Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
09. Bomber Heights-DEC Wetland letter-Delineation-Report-4.0-4.1
Division of Fish and Wildlife | Bureau of Ecosystem Health KATHY HOCHUL Governor Acting Commissioner LETTER OF NO JURISDICTION – FRESHWATER WETLANDS 06/04/2025 Dustin Bradley Labella Associates, Attn: Dustin Bradley, 3rd floor, 300 State St #201, Rochester, NY 14614 Sent via email to: dbradley@labellapc.com Re: DEC Freshwater Wetlands Parcel Jurisdictional Determination for Parcel 50308949.-1-26.2, Cayuga County. Dear Dustin Bradley, Based on the parcel(s) identified in your request, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has determined that there are no DEC regulated freshwater wetlands and/or adjacent areas identified on the parcel(s) referenced above. Therefore, in accordance with Article 24 of the Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) and 6 NYCRR Part 663, no freshwater wetlands permit is required. Pursuant to ECL section 24-0703, this letter shall remain valid for a period of five years from the date it is issued (through 06/02/2030). Please note that this determination pertains only to state-regulated, freshwater wetlands and regulated adjacent areas. DEC also regulates protected streams, tidal wetlands, coastal erosion hazard areas, and other important environmental resources. Work affecting those areas may also require DEC permits. More information on other DEC permit programs is available online at https://dec.ny.gov/regulatory/permits-licenses/environmental-permits. In addition, please note that this letter does not relieve you of the responsibility of obtaining any other necessary permits or approvals from other local, state, or federal agencies. If you have questions regarding this determination, please email FWWjurisdiction@dec.ny.gov. January 2, 2024 File No. 15.0167244.00 Mr. Ryan McCune Nexamp, Inc. 101 Summer Street, 2nd Floor Boston, MA 02110 Re: Wetland Delineation Report Troy Road Ithaca, New York Tax Parcel ID: 49.-1-26.2 Dear Mr. Ryan McCune: Pursuant to our proposal dated October 18, 2023, GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. (GZA) reviewed the above-referenced property for the presence of regulated wetland and waterbody resources using current State and Federal methodologies. The purpose of this work was to identify areas that may be subject to the jurisdiction of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), and/or the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) pursuant to Freshwater Wetlands Act [Article 24 and Title 23 of Article 71 of the Environmental Conservation Law (ECL)] and Article 15 ECL-Protection of Waters. This letter summarizes the findings of the desktop review and field delineation completed by GZA and is subject to the Limitations provided as Attachment A. Introduction GZA was retained by Nexamp (Client) to perform a wetland and waterbody delineation on the property located on Troy Road, Ithaca, New York. The tax parcel (49.-1-26.2) consists of approximately 62 acres of undeveloped forest and fields. The Study Area (Site) within the parcel consists of approximately 22.4 acres. See Figure 1 for the Site Location Map. GZA reviewed available background information including the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) Freshwater Wetlands Map1, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory Map2, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey Map3, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)4, United States Geological Survey (USGS) National 1 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Environmental Resource Mapper, 2023 [Website]. Available at: http://www.dec.ny.gov/gis/erm/ 2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, Wetland Mapper, 2023 [Website]. Available at: https://www.fsw.gov/wetaldns/data/mapper.html 3 United States Department of Agriculture, National Resource Conservation Service, Web Soil Survey, 2023 [Website]. Available at: https://websilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx 4 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 2023. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. Available at: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home January 2, 2024 File No. 15.0167244.00 Nexamp – Troy Heights Wetland Delineation Findings Page | 2 active by Design Mapper5, and commercially available aerial imagery. Following this desktop review, GZA conducted a field visit to delineate wetland and waterbody resources at the Site. Wetland scientists from GZA conducted the wetland and waterbody delineation on November 2 and 3, 2023 within the Site. Wetlands and waterbodies were delineated using the methodology outlined in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, using the Routine Determination Method; in conjunction with the Regional Supplement to the Corps 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual: North Central and Northeast Region, Technical Report ERDC/EL TR-09-19; North American Digital Flora: National Wetland Plant List, Version 2.4.0 US Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH and BONAP, Chapel Hill, NC (2012); and Field Indicators for Identifying Hydric Soils in New England, Version 4 (2018). GPS data for wetlands, waterbodies and other key site features were obtained in the field using a handheld, sub-meter Global Positioning System (GPS). GZA identified and delineated three wetlands and three streams within the Site boundary. Photographs taken during field work are provided in the Appendix A – Photo Log. Desktop Review Results The Site is located approximately 0.4 miles south of the intersection of Troy Road and Coddington Road in Ithaca, NY. A review of the National Mapper5 shows that the Site is gradually sloped to the northeast, with elevations ranging from 1,166 feet NAVD88 to 1,000 feet NAVD88. A review of the NYSDEC freshwater wetlands mapper1 does not identify any state regulated wetlands within the Site. The nearest mapped NYSDEC wetland (TW-9) is located ±2.45 miles to the west. The NYSDEC freshwater wetlands mapper1 does identify one unnamed classified stream (Class A) flowing through the Site. The USFWS National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapper2 (Figure 2) does identify one riverine wetland classified as R4SBC, which is located at the northern portion of the Site and flows to the northwest. The following describes the resources located within the Site: • Riverine, Intermittent, Streambed, Seasonally Flooded (R4SBC) The NRCS Jefferson County Soil Survey map provided in Appendix C – Soil Report, available online through the Web Soil Survey https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm, mapped the following soil series within the Site: Table 1. Study Area Soils Based on NRCS Web Soil Survey Mapping Unit Soil Name Drainage Class BgC Bath and Valois soils 5-15 Well drained 0 21.5 EbB Erie channery silt loam 3-8 5 72.1 EbC Erie channery silt loam 8-15 5 0.9 5 U.S. Geological Survey, The National Map, 2023 [Website]. Available at: https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/advanced-viewer/ January 2, 2024 File No. 15.0167244.00 Nexamp – Troy Heights Wetland Delineation Findings Page | 3 active by Design A review of the FEMA Flood Insurance Map effective June 19, 1985, maps the Site as Zone C, which are areas of minimal flood hazard4. Wetland Delineation Findings GZA’s wetland delineation, completed on November 2nd and 3rd, 2023, identified three wetlands and three streams within the Site as summarized below. Wetland A: Wetland A is located along the proposed access road for the Site and exhibits characteristics of an emergent wetland (PEM). Wetland A is approximately 0.02 acres in area and continues offsite to the north (Figure 3 - Waters & Wetlands Delineation Map). The vegetation present within Wetland A consists of scrub-shrub and emergent wetland vegetation. There is no vegetation in the tree stratum; part of Wetland A is within a transmission right-of-way (ROW). and is subject to vegetation maintenance. Vegetation in the shrub stratum consists of silky dogwood (Swida amomum, FACW) and Tartarian honeysuckle (Lonicera tatarica, FACU). Vegetation in the herb stratum consists of soft rush (Juncus effusus, OBL), sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis, FACW), grass-leaved goldenrod (Euthamia graminifolia, FAC), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens, FAC), several species of grass, a species of sedge (Carex sp.), and a species of goldenrod (Solidago sp.). Soils exhibited hydric conditions such as a dark matrix with low chroma and distinct redox concentrations, meeting the criteria for hydric soil indicator F6 (Redox Dark Surface). Hydrologic indicators include saturation to surface and FAC-Neutral test. Wetland B: Wetland B is located near the northwestern corner and center of the Site and is approximately 1.94 acres in area and exhibits characteristics of a forested wetland (PFO) (Figure 3 - Waters & Wetlands Delineation Map). Wetland B extends across the existing transmission ROW that runs through the middle of the Site utilizing multiple culverts which allow for flow underneath the access route. The vegetation present within Wetland B consists of forested, scrub-shrub, and emergent wetland vegetation. Vegetation in the tree stratum consists of European buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica, FAC). Vegetation in the shrub stratum consists of Tartarian honeysuckle (Lonicera tatarica, FACU). Vegetation in the herb stratum consists of creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens, FAC), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), creeping yellow-loosestrife (Lysimachia nummularia, FACW), grass-leaved goldenrod (Euthamia graminifolia, FAC), and several species of grass. Soils exhibited hydric conditions such as a depleted matrix with low chroma, meeting the criteria for hydric soil indicator F3 (Depleted Matrix). Hydrologic indicators include saturation to surface. Wetland C: Wetland C is located in the southeastern corner of the Site and is approximately 4.92 acres in area and exhibits characteristics of an emergent wetland (PEM) (Figure 3 - Waters & Wetlands Delineation Map). Wetland C extends across the existing transmission ROW that runs through the middle of the Site. The vegetation within Wetland C consists of forested, scrub-shrub, and emergent wetland vegetation. Vegetation in the tree stratum consists of green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica, FACW). Vegetation in the shrub stratum consists of rambler rose (Rosa multiflora, FACU) and gray dogwood (Swida racemose, FAC). Vegetation in the herb stratum consists of soft rush (Juncus effusus, OBL), sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis, FACW), swamp dewberry (Rubus hispidus, FACW), graa- January 2, 2024 File No. 15.0167244.00 Nexamp – Troy Heights Wetland Delineation Findings Page | 4 active by Design leaved goldenrod (Euthamia graminifolia, FAC), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens, FAC), northern bedstraw (Galium boreale, FAC), rambler rose (Rosa multiflora, FACU), and several species of grass. Soils exhibits hydric conditions such as a low chroma and distinct redox concentrations, meeting the criteria for hydric soil indicator S5 (Sandy Redox). Hydrologic indicators include saturation to surface and FAC-Neutral test. Stream 1: Stream 1 is located in the northwestern corner of the Site (Figure 3 - Waters & Wetlands Delineation Map). This unnamed stream is classified as Class A and is made up of multiple channels flowing in a northeasterly direction offsite into Sixmile Creek and then to the northwest where is discharges into Cayuga Lake, both of which are navigable waterways. The stream’s substrate consists of cobbles; stream widths ranged from 2 to 10 feet; and stream depth at the time of the delineation was approximately 2 inches. Stream 2: Stream 2 is located near the center of the Site (Figure 3 - Waters & Wetlands Delineation Map). Stream 2 is unnamed, unmapped, and flows to the northeast offsite. The stream’s substrate consists of silt; stream widths ranged from 1 to 4 feet wide; and stream depth ranged from 2-4 inches. Stream 3: Stream 3 is located in the southeastern corner of the Site (Figure 3 - Waters & Wetlands Delineation Map). Stream 3 is unnamed and unmapped, but it flows to the southeast offsite into a mapped (Class A) tributary to Sixmile Creek. The stream’s substrate consists of cobbles; stream widths range from 1 to 10 feet; and stream depths range from 2 to 4 inches. Other Observations on Site Micro Depressions: GZA observed several small, concaved areas or ‘micro depressions’ located along the western edge of the Site (Figure 3 – Waters & Wetlands Delineation). These depressions tend to temporarily pool water but do not qualify as State or Federal wetlands. Drainage: GZA observed several drainage features in the southwestern corner of the Site (Figure 3 - Waters & Wetlands Delineation Map). Two drainages flow into Wetland B and two drainages flow into Wetland C. These drainages range from 1 to 2 feet wide and 1 to 2 inches deep at the time of observation, with cobbles and silt making up the substrate. Shagbark Hickory Stands: GZA observed multiple stands of Shagbark Hickory (Carya ovata) within the Site. Shagbark Hickory is known to be a potential roosting habitat for the federally endangered Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis). Before any work associated with the project commences (i.e., site disturbance, tree clearing, etc.), consultation with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service is recommended to avoid violating section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). January 2, 2024 File No. 15.0167244.00 Nexamp – Troy Heights Wetland Delineation Findings Page | 5 active by Design Regulatory Authority New York State Department of Environmental Conservation The Freshwater Wetlands Act [Article 24 and Title 23 of Article 71 of the Environmental Conservation Law (ECL)] gives the NYSDEC jurisdiction over state-protected wetlands and an adjacent 100-foot protective upland buffer area. There does not appear to be any connection between Wetlands A, B, or C with mapped NYSDEC wetlands. Therefore, GZA anticipates that NYSDEC will not likely assert jurisdiction over Wetlands A, B, or C. The Use and Protection of Waters Regulation [Article 15 Part 608 of the Environmental Conservation Law (ECL)] gives the NYSDEC jurisdiction over state-protected streams. Stream 1 is classified as a Class A stream and therefore does fall within the definition of a protected stream. NYSDEC will assert jurisdiction over Stream 1. Stream 2 is not mapped and therefore does not fall within the definition of a protected stream. Stream 3 is not mapped but does flow into an unnamed mapped stream classified as Class A immediately southeast of the Site. Therefore, GZA anticipates that NYSDEC may assert jurisdiction over Stream 3. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) In accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the USACE asserts jurisdiction over Waters of the United States (WOTUS). WOTUS are defined as wetlands, streams, and other aquatic resources under the regulatory authority per Title 33 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 328 and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) per Title 40 CFR Part 230.3(s). Wetlands are defined as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (33 CFR 328.3[c]). The U.S. EPA and USACE revised the definition of WOTUS which became effective September 8, 2023. Based on the current rule, GZA understands the USACE will assert jurisdiction over the following categories of “waters of the United States” defined in 33 CFR 328.3 and as described below: (a)(1) Waters which are: (i) Currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; (ii) The territorial seas; or (iii) Interstate waters; (a)(2) Impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under this definition, other than impoundments of waters identified under paragraph (a)(5) of this section; (a)(3) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section that are relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water; January 2, 2024 File No. 15.0167244.00 Nexamp – Troy Heights Wetland Delineation Findings Page | 6 active by Design (a)(4) Wetlands adjacent to the following waters: (i) Waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section; or (ii) Relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water identified in paragraph (a)(2) or (a)(3) of this section and with a continuous surface connection to those waters; (a)(5) Intrastate lakes and ponds, streams, or wetlands not identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section that are relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water with a continuous surface connection to the waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(3) of this section. Eight exclusions from the definition of "waters of the United States" are codified at paragraph (b), and key terms are defined at paragraph (c). "Adjacent" is defined at (c)(2) as "having a continuous surface connection." These exclusions are described below: (1) Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons, designed to meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act; (2) Prior converted cropland designated by the Secretary of Agriculture. The exclusion would cease upon a change of use, which means that the area is no longer available for the production of agricultural commodities. Notwithstanding the determination of an area’s status as prior converted cropland by any other Federal agency, for the purposes of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction remains with EPA; (3) Ditches (including roadside ditches) excavated wholly in and draining only dry land and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water; (4) Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to dry land if the irrigation ceased; (5) Artificial lakes or ponds created by excavating or diking dry land to collect and retain water and which are used exclusively for such purposes as stock watering, irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing; (6) Artificial reflecting or swimming pools or other small ornamental bodies of water created by excavating or diking dry land to retain water for primarily aesthetic reasons; (7) Waterfilled depressions created in dry land incidental to construction activity and pits excavated in dry land for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel unless and until the construction or excavation operation is abandoned and the resulting body of water meets the definition of waters of the United States; and (8) Swales and erosional features (e.g., gullies, small washes) characterized by low volume, infrequent, or short duration flow. Section 404 of the CWA establishes a program to regulate the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. Activities in waters of the United States regulated under this program include fill for development, water resource projects (such as dams and levees), infrastructure development (such as highways and airports) and mining projects. Section 404 requires a permit before dredged or fill material may be discharged into waters of the United States, unless the activity is exempt from Section 404 regulation (e.g., certain farming and forestry activities). Wetlands B and C likely meet the definition of (a)(4) and (c)(2) as described above. GZA anticipates that USACE will likely assert jurisdiction over Wetlands B and C. Wetland A does not meet the definition of (a)(4) or (c)(2) as described above. GZA anticipates that USACE will not likely assert jurisdiction over Wetland A. Based on a review of the USGS National Mapper National Hydrography Dataset, Stream 1 is an intermittent stream. It flows in a generally northeast direction offsite and the flows into Sixmile Creek. Sixmile Creek then flows in a northwest direction towards the City of Ithaca and into the Cayuga Inlet, which then flows north into Cayuga Lake, all of which are January 2, 2024 File No. 15.0167244.00 Nexamp – Troy Heights Wetland Delineation Findings Page | 7 active by Design navigable waterways. Stream 1 meets the definition of (a)(3) as described above, therefore, GZA anticipates that USACE will likely assert jurisdiction over Stream 1. Based on a review of the USGS National Mapper National Hydrography Dataset, Stream 2 does not meet the definition of (a)(3) as described above. GZA anticipates that USACE will not likely assert jurisdiction over Stream 2. Based on a review of the USGS National Mapper National Hydrography Dataset, Stream 3 flows directly into an unnamed intermittent stream immediately southeast of the Site. It flows in a generally southeast direction into the unnamed stream, which then flows in a generally northeast direction into Sixmile Creek. Sixmile Creek then flows in a northwest direction towards the City of Ithaca and into the Cayuga Inlet, which then flows north into Cayuga Lake, all of which are navigable waterways. Stream 3 may meet the definition of (a)(3) as described above, therefore, GZA anticipates that USACE may assert jurisdiction over Stream 3. Final determination of the jurisdictional status of the wetlands and streams identified within the Site will be made by the USACE by an approved jurisdictional determination process. Conclusions GZA completed a desktop review of publicly available databases and a wetland and waterbody delineation within the Site described above. The results of this work are summarized below: • The Desktop review did not identify any state regulated wetlands but did identify one unnamed classified stream (Class A) flowing through the Site. The NWI mapper does identify one riverine wetland classified as R4SBC, which is located at the northern portion of the Site and flows to the northwest. The majority of the Site is considered to have somewhat poorly drained soils according to the NRCS Web Soil Survey mapper. • The field delineation conducted on November 2 and 3, 2023, identified three wetlands and three streams within the Site. • Wetlands A, B, and C are not connected to a state mapped wetland. NYSDEC will not likely assert jurisdiction over Wetlands A, B, or C. • Stream 2 is not a protected stream. NYSDEC will likely not assert jurisdiction over Stream 2. • Streams 1 and 3 are classified as protected streams. NYSDEC will likely assert jurisdiction over Streams 1 and 3. • Wetland A does not have a surface connection to a water of the United States. USACE will not likely assert jurisdiction over Wetland A. • Wetlands B and C appear to have a surface connection to a water of the United States. USACE will likely assert jurisdiction over Wetlands B and C. • Stream 2 is not a tributary to a navigable waterway. USACE will not likely assert jurisdiction over Stream 2. • Streams 1 and 3 are tributaries to a navigable waterway. USACE will likely assert jurisdiction over Streams 1 and 3. • Final determination of the jurisdictional status of the wetlands and streams identified within the Site will be made by both the USACE and the NYSDEC upon completion of detailed reviews by those agencies as part of a formal Jurisdictional Determination process. January 2, 2024 File No. 15.0167244.00 Nexamp – Troy Heights Wetland Delineation Findings Page | 8 active by Design Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Joe Rogers at (413) 218-2959 or by email at Joseph.Rogers@gza.com. Sincerely, GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL, INC. Joe Rogers, PWS, CESSWI Deborah M. Zarta Gier, CNRP Stephen L. Lecco, AICP, CEP, PWS Senior Project Manager Principal in Charge Consultant/Reviewer Attachments: Attachment A - Limitations Figure 1 Site Location Figure 2 Resource Map Figure 3 Wetland Map Appendix A - Photo Log Appendix B - Data Forms Appendix C - Soil Report January 2, 2024 File No. 15.0167244.00 Nexamp – Troy Heights Wetland Delineation Findings Page | 9 active by Design ATTACHMENT A – LIMITATIONS NATURAL RESOURCE SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT LIMITATIONS 15.0167244.00 Page | 1 January 2015 active by Design USE OF REPORT 1. GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. (GZA) has prepared this report on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of NEXAMP, INC. (“Client”) for the stated purpose(s) and location(s) identified in the report. Use of this report, in whole or in part, at other locations, or for other purposes, may lead to inappropriate conclusions; and we do not accept any responsibility for the consequences of such use(s). Further, reliance by any party not identified in the agreement, for any use, without our prior written permission, shall be at that party’s risk, and without any liability to GZA. STANDARD OF CARE 2. GZA’s findings and conclusions are based on the work conducted as part of the Scope of Services set forth in the Report and/or proposal, and reflect our professional judgment. These findings and conclusions must be considered not as scientific or engineering certainties, but rather as our professional opinions concerning the data gathered and observations made during the course of our work. Conditions other than described in this report may be found at the subject location(s). 3. GZA’s services were performed using the degree of skill and care ordinarily exercised by qualified professionals performing the same type of services, at the same time, under similar conditions, at the same or a similar property. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. LIMITS TO OBSERVATIONS 4. Natural resource characteristics are inherently variable. Biological community composition and diversity can be affected by seasonal, annual or anthropogenic influences. In addition, soil conditions are reflective of subsurface geologic materials, the composition and distribution of which vary spatially. 5. The observations described in this report were made on the dates referenced and under the conditions stated therein. Conditions observed and reported by GZA reflect the conditions that could be reasonably observed based upon the visual observations of surface conditions and/or a limited observation of subsurface conditions at the specific time of observation. Such conditions are subject to environmental and circumstantial alteration and may not reflect conditions observable at another time. 6. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based upon the data obtained from a limited number of surveys performed during the course of our work on the site, as described in the Report. There may be variations between these surveys and other past or future surveys due to inherent environmental and circumstantial variability. RELIANCE ON INFORMATION FROM OTHERS 7. Preparation of this Report may have relied upon information made available by Federal, state and local authorities; and/or work products prepared by other professionals as specified in the report. Unless specifically stated, GZA did not attempt to independently verify the accuracy or completeness of that information. COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS AND CODES 8. GZA’s services were performed to render an opinion on the presence and/or condition of natural resources as described in the Report. Standards used to identify or assess these resources as well as regulatory jurisdiction, if any, are stated in the Report. Standards for identification of jurisdictional resources and regulatory control over them may vary between governmental agencies at Federal, state and local levels and are subject to change over time which may affect the conclusions and findings of this report. NATURAL RESOURCE SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT LIMITATIONS 15.0167244.00 Page | 2 January 2015 active by Design NEW INFORMATION 9. In the event that the Client or others authorized to use this report obtain information on environmental regulatory compliance issues at the site not contained in this report, such information shall be brought to GZA's attention forthwith. GZA will evaluate such information and, on the basis of this work, may modify the conclusions stated in this report. ADDITIONAL SERVICES 10. GZA recommends that we be retained to provide further investigation, if necessary, which would allow GZA to (1) observe compliance with the concepts and recommendations contained herein; (2) evaluate whether the manner of implementation creates a potential new finding; and (3) evaluate whether the manner of implementation affects or changes the conditions on which our opinions were made. January 2, 2024 File No. 15.0167244.00 Nexamp – Troy Heights Wetland Delineation Findings Page | 10 active by Design FIGURES Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS usercommunity, Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c)OpenStreetMap contributors, © 2023 GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. \\GZASPRINGFIELD\Jobs\0 167200 - 0 167299\15.0167244.00 Nexamp Wetland Delineations 10 Sites\GIS\Nexamp Site 10 Troy Heights Solar - Site Locus.mxd, 12/19/2023, 4:46:50 PM, Megan.Wilckens TROY HEIGHTS SOLAR127 TROY ROAD, ITHACA, NY SITE LOCUS JOB NO. FIGURE NO. Data Supplied by : 1 15.0167244.00 401,000 2,000 3,000500 Feet This map presents land cover imagery for the world and detailed topographic maps for the UnitedStates. The map includes the National Park Service (NPS) Natural Earth physical map at 1.24km perpixel for the world at small scales, i-cubed eTOPO 1:250,000-scale maps for the contiguous UnitedStates at medium scales, and National Geographic TOPO! 1:100,000 and 1:24,000-scale maps(1:250,000 and 1:63,000 in Alaska) for the United States at large scales. The TOPO! maps areseamless, scanned images of United States Geological Survey (USGS) paper topographic maps. SITE DATE: DECEMBER 2023 MTW JBB JBB MTWDESIGNED BY: PROJ MGR: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PREPARED BY: GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc.Engineers and Scientistswww.gza.com Legend Study Area A A A Coddington Road East King Road Troy Road WhitetailDrive TroyHeights, LLC49.-1-26.2 \\GZASPRINGFIELD\Jobs\0 167200 - 0 167299\15.0167244.00 Nexamp Wetland Delineations 10 Sites\GIS\Nexamp NY23 Solar 10 - Resource Map.mxd, December 19, 2023 - 4:53:19 PM, Megan.Wilckens LEGEND Study Area TaxParcel Roads ??DEC Streams DEC Wetlands*NWI WetlandsNWI Wetland Type Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Freshwater Pond Lake Riverine © 2023 - GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. UNLESS SPECIFICALLY STATED BY WRITTEN AGREEMENT, THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GZAGEOENVIRONMENTAL, INC. (GZA). THE INFORMATION SHOWN ON THE DRAWING IS SOLELY FOR USE BY GZA'SCLIENT OR THE CLIENT'S DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE SPECIFIC PROJECT AND LOCATION IDENTIFIED ONTHE DRAWING. THE DRAWING SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED, REUSED, COPIED, OR ALTERED IN ANY MANNER FORUSE AT ANY OTHER LOCATION OR FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF GZA. ANYTRANSFER, REUSE, OR MODIFICATION TO THE DRAWING BY THE CLIENT OR OTHERS, WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTENEXPRESS CONSENT OF GZA, WILL BE AT THE USER'S SOLE RISK AND WITHOUT ANY RISK OR LIABILITY TO GZA. PREPARED FOR:PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: DRAWN BY: PROJECT NO: DESIGNED BY: PROJ MGR: DATE: SCALE: CHECKED BY: REVISION NO: GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc.www.gza.com 127 TROY RD, ITHACA, NYCOUNTY OF TOMPKINS RESOURCE MAP ITHACA PV SITE NEXAMP101 SUMMER STREET, 2ND FLOORBOSTON, MA 02110 2FIGURECR 1 " = 300 FEET 12/19/2023 JBB MTW 15.0167244.00 PIC MTW 0 325 650162.5 SCALE IN FEET. A A A Coddington Road East King Road Troy Road WhitetailDrive Wetland A0.02 ac Wetland B1.94 ac Wetland C4.92 ac Stream 2 Stream 3 Stream 1 TroyHeights, LLC49.-1-26.2 \\GZASPRINGFIELD\Jobs\0 167200 - 0 167299\15.0167244.00 Nexamp Wetland Delineations 10 Sites\GIS\Nexamp Site 10 Troy Heights Solar.mxd, December 21, 2023 - 10:14:45 AM, Megan.Wilckens LEGEND Micro Depression Wetland Flags Wet Area Not Flagged Stream Points Drainage Stream 5 5 Culvert Study Area Buffer Area Not Reviewed Tax Parcel Wetland Continuation Line Delineated Wetland Study AreaMapped Features Roads ??DEC Streams DEC Wetlands*NWI WetlandsNWI Wetland Type Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Freshwater Pond Lake Riverine © 2023 - GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. UNLESS SPECIFICALLY STATED BY WRITTEN AGREEMENT, THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GZAGEOENVIRONMENTAL, INC. (GZA). THE INFORMATION SHOWN ON THE DRAWING IS SOLELY FOR USE BY GZA'SCLIENT OR THE CLIENT'S DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE SPECIFIC PROJECT AND LOCATION IDENTIFIED ONTHE DRAWING. THE DRAWING SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED, REUSED, COPIED, OR ALTERED IN ANY MANNER FORUSE AT ANY OTHER LOCATION OR FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF GZA. ANYTRANSFER, REUSE, OR MODIFICATION TO THE DRAWING BY THE CLIENT OR OTHERS, WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTENEXPRESS CONSENT OF GZA, WILL BE AT THE USER'S SOLE RISK AND WITHOUT ANY RISK OR LIABILITY TO GZA. PREPARED FOR:PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: DRAWN BY: PROJECT NO: DESIGNED BY: PROJ MGR: DATE: SCALE: CHECKED BY: REVISION NO: GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc.www.gza.com 127 TROY RD, ITHACA, NYCOUNTY OF TOMPKINS WATERS & WETLANDS DELINEATION ITHACA PV SITE NEXAMP101 SUMMER STREET, 2ND FLOORBOSTON, MA 02110 3FIGURECR 1 " = 300 FEET 12/21/2023 JBB MTW 15.0167244.00 PIC MTW 0 325 650162.5 SCALE IN FEET. January 2, 2024 File No. 15.0167244.00 Nexamp – Troy Heights Wetland Delineation Findings Page | 11 active by Design APPENDIX A: PHOTO LOG Photographic Log Page 1 of 7 Client Name: Nexamp Site Location: 127 Troy Road, Ithaca, NY Project No. 15.0167244.00 Photo No Date: Direction Photo Taken: North Description: Wetland A located next to Troy Road, along the proposed access route for the Site. Photo No. Date: Direction Photo Taken: N/A Description: Photo set of upland (left) and wetland (right) soil samples for Wetland A. Photographic Log Page 2 of 7 Client Name: Nexamp Site Location: 127 Troy Road, Ithaca, NY Project No. 15.0167244.00 Photo No Date: Direction Photo Taken: South Description: Wetland B near the northern end of the Site. Photo No. Date: Direction Photo Taken: East Description: Wetland B along one of the fingers of the gulley within the forested area. Photographic Log Page 3 of 7 Client Name: Nexamp Site Location: 127 Troy Road, Ithaca, NY Project No. 15.0167244.00 Photo No Date: Direction Photo Taken: West Description: Wetland B where it crosses the existing transmission ROW. Photo No. Date: Direction Photo Taken: N/A Description: Photo set of upland (left) and wetland (right) soil samples for Wetland B. Photographic Log Page 4 of 7 Client Name: Nexamp Site Location: 127 Troy Road, Ithaca, NY Project No. 15.0167244.00 Photo No Date: Direction Photo Taken: South Description: Wetland C near the southeastern end of the Site. Photo No. Date: Direction Photo Taken: N/A Description: Photo set of upland (left) and wetland (right) soil samples for Wetland C. Photographic Log Page 5 of 7 Client Name: Nexamp Site Location: 127 Troy Road, Ithaca, NY Project No. 15.0167244.00 Photo No Date: Direction Photo Taken: Southeast Description: Stream 1 located in the northern end of the Site. Stream 1 consisted of multiple channels within gullies that flowed in a N- NE direction. Photo No. Date: Direction Photo Taken: North Description: Stream 2 located near the center of the Site. Stream 2 flows to the NE. Photographic Log Page 6 of 7 Client Name: Nexamp Site Location: 127 Troy Road, Ithaca, NY Project No. 15.0167244.00 Photo No Date: Direction Photo Taken: North Description: Stream 3 located in the southeastern corner of the Site. Stream 3 flows to the SE. Photo No. Date: Direction Photo Taken: North Description: Gravel access area off Troy Road. Photographic Log Page 7 of 7 Client Name: Nexamp Site Location: 127 Troy Road, Ithaca, NY Project No. 15.0167244.00 Photo No Date: Direction Photo Taken: North Description: Upland field in the northeastern corner of the Site. Photo No. Date: Direction Photo Taken: Southwest Description: Upland forest in the center of the Site. January 2, 2024 File No. 15.0167244.00 Nexamp – Troy Heights Wetland Delineation Findings Page | 12 active by Design APPENDIX B: DATA FORMS Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Lat: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X No No X X No X ? X X X Yes X WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Northcentral and Northeast Region Troy Heights Solar City/County:Ithaca / Tompkins Sampling Date:11/2/23 Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope %:1 Nexamp NY Sampling Point:TH-A Up GZA - PD, MW Section, Township, Range:N/A WGS 84 EbB N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Subregion (LRR or MLRA):LRR R 42.410003 Long:-76.477761 Datum: significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: Hydric Soil Present? Yes Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) TH-A upland sample taken near flag I-A3 HYDROLOGY Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Surface Water (A1) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Drainage Patterns (B10) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Moss Trim Lines (B16) Saturation (A3)Marl Deposits (B15)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Microtopographic Relief (D4) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Remarks: (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches): US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 1 = 1.x 2 = 2.x 3 = 3.x 4 = 4.x 5 = 5.(B) 6. 7. Herb Stratum (Plot size:X 1. 2.1 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4.X VEGETATION Dominance Test worksheet: N/A Number of Dominant Species Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species Lonicera tatarica 30 Yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 20 Yes FAC FAC species 190 570 0 Swida racemosa UPL species 15 75 FACU species 40 =Total Cover 805 Prevalence Index = B/A =3.29 245 (A) FACW species 0 5 ft )2 - Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Galium boreale 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Swida racemosa Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) Symphyotrichum lateriflorum 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Pastinaca sativa Ranunculus repens Solidago sp. Taraxacum officinale 10 No FACU Sapling/shrub – Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree – Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in Woody vines – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in N/A Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless Hydrophytic Vegetation Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) =Total Cover US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Sampling Point X SOIL Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) silt loam11-13 10YR 5/2 M Loamy/Clayey9510YR 5/8 5 C Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: LRR R,LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) MLRA 149B)LRR K, L, R) LRR R, MLRA 149B)LRR K, L, R) LRR K, L)LRR K, L) 1 2 MLRA 149B) MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) LRR K, L)LRR K, L) LRR K, L, R) LRR K, L ) Yes No Version 7.0, 2015 Errata. (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_051293.docx) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Hydric Soil Present? US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Lat: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X No X No X X No X ? X X X X Yes X WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Northcentral and Northeast Region Troy Heights Solar City/County:Ithaca / Tompkins Sampling Date:11/2/23 Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none):concave Slope %:1 Nexamp NY Sampling Point:TH-A Wet GZA - PD, MW Section, Township, Range:N/A WGS 84 EbB N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Subregion (LRR or MLRA):LRR R 42.41008089 Long:-76.47765467 Datum: significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: Hydric Soil Present? Yes Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) TH-A wetland sample taken along the edge of the exising transmission line HYDROLOGY Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Surface Water (A1) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Drainage Patterns (B10) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Moss Trim Lines (B16) Saturation (A3)Marl Deposits (B15)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Microtopographic Relief (D4) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Remarks: (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches):0 US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 1 = 1.x 2 = 2.x 3 = 3.x 4 = 4.x 5 = 5.(B) 6. 7. Herb Stratum (Plot size:X 1.X 2.1 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4.X VEGETATION Dominance Test worksheet: N/A Number of Dominant Species Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species Swida amomum 5 Yes FACW Prevalence Index worksheet: 5 Yes FACU FAC species 100 300 150 Lonicera tatarica UPL species 0 0 FACU species 5 =Total Cover 500 Prevalence Index = B/A =2.38 210 (A) FACW species 75 5 ft )2 - Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Juncus effusus 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Onoclea sensibilis Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) Grass species 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Euthamia graminifolia Sedge species Solidago sp. Ranunculus repens 5 No FAC Sapling/shrub – Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree – Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in Woody vines – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in N/A Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless Hydrophytic Vegetation Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) =Total Cover US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Sampling Point ? X X SOIL Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) silt loam6-13 10YR 3/2 M Loamy/Clayey9510YR 5/8 5 C Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: LRR R,LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) MLRA 149B)LRR K, L, R) LRR R, MLRA 149B)LRR K, L, R) LRR K, L)LRR K, L) 1 2 MLRA 149B) MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) LRR K, L)LRR K, L) LRR K, L, R) LRR K, L ) Yes No Version 7.0, 2015 Errata. (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_051293.docx) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Hydric Soil Present? US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Lat: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X No No X X No X X X X X Yes X WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Northcentral and Northeast Region Troy Heights Solar City/County:Ithaca / Tompkins Sampling Date:11/2/23 Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope %:1 Nexamp NY Sampling Point:TH-B Up GZA - PD, MW Section, Township, Range:N/A WGS 84 EbB N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Subregion (LRR or MLRA):LRR R 42.41007114 Long:-76.47627455 Datum: significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: Hydric Soil Present? Yes Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) TH-B upland sample taken between flags I-B1a+ and I-B2a HYDROLOGY Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Surface Water (A1) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Drainage Patterns (B10) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Moss Trim Lines (B16) Saturation (A3)Marl Deposits (B15)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Microtopographic Relief (D4) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Remarks: (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches): US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 1 = 1.x 2 = 2.x 3 = 3.x 4 = 4.x 5 = 5.(B) 6. 7. Herb Stratum (Plot size:X 1. 2.1 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4.X VEGETATION Dominance Test worksheet: Rhamnus cathartica Number of Dominant Species Fraxinus pennsylvanica Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:5 (B) Percent of Dominant Species Lonicera tatarica 20 Yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: FAC species 150 450 130 660 Prevalence Index = B/A =2.81 235 (A) FACW species 65 5 ft )2 - Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Lysimachia nummularia 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Euthamia graminifolia Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) Grass species 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Rhamnus cathartica Galium boreale 5 No FAC Sapling/shrub – Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree – Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in Woody vines – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in N/A Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless Hydrophytic Vegetation Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) =Total Cover US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Sampling Point X SOIL Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) silt loam13-20 10YR 5/3 Loamy/Clayey9010YR 5/2 5 Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: LRR R,LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) MLRA 149B)LRR K, L, R) LRR R, MLRA 149B)LRR K, L, R) LRR K, L)LRR K, L) 1 2 MLRA 149B) MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) LRR K, L)LRR K, L) LRR K, L, R) LRR K, L ) Yes No Version 7.0, 2015 Errata. (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_051293.docx) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Hydric Soil Present? US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Lat: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X No X No X X No X X X X Yes X WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Northcentral and Northeast Region Troy Heights Solar City/County:Ithaca / Tompkins Sampling Date:11/2/23 Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none):concave Slope %:1 Nexamp NY Sampling Point:TH-B Wet GZA - PD, MW Section, Township, Range:N/A WGS 84 EbB N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Subregion (LRR or MLRA):LRR R 42.41003798 Long:-76.47632903 Datum: significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: Hydric Soil Present? Yes Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) TH-B wetland sample taken between flags I-B1a+ and I-B2a HYDROLOGY Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Surface Water (A1) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Drainage Patterns (B10) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Moss Trim Lines (B16) Saturation (A3)Marl Deposits (B15)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Microtopographic Relief (D4) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Remarks: (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches):0 US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 1 = 1.x 2 = 2.x 3 = 3.x 4 = 4.x 5 = 5.(B) 6. 7. Herb Stratum (Plot size:X 1.X 2.1 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4.X VEGETATION Dominance Test worksheet: Rhamnus cathartica Number of Dominant Species Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species Lonicera tatarica 5 Yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: FAC species 150 450 140 610 Prevalence Index = B/A =2.71 225 (A) FACW species 70 5 ft )2 - Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Ranunculus repens 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Phalaris arundinacea Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) Grass species 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Lysimachia nummularia Euthamia graminifolia 15 No FAC Sapling/shrub – Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree – Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in Woody vines – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in N/A Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless Hydrophytic Vegetation Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) =Total Cover US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Sampling Point X X X SOIL Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) silt loam7-13 10YR 4/2 M Loamy/Clayey8010YR 5/8 10 C Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: LRR R,LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) MLRA 149B)LRR K, L, R) LRR R, MLRA 149B)LRR K, L, R) LRR K, L)LRR K, L) 1 2 MLRA 149B) MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) LRR K, L)LRR K, L) LRR K, L, R) LRR K, L ) Yes No Version 7.0, 2015 Errata. (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_051293.docx) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Hydric Soil Present? US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Lat: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. No X No X X No X ? X X X Yes X WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Northcentral and Northeast Region Troy Heights Solar City/County:Ithaca / Tompkins Sampling Date:11/3/23 Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope %:2 Nexamp NY Sampling Point:TH-C Up GZA - PD, MW Section, Township, Range:N/A WGS 84 EcA N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Subregion (LRR or MLRA):LRR R 42.40732236 Long:-76.47420623 Datum: significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: Hydric Soil Present? Yes Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) TH-C upland sample taken near flag I-C8, on the edge of the forest HYDROLOGY Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Surface Water (A1) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Drainage Patterns (B10) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Moss Trim Lines (B16) Saturation (A3)Marl Deposits (B15)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Microtopographic Relief (D4) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Remarks: (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches): US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 1 = 1.x 2 = 2.x 3 = 3.x 4 = 4.x 5 = 5.(B) 6. 7. Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2.1 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4.X VEGETATION Dominance Test worksheet: Acer rubrum Number of Dominant Species Prunus serotina Carya ovata 10 No Populus tremuloides 40 Yes FACU Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:FACU 6 (B) Percent of Dominant Species Elaeagnus umbellata 10 Yes UPL Prevalence Index worksheet: FAC species 65 195 0 885 Prevalence Index = B/A =3.77 235 (A) FACW species 0 5 ft )2 - Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Lonicera tatarica 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Ligustrum sinense Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Solidago sp. Sapling/shrub – Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree – Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in Woody vines – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in N/A Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless Hydrophytic Vegetation Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) =Total Cover US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Sampling Point X SOIL Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) fine sandy loam 4-10 10YR 4/4 Sandy100 Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: LRR R,LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) MLRA 149B)LRR K, L, R) LRR R, MLRA 149B)LRR K, L, R) LRR K, L)LRR K, L) 1 2 MLRA 149B) MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) LRR K, L)LRR K, L) LRR K, L, R) LRR K, L ) Yes No Version 7.0, 2015 Errata. (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_051293.docx) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Hydric Soil Present? US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Lat: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X No X No X X No X ? X X X X Yes X WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Northcentral and Northeast Region Troy Heights Solar City/County:Ithaca / Tompkins Sampling Date:11/3/23 Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none):concave Slope %:1 Nexamp NY Sampling Point:TH-C Wet GZA - PD, MW Section, Township, Range:N/A WGS 84 EcA N/A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Subregion (LRR or MLRA):LRR R 42.407209 Long:-76.474218 Datum: significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: Hydric Soil Present? Yes Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) TH-C wetland sample taken near flag I-C8 HYDROLOGY Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Surface Water (A1) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Drainage Patterns (B10) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Moss Trim Lines (B16) Saturation (A3)Marl Deposits (B15)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Microtopographic Relief (D4) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Remarks: (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches):0 US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 1 = 1.x 2 = 2.x 3 = 3.x 4 = 4.x 5 = 5.(B) 6. 7. Herb Stratum (Plot size:X 1.X 2.1 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4.X VEGETATION Dominance Test worksheet: Fraxinus pennsylvanica Number of Dominant Species Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:5 (B) Percent of Dominant Species Rosa multiflora 10 Yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 5 Yes FAC FAC species 85 255 90 Swida racemosa UPL species 0 0 FACU species 15 10 =Total Cover 455 Prevalence Index = B/A =2.33 195 (A) FACW species 45 5 ft )2 - Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Juncus effusus 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Onoclea sensibilis Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) Ranunculus repens 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Rubus hispidus Galium boreale Rosa multiflora Euthamia graminifolia 10 No FAC Sapling/shrub – Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Grass species 60 Yes FAC Tree – Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in Woody vines – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in N/A Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless Hydrophytic Vegetation Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) =Total Cover US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 Sampling Point X X SOIL Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) silt loam8-13 10YR 3/1 M Loamy/Clayey9510YR 4/6 5 C Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: LRR R,LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) MLRA 149B)LRR K, L, R) LRR R, MLRA 149B)LRR K, L, R) LRR K, L)LRR K, L) 1 2 MLRA 149B) MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) LRR K, L)LRR K, L) LRR K, L, R) LRR K, L ) Yes No Version 7.0, 2015 Errata. (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_051293.docx) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Hydric Soil Present? US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region – Version 2.0 January 2, 2024 File No. 15.0167244.00 Nexamp – Troy Heights Wetland Delineation Findings Page | 13 active by Design APPENDIX C: SOIL REPORT United States Department of Agriculture 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 Tompkins County, New York Natural Resources Conservation Service December 7, 2023 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 2 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. 3 Contents Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map..................................................................................................................8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Tompkins County, New York...........................................................................13 BgC—Bath and Valois soils, 5 to 15 percent slopes...................................13 EbB—Erie channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes..................................15 EbC—Erie channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes................................17 EcA—Chippewa and Alden soils, 0 to 8 percent slopes.............................18 Soil Information for All Uses...............................................................................21 Suitabilities and Limitations for Use....................................................................21 Land Classifications........................................................................................21 Hydric Rating by Map Unit...........................................................................21 References............................................................................................................26 4 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 5 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 6 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 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. 8 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 46 9 5 7 6 0 46 9 5 8 5 0 46 9 5 9 4 0 46 9 6 0 3 0 46 9 6 1 2 0 46 9 6 2 1 0 46 9 6 3 0 0 46 9 6 3 9 0 46 9 6 4 8 0 46 9 5 7 6 0 46 9 5 8 5 0 46 9 5 9 4 0 46 9 6 0 3 0 46 9 6 1 2 0 46 9 6 2 1 0 46 9 6 3 0 0 46 9 6 3 9 0 46 9 6 4 8 0 378350 378440 378530 378620 378710 378800 378890 378350 378440 378530 378620 378710 378800 378890 42° 24' 40'' N 76 ° 2 8 ' 4 2 ' ' W 42° 24' 40'' N 76 ° 2 8 ' 1 7 ' ' W 42° 24' 16'' N 76 ° 2 8 ' 4 2 ' ' W 42° 24' 16'' N 76 ° 2 8 ' 1 7 ' ' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 18N WGS84 0 150 300 600 900Feet 0 50 100 200 300Meters Map Scale: 1:3,690 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION 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 Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:20,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. 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: Tompkins County, New York Survey Area Data: Version 19, Sep 5, 2023 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Apr 1, 2020—Oct 1, 2020 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. Custom Soil Resource Report 10 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI BgC Bath and Valois soils, 5 to 15 percent slopes 4.8 21.5% EbB Erie channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 16.2 72.1% EbC Erie channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 0.2 0.9% EcA Chippewa and Alden soils, 0 to 8 percent slopes 1.2 5.5% Totals for Area of Interest 22.4 100.0% 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 11 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 12 Tompkins County, New York BgC—Bath and Valois soils, 5 to 15 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2v32c Elevation: 330 to 2,460 feet Mean annual precipitation: 31 to 70 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 180 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Bath and similar soils:40 percent Valois and similar soils:35 percent Minor components:25 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Bath Setting Landform:Mountains, hills Landform position (two-dimensional):Backslope, summit, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope, interfluve Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Loamy till derived mainly from gray and brown siltstone, sandstone, and shale Typical profile Ap - 0 to 9 inches: channery silt loam Bw1 - 9 to 15 inches: channery silt loam Bw2 - 15 to 25 inches: channery loam E - 25 to 29 inches: channery loam Bx - 29 to 52 inches: very channery silt loam C - 52 to 72 inches: very channery silt loam Properties and qualities Slope:5 to 15 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders:0.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature:26 to 38 inches to fragipan Drainage class:Well drained 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:About 24 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: F140XY030NY - Well Drained Dense Till Custom Soil Resource Report 13 Hydric soil rating: No Description of Valois Setting Landform:End moraines, lateral moraines, valley sides Landform position (two-dimensional):Shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional):Crest Down-slope shape:Convex Across-slope shape:Convex Parent material:Loamy till derived mainly from sandstone, siltstone, and shale Typical profile H1 - 0 to 2 inches: gravelly silt loam H2 - 2 to 32 inches: gravelly silt loam H3 - 32 to 49 inches: gravelly silt loam H4 - 49 to 60 inches: gravelly silt loam Properties and qualities Slope:5 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature:24 to 36 inches to fragipan Drainage class:Well drained 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:About 24 to 35 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: F140XY027NY - Well Drained Till Uplands Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Mardin Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Mountains, hills Landform position (two-dimensional):Summit, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve, side slope Down-slope shape:Convex Across-slope shape:Convex Hydric soil rating: No Lordstown Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Hills, mountains Landform position (two-dimensional):Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Mountainflank, nose slope, side slope Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Hydric soil rating: No Volusia Percent of map unit:5 percent Custom Soil Resource Report 14 Landform:Mountains, hills Landform position (two-dimensional):Footslope, summit Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope, interfluve, side slope Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Linear Hydric soil rating: No Erie Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Hills Landform position (two-dimensional):Footslope, summit Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope, interfluve Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Linear Hydric soil rating: No Langford Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Hills Landform position (two-dimensional):Backslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve, side slope Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Hydric soil rating: No EbB—Erie channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2wn35 Elevation: 330 to 2,460 feet Mean annual precipitation: 31 to 70 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 180 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Erie and similar soils:80 percent Minor components:20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Erie Setting Landform:Hills Landform position (two-dimensional):Footslope, summit Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope, interfluve Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Till Custom Soil Resource Report 15 Typical profile Ap - 0 to 9 inches: channery silt loam E - 9 to 13 inches: channery silt loam Bg - 13 to 15 inches: channery silt loam Bx - 15 to 38 inches: channery silt loam C - 38 to 72 inches: channery loam Properties and qualities Slope:3 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature:10 to 21 inches to fragipan Drainage class:Somewhat poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately low (0.01 to 0.14 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 7 to 14 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 2.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3w Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: F140XY024NY - Moist Dense Till Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Langford Percent of map unit:10 percent Landform:Hills Landform position (two-dimensional):Backslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve, side slope Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Hydric soil rating: No Chippewa Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Depressions Landform position (two-dimensional):Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Concave Hydric soil rating: Yes Fremont Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Hills Landform position (two-dimensional):Footslope, summit Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope, interfluve Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Linear Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 16 EbC—Erie channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2wn36 Elevation: 330 to 2,460 feet Mean annual precipitation: 31 to 70 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 180 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Erie and similar soils:80 percent Minor components:20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Erie Setting Landform:Hills Landform position (two-dimensional):Footslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope, interfluve Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 9 inches: channery silt loam E - 9 to 13 inches: channery silt loam Bg - 13 to 15 inches: channery silt loam Bx - 15 to 38 inches: channery silt loam C - 38 to 72 inches: channery loam Properties and qualities Slope:8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature:10 to 21 inches to fragipan Drainage class:Somewhat poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately low (0.01 to 0.14 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 7 to 14 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 2.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: F140XY024NY - Moist Dense Till Custom Soil Resource Report 17 Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Langford Percent of map unit:10 percent Landform:Hills Landform position (two-dimensional):Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Head slope, side slope Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Linear Hydric soil rating: No Chippewa Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Depressions Landform position (two-dimensional):Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Concave Hydric soil rating: Yes Fremont Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Hills Landform position (two-dimensional):Footslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve, side slope Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Linear Hydric soil rating: No EcA—Chippewa and Alden soils, 0 to 8 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2v32v Elevation: 330 to 2,460 feet Mean annual precipitation: 31 to 70 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 180 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Chippewa and similar soils:55 percent Alden and similar soils:30 percent Minor components:15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Chippewa Setting Landform:Depressions Custom Soil Resource Report 18 Landform position (two-dimensional):Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Concave Parent material:Loamy till dominated by siltstone, sandstone, and shale fragments Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: silt loam Eg - 7 to 15 inches: channery silt loam Bxg - 15 to 45 inches: channery silt loam C - 45 to 72 inches: channery silt loam Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 8 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders:0.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature:8 to 20 inches to fragipan Drainage class:Poorly drained 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:About 0 to 6 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: F140XY016NY - Mineral Wetlands Hydric soil rating: Yes Description of Alden Setting Landform:Depressions Landform position (two-dimensional):Toeslope, footslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope, side slope Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Concave, linear Parent material:A silty mantle of local deposition overlying loamy till Typical profile H1 - 0 to 10 inches: mucky silt loam H2 - 10 to 23 inches: silt loam H3 - 23 to 36 inches: channery silt loam H4 - 36 to 60 inches: channery silt loam Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Very poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 0 to 6 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:Frequent Custom Soil Resource Report 19 Calcium carbonate, maximum content:5 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: C/D Ecological site: F140XY016NY - Mineral Wetlands Hydric soil rating: Yes Minor Components Volusia Percent of map unit:10 percent Landform:Mountains, hills Landform position (two-dimensional):Footslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope, interfluve Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Linear Hydric soil rating: No Chippewa, very poorly drained Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Depressions Landform position (two-dimensional):Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Concave Hydric soil rating: Yes Custom Soil Resource Report 20 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. 21 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. Custom Soil Resource Report 22 23 Custom Soil Resource Report Map—Hydric Rating by Map Unit 46 9 5 7 6 0 46 9 5 8 5 0 46 9 5 9 4 0 46 9 6 0 3 0 46 9 6 1 2 0 46 9 6 2 1 0 46 9 6 3 0 0 46 9 6 3 9 0 46 9 6 4 8 0 46 9 5 7 6 0 46 9 5 8 5 0 46 9 5 9 4 0 46 9 6 0 3 0 46 9 6 1 2 0 46 9 6 2 1 0 46 9 6 3 0 0 46 9 6 3 9 0 46 9 6 4 8 0 378350 378440 378530 378620 378710 378800 378890 378350 378440 378530 378620 378710 378800 378890 42° 24' 40'' N 76 ° 2 8 ' 4 2 ' ' W 42° 24' 40'' N 76 ° 2 8 ' 1 7 ' ' W 42° 24' 16'' N 76 ° 2 8 ' 4 2 ' ' W 42° 24' 16'' N 76 ° 2 8 ' 1 7 ' ' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 18N WGS84 0 150 300 600 900Feet 0 50 100 200 300Meters Map Scale: 1:3,690 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons Hydric (100%) Hydric (66 to 99%) Hydric (33 to 65%) Hydric (1 to 32%) Not Hydric (0%) Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines Hydric (100%) Hydric (66 to 99%) Hydric (33 to 65%) Hydric (1 to 32%) Not Hydric (0%) Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points Hydric (100%) Hydric (66 to 99%) Hydric (33 to 65%) Hydric (1 to 32%) Not Hydric (0%) Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:20,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. 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: Tompkins County, New York Survey Area Data: Version 19, Sep 5, 2023 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Apr 1, 2020—Oct 1, 2020 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. Custom Soil Resource Report 24 Table—Hydric Rating by Map Unit Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI BgC Bath and Valois soils, 5 to 15 percent slopes 0 4.8 21.5% EbB Erie channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 5 16.2 72.1% EbC Erie channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 5 0.2 0.9% EcA Chippewa and Alden soils, 0 to 8 percent slopes 90 1.2 5.5% Totals for Area of Interest 22.4 100.0% Rating Options—Hydric Rating by Map Unit Aggregation Method: Percent Present Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Lower Custom Soil Resource Report 25 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 26 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 Custom Soil Resource Report 27