attachment e-2 wetland delineation reports: lake … · lake anna & waste heat treatment...
TRANSCRIPT
ATTACHMENT E-2
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORTS:
LAKE ANNA
AND
WASTE HEAT TREATMENT FACILITY SHORELINE
Dominion North Anna Power Station
Lake Anna & Waste Heat Treatment Facility
Shoreline Wetland Delineation Report
Prepared for:
Dominion Virginia Power
5000 Dominion Boulevard
Glen Allen, Virginia 23060-3308
Prepared by:
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology
15 Loveton Circle
Sparks, Maryland 21152
(410) 771-4950
July 2009
Lake Anna and WHTF Shoreline Wetland Delineation Report July 2009
Dominion North Anna Power Station ES-1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The North Anna Power Station (NAPS) is a nuclear power plant with the capacity to generate
electricity from two units (Unit 1 and Unit 2). NAPS is located in Louisa County, near the town
of Mineral, on a peninsula on the southern shore of Lake Anna, approximately 5 miles upstream
of the North Anna Dam. Virginia Electric and Power Company D/B/A Dominion Virginia
Power (Dominion), operates the existing nuclear units on the NAPS site.
Dominion is evaluating the possible construction of an additional nuclear generating unit (Unit
3) within the property boundary of the existing NAPS. An Early Site Permit (ESP) from the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was received in November 2007 finding the site suitable
for a new Unit 3. As presented in the ESP, a closed-cycle cooling system is proposed with dry
and hybrid wet cooling tower components with make-up water supply provided by Lake Anna.
Although the Unit 3 cooling system would use less water as compared to Units 1 and 2, it would
still involve some consumptive use of water from Lake Anna. Should Dominion decide to
construct Unit 3, it would propose to raise the normal pool elevation of Lake Anna by 3 inches to
250.25 ft msl. Similarly, the Waste Heat Treatment Facility’s normal full-pool elevation would
be raised by 3 inches to 250.85 ft msl. These new water elevations would help offset some of the
additional consumptive use by increasing water storage within Lake Anna.
In 2007, field data was collected at five representative coves within Lake Anna to estimate
potential shoreline impacts associated with raising the normal-pool elevation of Lake Anna.
Based on the results of the 2007 field study, wetland presence and type were a direct function of
elevation and percent slope of the ground surface.
In 2009, a desktop analysis of the Lake Anna and WHTF shorelines, including the five coves
evaluated in 2007, was conducted to determine the area of potential inundation and to classify
the percent slopes of the shorelines of Lake Anna and the WHTF. The desktop analysis was
conducted using aerial photographs and topographic information. This information was
incorporated into a Geographic Information System (GIS) and used to classify the percent slopes
of the shorelines of Lake Anna and the WHTF. This information was used to determine the
likely presence of wetlands along the shorelines, based on percent slope and elevation.
Increasing the normal water level elevations within Lake Anna and the WHTF by 3 inches is
estimated to impact a total of 8.14 acres of wetland area. For purposes of this assessment, it has
been assumed that all areas with slopes 2% currently support wetlands and these areas will be
impacted by the proposed increase in normal pool elevations of Lake Anna and the WHTF.
The overall wetland impact will likely be a temporary loss of function or a change in wetland
type, rather than a permanent loss of wetland acreage. It is believed that over time new wetlands
may develop at slightly higher elevations in some locations; however, the impacts associated
with the proposed inundation of areas classified as having slopes 2% will be considered to be
permanent impacts to wetlands and will require mitigation.
Lake Anna and WHTF Shoreline Wetland Delineation Report July 2009
Dominion North Anna Power Station 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The North Anna Power Station (NAPS) is a nuclear power plant with the capacity to generate
electricity from two units (Unit 1 and Unit 2). NAPS is located in Louisa County, near the town
of Mineral, on a peninsula on the southern shore of Lake Anna, approximately 5 miles upstream
of the North Anna Dam (Figure 1). Virginia Electric and Power Company D/B/A Dominion
Virginia Power (Dominion), operates the existing nuclear units on the NAPS site. Dominion
owns the land above and below the lake surface and around the lake up to the expected high-
water mark.
Lake Anna is one of the largest freshwater lakes in Virginia. In 1968, Dominion purchased
18,000 acres to provide a reliable clean source of cooling water for NAPS. By 1972, the North
Anna Dam was completed and the North Anna River was impounded creating the 9,600 acre
Lake Anna. Adjacent to Lake Anna is a 3,400 acre Waste Heat Treatment Facility (WHTF) that
receives the cooling water and transfers the excess heat from the water to the atmosphere before
discharge to the lower reservoir (Figure 2). North Anna Units 1 and 2 began commercial
operation in 1978 and 1980, respectively. Lake Anna is approximately 17 miles long and 1.5
miles wide, with approximately 272 miles of shoreline. Currently, the normal pool elevation of
Lake Anna is 250.0 ft mean sea level (msl). The elevation of the lake surface typically fluctuates
between 249.0 ft msl and 250.5 ft msl based on near-term weather, and has fluctuated between
248.0 ft msl and 251.0 ft msl based on long-term severe weather or severe precipitation events.
Dominion is evaluating the possible construction of an additional nuclear generating unit (Unit
3) within the property boundary of the existing NAPS. An Early Site Permit (ESP) from the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was received in November 2007 finding the site suitable
for a new Unit 3. As presented in the ESP, a closed-cycle cooling system is proposed with dry
and hybrid wet cooling tower components with make-up water supply provided by Lake Anna.
Dry cooling towers would use water-to-air finned-fan coolers to transfer heat through the finned
tubes to the atmosphere. The wet cooling towers would remove heat by spraying the water to a
forced or induced air stream.
Although the Unit 3 cooling system would use less water as compared to Units 1 and 2, it would
still involve some consumptive use of water from Lake Anna. Should Dominion decide to
construct Unit 3, it would propose to raise the normal pool elevation of Lake Anna by 3 inches to
250.25 ft msl. Similarly, the WHTF’s normal full-pool elevation would be raised by 3 inches to
250.85 ft msl. These new water elevations would help offset some of the additional consumptive
use by increasing water storage and reducing the potential increased frequency of implementing
the Lake Level Contingency Plan, related to temporary reductions of flow from the Lake Anna
dam during drought (i.e., low-flow) conditions.
In September 2007, EA Engineering, Science, and Technology (EA) conducted a study that
evaluated five representative coves within the lake to estimate potential shoreline impacts
associated with raising the normal-pool elevation of Lake Anna. This work was conducted based
on a multi-agency-approved study plan dated March 28, 2007. In addition, a desktop analysis of
the Lake Anna and WHTF shorelines, including the five coves evaluated in 2007, was conducted
to determine the area of potential inundation, also known as the “zone of inundation.” The
Lake Anna and WHTF Shoreline Wetland Delineation Report July 2009
Dominion North Anna Power Station 2
purpose of the analysis was to evaluate the relationship between the lake level and wetland areas
in Lake Anna and the relationship between water surface elevations of the WHTF and existing
wetlands along the shoreline of the WHTF.
2.0 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Field Studies
2.1.1 2007 Lake Anna Wetland Study
Field studies were conducted during the week of 17 September 2007, and 25 September through
27 September 2007 to determine the existing conditions present within the study areas and to
estimate potential shoreline impacts associated with raising the normal full-pool elevation. Five
coves within Lake Anna were assessed (Figure 3). The selected coves were associated with the
confluence of tributaries entering Lake Anna and were located at the interface between tributary
streams and the existing 250.0 ft msl normal full-pool elevation of Lake Anna.
Refined Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) elevation survey point files were provided by
Dominion for each of the five coves considered in this study. LIDAR is a remote sensing system
used to collect topographic data. A digital elevation model (DEM) was created by interpolating
the ground surface elevation points provided by the LIDAR. The processed LIDAR data
allowed proposed changes in water level elevations to be depicted geographically. The areal
extent of changes in inundation within the study areas caused by proposed normal full-pool
elevation changes were quantified using Geographic Information System (GIS) techniques. The
GIS compared the areas inundated at existing normal pool elevations to areas that would be
inundated by the proposed increase in normal pool elevation. The resultant DEM was contoured
at 0.25 ft intervals to depict areas of the 5 coves that would be inundated at lake levels ranging
from 248.0 to 250.25 ft msl.
Field-run transects situated perpendicular to the shoreline were established to collect vegetation
community information. Field observations of the vegetation communities were combined with
the DEM to assign elevation ranges to the wetland communities. The extent of the various
wetland communities observed (i.e., emergent, scrub/shrub, forested) were closely associated
with specific ground elevation ranges. Wetland presence and type were a direct function of
elevation and percent slope of the ground surface.
The coves that were assessed represent a range of topographic characteristics found throughout
Lake Anna. Some of the coves studied had steep slopes while others had flatter slopes. The
selected coves were located away from the dam in an effort to evaluate areas likely to be most
impacted by alterations in the current full pool elevation. Field surveys of 30 transects in five
coves were conducted as part of the Lake Anna study. A total of 19 transects out of the total 30
transects were assessed for wetland communities. As shown in Figure 3 the five coves studied
were:
Lake Anna and WHTF Shoreline Wetland Delineation Report July 2009
Dominion North Anna Power Station 3
Christopher Creek,
Contrary Creek,
Crafton Creek,
Freshwater Creek, and
Goldmine Creek.
Vegetative communities (wetland or upland types) were identified at each cove at transects
spaced approximately 1,000 ft apart. Four to seven transects were studied along the length of
each cove. Along each transect, data points were located approximately 50 feet apart. Sampling
stations were comprised of an area with a 6-ft radius centered on the transect. The transects
extended landward to elevation 252 ft msl. At each sampling point, observations of plant species
present, their distribution, dominance, and condition were recorded. A qualitative assessment of
plant density was also recorded. Measurements of density were recorded as 1 through 5, based
upon the Braun-Blanquet method for assessing cover class. A description of the cover class
codes is presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Braun-Blanquet Vegetative Cover Classes
Code Description Cover class
5Any number of plants covering more than ¾ of the
sample site > 75%
4Any number of plants covering between ½ and ¾ of
the sample site 50% - 75%
3Any number of plants covering ¼ to ½ of the sample
site 25% - 50%
2Any number of plants covering between 1/20 and ¼
of the sample site 5% - 25%
1
Numerous individuals, but cover < 1/20 of the sample
site, or scattered with cover up to 1/20 of the sample
site
< 5%
To estimate the area of wetlands within each cove, the DEM was used to determine the range of
elevations where known wetland transect points were identified. In the office, the wetlands that
were found along the cove at this range of elevation were interpolated to predict the wetland
areas within the cove, between transects with wetland communities. This approach allowed the
wetland areas to be quantified within the five coves based on the discrete transect locations and
the associated ‘wetland’ elevations. Using the estimated wetland areas and contoured areas of
potential inundation, the percentages of surveyed wetlands inundated at various lake levels
ranging from 248.0 – 250.25 ft msl were calculated.
Formal wetland delineations were not conducted as part of this study and USACE Routine
wetland Determination data forms were not completed; however, the procedures outlined in the
1987 Corps of Engineers Delineation Manual (USACE 1987) were used to identify wetland
Lake Anna and WHTF Shoreline Wetland Delineation Report July 2009
Dominion North Anna Power Station 4
areas within the study areas. Hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology indicators were
used to roughly define the boundaries of the observed wetland areas along each wetland transect.
Project-specific field data forms for the wetland community surveys were created for the wetland
assessment. Data collected in the field were recorded on these data forms and entered
electronically in the office. Copies of the data forms are included in Appendix A. Photographs
of the transects assessed during the Lake Anna Reservoir Study are included in Appendix B.
2.1.2 2009 Agency Field Visit
A tour of Lake Anna and the WHTF by boat was conducted in June 2009 with representatives of
the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) and the Norfolk District of the U.S.
Corps of Engineers (USACE). The primary goal of the field visit was to determine if the results
of the desktop analysis (See Section 2.2, below) were supported by the observable field
conditions. During the field visit, the shoreline wetland resources were compared with the slope
of the land as predicted by the desktop analysis. Another goal of the field visit was to determine
how wetland areas may be impacted by a 3 inch increase in water surface elevation within the
WHTF and Lake Anna. Prior to the field visit, specific locations were identified to reflect
approximately 1 percent, 3 percent, 5 percent and 10 percent shoreline slopes. Digital photos
were taken of these sites during the field visit and can be found in Appendix B.
2.2 Desktop Analysis
A desktop analysis of the shorelines of Lake Anna and the WHTF was conducted using available
information from several sources. Access to aerial photographs used during the analysis was
provided by the Virginia Geographic Information Network (aerial imagery circa late
February/early March 2007). Topographic information provided by Spotsylvania and Louisa
Counties was also acquired by EA. Spotsylvania County Government provided contour data for
approximately ¾ of Lake Anna’s shoreline at a 2-ft interval and Louisa County Government
provided contour data at a 5-ft interval for approximately ¼ of the lake shoreline and the entirety
of the WHTF shoreline.
To model the wetland impacts of raising the level of Lake Anna from 250 ft msl to 250.25 ft msl
and the WHTF from 250.6 ft msl to 250.85 ft msl, the following GIS workflow sequence was
undertaken. Contour data were obtained for the entire perimeter of Lake Anna and the WHTF,
using 2 ft and 5 ft contours for the lake and 5 ft contour data for the WHTF. Two foot contour
data was not available for the WHTF. While 2-ft contours were of adequate density to depict the
Spotsylvania County portion of the shoreline of Lake Anna, an additional contour was digitized
from aerial imagery for the areas covered by 5-ft contours (Louisa County portion of Lake Anna
and the WHTF) in order to capture the shoreline. The digitized contour was assigned a value of
250 ft msl on the lake side and 250.6 ft msl on the WHTF, corresponding to the water surface
elevation of Lake Anna and the WHTF, based on Dominion records for the dates of aerial
acquisition.
The contour data were used to build a DEM. From this DEM, the 250.25 ft msl contour was
extracted and used in conjunction with the existing 250 ft msl contour on the lake side to create a
Lake Anna and WHTF Shoreline Wetland Delineation Report July 2009
Dominion North Anna Power Station 5
zone of inundation from 250 – 250.25 ft msl. For the WHTF, a 250.85 ft msl contour was
extracted and used in conjunction with the digitized 250.6 ft msl contour to create a zone of
inundation from 250.6 – 250.85 ft msl. The zone of inundation was manually edited in some
locations where contour data did not correspond with the shoreline morphology, due to minor
data inconsistencies. Land cover associated with developed areas, such as impervious cover,
bulkheads, landscaped turf (as delineated from aerial imagery, where wetlands were not expected
to be found) were not included in the zone of inundation. Slopes within the zone of inundation
were calculated from the DEM and summarized to determine the area of potential inundation,
following a 3 inch rise in normal water surface elevation for Lake Anna and the WHTF.
3.0 RESULTS
3.1 2007 Lake Anna Wetland Studies
Wetland areas identified within the coves were characterized as emergent, scrub/shrub, and
forested wetlands. The majority of the wetlands observed were concentrated where the tributary
entered Lake Anna, with the exception of Goldmine Creek. At Goldmine Creek, wetlands were
observed within each of the transects evaluated.
The slope of banks within the study areas varied from steep to relatively shallow, typical of the
coves and tributaries throughout the lake. The coves with steep banks did not support wetlands
within the defined study area, while the coves with flatter slopes were more likely to support
wetland communities. The average ground surface slope of the wetland areas observed along the
shoreline was 1.75 percent.
The emergent wetland communities present were dominated by native species adapted to
wetland conditions. Soft rush (Juncus effusus), rice cutgrass (Leersia oryzoides), clearweed
(Pilea pumila), spotted touch-me-not (Impatiens capensis), nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus),
Pennsylvania smartweed (Polygonum pensylvanicum), broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia), and
lesser sparganium (Sparganium americanum) were the dominant plant species observed within
the emergent wetland community. The emergent wetlands were typically adjacent to the
tributary or cove and constituted fringe wetlands that experience periodic changes in depth and
frequency of inundation. Scrub/shrub wetlands were observed typically adjacent to emergent
wetlands. The dominant plant species within the scrub/shrub wetlands included speckled alder
(Alnus rugosa) and common greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia). These areas included high and
low marsh and appeared to be healthy, even though the field survey was conducted during a
period of relatively low lake levels. Forested wetlands were not as abundant, within the study
area, as emergent wetlands. The forested wetlands were located at higher elevations, further
from the shoreline of the tributaries and coves, and likely experience fewer changes in
hydrologic regime than the fringe wetlands. The forested wetland areas were dominated by red
maple (Acer rubrum), river birch (Betula nigra), and black willow (Salix nigra). Data forms for
the 2007 field study are presented in Appendix A.
The majority of species observed within the wetland areas have an inundation frequency
tolerance that ranges from seasonally saturated to irregularly or seasonally inundated. These
Lake Anna and WHTF Shoreline Wetland Delineation Report July 2009
Dominion North Anna Power Station 6
wetlands, especially the fringe wetlands, currently experience fluctuations in the water surface
elevations and have adapted to seasonal changes in inundation.
A description and summary of the coves studied is presented below:
Christopher Creek
Three of the five transects (CH-1, CH-3 and CH-5) were assessed for wetlands within
Christopher Creek.
The slope of the banks within the cove varied from moderately steep to steep.
No wetland areas were observed within the transects assessed.
Contrary Creek
Four of the six transects (CO-1, CO-3, CO-5 and CO-6) were assessed for wetlands
within Contrary Creek.
No wetlands were observed within the transects assessed.
Crafton Creek
Two of the four transects (CR-2 and CR-4) were assessed for wetlands within Crafton
Creek.
The banks along Crafton Creek were approximately three to six feet above the water
surface.
No wetlands were observed within the transects assessed.
Freshwater Creek
Four of the seven transects (FR-1, FR-3, FR-5 and FR-7) were assessed for wetlands
within Freshwater Creek.
Wetlands were observed along Transect FR-1.
The dominant species within FR-1 included red maple, rice cutgrass, soft rush, river birch,
speckled alder, common greenbrier, and hay scented fern (Dennstaedtia punctilobula).
Goldmine Creek
Six transects (GM- 1, GM-3, GM-5, GM-7, GM-9, and GM-11) were assessed for
wetlands within Goldmine Creek.
Wetland areas were observed within all transects assessed.
Goldmine Creek transect GM-1 was located at the interface of Goldmine Creek and Lake Anna.
The left bank of Goldmine Creek, at Transect GM-1, included upland forest. Wetlands were
observed along the transect on the left bank of Goldmine Creek. The dominant species included
clearweed, spotted touch-me-not, crowned beggarticks (Bidens coronata), nutsedge, and soft
Lake Anna and WHTF Shoreline Wetland Delineation Report July 2009
Dominion North Anna Power Station 7
rush. Transect GM-1 was dominated by emergent wetlands, but a forested wetland was observed
further from the shoreline, close to the endpoint of the transect.
Emergent wetland areas were observed along GM-3. The dominant species included
Pennsylvania smartweed and Nepalese browntop (Microstegium vimineum). Transect GM-5 was
dominated by emergent wetlands with shrubs and trees located throughout the emergent areas.
The dominant plant species included black willow, spotted touch-me-not, clearweed, river birch,
and crowned beggarticks.
GM-7 was dominated by emergent wetlands, but a forested wetland was observed further from
the shoreline, close to the endpoint of the transect. The dominant plant species along GM-7
included musclewood, rice cutgrass, broadleaf cattail, and lesser sparganium. GM-9 was
dominated by emergent wetlands. Dominant species within GM-9 included rice cutgrass,
Pennsylvania smartweed, and broadleaf cattail.
GM-11 was dominated by emergent wetlands. The dominant species within GM-11 included
rice cut grass and Allegheny blackberry.
3.2 2009 Agency Field Visit
At the end of the field visit conducted by USACE and VDEQ on 26 June 2009, it was concluded
by agency staff that the “desktop approach” was the preferred method to conservatively quantify
the amount of wetlands that might be inundated following a 3-inch increase in the normal lake
level. The desktop approach efforts and conclusions were supported in the field during the
agency field visit. The results of the desktop analysis are presented in Section 3.3, below.
3.3 Desktop Analysis
EA conducted a desktop analysis to determine areas that potentially support emergent,
scrub/shrub, and forested wetlands within the proposed zone of inundation. A shoreline slope
2% was chosen as the limit of wetland extent within the zone of inundation based on
observations made during field surveys of the five coves conducted in 2007. Within the zone of
inundation, with a ground surface slope 2%, the analyses determined that approximately 2.72
acres along the Lake Anna shoreline will potentially be inundated following a 3 inch rise in lake
level from 250 ft msl to 250.25 ft msl. Of the 2.72 acres, 2.5 acres are forested and 0.19 acres
have emergent/scrub-shrub vegetative cover. For the WHTF, approximately 5.42 acres within
the zone of inundation with a slope 2% are expected to be inundated following a 3 inch rise in
surface water elevation from 250.6 ft msl to 250.85 ft msl. Of the 5.42 acres within this zone
along the WHTF shoreline, 4.48 acres are forested and 0.94 acres have emergent/scrub-shrub
vegetative cover.
It has been assumed that all areas with slopes 2% within the zone of inundation currently
support wetlands. This is a conservative assumption since it is likely that non-wetland areas are
present within the zone of inundation with slopes less than 2%.
Lake Anna and WHTF Shoreline Wetland Delineation Report July 2009
Dominion North Anna Power Station 8
4.0 REGULATORY COORDINATION
The desktop analysis quantified the wetland areas located within the perimeter of Lake Anna and
the WHTF. Based on the methodology utilized, the field conditions observed in 2007 and 2009,
and the best technical information available related to the project site, the wetland delineation is
EA’s professional estimate of the wetlands located within the proposed zone of inundation.
5.0 CONCLUSION
Increasing the normal water level elevations within Lake Anna and the WHTF by 3 inches is
estimated to impact a total of 8.14 acres of wetland area. For purposes of this assessment, it has
been assumed that all areas with slopes 2% currently support wetlands and these areas will be
impacted by the proposed increase in normal pool elevations of Lake Anna and the WHTF.
The increase in lake level elevation would occur 75 percent of the time based on model
predictions utilizing historic lake level elevation data. These minor increases in water surface
elevation may affect existing wetlands. While some wetland types may tolerate a slight increase
in inundation (e.g., emergent wetlands) other wetland types (e.g., forested wetlands) may not be
able to adapt as easily. Wetlands, including forested wetlands, may shift in the landscape to
slightly higher elevations as a result of the proposed increase in the normal pool elevations of
Lake Anna and the WHTF. If forested wetlands shift to a higher elevation, the process would
likely take several years to occur.
The overall wetland impact will likely be a temporary loss of function or a change in wetland
type, rather than a permanent loss of wetland acreage. It is believed that over time new wetlands
may develop at slightly higher elevations in some locations; however, the impacts associated
with the proposed inundation of areas classified as having slopes 2% will be considered to be
permanent impacts to wetlands and will require mitigation.
LouisaCounty
HanoverCounty
CarolineCounty
SpotsylvaniaCounty
OrangeCounty
North Anna Power Station
Dam
WildernessWilderness
Fredericksburg
522
33
522
208
20
3
22
600
208
Spotsylvania Co Batl Nmp/FrdrcSpotsylvania Co Batl Nmp/Frdrc
Lake Anna State ParkLake Anna State Park
Q:\
pro
jects
\GIS
\14
39
10
1\M
XD
\Fig
ure
1.
Gen
era
l L
ocatio
n M
ap
.mxd
V i r g i n i a
0 42
Miles
Figure 1. General Location Map
Fig
ure
2.
La
ke
An
na
an
dth
eN
ort
hA
nn
aP
ow
er
Sta
tio
n's
Wa
ste
He
at
Tre
atm
en
tF
ac
ilit
y
05
2.5
Mile
sI J
uly
20
09
EA
Pro
jec
tN
o.
14
39
10
20
00
4N
ort
hA
nn
aP
ow
er
Sta
tio
nL
ak
eA
nn
aW
etl
an
ds
As
se
ss
me
nt
Are
aE
nla
rged
P:\Utilities\DominionEnergy\Projects\1439101-NorthAnnaPermitting\GIS\LakeAnnaReservoirWetlandAssessment\MXD\Figure2-LakeAnnaandtheNorthAnnaPowerStation'sWasteHeatTreatmentFacility.mxd
Dam
Nort
hA
nna
Po
wer
Sta
tion
La
ke
An
na
Waste
Heat
Tre
atm
en
tF
acilit
y
Dis
charg
ecanal
Fig
ure
3.
20
07
La
ke
An
na
Stu
dy
05
2.5
Mile
sI J
uly
20
09
EA
Pro
jec
tN
o.
14
39
10
20
00
4
No
rth
An
na
Po
we
rS
tati
on
Pe
rmit
tin
gA
ss
ista
nc
eL
ak
eA
nn
aW
etl
an
ds
As
se
ss
me
nt
Stu
dy
Are
a
P:\Utilities\DominionEnergy\Projects\1439101-NorthAnnaPermitting\GIS\LakeAnnaReservoirWetlandAssessment\MXD\Figure32007LakeAnnaStudy.mxd
Gold
min
eC
reek
Christo
pher
Cre
ek
Contr
ary
Cre
ek
Fre
shw
ate
rC
reek
Cra
fton
Cre
ek
Ora
ng
eC
ou
nty
Dam
Nort
hA
nna
Po
wer
Sta
tion
APPENDIX A
2007 FIELD SURVEY DATA SHEETS
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Christopher Creek
Date: 9/17/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
CH-1 50 Open Water Water
CH-1 100 Open Water Water
CH-1 150 Open Water Water
CH-1 200 Open Water Water
CH-1 250 Betula nigra Even Healthy 5 Upland
Platanus occidentalis
Rubus allegheniensis
Lonicera japonica
mowed upland X
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Christopher Creek
Date: 9/21/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
CH-3 0 Pasture Even X Healthy 5 Upland
CH-3 50 Pasture Even X Healthy 5 Upland
CH-3 100 Open Water Water
CH-3 150 Open Water Water
CH-3 200 Pasture Even X Healthy 5 Upland
CH-3 250 Pasture Even X Healthy 5 Upland
CH-3 300 Platanus occidentalis Even Healthy 5
(creeks edge) Toxicodendron radicans X
Dichanthelium clandestinum
CH-3 350 Open Water Water
CH-3 400 Pasture Even X Healthy 5 Upland
CH-3 450 Pasture Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Christopher Creek
Date: 9/21/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
CH-5 0 Pasture Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Fescue sp.
Cirsium arvense
50 Pasture Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Fescue sp.
Cirsium arvense
100 Pasture Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Fescue sp.
Cirsium arvense
150 Open Water Water
200 Pasture Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Fescue sp.
Cirsium arvense
250 Pasture Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Apocynum androsaemifolium
Hypericum perforatum
Solanum sp.
Sorghum halepense
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Contrary Creek
Date: 9/20/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
CO-1 0 Turf - mowed Even X Healthy 5 Upland
CO-1 50 Quercus alba Upland
Quercus phellos
Pinus virginiana Even X Healthy 5
Viburnum dentatum
Smilax rotundifolia
Vaccinium corymbosum
Nyssa sylvatica
Sphagnum sp.
CO-1 100 Gravel Upland
CO-1 150 Gravel Upland
CO-1 200 Gravel Upland
CO-1 250 Open Water Upland
CO-1 300 Open Water Upland
CO-1 350 Open Water Upland
CO-1 400 Kalmia latifolia Uneven X Healthy 2 Upland
Gravel
Smilax rotundifolia
CO-1 450 Pinus virginiana Uneven Fair-drought stress 2 Upland
Andropogon virginicus X
sand
CO-1 500 Gravel Upland
CO-1 550 Gravel Upland
CO-1 600 Pinus virginiana Even X Healthy 3 Upland
Betula nigra
Acer rubrum
Andropogon virginicus
Smilax rotundifolia
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Contrary Creek
Date: 9/20/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
CO-3 0 Ulmus americana Equal X Healthy 5 Upland
Betula nigra
Pinus virginiana X
Vaccinium corymbosum
Smilax rotundifolia
Kalmia latifolia
Dennstaedtia punctilobula
CO-3 50 Betula nigra Equal Healthy 5 Upland
Pinus virginiana X
Scirpus cyperinus
Eupatorium purpureum
Solidago sp.
Andropogon virginicus
CO-3 100 Gravel Upland
Pinus virginiana
CO-3 150 Water - gravel bed Water
CO-3 200 Gravel Upland
CO-3 250 Gravel Upland
CO-3 300 Liquidambar styraciflua Even X Healthy 4 Upland
Smilax rotundifolia X
Pinus virginiana
Pilea pumila
CO-3 350 Acer rubrum Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Smilax rotundifolia
Betula nigra
Liquidambar styraciflua
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Contrary Creek
Date: 9/20/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
CO-6 50 No plant species within this transect, disturbed area. Upland
CO-5 50 Disturbed area (pea gravel) Upland
CO-4 50 Disturbed area (pea gravel) Upland
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Crafton Creek
Date: 9/18/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
CR-2 50 ft (RB) Verbesina alternifolia Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Toxicodendron radicans
Lonicera japonica
Platanus occidentalis
CR-2 50 ft (LB) Toxicodendron radicans Even Healthy 5 Upland
Asimina triloba X
Rosa multiflora
Bidens coronata
Verbesina alternifolia
Rubus allegheniensis X
Campsis radicans
Dichanthelium clandestinum
Acer negundo
Eupatorium purpureum
Phlox sp.
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Crafton Creek
Date: 9/18/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
CR-4 50 ft (RB) Bidens coronata Even Healthy 5 Upland
Ambrosia artemisiifolia
Lactuca canadensis
Ulmus americana
Acer negundo
Impatiens capensis
Carex sp.
Juncus effusus
Vernonia sp.
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Acer rubrum
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Trifolium sp.
Scirpus cyperinus
Microstegium vimineum X
CR-4 50 ft (LB) Lonicera japonica Even Healthy 5 Upland
Juniperus virginiana
Carpinus caroliniana
Trifolium sp.
Rosa multiflora
Toxicodendron radicans
Microstegium vimineum X
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Freshwater Creek
Date: 9/19/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
FR-1 150 (RB) Carpinus caroliniana Even X Healthy 4 Upland
Smilax rotundifolia
Quercus alba
Betula nigra
Vaccinium corymbosum
Lycopodium dendroideum
Carya ovata
Sassafras albidum
FR-1 100 Betula nigra Even Healthy 5 Wetland
Acer rubrum X
Cornus amomum
Alnus sp.
Carex sp.
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Bidens coronata
Leersia oryzoides
Juncus effusus
Scirpus cyperinus
FR-1 50 Alnus sp. Even Healthy 5 Upland
Cornus amomum
Betula nigra
Juncus effusus
Hypericum perforatum
Leersia oryzoides X
Pilea pumila
FR-1 0 Open Water Water
FR-1 250 (LB) Smilax rotundifolia Even X Healthy 4 Wetland
Acer rubrum
Betula nigra
Dennstaedtia punctilobula
FR-1 200 Cornus amomum Even / Diverse Healthy 5 Wetland
Betula nigra
Onoclea sensibilis
Pilea pumila
Bidens coronata
Smilax rotundifolia
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Freshwater Creek
Date: 9/19/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
FR-1 150 Betula nigra Diverse Uniform Healthy 5 Wetland
Acer rubra
Pilea pumila
Leersia oryzoides
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Bidens coronata
Juncus effusus X
Scirpus cyperinus
Hypericum perforatum
FR-1 100 Betula nigra Even Healthy 5 Wetland
Alnus sp.
Bidens coronata
Juncus effusus X
FR-1 50 Alnus sp. Even Healthy 5 Wetland
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Juncus effusus X
Bidens coronata
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Pilea pumila
Hypericum perforatum
FR-1 0 Acer rubrum Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
(end of tape measCarpinus caroliniana
Betula nigra
Dennstaedtia punctilobula
Vaccinium corymbosum
Sphagnum sp.
FR-1 50
(from last pointBetula nigra Even X Healthy 4 Wetland
Acer rubrum
Sphagnum sp.
Dennstaedtia punctilobula
Smilax rotundifolia
Nyssa sylvatica
FR-1 100 Smilax rotundifolia Even Healthy 4 Upland
Dennstaedtia punctilobula X
Quercus phellos
Acer rubrum
Carpinus caroliniana X
Lycopodium dendroideum
Carya ovata
Nyssa sylvatica
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Freshwater Creek
Date: 9/19/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
FR-3 Carpinus caroliniana Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Quercus alba X
Ilex opaca
Dennstaedtia punctilobula
Carya glabra
Toxicodendron radicans
Smilax rotundifolia
Quercus rubra
Mitchella repens
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
Polystichum acrostichoides
Betula nigra
Liriodendron tuliperfera
Sassafras albidum
Quercus marilandica
Liquidambar styraciflua
Lycopodium dendroideum
Pinus virginiana
Juniperus virginiana
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Freshwater Creek
Date: 9/19/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
FR-5 Ilex opaca Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Smilax rotundifolia
Carpinus caroliniana X
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Platanus occidentalis
Dichanthelium clandestinum
Carya glabra
Quercus alba
Juniperus virginiana
Liriodendron tuliperfera
Polystichum acrostichoides
Dennstaedtia punctilobula
Toxicodendron radicans
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Freshwater Creek
Date: 9/19/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
FR-7 Smilax rotundifolia Even Healthy 5 Upland
Acer rubrum
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Ilex opaca
Polystichum acrostichoides
Dennstaedtia punctilobula
Cornus florida
Carya glabra
Carpinus caroliniana X
Dichanthelium clandestinum
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Goldmine Creek
Date: 9/25/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
GM-1 50 Liriodendron tulipifera Even Healthy 4 Upland
Carpinus caroliniana
Betula nigra
Asimina triloba
Smilax rotundifolia X
Rosa multiflora X
Nyssa sylvatica
Lonicera japonica
Acer rubrum
Festuca sp.
GM-1 100 Open Water Water
GM-1 150 Rubus allegheniensis Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Tragopogon sp.
Lonicera japonica
Cornus amomum X
Aster sp.
Carya glabra
Dichanthelium clandestinum
Helianthus tuberosus
GM-1 200 Pilea pumila Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Impatiens capensis
Carex sp.
Polygonum saggitatum
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Goldmine Creek
Date: 9/25/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
GM-1 250 Cornus amomum
Impatiens capensis Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Bidens coronata
Pilea pumila
Alnus sp.
Salix nigra
Carex sp.
Leersia oryzoides
Sagitaria latifolia
GM-1 300 Rosa palustris Even Healthy 5 Wetland
Bidens coronata X
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Cornus amomum
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Alnus sp.
GM-1 350 Betula nigra Even Healthy 5 Wetland
Bidens coronata X
Sagitaria latifolia
Cyperus esculentus
GM-1 400 Cyperus esculentus Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Bidens coronata
Nuphar lutea
GM-1 450 Nuphar lutea Uneven Healthy - browsed 2 Wetland
Cyperus esculentus
Lemna minor
Juncus effusus X
GM-1 500 Juncus effusus Even Healthy 5 Wetland
Impatiens capensis
Scirpus cyperinus
Polygonum saggitatum
Bidens coronata
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Pilea pumila
Nuphar lutea
Cyperus esculentus X
Sagitaria latifolia
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Cornus amomum
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Goldmine Creek
Date: 9/25/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
GM-1 550 Bidens coronata Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Impatiens capensis
Rosa palustris
Leersia oryzoides
Pilea pumila
Carex sp.
Polygonum saggitatum
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Juncus effusus
Sagitaria latifolia
GM-1 600 Pilea pumila Even Healthy 5 Wetland
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Alnus sp.
Leersia oryzoides
Sagitaria latifolia
Carex sp. X
Impatiens capensis
Acer rubrum
Dichanthelium clandestinum
Cornus amomum
Polygonum saggitatum
GM-1 650 Bidens coronata Even X Healthy 2 Wetland
Betula nigra
Pilea pumila
Carex sp.
GM-1 700 Festuca sp. Even X Healthy 2 Upland
Lindera benzoin
Rubus allegheniensis
Lonicera japonica
Toxicodendron radicans
Rhus typhina
Aster sp.
Pilea pumila
Juncus effusus
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Goldmine Creek
Date: 9/26/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
GM-3 50 Rubus allegheniensis Uneven X Healthy 3 Upland
Lonicera japonica
GM-3 100 Festuca sp. Uneven X Healthy 4 Upland
Lonicera japonica
Pilea pumila
Aster sp.
Toxicodedron radicans
Betula nigra
Carex sp.
GM-3 150 Polygonum pensylvanicum Even X Healthy 4 Wetland
Helianthus tuberosus
Carex sp.
Bidens coronata
Pilea pumila
Impatiens capensis
GM-3 200 Open Water Water
GM-3 250 Microstegium vimineum Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Lonicera japonica
Pilea pumila
Salix nigra
Phytolacca americana
Verbesina alternifolia
GM-3 300 Platanus occidentalis Even Healthy 5 Upland
Festuca sp.
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Pilea pumila
Rubus allegheniensis
Microstegium vimineum X
Verbesina alternifolia
Impatiens capensis
Cuscuta americana
GM-3 350 Microstegium vimineum Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Betula nigra
Rubus allegheniensis
Lonicera japonica
Fraxinus americana
Pilea pumila
Carpinus caroliniana
Festuca sp.
Lysimachia nummularia
Toxicodendron radicans
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Goldmine Creek
Date: 9/26/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
GM-3 400 Microstegium vimineum Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Festuca sp.
Pilea pumila
Platanus occidentalis
Rosa multiflora
Lonicera japonica
GM-3 450 Microstegium vimineum Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Festuca sp.
Pilea pumila
Verbesina alternifolia
GM-3 500 Pilea pumila Healthy 5 Upland
Festuca sp.
Commelina communis
Microstegium vimineum X
GM-3 550 Festuca sp. Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Pilea pumila
Carex sp.
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Eupatorium purpureum
GM-3 600 Festuca sp. Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Solidago sp.
Carex sp.
Betula nigra
Pilea pumila
Polygonum saggitatum
GM-3 650 Carpinus caroliniana Even Healthy 3 Upland
Quercus sp.
Carya glabra
Microstegium vimineum X
Toxicodendron radicans
Lonicera japonica
Smilax rotundifolia
Juniperus virginiana
GM-3 700 Fagus grandifolia Even Healthy 3 Upland
Asimina triloba
Carpinus caroliniana X
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Goldmine Creek
Date: 9/26/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
GM-5 50 Festuca sp. Even X Healthy 3 Upland
Juniperus virginiana
Smilax rotundifolia
GM-5 100 Acer rubrum Even Healthy 4 Upland
Toxicodendron radicans X
Fraxinus sp.
Rubus allegheniensis
Smilax rotundifolia
GM-5 150 Salix nigra Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Eupatorium purpureum
Pilea pumila
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Impatiens capensis X
Leersia oryzoides
Microstegium vimineum
GM-5 200 Pilea pumila Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Salix nigra
Carex sp.
Helianthus tuberosus
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Betula nigra
GM-5 250 Betula nigra Even X Healthy 3 Wetland
Pilea pumila
Festuca sp.
Cephalanthus occidentalis
GM-5 300 Bidens coronata Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Juncus effusus
Pilea pumila
Carex sp.
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Cardamine sp.
GM-5 350 Bidens coronata Uneven X Healthy 5 Wetland
Symphyotrichum novae-anliae
Echinochloa crus-galli
GM-5 400 Impatiens capensis Even Healthy 3 Wetland
Pilea pumila
Lysimachia nummularia
Smilax rotundifolia
Carpinus caroliniana X
Fraxinus americana
Eupatorium purpureum
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Goldmine Creek
Date: 9/26/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
GM-5 450 Asimina triloba Even X Healthy 4 Upland
Lonicera japonica
Smilax rotundifolia
Campsis radicans
Acer negundo
GM-5 500 Rubus allegheniensis Even X Healthy 5 Upland
Microstegium vimineum
Impatiens capensis
Helianthus tuberosus
Pilea pumila
GM-5 550 Open Water Uneven Healthy 2 Wetland
Sagitaria latifolia
Pilea pumila X
Polygonum pensylvanicum
GM-5 600 Pilea pumila Even Healthy 4 Upland
Toxicodendron radicans X
Festuca sp. (stressed)
GM-5 650 Lindera benzoin Even Healthy 3 Wetland
Acer rubrum
Pilea pumila X
Lonicera japonica
Festuca sp.
Toxicodendron radicans
Sagitaria latifolia
GM-5 700 Smilax rotundifolia Even Healthy 5 Upland
Carpinus caroliniana X
Acer rubrum
Carex sp.
Lonicera japonica
Campsis radicans
Lindera benzoin
Festuca sp.
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Goldmine Creek
Date: 9/27/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
GM-7 50 Carpinus caroliniana Even X Healthy 4 Upland
Carya glabra
Toxicodendron radicans
Acer rubrum X
Impatiens capensis
Pilea pumila
Leersia oryzoides
Asimina triloba
GM-7 100 Rubus allegheniensis Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Leersia oryzoides X
Lonicera japonica
Toxicodendron radicans
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Sagitaria latifolia
Impatiens capensis
GM-7 150 Open Water Water
GM-7 200 Leersia oryzoides Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Scirpus cyperinus
Sagitaria latifolia
Polygonum pensylvanicum
GM-7 250 Leersia oryzoides Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Salix nigra
GM-7 300 Leersia oryzoides Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Sparganium sp.
GM-7 350 Sparganium sp. Even X Healthy 4 Wetland
Nuphar lutea
Galium sp.
Lemna minor
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Eupatorium purpureum
Open Water
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Goldmine Creek
Date: 9/27/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
GM-7 400 Leersia oryzoides Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Sagitaria latifolia
Acer rubrum
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Juncus effusus
Polygonum saggitatum
Galium sp.
Open Water
GM-7 450 Juncus effusus Even Healthy 3 Wetland
Sagitaria latifolia
Leersia oryzoides X
Rosa palustris
Open Water
GM-7 500 Scirpus cyperinus Even Healthy 3 Wetland
Typha latifolia
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Galium sp.
Sagitaria latifolia
Leersia oryzoides X
Open Water
GM-7 550 Typha latifolia Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Leersia oryzoides X
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Polygonum saggitatum
Galium sp.
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Goldmine Creek
Date: 9/27/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
GM-9 50 Polygonum saggitatum Even Healthy 5 Wetland
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Leersia oryzoides X
Bidens coronata
Salix nigra
Impatiens capensis
Erigeron annuus
GM-9 100 Salix nigra Even X Healthy 4 Wetland
Leersia oryzoides
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Carya glabra
GM-9 150 Leersia oryzoides Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Garya glabra
Sagitaria latifolia
Bidens coronata
GM-9 200 Polygonum pensylvanicum Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Leersia oryzoides X
Acer rubrum
Sagitaria latifolia
Scirpus cyperinus
Carya glabra
Bidens coronata
Typha latifolia
GM-9 250 Acer rubrum Even Healthy 5 Wetland
Juncus effusus
Typha latifolia
Cyperus esculentus
Leersia oryzoides X
Sagitaria latifolia
GM-9 300 Scirpus cyperinus Even Healthy 5 Wetland
Leersia oryzoides X
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Sagitaria latifolia
Acer rubrum
Polygonum saggitatum
Cyperus esculentus
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Goldmine Creek
Date: 9/27/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
GM-9 350 Leersia oryzoides Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Salix nigra
Scirpus cyperinus
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Sagitaria latifolia
GM-9 400 Rosa palustrus Even Healthy 5 Wetland
Typha latifolia X
Leersia oryzoides X
Bidens coronata
Salix nigra
GM-9 450 Typha latifolia Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Polygonum pensylvanicum X
Leersia oryzoides
GM-9 500 Leersia oryzoides Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Bidens coronata
Scirpus cyperinus
Sagitaria latifolia
Polygonum pensylvanicum
GM-9 600 Scirpus cyperinus Uneven Healthy 2 Wetland
Nuphar lutea
Open Water X
GM-9 650 Nuphar lutea Uneven X Healthy 4 Wetland
Lemna minor
Dominion Lake Anna Study
Creek: Goldmine Creek
Date: 9/27/07 Person(s) Sampling: CWL, MLH, TW
Wetland Communities Survey
Transect
Number (1000
ft)
Survey
Intervals
(50 ft)
Plant Species Distribution Dominance Condition DensityWetland /
Upland
GM-11 50 Rubus allegheniensis Even X Healthy 5 Wetland
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Toxicodendron radicans
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Impatiens capensis
Salix nigra
Leersia oryzoides
100 Open Water Water
APPENDIX B
PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORD
Photographic Record Freshwater Creek Lake Study, Dominion Energy September 2007
Wetland area on right bank of transect
FR-1.
Looking upstream at Freshwater Creek
from transect FR-2.
Right bank of transect FR-3. Left bank of transect FR-4.
Looking upstream from transect FR-5. Looking downstream from transect FR-7.
Photographic Record Christopher Creek Lake Study, Dominion Energy September 2007
Right bank of transect CH-1, looking
across Christopher Creek.
Transect CH-2, looking towards right
bank.
Transect CH-3. Rock crossing upstream of transect CH-3.
Looking across Christopher Creek to left
bank of CH-4.
Right bank riparian area of transect CH-
5.
Photographic Record Contrary Creek Lake Study, Dominion Energy September 2007
Looking towards right bank of transect
CO-1.Transect CO-1 left bank.
Wetland area on left bank of Contrary
Creek, adjacent to transect CO-2.
Looking downstream from right bank of
transect CO-2.
Looking upstream from right bank of
transect CO-2.
Looking upstream from left bank of
transect CO-3.
Photographic Record Contrary Creek Lake Study, Dominion Energy September 2007
Looking downstream from transect CO-
3.Transect CO-4
Looking downstream from transect CO-
4.Looking upstream from transect CO-5.
Looking upstream from transect CO-6. Surveying endpoint on right bank of
transect CO-6.
Photographic Record Crafton Creek Lake Study, Dominion Energy September 2007
Riparian area at transect CR-2. Riparian area at transect CR-2.
Transit setup at transect CR-4. Left bank endpoint at transect CR-4.
Looking downstream from transect CR-4. Looking upstream from transect CR-4.
Photographic Record Goldmine Creek Lake Study, Dominion Energy September 2007
Left bank of transect GM-2. View of transect GM-3.
View of transect GM-5. Left bank riparian area of transect GM-7.
Right bank riparian area of transect
GM-9.Right bank riparian area of transect
GM-11.