APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Transcription

1 APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): /9/05 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, Meyer Gravel, Lakemoor, JD Waters Edge, C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Review area of approximately 00 acres at 05 W. IL Route 0 State: Illinois County/parish/borough: McHenry City: Lakemoor Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat N, Long W Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6, Y: ; X: Name of nearest waterbody: Fox River Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: None Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Upper Fox (070006) Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request. Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a different JD form. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): Office (Desk) Determination. Date: /3/05 Field Determination. Date(s): 0/7/05 SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 0 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no navigable waters of the U.S. within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 39) in the review area. [Required] B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no waters of the U.S. within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 38) in the review area. [Required]. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable): Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: The review area contains three ponds that were excavated for gravel mining purpose, two larger ponds to the north (Ponds A and B) and one smaller pond to the south (Pond C). All mining activities terminated around 00. Each pond is surrounded by a berm. Ponds A and B were clearly excavated in non-hydric soil. They both are two former gravel pits that receive water from the adjacent upland. The berm surrounding these two ponds is very tall and there is no outlet to any water of the U.S. These two ponds are clearly isolated in the landscape. Pond C, the smaller pond to the south, was created as a wash pit. It is also entirely surrounded by a berm with no hydrologic connection to a water of the U.S. There is a wetland on the other side of the berm but a site visit revealed that the berm is high enough at all locations to prevent any water exchange between the pond and the wetland. No culverts were found to be present on the berm. While it is possible that Pond C may have been created in hydric soil, based on a review of historical USGS quadrangles, the mining disturbance started in the early 970s. A review of aerial photos from 988 to the present reveals that Pond C changed size and shape over the years depending on the mining activity occurring on the site. The berm separating the pond from the landscape outside of the mine appears clearly on all the aerial photos dated back to 988 and there is no evidence of any water exchange occurring on any of the aerial photos between the pond and the wetland on the other side of the berm. At the present time, and at least since the 970s, Pond C has been isolated in the landscape from the wetlands located south of the site. Pond C has begun to naturalize but clearly remains a remnant of mining activity. There is no evidence of any ecological or chemical nexus to a downstream water. SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F. Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

2 which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce. which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce. Interstate isolated waters. Explain:. Other factors. Explain:. Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply): Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft). Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s) of waters:. F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements. Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce. Prior to the Jan 00 Supreme Court decision in SWANCC, the review area would have been regulated based solely on the Migratory Bird Rule (MBR). Waters do not meet the Significant Nexus standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:. Other: (explain, if not covered above):. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft). Lakes/ponds: Ponds A, B, and C total 73. acres. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the Significant Nexus standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft). SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below): Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: DK Environmental Services, Inc. Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Data sheets prepared by the Corps:. Corps navigable waters study:. U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:Wauconda HA 97, 966,. USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Wauconda 7.5", 993,, 960, photorevised in 97 and 976. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Web Soil Survey. National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Wauconda,. State/Local wetland inventory map(s): Pick List, Pick List,. FEMA/FIRM maps:. 00-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 99) Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date): Aerial views dated obtained on Google Earth Pro. or Other (Name & Date):. Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: AJD previously completed for this property on 9//006, File Number These ponds were found to be gravel pits and wash pit area with no discernible connection to a navigable waterway. Applicable/supporting case law:. Applicable/supporting scientific literature:. Other information (please specify):.

3 B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: Area(s) are geographically isolated.. Area(s) do not have a hydrologic nexus. The closest tributary to the Fox River is Defiance Lake, and is approximately,400 feet south of the review area. Area(s) do not have an ecological nexus.. Area(s) do not have evidence of a subsurface flow connection to a jurisdictional water.. Area(s) do not have evidence of surface overland sheet flow.. Area(s) are not located within the flood plain.. 3

4 APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): December 6, 05 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, Marine Properties, LLC; LRC C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: SE of I-55 and Route 6 State: Illinois County/parish/borough: Will City: Channahon Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat N, Long W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6 Name of nearest waterbody: Des Plaines River Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Des Plaines River Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Des Plaines (070004) Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request. Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a different JD form. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): Office (Desk) Determination. Date: November 5, 05 Field Determination. Date(s): November 4, 05 SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 0 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no navigable waters of the U.S. within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 39) in the review area. [Required] B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no waters of the U.S. within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 38) in the review area. [Required]. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable): Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: Wetland appears to be an old borrow pit for the interchange, and has water entering it from both the SW corner and the NE corner. Water flows into the site, and there is evidence of -3 feet of ponding on the trees. No water flows off-site, so it is a closed isolated depression. The small farmed wetland (0.0 acres) is a shallow isolated pocket in the middle of the corn field. SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce. which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce. Interstate isolated waters. Explain:. Other factors. Explain:. Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply): Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft). Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s) of waters:. Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F. Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

5 F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements. Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce. Prior to the Jan 00 Supreme Court decision in SWANCC, the review area would have been regulated based solely on the Migratory Bird Rule (MBR). Waters do not meet the Significant Nexus standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:. Other: (explain, if not covered above):. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft). Wetlands: 5. acres. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the Significant Nexus standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft). SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below): Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: EnCAP, Inc Wetland Delineation Report dated September, 05. Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Data sheets prepared by the Corps:. Corps navigable waters study:. U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:Channahon HA 36, 97,. USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Channahon 7.5", 993, Pick List, Pick List, Pick List,. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Soil Survey of Will County, Illinois (004). National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Channahon,. State/Local wetland inventory map(s): Pick List,. FEMA/FIRM maps:. 00-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 99) Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date):. or Other (Name & Date):. Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: LRC ; September 5, 008. Applicable/supporting case law:. Applicable/supporting scientific literature:. Other information (please specify):. B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: Site visit on November 4, 05 to walk wetland boudary. Area(s) are geographically isolated. Closed isolated depression with multiple water inputs, and no outlet. Area(s) do not have a hydrologic nexus.. Area(s) do not have an ecological nexus.. Area(s) do not have evidence of a subsurface flow connection to a jurisdictional water.. Area(s) do not have evidence of surface overland sheet flow.. Area(s) are not located within the flood plain..

6 APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): November 4, 05 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, Northgate Parkway Parcel, LRC C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State: Illinois County/parish/borough: Cook City: Wheeling Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat N, Long W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6 Name of nearest waterbody: Des Plaines River Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Des Plaines River Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Des Plaines (070004) Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request. Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a different JD form. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): Office (Desk) Determination. Date: MAY 5 Field Determination. Date(s): 4 JUL 5 SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 0 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no navigable waters of the U.S. within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 39) in the review area. [Required] B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no waters of the U.S. within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 38) in the review area. [Required]. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable): Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: Wetlands and are isolated with no surface, subsurface, or ecological connection. See details in Section IV(B). SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce. which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce. Interstate isolated waters. Explain:. Other factors. Explain:. Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply): Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft). Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s) of waters:. Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F. Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

7 F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements. Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce. Prior to the Jan 00 Supreme Court decision in SWANCC, the review area would have been regulated based solely on the Migratory Bird Rule (MBR). Waters do not meet the Significant Nexus standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:. Other: (explain, if not covered above):. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft). Wetlands:.5 acres. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the Significant Nexus standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft). SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below): Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: May 4, 05 Delineation Report for parcel. Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Data sheets prepared by the Corps:. Corps navigable waters study:. U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: Pick List,. USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Pick List, Pick List, Pick List, Pick List,. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Pick List. National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Pick List,. State/Local wetland inventory map(s): Pick List,. FEMA/FIRM maps:. 00-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 99) Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date):. or Other (Name & Date):. Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: LRC Applicable/supporting case law:. Applicable/supporting scientific literature:. Other information (please specify): foot contours. B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:. Area(s) are geographically isolated. Wetland is isolated with no connections observed. Area(s) do not have a hydrologic nexus. linear portion of wetland wsa dry during visit and showed no signs that flow regularly is conveyed east. No connections to Des Plaines River observed (see below). Area(s) do not have an ecological nexus. Wetlands and have no ecological nexus. Area(s) do not have evidence of a subsurface flow connection to a jurisdictional water. No pipes were observered around Wetland. No pipes were found at the low point of the linear wetlandportion of Wetland towards the east end of the site. Area(s) do not have evidence of surface overland sheet flow. Wetland has no overland connection. A portion of wetland is a linear wetland that generally grades to the east, but does not extend beyound street. The linear wetland grades up as it approaches the street.. Area(s) are not located within the flood plain. Wetlands and are not located in the floodplain.

8 APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): December 4, 05 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, Belt RR, LRC C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: South of 38 th Street, between Halsted Street and Asland Ave. State: Illinois County/parish/borough: Cook City: Blue Island Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat N, Long W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6 Name of nearest waterbody: Little Calumet River Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Calumet River Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Little Calumet-Galien ( ) Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request. Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a different JD form. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): Office (Desk) Determination. Date: November 3, 05 Field Determination. Date(s): November 9, 05 SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 0 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no navigable waters of the U.S. within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 39) in the review area. [Required] B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no waters of the U.S. within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 38) in the review area. [Required]. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable): Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: The 9 shallow wetland pockets are small micro-depressions in a relatively flat landscape, and do not drain offsite.. SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce. which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce. Interstate isolated waters. Explain:. Other factors. Explain:. Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply): Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft). Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s) of waters:. Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F. Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

9 F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements. Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce. Prior to the Jan 00 Supreme Court decision in SWANCC, the review area would have been regulated based solely on the Migratory Bird Rule (MBR). Waters do not meet the Significant Nexus standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:. Other: (explain, if not covered above):. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft). Wetlands: 0.75 acres. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the Significant Nexus standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft). SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below): Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: CB&I Environmental & Infrastructure, Inc. Wetland Delineation Report dated February 6, 05. Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Data sheets prepared by the Corps:. Corps navigable waters study:. U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:Blue Island HA 53, 966,. USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Blue Island 7.5", 993, Pick List, Pick List, Pick List,. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Soil Survey of DuPage and Part of Cook (979). National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Blue Island,. State/Local wetland inventory map(s): Pick List,. FEMA/FIRM maps:. 00-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 99) Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date):. or Other (Name & Date):. Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:. Applicable/supporting case law:. Applicable/supporting scientific literature:. Other information (please specify):. B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: All wetland boundaries walked in field. Area(s) are geographically isolated. Site is flat, with no off-site connections. Area(s) do not have a hydrologic nexus. Water ponds in shallow depressions. Area(s) do not have an ecological nexus.. Area(s) do not have evidence of a subsurface flow connection to a jurisdictional water.. Area(s) do not have evidence of surface overland sheet flow.. Area(s) are not located within the flood plain..

10 APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): /30/05 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, JD Multi Use Path Project, LRC C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: A 4-acre project area located north of Airport Road, south of Carillon Drive, east of Interstate 55, and west of Weber Road (Sections 6 and 7, T36N, R0E) State: Illinois County/parish/borough: Will City: Romeoville Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat N, Long W Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6; Y: ; X: Name of nearest waterbody: Mink Creek Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: None Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Des Plaines (070004) Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request. Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a different JD form. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): Office (Desk) Determination. Date: /5/05 Field Determination. Date(s): /3/05 SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 0 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no navigable waters of the U.S. within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 39) in the review area. [Required] B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no waters of the U.S. within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 38) in the review area. [Required]. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable): Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: Eight wetland areas were delineated within the review area. - Wetland (0.03 acres) is an emergent wetland area located near the southwestern property boundary. - Wetland (.40 acres) is a farmed wetland area located near the southwestern property boundary. - Wetland 3 (0.7 acres) is an emergent wetland area located near the northern portion of the subject site, north of Lakewood Falls Drive. - Wetland 4 (0.89 acres) is an emergent wetland area in the north-central part that was previously farmed, but did not appear to have been in the recent past. - Wetland 5 (0.06 acres) is an emergent wetland area located within a pipeline right-of-way along the western property boundary in the northern portion of the project area. - Wetland 6 (.09 acres) is located in the northwestern corner of the project area and consists of an emergent wetland area. - Wetland 8 (5.4 acres) is located in the northeastern corner of the project area and consists of an emergent wetland area. - Wetland 9 (0.75 acres) is located in the northeastern portion of the project area and consists of an emergent wetland area. Note that Wetland 7 is a wetland that was identified during the delineation but it is outside of the review area; therefore, no jurisdictional determination is being made on this one. All 8 wetlands were found to be depressional areas with no outlet to a downstream water. They are isolated in the landscape in that they are surrounded by upland and are located approximately 4,800 feet from the nearest tributary. SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

11 E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce. which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce. Interstate isolated waters. Explain:. Other factors. Explain:. Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply): Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft). Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s) of waters:. F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements. Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce. Prior to the Jan 00 Supreme Court decision in SWANCC, the review area would have been regulated based solely on the Migratory Bird Rule (MBR). Waters do not meet the Significant Nexus standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:. Other: (explain, if not covered above):. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft). Wetlands: Total acreage: 0.45 acres. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the Significant Nexus standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft). SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below): Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: V3 Companies. Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. Delineation report dated June, 05 and updated November 4, 05. Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Data sheets prepared by the Corps:. Corps navigable waters study:. U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:Normantown HA 0, 966,, Plainfield HA 8, 966. USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Plainfield 7.5", 993,, Normantown, IL Quadrangle. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Web Soil Survey. National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Normantown, Plainfield. State/Local wetland inventory map(s): Pick List,. FEMA/FIRM maps: 00-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 99) Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date): Aerial views provided in the delineation report. or Other (Name & Date): Site photos included in the delineation report. Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:. Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

12 Applicable/supporting case law:. Applicable/supporting scientific literature:. Other information (please specify): Site visit dated //05. B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: Area(s) are geographically isolated.. Area(s) do not have a hydrologic nexus.. Area(s) do not have an ecological nexus.. Area(s) do not have evidence of a subsurface flow connection to a jurisdictional water.. Area(s) do not have evidence of surface overland sheet flow.. Area(s) are not located within the flood plain.. 3

13 APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): //05 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, First Industrial Realty Trust JD, LRC C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: A 5-acre review area located at 365 North Avenue. State: Illinois County/parish/borough: DuPage City: Carol Stream Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat N, Long W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6 Name of nearest waterbody: Klein Creek Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: None Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Des Plaines (070004) Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request. Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a different JD form. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): Office (Desk) Determination. Date: /7/05 Field Determination. Date(s): 0/0/05 SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 0 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no navigable waters of the U.S. within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 39) in the review area. [Required] B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no waters of the U.S. within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 38) in the review area. [Required]. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable): Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: Wetland, approximately.7 acres on site, consists mostly open water in the northwest portion of the review area. Wetland is connected to a ditch that was constructed in non-hydric soil, apparently in the 970s. Old project plans provided by the current owner show that the site is pitched in the middle of the ditch, making it flow both east and west. On the western side of the pitch, water flows west into Wetland and on the east side of the pitch, water flows into a storm sewer system on the northeast portion of the review area. There is no evidence that this ditch carries relatively permanent water and given the pitch and its length (approximately,460 linear feet) it is very unlikely that water from Wetland reaches the storm sewer system. Wetland collects water from the adjacent upland and no outlet to a downstream water was found, making it isolated in the landscape. This finding is supported by all the internal resources. Finally, note that the nearest mapped tributary is located over 5,000 feet away. Wetland, approximately 0.7 acres, is located within the northeast portion of the project area and consists of a small depressional wooded wetland. Wetland is entirely surrounded by upland and does not have any hydrologic connection to a downstream water. SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce. which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce. Interstate isolated waters. Explain:. Other factors. Explain:. Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:. Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F. Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

14 Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply): Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft). Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s) of waters:. F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements. Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce. Prior to the Jan 00 Supreme Court decision in SWANCC, the review area would have been regulated based solely on the Migratory Bird Rule (MBR). Waters do not meet the Significant Nexus standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:. Other: (explain, if not covered above):. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft). Wetlands: Wetlands and total 3.4 acres. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the Significant Nexus standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft). SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below): Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: Encap Incorporated. Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. Wetland Delineation Report for 365 North Avenue, Carol Stream, Bloomingdale Township, DuPage County, Illinois, dated September 4, 05. Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Data sheets prepared by the Corps:. Corps navigable waters study:. U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: Lombard HA 43, 964,. USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Lombard 7.5", 993,. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Web Soil Survey. National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Lombard,. State/Local wetland inventory map(s): DuPage County ADID. FEMA/FIRM maps: Panel Number 7043C008H. 00-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 99) Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date): Aerial views obtained on Google Earth Pro from or Other (Name & Date): Photos provided in the delineation report. Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:. Applicable/supporting case law:. Applicable/supporting scientific literature:. Other information (please specify): Site visit notes available in the record. B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: Area(s) are geographically isolated.. Area(s) do not have a hydrologic nexus. Both Wetlands and do not have a hydrologic connection to a downstream water. The nearest mapped tributary, in this heavily developed area, is located over 5,000 feet away. Area(s) do not have an ecological nexus.. Area(s) do not have evidence of a subsurface flow connection to a jurisdictional water.. Area(s) do not have evidence of surface overland sheet flow.. Area(s) are not located within the flood plain..

15 Areas are ditches (check all that apply):. Non-tidal drainage and irrigation ditches excavated on dry land (5 FR 47, Nov. 3, 986).. Ditches (including roadside ditches) excavated wholly in and draining only uplands and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water (USACE JD Form Instructional Guidebook 5/30/007). The ditch identified within the review area was excavated in non-hydric soil in the 970s and there is no evidence that it carries relatively permanent flow. Ditches that do not have a relatively permanent flow into waters of the U.S. or between two (or more) waters of the U.S. (USACE JD Form Instructional Guidebook 5/30/007).. Area(s) are artificial waters created in upland or dry land:. Artificially irrigated areas which would revert to upland if the irrigation ceased (5 FR 47, Nov. 3, 986).. Artificial lakes or ponds created by excavating and/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 (5 FR 47, Nov. 3, 986).. Artificial reflecting or swimming pools or other small ornamental bodies of water created by excavating and/or diking dry land to retain water for primarily aesthetic reasons (5 FR 47, Nov. 3, 986).. 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 (5 FR 47, Nov. 3, 986).. Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons designed to meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act (other than cooling ponds as defined in 40 CFR 43.(m) which also meet criteria of this definition) (33 CFR 38.3 (a)).. Area(s) are swales (USACE JD Form Instructional Guidebook 5/30/007).. Area(s) are erosional features (including gullies) (USACE JD Form Instructional Guidebook 5/30/007).. Area(s) are prior converted cropland (33 CFR 38.3(a)(8)).. Area(s) are uplands.. Other:. 3

16 APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): November 7, 05 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, LRC-05-75, Celli Leasing C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: 7N60 Rodenburg Road State: Illinois County/parish/borough: DuPage City: Roselle Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat N, Long W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6 Name of nearest waterbody: Meacham Creek Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Des Plaines River Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Pick List Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request. Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a different JD form. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): Office (Desk) Determination. Date: October 7, 05 Field Determination. Date(s): October 3, 05 SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 0 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no navigable waters of the U.S. within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 39) in the review area. [Required] B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no waters of the U.S. within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 38) in the review area. [Required]. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable): Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: The subject 0. acre wetland is a closed isolated depression in the landscape that serves as a regional natural detention feature. All pipes drain in, and there is evidence of ponding. There are no surface water connection to any flowing water of the U.S.; therefore it is isolated and non-jurisdictional. SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce. which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce. Interstate isolated waters. Explain:. Other factors. Explain:. Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply): Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft). Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s) of waters:. Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F. Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

17 F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements. Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce. Prior to the Jan 00 Supreme Court decision in SWANCC, the review area would have been regulated based solely on the Migratory Bird Rule (MBR). Waters do not meet the Significant Nexus standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:. Other: (explain, if not covered above):. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft). Wetlands: 0. acres. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the Significant Nexus standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft). SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below): Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: V3 Jurisdictional Determination Submittal dated September 9, 05. Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Data sheets prepared by the Corps:. Corps navigable waters study:. U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: Lombard HA 43, 964,. USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Lombard 7.5", 993, Pick List, Pick List, Pick List,. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Soil Survey of DuPage County, Illinois (999). National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Lombard,. State/Local wetland inventory map(s): DuPage County ADID, Pick List,. FEMA/FIRM maps: Panel 7043C00H. 00-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 99) Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date): 04 Digital Globe Aerial. or Other (Name & Date): V3 report photos. Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:. Applicable/supporting case law:. Applicable/supporting scientific literature:. Other information (please specify):. B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: Entire wetland boundary was walked in the field, locating 3 inlets and no outlets. Entire wetland is in a bowl-shaped depression surrounded by higher ground. Area(s) are geographically isolated. Isolated bowl-shaped depressional feature in the landscape. Area(s) do not have a hydrologic nexus. All water flows into the wetland complex. Area(s) do not have an ecological nexus.. Area(s) do not have evidence of a subsurface flow connection to a jurisdictional water. Area serves as regional natural detention feature. Area(s) do not have evidence of surface overland sheet flow. All sheet flow is into the subject wetland. Area(s) are not located within the flood plain..