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): March 7, 08 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, Speedway Gas, LRC-07-836 C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: NW Corner of Rt. 59 & Batavia Road State: Illinois County/parish/borough: DuPage City: Warrenville Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 4.8343 N, Long. -88.035 W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6 Name of nearest waterbody: Spring Brook 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: March, 08 Field Determination. Date(s): March, 08 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: Small isolated local depressional impouned area against the roadway with no outlets or connections off-site.. 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.
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: 0.05 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: Cardno Regulated Waters Delineation Report dated July 3, 07. 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: Naperville HA 54, 965,. USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Naperville 7.5", 993, Pick List, Pick List, Pick List,. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Web Soil Survey. National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Naperville,. State/Local wetland inventory map(s): DuPage County ADID, 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: Site visit on March, 08 to view site in person. Area(s) are geographically isolated. Closed localized depression. 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..
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): March, 08 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, McHugh Sun I solar farm, Manhattan- LRC-07-978 C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This site contains one farmed wetland, which is currently still being utilized for corn/beans. The farmed wetland onsite is isolated based on its physical location in the landscape. There are no obvious overland drainage ways which carry hydrology on or off the project site. There might be drain tile, but no drain tile inlet or outlets were observed during the site visit. State: Illinois County/parish/borough: Will City: Manhattan Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 4.3840 N, Long. -87.9390 W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6 Name of nearest waterbody: Forked Creek Trib Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Kankakee River Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Kankakee (07000) 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: February, 08 Field Determination. Date(s): November 07 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: A site visit shows that there are no visable hydrological connections to adjacent WOUS. The farmed wetland area formed a depressional area and did not flow offsite, nor were there any observable drain tile inlets or outlets leaving the proposed site. The site slopes southwest towards Offner Rd. but there was no drainage leaving the site under Offner Road.. 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.
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:. 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: Manhattan,. 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): A site visit confirmed that there was no hydrological connection to Waters of the US. B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: **may want to include info about soils, and distance to the nearest JD area**. 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..
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): March 6, 08 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, City of Crystal Lake, LRC-08-66 C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: North Shore Drive State: Illinois County/parish/borough: McHenry City: Crystal Lake Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 4.39864 N, Long. -88.35865 W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6 Name of nearest waterbody: Crystal Lake Drain Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Rock River Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Kishwaukee (07090006) 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: February 3, 08 Field Determination. Date(s): February 0, 08 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 is a localized ponded depressional forested wetland area that is surrounded by homes and roads, and has no outlet or connection to Crystal Lake. 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.
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: 0.7 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: CBBEL Wetland Assessment Report dated October, 07. 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:Crystal Lake HA 53, 967,. USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Crystal Lake 7.5", 99, Pick List, Pick List,. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Soil Survey of McHenry County, Illinois (00). National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Crystal Lake,. 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):. 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: Site visit on February 0, 08 to walk boundary and view ponding. Area(s) are geographically isolated. Closed depressional feature. 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..
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): March 3, 08 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, MWRD, LRC-08-7 C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: SE of Kedzie & 35 th Street State: Illinois County/parish/borough: Cook City: Robbins Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 4.64668 N, Long. -87.696665 W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6 Name of nearest waterbody: Midlothian Creek Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Calumet-Sag Channel Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Little Calumet-Galien (0404000) 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: March, 08 Field Determination. Date(s): March, 08 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: Site is a closed isolated depression surrounded by historic fill piles in a brownfield area. Site 5 and Site W3 are next to each other, and in a ponded depressional feature in old woods also surrounded by various historic fill.. 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.
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: 0.4 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: Wetland and Surface Waters Investigation Report by IM Group, LLC, dated January 5, 08. 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: Site visit on March, 08 to walk site which had abandoned roads and sidewalks, and piles of historic fill. Area(s) are geographically isolated. Closed isolated depressional pockets of wetland with 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..
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): March 7, 08 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, C.V. Land Holdings, LLC, LRC-08-4 C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: NW of Rt. 83 & Rt. 6 State: Illinois County/parish/borough: Cook City: Mt. Prospect Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 4.03709 N, Long. -87.945 W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6 Name of nearest waterbody: Willow 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): 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: February 3, 08 Field Determination. Date(s): February 0, 08 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 (0.05 ac) is a shallow pocket of wetland created by past construction activities where water pools when it rains; and has no outlet or connection to any flowing water of the U.S.. 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.
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: 0.05 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: CBBEL Wetland and Waters of the U.S. Assessment Report dated February 7, 08. 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: Arlington Heights HA 67, 963,. USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Arlington Heights 7.5", 993, Pick List, Pick List, Pick List,. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Web Soil Survey. National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Arlington Heights,. 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: Site visit on February 0, 08 to observe site with fill pad in center and mowed grass all around. 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..
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): March, 08 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, Spreedway, LRC-08-44 C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: SE Corner of Rt. 76 and Terra Cotta Ave. State: Illinois County/parish/borough: McHenry City: Crystal Lake Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 4.47884 N, Long. -88.9505 W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6 Name of nearest waterbody: Crystal Lake Drain Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Rock River Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Kishwaukee (07090006) 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: February 7, 08 Field Determination. Date(s): 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: Small isolated shallow depressional feature impounded against the roadway with no outlet or connection to any flowing water of the U.S.. 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.
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: 0.03 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: Bollinger Environmental, Inc.Wetland Assessment Report dated December 07. 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:Crystal Lake HA 53, 967,. USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Crystal Lake 7.5", 99, Pick List, Pick List,. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Soil Survey of McHenry County, Illinois (00). National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Crystal Lake,. State/Local wetland inventory map(s): McHenry County ADID, Pick List,. FEMA/FIRM maps:. 00-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 99) Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date): 995-07. 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: Small depression in vacant land; no creeks or waterways nearby. Area(s) are geographically isolated. Small isolated depression. 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..
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): February 8, 08 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, Ahmed Zaidi, LRC-08-83 C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: 53 Widgeon Lane State: Illinois County/parish/borough: DuPage City: Bloomingdale Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 4.9509 N, Long. -88.37 W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6 Name of nearest waterbody: E. Br. DuPage 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: February 5, 08 Field Determination. Date(s): February, 08 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: Small wetland pocket on low lying residential lot in long establised residential subdivision next to roadside ditch that may drain to closed detention basin is considered 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.
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: 0.8 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: Raisanen & Associates, LLC Wetland Determination/Delineation Report dated January 5, 08. 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: West Chicago HA 0, 965,. USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: West Chicago 7.5", 993, Pick List, Pick List, Pick List,. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Web Soil Survey. National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: West Chicago,. State/Local wetland inventory map(s): DuPage County ADID, 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: Site visit on February, 08 to observe property. Area(s) are geographically isolated. Small remnant wetland pocket on vacant lot in established subdivision. 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..
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): March, 08 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Chicago District, LRC-06-5 C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State: Illinois County/parish/borough: Lake City: Round Lake Beach Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 4.38093 N, Long. -88.05767 W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 6 Name of nearest waterbody: Mill 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): 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: //08 Field Determination. Date(s): 07/6/06 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: No connection found; This is a drainage that has been problematic over time, there are clearly tiles providing drainage to Mill Creek, but no inlets or outlets have been found in reviewing this over a couple of properties. 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.
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:.44 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). Wetlands:.44 acres. 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: /4/07 Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. 6//06 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: Antioch HA 6, 966,. USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Grayslake 5", 960, Antioch 7.5", 960,. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Soil Survey of Lake County, Illinois (005). National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: USFWS NWI. State/Local wetland inventory map(s): Lake County Wetland Inventory,. FEMA/FIRM maps: //8. 00-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 99) Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date): Lake Co. 939, 96, 000, 005, 00, 0, 05, 07. 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: 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. As stated before, No connection found; This is a drainage that has been problematic over time, there are clearly tiles providing drainage to Mill Creek, but no inlets or outlets have been found in reviewing this over a couple of properties; Mill Creek is approximately.5 miles away. Area(s) do not have evidence of surface overland sheet flow.. Area(s) are not located within the flood plain..