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

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

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

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

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

MVP WMS, George Schorr

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

DRY LAND APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM 1 U.S.

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

Version TNW Only 1 of 3

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

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

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

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

SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT INFORMATION REQUESTED FOR VERIFICATION OF CORPS JURISDICTION

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

Information for File MVP RMM

Minimum Standards for Wetland Delineations

Minimum Standards for Aquatic Resource Delineations

Information for File # MMJ; Trunk Highway (TH) 7 / Louisiana Ave. Interchange Project

This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.

Wetlands in the Context of Road Projects

Information for File # ERH

MEMORANDUM FOR SWG

McHenry County Property Search Sources of Information

Electronic Submission Format Guide Large Noncoal (Industrial Minerals) Mine Permit Application (5600-PM-BMP0315)

Lab Topographic Maps. Name: Partner: Purpose. Background Information

December 16, Mr. Lee Hughes Southwest Florida Water Management District Tampa Service Office 7601 Highway 301 North Tampa, FL 33637

Custom Soil Resource Report for Victoria County, Texas

APPLICATION TO AMEND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP (FLUM) SMALL SCALE

CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL PR OPERTIES, IN C. GALE RANCH

McHenry County Property Search Sources of Information

Electronic Submission Format Guide Anthracite Preparation Plant Permit Application

Electronic Submission Format Guide Bituminous Coal Surface Mine Permit Application (5600-PM-BMP0311)

Pierce Cedar Creek Institute GIS Development Final Report. Grand Valley State University

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

Exhibit RMP-4. Foote Creek Geology and Topography

Summary Description Municipality of Anchorage. Anchorage Coastal Resource Atlas Project

Information Paper. Kansas City District. Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Project Jim and Olivia Hare Wildlife Area, MO

T his map is for illus trative purpos es only and does not repres ent a s urvey. I t is provided 'as is ' without warranty or any repres entation of

Template for Sediment and Erosion Control Plan General Instructions. Section Instructions

FOR PROJECTS INITIATED AFTER NOVEMBER 1, 2008 ITEM 716 EMBANKMENT EARTH OUTLET SEDIMENT TRAP

Custom Soil Resource Report. Soil Map. Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 14N WGS84. Feet.

A Comprehensive Inventory of the Number of Modified Stream Channels in the State of Minnesota. Data, Information and Knowledge Management.

Hydric Rating by Map Unit Harrison County, Mississippi. Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

Exhibit A Description of Services Section 37 Floodplain Storage Design

National Register of Historic Places Registration Form

Public Notice ISSUED: July 31, 2017 EXPIRES: August 31, 2017

Special Public Notice

Big Rivers Electric Corporation Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR) from Electric Utilities Final Rule CCR Impoundment Liner Assessment Report

YELLOWSTONE RIVER FLOOD STUDY REPORT TEXT

CRUM RANCH AREA MAP YOLO COUNTY, California, AC +/-

BUNCOMBE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA

PLANNING BOARD An Inventory of Its Water Basin Maps and Graphs

What Do You See? FOR 274: Forest Measurements and Inventory. Area Determination: Frequency and Cover

AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REFRESHER

LAKE SURVEY REPORT. Fisheries Management. DOW Number: Survey ID Date: 07/31/2017. Lake Identification. Lake Location. Legal Descriptions

Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

Template for Sediment and Erosion Control Plan General Instructions

Lecture 9: Reference Maps & Aerial Photography

RANCHO de DOS PALMAS DAVIS, California, AC +/-

Photographs to Maps Using Aerial Photographs to Create Land Cover Maps

Road Scholar. Coaches Clinic

Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map

Esri Image & Mapping Forum 9 July 2017 Geiger-Mode for Conservation Planning & Design by USDA NRCS NGCE

The following maps must be provided as a part of the ADA. The appropriate scale for each map should be determined at the pre application conference.

Cripps Ranch 76+/- Acres Orchard Development Opportunity Dixon, CA. Presented By:

List of Sites in District 2C Source Number

Pequabuck River Flooding Study and Flood Mitigation Plan The City of Bristol and Towns of Plainville and Plymouth, CT

Required Documents. Title: Number: AEP Administration 2017 No. 1. Provincial Wetlands and Water Boundaries Section. Effective Date: September 1, 2017

Butte County Fire Department

Remote Sensing and Geospatial Application for Wetlands Mapping, Assessment, and Mitigation

TRACT 7: ±252 Acres Irrigated Farmland Grassland

GRAPEVINE LAKE MODELING & WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS

STORMWATER REPORT FRITO LAY SUBDIVISION NO. 3

PW Parkway ES Prince William County, Virginia WSSI #

LiDAR User Data Needs Survey Results

² 2015 Program Year. Farm Tract McLeod County, Minnesota 1:4, NHEL NHEL

Wetland Mapping & Functional Assessment Canadian River Watershed New Mexico. Association of State Wetland Managers

Waterborne Environmental, Inc., Leesburg, VA, USA 2. Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, North America 3. Syngenta Crop Protection, Int.

THE DELINEATION OF WETLANDS IN THE WQODHAVEN VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT THE OLD BRIDGE PLANNING BOARD

NEWS RELEASE UNDER SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT (33 USC 1344) ACTION NUMBER SPA ABQ

Louisiana Transportation Engineering Conference. Monday, February 12, 2007

REMOTE SENSING AND GEOSPATIAL APPLICATIONS FOR WATERSHED DELINEATION

GIS APPLICATIONS IN SOIL SURVEY UPDATES

Butte County Fire Department

Location Restrictions Certification Report NIPSCO Michigan City Generating Station Boiler Slag Pond

What is a published soil survey?

Transcription:

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 10, 2016 B. ST PAUL, MN DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: MVP-2016-00725-ARC C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State:MN County/parish/borough: St. Louis City: Eveleth Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 47.43258 N, Long. -92.597348 W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Name of nearest waterbody: Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 4010201 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: 3/10/16 Field Determination. Date(s): SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 10 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 329) in the review area. 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 328) in the review area. 1. Waters of the U.S.: N/A 2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable): 1 Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: The two wetlands assessed are approximately 0.034 acres and are surrounded by high gravel uplands and show no signs of connectivity to navigable waters of the United States. This is a previously excavated gravel mine area and LiDAR data suggests the wetlands lie at the bottom of the excavated pit with no outlets. The wetlands within the review area are not known to be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreation or other purposes; they do not produce fish or shellfish that could be taken and sold in interstate or forign commerce; and they are not known to be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce. The wetlands are geographically isolated and do not support a link to interstate or foreign commerce. Therefore the wetlands in the review area, are not waters of the United States. SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs: N/A B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY): N/A C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION: N/A D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): N/A 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): N/A 1 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

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 1987 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 2001 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: acres. Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:. Wetlands: 0.034 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). Lakes/ponds: acres. Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:. Wetlands: 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:ross Dudzik - MN Power 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: USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: State/Local wetland inventory map(s): FEMA/FIRM maps: 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929) Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date):MnGEO WMS service (multiple photos) 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):lidar elevations acquired 2007-2012 B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: The two wetlands are located at the bottom of a previously excavated pit area previously used for the gravel production industry. We reviewed available desktop resources such as aerial photography, LiDAR derived elevation models and contours, flow path information, and stream and wetland mapping to make an approved isolated determination of the wetlands. We determined that these wetlands are depression area in the landscape and have no outlet, therefore there is no hydrologic connection between the wetlands and a Navigable water of the U.S. The wetlands do not support a link to interstate or foreign commerce because they are not known to be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreation or other purposes; do not produce fish or shellfish that could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; and are not known to be used for industrial purposes by industries in the interstate commerce. The wetlands were determined to not be jurisdictional 2

under the CWA because the wetlands lacked links to interstate commerce sufficient to serve as a basis for jurisdiction. 3

Parcel ID #295-0014-00310; SW, SW Section 11, T. 57N., R. 18W. Clinton Township, St. Louis County, Minnesota Copyright: 2010 National Geographic Society Feet 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 MNGEO MPCA MDH _ Property Location

Parcel ID #295-0014-00310; SW, SW Section 11, T. 57N., R. 18W. Town of Clinton, St. Louis County, Minnesota Past Mining Excavation Symbols - Both Sides of Highway 7 USGS Eveleth Quadrangle 1951 USGS Eveleth Quadrangle 2010 Feet 0 400 800 1,200 1,600 2,000 MNGEO USGS

Parcel ID #295-0014-00310; SW, SW Section 11, T. 57N., R. 18W. Town of Clinton, St. Louis County, Minnesota Past Mining Excavation - Both Sides of Highway 7 St. Louis County Aerial 1948 USGS Aerial 1991 MNGEO SLC 0 400 800 1,200 1,600 Feet 2,000 2016-00725-ARC Drawing 3 of 5

Parcel ID #295-0014-00310; SW, SW Section 11, T. 57N., R. 18W. Clinton Township, North St. Louis County, Minnesota Lat: 47.4326, Long: -92.5976 1308 SF 199 SF MNGEO, ST. LOUIS CO Feet 0 160 320 480 640 APPROXIMATE PARCEL BOUNDARY WETLANDS, TYPE 7 (115,418 Sq Ft) DISTURBED ISOLATED WET AREAS (1,507 Sq Ft)

Parcel ID #295-0014-00310; SW, SW Section 11, T. 57N., R. 18W. Clinton Township, North St. Louis County, Minnesota Lat: 47.4326, Long: -92.5976 A 0 150 300 Feet B B' Highway 7 A' MNGEO, ST. LOUIS CO A A' North Property Line Incidental, Isolated Low Areas South Property Line B West Property Line Incidental, Isolated Low Areas East Property Line B' Highway 7 SITE CROSS-SECTIONS