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

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

Version TNW Only 1 of 3

DRY LAND APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM 1 U.S.

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

Minimum Standards for Wetland Delineations

Minimum Standards for Aquatic Resource Delineations

Information for File MVP RMM

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

Wetlands in the Context of Road Projects

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

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

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

MEMORANDUM FOR SWG

3.11 Floodplains Existing Conditions

Summary Description Municipality of Anchorage. Anchorage Coastal Resource Atlas Project

YELLOWSTONE RIVER FLOOD STUDY REPORT TEXT

AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REFRESHER

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.

Rosgen Classification Unnamed Creek South of Dunka Road

Information for File # ERH

Custom Soil Resource Report for Victoria County, Texas

CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL PR OPERTIES, IN C. GALE RANCH

EAGLES NEST AND PIASA ISLANDS

Potential Restorable Wetlands (PRWs):

McHenry County Property Search Sources of Information

Improvement of the National Hydrography Dataset for Parts of the Lower Colorado Region and Additional Areas of Importance to the DLCC

ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WITH INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT APPENDIX B

Savannah District s Revised SOP: Moving Towards A Functional Approach. US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG

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

Exhibit RMP-4. Foote Creek Geology and Topography

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

McHenry County Property Search Sources of Information

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

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

UPPER COSUMNES RIVER FLOOD MAPPING

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

Template for Sediment and Erosion Control Plan General Instructions

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

National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) Update Project for US Forest Service Region 3

Dealing with Zone A Flood Zones. Topics of Discussion. What is a Zone A Floodplain?

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

Special Public Notice

CHAPTER GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS Applicability Regulations.

Elevation (ft) Slope ( ) County CONDITION CATEGORY. Parameter Natural Condition Slightly impacted Moderately Impacted Heavily Impacted

Discovery Data Questionnaire

Electronic Submission Format Guide Anthracite Preparation Plant Permit Application

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

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

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

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

BUNCOMBE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA

LOMR SUBMITTAL LOWER NEHALEM RIVER TILLAMOOK COUNTY, OREGON

3.0 TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY

Appendix J Vegetation Change Analysis Methodology

Appendix E Guidance for Shallow Flooding Analyses and Mapping

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

Distinct landscape features with important biologic, hydrologic, geomorphic, and biogeochemical functions.

Exhibit A Description of Services Section 37 Floodplain Storage Design

Flood Hazard Zone Modeling for Regulation Development

PolyMet NorthMet Project

Land Use MTRI Documenting Land Use and Land Cover Conditions Synthesis Report

Materials. Use materials meeting the following.

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

(b)(5) deliberative process

software, just as word processors or databases are. GIS was originally developed and cartographic capabilities have been augmented by analysis tools.

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Community Discovery Data Questionnaire

GRAPEVINE LAKE MODELING & WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS

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

GIS APPLICATIONS IN SOIL SURVEY UPDATES

Wetland and Riparian Mapping: An Overview of the Montana Program

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

LOMR SUBMITTAL LOWER NESTUCCA RIVER TILLAMOOK COUNTY, OREGON

Soil Map Boulder County Area, Colorado (Planet Blue Grass) Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

Bank Erosion and Morphology of the Kaskaskia River

United States Department of the Interior NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Northeast Region

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): December 7, 2016 B. ST PAUL, MN DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Laurentian Progression, C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State:Minnesota County/parish/borough: St. Louis County City: Gilbert Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 47.491174 N, Long. -92.4482208 W. Universal Transverse Mercator: 15 Name of nearest waterbody: Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): St. Louis, 04010201 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 15, 2016 Field Determination. Date(s): September 1, 2016 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: This review area was heavily disturbed by previous mine activities, road building and maintenance activities, and utility maintenance activities. LPP-01, LPP-02, LPP-03, LPP-04, LPP-05, LPP-06, LPP-07, LPP-08, LPP-09, LPP-10, LPP-11, LPP-12, LPP-13, LPP-14, LPP-15, LPP-16, LPP-17, LPP-18, LPP-19, LPP-20, LPP-21, LPP-22, LPP-23, LPP-24, LPP-25, LPP-26, LPP-27, LPP-28, LPP-29, LPP-30, LPP-31, LPP-32, LPP-33, LPP-34, LPP-35, and LPP-38, and the Mariska open-water pit do not have a surface or subsurface connection to a Navigable water of the United States. These aquatic resources were determined to be depressional areas that are located in topographic depressions within the landscape with no outlet. This area was visited on 1 Sept 2016 by Corps regulatory staff; no surface connections were present between these aquatic resources and any other waters during the visit. A desktop determination was completed on 15 Nov 2016; desktop resources such as aerial photography, LiDAR derived elevation models and contours, and stream and wetland, were reviewed and we determined that there are no surface connections between these aquatic resources and other waters. The LPP-01 (0.26 acre), LPP-02 (0.10 acre), LPP-03 (0.30 acre), LPP-04 (0.34 acre), LPP-05 (0.01 acre), LPP-06 (0.05 acre), LPP-07 (0.02 acre), LPP-08 (0.01 acre), LPP-09 (0.13 acre), LPP-10 (0.06 acre), LPP-11 (0.01 acre), LPP-12 (0.08 acre), LPP-13 (0.20 acre), LPP-14 (0.59 acre), LPP-15 (0.56 acre), LPP-16 (3.37 acres), LPP-17 (0.72 acre), LPP-18 (2.38 acres), LPP-19 (0.13 acre), LPP-20 (0.28 acre), LPP-21 (0.04 acre), LPP-22 (0.08 acre), LPP-23 (0.07 acre), LPP-24 (0.24 acre), LPP-25 (0.03 acre), LPP-26 (0.01 acre), LPP-27 (0.10 acre), LPP-28 (0.25 acre), LPP-29 (0.08 acre), LPP-30 (0.06 acre), LPP-31 (0.86 acre), LPP-32 (0.02 acre), LPP-33 (0.01 acre), LPP-34 (0.03 acre), LPP-35 (0.04 acre), and LPP-38 (0.14 acre), and the Mariska open-water pit (approx. 26 acres) 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 1 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

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 interstate commerce. The aquatic resources were determined to not be jurisdictional under the CWA because the aquatic resources lacked links to interstate commerce sufficient to serve as a basis for jurisdiction. 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 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: 26 acres. List type of aquatic resource: Open-water pit. : LPP-01, LPP-02, LPP-03, LPP-04, LPP-05, LPP-06, LPP-07, LPP-08, LPP-09, LPP-10, LPP-11, LPP-12, LPP-13, LPP-14, LPP-15, LPP-16, LPP-17, LPP-18, LPP-19, LPP-20, LPP-21, LPP-22, LPP-23, LPP-24, LPP-25, LPP-26, LPP-27, LPP-28, LPP-29, LPP-30, LPP-31, LPP-32, LPP-33, LPP-34, LPP-35, and LPP-38 total 18.33 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:. : 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:barr Engineering 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):mndnr 2

FEMA/FIRM maps: 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929) 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):site visit conducted with mining staff on 1 Sept. 2016. B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: This review area was heavily disturbed by previous mine activities, road building and maintenance activities, and utility maintenance activities. The LPP-01 (0.26 acre/deep marsh), LPP-02 (0.10 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-03 (0.30 acre/alder thicket), LPP-04 (0.34 acre/shallow marsh), LPP-05 (0.01 acre/shallow marsh), LPP-06 (0.05 acre/shallow marsh), LPP-07 (0.02 acre/fresh wet meadow), LPP-08 (0.01 acre/shallow marsh), LPP-09 (0.13 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-10 (0.06 acre/hardwood swamp), LPP-11 (0.01 acre/sedge meadow), LPP-12 (0.08 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-13 (0.20 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-14 (0.59 acre/alder thicket), LPP-15 (0.56 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-16 (3.37 acres/shrub-carr), LPP-17 (0.72 acre/hardwood swamp), LPP-18 (2.38 acres/shrub-carr), LPP-19 (0.13 acre/fresh wet meadow), LPP-20 (0.28 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-21 (0.04 acre/fresh wet meadow), LPP-22 (0.08 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-23 (0.07 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-24 (0.24 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-25 (0.03 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-26 (0.01 acre/fresh wet meadow), LPP-27 (0.10 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-28 (0.25 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-29 (0.08 acre/seasonally flooded basin), LPP-30 (0.06 acre/deep marsh), LPP-31 (0.86 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-32 (0.02 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-33 (0.01 acre/shrub-carr), LPP-34 (0.03 acre/shrub carr), LPP-35 (0.04 acre/shallow marsh), and LPP-38 (0.14 acre/hardwood swamp), and the Mariska open-water pit (approx. 26 acres/deep water habitat) do not have a surface or subsurface connection to a Navigable water of the United States (See Figure 3, 7 and Figure 8-1 through 8-4). 3

73 NHD Drainageways (third-order streams) White PWI Watercourses Established channel, regular flow Non-wetland ditch, intermittent flow Vermilion River 4567 105 PWI Basins Watersheds - DNR Level 4 Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2016-10-05 13:23 File: I:\Client\ArcelorMittal\Work_Orders\\Maps\Reports\2016_Laurentian Pushback\Revised Fig03 Public Waters Inventory.mxd User: dje 37 Ely Ely Gilbert Deep Gill St. Louis River 3 4567 97 Lost Leaf 4567 20 Leaf Lake Outlet Forge Lake Outlet Embarrass River!;N 0 1,000 2,000 Image Source: FSA (2015) PUBLIC WATERS INVENTORY FIGURE 3

T58N, R17W S23 T58N, R17W S24 Figure 8 Map Extents Delineated (2016) See Figure 8-1 Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2016-11-09 09:19 File: I:\Client\ArcelorMittal\Work_Orders\\Maps\Reports\2016_Laurentian Pushback\Fig07 Wetland Delineation Index.mxd User: dje T58N, R17W S26 LPP-36 LPP-32 LPP-31 LPP-33 LPP-30 LPP-34 LPP-29 LPP-35 LPP-39 See Figure 8-3 LPP-20 LPP-19 LPP-28 LPP-21 LPP-22 LPP-18 LPP-27 LPP-17 LPP-16 LPP-13 LPP-15 LPP-38 LPP-24 LPP-25 LPP-14 LPP-23 LPP-26 See Figure 8-4 LPP-12 LPP-11 T58N, R17W S25 LPP-10 LPP-02 Mariska LPP-06 Laurentian See Figure 8-2 LPP-03 LPP-08 LPP-09 LPP-05 LPP-04 LPP-07 LPP-01 LPP-37!;N 0 250 500 Image Source: FSA (2015) OVERVIEW FIGURE 7

1340 1640 1630 1620 1610 1590 1580 1600 Upland Plot Wetland Plot Access Roads LiDAR Elevation Contours (2011) 10-Foot Contour Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2016-11-09 09:27 File: I:\Client\ArcelorMittal\Work_Orders\\Maps\Reports\2016_Laurentian Pushback\Fig08 Wetland Delineation Detail Map Book.mxd User: dje 20160701-64W 20160701-61U LPP-39 LPP-21 LPP-32 LPP-20 LPP-31 LPP-33 20160701-60W 20160601-69W 20160602-54U 20160701-65U 20160701-62W LPP-30 LPP-34 20160701-63U 20160602-53W 20160526-68W 20160525-38U 20160525-37W LPP-22 LPP-19 20160525-34W 20160525-35U 20160525-39W 20160525-36W 20160525-40U LPP-18 1320 20160525-33U 20160525-32W 1330 1280 LPP-16 20160520-28W 20160520-29U 1270 1260 20160525-31U LPP-17 20160525-30W 1340 1220 1250 1300 0 1190 1370 1180 1310 1290 1210 1170 2 2 2-Foot Contour Delineated (2016). 0 100 200 Image Source: St. Louis County (2013) DETAIL MAP Figure 8-1

1370 1330 1200 1130 1140 1100 1120 1110 Laurentian 1180 1220 1220 1270 1310 Upland Plot Wetland Plot Access Roads 0 1320 1300 1280 1250 1220 1160 1250 1150 1200 1340 1300 LiDAR Elevation Contours (2011) Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2016-11-09 09:27 File: I:\Client\ArcelorMittal\Work_Orders\\Maps\Reports\2016_Laurentian Pushback\Fig08 Wetland Delineation Detail Map Book.mxd User: dje 1270 1340 1310 20160520-25U 20160520-24W 1290 1260 1170 1330 1210 1190 1190 LPP-14 LPP-13 1260 1370 1210 1280 1320 LPP-12 1290 20160519-23U 20160519-16W LPP-10 20160519-20W 20160519-22W 20160519-21U LPP-11 0 20160518-04U 20160518-06U 20160519-18W 20160519-17U 20160519-19U 20160518-05W 20160518-03W LPP-03 LPP-02 Mariska LPP-09 20160519-13W 20160519-15U 20160519-11W LPP-08 LPP-07 20160519-12U 20160519-08U LPP-05 20160519-09W 20160519-14W 20160519-07W 20160518-02U 20160518-01W LPP-01 20160701-56U 20160701-55W LPP-37 10-Foot Contour 2-Foot Contour Delineated (2016). 0 100 200 Image Source: St. Louis County (2013) DETAIL MAP Figure 8-2

LPP-39 20160525-38U LPP-21 20160525-37W 20160525-39W 20160525-40U 0 Upland Plot Wetland Plot Access Roads Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2016-11-09 09:27 File: I:\Client\ArcelorMittal\Work_Orders\\Maps\Reports\2016_Laurentian Pushback\Fig08 Wetland Delineation Detail Map Book.mxd User: dje 20160701-64W LPP-36 20160701-63U 20160701-62W LPP-19 LPP-33 LPP-30 LPP-34 20160701-61U 20160701-60W LPP-32 LPP-20 LPP-31 20160701-65U 20160601-69W 20160701-57W 20160701-58U 20160602-53W 20160602-54U LPP-29 20160526-68W 20160602-52U LPP-35 20160701-59W 20160602-51W 20160525-34W 20160525-35U 20160525-36W LPP-22 20160601-50U 20160601-49W LPP-16 20160520-28W 20160520-29U 20160525-33U 20160525-32W LPP-18 20160525-31U LPP-17 20160601-48U 20160601-47W LPP-28 LPP-27 20160525-30W LiDAR Elevation Contours (2011) 10-Foot Contour 2-Foot Contour Delineated (2016). 0 100 200 Image Source: St. Louis County (2013) DETAIL MAP Figure 8-3

1260 1280 1320 1300 0 1170 1200 1250 1370 1310 LPP-10 20160519-16W LPP-11 20160519-18W 20160519-17U 20160519-19U LPP-03 LPP-09 20160519-15U 20160519-14W Upland Plot Wetland Plot Access Roads Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4.1, 2016-11-09 09:27 File: I:\Client\ArcelorMittal\Work_Orders\\Maps\Reports\2016_Laurentian Pushback\Fig08 Wetland Delineation Detail Map Book.mxd User: dje U W LPP-15 LPP-38 20160701-66W 20160701-67U 20160520-25U 20160520-24W LPP-24 LPP-14 LPP-13 20160520-26W LPP-12 20160520-27U 20160601-42U 20160519-23U 20160519-20W 20160519-22W 20160601-43W 20160519-21U 20160601-41W 20160601-44W 20160601-45U LPP-26 LPP-23 20160601-46W LPP-25 Mariska 20160519-13W 20160519-11W LPP-06 LPP-08 LPP-07 20160519-12U 20160519-08U LPP-05 20160519-09W 20160519-10W 20160519-07W LPP-04 20160701-56U 20160701-55W LPP-37 LiDAR Elevation Contours (2011) 10-Foot Contour 2-Foot Contour Delineated (2016). 0 100 200 Image Source: St. Louis County (2013) DETAIL MAP Figure 8-4