Laserfiche WebLink
D Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent <br />and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this <br />conclusion is provided at Section III.C. <br />Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. <br />D 7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters. to <br />As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional. <br />D Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or <br />D Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or <br />D Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below). <br />E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE) WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, <br />DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY <br />SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THATAPPLJ'):11 <br />D which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. <br />D from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce. <br />D which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce. <br />D Interstate isolated waters. Explain: <br />D Other factors. Explain: <br />Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination: <br />Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply) <br />□ <br />□ <br />Tributary waters: linear feet <br />Other non-wetland waters: acres. <br />Identify type(s) of waters: <br />width (ft). <br />D Wetlands: acres. <br />F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): <br />D If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of <br />Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements. <br />[8J Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce. <br />D Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based <br />solely on the "Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR). <br />[8J Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: <br />All wetlands are considered to be isolated with no apparent connection to interstate or foreign commerce or other <br />significant nexus . <br />D Other: (explain, if not covered above): <br />Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR <br />factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best <br />professional judgment (check all that apply): <br />Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft). <br />Lakes/ponds: acres. <br />□ <br />□ <br />□ <br />□ <br />□ <br />Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: <br />Wetlands: acres. <br />10 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook. <br />11 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for <br />review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos. <br />ud080207 '#6'1J 7