My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2022-09-26_PERMIT FILE - M2022042 (10)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2022042
>
2022-09-26_PERMIT FILE - M2022042 (10)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/26/2022 12:01:11 PM
Creation date
9/26/2022 10:26:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2022042
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
9/26/2022
Doc Name Note
Exhibt J-1 Wetlands Jurisdictional Determination
Doc Name
Application
From
Julie M. Mikulas -Martin Marietta Materials, Inc
To
DRMS
Email Name
PSH
JLE
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> <br />7 <br />F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): <br /> 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 /> Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce. <br /> 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 /> Waters do not meet the “Significant Nexus” standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: . <br /> Other: (explain, if not covered above): Reference is made to the November 13, 1986 Federal Register (Page 41217), <br />Part 328 (b). Artificially irrigated areas which would revert to upland if the irrigation ceased. In this case, Wetland 1 appears <br />to have formed from bank failure associated with an irrigation ditch with additional input from sheet flow runoff associated <br />with crop irrigation. If agricultural activities were to cease, the wetland would no longer exist. The wetland was not present <br />prior to ditch construction. As such, this aquatic resource is not considered jurisdictional. <br /> Reference is made to the November 13, 1986, Federal Register (Page 41217), Part 328.3(a) Non-tidal drainage and <br />irrigation ditches excavated on dry land. Unnamed Ditch 1 and Unnamed Ditch 2 appear to be irrigation ditches associated <br />with excess agricultural runoff. Unnamed Ditch 1 and Unnamed Ditch 2 do not appear to carry relatively permanent flows to <br />the Cache La Poudre River. As such, these aquatic resources are also not considered jurisdictional. <br /> <br /> The Corps reserves the right on a case-by-case basis to determine that a particular waterbody within these categories of <br />waters is a water of the United States. <br /> <br /> Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is <br />the MBR factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), <br />using best professional judgment (check all that apply): <br /> Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft). <br /> Lakes/ponds: acres. <br /> Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: . <br /> Wetlands: acres. <br /> <br />Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the “Significant Nexus” standard, <br />where such a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply): <br /> Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft). <br /> Lakes/ponds: acres. <br /> Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: . <br /> Wetlands: acres. <br /> <br />SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. <br /> <br />A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, <br />where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below): <br /> Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: Wetland Delineation Report authored <br />by Pinyon Environmental Inc., Figure 1 and Figure 2, submitted September 1, 2022. <br /> Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. <br /> Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. <br /> Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. <br /> Data sheets prepared by the Corps: . <br /> Corps navigable waters’ study: . <br /> U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: . <br /> USGS NHD data. <br /> USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps. <br /> U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:1:24000 Bracewell 2016. <br /> USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: . <br /> National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: . <br /> State/Local wetland inventory map(s): . <br /> FEMA/FIRM maps: . <br /> 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929) <br /> Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date):Google Earth: 2003-2021. USGS Aerial Photos of Colorado: 1978, 1969, 1948. <br /> or Other (Name & Date): . <br /> Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: . <br /> Applicable/supporting case law: . <br /> Applicable/supporting scientific literature: . <br /> Other information (please specify): Colorado’s Decision Support System <br /> <br /> <br />B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.