United States	Office of	April 1988
Environmental Protection	Wetland Protection	Revised Interim
Aaencv	A-104"F	FINAL
Washington, DC 20460
Water
svEPA Wetland Identification
and Delineation Manual
VOLUME II
Field Methodology

-------
WETLAND IDENTIFICATION
AND DELINEATION MANUAL
VOLUME II
FIELD METHODOLOGY
by
William S. Sipple
Office of Wetlands Protection
Office of Water
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
April, 1988
Revised Interim Final

-------
PREFACE
According to Corps of Engineers and Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) regulations (33 CFR Section 328.3 and 40 CFR Section 230.3,
respectively), wetlands are "... areas that are inundated or saturated
by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to
support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence
of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.
Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas."
Although this definition has been in effect since 1977, the development
of formal guidance for implementing it has been slow, despite the fact
that such guidance could help assure regional and national consistency
in making wetland jurisdictional determinations. Moreover, a consistent,
repeatable operational methodology for determining the presence and
boundaries of wetlands as defined under the federal regulations cited
above would alleviate some concerns of the regulated public and various
private interest groups; it would also substantially reduce interagency
disputes over wetland jurisdictional determinations. Therefore, this
Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual was developed to address
the need for operational jurisdictional guidance.
EPA's Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual is comprised of two
volumes. Volume I presents EPA's rationale on wetland jurisdiction, elaborates
on the three wetland parameters generally considered when making wetland
jurisdictional determinations, and presents an overview of the jurisdictional
approaches developed by EPA in Volume II, the Field Methodology. Thus, it
lays the foundation for the three jurisdictional approaches presented in
Volume II.
The basic rationale behind EPA's wetland jurisdictional approach was
initially conceived in 1980 with the issuance of interim guidance for
identifying wetlands under the 404 program (Environmental Protection
Agency, 1980). In 1983 the rationale was expanded and a draft juris-
dictional approach was developed consistent with the revised rationale.
i i i

-------
EPA distributed the 1983 draft rationale and approach to about forty
potential peer reviewers. Because the responses were, for the most part,
favorable, additional revisions were made and a second draft was circulated
to about sixty potential peer reviewers in 1985. Individuals receiving
the drafts for review were associated with federal, state, and regional
governmental agencies, academic institutions, consulting firms, and
private environmental organizations; they represented a wide range
of wetland technical expertise. The 1985 draft also went through EPA
regional review, as well as formal Interagency review by the U.S. F1sh
and Wildlife Service, Corps of Engineers, National Marine Fisheries Service,
and Soil Conservation Service. Based upon the 1985 peer review comments,
the comments from the federal agencies, and subsequent EPA field testing 1n
Arkansas, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, Virginia (bottomland hardwoods),
North Carolina (pocoslns), Maryland and Virginia (marshes and forested swamps),
an Interim final Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual was developed.
The Interim final Manual was field tested again during 1987 1n Idaho (riparian
forests, shrub swamps, montane wet meadows, and bogs), Iowa (forested swamps
and marshes), Louisiana (fresh, brackish and saline tidal marshes), Maryland
(forested swamps and fresh tidal marshes), Massachusetts (wet meadows, bogs
and forested swamps), Texas (bottomland hardwoods) and Washington (forested
wetlands, wet meadows and bogs). Based upon the 1987 field testing, peer
review comments and comments from EPA regional offices, the Manual was further
revised where appropriate. Although the rationale and technical criteria
remain essentially the same, a number of procedural Improvements have been
made to both the simple and detailed approaches and a new approach for dealing
with atypical situations and/or normally variable environmental conditions
has been added. A more detailed explanation of these most recent revisions
can be found 1n a report on the field testing effort (Slpple, 1988). During
this same review period, the Corps of Engineers conducted field review of
Its wetland delineation manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). Now that
their reviews are complete, both agencies plan to meet, consider the comments
received, and attempt to merge the two documents Into one 404 wetland juris-
dictional methodology for use by both agencies.
1 v

-------
The author truly appreciates the efforts of the many peer reviewers who
commented on the 1987 interim final Manual or earlier drafts, Including Greg
Auble, Barbara Bedford, Virginia Carter, Harold Cassell, Lew Cowardln, Bill
Davis, Dave Davis, Doug Davis, Frank Dawson, M1ke Gantt, Cathy Garra, M1ke
Gilbert, Frank Golet, Dave Hardin, Robin Hart, John Hefner, Wayne Klockner,
Bill Kruczynskl, Lyndon Lee, D1ck Macomber, Gene McColllgan, Ken Metsler,
John Organ, Greg Peck, Don Reed, Charlie Rhodes, Charley Roman, Dana Sanders,
Bill Sanvllle, Hank Sather, 01m Schmld, Joe Shlsler, Pat Stuber, Carl Thomas,
Doug Thompson, Ralph T1ner, Fred Welnmann, and Bill W11en. Their many con-
structive comments and recommendations have been very helpful In refining
this document. EPA also appreciates the help of Its Regional Bottomland
Hardwood Wetland Delineation Review Team (Tom Glatzel, Lyndon Lee, Randy
Pomponlo, Susan Ray, Charlie Rhodes, Bill Slpple, Norm Thomas, and Tom Welborn)
1n field testing the basic rationale underlying the Field Methodology at a
number of bottomland hardwood sites In 1986. The vegetation sampling protocol
in the Field Methodology 1s to a large extent an outgrowth of that effort.
In addition, the 1987 field testing could not have been accomplished without
the aid of various agency and non-agency personnel, including Bob Barber,
Susan Bitter, John Bruza, Steve Calcco, Tom Davidson, Alex Dolgas, Ronnie
Duke, Woody Francis, M1ke Holllns, Bill Jenkins, Gene Keepper, Mark Kern,
Kathy Kunz, Bob Mosley, Tom Nystrom, Jeanene Peckham, Charlie Rhodes, Matt
Schwelsberg, Norm Sears, Eric See, Rod Schwarm, Ellalne Sorners, Michele
Stevens, Rusty Swafford, Ralph T1ner and Gary Voerman. I certainly appreciate
all of their help. Helpful review and administrative guidance was provided
by Suzanne Schwartz, John Meagher, and Dave Davis of EPA's Office of Wetlands
Protection. Comments and suggestions received during the federal Interagency
review 1n 1985 were also Instrumental 1n further refining the manual. In
fact, in addressing the soil and hydrology parameters 1n this manual 1n
1987, the author relied heavily upon materials already developed by the
Corps of Engineers In their wetland delineation manual cited above. Blake
Parker's review of the soil sections of the current version of the Manual
was also very helpful. Stan Franczak ably handled the huge typing load
associated with the 1987 and current versions of the Manual, as well as
the earlier drafts.
v

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PMi
Section I. Introduction		1
Section II. Scoping and Preliminary Data Gathering		3
A.	General		3
B.	Steps for Preliminary Data Gathering and Scoping		3
Section III. Simple Jurisdictional Approach		5
A.	General		5
B.	Steps for Implementing the Simple Jurisdictional Approach...	6
Section IV. Detailed Jurisdictional Approach		19
A.	General		19
B.	Steps for Implementing the Detailed Jurisdictional Approach.	19
Section V. Approach for Atypical Situations and/or Normally Variable
Environmental Conditions	 37
A.	General	 37
B.	Procedures to Follow When Atypical Situations and/or Normally
Variable Environmental Conditions are Encountered	 38
Appendix A.	Jurisdictional Decision Flow Chart		A-l
Appendix B.	Jurisdiction Decision Diagnostic Key		B-l
Appendix C.	Data Forms for Simple Jurisdictional Determinations		C-l
Appendix D.	Data Forms for Detailed Jurisdictional Determinations...	D-l
Appendix E. Equipment Necessary for Making Wetland Jurisdictional
Determinations	 E-l
Appendix F. Diagram of the Sample Plot for the Detailed Approach	F-l
v11

-------
SECTION I: INTRODUCTION
This Field Methodology is intended for use by Environmental Protection
Agency field personnel in making wetland jurisdictional determinations. It
was developed as a separate volume to facilitate its use in the field. The
Field Methodology includes five sections and six appendices. Section I is
an introduction which indicates the purpose of the document, outlines its
contents, and explains its relationship to Volume I (Rationale, Wetland
Parameters, and Overview of Jurisdictional Approaches). Section II addresses
scoping and preliminary data gathering, two steps that are generally necessary
prior to making jurisdictional determinations. A simple approach for making
more or less routine jurisdictional determinations is outlined in Section
III. A detailed approach for making jurisdictional determinations for large
and/or controversial sites or projects is presented in Section IV. Both
approaches should give the same results since the upland-wetland boundary
is determined in a similar fashion. The detailed approach, however, allows
for more extensive documentation. Section V should be used for atypical
situations (i.e., situations where one or more indicators of vegetation,
soils and/or hydrology cannot be found due to the effects of recent human
activities or natural events) or when normal seasonal, annual or long-term
cyclic variations in environmental conditions result from causes other than
human activities or catastrophic natural events. Appendix A is a Jurisdic-
tional Decision Flow Chart; Appendix B is a Jurisdictional Decision Diagnostic
Key. Both of these appendices are tools that will expedite and conceptually
guide decisions about jurisdiction for vegetation units and sample plots
once the field data have been collected. They closely track each other and
will lead to the same conclusions; one's preference for use will be solely a
matter of choice. Some field investigators may find the flow chart easier
to use than the key, especially if they have had limited experience using
diagnostic keys. Although these tools will be particularly helpful to
people who are not that familiar with the Field Methodology, their use is
optional since jurisdictional determinations can be conducted without them.
Appendices C and D include field data sheets for the simple and detailed
approaches, respectively. These data sheets are comprehensive, with short
explanatory notes to aid data collection. As field investigators become

-------
-2-
intimately familiar with the Field Methodology, particularly the three
approaches involved, they will be able to implement these approaches in the
field with the data sheets alone, referring to the Field Methodology only as
necessary. In fact, because of their comprehensive nature, the data sheets are
to some extent short versions of the approaches involved. Yet with practice,
they are not really difficult or time consuming to complete in the field.
Lists of necessary and optional equipment for both approaches are included
in Appendix E. Appendix F is a diagram of the sample plot used in the
detailed approach.
Volume II should not be utilized in isolation from Volume I. Users
should first become very familiar with the rationale, wetland parameters,
and overview of the jurisdictional approaches presented in Volume I. It is
also very important to thoroughly review the glossary in Volume I, since a
good understanding of the terms used in the methodology is imperative.
Thus, Volume I should be thought of, in part, as a prerequisite training
document on the use of Volume II, in that an understanding of the former
will help assure the proper use of the jurisdictional approaches presented
in the latter.

-------
-3-
SECTION II: SCOPING AND PRELIMINARY DATA GATHERING
A.	General
Prior to making a wetland jurisdictional determination, it is generally
necessary to gather preliminary data on the site or project and scope put the
task. This will allow the field investigator to determine whether the simple
or detailed jurisdictional approach is appropriate.
B.	Steps for Preliminary Data Gathering and Scoping
1.	Obtain and review any aerial photographs, vegetation maps,
wetland maps, topographic maps, soil surveys, technical
reports, or other pertinent information depicting and/or
describing the site.
2.	Estimate the size of the site.
3.	Determine the site's geomorphological setting (e.g., floodplain,
isolated depression, ridge and swale complex) and its habitat or
vegetative complexity (i.e., the range of habitat or vegetation
types).
4.	Determine whether a permit situation or an enforcement situation
is involved.
5.	If necessary, do a field reconnaissance to complete Steps 2-4.
6.	Based upon Steps 1-5, determine whether the simple jurisdictional
approach (Section III), the detailed jurisdictional approach
(Section IV), or the approach for atypical situations and/or normally
variable environmental conditions (Section V) is appropriate. This
step assumes that a field investigator is already familiar with all
three approaches and the types of projects or sites that would
generally be applicable to them as described in Sections 111 A,
IVA, and VA of this Field Methodology.

-------
Gather together the equipment (Appendix E) necessary to make the
jurisdictional determination, including an ample supply of the
appropriate data sheets (Appendices C and/or D).

-------
-5-
SECTION III: SIMPLE JURISDICTIONAL APPROACH
A. General
The simple jurisdictional approach is generally applicable to sites or
projects that are relatively small in extent (i.e., up to 15 acres, such as
a narrow fringe marsh along a shoreline or a small depressional wetland)
and/or non-controversial in terms of public or private interests, ecological
significance, potential jurisdictional challenges, enforcement status, etc.
Discretion must be exercised in deciding whether a project is simple, however,
since even small sites may be so vegetatively complex to require detailed
examination; larger sites may be so uniform to allow for a simple examination.
Controversial sites will generally entail conducting a detailed field examina-
tion regardless of size. Significantly altered sites, particularly enforcement
situations, will generally require the use of the approach presented in Section V
for atypical situations and/or normally variable environmental conditions in
conjunction with either the simple or the detailed jurisdictional approaches.
The simple jurisdictional approach involves inspecting the majority of
the site and making ocular vegetation estimates for the vegetation units as
a whole (as opposed to detailed sampling along transects as in the detailed
approach), and when appropriate, examining soil and hydrologic conditions
as well. Because fifteen steps are potentially involved in the simple juris-
dictional approach, on the surface it appears more complex than it really
is. Actually, many jurisdictional determinations can be made without going
through all fifteen steps. The simple jurisdictional approach will generally
be applied only to smaller sites, which probably will have only one or at
the most, a few vegetation units. Furthermore, a field investigator will
only have to proceed through Step 7 for any vegetation units dominated by
one or more obligate plant species, assuming there is no evidence of signifi-
cant hydrologic modifications. And if a vegetation unit is comprised of
only herbaceous plants, which is the situation with most marshes, dominants
will have to be determined just for those species. Thus, jurisdictional
determinations for small herbaceous wetlands, especially those with dominant
obligate wetland species, should be rather easy to conduct.

-------
-6-
All sites or projects for which the simple jurisdictional approach
is not appropriate, should be examined using the approaches in either
Section IV or Section V. Field data sheets are included in Appendix C.
A list of necessary and optional equipment is given in Appendix E.
B. Steps for Implementing the Simple Jurisdictional Approach
1.	Decide how the jurisdictional determination will be presented (e.g.,
ground delineation, delineation on aerial photographs or topographic
maps, written technical report, or any combination of these). Proceed
to Step 2.
2.	Inspect the site and horizontally stratify it into different vegetation
units either mentally, or on an aerial photograph or a topographic map.
The approach used to stratify the site will be contingent upon.how the
jurisdictional determination will be presented. If the determination is
to be presented using aerial photographs, then vegetation units should
be tentatively delineated directly on the photographs or on photographic
overlays prior to going into the field. These vegetation units should
then be refined as appropriate in the field. If a ground delineation
is planned, vegetation units can also be shown on aerial photographs
or topographic maps, but the upland-wetland boundary will also have
to be delineated on the ground using stakes or flagging tape. Note:
In some instances involving large vegetation units, it may be best
to divide the units into subunits and treat each subunit independently
even though they are similar vegetatively. Another option with large
units if they appear to be either obvious wetland or obvious upland
(i.e., units dominated by either obligate wetland species and/or
facultative wetland species growing on hydric soils or obligate
upland species and/or facultative upland species growing on non-hydric
soils, respectively) is to sample only a subset of the units. For
example, when the vegetation unit on the upland side of an apparent
upland-wetland boundary occurs on a steep, dry slope supporting
dominant obligate upland and/or dominant facultative upland species,
it can be examined using one or more sample plots in representative

-------
-7-
areas of the unit. Under this option, use the plot size described
1n Step 8 (page 22) of the detailed approach (or a smaller plot
where appropriate) and then apply Steps 9-19 of the detailed approach
to collect data on the plots. Remember though, under such conditions
(I.e., the unit appears to be obvious upland), it is only necessary
to collect enough data to confirm whether the unit is in fact what
it appears to be. Similarly, if the upland side of the upland-wetland
boundary is obvious made land (e.g., a road embankment or parking
lot), 1t is only necessary to address the made land in conjunction
with the boundary line procedure described in Step 15 (page 16).
If any of these options 1s exercised, however, 1t should be explained
on the data sheets and documented in a field notebook. Proceed to
Step 3.
3.	Develop lists of the understory species (with bryophytes listed
separately), woody vines, shrubs, saplings and trees as appropriate
for each vegetation unit. This should be done by walking the majority
of each vegetation unit, periodically scanning the vegetation, and
listing the species on Data Forms C-l through C-3. Note: Because
of the multiple strata, more time will be necessary for this step in
forested units. Also see note in Step 8 (page 11). Proceed to Step 4.
4.	Determine the dominant plant species for each vegetation unit by
inspecting the majority of each unit and making ocular estimates.
Because of seasonal die-back, some plants (e.g., the skunk cabbage,
Symplocarpus foetidus) may not appear dominant at the time of obser-
vation. Likewise, other species (e.g., high density, leafless plants
such as the common three-square, Scirpus pungens) may actually be
dominants even though they have low cover values due to their habit.
Such species should be added to the list of dominants as appropriate
with an explanation for why they were added in the "comment" section
of the pertinent data sheet.
a. Visually estimate the percent areal cover (by species) of the
graminolds, forbs, ferns, fern allies, tree seedlings, and
herbaceous vines In the non-bryophyt1c understory and record it

-------
-8-
on Data Form C-l (bryophytes are treated separately in Step 4g
below). This should be done by estimating the area of the
vegetation unit covered by the foliage of a given plant species
projected onto the ground. Note: Although the field observations
made in Step 2 will be helpful in making these estimates, additional
inspection will probably be necessary.
b.	Indicate the cover class into which each understory species
falls and its corresponding midpoint. The cover classes
(and midpoints) are: T=<1% (none); 1=1-5% (3.0); 2=6-152
(10.5); 3=16-25? (20.5); 4=26-50% (38.0); 5=51-75% (63.0);
6=76-95% (85.5); 7=96-100% (98.0).
c.	Rank the understory species according to their midpoints. If
two or more species have the same midpoints and the same or
essentially the same recorded percent area! cover, equally rank
them. Use absolute areal cover values as a tie-breaker only if
they are obviously different.
d.	Sum the midpoint values of all understory species.
e.	Multiply the total midpoint values by 50%.
f.	Compile the cumulative total of the ranked species 1n the understory
until 50% of the sum of the midpoints for all understory species is
reached or Initially exceeded. All species contributing areal cover
to the cumulative 50% threshold should be considered dominants. If
the threshold is reached by two or more equally ranked species, con-
sider them all dominants, along with any higher ranked species. If
all species are equally ranked, consider them all dominants. Place
an asterisk next to the dominants.
g.	Visually estimate the percent areal cover of the bryophyte species
and record it on a separate Data Form C-l than was used for the
non-bryophytic understory. Follow the same procedure used for
the non-bryophytic understory species in Step 4a-f (page 7-8).
h.	Visually estimate the percent areal cover of the shrub species
and record it on Data Form C-2. Follow the same procedure used
for non-bryophytic understory species in Step 4a-f (page 7-8).
i.	Visually estimate the percent areal cover of the woody vine species
independent of the strata in which they occur and record it on
Data Form C-2. Follow the same procedure used for non-bryophytic
understory species in Step 4a-f (page 7-8).
j. Visually estimate the percent areal cover of the sapling species
and record it on Data Form C-3. Follow the same procedure used
for non-bryophytic understory species in Step 4a-f (page 7-8).
k. Visually estimate the relative basal area of the tree species
(exclusive of saplings) and record it on Data Form C-3. This
should be done by considering both the size and number of

-------
-9-
individuals of a" tree species and comparing that species to
other tree species in the vegetation unit. The total relative
basal area for all the species in a vegetation unit will always
equal 100?. Note: An alternative option would be to establish
sample points in one or more representative areas of each vegeta-
tion unit from which basal area data can be collected following
the procedure described in Step 9q (page 24) of the detailed
approach. If this option is implemented, document it on the
data sheets and in a field notebook, then proceed to Step 5;
otherwise continue below.
1. Rank the tree species by relative basal area. If two or more
species have the same or essentially the same relative basal
area, equally rank them.
m. Compile the cumulative sum of the ranked tree species until
502 of the total relative basal area for all tree species
is reached or initially exceeded. All species contributing
relative basal area to the cumulative 50% threshold should be
considered dominants. If the threshold is reached by two or
more equally ranked species, consider them all dominants,
along with any higher ranking species. If all of the species
are equally ranked, consider them all dominants. Place an
asterisk next to the dominants. Proceed to Step 5.
5. Determine the indicator status of the dominant plant species in
each vegetation unit using the national, regional, or state lists
of plants that occur in wetlands and record it on Data Forms
C-l through C-3. Transfer this information (i.e., the dominant
species and their respective indicator status) to the data summary
sheets (Data Form C-5). Proceed to Step 6.
6. Determine whether the vegetation units have been hydrologically
modified (e.g., whether a vegetation unit with dominant obligate
wetland species has been ditched or a vegetation unit with dominant
obligate upland species has been impounded).
a. In the presence of one or more dominant obligate wetland species
or one or more dominant obligate upland species in a vegetation
unit, and in the absence of hydrological modifications, there is
no need to consider hydrology further, or soils. If hydrological
modifications are evident, however, the significance of these
modifications must be determined before proceeding to Step 7.
Note: For an elaboration on how to deal with natural or man-
induced disturbances, see Section V.

-------
-10-
b.	When the only dominants in a vegetation unit are facultative
species (i.e., facultative wetland, straight facultative, and/or
facultative upland), proceed to Step 8.
c.	If both situations exist at a site, (i.e., vegetation units
with one or more obligate dominants and vegetation units with
only facultative dominants) Steps 7 emd 8 must be completed.
If hydrological modifications are evident, however, the
significance of these modifications must be determined before
making the jurisdictional determination under Step 7. Note:
For an elaboration on how to deal with natural or man-induced
disturbances, see Section V.
7. Complete the remaining portions of the data summary sheets (Data
Form C-5) that are not yet filled out. Using the data summary
sheets and optionally either the Jurisdictional Decision Flow
Chart (Appendix A) or the Jurisdictional Decision Diagnostic Key
(Appendix B), decide whether the vegetation units supporting one
or more dominant obligate wetland species or one or more dominant
obligate upland species, are wetland units. Note: In a situation
involving multiple vertical strata in which the only dominants in
a given stratum occur sparsely because the total percent areal
cover for that stratum is low, more weight should be given to the
dominants in any strata that have substantially greater overall
percent areal cover. For example, if a vegetation unit in a her-
baceous wetland (e.g., a marsh) has one shrub species represented
by a few scattered individuals, the shrub species would be considered
the dominant shrub species present and thus a dominant under this
methodology. However, that shrub species should be given relatively
little weight in comparison with the dominant herbaceous species,
which are obviously more abundant overall. This can be particularly
significant if the shrub species is either an obligate wetland
species or an obligate upland species and its indicator status is
inconsistent with the indicator status of the herbaceous species
that are more abundant overall (i.e., both obligate wetland species
and obligate upland species occur as dominants in the same vegetation
unit). This situation, which would usually result from anomalous
conditions (e.g., man-induced disturbance), natural disturbance,
or the presence of microsites, should be documented in the "comments"
section of the data summary sheets (Data Form C-5). For an elaboration
of how to deal with natural and man-induced disturbances, see Section V.
Proceed to Step 15.

-------
-11-
8.	If the dominant plant species in any vegetation units are all
facultative (i.e., facultative wetland, straight facultative,
and/or facultative upland), examine the soils and hydrology
as indicated in Steps 9-13. Note: If it appears that soils and
hydrology data are required (i.e., when only facultative plant
species appear to dominate a vegetation unit), it might be more
efficient to sample the soils and make hydrologic observations
periodically as the unit is transversed to examine the vegetation
in Steps 3 and 4 (page 7-9).
9.	Check the appropriate county soil survey (or other sources of soils
information in the absence of a published survey) to determine the
soil series or phases (or other applicable soil mapping units) for
the vegetation units containing only facultative species. Record
this information on Data Form C-4 and proceed to Step 10.
10.	Check the national list of hydric soils or the pertinent state hydric
soils list to determine whether the soil series or phases for the
vegetation units are considered hydric. Record this information on
Data Form C-4 and proceed to Step 11.
11.	Examine the soil profiles in the vegetation units to confirm whether
they fit the soil series or phase descriptions in the soil survey.
This is necessary due to the possibility of inclusions of other
soil series or phases and to check for possible mapping errors.
Also some mapping units will be hydric (e.g., alluvial land, swamp,
tidal marsh, muck, and peat) but will not be on the list of hydric
soils because they do not yet have series names for the area in
question. Note: Because of the possibilities mentioned above and
perhaps others, the field characteristics at a given site should be
given precedence over how a site is mapped on a county soil survey.
However, any divergence from the soil survey or the national or
state lists of hydric soils should be wel1-documented technically,
and unless there is a good reason to believe otherwise for a given
series/phase (e.g., the exceptions mentioned above), any series/phase
not on the hydric soils lists should be considered non-hydric.

-------
-12-
The number of soil pits necessary will depend upon the size of the
vegetation units, but generally between one and three soil pits
per unit (or one soil pit with supplemental soil probes) will
suffice. Whenever possible, pits should be dug to at least 40
centimeters (16 inches) and the soil characteristics observed in
the major portion of root zone, generally the upper 30 centimeters
(12 inches) of soil. Note: In some instances (e.g., bedrock or
extremely rocky terrain), it may not be possible to excavate to 16
inches. Be sure, however, to examine the soil profile at least to
the depth of the major portion of the root zone. The units should
be considered hydric if they either (a) meet the hydric soil criteria
in Volume I (page 10) or (b) manifest any of the field indicators
of hydric soil listed in Step 12 below. Proceed to Step 12.
12. Determine whether field indicators of hydric soil conditions exist
in the vegetation units and record them on Data Form C-4. The
presence of one or more of the following indicators is indicative
of the presence of hydric soils. Note: The soil examination can
be terminated when a hydric soil indicator is encountered. After
considering these indicators, proceed to Step 13.
a.	Organic soils (Histosols) or mineral soils with a histic epipedon.
b.	Gleyed mineral soils or mineral soils with low soil matrix chromas.
Using Munsell Soil Color Charts, record the soil matrix color
and mottle color (i.e., the hue, value, and chroma) of a soil
sample by matching the sample with the appropriate color chips.
For example, a soil sample with a hue of 10YR, a value of 6,
and a chroma of 2 would be recorded as 10YR 6/2. Also determine
whether the soil is gleyed by matching the soil sample with
the color chips on the gley page of Munsell Soil Color Charts.
These samples should be taken at a 25-30 centimeter (lO^U
Inch) depth, or immediately below the A horizon, whichever is
higher in the soil profile. Note: The soil should be moistened
if it is dry when examined. Apply the following diagnostic
soil key to confirm whether the colors in the soil matrix are
indicative of hydric soil conditions:
la. Soil is mottled:
2a. Matrix is gleyed	
2b. Matrix is not gleyed:
3a. Chroma of matrix is < 2
....hydric.
not hydric.
hydric.
3b. Chroma of matrix is > 2

-------
-13-
lb. Soil	is not mottled:
4a.	Matrix is gleyed	hydric.
4b.	Matrix is not gleyed and chroma is <_ 1	hydric.
4c.	Matrix is not gleyed and chroma is > 1...not hydric.
Thus, gleyed soils, mottled soils with a matrix chroma of less
than or equal to 2, and unmottled soils with a matrix chroma
less than or equal to 1 are all hydric soils. Note: Because
of their high organic content, certain mineral soils (e.g.,
some Mollisols) may not meet these hydric criteria. However,
in such dark (black) soils, the presence of gray mottles within
25-30 centimeters (10-12 inches) of soil surface is considered
indicative of hydric conditions. For the most part in the
United States, Mollisols are mainly the dark colored, base-rich
soils of the Prairie Region. Because of the color of the
parent material (e.g., the red soils of the Red River Valley),
some soils will not meet any of these color characteristics.
Soil color is also generally not a good indicator in sandy soils
(e.g., barrier islands). When problematic parent materials
or sandy soils are encountered, hydric soil indicators other
than color may have to be relied on in the field.
c.	Aquic or peraquic moisture regime. Soils with peraquic moisture
regimes are always hydric; those with aquic moisture regimes are
usually hydric (i.e., they are hydric if they meet the hydric
soil criteria specified in Section IIIB2 of Volume I, page 10-11).
d.	Sulfidic materials. The smell of hydrogen sulfide (rotten egg
odor) is indicative of the presence of sulfidic materials.
Hydrogen sulfide forms under extreme reducing conditions
associated with prolonged soil saturation or inundation.
e.	Iron or manganese concretions. These are usually black or dark
brown and occur as small aggregates near the soil surface.
f.	Oxidized root-rhizome channels associated with living roots and
rhizomes! These oxidized (generally brown or orange-brown)
channels contrast sharply with the surrounding reduced (generally
gray, greenish or bluish) soils.
g.	Ferrous iron. This is chemically reduced iron, the presence of
which can be determined using a colorimetric field test kit.
h.	Other organic materials. In sandy soils (e.g., on barrier
islands) look for any of the indicators listed below.
(1) A layer of organic matter above the mineral surface or high
organic matter content in the surface horizon. The mineral
surface layer generally appears darker than the mineral

-------
-Im-
material immediately below it due to organic matter
interspersed among or adhering to sand particles. Note:
Because organic matter also accumulates in upland soils,
in some instances it may be difficult to distinguish a
surface organic layer associated with a wetland site from
litter and duff associated with an upland site unless the
plant species composition of the organic material is
determined.
(2) Dark vertical streaking in the root zone of subsurface
horizons due to the downward movement of organic materials
from the surface. When the soil from a vertical streak
is rubbed between the fingers, a dark stain will result.
This may sometimes be associated with a thin organic layer
of hardened soil (i.e., an organic pan or spodic horizon)
occurring at 30-75 centimeter (12-30 inch) depths.
13. Make hydrologic observations in the vegetation units and record them
on Data Form C-4. See the note in Step 8 (p. 11).
a.	Record any evidence of surface inundation, such as drift lines,
water marks, sediment deposition, bare areas, moss lines, water-
stained leaves, standing or flowing water, surface scouring,
drainage patterns, etc., within a 10 foot radius of the soil
samples taken in Step 11 (p. 11). Note: These phenomena
should be used as indicators only within the context that they
are used in Section IIIC2 of Volume I.
b.	After sufficient time has passed to allow water to drain into
the soil pit(s) dug in Step 11, examine the pit(s) for evidence
of standing water and soil saturation. Note: Because of the
capillary zone, the soil will be saturated higher in the soil
profile than the depth of standing water in the soil pit(s).
c.	Record any plant species that have morphological adaptations
(e.g., buttressed tree bases and adventitious roots) to saturated
soil conditions or surface inundation within a 10 foot radius of
the soil samples taken in Step 11 (p. 11).
d.	When necessary, additional information on hydrology should be
obtained from recorded sources, such as stream gauge data, tide
gauge data, flood predictions, piezometric data, soil surveys,
and the national or state lists of hydric soils.
Note: It is not necessary to directly demonstrate that wetland
hydrology is present. It is only necessary to show that the soil
or its surface is at least periodically saturated or inundated,
respectively, during a significant part of the growing season (i.e.,

-------
-15-
so11 saturation for usually a week or more, ponding for a long
or very long duration, and frequent flooding for long or very long
duration). Specifically, with a vegetation unit dominated by one
or more obligate wetland plant species, it is necessary to show
either (1) that there have been no significant hydrologlc modifi-
cations or (2) that there is one or more hydrologic indicators
at least periodically present during a significant part of
the growing season when the significance of the hydrologic
modification is in doubt. With a vegetation unit dominated by
only facultative species (i.e., facultative wetland, straight
facultative, and/or facultative upland) occurring on a hydric
soil, it is necessary to demonstrate that there is one or more
hydrologic indicators at least periodically present during a
significant part of the growing season. Indicators of surface
inundation and the presence of saturated soils in the major portion
of the root zone (i.e., generally the upper 30 centimeters (12
inches) of soil) are considered hydrology Indicators. Plant
morphological adaptations are also considered hydrology indicators,
unless the vegetation unit has been significantly altered hydro-
logically. Other hydrology indicators include the various recorded
sources listed in Step 13d (page 14). Proceed to Step 14.
14. Complete the remaining portions of the data summary sheets (Data
Forms C-5) that are not yet filled out. Using the data summary
sheets and optionally either the Jurisdictional Decision Flow
Chart (Appendix A) or the Jurisdictional Decision Diagnostic Key
(Appendix B), decide whether the vegetation units dominated by
facultative species (i.e., facultative wetland, straight facultative
and/or facultative upland) are wetland units. See the note in
Step 7 (page 10) and proceed to Step 15 (or back to Procedure 1
of Part V if unauthorized activities are involved).

-------
-16-
15. Indicate the extent of wetlands at the site by one of the following
options.
a.	Written report. If the extent of wetlands is to be conveyed in
a written description, the various vegetation units should be
described in a detailed technical report, including information
on the dominant plant species, as well as soil and hydrologic
conditions as appropriate. This information should be derived
from Data Forms C-l through C-5. The geographic extent of
wetlands at the site will coincide with the distribution of
the various wetland vegetation units determined in Steps 7
and/or 14, as applicable. Therefore, any upland-wetland
boundaries at the site will essentially coincide with the
boundaries between the upland vegetation units and the wetland
vegetation units that are present. However, it should be
indicated in the report that, if necessary, a more definitive
boundary could be established by an on-site ground delineation.
b.	Aerial photographs/topographic maps. If the extent of wetlands
is to be conveyed on aerial photographs or topographic maps, the
various vegetation units can be delineated directly on the photo-
graphs or maps or on overlays thereof. The geographic extent of
wetlands at the site will coincide with the distribution of the
various wetland vegetation units determined in Steps 7 and/or
14, as applicable. Therefore, any upland-wetland boundaries at
the site will essentially coincide with the boundaries between
the upland vegetation units and the wetland vegetation units
that are present. However, it should be indicated on the photo-
graphs or maps that, if necessary, a more definitive boundary
could be established in an on-site ground delineation.
c.	Ground delineation. If the extent of wetlands at the site is to
be delineated on the ground, the following additional steps are
necessary.
(1) Review the data summary sheets (Data Forms C-5) for the
various vegetation units to refresh your memory on which
vegetation units are upland versus wetland. This will give
you an indication of the approximate upland-wetland boundary.

-------
-17-
(2)	Walk the interface between the upland vegetation units and
the wetland vegetation units and make observations of vegeta-
tion, soils, and hydrology as necessary. Note: Soils
generally are more useful than vegetation in establishing
the upland-wetland boundary, particularly if there is no
evident vegetation break or when facultative species
dominate two adjacent vegetation units. However, in
the presence of dominant obligate plant species in a
vegetation unit, particularly when in conjunction with a
sharp topographic break, vegetation alone will generally
suffice for establishing the boundary.
(3)	If it is obvious that vegetation alone will suffice for
establishing the upland-wetland boundary (i.e., in the
presence of dominant obligate plant species) observations
should be made along the apparent boundary. The frequency
of observations necessary along the boundary will depend
upon its nature (e.g., a rather straight boundary occurring
along a sharp topographic breaks will allow for a lower
observation frequency than a meandering boundary with a
less distinct topographic break). Observations should be
periodically documented (i.e, as a general guide, at 100
foot intervals) by estimating the dominant plant species to
each side of the upland-wetland boundary and listing them in
the soils "comments" section of two Data Form C-4's numbered
1BU and 1BW, respectively (i.e., the 1BU refers to the obser-
vations on the upland side of the upland-wetland boundary
at the first location where data are recorded along the
boundary and 1BW refers to observations on the wetland side).
Based upon these observations along the interface between
upland and wetland vegetation units, establish the various
boundary points along the upland-wetland boundary and
stake or flag them. The boundary points in aggregate,
and by interpolation any lines established between them
using the vegetation break or topographic break as a
guide, constitute the upland-wetland boundary at the site.
(4)	If vegetation alone will not suffice for establishing the
upland-wetland boundary, soils should be examined along
the apparent boundary. At each location along the boundary
where soils are examined, samples should be taken across
(i.e., perpendicular to) the boundary. Although data
sheets do not have to be filled out for each location
along the boundary where soils are examined, they should be
periodically completed (i.e., as a general guide, at 100 foot
intervals). When data sheets are used, one sheet (Data Form
C-4) should be completed for areas immediately to each side
of the upland-wetland boundary (i.e., one form should be
completed for the wetland unit and one form should be
completed for the upland unit). The data sheets should be
numbered 1BU and 1BW, respectively (i.e., the 1BU refers to
the sample taken on the upland side of the upland-wetland

-------
-18-
boundary at the first location where data are recorded
along the upland-wetland boundary and 1BW stands for the
sample on the wetland side). Hydrological observations
should also be made within a five foot radius of the soil
samples. Like with soils, this hydrological information
should be periodically entered on data sheets (i.e., the
same ones used for the two soil samples). The dominant
plant species on the upland side of the upland-wetland
boundary should also be estimated and indicated in the
soils "comments" section of the Data Form C-4 used for sample
1BU and the dominant plants on the wetland side should be
estimated and indicated in the soils "comments" section of
the.Data Form D-4 used in sample 1BW. In addition, any
vegetation and/or topographic breaks in the immediate
vicinity of the upland-wetland boundary should be recorded
in the soils "comments" section of one of the two Data Form
C-4's. Based upon the soil, hydrology and vegetation
samples/observations along the interface between upland
and wetland vegetation units, establish the upland-wetland
boundary points and stake or flag them. Also record the
distances and compass directions between the boundary
points and their respective two soil samples (e.g., 1BU
and 1BW) on the appropriate Data Form C-4. The boundary
points in aggregate, and by interpolation any lines
established between them using vegetation breaks or topo-
graphic contours as a guide, constitutes the upland-wetland
boundary at the site.
(5) If desired, the extent of wetlands can also be indicated on
aerial photographs or topographic maps, and/or a written
report can be produced.
Note: Once the jurisdictional determination is complete, a permanent
file should be set up that includes (1) the documentation developed
in Step 15 above, including all of the data forms, (2) a general site
location map, (3) a sketch map where appropriate, (4) reference to
information gathered in the preliminary data gathering and scoping
effort if it was subsequently useful in the delineation effort,
and (5) any other pertinent information (e.g., that gathered from
interviews with people familiar with the site).

-------
-19-
SECTION IV: DETAILED JURISDICTIONAL APPROACH
A.	General
The detailed jurisdictional approach is generally applicable to sites
or projects that are relatively large (i.e., greater than 15 acres, such
as an extensive riverine bottomland hardwood tract or a large depressional
wetland) and/or controversial in terms of public or private interests,
ecological significance, potential jurisdictional challenges, etc. In
some instances, the detailed jurisdictional approach might also be appro-
priate for smaller sites or projects, especially those with complex
vegetation. However, the detailed approach is very time consumptive and
requires at a minimum two people, and preferably a team, to implement.
Thus, whenever possible the simple approach should be utilized for making
jurisdictional determinations.
The detailed jurisdictional approach involves standard quantitative
vegetation sampling along transects and frequently an examination of the
soils and hydrology as well. Field data sheets are included in Appendix D.
A list of necessary and optional equipment is given in Appendix E. Appendix
F is a diagram of the sample plot used in the detailed approach.
B.	Steps for Implementing the Detailed Jurisdictional Approach
1.	If a reconnaissance survey was not done in the preliminary data
gathering and scoping effort, it should be done here. This can
be very useful, particularly for forested sites, since it will
give the field investigator a good idea of the range of vegetation
and soil conditions over the site. Proceed to Step 2.
2.	Based upon the reconnaissance study, horizontally stratify the site
into different vegetation units either mentally or on aerial photo-
graphs or topographic maps. If aerial photographs or topographic
maps are used, the vegetation units should be tentatively delineated
directly on the photographs, on photographic overlays, or on the

-------
-20-
topographic maps prior to going into the field. These vegetation
units should then be refined on the photographs, overlays or maps
as appropriate in the field. If a ground delineation is planned
without the use of photographs or maps, then ground adjustments to
the vegetation units can be made along the transects as appropriate.
Either way, the upland-wetland boundary will have to be delineated
on the ground using stakes or flagging tape. Proceed to Step 3.
3.	Establish a baseline or baselines from which transects will extend
into the site. A baseline might be the boundary of the site, a
highway or unimproved road, or some other evident lineal feature.
It should extend more or less parallel to any major watercourse at
the site and/or perpendicular to the topographic gradient. Delineate
the baseline on an aerial photograph or a topographic map and record
Its origin, length and compass heading 1n a field notebook. In the
absence of obvious lineal features, the baseline can be established
and flagged using a compass heading. When a limited number of tran-
sects are planned, a baseline may not be necessary as long as there
are fixed points (e.g., structures such as a building) from which a
transect could start. Proceed to Step 4.
4.	Establish transect locations. The number of transects necessary
to adequately characterize a site will vary with the size of the
site and the complexity of the vegetation. It 1s generally best
to divide the baseline Into segments (e.g., 100 foot, 500 foot,
or 1000 foot Intervals depending on the size of the site) and
randomly select a point within each segment to begin a transect.
The location of each transect along the baseline should be recorded
1n a field notebook. When a fixed point Is used In lieu of a base-
line, that point will serve to locate the beginning of the transect.
Be sure, however, that each vegetation unit 1s Included within at
least one transect. Proceed to Step 5.

-------
-21-
5.	Establish each transect along a compass heading perpendicular to
the baseline. Record the compass heading 1n a field notebook.
Transects should extend far enough Into the site to adequately
characterize all of the vegetation units along the heading. In
most Instances the transects will extend across the entire width
of the wetland unless a body of water or other obstacles (e.g.,
an Impenetrable thicket) prevents access. Under those circum-
stances, access from the opposite side of the site may be necessary
to complete the transect and this should be explained on the data
sheets and 1n a field notebook. Proceed to Step 6.
6.	Following the compass heading and flagging 1t as you go, walk each
transect to a point at which all of the vegetation units along the
transect have been encountered. In the process, make any necessary
adjustments to the tentatively delineated vegetation units or
establish such units 1f they were not delineated 1n Step 2. If
aerial photographs or topographic maps are used, delineate the
transects on them. Proceed to Step 7.
7.	After a transect has been established and walked to Its terminus,
It should be traversed again in the opposite direction following
the flags to do the quantitative sampling. As you walk the transect,
record Its length by either pacing or measuring with a tape. The
number of sample plots necessary will depend upon the length of
the transect and the complexity of the vegetation. At least one
0.1 acre (0.04 hectare) circular sample plot should be established
In each vegetation unit along a transect. Note; If a vegetation
unit 1s small or so shaped (e.g., a narrow lineal swale) that the
0.1 acre plot would extend beyond Its boundaries, an adjustment 1n
the plot shape or size is warranted. This might Involve a rectangular
lineal plot of the same acreage, a smaller circular plot, or some
other modification, whichever seems most appropriate to site con-
ditions. Any modifications 1n plot size or shape, however, should
be documented on the data sheets and 1n a field notebook. In addition,
when the upland side of an apparent upland-wetland boundary is obviously

-------
-22-
uplarid (i.e., a steep, dry slope supporting dominant obligate upland
and/or dominant facultative upland species), a smaller plot size is
warrented for the upland vegetation unit. Similarly the upland side
of the boundary may be obvious made land (e.g., a road embankment or
parking lot) in which case the boundary line sampling procedure
described in Step 21 will suffice. Additional sample plots should
be established within the unit at 91.5 meters (300 foot) intervals
along the transect or sooner if a different vegetation unit is
encountered. With exceptionally large vegetation units or very
uniform or monotypic vegetation, however, a sampling interval larger
than 91.5 meters may be more appropriate. Thus, a field investigator
should exercise discretion in establishing sampling intervals. Sample
plots should be shown on either the aerial photographs or topographic
maps (when they are available), and their distances from the baseline
should be recorded on the data sheets and in a field notebook. Proceed
to Step 8.
8.	Select a point along the transect in the ultimate vegetation unit
to center the first 0.1 acre sample plot. Flag the center of the
plot and the four cardinal compass points of the perimeter of the
circular plot. This will divide the plot into four quadrants, and
the plot will have a 11.35 meter (37.24 foot) radius. Proceed to
Step 9.
9.	Determine the dominant plant species for the sample plot. There are
a number of ways to effectively sample vegetation. Many procedures
will produce essentially the same results and some procedures may
be appropriate for certain vegetation types but not for others.
The following procedure has proven effective in the field, but may
have to be adjusted as appropriate depending upon site conditions
and the nature of the vegetation. Note: If a team approach is
taken, field investigators have the option of completing Steps
14-18 (soils and hydrology) simultaneously with the vegetation
analysis, even though these steps would not be necessary in the
presence of dominant obligate plant species. Also see the third
note in Step 16 (page 28).

-------
-23-
a.	Randomly toss two O.lm? quadrat frames into the understory
of each quadrant of the 0.1 acre plot. On a Data Form D-l,
record the percent areal cover of each non-bryophytic under-
story species (graminoids, forbs, ferns, fern allies, tree
seedlings, and herbaceous vines) occurring soley within or
extending into each quadrat frame when viewed from directly
above it. Note: Record the percent areal cover of the
bryophytes on a separate Data Form D-l and see Step 9h below.
b.	Construct a species area curve to determine whether the eight
0.Im2 quadrats are sufficient to adequately survey the understory
(see back of Form D-l). The number of quadrats necessary will
correspond to the point on the curve where it first levels off
(and remains essentially level), indicating that the quadrats
after that point added few if any additional species. If eight
0.1m2 quadrats are not sufficient, do additional quadrats in
increments of four (one in each quadrant) until the necessary
number of quadrats is reached.
c.	For each species, sum the percent areal cover for all O.lm?
quadrats and divide the total by the total number of quadrats
sampled, which will give an average percent areal cover by
species.
d.	Rank the species in the understory by average percent areal
cover. If two or more species have the same or essentially
the same average percent areal cover, equally rank them.
e.	Sum the average percent areal cover for all the species
in the understory.
f.	Multiply the total average percent areal cover by 50%.
g.	Compile the cumulative sum of the ranked species in the understory
until 50$ of the total average percent areal cover for all species
is reached or initially exceeded. All species contributing cover
to the cumulative 50$ threshold should be considered dominants.
If the threshold is reached by two or more equally ranked species,
consider them all dominants, along with any higher ranking species.
If all of the species are equally ranked, consider them all
dominants. Place an asterisk next to the dominants.
h.	Repeat Step 9b-g above for the bryophyte component of the
understory.
1. Determine the percent areal cover of the shrub species within the
entire 0.1 acre sample plot and record the data on Data Form D-2.
This should be done by traversing the plot a number of times,
listing the shrub species present, and estimating their percent
areal cover for the entire plot.

-------
-24-
j. Indicate the cover class into which each shrub species falls and
its corresponding midpoint. The cover classes (and midpoints)
are: T=
-------
-25-
rotating 360 degrees in one direction. If a tree forks
below 1.37 meters (4.5 feet) and both trunks are "sighted
in," it should be tallied as two trees; if it forks above
1.37 meters, it should be counted as one if the trunk below
the fork is "sighted in." With borderline trees, every other
tree within a given species should be tallied. In the process,
also measure the diameter of each tallied individual tree
with a diameter tape and compute its basal area by the formula
Note: To expedite this calculation in the field, use a hand
calculator into which a conversion factor has been stored
(e.g., 0.0008454 for diameter data in centimeters). The basal
area of the individual tree (in square feet) can then be
obtained by simply squaring the tree diameter and multiplying
the result by the stored conversion factor.
(2)	Sum the individual tree basal areas by species.
(3)	Rank the tree species by their basal areas. If two or more
species have the same or essentially the same basal areas,
equally rank them.
(4)	Sum the basal areas of all tree species.
(5)	Multiply the summed (total) basal area by 50?.
(6)	Compile the cumulative sum of the ranked tree species until
50% of the total basal area for all tree species is reached
or initially exceeded. All species contributing cover to
the cumulative 501 threshold should be considered dominants.
If the threshold is reached by two or more equally ranked
species, consider them all dominants, along with any higher
ranking species. If all species are equally ranked, consider
them all dominants. If it is felt that a representative
sample of the trees has not been obtained by the one Bitterlich
tally, additional tallies should be obtained by offsetting
perpendicularly from the center point of the plot in alternate
directions and taking additional tallies.
r. As a check on the accuracy of the sampling in Step 9a-q above,
scan the entire plot and estimate what you feel would be the
dominant non-bryophytic understory, bryophytic, woody vine,
shrub, sapling and tree species as applicable. If your obser-
vations appear inconsistent with the data, redo the steps for
which inconsistencies exist and make adjustments to the data
sheets as necessary. Proceed to Step 10.
10. Determine the indicator status of the dominant plant species determined
in Step 9 using either the national, regional or state lists of plants
that occur in wetlands and enter it on Data Forms D-l through D-3 as
appropriate. Also enter the dominant species, along with their indicator
status, on the data summary sheet (Data Form D-5). Proceed to Step 11.
-------
-25-
11.	Determine whether the vegetation unit has. been hydro!ogically
modified (e.g., whether a vegetation unit with dominant obligate
wetland plants has been ditched or a vegetation unit with dominant
obligate upland plants has been impounded).
a.	In the presence of one or more dominant obligate wetland species
or one or more dominant obligate upland species in the sample
plot and in the absence of hydrological modifications, there is
no need to consider hydrology further, or soils. If hydrological
modifications are evident, however, the significance of these
modifications must be determined before proceeding to Step 12.
Note: For an elaboration on how to deal with natural or man-
induced disturbances, see Section V.
b.	When the only dominants in the sample plot are facultative
species (i.e., facultative wetland, straight facultative,
and/or facultative upland), proceed to Step 13.
12.	Complete the remaining portions of the data summary sheet (Data
Form D-5) that is not yet filled out. Using the sample plot data
summary sheet and optionally either the Jurisdictional Decision
Flow Chart (Appendix A) or the Jurisdictional Decision Diagnostic
Key (Appendix B), decide whether the sample plot supporting one
or more dominant obligate wetland or one or more dominant obligate
upland species, is wetland. Note: In a multiple-strata setting in
which the only dominants in a given stratum occur sparsely in the
sample plot because the total percent areal cover for that stratum in
that plot is low, more weight should be given to the dominants in
any strata that have substantially greater overall percent areal
cover in the sample plot. For example, if a sample plot in a
herbaceous wetland (e.g., a marsh) has one shrub species represented
by a few scattered individuals, the shrub species would be considered
the dominant shrub species present and thus a dominant under this
methodology. However, 1t should be given relatively little weight in
comparison with the dominant herbaceous species, which are obviously
more abundant overall. This can be particularly significant if the
shrub species 1s either an obligate wetland species or an obligate
upland species and its indicator status 1s Inconsistent with the
Indicator status of the herbaceous species that are more abundant
-------
-27-
overall (i.e., both obligate wetland species and obligate upland
species occur as dominants in the same plot). This situation, which
would usually result from anomalous conditions (e.g., man-induced
disturbance), natural disturbance, or the presence of microsites,
should be documented in the "comments" section of the data summary
sheet (Data Form D-5). For an elaboration on how to deal with natural
and man-induced disturbances, see Section V. A second potential
sampling problem may also occur. If a single large tree is recorded
in a sample plot, it may be determined to be dominant for that plot
under this methodology. Similarly to the example above, this species
may have an indicator status that is inconsistent with the dominants
in the other strata. Thus, when this situation is encountered, it
is important to determine whether the individual tree is occurring
under either anomalous conditions or on a microsite; in either
case, it should be given relatively little weight in comparison
with any more abundant species in the overall vegetation unit.
This situation should be similarly documented on the data summary
sheets. Proceed to Step 20.
13.	If the dominant plant species in the sample plot are all
facultative (i.e., facultative wetland, straight facultative,
and/or facultative upland), examine the soils and hydrology
as indicated in Steps 14-18.
14.	Check the appropriate county soil survey (or other sources of soils
information in the absence of a published survey) to determine the
soil series or phase (or other applicable soil mapping unit). Record
this information on Data Form D-4 and proceed to Step 15.
15.	Check the national list of hydric soils or the pertinent state
hydric soils list to determine whether the soil series or phase in
question is considered hydric. Indicate whether or not the series
is hydric on Data Form D-4 and proceed to Step 16.
-------
-28-
16. Dig a son pit near the center of the 0.1 acre sample plot and
examine the soil profile to confirm whether it fits the soil series
or phase descriptions in the soil survey. This is necessary due to
the possibility of Inclusions of other soil series or phases and to
check for possible mapping errors. Also, some mapping units may be
hydrlc (e.g., alluvial land, swamp, tidal marsh, muck, and peat) but
will not be on the 11st of hydric soils because they do not yet
have series names for the area in question. Note: Because of the
possibilities mentioned above and perhaps others, the field character-
istics at a given site should be given precedence over how a site is
mapped on a county soil survey. However, any divergence from the
soil survey or the national or state lists of hydric soils should be
well-documented technically, and unless there is a good reason to
believe otherwise (e.g., the exceptions mentioned above), any
series/phase not on the hydric soils lists should be considered
non-hydric. Whenever possible, the soil pit should be dug to at
least 40 centimeters (16 inches) and the soil characteristics
observed in the major portion of root zone, generally the upper 30
centimeters (12 inches) of soil. Note: In some instances (e.g.,
bedrock or extremely rocky terrain), it may not be possible to
excavate to 16 inches. Be sure, however, to examine the soil profile
at least to the depth of the major portion of the root zone. If it
Is felt that supplemental soil sampling should be done to adequately
characterize the soils at the plot, additional samples can be readily
obtained by randomly sampling in each quadrant with an Oakfleld soil
probe or similar device. Note: If it appears that soils and hydrology
data are required (i.e., when only facultative plant species appear to
dominate the plot a first glance), it might be best to dig the soil
pit earlier (i.e., when the plot is first established) for purposes of
the hydrology observations describe in Step 18b (page 31). Proceed to
Step 17.
17. Determine whether field indicators of hydric soil conditions exist
in the soil pits/probe holes and record the data on Data Form D-4.
Transfer this information to the data summary sheet (Data Form D-5).
-------
-29-
The presence of one or more of the following Indicators is indicative
of the presence of hydric soils. Note: The soil examination can be
terminated when a hydric soil indicator is encountered.
a.	Organic soils (Histosols) or mineral soils with a histic
epipedon.
b.	Gleyed mineral soils or mineral soils with low soil matrix
chromas. Using Munsell Soil Color Charts, record the soil
matrix color and mottle color (I.e., the hue, value, and chroma)
of a soil sample by matching the sample with the appropriate
color chips. For example, a soil sample with a hue of 10YR,
a value of 6, and a chroma of 2 would be recorded as 10YR 6/2.
Also determine whether the soil is gleyed by matching the soil
sample with the color chips on the gley page of Munsell Soil
Color Charts. These samples should be taken at a 25-30 centi-
meter (10-12 inch) depth or immediately below the A horizon,
whichever is higher in the soil profile. Note: The soil
should be moistened if it is dry when examined. Apply the
following diagnostic soil key to confirm whether the colors in
the soil matrix are indicative of hydric soil conditions:
la. Soil is mottled:
2a. Matrix is gleyed	hydric.
2b. Matrix is not gleyed
3a. Chroma of matrix is £ 2	hydric.
3b. Chroma of matrix is > 2	not hydric.
lb. Soil is not mottled:
4a. Matrix is gleyed	hydric.
4b. Matrix 1s not gleyed and chroma 1s £ 1	hydric.
4c. Matrix is not gleyed and chroma is > 1...not hydric.
Thus, gleyed soils, mottled soils with a matrix chroma less than
or equal to 2, and unmottled soils with a matrix chroma less than
or equal to 1 are all hydric soils. Note: Because of their high
organic content, certain mineral soils (e.g., some Mollisols) may
not meet these hydric criteria. However, In such dark (black)
soils, the presence of gray mottles within 25-30 centimeters (10-12
inches) of the soil surface is considered indicative of hydric
conditions. For the most part, in the United States, Mollisols
are mainly the dark colored, base-rich soils of the Prairie Region.
-------
-30-
Because of the color of the parent material (e.g., the red soil of
the Red River Valley), some soils will not meet any of these color
characteristics. Soil color is also generally not a good indicator
in sandy soils (e.g., barrier islands). When problematic parent
materials or sandy soils are encountered, hydric soil indicators
other than color may have to be relied on in the field.
c.	Sulfidic materials. The smell of hydrogen sulfide (rotten
egg odor) is indicative of the presence of sulfidie materials.
Hydrogen sulfide forms under extreme reducing conditions
associated with prolonged soil saturation or inundation.
d.	Iron or manganese concretions. These are usually black or dark
brown and occur as small aggregates near the soil surface.
e.	Oxidized root-rhizome channels associated with living roots and
rhizomes! These oxidized (generally brown or orange-brown) channels
contrast sharply with the surrounding reduced (generally gray,
greenish or bluish) soils.
f.	Ferrous iron. This is a chemically reduced iron, the presence of
which can be determined by using a calorimetric field test kit.
g.	Other organic materials. In sandy soils, look for any of the
indicators listed below.
(1)	A layer of organic matter above the mineral surface or high
organic matter in the surface horizon. The mineral surface
layer generally appears darker than the mineral material
immediately below it due to organic matter interspersed
among or adhering to sand particles. Note: Because organic
matter also accumulates in upland soils, in some instances
it may be difficult to distinguish a surface organic layer
associated with a wetland site from litter and duff associ-
ated with an upland site unless the plant species composition
of the organic material is determined.
(2)	Dark vertical streaking in subsurface horizons due to the
downward movement of organic materials from the surface.
When the soil from a vertical streak is rubbed between the
fingers, a dark stain will result. This may sometimes be
associated with a thin organic layer of hardened soil (i.e.,
an organic pan or spodic horizon) occurring at 30-75 centi-
meter (12-30 inch) depths. Proceed to Step 18.
18. Make hydrologic observations in the sample plot and record the data
on Data Form D-4. Transfer this information to the data summary
sheet (Data Form D-5).
-------
-31-
a.	Traverse the 0.1 acre sample plot a number of times and record
any evidence of surface inundation, such as drift lines, water
marks, sediment deposition, bare areas, moss lines, water stained
leaves, standing or flowing water, surface scouring, drainage
patterns, etc. Note: These phenomena should be used as Indicators
only within the context that they are used in Section IIIC2 of
Volume I.
b.	After sufficient time has passed to allow water to drain into
the soil pit dug in Step 16, examine the pit for evidence of
standing water and soil saturation. Note: Because of the
capillary zone, the soil will be saturated higher in the
profile than the standing water in the soil pit. Also see
the third note in Step 16 (page 28).
c.	Record any plant species found that have morphological adapta-
tions to saturated soil conditions or surface inundation.
d.	When necessary, additional information on hydrology should be
obtained from recorded sources, such as stream gauge data, tide
gauge data, flood predictions, piezometric data, soil surveys,
the national or state lists of hydric soils.
Note: It is not necessary to directly demonstrate that wetland
hydrology is present. It is only necessary to show that the soil
or its surface are at least periodically saturated or inundated,
respectively, during a significant part of the growing season
(i.e., soil saturation for usually a week or more, ponding for long
or very long duration, and frequent flooding for long or very long
duration). Specifically, with a vegetation unit dominated by one
or more obligate wetland plant species, it is necessary to show
either (1) that there have been no significant hydrologic modifi-
cations or (2) that there is one or more hydrologic indicators at
least periodically present during a significant part of the growing
season when the significance of the hydrological modifications 1s
1n doubt. With a vegetation unit dominated by only facultative
species (i.e., facultative wetland, straight facultative, and/or
facultative upland) occurring on a hydric soil, it is necessary to
demonstrate that there is one or more hydrologic Indicators at
least periodically present during a significant part of the growing
season. Indicators of surface inundation and the presence of
saturated soils 1n the major portion of the root zone are considered
hydrology indicators. Plant morphological adaptations are also
considered hydrology indicators, unless the vegetation unit has
-------
-32-
been significantly altered hydrologically. Other hydrology
indicators include the various recorded sources listed in Step 18d
(page 31). Proceed to Step 19.
19.	Complete the remaining portions of the data summary sheet (Data
Form D-5) that is not yet filled out. Using the sample plot data
summary sheet and optionally either the Jurisdictional Decision
Flow Chart or the Jurisdictional Decision Diagnostic Key, decide
whether the sample plot dominated by facultative species (i.e.,
facultative wetland, straight facultative and/or facultative
upland) is wetland. See the note in Step 12 (page 26) and proceed
to Step -20.
20.	Proceed along the transect towards the baseline until another
vegetation unit is encountered or 91.5 meters (300 feet), whichever
comes first. Establish a second 0.1 acre sampling plot (plot two)
at least 15.2 meters (50 feet) beyond the boundary of the new
vegetation unit or at a distance 91.5 meters from the first plot
if the same vegetation unit is encountered. Repeat the same pro-
cedures given in Steps 9-19. If the vegetation unit (including
soils and topography) at the second plot is essentially the same
as the first, or if the second is different but they are either
both wetlands or both uplands, proceed to Step 22. If the vege-
tation unit at the second plot is different and one of the units
is upland and the other is wetland, then an upland-wetland boundary
has been traversed. Proceed to Step 21.
21.	Determine the upland-wetland boundary between the two plots.
Note: At this point in the overall procedure, soils generally
become more useful than vegetation in establishing the upland-
wetland boundary, particularly if there is no evident vegetation
break or when facultative species dominate two adjacent vegetation
units. However, in the presence of dominant obligate plant
species in a vegetation unit, particularly when in conjunction
with a sharp topographic break, vegetation alone will generally
suffice for establishing the boundary.
-------
-33-
a.	Look for a change in vegetation or topography between sample
plots one and two. Information from the data sheets for
plots one and two will provide cues as to which parameters
have changed. In a forested area, this will frequently involve
changes in the shrubs or herbaceous plants. If there is a
vegetation or topographic change or break, sample the soil at
that point along the transect to see if it is hydric. If it
is hydric, proceed towards the upland plot until a more evident
change or break in the vegetation or topography is noted, and
examine the soil again to see if it is hydric. If no evident
change or break in vegetation or topography is initially noted,
the soil should be examined half way between plots one and
two. If the soil is hydric at this point on the transect,
sample the soil again half way between this point and plot
two. By repeating either of these procedures, make as many
additional soil samples as necessary to determine the location
of the upland-wetland boundary (actually a point) along the
transect. A soil probe (e.g., an Oakfield soil probe) is very
helpful to do this intensified soil sampling. Data sheets do
not have to be filled out for all of these soil probes. Once
the boundary point is determined for the transect, however,
one data sheet (Data Form D-4) should be filled out for the
areas immediately to each side of the upland-wetland boundary
point (i.e., one form should be completed for the upland unit
and one form should be completed for the wetland unit). These
samples should be numbered T1-BU1 and T1-BW1, respectively (T1
refers to transect #1; BUI refers to the boundary sample on
the upland side of the first upland-wetland boundary encountered
along transect #1; BW1 refers to the boundary sample on the
wetland side of the first upland-wetland boundary encountered
along transect #1). On the Data Form D-4's, also include any
hydrology observations made within a five foot radius of the
soil samples. Because quantitative vegetation data have already
been obtained for 0.1 acre plots (sample plots one and two) to
each side of the upland-wetland boundary, further detailed
quantitative analysis of the vegetation is generally not
necessary. However, the dominant plant species on the upland
side of the boundary point should be estimated and indicated
in the soils "comments" section of the Data Form D-4 used for
sample T1-BU1 and the dominant plants on the wetland side
should be estimated and indicated in the soils "comments" section
of the Data Form D-4 used for sample T1-BW1. In addition, any
vegetation or topographic breaks in the immediate vicinity of
the soil samples should be recorded on one of the two Data
Form D-4's. Also record the distances and compass directions
between the boundary point and samples T1-BU1 and T1-BW1 on
the appropriate Data Form D-4's.
b.	Once the upland-wetland boundary point is determined, stake or
flag the point, plot its location on the aerial photograph
or topographic map and label it "BP", and record its distance
from one of the two adjacent 0.1 acre sample plots and the
baseline. Proceed to Step 22.
-------
-34-
22. Make additional wetland determinations along the transect in
accordance with Step 20. The procedure described in Step 21
should be applied at every place along the transect where an
upland-wetland boundary occurs between successive 0.1 acre
sampling plots. Proceed to Step 23.
23. Establish all other necessary transects and repeat the procedures
in Steps 6-22. Proceed to Step 24.
24. Synthesize the sample data for all of the transects to determine
the portion of the site that is wetlands.
a.	Examine the sample plot data summary sheets (Data Form D-5)
and indicate on the aerial photograph or topographic map all
plots that are wetlands and all plots that are uplands.
b.	If the sampling plots are all wetlands or all uplands, the
entire site is either entirely wetlands or entirely uplands,
respectively.
c.	If some sampling plots are uplands and some are wetlands, then an
upland-wetland boundary is present. Connect the upland-wetland
boundary points ("BP's") on the aerial photograph or topographic
map by following either the vegetation break or the topographic
contour that corresponds with the upland-wetland boundary points.
This interpolated line passing through the "BP's" is the upland-
wetland boundary.
d.	If the distances between transects are large or the vegetation
breaks or the topographic contours do not consistently corres-
pond with the upland-wetland boundary, it may be necessary to
do additional soil sampling across the approximate boundary in
the areas between transects. The sampling frequency along the
upland-wetland boundary between transects is dependent upon the
transect spacing and the nature of the boundary. Shorter Inter-
transect distances and/or the presence of discrete vegetation or
topographic breaks allows for a minimum of inter-transect sampling.
Data sheets should be periodically (i.e., as a general guide, at
100 foot intervals) filled out for sampling locations along
the upland-wetland boundary as it is established. Where data
sheets are used, one data sheet (Data Form D-4) should be filled
out for areas immediately to each side of the upland wetland
boundary point (i.e., one sheet should be completed for the wetland
unit and one sheet should be completed for the upland unit). These
samples should be numbered 1BU and 1BW, respectively (i.e., 1BU
stands for the sample on the upland side of the upland-wetland
boundary point at the first sampling location between transects
-------
-35-
and 1BW stands for the sample on the wetland side). Hydrologic
observations should be made within five foot radius of the soil
samples. Like with soils, this hydrologic information should be
periodically entered on data sheets (i.e., the same ones used for
the two soil samples). The dominant plants on the upland side
of the boundary point should be estimated and indicated in the
soils "comments" section of the Data Form D-4 used for sample
1BU and the dominant plants on the wetland side should be
estimated and indicated in the soils "comments" section of the
Data Form D-4 used for sample 1BW. In addition, any vegetation
and/or topographic breaks in the immediate vicinity of the upland-
wetland boundary should be recorded in the soils "comments" section
of one of the two Data Form D-4's. Also record the distances and
compass directions between the boundary point and samples 1BU and
1BW on the appropriate Data Form D-4.
e. Place stakes or flagging tape at all boundary points established
during inter-transect sampling.
Note: Once the jurisdictional determination is complete, a permanent
file should be set up that includes (1) the data forms, (2) any report
or other documentation that might be produced, (3) a general site
location map, (4) a sketch map where appropriate, (5) reference to
information gathered in the preliminary data gathering and scoping
effort if it was subsequently useful in the delineation effort, and
(5) any other pertinent information (e.g., that gathered from interviews
with people familiar with the site).
-------
-37-
SECTION V: APPROACH FOR ATYPICAL SITUATIONS AND/OR
NORMALLY VARIABLE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
A. General
The simple and detailed approaches presented in Sections III and IV,
respectively, rely hierarchically on vegetation, soils and hydrology. How-
ever, as pointed out by the Corps of Engineers (Environmental Laboratory,
1987), atypical situations may exist in which one or more indicators of
hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and/or wetland hydrology cannot be
found at a site because of unauthorized activities, man-induced conditions
and/or recent natural events. Under such circumstances, an investigation
of the pre-existing conditions is necessary to determine whether or not a
wetland existed prior to the disturbance.
There are also certain wetland types and/or conditions that make
application of indicators of one or more of the three parameters difficult,
at least at certain times of the year. This should not be considered
atypical. Rather, it is due to normal seasonal, annual, or long-term
cyclic variations in environmental conditions that result from causes
other than human activities or catastrophic natural events. The Corps
(Environmental Laboratory, 1987) gives four examples of this situation
(wetlands in drumlins, seasonal wetlands, prairie potholes, and vege-
tated flats). For example, mudflats, which would be otherwise dominated
by annual plants during the growing season, are unvegetated during the
nongrowing season. Therefore, an indicator of hydrophytic vegetation
would not be evident for a significant part of the year. Likewise, a
prairie pothole may not have Inundated or saturated soils during most
of the growing season in years of below normal precipitation. Thus, a
hydrology Indicator would be absent. Under these circumstances, a field
investigator making a jurisdictional determination must decide whether or
not wetland indicators are normally present during a significant portion
of the growing season.
-------
-38-
If based upon the scoping and preliminary data gathering (Section III),
one or more indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and/or
wetland hydrology cannot be found because of unauthorized activities,
recent natural events, man-induced conditions, and/or normal annual,
seasonal or long-term variations of environmental conditions, then the
procedures in Section B below should be followed. Selected atypical
situations (e.g., drainage) are also discussed in Volume I.
B. Procedures to Follow When Atypical Situations and/or Normally Variable
Environmental Conditions are Encountered
1. If unauthorized activities (e.g., the placement of dredged or fill
material without a permit) have occurred at the site, the nature
and extent of these activities and the pre-existing site conditions
should be documented. This can be accomplished through the aid of
historical data (e.g., aerial photographs, vegetation maps, county
soil surveys, past jurisdictional determinations), peat analysis
(Sipple, 1985), or accounts of reliable individuals intimately
familiar with the site. This might involve documenting only the
pre-existing vegetation if it is cleared or the pre-existing
vegetation, soils and hydrology if a site is filled. Either
way, vegetation units should be reconstructed (either mentally
or on aerial photographs/maps) and the dominant plant species,
along with their indicator status, estimated and entered on the
data summary sheets normally used only for the simple approach
(Data Form C-5). Once this is accomplished, complete Steps 6-14 of
the simple approach (Section III). Then indicate the extent of
wetlands at the disturbed site either in a written report, on aerial
photographs or a topographic map, or by a ground delineation. The
geographic extent of wetlands at the disturbed site will coincide
with the distribution of the various wetland vegetation units
determined in Steps 7 and 14 (simple jurisdictional approach).
Therefore, any upland-wetland boundaries at the disturbed site will
essentially coincide with the boundaries between the upland vegetation
units and the wetland vegetation units that were present prior to
-------
-39-
the disturbance. In the case of an unauthorized activity involving
filling, more accurate boundaries can be delineated, if necessary,
on the ground by coring through the fill material and analyzing the
underlying natural soil profile (Sipple, 1985). Note: If standing
vegetation still exists at the site, the detailed approach can be
applied in lieu of the approach presented above, in which case the
field investigator should complete Steps 1-24 of Section IV.
2. If recent natural events (e.g., impoundment of water by beaver)
or man-induced conditions (e.g., legal drainage or inadvertent
impoundment due to highway construction) result in atypical
situations at the site that either effect wetland vegetation and
hydrology in an area which was upland prior to flooding or effect
upland vegetation and hydrology in an area which was wetland
prior to ditching, these events should be documented by on-site
inspection. Given the recent nature of these events, however, the
flooded area may not yet have developed hydric soil indicators.
Similarly, the ditched area may still be wet enough to support
hydrophytic vegetation. It is important in the latter two
circumstances (i.e., natural events and man-induced conditions)
to determine whether or not the alterations to the area have
resulted in changes that are now the "normal circumstances."
The relative permanence of the change and whether or not the
one-time upland area is now functioning as a wetland (or the
one-time wetland area is now functioning as an upland) must be
considered. Note: Because of the inherent difficulty in estab-
lishing how much the water table in a ditched wetland would have to
drop to no longer be a wetland hydrologically, it is generally more
appropriate to judge the significance of the hydrologic impact on
the site by evaluating the nature and direction of secondary plant
succession to determine whether the site still functions, or has
the potential to function, as a wetland. In addition, a site with
wetland vegetation and hydrology (other than from irrigation) that
has not yet developed hydric soil characteristics due to recent
flooding should be considered to have soils that are functioning as
-------
-40-
hydric soils. Keeping all of this in mind, the field investigator
should apply either the simple approach (Section III) or the detailed
approach (Section IV) to make the jurisdictional determination.
3. If normal seasonal, annual, or long-term cyclic variations in
environmental conditions occur at the site, these conditions should
be documented by field inspection, historical data (e.g., aerial
photographs, vegetation maps, past jurisdictional determinations),
accounts of reliable people intimately familiar with the site,
and an understanding of natural processes that normally occur
with the type of ecosystem involved. Keeping all of this in mind,
the field investigator should apply either the simple (Section III)
or the detailed (Section IV) approach to make the jurisdictional
determination.
-------
APPENDIX A
JURISDICTIONAL DECISION
FLOW CHART
-------
APPENDIX A: JURISDICTIONAL DECISION FLOW CHART
One Or More Dominant OBL Wetland
Yes 2/	Species Present 	
-No
One Or More Dominant
OBL Upland Species
Yes	Present	N
Dominant OBL Upland Species
Occur On Relatively Dry
Microsites And/Or
Yes<—Larger Similar Inclusions—> No 3/
| Wetlands (1) 1
Microsites And
Inclusions Are
Uplands; Matrix
Is Wetlands (2)8/
Dominant OBL Wetland
Species Comprise 50% Or
More Of The Total Dominant
OBL (Both OBL
Wetland And OBL
Yes <—Upland) Species	> No
Wetlands (3T~I
Uplands (4)
One Or More Dominant OBL
Yes <	Upland Speciies Present	> No £/£/
One Or More Dominant
Facultati ve
Species (FACW, FAC
Yes5/<~And/0r FACU) Present—> No 7/
Yes
Dominant OBL Upland
Species Occur On
Relatively Dry
Microsites And/Or
Larger Similar
<—Inclusions—> No 7/
Yes <-
Hydric Soils
¦Present—> No
ydrology lUplands(10)
Indicati ve
lUplands (5)| Of Wetlands £/
Yes
Yes
Vegetation
Unit Matrix Has
<—Hydric Soils—> No?/
Uplands (6)
Wetlands (12)| lUplands (11
Matrix Hydrology Indicative
Yes <—Of Wetlands ®/—> No
Microsites, Inclusions
And Matrix Are Uplands (7)
Microsites And
Inclusions Are
Uplands; Matrix
Is Wetlands (9)£/
Microsites, Inclusions
And Matrix Are
Uplands (8)	
-------
A-2
Footnotes For Part A
JV Dominant facultative species (FACW, FAC and/or FACU) and non-dominant species may be present.
£/ In the presence of one or more dominant obligate wetland species, assume wetland hydrology is present (except for upland
microsites and/or larger similar inclusions) unless evidence of disturbance suggests otherwise. If hydrologic dis-
turbance is evident, the significance of such disturbance must be determined.
3/ This situation (both dominant obligate wetland species and dominant obligate upland species in the same vegetation unit
under non-microsite/inclusion circumstances) should only occur in disturbed units, either naturally (e.g., a saltmarsh
invading a pine forest due to sea level rise) or unnaturally (e.g., a ditched wetland with wetland obligates dying out
and upland obligates invading). When such atypical situations occur, a 50% rule should be applied to the vegetation.
An alternative to the 50? rule for forested sites would be to examine tree vigor and reproduction (e.g., seedlings and
saplings), which may give a good indication of the direction of vegetation change at the unit or site. For example, a
comparison of the vegetation at a hydrologically disturbed wetland site with the vegetation at an "undisturbed" wetland
site (control) should indicate which direction the vegetation is going successionally (i.e., the same, wetter or drier)
and therefore indirectly whether the site is still wetlands hydrologically. This alternative should apply to herbaceous
sites as well. Atypical situations are also discussed in Section V.
V Under these circumstances, dominant FACW, FAC, and/or FACU species must be present.
Because facultative species are not diagnostic of wetlands or uplands, an examination of soil and hydrologic paramaters
is necessary to help determine whether the vegetation unit is wetlands.
_6/ At this point, a field investigator must decide whether or not wetland hydrologic indicators are naturally present
for a significant part of the growing season. If one or more are present, the vegetation unit is wetlands; if not, the
unit is uplands. If the site has been hydrologically disturbed, the significance of the disturbance must be considered
in deciding whether or not the unit is still wetlands hydrologically.
]_/ Under these circumstances, assume upland hydrology is present (except for wetland microsites and/or similar larger
inclusions) unless evidence of disturbance suggest otherwise.
_£/ An alternative would be to consider the vegetation unit to be all wetlands, but acknowledge the presence of local
uplands in a written description of the unit.
Note: (1) - (12) are jurisdictional determination points.
OBL = obligate
FACW = facultative wetland
FAC = straight facultative
FACU = facultative upland
-------
APPENDIX B
JURISDICTIONAL DECISION
DIAGNOSTIC KEY
-------
APPENDIX B: JURISDICTIONAL
DECISION DIAGNOSTIC KEY
la. One or more dominant obligate wetland plant species are present in the
vegetation unit (or site if it is a monotypic site). Dominant facultative
species (facultative wetland, straight facultative and/or facultative
upland) and non-dominant species may be present.^/
2a. Obligate upland dominants (one or more) are present.
3a. Dominant obligate upland species occur on relatively dry
microsites (e.g., live tree bases, decaying tree stumps,
mosquito ditch spoil piles, small earth hummocks) and/or
on larger similar inclusions occurring in an otherwise
topographically uniform unit containing dominant obligate
wetland species. The microsites and/or inclusions are
UPLANDS and the matrix is WETLANDS.£/
3b. Dominant obligate upland species do not occur on relatively
dry microsites and/or larger similar Inclusions; they occur
rather uniformly intermixed with the dominant obligate wetland
species.^/
4a. 50% or more of the total dominant obligate species (both
obligate wetland species and obligate upland species) are
obligate wetland species	WETLANDS (2)
4b. Less than 50% of the total dominant obligate species are
obligate wetland species	UPLANDS (3)
2b. Obligate upland dominants are not present	WETLANDS (4)
lb. One or more dominant obligate wetland plant species are not present In
the vegetation unit (or site 1f it Is a monotypic site). Dominant
facultative species (facultative wetland, straight facultative and/or
facultative upland) and non-dominant species may be present.
5a. Obligate upland dominants (one or more) are present.
6a. One or more dominant facultative species (facultative wetland,
straight facultative and/or facultative upland) are present.V
-------
B-2
7a. Dominant obligate upland species occur on relatively dry
microsites and/or larger similar inclusions.
8a. Vegetation unit matrix has hydric soils.
9a. Hydrology of vegetation unit matrix is indicative
of wetlands	Microsites and inclusions are
UPLANDS; matrix is WETLANDS (5)2/5/
9b. Hydrology of vegetation unit matrix is not indica-
tive of wetlands	Microsites, inclusions and
matrix are UPLANDS (6).
8b. Vegetation unit matrix does not have hydric soils...Micro-
sites, inclusions, and matrix are UPLANDS (7)\£/
7b. Dominant obligate upland species do not occur on relatively dry
microsites and/or larger similar inclusions	UPLANDS (8).jV
6b. One or more facultative species are not present	UPLANDS (9).£/
Obligate upland dominants are not present; one or more dominant
facultative species (facultative wetland, straight facultative
and/or facultative upland) are present.V
10a. Hydric soils are present
8a. Hydrology is indicative of wetlands	WETLANDS (10).£/
8b. Hydrology is not indicative of wetlands...UPLANDS (11).
10b. Hydric soils are not present	UPLANDS (12).
-------
B-3
Footnotes for Key
V	In the presence of one or more dominant obligate wetland species, assume wetland
hydrology is present (except for upland microsites and/or larger similar inclusions)
unless evidence of disturbance suggests otherwise. If hydrologic disturbance is
evident, the significance of such disturbance must be determined.
£/ An alternative would be to consider the vegetation unit to be all wetlands, but
acknowledge the presence of local uplands in a written description of the unit.
£/ This situation (both dominant obligate wetland species and dominant obligate
upland species in the same vegetation unit under non-microsite/inclusion circum-
stances) should only occur in disturbed units, either naturally (e.g., a saltmarsh
invading a pine forest due to sea level rise) or unnaturally (e.g., a ditched wetland
with wetland obligates dying out and upland obligates invading). When such atypical
situations occur, a 50% rule should be applied to the vegetation. An alternative
to this 50% rule for forested sites would be to examine tree vigor and reproduction
(e.g., seedlings and saplings), which may give a good indication of the direction
of vegetation change at the unit or site. For example, a comparison of the vegeta-
tion at a hydrologically disturbed wetland site with the vegetation at an "undisturbed"
wetland site (control) should indicate which direction the vegetation is going
successionally (i.e., the same, wetter or drier) and therefore, indirectly whether
the site is still wetlands hydrologically. This alternative should apply to
herbaceous sites as well. Atypical situations are also discussed in Section V.
V	Because facultative species are not diagnostic of wetlands or uplands, an examina-
tion of soil and hydrologic parameters is necessary to help determine whether the
vegetation unit is wetlands.
£/ At this point, a field investigator must decide whether or not wetland hydrologic
indicators are naturally present for a significant part of the growing season.
If one or more are present, the vegetation unit is wetlands; if not, the unit
is uplands. If the site has been hydrologically disturbed, the significance of
the disturbance must be considered in deciding whether or not the unit is still
wetlands hydrologically.
£/ Under these circumstances, assume upland hydrology is present (except for wetland
microsites and/or larger, similar inclusions) unless evidence of disturbance
suggests otherwise.
Note: (1)-(12) are jurisdictional decision points.
-------
APPENDIX C
DATA FORMS FOR
SIMPLE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATIONS
-------
DATA FORM C-l: UNDERSTORY SPECIES DATA
FOR SIMPLE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION V
EPA Region: 	Field Investigator(s): 	Date:
Project/Site: 	State: 	County: 	
Applicant/Owner: 	Vegetation Unit #/Name: '
Bryophyte stratum	 Non-bryophyte stratum 	
**************************************************************************************
Percent	Midpoint
Indicator Area! Cover of Cover £/
Species	Status	Cover Class Class	Rank
1.
2.
3
4.	"
5.
6
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13
14.
15.	:
16.
17.
18.	~
19
20.	:
21.
22.
23.
24.	~
25.		 	
26.
Sum of Midpoints
50? X Sum of Midpoints
lelelelcititic+leleielcieiejcieitieicic+icieickicicicit'k'k'k'k'k'k'kic'k'kir-k'k-k'k'k'k'k'k'kit'kic'kic'k'k'kic'k'k'k-kic-k-k-k-k-k'k'k'k-kitic'kic'k-kic'k-kic'kit'kir'k'k'k
Do the dominant understory species indicate that the vegetation unit supports hydrophytic
vegetation? 3/ Yes	No	Inconlusive	V
Comments:
*****************************************************************************************
The understory includes herbaceous species, such as all graminoids, forbs, ferns,
fern allies, bryophytes, and herbaceous vines, as well as tree seedlings. However,
bryophytes should be treated as a separate stratum for purposes of computing dominance
(check appropriate line above).
£/ Cover classes (midpoints): T<1% (none); 1=1-5% (3.0); 2=6-15% (10.5); 3=16-25% (20.5);
4=26-50% (38.0); 5=51-75% (63.0); 6=76-95% (85.5); 7=96-100%. (98.0).
y To determine the dominants, first rank the species by their midpoints. Then cumula-
tively sum the midpoints of the ranked species until 50% of the total for all species
midpoints is reached or Initially exceeded. All species contributing to that cumula-
tive total should be considered dominants and indicated with an asterisk above.
4/ Inconclusive should be checked when only facultative (i.e., facultative wetland,
straight facultative, and/or facultative upland) species dominate.
-------
DATA FORM C-2: SHRUB AND WOODY VINE DATA
FOR SIMPLE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
EPA Region: 	Field Investigator(s):	Date:
Project/Site:	State:	County:	
Applicant/Owner: 	 Vegetation Unit #/Name: 	
**************************************************************************************
SHRUBS y
Percent	Midpoint £_/
Indicator Area! Cover £/ of Cover
Species	Status	Cover Class Class	Rank
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Sum of Midpoints
50$ X Sum of Midpoints
********************************************************************7507****************
WOODY VINES
Percent	Midpoint £/
Indicator Area! Cover £/ of Cover
Species	Status	Cover Class Class	Rank
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.		 	 	 	 	 	
7.
Sum of Midpoints 	
50$ X Sum of Midpoints 	
******************************************************************************************
Do the dominant shrub species indicate that the vegetation unit supports hydrophytlc
vegetation? Yes 	 No 	 Inconlusive 	V
Do the dominant woody vine species Indicate that the vegetation unit supports hydro-
phytic vegetation? £/ Yes	 No	 Inconclusive	V
Comments:
******************************************************************************************
}j A shrub is usually less than 6.1 meters (20 feet) tall and generally exhibits several
erect, spreading or prostrate stems and has a bushy appearance. Percent cover of
woody vines should be estimated independent of strata and exclusive of seedlings.
£/ Cover classes (midpoints): T<1$ (none); 1=1-5$ (3.0); 2=6-15$ (10.5); 3=16-25$ (20.5);
4=26-50$ (38.0); 5=51-75$ (63.0); 6=76-95$ (85.5); 7=96-100$ (98.0).
£/ To determine the dominants, first rank the shrub species by their midpoints. Then
cumulatively sum the midpoints of the ranked shrub species until 50$ of the total
for all shrub species midpoints 1s reached or Initially exceeded. Do the same for
woody vines. All species contributing to these cumulative totals should be con-
sidered dominants and marked with an asterisk above.
4/ Inconclusive should be checked when only facultative (I.e., facultative wetland,
straight facultative, and/or facultative upland) species dominate.
-------
DATA FORM C-3: SAPLING AND TREE DATA
FOR SIMPLE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
"PA Region: 	Field Investigator(s): 	Date: 	
.Toject/Site: 	State: 	County: 	
Applicant/Owner: 	 	Vegetation Unit #/Name:	
******************************************************************************************
SAPLINGS
Percent	Midpoint
Indicator Areal Cover 2/ of Cover 2/
Species	Status	Cover Class Class	Rank
1
2.
3.
4.
5.
"6.
7.
8.
Sum of Midpoints 	
50? X Sum of Midpoints 	
******************************************************************************************
TREES V
Relative
Indicator Basal
Species	Status	Area (?) Rank
T«
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Total Relative Basal Area Equals 100?
*******************************************************************************************
Do the dominant saplings Indicate that the vegetation unit supports hydrophytic vegetation? £/
Yes	No	Inconlusive	V
Do the dominant trees indicate that the vegetation unit supports hydrophytic
vegetation? 3/ yes	No	Inconclusive	V
Comments:
*******************************************************************************************
j/ A tree is greater than 10 centimeters (4 inches) diameter breast height (dbh).
A sapling 1s from 1-10 centimeters (0.4-4 inches) dbh.
£/ Cover classes (midpoints): T<1? (none); 1=1-5% (3.0); 2=6-151 (10.5); 3=16-25? (20.5);
4=26-50? (38.0); 5=51-75? (63.0); 6=76-95? (85.5); 7=96-100? (98.0).
£/ To determine the dominants, first rank the tree species by relative basal area.
Then cumulatively sum the relative basal area of the ranked tree species until 50?
of the total relative basal area for all tree species 1s reached or initially exceeded.
Do the same for saplings using the sum of midpoints. All species contributing to these
cumulative totals should be considered dominants and marked with an asterisk above.
4/ Inconclusive should be checked when only facultative (i.e., facultative wetland,
straight facultative, and/or facultative upland) species dominate.
-------
DATA FORM C-4: SOIL/HYDROLOGY DATA
FOR SIMPLE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION V
EPA Region: 	Field Investigator(s): 		Date: 	
Project/Site: 	State: 	County: 	
Applicant/Owner:
Vegetation Unit #/Name
Sample # Within Unit (or Boundary Sample #1):
***** ****** ***************** *********** ******* ****************************************
SOILS
Series/phase: 	Subgroup: 	
Is the soil on the national or state hydrlc soils 11st? Yes	 No	
Is the soil a Hlstosol or 1s a hlstic eplpedon present? Yes 	 No 	
Is the soil: £/
Mottled? Yes	No 	N/A	Matrix Color: 	Mottle Color: 	
Gleyed? Yes	No	N/A	
Other Indicators					
Does the sampling indicate that the vegetation unit has hydrlc soils?
Yes	No	Inconclusive	
Rationale for decision on hydric soils:	
Comments:
**************************************************************************************
HYDROLOGY,
Is the ground surface Inundated? Yes 	 No 	 Depth of surface water: 	
Is the soil saturated?^/ Yes 	 No
Depth to free-standing water 1n pit/soll probe hole: 	
List other field evidence of surface Inundation or soil saturation 	
Are hydrology indicators present or would they be expected to be present 1n the
vegetation unit during a significant part of the growing season? V
Yes 	 No 	 Inconclusive 	
Rationale for decision on hydrology:	
Comments:
**************************************************************************************
V Data Form C-4 can be used for soil/hydrology data within vegetation units or for
soil/hydrology/vegetation data for boundary point determinations.
£/ For gleying and mottling, soils should be sampled within about 25-30 centimeters
(10-12 Inches) of the surface or Immediately below the A horizon, whichever comes
first. If desired, use the back of the form to diagram or describe the soil profile
3/ This is 1n reference to the majority of the root zone, which for most wetland species,
particularly herbaceous plants, 1s generally within the upper 30 centimeters
(12 inches) of soil. Also list the actual depth to saturation under "comments."
y It is not necessary to directly demonstrate that wetland hydrology is present.
It is only necessary to show that the soil or Its surface are at least periodically
saturated or inundated, respectively, for a significant part of the growing season.
Thus, 1t may be necessary to rely on supplemental hydrologic data (e.g., 1n the
national or state hydrlc soils lists or county soil surveys) during the drier part
of the growing season or In drought years, assuming the site has not been significantly
hydrologically modified since the supplemental data were collected.
-------
DATA FORM C-5: SUMMARY OF DATA
FOR SIMPLE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
EPA Region: 	Field Investigator(s):	Date:
Project/Site: 	State: 	County: 	
Applicant/Owner: 	Vegetation Unit ?/Name: 	
Dominant Species	Indicator Status
1.		 	
2.		 	
3.
4.	IZZZZZIZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZI 	
5.
6.	ZZZZIZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ 	
7.		 	
8.	~ 	
9.		 	
10.
11	.	 	
12.
13.		 	
14.	mmzzzzzzziizzzizzzzzzi 	
15.		 	
16.
17.
1.8.
19.
20.
****************************************************************************************
1.	Is hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes	No 	Inconclusive	
2.	Are hydric soils present? Yes	No 	 Inconclusive	
3.	Are hydrology indicators present or are they expected to be present in the
vegetation unit during a significant part of the growing season ? Yes 	 No 	
Inconclusive 	
4.	Overall, is the vegetation unit wetland? Yes	No	Inconclusive	
5.	Rationale for overall jurisdictional decision: 	
6. Comments:
7. Note: The source of Information in #'s 1-3 above is Data Forms C-l through C-4.
Number 4 should be checked affirmatively only if either #'s 1-3 inclusive are
answered affirmatively, or #1 is answered inconclusively (because only facultative
species dominate) but hydric soils and hydrology indicators are present. A possible
exception to this would be for disturbed sites (See Section V of Volume II).
-------
APPENDIX D
DATA FORMS FOR
DETAILED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATIONS
-------
DATA FORM D-l: UNDERSTORY SPECIES DATA ,
FOR DETAILED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION V
EPA Region:	Field Investigator(s): 	Date:	
Project/Site:	State: 	County:
Applicant/Owner: 	Transect #: 	Plot #:
Bryophyte Stratum: 	Non-bryophyte Stratum: 	
**************************************************************************************
PERCENT AREAL COVER 2/
Species	Status Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 X Rank
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
Total of Averages (X's) of Percent Area! Cover 	
50% X Total of Averages (X's) of Percent Areal Cover 	
**************************************************************************************
Do the dominant herbaceous species indicate that the sample plot supports hydrophytic
vegetation?^/ Yes	 No	Inconclusive	V
Comments:
*1<*1c1ciiicii1c-k-k1fkifk1fk-k1fk1rk1f)fkic1fk1t1ck-k1t1rk1fk-ifk1t1rlrk-kit1fk-k1rk1rk1rkirkirk1fk1t1r1t1fk1fk1cii1ckic1i1fk1rkirk-k1c1t1t1c-kic
y The understory includes herbaceous species such as graminoids, forbs, ferns, fern
allies, bryophytes, and herbaceous vines, as well as tree seedlings. However,
bryophytes should be treated as a separate stratum for purposes of computing
dominance (check appropriate line above).
£/ After the data for the eight quadrats are collected, construct a species area
curve (see back of sheet) to determine 1f eight are sufficient to adequately
survey the understory. See Step 9b in Volume II for more detailed explanation.
£/ To determine the dominants, first rank the species by their average percent areal
cover. Then cumulatively sum the percent areal cover averages (X's) of the
ranked species until 50% of the total of all the species averages Is reached or
initially exceeded. All species contributing to that cumulative total should be
considered dominants and indicated with an asterisk above.
V Inconclusive should be checked when only facultative (facultative wetland, straight
facultative, and/or facultative upland) species dominate.
-------
2C
¦
19
18
m
17
m
16
15
14
*
13
U
1L
1Q
9.
a
7.
6.
5.
4-
3-
2.
1"
SPECIES-AREA CURVE*
X
X
_X
X
X
3456789 10
Number of 0.1 m? Quadrats
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Plot the cumulative number of species against the quadrats (e.g., if quadrat #1 has 3
species and quadrat #2 has any, all, or none of those species but has 2 new species,
then 5 cumulative species should be plotted against quadrat #2). The number of quadrats
sufficient to adequately survey the understory will correspond to the point on the curve
where it first levels off and remains essentially level.
-------
DATA FORM D-2: SHRUB AND WOODY YINE
DATA FOR DETAILED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
EPA Region: 	Field Investlgator(s):	Date:
Project/Site: 	State: 	County:		
Applicant/Owner: 	Transects #: 	Plot #:
SHRUBS V
Indicator Percent Area! Cover 2/ Midpoint of 2/
Species	Status Cover	Class Cover Class Rank
2.		
3		
4.
5.		 	
6		
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Sum of .Midpoints..
50% X Sum of Midpoints
ieieicie'k'k'k'k'k'k'k'k'kifitif'k'k'k'k'kirieit'kic'k'kkir'k'k'k'k'k'kicieie'kiritif-kit'k'k'k-kir'kic'k'kie'kie'k'kifif'kit'k'k'kic'kirit'kic'k'k'k'k'k'kic'k'k'kif'k'k'k'k
WOODY VINES
Indicator Percent Area! Cover £/ Midpoint of £/
Species	Status Cover	Class Cover Class" Rank
2.	:
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Sum of Midpoints 	
50? X Sum of Midpoints
****************************************************************************************
Do the dominant shrubs Indicate that the sample plot supports hydrophytic vegetation?^/
Yes 	 No	 Inconclusive	V
Do the dominant woody vine species indicate that the sample plot supports
hydrophytic vegetation?^/ Yes	No	Inconclusive	V
Comments:
************************************************************************************* A At****
}j A shrub usually Is less than 6.1 meters (20 feet) tall and generally exhibits several
erect, spreading or prostrate stems and has a bushy appearance. Percent cover of
woody vines should be estimated independent of strata and exclusive of seedlings.
£/ Cover classes (midpoints): T=<1% (none); 1=1-5% (3.0); 2=6-15% (10.5); 3=16-25% (20.5);
4=26-50% (38.0); 5=51-75% (63.0); 6=76-95% (85.5); 7=96-100% (98.0).
3/ To determine dominants, first rank the shrub species by their midpoints. Then
cumulatively sum the midpoints of the ranked shrub species until 50% of the total
for all shrub species midpoints 1s reached or Initially exceeded. Do the same for
woody vines. All species contributing to these cumulative totals should be considered
dominants and marked with an asterisk above.
4/ Inconclusive should be checked when only facultative (I.e., facultative
wetland, straight facultative, and/or facultative upland) species dominate.
-------
DATA FORM D-3: SAPLING AND TREE DATA
FOR DETAILED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Field Investigator(s):
Date:
State:
Transect #:
County:
EPA Region: _
Project/Site: 	
Applicant/Owner:
mtT:!
SAPLINGS
Species
1 •
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Indicator
Status
Percent
Areal Cover
Cover
Class
2/
Midpoint
of Cover
Class
2/
Rank
Sum of Midpoints
50% X Sum of Midpoints
*******************************************************************************************
TREES (Bitterlich Method) 1/
Individual Tree
(Species Name)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Indicator DBH
Status Tern
ft)
Basal
Area
Per Tree
(sq ft) (sq ft)
Basal Area
Per Species
Rank
Total Basal Area of All Species Combined
50% X Total Basal Area of All Species Combined
Do the dominant saplings indicate that the sample plot supports hydrophytic vegetation? £/
Yes 	No	 Inconlusive	y
Do the dominant trees Indicate that the sample plot supports hydrophytic vegetation? 3/
Yes	 No	 Inconclusive	V
Comments:
*******************************************************************************************
}_/ A tree is greater than 10 centimeters (4 inches) diameter breast height (dbh).
A sapling is from 1-10 centimeters (0.4-4 inches) dbh.
2/ Cover classes (midpoints): T<1% (none); 1=1-5% (3.0); 2=6-15% (10.5); 3=16-25% (20.5);
~ 4=26-50% (38.0); 5=51-75% (63.0); 6=76-95 (85.5); 7=96-100% (98.0).
£/ To determine the dominants, first rank the tree species by their basal areas. Then
cumulatively sum the basal areas of the ranked tree species until 50% of the total
basal area for all tree species is reached or initially exceeded. Do the same for
saplings using the sum of midpoints. All species contributing to these cumulative
totals should be considered dominants and marked with an asterisk above.
ZJ Inconclusive should be checked when only facultative (i.e., facultative wetland,
straight facultative, and/or facultative upland) species dominate.
-------
DATA FORM D-4: SOIL/HYDROLOGY DATA FOR
DETAILED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION]/
EPA Region: 	Field Invest!gator(s): 	Date: 	
Project/Site:	State:	County:		
Applicant/Owner: 	~	Transect #:	Plot #:
Boundary Sample #: 	
**************************************************************************************
SOILS
Series/phase: 		Subgroup: 	
Is the soil on the national or state hydric soils list? Yes 	 No 	
Is the soil a Histosol or is a hlstlc epipedon present? Yes 	 No 	
Is the soil: £/
Mottled? Yes	No	N/A	Matrix Color:	Mottle Color:
Gleyed? Yes	No	N/A	
Other Indicators				
Does the sampling Indicate that the sample plot has hydric soils?
Yes 	 No 	 Inconclusive
Rationale for decision on hydric soils: 	
Comments:
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes 	 No 	 Depth of surface water: 	
Is the soil saturated?^/ Yes 	 No
Depth of free-standing water in pit/soil probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation of soil saturation
Are hydrology Indicators present or would they be expected to be present in the
sample plot during a significant part of the growing season? V
Yes	No	Inconclusive	
Rationale for decision on hydrology:	
Comments:
**************************************************************************************
V	Data Form D-4 can be used for soil/hydrology data within sample plots or for
soil/hydrology/vegetation data for boundary point determinations.
£/ For gleylng and mottling, soils should be sampled within about 25-30 centimeters
(10-12 Inches) of the surface or Immediately below the A horizon, whichever comes
first. If desired, use the back of the form to diagram or describe the soil profile.
2/ This is In reference to the majority of the root zone, which for most wetland
species, particularly herbaceous plants, Is generally within the upper 30 centimeters
(12 inches) of soil. Also list the actual depth to saturation under "comments."
V	It is not necessary to directly demonstrate that wetland hydrology 1s present.
It is only necessary to show that the soil or Its surface are at least periodically
saturated or inundated, respectively, for a significant part of the growing season.
Thus, 1t may be necessary to rely on supplemented hydrologic data (e.g., 1n the
national or state hydric soils lists or county soil surveys) during the drier part
of the growing season or in drought years, assuming the site has not been significantly
hydro!oglcally modified since the data were collected.
-------
DATA FORM D-5: SUMMARY OF DATA
FOR DETAILED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
EPA Region: 	Field Investigator(s): 	Date: 	
Project/Site: 	State: 		
Applicant/Owner: 	Transect #:	Plot #:
Dominant Species
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.	~
13.
14.
15.
Indicator
Status
***************************************************************************************
1.	Is hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes	 No	 Inconclusive	
2.	Are hydric soils present? Yes	No 	 Inconclusive	
3.	Are hydrology indicators present or are they expected to be present during a
significant part of the growing season? Yes	No	Inconclusive	
4.	Overall, is the sample plot wetland? Yes 	No	 Inconclusive	
5.	Rationale for overall jurisdictional decision:	
6. Comments:
7. Note: The source of information in #'s 1-3 above is Data Forms D-l through D-4.
Number 4 should be checked affirmatively only if either #'s 1-3 inclusive are
answered affirmatively, or #1 is answered inconclusively (because only facultative
species dominate) but hydric soils and hydrology indicators are present. A possible
exception to this would be for disturbed sites (See Section V of Volume II).
-------
APPENDIX E
EQUIPMENT NECESSARY FOR
MAKING WETLAND JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATIONS
-------
APPENDIX E
EQUIPMENT NECESSARY FOR MAKING WETLAND
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATIONS

Jurisdictional
Item
Approach 1/
National, regional or state list of plants
1,2
that occur in wetlands

National or state hydric soils list
1,2
Key to Soil Taxonomy (optional)2/
2
National List of Scientific Plant Names
1,2
State or regional plant identification manuals
1,2
Plant field guides
1,2
Spencer tape
2
Diameter tape
2
Two 0.1m2 quadrat frames
2
Prism or angle gauge
2
Vasculum or plastic bags
1,2
Sighting compass
2
Pens or pencils
1,2
Clip board and data sheets
1,2
Field notebook
1,2
Flagging tape
1,2
Wooden stakes or wire flagging stakes (optional)
1,2
Increment borer (optional)
2
10X hand lens
1,2
Dissecting kit
1,2
Calculator
2
Aerial photographs or topographic map
1,2
Shovel
1,2
Bucket auger and/or soil probe
1,2
Munsell Color Soil Charts
1,2
Colorimetric field test kit (optional)
1,2
]J 1 refers to equipment needed for simple jurisdictional approach.
2 refers to equipment needed for detailed jurisdictional approach.
2/ Optional items are not necessary, but may be useful in certain situations.
-------
APPENDIX F
DIAGRAM OF THE SAMPLE
PLOT FOR THE DETAILED
APPROACH
-------
SAMPLE PLOT FOR DETAILED
JURISDICTIONAL APPROACH
-------