Tom Heger <Tom.Heger@tpwd.state.tx.us> 04/16/2003 04:44 PM To: CWAwaters@EPAcc: Subject: Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the Clean Water Act Reg ulatoryDefinition of "Waters of the United States"

Attached please find comments from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department on the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.Specifically, please find attached:1) ANPRM comment letter.pdf - file containing a copy of a signed comment letter on Texas Parks & Wildlife Department letterhead2) ANPRM comment letter attachments.doc - MS Word file containing supporting attachments and information An original copy of these materials was also sent via UPS on Tuesday, April 16, but confusion regarding the address has caused delivery to be delayed until Thursday, April 17. The mailing also includes 13 photographs with captions, illustrating and documenting points made in the comment letter and attachments. Thomas G. HegerWetlands CoordinatorTexas Parks & Wildlife Department(512) 389-4583

i There is no uniform set of rules for establishing wetland adjacency to navigable waterways and their tributaries. This has resulted in vast differences between the ways various USACE Districts make jurisdictional determinations. Most USACE Districts, for example, consider surface water flow from a wetland into a navigable water or tributary as grounds for establishing adjacency and thus jurisdiction. The Galveston District does not. They discount all surface water flows that they feel constitute sheet flow such as flows through shallow swales, as well as flows that must cross non-wetlands as well as surface water connections made via wind driven tides (Attachment 1). The Galveston District discounts these surface water flows even when they are part of normal seasonal water movements and constitute the majority of all non-tidal surface flows into navigable waterways. Differences in jurisdictional determinations are also likely to vary between regions in Texas because of the many different types of wetlands found here. However, under Galveston District adjacency rules many wetlands that in normal years pour millions of gallons of water directly into bays, rivers and creeks are now considered isolated simply because that surface flow is not conveyed through what they consider to be a defined waterway or occurs through a ditch that has supplanted natural drainage conveyances. This is resulting in serious water quality degradation through the washing of fill material into Texas’ bays, rivers and creeks as well as the unmitigated loss of wetland water quality maintenance functions. ii The District has no set definition of sheet flow, however, most coastal plain wetland outflows are through sloughs or swales that do not exhibit a defined bed and banks and thus are considered sheet flow. This is not because outflow volumes are small or that they only occur for short periods, but rather because the region’s young geologic age, extremely cohesive clay soils, very flat slopes and dense vegetation has not allowed much channel cutting erosion to occur. The result has been that even those wetlands that are no more than several feet from an interstate water or tributary are no longer jurisdictional despite the large volumes of surface water flowing from out of them. Likewise, many coastal wetlands now defined as isolated occur below 5 feet mean sea level. Undeveloped areas lying below this elevation are characterized by seasonal periods during most years when heavy rains and high tides result in a blurring between freshwater and saltwater marshes. iii The soils that underlie the Texas and western Louisiana coastal plain are largely vertisol clays with extremely slow (less than 0.06 inches per hour) percolation rates. Coastal plain wetlands typically occur as shallow depressions within this clay plain and have an epiaquic moisture regime, i.e. they are wetted from above by inflowing surface water runoff and direct rainfall. They are generally shallow, but may cover many, even hundreds of acres. They are densely vegetated year round and generally do not have an open water zone. Their boundary expands greatly with increasing water levels. Rainfall runoff from surrounding uplands is either stored and evapotranspirated or when the wetland is full, outfalls downslope. Very little water is permanently lost to underground storage. Drainage downslope gathers into other wetlands in a dendritic pattern and within several miles at most from its most extreme upslope origin it outfalls into an interstate water or tributary to such. This simple hydrologic pattern coupled with abundant and often very heavy rainfall results in very large volumes of water being treated by these “isolated” wetlands. iv Texas’ barrier islands also contain many wetlands considered isolated post SWANCC. These wetlands occur within interdunal swales and channels formed by hurricane storm surges as they wash over the islands. Unlike other coastal plain wetlands, these wetlands occur on sandy soils with high vertical and horizontal transmission rates. Similarly, the Ingleside Strand is an ancient barrier island that lies on the mainland, often surrounded by tidal salt marshes, that contains many hydrologically similar wetlands. These wetlands exhibit surface outflows into the surrounding ocean or bay waters during periods of heavy rain as well as seasonal outflows via a surficial fresh groundwater lens floating on top of a permanent salty water table. As the water level in a wetland occupying a depression rises in response to input from overland flow, water flows into the

freshwater lens. Paths of both the surface and groundwater outflows from these wetlands and into the Gulf of Mexico and Texas’ bays are short-distanced and occur over short periods of time (outflows are seasonal). Nutrient loading may occur by surface runoff or discharge of shallow ground water, in fact the major pathway for nitrates is subsurface flow; therefore, the rapid ground water exchange between barrier island wetlands and adjacent bay and oceanic waters is a major factor that controls nitrate loading to these waters (Hayashi and Rosenberry 2002). vThe wetlands in question are generally shallowly ponded marshes or forests. Water enters via

surface flow from the surrounding uplands and outfalls via shallow swales into downslope wetlands or defined waters of the U.S. (streams or embayments). On undeveloped lands only about 25% of upland runoff flows directly into a defined waterway without first flowing through one of these “isolated” wetlands. The wetlands have a year-round growing season and a profusion of vegetation. These wetlands also expand greatly in area, not depth, when they receive these runoff flows. These characteristics allow them to detain and effectively treat large volumes of surface runoff. They are able to remove large amounts of the nitrogenous compounds that enter surface runoff via airborne deposition in rainfall or onto the ground and would cause algal blooms and low dissolved oxygen if they entered a stream or embayment. Similarly, their interception and detention of surface runoff allow them to remove fecal coliform bacteria released from cattle pastures and septic systems that frequently fail due to installation in clay soils. These wetlands cause colloidal clay particles to flocculate and thus remove turbidity through the chemical changes in surface water caused by plant and bacterial respiration. These three sources of pollution are most frequently responsible for the impairment of waterways and the major pathway they enter these waterways is via non-point surface flow. In addition, the three types of pollutants cited as being of future concern to Galveston Bay (GBEP 2002), PCB’s, mercury, and PAHs, are aerially deposited throughout the Bay’s watershed and would flow into the Bay via surface runoff if not first intercepted by the wetlands in question. viThe few objective water quality functional assessments that have been performed under USACE direction for “isolated” wetlands have found them to have a medium to high level of water quality improvement functions. Specifically, approximately 8 WET II (Waterways Experiment Station, 1987) analyses were conducted for “isolated” wetlands prior to SWANCC in order to debit mitigation banks overseen by the Galveston District. The banks that used these analyses included the Harris County Flood Control District and Katy-Cypress Wetland Mitigation Banks as per their banking MOAs. All WET II analyses results were reviewed by and the sole authority for their approval rested with the Galveston USACE District. The results were the product of the wetland’s urban watershed and high pollutant removal and assimilative capacity coupled with their seasonal to intermittent outflows into what were generally CWA 303d listed tidal streams.

Attachment 1

Attachment 2

Attachment 3 SOUTHEAST TEXAS ISOLATED WETLANDS AND THEIR ROLE IN MAINTAINING ESTUARINE WATER QUALITY Andrew V. Sipocz, Texas Parks and Wildlife Presented at the Coastal Society Conference 2002 The Supreme Court invalidated the EPA’s Migratory Bird Rule in early 2001. The EPA had used this rule to broaden federal Clean Water Act (CWA) oversight to virtually all wetlands based on their use by migratory birds. The Court stated that CWA jurisdiction required an additional nexus to federal interests such as a wetland’s ability to positively affect the biological, chemical and physical integrity of interstate waters. These include all tidal waters and their tributaries (SWANCC 2001). The Court did not dispute the ability of wetlands to positively affect the quality of this Nation’s waters, but rather wanted proof of this ability. The disputed wetland brought before the Court had neither a surface nor subsurface connection to other waters and therefore could not appreciably affect the water quality of nearby interstate waters. Shortly after the Supreme Court published their decision the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) stated the importance of avoiding “artificial lines” and instead using knowledge of hydrologic cycles, aquatic biology and the causes of water pollution (Guzy and Anderson 2001) to scientifically document CWA jurisdiction. The Galveston District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers implements CWA regulation on the Texas coast. They determined that many freshwater wetlands lying outside of the 100-year floodplain of rivers and streams were isolated from interstate (tidal) waters and no longer protected under the CWA. This determination assumes that these wetlands are not part of the surface hydrologic system, and instead are runoff sinks without significant outflows and therefore do not affect the quality of interstate waters (Galveston District 2001). This stripped CWA reviews from most flatwoods, farmed wetlands, prairie potholes and sloughs (Moulton and Jacob 2000). There are approximately 3.3 million acres of freshwater wetland on the Texas coastal plain. They are the most rapidly decreasing coastal wetland type in Texas and are being lost most rapidly from the Galveston Bay and nearby estuarine watersheds (Moulton et al. 1997). This study evaluated the potential for freshwater isolated wetlands to positively affect water quality by documenting their role in the surface hydrology of southeast Texas estuarine watersheds. Study Area The study area boundaries reflect a region whose hydrology is controlled by a uniform climate and similar geologic history (Barnes 1992). It encompassed 90 miles of coastline from Houston to Sargent and included watersheds of the Cedar

Lakes and western Galveston Bay estuaries. Three specific study sites were chosen based on the following criteria: The sites contained a relatively undisturbed mosaic of isolated wetland and upland typical of that geologic formation, they occurred over the range of the study area’s geologic history, and they occurred on pubic lands that were accessible and where detailed information on topography, soils and wetland boundaries was known or could be easily derived. The sites chosen include the west half of the Nannie M. Stringfellow Wildlife Management Area (1,575 acres), the east half of the Armand Bayou Nature Center (822 acres), and the northeastern portion of the Addicks Reservoir (1,255 acres). Site boundaries included the area’s highest elevation down to the nearest interstate water or tributary. The Nannie M. Stringfellow Wildlife Management Area study site (NMWMA), near the town of Sweeney, slopes from an elevation of 20’along a watershed divide down to the tidal waters of Cedar Lakes Creek. The Creek is the main stream of the Cedar Lakes estuary. The site occurred on clayey sediments deposited by the Colorado River since the last glacial episode (Holocene) but is no longer flooded by the River and is not within its watershed. The Armand Bayou Nature Center study site (ABNC) straddled a watershed divide and included lands sloping down from 25’ eastward into Taylor Lake and westward into Armand Bayou. The two watershed units were studied separately. Both waterways are tertiary tidal embayments of the Galveston Bay estuary. The site occurred on a clayey coastal terrace known as the Beaumont Formation. The Brazos River deposited this terrace during the Pleistocene. The Addicks Reservoir (Addicks) site included the upper watershed of Turkey Creek and slopes from 112 to 95 feet in elevation. The site was within the upper end of large diked area that temporarily detains runoff during extreme rainfall events. The wetlands within this site could be considered jurisdictional due to their location within the 100-year flood plain created by the dikes, but were no different physically and biologically than those on surrounding lands outside of the Reservoir. Vegetation and wetland hydrology are not significantly affected by the rare and short-lived inundation events within the diked area. Turkey Creek is a tributary to Buffalo Bayou which is a tributary to the Galveston Bay estuary. The Addicks site occurred on the Lissie Formation, a coastal terrace deposited by the Brazos River during the Pleistocene prior to the Beaumont. Methods A model developed for a coastal plain stream with soil, vegetation and slopes similar to those of the study sites was used to estimate average annual runoff (HDR 1998). Runoff volumes were estimated by multiplying the average annual percent runoff from the modeled watershed by the average annual precipitation for each study site. The result expressed in feet was then multiplied by the acreage of hydrologic group D soils found within the pertinent watershed to arrive

at a volume with acre-feet as its units. Group D soils are those most capable of generating runoff. Runoff volume estimates were comparable with those of other studies (Newell et al. 1992). Watersheds were delineated at each site using current and historic USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle topographic maps. These were field checked with color infrared 1-meter pixel digital orthoquads (DOQs) as well as direct observation of flow during runoff events. The DOQs illustrated even slight elevation differences that resulted from differences in soil moisture and vegetation (TOP 1995). Drainage patterns were determined using topographic maps, DOQs, on-site observation during runoff events, drift lines, and culvert placement. Wetland boundaries were delineated using DOQ’s with field checks. The delineation for the NMWMA site was previously approved by the USACE, while delineations at the other sites were purposefully conservative and also used approved delineations as checks. Wetland delineations and drainageways were overlain the DOQs to derive watershed sizes for isolated wetlands and thus the average annual runoff that passed through the isolated wetlands. Observations during runoff events verified that estimates were reasonable. Results The study sites are underlain with vertic clays or soils containing clay layers that seasonally perched precipitation above or near their surface due to their extremely slow infiltration rates when wetted. This preponderance of poorly drained soils resulted in 24% of annual precipitation leaving the sites as runoff. Isolated wetlands were numerous with the greatest percentage found on the geologically youngest sites. Furthermore, isolated wetlands occurred within drainage ways and collected runoff from surrounding uplands. They emptied into the next down slope wetland, stair stepping runoff to the bottom of the watersheds. Most upland runoff was channeled through isolated wetlands. These chains of wetlands merged towards the bottom of the watershed to produce a few outfall points into interstate waters (tidal or tidal tributaries). High precipitation rates led to large average annual outfall volumes (Table 1).

Study Site (acres)

Isolated Wetland (IW) (acres)

IW Watershed (acres)

Average Annual Volume of IW Outfall (acre-feet)

Percent Study Site Runoff Through IW

NMWMA 1,575

914 1,371 1,432 87

ABNC/Taylor 414

105 381 387 92

ABNC/Armand 408

77 222 226 57

Addicks Res. 1,255

163 873 791 70

Table 1. Amount and watershed size of isolated wetlands and their capacity to influence study site runoff.

Discussion Isolated wetlands often originated as ancient river channel scars reworked by aeolian erosion (i.e. wind deflation) into circular ponds (Aronow 1999). This explained their local topographic position slightly below surrounding uplands and fed by a watershed 4 to 5 times their size. A large amount of isolated wetland also resulted from the vertic action of clay soils. These “gilgai” wetlands had smaller upland watersheds, but were more numerous and usually received runoff from upslope wetlands. The ABNC/Taylor and NMWMA contained large isolated wetlands formed on backswamp deposits. These backswamp wetlands occurred at the bottom of the sites and received almost all study site runoff before outfalling directly into tidal waters. Surface runoff was conveyed between isolated wetlands by broad shallow drainages locally known as interbasin flats or sloughs. These were usually identifiable on the DOQs but were not shown on USGS topographic maps other than as disconnected marshy areas. The backswamp wetlands emptied via v-shaped gullies apparently too small or short to be illustrated on USGS topographic maps. The inability of USGS topographic maps to depict the hydrologic connections between freshwater wetlands and tidal waters or their tributaries may have influenced the USACE determination that study site wetlands were isolated. The entire watershed of the Cedar Lakes, Christmas Bay, Chocolate Bay, West Bay, Moses Bay, Dickinson Bay, and Clear Lake embayments are located within the coastal plain study area. The vast majority of these watersheds are undeveloped or farmed. Aerial photographs show a repetition of the isolated wetland drainage system on other undeveloped lands, largely used as pasturage. Farmed lands in this region show a similar pattern though wetlands are partially filled and their outlets have been enlarged to speed drainage. Ground water input into these estuaries is relatively small as evidenced by the lack of base flow in tributary streams between rainfall events. Most stream flow is derived from rainfall runoff. Ample runoff pollution sources exist within these estuarine watersheds. Aerial deposition of pollution is estimated to contribute approximately 15% of the total Galveston Bay nitrogen load while cattle waste and improper septic tank installation are ubiquitous in the region (GBNEP 1994). Freshwater wetlands within the study area are abundant and well positioned within the hydrologic pathway to provide substantial attenuation of runoff pollution destined for these estuaries. Though not shown as such on maps, freshwater wetlands are the upper tributaries of the region’s estuaries and are not truly isolated from them.

Citations Aronow, S. 2000. Geomorphology and surface geology of Harris County and

adjacent parts of Brazoria, Fort Bend, Liberty, Montgomery, and Waller Counties, Texas. Unpublished manuscript. Dept. of Geology, Lamar University, Beaumont, Texas.

Barnes, V. E., director. 1992. Geologic Map of Texas. University of Texas

Bureau of Economic Geology. Austin, TX. Galveston Bay National Estuary Program. 1994. The State of the Bay: a

Characterization of the Galveston Bay Ecosystem. Eds. Shipley, F. S. and R. W. Kiesling. GBNEP – 44: 232pp.

Guzy, Gary S. and R. M. Andersen. 2001. Memorandum on Supreme Court

ruling concerning CWA jurisdiction over isolated waters. U.S. EPA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

HDR Engineering. 1998. Sheldon Reservoir Study. Watershed study conducted

for Texas Parks and Wildlife. Austin, Texas. Moulton, Daniel W. and J. S. Jacob. 2000. Texas Coastal Wetlands Guide

Book. Texas Sea Grant Publication TAMU-SG-00-605. Bryan, Texas, 66pp. Moulton, Daniel W., T. E. Dahl and D. M. Dall. 1997. Texas Coastal

Wetlands: Status and Trends, Mid-1950’s to Early 1990’s. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Albuquerque, New Mexico, 32 pp.

Newell, C. J., R. S. Hanadi and P. B. Bedient. 1992. Characterization of non-

point sources and loadings to Galveston Bay. Galveston Bay National Estuary Program, publication GBNEP – 15: 221 pp.

Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers. 2001. U.S. Supreme Court decision. Texas Orthoimagery Program. Brazoria County, Galveston County, Fort Bend

County, Harris County, Texas. 1995 Color Infrared Digital Imagery. National Aerial Photography Program Photo.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Galveston District. 2001. Southshore Harbour

Development – FM 1266. Electronic message regarding CWA jurisdiction.

Attachment 4 Rationale for CWA Jurisdiction on Groundwater-Connected “Isolated” Waters Kay Jenkins and Mary Ellen Vega Texas Parks and Wildlife Department February 11, 2003 Not only do isolated, intrastate, non-navigable waters provide locally valuable fish and wildlife habitat, they also indirectly influence fish and wildlife habitat and water quality functions of navigable jurisdictional waters through their connectivity with these waters either by surface water or groundwater. Staff recommends that the following four factors be considered as a basis for determining Clean Water Act jurisdiction over isolated, intrastate, non-navigable waters in addition to the existing three factors in 33 CFR 328.3(a)(3) (1999). The four recommended factors are:

1) Location of the wetland relative to aquifer and groundwater recharge 2) Location of the wetland relative to the short flow path of groundwater

discharge into streams, rivers or bays 3) Hydrologic soil unit upon which the wetland is located 4) Connectivity through surface water connection to jurisdictional waters

at benchmark precipitation levels Surface water is almost always connected to ground water. Ground water flow has a much larger scale and is sensitive to the biogeographical conditions of the upland including geology, climate, vegetation, and land use (Hayashi and Rosenberry 2002). The direction of horizontal flow of shallow ground water is determined by the slope of the water table, and therefore, rivers, lakes and bays are commonly at the receiving ends of the ground water flow that originates under uplands. A change in the conditions of recharge area may significantly impact ground water recharge and, therefore, the receiving ends. In regions where intense runoff occurs in a relatively short period of time, closed topographic depressions of varying sizes are filled by runoff water to form ephemeral ponds or wetlands. As the water level in a pond occupying a depression rises in response to input from overland flow and streamflow, water flows from the pond to ground water where the adjacent ground water head is lower than the pond. Wetlands in higher parts of the landscape tend to recharge ground water and have relatively short hydroperiods. Ground water influences the ecology of rivers and streams directly by sustaining stream base flow and moderating water-level fluctuations of ground water fed lakes, providing stable temperature habitats, and supplying nutrients and inorganic ions (Hayashi and Rosenberry, 2002). Ground water provides the base flow, which represents the normal condition of rivers during periods of no rain or

snowmelt input. Ground water also provides much of the increased discharge during and immediately following storms in smaller streams. Depressional wetlands situated to provide ground water recharge are, therefore, important for maintaining the base flows of nearby rivers and streams through short, medium and long ground water flow paths. Wetlands located in aquifer and ground water recharge areas and in hydrologic soil units with high infiltration and transmission rates are potentially located on short flow paths of ground water discharge into navigable streams and rivers. The temperature of shallow ground water is very stable relative to surface water and is often just a few degrees higher than the annual mean air temperature. Localized areas of ground water discharge into streams, rivers and bays provide thermal refuges for fish in both winter and summer (Hayashi and Rosenberry 2002). Therefore maintaining ground water discharge into the receiving ends helps maintain these thermal refuges for fish. The biological productivity of surface waters is determined by the availability of nutrients. However, nutrient loading from anthropogenic input can alter the biological productivity of these waters. Nutrient loading may occur by surface runoff or discharge of shallow ground water. The major pathway for nitrates is subsurface flow, so ground water exchange is a major factor controlling nitrate loading to surface water. Therefore, it is important to carefully manage land use occurring on or near ground water recharge areas, including wetlands located in these areas to help manage nutrient loading impacts. Ground water also indirectly affects surface water by providing moisture for riparian vegetation, and controlling the shear strength of bank materials, thereby affecting slope stability and erosion processes (Hayashi and Rosenberry, 2002). The riparian zone is the transitional zone between the aquatic environment of rivers and streams and the terrestrial environment of the surrounding uplands. The riparian zone and other similar aquatic/terrestrial interfaces are important for shading surface waters and regulating the input of organic matter and nutrients. They are important for wildlife that simultaneously uses the terrestrial, riparian and aquatic systems for food, cover and nesting habitat. Shoreline vegetation intercepts sediment-laden surface runoff and nutrient-rich ground water before they enter surface water ecosystems. Plants living in riparian zones influence surface water temperatures through shading and provide detritus to the aquatic system. Riparian vegetation requires a shallow water table and some plant species actually acquire water from the saturated zone in the water table. Some studies indicate that some riparian species used ground water even when stream water was readily available. Therefore, riparian vegetation and the riparian zone are highly dependent on ground water. Severe declines in the water table can result in a disappearance or degradation of the riparian zone and finally result in increased bank erosion. The minimum rate of infiltration obtained for a bare soil after prolonged wetting is the hydrologic parameter that indicates runoff potential of a soil (V. Mockus, USDA 1969). This parameter is the qualitative basis of the classification of all soils into four hydrologic soil groups by the NRCS. The influences of both the surface and the horizons of a soil are included in the parameter, where the

infiltration rate is the rate at which water enters the soil at the surface and which is controlled by surface conditions, and the transmission rate is the rate at which the water moves in the soil and which is controlled by the horizons. The hydrologic soil groups, as defined by NRCS soil scientists, are:

A. (Low runoff potential) Soils having high infiltration rates even when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of deep, well to excessively drained sands or gravels. The soils have a high rate of water transmission.

B. Soils having moderate infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of moderately deep to deep, moderately well to well drained soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. These soils have a moderate rate of transmission.

C. Soils having slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of soils with a layer that impedes downward movement of water, soils with moderately fine to fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission.

D. (High runoff potential) Soils having very slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of clay soils with a high swelling potential, soils with a permanent high water table, soils with a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and shallow soils over nearly impervious material. These soils have very slow rate of water transmission.

Wetlands located very close to jurisdictional waters may occur on any of the four hydrological soil groups identified by the Soil Conservation Service and are part of the short flow path of ground water discharge into navigable waters. However, depressional wetlands located on hydrological soil group A can be located further from the navigable waters and still be on the short flow path of ground water discharge into the navigable waters due to the high infiltration rates and water transmission rates in that hydrological soil group. Because the variability of base flow, and associated changes in temperature and water quality, are critical factors for the ecology of many fish and invertebrates and the ecological health of the riparian zones, maintenance of ground water discharge into surface waters is vital to maintain high quality fish and wildlife habitat values. Conserving isolated wetlands located in aquifer and ground water recharge areas is important to maintaining both water quantity and water quality in navigable, jurisdictional waters of the U.S. TPWD recommends that by considering the first three factors listed above in determining the jurisdiction of isolated, non-navigable waters, the EPA and Corps of Engineers will help maintain water quality and water quantity in navigable, jurisdictional waters that are important to interstate commerce and recreation.

Citation Mockus, V. 1969. Hydrologic Soil Groups. Chapter 7 (pgs. 7.1-7.26) in SCS National Engineering Handbook, Section 4, Hydrology. USDA: Soil Conservation Service. 1971. U. S. Government Printing Office. Washington D.C. 20402

Attachment 5 List of attached photographs:

1. Aerial photo showing typical coastal drainage pattern. 2. Color infrared aerial photo showing close-up of an 80-acre wetland

complex. 3. Typical emergent marsh. 4. Emergent marsh from photo #3 being drained to facilitate filling. 5. Typical marsh considered isolated and non-jurisdictional post

SWANCC. 6. Forested wetland just upstream of previously pictured marsh. 7. Typical sheet flow through and between coastal plain wetlands. 8. Typical coastal plain forested wetland. 9. Coastal slough connecting coastal forested wetlands and Armand

Bayou. 10. Forested wetland draining via sheet flow into tidal tributary of Armand

Bayou. 11. Forested wetlands typical of the coastal Brazos and Colorado River

valleys, connected via unmapped sloughs. 12. Carpenters Bayou. 13. Created wetland built to treat roadway runoff.