Enhanced Wetlands Delineation Report Workflow

You are tasked with drafting a comprehensive Wetlands Delineation Report that serves as a critical regulatory compliance document under the Clean Water Act Section 404 and applicable state wetland protection statutes. This report must meet the exacting technical and legal standards required by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and relevant state environmental agencies. The document will establish jurisdictional determinations, support permit applications, and provide legally defensible documentation of wetland boundaries and characteristics that can withstand regulatory scrutiny and potential legal challenge.

Initial Research and Document Review

Before drafting begins, conduct a thorough review of all available project materials, site documentation, field data forms, photographs, maps, and any previous environmental assessments or reports related to the property. Search through uploaded documents to extract concrete facts including site addresses, parcel identification numbers, client information, field investigation dates, weather conditions, data point coordinates, vegetation observations, soil profile descriptions, and hydrologic indicators documented during the delineation. Identify the names and professional credentials of all field personnel who conducted the wetland delineation, ensuring their qualifications are properly documented. Extract any laboratory analysis results, survey data, or technical measurements that will support the delineation findings.

Verify the current regulatory framework applicable to this specific site by researching the relevant USACE district jurisdiction, identifying which Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual applies based on the site's geographic location, and confirming any state-specific wetland protection statutes or local ordinances that may impose additional requirements beyond federal law. Research recent case law developments, particularly Supreme Court decisions such as Sackett v. EPA (2023) and Rapanos v. United States (2006), that affect the definition of "waters of the United States" and jurisdictional determinations. Identify any USACE regulatory guidance letters, EPA memoranda, or regional conditional letters that provide interpretive guidance relevant to the site's characteristics or the type of wetlands present.

Gather authoritative reference materials including the appropriate version of the National Wetland Plant List for the region, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service soil survey data for the county or area where the site is located, and any published hydric soils lists. Research the watershed context by identifying the named water body or traditional navigable water to which the site's wetlands may have a hydrologic connection, as this significantly nexus analysis is critical to jurisdictional determinations under current regulatory standards.

Document Structure and Professional Presentation

Draft a professionally formatted Title Page that immediately establishes the document's regulatory purpose and authority. The title should clearly identify this as a "Wetlands Delineation Report" and include the complete project name, site address with parcel identification numbers, and geographic coordinates. Present the names and professional credentials of all report preparers, emphasizing relevant certifications such as Professional Wetland Scientist (PWS), Certified Professional Soil Scientist (CPSS), or similar credentials that establish technical expertise. Include the client or property owner's name and contact information, the date of report completion, and the date range during which field investigations were conducted. Add appropriate disclaimers regarding the preliminary or final status of the delineation and note the report's intended regulatory use, such as "Prepared in Support of Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit Application" or "Prepared for USACE Approved Jurisdictional Determination Request."

Introduction: Establishing Regulatory Context and Purpose

The Introduction must establish both the immediate project purpose and the broader regulatory framework within which the delineation operates. Begin by articulating the specific reason this delineation was undertaken, whether to support a permit application for proposed development activities, to obtain an approved jurisdictional determination from the USACE, to verify compliance with regulatory conditions, or to establish baseline conditions for conservation purposes. This statement of purpose should connect directly to the regulatory obligations or planning needs driving the assessment.

Provide precise site location information that enables regulatory reviewers to immediately understand the geographic and regulatory context. Include the complete street address, parcel identification numbers as recorded in local tax assessor records, latitude and longitude coordinates in decimal degrees, the USGS topographic quadrangle name, and the specific USACE district and regulatory office with jurisdiction over the site. Identify the watershed or sub-watershed in which the site is located, name any water bodies within or adjacent to the property, and describe the site's position within the larger landscape, such as its proximity to traditional navigable waters or interstate waters.

Establish the regulatory framework by citing the Clean Water Act Section 404, which prohibits the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States without a permit from the USACE. Reference the current regulatory definition of "waters of the United States" under 33 CFR Part 328, acknowledging the evolving nature of this definition through recent rulemakings and court decisions. Specifically address how recent Supreme Court precedent affects jurisdictional analysis, noting that under Sackett v. EPA (2023), wetlands must have a continuous surface connection to relatively permanent waters to fall under federal jurisdiction, representing a significant narrowing from previous interpretations. Cite any applicable state wetland protection statutes that may provide independent regulatory authority over wetlands that do not meet the federal jurisdictional standard, as many states maintain broader wetland protections than federal law requires.

Identify the specific USACE Regional Supplement that governs the technical methodology for this delineation based on the site's location, such as the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual for the Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region or the Northcentral and Northeast Region. Note any state-specific delineation guidance or approved methodologies that supplement or modify the federal approach, as some states have developed their own technical standards that must be followed for state regulatory purposes.

Methodology: Documenting Scientific Rigor and Technical Compliance

The Methodology section must demonstrate that the delineation was conducted according to accepted scientific protocols and regulatory standards, providing the technical foundation for all jurisdictional determinations. Begin by stating that the delineation was performed in strict accordance with the "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual" (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) as supplemented by the appropriate Regional Supplement identified in the Introduction. This establishes that the federally mandated three-parameter approach was employed, requiring the concurrent presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology for an area to be classified as wetland.

Describe the vegetation analysis methodology in detail, explaining that plant communities were characterized by stratum (tree layer, sapling/shrub layer, herb layer, and woody vine layer where present) and that dominant species were identified using either the dominance test or the prevalence index method as specified in the Regional Supplement. Note that wetland indicator status for each species was verified using the current National Wetland Plant List for the appropriate region and that the hydrophytic vegetation criterion was met when more than fifty percent of dominant species across all strata are rated as obligate wetland (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), or facultative (FAC) species, or when the prevalence index value is 3.0 or less.

Detail the soil examination procedures, specifying that soil profiles were examined to a depth of at least twenty inches below the surface (or to a restrictive layer if encountered at shallower depth) using soil augers, probes, or excavated pits as appropriate to site conditions. Explain that each soil profile was described according to USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service standards, documenting horizon depths, matrix colors using Munsell soil color notation, redoximorphic features including concentrations and depletions, and any other diagnostic characteristics. State that hydric soil indicators were identified using the specific indicator codes provided in the Regional Supplement, such as A2 (Histic Epipedon), A11 (Depleted Below Dark Surface), F3 (Depleted Matrix), or other indicators appropriate to the region and soil conditions observed. Note that the hydric soil criterion was met when one or more approved hydric soil indicators were present within the required depth.

Describe the hydrology assessment methodology, explaining that both primary indicators (such as surface water, high water table, saturation, water marks, drift deposits, sediment deposits, or drainage patterns) and secondary indicators (such as oxidized rhizospheres, water-stained leaves, or FAC-neutral test) were documented where observed. Specify that the wetland hydrology criterion requires evidence that the site is inundated or saturated to the surface for a continuous period of at least fourteen consecutive days during the growing season in most years, and explain how the observed indicators support this determination. Address the timing of the field investigation explicitly, providing the specific dates of site visits, describing weather conditions during and preceding the investigation, and noting recent precipitation patterns as documented through local weather station data or National Weather Service records. Explain how the timing of the investigation relates to the growing season for the region and whether conditions were normal, wetter than normal, or drier than normal, as this context is essential for interpreting the significance of observed hydrology indicators.

Document the qualifications of all field personnel who conducted the delineation, including their educational background, professional certifications, years of experience conducting wetland delineations, and familiarity with the regional wetland types and ecological communities present in the area. This establishes the credibility and expertise of the technical team and demonstrates that the delineation was conducted by qualified professionals as expected by regulatory agencies.

Address any limitations or constraints that affected the delineation process with complete transparency, as acknowledging limitations strengthens rather than weakens the report's credibility. Note any areas that were inaccessible due to safety concerns, property access restrictions, or physical barriers. Identify any seasonal constraints, such as frozen ground conditions, snow cover, or drought conditions that may have limited the ability to observe certain wetland indicators. Describe any areas where vegetation had been recently disturbed, mowed, or cleared, affecting the ability to characterize plant communities. Explain how these limitations were addressed through alternative approaches, additional data sources, or conservative assumptions that ensure the delineation remains protective of wetland resources.

Site Description: Establishing Environmental Context

Provide a comprehensive characterization of the site's environmental setting that allows regulatory reviewers to understand the ecological context and landscape position of any wetlands present. Begin with a description of the site's topography, noting the overall relief, slope gradients, aspect, and any distinctive landforms such as depressions, swales, terraces, or floodplains. Describe the site's position within the watershed, identifying whether it occupies upland, slope, or lowland positions and how surface water flows across or through the property. Note any artificial modifications to topography such as grading, filling, or excavation that may have altered natural drainage patterns.

Characterize the geology and soils present on the site by referencing the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service soil survey for the county or area. Identify the mapped soil series present, describe their typical characteristics and drainage classes, and note which soil series are listed as hydric soils on the official hydric soils list for the state. Explain how the mapped soils correspond to or differ from the soil conditions observed during field investigations, as field observations take precedence over mapped data for delineation purposes but mapped soils provide important context for interpreting field findings.

Describe the vegetation communities present across the site, organizing the description by major community types or zones observed. For each community type, characterize the dominant species by stratum using scientific nomenclature followed by common names in parentheses, and provide the wetland indicator status (OBL, FACW, FAC, FACU, or UPL) for each dominant species. Describe the overall structure and composition of the plant communities, noting any distinctive features such as the presence of invasive species, recent disturbance, or successional stage. This vegetation characterization provides the ecological context for understanding the vegetation data collected at specific sampling points.

Document the hydrologic features and water sources that influence the site, including any streams, rivers, ponds, or other surface water bodies on or adjacent to the property. Describe the flow regime of any streams (perennial, intermittent, or ephemeral) and note whether they appear on USGS topographic maps or the National Hydrography Dataset as blue-line streams. Identify any evidence of groundwater influence such as seeps, springs, or areas where the water table is at or near the surface. Describe precipitation patterns for the region based on long-term climate data and note any artificial drainage features such as ditches, tiles, or storm water management structures that may affect site hydrology. Identify any water control structures such as dams, berms, or culverts that influence water levels or flow patterns. This hydrologic characterization is essential for understanding how wetlands on the site function within the larger watershed and whether they have the surface water connections necessary for federal jurisdiction under current regulatory standards.

Delineation Results: Presenting the Evidentiary Foundation

The Delineation Results section constitutes the evidentiary core of the report and must present findings with scientific precision and complete documentation. Begin by providing an overview of the wetland areas identified on the site, including the total acreage of wetlands delineated, the number of distinct wetland areas if multiple wetlands are present, and their general locations and characteristics. Describe the wetland boundary determination process, explaining how the boundary was established by identifying the point where the transition occurs from areas meeting all three wetland parameters to upland areas that do not meet one or more parameters.

Present detailed documentation for each data point or sampling location established during the field investigation. For each location, provide the data point identifier, GPS coordinates, a description of the location's position within the site, and a clear statement of whether the location represents wetland or upland conditions. Include completed USACE wetland determination data forms (or state-equivalent forms) for each sampling point, ensuring all sections are thoroughly completed including vegetation data with percent cover estimates, soil profile descriptions with Munsell colors and hydric soil indicators, and hydrology indicators observed with dates and conditions. Organize the data point documentation logically, typically proceeding from wetland areas to adjacent upland areas to demonstrate the contrast in conditions across the wetland boundary.

For vegetation data, present quantitative information showing the dominant species in each stratum, their wetland indicator status, and the calculations demonstrating whether the hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met. If the dominance test is used, show that more than fifty percent of dominant species are OBL, FACW, or FAC. If the prevalence index is used, show the calculation yielding a value of 3.0 or less. Address any problematic situations such as disturbed vegetation, areas where the dominance test and prevalence index yield different results, or sites where hydrophytic vegetation is absent despite the presence of hydric soils and wetland hydrology, explaining how these situations were resolved according to Regional Supplement guidance.

For soil data, describe each soil profile examined in detail, providing horizon depths, matrix colors, redoximorphic feature colors and abundance, texture, and any other diagnostic characteristics. Identify the specific hydric soil indicator(s) present using the standard indicator codes from the Regional Supplement, such as A2 (Histic Epipedon), A11 (Depleted Below Dark Surface), F3 (Depleted Matrix), F6 (Redox Dark Surface), or others as appropriate. Include representative soil profile photographs showing the characteristic features that led to the hydric soil determination. Address any problematic situations such as soils that appear hydric but do not match any approved indicator, or areas where hydric soil indicators are absent despite other evidence of wetland conditions.

For hydrology data, document all primary and secondary wetland hydrology indicators observed, providing the specific dates and conditions under which each indicator was observed. For indicators that vary seasonally, such as surface water, high water table, or saturation, explain how the observations support the conclusion that the wetland hydrology criterion is met (inundation or saturation for fourteen or more consecutive days during the growing season in most years). Include photographs documenting key hydrology indicators such as water-stained leaves, drift deposits, drainage patterns, or oxidized rhizospheres. Address any situations where wetland hydrology indicators are limited or absent, explaining whether this represents a true absence of wetland hydrology or whether the timing of the investigation or recent weather patterns may have limited the expression of hydrology indicators.

Create clear, professionally prepared maps showing the delineated wetland boundaries overlaid on current aerial imagery or a survey base map at an appropriate scale (typically 1 inch equals 100 feet or larger scale for detailed site plans). Ensure wetland boundaries are clearly delineated with a distinctive line style and that wetland areas are shaded or hatched to distinguish them from upland areas. Mark and label all data point locations on the map, using different symbols to distinguish wetland data points from upland data points. Include a north arrow, scale bar, legend explaining all symbols and line styles, and a title block with the project name, site address, map title, preparer name, and date. If multiple wetlands are present, assign each a unique identifier (such as Wetland A, Wetland B, etc.) and label them clearly on the map. Show any streams, ponds, or other water bodies present on or adjacent to the site, and indicate whether they are perennial, intermittent, or ephemeral. If the site has been surveyed, show property boundaries and any proposed development features to provide context for permit review.

Classify each delineated wetland using the Cowardin classification system, which categorizes wetlands by system (Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riverine, Marine, or Estuarine), class (such as Forested, Scrub-Shrub, Emergent, or Unconsolidated Bottom), and modifiers describing water regime, soil, and special modifiers. For example, a wetland might be classified as "Palustrine Forested Wetland, Seasonally Saturated" or "Palustrine Emergent Wetland, Temporarily Flooded." This standardized classification provides important information about wetland type and function and is often required for regulatory submittals.

Identify any special aquatic sites present, such as sanctuaries and refuges, wetlands within the 100-year floodplain, mudflats, vegetated shallows, coral reefs, riffle and pool complexes, or vernal pools. These special aquatic sites receive particular attention under the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines and may be subject to enhanced protection or more stringent permit review. Describe the characteristics that qualify the site as a special aquatic site and explain its ecological significance.

Jurisdictional Analysis: Establishing Regulatory Status

Address the critical question of jurisdictional status explicitly and thoroughly, as this determination drives all subsequent regulatory requirements. Analyze whether each delineated wetland constitutes "waters of the United States" subject to Clean Water Act Section 404 jurisdiction under the current regulatory framework. Under the Sackett v. EPA (2023) decision, wetlands are jurisdictional only if they have a continuous surface connection to relatively permanent waters such as traditional navigable waters, interstate waters, or relatively permanent tributaries of such waters. Describe any surface water connections between the delineated wetlands and downstream waters, noting whether these connections are continuous or intermittent, whether they flow through natural channels or artificial conveyances, and whether the downstream waters qualify as relatively permanent waters.

For wetlands that do not have the continuous surface connection required under Sackett, note that they are not subject to federal Clean Water Act jurisdiction but may still be regulated under state wetland protection statutes. Identify the applicable state regulatory program and explain the jurisdictional criteria under state law, which often extend to isolated wetlands, wetlands of a certain minimum size, or wetlands with specific ecological functions regardless of their hydrologic connection to navigable waters. Provide a clear statement of jurisdictional status for each wetland under both federal and state law, as this dual analysis is essential for comprehensive regulatory compliance.

If any wetlands are adjacent to streams or other water bodies, analyze the jurisdictional status of those water bodies as well. Determine whether streams are relatively permanent (flowing year-round or continuously during certain seasons) or ephemeral (flowing only in direct response to precipitation). Note whether streams appear on USGS topographic maps or the National Hydrography Dataset, as this provides evidence of relative permanence. Explain how the jurisdictional status of adjacent water bodies affects the jurisdictional status of adjacent wetlands under the continuous surface connection test.

Address any areas of uncertainty in the jurisdictional analysis with transparency, noting where professional judgment was required or where additional information might affect the determination. Recommend whether the applicant should request an approved jurisdictional determination from the USACE, which provides a formal, legally binding determination of jurisdictional status that remains valid for five years and can be appealed through the USACE administrative appeal process if the applicant disagrees with the determination.

Conclusions and Regulatory Recommendations

Synthesize all findings into clear, actionable conclusions that directly address the regulatory questions driving the delineation. State definitively the total acreage of wetlands delineated on the site, broken down by individual wetland area if multiple wetlands are present. Provide a clear statement of jurisdictional status for each wetland under both federal Clean Water Act Section 404 and applicable state wetland protection statutes, noting which wetlands are subject to which regulatory programs.

If the delineation was conducted in support of a proposed project that will impact wetlands, provide specific recommendations regarding permit requirements. Identify whether impacts to jurisdictional wetlands will require a Department of the Army permit under Section 404, and if so, whether the impacts may qualify for authorization under a nationwide permit or will require an individual permit. Cite the specific nationwide permit that may apply (such as NWP 29 for residential development, NWP 39 for commercial and institutional development, or NWP 12 for utility line activities) and note any regional conditions or pre-construction notification requirements that must be satisfied. If impacts exceed the thresholds for nationwide permit authorization or if the site has special characteristics that preclude nationwide permit use, recommend pursuing an individual permit and describe the application process and typical review timeline.

Address compensatory mitigation requirements if wetland impacts are anticipated. Note that the 2008 Mitigation Rule establishes a preference hierarchy favoring mitigation bank credits, then in-lieu fee program credits, then permittee-responsible mitigation. Identify any approved mitigation banks serving the site's service area and note the typical mitigation ratios required for the wetland types present, which often range from 1:1 for wetland restoration to 3:1 or higher for wetland creation depending on the wetland type, functions, and regional guidance. If state wetland regulations impose separate mitigation requirements, address those as well, as some states require mitigation ratios higher than federal requirements or have different preferences regarding mitigation approaches.

Recommend specific next steps in the regulatory process based on the project's status and objectives. If no development is currently proposed, recommend maintaining the delineation documentation for future use and note that USACE typically considers wetland delineations valid for five years if site conditions remain unchanged, though this is a guideline rather than a regulatory requirement. If development is proposed, recommend scheduling a pre-application consultation with the USACE regulatory staff to discuss the project, review the delineation findings, and obtain preliminary feedback on permit requirements and potential concerns. If jurisdictional status is uncertain or if the applicant desires formal confirmation, recommend requesting an approved jurisdictional determination from the USACE, explaining that this provides a legally binding determination that can facilitate project planning and financing.

Identify any areas where additional investigation or analysis may be warranted to support permit review. This might include functional assessment of wetland values using methods such as the Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) Approach or state-specific assessment methods, rare species surveys if suitable habitat is present, water quality monitoring if discharge to impaired waters is proposed, or alternatives analysis to demonstrate that the proposed project avoids and minimizes wetland impacts to the maximum extent practicable as required by the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines.

Note the validity period of the delineation explicitly, explaining that while USACE guidance suggests delineations remain valid for five years if site conditions are unchanged, significant changes to site hydrology, vegetation, or land use may necessitate re-delineation. Recommend periodic site inspections if the delineation will be relied upon over an extended period to verify that conditions remain consistent with the delineation findings.

References and Regulatory Citations

Compile a comprehensive References section that provides complete citations to all regulatory authorities, technical manuals, scientific sources, and guidance documents relied upon in preparing the report. This section serves both as documentation of the technical and legal foundation for the delineation and as a resource for regulatory reviewers who may need to verify the authorities cited.

Provide full legal citations to statutory authorities including the Clean Water Act Section 404, codified at 33 U.S.C. § 1344, and any applicable state wetland protection statutes with their statutory citations. Cite the relevant sections of the Code of Federal Regulations including 33 CFR Part 328 (definition of waters of the United States), 33 CFR Part 320 (general regulatory policies), 33 CFR Part 323 (permits for discharges of dredged or fill material), and 40 CFR Part 230 (Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines for specification of disposal sites for dredged or fill material).

Cite the technical manuals and supplements that governed the delineation methodology, including the full citation to Environmental Laboratory, "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi (1987), and the specific Regional Supplement used, such as U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, "Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region," ERDC/EL TR-12-9, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi (2012), or the appropriate supplement for the site's region.

Include citations to USACE regulatory guidance letters, such as RGL 16-01 on approved jurisdictional determinations, RGL 08-02 on the 2008 Mitigation Rule, or other guidance letters relevant to the delineation or permit process. Cite any EPA guidance documents or memoranda that provide interpretive guidance on jurisdictional determinations or wetland protection.

Provide citations to key court decisions that affect jurisdictional analysis, including Sackett v. EPA, 598 U.S. ___, 143 S. Ct. 1322 (2023); Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006); and Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 531 U.S. 159 (2001). Use proper legal citation format for case citations.

Cite reference materials used in the delineation including the specific version of the National Wetland Plant List used (such as Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin, "The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings," Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17), the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service soil survey for the county or area, and the official hydric soils list for the state. Include the publication date and access date for web-based resources.

If any peer-reviewed scientific literature was cited in discussing wetland functions, ecological significance, or technical issues, provide complete citations in a consistent scientific citation format. Ensure all citations include sufficient information to allow readers to locate the original source.

Appendices: Compiling Supporting Documentation

Organize comprehensive appendices that compile all supporting documentation necessary for regulatory review and that demonstrate the evidentiary foundation for all delineation findings. Structure the appendices logically with clear section labels and ensure that all appendix materials are referenced in the main body of the report.

Include as Appendix A the completed USACE wetland determination data forms for all sampling points, organized sequentially by data point number. Ensure all sections of each form are thoroughly completed, including the project/site information header, vegetation data with percent cover estimates and indicator status, soil profile description with Munsell colors and hydric soil indicators, hydrology indicators with observation dates, and the wetland determination section indicating whether each parameter is met. Include the signature and credentials of the person who completed each form. If state-specific data forms were used in addition to or instead of USACE forms, include those as well with clear labeling.

Provide as Appendix B a comprehensive photographic log documenting site conditions, vegetation communities, soil profiles, and hydrologic indicators. Organize photographs logically, typically by data point or by subject matter (vegetation, soils, hydrology, site features). For each photograph, provide a caption that includes the photo number, date and time the photo was taken, location description or data point number, direction the camera was facing, and a description of what the photo depicts. Include metadata such as GPS coordinates for photo points if available. Ensure photographs are of sufficient quality and resolution to clearly show the features being documented. Include representative photographs showing overall site conditions and landscape context, close-up photographs of dominant plant species showing diagnostic features, soil profile photographs showing horizon depths and colors with a scale reference, and photographs documenting hydrology indicators such as surface water, water marks, drift deposits, or oxidized rhizospheres.

Include as Appendix C detailed maps at appropriate scales showing wetland boundaries, data point locations, and site features. Provide a site location map showing the property in relation to surrounding roads, water bodies, and landmarks. Include a detailed site map at a scale of 1 inch equals 100 feet or larger showing delineated wetland boundaries overlaid on current aerial imagery or a survey base map, with all data points marked and labeled, property boundaries shown if surveyed, and any proposed development features indicated. If the site includes streams or other water bodies, provide a map showing the hydrologic connections between wetlands and downstream waters to support the jurisdictional analysis. Ensure all maps include a north arrow, scale bar, legend, and title block with project information.

Provide as Appendix D the soil profile descriptions for all data points, presented in a standardized format that includes horizon depths, Munsell color notations for matrix and redoximorphic features, texture, structure, consistence, and any other diagnostic characteristics. Include the hydric soil indicator determination for each profile. If any soil samples were submitted for laboratory analysis (such as organic matter content, particle size analysis, or other parameters), include the laboratory reports.

Include as Appendix E copies of relevant portions of reference materials such as the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service soil survey for the area showing the mapped soil series present on the site and their descriptions, excerpts from the National Wetland Plant List showing the wetland indicator status of dominant species observed, and the official hydric soils list for the state. These materials provide context and verification for the technical determinations made in the field.

If any previous environmental reports, wetland delineations, or regulatory correspondence exist for the property, consider including relevant excerpts as Appendix F to provide historical context and demonstrate consistency or explain any differences between current findings and previous assessments.

Ensure all appendix materials are clearly labeled, organized, and referenced in the main text of the report. Number pages consecutively within each appendix and include a table of contents for the appendices if the volume of supporting documentation is substantial.

Quality Assurance and Final Review

Before finalizing the report, conduct a thorough quality assurance review to ensure accuracy, consistency, and completeness. Verify that all data point numbers referenced in the text correspond to the correct data forms and photograph numbers in the appendices. Confirm that wetland acreages stated in the text match the acreages shown on maps and that all calculations are correct. Check that all scientific names are spelled correctly and that wetland indicator status assignments match the current National Wetland Plant List. Verify that all Munsell color notations are recorded correctly and that hydric soil indicator codes match the descriptions in the Regional Supplement.

Review the jurisdictional analysis to ensure it accurately reflects current regulatory standards under Sackett v. EPA and applicable state law. Verify that all regulatory citations are complete and accurate and that all references are properly formatted. Ensure that the report maintains objective, scientific language throughout and that all conclusions are supported by documented field observations and data.

Check that all maps are clear, accurate, and professionally presented with appropriate scales, legends, and labels. Verify that all photographs are properly captioned and that photo point locations are correctly marked on maps. Ensure that all appendices are complete, properly organized, and referenced in the main text.

Review the entire document for consistency in terminology, formatting, and style. Ensure that the report presents a cohesive, professional document that can serve as a reliable basis for regulatory decisions and that can withstand scrutiny during permit review or potential legal challenge. The final report should demonstrate technical competence, regulatory knowledge, and professional judgment while maintaining the objectivity and transparency essential to credible scientific documentation.