0403_AnsonLF_EAComm&Response_20220606

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR
PHASE 5 PERMIT AMENDMENT APPLICATION
ANSON COUNTY MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE LANDFILL
Prepared for:
WASTE CONNECTIONS OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
375 DOZER ROAD, POLKTON, NC 28135
Prepared by:
CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
3701 ARCO CORPORATE DRIVE, SUITE 400
CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
CEC Project 165-276
December 2018
REVISED SEPTEMBER 2021
M=
XAV
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
+ 3701 Arco Corporate Drive, Suite 400 1 Charlotte, NC 28273 1 p: 980-237-0373 f: 980-237-0372 1 www.cecinc.corn

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION.......................................................................I
2.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED PROJECT.................................................4
3.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS.........................................................................................5
4.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PROJECT
AREA..................................................................................................................................8
4.1
Topography.............................................................................................................8
4.2
Soils.........................................................................................................................8
4.3
Land Use................................................................................................................. 8
4.4
Prime or Unique Agricultural Lands.......................................................................
8
4.5
Public lands, scenic and recreational area...............................................................
8
4.6
Areas of Archeological or Historical Value............................................................
9
4.7
Air Quality.............................................................................................................. 9
4.8
Noise Levels............................................................................................................
9
4.9
Water resources.......................................................................................................
9
4.10
Forest Resources...................................................................................................
10
4.11
Shellfish or fish and their habitats........................................................................
10
4.12
Wildlife and natural vegetation.............................................................................
11
4.13
Transportation.......................................................................................................
11
5.0 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................13
6.0 EXHIBITS........................................................................................................................14
7.0 STATE AND FEDERAL PERMITS REQUIRED.......................................................15
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -i- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

1.0 PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Title: Environmental Assessment for Chambers Development MSWLF
(Anson County Landfill)
Phase 5 Permit Amendment Application
NCDENR Solid Waste Permit No. 04-03-MSWLF-2010
CEC Project 165-276
Responsible State Agency:
Mailing Address:
Phone:
Email:
Donna Wilson, P.E.
Permitting Engineer
Solid Waste Section
Division of Waste Management
NCDEQ
217 W. Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27603
1646 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1646
[phone]
[e-mail]
Preparer of Document: Nathan Bivins, P.E.
Project Manager
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
3701 Arco Corporate Drive, Suite 400
Charlotte, NC 28273
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -1- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

The Chambers Development Municipal Solid Waste Landfill (MSWLF) (Anson County
Landfill) NCDENR Solid Waste Permit No. 04-03-MSWLF-2010) is an operating landfill
located at 375 Dozer Road between Polkton and Wadesboro on U.S. Route 74, see Figure 1.
The site is bounded on the northwest by Brown Creek, on the east by Pinch Gut Creek, and on
the south generally by the CSX railroad. A U.S.G.S. topographic map was used in the creation
of the facility location map included as Figure 3-1. The map extends beyond the facility
property boundary and displays general topographic features including the facility and adjacent
surface water bodies. The Anson County Municipal Solid Waste Landfill serves North Carolina
and South Carolina. The landfill site is approximately 875.693 acres in size and operated by
Waste Connections of North Carolina, Inc. Chambers Development owns additional
property of approximately 224 acres surrounding the landfill for a total of approximately
1,100 acres.
The nature of the business conducted at the Site consists of disposal operations of MSW. In
addition, vehicle and equipment maintenance and fueling in support of landfill and hauling
operations is conducted in the maintenance building (approx. 11,000 sf) at the Site. The site
also contains a truck wash near the maintenance building. Leachate collection tanks which
store the leachate generated from the municipal solid waste are present on the site. A scale
house (approx. 3,500 sf) to weigh collection vehicles and an administration building
(approx. 4,000 sf) is located on Dozer Road at the entrance to the site.
The development of the Anson County Landfill will be done incrementally in five phases with
each phase being comprised of smaller cells. The general intent is to construct a phase
incrementally within the landfill when needed. Phases 1, 2, and 3 of the landfill's four phases are
currently operational. Phase 1 was permitted to construct by NCDEQ on June 1, 2000. Phase 2
was permitted to construct in 2008. Phases 3 and 4 were permitted to construct in 2018. This
proposed project is for Phase 5, which adjoin Phases 3 and 4. The intended purpose of this
project (construction of Phase 5 C&D Landfill) is to effectively and efficiently maximize the
landfill capacity at the site by allowing for the original approved landfill to be fully developed.
All subsequent phases need to be developed contiguous to the existing landfill cells to maximize
the expanded volume and meet current solid waste requirements.
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -2- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

The infrastructure to support the landfill has been constructed. This infrastructure includes an
asphalt drive (Dozer Road) for access to the administrative building with a seven space asphalt
parking lot. The other constructed support buildings include a scalehouse, maintenance building
and truckwash. All leachate from the landfill operations are collected and stored onsite in a
leachate collection facility. The leachate collection facility is connected to the local municipal
sanitary sewer system. The landfill cells are constructed and accessed by paved and un-paved
roadways. Stormwater conveyance systems and sediment control basins have been constructed
to handle run-off from the developed landfill site.
With each major phase, perimeter berms, access roads, landfill base, leachate management
system, landfill gas management system, stormwater management system, and erosion and
sedimentation control measures will be constructed in accordance with NCDEQ Solid Waste
Regulations. Currently, in accordance with the contractual agreement with Anson County, the
landfill can operate at a maximum average waste acceptance of 6,000 tons of solid waste per
day. For an operating factor of 307 days per year, the yearly disposal rate is estimated to be
about 1,842,000 tons per year.
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -3- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

2.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED PROJECT
This Environmental Assessment has been prepared in support of an Amendment to the existing
Permit to add additional development phases to the existing Facility. This Phase 5 expansion
requires an Amendment to the existing NCDEQ Permit to Construct for Phases 1-4, which in
turn requires the completion of an Environmental Assessment for the site. It is anticipated that
the expansion of the existing Facility will increase daily landfill activities and increase the
operational life of the landfill. The expansion is proposed so that the landfill can continue to
adequately serve a growing population in the service area of the landfill.
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -4- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

3.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Advantages of Selected Site:
By utilizing the existing landfill on -site, Chambers Development of North Carolina, Inc. can
minimize impacts to the human and natural environment by using existing utility infrastructure
(both roadway, sewer and stormwater), regulatory buffers, and operational personnel and
equipment of the existing Facility. Expanding the existing facility on -site by added Phase 5 to the
existing development plan for the site is the only reasonable alternative that still meets the
project's purpose and need.
No -Build Alternative:
This application is based on a need for the addition of landfill airspace. A no -build option would
not be sufficient to meet the future landfill requirements of Anson County and other surrounding
communities. With a no -build scenario the landfill capacity will be shortened by an estimated
volume of 19.9 million cubic yards of waste and landfill life disposal needs of the citizens of the
service area reduced by approximately 12.1 years. This would force the users to find other
locations to fulfill these disposal needs.
Off -site Alternative:
Finding a new location off -site to meet the disposal size needs (19.9 million cubic yards) of the
Facility has been considered but found not to be practical. The expense of a new site to house the
19.9 million cubic yards of landfill needed, with the acquisition, permitting, and operational cost
of a new site would not be justifiable. The current site has already been acquired and is an active
landfill with Phases 1 - 2 already built and partial construction of Phase 3 completed. Phases 1 -
4 also have an existing groundwater monitoring plan that can be modified to include Phase 5.
Another site, offsite from the existing landfill, would require additional environmental impacts,
permitting, and would not have an established groundwater monitoring network and surface
water plan.
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -5- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

Development of a new site in general would require permitting for a new landfill (including
siting and buffer requirements), construction of new infrastructure and buildings, additional
operational staff and equipment, and potential impacts to wildlife and natural areas on the new
site. In addition to the natural and financial resources required for construction of a new site, the
timing of construction may result in an impact to current waste collection and disposal services.
Siting a new landfill typically takes four to six years to plan, permit, purchase property and
construct a new cell.
On -site Alternative:
Two on -site alternatives for the Phase 5 landfill expansion were reviewed for feasibility and
resulting impacts to environmental and cultural resources.
On -site Alternative 1:
On -Site Alternative 1 attempts to avoid impacts to WOTUS proposed within the preferred
alternative by shifting the proposed phase as far southeast as possible. However, this expansion
will conflict with an existing cemetery, storm water management facility and vehicle
maintenance operations. The relocation of the existing cemetery would require significant
impacts to site cultural resources. On -site Alternative 1 would require the reconstruction of a
stormwater management area and vehicle maintenance operations. The construction activities
and resulting environmental impacts associated with these relocations are not required for the
preferred Phase 5 Expansion site. See Alternatives Analysis Figure 1.
On -site Alternative 2:
On -Site Alternative 2, located on the northeastern portion of the property, avoids the existing
cemetery and existing maintenance building, but results in impacts to approximately 526 linear
feet of existing streams, approximately one acre of existing wetlands and will require the
removal/relocation of three existing storm water facilities. The environmental impacts to these
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -6- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

surface waters in addition to the impacts from construction activities required for the relocation
of the three stormwater management facilities appear to exceed those impacts required for the
preferred Phase 5 Expansion site. See Alternatives Analysis Figure 2.
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -7- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

4.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PROJECT AREA
4.1 TOPOGRAPHY
The existing site topography includes gently sloping wooded terrain in undeveloped areas of the
site. The constructed landfills generally have 3:1 side slopes and are constructed with access
roads and tack -on swales to maintain the landfill slopes after construction.
4.2 SOILS
The existing soils at the site have been graded to construct landfill cells and for operation of the
landfill. Soil export from the site is not anticipated. This project will result in no change to the
permitted soil moving activities on the site.
4.3 LAND USE
The current land use for the property is a MSW landfill and will continue to operate as permitted
by NCDEQ. This project will result in no change to the permitted land use of the site.
4.4 PRIME OR UNIQUE AGRICULTURAL LANDS
The current land use for the property is a MSW landfill and will continue to operate as permitted
by NCDEQ. This project will not result in the development of additional agricultural lands.
4.5 PUBLIC LANDS, SCENIC AND RECREATIONAL AREA
As part of the active NCDEQ Permit to Construct for the landfill, buffers must be maintained
between waste disposal activities and adjacent public parks, churches and public recreation areas.
This project will have no impact on the permitted buffers established for the landfill.
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -8- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

4.6 AREAS OF ARCHEOLOGICAL OR HISTORICAL VALUE
As part of the original Site Study and Permit to Construct for the landfill, an investigation of
archeological or historically valuable area on the site was performed. This project will have no
impact to areas of archeological or historical value.
4.7 AIR QUALITY
Odors and dust control are regulated through the approved NCDEQ Permit to Operate for the
landfill. In accordance with this permit and NCDEQ solid waste rules, the Permittee shall not
cause or allow fugitive dust emissions to cause or contribute to substantive complaints or excess
visible emissions beyond the property boundary. Dust is controlled by site best management
practices including soil and access road wetting with the on -site water truck.
Odors are also regulated in accordance with the approved NCDEQ solid waste permit and rules.
A landfill gas management and control plan for the landfill was approved by NCDEQ as part of
the Permit to Operate. This project is not anticipated to have an effect on overall air quality of
the site, as the site is regulated under the approved Permit to Operate.
4.8 NOISE LEVELS
The landfill is buffered from nearby residences. Although this project will include continued
equipment and truck activity on the site, the buffers will be maintained in accordance with the
approved Permit to Operate for the site. The landfill typically operates during the week from
6:30 A.M. to 5:30 P.M., and is typically closed on holidays.
4.9 WATER RESOURCES
The approved landfill Permit to Operate requires the collection of leachate from landfilling
activities. The groundwater is protected from contamination through the use of constructed
liners below the waste and collection of the landfill leachate. Leachate is discharged to the
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -9- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

municipal sanitary sewer system. Surface water is protected by existing sediment basins
constructed as part of the NCDEQ Sediment and Erosion Control Permit. This project will have
no additional impact on the permitted and approved leachate collection system or the constructed
surface water basins. In addition, the landfill is covered under the NCDEQ Division of Water
Quality General Permit No. NCG120000 to discharge stormwater under the national pollutant
discharge elimination system. This project will not affect this permit coverage.
On August 2, 2016, Carolina Wetland Service (CWS) performed a site visit to delineate
jurisdictional waters of the U.S. within the project area. Wetlands and three streams were
identified in the project area. Of the waters, only one stream, Stream A, will be impacted by this
project, consisting of approximately 1,168 LF of stream impact. This Stream A is shown on the
Engineering Drawings in Appendix B, and the delineation report can be found in Appendix G.
Streams B and C, and the wetlands identified in the CWS report will not be impacted by this
project. Based on this proposed stream impact of Stream A, the Owner has recieved an
Individual Permit with the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) dated May 2020, in
accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The site has also received an Individual
401 Water Quality Certification in April 2020. See Appendix D for this documentation.
4.10 FOREST RESOURCES
The site is an active MSW landfill. Clearing activities are limited to those required for the
construction of new cells in accordance with the approved Permit to Construct for the site. This
project will not result in impacts to existing forest resources.
4.11 SHELLFISH OR FISH AND THEIR HABITATS
Surface waters adjacent to the operating, permitted landfill are protected by sediment control
basins and periodic stormwater outfall testing in accordance with NCG120000. This project will
not impact surface waters, fish, shellfish or their habitat.
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -10- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

4.12 WILDLIFE AND NATURAL VEGETATION
This project will not result in the removal of additional natural vegetation or wildlife habitat,
beyond what has been previously permitted. A Protected Species Assessment Report was
prepared by CWS for this Facility on August 10, 2016, and is included in Appendix G.
4.13 TRANSPORTATION
The addition of the Phase 5 expansion has slight potential to increase the truck traffic to and
from the site. An analysis of the potential increase in truck traffic is discussed in the following
paragraphs. Since there will be no increase to the permitted allowable tonnage rate for the
facility, no significant additional vehicle trips to the landfill are expected on operating days.
The NCDOT compiles traffic data for most roadways in each County on a yearly basis and
makes this information available to the public in the form of a document titled "Annual Average
Daily Traffic Map". The NCDOT 2016 Annual Average Daily Traffic map for Anson County
estimates traffic data on U.S. Route 74 to be 18,000 trips per day. Based on the current traffic
data from NCDOT, the increase in additional truck traffic on U.S. Route 74 resulting from the
increase in the waste acceptance will be less than 1%
Further, the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) provides methodologies for estimating the
level of service and capacity for both uninterrupted and interrupted transportation facilities. For
each facility there are one or more performance measures, or measures of effectiveness (MOEs),
which characterize the user's perception of the operating conditions of that facility. It is critical
to understand at the outset that users, not facilities, experience the travel characterized by levels
of service (LOS) in the 2000 HCM. By implication, there are different levels of service for each
user, and indeed even within a travel mode there are different service qualities possible by
approach or direction, as well as by time of day. However, regardless of user mode, approach, or
direction, each LOS represents a range of values for that facility's MOE. This range varies by a
lettering system `A' through `F'. LOS `A' represents a user perception of the MOE as being
excellent, with `F' denoting a breakdown in the facility.
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -11- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

On November 28, 2018 CEC contacted Stan Brock, NCDOT District Engineer for Division 10,
which serves Anson County. According to Mr. Brock, and based on a cursory review of the
roadway, U.S. Route 74 would most likely be classified as LOS "A". At the landfill site, U.S.
Route 74 is a 4-lane, divided highway with dedicated turning lanes for access to Dozer Drive, the
private road which serves only the landfill. As Dozer Road is a private road to the landfill, any
increase in traffic would affect only U.S. Route 74 and no smaller local roads in the area. Based
on the information provided by NCDOT and the expected minimal percentage increase in traffic,
data suggests there will not be an adverse impact to U.S. Route 74 from this project.
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -12- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

5.0 REFERENCES
1. NCDEQ Division of Waste Management Solid Waste Section Anson County Landfill Permit
to Construct (NCDENR Solid Waste Permit No. 04-03-MSWLF-2010).
2. NCDEQ Division of Waste Management Solid Waste Section Anson County Landfill Permit
to Operate (NCDENR Solid Waste Permit No. 04-03-MSWLF-2010).
3. NCDEQ Division of Water Quality General Permit to Discharge Stormwater General Permit
NCG 120000.
4. Jurisdictional Delineation Report, CWS, August 10, 2016 (Appendix G).
5. Protected Species Assessment Report, CWS, August 10, 2016 (Appendix G).
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -13- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

6.0 EXHIBITS
Figure 1 — Anson County MSW Landfill Vicinity Map
Figure 3-1— USGS Topographical Map
Alternatives Analysis Figure 1
Alternatives Analysis Figure 2
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -14- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

7.0 STATE AND FEDERAL PERMITS REQUIRED
1. NCDEQ Division of Waste Management Solid Waste Section Permit Amendment to the
Permit to Construct.
2. USACE, Section 404, Individual Permit.
Civil & Environmental Consultanrs, Inc. -15- Anson County Landfill EA
December 2018

Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.

nJ
NORTH
I
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
1900 Center Park Drive - Suite A - Charlotte, NC 28217
Ph: 980.237.0373 • Fax: [phone]
www.cecinc.com
DRAWN BY: MTB CHECKED BY:
DATE: APRIL 2014 1 DWG SCALE:
WASTE CONNECTIONS OF NORTH CAROLINA
ANSON COUNTY MSW LANDFILL
375 DOZER ROAD
POLKTON, NC
VICINITY MAP
TMG APPROVED BY:
1 "=5 MILES PROJECT NO:
SLB I FIGURE NO.:
141-019

N
0
N
N
In
Brown-Cr
NORTH
0
O
g
250
Richmond
�Sturdivant
Cem
Z
f-1
300 '
350
r
N
300 -
REFERENCE
1. U.S.G.S. 7.5' TOPOGRAPHIC MAP, POLKTON QUADRANGLE, NC DATED: 2013 SCALE IN FEET
2. U.S.G.S. 7.5' TOPOGRAPHIC MAP, RUSSELLVILLE QUADRANGLE, NC DATED:
2012. 0 1000 2000
WAS
TE STE CONNECTIONS LLC
PERMIT APPLICATION
Civil &Environmental Consultants, Inc.
ANSON LANDFILL PHASE 5
ANSON, NORTH CAROLINA
1900 Center Park Drive - Suite A - Charlotte, NC 28217
USGS MAP
Ph: 980.237.0373 • Fax: [phone]
www.cecinc.com
DRAWN BY: CTH
CHECKED BY: NTB
APPROVED BY: SLB
FIGURE NO.:
3-1
DATE: OCTOBER 2018
DWG SCALE: 1 "=1000'
PROJECT NO: 165-276

ti
Y
a �.s u 4.4.
NORTH Z
CAMERON RD
c°v 4
v -ram
BROWN CRE `�- ` = `''` o —, CAMERON RD
—�
r` -
3�J SIT
PROPERTY
fz� LINE
POLK N J� �{ / PROPOSED
LIMIT OF
Richmond - WASTE
Sturdivant G
t' -
`"-- Cem PINCH GUT
CREEK
�• it �41.L -L4 �y/. � .,�
0 aD � Z
i
74 US
V\ '
noa 7 RUSSELL LLE
Shy
REFERENCE SCALE IN FEET
1. U.S.G.S. 7.5' TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS:
a. POLKTON QUADRANGLE, NC DATED: 2019; 0 2000 4000
b. RUSSELLVILLE QUANDRANGLE, NC DATED: 2019.
f1A
,�,� CHAMBERS DEVELOPMENT OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
ANSON COUNTY LANDFILL - PHASE 5
PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT APPLICATION
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. ANSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
3701 Arco Corporate Drive - Suite 400 - Charlotte, NC 28273
Ph:980.237.0373 Fax:[phone] USGS SITE LOCATION MAP
www.cecinc.com
DRAWN BY: PAB I CHECKED BY: DRAFT APPROVED BY: DRAFT I FIGURE NO.:
DATE: OCT 20201 DWG SCALE: 1 = 2,000 PROJECT NO: 165-276 2

NORTH
EXISTING l
STORMWATER /
FACILITY i
/ PROPOSED
/ PHASE 4
EXISTING
STREAM
F
PROPOSED r�4
1 PHASE 5 J
A
EX/STING EX/STING "
P2HASE STORMWATER�� i O FACILITY -�
PROPOSED 11 `till lll� i i �ii �� l 1
PHASE_ 3 i/�iILlit
1° �\, ALTERNATE #1,
PHASE 1 ���I ll��r \ a _PHASE 5
BOUND v�
l
CEMETARY e C c
300.000
PROPERTY
BUFFER
w/ - \v�
SCALE IN FEET
0 1000 2000
REFERENCE
0
EXISTING ,
MAINTENANCES
BUILDING II
I TT
LEGEND
300' PROPERTY LINE BUFFER — —
1000' RESIDENTIAL BUFFER
EXISTING WETLANDS
EXISTING STREAMS — — — — — —
FEMA 100 YEAR
PROPERTY LINE --- -- ---
1. SURFACE WATERS LOCATED BY CWS, USGS OR LANDFILL CELL BOUNDARIES
NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY (NWI). ALTERNATIVE CELL BOUNDARY ---------�
AMMAll,= WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
PERMIT APPLICATION
Civil &Environmental Consultants, Inc. ANSON COUNTY LANDFILL PHASE 5
1900 Center Park Drive - Suite A - Charlotte, NC 28217 ANSON, NORTH CAROLINA
Ph: 980.237.0373 • Fax: [phone] ON -SITE ALTERNATIVE #1
www.cecinc.com
DRAWN BY: MRJ CHECKED BY: TMG APPROVED BY: NTB
j FIGURE NO.:
DATE: APRIL 2018 DWG SCALE: 1 =1000' PROJECT NO: 165-276 1

NORTH
EXISTING l
STORMWATER /
FACILITY i
jf
w1w
-r
"' / %6
/ PROPOSED
/ PHASE 4
\� EXISTING
t STREAM Iq
i EXISTING
WETLAND
STREAM / \vim�� I\�' — EXISTING \�
PHASE !�
�1 PROPOSED
PHASE_ 3
PROPOSED l.` if j PHASEIG�ll�ll 1
PHASE 5 1 / / III �II
300.000
PROPERTY
BUFFER
w/ - \v�
SCALE IN FEET
0 1000 2000
REFERENCE
\ \ /9 '.mew ps ri -
)— ALTERNATE #2
PHASE 5
BOUNDARY
% EXISTING
STORMWATER
FACILITY
ir
�i EXISTING C `
CEMETARY
0
EXISTING ,
MAINTENANCES
BUILDINGTr_
II
I
LEGEND
300' PROPERTY LINE BUFFER — —
1000' RESIDENTIAL BUFFER _
EXISTING WETLANDS
EXISTING STREAMS — — — — — —
FEMA 100 YEAR
PROPERTY LINE --- -- ---
1. SURFACE WATERS LOCATED BY CWS, USGS OR LANDFILL CELL BOUNDARIES
NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY (NWI). ALTERNATIVE CELL BOUNDARY ---------�
AMMAll,= WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC.
PERMIT APPLICATION
Civil &Environmental Consultants, Inc. ANSON COUNTY LANDFILL PHASE 5
1900 Center Park Drive - Suite A - Charlotte, NC 28217 ANSON, NORTH CAROLINA
Ph: 980.237.0373 • Fax: [phone] ON -SITE ALTERNATIVE #2
www.cecinc.com
DRAWN BY: MRJ I CHECKED BY: TMG APPROVED BY: NTB
j FIGURE NO.:
DATE: APRIL 20181 DWG SCALE: 1 =1000' PROJECT NO: 165-276 2

JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION REPORT

CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC.
550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
704-527-1177 (office)
704-527-1133 (fax)
August 10, 2016
Mr. Nathan T. Bivins, PE
CEC, Inc.
1900 Center Park Drive, Suite A
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
Subject: Jurisdictional Delineation Report
Anson Waste Management Facility
Anson County, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2016-4091
Dear Mr. Bivins,
The Anson Waste Management Facility site (Anson County Tax Parcel No. 645500201283 [partial
parcel]) is approximately 286 acres in extent and is located at 375 Dozer Drive in Anson County, North
Carolina (Figure 1, attached).
Street Address of Project: located at 375 Dozer Drive in Anson County, North Carolina
Waterway: UTs to Brown Creek and Pinch Gut Creek
Basin: Yadkin Pee Dee (HUC' 03040104)
City: unincorporated Anson County
County: Anson County
Tax Parcel Nos.: 645500201283 (partial parcel)
Decimal Degree Coordinate Location of Project Site: 35.008742°,-80.162815'
USGS Quadrangle Name: Polkton, NC (1970)
Current Land Use
The project area consists of an active landfill and forested areas (Figure 2, attached). The vegetation
communities present on site consist of dry oak -hickory forest with pine stands and maintained/disturbed
vegetation within the cleared areas. Typical on -site vegetation in the dry oak -hickory forest consists of
swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii), willow oak (Quercus phellos), post oak (Quercus stellata),
mockernut hickory (Carya tomentosa), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), black
cherry (Prunus serotina), red maple (Acer rubrum), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), flowering
dogwood (Cornus florida) and Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides). Typical vegetation in the
disturbed/maintained areas consists of dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), sawtooth blackberry
(Rubus argutus), tall goldenrod (Solidago altissima), lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata), and Johnson grass
(Sorghum halepense).
According to the Soil Survey of Anson County' (Figures 3 and 4, attached), on -site soils consist of Badin
channery silt loam (8 to 15 percent slopes [BaC]), Badin-Goldston complex (2 to 8 percent slopes
[BgB]), Creedmoor fine sandy loam (2 to 8 percent slopes [CrB], Goldston channery silt loam (2 to 8
percent slopes [GOB] and 15 to 25 percent slopes [GOD]), Mayodan fine sandy loam (2 to 8 percent
1 "HUC" is the Hydrologic Unit Code. U.S. Geological Survey, 1974. Hydrologic Unit Map, State of North Carolina.
2 United States Department of Agriculture, 2015. Soil Survey of Anson County, North Carolina.
NORTH CAROLINA . SOUTH CAROLINA
ATAAA .'1.� IL ONLY�Tl Il

Anson Waste Management Facility August 10, 2016
Jurisdictional Delineation Report CWS Proiect No. 2016-4091
slopes [MaB]), Tillery silt loam (0 to 3 percent slopes [ToA]), and White Store fine sandy loam (2 to 8
percent slopes, moderately eroded [WhB21). None of the on -site soils are listed on the North Carolina
Hydric Soils List for Anson County3 nor are they listed on the National Hydric Soils List4 as having
hydric inclusions.
Wetlands are an important source of biodiversity and provide a multitude of ecological services. The
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), created by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is a program which
provides wetlands data and analysis available to the public. A review of the NWI GIS layer depicts a
portion of a freshwater forested/shrub wetland (PFOIA) within the project limits (Figure 5, attached).
Jurisdictional Delineation
On August 2, 2016, CWS scientists Kaitlin McCulloch, Wetland Professional in Training (WPIT), and
Kelly Thames, Professional Wetland Scientist (PWS), delineated jurisdictional waters of the U.S.,
including wetlands, within the project area (Figure 6, attached). Jurisdictional areas were delineated
(flagged in the field), classified, and mapped with a sub -foot Trimble Geo7X GPS unit using the USACE
Routine On -Site Determination Method. This method is defined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manuals, the 2007 USACE Jurisdictional Determination Form Instructional Guidebook, with
further technical guidance from the 2012 Eastern Mountains & Piedmont Regional Supplement.'
Jurisdictional stream channels were classified according to North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality (NCDEQ) guidance. These classifications include sampling with a D-shaped dip net, photograph
documentation, and defining approximate breakpoints (location at which a channel changes
classification) within each on -site stream channel. NCDEQ Stream Classification Forms representative
of on -site jurisdictional stream channels are attached as SCP1-SCP5. Wetland Determination Data
Forms representative of on -site jurisdictional wetland areas (DP1) and non jurisdictional upland areas
(DP2 and DP3) are attached. Locations of the stream classification points and the Wetland
Determination Data Forms are depicted on Figure 6 (attached).
Results
The results of the on -site field investigation conducted by CWS indicate that there are six jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. located within the project limits (Figure 6, attached). These waters consist of three
jurisdictional stream channels (Streams A-C), two jurisdictional wetland areas (Wetlands AA -BB), and
one jurisdictional pond (Pond A). On -Site jurisdictional waters drain to Brown Creek and Pinch Gut
Creek. Brown Creek and Pinch Gut Creek are part of the Yadkin Pee Dee River Basin (HUC 03040104)
and are classified as "Class C Waters" by the NCDEQ. Class C waters are defined as as: "Waters
protected for uses such as secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish consumption, aquatic life including
propagation, survival and maintenance of biological integrity, and agriculture."'
3 United States Department of Agriculture — Natural Resources Conservation Service, 1999. North Carolina Hydric Soils List, USDA-NRCS
North Carolina State Office, Raleigh.
4 United States Department of Agriculture — Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2015.2015 National Hydric Soils List by State.
5 Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual", Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
6 USACE Jurisdictional Determination Form Instructional Guidebook. 2007. USACE Regulatory National Standard Operating Procedures for
conducting an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) and documenting practices to support an approved JD. USACE Headquarters,
Washington, DC.
7 US Army Corps of Engineers, April 2012. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains
and Piedmont Region. US Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
8 NCDEQ. "Surface Water Classifications." http://portal.nedenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu/classifications.

Anson Waste Management Facility August 10, 2016
Jurisdictional Delineation Report CWS Proiect No. 2016-4091
As this property is located within unincorporated Anson County, Anson County Buffer Rules apply. The
Anson County Buffer Rules' require a minimum 100-foot vegetative buffer for all new development
activities that use the Special Non -Residential Intensity Allocation (SNIA) provision, which is a type of
high density development. A minimum 50-foot vegetative buffer for all other development activities is
required along all perennial waters (solid blue lines) indicated on the most recent U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. Since on -site streams drain to "Class C Waters" no state
implemented buffers apply to on -site streams.
Within the project limits, Streams A-C are not depicted on the most recent USGS topographic
quadrangle as solid blue lines (Figure 1, attached). Anson County buffers for all other
developments (excluding SNIA developments) only apply to streams depicted as solid blue lines on
the most recent USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. As there are no on -site streams
depicted as solid blue lines on the most recent USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle, Anson
County buffers for all other development besides SNIAs do not apply. However, depending on the
type of development, SNIA buffers may apply.
On -Site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. total approximately 2.62 acres, including 1,466 linear feet of
jurisdictional stream channel. On -Site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. are summarized in Table 1, below.
Table 1. Summary of on -site ,jurisdictional waters of the U.S.
Jurisdictional
Stream
Jurisdiction
Stream
Classification
(SCP)
NCDEQ
Stream
Classification
Scare
Linear
Feet (if)
Acreage
(ac.)
USACE/EPA Rapanos
Classification"
Stream A
RPW
SCP1
32
732
0.05
Seasonal RPW
SCP2
24.5
436
0.03
Stream B
Seasonal RPW
SCP3
21.75
99
0.007
Stream C
Seasonal RPW
SCP4
21.5
199
0.01
Stream Total:
1,466 If
0.10 ac.
Jurisdictional
Wetland
Jurisdiction
Data Point
Linear
Feet
Acreage
ac.
( )
USACE/EPA Rapanos Classification
Wetland AA
Directly Abutting Pond A
DPI
N/A
0.9
Wetland BB
Directly Abutting Seasonal RPW Stream C
DPI
N/A
0.03
Wetland Total:
Jurisdictional Jurisdiction
Pond USACE/EPA Rapanos Classification
N/A
Linear
Feet (If)
0.93 ac.
Acreage
(ac.)
Pond A
Directly Abutting Wetland AA
N/A
1.59
Pond Total:
N/A
1.59 ac.
Total Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.:
1,466 if
2.62 ac.
9 Anson County. 2005. Anson County Zoning Ordinance. http://www.co.anson.nc.us/Portals/2/documents/ansoncountyzoningordinance.pdf.
io Classifications of streams include Traditionally Navigable Waters (TNWs), Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs), and Non -Relatively
Permanent Waters (Non-RPWs). Subcategories of RPWs include perennial streams that typically have year-round flow, and seasonal streams
that have continuous flow at least seasonally. Two classifications of jurisdictional wetlands are used to describe proximity and connection to
TNWs. These classifications include either adjacent or directly abutting. Adjacent wetlands are defined as wetlands within floodplains or in
close proximity to a TNW but without a direct visible connection. Abutting wetlands have a direct surface water connection traceable to a
TNW.

Anson Waste Management Facility August 10, 2016
Jurisdictional Delineation Report CWS Proiect No. 2016-4091
Relatively Permanent Waters" (RPWs)
RPWs are those that have year-round flow in normal conditions. RPWs generally have greater biological
resources than intermittent streams and are capable of supporting resources requiring constant flow for
reproductive and maturation stages. The results of the on -site field investigation conducted by CWS indicate
that there is one RPW (Stream A) located within the project area (Figure 6, attached).
Stream A originates on site in the western portion of the project limits and flows northwest for approximately
1,168 linear feet before exiting the project limits (Figure 6, attached). The lower 732 linear feet of Stream A is
classified as a RPW. RPW Stream A (R5UB 112) exhibits strong continuity of channel bed and bank, strong
sinuosity, moderate in -channel structure, and moderate particle size of stream substrate. Biological sampling
revealed a strong presence of amphibians, a moderate presence of fish, and a weak presence of macrobenthos.
Stream characteristics indicate that continuous flow is present year round in a typical year. RPW Stream A
scored a 32 out of a possible 63 points on the NCDEQ Stream Classification Form (SCP1, attached).
Photograph A is representative of RPW Stream A.
Seasonal Relatively Permanent Waters13 (RPWs)
Seasonal RPWs are those that exhibit continuous flow for at least three consecutive months per year on a
seasonal basis. This flow regime is the result of a lowering of the water table during dry periods that
prevents groundwater discharge to the stream channel. Seasonal streams do not typically support aquatic
life requiring year-round flow necessary for reproductive and maturation stages. The results of the on -
site field investigation conducted by CWS indicate that there are three seasonal RPWs (Streams A-C)
with intermittent flow located within the project area (Figure 6, attached).
Stream A originates on site in the western portion of the project limits and flows northwest for approximately
1,168 linear feet before exiting the project limits (Figure 6, attached). The upper 436 linear feet of Stream A is
classified as a Seasonal RPW. Seasonal RPW Stream A (R4SB314) exhibits strong continuity of channel bed
and bank, strong headcuts, moderate sinuosity of channel along thalweg, moderate in -channel structure, and
moderate particle size of stream substrate. Biological sampling did not reveal the presence of any aquatic
organisms. Seasonal RPW Stream A scored a 24.5 out of a possible 63 points on the NCDEQ Stream
Classification Form (SCP2, attached). Photograph B is representative of Seasonal RPW Stream A.
Stream B originates from Wetland BB and flows north-northeast for approximately 99 linear feet before
continuing off site (Figure 6, attached). Seasonal RPW Stream B (R4SB515) exhibits moderate continuity of
channel bed and bank, moderate sinuosity of channel along thawleg, and soil -based evidence of a high water
table. Biological sampling revealed a weak presence of macrobenthos and amphibians. Seasonal RPW Stream
B scored a 21.75 out of a possible 63 points on the NCDEQ Stream Classification Form (SCP3, attached).
Photograph C is representative of Seasonal RPW Stream B.
Stream C originates on site in the eastern portion of the project limits and flows east for approximately 199
linear feet before continuing off site into a pipe beneath an existing access road (Figure 6, attached). Seasonal
RPW Stream C (R4SB5) exhibits strong continuity of channel bed and bank, weak baseflow, and soil -based
11 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional Determination Form Instructional Guidebook. May 5, 2007. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
the Environmental Protection Agency.
http://www.usace.anny.mil/Portals/2/docs/civilworks/regulatory/cwa_guide/j d_guidebook_051207final.pdf.
12 R5UB 1 = Unknown perennial stream with cobble -gravel bottom, Cowardin et al. Classification System, 1979.
13 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional Determination Form Instructional Guidebook. May 5, 2007. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
the Environmental Protection Agency.
http://www.usace.artny.mil/Portals/2/docs/civilworks/regulatory/cwa_guide/jd_guidebook_051207final.pdf .
11 R4SB3 = Intermittent stream with cobble -gravel bottom, Cowardin et al. Classification System, 1979.
15 R4S135 = Intermittent stream with muddy bottom, Cowardin et al. Classification System, 1979.
4

Anson Waste Management Facility August 10, 2016
Jurisdictional Delineation Report CWS Proiect No. 2016-4091
evidence of a high water table. Biological sampling did not reveal the presence of any aquatic organisms.
Seasonal RPW Stream C scored a 21.5 out of a possible 63 points on the NCDEQ Stream Classification Form
(SCP4, attached). Photograph D is representative of Seasonal RPW Stream C.
Wetlands
The USACE and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) define wetlands as: "Those areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater 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."16 The USACE uses three parameters to identify jurisdictional wetlands. These parameters areas
follows: 1) hydrophytic vegetation, 2) wetland hydrology, and 3) hydric soils. Except in certain atypical
situations, all three parameters must be present in order for an area to be determined to be a jurisdictional
wetland. The results of the on -site field investigation conducted by CWS indicate that there are two
jurisdictional wetlands (Wetlands AA -BB) located within the project area (Figure 6, attached).
Wetland AA is approximately 0.90 acre in extent and is located in the eastern portion of the project limits
directly abutting a pipe outlet from Pond A (Photograph E, attached). Wetland BB is approximately 0.03
acre in extent and is located directly abutting Seasonal RPW Stream B in the eastern portion of the
project limits (Photograph F, attached). Both Wetland AA and BB are classified as forested wetlands
(PFO 1 ") that exhibit low chroma soils, saturation to the surface, high water table (three inches), surface water
(up to one inch), and oxidized rhizospheres on living roots. Dominant wetland vegetation includes willow
oak, black willow (Salix nigra), false nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), poison ivy (Toxicodendron
radicans), and various sedges (Carex spp.). A Wetland Determination Data Form representative of both
Wetlands AA and BB is attached as DP1.
Jurisdictional Pond
The results of the on -site field investigation conducted by CWS indicate that there is one jurisdictional pond
located within the project area (Figure 6, attached). Pond A is approximately 1.59 acre in extent and exhibits a
downstream connection to jurisdictional waters (Wetland AA) via a pipe beneath an existing access road
(Photograph G, attached).
Non -Jurisdictional Pond
The results of the on -site field investigation conducted by CWS indicate that there are two non jurisdictional
man-made ponds excavated in the uplands within the project area (Figure 6, attached). These ponds function
as sediment basins and do not have a surface water connection to jurisdictional waters (Photograph H,
attached).
16 Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual", Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
17 PF01 = Forested wetland with broad-leaved deciduous vegetation, Cowardin et al. Classification System, 1979

Anson Waste Management Facility August 10, 2016
Jurisdictional Delineation Report CWS Proiect No. 2016-4091
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 704-408-1683, or through email at [e-mail] should you have
any questions or comments regarding this request.
Sincerely,
c
Gregg Antemann, PWS
Principal Scientist
YCwjw-�
Kaitlin McCulloch, WPIT
Staff Scientist II
Attachments: Figure 1. USGS Site Location Map
Figure 2. Aerial Imagery
Figure 3. Current USDA-NRCS Soils Map of Anson County
Figure 4. Historic USDA-NRCS Soils Map of Anson County
Figure 5. National Wetlands Inventory Map
Figure 6. Jurisdictional Boundaries
Jurisdictional Determination Request Form
Preliminary JD Request Form
NCDEQ Stream Classification Forms (SCP1-SCP5)
USACE Wetland Determination Data Forms (DP I-DP3)
Photopage (A-H)
6

U.\2016\CWS\2016 Projects\2016-4091 Anson Waste Management FacHiry\ArcGIS\Figure 1_USGS.mxd

U:\2016\CWS\2016 Projects\20164091 Anson Waste Management Facility\JD\ArcGIS\Fig= 2_Aerial.mxd

U:\2016\CWS\2016 Projects\20164091 Anson Waste Management Facility\ArcGIS\Figure 3_Current Soil.mxd

g00 ,
FB—Bad
s Tau
n channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes vvp
n-Goldston complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes oc
moor fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percentslopesston channery silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes m
GoD—Goldston channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes
MaB—Mayodan fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes t.
ToA—Tillery silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes ToA { �'
Wh132—White Store fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded i
TO r,4
INA
l`* rM1 to L[4
rp�C Cr gD B� MOB Pep RUB
Taff
T� M l WFM
Cnn }
Apc -D-9 lj 6ta�
90¢ tl, 1Thp2
a°E
MUG
l
60i! �' � 0afy
Cf i]op
ID CFO TuA
i 11nf1
CmA
% LYlr62 Alxp CmA
Pap 0 Pc8
ee
ChA $Sr Whp2 4,i
CrD
Dozer Dr
Andrew Jackson Hwy 74 C19 ;tom FOB
te2o Crs cv, 1MhB7
B2C F 81C CPU Y 10C f,g
u. Boylin Rd
HIM
CID M,n
qk
Chi i'i+C
CrnA
y, 1249 '
h16B A - R .-
n
Td Legend
Pub! f r
u�c Project Limits (286 ac.)
MOC
T°A- w 2,000 1,000 0 2,000 Feet
REFERENCE: USDA-NRCS SOIL SURVEY OF ANSON COUNYT, SHEETS 5 AND 9, DATED 2005. _ -
PwC]
SCALE: DATE:
1 inch = 2,000 feet 8/3/2016 USDA-NRCS Historic FIGURE NO.
S PROJECT NO: DRAWN Ey. Soil Survey of Anson County
W
2016-4091 KJM Anson Waste Management Facility
v
ICANTNO: CHECKED BY: CAROLINA Anson County, North Carolina
KMT WETL-AN ❑ SERVICES CWS Project No. 2016-4091
U:\2016\CWS\2016 Projects\20164091 Anson Waste Management Facflity\ArcGIS\Figure 4_Historic SoiLmxd

U.\2016\CWS\2016 Projects\2016-4091 Anson Waste Management FacHity\ArcGIS\Figure 5_NWI.mxd

Jurisdictional Determination Request
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington District
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
to the appropriate Corps Field Office (or project manager, if known) via mail, electronic mail, or
facsimile. A current list of county assignments by Field Office and project manager can be
found on-line at: http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Re_ug latooPermitPro_rg am.aspx , by
telephoning: 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below:
ASHEVILLE REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
General Number: 910-251-4633
Fax Number: [phone]

Jurisdictional Determination Request
INSTRUCTIONS:
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E and F.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part G.
NOTE ON PART D — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that all JD
requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to proceed with the
determination, which may include inspection of the property when necessary. This form must be
signed by the current property owner to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for JD
requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) projects will be
conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: Corps approved and preliminary JDs identify
the limits of CWA (and RHA, if applicable) jurisdiction for the particular site identified in your
request. The JD may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of
the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
® Property Information
Address: located at 375 Dozer Drive in Anson County, North Carolina
County: Anson County
Directions: located at 375 Dozer Drive in Anson County, North Carolina
Parcel Index Number (PIN): 645500201283 (partial parcel)
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
® Name: Gregg Antemann, PWS
Mailing Address: 550 E. Westinghouse Blvd., Charlotte, NC 28273
Telephone Number: 704-408-1683
Electronic Mail Address': [e-mail]
Select one:
❑ I am the current property owner.
® I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant2
❑ Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
® Name: Chambers Development of NC Inc
c/o Waste Connections Inc
Mailing Address: 3 Waterway Square Pl., Ste. 110, The Woodlands, Texas 77380
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address:
❑ Proof of Ownership Attached (e.g. a copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record data)
1 If available
Z Must attach completed Agent Authorization Form
3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY OWNER CERTIFICATIONS
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, do
authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to
enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -site investigations and
issuing a determination associated with Waters of the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
See the Agent Authorization Form
Property Owner Signature
E. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION TYPE
Select One:
® I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminarX JD for the property identified herein.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps investigate the property/project area for the presence or
absence of WOUS4 and provide an approved JD for the property identified herein. This
request does NOT include a request for a verified delineation. (proceed to F and G
below).
❑ I am requesting that the Corps delineate the boundaries of all WoUS on a property/project
area and provide an aqpproved JD (this may or may not include a survey plat).
❑ I am requesting that the Corps evaluate and approve a delineation of WoUS (conducted
by others) on a property/project area and provide an approved JD (may or may not
include a survey plat).
a For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
4 Waters of the United States
4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. ALL REQUESTS
® Map of Property or Project Area (attached). This Map must clearly depict the boundaries
of the area of evaluation.
® Size of Property or Project Area: 286 acres
® I verify that the property (or project) boundaries have recently been surveyed and marked
by a licensed land surveyor OR are otherwise clearly marked or distinguishable.
G. JD REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS OR AGENCIES
(1) Preliminary JD Requests:
® Completed and signed Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Forms.
® Project Coordinates: Latitude: 35.008742' Longitude:-80.162815'
Maps (no larger than I Ix17) with Project Boundary Overlay:
® Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum: streets, intersections, towns
® Aerial Photography of the project area
® USGS Topographic Map
® Soil Survey Map
® Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Delineation Information (when applicable):
Wetlands:
Wetland Data Sheets
Upland Data Sheets
Landscape Photos, if taken
Tributaries:
❑ USACE Assessment Forms
® Other Assessment Forms
(when appropriate)
Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes:
All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
Locations of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
Locations of photo stations
Approximate acreage/linear footage of aquatic resources
5 See Appendix A of this Form. From Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 08-02, dated June 26, 2008
6 Delineation information must include, at minimum, one wetland data sheet for each wetland/community type.

Jurisdictional Determination Request
(2) Approved JDs including Verification of a Delineation:
❑ Project Coordinates: Latitude: Longitude:
Maps (no larger than I1x17) with Project Boundary Overlay:
❑ Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum: streets, intersections, towns
❑ Aerial Photography of the project area
❑ USGS Topographic Map
❑ Soil Survey Map
❑ Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps)
Delineation Information (when applicable):
Wetlands:
❑ Wetland Data Sheets
❑ Upland Data Sheets
Tributaries:
❑ USACE Assessment Forms
❑ Other Assessment Forms
(when appropriate)
❑ Landscape Photos, if taken
❑ Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes:
All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
Locations of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
Locations of photo stations
Approximate acreage/linear footage of aquatic resources
Supporting Jurisdictional Information (for Approved JDs only)
❑ Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form(s) (also known as "Rapanos
Form(s)")
❑ Map(s) depicting the potential (or lack of potential) hydrologic connection(s),
adjacency, etc. to navigable waters.
' Delineation information must include, at minimum, one wetland data sheet for each wetland/community type.
0

Jurisdictional Determination Request
I. REQUESTS FOR CORPS APPROVAL OF SURVEY PLAT
Prior to final production of a Plat, the Wilmington District recommends that the Land
Surveyor electronically submit a draft of a Survey Plat to the Corps project manager for
review.
Due to storage limitations of our administrative records, the Corps requires that all hard -
copy submittals include at least one original Plat (to scale) that is no larger than I I "x 17"
(the use of match lines for larger tracts acceptable). Additional copies of a plat, including
those larger than I I"x17", may also be submitted for Corps signature as needed. The
Corps also accepts electronic submittals of plats, such as those transmitted as a Portable
Document Format (PDF) file. Upon verification, the Corps can electronically sign these
plats and return them via e-mail to the requestor.
Plats submitted for approval must:
❑ be sealed and signed by a licensed professional land surveyor
❑ be to scale (all maps must include both a graphic scale and a verbal scale)
❑ be legible
❑ include a North Arrow, Scale(s), Title, Property Information
❑ include a legible WoUS Delineation Table of distances and bearings/metes and
bounds/GPS coordinates of all surveyed delineation points
❑ clearly depict surveyed property or project boundaries
❑ clearly identify the known surveyed point(s) used as reference (e.g. property
corner, USGS monument)
❑ when wetlands are depicted:
*include acreage (or square footage) of wetland polygons
*identify each wetland polygon using an alphanumeric system
❑ when tributaries are depicted:
*include either a surveyed, approximate centerline of tributary with
approximate width of tributary OR surveyed Ordinary High Water Marks
(OHWM) of tributary
*include linear footage of tributaries and calculated area (using
approximate widths or surveyed OHWM)
7

Jurisdictional Determination Request
*include name of tributary (based on the most recent USGS topographic
map) or, when no USGS name exists, identify as "unnamed tributary"
❑ all depicted WoUS (wetland polygons and tributary lines) must intersect or tie -to
surveyed project/property boundaries
❑ include the location of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
❑ include, label accordingly, and depict acreage of all waters not currently subject to
the requirements of the CWA (e.g. "isolated wetlands", "non jurisdictional
waters"). NOTE: An approved JD must be conducted in order to make an official
Corps determination that a particular waterbody or wetland is not jurisdictional.
❑ include and survey all existing conveyances (pipes, culverts, etc.) that transport
Wous
CERTIFICATION LANGUAGE
❑ When the entire actual Jurisdictional Boundary. i�picted:
include the following Corps Certification language:
"This certifies that this copy of this plat accurately depicts the boundary of the jurisdiction
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the undersigned on this date.
Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, the determination of
Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five (5) years from
this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the appropriate Regional
Supplement to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual."
Regulatory Official:
Title:
Date:
USACE Action ID No.:
0

Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑ When uplands may be present within a depicted Jurisdictional Boundary
include the following Corps Certification language:
"This certifies that this copy of this plat identifies all areas of waters of the United States
regulated pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the
undersigned on this date. Unless there is change in the law or our published regulations,
this determination of Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not to exceed
five years from this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the
appropriate Regional Supplement to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual."
Regulatory Official:
Title:
Date:
USACE Action ID No.:
GPS SURVEYS
For Surveys prepared using a Global Positioning System (GPS), the Survey must include
all of the above, as well as:
❑ be at sub -meter accuracy at each survey point.
❑ include an accuracy verification:
One or more known points (property corner, monument) shall be located with the
GPS and cross-referenced with the existing traditional property survey (metes and
bounds).
❑ include a brief description of the GPS equipment utilized.
0

ATTACHMENT A
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION (JD):8-9-2016
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc.; POC: Mr. Gregg Antemann
550 E Westinghouse Blvd., 28273, Charlotte, NC
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
Wilmington District - Asheville Regulatory Field Office
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
located at 375 Dozer Drive in Anson County, North Carolina
(USE THE ATTACHED TABLE TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE WATERBODIES AT DIFFERENT
SITES)
State: NC
County/parish/borough: Anson
City: unincorporated Anson County
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat. 35.008742' ON; Long.-80.1628150
OW.
Universal Transverse Mercator: NAD83
Name of nearest waterbody: UT to Browns Creek and Pinch Gut Creek
Identify (estimate) amount of waters in the review area:
Non -wetland waters:
1,466 linear feet: 2-4 width (ft) and/or 0.10 acres.
COwardln Class: R51_1131, R4SB3, R4SB5
Stream Flow: RPW and Seasonal RPW
Wetlands:0-93 acres.
Cowardin Class: PF01
Name of any water bodies on the site that have been identified as Section 10
waters:
Tidal:
Non -Tidal:
1

E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑✓ Field Determination. Date(s): 8-2-2016
SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary JD
(check all that apply - checked items should be included in case file and,
where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
❑✓ Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant:
✓❑ Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant.
Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps
❑✓ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Polkton, NC (1970)
❑✓ USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.
Citation: Current (2015) and Historic (2005) for Anson County
WINational wetlands Inventory map(s). Cite name: USFWS NWI 2015
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is:
(National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
❑✓ Photographs: 0✓ Aerial (Name & Date): Esd (2015) or
Other (Name & Date): Site photographs, dated August 2016
❑ Previous determination (s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
2

1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the
United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party
who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to
request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site.
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this
preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in
this instance and at this time.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or
a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring
"pre -construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting
NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an
approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the
following: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved
JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and
that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) that
the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting
the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4)
that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply
with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation
requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking
any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting
an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is
practicable; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all
wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity
are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to
such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether
the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD
will be processed as soon as is practicable. Further, an approved JD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331,
and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33
C.F.R. 331.5(a)(2)). If, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary
to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or
to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps will
provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable.

Estimated
Amount of
Site
Cowardian
Class of Aquatic
Latitude
Longitude
Auatic
q
Number
Class
Resource
Resource in
Review Area
RPW Stream A
35.0090660
-80.1687760
R5UB1
732 If
non -section 10 -- non -tidal
Seasonal RPW
35.0082960
-80.1678930
R4SB3
436 If
non -section 10 -- non -tidal
Stream A
Seasonal RPW
35.0081180
-80.157871 °
R4SB5
99 If
non -section 10 -- non -tidal
Stream B
Seasonal RPW
35.0114540
-80.1585860
R4SB5
199 If
non -section 10 -- non -tidal
Stream C
Wetland AA
35.008697°
-80.158345°
PFO1
0.90 ac
non -section 10 -- wetland
Wetland BB
35.007966°
-80.158079 °
PFO1
0.03 ac
non -section 10 -- wetland

This preliminary JD finds that there "maybe" waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not
necessarily been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for
later jurisdictional determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
4
C- — 8-9-2016
Signature and date of
person requesting preliminary JD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: �a-�
ProjectlSite: rim -on bvct�fe,
Latitude: �F 00(1 0 o
Evaluator:K
MT
County:
Longitude:- W 4 6 � 1''7 / 9
To tal Points:
at
Stream Determination (cir
OtherSt rec;vo
ifr:19 rpereis
if>_ 19 or erennia/ if>_ 30*
perennst ial if
Ephemeral Intermittent erennia
e.g. Quad Name: ec r,
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
.2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
'
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step-pool,
sequence
ripple-poolp
1
0
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2)
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
CIO
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
C_V
2
3
B. Headcuts
1
2
3
9. Grade control
UOD
0.5
1
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
.5
11. Second or greater order channel
o = 0
Yes = 3
`artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = a )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
`0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0 °""'
<-Y'99j 5 3`�
C. Biology (Subtotal = Ll �_) -)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
'3'
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
CD
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
®
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
(7D
1.5
23, Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other, = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch: Oflddi) �� �
�i
�
F'�
�y �^�
If

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date:
Project/Site: li h'S0►�
Latitude: 3 S b
Evaluator: 4* -' t
County:�
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream
Stream is at least intermittent 19.q S
Stream Deter tion(circle one)
Ephemeral ntermitten Perennial
Other 41
Quad Name::
if>_ 30* ` 19 or perennial if>_ 6
e.g.
S (A1-
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =_�)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1" Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2)
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
b
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
QD
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
C D,
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discu sions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = =
12. Presence of. Baseflow
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteriaCO)1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 1
0.5
1
_ 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = (n )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
Co
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
CD
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other, = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: - o� -
ProjectlSite: P�`� vVeat
A+t.& ; �` ,i t �1 �p
Latitude:
, o
Evaluator: !!�) �. KMT
County: S��
Longitude: �- 60s 1976'11
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral
Other ��`CpG/h�
if>_ 19 or perennial if>_ 30 `��
er mitten Perennial
e. Qua Name:
g' , s
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2)
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
e-No = 0
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = S , .� )
12. Presence of. Baseflow
0
Q
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high Ovate table?
No = 0
es = s
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = K . i J )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
&
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
(D
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0 0.
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0. _5) BL = 1.5 Other, = 0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch: Al a

NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: .. I
Project/Site' �1v1
6010
Latitude: I V I I I I
Evaluator:✓
County: ��
Longitude: -0 a I J�
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Determi tion (circle one)
Ephemeral I r ten Perennial
Other }'C'
Quad,( reel
if? 19 or perennial if>_ 30
e. g' ('
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = eJ )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1" Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0)
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
CV
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
o = 0
Yes = 3
`artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = ( a
12. Presence of. Baseflow
0
0
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
_
.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
ees = 3
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = ( r)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
CP
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
-
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: ('� _ a _ I
25f�ht.,.G
Project/Sit��
,�. t
Latitude: 35 3
,
Evaluator: 1, -
County: �� ��,���
Longitude: Sj
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Determination (circle one)
me I Intermittent Perennial
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
if>_ 19 or perennial if>_ 30* r
l
I I-
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1, `
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
° 0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5)
1 1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
o = 0
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = --I- )
12. Presence of. Baseflow
OO
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0)
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
CUD
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
o = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biolocly (Subtotal = --I )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other, = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

qq WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Y1VI Project/Site: MI wkqf ArlhRiU.rtir��? ` o IIfu City/County: /nso �t1 Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: Cec. (hc, J J State: L Sampling Point: 0P1—We ilgh/I
Investigator(s): 1 -6 * Section, Township, Range: PoOr)
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): $�'.►�'r i�;. Local relief (concave, convex, none): V)O✓lQ, Slope (%): "A
Subregion (LRR o MLR .)) 1 A ia Lat: 5 r� 4G/CLong: �C�4��, � ��J 'I \ DDatum: h/ahk3
Soil Map Unit Name: CYttIAMN'r 41" $AYAAW bAMJ +�I 8 WUALL'i' ecr e) NWI classification: Ivry
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes A. No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes_ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
-A" pomi i� rt. V-eW+(AJ1vt,. bf rt Jultditlop"al VV6/h(4VA
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required;
check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
y Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3)
)(_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) _ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes �_ No
Depth (inches): 3"
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
��\ko
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: ..—o 1"t,
Absolute
f
Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size:,) b )
Species? StatusfAf-
r%7 �C'over
4.
5.
7.
'Lf ID = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 2-6 20% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: r'f4 )
1. sci lahy� 40 �
2. Gt p 0d D Y4 h w s DC cA ci,�:r� hU.Q-S K 08L_
3. Fr0.X I n,t,t4T \ A V C1 l ! f _ ►�_ W
6.
7.
9.
Total Cover
50% of total cover:a_. s 20% of total cover: 1
HerbStratum(Plot size: T )
1. PaeJN"INCr ck Ct�,h_(�ri�o1� So
3, hl k6L, C,
4. M� C.M-reiUV4 VtVWV I►r\etr1III C_
5. 1 A n S S 4
6. �"v r>h�Ica,4611a
7.
9.
10.
11.
_ = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: 2b. aea
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 1, )
1.,ny.\ CA1&LnC3 rt" Y a kt cwv s ► �� -PA C
3
4
5.
c 1 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 5 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:_ (B)
Percent of Dominant Species J� (A/B)
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (J
Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is:<3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
�1b� ��' �'� (�o�ei�e�d� \/�nu.�nfiPa+� FA('� fflL �f Y`✓��Ur,
0
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP141 )G/hd
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color (moist) %
4-6 �.S VIz �/ �0
Redox Features
Texture Remarks
Color (moist) % Tvr)el LOC2
^_1 V 2 S/ 36
6-w
C e -��
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lininq, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: hKoill (WAC ►%j�1V,Pg&j�-=� City/county:At31 'j;,"I / Sampling Date: 'tJ�
Applicant/Owner. State: Sampling Point: MODf
Investigator(s): IuT Section, Township, Range: P>fa ! # ` w )
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): friraze , Local relief (concave, convex, none): q �f� Slope ((%)):�pQ'71
Subregion (LRR o LR : 1314 Lat: 3 s, U�R Y I Long: Datum: l,y.
Soil Map Unit Name: 6"r-a6wr -i-Ilee s irli,A) bR lh �� �'t1 Ei`Ct�/� ��(�� NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Je No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes_ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes \ No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No­W_
Remarks•
Y;kg- is rep rr f,e4q, htf rt-t f c, �, - fi t r �, , i 'chr*4 V e lew ,
ll( ,
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots SC3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (65)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
Saturation Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No r
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
h o cars of
wl q kul
nu, � r
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: E)f a` Li L4
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 36 �-� ) % Cover Species? Status
1. yC-tA44h,dbt 1,0Q GAL
2. A r ul to 6t/V ) �s
3. ka ,C,C ( f., .� C I& (x 01,
7.
160 0 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: toL 20% of total cover:_
Sa lin /Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1. XAty-Wy 4 h we �)�1+�
2. r"A rA �_ IN ya���p�
3. PCIAIM c SKK631h!�
4.
5.
6.
7.
9.
3p_ = Total Cover
50% of total cover: (� 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:' -6 J4 )
1. 0 ► C r/ I hngt lA. Ito
+�,
2. rr�t t �, '� 0� 41F\Pik y�'ir 't �a
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
9.
11.
�= Total Cover
50% of total cover: _ 20% of total cover: 1
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)S f-} )
1.
3.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant91 Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 06 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is -<3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
4. Hydrophytic
5. Vegetation
= Total Cover Present? Yes No
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
dm,MRIIJ+ V0 0-hz�_J") CA Y-0 -�A w e�
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
4
e Description: (Describe to the depth needed to
or confirm the absence of in
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type, Loc2 �Texture Remarks
a
0 v a011
+F—
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soi
Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Iri4l f c&-f6CS {t,r
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
d C tjti. r
I t- () r1li Vt.
No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATIONDATA
tFORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Alls6pyiA�MQ4\[�Jitnnu, e C4C Its/ City/County: Awoy) Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: G G G� State: NC Sampling Point:
e, o
Investigator(s): rim 3' nm1T Section, Township, Range: 0
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Yl I �6rk Local relief
(concave, convex, none):
Subregion (LRRo�R (p Lat: 1 �10ItC Long:
Soil Map Unit Name: VGIcy. 3VI CIIALirifVj_I 4 f IDA 1,1 1?, >t
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typl
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology
for this time of year? Yes _
_ significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
h Or" Slope (%): --A%
(S Datum: q8ok3
WI classification: MI
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transacts, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes �_ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No__,�, within a Wetland? Yes No _
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes NoX_
Remarks:
Af k po,4- A vbn 11A yl �d ChDrO
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) _
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14) _
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) _
Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) _
Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7) _
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks) _
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(137) _
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No , Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No-Y Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No _
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
lndiwx� 6T�,
vvtftorl� kjdlwor ar6
voq
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: ?�_ 1 4
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: �4- ) % Cover Species? Status
1. Curuu 4wn,(,l,N10 Sa N14,
2. NVf_y(,y1S �fi� GhG1,1Yii ��
3. �A I 1A —F0 0
4. 1Y1&ty\ nv) �lAIyi f'f-ti_ S N P'14W
7.
715 = Total Cover r
50% oft al cover: 20% of total cover:��l
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Garn►Y`.,�c iGPa�1w�e'AN�A �_ -'n` - 1 ii�1
2. prAv\,A( d t. Yb�lln�, a` _em u
5.
7
9.
�= Total Cover
50% of total cover:_ 20% of total cover: a L
Herb Stratum (Plot size:) f-k )
-q
-
2- k61A
7.
8.
11.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: �. G
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: fi
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
rs here or on a separate sheet.)
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
7T�
Q
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
V (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
6f 0 m I n q / 4 V, e �fa fo k i frip'-1 -A 0 r
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: pp3"Vl���n
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type, Loc Texture Remarks
OCR ah,,i r I* 100% d nA
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lininq, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
�nd�cc�`�*� fir h�droc, Sail c�rc. jai P-
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

7 �
-71
1 ,,yam
�1 ti
� l I

Anson Waste Management Facility August 10, 2016
Jurisdictional Delineation Report CWS Proiect No. 2016-4091
Photograph E. View of Wetland AA, facing northeast.
Photograph F. View of Wetland BB, facing southwest.
lll

Anson Waste Management Facility August 10, 2016
Jurisdictional Delineation Report CWS Proiect No. 2016-4091
1V

PROTECTED SPECIES ASSESSMENT REPORT

CAROLINA *TLAND SERVICES, INC.
550 E. Westin house Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
704-527-1177 (office)
704-527-1133 (fax)
August 10, 2016
Mr. Nathan T. Bivins, PE
CEC, Inc.
1900 Center Park Drive, Suite A
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
Subject: Protected Species Assessment Report
Anson Waste Management Facility
Anson County, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2016-4091
Dear Mr. Bivins,
Civil and Environmental Consultants, Inc. has contracted Carolina Wetland Services, Inc. (CWS) to provide a
protected species assessment for the Anson Waste Management Facility site. The Anson Waste
Management Facility site is approximately 286 acres in extent and is located at 375 Dozer Drive in
Anson County, North Carolina (Figure 1, attached).
Literature Search
To determine which protected species are listed as occurring or potentially occurring at Anson Waste
Management Facility site, CWS consulted the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP)
Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species Inventory database for the USGS Polkton, North Carolina
topographic quadrangle'. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) North Carolina
Distribution Records of Endangered, Threatened, Candidate and Species of Concern list for Gaston
County2 was also consulted. The NCNHP database lists Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus
schweinitzii), red -cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis [historical record]) and shortnose strurgeon
(Acipenser brevirostum [historical record]) as potentially occurring in Anson County. The NCNHP
database does not list any federally listed species as occurring within the USGS Polkton quadrangle.
The USFWS database also lists Schweinitz's sunflower and the red -cockaded woodpecker as potentially
occurring in Anson County (Table 1, next page). Table 2 (next page) summarizes the status listing
definitions.
CWS performed a data review using the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) Data
Explorer' on August 1, 2016 to determine if any record occurrences of federally -listed, candidate
endangered, threatened species, or critical habitat are located within the project area. Based on this
review, there are no current records of federally -protected species within the project limits or within a
mile of the project site. A copy of the data review report is attached.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Online Database Search. Accessed August 1, 2016. Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Office of Land and Water Stewardship, Raleigh, NC. www.ncnhp.org.
2 United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Accessed August 1, 2016. Endangered Species Online Database Search, Endangered Species
Department, Southeast Division, Atlanta, GA. http://www.fws.gov/endangered/.
'North Carolina Natural Heritage Data Explorer. Accessed August 1, 2016. https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/.
NORTH CAROLINA* SOUTH CAROLINA
WWW.CWS-INC.NET

Anson Waste Management Facility Site August 10, 2016
Protected Species Assessment Report CWS Proiect No. 2016-4091
Table 1. A list of federally -protected species potentially occurring within the Anson Waste Management
Facility site, Anson County, NC.
Major
Scientific Name
Common
Status
Habitat
Source
Group
Name
Along roadsides, old pastures,
Plant
Helianthus
Schweinitz's
E
transmission line right-of-ways,
USFWS 2016
schwinitzii
sunflower
open areas, maintained habitat,
NCNHP 2016
ecotones.
Picoides
Red -cockaded
Mature pine forests, specifically
USFWS 2016
Animal
borealis
woodpecker
E
those with longleaf pines and
NCNHP 2016
loblolly pines
Large riverine systems and coastal
Animal
Acipenser
Shortnose
E
waters along the Atlantic coast from
NCNHP 2016
brevirostum
sturgeon
southern Canada to northeastern
Florida
Table 2. Endangered Species Act Listing Definitions
Code
Status Ah
1 Definition
E
Endangered
A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
T
Threatened
A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all
or a significant portion of its range."
C
Candidate
A taxon under consideration for official listing for which there is sufficient
information to support listing. (Formerly "C1" candidatespecies.)
BGPA
Protected
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. See below.
Federal
A species under consideration for listing, for which there is insufficient information
FSC
species of
to support listing at this time. These species may or may not be listed in the future,
concern.
and many of thesespecies were formerly recognized as "C2" candidatespecies.
Threatened
due to
A taxon that is threatened due to similarity of appearance with another listed species
T(S/A)
similarity of
and is listed for its protection. Taxa listed as T(S/A) are not biologically endangered
or threatened and are not subject to Section 7 consultation.
appearance
A taxon listed as experimental (either essential or nonessential). Experimental,
EXP
Experimental
nonessential populations of endangered species (e.g., red wolf) are treated as
population
threatened species on public land, for consultation purposes, and as species
proposed for listing on private land.
P
Proposed
Taxa proposed for official listing as endangered or threatened will be noted as "PE"
or "PT", respectively.
Field Survey
CWS scientists Kaitlin McCulloch, Wetland Professional in Training (WPIT), and Kelly Thames,
Professional Wetland Scientist (PWS), conducted a pedestrian survey of the project area on August 2,
2016. Identification references for vegetation include Schafale and Weakley's Third Approximation for
Natural Communities of North Carolina (1990)4 and Weakley (2015)5 for plant species. Identification
references for animals include Stokes (1996)6 for bird species and Menhinick (199If for fish species.
Transects were assessed along the areas identified as potential habitat, as applicable, for potentially
occurring federally -protected species.
° Schafale, M.P., and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Third Approximation.
http://ww.namethatplant.net/PDFs/class.pdf.
s Weakley, A.S. 2015. Flora of the Southern and Mid -Atlantic States. http://www.herbarium.unc.edu/flora.htm.
a Stokes, D. and L. Stokes. 1995. Stokes Field Guide to Birds: Eastern Region. First Edition.
Menhinick, E.F. 1991. The Freshwater Fishes of North Carolina. North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission; Raleigh, North Carolina.

Anson Waste Management Facility Site August 10, 2016
Protected Species Assessment Report CWS Proiect No. 2016-4091
Results
The project area consists of an active landfill and forested areas (Figure 2, attached). The vegetation
communities present on site consist of dry oak -hickory forest with pine stands and maintained/disturbed
vegetation within the cleared areas (Photographs A and B [Figure 2, attached]). Typical on -site vegetation in
the dry oak -hickory forest consists of swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii), willow oak (Quercus
phellos), post oak (Quercus stellata), mockernut hickory (Carya tomentosa), loblolly pine (Pious
taeda), black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), black cherry (Prunus serotina), red maple (Acer rubrum),
sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), flowering dogwood (Cornus florida) and Christmas fern
(Polystichum acrostichoides). Typical vegetation in the disturbed/maintained areas consists of dog
fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), sawtooth blackberry (Rubus argutus), tall goldenrod (Solidago
altissima), lespedeza (Lespedeza culneata), and Johnson grass (Sorghum halepense).
Prior to the field work, CWS scientists visited a known population of Helianthus schweinitzii on August 1,
2016 to determine the condition of its stem, leaves, and flowers. Based on the site visit, the
aboveground plant parts are identifiable and flower heads are forming. No species of Helianthus were
observed within the project area during the field investigation.
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) — No Effect
Schweinitz's sunflower is a perennial herb with yellow rays and yellow centers. They can reach heights
of five feet. Populations are limited to the piedmont of North and South Carolina. It has been listed as
an Endangered species under the ESA since 1991'. The typical habitat for this plant includes roadsides,
old pastures, transmission line right-of-ways, open areas, either natural or human -maintained habitats, or
edges of upland woods. Major characteristics of soils associated with suitable Schweinitz's sunflower
habitat include thin soils, soils on upland interstream flats or gentle slopes, those which are clayey in
texture (and often with substantial rock fragments), those which have a high shrinkage swell capacity,
and those which vary over the course of the year from very wet to very dry. Based on past aerial images
of the site, the site was clear-cut around 1995, thus making the current vegetation structure around 20
years old. Based on the site visit, there is no suitable habitat for the Schweinitz's sunflower within the
Anson Waste Management Facility project limits. Vegetation throughout the whole site has
experienced severe disturbance due to clear -cutting and ongoing fill and construction. Current
vegetation within the cleared areas consists of dog fennel, sawtooth blackberry, tall goldenrod, and
Johnson grass. Additionally, no Helianthus spp. were observed during the field assessment on August
2, 2016. Therefore, the habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower does not exist within the project limits
and the proposed project will have no effect on this species.
Red -Cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) — No Effect
The red -cockaded woodpecker is a small black and white woodpecker that is approximately 22
centimeters in length. Red -cockaded woodpeckers prefer mature pine forests with longleaf pines (Pious
palustris) and loblolly pines (Pious taeda) that range in age from 70 to 120 years old. Typically, red -
cockaded woodpeckers live in groups that included a breeding pair and up to four helpers. To support
the group's foraging and nesting habitat ranges, each group requires about 200 acres of old pine forest.'
Due to the need for timber and agricultural land during the late 1800s to mid- 1900s, the red -cockaded
woodpecker's habitat availability declined rapidly, which has resulted in it being listed as Endangered
under the ESA since 197010. Today, it is estimated that about 15,000 birds remain from Florida to
$ United States Fish and Wildlife Services. 1991. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Helianthus schweinitzii (Schweinitz's
sunflower) Determined to be Endangered. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_ register/frl852.pdf.
9 United States Fish and Wildlife Services. 2008. Red -cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis). http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa
library/pdf/woodpecker.pdf
° Federal Register. 1970. Title 50 Wildlife and Fisheries. 35:16047-16048. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_ register/fr27.pdf

Anson Waste Management Facility Site August 10, 2016
Protected Species Assessment Report CWS Proiect No. 2016-4091
Virginia and in parts of Oklahoma and Texas." Based on past aerial images of the site, the site was
clear-cut around 1995, thus making the current vegetation structure around 20 years old. Based on the
pedestrian survey within the project limits, no longleaf pines were observed within the project limits.
There were loblolly pines within the project limits, however, the loblolly pines were too young and too
sparse to support a population of red -cockaded woodpeckers. Therefore, the habitat for the red -
cockaded woodpecker does not exist within the project limits and this project will have no effect
on this species.
Shortnose Sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum) — No Effect
The shortnose sturgeon is a bony fish that can weigh up to 50 pounds and grow up to four feet long.
They are typically long-lived fish (average of 30 years) that inhabit lower sections of large rivers and
coastal waters along the Atlantic coast 12. They spend most of the year in brackish or salt water and
move into to fresh water only to spawn. It has been listed as an Endangered species since 1967. As this
project occurs in the western portion of Anson County in the Piedmont region of North Carolina and no
large riverine systems or brackish or salt water habitats exist within the project limits, there is no
suitable habitat for the shortnose sturgeon. Therefore, the habitat for the shortnose sturgeon does
not exist within the project limits and this project will have no effect on this species.
Determinations
Based on the literature search and the results of the on -site assessment for federally -protected
endangered, threatened, and candidate species, it has been determined that there was no suitable habitat
for Schweinitz's sunflower, red -cockaded woodpecker, and shortnose sturgeon within the project limits.
In addition, no individual species were observed; therefore, this project will have no effect on
Schweinitz's sunflower, red -cockaded woodpecker, or the shortnose sturgeon.
Please do not hesitate to contact Gregg Antemann at [phone] or [e-mail] should you
have any questions or comments regarding these findings.
Sincerely,
Z7__� C_ 74U�_
Gregg Antemann, PWS
Principal Scientist
Attachments: Figure 1. USGS Site Location Map
Figure 2. Aerial Imagery Map; Photographs A-B
NCNHP Data Review Report
Kaitlin McCulloch, WPIT
Staff Scientist II
The Nature Conservancy. Accessed 2016. Red -Cockaded Woodpecker.
http://www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/regions/northamerica/unitedstates/mississippi/explore/red-cockaded-woodpecker-species-profile.xml
12 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2015. Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum).
http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/pr/species/fish/shortnose-sturgeon.html.
91

U.\2016\CWS\2016 Projects\2016-4091 Anson Waste Management FacHiry\ArcGIS\Figure 1_USGS.mxd

A
y" Legend
Project Limits (286 ac.)
Roads
Parcels
900 450 0 900 Feet
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND AERIAL IMAGERY PROVIDED BY NCONE MAP, DATED 2015.
BACKGROUND GIS LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY ANSON COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT, DATED 2016.
ALE: DATE:
1 inch = 900 feet 8/3/2016 Aerial Imagery Map FIGURE NO.
NS PROJECT NO: DRAWN By.
2016-4091 KJM Anson Waste Management Facility
Is
APPLICANT NO: CHECKED BY: C A R O L I N A Anson County, North Carolina 2
I-KMT WETLAN p SERVICES. CWS Project No. 2016-4091 /
U:\2016\CWS\2016 Projects\2016-4091 Anson Waste Management FacHiry\PETS\ArcGIS\Fignre 2_Aerial.mxd

PAT 11cCRORY
mrpwr
SUSA':%- KLUTZ
callslmu Rescoun =
NCNHDE-1986
August 1, 2016
Kaitlin McCulloch
Carolina Wetlands Inc
550 East Westinghouse Blvd
Charlotte, NC 28273
RE: Anson Waste Management Facility; 2016-4091
Dear Kaitlin McCulloch:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide information
about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
A query of the NCNHP database indicates that there are records for rare species, important natural
communities, natural areas, or conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. These
results are presented in the attached `Documented Occurrences' tables and map.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that have been
documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these records suggests that
these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area if suitable habitat exists and is
included for reference. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed area within a one -mile radius of the
project area, if any, are also included in this report.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation planning, project
review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria for regulatory decisions.
Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published without prior written notification to the
NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP
data may not be redistributed without permission.
Also please note that the NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve (DNP), Registered Heritage Area (RHA), Clean Water Management Trust Fund
(CWMTF) easement, or an occurrence of a Federally -listed species is documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance, please
contact Suzanne Mason at suzanne.mason(c�r�ncdcr.gov or 919.707.8637.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
c lothing ompares
MAR ofNork Cantina I Deparummt oftimmal and Cblual R.es=Bs
109 East J®es Street I RaleigbND2701
919407-730D

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Intersecting the Project Area
Anson Waste Management Facility
Project No. 2016-4091
August 1, 2016
NCNHDE-1986
Element Occurrences Documented Within Project Area
Taxonomic EO ID Scientific Name Common Name
Last
Element Accuracy Federal
State
Group
Observation
Occurrence Status
Status
Date
Rank
Freshwater 27819 Villosa delumbis Eastern Creekshell
2003-09-05
E 3-Medium ---
Significantly
Bivalve
Rare
Natural 3106 Piedmont Levee Forest ---
1998
B 3-Medium ---
---
Community (Typic Subtype)
Natural Areas Documented Within Project Area
Site Name Representational Rating
Upper Brown Creek Swamp R3 (High)
No Managed Areas Documented within the Project Area
Collective Rating
C4 (Moderate)
Global State
Rank Rank
G4 S4
G3G4 S3S4
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/help. Data query generated on August 1, 2016; source: NCNHP, Q2 June 2016. Please resubmit your
information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 5

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Anson Waste Management Facility
Project No. 2016-4091
August 1, 2016
NCNHDE-1986
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic
EO ID
Scientific Name
Common Name
Last
Element
Group
Observation
Occurrence
Date
Rank
Dragonfly or
33735
Somatochlora georgiana
Coppery Emerald
2004-Pre
H?
Damselfly
Freshwater
34153
Lampsilis sp. 2
Chameleon Lampmussel
2003-09-05
E
Bivalve
Freshwater
6410
Strophitus undulatus
Creeper
2003-05-12
E
Bivalve
Freshwater
27819
Villosa delumbis
Eastern Creekshell
2003-09-05
E
Bivalve
Natural
10654
Floodplain Pool
---
2009-10-01
A?
Community
Natural
13368
Piedmont Bottomland
---
2009-10-01
BC
Community
Forest (Typic Low
Subtype)
Natural
3106
Piedmont Levee Forest
---
1998
B
Community
(Typic Subtype)
Natural
16334
Piedmont Swamp Forest
---
1998
B?
Community
Natural
16196
Piedmont/Mountain
---
2009-10-01
A
Community
Semipermanent
Impoundment (Open
Water Subtype)
Natural
30592
Piedmont/Mountain
---
2009-10-01
A
Community
Semipermanent
Impoundment (Piedmont
Marsh Subtype)
Natural
30593
Piedmont/Mountain
---
2009-10-01
A
Community
Semipermanent
Impoundment (Shrub
Subtype)
Accuracy Federal
Status
5-Very ---
Low
3-Medium ---
3-Medium ---
3-Medium ---
3-Medium ---
4-Low ---
3-Medium
4-Low
3-Medium
3-Medium
3-Medium
State
Global
State
Status
Rank
Rank
Significantly
G3G4
S2?
Rare
Significantly
G1
S2
Rare
Threatened
G5
S3
Significantly
G4
S4
Rare
---
G3
S2
---
G2?
S2
--- --- G3G4 S3S4
--- --- G3G4 S2
--- --- G4G5 S4
--- --- G4? S4
--- G4 S4
Page 3 of 5

Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic EO ID Scientific Name
Common Name Last
Element Accuracy Federal
State Global State
Group
Observation
Occurrence Status
Status Rank Rank
Date
Rank
Vascular Plant 23071 Helianthus laevigatus
Smooth Sunflower 2002-09-30
D? 2-High ---
Special G4 S3
Concern
Vulnerable
Natural Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Site Name
Representational Rating
Collective Rating
Upper Brown Creek Swamp
R3 (High)
C4 (Moderate)
No Managed Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/help. Data query generated on August 1, 2016; source: NCNHP, Q2 June 2016. Please resubmit your
information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 4 of 5

August 1, 2016
❑ Project Boundary
❑ Buffered Project Boundary
EJ NH Natural Area (NH NA)
NCNHDE-1986: Anson Waste Management Facility
1:29,659
0 0.25 0.5 1 mi
0 0.4 08 1.6km
Sources: Ean, HERE, QeLorm9, InI.—p, increment P Conp., GESCO, USGS.
PAO. NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IC,GN, Kadas[er NL. Ordnance Survey, Esri ,L pan.
METI_ Esri China (Hong Kong). swisstoW. Mapmylndia, ® Op, n r¢ jlvlap
mnln6lAors, and the GIs Vser Communny
Page 5 of 5

ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretory
To: Donna Wilson
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
Engineering Project Manager, Solid Waste Section
Division of Waste Management
From: Lyn Hardison
Division of Environmental Assistance and Customer Service
Washington Regional Office
RE: Environmental Assessment - Anson Landfill, Phase 5 expansion
DWM-SW permit 0403-MSWLF-2010
DEQ#1838
Anson County
Date: March 3, 2022
The NC Department of Public Safety Emergency Management requested to participate in NC
Department Environmental Quality internal review process, and it was granted essentially to
help expedite the environmental document for the applicant.
Both departments have completed the review of the proposal referenced project. Based on
the information provided, several of our agencies have identified permits that may be required
and offered some guidance to help minimize impact to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife
resources in and around the site. The comments are attached for review.
Unfortunately, I did not receive any comments for the Department's Environmental Justice
program. Please contact Renee Kramer directly for comments.
If you agree with the comments, the Environmental Document can be sent to the State
Clearinghouse of the Department of Administration for further review.
We appreciate the opportunity to respond during the Department's internal review.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
Attachments
��� North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
217 West Jones Street 11601 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601
NOfi1H C.eMJ_II4a. ~
919.707,8600

9 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 9
Cameron Ingram, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Lyn Hardison, Environmental Assistance and SEPA Coordinator
NCDENR Division of Environmental Assistance and Customer Services
FROM: Olivia Munzer, Western Piedmont Coordinator
Habitat Conservation
DATE: 25 February 2022
SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment for the Chambers Development/Anson County Municipal
Solid Waste Landfill — Phase 5 Permit Amendment Application in Polkton, Anson
County. DEQ Project No. 1838.
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the subject
information. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the United States National
Environmental Policy Act and Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C.
661 et seq.).
Civil and Environmental Consultants, Inc., on behalf of Chambers Development and Anson County, has
prepared an Environmental Assessment in support of an Amendment to the existing Permit to add Phase 5
to the existing Anson County Municipal Solid Waste Landfill. The landfill is located at 375 Dozer Drive
in Polkton, Anson County, North Carolina.
The project would impact unnamed tributaries to the Brown Creek and Pinch Gut Creek in the Yadkin -
Pee Dee River basin. Brown Creek and Pinch Gut Creek are classified as Class C streams by the NC
Division of Water Resources (NCDWR).
We have known records for the state threatened creeper (Strophitus undulatus) and the state significantly
rare eastern creekshell (Villosa delumbis) and Chameleon lampmussel (Lampsilis sp. 2) in Brown Creek.
The lack of records from on or adjacent to the site does not imply or confirm the absence of state -listed
species. An on -site survey is the only definitive means to determine if the proposed project would impact
rare, threatened, or endangered species. Brown Creek Swamp Natural Heritage Natural Area (NHNA)
occurs adjacent to the project area; natural areas are sites with special biodiversity significance.
Furthermore, there are occurrences of Piedmont Swamp Forest, Piedmont Bottomland Forest, Piedmont
Levee Forest, Floodplain Pool, and Piedmont/Mountain Semipermanent Impoundment Natural
Communities, which are rare or high -quality natural communities.
We offer the following recommendations to minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife
resources:
Based upon photos, we have concerns with the current amount of sedimentation observed in the
streams, and the potential for additional direct and indirect impacts to Brown Creek, Pinch Gut
Mailing Address: Habitat Conservation • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

25 February 2022 Page 2
Anson County Landfill
DEQ Project No. 1838
Creek, and the NHNA from the expansion of the waste management facility. Therefore, we
suggest stringent erosion and sedimentation control measures.
2. To ensure the liners and leachate collection systems work effectively, we suggest monitoring for
waste pollutants in the Brown Creek upstream and downstream of the waste management facility,
specifically downstream of the confluence of Pinch Gut Creek and Brown Creek. If waste
pollutants are found downstream, then measures should be implemented to identify the source
and contain the pollutants.
3. Establish or maintain a minimum 100-foot undisturbed, native, forested buffer for perennial
streams and a minimum 50-foot undisturbed, native, forested buffer for intermittent streams and
wetlands. Maintaining undisturbed, forested buffers along these areas will minimize impacts to
aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources, water quality, and aquatic habitat both within and
downstream of the site. In addition, wide riparian buffers are helpful in maintaining stability of
stream banks and for treatment of pollutants associated with stormwater runoff.
4. All stormwater outlets should drain through a vegetated upland area prior to reaching any stream
or wetland area. Sufficient retention designs should be implemented to allow for the slow
discharge of storm water, attenuating the potential adverse effects of stormwater surges; thermal
spikes; and sediment, nutrient, and chemical discharges.
5. Avoid using invasive, non-native plants to reseed disturbed areas. Bermudagrass, redtop, tall
fescue, and lespedeza, which are invasive and/or non-native species, should not be used and these
species provide little benefit to wildlife. A list of alternatives to non-native species is attached.
Specifically, this project would be ideal for planting native, wildflower seed mixes that will create
pollinator habitat when a unit is capped. Pollinators are some insects (i.e., bees, moths, and
butterflies) and birds that play an important role in the reproduction of flowering plants, which
produce many fruits and vegetables. Habitat loss, disease, and other environmental changes have
caused a decline in pollinators.
6. Sediment and erosion control measures should be installed prior to any land clearing or
construction. The use of biodegradable and wildlife -friendly sediment and erosion control
devices is strongly recommended. Silt fencing, fiber rolls and/or other products should have
loose -weave netting that is made of natural fiber materials with movable joints between the
vertical and horizontal twines. Silt fencing that has been reinforced with plastic or metal mesh
should be avoided as it impedes the movement of terrestrial wildlife species. These measures
should be routinely inspected and properly maintained. Excessive silt and sediment loads can
have numerous detrimental effects on aquatic resources including destruction of spawning
habitat, suffocation of eggs, and clogging of gills of aquatic species.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the early planning stages for this project. Please contact
me at [phone] or olivia.munzerkncwildlife.org if there are any questions about these comments
or for free technical guidance.

RCY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretary
MICHAEL SCOTT
Director
Date: February 22, 2022
To: Michael Scott, Director
Division of Waste Management
Through: Janet Macdonald
Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch
From: Bonnie S. Ware
Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch
NORTH CAROLINA
£nvironmentat Quality
Subject: DEQ Project # 1838, NCDENR Solid Waste, Anson County, North Carolina
The Superfund Section has reviewed the proximity of sites under its jurisdiction to the NCDENR Solid
Waste project. Proposed project is to maximize the landfill capacity at the site by allowing for the original
approved landfill to be fully developed.
Two (2) Superfund Section sites were identified within one mile of the project as shown on the
attached report. The Superfund Section recommends that site files be reviewed to ensure that appropriate
precautions are incorporated into any construction activities that encounter potentially contaminated soil
or groundwater. Superfund Section files can be viewed at: http://deg.nc.gov/waste-management-laserfiche.
Please contact Janet Macdonald at 919.707.8349 if you have any questions concerning the
Superfund Section review portion of this SEPA/NEPA inquiry.
�� NOTth Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Waste Management
t
-DE2l7 West Jones Street 1646 Artail Service Center I Raleigh, Forth Carolina 27699-1646
=o•^,� a .^�nua.+� �� 919.707.8200

2/22/22, 2:46 PM
SUPERFUND SECTION SITES ONLY: SEPA/NEPA
Area of Interest (AOI) Information
Area : 4,266.41 acres
Feb 22 2022 13:59:18 Eastern Standard Time
I-T
d
ti 011 ;
NC 13—ri i6ds Location_Vic.
qp
Recorded
• inactive Hazardous Sites
Parcels (Polygons) - Parcels
1:36,112
a e.30 G-75 1.5m1
I
0 D.5 1 2km
slate of— Carole DOT. �sn, HERE, Gdn r GeoTeclrwbg-
rc —Sr MEfIlN0.5A, EPA, USDA
1/2

MWIMMOMMr:1tWN
Superfund Section Sites Only : DEQ 1838, Anson County
Summary
Name
Count
Area(acres)
Length(mi)
Certified DSCA Sites
0
N/A
N/A
Federal Remediation Branch Sites
0
N/A
N/A
Inactive Hazardous Sites
1
N/A
N/A
Pre -Regulatory Landfill Sites
0
N/A
N/A
Brownfields Program Sites
1
N/A
N/A
Inactive Hazardous Sites
# I EPAID
1 NONCD0001046
Brownfields Program Sites
# BF ID
1 1902915004
B&H RECYCLERS
B&H Recyclers (RN)
SITENAME I Count
BF —Name I Count
W,

Project Number: DEQ # 1838
Department of Environmental
Quality Project Internal Review
County: Anson
Due Date: 2-22-2022
Date Received: 2-1-2022
Project Description: Environmental Assessment -Chambers Development MSWLF/Anson County
Landfill - Phase 5 Permit Amendment Application - Purpose is to maximize the
landfill capacity at the site by allowing for the original approved landfill to be fully
developed.
This Project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office
Asheville
Fayetteville
Mooresville
Raleigh
Washington
Wilmington
Winston-Salem
Manager Sign-Off/Region:
Regional Office Area
V
Air
V
DWR
DWR - Public Water
V
DEMLR (LQ & SW)
DWM
In -House Review
Air Quality
, / Enviromental Justice
Waste Mgmt
Water Resources Mgmt
(Public Water, Planning & Water
Quality Program)
DWR-Transportation Unit
Coastal Management
Marine Fisheries
CC & PS Div. of Emergency Mgmt
DMF-Shellfish Sanitation
Wildlife Olivia
Wildlife/DOT
Date: IIn-House Reviewer/Agency:
March 3, 2022 Jintao Wen, LE -Emergency Management
Response (check all applicable) The proposed project is inclose vicinity of Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). Any encroachment, grading, fill or
placement of equipment or materials in the SFHA will require a floodplain development permit issued by Anson
County. Please coordinate with the County's Floodplain Administrator_ for permitting if needed.
No objection to project as proposed.
Insufficient information to complete review
No Comment
Other (specify or attach comments)
If you have any questions, please contact:
Lyn Hardison at lyn.hardison(ancdenr.gov or [phone]
943 Washington Square Mall Washington NC 27889
Courier No. 16-04-01

State of North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROJECT COMMENTS
Reviewing Regional Office: FRO
Project Number: DE-1838 Due Date: 2 22 2022
County: Anson
After review of this project it has been determined that the DEQ permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in order for this
project to comply with North Carolina Law. Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the
reverse of the form. All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same Regional Office.
Normal Process
PERMITS
SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
Time
(statutory time
limit)
Permit to construct & operate wastewater
Application 90 days before begins construction or award of
®
treatment facilities, non-standard sewer system
construction contracts. On -site inspection may be required. Post -
30 days
extensions & sewer systems that do not
application technical conference usual.
(90 days)
discharge into state surface waters.
Permit to construct & operate, sewer
extensions involving gravity sewers, pump
Fast -Track Permitting program consists of the submittal of an
30 days
®
stations and force mains discharging into a
application and an engineer's certification that the project meets all
(N/A)
sewer collection
applicable State rules and Division Minimum Design Criteria.
system
NPDES - permit to discharge into surface water
Application 180 days before begins activity. On -site inspection. Pre -
and/or permit to operate and construct
application conference usual. Additionally, obtain permit to construct
90-120 days
wastewater facilities discharging into state
wastewater treatment facility -granted after NPDES. Reply time, 30 days
(N/A)
surface waters.
after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES permit -whichever is later.
❑
Water Use Permit
Pre -application technical conference usually necessary.
30 days
(N/A)
Complete application must be received and permit issued prior to the
❑
Well Construction Permit
installation of a groundwater monitoring well located on property not
7 days
owned by the applicant, and for a large capacity (>100,000 gallons per
(15 days)
day) water supply well.
Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property
❑
Dredge and Fill Permit
owner. On -site inspection. Pre -application conference usual. Filling may
55 days
require Easement to Fill from N.C. Department of Administration and
(90 days)
Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
Permit to construct & operate Air Pollution
Application must be submitted and permit received prior to
®
Abatement facilities and/or Emission Sources as
construction and operation of the source. If a permit is required
90 days
per 15 A NCAC (2Q.0100 thru 2Q.0300)
in an area without local zoning, then there are additional
requirements and timelines (2Q.0113).
Any open burning associated with subject
60 days
®
proposal must be in compliance with 15 A NCAC
N/A
(90 days)
2D.1900
Demolition or renovations of structures
Please Note - The Health Hazards Control Unit (HHCU) of the N.C.
containing asbestos material must be in
Department of Health and Human Services, must be notified of plans to
®
compliance with 15 A NCAC 20.1110 (a) (1)
demolish a building, including residences for commercial or industrial
60 days
which requires notification and removal prior to
expansion, even if no asbestos is present in the building.
(90 days)
demolition. Contact Asbestos Control Group
919-707-5950
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion &
sedimentation control plan will be required if one or more acres are to be disturbed. Plan must be filed with and approved
20 days
®
by applicable Regional Office (Land Quality Section) at least 30 days before beginning activity. A NPDES Construction
(30 days)
Stormwater permit (NCG010000) is also usually issued should design features meet minimum requirements. A fee of $65
for the first acre or any part of an acre. An express review option is available with additional fees.
Sedimentation and erosion control must be addressed in accordance with NCDOT's approved program. Particular
(30 days)
❑
attention should be given to design and installation of appropriate perimeter sediment trapping devices as well as stable
Stormwater conveyances and outlets.
Sedimentation and erosion control must be addressed in accordance with Local Government's approved program.
Based on Local
❑
Particular attention should be given to design and installation of appropriate perimeter sediment trapping devices as well
Program
as stable Stormwater conveyances and outlets.
❑
Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H .0126 - NPDES Stormwater Program which regulates three types of activities: Industrial,
30-60 days
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System & Construction activities that disturb >_1 acre.
(90 days)
Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H 1000 -State Stormwater Permitting Programs regulate site development and post-
45 days
❑
construction stormwater runoff control. Areas subject to these permit programs include all 20 coastal counties, and
(90 days)
various other counties and watersheds throughout the state.
DEQ INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROJECT Form Page 1 of 3
January 2017/lbh

State of North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROJECT COMMENTS
Reviewing Regional Office: FRO
Project Number: DE-1838 Due Date: 2 22 2022
County: Anson
Normal Process
PERMITS
SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
Time
(statutory time
limit)
On -site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with DEQ Bond amount
❑
Mining Permit
varies with type mine and number of acres of affected land. Affected
30 days
area greater than one acre must be permitted. The appropriate bond
(60 days)
must be received before the permit can be issued.
If permit required, application 60 days before begin construction.
Applicant must hire N.C. qualified engineer to: prepare plans, inspect
construction, and certify construction is according to DEQ approved
❑
Dam Safety Permit
plans. May also require a permit under mosquito control program. And
30 days
a 404 permit from Corps of Engineers. An inspection of site is necessary
(60 days)
to verify Hazard Classification. A minimum fee of $200.00 must
accompany the application. An additional processing fee based on a
percentage or the total project cost will be required upon completion.
❑
Oil Refining Facilities
N/A
90-120 days
(N/A)
File surety bond of $5,000 with DEQ running to State of NC conditional
❑
Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well
that any well opened by drill operator shall, upon abandonment, be
10 days
N/A
plugged according to DEQ rules and regulations.
❑
Geophysical Exploration Permit
Application filed with DEQ at least 10 days prior to issue of permit.
10 days
Application by letter. No standard application form.
N/A
Application fee based on structure size is charged. Must include
15-20 days
❑
State Lakes Construction Permit
descriptions & drawings of structure & proof of ownership of riparian
N/A
property
Compliance with the T15A 02H .0500 Certifications are required
60 days
®
401 Water Quality Certification
whenever construction or operation of facilities will result in a
(130 days)
discharge into navigable water as described in 33 CFR part 323.
Compliance with Catawba, Goose Creek, Jordan Lake, Randleman, Tar Pamlico or Neuse Riparian Buffer Rules is required.
❑
Buffer requirements: http://deci.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/water-resources-permits/wastewater-
branch/401-wetlands-buffer-permits/401-riparian-buffer-protection-program
Nutrient Offset: Loading requirements for nitrogen and phosphorus in the Neuse and Tar -Pamlico River basins, and in the
Jordan and Falls Lake watersheds, as part of the nutrient -management strategies in these areas. DWR nutrient offset
❑
information:
http://deg.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/nonpoint-source-management/nutrient-offset-information
❑
CAMA Permit for MAJOR development
$250.00 - $475.00 fee must accompany application
75 days
(150 days)
❑
CAMA Permit for MINOR development
$100.00 fee must accompany application
22 days
(25 days)
®
Abandonment of any wells, if required must be in accordance with Title 15A. Subchapter 2C.0100.
®
Notification of the proper regional office is requested if "orphan" underground storage tanks (USTS) are discovered during
any excavation operation.
Plans and specifications for the construction, expansion, or alteration of a public water system must be approved by the
Division of Water Resources/Public Water Supply Section prior to the award of a contract or the initiation of construction
❑
as per 15A NCAC 18C .0300 et. seq., Plans and specifications should be submitted to 1634 Mail Service Center, Raleigh,
30 days
North Carolina 27699-1634. All public water supply systems must comply with state and federal drinking water monitoring
requirements. For more information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
If existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, plans for the water line relocation must be submitted to
❑
the Division of Water Resources/Public Water Supply Section at 1634 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-
30 days
1634. For more information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
Plans and specifications for the construction, expansion, or alteration of the water system must be approved
through the delegated plan approval authority. Please contact them at for further information.
DEQ INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROJECT Form Page 2 of 3
January 2017/lbh

State of North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROJECT COMMENTS
Reviewing Regional Office: FRO
Project Number: DE-1838 Due Date: 2 22 2022
County: Anson
Other Comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to comment authority)
Division
Initial
No
Comments
Date
s
comme
Review
nt
DAQ
JDC
❑
Permit modification may be required to meet federal rules. Contact DAQ Raleigh Central Office
2/4/2022
to confirm.
DWR-
KMB
®
2/4/2022
WQROS
DWR-
❑
PWS
DEMLR
LHB
®
2/16/202
(LQ &
2
SW)
DWM —
KEC
❑
The UST Section, Fayetteville Regional Office, does not have record of a petroleum release in the
2/4/2022
UST
general area of concern for this project number, nor are there any records of registered USTs.
https://ncdenr.maps.a rcgis.com/a pps/weba ppviewer/index. html?id=7dd59be275Ob4Obebebfa4
9fc383f688
Other
❑
/ /
Commen
is
REGIONAL OFFICES
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office marked below
❑ Asheville Regional Office
® Fayetteville Regional Office
❑ Mooresville Regional Office
2090 U.S. 70 Highway
225 Green Street, Suite 714,
610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301,
Swannanoa, NC 28778-8211
Fayetteville, NC 28301-5043
Mooresville, NC 28115
Phone:[phone]
Phone:[phone]
Phone:[phone]
Fax: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
❑ Raleigh Regional Office
❑ Washington Regional Office
❑ Wilmington Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive,
943 Washington Square Mall,
127 Cardinal Drive Ext.,
Raleigh, NC 27609
Washington, NC 27889
Wilmington, NC 28405
Phone:[phone]
Phone:[phone]
Phone:[phone]
Fax: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
❑ Winston-Salem Regional Office
450 Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300,
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
Phone:[phone]
Fax:[phone]
DEQ INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROJECT Form Page 3 of 3
January 2017/lbh

Project Number: DEQ # 1838
Department of Environmental
Quality Project Internal Review
County: Anson
Due Date: 2-22-2022
Date Received: 2-1-2022
Project Description: Environmental Assessment -Chambers Development MSWLF/Anson County
Landfill - Phase 5 Permit Amendment Application - Purpose is to maximize the
landfill capacity at the site by allowing for the original approved landfill to be fully
developed.
This Project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office
Asheville
Fayetteville
Mooresville
Raleigh
Washington
Wilmington
Winston-Salem
Manager Sign-Off/Region:
Regional Office Area
V
Air
DWR
DWR - Public Water
DEMLR (LQ & SW)
V
DWM
Response (check all applicable)
In -House Review
Air Quality
\/ Enviromental Justice
Waste Mgmt
Water Resources Mgmt
(Public Water, Planning & Water
Quality Program)
DWR-Transportation Unit
Coastal Management
Marine Fisheries
V CC & PS Div. of Emergency Mgmt
DMF-Shellfish Sanitation
Wildlife Olivia
Wildlife/DOT
Date: �In-House Reviewer/Agency:
2/25/22 Melodi Deaver,Hazardous Waste Section
No objection to project as proposed. X No Comment
Insufficient information to complete review Other (specify or attach comments)
If you have any questions, please contact:
Lyn Hardison at lyn.hardisonnncdenr.gov or [phone]
943 Washington Square Mall Washington NC 27889
Courier No. 16-04-01

Project Number: DEQ # 1838
Department of Environmental
Quality Project Internal Review
County: Anson
Due Date: 2-22-2022
Date Received: 2-1-2022
Project Description: Environmental Assessment -Chambers Development MSWLF/Anson County
Landfill - Phase 5 Permit Amendment Application - Purpose is to maximize the
landfill capacity at the site by allowing for the original approved landfill to be fully
developed.
This Project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office
Asheville
Fayetteville
_ Mooresville
Raleigh
Washington
Wilmington
Winston-Salem
Regional Office Area
V
Air
DWR
DWR - Public Water
DEMLR (LQ & SW)
V
DWM
In -House Review
Air Quality
Enviromental Justice
Waste Mgmt
Water Resources Mgmt
(Public Water, Planning & Water
Quality Program)
DWR-Transportation Unit
Coastal Management
Marine Fisheries
V CC & PS Div. of Emergency Mgmt
DMF-Shellfish Sanitation
Wildlife Olivia
Wildlife/DOT
Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: In -House Reviewer/Agency:
2/21/2022 DWR/WRMS David Wainwright
Response (check all applicable)
No objection to project as proposed. X No Comment
Insufficient information to complete review Other (specify or attach comments)
If you have any questions, please contact:
Lyn Hardison at lyn.hardisonnncdenr.gov or [phone]
943 Washington Square Mall Washington NC 27889
Courier No. 16-04-01

1 1- A07"
Civil & Environmental Consultants. Inc.
May 16, 2022
ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL
donna.wilsongncdcnr. gov
Donna Wilson
Environmental Engineer, Solid Waste Section
Division of Waste Management
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Dear Donna:
Subject: Response to Comments Email dated May 13, 2022
Environmental Assessment — Anson Landfill Phase 5 Expansion
DWM-SW Permit 0403-MSWLF-2010
CEC Project 165-276
NC Wildlife Resources Commission - 02/25/2022
Comment #1 — Based upon photos, we have concerns with the current amount of sedimentation
observed in the streams, and the potential for additional direct and indirect impacts to Brown
Creek, Pinch Gut Creek, and the NHNA from the expansion of the waste management facility.
Therefore, we suggest stringent erosion and sedimentation control measures.
The sediment and erosion control plan for the landfill will meet all federal and state standards
and be submitted to the NC Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources for approval prior
to implementation.
Comment #2 — To ensure the liners and leachate collection systems work effectively, we suggest
monitoring for waste pollutants in the Brown Creek upstream and downstream of the waste
management facility, specifically downstream of the confluence of Pinch Gut Creek and Brown
Creek. If waste pollutants are found downstream, then measures should be implemented to identify
the source and contain the pollutants.
Surface water streams up gradient and down gradient are sampled and analyzed as part of the
water quality monitoring plan and monitored semi-annually since at least August 2015. Upstream
locations are (Punch Gut Creek upstream (BG-1) and Brown Creek Upstream (BG-2).
Downstream locations are Brown Creek Down Stream (SG-3) and Pinch Gut Creek Downstream
(SG-4). Please refer to the most recent Groundwater Monitoring report prepared by Jett February
2022 for figures showing the locations of each monitoring location. All Groundwater Monitoring
Activities will be implemented as required by North Carolina Solid Waste Regulations 15A NCAC
13B Rules .1630 through .1637.
3701 Arco Corporate Drive, Suite 400 1 Charlotte, NC 28273 1 p: 980-237-0373 f: 980-237-0372 1 www.cecinc.com

Anson County Landfill Site Suitability Study EA NCDEQ Comments
CEC Project 165-276
Page 2
May 16, 2022
Comment #3 — Establish or maintain a minimum 100 foot undisturbed, native, forested buffer for
perennial streams and a minimum 50-foot undisturbed, native, forested buffer for intermittent
streams and wetlands. Maintaining undisturbed, forested buffers along these areas will minimize
impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources, water quality, and aquatic habitat both within
and downstream of the site. In addition, wide riparian buffers are helpful in maintaining stability
of stream banks and for treatment of pollutants associated with stormwater runoff.
Undisturbed existing buffers along the tributaries to Brown Creek and Pinch Gut Creek will be
maintained.
Comment #4 — All stormwater outlets should drain through a vegetated upland area prior to
reaching any stream or wetland area. Sufficient retention designs should be implemented to
allow for the slow discharge of stormwater, attenuating the potential adverse effects of
stormwater surges, thermal spikes, and sediment, nutrient, and chemical discharges.
All stormwater outlets have riprap aprons as required by NCDEQ to prevent erosion at the outlet
of a channel or conduit by reducing the velocity of flow and dissipating energy.
Comment #5 — Avoid using invasive, non-native plants to reseed disturbed areas. Bermudagrass,
redtop, tall fescue, and lespedeza, which are invasive and/or non-native species, should not be used
and these species provide little benefit to wildlife. A list of alternatives to non-native species is
attached. Specifically, this project would be ideal for planting native, wildflower seed mixes that
will create pollinator habitat when a unit is capped. Pollinators are some insects (i.e. bees, moths,
and butterflies.) and birds that play an important role in the reproduction of flowering plants, which
produce many fruits and vegetables. Habitat loss, disease and other environmental changes have
caused a decline in pollinators.
Upon closure of the proposed landfill cells and disturbed areas, final cover plantings will be
evaluated and non-invasive native vegetation options considered assuming they meet Solid Waste
and erosion control requirements.
Comment #6 — Sediment and erosion control measures should be installed prior to any land
clearing or construction. The use of biodegradable and wildlife -friendly sediment and erosion
control devices is strongly recommended. Silt fencing, fiber rolls, and or other products should
have the loose -weave netting that is made of natural fiber materials with movable joints between
the vertical and horizontal twines. Silt fencing that has been reinforced with plastic or metal mesh
should be avoided as it impedes the movement of terrestrial wildlife species. These measures
should be routinely inspected and properly maintained. Excessive silt and sediment loads can have
numerous detrimental effects on aquatic resources including destruction of spawning habitat,
suffocation of eggs, and clogging of gills of aquatic species.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.

Anson County Landfill Site Suitability Study EA NCDEQ Comments
CEC Project 165-276
Page 3
May 16, 2022
The sediment and erosion control plan for the landfill will meet all federal and state standards
and be submitted to the NC Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources for approval prior
to implementation.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.

Anson County Landfill Site Suitability Study EA NCDEQ Comments
CEC Project 165-276
Page 4
May 16, 2022
NC DWM Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch — 02/22/22
Comment #7 — Two (2) sites were identified within one mile of the project as shown on the
attached report. The Superfund Section recommends that site files be reviewed to ensure that
appropriate precautions are incorporated into any construction activities that encounter potentially
contaminated soil or groundwater. Superfund Section files can be viewed at:
http://deq.nc.gov/waste-management-laserfiche.
The proposed landfill expansion area has been thoroughly studied as part of the site suitability
analysis and permit to construct applications to NCDWM. If contaminated soil or groundwater
are encountered during construction of the landfill, the material will be transported to a permitted
facility and disposed of in compliance with all state and federal rules.
Emergency Management — 03/03/22
Comment #8 — The proposed project is in close vicinity of Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA).
Any encroachment, grading, fill or placement of equipment or materials in the SFHA will require
a floodplain development permit issued by Anson County. Please coordinate with the County's
Floodplain Administrator for permitting if needed.
All required permits/ approval will be obtained prior to grading, fill or placement of equipment or
materials in the SFHA.
Please let us know if you need any additional information in support of this review.
Sincerely,
CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Chris Haggard, E.I.
Assistant Project Manager
Nathan Bivins, P.E.
Project Manager
Civil & Environmental Consultancs, Int.