Johnston County Landfill Expansion Variance Application

3040 NC Hwy 42 West; Clayton, NC 27520
P:919-359-1102 – F:919-585-5570
March 16, 2017
Ms. Jennifer Burdette
NC DWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27669-1650
RE: Major Buffer Variance Request
Johnston County Landfill Expansion
Smithfield, NC
Dear: Ms. Burdette,
On behalf of Johnston County, Carolina Ecosystems, Inc. and Smith Gardner Inc. have prepared
an application for a Major Variance from the Neuse River Basin Protection and Maintenance of
Riparian Areas Rule (15A NCAC 02B.0233) for the above referenced project. The County plans
to expand the existing Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Landfill within its existing permitted
facility boundary. This expansion would involve impact to a discontinuous segment of riparian
buffer subject to the above rule. As landfills are not an allowable use under the rules, a variance
is requested. The items below are numbered to correspond to items on the attached Variance
Application Form, and additional supplemental information is attached to this letter.
A.10 – List any permits/approvals that have been requested or obtained for this project in the
past (including all prior phases).
NWP 14 – Action ID 199403772 – 0.43 acre wetland, Issued 02/27/1995
NWP 26 – Action ID 199920268 – 1.75 acres wetland, 490 feet stream, Issued 03/24/2000
NWP 33 – Action ID 200320507 – 0.22 acre wetland, Issued 03/06/2003
NC Solid Waste Permit No. 51-03, Issued 05/27/2015
NC Title V Air Quality Permit No. 08844T06, Issued 03/11/2015
NPDES General Permit (for landfills) No. 120087
B. 1a - PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Johnston County MSW Landfill (Site) is located at 680 County Home Road, Smithfield NC,
in Johnston County (Figure 1). It lies within the NC Neuse River Basin (USGS HUC:
03020201).
The Site includes four parcels in Johnston County (Parcel IDs 15I08028, 15I09033, 15I08028C,
15I09001) and comprises 1,153 acres (1,140 based on County GIS) between Middle Creek and
NC Highway 210. The subject buffer impact related to the landfill expansion is located in Parcel
Ms. Jennifer Burdette Page 2 of 9
March 16, 2017
Page 2
ID 15I08028. In the center of the Site, the North Carolina Department of Transportation owns a
borrow site (Parcel ID 15I08028B). This 47.4 acre tract is not part of the landfill property or
solid waste permit. Existing development on the Site includes a scale house and office, a
recycling center, 1.6 Mw gas-to-electricity facility, maintenance building and parking/storage
area, the existing landfill, and the future landfill cell areas that are currently borrow area,
irrigation fields, scrub, and forest. Of the 1,153 acres, 529.4 acres are within the approved Solid
Waste Facility Boundary, and therefore available for use as a landfill (Figure 4).
The proposed project would expand the existing MSW landfill west from the existing Phase 5
cell. Work would include grading to establish base elevations (including a 4 foot separation
from ground water and bedrock) and construction of a base liner system which will include soil
and geomembrane liners (Engineering Figure 1). The cells would be expanded laterally from
Cell 5, in the following order: Cell 9, 6, 7, 8, and 10. This sequence is most practical from an
engineering and construction perspective, and preferred by the NC Division of Waste
Management (NCDWM) if other approvals are acquired, including this Variance and Clean
Water Act permits. Each cell would be filled to capacity and capped with a final cover system
including a geomembrane and vegetative soil cover as shown in Engineering Figure 1.
Waste accepted at this facility is restricted to MSW and does not include hazardous materials as
shown in Attachment 3. Significant environmental protections are already in place, including a
detailed Water Quality Monitoring Plan, which includes ground and surface water. The current
monitoring point locations are shown in Engineering Figure 2. Additional monitoring would be
provided in appropriate locations surrounding the proposed expansion cells, subject to NCDWM
approval. This plan would be implemented, as it is currently for the existing facility, and would
continue for a minimum of 30 years post-closure. The monitoring plan would include at least 15
inorganic constituents and 47 organics (see Attachment 4), which would be monitored on a semi-
annual basis. If any significant difference occurs from background concentrations, a step-wise
increase in protection would be initiated including increasing the number of constituents
monitored, providing an assessment of corrective measures, and if required a corrective action
plan. The landfill cap, slopes, and Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be monitored and
also maintained for at least 30 years post-closure. This would ensure proper function of the
drainage system and stormwater measures. Post-closure monitoring and maintenance is required
by North Carolina State law, and proof of financial assurance for these activities must be
provided.
Proposed Impacts
The proposed expansion would involve impacts to the upper reaches of the site’s western-most
drainage. Stream and wetland resources on the site (Figures 5 and 6) are unnamed tributaries of
Middle Creek (27-43-15-(4)), which carries a NC Division of Water Resources (NCDWR)
classification of C;NSW. In 2012, field verification by the US Army Corps of Engineers and NC
Division of Water Resources determined that the stream in question has a short segment of
perennial channel that drained to an ephemeral feature. No official documentation of that visit
was produced by the USACE, but NCDWR did provide documentation of their riparian buffer
determinations based on stream calls made during that visit (NBRRO# 12-206; July 10, 2013,
Ms. Jennifer Burdette Page 3 of 9
March 16, 2017
Page 3
Attachment 1). The perennial reach of stream is therefore under the jurisdiction of the Neuse
Buffer Rules per this determination.
The stream in question has been altered several times since the 1970s. As can be seen in Figure
7, USGS 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle maps from 1976, 1982, 1999, and 2013 show
multiple changes in the hydrology of this drainage. These maps reflect the history of the site,
although due to incremental updates by USGS, the dates are not accurate. The pond was drained
in the mid-1990’s.
The 2013 USGS map (Figure 7) contours also reflect adjacent land use changes. To the east of
this area and extending to the 250-foot contour is the MSW Phase 5 lined landfill cell. Extending
around the base of this cell are stormwater collection facilities (ditches and basins) that discharge
to several locations along the subject drainage. To the west of the proposed impact area, the
surface contours reflect prior borrow activity to support construction and daily operations of the
facility.
These activities have resulted in a stream with a unique hydrologic regime which does not
exhibit the geomorphologic, hydrologic, or biologic indicators expected of a stream in this
ecoregion and landscape position (Attachment 6). Today, the stream begins as a short perennial
segment and then transitions to an intermittent and then ephemeral channel before disappearing
entirely within the old pond bed. The intermittent reach exhibits minimal biology and
experiences extensive periods with no flow. It is our opinion that the flow regime of the upper
segment is sustained by upslope land irrigation by Johnston County. This irrigation is reclaimed
water from the County Wastewater Treatment Facility (Permit No. WQ0019632) and has been
regularly discharged on the land forming the upper watershed of the subject channel since the
mid-1990s. Downstream of the proposed impact area, north of an existing culverted road
crossing, the channel reforms as a perennial stream before a confluence with another stream
entering the Middle Creek flood plain.
D. 1 – Provide a description of how diffuse flow will be maintained through the protected
riparian buffers.
The amount of impervious area associated with this project is minimal (less than 5%). This is
below regulatory thresholds for stormwater BMPs and also below NC Department of
Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) recommended limitations for the protection of sensitive
aquatic environments. The landfill final cover system will include a vegetated cover that allows
infiltration of precipitation before it is collected and drained to a BMP. The final cover system
see Engineering Figure 1) would provide detention and some treatment of stormwater prior to
entering the BMP. During the typical two year event, there would be minimal discharge from
the BMPs. Diffuse flow would be achieved via small level spreaders or energy dissipators.
Regular maintenance and monitoring requirements would protect water quality as described
below.
D. 2 – Provide a description of all BMPs that will be used to minimize disturbance and control
the discharge of nutrients and sediments from stormwater.
Ms. Jennifer Burdette Page 4 of 9
March 16, 2017
Page 4
BMPs including extended dry detention basins in the approximate locations shown on the
attached Engineering Drawings, along with grassed swales and other measures appropriate for
control of discharges. State solid waste regulations require more conservative design standards
than the Rule including controlling peak runoff from a 25 year-24 hour storm event. A detailed
plan will be developed during the final design of the facility and submitted to NCDWR to review
during the 404/401 permitting process. Due to the extensive solid waste regulatory buffers
required from property lines and other features, there is more than sufficient room to implement
adequately sized BMPs in the proposed locations.
E.1 - Explain how complying with the provisions of the applicable rule would prevent you
from securing a reasonable return from or make reasonable use of your property. Merely
proving that the variance would permit a greater profit from the property shall not be
considered adequate justification for a variance. The Division will consider whether the
variance is the minimum possible deviation from the terms of the applicable Buffer Rule that
shall make reasonable use of the property possible.
Compliance with the rule would impact solid waste services in the County and surrounding area
in the future. The County purchased this property in order to provide this service to the public
for the foreseeable future, and has operated on this site since the early 1970s. Prohibiting the
proposed landfill expansion in this area alters the use of this property as it was intended more
than 40 years ago, and results in hardships to Johnston County through significant reduction in
solid waste disposal capacity which could result in higher costs being passed along to the public,
and possible negative impacts on future growth in the County.
Due to the rapid growth in Johnston County and surrounding areas, there is a continuous demand
for both municipal and construction/demolition waste disposal. As can be seen in Figure 8, there
are a limited number of MSW facilities in the area. Within Johnston, Wake, Franklin, Nash,
Wilson, Wayne, Sampson, and Harnett counties, only three other active MSW landfills exist.
Therefore there is a significant need for MSW disposal capacity in the area.
Compliance with the Rule would reduce landfill capacity by approximately 67% as landfill
expansion would be limited to Option 1, described below. The Johnston County Landfill
property was purchased in 1991 with the intent to provide a long-term solid waste disposal
solution for the County residents and adjacent areas. There are 7 streams (33,527 linear feet)
subject to the Rule on the property, and 5 subject streams (20,029 linear feet) within the
permitted facility boundary. The proposed project would impact only 328 linear feet of stream
subject to the Rule, while preserving 16,744 linear feet. This is an impact to less than 2% of the
subject streams on the property. The remaining streams on the site would not be impacted,
except for two minor “Allowable” road crossings to access borrow areas on the eastern side of
the Site, and are contiguous stream channels with higher function and flow than the stream
within the proposed impact area.
No other practical on-site expansion alternatives exist within the permitted facility boundary.
The County has maximized use of the upland areas within the site and facility boundary and any
Ms. Jennifer Burdette Page 5 of 9
March 16, 2017
Page 5
additional landfill area besides the proposed project would involve either increased stream and
wetland impacts, or an expansion of the facility boundary to allow landfill in the eastern section
of the property. The expansion of the facility boundary, or location of a new landfill site, would
involve significant effort including public review and subject to extremely tight regulatory
restrictions. This process has been proven to be very difficult to successfully negotiate, as
evidenced by the fact that only one new MSW landfill has been permitted in the State in the last
10 years.
Alternative site designs within the existing facility boundary were evaluated that encompassed
complete avoidance of all resources as well as minimization alternatives. Each of these is
presented in Table 1, along with the attached engineering exhibits, and evaluated below.
Intermediate alternatives between these options were considered, but not included as they did not
provide significant or practical differences from the options below.
TABLE 1: Johnston County Landfill Expansion Alternatives
Alternative
see attached plans)
Waste
Area
ac)
Capacity
mcy)
Impacts
Wetland
ac)
Stream*
lf)
Buffers (sq.ft.)*
Zone 1 / Zone 2
Option 1 -No Impact 66.1 5.0 0 ac 0 0 / 0
Option 2 – Proposed
Project
106.1 14.8 2.1 1,516 22,046 / 17,654
Option 3 – Full Build Out 118.0 18.2 2.1 2,314 71,829 / 52391
ac = acres; mcy= million cubic yards; lf = linear feet; sq. ft. = square feet
Include permanent and temporary impacts as depicted in attached figures
Option 1 - No Impact (Engineering Figure 3)
The avoidance of all jurisdictional features (buffers, streams, and wetlands) was
evaluated but deemed not practical as it results in a much smaller landfill footprint that
would yield approximately 5 MCY of capacity, which is a 67% loss compared to the
proposed project (Option 2). The hydrology of the subject stream would likely be
affected in the long term due the reduction of area draining to the channel, including
diversion of upslope drainage, discharge of stormwater from the landfill downstream of
the subject buffers, and cessation of spray irrigation that may be sustaining the current
flow regime. While this option would be permitted under current rules, and the County
could choose to re-evaluate the stream channel status at a later date after building this
option, they are choosing to propose Option 2 instead and provide reasonable mitigation
to offset impacts for constructability reasons detailed below.
Option 2 – Proposed Project (Engineering Figure 4)
The proposed project provides a constructible lateral expansion of the existing lined
landfill, impacting the subject stream channel described above while avoiding the lower
reach below the old pond bed that is directly connected to the flood plain of Middle
Ms. Jennifer Burdette Page 6 of 9
March 16, 2017
Page 6
Creek (see Engineering Figure 4). As mentioned above, avoidance of the channel
would likely result in a reduction of jurisdictional channel within the proposed impact
area of this option. Rather than construct Option 1, the County proposes to laterally
expand through the subject drainage so that construction is more practical and easier to
accomplish than returning to “fill in” the drainage at a later date. Due to the uncertainty
of the exact location where the stream characteristics would be retained, and the difficulty
of constructing and maintaining landfill cells around the stream, it was determined to be
more practical to accept the proposed impact and provide compensatory mitigation to
offset this loss.
This option provides 14.8 MCY of capacity and a waste disposal lifespan of
approximately 60 years assuming an average airspace utilization factor of 0.7 tons per
cubic yard and an average disposal rate of 175,000 tons per year. This 3-fold increase in
capacity over Option 1 would provide the County with a reliable waste disposal
alternative for the foreseeable future to support continued growth in the County. The
phased construction approach would be the most practical and preferred expansion
pattern according to the NC Division of Waste Management, assuming permits are
acquired for stream, wetland, and buffer impacts.
The proposed Option 2 would avoid impacts to the stream segment that is contiguous
with Middle Creek below the old pond. Stormwater routing for this option can be
designed to discharge base flow to the remaining channel below the road crossing,
therefore ensuring future hydrology of the stream is not removed.
Option 3 – Full Development (Engineering Figure 5)
Another expansion option (see Engineering Figure 5) was considered that included
some impact downstream of the old pond bed, and a segment of the stream channel
directly connected to the Middle Creek flood plain. This option results in a landfill
capacity of 18.2 MCY and represents a 22% increase in capacity as compared to the
proposed project. However, this option would result in increased impacts to a buffered
stream channel that is directly connected to the Middle Creek flood plain, and also
require relocation of existing site infrastructure including a leachate gravity line. For
these reasons, it was deemed impractical due to the limited increase in capacity/lifespan
to offset these issues.
The proposed project (Option 2) was chosen as the most practical expansion alternative for the
landfill that minimized impacts to jurisdictional resources and improves long-range planning for
the County, while also addressing potential future changes in hydrologic patterns on the site.
The change between pre and post-construction drainage of Option 1 would likely result in
significant loss of drainage contributing to the subject stream’s upper reaches. This would have
a long term effect on the hydrology of the subject stream to such an extent that it might no longer
be jurisdictional in the future. Similar situations on other solid waste sites have shown this to be
a valid concern, due to the reconfiguration of on-site drainage associated with these facilities.
Ms. Jennifer Burdette Page 7 of 9
March 16, 2017
Page 7
This, in addition to the large loss of landfill capacity, resulted in Option 2 being chosen as the
Proposed Project.
E.2 - Explain how the hardship results from application of the Buffer Rule to the property
rather from other factors such as deed restrictions or other hardships (e.g. zoning setbacks,
floodplains, etc).
There are no other restrictions on the proposed MSW landfill that would restrict its expansion,
beside the Buffer Rule and Clean Water Act (CWA) permitting. The proposed expansion is
included in the approved facility plan for the site, and Johnston County would only need to
modify its NCDEQ Solid Waste Permit (Permit No. 51-03). The CWA Individual Permit will be
submitted after this variance application, and coordination with the USACE and NCDWR is in
progress. All required solid waste buffers have been applied to the site, and do not result in the
hardship being addressed in this application. The flood plain of Middle Creek has been avoided
Figure 5).
E.3 - Explain how the hardship results from physical nature of the property, such as its size,
shape, or topography, which is different from that of neighboring property.
The physical nature of this site is the key constraint limiting landfill expansion alternatives and
preventing reasonable use of the property. Expansion in other directions besides west of the
existing lined landfill is not practical for the following reasons:
North is Middle Creek and its extensive flood plain with bottomland hardwood wetlands.
East are larger wetland drainages with contiguous and fully functional stream channels,
as well as the NCDOT parcel that divides the County property. Much of this area is also
outside the current permitted facility boundary.
South is constrained by site infrastructure including gas to energy plant, office, scale
house, maintenance facility, and public convenience center.
The drainage area of the subject stream is almost entirely contained on the Johnston County
Landfill property (Figure 9). Landfill configurations that avoid the stream and buffer, described
above, drastically alter the drainage on site and would likely reduce or eliminate flow in the
upper reach of stream over the long term, possibly eliminating its jurisdiction under the CWA
and Rule.
The site is unique in the fact that it is an existing MSW landfill with an approved facility
boundary and solid waste permit. This provides for additional landfill capacity due to the ability
to build off the existing landfill cell (Phase 5), and also does not require a difficult and costly
siting and permitting of a new landfill site. This process is extremely difficult to successfully
negotiate, as shown by the fact that only one new MSW site has been permitted in the last 10
years in NC. Attachment 5 provides the siting requirements for a new facility.
Ms. Jennifer Burdette Page 8 of 9
March 16, 2017
Page 8
Finally, as discussed above, the hydrology of the subject stream buffer along the perennial
segment is possibly sustained by the irrigation input to the watershed. This irrigation will be
ceased upon construction of the other landfill cells in all options and therefore could change
hydrology and remove jurisdiction on this segment of stream channel.
E.4 - Explain whether the hardship was caused by the applicant knowingly or unknowingly
violating the applicable Buffer Rule.
The Site is currently in compliance with the Rule. The County purchased the property and began
developing it as a solid waste site in the 1970’s, well before the Buffer Rule was implemented.
All prior landfill construction, borrow activities, and other site infrastructure have avoided
riparian buffers on the site, with the exception of a road crossing east of the current cell 4A,
which was classified as an allowable activity to access borrow areas to the east. The subject
stream was shown as part of the proposed landfill footprint and is included in the approved
facility plan for the site.
E.5 - For Neuse, Tar-Pamlico, Jordan Lake and Goose Creek only: Did the applicant
purchase the property after the effective date of the applicable Buffer Rule and then request a
variance?
No. The County purchased the portion of the property containing the subject stream in 1991, 6
years prior to the effective date of the Buffer Rule (July 22, 1997).
E.6 - Explain how the hardship is rare or unique to the applicant’s property, rather than the
result of conditions that are widespread.
The property contains an existing MSW landfill, which is in itself relatively rare. As seen in
Figure 8, only 3 active MSW disposal sites are currently present within the adjacent counties.
Due to the need for stable side slopes and the three dimensional aspect of landfills, avoidance of
the stream and buffer is magnified to a much greater extent than avoidance for a typical “two
dimensional” projects, which can develop up to the edge of the buffer without being impeded
through the use of retaining walls and other engineering features. This is not practical for a solid
waste landfill.
The continued use of the County facility would provide a unique function in the area, including
reuse, recycling, and disposal of waste streams from residential, commercial, and industrial uses.
The comprehensive waste management system is more efficient co-located on one site, so waste
streams can be separated and materials reused. Additionally, electricity is generated at the site
using methane created from the decomposition of the disposed solid waste.
The information above and attached Variance Application Form are provided for your review of
this Major Variance Request. In addition, we have included Figures, Engineering Drawings, and
Attachments to supplement the information referenced in the application. We respectfully
Ms. Jennifer Burdette Page 9 of 9
March 16, 2017
Page 9
request your review of this information with the intention of receiving an Environmental
Management Commission Review in May 2017. Please let us know if you have any questions or
require additional information.
Sincerely,
Carolina Ecosystems, Inc.
Philip May
Senior Environmental Scientist
Cc: Rick Proctor, Johnston County
Pieter Scheer, P.E., Smith Gardner Inc.
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
15A NCAC 02B .0233 (8)(b), .0243 (8)(b), .0250 (11)(b), .0259 (8)(b), .0267 (11)(c), .0607 (e)(2)
Protection and Maintenance ofRiparian Areas Rules - Variance Application
FORM: VAR 10-2013
FORM: VAR 10-2013
PLEASE IDENTIFY WHICH RIPARIAN AREA PROTECTION RULE APPLIES:
Neuse River Basin (15A NCAC 02B.0233)
X Major Variance Minor Variance
Catawba River Basin (15A NCAC 02B.0243)
Randleman Lake Water Supply Watershed (15A NCAC 02B.0250)
Major Variance Minor Variance
Tar-Pamlico River Basin (15A NCAC 02B.0259)
Major Variance Minor Variance
Jordan Lake Water Supply Nutrient Strategy (15A NCAC 02B.0267)
Major Variance Minor Variance
Goose Creek Watershed (15A NCAC 02B.0606 & 15A NCAC 02B.0607)
A. General Information
1. Applicant’s Information(if other than the current property owner):
Name:
Title:
Street Address:
City, State & Zip:
Telephone:
Email:
2. Property Owner/Signing Official (person legally responsible for the property and its compliance ):
Name: County of Johnston – Rick Hester
Title: County Manager
Street Address: PO Box 1049
City, State & Zip: Smithfield, NC 27577
Telephone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
FORM: VAR 10-2013 Page 2 of5
3. Agent Information:
3a. Name: Phil May
Company Affiliation: Carolina Ecosystems, Inc.
Street Address: 3040 NC 42 West
City, State & Zip: Clayton, NC 27520
Telephone: (919) 606 - 1065
E-mail: [e-mail]
3b. Attach a signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner.
4. Project Name (Subdivision, facility, or establishment name):
Johnston County Landfill
5. Project Location:
5a. Street Address: 680 County Home Rd
City, State & Zip: Smithfield, NC 27577
5b. County: Johnston County
5c. Site Coordinates (in decimal degrees): 35.5133 Latitude -78.4244 Longitude
5d. Attach an 8 ½ x 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the site.
5e. Attach an 8 ½ x 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey Map depicting the
project site.
6. Property Information:
6a. Property identification number (parcel ID): 15I08028
6b. Date property was purchased: 6c. July 22 1991/6d. Nov 1, 1991
6c. Deed book 1215 and page number 747
6d. Map book 1228 and page number 652
6e. Attach a copy of the recorded map that indicates when the lot was last platted.
7. Is your project in one of the 20 Coastal Counties covered under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA)?
YES X NO
7a. If youanswered yes above, in which AEC do you fall (30 ft or 75 ft)? N/A
7b. If youanswered yes above, what is the total percent of impervious cover that you have proposed within the AEC? N/A
FORM: VAR 10-2013 Page 3 of5
8. Directions to site from nearest major intersection:
Take Exit 319 from I-40. Turn onto NC-210 E. Go 8 miles and turn left onto County Home Rd. Go 0.5 mile to reach the landfill.
9. Stream associated with riparian buffer to be impacted by the proposed activity:
Name Water Quality Classification
UT to Middle Creek C;NSW
9a. For Goose Creek only: Is the buffer in the 100-year floodplain? YES NO
10. List any permits/approvals that have been requested or obtained for this project in the past (including all prior phases).
Date Applied: Date Received: Permit Type:
See attached list
B. Proposed Activity
1. Project Description
1a. Provide a detailed description of the proposed activity including its purpose:
See attached Variance application cover letter
1b. Attach a site plan showing the following items as applicable to the project:
Development/Project name
Revision number & date
North arrow
Scale (1” = 50’ is preferred)
Property/project boundary with dimensions
Adjacent streets and roads labeled with names and/or NC State Road numbers
Original contours and proposed contours
Perennial and intermittent streams, ponds, lakes, rivers and estuaries
Mean high water line (if applicable)
Wetlands delineated, or a note on plans that none exist
Location of forest vegetation along the streams, ponds, lakes, rivers and estuaries
Extent of riparian buffers on the land including Zone 1 and Zone where applicable
FORM: VAR 10-2013 Page 4 of5
Location and dimension of the proposed buffer impact (label the area of buffer impact in ft2 on the plan)
Details of roads, parking areas, cul-de-sacs, sidewalks, and curb and gutter systems
Footprint of any proposed buildings or other structures
Discharge points of gutters on existing structures and proposed buildings
Existing drainage (including off-site), drainage easements, and pipe dimensions
Drainage areas delineated
C. Proposed Impacts and Mitigation
1. Individually list the square footage of each proposed impact to the protected riparian buffers :
Buffer Impact
Number1 –
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
Reason for Impact Buffer
Mitigation
Required
Zone 1 Impact
square feet)
Zone 2 Impact
square feet)
B1 - P T Landfill expansion X Yes No 22,046 17,654
B2 - P T Yes No
B3 - P T Yes No
Total Buffer Impacts 39,700
1Label on site plan
2. Identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation from the table above. Calculate
the amount of mitigation required.
Zone Total Impact
square feet)
Multiplier
Required
Mitigation
square feet)
Zone 11 18,129 3
2 for Catawba only)
54,387
Zone 2 14,380 1.5 21570
Total Buffer Mitigation Required: 75,957
1For projects in the Goose Creek Watershed, list all riparian buffer impacts as Zone 1
and use Zone 1 multiplier.
3. Provide a description of how mitigation will be achieved at your site pursuant to the mitigation requirements of the applicable
river basin/watershed.
Buffer mitigation will be provided by the NC Division of Mitigation Services
3a. Is buffer restoration or enhancement proposed? Yes X No
If yes, attach adetailed planting plan to include plant type, date of plantings, the date of the one-time fertilization in the
protected riparian buffers, and a plan sheet showing the proposed location of the plantings.
3b. Is payment into a buffer restoration fund proposed? X Yes No
If yes, attach an acceptance letter from the mitigation bank you propose to use or the NC Ecosystem Enhancement
Programstating they have the mitigation credits available for the mitigation requested.
FORM: VAR 10-2013 Page 5 of5
D. Stormwater
1. Provide a description of how diffuse flow will be maintained through the protected riparian buffers (e.g., re-planting vegetation
or enhancement of existing vegetation, gutter splash pads, level spreader to control of runoff from impervious surfaces, etc.).
See attached Variance cover letter
1a. Show the location of diffuse flow measure(s) on yoursite plan.
1b. Attach a completed Level Spreader Supplement Form or BMP Supplement Form with all required items for each proposed
measure.
1c. Attach an Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Form for each proposed level spreader or BMP.
2. For Major, Catawba, and Goose Creek variance requests, provide a description of all best management practices (BMPs) that
will be used to minimize disturbance and control the discharge of nutrients and sediments from stormwater.
See attached Variance cover letter
2a. Show the location of BMPs on your site plan.
2b. Attach a Supplement Form for each structural BMP proposed.
2c. Attach an Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Form for each structural BMP proposed.
E. Demonstration of Need for a Variance
The variance provision of the riparian buffer rules allows the Division or the Environmental Management Commission to grant a
variance when there are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships that prevent compliance with the strict letter of riparian
buffer protection.
1. Explain how complying with the provisions of the applicable rule would prevent you from securing a reasonable return from or
make reasonable use of your property. Merely proving that the variance would permit a greater profit from the property shall
not be considered adequate justification for a variance. The Division will consider whether the variance is the minimum possible
deviation from the terms of the applicable Buffer Rule that shall make reasonable use of the property possible.
See attached Variance cover letter
Smithfield
NeuseRiver
BlackCreek
M iddleCreek
Neuse
R
iv
r
Sw
iftCreek
Bla ckCreek
SassarixaSwamp
ArtersBranch
P
op
la
r
C re
ek
SteepHillBranch
BuffaoCreek
G umSwamp
GumSwamp
BlackCreek
95
210
70
301
Figure 1: Project Vicinity
March 2017
Johnston CountyLandfillPhases6-10JohnstonCounty, NC³0 0.5 1Miles Property Boundary
USGS Named Streams
Project Location:
Johnston County, NC
Lat 35.5119° / Long -78.4235 °
Powhatan (2013) USGS 1:24,000 Quadrangle Map³
Property Boundary
Property Not Studied
NCDOT Borrow Pit
Map Date:
Revised:
Revised:
Revised:
March 2017
0 1,000 2,000Feet
Figure 2: USGS Map
Johnston CountyLandfillPhases6-10JohnstonCounty, NC
Johnston County NRCS Soil Survey Map 6³
Property Boundary
Property Not Studied
NCDOT Borrow Pit
Map Date:
Revised:
Revised:
Revised:
March 2017
0 1,000 2,000Feet
Figure 3: NRCS Map
Johnston CountyLandfillPhases6-10JohnstonCounty, NC
Middle Cree k
NC OneMap, NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, NC 911 Board
Figure 4: Site Overview
0 500 1,000Feet³Johnston CountyLandfillPhases6-10JohnstonCounty, NC
Map Date:
Revised:
Revised:
Revised: 2013 NC StatewideAerial Photography
March 2017
MSWPhase5
MSWPhase3 - 4
FutureBorrowArea
Current
BorrowArea
NCDOTParcel
MSWPhase
1 - 2
C&D
SEE ENGINEERING
DRAWING FIG. 2 FOR DETAILS
ON SITE INFRASTRUCTURE
IrrigationField
YardWasteProcessing
IrrigationField
MiddleCreek
N C 210
County
Hom
e
Rd
NC210
Property Boundary
Deed Breakouts
Facility Boundary
Streams
NCDOT Parcel
Property Not Studied
Middle
Creek
MiddleCreek
NC210
NC OneMap, NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, NC 911 Board
Figure 5: Jurisdictional Areas
0 500 1,000Feet³Johnston CountyLandfillPhases6-10JohnstonCounty, NC
Map Date:
Revised:
Revised:
Revised: 2013 NC Statewide Aerial Photography
March2017PropertyBoundary
Facility Boundary
Deed Breakouts
NCDOT Parcel
Property Not Studied
Wetlands
FEMA 100 Year Floodplain
Zone 1 (30' Buffer)
Zone 2 (20' Buffer)
Intermittent
Perennial
Jurisdictional Areas Totals
UT's of Middle Creek:17,516ftZone2Buffers:23.4 acres
Wetlands:163.8acresFEMAFloodplain:167acresZone1Buffers:34.2 acres
Flag W9
SC1
Pipe Outlet
SC1B
Pipe Outlet
SK
WN
WAN
WQ
WP
WO
WAM
NC OneMap, NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, NC 911 Board
Johnston CountyLandfillPhases6-10JohnstonCounty, NC0100200Feet
Figure 6: Proposed Impact Area
2013 NC StatewideAerial Photography
Map Date:
Revised:
Revised:
Revised:
March2017Zone1 (30' Buffer)
Zone 2 (20' Buffer)
Intermittent
Perennial
Wetlands
0 500 1,000Feet³
Figure 7 : USGSHistoryPowhatan (1976, 1982, 1999, 2013)
USGS 1:24,000 Quagrangle Map
1982
1999
1976
2013
Johnston CountyLandfillPhases6-10JohnstonCounty, NC
Map Date:
Revised:
Revised:
Revised:
March 2017
Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, increment P Corp.,NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand),MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
March 2017
Figure 8: Active PermittedMSWLandfills
Johnston CountyLandfillPhases6-10JohnstonCounty, NC³0 10Miles
Johnston County Landfill
Surrounding MSW Landfills
G:
CA
D
Joh
nston
Joh
n
15
5
sheets
JO
H
N
B0729
dw
g
3/
16
2017
11
52
AM
DR
AWN
AP
PROVEDPR
OJECT
NO
SC
ALE
FILENAME
DA
TE
FIGURE
NO
PR
EPARED
BY
DR
AWING
TITLE
SM
I
T
H
14
N
Boylan
Avenue
Raleigh
NC
27603
NC
LIC
NO
F
1370
ENGINEERING
91
9
828
0577
GA
R
D
N
E
R
2017 Smith Gardner, Inc.
JO
HNSTO
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
LA
N
D
F
ILL
PH
ASES
6
10
DE
TAILS
C.
T
J
P.
K
S
NO
T
TO
SCALE
1
Ma
r
201
7
JO
HN
15
5
JO
H
N
B
0729
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
6 4 3 21855 1079PROJECTTITLEDRAWINGTITLEREVDATEDESCRIPTIONDESIGNEDDRAWNAPPROVEDPROJECTNOSCALEFILENAME PREPAREDBY PREPAREDFORSHEETNUMBERDRAWINGNUMBERDATESEALSEALSMITHGARDNERENGINEERS14NBoylanAvenueRaleighNC27603NCLICNOF1370ENGINEERING9198280577ElectronicfilesareinstrumentsofserviceprovidedbySmithGardnerIncfortheconvenienceoftheintendedrecipientsandnowarrantyiseitherexpressedorimpliedAnyreuseorredistributionofthisdocumentinwholeorpartwithoutthewrittenauthorizationofSmithGardnerIncwillbeatthesoleriskoftherecipientIfthereisadiscrepancybetweentheelectronicfilesandthesignedandsealedhardcopiesthehardcopiesshallgovernUseofanyelectronicfilesgeneratedorprovidedbySmithGardnerIncconstitutesanacceptanceofthesetermsandconditionsJOHNSTONCOUNTYNORTHCAROLINADEPARTMENTOFSOLIDWASTESERVICESJOHNSTONCOUNTYLANDFILLPHASES610EXISTINGCONDITIONSPKSCTJJOHN155ASSHOWNMAR2017JOHND0728FIG2PRELIMINARYNOTFORCONSTRUCTION
PROJECT TITLE:
DRAWING TITLE:
REV.DATE DESCRIPTION
DESIGNED:
DRAWN:
APPROVED:
PROJECT NO:
SCALE:
FILENAME:
PREPARED BY:
PREPARED FOR:
SHEET NUMBER:DRAWINGNUMBER:
DATE:
G:
CA
D
Joh
nston
Joh
n
15
5
sheets
JO
H
N
D
0727
dwg
3/
17
201
7
1
0
32
AM
SEAL
SEAL
SMITH
GARDNER
ENGINEERS
14 N. Boylan Avenue, Raleigh NC 27603
NC LIC. NO. F-1370 (ENGINEERING)
919.828.0577
Electronicfiles are instruments of serviceprovided by Smith
Gardner, Inc. for theconvenience ofthe intended recipient(s), and
nowarranty is either expressed or implied. Anyreuse or
redistribution ofthis document inwholeor partwithout the
written authorization of Smith Gardner, Inc., willbe at thesole
riskofthe recipient. If there is adiscrepancy between the
electronic files and the signed andsealed hard copies, thehard
copies shall govern. Useof anyelectronic files generated or
provided by Smith Gardner, Inc., constitutesan acceptance of
theseterms and conditions.
2017 Smith Gardner, Inc.
JOHNSTON COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF
SOLID WASTE SERVICES
JOHNSTON COUNTY
LANDFILL
PHASES 6-10
OPTION 1
NO IMPACT
P.K.S.
C.T.J.
JOHN 15-5
AS SHOWN
Mar 2017
JOHN-D0727
FIG.3
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT TITLE:
DRAWING TITLE:
REV.DATE DESCRIPTION
DESIGNED:
DRAWN:
APPROVED:
PROJECT NO:
SCALE:
FILENAME:
PREPARED BY:
PREPARED FOR:
SHEET NUMBER:DRAWINGNUMBER:
DATE:
G:
CA
D
Joh
nston
Joh
n
15
5
sheets
JO
H
N
D
0727
dwg
3/
17
201
7
1
0
32
AM
SEAL
SEAL
SMITH
GARDNER
ENGINEERS
14 N. Boylan Avenue, Raleigh NC 27603
NC LIC. NO. F-1370 (ENGINEERING)
919.828.0577
Electronicfiles are instruments of serviceprovided by Smith
Gardner, Inc. for theconvenience ofthe intended recipient(s), and
nowarranty is either expressed or implied. Anyreuse or
redistribution ofthis document inwholeor partwithout the
written authorization of Smith Gardner, Inc., willbe at thesole
riskofthe recipient. If there is adiscrepancy between the
electronic files and the signed andsealed hard copies, thehard
copies shall govern. Useof anyelectronic files generated or
provided by Smith Gardner, Inc., constitutesan acceptance of
theseterms and conditions.
2017 Smith Gardner, Inc.
JOHNSTON COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF
SOLID WASTE SERVICES
JOHNSTON COUNTY
LANDFILL
PHASES 6-10
OPTION 2
PROPOSED PROJECT
P.K.S.
C.T.J.
JOHN 15-5
AS SHOWN
Mar 2017
JOHN-D0727
FIG.4
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT TITLE:
DRAWING TITLE:
REV.DATE DESCRIPTION
DESIGNED:
DRAWN:
APPROVED:
PROJECT NO:
SCALE:
FILENAME:
PREPARED BY:
PREPARED FOR:
SHEET NUMBER:DRAWINGNUMBER:
DATE:
G:
CA
D
Joh
nston
Joh
n
15
5
sheets
JO
H
N
D
0727
dwg
3/
17
201
7
1
0
32
AM
SEAL
SEAL
SMITH
GARDNER
ENGINEERS
14 N. Boylan Avenue, Raleigh NC 27603
NC LIC. NO. F-1370 (ENGINEERING)
919.828.0577
Electronic files are instruments ofserviceprovided bySmith
Gardner, Inc. for theconvenience oftheintended recipient(s), and
nowarranty is either expressed or implied. Anyreuse or
redistribution ofthis document inwholeor partwithout the
written authorization of Smith Gardner, Inc., willbe at thesole
riskofthe recipient. If there is adiscrepancy between the
electronic files and the signed andsealedhard copies, thehard
copies shall govern. Useof any electronic files generatedor
provided by Smith Gardner, Inc., constitutesan acceptance of
these terms and conditions.
2017 Smith Gardner, Inc.
JOHNSTON COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF
SOLID WASTE SERVICES
JOHNSTON COUNTY
LANDFILL
PHASES 6-10
OPTION 3
FULL DEVELOPMENT
P.K.S.
C.T.J.
JOHN 15-5
AS SHOWN
Mar 2017
JOHN-D0727
FIG.5
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
ATTACHMENT 1
BUFFER DETERMINATION
ATTACHMENT 2
DMS MITIGATION ACCEPTANCE
ATTACHMENT 3
ACCEPTED WASTES
EXCERPT FROM OPERATIONS MANUAL)
Operations Manual
Johnston County Landfill Facility
Smithfield, North Carolina
Preparedfor:
Johnston County Department of Solid Waste Services
Smithfield, North Carolina
December 2013
Revised: May 2015
2015 SmithGardner, Inc.
This document is intended for the soleuse of the client for which it was prepared and
forthe purpose agreed upon by the client andSmith Gardner, Inc.
Johnston County Landfill Facility Operations Manual
December 2013 (Revised: May2015) TableofContents Pagei
Johnston County Landfill Facility
Smithfield, North Carolina
Operations Manual
Table of Contents
Page
1.0 GENERAL FACILITY OPERATIONS ............................................................................. 1
1.1 Contact Information .................................................................................................. 1
1.1.1 Johnston County (County) ............................................................................. 1
1.1.2 North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources ........ 2
1.2 Facility Operating Hours ........................................................................................... 2
1.3 Site Access ................................................................................................................. 2
1.3.1 Physical Restraints ....................................................................................... 3
1.3.2 Security .......................................................................................................... 3
1.4 Signage ...................................................................................................................... 3
1.4.1 Waste Limit Markers ..................................................................................... 3
1.5 Communications........................................................................................................ 4
1.6 Fire Control ................................................................................................................ 4
1.6.1 Open Burning ................................................................................................ 4
1.6.2 Fire Tetrahedron ........................................................................................... 4
1.6.3 Equipment ..................................................................................................... 5
1.6.4 General Fire Management Strategies .......................................................... 5
1.6.5 Fires Within Disposal Areas.......................................................................... 5
1.6.6 Notification .................................................................................................... 6
1.6.7 Coordination With Local Fire Department ................................................... 6
1.7 Severe Weather Conditions ....................................................................................... 6
1.7.1 Ice Storms ..................................................................................................... 6
1.7.2 Heavy Rains ................................................................................................... 6
1.7.3 Electrical Storms .......................................................................................... 7
1.7.4 Windy Conditions ........................................................................................... 7
1.7.5 Violent Storms ............................................................................................... 7
1.8 Equipment Requirements ......................................................................................... 7
1.9 Personnel Requirements .......................................................................................... 8
1.10 Health and Safety ...................................................................................................... 8
1.10.1 Personal Hygiene ......................................................................................... 8
1.10.2 Personal Protective Equipment .................................................................. 8
1.10.3 Mechanical Equipment Hazard Prevention ................................................ 9
1.10.4 Employee Health and Safety........................................................................ 9
1.10.5 Physical Exposure ........................................................................................ 9
1.10.6 Safety Data Sheets ..................................................................................... 10
1.11 Utilities ..................................................................................................................... 10
1.12 Record Keeping Program........................................................................................ 10
Johnston County Landfill Facility Operations Manual
December 2013 (Revised: May2015) Table ofContents Page ii
2.0 WASTE HANDLING OPERATIONS ............................................................................ 13
2.1 Acceptable Wastes .................................................................................................. 13
2.1.1 MSW Landfill Unit ........................................................................................ 13
2.1.2 C&D Landfill Unit ........................................................................................ 13
2.2 Prohibited Wastes ................................................................................................... 14
2.2.1 MSW Landfill Unit ........................................................................................ 14
2.2.2 C&D Landfill Unit ........................................................................................ 14
2.3 Waste Screening Programs .................................................................................... 16
2.3.1 Waste Receiving and Inspection ................................................................. 16
2.3.2 Hazardous Waste Contingency Plan ........................................................... 17
2.4 Waste Disposal ........................................................................................................ 18
2.4.1 Access .......................................................................................................... 18
2.4.2 General Procedures .................................................................................... 18
2.4.3 Lined Landfill Units ..................................................................................... 19
2.4.3.1 Cell Operations and Phasing ........................................................ 19
2.4.3.2 Cell Activation ............................................................................... 20
2.4.3.3 Placement of Initial Lift ................................................................ 20
2.4.3.4 Equipment Operations Within the Landfill .................................. 21
2.4.3.5 Tipper Operations (If Applicable) ................................................. 21
2.4.4 Special Waste Management ....................................................................... 22
2.4.4.1 Asbestos Management (MSW or C&D Landfill Units) ................. 22
2.4.4.2 Sewage Sludge Management (MSW Landfill Unit) ...................... 22
2.4.4.3 Spoiled Food and Animal Waste (MSW Landfill Unit) .................. 23
2.4.5 Daily or Periodic Cover ............................................................................... 23
2.4.5.1 MSW Landfill Unit ......................................................................... 23
2.4.5.2 C&D Landfill Unit .......................................................................... 23
2.4.6 Alternate Daily Cover .................................................................................. 24
2.4.6.1 Tarps (Tarpomatic) ....................................................................... 24
2.4.6.2 Auto Shredder Residue (ASR) ...................................................... 25
2.4.6.3 Other Materials/Methods ............................................................. 25
2.4.7 Intermediate Cover ..................................................................................... 26
2.4.8 Height Monitoring ....................................................................................... 26
2.5 Yard Waste Processing Area Operations ................................................................ 26
2.6 Convenience Center Operations ............................................................................. 27
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ........................................................................... 29
3.1 Surface Water Control............................................................................................. 29
3.1.1 Surface Water Run-On Control ................................................................... 29
3.1.2 Active Face Run-Off Control ....................................................................... 29
3.1.3 Separation of Stormwater/Leachate - Lined Landfill Units ...................... 30
3.1.4 Erosion Control ........................................................................................... 30
3.1.5 Sedimentation Control ................................................................................ 30
3.1.6 NPDES Requirements ................................................................................. 31
3.2 Leachate Management - Lined Landfill Units ........................................................ 31
3.2.1 Leachate Collection System (LCS) ............................................................. 31
3.2.1.1 Drainage Aggregate Maintenance ............................................... 32
3.2.1.2 Collection Pipe Cleanout .............................................................. 32
Johnston County Landfill Facility Operations Manual
December 2013 (Revised: May2015) Table of Contents Page iii
3.2.1.3 Leachate Removal ........................................................................ 32
3.2.1.4 O&M of Leachate Pumps and Storage Lagoon............................ 33
3.2.2 Leak Detection System - Phase 4A MSW Landfill Unit .............................. 33
3.2.3 Leachate Quality Sampling ......................................................................... 33
3.2.4 Record Keeping ........................................................................................... 34
3.2.5 Leachate Contingency Plan ........................................................................ 34
3.2.6 Operation of Leachate Lagoon/Wastewater Equalization Basin ............... 34
3.3 Water Quality Monitoring ........................................................................................ 35
3.4 Landfill Gas (LFG) Management ............................................................................. 35
3.4.1 MSW Landfill Units ...................................................................................... 35
3.4.2 C&D Landfill Unit ........................................................................................ 36
3.5 Landfill Gas (LFG) Monitoring Plan......................................................................... 36
3.5.1 Record Keeping ........................................................................................... 36
3.6 Vector Control .......................................................................................................... 36
3.6.1 MSW Landfill Units ...................................................................................... 36
3.6.2 C&D Landfill Unit ........................................................................................ 36
3.7 Litter Control ........................................................................................................... 37
3.8 Odor Control ............................................................................................................ 37
3.8.1 MSW Landfill Units ...................................................................................... 37
3.8.2 C&D Landfill Unit ........................................................................................ 37
3.9 Dust Control............................................................................................................. 37
3.10 Air Quality ................................................................................................................ 37
3.11 Leachate Seeps ....................................................................................................... 37
3.12 Irrigation of Reclaimed Wastewater ....................................................................... 38
TABLES
Table 1 Equipment Requirements ............................................................................. 7
FIGURES
Figure 1 Existing and Proposed Landfill Units and Solid Waste Management
Activities
Figure 2 Convenience Center Site Plan
Figure 3A Leachate Collection Pipe Cleanout Locations - MSW Phase 4A
Figure 3B Leachate Collection Pipe Cleanout Locations - MSW Phase 5
Figure 3C Leachate Collection Pipe Cleanout Locations - C&D Area 2
APPENDICES
Appendix A Fire Occurrence Notification Form
Appendix B Paint Filter Liquids Test
Appendix C Waste Screening Form
Appendix D Cell Activation Forms
Appendix E Reclaimed Wastewater Training Information
Johnston County Landfill Facility Operations Manual
December 2013 (Revised: October2014) 2.0 WasteHandling Operations Page 13
2.0 WASTE HANDLING OPERATIONS
This section describes the required waste handling operations for the Johnston County Landfill
facility. In addition to the MSW and C&D waste disposed of at this facility, the County also
processes wood/yard waste, recyclables, scrap tires, and white goods. These materials are
stored at the landfill facility until there are sufficient quantities for pick up by various recycling
contractors.
2.1 Acceptable Wastes
2.1.1 MSW Landfill Unit
Non-hazardous solid waste as defined by NCGS 130A-290(a)(35) generated within
the approved service area may be disposed of in the MSW landfill unit. In
addition, the special wastes described in Section 2.4.4 may also be disposed of in
the MSW landfill unit.
2.1.2 C&DLandfill Unit
Only the following wastes generated within the approved service area may be
disposed of in the C&D landfill unit:
Construction and Demolition (C&D) Solid Waste: as defined in 15A NCAC
13B.0532(8) means solid waste resulting solely from construction,
remodeling, repair, or demolition operations on pavement and buildings
or structures. C&D waste does not include municipal and industrial
wastes that may be generated by the on-going operations at buildings or
structures.
Inert Debris: as defined in 15A NCAC 13B.0101(22) means concrete,
brick, concrete block, uncontaminated soil, gravel and rock, and
untreated and unpainted wood.
Land Clearing Waste: as defined in 15A NCAC 13B.0101(23) means solid
waste which is generated solely from land-clearing activities, limited to
stumps, trees, limbs, brush, grass, and other naturally occurring
vegetative material.
Asphalt: in accordance with NCGS 130A-294(m).
Industrial solid waste that is generated by mobile or modular home
manufacturers and asphalt shingle manufacturers. The waste must be
separated at the manufacturing site to exclude municipal solid waste,
hazardous waste, and other waste prohibited from disposal in a
Construction and Demolition Landfill.
Other Wastes as Approved by the Solid Waste Section of the Division of
Waste Management.
Johnston County Landfill Facility Operations Manual
December 2013 (Revised: October2014) 2.0 WasteHandling Operations Page 14
In addition, the special wastes (asbestos only) described in Section 2.4.4 may
also be disposed of in the C&D landfill unit.
2.2 Prohibited Wastes
2.2.1 MSW Landfill Unit
The following wastes are prohibited from disposal within the MSW landfill unit:
Used Oil and Motor Vehicle Oil Filters;
Yard Waste;
White Goods;
Antifreeze (ethylene glycol);
Aluminum Cans;
Whole Scrap Tires;
Lead Acid Batteries;
Certain Recyclable Rigid Plastic Containers (per NCGS 130A-
309.10(f)(11));
Wooden Pallets;
Oyster Shells;
Discarded Computer Equipment and Televisions;
Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D) (Except when allowed by the
County).
In addition, operating criteria prohibit other materials from disposal within the
MSW landfill unit. These materials include:
Hazardous waste as defined by NCGS 130A-290(a)(8), including hazardous
waste from conditionally exempt small quantity generators.
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) wastes as defined in 40 CFR 761 with the
exception of trace amounts found in materials such as consumer
electronics.
Bulk or non-containerized liquid wastes unless the waste is household
waste other than septic waste and waste oil; or the waste is leachate or
gas condensate derived from the MSW landfill unit. A liquid
determination will be performed by the paint filter test (see Appendix B
for apparatus and procedure).
Containers holding liquid wastes unless the waste is household waste.
2.2.2 C&DLandfill Unit
Only wastes as defined in Section 2.1.2 above may be accepted for disposal in
the C&D landfill unit. Prohibited wastes include waste exclusions listed in 15A
NCAC 13B 0.0542 as follows:
ATTACHMENT 4
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Constituentsfor Detection Monitoring
40 CFR 258, Appendix I)
Common name CAS RN
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Barium (Total)
Beryllium (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Cobalt (Total)
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Selenium (Total)
Silver (Total)
Thallium (Total)
Vanadium (Total)
Zinc (Total)
Acetone 67-64-1
Acrylonitrile 107-13-1
Benzene 71-43-2
Bromochloromethane 74-97-5
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4
Bromoform; Tribromomethane 75-25-2
Carbon disulfide 75-15-0
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5
Chlorobenzene 108-90-7
Chloroethane; Ethylchloride 75-00-3
Chloroform; Trichloromethane 67-66-3
Dibromochloromethane; Chlorodibromomethane 124-48-1
1,2-Dibromo-3-chlorpropane; DBCP 96-12-8
1,2-Dibromoethane; Ethylene dibromide; EDB 106-93-4
o-Dichlorobenzene; 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1
p-Dichlorobenzene; 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7
trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene 110-57-6
1,1-Dichloroethane; Ethylidene chloride 75-34-3
1,2-Dichloroethane; Ethlyene dichloride 107-06-2
1,1-Dichloroethylene; 1-1-Dichloroethene; Vinylidene
chloride
75-35-4
cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene; cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2
trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene; trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5
1,2-Dichlorpropane; Propylene dichloride 78-87-5
cis-1,3-Dichlorpropene 10061-01-5
trans-1,3-Dichlorpropene 10061-02-6
Ethylbenzene 100-41-4
2-hexanone; Methylbutyl ketone 591-78-6
Methylbromide; Bromomethane 74-83-9
Methyl chloride; Chloromethane 74-87-3
Methylene bromide Dibromomethane 74-95-3
Methylene chloride; Dichloromethane 75-09-2
Methylethylketone; MEK; 2-Butanone 78-93-3
Methyl iodide; Iodomethane 74-88-4
4-Methyl-2-pentanone; Methylisobutylisobutyl
ketone
108-10-1
Styrene 100-42-5
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 630-20-6
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5
Tetrachloroethylene; Tetracholorethene;
Perchloroethylene
127-18-4
Toluene 108-88-3
1,1,1-Trochlorethane; Methylchloroform 71-55-6
1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5
Trichloroethylene; Trichlorethene 79-01-6
Trichlorofluoromethane; CFC-11 75-69-4
1,2,3-Trichloropropane 96-18-4
Vinyl acetate 108-05-4
Vinyl chloride 75-01-4
Xylenes 1330-20-7
ATTACHMENT 5
LOCATION RESTRICTIONS
15A NCAC 13B .1622 LOCATION RESTRICTIONS FOR MSWLF FACILITY SITING
MSWLF units shall comply with the siting criteria set forth in this Rule. In order to demonstrate compliance with specific criteria,
documentation orapprovalbyagencies other than the Divisionof SolidWasteManagement may be required. The scopeofdemonstrations
including design and construction performance shall be discussed in a site study and completed in the permit application.
1) Airport Safety.
a) A newMSWLF unit shall be located no closerthan 5,000 feet from any airport runway usedonly bypiston-
powered aircraft and no closer than 10,000 feet from any runway used byturbine -powered aircraft.
b) Ownersor operators proposing to site a newMSWLF unit or lateral expansion within a five-mile radius of
anyairport runwayused byturbine-powered orpiston-poweredaircraft shall notify the affectedairport and
the Federal Aviation Administration prior to submitting a permit application to the Division.
c) Thepermittee ofany existing MSWLF unit or a lateral expansion located within 5,000 feetfrom anyairport
runway used by only piston-powered aircraft or within 10,000 feet from any runway used by turbine-
powered aircraft shall demonstrate that the existing MSWLF unit does not pose a bird hazard to aircraft.
The owner or operator shall place the demonstration in the operating record and notifythe Division that it
has been placed in the operating record.
d) For purposes of this Paragraph:
i) Airport means a public-use airport open to the public without prior permission and without
restrictions within the physical capacities of the available facilities.
ii) Bird hazard means an increasein the likelihood of bird/aircraft collisions that may cause damage
to the aircraft or injury to its occupants.
2) Floodplains.
a) New MSWLF units, existing MSWLF units, and lateral expansions shall not be located in 100 -year
floodplains unlessthe owners or operatorsdemonstrate that theunitwill not restrictthe flowofthe100-year
flood, reduce the temporary water storagecapacityof thefloodplain, orresult in washout ofsolid wasteso
as to pose a hazard to human health and the environment.
b) For purposes of this Paragraph:
i) "Floodplain" means the lowland and relatively flat areas adjoining inland and coastal waters,
including flood-prone areas of offshore islands, that are inundated by the 100 -year flood.
ii) "100-year flood" means a flood that has a 1-percent or greater chance of recurring in any given
year or a flood of a magnitude equalled or exceeded once in 100 years on the average over a
significantly long period.
iii) "Washout" means the carrying away of solid waste bywaters of the base flood.
3) Wetlands.
a) New MSWLF units and lateralexpansions shall notbe locatedinwetlands, unless theowneror operatorcan
make the following demonstrations to the Division:
i) Where applicable underSection404 of the Clean WaterAct or applicableStatewetlandslaws, the
presumption that apracticable alternativeto the proposed landfill facilityis available whichdoes
not involve wetlands is clearly rebutted.
ii) The construction and operation of the MSWLF unit will not:
A) Cause or contribute to violations of any applicable State water quality standard;
B) Violate any applicable toxic effluent standard or prohibition under Section 307 of the
Clean Water Act;
C) Jeopardize the continued existenceofendangered or threatened species or resultinthe
destruction or adverse modification of a critical habitat, protected under the Federal
Endangered Species Act of 1973; and
D) Violate anyrequirement under the Marine Protection, Research, andSanctuariesActof
1972 for the protection of a marine sanctuary.
iii) TheMSWLF unit willnot cause or contributetosignificant degradationof wetlands. Theowner
or operator shall demonstrate theintegrityoftheMSWLF unit and its abilityto protect ecological
resources by addressing the following factors:
A) Erosion, stability, and migration potential of native wetland soils, muds and deposits
used to support the MSWLF unit;
B) Erosion, stability, andmigrationpotential of dredged andfill materialsused to support
the MSWLF unit;
C) The volume and chemical nature of the waste managed in the MSWLF unit;
D) Impacts on fish, wildlife, and other aquatic resources and their habitat from release of
the solid waste;
E) The potential effects of catastrophic release of waste to the wetland and the resulting
impacts on the environment; and
F) Any additional factors, as necessary, to demonstrate that ecological resources in the
wetland are sufficiently protected.
iv) To the extent required under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act or applicable State wetlands
laws, steps have been taken to attempt to achieve no net loss of wetlands (as defined by acreage
andfunction) by first avoidingimpacts to wetlands to themaximumextent practicableasrequired
by Subitem (3)(a)(i) of this Rule, then minimizing unavoidableimpacts to the maximum extent
practicable, and finally offsettingremainingunavoidablewetland impactsthroughall appropriate
andpracticable compensatory mitigation actions (e.g., restoration ofexisting degradedwetlands
or creation of man-made wetlands); and
v) Sufficient information is available to make a reasonable determination with respect to these
demonstrations.
b) For purposes of this Item, wetlands means those areas that are defined in 40 CFR 232.2(r).
4) Fault Areas.
a) New MSWLF units and lateralexpansions shall notbe locatedwithin200 feet (60meters) ofafault that has
had displacement in Holocene time unless the owner or operator demonstrates to the Division that an
alternative setback distanceof less than 200 feet (60meters) will prevent damagetothestructural integrity
of the MSWLF unit and will be protective of human health and the environment.
b) For the purposes of this Item:
i) "Fault" means afracture orazone offractures inany material along which strataon oneside have
been displaced with respect to that on the other side.
ii) "Displacement" means the relative movement of any two sides of a fault measured in any
direction.
iii) "Holocene" means themost recentepoch ofthe Quaternary period, extending fromtheend of the
Pleistocene Epoch to the present.
5) Seismic Impact Zones.
a) New MSWLF units and lateralexpansions shall notbe locatedinseismic impact zones, unlessthe owner or
operator demonstrates tothe Division that all containment structures, including liners, leachate collection
systems, and surface water control systems, aredesigned to resist the maximum horizontal acceleration in
lithified earth material for the site.
b) For the purposes of this Item:
i) "Seismicimpact zone" means an area with a ten percent or greaterprobability thatthemaximum
horizontal acceleration in lithified earth material, expressed as a percentage of the earth's
gravitational pull (g), will exceed 0.10g in 250 years.
ii) "Maximum horizontal acceleration in lithified earth material" means the maximum expected
horizontal acceleration depictedonaseismic hazard map, with a 90percent orgreaterprobability
that the acceleration will not be exceeded in 250 years, or the maximum expected horizontal
acceleration based on a site-specific seismic risk assessment.
iii) "Lithified earth material" means all rock, including all naturally occurring and naturally formed
aggregatesor masses of minerals or small particlesof older rock that formed bycrystallization of
magmaor byindurationof loosesediments. This termdoes not includeman-madematerials, such
as fill, concrete, and asphalt, or unconsolidated earth materials, soil, or regolith lying at or near
the earth surface.
6) Unstable Areas.
a) Owners or operators of new MSWLF units, existing MSWLF units, and lateral expansions located in an
unstable area shall demonstrate thatengineering measures have been incorporated into the MSWLF unit's
design to ensure that the integrity of the structural components of the MSWLF unit will not be disrupted.
The owner or operator shall consider the following factors, at a minimum, when determining whether an
area is unstable:
i) On-site or local soil conditions that may result in significant differential settling;
ii) On-site or local geologic or geomorphologic features; and
iii) On-site or local human-made features or events (both surface and subsurface).
b) For purposes of this Item:
i) "Unstable area" means a location that is susceptibletonatural orhuman-induced eventsorforces
capable of impairing theintegrity of some or all of the landfill structural components responsible
for preventing releases from a landfill. Unstable areas can include poor foundation conditions,
areas susceptible to mass movements, and Karst terranes.
ii) "Structural components" meansliners, leachatecollection systems, finalcovers, run-on orrun-off
systems, and any other component used in theconstruction and operation of the MSWLF thatis
necessary for protection of human health and the environment.
iii) "Poorfoundation conditions" means those areas where features existwhich indicate that anatural
or man-induced event may result ininadequatefoundation support for thestructural components
of an MSWLF unit.
iv) "Areas susceptibletomass movement" meansthoseareasof influence (i.e., areascharacterized as
having an active or substantial possibility of mass movement) where the movement of earth
material at, beneath, or adjacent to the MSWLF unit, because ofnatural or man-induced events,
results in the downslope transport of soil and rock material by means of gravitational influence.
Areas ofmass movementinclude, butarenot limited to, landslides, avalanches, debrisslides and
flows, soil fluction, block sliding, and rock fall.
v) "Karst terranes" means areas where karst topography, with its characteristic surface and
subterranean features, is developed as the result of dissolution of limestone, dolomite, or other
soluble rock. Characteristic physiographic features present inkarst terranes include, but are not
limited to, sinkholes, sinking streams, caves, large springs, and blind valleys.
7) Cultural Resources. A new MSWLF unit or lateral expansion shall not damage or destroy an archaeological or
historical property. The Department ofCultural Resourcesshall determinearcheological orhistoricalsignificance. To
aid in making adetermination astowhether the property is ofarcheological or historical significance, theDepartment
of Cultural Resources mayrequest the owner oroperator to perform a site-specific survey which shall be included in
the Site Study.
8) StateNature andHistoricPreserve. Anew MSWLFunit or lateral expansionshallnot havean adverse impacton any
lands included in the State Nature and Historic Preserve.
9) Water Supply Watersheds.
a) A newMSWLF unit orlateral expansion shall not belocatedinthecritical area of awatersupplywatershed
or in the watershed for a stream segment classified as WS-I, in accordance with the rules codified at 15A
NCAC 2B .0200 - "Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable To Surface Waters Of North
Carolina."
b) Any newMSWLF unitor lateral expansion, which shall discharge leachate to surface watersatthelandfill
facility and must obtain a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit from the
Divisionof Environmental Managementpursuant toSection 402ofthe UnitedStates Clean Water Act, shall
not belocated within watershedsclassified asWS-II or WS-III, inaccordance withthe rulescodifiedat15A
NCAC 2B .0200 - "Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable To Surface Waters Of North
Carolina."
10) Endangered and Threatened Species. A new MSWLF unit or lateral expansion shall not jeopardize the continued
existence of endangered orthreatened speciesor result in thedestructionor adverse modification of a critical habitat,
protected under the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973.
History Note: Authority G.S. 130A-294;
Eff. October 9, 1993.
ATTACHMENT 6
STREAM PHOTOS & NCSAM FORMS
NCSAM Middle Reach
NCSAM Upper Reach
98
7
6
54321
201918171615
14
13121110
Johnston CountyLandfillJohnstonCounty
0 75 150Feet Figure : Photo Locations
Map Date:
Revised:
Revised:
Revised: 2013 NC Statewide Aerial Photography
December 2016^_Photo Locations
Streams
Johnston County Landfill August 31, 2016
Site Photographs
Page 1 of 10
Photo 1: Looking north inside old pond bed.
Photo 2: Looking south inside old pond bed.
Johnston County Landfill August 31, 2016
Site Photographs
Page 2 of 10
Photo 3: Looking south within old pond bed.
Photo 4: View of channel inside old pond bed.
Johnston County Landfill August 31, 2016
Site Photographs
Page 3 of 10
Photo 5: Looking south within old pond bed.
Photo 6: Looking south within old pond bed (~100’ south of photo 5)
Johnston County Landfill August 31, 2016
Site Photographs
Page 4 of 10
Photo 7: View of channel inside old pond bed.
Photo 8: Channel inside forest above old pond / NCSAM location “Middle Reach”.
Johnston County Landfill August 31, 2016
Site Photographs
Page 5 of 10
Photo 9: Looking south (upstream) inside forest.
Photo 10: Looking south (upstream) inside forest.
Johnston County Landfill August 31, 2016
Site Photographs
Page 6 of 10
Photo 11: Looking north (downstream) inside forest.
Photo 12: View of channel inside forest, near wet/dry transition.
Johnston County Landfill August 31, 2016
Site Photographs
Page 7 of 10
Photo 13: Looking south (upstream) inside forest. Intermittent reach.
Photo 14: Looking south (upstream) inside forest. Intermittent reach.
Johnston County Landfill August 31, 2016
Site Photographs
Page 8 of 10
Photo 15: View of channel oriented southeast (upstream) at subsurface break in flow.
Photo 16: View of channel oriented down/south in intermittent reach.
Johnston County Landfill August 31, 2016
Site Photographs
Page 9 of 10
Photo 17: View of channel looking downstream, inside intermittent reach.
Photo 18: View of channel oriented southeast (upstream) inside perennial reach.
Johnston County Landfill August 31, 2016
Site Photographs
Page 10 of 10
Photo 19: View of channel looking downstream inside perennial reach.
Photo 20: View of channel looking south (upstream)/ NCSAM site “Upper Reach”.
USACE AID #:NCDWR #:
PROJECT / SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any):2. Dateof evaluation:
3. Applicant/owner name:
5. County:6. Nearestnamed water body
7. River Basin: on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
8. Sitecoordinates (decimaldegrees, atlower end ofassessment reach):
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and widthcan be approximations)
9. Sitenumber (showon attached map):10. Length of assessmentreach evaluated (feet):
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) totopof bank (feet):Unableto assesschanneldepth.
12. Channel width attop ofbank (feet):13. Is assessment reach a swampstream?Yes No
14. Feature type:Perennial flow Intermittentflow Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATINGINFORMATION:
15. NCSAMZone:Mountains (M)Piedmont (P)InnerCoastalPlain (I)OuterCoastalPlain (O)
16. Estimatedgeomorphic
valley shape (skip for a b
Tidal Marsh Stream):(more sinuousstream, flatter valleyslope)(less sinuous stream, steeper valleyslope)
17. Watershedsize: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1mi2)Size2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi2)Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi2)Size4 ( 5mi2)
for TidalMarshStream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerationsevaluated?Yes No IfYes, check all that appy totheassessment area.
Section 10water Classified Trout Waters Water Supply Watershed (I II III IV V)
Essential Fish Habitat PrimaryNurseryArea High Quality Waters/OutstandingResource Waters
Publiclyowned property NCDWRriparian bufferrule in effect Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Anadromous fish 303(d) List CAMA Area ofEnvironmental Concern (AEC)
Documented presenceofa federal and/orstate listed protectedspecies within the assessment area.
Listspecies:
DesignatedCriticalHabitat (list species):
19. Areadditionalstream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" sectionorattached?Yes No
1.Channel Water – assessment reach metric (skip forSize 1 streams and TidalMarsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, waterinpools only.
C No waterinassessment reach.
2.Evidence of Flow Restriction – assessment reach metric
A Atleast10% ofassessment reachin-stream habitatorriffle-pool sequence is adverselyaffected bya flowrestriction orfill to the
pointof obstructing flowor achannelchoked with aquaticmacrophytesor ponded water or impoundedon flood orebbwithin
theassessment reach (examples: undersized orperchedculverts, causewaysthatconstrict the channel, tidalgates).
B NotA
3.Feature Pattern – assessment reachmetric
A Amajorityof the assessmentreach hasalteredpattern (examples: straightening, modificationaboveorbelowculvert).
B NotA.
4.Feature LongitudinalProfile – assessmentreach metric
A Majority ofassessment reachhas asubstantiallyalteredstreamprofile (examples: channeldown-cutting, existingdamming,
overwidening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavationwhere appropriate channelprofile has not reformed fromany of
thesedisturbances).
B NotA
5.Signs ofActive Instability – assessment reachmetric
Consider onlycurrent instability, notpastevents from which the streamhas currently recovered. Examples of instabilityinclude
activebank failure, activechanneldown-cutting (head-cut), activewidening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip-rap).
A < 10% ofchannelunstable
B 10to 25% ofchannelunstable
C > 25% ofchannelunstable
6.StreamsideArea Interaction – streamside area metric
Consider forthe Left Bank (LB) and the RightBank (RB).
LB RB
A A Little or no evidenceof conditionsthatadverselyaffectreference interaction
B B Moderate evidence ofconditions (examples: berms, levees, down-cutting, aggradation, dredging) thatadverselyaffect
reference interaction (examples: limitedstreamsidearea access, disruption of flood flows through streamsidearea,
leaky orintermittent bulkheads, causeways withfloodplainconstriction, minor ditching [including mosquitoditching])
C C Extensive evidence of conditionsthatadverselyaffectreference interaction (little to nofloodplain/intertidal zone access
examples: causeways withfloodplain and channelconstriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows throughstreamsidearea] ortoo muchfloodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquitoditching]) or floodplain/intertidalzone unnaturally absent orassessmentreach is a
man-madefeature on an interstream divide
7.Water Quality Stressors – assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check allthatapply.
A Discoloredwaterin stream or intertidalzone (milkywhite, blue, unnatural waterdiscoloration, oilsheen, streamfoam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying ofstream features or intertidalzone)
0.5
4
NC SAMFIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User ManualVersion2.1
INSTRUCTIONS:Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs.Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle,and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation.If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property,identify and number all reaches on the attached map,and include a separate form for each reach.See the NC SAM User
Manualfor detailed descriptions and explanations of requestedinformation. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section ifany supplementary
NOTEEVIDENCE OFSTRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do notneed to bewithinthe assessment area).
measurements were performed. See the NCSAMUser Manualfor examples ofadditionalmeasurementsthatmay be relevant.
JohnstonCountyLandfill July 22, 2016
Mid-Reach 200
JohnstonCounty 4. Assessor name/organization:C. Hopper, P. May, G. Price
Johnston
Neuse Middle Creek
C Noticeableevidence ofpollutant discharges enteringtheassessment reachandcausing a waterquality problem
D Odor (not including natural sulfideodors)
E Current published or collected dataindicating degraded water quality intheassessment reach. Cite sourceinthe "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F Livestock with access to streamor intertidalzone
G Excessive algae in stream or intertidalzone
H Degradedmarsh vegetationin the intertidalzone (removal, burning, regularmowing, destruction, etc.)
I Other:(explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
J Little to nostressors
8.Recent Weather – watershed metric
For Size1 or 2 streams, D1 droughtor higher isconsidered adrought; for Size3 or 4streams, D2 droughtor higheris considered a
drought.
A Drought conditionsandnorainfallorrainfall not exceeding 1inchwithin the last 48 hours
B Drought conditionsandrainfallexceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
C No drought conditions
9 Large orDangerous Stream – assessmentreach metric
Yes No Isstream is too largeordangerousto assess? If Yes, skip toMetric13 (Streamside AreaGroundSurfaceCondition).
10.Natural In-stream HabitatTypes – assessment reachmetric
10a.Yes No Degraded in-stream habitatovermajorityof the assessmentreach (examplesof stressorsinclude excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in-stream hardening [for example, rip-rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
evaluate forsize 4Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b.Check allthat occur (occurs if > 5% coverage ofassessment reach) (skip forSize4 Coastal Plainstreams)
A Multipleaquatic macrophytesandaquatic mosses F 5% oysters or othernatural hard bottoms
includeliverworts, lichens, andalgalmats)G Submerged aquatic vegetation
B Multiplesticks and/orleaf packs and/or emergent H Low-tide refugia (pools)
vegetation I Sand bottom
C Multiplesnags and logs (including laptrees)J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
D 5% undercutbanks and/or root mats and/or roots K Little orno habitat
inbanks extend to the normalwetted perimeter
E Little orno habitat
11.Bedformand Substrate – assessmentreach metric (skip forSize4 Coastal Plainstreams andTidal Marsh Streams)
11a.Yes No Isassessment reach ina natural sand-bedstream? (skip forCoastalPlain streams)
11b.Bedform evaluated. Checkthe appropriatebox(es).
A Riffle-run section (evaluate11c)
B Pool-glide section (evaluate11d)
C Naturalbedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c.In riffles sections, check allthat occurbelowthe normalwettedperimeterof the assessment reach – whether ornotsubmerged.
Check at least onebox in each row (skipforSize4 Coastal PlainStreams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) =
absent, Rare (R) = presentbut 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%, Abundant (A) = > 40-70%, Predominant (P) = > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should notexceed100% for each assessmentreach.
NP R C A P
Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder (256 – 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 – 256mm)
Gravel (2 – 64 mm)
Sand (.062 – 2mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip-rap, concrete, etc.)
11d.Yes No Are poolsfilled withsediment? (skipfor Size 4 CoastalPlain streams and TidalMarshStreams)
12.Aquatic Life – assessment reachmetric (skipfor Size 4CoastalPlain streams andTidal MarshStreams)
12a.Yes No Was an in-streamaquatic life assessmentperformed asdescribed in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the followingreasons and skipto Metric13. No Water Other:
12b.Yes No Are aquatic organismspresentintheassessment reach (lookinriffles, pools, thensnags)? IfYes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric13.
1 >1 Numbersovercolumns referto “individuals” for size1 and 2streams and “taxa” for size3 and 4streams.
Adultfrogs
Aquatic reptiles
Aquatic macrophytesandaquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, andalgalmats)
Beetles (including waterpennies)
Caddisflylarvae (Trichoptera [T])
Asian clam (Corbicula )
Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
Dipterans (true flies)
Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
Midges/mosquito larvae
Mosquito fish (Gambusia ) ormudminnows (Umbra pygmaea)
Mussels/Clams (notCorbicula )
Other fish
Salamanders/tadpoles
Snails
Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
Tipulidlarvae
REMAINING QUESTIONS ARENOT APPLICABLE FORTIDALMARSH STREAMS****************************
Ch
eck
for
Tidal
Ma
rsh
Streams
on
ly
Worms/leeches
13.StreamsideArea GroundSurface Condition – streamside areametric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and Bvalleytypes)
Consider forthe Left Bank (LB) and the RightBank (RB). Consider storage capacity withregardto bothoverbank flowand
upland runoff.
LB RB
A A Little or no alterationto water storage capacity over a majorityofthestreamside area
B B Moderatealteration towater storagecapacityovera majority of the streamsidearea
C C Severealteration to waterstoragecapacityovera majority ofthestreamsidearea (examples include: ditches, fill,
soil, compaction, livestockdisturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainagepipes)
14.StreamsideArea Water Storage – streamside area metric (skip forSize1 streams, TidalMarshStreams, and Bvalleytypes)
Consider forthe Left Bank (LB) and the RightBank (RB) ofthe streamsidearea.
LB RB
A A Majority ofstreamside area withdepressions able topond water 6 inches deep
B B Majority ofstreamside area withdepressions able topond water 3to 6inchesdeep
C C Majority ofstreamside area withdepressions able topond water < 3 inchesdeep
15.Wetland Presence – streamsidearea metric (skip forTidalMarsh Streams)
Consider forthe Left Bank (LB) and the RightBank (RB). Do notconsider wetlands outside ofthestreamside area orwithin the
normalwettedperimeterofassessment reach.
LB RB
Y Y Arewetlandspresentinthestreamsidearea?
N N
16.Baseflow Contributors – assessmentreach metric (skip forsize 4 streams and TidalMarsh Streams)
Check all contributors within theassessmentreach orwithin view ofand draining to the assessmentreach.
A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sedimentbasinsor drydetention basins)
C Obstruction that passes some flowduringlow-flow periodswithin assessment area (beaver dam, bottom-releasedam)
D Evidence of bank seepage orsweating (iron oxidizing bacteriainwaterindicates seepage)
E Stream bedorbanksoilreduced (dig through deposited sedimentifpresent)
F None oftheabove
17.Baseflow Detractors – assessmentarea metric (skip forTidalMarsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
A Evidence of substantialwaterwithdrawals from the assessment reach (includesareas excavated for pumpinstallation)
B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periodsaffecting theassessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sedimentdeposit)
C Urban stream ( 24% impervious surface forwatershed)
D Evidence thatthestream-side area has beenmodified resulting inaccelerated drainageintothe assessmentreach
E Assessmentreach relocated tovalley edge
F None oftheabove
18.Shading – assessmentreach metric (skip forTidal Marsh Streams)
Consideraspect. Consider “leaf-on” condition.
A Stream shadingis appropriatefor stream category (may includegaps associatedwith natural processes)
B Degraded (example: scatteredtrees)
C Stream shadingis gone orlargelyabsent
19.BufferWidth – streamside area metric (skip forTidal Marsh Streams)
Consider “vegetated buffer” and “wooded buffer” separately for leftbank (LB) andright bank (RB) starting at thetop
ofbankout to thefirst break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
A A A A 100-feetwideor extends totheedge ofthewatershed
B B B B From 50to < 100-feetwide
C C C C From 30to < 50-feet wide
D D D D From 10to < 30-feet wide
E E E E < 10-feet wide or no trees
20.BufferStructure – streamside areametric (skip for Tidal MarshStreams)
Consider forleft bank (LB) and rightbank (RB) forMetric19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
A A Mature forest
B B Non-maturewoodyvegetation ormodified vegetation structure
C C Herbaceousvegetation with or withouta strip oftrees < 10 feetwide
D D Maintainedshrubs
E E Little orno vegetation
21.BufferStressors – streamside areametric (skip for TidalMarshStreams)
Check all appropriateboxesforleft bank (LB) and rightbank (RB). Indicate if listed stressorabutsstream (Abuts), does not abut but
iswithin 30feetofstream (< 30 feet), oris between30 to 50feetofstream (30-50feet).
If none ofthefollowing stressors occursoneitherbank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30feet 30-50feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
A A A A A A Row crops
B B B B B B Maintained turf
C C C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercialhorticulture
D D D D D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22.Stem Density – streamside areametric (skip for Tidal MarshStreams)
Consider forleft bank (LB) and rightbank (RB) forMetric19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
A A Medium to highstem density
B B Lowstem density
C C No wooded riparianbufferor predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23.Continuity ofVegetated Buffer – streamside areametric (skip forTidal Marsh Streams)
Considerwhether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areaslacking vegetation > 10-feetwide.
LB RB
A A The total lengthof buffer breaksis < 25 percent.
B B The total lengthof buffer breaksis between 25 and 50percent.
C C The total lengthof buffer breaksis > 50 percent.
24.Vegetative Composition – First 100 feetofstreamside area metric (skipfor TidalMarshStreams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of eachbank orto the edgeof the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
toassessment reachhabitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation isclose to undisturbedinspecies present and theirproportions. Lowerstrata composedof native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in termsofspecies diversity orproportions, butis still largelycomposedof native
species. Thismay include communities of weedy nativespecies that develop after clear-cuttingorclearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over alarge portion of the expected strataor
communities missing understory but retaining canopytrees.
C C Vegetation isseverely disturbed in termsof species diversity orproportions. Maturecanopy is absent or communities
with non-nativeinvasivespecies dominant over alarge portion ofexpected strataor communities composed ofplanted
stands ofnon-characteristic speciesorcommunitiesinappropriatelycomposed ofa single species or no vegetation.
25.Conductivity – assessment reach metric (skipforallCoastal Plain streams)
25a.Yes No Was aconductivity measurementrecorded?
If No, select one of thefollowing reasons. NoWater Other:
25b.Check the boxcorrespondingto the conductivitymeasurement (units ofmicrosiemens percentimeter).
A <46 B 46 to < 67 C 67 to < 79 D 79to < 230 E 230
Notes/Sketch:
No conductivitymeter
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NCSAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
4) Floodplain Access
4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
4) Microtopography
3) Stream Stability
4) Channel Stability
4) Sediment Transport
4) Stream Geomorphology
2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
1) Water Quality
2) Baseflow
2) Streamside Area Vegetation
3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
3) Thermoregulation
2) Indicators of Stressors
2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
1) Habitat
2) In-stream Habitat
3) Baseflow
3) Substrate
3) Stream Stability
3) In-stream Habitat
2) Stream-side Habitat
3) Stream-side Habitat
3) Thermoregulation
2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
3) Flow Restriction
3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
Overall
NCSAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
LOW
HIGH
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
NA
NA
2) Flood Flow
C. Hopper, P. May, G. Price
July 22, 2016
NO
YES
NO
Intermittent
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
2) Baseflow
Stream Category Assessor Name/Organization
HIGH
Ia2
Stream Site Name
HIGH
NA
Johnston County Landfill Date of Evaluation
MEDIUM
4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
NA
NA
LOW
NA
LOW
HIGH
3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
3) Streamside Area Attenuation
Function Class Rating Summary
1) Hydrology
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NO
NA
NA
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
HIGH
NO
NA
NA
HIGH
LOW
NA
NA
NA
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
NA
NA
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
USACE AID #:NCDWR #:
PROJECT / SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any):2. Dateof evaluation:
3. Applicant/owner name:
5. County:6. Nearestnamed water body
7. River Basin: on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
8. Sitecoordinates (decimaldegrees, atlower end ofassessment reach):
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and widthcan be approximations)
9. Sitenumber (showon attached map):10. Length of assessmentreach evaluated (feet):
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) totopof bank (feet):Unableto assesschanneldepth.
12. Channel width attop ofbank (feet):13. Is assessment reach a swampstream?Yes No
14. Feature type:Perennial flow Intermittentflow Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATINGINFORMATION:
15. NCSAMZone:Mountains (M)Piedmont (P)InnerCoastalPlain (I)OuterCoastalPlain (O)
16. Estimatedgeomorphic
valley shape (skip for a b
Tidal Marsh Stream):(more sinuousstream, flatter valleyslope)(less sinuous stream, steeper valleyslope)
17. Watershedsize: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1mi2)Size2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi2)Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi2)Size4 ( 5mi2)
for TidalMarshStream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerationsevaluated?Yes No IfYes, check all that appy totheassessment area.
Section 10water Classified Trout Waters Water Supply Watershed (I II III IV V)
Essential Fish Habitat PrimaryNurseryArea High Quality Waters/OutstandingResource Waters
Publiclyowned property NCDWRriparian bufferrule in effect Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Anadromous fish 303(d) List CAMA Area ofEnvironmental Concern (AEC)
Documented presenceofa federal and/orstate listed protectedspecies within the assessment area.
Listspecies:
DesignatedCriticalHabitat (list species):
19. Areadditionalstream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" sectionorattached?Yes No
1.Channel Water – assessment reach metric (skip forSize 1 streams and TidalMarsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, waterinpools only.
C No waterinassessment reach.
2.Evidence of Flow Restriction – assessment reach metric
A Atleast10% ofassessment reachin-stream habitatorriffle-pool sequence is adverselyaffected bya flowrestriction orfill to the
pointof obstructing flowor achannelchoked with aquaticmacrophytesor ponded water or impoundedon flood orebbwithin
theassessment reach (examples: undersized orperchedculverts, causewaysthatconstrict the channel, tidalgates).
B NotA
3.Feature Pattern – assessment reachmetric
A Amajorityof the assessmentreach hasalteredpattern (examples: straightening, modificationaboveorbelowculvert).
B NotA.
4.Feature LongitudinalProfile – assessmentreach metric
A Majority ofassessment reachhas asubstantiallyalteredstreamprofile (examples: channeldown-cutting, existingdamming,
overwidening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavationwhere appropriate channelprofile has not reformed fromany of
thesedisturbances).
B NotA
5.Signs ofActive Instability – assessment reachmetric
Consider onlycurrent instability, notpastevents from which the streamhas currently recovered. Examples of instabilityinclude
activebank failure, activechanneldown-cutting (head-cut), activewidening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip-rap).
A < 10% ofchannelunstable
B 10to 25% ofchannelunstable
C > 25% ofchannelunstable
6.StreamsideArea Interaction – streamside area metric
Consider forthe Left Bank (LB) and the RightBank (RB).
LB RB
A A Little or no evidenceof conditionsthatadverselyaffectreference interaction
B B Moderate evidence ofconditions (examples: berms, levees, down-cutting, aggradation, dredging) thatadverselyaffect
reference interaction (examples: limitedstreamsidearea access, disruption of flood flows through streamsidearea,
leaky orintermittent bulkheads, causeways withfloodplainconstriction, minor ditching [including mosquitoditching])
C C Extensive evidence of conditionsthatadverselyaffectreference interaction (little to nofloodplain/intertidal zone access
examples: causeways withfloodplain and channelconstriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows throughstreamsidearea] ortoo muchfloodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquitoditching]) or floodplain/intertidalzone unnaturally absent orassessmentreach is a
man-madefeature on an interstream divide
7.Water Quality Stressors – assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check allthatapply.
A Discoloredwaterin stream or intertidalzone (milkywhite, blue, unnatural waterdiscoloration, oilsheen, streamfoam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying ofstream features or intertidalzone)
0.5
0.8
NC SAMFIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User ManualVersion2.1
INSTRUCTIONS:Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs.Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle,and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation.If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property,identify and number all reaches on the attached map,and include a separate form for each reach.See the NC SAM User
Manualfor detailed descriptions and explanations of requestedinformation. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section ifany supplementary
NOTEEVIDENCE OFSTRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do notneed to bewithinthe assessment area).
measurements were performed. See the NCSAMUser Manualfor examples ofadditionalmeasurementsthatmay be relevant.
JohnstonCountyLandfill July 22, 2016
Upper Reach 200
JohnstonCounty 4. Assessor name/organization:C. Hopper, P. May, G. Price
Johnston
Neuse Middle Creek
C Noticeableevidence ofpollutant discharges enteringtheassessment reachandcausing a waterquality problem
D Odor (not including natural sulfideodors)
E Current published or collected dataindicating degraded water quality intheassessment reach. Cite sourceinthe "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F Livestock with access to streamor intertidalzone
G Excessive algae in stream or intertidalzone
H Degradedmarsh vegetationin the intertidalzone (removal, burning, regularmowing, destruction, etc.)
I Other:(explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
J Little to nostressors
8.Recent Weather – watershed metric
For Size1 or 2 streams, D1 droughtor higher isconsidered adrought; for Size3 or 4streams, D2 droughtor higheris considered a
drought.
A Drought conditionsandnorainfallorrainfall not exceeding 1inchwithin the last 48 hours
B Drought conditionsandrainfallexceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
C No drought conditions
9 Large orDangerous Stream – assessmentreach metric
Yes No Isstream is too largeordangerousto assess? If Yes, skip toMetric13 (Streamside AreaGroundSurfaceCondition).
10.Natural In-stream HabitatTypes – assessment reachmetric
10a.Yes No Degraded in-stream habitatovermajorityof the assessmentreach (examplesof stressorsinclude excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in-stream hardening [for example, rip-rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
evaluate forsize 4Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b.Check allthat occur (occurs if > 5% coverage ofassessment reach) (skip forSize4 Coastal Plainstreams)
A Multipleaquatic macrophytesandaquatic mosses F 5% oysters or othernatural hard bottoms
includeliverworts, lichens, andalgalmats)G Submerged aquatic vegetation
B Multiplesticks and/orleaf packs and/or emergent H Low-tide refugia (pools)
vegetation I Sand bottom
C Multiplesnags and logs (including laptrees)J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
D 5% undercutbanks and/or root mats and/or roots K Little orno habitat
inbanks extend to the normalwetted perimeter
E Little orno habitat
11.Bedformand Substrate – assessmentreach metric (skip forSize4 Coastal Plainstreams andTidal Marsh Streams)
11a.Yes No Isassessment reach ina natural sand-bedstream? (skip forCoastalPlain streams)
11b.Bedform evaluated. Checkthe appropriatebox(es).
A Riffle-run section (evaluate11c)
B Pool-glide section (evaluate11d)
C Naturalbedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c.In riffles sections, check allthat occurbelowthe normalwettedperimeterof the assessment reach – whether ornotsubmerged.
Check at least onebox in each row (skipforSize4 Coastal PlainStreams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) =
absent, Rare (R) = presentbut 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%, Abundant (A) = > 40-70%, Predominant (P) = > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should notexceed100% for each assessmentreach.
NP R C A P
Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder (256 – 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 – 256mm)
Gravel (2 – 64 mm)
Sand (.062 – 2mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip-rap, concrete, etc.)
11d.Yes No Are poolsfilled withsediment? (skipfor Size 4 CoastalPlain streams and TidalMarshStreams)
12.Aquatic Life – assessment reachmetric (skipfor Size 4CoastalPlain streams andTidal MarshStreams)
12a.Yes No Was an in-streamaquatic life assessmentperformed asdescribed in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the followingreasons and skipto Metric13. No Water Other:
12b.Yes No Are aquatic organismspresentintheassessment reach (lookinriffles, pools, thensnags)? IfYes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric13.
1 >1 Numbersovercolumns referto “individuals” for size1 and 2streams and “taxa” for size3 and 4streams.
Adultfrogs
Aquatic reptiles
Aquatic macrophytesandaquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, andalgalmats)
Beetles (including waterpennies)
Caddisflylarvae (Trichoptera [T])
Asian clam (Corbicula )
Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
Dipterans (true flies)
Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
Midges/mosquito larvae
Mosquito fish (Gambusia ) ormudminnows (Umbra pygmaea)
Mussels/Clams (notCorbicula )
Other fish
Salamanders/tadpoles
Snails
Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
Tipulidlarvae
REMAINING QUESTIONS ARENOT APPLICABLE FORTIDALMARSH STREAMS****************************
Ch
eck
for
Tidal
Ma
rsh
Streams
on
ly
Worms/leeches
13.StreamsideArea GroundSurface Condition – streamside areametric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and Bvalleytypes)
Consider forthe Left Bank (LB) and the RightBank (RB). Consider storage capacity withregardto bothoverbank flowand
upland runoff.
LB RB
A A Little or no alterationto water storage capacity over a majorityofthestreamside area
B B Moderatealteration towater storagecapacityovera majority of the streamsidearea
C C Severealteration to waterstoragecapacityovera majority ofthestreamsidearea (examples include: ditches, fill,
soil, compaction, livestockdisturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainagepipes)
14.StreamsideArea Water Storage – streamside area metric (skip forSize1 streams, TidalMarshStreams, and Bvalleytypes)
Consider forthe Left Bank (LB) and the RightBank (RB) ofthe streamsidearea.
LB RB
A A Majority ofstreamside area withdepressions able topond water 6 inches deep
B B Majority ofstreamside area withdepressions able topond water 3to 6inchesdeep
C C Majority ofstreamside area withdepressions able topond water < 3 inchesdeep
15.Wetland Presence – streamsidearea metric (skip forTidalMarsh Streams)
Consider forthe Left Bank (LB) and the RightBank (RB). Do notconsider wetlands outside ofthestreamside area orwithin the
normalwettedperimeterofassessment reach.
LB RB
Y Y Arewetlandspresentinthestreamsidearea?
N N
16.Baseflow Contributors – assessmentreach metric (skip forsize 4 streams and TidalMarsh Streams)
Check all contributors within theassessmentreach orwithin view ofand draining to the assessmentreach.
A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sedimentbasinsor drydetention basins)
C Obstruction that passes some flowduringlow-flow periodswithin assessment area (beaver dam, bottom-releasedam)
D Evidence of bank seepage orsweating (iron oxidizing bacteriainwaterindicates seepage)
E Stream bedorbanksoilreduced (dig through deposited sedimentifpresent)
F None oftheabove
17.Baseflow Detractors – assessmentarea metric (skip forTidalMarsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
A Evidence of substantialwaterwithdrawals from the assessment reach (includesareas excavated for pumpinstallation)
B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periodsaffecting theassessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sedimentdeposit)
C Urban stream ( 24% impervious surface forwatershed)
D Evidence thatthestream-side area has beenmodified resulting inaccelerated drainageintothe assessmentreach
E Assessmentreach relocated tovalley edge
F None oftheabove
18.Shading – assessmentreach metric (skip forTidal Marsh Streams)
Consideraspect. Consider “leaf-on” condition.
A Stream shadingis appropriatefor stream category (may includegaps associatedwith natural processes)
B Degraded (example: scatteredtrees)
C Stream shadingis gone orlargelyabsent
19.BufferWidth – streamside area metric (skip forTidal Marsh Streams)
Consider “vegetated buffer” and “wooded buffer” separately for leftbank (LB) andright bank (RB) starting at thetop
ofbankout to thefirst break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
A A A A 100-feetwideor extends totheedge ofthewatershed
B B B B From 50to < 100-feetwide
C C C C From 30to < 50-feet wide
D D D D From 10to < 30-feet wide
E E E E < 10-feet wide or no trees
20.BufferStructure – streamside areametric (skip for Tidal MarshStreams)
Consider forleft bank (LB) and rightbank (RB) forMetric19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
A A Mature forest
B B Non-maturewoodyvegetation ormodified vegetation structure
C C Herbaceousvegetation with or withouta strip oftrees < 10 feetwide
D D Maintainedshrubs
E E Little orno vegetation
21.BufferStressors – streamside areametric (skip for TidalMarshStreams)
Check all appropriateboxesforleft bank (LB) and rightbank (RB). Indicate if listed stressorabutsstream (Abuts), does not abut but
iswithin 30feetofstream (< 30 feet), oris between30 to 50feetofstream (30-50feet).
If none ofthefollowing stressors occursoneitherbank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30feet 30-50feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
A A A A A A Row crops
B B B B B B Maintained turf
C C C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercialhorticulture
D D D D D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22.Stem Density – streamside areametric (skip for Tidal MarshStreams)
Consider forleft bank (LB) and rightbank (RB) forMetric19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
A A Medium to highstem density
B B Lowstem density
C C No wooded riparianbufferor predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23.Continuity ofVegetated Buffer – streamside areametric (skip forTidal Marsh Streams)
Considerwhether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areaslacking vegetation > 10-feetwide.
LB RB
A A The total lengthof buffer breaksis < 25 percent.
B B The total lengthof buffer breaksis between 25 and 50percent.
C C The total lengthof buffer breaksis > 50 percent.
24.Vegetative Composition – First 100 feetofstreamside area metric (skipfor TidalMarshStreams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of eachbank orto the edgeof the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
toassessment reachhabitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation isclose to undisturbedinspecies present and theirproportions. Lowerstrata composedof native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in termsofspecies diversity orproportions, butis still largelycomposedof native
species. Thismay include communities of weedy nativespecies that develop after clear-cuttingorclearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over alarge portion of the expected strataor
communities missing understory but retaining canopytrees.
C C Vegetation isseverely disturbed in termsof species diversity orproportions. Maturecanopy is absent or communities
with non-nativeinvasivespecies dominant over alarge portion ofexpected strataor communities composed ofplanted
stands ofnon-characteristic speciesorcommunitiesinappropriatelycomposed ofa single species or no vegetation.
25.Conductivity – assessment reach metric (skipforallCoastal Plain streams)
25a.Yes No Was aconductivity measurementrecorded?
If No, select one of thefollowing reasons. NoWater Other:
25b.Check the boxcorrespondingto the conductivitymeasurement (units ofmicrosiemens percentimeter).
A <46 B 46 to < 67 C 67 to < 79 D 79to < 230 E 230
Notes/Sketch:
No conductivitymeter
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NCSAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
4) Floodplain Access
4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
4) Microtopography
3) Stream Stability
4) Channel Stability
4) Sediment Transport
4) Stream Geomorphology
2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
1) Water Quality
2) Baseflow
2) Streamside Area Vegetation
3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
3) Thermoregulation
2) Indicators of Stressors
2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
1) Habitat
2) In-stream Habitat
3) Baseflow
3) Substrate
3) Stream Stability
3) In-stream Habitat
2) Stream-side Habitat
3) Stream-side Habitat
3) Thermoregulation
2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
3) Flow Restriction
3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
Overall HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NA
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
HIGH
HIGH
3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
3) Streamside Area Attenuation
Function Class Rating Summary
1) Hydrology
NA
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NO
MEDIUM
Stream Site Name Johnston County Landfill Date of Evaluation
HIGH
4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
HIGH
MEDIUM
NA
NA
MEDIUM
NA
HIGH
NCSAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
LOW
HIGH
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
NA
NA
2) Flood Flow
C. Hopper, P. May, G. Price
July 22, 2016
NO
YES
NO
Perennial
2) Baseflow
Stream Category Assessor Name/Organization
MEDIUM
Ia2