20240241 Ver 1_More Info Received_20240619

A=COM
Memorandum
AECOM 410 785 7220 tel
4 North Park Drive 410 785 6818 fax
Hunt Valley, MD 21030
www.aecom.com
To Matthew Martin, USACE
Phil Lanier, Johnston Regional Airport
Stephanie Gross, NCDEQ 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
cc Sue Homewood, NCDEQ 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Corps Action ID# SAW-2001-20723
Midfield Apron Development
Johnston Regional Airport
Subject Smithfield, North Carolina
From Jennifer Lutz
Date June 19, 2024
Comments from Matthew Martin, [Regulatory Specialist, US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)] were transmitted via
electronic email on May 20, 2024. In accordance with the guidelines included in the letter, comments are to be
responded to in writing within 30 days of receipt of the letter (June 19, 2024).
In the introduction of the letter, M. Martin requested that responses to comments received from the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) to M. Martin, dated March 14, 2024, and comments received from
NCDEQ to P. Lanier, dated April 24, 2024, be provided. The comments in both letters are similar in nature and are
cross reference herein with the exception of Comment No. 3; a response is provided below.
Comment No. 1 from NCDEQ to M. Martin on March 14, 2024 is the same/similar to Comment No. 2 from NCDEQ
to P. Lanier on April 24, 2024. See Memorandum, dated May 21, 2024, to NCDEQ for response.
Comment No. 2 from NCDEQ to M. Martin on March 14, 2024 is the same/similar to Comment No. 3 from NCDEQ
to P. Lanier on April 24, 2024. See Memorandum, dated May 21, 2024, to NCDEQ for response.
Response to Comment No. 3 from NCDEQ to M. Martin on March 14, 2024 is as follows:
Retaining the existing drainage patterns on site is less environmentally intrusive for several reasons. The first reason
is to maintain the hydrology of natural resources downstream of P01 1 such as S3. By shifting the drainage area
away from P01 1, the hydrology to S3 will be reduced. This option is also environmentally intrusive because diversion
to POI would require a larger stormwater control measure (SCM) which would have more impacts to the riparian
buffer of Swift Creek. As currently designed, all proposed impacts are outside of the stream buffer.
Comment No. 4 from NCDEQ to M. Martin on March 14, 2024 is the same/similar to Comment No. 4 from NCDEQ
to P. Lanier on April 24, 2024. See Memorandum, dated May 21, 2024, to NCDEQ for response.
Comment No. 5 from NCDEQ to M. Martin on March 14, 2024 is the same/similar to Comment No. 4 from NCDEQ
to P. Lanier on April 24, 2024. See Memorandum, dated May 21, 2024, to NCDEQ for response.
Comment No. 6 from NCDEQ to M. Martin on March 14, 2024 is the same/similar to Comment No. 5 from NCDEQ
to P. Lanier on April 24, 2024. See Memorandum, dated May 21, 2024, to NCDEQ for response.

A=COM
June 19, 2024
Page 2
In response to Articles A, B, and C identified in the May 20, 2024 letter from M. Martin to P. Lanier, we respectfully
offer the following responses to the Items described (Article A, see Item 1 and Article B, see Items 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8).
Response No. Article A, Item1
a. Siting Criteria
FAA Design Criteria: Knowledge of the type of aircraft using and are expected to use an airport allows a Sponsor to
design facilities to the applicable design criteria for those aircraft. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Advisory
Circular 150/5300-13B, Airport Design, provides guidelines and recommendations for the geometric layout and
design of runways, taxiways, aprons, and other facilities at an airport based on the intended aircraft. Furthermore, the
FAA uses a coding system, referred to an Airport Reference Code (ARC), to relate the operational and physical
characteristics of the aircraft intended to operate at the airport. An airport's ARC consists of the Aircraft Approach
Category (AAC) and the Airplane Design Group (ADG). The AAC relates to the operational characteristics of aircraft
approach speed and is denoted by a letter; the ADG relates to the grouping of airplanes based on the tail height or
wingspan and is depicted by a Roman numeral.
As described in 14 CFR Part 77.19, Safe, Efficient Use, and Preservation of Navigable Airspace, and FAA Advisory
Circular (AC)150/5300-13B, Airport Design, surfaces are established in relation to an airport and each runway end in
order to identify those objects that may affect airport planning and flight procedures The five principal surfaces defined
in 14 CFR Part 77 are the primary surface, approach surface, transitional surface, horizontal surface, and conical
surface. These criteria are used to determine how close an aircraft can be parked or a permanent object, such as a
hangar, can be placed as to not encroach upon one of these defined surfaces.
Figure 1 depicts the applicable safety areas per FAA criteria where development is either prohibited or height restricted per
siting criteria as stipulated by the FAA. These areas include the Runway Safety Area (RSA), Taxiway Safety Area (TSA),
Runway Object Free Area (ROFA), Taxiway Object Free Area (TOFA), and Runway Protection Zone (RPZ). In addition,
height restrictions are also noted.
The green shaded area represents the RSA, TSA, ROFA, TOFA and 14 CFR Part 77 (primary and transitional surface
areas). Per FAA AC 150/5300-13B, the RSA (Sections 3.10.1.3 and 3.10.1.4) and TSA (Section 4.5.3.1) need to be
free of objects, excluding those objects that need to reside within the RSA or TSA because of function (i.e. fixed -by -
function and required for air navigation purposes). Beyond the RSA there is also a ROFA and beyond the TSA area a
TOFA. Similar to the RSA and TSA areas, the ROFA (Section 3.12) and TOFA (Section 4.5.4) areas also need to be
clear of any permanent above ground objects not needed for air and ground navigation that extend above the elevation
of the nearest point on the RSA or TSA.
The blue shaded area represents the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ). Per FAA AC 150/5300-13B, RPZs are to
enhance the protection of people and property on the ground and be clear of incompatible land uses (Section 3.13)
that would be considered hazards to the associated approach and departure surfaces. Structures which would result
in the congregation of people are not permitted.
The remaining portion of the green shaded area and the additional shaded areas represent building height restrictions
based on 14 CFR Part 77. The tail height of an aircraft determines which ADG it falls into. ADG-1 is limited to aircraft
with tail heights less than 20 feet (< 20'); ADG-2 is limited to aircraft with tail heights greater than or equal to 20 feet
and up to 30 feet; and ADG-3 is limited to aircraft with tail heights greater than 30 feet and up to 45 feet. Based on its
proximity to the runway, proposed Taxilane H is restricted to ADG-1 aircraft and proposed Taxilane J is restricted to
ADG-2 aircraft. Since the proposed Midfield Apron hangar area is needed to serve larger corporate aircraft, the hangar
area and associated taxilane leading to it is being designed for ADG-3 aircraft. Although the light orange, darker
reddish -orange, and purple hatched bands represent the nearest areas where the various aircraft could be parked to

A=COM
June 19, 2024
Page 3
remain under the 14 CFR Part 77 surfaces, the taxiways and taxilanes that are needed to allow access to the associated
hangars are required to meet separation criteria provided in FAA AC 150/5300-13B. Thus, to meet the required taxilane
separation criteria, the proposed hangars will need to be placed within or beyond the shaded limits depending on the
heights of the aircraft. Since hangars typically need to be 5 feet to 15 feet higher than the tail heights for the average
aircraft expected to use them (5 feet to 10 feet for lower ADG's and 10 feet to 15 feet for higher ADG's), the colored
bands noted previously have been provided on Figure 1 to denote the closest areas where the various ADG's and their
associated hangars could be placed. The ADG-1 area (light orange hatch) has been set to be 20 feet to 30 feet below
the 14 CFR Part 77 Transitional Surface. The ADG-2 area (darker reddish -orange hatch) has been set to be 30 feet to
40 feet below the Part 77 Transitional Surface. The ADG-3 area (purple hatch) has been set to be 40 feet to 60 feet
below the 14 CFR Part 77 Transitional Surface. An additional dark blue dashed line has been added to Figure 1 to
denote the first location where a 60-foot hangar (expected worst -case for ADG-3) could be placed and remain under
the 14 CFR Part 77 Transitional Surface.
Need for Hangars: The purpose of the proposed project is to safely and efficiently accommodate existing demand at
JNX for hangar space. The 2020 Environmental Assessment reported 110 based aircraft; per the recent Master Plan
Update (2022), the Airport has 126 based aircraft and is projected to have 171 based aircraft within the 20-year
planning horizon. Per the Master Plan Update (2022), the Airport has the following storage facilities: T-hangars (46
units), Box hangars (4 buildings), Fixed Based Operators (FBO) (5 buildings), and Corporate hangars (11 buildings).
As reported in the 2020 Environmental Assessment, more than 70 customers are currently waiting for hangars at
JNX. The Johnston County Airport Authority (Authority) maintains two waiting lists for customers looking for facilities
to store aircraft and/or conduct business: one for small box/T-hangars and one for corporate/business box hangars
that includes law enforcement and emergency response. The lists are updated each year by contacting each person
or business or agency on the list to identify and remove potential customers who have found a facility at another
airport or are otherwise no longer interested in a hangar at JNX.
Table 3.10, Aircraft Storge Requirement Summary, in the Master Plan Update (2022) details the hangar and tie down
storage that will be needed TABLE 3.10: AIRCRAFT STORAGE REQUIREMENT SUMMARY
over the next 20 years to
accommodate the
additional aircraft and
replacement of existing
hangars that are nearing
the end of their useful life.
In response to a growing
demand in general aviation
at JNX, the Authority has
proposed development of
additional corporate,
emergency/police, and
general aviation hangars
and associated aprons at
JNX. The current Midfield
Existing/Base Year (2019)
Base Year
Base Year
20 Years
Existing Hangar Spaces
94 hangar spaces
N/A
N/A
(87 t-hangars and 7 box hangars)
New Hangar Spaces
N/A
21 hangar spaces
24 hangar spaces
Existing Hangars to be Replaced
7 hangars
17 hangars
41 hangars
Total Hangar Spaces Needed
7 hangar spaces
38 hangar spaces
65 hangar spaces
Existing Based Aircraft Tiedowns
18 spaces
N/A
N/A
Existing FBO Tiedowns
14 spaces
N/A
N/A
Based Aircraft & FBO Tiedowns
32 spaces
N/A
N/A
Needed
Total Based Aircraft & FRO Tiedowns
0 spaces
0 spaces
0 spaces
Needed
Existing Transient Tiedowns
15 spaces
N/A
N/A
Transient Tiedowns Needed
32 spaces
45 spaces
57 spaces
Total Transient Tiedowns Needed
17 add'/ spaces
13 add'I spaces
12 add'I spaces
Source, ACRP Report 113, Guidebook on General Aviation Facility Planning, and Marr Arnold Planning Analysis,
Apron Development design
shows areas available for approximately 12 corporate hangars with associate apron.

A=COM
June 19, 2024
Page 4
b. Off -Site Alternative "Preliminary Alternative A"
A Final Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Midfield Hangar Development was prepared by others (WSP) in
September 2020; the FAA issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the Final Environmental
Assessment on October 1, 2021. The Final Environmental Assessment (2020) evaluated a range of alternatives for
the development of hangars. Per the documentation included in the Environmental Assessment, screening first
included land that met FAA design criteria for the critical aircraft family of B-III. This included, but not limited to, RPZs,
RSAs, ROFAs, TOFAs, as well as the Building Restriction Line (BRL) and topography. Based on design criteria,
BRL, and topography, available land for hangar development was determined to be limited. Note: This rationale was
further explained under "Siting Criteria" above and depicted on Figure 1.
The Environmental Assessment identified three preliminary alternatives along with the No Action Alternative. The build
alternatives, as referred to in the Environmental Assessment, are Proposed Midfield Development, Alternative A, and
Alternative B. It must be noted that the alternatives analysis included in the 2020 Final Environmental Assessment and
summarized herein only involved the physical footprint of the proposed development. Thus, the Final Environmental
Assessment also did not address the drainaae and stormwater control measures reauired for the oroaosed oroiects.
Off Site Alternative "Preliminary Alternative A": As evaluated in the Environmental Assessment, this alternative
would include development of hangars on a 20-acre site at the northern end of the Airport on privately owned
property west of Swift Creek Road. To provide access from Alternative A to the airfield would require relocating
approximately 0.9 miles of Swift Creek Road, which is a major collector road. The relocation of Swift Creek Road would
require a new bridge crossing Reedy Branch and the filling of approximately 2.1 acres of riparian wetlands and 0.62 acres
of riparian buffer associated with Reedy Branch. In addition, Alternative A would require full or partial acquisition of land
from 11 parcels including two residences and three businesses. As noted above, these estimates provided in the
Environmental Assessment were based on conceptual level planning and did not include any required drainage
improvements and associated stormwater control measures.
Preliminary Alternative A was not carried forward in the 2020 Final Environmental Assessment and FONSI; the alternative
was deemed to not be a viable and was not further evaluated.
c. On -Site Alternative "Preliminary Alternative B"
On -Site Alternative "Preliminary Alternative B": This alternative would include development of hangars on an
approximate 20-acre site east of the airfield on Airport property. Per the Environmental Assessment, this site would
result in approximately 10.1 acres of wetlands impacts and 6.1 acres of fill in the floodplain. As noted above, these estimates
provided in the Environmental Assessment were based on conceptual level planning and did not include any required
drainage improvements and associated stormwater control measures.
The Environmental Assessment noted steep slopes being present averaging 18 to 23 percent from most of the airfield to the
surrounding valley and would require fill to provide a suitable area with an acceptable grade to the airfield. This alternative
would require construction of a connector taxiway from the west side of the airfield, a partial parallel taxiway for access
to the apron and associated hangars, and a vehicle access drive from US Highway 70BUS. In addition, no facilities are
located on the east side of the airfield; aircraft would be required to taxi to the west side of the airfield for services,
including access to the terminal, maintenance, and fueling. Land acquisition would also be needed for the vehicle
access road from US Highway 70BUS.
The Airport Master Plan Update Technical Report, dated April 2022, prepared by others (Marr Arnold) identifies the
east side of the airfield of an area of potential growth beyond the 20-year planning period. The Master Plan noted this
area would be ideal for a mixture of corporate and /or aviation related industrial development beyond the 20-year

A=COM
June 19, 2024
Page 5
planning period. In addition, the Master Plan notes that as aircraft operations continue to increase, the Airport should
plan for a capacity enhancing project within the next several years. A capacity enhancing project could involve a
parallel runway and/or an Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT). Without the additional analyses required to detail
operational activity, development of hangars on the east side of the airfield in the absence of this detailed data would
be short-sighted and preclude the development of a parallel runway and/or ATCT in the future. Thus, this area
remains reserved for future development on the Airport Layout Plan. As noted in Response No. 8, the Authority has
recently started initial planning, engineering, and environmental assessments for road access to facilitate airfield
expansions near US Highway 70 and Runway 3-21 within this area. This analysis is assessing current site
conditions, such as land use and potential environmental impacts, and proposes preferred road alignments. It
includes schematic design exhibits, grading, geometrics, construction cost estimates, and programming schedule
recommendations for the Airport's future reference and documentation.
Based on the environmental analysis completed as part of the Final Environmental Assessment (September 2020),
per National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping and limited field delineations, Alternative B would impact
approximately 10.1 acres of wetlands and the Midfield Apron Development was estimated to impact 10.3 acres. The
wetland impact calculations provided in the Final Environmental Assessment were based on conceptual/planning
only level (not design) analyses including just the impervious footprint of the development and did not include any
additional impacts to wetlands because of required grading to meet FAA design criteria, drainage, and/or stormwater
management facilities. Based on final design (well beyond planning level), the wetland impacts associated with the
impervious surfaces for the Midfield Apron Development, including the airfield/apron pavement, parking lot
improvements, and hangar foundations of the Midfield Apron total 8.34 acres of wetlands. The remaining impacts
(10.3 acres) are attributed to the grading requirements, drainage improvements, and re-establishment of the
stormwater management facility. Thus, at the time of the Final Environmental Assessment, the impact comparisons
were relatively the same with respect to the impacts from the physical pavement needs associated with the project; it
is not prudent to make a direct comparison between the impacts of Alternative B included in the Final Environmental
Assessment that were based on conceptual plans to the Midfield Apron (Preferred Alternative) based on final design.
Since impacts calculations in the Environmental Assessment were based on physical footprint of the hangars, the
prior analyses concluded that Alternative B would not decrease impacts to wetlands as compared to the Midfield
Apron Development Alternative. Furthermore, the location is remote and would require a lengthy taxiing to the west
side of the airfield for services (terminal and fueling); significant infrastructure (connector taxiways, parallel taxiway,
and new access road through Reedy Branch to US 70) would need to be constructed; and development could
preclude future airfield expansion to address future capacity needs, Alternative B is not viable.
Proposed Midfield Development: This alternative would develop approximately 24 acres west of the airfield midway
between existing corporate and general aviation hangars on existing Airport property. The gated road from Swift Creek
Road that provides access to hangars at the south end of the Airport would be relocated slightly to the west to accommodate
the proposed development. The alternative has direct access to the airfield and is well -integrated into the Airport environs.
Proposed Midfield Development was the only Build Alternative considered for the construction of the proposed
development in the Final Environmental Assessment (2020) / FONSI (2021). Thus, this alternative was the only
alternative carried forward for further design, including drainage and stormwater management.
With respect to wetland impacts, as stated above, the wetland impact calculations provided in the Final Environmental
Assessment (10.29 acres) were based on conceptual/planning only level (not design) analyses including just the impervious
footprint of the development and did not include any additional impacts to wetlands attributed to the required grading to meet
FAA design criteria, drainage, and/or stormwater management facilities. Based on final design, the wetland impacts
associated with the impervious surfaces for the Midfield Apron Development, including the airfield/apron pavement, parking
lot improvements, and hangar foundations of the Midfield Apron total 8.34 acres of wetlands. The remaining impacts (10.3
acres) are attributed to the grading requirements, drainage improvements, and re-establishment of the stormwater

A=COM
June 19, 2024
Page 6
management facility.
Thus, at the time of the Final Environmental Assessment, the impact comparisons were relatively the same with respect to
the impacts from the physical pavement needs associated with the project; it is not prudent to make a direct comparison
between the impacts of Alternative B included in the Final Environmental Assessment that were based on conceptual plans
to the Midfield Apron (Preferred Alternative) based on final design.
Response to Article A, Item 2
a. Potential Impacts on Human Use Characteristics
The proposed Midfield Apron Development project is not located in a Water Supply Watershed as classified by the
North Carolina Division of Water Resources and there are no public water supply sources located along Swift Creek
or Reedy Branch between the project location and the confluence with the Neuse River approximately 3 miles
downstream of the airport. This project will be served by the public water supply. There are no groundwater
resources on or immediately adjacent to the project site, including sole source aquifers and recharge areas, local
water supply watersheds and public wells. The closest such resource is a local water supply watershed, which is
approximately one mile northeast of the project site, across US 70-BUS.
b. Potential Impacts on Special Aquatic Sites
The proposed project occurs across Swift Creek from a North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services easement, but
the footprint of the Midfield project will not overlap with the site. No impacts to the hydrologic regime will occur
because of the project in this location and are not anticipated to affect the hydrology of the easement. A Johnston
County Open Space tract occurs at the confluence of Swift Creek with the Neuse River. The Managed Areas GIS
data from the North Carolina Natural Heritage program indicates the tract is Johnston County Open Space but does
not indicate the use or special designation for the tract's use. The Johnston County website does not have any
additional information about the tract other than it is owned by Johnston County. The project will not directly impact
this tract and it is not anticipated that there will be indirect effects to it because of the project. The project will not
directly affect any areas designated as sanctuaries or refuges by local, State, or Federal laws.
c. Potential Impacts on Physical and Chemical Characteristics of the Aquatic Ecosystem
The proposed project impacts the physical and chemical characteristics of the aquatic ecosystem of the wetlands and
streams within the proposed Midfield Apron and Submerged Gravel Wetland areas via fill operations. Alternative
locations A and B for the Midfield Apron site would impact the same if not more wetlands and streams. Local
stormwater management regulations require treatment of any impervious area proposed for the project. The
proposed Submerged Gravel Wetland serves as the stormwater management solution for the proposed project;
conceptually should Alternative A been selected as a preferred alternative, the same location of the Submerged
Gravel Wetland would most likely have been selected. The Submerged Gravel Wetland is proposed at the location of
a failed stormwater management pond. This location for stormwater management provides the least amount of
impact to the surrounding wetlands. Alternative B would be subject to the same local stormwater management
regulations, but proposed stormwater facility would be proposed in a new location, potentially impacting more existing
wetlands, streams, and floodplains in comparison to the proposed Submerged Gravel Wetland.
The proposed Submerged Gravel Wetland, while altering existing water circulation and inundation fluctuations, will
provide a similar pattern of water circulation and inundation while maintaining existing discharges downstream post -
construction, preventing potential erosion and other damage to downstream water chemistry. The proposed
Submerged Gravel Wetland is designed to capture and remove sediment, nitrogen, and phosphorus from stormwater
runoff from the proposed Midfield Apron area, protecting downstream water chemistry from the project development

A=COM
June 19, 2024
Page 7
and preventing increases in biological oxygen demand. The facility will be monitored post -construction to ensure that
it is functioning as expected in pollutant removal. Local erosion and sediment control regulations also require proper
maintenance of exposed soils during construction to limit suspension of sediment into downstream waterbodies.
Erosion and sediment control practices will be employed to the maximum extent possible for the proposed project
regardless of location at the Airport.
The proposed Submerged Gravel Wetland will serve as habitat for microbial and benthic organisms within the gravel
substrate like adjacent wetlands. Stormwater discharged from the proposed Submerged Gravel Wetland underdrain
will be the same temperature or cooler than the adjacent wetland systems since water draining through the gravel
substrate is not exposed to sunlight for extended periods of time. The proposed Midfield Apron Development project
is not located near water bodies with saline gradients.
d. Factual Determination
The proposed Midfield Apron and Submerged Gravel Wetland areas will be permanently filled with structural fill
comprised of sand and clay sized particles. Elevations will be raised within the proposed hangar and apron
development area to accommodate its proposed use for aircraft storage facilities. Elevations within the Submerged
Gravel Wetland area will be raised to construct an embankment for stormwater management. The Submerged Gravel
Wetland will be filled with a layer of gravel for stormwater treatment. Per local regulations, the existing drainage
patterns and discharge rate will be maintained to existing conditions via the Submerged Gravel Wetland. The
Submerged Gravel Wetland is designed to capture and remove sediment, nitrogen, and phosphorus from stormwater
runoff from the proposed Midfield Apron area, protecting the downstream waters from changes in clarity, color, odor,
taste, dissolved gas levels, nutrients, and eutrophication. The Submerged Gravel Wetland also regulates the
temperature of the discharged water by allowing water to infiltrate into the gravel media instead of remaining on the
surface to be heated by the sun over a long time. The location of the Submerged Gravel Wetland which satisfies
stormwater management for the proposed project minimizes impacts to wetlands and streams by replacing an
existing failed stormwater pond. A similar comparison would be applicable for Alternative A. Alternative stormwater
management locations for Alternative B may impact more wetlands or streams. Local erosion and sediment control
regulations also require proper maintenance of exposed soils during construction to limit suspension of sediment into
downstream waterbodies. Erosion and sediment control practices will be employed to the maximum extent possible
for the proposed project and Alternatives A and B. The material to be used as fill material will be free of any known
contaminants that may pose a threat to the aquatic environment. The proposed Midfield Apron Development project
is not located near water bodies with saline gradients.
e. General Public Interest Review
The proposed Midfield Apron Development project is an important project for Johnston County and the surrounding
region. The purpose of the project is to provide safe and efficient aviation facilities to meet current and projected
demand and meet current FAA design standards. The proposed improvements are needed to provide more efficient
apron areas and adequate aircraft storage facilities as well as adhere to FAA design standards. As reported in the
2020 Environmental Assessment, more than 70 customers are currently waiting for hangars at JNX.
JNX airport currently serves commercial and non-commercial tenants that provide services that are important to the
surrounding region. JNX is the satellite helicopter base for Duke Life Flight supporting the Duke University Hospital's
critical care transport program that is based in Durham. Duke Life Flight is one of the nation's leading Level 1 Trauma
Centers. Duke has one helicopter based at JNX, a Eurocopter EC-145, which is utilized for critical care patient
transfers. It covers all of North Carolina and parts of South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. A representative for
Duke Life Flight estimates on average 5-6 helicopter operations per day at JNX. In early 2019, the Authority
approved an air medical transport franchise for Vector AeroMedical. Vector has a fleet of Citation jets they use to

A=COM
June 19, 2024
Page 8
transport passengers quickly around the country. They will contract with Duke Life Flight at JNX to provide medical
transport services.
JNX is home to one of two hubs for Blue Line Aviation which provides flight training and also hosts a career pilot
program for training commercial pilots. The current commercial pilot shortage is well documented and programs
such as this are important in providing training to an essential service in modern society.
Farming and farming -related activities are still prevalent in much of the region. JNX is a base for agricultural spraying
operations Q Bar Ag Services. The company sprays crop enhancers over many farms in the region utilizing a
Robinson R-44 helicopter.
The North Carolina Highway Patrol has shown interest in utilizing some of the proposed Midfield hangars to support
aerial operations in the region.
If. No Action Alternative
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and applicable Council on Environmental Quality regulations
require the evaluation of a No Action Alternative. In the No Action Alternative, the proposed Midfield Development
would not be implemented. As a result, the purpose of the project would not be achieved by the No Action Alternative
and the regional aviation needs would not be addressed. Economic development benefits of the proposed
development would not accrue to Johnston County and the surrounding region. As a result of the No Action
Alternative, there would be no impacts to wetlands and riparian buffers, which would result from the proposed
Midfield Development.
g. Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management:
The proposed project will not result in changes to the volumetric capacity of the floodplain or indirectly through an
increase in the total volume of water arriving at and being conveyed by the floodplain, thus, it is expected that a 'No -
Rise" or "No -Impact" certification will be approved for the project. Per NCDEQ regulation, a Floodplain Development
Permit will be obtained prior to construction.
Response to Article B, Item 3
The proposed Submerged Gravel Wetland is not designed
to eliminate perennial stream flow and allows for the
hydrology to S3 to be maintained. The Submerged Gravel
Wetland is designed to maintain a permanent water level
under the SCM surface that treats water anaerobically. As
runoff is introduced to the system, the Submerged Gravel
Wetland discharges treated water through underdrain
system downstream to S3. The existing stream flows
through an existing SCM and will have a similar flow
regime under proposed conditions. The table herein is the
hydrology summary of POI 1 from the Stormwater
Management (SWM) report.
POI HYDROLOGY SUMMARY
Pre -development
Drainage area (acres)
168.63
Runoff curve number
77
Time of concentration (minutes)
62.1
Discharge
(cubic feet per second)
Water Surface Elevation —
Ecistr g Detention Pond
(feet-olev.)
1-Year
62.28
126.56
2-Year
99.02
126.97
10-Year
220.99
12791
2�,Year
300.67
128.37
100-Year
436.00
12903
Post -development
Drainage area (acres)
170 36
Runoff curve number
79
Time of concentration (minutes)
59.8
Discharge
{cubic feet per second)
Water Surface Eievation —
SGW
(feel2lev.)
1-Year
46.09
127.99
2-Year
80.08
128.10
10-Year
217.25
12829
25-Year
331.64
128.38
100-Year
K2.88
12849
Response to Article B, Item 4
Figure 2 depicts the following sources of wetland resources:
- Restoration Area Wetlands
- Wetland areas determined through on -site field studies by AECOM on October 4, 2023

AECOM
June 19, 2024
Page 9
- Wetland areas delineated by AECOM between 2022 and 2023
- Wetland areas delineated by AECOM between 2022 and 2023 included in the Preliminary Jurisdictional
Determination (SAW-2001-20723)
Response to Article B, Item 5
The evaluation of wetland impacts of Alternative A and B were taken from the analyses completed for the Final
Environmental Assessment. In the Final Environmental Assessment, Alternative A would require the filling of
approximately 2.1 acres of riparian wetlands and 0.62 acres of riparian buffer associated with Reedy Branch.
Alternative B would result in approximately 10.1 acres of wetlands impacts and 6.1 acres of fill in the floodplain. The
Midfield Alternative would result in 10.3 acres of wetland impacts. As noted herein, these estimates provided in the
Environmental Assessment were based on conceptual level planning and did not include any additional impacts to
wetlands because of required grading to meet FAA design criteria, drainage, and/or stormwater management
facilities.
Based on final design of the Midfield Alternative, the wetland impacts associated with the impervious surfaces for the
Midfield Apron Development, including the airfield/apron pavement, parking lot improvements, and hangar
foundations of the Midfield Apron total 8.34 acres of wetlands. For comparison, the Final Environmental Assessment
calculated the impacts for those impervious surfaces to be 10.3 acres, as stated above. The remaining impacts (10.3
acres) are attributed to the grading requirements, drainage improvements, and re-establishment of the stormwater
management facility. Thus, at the time of the Final Environmental Assessment, the impact comparisons were
relatively the same with respect to the impacts from the physical pavement needs associated with the project.
Regarding aquatic resources and species, USFWS IPaC reports were run for Alternative A, B, and the Midfield
Alternative. All reports resulted in the same eight species, and none noted critical habitat in the area.
Response to Article B, Item 6
Please refer to the Avoidance and Minimization section for a detailed evaluation of alternative locations for SCMs.
This section discusses the benefits of the proposed SCM locations maintaining existing drainage patterns, allowing
for SWM control throughout the construction of the project, and that the proposed SCM location would mostly impact
an existing non-functional SCM instead of other natural resources such as previously restored wetland areas. This
section also discusses alternative locations that were considered during design that include areas directly off of the
runways and taxiways that are eliminated as SCM locations because of FAA regulations that do not allow for
promoting standing water and attracting wildlife (FAA AC 150/5200-33C) and limiting drainage structures to outside
of aircraft operation runway and taxiway safety areas (FAA AC 150/53000-13B and AC 150/5320-5D).
Response to Item 7
- N/A
Response to Article B, Item 8
- Public Safety Center: The Authority is currently evaluating a public safety center east of Swift Creek Road
and south of US Highway 70. This economic development project is currently in schematic design.
Applicable environmental resource analyses and associated agency coordination are being conducted.
Corporate Industrial Development Area (Area D JNX 2040): As stated previously, the Authority has
recently started initial planning, engineering, and environmental assessments for road access to facilitate
airfield expansions near US Highway 70 and Runway 3-21. This analysis is assessing current site
conditions, such as land use and potential environmental impacts, and proposes preferred road alignments.
It includes schematic design exhibits, grading, geometrics, construction cost estimates, and programming
schedule recommendations for the Airport's future reference and documentation.

A=COM
June 19, 2024
Page 10
Future Aeronautical Services and Industrial Development Area (Area C JNX 2040): Area C
encompasses several projects, some of which are complete, some of which are in construction, and some
of which are proposed for the future. Area C includes the Blue Line Aviation facility and associated ramp
expansion; this was completed in January 2022. Area C also encompasses the FBO#3 site redevelopment,
hangar construction, and parking lot expansion; this project is currently under construction with a scheduled
completion date of October 2024. No schedule has been developed for the other projects that are identified
within this area.

LEGEND:
f
//
AIRPORT PROPERTY LINE
ADG 3 HANGAR 60' BUILDING LIMIT LINE
HANGAR BUILD AREA - ADG 1
HANGAR BUILD AREA - ADG 2
.044
PROPOSED MIDFIELD APRON-\ /*'
`PROPOSED TAXILANE J
OPOSED TAXILANE H
0
AL
!II IIU� V
1
TAXIWAY A
PROPOSED SUBMERGED
GRAVEL WETLAND
JOHNSTON REGIONAL AIRPORT
HANGAR BUILD AREA - ADG 3
NORTH CAROLINA
JOHNSTONMITHFIELD,
RAGRPORT GION L
MIDFIELD APRON DEVELOPMENT
NO BUILD AREA DUE TO RUNWAY AND
TAXIWAY SAFETY AREAS AND PART 77
CL 33 AND RFAI / SAW - 2001 - 20723
SURFACES
80NE. 00■� Na:
NO BUILD AREA DUE TO RUNWAY
AS
AC0M SMM
PROTECTION ZONEam
JUIIE 2024

JOHNSTON
REGIONAL
� AIRPdRT�
Johnston Regional Airport
Midfield Apron Development
Johnston County, NC
Figure 2
Wetland Resources
i�►1�`�w � �I�L ir'f��
_
11
June 2024
This map is for reference only.

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
3916 Sunset Ridge Rd
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Project Code: 2024-0105332
Project Name: JNX Alternative A
".41 &WILDCUM
XEF4' 1r 6
06/18/2024 13:10:27 UTC
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the
requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the
Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). If your project area
contains suitable habitat for any of the federally -listed species on this species list, the proposed
action has the potential to adversely affect those species. If suitable habitat is present, surveys
should be conducted to determine the species' presence or absence within the project area. The
use of this species list and/or North Carolina Natural Heritage program data should not be
substituted for actual field surveys.
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered

Project code: 2024-0105332
06/18/2024 13:10:27 UTC
species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having
similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological
evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may
affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended
contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.
If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that
listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the
agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service
recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed
within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7
consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered
Species Consultation Handbook" at:
https: //www.fws. gov/sitesldefaultlfilesldocuments/endangered-species-consultation-
handbook.pdf
Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to
protect native birds from project -related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional,
resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more
information regarding these Acts, see https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-bird-permit/what-
we-do.
The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally
killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to
comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within
applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan
(when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid
or minimize the production of project -related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and
their resources to the project -related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and
recommended conservation measures, see https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/threats-birds.
In addition to MBTA and BGEPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies
to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities
that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures
that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both
migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of
Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.gov/partner/council-conservation-
migratory-birds.
2 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105332
06/18/2024 13:10:27 UTC
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Code in the header of
this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit
to our office.
Attachment(s):
■ Official Species List
■ USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries
• Bald & Golden Eagles
■ Migratory Birds
OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
3916 Sunset Ridge Rd
Raleigh, NC 27607
[phone]
3 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105332 06/18/2024 13:10:27 UTC
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Code: 2024-0105332
Project Name: JNX Alternative A
Project Type: Airport - New Construction
Project Description: Hangar development at JNX airport.
Project Location:
The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://
www.google.com/maps/(a)35.549544,-78.39149385703638,14z
CL
{�c
�G
3
;oWn4�n
G�5411rF
Mwrl
Counties: Johnston County, North Carolina
4of11

Project code: 2024-0105332 06/18/2024 13:10:27 UTC
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES
There is a total of 8 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheries1, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
5 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105332 06/18/2024 13:10:27 UTC
MAMMALS
NAME STATUS
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis sub flavus Proposed
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Endangered
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515
BIRDS
NAME
STATUS
Red -cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7614
AMPHIBIANS
NAME
STATUS
Neuse River Waterdog Necturus lewisi
Threatened
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6772
FISHES
NAME
STATUS
Carolina Madtom Noturus furiosus
Endangered
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/528
CLAMS
NAME
STATUS
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni
Threatened
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5164
Dwarf Wedgemussel Alasmidonta heterodon
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/784
Yellow Lance Elliptio lanceolata
Threatened
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4511
INSECTS
NAME
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
STATUS
Candidate
6 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105332
06/18/2024 13:10:27 UTC
10 hi LVA ICI
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
STATUS
CRITICAL HABITATS
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S) MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL
ABOVE LISTED SPECIES.
USFWS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE LANDS
AND FISH HATCHERIES
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a
'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to
discuss any questions or concerns.
THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS OR FISH HATCHERIES WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA.
BALD & GOLDEN EAGLES
Bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Actl and the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act2.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to bald or
golden eagles, or their habitats3, should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically,
please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
1. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
2. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
THERE ARE NO BALD AND GOLDEN EAGLES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF YOUR PROJECT AREA.
MIGRATORY BIRDS
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Actl and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act2.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
7 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105332
06/18/2024 13:10:27 UTC
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically,
please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY
OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
NAME
BREEDING SEASON
American Kestrel Falco sparverius paulus
Breeds Apr 1 to Aug
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation
31
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
hqps:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9587
Brown -headed Nuthatch Sitta pusilla
Breeds Mar 1 to Jul
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation
15
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
htWs:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9427
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica
Breeds Mar 15 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental
Aug 25
USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9406
Chuck-will's-widow Antrostomus carolinensis
Breeds May 10 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation
Jul 10
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9604
Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental
31
USA and Alaska.
hqps:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9439
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina
Breeds May 10 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental
Aug 31
USA and Alaska.
htWs:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9431
PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental
Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper
8 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105332
06/18/2024 13:10:27 UTC
Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret
this report.
Probability of Presence (■)
Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project
overlaps during that week of the year.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire
range.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s)
your project area overlaps.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
_ probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
BCC- BCRestrel ---- —'
BCC NuthatchNU
11111111 III— ---- —�--
Chimney Swift
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Chuck-will's-widow — — — — — — — — — — — — --'—----
BCC -BCR
Prothonotary
Warbler — ---- IIII IIII IIII IIII ----
---- BCC Rangewide
Rangewide
(CON)
Wood Thrush
BCC Rangewide
— — — — — — — — — — — — --1
(CON)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management
■ Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/librur /
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds
9 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105332 06/18/2024 13:10:27 UTC
■ Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
■ Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/
media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-eagles-may-occur-
project-action
10 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105332
06/18/2024 13:10:27 UTC
IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION
Agency: AECOM
Name: Susan Draper
Address: 301 Government Center Drive
Address Line 2: Suite 200
City: WILMINGTON
State: NC
Zip: 28412
Email [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]
11 of 11

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
3916 Sunset Ridge Rd
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Project Code: 2024-0105335
Project Name: JNX Alternative B
".41 &WILDCUM
XEF4' N'• 6
06/18/2024 13:14:03 UTC
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the
requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the
Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). If your project area
contains suitable habitat for any of the federally -listed species on this species list, the proposed
action has the potential to adversely affect those species. If suitable habitat is present, surveys
should be conducted to determine the species' presence or absence within the project area. The
use of this species list and/or North Carolina Natural Heritage program data should not be
substituted for actual field surveys.
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered

Project code: 2024-0105335
06/18/2024 13:14:03 UTC
species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having
similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological
evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may
affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended
contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.
If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that
listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the
agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service
recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed
within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7
consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered
Species Consultation Handbook" at:
https: //www.fws. gov/sitesldefaultlfilesldocuments/endangered-species-consultation-
handbook.pdf
Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to
protect native birds from project -related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional,
resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more
information regarding these Acts, see https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-bird-permit/what-
we-do.
The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally
killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to
comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within
applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan
(when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid
or minimize the production of project -related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and
their resources to the project -related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and
recommended conservation measures, see https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/threats-birds.
In addition to MBTA and BGEPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies
to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities
that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures
that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both
migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of
Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.gov/partner/council-conservation-
migratory-birds.
2 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105335
06/18/2024 13:14:03 UTC
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Code in the header of
this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit
to our office.
Attachment(s):
■ Official Species List
■ USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries
• Bald & Golden Eagles
■ Migratory Birds
OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
3916 Sunset Ridge Rd
Raleigh, NC 27607
[phone]
3 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105335 06/18/2024 13:14:03 UTC
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Code: 2024-0105335
Project Name: JNX Alternative B
Project Type: Airport - New Construction
Project Description: Hangar development at JNX airport.
Project Location:
The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://
www.google.com/maps/(a)35.54443715,-78.38578704479886,14z
Counties: Johnston County, North Carolina
4 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105335 06/18/2024 13:14:03 UTC
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES
There is a total of 8 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheries1, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
5 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105335 06/18/2024 13:14:03 UTC
MAMMALS
NAME STATUS
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis sub flavus Proposed
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Endangered
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515
BIRDS
NAME
STATUS
Red -cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7614
AMPHIBIANS
NAME
STATUS
Neuse River Waterdog Necturus lewisi
Threatened
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6772
FISHES
NAME
STATUS
Carolina Madtom Noturus furiosus
Endangered
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/528
CLAMS
NAME
STATUS
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni
Threatened
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5164
Dwarf Wedgemussel Alasmidonta heterodon
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/784
Yellow Lance Elliptio lanceolata
Threatened
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4511
INSECTS
NAME
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
STATUS
Candidate
6 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105335
06/18/2024 13:14:03 UTC
10 hi LVA ICI
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
STATUS
CRITICAL HABITATS
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S) MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL
ABOVE LISTED SPECIES.
USFWS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE LANDS
AND FISH HATCHERIES
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a
'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to
discuss any questions or concerns.
THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS OR FISH HATCHERIES WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA.
BALD & GOLDEN EAGLES
Bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Actl and the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act2.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to bald or
golden eagles, or their habitats3, should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically,
please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
1. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
2. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
THERE ARE NO BALD AND GOLDEN EAGLES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF YOUR PROJECT AREA.
MIGRATORY BIRDS
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Actl and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act2.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
7 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105335
06/18/2024 13:14:03 UTC
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically,
please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY
OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
NAME
BREEDING SEASON
American Kestrel Falco sparverius paulus
Breeds Apr 1 to Aug
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation
31
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
hqps:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9587
Brown -headed Nuthatch Sitta pusilla
Breeds Mar 1 to Jul
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation
15
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
htWs:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9427
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica
Breeds Mar 15 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental
Aug 25
USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9406
Chuck-will's-widow Antrostomus carolinensis
Breeds May 10 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation
Jul 10
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9604
Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental
31
USA and Alaska.
hqps:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9439
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina
Breeds May 10 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental
Aug 31
USA and Alaska.
htWs:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9431
PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental
Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper
8 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105335
06/18/2024 13:14:03 UTC
Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret
this report.
Probability of Presence (■)
Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project
overlaps during that week of the year.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire
range.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s)
your project area overlaps.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
_ probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
BCC- BCRestrel ---- —'
BCC NuthatchNU
11111111 III— ---- —�--
Chimney Swift
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Chuck-will's-widow — — — — — — — — — — — — --'—----
BCC -BCR
Prothonotary
Warbler — ---- IIII IIII IIII IIII ----
---- BCC Rangewide
Rangewide
(CON)
Wood Thrush
BCC Rangewide
— — — — — — — — — — — — --1
(CON)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management
■ Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/librur /
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds
9 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105335 06/18/2024 13:14:03 UTC
■ Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
■ Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/
media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-eagles-may-occur-
project-action
10 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105335
06/18/2024 13:14:03 UTC
IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION
Agency: AECOM
Name: Susan Draper
Address: 301 Government Center Drive
Address Line 2: Suite 200
City: WILMINGTON
State: NC
Zip: 28412
Email [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]
11 of 11

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
3916 Sunset Ridge Rd
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Project Code: 2024-0105337
Project Name: JNX Midfield Alternative
".41 &WILDCUM
XEF4' 1r 6
06/18/2024 13:17:41 UTC
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the
requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the
Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). If your project area
contains suitable habitat for any of the federally -listed species on this species list, the proposed
action has the potential to adversely affect those species. If suitable habitat is present, surveys
should be conducted to determine the species' presence or absence within the project area. The
use of this species list and/or North Carolina Natural Heritage program data should not be
substituted for actual field surveys.
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered

Project code: 2024-0105337
06/18/2024 13:17:41 UTC
species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having
similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological
evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may
affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended
contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.
If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that
listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the
agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service
recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed
within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7
consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered
Species Consultation Handbook" at:
https: //www.fws. gov/sitesldefaultlfilesldocuments/endangered-species-consultation-
handbook.pdf
Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to
protect native birds from project -related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional,
resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more
information regarding these Acts, see https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-bird-permit/what-
we-do.
The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally
killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to
comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within
applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan
(when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid
or minimize the production of project -related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and
their resources to the project -related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and
recommended conservation measures, see https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/threats-birds.
In addition to MBTA and BGEPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies
to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities
that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures
that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both
migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of
Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.gov/partner/council-conservation-
migratory-birds.
2 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105337
06/18/2024 13:17:41 UTC
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Code in the header of
this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit
to our office.
Attachment(s):
■ Official Species List
■ USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries
• Bald & Golden Eagles
■ Migratory Birds
OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
3916 Sunset Ridge Rd
Raleigh, NC 27607
[phone]
3 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105337 06/18/2024 13:17:41 UTC
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Code: 2024-0105337
Project Name: JNX Midfield Alternative
Project Type: Airport - New Construction
Project Description: Hangar development at JNX airport.
Project Location:
The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://
www.google.com/maps/(a)35.5434855,-78,3927514956111,14z
Counties: Johnston County, North Carolina
4 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105337 06/18/2024 13:17:41 UTC
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES
There is a total of 8 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheries1, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
5 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105337 06/18/2024 13:17:41 UTC
MAMMALS
NAME STATUS
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis sub flavus Proposed
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Endangered
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515
BIRDS
NAME
STATUS
Red -cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7614
AMPHIBIANS
NAME
STATUS
Neuse River Waterdog Necturus lewisi
Threatened
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6772
FISHES
NAME
STATUS
Carolina Madtom Noturus furiosus
Endangered
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/528
CLAMS
NAME
STATUS
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni
Threatened
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5164
Dwarf Wedgemussel Alasmidonta heterodon
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/784
Yellow Lance Elliptio lanceolata
Threatened
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4511
INSECTS
NAME
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
STATUS
Candidate
6 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105337
06/18/2024 13:17:41 UTC
10 hi LVA ICI
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
STATUS
CRITICAL HABITATS
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S) MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL
ABOVE LISTED SPECIES.
USFWS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE LANDS
AND FISH HATCHERIES
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a
'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to
discuss any questions or concerns.
THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS OR FISH HATCHERIES WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA.
BALD & GOLDEN EAGLES
Bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Actl and the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act2.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to bald or
golden eagles, or their habitats3, should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically,
please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
1. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
2. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
THERE ARE NO BALD AND GOLDEN EAGLES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF YOUR PROJECT AREA.
MIGRATORY BIRDS
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Actl and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act2.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
7 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105337
06/18/2024 13:17:41 UTC
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically,
please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY
OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
NAME
BREEDING SEASON
American Kestrel Falco sparverius paulus
Breeds Apr 1 to Aug
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation
31
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
hqps:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9587
Brown -headed Nuthatch Sitta pusilla
Breeds Mar 1 to Jul
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation
15
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
htWs:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9427
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica
Breeds Mar 15 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental
Aug 25
USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9406
Chuck-will's-widow Antrostomus carolinensis
Breeds May 10 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation
Jul 10
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9604
Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental
31
USA and Alaska.
hqps:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9439
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina
Breeds May 10 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental
Aug 31
USA and Alaska.
htWs:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9431
PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental
Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper
8 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105337
06/18/2024 13:17:41 UTC
Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret
this report.
Probability of Presence (■)
Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project
overlaps during that week of the year.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire
range.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s)
your project area overlaps.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
_ probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
BCC- BCRestrel ---- —'
BCC NuthatchNU
11111111 III— ---- —�--
Chimney Swift
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Chuck-will's-widow — — — — — — — — — — — — --'—----
BCC -BCR
Prothonotary
Warbler — ---- IIII IIII IIII IIII ----
---- BCC Rangewide
Rangewide
(CON)
Wood Thrush
BCC Rangewide
— — — — — — — — — — — — --1
(CON)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management
■ Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/librur /
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds
9 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105337 06/18/2024 13:17:41 UTC
■ Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
■ Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/
media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-eagles-may-occur-
project-action
10 of 11

Project code: 2024-0105337
06/18/2024 13:17:41 UTC
IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION
Agency: AECOM
Name: Susan Draper
Address: 301 Government Center Drive
Address Line 2: Suite 200
City: WILMINGTON
State: NC
Zip: 28412
Email [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]
11 of 11

A=COM
Memorandum
AECOM 410 785 7220 tel
4 North Park Drive 410 785 6818 fax
Hunt Valley, MD 21030
www.aecom.com
To Stephanie Gross, NCDEQ 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Phil Lanier, Johnston Regional Airport
Sue Homewood, NCDEQ 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
cc Matthew Martin, USACE
Corps Action ID# SAW-2001-20723
Midfield Apron Development
Johnston Regional Airport
Subject Smithfield, North Carolina
From Jennifer Lutz
Date May 21, 2024
Comments from Stephanie Gross [(Supervisor, 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch of the North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality (NCDEQ)] were transmitted via electronic email from Sue Homewood (NCDEQ) on April 24,
2024. In accordance with the guidelines included in the letter, comments are to be responded to in writing within 30
days of receipt of the letter (May 24, 2024). Responses are as follows:
RESPONSE NO. 1:
Comments from the US Army Corps of Engineers were received on May 20, 2024. The NCDEQ Division of Water
Resources (DWR) will be copied on the responses.
RESPONSE NO. 2:
Alternative B was developed in support of a Final Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Midfield Hangar
Development, which was prepared by others (WSP) in September 2020; the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the Final Environmental Assessment on October 1, 2021.
The topography at the location of Alternative 8 is just one reason that this alternative was deemed not feasible in the
Final Environmental Assessment (September 2020). This alternative would require construction of a connector
taxiway from the west side of the airfield, a partial parallel taxiway for access to the apron and associated hangars,
and a vehicle access drive from US Highway 70BUS. In addition, no facilities are located on the east side of the
airfield; aircraft would be required to taxi to the west side of the airfield for services, including access to the terminal,
maintenance, and fueling. Land acquisition would also be needed for the vehicle access road from US Highway
70BUS.
The Airport Master Plan Update Technical Report, dated April 2022, prepared by others (Marr Arnold) identifies the
east side of the airfield of an area of potential growth beyond the 20-year planning period. The Master Plan noted this
area would be ideal for a mixture of corporate and /or aviation related industrial development beyond the 20-year
planning period. In addition, the Master Plan notes that as aircraft operations continue to increase, the Airport should
plan for a capacity enhancing project within the next several years. A capacity enhancing project could involve a
parallel runway and/or an Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT). Without the additional analyses required to detail
operational activity, development of hangars on the east side of the airfield in the absence of this detailed data would
be short-sighted and preclude the development of a parallel runway and/or ATCT in the future. Thus, this area
remains reserved for future development on the Airport Layout Plan.

A=COM
May 21, 2024
Page 2
Furthermore, prior planning analyses concluded that since Alternative B would not decrease impacts to wetlands as
compared to the Midfield Apron Development Alternative; the location is remote and would require a lengthy taxiing
to the west side of the airfield for services (terminal and fueling); significant infrastructure (connector taxiways,
parallel taxiway, and new access road through Reedy Branch to US 70) would need to be constructed; and
development could preclude future airfield expansion to address future capacity needs, Alternative B is not viable.
RESPONSE NO. 3:
Based on the environmental analysis completed as part of the Final Environmental Assessment (September 2020),
per National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping and limited field delineations, Alternative B would impact
approximately 10.1 acres of wetlands and the Midfield Apron Development was estimated to impact 10.3 acres. The
wetland impact calculations provided in the Final Environmental Assessment were based on conceptual/planning
only level (not design) analyses including just the impervious footprint of the development and did not include any
additional impacts to wetlands because of required grading to meet FAA design criteria, drainage, and/or stormwater
management facilities. Based on final design (well beyond planning level), the wetland impacts associated with the
impervious surfaces for the Midfield Apron Development, including the airfield/apron pavement, parking lot
improvements, and hangar foundations of the Midfield Apron total 8.34 acres of wetlands. The remaining impacts
(10.3 acres) are attributed to the grading requirements, drainage improvements, and re-establishment of the
stormwater management facility. Thus, at the time of the Final Environmental Assessment, the impact comparisons
were relatively the same with respect to the impacts from the physical pavement needs associated with the project; it
is not prudent to make a direct comparison between the impacts of Alternative B included in the Final Environmental
Assessment that were based on conceptual plans to the Midfield Apron (Preferred Alternative) based on final design.
RESPONSE NO.4:
Part A: The proposed drainage layouts were designed to match existing drainage patterns and drainage areas; in
addition, ditches and associated drainage structures were placed so that they would be outside of aircraft operational
runway and taxiway safety areas to adhere to FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13B, Airport Design and Advisory
Circular 150/5320-5D, Airport Drainage Design and provide for the maximum allowable development area to meet
current hangar demands.
In addition, given the airport environs, drainage and associated stormwater management systems are to adhere to
recommendations contained in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33C, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or near
Airports. Per the aforementioned Advisory Circular, stormwater management systems should be designed and
operated as to not create above -ground standing water with a maximum 48-hour detention period after the design
storm and to remain completely dry between storms. While there are physical barriers such as bird balls, wire grids,
floating covers, vegetation barriers (bottom liners), or netting that can be installed to deter waterfowl and other
hazardous wildlife on open systems, these measures typically require some sort of annual maintenance and are not
preferred.
A more in-depth discussion of the proposed drainage system layout and stormwater management rationale is
included below.
Drainage System: Significant upgrades to the existing drainage system will be required to handle the proposed flows
due to the conversion of an existing forested wetland area into impervious pavements with minimal grass infield
areas (pervious). The required upgrades will consist of removal of an existing culvert in stream SA, removal of the
existing 54-inch diameter culvert under Taxiway A and replacement with multiple proposed culverts on the north and
south sides of proposed Taxilane L, and removal of the existing single 54-inch diameter culvert under Runway 3-21

A=COM
May 21, 2024
Page 3
and replacement with dual 72-inch diameter culverts. Grass swales (vegetated conveyances) are being proposed to
the maximum extent possible adjacent to impervious areas.
The drainage for the apron areas will consist of a series of trench drains, manholes, and associated piping that will be
connected to stop valve pump -out manholes on the northern side of proposed Taxilane L. This flow will then be
routed through proposed oil/water diversion vaults and 5,000-gallon oil/water separators prior to their connections
into the proposed culvert system running along the north side of proposed Taxilane L. The stop valve pump -out
manholes will contain a valve to close the downstream pipe to allow for pumping out of glycol or other contaminated
fluids.
The proposed drainage culverts on the north and south sides of proposed Taxilane L will be combined into a single
drainage structure in the infield area on the east side of proposed Taxiway A. The existing developed area south of
the Midfield Apron site will also be drained via a third parallel culvert that will be placed under Taxiway A. All three (3)
pipes will be combined into a second associated drainage structure that will be placed on the east side of Taxiway A
and connected into the dual 72-inch diameter culvert system that will be constructed under existing Runway 3-21.
The dual culvert system will be drained through a flow splitter prior to its outfall into the proposed Submerged Gravel
Wetland area.
The remainder of the Midfield Apron Development area (Corporate Hangars #26 and #27 and their associated
parking and landside pavements), the off -site flow to the west, and the existing T-hangar apron to the north of the
Midfield Apron Development (to be re -developed in the future) will be tied together and drained to the east to a
proposed drainage structure that will be placed in the infield area between the Central Apron/Taxilane H and
proposed Taxiway A. A portion of the 60-inch diameter culvert placed as part of the Corporate Hangar Site
Development — Phase 1 construction project recently built, designed by others, to the north of the Midfield Apron
Development site will be re -constructed and tied into the proposed piping that is being constructed to drain the
proposed extension of Taxilane H, Taxilane J, and Taxilane P (re -location of existing Taxiway E and re-establishment
as a new taxiway). This new piping will also be tied into the aforementioned drainage structure. A fourth parallel pipe
will be constructed under proposed Taxiway A to tie into the proposed infield piping that will be placed between
proposed Taxiway A and existing Runway 3-21 that will be further discussed herein.
The existing Terminal Apron area and remaining hangar/apron areas to the north of the Corporate Hangar Site
Development — Phase 1 construction project (by others) flows will be tied into the dual 72-inch culvert system via
filling in of the existing swale and construction of a proposed grass surface swale (vegetated conveyance) and
associated inlets and subsurface drainage culverts. The subsurface drainage will begin at a manhole placed on the
southside of existing Taxiway E at the existing downstream headwall location. The proposed subsurface culvert
construction will continue to the south where it will be tied into the proposed dual 72-inch culvert system that will be
constructed under existing Runway 3-21. The proposed infield areas on the east side of proposed Taxiway A north of
existing Taxiway F will also be drained via filling in of the existing swale and construction of a proposed grass surface
swale (vegetated conveyance) and associated inlets and subsurface drainage culverts between proposed Taxiway A
and existing Runway 3-21. This infield drainage will also be tied into the dual 72-inch pipe system that will be
constructed under existing Runway 3-21.
Corporate Hangars #22, 23, 24, 25, and their associated parking lots will be drained via construction of associated
inlets and subsurface drainage culverts that will drain into a proposed Linear Dry Detention Pond and associated
Level Spreader — Filter Strip prior to discharging into Swift Creek.

A=COM
May 21, 2024
Page 4
Overall, the proposed drainage was laid out to avoid major changes to existing drainage areas and patterns aside
from the conversion of pervious to impervious surfaces within the respective project drainage areas. Thus, the
current layout provided the only viable alternative.
Stormwater Management: To ensure the safety of aircraft within the operations areas, the proposed Best
Management Practices (BMP) types were selected to not attract wildlife per FAA regulations. A submerged gravel
wetland is proposed to manage and treat stormwater runoff with no vegetation and no above ground permanent pool
as to not be an attractant to waterfowl which pose a strike hazard to aircraft. Similarly, the dry pond and level
spreader -filter strip is designed to manage and treat stormwater runoff and remove sediment with no permanent
standing water. To meet NCDEQ stormwater regulations, the degraded stormwater treatment pond is proposed to be
retrofit into a submerged gravel wetland at POI 1, and a combination of a linear dry detention pond and a level
spreader -filter strip is proposed at POI 2.
The proposed submerged gravel wetland is located to avoid impacts to an area of restored wetlands to the northeast
of the facility. The restored wetland area shall be protected since the function and value of these wetlands is more
significant than the adjacent wetlands. Although the proposed storm culvert and submerged gravel layout will remove
some waters of the U.S., the channel flow direction will remain the same and the overall hydraulic connectivity to the
downstream wetlands and other natural resources will remain intact. The submerged gravel wetland will provide
increased treatment of stormwater in comparison to the degraded stormwater treatment pond and is designed to treat
the maximum amount of stormwater while minimizing the impact extents to adjacent waters of the U.S. and wetlands.
The proposed linear dry pond and level spreader -filter strip was designed to avoid all impacts to waters of the U.S.
and their buffers. The combined dry pond and level spreader -filter strip system is proposed to treat stormwater runoff
by removing nutrients, sediment, and other pollutants before discharging into the adjacent stream.
Overall, the proposed stormwater management features at POI 1 (submerged gravel wetland) and POI 2
(combination linear dry detention pond and level spreader -filter strip) were located to provide a safe airport
environment and alleviate wildlife hazard concerns by keeping the proposed detention facilities away from aircraft
operational areas to the maximum extent practicable.
Part B: The proposed elevation of the borrow area will range from 147 feet to 165 feet after the site is used. The
proposed gravel beds at the SCM are at 125 feet. Thus, a pump would be required should the borrow pit area be
used as an SCM location. In addition, this area is slated for future development beyond the 20-year planning horizon.
RESPONSE NO. 5:
Due to the above ground structures and features associated with the proposed Submerged Gravel Wetland (SGW),
the facility must be located outside of the Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) to meet FAA Advisory Circularl50/5300-
13B, Airport Design, criteria. While the 48-hour maximum standing water detention period and the requirement that
any SCM remain completely dry between storms as dictated by Advisory Circular 150/5200-33C, Hazardous Wildlife
Attractants on or Near Airports, is being met by the SGW design, the Advisory Circular also suggests that such
features be located as far from aircraft operations areas as possible. The current location not only provides for this
but will also allow for the existing pond to remain in place and be used for stormwater quantity management while the
proposed SGW is being constructed. Additionally, the proposed SGW has been located to avoid impacts to an area
of restored wetlands to the northeast of the facility. Although the proposed storm culvert and submerged gravel layout
will remove some waters of the U.S., the channel flow direction will remain the same and the overall hydraulic
connectivity to the downstream wetlands and other natural resources will remain intact. The submerged gravel
wetland will provide increased treatment of stormwater in comparison to the existing wet pond and is designed to

A=COM
May 21, 2024
Page 5
treat the maximum amount of stormwater while minimizing the impact extents to adjacent waters of the U.S. and
wetlands.
RESPONSE NO. 6:
Part A: The 00 for the submerged gravel wetland (SGW) has been reviewed and updated to provide proper header
and description, and additional details, see attached.
Part B: A draft monitoring plan for the SGW has been provided in accordance with the protocols outlines in the 2023
NC Stormwater Control Measure Credit Document, Part C, see attached.
RESPONSE NO. 7:
Impacts necessary for temporary construction access and sediment and erosion control measures have been
denoted on Sheets CX-100 through CX-110 (Existing Conditions and Erosion Sediment Control Plans) and Sheets
CX-501 through CX-502 (Existing Conditions and Erosion Sediment Control Notes). It is not expected that any
additional measures and associated limits of disturbance beyond what is shown in these plans will be required for
construction of the project. As noted in Response No. 5, the current SGW location will allow for the existing pond to
remain in place and be used for stormwater quantity management while the proposed SGW is being constructed.
Since the existing pond will be maintained during construction turbidity during construction should not be increased
beyond the current limits. Silt Fence (SF), Super Silt Fence (SSF), Temporary Rock Silt Checks, Sand Bag Dikes,
and Filter Bag, Pipe and Temporary Pump measures proposed around the existing pond and proposed SGW will be
used to mitigate sediment impacts during construction.

Operation & Maintenance Agreement
Project Name:
Project Location:
Midfield Apron Development - Johnston Regional Airport
3149 Swift Creek Road, Smithfield, NC, 27577
Cover Page
Maintenance records shall be kept on the following SCM(s). This maintenance record shall be kept in a log in a known set location.
Any deficient SCM elements noted in the inspection will be corrected, repaired, or replaced immediately. These deficiencies can
affect the integrity of structures, safety of the public, and the pollutant removal efficiency of the SCM(s).
The SCM(s) on this project include (check all that apply & cc
Infiltration Basin
Quantity:
Infiltration Trench
Quantity:
Bioretention Cell
Quantity:
Wet Pond
Quantity:
Stormwater Wetland
Quantity:
Permeable Pavement
Quantity:
Sand Filter
Quantity:
Rainwater Harvesting
Quantity:
Green Roof
Quantity:
Level Spreader - Filter Strip
Quantity:
Proprietary System
Quantity:
Treatment Swale
Quantity:
DryPond
Quantity:
Disconnected Impervious Surface
Present:
User Defined SCM
Present:
Low Density
Present:
g O&M sheets will
Location(s):
Location(s):
Location(s):
Location(s):
Location(s):
Location(s):
Location(s):
Location(s):
Location(s):
Location(s):
Location(s):
Location(s):
Location(s):
Location(s):
Location(s):
Type:
oe aaaea automaticai
est
ISubmerged Gravel Wetland: East I
I acknowledge and agree by my signature below that I am responsible for the performance of the maintenance procedures listed for
each SCM above, and attached O&M tables. I agree to notify NCDEQ of any problems with the system or prior to any changes to
the system or responsible party.
Responsible Party:
Title & Organization:
Street address:
City, state, zip:
Phone number(s):
Email:
Phil Lanier
Airport Director, Johnston County Airport Authority
3149 Swift Creek Road
Smithfield, NC, 27577
919-934-1214
[e-mail]
Signature: ,;- Date: 2�
I, PC I P v1 L �� , m rn : ,.+� a Notary Public for the State of +t+ CCt L C L tic'
County of ) 11 H )k t;'\,-',. do hereby certify that h i L L Ct I-) i e v
personally appeared before me this +k day of I C ht ,L c, vv and
acknowledge the due execution of the Operations and Maintenance Agreement.
Witness m� hand and official seal, J �1�� t� YJ ;,t,v>'K"
= r'..0TA.RY —
` :.
3 L I C
%F
v
Seal
My commission expires
STORM-EZ 11 /20/2023
Version 1.5 O&M Agreement Page 1 of 7

Level Spreader -Filter Strip Maintenance Requirements
Important operation and maintenance procedures:
_ Immediately after the filter strip is established, any newly planted vegetation will be watered twice weekly if
needed until the plants become established (commonly six weeks).
_ Stable groundcover will be maintained in the drainage area to reduce the sediment load to the level
spreader -filter strip.
Every two weeks during the growing season, the filter strip will be mowed. Turf grass should not be cut
shorter than 4-6 inches and may be allowed to grow as tall as 12 inches depending on aesthetic
requirements (NIPC, 1993).
Once a year, the soil will be aerated if necessary and the filter strip will be reseeded to maintain a dense
growth of vegetation.
Once a year, soil pH will be tested and lime will be added if necessary.
For the fist two years after the LS-FS is established, it shall be inspected quarterly and within 24 hours after every storm event greater
than 1.0 inches (or 1.5 inches if in a Coastal County). After two years of successful performance, it will be inspected quarterly.
Records of operation and maintenance shall be kept in a known set location and shall be available upon request.
Inspection activities shall be performed as follows. Any problems that are found shall be repaired immediately.
SCM element:
Potential problem:
How to remediate the problem:
The entire LS-FS
Trash/debris is present.
Remove the trash/debris.
The flow splitter device is
Unclog the conveyance and dispose of any sediment off -site.
The flow splitter device (if
clogged.
applicable)
The flow splitter device is
Make any necessary repairs or replace if damage is too large for repair.
damaged.
The swale is clogged with
Remove the sediment and dispose of it off -site.
The blind swale
sediment.
The swale is overgrown with
Mow vegetation. Regrade and vegetate if the swale has become silted in.
vegetation.
The level lip is cracked,
settled, undercut, eroded or
Repair or replace the lip.
otherwise damaged.
There is erosion around the
Regrade the soil to create a berm that is higher than the level lip, plant ground
The level spreader
end of the level spreader that
show stormwater has
cover and water until it is established. Provide lime and aone-time fertilizer
b
bypassed it.
application.
Trees or shrubs have begun
to grow on the swale or just
Remove the shrubs or trees.
downslope of the level lip.
Areas of bare soil and/or
Regrade the soil if necessary to remove the gully, plant ground cover and
erosive gullies have formed.
water until it is established. Provide lime and a one-time fertilizer application.
The bypass channel
Turf reinforcement is
Study the site to see if a larger bypass channel is needed (enlarge if
damaged or ripap is rolling
necessary). After this, reestablish the erosion control material.
downhill.

Level Spreader -Vegetated Filter Strip Maintenance Requirements (continued)
SCM element:
Potential problem:
How to remediate the problem:
Grass is too short or too long.
Maintain grass at a height of approximately three to six inches.
Areas of bare soil and/or
Regrade the soil if necessary to remove the gully, plant ground cover and
erosive gullies have formed.
water until it is established. Provide lime and a one-time fertilizer application.
Sediment is building up on the
Remove the sediment and restabilize the soil with vegetation if necessary.
filter strip.
Provide lime and a one-time fertilizer application.
The filter strip
Grass is dead, diseased or
Determine the source of the problem: soils, hydrology, disease, etc. Remedy
dying.
the problem and replace plants. Provide a one-time fertilizer application to
establish the ground cover if necessary.
Determine the source of the problem: soils, hydrology, disease, etc. Remedy
Plants are dead, diseased or
the problem and replace plants. Provide a one-time fertilizer application to
dying.
establish the ground cover if a soil test indicates it is necessary. If sod was
used, check to see that it was not grown on clay or impermeable soils.
Replace sod if necessary.
Nuisance vegetation is
Remove vegetation by hand if possible. If pesticide is used, do not allow it to
choking out the grass.
get into the receiving water.
Erosion or other signs of
damage have occurred at the
Repair the damage and improve the flow dissipation structure.
outlet.
The receiving water
Discharges from the LS-FS
are causing erosion or
Contact the local NCDEQ Regional Office.
sedimentation in the receiving
water.

Dry Pond Maintenance Requirements
Important operation and maintenance procedures:
The drainage area will be managed to reduce the sediment load to the dry pond.
Immediately after the dry pond is established, the vegetation will be watered twice weekly if needed until the
plants become established (commonly six weeks).
After the initial fertilization to establish vegetation in the dry pond, fertilizer will not be applied to the dry pond.
The vegetation in and around the basin will be maintained at a height of approximately six inches.
- At least once annually, a dam safety expert will inspect the embankment. Any problems that are found will
be repaired immediately.
After the dry pond is established, it shall be inspected quarterly and within 24 hours after every storm event greater than 1.0 inches
(or 1.5 inches if in a Coastal County). Records of operation and maintenance shall be kept in a known set location and shall be
available upon request.
Inspection activities shall be performed as follows. Any problems that are found shall be repaired immediately.
SCM element:
Potential problem:
How to remediate the problem:
The entire SCM
Trash/debris is present.
Remove the trash/debris.
Areas of bare soil and/or
Regrade the soil if necessary to remove the gully, plant ground cover and
The perimeter of the SCM
erosive gullies have formed.
water until it is established. Provide lime and a one-time fertilizer
application.
The inlet pipe is clogged (if
Unclog the pipe. Dispose of the sediment in a location where it will not
applicable).
cause impacts to streams or the SCM.
The inlet pipe is cracked or
The inlet device
otherwise damaged (if
Repair or replace the pipe.
applicable).
Erosion is occurring in the
Regrade the swale if necessary and provide erosion control devices such
swale (if applicable).
as reinforced turf matting or riprap to avoid future problems with erosion.
Sediment has accumulated to
Search for the source of the sediment and remedy the problem if possible.
a depth greater than the
Remove the sediment and dispose of it in a location where it will not cause
original design depth for
impacts to streams or the SCM.
sediment storage.
The forebay
Erosion has occurred.
Provide additional erosion protection such as reinforced turf matting or
riprap if needed to prevent future erosion problems.
Weeds are present.
Remove the weeds, preferably by hand. If pesticide is used, wipe it on the
plants rather than spraying.
Sediment has accumulated to
Search for the source of the sediment and remedy the problem if possible.
a depth greater than the
original design depth for
Remove the sediment and dispose of it in a location where it will not cause
sediment storage.
impacts to streams or the SCM.
The main treatment area
Water is standing more than 5
Check the outlet structure for clogging. If it is a design issue, consult an
days after a storm event.
appropriate professional.
Weeds and noxious plants are
Remove the weeds, preferably by hand. If pesticide is used, wipe it on the
growing in the main treatment
plants rather than spraying.
area.

Dry Pond Maintenance Requirements (continued)
SCM element:
Potential problem:
How to remediate the problem:
Shrubs have started to grow on
Remove shrubs immediately.
the embankment.
Evidence of muskrat or beaver
Consult a professional to remove muskrats or beavers and repair any holes
activity is present.
or erosion.
The embankment
A tree has started to grow on
Consult a dam safety specialist to remove the tree.
the embankment.
An annual inspection by an
appropriate professional shows
Make all needed repairs immediately.
that the embankment needs
repair.
Clogging has occurred.
gg g
Clean out the outlet device. Dispose of the sediment in a location where it
will not cause impacts to streams or the SCM.
The outlet device
The outlet device is damaged
Repair or replace the outlet device.
Erosion or other signs of
damage have occurred at the
Repair the damage and improve the flow dissipation structure.
outlet.
Discharges from the dry pond
The receiving water
are causing erosion or
Contact the local NCDEO Regional Office.
sedimentation in the receiving
water.
Dry Detention Pond Design Summary
DRY POND ID FOREBAY MAIN POND
Temporary Pool El: N/A Temporary Pool El: 139.05
Clean Out Depth: N/A Clean Out Depth: 4.05
Pretreatment No Sediment Storage El: N/A Sediment Storage El: 135
Has Veg. Filter No Bottom Elevation: N/A Bottom Elevation: 135

Submerged Gravel Wetland Maintenance Requirements
Important operation and maintenance procedures:
- The drainage area will be managed to reduce the sediment load to the submerged gravel wetland.
Immediately after the submerged gravel wetland is established, the vegetation will be watered twice weekly if
needed until the plants become established (commonly six weeks).
After the initial fertilization to establish vegetation on the slopes of the submerged gravel wetland, fertilizer will not be
applied to the submerged gravel wetland.
The vegetation around the basin will be maintained at a height of approximately six inches.
At least once annually, a dam safety expert will inspect the embankment. Any problems that are found will be
repaired immediately.
After the submerged gravel wetland is established, it shall be inspected quarterly and within 24 hours after every storm event greater
than 1.0 inches (or 1.5 inches if in a Coastal County). Records of operation and maintenance shall be kept in a known set location and
shall be available upon request.
Inspection activities shall be performed as follows. Any problems that are found shall be repaired immediately.
SCM element:
Potential problem:
How to remediate the problem:
Excessive vegetative
growth, erosion, and
obstructions on access
Maintain access way and prevent growth of vegetation.
The entire SCM
way.
Trash/debris is present.
Remove the trash/debris.
Areas of bare soil and/or
Regrade the soil if necessary to remove the gully, plant ground cover
The perimeter of the SCM
erosive gullies have
and water until it is established. Provide lime and a one-time fertilizer
formed.
application.
The inlet pipe is clogged (if
Unclog the pipe. Dispose of the sediment in a location where it will
applicable).
not cause impacts to streams or the SCM.
The inlet pipe is cracked or
The inlet device
otherwise damaged (if
Repair or replace the pipe.
applicable).
Erosion is occurring in the
Regrade the swale if necessary and provide erosion control devices
swale (if applicable).
such as reinforced turf matting or riprap to avoid future problems with
erosion.
Sediment has
accumulated to a depth
Search for the source of the sediment and remedy the problem if
greater than the original
possible. Remove the sediment and dispose of it in a location where it
design depth for sediment
will not cause impacts to streams or the SCM.
The forebay
storage.
Erosion has occurred.
Provide additional erosion protection such as reinforced turf matting or
riprap if needed to prevent future erosion problems.
Weeds or invasive species
Remove the weeds, preferably by hand. If pesticide is used, wipe it
are present.
on the plants rather than spraying.
Sediment has
accumulated to a depth
Search for the source of the sediment and remedy the problem if
greater than the original
possible. Remove the sediment and dispose of it in a location where it
design depth for sediment
will not cause impacts to streams or the SCM.
storage.
Water is standing more
than 48 hours after a
Check the underdrain for clogging. Remove and replace the top three
The main treatment area
storm event. Presence of
inches of pea gravel in the affected area. If the facility does not
algae or aquatic
function as intended after action, the entire system including the
vegetation
underdrain and full depth of gravel media may need to be refurbished.
Weeds and noxious plants
Remove the weeds, preferably by hand. If pesticide is used, wipe it
are growing in the main
on the plants rather than spraying.
treatment area.

Submerged Gravel Wetland Maintenance Requirements (continued)
SCM element:
Potential problem:
How to remediate the problem:
The underdrain
Clogging has occurred.
Clear out any blockages.
Shrubs have started to
Remove shrubs immediately.
grow on the embankment.
Evidence of muskrat or
Consult a professional to remove muskrats or beavers and repair any
beaver activity is present.
holes or erosion.
The embankment
A tree has started to grow
Consult a dam safety specialist to remove the tree.
on the embankment.
An annual inspection by an
appropriate professional
shows that the
Make all needed repairs immediately.
embankment needs
repair.
Clogging has occurred.
gg g
Clean out the outlet device. Dispose of the sediment in a location
where it will not cause impacts to streams or the SCM.
The outlet device
The outlet device is
Repair or replace the outlet device.
damaged
Erosion or other signs of
Repair the damage and improve the flow splitter structure or
damage have occurred at
underdrain outfall.
the outlet.
The receiving water
Discharges from the
submerged gravel wetland
are causing erosion or
Contact the local NCDEQ Regional Office.
sedimentation in the
receiving water.
SUBMERGED GRAVEL WETLAND ID
Pretreatment Yes
Has Veg. Filter No
suameraea caravel wetlana uesian summary
FOREBAY
Temporary Pool El:
126.92
Clean Out Depth:
1.25
Sediment Storage El:
125.67
Bottom Elevation:
125.67
MAIN POND
Temporary Pool El:
127.67
Clean Out Depth:
2
Sediment Storage El:
125.67
Bottom Elevation:
125.67

SUBMERGED GRAVEL WETLAND DRAFT MONITORING PLAN
Johnston Regional Airport Midfield Apron Development Prepared by: AECOM
Corps Action ID# SAW-2001-20723 Date: 5/21/2024
DWR# 20240241
MONITORING ITEM
REQUIREMENTS
ACTION
The number of location installations required
. Continuous monitoring of flow at
Number and
also applies to expanding the use of a
inflow, underdrain outflow,
location of
stormwater technology to nutrient reduction
bypass channel.
monitoring stations
or other water quality treatment for which
. Collect run off samples at inflow
quantification of classification of performance
is sought.
and underdrain outflow
• Concentrations must be a
Storm event influent and concentrations must
minimum of:
be a minimum of 0.71 mg/L for TN and 0.05
o 0.71 mg/L for TN
mg/I for TP. A minimum of 8 storm event
o 0.05 mg/I for TP.
influent -effluent pairs for each installation
• Minimum of 8 storm event
must meet this influent screening for their
influent -effluent pairs for each
associated effluent concentrations to be
installation must meet influent
included in this evaluation.
screening for their associated
effluent concentrations
Minimum Qualifying
Events
Monitoring shall include sampling of the
• Minimum of 15 storm events over
submerged gravel wetland's performance for a
a period of 3 years.
minimum of 15 storm events over a period of 3
• A minimum of 3 storm events
years (A minimum of 3 storm events each
each season.
season.) Each included storm must be a
• Each included storm must be a
minimum of 0.10 inches of rainfall and have a
minimum of 0.10 inches of rainfall
dry antecedent period of (0" of rain) of 6
and have a dry antecedent period
hours.
of 6 hours.
Runoff volume into and out of the submerged
Runoff volume will be computed from
Inflow and Outflow
gravel wetland, and volume bypassing the
continuous runoff data.
submerged gravel wetland.
Full Storm hydrograph flow -weighted
composite sampling of both the influent and
Runoff samples must be collected over the
Runoff Sample
effluent (but not bypass). Seventy percent
Collection
(70%) or more of the hydrograph's volume
course of 70% of the storm hydrograph
shall be represented by the sample collection
based off continuous monitoring data.
for each storm event

SUBMERGED GRAVEL WETLAND DRAFT MONITORING PLAN
Johnston Regional Airport Midfield Apron Development Prepared by: AECOM
Corps Action ID# SAW-2001-20723 Date: 5/21/2024
DWR# 20240241
Influent and effluent samples shall be collected
and analyzed for Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
for the entire study must meet the
Influent and effluent samples will be
TSS Samples
requirements of Table B-2: TSS Removal
analyzed for TSS concentrations by lab and
Standards for Studies of Primacy SCMs from
compared to Table B-2.
the 2023 North Carolina Stormwater Control
Measure Credit Document.
Influent and effluent samples will be
Collect influent and effluent samples, analyze
analyzed by lab for:
Nutrient Samples
for Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN), Nitrate +
• TKN
Nitrite (NO2,3-N), and total Phosphorus (TP)
• NO2,3-N
• TP
Sampling, laboratory analysis and data
interpretation shall be conducted by a party
The laboratory that is used shall be
Collection, analysis,
independent of the entity proposing the new
certified in accordance with 15A NCAC 02H
and Interpretation
technology to DWR/DEMLR and the entity
installing the technology, except for academic
Section 0.0800.
institutions.
Applicants will submit a short email report
every 6 months to DEMLR staff describing the
activities completed in the past six months, the
Submit to:
Reporting
activities anticipated in the next six months,
Chonticha McDaniel
and any unanticipated conditions and events
[e-mail]
that have happened that may lengthen the
period needed to complete studies
*For further information, please refer to the 2023 North Carolina Stormwater Control Measure Credit Document.