20090297 Ver 1_401 Application_20090309

IL?_A THE LPA GROUP INCORPORATED
Transportation Consultants
700 HUGER STREET ¦ PO. BOX 5805 ¦ COLUMBIA, SC 29250 ¦ 803-254-2211 ¦ FAX [phone]
March 19, 2009 n- 0 2 9 7 1 -,
.? ?.1 L l
Ms. Cyndi Karoly fvIA R E? n
42009
01 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
North Carolina Division of Water Quality DENR' t',Ir?: 011-Y
1?'ETL4'tDS A.n.n S i'o,^?! vTER BRANCH
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: Halifax Northampton Regional Airport - Pond Drainage/Temporary Stream Crossings
Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rules Authorization
Ms. Karoly:
Please find enclosed five (5) copies of the Pre-Construction Notification Application Form as well as all
accompanying drawings for the above referenced project. This Application is being submitted for written
authorization of impacts to the Tar-Pamlico Riparian Buffer as Allowable (per the Table of Uses in 15 NCAC 02B
.0259 for temporary road crossings) resulting from two temporary stream crossings.
The crossing of two buffered streams is required to access a pond that needs to be drained to comply with Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) safety regulations, as defined in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5200-33B,
Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or Near Airports. The crossings would consist of timber mats, which would span
the channel and no fill or culverts would be placed within the stream channel. Therefore, since no temporary or
permanent fill impact would occur within the streams and/or wetlands a Section 404 Permit and Section 401 Water
Quality Certification would not be required.
This work is being performed to comply with FAA safety regulations regarding a hazardous wildlife attractant at the
Airport. To minimize risk to life and property, the FAA specifies a separation distance of 5,000 feet for Airports
serving piston-powered aircraft and hazardous wildlife attractants. The existing pond is located approximately
2,300 feet south of the existing runway.
If you have any questions or need additional information, I can be reached by email at [e-mail] or by
phone at 843-329-0050.
Sincerely,
THE LPA GROUP INCORPORATED
c
Edward J. Smail
Environmental Scientist
Enclosures
Cc: Mr. Thomas Brown, USACE (w/enclosure)
Mr. Terry Bumpus, P.E., THE LPA GROUP of North Carolina, p.a. (w/enclosure)
Project File (w/enclosure)
ATLANTA ¦ BATON ROUGE ¦ CHARLESTON ¦ CHARLOTTE ¦ COLUMBIA ¦ GREENSBORO ¦ GULFPORT ¦ JACKSONVILLE
KNOXVILLE ¦ LITTLE ROCK ¦ MOBILE ¦ ORLANDO ¦ RALEIGH ¦ SARASOTA ¦ TALLAHASSEE ¦ TAMPA ¦ WEST PALM BEACH
-297
TF9OG
?o,? W A
O
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information ? ''
1.
?
Processing MA 2- 0-j
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps: DENR - WATER QUALITY
? Section 404 Permit ? Section 10 Perr>'4RA' DS AND sTmRP 1WATER BRANCH
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ? Yes ? No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Express ® Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
® Yes ? No For the record only for Corps Permit:

® Yes ? No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program. ? Yes ® No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ? Yes ® No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Halifax Northampton Regional Airport - Pond Drainage
2b. County: Halifax
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Halifax, NC
2d. Subdivision name: N/A
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: N/A
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: Halifax Regional Airport Authority
3b. Deed Book and Page No. 1911-134
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): Mr. Tony Brown - County Manager
3d. Street address: 10 North King Street
3e. City, state, zip: Halifax, NC, 2 3 ?`] 3 q
3f. Telephone no.: 252-583-1131
3g. Fax no.: 252-583-9921
3h. Email address: brownt halifaxnc.com
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ® Agent ? Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: Edward J. Smail
5b. Business name
(if applicable): THE LPA GROUP INCORPORATED
5c. Street address: 4401 Belle Oaks Drive, Suite 105
5d. City, state, zip: North Charleston, SC 29405
5e. Telephone no.: 843-329-0050
5f. Fax no.: 843-329-0055
5g. Email address: esmail(@Ipagroup.com
Page 2 of 11
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): 0619739
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 36.314526 Longitude: - 77.637859
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size: 870 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to Marsh Swamp
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: C; SW, NSW
2c. River basin: Tar-Pamlico
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
Land use adjacent to the project consist of existing airport maintained areas, undeveloped wooded areas, and agricultural
fields. Land use adjacent to the airport is largely undeveloped and consists mostly of fallow and active farmland/pasture.
A site location map is inlcuded as Figure 1.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
Approximately 60 acres
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
Approximately 11,700 linear feet
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Refer to the attached Project Narrative
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Refer to the attached Project Narrative
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: A delineation was preformed and a Jurisdictional ® Yes ? No ? Unknown
Determination was received for the construction of the
Airport (Action ID 200420672 and 200421162, DWQ Project
# 04-0639)
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
? Preliminary ®Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company: THE LPA GROUP INC.
Name (if known): Gordon Murphy and Edward Smail Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
JD determination was included with the approval of the permit (200420672 and 200421162, DWQ Project # 04-0639)
6. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for ® Yes ? No ? Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
Refer to the attached Project Narrative
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 4 of 11
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
? Wetlands ? Streams - tributaries ® Buffers
? Open Waters ? Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number- Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non-404, other) (acres)
Tem ora T
W1 ? PEI T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W2 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W3 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W4 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W5 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W6 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts None
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number - (PER) or (Corps - 404, 10 stream length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ - non-404, width (linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet) feet)
S1 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S2 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S3 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S4 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S6 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts None
3i. Comments:
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individual) list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number - (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
01 ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
0. Total open water impacts None
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
Pond ID Proposed use or purpose (acres)
number of pond
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
? Yes ? No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
? Neuse ? Tar-Pamlico ? Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba ? Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number - Reason Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or for impact Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
Temporary T required?
61 ? P ®T Crossing UT-1 to Marsh Swamp ® Nos 720 480
B2 ? P ®T Crossing Little Marsh Swamp ® Nos 720 1,728
B3 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
6h. Total buffer impacts 1,440 2,208
6i. Comments: Buffer impacts are detailed on Figure 6.
Page 6 of 11
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Refer to the Attached Project Narrative.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Refer to the Attached Project Narrative
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State? ? Yes ® No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ? Corps

2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project? ? Mitigation bank

? Payment to in-lieu fee program
? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ? Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.

Zone 6c.
Reason for impact 6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier 6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required: None
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments: Refer to the attached Project Narrative
Page 8of11
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ® Yes ? No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments: The temporary crossing of the buffer would not require impervious ? Yes ® No
surface or stormwater outfalls in, or through the buffer.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? 0%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ? Yes ® No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
? Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ? DWQ Stormwater Program
? DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
? Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ? NSW
? USMP
apply (check all that apply): ? Water Supply Watershed
? Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ? No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
? Coastal counties

4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply ? HQW
? ORW
(check all that apply): ? Session Law 2006-246
? Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? ? Yes ? No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ? Yes ? No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ? Yes ? No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ® Yes ? No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ? Yes ® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.) ? Yes ? No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ? Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ? Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The proposed project would correct a safety hazard at the Airport and would not lead to additional development or
capacity at the Airport.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
N/A
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or ? Yes ® No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ? Yes ® No
impacts?

5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. ?
Raleigh
? Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Review of the most recent USFWS list for Halifax County (http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/es/countyfr.html)
Review of the NCNHP Element Occurrence Database (http://www.ncnhp.org/Pages/heritagedata.htmi)
Observation of habitat during site visits.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
GIS data was obtained from the Fish and Wildlife Resource Institute (http://ocean.floridamarine.o[g//) and reviewed to
determine if Essential Fish Habitat occurs within the project area.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ? Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
There are no structures that would be impacted by the proposed project and the only land disturbance that would occur
would be the removal of a man-made earthen dam.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ? Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program
(htt[)://www.ncfloodmaps.com/)

Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applica Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is rovided.
Page 11 of 11
x co'
jJl ?rwy?' 1
< `
Mo15L 4
January 12, 2009
Wtate of Pord) Carolina
Countp of Joalifax
HISTORIC COURTHOUSE - PO BOX 38 - KING STREET - HALIFAX, NC 27839
252-583-1131 - FAX; 252-583-9921
Mr. Terry Bumpus, P.E.
THE LPA GROUP of North Carolina, p.a.
5000 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 304
Raleigh, NC 27609
Re: Halifax-Northampton Regional Airport
Parallel Taxiway Project
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION
Dear Mr. Bumpus:
TONY N. BROWN
COUNTY MANAGER
This letter is provided to acknowledge that THE LPA GROUP is hereby allowed to be the Duly
Authorized Representative for the Halifax-Northampton Regional Airport in regards to
submitting documents and applicable fees for permits, certifications, and/or approvals as
applicable for obtaining the required federal and state permits for the above referenced project.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at 252-583-1131, ext. 273.
Sincerely,

Dia H. Denton
Assistant County Manager for Operational Services
!/(/llPitP.,f.1lY ?,2L2u ,[2?/-PLllP,2P?G?!!Lf!P (/UQ.O ?O/7?7
Halifax Northampton Airport
Pond Drainage
Project Narrative
March 2009
Purpose of Project (Section 3d)
According to the Memorandum of Agreement between the Federal Aviation
Administration, the United States Air Force, the United States Army, the United Stated
Environmental Protection Agency, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and the
United States Department of Agriculture to Address Aircraft-Wildlife Strikes, aircraft-
wildlife strikes are the second leading cause of aviation related fatalities.I The FAA
estimates that during the 1990's wildlife strikes damaged 4,500 civilian U.S. aircraft,
injured 91 people, caused 6 fatalities, and caused $4 billion dollars worth of damage.
Globally, the FAA estimates that wildlife strikes have killed over 400 people and
destroyed more than 400 aircraft.
According to the FAA and USDA manual, Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports2
water acts as a magnet for birds and all standing water on an airport should be eliminated
to the greatest extent possible. The large bodied bird species such as waterfowl and
wading birds that frequent impounded areas are especially hazardous. According to FAA
Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5200-3313, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or Near
Airports these types of species rank in the top ten of the most hazardous wildlife.3
According to the Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports manual from 1990 though
1999 the Canada goose was the second most struck species by U.S. aircraft and the
population in the U.S. quadrupled between 1986 and 2002. In September of 1995 an U.S.
Air Force reconnaissance jet stuck a flock of Canada geese during takeoff killing all 24
passengers aboard. The January 15, 2009, crash of U.S Airways Flight 1549 into the
Hudson River in New York was determined to have been caused by a bird strike.
The existing pond proposed to be drained is located approximately 2,300 feet south of
Runway 2-20 within the centerline of the Runway (as shown on Figure 1 and in the
attached photographs). Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Advisory Circular (AC)
150/5200-3313, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or Near Airports specifies a separation
distance of 5,000 feet for Airports serving piston-powered aircraft and hazardous wildlife
attractants. The existing pond provides habitat for Canada goose and other waterfowl,
I Federal Aviation Administration. Memorandum of Agreement between the Federal Aviation
Administration, the United States Air Force, the United States Army, the United Stated Environmental
Protection Agency, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and the United States Department of
Agriculture to Address Aircraft-Wildlife Strikes. (2003).
http://www.faa.eov/airports airtraffic/airports/environmental/media/wildlife hazard mou 2003 pdf
z Federal Aviation Administration and United States Department of Agriculture. Wildlife Hazard
Management at Airports. (July 2005).
http://wildlife.pr.erau.edu/EnglishManual/2005 FAA Manual complete_pdf
3 Federal Aviation Administration. Advisory Circular 150/5200-33B, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or
Near Airports. (August 2007).
1
and due to the gently sloped banks and shallow water the pond also provides feeding
habitat for wading birds.
In order to meet the separation requirements for hazardous wildlife attractants set forth in
FAA AC 15/5200-33B and improve safety at the Airport by removing an attractant to
large bodied birds, the pond located 2,300 feet south of Runway 2-20 must be drained.
Project Description (Section 3e)
This pond is shown on the Soil Survey of Halifax County and the USGS 7.5 Minute
Topographic Quadrangle shows the area of the pond as a `blue line' stream (refer to
Figure 1). Therefore the pond is subject to the Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rules as described in
15 NCAC 02B .0259. According the Table of Uses within 15 NCAC 02B .0259 drainage
of a buffered pond within a natural drainage way is exempt from the buffer rules
provided that a new riparian buffer is with a Zone 1 and Zone 2 is established adjacent to
the new channel and diffuse flow is maintained through Zones 1 and 2 of the newly
established buffer. Specifications for the proposed project to meet the stipulations set
forth by 15A NCAC 02B .0259 is described in further detail below.
The dam would be breached on the south side (refer to Figure 3) in order to restore
natural hydrology of Little Marsh Swamp and in accordance with Buffer
Interpretation/Clarification #2007-012. Prior to breaching the dam, the pond would be
pumped as low as possible prior to land disturbance to minimize downstream impacts,
such as sedimentation and erosion from the effluent exiting the pond. The opening in the
dam would be graded to match the downstream conditions as much as possible, tying it
into the existing pond sides. The opening would have 7:1 side slopes and longitudinal
slope of approximately 1 percent. The graded slopes would be seeded, mulched, and
covered with temporary erosion control matting. Additionally, during construction, a
temporary rock dam would be installed downstream to act a sediment basin to minimize
downstream impacts resulting from sedimentation. This structure would be removed
once the project is completed while the temporary crossings are still in place.
No additional clearing would be required of the existing riparian buffer surrounding the
pond. The stream channel within the pond would be allowed to form naturally and no
disturbance would occur within the newly formed channel. This site is being considered
as a mitigation site for future projects at the Airport. If it is determined that the site
would be used for stream and/or wetland mitigation a plan would be developed in the
future detailing the improvements that would be make to restore the site to its natural
state and provide as much ecological uplift as possible.
The property owner to the southwest of the Airport was approached concerning using
their property to access the pond site. The landowners did not agree to give the Airport
permission to access the pond from their property. Therefore, the pond would have to be
accessed from existing Airport property. In order to access the site from Airport property
(as shown on Figure 4) the crossing of Little Marsh Swamp and an unnamed tributary of
Little Marsh Swamp (UT-1) would be required. Little Marsh Swamp and UT-1 are
shown on either the USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle as a blue line stream or
2
in the hard copy of the Soil Survey of Halifax County (obtained from the Natural
Resources Conservation Service). Therefore, Little Marsh Swamp and UT-1 would be
subject to the Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rules, as described in 15 NCAC 02B .0259.
The crossings would consist of timber mats, which would span the channel and no fill or
culverts would be placed within the stream channel. Therefore, since no temporary or
permanent fill impact would occur within the streams and/or wetlands a Section 404
Permit and Section 401 Water Quality Certification would not be required. However,
since the temporary crossing would occur within the riparian buffer, a Buffer
Authorization would be required by DWQ.
Three Alternatives for the crossing were investigated to determine which crossing would
have the least amount of impact. These alternatives are shown on Figure 5 and
photographs of the Alternative crossing sites are also attached. Crossing One would
Little Marsh Swamp at the airport property line on the western side of the Airport
Property and UT-1 south of the hangar area. Crossing Two would cross Little Marsh
Swamp directly south of the existing runway. Crossing Three would follow the eastern
edge of the Airport property line and cross Little Marsh Swamp below the dam accessing
it from the south. Out of all the crossings investigated the crossing location chosen for
Crossing One did not require the crossing of wetlands and the stream channel is narrower
at that point than anywhere else on the Airport property. Impacts to the buffer would
minimized as much as possible the crossings would consist of two 12-foot wide roads
crossing the buffer a perpendicular as possible. For Crossing One, since the crossing
abuts the property line a turn would be required within the buffer area. The two crossing
areas are not densely vegetated with woody vegetation and clearing required within the
buffer areas would be minimal. However, woody vegetation that would require removal
would be cleared by hand. No grubbing or grading would also occur within the buffer
areas and stumps/root mats would be left in tact to protect the integrity of the soil.
Crossing One would require the crossing of the mitigation site associated with the
construction of the Airport (Action ID 200420672 and 200421162, DWQ Project # 04-
0639). The location chosen for Crossing One would have the least amount of impact on
wetlands and streams, therefore; there is not another feasible location to cross.
Additionally, the draining of the pond would improve overall water quality and provide
natural stream restoration, as well as improve safety at the Airport. The impact to the
mitigation site would be minimal since the impacted areas would be allowed to re-
vegetate once construction is completed with like vegetation. Additionally, impacts
would be offset by the stream restoration accomplished by the removal of the dam.
Project History (Section 5b)
On June 30, 2004 the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued a Section
404 Permit (Action ID 200420672 and 20042 1 1 62, DWQ Project # 04-0639) to the
Halifax-Northampton Regional Airport located in Halifax, NC for 0.36-acre of fill placed
in USACE jurisdictional wetlands, 280 linear feet of impact to an un-named tributary to
Quankey Creek, and 1,642 linear feet of impacts to un-named intermittent drainages.
Copies of these approvals are attached. These impacts are the result of the runway site
3
preparation (including the grading for the parallel Taxiway) for construction of an airport
on new location in Halifax County, NC. Wetlands that were impacted were low quality
wetlands consisting of former farm ponds and naturalized ditches. Streams that were
impacted were located in former agricultural fields, channelized, and did not have
vegetated riparian buffers. It was determined by the USACE and North Carolina
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) at an on-site meeting in March 16, 2004, that the
channelized intermittent drainages did not provide any important biological function, and
mitigation would not be required for impacts to these drainages.
Construction began on the Airport in September of 2004, and is currently still in progress.
It is anticipated that the Airport will open to the public in the Spring of 2009. The project
consisted of approximately 596,000 cubic yards of unclassified excavation and disturbed
approximately 192 acres on the Airport property. This included grading of the runway,
parallel taxiway, connector taxiways, and the apron for the Airport. Impacts resulting
from the construction of these facilities, 0.36-acre of wetland impacts and 280 linear feet
of stream impacts, required mitigation. The project also included construction of three
permanent sediment basins to capture on-site runoff. All on-site runoff was routed to the
sediment ponds. A variety of erosion and sediment control measured were employed
(and are continuing to be used) during construction to protect adjacent waters and
wetlands. A sequence of riprap check dams, rock dams, and temporary sediment traps
were used to control sediment in the grassed drainage ditches on the site. Additional
sediment was trapped using three stormwater detention basins during construction. Silt
fence was also used to contain runoff from slopes and to protect surrounding wetlands
during construction. A combination of Type 1, Type 2, and Type 3 erosion control
matting was used on side slopes and in ditches to prevent erosion and enable growth of
permanent vegetation. Side slopes on ditches and fill slopes were steepened to 3:1 in
order to minimize the disturbed area and avoid impacts to adjacent wetlands. Where
ditches were required to be located adjacent to, or, in the edges of wetlands, the soil
adjacent to the ditches was compacted and a low berm was constructed adjacent to the
ditches to prevent inadvertent wetland draining. Additionally, Best Management
Practices including, but not limited to the use of slit fencing, straw bales, and seeding and
mulching were used where appropriate.
Onsite wetland mitigation consisted of wetland restoration, and involved replanting a 1.5-
acre on-site wetland with native hardwood tree species. This planting provided a 4:1
mitigation ratio (1.5 acres mitigated to 0.36 acres impacted). The wetland is situated at
the toe of a slope and the source of hydrology appears to be from surface runoff and
groundwater, perched on the clayey sub-soil.
To compensate for impacts to the channelized perennial stream, a 7.25-acre buffer area
was planted with native hardwood species along a 1,485 linear foot section of two
perennial streams, located on Airport property south of SR 1619. The buffer site is
located along a portion of Little Marsh Swamp and one of its tributaries, both of which
are in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. The establishment of vegetated riparian buffer
provides water quality benefits to streams by creating a forested buffer between the
4
stream and future development at the Airport, in an area that consisted of former
agricultural fields vegetated with successional herbaceous species.
Avoidance and Minimization Using Design Measures (Section D.l.a)
Design measures were taken to avoid impacts to wetlands and streams associated with the
stream crossings needed to access the pond site. Several locations for the stream crossing
of Little Marsh Swamp were investigated to determine which would have the least
environmental effect. The additional crossings of the unnamed tributary investigated
were located further downstream. These areas have been flooded by beaver activity and
had large areas of inundation. Crossing in these areas would have likely required
temporary fill to construct haul roads through the wetland areas. The area selected for the
crossing of Little Marsh Swamp does not have wetlands abutting the stream channel;
therefore, by selecting this location for the crossing, wetland impacts were completely
avoided. Stream impacts were avoided by using temporary timber mats as opposed to a
temporary haul road with a pipe culvert and temporary fill within the stream channel.
Access to the pond site does exist off of Grapevine Road (S.R. 1618) that would not
require temporary crossings of the stream/buffer. However, these access points would
require the crossing of private property in between the Airport and Grapevine Road. The
landowner was approached by Halifax County regarding allowing construction
equipment access the pond from the property. The landowner would not grant
permission to the Airport to access the site through the property without monetary
compensation. Therefore, access had to occur from existing Airport property.
Avoidance and Minimization Using Construction Techniques (Section D.1.b)
Impacts to streams in close proximity to the construction site will be minimized through
the implementation of standard erosion and siltation control measures as specified in
FAA AC 150/5370-10, entitled Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports, and
specifically Item P-156, Temporary Air and Water Pollution, Soil Erosion, and Siltation
Control, and state and local erosion control requirements. Prior to breaching the dam, the
pond would be pumped as low as possible prior to land disturbance to minimize
downstream impacts, such as sedimentation and erosion from the effluent exiting the
pond. The opening in the dam would be graded to match the downstream conditions as
much as possible, tying it into the existing pond sides. The graded slopes would be
seeded, mulched, and covered with temporary erosion control matting. Additionally,
during construction, a temporary rock dam would be installed downstream to act as a
sediment basin to minimize downstream impacts resulting from sedimentation.
Buffer Mitigation (Section D.6.h)
The pond is shown on the Soil Survey of Halifax County and the USGS 7.5 Minute
Topographic Quadrangle shows the area of the pond as a `blue line' stream. Therefore
the pond is subject to the Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rules as described in 15 NCAC 02B .0259.
According the Table of Uses within 15 NCAC 02B .0259 drainage of a buffered pond
within a natural drainage way is exempt from the buffer rules provided that a new
riparian buffer is with a Zone 1 and Zone 2 is established adjacent to the new channel and
diffuse flow is maintained through Zones 1 and 2 of the newly established buffer. Little
5
Marsh Swamp and UT-1 are shown on either the USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic
Quadrangle as a blue line stream or in the hard copy of the Soil Survey of Halifax County
(obtained from the Natural Resources Conservation Service). Therefore, these two
tributaries would be subject to the Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rules, as described in 15 NCAC
02B .0259. As shown in Figure 6, impacts to the riparian buffer occuring from the
temporary crossings are below the threshold defined in the the Table of Uses in 15
NCAC 02B .0259, which states that Road crossings that impact greater than 40 linear feet
but equal to or less than 150 linear feet or one-third of an acre of riparian buffer are
Allowable. Therefore, since the prposed project would imapct approximatey 148 linear
feet (0.9-acre) of buffer, mitigation is not proposed for the buffer imapcts. However, the
impacted areas would be allowed to re-vegetate once construction is completed with like
vegetation and potential impacts would be offset by the stream restoration accomplished
by the removal of the dam.
6
FIGURES
OIL
rd -,\ .? ,qlV
60 JQ
Z
tvh 1 + " \ f 0 a

.+ ? Mi
_ ?\ , '? 1
o?, ,w-,?1\?} l
,C?1`J ??(""t• Q 00

?yt ,`'.,Kra`
!, Q
04 - , 40
0
U
C l)

t ""`?
to
, '\ ?
.' ?y
?. {'•.Int ,1'I r
?jtr Q
~ Ea `J < 1
Q
J
O
,

r j"1,

. _ -.1 ? ' ?? ? l? ?..? ?
. " ? L? 1 {{
ii
: ?a?!? , *?)14' \1 l.? 1, ? E ?
?' ,vl?., ?''.` y ?,•'1 1 j.s'
Z

o"A.,

I
IML
is'
of j , . ? ? \
' MA
?,... iu? 1
, If

10
?r
j
i4 ?"` ?`
"'. ?'
i
!.s ,
fi (
?? w
L
w ?

t
to
_` ,+ rte/
C
^,?? "" .l+
`
? !'
`
t 1
/¦?? y T 1 ?°
?'\.. r M
`w \ ?,, ( l?`\
.
?"
!
''?..
r j 1'? S
,w a C r
w
M
M
, tiJ
,
?
? q
l
,
?\ b\?
?+
??? ?
?lrl -?idii o
- ;. 1 \ i `
.. W i + 4 d tir. , 1M !n! / M ', tt
1?
41
Z h
'? ( +? CMr!- J, f
40
r / `?-^,
: +? +?- ,
w?`.
?
M !p ?-r a? < _. ;' W

? M ,,-*.1 `?, '^, -:?.

l
-
M1 ?
?Ml
?
? ' r trr?-'?.+Nd ! \y(`

?
+
ys 2d

?
?
.?'- 9v_-tii
-?.. J
i?. (
?
.,' `_ II
, ? Iw r-ra t t?i-- ? ?(pi "
` :'-l t'?f ?
r
+?
'V 1?\ V
4
. j?
. j( e?
!
1 r
]J
? i ??
?
F
r
D ?
W
CD Z Z
0 0
_
o Z
0

CD Cf) /
W
0
00 ?W Z 0
0?L
LL
O w 7LLJ ry1 O
Z
IL Q ?
O Q
? O W
a- CD

Z0 z
?
?cl? w Q
Oz
P: w BOO zQ
U)0 ? o
O a-z w
W ~ ?
_j
wv 00
ODD ?:2
J? w0

vi oa- cn
, oa-
Q
/ z _
? i z
w 000 ll? O
O ?UU CD
Z r- N

0
?
wo

1 v
I

/ / I I
I / N

/
/ / I I
/ ^o
/115

\
C Z
Q
C
w
z
U) 0
R

7
N /

I
1 l I
1
I
1
N
_

0
?>
02
Ow
ZOf
w
c~n m
w o

02
\
Q
I..L
Y
0-O /
LU /
I
/ / by I

/ I

0

O
O
N
K
m
L9
O cUn
2
CL
Luo)
O
o?
0
0
z° M
Q
o ?
------_120_ O
\ _--- a
? ^o
>a
Z o
/ 00Z
/
? O
ry0 /
\ \ I
I \ 1
I
I
1 ~?
Z°
1 H°°
1 ?U1N
Z
1 ?IIIIQ,
U
1 ?IIII a oz
/ wQa??
xa:) oo.u
F- ? 0 IL
co?
/ ?Z
N
H

adorn Auoo Np
oll
f
t_ 1 1
ow I?' - I I II \ l
z ?0Q? i?, r -?? I I I li l 1
UI QU?m --- ?i I I l I 11} / 11?
wowo ' I I i I 111 \/ J
? ??mw I 1 i
C --U o ?? ?--° = i III I I !I \ l
Of
Q!
w ?w Wo? l
o I? III ¢ l
<? `?? III I li \ \ \?
Ali ?o:?E ?
Qi ?z\? , ` I I II -J \
m a
LLJ
=;oo<o=? LLJ
1\J ?I i 4 I III \ ?-
w, z J I
0
CV z qq:t
Q?
a
o iL
I-t Zo:2noLi
III > g
,1 1 I I
04 00
/l \ II IQ i I I?il ?? ?)
_-D co
?? /I ?? /}II I # IhI ?_ o U
O
I ? (I/ / l111 I? II I I ? ? I ? ? ? 1 / ? ? a
? 1 I II Z I ?I? / I ??
{? i 4 I III) o N F-
?
a cl)
N ?o% L -/ /? ?? J \\ Q V
'o"/ ICI 1 _ ?/ 11 Q UQ Co, I InD r,,
n cc C:))
LLI
- _ / UWZL I J \ 0° I
Z
IL a
CJ--14-r" / ?? \ J Ste! 0 NCNa?. I '/ '/ J z m
sz` I No)I ? , o C7
a_ 0
n.t- on LL
d _rnc? 0 _ ?? _ _
UZW 135 Lri s?? Q a Z
ULLJZLJ-j
op/
or"
X30
s I /
zw I l ??
00 CZ °zw
0a'? ?- J aQ 11 x?- I \
m 'I LLJ
z° ? 1 I o I
? a cnm
11 I \.oo r =' 1
1 \ / ?I ° 125 / / / `n I? NJ 1 1
(9 L / ?-
co Q I
00
Li z
\1 o 46 / -- /
1
Fa
=o
m
Z O O
li z"
ooo
?IIII7 WU
?IIII a o=
wQaIX.Z
xa:Do
HJpa?o
Q. Z.?
o?o
0

0
0
0
M
0
0
0
N
0
C)
0
CD
n

SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

Halifax-Northampton Regional Airport
Taxiway Paving and Pond Drainage

I'llo( lord h 1 Lool'ilig :'vol tfi tat Poild from D uu (Octob r I: o 200s)

a?

; e?: x
+?•i_-+tis?$a? ? _ 7 » k''?r ?'ta art3? :.

t
` ?
r r,
°?: R
.. t?R. ?1s yd?? ? 1 ` f Q ?? 1?P, y
i f
x
.
xTi c '9?t ?? 4 ,.
t
is 3t ,•`

- ,
Photograph 4
Looking West (Upstream) at Little Marsh Swamp at Crossing One (October 16, 2008)
Photograph 3 - Looking West at Base of Dam to be Breached (October 14, 2008)
Photograph 5 - Looking East (Downstream) at Little Marsh Swamp at Crossing One (October 16, 2008)
rnotograpn 6 - Looking West (Upstream) at Little Marsh Swamp at Crossing Two (October 16, 2008)
(October 16, 2008)
Photograph 7 - Looking East (Downstream) at Little Marsh Swamp at Crossing Two (October 16, 2008)
rnotograpn a - Looking ivortn (upstream) at Little Marsh Swamp at Crossing Three Above Beaver Dam
Photograph 9 - Looking South (Downstream) at Little Marsh Swamp at Crossing Three Below Beaver Dam
(October 16, 2008)