soils - northeast supply enhancement › wp-content › ... · soils, hydric soils, compaction...

SOILS– RESOURCE REPORT 7 -

Williams has prioritized responsible soil management during all phases of the Northeast Supply Enhancement Project.

Northeast Supply Enhancement

B4555

This page intentionally left blank.

NORTHEAST SUPPLY ENHANCEMENT PROJECT RESOURCE REPORT 7 - SOILS

i

RESOURCE REPORT 7 – SOILS

INFORMATION Data Sourcesa

Found in Section

Full FERC Requirements

1. List the soil associations that would be crossed and describe the erosion potential, fertility, and drainage characteristics of each association. L, W, X, CC See Appendix 7B

2. If an aboveground facility site is greater than 5 acres: (i) List the soil series within the property and the percentage of the

property comprising each series; (ii) List the percentage of each series that would be permanently

disturbed; (iii) Describe the characteristics of each soil series; and (iv) Indicate which are classified as prime or unique farmland by the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

C, H, L, W, X, CC

See Table 7B-4 in Appendix 7B

3. Identify, by milepost, potential impacts from: Soil erosion due to water, wind, or loss of vegetation; soil compaction and damage to soil structure resulting from movement of construction vehicles; wet soils and soils with poor drainage that are especially prone to structural damage; damage to drainage-tile systems due to movement of construction vehicles and trenching activities; and interference with the operation of agricultural equipment due to the probability of large stones or blasted rock occurring on or near the surface as a result of construction.

C, K, W, Y, CC See Appendix 7B

4. Identify, by milepost, cropland and residential areas where loss of soil fertility due to trenching and backfilling could occur.

C, D, H, K, W, Y, CC

See Table 7.5-2 and Table 7.6-1

5. Describe proposed mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse impact on soils or agricultural productivity. Compare proposed mitigation measures with the staff's current “Upland Erosion Control, Revegetation, and Maintenance Plan,” which is available from the Commission Internet home page or from the Commission staff, and explain how proposed mitigation measures provide equivalent or greater protections of the environment.

C, D, H, K, W, Y, CC See Section 7.3

Additional Information Often Missing and Resulting in Data Requests

1. If the applicant generally proposes to adopt the FERC staff’s Plan except at certain locations, identify on a site-specific basis locations where alternative measures are proposed and describe the alternative measures that will ensure an equal or greater level of protection.

D

See Attachment 1 to Appendix 1B of Resource Report 1 for the Transco Plan and for a list of deviations and

alternative measures to the

FERC Plan.


ii

INFORMATION Data Sourcesa

Found in Section

Full FERC Requirements

2. Identify invasive species and/or noxious weeds that occur in the area and measure to prevent the introduction and/or spread of these species.

D, W

See Section 3.3.3 of Resource Report 3 and

Attachment 10 to Appendix 1B of

Resource Report 1 for the Noxious

Weed And Invasive Plant

Management Plan

3. Provide documentation of consultation with the NRCS or other applicable agencies regarding seed mixes, erosion control, and invasive species/noxious weeds.

D, W, CC See Appendix 7D and Volume 3

a Data Source Definitions: C = Agricultural Extension Agents CC = Soil Authorities other than the NRCS D = Applicant H = Comprehensive Plans: County or Land Management Agencies K = Erosion Control and Drainage Plan Handbooks: State and County L = Field Surveys W = NRCS X = NRCS Soil Surveys Y = Plan


iii

RESPONSES TO FERC COMMENTS DATED 1/17/2017 REGARDING DRAFT RESOURCE REPORT 7 Comment: Response/Information Location:

98. Provide a table or tables that describe acreage of prime farmland soils, hydric soils, compaction prone soils, highly wind and water erodible soils, soils with revegetation concerns, stony/rocky soils, and soils with shallow bedrock that would be impacted by the planned pipeline facilities, summarized by state, county, and soil map unit.


99. Provide a separate table outlining soil characteristics for pipe storage and contractor yards. Include acreages by soil map unit and both temporary and permanent impacts for each planned yard.


100. Provide a separate table outlining soil characteristics for access roads. Include acreages by soil map unit and indicate whether each road is planned as a temporary or permanent access road.


101. Identify the source (location) and volume of offshore backfill materials that would be used with the approval of regulatory agencies. Provide documentation of agency approval of the source of the backfill materials.

See Resource Report 1, Section 1.4.3.1,


iv



v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

7 SOILS ............................................................................................................................7-1

7.1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................7-1

7.2 EXISTING SOIL RESOURCES............................................................................................7-4

7.2.1 Onshore Facilities ....................................................................................................7-5

7.2.1.1 Pennsylvania ............................................................................................................7-5

7.2.1.1.1 Quarryville Loop .......................................................................................................7-5

7.2.1.1.2 Compressor Station 200 ..........................................................................................7-6

7.2.1.2 New Jersey ..............................................................................................................7-7

7.2.1.2.1 Madison Loop ..........................................................................................................7-7

7.2.1.2.2 Raritan Bay Loop .....................................................................................................7-7

7.2.1.2.3 Compressor Station 206 ..........................................................................................7-8

7.2.1.3 Contractor Yards ......................................................................................................7-8

7.2.2 Offshore Pipeline Facilities .......................................................................................7-9

7.3 POTENTIAL EFFECTS AND MITIGATION .......................................................................... 7-10

7.3.1 Onshore Pipeline Construction and Operation Effects and Mitigation ..................... 7-11

7.3.1.1 Soil Compaction ..................................................................................................... 7-12

7.3.1.2 Erosion ................................................................................................................... 7-14

7.3.1.3 Revegetation .......................................................................................................... 7-16

7.3.1.4 Stony/Rocky Soils .................................................................................................. 7-18

7.3.1.5 Hydric Soils ............................................................................................................ 7-19

7.3.1.6 Fragipan Soils ........................................................................................................ 7-20

7.3.2 Offshore Pipeline Construction and Operation Effects and Mitigation ..................... 7-21

7.3.2.1 Offshore Backfill ..................................................................................................... 7-22

7.3.2.2 Drill Fluids .............................................................................................................. 7-23

7.3.3 Compressor Station Construction Effects and Mitigation ........................................ 7-23

7.3.3.1 Soil Compaction ..................................................................................................... 7-23

7.3.3.2 Erosion ................................................................................................................... 7-24

7.3.3.3 Revegetation .......................................................................................................... 7-25

7.3.3.4 Stony/Rocky Soils .................................................................................................. 7-25

7.3.3.5 Hydric Soils ............................................................................................................ 7-25

7.3.3.6 Fragipan Soils ........................................................................................................ 7-26

7.4 POTENTIAL FOR SOIL CONTAMINATION ......................................................................... 7-26

7.4.1 Onshore Facilities .................................................................................................. 7-26


vi

7.4.1.1 Pennsylvania .......................................................................................................... 7-29

7.4.1.2 New Jersey ............................................................................................................ 7-29

7.4.1.2.1 Madison Loop ........................................................................................................ 7-29

7.4.1.2.2 Raritan Bay Loop ................................................................................................... 7-32

7.4.1.2.3 Compressor Station 206 ........................................................................................ 7-33

7.4.2 Offshore Facilities .................................................................................................. 7-33

7.5 AGRICULTURAL SOILS .................................................................................................. 7-45

7.5.1 Onshore Facilities .................................................................................................. 7-46

7.5.1.1 Pennsylvania .......................................................................................................... 7-49

7.5.1.1.1 Quarryville Loop ..................................................................................................... 7-49


7.5.1.2 New Jersey ............................................................................................................ 7-49

7.5.1.2.1 Madison Loop ........................................................................................................ 7-49


7.5.2 Agricultural Effects and Minimization ...................................................................... 7-49

7.5.2.1 Avoidance and Minimization ................................................................................... 7-49

7.5.2.2 Onshore Pipeline Effects and Mitigation ................................................................. 7-50

7.5.2.3 Aboveground Facility Pipeline Effects and Mitigation ............................................. 7-50

7.5.2.4 Croplands Effects and Mitigation ............................................................................ 7-50

7.5.3 No-till Farming ........................................................................................................ 7-50

7.5.3.1 Onshore Pipeline and Aboveground Facilities Effects and Mitigation ..................... 7-51

7.6 RESIDENTIAL IMPACTS ................................................................................................. 7-51

7.7 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 7-52

APPENDICES Appendix 7A Resource Report Figures

Appendix 7B Resource Report Tables

Appendix 7C Project Soil Descriptions

Appendix 7D Seed-Mix Recommendations


vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 7.1-1 Summary of Pipeline Facilities ..........................................................................7-1

Table 7.2-1 Summary of Surface Sediments Crossed by the Offshore Raritan Bay Loop..................................................................................................................7-9

Table 7.3-1 Soils with High Compaction Potential Impacted by the Onshore Pipelines ...... 7-13

Table 7.3-2 Soils with Severe Water-Erosion Potential Crossed by the Onshore Pipelines ......................................................................................................... 7-15

Table 7.3-3 Soils with Severe Wind-Erosion Potential Crossed by the Onshore Pipelines ......................................................................................................... 7-15

Table 7.3-4 Soils with Poor Revegetation Potential Crossed by the Onshore Pipelines ..... 7-17

Table 7.3-5 Stony/Rocky Soils Crossed by the Onshore Pipelines .................................... 7-18

Table 7.3-6 Hydric Soils Crossed by the Onshore Pipelines .............................................. 7-20

Table 7.3-7 Fragipan Soils Crossed by the Onshore Pipeline ............................................ 7-21

Table 7.3-8 Surface Sediment Types Within Offshore Pipeline Workspaces ...................... 7-22

Table 7.3-9 Soils with High Compaction Potential Impacted by Compressor Stations ........ 7-24

Table 7.3-10 Soils with Severe Water-Erosion Potential Impacted by Compressor Stations ........................................................................................................... 7-24

Table 7.3-11 Hydric Soils Impacted by Aboveground Facilities ............................................ 7-25

Table 7.4-1 Active Sites with Confirmed Contamination within 0.25 Mile of Project Workspaces .................................................................................................... 7-27

Table 7.4-2 Summary of Analytical Results for Sediment Samples .................................... 7-34

Table 7.4-3 Geographic Sediment Sample Groups ............................................................ 7-36

Table 7.4-4 Summary of Sediment Chemistry Tests and Screening Criteria ...................... 7-40

Table 7.5-1 Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Farmland of Unique Importance Soils Crossed by the Project ........................................... 7-46

Table 7.5-2 Croplands Crossed by Centerline by MP ........................................................ 7-47


viii



ix

LIST OF ACRONYMS

Agricultural Plan Agricultural Construction and Monitoring Plan ATWS additional temporary workspace Bgs below ground surface BMP best management practice BTEX benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene Certificate Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity CFR Code of Federal Regulations CEA Classification Exception Area CERCLIS Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and

Liability Information System CONMAP Continental Margin Mapping CP cathodic protection Dth/d dekatherms per day EDR Environmental Data Resources, Inc. EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESC Ecological Screening Criteria FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites HDD horizontal directional drill hp horsepower ISO International Organization for Standardizations LNYBL Lower New York Bay Lateral M&R meter and regulating MP milepost NJDEP New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection NPL National Priorities List NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NYSDEC New York State Department of Environmental Conservation PADCNR (Pennsylvania) Department of Conservation and Natural

Resources PADEP Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection PCB polychlorinated biphenyl Project Northeast Supply Enhancement Project RDL Rockaway Delivery Lateral


x

ROW right-of-way RR Resource Report SGV Sediment Guidance Value Spill Plan Spill Plan for Oil and Hazardous Materials SRP Site Remediation Program SSURGO Soil Survey Geographic (database) TOGS Technical and Operational Guidance Series Transco Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC Transco Plan Project-Specific Upland Erosion Control, Revegetation, and

Maintenance Plan Transco Procedures Project-Specific Wetland and Waterbody Construction and

Mitigation Procedures USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USDOT U.S. Department of Transportation USGS U.S. Geological Survey UST underground storage tank WRA Well Restriction Area Williams Williams Partners L.P. WEG wind erodibility group


7-1

7 SOILS

7.1 Introduction Resource Report (RR) 7 describes existing soil resources directly and indirectly affected

by construction and operation of Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC’s (Transco’s)

proposed Northeast Supply Enhancement Project (Project). Information pending in this RR will

be submitted in a supplemental filing as noted in grey italics with the anticipated filing date.

Transco, a subsidiary of Williams Partners L.P. (Williams), prepared this RR to support its

application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) for a Certificate

of Public Convenience and Necessity (Certificate) for the Project. The Project supports National

Grid's long-term growth, reliability, and flexibility beginning in the 2019/2020 heating season.

Transco is proposing to expand its existing interstate natural gas pipeline system in Pennsylvania

and New Jersey and its existing offshore natural gas pipeline system in New Jersey and New

York waters. The Project capacity is fully subscribed by two entities of National Grid: Brooklyn

Union Gas Company (d/b/a [doing business as] National Grid NY) and KeySpan Gas East

Corporation (d/b/a National Grid), collectively referred to herein as “National Grid.”

To provide the incremental 400,000 dekatherms per day (Dth/d) of capacity, Transco plans

to expand portions of its system from the existing Compressor Station 195 in York County,

Pennsylvania, to the Rockaway Transfer Point in New York State waters. As defined in executed

precedent agreements with National Grid, the Rockaway Transfer Point is the interconnection

point between Transco’s existing Lower New York Bay Lateral (LNYBL) and existing offshore

Rockaway Delivery Lateral (RDL). Table 7.1-1 lists the pipeline facilities associated with the

Project. Figure 1A-1 in Appendix 1A shows the overall Project location and facilities.

Table 7.1-1 Summary of Pipeline Facilities

Facility Size Onshore/ Offshore State County Length

(miles)

Quarryville Loop 42-inch-diameter pipeline Onshore Pennsylvania Lancaster County 10.17

Madison Loop 26-inch-diameter pipeline Onshore New Jersey Middlesex County 3.43

Raritan Bay Loop 26-inch-diameter pipeline Onshore New Jersey Middlesex County 0.16

Raritan Bay Loop 26-inch-diameter pipeline Offshore New Jersey Middlesex County 1.86

Raritan Bay Loop 26-inch-diameter pipeline Offshore New Jersey Monmouth County 4.09

Raritan Bay Loop 26-inch-diameter pipeline Offshore New York Queens County 6.44

Raritan Bay Loop 26-inch-diameter pipeline Offshore New York Richmond County 10.94


7-2

A description of the Project facilities is provided below. Note that the mileposts (MPs)

provided below for the onshore pipeline facilities correspond to the existing Transco Mainline and

Lower New York Bay Lateral1. The offshore pipeline facility MPs are unique to the Raritan Bay

Loop. The starting MP for the Raritan Bay Loop corresponds to MP12.00 of the Lower New York

Bay Lateral, and the end MP corresponds to the Rockaway Transfer Point.

Onshore Pipeline Facilities

Quarryville Loop ● 10.17 miles of 42-inch-diameter pipeline from MP1681.00 near Compressor

Station 195 to MP1691.17 co-located with the Transco Mainline in Drumore, East

Drumore, and Eden Townships, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Once in service,

the Quarryville Loop will be referred to as Mainline D.

Madison Loop ● 3.43 miles of 26-inch-diameter pipeline from Compressor Station 207 at MP8.57

to MP12.00 southwest of the Morgan meter and regulating (M&R) Station on the

Lower New York Bay Lateral in Old Bridge Township and the Borough of

Sayreville, Middlesex County, New Jersey. Once in service, the Madison Loop will

be referred to as Lower New York Bay Lateral Loop F.

Raritan Bay Loop ● 0.16 mile of 26-inch-diameter pipeline from MP12.00 west-southwest of the

Morgan M&R Station to the Sayreville shoreline at MP12.16. Additionally, a

cathodic protection (CP) power cable will be installed from a rectifier located at the

existing Transco Morgan M&R Station near MP12.10 and extending to a

connecting point on the proposed 26-inch-diameter pipeline at MP12.00. The

approximately 545-foot-long power cable will be installed by horizontal directional

drill (HDD).

Offshore Pipeline Facilities

Raritan Bay Loop ● 23.33 miles of 26-inch-diameter pipeline from MP12.16 at the Sayreville shoreline

in Middlesex County, New Jersey, to MP35.49 at the Rockaway Transfer Point in

1 Also referred to as Lower Bay Loop C.


7-3

the Lower New York Bay, New York, south of the Rockaway Peninsula in Queens

County, New York. Additionally, a 1,831-foot-long CPtion power cable will be

installed via HDD from a rectifier at the existing Transco Morgan M&R Station near

MP12.10 to an offshore anode sled located approximately 1,200 feet north of

MP12.32. Once in service, the Raritan Bay Loop will be referred to as Lower New

York Bay Lateral Loop F.

Aboveground Facilities

New Compressor Station 206 ● Construction of a new 32,000 ISO (International Organization for Standardizations)

horsepower (hp) compressor station and related ancillary equipment in Franklin

Township, Somerset County, New Jersey, with two Solar Mars® 100 (or

equivalent) natural gas-fired, turbine-driven compressors.

Modifications to Existing Compressor Station 200 ● Addition of one electric motor-driven compressor (21,902 hp) and related ancillary

equipment to Transco’s existing Compressor Station 200 in East Whiteland

Township, Chester County, Pennsylvania.

Modifications to Existing Mainline Valve Facilities ● Existing Valve Site 195-5 – Installation of a new mainline valve,

launcher/receiver, and tie-in facilities at the start of the Quarryville Loop

(MP1681.00).

● Existing Valve Site 195-10 – Installation of a new mainline valve,

launcher/receiver, and tie-in facilities at the end of the Quarryville Loop

(MP1691.17).

● Existing Valve Site 200-55 – Installation of a new mainline valve,

launcher/receiver, and tie-in facilities at the start of the Madison Loop (MP8.57).

New Mainline Valve Facilities ● Proposed Valve Site 195-8 – Installation of a new intermediate mainline valve for

the Quarryville Loop (MP1687.86).

● Proposed Valve Site 200-59 – Installation of a new mainline (isolation) valve for

the Madison Loop (MP11.90).


7-4

If the Commission issues a Certificate for the Project and Transco obtains the applicable

permits and authorizations, Transco anticipates that construction of the Project will begin in the

3rd quarter of 2018 to meet an in-service date in the 3rd quarter of 2019.

7.2 Existing Soil Resources Transco obtained the information contained in this RR and in Appendices 7A through 7D

from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil

Survey Geographic (SSURGO) database and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Continental

Margin Mapping (CONMAP) database (USGS 2005; NRCS 2015). Detailed information for soil

and sediment characteristics and soil map unit descriptions are included in Appendices 7B and

7C. Additional information regarding offshore sediment distribution and grain size was obtained

through an offshore geotechnical investigation, including a baseline benthic survey and offshore

deep and shallow core sediment sampling (see Appendix 1D to RR 1). Additional information

related to the vibracores collected as part of the offshore geotechnical investigation will be

provided in a supplemental filing in the 2nd quarter of 2017.

Soils that exhibit similar physical, chemical, horizon composition, thickness, and

arrangement make up a soil series. Soil map units consist of one or more components, usually

a soil series and, sometimes, miscellaneous areas such as urban areas. An individual soil series

may be a whole or a part of a soil map unit. Map units are often named for one or more component

series, each of which indicate the important/major features of the soil such as the range of slope

and rock content. Properties used to differentiate soil map units include slope, texture (i.e., the

proportions of sand, silt, and clay), mineralogy, stone composition, acidity, water content, and

depth to bedrock.

Information on soil formation factors and physical and chemical properties is used to

define map units, allowing for planning soil management during design, construction, and

restoration phases of a project. For a variety of reasons—including the fact that soil surveys have

been conducted over the course of several decades and the state of the science has grown since

earlier soil surveys were completed—a soil in one county that is similar to a soil in a neighboring

county may sometimes be included in a map unit with a different name. In addition, a soil map

unit symbol (usually designated by two or three letters such as “AgB”) in one county may be used

in another county but may represent a very different soil. Conversely, map units with similar

names may have different symbols in different counties.


7-5

Appendix 7A presents the soil and sediment maps for the Project area. Appendix 7B

provides the Project soil and sediment tables. Table 7B-1 of Appendix 7B shows the distribution

of soil map units, by MP, crossed by the centerline of the Quarryville Loop, Madison Loop, and

Raritan Bay Loop. Construction and operation impacts on soils from the pipeline facilities are

found in Table 7B-2 of Appendix 7B, and construction and operation impacts from compressor

stations are found in Table 7B-3 of Appendix 7B. Acres of impact and soil characteristics within

the boundaries of aboveground facilities larger than 5 acres are found in Table 7B-4 of Appendix

7B. Acres of impact and soil characteristics of all soils within each pipeline facility are found in

Table 7B-5 of Appendix 7B. Acres of impact and soil characteristics within the boundaries of

contractor yards are found in Table 7B-6 of Appendix 7B, and acres of impact and soil

characteristics within the boundaries of access roads are found in Table 7B-7 of Appendix 7B. A

summary of the offshore sediment grab sample results and sediment core results are found in

Tables 7B-8 and 7B-9, respectively of Appendix 7B. Appendix 7C provides descriptions of each

soil map unit within the Project area.

7.2.1 Onshore Facilities Transco identified and assessed 39 soil map units within the onshore Project area using

the SSURGO database (see Figure 7A-1 in Appendix 7A). In addition to the 39 soil map units,

portions of the Project are mapped as “water,” and soil characteristics are not applicable for these

areas. Tables 7B-2 and 7B-3 in Appendix 7B present the soil map units and the acreage of soils

traversed by the construction and operation of the pipeline facilities and aboveground facilities,

including pipeline rights-of-way (ROWs), contractor yards, access roads, additional temporary

workspace (ATWS), and new and modified aboveground facilities.

7.2.1.1 Pennsylvania

7.2.1.1.1 Quarryville Loop The Quarryville Loop in Lancaster County is located wholly within the Piedmont Upland

section of the Piedmont physiographic province. This section consists of broad, gently rolling hills

and valleys and has developed mainly on metamorphic rocks called schists (Pennsylvania

Department of Conservation and Natural Resources [PADCNR] 2016). RR 6 provides additional

discussions of the physiographic province, topography, surficial geology, and bedrock geology

crossed by the Project.

The Quarryville Loop crosses 15 unique soil map units over its 10.17-mile length. In

addition to the 15 soil map units, portions of the Quarryville Loop are mapped as “water,” and soil


7-6

characteristics are not applicable for these areas. The soil map unit drainage classes range from

poorly drained to well-drained. Soil map-unit textures are predominantly silt loams. The soils

have low compaction and wind-erosion potential and poor revegetation potential. The soils are

predominantly non-hydric (see RR 2 for information on wetlands). Soil map-unit land-capability

classes, a classification system developed to group soils by the characteristics that influence their

use and management, range from 1 to 8. Soils with a land-capability class of 1 have few

limitations for cultivation, while a land-capability class of 8 indicates that the soil is unsuited for

cultivation and its use is restricted to recreation, wildlife, water supply, or aesthetic purposes.

Along the Quarryville Loop, the soil map unit land-capability classes range from 1 to 7. Land-

capability class 7 indicates that the soil is unsuited for cultivation and has one or more limitations

that cannot be corrected. Most soils along the Quarryville Loop have a moderate to severe water-

erosion potential, and 56% of the soil map units are classified as prime farmland or farmland of

statewide importance. However, the designation as prime farmland or farmlands of statewide

importance is not necessarily indicative of the land use (see RR 8 for a description of the current

land uses crossed by the Quarryville Loop and Section 7.5 for more information on agricultural

soils). Table 7B-1 in Appendix 7B identifies, by MP, the soils crossed by the centerline of the

Quarryville Loop, along with characteristics of each soil map unit as they relate to potential effects

of construction and operation. Table 7B-5 in Appendix 7B identifies all soils impacted by pipeline

facilities and the soil characteristics. Appendix 7C provides detailed descriptions of each soil map

unit traversed by the centerline of the Quarryville Loop.

7.2.1.1.2 Compressor Station 200 Transco is proposing to modify existing Compressor Station 200, located in East

Whiteland Township in Chester County, Pennsylvania. The modification will be located within the

fenceline of the existing compressor station. There are three unique soil map units located on

this site. The soil map unit drainage classes range from moderately well-drained to well drained.

The soil map unit land-capability classes range from 1 to 2. Soils with a land-capability class of

1 have few limitations to cultivation, and class 2 has moderate limitations that reduce the choice

of plants or that require moderate conservation practices. Soil map-unit textures are

predominantly silt loams. The soils have a low compaction and wind-erosion potential and low to

poor revegetation potential. The soils are non-hydric (see RR 2 for information on wetlands). The

soils have a low water-erosion potential, and approximately 75% of the soil map units are

classified as prime farmland. However, the designation as prime farmland or farmlands of

statewide importance at Compressor Station 200 is not indicative of the land use (see RR 8 for a


7-7

description of the current land uses impacted by Compressor Station 200 and Section 7.5 for

more information on agricultural soils). Appendix 7C provides detailed descriptions of each soil

map unit affected by the Compressor Station 200 modification (see Table 7B-3 in Appendix 7B

for construction and operation impacts on soils at Compressor Station 200).

7.2.1.2 New Jersey

7.2.1.2.1 Madison Loop The Madison Loop extends through Middlesex County, which is located within the Coastal

Plain physiographic province. The prevalent topography of the Coastal Plain is gently rolling hills

tapering to a flatter plain closer to the coastline (see RR 6 for additional discussions of the

physiographic provinces, topography, surficial geology, and bedrock geology crossed by the

Project).

The Madison Loop crosses 15 unique soil map units over its 3.43-mile length. The soil

map unit drainage classes range from very poorly drained to excessively drained. Map unit

textures are predominantly sands and loams. The soils have low compaction potential and high

revegetation potential. The soils are predominantly non-hydric (see RR 2 for information on

wetlands). The soil map unit land-capability classes range from 2 to 8. Soils with land-capability

class 2 have moderate limitations that reduce the choice of plants or that require moderate

conservation practices, and soils with land-capability class 8 are unsuited for cultivation and are

restricted to recreation, wildlife, water supply, or aesthetic purposes. Most soils along the

Madison Loop have a moderate to slight water-erosion potential but have a relatively high wind-

erosion potential. Approximately 50% of soils are considered prime farmland or other important

farmland; however, this soil designation is not indicative of the land use of the Madison Loop (see

RR 8 for a description of the current land uses crossed by the Madison Loop and Section 7.5 for

more information on agricultural soils). Table 7B-1 in Appendix 7B identifies, by MP, the soils

crossed by the centerline of the Madison Loop, along with the characteristics of each soil map

unit as they relate to potential effects of construction and operation. Table 7B-5 in Appendix 7B

identifies all soils impacted by pipeline facilities and their characteristics. Appendix 7C provides

detailed descriptions of each soil map unit traversed by the centerline of the Madison Loop.

7.2.1.2.2 Raritan Bay Loop The onshore portion of the Raritan Bay Loop is located in Middlesex County in the Coastal

Plain physiographic province, as described above for the Madison Loop. The Raritan Bay Loop

begins on land and crosses five soil map units over its 0.16-mile onshore length. Because the


7-8

Raritan Bay Loop and the Madison Loop are located in the same county, they share the same

soil map units unique to the Raritan Bay Loop (NRCS 2015). Table 7B-1 in Appendix 7B identifies,

by MP, the soils crossed by the centerline of the onshore portion of the Raritan Bay Loop, along

with the characteristics of each soil map unit as it relates to potential effects from construction

and operation. Table 7B-5 in Appendix 7B identifies all soils impacted by pipeline facilities and

their characteristics. Appendix 7C provides detailed descriptions of each soil map unit traversed

by the centerline of the onshore portion of the Raritan Bay Loop.

7.2.1.2.3 Compressor Station 206 The proposed site for Compressor Station 206 is approximately 22.35 acres and located

in Franklin Township, Somerset County, New Jersey. The proposed site for Compressor Station

206 is largely undeveloped, with existing soils consisting of five unique soil map units. The soil

map unit drainage classes range from well-drained to poorly drained. Soil map unit textures are

all silt loams and have a low compaction potential. All of the soil map units have a severe water-

erosion potential and a moderate wind-erosion potential. One out of the five soil map units are

hydric (see RR 2 for information on wetlands). The soil map unit land-capability classes for this

site range from 2 to 6. Soils with land-capability class 2 have moderate limitations that reduce

the choice of plants or that require moderate conservation practices, and soils with land-capability

class 6 have severe limitations that make them generally unsuitable for cultivation. Approximately

20% of the soil map units at the proposed site for Compressor Station 206 are classified as

farmland of statewide importance, if drained (see Section 7.5 for more information on agricultural

soils). Table 7B-4 in Appendix 7B identifies soils impacted by aboveground facilities larger than

5 acres, including their characteristics. Appendix 7C provides detailed descriptions of each soil

map unit identified within the proposed Compressor Station 206 site.

7.2.1.3 Contractor Yards During construction of the Project facilities, areas off or adjacent to the construction ROW

will be needed for contractor yards. These yards are located near the Project in areas that have

convenient and safe access to the pipeline routes. Table 7B-6 in Appendix 7B lists the soil map

units and affected construction and operation acreages within the boundaries of each contractor

yard for the Project. (Additional information on the contractor yards along the Madison Loop will

be provided in a supplemental filing in the 2nd quarter of 2017.)


7-9

7.2.2 Offshore Pipeline Facilities The offshore component of the Project will be located in Raritan Bay, the Lower New York

Bay, and in the Atlantic Ocean from the shoreline of Middlesex County, New Jersey, to

approximately 3 miles seaward of Rockaway, New York. The offshore portion of the Raritan Bay

Loop route crosses five sediments and sediment mixtures consisting of clay, silt, sand, and gravel.

New Jersey and New York

Raritan Bay Loop The offshore portion of the Raritan Bay Loop will extend 23.33 miles across Raritan Bay

and Lower New York Bay to the Rockaway Transfer Point. The Raritan Bay Loop route crosses

New Jersey waters (5.95 miles) and New York waters (17.38 miles).

The whole of Raritan Bay was impacted by widespread Pleistocene glacial ice. The

repeated submergence and emergence of the continental shelf led to the erosion of the early

coastal plain layers and sediments, resulting in plains formed of glacial sediments deposited by

meltwater outwash that unconformably overlie sequences of pre-Wisconsinan Pleistocene

glaciofluvial and shallow marine units (Schwab et al. 2002). (See RR 6 for additional discussions

of the physiographic provinces, topography, surficial geology, and bedrock geology crossed by

the Project.)

The New Jersey section of the Raritan Bay Loop contains sands, silts, and clays, while

the New York section of the Raritan Bay Loop consists of sands, gravels, and mixtures of the two.

Sediments in the Project area are approximately 75 feet thick. Table 7.2-1 identifies, by MP, the

surface sediments crossed by the centerline of the offshore portion of the Raritan Bay Loop

(USGS 2005) and Figure 7A-2 in Appendix 7A shows the surface sediment types distributed

through the offshore Project area.

Table 7.2-1 Summary of Surface Sediments Crossed by the Offshore Raritan Bay Loop

From Milepost To Milepost Sediment Texture 12.15 18.11 sand/silt/clay

18.11 20.89 clay-silt/sand

20.89 30.40 sand

30.40 31.58 gravel-sand

31.58 33.54 gravel

33.54 34.57 gravel-sand

34.57 35.49 sand Source: USGS 2005


7-10

As part of a 2016 field effort, surface sediments were collected at each of the Project

sampling sites along the route, with one sample collected along the centerline of the route and

two samples collected at points 30 feet to either side of the route centerline. Table 7B-8 in

Appendix 7B summarizes the surface sediments found during the benthic survey. See Appendix

1D of RR 1 for the results of the laboratory analysis. Additional information related to the offshore

vibracores collected will be provided in a supplemental filing in the 2nd quarter of 2017.

To assess the current offshore conditions in the Project area, Transco conducted sediment

sampling at 69 sites along the Raritan Bay Loop. Figure 7A-3 in Appendix 7A shows the sediment

sampling locations in relation to the sediment types distributed through the Project area. Table

7B-9 in Appendix 7B summarizes the deep core and shallow core locations and the sediment

types found at each location.

Overall, sediment descriptions of the sediment cores, along with the confirmatory grain

size analyses, indicate that the CONMAPS data of surface sediments closely represent Project

site conditions.

Contractor Yards During construction of the Raritan Bay Loop, areas off or adjacent to the construction

ROW will be used for contractor yards. These yards are located near the Project in areas that

have convenient and safe access to the pipeline routes. Table 7B-6 in Appendix 7B lists the soil

map units and affected construction and operation acreages within the boundaries of each

contractor yard to be used for the Project.

7.3 Potential Effects and Mitigation2

The environmental consequences of constructing and operating the Project would vary in

duration. In these RRs, Transco considered five levels of impact duration: negligible, temporary,

short-term, long-term, and permanent. A negligible impact means that no apparent or measurable

adverse impacts are expected. Temporary impact generally occurs during construction with the

resource returning to pre-construction conditions almost immediately afterward. Short-term

impacts could continue for up to three years following construction. An impact was considered

long-term if the resource would require more than three years to recover. A permanent impact

2 Transco used SSURGO data (NRCS 2015) as the basis for the onshore soil impacts analysis and

discussion in this section, unless otherwise noted. The NRCS interprets data for each soil map unit and makes determinations of various hazards that may result from a variety of uses of a given map unit.


7-11

could occur as a result of any activity that modifies a resource to the extent that it would not return

to preconstruction conditions during the life of the Project, such as with the construction of a

compressor station or M&R stations.

Potential effects on soils as a result of the Project include (1) direct soil disturbance when

clearing vegetation, grading, excavating trenches, and operating and moving heavy machinery

along the temporary ROW during onshore pipeline construction; (2) reduction of soil quality from

soil settling or slumping and when topsoil and subsoil are mixed; and (3) direct disturbance of

sediment during offshore trenching and HDD activities.

Soils will be affected primarily during construction. Depending on the soil types and soil

conditions, other onshore impacts may include loss of excavated soil through water and wind

erosion, soil compaction from construction equipment, mixing of topsoil and subsoil on agricultural

land and wetlands, and introduction of rocks into topsoil on agricultural land. Offshore impacts

may include sediment loss from suspension of sediments during dredging activities and the

resulting displacement by wave/current action. Section 7.3.1 below describes effects and

mitigation on soils related to the pipeline and appurtenant facilities including new and modified

mainline valves, contractor yards, additional temporary workspaces, and access roads. Section

7.3.2 describes the effects and mitigation on sediment related to the offshore portion of the Raritan

Bay Loop. Section 7.3.3 describes the effects and mitigation on soils associated with the new

and modified compressor stations and appurtenant facilities.

7.3.1 Onshore Pipeline Construction and Operation Effects and Mitigation During construction of the onshore Project facilities, Transco will implement proven best

management practices (BMPs) from the start of construction until final stabilization. Transco’s

Project-Specific Upland Erosion Control, Revegetation, and Maintenance Plan (Transco Plan [see

Attachment 1 to Appendix 1B of RR 1]), and Project-Specific Wetland and Waterbody

Construction and Mitigation Procedures (Transco Procedures [see Attachment 2 to Appendix 1B

of RR 1]) outline the BMPs that Transco will implement to minimize erosion of disturbed soils and

prevent the transportation of sediment outside the construction ROW and into environmentally

sensitive areas such as wetlands and waterbodies. Transco’s Agricultural Construction and

Monitoring Plan (Agricultural Plan [Attachment 7 to Appendix 1B of RR 1]) presents measures for

minimizing impacts on and restoring agricultural lands during and after pipeline construction.

Transco is developing the Agricultural Plan in consultation with the NRCS.


7-12

7.3.1.1 Soil Compaction Soil compaction commonly occurs during construction as a result of the movement of

heavy equipment and vehicle traffic on wet soils. Hydric soils and poorly drained non-hydric soils

may also be susceptible to compaction due to high moisture content throughout most of the year.

Soil compaction can alter surface hydrology by minimizing surface water infiltration, reducing

aboveground biomass, and restricting root growth. Soil compaction can also reduce agricultural

productivity and adversely affect the restoration of vegetation in wetlands. Compaction is more

likely to occur when soils are moist or at field capacity3. Additionally, soils that are wet can be

structurally damaged by the movement of heavy equipment. Soil structure is the arrangement of

individual soil particles into larger aggregates of varying shapes and sizes. Aggregation of soil

particles (sand, silt, clay) can create pore spaces that allow water and air to move through the

soil. Degrading soil structure can reduce soil porosity and negatively affect plant growth. If

structural damage occurs, BMPs will be implemented to prevent permanent damage of the soil

structure.

Potential for soil compaction is a function of multiple factors, some of which vary over time,

such as moisture content. Generally, three soil characteristics have the greatest effect on the

potential for soil compaction from machinery traffic: soil moisture, surface soil texture (in terms of

percent clay content), and organic matter content. Organic matter has the greatest effect on the

potential for soil compaction where it is present in relatively high percentages; however, most

soils have relatively low organic matter content. In addition, organic matter content can vary with

soil-management practices, whereas the percentage of clay content in the surface horizon is

largely independent of management practices. Soil moisture is also generally independent of

management, except in areas where agricultural drainage or urban storm water infrastructure is

present.

Given the same moisture content, soils with more than 18% clay are more likely to

experience compaction than those with less than 18% clay (Kraft 2014a). Wet soils (i.e., at or

near field capacity) are more likely to experience compaction than drier soils. Drainage class is

used as an indicator of the likelihood that a soil would be wet at any given time. Generally,

somewhat poorly drained, poorly drained, and very poorly drained soils are likely to be wet for

longer periods throughout the year.

3 Field capacity is the amount of soil moisture or water content held in the soil after excess water has

drained away and the rate of downward movement has decreased.


7-13

Table 7.3-1 identifies the total acres of soils with high compaction potential that will be

impacted by the pipeline and associated facilities (e.g., cathodic protection facilities, additional

temporary workspaces, new and modified mainline valves, access roads, and contractor yards).

No soils with high compaction potential are crossed by the onshore portion of the Raritan Bay

Loop. Soils with more than 18% clay and a drainage class of somewhat poorly drained or wetter

are considered to be at a relatively high risk for compaction.

Table 7.3-1 Soils with High Compaction Potential Impacted by the Onshore Pipelines

Facility County Total Acres Impacted by

Pipeline a

Soils with High Compaction Potential (acres)

Pennsylvania Quarryville Loop Lancaster 194.54 3.76 HDD Tracking Wires (foot traffic only) 3.23 0.62 New Jersey Madison Loop Middlesex 42.38 4.24 HDD Tracking Wires (foot traffic only) 2.48 0.60 Raritan Bay Loop (Onshore) Middlesex 7.22 0.00 HDD Tracking Wires (foot traffic only) 0.59 0.00

Project Total 250.44 9.22 Source: NRCS 2015 a Values may not exactly reflect the impact acreages reported in RR1 due to rounding error.

During Project construction, compaction from soil rutting will be avoided or minimized

through the use of timber mats, as deemed necessary, or by postponing work until soils have

dried. In addition, Transco will minimize compaction of topsoil within agricultural lands, residential

areas, and unsaturated wetlands by stripping, segregating, and stockpiling topsoil separately from

subsoil during construction. Transco will segregate 12 inches of topsoil or the entire topsoil layer

if it is less than 12 inches. Soil surface elevations and contours and vegetation will be restored

in accordance with the Transco Plan. In areas where topsoil has been segregated, the subsoil

will be placed back in the trench first, and the topsoil will be placed over the subsoil. Backfilling

will be to approximate grade; however, a soil crown may be placed above the trench to

accommodate soil settling.


7-14

To identify soil compaction, Transco will test topsoil and subsoil for compaction at regular

intervals in agricultural and residential areas disturbed by construction activities and will conduct

tests on the same soil type under similar moisture conditions in undisturbed areas to approximate

pre-construction conditions. Transco also will plow severely compacted agricultural areas with a

paraplow or other deep tillage implement. In areas where topsoil has been segregated, Transco

will plow the subsoil before replacing the segregated topsoil. If subsequent construction and

cleanup activities result in further compaction, Transco will conduct additional tilling.

Any adverse impacts on soils due to soil compaction during construction activities would

be temporary. Transco does not expect any compaction of soils due to operation of the pipeline

facilities, so the impacts during operation would be negligible.

7.3.1.2 Erosion Transco identified highly erodible soils within the Project area by querying the NRCS

SSURGO database (NRCS 2015). The NRCS rates each map unit according to the water-

erosion hazard that may result from construction of forest roads and trails. The NRCS rates the

soil water-erosion hazard as either severe, moderate, or slight.

Erosion of soil by water is a natural process influenced by soil texture, soil structure, slope,

vegetative cover, rainfall and other climatic factors, topography, and soil-management practices.

Bare or sparse vegetative cover, non-cohesive soil particles, low infiltration rates, and/or

moderate to steep slopes typify soils most susceptible to water erosion. Soil properties, soil cover,

climate, land management, soil surface roughness, unsheltered distance, and wind velocity and

turbulence affect the susceptibility of soil to wind erosion. Clearing vegetation, grading, and

equipment movement can accelerate the erosion process and, without adequate protection, result

in the transportation of soils into adjacent wetlands and waterbodies. In addition, accelerated

erosion can reduce soil fertility and revegetation potential. Table 7.3-2 lists the acreages of soils

with severe water-erosion potential that will be impacted by the pipeline and associated facilities.

No soils with severe water-erosion potential are crossed by the onshore portion of the Raritan

Bay Loop.


7-15

Table 7.3-2 Soils with Severe Water-Erosion Potential Crossed by the Onshore Pipelines


Pipelinea

Soils with Severe Erosion Potential

(acres) Pennsylvania Quarryville Loop Lancaster 194.54 64.76

HDD Tracking Wires (foot traffic only) Lancaster 3.23 2.78 New Jersey Madison Loop Middlesex 42.38 0.18

HDD Tracking Wires (foot traffic only) Middlesex 2.48 0.00

Raritan Bay Loop (Onshore) Middlesex 7.22 0.00



Wind erosion often occurs when dry, non-cohesive soils, especially sands and silts, are

exposed to high-velocity wind. Transco queried the SSURGO wind erodibility group (WEG) data

to evaluate this potential effect. The data are presented as a range between 1 and 8, with 1 being

most susceptible to wind erosion and 8 being least susceptible to wind erosion. A component soil

series has a high potential for wind erosion if the soil has a WEG value of 1 or 2. Table 7.3-3

identifies the acreages of soils with severe wind-erosion potential that are impacted by the pipeline

and associated facilities.

Table 7.3-3 Soils with Severe Wind-Erosion Potential Crossed by the Onshore Pipelines


Pipelinea

Soils with Severe Erosion Potential


HDD Tracking Wires (foot traffic only) Lancaster 3.23 0.00

New Jersey Madison Loop Middlesex 42.38 18.33




Project Total 250.44 20.84

Source: NRCS 2015 a Values may not exactly reflect the impact acreages reported in RR1 due to rounding error.


7-16

Transco will adhere to the Transco Plan for erosion control methods that can be used for

both water and wind erosion. Transco will install temporary erosion controls immediately after

initial disturbance of the soil. Temporary erosion controls will be properly maintained throughout

construction and reinstalled as necessary until they are replaced with permanent erosion controls

or until restoration is complete. Temporary slope breakers will be used to reduce runoff velocity

and divert water away from the construction ROW. The slope breakers will be installed on slopes

greater than 5% where the base of the slope is less than 50 feet from waterbody, wetland, and

road crossings. Transco will direct the outfall of each temporary slope breaker to a stable, well-

vegetated area or construct an energy-dissipating device at the end of the slope breaker and off

the construction ROW. Transco will also use temporary trench plugs, as necessary, to reduce

trenchline erosion and minimize the volume and velocity of trench water flow at the base of slopes.

Sediment barriers will be used to stop the flow of sediments and to prevent deposition of

sediments beyond approved workspaces or into sensitive resources. Transco will also apply

mulch on all slopes (except in cultivated cropland) concurrent with or immediately after seeding,

where necessary, to stabilize the soil surface and to reduce wind and water erosion.

Operation of the pipelines is not anticipated to result in any soil erosion. Transco’s

operations personnel will monitor the effectiveness of revegetation and permanent erosion-

control measures during routine inspections and maintenance of the facilities and pipeline ROWs.

Transco will operate and maintain the proposed facilities and pipelines in compliance with U.S.

Department of Transportation (USDOT) regulations provided in 49 Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR) Part 192, FERC guidance in 18 CFR 380.15, and the maintenance provisions of the

Transco Plan and Procedures.

Any adverse impacts on soil due to soil erosion during construction activities would be

short-term. Transco does not expect any soil erosion due to operation of the pipeline facilities,

so the impacts during operation would be negligible.

7.3.1.3 Revegetation Soils generally have a poor revegetation potential if they occur on steep slopes commonly

found in rugged terrain or have very low available water-holding capacity (Kraft 2014a, 2014b).

Soils that are either poorly vegetated or that have no vegetative cover are susceptible to erosion

by rainfall, storm water runoff, and wind. Disturbed areas that are not successfully revegetated

may also be at increased risk for the establishment of invasive plant species and noxious weeds

(see Section 3.3.3.3 of RR 3 for a discussion of invasive plant control). Soils with poor


7-17

revegetation potential are those with greater than 15% slopes or with a land capability class of 4

or 7 (NRCS 2015).

Table 7.3-4 lists the acreages of soils with poor revegetation potential that are impacted

by the pipeline and associated facilities.

Table 7.3-4 Soils with Poor Revegetation Potential Crossed by the Onshore Pipelines


Pipelinea

Soils with Poor Revegetation

Potential (acres)

Pennsylvania Quarryville Loop Lancaster 194.54 20.53


New Jersey

Madison Loop Middlesex 42.38 11.00





Successful restoration and revegetation is important for maintaining existing soil

productivity levels. In accordance with the Transco Plan and as required by regulatory agencies

or the landowner, all site-specific fertilizer and soil pH modifiers will be incorporated into the top

2 inches of soil as soon as practical. Where no site-specific requirements are identified, Transco

will apply standard soil amendments (e.g., fertilizer, lime) in areas of poor revegetation potential

to offset potential nutrient loss and maximize plant establishment. Transco will not use soil

additives or fertilizers within wetlands or near waterbodies unless required to do so in writing by

the relevant regulatory agency. If there are landowner specific requests, (e.g., cover crops, etc.)

Transco will replant with those particular species. Transco may develop specialized re-seeding

treatment for wetlands, stream banks, and riparian banks. See RR 2 and Transco Procedures

for more information on specialized re-seeding treatments. Transco consulted with local NRCS

and State Soil Conservation Districts for general recommended seed mixes for Lancaster County,

Pennsylvania, and Middlesex County, New Jersey. A table summarizing agency correspondence

completed to date is provided in Attachment 1 to Volume 3, Agency Correspondence. The seed

mixes recommended for New Jersey are found in Attachment 7D-1 of Appendix 7D (NJDA-SSCC


7-18

2014). The seed mixes recommended for Pennsylvania are found in Attachment 7D-2 of Appendix

7D (PDEP 2012). If poor revegetation occurs after mitigation measures are in place, Transco will

implement BMPs for successful revegetation.

Transco will monitor the ROW to identify any revegetation problems that may arise due to

unforeseen circumstances during operation of the pipelines. Transco will re-treat areas needing

corrective action and properly revegetate disturbed areas during operation of the Project.

Any adverse impacts on soils due to poor revegetation during construction activities would

be short-term. Transco will monitor and remedy areas that are not adequately revegetated.

7.3.1.4 Stony/Rocky Soils Introducing stones or rocks into surface soil layers during construction can reduce soil

moisture-holding capacity, resulting in a reduction of soil productivity and damage to agricultural

equipment. The process of excavating stony/rocky subsoil or bedrock (through ripping or blasting)

can potentially introduce rocks into surface soil. This section identifies soils with a high risk for

introducing stones/rocks into surface soil based on stone/rock content of soils and by depth to

bedrock, as identified by the NRCS (NRCS 2015). Soils with 15% by weight or greater of the

surface soil horizon occupied by rock fragments more than 3 inches in size and/or soils with

bedrock within approximately 3 feet of the surface present the greatest risk of introducing rocks

into surface soil (see Section 6.4.3 of RR 6 for mitigation measures associated with shallow

bedrock). Because no soils within the Project area have bedrock within 3 feet of the surface,

Table 7.3-5 lists only the acres of soils with stony/rocky soils that would be impacted by the

pipeline and associated facilities.

Table 7.3-5 Stony/Rocky Soils Crossed by the Onshore Pipelines


Pipelinea

Stony/Rocky Soils and Soils Overlying

Shallow Bedrock (acres)

Pennsylvania

Quarryville Loop Lancaster 194.54 5.88


New Jersey

Madison Loop Middlesex 42.38 2.98



7-19

Table 7.3-5 Stony/Rocky Soils Crossed by the Onshore Pipelines


Pipelinea

Stony/Rocky Soils and Soils Overlying

Shallow Bedrock (acres)




Because of the presence of coarse materials along the pipeline routes, the potential to

introduce subsurface stone and rock into surface soils during construction is high. However, in

accordance with the Transco Plan, Transco will remove any excess stone and rock from surface

soils along the construction ROW so that the rock content in soils on the ROW will remain similar

to soils adjacent to the ROW in undisturbed locations. Once construction and restoration have

been completed, operation of the Project will have no effect on the stone and rock content of soil

within the ROW or within the restored temporary workspace areas.

If stony/rocky soil is encountered during construction activities, the impacts would be

temporary. The Transco Plan identifies measures that would be taken in the event that

stony/rocky soils are encountered. Transco does not anticipate encountering any stony/rocky

soils during operation of the pipeline facilities, so the impacts during operation would be negligible.

7.3.1.5 Hydric Soils Hydric soils are “soils that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long

enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part” (Federal

Register 1994). Soils that are artificially drained or protected from flooding (e.g., by levees) are

still considered hydric if the soil in its undisturbed state meets the definition of a hydric soil.

Generally, hydric soils are those identified by the NRCS data as being poorly and very poorly

drained.

Table 7.3-6 lists the acreages of hydric soils crossed by the pipeline and associated

facilities as identified by the NRCS. No hydric soils will be crossed by the onshore portion of the

Raritan Bay Loop.

Hydric soils are often associated with wetlands and are frequently found in areas with high

water tables, which can have an effect on trenching design and construction. In areas with hydric


7-20

soils, dewatering of trenches and bore pits may be necessary when groundwater is encountered

during pipeline installation. A discussion of construction procedures in wetlands is included in RR

2, Section 2.4.2.

Hydric soils, whether or not they occur in wetlands, are generally more susceptible to

compaction and rutting than non-hydric soils. Measures to mitigate compaction are discussed

above in Section 7.3.1.1.

Table 7.3-6 Hydric Soils Crossed by the Onshore Pipelines


Pipelinea

Hydric Soils (acres)

Pennsylvania

Quarryville Loop Lancaster 194.54 3.49


New Jersey Madison Loop Middlesex 42.38 4.42





Any impacts on hydric soils during construction activities would be short-term. However,

through the implementation of the mitigation measures outlined in RR 2, impacts on hydric soils

are not anticipated. Transco does not expect any impacts on hydric soils due to operation of the

pipeline facilities.

7.3.1.6 Fragipan Soils A fragipan is a diagnostic horizon in the USDA soil taxonomy. Fragipans are natural

subsurface soil horizons that restrict water flow and root penetration. Improper handling of

fragipan soils during excavation and backfilling has the potential to degrade agricultural

productivity. In areas where NRCS soil survey information indicates a high likelihood of the

presence of fragipan soils, a pre-disturbance evaluation will be conducted using available data

and soil survey techniques. If fragipan soils are found in agricultural areas, the procedures

discussed in the Agricultural Plan will be followed. Proper handling during excavation within


7-21

fragipan soil units in agricultural areas will be closely monitored by the Agricultural Inspector to

prevent unintentional mixing of the fragipan horizons within the overlying soil horizons.

Glenville silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes (GdB), is the only fragipan soil identified in the

SSURGO database within the Project area, and it occurs along the Quarryville Loop. Table 7.3-

7 lists the acres of the fragipan soil identified by the NRCS SSURGO database that are crossed

by the Project pipeline facilities. Table 7B-1 in Appendix 7B provides the locations of GdB by MP.

Construction and operation of surficial and aboveground facilities such as contractor yards and

access roads will not affect fragipan soils due to the anticipated depth to the fragipan layer 29 to

31 inches below ground surface (bgs).

Table 7.3-7 Fragipan Soils Crossed by the Onshore Pipeline


Pipelinea

Fragipan Soils (acres)

Pennsylvania Quarryville Loop Lancaster 194.54 19.96


Quarryville Total 197.77 19.96 Source: NRCS 2015 a Values may not exactly reflect the impact acreages reported in RR1 due to rounding error.

If fragipan soils are encountered during construction activities, the impacts would be short-

term. Transco does not expect any impacts on fragipan soils during operation of the pipeline

facilities, therefore the impacts during operation would be negligible.

7.3.2 Offshore Pipeline Construction and Operation Effects and Mitigation Project-related impacts on sediment would result primarily from disturbance of the seafloor

during clamshell dredging, jet sledding, hand jetting, pipelay, anchor placement, pile driving and

removal, and casing installation and removal. Once disturbed, sediments would be temporarily

suspended in the water column and subsequently settle to the seafloor. Coarser sediments would

fall out and resettle quickly, while finer sediments would remain suspended for longer periods.

The surface sediments that would be disturbed by the offshore construction are sand, silt, clay,

and gravel. Therefore, re-deposited material in the Project area would be similar in character to

the existing surface sediments. Changes in sediment cohesion and compaction following

construction could result in adverse short-term impacts on biological communities. For additional

information on offshore sediment-related impacts on water quality and biological resources, see


7-22

RR 2 and RR 3, respectively. Based on available information, and as noted on Table 7.3-8,

underlying sediment characteristics vary across the workspaces and easements required for the

Raritan Bay Loop. Actual construction disturbance associated with the offshore facilities will only

affect approximately 116.75 acres of sediments.

Table 7.3-8 Surface Sediment Types Within Offshore Pipeline Workspaces

County Sediment Type Construction Impacts (acres)a

HDD Tracking Wires (no seafloor impacts) (acres)a

Operational Impacts (acres)b

New Jersey Middlesex sand/silt/clay 975.51 0.00 7.53

Monmouth sand 2,284.86 285.34 13.99

gravel-sand 132.77 11.39 0.87

sand/silt/clay 34.11 0.00 0.00

New York Queens gravel 1038.50 0.00 47.42

gravel-sand 1038.85 0.00 47.69

sand 1755.46 0.00 61.39

Richmond clay-silt/sand 1714.09 0.00 67.41

sand 2462.57 0.00 98.57

sand/silt/clay 2422.58 0.00 99.82

Total 13,859.30 296.73 444.69 Source: USGS 2005

a Acreages associated with the construction of the offshore portion of the Raritan Bay Loop reflect the 5,000-foot construction buffer. Although a 5,000-foot ROW is being requested across the Ambrose Channel, this navigational channel will be crossed via HDD. Therefore, construction of the offshore Raritan Bay Loop will not result in any seafloor impacts between the Ambrose Channel HDD entry and exit pits.

b Acreages associated with operation of the offshore portion of the Raritan Bay Loop reflect the easement that will be acquired; however, following installation no routine bottom disturbing impacts associated with operations are anticipated. Future maintenance is expected to be minimal based on the operational life of the pipeline.

7.3.2.1 Offshore Backfill It is anticipated that the Project’s offshore trench would backfill to some extent naturally,

but areas that are trenched with a clamshell dredge or a jet sled will need to be mechanically

backfilled following installation of the pipeline. The subsea tie-in skid, tie-in valve spool, and

additional tie-in spools would also be covered with sandbags following installation and before

backfill begins. Exit pits will be backfilled with additional material as needed. Transco would

obtain any necessary material from a compatible offshore source, to be approved in consultation


7-23

with the regulatory agencies, to return the seafloor to surrounding conditions (see RR 1 Section

1.4.3.1 for additional information regarding backfill). These backfill activities will facilitate the

restoration of the seabed to pre-construction contours and minimize impacts associated with

seabed sediment loss. Additional information regarding backfill material will be provided in a

supplemental filing in the 2nd quarter of 2017.

7.3.2.2 Drill Fluids Offshore sediments may be impacted by inadvertent releases of drill fluids during HDD.

In the event of inadvertent releases of drill fluids, Transco will follow the offshore HDD

Contingency Plan (Attachment 4B to Appendix 1B of RR 1). Drilling activities would not be

suspended unless the volume of inadvertent drill fluid released offshore would be a threat to public

health and safety or if an inspection/evaluation would be needed to determine if mitigation

measures are necessary to maintain the integrity of the drill hole. In the latter case, any

suspension of drilling activity would be temporary. Transco would determine the cause of the

release and then implement corrective measures to control seepage and minimize the chance of

recurrence. The corrective measures would be both site- and problem-specific.

Based on the negligible impact anticipated on the seafloor from drilling activities, no

offshore clean-up work is proposed with respect to the HDD operations. The offshore HDD

Contingency Plan includes additional information regarding inadvertent release of HDD fluid.

Transco does not anticipate any adverse effects on offshore sediments due to operation

of the offshore pipeline facilities.

7.3.3 Compressor Station Construction Effects and Mitigation

7.3.3.1 Soil Compaction Construction and modification of the compressor stations will affect approximately 3.04

acres of soils with high compaction potential. Table 7.3-9 lists the acres of compaction-prone

soils affected by compressor stations. See Section 7.3.1.1 for the measures that Transco would

implement to mitigate soil compaction.

Any impacts on soils with high compaction potential during construction activities would

be temporary. Transco does not expect any soil compaction due to operation of the aboveground

facilities.


7-24

Table 7.3-9 Soils with High Compaction Potential Impacted by Compressor Stations


Project

Soils with High Compaction

Potential (acres)

New Jersey Compressor Station 206 Somerset 22.35 3.04

Compressor Station 200 Chester 28.93 0.00

Total 51.28 3.04

7.3.3.2 Erosion Construction and modification of the compressor stations will affect approximately 27.25

acres of soils with severe water-erosion potential. Table 7.3-10 lists the acres of soils with severe

water erosion potential that will be affected by compressor stations. See Section 7.3.1.2 for the

measures that Transco would implement to mitigate severe water-erosion impacts on soils.

Any impacts on soils with severe water-erosion potential during construction activities

would be short-term. Transco does not expect any water-erosion of soils due to operation of the

aboveground facilities.

Table 7.3-10 Soils with Severe Water-Erosion Potential Impacted by Compressor Stations


Project

Soils with Severe Erosion (acres)

New Jersey

Compressor Station 206 Somerset 22.35 19.80

Compressor Station 200 Chester 28.93 7.45

Total 51.28 27.25

Construction and modification of Compressor Station 206 and 200 will not affect any soils

with severe wind-erosion potential.

Operation of the compressor stations is not anticipated to result in any soil erosion.

Transco operations personnel will monitor the effectiveness of revegetation and permanent

erosion-control measures during routine inspections and maintenance of the compressor stations.

Transco will operate and maintain the proposed facilities in compliance with USDOT regulations

provided in 49 CFR Part 192, FERC guidance in 18 CFR 380.15, and the maintenance provisions

of the Transco Plan and Procedures.


7-25

7.3.3.3 Revegetation No soils with poor revegetation potential are traversed by the compressor stations.

Once construction is complete, land disturbed by the construction and modification of the

compressor stations that is not covered with impervious surface or gravel will be graded and

seeded to stabilize soils. Transco’s operations personnel will monitor the compressor stations

and will identify any revegetation problems that might arise. Transco will re-treat areas needing

corrective action and properly revegetate disturbed areas during operation of the Project.

Transco does not expect poor revegetation of soils due to operation of the aboveground

facilities.

7.3.3.4 Stony/Rocky Soils No stony/rocky soils and soils overlying shallow bedrock will be affected by construction

or modification of the compressor stations. Transco does not expect to encounter any stony/rocky

soils during operation of the aboveground facilities.

7.3.3.5 Hydric Soils Construction of the compressor stations will affect approximately 5.59 acres of hydric soils.

Table 7.3-14 identifies the acreage of hydric soils traversed by compressor stations.

The impacts on hydric soils at the compressor stations and the measures that Transco will

implement to mitigate these impacts will be similar to those discussed for the onshore pipeline

facilities described in Section 7.3.1.5 above. Compressor Station 206 and 200 will be fenced in

and maintained and will likely be graded or graveled.

Any impacts on hydric soils from construction activities would be short-term, but the

establishment of compressor stations will result in a permanent impact to the hydric soils

underlying the footprint of the new facilities. Transco does not expect any additional impacts on

hydric soils due to operation of compressor stations.

Table 7.3-11 Hydric Soils Impacted by Aboveground Facilities

Facility County Total Acres Impacted by Pipeline

Hydric Soils (acres)

New Jersey Compressor Station 206 Somerset 22.35 5.59 Compressor Station 200 Chester 28.93 0.00

Total 51.28 5.59


7-26

7.3.3.6 Fragipan Soils No fragipan soils are located within the proposed site for Compressor Station 206 or the

Compressor Station 200 site: therefore, construction and operation activities will not affect

fragipan soils.

7.4 Potential for Soil Contamination

7.4.1 Onshore Facilities Project construction has the potential to disturb soils that were previously contaminated

and to contaminate soils through spills of liquids such as fuels and lubricants. Transco obtained

federal and state search reports from Environmental Data Resources, Inc., (EDR) to determine

the presence and location of potential soil contamination near all proposed onshore pipeline

facilities and new aboveground facilities in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. The search area for

the EDR reports was based on a 2-mile radius extending from the centerline of the pipeline routes

and from the compressor station property boundaries. This radius will account for any subsequent

route modifications. Consequently, the EDR reports that Transco obtained from the Project

provide complete coverage for all pipeline facilities and mainline valves. Separate EDR reports

were obtained for the Quarryville Loop (EDR 2016a), Compressor Station 200 (EDR 2016b), the

onshore Raritan Bay Loop, and the Madison Loop (EDR 2016c). A Phase I environmental site

assessment was conducted on the proposed site of Compressor Station 206 in June 2016, to

identify the presence of hazardous waste sites and facilities, solid waste facilities, and nearby spill

sites that may have resulted in the presence of soil contamination (EcolSciences, Inc. 2016a). A

Phase II Investigation was conducted in September 2016 to evaluate areas of concern identified

during the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (EcolSciences, Inc. 2016b). Table 7.4-1

provides a summary of the sites identified within the 0.25-mile-radius search area of the pipeline

facilities and compressor stations. No active sites with confirmed contamination were identified

within 0.25 mile of the Quarryville Loop or Compressor Station 200.


7-27

Table 7.4-1 Active Sites with Confirmed Contamination within 0.25 Mile of Project Workspaces

Site Name Nearest

Milepost/Site Address

Database(s)

Distance from

Centerline (miles)

Direction from

Workspace to Site

Workspace Upgradient or Downgradient

of Sitea

Site Identification

Number

New Jersey Madison Loop Road Department Garage Area 3-1

9.50 NJ Release, NJ Brownfields

<0.1 North Downgradient NJDEP Site Remediation Program PI ID #012743

Global Sanitary Landfill Superfund Site

10.13 to 10.38

NPL <0.1 South Upgradient EPA ID #NJD063160667

Morgan Ordnance Depot

11.10 FUDS 0.3 North Downgradient FUDS #C02NJ0007

1788 Route 35 in Sayreville, NJ

12.00 SHWS/HIST HWS, New Jersey

Release, New Jersey Spill

<0.1 Northeast Downgradient NJDEP Site Remediation Program PI ID #026234

Morgan Fire House*


Release

<0.1 South Upgradient NJDEP Site Remediation Program PI ID #003720

Raritan Bay Loop (Onshore) 1788 Route 35 in Sayreville, NJ


Release, New Jersey Spill

<0.1 North Downgradient NJDEP Site Remediation Program PI ID #026234

Morgan Fire House*


Release

0.1 Southwest Upgradient NJDEP Site Remediation Program PI ID #003720

Compressor Station 206 Higgins Farm NPL Site

N/A NPL Directly adjacent

West N/A EPA ID #NJD981490261, NJDEP Site Remediation Program PI ID #G000005807


7-28

Table 7.4-1 Active Sites with Confirmed Contamination within 0.25 Mile of Project Workspaces

Site Name Nearest

Milepost/Site Address

Database(s)

Distance from

Centerline (miles)

Direction from

Workspace to Site

Workspace Upgradient or Downgradient

of Sitea

Site Identification

Number

Source: EDR 2016a, 2016b, 2016c; EcolSciences, Inc. 2016a, 2016b. Database IDs: ERNS – The Emergency Response Notification System records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous substances. The source of this database is the United States Environmental Protection Agency. FUDS – Formerly Used Defense Sites. The Department of Defense is responsible for the environmental restoration of properties that were formerly owned by, leased to, or otherwise possessed by the United States and under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense prior to October 1986. New Jersey Brownfields – Brownfields sites are identified as former or current commercial or industrial use sites that are presently vacant or underutilized, on which there is suspected to have been a discharge of contamination to the soil or groundwater at concentrations greater than the applicable cleanup criteria. New Jersey Release – New Jersey Hazardous Material Release database is a record of the initial notification information reported to the NJ DEP’s Action Line. New Jersey Spill – All HazMat known or unknown spills to the ground reported to the NJ DEP’s Action Line. NPL – National Priority List database, also known as Superfund, is a subset of Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority cleanup under the Superfund program. The source of this database is the United States Environmental Protection Agency. SHWS/HIST HWS - State Hazardous Waste Sites/Historic Hazardous Waste Sites – Known Contaminated Sites in New Jersey database is a municipal listing of sites where contamination of soil and/or groundwater is confirmed at levels more than the applicable cleanup criteria or standards. Remedial activities are under way or required at the sites with an on-site source(s) of contamination and at locations where the source(s) of contamination are unknown. Sites with completed remedial work that require engineering and/or institutional controls have reporting measures in place to ensure the effectiveness of past actions, and some include maintenance and/or monitoring. a Transco evaluated contour lines from topographic maps to determine the difference in elevation from the workspace to the site to

determine the likely flow path of groundwater (USGS 2017).

b The Morgan Fire House is listed on both the NJDEP Active Sites with Confirmed Contamination list and the NJDEP Closed Sites with Remediated Contamination list. The site is included on the Known Contaminated Site list but is classified as no further action (restricted use) with an active deed notice in the NJDEP post-remediation group.

Key: N/A = Not applicable NPL = National Priorities List PI = Preferred Identification

Contamination from spills or leaks of oils and hazardous materials that occur during

construction could adversely affect soils. The effects of such spills or leaks typically are small

because of their low frequency and volumes. Transco’s construction contractor will adhere to

Transco’s Spill Plan for Oil and Hazardous Materials (Spill Plan [Attachment 9 to Appendix 1B of

RR 1]). The Spill Plan specifies soil cleanup procedures to be used for spills or leaks of oil and

hazardous materials. Transco will monitor excavations during construction for evidence of

potential contamination. If encountered, Transco will follow the Unanticipated Discovery of

Contamination Plan (Attachment 8 to Appendix 1B of RR 1).


7-29

7.4.1.1 Pennsylvania No active sites with confirmed soil contamination were identified within 0.25 mile of the

Quarryville Loop or Compressor Station 200 (EDR 2016a, EDR 2016b).

7.4.1.2 New Jersey Six sites have been identified within 0.25-mile radius of the Madison Loop, onshore

Raritan Bay Loop, and Compressor Station 206 to have soil and/or groundwater contamination.

Two sites are within a 0.25-mile radius of both the Madison Loop and the Raritan Bay Loop (see

Table 7.4-1) (EDR 2016c, EDR 2016d, EcolSciences, Inc. 2016a).

7.4.1.2.1 Madison Loop Of the six sites, five are within 0.25-mile of the Madison Loop. An EDR DatamapTM

Corridor Study for the Madison Loop (EDR 2016c) identified five active sites with confirmed

contamination within 0.25 mile of the Madison Loop, which are included on Table 7.4-1. These

sites have contamination that have the potential to impact the soil in the vicinity of the Project

facilities.

In addition to the five sites listed in Table 7.4-1, the New Jersey Open Public Records Act

database identified the E.I. Dupont Denemours and Company site, located at 250 Cheesequake

Road in Sayreville, New Jersey (NJDEP 2016a). The site is located approximately 1.2 miles

northwest of the Madison Loop, which is outside the EDR search radius. Because groundwater

at this site contains volatile organic compounds and metals, there is the potential for soil

contamination. The Project facilities are located in an active NJDEP Classification Exception Area

(CEA) and Well Restriction Area (WRA) from approximately MP9.20 to 10.31, and contamination

associated with this site could be present in the soil. If contamination is unearthed, Transco will

adhere to its Unanticipated Discovery of Contamination Plan included in RR 1, Appendix 1B,

Attachment 8.

Road Department Garage Area 3-1 The New Jersey Open Public Records Act database indicates that the Middlesex County

Road Department Garage Area 3-1 is located along Route 9 North in Old Bridge Township, New

Jersey, less than 0.1 mile north of MP9.50 of the Madison Loop (NJDEP 2016a). The site had

two leaking fuel tanks removed on October 13, 1993 — one 1,000-gallon leaded-gasoline tank

and one 4,000-gallon unleaded gasoline tank. The New Jersey Brownfields database indicates

that the property was assigned to the Brownfields Program on August 31, 1994, as a known


7-30

source and release of groundwater contamination (New Jersey State 2015). Because this

property is relatively close to the Project facilities, is a known contaminated site, and has an

unclear remedial history, it is possible that contamination associated with this property could be

present in the soil in the vicinity of the Project facilities. If contamination is unearthed, Transco

will adhere to its Unanticipated Discovery of Contamination Plan included as Attachment 8 in

Appendix 1B of RR 1.

Global Sanitary Landfill The EPA National Priorities List (NPL) database indicates that the Global Sanitary Landfill,

located along Ernston Road in Old Bridge Township, New Jersey, is less than 0.1 mile south of

MP10.13 to MP10.38 of the Madison Loop (EPA 2016a). This site has a historical record of

groundwater, soil, sediment, and surface water contamination. The Global Sanitary Landfill is a

57.5-acre area used for solid waste disposal from 1968 to 1984 by the Global Landfill Reclaiming

Corporation (EPA 2016b). Operations ceased in 1984 after a landfill side-slope failure destroyed

several acres of adjacent wetlands. In 1989, the site was placed on the EPA National Priorities

List (NPL) due to the presence of contaminated leachate and the discovery of buried drums

containing hazardous waste in a portion of the landfill. The EPA issued a Record of Decision,

which included remedial action objectives for addressing contaminant migration (volatile and

semi-volatile organic compounds, pesticides, and metals) from the landfill into groundwater,

surface water, sediment, and soil.

Since the Madison Loop is not included in the site Classification Exception Area and Well

Restriction Area, it is unlikely that any contamination associated with this site would be present in

the soil or groundwater in the vicinity of Project facilities. Trenching is planned to approximately

8 feet bgs for the Project facilities in this area. If contamination is unearthed, Transco will adhere

to its Unanticipated Discovery of Contamination Plan.

Morgan Ordnance Depot The New Jersey Open Public Records Act database indicates that the Morgan Ordnance

Depot site (New Jersey Environmental Management System Site Identification Number 80914) is

located on Ernston Road (between Route 35 and Cheesequake Road) in Sayreville, New Jersey,

approximately 0.3 mile north of MP11.10 of the Madison Loop (NJDEP 2016a). As of December

17, 1995, the site is listed as a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Formerly Used Defense

Site (FUDS) with confirmed contamination. The USACE FUDS Geographic Information System

public database indicates that the site contamination area includes a portion of the Madison Loop


7-31

starting from approximately Route 9 to the Raritan Bay shoreline (USACE 2013). On October 4,

1918, there was an explosion at the T.A. Gillespie Company Shell Loading Plant (also known as

the Morgan Ordnance Depot), which was a World War I ammunition plant. Nearly a century later,

explosive debris continues to surface regularly across a 1.2-mile radius. Because this site

contamination boundary includes a portion of the Project facilities and has an unclear remedial

history, it is possible that soil contamination associated with this property could be present in the

vicinity of the Project facilities. If contamination is unearthed, Transco will adhere to its

Unanticipated Discovery of Contamination Plan included in RR 1, Appendix 1B, Attachment 8.

1788 Route 35 in Sayreville, New Jersey The New Jersey Open Public Records Act database indicates that the property located at

1788 Route 35 North in South Amboy, New Jersey, is located less than 0.1 mile northeast of

MP12.0 of the Madison Loop and less than 0.1 mile north of MP12.0 of the Raritan Bay Loop

(NJDEP 2016a). This property has been and currently is the location of a gas station and is listed

on the underground storage tank (UST) active remediation list (NJDEP 2016a). This site contains

an active NJDEP CEA and WRA in effect from October 2015 to October 2026, which extends

within 200 feet northeast of Madison Loop and 165 feet north of the Raritan Bay Loop (NJDEP

2016b). Since neither the Madison Loop nor the Raritan Bay Loop are included in the CEA and

WRA, it is unlikely that any contamination associated with this site would be present in the soil in

the vicinity of the Project facilities.

Morgan Fire House The New Jersey Open Public Records Act database indicates that the Morgan Fire House

property is located at Route 35 and Old Spye Road in Sayreville, New Jersey, which is less than

0.1 mile south of MP12.0 of the Madison Loop and approximately 0.1 mile southwest of MP12.0

of the Raritan Bay Loop (NJDEP 2016a). The site is listed on both the NJDEP Active Sites with

Confirmed Contamination list and the NJDEP Closed Sites with Remediated Contamination list

(NJDEP 2016a). The site is included on the Known Contaminated Site list but is classified as no

further action (restricted use) with an active deed notice and engineering controls in the NJDEP

post-remediation group. Contamination at this site was due to a leaking 550-gallon UST that

contained medium diesel fuel (#2-D). The site is approximately 150 feet south of the Project

facilities, and the specifics of the active deed notice and engineering controls are not known.

However, since no further action is required for the site, it is unlikely that significant contamination

associated with this site would be present in the soil in the vicinity of the Project facilities.


7-32

7.4.1.2.2 Raritan Bay Loop Of the six sites identified, an EDR Datamap™ Corridor Study for the onshore Raritan Bay

Loop (EDR 2016d) showed two active sites with confirmed contamination within 0.25 mile of the

Raritan Bay Loop, which are included on Table 7.4-1. These sites have contamination that have

the potential to impact the soil in the vicinity of the Project facilities.

In addition to the two sites listed in Table 7.4-1, the New Jersey Open Public Records Act

database identified the Raritan Bay Slag site (NJDEP Program Interest Number 514709) located

along the southern shore and in the Raritan Bay in Old Bridge Township and Sayreville, New

Jersey (NJDEP 2016a). The site is located approximately 0.5 mile south of the Raritan Bay Loop,

which is outside the EDR search radius. The site is included on the NJDEP Known Contaminated

Site list (NJDEP 2016a) and is on the EPA National Priorities List (NPL) site list (EPA ID

NJN000206276) (EPA 2016a). Although the physical address of the site is located outside the

EDR search radius, cleanup Areas 7 and 11 (Jetty Sector) of the NPL site are located within the

Project facility construction area in Raritan Bay (see Figure 7A-4). Contamination associated with

this site may be present in the Raritan Bay sediment in Areas 7 and 11 where the Raritan Bay

Loop will be located.

The Raritan Bay Slag site is approximately 1.5 miles long and consists of waterfront areas

between Margaret’s Creek and the areas just beyond the western jetty at the Cheesequake Creek

Inlet. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the Laurence Harbor seawall, which makes up a portion

of the site, was reported to have metal slag from blast furnace bottoms deposited along the

beachfront. The primary sources of contamination are slag from a lead reclamation process and

battery casings. The prevailing currents in the vicinity of the western jetty promote sediment

deposition on the western side of the jetty and transport sediment into Raritan Bay (EPA 2016b).

Contamination associated with this site may be present in the Raritan Bay sediment in

Areas 7 and 11 where Raritan Bay Loop will be located. If contamination is unearthed, Transco

will adhere to its Unanticipated Discovery of Contamination Plan included as Attachment 8 in

Appendix 1B of RR 1.

1788 Route 35 in Sayreville, New Jersey See the above discussion regarding this facility under the Madison Loop.

Morgan Fire House See the above discussion regarding this facility under the Madison Loop.


7-33

7.4.1.2.3 Compressor Station 206 A Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessment were conducted on the proposed

site for Compressor Station 206, located in Somerset County, New Jersey. See Section 2.2.5.1.2

of RR 2 for a complete discussion on the potential for contamination at Compressor Station 206.

7.4.2 Offshore Facilities

New Jersey and New York

Raritan Bay Loop As mentioned above in Section 7.4.1.2.2 for groundwater, the Raritan Bay Slag EPA NPL

site cleanup Areas 7 and 11 (Jetty Sector) are located within the offshore Project workspaces in

the New Jersey portion of Raritan Bay (EPA 2016a). Contamination associated with Areas 7 and

11 may be present in the Raritan Bay sediment crossed by the offshore Project route, including

the Morgan Shore Approach HDD.

Transco conducted sediment sampling in late 2016 to identify any potentially

contaminated sediments along the offshore portion of the Raritan Bay Loop. A summary of the

sediment chemistry analyses is presented below. Complete tables of the sediment chemistry

testing results are provided in Appendix 1D of RR 1. The Project-specific Sampling and Analysis

Plan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for offshore sediment sampling is provided in Appendix 1C

of RR 1. (A complete offshore environmental sampling report will be provided in a supplemental

filing in the 2nd quarter of 2017.)

As mentioned in Section 7.2.2, Transco conducted sediment sampling at 69 sites along

the Raritan Bay Loop in the fall of 2016. Once samples were retrieved, sediments were collected

from the core and shipped to an onshore laboratory for chemical analysis. Separate sample sets

were generally collected from each 3-foot interval. The list of chemical analyses performed was

based upon New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s (NYSDEC) Technical

and Operational Guidance Series (TOGS) 5.1.9 In-Water and Riparian Management of Sediment

and Dredged Material (2004), NSYDEC’s Screening and Assessment of Contaminated Sediment

(2014), NJDEP’s The Management and Regulation of Dredging Activities and Dredged Material

in New Jersey’s Tidal Waters (1997), the USACE/EPA document titled Guidance for Performing

Tests on Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal (2016), and input from NJDEP and

NYSDEC staff. Upon completion of the analyses, positive results were evaluated and compared

with the TOGS and NJDEP Site Remediation Program (SRP) criteria. In New Jersey, these

criteria are the Effects Range Low (ER-L) and Effects Range Median (ER-M) Ecological


7-34

Screening Criteria (ESC). The ESC presented are not promulgated, and are intended as

screening values for ecological assessments. In New York, sediments that meet Class A

standards are considered to have no appreciable contamination and dredging and in-water

placement at approved locations can generally proceed. Sediments that exceed Class A

standards may be considered for dredging with several restrictions (Class B) or may have

stringent requirements for dredging and disposal (Class C). A selection of analytes detected

throughout the study corridor and the number of times the SGVs (Sediment Guidance Values)

and ESC were exceeded in both states is presented in Table 7.4-2.

Sample sites within the offshore study area were organized into five geographic groups

based upon the sediment composition of grab samples (Table 7.4-3). Information regarding

composition of vibracores and sediment contamination results will be provided in a supplemental

filing in the 2nd quarter of 2017.

Table 7.4-2 Summary of Analytical Results for Sediment Samples

Analyte

Frequency of

Detection (%)

Maximum Result

Location of Maximum Result

Count of Exceedances Throughout Study Areaa

NJDEP ER-L

NYSDEC Class A

NJDEP ER-M

NYSDEC Class B

Total BTEX (µg/kg) 4.29 9.8 VC16-D9-12E N/A 0.0 N/A 0.0

Total PAHs (µg/kg) 49.34 21,900 VC38-D0-3E 24.0 24 0 0

Dioxins and Furans Total Toxicity Equivalency Factor (pg/g)

92.19 39.7 VC17-D6-9E 70 55 N/A 0

Chlordane (µg/kg) 0 N/A N/A 0 0 0 0

Dieldrin (µg/kg) 0.33 1.8 VC1-ALT-D3-6E 0 0 0 0

Endrin (µg/kg) 0.59 0.736 VC38-D0-3E 0 0 0 0

Heptachlor (µg/kg) 0 N/A N/A 0 0 N/A 0.0

Mirex (µg/kg) 0 N/A N/A 0 0 0 0

Sum of DDT + DDE + DDD (µg/kg)

7.57 99.0 VC6-D0-3E 0 19 0 0

Total PCB Congeners (pg/g)

77.99 2,000,000 VC16-D9-12E 14 12 0 0

Total PCB Aroclors (µg/kg)

6.29 1,140 VC1B-ALT-D0-3E 0 65 124 59

Aluminum (mg/kg) 100.00 18,000 VC16-D0-3E 0 N/A N/A N/A

Antimony (mg/kg) 7.59 15.8 VC6-D0-3E 1 N/A N/A N/A


7-35

Table 7.4-2 Summary of Analytical Results for Sediment Samples

Analyte

Frequency of

Detection (%)

Maximum Result

Location of Maximum Result

Count of Exceedances Throughout Study Areaa

NJDEP ER-L

NYSDEC Class A

NJDEP ER-M

NYSDEC Class B

Arsenic (mg/kg) 100 108 VC1-ALT-D3-6E 80 80 3 3

Barium (mg/kg) 95.38 135 VC1B-ALT-D0-3E 17 N/A N/A N/A

Cadmium (mg/kg) 45.87 3.49 VC16-D6-9E 12 12 0 0

Chromium, Total (mg/kg)

94.06 202 VC16-D6-9E 14 14 0 0

Cobalt (mg/kg) 99.67 16.3 VC16-D6-9E 44 N/A N/A N/A

Copper (mg/kg) 89.11 504 VC1B-ALT-D0-3E 20 20 2 2

Lead (mg/kg) 100 285 VC16-D6-9E 20 20 4 4

Manganese (mg/kg)

100 906 VC16-D6-9E 89 N/A N/A N/A

Nickel (mg/kg) 95.71 53.5 VC16-D6-9E 81 81 1 1.0

Selenium (mg/kg) 53.80 18.6 VC1-ALT-D3-6E 140 N/A N/A N/A

Silver (mg/kg) 11.22 8.52 VC16-D9-12E 10 10 8 8

Vanadium (mg/kg) 88.78 94.4 VC22-D9-12E 6 N/A N/A N/A

Zinc (mg/kg) 85.48 494 VC16-D6-9E 15 15 3 3

Mercury (mg/kg) 62.05 5.28 VC1B-ALT-D0-3E 0 14 21 21

Cyanide, Amenable (mg/kg)

0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Cyanide, Total (mg/kg)

8.24 1.5 VC1-ALT-D3-6E N/A N/A N/A N/A

Sources: NJDEP 2009, NYSDEC 2004, 2014c. a All measured concentrations of analytes detected in samples from New Jersey and New York were compared to both the SGVs and

ESC. Key: DDD = dichloro-diphenyl-dichloroethane DDE = dichloro-diphenyl-dichloroethylene DDT = dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane µg/kg = micrograms per kilogram mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram PCBs = polychlorinated biphenyls pg/g = picogram/gram N/A = not applicable


7-36

Table 7.4-3 Geographic Sediment Sample Groups

Group ID Mileposts Included Sample(s) State(s)

Predominantly sand, gravel or

rock? A 12.53 – 12.90 VC1-ALT, VC2 NJ Yes

B 13.32 – 19.34 VC3-ALT to VC23 NJ, NY No

C 19.72 – 24.27 VC24 to VC36 NY Yes

D 24.65 – 25.24 VC37 to VC41-ALT NY No

E 25.41 – 35.44 VC42 to VC69-ALT NJ, NY Yes

Metals Each sediment sample was analyzed for metals (see Appendix 1D to RR 1 for a complete

list of these metals). Positive results were obtained for all of these metals in at least one sample.

Thresholds for New York and New Jersey are presented in Table 7.4-4.

All metals were detected in the samples from New Jersey and 13 of the metals were

detected at concentrations that exceeded either the ER-L or ER-M threshold. In sample Group

A, barium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, silver, zinc, and mercury were detected at

concentrations that exceeded the most conservative NJDEP threshold for each metal at VC1-ALT

from 0-6 feet. Mercury also exceeded the ER-M threshold at VC1-ALT within the 6-9 feet depth

interval. Arsenic and nickel exceeded the ER-L threshold for the entire depth of the sample taken

at VC1-ALT. Arsenic also exceeded the ER-L threshold within two depth intervals at VC2 (0-3

feet and 6-9 feet). Cobalt exceeded the ER-M threshold in three depth intervals in VC1-ALT (3-

6 feet, 12-15 feet, and 15-16 feet), with concentrations ranging from 10.7 mg/kg to 11.6 mg/kg.

Manganese exceeded the ER-M threshold at VC1-ALT in the depth intervals spanning 3 feet to

15 feet, with concentrations ranging from 274 mg/kg to 361 mg/kg. Selenium exceeded the ER-

M threshold at all depths sampled for VC1-ALT and VC2, with the exception of the 6-9 feet depth

interval at VC2, with concentrations ranging from 1.22 mg/kg to 18.6 mg/kg. The only metal not

detected in this group was antimony.

For samples collected in Group A, the ranges of concentrations of metals that exceeded

the NJDEP thresholds are presented below:

● Arsenic - 8.37 mg/kg to 108 mg/kg

● Barium - 82.5 mg/kg to 135 mg/kg

● Cadmium - 1.62 mg/kg to 2.36 mg/kg

● Chromium - 97.6 mg/kg to 145 mg/kg


7-37

● Copper - 237.0 mg/kg to 504.0 mg/kg

● Lead - 185.0 mg/kg to 235.0 mg/kg

● Nickel - 24.3 mg/kg to 40.7 mg/kg

● Silver - 3.06 mg/kg to 4.58 mg/kg

● Zinc - 227 mg/kg to 336 mg/kg

● Mercury - 0.32 mg/kg to 5.28 mg/kg

For New Jersey samples from Group B, seven metals were detected at concentrations

that exceeded the ER-L or ER-M thresholds and are presented below

● Arsenic exceeded the ER-L threshold at all depths sampled for VC3 and VC4, with

concentrations ranging from 10.7 mg/kg to 17.5 mg/kg.

● Cobalt exceeded the ER-M threshold at VC3 at depths deeper than 6 feet and at

VC4 at depths shallower than 6 feet, with concentrations ranging from 10 mg/kg to

11 mg/kg.

● Lead exceeded the ER-L threshold at VC4 from 0-3 feet (47.4 mg/kg).

● Manganese exceeded the ER-M threshold at all depths sampled for VC3 and VC4,

with concentrations ranging from 372 mg/kg to 436 mg/kg.

● Nickel exceeded the ER-L threshold at all depths sampled for VC3 and VC4, with

concentrations ranging from 24.6 mg/kg to 29.3 mg/kg.

● Selenium exceeded the ER-M threshold at all depths sampled for VC3 and VC4,

with concentrations ranging from 8.36 mg/kg to 13.1 mg/kg.

● Mercury exceeded the ER-L threshold at VC4 from 0-3 feet (0.294 mg/kg).

For New Jersey samples from Group E, three metals (nickel, selenium, and mercury)

exceeded NJDEP ER-L and ER-M thresholds. Two metals (antimony and molybdenum) were not

detected in any of the sediment samples collected. Nickel exceeded the ER-L threshold only in

the 9-12 feet interval at VC47. Selenium exceeded the ER-M threshold at VC46 (0-3 feet), VC47

(9-12 feet), VC50 (0-12 feet), VC51 (0-12 feet), and VC52 (3-9 feet), with concentrations ranging

from 1.01 mg/kg to 2.12 mg/kg. Mercury exceeded the ER-L threshold at VC47 (0-3 feet) and

VC54 (3-9 feet). The concentrations of mercury that exceeded the NJDEP thresholds ranged

from 0.19 mg/kg to 0.51 mg/kg.

In New York samples from Group B, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel,

silver, zinc, and mercury exceeded the Class A thresholds, and six of these nine metals (arsenic,

lead, nickel, silver, zinc, and mercury) also exceeded the Class B thresholds. Samples from three

sites (VC6, VC7, and VC16) contained concentrations that exceeded the Class A/B thresholds


7-38

for the nine metals listed above, and VC17 contained concentrations that exceeded the same

thresholds for the same metals, excluding cadmium. At VC6, and VC7, all nine metals were

detected between 0-3 feet at concentrations that exceeded the Class A/B thresholds, and the

number of metals exceeding these thresholds decreased as depth increased. At VC16 and VC17

these exceedances were detected between 3-12 feet and 6-15 feet, respectively, and are as

follows:

● Concentrations of arsenic that exceeded the NYSDEC thresholds ranged from

8.27 mg/kg to 87.8 mg/kg.

● Concentrations of cadmium that exceeded the Class A threshold ranged from 1.3

mg/kg to 3.5 mg/kg.

● Concentrations of chromium that exceeded the Class A threshold ranged from 86.5

mg/kg to 202.0 mg/kg.

● Concentrations of copper that exceeded the Class A threshold ranged from 36.4


● Concentrations of lead that exceeded the NYSDEC thresholds ranged from 47.4

mg/kg to 285 mg/kg.

● Concentrations of silver that exceeded the NYSDEC thresholds ranged from 1.22


● Concentrations of zinc that exceeded the NYSDEC thresholds ranged from 150

mg/kg to 494 mg/kg.

● Concentrations of mercury that exceeded the NYSDEC thresholds ranged from

0.19 mg/kg to 4.22 mg/kg.

In Group C, 26 metals were detected and two exceeded the Class A thresholds. The only

metal not detected was silver, while the two metals that exceeded their Class A threshold, arsenic

and nickel, were detected at all depths within each of the 18 sample locations. Arsenic exceeded

the Class A threshold only at VC25 within the 9-11.5 feet depth interval at a concentration of 8.9

mg/kg. Nickel exceeded the Class A threshold from 0-6 feet at VC27, and within the 9-12 feet

depth interval at VC29, at concentrations ranging from 29.1 mg/kg to 39.7 mg/kg.

In Group D, all 27 metals were detected and seven exceeded the Class A thresholds.

Arsenic, copper and lead, and mercury exceeded their Class A threshold at locations VC37 and

VC38 in the 0-3 feet intervals. The concentrations in exceedance of Class A thresholds at VC37

and VC38 for these four metals were: 12.8 mg/kg and 25.6 mg/kg for arsenic; 37.3 mg/kg and

73.7 mg/kg for copper; 89.8 mg/kg and 130 mg/kg for lead; and 3.51 mg/kg and 2.72 mg/kg for


7-39

mercury, respectively. Nickel (23.8 mg/kg), silver (1.06 mg/kg), and zinc (154 mg/kg) also

exceeded the Class A threshold at VC38 from 0-3 feet. Mercury (0.368 mg/kg) also exceeded

the Class A threshold at location VC41-ALT from 0-3 feet.

In New York samples from Group E, 26 metals were detected and six exceeded the Class

A thresholds. Arsenic, copper, lead, zinc, and mercury exceeded the Class A thresholds at VC42

(3-6 feet) and VC60 (0-3 feet). The concentrations in exceedance of Class A thresholds at VC42

and VC60 for these five metals were: 27.8 mg/kg and 8.27 mg/kg for arsenic; 70.9 mg/kg and

43.1 mg/kg for copper; 172 mg/kg and 86.3 mg/kg for lead; 157 mg/kg and 69 mg/kg for zinc; and

3.83 mg/kg and 0.231 mg/kg for mercury, respectively. Nickel exceeded the Class A thresholds

at VC42 (3-6 feet) and at VC47 (9-12 feet) with concentrations of 22.9 mg/kg and 23 mg/kg,

respectively. Zinc (157 mg/kg) exceeded the Class A threshold at VC42 (3-6 feet). Mercury

exceeded the Class A threshold at VC42 (6-9 feet) and VC60 (0-3 feet), with concentrations of

0.285 mg/kg and 0.231 mg/kg, respectively. Mercury also exceeded the Class B threshold at

VC42 (3-6 feet) with a concentration of 3.83 mg/kg. Antimony was not detected in any of the

sediment samples collected.

Cyanide In New Jersey, total cyanide and cyanide amenable to chlorination was measured. Total

cyanide was detected within samples collected from one sampling location in Group A (VC1-ALT

[0-6 feet]) and three sampling locations in Group E (VC48-ALT [6-9.7 feet], VC51 [9-12 feet], and

VC55 [3-9 feet]). Cyanide was not detected in any samples collected from Group B in New Jersey.

Total cyanide concentrations ranged from 0.17 mg/kg to 1.5 mg/kg. A standard or guidance value

for cyanide is not available in New Jersey.

In New York, total cyanide was detected in samples collected from three sampling

locations in Group B (VC7 [0-3 feet]), VC16 [9-12 feet], and VC17 [9-12 feet]) and two sampling

locations in Group C VC35 [3-6 feet] and VC36 [3-6 feet and 9-12 feet]). Cyanide was not tested

for in any samples in Group D and Group E in New York. Total cyanide concentrations ranged

from 0.25 mg/kg to 0.97 mg/kg. A standard or guidance value for cyanide is not available.

Pesticides Pesticides were tested for in sediment samples (see Appendix 1D to RR1 for a complete

list of these pesticides). Of these, only 13 have an existing standard or guidance value. All

existing standards or guidance values for New York and New Jersey that are exceeded are

presented in Table 7.4-4.


7-40

Table 7.4-4 Summary of Sediment Chemistry Tests and Screening Criteria

Test Description EPA Method Unit

NYSDEC Required Method

Detection Limits

NJDEP or USACE

Required Reporting

Limitsa

NJDEP Effects Range Low

(ER-L)b

NJDEP Effects Range-Median (ER-M)c

NYSDEC Class A

NYSDEC Class C

Arsenic EPA 6020A mg/kg 3^ 1 8.2 70 8.2 70

Barium EPA 6020A mg/kg N/A 40 N/A 48 N/A N/A

Cadmium EPA 6020A mg/kg 1 1 1.2 9.6 1.2 9.6

Chromium EPA 6020A mg/kg N/A 1 81 370 N/A N/A

Cobalt EPA 6020A mg/kg N/A 10 N/A 10 N/A N/A

Copper EPA 6020A mg/kg 5^ 1 34 270 34 270

Lead EPA 6020A mg/kg 2^ 0.6 47 218 47 220

Manganese EPA 6020A mg/kg N/A 3 N/A 260 N/A N/A

Mercury EPA 7474 mg/kg 0.2^ 0.1 0.15 0.71 0.15 0.71

Nickel EPA 6020A mg/kg N/A 1 21 52 21 52

Selenium EPA 6020A mg/kg N/A 1 N/A 1 N/A N/A

Silver EPA 6020A mg/kg N/A 1 1 3.7 1 3.7

Zinc EPA 6020A mg/kg N/A 4 150 410 150 410

Benzene EPA 8260C µg/kg 0.3 10 340 N/A 460 1400

Total BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Xylene) EPA 8260C µg/kg 0.8 10 N/A N/A 960 5900

Fluorene EPA 8270D µg/kg N/A 0.1 19 540 N/A N/A

Total PAHs (sum of Target Compound List PAH) EPA 8270D µg/kg 330 N/A 4000 45000 4000 45000

Endrin EPA 8081B µg/kg N/A 0.0036 3 130000 6 96

Sum of DDT+DDE+DDD EPA 8081B µg/kg 3.3 N/A 1.6 46 44 5700

PCBs (sum of Aroclors) EPA 8082A µg/kg 33 <100 23 180 100 1000


7-41

Table 7.4-4 Summary of Sediment Chemistry Tests and Screening Criteria

Test Description EPA Method Unit

NYSDEC Required Method

Detection Limits

NJDEP or USACE

Required Reporting

Limitsa

NJDEP Effects Range Low

(ER-L)b

NJDEP Effects Range-Median (ER-M)c

NYSDEC Class A

NYSDEC Class C

PCBs (sum of congeners) EPA 1668C µg/kg N/A N/A 23 180 100 1000

Dioxins/Furans - Total Toxicity Equivalency Factor EPA 1613B pg/g 2000 N/A N/A 3.65 4.5 50 a Unshaded cells present reporting limits from USACE/EPA Guidance for Performing Tests on Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal (2014). Shaded Cells present

reporting limits from The Management and Regulation of Dredging Activities and Dredged Material in New Jersey’s Tidal Waters (1997). If both documents provide reporting limits, only the lowest is shown here.

b NJDEP Ecological Screening Criteria (2009) c Threshold values from NYS Screening and Assessment of Contaminated Sediment (2014), except values for total BTEX and dioxins/furans from NYS TOGS 5.1.9 (2004). Key: ^Use the laboratory reporting limit if the value is less than the method detection limit shown in the table N/A= Not available


7-42

In New Jersey, pesticides were not detected in any sediment samples collected from

Group B and Group E. In Group A, a total of seven pesticides were detected in samples from

VC1-ALT and three of these exceeded the ER-L threshold. The sum of the concentrations of

DDD + DDE + DDT exceeded the ER-L threshold value from 6-12 feet and exceeded the ER-M

threshold from 0-6 feet. The sum of the concentrations of DDD + DDE + DDT that exceeded

these thresholds ranged from 14.21 µg/kg to 92.57 µg/kg. No pesticides were detected in

samples from VC2 at concentrations that exceeded the NJDEP thresholds.

In New York, pesticides were not detected in any sediment samples collected from Group

C. A total of seven pesticides were detected across six of the sample sites in Group B, located

in New York. The sum of DDT + DDE + DDD was detected in exceedance of the Class A criteria

within the 0-3 feet depth interval at VC6, and VC7 and within the entirety of VC16 and VC17. The

sum of the concentrations of DDD + DDE + DDT that exceeded the Class A threshold ranged

from 8.7 µg/kg to 99.0 µg/kg.

In Group D, positive results were obtained for five pesticides (aldrin, endrin, O,P'-DDE,

P,P'-DDD, and P,P'-DDE) between VC38 (0-3 feet.) and VC41-ALT (0-6 feet.). The detected

concentration of endrin did not exceed the Class A threshold and there are no standard or

guidance values available for the other detected pesticides. The sum of DDT + DDE + DDD for

location VC41-ALT in interval 0-3 feet (9.002 µg/kg) exceeded the Class A threshold. For samples

in Group E and in New York, six pesticides (O,P’-DDD, O,P’-DDE, P,P’-DDD, P,P’-DDE, P,P’-

DDT, and trans-chlordane) were detected in the 0-3 feet depth interval at VC63. A standard or

guidance value is not available for any of the pesticides detected. The sum of the concentrations

of DDT + DDE + DDD detected at VC63 in the 0-3 feet interval was 3.56 µg/kg, which did not

exceed the Class A threshold.

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) PCBs were tested for as the sum of Aroclor compounds in sample locations in both New

Jersey and New York. PCBs were also tested for as the sum of congeners in samples from

locations in New Jersey and in samples from locations in New York where clamshell dredging

may occur. A complete list of the PCB Aroclor compounds and congeners included in the analysis

is provided in Appendix 1D to RR1. Thresholds for New York and New Jersey that are presented

in Table 7.4-4.

For Group A, PCBs expressed as the sum of Aroclor compounds and the sum of

congeners were detected and exceeded the ER-M threshold from 0-9 feet at VC1-ALT.


7-43

Concentrations of the sum of Aroclor compounds ranged from 291.6 µg/kg to 1,140.5 µg/kg.

Concentrations of the sum of congeners ranged from 44,124 pg/kg to 1,597,166 pg/kg. For

samples from Group B in New Jersey, PCBs expressed as the sum of Aroclor compounds were

not detected in any sediment samples collected. PCBs expressed as the sum of congeners were

detected in all sample sites at all depths. However, no sample locations contained concentrations

exceeding the New Jersey ER-L threshold for total PCB congeners. For samples from Group E

in New Jersey, PCBs expressed as the sum of Aroclor compounds were detected and exceeded

the NJDEP thresholds at VC48 (0-9.7 feet) and VC55 (0-24 feet), with concentrations ranging

from 61.9 µg/kg to 67.2 µg/kg and 109 µg/kg to 125 µg/kg, respectively. The sum of congeners

were not detected in exceedance of the ER-L threshold.

For samples from Group B in New York, PCBs expressed as the sum of Aroclor

compounds, were detected at concentrations that exceeded the Class A threshold within the 0-3

feet depth interval at VC6 and VC7 and within the entire depth of the samples from VC16 and

VC17. Concentrations that exceeded the Class A threshold ranged from 161.0 ug/kg to 945.5

ug/kg. PCBs, expressed as the sum of congeners, were detected at all depths at VC5 through

VC10 and VC15 through VC18 and exceeded the Class A threshold within VC6 (0-3 feet) and

VC7 (0-3 feet), the entire depth of VC16, and VC17 (0-15 feet). The concentrations at these four

sites ranged from 149,000 pg/g to 2,000,000 pg/g.

In Groups C and D, PCBs, expressed as the sum of Aroclor compounds, were not detected

in any sediment samples. In Group C, PCBs expressed as the sum of congeners were detected

at all depths sampled at VC35 and VC36. PCBs expressed as the sum of congeners did not

exceed the Class A threshold within any of the sample locations. In Group D, PCBs expressed

as the sum of congeners were detected at all depths at all locations, with the exception of VC39

at depths greater than 9 feet, but the concentrations did not exceed the Class A threshold in any

of the samples. For samples collected from Group E in New York, PCBs expressed as the sum

of Aroclors were detected at three sample locations but did not exceed the Class A threshold.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) The following VOCs were tested for in sediment samples: benzene, ethylbenzene, m,p-

Xylene, o-Xylene, xylenes, toluene, total benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX). In

New Jersey, VOCs were detected in samples from one location in Group A and one location in

Group E, but no VOCs were detected at a concentration that exceeded the ER-L threshold. In

New York, VOCs were detected in samples from two locations in Group B and one location in

Group E, but no VOCs were detected at a concentration that exceeded the Class A threshold.


7-44

Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs), including Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)

Sediment samples were tested for SVOCs, including 15 PAHs (see Appendix 1D to RR1

for a complete list of these SVOCs). Thresholds for New York and New Jersey that are presented

in Table 7.4-4.

In New Jersey, 31 SVOCs were detected at one sampling location in Group A, 19 SVOCs

were detected at one sampling location in Group B, and 24 SVOCs were detected at six sampling

locations in Group E. Of the SVOCs detected at the Group A location (VC1-ALT [0-9 feet]), 19

were detected at concentrations that exceeded the ER-L or ER-M thresholds. The concentrations

of total PAHs that exceeded the ER-L threshold ranged from 4,225 µg/kg to 6,999 µg/kg. Of the

SVOCs detected in Group B (VC4 [0-3 feet]), only fluorene (a PAH) was detected at

concentrations that exceeded the ER-L threshold. The concentrations of fluorene that exceeded

the ER-L threshold ranged from 21 µg/kg to 78.1 µg/kg. Of the SVOCs detected in Group E, 14

were detected at concentrations that exceeded the ER-L thresholds at VC54 (0-9 feet). The

concentrations of total PAHs that exceeded the ER-L threshold ranged from 10,400 µg/kg to

15,400 µg/kg.

In New York, 29 SVOCs were detected across all sample locations in Group B; 18 PAHs

were detected across all locations in Group C; 24 SVOCs were detected across all sample

locations in Group D; and 18 SVOCs were detected across 12 sample locations in Group E. Of

the SVOCs detected in Group B, total PAHs detected exceeded the Class A threshold at two

sampling locations (VC16 [0-12 feet] and VC17 [0-12 feet]), with concentrations ranging from

4,540.0 µg/kg to 8,330 µg/kg. Of the PAHs detected in Group C, the concentrations of all

individual PAHs and total PAHs were below the Class A thresholds at all sampling locations. Of

the SVOCs measured in Group D, the concentration of total PAHS exceeded the Class A

threshold at two sampling locations (VC37 [0-3 feet] and VC38 [0-3 feet]), with concentrations of

15,394 µg/kg and 21,861 µg/kg. Of the SVOCs detected in Group E, the concentration of total

PAHs exceeded the Class A threshold at four sampling locations (VC42 [3-9 feet], VC62 [3-5

feet], VC63 [6-7 feet], and VC64 [3-6.1 feet]), with concentrations ranged from 4,813 µg/kg to

19,790 µg/kg.

Dioxins/Furans Sediment samples were tested for a total of 7 dioxins and 10 furans (see Appendix 1D to

RR1 for a complete list of these dioxins and furans). Of these, only one dioxin has an existing


7-45

standard or guidance value. The total toxicity equivalence factor for dioxins and furans has

existing standards in both New Jersey and New York, and is presented in Table 7.4-4.

In Group A, the total toxicity equivalency factor exceeded the ER-M threshold at VC1 (0-

9 feet and 12-15 feet) and the entire depth of VC2, with concentrations ranged from 4.12 pg/g to

81.5 pg/g. For samples from Group B in New Jersey, the total toxicity equivalency factor

exceeded the ER-M threshold at all sampling locations at all depths sampled, with concentrations

ranging from 9.4 pg/g to 11.9 pg/g. For samples from Group E in New Jersey, the total toxicity

equivalency factor exceeded the ER-M threshold at all depths for VC45-ALT, VC46, VC47, VC50,

VC51, and VC52. The total toxicity equivalency factor also exceeded the ER-M threshold at VC54

from 6-9 feet. Concentrations in exceedance of the ER-M threshold at these seven sampling sites

ranged from 5.83 pg/g to 9.94 pg/g.

For samples from Group B in New York, the total toxicity equivalency factor exceeded the

Class A threshold at nine sampling locations, with concentrations ranging from 4.6 pg/g to 39.7

pg/g. In Group C, the total toxicity equivalency factor did not exceeded the Class A threshold at

any sampling location. In Group D, the total toxicity equivalency factor exceeded the Class A

threshold at VC37 (0-3 feet) and VC39 (3-6 feet), at concentrations of 4.7 pg/g and 6.2 pg/g,

respectively. For samples from Group E in New York, the total toxicity equivalency factor was

detected and did not exceed the Class A threshold.

7.5 Agricultural Soils This section discusses the potential effects of construction and operation of the Project on

agricultural soils. RR 8 provides an assessment of land use effects on agricultural lands and

mitigation measures. No agricultural soils are crossed by the Raritan Bay Loop.

In an effort to identify the extent and location of important farmlands, the NRCS, in

cooperation with other interested federal, state, and local government organizations, inventoried

land that could be used for production of the nation's food supply. Important farmlands consist of

prime farmland, unique farmland, and farmland of statewide or local importance. However, not

all important farmland soils are used for farming. The NRCS makes important farmland

designations based on soil properties, not on current or past use.

The NRCS defines prime farmland as land that has the best combination of physical and

chemical characteristics for producing food, feed, forage, fiber, and oilseed crops and is available

for these uses. Such farmland may include cultivated land, pastureland, forestland, or other land

that is not urban, built-up land, or inundated by water. The soil quality, growing season, and


7-46

adequate moisture supply are factors needed for the soil to economically produce sustained high

yields of crops when proper management, including water management and acceptable farming

methods, are applied (NRCS 2013).

Unique farmland is land other than prime farmland that is used for the production of

specific high-value food and fiber crops (e.g., tree nuts, cranberries, and other fruits and

vegetables). It has the unique combination of soil quality, growing season, moisture supply,

temperature, humidity, air drainage, elevation, and aspect needed for the soil to economically

produce sustainable high yields of these crops when properly managed (NRCS 2013).

Farmlands of statewide importance generally include those areas of soils that nearly meet

the requirements of prime farmland and that economically produce high yields of crops when

treated and managed according to acceptable farming methods (NRCS 2013). Farmland

locations that are not identified as having statewide or local importance can be designated by

local agricultural agencies as statewide or local importance for the production of food, feed, fiber,

forage, and oilseed crops (NRCS 2013).

7.5.1 Onshore Facilities Soil types and characteristics found at the MPs crossed by the centerline of the pipelines

are noted in Table 7B-1 in Appendix 7B. Table 7B-5 in Appendix 7B lists the soils and their

characteristics impacted by the pipeline facilities. Table 7.5-1 lists the miles of prime farmlands,

farmlands of statewide or local importance, and farmlands of unique importance crossed by the

pipeline centerlines. Note that the designation of prime farmland, unique farmland, and farmland

of statewide or local importance does not indicate that the soils are in agricultural production (see

RR 8 for more information on agricultural areas in production).

Table 7.5-1 Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Farmland of Unique Importance

Soils Crossed by the Project


Pipeline

Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Statewide Importance




7-47

Table 7.5-1 Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Farmland of Unique Importance

Soils Crossed by the Project


Pipeline

Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Statewide Importance

(acres) New Jersey Madison Loop Middlesex 42.38 10.83




Project Total 250.44 184.19

Potential impacts on agricultural operations include loss of soil productivity, damage to

drain tiles and irrigation facilities, spread of noxious weeds and soil pathogens, disruption of

agricultural activities, restriction of long-term crop selection within the pipeline ROW, impacts on

certain crop certifications, damage to crops, and the introduction of subsurface rocks to the

surface tilled zone. Construction activities could degrade soil quality if there is extended soil

exposure, poor topsoil segregation, or soil compaction. Loss in soil productivity can result in

failure to revegetate croplands to their original landscape. Though some active cropland impacts

will be avoided by the use of HDD, most will be trenched and backfilled. The Quarryville Loop is

the only facility that has active row crops traversing the pipeline ROW. Table 7.5-2 shows active

row crops by MP that will be impacted by the construction of pipeline facilities.

Table 7.5-2 Croplands Crossed by Centerline by MP

Land Cover Type From Milepost To Milepost Total Crossing Distance Quarryville Loop

Active Row Crops 1681.18 1681.39 0.21

Active Row Crops 1681.41 1681.54 0.13

Active Row Crops 1681.59 1681.80 0.21

Active Row Crops 1682.18 1682.24 0.06

Active Row Crops 1682.35 1682.53 0.18

Active Row Crops 1682.66 1682.75 0.09

Active Row Crops 1683.02 1683.10 0.08

Active Row Crops 1683.13 1683.32 0.19

Active Row Crops 1683.32 1683.35 0.03


7-48

Table 7.5-2 Croplands Crossed by Centerline by MP

Land Cover Type From Milepost To Milepost Total Crossing Distance

Active Row Crops 1683.84 1684.20 0.36

Active Row Crops 1684.20 1684.76 0.56

Active Row Crops 1684.77 1684.90 0.13

Active Row Crops 1685.03 1685.27 0.24

Active Row Crops 1685.34 1685.47 0.13

Active Row Crops 1685.80 1686.00 0.20

Active Row Crops 1686.72 1687.20 0.48

Active Row Crops 1687.48 1687.90 0.42

Active Row Crops 1687.90 1688.06 0.16

Active Row Crops 1688.18 1688.45 0.27

Active Row Crops 1688.52 1688.57 0.05

Active Row Crops 1688.58 1688.71 0.13

Active Row Crops 1688.79 1688.81 0.02

Active Row Crops 1688.82 1689.03 0.21

Active Row Crops 1689.23 1689.33 0.10

Active Row Crops 1689.42 1689.67 0.25

Active Row Crops 1689.68 1689.90 0.22

Active Row Crops 1689.91 1690.18 0.27

Active Row Crops 1690.22 1690.37 0.15

Active Row Crops 1690.38 1690.43 0.05

Active Row Crops 1690.44 1690.48 0.04

Active Row Crops 1690.52 1690.52 0.00

Active Row Crops 1690.53 1690.58 0.05

Active Row Crops 1690.59 1690.62 0.03

Active Row Crops 1690.64 1690.85 0.21

Active Row Crops 1690.98 1691.13 0.15


7-49

7.5.1.1 Pennsylvania

7.5.1.1.1 Quarryville Loop The Quarryville Loop will temporarily affect approximately 170.50 acres of important

farmland soils.

7.5.1.1.2 Compressor Station 200 Construction and operation of the Compressor Station 200 expansion will temporarily

affect approximately 7.43 acres of soils designated as important farmland. However, none of the

7.43 acres are in agricultural production because all disturbed areas are within the existing

compressor station footprint. Table 7B-4 in Appendix 7B lists the acres of important farmland

soils and their characteristics within the boundaries of aboveground facilities larger than 5 acres.

7.5.1.2 New Jersey

7.5.1.2.1 Madison Loop The Madison Loop will temporarily affect approximately 10.81 acres of important farmland

soils. Even though these soils are characterized as important farmland soils, they are not in

agricultural protection.

7.5.1.2.2 Compressor Station 206 Construction of the aboveground facilities at the proposed Compressor Station 206 site

would permanently affect approximately 0.51 acre of important farmland soils, but none are in

agricultural production. Table 7B-4 in Appendix 7B lists the acres of prime and important

farmlands soils and their characteristics within the boundaries of aboveground facilities larger

than 5 acres.

7.5.2 Agricultural Effects and Minimization

7.5.2.1 Avoidance and Minimization Transco will minimize effects on soils in agricultural lands by stripping and stockpiling

topsoil for the full width of the construction ROW. Transco will also mechanically decompact

actively tilled agricultural lands where testing indicates compaction has occurred. Transco’s

Agricultural Plan specifies the measures Transco will follow to minimize and mitigate adverse

effects on agricultural soils being actively used as agricultural lands during and following

construction.


7-50

7.5.2.2 Onshore Pipeline Effects and Mitigation Project construction may result in temporarily removing those soils from agricultural

production if construction occurs during the growing season. Soils that are currently designated

as prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance will retain their designation after

construction. Effects on agricultural soils, including important farmland soils, will be mitigated in

accordance with the Transco Plan and Agricultural Plan. While some short-term decreases in

agricultural productivity may result because of the disturbance of soil during construction, those

effects can be mitigated over time by the restoration measures previously discussed.

7.5.2.3 Aboveground Facility Pipeline Effects and Mitigation The aboveground facilities cover multiple soil map units that may include both prime

farmland and soils with potential for impacts such as compaction and poor revegetation. Although

important farmland soils may be impacted by the construction of the compressor station sites, the

sites will not be constructed on active agricultural lands. Once construction is complete,

aboveground facilities will be fenced and maintained permanently as nonagricultural land uses

for the operation of the facility.

7.5.2.4 Croplands Effects and Mitigation To minimize impacts on croplands, Transco will conserve topsoil in all actively cultivated

and rotated cropland and improved pasture. At least 12 inches of topsoil will be segregated in

these areas. Where topsoil is less than 12 inches deep, the actual depth of the topsoil will be

segregated. The topsoil and subsoil will be stored in separate spoil piles on the construction

ROW and will not be allowed to mix. Upon completing construction, Transco will coordinate with

landowners to allow continued agricultural use of the property while minimizing impacts on

pipeline operations. Transco’s Agricultural Plan (Attachment 7 to Appendix 1B of RR 1)

documents the measures Transco will follow to minimize and mitigate effects on agricultural

lands.

7.5.3 No-till Farming No-till farming is a management technique in which crops are produced with limited or no

tilling to reduce soil erosion. Some farmers use no-till farming exclusively or for long periods

between tillage events. Long-term no-till farming can result in changes in the soil that can benefit

soil health, such as increased organic matter content, stronger soil aggregates, and greater

porosity, which benefit the soil’s ability to provide water to plant roots and improves aeration.

Construction activities will cause temporary disturbance within the no-till field. Restoration


7-51

measures relating to no-till farming are discussed in the Agricultural Plan. Once construction is

completed, the farmer can choose to continue to use no-till farming within the construction ROW.

7.5.3.1 Onshore Pipeline and Aboveground Facilities Effects and Mitigation No-till farms have been identified along the pipeline routes. Table 8.4-3 in RR 8 lists the

locations of no-till farms in the Project area identified to date and the acres of land affected during

construction. No aboveground facilities are proposed to be located on no-till farms.

Construction activities such as grading the soil and excavation will disturb the conditions

and some of the accumulated benefits for the soil created by long-term no-till farming. After

construction, soil conditions will be similar, in some respects, to conditions prior to initiating no-till

farming. As stated above, Transco will mitigate the effects of construction on soil using measures

such as topsoil segregation. These measures will also benefit soils that were farmed using no-till

methods.

The soil conditions created as the result of multiple years of the no-till farming technique

can be restored over time by resuming prior farming practices. The addition of soil amendments

and vegetative treatments such as cover crops chosen specifically for each site can, over time,

improve and restore soil tilth (Scheffe 2014).

Transco’s Agricultural Plan contains measures to minimize and mitigate effects on soils in

no-till farming areas. Transco developed the measures in consultation with subject matter experts

to provide guidance to ensure these lands are restored to their original uses and crops yields. In

addition, Transco will follow the Transco Plan and Transco Procedures.

7.6 Residential Impacts Potential impacts on residential areas include loss of soil productivity, spread of noxious

weeds, and damage to landowner property. In general, land use in the Project area is rural. The

proposed onshore pipelines are co-located with existing Transco pipelines to the extent

practicable.

In accordance with the Transco Plan, Transco will complete final grading, topsoil

replacement, and installation of permanent erosion controls within 10 days of backfilling the trench

in residential areas. Following completion of major construction, properties will be restored as

requested by the landowner, insofar as the landowner’s requirements are compatible with existing

regulations and with Transco’s standards regarding ROW restoration and maintenance. Transco

will adhere to the Transco Plan and site-specific residential crossing plans for residences located


7-52

within 50 feet of the Project workspace (see Appendix 8A in RR 8). For additional information on

residential areas, see Sections 8.3.1 and 8.3.2 of RR 8.

7.7 References EcolSciences, Inc. 2016a. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment/Preliminary Assessment for

Option #3 Proposed Compressor Station (CS206) Location Block 5.02, Lot 25, Township

of Franklin, Somerset County, New Jersey. June 17, 2016.

_________. 2016b. Phase II Investigation Letter Report, Option #3 Proposed Compressor

Station (CS206) Location, Block 5.02, Lot 25, Township of Franklin, Somerset County,

New Jersey. October 12, 2016.

Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR). 2016a. DataMap Corridor Study, Quarryville Loop,

Quarryville, PA, 17566, Inquiry Number: 4726092.2s. September 19, 2016.

_________. 2016b. The EDR Radius Map Report™ with GeoCheck®. Compressor Station

200, 52 Bacton Hill Road, Exton, PA 19341, Inquiry Number: 4726100.2s. September

13, 2016.

__________. 2016c. DataMap Corridor Study, Madison Loop, South Amboy, NJ, 08879, Inquiry

Number: 4726085.2s. September 19, 2016.

__________. 2016d. DataMap Corridor Study, Raritan Bay Loop - Onshore, Middlesex County,

South Amboy, NJ, 08879, Inquiry Number: 4725896.2s. September 13, 2016.

Federal Register. 1994. “Changes in Hydric Soils of the United States.” Natural Resources

Conservation Service. 61 Federal Register (FR) 29050. June 7, 1994.

Kraft, Joseph. 2014a. State Soil Scientist, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Harrisburg,

PA. Telephone communication with David Weeks.

_________. 2014b. State Soil Scientist, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Harrisburg,

PA. Email communication with David Weeks.

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2013. Farmland Policy Protection Act

Manual. U.S. Department of Agriculture.

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/landuse/fppa. Accessed August

3, 2016.

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/landuse/fppa


7-53

_________. 2015. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) databases for Middlesex County, NJ

and Lancaster County, Pennsylvania Published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture,

NRCS. Survey Area Version Date: September 17, 2015 (Middlesex County) and

November 16, 2015 (Lancaster County). https://gdg.sc.egov.usda.gov/GDGOrder.aspx .

New Jersey Department of Agriculture (NJDA) – State Soil Conservation Committee (SSCC).

2014. The Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey. 7th Edition.

January 2014.

http://www.nj.gov/agriculture/divisions/anr/pdf/2014NJSoilErosionControlStandardsCom

plete.pdf . Accessed March 21, 2017.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). 1997. The Management and

Regulation of Dredging Activities and Dredged Material in New Jersey’s Tidal Waters.

October 1997. Trenton, New Jersey.

________. 2009. Ecological Screening Criteria. NJDEP Site Remediation Program.

http://www.nj.gov/dep/srp/guidance/ecoscreening/ Accessed February 1, 2017.

_________. 2016a. Open Public Records Act, Data Miner.

http://datamine2.state.nj.us/dep/DEP_OPRA/. Accessed January 3, 2017.

_________. 2016b. NJ-Geo Web. http://www.nj.gov/dep/gis/geowebsplash.htm. Accessed

January 3, 2017.

New Jersey State. 2015. Brownfields SiteMart.

http://www.njbrownfieldsproperties.com/SiteInformation.aspx?Site_Number=8072.

Accessed January 3, 2017.

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). 2004. Technical &

Operational Guidance Series (TOGS) 5.1.9: In-Water and Riparian Management of

Sediment and Dredged Material. November 2004. Division of Water. Albany, New York.

________. 2014c. Screening and Assessment of Contaminated Sediment. June 2014. Division

of Fish, Wildlife and Marine Resources. Bureau of Habitat. Albany, New York.

Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (PADCNR). 2016a.

Piedmont Upland Section Piedmont Province. Last revised: 2016.

http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/topogeo/field/map13/13pus/index.htm. Accessed August 1,

2016.

https://gdg.sc.egov.usda.gov/GDGOrder.aspx

http://www.nj.gov/agriculture/divisions/anr/pdf/2014NJSoilErosionControlStandardsComplete.pdf

http://www.nj.gov/agriculture/divisions/anr/pdf/2014NJSoilErosionControlStandardsComplete.pdf

http://www.nj.gov/dep/srp/guidance/ecoscreening/

http://datamine2.state.nj.us/dep/DEP_OPRA/

http://www.nj.gov/dep/gis/geowebsplash.htm

http://www.njbrownfieldsproperties.com/SiteInformation.aspx?Site_Number=8072

http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/topogeo/field/map13/13pus/index.htm


7-54

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP). 2012. Erosion and Sediment

Pollution Control Program Manual. March 2012.

http://www.elibrary.dep.state.pa.us/dsweb/Get/Document-88925/363-2134-008.pdf .

Accessed March 21, 2017.

______. 2016. 2016 Pennsylvania Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report.

http://www.elibrary.dep.state.pa.us/dsweb/Get/Document-

113834/2016_Draft_Pennsylvania_Integrated_Water_Quality_Monitoring_and_Assessm

ent_Report_Updated_07-28-2016.pdf. Accessed August 4, 2016.

Scheffe, K. 2014. Soil Scientist, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Lincoln, NE.

Telephone communication with David Weeks.

Schwab, W.C., J.F. Denny, D.S. Foster, L.L. Lotto, M.A. Allison, E. Uchupi, B.A. Swift, W.W.

Danforth, E.R. Thieler, and B. Butman. 2002. High Resolution Quaternary Seismic

Stratigraphy of the New York Bight Continental Shelf. USGS Open-file Report 02-

152. Washington D.C.

U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE). 2013. Formerly Used Defense Sites Geographic

Information System. http://rsgisias.crrel.usace.army.mil/apex/f?p=516:2. Accessed

January 3, 2017.

USACE, EPA. 2016. Guidance for Performing Tests on Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean

Disposal. April 2016. USACE New York District. EPA Region 2. New York, New York.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2010. Region 2 Water - New Jersey Coastal

Plain Aquifer. Modified March 2013.

http://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1409/ML14091A147.pdf. Accessed July 26, 2016

__________. 2016a. Superfund National Priorities List Sites-by State.

https://www.epa.gov/superfund/national-priorities-list-npl-sites-state. Accessed January

3, 2017.

__________. 2016b. EPA Superfund Program: Global Sanitary Landfill, Ild Bridge Township, New Jersey. https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0200398&msspp=med

http://www.elibrary.dep.state.pa.us/dsweb/Get/Document-88925/363-2134-008.pdf

http://www.elibrary.dep.state.pa.us/dsweb/Get/Document-113834/2016_Draft_Pennsylvania_Integrated_Water_Quality_Monitoring_and_Assessment_Report_Updated_07-28-2016.pdf



http://rsgisias.crrel.usace.army.mil/apex/f?p=516:2

http://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1409/ML14091A147.pdf

https://www.epa.gov/superfund/national-priorities-list-npl-sites-state

https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0200398&msspp=med


7-55

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2005. CONMAPSG: Continental Margin Mapping (CONMAP)

sediments grainsize distribution for the United States East Coast Continental Margin:

Open-File Report 2005-1001, U.S. Geological Survey, Coastal and Marine Geology

Program, Woods Hole Science Center, Woods Hole, Massachusetts.

http://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/openfile/of2005-1001/data/conmapsg/conmapsg.htm

Accessed July 2016.

_________. 2017. US Topo Quadrangles – Maps for America.

https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/?basemap=b1&category=ustopo&title=US%20Top

o%20Download. Accessed January 26, 2017.

http://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/openfile/of2005-1001/data/conmapsg/conmapsg.htm

https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/?basemap=b1&category=ustopo&title=US%20Topo%20Download

https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/?basemap=b1&category=ustopo&title=US%20Topo%20Download

TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC

APPENDICES TO RESOURCE REPORT 7

SOILS

NORTHEAST SUPPLY ENHANCEMENT PROJECT

MARCH 2017

B4555


APPENDIX 7A

FIGURES


MARCH 2017

CONTRACTOR YARD(QUAR-CY-LA-1-002)

PROPOSED 42" QUARRYVILLE LOOP

MILE1681.00

MILE1682.00

MILE1683.00

MILE1684.00

MILE1685.00

MILE1686.00

MARTIC TOWNSHIPDRUMORE TOWNSHIP

DRUM

ORE T

OWNS

HIPEA

STDR

UMOR

E TOW

NSHIP

TEMPORARYACCESS ROAD

(AR-LA-010)


(AR-LA-002)

TEMPORARYACCESS ROAD(AR-LA-003)

TEMPORARYACCESS ROAD(AR-LA-004)


(AR-LA-005)


(AR-LA-008)

PERMANENTACCESSROAD

(AR-LA-009)

MILE1687.00

EXISTING 36" TRANSCO PIPELINE "C"EXISTING 30" TRANSCO PIPELINE "A"EXISTING 30" TRANSCO PIPELINE "B"

PROPOSED MAIN LINE VALVE SITE

BEGIN PROPOSED42" QUARRYVILLE LOOPM.P. 1681.00


EXISTING ROCK SPRINGS LATERALANODE BED


PERMANENTACCESS ROAD

(AR-LA-001)

GbC

CbC

MbFCm

Cm

CbC

MbD

MaDMaC

MbD

MaD

GbC

GbB

MbB

MaC

GbC

GbCMaD MaB

MaB

MbD

MbF

CbA

MbF

CbB

CbB

GbD

GbB

GbC

GdB

MaD

GdB

MbB

MaB

GdB

GbC

GbC

CbA

GbD

MbF

GbBGbB

MbD

MaB

CbB

CbB

CbA

MbF

CbC

CbB

GbB

CbC

CbA

CbB

GbB

GbD

MaC

W

GdB

GbC

CbANc

GdB

GbD

MbFHg

GbC

MbDMbF

GbB

MaD

CbB

MaD

GbC

MaC

GbB

W

Nc

MbD

MaCMaB

MbDCbC

GbC

GbB

MaB

MbF

MbFMbF

MbF

MbF

MbF

MbF

MbF

GbC

MaB

W

GbD

GbC

MaC

GdB

GbD

GbB

GbB

MbF

MaB

GdB

CbB

MaDGbB

GdB

MaB

MaB

MaBW

MaB

GbB

MaB

GbC

W

GbC

GbC

MaC

CbB

MaD

MbB

MaD

GbC

MaB

GbB

MaC

CbC

GdB

Nc

MaBMbB

CbA

MaB

CbC

GdB

GbCCbB

MaD

GbC

GbD

GdB

CbCGbD

CbB

CbC

GbD

GdB

MaD

GbB

CbC

MaB

W

CbA

MaB

GbB

MaB

MaC

GbC

GbB

MaD

MaB

W

GbC

MaC

CbB

MbD

CbC

CbBMaD

CbBGbD

CbC

MaB

GbB

MaB

MaDGdB

MaD

GbC

MaC

MbD

GbB

GbC

CbCGbC

CbC

CbB

MaB

CbB

GdB

MaB

MaB

MaB

MaB

GbC

CbC

GbB

MbD

GbD

GbDGbD

GbC

W

MaD

MaD

MbD

GbC

CbB

CbB

MaC

CbB

CbB

GbBMaD

MbF

MaC

GbD

GbB

CbBGbB

MaD

GdB

GbC

GbC

GbB

MaB

MaC

MaCMaD

GdB

MaC

MaCMaC

CbB

MaD

MaB

MbD

MbB

GbB

MbDGbC

MaD

GdB

MbD

GbC

MaDCbB

W

Ud

MbB

CbA

Ud

GdB

CbB

CbB GbB

GbD

GbD

GdB

MaB

MaBCbB

GdB

GbB

MbDGdB

MbD

CbC

MaDMbD

GdB

GbD

GbD

GdB

MaC

MbF

GbBMbB

CbC

GbC

GbC

MaB

MbF

MaB

BaCbA

MaC

MaD

MaC

MbD

MaB

GbD

MaC

GdB

CbA

Ba

GbB

GbD

CbCGbC

MaB

CbC

GbB

W

MbD

CbB MbD

MbD

MbD

MbD

MaD

MbF

MaD

GbB

GbD

MaC

GbC

CbC

MaB

MaD

MaC

CbB

GbC

MaB

GbB

CbC

MaBMaC

Nd

Nd

Nd

GbD

NcCbAGbB

GbB

GbD

Nc MaC

CbB

MbF

GbC

MaC

GdB

GbC

MaC

CbB

GdB

GbD GbC

CbC

CbC

CbB

GbD

MaC

CbC

CbB

GdB

GbD

CbB

GbBCm

Ba

MaC

Cm

CbB

CbC

MaD

GbC

MaB

Ud

W

GbBGbB

GbB

GdB

GbC

GbC

CbB

CbB

GbC

CbC

GbD

MbD

MaC

GbC

GbC

CbC

MaC

GbC

GdB GbD

CbB

GbC

CbB

CbC

GbB

GbC

MaB

GdB GdB

GdBMbB

MaD

GdB

GbCGdB

MaC

GdB

MaC W

MaB

MaBMaD

Ud CbA

MaC

GbC

CbC

GbC

CbC

MaB

MaB

Ud

GbC

GdB

CbC

MaC

GdB

NcHg

GbC

W

MaD

GbD

GbC

GdB

GbDCbB

MaB

GbD

CbC

GbC

CbC

MaC

GbD

GbC

CbC

CbA

GbC

MbF

MbD

GbD

GdB

CbC

GbB

CbC

MbB

CbB

CbB

GbB

CbC

MaD

CbBCbB

CbC

GbD

GbB

GbC

CbB

CbC

CbB

MaCGbD

CbB

GbCCbC

MbD

Ba

GbC

GbD

CbA

CbC

CbA

CbC

MbD

MbB

CbC

GbC

MaC

GbD

MaBMaD

GbB

CbC

MbF

CbA

CbA

MaD

MaD

GbC

GbD

CbC

GbB

MaB

GbB

GbC

MaB

GbD

MaD

Uc

GbD

Cm

GdB

Ud

W

CbB

CbC

MaD

MaD

GbB

MaD

GdB

MaD

MaB

Ba

Ud

MaC

MaD

Cm

GbCGbD

Ud

MaD

GdB

MaB

GdB

GbDGbD

MaD

MaD

MaC

GbC

MaC

Ud

MaB

CbBCbB

GbDGbD

W

MaC

MaCMaB

CbC

MaC

CbA

GbB

GdB

CbB

GbB

MaC

GbC

GbB

CbB

TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY LLCSOIL ASSOCIATION MAP

NORTHEAST SUPPLY ENHANCEMENTPROPOSED 42" QUARRYVILLE LOOP

M.P. 1681.00 TO M.P. 1691.17LANCASTER, PENNSYLVANIA

ELREL

11/11/1611/11/16

10/24/16

Figure 7A-1\\WP-fs-arcgis-1.woodgroup.com\GIS_Projects\01_Projects\106259\03_Exhibits\07_Project_Location_Map\2017_03_15\MXD\NESE_SOIL_Association_Map.mxd

0 2,000 4,000 6,000SCALE IN FEET

JTN

1185726

ISSUED FOR FERC FILING0 JTN03/20/17 1185726 CLR

DRAWING NO. REFERENCE TITLE

NO. DATE BY REVISION DESCRIPTION W.O. NO. CHK. APP.EL

DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:WO:

DATE:DATE:DATE: ISSUED FOR BID:

ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION: REVISION:

OFSHEET

LEGEND

EXISTING PIPELINEACCESS ROADSCOUNTY/TOWNSHIP BOUNDARYCONTRACTOR STAGING AREACONTRACTOR YARD/PIPE YARD 1"=2,000'

0SCALE:

15

MATC

H LIN

E S

EESH

EET

2

PROPOSED 42" QUARRYVILLE LOOPNOTES:SOIL GEOGRAPHICDATABASE BY USDAANODE BED

MILE1686.00

DRUM

ORE T

OWNS

HIPEA

STDR

UMOR

E TOW

NSHIP

TEMPORARYACCESSROAD

(AR-LA-005)

TEMPORARYACCESSROAD

(AR-LA-008)


(AR-LA-006)


(AR-LA-009)

MILE1687.00

MILE1688.00

MILE1689.00

MILE1690.00

MILE1691.00

MILE1691.17

PERMANENTACCESS ROAD(AR-LA-007)


PROVIDENCE TOWNSHIPEAST DRUMORE TOWNSHIP

EDEN TOWNSHIP

COLERAIN TOWNSHIP

QUARRY

VILLE B

OROUGH

EDEN T

OWNSH

IP

EASTDRU MORE TOWNSHIP

PROPOSED 42" QUARRYVILLE LOOP


PROPOSED MAIN LINE VALVE SITEPROPOSED MAIN LINE VALVE SITE

END PROPOSED42" QUARRYVILLE LOOPM.P. 1691.17

CONTRACTORYARD(QUAR-CY-LA-1-003)

PERMANENTACCESS ROAD(AR-LA-011)

CbC

GbC Nd

MbF

CbB

MaD

CbB

GbB

Cm

W

MaD

GbB

GbD

CbB

GbB

W

GdB

GbD

GbD

CbB

CbC

MbF MaB

GdB

GbB

GbD

MaB

CbB

GbD

MbDW

MbF

GbC

GbBGbB

CbAGbB

CbC

GbD

MbF

GdB

CbB

GbD

CbB

MaC

MaC

MaD

CbA

GbB

GbD

CbC

Ba

MaD

CbA

GbC

GbC

GdB

CbB

Ba

CbC

MaC

GdB

GbC

LaC

CbC

W

CbB

Cm

CbAMaB

GdB

GbB

GbC MbF

CbB

CbB

MbF

MbF

CbBCbC

CbC

GbB

GbD

W

ClBGbD

GbD

CbB

GbB

MaC

GbC

MaB

GdB

CbB

ClD

W

GbB

GbD

GdB

GdB

GdB

GdBW

Ba

CbCGdB

CbB

GbB

CbB

CbA

GbC

GdB

GbB

GdB GbC

MbD

Ba

GdB

W

MbF

GbC

GbD

CbB

MaC

GdB

GbD

GdB

GbC

GbC

GbC

GdB

MaBGbC

CbA

GdB

GdBCbB

GdB

GdB

GbB

W

MaB

MaD

GbB

MaBMaD

Ba

MaB

MaD

GdB

GdB

MaD

GbD

CbB

MbF

GbD

GdBMaB

GbB

GbDMaB

GbD

CbB

MaC

GbB

GbC

GbD

GbC

GbC

GbB

W

MaC

MaC

MaCBa

GbB

CbB

GbB

GbD

Ba

CbB

GbB

CbB

GdB

MaB

GdB

MbF

GdB

GbB

Ba

GbC

GbB

CbA

GdB

GbCGbB

GdB

ClD

CbC

GbD

GbC

GbD

CbB

Ba

CbA

MaC

GbC

GbC

GbD

MaB

CbB

GbD

CbC

GbC

GbC

GdB

GdB

GbD

CbB

W

GdB

GdB

GbC

CbB

CbB

GdB

MaB

GdBCbB

GbC

MaB

GbC

CbA

MbF

CbB

CbB

CbB

CbB

CbC

CbB

MaC

GbD

Ba

GbD

MaB

GdB

GdB

MbF

GbB

GbC CbA

CbB

GbC

GbC

W

GbC

GbD

CbB

CbC

GbCCbB

GbD

ClB

GbB

CbB

CbB

Nd

NdCbC

GdB

GbD

W

GdB

CbA

GbB

GdB

MbF

CbC

MaB

MbD

GbB

W

CbB

W

Ba MaC CbC

GbD

GbC

GbC

GbB

MaB

MaB

GbC

MaB

GdB

GbC

CbB

GbB

GbC

CbB

GbC

W

GbC

MaD

MbB

W

MaB

MbF

CbB

GbC

GbCCbB

CbA

W

CbB

MaC

MaB

GdB

CbB

LaB

ClB

GbB

GbC

MbB

GbB

Ba

CbC

GbB

Ba

MbF

MaC

GdB

GdB

GbC

GbC

ClB

GbB

MaD

W

GbDGdB

GbC

CbB

MaC

GdB

CbB

CbB

CbB

CbB

CbB

CbC

GbB

GbCMbFMbF

GbB

GbD

CbA

GbB

MaD

MaC

W

GbBGbC

MaC

Qu

GbC

MbF

MaC

MaD

MaC

W

MaD

CbA

MaB

CbA

MaD

MaD

CbB

Ba

MbDMbD

W

GbD

CbB

W

GbC

MbF

MbB

GdB

GbB

GbC GbCGbD

MaB

CbA

LaD

GbB

MaC

MaC

MaCMaC

ClB

MaB

CbC

W

GdB

GbD

CbC

W

GdB

MaD

CbC

GbCMaB

MaC

MaC

GbC

GbC

CbC

GbB

GbC

GbC

GbC

GbB

GbD

GbB

GbB

GbB

LaC

CbBMaB

MaB

GbB

CbC

CbB

GbC

GbB

GbC

CbB

GdB

Nd

GbD

GbD

GbC

GbBGbB

CbC

MaC

GdB

CbA

CbBGbB

GdB

CbA

MaB

GbB

CbA

ClB

Nd

GbB

ClD GdBLaB

GbD

GbD

CbA

CbA

GbB

MbF

GbD

ClB

GbC

CbB

GdB

CbB

GdB

GbD

ClF

Ba

GbD

CbBMaD

GbB

Ba

CbBGbC

GbC

GbD

GbD

CbC

CbA

GdB

GbB

GbB

GbC

CbA

GbB

GbD

Nd

MaB

GdB

GbD

CbB

CbC

GdB

GbD

GbB

GdB

CbC

GbDBa

CbCGbC

MaCGbC

MaD

GbC

GbC

CbB

MaC

GdB

CbA

GbB

W

GbD

GdBGbD

CbB

GdB

LaB

CbC

GbD

GbD

W

GbC

MaC

GdB

MaB

CbA

GbB

GbC

GbD

MbD

GdB

GdBMbF

CbB CbBCbB GbB GbBGbB

Nd

Nd

MaB

Ba

GbB

GbC

GbD

GbC

MaCGbB

GdBGbCCbB

GdB

GbB

Cm

GbC

GbDGbD

CbB

CbC

CbC

GbD

GbB

GbB

W

GdB

GdB GdB

MaB

GbC

MaD

GbC

GbD

GbB

CbA

MbF

GbC

CbC

GbB

CbB

W

GdB

GbC

GbBTRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY LLC

SOIL ASSOCIATION MAP NORTHEAST SUPPLY ENHANCEMENTPROPOSED 42" QUARRYVILLE LOOP

M.P. 1681.00 TO M.P. 1691.17LANCASTER, PENNSYLVANIA

ELREL

11/11/1611/11/16

10/24/16

\\WP-fs-arcgis-1.woodgroup.com\GIS_Projects\01_Projects\106259\03_Exhibits\07_Project_Location_Map\2017_03_15\MXD\NESE_SOIL_Association_Map.mxd

0 2,000 4,000 6,000SCALE IN FEET

JTN

1185726

ISSUED FOR FERC FILING0 JTN03/20/17 1185726 CLR


NO. DATE BY REVISION DESCRIPTION W.O. NO. CHK. APP.EL

DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:WO:



OFSHEET

LEGEND

EXISTING PIPELINEACCESS ROADSCOUNTY/TOWNSHIP BOUNDARYCONTRACTOR STAGING AREACONTRACTOR YARD/PIPE YARD 1"=2,000'

0SCALE:

25

MATC

H LIN

E

SEE

SHE

ET 1

PROPOSED 42" QUARRYVILLE LOOPNOTES:SOIL GEOGRAPHICDATABASE BY USDAANODE BED

Figure 7A-1

EXISTING 20" MARCUS HOOK LAT "A"EXISTING 30" MARCUS HOOK LAT "B"


EAST WHITELAND TOWNSHIP

WEST WHITELAND TOWNSHIP

MILE1722.00

COMPRESSOR STATION 200PERMANENT WORKSPACE

COMPRESSOR STATION 200TEMPORARY WORKSPACE

COMPRESSORSTATION 200

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029 PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029 PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029 PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029

PA029 PA029PA029

PA029

OFSHEET

REFERENCE TITLE

APP.CHK.W.O. NO.REVISION DESCRIPTIONBYDATENO.

DATE:

DATE:

DATE:

APPROVED BY:

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY: SCALE:ISSUED FOR BID:

ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION:

WO: 1185731

REVISION:

SCALE IN FEET0 500 1,000 1,500

1"=500'

35


PROPOSED FACILITY MODIFICATIONSNORTHEAST SUPPLY ENHANCEMENT PROJECT

COMPRESSOR STATION 200M.P. 1722.25

CHESTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

\\WP-fs-arcgis-1.woodgroup.com\GIS_Projects\01_Projects\106259\03_Exhibits\12_Compressor_Station_Maps\2017_03_16\MXD\F-FS-NESE-ABC-01.mxd

DRAWING NO.

JTNEXP

11/14/1611/15/1611/15/16EL

WEST WHITELAND TOWNSHIP

0 ISSUED FOR FERC FILINGJTN03/20/17 1185731 EXP EL 0

LEGEND NOTES:SOIL GEOGRAPHICDATABASE BY USDA

COUNTY/TOWNSHIP BOUNDARY

EXISTING PIPELINEPERMANENT WORKSPACE

PROPERTY LINE

TEMPORARY WORKSPACE

Figure 7A-1

SOME

RSETC

OUNTY

FRANK

LINTOW

NSHIP

MIDDLE

SEXCO

UNTY

SOUTH

BRUNS

WICKT

OWNSH

IP

EXISTING 30" TGPL MAINLINE "A"EXISTING 42" TGPL MAINLINE "C"

COMPRESSOR STATION 206TEMPORARY WORKSPACE

COMPRESSOR STATION 206PERMANENT WORKSPACE

MILE1782.50


EkbA

KepA

KepA

KepB

MonBb

MonAMonB

KemB

NehB

KepB

KepA

EkbAEkbA

WasA

KepB

QY

KepBMonB

NemCb

KepB

NehEb

KepA

KepB

KepA

PeoCNemCb

KepB

NehB

KepA

EkbA

EkbA

EkbA

NemCb

MopCb

PeoC

NehEb

NemCb

OFSHEET

REFERENCE TITLE

APP.CHK.W.O. NO.REVISION DESCRIPTIONBYDATENO.

DATE:

DATE:

DATE:

APPROVED BY:

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY: SCALE:ISSUED FOR BID:

ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION:

WO: 1185732

REVISION:

SCALE IN FEET0 500 1,000 1,500

1"=500'

45

TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY LLCSOIL ASOCIATION MAP

PROPOSED COMPRESSOR STATION 206 NORTHEAST SUPPLY ENHANCEMENT PROJECT

M.P. 1782.50SOMERSET COUNTY, NEW JERSEY

\\wp-fs-arcgis-1.woodgroup.com\GIS_Projects\01_Projects\106259\03_Exhibits\12_Compressor_Station_Maps\2017_03_21\MXD\F-FS-NESE-AC-01.mxd

DRAWING NO.

JTNEXP

11/14/1611/15/1611/15/16EL

FRANKLIN TOWNSHIP

0 ISSUED FOR FERC FILINGJTN03/20/17 1185732 EXP EL 0

LEGEND NOTES:SOIL GEOGRAPHICDATABASE BY USDA

COUNTY/TOWNSHIP BOUNDARY

EXISTING PIPELINE

PROPERTY LINE

PERMANENT WORKSPACELIMITS OF DISTURBANCE

Figure 7A-1

MILE12.00

MILE11.00

MILE10.00MILE

9.00MILE8.57

EXISTING 26" LOWER BAY LOOP "C"

TEMPORARYACCESS ROAD(AR-MS-005)


(AR-MS-004)TEMPORARYACCESS ROAD(AR-MS-003)


(AR-MS-001)


(AR-MS-006)



TEMPORARYACCESS ROAD(AR-MS-002)

NJ

NY

EXISTING 42" LOWER BAY LOOP "C"

BEGIN PROPOSED26" MADISON LOOP

M.P. 8.57

END PROPOSED26" MADISON LOOP

M.P. 12.00

OLD BRIDGE TOWNSHIP

MONMOUTH COUNTY

ABERDEEN TOWNSHIP

MIDDLESEX COUNTY

RICHMOND COUNTY

MIDDLESEX COUNTYBOROUGH OF SAYREVILLE

SOUTH AMBOYTOWNSHIP

OLD BRIDGE TOWNSHIP

BOROUGH OF SAYREVILLE

PROPOSED 26" MADISON LOOP

PdwAv

EveD

PHG

EveDGamB

WoekA

AtsA

GamB

SafB

AtsA

PHM WoekA

EveC

GamkBGamkBGamkB

EveD

AtsA

HbmBKemD

PHG

KemB

GamB

KeoB

KemD

SacC

UR

UdcB

UR

PssA

UR

DocB

PdwAv

PssA

MakAt

DocB

SadC

LasC

PHG

WATER

DocB

DocB

KemBKemD

EveDKemD

GamB

EveB

AtsA

WATERHbmB

KeoDKemDKemD

KemDKemD KemA

EveB

KeoB

PHG

EveD

PHG

PHM

EveD

PssA

DocC

DocC

SadD

PssA

KemD

DocB

HumAt

DocB

PssA

PssA

AtsA

GamkB

WATER

KemD

WATER

HbmkB

KeoD

LasC

EveD

GamB

DouC

KemB

HumAt

AtsA

HumAt

PHG

AtsA

UR

PssAPssA

WATER

PssA

PHM

PHG

UdcB

GamkB

GamB

SafB

EveD

AtsAAtsA

PHG

EveD

PHM

UR

WATER

HumAt

EveB

KeoA

GamBPssA

MakAt

KeoC

PssA

EveD

PHG PHG

UR

HumAt

PHG

SafB

KemB

SadC

PHG

LakB

PstA

HbmkB

HumAt

EveD

WATER

WATER

PHG

PHG

KeoD

PsuB

AtsA

EkaAr

EveD

PssA

EkaArKemAGamB

PHG

HumAt

KeoBKemB

EveB

KemB

KeoB

MakAt

WATER

EveB

WATER

KemB

SadB

UR

PHM

PssA

PssA

KeoB

AtsA

AtsA

DocC

PHG

WATERPssA

PdwAv

PsuB

WATER

PssA

DoeBPHG

AtsA

KeoD

SapB

DocB

PHG

WoekA

KeoD

WATER

KeoC KeoBKeoBKeoD

PHG

KeuCKemDKeoC

PHM

GaokB

DocBEveB

WoekB

HbmkB

PssADocB

HbmkB

PssASadB

DocB

PHG

DocB

DocB

HumAt

PssA

DocC

PssA

EveD

PHM

SapBDocB

DouC

EveD

DocBHbmkB

GamBKemB

KeuC

DocC

PHM

PsuB

KeuC

HbmkB

AtsA

EveB

GamB

UR

HumAt

EveD

HbmB

HbmBGamB

KemB

KemB KeoA

GamBPHG

PHM

KeoCAtsAAtsA

KemB

KeoD

UR

SadDUR

HbmB

EveD

PssA

DouC

EveD

PHMAtsA

AtsADocB

PdwAv

PssADocB

PssA

HumAt

EveD

WATER

SadC

HbmkB

PHM

UR

KemD

EveD

HbmB

PssA

AtsA

PssA

DocB

DocB

PdwAv

KemB

UdaB

ThhB

MakAt

PegB

KkgkBKkgkB

UdaB

HumAtKeuC

KeuC

MakAt

KemA

KemA

EkaAr

UdaBPHM

PHM


NORTHEAST SUPPLY ENHANCEMENTPROPOSED 26" MADISON LOOP

M.P. 8.57 TO M.P. 12.00MIDDLESEX COUNTY, NEW JERSEY

ELREL

NOTES:SOIL GEOGRAPHICDATABASE BY USDA

11/11/1611/11/16

11/01/16

\\WP-fs-arcgis-1.woodgroup.com\GIS_Projects\01_Projects\106259\03_Exhibits\07_Project_Location_Map\2017_02_08\MXD\Madison_Soil_Association_Map.mxd

0 2,000 4,000 6,000SCALE IN FEET

JTN

1185727


NO. DATE BY REVISION DESCRIPTION W.O. NO. CHK. APP. DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:WO:



OFSHEET

SCALE:

55

LEGENDEXISTING PIPELINEACCESS ROADSCOUNTY/TOWNSHIP BOUNDARY

PROPOSED 26' MADISON LOOP

0 03/20/17 JTN ISSUED FOR FERC FILING 1185727 CLR MJH1"=2,000'

0

Figure 7A-1

Atlan

ticOcea

n

NYNY

NJNJ

PAPA

WVWVMDMD

DEDE

CTCT

MAMA

VTVT NHNH

L:\Buffalo\Williams_NYRE\Map\MXDs\ResourceReport\RR7\FINAL\7A2_SurficialSedimentOffshore.mxd

TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY LLCDISTRIBUTION OF SURFICIAL SEDIMENT

NORTHEAST SUPPLY ENHANCEMENT PROJECTNEW JERSEY, NEW YORK

MK1000891ISSUED FOR FERC DRAFT FILINGA CE

FIGURE 7A-212:13 PM3/22/2017

DRAWINGNUMBER:

DATE:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

WO:

APPROVED BY: DATE:

ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION:

ISSUE FOR BID: SCALE:W.O. NO. CHK. APP.NO. DATE BY

DRAWING NO.

DATE:

REFERENCE TITLE

REVISION DESCRIPTION

OF 1SHEET 1

SITE LOCATION

Data Sources: NJDEP 2006; USGS 2000, 2005; Williams 2017; E&E 2017; ESRI 2012, 2017; NYS Office of Information Technology Services GPO 2016.

7A-2

N/A

N/A3/22/20173/22/2017

CEMK

1000891

11/17/2016 Project features ver14

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!.

!.

!.

!.!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Raritan Bay

NEW YORKNEW YORKNEW JERSEYNEW JERSEY

Madison Loop

RaritanBay Loop(Onshore)

RaritanBay Loop

(Offshore)

MP 35.00

MP 11.00

MP 12.00

MP 29.00

MP 21.00

MP 14.00

MP 15.00

MP 13.00

MP 35.49

MP 16.00

MP 19.00

MP 23.00 MP 25.00

MP 26.00

MP 18.00

MP 31.00

MP 28.00

MP 32.00

MP 30.00

MP 24.00

MP 20.00

MP 34.00

MP 22.00

MP 27.00

MP 33.00

MP 17.00

MiddlesexCounty

MonmouthCounty

Kings County

QueensCounty

RichmondCounty

UV440

UV34

UV35 UV36

-60

-30

-40

-50

-80

-10

-20

-70

-50

-60

-40

-30

-10

-10

-20

-20

SAND

SAND

SAND

SAND

SAND

SAND

SAND

SAND

SAND

SAND

SAND

SAND

§̈¦95

U0 0.5 1

Miles

Legend! Milepost

!. Sediment Texture Sample Locations

Proposed PipelineCounty BoundaryMajor and Secondary Roads

Local RoadNY/NJ Boundary

Bathymetry (10-ft intervals) -10

-20

-30

-40

-50

-60

-70

-80

Offshore Sediment Grain Size Distributionclay-silt/sand

gravel

gravel-sand

sand

sand-clay/silt

sand/silt/clay

1:92,000MK1000891ISSUED FOR FERC FILINGB CE3/22/2017

SM

!

!!

!

!!

")")

")")

")

")")

")")

")")

")")")

")")")

") ") ") ") ") ") ")")

")

")

")

")")

")") ") ")

") ")")")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")") ") ")

") ") ")

")")

")")

")")

")")

")")

") ") ")")")

")

")

NEW YORKNEW YORK

NEW JERSEYNEW JERSEY

Kings Co.

Rar i tan Bay

Sandy H ookBay

Lower Bay

At lant ic Ocean

Middlesex Co.

Monmouth Co.

Queens Co.

Richmond Co.

VC54

VC1-A

LT

VC40

VC39

VC41

-ALT

VC42

VC53

VC2 VC

3-ALT

VC4 VC

5 VC6 VC

7

VC9 VC

10 VC11 VC

12 VC13 VC

14VC

15VC

16 VC18 VC19 VC

20

VC21

VC22

VC23

VC24

VC25 VC26 VC

27 VC28 VC

29 VC30

VC31

-ALT VC

32

VC33

-ALT

VC34 VC35

VC36

VC37

VC38

VC43

VC44

VC45

-ALT

VC46

VC47

VC48

-ALT

VC49

VC50

VC51 VC

52

VC55 VC

56 VC57 VC

58 VC59 VC

60 VC61

-ALT

VC62 VC

63 VC64 VC

65

VC66

VC67

VC68

VC69

-ALT

VC8

VC17

MP 15 .00

MP 35.49MP 25.00

MP 12.00

MP 30.00MP 20.00

-60

-80

-40-6

0-20

-40

-20

-40

-20

-40

-20

-40

-20

-40

-60

-80 -60

-80

-60

-60

-20

-40

-60

-40

-40

-60

-40

-40

-40

-20

-20 -40-20

-20

-40

-40

-40

-20

-40

-20

-20

-20

-40

-20

-20

-20

-40

-40

-40

-20

-20

-20

-40

-40

-80

-20

-20

-20

-20

-20

-20

-40

L:\Buffalo\Williams_NYRE\Map\MXDs\ResourceReport\RR7\FINAL\7A3_Sediment_RBL_Cores.mxd

TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY LLCSURFICIAL SEDMIMENT AND CORE LOCATIONSNORTHEAST SUPPLY ENHANCEMENT PROJECT

NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK

MK1000891ISSUED FOR FERC FILINGA AL

FIGURE 7A-312:15 PM3/22/2017

DRAWINGNUMBER:

DATE:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

WO:

APPROVED BY: DATE:

ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION:

ISSUE FOR BID: SCALE:W.O. NO. CHK. APP.NO. DATE BY

DRAWING NO.

DATE:

REFERENCE TITLE

REVISION DESCRIPTION

OF 1SHEET 1

SITE LOCATION

Data Sources: Williams 2017; E&E 2017; ESRI 2012, 2017; NJDEP Digital Data Series Bathymetric Data 2006; NOAA ENC, Approach Scale, data downloaded 2016; USGS 2005; NYS Office of Information Technology Services GPO 2016.

7A-3

N/A

N/A

Legend! Milepost

Proposed Raritan Bay Loop

Temporary Workspace

NY/NJ Boundary

Lower NY Bay Lateral

Rockaway Delivery Lateral

Maintained Navigation Channel

0 1 2

Miles

3/22/20173/22/2017

ALMK

1000891

3/22/20171:95,000

Project features ver14

MadisonLoop

RaritanBay Loop

Quarryville Loop

DEDENJNJ

NYNYPAPA

CTCT

MDMD

U

Grab Sample Site Location (USCS Type)") CL (lean clay)

") GC (clayey gravel)

") OH (organic clay)

") SC (clayey sand)

") SM (silty sand)

") SP (poorly graded sand)

") SP-SM (poorly graded sand/silty sand)

Offshore Sediment Grain Size Distributionclay-silt/sand

gravel

gravel-sand

sand

sd-cl/st

sand/silt/clay

B4555


APPENDIX 7B

TABLES


MARCH 2017


Table 7B-1 Soil Characteristics of each Soil Map Unit Crossed by the Centerline of the Project

From Milepost

To Milepost

Map Unit Symbol a

Percent Slope b

Depth to Bedrock

(inches) b c

Land Capability Class b d

High Compaction Potential e

Erosion Potential b f

Wind Erodibility

Group b

Poor Revegetation

Potential g

Stony/ Rocky Soils h

Hydric Soil b

Prime Farmland i

Quarryville Loop

1681.00 1681.49 CbB 4 >=80 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

1681.49 1681.53 GbC 12 72 3 No Severe 6 No No No SWI

1681.53 1681.56 GbD 20 72 4 No Severe 6 Yes No No N

1681.56 1681.62 CbC 12 >=80 3 No Severe 5 No No No SWI

1681.62 1681.70 MaB 6 72 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y




1681.86 1681.94 GdB 6 >=80 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

1681.94 1682.08 MaD 20 72 4 No Severe 5 Yes No No N

1682.08 1682.16 MaC 12 72 3 No Severe 5 No No No SWI

1682.16 1682.19 MaD 20 72 4 No Severe 5 Yes No No N












From Milepost

To Milepost

Map Unit Symbol a

Percent Slope b

Depth to Bedrock

(inches) b c




Wind Erodibility

Group b

Poor Revegetation

Potential g


Hydric Soil b

Prime Farmland i

1682.96 1683.01 CbA 3 >=80 1 No Moderate 5 No No No Y




1683.28 1683.39 GbB 6 >=80 2 No Moderate 6 No No No Y

1683.39 1683.43 MbD 17 72 6 No Severe 6 Yes Yes No N

1683.43 1683.59 MbF 43 72 7 No Severe 6 Yes Yes No N


















From Milepost

To Milepost

Map Unit Symbol a

Percent Slope b

Depth to Bedrock

(inches) b c




Wind Erodibility

Group b

Poor Revegetation

Potential g


Hydric Soil b

Prime Farmland i



1686.49 1686.56 Nd 2 60 2 Yes Slight 5 No No No SWI






















From Milepost

To Milepost

Map Unit Symbol a

Percent Slope b

Depth to Bedrock

(inches) b c




Wind Erodibility

Group b

Poor Revegetation

Potential g


Hydric Soil b

Prime Farmland i

1688.07 1688.15 Ba 2 60 5 Yes Slight 6 No No Yes N
























From Milepost

To Milepost

Map Unit Symbol a

Percent Slope b

Depth to Bedrock

(inches) b c




Wind Erodibility

Group b

Poor Revegetation

Potential g


Hydric Soil b

Prime Farmland i














Madison Loop 8.57 8.63 SafB 4 >=80 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

8.63 8.90 PHG N/A N/A 8 No NR 8 N/A N/A No N

8.90 8.91 SafB 4 >=80 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

8.91 8.93 SadC 8 >=80 3 No Moderate 5 No No No SWI

8.93 8.95 DocB 3 >=80 2 No Slight 2 No No No SWI


9.24 9.27 SacC 8 >=80 3 No Moderate 5 No No No SWI




From Milepost

To Milepost

Map Unit Symbol a

Percent Slope b

Depth to Bedrock

(inches) b c




Wind Erodibility

Group b

Poor Revegetation

Potential g


Hydric Soil b

Prime Farmland i

9.47 9.77 UR 1 N/A 8 N/A NR N/A N/A Yes N/A N

9.77 9.77 PssA 1 >=80 7 No Slight 1 No No No N



10.05 10.32 EveD 13 >=80 7 No Moderate 1 Yes No No N

10.32 10.40 PsuB 4 >=80 7 No Slight 1 No No No N


10.87 11.02 PdwAv 1 >=80 8 Yes Slight 8 No No Yes UI











11.89 12.00 DouC 8 >=80 3 No Moderate 2 No No No N



From Milepost

To Milepost

Map Unit Symbol a

Percent Slope b

Depth to Bedrock

(inches) b c




Wind Erodibility

Group b

Poor Revegetation

Potential g


Hydric Soil b

Prime Farmland i

Raritan Bay Loop 12.00 12.13 DouC 8 >=80 3 No Moderate 2 No No No N

12.13 12.16 EveD 13 >=80 7 No Moderate 1 Yes No No N Note: There are small discrepancies due to rounding. a Map unit names and descriptions are located in Appendix 7C. b As identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database. c Where no bedrock is found within 79 inches of the surface, bedrock depth is assumed to be greater than or equal to 80 inches (>=80) d Land capability classes are defined as follows

Class 1 – soils with moderate limitations that restrict their use Class 2 – soils with moderate limitations that reduce the choice of plants or that require moderate conservation practices Class 3 – soils with severe limitations that reduce the choice of plants or that require moderate conservation practices, or both Class 4 – soils with very severe limitations that reduce the choice of plants or that require very careful management Class 5 – soils that are not likely to erode but have other limitations that limit their use, impractical to remove Class 6 – soils that have severe limitations that make them generally unsuitable for cultivation Class 7 – soils that have very severe limitations that make them unsuitable for cultivation Class 8 – soils with limitations that preclude their use for commercial plant production and restrict their use to recreation, wildlife, or water supply or to aesthetic purposes

e Compaction Potential: Soils with "Yes" compaction potential are those with more than 18 percent % clay in the surface horizon with somewhat poorly drained or wetter drainage class, as identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database.

f Erosion Potential: NRCS rating for the relative hazard of erosion of soil by water that may result from construction of forest roads and trails, as identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database. g Poor Revegetation Potential: Soils with poor revegetation potential are those with greater than 15 percent % slopes or with a land capability class of 4 or 7, as identified by the USDA NRCS

SSURGO database. h Stony/Rocky Soils: Soils that have a risk for introducing large rocks into the topsoil are those with 15 percent % or more percent by weight of the surface horizon occupied by rock fragments greater

than 3 inches in size or soils with bedrock within 39 inches of the surface, as identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database and USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey. I Prime Farmland Soils: Y=Yes; N=No; SWI=statewide importance; UI= unique importance; NR= not rated Key: N/A = Not applicable NR = Not Rated


Table 7B-2 Construction and Operation Impacts on Soils at the Pipeline Facilities

Constructiona Operationa

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Construction

ROW (acres)

HDD Tracking

Wires (foot traffic only)

(acres)

Mainline Valves and

Tie-in Assemblies

(acres)

Contractor Yards (acres)

ATWS (acres)

Temporary Access Roads (acres)

Operational ROW

(acres)

Mainline Valves and

Tie-in Assemblies

(acres)

Permanent Access Roads (acres)

Quarryville Loop

Ba Baile silt loam 3.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.52 0.00 0.00

CbA Chester silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes

5.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.61 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.00

CbB Chester silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes

32.41 0.00 0.82 8.99 14.23 0.68 6.83 0.30 0.00

CbC Chester silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes

10.71 1.39 0.00 0.24 6.11 0.38 2.87 0.00 0.00

GbB Glenelg silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes

16.23 0.00 0.32 0.00 10.11 0.31 4.09 0.32 0.07

GbC Glenelg silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes

12.00 0.31 0.00 0.64 5.80 0.64 2.51 0.00 0.00

GbD Glenelg silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes

4.36 0.96 0.00 0.00 2.45 0.00 1.13 0.00 0.00

GdB Glenville silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes

9.59 0.00 0.32 5.15 4.76 0.14 2.00 0.14 0.07

MaB Manor silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes

8.13 0.00 0.00 3.17 3.65 0.16 1.78 0.00 0.00

MaC Manor silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes

5.09 0.00 0.00 0.14 2.36 0.11 1.09 0.00 0.00

MaD Manor silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes

2.32 0.00 0.00 2.95 0.47 0.02 0.57 0.00 0.00

MbD Manor very stony silt loam, 8 to 25 percent slopes

0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00





ROW (acres)

HDD Tracking


(acres)

Mainline Valves and

Tie-in Assemblies

(acres)


ATWS (acres)


Operational ROW

(acres)

Mainline Valves and

Tie-in Assemblies

(acres)


MbF Manor very stony silt loam, 25 to 60 percent slopes

4.12 0.12 0.00 0.38 0.78 0.00 1.23 0.00 0.00

Nd Newark silt loam, schist substratum

0.23 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00

Ud Udorthents, loamy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.52 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00

W Water <0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Madison Loop DocB Downer loamy sand,

0 to 5 percent slopes 0.88 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00

DouC Downer-Urban land complex, 5 to 10 percent slopes

0.82 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.25 0.07 0.00 0.16 0.07

EveD Evesboro sand, 10 to 15 percent slopes

8.18 0.00 <0.01 0.00 2.82 <0.01 0.10 <0.01 0.00

HbmkB Hammonton loamy sand, clayey substratum, 0 to 5 percent slopes

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00

HumAt Humaquepts, 0 to 3 percent slopes, frequently flooded

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

PdwAv Pawcatuck-Transquaking complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes, very frequently flooded

2.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 1.64 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00





ROW (acres)

HDD Tracking


(acres)

Mainline Valves and

Tie-in Assemblies

(acres)


ATWS (acres)


Operational ROW

(acres)

Mainline Valves and

Tie-in Assemblies

(acres)


PHG Pits, sand and gravel

7.49 0.74 0.07 0.00 3.21 0.93 1.79 0.03 0.00

PssA Psamments, 0 to 3 percent slopes

1.42 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.84 0.01 0.00 0.00

PsuB Psamments, waste substratum, 0 to 8 percent slopes

0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00

SacC Sassafras sandy loam, 5 to 10 percent slopes

0.04 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00

SadC Sassafras gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 10 percent slopes

0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.95 0.22 0.21 0.00 0.00

SafB Sassafras loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes

0.71 0.00 0.19 0.00 1.49 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00

UR Urban land 1.63 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.80 0.03 0.00 0.00

WATER Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 <0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

WoekA Woodstown sandy loam, clayey substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes

0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00

WoekB Woodstown sandy loam, clayey substratum, 2 to 5 percent slopes

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00





ROW (acres)

HDD Tracking


(acres)

Mainline Valves and

Tie-in Assemblies

(acres)


ATWS (acres)


Operational ROW

(acres)

Mainline Valves and

Tie-in Assemblies

(acres)


Raritan Bay Loop (Onshore) DouC Downer-Urban land

complex, 5 to 10 percent slopes

0.85 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

EveD Evesboro sand, 10 to 15 percent slopes

0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

UR Urban land 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 a Values may not exactly reflect the impact acreages reported in RR1 due to rounding error.


Table 7B-3 Construction and Operation Impacts on Soils at Compressor Station 206 and 200

Construction Operation

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name

Construction Footprint (acres)


ATWS (acres)


Operational Footprint

(acres)


Compressor Station 206

EkbA Elkton silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 1.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.00

KepA Keyport silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 12.81 0.00 0.00 3.78 8.32 3.78

MopCb Mount Lucas-Watchung silt loams, 6 to 12 percent slopes, very stony

0.00 0.00 0.00 2.55 0.00 2.55

NehB Neshaminy silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00

WasA Watchung silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.48 0.00 1.48


ClB Clarksburg silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 7.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

CtA Conestoga silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

UrgB Urban land-Conestoga complex, 0 to 8 percent slopes 21.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.22 0.00


Table 7B-4 Permanent Impacts on Soils: Aboveground Facilities Larger than 5 Acres

County Map Unit

Symbol a

Temporary Impacts (acres)

Permanent Impacts (acres)

Percent Slope b

Depth to Bedrock

(inches) b c




Wind Erodibility

Group b

Poor Revegetation

Potential g

Stony/Rocky Soils h

Hydric Soil b

Important Farmland i

Percentage of Soil

Component


Somerset EkbA 1.56 0.51 1 >=80 3 Yes Severe 5 No No Yes SWI, if drained

7%

Somerset KepA 16.59 12.10 1 >=80 2 No Severe 5 No No No N 74%

Somerset MopCb 2.55 2.55 7 48 6 No Moderate 6 No No Partiallyj N 11%

Somerset NehB 0.17 0.09 4 48 2 No Severe 5 No No No N 1%

Somerset WasA 1.48 1.48 4 >=80 5 Yes Severe 6 No No Yes N 7%


Chester ClB 7.43 0.00 6 60 2 No Severe 5 No No No Y 22%

Chester CtA 0.02 0.00 2 60 1 No Severe 6 No No No Y >0%

Chester UrgB 21.48 4.22 4 60 2 No NR 8 No No No N 78% a Map unit names and descriptions are located in Appendix 7C. b As identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database c Where no bedrock is found within 79 inches of the surface, bedrock depth is assumed to be greater than or equal to 80 inches (>=80) d Land capability classes are defined as follows:


e Compaction Potential: Soils with "Yes" compaction potential are those with more than 18 percent clay in the surface horizon with somewhat poorly drained or wetter drainage class, as identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database.

f Erosion Potential: NRCS rating for the relative hazard of erosion of soil by water that may result from construction of forest roads and trails, as identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database. g Poor Revegetation Potential: Soils with poor revegetation potential are those with greater than 15 percent slopes or with a land capability class of 4 or 7, as identified by the USDA NRCS

SSURGO database. h Stony/Rocky Soils: Soils that have a risk for introducing large rocks into the topsoil are those with 15 percent or more percent by weight of the surface horizon occupied by rock fragments

greater than 3 inches in size or soils with bedrock within 39 inches of the surface, as identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database and USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey. I Prime Farmland Soils: Y=Yes; N=No; SWI=statewide importance; UI= unique importance; NR= not rated j Partially Hydric Soil: where 33% to <66% of the soil component is classified as hydric


Table 7B-5 Soil Characteristics: Temporary and Permanent Impacts on Soils from Pipeline Facilities

State County Map Unit

Symbol a Soil Map Unit

Temporary Impacts (acres) j

HDD Tracking Wires (foot traffic

only) (acres) j

Permanent Impacts (acres) j

Percent Slope b

Depth to Bedrock

(inches) b c




Wind Erodibility

Group b

Poor Revegetation

Potential g


Hydric Soil b

Prime Farmland i

Quarryville Loop

PA Lancaster Ba Baile silt loam 3.49 0.00 0.52 2 60 5 Yes Slight 6 No No Yes N

PA Lancaster CbA Chester silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 6.66 0.00 0.87 3 >=80 1 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

PA Lancaster CbB Chester silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 57.13 0.00 7.13 4 >=80 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

PA Lancaster CbC Chester silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 17.45 1.39 2.87 12 >=80 3 No Severe 5 No No No SWI

PA Lancaster GbB Glenelg silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 26.97 0.00 4.48 6 >=80 2 No Moderate 6 No No No Y

PA Lancaster GbC Glenelg silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 19.08 0.31 2.51 12 72 3 No Severe 6 No No No SWI

PA Lancaster GbD Glenelg silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 6.81 0.96 1.13 20 72 4 No Severe 6 Yes No No N

PA Lancaster GdB Glenville silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 19.96 0.00 2.21 6 >=80 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

PA Lancaster MaB Manor silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 15.11 0.00 1.78 6 72 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

PA Lancaster MaC Manor silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 7.70 0.00 1.09 12 72 3 No Severe 5 No No No SWI

PA Lancaster MaD Manor silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 5.76 0.00 0.57 20 72 4 No Severe 5 Yes No No N

PA Lancaster MbD Manor very stony silt loam, 8 to 25 percent slopes 0.60 0.00 0.26 17 72 6 No Severe 6 Yes Yes No N

PA Lancaster MbF Manor very stony silt loam, 25 to 60 percent slopes 5.27 0.12 1.23 43 72 7 No Severe 6 Yes Yes No N

PA Lancaster Nd Newark silt loam, schist substratum 0.26 0.62 0.06 2 60 2 Yes Slight 5 No No No SWI

PA Lancaster Ud Udorthents, loamy 2.08 0.00 0.00 6 72 7 No Severe 5 Yes No No N

PA Lancaster W Water 0.03 0.00 0.00 0 N/A N/A N/A NR N/A N/A N/A N/A N

Madison Loop

NJ Middlesex DocB Downer loamy sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes 1.51 0.04 0.18 3 >=80 2 No Slight 2 No No No SWI

NJ Middlesex DouC Downer-Urban land complex, 5 to 10 percent slopes 1.30 0.00 0.23 8 >=80 3 No Moderate 2 No No No N

NJ Middlesex EveD Evesboro sand, 10 to 15 percent slopes 11.00 0.00 0.10 13 >=80 7 No Moderate 1 Yes No No N

NJ Middlesex HbmkB Hammonton loamy sand, clayey substratum, 0 to 5 percent slopes

0.13 0.00 0.00 1 >=80 2 No Moderate 2 No No No SWI

NJ Middlesex HumAt Humaquepts, 0 to 3 percent slopes, frequently flooded

0.18 0.00 0.00 1 >=80 5 No Severe 8 No No Yes N

NJ Middlesex PdwAv Pawcatuck-Transquaking complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes, very frequently flooded

4.24 0.60 0.26 1 >=80 8 Yes Slight 8 No No Yes UI

NJ Middlesex PHG Pits, sand and gravel 11.71 0.74 1.82 N/A N/A 8 No NR 8 N/A N/A No N

NJ Middlesex PssA Psamments, 0 to 3 percent slopes 3.01 0.14 0.01 1 >=80 7 No Slight 1 No No No N

NJ Middlesex PsuB Psamments, waste substratum, 0 to 8 percent slopes

1.37 0.00 0.00 4 >=80 7 No Slight 1 No No No N

NJ Middlesex SacC Sassafras sandy loam, 5 to 10 percent slopes 0.12 0.07 0.03 7 >=80 3 No Moderate 3 No No No SWI

NJ Middlesex SadC Sassafras gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 10 percent slopes

1.38 0.00 0.21 8 >=80 3 No Moderate 5 No No No SWI

NJ Middlesex SafB Sassafras loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes 2.39 0.00 0.19 4 >=80 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

NJ Middlesex UR Urban land 2.98 0.89 0.03 1 N/A 8 N/A NR N/A N/A Yes N/A N

NJ Middlesex WATER Water <0.01 0.00 0.00 0 N/A N/A N/A NR N/A N/A N/A N/A N


Table 7B-5 Soil Characteristics: Temporary and Permanent Impacts on Soils from Pipeline Facilities

State County Map Unit


Temporary Impacts (acres) j

HDD Tracking Wires (foot traffic

only) (acres) j

Permanent Impacts (acres) j

Percent Slope b

Depth to Bedrock

(inches) b c




Wind Erodibility

Group b

Poor Revegetation

Potential g


Hydric Soil b

Prime Farmland i

NJ Middlesex WoekA Woodstown sandy loam, clayey substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes

0.80 0.00 0.00 1 >=80 2 No Moderate 3 No No No Y

NJ Middlesex WoekB Woodstown sandy loam, clayey substratum, 2 to 5 percent slopes

0.26 0.00 0.00 4 >=80 2 No Moderate 3 No No No Y

Raritan Bay Loop (Onshore) NJ Middlesex DouC Downer-Urban land complex, 5 to 10 percent slopes 1.74 0.41 0.00 8 >=80 3 No Moderate 2 No No No N

NJ Middlesex EveD Evesboro sand, 10 to 15 percent slopes 0.00 0.18 0.00 13 >=80 7 No Moderate 1 Yes No No N

NJ Union UR Urban land 5.48 0.00 0.00 1 N/A 8 N/A NR N/A N/A Yes N/A N a Map unit names and descriptions are located in Appendix 7C. b As identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database. c Where no bedrock is found within 79 inches of the surface, bedrock depth is assumed to be greater than or equal to 80 inches (>=80) d Land capability classes are defined as follows:


e Compaction Potential: Soils with "Yes" compaction potential are those with more than 18 percent % clay in the surface horizon with somewhat poorly drained or wetter drainage class, as identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database. f Erosion Potential: NRCS rating for the relative hazard of erosion of soil by water that may result from construction of forest roads and trails, as identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database. g Poor Revegetation Potential: Soils with poor revegetation potential are those with greater than 15 percent % slopes or with a land capability class of 4 or 7, as identified by the USDA NRCS SSURGO database. h Stony/Rocky Soils: Soils that have a risk for introducing large rocks into the topsoil are those with 15 percent % or more percent by weight of the surface horizon occupied by rock fragments greater than 3 inches in size or soils with bedrock within 39 inches of the surface, as identified in USDA NRCS

SSURGO database and USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey. I Prime Farmland Soils: Y=Yes; N=No; SWI=statewide importance; UI= unique importance; NR= not rated j Values may not exactly reflect the impact acreages reported in RR1 due to rounding error.

Key: N/A = Not applicable NR = Not Rated


Table 7B-6

Soil Characteristics: Temporary and Permanent Impacts on Soils from Contractor Yards

Contractor Yard ID

Map Unit


Temporary Impacts (acres)j

Permanent Impacts (acres)

Percent Slope b

Depth to Bedrock

(inches) b c




Wind Erodibility

Group b

Poor Revegetation

Potential g


Hydric Soil b

Prime Farmland i

Quarryville Loop

QUAR-CY-LA-1-001 CbB Chester silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 1.31 0.00 4 >=80 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

CbC Chester silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 0.24 0.00 12 >=80 3 No Severe 5 No No No SWI

GdB Glenville silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 5.15 0.00 6 >=80 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

MaB Manor silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 3.17 0.00 6 72 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

MaC Manor silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 0.14 0.00 12 72 3 No Severe 5 No No No SWI

MaD Manor silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 2.70 0.00 20 72 4 No Severe 5 Yes No No N


GbC Glenelg silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 0.64 0.00 12 72 3 No Severe 6 No No No SWI

MaD Manor silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 0.25 0.00 20 72 4 No Severe 5 Yes No No N

MbF Manor very stony silt loam, 25 to 60 percent slopes

0.38 0.00 43 72 7 No Severe 6 Yes Yes No N


Raritan Bay Loop (Onshore) ATWS-RBL-001 UR Urban land 5.48 0.00 1 N/A 8 N/A NR N/A N/A Yes N/A N Note: There are no Contractor Yards associated with the Madison Loop. a Map unit names and descriptions are located in Appendix 7C. b As identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database. c Where no bedrock is found within 79 inches of the surface, bedrock depth is assumed to be greater than or equal to 80 inches (>=80) d Land capability classes are defined as follows:


e Compaction Potential: Soils with "Yes" compaction potential are those with more than 18 percent % clay in the surface horizon with somewhat poorly drained or wetter drainage class, as identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database f Erosion Potential: NRCS rating for the relative hazard of erosion of soil by water that may result from construction of forest roads and trails, as identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database. g Poor Revegetation Potential: Soils with poor revegetation potential are those with greater than 15 percent % slopes or with a land capability class of 4 or 7, as identified by the USDA NRCS SSURGO database. h Stony/Rocky Soils: Soils that have a risk for introducing large rocks into the topsoil are those with 15 percent % or more percent by weight of the surface horizon occupied by rock fragments greater than 3 inches in size or soils with bedrock within 39 inches of the surface, as identified in USDA

NRCS SSURGO database and USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey. I Prime Farmland Soils: Y=Yes; N=No; SWI=statewide importance; UI= unique importance; NR= not rated j Values may not exactly reflect the impact acreages reported in RR1 due to rounding error. Key: N/A = Not applicable NR = Not Rated


Table 7B-7 Soil Characteristics: Temporary and Permanent Impacts on Soils from Access Roads

Access Road Name

Map Unit


Temporary Impacts (acres)k

Permanent Impacts (acres) k

Percent Slope b

Depth to Bedrock

(inches) b c




Wind Erodibility

Group b

Poor Revegetation

Potential g


Hydric Soil b

Prime Farmland i

Quarryville Loop AR-LA-001 CbB Chester silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 0.05 0.00 4 >=80 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

AR-LA-001 GbC Glenelg silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 0.18 0.00 12 72 3 No Severe 6 No No No SWI

AR-LA-001 Ud Udorthents, loamy 0.09 0.00 6 72 7 No Severe 5 Yes No No N

AR-LA-002 CbB Chester silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 0.35 0.00 4 >=80 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y



AR-LA-003 CbC Chester silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 0.27 0.00 12 >=80 3 No Severe 5 No No No SWI

AR-LA-003 GbB Glenelg silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 0.10 0.00 6 >=80 2 No Moderate 6 No No No Y


AR-LA-003 MaC Manor silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 0.09 0.00 12 72 3 No Severe 5 No No No SWI


AR-LA-004 MaB Manor silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 0.16 0.00 6 72 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

AR-LA-004 MaC Manor silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 0.03 0.00 12 72 3 No Severe 5 No No No SWI

AR-LA-004 MaD Manor silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 0.02 0.00 20 72 4 No Severe 5 Yes No No N



AR-LA-007 GdB Glenville silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 0.08 0.00 6 >=80 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

AR-LA-008 CbC Chester silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 0.11 0.00 12 >=80 3 No Severe 5 No No No SWI



AR-LA-010 Ud Udorthents, loamy 0.47 0.00 6 72 7 No Severe 5 Yes No No N

AR-LA-011 GdB Glenville silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes 0.07 0.07 6 >=80 2 No Moderate 5 No No No Y

Madison Loop

AR-MS-001 HbmkB Hammonton loamy sand, clayey substratum, 0 to 5 percent slopes 0.13 0.00 1 >=80 2 No Moderate 2 No No No SWI

AR-MS-001 PHG Pits, sand and gravel 0.79 0.00 N/A N/A 8 No NR 8 N/A N/A No N

AR-MS-001 SadC Sassafras gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 10 percent slopes 0.22 0.00 8 >=80 3 No Moderate 5 No No No SWI

AR-MS-001 WoekA Woodstown sandy loam, clayey substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes 0.10 0.00 1 >=80 2 No Moderate 3 No No No Y

AR-MS-002 WoekA Woodstown sandy loam, clayey substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes 0.12 0.00 1 >=80 2 No Moderate 3 No No No Y

AR-MS-003 PHG Pits, sand and gravel 0.14 0.00 N/A N/A 8 No NR 8 N/A N/A No N

AR-MS-004 PssA Psamments, 0 to 3 percent slopes 0.01 0.00 1 >=80 7 No Slight 1 No No No N

AR-MS-004 UR Urban land 0.34 0.00 1 N/A 8 N/A NR N/A N/A Yes N/A N

AR-MS-005 EveD Evesboro sand, 10 to 15 percent slopes <0.01 0.00 13 >=80 7 No Moderate 1 Yes No No N


Table 7B-7 Soil Characteristics: Temporary and Permanent Impacts on Soils from Access Roads

Access Road Name

Map Unit


Temporary Impacts (acres)k

Permanent Impacts (acres) k

Percent Slope b

Depth to Bedrock

(inches) b c




Wind Erodibility

Group b

Poor Revegetation

Potential g


Hydric Soil b

Prime Farmland i

AR-MS-005 PssA Psamments, 0 to 3 percent slopes 0.82 0.00 1 >=80 7 No Slight 1 No No No N

AR-MS-005 PsuB Psamments, waste substratum, 0 to 8 percent slopes 0.23 0.00 4 >=80 7 No Slight 1 No No No N

AR-MS-005 UR Urban land 0.46 0.00 1 N/A 8 N/A NR N/A N/A Yes N/A N

AR-MS-006 DouC Downer-Urban land complex, 5 to 10 percent slopes 0.07 0.07 8 >=80 3 No Moderate 2 No No No N

Compressor Station 206 AR-CS206 KepA Keyport silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 3.78 3.78 1 >=80 2 No Severe 5 No No No N

AR-CS206 MopCb Mount Lucas-Watchung silt loams, 6 to 12 percent slopes, very stony

2.55 2.55 7 48 6 No Moderate 6 No No Partiallyj N

AR-CS206 WasA Watchung silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

1.48 1.48 4 >=80 5 Yes Severe 6 No No Yes

a Map unit names and descriptions are located in Appendix 7C. b As identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database c Where no bedrock is found within 79 inches of the surface, bedrock depth is assumed to be greater than or equal to 80 inches (>=80) d Land capability classes are defined as follows:


e Compaction Potential: Soils with "Yes" compaction potential are those with more than 18 percent clay in the surface horizon with somewhat poorly drained or wetter drainage class, as identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database. f Erosion Potential: NRCS rating for the relative hazard of erosion of soil by water that may result from construction of forest roads and trails, as identified in USDA NRCS SSURGO database. g Poor Revegetation Potential: Soils with poor revegetation potential are those with greater than 15 percent slopes or with a land capability class of 4 or 7, as identified by the USDA NRCS SSURGO database. h Stony/Rocky Soils: Soils that have a risk for introducing large rocks into the topsoil are those with 15 percent or more percent by weight of the surface horizon occupied by rock fragments greater than 3 inches in size or soils with bedrock within 39 inches of the surface, as identified in USDA

NRCS SSURGO database and USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey. I Prime Farmland Soils: Y=Yes; N=No; SWI=statewide importance; UI= unique importance; NR= not rated j Partially Hydric Soil: where 33% to <66% of the soil component is classified as hydric k Values may not exactly reflect the impact acreages reported in RR1 due to rounding error.


Table 7B-8 Summary of Sediment Grab Sample Results

Station Easting (ft) NYSP LI NAD83

Northing (ft) NYSP LI NAD83 Sediment Description

VC1-ALT 912892.97 110104.58 Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines - Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures

VC2 914618.41 110944.23 Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines - Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures

VC3-ALT 916545.29 112042.94 Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts

VC4 918096.17 112926.19 Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts




VC8 925043.57 116883.09 Silty gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures

VC9 926783.06 117875.85 Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures



VC12 931997.47 120844.58 Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures







VC19 937799.74 124058.08 Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays







VC26 951088.68 124394.69 Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines









VC31-ALT 960092.75 128929.11 Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines - Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures


VC33-ALT 963524.37 130901.36 Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines








VC41-ALT 974204.34 974204.34 Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures
























Table 7B-9 Summary of Sediment Core Results: Sediment Types

Location Latitude (WSG 84)

Longitude (WGS 84) State Depth

(feet) Sediment Types

Deep Core (boring)

BHA3 40.4661221 -74.26199 NJ -1.2 Poorly graded sand, silty and clayey sand, poorly graded sand with silt, inorganic silt with low plasticity, lean inorganic clay with low plasticity, elastic inorganic silt with moderate to high plasticity

BHA4 40.4667565 -74.260539 NJ -2.5 Poorly graded sand, poorly graded sand with silt, elastic inorganic silt with moderate to high plasiticity, lean inorganic clay with low plasticity, inorganic sitly with low plasticity

BHA5 40.4674384 -74.258979 NJ -3.1 Poorly graded sand with silt, organic silt or clay with moderate to high plasticity, poorly graded sand, lean inorganic clay with low plasticity - inorganic silt with low plasticity, lean inorganic clay with low plasticity, sitly sand

BHA6-ALT 40.4682146 -74.257285 NJ -6.2 Poorly graded sand with silt, silty sand, elastic inorganic silt with moderate to high plascicity, clayey sand and silty sand, inorganic silt with low plasticity

BHA7-ALT 40.4688374 -74.255837 NJ -9.2 Fat inorganic clay with moderate to high plasticity, silty sand, poorly graded sand, well-graded sand with silt, inorganic silt with low plasticity

BHA8 40.5041537 -73.966412 NJ 0 Poorly graded sand with silt, well-graded sand with silt, inorganic silt with low plasticity

BHA9-ALT 40.4703727 -74.252342 NJ -8.1 Poorly graded sand with silt, lean inorganic clay with low porosity, silty sand, fat inorganic clay with moderate to high plasticity

BHA10 40.50403 -73.967324 NJ -40.218 Poorly graded sand with silt, silty sand, fat inorganic clay with moderate to high plasticity, poorly graded sand, lean inorganic clay with low plasticity

BHA11 40.5039909 -73.965562 NJ -44.828 Silty sand, lean inorganic clay with low plasticity, fat inorganic clay with moderate to high plasticity, inorganic silt with low plasticity, poorly graded sand, poorly graded sand with silt

BHA12 40.5049667 -73.964348 NJ -67.197 Poorly graded sand, lean inorganic clay with low plasticity, fat inorganic clay with moderate to high plasticity, inorganic silt with low plasticity, elastic inorganic silt with moderate to high plasticity

BHA13 40.5054914 -73.96268 NJ -69.78 Poorly graded sand with silt, fat inorganic clay with moderate to high plasticity, lean inorganic clay with low plasticity, inorganic silt with low plasticity






BHA14 40.5059033 -73.961371 NJ -69.001 Poorly graded sand, inorganic silt with low plasticity, elastic inorganic silt with moderate to high plasticity, fat inorganic clay with moderate to high plasticity

BHA15 40.5062293 -73.960524 NJ -69.948 Poorly graded sand with silt, sitly sand, inorganic silt with low plasticity, elastic inorganic silt with moderate to high plasticity

BHA16 40.5072655 -73.95757 NJ -69.872 Poorly graded sand, poorly graded sand with silt, silty sand, fat inorganic clay with modferate to high plasticity, lean inorganic clay with low plasticity

BHA17 40.5046201 -73.965346 NJ 0 Well-graded sand with silt, poorly graded sand with clay, lean inorganic clay with low plasticity, fat inorganic clay with moderate to high plasticity

BHA18 40.5077764 -73.955418 NJ -18.439 Poorly graded sand, poorly graded sand with silt, well-graded sand with silt, silty sand

BHA19 40.507737 -73.953656 NJ -16.306 Poorly graded sand, poorly graded sand with silt

Shallow Core (Vibracore)

VC1-ALT 40.4684751 -74.256647 NJ -7.565 TBD

VC2 40.4709043 -74.250259 NJ -8.549 TBD

VC3-ALT 40.4739328 -74.243344 NJ -9.695 TBD

VC4 40.47637 -74.237777 NJ -10.786 TBD

VC5 40.4790998 -74.231542 NY -11.641 TBD

VC6 40.4818302 -74.225304 NY -12.7639 TBD

VC7 40.4845618 -74.219061 NY -13.8028 TBD

VC8 40.4872855 -74.212836 NY -14.8417 TBD

VC9 40.4900162 -74.206593 NY -15.8806 TBD

VC10 40.4927457 -74.200352 NY -16.9195 TBD

VC11 40.4954727 -74.194115 NY -17.9584 TBD

VC12 40.4982015 -74.187873 NY -18.9973 TBD

VC13 40.500929 -74.181632 NY -20.0362 TBD

VC14 40.5024717 -74.178102 NY -21.0751 TBD

VC15 40.5032858 -74.176237 NY -22.114 TBD

VC16 40.5040566 -74.174471 NY -23.1529 TBD

VC17 40.5051959 -74.171867 NY -24.1918 TBD

VC18 40.5059681 -74.170079 NY -25.2307 TBD

VC19 40.5070488 -74.167031 NY -26.2696 TBD

VC20 40.5081227 -74.162337 NY -27.3085 TBD






VC21 40.5085665 -74.155187 NY -28.3474 TBD

VC22 40.5083918 -74.147998 NY -29.3863 TBD

VC23 40.5082167 -74.14081 NY -30.4252 TBD

VC24 40.5080411 -74.133621 NY -31.4641 TBD

VC25 40.5078651 -74.126433 NY -32.503 TBD

VC26 40.5080331 -74.119256 NY -33.5419 TBD

VC27 40.5094934 -74.112343 NY -34.5808 TBD

VC28 40.5120776 -74.106004 NY -35.6197 TBD

VC29 40.514823 -74.099775 NY -36.6586 TBD

VC30 40.5175681 -74.093546 NY -37.6975 TBD

VC31-ALT 40.5205057 -74.086879 NY -38.7364 TBD

VC32 40.5230572 -74.081086 NY -39.7753 TBD

VC33-ALT 40.5259324 -74.07454 NY -40.8142 TBD

VC34 40.5279315 -74.068241 NY -41.8531 TBD

VC35 40.5288984 -74.061174 NY -42.892 TBD

VC36 40.5286526 -74.054002 NY -43.9309 TBD

VC37 40.5274735 -74.046977 NY -44.9698 TBD

VC38 40.5268341 -74.043371 NY -46.0087 TBD

VC39 40.5264488 -74.041158 NY -47.0476 TBD

VC40 40.5261251 -74.039373 NY -48.0865 TBD

VC41-ALT 40.5254534 -74.036149 NY -49.1254 TBD

VC42 40.52454 -74.033142 NY -50.1643 TBD

VC43 40.5216309 -74.027063 NY -51.2032 TBD

VC44 40.5173477 -74.021425 NY -52.2421 TBD

VC45-ALT 40.5130556 -74.016094 NJ -53.281 TBD

VC46 40.5097517 -74.011992 NJ -54.3199 TBD

VC47 40.5060574 -74.006768 NJ -55.3588 TBD

VC48-ALT 40.5030082 -74.000169 NJ -56.3977 TBD

VC49 40.5015291 -73.995029 NJ -57.4366 TBD

VC50 40.5005757 -73.988667 NJ -58.4755 TBD

VC51 40.5005404 -73.981704 NJ -59.5144 TBD

VC52 40.5017451 -73.973943 NJ -60.5533 TBD

VC53 40.5027563 -73.970427 NJ -61.5922 TBD

VC54 40.5037762 -73.967187 NJ -62.6311 TBD

VC55 40.5079908 -73.953793 NJ -63.67 TBD

VC56 40.5099247 -73.947645 NY -64.7089 TBD






VC57 40.5113181 -73.943213 NY -65.7478 TBD

VC58 40.5133837 -73.934771 NY -66.7867 TBD

VC59 40.5154474 -73.927729 NY -67.8256 TBD

VC60 40.5173662 -73.921185 NY -68.8645 TBD

VC61-ALT 40.5187561 -73.916515 NY -69.9034 TBD

VC62 40.5212458 -73.907949 NY -70.9423 TBD

VC63 40.5232068 -73.901256 NY -71.9812 TBD

VC64 40.5251641 -73.894571 NY -73.0201 TBD

VC65 40.5266206 -73.887209 NY -74.059 TBD

VC66 40.5268629 -73.87961 NY -75.0979 TBD

VC67 40.5259347 -73.872341 NY -76.1368 TBD

VC68 40.524584 -73.865376 NY -77.1757 TBD

VC69-ALT 40.5240778 -73.862787 NY -78.2146 TBD Key: (Additional information regarding sediment types will be provided in a supplemental filing in the 2nd quarter in 2017).


APPENDIX 7C

PROJECT SOIL DESCRIPTIONS


MARCH 2017


Soils Crossed by the Quarryville Loop The soil descriptions below were generated from the SSURGO Database (NRCS 2015).

Ba - Baile silt loam The Baile component makes up 85% of the map unit; slopes are 0% to 3%. This

component is found on depressions and uplands. The parent material consists of local alluvium

over residuum weathered from mica schist. Depth to a root-restrictive layer (lithic bedrock) is 60

to 99 inches, and the natural drainage class is poorly drained. Water movement in the most

restrictive layer is moderately low and available water to a depth of 60 inches is high. Shrink-

swell potential is moderate; the soil is not flooded or ponded. A seasonal zone of water saturation

is at 3 inches during January, February, March, April, November, and December. Organic matter

content in the surface horizon is about 3%, and the non-irrigated land capability classification is

5w. This soil meets hydric criteria and is not classified as prime farmland.

CbA - Chester silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes The Chester component makes up 80% of the map unit; slopes are 0% to 3%. This

component is on hillslopes and upland piedmonts. The parent material consists of residuum

weathered from phyllite. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60 inches, and the natural

drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately high,

and available water to a depth of 60 inches is high. Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is not

flooded or ponded. There is no zone of water saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic

matter content in the surface horizon is about 3%, and the non-irrigated land capability

classification is 1. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified as prime farmland.

CbB - Chester silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes The Chester component makes up 80% of the map unit; slopes are 3% to 8%. This

component is on hillslopes and upland piedmonts. The parent material consists of residuum

weathered from phyllite. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60 inches, and the natural


and available water to a depth of 60 inches is high. Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is not

flooded or ponded. There is no zone of water saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic

matter content in the surface horizon is about 3%, and non-irrigated land capability classification

is 2e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified as prime farmland.


CbC - Chester silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes The Chester component makes up 80% of the map unit; slopes are 8% to 15%. This

component is on hills and uplands of the northern Piedmont Plateau. The parent material consists

of residuum weathered from phyllite. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60 inches and

the natural drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is

moderately high, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is high. Shrink-swell potential is low;

the soil is not flooded or ponded. There is no zone of water saturation within a depth of 72 inches.

Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 3%, and non-irrigated land capability

classification is 3e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified as farmland of

statewide importance.

GbB - Glenelg silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes The Glenelg component makes up 85% of the map unit; slopes are 3% to 8%. This

component is on nearly level to steep dissected hillslopes and upland piedmonts. The parent

material consists of residuum weathered from phyllite. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more

than 60 inches, and the natural drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in the most

restrictive layer is moderately high and available water to a depth of 60 inches is high. Shrink-

swell potential is low; the soil is not flooded or ponded. There is no zone of saturation within a

depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 3%, and non-irrigated

land capability classification is 2e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified as prime

farmland.

GbC - Glenelg silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes The Glenelg component makes up 90% of the map unit; slopes are 8% to 15%. This

component is on nearly level to steep dissected hillslopes and hills. The parent material consists

of residuum weathered from mica schist. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60 inches,

and the natural drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is

moderately high and available water to a depth of 60 inches is high. Shrink-swell potential is low;


Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 3% and non-irrigated land capability

classification is 3e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified as farmland of



GbD - Glenelg silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes The Glenelg component makes up 90% of the map unit; slopes are 15% to 25%. This

component is on nearly level to steep dissected slopes and hills. The parent material consists of

residuum weathered from mica schist. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60 inches

and the natural drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is

moderately high and available water to a depth of 60 inches is high. Shrink-swell potential is low;



classification is 4e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is not classified as prime farmland.

GdB - Glenville silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes The Glenville component makes up 75% of the map unit; slopes are 3% to 8%. This

component is on drainage ways and piedmonts. The parent material consists of colluvium over

schist, gneiss, or phyllite residuum. Depth to a root-restrictive layer—fragipan—is 29 to 31 inches

and the natural drainage class is moderately well-drained. Water movement in the most restrictive

layer is moderately low and available water to a depth of 60 inches is moderate. Shrink-swell

potential is low; the soil is not flooded or ponded. A seasonal zone of water is at 20 inches during

January, February, March, April, November, and December. Organic matter content in the

surface horizon is about 3%, and non-irrigated land capability class is 2e. This soil does not meet

hydric criteria and is classified as prime farmland.

MaB - Manor silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes The Manor component makes up 90% of the map unit; slopes are 3% to 8%. This

component is on nearly level to very steep strongly dissected hills and uplands. The parent

material consists of residuum weathered from mica schist. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is

more than 60 inches and the natural drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in the most


swell potential is low; the soil is not flooded or ponded. There is no zone of water saturation within

a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 3% and non-irrigated

land capability classification is 2e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified as prime

farmland.

MaC - Manor silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes The Manor component makes up 90% of the map unit; slopes are 8% to 15%. This




more than 60 inches, and the natural drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in the most




land capability classification is 3e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified as

farmland of statewide importance.

MaD - Manor silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes The Manor component makes up 90% of the map unit; slopes are 15% to 25%. This



more than 60 inches and the natural drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in the most




land capability classification is 4e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is not classified as

prime farmland.

MbD - Manor very stony silt loam, 8 to 25 percent slopes The Manor very stony component makes up 90% of the map unit; slopes are 8% to 25%.

This component is on nearly level to very steep strongly dissected hills and uplands. The parent


more than 60 inches and the natural drainage class is well--drained. Water movement in the most

restrictive layer is moderately high, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is moderate.

Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is not flooded or ponded. There is no zone of water saturation

within a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 4%, and non-

irrigated land capability classification is 6s. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is not

classified as prime farmland.

MbF - Manor very stony silt loam, 25 to 60 percent slopes The Manor very stony component makes up 90% of the map unit; slopes are 25% to 60%.

This component is on nearly level to very steep strongly dissected hills and uplands. The parent


more than 60 inches, and the natural drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in the most



Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is not flooded or ponded. There is no zone of water saturation

within a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 3%, and non-

irrigated land capability classification is 7s. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is not


Nd - Newark silt loam, schist substratum The Newark component makes up 85% of the map unit; slopes are 0% to 3%. This

component is on depressions, nearly level flood plains, and uplands. The parent material consists

of mixed alluvium derived from limestone, sandstone, and shale. Depth to a root-restrictive layer

(lithic bedrock) is 60 to 99 inches and the natural drainage class is somewhat poorly drained.

Water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately high and available water to a depth of

60 inches is high. Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is occasionally flooded, but it is not

ponded. A seasonal zone of water saturation is at 12 inches during January, February, March,

April, May, and December. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 3%, and non-

irrigated land capability classification is 2w. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified

as farmland of statewide importance.

Ud - Udorthents, loamy The Udorthents, loamy component makes up 90% of the map unit; slopes are 0% to 8%.

This component is found on ridges and uplands. The parent materials consists of graded areas

of loamy sedimentary rock. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60 inches and the natural

drainage class is moderately well-drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is

moderately low and available water to a depth of 60 inches is moderate. Shrink-swell potential is

low; the soil is not flooded or ponded. A seasonal zone of water saturation is at 21 inches during

January, February, March, April, May, June, November, and December. Organic matter content

in the surface horizon is about 1%, and non-irrigated land capability classification is 7s. This soil

does not meet hydric criteria and is not classified as prime farmland.

W - Water Water is not a major soil component and is considered a miscellaneous area. No soil

description is generated for this map unit.

Soils Crossed by the Madison Loop The soil descriptions below were generated from the SSURGO Database (NRCS 2015).


DocB - Downer loamy sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes The Downer component makes up 80% of the map unit; slopes are 0% to 5%. This

component is on knolls, North Atlantic coastal plains, and low hills. The parent material consists

of loamy fluviomarine deposits and/or gravely fluviomarine deposits. Depth to a root-restrictive

layer is more than 60 inches, and the natural drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in

the most restrictive layer is moderately high, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is

moderate. Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is not flooded or ponded. There is no zone of

water saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is

about 1%, and non-irrigated land capability classification is 2s. This soil does not meet hydric

criteria and is classified as farmland of statewide importance.

DouC - Downer-Urban land complex, 5 to 10 percent slopes The Downer component makes up 60% of the map units; slopes are 5% to 10%. This

component is on low hills on coastal plains. The parent material consists of loamy fluviomarine

deposits and/or gravelly fluviomarine deposits. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60

inches, and the natural drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in the most restrictive

layer is moderately high, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is low. Shrink-swell potential

is low; the soil is not flooded or ponded. A seasonal zone of water saturation is at 72 inches year-

round. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 1%, and non-irrigated land

capability classification is 3e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is not classified as prime

farmland.

EveD - Evesboro sand, 10 to 15 percent slopes The Evesboro component makes up 95% of the map unit; slopes are 10% to 15%. This

component is on dunes, coastal plains, and low hills. The parent material consists of sandy

aeolian deposits and/or sandy fluviomarine deposits. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than

60 inches, and the natural drainage class is excessively drained. Water movement in the most

restrictive layer is high, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is low. Shrink-swell potential

is low; the soil is not flooded or ponded. There is no zone of water saturation within a depth of 72

inches. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 1%, and non-irrigated land

capability classification is 7s. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is not classified as prime

farmland.


HbmkB - Hammonton loamy sand, clayey substratum, 0 to 5 percent slopes The Hammonton, clayey substratum component makes up 90% of the map unit; slopes

are 0% to 5%. This component is found on on flats, North Atlantic coastal plains, and depressions.

The parent material consists of coarse-loamy fluviomarine deposits over clayey estuarine

deposits. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60 inches, and the natural drainage class

is moderately well-drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is low, and available

water to a depth of 60 inches is moderate. Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is not flooded or


and April. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 1%, and non-irrigated land

capability classification is 2w. The soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified farmland of


HumAt - Humaquepts, 0 to 3 percent slopes, frequently flooded The Humaquepts, frequently flooded component makes up 85% of the map unit; slopes

are 0% to 3%. This component is found on river valleys on North Atlantic coastal plains and flood

plains. The parent material consists of loamy alluvium. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more

than 60 inches, and the natural drainage class is poorly drained. Water movement in the most


Shrink-swell potential is moderate; the soil is frequently flooded and frequently ponded. A

seasonal zone of water saturation is at 6 inches during January, February, March, April, May,

June, November, and December. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 12%,

and non-irrigated land capability classification is 5w. This soil meets hydric criteria and is not


PdwAv - Pawcatuck-Transquaking complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes, very frequently flooded The Pawcatuck, very frequently flooded component makes up 60% of the map unit; slopes

are 0% to 1%. This component is on tidal marshes on coastal plains. The parent material consists

of herbaceous organic material over sandy marine deposits. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is

more than 60 inches, and the natural drainage class is very poorly drained. Water movement in

the most restrictive layer is moderately high, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is very

high. Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is very frequently flooded and frequently ponded. A

seasonal zone of water saturation is at 0 inches year-round. Organic matter content in the surface

horizon is about 55%, and non-irrigated land capability classification is 8w. This soil meets hydric

criteria and is classified as farmland of unique importance. The soil has a strongly saline horizon

within 30 inches of the soil surface.


The Transquaking, very frequently flooded component makes up 25% of the map unit;

slopes are 0% to 1%. This component is on tidal marshes on coastal plains. The parent material

consists of herbaceous organic material over loamy material. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is

more than 60 inches, and the natural drainage class is very poorly drained. Water movement in

the most restrictive layer is moderately low, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is very

high. Shrink-swell potential is moderate; the soil is very frequently flooded and frequently ponded.

A seasonal zone of water saturation is at 0 inches year-round. Organic matter content in the

surface horizon is about 55%, and non-irrigated land capability classification is 8w. This soil

meets hydric criteria and is classified as farmland of unique importance. The soil has a strongly

saline horizon within 30 inches of the soil surface.

PHG - Pits, sand, and gravel Pits, sand, and gravel are not major soil components and are considered miscellaneous

areas. No soil description is generated for this map unit.

PssA - Psamments, 0 to 3 percent slopes The Psamments, nearly level component makes up 85% of the map unit; slopes are 0%

to 3%. This component is on fills and depressions on North Atlantic coastal plains. The parent

material consists of sandy lateral spread deposits. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than

60 inches, and the natural drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in the most restrictive

layer is high and available water to a depth of 60 inches is low. Shrink-swell potential is low; the

soil is not flooded or ponded. A seasonal zone of water saturation is at 48 inches during January,

February, March, April, May, June, November, and December. Organic matter content in the

surface horizon is about 2%, and non-irrigated land capability classification is 7s. The soil does

not meet hydric criteria and is not classified as prime farmland.

PsuB - Psamments, waste substratum, 0 to 8 percent slopes The Psamments, waste substratum component makes up 85% of the map unit; slopes are

0% to 8%. This component is on hills on uplands and fills. The parent material consists of sandy

lateral spread deposits. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60 inches, and the natural


and available water to a depth of 60 inches is very low. Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is

not flooded or ponded. There is no zone of water saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic

matter content in the surface horizon is about 0%, and non-irrigated land capability classification

is 7s. The soil does not meet hydric criteria and is not classified as prime farmland.


SacC - Sassafras sandy loam, 5 to 10 percent slopes The Sassafras component makes up 90% of the map unit; slopes are 5% to 10%. This

component is found on knolls on coastal plains and hillslopes. The parent material consists of

loamy and/or gravelly fluviomarine deposits. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60


layer is moderately high, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is moderate. Shrink-swell

potential is low; the soil is neither flooded or ponded. There is no zone of water saturation within

a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 2%, and non-irrigated

land capability classification is 3e. The soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified as

farmland of statewide importance.

SadC - Sassafras gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 10 percent slopes The Sassafras, eroded component makes up 95% of the map unit; slopes are 5% to 10%.

This component is found on North Atlantic coastal plains, knolls, and low hills. The parent material

consists of loamy and/or gravelly fluviomarine deposits. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more

than 60 inches, and the natural drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in the most


Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is neither flooded nor ponded. There is no zone of water

saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 2%,

and non-irrigated land capability classification is 3e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is

classified as farmland of statewide importance.

SafB - Sassafras loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes The Sassafras component makes up 90% of the map unit; slopes are 2% to 5%. This

component is on hills and knolls on North Atlantic coastal plains. The parent material consists of

old alluvium and/or sandy marine deposits. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60



potential is low; the soil is neither flooded nor ponded. A seasonal zone of water saturation is at

72 inches year-round. Organic matter content at the surface horizon is about 2%, and non-

irrigated land capability classification is 2e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified

as prime farmland.


UR - Urban land Urban land is not a major soil component and is considered a miscellaneous area. No

soil description is generated for this map unit.

WATER - Water Water is not a major soil component and is considered a miscellaneous area. No soil

description is generated for this map unit.

WoekA: Woodstown sandy loam, clayey substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes The Woodstown, clayey substratum component makes up 85% of the map unit; slopes

are 0% to 2%. This component is found on on flats on North Atlantic coastal plains. The parent

material consists of sandy marine deposits and/or old alluvium over clayey estuarine deposits.

Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60 inches, and the natural drainage class is

moderately well-drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately high, and

available water to a depth of 60 inches is moderate. Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is neither

flooded nor ponded. A seasonal zone of water saturation is at 30 inches during January, February,

March, and April. Organic matter content on the surface horizon is about 1%, and non-irrigated

land capability class is 2w. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified as prime

farmland.

WoekB - Woodstown sandy loam, clayey substratum, 2 to 5 percent slopes The Woodstown, clayey substratum component makes up 85% of the map unit; slopes

are 2% to 5%. This component is found on on flats on North Atlantic coastal plains. The parent

material consists of sandy marine deposits and/or old alluvium over clayey estuarine deposits.

Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60 inches, and the natural drainage class is

moderately well-drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately high, and

available water to a depth of 60 inches is moderate. Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is neither

flooded nor ponded. A seasonal zone of water saturation is at 30 inches during January, February,

March, and April. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 1%, and non-irrigated

land capability class is 2w. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified as prime

farmland.

Soils Crossed by the Raritan Bay Loop The soil descriptions below were generated from the SSURGO Database (NRCS 2015).


DouC - Downer-Urban land complex, 5% to 10% slopes The Downer component makes up 60% of the map unit; slopes are 5% to 10%. This

component is on low hills on coastal plains. The parent material consists of loamy fluviomarine

deposits and/or gravelly fluviomarine deposits. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60


layer is moderately high, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is low. Shrink-swell potential

is low; the soil is not flooded or ponded. A seasonal zone of water saturation is at 72 inches year-

round. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 1%, and non-irrigated land

capability classification is 3e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is not classified as prime

farmland.

EveD - Evesboro sand, 10% to 15% slopes The Evesboro component makes up 95% of the map unit; slopes are 10% to 15%. This

component is on dunes, coastal plains, and low hills. The parent material consists of sandy

aeolian deposits and/or sandy fluviomarine deposits. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than

60 inches, and the natural drainage class is excessively drained. Water movement in the most

restrictive layer is high, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is low. Shrink-swell potential

is low; the soil is not flooded or ponded. There is no zone of water saturation within a depth of 72

inches. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 1%, and non-irrigated land

capability classification is 7s. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is not classified as prime

farmland.

Soils within Compressor Station 206 The soil descriptions below were generated from the SSURGO Database (NRCS 2015).

EkbA – Elkton silt loam, 0% 2% The Elkton component makes up 85% of the map unit; slopes are 0% to 2%. This

component is on marine terraces on coastal plains. The parent material consists of silty aeolian

deposits over loamy alluvium and/or loamy marine deposits. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is

more than 60 inches, and the natural drainage class is poorly drained. Water movement in the

most restrictive layer is low, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is high. Shrink-swell

potential is moderate; the soil is not flooded or ponded. A seasonal zone of water saturation is at

6 inches during January, February, March, April, May, November, and December. Organic matter

content in the surface horizon is about 3%, and non-irrigated land capability classification is 3w.

The soil meets hydric criteria and is classified as farmland of statewide importance, if drained.


KepA – Keyport silt loam, 0% to 2% slopes The Keyport component makes up 80% of the map unit; slopes are 0% to 2%. This

component is on knolls on North Atlantic coastal plains. The parent material consists of silty and

clayey aeolian deposits and/or silty and clayey fluviomarine deposits. Depth to a root-restrictive

layer is more than 60 inches, and the natural drainage class is moderately well-drained. Water

movement in the most restrictive layer is very low, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is

high. Shrink-swell potential is moderate; the soil is not flooded or ponded. A seasonal zone of

saturation is at 24 inches during January, February, March, April, May, November, and December.


classification is 2w. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified as prime farmland.

MopCb - Mount Lucas-Watchung silt loams, 6 to 12 percent slopes, very stony The Mount Lucas, very stony component makes up 60% of the map unit; slopes are 6%

to 12%. This component is on hills and piedmonts. The parent material consists of dark-colored

basic rocks or loamy residuum weathered from diabase. Depth to a root-restrictive layer, lithic

bedrock, is 48 to 99 inches below the surface, and the natural drainage class is moderately well-

drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately low, and available water to a

depth of 60 inches is moderate. Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is neither flooded nor


November, and December. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 3%, and non-

irrigated land capability classification is 6s. The soil does not meet hydric criteria and is not


The Watchung, very stony component makes up 40% of the map unit; slopes are 6% to

12%. This component is on depressions on piedmonts. The parent material consists of fine-silty

residuum weathered from diabase. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is morethan 60 inches, and

the natural drainage class is poorly drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is very

low, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is high. Shrink-swell potential is moderate; the

soil neither flooded nor ponded. A seasonal zone of water saturation is at 6 inches during January,

February, Match, April, May, June, and December. Organic matter content in the surface horizon

is about 2%, and non-irrigated land capability classification is 7s. The soil meets hydric criteria

and is not classified as prime farmland.


NehB – Neshaminy silt loam, 2% to 6% slopes The Neshaminy component makes up 85% of the map unit; slopes are 2% to 6%. This

component is on hills on piedmonts. The parent material consists of dark-colored basic rocks or

loamy residuum weathered from diabase. Depth to a root-restrictive layer, lithic bedrock, is 48 to

99 inches below the surface, and the natural drainage class is poorly drained. Water movement

in the most restrictive layer is moderately high, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is

moderate. Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is not flooded or ponded. There is no zone of

water saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is

about 3%, and non-irrigated land capability classification is 2e. The soil does not meet hydric

criteria and is classified as prime farmland.

WasA - Watchung silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes The Watchung component makes up 85% of the map unit; slopes are 0% to 2%. This

component is on depressions on piedmonts. The parent material consists of fine-silty residuum

weathered from diabase. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is greater than 60 inches, and the natural

drainage class is poorly drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is very low, and

available water to a depth of 60 inches is high. Shrink-swell potential is moderate; the soil is not

flooded or ponded. A seasonal zone of water saturation is at 6 inches during January, February,

March, April, May, June, and December. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about

2%, and non-irrigated land capability classification is 5w. The soil meets hydric criteria and is not


Soils within Compressor Station 200 The soil descriptions below were generated from the SSURGO Database (NRCS 2015).

ClB – Clarksburg silt loam, 3% to 8% slopes The Clarksburg component makes up 90% of the map unit; slopes are 3% to 8%. This

component is on uplands and limestone valley flats. The parent material consists of residuum

weathered from schist. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than 60 inches, and the natural

drainage class is moderately well drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is

moderately low, and available water to a depth of 60 inches is moderate. Shrink-swell potential

is moderate; the soil is not flooded or ponded. A seasonal zone of water saturation is at 27 inches

during January, February, March, November, and December. Organic matter content in the

surface horizon is about 2%, and non-irrigated land capability classification is 2e. This soil does

not meet hydric criteria and is classified as prime farmland.


CtA – Conestoga silt loam, 0% to 3% slopes The Conestoga component makes up 90% of the map unit; slopes are 0% to 3%. This

component is on hillsides and hills. The parent material consists of residuum weathered from

schist and/or residuum weathered from limestone. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than

60 inches, and the natural drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in the most restrictive


potential is low; the soil is not flooded or ponded. There is no zone of water saturation within a

depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about 3%, and non-irrigated

land capability class is 1. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is classified as prime

farmland.

UrgB – Urban land-Conestoga complex, 0% to 8% slopes Urban land makes up a majority of this soil map unit but is not a major soil component and

is considered a miscellaneous area. No soil description is generated for this map unit.

The Conestoga component makes up 35% of the map unit; slopes are 0% to 8%. This

component is on hillsides and hills. The parent material consists of residuum weathered from

schist and/or residuum weathered from limestone. Depth to a root-restrictive layer is more than

60 inches, and the natural drainage class is well-drained. Water movement in the most


Shrink-swell potential is low; the soil is not flooded or ponded. There is no zone of water

saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in the surface horizon is about

2%, and non-irrigated land capability class is 2e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria and is

not classified as prime farmland.


APPENDIX 7D

SEED MIX RECOMMENDATIONS


MARCH 2017

Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey January 2014 Table 4-2

1. Refer to Soil Surveys for drainage class descriptions. 2. Refer to Soil Bioengineering Standard for additional seed mixtures. 3. Spillways only 4. See Appendix E for description of turf grasses and cultivars

Table 4-2 Permanent Stabilization Mixtures for Various Uses

Application

PLANTING MIXTURES BY SOIL DRAINAGE CLASS/1 (see Table 4-3)

Excessively Drained

Well to Moderately Well

Drained

Somewhat Poorly to Poorly

Drained

Residential/commercial lots

10, 12, 15 6, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15 16

Pond and channel banks, dikes, berms and dams

2, 5, 6, 10

5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 15

2, 8, 16, 17

Drainage ditches, swales, detention basins

2, 9, 11 2, 7, 9, 11, 12, 17 2, 9, 16, 17

Filter Strips 12 11, 12 11, 12

Grasses waterway, spillways

2, 3, 9, 10, 12 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 2, 9, 11,12

Recreation areas, athletic fields

5, 12, 15, 18 12, 13, 14, 15, 18 16

Special Problem Sites Steep slopes and banks, roadsides, borrow areas

2, 3, 4 ,6

2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 18

2, 9, 10, 11, 12

Sand and gravel pits, Sanitary landfills

1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 20 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 15, 20 2, 8

Dredged material, spoilbanks, Borrow areas

2, 3, 6, 20

2, 3, 6, 11,

2,8

Streambanks & shorelines 2

2, 8, 20, 21a 2, 8, 19b, 20, 21a, 21b 2, 8, 19a, 21a,b,c,d

Utility rights-of-way 3,7,180 3, 7 8, 9, 17

4-5

Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey January 2014

PERMANENT VEGETATIVE MIXTURES, PLANTING RATES AND PLANTING DATES1

SEED MIXTURE 2 PLANTING

RATE /3

PLANTING DATES.

MA

INT

EN

AN

CE

L

EV

EL

/4

REMARKS

O = Optimal Planting period A = Acceptable Planting period PLANT HARDINESS ZONES (see Figure 4-1)

Zone 5b, 6a Zone 6b Zone 7a, 7b

lbs/acre lbs/1000

sq. ft. 3/15-5/31

6/1-7/31 8/1-10/1

3/1-4/30 5/1-8/14

8/15-10/15

2/1-4/30

5/1-8/14

8/15-10/30

WARM SEASON SEED MIXTURES

O

O

O

1A. For Pinelands National

Reserve Seed mixtures see Table 4-4 page 4-17

1. Switchgrass and/or Coastal panicgrass plus or Flatpea

15 15 20 20

.35 .35 .45 .45

O

O

O

C-D

4-6

Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey January 2014 2. Deertongue or Switchgrass Redtop

15 20 1 10

.35

.45 .1

.23

O

O

O

C-D

Use Deertongue if pH < 4.0. Switchgrass is superior wildlife plant. Use for waterways. Redtop provides quick cover.

3. Switchgrass Deertongue Little Bluestem Sheep fescue plus Partridge pea

15 10 20 20 10

.35

.25

.45

.45

.25

O

O

O

C-D

Pinelands mixture.

4. Switchgrass Big Bluestem Little Bluestem Sand lovegrass Coastal panicgrass

10 5 5 4 10

.25

.10

.10

.10

.25

O

O O

C-D

Native warm-season mixture.

5. Bermudagrass Zoysiagrass (seed) Zoysiagrass (sprigs)

15 30

0.35 0.70 O O O A-D Bermudagrass has

superior salt tolerance. Zoysia has greater wear tolerance

COOL SEASON SEED MIXTURES

130

3

A A5 O A A5 O A A5 O

General low-maintenance mixture.

4-7

Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey January 2014 6. Fine Fescue (Blend) Hard Fescue Chewings fescue Strong Creeping Red Fescue Kentucky bluegrass Perennial ryegrass plus White clover (see note at

right)

45 20 5

.1 ..5 .10

B-D White clover can be removed when used to establish lawns

7. Strong Creeping red fescue Kentucky bluegrass Perennial ryegrass or Redtop plus White clover

130 50 20 10 5

3 1 .5

.25

.10 A A5 O A A5 O A A5 O

B-D

Suitable waterway mix. Canada bluegrass more drought tolerant. Use Redtop for increased drought- tolerance.

8. Tall fescue (turf-type) or Strong Creeping red fescue or Perennial ryegrass Flatpea

30 30 30 25

.7

.7

.7 .60

O A6 O A6 O A6

B-D

Tall fescue best selected for droughty conditions. Use Creeping red fescue in heavy shade. Use Flatpea to suppress woody vegetation.

9. Deertongue Redtop Wild rye (Elymus) Switchgrass

20 2 15 25

.45

.05

.35

.60 O O O

C-D

Native wet mix.

4-8

Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey January 2014 10. Tall fescue (turf-type) Perennial ryegrass or White clover (see note at right)

265 20 10 5

6 5

.25 .10

O A5 A5 O A5 A5 O A5 A5

C-D

white clover can be excluded on lawn sites

11 Kentucky Bluegrass Turf-type Tall fescue

15 45 22

0.33 1 5


C-D

Filter strip use for nutrient uptake.

12. Turf-type Tall fescue (Blend of 3 cultivars)

350 8


C-D Use in a managed filter strip for nutrient uptake.

13. Hard Fescue and/or Chewing fescue and/or Strong creeping red fescue Perennial ryegrass Ky. bluegrass (blend)

175 45 45

4

1 1


A-C

General lawn/recreation.

14. Tall fescue Ky. bluegrass (blend) Perennial ryegrass (blend)

265 20 20

6 0.50 0.50


A-B Athletic field/ 3 cultivar mix of Kentucky Bluegrass.

15. Hard fescue Chewings fescue Strong Creeping red fescue Perennial ryegrass

130 45 45 10

3 1 1

.25


C-D Low-maintenance fine fescue lawn mix.

16. Rough bluegrass Strong Creeping red fescue

90 130

2.0 3 A A5 O A A5 O A A5 O

C-D Moist shade.

4-9

Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey January 2014

17. Creeping bentgrass Creeping red fescue Alkali saltgrass

45 45 45

1 1 1

A

A5

O

A

A5

O

A

A5

O

B-D

Use bentgrass under wetter conditions. Saltgrass will only persistent under saline conditions.

18. Hard or Sheeps fescue N. E. wildflower mixture

25 12

0.60 0.35

O

A

O

O

A

O

O

A

O

C-D

Regional Wildflower mix Hydroseeding not recommended.

19. a. Smooth cordgrass b. Saltmeadow cordgrass

veg veg

O Before July 1

O Before July 1

D Planted in the intertidal zone. Planted above mean high tide.

20. American Beachgrass Coastal Panicgrass

Veg 20

.45 Before April 1

O D Coastal Panicgrass may be interseeded between rows of beachgrass

21. a. Purpleosier willow b. Dwarf willow c. Redosier dogwood d. Silky dogwood

veg veg. veg. veg.

Before May 10

Before May 10

Before May 1

D Also refer to Chapters 16 and 18 of USDA NRCS Engineering Field Handbook

4-10

Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey January 2014 Table 4-3 Footnotes: 1. See Appendix B for descriptions of turf grass mixtures and cultivars. The actual amount of warm-season

grass mixture used in Table 3 (seed mix 1-7) shall be adjusted to reflect the amount of PLS as determined by germination testing results. No adjustment is required for cool-season grasses (seed mixtures 8-20).

2. Seeding mixtures and/or rates not listed above may be used if recommended by the local Soil Conservation

District, Natural Resources Conservation Service; recommendations of Rutgers Cooperative Extension may be used if approved by the Soil Conservation District. Legumes (white clover, flatpea, lespedeza) should be mixed with proper innoculant prior to planting.

3. Seeding rates specified are required when a report of compliance is requested prior to actual establishment

of permanent vegetation. Up to 50% reduction in rates may be used when permanent vegetation is established prior to a report of compliance inspection. These rates apply to all methods of seeding. Establishing permanent vegetation means 80% vegetative coverage of the seeded area and mowed once. Grass seed mixture checked by the State Seed Analyst, New Jersey Department of Agriculture, Trenton, New Jersey, will assure the purchaser that the mixture obtained is the mixture ordered, pursuant to the N.J. State Seed Law, N.J.S.A. 4:8-17.13 et. seq.

O = optimal planting period A = acceptable planting period

4. Maintenance Level: A: Intensive mowing, (2-4 days), fertilization, lime, pest control and irrigation (Examples –

high-maintenance lawns, commercial and recreation areas, public facilities). B: Frequent mowing, (4-7 days), occasional fertilization, lime and weed control (Examples -

home lawns, commercial sites, school sites). C: Periodic mowing (7-14 days), occasional fertilization and lime (Examples - home lawns,

parks). D: Infrequent or no mowing, fertilization and lime the first year of establishment

(Examples - roadsides, recreation areas, public open spaces) 5. Summer seedings should only be conducted when the site is irrigated. Mixes including white clover require

that at least six weeks of growing season remain after seeding to ensure establishment before freezing conditions.

4-11

363-2134-008 / March 31, 2012 / Page 268

TABLE 11.4 Recommended Seed Mixtures

Mixture Number

Species

Seeding Rate - Pure Live Seed 1

Most Sites Adverse Sites

1 2

Spring oats (spring), or 64 96 Annual ryegrass (spring or fall), or Winter wheat (fall), or Winter rye (fall)

64 10 90 56

96 15

120 112

2 3

Tall fescue, or 75 Fine fescue, or 40 Kentucky bluegrass, plus 25 30 Redtop4, or Perennial ryegrass

60 35 25

3 15

75 40 30

3 20

3

Birdsfoot trefoil, plus 6 10 Tall fescue

6 30

10 35

4

Birdsfoot trefoil, plus Reed canarygrass

6 10

10 15

58

Crownvetch, plus Tall fescue, or Perennial ryegrass

10 20 20

15 25 25

6 5,8

Crownvetch, plus Annual ryegrass

10 20

15 25

78

Birdsfoot trefoil, plus Crownvetch, plus Tall fescue

6 10 20

10 15 30

8

Flatpea, plus Tall fescue, or Perennial ryegrass

20 20 20

30 30 25

9 6

Serecia lespedeza, plus Tall fescue, plus Redtop4

10 20

3

20 25

3

10

Tall fescue, plus Fine fescue

40 10

60 15

11

Deertongue, plus Birdsfoot trefoil

15 6

20 10

12 7

Switchgrass, or Big Bluestem, plus Birdsfoot trefoil

15 15

6

20 20 10

13

Orchardgrass, or Smooth bromegrass, plus Birdsfoot trefoil

20 25

6

30 35 10

Penn State, “Erosion Control and Conservation Plantings on Noncropland” 1. PLS is the product of the percentage of pure seed times percentage germination divided by 100. For

example, to secure the actual planting rate for switchgrass, divide 12 pounds PLS shown on the seed tag. Thus, if the PLS content of a given seed lot is 35%, divide 12 PLS by 0.35 to obtain 34.3 pounds of seed required to plant one acre. All mixtures in this table are shown in terms of PLS.

2. If high-quality seed is used, for most sites seed spring oats at a rate of 2 bushels per acre, winter wheat at 11.5 bushels per acre, and winter rye at 1 bushel per acre. If germination is below 90%, increase these suggested seeding rates by 0.5 bushel per acre.

3. This mixture is suitable for frequent mowing. Do not cut shorter than 4 inches. 4. Keep seeding rate to that recommended in table. These species have many seeds per pound and are very

competitive. To seed small quantities of small seeds such as weeping lovegrass and redtop, dilute with dry sawdust, sand, rice hulls, buckwheat hulls, etc.

5. Use for highway slopes and similar sites where the desired species after establishment is crownvetch.

363-2134-008 / March 31, 2012 / Page 269

6. Use only in extreme southeastern or extreme southwestern Pennsylvania. Serecia lespedeza is not well adapted to most of PA.

7. Do not mow shorter than 9 to 10 inches. 8. Seed mixtures containing crown vetch should not be used in areas adjacent to wetlands or stream channels

due to the invasive nature of this species.

TABLE 11.5 Recommended Seed Mixtures for Stabilizing Disturbed Areas

Penn State, “Erosion Control and Conservation Plantings on Noncropland”

1. For seed mixtures 11 and 12, only use spring oats or weeping lovegrass (included in mix) as nurse crop. 2. Contact the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation district roadside specialist for specific suggestions on

treatment techniques and management practices. 3. Seed mixtures containing crown vetch should not be used in areas adjacent to wetlands or stream channels

due to the invasive nature of this species.

Site Condition

Nurse Crop

Seed Mixture (Select one mixture)

Slopes and Banks (not mowed) Well-drained Variable drainage

1 plus 1 plus

3, 5, 8, or 12

1

3 or 7

Slopes and Banks (mowed) Well-drained

Slopes and Banks (grazed/hay) Well-drained

1 plus 1 plus

2 or 10 2, 3, or 13

Gullies and Eroded Areas 1 plus 3, 5, 7, or 121

Erosion Control Facilities (BMPs) Sod waterways, spillways, frequent water flow areas Drainage ditches

Shallow, less than 3 feet deep Deep, not mowed

Pond banks, dikes, levees, dams, diversion channels, And occasional water flow areas

Mowed areas Non-mowed areas For hay or silage on diversion channels and occasional water flow areas

1 plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 plus

2, 3, or 4 2, 3, or 4 5 or 7 2 or 3 5 or 7 3 or 13

Highways 2

Non-mowed areas Pure crownvetch

3

Well-drained Variable drained Poorly drained

Areas mowed several times per year

1 plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 plus

5 or 6 5, 7, 8, 9, or 10 3 or 7 3 or 4 2, 3, or 10

Utility Right-of-way Well-drained Variable drained Well-drained areas for grazing/hay

1 plus 1 plus 1 plus

5, 8, or 12

1

3 or 7 2, 3, or 13

Effluent Disposal Areas 1 plus 3 or 4

Sanitary Landfills 1 plus 3, 5, 7, 111, or 12

1

Surface mines Spoils, mine wastes, fly ash, slag, settling basin Residues and other severely disturbed areas

(lime to soil test) Severely disturbed areas for grazing/hay

1 plus 1 plus

3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11

1, or 12

1

3 or 13

soils - northeast supply enhancement › wp-content › ... · soils, hydric soils, compaction...

Documents