19970722 Ver 1_More Info Received_19970711

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Action ID No.199102669

9'7 0'7 ? 2
July 10, 1997
RANDLEMAN LAKE
GUILFORD AND RANDOLPH COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA
SECTION 404 PUBLIC NOTICE
AND
NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF THE
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
The Piedmont Triad Regional Water Authority (PTRWA), Wilmington Building,
Suite 217, 2216 West Meadowview Road, Greensboro, North Carolina 27407-3480,
has applied for a Department of the Army Section 404 of the Clean Water Act permit
TO PLACE FILL MATERIALS INTO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES IN ORDER
TO CONSTRUCT THE RANDLEMAN DAM AND LAKE, GUILFORD AND RANDOLPH
COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA.
THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The Piedmont Triad Regional Water Authority (PTRWA) has proposed to place fill
material in the Deep River approximately 2 miles upstream from the town of Randleman
in Randolph County, North Carolina, in order to construct Randleman Dam and Lake.
At a normal pool elevation of 682 feet above mean sea level (m.s.l.), the proposed
reservoir would inundate approximately 3,000 acres and would provide a safe yield of
48.0 million gallons per day (MGD) of raw water for the PTRWA member governments,
including Randolph County and the municipalities of Greensboro, High Point,
Jamestown, Archdale, and Randleman. The project would also include a buffer area
approximately 200 feet wide that would require the acquisition of 3,000 additional acres.
PERMIT DECISION
The decision whether to issue a Section 404 permit for this proposed project will be
based on an evaluation of the probable impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the
proposed activity and its intended use on the public interest. Evaluation of the probable
86co VEQ
J61 I 1 19yI
?N?IRoNM?NTq? , .,
,,,? CIFN?FS
impacts which the proposed activity may have on the public interest requires a careful
weighing of all those factors which become relevant in each particular case. The
benefits which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal must be
balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. The decision whether to
autodtize a`proposal, and if so the conditions under which it will be allowed to occur,
are therefore determined by the outcome of the general balancing process. That
decision should reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of
important resources. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal must be
considered including the cumulative effects thereof. Among those are conservation,
economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish
and wildlife values, flood hazards and flood plain values (in accordance with Executive
Order 11988), land use, navigation, shore erosion and accretion, recreation, water
supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber production,
mineral needs, considerations of property ownership, and, in general, the needs and
welfare of the people. For activities involving the placement of dredged or fill materials
in waters of the United States, a permit will be denied if the discharge that would be
authorized by such permit would not comply with the Environmental Protection
Agencies' 404 (b)(1) guidelines. Subject to the preceding sentence and any other
applicable guidelines or criteria, a permit will be granted unless the District Engineer
determines that it would be contrary to the public interest. The decision on the
Department of the Army Section 404 permit application will be made with full
consideration of the public interest and after the comment period on the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS).
OTHER REQUIRED AUTHORIZATIONS
This proposal shall be reviewed for the applicability of other actions by North Carolina
agencies such as:
a. The issuance of a Water Quality Certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ).
b. The issuance of a permit to dredge and/or fill under North Carolina General Statute
113-229 by the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM).
c. The issuance of a permit under the North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA) by the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) or their
delegates.
d. The issuance of an easement to fill or otherwise occupy State-owned submerged
land under North Carolina General Statute 143-341(4), 146-6, 146-11, and 146-12 by
the North Carolina Department of Administration .(NCDA) and the North Carolina
Council of State.
a
e. The approval of an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan by the Land Quality
Section, North Carolina Division of Land Resources (NCDLR), pursuant to the State
Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (NC G. S. 113 A-50-66).
The requested Department of the Army (DA) permit will be denied if any required State
or local authorization and/or certification is denied. No DA permit will be issued until a
State coordinated viewpoint is received and reviewed by this agency. Recipients of this
notice are encouraged to furnish comments on factors of concern represented by the
above agencies directly to the respective agency, with a copy furnished to the Corps of
Engineers.
Generally, the decision whether to issue this Department of the Army (DA) permit will
not be made until the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) issues,
denies, or waives State certification required by Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
The NCDWQ considers whether or not the proposed activity will comply with Sections
301, 302, 306, and 307 of the Clean Water Act. The application and this public notice
for the Department of the Army (DA) permit serves as application to the NCDWQ for
certification.
Additional information regarding the Clean Water Act certification may be reviewed at
the offices of the Environmental Operations Section, North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (NCDWQ), Salisbury Street, Archdale Building, Raleigh, North Carolina. Copies
of such materials will be furnished to any person requesting copies upon payment of
reproduction costs.
All persons desiring to make comments regarding the application for Clean Water Act
certification should do so in writing delivered to the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (NCDWQ), Post Office Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687,
Attention: Mr. John Dorney.
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Randleman Lake. Guilford and
Randolph Counties. North Carolina is now available for public review and comment in
accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. The Draft EIS was filed
with EPA and appears in the Federal Register on July 11, 1997. Copies of the Draft
EIS may be obtained by contacting this office, (see Points of Contact below). In
addition, copies of the Draft EIS were sent to a number of local libraries (see attached
list).
3
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Seven alternatives to the proposed action were evaluated in the EIS. They included the
following:
Alternative A - Upper Deep River Lake
Alternative B - Altamahaw Lake
Alternative C - Benaja Lake and Polecat Creek Lake
Alternative D - Purchasing Water from Other Municipalities
Alternative E - Development of Groundwater Wells
Alternative F - Combination of Benaja Lake and Groundwater
Wells
Alternative G - No Action
Alternatives D, E, and G were eliminated from detailed evaluation due to serious
deficiencies which made them unacceptable. Alternatives A, B, C, and F, which all
include reservoirs, were analyzed in greater detail including their yields, adequacy to
meet 50-year needs, project costs, physical characteristics, and major environmental
impacts. The locations of the reservoir alternatives appear on Figure 1. The locations
of groundwater well fields were not defined but were anticipated to be in the Haw River
basin.
The proposed project and the four reservoir alternatives are each capable of providing
a long-term water supply for PTRWA member governments. However, only Randleman
Lake, Altamahaw Lake, and the Combination Alternative (Benaja Lake plus
Groundwater Wells) would have a safe yield expected to be sufficient to fully satisfy the
stated purpose and need of providing a 50-year water supply. The safe yield of Upper
Deep River Lake or Benaja Lake-Polecat Creek Lake is expected to be sufficient to
satisfy water demand for about 40 years.
The Randleman Lake project would be the least expensive alternative by a substantial
margin. It would cost about $33 million less than the next cheapest alternative and
about $66 million less than the most expensive alternative. The alternatives, ranked in
order of increasing estimated costs, are Randleman Lake ($123 million), Altamahaw
Lake ($156 million), Benaja Lake-Polecat Creek Lake ($165 million), Upper Deep River
Lake ($173 million), and the Combination of Benaja Lake and Groundwater Wells ($189
million).
All the reservoir alternatives represent large projects which would result in the
acquisition of thousands of acres of land. Project land requirements would be smallest
for Upper Deep River Lake (4,880 acres) followed, in ascending order, by Randleman
Lake (6,000 acres), Altamahaw Lake (7,280 acres), Benaja Lake-Polecat Creek Lake
(9,960 acres), and the Combination of Benaja Lake and Groundwater Wells (7,660
acres for reservoir plus land use controls or purchase of approximately 48,000 acres for
well fields). Some of the adverse impacts of these alternatives are reflections of project
size, such that alternatives with larger land requirements produce more significant
adverse effects. In this respect, the larger projects would change current land uses
over larger areas and would be more destructive of plant communities and their
associated wildlife inhabitants and habitat. When evaluated on this basis, the most
environmentally acceptable alternatives are Upper Deep River Lake and Randleman
Lake.
Other types of impacts are more related to environmental characteristics and the level
of existing development of the project location than to project size. Such impacts
include the numbers of residences affected, the numbers of stream miles inundated,
the numbers of roadways requiring modifications, the amounts of interbasin water
transfer, and the acreage of wetlands affected. The range of such impacts for project
alternatives would include land acquisition of 59 (for the Combination Alternative plus
well fields still to be found) to 254 tracts, loss of 7 to 41 residences, modification of 6 to
16 roadways, inundation of 14 to 28 miles of free-flowing streams, and interbasin
transfer of 3.8 MGD to 30.5 MGD of water. All alternatives would reduce downstream
average flows. While some impacts may be insignificant for a particular alternative,
collectively the impacts would be significant for every alternative.
A very important category of impacts with regard to consideration of the proposed
project under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the amount of wetlands adversely
affected. All project alternatives would involve wetland losses. The amount of
unavoidable wetland loss for the Randleman Lake project has been determined through
detailed, site-specific investigations to be 121 acres. This wetland amount has been
mapped and certified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This level of detailed
wetland definition was not available for the other reservoir alternatives. Consequently,
the comparative wetland impacts of the other alternatives were estimated from readily
available data. The single factor generally considered to be the best indicator of
potential wetland presence is the acreage of mapped hydric soils. Mapped hydric soils
within the reservoir area of each project alternative total 7 acres for Upper Deep River
Lake, 37 acres for Randleman Lake, 470 acres for Altamahaw Lake, 735 acres for
Benaja Lake-Polecat Creek Lake, and 735 acres for the Combination Alternative. The
acreage of mapped hydric soils is an imperfect indicator of jurisdictional wetlands, as is
indicated by Randleman Lake's 37 acres of mapped hydric soils versus its 121 acres of
Section 404 wetlands, but these data are sufficient to show that potential wetland
impacts would be much lower for Upper Deep River Lake and Randleman Lake than for
the other alternatives.
The construction of Randleman Lake or any of the reservoir alternatives would provide
a water supply to sustain regional growth. All alternatives would result in increased
streamflows downstream from the reservoir during low flows, which would improve
water quality within these stream reaches during summer droughts.
5
Although all the reservoir alternatives could address long-term water supply needs of
the Piedmont Triad, the PTRWA prefers the Randleman Lake project for the following
reasons.
- it is expected to fully satisfy the project purpose and need by providing a safe,
reliable water supply that is adequate to meet projected needs over approximately 50
years;
it is estimated to be the least costly alternative by a substantial margin;
- it is located within the counties of member governments so that watershed
protection and zoning controls can be effectively managed;
- its wetland impacts are judged to be in a range comparable to those of Upper Deep
River Lake and substantially lower than those of all other alternatives; and
- its adverse impacts, while significant, are comparable to or lower than those of the
other alternatives.
PROPOSED PROJECT IMPACTS
Historic and Archaeological Resources
Full descriptions of the archaeological, architectural, and historic resources of the
project area will not be known until required comprehensive surveys are completed and
the resources are evaluated. The plan outlining the methodology for this work was
developed by Garrow and Associates (1993) and will be incorporated into a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). This MOA will represent mutual agreement by the
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), the USACE, the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation, and the PTRWA for work related to the plan.
Important components of the draft plan will include the following:
- The PTRWA will perform an archaeological survey of any unsurveyed portion of the
project which has been determined to have a potential to contain undisturbed
archaeological sites, as reported by Garrow and Associates (1993).
- These surveys will be conducted using methods agreed upon by the North
Carolina SHPO and the PTRWA and will consist of a 30-meter transect survey to locate
significant archaeological materials.
- Survey implementation, phasing, and scheduling will take place substantially in
accordance with the recommendations of Garrow and Associates (1993). The surveys
may be conducted in phases coinciding with property acquisitions, but they must be
completed for each respective area before the initiation of any land-disturbing activities
by the PTRWA.
- The PTRWA will also undertake an architectural survey of all unassessed
architectural properties in the project area. This survey must be conducted prior to any
undertaking which may affect these properties.
- After survey completion, the PTRWA will, in consultation with the North Carolina
SHPO, apply the National Register criteria to each site or historic property located as a
result of archaeological and architectural surveys undertaken within the project area.
The PTRWA will seek determinations of eligibility for sites from the North Carolina
SHPO.
- The PTRWA, in consultation with SHPO, will formulate and implement an
appropriate preservation or mitigation plan for all sites which the PTRWA and SHPO
agree are eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places.
At present, there are no sites in the Randleman Lake project area which are listed, or
determined eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places.
Endangered and Threatened Species
No species listed as endangered or threatened, or proposed for such listing by the
State of North Carolina or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, would be impacted by the
construction of Randleman Lake (Carter and Heiman, 1993). The only listed species
located within the potential realm of influence of the proposed project is the endangered
Cape Fear shiner (Notropis mekistocholas). Its closest known location is in the Deep
River at Coleridge, which is approximately 22 miles downstream from the dam site.
Estimates of flow conditions at Coleridge indicate that average flows would be reduced
approximately 32 percent during the reservoir filling period and about 11 percent over
the long term. The designated critical habitat of the shiner in the Deep River (and Fork
Creek) is located about 33 miles below the dam site. It is estimated that average flows
in that vicinity would be reduced about 23 percent during filling and about 8 percent
long term. Despite these reductions in average flow, low flow conditions would be
improved by the proposed 30-20-10 tiered release program from Randleman Lake. It is
also anticipated that the lake would result in water quality improvements downstream in
the Deep River similar to the effects of other Piedmont reservoirs. These improvements
include higher dissolved oxygen, lower biochemical oxygen demand, reduced turbidity,
and reduced loads of nutrients, metals, and toxic compounds. It is likely that water
quality and low flow conditions are more important than average flows to the viability of
Cape Fear shiner populations in the Deep River. Therefore, it is expected that the
Randleman Lake project would not affect the Cape Fear shiner or its critical habitat.
Portions of three populations of dissected toothwort (Cardamine dissecta), a
significantly rare plant in North Carolina, would be inundated. However, small portions

of the western subpopulation on Richland Creek and a narrow band of the Hickory
Creek population would be above the pool line and would not likely be destroyed by
inundation (Carter and Heiman, 1993). In addition, some individuals of this species
would be protected in the buffer, and others could be transplanted prior to flooding.
Some of these plants have already been successfully transferred by Dr. Joseph
Christian to the Bog Garden owned by the city of Greensboro. No other species of
concern would be adversely impacted by the proposed project.
Wetland Impacts
Construction and operation of Randleman Lake would impact, principally by inundation,
approximately 121 acres of wetlands and 188 acres of free-flowing streams. All
affected wetlands are generally categorized as palustrine. Affected habitat types
include approximately 72 acres of forested, broad leaf deciduous; 21 acres of persistent
emergent; 11 acres of forested, scrub-shrub broad leaf deciduous; and 17 acres of
forested broad leaf and persistent emergent wetlands. Most of the forested wetlands
along the Deep River and in the proposed impoundment have experienced substantial
adverse impacts in their functional values due to timber harvesting and farming
practices that have altered the hydrology and characteristics of the resident plant
communities.
PROPOSED MITIGATION PLAN
The applicant has proposed a comprehensive plan to mitigate for unavoidable impacts
of the Randleman Lake project. This draft plan addresses wetlands, water quality, plant
communities, and fish and wildlife resources. Features of the plan include the following-
- Acquisition and preservation of approximately 700 acres of existing forested
wetlands known as the Cone's Folly Ancient Cypress Swamp. Located along the Black
River in the lower Cape Fear Basin, this wetland has been identified by the N. C.
Natural Heritage Program as the most important swamp site in the State and, because
of the great age of the trees, the extent and undisturbed character of the swamp, and
its great beauty, as a national treasure.
- Restoration and/or creation of 120 acres of forest wetlands along major tributaries
of the Deep River upstream of Randleman Lake. Such strategically located wetlands
should be beneficial in protecting water quality of Randleman Lake from upstream
sources of nonpoint pollutants.
- Development of 3,000 acres of aquatic habitat at Randleman Lake. The lake is
expected to provide an improved and enlarged fishery habitat and, also, to attract a
variety of waterfowl and other migratory bird species by providing improved feeding and
resting habitat.
a
Acquisition and preservation of approximately 3,000 acres of uplands in a 200-foot-
wide buffer strip around Randleman Lake. The different cover types initially present in
the buffer zone, including old fields, early successional pine forest, and mature
hardwood forest, would provide a diversity of habitat for upland wildlife species.
Existing fields and early successional plant communities would be allowed to proceed
through natural ecological succession ultimately to hardwood forest. Existing wetlands
within the buffer zone would be preserved in perpetuity. The wide buffer zone would
contribute to lake water quality through the removal of sediments and pollutants from
surface runoff entering from adjacent portions of the watershed.
- Opportunity for natural generation of wetlands along approximately 100 miles of
Randleman Lake shoreline and along tributaries of the reservoir. If these wetlands
develop, they would provide valuable fish and wildlife habitat.
- Installation of 60 nest boxes for wood ducks in shallow coves and near the
shoreline of Randleman Lake. Within the protection of the lake buffer zone, nest boxes
that are properly constructed and located should increase the population of resident
wood ducks.
- Cooperation with Guilford and Randolph Counties to develop recreational facilities,
including boat access and day visitor picnic facilities at Randleman Lake.
- Cooperation with the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) to promote
stocking of sport fish in Randleman Lake. Stocking has long been employed
successfully to establish fish species composition, enhance fisheries production, and
improve angling opportunities. It is expected that the lake could support good fishery
populations, including species such as the bluegill, largemouth bass, yellow perch,
channel catfish,-and black crappie.
- Cooperation with the NCWRC to develop fish attractors in Randleman Lake. Fish
attractors would be designed to create habitat features that promote fish production and
survival and to congregate desirable species for improved angling. Residual trees
would be retained within selected coves of the lake and allowed to die from inundation.
Coves would be selected that are conducive from a structural and water depth
perspective to provide improved fish feeding and spawning areas. After a period of
several years, the standing dead snags would fall and become partially submerged to
provide further structural components. Fish attractors have been successfully utilized in
other recreational impoundments and have provided the added benefit of providing
perches and nesting sites for fishing raptors.
PUBLIC HEARING
This application is being considered pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33
U.S.C. 1344). Any person may request, in writing within the comment period specified
9
in the notice, that a public hearing be held to consider this application or to provide
comment on the adequacy and accuracy of the Draft EIS. Requests for public hearing
shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing.
REQUEST FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
This public notice announcing the availability of the Draft EIS and Section 404 permit
application review has been mailed to interested Federal, State, and local agencies,
and the concerned public.
Comments on the EIS and on the proposed project are requested and will be received
until August 26, 1997. All comments should be provided in writing to the address
provided below.
CORPS USE OF PUBLIC COMMENT
The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State and local
agencies and officials; Indian Tribes and other interested parties in order to consider
and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be
considered by the Corps of Engineers to determine whether to issue, modify, condition
or deny a permit for this proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to
assess impacts on endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general
environmental effects and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments will
be used to determine the overall public interest of the proposed activity. Comments will
also be used to determine the adequacy and accuracy of the EIS pursuant to the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
POINTS OF CONTACT
Mr. John Meshaw is the project manager for the development of the EIS. Inquiries
regarding the EIS should be addressed to Mr. Meshaw at telephone [phone].
Mr. David Franklin is the project manager for the Section 404 permit request. Inquiries
regarding the requested Section 404 permit should be addressed to Mr. Franklin at
telephone [phone].
All written comments should be addressed to:
Mr. David Franklin
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Branch
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Attachments
10
Libraries
Archdale Public Library
Asheboro Public Library
Greensboro Public Library
Guilford County Public Library
High Point Public Library
Jamestown Public Library
Lee County Public Library
Moore County Public Library
N.C. Department of Environment, Health, & Natural Resources Library
Pittsboro Memorial Library
Ramseur Public Library
Randleman Public Library
Randolph County Public Library
Southern Pines Public Library
Wren Memorial Library
11
r
1
I
U '
ti ? , Na`N N
r- 1
1
U °
1 C
1 ;

O ors `? 1

I Yl. ?
I
U o
41
J.-
(l?
• Q ?.I
0
ti
I _
o
N
G
m SD
o m ca
V J
O
a?
bin
w

Oa
H
F-I
3z?
z?
o?
as
a'
Hw
Q
a
2
U
F-
w e
? r
1I 06
Y V
J
CO
d