Appendix C - Water Supply Well Mitigation Plan

Piedmont Lithium Carolinas, Inc. I Response to DEMLR Additional Information Request
Appendices
a
PIEDMONT
LITHIUM
C
Appendix C: Water Supply
Well Mitigation Plan

Water Supply Well
Mitigation Plan
Carolina Lithium Project
Enter Project Description or Caption
Gaston County, North Carolina
December 2, 2021

Page intentionally left blank.

1 Introduction
Piedmont Lithium Carolinas, Inc. (PLCI) is proposing to construct an open pit mine in the
Carolina Tin-Spodumene Belt (TSB) of North Carolina where lithium -bearing pegmatites have
been identified. The Concentrate Operations and the Lithium Hydroxide Conversion Plant (the
Site) is in the TSB of the Piedmont physiographic province in south-central North Carolina. The
approximately 1,548-acre Site is in an unincorporated area of Gaston County, on private land
surrounding portions of Hephzibah Church Road, Whitesides Road, and St. Mark's Church
Road, approximately 1 mile east of Cherryville, North Carolina.
The overall Concentrate Operations are composed of three components: the Piedmont Lithium
Carolinas Mine #1, a Concentrate Plant, and an Industrial Minerals Plant. The Piedmont Lithium
Carolinas Mine #1 will consist of four open pits of varying sizes, a waste rock disposal area,
topsoil stockpiles areas, haul roads, and other mine support areas. Mining will occur through
open pit excavations which will require dewatering. On behalf of PLCI, HDR Engineering, Inc. of
the Carolinas (HDR) performed groundwater modeling to estimate the rate of water withdrawal
during pit dewatering and evaluate possible effects pit dewatering may have on local water
resources and water users. The base groundwater model was developed by HDR for PLCI and
documented in a Technical Memorandum Groundwater Model dated July 2, 2019 (HDR, 2019).
HDR subsequently updated the model to a transient model to better evaluate potential pumping
effects with more than one pit in operation at a time. The results of the updated modeling were
presented in a Technical Memorandum Groundwater Model dated August 27, 2021, which was
also included as Appendix G of the Mine Permit Application submitted to DEMLR in August
2021.
Results of modeling indicate that dewatering, as currently proposed, may result in localized
lowering of the groundwater potentiometric surface in areas north of the North Pit, east of the
East Pit, and south of the South and East Pits. Based on data obtained from Gaston County,
private water supply wells registered with the County may be located in each area potentially
affected by mine dewatering (Figure 1).
Thus, PLCI has developed this Water Supply Well Mitigation Plan to provide details regarding
PLCI's commitment to take action if an off -site supply well is impacted to the extent that it no
longer provides adequate capacity or quality of water for residential use. Strategies for
mitigating the effects of mine dewatering on surface and groundwater resources may be
collectively or individually administered for the protection of existing water supply wells.
2 Water Well Inventory
In 2018, HDR contacted the Gaston County Environmental Health Department to request
records of private water supply wells in the vicinity of the mine permit boundary. The County
provided spatial data for 15 private wells registered with the County; however, PLCI suspects
that additional private supply wells exist in the area based on the current lack of access to a
municipal water supply. Additional wells were noted in field surveys conducted by Deep Earth
Logic in 2019 and 2020 within a 1,500-foot radius of the proposed open pit areas of the Site for

which property owner participation was voluntary; thus, wells noted during this survey were
located only with property owner permission. For the purpose of groundwater modeling, HDR
used locations and well construction data provided by the County for registered wells, and
added possible domestic wells observed during field surveys to evaluate potential effects of
drawdown resulting from dewatering activities. Well construction details for the 15 wells
registered with the County are provided in Table 1.
3 Response Plan
The groundwater modeling completed for the Project provides estimates of drawdown resulting
from dewatering through the life of the mine, and potential effects to residential water supply
wells may be predicted based on the model results. While effects to these wells are expected to
be minimal, PLCI has developed the following response plan for evaluation and mitigation of
groundwater well effects that may require action. Note that an actionable effect on a residential
water supply well is considered to be a long-term change in water level which negatively
impacts the ability of the well to provide adequate water to the resident.
If an actionable water level decline occurs in a residential water supply well, the well owner
should notify PLCI of the water supply well issue. PLCI will conduct an assessment of the
reported decline to include the following:
1. Comparison of the well location to the location of ongoing mining activities and to
predicted groundwater level drawdown contours from the groundwater model, as well as
comparison to groundwater levels in nearby observation wells (Figure 2).
2. Examination of the condition of the well and measurement of the groundwater level in
the well by a PLCI representative and/or a qualified hydrogeologist or well
repair/installation specialist.
If a determination is made that the water -supply well in question has failed due to mechanical
reasons not related to drawdown from dewatering activities, the NCDEQ will be notified, and the
procedures outlined in this Mitigation Plan will not be applicable. The property owner will be
notified of the findings of this determination and will be responsible for any necessary repairs.
If a determination is made that the water supply well in question has been affected by
dewatering activities, and that the decline is an effect that will result in long-term change in
groundwater level which negatively impacts the ability of a residential water supply well to
provide adequate water to the resident, PLCI will initiate the following mitigation plan in
successive order.
1. Where municipal water service has been brought to a practical distance from the
affected property, PLCI may assist the affected resident with connection to municipal
water supply. PLCI will pay for the cost of connection; however, ongoing utility expense
will be the responsibility of the affected property owner. PLCI is currently working with
local municipalities to evaluate options for bringing municipal water to the area
(Attachment A). The outcome of that study is pending. If a private well is affected by the

mining operation prior to availability of municipal water, PLCI will implement options 2
and/or 4, on a case -by -case basis and at their discretion.
2. Where municipal water service is not within a practical distance of the affected property,
PLCI may commission a certified well driller to install a deeper residential water supply
well for normal household use.
3. If a deeper residential water supply well will not yield a reliable source of water, PLCI
may either:
a. Continue to work with municipal water providers to extend water service to the
area; or,
b. Negotiate in good faith to acquire the affected property
4. Depending on the time required to mitigate the affected water supply concern, PLCI may
provide a short-term water supply replacement in the form of a clean water tank or
container that is refilled, as necessary, by delivery truck or some other means (e.g.
bottled water). The short-term water supply must be provided by a licensed and
reputable water distributor. The result of the mitigation activities must meet the minimum
water volume used or needed by the resident prior to the groundwater level decline.
The activities required to fulfill the requirements of mitigation will be completed at PLCI's
expense and PLCI will determine the outside vendors to be used for these tasks. This Mitigation
Plan relies on the use of qualified outside vendors to satisfy the needs of a temporary water
supply and to develop a permanent water source. As licensed reputable companies, they are
expected to accomplish and carry out their assigned duties in a manner that ensures that all
work is completed within a predetermined time period. If for any reason, this work is not
completed to an acceptable level of quality and/or within the time frame agreed upon by all
parties, the outside vendor will be replaced by another company designated by PLCI.

Page intentionally left blank.

Table 1. Well Construction Details for Private Wells Registered with Gaston County
Well
Well
Total
Static
Well
Well Owner
Address*
Latitude
Longitude
Constructio
Installation
Diameter
Casing
Well
Water
Yield
n Date
Method
(in)
Depth
Depth
Level (ft)
(gpm)
ft
ft
Denton, Anna Gail
921 Whitesides Rd.*
35.3933
-81.297682
1991
Drilled
6.25
70
150
30
8
Hastings, Calvin R. and
210 Hastings Rd.*
35.379616
-81.282877
2017
Bored
24
50
50
25
10
Terresa M.
Hyleman, Marvid D. and
732 Whiteside Rd.
35.385206
-81.298376
1992
Drilled
6.25
125
166
20
25
Cynthia M.
Jarrett, Brian Frank
1121 He hzibah Church Rd.*
35.394472
-81.292983
1995
Drilled
6.25
101
1 300
40
3
Knowles, Patrician and
1029 Hephzibah Church Rd.*
35.397076
-81.29344
1901
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Dallas
Knowles, Doug
1021 He hzibah Church Rd.*
35.397794
-81.295147
1994
Bored
24
45
45
35
3
Leonhardt, Timothy Dale
129 George Pa seur Rd.
35.380405
-81.295369
1971
Bored
24
63
63
33
4
35.377052
-81.295019
1998
Drilled
6.25
30
550
40
4
Locke, Bill
534 Whitesides Rd.
35.377052
-81.295019
Unknown
Drilled
6.25
69
690
Unknown
150
Lovelace, Freddie and Hal
633 Aderholdt Rd.
35.391994
-81.279303
1999
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Maune , Ronald Jame
663 Aderholdt Rd.
35.393967
-81.27992
1996
Drilled
6.25
62
105
40
20
McLamb, Ransom W. and
1523 R W McLamb Dr.*
35.386299
-81.296342
1998
Drilled
6.25
115
185
15
20
Wendi S.
Payne, William E.
901 Whitesides Rd.*
35.393774
-81.299542
2012
Bored
24
56
56
25
5
Reynolds, Paul David
1266 He hzibah Church Rd.*
35.387603
-81.286978
2002
Drilled
6.25
126
300
Unknown
30
Starks, Paul
819 Whitesides Rd.*
35.389721
-81.299089
1998
Drilled
6.25
41
180
34
25
* Denotes wells that are located within the proposed Mine Boundary and would not be used as a drinking water source.

-+ wnxrEr
_ EAST
I
,5
Soueas: Es ,}1ER_, aTIIIXI [�rna Ini
{ UJGS. FAO N PS, NR1 JW. Ge363! @. IGN
SurreX, r M=TI, EW -2Illna i Hw
OpenStreeima ntrlb+utars,andtheG;I&k
Figure 1. Model -predicted Drawdown during Operating Years 14-20
ryes: E5r1, HERE, Gatrnllr,
Intennap, Irwernenl P Corp.,
GEBC0, USGS, FAO, NPS.
N RCAN, GeaBase, I GN,
Legend
Domain Drawdown {tj
® Planned Pits 3-7
Simulated Mined Pit Area -71
by Receptor Wells
oI,a Possible Domestic Well 15-21
-SueamS
I
6k AS'xRCES EaftPri.
�F ' ��. rt�:�d�. sf115s 57]ol nbLir�sOn.1..i
MODEL PREDICTED DRAWDOWN
FROM DEWATERING YEARS 14-20
P C90.. GEWCO
OFdrLan
7mu,ny
= 2
PIFDAA,0NT
Lilriur
FIGURE 1

a
111cnony Grove 1
Y��n ille-Rd �A °yes;s
is o
4b Q�
0
ay. ca,

Page intentionally left blank.

Attachment A
Gaston ia-CherryviIle Water
Interconnection Study

Page intentionally left blank.

SUMMARY OF GASTONIA-
CHERRYVILLE WATER
INTERCONNECTION STUDY
for the
GASTON COUNTY
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION
GASTON COUNTY, NC
PREPARED BY:
LKC ENGINEERING, PLLC
ATTN: Adam Kiker, P.E.
140 Aqua Shed Court
Aberdeen, NC 28315
[phone]
License # P-1095
email: [e-mail]
CLIENT INFORMATION:
GASTON COUNTY ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
ATTN: Donny Hicks
620 N. Main Street
Belmont, NC 28012
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
�.•���N GA "'•�.
"
FES
' , 9
A
38
;F
NGINE�
ADAM P. KIKER,
t

Gaston County Economic Development Commission
Summary of Gastonia-Cherryville Water Interconnection Study
Table of Contents
LKC No. GCEDC-21.01
1.0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................... 1
1.1
Introduction..................................................................................................................................1
1.2
Background...................................................................................................................................1
2.0
EXISTING GASTONIA WATER SYSTEM.................................................................. 2
3.0
EXISTING CHERRYVILLE WATER SYSTEM.......................................................... 3
4.0
PROPOSED INTERCONNECTION PROJECT........................................................... 4
4.1
Proposed Interconnection Waterline...........................................................................................4
4.2
Proposed Booster Pump Station...................................................................................................4
4.3
White Jenkins Road Water Line.................................................................................................... 5
4.4
Cost Estimate................................................................................................................................ 5
5.0
PROPOSED RURAL WATER DISTRIBUTION PROJECT ...................................... 5
5.1
Area to be Served.......................................................................................................................... 5
5.2
Cost Estimate................................................................................................................................ 6
6.0
SCHEDULE FOR IMPLEMENTATION....................................................................... 6
Index of Tables
Table 1: Gastonia Water Sales(2019)......................................................................................... 3
Table2: Project Schedule............................................................................................................. 6
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A — PROJECT MAPS
APPENDIX B — INTERCONNECTION COST ESTIMATES
APPENDIX C — RURAL WATER SYSTEM COST ESTIMATES
APPENDIX D — GASTONIA 2019 LOCAL WATER SUPPLY PLAN
APPENDIX E — CHERRYVILLE 2020 LOCAL WATER SUPPLY PLAN
APPENDIX F — HYDRAULIC MODEL RESULTS
LKC LKC Engineering, PLLC
Aberdeen, NC P a c l i

Gaston County Economic Development Commission LKC No. GCEDC-21.01
Summary of Gastonia-Cherryville Water Interconnection Study
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 Introduction
This report is prepared on behalf of the Gaston County Economic Development
Commission (GCEDC) and is motivated by a potential investment by Piedmont Lithium
in northwestern Gaston County. The intention is two -fold: (1) evaluate and summarize
the infrastructure necessary to consummate a potable water interconnection between the
Cities of Gastonia and Cherryville to augment the drinking water supply for Cherryville,
and (2) summarize the infrastructure necessary to provide public water service to
residents in the area of the proposed industrial construction.
In summary, the conveyance of potable water from Gastonia to Cherryville is feasible via
construction of a 16" water line along Dallas-Cherryville Highway, a 16" water line
creating a hydraulic loop on White Jenkins Road, and a booster pump station at the
northwestern edge of Gastonia's existing system. The estimated total project budget for
these improvements is $18,514,000.
Furthermore, based on general assumptions of the proposed site of the Piedmont Lithium
mine and processing facility, service to the rural area around the site is feasible through a
combination of 12" and 6" water lines allowing those residents around the site to connect
to public water. The estimated total project budget for the rural water lines is
$10,350,000. Further refinement of the scope and cost of these water lines is important
once a more precise location of the Piedmont Lithium investment is available.
This report presents hydraulic evaluations, water line routing and sizing, preliminary
pump station sizing, preliminary cost estimates, and a schedule for implementation.
Background data and documentation are included in the Appendices.
1.2 Background
Based on information from Piedmont Lithium's website, a significant deposit of lithium
exists in Gaston County to the east of Cherryville, between St. Mark's Church Road and
Long Shoals Road. Piedmont Lithium has interest in developing the site as a mine and
potentially a processing facility. The development of a lithium mine could impact the
quality and quantity of the groundwater used as drinking water by residents and
businesses in the surrounding, rural area.
In addition, the potential mining and other industrial operations may require potable
water service from the City of Cherryville. The City of Cherryville currently relies on
Indian Creek as its primary source of drinking water. While it has been a sufficient
supply for Cherryville's needs in the past, Indian Creek is not as robust of a resource as
other surface waters in the region. Cherryville has an interconnection with the City of
Lincolnton that is currently used on an emergency basis. Based on the potential needs of
Piedmont Lithium, there is interest in a water supply interconnection between Gastonia
LKC LKC Engineering, PLLC
Aberdeen, NC P a g e l

Gaston County Economic Development Commission LKC No. GCEDC-21.01
Summary of Gastonia-Cherryville Water Interconnection Study
and Cherryville that would augment the available water supply to Cherryville, allowing
Cherryville to continue to grow beyond the Piedmont Lithium project.
The water infrastructure necessary to provide a supply interconnection between Gastonia
and Cherryville, and to provide water service to current and future residents located
around the Piedmont Lithium sites, consists of the following:
1) A 16" water line between Cherryville and the City of Gastonia along Dallas-
Cherryville Hwy.
2) A 16-inch water line along White Jenkins Road that is hydraulically necessary to
support the supply to Cherryville.
3) A booster pump station to deliver water to Cherryville through the
interconnection.
4) A rural water system, mostly 12" and 6" water lines, to serve the area within a 1-
mile radius of the potential Piedmont Lithium mine site.
2.0 EXISTING GASTONIA WATER SYSTEM
The City of Gastonia / Two Rivers Utilities (TRU) owns and operates a public water system
under PWS ID No. 01-36-010. According to Gastonia's 2019 Local Water Supply Plan, the
system consists of a water treatment plant, three elevated storage tanks, and approximately 631
miles of 1-inch through 42-inch water transmission and distribution lines.
Gastonia draws its water from Mountain Island Lake on a normal basis and the South Fork
Catawba River on an emergency basis. After drawing its water from Mountain Island Lake, TRU
treats the water at the City of Gastonia's water treatment plant prior to distributing it. The
original part of Gastonia's water treatment plant was built in the early 1920s and has been
expanded five times since then. Based on TRU's 2019 local water supply plan, the water
treatment plant's current permitted capacity is 27.3 MGD. There are 5.5 million gallons of
storage at the water treatment plant plus an additional 7 million gallons of storage in the storage
tanks located in different areas of the city. Based on conversations with TRU staff, the treatment
plant has adequate capacity to support its existing customers, the expected future growth of TRU,
and the potential interconnection with Cherryville.
According to the Local Water Suppl Plan, Gastonia's system had an average daily demand of
8.358 MGD across its residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional customers within the
City's system in 2019. In addition to the customers within the City, Gastonia has bulk -rate water
relationships with Belmont, Bessemer City, Clover (SC), Dallas / Spencer Mt Village, Lowell,
McAdenville, and Ranlo. Gastonia's average bulk water sales are summarized in the following
table:
LKC LKC Engineering, PLLC
Aberdeen, NC P a g e 12

Gaston County Economic Development Commission LKC No. GCEDC-21.01
Summary of Gastonia-Cherryville Water Interconnection Study
Table 1: Gastonia Bulk Water Sales (2019)
Average
Contract
Contract
Purchaser
PWSID
Daily Sold
Amount
Expiration
Use Type
(MGD)
(MGD)
Belmont
01-36-015
0.0000
-
2020
Emergency
Bessemer City
01-36-025
0.0000
1.7000
2028
Emergency
Clover, SC
46-10-005
0.7840
1.0170
2045
Regular
Dallas / Spencer
01-36-065
0.1250
1.0000
2028
Regular
Mt Village
Lowell
01-36-060
0.3610
0.6180
2029
Regular
McAdenville
01-36-045
0.2710
1.000
2030
Regular
Ranlo
01-36-034
0.3900
0.6000
2040
Regular
During preparation of this study, LKC evaluated the ability of Gastonia's water system to
provide a secondary supply source to Cherryville. The proposed point of connection is in the
northwest corner of the City's existing water system at Costner Elementary School. There are
two elevated tanks that provide service to the northern part of the City's system:
• East Tank, located on E. Ozark Avenue just south of I-85; and
• West Tank, located on Jenkins Dairy Road just east of NC274.
Both tanks operate at a high-water elevation of 976' MSL.
LKC used GIS mapping information provided by Gastonia to build a hydraulic model of the
primary water lines in the northern part of the City's system. For conservancy purposes, only
water lines over 12" in diameter were modeled.
The proposed connection point around Costner Elementary School historically has low operating
pressures and low available fire flows mostly due to the topography. The ground elevations in
this area are approximately 875', compared to the service tank elevations of 976'. This is
discussed in more detail later in the report.
A map of the existing Gastonia water system components relative to the connection with
Cherryville can be found in Appendix A.
3.0 EXISTING CHERRYVILLE WATER SYSTEM
The City of Cherryville owns and operates a public water system under PWS ID No. 01-36-030.
According to Cherryville's Local Water Supply Plan, the water supply system consists of a water
treatment plant and approximately 35 miles of 2-inch through 16-inch water transmission and
distribution lines. The City's primary water source is Indian Creek. Based on Cherryville's local
water supply plan, the average withdrawal from Indian Creek was 0.7500 MGD during 2020.
LKC LKC Engineering, PLLC
Aberdeen, NC P a g e 13

Gaston County Economic Development Commission LKC No. GCEDC-21.01
Summary of Gastonia-Cherryville Water Interconnection Study
Although the Local Water Supply Plan for Cherryville shows a 20-year safe yield of 3.200 MGD
for Indian Creek, it is recommended this figure be re-evaluated based on flows recorded during
the 2002 and 2007 droughts before it is relied upon for the full capacity.
From the City's website, the John M. McGinnis Water Treatment Facility was built in 1963.
Originally constructed as a 1.5 MGD plant, in 1974 it was expanded to treat up to 3.2 million
gallons per day.
The City maintains two elevated storage tanks with a combined capacity of 2 million gallons for
finished water storage and maintains a raw water reservoir with a storage capacity of 10 million
gallons. Cherryville's elevated storage tanks operate at a hydraulic grade of approximately 1,093
ft MSL.
4.0 PROPOSED INTERCONNECTION PROJECT
4.1 Proposed Interconnection Waterline
The proposed water line interconnection between Gastonia and Cherryville involves
approximately 42,500 linear feet of 16-inch waterline following Dallas-Cherryville Hwy
from the existing Gastonia 16-inch waterline near Costner Elementary School at the south
end to the intersection with Wallaby Road, where it would connect to the existing
Cherryville 12-inch waterline. A map of the proposed interconnection is included in
Appendix A.
4.2 Proposed Booster Pump Station
A booster pump station is necessary to overcome the different hydraulic grades of the two
systems and the headloss in the connecting pipes. For the purpose of the report a
maximum pumping rate of 700 gallons per minute (gpm) was used. This would provide a
maximum additional supply of approximately 1.0 MGD to Cherryville. Higher pumping
rates were modeled, and rates above 700 gpm negatively impact the existing Gastonia
customers, even with the White Jenkins Road water line discussed later.
The optimal location for the pump station is on the Gastonia side of Costner Elementary
School. This will transition the elementary school and surrounding customers to the
higher hydraulic gradient, improving the service pressure and available fire flow in this
region. The exact location of the pump station would be determined during preliminary
design.
The preliminary operating condition for the proposed pump station is approximately 700
gallons per minute at 160 feet of total dynamic head. The exact design point for the
station would be determined during preliminary design. Of the 160 feet of total dynamic
head, approximately 130' is static head and 30' is friction head. The proposed layout for
the station would feature two pumps with sufficient space for a third pump. For budget
purposes LKC assumed vertical turbine pumps installed in below -ground cans. Variable
frequent drives would be used to adjust the pump output based on system demand.
LKC LKC Engineering, PLLC
Aberdeen, NC P a g e 14

Gaston County Economic Development Commission LKC No. GCEDC-21.01
Summary of Gastonia-Cherryville Water Interconnection Study
Additional information on the proposed booster pump station operation can be found in
Appendix F.
4.3 White Jenkins Road Water Line
Gastonia's existing water system in the subject area features a single, dead-end 16" water
line extending through the Apple Creek Industrial Park, following NC279 and Old
NC277 Loop terminating just past Costner Elementary School at the proposed connection
point for the Cherryville connection. The single -feed line to this location is hydraulically
limiting and creates low suction pressures when pumping 700 gpm to Cherryville.
To alleviate this problem, a proposed 16" water line constructed along White Jenkins
Road creates a hydraulic loop in Gastonia's system on the northwest side. The proposed
White Jenkins Road water line consists of approximately 15,100 feet of 16" water line
from Fairway Drive on the south end to NC279 on the north end. This water line is a
necessary component for the booster pump station and Cherryville interconnection to
operate without noticeable, negative impacts to Gastonia's existing customers.
4.4 Cost Estimate
The total project budget for the three items discussed above is $18,514,000. This
includes construction, contingency, and budget figures for engineering, land/easement
acquisition, geotechnical reports, and legal services. A detailed breakdown for the
individual components of the proposed project can be found in Appendix B.
5.0 PROPOSED RURAL WATER DISTRIBUTION PROJECT
5.1 Area to be Served
The construction of a new mine has the potential to impact the water quantity and quality
of groundwater wells in the area. LKC studied the feasibility of constructing new water
lines along the roads in the region of the mine such that current and future residents and
businesses in the area could connect to public water.
The layout of the proposed mine and processing facilities was not provided to LKC
during development of this report. For evaluation purposes LKC assumed a general
location of the proposed mining pits based on maps and other information available from
Piedmont Lithium's website. LKC then off -set this boundary one mile in each direction
and modeled a water distribution system to serve all roads that crossed through the one
mile off -set. A map of the potential water lines can be found in Appendix A.
The rural water system would feature primarily 6" water lines, with some 4" or 2" lines
near the end of dead-end roads for water quality purposes. To support fire flow needs at
the new mining facilities, LKC assumed a 12" looped line would be needed from
LKC LKC Engineering, PLLC
Aberdeen, NC P a g e 15

Gaston County Economic Development Commission LKC No. GCEDC-21.01
Summary of Gastonia-Cherryville Water Interconnection Study
Cherryville's existing 12" line southward to the proposed 16" line on Dallas-Cherryville
Highway. The size of the proposed water lines would need to be re-evaluated when more
information is available about the fire flow requirements for the new facilities.
Based on GIS data collected from Gaston County, the rural water system evaluated in this
report will provide available public water service to approximately 600 existing
residential or business structures in the region. If all of those structures connected to the
water system, the resulting increase in average daily demand would be approximately
100,000 gallons per day.
5.2 Cost Estimate
The total project budget for the rural water system described above and shown in
Appendix A is $10,350,000. This includes construction, contingency, and budget figures
for engineering, land/easement acquisition, geotechnical reports, and legal services. A
detailed breakdown for the individual components of the proposed project can be found
in Appendix B.
LKC recommends the scope and budget for proposed rural water distribution lines be
updated as more information is available from Piedmont Lithium about the development.
The layout, size, normal water demand, and requisite fire flow of the Piedmont Lithium
site could have a noticeable impact on the scope and budget.
6.0 SCHEDULE FOR IMPLEMENTATION
The table below provides an expectation on a reasonable timeframe for implementation of the
components described in Section 4 and 5 above. Interlocal agreements, funding opportunities,
land and easement acquisition, and other factors can impact the timeframes shown below.
Table 2: Project Schedule
Preliminary design documents
5 months
Final design documents
4 months
Staff review and regulatory permitting
3 months
Bidding, award, and pre -construction activities
4 months
Construction
12 months
System startup
2 months
TOTAL ESTIMATED TIMEFRAME
30 months
LKC LKC Engineering, PLLC
Aberdeen, NC P a g e 16

Appendix A
Project Maps

Legend
Gastonia Tanks
Existing Gaston County WL
2-inch
4-inch
6-inch
8-inch
10-inch
12-inch
14-inch
16-inch
18-inch
20-inch
24-inch
30-inch
36-inch
42-inch
48-inch
54-inch
72-inch
Modeled Waterlines
a
MAP 1 - EXISTING GASTONIA WATER SYSTEM
GASTON IA -CH ERRYVI LLE INTERCONNECTION STUDY
PGASTON COUNTY, NC
0 2,000 4,000 8,000 Feet
-
- . 1 I i' .• �1
,EM• �.� r �@P• I'l:!/uqu�u ly �. c�Ynr.�.nolr•.,�'�� •
/�.� � ' •�11► �%,S- Q�� - �1�=-�� �-unu� F li, i�A_=-'.:�_=,:�LL�'lii��`�•�i`'i`
ON
ff
y_...
_ 1
moo- r
fro
l� /
oilON
a —~

Appendix B
Proposed Interconnection Cost Estimate

GASTON COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
GASTONIA-CHERRYVILLE INTERCONNECTION
SUMMARY OF TOTAL PRELIMINARY BUDGET
Dallas Cherryville Hwy Waterline
$9,974,000
Booster Pump Station
$1,523,000
White Jenkins Road Waterline
$3,134,000
Subtotal Construction Estimate
$14,631,000
Contingencies @ 10%
$1,463,000
Engineering, budgeted @ 15%
$2,195,000
Easement Acquisition (budget)
$150,000
Geotechnical Investigation
$40,000
Legal Fees
$30,000
Permit Fees / Advertisements / Misc.
$5,000
Total Preliminary Project Budget
$18,514,000

GASTON COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
GASTONIA-CHERRYVILLE INTERCONNECTION
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE
16" Water Line along NC279 starting at the connection to Gastonia near Costner Elementary School and extending to
Cherryville to the Walaby Road intersection.
Item Description
Quantities
Units
Unit Cost
Extended Cost
1.
16" Class 250 DIP Water Main
42,000
LF
$95.00
$3,990,000.00
2.
16" Restrained Joint Class 250 DIP Water Main
500
LF
$140.00
$70,000.00
3.
32" Steel Casing Installed by Bore and Jack
1,400
LF
$1,600.00
$2,240,000.00
4.
18" HDPE Installed by Directional Drill
2,500
LF
$800.00
$2,000,000.00
5.
Air Release Valve
15
LS
$7,000.00
$105,000.00
6.
Fire Hydrant Assembly
40
EA
$4,400.00
$176,000.00
7.
16" Gate Valve
50
EA
$5,500.00
$275,000.00
8.
8" Gate Valve
5
EA
$1,800.00
$9,000.00
9.
6" Gate Valve
55
EA
$1,300.00
$71,500.00
10.
16"x8" Tee
23
EA
$1,600.00
$36,800.00
11.
16"x6" Tee
23
EA
$1,400.00
$32,200.00
12.
16" 90-Degree Bend
8
EA
$2,000.00
$16,000.00
13.
16" 45-Degree Bend
15
EA
$1,800.00
$27,000.00
14.
16" 22.5-Degree Bend
15
EA
$1,800.00
$27,000.00
15.
6" Plug
4
EA
$400.00
$1,600.00
16.
Connection to Existing Water Main
2
EA
$8,000.00
$16,000.00
17.
Rock Excavation
4,400
CY
$85.00
$374,000.00
18.
Select Backfill
3,300
CY
$35.00
$115,500.00
19.
Concrete Driveway Repair
500
SY
$65.00
$32,500.00
20.
Asphalt Replacement and Repair
500
SY
$55.00
$27,500.00
21.
Gravel Driveway Repair
500
TONS
$45.00
$22,500.00
22.
Pressure Testing and Disinfection
42,500
LF
$3.50
$148,750.00
23.
Erosion Control
1
LS
$75,000.00
$75,000.00
24.
Clearing and Grubbing
1
LS
$25,000.00
$25,000.00
25.
Site Cleanup and Restoration
1
LS
$60,000.00
$60,000.00
CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE: $9,974,000

GASTON COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
GASTONIA-CHERRYVILLE INTERCONNECTION
WATER BOOSTER PUMP STATION
Preliminary Cost Estimate
Booster Pump Station
$1,080,000
Clearing, grubbing, and grading
$25,000
Gravel access road
$15,000
Concrete
$35,000
Pump station building
$250,000
Equipment - pumps, motors, etc.
$270,000
Installation and startup
$140,000
Internal piping and valves
$80,000
Coating systems
$30,000
Electrical
$160,000
Mechanical
$75,000
Yard Piping
$75,000
SCADA Systems
$60,000
Site Restoration, Fence, and Landscaping
$50,000
Generator and Automatic Transfer Switch
$95,000
Contractor's Overhead and Profit (12.0%)
$163,000
CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE
$1,523,000

GASTON COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
WHITE JENKINS LOOP
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE
16" Water Line along White Jenkins Road starting at the NC275 / Fairview Drive intersection and extending to the
White Jenkins Rd / NC279 intersection
Item Description
Quantities
Units
Unit Cost
Extended Cost
l .
16" Class 250 DIP Water Main
14,000
LF
$105.00
$1,470,000.00
2.
16" Restrained Joint Class 250 DIP Water Main
500
LF
$140.00
$70,000.00
3.
32" Steel Casing Installed by Bore and Jack
350
LF
$1,600.00
$560,000.00
4.
18" HDPE Installed by Directional Drill
600
LF
$800.00
$480,000.00
5.
Air Release Valve
2
LS
$7,000.00
$14,000.00
6.
Fire Hydrant Assembly
12
EA
$4,400.00
$52,800.00
7.
16" Gate Valve
12
EA
$5,500.00
$66,000.00
8.
8" Gate Valve
0
EA
$1,800.00
$0.00
9.
6" Gate Valve
12
EA
$1,300.00
$15,600.00
10.
16"x8" Tee
0
EA
$1,600.00
$0.00
11.
16"x6" Tee
12
EA
$1,400.00
$16,800.00
12.
16" 90-Degree Bend
5
EA
$2,000.00
$10,000.00
13.
16" 45-Degree Bend
8
EA
$1,800.00
$14,400.00
14.
16" 22.5-Degree Bend
8
EA
$1,800.00
$14,400.00
15.
6" Plug
0
EA
$400.00
$0.00
16.
Connection to Existing Water Main
1
EA
$8,000.00
$8,000.00
17.
Rock Excavation
1,500
CY
$85.00
$127,500.00
18.
Select Backfill
1,125
CY
$35.00
$39,375.00
19.
Concrete Driveway Repair
300
SY
$65.00
$19,500.00
20.
Asphalt Replacement and Repair
300
SY
$55.00
$16,500.00
21.
Gravel Driveway Repair
300
TONS
$45.00
$13,500.00
22.
Pressure Testing and Disinfection
14,500
LF
$3.50
$50,750.00
23.
Erosion Control
1
LS
$30,000.00
$30,000.00
24.
Clearing and Grubbing
1
LS
$15,000.00
$15,000.00
25.
1 Site Cleanup and Restoration
1
LS
$30,000.00
$30,000.00
CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE: $3,134,000

Appendix C
Proposed Rural Water System Cost Estimate

GASTON COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
RURAL WATER SYSTEM
SUMMARY OF TOTAL PRELIMINARYBUDGET
Subtotal Construction Estimate $8,092,000
Contingencies @ 10% $809,000
Engineering, budgeted @ 15% $1,214,000
Easement Acquisition (budget) $150,000
Geotechnical Investigation $50,000
Legal Fees $30,000
Permit Fees / Advertisements / Misc. $5,000
Total Preliminary Project Budget $10,350,000

GASTON COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
RURAL WATER SYSTEM AROUND PEIDMONT LITHIUM SITE
PROPOSED SCOPE
WM
Route Description
Length (ft)
Total Houses
Diameter
Estimate
Hephzibah Church Road and Will Kiser
1
Road — From St Marks Church Road to
7,350
35
12 inch
$870,850.00
Gaston-Webbs Chapel Road
2
Gaston-Webbs Chapel Road — From Will
1,350
2
12 inch
$141,025.00
Kiser Road to Aderholdt Road
3
Aderholdt Road — From Gaston-Webbs
14,800
40
12 inch
$1,544,500.00
Chapel Road to He hzibah Church Road
4
Mauney Road — From Hephzibah Church
5,900
59
12 inch
$658,525.00
Road to Dallas-Cherryville Hwy
5
Gaston-Webbs Chapel Road — From
2,550
22
6 inch
$163,425.00
Aderholdt Road to Landers Chapel Road
6
Hephzibah Church Road — From Will
15,250
50
6 inch
$791,975.00
Kiser Road to Aderholdt Road
7
Whiteside Road — From Hephzibah Church
14,500
57
6 inch
$729,350.00
Road to Dallas-Cherryville Hwy
8
Landers Chapel Road — From Gaston-
10,900
60
6 inch
$687,275.00
Webbs Chapel Road to Long Shoals Road
9
Long Shoals Road — From Landers Chapel
13,100
84
6 inch
$802,900.00
Road to Dallas-Cherryville Hwy
10
Country Way Drive — From Long Shoals
2,450
18
6 inch
$157,675.00
Road to end
11
S J Crawford Road — From Landers Chapel
2,700
21
6 inch
$168,675.00
Road to end
12
Deer Creek Drive and Swift Creek Court
2,300
17
6 inch
$153,675.00
13
Flat Rock Drive and Butterfield Lane
2,100
32
6 inch
$166,550.00
14
Marshall Allen Trail — From Hephzibah
1,500
3
6 inch
$97,325.00
Church Road to end
15
Hastings Road— From Hephzibah Church
2,350
11
6 inch
$183,000.00
Road to Aderholdt Road
16
Forest Dellinger Road and Forest Ride
5,700
62
6 inch
$342,825.00
17
Rudisill Road — From Aderholdt Road to
7,900
34
6 inch
$432,800.00
Lon Shoals Road
TOTAL LENGTH: 112,700
TOTAL WATER MAIN CONSTRUCTION: $8,092,000
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES: 607

Appendix D
City of Gastonia L-ocal Water Supply Plan

6/7/2021
DWR :: Local Water Supply Planning
Two Rivers Utilities/Gastonia
Rltir•lp,
The Division of Water Resources (DWR) provides the data contained within this Local Water Supply Plan (LWSP) as a courtesy and service to our customers. DWR staff does not field verify data. Neither DWR, nor any other party involved in
the preparation of this LWSP attests that the data is completely free of errors and omissions. Furthermore, data users are cautioned that LWSPs labeled PROVISIONAL have yet to be reviewed by DWR staff. Subsequent review may result in
significant revision. Questions regarding the accuracy or limitations of usage of this data should be directed to the water system and/or DWR.
1. System Information
Water System Name:
Two Rivers Utilities/Gastonia
PWSID:
01-36-010
Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 1748
Ownership:
Municipality
Gastonia, NC 28053
Contact Person:
Kyle Butler
Title:
Utilities Engineer
Phone:
704-866-6768
Cell/Mobile:
704-214-9078
Line Type Size Range (Inches) Estimated % of lines
Asbestos Cement 6-16 10.10 %
Cast Iron 6-42 24.50 %
Ductile Iron 6-36 34.10 %
Galvanized Iron 1-2 1.90 %
Polyvinyl Chloride 2-10 29.40 %
What are the estimated total miles of distribution system lines? 631 Miles
How many feet of distribution lines were replaced during 2019? 1,443 Feet
How many feet of new water mains were added during 2019? 24,350 Feet
How many meters were replaced in 2019? 1,316
How old are the oldest meters in this system? 17 Year(s)
How many meters for outdoor water use, such as irrigation, are not billed for sewer services? 2,482
What is this system's finished water storage capacity? 13.7500 Million Gallons
Has water pressure been inadequate in any part of the system since last update? Line breaks that were repaired quickly should not be included. No
Complete
Does this system have a program to work or flush hydrants? Yes, As Needed
Does this system have a valve exercise program? Yes, 2 Years or More
Does this system have a cross -connection program? Yes
Does this system have a program to replace meters? Yes
Does this system have a plumbing retrofit program? No
Does this system have an active water conservation public education program? Yes
Does this system have a leak detection program? Yes
® We purchased a valve operation trailer and formed a valve operation crew in 2016. We have located and verified the operation of 5,632 valves which includes GPS locating the valves to go in our GIS System. WTP staff flow hydrants on
an as needed basis for water quality. The fire department performs static pressure tests on hydrants throughout the year and reports any operational issues to our Utilities Maintenance Division for repairs. The valve crew also has leak
detection equipment available to locate unseen leaks.
What type of rate structure is used? Fiat/Fixed, Increasing Block
How much reclaimed water does this system use? 0.0000 MGD For how many connections? 0
Does this system have an interconnection with another system capable of providing water in an emergency? Yes
® We have emergency water connections with the City of Belmont, the City of Bessemer City, and the Town of Dallas. Their system capacities and hydraulic gradient do not allow them to provide adequate supply to our system.
2. Water Use Information
Sub-Basin(s) % of Service Population County(s) % of Service Population
South Fork Catawba River (03-2) 70 % Gaston 100 %
Catawba River (03-1) 30 %
What was the year-round population served in 2019? 85,556
Has this system acquired another system since last report? No
® Service area map will be submitted at a later date.
Type of Use
Metered
Metered
Non -Metered
Non -Metered
Connections Average
Use (MGD)
Connections
Estimated Use (MGD)
Residential
27,971
4.1840
17
0.0020
Commercial
2,908
2.2230
45
0.0260
Industrial
114
0.7590
0
0.0000
Institutional
196
1.1920
0
0.0000
How much water was used for system
processes (backwash, line cleaning, flushing, etc.)? 5.9850 MGD
® Non -metered connections are
for permitted hydrant usage for filling pools or water for construction
sites that are billed through miscellaneous invoice.
System Process Water includes 5.298 MGD water to Rankin Lake for water quality. Some of the raw water pumped from Mountain Island Lake into Rankin Lake which is our raw water reservoir is used to maintain water levels and water
quality. There is no other water supply to Rankin Lake. The remainder of the raw water is sent to the WTP for treatment.
https://www.ncwater.org/WUDC/app/LWSP/report.php?pwsid=Ol -36-010 1 /4

6/7/2021
DWR :: Local Water Supply Planning
Regarding the high amount of unaccounted-for water (21 % of total supply) -- we continue to work to increase the accuracy of our internal reporting of filling and flushing new water lines and flushing for water quality. We also had several
large water main breaks in 2019 which would have increased the non -revenue water volumes. The water withdrawal volumes were higher due to refilling the raw water lines and Rankin Lake following the repair of a raw water line break.
We installed new distribution system meters as part of the recently completed water treatment plant renovation project. The valve operation crew continues to locate and verify the operation of the valves in our system as mentioned in
Sections 1 and 5 of the report. Verification of the location and operation of our valves will reduce the response time and shut down of water lines when we have main breaks. We will continue to use our leak detection equipment to find and
repair underground leaks.
Average Days Contract
Required to pipe Sue(s)
Use
Purchaser PWSID Daily Sold
Used
comply with water (Inches)
Type
(MGD) MGD Expiration
Recurring
use restrictions?
Belmont 01-36-015 0.0000 0 2020
Yes
Yes 12
Emergency
Bessemer City 01-36-025 0.0000 0 1.7000 2028
Yes
Yes 12
Emergency
Clover, SC 46-10-006 0.7840 365 1.0170 2045
Yes
Yes 16
Regular
Dallas/Spencer Mt Village 01-36-065 0.1250 365 1.0000 2028
Yes
Yes 12
Regular
Lowell 01-36-060 0.3610 365 0.6180 2029
Yes
Yes 12,6
Regular
McAdenville 01-36-045 0.2710 365 1.0000 2030
Yes
Yes 16
Regular
Ranlo 01-36-034 0.3900 365 0.6000 2040
Yes
Yes 8
Regular
® We entered into a Supplemental Water Connection Sales Agreement with the City of Bessemer City on 6-26-2018 for a term of 10 years. No usage in 2019. We are
currently working with Bessemer City on the project which includes the
construction of a booster pump station this project should be completed sometime in 2021.
We have a Supplemental Water Sale Agreement with the Town of Dallas to formalize emergency water sales. There are 2 metering points
that are used for emergency
water use. We also directly serve a small section
of Spencer Mountain
Village which is in the Dallas City Limits. In 2019, the monthly average for Spencer Mountain Village was 763,050 gallons. Our billing
records indicate that we billed
Dallas for 36,418,400 gallons for a monthly average
of 3,034,867 gallons
of emergency water use. These volumes were combined to arrive at the total ADF of 0.125 reported in our LWSP.
The sales to Dallas/Spencer Mountain Village include Emergency Sales on 59 days at a rate of 0.617 MGD and Regular Sales to Spencer Mountain Village at a rate of 0.025 MGD.
The difference in reported sales and purchase to/from Lowell in 2019 may be due to the monthly billing records. Our billing cycle does not start on the first of the month. Lowell's monthly readings may be different.
3. Water Supply Sources
Monthly Withdrawals & Purchases
Average Daily Max Day Average Daily
Max Day
Average Daily
Max Day
Use (MGD) Use (MGD) Use (MGD)
Use (MGD)
Use (MGD)
Use (MGD)
Jan 18.0000 18.0000 May 20.3100
27.7000
Sep 26.1600
27.7000
Feb 18.0000 18.0000 Jun 20.0300
27.7000
Oct 26.3300
27.6000
Mar 17.8900 18.0000 Jul 23.6500
27.6000
Nov 18.3300
23.2500
Apr 18.0000 18.0000 Aug 23.6600
27.7000
Dec 18.1600
23.0000
® High daily withdrawals were for catching up on off-peak days and hours during the water plant renovation project to minimize peak electric cost and to refill the raw water lines and Rankin Lake following a raw water
line repair.
LOW
Surface Water Sources
Average Daily Withdrawal
Da
Available Raw
Available
Water Supply
Usable On -Stream
Stream Reservoir
Withdrawal (MGD)
RawWater
MGD Days Used
MGD 'Qualifier
Storage (MG)
Catawba River Mountain Island Lake 20.7430 365
36.0000
75.0000 C
8,601.0000
South Fork Catawba River 0.0000 0
0.0000
15.5000 F
0.0000
Qualifier: C=Contract Amount, SY20=20-year Safe Yield, SY50=50-year Safe Yield, F=20 % of 7Q10 or other instream flow requirement, CUA=Capacity Use Area Permit
Surface Water Sources (continued)
Stream Reservoir Drainage Area Metered?
Sub -Basin
County Year
Use
(sq mi)
Offline
Type
Catawba River Mountain Island Lake 1,819 Yes Catawba River (03-1)
Gaston
Regular
South Fork Catawba River 560 No South Fork Catawba River (03-2)
Gaston
Emergency
What is this system's off -stream raw water supply storage capacity? 180 Million gallons
Are surface water sources monitored? Yes, Daily
Are you required to maintain minimum flows downstream of its intake or dam? No
Does this system anticipate transferring surface water between river basins? Yes
® The sub -basin transfer between the South Fork Catawba and Catawba River will continue.
Water Purchases From Other Systems
Average Days Contact
Required to pipe Size(s)
Use
Seller PWSID Daily Purchased
Used
comply with water
(Inches)
Type
(MGD) MGD Expiration
Recurring
use restrictions?
Belmont 01-36-015 0.0000 0 0.0000 2020
Yes
Yes 12
Emergency
Bessemer City 01-36-025 0.0000 0 0.0000
Yes
Yes 12
Emergency
Dallas 01-36-065 0.0000 0 0.0000
Yes 12,10
Emergency
Plant Name PerminMGD)ed pacity Is Raw Water Metered? Is Finished Water Ouput Metered? Source
Gastonia WTP 27.3000 Yes Yes Mountain Island Lk (Primary) SF Catawba Riv (Sec.)
Did average daily water production exceed 80 % of approved plant capacity for five consecutive days during 2019? No
If yes, was any water conservation implemented? No
Did average daily water production exceed 90% of approved plant capacity for five consecutive days during 2019? No
If yes, was any water conservation implemented? No
Are peak day demands expected to exceed the water treatment plant capacity in the next 10 years? No
4. Wastewater Information
Average Daily Average Daily Average Daily
Discharge (MGD) Discharge (MGD) Discharge (MGD)
-- 14.6200 May 12.4400 Sep 11.5100
https://www.ncwater.org/WUDC/app/LWSP/report.php?pwsid=Ol -36-010 2/4

6/7/2021
Feb
Mar
Apr
DWR :: Local Water Supply Planning
16.3200 Jun 13.3100
14.3200 Jul
14.3300 Aug
Two Rivers UtilitiesIGastonia's 2019 Monthly Discharges
17
cO�
g 16
p 15
0 14
13
r7
12
0
F 11
,mac 4�
How many sewer connections does this system have? 28,501
How many water service connections with septic systems does this system have? 2,695
Are there plans to build or expand wastewater treatment facilities in the next 10 years? No
49 Oc -�Pa e
Oct
Nov
Dec
Permitted Capacity
Design Capacity
Annual
AverageMaximum
Day Discharge
Permit Number
(MGD)
(MGD)
Daily Discharge
(MGD)
Receiving Stream
(MGD)
NC0006033
4.0000
4.0000
0.9100
2.6100
South Fork Catawba River
NCO020184
16.0000
16.0000
9.2000
25.7000
South Fork River
NCO040070
1.0000
0.7500
0.0000
0.0000
Unnamed Trib. to Long Creek
NCO074268
6.0000
6.0000
3.0300
10.9700
Crowders Creek
ND0084883
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Land Application (SC)
WQ0001793
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Land Application (NC)
® Land Application
Permits - W00001793 applied 1617 dry tons over 133 days in
NC. ND0084883 applied 176 dry tons over 15 days in SC.
There was no discharge to surface waters
from NCO040070 in 2019. The wastewater from this facility was discharged
to Long Creek W WTP for treatment
and discharge.
12.1000
11.7600
13.4700
Receiving Basin
South Fork Catawba River(03-2)
South Fork Catawba River (03-2)
South Fork Catawba River (03-2)
Catawba River (03-1)
Catawba River (03-1)
Catawba River (03-1)
Average Daily Amount
Contract
Water System
PWSID
Type
Maximum (MGD)
MGD
Days Used
Belmont
01-36-015
Receiving
0.0580
365
2.0000
Bessemer City (Abernethy Creek)
01-36-025
Receiving
0.4770
365
1.0000
Bessemer City (Oates Rd)
01-36-025
Receiving
0.4920
365
1.0000
Clover
46-10-006
Receiving
0.7850
365
0.8670
Dallas - Spencer Mountain Village
01-36-065
Receiving
0.0250
365
0.6000
High Shoals
01-36-075
Receiving
0.0290
365
0.1000
Kings Mountain
01-23-020
Receiving
0.0200
365
1.0000
Lowell
01-36-060
Receiving
0.0500
365
0.0000
Ranlo
01-36-034
Receiving
0.2830
365
0.4000
Town of McAdenville
01-36-045
Receiving
0.0340
165
0.1800
Town of Stanley
01-36-035
Receiving
0.7270
365
1.0000
® There are 2 permitted sewer connections with Bessemer City with separate contracts:
Oates Rd with
a contract maximum
of 1 MGD and an
ADF of 0.492
and Abernethy Creek with a contract maximum of 0.608 MGD and a ADF of 0.477.
Bessemer City is reporting these as a total of 0.9630 MGD.
We have entered into an Emergency Sewer Connection with Dallas. Flow has not started. The project will be bid in 2020.However,
we do presently
serve
a small section of Dallas called Spencer
Mountain Village, and the now from
that
development in 2019 is the 0.0250 MGD.
Kings Mountain has 2 metering points with very low flows. the ADF for 2019 was 0.02
MGD.
Stanley has 2 metering points with an ADF of 0.727 MGD.
5. Planning
2019
2020
2030
2040 2050
2060
Year -Round Population 85,556
86,513
95,763
107,931
122,820
141,575
Seasonal Population 0
0
0
0 I
0
0
Residential 4.1860
4.1526
4.5966
5.1807
5.8954
6.7956
Commercial 2.2490
2.2940
2.7420
3.3420
4.0740
4.9660
Industrial 0.7590
0.7740
0.9250
1.1280
1.3750
1.6760
Institutional 1.1920
1.2160
1.4530
1.7710
2.1590
2.6320
System Process 5.9850
4.7100
3.3370
3.2710
3.2440
3.5170
Unaccounted-for 4.4410
3.2500
2.5000
2.2500
2.0000
1.7500
® Regarding the significant reduction in projected system process water use -- we recently completed a WTP renovation project and
have installed
a membrane
filtration train at the WTP and will be recycling some of the system process
water. A future phase of the project will upgrade other trains to membrane filtration.
The projections
will be adjusted as we determine how much of the process water we can recycle.
Contract
Purchaser PWSID MGD Year Begin Year End Pipe Size(s) (Inches) Use Type
Bessemer City 01-36-025 1.7000 2020 2028 12 Regular
® The Bessemer City water interconnect project should be operational sometime in 2021. The connection will supply supplemental water to Bessemer City on an as needed basis.
https://www. ncwater.org/W U DC/app/LWSP/report. ph p?pwsid=01-36-010 3/4

6/7/2021 DWR:: Local Water Supply Planning
2019 2020 2030 2040
2050
2060
Surface Water Supply 75.0000 75.0000 75.0000 75.0000
75.0000
75.0000
Ground Water Supply 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Purchases 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Future Supplies 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Total Available Supply (MGD) 75.0000 75.0000 75.0000 75.0000
75.0000
75.0000
Service Area Demand 18.8120 16.3966 15.5536 16.9427
18.7474
21.3366
Sales 1.9310 4.2350 4.2350 4.2350
4.2350
4.2350
Future Sales 1.7000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Total Demand (MGD) 20.7430 22.3316 19.7886 21.1777
22.9824
25.5716
Demand as Percent of Supply 28 % 30 % 26 % 28 %
31 %
34
The purpose of the above chart is to show a general indication of how the long-term per capita water demand changes over time. The per capita water demand may actually be different than indicated
due to seasonal populations and the accuracy of
data submitted. Water systems that have calculated long-term per capita water demand based on a methodology that produces different results may submit their information in the notes field.
Your long-term water demand is 49 gallons per capita per day. What demand management practices do you plan to implement to reduce the per capita water demand (i.e. conduct regular water audits, implement a plumbing retrofit program, employ
practices such as rainwater harvesting or reclaimed water)? If these practices are covered elsewhere in your plan, indicate where the practices are discussed here.
Are there other demand management practices you will implement to reduce your future supply needs? We will continue to use an increasing block rate for residential and irrigation water use
to promote conservation. We will
continue to use our leak
detection equipment to locate and repair leaks. We will continue to replace water meters in our meter change -out program to maintain accuracy of our small meters and test our larger meters as per our established meter testing policy.
What supplies other than the ones listed in future supplies are being considered to meet your future supply needs? The water supply at Mountain Island Lake will meet our needs into the future.
Our current permit is for an average daily withdrawal of
75 MGD.
How does the water system intend to implement the demand management and supply planning components above? We will continue to use an increasing block rate structure and a full cost recovery
rate structure. We will continue
our leak detection
program and meter testing and change -out programs. We will monitor our per capita water use annually as we update the LWSP in order to work to reduce our per capita water use.
Has this system participated in regional water supply or water use planning? Yes, We participate in the Catawba Wateree Water Management Group and the Catawba Wateree Drought Management Group with other water purveyors in the Catawba
Wateree Basin.
What major water supply reports or studies were used for planning? We participated in the development of the Catawba Wateree Basin Master Plan. By participating in the Water Management Advisory Group and the DMAG, we have access to
reports showing the water Flow information and the available water supply in the Catawba River above our intake on Mountain Island Lake. We follow the Low Flow Protocol from the DMAG to determine what level of water conservation may be
needed.
Please describe any other needs or issues regarding your water supply sources, any water system deficiencies or needed improvements (storage, treatment, etc.) or your ability to meet present and future water needs. Include both quantity and
quality considerations, as well as financial, technical, managerial, permitting, and compliance issues: Protection of the water quality in our water supply on Mountain Island Lake. Funding assistance to allow further regionalization of the utility
systems in Gaston County. The possible impacts of inter -basin transfer regulations on our water supplies from the Catawba River Basin and Mountain Island Lake. Adequate funding sources to maintain and expand the water system to meet the
needs or our customers and the future needs of Gaston County.
The Division of Water Resources (DWR) provides the data contained within this Local Water Supply Plan (LWSP) as a courtesy and service to our customers. DWR staff does not field verify data. Neither DWR, nor any other party involved in
the preparation of this LWSP attests that the data is completely free of errors and omissions. Furthermore, data users are cautioned that LWSPs labeled PROVISIONAL have yet to be reviewed by DWR staff. Subsequent review may result in
significant revision. Questions regarding the accuracy or limitations of usage of this data should be directed to the water system and/or DWR.
https://www.ncwater.org/WUDC/app/LWSP/report.php?pwsid=Ol -36-010 4/4

Appendix E
City of Cherryville Locai Water Supply Plan

6/7/2021
DWR :: Local Water Supply Planning
Cherryville 2020
The Division of Water Resources (DWR) provides the data contained within this Local Water Supply Plan (LWSP) as a courtesy and service to our customers. DWR staff does not field verify data. Neither DWR, nor any other party involved in
the preparation of this LWSP attests that the data is completely free of errors and omissions. Furthermore, data users are cautioned that LWSPs labeled PROVISIONAL have yet to be reviewed by DWR staff. Subsequent review may result in
significant revision. Questions regarding the accuracy or limitations of usage of this data should be directed to the water system and/or DWR.
1. System Information
Water System Name: Cherryville PWSID: 01-36-030
Mailing Address: 116 S. Mountain Street Ownership: Municipality
Cherryville, NC 28021
Contact Person: Patty Hall Title: Water Plant Superintendent
Phone: [phone] Cell/Mobile: [phone]
Distribution System
Line Type
Size Range (Inches)
Asbestos Cement
6-12
Cast Iron
6-16
Ductile Iron
6-12
Galvanized Iron
1-3
Polyvinyl Chloride
2-12
What are the estimated total miles of distribution system lines? 35 Miles
How many feet of distribution lines were replaced during 2020? 0 Feet
How many feet of new water mains were added during 2020? 0 Feet
How many meters were replaced in 2020? 500
How old are the oldest meters in this system? 51 Year(s)
How many meters for outdoor water use, such as irrigation, are not billed for sewer services? 39
What is this system's finished water storage capacity? 2.0000 Million Gallons
Has water pressure been inadequate in any part of the system since last update? Line breaks that were
repaired quickly should not be included. No
Does
this system have a
program to work or flush hydrants? Yes, Annually
Does
this system have a
valve exercise program? No
Does
this system have a
cross -connection program? Yes
Does
this system have a
program to replace meters? Yes
Does
this system have a
plumbing retrofit program? No
Does
this system have an
active water conservation public education program? Yes
Does
this system have a
leak detection program? No
What type of rate structure is used? Uniform
How much reclaimed water does this system use? 0.0000 MGD For how many connections? 0
Does this system have an interconnection with another system capable of providing water in an emergency? Yes
2. Water Use Information
Sub-Basin(s) % of Service Population
South Fork Catawba River (03-2) 100 %
What was the year-round population served in 2020? 6,102
Has this system acquired another system since last report? No
Type of Use
Metered
Metered
Connections
Average
Use (MGD)
Residential
2,690
0.3040
Commercial
274
0.0670
Industrial
20
0.0300
Institutional
31
0.0070
How much water was used for system processes
(backwash, line cleaning,
flushing, etc.)? 0.3000 MGD
Average Days
Contract
Purchaser
PWSID
Daily Sold Used
(MGD)
MGD Expiration
CITY OF LINCOLNTON
01-55-010
0.0000 0
1.2000 2024
3. Water Supply Sources
County(s)
Gaston
Non -Metered
Connections
0
0
0
0
Recurring
Yes
Complete
Estimated %of lines
10.00 %
35.00 %
15.00 %
2.00 %
38.00 %
% of Service Population
100 %
Non -Metered
Estimated Use (MGD)
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Required to Pipe Size(s) Use
comply with water (Inches) Type
use restrictions?
Yes 12 Emergency
Average Daily Max Day Average Daily Max Day Average Daily Max Day
Use (MGD) Use (MGD) Use (MGD) Use (MGD) Use (MGD) Use (MGD)
Jan 0.6840 0.8960 May 0.7970 0.9110 Sep 0.7740 1.0570
https://www. ncwater.org/W U DC/app/LWSP/report. ph p?pwsid=01-36-030&year=2020
1/3

6/7/2021 DWR :: Local Water Supply Planning
Feb 0.6730 1.0600 Jun 0.7970
0.9920
Oct 0.7530
0.9640
Mar 0.7420 0.8570 Jul 0.8330
0.9680
Nov 0.7270
0.9170
Apr 0.7930 0.9760 Aug 0.8040
1.0710
Dec 0.6360
0.8010
Ili
Ground Water Sources
Average Daily Withdrawal (MGD)
12-Hour Supply
Name or Number MaxDay Withdrawal (MGD)
(MGD)
CUA Reduction
Year Offline Use Type
MGD Days Used
WP1 0.0000 0 0
0.3000
Emergency
Ground Water Sources (continued)
Casing Depth Screen Depth (Feet)
Name or Number Well Depth (Fee[) (Feet)
Well Diameter (Inches)
Pump Intake Depth (Feet) Metered?
Top Bottom
WP1
No
Are ground water levels monitored? No,
Does this system have a wellhead protection program? No
Surface Water Sources
Average Daily Withdrawal Day
AvailaMaximum
Water leRaw
Supply
Usable On -Stream
Stream Reservoir Withdrawal (MGD)
Raw Water Supply
MGD Days Used
MGD
"Qualifier
Storage (MG)
Indian Creek off stream 0.7500 365 1.0710
3.2000
SY20
10.0000
" Qualifier: C=Contract Amount, SY20=20-year Safe Yield, SY50=50-year Safe Yield, F=20 % of 7Q10 or other instream flow requirement, CUA=Capacity Use Area Permit
Surface Water Sources (continued)
Stream Reservoir Drainage Area Metered?
Sub -Basin
County
Year Use
(sq mi)
Offline Type
Indian Creek off stream 39 Yes South Fork Catawba River (03-2)
Lincoln
Regular
What is this system's off -stream raw water supply storage capacity? 10 Million gallons
Are surface water sources monitored? Yes, Daily
Are you required to maintain minimum flows downstream of its intake or dam? No
Does this system anticipate transferring surface water between river basins? No
Water Purchases From Other Systems
Average Days Contract
Required to
Pipe Size(s) Use
Seller PWSID Daily Purchased
Used
comply with water
(Inches) Type
(MGD) MGD Expiration
Recurring
use restrictions?
City of Lincolnton 01-55-010 0.0005 1 1.2000 2024
Yes
Yes
12 Emergency
Water Treatment Plants
Plant Name Permi (MGD) ed Capacity Is Raw Water Metered?
Is Finished Water Oupul Metered?
Source
Cherryville WTP 3.2000 Yes
Yes
Indian Creek
Did average daily water production exceed 80 % of approved plant capacity for five consecutive days during 2020? No
If yes, was any water conservation implemented? No
Did average daily water production exceed 90 % of approved plant capacity for five consecutive days during 2020? No
If yes, was any water conservation implemented? No
Are peak day demands expected to exceed the water treatment plant capacity in the next 10 years? No
4. Wastewater Information
Average Daily Average Daily
Discharge (MGD) Discharge (MGD)
Jan 0.4910 May 0.6190
Feb 0.5010 Jun ---
Mar 0.5160 Jul
Apr 0.6430 Aug
Gherryville's 2020 Mcirthly Discharges
1
a
O
v
0
m
t7
0
0
4, 4? Oat PQt �,�-� 4� �a F q 4Q
How many sewer connections does this system have? 2,791
How many water service connections with septic systems does this system have? 247
Are there plans to build or expand wastewater treatment facilities in the next 10 years? No
Wastewater Permits
Avera a Annual
0.5320
� Avg Daily
Permitted Capacity Design Capacity 9 Maximum Day Discharge
Permit Number (MGD) (MGD) Daily Discharge (MGD)
(MGD)
NCO044440 2.0000 2.0000 0.5720 1.2020
5. Planning
https://www. ncwater.org/W U DC/app/LWSP/report. ph p?pwsid=01-36-030&year=2020
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Average Daily
Discharge (MGD)
0.5630
0.6620
0.7040
0.7080
Receiving Stream Receiving Basin
Indian Creek South Fork Catawba River (03-2)
2/3

6/7/2021 DWR:: Local Water Supply Planning
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
2070
Year -Round Population
6,102
7,322
8,787
10,544
12,653
15,184
Seasonal Population
0
0
0
0
0
0
Residential
0.3040
0.3808
0.4569
0.5483
0.6600
0.7900
Commercial
0.0670
0.0740
0.0888
0.1066
0.1279
0.1534
Industrial
0.0300
0.0550
0.0600
0.0650
0.0700
0.0750
Institutional
0.0070
0.0100
0.0110
0.0130
0.0140
0.0160
System Process
0.3000
0.2800
0.2828
0.2856
0.2885
0.2914
Unaccounted-for
0.0400
0.0447
0.0528
0.0630
0.0748
0.0892
2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070
Surface Water Supply 3.2000 3.2000
3.2000
3.2000
3.2000
3.2000
Ground Water Supply 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Purchases 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Future Supplies 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Total Available Supply (MGD) 3.2000 3.2000
3.2000
3.2000
3.2000
3.2000
Service Area Demand 0.7480 0.8445
0.9523
1.0815
1.2352
1.4150
Sales 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Future Sales 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Total Demand (MGD) 0.7480 0.8445
0.9523
1.0815
1.2352
1.4150
Demand as Percent of Supply 23 % 26 %
30 %
34 %
39 %
44
The purpose of the above chart is to show a general indication of how the long-term per capita water demand changes over time. The per capita water demand may actually be different than indicated
due to seasonal populations and
the accuracy of
data submitted. Water systems that have calculated long-term per capita water demand based on a methodology that produces different
results may submit their information
in the notes field.
Your long-term water demand is 50 gallons per capita per day. What demand management practices do you plan to implement to reduce
the per capita water demand (i.e. conduct regular water audits,
implement a plumbing retrofit program, employ
practices such as rainwater harvesting or reclaimed water)? If these practices are covered elsewhere in your plan, indicate where the practices are discussed here.
Are there other demand management practices you will implement to reduce your future supply needs? Require water conservation tools
and appliances in new homes and
business construction.
What supplies other than the ones listed in future supplies are being considered to meet your future supply needs?
How does the water system intend to implement the demand management and supply planning components above?
Has this system participated in regional water supply or water use planning? No
What major water supply reports or studies were used for planning?
Please describe any other needs or issues regarding your water supply sources, any water system deficiencies or needed improvements (storage, treatment, etc.) or your ability to meet present and future water needs. Include both quantity and
quality considerations, as well as financial, technical, managerial, permitting, and compliance issues:
The Division of Water Resources (DWR) provides the data contained within this Local Water Supply Plan (LWSP) as a courtesy and service to our customers. DWR staff does not field verify data. Neither DWR, nor any other party involved in
the preparation of this LWSP attests that the data is completely free of errors and omissions. Furthermore, data users are cautioned that LWSPs labeled PROVISIONAL have yet to be reviewed by DWR staff. Subsequent review may result in
significant revision. Questions regarding the accuracy or limitations of usage of this data should be directed to the water system and/or DWR.
https://www. ncwater.org/W U DC/app/LWSP/report. ph p?pwsid=01-36-030&year=2020 3/3

Appendix F
Hydraulic Model Results

Figure 1: Existing Gastonia Water System
Elementary School
=I
y�
listing Line
psi
I
a
ressure. 8 Ps'
M

ressure: 109 psi
Flow: 700 9pm
ressure: 116 psi
re: 112 psi
ressure:
ressu
Figure 2: Gastonia System with 16"
Interconnection to Cherryville
Proposed Booster Pump Station
(Location Approximate)
C1
. 2 psi
1 L ..�

Figure 3: Proposed Interconnection with
16-inch White Jenkins Loop
Vol
J Booster Pump Station
i Approximate)