Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix C - Water Supply Well Mitigation PlanPiedmont 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 (910)420-1437 License # P-1095 email: adam@LKCengineering.com CLIENT INFORMATION: GASTON COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ATTN: Donny Hicks 620 N. Main Street Belmont, NC 28012 Phone: (704) 825-4046 Email: Donny.Hicks@gastongov.com �.•���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: 704-435-1738 Cell/Mobile: 704-734-3466 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)