20200405 Ver 1_SAW-2019-01988_PCN_20200325

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
ACTION ID #: SAW- 2019-01988 Begin Date (Date Received):
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Stowe Regional WRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
2. Work Type: ❑Private ❑✓ Institutional ❑Government ❑ Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
The purpose of this project is to construct the Stowe Regional Water Resource Recovery Facility (RWRRF) & Associated
Infrastructure Projects to meet the increasing population growth demands for the treatment of wastewater for Mt. Holly, Belmont, and
the Long Creek Basin in Mecklenburg County.
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A41: Charlotte Water; POC: Carl Wilson
5. Agent / Consultant [PNC Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]:
HDR; Kelly Thames
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]: SAW-2019-01988
7. Project Location— Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form Blb]:
35.28193,-81.002598; along both sides of the Catawba River. Mt. Holly side is located at Broome St. in Mt. Holly, NC.
The Mecklenburg County side is located west of Whitewater Center Parkway and north of the National White Water
Center.
8. Project Location— Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form Bla]: Multiple; See Appendix B
9. Project Location— County [PCN Form A2b]: Gaston and Mecklenburg County
10. Project Location —Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Charlotte and Mt. Holly
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: Catawba River
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: Catawba (HUC 03050101)
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404 ❑
Regulatory Action Type:
❑ Standard Permit
Nationwide Permit # 12, 14
Regional General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Section 10 and 404 ❑�
❑Pre -Application Request
❑ Unauthorized Activity
❑ Compliance
❑ No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

hdrinc.com
440 S Church Street, Suite 1000, Charlotte, NC 28202-2075
[phone]

March 24, 2020
Mr. David Shaeffer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Regulatory District
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 611
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262

Ms. Karen Higgins
NC Division of Water Resources
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604

Subject: Stowe Regional Water Resource Recovery Facility
& Associated Infrastructure Projects (SAW-2019-01988)

Pre-Construction Notification Pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and
Harbors Act, Nationwide Permit Nos. 12 and 14, and Water Quality
General Certification Nos. 4133, 4135

The Stowe Regional Water Resource Recovery Facility (RWRRF) & Associated
Infrastructure Projects (the Project) is proposed to be a regional water resource recovery
facility (RWRRF). Over a series of construction and implementation phases, the Project
would provide regional wastewater treatment capacity for existing customers and for
anticipated population growth in northwestern Mecklenburg County and eastern Gaston
County by treating wastewater from Mt. Holly, Belmont, Clariant, and the Long Creek
Basin in Mecklenburg County.
HDR Engineering Inc. of the Carolinas (HDR) and Black & Veatch (B&V), along with their
environmental subconsultant Carolina Wetland Services (CWS), were contracted by
Charlotte Water (the Applicant) to provide Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and
Section 404/401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) permitting services for this Project.
This cover letter serves to introduce the Project briefly; however, details of the proposed
Project are included in the Pre-Construction Notification (PCN, Appendix A). The
subsequent list of appendices at the end of this letter follows the order in which they
appear in the PCN (Appendix A).
Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

Page | 2

Introduction
The Project is located in both Mecklenburg and Gaston Counties, which also spans the
Catawba River (Figures 1a and 1b, Appendix E). This Project proposes a RWRRF (Stowe
RWRRF) in Mecklenburg County, located approximately adjacent to the existing Long
Creek Pumping Station (PS). This regional facility would initially have a treatment capacity
of 15 million gallons per day (mgd) and would have the ability to take wastewater flows
from two existing facilities: the Mt. Holly Wastewater Reclamation Facility (WRF) and
Clariant, an adjacent industrial facility; and wastewater flows from the Long Creek basin
(Figures 1a and 1b, Appendix E). Through a future expansion, the Stowe RWRRF would
treat 25 mgd and be able to handle wastewater flows from the Belmont WWTP via the
Paw Creek PS (Figure 2, Appendix E).
Once connected to the Stowe RWRRF through the proposed Project, the effluent outfalls
at the Mt. Holly WRF and the Belmont WWTP would be eliminated. Prior to the Stowe
RWRRF construction, the Charlotte Water wastewater treatment system would treat flows
from the Mt. Holly WRF and the Belmont WWTP. It would also eliminate the need for
expansions and rehabilitations of the outdated Mt. Holly and Belmont facilities while still
serving existing and anticipated treatment capacity needs for the region.
To support the regional facility construction and provide treatment needs for the facilities
mentioned above, the project will be implemented in phases. In Phases 1a through 1c, the
existing Long Creek PS would be replaced with a new pumping station and headworks
facility in order handle wastewater flows from the Mt. Holly WRF (Figure 3, Appendix E).
These flows would be pumped beneath the Catawba River to the replaced Long Creek PS
by horizontal directional drilling (HDD) methods, would continue from the current Long
Creek PS site to the Paw Creek PS, and then on to larger Charlotte Water treatment
facilities via the existing system (Figure 2, Appendix E). A new pumping station would be
constructed at the Mt. Holly WRF site so that the WRF could be decommissioned.
Additionally, access roads and power transmission would be constructed to the regional
facility location.
In Phase 2a, the RWRRF would be constructed and flows that are currently being pumped
to the Paw Creek PS (via the Long Creek PS) would now be pumped to the RWRRF
(Figure 3, Appendix E). In Phase 2b, a new pumping station at the existing Belmont
WWTP would be constructed to convey wastewater flows through a new forcemain
aligned with an existing railroad right of way, crossing beneath the Catawba River, to the
existing Paw Creek PS (Figure 4, Appendix E). Flows from the Paw Creek PS would
continue to be pumped either to the existing McAlpine Creek Wastewater Management
Facility (WWMF) or the Irwin WWTP via existing forcemains. This route is preliminary and
could be adjusted in detailed design. In Phase 3, the 15 mgd treatment capacity of the
RWRRF would be expanded to a future 25 mgd treatment capacity and flows from the
Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

Page | 3

Paw Creek PS would be rerouted to the Long Creek PS and on to the regional facility.
Phase 3 is contingent on area growth and could easily be 10+ years.
The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) requested that the Applicant submit
a project-wide Section 10 and Section 404 application to include future phases beyond the
initial phase that would propose impacts to Waters of the U.S. (WoUS).
The Project consists of three major Phases and this permit will take a phased approach,
providing design and details on the most imminent phase of the Project (Phase 1), while
providing only high-level planning details for future elements yet to be designed. Impacts
to Section 10 waters (Catawba River), Section 404 W oUS, and Non-Section 404 isolated
waters are anticipated (Table 1).
Table 1. Phasing for the Proposed Stowe RWRRF Elements
Proposed Stowe RWRRF
Elements
Proposed Impacts
Phase
Anticipated
Construction
Dates
Section
10
Section
404
Non-
Section
404
Mount Holly Forcemains
(HDD) and Stowe Site
Preparation
Yes Yes No 1a 08/20-2/21
Stowe RWRRF Access
Roads No Yes Yes 1b 10/20-12/21
Stowe Headworks & Influent
Pumping Station and Mount
Holly Pumping Station
No No No 1c 2021-2023
Stowe Regional Water
Resource Recovery Facility Yes No Yes 2a 2021-2024
(TBD)
Belmont Pumping Station
and Forcemains Yes No No 2b 2022-2024
(TBD)
Stowe RWRRF Expansion No No No 3 TBD in 2035-
2040

This permit application seeks authorization for Phase 1 out of three phases; however, total
project impacts total 0.20 acre of Section 404 wetlands, 0.22 acre of Non-Section 404,
isolated wetlands, Section 10 crossings of the Catawba River (navigable WoUS) that do
not result in surface water impacts, and < 0.1 acre of Section 10/Section 404, surface
water impacts to the Catawba River. Total impacts to WoUS for all phases are provided in
Table 2.

Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

Page | 4

Table 2. Total Project Impacts for Phase 1-3
Impact Type Total (ac)
Section 10 Impacts n/a
Total Section 10/404 Stream Impacts <0.10 ac*
Total Section 404 Wetland Impacts 0.20 ac
Total Non-Section 404 Isolated Wetland Impacts 0.22 ac
*estimated surface water impact amount.

Project History
In compliance with the North Carolina State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA), an
Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for the Stowe RWRRF was submitted in 2011. The EIS
assessed potential impacts to environmental and social resources as a result of the
Project. An alternatives analysis and direct and cumulative impacts were also evaluated.
Alternative 2 was selected as the Preferred Alternative because it meets the purpose and
need of the Project and results in a combination of fewer negative environmental
consequences. This Project, the subject of this permit application and described above, is
Alternative 2 for which The Record of Decision (ROD) was issued on March 18th, 2015. A
revision to the ROD was submitted in December 2019 to include the analysis of additional
land clearing and the need for additional road access to the proposed Stowe RWRRF for
Phase 1. The revised ROD was issued on January 2nd, 2020. The revised ROD can be
found in Appendix D.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) request was submitted by HDR to the
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on October 11th, 2019 for the
Mecklenburg County side of the Project to include the Stowe Headworks and Influent
Pumping Station, Stowe Storm Flow Equalization, the RWRRF, and access road property.
The USACE conducted a field verification of on-site WoUS on November 22nd, 2019.
Subsequently, CWS investigated the Mt. Holly side of the project in December 2019 and in
March 2019 and determined that no WoUS were present, with the exception of the
Catawba River which forms the western boundary of the Mt. Holly side. Details of the Mt.
Holly side field review conducted by CWS have been submitted by HDR as an amendment
to the AJD on March 19th, 2020. The proposed Phase 2b has not yet been put to
procurement by the Applicant and a design consultant has not been chosen; therefore, the
forcemain alignment from the Belmont WWTP to the Paw Creek PS had not been ground-
truthed for WoUS; however, the preliminary alignment follows existing roads through
developed land from the Belmont WWTP to an existing railroad, and then follows the
railroad until reaching the Paw Creek PS. This Phase 2b is anticipated to have a Section
10 crossing beneath the Catawba River via HDD methods (Figure 4, Appendix E). If any
streams or wetlands encountered along this alignment, the Applicant would cross via HDD
methods.
Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

Page | 5

The Pre-Construction Notification Form (PCN) along with supplemental information and
figures (Appendix E) detailing the impacts and phasing can be found in Appendix A.
A Protected Species Habitat Assessment was performed by CWS utilizing both desktop
review methods, as well as a field surveys for the Mt. Holly side. HDR completed a similar
survey of the Mecklenburg County side of the project. These reports can be found in
Appendix G.
On behalf of Charlotte Water, HDR is hereby submitting this Pre-Construction Notification
with attachments in accordance with Section 10, NWP 12 (Utility Line Activities) and NWP
14 (Linear Transportation Projects), and Water Quality General Certifications 4133 and
4145. Should you have any questions or require additional information following your
review of the enclosed materials, please contact me at [phone] or
[e-mail].
Sincerely,

Kelly Thames, PWS Benjamin Burdette, WPIT
Environmental Project Manager Environmental Scientist

Appendix:
Appendix A: PCN and Supplemental Information
Appendix B: Landowner Information
Appendix C: Agent Authorization
Appendix D: Record of Decision
Appendix E: Figures and Plansheets
Appendix F: City of Charlotte Umbrella Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank
Credit Acceptance Letter
Appendix G: Threatened and Endangered Species Reports

Appendix A
Pre-Construction Notification
and Supplemental
Information

3DJHRI
3&1)RUP±9HUVLRQ -DQXDU\
2IILFH8VH2QO\
&RUSVDFWLRQ,'QRBBBBBBBBBBBBB
':4SURMHFWQRBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
)RUP9HUVLRQ -DQXDU\
3UH&RQVWUXFWLRQ1RWLILFDWLRQ3&1)RUP
$ $SSOLFDQW,QIRUPDWLRQ
 3URFHVVLQJ
D 7\SHVRIDSSURYDOVRXJKWIURPWKH&RUSV 6HFWLRQ3HUPLW 6HFWLRQ3HUPLW
E6SHFLI\1DWLRQZLGH3HUPLW1:3QXPEHU RU*HQHUDO3HUPLW*3QXPEHU
F +DVWKH1:3RU*3QXPEHUEHHQYHULILHGE\WKH&RUSV" <HV 1R
G 7\SHVRIDSSURYDOVRXJKWIURPWKH':4FKHFNDOOWKDWDSSO\
:DWHU4XDOLW\&HUWLILFDWLRQ±5HJXODU 1RQ-XULVGLFWLRQDO*HQHUDO3HUPLW
:DWHU4XDOLW\&HUWLILFDWLRQ±([SUHVV 5LSDULDQ%XIIHU$XWKRUL]DWLRQ
H ,VWKLVQRWLILFDWLRQVROHO\IRUWKHUHFRUG
EHFDXVHZULWWHQDSSURYDOLVQRWUHTXLUHG"
)RUWKHUHFRUGRQO\IRU':4
&HUWLILFDWLRQ
<HV1R
)RUWKHUHFRUGRQO\IRU&RUSV3HUPLW
<HV1R
I ,VSD\PHQWLQWRDPLWLJDWLRQEDQNRULQOLHXIHHSURJUDPSURSRVHGIRU
PLWLJDWLRQRILPSDFWV",IVRDWWDFKWKHDFFHSWDQFHOHWWHUIURPPLWLJDWLRQEDQN
RULQOLHXIHHSURJUDP
<HV 1R
J ,VWKHSURMHFWORFDWHGLQDQ\RI1&¶VWZHQW\FRDVWDOFRXQWLHV,I\HVDQVZHUK
EHORZ<HV 1R
K,VWKHSURMHFWORFDWHGZLWKLQD1&'&0$UHDRI(QYLURQPHQWDO&RQFHUQ$(&" <HV 1R
 3URMHFW,QIRUPDWLRQ
D 1DPHRISURMHFW
E &RXQW\
F 1HDUHVWPXQLFLSDOLW\WRZQ
G 6XEGLYLVLRQQDPH
H 1&'27RQO\7,3RUVWDWHSURMHFWQR
 2ZQHU,QIRUPDWLRQ
D 1DPHVRQ5HFRUGHG'HHG
E'HHG%RRNDQG3DJH1R
F 5HVSRQVLEOH3DUW\IRU//&LI
DSSOLFDEOH
G 6WUHHWDGGUHVV
H &LW\VWDWH]LS
I 7HOHSKRQHQR
J )D[QR
K (PDLODGGUHVV
6WRZH5HJLRQDO:DWHU5HVRXUFH5HFRYHU\)DFLOLW\ $VVRFLDWHG,QIUDVWUXFWXUH3URMHFWV
*DVWRQ DQG 0HFNOHQEXUJ
0W+ROO\%HOPRQWDQG&KDUORWWH1&
0XOWLSOH2ZQHUVVHH$SSHQGL[%
12


3DJHRI
 $SSOLFDQW,QIRUPDWLRQLIGLIIHUHQWIURPRZQHU
D $SSOLFDQWLV $JHQW 2WKHUVSHFLI\
E 1DPH
F %XVLQHVVQDPH
LIDSSOLFDEOH
G 6WUHHWDGGUHVV
H &LW\VWDWH]LS
I 7HOHSKRQHQR
J )D[QR
K (PDLODGGUHVV
 $JHQW&RQVXOWDQW,QIRUPDWLRQLIDSSOLFDEOH
D 1DPH
E %XVLQHVVQDPH
LIDSSOLFDEOH
F 6WUHHWDGGUHVV
G &LW\VWDWH]LS
H 7HOHSKRQHQR
I )D[QR
J (PDLODGGUHVV
&KDUORWWH :DWHU 32& &DUO :LOVRQ
&KDUORWWH :DWHU
 %URRNVKLUH %OYG
&KDUORWWH 1& 

1$
FZLOVRQ#FKDUORWWHQFJRY
.HOO\7KDPHV
+'5,QF
6&KXUFK6WUHHW6XLWH
&KDUORWWH1&

1$
NHOO\WKDPHV#KGULQFFRP
$IBSMPUUF
8BUFS
3DJHRI
3&1)RUP±9HUVLRQ -DQXDU\
% 3URMHFW,QIRUPDWLRQDQG3ULRU3URMHFW+LVWRU\
 3URSHUW\,GHQWLILFDWLRQ
D 3URSHUW\LGHQWLILFDWLRQQRWD[3,1RUSDUFHO,'
E 6LWHFRRUGLQDWHVLQGHFLPDOGHJUHHV /DWLWXGH       /RQJLWXGH
F 3URSHUW\VL]H DFUHV
 6XUIDFH:DWHUV
D 1DPHRIQHDUHVWERG\RIZDWHUWRSURSRVHGSURMHFW
E :DWHU4XDOLW\&ODVVLILFDWLRQRIQHDUHVWUHFHLYLQJZDWHU
F 5LYHUEDVLQ
 3URMHFW'HVFULSWLRQ
E/LVWWKHWRWDOHVWLPDWHGDFUHDJHRIDOOH[LVWLQJZHWODQGVRQWKHSURSHUW\
F/LVWWKHWRWDOHVWLPDWHGOLQHDUIHHWRIDOOH[LVWLQJVWUHDPVLQWHUPLWWHQWDQGSHUHQQLDORQWKHSURSHUW\
 -XULVGLFWLRQDO'HWHUPLQDWLRQV
D+DYHMXULVGLFWLRQDOZHWODQGRUVWUHDPGHWHUPLQDWLRQVE\WKH
&RUSVRU6WDWHEHHQUHTXHVWHGRUREWDLQHGIRUWKLVSURSHUW\
SURMHFWLQFOXGLQJDOOSULRUSKDVHVLQWKHSDVW"
<HV 1R 8QNQRZQ
&RPPHQWV
E,IWKH&RUSVPDGHWKHMXULVGLFWLRQDOGHWHUPLQDWLRQZKDWW\SH
RIGHWHUPLQDWLRQZDVPDGH"3UHOLPLQDU\ )LQDO
F,I\HVZKRGHOLQHDWHGWKHMXULVGLFWLRQDODUHDV"
1DPHLINQRZQ
$JHQF\&RQVXOWDQW&RPSDQ\
2WKHU
 3URMHFW+LVWRU\
D +DYHSHUPLWVRUFHUWLILFDWLRQVEHHQUHTXHVWHGRUREWDLQHGIRU
WKLVSURMHFWLQFOXGLQJDOOSULRUSKDVHVLQWKHSDVW"<HV 1R 8QNQRZQ
E ,I\HVH[SODLQLQGHWDLODFFRUGLQJWR³KHOSILOH´LQVWUXFWLRQV
 )XWXUH3URMHFW3ODQV
D ,VWKLVDSKDVHGSURMHFW" <HV 1R
0XOWLSOHVHH$SSHQGL[%

&DWDZEDDQG/RQJ&UHHN
:6,93DQG&
&DWDZED 5LYHU 
D 'HVFULEHWKHH[LVWLQJFRQGLWLRQVRQWKHVLWHDQGWKHJHQHUDOODQGXVHLQWKHYLFLQLW\RIWKHSURMHFWDWWKHWLPHRIWKLV
DSSOLFDWLRQ
7KHSURMHFWDUHDODQGXVHFRQVLVWVRIXQGHYHORSHGIRUHVWHGDUHDVXQPDLQWDLQHGRSHQDUHDVPDLQWDLQHGRSHQDUHDVWKHH[LVWLQJ/RQJ&UHHN3XPS
6WDWLRQDQG H[LVWLQJ 0W +ROO\ :DWHU 5HFODPDWLRQ IDFLOLW\ :5)/DQGFRYHUZLWKLQWKHSURMHFWDUHDFRQVLVWVRIGHFLGXRXVDQG PL[HG IRUHVW
SUHYLRXVO\GLVWXUEHGDUHDVORZGHQVLW\GHYHORSPHQWDQGXQPDLQWDLQHGKHUEDFHRXVDUHDV

G ([SODLQWKHSXUSRVHRIWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFW
7KHSXUSRVHRIWKLVSURMHFWLVWRFRQVWUXFWWKH6WRZH5:55) $VVRFLDWHG,QIUDVWUXFWXUH3URMHFWVWRPHHWWKHLQFUHDVLQJSRSXODWLRQJURZWK
GHPDQGVIRUWKHWUHDWPHQWRIZDVWHZDWHUIRU0W+ROO\%HOPRQWDQGWKH/RQJ&UHHN%DVLQLQ0HFNOHQEXUJ&RXQW\6HH6HFWLRQ%GLQWKH
$GGLWLRQDO6XSSOHPHQWDO,QIRUPDWLRQGRFXPHQW
+'5DQG&:6
G ,I\HVOLVWWKHGDWHVRIWKH&RUSVMXULVGLFWLRQDOGHWHUPLQDWLRQVRU6WDWHGHWHUPLQDWLRQVDQGDWWDFKGRFXPHQWDWLRQ
E ,I\HVH[SODLQ
6HH6HFWLRQV%HDQG%ELQWKH$GGLWLRQDO6XSSOHPHQWDO,QIRUPDWLRQGRFXPHQW


$Q$-'ZDVVXEPLWWHGIRUWKH0HFNOHQEXUJ&RXQW\VLGHE\+'5RQ2FWREHUWKDQGZDVILHOGYHULILHGE\WKH86$&(RQ1RYHPEHU
$QDGGHQGXPZDVVXEPLWWHGE\+'5RQ0DUFKFRQGXFWHGE\&:6IRUWKH0W+ROO\VLGHRIWKHSURMHFW
H 'HVFULEHWKHRYHUDOOSURMHFWLQGHWDLOLQFOXGLQJWKHW\SHRIHTXLSPHQWWREHXVHG
6HH6HFWLRQ%HLQWKH$GGLWLRQDO6XSSOHPHQWDO,QIRUPDWLRQGRFXPHQW

)LQDOYHULILFDWLRQRI6$:SHQGLQJ
3DJHRI
3&1)RUP±9HUVLRQ -DQXDU\
& 3URSRVHG,PSDFWV,QYHQWRU\
 ,PSDFWV6XPPDU\
D :KLFKVHFWLRQVZHUHFRPSOHWHGEHORZIRU\RXUSURMHFWFKHFNDOOWKDWDSSO\
:HWODQGV 6WUHDPV±WULEXWDULHV %XIIHUV 2SHQ:DWHUV3RQG&RQVWUXFWLRQ
 :HWODQG,PSDFWV
,IWKHUHDUHZHWODQGLPSDFWVSURSRVHGRQWKHVLWHWKHQFRPSOHWHWKLVTXHVWLRQIRUHDFKZHWODQGDUHDLPSDFWHG
D
:HWODQGLPSDFW
QXPEHU
3HUPDQHQW3RU
7HPSRUDU\7
E
7\SHRILPSDFW
F
7\SHRIZHWODQG
G
)RUHVWHG
H
7\SHRIMXULVGLFWLRQ
&RUSVRU
':4RWKHU
I
$UHDRI
LPSDFW
DFUHV
,PSDFW:
,PSDFW:
,PSDFW:
,PSDFW:
,PSDFW:
,PSDFW:
J7RWDO:HWODQG,PSDFWV
 6WUHDP,PSDFWV
,IWKHUHDUHSHUHQQLDORULQWHUPLWWHQWVWUHDPLPSDFWVLQFOXGLQJWHPSRUDU\LPSDFWVSURSRVHGRQWKHVLWHWKHQFRPSOHWHWKLV
TXHVWLRQIRUDOOVWUHDPVLWHVLPSDFWHG
D
6WUHDPLPSDFW
QXPEHU
3HUPDQHQW3RU
7HPSRUDU\7
E
7\SHRILPSDFW
F
6WUHDPQDPH
G
3HUHQQLDO3(5RU
LQWHUPLWWHQW,17"
H
7\SHRI
MXULVGLFWLRQ
I
$YHUDJH
VWUHDP
ZLGWK
IHHW
J
,PSDFW
OHQJWK
OLQHDU
IHHW
K7RWDOVWUHDPDQGWULEXWDU\LPSDFWV
)LOO (PHUJHQW 1R &RUSV 
1R &RUSV
<HV ':4
1R ':4
1R &RUSV
<HV &RUSV

K&RPPHQWV
3KDVH3HUPDQHQW6HFWLRQZHWODQGLPSDFWVWRWDODFDQG1RQ6HFWLRQZHWODQGLPSDFWVWRWDODF
3KDVH7RWDO3HUPDQHQW1RQ6HFWLRQZHWODQGLPSDFWVWRWDODF
3KDVH1RZHWODQGLPSDFWVDUHSURSRVHG
6HH7DEOHLQ6HFWLRQ%HRIWKH$GGLWLRQDO6XSSOHPHQWDO,QIRUPDWLRQIRUGHWDLOHGEUHDNGRZQRILPSDFWV
+''EHQHDWK 3 &RUSV
L &RPPHQWV)RUFHPDLQVZLOOEHKRUL]RQWDOO\GULOOHGEHQHDWKWKH&DWDZEDULYHULQ3KDVHD,PSDFWDQG3KDVHE,PSDFW7KLVZRXOGQRWFRQVWLWXWHDQ\LPSDFWWRVXUIDFHZDWHUV)RUFHPDLQFURVVLQJVRI/RQJ&UHHNZLOODOVREHKRUL]RQWDOO\GULOOHGDQGZLOOQRWFDXVHLPSDFWVWRVXUIDFHZDWHUV
3
3
3
3
3
3
)LOO
)LOO
)LOO
)LOODQGJUDGLQJ
)LOO
(PHUJHQW
%RWWRPODQG+DUGZRRG)RUHVW
6KUXE6FUXE
(PHUJHQW
%RWWRPODQG+DUGZRRG)RUHVW
3





&DWDZED5LYHUQD
QD
+''EHQHDWK 3 &RUSV
,PSDFW
&DWDZED5LYHU&DWDZED5LYHUQD
,PSDFW
&DWDZED5LYHU
3
3DJHRI
 2SHQ:DWHU,PSDFWV
,IWKHUHDUHSURSRVHGLPSDFWVWRODNHVSRQGVHVWXDULHVWULEXWDULHVVRXQGVWKH$WODQWLF2FHDQRUDQ\RWKHURSHQZDWHURI
WKH86WKHQLQGLYLGXDOO\OLVWDOORSHQZDWHULPSDFWVEHORZ
D
2SHQZDWHU
LPSDFWQXPEHU
3HUPDQHQW3RU
7HPSRUDU\7
E
1DPHRIZDWHUERG\
LIDSSOLFDEOH
F
7\SHRILPSDFW
G
:DWHUERG\
W\SH
H
$UHDRILPSDFWDFUHV
I7RWDORSHQZDWHULPSDFWV
J&RPPHQWV
 3RQGRU/DNH&RQVWUXFWLRQ
,ISRQGRUODNHFRQVWUXFWLRQSURSRVHGWKHQFRPSOHWHWKHFKDUWEHORZ
F
:HWODQG,PSDFWVDFUHV
G
6WUHDP,PSDFWVIHHW
H
8SODQG
DFUHV
D
3RQG,'QXPEHU
E
3URSRVHGXVHRU
SXUSRVHRISRQG
)ORRGHG )LOOHG ([FDYDWHG )ORRGHG )LOOHG ([FDYDWHG
I7RWDO
J&RPPHQWV
K,VDGDPKLJKKD]DUGSHUPLWUHTXLUHG" <HV 1R ,I\HVSHUPLW,'QR
L([SHFWHGSRQGVXUIDFHDUHDDFUHV
M6L]HRISRQGZDWHUVKHGDFUHV
N0HWKRGRIFRQVWUXFWLRQ
 %XIIHU,PSDFWVIRU':4
,ISURMHFWZLOOLPSDFWDSURWHFWHGULSDULDQEXIIHUWKHQFRPSOHWHWKHFKDUWEHORZ,I\HVWKHQLQGLYLGXDOO\OLVWDOOEXIIHULPSDFWV
EHORZ,IDQ\LPSDFWVUHTXLUHPLWLJDWLRQWKHQ\RX0867ILOORXW6HFWLRQ'RIWKLVIRUP
D3URMHFWLVLQZKLFKSURWHFWHGEDVLQ"1HXVH7DU3DPOLFR &DWDZED5DQGOHPDQ 2WKHU
E
%XIIHU,PSDFW
QXPEHU±
3HUPDQHQW3RU
7HPSRUDU\7
F
5HDVRQIRULPSDFW
G
6WUHDPQDPH
H
%XIIHU
PLWLJDWLRQ
UHTXLUHG"
I
=RQH
LPSDFW
VTXDUH
IHHW
J
=RQH
LPSDFW
VTXDUH
IHHW
K7RWDO%XIIHU,PSDFWV
L&RPPHQWV
'XULQJ3KDVHRIWKHSURMHFWDQHIIOXHQWRXWIDOODQGGRFNZLOOEHFRQVWUXFWHGRQWKH&DWDZED5LYHU7KLVZLOOFRQVWLWXWHOHVVWKDQDFUHRI
VXUIDFHZDWHULPSDFW$GGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQFDQEHIRXQGLQ7DEOHRI6HFWLRQ%HRIWKH$GGLWLRQDO6XSSOHPHQWDO,QIRUPDWLRQ

(IIOXHQW'LVFKDUJHDQG'RFN&DWDZED5LYHU 5LYHU DFUH,PSDFW
&DWDZED5LYHU
3DJHRI
3&1)RUP±9HUVLRQ -DQXDU\
' ,PSDFW-XVWLILFDWLRQDQG0LWLJDWLRQ
 $YRLGDQFHDQG0LQLPL]DWLRQ
 &RPSHQVDWRU\0LWLJDWLRQIRU,PSDFWVWR:DWHUVRIWKH86RU:DWHUVRIWKH6WDWH
D 'RHVWKHSURMHFWUHTXLUH&RPSHQVDWRU\0LWLJDWLRQIRU
LPSDFWVWR:DWHUVRIWKH86RU:DWHUVRIWKH6WDWH"
<HV 1R
E ,I\HVPLWLJDWLRQLVUHTXLUHGE\FKHFNDOOWKDWDSSO\ ':4 &RUSV
F ,I\HVZKLFKPLWLJDWLRQRSWLRQZLOOEHXVHGIRUWKLV
SURMHFW"
0LWLJDWLRQEDQN
3D\PHQWWRLQOLHXIHHSURJUDP
3HUPLWWHH5HVSRQVLEOH0LWLJDWLRQ
 &RPSOHWHLI8VLQJD0LWLJDWLRQ%DQN
D1DPHRI0LWLJDWLRQ%DQN
E&UHGLWV3XUFKDVHGDWWDFKUHFHLSWDQGOHWWHU
7\SH
7\SH
7\SH
4XDQWLW\?
4XDQWLW\
4XDQWLW\
F&RPPHQWV6HHDGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQEHORZWKLVIRUP
 &RPSOHWHLI0DNLQJD3D\PHQWWR,QOLHX)HH3URJUDP
D$SSURYDOOHWWHUIURPLQOLHXIHHSURJUDPLVDWWDFKHG
E6WUHDPPLWLJDWLRQUHTXHVWHG OLQHDUIHHW
F,IXVLQJVWUHDPPLWLJDWLRQVWUHDPWHPSHUDWXUH
G%XIIHUPLWLJDWLRQUHTXHVWHG':4RQO\ VTXDUHIHHW
H5LSDULDQZHWODQGPLWLJDWLRQUHTXHVWHG DFUHV
I 1RQULSDULDQZHWODQGPLWLJDWLRQUHTXHVWHG DFUHV
J&RDVWDOWLGDOZHWODQGPLWLJDWLRQUHTXHVWHG DFUHV
K&RPPHQWV
 &RPSOHWHLI8VLQJD3HUPLWWHH5HVSRQVLEOH0LWLJDWLRQ3ODQ
D ,IXVLQJDSHUPLWWHHUHVSRQVLEOHPLWLJDWLRQSODQSURYLGHDGHVFULSWLRQRIWKHSURSRVHGPLWLJDWLRQSODQ
D 6SHFLILFDOO\GHVFULEHPHDVXUHVWDNHQWRDYRLGRUPLQLPL]HWKHSURSRVHGLPSDFWVLQGHVLJQLQJ
SURMHFW6HH6HFWLRQ'DLQWKH$GGLWLRQDO6XSSOHPHQWDO,QIRUPDWLRQGRFXPHQW
E 6SHFLILFDOO\GHVFULEHPHDVXUHVWDNHQWRDYRLGRUPLQLPL]HWKHSURSRVHGLPSDFWVWKURXJKFRQVWUXFWLRQ
WHFKQLTXHV6HH6HFWLRQ'ELQWKH$GGLWLRQDO6XSSOHPHQWDO,QIRUPDWLRQGRFXPHQW
&KRRVH RQH
&KRRVHRQH
&KRRVHRQH
&KRRVHRQH
6HH6HFWLRQ'KLQWKH$GGLWLRQDO6XSSOHPHQWDO,QIRUPDWLRQGRFXPHQW
[

3DJHRI
 %XIIHU0LWLJDWLRQ6WDWH5HJXODWHG5LSDULDQ%XIIHU5XOHV±UHTXLUHGE\':4
D:LOOWKHSURMHFWUHVXOWLQDQLPSDFWZLWKLQDSURWHFWHGULSDULDQEXIIHUWKDWUHTXLUHV
EXIIHUPLWLJDWLRQ"<HV 1R
E ,I\HVWKHQLGHQWLI\WKHVTXDUHIHHWRILPSDFWWRHDFK]RQHRIWKHULSDULDQEXIIHUWKDWUHTXLUHVPLWLJDWLRQ&DOFXODWHWKH
DPRXQWRIPLWLJDWLRQUHTXLUHG
=RQH
F
5HDVRQIRULPSDFW
G
7RWDOLPSDFW
VTXDUHIHHW
0XOWLSOLHU
H
5HTXLUHGPLWLJDWLRQ
VTXDUHIHHW
=RQHIRU&DWDZED
=RQH
I7RWDOEXIIHUPLWLJDWLRQUHTXLUHG
J ,IEXIIHUPLWLJDWLRQLVUHTXLUHGGLVFXVVZKDWW\SHRIPLWLJDWLRQLVSURSRVHGHJSD\PHQWWRSULYDWHPLWLJDWLRQEDQN
SHUPLWWHHUHVSRQVLEOHULSDULDQEXIIHUUHVWRUDWLRQSD\PHQWLQWRDQDSSURYHGLQOLHXIHHIXQG
K&RPPHQWV
3DJHRI
3&1)RUP±9HUVLRQ -DQXDU\
( 6WRUPZDWHU0DQDJHPHQWDQG'LIIXVH)ORZ3ODQUHTXLUHGE\':4
 'LIIXVH)ORZ3ODQ
D 'RHVWKHSURMHFW LQFOXGHRULVLWDGMDFHQWWRSURWHFWHGULSDULDQEXIIHUVLGHQWLILHG
ZLWKLQRQHRIWKH1&5LSDULDQ%XIIHU3URWHFWLRQ5XOHV"<HV 1R
<HV 1R
 6WRUPZDWHU0DQDJHPHQW3ODQ
D :KDWLVWKHRYHUDOOSHUFHQWLPSHUYLRXVQHVVRIWKLVSURMHFW"
E'RHVWKLVSURMHFWUHTXLUHD6WRUPZDWHU0DQDJHPHQW3ODQ" <HV 1R
F,IWKLVSURMHFW'2(6127UHTXLUHD6WRUPZDWHU0DQDJHPHQW3ODQH[SODLQZK\
H:KRZLOOEHUHVSRQVLEOHIRUWKHUHYLHZRIWKH6WRUPZDWHU0DQDJHPHQW3ODQ"
 &HUWLILHG/RFDO*RYHUQPHQW6WRUPZDWHU5HYLHZ
D,QZKLFKORFDOJRYHUQPHQW¶VMXULVGLFWLRQLVWKLVSURMHFW"
E :KLFKRIWKHIROORZLQJORFDOO\LPSOHPHQWHGVWRUPZDWHUPDQDJHPHQWSURJUDPV
DSSO\FKHFNDOOWKDWDSSO\
3KDVH,,
16:
8603
:DWHU6XSSO\:DWHUVKHG
2WKHU
F+DVWKHDSSURYHG6WRUPZDWHU0DQDJHPHQW3ODQZLWKSURRIRIDSSURYDOEHHQ
DWWDFKHG"<HV 1R
 ':46WRUPZDWHU3URJUDP5HYLHZ
D:KLFKRIWKHIROORZLQJVWDWHLPSOHPHQWHGVWRUPZDWHUPDQDJHPHQWSURJUDPVDSSO\
FKHFNDOOWKDWDSSO\
&RDVWDOFRXQWLHV
+4:
25:
6HVVLRQ/DZ
2WKHU
E+DVWKHDSSURYHG6WRUPZDWHU0DQDJHPHQW3ODQZLWKSURRIRIDSSURYDOEHHQ
DWWDFKHG"<HV 1R
 ':48QLW6WRUPZDWHU5HYLHZ
D 'RHVWKH6WRUPZDWHU0DQDJHPHQW3ODQPHHWWKHDSSURSULDWHUHTXLUHPHQWV" <HV 1R
E+DYHDOORIWKH8QLWVXEPLWWDOUHTXLUHPHQWVEHHQPHW"<HV 1R

City of Charlotte(7-
E ,I\HVWKHQLVDGLIIXVHIORZSODQLQFOXGHG",IQRH[SODLQZK\
$OODFWLYLWLHVZLOOWDNHSODFHRXWVLGHRIWKHUHTXLUHGIRRWEXIIHURIDOOUHPDLQLQJRQVLWH
ZDWHUV
G ,IWKLVSURMHFW'2(6UHTXLUHD6WRUPZDWHU0DQDJHPHQW3ODQWKHQSURYLGHDEULHIQDUUDWLYHGHVFULSWLRQRIWKHSODQ
7KHSURMHFWLVVXEMHFWWRWKH&LW\RI&KDUORWWH¶V3RVW&RQVWUXFWLRQ6WRUPZDWHU2UGLQDQFH3&62DQG=RQLQJ2UGLQDQFH6HFWLRQ3KDVHRI
WKHSURMHFWLVEHORZ%8$7KHSURMHFWTXDOLILHVDVDORZGHQVLW\GHYHORSPHQWXQGHUWKH3&62DQGWKHUHIRUHPXVWWUHDWUXQRIIWKURXJKYHJHWDWHG
FRQYH\DQFHVWRWKHPD[LPXPH[WHQWSUDFWLFDEOHDQGQRWUHTXLUHGWRSHUIRUPSHDNGLVFKDUJHFRQWURO7KHSURMHFWLVVXEMHFWWRIRRWZDWHUVXSSO\
ZDWHUVKHGEXIIHUVDQGIRRWIORRGIULQJHSRVWFRQVWUXFWLRQEXIIHUV$VVXEVHTXHQWSKDVHVDUHGHVLJQHG6WRUPZDWHU0DQDJHPHQW3ODQVZLOO
EHVXSSOLHGWRWKH&LW\RI&KDUORWWHIRUUHYLHZ
City of Charlotte
3DJHRI
3&1)RUP±9HUVLRQ -DQXDU\
) 6XSSOHPHQWDU\,QIRUPDWLRQ
 (QYLURQPHQWDO'RFXPHQWDWLRQ':45HTXLUHPHQW
D 'RHVWKHSURMHFWLQYROYHDQH[SHQGLWXUHRISXEOLFIHGHUDOVWDWHORFDOIXQGVRUWKH
XVHRISXEOLFIHGHUDOVWDWHODQG"<HV 1R
E ,I\RXDQVZHUHG³\HV´WRWKHDERYHGRHVWKHSURMHFWUHTXLUHSUHSDUDWLRQRIDQ
HQYLURQPHQWDOGRFXPHQWSXUVXDQWWRWKHUHTXLUHPHQWVRIWKH1DWLRQDORU6WDWH
1RUWK&DUROLQD(QYLURQPHQWDO3ROLF\$FW1(3$6(3$"
<HV 1R
F ,I\RXDQVZHUHG³\HV´WRWKHDERYHKDVWKHGRFXPHQWUHYLHZEHHQILQDOL]HGE\WKH
6WDWH&OHDULQJ+RXVH",IVRDWWDFKDFRS\RIWKH1(3$RU6(3$ILQDODSSURYDO
OHWWHU<HV 1R
 9LRODWLRQV':45HTXLUHPHQW
D ,VWKHVLWHLQYLRODWLRQRI':4:HWODQG5XOHV$1&$&+,VRODWHG
:HWODQG5XOHV$1&$&+':46XUIDFH:DWHURU:HWODQG6WDQGDUGV
RU5LSDULDQ%XIIHU5XOHV$1&$&%"
<HV 1R
E ,VWKLVDQDIWHUWKHIDFWSHUPLWDSSOLFDWLRQ" <HV 1R
F ,I\RXDQVZHUHG³\HV´WRRQHRUERWKRIWKHDERYHTXHVWLRQVSURYLGHDQH[SODQDWLRQRIWKHYLRODWLRQV
 &XPXODWLYH,PSDFWV':45HTXLUHPHQW
D :LOOWKLVSURMHFWEDVHGRQSDVWDQGUHDVRQDEO\DQWLFLSDWHGIXWXUHLPSDFWVUHVXOWLQ
DGGLWLRQDOGHYHORSPHQWZKLFKFRXOGLPSDFWQHDUE\GRZQVWUHDPZDWHUTXDOLW\"<HV 1R
E ,I\RXDQVZHUHG³\HV´WRWKHDERYHVXEPLWDTXDOLWDWLYHRUTXDQWLWDWLYHFXPXODWLYHLPSDFWDQDO\VLVLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKWKH
PRVWUHFHQW':4SROLF\,I\RXDQVZHUHG³QR´SURYLGHDVKRUWQDUUDWLYHGHVFULSWLRQ
 6HZDJH'LVSRVDO':45HTXLUHPHQW
D&OHDUO\GHWDLOWKHXOWLPDWHWUHDWPHQWPHWKRGVDQGGLVSRVLWLRQQRQGLVFKDUJHRUGLVFKDUJHRIZDVWHZDWHUJHQHUDWHGIURP
WKHSURSRVHGSURMHFWRUDYDLODEOHFDSDFLW\RIWKHVXEMHFWIDFLOLW\
3URMHFWLVDZDVWHZDWHULQIUDVWUXFWXUHSURMHFWDQGWKHIXWXUH6WRZH5:55)SURSRVHGFDSDFLW\LVPLOOLRQJDOORQVSHUGD\&KDUORWWH:DWHU
KDVDOUHDG\REWDLQHGD13'(6SHUPLWIRUWKHHIIOXHQWGLVFKDUJHDVVRFLDWHGZLWKWKHIDFLOLW\
6HHDWWDFKHG5HFRUGRI'HFLVLRQLQ$SSHQGL['
%H\RQGZKDWLVGHVFULEHGLQWKLVSKDVHGSHUPLWWKLVSURMHFWZLOOQRWUHVXOWLQDGGLWLRQDOGHYHORSPHQWKRZHYHUWKHSURMHFWLVDQWLFLSDWLQJ
SRSXODWLRQJURZWKLQWKHUHJLRQDQGLVDSUHHPSWLYHPHDVXUHWRDFFRXQWIRUWKHIXWXUHJURZWK,PSDFWVWRZDWHUTXDOLW\ZHUHDQDO\]HGLQWKH
(,6
3DJHRI
 (QGDQJHUHG6SHFLHVDQG'HVLJQDWHG&ULWLFDO+DELWDW&RUSV5HTXLUHPHQW
D :LOOWKLVSURMHFWRFFXULQRUQHDUDQDUHDZLWKIHGHUDOO\SURWHFWHGVSHFLHVRU
KDELWDW"<HV 1R
E +DYH\RXFKHFNHGZLWKWKH86):6FRQFHUQLQJ(QGDQJHUHG6SHFLHV$FW
LPSDFWV"<HV 1R
F ,I\HVLQGLFDWHWKH86):6)LHOG2IILFH\RXKDYHFRQWDFWHG
 (VVHQWLDO)LVK+DELWDW&RUSV5HTXLUHPHQW
D:LOOWKLVSURMHFWRFFXULQRUQHDUDQDUHDGHVLJQDWHGDVHVVHQWLDOILVKKDELWDW" <HV 1R
E :KDWGDWDVRXUFHVGLG\RXXVHWRGHWHUPLQHZKHWKHU\RXUVLWHZRXOGLPSDFW(VVHQWLDO)LVK+DELWDW"
 +LVWRULFRU3UHKLVWRULF&XOWXUDO5HVRXUFHV&RUSV5HTXLUHPHQW
D :LOOWKLVSURMHFWRFFXULQRUQHDUDQDUHDWKDWWKHVWDWHIHGHUDORUWULEDO
JRYHUQPHQWVKDYHGHVLJQDWHGDVKDYLQJKLVWRULFRUFXOWXUDOSUHVHUYDWLRQ
VWDWXVHJ1DWLRQDO+LVWRULF7UXVWGHVLJQDWLRQRUSURSHUWLHVVLJQLILFDQWLQ
1RUWK&DUROLQDKLVWRU\DQGDUFKDHRORJ\"
<HV 1R
 )ORRG=RQH'HVLJQDWLRQ&RUSV5HTXLUHPHQW
D:LOOWKLVSURMHFWRFFXULQD)(0$GHVLJQDWHG\HDUIORRGSODLQ" <HV 1R
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
$SSOLFDQW$JHQW
V6LJQDWXUH
$JHQW
VVLJQDWXUHLVYDOLGRQO\LIDQDXWKRUL]DWLRQ
OHWWHUIURPWKHDSSOLFDQWLVSURYLGHG
$VKHYLOOH1&
G :KDWGDWDVRXUFHVGLG\RXXVHWRGHWHUPLQHZKHWKHU\RXUVLWHZRXOGLPSDFW(QGDQJHUHG6SHFLHVRU'HVLJQDWHG&ULWLFDO
+DELWDW"ILHOG DVVHVVPHQW RI WKH RQVLWH KDELWDW ZDV FRQGXFWHG RQDUHDVWKDWZLOOEHLPSDFWHGE\DOOSKDVHV RI WKH SURMHFW 5HVXOWV RI WKDW DVVHVVPHQW DUHDWWDFKHG$SSHQGL[()XUWKHUGLVFXVVLRQUHJDUGLQJFRQVXOWDWLRQZLWK86):6FDQEHIRXQGLQWKH(,6DQG52''XULQJWKH(,6GHYHORSPHQW
12$$ (VVHQWLDO )LVK +DELWDW 0DSSHU KWWSVZZZILVKHULHVQRDDJRYUHVRXUFHPDSHVVHQWLDOILVKKDELWDWPDSSHU
E :KDWGDWDVRXUFHVGLG\RXXVHWRGHWHUPLQHZKHWKHU\RXUVLWHZRXOGLPSDFWKLVWRULFRUDUFKHRORJLFDO
UHVRXUFHV"'XULQJFRPSOHWLRQRIWKHRULJLQDO(,66+32ZDVFRQVXOWHG1RSURSHUWLHVUHJLVWHUHGRQWKH1DWLRQDORU6WDWHUHJLVWHURI+LVWRULF3ODFHVZHUHIRXQGWREH
SUHVHQWRQWKHSURMHFWVLWHDQGDUHDVRXWVLGHRIWKH\HDUIORRGSODLQZLOOEHORFDWHGZLWKLQSUHYLRXVO\GLVWXUEHGDUHDVSHUJXLGDQFHIURP6+32
E,I\HVH[SODLQKRZSURMHFWPHHWV)(0$UHTXLUHPHQWV
$ IORRGSODLQGHYHORSPHQWSHUPLWDQGDVVRFLDWHG&/205/205ZLOOEHDFTXLUHGIURPWKHORFDO)(0$DGPLQLVWUDWRU
F:KDWVRXUFHVGLG\RXXVHWRPDNHWKHIORRGSODLQGHWHUPLQDWLRQ"
)(0$)LUP3DQHOV.DQG/
.HOO\7KDPHV
$SSOLFDQW$JHQW
V3ULQWHG1DPH
'DWH
24
PCN Supplemental Information
Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

1

Additional Supplemental Information
Stowe Regional Wastewater Resource Recovery Facility (RWRRF)
& Associated Infrastructure Projects

B3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project.
Charlotte Water (the Applicant) provides wastewater services to more than 805,000 customers
in the City of Charlotte and surrounding areas in Mecklenburg County, including the towns of
Matthews, Mint Hill, Pineville, Huntersville, and Cornelius. Population growth and land
development in the Charlotte region have resulted in an increased need for wastewater
collection and treatment.

Charlotte Water, formerly Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities (Utilities), undertook a comprehensive
evaluation of current and anticipated future wastewater treatments needs by performing a
Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion Study (Expansion Study, CH2M Hill, 2007). The
Expansion Study focused on three wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), the Irwin Creek
WWTP, Sugar Creek WWTP, and McAlpine Creek Wastewater Management Facility (WWMF).
Combined, these facilities have a total maximum month rated treatment capacity of 99 million
gallons per day (mgd). This capacity treats a population that was projected to be 685,000 in
2010, increasing to 923,000 in 2030.1 The Expansion Study determined that the best approach
toward meeting future wastewater capacity needs would include construction of a new regional
WWTP to provide wastewater services to the Long Creek Basin and expansions/rehabilitations
of existing WWTP facilities (Figure 1a and 1b, Appendix E). This would increase wastewater
capacity from 99 mgd to 155 mgd by 2030.

Concurrently, a Feasibility and Preliminary Planning Study for Regional Wastewater Treatment
(Feasibility Study [Black & Veatch, 2006]) was conducted to provide long-range planning for
wastewater treatment for the City of Mount Holly and the Long Creek Basin in Mecklenburg
County. This high level feasibility study focused on developing an innovative solution to meet
the needs of the growing area.

In 2011, Black & Veatch, submitted an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) in compliance with the
North Carolina State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA), evaluating options for wastewater
treatment needs based on The Expansion and Feasibility Studies. This Project, the subject of
this permit application, is Alternative 2 which proposes a regional WTTP in Mecklenburg County
to provide wastewater treatment for Mt. Holly and Belmont in Gaston County, and the Long
Creek Basin in Mecklenburg County. Alternative 2 was selected as the Preferred Alternative
because it meets the purpose and need of the project and results in a combination of fewer
negative environmental consequences. As a result of the proposed project, the EIS assessed
potential impacts to environmental and social resources, evaluated alternatives, and considered
direct and cumulative impacts. The Record of Decision (ROD) was issued on March 18th, 2015.

1 According to the United States Census Bureau, the 2010 Census indicated that the population of Mecklenburg County was over
919,500 as of 2009 and the 2019 population estimates are approximately 1.09 million.2
2 https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/mecklenburgcountynorthcarolina#
PCN Supplemental Information
Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

2

A revision to the ROD was submitted in December 2019 to include the analysis of additional
land clearing and the need for a second road access to the proposed Stowe Regional Water
Resource Recovery Facility (RWRRF). The revised ROD was issued on January 2nd, 2020. The
revised ROD can be found in Appendix D.
In order to meet the need of increasing population growth and increasing wastewater treatment
capacity, the identified solution is to construct a new RWRRF in Mecklenburg County
(Alternative 2 of the EIS). The implementation of this project will occur in phases (Figure 2,
Appendix E).
Therefore, the purpose of this project is to construct the Stowe RWRRF & Associated
Infrastructure Projects to meet the increasing population growth demands for the treatment of
wastewater for Mt. Holly, Belmont, and the Long Creek Basin in Mecklenburg County, and
results in a combination of fewer negative environmental consequences. Associated
infrastructure related to the Stowe RWRRF include new pump stations and forcemains installed
by horizontal directional drilling (HDD) methods for Mt. Holly and Belmont, facility access roads,
a Stowe Pump Station and Headworks project at the existing Long Creek Pumping Station (PS),
and a future expansion of the proposed facility (Figures 3 and 4, Appendix E).
B3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be
used.
This Project proposes a regional WWTP (Stowe RWRRF) in Mecklenburg County, located
approximately adjacent to the existing Long Creek Pumping Station (PS). This regional facility
would initially have a treatment capacity of 15 million gallons per day (mgd) and have the ability
to take wastewater flows from two existing facilities: the Mt. Holly Wastewater Reclamation
Facility (WRF) and Clariant, an adjacent industrial facility; and wastewater flows from the Long
Creek basin (Figures 1a and 1b, Appendix E). Through a future expansion, the Stowe RWRRF
would treat 25 mgd and be able to handle wastewater flows from the Belmont WWTP via the
Paw Creek PS (Figure 2, Appendix E).
Once connected to the Stowe RWRRF through the proposed project, the effluent outfalls at the
Mt. Holly WRF and the Belmont WWTP would be eliminated. Prior to the Stowe RWRRF
construction, the Charlotte Water wastewater treatment system would treat flows from the Mt.
Holly WRF and the Belmont WWTP. It would also eliminate the need for expansions and
rehabilitations of the outdated Mt. Holly and Belmont facilities while still serving existing and
anticipated treatment capacity needs for the region.
The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) requested that the Applicant submit a project-wide
Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 application to include future construction projects
(elements) that would propose impacts to Waters of the U.S. (WoUS). This permit will take a
phased approach, providing design and details on the most imminent elements of the Project,
while providing only high-level planning details for future elements yet to be designed (Table 1).
PCN Supplemental Information
Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

3

Table 1. Phasing for the Proposed Stowe RWRRF Elements
Proposed Stowe RWRRF Elements
Proposed Impacts
NWP
No. Phase
Anticipated
Construction
Dates
Section
10
Section
404
Non-
Section
404
Mount Holly Forcemains (HDD) and Stowe Site
Preparation Yes Yes No 12 1a 08/20-2/21
Stowe RWRRF Access Roads No Yes Yes 14 1b 10/20-12/21
Stowe Headworks & Influent Pumping Station
and Mount Holly Pumping Station No No No n/a 1c 2021-2023
Stowe Regional Water Resource Recovery
Facility Yes No Yes 12 2a 2021-2024
(TBD)
Belmont Pumping Station and Forcemains Yes No No 12 2b 2022-2024
(TBD)
Stowe RWRRF Expansion No No No n/a 3 TBD in 2035 to
2040

This permit application seeks authorization for Phase 1 out of three phases (Figure 3, Appendix
E). Section B6b describes future Phases 2 and 3. Total impacts to WoUS for all phases are
provided in Table 2.

Table 2. Total Project Impacts for Phase 1-3
Impact Type Total (ac)
Total Section 10/404 Stream Impacts: <0.10 ac*
Total Section 404 Wetland Impacts: 0.20 ac
Total Non-Section 404 Isolated Wetland Impacts: 0.22 ac
*estimated surface water impact amount.

Phase 1 (this Permit)
In Phases 1a through 1c, the existing Long Creek PS would be replaced with a new pump
station and headworks facility on the same site in order handle wastewater flows from the Mt.
Holly WRF (Figure 5, Appendix E). These flows would be pumped beneath the Catawba River
to the replaced Long Creek PS by horizontal directional drilling (HDD) methods, would continue
from the current Long Creek PS site to the Paw Creek PS, and then on to larger Charlotte
Water treatment facilities via the existing system (Figure 2, Appendix E). A new pumping station
would be constructed at the Mt. Holly WRF site so that the WRF could be decommissioned.
Additionally, access roads and power transmission would be constructed to the regional facility
location.

Table 3 (below) summarizes regulatory authority, impact type, Nationwide Permit (NWP)
number, and impact amount. Phase 1a requires authorization under Section 10 and NWP 12
for HDD installation of forcemains beneath the Catawba River and between the existing Long
Creek PS and Mt. Holly Water Reclamation Facility (WRF). Phase 1b requires authorization
under NWP 14 for access road construction.

PCN Supplemental Information
Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

4

Table 3. Proposed Phase 1 Impacts
Impact
Number
Feature
Type1
Figure/
Plansheet
Regulatory
Authority
Impact
Type
NWP
No. Phase Total (ac)
1 Wetland 10
(PEM)
Figure 6/
Plansheet 1 Section 404 Grading
and Fill 12 1a 0.04
2 Catawba
River
Figure 5/
Plansheet 2 Section 10/404
HDD
beneath
Catawba
River
12 1a n/a
3 Wetland 5
(PEM)
Figure 7/
Plansheet 3 Section 404 Fill 14 1b 0.01
4 Wetland 6
(PEM)
Figure 7/
Plansheet 3 Section 404 Fill 14 1b 0.04
5 Wetland 8
(PFO)
Figure 8/
Plansheet 4
Non-Section 404-
Isolated Fill n/a* 1b 0.04
6 Wetland 12
(PFO)
Figure 9/
Plansheet 5 Section 404 Fill 14 1b 0.11
Total Section 10/404 Stream Impacts: n/a
Total Section 404 Wetland Impacts: 0.20 ac
Total Non-Section 404 Isolated Wetland Impacts: 0.04 ac
A nationwide permit is not required for non-section 404 isolated waters
1Cowardin Classifications: PEM = Palustrine emergent wetland; PFO = Palustrine forested wetland
Phase 1a: Mt. Holly Forcemains and Stowe Site Preparation (Section 10 and NWP No. 12)
· Includes site preparation for the horizontal directional drill (HDD) of forcemains between
existing Charlotte Water Long Creek Pumping Station (PS) to the existing City of Mount
Holly WRF.
· The purpose of the forcemains will be to transfer wastewater from the existing Mount Holly
WRF to a new pump station to be constructed adjacent to the existing Long Creek PS.
Once the Stowe RWRRF is operational (Phase 2a), it will treat the wastewater from Mt.
Holly WRF.
 This would result in 0.04 acre of impact to Section 404 Wetland 10 as site
grading would be required for the future odor control facility pad
associated with Stowe Headworks & Influent Pumping Station (Stowe
HW&IPS) in Phase 1c (Figure 6, Plansheet 1, Appendix E).
 This would result in a Section 10 impact due to HDD of forcemains beneath
the Catawba River with no acreage or linear footage loss of jurisdictional
surface waters (Figure 5 and Plansheet 2, Appendix E). Forcemains
beneath Long Creek would also be installed by HDD methods, resulting in
no surface water impacts.

Two parallel 24-inch high density polyethylene (HDPE) forcemains will be provided from Mount
Holly WRF to the existing Long Creek PS site, where they will discharge into the existing Long
Creek interceptor. The dual 24-inch forcemains will be installed by horizontal directional drill
(HDD) with each main installed in a single drill from the existing Long Creek Pumping Station
site to the Mt. Holly WRF. One forcemain will serve as the duty main with the second functioning
as a redundant standby main. Additionally, a 4-inch fiber optic conduit line will be included in
PCN Supplemental Information
Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

5

each 24-inch main HDD to allow for more reliable communications and control between the
receiving facilities and a future Mount Holly Pumping Station (PS), which will be brought online
in Phase 1c.

The 24-inch main HDDs will extend from the Mount Holly WRF to the connection point with the
Long Creek Interceptor, just north of the Long Creek Pump Station. The dual 24-inch mains
HDD are 2,900-ft long and will cross under the Catawba River and Long Creek. Both the entry
and exit points for the forcemains will be in uplands and beyond the FERC/Duke Energy
management boundary. A 60-ft wide easement is requested along this alignment across the
Catawba River and Long Creek to encompass both forcemains. No impacts to WoUS are
proposed; however, because the Catawba River is a traditionally navigable waterway, NWP 12
authorization is required, along with a Section 10 review for hazards to navigation. No changes
or structures are proposed for the water surface, water column, or riverbed; as such, no hazards
to navigation are anticipated. The forcemain alignment, HDD entry and exit points, proposed
easement boundaries, and piping profile are shown on Plansheet 2 (Appendix E).

In preparation for pipe stringing necessary for HDD, clearing and grading will be required for the
pipe stringing laydown areas, which would impact 0.04 acres of Wetland 10 (Plansheet 1,
Appendix E) This impact would also be necessary for the Stowe Headworks Improvement for
the fill slopes necessary to prepare the location of the odor control facility (Phase 1c). As a
result of this fill, 0.04 acres of Wetland 10 will be permanently impacted. Site preparation will
involve typical construction equipment such as excavators, earthmovers, and bulldozers.

Phase 1b: Stowe RWRRF Access Roads (NWP No. 14)
· Construction of access roads to the Stowe RWRRF (Phase 2a) site.
· Two bridges spanning Long Creek will also be built; however, no impacts to
streams will occur.
 This would result in 0.16 acre of impacts to Section 404 Wetlands 5, 6,
(Figure 7 and Plansheet 3, Appendix E), and 12 (Figure 8 and Plansheet 5,
Appendix E), and 0.04 acres of Non-Section 404 Isolated Wetland 8 (Figure
8, Plansheet 4, Appendix E).

Access roads will be constructed during this phase, as well as two separate bridges, crossing
Long Creek in the north from Belmeade Drive and in the south from Hawfield Road off of
Whitewater Center Parkway (Figure 5, Appendix E). Due to frequent public events associated
with the Whitewater Center, traffic on Whitewater Center Parkway would restrict both routine
and emergency access to the facility via Hawfield Road. Therefore, the main entrance will be
located off of Belmeade Road (northern road/entrance) which will remain unaffected by events
and traffic at the National Whitewater Center. The second (southern) bridge will provide for a
critical connection between treatment facilities located on both sites of Long Creek and provides
a secondary entrance from Hawfield Road (southern road/entrance). Two roads and two bridges
are necessary for ingress and egress, and safety and security purposes.

PCN Supplemental Information
Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

6

These bridges will be spans with concrete support structures placed beyond top of bank of Long
Creek. The support structures for these bridges will be pile driven. The bridge approaches will
be constructed first so that the pile driving can occur in uplands. A crane will be utilized to lift
and place spans in place without impact to Long Creek. The bridge crossing in the north will be
aligned with a previous NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) abandoned roadway (Old
Blacksnake Road) to minimize land disturbance and impacts. Equipment used in the
construction will involve cranes, excavators, earthmovers, and bulldozers.

Portions of Section 404 Wetlands 5, 6, and 12 will be filled for bridge approaches and pilings.
Impacts to Long Creek will be avoided.

Additionally, there is an impact to a Non-Section 404, isolated wetland as a result the northern
road alignment (Wetland 8) (Figure 8 and Plansheet 4, Appendix E).

Phase 1c: Stowe Headworks & Influent Pumping Station and Mount Holly Pumping Station
· The purpose of the Stowe HW&IPS will be to provide preliminary wastewater treatment
and would eventually send flows to the future Stowe RWRRF (Phase 2a), once
operational.
· A new pumping station would be constructed at the existing Mount Holly WRF in
order to send wastewater flow to the Stowe HW&IPS. The existing Mount Holly
WRF would be decommissioned (in a separate project by Mount Holly) upon
completion of the Stowe RWRRF (Phase 2a).
· No additional impacts to jurisdictional features are expected.
· A Duke transmission line is proposed to be constructed to provide power services to
the future Stowe RWRRF (Phase 2a).
• No impacts to jurisdictional features are expected.

There are existing equalization basins at Long Creek PS adjacent to Hawfield Road on the
Mecklenburg County side of the Catawba River. A new wastewater treatment plant facility will
be constructed in Phase 2 of this project on a portion of land between the Catawba River and
Long Creek (Figure 3, Appendix E). In order to support this proposed wastewater plant, which
would require storing excess influent during large storm events and to equalize flow to the plant,
the existing basins will need to be expanded and support facilities added. This will be referred
to as the Stowe Headworks & Influent Pumping Station (Stowe HW&IPS). These improvements
must be made prior to Phase 2 as they are part of the critical path for operations.

In addition to new and expanded equalization basins, an odor control facility would be included
to limit impacts to nearby recreational, public, and private facilities. This expanded footprint will
require grading and filling areas which would be conducted previously during Phase 1a. As such
no impacts to jurisdictional features are proposed for Phase 1c.

PCN Supplemental Information
Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

7

B4d. Jurisdictional Determinations
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) request was submitted by HDR to the United
States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on October 11th, 2019 for the Mecklenburg County
side of the Project to include the Stowe Headworks and Influent Pumping Station, Stowe Storm
Flow Equalization, the RWRRF, and access road property. The USACE conducted a field
verification of on-site WoUS on November 22nd, 2019. Subsequently, CWS investigated the Mt.
Holly side of the project in December 2019 and in March 2019 and determined that no WoUS
were present, with the exception of the Catawba River which forms the western boundary of the
Mt. Holly side. Details of the Mt. Holly side field review conducted by CWS have been submitted
by HDR as an amendment to the AJD on March 19th, 2020.
The proposed Phase 2b has not yet been put to procurement by the Applicant and a design
consultant has not been chosen; therefore, the forcemain alignment from the Belmont WWTP to
the Paw Creek PS had not been ground-truthed for WoUS; however, the preliminary alignment
follows existing roads through developed land from the Belmont WWTP to an existing railroad,
and then follows the railroad until reaching the Paw Creek PS. This Phase 2b is anticipated to
have a Section 10 crossing beneath the Catawba River via HDD methods (Figure 4, Appendix
E). If any streams or wetlands encountered along this alignment, the Applicant would cross via
HDD methods.
B6b. Future Project Plans
This permit application seeks authorization for Phase 1 (as described in Section B3e). Phases
2-3 are still in the planning stages and proposed impacts to WoUS for these future phases will
be considered cumulatively.

Phase 2 would result in a Section 10 impact and loss of surface waters of <0.1 acre to the
Catawba River associated with an effluent outfall and dock (Table 4). The design, location, and
exact impacts are unknown at this time. Additionally, there is an impact to a non-Section 404,
isolated wetland (Wetland 9) as a result the Stowe RWRRF construction (Figure 10, Appendix
E). The following is a brief description of the remaining phasing of the project. Phase 1 was
described in detail in Section B3e.

Table 4. Proposed Phase 2 Impacts
Impact
Number Feature Type1 Figure Regulatory
Authority Impact Type Total (ac)
7 Wetland 9 (PFO) Figure 10 Non-Section 404
– Isolated Fill 0.18
8 Catawba River Figure 10 Section 10/404 Effluent Outfall and Dock <0.10*
9 Catawba River Figure 4 Section 10/404 HDD beneath Catawba
River n/a
Total Section 10/404 Stream Impacts: <0.10 ac*
Total Section 404 Wetland Impacts: n/a
Total Non-Section 404 Wetland Impacts: 0.18 ac
*estimated surface water acreage on the Catawba River
1Cowardin Classification: PFO = Palustrine forested wetland
PCN Supplemental Information
Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

8

Phase 2 (Future)
Phase 2a: Stowe Regional Water Resource Recovery Facility (Section 10 and NWP No. 12)
In Phase 2a, the regional facility would be constructed and flows from the Stowe HW&IPS
would be rerouted to the regional facility (instead of continuing on to the Paw Creek PS)
(Figure 3, Appendix E). In Phase 2b, a new pumping station at the existing Belmont WWTP
would be constructed to convey wastewater flows through a new forcemain potentially aligned
with an existing railroad right of way, crossing beneath the Catawba River, to the existing Paw
Creek PS (Figure 4, Appendix E). Flows from the Paw Creek PS would continue to be pumped
either to the existing McAlpine Creek Wastewater Management Facility (WWMF) or the Irwin
WWTP via existing forcemains.
· The Stowe RWRRF is proposed to be a 15 million gallons per day (mgd) WWTP facility
that would treat wastewater flows from Charlotte Water and City of Mount Holly.
 The Stowe RWRRF facility would result in 0.18 acre of Non-Section 404 isolated
Wetland 9 (Figure 10, Appendix E).
 The Stowe RWRRF effluent outfall and access dock would result in Section 10
impacts to the Catawba River, estimated to be less than 0.1 acre of surface
water impact (Figure 10, Appendix E).
• At the time of design, avoidance to Section 404 wetlands will be
considered
Phase 2b: Belmont Pumping Station and Forcemains (Section 10)
· Additional HDDs are proposed beneath the Catawba River to send wastewater flows from
the existing Belmont Wastewater Treatment Plant to the existing Paw Creek PS (Phase
2b).
· The PS and forcemain would send wastewater flow to Charlotte Water’s existing Paw
Creek PS.
· Belmont WWTP would likely be decommissioned (in separate project by City of Belmont)
upon completion of the PS and Forcemains.
 This would result in a Section 10 impact due to HDD of forcemains beneath the
Catawba River with no acreage or linear footage loss of jurisdictional surface
waters.
 The preliminary forcemain alignment between the Belmont WWTP and the Paw
Creek PS is anticipated to be installed via HDD methods beneath any streams or
wetlands (Figure 4, Appendix E).

PCN Supplemental Information
Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

9

Phase 3 (Future)
Phase 3: Stowe RWRRF Expansion
In Phase 3, the 15 mgd treatment capacity of the regional facility would be expanded to a future
25 mgd treatment capacity and flows from the Paw Creek PS would be rerouted to the Long
Creek PS and on to the regional facility.

· Expand the existing Stowe RWRRF (proposed to be built in Phase 2a) to 25 MGD
to meet the growing population needs.
· No impacts to WoUS anticipated

D1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed
impacts in designing project.
To avoid and minimize impacts to waters of the U.S., the project area was delineated for
jurisdictional streams and wetlands. Because the Catawba River is a Traditionally Navigable
Waterway (TNW), Section 10 authorization is required for any impacts beneath, through, on, or
over the river. For those impacts to the Catawba River that propose forcemain installation by
HDD, no changes or structures are proposed for the water surface, water column, or riverbed so
no hazards to navigation are anticipated. For those impacts to the Catawba River proposed on
the surface of the river, design has not yet commenced. Any element of this project that would
require future impacts in Phase 2-3, refined designed and calculated impacts would be
submitted to the USACE prior to construction.

The EIS and approved ROD already considered alternatives for the overall Stowe RWRRF
project, location, and HDD methods verses other wastewater treatment options. Impacts
associated with the Stowe HW&IPS (Impact 1) cannot be avoided due to the existing location of
the Long Creek PS. Impacts associated with the Stowe RWRRF are isolated and not regulated
by the USACE (Impact 7) or are in a future phase (dock and effluent outfall) (Impact 8). As such,
the alternatives considered here are associated with the road access alignments (Impacts 3, 4
and 6). Impacts 2 and 9, and are Section 10 impacts to the Catawba River, but do not propose
surface water impacts.

No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative would not involve the construction of a new regional treatment facility;
however, it would include upgrading the existing Mt. Holly WRF and Belmont WWTP. It would
also require substantial wastewater collection system upgrades to the Charlotte Water system.
In the absence of the project, capacity for wastewater treatment would be inadequate in
providing these services for the existing and anticipated population. The No-Build Alternative
would not meet the purpose and need of the project.
PCN Supplemental Information
Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

10

Access Roads Alternatives Analysis
The main access to the future Stowe RWRRF will be the northern road alignment via Belmeade
Drive (Figure 3, Appendix E). Originally, the southern access road (Hawfield Road) was
approved in the ROD; however, traffic on Whitewater Center Parkway (the only connection to
Hawfield Road) can be severely backed up with no movement during public and private events
at the National Whitewater Center. If there were an emergency at the facility, first responders
could not adequately access the facility. Therefore, the main entrance from the north will be a
dedicated facility access and a secondary road from the south operational access between
facilities and for ingress/egress options are necessary.

The first consideration for a secondary access road was the existing entrance and roads on the
adjacent Clariant site. The Clariant entrance is located at the intersection of Belmeade Road
and Mt. Holly Road. This option proposed no impacts on the western side of Long Creek as it
would only utilize existing roads. However, the existing entrance to Clariant would require a
crossing of two railroad tracks and any blockage at the entrance gate would result in stopped
traffic on an active railroad track. Furthermore, the utilization of Clariant roads for construction
and operational vehicles of the Stowe RWRRF would directly interfere with commercial
operations at Clariant.

As access directly through the Clariant site was eliminated as a feasible northern option, a road
alignment from Belmeade Drive to the site was considered. This would follow a previously
abandoned NCDOT road footprint that still exhibits old asphalt. The northern road alignment
was deemed to be the most feasible, both economically and environmentally.
The southern alignment will connect the future Stowe RWRRF to existing Hawfield Road and
Long Creek PS. The northern road alignment utilizes an old road footprint, thus minimizing land
disturbance and impacts outside of that footprint. Both roads cross Long Creek at narrow spans
to avoid and minimize impacts to Long Creek itself.

D1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed
impacts through construction techniques.
Erosion and sedimentation control measures will be properly installed and inspected in
accordance with a NPDES Erosion and Sedimentation Control (ESC) permit. Erosion and
sedimentation BMPs will be installed prior to construction. Impacts will be minimized by strict
enforcement of Best Management Practices for the protection of surface waters, including
restrictions against the staging of equipment in or adjacent to waters of the US. Piling drive
techniques will be utilized for bridge construction to minimize the impact footprint of the bridge
bents. This project will follow all conditions of NWP 12 and NWP 14, including their respective
Water Quality General Certifications (WGC) 4133 and 4135. Equipment to be used includes
excavators, dump trucks, earthmovers, cranes, and HDD equipment.
PCN Supplemental Information
Stowe RWRRF & Associated Infrastructure Projects
SAW-2019-01988

11

D4h. Complete if using a mitigation bank, comments.
Approximately 32.44 acres of wetlands with 13,249 linear feet of stream were identified on site.
According to site design, 0.20 acres of jurisdictional wetlands will be impacted. These impacts
are proposed to be mitigated as a 2:1 ratio which amounts to mitigating the equivalent of 0.40
acres. Mitigation banks require rounding up to the nearest 0.25 acre, as such 0.5 acres of
wetland credits will be purchased from the City of Charlotte Umbrella Stream and Wetland
Mitigation Bank. A Credit Acceptance Letter from the Umbrella Stream and Wetland Mitigation
Bank is attached (Appendix F). No mitigation is required for impacts to the non-Section 404,
isolated wetland impacts (0.22 acre).

F5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat
The 2015 EIS examined potential impacts to federal and state protected species. The Preferred
Alternative (this Project) was determined to have no impacts to federal and state protected
species. However, the EIS did indicate a population of Schweinitz’s sunflower adjacent to, but
outside, the Project on the Mt. Holly side and the population was confirmed during a survey
conducted on November 19th, 2019 by CWS. HDR surveyed the Mecklenburg County side of
the project over several days during the survey window for Schweinitz’s sunflower. HDR
determined that there were no suitable habitat present on the Mecklenburg County side.
Measures will be put in place, such as extra erosion control fencing and orange tree protection
fencing within the project area to protect the population outside the project area; no direct or
indirect impacts to this population are anticipated. Therefore, no impacts to federal or state
protected species are anticipated. Details of these surveys can be found in Appendix G.

Appendix B
Landowner Information

Landowner Information Tax Parcel Owner Deed Book Deed Page Phone/Email Mailing Address Mailing City State Mailing Zip Code County Telephone Number 05305102 Clariant Corporation 4677 309 [e-mail] 4000 Monroe Road Charlotte North Carolina 28205 Mecklenburg 704.331.7104 05305103 City of Charlotte 28400 380 [e-mail] 600 E. 4th St. Charlotte North Carolina 28202 Mecklenburg 704.336.1083 05305104 City of Charlotte 28400 386 [e-mail] 600 E. 4th St. Charlotte North Carolina 28202 Mecklenburg 704.336.1083 05306101 Clariant Corporation 3201 551 [e-mail] 4000 Monroe Road Charlotte North Carolina 28205 Mecklenburg 704.331.7104 05306119 Cawtawba Lands Conservancy 26977 599 [e-mail] 105 W. Morehead St. Charlotte North Carolina 28202 Mecklenburg 704.342.3330 05306117 City of Charlotte 28400 380 [e-mail] 600 E. 4th St. Charlotte North Carolina 28202 Mecklenburg 704.336.1083 124524 City of Mt. Holly 0862 0206 - PO Box 406 Mt. Holly North Carolina 28120 Gaston - 217834 American and Efird Inc. 4584 0013 - PO Box 507 Mt. Holly North Carolina 28120 Gaston - 124527 City of Mt. Holly 1424 0103 - PO Box 406 Mt. Holly North Carolina 28120 Gaston - 124512 American and Efird Inc. 4584 0013 - PO Box 507 Mt. Holly North Carolina 28120 Mecklenburg -

Appendix C
Agent Authorization

AGENT CERTIFICATION OF AUTHORIZATION
I, V, � C. LV I ISO, , representing Charlotte Water hereby certify that I have authorized
Benjamin Burdette of HDR to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary to the
processing, issuance, and acceptance of this request for wetlands determination /
permitting and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
We hereby certify that the above information submitted in ,this application is true and
accurate to the best of our knowledge
A
A licant's signature
/ 2 `1
Da e
Agent's signature
9/19/19
Date
Completion of this form will allow the agent to sign all future application correspondence.

Appendix D
Record of Decision

REVISED
RECORD OF DECISION
STOWE REGIONAL WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY
(formerly known as the Long Creek Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant)
CHARLOTTE WATER/CITY OF MOUNT HOLLY/CITY OF BELMONT
MECKLENBURG AND GASTON COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA
DEQ#1603; DENR#1597
PREPARED BY:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
January 2, 2020
(Replaces the approved March 18, 2015 version)
CONTACT PERSON:
David Wainwright
NCDEQ, Division of Water Resources
Mail Service Center 1611
Raleigh, NC 27699-1611
[phone]
[e-mail]

REVISED -Record of Decision — Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities/City of Mount Holly Regional Wastewater Treatment
REVISION NOTE
Prior to construction of the proposed project, the applicant contacted the DWR regarding a few minor
changes to the project. Changes include the location of an equalization basin and new access and
construction roads. The preferred alternative has not changed and remains alternative 2. The applicant has
submitted documentation to the Division dated December 20, 2019, with the subject line of "Charlotte -
Mecklenburg Utilities/City of Mount Holy+/City of Belmont Regional Wastewater Treatment Final
Environmental Impact Statement Revision Letter" which outlines proposed changes to the project and are
addressed in this revised ROD.
Proposed revisions are only to occur' at the current Long Creek Pump Station site. Proposed project revisions
will include additional impacts to wetlands, prime and unique farmlands, and floodplains; but all will be
minor or negligible impacts. Bridges over Long Creek will result in minor impacts to wetlands (less than
0.1 acre) and potentially minor or negligible impacts to floodways. Clearing of land will increase
(approximately 4.5 acres for temporary construction access, approximately 8.5 acres for a permanent access
road, and approximately 20 acres for the equalization basin). Much of these lands are considered prime and
unique farmlands or farmland of statewide importance. However, these areas are forested and not currently
being farmed, are zoned either industrial or single family residential, and are owned by the City of Charlotte.
Due to these conditions, impacts to prime and unique farmlands is considered minimal. Due to the
additional clearing, impacts to land cover will occur. Wildlife may be impacted by the additional clearing,
but much of the surrounding area will still be forested and it is therefore expected that wildlife will relocate
to those areas.
The proposed changes will impact the Thread Trail (used for walking, hiking, and mountain biking).
Impacted portions of the will be relocated within the remaining 85-acre forested track, thereby mitigating
additional impacts to public lands, scenic, and recreational areas.
No additional impacts rp areas of archeological or historical value; rare or protected species; air quality;
noise; water resources, shellfish, and their habitats; water quality; soils; ground water; water supply; or
impacts from toxic substances are anticipated.
SUMMARY
An EIS has been prepared for the Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities Department (CMUD) and the planned
wastewater treatment expansion for the existing service area as well as surrounding service areas. The
proposal considers wastewater treatment at a regional level and includes the City of Mount Holly, the City
of Belmont, Clariant Corporation (Clariant), and CMUD's western Mecklenburg County wastewater
service area. A feasibility study was performed in 2006 for CMUD and the City of Mount Holly to identify
potential alternatives to meet the needs of the projected growth in the service areas. Study results
recommended a regional approach, and that is what is being pursued by CMUD and the City of Mount
Holly. As discussed in the EIS, there has been extensive stakeholder involvement with the public and private
sector as well as government officials throughout project development.
The preferred alternative would include constructing a new Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) facility
on the Mecklenburg County side of the Catawba River on land near the existing Long Creek pump station.
The new facility would treat wastewater from both CMUD and the City of Mount Holly. Flows from the
City of Mount Holly and the City of Belmont would be pumped under the Catawba River to the new facility.

REVISED -Record of Decision —Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities/City of Mount Holly Regional Wastewater Treatment
A new force main would be constructed from the City of Belmont WWTP to the Paw Creek lift station.
The existing Long Creek pump station would be modified to serve as the influent pumping station for the
new facility.
PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose of the proposed project is to address future wastewater demands in northwestern Mecklenburg
and eastern Gaston Counties. Populations in these areas are expected to grow considerably by 2030.
Population growth in the CMUD service area, which includes the Long Creek Basin, Paw Creek Basin,
Catawba Creek Basin, Gar Creek Basin, and the Lower Mountain Island Lake Basin, is expected to increase
from 43,371 in 2010 to 1 15,580 in 2030. Consequently, wastewater flows in the service area is expected to
increase from 6.44 million gallons per day (mgd) in 2010 to 14.74 mgd in 2030. In order to meet the needs
of these growing areas, without hindering growth, the wastewater capacity of the region will need to be
increased.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Several alternatives were identified dwing the planning process. A total of seven alternatives were carried
forward and considered in the EIS; the EIS provides a full discussion of these alternatives. A brief statement
on each is below:
No Action: The No Action Alternative does not include construction of a new wastewater Geatment
plant or other associated infrastructure. However, based on a NCDENR requirement, this alternative
would include upgrading the existing City of Mount Holly WWTP (Mount Holly WWTP) and City of
Belmont WWTP (Belmont WWTP). Wastewater from the Long Creek basin would continue to be
piped over 20 miles to the McAlpine Creek Wastewater Management Facility (WWMF). The Mount
Holly WWTP is approaching its maximum design capacity. Without expansion, areas not currently
serviced would likely have to utilize onsite septic systems.
2. Operate ,Tointly at New Reeional WWTP in Mount Holly (Alternative 1): This alternative consists
of constructing a new WWTP facility on land adjacent to the existing Mount Holly WWTP site. This
new plant would serve the City of Mount Holly as well as CMUD. The Belmont WWTP would be
decommissioned and replaced with a new pump station. A new force main would be constructed from
the Belmont WWTP to the Paw Creek lift station. Wastewater From Long Creek would be pumped
across the Catawba River to the new facility. A portion of the wastewater may be treated for reuse or
reclaimed purposes such as landscape irrigation and industrial purposes.
3. Operate Jointly at New Reeional WWTP in Mecklenburg County near Lone Creek (Alternative
2—Preferred Alternative): Under this alternative, a new WWTP facility would be constructed on the
Mecklenburg County side of the Catawba River on land near the existing Long Creek Pump Station.
The new facility would treat wastewater from both CMUD and the City of Mount Holly. Flows from
the City of Mount Holly and/or City of Belmont would be pumped under the Catawba River to the new
facility. A new force main would be constructed from the Belmont WWTP to the Paw Creek lift station.
The existing Long Creek pump station would be modified to serve as the influent pumping station for
the new facility. A portion of the wastewater may be treated for reuse or reclaimed purposes such as
landscape irrigation and industrial purposes.

REVISED -Record of Decision —Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities/City of Mount Holly Regional Wastewater Treatment
4. Non-Discharge/Land Application Alternative: State law requires land application to be considered
for any WWTP. This option was found to be technically and economically infeasible due to the large
amount of land that would be required. Based on calculations, necessary land requirements would be
between 37 and 230 acres for non -discharge ponds and storage and between 1,000 acres and 13,000
acres for land application. In an urban setting these land requirements would be difficult to achieve and
the cost to purchase suitable land would be prohibitive.
PREFERED ALTERNATIVE
Alternative 2, operate jointly at a new regional WWTP on the Mecklenburg County side of the Catawba
River near Long Creek, was chosen as the preferred alternative. This alternative was selected over the others
because it meets the developing region's need for additional wastewater treatment capacity and results in a
combination of fewer negative environmental consequences. These include comparatively fewer natural
resource and environmental impacts at the building site; fewer construction and operational constraints;
greater public recreation and open space benefits; reduced energy use; increased water volume in Lake
Wylie for local uses such as power generation, cooling water, low flow supplementation, and drinking
water; and concurrence with the planning goals of the affected local governments.
Additionally, the placement of a single W WTP is preferable to other alternatives in terms of compatibility
with existing and future land uses, protection of riparian buffers, and reduced impacts to critical areas such
as streams and wetlands. Advanced treatment at a new facility would produce high quality effluent with
low nutrient concentrations and provide additional water into Lake Wylie for many beneficial uses. The
Preferred Alternative also provides regional wastewater treatment with a single discharge that promotes
efficient planning, design, and permitting; minimizes shoreline and wetland impacts; and cost-effectively
achieves project goals. It also has the potential to eliminate three existing discharges and reduce the risk of
overflows by reducing wastewater pumping distance.
F,NVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
All means of avoiding or minimizing environmental and cultural impacts outlined in the EIS will be
incorporated into the project. Moreover, the project will be designed and constructed to avoid adverse
mpacts to existing environmental features as much as practicable. A summary of impacts to environmental
features and mitigative actions for the preferred alternative is described below:
Topography and soils: There will not be significant long-term impacts as a result of the project. Impacts
include those associated with leveling, excavation, and grading from construction of the project Much of
the preferred alternative would occur on land that has been previously disturbed. Impacts to soils and soil
loss would be controlled through the use of appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPS).
Land Cover and Land Use: The new facility constructed under the preferred alternative would be located
on land currently zoned industrial and the Belmont pump station and face main would be constructed on
previously disturbed land. With the preferred alternative, there would be approximately 85-acres of
undisturbed forested lands adjacent to the National Whitewater Center that could be used for public uses
such as greenways or other recreational activities. Impacts to the Thread Trail would be mitigated by
relocating affected trail portions within the remaining forested tract adjacent to the project.

REVISED -Record of Decision —Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities/City of Mount Holly Regional Wastewater Treatment
Wetlands and Floodplains: Force mains would cross the Catawba River, Paw Creek, and Long Creek. These
crossings would be within the floodplain and associated wetland areas. Force mains and outfall structure
would be directionally bored, eliminating direct impacts to wetlands. The outfall would be constructed
within the Catawba River floodplain but will not result in an increase in the 100-year flood base flood
elevation. Impacts from access road bridges over Long Creek will minimize impacts to wetlands and
floodplains but will still result in unavoidable but minimal impacts to wetlands and floodplains.
Water Quality: Impacts to surface waters include those from stormwater runoff, riparian buffer impacts,
and wastewater effluent. Increases in stormwater runoff may affect aquatic resources. The project will
require a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP); the included guidelines will minimize and reduce
the number and amount of pollutants leaving the site through BMPs. Riparian buffer areas may be affected
by force main and outfall crossings. Impacts to these areas will be minimized through the use of directional
boring under streams and associated riparian areas. Additionally, proposed facilities will be located outside
of riparian buffer areas. Wastewater discharge to Lake Wylie will increase. Compliance with all NPDES
permit limits will be required.
Ground Water: No direct impacts to groundwater are expected.
Water Supply: The proposed project will increase the amount of wastewater being discharged into Lake
Wylie. NPDES permit limits will protect the quality of water which will not exceed drinking water
standards.
Wildlife and Aquatic Resource Habitats: Impacts to terrestrial species is expected to be limited to those
areas that will be cleared; impacted wildlife may move to adjacent forested areas. Impacts to aquatic species
are expected to be minimal due to stormwater controls and stringent NPDES discharge limits.
Rare and Protected Species: The preferred alternative will not impact any rare or protected species.
Public, Scenic, and Recreational Areas: A portion of the proposed project is in close proximity to the
National Whitewater Center. The proposed alternative would preserve an approximately 85-acre tract
adjacent to the National Whitewater Center which could be used to provide additional hiking and biking
trails as well as a new canoe launch on Long Creek. Potential adverse impacts include odors and wastewater
spills, which could result in disruption of recreational activities. New facilities would be designed to prevent
storm -flow bypasses and sanitary sewer overflows. Odor control technology would be incorporated into the
project as well. Impacts to the Thread Trail would be mitigated by relocating affected trail portions within
the remaining forested tract adjacent to the project.
Energy Resources: Energy consumption would increase as the new facility comes online, but usage would
partially be offset by not having to pump wastewater from Long Creek pumping station to McAlpine Creek
W WTP. Additional water volume in Lake Wylie could potentially be used for additional power generation,
and it may be possible to use onsite generated methane to partially power the facility and reduce the
consumption of natural gas.
Archeological or Historical Resources: There are no properties registered on the National Sate Register of
Historic Places. State Historic Preservation Office correspondence states that they will not require any
archeological surveys.
Prime Agricultural Lands: Construction of the equalization basin, access roads, and temporary construction
access roads will result in impacts to prime agricultural lands. However, the affected lands are currently
forested and not being used for agriculture, are zoned industrial and single residence, and are owned by the

REVISED - Record of Decision — Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities/City of Mount Holly Regional Wastewater Treatment
City of Charlotte. Since the City of Charlotte has no intent to sell or farm the land, and based on current
zoning, impacts are deemed minimal.
Air Quality: Direct impacts to air quality will be temporary and minor. During construction, dust control
measures will be employed to limit dust exposure in the project area. Operation of the plant will not produce
any regulated air quality contaminants. Nearby residences and businesses would be buffered by forested
areas surrounding the facility. An air quality permit would be required for the operation of the back-up
generators and methane gas produced onsite would likely be used to generate power for the facility.
Nuisance Conditions: Temporary uoise and dust will be generated as result of construction. Odor conG'ol
measures would be used at the plant and pumping station. Most equipment would be housed in buildings
which will also help reduce noise and odors. A forested buffer around the facility will also help alleviate
potential noise and odor concerns.
Toxic Substances: Toxic substances will not be inu'oduced during construction. All chemical storage and
feed areas at the plant would be provided with secondary containment. Onsite diesel fuel tanks for
generators will have secondary containment and leak detection systems.
SECONDARY AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The secondary and cumulative impacts associated with the preferred alternative would generally be related
to continued urban growth and land use changes associated with population increases in the service area. It
is expected that population increases and associated secondary and cumulative impacts would occur
regardless of whether or not the proposed project is constructed.
The Gar and Catawba Sub -basins and portions of the Mountain Island Lake Sub -basin currently utilize
onsite septic tanks. The preferred alternative may allow these areas to be serviced with the wastewater
facility which would help eliminate the effects of failing septic sewer systems. If these areas were to be
serviced by the new facility, it would allow higher density development than what currently exists in these
areas. This may allow these areas to have more development due to higher density than would be seen if
the area remained on individual septic systems. Growth would continue in other areas of the service areas
as well. Several local and State regulations are in place throughout the project service area that will
minimize secondary and cumulative impacts and include various zoning restrictions, Water Supply
Watershed Protection areas, stormwater BMPS and regulations, riparian buffer rules, NPDES permitting,
floodplain protection ordnances, and municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4). Public sewer
extension projects would be required to apply for and obtain the necessary permits and evaluate, avoid, and
minimize environmental impacts. Water supply watershed protection rules, which limit land use densities
and apply other development restrictions to protect water quality, apply to a large portion of the project
service area in both Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties. Additionally, a number of local policies and
ordinances are in place that would further limit secondary and cumulative impacts.
Beneficial impacts of the proposed project may also Deco. By relocating the discharge point from Long
Creek to Lake Wylie, energy currently being used to pump wastewater 20 miles will be saved. The
additional discharge into Lake Wylie could be used to produce additional electricity. While some of the
treated effluent would be used onsite as reclaimed water, there exists the possibility that the reclaimed water
F7

REVISED - Record of Decision — Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities/City of Mount Holly Regional Wastewater Treatment
program could be expanded to include industrial and/or landscape applications, which could, in turn, reduce
the demand for treated drinking water during peak and drought conditions.
NECESSARY ACTIONS
It is ant cipated that the project will require the following actions:
• NPDES Permit
• FERC Permit
• Air Quality Permit
• Dam Permit (for Equalization Basin embankment)
• 401 Water Quality Certification
• 404 Clean Water Act Permit
• Erosion Control Permit
• Mecklenburg County Building Permit
• Authorization to Construct
EIS REVIEW AND COMMENT
The EIS has been properly advertised and reviewed by State and Fedora] agencies. Extensive public input
has been made into the planning process. Comments from agencies and citizens have been incorporated
into the proposed project. A copy of this Revised Record of Decision will be sent to the Clearinghouse, all
review agencies, and a notice of its availability will be published in the Environmental Bulletin.
L tda Culpepper (Date)
Director, Division of Water Resources

Appendix E
Figures and Plansheets

!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
Mt. Holly WaterReclamationFacility Long CreekPumpingStation
Paw CreekPumpingStation
Irwin CreekWastewaterTreatment Plant
McAlpine WastewaterManagement Facility
Sugar CreekWastewaterTreatment Plant
STOWE RWRRF & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
FIGURE 1APROJECT VICINITY - OVERVIEW
NATIONWIDE PERMITPATH: \\CLTSMAIN\GIS_DATA\GIS\PROJECT S\3 018 _CHARLOTT EWATER\1013 722 9_LONGC REEKWWT P\7 .2 _WIP\MAP_DOCS\MXD \NWP\DRAFT3 \0 1A_PROJ VICINITY.MXD - US ER: KTHAMES - DAT E: 3/23 /2 020
(CLIENT LOGO)
O
LEGEN D
Pro ject Site(Ph ases 1 a-1c,2a, an d 3 )
!.Existing System(a bridg ed)
Existing Sew er(a bridg ed)
Pro posedForcemain(Ph ase 2 b)
Long Cree kBasin
0 1.50.75
Miles
SAW #: 20 19-019 88Author: KTHAMESDate: 3/23/202 0Data Source: Cha rlotte Water GISBasemap Source: ESRI World Top ograp hic Ma p
Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE,Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO,USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN,Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI,Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMapcontributors, and the GIS User Community
Belmont WastewaterTreatment Plant
Gaston & Mecklen burg Cou nties,North Ca rolin a
!.!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
Mt. Holly WaterReclamationFacility Long CreekPumpingStation
Paw CreekPumpingStation
Irwin CreekWastewaterTreatment Plant
McAlpine WastewaterManagement Facility
Sugar CreekWastewaterTreatment Plant
PATH: \\CLTSMAIN\GIS_DATA\GIS\PROJECTS\3018_CHARLOTTEWATER\10137229_LONGCREEKWWTP\7.2_WIP\MAP_DOCS\MXD\NWP\DRAFT3\01_PROJVICINITY.MXD USER: KTHAMES - DATE: 3/23/2020STOWE RWRRF & ASSOCIATEDINFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
FIGURE 1BPROJECT VICINITY
O
LEGEND
Project Site(Phases 1a-1c,2a, and 3)
ProposedForcemain(Phase 2b)
!.Existing System(abridged)
Existing Sewer(abridged)
Gaston & Mecklen burg Cou nties,North Ca rolin a
0 21
Miles
SAW#: 2019-01988Author: KTHAMESDate: 3/23/2020Data Source: Mecklenburg Coun ty GISBasemap Source: ESRI World Top ograp hic Ma p
Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE,Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO,USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN,Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI,Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMapcontributors, and the GIS User Community
Belmont WastewaterTreatment Plant
NATIONWIDE PERMIT
PATH : \\CLTSMAIN\GIS_DATA\GIS\PROJECT S\3 018 _CHARLOT TEWATER\101 3722 9_L ONGCREEKWWTP\7.2_WIP\MAP_DOCS\MXD\NWP\DRAFT 3\02_P HASING.MXD - U SER: KTHA ME S - DATE: 3 /2 4/2 020
STOWE RWRRF & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
FIGURE 2
PHASING
NATIONWIDE PERMIT
(CLIENT LOGO)
ONot to Scale
SAW#: 2019-01988Author: KTHAMESDate: 3/24/2020Data Source: Charlotte Water, modified by KTh amesBasemap Source: None
Post Phase 1 and 2 Flows Post Phase 3 FlowsCurrent Condition Flows
PATH: \\CLTSMAIN\GIS_DATA\GIS\PROJECTS\3018_CHARLOTTEWATER\10137229_LONGCREEKWWTP\7.2_WIP\MAP_DOCS\MXD\NWP\DRAFT3\03_PHASE1.MXD USER: KTHAMES - DATE: 3/20/2020STOWE RWRRF & ASSOCIATEDINFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
FIGURE 3PHASES 1A-1C AND PHASE 2A
O
LEGEND
Project Site
Jurisdictional Streams
Jurisdictional Wetlands
Non-404 Isolated Wetland
0 1,500750
Feet
&
SAW#: 2019-01988Author: KTHAMESDate: 3/20/2020Data Source: Preliminary Engineering Report layoutBasemap Source: NC OneMap Orthoimagery
Service Layer Credits: NC Center for GeographicInformation & AnalysisSources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap,increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS,NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, OrdnanceSurvey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong
existing Mt. HollyWater Reclamation Facility
Existing Long CreekPumping Station
ProposedStowe RWRRF(Phase 2a)
Proposed Roadand Bridge(Phase 1b)
Proposed EquilizationBasin (part of StoweHeadworks)(Phase 1c)
Proposed Forcemains(by horizontional directional drilling)(Phase 1a)
Proposed effluentstructure(Phase 2a)
Proposed Roadand Bridge(Phase 1b)
Haw
fieldRoad
various utilities(by horizontional directional drilling)(Phase 2a)
M t.H o lly R o a d
CSXRailroad
Clariantentrance
Norfolk Sout h e r nR ailr o a d
NATIONWIDE PERMIT
Stowe Headworks &Influent Pumping Station(Phase 1c)
Mt. Holly Pumping Station(Phase 1c)WhitewaterCenterParkwayNote: Depicted linework is from Prelminary Engineering Report design, andis not representative of final design.Bel
me
a
de
Drive
Clariantfacility
!.
!.
L1UBHh
PFO1A
PFO1Ch
PFO1Ah
PFO1C
PSS1A PSS1Fh
PSS1Ch
PUBKx
PSS1Ah
PEM1Ch
PEM1Fh
PUBHx
L2USCh
PUSCh
PUBHh
PATH: \\CLTSMAIN\GIS_DATA\GIS\PROJECT S\3 018 _CHARLOTT EWATER\1013 722 9_LONGC REEKWWT P\7 .2 _WIP\MAP_DOCS\MXD \NWP\DRAFT3 \0 4_PHAS E2B.MXD - USER: KTHAMES - DATE : 3/23/202 0
STOWE RWRRF & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
FIGURE 4
PH ASE 2B
NATIONWIDE PERMIT
(CLIENT LOGO)
O
LEGEN D
Pro posed Fo rce ma in (Phase 2b)
!.Existing System (ab ridged )
Existing Sew er (ab ridge d)
National Hyd rograph y Dataset
Natio na l Wetla nd In ven to ry
SAW #: 20 19-019 88Author: KTHAMESDate: 3/23/202 0Data Source: USGS 1:24,000 -sca le Qua drangles Be lmont, NC and Cha rlotte West, NC; USFWS NWI;USGS N HD; an d Meckle nburg Co unty GISBasemap Source: ESRA USA To po Map
Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment PCorp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL,Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c)OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User CommunityCopyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
0 1,500750
Feet
Belmont WastewaterTreatment Plant
Paw CreekPumpingStation
Charlotte WestUSGS QuadBelmontUSGS Quad
STOWE REGIONAL WRRF & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
FIGURE 5PHASE 1 OVERVIEW
O
LEGEN D
Pro ject Area
Pe rme nant Impact
Ju risdictiona l Wetla nds
Ju risdictiona l Stream
Non-40 4 Isola ted Wetland
Figure 8
Figure 7
Figure 2
Figure 9
existing Mt. Ho llyWater Recla mation Facility
Existing L ong CreekPumping Sta tion
Pro posed Roadand Bridge(Ph ase 1b)
Pro posed EquilizationBasin (p art of StoweHeadworks)(Ph ase 1 c)
Pro posed Fo rce ma ins(b y ho rizontiona l directiona l d rilling)(Ph ase 1 a)
Pro posed Roa dand Bridge(Ph ase 1 b)
Claria ntentrance
Stowe He adworks &Influe nt Pumpin g Station(Ph ase 1 c)
Mt. Holly Pu mp ing Sta tion(Ph ase 1 c)
Claria ntfacility
M t .H o l l y R o ad
CSX Railroad
Norfo lk S o uth e r n R a i l r o a d
WhitewaterCenterParkwayBelmeade
Drive
0 800400
Feet
SAW #: 20 19-019 88Author: KTHAMESDate: 3/23/202 0Data Source: Preliminary En gine ering Re port layoutBasemap Source: NC On eMap Orthoimagery
NATIONWIDE PERMITPATH: \\CLTSMAIN\GIS_DATA\GIS\PROJECT S\3 018 _CHARLOTT EWATER\1013 722 9_LONGC REEKWWT P\7 .2 _WIP\MAP_DOCS\MXD \NWP\DRAFT3 \F IG5_1.MXD US ER: KTHAMES - DATE: 3/23 /2 020
Hawfie
l
dRoadDuke Transmission Line(Ph ase 1 c)
STOWE REGIONAL WRRF & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
PHASE 1A IMPAC T
O
LEGEN D
Pro ject Area
Perme nant Impacts
Jurisdictiona l Wetla nds
Odor Con trol Facility
Pro posed Edge of Pa ve me nt
Limits of Distu rbance
Figure 6
Impact 1 - We tland 10(Section 404)permanent impact (g ra de and fill)0.04 ac
0 5025
Feet
SAW#: 2019-01988Author: KTHAMESDate: 3/23/2020Data Source: HDR GIS FilesBasemap Source: NC OneMap Orthoima gery
PATH: \\CLTSMAIN\GIS_DATA\GIS\PROJECTS\3018_CHARLOTTEWATER\10137229_LONGCREEKWWTP\7.2_WIP\MAP_DOCS\MXD\NWP\DRAFT3\FIG5_1.MXD USER: KTHAMES - DATE: 3/23/2020 NATIONWIDE PERMIT
Document Path: \\cltsmain\GIS_DATA\GIS\Projects\3018_CharlotteWater\10137229_LongCreekWWTP\7.2_WIP\map_docs\mxd\NWP\Draft3\Fig6_1.mxdNATIONWIDE PERMIT
STOWE REGIONAL WRRF & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
PHASE 1B IMPAC T
O
LEGEN D
Pro ject Area
Perme nant Impacts
Limits of Distu rbance
Jurisdictiona l Wetla nds
Jurisdictiona l Stream
Figure 3
Impact 4 - Wetland 6(Section 404)permanent impact (fill)0.04 ac
Impact 3 - We tland 5(Se ction 4 04)permanen t impact (fill)0.0 1 a c
0 5025
Feet
SAW #: 20 19-019 88Author: KTHAMESDate: 3/23/202 0Data Source: HDR G IS FilesBasemap Source: NC O neMap Orthoima gery
Document Path: \\cltsmain\gis_data\GIS\Projects\3018_CharlotteWater\10137229_LongCreekWWTP\7.2_WIP\map_docs\mxd\NWP\Draft3\Fig7_1.mxdNATIONWIDE PERMIT
Palustrine Eme rgent Wetla nd(no clearin g n eede d b enea thbridge spa n)
bridge pilin g
bridge span
road
STOWE REGIONAL WRRF & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
PHASE 1B IMPAC T
0 50Feet
O
LEGEN D
Limits of Distu rbance
Perme nant ImpactDATA SOURCE: Esri, OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
Figure 8
Impact 5 - We tland 8(N on-Section 404 )permanen t impact (fill)0.0 4 a c
0 5025
Feet
SAW#: 2019-01988Author: KTHAMESDate: 3/23/2020Data Source: HDR GIS FilesBasemap Source: NC OneMap Orthoima gery
Document Path: \\cltsmain\GIS_DATA\GIS\Projects\3018_CharlotteWater\10137229_LongCreekWWTP\7.2_WIP\map_docs\mxd\NWP\Draft3\Fig8_1.mxdNATIONWIDE PERMIT
road
STOWE REGIONAL WRRF & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
PHASE 1B IMPAC T
O
LEGEN D
Limits of Distu rbance
Perme nant Impacts
Jurisdictiona l Stream
Jurisdictiona l Wetla nds
Figure 9
Impact 6 - We tland 12(Se ction 4 04)permanen t impact (fill)0.11 a c
Document Path: \\cltsmain\GIS_DATA\GIS\Projects\3018_CharlotteWater\10137229_LongCreekWWTP\7.2_WIP\map_docs\mxd\NWP\Draft3\Fig9_1.mxdNATIONWIDE PERMIT
0 5025
Feet
1
bridge pilin g
bridge span
road
bridge piling
Palustrine Fo re sted Wetlan ds(any trees will b e re mo vednon-mechan ically an d stumpsleft in-situ ben eath b ridge span ;no impact)
SAW #: 20 19-019 88Author: KTHAMESDate: 3/23/202 0Data Source: HDR G IS FilesBasemap Source: NC O neMap Orthoima gery
STOWE REGIONAL WRRF & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
PHASE 2A IMPAC TS
O
Figure 10
Impact 7 - We tland 9(Non-Section 404 )permanen t impact (fill)0.18 ac
Impact 8 - Catawba River(Se ction 1 0/Section 4 04)Dock an d HDD for effluen t outfall.An ticipate <0.10 acre surfa ce wa terimpact to Catawba Rive r
LEGEN D
Pro ject Area
Perme nant Impacts
Jurisdictiona l Wetla nds
Jurisdictiona l Stream
NOTE: All Site layout e lements o n this pa ge are represe ntative o f Phase 2 and therefore to be considere d preliminary a nd subje ct to chan ge
various utilities(by horizontiona l directional drilling)(Phase 2a)
Pro posed Fo rce ma ins(b y ho rizontiona l directiona l d rilling)(Ph ase 1 a)PATH: \\CLTSMAIN\GIS_DATA\GIS\PROJECTS\3018_CHARLOTTEWATER\10137229_LONGCREEKWWTP\7.2_WIP\MAP_DOCS\MXD\NWP\DRAFT3\FIG10.MXD USER: KTHAMES - DATE: 3/23/2020NATIONWIDE PERMIT
SAW#: 2019-01988Author: KTHAMESDate: 3/23/2020Data Source: Preliminary En gine ering Re port la youtBasemap Source: NC OneMap Orthoima gery
0 400200
Feet
5
LL$a
/
Al I
EASFM T
5, fi
/ \\\\�\ \
3 R
11\\
1
° s \
O CONSFRUCT SEDIMENT PIT 6' LONGX d'WIDE X2 DEEP AND SLOPE
J
'
/ B89 /
s 5Bb6
/,
/
\
/
\
SURROUNDING GRADE TO PIT TO THE EXTENTPOSSIBLE DURING
WITH MINIMUM B'LAYER OF NCDOT CLASS
ROSION CONTROLE PIT STONE
\2 DIVERSION DITCH DDSI. ODS2.—,AND— SHALL SE ROUTED AS
5
/
/ �70.3/ /
/ /
/ I /)sx
�\
-�- v
�- \(
NEEDED AROUND THAS E HEADWORKSSTATION
TOCOMPLETE INFLUENT THE WORK.
I 3 ALL TREE
RWN oa As aEoul�aEo nHo3nREA shnue sE oD OG THE EXTENTS
I s7 . CONNECT NEW FENCE LINE TO EXISTING FENCE LINE.
ss
1
J//
G
/55a51 / /' 1
sT_ z
!/ ��_IIx
v / \
W /
— I5's'
MT/OF DISTURBANCE
9) l\
�—\ �Y \�J
\
SIX,
/
gz/
—_
i ✓T
\ x PROVIDEPOSITIVE SLOPEM'TNTO ALL DIVERSION DITCHES.
58 EGUAL TO OR GREATER THAN 4.,. 5 EE PON DETAIL ON
1
p
-Al
`
t77—
Dy siai
/
I
I57
—
Mp FLO
7 REFER TO SHEET C--06 FOR STORM DRAIN AND MANHOLE
\\ SCHEDULES.
SEE GENERAL NOTES ON-01.
_
-
x\Ta.s
1•�N-
/ J/
l
ws.9
-9003 /
{.��{
I�_1 /T'.
\
�S� NOTE4
m
Rol
\\\
M -13
\
SE MEN\ P
'
l I
\ \ I I
\\c \ \ \
�SmTOPrv`E OUTLETc,A
I
N
DEL T EpTE wETu
POTENNIAL
DBOUNDARYc0S6
FUTURE
so3
R E
\
—
MH
9at t
' \,�,I�
DAY TANK
F
DOR CONTROL
ILITV _
\ wITYP) CA6501
\ \
\
m
E
4-9010,66'WATER`ALI
RDFFERLINE_
u U
r\
_ _
P' ` C
_
`\
x
0£$4
.E.
H
\
<`
W
589.0
`\ \\ \ \ \ I
LON
PUMPING
11
CREEK z7
STATIONx \
2
` \
V \
\
e� /
O j
C�
`��`` ` \ 2
` STOWE a
Q 0 o¢a
t $
J t3+
5\♦'
ODOR CONTROL
FACILITY
—T'\
` ♦\
D]
°4
O
�\ \ 33i
�OQ4/
\
POTENTIAL
FTURE S T WE D
0
Z
/ I
sus
P
Q
z
zzz
° o
LONG
LUo
QQZ
Iwo
l
\�
cl
J�MATCH LINE -SEE SHEET
C-01-107 FOR CONTINUATION
��/
-
�-��/ /w
\
Lu
s8
/ ✓
{{
�� / /��
ASPHALT
e" PW ,
DRIVE
sAs
STOWE
AN TANK
N0.2
�1
d \
s2 , �%�'�
/ I I
!� `f 11\�
_
~ Z
Q d Pt5
Z Q
Q Q
(rvP)
1, O%
/ l
I
�'1 1 -�.
\'=—
J J Y
moo
z�o
Z W y
X,3
US
FEaA 100 YN
LOODELEVATON
/// //
STOWE STO
M
\ \
_
I
/ gl
II
sag. a3--
U 2�
NQoQ
6 I ; STING
Dlnoxs
//
/
FLOW ED
BASIN NO.
O
\\\
_ \
III
O—
li!/
/
�f ,
\
W
W K
YR
L000 ELEVATION
/ /
I
l/� \
l I
i /
/x7
In W
A
�UINDSIDG
rrnITRDFMSToaen ca
GOPHOLLOSCOVERNE.\
0Of)'rEMPa
o`T
S NFLUENTPU
PING
ER THE MOUNT Y FORCE MA `
f
aPP ovEa
STATION
IJfII
,
/ /y // / /
�
DEDEM6ER„
ew���/�
� i/
/111
TRANSFORMER 40' 20'a, 40' 80'
PAD
IS PROJECT NO. E
401825
C-01-106
FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY — NOT RELEASED FOR CONSTRUCTION
SOFT
Plansheet 1 - Impact 1

8
s
R,
LLSn'
---:¢R.k1 r4k
d s.
• �=i..'Y` •
111 `: �' � •
1
-
naaRowNuiE. AciunL�oalNCS�No0cAilous Arvo TMe IFIF No soF
THE GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION ARE COVERED IN THE NG
-
•, -
`t•
I "^
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT DENT CON RACTI
I /
g _
'k. •'�V .. - 2
STRTHE
NLYAN
WILLVARYBETWEENBORINGSIILLOF DRILLING AS SHOWN BELOW ANOEPT ARE IN THE DINECTO IN
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES ARE SHOWN. THE
ES lVlANl
"ENDLOCATION, PROTECTION AND CLEARANCE, AS NOTED BY THE
! I
(
I
CO THAEFDOCUMENTS
H(UCb AS SHOWN ON THE PROFILE)OF THE
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
ROCK CORES WERE DETERMINED BY PREPARING THE SAMPLES PER
FE�ADPLAN �. I,Y
9oONDARY I"
! -
LONGC
ERCEPTORRE
_PROPOSED
MITS OF DISTUR TRANCE B
_
AS M
PROFI eFo ows THE CENTERLINE OF BOTH THE DUAL MOUNT
HOLLY FORCEMAIN.
BORINGS WITH OFFSET GREATER THAN 2W, ARE SHOWN ONLY IN
P — NOT IN THE PROFILE.
RLLEC NOTES
HT STATIONSARE IN FEET BY HORIZONTALNTROL �LISHE
NO ME FER M
FOR THE DRILLED SEGMENT
II
I
6M0
_Fx
10a00 16+00 20+00
26a00 30a00AND
-21
EX 24IRS
"
PATH COORDINATES REFER TO CENCED
ENTERLINE OF PILOTo
TO
THE TOLERANCES LISTED BELOWLHo DLE EVER 'IN PLL CASDR,ES
ARIGHT F-WAYANDCONCERN
TEXISTINGEFACILIIT ES SHALITAKE PRECEDENCE OVERR
THESE TOLERANCES.
DESIGNEDENTRYPDINT;UPETOSFEETARIGHTORLEFTOFTHE
DESIGNEDALIGNMENT.
o
E
'
HOLLY FORCE MAIN
-
TESIGNEDA-IIGNME PoINTEUP TICS FEEET RIGHT ORNEFT OF TIHE TO
DESIGNEDALIONMENT.
DESIGNED PROFP EO2FEET ABOVE AND 15 FEET BELOW THE
ya`,,
•`
a. "
x
HOLLY
LONG CREEK
ALGNMENT UPTO-EETRGTORLEFTOFTHEGESGNED
ENT
6�pN
yr e
yz,
l�MOUNT
WATER
_
PUMPING STATION °
.LCUI.R
EDESIGN RADIUS 1400 FEET BASEDON a BJONT
AVERAGE.
a"'+..�.��.�••"T
RECLAMATION
�"
tB.
PROTECTIONEXITING FACILITIES. CONTRACTOR srvaLL
UNDERTAKEAKETHE FOLLOWING STEPS PRIOR TOCOMMENCING
FACILITY
DRIL
n
• / LING OPTRATIFFL:I LONG
UFFry LocAnOTI oNINFICATION SERVICE FORTH
LrR
!
CREEK
CONSTRUCTION AREa
S. LOCATE AND STAKE ALL EXISTING UNDERGROUND FACILITIES.
T' E
LIf TIT OF OI TURF V
'
E T
ANY FACILITIES LOCATED WITHIN IO FEET OF THE DRILLED PATH
TE
SHALL BE EXPOSED.
As
F L)
MA o
ENCROACHMENT BOUNDARY
11.
NE CESSARVTOPREVENTDIAMAGETO EOXISTINO FACILITIES.OLE
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES ARESHOWN. THE
W
' OOR�
-
BOUNDARVR FLOOOPW
COMMUNITY 100 VR 12.
FLOODPITAIN BOUNDARY
CTENTRA IEOD LOCATONNSIBLEPROTFOR ABOVEAND ANDBANOW GROUND
UILI
ADDITIONAL BORINGS WERE DRILLED FOR STRUCTURES BUT WERF
SHALLOWAND DOES NOT IMPACT PROFILE SHOWN BELOW
Ce
N�g
`
r^
7 6
oil
NONE
0
moommommolMEN
No
moommimmimirom
SIMON
MEN
NINE
[El
SOIL TYPE:
■ OR ■ QL-ML ® MR ® ML
SC ■ SM ■ CL n Fl-
ROCK TYPE:
PWR GABBRO ® MOD
w
Q C)
J
LL
® ROCK ■GRANITE
L. 1
Z
� a-
LEGEND:
~ J
O -j
U CJ Z
jra
�B_T2 BORING LOCATION (APPROXIMATE)
O
Da
RIL PROPERTY LINE
SPL IT SPOON SAMPLE
Q F
z
�
E.,.,µ..,me...
SORE BARREL ELSAMPLE
PwR PaRTNLLv WEATHERED RocK
Moo METAMORPHosEO QUARTZ ODRHE
WATER LEVEL TAKEN AFTER s LI WATER LEVEL TAKEN MILE RLLNGG
cKeD. ew
30' t5' S. 30' 60'
VERTICAL SCALE V=90'
PRa6ETLNo1 e
160' 7
6' a tear 300• 401825
HORIZONTAL SCALE 1=1511C-01-104
SHEET
7 OF 26
Plansheet 2 - Impact 2

1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8
4
"1Y-010" PA 1RA<A.\,
YEA '" �L j �.RIEAYBORCAwL A
L OUT 01 BOX BE w DNm
OUT To
BRIDGE TYPICAL SECTION
NORTHERN ACCESS ROAD
OVER LONG CREEK
'I I \ \ )IIIIII/lllllllll/// l
w.TeA EDGE
vIII '�v � I v II I!/////IIIIII////II IIII
V11
\
'Ida
k \iII
jlllll 1�1i \ —
/ / I I 1 / % / _ le� Rewv � f IIAIM
l�„� l i 111 ihlll--F7rt-- \ II111111111/// / ll I I
�_ i I I; IIIII END aNDGE aT+w
i // 1 i \� l�l ✓!l ll /� I /ii�� l ��_ \ tl(l/11/%/I� I I� \\
_ ceo Txn = \Iv�l/I
i/ l v
i/ I/ /� // h�� 111111111111 I A 1 I l
VA r �lI l /j/// i I V �� �j III//IIIII�IIII 11V I A�
1011
�/ �Gppppppl/// V I 1 i� A (IU711//JIIII11�
gcclI� EIID� 1111
` V
/ / / /// //// / / / \ / I I \ \ \ \
600
590
580
570
560
550
BEGIN BRIDGE
`
m> `�
`EXISTING GROUND
SIDE/
LOW CHORD
-2L BRIDGE
STA 46.48
39r BOx BEAu:2
tITHTyiO{"I}'n' X 9' DEEP CAPS
KE W T5'
PRoaosEO GRADE
15.2
END BRIDGE 97«98
�.oTSDOz
lao lao
PROPOSED BRIDGE
__ _ __
LONG CREEK �--- PROPOSED 100 YR
WSEL• = 583.2
EY
o111N vPI j
NWSE=569.8 NORMALTb CAP IT -
DATE: 9/18/I9
PZE4• STEEL PIP
PROPOSED 25 58 DESIGN)
WSEL = 582.2
�I"°
/ .
600
590
58
570
560
550
—
r-�zoov.
SCALE:
1=100'
1'=20'
HORIZONTAL
VERTICAL
*ELEVATIONS DETERMINED BY PLOWS EROM USGS REGIONAL REGRESSION
42 43
EQUATIONS
44
4
5
51
DESIGNED By DE Stowe Regional WRRF
SENSITIVE F)l
CHIRCRED BY G—N Access Roads NORTH ALIGNMENT
DRAWINGS INCOMPLETE PLANS PLAN AND PROFILE
aw S. Ch—h Street SON, 1000 PRELIMINARY PLANS CHARLOTTE
DO NOT SCAN ;oa ae;O-.2 W TER Plansheet 3 -
N.D.B.B.L.S.L,—N.--16 ISSUE DATE DESORIP110N PROJEDTNONBER 13-9 Impacts 3 and 4
D
C
B
A

1 12 13
4 6
APO
0 SEE
w
w -
2
N c seDEi"
ReTAi,
®3vl
w
O
O
+
O
12.
Q__________F ___
N----F r
m `7�svr ceo-rexnLe
J
� RCFIIIQFb.R% �
W
= TO FUTURE _ JR R`-- o.5% —
u STOWE REGIONAL WRRF _ __—
EA,2 I Ir R — TO
IEEo�rkl[°�'�"tl'� ® BELMEADE DR
(SR 1606)
DETAIL C
u R L RASED R DETAIL E
nIE P—ON
LE r l iw rcfW
FROM n _ s+oo Rr To sr _ 3+33 Rr FROM n - _ t+eo Lr ro n _ s+oo Lr
DETAIL A
MP
Cur Ora
��o: —11. -I°°i- � PR 8CU E°
v.. - Dikh SI.. f fmpw.d O /
s_
FROM n _ i+oD LTTO sT -_ t+so RT su _ �+
zl+oo
zz+oo 2. oo za+oo
�
-L_B-
N 4PI459T£
�
au®Fe
� � v �f59
� N
PROUIECTIFI—GER TYLER LESEN, PE
DESIGNED BY M4TT --RDER PE
SENSITIVE BRAD TAYLOR. PE
MATiH-WERDER PE
DRAWINGS INC_®M_PL_ETE PLANS
F)l
aa° S. ch�r<h so-�t smt� moo PRELIMINARY PLANS
DO NOT SCAN
N.C.B.ELS. Li.— N.—FA11R ISSUE DATE DESCRIPTION PROJEOT NUMBER 13T33B
Stowe Regional WRRF
Access Roads
CHARLOTTE
W TERII 2
n
O
w
w
(Al
W
N
O
O
N
H
N
00
J
Z
U
Q
sLu
SEE SHEET 18 FOR -L_B- PROFILE
NORTHERN ACCESS ROAD
ROADWAY PLAN SHEET
Plansheet 4 -
Impact 5
D
c
B
A

1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 B
a
BAR isaAE
IP2A•-0TI MfT°0
IUNG
RIFTE
w.L
HC
orvcMre BARRIER
CONCRETE
BEAM
Ae•-0"om TO OUT 16 BOX UNIT,
BRIDGE TYPICAL SECTION
SOUTHERN ACCESS ROAD
OVER LONG CREEK
\ VA VAAA AAAAAA A !// -- VAA A A A
__,,i i ivv�vvvvvvv vvvvvvvv`vvvi`11v �,� �i1i,r1n11111rr/�----' � / i v v \ 1 � av v Fwcts� +14,-31
A
\
IIIIIIIII
1,mill
vv
B /III;,, y1110111i1 y� / �� I A 1
➢ I
VAVAAAAAvvI / /// 18•R
v AAVAAAv _ �� ��7J-L �'+ 3O / I
\�A \VAv v / 4 END BRIDGE 16,98
v A\ \V A v / i I l I v, �� l I I
v----_— -
BE.T 2'\\\VAA A\ lea'rzew ��\\ \ \ 1 I I \ \
\�\\\�\\�\\\ Il/cYA§s�;a'F/ 111�11I ! / / , =rl I\ 1 11j�, 1
\ \ \\\\ \\
V AAI1�11A v� I If/ ROGN)BRIDGE 41111111I
V I,�� A IIIII412q II ml V,EA ��IIVAAAAAAvv
-- ������ A IIIII ,/ I I IIIII of I A I11�11AAAAvv TillE l
�E
u �� ii'i�
-
/,DDO
v , j '\ \� \ v v s cv val i N os
w.T vAvvv�ERo . D RE.RN 1
ii
610
600
590
580
570
560
—�yDRIUGS'yA
PITH` G 0REEPM
GP ELE V-59US
BEGIry ORIDGE 15+2s
PROPOSED GRADE
BEGIry GRADDE PROPOSED
STA 13+0000 BRIDGE
EL.sa9.65
EXISTING
ROUND Imo'
Low LOW SIDE/
aoaD loo
4 55T L PIPE
R
PILES tT �`
%
"K
--
RG BOUNDARY
16+13
CAPS ' Ie100'. 1e35'
a°
BRIDGE 16+98
61U
600
590
580
570
560
3GLE:
1"=100'HORIZONTAL
1"=20'VERTIGL
---
'�'---
I-DRDz InSfl
EXCAVATION=1s0 C
BENCH
a2
ELEVATION= S.0'
3.5'KEY IN DEPTH
EXISTING GROUND
ICES SURVEYI
PROPOSED - YR
POLL' = SEO.I
PROPOSED 25 YR IDESIG
wsEL. = 579,
..
.. ..
..
..
..
..
RS 56 .
.
*ELEVATIONS DETERMINED BY FLOWS FROM USGS REGIONAL REGRESSION EQUATION
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
19 20
FNRDGNEHESNEICG.H-NEEEDDM
BV OER MATTHEJIWERDERRE
, PE Stowe Regional WRRF
SENSITIVE Access Roads
DRAWINGS INCOMPLETE PLANS
CHARLOTTE
aw S. C-1, So- , Sm 1000 PRELIMINARY PLANS W T E R
DO NOT SCAN ;a;;ae;.'�02
N.C.B.E.LSH.,n N.—F-6 ISSUE DATE DESCRIPTION PROJECT NUMBER 10137229
SOUTH ALIGNMENT
PLAN AND PROFILE
Plansheet 5 -
Impact 6
D
A

Appendix F
Mitigation Credit Acceptance
Letter

600 E. Fourth Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
Fax [phone]
To report pollution or drainage problems, call: 311
http://stormwater.charmeck.org
February 18, 2020
Mr. Joseph Wilson
c/o: Kelly Thames (HDR Inc.)
440 S. Church St., Ste 1000
Charlotte, NC 28202
Subject Project: Stowe Regional Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) (SAW#: 2019-01988)
HUC#: 03050101 (Upper Catawba)
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the City of Charlotte Umbrella Stream and Wetland
Mitigation Bank (“Umbrella Bank”) is willing to accept the mitigation responsibility associated with the
subject project. Please note that the decision by the Umbrella Bank to accept this responsibility does not
ensure acceptance by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the North Carolina Division of Water
Resources. It is the responsibility of the applicant to coordinate with these agencies to determine if
payment to the Umbrella Bank for impacts associated with this project is appropriate.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter. The following documents must be
submitted to the Umbrella Bank within this time frame for this acceptance to remain valid:
1.404 Permit Verification
2.401 Water Quality Certification
3.Executed Transfer of Funds between the Charlotte Water and the Mitigation Bank (Storm
Water Services) detailing the use of and payment for the credits described in the table below.
Based o n the information supplied by your consultant, the stream and wetland credits that are necessary to
satisfy the compensatory mitigation requirements and the total mitigation credits available for this for this
project are detailed in the table below.
Wetland (WMUs)
Credits Requested 0.50
Credits Available 0.50
Project Name Torrence Creek
The stream and wetland mitigation will be provided as specified in the Section 404 Permit or corresponding
401 Water Quality Certification for impacts associated with the subject project in Hydrologic Unit
03050101 of the Catawba River Basin. The mitigation will be performed in accordance with the
Agreement to Establish the City of Charlotte Umbrella Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank in
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, dated June, 16, 2004.
Please contact me with questions and to arrange payment upon receipt of permit approvals at (704) 562-
2691 or [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Erin Shanaberger, PWS
Surface Water Quality Program Specialist

Appendix G
Threatened and Endangered
Species Reports

CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC.
550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
704-527-1177 (office)
704-527-1133 (fax)

December 19, 2020

Mike Osborne, P.E.
Project Manager, Water Division
Black & Veatch
10715 David Taylor Drive, Suite 240
Charlotte, NC 28262

Subject:Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report
Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force Main
Charlotte, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2019-0368

Dear Mr. Osborne,

Carolina Wetland Services, Inc. (CWS) has been contracted to provide a protected species
habitat assessment for the Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force Main site. The Mt Holly
Pumping Station and Force Main study area is approximately 55 acres in extent and is located
in both Mount Holly in Gaston County and unincorporated Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
(Figure 1).

Methods
In-office Desktop Review
To determine which protected species are listed as occurring or potentially occurring within the
project vicinity and prior to conducting the on-site field investigation, CWS consulted the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Endangered and Threatened Species and Species
of Concern by County for North Carolina online database for Mecklenburg County and Gaston 1
County . In addition, CWS performed a data review using the North Carolina Natural Heritage 2
Program (NCNHP) Data Explorer on November 19, 2019 to determine if any record 3
occurrences of federally-listed, candidate endangered, threatened species, or critical habitat are
located within the project limits.

Typical habitat requirements for listed species was discerned from multiple USFWS and 4
NCNHP online resources including, but not limited to, specific USFWS species profiles, 5
1 United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh Field Office. Accessed November 19, 2019. Endangered and Threatened
Species and Species of Concern by County for North Carolina. https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/mecklenburg.html
2 ​ United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh Field Office. Accessed November 19, 2019. Endangered and Threatened
Species and Species of Concern by County for North Carolina. https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/gaston.html
3 North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 2018. Biotics Database. Division of Land and Water Stewardship. Department of
Natural and Cultural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina..
4 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. Optimal Survey Windows for North Carolina’s Federally Threatened and Endangered Plant
Species. http://www.fws.gov/nces/es/plant_survey.html. Accessed November 19, 2019.
5 ​Buchanan, M.F. and J.T. Finnegan. 2010. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of North Carolina. NC Natural
Heritage Program, Raleigh, NC. ​Accessed from https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/nc_counties.html
NORTH CAROLINA - SOUTH CAROLINA
WWW.CWS-INC.NET

Page 1 of 9

Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force Main December 19, 2019
Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report CWS Project No. 2019-0368

recovery plans, NCNHP’s Guide to Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species of
North Carolina, and List of the Rare Plant Species of North Carolina. United States Department
of Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS) Web Soil Survey of
Mecklenburg and Gaston Counties and aerial imagery were also reviewed for potential habitat 6
communities of listed species within the project vicinity (Figures 2 and 3).

Field Survey
CWS scientists Dan Zurlo, Project Scientist, Julia McGuire, Staff Scientist II, and Ian Dunning,
Staff Scientist I, conducted a pedestrian habitat assessment of the project area on November 7
and November 19, 2019. Potential habitat for potentially occurring federally-protected species
that was identified during the desktop review was assessed in the field for the quality of physical
and/or biological features essential to the conservation of the applicable species. Additionally,
during the pedestrian habitat assessment, areas were reviewed for applicable federally
protected species; however, formal surveys were not conducted. An off-site population of
Schweinitiz’s sunflower identified in the previous EA document for the site and NCNHP report 7
was located. Its location is depicted in Figure 3. Identification references for natural
communities include Schafale and Weakley’s Third Approximation for Natural Communities of
North Carolina (1990) and Weakley (2015) for plant species. 8 9

Results
Based on the previous EA document​7​ and NCNHP data explorer review, there is one current
record of Schweinitz's sunflower within the project limits, and within a mile of the project limits
(Attachment A). The USFWS lists eight federally protected species for Mecklenburg and
Gaston Counties (Table 1). An official species list has not been obtained from the USFWS
Asheville Field Office.

Table 1. Unofficial List of Federally-Protected Species Potentially Occurring within the
Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force Main Site, Mecklenburg and Gaston Counties, NC.
Major Group Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status* Record Status County
Plant Helianthus
schweinitzii
Schweinitz's
sunflower E Current Mecklenburg
Plant Rhus michauxii Michaux's sumac E Current Mecklenburg
Plant Echinacea
laevigata
Smooth purple
coneflower E Current Mecklenburg
Plant Hexastylis
naniflora
Dwarf-flowered
heartleaf T Current Gaston
Animal Lasmigona
decorata
Carolina
heelsplitter E Current Mecklenburg
Animal Bombus affinis Rusty patched
bumble bee E Historic Mecklenburg
Animal Haliaeetus
leucocephalus Bald eagle BGPA Current Mecklenburg
and Gaston
6 United States Department of Agriculture, 2017. Web Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. November 19, 2019.
Source: https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm
7 NCDENR. EIS, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities/City of Mount Holly Regional Wastewater Treatment. 2015.
8 Schafale, M.P., and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Third Approximation.
http://ww.namethatplant.net/PDFs/class.pdf.
9 Weakley, A.S. 2015. Flora of the Southern and Mid-Atlantic States. http://www.herbarium.unc.edu/flora.htm.

Page 2 of 9

Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force Main December 19, 2019
Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report CWS Project No. 2019-0368

Animal Myotis
septentrionalis
Northern
long-eared bat T Current Mecklenburg
and Gaston
* E - Endangered, T - Threatened, BGPA - Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act

Two terrestrial community types were identified within the project area during the field survey.
These community types consist of mixed forest and herbaceous areas (Figure 3). Of the
identified on-site community types, both the mixed forest and herbaceous areas are considered
potential habitat for federally threatened or endangered species that could potentially occur
within the project limits. Aquatic habitat is present on-site in the form of one perennial stream.
A brief description of each species habitat requirements and determination of effect findings are
listed below by species.

Schweinitz’s sunflower (​Helianthus schweinitzii​)
Habitat Description:
Schweinitz’s sunflower is a perennial herb with yellow rays and yellow centers. They
can reach heights of five feet. Populations are limited to the piedmont of North and
South Carolina. It has been listed as an endangered species under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) since 1991. The typical habitat for this plant includes roadsides, old 10
pastures, transmission line right-of-ways, open areas, either natural or
human-maintained habitats, or edges of upland woods. Major characteristics of soils
associated with suitable Schweinitz’s sunflower habitat include thin soils, soils on upland
interstream flats or gentle slopes, soils that are clay like in both composition and texture
(and often with substantial rock fragments), soils that have a high shrinkage swell
capacity, and those which vary over the course of the year from very wet to very dry.

Biological Analysis:
The previous EA document and NCNHP data record review revealed one current 11
occurrence for this species within the project limits (Attachment A). The desktop review
determined that herbaceous areas could be potential habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower,
but the forested areas do not receive the appropriate amount of sunlight for the
sunflower due to a heavy canopy (Photograph 1). While most on-site herbaceous areas
are too intensively maintained to support Schweinitz's sunflower populations
(Photograph 2), one herbaceous area receives the appropriate amount of maintenance
through periodic mowing (Photograph 5). The documented population of Schweinitz's
sunflower individuals was located just off-site the project limits, to the north of the site
(six ramets; Figure 3, Photograph 4). The project area was scrutinized during the
November 7 and November 19, 2019 site visits, and no Schweinitz's sunflower
individuals or individuals of any ​Helianthus ​species were observed within the project
area. ​As no Helianthus species were observed on-site, CWS concludes that this
project will have no effect on the Schweinitz’s sunflower.

Michaux’s sumac (​Rhus michauxii​)
Habitat Description:
10 United States Fish and Wildlife Services. 1991. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; ​Helianthus schweinitzii
(Schweinitz’s sunflower) Determined to be Endangered. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_register/fr1852.pdf.
11 ​ NCDENR. EIS, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities/City of Mount Holly Regional Wastewater Treatment. 2015.

Page 3 of 9

Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force Main December 19, 2019
Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report CWS Project No. 2019-0368

Michaux’s sumac is a rhizomatous shrub. It is densely hairy with compound leaves
exhibiting evenly-serrated leaflets. Flowers are small, greenish to white, in terminal
clusters. Fruits are red drupes produced from August to October. It has been listed as
an Endangered species under the ESA since 1989. It is found on the coastal plains of 12
Virginia to Florida, with most populations occurring in North Carolina. It prefers sandy or
rocky open woods with basic loam soils, as well as highway right-of-ways, roadsides, or
edges of artificially-maintained clearings.

Biological Analysis:
A NCNHP data record review revealed that there are no current occurrences for this
species within the project limits or within a one-mile radius of the project (Attachment A).
Open areas conducive to early-succession species were observed within the project
area. However, no individuals of Michaux sumac were observed during the field
assessment on November 7 and November 19, 2019. Additionally, there are no current
records of this species within Mecklenburg County . Michaux sumac is not listed in 13
Gaston County. ​Due to the lack of observations for this species within the study
area and known current occurrences within Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties,
CWS concludes that this project will have no effect on the Michaux’s sumac.

Dwarf-flowered heartleaf (​Hexastylis naniflora​)
Habitat Description:
Dwarf-flowered heartleaf is endemic to the western Piedmont and foothills of North and
South Carolina. This herbaceous evergreen is found in moist to dry forests along bluffs;
boggy areas next to streams and creek heads; and adjacent hillsides, slopes, and
ravines. Requiring acidic, sandy loam soils, the species is found in soil series such as
Pacolet, Madison, and Musella, among others. Occurrences are generally found on a
north-facing slope. Undisturbed natural communities such as Piedmont/Coastal Plain
Heath Bluff, Dry-Mesic Oak Hickory Forest, and Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest hold the
most viable occurrences. However, less viable remnant occurrences are found in
disturbed habitats, including logged, grazed, mown, and residential/commercial
developed lands; areas converted to pasture, orchards, and tree plantations; roadside
right-of-ways; and on upland slopes surrounding man-made ponds or lakes. 14

Biological Analysis:
A NCNHP data record review revealed that there are no current occurrences for this
species within the project limits, or within a one-mile radius of the project. Of the on-site
habitat types, only the forested areas could be potential habitat for this species. The
desktop review revealed that the project area does not contain the soils associated with
the dwarf-flowered heartleaf. The hillsides assessed for the presence of potential
habitats were densely vegetated in the herbaceous layer, which is not conducive to
dwarf-flowered heartleaf (Photograph 1). Species commonly associated with the
dwarf-flowered heartleaf, such as mountain-laurel (​Kalmia latifolia​), were not found
12 United States Fish and Wildlife Services. 1989. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants;Determination of Endangered
Status for ​Rhus michauxii​ (Michaux’s sumac). http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_register/fr1601.pdf.
13 USFWS Michaux’s Sumac Recovery Plan; https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/930430.pdf
14 North Carolina Department of Transportation NRTR Guidelines for Consultants. T&E Animal and Plant Habitat Descriptions.
https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/environmental/pages/environmental-compliance-guides.aspx

Page 4 of 9

Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force Main December 19, 2019
Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report CWS Project No. 2019-0368

on-site. Due to the lack of suitable habitat and lack of known occurrences in the project
vicinity, ​CWS concludes that the project will have no effect on the dwarf-flowered
heartleaf.

Smooth purple coneflower (​Echinacea laevigata​)
Habitat Description:
Smooth purple coneflower is a tall, perennial herbaceous plant found in areas with
abundant sunlight where competition in the herbaceous layer is minimal. It has been
federally listed as Endangered under the ESA since 1992. Typical habitat for this plant 15
includes meadows, open woodlands, the ecotonal regions between meadows and
woodlands, cedar barrens, dry limestone bluffs, clear cuts, and roadside and utility
rights-of-way. In North Carolina, the species normally grows in magnesium- and calcium-
rich soils associated with gabbro and diabase parent material, and typically occurs in
Iredell, Misenheimer, Mecklenburg, and Picture soil series. It grows best where there is
abundant sunlight, little competition in the herbaceous layer, and periodic disturbances
(e.g., regular fire regime, well-timed mowing, careful clearing) that prevents
encroachment of shade-producing woody shrubs and trees. On sites where woody
succession is held in check, it is characterized by a number of species with prairie
affinities.

Biological Analysis:
A NCNHP data record review revealed that there are no current occurrences for this
species within the project limits or within a one-mile radius of the project (Attachment A).
Potential on-site habitat is limited to the infrequently maintained on-site herbaceous
areas. These infrequently maintained areas do not occur in areas with Iredell,
Misenheimer, Mecklenburg, or Picture soil series. Additionally, no individuals of smooth
purple coneflower were observed during the field assessment on November 7 and
November 19, 2019. ​Due to the lack of suitable habitat and observed individuals,
this project will have no effect on the smooth coneflower.

Carolina heelsplitter (​Lasmigona decorata​)
Habitat Description:
The Carolina heelsplitter was historically known from several locations within the
Catawba and Pee Dee River systems in North Carolina and the Pee Dee and Savannah
River systems, and possibly the Saluda River system in South Carolina. In North
Carolina, the species is now known only from a handful of streams in the Pee Dee and
Catawba River systems. The species exists in very low abundances, usually within 6 feet
of shorelines, throughout its known range. The general habitat requirements for the
Carolina heelsplitter are shaded areas in large rivers to small streams, often burrowed
into clay banks between the root systems of trees, or in runs along steep banks with
moderate current. Recently, the Carolina heelsplitter has been found is in sections of 16
15 ​United States Fish and Wildlife Services. 1992. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; ​Echinacea laevigata​ (Smooth
Coneflower) Determined to be Endangered. ​http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_register/fr2140.pdf​.

16 United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh Field Office. Accessed November 19, 2019. Endangered and Threatened
Species and Species of Concern by County for North Carolina. https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/mecklenburg.htmll

Page 5 of 9

Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force Main December 19, 2019
Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report CWS Project No. 2019-0368

streams containing bedrock with perpendicular crevices filled with sand and gravel, and
with wide riparian buffers. 17

Biological Analysis:
A desktop review of potential on-site habitat for the Carolina heelsplitter was conducted
on the on-site perennial stream during the site visits on November 7 and November 19,
2019. The on-site perennial streams have silty banks and moderate amounts of woody
debris (Photograph 3). These stream conditions are not considered supportive Carolina
heelsplitter habitat.

The Catena Group surveyed the study area for freshwater mussels in 2008 and no
Carolina heelsplitter individual were found. The report concluded that Carolina
heelsplitters were not likely to occur within the study area due to the degraded conditions
of the stream. After reviewing the site, CWS concludes that the conditions have not
improved since the 2008 survey documented in the previous EA document . Based on 18
the lack of potential habitat, previous mussel surveys, and the NCNHP database
indicating there is no known population of the species within one-mile of the project area,
CWS concludes that this project will have no effect on the Carolina heelsplitter.

Rusty Patched Bumble Bee (Bombus affinis)
The Rusty patched bumble bee was listed as Endangered under the ESA in January 2016. 19
Rusty patched bumble bees once occupied grasslands and tallgrass prairies of the Upper
Midwest and Northeast, but most grasslands and prairies have been lost, degraded, or
fragmented by conversion to other uses. According to USFWS guidance, the rusty patched
bumble bee population has declined by approximately 90% or more. There are currently
records of ​Bombus affinis​ in isolated places within 13 states and 1 providence since 2000. In
these areas, surveys should only be completed by qualified biologists under the guidance of the
federal recovery/scientific permit under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA. These surveyors must
also meet all applicable state permitting and reporting requirements. The presence of ​Bombus
affinis​ has been broken down into three zones. A high potential zone provides a reasonable
basis for describing where the species is likely to be present and where federal agencies and
others should consult with Fish and Wildlife Services to evaluate the potential effects of their
actions. A low potential zone buffers a high potential zone and are much less likely to support
existing populations. Scientists are hopeful that some of these low potential areas may contain
the bee, and they recommend that surveyors obtain a scientific recovery permit. The third zone
is the unoccupied zones. Scientists believe that the likelihood of finding the species in these
areas is so low that they do not recommend scientific recovery permits, unless a ​Bombus affinis
may have accidentally been collected. According to USFWS’ Rusty Patched Bumble Bee 20
Interactive Map, Mecklenburg and Gaston Counties are located within an unoccupied zone.
Therefore, CWS concludes that this project will have no effect on the Rusty-patched
bumble bee.

17 NCDOT TE Animal Habitat Descriptions. 2015. https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/Environmental/Compliance%20Guides%20
and%20Procedures/TE%20Animal%20Habitat%20Descriptions%20Mar_6_2015.pdf
18 NCDENR. EIS, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities/City of Mount Holly Regional Wastewater Treatment. 2015.
19 United States Fish and Wildlife Services.
​https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/insects/rpbb/pdf/Survey_Protocols_RPBB_12April2019.pdf
20 United States Fish and Wildlife Services. https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/insects/rpbb/index.html

Page 6 of 9

Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force Main December 19, 2019
Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report CWS Project No. 2019-0368

Bald eagle (​Haliaeetus leucocephalus​)
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, enacted in 1940, prohibits anyone, without a 21
permit issued, from "taking" bald eagles, including their parts, nests, or eggs. Habitat for the
bald eagle includes cliffs and forested areas near estuaries, large lakes, reservoirs, rivers,
seacoast, and as they become more abundant, stands of undisturbed forest. The nearby
Catawba River is large enough to be considered a potential feeding source and is located within
one mile of the project area. The project limits also include patches of undisturbed deciduous
forest with large trees in the canopy (Figure 3). The previous EA document noted the location 22
of an off-site nest. However, no bald eagles or bald eagle nests were observed there or on-site
during the site visits on November 7 and November 19, 2019. Additionally, a review of the
NCNHP database on November 19, 2019, revealed no known occurrences of this species within
1.0 mile of the project study area. Due to the presence of suitable habitat, ​CWS concludes
that this project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the bald eagle. However,
if an eagle nest is observed within the property at any time during the project related
activities, consultation with the USFWS will be required.

Northern long-eared bat (​Myotis septentrionalis​)
The northern long-eared bat (NLEB) is one of the species of bats most impacted by the
white-nose syndrome disease. Summer habitat (roosting habitat) of the NLEB includes forests
and woodlots containing live trees and/or dead snags greater than three inches diameter at
breast height with cavities or crevices. Winter habitat (hibernacula) of the NLEB includes caves,
mines, rocky areas, or structures that mimic similar conditions such as culverts greater than
48-inch in diameter. The NLEB was listed as Threatened (T) on April 2, 2015. 23

The forested areas within the study area are potential habitats for the NLEB. A Standard Local
Operating Procedure for Endangered Species Act Compliance (SLOPES) was established for
NLEB between the USFWS Asheville and Raleigh Ecological Offices and the United States
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Wilmington District, on January 31, 2017. This SLOPES 24
defines how the USACE will make determinations of effect to the NLEB on projects in which the
USACE is the lead federal agency. Alternative Local Procedure 2 (ALP 2) applies for the Mt
Holly Pumping Station and Force Main site as the action area is within range of the NLEB, the 25
action area is located outside of a red 12-digit HUC as defined by the Asheville Ecological
Services Field Office, and consultation by the USACE is not required on other listed species or 26
critical habitat.

Determinations
Based on the literature search and the results of the on-site assessment for suitable habitat of
federally-protected endangered, threatened, and candidate species, suitable habitat was not
observed within the project limits for dwarf-flowered heartleaf, Carolina heelsplitter, Michaux’s
sumac, or smooth purple coneflower. Therefore, this project will have no effect on these
21 https://www.fws.gov/midwest/MidwestBird/eaglepermits/bagepa.html
22 ​ NCDENR. EIS, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities/City of Mount Holly Regional Wastewater Treatment. 2015.
23 United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016. 4(d) Rule for the Northern Long-Eared Bat; Final rule.
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-01-14/pdf/2016-00617.pdf
24 USACE ​http://saw-reg.usace.army.mil/NLEB/1-30-17-signed_NLEB-SLOPES&apps.pdf
25 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2016. https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/pdf/WNSZone.pdf
26 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2016. Northern Long-Eared Bat.

Page 7 of 9

Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force Main December 19, 2019
Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report CWS Project No. 2019-0368

species. Suitable habitat was observed for Schweinitz's Sunflower but no individuals were
observed within the study area. Consequently, CWS concludes that this project will not affect
Schweinitz's Sunflower. No bald eagles or bald eagle nests were observed during the site visit,
but due to the presence of suitable habitat, CWS concludes that this project may affect, but is
not likely to adversely affect the bald eagle. If an eagle nest is observed within the property at
any time during the project related activities, consultation with the USFWS will be required. The
project area is not located within the currently occupied range of the rusty-patched bumble bee.
Additionally, based on the project area location, no tree removal activities will occur within a
150-foot radius of a known, occupied NLEB maternity roost from June 1-July 31, and no trees
will be removed within 0.25 miles of a known hibernaculum at any time of year. Therefore, any
incidental take on NLEB that may result from associated activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule
and notifications will follow the SLOPES agreement . Biological determinations requirements 27
for federally protected species are summarized in Table 2 (below).

Table 2. Biological Determination Requirements Summary Table for Federally Protected Species
Scientific Name Common Name Federal
Status*
Effect on Listed
Species
Biological
Determination
Required
Helianthus schweinitzii Schweinitz's sunflower E No effect No
Echinacea laevigata Smooth coneflower E No effect No
Rhus michauxii Michaux’s sumac E No effect No
Hexastylis naniflora Dwarf-flowered heartleaf T No effect
Lasmigona decorata Carolina heelsplitter E No effect No
Bombus affinis Rusty-patched bumble bee E No effect No
Myotis septentrionalis Northern-long-eared bat T Exempt Yes**
Haliaeetus
leucocephalus Bald eagle BGPA
May affect, but not
likely to adversely
affect
No
* E - Endangered, T - Threatened, BGPA - Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
** - Required in accordance with SLOPES, ALP 2 agreement.

A biological assessment was not conducted for this project. All biological determinations of
effect represent the best professional opinion of CWS and are not official determinations of
effect. It is the responsibility of the lead federal agency to render an official determination of
effect. Should the lead federal agency agree with CWS’s initial findings of no effect, then no
USFWS consultation is required to comply with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.
Should the lead federal agency’s determination of effect differ from the findings of CWS, formal
or informal consultation with USFWS may be required.

27 http://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmls/project_review/NLEB_in_WNC.html

Page 8 of 9

Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force Main December 19, 2019
Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report CWS Project No. 2019-0368

Thank you for the opportunity to provide these services on this important project. Please do not
hesitate to contact Dan Zurlo at 717-460-3466 or [e-mail] should you have any
questions or comments regarding this report.

Sincerely,

Dan Zurlo Christine Geist, PWS, CE
Project Scientist Consulting Group Manager

Attachments:Figure 1: USGS Topographic Map
Figure 2: USDA-NRCS Web Soil Survey of Mecklenburg and Gaston Counties
Figure 3: Aerial Map
Attachment A: NCNHP Data Review Report
Attachment B: Representative Photographs (1-5)

Page 9 of 9
FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
USGS Topographic Map
I
2,000 0 2,0001,000 Feet
CAG
Legend
Project Limits (55 ac.)
12/10/20191 inch = 2,000 feet
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2019\2019 Consulting Projects\2019-0368 Mount Holly Pump Station\PETS\ArcGIS\Figure1_USGS.mxd
REFERENCE: USGS 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE: MOUNTAIN ISLAND LAKEAND MOUNT HOLLY, NC (2017).
JKM2019-0368 Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force MainMt Holly, North CarolinaMecklenburg and Gaston County 135.279884, -81.006109
FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
W
CfB
CfB
CfB
LdB2
ChA
CfB
ChA
WkD
PaE
Ud
CeB2
LdB2
WnD
LdB2
CfD
PaE
PaE
WnB
W
CfB
PaE
ChA
LdB2
ChA
PaD2
WkF
CoA
HeB
HeB
WkF
LdB2
PaD2
LdD2
CeB2
W
WkF
ChA
CoA
LdB2
WW
ChA
WkF
W
LdD2
W
W
PaD2CeB2
CfD
W
MO
CeB2
MO
CeB2
CeD2
WkE
PaE
EnB
W
MO
EnB
EnD
EnD
PaE
WkD
DaB
EnB
CeD2
EnB
CeD2
EnB
CeB2
EnD
CeD2
WkE
WkE
WkD
MeB
EnD
PaF
EnB EnB
EnB
W
PaE
EnD
EnB
MeB
MO
WkE
CeD2
EnD
DaD
W
MO
CeB2
EnD
CeD2
WkD
H
A
W
F
I
E
L
D

R
D
CHARLIE HIPP
R
D
USDA-NRCS Web Soil Surveyof Mecklenburg and Gaston Counties 2
I
1,000 0 1,000500 Feet
CAG
Legend
Project Limits (55 ac.)
Roads
12/10/20191 inch = 1,000 feet
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2019\2019 Consulting Projects\2019-0368 Mount Holly Pump Station\PETS\ArcGIS\Figure2_CurrentSoil.mxd
REFERENCE: USDA-NRCS WEB SOIL SURVEY OF MECKLENBURG AND GASTON COUNTIES, NC, DATED 2017.
JKM2019-0368 Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force MainMt Holly, North CarolinaMecklenburg and Gaston County35.279884, -81.006109
Hydric (Y/N) Coverage (%)CeB2 Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded No 14.65CeD2 Cecil sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately eroded No 4.70CfB Cecil-Urban land complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes No 10.31ChA Chewacla loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded Yes 0.18EnB Enon sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes No 12.12EnD Enon sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes No 16.46HeB Helena sandy loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes Yes 0.18LdB2 Lloyd sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded No 8.14MeB Mecklenburg fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes Yes 13.02MO Monacan loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded Yes 4.52PaE Pacolet sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes No 0.54W Water No 9.04WkE Wilkes loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes No 6.15100Totals for Area of Interest:
Map Unit Symbol and Description
FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:Sta
te
Rd
2044Tuckaseege
Rd
Broome St
Riverfront PkwyTom Sawyer LnLighthouse RdSports LnMarina Village DrA St
Mauney StAmerican StRoc
k

R
i
d
g
e

L
n
WHITEWATER CENTER PKYAerial Map
I
800 0 800400 Feet
CAG
JKM
Legend
Project Limits (55 ac.)
Schweinitz's Sunflower Location
Potential Schweinitz's Sunflower Habitat
Potential Bald Eagle Habitat
Roads
!Í Photo Location and Direction
12/10/20191 inch = 800 feet
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2019\2019 Consulting Projects\2019-0368 Mount Holly Pump Station\PETS\ArcGIS\Figure3_Aerial.mxdÅ2
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND AERIAL IMAGERY PROVIDED BY ESRI, ACCESSED 2019. BACKGROUND GIS LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY THE MECKLENBURG COUNTY AND GASTONCOUNTY GIS DEPARTENTS, DATED 2019.
NOTE: HABITAT ASSESMENT PERFORMED BY CWS, INC. ON NOVEMBER 19 AND 20, 2019.
2019-0368 Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force MainMt Holly, North CarolinaMecklenburg and Gaston County35.279884, -81.006109 3
Å 3
Å1Å4Å5
NCNHDE-10720
November 19, 2019
Julia McGuire
Carolina Wetland Services
550 e Westinghouse Blcd
Charlotte, NC 29707
RE: Mt Holly Pump station; 2019-0368
Dear Julia McGuire:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
A query of the NCNHP database indicates that there are records for rare species, important natural
communities, natural areas, and/or conservation/managed areas within the proposed project
boundary. These results are presented in the attached ‘Documented Occurrences’ tables and map.
The attached ‘Potential Occurrences’ table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one-mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one-mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally-listed species is documented within the project area or indicated within a one-mile
radius of the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) for guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
Also please note that the NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional
correspondence if a Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water
Management Trust Fund easement, or an occurrence of a Federally-listed species is documented
near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at [e-mail] or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Intersecting the Project Area
Mt Holly Pump station
Project No. 2019-0368
November 19, 2019
NCNHDE-10720
Element Occurrences Documented Within Project Area
Taxonomic
Group
EO ID Scientific Name Common Name Last
Observation
Date
Element
Occurrence
Rank
Accuracy Federal
Status
State
Status
Global
Rank
State
Rank
Natural
Community
33727 Floodplain Pool ---2014-07-14 C? 3-Medium ------ G3 S2
Vascular Plant 25499 Helianthus schweinitzii Schweinitz's Sunflower 2011-09-22 D 2-High Endangered Endangered G3 S3
Natural Areas Documented Within Project Area
Site Name Representational Rating Collective Rating
Long Creek Bluff R2 (Very High)C4 (Moderate)
Managed Areas Documented Within Project Area*
Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type
Gaston County Open Space Gaston County: multiple local government Local Government
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
*NOTE: If the proposed project intersects with a conservation/managed area, please contact the landowner directly for additional information. If the project intersects with a Dedicated Nature Preserve
(DNP), Registered Natural Heritage Area (RHA), or Federally-listed species, NCNHP staff may provide additional correspondence regarding the project.
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/help. Data query generated on November 19, 2019; source: NCNHP, Q4 Oct 2019.
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 5
Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Mt Holly Pump station
Project No. 2019-0368
November 19, 2019
NCNHDE-10720
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic
Group
EO ID Scientific Name Common Name Last
Observation
Date
Element
Occurrence
Rank
Accuracy Federal
Status
State
Status
Global
Rank
State
Rank
Animal
Assemblage
38910 Waterbird Colony ---2018-02-14 E 2-High ------ GNR S3
Freshwater Fish32504 Etheostoma
thalassinum
Seagreen Darter 2008-02-13 E 3-Medium --- Significantly
Rare
G4 S3
Natural
Community
33727 Floodplain Pool ---2014-07-14 C? 3-Medium ------ G3 S2
Natural
Community
33726 Mesic Mixed Hardwood
Forest (Coastal Plain
Subtype)
---2015-04-08 C 2-High ------ G3 S3
Vascular Plant 25499 Helianthus schweinitzii Schweinitz's Sunflower 2011-09-22 D 2-High Endangered Endangered G3 S3
Vascular Plant 34548 Ilex longipes Georgia Holly 2015-04-08 BC 2-High --- Significantly
Rare
Peripheral
G5 S1
Natural Areas Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Site Name Representational Rating Collective Rating
Long Creek Bluff R2 (Very High)C4 (Moderate)
Managed Areas Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type
Gaston County Open Space Gaston County: multiple local government Local Government
US National Whitewater Center Mecklenburg County Local Government
NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund Funded
Project
NC DNCR, Clean Water Management Trust
Fund
State
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy - Long Creek Preserve
(Tract 1 & 1b)
Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Page 3 of 5
Managed Areas Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/help. Data query generated on November 19, 2019; source: NCNHP, Q4 Oct 2019.
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 4 of 5
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
Page 5 of 5

Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force Main December 19, 2019
Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report CWS Project No. 2019-0368

Photograph 1. View of forested area, unsuitable for all examined terrestrial species, facing east.

Photograph 2. View of maintained herbaceous area, unsuitable for all examined terrestrial
species, facing north-northeast.

Photopage 1 of 3

Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force Main December 19, 2019
Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report CWS Project No. 2019-0368

Photograph 3. View of Long Creek, an unsuitable , unsuitable habitat for the Carolina
heelsplitter, facing northwest.

Photograph 4. View of an off-site Schweinitz's sunflower population, facing west.

Photopage 2 of 3

Mt Holly Pumping Station and Force Main December 19, 2019
Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report CWS Project No. 2019-0368

Photograph 5. View of an on-site Schweinitz's sunflower habitat, facing south.

Photopage 3 of 3

hdrinc.com 440 S Church Street, Suites 800, 900 & 1000, Charlotte, NC US 28202-2075
[phone]
1

November 22, 2019
Mr. Byron Hamstead
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801

RE: Threatened and Endangered Species Survey
Stowe Regional Water Resource Recovery Facility
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina

Dear Mr. Hamstead,

This letter presents the findings of a threatened and endangered species assessment conducted by
HDR for Charlotte Water to support planning efforts the Stowe Regional Water Resource Recovery
Facility (WRRF). The survey was conducted over a 253 acre Study Area located in Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina near the Catawba River (Figure 1).
The Study Area (Site) is located between the Catawba River and Belmeade Drive, south of NC 27
and north of US National Whitewater Center in Mt Holly, North Carolina and encompasses
approximately 253 acres. The Site consists of undeveloped forested areas, jurisdictional streams
and wetlands, and existing infrastructure associated with Long Creek Pump Station (Figure 2). The
proposed Stowe Regional WRRF is needed for a regional waste water treatment operation to
support continued growth in the region; therefore, the project proposes upgrades to the existing
Long Creek Pump Station, the construction of the proposed Stowe WRRF, access roads, and
sanitary sewer forcemains that will be installed by horizontal directional drilling methods (Figure 3).
HDR’s approach to this study involved conducting a desktop review of publically available data as
well as an on-site investigation to evaluate potential habitat for federally protected species. The
following sections provide a summary of HDR’s methods and findings of the desktop review and on-
site field reconnaissance. Attached to this letter are supporting figures and agency reports.
Desktop Review
HDR conducted a desktop review of protected species likely to occur on or in the vicinity of the
Project Site. Species addressed include those listed under the Endangered Species Act or critical
habitat designated under the Endangered Species Act.
HDR consulted the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) database, which
summarizes species and trust resources under the USFWS’s jurisdiction that are known or
expected to be on or near the project area (IPaC Resource List, attached). The North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) Data Explorer database was also queried for a list of federally
Charlotte Water | Stowe RWRRF
Threatened and Endangered Species Survey

2

protected species with potential to occur within and in proximity to the project site, attached. Table 1
summarizes species that are federally listed on both lists. Species that are federally protected under
the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) were also included in this review.
Table 1. Federally protected species listed for Mecklenburg County
Common Name Scientific
Name
Federal
Status1 Habitat Description
Habitat
Present
(Y/N)
Birds
Bald eagle Haliaeetus
leucocephalus BGPA
Nests at tops of large, mature trees near
large rivers, lakes, and marshes containing
small animals, fish, and carrion.
No
Mammals
Northern long-
eared bat
Myotis
septentrionalis T
Hibernates in caves and mines during
winter; roosts under bark, in cavities or
crevices in trees and snags during summer
No -
hibernacula;
Yes -
roosting
trees
Invertabrate
Carolina
heelsplitter
Lasmigona
decorata E Cool, clean, well-oxygenated water with
stable, silt-free stream bottoms No
Plants
Michaux’s sumac Rhus michauxii E
Sandy or rocky, open, upland woods on
acidic or circumneutral, well-drained sandy
or loamy soils; sandy or submesic loamy
swales and depressions in the Sandhills
region; disturbed areas such as maintained
roadsides and utility rights-of-way.
No
Schweinitz’s
sunflower
Helianthus
schweinitzii E
Areas with poor soils in forest openings,
grasslands, or disturbed areas such as
roadsides and utility rights-of-way.
No
Smooth
coneflower
Echinacea
laevigata E
Open woods, glades, xeric hardpan forests,
diabase glades in abundant sunlight and
little competition in the herbaceous layer.
No
1 BGEPA = Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Federally protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
T = Threatened. A taxon “likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion
of its range.”
E = Endangered. A taxon “in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.”

The NCNHP Project Report (NCNHDE-10381, attached) summarizes that there have been no
known occurrences of federally protected species or critical habitat that have been documented
within the Site; however, two occurrences of Schweinitz’s sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) have
been documented within a one-mile radius of the Site in 2011 and 2013.
Charlotte Water | Stowe RWRRF
Threatened and Endangered Species Survey

3

Field Reconnaissance Results
During the week of September 9 through the 13th, 2019, HDR environmental scientists conducted a
pedestrian survey of the site to verify the presence or absence of potential habitat for federally
threatened and endangered species listed in Table 1 that may occur on the site. A reference site of
Schweinitz’s sunflower was visited on September 9th and confirmed to be in flower. No habitat has
been identified for any of the species in Table 1 with the exception of summer roosting habitat for
the northern long-eared bat (NLEB).

Vertebrates
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) [Federally Protected under BGEPA]
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: October 1 – May 15
Habitat Description: Bald eagles occur throughout much of the continental U.S. and Canada. The
species frequently builds their nests in live pines or cypress trees near large bodies of open water
and may congregate around fish processing plants, dumps, and below dams where fish
congregate. Nests typically measure 6 to 8 feet deep and 6 feet in diameter, and are cone shaped.
Bald eagles are opportunistic feeders and consume a variety of prey, which may be self-caught,
scavenged, or robbed from other bird species. The threat to this species is attributed to disturbance
and destruction of foraging and nesting habitat by urban and residential development (USFWS
1978).
No individuals of bald eagles were observed; therefore, no impacts to this species are anticipated.
Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) [Federally Threatened]
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: May 15 – August 15 (summer); January 15 – February 15
(winter)
Habitat Description: The northern long-eared bat is found across much of the eastern and north-
central U.S. and all Canadian provinces from the Atlantic coast to the southern Northwest
Territories and eastern British Columbia. The species’ range includes 37 states. White-nose
syndrome, a fungal disease known to affect bats, is currently the predominant threat to this species.
Northern long-eared bats have two distinct seasonal habitats. Winter habitats include caves and
mines, whereas summer habitats consist of roosting singly or in colonies underneath bark, in
cavities, or crevices of both live and dead trees. On rare occurrences this bat has also been found
roosting in man-made structures such as barns or sheds. Northern long-eared bats emerge at dusk
to fly through the understory of forested hillsides and ridges feeding on moths, flies, leafhoppers,
caddisflies, and beetles, which they catch while in flight using echolocation. The bat also feeds by
gleaning motionless insects from vegetation and water surfaces (USFWS 2015).
Mature trees (greater than 12 inches in diameter) that exhibit exfoliating bark (i.e., hickories and
oaks) and dead tree snags were observed within the forested portions of the Site and may serve as
Charlotte Water | Stowe RWRRF
Threatened and Endangered Species Survey

4

potential roosting habitat; however, the site was reviewed in accordance with the NLEB Standard
Local Operating Procedures for Endangered Species (SLOPES) between the USACE, Wilmington
District, and the Asheville and Raleigh U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Offices, and it was
determined that the project is located outside of the highlighted areas/red 12-digit HUCs and
activities in the project limits do not require prohibited incidental take; as such, this project meets
the criteria for the 4(d) rule and any associated take is exempted/excepted. As established in the
NLEB SLOPES, this project does not require prohibited intentional take of the NLEB and it meets
the criteria for the 4(d) rule.
Additionally, according to the NCNHP Data Explorer report, no known occurrences including
hibernacula and/or maternity roost trees have been documented within or within close proximity to
the Site.
Invertebrates
Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata) [Federally Endangered]
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: Year-round; March 1 – September (optimal)
Habitat Description: The Carolina heelsplitter requires cool, clean, well-oxygenated water. It prefers
stable, silt-free stream bottoms and generally occurs where the stream banks are well-vegetated
with trees and shrubs. Historically, the Carolina heelsplitter was found in several locations in North
and South Carolina. Known populations for the Carolina heelsplitter in Mecklenburg County occur
only in the Goose Creek and Duck Creek watersheds within the Yadkin Pee-Dee River Basin and
the Sixmile Creek watershed within the Catawba River Basin (USFWS 2011).
The proposed project is located in the Long Creek watershed within the Catawba River Basin;
however, there are no known populations of the Carolina heelsplitter within the Long Creek
watershed. Moreover, the on-site streams are moderately degraded and exhibit erosion, incision,
and high sediment levels which are limiting habitat factors for this species. No mussels of any
species were observed and no suitable habitat for Carolina heelsplitter is present within the Site. No
impacts to this species are anticipated.
Vascular Plants
Michaux’s sumac (Rhus michauxii) [Federally Endangered]
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: May – October
Habitat Description: Michaux’s sumac is endemic to the inner Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont
regions, and grows in sandy or rocky, open, upland woods on acidic or circumneutral, well-drained
sands or sandy loam soils with low cation exchange capacities. The species is also found on sandy
or submesic loamy swales and depressions in the Sandhills region as well as in openings along the
rim of Carolina bays; maintained railroad, roadside, power line, and utility rights-of-way; areas
Charlotte Water | Stowe RWRRF
Threatened and Endangered Species Survey

5

where forest canopies have been opened up by blow downs and/or storm damage; small wildlife
food plots; abandoned building sites; under sparse to moderately dense pine or pine/hardwood
canopies; and in and along edges of other artificially maintained clearings undergoing natural
succession. In the central Piedmont, it occurs on clayey soils derived from mafic rocks. The plant is
shade intolerant and, therefore, grows best where disturbance (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, and
periodic fire) maintains its open habitat (USFWS 1989).
The Site contains clayey soils that are not derived from mafic rock and are not well-drained. Due to
lack of suitable soils, no habitat exists for the Michaux’s sumac within the Site; therefore, no
impacts to this species are anticipated.
Schweinitz’s sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) [Federally Endangered]
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: late August – October
Habitat Description: Schweinitz's sunflower is endemic to the Piedmont of North and South
Carolina. The few sites where this rhizomatous perennial herb occurs in relatively natural vegetation
are in xeric hardpan forests. The species is also found along roadside rights-of-way, maintained
power lines and other utility rights-of-way, edges of thickets and old pastures, clearings and edges
of upland oak-pine-hickory woods, Piedmont longleaf pine forests, and other sunny or semi-sunny
habitats where disturbances (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, blow downs, storms, frequent fire)
help create open or partially open areas for sunlight. The species is intolerant of full shade and
excessive competition from other vegetation. Schweinitz’s sunflower occurs in a variety of soil
series, including Badin, Cecil, Cid, Enon, Gaston, Georgeville, Iredell, Mecklenburg, Misenheimer,
Secrest, Tatum, Uwharrie, and Zion, among others. It generally grows in shallow sandy soils with
high gravel content, shallow, poor, clayey hardpans, or shallow rocky soils, especially those derived
from mafic rocks (USFWS 1991).
The Site includes dense forested areas of varying ages, unmaintained areas heavily invaded by
invasive plant species, and regularly maintained mowed areas. Given the lack of disturbance to
reduce competition and presence of invasive species, it was determined that there was no suitable
habitat for Schweinitz’s sunflower present. Although it was determined that no suitable habitat was
present, surveys for Schweinitz’s sunflower were still conducted during the survey window and no
individuals were observed. Therefore, no impacts to this species are anticipated.
Smooth coneflower (Echinacea laevigata) [Federally Endangered]
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: Late May – October
Habitat Description: Smooth coneflower, a perennial herb, is typically found in meadows, open
woodlands, the ecotonal regions between meadows and woodlands, cedar barrens, dry limestone
bluffs, clear cuts, and roadside and utility rights-of-way. In North Carolina, the species normally
grows in magnesium- and calcium- rich soils associated with gabbro and diabase parent material,
and typically occurs in Iredell, Misenheimer, and P icture soil series. It grows best where there is
Charlotte Water | Stowe RWRRF
Threatened and Endangered Species Survey

6

abundant sunlight, little competition in the herbaceous layer, and periodic disturbances (e.g.,
regular fire regime, well-timed mowing, clearing) that prevent encroachment of shade-producing
woody shrubs and trees. In locations where woody succession is held in check, it is characterized
by a number of species with prairie affinities (USFWS 1995).
The Site includes dense forested areas of varying ages, unmaintained areas heavily invaded by
invasive plant species, and regularly maintained mowed areas. These areas within the Site were
not determined to be suitable habitat for smooth coneflower; therefore, no impacts to this species
are anticipated.

Effect Determination
Based on the desktop review of the USFWS County List, IPaC, the NCNHP Data Explorer Report,
and the subsequent field survey for the presence or absence of potential habitat, the project will
have no effect on the bald eagle, Carolina heelsplitter, Michaux’s sumac, Schweinitz’s sunflower, or
smooth coneflower. The project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the northern long-
eared bat, but meets the criteria for the 4(d) rule and any associated take is exempted/excepted.
We ask that you review the project area based on the attached information to determine if there will
be any adverse impacts to federally protected species. If you have any questions or require
additional information, please contact me at 704-338-6710 or [e-mail].
Sincerely,

HDR Inc.

Kelly Thames, PWS
Project Manager/Environmental Scientist

Attachments: Figure 1: Project Vicinity
Figure 2: Aerial Imagery
Figure 3: Preliminary Site Layout
Photopage
USFWS IPaC Resource List
NCNHP Project Report NCNHDE-10381

cc: Nicole Bartlett, PE, Charlotte Water
Charlotte Water | Stowe RWRRF
Threatened and Endangered Species Survey

7

References
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017. Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Federal Species
of Concern, and Candidate Species, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. Updated June 27,
2018. (https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/mecklenburg.html)
_____. 2015. Threatened Species Status for the Northern Long-eared Bat with 4(d) Rule. April
2015. (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-04-02/pdf/2015-07069.pdf)
_____. 2011. Fact Sheet for Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata). December 2011.
(https://www.fws.gov/asheville/pdfs/CarolinaHeelsplitter_factsheet.pdf)
_____. 1995. Recovery Plan for Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea laevigata). April 1995.
(https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plans/1995/950418.pdf)
_____. 1991. Schweinitz’s Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) Determined to be Endangered. May
1991. (https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_register/fr1852.pdf)
_____. 1989. Determination of Endangered Status for Michaux’s Sumac (Rhus michauxii).
September 1989. (https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_register/fr1601.pdf)
_____. 1978. Determination of Certain Bald Eagle Populations as Endangered or Threatened. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.
(https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_register/fr183.pdf)

STOWE REGIONAL WRRF & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
FIGURE 1
PROJECT VICINITY
0 1Miles
O
LEGEND
Project Site (253.0 ac.)
Mecklenburg County,North Carolina
DATA SOURCE: Esri, OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
STOWE REGIONAL WRRF & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTSAERIAL IMAGERY
0 1,000Feet
O
Ph oto graphs
LEGEN D
Project Site (2 53 ac.)
Juris dictiona l Strea ms
Ju risdictiona l Wetlan ds
DATA SOURCE: Esri, OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
1 INCH = 1,000 FEET
1
2
Figure 2
STOWE REGIONAL WRRF & ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTSPRELIMINARY SITE LAYOUT
0 1,000Feet
O
LEGEN D
Project Site (2 53 ac.)
Juris dictiona l Strea ms
Ju risdictiona l Wetlan ds
DATA SOURCE: Esri, OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
1 INCH = 1,000 FEET
Figure 3
Existing Lo ng CreekPump Station
NOTE: All site layout elements arepreliminary only and are subject to change.
Prop osedStowe W RRF
Prop osed Roadand Bridge
Prop osed Roadand Bridge
Prop osed EquilizationBasin
Prop osed Forcemains(b y ho rizontional directional d rilling)
Prop osed efflu entstructure

Photopage | 1

Photograph 1 – View of Site, Facing Northeast (dated September 13, 2019).

Photograph 2 – View of Site, Facing South (dated September 12, 2019).

IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat
(collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS)
jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list
may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be
directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and
extent of effects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-
Local office
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
[phone]
[phone]
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/es/countyfr.html
U.S. Fish & Wildlife ServiceIPaCInformation for Planning and Consultation
Page 1 of 11IPaC: Explore Location
10/3/2019https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/QOYIDXXKLBEANNDCO4VSMVY2PI/resources
Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project
level impacts.
The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species.
Additional areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the
species range if the species could be indirectly affected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam
upstream of a fish population, even if that fish does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact
the species by reducing or eliminating water flow downstream). Because species can move, and site
conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project
.
1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows
species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more
information.
2.NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.
The following species are potentially affected by activities in this location:
Page 2 of 11IPaC: Explore Location
10/3/2019https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/QOYIDXXKLBEANNDCO4VSMVY2PI/resources
Mammals
Clams
species themselves.
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS AT THIS LOCATION.
Migratory birds
NAME STATUS
Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9045
Threatened
NAME STATUS
Carolina Heelsplitter Lasmigona decorata Endangered
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act .
1 2
Page 3 of 11IPaC: Explore Location
10/3/2019https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/QOYIDXXKLBEANNDCO4VSMVY2PI/resources
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory
birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing
appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/
birds-of-conservation-concern.php
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
Page 4 of 11IPaC: Explore Location
10/3/2019https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/QOYIDXXKLBEANNDCO4VSMVY2PI/resources
Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities
to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the FAQ “Proper
Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report” before using or attempting to interpret this
report.
NAME BREEDING SEASON (IF A BREEDING
SEASON IS INDICATED FOR A BIRD
ON YOUR LIST, THE BIRD MAY
BREED IN YOUR PROJECT AREA
SOMETIME WITHIN THE
TIMEFRAME SPECIFIED, WHICH IS A
VERY LIBERAL ESTIMATE OF THE
DATES INSIDE WHICH THE BIRD
BREEDS ACROSS ITS ENTIRE
RANGE. "BREEDS ELSEWHERE"
INDICATES THAT THE BIRD DOES
NOT LIKELY BREED IN YOUR
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the
continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds May 10 to Aug 31
Page 5 of 11IPaC: Explore Location
10/3/2019https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/QOYIDXXKLBEANNDCO4VSMVY2PI/resources
 no data survey effort breeding season probability of presence
Probability of Presence ( )
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your
project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.) A
taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see below) can be used
to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher confidence in the
presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week
where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For
example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all
years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Page 6 of 11IPaC: Explore Location
10/3/2019https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/QOYIDXXKLBEANNDCO4VSMVY2PI/resources
Bald Eagle
Non-BCC Vulnerable
(This is not a Bird of
Conservation Concern
(BCC) in this area, but
warrants attention
because of the Eagle
Act or for potential
susceptibilities in
offshore areas from
certain types of
development or
activities.)
Prairie Warbler
BCC Rangewide (CON)
(This is a Bird of
BCC Rangewide (CON)
(This is a Bird of
Conservation Concern
(BCC) throughout its
range in the
continental USA and
Alaska.)
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any
location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in
the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding
their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be
Page 7 of 11IPaC: Explore Location
10/3/2019https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/QOYIDXXKLBEANNDCO4VSMVY2PI/resources
breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures and/or permits may be
advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present
on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC)and other species that
may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network
(AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried
and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects,
and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle
(Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range
anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the
continental USA; and
3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of
the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain
types of development or activities (e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made, in particular, to avoid
and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more
information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and
requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.
Page 8 of 11IPaC: Explore Location
10/3/2019https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/QOYIDXXKLBEANNDCO4VSMVY2PI/resources
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird
species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also
offers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review.
Alternately, you may download the bird model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS
Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic
Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including
migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine bird
tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.
What if I have eagles on my list?
National Wildlife Refuge lands
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a
'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to
discuss any questions or concerns.
THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS AT THIS LOCATION.
Page 9 of 11IPaC: Explore Location
10/3/2019https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/QOYIDXXKLBEANNDCO4VSMVY2PI/resources
Fish hatcheries
THERE ARE NO FISH HATCHERIES AT THIS LOCATION.
Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
Data limitations
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information
on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery.
Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use
of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland
boundaries or classification established through image analysis.
The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the
amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted. Metadata
should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.
Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be
occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and the
actual conditions on site.
Page 10 of 11IPaC: Explore Location
10/3/2019https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/QOYIDXXKLBEANNDCO4VSMVY2PI/resources
Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery
as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic
vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters. Some
deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These
habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.
Data precautions
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a
different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this
inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the
geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities
Page 11 of 11IPaC: Explore Location
10/3/2019https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/QOYIDXXKLBEANNDCO4VSMVY2PI/resources
NCNHDE-10381
October 3, 2019
Jessica Tisdale
HDR
555 Fayetteville Street
Raleigh, NC 27601
RE: Stowe Project
Dear Jessica Tisdale:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
A query of the NCNHP database indicates that there are records for rare species, important natural
communities, natural areas, and/or conservation/managed areas within the proposed project
boundary. These results are presented in the attached ‘Documented Occurrences’ tables and map.
The attached ‘Potential Occurrences’ table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one-mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one-mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally-listed species is documented within the project area or indicated within a one-mile
radius of the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) for guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
Also please note that the NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional
correspondence if a Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water
Management Trust Fund easement, or an occurrence of a Federally-listed species is documented
near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at [e-mail] or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Intersecting the Project Area
Stowe Project
October 3, 2019
NCNHDE-10381
Element Occurrences Documented Within Project Area
Taxonomic
Group
EO ID Scientific Name Common Name Last
Observation
Date
Element
Occurrence
Rank
Accuracy Federal
Status
State
Status
Global
Rank
State
Rank
Natural
Community
33727 Floodplain Pool ---2014-07-14 C?3-Medium ------G3 S2
Natural Areas Documented Within Project Area
Site Name Representational Rating Collective Rating
Long Creek Bluff R2 (Very High)C4 (Moderate)
Managed Areas Documented Within Project Area*
Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type
US National Whitewater Center Mecklenburg County Local Government
Catawba Lands Conservancy - Long Creek Preserve
(Tract 1 & 1b)
Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
*NOTE: If the proposed project intersects with a conservation/managed area, please contact the landowner directly for additional information. If the project intersects with a Dedicated Nature Preserve
(DNP), Registered Natural Heritage Area (RHA), or Federally-listed species, NCNHP staff may provide additional correspondence regarding the project.
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/help. Data query generated on October 3, 2019; source: NCNHP, Q3 Jul 2019.
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 5
Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Stowe Project
October 3, 2019
NCNHDE-10381
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic
Group
EO ID Scientific Name Common Name Last
Observation
Date
Element
Occurrence
Rank
Accuracy Federal
Status
State
Status
Global
Rank
State
Rank
Animal
Assemblage
38910 Waterbird Colony ---2018-02-14 E 2-High ------GNR S3
Freshwater Fish 32504 Etheostoma
thalassinum
Seagreen Darter 2008-02-13 E 3-Medium ---Significantly
Rare
G4 S3
Natural
Community
33727 Floodplain Pool ---2014-07-14 C?3-Medium ------G3 S2
Natural
Community
33726 Mesic Mixed Hardwood
Forest (Coastal Plain
Subtype)
---2015-04-08 C 2-High ------G3 S3
Vascular Plant 13743 Delphinium exaltatum Tall Larkspur 1800s Hi?5-Very
Low
---Endangered G3 S2
Vascular Plant 20445 Helianthus schweinitzii Schweinitz's Sunflower 2013 X 2-High Endangered Endangered G3 S3
Vascular Plant 25499 Helianthus schweinitzii Schweinitz's Sunflower 2011-09-22 D 2-High Endangered Endangered G3 S3
Vascular Plant 34548 Ilex longipes Georgia Holly 2015-04-08 BC 2-High ---Significantly
Rare
Peripheral
G5 S1
Vascular Plant 35172 Tradescantia virginiana Virginia Spiderwort 2015-05-04 A 2-High ---Threatened G5 S2S3
Natural Areas Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Site Name Representational Rating Collective Rating
Long Creek Bluff R2 (Very High)C4 (Moderate)
Managed Areas Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type
Gaston County Open Space Gaston County: multiple local government Local Government
Long Creek Greenway Mecklenburg County Local Government
US National Whitewater Center Mecklenburg County Local Government
NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund Easement NC DNCR, Clean Water Management Trust
Fund
State
NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund Easement NC DNCR, Clean Water Management Trust
Fund
State
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Page 3 of 5
Managed Areas Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type
Catawba Lands Conservancy - Long Creek Preserve
(Tract 1 & 1b)
Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/help. Data query generated on October 3, 2019; source: NCNHP, Q3 Jul 2019.
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 4 of 5
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
Page 5 of 5