20011729 Ver 1_Application_20011127

DR. J.H. CARTER III & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Environmental Consultants,! ,y
P.O. x 891 • Southern Pines, N.C. 28388
pI N 695-1043 9 Fax [phone]
Letter of Transmittal
To Mr. John Thomas 01 17 2 9
USACOE
Raleigh Regional Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615-6846
WE ARE SENDING YOU
X Attached
Copy of letter
Prints
Date: 11-19-01 Job # 9847
Attn: Mr. John Thomas
Re: Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion
Individua1404 permit application package
Reports X Maps
Plans Data
Photos X Individual 404 Permit
COPIES DATE # Pgs DESCRIPTION
1 11/2/01 2 Permit letter to Thomas
1 11/19/01 3 Permit Application ENG Form 4345
1 10/24/01 1 Statement of Authorization for Block 11
1 11/19/01 1 Adjoining property owners list for Block 24
1 11/19/01 3 Enclosures 1-6 maps and cross-section of project site
1 11/19/01 4 Enclosure 7 Purpose & Need for the Rocky River
Lower Reservoir Expansion
1 11/19/01 32 Enclosure 8 Alternatives for the Rocky River
Lower Reservoir Expansion
1 11/19/01 1 Enclosure 9 Compensatory Mitigation Plan for the
Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED
X For approval
For your use
As requested
For review and comment
REMARKS:
Approved as noted
Approved as submitted
Returned for corrections
For your information
COPY TO: Joel Brower, Town of Siler City SIGNED:
Angie Mettlen, HUA
John Dorney, NCDWQ
Endangered Species Surveys • Environmental Assessments • Land Management Wetlands ping and Permitting
) t
DR. J.H. CARTER III & ASSOCIATES, IN
Environmental Consultants PILE
P.O. Box 891 • Southern Pines, N.C. 28388®p
[phone] • Fax [phone]
2 November, 2001
Mr. John Thomas 0 1 1 7 2 9
Regulatory Specialist
US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
Raleigh Area Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615-6846
Dear Mr. Thomas:
Enclosed are the individual 404 permit application and supporting documents for the
Town of Siler City's proposed Rocky River Lower Reservoir expansion. Our application
requests authorization to impact 18.5 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, and
inundation of 12,990 linear feet of perennial streams, 1,926 linear feet of intermittent streams
and 4,208 linear feet of ephemeral streams. We recognize that this application will be subject to
extensive scrutiny, however, we believe that the impacts proposed are necessary for the viability
of this project, which will provide a long-term supply of water for the Town of Siler City.
We propose to restore wetlands in the immediate area and preserve buffers along the
Rocky River and its tributaries; however, our mitigation plan is still being developed.
No federally endangered species occur onsite, thus no Section 7 formal consultation with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will be required.
The following information is provided for inclusion in the Corps Public Notice for this
proj ect:
Jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, within the project site were predominantly open
waters and forested wetlands. Forested wetland habitat associated with the banks of the Lower
Reservoir, the Rocky River, Mud Lick Creek and adjacent perennial, intermittent and ephemeral
streams were predominantly vegetated with Piedmont Alluvial Forest. The overstory in the
Piedmont Alluvial Forest community type included river birch (Betula nigra), tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), green ash (Fraxinus
pennsylvanica), black walnut (Juglans nigra), hackberry (Celtis laevigata) and sycamore
Endangered Species Surveys 9 Environmental Assessments • Land Management • Wetlands Mapping and Permitting
(Platanus occidentalis). Typical understory species included boxelder (Acer negundo), red
maple (Acer rubrum), paw paw (Asimina triloba), elderberry (Sambucus canadensis) and
ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana). Shrubs included American strawberry bush (Euonymus
americanus), spicebush (Lindera benzoin) and privet (Ligustrum sinese). Ground cover species
included vermin grass (Microstegium virmineum), false nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), Canada
avens (Geum canadense) and violets (Viola spp.). Vines were common and included poison ivy
(Rhus radicans), muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia), greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia), Japanese
honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) and Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia). In the
wettest areas, sedges (Carex spp.), rushes (Juncus spp.), and aquatic plants such as burreed
(Sparganium americanum), lizard's tail (Saururus cernuus), tearthumb (Polygonum sagittatum),
and arrowhead (Sagittaria latifolia) were common.
Other natural communities that occur within the project site include, Dry-Mesic Oak-
Hickory Forest and minor inclusions of Dry Oak-Hickory Forest, Mesic-Mixed Hardwood Forest
and Piedmont/Coastal Plain Heath Bluff. Natural communities within the project site have been
generally disturbed and altered. Logging, fire exclusion and grazing have degraded most
forested areas within the project site. Pastures are a major land use within the project site and are
composed of a wide range of exotic (and some native) aggressive species, which quickly
colonize disturbed areas.
The topography ranges from gently to strongly sloping. Elevations within the project
area range from 450 to 700 feet above mean sea level. Geologically, the project area is in the
Carolina Slate Belt of North Carolina. The soils are generally silt loams and silty clay loams,
with the Badin, Cid, Lignum, Georgeville and Nanford Series being the most widespread. Soils
along rivers and creeks, which ultimately drain to the Cape Fear River, are dominated by
Riverview and Badin-Nanford soils.
If you have any questions please call.
Sincerely,
Df. J.H. Carter III
Environmental Consultant
Cc: A. Mettlen, HUA
J. Brower, Town of Siler City
Endangered Species Surveys • Environmental Assessments 9 Land Management 9 Wetlands Mapping and Permitting
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT OMB APPROVAL NO. 0170-003
(33 CFR 325) Expires October 1998
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 5 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments
regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of
Defense, Washington Headquarters Service Directorate of Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA
22202-4302; and to the Office of Management and Budget, paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003), Washington, DC 20503. Please DO NOT
RETURN your form to either of those addresses. Completed applications must be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location
of the proposed activity.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authority: 33 USC 401, Section 10; 1413, Section 404. Principal purpose: These laws require permits authorizing activities in, or affecting, navigable
waters of the United States, the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, and the transportation of dredged material for the
purpose of dumping it into ocean waters. Routine Uses: Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application for a permit.
Disclosures: Disclosure of requested information is voluntary. If information is not provided, however, the permit application cannot be processed nor
can a permit be issued.
One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this
application (see sample drawings and instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity.
An application that is not completed in full will be returned.
ITEMS I THRU 4 TO BE FILLED BY THE CORPS
1. APPLICATION NO. 7 FFICE CODE 7 DATE RECEIVED 4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED
ITEMS BELOW TO BE FILLED BYAPPLICAN
5. APPLICANT'S NAME 8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE (an agent is not required)
Town of Siler City, Joel Brower (Town Manager) Dr. J. H. Carter III & Associates
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 9. AGENT'S ADDRESS
P.O. Box 769 P.O. Box 891
Siler City, NC 27344-0769 Southern Pines, NC 28388
7. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOS. W/ AREA CODE 10. AGENT'S PHONE NOS. W/ AREA CODE
a. Residence: NA a. Residence: NA
b. Business: [phone] b. Business: [phone]
11. STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize, Dr. J. H. Carter III & Associates to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish,
upon request, supplemental information in support of this permit application.
See attached
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE
NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE, IF KNOWN (see instructions)
Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN (if applicable) 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (if applicable)
Rocky River Water Treatment Plant
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT 955 Water Plant Road
Chatham North Carolina Siler City, NC 27344
COUNTY STATE
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN (see instructions)
Siler City, Chatham County, Latitude: 350 44' 10.44" N, Longitude: 790 25' 29.99" W
17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
From Hwy 421 north, take Piney Grove Church Road exit, and then the first right into the water treatment plant and lower dam. This is
the southern terminus of project site.
ENG FORM 4345, Feb 94 EDITION OF SEP 91 IS OBSOLETE. (Proponent: CECW-DR)
18. Nature of Activity (Description of project, include all features)
The Town of Siler City seeks to expand its water supply to provide an additional 2.0 million gallons per day (MGD) to meet its
projected long-term needs through 2020. The Town proposes to construct a new dam structure immediately below the existing Rocky
River Lower Reservoir dam. The project would include the establishment of a 164.1-acre reservoir (including 24.0 acres of existing
reservoir) and the preservation of a 116.1-acre buffer zone consisting of a strip approximately 100 feet wide buffer around the proposed
reservoir. Project construction would result in the loss of 18.5 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, and inundation of
12,990 linear feet of perennial streams, 1,926 linear feet of intermittent streams and 4,208 linear feet of ephemeral streams.
19. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of this project, see instructions)
The applicant's purpose and need is to develop a safe and dependable water supply for the Siler. City that will satisfy the
projected water demand for a planning period of approximately 20 years. The Town has experienced recent severe water shortages
and limitations and based on projected growth and an increase in water demand, water shortages are predicted to increase. While
water conservation may reduce water demand, more severe shortages are expected in the near future. The assurance of an adequate
water supply is essential for the continued economic and population growth of the Town of Siler City as well as to serve the existing
population and industries.
USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
A dam will be placed on the Rocky River to expand the lower river reservoir (enclosure 3).
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards
The dam will consist of 756,000 cubic yards of concrete (enclosure 3).
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled (see instructions)
Surface area of total impacts to jurisdictional waters, including wetlands is 42.6 acres.
24.1 = existing reservoir pool (jurisdictional waters).
18.36 = proposed reservoir pool (jurisdictional wetlands).
0.14 acre = surface area of dam in jurisdictional waters.
23. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? Yes No X IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
24. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (If more than can be entered here,
please attach a supplemental list)
Please see attached
25. List of Other Certifications or Approvals/Denials Received from other Federal, State or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL* IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
NC DWQ 19 Nov. 2001
NC DEH
NC DWQ
NC DS
*Would include but is not restricted to zoning building and flood plain permits
26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this application
is complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent
of the applicant.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly
authorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and
willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or
representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry, shall be
fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
"U. S.GPO:1994-520-478/82018
V ! ur-Ir- 1 1
JOEL J. BROWER
TOWN MANAGER
WILLIAM C. MORGAN, JR.
TOWN ATTORNEY
Tvtun of Sitex Tifij
POST OFFICE BOX 769 CHARLES L. TURNER
311 NORTH SECOND AVENUE MAYOR
SILER CITY, NORTH CAROLINA 27344-0769
HELEN M. BUCKNER
PHONE: [phone] PROTEM
FAX: [phone] COMMISSIONERS
SAM ADAMS
WILLIAM F. COLLINS
ALEXANDER GRAVES, JR.
JOHN GRIMES
ROBERT SILER
GUY D. SMITH
October 24, 2001
To Whom It May Concern:
With notification by this letter, Dr. Jay Carter and Dr. J. H. Carter & Associates, Inc. has been
retained by the Town of Siler City to coordinate and submit proper documentation related to all
environmental permitting issues for the proposed Lower Rocky River Reservoir Expansion, Siler
City, Chatham County, North Carolina.
Any questions or concerns may be directed to the assigned.
Joel Brower
Town of Siler City
P. O. Box 769
Siler City, NC 27344-0769
Sincerely,
TOWN OF SILER CITY
oe J. rower
Town Manager
JJB:ka
Cc: Files
Block 24 Attachment:
Adjoining Property Owners Names & Addresses
Castleburg, Philip C.
163 RC Overman Rd.
Siler City, NC 27344
Lee, Kathryn H.
555 Ed Clapp Rd.
Siler City, NC 27344
Clapp, Charles E. SR. & Eleanor H.
1578 Ed Clapp Rd.
Siler City, NC 27344
Clapp, Edwin Sr.
1578 Ed Clapp Rd.
Siler City, NC 27344
Clapp, Timothy G. & James M.
1660 Ed Clapp Rd.
Siler City, NC 27344
Culberson, Alfred Parker & Sandra
1217 RC Overman Rd.
Siler City, NC 27344
Darrell Andrews Trucking Inc.
P.O. Box 654
Siler City, NC 27344
De La Houssaye, Alfred
84 Kirkmans Ford Rd.
Siler City, NC 27344
Fox, Frank Lee & Martha F.
#13 Promontory Court
Hilton Head ISL, SC 29928
Fowler, Nancy E.
674 Edwards Rd.
Siler City, NC 27344
Hoffinan, Freda C. Byron J.
523 W. Glendale Rd.
Siler City, NC 27344
McPherson, George T.
1013 Piney Grove Church Rd.
Siler City, NC 27344
McPherson, Raymond Ronald & Children
2312 Bellmont-Alamance Rd.
Burlington, NC 27215
Mericle, Julia C.
727 Ardsley Rd.
Winnetka, IL 60093
Morris, Clarence C.
713 Pittsboro Goldston Rd.
Pittsboro, NC 27312
Nelson, Robert E. & Jacquelyn
4387 Siler City-Snow Camp Rd.
Siler City, NC 27344
Smith, Martha M.
P.O. Box 343
Apex, NC 27502
Smith, Weldon R. & Harvey Jr.
771 RC Overman Rd.
Siler City, NC 27344
Wicker, Mrs. R.V.
2754 Flint Ridge Rd.
Siler City, NC 27344
Johnson, Wade W.
104 Arbor Dr.
Lexington, NC 27292
T_
)-
ROCKY RIVE
UPPER RESERV iR
PROJEC
SITE
ROC Y RI R
LOWER RES VOIR
US 421
Business
V
TOWN OF - f
ILER CITY
_ L664 f- - ----
Proposed Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion
Town of Siler City, Chatham County, North Carolina
Joel Brower (Town Manager)
Vicinity Map, Enclosure 1
ROCKY RIVER
UPPER RESERVOIR
D
1 ? d o
{
a
Clapp Lake
VN d Rd.? (SRI

r/ y
PROPOSED ROCKY RIVER
LOWER RESERVOIR
I-]
O I \
J
?
1 I

Ra
?a a<as
s
,y
LEGEND e?

0 Parcels EXISTING DAM
Existing Hydro ?' -
Proposed Lower
PROPOSED DAM
Reservoir Flood Elev. 540.30 (r? '- -\
Property Affected
F- I100'Buffer
??--
-
--

Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion Study
Proposed Lower Rocky River forthe
Reservoir Expansion Town of Siler City, Chatham County
Town Of siler City Prepared By'
Joel Brower (Town Manager) Hobbs, Upchurch and Associates, P.A. 1000 0 1000 Feet
Plan View, Enclosure 2 JEWELL Engineering Consultants
P.C.
,
Enclosure 3
Rocky River'
? C Ovcrman Rd. (SR 14.' 5)
Ed Clapp R. i. (SR 1312) k
Y.
l
71 l\
A
,,'
?"wer Rothe friVic-r Dam
Proposed Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion
Town of Siler City, Chatham County, North Carolina
Joel Brower (Town Manager)
Topographic Map, Enclosure 3

A? r? 5
rU
Fi+ yJf (P
O FI

o
?'

v
?
•
41,

r ?
' 4 I $# hl i'
'I gg
1
_
y
_. _

I i ?

_
ir7
?t

t Q

? 1

w
? I

7

I
??• Rt
I l _ -
Al
d
,
M i. ? E .\

' .

I f, Al-
?
i ?
r ' ; I_-- --
L. 111
- \ad
?
?I
?I

Enclosure 5

Proposed Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion
Town o1' Siler City, Chatham County, North Carolina
Joel Brower (Town Manager)
Aerial Photo of Project Site, Enclosure 5
"' 'n
,,ld ? L70.VY1 ?. QC,7. ?t h "1

O
\7
X
X
Z
?n

4a q
0
V

WU
c
a z w

ao? b

? o 0

n
a
?o

00
off
a ?
x
X
X

Enclosure 7
Proposed Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion
Town of Siler City, Chatham County, North Carolina
Joel Brower (Town Manager)
Purpose & Need
HISTORY
Between 1986 and 1988 and 1998 and 2000, the Town of Siler City experienced severe
droughts that strained its raw water supply. In the 1980s, the Town had 2 small impoundments
on the Rocky River, the Upper and Lower Reservoirs, which did not impound enough water to
supply the Town during droughts. In 1989, the Town completed an expansion of the Upper
Reservoir. This expansion provided the Town with needed raw water storage. Subsequently, the
Town has continually monitored the growing demands for more water and has identified the
need for additional water storage capacity. The severe water shortage that developed during the
draught of 1998-2000 underscored the need to develop additional water supplies.
APPLICANT'S PURPOSE AND NEED
The applicant's purpose and need are to develop a safe and dependable water supply for
the Town that will satisfy the projected water demand for a planning period of approximately 20
years. In the recent past, the Town has experienced water shortages and based on expected
growth and increases in water demand, water shortages are predicted to increase in frequency
and severity in the future. The assurance of an adequate water supply is essential to serve the
existing population and industries and for continued economic growth. The Town seeks to
establish a water supply to provide an additional 2.0 MGD to meet its projected needs through
2020.
CURRENT CONDITIONS
Currently, the Upper and Lower Reservoirs on the Rocky River in northwest Chatham
County serve as the primary raw water source for the Town. The Upper Reservoir Dam is
located approximately 9,000 feet upstream of the State Road (SR) 1312 bridge. The Lower
Reservoir Dam is located approximately 7,500 feet downstream of the same bridge. The intake
pump house for the Town's water treatment plant (WTP) is located immediately upstream of the
Lower Reservoir Dam. The Upper Reservoir stores approximately 90 percent (471.1 million
Enclosure 7
gallons) of the Town's raw water supply and the Lower Reservoir stores the remaining 10
percent (48.6 million gallons).
The existing reservoir system can provide a maximum of 4.0 MGD of raw water for
treatment. Currently, the capacity of the Town's WTP is rated at 4.0 MGD. The plant currently
treats approximately 2.75 MGD on average; however, during peak periods demand has reached
3.5 MGD (approximately 88 percent of the plant's capacity).
Residential Water Use Residential water use is normally expressed by per capita
water consumption, which is defined as total water production divided by the population served
and is measured in gallons per day per capita (GPDPC). Water usage per capita is typically
estimated to be 80 to 120 gallons GPDPC (individuals, not industry). Residential water use
during the period between 1991 and 2001 was analyzed. The average water use over this period
was calculated to be 0.699 MGD. Based upon the monthly residential customer base during this
same period, an average per capita water consumption rate of 84.72 GPDPC was calculated.
This water consumption rate was used as the basis for the projection of residential water
demands. As of the September 2001 billing cycle, the Town has a total of 3,331 residential taps
(2,705 within the Town and 626 outside of Town). Historically, residential consumption
accounts for approximately 30 percent of Town's total average daily water usage.
Commercial and Industrial Water Use The relatively low percentage of residential
water use illustrates how the make-up of the Town's water system varies from the norm. The
bulk of the water usage is from the commercial/industrial sector. Compared to the number of
residential taps, commercial and industrial customers are far fewer in number; however, Siler
City is home to 2 large poultry processing facilities, which must utilize potable water (according
to USDA regulations) in their daily activities. These facilities in conjunction with the other
commercial/industrial customers have accounted for approximately 50 percent of the Town's
water use. From the period beginning in 1991 through 2001, the average daily use for the
commercial/industrial customers has been 1.08 MGD. The number of commercial/industrial taps
has remained relatively constant over this 11-year period.
Additional Water Uses. Siler City tracks an additional customer base, Chatham
County, through its monthly billing records. The Town supplies the southwest portion of the
Enclosure 7
Chatham County water system through 7 metering points within the Town's distribution system.
During the same 11-year period from 1991 through 2001, the average daily usage for all 7 meters
has been 0.20 MGD, which equates to approximately 10 percent of the Town's average daily
usage. The County use is currently limited to a maximum of 0.30 MGD by contract.
The remaining 10 percent of Siler City's average water use comes from unbillable uses,
such as water used at the treatment plant, line flushing, etc., as well as normal system losses.
These unbillable uses have averaged 0.09 MGD since 1991.
Current Water Shortage Measures The Town has conservation measures in place to
appropriately respond to water shortages resulting from prolonged droughts. The Town's water
shortage ordinance outlines 4 stages of water conservation tied to water levels in the Rocky
River Upper Reservoir. As water levels in the reservoir drop, each progressive stage is
associated with a higher level of restriction on water use. The Town has instituted mandatory
water conservation measures during the 1986, 1987, 1988 and 1998 droughts and voluntary
water conservation measures during 1999-2000.
Closely tied to these water shortage response stages are the minimum release tiers
required by the NC DENR-NC DWR. The minimum release scenario currently in place for the
Town's reservoirs is also dictated by the amount of water storage in the Upper Reservoir. It is a
3-tiered system designed to sustain minimum flows downstream of the Town's reservoirs in
order to maintain aquatic habitats.
The successful implementation of water conservation measures alone is not enough
during periods of sustained drought. During such times, water restrictions are mandated to all
customers. This is typically done through incremental restrictions outlined in specific
ordinances, codes or drought response plans.
FUTURE NEEDS
Based on water demand projections, the Town proposed expansion of the Lower
Reservoir in order to meet their 20-year water needs. The proposed project would produce a safe
yield of 6.0 MGD (combination of Upper and Lower Reservoirs) based on a 7-day, 10-year low
flow (7Q10), at the Rocky River Lower Reservoir on the Rocky River, of 0.3 cubic feet per
second (cfs) and the current 3-tiered minimum release flow strategy. This increased water
Enclosure 7
supply capacity would be sufficient to meet the average daily demands for the Town through the
year 2020.
Future Water Conservation Initiatives While water conservation alone is not
adequate to fully address long-term water needs, the Town recognizes that reductions in water
demand through conservation can be significant.
Given this understanding, the Town has begun exploring ways to further improve upon
its current water conservation programs. First, the Town is reviewing its current water shortage
ordinance to look at ways to include normal water conservation initiatives, such as installation of
low-flow plumbing devices and improving daily water use practices, so that they are more
universally promoted during non-drought periods. The Town is also considering adding
requirements for its large water users that would ensure that internal water conservation is
practiced daily within each facility. The installation of a water reuse line is also being seriously
evaluated. If such a line were installed, the Town would require its use for irrigation purposes
throughout its jurisdictional area. Finally, Siler City has historically operated under a declining
block rate structure for both water and sewer. In 1994, the Town modified its sewer rate. This
rate was changed to a flat rate structure and is directly based on the amount of water used.
Currently, the Town is evaluating moving into a flat or possible an increasing block water rate
structure and instituting impact fees, particularly for those customers with the potential to use
large volumes of water (car washes, laundromats, etc.).
CONCLUSION
As of now, Siler City can hardly support current levels of water use during droughts.
With expected shortages and population increases the Town of Siler City must expand their
water supply to support the town's demands. Siler City is expected to grow by 20% in the next
20 years. Without an improved water supply the Town's growth will be hampered.
Additionally, industries will look elsewhere and Siler City will suffer economically. The Rocky
River Lower Reservoir expansion will greatly benefit Siler City and its residence.
Enclosure 8
Proposed Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion
Town of Siler City, Chatham County, North Carolina
Joel Brower (Town Manager)
ALTERNATIVES
GENERAL
In 1997, the Town commissioned Hobbs, Upchurch and Associates (HUA), P.A. to
prepare a study evaluating various water supply alternatives throughout the Chatham County.
The alternatives described herein were selected for further review.
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES
The Proposed Proiect: Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion. The proposed project
consists of the construction of a new dam on the Rocky River to expand the existing 24.1 acre
Rocky River Lower Reservoir. The proposed dam and expansion of the Lower Reservoir are
located entirely in western Chatham County northeast of the Town (Enclosure 1). The expanded
Lower Reservoir would impound 162.5 acres (including the existing 24.1 acres) and would have
an additional 117.3 acres for a 100-foot-wide buffer around the reservoir (Enclosure 2). North
Carolina Statutes require that a public water supply have a buffer at least 50 feet wide that is
owned or controlled by the water supplier.
A roller compacted concrete dam would be constructed approximately 105 feet
downstream the existing Lower Reservoir dam. A single release outlet structure capable of
releasing a range of flows equivalent to the minimum release requirements will be utilized. The
drainage area above the proposed dam site, including the Upper Reservoir drainage area, is
approximately 53.8 square miles (sq. mi.). In order to increase the draft rate of the Lower
Reservoir to 6.0 MGD (an increase of 2.0 MGD), the normal water level would need to be raised
12.3 feet above the spillway crest of the existing dam. The elevation of the impounded pool
would be 540.3 feet above MSL and would impound approximately 1,102 acre-feet of water. A
summary of pertinent data appears in Table 1.
TABLE 1
SUMMARY DATA FOR THE
PROPOSED ROCKY RIVER LOWER RESERVOIR EXPANSION PROJECT

HEIGHT / ELEVATIONS:
Approximate Height of Dam Above Stream Invert (feet) 23
Normal Pool Elevation (feet, MSL) 540.3
To of Dam Elevation (feet, MSL) 560.3

LENGTH:
Conventional Concrete Gravity Dam (feet) 500
Uncontrolled Ogee Spillway Crest (feet) 20

AREAS:
Drainage Area (square miles) (includes Upper and Lower Reservoir
drainages) 53.8
Inundated at Normal Pool (acres) (including 24.1 acres of existing pool) 162.5

STORAGE:
Total at Normal Pool (million gallons) 391.3
Active Storage Pool (million gallons) 352.4
20-Year Sediment Pool million gallons) 38.9

PROPERTY ACQUISITION WITHIN PROJECT SITE:
Area Within Reservoir Acquisition Limits (acres) 279.8
Area Currently Owned by Town (acres) 32.8
Total Area to Be Acquired (acres) 247.0
Residences 0
Other Structures 0
Enclosure 8
The expanded Lower Reservoir would continue to be used in conjunction with the Upper
Reservoir. The Lower Reservoir would remain the terminal reservoir from which raw water is
pumped to the Siler City WTP. Currently, the WTP raw water intake and pumps are located
immediately above the existing Lower Reservoir dam. These structures would be demolished
and upgraded to meet the proposed increased pool level and draft rate. The new intake structures
would be designed and constructed as an integral part of the proposed new dam structure. No
changes in treatment requirements are anticipated for the proposed Lower Reservoir Expansion.
The Siler City WTP currently has the capacity to treat 4.0 MGD, but the reservoir expansion
would upgrade the capacity to 6.0 MGD.
According to property maps of the area, 21 tracts of land will be affected by the reservoir
expansion. No private residences or other structures will be taken due to the proposed expansion
of the Lower Reservoir.
No roads will be affected by the proposed project. The bridge located on Clapp Road
(SR 1312) spans the Rocky River between the Upper and Lower Reservoirs. The bridge was
designed to withstand the 50-year storm event and the bottom elevation of the lowest chord is
543.5 feet. With a 12.3 foot increase in elevation, the dam height and pool level will be at 540.3
feet. The initial pool expansion will not cause the bridge to be flooded. The Feasibility Study
for the Rocky River Lower Reservoir (HUA 1997) was approved by the North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NC DOT). NC DOT recognized that storms approximating the
50-year or greater event would overtop the bridge and roadway. Final plans of the proposed
project will include plans to flatten roadway slopes and the placement of suitable riprap to
protect the slopes that may become more frequently inundated during storms.
Clapp and Fox Lakes are located on tributaries of the Rocky River that drain into the
Lower Reservoir (Enclosure 1). The normal water surface elevations are above 550 feet. The
downstream slopes of these dams will be armored to provide additional stability from backwaters
of the proposed reservoir.
The proposed expanded reservoir would impound approximately 391.3 million gallons
and have a 20-year combined safe yield of 6.0 MGD, adjusted for sedimentation, evaporation
and a tiered minimum release. A tiered minimum release schedule as described in the "Rocky
River Instream Flow Study" (NC DWR 1993) will be utilized to provide low-flow augmentation
on the Rocky River. The current tiered release schedule requires different release rates based on
3
Enclosure 8
various percentages of usable impoundment volume. The tiered minimum release rates also vary
between winter and summer months (NCDNR 1993).
The Town's WWTP discharges up to 4.0 MGD of treated effluent into Loves Creek, a
tributary of the Rocky River approximately 3.0 miles downstream of the proposed dam. The
number of days of reduced minimum release (tier 2 or 3) will be decreased with the construction
of additional storage. Increased storage capacity along with the tiered minimum release schedule
will have less impact downstream in relation to operation of the WWTP.
The watershed above the existing Lower Reservoir consists of agricultural land, forest
and rural development. Lacys Creek and Mud Lick Creek drain into the Rocky River within the
project are. Several unnamed intermittent drainages located on the east and west side slopes
provide direct discharge of surface runoff. Several of these drainages have ponds in their upper
reaches. All named and unnamed discharges to a point 0.3 miles downstream of Lacys Creek are
classified as WS-III-CA waters (NC DENR 1999). WS-III waters are defined for best usage as
"waters protected as water supplies which are generally in low to moderately developed
watersheds. Point source discharges of treated wastewater are permitted pursuant to Rules 0.104
and .02110 of this Subchapter; local programs to control nonpoint source and stormwater
discharge of pollution and water are required, suitable for all Class C uses" (NC DENR 1999).
Class C waters are defined for best usage as "aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing,
wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture".
In the 1999 report" Basinwide Assessment Report of the Cape Fear River Basin" (NC
DENR 1999) waters below the Lower Reservoir (at US Highway 64) received a "water quality"
index of Good-Fair in comparison with other North Carolina streams and rivers. This rating is
based on the extent to which chemical and physical pollutants are present. There are no major
discharges of industrial wastewater upstream of the reservoirs. The same report assigned
portions of many North Carolina streams a "biologic" rating based on the numbers and kinds of
organisms found in the streams. No streams above the Lower Reservoir dam were included in
these biologic surveys. The water impounded by the expanded Lower Reservoir is expected to
be of Good-Fair quality as a water supply. The proposed expansion of the Lower Reservoir
should not create a problem with treated water meeting requirements of the Safe Water Drinking
Act.
The area around the proposed reservoir is not expected to develop at a significantly
increased rate as a result of the proposed project. Increased development has not occurred
4
Enclosure 8
around the existing reservoirs and is not anticipated for the proposed expanded Lower Reservoir.
The water quality in the proposed reservoir will be protected by enforcement of watershed
protection measures as adopted by the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
(NC DEM) and by maintenance of a 100-foot buffer around the reservoir (Enclosure 2).
Wetlands were delineated between September 1999 and May 2000 using the USACOE
Wetlands Delineation Manual (USACOE 1987). Field delineations determined the presence of
43.0 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands and 12,990 linear feet of perennial stream
channel, 1,926 linear feet of intermittent stream channel and 4,208 linear feet of ephemeral steam
channel. Of 43.0 acres of jurisdictional waters delineated, 24.1 acres are located in the existing
Lower Reservoir pool.
The total estimated cost of construction for the expansion of the Lower Reservoir is
approximately $6.87 million. Estimated construction costs are presented in Table 2. This
includes the costs of land acquisition, engineering, survey, design, environmental assessments,
dam construction, mitigation costs, relocation of existing intake structure, construction
management and the WTP upgrade.
Alternative 2: Jordan Lake. This alternative actually consists of 3 different options for the
Town, all involving obtaining water supply from Jordan Lake. In order to fully evaluate these
options, the mechanism for obtaining water from Jordan Lake must be discussed.
Jordan Lake is a large multi-purpose lake located in eastern Chatham County. The
impoundment was constructed by the USACOE beginning in 1967. Filling of the lake was
completed in 1982. The State of North Carolina control of the entire water supply storage
capacity in Jordan Lake. Under specific conditions and procedures, the State can allocate this
storage to units of local government in need of water supplies. Allocations made by the State fall
into 2 categories, Level I and Level H. Level I allocations are those made for units of
government needing additional supplies of water based on 20-year demand projections and
planning to utilize their allocation within 5 years. Level II allocations are made to units of
government needing additional supplies of water based on longer term planning, such as 30-year
demand projections. These allocations are not expected to be utilized for a number of years.
Initial allocations for water supply capacity from Jordan Lake were made in 1988. These
first allocations used approximately 42 percent of the available water storage capacity in the
lake. Some of these initial allocations have since been released by various units of government
5
'o c
42 V O O O O O p O p O
O O O O O p
O O p O
C
V1 p
O p
O O p
O W) QM1
6.
? ? N
69 L
QS N 69 00
69 00
?
?' N 69 69 6
9
•
o

Q
° ° °
o °
° °
°
0
c? o
o o
0 O
0 0
0 O
° o
o o
° o
o o
0

v C)
N 0
Wn o
O p
?O o
? o
Ln O

00

40
C

M

69
It
69
t-
69

b9
"t
us

69 1

0

n 6q
b
9
? O C) O O O O O
+
-+
° p o 0 p 0 0 0 °

0
a
Q C>
C> C)
C)

O

O

N
A U 69 669 669 ? s 00
Os 69

U °o O
O o
° o o
O O
° O
o °O
°
? ;° °O o
o o
0 0 °o 0 0 o
0 o v°

4-o
0

.

6
00

69 00

69

00
W)

N
O 6
9
69
69
6
9
G9
69
US,
i.+
rA
w
U °
C)
o °
O
0
0
CD
o
O°
Ei a a °^ o o °
° o O O o
o
o, ° o o 0 0 °o o
U O 69 rs 69 69 69
0
o ° o 0 0 'o
O O O O O NO ° O M
O
W O
O\ 00 00
'dam O
Ln
O
? 1?
69
6
69
69 It
69
r s

O
6
9 Efl 69 b4
?
•O ° O ° O O O O
+
y? O O O O O O O
O ° O O ° O
M N r- tn \O 00
W 669 604 69 69 fig

?

'
0
y. n
U S. ?
= ' ' :,. w
o
y p; v ¢ o Q' o °? by N o
CL
CL 4
• a' _ on +
o 3 o `? d `? w W
z ?? x
x

Enclosure 8
so that they could be reallocated by the State. With the completion of the third round of
allocations in October 2001, 61 percent of the lake's storage capacity is now allocated, leaving
approximately 39 percent of the storage unallocated. State rules limit the amount of water that
can be allocated for use outside of the Haw River watershed. This limit is 50 percent of the
supply pool. Based on current allocations, approximately 40 percent of the 61 percent currently
allocated storage will eventually be used outside of Jordan Lake's watershed area.
As stated, Jordan Lake was constructed by the USACOE utilizing federal funds. Storage
for water supplies was included in the project at the request of the State with the understanding
that the users of this storage would repay the costs associated with it. As such, units of
government receiving allocations in Jordan Lake are required to make annual payments to the
State. The amount of these payments covers capital, operating and administrative costs and are
based upon the level and amount of allocation. At this time, payments are amitorized beginning
with the date of allocation and ending in the year 2012, the current date set in the governing
statute for repayment to be completed.
In order for a unit of government to obtain an allocation, it must submit an application to
the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources (NC DENR) - North Carolina Division of
Water Qualtiy (NC DWR). As round 3 allocation recommendations were just completed, new or
increased allocation requests may not be considered for some time.
Chatham County submitted an application to NC DWR for round 3 allocations. The
Town and the County have worked jointly to identify future water needs for both the Town and
the southwest portion of the County, currently supplied by the Town's water system. The Town
has expressed its willingness to continue to work with the County on this county-wide project,
which targets additional supplies of water from Jordan Lake. In the County's recent application
to NC DWR, it requested an increase of 4.5 MGD to its existing allocation for a total of 10.5
MGD. The County based this request on the Town proceeding with the expansion of the Lower
Reservoir and with no increase in the amount of water (0.30 MGD) contractually provided to the
County from the Town. Based on the report outlining the round 3 allocation recommendations,
the County's requested increase has not been supported by NC DWR.
With this background information in mind, the following subsections provide discussions
of the 3 most probable Jordan Lake options currently available to the Town.
7
Enclosure 8
Jordan Lake Option A: New Jordan Lake 6.5 MGD Intake. As previously stated, the Town has
been working with Chatham County through the most recent allocation process. The requested
increase of 4.5 MGD by Chatham County assumed that the Town would be able to expand the
Lower Reservoir, thereby increasing the Town's water supply capacity by 2.0 MGD, and that
there would be no increase in the amount of water being supplied by the town to the southwest
portion of the County. Given these factors, the first option for use of Jordan Lake would first
require either the Town or Chatham County to receive an allocation of 6.5 MGD. In this case, a
new raw water intake structure would be constructed on the western side of Jordan Lake with a
raw water transmission line and a pump station to convey 2.0 MGD of this raw water from
Jordan Lake to the Town's WTP. This alternative would also require an upgrade of the Siler
City WTP to handle the 2.0 MGD increased capacity. The County's 4.5 MGD portion of this
allocation would be pumped to their existing WTP and utilized as outlined in their allocation
application; therefore, that portion of this option would have no bearing on the costs that would
be incurred by the Town.
Because this option would provide benefits to both the Town and Chatham County, it is
assumed for the purposes of this document that the costs associated with the construction of the
intake would be a collaborative investment. The raw water line, associated equipment and
upgrade to the Town's WTP would be funded solely by the Town as it would be the sole
beneficiary of the additional 2.0 MGD. Annual payments to the State associated with the
allocations could also be arranged such that Chatham County and the Town would pay a
proportionate share based on the 6.5 MGD allocation. Estimated costs associated with the
allocation for this option were calculated based on discussions with Mr. Sydney Miller of NC
DWR as well as on Chatham County's current annual payment of approximately $16,000.00 for
their 4.0 MGD Level I allocation and the approximate $4,000.00 annual payment for the 2.0
MGD Level 11 allocation.
As stated, this option would require construction of a new water supply intake on the
western shore of Jordan Lake adjacent to US Highway 64. A pump station would be located
adjacent to the intake. A 16-inch diameter raw water transmission line would traverse
approximately 25 miles to the Town's WTP. The transmission line would run west along US
Highway 64, passing north of Pittsboro to the intersection of US Highway 421, then turn north
along US Highway 421. The line would terminate at the existing Town WTP located near US
Highway 421 northeast of Siler City.
8
Enclosure 8
New easements would be required along the entire project route. Existing road right-of
ways (ROW) would not be used for the transmission line paralleling US Highway 64 and US
Highway 421. These are controlled access highways and use of the ROW is not permitted.
Approximately 3 acres involving 1 property would need to be aquired for a new Jordan Lake
intake and pump station.
The estimated cost of this alternative is approximately $10.6 million. Estimated
construction costs are presented in Table 2. This includes the cost of land acquisition/easements,
engineering and design, water intake structure, raw water transmission line and a booster pump
station. The intake structure, pump station, land acquisition/easement and allocations costs are
figured as proportionate to the amount of the allocation used by each entity.
Environmental impacts of the pipeline and pump station construction were not evaluated
in depth, but would likely be significant based on the long length of pipeline ROW required. A
30-foot wide cleared ROW would be required along the corridor of the water transmission line.
Existing forestlands along these corridors would be cleared and converted to herbaceous
vegetation. According to Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) soil survey maps, 6.4
acres of hydric soils are located within the project corridor. The acreage of mapped hydric soils
is an imperfect indicator of jurisdictional wetlands, but these data are sufficient to show potential
wetland impacts. Using USGS topographic maps and soil survey maps, perennial stream and
intermittent stream channel impacts were estimated be 390 linear feet and 660 linear feet,
respectively.
In addition, the proposed use of this water would involve a 2.0 MGD interbasin transfer
from the Haw River watershed to the Deep River watershed. The transfer of this amount of
water would require an interbasin transfer permit from NC DWR. It would also impact the
percent of allocations allowed by law for use outside the Haw River watershed. The full scope
of the environmental impact of this transfer was not evaluated and would have to be considered.
Jordan Lake Option A would adequately address the Town's goal of 2.0 MGD and would
satisfy the purpose and need.
Jordan Lake Option B: Increase Chatham County's Allocation to 12.5 MGD. This option
would make use of the current intake structure on Jordan Lake, which Chatham County shares
with the Towns of Cary and Apex. Siler City would then participate with Chatham County in
applying for an increase of 6.5 MGD to the County's current allocation. This increase is based
9
Enclosure 8
on the County's most recent allocation application, which projected the need for an additional
4.5 MGD, and on the Town utilizing water from Jordan Lake for the additional 2.0 MGD
capacity rather than expanding the Lower Reservoir. The minimum components associated with
this option would consist of Chatham County expanding its existing WTP to treat the a total of at
least 12.5 MGD and the construction of a finished water line and associated pump/booster
chlorination stations to carry 2.0 MGD from the County' plant to Siler City.
The current shared intake structure and associated piping can carry a maximum of 50
MGD. In round 3, the Jordan Lake allocation for the Towns of Cary and Apex was increased to
32 MGD, bringing the current total allocation through this intake structure to 38 MGD. The
Towns of Cary and Apex actually requested a total allocation of 44 MGD. Although the full
increase was not recommend by NC DWR, the basis for this request came from water demand
projections and illustrates that these Towns, like Chatham County, have the need for additional
supply capacity from Jordan Lake. The requested 44 MGD from Cary and Apex, combined with
Chatham County's current allocation of 6.0 MGD, places the intake structure and associated
piping at maximum capacity. Given this, it is likely that the Towns of Cary and Apex would
look to Chatham County to participate in an upgrade to this structure should the County's
allocation be increased to at least 12.5 MGD. A proportionate cost to Siler City for the intake
upgrade must also be considered for this Jordan Lake option. For the purposes of comparing
costs of the alternatives, it would be assumed that Pittsboro would participate in this project as
well as Siler City and Chatham County. This is reasonable because supplying water to Pittsboro
and Siler City is a part of the County's future plans for providing water throughout Chatham
County.
The finished water main would follow basically the same course as outlined for Jordan
Lake Option A, which would be constructed along US Highway 64, passing north of Pittsboro to
the intersection of US Highway 421, then turn north along US Highway 421, where it would be
connected to the Town's existing distribution system. Pump stations with booster chlorination
would be needed along this route to ensure the quality of the finished water before it entered the
Town's water system. A water storage tank would also be needed adjacent to the Town's
interconnection.
Because the finished water main would follow basically the same route as discussed for
Option A, new easements would also be required along the entire route for this project. The
same constraints concerning utilization of 'existing road ROWS would also remain with this
10
Enclosure 8
option. In addition, approximately 3 acres involving 2 properties will need to be acquired for a
pump station and water storage tank.
The estimated cost of Jordan Lake Option B is approximately $7.7 million. Estimated
construction costs are presented in Table 2. This includes the cost of land acquisition/easements,
engineering and design, upgrades to the existing water intake structure, upgrade to Chatham
County's WTP, the finished water transmission line (portion from Pittsboro to Siler City), a
booster pump/chlorination station, Jordan Lake allocation costs, and bulk water purchase from
Chatham County. The intake structure, WTP upgrade, and allocations costs was calculated as
being proportionate to the amount of the allocation used by each entity. The estimated allocation
costs were calculated based on the same rationale outlined for Option A
Environmental impacts of this option would be similar to those outlined for Option A, but
would also have to take into consideration the secondary and cumulative effects from growth that
would likely be associated with approximately 24 miles of potable water line being extended
across the County.
This second option would also involve a 2.0 MGD interbasin transfer from the Haw
River Basin to the Deep River Basin. As previously stated, such transfers must be permitted by
NC DWR and would also impact the percent of allocations allowed by law for use outside the
Haw River watershed. The environmental impacts of this transfer were not evaluated and would
have to be considered if this option was pursued.
Jordan Lake Option B would adequately address the 20-year water need of the Town.
Jordan Lake Option C. Jordan Lake Allocation Captured at Sanford Intake. This option
would consist of the Town obtaining an allocation of at least 2.0 MGD from Jordan Lake,
allowing that capacity to be released downstream of Jordan Lake and then captured at the
Sanford intake on Cape Fear River. The water would then be treated at the Sanford WTP and
pumped to the Town's water system. Jordan Lake Option C would involve, at a minimum, a
finished water distribution main, a pump station and a water storage tank.
The project would require installation of approximately 15 miles of 16-inch diameter
finished water distribution main. An interconnection with the City of Sanford would begin on
US Highway 421 at the Lee County line and parallel US Highway 421 northwest to Siler City.
The line would terminate south of the Town at an interconnection located near the intersection of
11
Enclosure 8
SR 1124 and SR 2208. A pump station would be located adjacent to the City of Sanford
interconnection. A water storage tank would be located adjacent to the Town's interconnection.
Easements would be necessary for the portion of the distribution main paralleling US
Highway 421. This is a controlled access highway and use of the ROW is not permitted. A 30-
foot wide cleared ROW would be required along the corridor of the water transmission line.
Existing forestlands along these corridors would be cleared and converted to herbaceous
vegetation. Approximately 3 acres involving 2 properties will need to be acquired for the pump
station and water storage tank.
According to the City of Sanford's Water Supply Plan, their current raw water pump
station has a capacity of 9.0 MGD and the WTP has a permitted capacity of 12 MGD. Based on
their demand projections and allocation application, the raw water pump station and the WTP
will need to be upgraded within this 20-year planning period in order to meet their needs alone.
Any capacity allocated to the Town would most likely require the Town to participate financially
in these upgrades either directly or through capacity impact fees. Sanford does currently have
impact fees in place. For this reason, estimated impact fees were used in the cost estimates for
this option rather than costs for participation in necessary upgrades.
The estimated cost of Jordan Lake Option C is approximately $8.34 million. These costs
are presented in Table 2. This includes the cost of easements, engineering and design, finished
water distribution main, a pump station and a water storage tank. The Jordan Lake allocation,
bulk water and WTP and upgrade/impact fee costs would also be considerable expenses
associated with the total cost of this option.
Environmental impacts of the finished water distribution main, pump station and the
water storage tank were not fully evaluated, but would include the potential for secondary and
cumulative impacts related to growth associated with the extension of approximately 15 miles of
potable water line. Also, a 30-foot wide cleared transmission line ROW corridorwould be
required. Existing forestlands along this corridor would be cleared and converted to herbaceous
vegetation. According to USGS soil survey maps, 8.2 acres of hydric soils are located within the
project corridor. The acreage of mapped hydric soils is an imperfect indicator of jurisdictional
wetlands, but these data are sufficient to show potential wetland impacts. Using NRCS
topographic maps and soil survey maps, perennial stream and intermittent stream channel
impacts were estimated to be approximately 240 linear feet and 90 linear feet, respectively.
12
Enclosure 8
With this option, there is a potential interbasin transfer issue from the Cape Fear Sub-
basin to the Deep River Sub-basin. This issue would need to be explored further if this option
were to be implemented. The fact that the Town's wastewater discharge is upstream of
Sanford's water supply intake may eliminate or reduce the amount of the interbasin transfer.
Whether or not an interbasin transfer exists with this option, it would impact the percent of
allocations from Jordan Lake allowed by law for use outside the Haw River watershed.
Jordan Lake Option C would adequately address the Town's goal of 2.0 MGD and would
satisfy the purpose and need.
Alternative 3: Deep River/Carbonton. This alternative would require the installation of a new
raw water intake on the Deep River near the existing Carbonton Dam, renovation/repairs of the
existing dam, a raw water transmission line and a booster pump station. This alternative would
also require an upgrade of the Town;s WTP to handle the 2.0 MGD increased capacity and
cooperation with Carolina Power and Light (CP&L), the current owner of the existing dam and
power generating facility.
The project would require a new raw water intake located upstream of the existing
Carbonton Dam on Deep River. A pump station would be located adjacent to the new intake. A
16-inch diameter raw water transmission line would traverse approximately 21 miles to the
Town's WTP. The transmission line would run from the existing Carbonton Dam north along
SR 2306 to Goldston, then northwest paralleling US Highway 421. The line would terminate at
the existing Town WTP located adjacent to US Highway 421 north of Siler City.
Easements would be required along the portion of the project paralleling US Highway
421. This is a controlled access highway and use of the ROW is not permitted. Existing cleared
road ROWS would be used along SR 2306 between the Carbonton Dam and Goldston.
Approximately 4 acres involving 2 properties would need to be acquired for a new intake and
pump station.
Estimated cost of this alternative is approximately $9.25 million. Estimated construction
costs are presented in Table 2. This includes the cost of land acquisition/ easements, engineering
and design, the water intake structure, raw water transmission line and a pump station. This
alternative would also require an upgrade of the Town's WTP to handle the 2.0 MGD increased
capacity. Costs include only renovation and/or repairs to the existing dam. A structural
evaluation of the existing dam has not been conducted. Increased costs would incurred if
13
Enclosure 8
replacement of the dam was necessary. No discussions or agreements between CP&L and the
Town have been initiated.
Environmental impacts of the new Deep River intake, transmission lines and pump
station were not fully evaluated. A 30-foot wide cleared transmission line ROW corridor would
be required. Existing forestlands along these corridors would be cleared and converted to
herbaceous vegetation. According to NRCS soil survey maps, 22.5 acres of hydric soils are
located within the project corridors. The acreage of mapped hydric soils is an imperfect
indicator of jurisdictional wetlands, but these data are sufficient to show potential wetland
impacts. Using USGS topographic maps and soil survey maps, perennial stream and intermittent
stream channel impacts were estimated to be approximately 240 linear feet and 120 linear feet,
respectively.
The Deep River/Carbonton alternative would satisfy the projected water needs of the
Town through the 20-year planning period.
Alternative 4: Goldston - Gulf Interconnection. The Town is not connected to the water
distribution system of any other municipality. Interconnection or purchase of water from
Goldston - Gulf would involve an upgrade of the existing Goldston - Gulf raw water intake on
the Deep River, an upgrade of the existing Goldston - Gulf WTP, construction of finished water
distribution lines, a pump station and a water storage tank.
An interconnection with Goldston-Gulf would involve high costs for transmission and
facility upgrades and would require an upgrade of the Goldston - Gulf raw water intake located
on the Deep River near Gulf. The existing Goldston - Gulf WTP capacity is 0.3 MGD and
would require a major upgrade due to the additional raw water treatment needed. . A new pump
station would be located adjacent the intake A 16-inch diameter finished water distribution line
would parallel US Highway 421 for approximately 13 miles and would terminate at an
interconnection south of Siler City. A water storage tank would also be located at this junction.
The Goldston-Gulf Interconnection would provide service to an expanded area along the
route of the new distribution line. Easements would be needed for the portion of the distribution
line paralleling US Highway 421. This is a controlled access highway and use of the ROW is
not permitted. Approximately 2 acres involving 1 property will need to be acquired for a new
intake, pump station and water storage tank.
14
Enclosure 8
The estimated cost of this alternative is approximately $8.8 million. Estimated
construction costs are presented in Table 2. This includes the cost of easements, engineering and
design, an upgrade of the existing water intake structure, an upgrade of the existing Goldston -
Gulf WTP, finished water distribution lines, a pump station and a water storage tank. Initial
discussions of an agreement between Goldston - Gulf and the Town have not taken place to date.
Environmental impacts of this alternative were not fully evaluated, but would include
secondary and cumulative impacts related to the growth associated with the extension of
approximately 13 miles of potable water line. A 30-foot wide cleared transmission line ROW
corridor would be required. Existing forestlands along these corridors would be cleared and
converted to herbaceous vegetation. According to NRCS soil survey maps, 8.8 acres of hydric
soils are located within the project corridor. The acreage of mapped hydric soils is an imperfect
indicator of jurisdictional wetlands, but these data are sufficient to show potential wetland
impacts. Using USGS topographic maps and soil survey maps, perennial stream and intermittent
stream channel impacts were estimated to be approximately 240 linear feet and 120 linear feet,
respectively.
The Goldston - Gulf Interconnection alternative would satisfy the purpose and need of
the Town.
Alternative 5: City of Sanford Interconnection. This alternative would include an
interconnection with the City of Sanford with an agreement to purchase 2.0 MGD of finished
water. Interconnection and purchase of water from the City of Sanford would involve a finished
water distribution main, a pump station, and a water storage tank similar to the project outlined
for Jordan Lake Option C.
The project would require installation of approximately 15 miles of 16-inch diameter
finished water distribution main along the same route as outlined for Jordan Lake Option C. As
with Option C, this project would also include a pump station to be located adjacent to the City
of Sanford interconnection and a water storage tank to be located adjacent to the Town's
interconnection.
Easements would be necessary for the portion of the distribution main paralleling US
Highway 421. This is a controlled access highway and use of the ROW is not permitted. A 30-
foot wide cleared transmission line ROW corridor would be required. Existing forestlands along
15
Enclosure 8
this corridor would be cleared and converted to herbaceous vegetation. Approximately 3.0 acres
involving 2 properties will need to be acquired for the pump station and water storage tank.
The issues that exist with this alternative are the same as with Jordan Lake Option C and
concern the capacities of Sanford's raw water pump station and WTP. As previously discussed,
the Town would need to contribute to these upgrades directly or through capacity impact fees
assessed by Sanford. Capacity impact fees were estimated and used in the costs for this
alternative.
The estimated cost of this alternative is approximately $7.93 million. Estimated
construction costs are presented in Table 2. This includes the cost of easements, engineering and
design, the finished water distribution main, a pump station and a water storage tank. Bulk water
purchase and capacity impact fees/participation in upgrades are large expenses associated with
this alternative. No negotiations or agreements have been initiated with the City of Sanford.
Environmental impacts of this alternative would be similar to those outlined for Jordan
Lake Option C and would also include secondary and cumulative impacts related to growth
spurred by the extension of approximately 15 miles of potable water line.
This alternative has a potential interbasin transfer issue from the Cape Fear sub-basin to
the Deep River Sub-basin; however, the Town's 4.0 MGD wastewater discharge upstream of
Sanford's water intake may negate the transfer concerns. This issue would need to be explored
further if this option were to be chosen.
The Sanford Interconnection would adequately address the Town's need of providing an
additional 2.0 MGD to meet its 20-year demand projections.
Alternative 6 - No Action. This alternative considers using the existing sources of water supply
to serve the projected water needs, requiring no action by the Town. No additional groundwater
or surface water sources would be developed to augment existing supply and withdrawal rates
from existing supply would be maximized.
This alternative would require the Town to implement aggressive conservation measures.
Siler City recognizes the importance of a strong conservation program and has outlined a number
of initiatives that it will be pursuing even with the implementation of the Lower Reservoir
expansion. These initiatives include a rate structure that promotes conservation of water and
modifications to the existing water shortage ordinance to include day-to-day water conservation
measures. The Town is also considering increasing requirements on its large water users in order
16
Enclosure 8
to ensure that they practice water conservation daily within their respective facilities. The
installation of a water reuse line is also being seriously evaluated. If such a line is installed, the
Town would require its use for irrigation purposes throughout its jurisdictional area.
To the Town, these steps represent a critical part of any alternative chosen to meet future
water demands, as well as to provide for protection of this valuable resource; however, these
measures alone without any other action will not be adequate. There are several reasons why
conservation alone would not allow the Town to meet its future water needs.
First, the Town must be cognizant that their industrial customer base accounts for the
livelihoods of most of its residents. Elimination of these large water users would address the
Town's water needs, however such action would devastate the Town's economy. The Town
agrees that these industries must be good environmental citizens and will work to ensure that
they are. On the other hand, the Town also recognizes that many of industries, such as the
poultry processing facilities, are required to utilize minimum volumes of potable water in order
to meet USDA regulations. Therefore, while the Town is not recruiting any additional large
water users, it must include the existing industrial customer base when planning for future water
demands.
Second, the majority of water conservation programs are aimed at residential
conservation. This is understandable because most municipalities have larger residential
demands and conservation measures targeted at this customer base provide the most immediate
impact on water use. This is not to say that residential conservation would not have an impact in
Siler City, it simply would not be as great as elsewhere and would not eliminate the need for
additional water supply to meet future demands. The Town does plan to implement conservation
programs aimed at its residents as well as its commercial and industrial facilities.
Third, the installation of a water reuse line would have advantages with regard to the
reducing the amount of potable water used for irrigation. Reclaimed water could be used in
some industrial processes also. The Town, however, does not have a significant of demand
associated with irrigation systems. In addition, its largest industrial users, the poultry processing
facilities, would not be allowed to utilize reclaimed water in most of their processes. Although
water reuse would not totally alleviate the need for additional water supply capacity, the Town is
pursuing the construction of such a line, particularly for use in the Chatham County Industrial
Park.
17
Enclosure 8
Given these issues, the no action alternative would not satisfy the Town's purpose and
need, although it would eliminate all environmental impacts. Under this alternative, drawdowns
of several feet in the existing reservoir would become frequent and would result in a water
supply deficit for the Town well before the end of the 20-year planning period. Therefore, this
alternative is unacceptable and is not considered for further evaluation; however, the Town is
committed to the implementation of programs aimed at water conservation regardless of the
alternative implemented.
Alternatives considered, but not evaluated. Five other options were considered, but were
eliminated from detailed evaluation due to serious deficiencies that made them unacceptable.
These options included Pittsboro Interconnection, Ramseur Interconnection, Groundwater
Supply, Southern Rocky River Reservoir and West Chatham Regional System.
The Pittsboro Interconnection option is not a feasible solution because the Town of
Pittsboro is currently near capacity with respect to its 20-year water needs and cannot supply the
2.0 million gallons per day (MGD) needed by the Town of Siler City. This alternative would
also require an interbasin transfer of 2.0 MGD.
The Town of Ramseur does not have the 2.0 MGD excess capacity to provide to the
Town of Siler City. To interconnect with Ramseur and meet the required capacity, construction
of an expanded raw water intake, WTP upgrade and transmission line would be needed. This
alternative would also require an interbasin transfer of 2.0 MGD.
Previous water supply studies (USGS 1974) confirm that the supply of groundwater
available in Chatham County is insufficient for use as a public water supply. Geological
conditions across most of the county are unfavorable for the development of groundwater
supplies. Historical data also indicate that well yields countywide are decreasing.
In order to take advantage of additional tributaries and an expanded drainage basin, the
construction of a new dam south of the Rocky River Lower Reservoir was considered. Wetlands
impacts and the number of properties affected were significant with this option. Additionally,
this option would directly impact Cape Fear shiner (Notropis mekistocholas) critical habitat
located in the Rocky River below NC Highway 902.
A West Chatham Regional System would require installation of a new intake on the Deep
River near Carbonton and construction of a regional WTP and distribution system. This option
18
Enclosure 8
deserves merit for the overall potential and should be considered as an integral part of the Town
and Chatham County's planning for needs beyond the immediate 20-year planning period.
EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
Introduction. The proposed project and 7 primary alternatives were evaluated and compared.
The factors in this analysis included environmental impacts, project costs and effectiveness in
meeting purpose and need. Potential impacts vary slightly in several aspects and often are not
directly comparable due to the differences in project designs. The preferred alternative is the
only alternative that involves impacts due to the expansion of a reservoir. The remaining
alternatives are similar in that they involve transmission or distribution of raw or finished water.
Environmental Impacts. Due to differences in project designs, environmental impacts differ
slightly for the alternatives. The impacts of the preferred alternative and other alternatives are
presented in Table 3. The impacts are evaluated, by category, for all pertinent aspects of the
man-made and natural environments as well as secondary and cumulative impacts.
All alternatives represent large projects and would result in the acquisition of land and/or
the purchase of easements. Total lands to be acquired would be largest for the Rocky River
Lower Reservoir Expansion (247.0 acres/21 properties). Land acquisitions for all other
alternatives would be minimal and limited to sites for pump stations, water storage tanks and
intake structures. The acreages and numbers of potentially affected properties listed are
approximate. Project land requirements would be the smallest for the Goldston - Gulf
Interconnection (2 acres/l property), followed in ascending order by Jordan Lake Option A (3
acres/1 property), Jordan Lake Options B and C and the City of Sanford Interconnection (3
acres/2 properties) and the Deep River/Carbonton Alternative (4 acres/2 properties). Purchase
of easements would be required along project routes for the Goldston - Gulf Interconnection
(114 easements), Jordan Lake Option C and the City of Sanford Interconnection (134
easements), Jordan Lake Options A and B (179 easements) and the Deep River/Carbonton (197
easements) alternatives. Some of the adverse impacts of these alternatives are reflections of
project size, such that alternatives with larger land requirements produce more significant
adverse effects. In this respect, the Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion would change
current land use over a larger area and would be more destructive to natural vegetative
19
00
U
W
C
b
cu C13
C U O y C y O Y •^? .?
O
O U U
O C f] .. N U i
f .
?••• U R' .b .C O. •? l N ro O
? O O O
rr cu, N
M
U E .. C'o
ti z Z. r7.
O W (3. ?• i
. ro O C
N° O y Ot:? 7 0.b
F
cm
? x ??
d a
d w 3
cli o

co
o i W
cts
, °
o
° V Y c
M
°
(7 u O
a a i
' v, U U U E
o ?..
O ~ O2 s- O
.o U v
E co
o C '? '3 ° o o a a•- ro' a d o o O o
'9 L O N S1 N sU.. W d O F N ??.
O C Z. z r7-.
a? 0.
E C) 00 C O O
O

a d w
3
C is
U p 1-
' ^-, ti-i > C's
id p
C v
i
cd Y _ c o 3 ° o
°
> a
i ?q o ca ° a) U N
y U o ° 0 •
"7 cd N o 0 0 0
y C
C
?i y N D\ O D\ O y O w W a cUd
?i Qn N •+•+ U N G. yU,i

l
A
x b q
¢ `" a
¢ w 3
'o
L
a
en O V O v V

R ca ti' O M N?°

s u 0 rn ti C { OF.. s., p 0

L w+
C Q T ?.

LL ?-. U
cdU a+ r-+

n' O ° U ? «3

m 0. a+ > N .

CL 0 0 0
M 0 O ch N
° O O O O z z z
8b .-. O O O U O. bq
14 E

F
d N
M
E x ° o cl Q 0 v? c
a °
¢
O M a?° O ° ¢ w

o ^, ° > u

L 1-

> w _a
u
cd
N
w O
5 O O G.'a M O O O
..
}
N E
0
C
N O O
,2
?c
O N

=3 ro

x Q'-' ?°a ¢ w 3
H

o o
`
s

° =a
?
-
u
cd 0
1
)
z w o
p bj) u.
0-0 .
o; o
8 o .y
O p o Gi C
°
°' F ca cy ^-
Q
F Eco

=>
a
o
?"
o
H v o w G w
u v °
a
b o o Q cn
p, W ; ti
O W o v
d a 2° O °
'7 w °? A cd Q. W CL?

z o a? z ti U a? a?

O o
"" ro
z . a
0
Oww d Hw v v ww w ?W3 3 ?Hxx ?
a a w rA F?
O
N
w
O
Pi
W
p
O .T+
U O O O O
G 'V T

V
O
?"'
U ?
U? ? w N >N>
1•.
7 V]
U
N
C
p U 47
^y w cn 4. G w Q
T N 0
? b > ? 0. m
? 'b `"+
ai
W
N¢ ¢ _ O
O
G p U a+
p 0
U
O O
G
o oz z G
? o.4 o O
zz z

° c z
U c
c7
cd
U 'b
•? N

4. p
t.+ ?
K
C
7 U U N
O

O ti
U
CJ u _
U
?w .
m i., 0 N,
?b >
. rob O

i 67
O C
W
° v? Q Q _
O
G O
C
N
U
b0 0

U

O O O
Yv, v z z
o :.°' G C
v +- o •° o a ``" z z z
b o
0 y o .
U" p E 9 bq ?- ,?..
In ° fn
F•M 4
.'
O
z

°

y O
Yp' U
? G
UCL N° U
?>. _
U
a? w '? 'v
w at ?

i
U
^vO Q w
0
ccz v° G
bA
v
O O O
zz z
d b ?b o
y U ?
a3
a s A j ? ? c° z
(
p
O Vi
Y

V
?+
M ?
t O
o
?
F iUt-•? ? U N U ? v, ?
y
F Vi N N cd U ¢.
P W
°? cd

A ccl p
a a> w
o U
y w O
> > M, CG O 3
o G
w
O
ll ? d d
G z z
¢•" 0 0
p r c
d
w as
> o p cv
° C o
Z Z
O Q 9 ° c
? bu r.

U o Q

L p U G O G v? cd W
O p a> a? c? c"" ?
w
° •? G
o
a?
? O
a y d
a
D •
"o ° ? k c
W
a .o o
o° o t ?' _ o

v cGV ,? U > ' N E
a ?
?
?? z az

W

G `?
y ?! ?y a a? `"
x tp
o ? o a O N
Y 5 w 3 c
U z
t

G o
Al.
' ti d . ?
W c v O W G G v,
ob
x¢°?
?
c a H.°° i
oU
¢d
W z O
. ??? d v
O
W v? U Z U F
N
OD
0
U
A
w
b ?
G
O y y cC B O O i?
"+
'+ N N O?
o,
??
??Q >V U rU, U N WO
w>3
? C v v Y
a`i Kew w Q? wwC7 ? ? O
w
' ?, ?, o ?
`i' c
? ?bzz z zz° 00
u0
?n in.
R p
R
zz

F- o
o
U
°O

o
o C U U °?
?
?
C
0
? Q Q
w
?
? C
?' ?
w a?
4.w i a
i a
i
a a
i
zz U " 0°'0
o ?0 iao ?bzz zz°
z 0 0
n o 0
0 0
? o ?,
? a ? a ?
zz
Hv
F? o OJ °
o?
U ?

C 0
?
y ? U U
O cGd ? O

? ? O ? O
>
+:+ O
J? yw
y C
O p ...
V U Cc .?
>V U
in YO
C C G O N N N N N Q •p +?"• O dq
> 0
E zz cl 0
?
d a ,? 0 0
o 0zz o0
o
z zz° W
o
a
N '
0.
N U
'
p 0. 0 ai C 7 "i c?
a
?a A H ?
o
fA cj
O
U co
n
a
a

A C ° v v w
°?
w
G w
w
ww
" a ? o O
c a
i ai
a
i
o o a
a
i
i ai
O z z o 00 ° u ° U o
r-
zz
z zz
a
a 0
•?
?°?d an 00 0V ??
zz N Hb ?? o0

w
o w o
W o

o 0 Cd

2 A
`O U
d
N
~
k
> W c0 cd N
a? Q w? id N
N C0 . C
Ud
•?" O U
ww ? ,1 O?
N ?? U °

O

>' a O

cd •,.. O
C C
•?'

G
T
P O bA

c bA

R ? 00
p

00 2
u
? ?
" U5 q
E ?.
.
c U
.5
O
C4
9 o o
z z V
°
H °
H o a
C F

c
o .b
c,
? ? o rn

b

41
.U
T:
.
a
O
° G
O

G

O
w W
' a H a"¢ O' Un
w <
wv>> ?w ww dC7 v1 x '-' ?

u
d
C
i
N
N
OD
O
q
W
7
w J w w
~
O c a0i a0
i °-'
t °

° :? cd ro cCU cov
c CIJ ,
W ,? ro
w. G w a°a~www

am
j

6
C)
°
4.

O U q p

b
y
„ NG?
A _W W
? O O vi ? in ? vi in m ?
z zzzzz

as O
+
' 'b a
O U U U U U U

O
O C
b
N vi
CCud N "0
Q U cUG
N
O .C
in N?
"?
? ? C YC. Y!'y G
U U U U
m
a

a, moo
O
40. c U
U t
i
4. w
_www?:
.
O j oo
N V) w0 vOi ?
qq
bA
? b4
C U C W _
r z a a? z z z z z z
N
N

O 3 U .,, U 1 WN
((..
W?
W ? W W

O
d
? Z O
? N N d N N N

V
?
N U
N
O
? U
N
N N "'
"? C
? ? CFC ? cd

Q _ O
4. 7-.
4. U U U U U U
N N
N ° O N b4 bq bq bA by
40
¢
a?
O
ti fn y ti
0 Z a? z zzzzz
c A
L

d U ?w ai
cu

.0 ' ++ 0? U C

T
N
° °i O

w
o
L
7-
O
N
°
0
w
w w
p
b C4 ?
? 0 b y
? Y Y
U U U U U
U

G O
O y
"U
v,
of O S5,
,,..,,
W 1-0 ? 4oi W 4-?
O rn
U 'Y C7 G fn q ,? O N N N N N N
cl
r
?'
¢
w ° ?
?? `d
w ?cl c acct
u u u u U 0
? rn

o
Q O W
o 0 b
q
0 W W
> ^
W a
?

A z° d ?? a z zzzzz
o ?' rn 0 `s S
? Q M 1O ° d
C
E
rig
o Y 'y . ^ b ti
o
o
> 3 °
ca 0 c
v o

C N w 3
o ° a°i o° c°?
ro c 04. c
O
L X 00 N O tl1 vUi O W c p
bq .? .U N
cd a? W C o L N
.., y O O y 't7 LL E 'b O CL
a> N C -gyp

a

a

co? v
C cd cd
o
^
Q?? °
rz
7EL
Q'
o
a E ;b O c
t u

v
V w ? a

c
E
O

ctj
o N ? °
Y
F
d
q
?o W •
3 W .
c?
o

w
z c
?' ?3 FV
v?rx 0o
UU
?a
CE E?°'=N:
Q a ? ?o'T>,•^?
° ?O ? ? i
dp ?,?.?o?c
?
?
r? w
? 3 ?.E
a?xv WvW?
W ? H v
i.aivCa?
O'W
F d?4
M
N
10
O
U
Ste"
W
a
0
u
u
? T T
O
? N N
X x
o o U
? U

u

0 0

zz a
i ?

z z z z
42'
K

?o

u
O C
O O
z z N d
T? L O O
z z z z
a
rr
G

s[ U x c c
. o o
Q o o zz z z
a z z
a
Q
a A
?
a o
O tq
U to
M
u
?
u u
T T
H? aw x x o o

A
a a

z z 0 a)
0 ° ° z z
z z
cl
e

12

oC o

L 0.
w N N N N C
O N
N
>
a
o O O
z z O O
zz z
>
u y

a .
s
°
a
S z
a o
w
? z o
w
'
? a on
? W
w

O v
fsi W Z r U
N d a?i U

Q

?F

to

0-4 a

a cn
zdw
cn ??
x
p
d dr?V-d? ? ?
dy ? i E, A
w zxaw -65 W
wHvs zd d O
N
Enclosure 8
communities and associated wildlife habitat. However, most of the other alternatives discussed
would consist of the extension of potable water supply lines across portions of Chatham County
where public water is not currently available. Making potable water available would most
certainly accelerate growth in these areas resulting in secondary and cumulative impacts that
cannot be controlled by the Town.
The main adverse impacts of implementing the proposed expansion of the Lower
Reservoir include:
• Acquisition of approximately 247.0 acres (excluding 24.1 acres of existing
reservoir) of land and conversion 53 percent of its land uses.
• Approximately 140 additional acres would be inundated and would include 85.3
acres of forestland, 18.5 acres of wetlands (exclusive of 24.1 acres in existing
pool), 19,124 linear feet of stream channels (perennial, intermittent and
ephemeral) and 52.1 acres of agricultural land (pasture and cropland).
• Direct, permanent loss of approximately 140 acres of terrestrial wildlife habitat by
inundation and the related loss of many of its wildlife species either through direct
mortality or by displacement to other areas. Those displaced to other lands would
be subject to overcrowding stress and mortality if the carrying capacity of those
areas was exceeded.
• Direct, permanent loss of stream (perennial, intermittent and ephemeral)
environment along 19,124 linear feet of affected area. Fish and wildlife species
unable to adapt to a lake environment would decline or disappear.
The primary beneficial effect of the proposed reservoir expansion will be the
augmentation of a quality source of raw water for public water supply. This would help to
sustain the quality of life and promote the economic viability in the are. The buffer area
associated with the proposed project would preserve approximately 117.3 acres. An increased
reservoir surface area would increase waterfowl habitat. The buffer area would also assist in
protecting water quality. It should be noted that the "buffered" land around the expanded
reservoir would not simply be controlled by ordinance or through conservation easement, but
rather through the Town actually purchasing this land as it has around the existing reservoir. By
the Town having complete control of the land, development will certainly be curbed around the
reservoir, limiting any potential negative secondary and cumulative impacts on water quality in
the reservoir itself.
25

Enclosure 8
The Man-Made Environment. The principal differences of direct impacts between the project
alternatives, relative to the man-made environment, are the magnitude of land use changes and
the removal of land from the tax rolls.
The implementation of the proposed expansion of the Lower Reservoir would require the
acquisition of approximately 247.0 acres. Twenty-one landowners would be affected by the
inundation of 85.3 acres of forest land, 38.5 acres of pasture and 10.7 acres of cropland
associated with the preferred alternative. This acreage would also be removed from the local tax
rolls, resulting in a loss of tax revenues from Chatham County. Tax revenue loss associated with
the remaining project alternatives would be minimal.
No roadway modifications would be needed with any project alternative evaluated. Final
plans of the preferred alternative will include plans to flatten roadway slopes and the placement
of suitable riprap to protect the slopes of the Clapp Road Bridge that may become inundated
during large storm events. Traffic flow may be temporarily affected during installation of
transmission lines and/or distribution lines along road ROWS and easements adjacent to
roadways associated with all alternatives with the exception of the preferred alternative.
All project alternatives would produce similar types of impacts on population,
employment, municipal and county services, utilities, energy consumption, social and
community structure and cultural resources. Overall, these impacts are not expected to be major
and would be similar among alternatives.
The Natural Environment. In terms of the natural environment, the alternatives differ in terms
of changes in land use or habitat types inundated and the amount of stream channels and
wetlands affected. The proposed project and most of the other alternatives would not require an
interbasin transfer, while all the Jordan Lake options would require a permit for a 2.0 MGD
interbasin transfer.
The 279.8-acre (lake and buffer) Lower Reservoir expansion would impact wildlife and
associated habitat in several ways, both positive and negative. First, the reservoir would
permanently inundate about 138.4 acres of terrestrial wildlife habitat, including 85.3 acres of
forest and 49.2 acres of open lands (38.5 pasture and 10.7 cropland). Second, the wildlife on
these lands would experience either direct mortality or displacement to adjacent lands. Since the
adjacent lands have a finite carrying capacity, it is possible that the displaced animals would not
26

Enclosure 8
be accommodated and some or most would perish. The 117.3 acre buffer area would be
permanently protected in a natural state, thereby preserving wildlife habitat. Without the
proposed alternative these lands would undergo gradual urbanization and development with an
attendant loss of wildlife habitat. Non-forested land in the buffer area would be reforested.
Waterfowl habitat would increase due to the increase water area associated with the preferred
alternative. The loss of habitat associated with all other alternatives is minimal. The forested
lands within the raw water transmission and distribution line ROWS would be cleared and
changed to herbaceous vegetation.
There would be 19,124 linear feet of stream habitat lost due to implementation of the
proposed alternative. Fish and wildlife species unable to adapt to a lake environment would
decline or disappear. Species primarily affected would be fish and invertebrates characteristic of
streams. Fish species such as darters and shiners, which utilize such habitat, would not survive
in the reservoir. Mussel species, which require pool and riffle type habitat would not survive in
the reservoir. The proposed project alternative would increase the lake environment and would
result in a net increase in fish biomass.
No interbasin transfer would occur as a result of the preferred, the Deep River/Carbonton,
or the Goldston - Gulf Interconnection alternatives. The City of Sanford Interconnection
alternative involves a potential transfer from the Cape Fear Sub-basin to the Deep River Sub-
basin, but likely would be negated by the Town's wastewater discharge. All of the options
discussed in the Jordan Lake alternative would involve an interbasin transfer 2.0 MGD from the
Haw River drainage to the Deep River.
All project alternatives would impact jurisdictional wetlands. Based upon a field
delineation, the amount of unavoidable wetland loss for the Lower Reservoir Expansion is 18.5
acres. The wetland delineation has not been verified by the USACOE. This level of detailed
wetland determination was not available for the other project alternatives. Consequently, the
comparative wetland impacts of the other alternatives were estimated from readily available data.
The single factor generally considered the best indicator of potential wetland presence is the
acreage of mapped hydric soils. The acreage of mapped hydric soils is an imperfect indicator of
jurisdictional wetlands, but these data are sufficient to show potential wetland impacts. Mapped
soils with hydric inclusions within the project sites total approximately 6.4 acres for Jordan Lake
Options A and B, 8.2 acres for Sanford Interconnection and Jordan Lake Option C, 8.8 acres for
Goldston - Gulf, and 22.5 acres for Deep River/Carbonton.
27
Enclosure 8
The total unavoidable impact to stream channels within the project site is 19,124 linear
feet of stream channels, which consists of 12, 990 linear feet of perennial stream channels, 1,926
linear feet of intermittent stream channels and 4,208 linear feet of ephemeral stream channels.
Stream channel impacts for the other sites were categorized into perennial stream impacts and
intermittent stream impacts. Stream channel impacts within the project sites are approximately
240 linear feet of perennial streams and 90 linear feet of intermittent streams for Goldston -
Gulf, the Sanford Interconnection and Jordan Lake Option C; 240 linear feet of perennial streams
and 120 linear feet of intermittent streams for Deep River/Carbonton; and 390 linear feet of
perennial streams and 660 linear feet of intermittent streams for Jordan Lake Options A and B.
A fringe of new wetlands would gradually develop along some portions of the perimeter
of the expanded reservoir due to saturated soil conditions. The width of this fringe would
depend upon the slope of the adjacent land, flatter areas would generate wider fringes. Many
areas have steep slopes, so the wetland fringe would be expected to be narrow, if present. Newly
formed wetlands would provide habitat for wildlife.
It is projected that with the new dam and additional storage capacity, the number of days
of reduced minimum release (tier 2 or 3) will be decreased. Increased storage capacity along
with the tiered minimum release schedule will have less impact downstream in relation to
operation of the WWTP.
All project alternatives are similar in other impacts, as shown in Table 3. Each would
result in temporary soil erosion and sedimentation during project construction, temporary
reductions in local air quality during construction and temporary increases in noise during
construction.
None of the alternatives would directly impact threatened and endangered species or
State-protected natural areas and scenic rivers.
Secondary and Cumulative Impacts of the Alternatives. The main difference in impacts
associated with the implementation of the alternatives occurs in the secondary and cumulative
effects on both the man-made and the natural environment. Generally, these impacts stem from
the changes in population, land use, water quality, vegetative resources and fish and wildlife
habitats as a result of the effects of growth spurred by a particular project. Most public utility
projects have these kinds of secondary impacts related to "sprawl", but they differ in the
capability for the respective units of local government to adequately control these impacts.
28
11 '! 6 Enclosure 8
The Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion project would occur within the Town's
jurisdictional area, allowing the Town to utilize and expand existing ordinances, such as the
Town of Siler City Watershed Protection Ordinance (Appendix C) and Unified Development
Ordinances, to manage and direct growth within the Town and its extraterritorial jurisdiction
(ETJ) in order to protect resources. To further this protection effort, the Town will be increasing
the minimum buffer requirements contained in their watershed protection ordinance to be at least
100 feet along rivers as well as perennial and intermittent streams within 2,500 feet of rivers.
This is particularly important because the Town is currently in discussion with Chatham County
regarding the expansion of the Town's ETJ. This expansion would give the Town control of
both sides of the Rocky River for a large distance both upstream and downstream of the
reservoir, which would in turn allow the Town to protect natural vegetative buffers and wildlife
habitats along the Rocky River corridor. As the expansion of the reservoir would most likely
confine population growth to the Siler City area proper (as apposed to some alternatives), the
Town could also better direct and control water conservation programs and initiatives. In
addition to these secondary and cumulative mitigation measures, the Town is also looking to
implement significant portions of the programmatic requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II Stormwater Permit prior to the issuance of the
permit itself. In particular, the Town will be moving to modify a portion of the Town's
subdivision regulations that give developers the option to utilize curb and gutter. The
modification will no longer allow curb and gutter to be installed.
The majority of the other alternatives available to the Town at this time would involve
the extension of water lines across major portions of Chatham County. Having public water
available will increase the potential for growth outside of current municipal boundaries, resulting
in a sprawl-type situation. In these situations, the Town would not be able to control and manage
the direction of growth nor would it be able to directly impose water conservation measures on
these areas. The most likely entity that would be responsible for such control would be Chatham
County. Chatham County does have development and watershed protection ordinances in place
to aid in the mitigation of secondary and cumulative impacts; however, the greater potential for
these other alternatives to create more growth than the reservoir expansion alternative cannot be
ignored nor can the fact that the Town cannot directly control or manage these impacts should
they occur outside of their jurisdictional area.
29
I. Enclosure 8
Economic Comparisons of the Alternatives. The costs for the proposed project and other
alternatives are presented in Table 2. The Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion would be the
least expensive alternative. The alternatives, ranked in order of increasing estimated costs, are
Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion ($6.87 million), Jordan Lake Option B ($7.71 million),
City of Sanford Interconnection ($7.93 million), Jordan Lake Option C ($8.34 million),
Goldston-Gulf Interconnection ($8.80 million), Deep River/Carbonton ($9.25 million) and
Jordan Lake Option A ($10.6 million).
As stated, the proposed reservoir expansion does represent the least costly alternative;
however, cost alone should not be the final determination for choosing a certain project. The
other options, while costing more than the reservoir expansion, do present obstacles that must be
overcome in order for them to be implemented. The Jordan Lake alternatives require either the
Town or Chatham County to receive either new or increased allocations. As the third round has
just been completed with no increase for Chatham County being recommended, the Jordan Lake
alternatives are not reliable for the Town at this time. All of the other alternatives would
themselves hinge a great deal on other systems or municipalities being willing to allocate
capacities within their respective systems to Siler City. Given the fact that most of these entities
are looking for increased capacity to serve their future needs alone, such diversion of capacity
outside their service areas would take considerable time to negotiate and may well result in the
other alternatives costing more than has been estimated.
This, however, does not mean the Town will abandon its participation with Chatham
County in seeking increased Jordan Lake allocations or additional water from other sources.
What it does mean is that the Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion is the one alternative over
which the Town has the most control, both in ensuring that it happens as expeditiously as
possible and in controlling secondary and cumulative impacts. All of theses issues taken
collectively make the proposed action the most economically feasible for the Town.
Effectiveness in Meeting the Purpose and Need
Water Quantity. All alternatives would provide 2.0 MGD for additional water supply
for the Town. All alternatives would meet the projected water needs for the Town's 20-year
planning period.
30
' Enclosure 8
Water Quality. The preferred alternative, the Jordan Lake alternative and the Deep
River/Carbonton alternative would provide a water supply of fair to good quality that could, with
conventional water treatment, meet the requirements of the Safe Water Drinking Act and NC
DENR criteria for finished water. The finished water supply that would be provided by the
Goldston - Gulf Interconnection and the City of Sanford Interconnection currently meet the
requirements of the Safe Water Drinking Act and
NC DENR criteria for finished water.
In the 1999 report" Basinwide Assessment Report of the Cape Fear River Basin"(NC
DENR 1999) waters below the Lower Reservoir (at US Highway 64) received a "water quality"
index of Good-Fair in comparison with other North Carolina streams and rivers. This rating is
based on the extent to which chemical and physical pollutants are present. There are no major
discharges of industrial wastewater upstream of the Reservoirs. The same report assigned
portions of many North Carolina streams a "biologic" rating based on the numbers and kinds of
organisms found in the streams. No streams above the Lower Reservoir dam were included in
these biologic surveys. The water impounded by the expanded Lower Reservoir is expected to
be of Good-Fair quality as a water supply. The proposed expansion of the Lower Reservoir
should not create a problem with treated water meeting requirements of the Safe Water Drinking
Act.
Reliability. Some alternatives will require cooperation and/or negotiation with other
municipalities, assuming participation with other municipalities is agreeable all alternatives
would be capable of supplying a reliable long-term water supply to meet the projected needs of
the Town of Siler City.
Preliminary Commitments of the Applicant. Steps have been taken toward
implementing the preferred alternative, even though there has been no assurance that the
necessary Section 404 permit would be issued. In conjunction with the presentation of the
Feasibility Study Rocky River Lower Reservoir for the Town of Siler City, Chatham County
(HUA 1997), HUA, prepared and submitted a High Unit Cost Grant Application (North Carolina
Clean Water Revolving Loan and Grant Act of 1987) for the Town in March 1999. Preliminary
funding approval for this grant was received in June 1999. A scoping meeting with pertinent
31
s Enclosure 8
agencies took place in March 1999. Landowners affected by the proposed project have been
notified of preliminary studies.
No other alternative has undergone this level of investigation. No meetings, agreement
or negotiations have been initiated with respect to any other alternative.
These preliminary commitments toward implementation of the expansion of the Lower
Reservoir clearly reflect the applicant's preference for this alternative. However, this cannot be a
reason for the issuance of a Section 404 permit if one of the other alternatives is determined to be
more suitable.
Effectiveness in Meeting Water Needs Beyond 20 Years. Based on water demand projections
and the fact that no major water line extensions or annexations are planned, the Town believes
that the reservoir expansion will provide for increased water demands past this 20-year planning
window until at least the year 2030. The Town, however, does recognize the importance of
continuing to work with Chatham County as the County continues to identify additional sources
for future water supplies. The County has a comprehensive plan that looks to interconnect most
of the County's water supplies within the next 20 years. This would most likely mirror the
Jordan Lake Option B, at least conceptually, even if the bulk of the water from this system did
not come from Jordan Lake. By remaining involved in the planning of the county-wide system,
the Town can ensure that any additional needs past the next 20 years are included. Doing this
simply represents effective and proactive planning on the part of the Town.
32
A ?s
Proposed Rocky River Lower Reservoir Expansion
Town of Siler City, Chatham County, North Carolina
Joel Brower (Town Manager)
Proposed Compensatory Mitigation Plan
Enclosure 9
Adverse, irretrievable impacts to terrestrial, forested wildlife habitat will be mitigated by
restoring native hardwood forest on 37.2 acres of cropland and pasture within the reservoir
buffer. The entire buffer (117.3 acres) will be preserved and protected perpetually from
development and logging.
Adverse, irretrievable impacts to 18.5 acres of forested wetlands will be mitigated by
acquisition of 18.5 acres of prior-converted wetlands within the Rocky River Basin and
restoration of natural hydrology and native vegetation. No mitigation is proposed for adverse,
irretrievable impacts to non-forested wetlands, such as the 24.1 acres of existing pool, and prior-
converted wetlands within the proposed pool area.
Adverse, irretrievable stream channel impacts to 12,990 liner feet of perennial stream
channels and 1,926 linear feet of intermittent stream channels will be mitigated by acquisition of
streamside buffers (minimum of 100 feet wide) along 10,000 feet of the Rocky River. Protection
will be by fee simple acquisition or purchase of Conservation Easements. Efforts will be focused
on the Rocky River between the proposed new Lower Reservoir dam and U.S. Highway 64,
within the designated critical habitat for the Cape Fear Shiner between NC Highway 902 and the
Rocky River's confluence and in Mud Lick Creek above the proposed Lower Reservoir pool.
No mitigation is proposed for the 4,208 linear feet of ephemeral stream channels that will be
flooded.