20071250 Ver 4_Individual_20130306

CLearWaLer
C1earWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
www.ewenv.com
March 5, 2013
Ms. Tasha McCormick
US Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801 -2638
Ms. Karen Higgins
NC Division of Water Quality
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
RE: Unimin Corporation
Quartz Processing Plant — Tailings Dump
Hawldns Mine — South Mine Waste Dump
Mitchell County, North Carolina
Ms. McCormick and Ms. Higgins,
of - taso v j
ft� P I�'i
@GC aM@
MAR 0 6 2013
The attached Individual Permit application is being submitted on behalf of the Unimin
Corporation represented by Mr. Doug Myers. The Unimin Corporation is seeking permit
authorization for impacts associated with development of two dumps located in Spruce Pine,
Mitchell County, North Carolina.
Should you have any questions regarding the attached permit application and supplemental
information please do not hesitate to contact me at 828 -698 -9800. A copy of this application has
been sent to Mr. David McHenry of the NC Wildlife Resources Commission and Mr. Bryan
Tompkins of the US Fish and Wildlife Service for review. A copy of this application has also
been submitted to the NC Division of Water Quality, Asheville Regional Office.
Respectfully,
���GU�cus
Rebekah L. Newton
Project Biologist
A?
R. CL/
ent Riddle, . S
Principal
Copy Furnished:
NC Division of Water Quality; Asheville Regional Office — Tim Fox
NC Wildlife Resources Commission — David McHenry
US Fish and Wildlife Service — Bryan Tompkins
224 South Grove Street, Suite F
Hendersonville, NC 28792
828 - 698 -9800 Tel
828 - 698 -9003 Fax

Individual Permit Application for
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Section 404 Permit
North Carolina 401 Water Quality Certification
March 2013
Applicant:
Attn: Doug Myers
P.O. Box 588
7638 Highway 226 South
Spruce Pine, NC 28777
Project:
Quartz Processing Plant — Tailings Dump and
Hawkins Mine — South Mine Waste Dump
Prepared by:
C1earWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
224 South Grove Street, Suite F
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28792
828 - 698 -9800

Individual Permit Application for
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Section 404 Permit
North Carolina 401 Water Quality Certification
March 2013
Applicant:
Attn: Doug Myers
P.O. Bog 588
7638 Highway 226 South
Spruce Pine, NC 28777
Project:
Quartz Processing Plant — Tailings Dump and
Hawkins Mine — South Mine Waste Dump
Prepared by:
ClearWater Environmental Consultant
224 South Grove Street, Suite F
Hendersonville, North Carolina 281
828 -698 -9800

Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Please provide the following info:
1. Project Name: Quartz Processing Plant Tailings Dump and Hawkins Mine South
Mine Waste Dump
2. Name of Property Owner /Applicant: Unimin Corporation; Attn: Doug Myers
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: C1earWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
*Agent authorization needs to be attached.
4. Related/previous Action ID numbers(s): 2008 -1254
5. Site Address: NC Highway 226
6. Subdivision Name: n/a
7. City: Spruce Pine
8. County: Mitchell
9. Lat: 35.930598N Long: - 82.096735W (Decimal Degrees Please
10. Quadrangle Name: Spruce Pine
11. Waterway: Little Bear Creek, North Toe River, unnamed tributaries
12. Watershed: Nolichucky 06010108
13. Requested Action:
X Individual Permit #
General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre - Application Request
The following information will be completed by the Corps office:
I 10
Prepare File Folder Assign number in ORM Begin Date
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404
Project Description/Nature of Activity/Project Purpose:
Site/Waters Name:
Keywords:

CLear r
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Attn: Ken Jolly, Chief Regulatory Division
PO Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402 -1890
-and-
NC Division of Water Quality
Attn: Ian McMillan
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650
I, the current landowner /managing partner of the property identified below, hereby
authorize C1earWater Environmental Consultants, Inc. (CEC) to act on my behalf as my
agent during the processing of permits to impact Wetlands and Water of the US that are
regulated by the Clean Water Act and the Rivers and Harbors Act.
CEC is authorized to provide supplemental information needed for permit processing at
the request of the USACE or DWQ.
Property Owner of Record: )A;P^ f n
Property Owner Address: a 5 I m .. NPR (,a r\o o n
C D&-740-S-309
Phone Number: 2F,2S - 7 l P 5- q a3? 21
Property Location:
Owner/Managing partner S
Date:
224 South Grove Street, Suite F
Hendersonville, NC 28792
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
www.cwenv.eom

Penland Bailey Estate, LLC
1959 N. Peace Haven Road PMB 192
Winston - Salem, NC 27106
Donald Duncan and Maxine Tru
454 Hawkins Branch Road
Spruce Pine, NC 28777
Joe and Shirley Hoilman
363 Thompson Road
Spruce Pine, NC 28777
Unimin Corporation
Adjacent Landowners
GP Sullins Heirs Etal
c/o RA Dickson
PO Box 458
Gastonia, NC 28053
Sam and Rachel Watson
501 Hawkins Branch Road
Spruce Pine, NC 28777
Rhonda Buchanan Etal
273 Peaceful Lane
Bakersville, NC 28705
Sam Cook
281 Pine Branch Road
Spruce Pine, NC 28777
Russell Duncan
446 Hawkins Branch Road
Spruce Pine, NC 28777

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
OMB APPROVAL NO 071
33 CFR 325. The proponent agency is CECW -CO -R
EXPIRES 28 FEBRUARY RY 20 2013 3
Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to average 11 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 the collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense,
Washington Headquarters, Executive Services and Communications Directorate, Information Management Division and to the Office of Management and
Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003) Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be
subject to any penalty for fading to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number 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
Authorities. Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403, Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344, Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
Act, Section 103, 33 USC 1413; Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule 33 CFR 320 -332. Principal Purpose- Information provided on
this form will be used in evaluating the application for a permit. Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other
federal, state, and local government agencies, and the public and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by Federal law. Submission
of requested information is voluntary, however, if information is not provided the permit application cannot be evaluated 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/or 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 1 THRU 4 TO BE FILLED BY THE CORPS)
1 APPLICATION NO
2. FIELD OFFICE CODE
3 DATE RECEIVED
4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETE
(ITEMS BELOW TO BE FILLED BYAPPLfCAMI)
5. APPLICANTS NAME
8. AUTHORIZED AGENTS NAME AND TITLE (agent is not required)
First - Doug Middle - Last - Myers
First - R Middle -Clement Last - Riddle
Company - Unimin Corporation
Company - ClearWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
E-mail Address - dmyers @unimin.com
E -mail Address - [e-mail]
6 APPLICANTS ADDRESS:
9 AGENTS ADDRESS-
Address- 7638 NC Highway 226 South
Address- 224 South Grove Street, Suite F
City - Spruce Pine State - NC Zip - 28777 Country -USA
City - Hendersonville State - NC Zip - 28792 Country -USA
7. APPLICANTS PHONE NOs. w /AREA CODE
10. AGENTS PHONE NOs. WAREA CODE
a. Residence b. Business c. Fax
a. Residence b Business c. Fax
828 - 7654823
828 - 698 -9800
STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
11. 1 hereby authorize, to I y behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon request,
supplemental information In support of this ermi pplication
D
APPLICANT
DATE
7URE ,r
NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE (see instructions)
Quartz Processing Plant - Tailings Dumps and Hawkins Mine - South Mine Waste Dump
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN rd applicable)
14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (if applicable)
Little Bear Creek, North Toe River, unnamed tributaries
Address NC Highway 226
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Latitude: -N 35.930598 Longitude. -W - 82.096735
City - Spruce Pine State- NC Zip- 28777
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN (see Instructions)
State Tax Parcel ID Municipality
Section - Township - Range -
r-nv rvmm nava, uL. t zu't[ PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE Page 1 of 3

17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
From Asheville, take Future 1 -26 North towards Woodfin/Weaverville to Exit 9 (US Highway 19) Take Exit 9 and turn right onto US
Highway 19. Travel through the Town of Burnsville and turn left (north) onto NC Highway 226 before entering downtown Spruce Pine.
Travel approximately 1.7 miles on NC Highway 226. The Hawkins Quartz processing plant is on the left and the Hawkins Mine is on the
right.
18 Nature of Activity (Description of project, include all features)
The applicant, the Unimin Corporation, proposes to continue development of two dump sites: the south mine waste dump located at the
Hawkins Mine immediately southwest of the active mine area and the tailings dump located at the Quartz processing plant. See
application.
19 Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see Instructions)
The purpose of the proposed projects is to continue the development and achieve design capacity at two waste areas, the tailings dump and
the south mine waste dump, at the Unimin Corporation's Hawkins Mine and Quartz processing plant. See application narrative.
USE BLOCKS 20.23 IF DREDGED AND /OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
Fill material in the form of culverts/under drains will be placed in jurisdictional streams and wetlands on the sites. Tailings and raw waste
material will be placed in the dump locations. See application narrative.
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type In Cubic Yards-
Type Type Type
Amount in Cubic Yards Amount in Cubic Yards Amount in Cubic Yards
Culverts and under drains. See application.
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled (see instructions)
Acres 0.044 AC of wetlands. See application narrative.
or
Linear Feet 1,305 LF of stream channel. See application narrative.
23 Description of Avoidance, Minimization, and Compensation (see Instructions)
See application narrative.
tnG wRM 4345, OGT 2012 Page 2 of 3

24. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? []Yes ❑X No IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
25 Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc , Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (d more than can be entered here, please attach a supplemental list)
a Address- See attached list
City - State - Zip -
b Address -
City - State - Zip -
c, Address -
City - State - Zip -
d, Address -
City - State - Zip -
e. Address -
City - State - Zip -
26. List of Other Certificates or Approvals/Denials received from other Federal, State, or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL' IDENTIFICATION DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
NUMBER
Would include but is not resbicted to zoning, building, and flood plain permits
27. Application is hereby made for permit or permits to authorize the work described in ti(isapplication. I certify that this information In this application is
complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the wo bed It or am acting as the duly authorized agent of the
applicant
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE LIGNA Clicant) OF AGENT DATE
The Application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the pro posed y 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.
ENG FORM 4345, OCT 2012 Page 3 of 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LISTOF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... ............................... ii
1.0
INTRODUCTION TO PROJECT ................................................................................ ..............................1
1.1
Project Location ......................................................................................................... ............................... 1
1.2
Jurisdictional Waters ................................................................................................... ..............................1
2.0
BACKGROUND/PRIOR PROJECT HISTORY ........................................................ ..............................3
3.0
EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS ................................................................................. ............................... 4
3.1
Disturbed Riparian Forest .......................................................................................... ............................... 4
3.2
Disturbed Mixed Pine Hardwood Forest .................................................................... ............................... 4
3.3
Cleared Area ............................................................................................................... ............................... 4
3.4
Streams and Wetlands ................................................................................................ ............................... 4
3.5
Soils ............................................................................................................................. ..............................5
3.6
Fish and Wildlife Use of the Project Site ................................................................... ............................... 5
3.7
Threatened and Endangered Species .......................................................................... ............................... 5
3.8
Cultural Resources ..................................................................................................... ............................... 5
4.0
PROJECT PURPOSE ................................................................................................... ............................... 7
5.0
PROPOSED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT ................................................................. ..............................8
6.0
DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVES .......................................................................... ............................... 9
6.1
Avoidance ................................................................................................................... .............................10
6.2
Minimization .............................................................................................................. .............................11
6.3
Alternatives Conclusion ............................................................................................. .............................12
7.0
CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION PLAN ....................................................................... .............................13
8.0
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES ....... .............................14
8.1
Factual Determination ................................................................................................ .............................14
8.2
Potential Impacts on Physical and Chemical Characteristics of the Aquatic Ecosystem ........................
14
8.3
Potential Impacts to Biological Characteristics of the Ecosystem .............................. .............................15
8.4
Potential Impacts on Special Aquatic Sites ................................................................ .............................17
8.5
Potential Effects on Human Use Characteristics ........................................................ .............................18
8.6
Summary .................................................................................................................... .............................18
9.0
PUBLIC INTEREST CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................ .............................19
9.1
Conservation ............................................................................................................... .............................19
9.2
Economics .................................................................................................................. .............................19
9.3
Aesthetics ................................................................................................................. ...............................
20
9.4
General Environmental Concerns ............................................................................. ...............................
20
9.5
Wetlands ..................................................................................................................... .............................20
9.6
Historic Properties .................................................................................................... ...............................
20
9.7
Fish and Wildlife Values .......................................................................................... ...............................
20
9.8
Flood Hazards .......................................................................................................... ...............................
21
9.9
Floodplain Values ..................................................................................................... ...............................
21
9.10
Land Use .................................................................................................................. ...............................
22
9.11
Navigation ................................................................................................................ ...............................
22
9.12
Shore Erosion and Accretion .................................................................................... ...............................
22
9.13
Recreation ................................................................................................................... .............................22
9.14
Water Supply and Conservation ............................................................................... ...............................
22
9.15
Water Quality (Stonmwater Management) ............................................................... ...............................
22
9.16
Energy Needs ........................................................................................................... ...............................
22
9.17
Safety .......................................................................................................................... .............................23
9.18
Food and Fiber Production ....................................................................................... ...............................
23
9.19
Mineral Needs .......................................................................................................... ...............................
23
9.20
Considerations of Property Ownership ..................................................................... ...............................
23
9.21
Needs and Welfare of the Public .............................................................................. ...............................
23
10.0
SECONDARY AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ..................................................... ...............................
24
11.0
SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... .............................25

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Site Vicinity Map
Figure 2 USGS Topographic Map
Figure 3a and 3b Soils Map
Figure 4a and 4b Site Plan
Figure 5 100 Year Floodplain Map
LIST OF APPENDICES
Attachment A Jurisdictional Determination Information
Attachment B EEP Correspondence
Attachment C Stream Forms
ii

1.0 INTRODUCTION TO PROJECT
The applicant, the Unimin Corporation, proposes to continue development of two dump
sites: the south mine waste dump located at the Hawkins Mine immediately southwest of
the active mine area and the tailings dump located at the Quartz processing plant.
1.1 Proiect Location
The Hawkins Mine is located on the east side of Highway 226 and the Quartz
processing plant is located west of Highway 226; both sites are located
approximately 1.7 miles north of Spruce Pine in Mitchell County, North Carolina.
A site vicinity map (Figure 1) and a USGS topographic map are included for
review (Figure 2).
1.2 Jurisdictional Waters
Quartz Processing Plant — Tailings Dump - Tributaries on site include Little Bear
Creek, unnamed tributaries to Little Bear Creek, and unnamed tributaries to the
North Toe River. Streams within the Quartz processing plant project boundary
are tributaries to the North Toe River. The North Toe River flows into the
Nolichucky River, which is a tributary to the French Broad River. The French
Broad River is a navigable -in -fact water at the Wilson Bridge southeast of
Brevard. The stream channels on site are classified by the NC Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) as class "C, Tr" waters.
There are wetlands located within the Quartz processing plant tailings dump
project boundary. The wetlands are small and abutting associated stream
channels.
Hawkins Mine - South Mine Waste Dump — Tributaries on site include unnamed
tributaries to the North Toe River. The North Toe River flows into the
Nolichucky River, which is a tributary to the French Broad River. The French
Broad River is a navigable -in -fact water at the Wilson Bridge southeast of
Brevard. The unnamed tributaries are classified by the NC Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) as class "C, Tr" waters.
There are no wetlands located within the Hawkins Mine south mine waste dump
project boundary.
The table below summarizes the total amounts of jurisdictional waters on both
sites.
On -site Totals
Feature
Amount
Unit
Stream
7,800
linear feet
Wetlands
0.044
acres
Open Water
0
acres

An "Existing Site Conditions" section (Section 3.0) has been included in this
application for review and further describes the jurisdictional waters on site.

2.0 BACKGROUND/PRIOR PROJECT HISTORY
Mitchell County is known in the mining industry as the Spruce Pine mining district.
Small mines produced gemstones, kaolin, feldspar, quartz, and mica in the late 1880's
and early 1900's. Gemstone mining proved unsustainable, and the move away from
mica -based electrical conductors to quartz -based semiconductors caused many small
mines to close. Development of the railroad caused the town of Spruce Pine to grow and
become the industrial center of the county, as well as, open the area to large -scale mining
operations. Mineral resources currently mined in this district include mica, feldspar, and
quartz. As of 1996, three mining companies, operating five mines, extracted
approximately 35% of the nation's production of feldspar; and approximately 95% of the
nation's supply and approximately 65% of the world's supply of ultra -pure quartz. Mica,
to a much smaller extent, is also still mined. The Unimin Corporation was founded in
1970. The Spruce Pine mining district leads the nation in production of high -quality
quartz used for semiconductors, solar energy cells, high intensity lighting, quartz tubing,
etc.
A permit application requesting written authorization for impacts associated with
development of a mine waste dump at the Unimin Corporation's Hawkins Mine was
submitted by ClearWater Environmental Consultants, Inc. (CEC), on behalf of the
Unimin Corporation in April 2008. The NC Division of Water Quality issued the 401
Water Quality Certification on February 27, 2009 (Project # 20071250 Ver. 3) and the
US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) issued the requested permit on May 20, 2009
(Action ID 2008 - 1254). Impacts and required mitigation for this project have been
complete and the project has been "closed out" by the Corps.
A "Notice of Jurisdictional Determination" was issued by the Corps on May 19, 2011 for
the Hawkins Mine south mine waste dump project boundary (Attachment A).
A "Notice of Jurisdictional Determination" was issued by the Corps on January 31, 2013
for the Quartz processing plant tailings dump project boundary (Attachment A).
k3

3.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
The project sites consists of an operational mine and quartz processing plant, existing
dump space, disturbed wooded areas, cleared areas, and associated infrastructure.
3.1 Disturbed Riparian Forest
This habitat is varied and often contains mesophytic and hydrophytic species.
Communities include tributaries in the bases of coves or at the toes of the slopes.
Tree species observed along the stream banks include eastern hemlock (Tsuga
canadensis), red maple (Acer rubrum), and tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera).
Shrubs observed in this habitat include rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum),
pepperbush (Clethra acuminata), and spicebush (Lindera benzoin). Species
observed in the herbaceous layer include coneflower (Rudbeckia laciniata),
bugleweed (Lycopus sp), goldenrod (Solidago sp), and stiff cowbane (Oxypolis
rigidior). This area has been disturbed by historic and active mining.
3.2 Disturbed Mixed Pine Oak Forest
This mesic to xeric community is found along the ridges. Trees species observed
include white oak (Quercus alba), black oak (Quercus velutina), northern red oak,
southern red oak (Quercus falcate), white pine (Pinus strobus), Virginia pine (Pinus
virginiana), and eastern hemlock. Species observed in the shrubs layer include
mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia) , rhododendron, and blueberry (Vaccinium sp.).
This area has been disturbed by historic and active mining.
3.3 Cleared Area
Cleared areas include the operational mine and existing dump space. These areas
are devoid of trees and shrubs and include bare rock or dump material. Stabilized
areas are vegetated with Johnson grass (Sorghum sp.) or other species commonly
used for erosion control.
3.4 Streams and Wetlands
Streams on the sites include Little Bear Creek, unnamed tributaries to Little Bear
Creek, and unnamed tributaries to the North Toe River. There are approximately
7,800 linear feet of stream channel within the two project boundaries. In general,
these tributaries flow north to south and eventually into the North Toe River. The
North Toe River flows into the Nolichucky River, which is a tributary to the
French Broad River. The French Broad River is a navigable -in -fact water at the
Wilson Bridge southeast of Brevard. Generally, stream channels proposed for
impact are of low quality as they have been impacted by historic and current land
use activities.
There are approximately 0.044 acre of wetlands located within the Quartz
processing plant tailings dump project boundary. The wetlands are small and
adjacent to associated stream channels.
4

3.5 Soils
The project sites are located within the Mountains physiographic region of North
Carolina and more specifically the Southern Crystalline Ridges and Mountains
Ecoregion. Soils in this ecoregion are characterized as well - drained, acidic, loamy
soils. Soil series present on the sites include: Biltmore, Cashiers, Chandler -
Micaville, Fannin, Saunook, Udorthents, and Watauga. A soils map and legend
have been attached for review (Figure 3a and 3b).
3.6 Fish and Wildlife Use of the Proiect Site
It is expected that wildlife species inhabiting the sites would include those
typically found in the forest types of the region previously described. Although
site - specific studies and inventories documenting species utilization of the project
area have not been conducted, general observations wildlife (mainly deer) use
were recorded during the stream and wetland delineation and during on -site
meetings.
3.7 Threatened and Endangered Species
CEC has conducted a file review of records maintained by the US Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) and North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP).
The desktop literature review involved a review of the FWS list of protected
species in Mitchell County and the NHP Element Occurrence data on which NHP
identifies current and historic occurrences of listed species for a specific locale.
The NHP database identifies 43 element occurrences (EO) within a 5 -mile radius
of the project sites; six EOs hold federal status and are subject to Section 7
consultation. These EOs are listed below.
Common Name
Scienti c Name
Status
Appalachian elktoe
Alasmidonta raveneliana
endangered
spreading avens
Geum radiatum
endangered
bog turtle
Gl tem s muhlenber ii
threatened s/a
rock gnome lichen
G mnoderma lineare
endangered
Roan Mountain bluet
Houstonia montana
endangered
Virginia s irea
S irea virginiana
threatened
Due to the active mining and processing activities taking place at the Hawkins Mine
and Quartz processing plant and the disturbed nature of the remaining habitats, it is
the opinion of CEC that federally protected species are not likely to be present
within the project boundaries. As such, the proposed activities at the project sites
are not likely to cause an adverse impact to any federally threatened or endangered
species or their critical habitat.
3.8 Cultural Resources
A desk review of the National Register of Historic Places records maintained by the
NC State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and available on SHPO's HPOWEB
GIS Service indicates five historic properties within 2 miles of the Hawkins Mine
and Quartz processing plant project areas: the Penland Post Office and General
5

Store (SHPO Site # ML0069) located southwest approximately 0.5 mile, the
Penland School Historic District (NPS Reference # 03001270) located west
approximately 1.2 miles, the Henry Willis House (NPS Reference # 88001051)
located west approximately 1.9 miles, the Gunter Building (NPS Reference #
02000112) located south approximately 1.9 miles, and the Downtown Spruce Pine
Historic District (NPS Reference # 03000855) located south approximately 2 miles.
It is the opinion of CEC that activities taking place within the project boundaries
will not affect the integrity of the historic sites. The SHPO will be notified via
Public Notice about the projects and will be given the opportunity to comment on
the projects and their potential effects on archaeological and cultural resources.
6

4.0 PROJECT PURPOSE
The purpose of the proposed projects is to continue the development and achieve design
capacity at two waste areas, the plant tailings dump and the south mine waste dump, at
the Unimin Corporation's Hawkins Mine and Quartz processing plant.

5.0 PROPOSED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
The tailings dump at the Quartz processing plant and the proposed south mine waste
dump at the Hawkins Mine were approved by the Division of Land Quality (DLQ) in
1999 and 2005, respectively. The proposed impacts will enable the Unimin Corporation
to achieve the original design capacity for these areas as permitted by the DLQ. The
proposed project includes the continued development of the tailings dump at the Quartz
processing plant (Figure 4a) and the south mine waste dump southwest of the active mine
area at the Hawkins Mine (Figure 4b). Impacts to unnamed tributaries to the North Toe
River associated with the south mine waste dump and tailings dump are as follows:
New Stream hn acts Associated with Modification
Linear Feet
Impact
1 — quartz processing plant
(Figure
4a
84
hn
act 3 — quartz processing plant
(Figure
4a
325
Impact
5 — quartz processing plant
(Figure
4a
126
Impact
6 — quartz processing plant
(Figure
4a
70
Impact
8 — south mine waste dump
(Figure
4b
110
Impact
9 — south mine waste dump
(Figure
4b
590
Total
1,305
New Wetland Impacts Associated with Modification
Acres
I n act 2 — quartz processing plant (Figure 4a
0.008
I n act 4 — quartz processing plant (Figure 4a
0.001
Impact 7 — quartz processing plant (Figure 4a
0.035
Total
0.044

6.0 DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVES
This discussion of alternatives is submitted by the applicant to assist the Wilmington
District, Corps in evaluating the application for authorization to discharge dredged or fill
material into waters of the United States, including wetlands, under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1344 at the Hawkins Mine and Quartz processing plant in
Mitchell County, North Carolina.
An analysis of the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines (Guidelines) requirements for
consideration of alternatives as required by 40 C.F.R. 230.10(a) is set forth below.
The Guidelines' alternatives requirements provide that "no discharge of dredged or fill
material shall be permitted if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge
which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem, so long as the
alternative does not have other significant adverse environmental consequences." [See
40 C.F.R. 230.10(a) (emphasis added).] The record must contain "sufficient information
to demonstrate that the proposed discharge complies with the requirements of Section
230.10(a) of the Guidelines. The amount of information needed to make such a
determination and the level of scrutiny required by the Guidelines is commensurate with
the severity of the environmental impact (as determined by the functions of the aquatic
resource and the nature of the proposed activity) and the scope /cost of the project." [See
Corps/EPA Memorandum to the Field "Appropriate Level of Analysis Required for
Evaluating Compliance with Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines Alternatives Requirements," p.
2, dated August 23, 1994, hereinafter the "Memorandum. "] As noted in the
Memorandum on pages 3 -4, the 404(b)(1) Guidelines "only prohibits discharges when a
practicable alternative exists which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic
ecosystem." [See Memorandum.] "If an alleged alternative is unreasonably expensive to
the applicant, the alternative is not practicable." [See Guidelines Preamble, "Economic
Factors," 45 Federal Register 85343 (December 24, 1980).]
Practicable alternatives for the project are those alternatives that are "available and capable
of being done after taking into consideration costs, existing technology, and logistics in
light of overall project purposes." [See 40 C.F.R. 230.10(a)(2).] Clarification is provided
in the Preamble to the Guidelines on how cost is to be considered in the determination of
practicability. An alternative site is considered "available" if it is presently owned by the
applicant or "could reasonably be obtained, utilized, expanded or managed in order to
fulfill the basic purpose of the proposed activity." 40 C.F.R. § 230.10(a)(2).
The intent is to consider those alternatives, which are reasonable in terms of the overall
scope and cost of the proposed project. The term economic [for which the term "costs"
was substituted in the final rule] might be construed to include consideration of the
applicant's financial standing, or investment, or market share, a cumbersome inquiry
which is not necessarily material to the objectives of the Guidelines.
9

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 404(b)(1) Guidelines state that, "we have
chosen instead to impose an explicit, but rebuttable presumption that alternatives to
discharges in special aquatic sites are less damaging to the aquatic ecosystem, and are
environmentally preferable." Of course, the general requirements that impacts to the
aquatic system not be acceptable also applies. This presumption "...contains sufficient
flexibility to reflect circumstances of unusual cases" (249 Fed. Reg., 85339, December
24, 1980). It is clear from these stipulations that a preferable alternative may allow
filling in certain wetland areas and subsequent mitigation and/or management of other
areas.
6.1 Avoidance
In order to meet the stated project purpose, the waste areas must be located in
close proximity to the Quartz processing plant (in the case of the tailings dump)
and the active mine area (in the case of the mine waste dump). The waste areas
must be sited on existing mine property and/or leases and in a location that does
not hinder existing Quartz processing plant activities and mining. Waste material
cannot be placed over potentially mineable ore. And, waste areas must be easily
accessible to limit hauling costs and increased traffic on public roads.
Logistically, continuous and central dump space is preferable to multiple small
dump locations placed throughout the county. The Quartz processing plant and
mine have existing dumps on site. The proposed projects constitute the continued
development of these dumps to meet the design capacity for the dumps as a
whole. In order to meet design capacity as a whole, additional dump space must
be adjacent to the existing dumps on site.
The Unimin Corporation operates two types of waste disposal dumps associated
with the mining process. The first type, the tailings dump, is located in the area
directly northwest of the newly constructed Quartz processing plant. The second
type is a mine waste dump which is located in active mining areas.
The tailings dump exclusively serves as a repository for waste products generated
during mineral processing. This waste product, commonly termed "tailings ",
ranges in size from clay and silt to coarse sand. Additionally, this material has a
relatively high initial moisture content ( >20 %). As such, after the tailings are
loaded and transported to the dump they must be allowed to dry through a
combination of mechanical mixing and exposure to the atmosphere. Once
suitably dry, the material is spread into 8 to 10 -inch lifts. These lifts are then
mechanically compacted to a minimum of 95% of the Standard Proctor maximum
dry density.
The mine waste dumps are distinctly different from the tailings dump. Mine
waste dumps are comprised of raw rock waste generated in the blasting and
mining processes. Any material that does not meet quality specifications for
processing is separated prior to crushing and deposited into these dumps. The
waste material is poorly sorted with a particle size range from silt and clay to
10

small boulders. Mine waste is deposited into these dumps by end- dumping and
dozing.
As detailed above, the two dump types, the materials disposed, and the methods
used for constructing the dumps are distinctly different. However, these are not
the only reasons that these dumps are not interchangeable and that the Unimin
Corporation must maintain two separate locations. Additional reasons are as
follows:
• The cost of transporting tailings to the dumps located at the Hawkins Mine is
highly impracticable. Currently, a 25 -ton capacity articulated haul truck is
used to transport all tailings. This requires approximately 30 round trips of
0.8 miles per trip. One operator is used for loading and hauling. Contrarily, if
this material were placed into a mine waste dump in the Hawkins Mine, it
would require approximately three tandem dump trucks hauling a total of
approximately 60 round trips of 3.2 miles per trip. The incremental cost of
three additional operators, haulage, and fuel is unreasonable. The cost of
transporting rock waste from the Hawkins Mine to the tailings dump is even
more unfavorable due to the high volumes of material comparatively.
• The lack of maintaining both of these dumps will also affect the safety of
plant personnel and the public. Moving tailings to the mine waste dumps, or
vice versa, would greatly increase the crossing traffic on Highway 226. This
is a heavily traveled thoroughfare. The Unimin Corporation currently
experiences an average of two major vehicular accidents per year at this
crossing. Any further traffic will expound upon the existing risk.
• Each dump, whether tailings or mine waste dumps, have been specifically
designed and permitted to match the slope stability characteristics of the
material currently placed into them. Changing the permitted materials of
construction may be possible through permit modifications but is potentially
costly, lengthy, and uncertain.
• Due to the topography of the region in proximity to the Quartz processing
plant and mining operations, the availability of suitable property for waste
and/or tailings disposal is extremely limited. Thus, the Unimin Corporation
must maximize all of its existing disposal areas in order to ensure longevity.
6.2 Minimization
The site has been planned to avoid streams and wetlands to the maximum extent
practicable while complying with designs approved by DLQ in 1999 and 2005.
The table below summarizes the total avoidance and minimization that has taken
place within the project boundaries.
11
Amount
Percent
Feature
Avoided and
Avoided and
Minimized
Minimized
Streams
6,495 LF
83
Wetlands
0
0
11

6.3 Alternatives Conclusion
This discussion of avoidance and minimization, together with the documents
submitted by the applicant in support of the 404 Permit, show that the project is in
compliance with the Guidelines. As this analysis clearly demonstrates, the
proposed projects are designed to avoid and minimize impacts to the sites to the
maximum extent practicable while complying with previously approved dump
designs.
12

7.0 CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION PLAN
Upon completion and implementation of all practical avoidance and minimization efforts,
1,305 linear feet of stream channel and 0.044 acre of wetlands associated with the
development of the proposed project are unavoidable.
The applicant proposes to mitigate for unavoidable stream impacts (1,305 linear feet of
stream) at a mitigation activity ratio of 1:1 through payment into the EEP in -lieu fee
program. By letter dated January 22, 2013, EEP has indicated they are willing to accept
payment for impacts at the project site. The acceptance letter is enclosed for review
(Attachment B). Stream Quality Assessment Forms for the sites are also enclosed for
review (Attachment C).
13

8.0 US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES
EPA interim regulations providing guidance for specification of deposit on sites for
dredge and fill material were published on September 17, 1993, in 40 C.F.R. 230 per
Section 404(b)1. Sub -Parts A through I pertain to dredge and fill permits, and apply to
project sites similar to this project.
Sub -Part D presents a summary of compliance criteria for the 404(b)l guidelines. This
section references and defines practicable alternatives and indicates that a dredge and fill
permit shall not be issued if practicable alternatives exist. Alternatives reviewed, detailed
in Section 6.0, were assessed for compliance with 404(b)1 guidelines.
Additional EPA guidance is presented related to general regulatory criteria, wildlife
value, and human health guidelines. The discharge of dredge and fill material is
considered permittable under these guidelines if the discharge activity: does not
contribute to violation of state water quality standards; does not violate toxic effluent
standards; does not jeopardize the continued existence of species listed as threatened and
endangered pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 and subsequent
amendments; does not cause degradation to any marine sanctuaries; does not contribute
to significant degradation of "waters of the United States;" does not adversely affect
human health as it pertains to water supply; does not adversely impact wildlife, the food
chain, and special aquatic sites; does not contribute to the discharge of pollutants that
may affect the food web; does not have negative effects on the productivity of the aquatic
ecosystem, or their physical values; and does not have adverse impacts on recreation,
aesthetic, or economic values. Additionally, the applicant is required to minimize
potential adverse impacts on the aquatic ecosystem.
8.1 Factual Determination
The Corps is required to determine both potential short-term and long -term effects
of a proposed discharge of fill material on the physical, chemical, and biological
components of an aquatic environment.
8.2 Potential Impacts on Physical and Chemical Characteristics of the Aquatic
Ecosystem
Sub -Part C of the 40 C.F.R. 230 guidelines lists six physical and chemical
characteristics that must be assessed during the permit review, and the effects of
which must be determined to be minimal on the aquatic ecosystem.
8.2.1 Substrate
Fill material in the form of culverts /under drains will be placed in
jurisdictional streams and wetlands on the sites. Any discharge will
consist of suitable fill material and will not include any trash, debris, car
bodies, asphalt, etc. The fill material will also be free of toxic pollutants
in toxic amounts. Proper sediment and erosion control measures will be
installed prior to and during construction to ensure that the bottom
elevation of remaining streams and wetlands on the sites will not change.
14

8.2.2 Suspended Particulate/Turbidity (Sediment and Erosion Control)
During construction activities on the sites, there may be a minimal
increase in suspended particulates that may lead to increased turbidity
downstream. However, the increase is anticipated to be minimal and
temporary due to the installation and maintenance of proper sediment and
erosion control measures during construction and shortly thereafter.
8.2.3 Water Quality
The proposed discharge of fill material should not cause increased
chemical contamination levels within the aquatic ecosystem. Specifically,
changes in clarity, color, odor, and taste of water in addition to possible
chemical contamination shall be minimized or reduced. All discharges of
fill material will be controlled with a sediment and erosion control plan.
The applicant will be concurrently applying for a NC Division of Water
Quality, Water Quality Certification.
8.2.4 Current Patterns in Water Circulation
The discharge of fill material will modify current water circulation
patterns by obstructing flow, changing direction or velocity of water, and
changing velocity or flow of circulation in the channels proposed for
impact; however, water circulation and patterns will be re- established in
the stream channels provided as mitigation.
8.2.5 Normal Water Fluctuations
The discharge of fill material associated with these projects is not
anticipated to have any significant effect on the downstream hydrologic
regimes.
8.2.6 Salinity
Because these projects are located inland and away from tidally influenced
waters and wetlands, no modification to the salinity of on -site or adjacent
waters is expected.
8.3 Potential Impacts to Biological Characteristics of the Ecosystem
Sub -Part D of the 40 C.F.R. 230 guidelines specifies three areas of concern in
which discharge of fill material can affect the biological components of the
ecosystem. These components are threaten and endangered species; fish,
crustaceans, mollusks, other aquatic organisms in the food web; and wildlife.
8.3.1 Threatened or Endangered Species
CEC has conducted a file review of records maintained by the FWS and
NHP. The desktop literature review involved a review of the FWS list of
protected species in Mitchell County and the NHP Element Occurrence
data on which NHP identifies current and historic occurrences of listed
species for a specific locale. The NHP database identifies 43 EOs within a
15

5 -mile radius of the project sites; six EOs hold federal status and are
subject to Section 7 consultation. The EOs are listed below.
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Appalachian elktoe
Alasmidonta raveneliana
endangered
spreading avens
Geum radiatum
endangered
bog turtle
Gl tem s muhlenber ii
threatened s/a
rock gnome lichen
G mnoderma lineare
endangered
Roan Mountain bluet
Houstonia montana
endangered
Virginia s irea
S irea vir iniana
threatened
Due to the active mining and processing activities taking place at the
Hawkins Mine and Quartz processing plant and the disturbed nature of the
remaining habitats, it is the opinion of CEC that federally protected species
are not likely to be present within the project boundaries. As such, the
proposed activities at the project sites are not likely to cause an adverse
impact to any federally threatened or endangered species or their critical
habitat.
8.3.2 Fishes, Crustaceans, Mollusks, and other Aquatic Organisms in the
Food Web
Discharges of fill material can alter the food web by impacting animals
such as invertebrates that make up the basis of a food chain. The release
of contaminants or an increase in turbidity has the potential to negatively
affect certain aspects of the food web. Such releases may also potentially
increase the levels of exotic species.
Impacts to primary food chain production within the waters of the US and
wetlands will occur on the project sites; however, food chain production
will be re- establish over time in the streams provided as mitigation. Net
impacts to primary food chain production are expected to be minimal.
8.3.3 Other Wildlife
The discharge of fill material has the potential to negatively affect
breeding and nesting areas, escape cover, travel corridors, and preferred
food sources for resident and migrant wildlife species.
Although some evidence of wildlife usage was apparent on the sites,
because the project areas are within close proximity to existing mining and
processing facilities, wildlife habitat is minimal. Noise pollution, denuded
vegetation, and anthropogenic activity make this area less desirable for
resident and migrant wildlife. While a loss of wildlife habitat for stream -
dependent and wetland species may result from the project, the proposed
mitigation will compensate for any minor loss of habitat.
16

8.4 Potential Impacts on Special Aquatic Sites
Sub -Part E of the 40 C.F.R. 230 guidelines addresses considerations for potential
impacts on special aquatic sites, which include: sanctuaries and refuges,
wetlands, mud flats, vegetated shallows, coral reefs, and riffle -pool complexes.
8.4.1 Sanctuaries and Refuges
The discharge fill material has the potential to negatively affect adjacent
sanctuaries and wildlife refuges by impacting water quality, decreasing
wildlife habitat, increasing human access, and creating the need for
frequent maintenance activity, resulting in the establishment of
undesirable plant and animal species, which can change the balance of
habitat type. There are no designated sanctuaries of refuges located within
the vicinity of the projects; therefore, impacts to sanctuaries or refuges
will not occur as a result of the proposed projects.
8.4.2 Wetlands
The discharge of fill material has the potential to adversely affect wetlands
including wetland substrate, hydrology, and vegetation. Discharges can
lead to a loss of wetland values, such as wildlife habitat, flood storage, and
groundwater recharge. The discharge of fill material associated with
development at the sites will impact 0.044 acre of on -site wetlands.
Wetland impacts are minimal.
8.4.3 Mud Flats
Discharge of fill material has the potential to negatively affect mud flats
that exist along inland lakes, ponds, and riverine systems. There are no
mud flat communities within the vicinity of the projects; therefore, loss of
these ecosystems will not occur as a result of the proposed projects.
8.4.4 Vegetated Shallows
Discharge of fill material has the potential to negatively affect vegetated
shallows. Vegetated shallows are permanently inundated areas that
contain rooted aquatic vegetation. This type of habitat generally exists
within estuarine and marine environments; and some freshwater lakes and
rivers. No vegetated shallow habitats exist within the vicinity of the
projects; therefore, no impacts to this ecosystem will occur as a result of
the proposed projects.
8.4.5 Coral Reefs
Discharge of fill material has the potential to negatively affect coral reefs.
Coral reefs typically exist within marine ecosystems. Coral reefs do not
exist within the vicinity of the projects; therefore, no impacts to this
ecosystem will occur as a result of the proposed projects.
17

8.4.6 Riffle -Pool Complexes
Discharge of fill material into or upstream of riffle -pool complexes has the
potential to negatively affect water quality and wildlife value. Fill has the
potential to be placed into riffle -pool complexes. Any permanent impact
to riffle -pool complexes will be mitigated for through the proposed
mitigation plan.
8.5 Potential Effects on Human Use Characteristics
Sub -Part F of the 40 C.F.R. 230 guidelines address potential effects on human use
of wetlands and waterways. Factors including water supply, recreational and
commercial fisheries, water - related recreation, aesthetics, and parks and similar
preserves are considered within this portion of the guidelines.
8.5.1 Municipal and Private Water Supply
The public water supply will not increase or decrease due to proposed
activities within the project boundaries.
8.5.2 Recreational and Commercial Fisheries
Discharge of fill material has the potential to negatively affect recreational
and commercial fisheries. Streams and wetlands on the project sites are
not a part of any recreational or commercial fishery. Activities taking
place within the project boundaries will not adversely impact recreational
or commercial fisheries.
8.5.3 Water - Related Recreation
Proposed activities within the project boundaries will not increase or
decrease waterborne recreation in the project boundaries or vicinity.
8.5.4 Aesthetics
The proposed project sites are within the boundaries of an operational
mine and Quartz processing plant. The proposed projects are not expected
to increase or diminish the aesthetic value of the area or cause disharmony
from an aerial or neighboring view.
8.5.5 Parks, National and Historical Monuments, National Beach Shores,
Wilderness Areas, Research Sites, and Similar Preserves
No areas as described above will be effected by the proposed projects.
8.6 Summary
Based on the EPA guidelines identified within 40 C.F.R. 230, and enumerated
herein, a number of potential environmental impacts have been presented and
subsequently addressed. The proposed permanent impact to 1,305 linear feet of
streams and 0.044 acre of wetland will not cause any off -site adverse impacts.
Mitigation offered through payment in to the EEP will compensate for any on -site
impacts.
18

9.0 PUBLIC INTEREST CONSIDERATIONS
When reviewing this application, the Corps is required to consider the project in terms of
the public interest. In considering the public interest, the Corps must evaluate the
probable impacts of the project and evaluate the "benefits which reasonably may be
expected to occur from the proposal against reasonably foreseeable detriments ". In
balancing these interests, the Corps must consider the public and private need for the
proposed project, the practicability of using reasonable alternative locations, and the
extent and permanence of the beneficial and/or detrimental impacts of the project. The
Corps also considers the following public interest factors:
conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns,
wetlands, historic and cultural resources, fish and wildlife values, flood
hazards, floodplain values, land use, navigation, shore erosion and
accretion, recreation, water supply and water quality, energy needs, safety,
food and fiber production, mineral needs, and considerations of the
property ownership.
Pursuant to 33 C.F.R. 323.6, a determination that the project is not contrary to the public
interest must be achieved before permit issuance. Public interest considerations are listed
in 33 C.F.R. 320.4 (a)(1) and are discussed below.
Furthermore, the Corps regulations state that a permit will be granted unless the district
engineer determines that it would be contrary to the public interest.
The applicant has extensively evaluated these factors through the planning process and
believes that the proposed project is clearly not contrary to the public interest.
9.1 Conservation
The applicant is not proposing preservation as a component of the project;
however, those projects completed by the EEP in association with these
projects will be preserved in perpetuity.
9.2 Economics
The Unimin Corporation operates at least two mines within the Spruce
Pine Mining District, which employee hundreds of people. Mining
provides an overall benefit to the local economy of the area. Any activity
completed in support of the mine and their existing operations will
promote the local economy.
19

9.3 Aesthetics
The proposed project sites are within the boundary of an operational mine
and Quartz processing plant. The proposed projects are not expected to
increase or diminish the aesthetic value of the area or cause disharmony
from an aerial or neighboring view.
9.4 General Environmental Concerns
Other than stream and wetland impacts, proposed development activities
within the project boundaries will have no significant identifiable impacts
upon other environmental components.
9.5 Wetlands
The discharge fill material has the potential to adversely affect wetlands
including wetland substrate, hydrology, and vegetation. Discharges can
lead to a loss of wetland values, such as wildlife habitat, flood storage, and
groundwater recharge. The discharge of fill material associated with
development at the sites will impact 0.044 acre of on -site wetlands.
Wetland impact is minimal.
9.6 Historic Properties
A desk review of the National Register of Historic Places records
maintained by the NC State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and
available on SHPO's HPOWEB GIS Service indicates five historic
properties within 2 miles of the Hawkins Mine and Quartz processing plant
project areas: the Penland Post Office and General Store (SHPO Site #
ML0069) located southwest approximately 0.5 mile, the Penland School
Historic District (NPS Reference # 03001270) located west approximately
1.2 miles, the Henry Willis House (NPS Reference # 88001051) located
west approximately 1.9 miles, the Gunter Building (NPS Reference #
02000112) located south approximately 1.9 miles, and the Downtown
Spruce Pine Historic District (NPS Reference # 03000855) located south
approximately 2 miles. It is the opinion of CEC that activities taking place
within the project boundary will not affect the integrity of the historic site.
The SHPO will be notified via Public Notice about the projects and will be
given the opportunity to comment on the projects and their potential effects
on archaeological and cultural resources.
9.7 Fish and Wildlife Values
Riparian and wetland areas provide habitat for many types of wildlife
because of their diverse and productive plant communities, complex
structure, and close proximity to surface water. Wildlife may be
permanent residents of riparian and wetland areas or occasional visitor that
use the areas for food, water, or temporary shelter.
Food availability varies with the type of vegetation in riparian and wetland
areas, but includes fruit, seed, foliage, twigs, buds, insects, and other
20

invertebrates. Trees and shrub produce a variety of foods that are eaten by
many animals and may be especially important sources of nutrition during
the winter months. Grasses and herbaceous vegetation provide seeds and
forage both within riparian and wetland areas and along the forest border.
The stream environment provides moving water for many animals to
drink, feed, swim, and reproduce. Water is also available on moist
vegetation and in wetlands that are often associated with riparian areas.
These areas, both permanent and temporary, are especially important for
amphibians and macro- invertebrates.
Riparian and wetland areas provide a sheltered environment for many
species of animals to feed, rest, and reproduce. Animals use these areas to
seek shelter from extreme weather and to escape predators and human
activity. Riparian and wetland areas may also provide important travel
corridors for some species, and are frequently used as stop -over points for
migratory birds.
Although some evidence of wildlife usage was apparent on the sites,
because the project areas are within close proximity to existing mine and
processing facilities, wildlife habitat is minimal. Noise pollution, denuded
vegetation, and anthropogenic activity make this area less desirable for
resident and migrant wildlife. While a loss of wildlife habitat for stream -
dependent species may result from the proposed projects, the proposed
mitigation should compensate for any lost functions and values.
9.8 Flood Hazards
It is likely that some tributaries on the project sites will flood occasionally
due to natural fluctuations in weather patterns that increase precipitation.
The activities taking place within the project boundaries are not expected
to increase or decrease the natural rate of flooding at the sites or
downstream.
9.9 Floodnlain Values
Designated floodplains do exist downslope of the railroad tracks adjacent
to the North Toe River within the Hawkins Quartz processing plant
tailings dump project boundary (FEMA Map Panel 0880, effective
February 4, 2009). However, designated floodplains will not be impacted
by activities within Hawkins quartz processing plant tailings dump project
boundary. Flood stages and frequencies should not increase or decrease as
a result of the activities taking place within the quartz processing plant
project boundary. A map showing the 100 -year floodplain boundary is
included for review (Figure 5).
21

9.10 Land Use
The proposed projects will be in compliance with local zoning regulations
and ordinances. The projects are consistent with surrounding land use and
development.
9.11 Navigation
Streams on both sites are tributaries to the North Toe River. The North
Toe River flows into the Nolichucky River, which is a tributary to the
French Broad River. The French Broad River is a navigable -in -fact water
at the Wilson Bridge southeast of Brevard. Activities proposed at the
project sites are not likely to affect navigation.
9.12 Shore Erosion and Accretion
The projects should have minimal effects on erosion and runoff. Erosion
control plans will be implemented as part of the construction plan for the
projects. During the construction process, best management practices
(BMPs) will be followed. These BMPs will include the construction of
swales, erosion and sediment control structures, turbidity barriers, and other
measures that will prevent sediment transport off the project sites and into
adjacent waters. Activities proposed at the project sites are not likely to
cause significant erosion or accretion.
9.13 Recreation
Proposed activities will not increase or decrease waterborne recreation on
the sites or in the vicinity of the projects.
9.14 Water Supply and Conservation
The public water supply will not increase or decrease due to proposed
activities within the project boundaries.
9.15 Water Ouality (Stormwater Management)
No short term or long term adverse water quality impacts are anticipated.
BMPs will be incorporated during construction.
The applicant will be concurrently applying for a NC Division of Water
Quality, Water Quality Certification.
9.16 Energy Needs
Activities taking place within the proposed project boundaries, during
construction and at full build out, are not expected to significantly increase
energy demands beyond the capacity of the local facility. Energy will not
be produced as a result of the proposed activities within the proposed
project boundaries.
22

9.17 Safety
The proposed projects will be designed with the maximum possible
considerations for public safety. The proposed activities at the project sites
will not increase or decrease public safety. Access to the sites by the
general public is prohibited, eliminating any threat to public safety.
9.18 Food and Fiber Production
The proposed activities within the project boundaries will not increase or
decrease food and fiber production.
9.19 Mineral Needs
The proposed projects fulfill the need for high- quality quartz. The Unimin
Corporation's Hawkins Mine is a producer of high- quality quartz used in
semiconductors, solar energy cells, high intensity lighting, quartz tubing,
etc. Any activity completed in support of the mine and existing operations
will promote mineral production at the site.
9.20 Considerations of Property Ownership
The Unimin Corporation owns and/or leases the property proposed for
development and has the inherent right to develop the land in a reasonable
and responsible manner, which includes adhering to all Federal, State, and
local regulations.
The Unimin Corporation
7638 NC Highway 226 South
Spruce Pine, North Carolina 28777
9.21 Needs and Welfare of the Public
The projects will positively address the needs and welfare of the public by
promoting mineral production and economic growth in the community of
Spruce Pine, Mitchell County, North Carolina.
23

10.0 SECONDARY AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
The proposed projects are located within the French Broad River Subbasin 04- 03 -06.
Approximately 87 percent of this subbasin is forested and the total land mass includes
approximately 445 square miles (297,600 acres). The two proposed project sites are
comprised of approximately 257 acres (0.40 square miles). All of the land mass for the
project sites account for less than 0.08 percent of the land mass of the basin. These
percentages alone, limit significant cumulative effects on the watershed. Past activities
within the subbasin include logging, agricultural and residential development, road
building, and mining. Mining activities are continuing at the Unimin Corporation's
Hawkins Mine and competitors' mines. Agricultural and residential development, and road
building in the vicinity remains active; however, continued and future development of the
watershed is independent of activities proposed at the Hawkins Mine and Quartz
processing plant. Impacts within the project boundaries include fill of stream channels
through the development of the tailing dump and south mine waste dump. Avoidance and
minimization activities have lessened impacts associated with the proposed projects and
their effect cumulatively on the watershed will be minimal. Activity within the project
boundaries should not result in a major impairment of the water resources on site or
interfere with the productivity and water quality of the existing aquatic ecosystem.
24

11.0 SUMMARY
The development of the tailings dump at the Hawkins Quartz processing plant and the
south mine waste dump at the Hawkins Mine includes 6 permanent stream impacts and 3
permanent wetland impact associated placement of culverts /under drains and subsequent
placement of fill. Alternatives have been discussed and the project as proposed is the
least damaging practical alternative which meets the project purpose. Potential impacts
to the physical and chemical characteristics of the ecosystem, biological characteristic of
the ecosystem, impacts on special aquatic sites, and potential effects on human use
characteristics will be minimal. The project is not contrary to the public interest and will
aid in the continued growth of Mitchell County.
25

Unimin - Quartz Processing Plant Tailings Dump and South Mine Waste Dump
Now-
? PO
Legend .r
pajAve Svtut Aw
— Mining Permit Boundary 4" sd Spruce �
Iv V. Pine N
New Mining Permit Boundary
Fn ®lish Rd i`
Active Mine Area c
b
g� 1153 V%%(
Permitted Area
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
QProcess Plant Boundary iiiiii Miles P"
Drawn b��l �1 15.12 cat
Mitchell County, CLearWater Vicinity Map
North Carolina Figure 1
224 South Grove Street, Suite F
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28792

Unimin - Quartz Processing Plant Tailings Dump and South Mine Waste Dump

Unimin - Quartz Processing Plant Tailings Dump
� •dr 4
r
1s .; ;, .. 0
Legend
Process Plant Boundary
Soils
BmA
Biltmore
CeE
Chandler - Micaville
ScC
Saunook
Ud; Un
Udorthents
W
Water
W9C; WgD; WgE
Watauga
Mitchell County,
North Carolina
OwarWater
224 South Grove Street, Suite F
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28792
V�
s jf
i
USDA Soils Map
Figure 3a

Unimin - South Mine Waste Dump
c ` t
1
P
Legend
Mining Permit Boundary
New Mining Permit Boundary
® Active Mine Area
Permitted Area
Soils
CaF
Cashiers
FeC2; FeD2
Fannin
SaB;ScC
Saunook
Un
Udorthents
WgC; WgD; WgE
Watauga
Mitchell County,
North Carolina
Permitted Area
Corps Action ID 2008 -1254
DWQ Project # 20071250
a
Fe
s ,1�
CLearWater
224 South Grove Street, Suite F
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28792
a
��
q
' � a
0 250 500 1,000 1,500
i
USDA Soils Map
Figure 3b

Unimin - Quartz Processing Plant Tailings Dump ( +/- 172 AC)
```/
.4
N
I + 1 inch = 500 feet
0 250 500 1,000 1,500
Feet
Drawn by: RLN 01.17.13; CEC Project #693
Mitchell County,
North Carolina
A--
Project Data
Total Project Area +/- 257 acres
Jurisdictional Waters of the US
Stream 7,800 linear feet
Wetland 0.044 acres
Open Water 0 acres
Jurisdictional Impacts
Stream (processing plant) 605 LF
Stream (south mine waste) 700 LF
Total Stream Impacts 1,305 LF
Wetland (processing plant) 0.044 acres
Wetland (south mine waste) 0 acres
Total Wetland Impacts 0.044 acres
Avoidance
Streams 6,495 linear feet
Wetlands 0 acres
Mitigation
Streams (EEP) 1,305 linear feet
Wetlands (EEP) 0 acres
CLear\A/ater
224 South Grove Street, Suite F
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28792
Impact 1
84 LF
Impact 2
0.008 AC
Impact 3 f
325 LF
VIA VA
._ FIA
I ilv"A
+1 #r1kJVV
'A -)A
�Affir
Legend
1 inch = 100 feet
- Culvert Proposed Waste Area
Stream Existing Basins (non jurisdictional)
Wetland = Processing Plant Boundary
Impact Map
Figure 4a

Unimin -South Mine Waste Dump ( +/- 85 AC)
.egend
Culvert ® Proposed Waste Area
'- Stream Existing Basin (non - jurisdictional)
® Active Mine Area ' Mining Permit Boundary
Permitted Area New Mining Permit Boundary
�p
X
r
0 250 500 1,000 1,500
Feet
Mitchell County,
North Carolina
Project Data
Total Project Area +/- 257 acres
Jurisdictional Waters of the US
Stream 7,800 linear feet
Wetland 0.044 acres
Open Water 0 acres
Jurisdictional Impacts
Stream (processing plant) 605 LF
Stream (south mine waste) 700 LF
Total Stream Impacts 1,305 LF
Avoidance
Mitigation
Wetland (processing plant) 0.044 acres
Wetland (south mine waste) 0 acres
Total Wetland Impacts 0.044 acres
Streams 6,495 linear feet
Wetlands 0 acres
Streams (EEP) 1,305 linear feet
Wetlands (EEP) 0 acres
Permitted Area
Corps Action ID 2008 -1254
DWQ Project # 20071250
Active Mine Area
Not Delineated
N
_( r
CLearWater
224 South Grove Street, Suite F
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28792
Impact 8
110 LF
Impact 9
590 LF
1 inch = 100 feet
Drawn by: RLN 01.17.13; CEC Project #693
Impact Map
Figure 4b

Unimin - Quartz Processing Plant Tailings Dump

Attachment A
Jurisdictional Determination Information
Hawkins Mine South Mine Waste Dump (dated May 20, 2011)
Hawkins Quartz Processing Plant Tailings Dump (dated January 31, 2013)

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action I.D.: 2008 -1254 County: Mitchell U.S.G.S. Quad: Spruce Pine
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner /Agent:
Address:
Telephone No.:
The Unimin Corporation
Attention: Rolf Pippert
Post Office Box 588
Spruce Pine, NC 28777
828 - 765 -4283
Property description:
Size (acres): Approximately 85 acres in area delineated
Nearest Waterway: North Toe River
Coordinates: 35.9442/- 82.0789
Nearest Town: Spruce Pine
River Basin: Nolichucky
Hydrologic Unit Code: 06010108
Location Description: The site is located off of NC Hwy 226, near Spruce Pine, Mitchell County, North Carolina. The
delineation is accurately depicted on the updated map submitted via email on May 4, 2011.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
_ Based on preliminary information, there may be waters and wetlands on the above described property. We strongly
suggest you have this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction. To be
considered final, a jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
B. Approved Determination
_ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
X There are waters and wetlands on the above described property subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We strongly suggest you have the waters and wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property
and/or our present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner. For a
more timely delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any delineation must be verified by
the Corps.
X The waters and wetlands on your property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps.
We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by
the Corps. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your
property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to
exceed five years.
_ The waters and wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.

Action Id.: 2008 -1254
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of COE's Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Tasha McCormick at 828 -271 -7980.
C. Basis For Determination
This site contains stream channels located on the property that exhibit indicators of ordinary high water marks. The stream
channels on the property are unnamed tributaries to the North Toe River. The North Toe flows into the Nolichucky River
which flows into the French Broad. The French Broad merges with the Holston River to form the Tennessee River. Tennessee
River drains to the Ohio River then to the Mississippi before entering the Gulf of Mexico.
D. Remarks
Site visit conducted on May 3.2011 with Rebekah Newton and Clement Riddle, ClearWater Environmental
Consultants.
E. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
Attached to this verification is an approved jurisdictional determination. If you are not in agreement with that approved
jurisdictional determination, you can make an administrative appeal under 33 CFR 331. Enclosed you will find a Notification
of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you must
submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Program
Attn: Tasha McCormick, Project Manager
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by May 10, 2011.
"`It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence."
Corps Regulatory Official:
Issue Date: May 19, 2011 Expiration Date: May 19.2016
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to
do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at our website at http:// pert .nwp.usace.army.mil/survey.html
to complete the survey online.
CF: Clearwater Environmental Consultants, Inc. 224 South Grove Street, Hendersonville, NC 28792 Attention:
Rebekah Newton

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action I.D.: 2008 -1254 County: Mitchell U.S.G.S. Quad: Spruce Pine
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner /Agent:
Address:
Telephone No.:
The Unimin Corporation
Attention: Rolf Pippert
Post Office Box 588
Spruce Pine, NC 28777
828 - 7654283
Property description:
Size (acres): Approximately 85 acres in area delineated
Nearest Waterway: North Toe River
Coordinates: 35.9442/ - 82.0789
Nearest Town: Spruce Pine
River Basin: Nolichucky
Hydrologic Unit Code: 06010108
Location Description: The site is located off of NC Hwy 226, near Spruce Pine, Mitchell County, North Carolina. The
delineation is accurately depicted on the updated map submitted via email on May 4, 2011.
Indicate Which of the Following Army:
A. Preliminary Determination
Based on preliminary information, there may be waters and wetlands on the above described property. We strongly
suggest you have this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction. To be
considered final, a jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
X There are waters and wetlands on the above described property subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWAx33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
We strongly suggest you have the waters and wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property
and/or our present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner. For a
more timely delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any delineation must be verified by
the Corps.
X The waters and wetlands on your property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps.
We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by
the Corps. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your
property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to
exceed five years.
_ The waters and wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.

Action Id.: 2008 -1254
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of COVs Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Tasha McCormick at 828 -271 -7980.
C. Basis For Determination
This site contains stream channels located on the property that exhibit indicators of ordinary high water marks. The stream
channels on the property are unnamed tributaries to the North Toe River. The North Toe flows into the Nolichucky River
which flows into the French Broad. The French Broad merges with the Holston River to form the Tennessee River. Tennessee
River drains to the Ohio River then to the Mississippi before entering the Gulf of Mexico.
D. Remarks
Site visit conducted on May 3.2011 with Rebekah Newton and Clement Riddle, ClearWater Environmental
Consultants.
E. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
Attached to this verification is an approved jurisdictional determination. If you are not in agreement with that approved
jurisdictional determination, you can make an administrative appeal under 33 CFR 331. Enclosed you will find a Notification
of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you must
submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Program
Attn: Tasha McCormick, Project Manager
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by May 10, 2011.
* *It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence. **
Corps Regulatory Official:
Issue Date: May 19, 2011 Expiration Date: May 19.2016
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to
do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at our website at hM: // pert .M.usace.army.mil /survgy.htmi
to complete the survey online.
CF: Clearwater Environmental Consultants, Inc. 224 South Grove Street, Hendersonville, NC 28792 Attention:
Rebekah Newton

Attachment B
EEP Acceptance (dated January 22, 2013)

Y
E1 1W
'emsm1
PROGRAM
January 22, 2013
Doug Myers
Unimin Corporation
7638 NC Highway 226
Spruce Pine, NC 28777
Project: Hawkins Processing Plant and Mine
Expiration of Acceptance: July 22, 2013
County: Mitchell
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is willing to accept
payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as indicated in the table below. Please
note that this decision does not assure that participation in the NCEEP will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation
for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact these agencies to determine if payment to the NCEEP will be
approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits regulations or authorizations associated
with the proposed activity including SL 2009 -337: An Act to Promote the Use of Compensatory Mitigation Banks as amended by
S.L. 2011 -343.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not received a copy of the
issued 404 Permit/401 Certification/CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's
responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP. Once NCEEP receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based
on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the In-
Lieu Fee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed at www.nceep.net.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the NCEEP, the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are
summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation required for this impact is determined by permitting agencies.
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation will be performed in
accordance with the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee
Instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the NCEEP. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at
(919) 707 -8915.
Sincerely,
Suza Klimek
Acting Director
cc: Karen Higgins, NCDWQ Wetlands/401 Unit
Tasha McCormick, USACE- Asheville
Tim Fox, NCDWQ - Asheville
Rebekah Newton, agent
File
mtoru;t9... Enka"— Pro" Our Stag
a ill
AMM
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652 / 919 - 919 - 707 -8976 / www.nceep.net
River
CU
Stream (feet)
Wetlands (acres)
Buffer I
Buffer II
Basin
Location
(Sq. Ft.)
(Sq. Ft.)
Cold
Cool
Warm
Riparian
Non-Riparian
Coastal Marsh
Impact
French
06010108
1,305
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Broad
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation will be performed in
accordance with the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee
Instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the NCEEP. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at
(919) 707 -8915.
Sincerely,
Suza Klimek
Acting Director
cc: Karen Higgins, NCDWQ Wetlands/401 Unit
Tasha McCormick, USACE- Asheville
Tim Fox, NCDWQ - Asheville
Rebekah Newton, agent
File
mtoru;t9... Enka"— Pro" Our Stag
a ill
AMM
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652 / 919 - 919 - 707 -8976 / www.nceep.net

Attachment C
Stream Quality Assessment Worksheets

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET r
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Unimin Corporation 2. Evaluator's name: R. Newton, C. Riddle
3. Date of evaluation: 11/18/10 4. Time of evaluation: 11:30 AM
5. Name of stream: UT North Toe River 6. River basin: Nolichuckv
7. Approximate drainage area: +/- 30 Acres 8. Stream order: First Order
9. Length of reach evaluated: AAurox. 100 LF 10. County: Mitchell
11. Site coordinates (if known): 35.936564.-82.085301 12. Subdivision name (if any): n/a
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):_
Small unnamed tributM in center of site
14. Proposed channel work (if any): fill
15. Recent weather conditions: Cloudy, rain within 48 hours
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Could
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
X Trout Waters _Outstan ding Resource Waters — Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed _(I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential _% Commercial 100 % Industrial _% Agricultural
_% Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
22. Bankfull width: 34 ft 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 3 -6 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2 %) _Gentle (2 to 4 %) 2L-Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight X Occasional bends _Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to
each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot
be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where
there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may
be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned
to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 56 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature --PQ Date 11/18/10
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Caashl
Piedmont
Monabdu
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
4
no flow or sam stion = 0• sum flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human altmadon
0-6
0-5
0-5
0
extensive attmadon = 0• no attacabion = max rots
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
no buffet = 0, buffer = max
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemkal dbd cages
0-5
0 —4
0-4
4
exbeosive &cbwm = a no &schum = max pobW
5
dischur
0-3
0-4
0-4
3
no discimm = 0• etc. = max
V
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
0
no flooblain = 0• camsive fl laic = max points)
7
�nttvne1, / floodpWa seem
0-5
0 -4
0-2
3
entcenchod = 0• fiyquat flooding = max
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0 -4
0-2
0
no wetlands = a bw a4scat wadands = max
9
extensive con" 0• = max .
0-5
0 —4
0 —3
1
10
Sedtiment imput
0-5
0 -4
0-4
4
extensive little or no sodment = max
11
Size & dlva*y of eta d bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0 — S
3
= 0• legm diverse sines = max
12
Evidence of ehaand ImMon or widening
0-5
0 - 4
0 — S
3
incised= etable bed dt berms = max points)
13
Presence of major book hftm
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
sevens emnon = ©• n0 stable batd<s — tna7C '
14
Root depth and damft on bub
'
0-3
0-4
0-5
5
visible toots = a dense toots dwoothm = max
15
by livestock or timber production
0-5
0-4
0 —S
1
WmsmW impact =0• no evidmoe = man
16
Presenceof°si��
•
0 -3
0 -5
0 -6
3
rl/ oar ppks = mesa
Ew"
17
Gjak Or no habitat = vaned habitats = max
0 -6
0 -6
0 -6
3
18
_
Can"
0 -5
0 -5
0--5
5
no metad SIM
19
embed" r • loose stmeriu�e = MR)
NA*
0 —4
0-4
3
20
Presence of shneam btveztefu (see page 4)
0-4
0 - 5
0-5
1
no evidence = a common, nmam ftes = tax
21
Poememm of x"bbkas
0 -4
0-4
0 -4
0
no evidence = mm>eims types = max poift
O
22
Presence of fbb
0 -4
0 -4
0 -4
0
(no evulanm= 0. commo% mmmms typo =max
23
Evidence of wWwo use
0 -6
0 -5
0 -5
3
���= 0,abm� evidence =�
Told Pshtts Possilde
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on Salt pass)
56
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

I USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
+�p!1P5 pFF
9
STREAM QUALITY WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Unimin Corporation 2. Evaluator's name: R. Newton, C. Riddle
3. Date of evaluation: 09/13/12
5. Name of stream: UT North Toe River
7. Approximate drainage area: +/- 10 Acres
4. Time of evaluation: 3:00 PM
6, River basin: Nolichucky
8. Stream order: First Order
9. Length of reach evaluated: Aorox. 100 LF 10. County: Mitchell
11. Site coordinates (if known): 35.93511, - 82.10507 12. Subdivision name (if any): n/a
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):_
Stream RD.
14. Proposed channel work (if any): fill
15. Recent weather conditions: Sunny and dry.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: SUM and dry
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
X Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluatii
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential
_Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed _(I -IV)
3n point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
�% Commercial `% Industrial _% Agricultural
70 % Forested 30 % Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
22. Bankfull width: 3 ft 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2 R
24. Channel slope down center of stream: 2L-Flat (0 to 2 %) _Gentle (2 to 4 %) _Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight X Occasional bends ,Frequent meander Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to
each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot
be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where
there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may
be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned
to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 35 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature --O )U -GC.— Date 09/13/12
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent poob in stream
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
3
no flow or saumdon = 0, = max
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
3
extensive alteration = a no alteration = max rots
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
2
no buffer= a condgwas, wide buffer= max
4
Evidence of nutrient or chem&sd diecharges
0-5
0 —4
0-4
1
extensive discharges = a no discharys = max
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
3
no dbchaw = 0• Wdygs, wg% wedands, etc. = max
6
Presence of adjacent fbodplak
0— 4
0— 4
0— 2
0
no lain = 0• extensive lsin = mad rots
7
Entrenchment / floodplafn aces°
0-5
0-4
0 -2
0
a+
entrenched = a fiegog flooding = mad
g
Prevents of adjacent wedaneb
0-6
0-4
0-2
2
no mdands = 0• wetlands = max poiW
g
�� a danowy netwal =�
0 -5
0 -4
0 -3
1
10
0-5
0 -4
0 -4
2
input
(edendw desxmition= 0; We =�
I l
Sine & divertdty of cbaund red so bdrete
NA•
0-4
0 - 5
0
= 0, vow Siena - max
12
Evldence of dnmnd Juddon or wider
"
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
incised= 0• stable bed & banns = men
13
Pceseneeef me* bank f 8wo
'
0 -5
0 -5
0 -5
3
severe erosion - a w stable bank — max
1114
Root depth and dwAly on barb
'
0 -3
0-4
0-5
3
F,
no visible mots = a dense r = men
15
hPactb9' VvedoeI16 or pmhwdm
0 -5
0 -4
0 -5
1
dal ' =0• no evidence = moat
16
PreenceddMejosMp
0 -3
0 -5
0 -6
1
no or = =mad VOW
Habflatcompieift
17
0 -6
0--6
0 -6
0
Oide arnobabitat= 0• varied babitm =meat
18
Canopy = eontirraous = mad
�
0-5
0 —S
0 —S
4
lq
NAB
0-4
0 -4
0
embedded= . =
20
Pronce of dream hwerbebaRa (w0 pop 4)
'
0-4
0-5
0 -5
2
no evWeaca = a m - mad
21
race
0 —4
0-4
0-4
1
M evidwce = 0; co = max points
Qi
=0• Premnce _�
voints)
0 -4
0 -4
0 -4
0
23
Evidence of wildflfe use
0-6
0-5
0-5
0
no evidence = a abundain evidence = max 960
Total Plahrte rewm a
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (8190 entm on fib page)
35
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
[Ell STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET -A*-
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Unimin Corporation 2. Evaluator's name: R. Newton, C. Riddle
3. Date of evaluation: 09/13/12 4. Time of evaluation: 3:00 PM
5. Name of stream: UT North Toe River 6. River basin: Nolichuchy
7. Approximate drainage area: +/- 10 Acres 8. Stream order: First Order
9. Length of reach evaluated: Approx. 100 LF 10. County: Mitchell
11. Site coordinates (if known): 35.93511, - 82.10507 12. Subdivision name (if any): n/a
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):_
Stream RA.
14, Proposed channel work (if any): fill
15. Recent weather conditions: Sunny and dry.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Sunny and dry
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
X Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters , Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed _(I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
70 % Forested 30 % Cleared / Logged _% Other
22. Bankfull width: 2 ft 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 6 in
24. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2 %) 2L-Gentle (2 to 4 %) _Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight X Occasional bends _Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to
each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot
be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where
there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may
be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned
to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 38 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature -7Wffi Date 09/13/12
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
+ These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Hedmmnt
Momttalm
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0 —4
0 — S
4
no flow or saturation= 0, max rots
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0— S
0-5
2
exteaive alteration = 0• no alteration = max
3
Riparian zone
0 -6
0 -4
0 -5
5
nobn� =0, buffer =�
4
Evidence of nutrient or ehemieal discharges
0-5
0 —4
0 —4
0
estmsive = 0. disc = max
5
Groandwater disehar*e
0-3
0-4
0-4
3
= ebc. =max
no a
6
Presence of adjacent flooapialm
0- a
0— 4
0— 2
0
floofthdn = o• ageoaive fl Wn = max
7
fl°
t /°dplain �
0 -5
0 -4
0 -2
0
0,- fiegium
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0 -4
0 -2
2
m wands - 0. adfacft madends = man
9
C2mmddmwft
ea �ive ehamdlioa 0• natural mender max .
@— S
0 —4
0— 3
1
10
Sodt� ti
0-5
0-4
0-4
0
axtearsive _ max
11
She dt diverft of chaund bed substrate
NA+
0-4
0 — S
1
bEgIM — 2i kne, diverse shm — ma
12
of ehanael faddon or wing
0-5
0-4
0 — S
2
_
kcised = V dable bed R {lacks mess.
13
ofonjorbank 0 B
0-5
0 —S
@ —S
3
erWon s 2i no stable bmdm — max
14
moat depth and demsW m banks
0-3
0 -4
0-5
2
no vim mss = Q• don roots = mm '
at!
IS
Input by q*dtw% Esc'or timber production
'
0 -5
0 -4
0 -5
1
wbs i =0• no evidence = mm
I6
Presmce of rinapoolhippie,1ool complexes
0 -3
0 -5
0 -6
1
(no jfflEmoft of MU = I M@ = n= 22M
nabkt eonplcft
17
or no haft= o• fmSTMh varied habho = max
0 -6
0 -6
0-6
3
as
C%nW ^ ova streanibed �
@ —s
o--s
o —s
a
19
NA+
0 -4
0 -4
0
emtbedded- 0• loose sbumm =max
20
Pe+a roofdre m&vwtebr*ft(9wpW4)
0 -4
0 -5
0 -5
2
�+
no a locum = mmaerm types - max '
21
Price b
0 -4
0 -4
0 -4
2
_ =�
22
Preanee
0 —4
0-4
0-4
0
no avidewe = 0; _ max PoW
23
Evidence of wu fe use
0-6
0 — S
0-5
0
no evidaeoe = 0• abundant evidence =max '
Tob1 Points Poke
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on fird pW)
38
+ These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.