20051457 Ver 1_Cyndi Karoly Emails_20130418

Strickland, Bev
From: Karoly, Cyndi
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 2:23 PM
To: Strickland, Bev
Subject: FW:
Attachments: First Broad River Reservoir (11).pdf; First Broad River ReservoirFeb2009.pdf
From: Karoly, Cyndi
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 1:57 PM
To: Hobbs, Cindy E
Subject: RE:
No, the Cleveland County Reservoir (aka First Broad River Reservoir) would not be waived under the language we
proposed. The application fee for the 401 was never submitted, and it gets much more complex from there.
Attached is the letter DWQ sent in 2005 in response to the Corps' Public Notice, in which we requested payment of the
application fee, among other information needed to review the application. Subsequently, the Corps put this project
into the Project delivery Team process, through which a variety of stakeholders are involved in moving a project from
concept to permit application. At any given time, the Corps may only have one or two PDT's active, and they are
typically very large, complex, or controversial projects. I'd be happy to discuss this process in more detail. I've also
attached the most recent item in our file, dating from 2009. It include materials from the most recent PDT meeting in
which we were involved. As you will see upon review of this document, the project remains in the early planning
phases, as in Purpose and Need, to be followed by Alternatives Analysis, and so on. This will follow the NEPA process,
which serves to meet SEPA requirements. It's possible the Corps has been involved with other discussions with the
applicant in which we were not involved.
From: Hobbs, Cindy E
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 12:57 PM
To: Karoly, Cyndi
Subject: RE:
Cindy Hobbs
Executive Assistant
Mitch Gillespie, Assistant Secretary for Environment
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Street Address: 217W. Jones Street, ,6th floor, Room 5304E, Raleigh, NC 27603 -6100
Mailing Address: 1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1601
Telephone: 919 - 707 -8643
From: Karoly, Cyndi
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 10:53 AM
To: Gillespie, Mitch
Subject:
Per discussion. At the time this review worksheet was submitted, we were working off the earlier version of the bill, not
the one with the isolated waters language.

O�0F W ATFgQG Michael F. Easley, Governor
� William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
rNorth Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Q Alan W. 1�limek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
August 23, 2005
DWQ Project # 20051457
Cleveland County
CERTIFIED MAIL: RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Cleveland County Sanitary District
Attn: Butch Smith, General Manager
Post Office Box 778
Lawndale, NC 28090
Subject Property: Proposed First Broad River Reservoir
REQUEST FOR MORE INFORMATION
Dear Mr. Smith:
On June 30, 2005, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your application dated April 5,
2005 to impact wetlands /waters to construct the proposed reservoir construction. The DWQ
has determined that your application was incomplete and /or provided inaccurate information as
discussed below. The DWQ will require additional information in order to process your
application to impact protected wetlands and /or streams on the subject property. Therefore,
unless we receive the additional information requested below, we will have to move toward
denial of your application as required by 15A NCAC 2H .0506 and will place this project on hold
as incomplete until we receive this additional information. Please provide the following
information so that we may continue to review your project.
Additional Information Requested:
1. Water Quality Certification Application Fee. An application fee of $475 is required for this
project. This check should be made out to the NC Division of Water Quality and sent to the
Central Office address listed below.
2. Environmental Documentation: Please provide a copy of the environmental documentation
for this project. It is unclear whether an Environmental Assessment or Environmental
Impact Statement has been done for this project under the State Environmental Policy Act
(SEPA). Please contact Ms. Melba McGee at 919 - 715 -4194 to determine if preparation of
this document is needed. In any case, this documentation must thoroughly examine all
practical alternatives (including pumped storage) that would likely affect a smaller amount of
streams and wetlands.
3. Minimum Release: The Certification for this project will require a minimum release in order
to protect downstream uses including aquatic life. Please provide a proposed minimum
release schedule for this project. We suggest that this flow be based on an updated
Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM) analysis.
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: 919 - 733 -1786 / FAX [phone] / Internet: http: //Uo.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled/ 10% Post Consumer Paper
None Carolina
N t ura!!y

Cleveland County Sanitary Sewer District
Page 3 of 3
August 23, 2005
4. Cumulative Impacts: You will need to conduct a qualitative analysis to examine the
potential for cumulative impacts on streams, wetlands and water quality in the reservoir
in accordance with the latest cumulative impact guidance that DWQ has provided. If this
analysis shows that cumulative impacts are likely, then a quantitative analysis with
proposed management plan will be required for the 401 Certification. Please contact
John Dorney at 919 - 733 -9646 if you have specific questions in this regard.
5. Water quality in the proposed reservoir: The Division will require you to prepare an
acceptable water quality model to address whether water quality standards will be met in
the reservoir. Dissolved oxygen, temperature and eutrophication are issues that must
be addressed by this model. DWQ will need to approve the model before it is used.
Please contact Ms. Michelle Wookfolk (919- 733 -5083 ext. 505) for that review. This
model should also reflect current water quality conditions in the First Broad River.
Additional water quality sampling may be needed in order to address this issue if existing
data are inadequate. This model should also address the effect of any additional
development in the basin within a reasonable time frame.
6. Wetland impacts: The Public Notice states that wetland impacts are probably less than
one acre. Please provide a signed delineation map from the US Army Corps of
Engineers or similar assurance regarding the extent of wetland impacts. If impacts
exceed one acre, then compensatory mitigation for wetland impacts will be required by
DWQ.
7. Public Hearing: Please be aware that the Division has received several requests for a
Public Hearing on this project. According to our rules (15A NCAC 2H .0503), the
Director of the Division must decide whether to have a hearing based on the level of
public interest. DWQ staff will seek this decision in the near future. If a Hearing is
needed, additional correspondence will be sent to you.
Please respond within three weeks of the date of this letter by sending this information to me in
writing and Alan Johnson of the DWQ Mooresville Regional Office. If we do not hear from you
within three weeks, we will assume that you no longer want to pursue this project and we will
consider the project as withdrawn.
This letter only addresses the application review and does not authorize any impacts to
wetlands, waters or protected buffers. Please be aware that any impacts requested within your
application are not authorized (at this time) by the DWQ. Please call Mr. John Dorney or Mr. Ian
McMillan at 919 - 733 -1786 if you have any questions regarding or would like to set up a meeting
to discuss this matter.
hn Dorney
Wetland P g m Development nit
CBK/ /jrd /bs
cc: Alan Johnson, DWQ Mooresville Regional Office

Cleveland County Sanitary Sewer District
Page 3 of 3
August 23, 2005
Dave Baker, USACE Asheville Regulatory Field Office
File Copy
Central Files
Michelle Woolfolk, DWQ
Michelle Raquet, DWQ
John Sutherland, DWR
Melba McGee, DENR
Becky Fox, US Environmental Protection Agency
Pam Boaze, Fish and Wildife Associates, Inc., P.O. Box 241, 25 Water Tower Lane,
Whittier, NC 28789
Filename: S: \2005 Correspondence \05 -1457 First Broad River Reservoir (Cleveland) On
Hold.doc

Agenda
February 18, 2009
Cleveland County Water's Resource Agency /Stakeholder Scoping Meeting
The purpose of the meeting is to get input from resource agencies /stakeholders and
provide clarification on subject matter.
10:30 - 10:35 Introductions - USACE
10:35 - 10:45 Roles and responsibilities of group - USACE
10:45 - 10:55 NEPA and Section 404 process - USACE
10:55 - 11:10 Cleveland County Water's proposed project - McGill Associates
11:10 - 11:40 In- Stream Flow Study - Division of Water Resources, Jim Mead
11:40 - 12:10 Purpose and Need - Arcadis
12:10 - 1:00 Alternatives Analysis - McGill Associates
Comments on the Purpose and Need Statement and Alternatives Analysis are due to the
Corps by March 4, 2009. You may provide written comments to Henry Wicker by E-
mail ( Henry .M.Wicker.Jr @USACE.Army.mil) or by letter, 69 Darlington Avenue,
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403.
We will notify the group at a later date when we will have our next meeting.

Re: EPA Fomments on Cleveland Co P &N statement
Subject: Re: EPA comments on Cleveland Co P &N statement
From: Fox.Rebecca @epamail.epa.gov
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 14:22:09 -0500
To: Fox.Rebecca @epamail.epa.gov
CC: " Alan.Johnson@ncmail. net" <Alan. Johnson@ncmail. net>, "allen_ ratzlaff @fws.gov"
<allen_ ratzlaff @fws.gov >, "Jones, Amanda D SAW" < Amanda .D.Jones @saw02.usace. army. mil >,
"O'Quinn, Barney" <Barney.O'Quinn @arcadis- us.com >, "Britt. Setzer@ncmail. net"
<Britt. Setzer@ncmail. net>, "Bryan _ Tompkins @fws.gov" <Bryan_Tompkins @ fws.gov>,
"chris.goudreau @ncwildlife.org" <chris.goudreau @ncwildlife.org >, " Cyndi. Karoly@ncmail. net"
<Cyndi.Karoly @ncmail.net>, Manager- <David. Dear@ClevelandCounty. com>,
"elammt @hotmail.com" <elammt @hotmail.com >, "fred.tarver @ncmail.net"
<fred.tarver @ncmail.net>, "fwa @dnet.net" <fwa @dnet.net>, "gormancm @dhec.sc.gov"
<gormancm @dhec.sc.gov >, "gwood @lincolncounty.org" <gwood @lincolncounty.org >, "Wicker,
Henry M JR SAW" <Henry.M. Wicker .JR @saw02.usace.army.mil >, "hortonjl @dhec.sc.gov"
<hortonjl @dhec.sc.gov >, "James. [e-mail]: " <James.McRight @ncmail.net: >,
Derby. Jennifer@epamail. epa. gov, "smtp -Mead, Jim" <j im. mead@ncmail. net>,
"John. Condrey@rutherfordcountync. gov" <John. Condrey@rutherfordcountync. gov>,
justin .p.mccorcle @usace.army.mil, "keithw @mcgillengineers.com" <keithw @mcgillengineers.com >,
"kfortner @gbpw.com" <kfortner @gbpw.com >, "linvillejr @earthlink.net" <linvillejr @earthlink.net >,
"manager @ccsdwater.com" <manager @ccsdwater.com >, "marilyns @cityofkm.com"
<marilyns @cityofkm.com >, "Melba. Mcgee@ncmail. net" <Melba. Mcgee@ncmail. net>,
"mholder @dot. state.nc.us" <mholder @dot. state. nc. us>, " renee .gledhill - earley @ncmail.net"
<renee.gledhill- earley @ncmail.net>, "Rick. Howell @cityofshelby. com "
<Rick. Howell@cityofshelby. com>, "Pugh, Robin" <Robin.Pugh @arcadis- us.com >,
"russtown @nc- cherokee.com" <russtown @nc- cherokee.com >, ron mccollum
<teweenot @yahoo.com >, "Tom. Reeder@ncmail. net" <Torn.Reeder @ncmail.net >,
"turnerle @dhec.sc.gov" <turnerle @dhec.sc.gov>
I'm resending EPA's email from 1 -15 re the EPA requirement for the
incorporation of water efficiency measures in determining future water
demand projections for the purpose and need for proposed water supply
reservoir projects so the team can have an opportunity to look over it
again in preparation for the meeting tomorrow.
Thanks!
Becky Fox
Wetland Regulatory Section
USEPA
Phone: 828 - 497 -3531
Email: fox.rebecca @epa.gov
Rebecca
Fox /R4 /USEPA /US
To
01/15/2009 10:41 "Pugh, Robin"
AM <Robin.Pugh@arcadis- us.com>
CC
"Alan.Johnson @ncmail.net"
<Alan.Johnson @ncmail.net >,
"allen ratzlaff @fws.gov"
<allen ratzlaff @fws.gov >, "Jones,
Amanda D SAW"
1 of 8 2/17/2009 2:22 PM

Re: EPA comments on Cleveland Co P &N statement
< Amanda .D.Jones @saw02.usace.army.
mil >, "0'Quinn, Barney"
<Barney.0'Quinn @arcadis- us.com >,
"Britt.Setzer @ncmail.net"
<Britt.Setzer @ncmail.net >,
"Bryan Tompkins @fws.gov"
< Bryan [e-mail] >,
"chris.goudreau @ ncwildlife.org"
<chris.goudreau @ncwildlife.org >,
"Cyndi.Karoly @ncmail.net"
<Cyndi.Karoly @ncmail.net >,
Manager -
< David .Dear @ClevelandCounty.com >,
"elammt @hotmail.com"
<elammt @hotmail.com >,
"fred.tarver @ncmail.net"
<fred.tarver @ncmail.net >,
"fwa @dnet.net" <fwa @dnet.net >,
"gormancm @dhec.sc.gov"
<gormancm @dhec.sc.gov >,
"gwood @lincolncounty.org"
<gwood @lincolncounty.org >,
"Wicker, Henry M JR SAW"
< Henry .M.Wicker.JR @saw02.usace.ar
my.mil >, "hortonjl @dhec.sc.gcv"
<hortonjl @dhec.sc.gov >,
"James.McRight @ncmail.net:"
<James.McRight @ncmail.net: >,
"smtp -Mead, Jim"
<jim.mead @ncmail.net >,
" John .Condrey @rutherfordcountync.
gov"
< John .Condrey @rutherfordcountync.
gov >,
"keithw @mcgillengineers.com"
<keithw @mcgillengineers.com >,
"kfortner @gbpw.com"
<kfortner @gbpw.com >,
"linvillejr @earthlink.net"
<linvillejr @earthlink.net >,
"manager @ccsdwater.com"
<manager @ccsdwater.com >,
"marilyns @cityofkm.com"
<marilyns @cityofkm.com >,
"Melba.Mcgee @ncmail.net"
<Melba.Mcgee @ncmail.net >,
"mholder @dot.state.nc.us"
<mholder @dot.state.nc.us >,
"renee .gledhill - [e-mail]
If
< renee .gledhill- earley @ncmail.net
>, "Rick.Howell @cityofshelby.com"
<[e-mail] >,
"russtown @nc- cherokee.com"
<russtown @nc- cherokee.com >, ron
mccollum <teweenot @yahoo.com >,
"Tom.Reeder @ncmail.net"
<Tcm.Reeder @ncmail.net >,
"turnerle @dhec.sc.gov"
<turnerle @dhec.sc.gov >, Jennifer
Derby /R4 /USEPA /US @EPA,
justin.p.mccorcle @usace.army.mil
Subject
EPA comments on Cleveland Co P &N
statement (Document link: Rebecca
Fox)
2 of 8 2/17/2009 2:22 PM

Re: EPA Comments on Cleveland Co P &N statement
Henry, Robin, et al,
I have reviewed the draft Purpose and Need (P &N) for the First
Broad River Reservoir (FBRR) and am providing some initial comments in
preparation for our meeting next week. I have not yet had the
opportunity to review the alternatives analysis that was sent out
yesterday. EPA has provided numerous written and oral comments for this
project and our comments have always stressed the need for a strong
water conservation /reuse component for use in determining the projected
water demand and in developing the alternatives analysis. Although the
first objective listed in the project objectives section of the P &N
section is to "develop an effective and efficient water supply system"
there was little information in this section as to how the use of water
efficiency measures was a component in projecting future water needs.
Last week, I forwarded a draft paper to the FBRR project development
team outlining EPA Region 4 guidelines that any applicant for a
reservoir project in the Southeast will be required to utilize in
developing water demand projections and alternatives analysis. Water
efficiency measures have been shown to provide substantial and
documented savings in water and money, and should not be dismissed as
impractical and /or insignificant. The use of these measures are even
more important in light of the current drought being experienced in the
Southeast. EPA Region 4 places a very high priority on applying these
measures in determining P &N and evaluating the alternatives analysis for
reservoir projects, and recommends the applicant and the COE rigorously
apply them in the development of the FBRR EIS. The discussion below is
a follow up to the draft Region 4 paper and provides more information on
efficiency measures we will expect to see addressed in the water needs
projection and alternatives analysis for the FBRR.
We believe water efficiency measures can and should be central to
water supply planning. In comparison, large reservoirs can be very
costly in both money and environmental impacts (and mitigation for
environmental impacts), and lose very large amounts of water through
evaporation. Water conservation measures should not be a policy enacted
only in times of drought. The following discussion elaborates on some
of the measures outlined in the EPA Region 4 drought measures guidelines
paper:
Stop leaks: Aged and broken pipes and valves can be responsible for
huge quantities of water loss in water supply systems in the U.S. It is
not clear from the P &N document if the Cleveland County Sanitary
District (CCSD) utilizes a leak detection /repair program. Table 15
contains water loss information that shows an average of 17% unaccounted
water loss per year for years 2003 -2007, but there was not a discussion
of a water loss detection and repair program. The P &N section should
contain a detailed discussion of what measures CCSD is using to
determine unaccounted for losses of water and what type of leak
detection and repair measures are being utilized. Although water
losses may be 20% or higher in water supply systems across the country,
we believe with advances in technologies and expertise, these losses
should be able to be reduced to less than 10 %. Leesburg, VA was able to
reduce their loss from 33 to 6% and is working on further reductions.
Raleigh, NC, through a year round leak detection and abatement program,
has been able to reduce their leakage rate to 4.5 %. This can represent
huge savings in MGD of water usage. Leak detection and the impact of
potential repairs to the water supply system should be incorporated into
3 of 8 2/17/2009 2:22 PM

Re: EPA comments on Cleveland Co P &N statement
the water demand projections for the FBRR project. There may be money
available for this with the new Administration as part of an
infrastructure repair component of the financial recovery plan. EPA can
provide additional information on this as it becomes available.
Water Price: Water should be priced to encourage conservation. This
means water should be priced to cover what it actually costs to provide
it to the consumer. A two -tier pricing system is recommended. This
would include a flat fee to cover fixed utility costs and a second part
variable fee that would charge higher rates as water consumption
increases to above average levels to discourage waste and encourage
conservation. Correct pricing for water has been estimated to be able
to provide savings of around 15 %.
Meter all Users: Generally multi - family units and commercial buildings
charge a flat rate for water. This practice does not encourage users to
conserve water. Individual user water meters should be installed on all
new buildings and incentives should be provided to retrofit old
buildings with individual metering.
Retrofit all Buildings: Large water savings could be realized if all
households and businesses used water efficient appliances and fixtures.
Estimates are this could result in 20% savings. This could be
accomplished in old buildings by mandating updates be made on resale or
establishment of new accounts. Voluntary incentive programs such as
rebates and free audits could also help with retrofitting older
buildings.
Landscape and Irrigation Systems: Large amounts of water usage can be
attributed to landscaping (some estimates have it at 30 %).
Municipalities have been able to greatly reduce this use through
measures such as: dedicated irrigation meters for large landscapes with
a significantly higher water rate, moisture /rain sensors for all
irrigation systems, free irrigation system audits, use of different
landscape models and plants that use less water.
Smart New Buildings: All new buildings should require the most water
efficient technologies. This should include the appliances and
fixtures, and also dual plumbing systems that allow the use of gray
water and harvested rain water for activities that do not require
drinking - quality water, like toilet flushing or irrigation. Section
4.1.2 of the P &N section discusses future demands from new housing.
These demand projections should be based on the use of efficiency
measures in new housing and businesses and not on historical water usage
data from houses and buildings not incorporating water efficiency
technology and programs.
These are just some of the ways water efficiency measures can
result in large savings in water and costs. Revised water demand
projections for this project should, at a minimum, reflect the
incorporation of these and other measures outlined in the Region 4
drought management guideline paper. The demand projections in the P &N
appear to be based on historical usage rates and should be updated to
reflect the incorporation of the efficiency measures outlined above.
Section 4.42 (Water Supply Needs) does not contain any mention of the
incorporation of water efficiency /conservation measures. This should be
a major component in this section. We will be looking for how each of
these measures will impact the water demand projections in the revised
Purpose and Need section. EPA Region 4 considers this a key component
in the evaluation of not only the FBRR project but also all future
reservoir projects in the Southeast.
4 of 8 2/17/2009 2:22 PM

Re: EPA comments on Cleveland Co P &N statement
Along with the incorporation of the efficiency measures, we are
also providing the reminder that any other municipalities, towns, etc
that are used to determine water projection demands should have a signed
service agreement with CCSD. This information should be included in the
P &N section.. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the draft P &N
section and look forward to being involved with this project as we move
through the EIS development process.
Becky Fox
Wetland Regulatory Section
USEPA
Phone: 828 - 497 -3531
Email: fox.rebecca @epa.gov
"Pugh, Robin"
<Robin.Pugh @arca
dis- us.com> To
"Wicker, Henry M JR SAW"
01/14/2009 02:58 < Henry .M.Wicker.JR @saw02.usace.ar
PM my.mil >,
"wood @lincolncounty.crg"
<gwood @lincolncounty.crg >,
"James.McRight @ncmail.net:"
<James.McRight @ncmail.net:>,
"John.Condrey @rutherfordcountync.
gov"
< John .Condrey @rutherfordcountync.
gov >, "Britt.Setzer @ncmail.net"
<Britt.Setzer @ncmail.net >,
"linvillejr @earthlink.net"
<linvillejr @earthlink.net >,
"chris,goudreau @ncwildlife.org"
< [e-mail] >,
"Cyndi.Karoly @ncmail.net"
<Cyndi.Karoly @ncmail.net >,
"Alan.Johnson @ncmail.net"
<Alan.Johnson @ncmail.net >,
" renee .aledhill- earlev @ncmail.net
<renee .gledhill- earley @ncmail.net
>, "russtown @nc- cherokee.com"
<russtown @nc- cherokee.com>,
'lmholder @dot.state.nc.us"
<mholder @dot.state.nc.us >,
"smtp -Mead, Jim"
<jim.mead @ncmail.net >,
"fred.tarver @ncmail.net"
<fred.tarver @ncmail.net >,
"turnerle @dhec.sc.gov"
<turnerle @dhec.sc.gov >,
"allen ratzlaff @fws.gov"
<allen ratzlaff @fws.gov >,
"Bryan Tompkins @fws. ov"
<Bryan Tompkins @fws.gov >, Rebecca
Fox /R4 /USEPA /US @EPA,
"hortonjl @dhec.sc.gov"
<hortonjl @dhec.sc.gov >,
"gormancm @dhec.sc.gov"
<gormancm @dhec.sc.gov >,
"kfortner @gbpw.com"
<kfortner @gbpw.com >, Manager -
< David .Dear @ClevelandCounty.com >,
5 of 8 2/17/2009 2:22 PM

Re: EPA comments on Cleveland Co P&N statement
"[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, ron
mccollum <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>
cc
"O'Quinn, Barney"
<Barney.O'[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, "Jones,
Amanda D SAW"
<[e-mail].
mil>
Subject
RE: Cleveland County Water
Agency/stakeholders scoping
meeting January 21, 2009, 10:30
at the NC DENR Mooresville office
(UNCLASSIFIED)
On behalf of Henry Wicker:
As you know, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Wilmington
District, Regulatory Division is continuing the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) process in developing an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for Cleveland County Water's (CCW) proposal to construct
a 1,300 acre water supply reservoir on the First Broad River
approximately 1.4 miles north of the Town of Lawndale, Cleveland County
North Carolina.
The USAGE scheduled the first agency and stakeholder meeting on January
21, 2009, at the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NCDENR) Mooresville office from 10:30 a.m.to 1:00 p.m. The
NCDENR Mooresville Regional Office is located at 610 East Center Avenue
in Mooresville. Directions are provided on the following website:
http://www.enr.state.nc.us/regionaloffices/offices/mrowhere.html
At the meeting, as well as future agency and stakeholder meetings,
participants will be able to provide scoping comments on draft review
documentation for the EIS. The agenda for the January 21 meeting is
attached. Prior to the meeting, please review the agenda and the
attached agency stakeholder letter which outlines the scoping meeting
format.
The draft Alternatives Analysis, prepared by McGill Associates, is also
provided for your review prior to the meeting. Because of the large
size of the file, the report is not attached to this email, but is
available on the ARCADIS ftp site. To download the report, go to
htty://filetransfer.arcadis-us.com. (Copy this address into your web
6 of 8 2/17/2009 2:22 PM

Re: EPA comments on Cleveland Co P&N statement
browser.) Provide the following (case sensitive) user name and password
- Username: arcadisftp Password: Tr4nsf3R. Then click "Login." Select
"From ARCADIS" then the "Cleveland County Water" folder. The
alternatives report is located in that folder. We will provide hard
copies of the reports at the meeting.
The draft purpose and need statement was provided to you by email on
January 7, 2009. The report is also available on the ARCADIS ftp site.
These are the two documents/issues that will be presented at the January
7 meeting.
Please contact Robin Pugh if you have problems accessing the reports on
the ftp site.
We look forward to seeing you on the 21st.
Robin Pugh, AICP
ARCADIS
801 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27607
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
From: Wicker, Henry M JR SAW
[mailto:[e-mail]
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 10:20 AM
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; smtp-Mead, Jim; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; allen [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; Manager-; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
ron mccollum
Cc: Pugh, Robin; O'Quinn, Barney; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]; Jones, Amanda D SAW
Subject: Cleveland County Water Agency/stakeholders scoping meeting
January 21, 2009, 10:30 at the NC DENR Mooresville office
(UNCLASSIFIED).
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Hello everyone,
The Wilmington District US Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory
Division is continuing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
process in developing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for
Cleveland County Water's proposal to construct a water supply reservoir
in the First Broad River basin near Lawndale in Cleveland County, North
Carolina.
We will be having an Agency/stakeholders scoping meeting to get
comments on revised draft documents on January 21, 2009, 10:30 at the NC
DENR Mooresville office. We will send out the copies of the
documentation on January 7 to provide you two weeks to review the
documentation (revised Purpose and Need Statement, Alternatives
Analysis, and Service Area). If can't make the meeting on January 21,
you will still have the opportunity to send your comments to me by
7 of 8 2/17/2009 2:22 PM

Re: EPA comments on Cleveland Co P&N statement
February 4.
The purpose of this E-mail was to give you enough time to pencil
the meeting date on your calendars if you wanted to attend. We will
send out more information about the meeting on January 7.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Henry
Henry Wicker
Project Manager
USACE Wimington District
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
Fax [phone]
[phone]
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
NOTICE: This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are the property
of ARCADIS U.S., Inc. and its affiliates. All rights, including without
limitation copyright, are reserved. The proprietary information
contained in this e-mail message, and any files transmitted with it, is
intended for the use of the recipient(s) named above. If the reader of
this e-mail is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
you have received this e-mail in error and that any review, distribution
or copying of this e-mail or any files transmitted with it is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender immediately and delete the original message and any files
transmitted. The unauthorized use of this e-mail or any files
transmitted with it is prohibited and disclaimed by ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
and its affiliates.[attachment "CCW -agenda -Jan -21-09 meeting.pdf"
deleted by Rebecca Fox/R4/USEPA/US] [attachment
"USACE_agency_stakeholder letter -1 14 09.pdf" deleted by Rebecca
Fox/R4/USEPA/US]
8 of 8 2/17/2009 2:22 PM

US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Regulatory Division Office
Scoping Meeting Format
January 14, 2009
In order to promote more effective and efficient scoping meetings for EIS -level projects, the
District intends to hold scoping meetings in the manner described below. Minor changes may be
incorporated as project specifics allow. The intent of these meetings will be to inform resource
agencies and other interested parties of the status of ongoing studies and issues, and to solicit
individual comments from agencies and other groups about the major issues associated with the
proposed action in a manner that is focused on specific issues or specific elements of the EIS. The
purpose of these meetings is to complete the Corps' process in as open a manner as possible; at the
same time, however, meetings will be held only if they continue to be helpful to the Corps and
resource agencies in preparing its NEPA document.
Specifically, the District intends to implement the following measures for its meetings:
1. Meetings will be focused on specific topics of concern. The purpose of scoping meetings is to
disclose an applicant's preferences regarding a proposed project, discuss the Corps' proposed
strategy for studying, analyzing, and documenting particular issues of concern, and solicit the
individual comments of agencies and interested groups and parties regarding those preferences and
strategies. Specifically, issues such as purpose and need, range of alternatives, mitigation, and
cumulative and secondary impacts will be discussed, as will project -specific issues associated with
proposed environmental impacts and necessary studies accomplished during the planning and
permitting process.
2. Meetings will not be a public forum for opinion or comment on the project as a whole. The
Corps solicits comments from the public on major projects through a variety of mechanisms,
including public notices for all major permit applications received, public notices for draft and final
EIS documents, and, as needed, public hearings. The purpose of scoping meetings, as opposed to
these other opportunities for public comment, is to allow resource agencies and other concerned
parties the opportunity to keep up with the scoping process as it progresses, and to provide comments
and concerns related to specific topics of concern before the Draft EIS is released.
3. The purpose of the meeting is to both provide information and solicit input; it is not to
reach consensus. The Corps seeks input from a wide array of interests as it compiles its EIS
documents. It is highly unlikely that widely diverse interests will be able to reach consensus on any
particular issue. The Corps' goal is to solicit the individual comments of each interested agency or
party. The Corps will then decide on the appropriate course of action.
4. There is no particular "team" associated with this process; advice and comment are
solicited from all interested parties, particularly those with regulatory responsibility for or
expertise with particular areas of concern. All agencies with regulatory responsibility will be
invited to participate. Others are welcome, although it must be reiterated that this is not a forum for
general comments of support or opposition to the project.

5. Individual comments are welcome at all stages, and should be made in writing if at all
possible. While notes of meetings will be kept, in order to assure that all comments are received
accurately, the Corps asks that comments be made in writing. A list of comments will be kept, and
comments will be responded to as appropriate.
6. Professional decorum is required at all scoping meetings. Those that do not respect the
process will be asked to leave. If holding productive meetings becomes a challenge for any
particular project, scoping meetings may be cancelled, and the public will be allowed the opportunity
to comment through public notices on the permit application and the EIS.
7. Review Documentation and a summary of each meeting will be posted on the
Wilmington District's Regulatory website. The District will provide a webpage that the public
can access and review what documentation the agency/stakeholders have commented on and a
summary of each meeting.
We look forward to working with all parties in developing the EIS. If you have any questions or
comments regarding this correspondence, please do not hesitate to contact Henry Wicker in the
Wilmington Regulatory Division Office at 910-251-4930.

Cleveland County Water - document reviews
Subject: Cleveland County Water - document reviews
From: "Goudreau, Chris J." <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 16:35:07 -0500
To: "Pugh, Robin" <[e-mail]>, "'Wicker, Henry M JR SAW"'
<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <James. McRight@ncmai 1. net>, "John. Condrey@rutherfordcountync. gov"
<John. Condrey@rutherfordcountync. gov>, "[e-mail]" <Britt. Setzer@ncmai 1. net>, "Linville,
James R." <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <Cyndi.Karoly@ncmai].net>,
"AIan. John [e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "Holder,
Michael L" <[e-mail]>, "'smtp-Mead, Jim"' <[e-mail]>, " fred.tarver@ncmai 1. net"
<fred.tarver@ncmai 1. net>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "alien [e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"Fox. [e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, 'Manager-'<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<Rick,Howe [e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <Tom. Reeder@ncmai 1. net>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>,'ron mccollum' <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>
CC: "O'Quinn, Barney" <Bamey.O'[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, "'Jones, Amanda D SAW"' <[e-mail]. miI>
El
Attached are NCWRC comments on the "Purpose and Needs" and "Alternatives Analysis" documents.
Chris
2008-11-26 - CCW
Content -Description: purpose and needs -
WRC
2008-11-26 - CCW purpose and needs - WRC comments.doc comments.doc
Content -Type: application/msword
Content -Encoding: base64
2009-01-13 - CCW alternatives analysis - WRC comments.doc
2009-01-13 - CCW
alternatives
Content -Description: analysis - WRC
comments.doc
Content -Type: application/msword
Content -Encoding: base64
1 of 1 3/3/2009 2:47 PM

Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
1. Introduction
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as
amended, a planning, environmental, and engineering study is underway to increase
the water supply for Cleveland County Water. An Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) will be prepared to describe and evaluate potential impacts to the natural, cultural
and human environments associated with the proposed action. This Purpose and
Need Statement will comprise the first chapter of the EIS.
The content of this document conforms to the requirements of Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations, which provide direction regarding
implementation of the procedural provisions of NEPA. It is anticipated that any build
alternative selected will require U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) permits;
therefore, the USACE is the lead agency for the EIS. The EIS will be prepared by a
third party in conformance with 33 CFR Part 325.
1.1 Proposed Action
The proposed action is to construct a water supply reservoir in the First Broad River
basin near Lawndale in Cleveland County, North Carolina.
1.2 Summary of Need for the Proposed Action
It is projected that Cleveland County Water will need 6.23 million gallons per day (mgd)
of raw water by 2060 to meet average day demands and 7.78 mgd to meet peak day
demands (see Section 4.4.2). At the Cleveland County Water intake on the First
Broad River, the estimated available raw water supply under low flow conditions is 5.97
mgd (see Section 2.4.1).
Historical records from 1940 through 2008 were used to assess the ability of
Cleveland County Water's existing run -of -river intake to supply future raw water
needs. Depending on the minimum instream flow requirement, the future demand of
7.78 mgd would not be met on 9.7 percent of the days (2,420 out of 24,954 days). Of
these, as many as 110 days would be consecutive. Water shortages lasting at least
10 consecutive days would occur 4.2 percent of the time (see Section 4.4.3).

The First Broad River is insufficient to meet projected demands, based on the following
conditions:
Fluctuations in the normal stream flow of the First Broad River vary widely and
affect water availability at the Cleveland County Water intake on a daily basis.
Cleveland County suffered a severe drought that peaked in 2002. The county is
experiencing another drought in 2008 and is susceptible to future droughts. A
long-term solution is needed to ensure adequate drinking water, especially during
drought conditions.
Groundwater is not a reliable source of water in the Cleveland County area, as
wells either run dry or have low water levels. Water quality is also a concern. It is
estimated that approximately 8,000 housing units (approximately 20,240 persons)
rely on individual groundwater wells as the sole source of potable water. It is
expected that most of these residences will become Cleveland County Water
customers through the planning period (2060).
The population of Cleveland County Water's current service area is projected to
increase by approximately 6,000 persons by 2060. It is expected that these new
residents will be Cleveland County Water customers.
• Based on continuing requests for service connections, it is evident that the need
for a dependable source of potable water does not stop at the county line.
Cleveland County Water already serves approximately 500 customers in Gaston,
Lincoln and Rutherford counties. Cleveland County Water plans to expand its
service area in areas that can be more easily and economically served by
Cleveland County Water rather than existing water systems in these counties.
1.3 Purpose of the Proposed Action
The purpose of the proposed action is to ensure a dependable water supply for
Cleveland County Water that meets projected long-term (2060) needs. A "dependable"
water supply will provide the district's needs and maintain required instream flows
(assuming water conservation measures are implemented in accordance with an
approved drought management plan).
Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
2

Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
1.4 Project Objectives
Key project objectives, applicable to the Cleveland County Water service area, include
the following:
• develop an effective and efficient water supply system;
• provide adequate water infrastructure that supports population growth and
economic development;
• maintain sufficient instream flow to support aquatic habitat and other uses;
• sustain required instream flow levels for downstream users; and
• respond to the needs of existing and future water customers.
1.5 Project Setting
Cleveland County is located in the southwestern Piedmont of North Carolina in the
foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Cleveland County is bordered by Gaston and
Lincoln counties on the east, Burke County on the north, Rutherford County on the
west, and South Carolina to the south. The primary transportation route is US 74,
which traverses the county in an east -west direction, connecting Interstates 85 and 26.
Interstate 85 traverses the southeastern corner of Cleveland County.
Shelby, the largest municipality in the county, is the county seat. Other municipalities
include Kings Mountain, Boiling Springs, Belwood, Casar, Earl, Fallston, Grover,
Kingstown, Lattimore, Lawndale, Mooresboro, Patterson Springs, Polkville, and Waco
(see Figure 1). The largest cities or towns, Shelby, Kings Mountain, and Boiling
Springs, are concentrated on or near the US 74 corridor. Despite the number of
incorporated towns, Cleveland County remains relatively rural overall. In 2000, most of
these municipalities had a population below 1,000 according to U.S. Census data.
(See Population and Demographic Trends, Section 4.1.)
1.6 Water Resources
Most of Cleveland County is located in the Broad River Basin. A small area of eastern
Cleveland County is in the Catawba River Basin (see Figure 2). In North Carolina, the
Broad River Basin encompasses a 1,513 square mile watershed with headwaters in

Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
the mountains. The First Broad, Second Broad, and Green rivers are the major
tributaries of the Broad River. The First Broad River originates in Rutherford County
and flows into the Broad River in Cleveland County, just north of the South Carolina
border. The Broad River flows southeast into South Carolina, eventually flowing into
the Atlantic Ocean as the Cooper River at Charleston, South Carolina.
1.6.1 Sub -Basin 03-08-04
The Broad River Sub -basin (03-08-04) includes approximately 240 square miles and
encompasses the project area and approximately two-thirds of Cleveland County.
Land within this sub -basin is the transitional zone between the mountain and piedmont
eco -regions. According to the 2006 Basinwide Assessment Report for the Broad
River, land cover in this sub -basin is primarily forested (63 percent forest/wetland) and
pasture (31.2 percent pasture/managed herbaceous). Urbanized areas account for 2.7
percent of the land area in the sub -basin, while cultivated cropland includes 2.0 percent
of the land area in the sub -basin.
e North
vision
Water
uality
thhs sub -bas nr sllgo dl overallf Benthic�rnacroiNveDebQrate data reports
from threewater
sitesltonithe Deleted: macro invertbrate
First Broad River resulted in "Good" bioclassifications. None of the surface waters in
this sub -basin are considered to be impaired.
1.6.2 Sub -Basin 03-08-05
The Broad River Sub -basin (03-08-05) includes approximately 181 square miles and
encompasses most of eastern Cleveland County. This area is considered to be in the
piedmont eco -region, although some streams in the northern portion of the watershed
exhibit some mountain characteristics. Land use is dominated by forest and
agricultural activities (48.5 percent forest/wetland and 40.5 percent pasture/managed
herbaceous). While urban uses account for only 5.1 percent of total land cover, residential
development is increasing. Kings Mountain is the largest urban area in the sub -basin.
The NCDWQ reports that water quality in this sub -basin is good overall. None of the
surface waters in this sub -basin are considered to be impaired, although some water
quality issues have been documented.
4

Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
1.7 Project History
In 1989, the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) prepared the
Cleveland County Water Supply Study, at the request of the Cleveland County Board
of Commissioners. The study was prepared, in part, to project future water needs and
determine if future water needs (2030) will exceed existing supplies. The study
determined that existing systems were adequate to meet 2020 needs, with the
exception of the Town of Boiling Springs' well system. The town is now connected to
the City of Shelby's system. The study suggested that raw water supply availability
may be increased through capital improvements, such as reservoirs and off stream
storage.
The possibility of an impoundment on the First Broad River has been explored for a
number of years. The USACE studied a potential reservoir on the First Broad River in
1990. It was determined that a reservoir was not feasible for flood control purposes;
however, a reservoir might be feasible for water supply purposes (USACE 1990).
The 1995 Cleveland County Land Use Plan, adopted by the Cleveland County Board
of Commissioners in November 1995, included the following recommendation:
"Support the development of a 50 million gallon raw water reservoir for the Cleveland
County Sanitary District."
A feasibility study for the First Broad River Reservoir was completed by McGill
Associates in 1997. The study concluded that a reservoir would be needed by 2029
and recommended an impoundment on the First Broad River (McGill 1997).
The water shortages experienced during the 2002 drought demonstrated the need for
a more dependable water supply. Since that time, Cleveland County Water has
continued to work towards this goal. Additional information about drought conditions is
provided in Section 2.4.2.3.
The adopted 2005 Cleveland County Land Use Plan notes that a reservoir site has
been chosen and the project is in the environmental permitting stage. The 2005 plan's
Land Use Plan Map shows a reservoir site.

Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
2. Cleveland County Water
2.1 Background
2.1.1 Sanitary Districts in North Carolina
Cleveland County Water was established under North Carolina statutes as a sanitary
district. In North Carolina, a sanitary district is a special governmental unit created for
the purpose of preserving and promoting the public health and welfare. A sanitary
district is formed with the consent of a majority of property owners in the proposed
district. The North Carolina Commission for Public Health and the Board of
Commissioners of the county (or counties) where the proposed district is located create
the sanitary district by adopting an ordinance setting the corporate boundaries of the
district. According to North Carolina general statutes (G.S.), a sanitary district may be
established without regard for county, township or municipal lines. (However, approval
by a municipality is required before including any part of a municipality in the sanitary
district.)
A sanitary district has the power to acquire, construct, maintain and operate water
supply systems and water purification or treatment plants and other utilities "within and
outside the corporate limits of the district, as may be necessary for the preservation of
the public health and sanitary welfare outside the corporate limits of the district, within
reasonable limitation" (G.S. 130A-55). Corporate powers set by North Carolina
statutes also include the power to levy taxes on property within the district; to acquire
by purchase or condemnation, property, easements, and rights-of-way inside or
outside the district; to negotiate and enter into agreements with other water suppliers in
order to carry out the purpose of the sanitary district. A sanitary district has the
authority to levy taxes only within its corporate boundaries but the sanitary district may
set a different rate for customers inside and outside the corporate boundaries of the
district. The statutes also set provisions for expanding the corporate boundaries of a
sanitary district. A complete list of corporate powers of a sanitary district is included in
G.S. 130A-55.
2.1.2 History of Cleveland County Water
Cleveland County Water was established in accordance with state statutes as the
Upper Cleveland County Sanitary District in 1980. In 1984, the Upper Cleveland
County Sanitary District started supplying water to 1,200 customers. By the late
1980s, the Piedmont Metropolitan Water District had formed in southern Cleveland

Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
County to address dry wells and poor water quality in the southern portion of the
county. The two districts merged in 1989 to form the Cleveland County Sanitary
District. By 1990, the sanitary district was serving 16,800 customers with 5,600
meters. In February 2008 upon approval of the North Carolina Commission for Health
Services, the Cleveland County Sanitary District changed its name to Cleveland
County Water.
In July 2008, Cleveland County Water was providing water to approximately 45,155
residential customers with 18,374 active meters. With approximately 3,000 inactive
meters also on the system, the total number of residential customers could increase to
over 52,700. Cleveland County Water covers approximately 80 percent of the
geographic area of the county and is one of the fastest growing water providers in
North Carolina. Cleveland County Water has averaged 520 new taps per year since
1999 and this trend is expected to continue over the next 5 years.
2.2 Facilities
2.2.1 Existing Facilities
Cleveland County Water uses the First Broad River as the source for a 6.0 mgd water
plant. Cleveland County Water operates raw water intakes and a pump station at the
confluence of the First Broad River and Knob Creek. The raw water intake facility can
withdraw a maximum of 10 mgd from the First Broad River and Knob Creek. The
current average daily withdrawal is 3.70 mgd. The distribution system includes
approximately 1,000 miles of water lines and several finished water storage tanks. In
addition, Cleveland County Water has emergency connections with Kings Mountain;
Shelby; the Broad River Water Authority; and Grassy Pond, a small system in southern
Cleveland County.
2.2.2 Planned Facilities
Cleveland County Water plans to expand its water treatment plant capacity in
anticipation of system growth. As the first phase of water treatment plant expansion,
Cleveland County Water plans to build off -stream storage sized to accommodate a 10
mgd water treatment plant. This off -stream storage is required by state code in order
to provide an unpolluted storage reserve in the event of contaminant spills. With a
capacity of 50,000 gallons per day (gpd), the off -stream storage will provide a 5 -day
supply of water. Planned for construction in 2009, the storage facility has been
permitted by the USACE (permit number 200531774). The next steps in the phased

Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
expansion are to expand the filters to 8 mgd by 2010 and expand distribution pumps to
10 mgd by 2011. By 2012, Cleveland County Water plans to upgrade the water
treatment plant capacity to 8 mgd and eventually to upgrade the plant to 10 mgd.
2.3 Service Area
2.3.1 Existing Service Area
Cleveland County Water provides water to most rural areas of the county; the towns of
Belwood, Casar, Earl, Kingstown, Lattimore, Mooresboro, Patterson Springs, Polkville,
and Waco; and on a contract basis to the town of Fallston. Cleveland County Water
also has lines extending into Gaston, Lincoln, and Rutherford counties. Cleveland
County Water has connections extending to Boiling Springs, Fallston, and Lawndale for
emergency use. The Cleveland County Water service area boundary is based on
topography and the hydraulic grade line of the distribution system, which includes
existing finished water storage tanks. Cleveland County Water's service area is shown
in Figure 3.
2.3.2 Future Service Area
As evidenced by the existing service area and requests from property owners, the
need for water does not stop at the Cleveland County line. Cleveland County Water
plans to continue to expand its distribution system into areas of Rutherford, Lincoln,
and Gaston counties which can be more easily and economically served by Cleveland
County Water rather than existing water systems in these counties. Future service
area is shown on Figure 3.
Cleveland County Water owns a water storage tank in northern Cleveland County near
Casar; as well as a smaller water storage tank on Moriah School Road near the
Rutherford County line. These tank locations allow for service into the northern part of
Rutherford County. Near the Polkville area of Cleveland County, Cleveland County
Water owns a tank which provides water service to the areas of Cleveland County west
of the First Broad River. The location of this Polkville tank and the hydraulic service
area provided from the tank also permits economical service into the eastern part of
Rutherford County.
The boundary for the Rutherford County future service area is based on topography
and resulting hydraulic constraints and existing service areas for other water providers
in the county. For example, in the northern part of Rutherford County, Cherry

Mountain, located southwest of NC 226, provides a natural drainage boundary
between the First Broad River to the east and the Second Broad River to the west.
This natural geographic boundary makes the provision of water service farther
westward uneconomical due to hydraulic constraints.
Generally, the Rutherford County expansion area stretches from just north of the First
Broad River to the Second Broad River to the south. The western boundary follows
ridge lines and property lines. Future water service to the east of this boundary is not
feasible and water service to the west of the boundary will be provided by existing
water systems located in Rutherford County, either the BRWA, the Town of Ellenboro
or the Town of Forest City.
Future service to the east of Cleveland County by Cleveland County Water into Lincoln
and Gaston counties is limited by system hydraulics similar to those described above.
The eastern service area boundary in Lincoln County and Gaston County as shown on
the "Service Area" map (Figure 3) is the ridge line between the Broad River Basin and
the Catawba River basins. Future service into these two adjoining counties is
proposed entirely within the Broad River Basin and outside the Cherryville city limits.
2.4 Water Supply and Availability
2.4.1 Available Raw Water Supply
An updated 7Q10 was used as a basis for determining available raw water supply.
While changes in low -flow characteristics resulting from recent drought conditions have
not been formally investigated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), updated values
are likely to be 20 to 30 percent lower than previously reported values according to the
USGS (Weaver 2008).
To determine a revised 7Q10 at the Cleveland County Water intake (181 square
miles), the 7Q10 for the Knob Creek drainage area (36 square miles) was added to the
7Q10 for the First Broad River drainage area (145 square miles). Updated 7Q10
values were determined as follows:
First Broad River
In June 2008, NCDWR updated an instream flow/aquatic habitat study,completed in
the 1990s for three locations on the First Broad River. A major revision to the previous
study was to include updated and improved stream flow record. Based on merged flow
Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
Comment [N1]: Why not perform
a new 7Q10 analysis for the
Casar gage? Even though it
would not be "official" it is better
than assuming it is 20 or 30%.
Deleted:

records from the Lawndale and Casar USGS gaging stations, the 7Q10 just
downstream of the Cleveland County Water intake was determined to be 36.4 cubic
feet per second (cfs), at a drainage area of 145 square miles. This 7Q10 value reflects
the lower flows during periods of drought experienced in recent years.
Knob Creek
In the absence of an instream flow study, the 7010 for Knob Creek is based on USGS
records for a similar upstream site. (According to the USGS, it would be appropriate
to use the 7Q10 estimate at this site for application to the Knob Creek intake site
[Weaver 2008].) To account for recent drought conditions, it was assumed that the
7Q10 has declined by 30 percent. The updated 7Q10 for the Knob Creek drainage
area is estimated to be 9.84 cfs, at a drainage area of 36 square miles.
Therefore, the estimated 7Q10 is 46.24 cfs at the Cleveland County Water intake site.
Based on the new 7Q10 calculation, the available raw water supply (defined by
regulation as 20% of the 7Q10) from the First Broad River at the Cleveland County
Water intake is estimated to be 9.25 cfs or 5.97 mgd.
2.4.2 Issues Affecting Water Supply
The river's capacity to supply water to Cleveland County Water is substantially affected
by other demands on the river and by fluctuations in the normal stream flow.
Downstream from the Cleveland County Water intake, the City of Shelby also relies on
the First Broad River for water; therefore, downstream conveyance to the city's intake
is a concern. The First Broad River is also needed for wastewater treatment
discharges, mainly for the City of Shelby, and for agricultural irrigation purposes. An
instream flow is also required to sustain the aquatic community within the river. Other
instream uses for water can include water quality maintenance and prevention of
sediment build-up.
Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
Iff

Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
2.4.2.1 Aquatic Habitat
The NCDWR determines flow requirements for streams to ensure aquatic habitat
protection, particularly during dry season flows. The aquatic habitat target flow, was
determined to be 70 cfs (45.16 mgd) at the previous Cleveland County Water intake
(Sutherland 1992). Cleveland County Water was allowed to take 5 mgd without
instream flow limits, but could take an additional amount up to a total of 6 mgd if a flow
of 70 cfs was maintained immediately downstream of the intake. At the current intake
location, no minimum flow or withdrawal constraint is required (Sutherland 1997).
2.4.2.2 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are regulated through the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. The NPDES
program was established to control point -source discharges of water pollution.
Dischargers are required by law to register for a permit. The permitting process
includes determining the quality and quantity of treated wastewater that the receiving
stream can assimilate, incorporating input from stream modeling, collaborating with
NCDWQ Regional Office staff, and evaluation of the discharger's location.
According to NCDWQ, there are eleven permitted dischargers within the 03-08-04 sub -
basin, three of which are considered major dischargers. Of the eleven dischargers, the
City of Shelby Waste Water Treatment Plant (major), the City of Shelby Water
Treatment Plan (minor), Cleveland County Water (minor), and an industrial facility
(major) discharge to the First Broad River. The first Broad River plays an important
role in the disposal of wastewater.
2.4.2.3 Drought Conditions
Water systems such as Cleveland County Water that rely on run -of -river type intakes
are particularly susceptible in drought conditions. The drought that Cleveland County
'According to the Cleveland County Water Supply Survey (NCDWR 1989), instream target
flows are based on maintaining one dominant instream use or a combination of uses. During
those times when natural flows are below the target flow, projects capable of flow augmentation
should maintain the target flow, while others without flow augmentation should use the naturally
occurring flow as the temporary target.

experienced from 1999 to 2002 highlighted the need for a more dependable water
source. The drought was so severe that Governor Michael Easley declared a State of
Disaster and State of Emergency existed in the Cleveland County Water service area
and the City of Shelby. Cherryville, located in Gaston County to the east, was also
named in the proclamation. In addition, local proclamations were issued by Cleveland
County, excluding the City of Kings Mountain, and by the City of Shelby.
In July and August of 2002 the flow at the Cleveland County Water intake dropped to
3.0 mgd (McGill 2004). Also during that time, the available supply at the City of Shelby
water intake dropped to less that 1.50 mgd (McGill 2004). As a result, water
restrictions were imposed and Cleveland County Water and the City of Shelby were
forced to find alternative means to provide water to their customers. To provide some
relief, the Broad River Water Authority allowed an emergency connection to the
Cleveland County Water system. However, this connection could only supply water to
approximately 200 customers because of the six-inch pipe size and the difference in
elevation of the two systems' tanks.
Even during drought conditions, Moss Lake provided more than adequate supply of
water to the Kings Mountain service area. The City of Kings Mountain was able to
provide water to Shelby customers through an emergency connection with the City of
Shelby water system. This connection is to provide water only during periods of a
declared emergency. Shelby also pumped water from a small privately owned lake,
and implemented water restrictions in order to continue to supply water to their
customers during the drought (McGill 2004). To prepare for future drought conditions,
the City of Shelby installed an emergency 30 -inch water line to the Broad River after
the 2002 drought. However, it should be noted that the Broad River is also at risk
during drought conditions and the location of the intake requires water to be pumped.
As the demand for water in the Cleveland County Water and City of Shelby service
areas increases, Moss Lake will not be sufficient to supply these areas during drought.
Droughts also occurred in the area in 1977 and 1986 (Cawthon 2005) and the area is
currently in drought in 2008. According to the U.S. Drought Monitor, Cleveland County
is experiencing exceptional drought in August 2008. While the area has not yet
experienced the degree of water shortage as those experienced during the drought
that peaked in 2002, water levels have been a cause for concern. Such concerns are
documented in news articles published in the Shelby Star in the summers of 2005
(Cawthon 2005) and 2006 (DeLea 2006), and again in June 2008 (Wilson 2008).
Large amounts of rainfall that occur in relatively short periods of time are not helpful
towards easing drought conditions because there are no provisions for capturing water.
Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
12

Steady rains over a longer period of time are needed to restore the water table and
increase stream flows.
2.4.2.4 Run-of-Riverintake
Of the 32 water providers in North Carolina serving a population of 40,000 or more, 16
depend on reservoirs as their primary water source, while three depend on
groundwater. The remaining 13 water providers, including Cleveland County Water,
depend on run -of -river type intakes for water supply (see Table 1.) These intakes are
located on the Cape Fear River (Fayetteville, Wilmington, Harnett County, Brunswick
County, Sanford), Yadkin River (Davidson, Salisbury), Tar River (Greenville), Neuse
River (Johnston County), Catawba River (Union County), and the First Broad River
(Cleveland County). With the exception of the First Broad River, these are considered
major rivers in North Carolina. Table 2 compares the size of watersheds and river
volume for these water systems. Based on data from the gage at Casar, the First
Broad River in proximity to the Cleveland County Water intake has the lowest mean
and median flow.
Even in non -drought conditions, fluctuations in the normal stream flow can vary widely
and affect available water on a daily basis. The USGS maintains a surface water
gaging station on the First Broad River near Casar. For illustrative purposes, annual
discharge data beginning in 1960 is included in Table 3. As the table indicates, annual
discharge during the 45 -year period varied from a high of 139.3 cfs (89.9 mgd) in 1960
and 1975, to a low of 26.8 cfs (17.3 mgd) in 2002. A breakdown of this data by month
further illustrates the variation in flows of the First Broad River (see Table 4.) Daily
flows are recorded by the Casar gage beginning March 1, 1959. Daily records are
available on the USGS website: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis.
3. Other Area Water Sources
The existing sources of potable water in Cleveland County are Moss Lake, the First
Broad River, and groundwater. The Broad River is a source of limited drinking water
during emergencies. Water sources and providers for Cleveland County are shown in
Table 5.
3.1 John H. Moss Reservoir
The John H. Moss Reservoir (Moss Lake), an impoundment on Buffalo Creek, is the
raw water supply for the City of Kings Mountain and the Town of Grover. Moss Lake
Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
13

has a total drainage area of approximately 68 square miles in eastern Cleveland
County. The City of Kings Mountain operates an 8.0 mgd water treatment plant
adjacent to the lake. The city provides water only within its corporate limits and to its
municipal customer, the Town of Grover. However, the city permitted the construction
of an emergency connection with the City of Shelby water system during the 2002
drought to provide water only for emergency purposes. According to the city, the water
provided by Moss Lake is sufficient to meet demands of its service area through 2050
and beyond. In 2007 Kings Mountain permitted the construction of an emergency
connection with Cleveland County Water.
3.2 First Broad River
In addition to Cleveland County Water, the First Broad River is also the water source
for the City of Shelby, the Town of Boiling Springs. (Boiling Springs purchases water
from Shelby.)
The City of Shelby has a raw water intake on the First Broad River which supplies
water to the city's water treatment plant. Treatment facilities include three off -stream
raw water reservoirs. The intake location has a drainage area of approximately 226
square miles. Shelby's water treatment plant has a capacity of 12.0 mgd and current
average daily water treated is 4.2 mgd. Demand has decreased in recent years as
several manufacturing plants in the city have closed. Current (2005) peak demand is
approximately 6 mgd compared to 8 to 9 mgd in past years (City of Shelby Strategic
Growth Plan 2005). The City of Shelby provides water on a wholesale basis to the
Town of Boiling Springs. The contract amount in 2002 was 1.0 mgd (Shelby Water
Supply Plan 2002).
The City of Shelby Water and Wastewater Planning Report sets a future water service
area boundary that extends beyond the current city limits. Shelby's water system is
encircled by the Cleveland County Water service area, which limits the ability of the city
to expand its water system. Expansion of Shelby's water service area and annexation
in areas already served by Cleveland County Water could affect the district's customer
base to some degree.
According to the city's Strategic Growth Plan, "when the city annexes new areas, it can
not take these annexed homes and businesses into its water system customer base."
However, according to Brad Cornwell, Shelby Public Utilities Director, "the city can
require connection to the public water system if the building or structure is within 300
feet of such public water main and the property abuts a street where a public water
Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
Comment [N2]: Are more recent 11
data available? If so, has the
I downward trend continued,
l leveled off, or increased?
14

main is available" (Cornwell 2007). There is no city policy to specifically address
annexation of areas served by Cleveland County Water. In the past, the city has
chosen not to provide water in most cases where the annexed area is already served
by Cleveland County Water, but reserves the right in the future to construct water
facilities if it is feasible (Cornwell 2007). At a minimum, the city is required to provide
increased flows for fire protection to these annexed areas.
Based on the City of Shelby's 2002 Water Supply Plan, average daily water demands
for the city's service area are projected to be 8.7 mgd by 2050, including contract sales
of 1.0 mgd. Assuming an average day to peak day multiplier of 1.25, approximately
10.88 would be needed in 2050.
3.3 Groundwater
In Cleveland County, the primary problem associated with dependence on
groundwater as a source for potable water is a natural shortage in water, with either
very low water levels in wells or wells running dry. It is sometimes necessary to drill
several wells before finding water (North Carolina Division of Water Resources 1989).
Property owners have to assume the risk and cost of drilling dry wells in their search for
a suitable yielding well. It is more cost effective to connect to a water system if
available.
Water quality is also a problem. For example, residents of the Town of Mooresboro
relied on wells as their source for potable water prior to 2005. Many residents had to
bleach their well water to sanitize it, and in 2003 E. coli bacteria were discovered in 6 of
11 wells tested (Scott 2004). Also, some wells ran dry during the 2002 drought. The
town was connected to the Cleveland County Water system in 2005.
In some areas of the county, both recharge and discharge areas display high
concentrations of iron and manganese in the groundwater. Water treatment for these
metals is necessary (North Carolina Division of Water Resources 1989). Where iron or
manganese is not a problem, the groundwater may require chlorination. In addition,
lithium has been detected in groundwater in the Cherryville and Bessemer City vicinity
of Gaston County. (Cleveland County Water already has nearly 100 customers in
Gaston County.) Costs associated with water treatment, whether for a municipal
system or individual well, are ultimately borne by the end user. Additional treatment
can potentially be a significant expense (Setzer 2007).
Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
E,

Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
3.3.1 Municipal Systems
The towns of Lawndale and Fallston rely on groundwater for their primary water supply.
Lawndale draws its water supply from two wells with a combined average daily
withdrawal of 0.058 mgd for 287 connections (Lawndale Water Supply Plan 2002). In
the Town of Fallston, three wells provide an average daily withdrawal of 0.046 mgd.
Fallston supplements this supply with water purchases from Cleveland County Water.
In 2002, the average daily amount provided to Fallston was 0.001 mgd, with a contract
amount of 0.002 mgd, according to the draft 2002 Fallston water supply plan.
3.3.2 Private Wells
Groundwater is the water source for numerous residences throughout rural Cleveland
County. However, very little data is available regarding private wells in the county.
Until recently, Cleveland County did not require permits for private wells and the county
Health Department inspected wells only upon request. In July 2006, the state of North
Carolina mandated that all counties adopt drinking water well regulations. House Bill
2873 requires all North Carolina counties to implement a private drinking water well
permitting, inspection, and testing program. As a result, Cleveland County adopted
"Rules Governing the construction, Inspection, Repair, Abandonment, and Water
Quality Testing of Private Drinking Water Wells in Cleveland County." The ordinance
was effective July 1, 2007.
It is estimated that approximately 8,000 housing units in Cleveland County rely on
groundwater for potable water. A number of these have a metered connection to the
Cleveland County Water system; however, the meter is inactive. In 1992, the county
began requiring new residences to tie on to Cleveland County Water lines if they were
available (McCarter 2006).
3.4 Broad River
In Cleveland County, the Broad River is not currently used as a water source for
everyday use. The City of Shelby has an emergency 30 -inch raw water line from the
Broad River to its water treatment plant. The raw water line and a pumping station
were constructed as a result of the 2002 drought, as mentioned in Section 2.4.2.3.
Cleveland County Water is also equipped to obtain small quantities of water from the
Broad River in emergencies.

In Rutherford County, the Broad River is the primary water source for the Broad River
Water Authority. Several municipalities, including Forest City and some in South
Carolina, plan to use the Broad River as a water source.
4. Water Demand
Increases in future water supply needs for Cleveland County Water will be affected by
new customers in the existing service area and service area expansion into adjacent
counties. Within the existing service area (Figure 3), new metered connections are
expected due primarily to well conversions and population growth. As discussed in
Section 2.2.3, groundwater is not expected to be a reliable source of potable water in
Cleveland County. Groundwater quality and drought conditions (wells drying up) will
likely result in increased demand for water from Cleveland County Water. Population
trends and economic conditions that may affect population growth in the county and
the type of users (e.g., commercial and industrial users) are discussed in the following
sections.
Cleveland County Water's service area and future demand will also be influenced, but
to a lesser degree, by annexation and government policies. For example, as
discussed in Section 2.2.1, it is the policy of the City of Kings Mountain not to provide
water outside its corporate limits (other than to the Town of Grover.) In addition, recent
state legislation requiring county well inspection programs could result in more
requests to connect to Cleveland County Water's system.
As previously noted, Cleveland County Water provides water to some customers in
adjacent counties. The sanitary district plans to continue to expand its service area
into these counties as requested. Demand in these areas will also be largely based on
population growth and problems with groundwater. Cleveland County Water's future
service area expansion in adjacent counties is shown in Figure 3.
4.1 Population and Demographic Trends
4.1.1 Population Growth
Cleveland County experienced moderate population growth of approximately 14
percent from 1990 to 2000. Historical population data indicate similar growth rates in
the 1960s and 1970s, but a substantially lower growth rate in the 1980s of less than 2
percent (see Table 6). While U.S. Census data indicate substantial growth in municipal
population from 1990 to 2000, some of that growth is due to expansion of corporate
Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
Comment [N3]: This section is
the crux of the document. It
would benefit from a series of
clear statements explaining
exactly how future water
demand was calculated.
For example, in Section 4.1 data
population data are presented
from US Census Bureau and NC
Demographics, but it is not clear
if both data sets were used to
estimate the future population.
If, as stated in Section 4.1.3, the
NC Demographics numbers were
used, explain why they were
used instead of US Census
Bureau numbers.
It is stated in Section 2 that
those parts of adjoining counties
that lie outside the Broad River
basin will not be served by CCW.
Section 4 should explain how the
population data for those
counties was used to project
future demand. For example, it
is not likely that the census
tracts follow the basin
boundaries. So, how were the
demographic data for western
Lincoln and Gaston counties used
to project population estimates
in the CCW service area?
Comment [N4]: The Census
Bureau has more recent data
than 2000. The 2000 data is
considered a census, but they
also have annual, population
estimates up to 2007. Do those
data lead one to different
estimates of future population?
17

limits. Shelby, in particular, can attribute most of its population gain during that period
to an aggressive annexation program. An examination of population growth by census
tract indicates that the highest population growth occurred in the southern and eastern
areas of the county, with population declines in the central areas of Shelby and Kings
Mountain. A breakdown of 1990 to 2000 population growth by municipality and census
tract is provided in Tables 7 and 8, respectively. Census tracts are shown on Figure 4.
From 1990 to 2000, approximately 4,066 county residents were added to the
Cleveland County Water service area. Population growth in the service area was
estimated by excluding population in Shelby, Boiling Springs, Kings Mountain, and
Grover from the overall county population. (Note: Fallston and Lawndale were
included in the service area because these municipalities use groundwater and are
potential Cleveland County Sanitary District customers.)
4.1 .2 Housing
The increase in housing units is another indicator of water demand. The number of
housing units in Cleveland County increased by nearly 18 percent (6,085 units) from
1990 to 2000 Table 9). The number of housing units added in the Cleveland County
Water service area over this same time period is estimated to be 2,710 units Table 9).
Like population growth, the increase in the number of housing units in Shelby is largely
due to annexation. The greater increase in the percentage of housing units as
compared to population increase could indicate a trend in the reduction of household
size or an increase in the supply of vacant housing during this period. According to the
US Census, the average household size for Cleveland County in 2000 was 2.53
persons, while the average household size in 1990 was slightly higher at 2.59. In
addition, the percentage of vacant housing rose from 6.4 percent to 8.1 percent of total
housing during this period. A breakdown of 1990 to 2000 housing units by state,
county, and municipality is provided in Table 9.
4.1.3 Population Projections
The North Carolina State Demographics Unit (Office of State Management and
Budget) projected county populations through 2030. Population through 2060 was
projected using an average annual growth rate based on the state's projected growth
from 2005 through 2025. It was assumed that each county would experience this
same average growth rate over the next 30 years through 2060.1
Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
Comment [N5]: Other than the
number of people per house,
how were the housing data used
to project future demand?
Please explain how housing data
(Table 9) were used to calculate
future water demand (Table 17).
If not, this section could be
deleted.
Comment [N6]: This is a major
assumption that could be way
off. It is a good reason for
projecting a +/- percentage
around that estimate to
understand the water needs
under different scenarios. Ji
18

Population growth in Cleveland County will continue to be influenced by proximity to
major metropolitan areas, the Charlotte -Gastonia area in particular, and proximity to
major transportation routes. Within Cleveland County, population growth is expected
to a greater extent in the southern and southeastern portions of the county.
The North Carolina State Demographics Unit projects that Cleveland County will grow
by approximately 2.24 percent from 2010 to 2030, reaching a population of 99,370 by
2030. In comparison, the state of North Carolina is expected to grow by approximately
29 percent during the same 20 -year period. Assuming a constant growth rate for the
next 30 -year period, Cleveland County's population would reach nearly 103,000 by
2060.
In addition to growth in Cleveland County, growth in the adjacent counties of
Rutherford, Lincoln and Gaston will also play a role in future demand in the Cleveland
County Water water supply. The North Carolina State Demographics Unit projects that
Rutherford County's population will decrease by approximately 600 persons or
1 percent from 2010 to 2030. During the same period, Gaston County's population is
expected to increase by approximately 13.5 percent, while Lincoln County's population
is expected to increase by nearly 34 percent.',
Population projections are shown in Tables 10 and 11.
4.2 Economic Characteristics
4.2.1 Economic Base
Cleveland County is ranked one of the top ten best small markets by Southern
Business and Development magazine (Charlotte Regional Partnership 2006). The
county boasts easy access from four major interstate highways (1-85, 1-77, 1-26, and
1-40) and the Charlotte Douglas International Airport, making geography one of its
prime assets.
Although Cleveland County's economy was once dependent upon textile
manufacturing, the county's economy is diverse, with no dependence on any one
industry. From 1995 to 2005, manufacturing jobs in the county decreased by 7,609
jobs; however, manufacturing still dominates in terms of number of jobs. Employment
by industry is shown in Table 12.
Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
Comment [N7]: The majority of
growth in Lincoln and Gaston will
most likely be in the eastern and
central portions; less so in the
western parts of those counties.
Was this taken into account?
Comment [N8]: A major
shortcoming of this document is
that it does not explain exactly
how the population data and the
housing data were
used/combined to make
projections into the future.
Please provide text to explain
this and give a mathematical
example from start to finish.
Comment [11419]: All this is
interesting, but again, how were
these data used to project future
demand (i.e., in Table 17).
Comment [114110]: How much has 1
this been further reduced in the
past year? Please provide data
through 2008.
19

4.2.2 Employment Centers and Major Employers
According to the North Carolina Department of Commerce, the top manufacturers in
Cleveland County include PPG Industries Fiberglass Products, Eaton Corporation, and
Entertainment Distribution Company. The top non -manufacturing employers in
Cleveland County are Cleveland County Schools, Cleveland Regional Medical Center,
Cleveland County government, and Gardner -Webb University. Cleveland County's top
employers are listed in Table 13
As indicated on Table 13, the county's employment centers are primarily in and around
the cities of Shelby and Kings Mountain. In addition, major retail centers are the
Cleveland Mall in Shelby and the uptown Shelby, Kings Mountain, and Boiling Springs
areas.
There are several major industrial parks in Cleveland County. The Cleveland County
Industrial Park is located in Kings Mountain. The 250 -acre park is home to Sara Lee
Intimate Apparel, which recently expanded; MRA Industries; and Owens & Minor.
Cleveland County recently assembled a 210 -acre industrial park to help with industrial
recruitment efforts in the county. The site has rail access and is located near the
proposed US 74 Bypass, just west of Shelby.
The North Carolina Department of Commerce is currently marketing 18 buildings and
45 sites in Cleveland County for commercial or industrial use. According to marketing
information, Cleveland County Water would provide water to 21 of these properties. A
total of 30 properties would likely rely on the First Broad River for water supply.
Industrial recruitment efforts are enhanced by several tax credit and incentive
programs that are available to industries that locate or expand in Cleveland County.
For example, firms such as manufacturing and processing operations, warehousing
and distribution plants, and data processing firms that pay at least 110 percent of the
average county wage are eligible for tax incentives under the William S. Lee Quality
Jobs and Business Expansion Program.
4.3 Land Use and Development
Development trends, projected future land use patterns, and local land use policies and
regulations were examined to determine the potential effect on future water demand
and the distribution of that demand.
Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
Comment [Nii]: Again, how was
this information used to estimate
(or adjust) future water
demand? If was not used, then
it is not necessary to provide it.
20

Historically, development patterns in Cleveland County have largely been influenced by
transportation corridors. The arrival of the railroad spurred growth in the 1870s and
established Shelby as a cotton market and textile manufacturing center. Shelby and
Kings Mountain, the largest cities in the county, are located along US 74, an east -west
route that traverses North Carolina. Growth in the county continues to be influenced by
proximity to 1-85, which traverses the southeastern corner of the county, and by
proximity to the Charlotte -Gastonia area. Gardner -Webb University, located in Boiling
Springs, also played a role in the growth and development of the southern area of
Cleveland County. According to the Cleveland County Planning Director, growth in this
southern portion of the county is expected to continue.
Cleveland County residents have favored rural or suburban areas to municipalities.
The distribution of municipal and rural/suburban population in the county for the period
1950 to 2000 shows that at least 57 percent of the population lived in rural and
suburban areas during that time. In 2000, 56,334 of the county's 96,287 residents, or
nearly 60 percent, lived in rural and suburban areas. Another trend is the loss of
population from the central -city areas in Shelby and Kings Mountain.
The Cleveland County Future Land Use Map, adopted as part of the Cleveland County
2005 Land Use Plan, identifies generalized land use patterns through 2015 (see Figure
5). The land use plan map indicates that growth in the county is expected in the
central and southern areas with rural residential uses primarily to the north and west.
(Rural residential includes residential uses with a 1 -acre minimum lot size and limited
commercial uses.) In addition, most of this northern area is in a protected water supply
watershed. The predominant land use designation in the central portion of the county
(outside municipalities) is residential. Much of this area, which is not in the protected
water supply watershed area, is zoned for a one-half acre minimum lot size. Also in
this central area, several large employment centers outside municipalities are indicated
by light industrial, heavy industrial and commercial designations. These areas are
located in proximity to major transportation corridors on the periphery of municipalities.
4.4 Water Demand Projections
4.4.1 Historical Water Demand
Available historical water plant records (1999 — 2007) were evaluated to provide a
basis for projecting future raw water supply needs. Historical records were provided by
residential and non-residential use categories. Non -revenue water usage and
Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
a

unaccounted flow records were available for the previous five years (2003 — 2007).
Historical records are shown in Tables 14, 15, and 16.
The average residential demand was estimated to be 150.6 gpd per metered
connection. Using the Census reported average household size for Cleveland County
of 2.53 persons, water usage was 59.5 gallons per capita per day (gpcd).
Average non-residential demand was estimated to be 465.9 gpd per metered
connection. Also, from 1999 to 2007 an average of 9.2 non-residential meters were
added to the system each year.
Non -revenue water includes water used for system processes such as backwash, line
cleaning and flushing, as well as water used for fire protection. From 2003-2007, non -
revenue water usage averaged 2.8 percent of the total water plant production. In any
water system, a certain amount of water is lost due to leaks and unknown uses. From
2003-2007, unaccountable water loss averaged 17 percent of the total water plant
production.
4.4.2 Water Supply Needs
Future water demand was projected for Cleveland County Water based on
population projections and historical water demand records. Average daily demands
for Cleveland County Water are projected to be 6.23 mgd by 2060, while peak daily
demands are expected to be 7.78 mgd in 2060, based on the number of existing
wells, the projected population growth for Cleveland County, and the district's
expansion plans (see Figure 3).
In addition to utilizing historical data, several assumptions were made to estimate
future water demand. First, it was assumed that the service area population as a
percentage of overall county population would remain constant. In Cleveland
County, this assumption is supported by past trends regarding the distribution of the
county's population in urban, suburban and rural areas. It was also assumed that
new residential construction in Cleveland County Water's service area would connect
to Cleveland County Water. Projected water demands include an additional 375
connections per year through 2015 due to wells converting. It was assumed that by
2030, all estimated residential wells would be converted to Cleveland County Water.
In adjacent counties, it was assumed that Cleveland County Water's customer base
would continue to expand to include up to 98 percent of the Rutherford County,
Lincoln County and Gaston County expansion areas. In addition, an average of 9.3
Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
Comment [N12]: Why assume a
ratio of 1.25:1 of peak:average
demand? What do the actual
use patterns show for CCW in
the past 5-10 years? If that
ratio is different than 1.25:1,
wouldn't it be better to use the
actual ratio?
22

new non-residential customers will be added to the Cleveland County Water system
per year with water usage continuing at rates similar to the previous nine years.
Future demand through 2060 for Cleveland County Water, including customers in
adjacent counties, is shown in Table 17.
4.4.3 No Build Modeling
A No Build scenario was modeled in order to assess the ability of Cleveland County
Water's existing run -of -river intake to supply future raw water needs. Specifically, the
purpose of the model was to determine the number of days when there is inadequate
water in the First Broad River to meet future needs, as described in Section 4.4.2.
The model is based on a synthesized period of record from two USGS gaging
stations (Casar and Lawndale) from March 1940 to September 2008.
Assuming a 70 cfs minimum flow requirement, the future demand of 7.78 mgd would
not be met on 9.7 percent of the days (or approximately 2,420 days out of 24,954
days). Of these, as many as 110 days would be consecutive. Water shortages
lasting at least 10 consecutive days would occur 4.2 percent of the time. Also, based
on historical records, water would not be available on 6.5 percent of the days (or
approximately 1,622 days out of 24,954 days). Of these, no water would be
available for periods of at least 10 consecutive days for 2 percent of the days.,
5. Summary
With an estimated available raw water supply at the Cleveland County Water intake of
5.97 mgd, the First Broad River will not consistently meet Cleveland County Water's
projected needs. Today Cleveland County Water provides water for approximately 46
percent of Cleveland County's population, as well as for numerous commercial and
industrial establishments and adjacent areas of Gaston, Lincoln, and Rutherford
counties. With projected population increases, industrial development and the
unreliable nature of groundwater in the county, the number of people who depend on
Cleveland County Water will certainly increase. The First Broad River does not provide
an adequate water supply to meet future demands of Cleveland County Water, given
stream flow fluctuations, instream flow requirements and downstream flow needs. In
addition, the run -of -river type intake utilized by Cleveland County Water is particularly
susceptible to drought conditions such as those experienced in 2002. A more
dependable and abundant water supply is needed for Cleveland County.
Draft Purpose and
Need Report
First Broad River Reservoir
Comment [N13]: Why is peak 1
demand used, not the average?
First, the peak demand is not
needed every day of the year.
Second, the analysis should
assume a reduction in demand
when there is a water shortage,
due to voluntary, then
mandatory, water conservation
measures, j
What are the model results if the
average demand is used?
Comment [N14]: Were the only
assumptions a min flow of 70 cfs
and a demand of 7.78 mgd?
Were there other model
constraints or operating
protocols for low flow periods? J
Comment [N15]: It is hard to 1
understand the meaning of the
phrases "water shortages",
"water would not be available",
and "no water would be
available". Do they all refer to
flows <70 cfs?
Again, a realistic operations
protocol would allow for
withdrawal by reducing the min
release to 36.7 cfs. How do the
model results differ under that
23

Draft Purpose and
Need Report
References
6. References
24

Table 3. Annual Discharge of First Broad River near Casar
Water Year
Discharge
(Oct 1 - Sept 30)
cfs mgd
1960
139.3 89.9
1961
94.7 61.1
1962
108.9 70.3
1963
63.4 40.9
1964
69.1 44.6
1965
129 83.2
1966
72.6 46.8
1967
63.2 40.8
1968
87.1 56.2
1969
79.9 51.5
1970
76.8 49.5
1971
83.1 53.6
1972
95.8 61.8
1973
110.3 71.2
1974
107.4 69.3
1975
139.3 89.9
1976
92.5 59.7
1977
101.7 65.6
1978
109.9 70.9
1979
99.4 64.1
1980
113.2 73.0
1981
54.9 35.4
1982
70.9 45.7
1983
106.5 68.7
1984
126.7 81.7
1985
70 45.2
1986
55.3 35.7
1987
91.1 58.8
1988
43.4 28.0
1989
60.6 39.1
1990
113.8 73.4
1991
99.7 64.3
1992
62.7 40.5
1993
135.2 87.2
1994
94.9 61.2
1995
97.8 63.1
1996
93.5 60.3
1997
99.1 63.9
1998
104 67.1
1999
51.8 33.4
2000
41.3 26.6
2001
29.5 19.0
2002
26.8 17.3
2003
151.7 97.9
2004
107.8 69.5
2005
113.4 73.2
Source: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nc/nwis/monthly/?format=
sites selection links&search site no
=02152100&amp referred module=sw
Comment [N16]: Update this
table to include water years
2006 and 2007.

Comment [N17]: Include all
`years from 1960 - 2007.
Table 4. Monthly Mean Discharge (cfs) of First Broad River near Casar
Water
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1975
119.1
141.1
385.6
149.1
254.4
167.7
94.4
59.4
97.4
193.7
99.9
85.0
1976
132.3
95.2
90.2
89.0
92.8
84.9
52.8
45.7
47.3
223.9
86.9
146.4
1977
87.8
78.5
141 A
163.1
74.7
64.7
42.1
41.7
66.4
53.5
191.2
87.0
1978
200.0
85.9
157.0
98.3
135.1
78.1
61.7
117.4
50.9
40.8
41.5
59.9
1979
138.4
163.0
173.0
156.7
104.7
87.3
77.1
54.1
101.5
119.4
114.9
74.4
1980
124.8
75.6
174.8
212.8
138.9
114.6
90.6
53.7
63.3
75.3
73.2
51.7
1981
47.2
70.2
63.1
59.3
67.7
39.4
42.3
32.7
37.4
29.1
27.3
57.8
1982
115.3
151.2
70.0
87.4
65.7
99.6
62.0
57.6
35.1
44.5
50.9
116.5
1983
96.9
165.1
155.0
291.2
131.6
92.3
59.5
40.0
41.6
45.6
60.1
150.3
1984
150.3
94.0
234.7
157.7
191.2
171.8
99.1
137.7
126.4
55.6
56.9
62.9
1985
71.5
125.0
59.0
58.0
41.4
27.7
77.7
153.2
53.2
40.1
127.6
76.8
1986
54.8
57.5
87.5
52.7
50
32.7
20.5
26.2
38.9
32.5
65.7
100.6
1987
88.1
154.7
228.8
127.8
88.5
74.6
45.9
32.8
58.3
34.9
51.5
60.2
1988
88.1
50.8
44.6
67.5
33.9
23.4
19.2
19.5
37.2
28.5
35.9
26.6
1989
44.4
79.0
97.0
55.4
67.8
74.1
45.4
46.9
130.0
149.5
71.8
100.6
1990
133.5
247.4
194.5
126.3
108.3
66.9
63.3
69.2
42.7
160.0
63.1
72.2
1991
124.5
85.7
143.5
176.4
112.8
88.7
58.4
67.6
41.1
35.0
38.0
45.3
1992
55.5
77.8
78.4
139.2
80.8
86.2
39.0
35.5
44.7
74.4
178.9
142.2
1993
222.9
135.1
287.3
219.1
138.5
80.6
52.4
54.6
35.6
31.1
46.8
56.8
1994
121.0
122.4
180.9
102.1
57.5
89.6
92.6
172.3
66.1
62.7
56.8
69.8
1995
273.0
122.8
177.0
77.1
63.8
97.2
56.4
65.7
49.7
106.5
98.4
62.4
1996
162.6
133.8
134.5
103.4
81.8
69.0
45.4
69.1
56.5
44.5
64.3
116.4
1997
89.0
141.9
188.3
167.8
104.9
99.4
79.9
51.8
44.4
45.6
47.2
58.2
1998
176.9
185.9
173.2
183.7
147.5
78.9
63.1
55.8
37.9
42.9
42.2
52.2
1999
84.3
84.6
57.0
76.4
56.0
37.7
44.7
22.6
22.8
32.5
41.1
40.4
2000
49.8
48.4
77.9
87.1
37.5
23.8
19.2
16.2
22.6
17.6
23.3
30.0
2001
30.9
37.8
76.5
38.0
18.3
19.9
23.0
14.7
24.9
17.4
17.2
22.7
2002
49.0
43.8
56.7
36.1
23.9
14.9
11.4
8.09
21.0
32.9
69.2
111.5
2003
48.7
95.8
156.7
300.2
218.7
260.9
242.8
196.1
85.4
74.1
79.5
85.3
2004
55.4
130.5
57.8
94.5
79.7
135.0
108.7
53.9
347.7
77.2
149.0
171.5
Source:
http://waterdata usgs.qovtnc/nwis/monthlv/?referred module=sw&site no=02152100&por 02152
100 1=1032180 00060 1 1959-03 2005-09&format=html table&date format=YYYY-MM-
DD&rdb compression=file& submitted form=parameter selection list

Table 13. Cleveland County Top Industries
Company Name
Industry
Employment
Range
Location
Cleveland County Schools
Education and Health Services
1,000+
countywide
Cleveland Regional Medical
Center
Education and Health Services
1,000+
Shelby
County of Cleveland
Public Administration
500-999
Shelby
Gardner -Webb University
Education and Health Services
500-999
Boiling Springs
Wal-Mart Distribution Center
Trade, Transportation, Utilities
500-999
Shelby
PPG Industries Fiberglass
Manufacturing
500-999
Shelby
Products
Eaton Corporation
Manufacturing
500-999
Kings Mountain
Entertainment Distribution
Company
Manufacturing
500-999
Grover
White Oak Manor, Inc.
Education and Health Services
259-499
Shelby
City of Shelby
Public Administration
259499
Shelby
Cleveland Community
College
Education and Health Services
259499
Shelby
Shelby Personnel Services
Professional and Business
259499
Shelby
Services
Reliance Electric Industrial
Company
Manufacturing
259499
Kings Mountain
Curtiss Wright Flight
Systems Inc.
Manufacturing
259499
Shelby
Copeland Corporation
Manufacturing
259499
Shelby
BFS Diversified Products
Manufacturing
259499
Kings Mountain
Honeywell International
Manufacturing
259499
Shelby
Source: North Carolina Department of Commerce, NC Profile
http://eslmi23 esc.state.nc.us/ncpindlnfo/topTen.aspx
Comment [NILS]: What year are
these data?
Are any of these now out of
business? or reduced in size?
At any rate, how were these data
(and Table 12) used to project
future water demand?

vCU1
Y N O �) i m
C)
.G In
C 0
3� 0 CO=
r"�r: E�
P'Ov
dl C
0
���
cY c ar
8 yT
d) a
vai
o
yvc voa'
nco
a{7�Y�':3
Moony �=,0 LyL
d N C O
O
3 0
0 O_
>c>
�;

Cleveland County Water
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Preliminary Alternatives Report
(draft)
First Broad River Reservoir
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Cleveland County, North Carolina
January 12, 2009

Table of Contents
Page
ProjectPurpose and Need............................................................................................................
1
Initial Alternatives Considered.................................................................................................................2
No -Action Alternative................................................................................................................................
3
Implementation of an Aggressive Water Conservation Plan to Reduce Demands ..................................
3
Implementation of the Use of Recycled Treated Wastewater...................................................................4
Increased Utilization of Groundwater Supplies.........................................................................................
5
Increased Withdrawal from the CCW Existing First Broad River Intake................................................6
Construction of Additional Finished Water Storage Tanks......................................................................7
Purchase Water from other Sources...........................................................................................................
8
Cityof Shelby....................................................................................................................................10
Cityof Kings Mountain....................................................................................................................11
Broad River Water Authority(BRWA)............................................................................................12
Townof Forest City...........................................................................................................................
13
Cityof Hickory ..................................................................................................................................
14
Construction of a New Raw Water Intake on the Broad River...............................................................15
Reservoiron First Broad River...............................................................................................................16
Development of a Reservoir on Knob Creek...........................................................................................
16
Construction of a Side Stream (Pumped Storage) Reservoir on Knob Creek
with Pumped Storage from the Existing CCW First Broad River intake and
PumpStation...........................................................................................................................................
17
Construction of a Side Stream (Pumped Storage) Reservoir on Crooked Run
Creek (upper site) with Pumped Storage from the Existing CCW First Broad
Riverintake and Pump Station.................................................................................................................
17
Construction of a Side Stream (Pumped Storage) Reservoir on Crooked Run
Creek (lower site) with Pumped Storage from the Existing CCW First Broad
Riverintake and Pump Station...............................................................................................................18
Alternatives for Further Consideration....................................................................................................19
AppendixA...............................................................................................................................................20
AppendixB...............................................................................................................................................21

Project Purpose and Need
A "Purpose and Need Report" for the project has been completed and from that study it is projected that
Cleveland County Water (CCW) will need 6.23 million gallons per day (MGD) of raw water by 2060 to
meet average day demands and 7.78 MGD to meet peak day demands. At the Cleveland County Water
intake on the First Broad River, the estimated available raw water supply under low flow conditions is 5.97
MGD.
Historical records from 1940 through 2008 were used to assess the ability of Cleveland County Water's
existing run -of -river intake to supply future raw water needs. Depending on the minimum instream flow
requirement, the future demand of 7.78 MGD would not be met on 9.7 percent of the days (2,420 out of
24,954 days). Of these, as many as 110 days would be consecutive. Water shortages lasting at least 10
consecutive days would occur 4.2 percent of the time .
Demonstration of Need
The First Broad River is insufficient to meet projected demands, based on the following conditions:
• Fluctuations in the normal stream flow of the First Broad River vary widely and affect water availability
at the Cleveland County Water intake on a daily basis.
• Cleveland County suffered a severe drought that peaked in 2002. The county is experiencing another
drought and is susceptible to future droughts. A long-term solution is needed to ensure adequate
drinking water, especially during drought conditions.
• Groundwater is not a reliable source of water in the Cleveland County area, as wells either run dry or
have low water levels. Water quality is also a concern. It is estimated that approximately 8,000 housing
units (approximately 20,240 persons) rely on individual groundwater wells as the sole source of potable
water. It is expected that most of these residences will become Cleveland County Water customers
through the planning period (2060).
• The population of Cleveland County Water's current service area is projected to increase by
approximately 6,000 persons by 2060. It is expected that these new residents will be Cleveland County
Water customers.
• Based on continuing requests for service connections, it is evident that the need for a dependable source
of potable water does not stop at the county line. Cleveland County Water already serves
approximately 500 customers in Gaston, Lincoln and Rutherford counties. Cleveland County Water
plans to expand its service area in areas that can be more easily and economically served by Cleveland
County Water rather than existing water systems in these counties.
Purpose of the Proposed Action
The purpose of the proposed action is to ensure a dependable water supply for Cleveland County Water that
meets projected long-term (2060) needs. A "dependable" water supply will provide the district's needs and
Comment IN3]: See our
comments In the P&N document.
If the P&N document Is adjusted,
new text will be needed here.

maintain required instream flows (assuming water conservation measures are implemented in accordance
with an approved drought management plan).
Initial Alternatives Considered
The regulations developed by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) for implementation of the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process require the development of alternatives for the
proposed project and an objective evaluation of "all reasonable alternatives". In order to meet the CEQ
regulations the following alternatives have been identified:
• No -Action
• Implementation of an Aggressive Water Conservation Plan to Reduce Demands
• Implementation of the Use of Recycled Treated Wastewater
• Increased Utilization of Groundwater Supplies
• Increased Withdrawal from the CCW Existing First Broad River Intake
• Construction of Additional Finished Water Storage Tanks
• Purchase Excess Water Demands from an Existing Public Water Supply System in addition to the
continued utilization of the CCW intake. Potential systems to be considered are:
➢ City of Shelby
➢ City of Kings Mountain
➢ Town of Forest City
➢ Broad River Water Authority (BRWA)
➢ City of Hickory
• Construction of a New Raw Water Intake on the Broad River
• Development of a Reservoir on the First Broad River
• Development of a Reservoir on Knob Creek
• Construction of a Side Stream (Pumped Storage) Reservoir on Knob Creek with Pumped Storage
from the Existing CCW First Broad River intake and Pump Station
• Construction of a Side Stream (Pumped Storage) Reservoir on Crooked Run Creek (upper site)
with Pumped Storage from the Existing CCW First Broad River intake and Pump Station
• Construction of a Side Stream (Pumped Storage) Reservoir on Crooked Run Creek (lower site) with
Pumped Storage from the Existing CCW First Broad River intake and Pump Station
2

No -Action Alternative
Under the No -Action alternative, CCW would continue to withdraw water from the current raw water intake
located at the confluence of the First Broad River and Knob Creek. This alternative would result in no
changes to the existing conditions within the project area and water flow fluctuations in the First Broad
River would continue to affect the dependability of the river as a water supply for the CCW service area. A
review of historical stream flow records and modeling of the river basin as a part of the draft environmental
impact statement (DEIS) indicates that the First Broad River has inadequate flow to meet the projected
CCW demands as well as in -stream flow requirements imposed by the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality and other resource agencies. Approximately 10% of the time the flow in the river is inadequate to { Comment [N2]: see comment on
meet both of these demands. page t.
Implementation of the "No -Action" alternative would result in periods when CCW would be unable to meet
current and projected future water demands, especially during periods of drought or low stream flow. The
lack of an adequate water supply has the potential to adversely impact public health and would likely limit
population growth and development in Cleveland County, as well as portions of adjacent counties served by
CCW.
The "No -Action" alternative does not meet the purpose and need for the project given the fact that under
current demands the current source is inadequate to supply the required amount of raw water and is certainly
inadequate to meet projected future demands. While the "No -Action" alternative would avoid any adverse
environmental impacts, it does not meet the requirements of the purpose and need for the project.
Requirements of NEPA require that the "No -Action" alternative be carried forward through the completion
of the alternatives analysis; therefore this alternative will be carried forward for additional review and
consideration as a baseline condition.
Implementation of an Aggressive Water Conservation Plan to Reduce Demands
The purpose of this alternative would be to implement a more aggressive water conservation plan that would
result in a substantial reduction in per capita consumption to a level that would possibly allow CCW to meet
future demands without the need for an expansion or development of new water sources.
CCW has experienced drought conditions since 2000 and as a result had in place a successful program of
water conservation. This program is a volunteer program but management has the option to implement
mandatory restrictions in the case of a severe drought conditions or a water emergency. CCW also has in
place a "Water Shortage Response Resolution' that was adopted by CCW in February 2003. (See Purpose
and Need Section) The resolution stipulates conservation measures for both voluntary and mandatory
conservation phases. These measures address indoor residential use, outdoor residential use, and industrial
use.
The water conservation program has been successful and has resulted in a reduction in per capita demands
and the efficient use of the available water supply by the customers of the district. As a part of the DEIS
water usage records for CCW were reviewed from 1999 to present. This review indicates that the current

residential per capita water consumption over the nine year period is 59.5 gpd. However, this number has
decreased to 58.9 gpd/person over the past 5 year period as a result of the water conservation measures. The
59.5 gpd/person average daily flow demand has been used to project future residential water demands. This
per capita water consumption is less than more standard accepted per capita recommended demands such as
the 400 gpd/connection recommended by the North Carolina Public Water Supply Section in the "Rules
Governing Public Water Systems".
The current water conservation measures in place have contributed to this lower than normal residential per
capita consumption. A review of information provided by the North Carolina Public Water Supply Section comment [N3]: The CCW
indicates that other water systems serving basically residential customers in the general vicinity of CCW conservation plan would benefit
from Including clearly defined
have documented per capita water consumption numbers of 70 to 120 gpd per person. trigger points.
Unlike many public water systems the majority of the CCW service area is rural by nature and the use of
potable water for irrigation purposes is minimal. Therefore there are no measures that could be implemented
to reduce per capita consumption by reducing the use of water for irrigation.
As a stand alone alternative a more aggressive water conservation plan would not satisfy the requirements of
the purpose and need. However, the continued implementation of a water conservation plan will be a vital
part of all other alternatives to be considered and the demand projections being used reflect the effectiveness
of the current program.
Implementation of the Use of Recycled Treated Wastewater
The use of potable water for irrigation purposes by CCW customers is minimal: therefore the use of treated
wastewater for reuse purposes including irrigation supply would have minimal impact on the future
demands of CCW. A program to utilize treated wastewater effluent is dependent on a customer base that
utilizes larger quantities of water for irrigation and other non -potable uses. This is not the case for CCW.
In order to adequately utilize treated wastewater will require the upgrade of existing wastewater treatment
plants to supply the treated wastewater effluent. CCW does not own or operate an existing wastewater
treatment plant. The City of Shelby, City of Kings Mountain and Town of Boiling Springs own wastewater
treatment plants that could potentially be utilized and upgraded to produce treated wastewater effluent for
reuse purposes. However, it would be more cost effective to identify areas close to these treatment facilities
for the reuse of the treated effluent. Any reduction in water demand as a result of the reuse of treated
effluent would contribute to the reduction in demand for the City of Shelby, City of Kings Mountain and
Town of Boiling Springs, and would not result in a decrease in demands for CCW.
The use of treated wastewater effluent to reduce the demand for potable water is not an option for CCW and
the program would not satisfy the requirements of the purpose and need and provide for an adequate water
supply to meet future demands associated with growth of the system and is therefore will not be carried
forward for future consideration.
Comment [N4]: What data are
available to support this
statement. Does nobody in the
service area water lawns?
Comment [N5]: There Is no
mention of reducing the leaks in
the system. The P&N document
states that unaccounted water is
17% of current demand. This Is
equivalent to 0.6 mgd on
average. Reducing the 17%
figure to 7% by reducing leaks,
reduces the unaccounted for
value to 0.25 mgd (saving 0.35
mgd).
Since the P&N assumes a
constant 14% into the future,
the savings in year 2060 by
reducing leaks to 7% would be
worth 0.38 mgd.
Comment [N6]: This alternative is
missing from the list on page 19.
Comment [N7]: See comment
above.

Increased Utilization of Groundwater Supplies
The use of groundwater to meet potable water supply demands in the foothills section of North Carolina has
been somewhat limited due to the geology of the area. Granite rock is underlying much of the area and
groundwater sources are located within fractures in these rock structures. While smaller communities and
residences in Cleveland County with lower water demands have historically been served by groundwater
wells, the limited capacity of water from these bedrock fractures limits the ability of larger water users such
as CCW to utilize groundwater and depend on it as a source.
Groundwater in Cleveland County is obtained by developing wells into fractures in the underlying bedrock.
Historically groundwater production wells with capacities of 50 to 150 gpm are typical. There are no well
defined aquifers in the Cleveland County area to support the required demands of CCW. To meet the
projected demands of CCW well capacity of 7,000 gallons per minute (gpm) would be required. Given the
typical well yield the development of an adequate number of wells to meet the projected demands would be
very difficult. The North Carolina Division of Environmental Health estimates that it is very unlikely that
wells with the pumping capacity needed to meet CCW demands can be found in Cleveland County (Setzer
2007).
The recent drought conditions have and continue to impact the capacity of groundwater supplies. Based
upon records of new home construction and new meter connections by CCW during the past eight years
over 1,000 new customers have connected to the CCW system that were previously served by groundwater
supplies. The following table shows the number of new taps, number of new homes and the number of
connections attributed to poor groundwater supplies for CCW.

TABLE I
NEW CONNECTIONS AND GROUINDWATER SUPPLY COMPARISON CCW
Year
New Construction
New CCW Taps
Taps Abandoning Use
of Groundwater
2000
420
529
109
2001
344
567
223
2002
395
651
256
2003
291
402
111
2004
313
349
36
2005
318
336
18
2006
244
309
65
2007
148
332
184
TOTALS
2,473
3,475
1,002
Water quality may also be a problem. In some areas of the county, existing wells display high
concentrations of iron and manganese in the groundwater. Water treatment for these metals is necessary
(North Carolina Division of Water Resources 1989). In addition, lithium has been detected in groundwater
in the Cherryville and Bessemer City vicinity of Gaston County. (The CCW already has more than 100
customers in Gaston County.) Additional treatment can potentially be a significant expense (Setzer 2007).
Due to the shortage of groundwater capacity and water quality concerns, the alternative to utilize
groundwater, either from individual wells or large municipal wells, does not meet the project's purpose or
therefore will not be carried forward for future consideration.
Increased Withdrawal from the CCW Existing First Broad River Intake
Withdrawals at the existing CCW intake site are constrained by normal flows of the First Broad River and
the required instream flow requirements established by the North Carolina Division of Water Resources.
Safe yield for run of the river type raw water intakes is dependent upon the 7Q10 flow of the stream. 7Q10
flow is defined as the average low flow over a 7 consecutive day period that occurs once every 10 years.
Water withdrawals of up to 20% of the 7Q 10 flow are typically permitted. The calculated available yield of

the First Broad River at the existing CCW intake based upon previously published 7Q10 flows for the
stream is 10.0 MGD. However, during the 2002 drought the available supply dropped to less than 4.0
MGD.
As a part of the preparation of the DEIS for the proposed First Broad River Reservoir additional modeling
of the river has been completed to determine the available water supply. This modeling shows that based
upon historical flow records for the First Broad River that the required 7.78 MGD future demand for CCW
is not available 10% of the time! The modeling was conducted with an instream flow of 71.6 cfs below the irComment [N8]: see comment on
CCW intake. The 71.6 cfs was recently determined as the acceptable required flow by the North Carolina page i,
Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) based upon a site-specific study of aquatic habitat and instream
flows (see Appendix A).
In the absence of some type of raw water storage capacity, this alternative will not provide an adequate
supply during drought conditions, is not considered dependable, and does not meet the project's purpose and
need. Therefore this alternative will not be carried forward for future consideration.
Construction of Additional Finished Water Storage Tanks
This alternative would consist of the construction of additional finished water storage tanks to be installed at
various locations in the CCW distribution system. During periods of adequate flow in the First Broad River
the water treatment plant would be operated at the maximum design capacity of 6.0 MGD. Treated water
would then be stored until the time needed for usage.
CCW currently has storage tanks with a combined capacity of 5.1 million gallons at various locations within
the system. These tanks are located to provide storage needed to maintain adequate system pressures during
periods of peak instantaneous demand. The "Rules Governing Public Water Systems" (North Carolina
Administrative Code, Title 15A, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, subchapter 18)
requires that a minimum of one-half day's supply of finished water be provided (Section .0805). The current
storage within the system meets these requirements.
Section .1500 of the "Rules Governing Public Water Systems" also address water quality standards and
require certain quality parameters as mandated by USEPA and the Safe Drinking Water act as amended.
One of these requirements has to do with the formation of various disinfection by-products within the
system. The age of the water in the system has a direct impact on these parameters. Implementation of this
alternative to build additional finished water storage in the capacities necessary to provide water supply over
the periods of low stream flows will have a negative impact on these parameters. The increased water age
contributes to increased levels of disinfection by-products and violations of the standards.
This alternative will not meet the purpose and need of the project since it will not provide the additional
capacity needed to meet the demands of CCW. Therefore this alternative will not be carried forward for
future consideration.

Purchase Water from other Sources
This alternative consists of the purchase of finished water on a wholesale basis from an existing municipal
source. Water would be purchased in those amounts necessary to supplement the available supply from the
First Broad River. Based upon the reviews of historical stream flow for the First Broad River and available
withdrawals by CCW during low flow or drought conditions a minimum of 5.0 MGD of finished water will
be needed by CCW to supplement the existing supply during these periods. Each of the proposed
I Comment [N9]: The P&N
document shows that the highest
alternatives for this option must have the capacity to meet this demand. In addition it should be noted that
p p ty
! monthly use on record was 4.05
the purchase of finished water from other suppliers will be on an intermittent basis and only utilized during
mgd (Sept. 2007). The P&N
those periods of low stream flows.
document also says that the max
daily demand in 2060 is 7.78
mgd. The minimum water
Municipal sources which are located in the proximity of CCW that can possibly meet the requirements of
production for CCW was 2.98
mgd (Feb. 2006).
this alternative are:
The difference between MAX
• City of Shelby
demand
more the rangeproduction of 1 mgd in
current years and 4.8 mgd in
year 2060. This assumes no
• City of Kings Mountain
conservation by users. Thus, the
request for a minimum of 5 mgd
(with no mention of when it
• Broad River Water Authority (BRWA)
would be needed) seems to
`overstate the need.
• Town of Forest City
• City of Hickory
To adequately address each of the potential existing finished water systems associated with this alternative
additional information is required from the water system as to their ability and willingness to supply water
to CCW. CCW in a letter dated December 4, 2208 requested information from each of the water systems to
address the technical issues of this option. The information requested is:
• Does the water system have adequate excess water supply capacity to meet the projected
5.0 MGD demand during this planning period (2008 — 2060) for CCW during periods of
drought?
• If so, is there adequate water treatment plant capacity currently in place to supply the CCW
demand? If not, are there plans for such capacity, including all associated appurtenances
such as raw water pumps, raw water transmission mains, finished water pumps and finished
water transmission mains, to be added?
• If there is adequate supply and treatment capacity, would the water system be willing to
enter into an agreement with CCW in which the water system would agree to sell CCW up
to 5.0 MGD during periods of drought?

• If the water system can not commit to supplying 5.0 MGD during periods of drought, how
much could you commit to supplying?
• Please identify the source of the excess capacity the water system would be willing to sell.
• Identify those locations where CCW may purchase the supply of finished water.
• Identify the hydraulic grade line at the proposed connection points.
A copy of the letter may be found in Appendix B.
Three of the potential sources either currently utilize or plan to utilize the Broad River as a raw water
source. Therefore, a discussion of the Broad River and its impact on water supply in the Cleveland County
region is important prior to additional discussion about each of the alternatives. The Broad River forms in
the mountains of Western North Carolina in Buncombe, Henderson and Polk counties and flows into
Rutherford and Cleveland Counties prior to crossing into South Carolina. The river and its tributaries
provide the potable water supply for much of the area. In recent years increased emphasis has been placed
on the river for use as a future water supply. The BRWA currently utilizes the river as their source and a
section of the river upstream of their intake is protected under the rules for public water supplies and source
water protection developed by the Division of Water Quality.
In anticipation of the future use of the river both the Town of Forest City and the City of Shelby have
successfully permitted the reclassification and protection of others areas of the river for future water supply.
The Broad River plays a vital role in the economy of Cleveland County and the surrounding region. The
river also provides water supply for power production in the area. Duke Energy has a major power facility
located at the Rutherford County/Cleveland County line at Cliffside. This is a fossil fuel fired facility that is
currently being expanded and upgraded. Water is withdrawn from the Broad River at this location for use in
the production of power. There are also hydro power facilities near Gaffney in South Carolina owned by
Duke Energy. In addition there are smaller hydro power facilities in the upper reaches of the Broad River
basin at Lake Summit, Lake Adger, and Lake Lure.
Duke Energy recently completed a study of the Broad River basin entitled `Broad River Basin Water
Supply Study" that evaluated the ability of the river to meet all of the projected water demands including
potable water supply, power production, and agricultural needs. The study indicates that the river can meet
the projected demands of the region, but with very little margin of error with the assumptions made in the
study.
USGS maintains a number of stream flow gauging stations in the watershed. One of these stations is located
on the Broad River in southern Cleveland County near Boiling Springs (station # 02151500). At this
location the Broad River has a drainage area of 875 square miles. USGS has calculated the 7Q10 flow at
this location to be 198 MGD. A review of records from the gauging station shows a low flow of 53.6 MGD

during the 2002 drought. As previously discussed the NCDWR historically has allowed for the withdrawal
of up to 20% of the 7Q10 flow for water supply. Therefore the available supply from the Broad River near
the Boiling Springs gauge is 39.6 MGD.
Average daily demand for the Cliffside Steam Station was projected to increase from the current of 6.7
MGD to 20.7 MGD in the Duke Energy "Broad River Basin Water Supply Study. These projected demands
will have an impact on water supply availability from the Broad River.
In addition to the current demands from existing water users on the Broad River other communities have
expressed an interest in the development of the river as future water supplies. Polk County has expressed an
interest in the construction of a water treatment plant on the Green River. Spartanburg Water System has
expressed an interest in development of an intake on the Broad River for the withdrawal of water to
supplement their existing supplies from the Pacolet River. Like the Duke Energy demands these potential
withdrawals, if developed, will have an impact on the availability of water from the Broad River to meet
future water supply demands.
The City of Shelby
The City of Shelby, like CCW also depends on the First Broad River as the supply for the City's water
system. A raw water intake located just north of West Grover Street in the northwestern part of the City
supplies water to the city's water treatment plant. The treatment plant has a design capacity of 12.0 MGD
and components include three (3) off -stream raw water reservoirs for the storage of water prior to treatment.
Current average daily water demands for Shelby are 4.2 MGD. The City of Shelby also provides water on a
wholesale basis to the Town of Boiling Springs. The contract amount in 2002 was 1.0 MGD (Shelby Water
Supply Plan 2002).
Based on the City of Shelby's 2002 Water Supply Plan, average daily water demands for the city's service
area are projected to be 8.7 MGD by 2050, including the contract sales of 1.0 MGD. Assuming an average
day to peak day multiplier of 1.25, approximately 10.88 MGD would be needed in 2050. The City of
Shelby is permitted to withdraw up to 18.0 MGD from the First Broad River raw water intake once the
water plant is upgraded and expanded, provided stream flows are adequate to permit the 18.0 MGD
withdrawal and also maintain a downstream flow of 25 cfs in the First Broad River. (McGill 2004).
To prepare for future drought conditions, the City of Shelby installed a 30 -inch raw water line from the
Grover Street Water Plant to the Broad River immediately following the 2002 drought. The project was
planned to include a future raw water intake and pump station but these facilities have not been constructed
to date. A temporary diesel driven pump has been installed to withdraw water from the Broad River and
pump to the Grover Street plant during those periods when low stream flows in the First Broad River dictate
the need to utilize this additional source.
The Broad River has been reclassified for future use as a raw water source and is currently classified as WS
-IV byNCDENR, DWQ.
10

Available water supply from run of river type intakes is typically based upon the 7Q10 flow of the river.
Water suppliers are normally allowed to withdraw up to 20% of the 7Q 10 flow without the need for special
environmental studies and permitting. Based upon these criteria the estimated available supply at the City
of Shelby proposed Broad River intake location is 42 MGD. However, it should be noted that the recent
drought conditions experienced in the Cleveland County area have resulted in a decrease in stream flows,
including those in the Broad River. A review of flow information for the Broad River during the drought
period from 2001 to 2008 shows that stream flows have decreased. In an e-mail dated September 23, 2008
USGS estimates that the 7Q 10 flows for the Broad River watershed may be reduced as much as 28% due to
the impact of the recent drought. Should the 7Q10 flows be reduced the available water supply at the
proposed City of Shelby intake location would be decreased to 30.8 MGD.
CCW has an emergency use agreement and metered connection in place with the City of Shelby. The
volume of water currently offered to the CCW is limited and depends on the available water supply.
As previously discussed CCW has requested certain information from the City of Shelby as to their ability
to supply up to 5.0 MGD of water to CCW.
As of this date CCW has not received a response to the letter.
Given the current design capacity of the City of Shelby water plant and their projected growth demands the
City of Shelby does not have adequate capacity to meet their demands as well as the required future
demands of CCW without improvements to their water infrastructure. In order to meet these demands the
City of Shelby will be required to expand their water plant. A part of the water plant expansion would
include the construction of a raw water intake and pump station on the Broad River to provide adequate raw
water capacity for the plant.
The purchase of water on a wholesale basis from the City of Shelby appears to have potential as an
acceptable alternative that should have additional analysis as an alternative for the CCW project. Therefore
this alternative will be carried forward for future consideration.
The City of Kings Mountain
Moss Lake provides the raw water source for the City of Kings Mountain water plant. The City of Kings
Mountain operates an 8.0 MGD water treatment plant adjacent to the lake. The city provides water only
within its corporate limits and to its single municipal customer, the Town of Grover. In 2002, an emergency
pipeline connection with the City of Shelby was constructed to supplement Shelby's water supply during the
drought.
In June 26, 2007 CCW entered into an agreement with the City of Kings Mountain to purchase water on an
as needed, emergency condition. The agreement stipulates "that if in the event of an emergency situation or
need for conservation of the water resources by the City, the city does reserve the right to refuse to supply
water to the District, during such emergency or conservation situation.

The approximately 1,000 acre Moss Lake reservoir was formed in 1973 by impounding Buffalo Creek and
is supplied from the 68 square mile drainage area. Information obtained from the Kings Mountain Water
Supply Plan prepared in 2002 and reports prepared by HDR for the Kings Mountain water system indicated
that the safe yield of Moss Lake as 23.0 MGD. The HDR report indicates that the Moss Lake reservoir has
approximately 12,700 million gallons of storage.
The City of Kings Mountain has seen a decrease in average daily water demands over the past several years
due to the loss of several major industrial water users. Many of these were within the textile industry sector
and their loss has resulted in a significant decrease in average daily water demands.
The City of Kings Mountain has initiated preliminary studies as to the feasibility of the construction of a
second water supply reservoir on Muddy Creek to supplement the available water supply from Moss Lake.
Information provided by HDR indicates that the Muddy Creek reservoir is estimated to provide an
additional capacity of 11.1 MGD.
The Duke Energy study of the Broad River basin entitled "Broad River Basin Water Supply Study"
estimates that the demand of the Kings Mountain system will increase to 7.37 MGD over the study period.
Based upon the estimated safe yield of Moss Lake at 23.0 MGD the City of Kings Mountain has adequate
capacity to meet both their projected demands and the future demands of CCW.
As previously discussed CCW has requested certain information from the City of Kings Mountain as to their
ability to supply up to 5.0 MGD of water to CCW.
The City of Kings Mountain has responded to the original request and has requested additional information.
A copy of the letter may be found in the appendix A. CCW provided a response to the initial City of Kings
Mountain letter on December 29, 2008
Given the current design capacity of the City of Kings Mountain water plant and their projected growth
demands the City of Kings Mountain does not have adequate capacity to meet their demands as well as the
required future demands of CCW without improvements to their water infrastructure. In order to meet these
demands the City of Kings Mountain will be required to expand their water plant and portions of the water
distribution system.
The purchase of water on a wholesale basis from the City of Kings Mountain appears to have potential as an
acceptable alternative that should have additional analysis as an alternative for the CCW project. Therefore
this alternative will be carried forward for future consideration.
Broad River Water Authority
In adjacent Rutherford County, the Broad River Water Authority (BRWA) serves the towns of Ruth,
Rutherfordton, and Spindale; and some of the rural areas of Rutherford County. The BRWA utilizes the
Broad River as its water source with an intake near Rutherfordton, upstream of the confluence of the Green
River. BRWA has an 8.0 MGD water treatment plant and has indicated that many of the components are in
12

place for the expansion of the WTP to a capacity of 12.0 MGD. The estimated safe yield at the BRWA
intake is 13.1 MGD.
CCW has an emergency use agreement and pipeline connection in place with the BRWA.
BRWA has made and continues to enter into agreements for the wholesale of water to a number of regional
customers. BRWA has an agreement with Grassy Pond Water Corporation in South Carolina for the sale of
0.50 MGD of finished water and have recently entered into an agreement with Inman -Campobello Water
District in northern Spartanburg County, South Carolina and Polk County, North Carolina for the sale of
finished water. These contracts, as well as the predicted growth of BRWA will approach the available safe
yield of the BRWA source during the planning period.
As previously discussed CCW has requested certain information from BRWA as to their ability to supply up
to 5.0 MGD of water to CCW.
In a letter dated December 31, 2008 the Broad River Water Authority (BRWA) indicated that they do not
have the capacity required to meet the future demands of CCW. Therefore this alternative will not be
carried forward for future consideration.
Town of Forest City
The Town of Forest City utilizes the Second Broad River as its water source with an intake located north of
the town. The Town has an 8.0 MGD water treatment plant with many of the components in place for the
expansion of the WTP to a capacity of 12.0 MGD. The town's system includes elevated tanks with a storage
capacity of 2.5 MGD. The town's distribution system extends outside the city limits to serve outlying areas
and other communities. Forest City sells water, under contract, to the towns of Bostic, Ellenboro, and the
Concord Community Water System.
CCW does not currently have a connection in place with the Town of Forest City.
Current average daily demand in the Forest City service area is approximately 3.0 MGD. During the 2002
drought, the available yield of the Second Broad River at the city's intake was less than 4.0 MGD.
In planning for future growth and in anticipation of increased water demands the Town of Forest City has
planned to develop the Broad River as an additional water source. The Town owns a site on the Broad River
in the southern part of Rutherford County and has plans to construct a new raw water intake and pump
station with a capacity of 12.0 MGD to supplement the existing Second Broad River intake and to provide
additional raw water capacity for their system. The estimated available supply at the Town of Forest City
proposed Broad River intake location is 25.0 MGD based upon the criteria for run of the river type intakes
and available withdrawal discussed in the City of Shelby section above.
As previously discussed CCW has requested certain information from the Town of Forest City n as to their
ability to supply up to 5.0 MGD of water to CCW.
13

As of this date CCW has not received a response to the letter.
Major improvements to the Town of Forest City water system infrastructure will be required to allow the
Town to meet the projected demands of CCW. These improvements include the expansion of the existing
WTP and the construction of a new raw water pump station and transmission line to utilize the Broad River
as an additional source of raw water. With these improvements in place the Town of Forest City could have
the additional capacity to supply the needs of CCW. However, major improvements to the distribution
system would be required to transport the water to the CCW system. In addition water quality could be a
concern due to the residence time of the finished water and the impact this residence time could have on
water quality.
The purchase of water on a wholesale basis from the Town of Forest City appears to have potential as an
acceptable alternative provided that the major improvements to their water treatment and distribution system
described are made. Therefore this alternative will be carried forward for future consideration.
City of Hickory
The City of Hickory uses the Catawba River (Lake Hickory) as a raw water supply. The City of Hickory
Water Plant has a design capacity of 32.0 MGD, with current demands averaging 12.1 MGD. The City also
has current contractual agreements with the City of Conover and Alexander County to provide an additional
6.30 MGD in the future. The city currently has available excess capacity. This alternative utilizes Lake
Hickory, part of the Catawba River as the source for raw water.
North Carolina regulations require that all flows in excess of 2.0 MGD must be approved by the
Environmental Management Commission and may require the development and approval of an
environmental assessment prior to approval. To meet the required average daily demand of 5.0 MGD
implementation of this alternative would require permission from the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission for an interbasin transfer from the Catawba River basin to the Broad River basin.
The Cabarrus County cities of Kannapolis and Concord have an interbasin transfer certificate, approved in
January 20007, to transfer 10 MGD from the Catawba River basin and 10 MGD from the Yadkin River
basin to the Rocky River basin. The cities requested a transfer of up to 36 MGD from the Catawba River
basin; however, only up to 10 MGD was approved. The City of Hickory, as well as a number of towns and
counties in the Catawba River basin, passed resolutions in opposition to the transfer. Some of the reasons
given for opposing the transfer of water from the Catawba River basin are:
• permanent removal of water from the Catawba River will reduce lake levels in all 11 Catawba River
lakes including Lake Hickory;
• aquatic life would lose water during critical summer low flow conditions;
• reduced water levels in the basin would result in additional conservation measures during drought ;
• the transfer would result in reduced revenues needed to operate the public water and sewer systems
inside the basin; and
14

• Cities and counties within the Catawba River Basin would lose water resources for future economic
and population growth.
A consortium of Catawba River basin local governments, joined by the Catawba River Foundation,
appealed the decision by the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission to grant the
interbasin transfer certificate
At present. Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities also has an interbasin transfer certificate (March 2002) to
transfer water (33 MGD) from the Catawba River basin to the Rocky River basin.
As previously discussed CCW has requested certain information from the City of Hickory as to their ability
to supply up to 5.0 MGD of water to CCW.
In a letter dated December 29, 2008 from Kevin B. Greer, P.E., and the City of Hickory has indicated that
they do have the excess capacity to provide for the future demands of CCW. However the letter indicates
that the purchase of water will be required on a continuous basis. There are also numerous contractual issues
that would have to be addresses. Of these the most significant is the approval of an interbasin transfer.
Given the opposition expressed by the City of Hickory to the cities of Kannapolis and Concord approved
interbasin transfer and opposition from other groups in the Catawba River basin it appears that an approval
to obtain the required 5.0 MGD of water from the City of Hickory would be difficult. In addition CCW does
not need to purchase water on a daily basis as required by the City of Hickory. Based upon these factors this
alternative will not be carried forward for future consideration.
Construction of a New Raw Water Intake on the Broad River
This alternative would consist of the construction of a new run -of -river type intake on the Broad River and
the utilization of the Broad River for a raw water supply by CCW to supplement the existing First Broad
River source. As previously discussed both the City of Shelby and the Town of Forest City have
documented plans for the future use of the Broad River as an alternative water source. The safe yield of the
Broad River is estimated to be between 25.0 MGD and 42.0 MGD depending upon the proposed intake
location and based upon a withdrawal of 20 percent of documented 7Q 10 low flow.
In adjacent Rutherford County, the Broad River is the raw water source for the BRWA and will be utilized
by the Town of Forest City in the near future. The Second Broad River, a Broad River tributary is the raw
water source for Forest City, Bostic, and Ellenboro. The City of Shelby recently constructed a temporary
emergency intake on the Broad River for use in emergencies and a portion of the river and watershed were
reclassified to WS IV for use as a water supply. Several other municipalities have expressed interest in
future utilization of the Broad River for water supply, including Spartanburg Water System in South
Carolina.
Polk County, in the upper reaches of the Broad River basin has expressed a desire to construct a new raw
water intake, pump station and water treatment plant on the Green River, a major tributary of the Broad
15

River. In consideration of the available safe yield, other demands for water from the river will impact the
amount of water available for CCW.
The Broad River has adequate supply to meet the projected demands of CCW and to supplement the current
First Broad River source. The absence of raw water storage capability however will make this option,
susceptible to drought conditions, but the river appears to have adequate capacity to meet the projected
CCW demands. Therefore this alternative will be carried forward for future consideration.
Reservoir on First Broad River
This alternative would consist of the construction of a dam on the First Broad River, immediately upstream
of the existing CCW raw water intake and treatment plant. The initial proposed alternative would impound
§
areas below 860 -feet msl, providing an estimated safe yield ofJ MGD (The safe yield is based on the
release of 71.6 cfs for in -stream flow needs.) An earthen dam would be constructed across the First Broad
River upstream of the existing CCW raw water intake. The impoundment would extend west of NC 10 and
have a surface area at full pool of approximately 1,300 acres. The total drainage area upstream of the dam
location is approximately 146 square miles.
Different scenarios of this option will also be evaluated with pool elevations at 850 and 840. Each of these
scenarios will result in smaller impoundments which will also decrease the safe yield of the reservoir.
This alternative meets all of the requirements of the purpose and need of the project and will provided the
required raw water needed for future potable water demands. This alternative also ensures a more reliable
source for the City of Shelby from the First Broad River and will enhance the aquatic conditions in the First
Broad River due to increased stream flows as a result of controlled releases from the new reservoir.
Therefore this alternative will be carried forward for future consideration.
Development of a Reservoir on Knob Creek
This alternative would consist of the construction of a dam on Knob Creek and would impound areas below
860 -feet msl. The proposed reservoir would have a total drainage area of approximately 35 square miles.
Based upon modeling results the estimated safe yield of this alternative would be A; MGD. (The safe yield
is based on the release of 11 cfs. The 11 cfs minimum release was calculated based upon the minimum
release for the first Broad River of 71.6 cfs as determined by NCDWR and adjusted to the smaller drainage
basin.) For this alternative water would be released from the dam to the existing raw water pump station at
which point the water will be picked up and pumped to the water plant.
To impound Knob Creek, an earthen dam would be constructed east of the CCW water treatment plant and
Lawndale-Cesar Road. See Figure I for a map of the lake. The dam would create a reservoir on Knob
Creek with a surface area of approximately 498 acres. With buffers, the area required for this alternative is
approximately 650 acres.
16
Comment [N10]: This document
should list all assumptions and
model operations protocols used
to calculate the safe yield
estimates for all of the reservoir
alternatives. For example:
1. min flow of X
2. min flow does (or does not)
change with season or inflow
3. demand Is reduced (or not)
under mandatory conservation
4. pump size of X mgd
5. etc.
Were the results of the instream
flow study done by NCDWR used
in the assumptions? If not,
these safe yield estimates might
be off and none of the
alternatives should be discarded
until new model runs are
performed equivalent to ALT 2
and ALT 3A.
Comment [N11]: Provide updated
safe yield estimates for all
reservoir alternatives.
Formatted:
Formatted: Highlight

This alternative will meet the requirement for projected demands for CCW, but with very little margin for
error in demand projections and other assumptions as to water demands for minimum release and
evaporation. Therefore this alternative will be carried forward for future consideration.
Construction of a Side Stream (Pumped Storage) Reservoir on Knob Creek with Pumped Storage
from the Existing CCW First Broad River intake and Pump Station
This alternative is identical to the alternative previously discussed for Knob Creek with the exception that
this alternative will have a much larger safe yield as raw water from the First Broad River will be pumped Comment [N12]: Provide a
from the existing CCW raw water intake at the confluence of the First Broad River and Knob Creek. The number.
pumped storage option will increase the safe yield of this alternative to 15.0 MGD.
This alternative will meet the requirement for projected demands for CCW as described in the purpose and
need statement. However as this alternative will utilize the pumped storage option stream flows below the
existing intake will be decreased to those minimum amounts required by the Division of Water Resources.
This alternative will be carried forward for future consideration.
Construction of a Side Stream (Pumped Storage) Reservoir on Crooked Run Creek (upper site) with
Pumped Storage from the Existing CCW First Broad River intake and Pump Station
This alternative would consist of the construction of an "off -stream reservoir" on Crooked Run Creek to
provide for the storage of raw water. Two locations have been identified as potential reservoir sites. The
upper impoundment would be located just north of Kistler Road (SR 1514) and extend upstream in a
northwest direction to Walker Road (SR 1517). This option would form a reservoir with a surface area of
approximately 650 acres and has a drainage area of 5.7 square miles.
The proposed reservoir will utilize the pumped storage option and would be maintained at full pool
elevation during periods of normal to high flows in the First Broad River by pumping water from the
existing CCW raw water intake and pump station located at the confluence of the First Broad River and
Knob Creek to the Crooked Run Creek reservoir. 'Be existing pump station will be upgraded to increase
the pumping capacity to a pump capacity of 15 MGD.
During periods of low flow in the First Broad River, raw water would be withdrawn from the "off -stream
reservoir" for use in the CCW water treatment plant to supplement flows from the First Broad River. A new
raw waterline would convey water from the reservoir to the existing water treatment plant.
'Be upper site and the resulting 650 -acre reservoir would have a safe yield of; S MGD. See Figure 11 for { Formatted: Highlight
a map of the reservoir.
This alternative requires the daily withdrawal of water from the First Broad River to the reservoir from the
existing CCW raw water intake. The daily flow will be required to maintain water quality in the reservoirs
due to the small drainage areas and the resulting normal inflow.
17

This alternative meets the requirement for projected demands for CCW as described in the purpose and need Deleted:
statement. This alternative will be carried forward for future consideration.
Construction of a Side Stream (Pumped Storage) Reservoir on Crooked Run Creek (lower site) with
Pumped Storage from the Existing CCW First Broad River intake and Pump Station
This alternative would consist of the construction of an "off -stream reservoir" on Crooked Run Creek to
provide for the storage of raw water. This scenario has a reservoir location located further downstream on
Crooked Run Creek closer to the First Broad River. This option would form a reservoir with a surface area
of approximately 220 acres and has a drainage area of 6.9 square miles.
The proposed reservoir will utilize the pumped storage option and would be maintained at full pool
elevation during periods of normal to high flows in the First Broad River by pumping water from the
existing CCW raw water intake and pump station located at the confluence of the First Broad River and
Knob Creek to the Crooked Run Creek reservoir. The existing pump station will be upgraded to increase
the pumping capacity to a pump capacity of 15 MGD.
During periods of low flow in the First Broad River, raw water would be withdrawn from the "off -stream
reservoir" for use in the CCW water treatment plant to supplement flows from the First Broad River. A new
raw waterline would convey water from the reservoir to the existing water treatment plant.
The lower site and the resulting 220 -acre reservoir would have a safe yield of,9,0 MGD. See Figure III for a Formatted Highlight
map of the lake.
This alternative requires the daily withdrawal of water from the First Broad River to the reservoir from the
existing CCW raw water intake. The daily flow will be required to maintain water quality in the reservoirs
due to the small drainage areas and the resulting normal inflow.
This alternative meets the requirement for projected demands for CCW as described in the purpose and need Deleted:
statement. This alternative will be carried forward for future consideration.
18

Alternatives for Further Consideration
After consideration of initial alternatives the following selected alternatives are recommended to be carried
forward for future evaluation:':
• No action
• Purchase Excess Water Demands for an Existing Public Water Supply System. Potential systems to
be considered are:
➢ City of Shelby
➢ City of Kings Mountain
➢ Town of Forest City
• Construction of a New Raw Water Intake on the Broad River
• Development of a Reservoir on the First Broad River
• Development of a Reservoir on Knob Creek
• Construction of a Side Stream (Pumped Storage) Reservoir on Knob Creek with Pumped Storage
from the Existing CCW First Broad River intake and Pump Station
• Construction of a Side Stream (Pumped Storage) Reservoir on Crooked Run Creek (upper site)
with Pumped Storage from the Existing CCW First Broad River intake and Pump Station
• Construction of a Side Stream (Pumped Storage) Reservoir on Crooked Run Creek (lower site) with
Pumped Storage from the Existing CCW First Broad River intake and Pump Station
19
�- -- - --- ---------------
Comment
_ -Comment [N131: The alternatives
list should repeat the statement
from page 4 that water
conservation and leak detection
will be used in conjunction with
each alternative.

APPENDIX A
20