20211505 Ver 1_182-803 LNQ Hedrick Alternatives Analysis_20211013

HEDRICK GRAVEL & SAND CO -LAKE NORMAN QUARRY MINE
Charlotte
EXPANSION
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Prepared By:
CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
CEC Project 182-803
OCTOBER 2021
fl
AW lw
w'w7
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
3701 Arco Corporate Drive, Suite 400 1 Charlotte, NC 213273 1 p: 980-237-0373 f: 980-237-0372 1 www.cecinc.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................
5
1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW, MINE HISTORY & ECONOMIC IMPACT .........................
7
2.0 PROPOSED ACTION.......................................................................................................
11
3.0 PURPOSE AND NEED.....................................................................................................
12
4.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS.........................................................................................
14
4.1 SCREENING CRITERIA..............................................................................................
14
4.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED FOR ANALYSIS ..................................................
15
4.2.1 Alternative 1 — Northwest Mine Wall Expansion (Preferred Alternative) (Appendix
B) 15
4.2.2 Alternative 2 — No Wall Expansion, Deepen Current Pit .......................................
28
4.2.3 Alternative 3 - New Quarry Pit, North Side...........................................................
30
4.2.4 Alternative 4 — South Expansion............................................................................
33
4.2.5 Alternative 5 — East Mine Wall Expansion.............................................................
35
4.2.6 Alternative 6 — Greenfield Site...............................................................................
37
4.2.7 Alternative 7- No Action........................................................................................
40
4.3 METHODS OF EVALUATING IMPACTS TO NATURAL AND
CULTURAL
RESOURCES............................................................................................................................
41
4.3.1 Natural Resources; Protected Species.....................................................................
41
4.3.2 Wetlands (Appendix F: WoUS Report and SAW-2020-00436 PJD Concurrence) 41
4.3.3 Cultural Resources..................................................................................................
42
5.0 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES............................................................................
43
5.1 CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................
45
6.0 REFERENCES..................................................................................................................
46
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -i- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1 LNQ Mine Economic Impact Analysis
Table 3-1 Applicable Safety Laws, Regulations, and Requirements Considered under the
Proposed Action
Table 5-1 Alternative Comparison Table
FIGURES
Figure 1-1 Project Location
Figure 1-2 Permitted Area Use Map
Figure 1-3 Surrounding Use Map
Figure 4-1.1 Alternative 1 — Northwest Mine Wall Expansion [Preferred Alternative]
Figure 4-1.2 Forney Creek 303d Stream
Figure 4-1.3 Forney Creek Existing BEHI Conditions
Figure 4-2 Alternative 2 — No Wall Expansion, Deepen Current Pit
Figure 4-3 Alternative 3 — New Quarry Pit, North Side
Figure 4-4 Alternative 4 — South Expansion
Figure 4-5 Alternative 5 — East Mine Wall Expansion
Figure 4-6 Potential Greenfield Site Locations (Overview)
APPENDICES
Appendix A — NCDEQ Permit 955-01
Appendix B —Forney Creek Conceptual Stream Relocation Plan Natural Channel Design
Appendix C — Duke Energy Cost Estimate (Alternative 4 South Expansion)
Appendix D — Potential Greenfield Site Locations
Appendix E — Natural and Cultural Resources
Appendix F — WoUS Report and SAW-2020-00436 PJD Concurrence
Appendix G — Permittee-Responsible Mitigation Plan
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -i- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ASTM
American Society of Testing and Material
BANCS
Bank Assessment for Non -point Source Consequences of Sediment
BEHI
Bank Erosion Hazard Index
CEC
Civil & Environmental Consultants, LLC
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
CWA
Clean Water Act
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
ESA
endangered species act
ft
feet
FEMA
Federal Emergency Management Agency
LEDPA
Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative
LNQ
Lake Norman Quarry
LOM
life of mine
mi
mile
MSHA
Mine Safety Health Administration
NBS
Near Bank Stress
NCSAM
NC Stream Assessment Method
NCDEQ
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
NCNHP
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
NCWAM
North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method
NEPA
National Environmental Policy Act
NLEB
northern long-eared bat
NRIS
National Register Information System
NWI
National Wetlands Inventory
PJD
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination
PRMP
Permittee-Responsible Mitigation Plan
PWS
Professional Wetlands Scientist
ROW
right of way
U.S.
United States
USACE
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USDA
U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFWS
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
WARSSS
Watershed Assessment of River Stability and Sediment Supply
WoUS
Waters of the United States
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -i- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. (CEC) has prepared an analysis of practicable alternatives
on behalf of Hedrick Industries, for the proposed Hedrick Gravel & Sand CO -Lake Norman Quarry
(LNQ) Mine expansion project in Lincoln County, North Carolina (Figure 1-1 Project Location).
The alternatives analysis serves as part of the project's 401 Water Quality Certification permit
application for the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) and Individual
Section 404 permit application for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), respectively. In
the evaluation of Section 404 permit applications to discharge dredged or fill material into waters
of the U.S (WoUS), including wetlands, the USACE is required to analyze alternatives that could
achieve the purpose and need.
This report demonstrates Hedrick Industries compliance with the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) and the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404(b)(1) guidelines (40 Code of
Federal Regulations [CFR] § 230), of which require project activities avoid and minimize impacts
to aquatic resources to the maximum extent practicable (i.e., considering cost, existing
technologies, and logistics in light of the overall project purpose), and demonstrate that the
proposed aquatic impacts are necessary to achieve the overall project purpose.
The alternatives analysis presents a project overview, purpose and need, and a discussion of the
alternative sites and designs that were methodically evaluated during the environmental planning
process. Additionally, a comparison of the alternative sites presents the rationale for identification
of a preferred alternative for the proposed LNQ Mine expansion. The contents within this analysis
have been prepared to provide the NCDEQ and USACE with the criteria by which the alternatives
can be evaluated for the USACE to determine the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable
Alternative (LEDPA).
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -5- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

REFERENCES AND NOTES
'3$ W c tyI ESRI STREET IMAGERY /ARCGIS MAP SERVICE:
HTTP://GOTO.ARCG ISDN LIN E.COM/MAPS/VVO R LD_IMAGERY,
ACCESSED 4/12,2021, IMAGERY DATE: 212412021.
z
4
q 2
NORTH
4
M�y�aY ". pem Trago- Hxg�s Ferry ttd
Fw st pak Or a
W�
3
N19hWi' Tl � Z
OIJPar A ,.u•
5N9
pd
"' 9P,tal K�°b — T�NberN
sery M�`<y.
Dm�'M J
O
f
Y
ry w
j
N
V
O dftd E
g y p G3rmnai III
ZI P S,ba 6 Low
p �rPpq° �r/M1d P.
t _
�I
__ ______________
----------------------------- I°
0
I
a
V;
I
O
W
rw
o X w
1��
w LEGEND
c SCALE IN FEET
PERMITTED BOUNDARY( 499.5
h O ACRES) 0 2,000 4,000 8,000 APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION
c�
HED
AAMFIV7
AKE ICKNOR INDUSTRIES
LAKE NORMAN QUARRY
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
� b Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. LINCOLN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
3701 Arco Corporate Drive - Suite 400 Charlotte, NC 28273
9, [phone] [phone] www.cecinc.com PROJECT LOCATION MAP
m
Q
DRAWN BY: HLS CHECKED BY: KT APPROVED BY: KT' FIGURE NO: -�
DATE: 4/12/2021 SCALE: 1 = 4,000 PROJECT NO: 183-802
'Hand S-atore on file
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
FIGURE 1-1 PROJECT LOCATION
-6- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW, MINE HISTORY & ECONOMIC IMPACT
Hedrick Industries is proposing to construct additional subsidiary infrastructure in support of
future on -site mine expansion of the LNQ Mine, within the current permitted mine boundary.
Hedrick Industries plans to operate under the current permit (NCDEQ Division of Land Quality
Quarry Permit 955-01) to meet the continued and growing demand for construction aggregate
product (i.e. crushed stone) in Lincoln County, and the Charlotte Metro Region of North Carolina.
Currently, the LNQ Mine provides aggregate product for multiple businesses and organizations
supporting community growth projects. A brief summary of the history, economic impact and
businesses or current projects being serviced by the LNQ Mine is presented below:
Table 1-1 LNQ Mine Economic Impact Analysis
HISTORY AND ECONOMIC EFFECT
Opened May 1985
Lincoln County Industrial Revenue Bonds Approved by
Board of Commissioners of Lincoln County
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Investment
! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$20,000,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employment
!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25 Employees
Gross Payroll 2018 $2,145,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affiliated
i-------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asphalt - 43 Employees
Concrete - 10 Employees
Delivery - 75 Employees
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total - 128 Employees
COMMUNITY GROWTH PROJECTS USING LAKE NORMAN QUARRY MATERIALS:
• New Hwy 16
• Denver Charter School
Mountain Island Lake
• Mt. Island Charter School
to Catawba County
• North Lincoln Middle School
• Dunkin Donut
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• Lowes in Denver and
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• Villages of Denver
Lincolnton
• Shoreline projects on Lake Norman
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• Wal-Mart in Denver
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• Rock Springs Nature Reserve
and Lincolnton
• Verdict Ridge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• CMC - Lincoln
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• Lincoln Wastewater Treatment
Hospital
• Plant, Old Plank Road
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• New Lake Norman
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• Lincoln Water Treatment Plant, Tree Farm Road
Charter School
• North Lincoln High School in Pumpkin Center
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• 7 Warehouses at Hwy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• East Lincoln Fire Department
321 Business Park
• Duke Power Turbine Complex
• North Lincoln High School in Pumpkin Center
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• Rail project in
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• Duke Energy CT Plant Expansion
Belmont
• Lincoln Charter School
COMMUNITY GROWTH PROJECTS USING LAKE NORMAN QUARRY MATERIALS
(CONT.):
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -7- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

• Expansion projects at • Large projects at McGuire Nuclear, Marshall Steam
Lincoln County and Riverbend
• Optimist Road • Concrete and Asphalt plants supplying materials to
Business Park & Lincoln, Gaston, Mecklenburg, and Iredell
Sally's Y
According to the NCDEQ, North Carolina is the eighth largest crushed stone producing state in
the United States. Aggregate is produced from about 135 crushed stone quarries and about 500
sand and gravel sites throughout the state. Crushed stone, sand and gravel facilities account for
about 85 percent of all permitted mining operations. There is aggregate mining in 80 of North
Carolinas 100 counties (NCDEQ, 2021). The LNQ Mine facility currently handles approximately
1.5 million tons of aggregate product per year. The estimated reserve base of aggregate materials
remaining equates to roughly 15 to 25 years left of product to meet the current market demand.
The average production life of a crushed stone quarry is roughly 40 to 50 years, while sand and
gravel deposits are typically worked out in much shorter time (NCDEQ, 2021).
Land use within the permitted LNQ Mine footprint consists of the pit, the processing plant(s),
overburden storage, pond fine storage, ponds, an asphalt plant, and a concrete plant (Figure 1-2
Permitted Area Use Map).
Land use of the surrounding area of the LNQ Mine consists of: a residential housing development
(Trilogy Home Development) to the north; a permitted landfill (Republic Services) to the east; a
nuclear power plant (Duke Power Combustion Turbine Plant) and the Kilian Creek Wastewater
Treatment Facility to the west and south west. The southern boundary is occupied by an existing
overhead transmission line Right of Way (ROW) that services the nuclear plant. An additional
natural gas line ROW (owned by Piedmont Natural Gas) exists along the southern border. Blum
Manufacturing facilities and the Earnhardt Grading Company are located to the south (Figure 1-3
Surrounding Use Map).
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -8- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

NORTH +'
♦ ��
Current Overburden
& Pond Fines Storaw
SCALE IN FEET
Giiiiipmmmmmmmmm
0 500 1,000 2,000
11_AFw1AFjrAw7wM
FMI
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
3701 Arco Corporate Drive - Suite 400 Charlotte, NC 28273
[phone] [phone]
www.cecinc.com
DRAWN BY: HLS I CHECKED BY: KT
DATE: 4/12/2021 1 SCALE: 1 = 1,000'
REFERENCES AND NOTES
1. ESRI WORLD IMAGERY /ARCGIS MAP SERVICE:
HTTP://GOTO.ARCGI SONLI NE.COMMIAPSNVORLD_
IMAGERY,
ACCESSED 4112/2021, IMAGERY DATE: 211/2019.
2. AERIAL IMAGE PROVIDED BY HEDRICK
INDUSTRIES. IMAGERY CAPTURED ON 319/2021.
3. FEMA NATIONAL FLOOD HAZARD LAYER (NFHL)
FOR NORTH CAROLINA- DATED 8/1612007.
NOTE:
JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES HAVE BEEN FIELD
VERIFIED BY THE USACE SAW-2020-01835, PM
MR. RODEN-REYNOLDS, PWS 7/15/2020 AND
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION ISSUED BY
USACE PM KRYSTYNKA STYGAR 3/8/2021.
OverdenburStorage
M-800,000 cubic yards
♦ y I
s
s
Lay Down
�y Overburden Storage
LEGEND
Q PERMITTED BOUNDARY (- 499.5ACRES)
WETLAND (-4.5 ACRES)
PONDS (-10.9 ACRES)
STREAMS (-14,651 LF)
FEMA
100 YEAR FLOOD ZONE
500 YEAR FLOOD ZONE
Area Use Type
ASPHALT PLANT (-8.9 ACRES)
CONCRETE PLANT (-8.6 ACRES)
OVERBURDEN STORAGE (-110.1 ACRES)
OVERBURDEN/ POND FINE STORAGE
(-28.7ACRES)
PROCESSING PLANT (-55.9 ACRES)
- QUARRY PIT (-84.0 ACRES)
HEDRICK INDUSTRIES
LAKE NORMAN QUARRY
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
LINCOLN COUNTY. NORTH CAROLINA
PERMITTED AREA USE MAP
APPROVED BY KT* FIGURE NO:
PROJECT NO: 183-802 1-2
FIGURE 1-2 PERMITTED AREA USE MAP
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -9- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

REFERENCES AND NOTES
Lake Norman Community Association, Inc. 1. ESRI WORLD IMAGERY lARCGIS MAP SERVICE:
Trilogy Home's Development HTTP://GOTO.ARCGISONLINE.COM/MAPSNVORLD
IMAGERY,
ACCESSED 4/1=021, IMAGERY DATE: 21112019.
2. AERIAL IMAGE PROVIDED BY HEDRICK
NORTH INDUSTRIES. IMAGERY CAPTURED ON 3/9/2021.
Lake Norman Landfill "
Republic Services
s `♦
Industrial LLC
}
Duke Power Company
CT - Plant "`� ��♦
�. Rapido Concrete LLC
0 10 Dellinger
s: y
f'
M _...~ 'to emu+
Do�EEME551oNJN - SR Watts Custom
t 'GRANS 5�� y n Cabinets LLC
Hills Chapel
� � United Methodist
I ♦ �♦ ` �_ `. • Julius Blum, Inc.
Grigg Marvin Atkin Jr
Killian Creek Wastewater Crane (-
Treatment Plant
Y,
Santus '
{ Sennebogen Real
i` Estate LLC Reece
Morrison James Henry'^
sY- EDPH LLC
Hoover
Dellinger
LEGEND
PERMITTED BOUNDARY (— 499.5 INDUSTRIAL GENERAL PARCELS
0 ACRES) NON INDUSTRIAL GENERAL
ADDITIONAL PARCELS OWNED BY PARCELS
HEDRICK OUTSIDE OF PERMITTED BOUNDARY (-59.2 ACRES) GAS LINE ROW SCALE IN FEET
0 HEDRICK PARCELS DUKE ENERGY ROW
11-AFw1AFjrAw7wM
FMI
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
3701 Arco Corporate Drive - Suite 400 Charlotte, NC 28273
[phone] [phone]
www.cecinc.com
0 900 1,800 3,600
HEDRICK INDUSTRIES
LAKE NORMAN QUARRY
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
LINCOLN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SURROUNDING USE MAP
DRAWN BY: HLS CHECKED BY: KT APPROVED BY: KT' I FIGURE NO: DATE: 4/12/2021 SCALE: 1 = 1,800' PROJECT NO: 183-802 A 1 _ J
�H-d Si—t—, - eiA
FIGURE 1-3 SURROUNDING USE MAP
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
-10- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

2.0 PROPOSED ACTION
Under the Proposed Action, Hedrick Industries would construct additional subsidiary
infrastructure within the permitted LNQ Mine boundary to continue aggregate production. The
Proposed Action is needed in support of the required future mine expansion at the LNQ Mine in
order to extend the life of the mine (LOM). LOM signifies the time in which, through the
employment of the available capital, the ore reserves, or such reasonable extension of the ore
reserves as conservative geological analysis may justify, will be extracted. Extending the LOM is
essential to prevent the depletion of the LNQ Mine's projected reserve base, as well as deliver
contiguous aggregate supply to Lincoln County, and the Charlotte Metro Region of North
Carolina. Without the expansion, any additional extraction of aggregate product (outside of the
projected LOM) would impede safety requisites preventing the possibility for contiguous onsite
mining.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -11- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

3.0 PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose of the Proposed Action is to extend the LOM expectancy and projected reserve base
of the LNQ Mine from 15-25 years, to between 75 -100 years to meet the current economic
production demands of aggregate product.
In the past three years, LNQ Mine has completed extensive borehole testing using an in-house drill
and outsourcing with Geological Exploration testing for reserves. The data was modeled with
Carlson Mining Software to determine the existing and potential reserve base. The present quarry
mine production rate of 1.5 million tons of aggregate product produced per year equates to an
estimated LOM reserve base of up to 25 years; potentially depleting the current LNQ Mine reserve
base by 2046. However, based on forecasted continued population growth in the Charlotte Metro
area Hedrick Industries will need to increase LNQ Mine production to approximately 2.5 million
tons per year, exacerbating the depletion of the LOM to approximately 15 years. In mining terms
this would not provide a significant amount of time left to operate at the current facility.
While reserve life fluctuates with the market, the standard LOM for an aggregate production site
is between 75 to 100 years. Two examples of LOM for Hedrick Industries includes the North
Buncombe and Grove Stone Quarries located in Buncombe County. Both operations have a LOM
of over 75 years. Additionally, Hedrick Industries believes the market demand will continue to
increase, significantly impacting the current LNQ Mine reserves and potentially decreasing the
LOM even lower than currently estimated.
Furthermore, Hedrick Industries will require the construction of subsidiary infrastructure to ensure
safer extraction of aggregate product. The safety measures presented in Table 3-1 are requisite to
meet federal and Mine Safety Health Administration (MSHA) requirements. For specific LNQ
Mine safety requirements, please refer to the NCDEQ Permit 955-01 in Appendix A.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -12- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

Table 3-1 Applicable Safety Laws, Regulations, and Requirements Considered Under the
Proposed Action
LAW,
REGULATION,
DESCRIPTION
PURPOSE
REQumEMENT
CFR
Mining methods shall be used that will maintain wall, bank,
and slope stability in places where persons work or travel in
Wall, bank, and slope
performing their assigned tasks. When benching is necessary,
30 CFR §56.3130
stability
the width and height shall be based on the type of equipment
used for cleaning of benches or for scaling of walls, banks, and
slopes.
MSHA
To prevent landslide or slope instability adjacent to adjoining
permit boundaries during mining, the alternative action must
Alternative must maintain
include a minimum 2 horizontal to 1 vertical slopes or flatter
a 2:1 slope if the material
for clayey material and minimum 3 horizontal to 1 vertical
Slope Protection
is clayey, slope if
slopes or flatter for sandy material are generally required,
Ratio
the materiall is
as found to
unless technical justification can be provided to allow steeper
have a more sandy
slopes.
consistency.
In excavation(s) of unconsolidated (non -rock) materials, slopes
in areas of unconsolidated material will be constructed on a 3:1
slope
Alternative bench heights
In hardrock excavations, the alternative must provide cross -
Selection of
must be 45 to 50 feet (ft).
sections of the mine excavation noting the angles of the cut
Practical Bench
Bench widths will be
slopes, widths of all safety benches and mine benches, and the
Height
determined during course
expected maximum depth of the excavation.
of operation.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
-13- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

4.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
This section presents a discussion and analysis of the reasonable and practicable alternatives
considered for implementing the Proposed Action, as evaluated under 40 CFR § 1502.14, NEPA
regulations. Reasonable alternatives include those that are practical or feasible from the technical
and economic standpoint and use common sense.
4.1 SCREENING CRITERIA
In order for Hedrick Industries to fully perform the functions for which aggregate production can
be achieved, the following screening and design criteria were considered when developing the
practicable alternatives considered for analysis:
1. The alternative must consider the geophysical integrity of the site, choosing areas that
would not hinder mining activities, such as overburden stability and or depth to viable
product;
2. The alternative area must contain soils/geology that meet the American Society of Testing
and Material (ASTM) standards and requirements set by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation, Standard Specifications for Roads and Structure (NCDOT 2018);
3. The alternative shall consider areas that would not significantly impact sensitive resource
areas (including but not limited to: state and federally protected species' habitats, water
resources [such as wetlands], and/or cultural resource areas;
4. The alternative shall consider areas that would not significantly impact the surrounding
land uses; considering adverse impacts to the surrounding residential and industrial areas;
5. The alternative area must be located within a one -mile radius from the LNQ Mine to meet
the requisite aggregate product trucking/transportation needs. Specifically, the proposed
expansion areas would need to be located close enough to the LNQ Mine as to minimize
travel distances, particularly on public roadways;
6. The alternative must be sited on property owned by the proponent, or on at least 100 acres
of contiguous industrial zoned land available for purchase;
7. The alternative must consider areas that would not conflict with existing high voltage
transmission power lines, as mining could not take place underneath; and
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -14- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

8. The alternative area must be constructed in an area in which slope stability concerns do not
create a safety hazard (as listed in Table 3-1).
Based on the above eight screening criteria, Hedrick Industries has identified and evaluated five
on -site alternatives, and one potential off -site alternative. The absence of any of the above criteria
was viewed as a fatal flaw for an alternative considered for analysis. The findings of the alternative
analyses for the practicable alternatives considered are described in Section 4.2.
4.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED FOR ANALYSIS
The alternatives analysis presented within this section describes the reasonable alternatives being
considered for the LNQ Mine expansion under the site screening criteria, as described in Section
4.1. The alternatives analysis includes consideration of five on -site design alternatives located
adjacent to or near the existing quarry (Alternative 1 — Alternative 5), as well as potential off -site
alternatives considered for a Greenfield Site location (Alternative 6). The No Action alternative
has also been included for comparison.
The maximum limits of disturbance for each of the five alternatives are presented on Figures 4-1
through 4-5.
4.2.1 Alternative I Northwest Mine Wall Expansion (Preferred Alternative) (Appendix B)
Under Alternative 1, an existing mine wall would be expanded to the northwest and the current
floor pit would be deepened by an extra 100 ft (Figure 4-1.1 Alternative 1 Northwest Mine Wall
Expansion [Preferred Alternative]). In order to expand the mine wall to the northwest, Forney
Creek would be realigned and subsequently restored. Along the proposed realignment, an existing
culvert would be removed and replaced with a bridge span, as well as the removal of a low head
dam. The stream invert would be brought to the current invert of the low head dam, allowing for
aquatic passage with the newly proposed Forney Creek stream alignment. Upon removal of the
low head dam, an additional 467 linear ft of stream would be added to Forney Creek. Maintaining
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -15- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

hydrology to the wetlands upstream of the dam would be accomplished by raising the channel bed
elevation to current dam invert.
Forney creek is currently listed as an impaired Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 303d
highly entrenched and unstable stream (EPA, 2021) (Figure 4-1.2 Forney Creek 303d Stream).
The creek stream is characterized by incision and entrenchment and currently has an undersized
culvert and low head dam that inhibit aquatic passage. The proposed action area footprint
encompasses approximately 11 acres.
Under this action, approximately 3,170 linear ft of Forney Creek would be impacted. To negate
these impacts, Priority 1 and Priority 2 restoration techniques would be applied to the impact areas.
Priority 1 would be applied to 2,848 linear ft of the existing stream, while priority 2 restoration
techniques would be applied to the remaining 322 linear feet of stream. Priority 1 restoration within
Forney Creek will include establishing bankfull stage at the historical floodplain elevation,
replacing the incised channel with a new, stable stream at a higher elevation. To ensure there would
be no net loss of habitat, approximately 2,879 linear ft would be restored, creating an additional
31 linear ft of priority 1 stream work. Priority 2 restoration would begin where priority 1
restoration work would end, and extend to the end of the proposed tie in for a total of 160 linear ft
of priority 2 restoration. Priority 2 restoration will create a new floodplain and stream alignment
with the streambed remaining at the present elevation.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -16- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

N
f 4
ih
_
..... .... ... S
a
%. f.: , 4
Figure 4-1.1 Alternative 1— Northwest Mine Wall Expansion [Preferred Alternative]
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -17- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

6
NORTH
SCALE IN FEET
0 325 660 1 3CD
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
/.'/'/
Civil & Environmental Consultants,
3701A-0,T—e0,I, 3uhe 400 Charlctle,NC 232I3
(890)Zi�-03r3-1855)855&8952
LEGEND
O PERMITTED BOUNDARY (— 499.5 ACRES)
NO DEO's WATERBCDY ASSESSMENT
(2020) LISTED FORNEY CREEK AS A
CATEGORY 5 ASSESSMENT - 302(d) LISTED
STREAM
HEDRICK INDUSTRIES
LAKE NORMAN QUARRY
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
LINCOLN COUNTY
FORNEY CREEK 303d STREAM
DRAwN
e EO ILLS ON EKT EDe KT" FIGURE NO .^
DATE. 4/12f2021 O[ SCAIE,1 "=650' naPROVaRo�Ecr No:Y 183-802 4-1 1 `
Figure 4-1.2 Forney Creek 303d Stream
-18- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

On June 4, 2019 CEC ecologists Kevin Thomas, NC Stream Assessment Method (NCSAM)
Certified, conducted the NCSAM along approximately 3,000 linear ft of Forney Creek proposed
for relocation under Alternative 1 (refer to Appendix B NCSAM Report). Six assessment reaches
were establish, each assessing approximately 200 to 850 linear ft of stream per reach, all six
assessment reaches scored as `Low Quality Waters'.
Under Alternative 1, stream relocation and restoration would occur by realigning Forney Creek to
a more stable configuration using Natural Channel Design methodologies, as dictated by the North
Carolina Stream Channel Design National Engineering Handbook 654 (USDA, 2008). The
proposed design relocates Forney Creek away from the LNQ Mine, using priority 1 restoration,
and brings the stream invert to the current invert of the low head dam. Alternative 1 also proposes
to replace the culvert with a bridge. Significant design constraints for the project involve the need
to maintain hydrology for the wetlands upstream of the dam and simultaneously have a no rise at
the upstream property line. Maintaining hydrology to the wetlands upstream of the dam is
accomplished by raising the channel bed elevation to current dam invert. Raising the channel bed
initially resulted in a rise of the 100 year water surface elevation in excess of 6 ft. The valley wall
was carved out to laterally expand flood flows in the vicinity of the existing dam and reduce 100
year water surface elevation. Expanding the valley wall reduced post project flood elevations to
within approximately 0.25 ft of pre -project levels.
A description of the existing conditions of Forney Creek is provided below:
Forney Creek Existing Conditions
1. Dam upstream
a. Creates open water wetland upstream.
b. Low gradient Rosgen E stream has developed within the wetland as sediments fill
in the open water portion of the wetland. The E channel has a contributing drainage
area of 8.55 square miles (mil) cross sectional area of approximately 89.3 square ft
(W) with a width to depth ratio of 5.65. The regional curve produced by North
Carolina State University predicts a bankfull channel with 92.2 W of cross sectional
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -19- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

area. The close agreement between the NC state regional curve and the E cross
section suggests this reach is a reasonable reference reach for a Rosgen E type
stream.
c. Large scour pool downstream of existing dam. Approximately 125 ft in length and
80 ft wide. The dam is approximately 17 ft higher than the bed elevation in the
deepest portion of the scour pool.
d. Reference cross section data collected downstream of the culvert has an area of
approximately 70.7 at a drainage area of 9.27 mil. The width to depth ratio is 12.5
and with a slope of 0.21 percent (%) the stream classifies as a Rosgen B4c. This
cross section has an inner berm with cross sectional area of 37.1 W which is
approximately have the bankfull channel area.
e. Cross sections of representative riffles and pools were collected during the
geomorphic survey. A total of 43 cross sections were collected, within the main
stem of Forney Creek of which 22 were on riffles and 21 were on pools. An
Additional 16 cross sections, 8 riffle and 8 pools along the unnamed tributary to
Forney. Bankfull indicators on representative reaches were either absent or
unreliable at best. We used the 2D hydraulic model to estimate bankfull water
surface elevations in the sections lacking bankfull indicators. The procedure for
estimating bankfull water surface elevations from the 2D hydraulic model is
analogous to the traditional method of measuring height of reliable bankfull
indicators and assuming bankfull elevations remain constant in the stream wise
direction. The 2D hydraulic model is calibrated by adjusting flowrate and
manning's roughness within reasonable range of values to best fit reliable bankfull
indicators. The 2D model then calculates water surface throughout the project
reach. The use of the 2D model to predict water surface elevations has the
advantage over traditional methods because it accounts for hydraulics in unstable
channels that affect water surface elevation such as bank sloughing and changes in
channel width. Refer to `Appendix B —Forney Creek Conceptual Stream Relocation
Plan Natural Channel Design' for the representative cross sections. Bank Erosion
Hazard Index (BEHI) ratings for the portions of Forney Creek proposed for
restoration had a geometric mean that equated to a high to very high potential for
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -20- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

eroding. Forney Creek is accurately described as a Rosgen F5/4. We note that due
to entrenchment ratios greater than 1.4 some cross sections classify as Rosgen 135/4.
We classify the reach as a whole as 175/4 because the low top of bank ratio is nearly
3 for all cross sections and Rosgen E4 or C4 channels would be expected for this
valley configuration. The occurrence of B type cross sections are commonly found
in locations where bank sloughing created benches and are not consistent with
floodplain benches created by fluvial deposition.
f. CEC collected data at a second location downstream of the culvert that has an area
of 68.2 ft2 and classifies as a Rosgen 134c. The inner berm on this cross section is
19.2 ft2and is approximately 28% of the bankfull area. The valley in the vicinity of
this cross section naturally necks down as a result of bedrock. The alluvial bench
that defined bankfull is structurally different from benches observed through most
of the restoration reach in that is comprised of fluvial sediments rather than
sloughed banks. The bankfull slope in this reach at 0.24% is steeper than the 0.12%
observed through the existing project reach.
g. Immediately upstream of the dam is an open water wetland (pond). Upstream of
the pond Forney Creek has deposited fine sediments and is currently building a
channel through the pond. On either side of the newly formed channel is open water
wetland area. Further upstream where disposition is older and Forney Creek
formation is more mature levee deposits line the stream channel.
h. The existing stream profile (presented in Appendix B —Forney Creek Conceptual
Stream Relocation Plan Natural Channel Design, sheets 4 through 6) along with the
bankfull flow event and the left and right top of banks illustrates channel incision.
Many streams in the Piedmont are characterized as incised due to legacy sediment
deposition as a result of historic land use. Channel incision through legacy
sediments reduces floodplain access and further degrades the channel by increasing
shear stress during large flow events.
i. There is a road crossing on Forney Creek near the downstream of the project reach.
At the road crossing Forney Creek flows through a 7 foot diameter culvert. The
culvert is undersized and currently backs water up through the project reach. During
the geomorphic survey scour from road overtopping was evident.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -21- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

J
To assess annual stream bank erosion on Forney Creek, CEC utilized BEHI
combined with Near Bank Stress (NBS) in the procedure known as `Bank
Assessment for Non -point Source Consequences of Sediment" (BANGS) which
when properly applied, can be an excellent predictor of stream bank erosion rate
(Rosgen, 2001; Doll et al., 2003) (Figure 4-1.3 Existing BEHI Conditions). Stream
bank erosion rates of the existing and proposed conditions are calculated using
BANCS and sediment reduction via restoration. Sediment load is determined by
multiplying erosion rate by bank height, length of stream, and bulk density.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -22- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
September 2021

m
Tri
'At
O
tO
oc
N
oc

k. During the initial assessment of Forney Creek, bank condition scores were
determined using the BEHI method. Each study bank was assigned a BEHI score
and was photographed and geo-tagged at the start and end points of each study
reach. During this process, 64 bank condition sites were identified on Forney Creek.
These study reach lengths were identified on the basis of changes in the Top of
Bank (Study Bank Height) to bankfull height ratios, bankfull width, and general
appearance of the study bank conditions that included vegetation cover, bankfull
angle, root depth and density, and bank material composition. Each study reach was
given a rating from 1 to 10, 10 equating to banks with high erosion potential and 1
equating to banks with low erosion potential. When a change in one of these
parameters occurred, a new BEHI study reach and scoring procedure were repeated.
During this process assumptions were made within these parameters to achieve
representative reaches for each scoring index. An example field sheet for these
assessments can be found in Appendix B —Forney Creek Conceptual Stream
Relocation Plan Natural Channel Design.
1. To assess annual stream bank erosion, the 64 study reaches on Forney Creek were
evaluated using the BEHI Worksheet 5-16 from "Watershed Assessment of River
Stability and Sediment Supply (WARSSS)," a technical procedure developed by
David L. Rosgen (Rosgen, 2009). BEHI information was compiled and computed
using RiverMORPH software. Note that BEHI forms are referred to as Worksheet
3-11 in RiverMORPH software as compared to Worksheet 5-16 in the WARSSS
reference material. During the BEHI assessment, values for Study Bank Height (ft),
Bankfull Height (ft), Root Depth (ft), Root Density (percent), Bank Angle
(degrees), and Surface Protection (percent) were entered into the appropriate
sections of RiverMORPH, Worksheet 3-11 for each study reach. From this data,
ratios for Study Bank Height/Bankfull Height and Root Depth/Study Bank Height
were generated, as well as a Weighted Root Density, which was calculated by
multiplying the Root Density Percentage by the Root Depth/Study Bank Height
Ratio. These values were then used to generate the BEHI rating for each study
reach from RiverMORPH.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -24- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

in. A Near -Bank Stress (NBS) rating was calculated using Level 1 and Level 2
assessment methods from Worksheet 5-17 in WARSSS reference manual (Rosgen,
2009). Level I assessment uses channel patterns to identify features that create
disproportionate energy distribution in the near bank region that include chute
cutoffs that converge flow and heavy depositional areas that force water to the near
bank region. Level II assessment method uses channel and profile geometry
including: Radius of Curvature - Rc (ft), Bankfull Width - Wbkf (ft), Pool Slope -
Sp, Average Slope - S, and Riffle Slope - Sriff. These variables are used to calculate
the ratios for Rc/Wbkf, Sp/S and Sp/Sriff. From those ratios, a Near -Bank Stress
Rating was generated and the dominate NBS rating was used to generate an erosion
rate.
2. The primary driving factor in channel degradation on the project site is containment of
flood flows within the bankfull channel. Containing flood flows in the bankfull channel
produces symptoms of channel degradation, which include bank erosion and copious
volumes of sediment (sand to cobble) that smother out bed forms and degrade in -channel
aquatic habitats. Course sediment particles are nearly absent within the project reach and
where present are surrounded by fine sediment leading to dense embedded substrate
distribution. Evidence of fine sediment intrusion to the channel is evident in measured
particle size distributions and lack of pool depth. Surveyed profiles do show the presence
of pools that are typically associated with down trees from bank sloughing.
a. BEHI ratings for Forney Creek ranged from Very Low to Extreme potential of
eroding throughout all 64 reaches. BEHI was assessed for the right and left banks
of Forney Creek throughout the project reach and summarized graphically in Figure
4.1-3 Forney Creek Existing BEHI Conditions. BEHI rating show 35 of 64 banks
have High susceptibility to bank erosion. Only 5 of the 64 banks assessed ranked
in the Moderate or lower susceptibility categories for bank erosion. The remaining
banks ranked as either Very High (17 of 64) or Extreme (7 of 64) for BEHI.
3. Proposed conditions:
4. Summary of Stale Channel Parameters Identified in BEHUBANCS:
a. The BEHUBANCS analyses provide useful indicators to some of the parameters
that should be observed in stable streams. Based on the BEHUBANCS analyses the
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -25- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

following parameters are established to either maintain a low BEHI index or low
near bank stress.
b. Bank Height/Bankfull Height — Needs to stay in the low bank erosion potential
range in order to keep erosion potential to a minimum. The design bank height
needs to be less than 1.2 times the bankfull height.
c. Root Depth/Bank Height — Planting deep-rooted vegetation to help stabilize the
bank and reduce erosion. The riparian zone planting specification is comprised of
deep rooting plants, such as trees.
d. Root Density — Plant roots on the bank need to be dense enough to secure the bank
and protect against erosion. The riparian planting mix should contain a mixture of
species to obtain a deep rooting depth and high root density as is obtained by
planting trees and shrubs. Roots help maintain bank strength and entangle
individual particles to help prevent erosion.
e. Bank Angle — The higher the bank angle the more susceptible it is to erosion. In
order to keep the erosion down, the bank angle needs to be no greater than 60
degrees.
f. Surface Protection — Structures such as large woody debris and live brush layering
can be used along with herbaceous plantings to provide surface protection.
g. Near Bank Stress Level 1 — The channel will be designed as a single thread channel
to avoid converging flow. The stream channel will be designed to flow in the down
valley direction to prevent down valley lateral migration.
h. Near Bank Stress Level 2, Radius of Curvature — Ideally radius of curvature will be
maintained greater than 2.2 times the bankfull width to keep near bank stress in the
low range. However, the radius of curvature should always be greater than two
times the bankfull width to maintain a near bank shear stress rating in the moderate
or better categories.
i. Near Bank Stress Level 2, Pool slope — The water surface of pools should be flat.
This parameter provides little information on how to prescribe restoration geometry
but does provide a metric to evaluate hydraulic functioning of the design.
j. CEC sized the initial stream channel based on the two cross sections located
downstream of the culvert crossing. The stream was initially designed with cross
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -26- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

sectional area of 70 ft2 with a width to depth ratio of 12. The initial proposed cross
section included an inner berm that comprised 25% of the bankfull flow area. The
downstream reference cross sections were selected for design because the B4c more
closely represents the C4 stream type that can be expected to naturally form given
the valley width and slope. The upstream reference reach occurs in a backwater
situation and would be more appropriate in a lower gradient valley. 2D hydraulic
models were developed for the proposed conditions to analyze sediment transport
through the project reach. The hydraulic models indicated fine sediments would be
transported through the proposed reach however shear stress during the 2 year flow
events approached nearly 2.5 lb ft-2 which is higher than desired. To reduce shear
stress we increased the width depth ratio to 15, 14, and 15 in reach 1, 2, and 3
respectively. Reach 1 and 3 are designed with riffle side slopes of 3:1 H:V and
reach 2 has riffle side slopes of 2.5:1 H:V which gentler sloping than typical
reference reaches in the Piedmont. The proposed side slopes are gentler sloping
because our experience working with erosive Piedmont soils has taught that gentle
slopes are more resistant to erosion immediately following construction and prior
to establishment of stabilizing vegetation. Reach 1 and 3 are slightly steeper than
reach 2. Reach 1 has slopes ranging from 0.49% to 0.97% and is steepest just
downstream of the existing dam.
k. To maintain hydrology in the wetland upstream of the dam the invert elevation of
the proposed stream matches the current invert on the dam. Typical dam removal
for fish passage and restoration specified removal of all or a portion of the dam and
grading the proposed stream to the lower elevation. This design maintains elevation
of the dam and brings the stream channel up the dam elevation.
1. Raising the stream to meet existing dam elevation is designed to maintain the
current 100-year water surface elevation at the upstream property boundary. The
100-year water surface elevation is maintained by increasing the valley width.
in. The proposed restoration plan includes a tributary connection to convey flow from
a tributary that enters the pond from the north. The tributary connection has the
added benefit of facilitating fish passage during larger flow events.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -27- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

n. The upstream of Forney Creek is aligned with the stream centerline as that will
likely form as the pond upstream of the dam continues to silt in. The pool -to -pool
spacing is maintained as can be seen from the proposed alignment from station
0+00 to 4+00.
o. The proposed restoration plan includes upgrading the current undersized culvert to
a bridge crossing with capacity to handle the 10-year flow event. The proposed
bridge crossing will improve aquatic passages and sediment transport
characteristics while decreasing erosive forces downstream of the crossing.
Backwater from the current culvert reduces sediment transport capacity in the
restoration reach causing fine sediments to drop out in the channel. The proposed
bridge allows water to flow unobstructed during bankfull flow events to transport
fine sediments derived from upstream reaches through the project reach.
Under Alternative 1, post -construction mitigation would be required for the proposed action (i.e.
mine wall expansion, removal of culvert and low head dam [replaced with a bridge span], and
relocation and restoration of Forney Creek). As such, a Permittee-Responsible Mitigation Plan
(PRMP) has been prepared as part of the USACE application submittal (please refer to Appendix
G).
4.2.2 Alternative 2 No Wall Expansion, Deepen Current Pit
Under Alternative 2, there would be no aerial footprint expansion, only a deepening of the current
mine pit by approximately 100 ft.
Under this alternative, Hedrick Industries considered increasing the current pit depth (350 ft) by
another 100 ft for a total of 450 ft, however safety requirements (as outlined in Table 3-1) could
not be met due to wall, bank, and slope stability requirements. Dewatering of the pit at this
elevation would also be required. Consideration of this alternative would require a significant
capital purchase of additional haul trucks at an estimated cost of 4-million dollars.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
-28- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

� NM-1 A.5 Acras
a{
-� F nwa�rPo 0 3
aaa
Y
r
AIL ii C,-k ;
-
3A-6'.
SA-t: -3,J26 LF
SFS. -1 )dR LF
aR
1 LEGEND
1
PERMIT COBOUNHARr
(-499.5499.5 ACRES)
3: ADDITIONAL PARCELS
4 i OWNED 6Y HEDRICK
OUTSIDE OF PERMITTED
NO Wall Expansion, Deepen Current Pit BOUNDARY (-59.2ACRES)
Identifier Length (LF) Permanent HEDRICK PARCELS
IrnpaCtS (LF) =:.�y�-jµ,;=� yyETLAND (-4.5 ACRES)
n SA-1 129 0 -P0NDS(-10,9ACRES)
- SA-2 4,450 0 STREAMS (-14,651 LE)
SA-3 3,2D0 0
EXISTING OVERBURDEN
SA-4 3,328 0 STORAGEAREA(-16,1
SA-5 3,248 0 ACRES)
SCALE IN FEET SA-6 296 D GAS LINE ROW
0 325 660 1,300 TOta Is: 14,651 D DUKE ENERGY ROW
HEDRICK INDUSTRIES
wiwF ao uuceav LAKE NORMAN QUARRY
ncczsseounaort.InvcEA.oa,e.z '�'�,,� ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
,2,� -cw PRo—D %8Y H —' Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. LINCOLN COUNTY
9l01 Arw Cwpaa[e orrve — J00 Cttattette,NC ]82)3
rvore, teao)3a�aa�9-cars a9aaeu ALTERNATIVE 3 - NO WALL EXPANSION
DEEPEN CURRENT PIT
issusu er®ncs Px Nrrsrmiwsmrarx awisz� °w'v"TM HLS crvEcry KT AaPaovEo °v KT" uRE lvo. d
DATE'. klV2021 SCALP E° 1"=6511' PROJECT NO', 183-502 F T-2
FIGURE 4-2 ALTERNATIVE 2 — NO WALL EXPANSION, DEEPEN CURRENT PIT
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
-29- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

4.2.3 Alternative 3 - New Quarry Pit, North Side
Under Alternative 3, a new 22.8-acre quarry pit would be excavated on the north side of the LNQ
Mine (Figure 4-3 Alternative 3 — New Quarry Pit, North Side). On -site assessment and aerial
imagery reveal an existing berm (13.1 acres) residing in the northwest portion of the site adjacent
to the permitted boundary. South of the berm appears to be exposed clay with roads, small ponds,
and deciduous forest, which is the location of the proposed North Side quarry. South of this area
is the 100 year flood plain of Forney Creek that gives the proposed area its odd shape. The
overburden resulting from the Alternative 3 is proposed to be moved to the southern portion of the
site (36.7 acres), resulting in permanent impacts to approximately 2,601 linear ft of stream.
Hedrick Industries has previously explored the feasibility of opening a small quarry along the
northern portion of LNQ and test drilled within the area prior to purchase in 1986 for potential
aggregate reserves. The resulting test data proved that the overburden in this area ranged from
100 foot in depth at the property boundary to approximately 35 ft adjacent to Forney Creek. Due
to the depth of overburden, the property was purchased as buffer land between the proposed quarry
and any future development.
In 2016 Shea Homes purchased all of the property north of LNQ Mine property boundary, of which
is now utilized for mixed use residential and age restricted development. As a result, Hedrick
Industries explored the possibility of instead developing a small quarry within the area to extract
all sellable aggregate products prior to the development of Shea Homes. Hedrick Industries
conducted additional exploratory drilling to update and verify the drill data (between 1986 and
2016, by Hedrick Industries Geologists). This data was then entered into the Carlson Software
Geology and Mining Evaluation Software to determine the amount of overburden and rock
available if a small separate quarry was to be developed. Within the 34-acre footprint of the quarry
the computer models reported 8-million cubic yards of overburden would need to be removed.
After removal of the overburden and maintaining a 3:1 slope required by NCDEQ - of the
overburden material to the first rock bench only 9-million cubic yards of aggregate material -
would be recoverable within the 34-acre footprint. The cost to remove the overburden would be
an estimated 24-million dollars and was deemed cost prohibitive for what small amount of
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -30- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

aggregate material that could be recovered. After the evaluation it was determined this area would
be more suitable for storage of excess overburden as Hedrick Industries developed the existing
LNQ Mine footprint. As a result of Shea Homes purchasing the property, and the additional
evaluation, Hedrick Industries decided to construct a large site berm adjacent to the property
boundary to prevent any potential commercial residential conflicts between the Shea Homes
development and LNQ Mine. The site berm consists of 12 acres and is 40 ft high and contains
500,000 cubic yards of overburden. The site berm eliminated any future possibility of constructing
a quarry north of Forney Creek due to the reduced size of a potential quarry from 34-acre to 24-
acres.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -31- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

.. _._ .. _ .
*� �'• �* ''sAr �svLF- ��
NORTHIC;. -
s9
{ WA-1' rl3 Acres
Forney Creak F K � `"
SA-2.-4,45U LF "``-ri •,
r R
�- ASPhaIt, Plant
4. �1` r1 �.
f ;
F
KillI Creek
Are
00 °
' Sp.6: -296 LF
3_ If,
Vol
w
g 3
1
2A
SCALE IN FEET
0 325 550 1,300
New Quarry Pit, North Side
Permanent
Identifier Length (LF)
Impacts (LF)
SA-1 1291
SA-3
3,200
SA-4
3,328
SA-5
3,248
SA-6
296
Totals:
14,651
�_1
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
�01 new co�o�te Dore seas 400 cnanoca, Nc zaz�a
(BBO)23�03]3(855)B58B031
LEGEND
PERMITTEDECUNUARY1-499.5
ACRES)
ADDITIONAL PARCELS OWNED
_ SY HEDRICKOUTSIDE OF
PERMITTED BOUNDARY [-59.2
ACRES)
O HEORICK PARCELS
100 YEAR FLOOD ZONE
500 YEAR FLOOD ZONE
WETLAND(-4.5 ACRES)
PONDS(-10.9 ACRES)
STREAMS (-14,651 LF)
ALTERNATIVE NORTH SIDE.
NEW QUARRY PIT (-22.6
ACRES)
EXISTING SITE BERM (-13.1
ACRES)
REQUIRED OVERBURDEN
p EXPANSION FOR PROPOSED
NORTH SIDE PIT (-38.7ACRES)
EXISTING OVEREURDEN
STORAGE AREA (-16 1 ACRES)
GAS LINE ROW
- DUKE ENERGY ROW
HEDRICK INDUSTRIES
LAKE NORMAN QUARRY
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
LINCOLN COUNTY
NORTH SIDE
KT FiGVRE NO'. 4-„
83-862 3
FIGURE 4-3 ALTERNATIVE 3 — NEW QUARRY PIT, NORTH SIDE
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -32- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

4.2.4 Alternative 4 South Expansion
Under Alternative 4, the existing quarry mine would be expanded to the south of the LNQ Mine
(Figure 4-4 Alternative 4 — South Expansion) by approximately 56.0 acres. On -site assessment and
aerial imagery reveal existing infrastructure within the proposed project footprint. This includes
an existing plant and roads to the south, as well as ponds to the southeast of the current LNQ Mine.
The Alternative 4 proposed expansion area includes these areas up until the Duke Energy's
Transmission Line and ROW to the south.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -33- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

'. SA1 1Gy LF,
NORTH
rnr L WA-i . 4.5 A cre¢
SA-2: -9 95U LF
d
,1
LEGEND
PERMITTED BCUNDARY 1- 499 5
ACRES)
ADDITIONAL PARCELS OWNED EY
HEDRICK OUTSIDE OF
' +1 PERMITTED RCUNDARY (-59.2
wi+ - ACRES)
+ HEDRICKPARCELS
♦ i
100 YEAR FLOOD ZONE
500 YEAR FLOOD ZONE
• --'r' "'_'�-,� VVETLAND(-4.5ACRES)
PONDS[-19.9 ACRES)
South Expansion STREAMS (-14651 LF)
Permanent ;%///// ALTERNATIVE SOUTH EXPANSION
�y Identifier Length (LF) (-56.0 ACRES)
•jam l Impacts)LF) _• PLANT AND POND REPLACEMENT
SA-1 129 14�1
AND ADDITIONAL OVERBURDENSA-2 4,45C STORAGE FCR PROPPOSED
SOUTH EXPANSIONAREA (-54.5
SA-3 3,20CACRES)
5A-4 3,328 EXISTING OVERBURDEN
5A-5STORAGE AREA(-16.1 ACRES)
SCALE IN FEET GAS LI NE ROW
0 325 650 1.30D Totals: 14,6511 3,544 DUKE ENERGY ROW
A;` HEDRICK INDUSTRIES
LAKE NORMAN QUARRY
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. LINCCLN COUNTY
Ro i.hvFR I��HL; rnR us.Tn 3101 Arm LORorale DrNe 5ulle 400 L�arlolle. NL 2RZ13
JOMo237-0373 (Sse)ea SM ALTERNATIVE 4-SOUTH EXPANSION
ORAVM RY' HLS LRELKED RY' KT APPROVED 6YKT' FIGURE No' 4-4
ivGnFr. a, ns�s an "" srvv"�srvn>a ere�asr DATE 411 �P�021 SCALE: 1 "e FEn' PROJECT NO' 1RARn�
FIGURE 4-4 ALTERNATIVE 4 — SOUTH EXPANSION
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -34- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

Under Alternative 4, the series of ponds, the plant, overburden, and other existing infrastructure
would need to be moved to the southern portion of the site ( 54.5 acres), resulting in approximately
3,544 linear ft of stream permanently impacted.
While Hedrick Industries considered the feasibility of this alternative, multiple constraints were
identified that would prevent expansion in a southerly direction beyond the Duke Energy ROW.
The first limitation includes the need to relocate a portion (5 structures) of the 150 kilovolt
transmission line located within the proposed area. The transmission line ROW runs south west
towards the Duke Energy Plant located west of LNQ Mine's property boundary. Hedrick
Industries had discussions with Duke Energy about relocating the line adjacent to the Piedmont
Natural Gas Line. Duke Energy indicated that they would prefer not to move this line as it is a
main artery line connecting to the power plant. Additionally, the estimated cost to move the five
structures was over 5 million dollars — providing a considerable cost constraint (Appendix C Duke
Energy Cost Estimate).
Even if the transmission line could be relocated and stream and wetland complex mitigated,
Hedrick Industries would still need to construct a new plant. Due to the aggregate needs of Lincoln
County and the greater Charlotte area, the current plant could not be disassembled and
reconstructed. The LNQ Mine consists of 5 large crushers, 4 screens, and over 35 conveyors along
with multiple bins, and various concrete structures to support the equipment needed to process
aggregate. A new plant would have to be constructed at an estimated cost of 40 million dollars.
Therefore, the south expansion would not be considered as a viable option due to the costs
associated with relocating the transmission line structures, proposed mitigation of an estimated
3,544 linear ft of stream, and costs associated with constructing a new plant.
4.2.5 Alternative 5 East Mine Wall Expansion
Under Alternative 5, an existing mine wall would be expanded to the east (Figure 4-5 Alternative
5 East Mine Wall Expansion) extending the area to approximately 40.1 acres. Aerial imagery
reveals that storage and series ponds (Pond System) currently reside within the proposed
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -35- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

Alternative 5 expansion area, which reaches the eastern parcel boundary of parcel 93691985823
where overburden is currently stored.
i � � SA i 129 LF
NORTH 41 � a
SA 2-4450 LF-- y
/ I
�,/'//'j'rJ � l Sexes Pontls _ �•�
glllhn LTaeh '
Pa
y
A!.
LEGEND,
I�PERMITTED BOUNDARY (-4W 5
ACRES)
a AODITIDNAL PARCELS OWNED 2-
HEDRICKOUTSIDE OF
�, -y ''a• PERMITTED BOUNDARY (-59,2
ACRES)
10DRICKIN
1W ��• � YEAR FLOODODOZONE
5W YEAR FLOOD ZONE
•,'";�VvEfLAND(-4.G ACRES)
— PONDS (-109ACRES)
�y East Mine Wall Expansion STREAMS (-14,MI LF)
Permanent
Identifier Leng[h [LF[ ��� FAST MINE WALL EXPANSION
Impacts ¢R) (-40.1 ACRES)
SA-j 129 U. REOUI RED OVERBUR DEN AND
SA-2 4,450 0 "�//% RONDS
PROPOSED EASTTMMINE WALL
%ter SA-3 3,200 0 EXPANSION(-S02ACRES)
3,328 490 EXISTING OVERBURDEN
SA-5 3,248 2,524 STORAGE AREA(-161 ACRES)
SCALE IN FEET - SA-6 296 296 GASLINERUW
10 325 SIX 1,399 Totals: 14,651 3, 310 DUKE ENERGY ROW
HEDR
cx NwrP es UARRY
A. A_ 1.7A TERNIA IV S AKE NORNALYSIS
Civil & EnvironxnentRl Consultants, Inc. LINCOLN COUNTY
- ao�m[:, sty Fl;=. Nonin 3701 A—Copf —DrNe soAe 400-Cha A,N0382]3
GhoL...oA.Eo..a�or (eaolam-oavatasslasa�aa ALTERNATIVE 6- EAST MINE WALL EXPANSION
ORAVNJ aV: ILLS CHA—BY: KT APPROVED 6Y: KT` FIGURE N. -�
DATE. 01M021 SCALE'. 1"=B5N' PRO-7 NO. 1g3-B02
FIGURE 4-5 ALTERNATIVE 5 — EAST MINE WALL EXPANSION
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -36- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

Under Alternative 5, the storage and Pond System would need to be moved to the southern portion
of the site (50.2 acres), resulting in approximately 3,310 linear ft of stream permanently impacted.
While Hedrick Industries considered the feasibility of this alternative, multiple constraints were
identified that would prevent expansion of the mine wall in an eastern direction due to the need
for additional infrastructure in addition to adverse stream impacts. The Pond System consists of
approximately 10.5 acres. The Pond System, is series of four ponds, that were engineered as a
gravity fed system and designed to settle out the pond fines prior to exiting the fourth pond and
discharging into the freshwater pond then pumped back as clean water for washing the aggregate
material. If the Pond System were to be relocated to the southwestern area of the LNQ Mine
property, it would no longer be a gravity fed system, thus requiring additional pumps to properly
settle out the fines prior to being pumped back to the plant.
The pond fine stockpile would pose as another constraint to mining aggregate material in the
eastern direction. The LNQ Mine has accumulated an estimated 800,000 cubic yards of pond fines
over the last 30 years that would need to be relocated. The cost per cubic yard to relocate is around
$4.00 per yard; equating to an approximate cost of 3.2 to 4-million dollars. The pond fine area
consists of a 10 to 12-acre area and LNQ Mine has not been able to find a feasible area to relocate
the pond fines without impacting additional stream or wetland areas. The LNQ Mine currently
produces about 100,000 tons of pond fines annually. If the pile were to be relocated, additional
space would be required to handle future needs.
The initial cost engineer, move, and construct a new Pond System to expand becomes cost
prohibitive. Hedrick Industries estimates this cost to be around 10-to15 million dollars to have an
equivalent system.
4.2.6 Alternative 6 Greenfield Site
Under Alternative 6, Hedrick Gravel & Sand CO-LNQ would move its current operating facilities
to a proposed Greenfield Site location. For this to be feasible, potential Greenfield Site locations
within Lincoln County would need to meet the following screening criteria: the potential site
contain at least 100 acres of land, after the required NC DEQ 50' property buffer boundary is
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -37- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

applied, available for purchase, be zoned as industrial, be one contiguous parcel or have the same
owner of multiple contiguous parcels. Additionally, the potential site locations could not contain
existing companies or infrastructure and must have a minimal potential to impact streams and
wetlands.
Under these criterions, eight potential relocation site alternatives were assessed. Figure 4-6.1
Potential Greenfield Site Locations presents these areas. (Refer to Appendix D for a detailed
overview of all eight locations). However, all sites were deemed insufficient due to fatal flaws
under the above screening criterion. A summary of the eight alternatives considered is provided
below:
• Greenfield Site - Alternative Area 1, or AAl, is adjacent to the Cowen's Dam at the
southern end of Lake Norman. The site is owned by Duke Energy and has approximately
153.3 acres within 3 parcels that contain 3,767 linear ft of stream. Of that total, 25 acres
have existing infrastructure. When the 50-foot buffer is taken into account of the total, there
remains approximately 87 acres — which is insufficient under the site screening land the
requirement.
• Greenfield Site - AA2 is the site of Republic Services, Inc. Landfill, or Lincoln County
Landfill. There are approximately 117.1 acres in this one parcel and 6,865 linear ft of
stream. Within this total, approximately 35 acres are being used in the existing landfill.
Only 75 acres remain after the 50-foot buffer is calculated — which is insufficient under the
site screening land the requirement. Although this parcel is adjacent to the LNQ, the
amount of potential permanent stream impacts exceeds all other alternatives.
• Greenfield Site - AA3 is a true, undeveloped Greenfield site that is approximately 134.8
acres. Currently these four parcels are owned by Ingleside Real Estate and there are 4,571
linear ft of stream that run within them. A stream transects the parcels North to South with
a branch on the East side situated east to west, creating higher potential for more permanent
stream impacts if relocated here. In addition, when the required 50-foot buffer is accounted
for, there are only 92 acres remaining in AA3 — which is insufficient under the site
screening land the requirement.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -38- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

• Greenfield Site - AA4 is also a true, undeveloped Greenfield site that is approximately
112.4 acres. These three parcels are currently owned by the East Lincoln Land Company,
Inc. and have 1,453 linear ft of stream within them. After calculating the required 50-foot
buffer, there are only 78 acres left — which is insufficient under the site screening land the
requirement.
• Greenfield Site - AA5 is a mine site currently owned by Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.
There are approximately 170.6 acres in these 12 parcels and 6,420 linear ft of streams. Of
this total, approximately 68 acres are existing mine infrastructure and pit, of which would
be insufficient under the site screening existing infrastructure requirement. There are 116
acres remaining when the 50-foot buffer is accounted for.
• Greenfield Site - AA6 is currently the Lincoln County Airport that contains approximately
218.3 acres in one parcel and 4,778 linear ft of stream. Approximately 90 of these acres
are the existing airport and surrounding buildings, of which would be insufficient under
the site screening existing infrastructure requirement. After calculating the 50 buffer, there
are 143 acres left in this area.
• Greenfield Site - AA7 is the Timken Plant that manufactures bearings and mechanical
power transmission products. The Timken Plant has approximately 265.2 acres within its
one parcel and 719 linear feet of stream. The existing plant uses approximately 83 acres of
the total. Nearly 177 acres remain once the 50-foot buffer is accounted for, however the
land is not available for purchase — eliminating the alternative from further consideration.
• Greenfield Site - AA8 is an industrial area owned by Charlotte Industrial LL LLC. There
are approximately 128 acres and 3,663 linear ft of stream within 2 parcels. Approximately
34 acres are existing buildings of the area. In addition, about 79 acres remain after
accounting for the required 50-foot buffer — which is insufficient under the site screening
land the requirement.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -39- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

© + AAO: Existing Charlc
Intlus[d al LL LLC
^728.0 Acres
NORTH
Legend
REFERENCES AND NOTES
is Exl sting LIDCOIn 1. E3RI VJGRLD IMAGERY /ARCGIS MAP SERVICE.
AA5: Exi Sting Martin HTTP://GOTOARCGISONLINE.COMMIAPSMORLD IMAGERY,
County Airport Marietta Materials, Inc. ACCESSED 411=021, IMAGERY DATE: 2/1r 19.
-218.3 Acres -170.6 Acres
DATSATNAIANnSINVFN TGRV (NNII)
DATAA BYSTATE --NORTTHH CAROLINA
71 .. ... p
AA7: Existing Timken
1 OWNER, INDIVIDUAL OR Company Plant
ADJACENT PARCELS, 100 ACRES -265.2 Acres
—, HEDRICK INDUSTRIES PARCELS -
LAKE NOR MAN QUARRY
NWIRESOURCES
LINCOLN COUNTY BOUNDARY
In Lincoln County, NC, there are two
Industrial Zone types: Industrial General
(I-G) and Industrial Light (I-L). All I-L's are
do not meet the area or zone criteria that
is needed for a Mining Operation. That is
why only the I-G's are being shown.
t: Existing East Lincol
Land Company, Inc.
^112.4 Acres
�AA3: Existing Ingleside
Real Estate
-134.8 Acres
AA1: Ezi sting
_ Duke Energy
- ^153.3 Acres
Existing Lake Norman AA2 Existing Repuhlic
quarry - Hedrick Industries Services Landfill
-558.6Acres -177.1 Acres
0
SCALE IN FEET
0 7,500 15,000 30,000 1 APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION
,i,=,-7 HEDRICK INDUSTRIES
LAKE NORMAN QUARRY
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. EXPANSION
3701 Arco Corporate Drive Suite 400 - Charlotte, NC 28273 LINCOLN COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA
[phone] - [phone] POTENTIAL GREENFIELD SITE LOCATIONS
OVERVIEW
DRAWN BY. HLS CHECKED BY. KT APPROVED BY KT* FIGURE NO'. 4-6.1
DATE: 4112/2021 SCALE: 1" = 15, 000' PROJ ECT NO: 183-802
FIGURE 4-6.1 POTENTIAL GREENFIELD SITE LOCATIONS (OVERVIEW)
4.2.7 Alternative 7- No Action
Under the No Action Alternative, the Proposed Action would not occur and the quarry mine would
not be expanded. As a result, the current LOM and potential reserve base would expire within 15
to 25 years, pending economic aggregate product demand. This would create a loss of $82,106 in
Annual County Taxes, a loss of 25 direct jobs with a gross payroll of $2,145,000 and affiliated
organizations job loss of 128 employees.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -40- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

4.3 METHODS OF EVALUATING IMPACTS TO NATURAL AND CULTURAL
RESOURCES
This section summarizes the evaluation of the potential impacts to natural and cultural resources
that could occur at each of the five on -site alternatives as a result of implementation of the
Proposed Action. The evaluation was conducted via desk -top analysis of available data, literature
reviews, on -site WoUS determination and delineations and protect species habitat assessment and
pedestrian survey evaluations.
4.3.1 Natural Resources; Protected Species
On March 23rd, 2020 Kevin Thomas, Professional Wetland Scientist (PWS) and NC Licensed Soil
Scientist and David Campbell, Professional Botanist of CEC, performed the habitat assessment
and species specific survey's for the Northern Long -Eared Bat (NLEB), Dwarf -flowered Heartleaf
(Hexastylis naniflora) and Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii) (please refer to the Protected
Species Report located in Appendix E). No Dwarf -flowered Heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora) were
observed, nor were any habitats suitable for both the Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii) and
Dwarf -flowered Heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora) observed. However, habitat for the NLEB
potentially exists within the permitted mine limits but not along the preferred Alternatives Project
Area. Specifically potential summer roost sites with some on -site trees offering "flaking bark",
and in cavities or in crevices of both live trees and snags exist within the permitted mine boundary.
In July and October of 2020, Kevin Thomas performed additional site visits to perform the
Michaux's Sumac species specific survey. CEC, rendered that the proposed construction activities
at this site would have no effect on any populations of the two plant and one mammal species and
is discussed in CEC's Protected Species Report, Dated October 23rd, 2020.
4.3.2 Wetlands (Appendix F: WoUS Report and SAW-2020-00436 PJD Concurrence)
In March, 2020 Kevin Thomas, PWS and NC Licensed Soil Scientist and David Campbell,
Professional Botanist of CEC, performed preliminary WoUS determination and delineations for
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
-41- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

the entire permitted LNQ Mine site. Multiple aquatic resources we identified and delineated
(Appendix F: WoUS Report and SAW-2020-00436 PJD Concurrence).
On April 1st, 2020 Kevin Thomas submitted a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination request
with CEC's findings of WoUS to the USACE Asheville office for verification from the Charlotte
regional office SAW-2020-00436. The project was originally assigned to Project Manager
Catherine Janiczak and then to Mr. Bryan Roden -Reynolds upon Ms. Janiczaks departure. A site
visit was held on July 151h, 2020 the USACE PM, Mr. Roden -Reynolds verbally provided
concurrence with CEC's findings. However, CEC was notified by Mr. Roden -Reynolds in
September of 2020 that Project Manager Krystynka Stygar is now assigned to the project. On
March 3rd, 2021 Ms. Stygar provided PJD Verification.
4.3.3 Cultural Resources
No cultural resources were identified to occur within the proposed project area during the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database the query (NCNHP, 2021; NC SHPO)
(Appendix E).
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -42- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

5.0 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES
CEC assessed five on -site alternatives (Alternatives 1 through 5) in order to identify the location
best suited for the Hedrick Industries proposed LNQ Mine expansion, while resulting in the
LEDPA.
Under the site screening criteria (Section 2.1), all on -site alternatives evaluated for consideration
are located within a one mile radius from the LNQ Mine to meet the requisite aggregate product
trucking/transportation needs. Additionally, all alternatives contain soils/geology that meet the
ASTM standards and requirements. However, Alternatives 2 through 6 were eliminated due to one
or more of the following constrictions: site screening constraints (as presented in Table 5-1 below);
exceptional prohibitive costs; restrictive scheduling; additional environmental permitting
requisites needed to move the existing infrastructure and/or construct a new quarry.
Alternative elimination rationales are listed below:
o Alternative 2 — No Wall Expansion, Deepen Current Pit would be eliminated from
implementation due to safety constraints. Hedrick Industries would not be able to deepen
the current pit by an additional 100 ft without potentially violating federal, MSHA, and/or
LNQ Mine safety requirements.
o Alternative 3 —New Quarry Pit, North Side would be eliminated from implementation due
to screening criteria constraints. Approximately 40.5 acres of overburden would need to be
moved, making this alternative cost prohibitive (estimated cost to move overburden was
24 million dollars). Additionally, impacts to on -site aquatic resources would occur, as
2,661 linear ft of stream would be permanently impacted. And lastly, implementation of
Alternative 3 would result in impacts to the existing site berm that that borders encroaching
residential development.
o Alternative 4 — South Expansion would be eliminated from implementation due to
screening criteria constraints, as well as cost constrictions as part of moving the existing
infrastructure. Under Alternative 4, the series of ponds, the plant, overburden, and other
existing infrastructure would need to be moved to the southern portion of the site (56.0
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -43- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

acres). Additionally, 7.6 acres of the proposed expansion area are within the 100 year
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood plain and 4,762 linear ft of stream
would be permanently impacted.
o Alternative 5 — East Mine Wall Expansion would be eliminated due to site screening
constraints, as well as cost constrictions as part of moving the existing infrastructure.
Under Alternative 5, the storage and series of ponds would need to be moved to the
southern portion of the site (55.1 acres). The cost to relocate, engineer, and construct a
similar size pond would cost approximately 2-million dollars — providing considerable
constraints under this option. The series of ponds that filters the wash water from the plant
would also need to be relocated and reconstructed. The series ponds consist of
approximately 10.5 acres. Additionally, 7.6 acres of the proposed expansion area are
within the 100-year FEMA flood plain and 4,762 linear ft of stream would be permanently
impacted.
o Alternative 6 — Relocation to a Greenfield Site would be eliminated from implementation
due to diminution of feasible Greenfield Site availability within Lincoln County, as well
as projected cost constrictions estimated as part of this action (note that this estimate
excludes the consideration of financial return or profit, and land price — as these are
unknown at this time), and/or additional significant environmental permitting requisites
needed to move the existing infrastructure. Additionally, all sites were deemed insufficient
due to fatal flaws under the Greenfield Site screening criterion.
Table 5-1 On -Site Alternatives Comparison Table
SCREENING
CRITERIA CONSTRAINTS
Impact(s)
Alternative
Infrastructure,
Impacts to
to
Impacts to
Meets Safety
Impacts
Impacts to
#
geophysical
existing
sensitive
surrounding
Requirements
to NWI
Floodplains
integrity
infrastructure
resource
land use
resources
areas
1
•
X/+
•
•
•
X/+
X/+
2
X
•
•
•
X
•
•
3
X
•
•
X
X
•
•
4
X
X
•
•
•
X/-
X
5
X
X
•
•
•
X/-
X
Notes: • = meets criteria/no impacts; X = does not meet cntena/will impact; + = impacts would be beneficial; - = impacts would
be negative
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -44- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

5.1 CONCLUSION
Hedrick Industries has identified Alternative 1 as the preferred reasonable and practicable
alternative, as it would result in the LEDPA as evaluated under the site screening criteria (Section
4.1). Additionally, the restored Forney Creek would increase connectivity with the floodplain and
provide increased in -channel habitat for aquatic species as well as potentially increase riparian
habitat quality and diversity. The newly proposed stream alignment would employ restoration
strategies to engage floodplains, promote wetland development, and support healthy alluvial
processes. The restoration design will enhance fish and aquatic passage by removing a low head
dam located at the upstream portion of the project and improving an undersized culvert near the
downstream end of the project.
For Hedrick, implementation of Alternative 1 would increase the LOM expectancy and allow for
the safest extraction of aggregate product (based on the requirements presented in Table 3-
1). Under this action Hedrick Industries would be able to expand the quarry mine using existing
lands within the permitted mine boundary. Existing infrastructure would be utilized to ensure safe
extraction of aggregate product, minimize costs associated with the proposed action (as compared
to the other proposed alternatives), and appease the required site screening criteria. Finally,
Alternative 1 will help achieve the objectives of the Proposed Action, in order to extend the LOM
and prevent the depletion of LNQ's projected mine reserve base.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -45- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

6.0 REFERENCES
Doll et al., 2003. Stream Restoration — A Natural Channel Design Handbook. Prepared by the North Carolina
Stream Restoration Institute and North Carolina Sea Grant. Authors: Barbara A. Doll. Garry L. Grabow.
Karen R. Hall. James Halley. William A. Harman. Gregory D. Jennings. Dani E. Wise. Accessed online at:
https://semspub.cpa.gov/work/01/554360.pdf on 12 April 2021.
Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats
of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-79/31. Washington, DC.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2021. Overview of Identifying and Restoring Impaired Waters under
Section 303(d) of the CWA I Clean Water Act Section 303(d): Impaired Waters and Total Maximum Daily
Loads (TMDLs) I US EPA. Accessed online at: https://www.epa.gov/tmdUoverview-identifying-and-
restoring-impaired-waters-under-section-303d-cwa on 16 February 2021.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) 2021. Crushed Stone in North Carolina. Accessed
online at: https://deg.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/north-carolina-geolo ig cal-
survey/geoscience-education/crushed-stone-in-nc on 12 February 2012.
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) 2018. Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures.
North Carolina Department of Transportation Raleigh. Accessed online at:
https:Hcomect.ncdot.gov/resources/Specifications/StandSpecLibM/2018%20Standard%2OSpecifications
%20Manua1%20with0/o20ASTM.pdf on 17 February 2021.
Rosgen, D.L. 2001. A Practical Method of Computing Streambank Erosion Rate. Proceedings of
the Seventh Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference, Vol. 2, pp. II - 9-15, March 25-29, 2001,
Reno, NV. hU://www.wildlandhdrology.com/html/references_.html
USACE 2016. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation
Update. North Carolina Interagency Review Team — October 24, 2016. Accessed online at: https://saw-
reg.usace.glmy.mil/PN/2016AVilmington-District-Mitt atilt on-Update.pdf on 12 April 2021.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2008. Natural Resources Conservation Service. North Carolina
Natural Stream Channel Design, Stream Restoration Design National Engineering Handbook 654, and
Natural Channel Design. Accessed online at:
hlWs://www.nrcs.usda.gov/-
LAM s/portal/nrcs/detail/natio nal/water/manage restoratiort/?cid=stelprdb1044707
on 18 February 2021.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2020. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). Wetlands Mapper. Accessed
online at: https://fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html on 17 FebnzaU 202 1.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2021. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). Wetlands Code Interpreter.
Accessed online at: https:HfwsprimM.wim.usgs.gov/decoders/wetlands.aspx on 17 February 2021.
Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. -46- 182-802 Alternatives Analysis Report
October 2021

APPENDIX A
LNQ NHNE PERNHT #55-01

APPENDIX B
FORNEY CREEK CONCEPTUAL STREAM RELOCATION PLAN NATURAL
CHANNEL DESIGN

APPENDIX C
DUKE ENERGY COST ESTIMATE (ALTERNATIVE 4 SOUTH EXPANSION)

APPENDIX D
GREENFIELD SITE LOCATIONS (INDIVIDUAL AREAS ASSESSED)

APPENDIX E
NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES

APPENDIX F
WoUS REPORT AND SAW-2020-00436 PJD CONCURRENCE

APPENDIX G
PERMITTEE-RESPONSIBLE MITIGATION PLAN