20051457 Ver 1_FW Letter to Cleveland County Water 1.msg_20110524

Strickland, Bev
From:
Reeder, Tom [tom.reeder @ncdenr.gov]
Sent:
Tuesday, May 24, 2011 9:33 AM
To:
Barsness, Kari K; Sullins, Coleen
Subject:
FW: Letter to Cleveland County Water
Attachments:
USACE-1 0-01 -09-letter to CCW.pdf
Kari - Here is an electronic copy of the letter that I promised earlier. Just let me know if
you need anything else. Thanks.
Tom Reeder
Director, NC Division of Water Resources
Phone: 919 - 715 -3045
e -mail: tom.reeder(@ncdenr.gov
E -mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public
Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Mead, Jim
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 9:31 AM
To: Reeder, Tom
Subject: FW: Letter to Cleveland County Water
Tom,
The letter in question is attached
Jim Mead, Environmental Supervisor
NOTE NEW EMAIL ADDRESS Jim.Mead(@ncdenr.gov
919/715 -5428 fax - 919/733 -3558
****** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
NC Division of Water Resources - DENR
1611 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1611
(for overnight mail, UPS, or FedEx - contact me for street address)
E -mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public
Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Wicker, Henry M JR SAW [mailto:Henry.M. Wicker.]R(@saw02.usace.army.mil
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 2:43 PM
To: Mead, Jim
Subject: FW: Letter to Cleveland County Water
<<USACE-10-01-09- letter to CCW.pdf >>
Jim,
1

Attached is a copy of the letter we sent to Cleveland County Water (CCW). We met with them
at their office on Friday (October 2) and discussed the letter.
Basically we reiterated our concern that the Broad River could met their water supply needs
and have much less impacts than their preferred alternative of constructing a 1,200 acre
reservoir. We asked CCW to provide us a written response on why the Broad River is not a
practicable alternative to meet their water supply needs. We gave them a copy of the
404(8)(1) guidelines so they could understand why we are required to permit the least
environmentally damaging alternative. We asked for a response from CCW within the next 30
days. They responded that they are in the middle of Board elections and may not be able to
respond until December. Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks
Henry
Henry Wicker
Project Manager
Regulatory Division
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Ave
Wilmington NC, 28402
(910) 251 -4930 (Ph)
(910) 251 -4025 (Fax)
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public.
To help us ensure we continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey
located at our website at http : / /regulatory.usacesurvey.com/ to complete the survey online.
N

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 -1343
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF October 1, 2009
Regulatory Division
Action ID No. SAW- 2003 -30194
Mr. Butch Smith
Cleveland County Water
Post Office Box 788
Lawndale, North Carolina 28090 -0788
Dear Mr. Smith:
This letter is in reference to Cleveland County Water's application to build a 24 -mile run -of -the -river
reservoir on the First Broad River in Cleveland County, North Carolina, and the ensuing process that the U.S. Army,
Corps of Engineers (Corps) has engaged in to review the application. As you know, the Corps is the lead federal
agency preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that will be required for issuance or denial of a permit
for the reservoir under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The Corps has continued to work with your organization,
affected stakeholders, the North Carolina Divisions of Water Quality (DWQ) and Water Resources (DWR), as well
as other local, state, and federal agencies, in the review of your request. As a result of our ongoing investigation and
review, we are concerned that we may not be able to permit your proposed project, in light of the other available
alternatives outlined below.
Please reference our June 1, 2009 letter to you in which we identified several significant issues of concern
with your proposal to construct a water supply reservoir on the First Broad River in Cleveland County, North
Carolina. To date, we have not received an adequate reply from you regarding the issues addressed in our June 1
letter. We continue to have serious concerns regarding the viability of your proposed project in light of several
potential alternatives that would appear to meet Cleveland County Water's (CCW's) projected needs, have fewer
environmental impacts than your proposal, and cost less than a reservoir. Specifically, it appears that the purchase
of treated water supply capacity from nearby cities or towns, and/or the construction of a new raw water intake on
the Broad River, would satisfy the purpose and need for water supply with much less adverse impacts than the
proposed reservoir. In addition, we remain concerned that the safe yield of the proposed project appears to be more
than what CCW projects to need by the year 2060. As we discussed in our June 1 letter, the Corps may issue Clean
Water Act permits only for the alternative or alternatives found to be the Least Environmentally Damaging
Practicable Alternative (LEDPA). Given that a number of identified alternatives appear to be both practicable to
CCW and less environmentally damaging than your proposed project, unless we receive specific information
regarding the impracticability of all of these less damaging alternatives, we will have no choice but to deny your
permit request.
Revised Safe Yield of CCW Preferred Reservoir Alternative.
Recently the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (DWR) reviewed the methodology used for
calculating the downstream flow requirement for CCW's preferred 1,200 -acre water supply reservoir alternative and
provided guidance on correcting previous safe yield calculations. Under the revised method for determining
downstream flows, CCW's 1,200 -acre preferred alternative will now have a safe yield of 8.9 MGD. While this
provides a safe yield closer to what CCW needs by the year 2060 (7.91 MGD), the Corps continues to have concerns
about the substantial impacts to the aquatic environment from the proposed project.
CCW's preferred alternative is to construct a 1,200 -acre water supply reservoir that would impound areas
below 860 feet msl, on the First Broad River, near Lawndale, North Carolina. An earthen dam would be constructed

across the First Broad River upstream of the existing CCW raw water intake. Initial feasibility studies indicate that
the dam would be approximately 83 feet high and 1,245 feet wide at the base. The associated emergency spillway,
located south of the dam, would be approximately 1,000 feet wide. The resulting dam would cause the subsequent
upstream flooding of 24 miles of the First Broad River, as well as an undetermined length of associated tributaries.
The conversion of these waters, and the loss of associated functions, would likely result in a requirement to provide
mitigation to compensate for these losses. According to the best available information concerning mitigation costs,
it may require the expenditure of approximately $22 to $43 million, or the removal of an existing dam on another
river within the watershed, to provide the necessary compensatory mitigation for these flooding impacts.
We have identified many significant environmental impacts associated with the reservoir alternative that will
have to be addressed before we can render a final decision. These impacts include, but are not limited to, the
potential take of endangered species, impacts to existing fish and wildlife resources, and substantial adverse impacts
and loss of aquatic resources associated with the First Broad River, its associated tributaries, and adjacent wetlands.
As discussed in our previous letter, potential alternatives to the proposed reservoir include the purchase 4.0 MGD of
treated water supply capacity from the City of Shelby or the Town of Forest City to meet future demands.
The City of Shelby
The City of Shelby, like CCW, 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.
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.
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. CCW provided
approximately $1.1 M in funding to help with the construction of this line. The Corps assumes that, given this
expenditure, that CCW could claim some right to the water supplied by this intake. 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 by NCDENR, DWQ.
Available water supply from run -of -river type intakes is typically based upon the 7Q 10 flow of the river.
Based upon the Corps discussions with North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(NCDENR), Department of Water Resources (DWR) 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. A review of flow
information for the Broad River during the drought period from 2001 to 2008 shows that during certain periods
stream flows have decreased. In an e -mail dated March 3, 2009, USGS estimates that the 7Q 10 flow for the Broad
River is 306 cfs (197.8 MGD) at the Boiling Springs gauging station including flow data through 2008. Utilizing
the 20% rule from DWR a withdrawal of 39.5 MGD is possible.
Given the current design capacity of the City of Shelby water plant and their projected growth demands, the
City of Shelby appears to have adequate capacity to meet their demands as well as the required future demands of
CCW, provided improvements are made 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 during periods of reduced stream flow in the First Broad River. Under current demand conditions it
appears that the City of Shelby has adequate water to supply the additional needs of CCW, and could easily
accommodate future demands through expansion of its plant. It is our understanding that the City of Shelby has
agreed to discussions necessary to consider an agreement of water supply capacity with CCW. The Corps notes that
this alternative would require little or no additional work in waters of the United States to accomplish, and appears
to be significantly less expensive than construction of a reservoir.
Town of Forest Cit
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. The
purchase of treated water supply from the Town of Forest City appears to be a readily available alternative.
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 should have the additional capacity
to supply the needs of CCW. Major improvements to the distribution system would be required to transport the
water to the CCW system. 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. These improvements, however, are expected to cost far less, and have much
less environmental impact, than a new reservoir.
Inter -local Aereements
Once CCW has worked out the details of purchasing capacity with either Shelby or Forest City it could then
enter into an inter -local agreement with one of the Towns for the purchase of water on an as- needed basis with the
cost for water being equal to the cost for treatment and delivery of finished water to the CCW metered connections.
The costs for water would be based upon the approved budget for the Town's Water Plants and the budget would be
open to review by CCW on an annual basis. CCW would only pay for water purchased on an as- needed basis.
Based on the information available to us, it appears that purchasing additional water supply capacity from the
adjacent Towns would satisfy the purpose and need of the proposed project and have vastly less impact to wetlands
and waters of the US than CCW's preferred alternative.
CCW use of Broad River
An option that also appears to be readily available to CCW is an intake on the Broad River, which appears to
have adequate flows through drought events to meet all anticipated needs. As mentioned above, CCW has already
contributed significant funds to build a pipeline from the Broad River to Shelby, and could potentially draw water
directly from this pipeline, if necessary. Even if this is not possible, CCW needs to explore an alternative that would
involve pumping water directly from the Broad River. While this may involve some minor impacts to waters and

wetlands, it would still appear to be less environmentally damaging and far less costly that the construction of a
reservoir.
All of these alternatives appear to be to fully meet CCW's purpose and need, have significantly less
environmental impact than a new reservoir, and be far less costly than the construction of a new reservoir. Unless
CCW can provide information as to why these alternatives are not available to you, and also demonstrate that the
reservoir is the LEDPA, the Corps will have no choice but to deny your request to construct a reservoir on the First
Broad River. Accordingly, we feel that continued efforts toward the preparation of an EIS document are an unwise
use of the resources of both CCW and the Corps. In the light of these other, feasible alternatives, we strongly urge
CCW to reconsider its desire to pursue the reservoir alternative at this time. We believe that consideration of one or
a combination of the alternatives outlined in this letter will potentially save CCW significant effort and costs, while
meeting the purpose and need for the proposed project.
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, or Ken Jolly, Regulatory Chief, at
(910) 251 -4630.
Sincerely,
e M. R s v
Colonel, U. S. rmy
District Commander
Copies furnished:
Don Melton (Chairman)
5638 Casar Road
Casar, North Carolina 28020
Dewey Cook (Vice- Chair)
307 Wes Cook Road
Casar, North Carolina 28020
J. Alan Norman
568 Oak Grove - Clover Hill Church Road
Lawndale, North Carolina 28090
C. J. Pete Pedersen (Secretary)
Post Office Box 166
Polkville, North Carolina 28136
Timothy B. Brooks
1551 Mountain View Circle
Shelby, North Carolina 28150
Bill Cameron
3016 Bettis Road
Grover, North Carolina 28073
Freddie Harrill
833 Ivywood Drive
Shelby, North Carolina 28150