FONSI_2001_08_20

FINAL
MITIGATED FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG UTILITIES
PROPOSED INCREASE IN INTERBASIN TRANSFER
FROM THE CATAWBA RIVER BASIN TO THE ROCKY RIVER BASIN
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY: NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
CONTACT: TOM FRANSEN
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
1611 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1611
[phone]
August 20, 2001
1
MITIGATED FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI)
Project Applicant: Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities
Summary Project Description: Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities (CMUD) is requesting
an interbasin transfer (IBT) certificate from the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission (EMC) for an increase in their transfer amount from 16.1
million gallons per day (mgd) to 35 mgd. The proposed IBT is based on the existing
water withdrawals from the source basin (Mountain Island Lake within the Catawba
River Sub-basin, and transfer of the water to the receiving basin (Eastern Mecklenburg
County within the Rocky River Sub-basin via consumptive use and existing discharges in
the receiving basin (Mallard Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant [WWTP] and Rocky
River Regional WWTP). The IBT will not lead to expansions of permitted discharges at
either of the WWTP locations in the receiving basin. This Environmental Assessment
(EA) provides supporting documentation for the IBT certificate petition.
Background and Procedural History: Pursuant to the Regulation of Surface Water
Transfers Act [G.S. 143-215.22I(f1)], the Department is required to prepare an
environmental assessment (EA) for petitions for an interbasin transfer certificate. The
determination of whether an environmental impact statement shall also be required is
made in accordance with provisions of Article 1 of G.S. 113A. Within the Department,
the Division of Water Resources is the responsible agency for interbasin transfer
requests.
After reviewing scoping comments, the Division determined that a mitigated EA was the
appropriate environmental review document. Under a mitigated EA, all significant
impacts must be mitigated to a level of insignificance through identified mitigation
measures. The Division will recommend to the EMC that some of the mitigation
measures be included in the certificate as enforceable permit conditions.
Following public review of the FONSI/EA, the Applicant will present its petition
requesting an increase in interbasin transfer to the EMC. The Division will also present
its recommendations. The EMC will then hold a public hearing on the proposed transfer.
A final decision will be made at the next full EMC meeting following the public
comment period and preparation of a hearing officer’s report.
The environmental assessment (EA) found no direct impacts that would result from the
proposed transfer. Direct impacts that may result from future infrastructure projects such
as water and sewer lines will be assessed through separate environmental reviews of
those projects. The EA identified secondary and cumulative impacts due to growth in the
receiving basin as the primary significant environmental impacts. These impacts include
water quality impacts, wetland impacts, impacts to threatened mussel populations, habitat
fragmentation, and loss of open space.
2
Mitigation Measures: The Division of Water Resources will recommend to the EMC
inclusion of a number of conditions in the IBT Certificate for the implementation of long-
term mitigation of secondary and cumulative impacts. The certificate should also include
provisions for a compliance and monitoring plan to track progress on meeting the
proposed conditions. The plan would also specify requirements for reporting actual
maximum daily transfer amounts. The following items are under consideration for
inclusion in the IBT certificate. Note that the specific permit language may be modified
from the text shown.
• Require the County to evaluate the feasibility of each element of the Surface Water
Improvement and Management Program (SWIM) on an annual basis. For those
elements that are deemed feasible, the County should continue to seek funding from
its Board of County Commissioners to fund the SWIM program to continue
implementing the Phases outlined in Section 6.2.1.2 of the EA.
• Require the County and the Town of Mint Hill to consider the conclusions of WRC’s
Goose Creek watershed study when complete. Mecklenburg County and Mint Hill
should provide information to WRC on which recommendations they will pursue
adopting and which recommendations are infeasible and why.
• Require Mecklenburg County and the City of Charlotte to continue the stakeholder
process to investigate water quantity control from single-family development and
water quality control for all development. To accomplish this end, the stakeholder
group should consider evaluating the feasibility of single-family detention and
recommending ordinance revisions based on technical, political, long-term
maintenance, cost, and benefits related to the proposed ordinance changes.
In addition to the permit conditions listed above, Mecklenburg County, the City of
Charlotte, and the Towns of Cornelius, Huntersville, Davidson and Mint Hill have
implemented, proposed and /or committed to a number of mitigation measures designed
to avoid and minimize any potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. These
measures include but are not limited to the following:
1. Mecklenburg County has adopted the Phase I strategy of the Surface Water
Improvement and Management program (SWIM). The goal of the nine-part strategy
is for all county streams to be suitable for prolonged human contact and supportive of
aquatic life.
2. All towns within Mecklenburg County have adopted stream buffer requirements
under Part 3 of the SWIM Phase I strategy. Buffer widths range from 30 to 100 feet
and apply to all streams with a drainage area of 100 acres or more. Some of the local
jurisdictions have adopted more stringent requirements.
3. Mecklenburg County is implementing water quality modeling under Part 5 of the
SWIM Program strategy. The County is working with the Town of Huntersville to
establish a watershed management strategy for McDowell Creek based on the results
of the model. Following the pilot, the County plans to extend this effort to the entire
county.
3
4. Towns within Mecklenburg County have adopted land use policies which include
provisions for open space preservation, stormwater control, sedimentation and
erosion controls, growth boundaries, and tree preservation among others.
5. The Goose Creek subbasin in Mecklenburg County is removed from the area to be
served by the IBT. A moratorium on the installation of new IBT water lines into
Goose Creek subbasin is in effect until the impacts of additional growth urban growth
on the endangered specifies are fully evaluated.
6. Mecklenburg County and the Town of Mint Hill commit to participate in the Goose
Creek watershed protection initiative and to cooperate with the NC Wildlife
Resources Commission to secure funding for riparian buffer acquisition in Goose
Creek (particularly within Mecklenburg County).
7. Mecklenburg County commits to consider incorporation of a number of
recommendations from the Voices and Choices initiative in the county’s
environmental protection programs, as appropriate.
8. Mecklenburg County commits to pursue its existing county-wide comprehensive
watershed management programs and work with Towns on land use planning. This
effort may include working with local land trusts and other natural preservation
groups along with large landowners to implement voluntary forest and agricultural
preservation plans. Mecklenburg County will continue to evaluate the possibility of
using other measures besides typical BMPs to protect sensitive aquatic species,
including land use controls, alternative land use scenarios and land acquisition. Also,
local zoning ordinances could be amended to create zoning districts that prohibit
typical suburban sprawl-type subdivisions, and encourage “smart growth.”
9. Mecklenburg County commits to pursue funding for watershed restoration. This
effort includes working with the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program to
identify potential stream restoration sites within Mecklenburg County and using
wetland impact fees generated from projects within Mecklenburg County on county
stream restoration.
Each of the foregoing mitigation measures is described in more detail in the
environmental assessment (EA) supporting the requested interbasin transfer. The
Applicant’s proposed mitigation measures have adequately addressed identified concerns
regarding potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. The Division of Water
Resources has determined that the analysis of the potential environmental impacts set
forth in the EA and mitigative measures set forth above support a finding of no
significant impact such that preparation of an environmental impact statement will not be
required. This decision is based upon information in the attached EA and review by
governmental agencies. This FONSI completes the environmental review record, which
is available for inspection at the State Clearinghouse.
Sincerely,
___________________________
Thomas C. Fransen
Division of Water Resources