20230712 Ver 1_USACE Request for More Info_20230817

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
CHARLOTTE REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
8430 UNIVERSITY EXECUTIVE PARK DRIVE, STE 615
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28262
August 17, 2023
Regulatory Division
Action ID Number: SAW-2023-00898
Re: Lyle Creek Data Center
Mr. Chris Sander
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052
Dear Mr. Sander,
Please reference your Individual Permit (IP) application for Department of the Army
(DA) requested authorization to permanently impact 889 linear feet (LF) of stream
channel, and 0.08 acre of wetland, permanently convert 0.19 acre of wetland, and
temporarily impact 285 LF of stream channel, in conjunction with the construction of the
Lyle Creek Data Center- CLT 04 (Site), in Conover, Catawba County, North Carolina.
The United States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps) advertised
your proposal by public notice dated June 1, 2023. Comments in response to the notice
were received from the Cherokee Nation, United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS), United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), North Carolina
Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, State Historic Preservation Office
(NCSHPO), and North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water
Resources (NCDEQ-DWR) and North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (WRC).
The comments and recommendations received are enclosed for your information and to
provide you with the opportunity to address any of the stated concerns (reference Table
1 attached).
Further, on February 6, 1990, the Department of Army (DA) and EPA signed a
memorandum of agreement (MOA) establishing procedures to determine the type and
level of mitigation necessary to comply with the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section
404(b)(1) Guidelines. This MOA provides for first, avoiding impacts to waters and
wetlands through the selection of the least damaging, practical alternative; second,
taking appropriate and practical steps to reduce impacts on waters and wetlands; and
finally, compensation for remaining unavoidable impacts to the extent appropriate and
practical. To enable us to process your application, in compliance with the MOA, we
request that you provide the following additional information.

-2-
A. Permits for work within wetlands or other special aquatic sites are available only
if the proposed work is the least environmentally damaging, practicable
alternative. Please furnish information regarding any other alternatives, including
upland alternatives, to the work for which you have applied and provide
justification that your selected plan is the least damaging to water or wetland
areas.
Specifically, please add to the alternatives analysis provided in your
Individual Permit application dated May 18, 2023:
a. What is the minimum MW required to achieve the purpose and need of
the proposed project?
b. Please explain how five (5) buildings at 48 MW each would provide
488 MW of total storage.
c. In section 1.3.8 the applicant has indicated that the "100-year
floodplain is present within the project area. The duct banks will be
installed under the creek bed and there is no anticipated change in
floodplain elevation." Please provide additional information on the
process, description of duct bank, and how there will be no impacts.
Furthermore, Impact SC1 and SX2 the applicant indicated that the
project will temporarily impact 112 LF of stream channel in Lyle Creek
for the installation of two separate duct bank crossings. With graphics
in Appendix B of the application, which does not have the appropriate
cross -sections. When using nomenclature please be accurate that
there are no duplicitous or provide exact locations of the required
graphics.
d. Please provide all North Carolina Stream Assessment Method
(NCSAM forms) and North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method
(NCWAM) forms for this site.
e. The applicant has indicated under the purpose and need section 4.2
that, "The State of North Carolina encourages data centers to locate
within the state and currently provides three sales and use tax
exemptions for purchase of items related to data centers and their
operations." The Corps is seeking a demonstration that the site
selection criteria was not solely monetarily based. Further in the
narrative, the applicant indicates, that "Because Catawba County is

-3-
already home to several data centers, the county has existing fiber and
electrical infrastructure to serve additional sites as well as low taxes,
making it a desirable location for data centers." Furthermore, "Microsoft
has guaranteed a $1 Billion minimum investment in Catawba County
associated with four data center sites." Please provide further detailed
analysis that the proposed data centers could not be viable outside of
Catawba County, North Carolina.
f. Please provide a revised table that compares the selection criteria
outlines below to your offsite alternatives, refer to Table 10 in your
application submittal. Please use the following selection criteria and
quantify as appropriate: Minimum MW required to achieve the purpose
and need of the project; Proximity to other data centers (in miles);
Utilities (Sewer, water, electric, existing infrastructure); number of
buildings, minimum parcel acreage required; zoning (industrial);
proximity to large scale infrastructure/development; proximity to
floodplain (miles); aquatic resources on alternative parcels (wetlands
and waters); amount of impact of waters/wetlands on those parcels.
g. The applicant indicated that site selection and suitability, "9. Land that
is: a Least impactful to the environment (wetlands/waters of the US,
other environmental issues, artifacts, and endangered species) b. not
close to airports, freeways, schools, churches, and shopping centers."
Please clarify why the applicant is unable to potentially work with land
that is close to the above listed restraints.
h. Please revise any design drawings that could potentially be affected by
the above referenced request for information.
i. Please provide further clarification as to why Catawba County was
selected for the project location. Further, please provide additional
justification as to why the following site selection criteria were chosen:
Statutory incentives for taxes and or local rebates/incentives: Example -
property tax abatements, income tax free zones, enterprise zones.
Please provide the air permit for the proposed 3MW and 500kW diesel -
fired generators. Please provide further information on why additional
diesel -fired generators are necessary for the proposed site design.

M
k. Section 6.2.2.1 Offsite Alternatives: The applicant determined that
Catawba County, was the most appropriate project location based on
the site selection, and other suitability criteria. The applicant did not
state which other areas, counties, and/or cities were considered for the
proposed development in the North Carolina Regional Network
Gateway. Therefore, please provide other locations that were
considered along with reasons/justifications as to why those sites were
not chosen.
In the alternatives analysis has indicated that every alternative is five
(5) single story buildings, (Example: Summary Site 1 would not meet
the project purpose because of insufficient developable areas for the
required data storage capacity and would have greater impacts to the
aquatic environment.") Please provide reasoning/justifications as to
why two-story buildings are not feasible or considered under the
alternative analysis.
m. Alternative Site 1 and Alternative Site 2: The applicant stated that, "it
appears only 2 buildings (96 MW) could be built onsite: Building 2
could not be built as shown with associated roads because the
footprint exceeds the property boundary." Please provide additional
information as to why various size buildings were not considered
feasible. In addition, if there was not enough developable land
available for the basic project purpose, why was this considered a
feasible alternative?
n. "The area at the rear of the property along Pinch Gut Creek contains
steep slopes and grading would have impacts to at least 1.5 AC of a
FEMA regulated 100-year floodplain and the associated floodway.
Engineering requirements would be extensive; mitigation for the
impacts would not be possible onsite; and permitting requirements, if
possible, would extend the timeline for construction." Please provide
additional details as to why mitigation for the impacts is not possible
onsite and were considered as part of the alternatives analysis, when
the proposed LEDPA for the preferred action alternative does not have
onsite mitigation proposed? Please provide additional details as to why
the extension of the timeline of construction are considered under the
selection criteria.

-5-
o. Offsite alternative 3 states, "Existing electrical service is inadequate.
Required substation would be +4,600 FT from Town of Maiden
substation and +5,000 FT from Duke Energy 230KV transmission line.
Connection would require extensive coordination with Duke Energy to
provide a new transmission line and would extend the timeline of
construction by more than a year due to planning and permitting
requirements." In addition, "No existing fiber in proximity. This would
require an extension from existing lines." Please provide additional
details for all alternatives in regard to this statement. What is the
distance/location to the utility substation, building hook -in that indicates
that this was a key component to determining offsite alternatives. In
addition, please provide this information for the LEDPA. Furthermore,
in Table 10, please define "adjacent" in regard to "other utilities."
p. Onsite avoidance and minimization planning included: Two-story
buildings options were considered but did not support the construction
schedule (longer initial construction duration). Construction is planned
to start mid-2024. Schedules and need -by dates for this site are driven
by customer demand. The current demand necessitated the use of
Single -Story Pre -Engineered Metal Buildings (PEMB) construction due
to the short duration to design and erect, anticipated to be 18 months.
Please provide further information to the construction feasibility of
buildings other than PEMB. In addition, the construction timeline and
need -by dates need further explanation. If this project is not completed
within 18 months, does it make it unviable? Please provide
comparisons, cost analysis, and other considerations and supporting
documentation.
B. It is necessary for you to have taken all appropriate and practicable steps to
minimize losses of Waters of the U.S. including wetlands. Please indicate all that
you have done, especially regarding development and modification of plans and
proposed construction techniques, to minimize adverse impacts.
I have evaluated the avoidance and minimization included in your application and
have determined the details to be generally sufficient for our evaluation.
C. The MOA requires that appropriate and practicable mitigation will be required for
all unavoidable adverse impacts remaining after the applicant has employed all
appropriate and practicable minimization. Please indicate your plan to mitigate

M
for the projected, unavoidable loss of waters or wetlands or provide information
as to the absence of any such appropriate and practicable measures.
The applicant has chosen to purchase 1,485 stream mitigation units (SMUs) and
0.35 wetland mitigation units (WMUs) from a combination of a private mitigation
bank and the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) to offset.
the unavoidable loss of 889 LF of stream channel and 0.27-acre wetland.
Additionally, the following items must be resolved prior to continuing to process your
permit request.
1. The applicant has provided Threatened and Endangered Species information
including proposed listed species. "The tri-colored bat has been proposed to be
federally listed as endangered and is expected to be officially listed before this site
goes to construction. Roosting habitat is present across the site in the form of
forested areas. Acoustic surveys are scheduled to occur at the end of May 2023 for
this species and further analysis and results will be provided at that time." Please
provide the results of the acoustic surveys, and any avoidance and minimization
measures based on the survey results that the applicant proposes.
2. The North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, State Historic
Preservation Office. "There are five known archaeological sites within the proposed
area of disturbance: 31 CT255, 31 CT254 and 31 CT289- 31 CT291: Sites 31 CT255
and 31 CT254 are not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places
and no further archaeological work is necessary on these sites. However, according
to our records, sites 31 CT289- 31 CT291 were recorded in January 2023 by Stantec
Consulting Services, Inc for the above referenced project." Based on the Corps
review area, there are numerous sites within the overall project area that were
assigned archaeological numbers with the Office of State Archaeology in January of
2023. The Corps requests a copy of the survey results, and files that were
complied. The Corps requests to be copied on any correspondence with the State
Historic Preservation Office. NCSHPO indicated that this information request is
required. Please provide the Corps with a copy of the historical report (HSSR) and
any correspondence between the applicant and NCSHPO. Your response to this
item needs to include 1) date(s) of field survey; and 2) approximate timeframe when
the survey and report will be available to the Corps and NCSHPO.
3. Please provide your responses to the public comments received.
4. Please note that responses to the questions above may prompt additional
information requests to allow full evaluation of the proposed project.

-7-
The above requested information is essential to the expeditious processing of your
application; please forward this information to us within 30 days of your receipt of this
letter. If you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please contact me at
[phone] or krystynka.b.stygarCc)-usace.army. mi1.
Sincerely,
Krysta Stygar
Regulatory Program Manager
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
Enclosures:
1.Table 1. Comments in Response to the Public Notice
2. NCDEQ-DWR Comment Letter Dated June 26, 2023
3.NCSHPO Comment Letter Dated July 6, 2023
Copies furnished electronically:
Melissa Ruiz — Stantec Consulting
[e-mail]
Todd Bowers
Permit Review Specialist
Wetlands Regulatory Section
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency- Region IV
Bowers.todd(oepa.gov
Sue Homewood
NCDEQ- Division of Water Resources
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Sue. Homewood (o)-ncdenr.gov

DocuSign Envelope ID: 49B28E55-1017-4E4B-9246-DA7BE700DC26
ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretary
RICHARD E. ROGERS, JR.
Director
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
June 26, 2023
Corps Action ID# SAW-2023-00898
DWR# 20230671
Catawba County
Krysta Stygar
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
Delivered via email to: [e-mail]
Subject Project: Lyle Creek Data Center
Dear Ms. Stygar:
On behalf of the NC Division of Water Resources, we respectfully request that you consider the
following comments within your review of the 404 Individual Permit request for the above referenced
project:
1. The applicant has provided site selection criteria that appear to be tied to cost and statutory
incentives. The Division requests that the USACE evaluate whether the siting criteria of cost and
economic development incentives is appropriate to be included as LEDPA site alternative
criteria.
The applicant states that 2-story buildings are not feasible due to the proposed construction
schedule. The Division requests that the USACE evaluate whether the applicants preferred
construction schedule is appropriate to be included as LEDPA on -site alternative criteria.
The Division is unable to complete a review of the project for compliance with 15A NCAC 02H
.0506 at this time. The Division has requested additional technical information from the
applicant. The Division requests that the USACE also consider the items requested in the
attached letter during the review of the application.
Thank you for your considering the Division's comments during your review of this Individual Permit. If
you have any questions, please contact Sue Homewood at 336-813-1863 or [e-mail].
Sincerely,
ESDocuSigned by:
ft p�t, 1 ass
980C5097D80E4E9_.
Stephanie Goss, Supervisor
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
D � � North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1 1611 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
NOR 7Fi CAR,.lNA
a..—t mEnmmme U1 919.707.9000

DocuSign Envelope ID: 49B28E55-1017-4E4B-9246-DA7BE700DC26
Lyle Creek Data Center
Corps Action ID# SAW-2023-00898
Electronic cc:
Amber Forestier, Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Olivia Munzer, NCWRC
DWR MRO
DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch file
DWR# 20230712
Page 2of2
Filename: 20230712_Lyle Creek Data Center_Catawba_PN Comments to USACE.docx
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
D E Q� 512 North Salisbury Street 1 1611 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
NORTH CARCLINA \\ 919.707.9000
D,Pwh mda€ fflnwe Ouai�

DocuSign Envelope ID: 49B28E55-1017-4E4B-9246-DA7BE700DC26
ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretary
RICHARD E. ROGERS, JR.
Director
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
June 26, 2023
DWR# 20230712
Catawba County
Microsoft Corporation
Attn: Mr. Chris Sander
One Microsoft Way
Redmond WA 98052
Delivered via email to: [e-mail] / [e-mail]
Subject: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Lyle Creek Data Center
Corps Action ID# SAW- SAW-2023-00898
Dear Mr. Sander:
On May 22, 2023, the Division of Water Resources (Division) received your application requesting a 401
Individual Water Quality Certification from the Division for the subject project. The Division has
determined that your application is incomplete and cannot be processed. The application is on -hold
until all of the following information is received:
If the USACE requests a response to any comments received as a result of the Public Notice,
please provide the Division with a copy of your response to the USACE to ensure we have all
relevant information to complete our review in accordance with 15A NCAC 02H .0506(b).
2. The Division appreciates the applicant's efforts to provide evaluations of multiple on -site
alternatives to document avoidance and minimization of impacts. In order to complete the
Division's avoidance and minimization evaluation, please indicate the proposed width of the
roads at the stream crossing locations (i.e. how many lanes, how wide per lane, etc). In
addition, please specify the proposed road side slopes and provide a discussion regarding the
feasibility of reducing slopes and/or using retaining walls to further minimize stream impacts
at both crossing locations.
3. Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02H.0506(b) "a 401 Water Quality Certification may only be issued
upon determining that the proposed activity will comply with state water quality standards
which includes designated uses, numeric criteria, narrative criteria and the state's
antidegradation policy, as defined in rules of 15A NCAC 02B .0200... In assessing whether the
proposed activity will comply with water quality standards, the Division shall evaluate if the
proposed activity: (2) would cause or contribute to a violation of water quality standards; (3)
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1 1611 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
NORTH CAROLINA
Ogwhnnnl of Emlmnnnental Oaali� 919.707.9000

DocuSign Envelope ID: 49B28E55-1017-4E4B-9246-DA7BE700DC26
Lyle Creek Data Center
DWR# 20230712
Request for Additional Information
Page 2 of 3
would result in secondary or cumulative impacts that cause or contribute to, or will cause or
contribute to, a violation of water quality standards;" Based on the current proposed plan
the Division believes indirect impacts to the remaining portion Stream SA between Impacts
SA1 and SA4 will be significantly isolated and short and will therefore unable to maintain
existing uses at the current function. Therefore it is necessary to include these indirect
impacts to Stream SA within the impact table and provide mitigation for this section.
4. Please provide a clear detail of what the proposed impacts are for SF1. The application states
that the impact is for riprap as a result of the BMP spillway, however it is unclear if this riprap
is proposed only on the stream bank or within the channel. The profile view provided does
not denote where the riprap is proposed to be located in relation to the stream bottom or
stream bank. If riprap is proposed within the stream bed, please explain why that is required
and why velocity/erosion potential can not be controlled before discharge into the stream
bed.
Pursuant to Title 15A NCAC 02H .0502(e), the applicant shall furnish all of the above requested
information for the proper consideration of the application. Please respond in writing within 30
calendar days of receipt of this letter by sending one (1) copy of all of the above requested information
to the 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 OR by
submitting all of the above requested information through this
link: https://edocs.deg.nc.gov/Forms/Supplemental-Information-Form (note the DWR# requested on
the link is referenced above).
If all of the requested information is not received within 30 calendar days of receipt of this letter, the
Division will be unable to approve the application and it will be denied as incomplete. The denial of this
project will necessitate reapplication to the Division for approval, including a complete application
package and the appropriate fee.
Please be aware that you have no authorization under the Section 401 of the Clean Water Act for this
activity and any work done within waters of the state may be a violation of North Carolina General
Statutes and Administrative Code.
Please contact Sue Homewood at 336-813-1863 or [e-mail] if you have any
questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
EeDocuSigned by:
ft ply, tk7 G 1 ass
980C5097D80E4E9_.
Stephanie Goss, Supervisor
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
D � � North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1 1611 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
NORTH CAROLINA
n�-M&�—� QUaZ �/ 919.707.9000

DocuSign Envelope ID: 49B28E55-1017-4E4B-9246-DA7BE700DC26
Lyle Creek Data Center
DWR# 20230712
Electronic cc:
Request for Additional Information
Page 3 of 3
Amber Forestier, Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Krysta Stygar, USACE Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
Olivia Munzer, WRC
DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch file
Filename: 20230712 Lyle Creek Data Center - Catawba - addinfo.docx
REQ
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
r/ 512 North Salisbury Street 11611 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
NORTH CAROiJNA 919.707.9000
oppmym of EmironmanW 9uallly

Date of
Comment
Letter
Commenter
Comment
Recommendation
June 2,
EPA
The EPA Region 4 Ocean, Wetlands and Streams Protection Branch has
None
2023
reviewed the subject Individual Permit Public Notice under DA Action ID
SAW-2023-00898 dated June 1, 2023. It is our understanding that the
applicant Microsoft Corporation, is seeking Department of the Army
authorization to permanently impact 889 Linear Feet (LF) of stream channel
and 0.08 acres of wetland, permanently convert 0.19 acre of wetland, and
temporarily impacts 285 LF of stream channel in conjunction with the
construction of the Lyle Creek Data Center- CLT 04 (Site), in Conover,
Catawba County, North Carolina.
According to the Public Notice, Applicants stated purpose, and the project
description, the applicants stated purpose of the proposed project is to
provide additional cloud storage capacity in support of Microsoft's North
Carolina Regional Network Gateway (RNG). The overall purpose of the
project is to construct a data center that would provide additional cloud
storage capacity for Microsoft's North Carolina RNG.
The applicant is proposing to construct five (5) single -story data center
buildings along with associated infrastructure and amenities. The proposed
project would provide 488-MW of data storage and would include five (5)
48-MW data center buildings with parking, access roads, a pad site for one
(1) Duke Energy substation, security entrances and features, installation
and/or relocation of utilities, and stormwater management treatment
facilities. Implementation of the proposed project would permanently
impact 889 LF stream channel and 0.08 acres of wetland, permanently
convert 0.19 acre of wetland and temporarily impact 285 LF of stream
channels.
As detailed in the plans and alternatives analysis, the selected alternative has
avoided and minimized impacts to waters of the U.S. to the maximum extent

practicable by orienting the buildings to have the least impact on aquatic
resources. The project area contains 2.55 acres of wetlands and 10,838 LF of
stream. The proposed development would avoid 9,664 LF of stream channel
and 2.25 acres of wetlands. Overall, the proposed design avoids and
preserves greater than 88 percent of streams and wetlands on -site.
The applicant has chosen to purchase 0.35 acre wetland mitigation units and
1485 stream mitigation units from a combination of private mitigation banks
and from the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) In -Lieu
Fee program to offset the unavoidable loss of 889 LF of stream and 0.08 acre
of wetland, and the permanent conversion of 0.19 acre of wetland.
At this time, EPA Region 4 has no site -specific comments or concerns
associated with the CWA regulation for the project as presented in the Public
Notice.
June 26,
Cherokee
The Cherokee Nation (Nation) is in receipt of your correspondence about
Special Condition to
2023
Nation
SAW-2023-00898, and appreciates the opportunity to provide comment
the SP that indicates if
upon this project.
any items of
significance are
The Nation maintains databases and records of cultural, historic, and pre-
discovered that
historic resources in this area. Our Historic Preservation Office (Office)
notification to the
reviewed this project, cross referenced the project's legal description against
USACE occurs, and
our information, and found no instances where this project intersects or
Work halted until
adjoins such resources. Thus, the Nation does not forsee this project
investigations and
imparting impacts to Cherokee cultural resources at this time.
notifications are
complete
However, the Nation requests that the United States Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) halt all project activities immediately and re -contact our
Office for further consultation if items of cultural significance are discovered
during the course of this project. Additionally, the Nation requests that
USACE conduct appropriate inquiries with other pertinent Historic

Preservation Offices regarding historic and prehistoric resources not
included in the Nation's databases or records.
June 26,
North Carolina
On May 22, 2023 the Division of Water Resources (division) received your
Provide all information
2023
Division of
application requesting a 401 Individual Water Quality Certification from the
as requested, and copy
Water
Division for the subject project. The Division has determined that your
the CORPS on
Resources
application is incomplete and cannot be processed. The application is on-
correspondence.
hold until all of the following information is received.
1. If the USACE requests a response to any comments received as a
result of the Public Notice, please provide the Division with a copy of
your response to the USACE to ensure we have all relevant
information to complete our review in accordance with 15A NCAC
02H.0506 (b).
2. The Division appreciates the applicants' efforts to provide
evaluations of multiple on -site alternatives to document avoidance
and minimization of impacts. In order to complete the Division's
avoidance and minimization evaluation, please indicate the proposed
width of the roads at the stream crossing locations (i.e. how many
lanes, how wide per lane, etc). In addition, please specify the
proposed road side slopes and provide a discussion regarding the
feasibility of reducing slopes and/or using retaining walls to further
minimize stream impacts at both locations.
3. Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02H. 0506 (b) " a 401 Water Quality
Certification may only be issued upon determining that the proposed
activity will comply with state water quality standards which includes
designated uses, numeric criteria, narrative criteria and the states
antidegradation policy as defined in rules of 15A NCAC 02B.0200.. In
assessing whether the proposed activity will comply with water
quality standards, the Division shall evaluate if the proposed activity:
(2) would cause or contribute to a violation of water quality

standards: (3) would result in secondary or cumulative impacts that
cause or contribute to, or will cause or contribute to, a violation of
water quality standards, " Based on the current proposed plan the
Division believes indirect impacts to the remaining portion of Stream
SA between impacts SA1 and SA4 will be significantly isolated and
short and will therefore unable to maintain existing uses at the
current function. There it is necessary to include these indirect
impacts to Stream SA within the impact table and provide mitigation
for this section.
4. Please provide a clear detail of what the proposed impacts are for
SF1. The application states that the impact is for riprap as a result of
the BMP spillway, however it is unclear if this riprap is only proposed
only on the stream bank or within the channel. The profile view
provided does not denote where the riprap is proposed to be located
in relation to the stream bottom or stream bank. If riprap is proposed
within the stream bed, please explain why that is required and why
velocity/erosion potential can not be controlled before discharge
into the stream bed.
Pursuant to Title 15A NCACA02H.0502€, the applicant shall furnish all of
the above requested information for the proper consideration of the
application. Please respond in writing within 30 calendar days of receipt
of this letter by sending one(1)copy of all the above requested
information to the 401 & buffer Permitting Branch, 1617 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, NC 276991617 or by submitting all the above requested
information through the link.
If all of the requested information is not received within 30 calendar days
of receipt of this letter, the Division will be unable to approve the
application and it will be denied as incomplete. The denial of this project
will necessitate reapplication to the Division for approval, including a
complete application packing and the appropriate fee.

June 27,
2023
United States
Fish and
Wildlife
Service
I saw the attached PN. Pass along an Official Species List from IPAC
referenced in the PN and the Applicants Biological Evaluation to complete
consultation. The applicant can find guidance for preparing a BE/BA here:
https://www.fws.gov/office/asheville-ecological-services/asheville-field-
office -online -review -process -overview.
Provide BE/BA to Corps
personnel
Finish consultation
about the Tri-Colored
Bat, and submit survey
results
June 27,
North Carolina
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC)
Consider some of the
2023
Wildlife
have reviewed the subject document. Comments are provided in accordance
recommendations,
Resource
with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (as amended) and Fish and
Erosion Control, Tree
Commission
Wildlife Coordination Act Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as
Cutting moratoriums,
amended; 16. U.S.C. 661 et seq.)
and native seed
mixtures for
On behalf of Microsoft Corporation (applicant) Stantec Consulting Services,
stabilization
Inc has submitted an Individual Permit Application (IP) for the Lyle Creek
Data Center located on 220.19 acres northwest of NC Highway 16, east of
County Home Road, and southwest of C & B Farm Road in Conover, Catawba
County, North Carolina. The proposed project will permanently impact 889
LF of stream channel and 0.08 acres of wetland; covert 0.19 acres of wetland
and temporarily impact 285 LF of stream channel. Lyle Creek and its
unnamed tributaries in the Catawba River Basin flow through the site.
We have no known records of state or federal rare, threatened or
endangered species at or adjacent to the site. However, the lack of records
from the stie does not imply or confirm the absence of federal or state -listed
species. An on -site survey is the only means to determine if the proposed
project may impacts federal or state rate, threatened or endangered species.
We offer the following recommendations for the applicant to minimize
impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources:
1. WE recommend the applicant further reduce impacts to streams and
wetlands. We recommend considering using an underground

stormwater detention system to allow more space for design layout
changes to reduce impacts to Stream SA and SB or use tow -story
buildings.
2. A) The culvert must be designed to allow for aquatic life and fish
passage. Generally, the culvert or pipe invert should be buried at least 1
foot below the natural streambed (measured from the natural thalweg
depth), except if slopes of culverts are greater than 2% due to concerns
of head cutting. If multiple barrels are required, barrels other than the
base flow barrel (s) should be placed on or near stream bankfull or
floodplain bench elevation (similar to Lyonsfield design). These should
be reconnected to floodplain benched as appropriate. This may be
accomplished by utilizing sills on the upstream and downstream ends to
restrict or divert flow to the base flow barrel(s). Silled barrels should be
filled with sediment so as not to entrap wildlife or support mosquito
breeding conditions. Sufficient water depth should be provided in the
base flow barrel(s) during low flows to accommodate fish movement. If
culverts are longer than 40-50 linear feet, alternating or notched baffles
should be installed in a manner that mimics existing stream pattern. This
should enhance aquatic life passage: 1) by depositing sediments in the
barrel 2) by maintaining channel depth and flow regimes 3) by providing
resting places for fish and other aquatic organisms. In essence, base flow
barrel(s) should provide a continuum of water depth and channel
without substantial modifications of velocity.
B) If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be
designed to remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
C) Culverts or pipes should be situated along the existing channel alignment
whenever possible to avoid channel realignment. Widening the stream
channel must be avoided. Stream channel widening at the inlet or outlet
end of structures typically decrease water velocity causing sediment
deposition that requires increased maintenance and disrupts aquatic life
passage.
D) Rip rap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in
the streambed in a manner that precludes aquatic life passage.

Bioengineering boulders or structures should be professionally designed,
sized and installed.
3. Furthermore, non-native plants should be used for seeding disturbed
areas. Specifically, avoid using bermudagrass, redtop, tall fescue, and
lespedeza, which are invasive and/or non-native. A list of alternatives to
non-native species has been attached. Alternatively, use a grain, such as
oats, wheat, or rye for temporary ground cover and native seed
mixtures for permanent seeding. We recommend planting native,
wildflower seed mixes that will create pollinator habitat within the
project boundary. Avoid using invasive, non-native plants in seed
mixtures or landscaping plants.
4. Avoid tree clearing activities during the maternity roosting season for
bats (May 15-August 15) due to the decline of tree roosting bat species,
such as the state endangered and proposed federally listed tricolored
bat. (perimyotis subflavus).
5. Stringent sediment and erosion control measures should be
implemented and installed prior to any land -disturbing activity.
Incorporate the following elements into erosion and sediment control
plans: minimize clearing and grading, protect waterway, phase
construction for larger construction sites (>25 acres), stabilize soils as
rapidly as possible (<2 weeks), protect steep slopes, establish perimeter
controls, employ advanced settling devices, implement a certified
contractors program, and regularly inspect erosion control measures.
Ensure all silt fencing is removed once vegetation has reestablished and
soils have stabilized.
6. Erosion control matting made of plastic mesh or twine should not be
used within the project area because it can injure or kill wildlife.
June 29,
Catawba
The Catawba have no immediate concerns with regard to traditional cultural
Special condition to the
2023
properties, sacred sites or Native American archaeological sites within the
SP that indicates that if
boundaries of the proposed project areas. However, the Catawba are to be
any items of cultural
significance are

notified if Native American artifacts and/or human remains are located
during the ground disturbance phase of this project.
discovered that
notification to USACE
occurs, and work
halted until
investigations and
notifications are
complete
July 6,
North Carolina
Thank you for your letter of June 1, 2023, regarding the above -referenced
Supply additional
2023
Department
undertaking. We have reviewed the submittal and offer the following
information as
of Natural and
comments:
requested, and CC the
Cultural
Corps on any
Resources:
There are five known archaeological sites within the proposed area of
correspondence.
State Historic
disturbance: 31CT255, 31CT254 and 31CT289- 31CT291. Sites 31CT255 and
Preservation
31CT254 are not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places and
Office
no further archaeological work is necessary on these sites. However, according
to our records, site 31CT289- 31CT291 were recorded in January 2023 by
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc for the above referenced project. We have not
received completed site forms, or a Phase I archaeological survey report for
compliance review and comment. Sites 31CT289-31CT291 are considered
unassessed for eligibility in the National Register of Historic Places. We request
the following items for review.
• One (1) digital copy of the archaeological survey report, to be sent
through ShareFile.
• One (1) digital copy of each NC Site Form(s) with site map(s) for each
site that was recorded as part of the archeological investigation, to be
sent through ShareFile. Please submit each site form as a separate
document.
• Hard copies of reports will be requested by the OSA once we determine
that no further changes to the report are needed. Concurrence letters
will not be sent until after we receive the hard copy of the final
archaeological survey report.
We strongly recommend that all future projects be submitted for environmental
review prior to any archaeological investigations. Unless we request

archaeological investigations upon review of a project, we do not require prior
archaeological surveys.
We have determined that the project as proposed will not have an effect on any
historic structures.
COMMENTS RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE START OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE PERIOD

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary D. Reid Wilson
July 6, 2023
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary, Darin J. Waters, Ph.D.
Krystynka Stygar [e-mail]
Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262
Re: Construct Lyle Creek Data Center-CLT 04, Northern Drive, NW, Conover, Catawba County,
ER 23-1341
Dear Ms. Stygar:
Thank you for your letter of June 1, 2023, regarding the above -referenced undertaking. We have reviewed
the submittal and offer the following comments:
There are five known archaeological sites within the proposed area of disturbance: 31 CT255, 31 CT254 and
31 CT289-31 CT291. Sites 31 CT255 and 31 CT254 are not eligible for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places and no further archaeological work is necessary on these sites. However, according to our
records, sites 31 CT289-31 CT291 were recorded in January 2023 by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. for
the above reference project. We have not received completed site forms, or a Phase I archaeological survey
report for compliance review and comment. Sites 31CT289-31CT291 are considered unassessed for
eligibility in the National Register of Historic Places. We request the following items for review:
• One (1) digital copy of the archaeological survey report, to be sent through ShareFile.
One (1) digital copy of each NC Site Form(s) with site map(s) for each site that was recorded as part
of the archaeological investigation, to be sent through ShareFile. Please submit each site form as a
separate document.
Hard copies of reports will be requested by the OSA once we determine that no further changes to
the report are needed. Concurrence letters will not be sent until after we receive the hard copy of the
final archaeological survey report.
We strongly recommend that all future projects be submitted for environmental review prior to any
archaeological investigations. Unless we request archaeological investigations upon review of a project, we
do not require prior archaeological surveys.
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6898

ER 23-1341, July 06, Page 2 of 2
Please note that as of June 30, 2023, OSA will use Citrix ShareFile for archaeological consultants to submit
digital archaeological reports and site files for Environmental Review. Consultants should review our
ShareFile User Guidelines and submit a ShareFile User Access Form to Kim Urban
(kimberly.urbankncdcr.gov) to obtain access to ShareFile if they have not already done so.
More information on our Environmental Review submission requirements can be found at:
https:Harchaeology.ncdcr. goy/pro grams/environmental-review.
We have determined that the project as proposed will not have an effect on any historic structures.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-814-6579
or environmental.review(cncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
[� Ramona Bartos, Deputy
[� State Historic Preservation Officer
cc: Donald Sadler, Stantec
donald. sadlergstantec. com
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6898