20231101 Ver 1_More Info Received_20231215 (2)

December 13, 2023
Delivered via email to: [e-mail]
Ms. Brooke Davis
Regulatory Project Manager
USACE Wilmington District -Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
Re: Response to Second Reauest for Additional Information
Joint 404/401 Individual Permit Application
Duke Energy Unit 5 Inactive Ash Basin Dam Decommissioning Project, Cliffside
Steam Station
Cleveland and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina
USACE Action ID 2015-01426
Ms. Davis:
WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. (WSP) and Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy)
are in receipt of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) request for additional information (RAI)
for the Duke Energy Unit 5 Inactive Ash Basin (U51AB) Dam Decommissioning (DID) project
located at the Cliffside Steam Station in Cleveland and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina. The
USACE RAI, dated October 24, 2023 (letter and via email), is the second USACE RAI for the U51AB
DID project. The first USACE RAI entailed an August 18, 2023, pre -application meeting among
you and staff from WSP, Duke Energy, and the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality (NCDEQ) Division of Water Resources (DWR).
The comments and questions from the current USACE RAI are recounted below, along with the
corresponding Duke Energy/WSP responses. You had indicated in your October 24, 2023,
correspondence that "responses to our and other agency comments (where applicable) are due
by the close of business on November 7, 2023." The November 7 due date was later changed to
December 15 via email correspondence (agreement) between WSP and you.
The October 24, 2023, USACE RAI correspondence also included comments and/or questions
from the following interested federal and state agencies, as well as one private landowner:
• North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC), October 12, 2023,
correspondence,
• North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources (NCDNCR) State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO), October 12, 2023, correspondence,
• US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Region 4, September 25, 2023, email
correspondence, and
• Ms. Donna Turner (adjacent private landowner), October 24, 2023, email correspondence.

Responses to the additional comments and/or questions from these additional agencies are
included herein.
USACE October 24, 2023, RAI Comments
Delineation/Functionality of Aquatic Resources:
Item Number 1
Please provide the updated delineation from the August 30, 2023, field survey, including the
map of the new drainage feature, data point locations, and the supporting data sheets of verified
wetland boundaries.
Item Number 1. Response
The attached Figure 5 (Jurisdictional Features Map, dated 12/11/23) is an updated figure from the
USACE Individual Permit application figure set. This figure shows the extents of the new
drainage feature (stream) located within the northeast portion of Wetland C, at the Broad River.
The delineation of the drainage feature was based on the collection of flag point data (along
meanders) via sub -meter global positioning system (GPS) technology during a follow-up site visit
by WSP on August 30, 2023. The stream identification was based on the NCDEQ-DWR
Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and Their Origins
(Version 4.11). The location of the DWR Stream Identification data point (DP-1) is also shown on
Figure S. The drainage feature was determined to be perennial. The mapped (delineated) length
of the drainage feature was 142 linear feet. The level of function of the new drainage feature
(relative to reference condition) was assessed during the August 30, 2023, site visit using the
North Carolina Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM) per the methodology outlined in the NC
SAM Draft User Manual, effective March 2013. The NC SAM Overall Rating was determined to be
Medium for this feature. The completed DWR Stream Identification Form and NC SAM Form for
the new drainage feature are attached herein. Site photography (August 30 and November 2,
2023) of the drainage feature is also attached.
The USACE jurisdictional limits of Wetland C were also examined by WSP during the August 30,
2023, site visit. It was determined that the prior approved, USACE jurisdictional limits had not
changed for this forested riparian wetland (Notification of JD; USACE Action ID 2015-01426). The
areal size of Wetland C remains at 0.9 acre. During a subsequent November 2, 2023, field
evaluation, the USACE Wetland Determination Data Forms for the wetland side and upland side
data points for Wetland C were completed (attached). Thejurisdictional limits of Wetland C were
based on the Routine On -Site Determination Method as defined in the USACE 1987 Wetland
Delineation Manual and the 2012 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement. The
level of function of Wetland C was also assessed during the November 2, 2023, site visit using the
North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) per the methodology outlined in the NC
WAM User Manual (Version 5), effective February 2016. The NC WAM Overall Rating for Wetland
C was determined to be Low.
The following field data forms and other documents are attached to this RAI letter response:
• Figure 5 - Jurisdictional Features Map (updated to include the new drainage feature
within Wetland C)
Duke Energy U51AB Dam Decommissioning Project, Cliffside Steam Station WSP
Cleveland and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina December 2023
Duke Energy Progress, LLC

• Wetland C- USACE Routine Determination Data Form -Wetland Side
• Wetland C- USACE Routine determination Data Form -Upland Side
• Wetland C- NCWAM Data Sheets
• Drainage Feature- NCDEQ-DWR Stream Identification Form
• Drainage Feature - NC SAM Data Sheets
• Drainage Feature- Photographic Log
Item Number 2
If the newly identified drainage feature is slated for impact, please provide the impact amount
and compensatory mitigation amount proposed.
Item Number 2. Response
Duke/WSP developed five design alternatives for outlet Channel 5 that was presented in the
USACE Individual Permit application. The attached December 13, 2023, Memo (U51AB Dam
Decommissioning Plan Outlet Channel Alternatives Evaluation) from WSP to Duke discusses
how each alternative differs from the original Channel 5 design. Based on this memo, Duke/WSP
identified West-2 (Figure 4 - Alternative Channel Design - West 2) as the new preferred
alternative. Based on the West-2 preferred alternative, the new drainage feature will not be
impacted by the construction of the outlet channel to the Broad River. As such, no
compensatory mitigation for this jurisdictional feature will be required.
Item Number 3
For clarification, the September 12, 2023, document stated the re-evaluation of Wetland C was
"...to be conducted by the WSP Professional Wetland Scientist (PWS)..." For the record, we never
stated this work had to be conducted by a PWS.
Item Number 3 Response
Clarification noted. Pursuant to verbal agreement between WSP and Duke Energy, a WSP
Professional Wetland Scientist is directed to perform wetland determinations on Duke Energy
projects, with respect to Notifications of JD.
Item Number 4
The NCWAM data forms were prepared on April 13, 2023, without an updated delineation. The
photos do not depict a low functional quality wetland. Please update the NCWAM data forms
per the August 2023 delineation findings.
Item Number 4 Response
The functional quality of Wetland C was re -assessed in a follow-up site visit on November 2, 2023,
using the NC WAM methodology. The NC WAM Overall Rating was determined to be Low for
this forested riparian wetland. The completed NCWAM Data Sheets for Wetland C are attached
herein.
Duke Energy U51AB Dam Decommissioning Project, Cliffside Steam Station WSP
Cleveland and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina December 2023
Duke Energy Progress, LLC

Post -Construction Planning/Alternatives/Avoidance and Minimization/Mitigation:
Item Number 5
What is the proposed use for this closed ash basin once the dam has been removed?
Item Number 5 Response
Duke Energy has no specific plans for the post closure use of the area. The area will be regraded
and stabilized with vegetation during closure construction activities and remain post closure as
open space.
Item Number 6
There still appears to have been no attempt to reduce the permanent loss of Wetland C. We
understand the topographic and powerline constraints of this area; however, the channel could
have been designed with a more natural approach and/or shifted to attempt some avoidance
and minimization of impacts. In addition, no other true alternatives have been evaluated to show
any attempt of avoidance and minimization. For example, the September 12, 2023, document
states moving the channel could "potentially" cause a relocation of a powerline. By stating this,
that means there was no effort to evaluate if this would be a practicable alternative to this
project. Therefore, we cannot determine that the proposed action is truly the least
environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA) with only a build and no build
alternative.
Item Number 6 Response
WSP evaluated alternative designs to the proposed outlet channel with the objective of reducing
Wetland C impacts. The attached December 12, 2023, Memo summarizes the alternatives. Based
on this evaluation Duke Energy/WSP identified West-2 as the new preferred alternative that
results in reducing wetlands impacts from the originally proposed 0.9 acre for Wetland C to 0.38
acre for this forested riparian wetland as well as avoiding any impact to the new drainage
feature. Duke Energy/WSP plan to proceed with detailed design of the West 2 preferred
alternative limiting the wetlands impacts to no more than 0.38 acres while confirming the
appropriate permitting pathway with the USACE. The proposed impact to Wetland C is now less
than 0.5 acre which is within a Nationwide Permit (NWP) threshold. We welcome guidance from
the USACE as to which NWP will be utilized for authorization of the proposed action. The
selection of the appropriate NWP will also direct which applicable General Certification will be
issued by the NCDEQ for corresponding Water Quality Certification for the proposed action.
Item Number 7
The September 12, 2023, documentation states that the ash and the dam will be removed to the
pre -ash placement topography within the basin. If this is the natural landform and the CCR will
be removed (i.e. the riprap lined channels are not proposed to prevent contaminant migration),
why would a more natural channel design not be feasible? Soft sediments within the valley floor
would not "require" a riprap lined channel, the stream would simply be allowed to move and
shift throughout the dynamic system. Smaller rock and/or wood structures could be installed to
achieve any goals you have vs. rock -lining the entire channels. This could also lead to a reduction
of impacts to Wetland C by incorporating the channel within/throughout the wetland.
Duke Energy U51AB Dam Decommissioning Project, Cliffside Steam Station WSP
Cleveland and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina December 2023
Duke Energy Progress, LLC

Item Number 7 Response
Duke Energy/WSP considered the feasibility of natural channel design as an alternative for
Channels 5 which is included as Attachment 2 in the December 13, 2023, Memo. The Memo
discusses natural channel design feasibility and presents a conceptual design for the outlet
channel natural channel design principles (see Figure NSD-1, Attachment 2). Duke Energy/WSP
concludes that natural channel design principles are not applicable for Channels 1 to 4, inside of
the U51AB area, due to the large drainage basin, anticipated stormwater runoff flows, steep
longitudinal channel slopes and because the terrain offers little to no space for a floodplain
development. The conceptual design shows that natural channel design is feasible for the outlet
channel (Channel 5). However, in comparison to the other alternatives, the natural channel
design alternative impacts a larger area of Wetland C, impacts the new drainage feature, and is
one of the most costly alternatives. For these reasons, Duke Energy and WSP do not see natural
channel design as an LEPDA.
Item Number 8
The starting ratio for compensatory mitigation is 2:1. Please advise as to how a 1:1 ratio (or
anything lower than 2:1) was evaluated as appropriate.
Item Number 8 Response
A 2:1 ratio will be applied for compensatory mitigation for the proposed impact to Wetland C, a
riparian forested wetland. Note: The 1:1 ratio was based on the results of the functional
assessment of Wetland C during the follow-up site visit on November 2, 2023, and the
determination of a NCWAM Overall Rating of Low for Wetland C.
Item Number 9
The mitigation credits do not appear to have been secured for this project.
Item Number 9 Response
The North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) In -Lieu Fee (ILF) Request Form was
completed for the proposed 0.38-acre impact of Wetland C. The ILF Request Form is attached
herein. The completed form was submitted to Ms. Kelly Williams, NCDMS, on December 13,2023.
WSP will notify the USACE as soon as the authorization of mitigation credits for the proposed
project jurisdictional waters impact is received from the NCDMS.
NCWRC October 12, 2023, RAI - Recommendations and Comments (from Ms. Andrea
Leslie, Mountain Region Coordinator, Habitat Conservation Program)
Item Number 1
This project provides an opportunity to restore Streams 7 and 8. Instead, these streams would
essentially be rock -lined stormwater channels, which would provide little aquatic and riparian
habitat. We strongly recommend that the design be re-evaluated and natural channel design
methods be used to restore these channels. A robust native riparian buffer should be planted
along these channels, as well.
Duke Energy U51AB Dam Decommissioning Project, Cliffside Steam Station WSP
Cleveland and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina December 2023
Duke Energy Progress, LLC

Item Number 1 Response
The permit applicant acknowledges the above comment regarding the re-evaluation of the
design of Streams 7 and 8, via natural channel design methods, as an opportunity for the
restoration of these two streams. Streams 7 and 8 abut the southern finger lobes of the U51AB
area. As proposed under the Main Dam Decommissioning Plan, hydrological connections will
be established between Stream 7 and Channel 4 and between Stream 8 and Channel 3. Based
on USACE comments, WSP considered the feasibility of natural channel design for the U51AB
Channels 1 through S. WSP concluded that natural channel design principles are not applicable
for Channels 1 to 4, however, due to the large drainage area, anticipated stormwater runoff flows,
steep longitudinal channel slopes and because the terrain offers little to no space for floodplain
development. As presented in the attached December 13, 2023, Memo, WSP developed an
alternative Channel 5 design using natural channel design approach. Due to the wetland and
stream impacts and the estimated construction cost, this alternative Channel 5 design was not
selected as the preferred option.
Item Number 2
Gabion baskets are proposed to stabilize the outlet of the 'stormwater channel' at the Broad
River. Gabion baskets are not long-term solutions for streambank stability, as they tend to fall
apart over time. We recommend that a bioengineering method of bank stabilization be used,
such as geolifts.
Item Number 2 Response
The permit applicant acknowledges the above comment regarding the use of a bioengineering
method (rather than the proposed gabion baskets) to stabilize the outlet of the 'stormwater
channel' at the Broad River, i.e., to assure that bank stabilization occurs. For the response to Item
Number 2, please see the attached December 13, 2023, Memo. Considering wetland and stream
impacts and the estimated construction costs, Duke Energy selected West-2 as the preferred
alternative Channel 5 alignment that will connect to the existing U51AB spillway outlet channel
at the Broad River. The existing outlet channel hydraulic capacity will be reevaluated and may
be revised at its confluence with the Broad River. As noted in the attached December 13, 2023,
Memo, Duke Energy/WSP will consider alternatives to riprap gabion baskets.
Item Number 3
Wetland impacts should be minimized as much as possible.
Item Number 3 Response
The permit applicant acknowledges the above comment regarding the minimization of
wetland impacts. For the response to Item Number 3, please see the attached December 13,
2023, Memo prepared by WSP engineering staff. Specifically, in the Channel 5 Alternatives
discussion in the Memo, WSP evaluated five Channel 5 alternatives to reduce the impact to
Wetland C and the new drainage feature.
Based on this evaluation Duke Energy/WSP identified West-2 as the new preferred alternative.
(see Figure 4) as shown in the attached December 13, 2023, Memo. Conceptual design results
indicate that relocating the outlet channel will reduce Wetland C disturbance to approximately
0.38 acre and avoid any impact to the new drainage feature. Duke Energy/WSP plan to proceed
Duke Energy U51AB Dam Decommissioning Project, Cliffside Steam Station WSP
Cleveland and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina December 2023
Duke Energy Progress, LLC

with detailed design of the "West 2" alternative limiting the wetlands impacts to no more than
0.38 acres while confirming the appropriate permitting pathway with the USACE.
Item Number 4
The applicant should consult with the US Fish and Wildlife Service in order to assure that
impacts to bat habitat within the wetland are minimized.
Item Number 4 Response
Wetland C is proposed to be impacted for the construction of the outlet channel to the Broad
River. Post -construction, however, there will be suitable bat habitat present within the riparian
forest along the Broad River, as including dead/dying trees and shaggy bark trees (summer
roosting habitat). The permit applicant will consult with the US Fish and Wildlife Service, as
necessary, to assure that impacts to bat habitat within the project area are minimized.
Item Number 5
Mitigation is proposed at 1:1, with the NCWAM score for the impact wetland deemed Low. We
recommend that the mitigation ratio be 2:1, as this wetland provides valuable habitat adjacent
to the Broad River.
Item Number 5 Response
The permit applicant acknowledges the above comment regarding the recommendation of a
mitigation ratio of 2:1 for the impacted wetland (i.e., Wetland C), as this wetland provides
valuable habitat adjacent to the Broad River. A 2:1 ratio will be applied for compensatory
mitigation for the proposed impact to Wetland C, a riparian forested wetland.
Item Number 6
A native forested riparian buffer of at least 100 ft in width should be maintained or replanted
along the Broad River
Item Number 6 Response
The permit applicant acknowledges the above comment regarding the replanting of, or the
effort to maintain, a native forested riparian buffer of at least 100 ft in width along the Broad
River. Outside the project area boundary (specifically at the northern tip of the project), mature,
forested riparian habitat abuts the Broad River. Shrub/groundcover habitat occurs within the
maintained electrical transmission lines that occurs to the west of the project area boundary at
the Broad River. Within the project area at the Broad River, the proposed construction of the
outlet channel to the river will require the removal of forested uplands and a portion of Wetland
C. Post -construction, the cleared and graded, open areas surrounding the outlet channel will be
revegetated as specified in the October 25, 2023 erosion and sediment control (E&SC) plans
approved under permit CLEVE-2024-017 issued for this area. Outside the construction footprint,
mature, forested riparian habitat will remain post -construction along the Broad River in the
vicinity of the project area.
Duke Energy U51AB Dam Decommissioning Project, Cliffside Steam Station WSP
Cleveland and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina December 2023
Duke Energy Progress, LLC

Item Number 7
Any erosion control matting used should be free of nylon or plastic mesh, as this type of mesh
netting frequently entangles wildlife and is slow to degrade, resulting in a hazard that may last
for years.
Item Number 7 Response
The permit applicant acknowledges the above comment regarding the preferred use of erosion
control matting that is free of nylon or plastic mesh. The October 25, 2023, E&SC Plan has been
approved under permit number CLEVE-2024-017 and defines erosion control matting to be
used. The E&SC Plan species using 100-percent coconut fiber erosion control matting on slopes
that are 3H:1V or steeper. The plans also allow for equivalent hydroseeding if approved by the
engineer. We note that turf reinforcement mats or other erosion control matting that includes
synthetic materials may be used as needed and as alternatives to riprap channel lining. Duke
Energy/WSP will consider the material type, seeking to choose natural fiber products where they
offer similar performance for the application at a comparable cost to products containing
synthetic materials.
Item Number 8
Seeding specifications are not provided. Invasive species such as Tall Fescue, Kentucky Bluegrass,
and Sericea Lezpedeza should be avoided. Permanent seeding should be comprised of native
grasses and forbs.
Item Number 8 Response
The permit applicant acknowledges the above comment regarding seeding specifications,
permanent seeding composition, and avoidance of invasive species. The October 25, 2023, E&SC
plans were approved under permit CLEVE-2024-017 including permanent seed mixes consistent
with the NC Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual that includes tall fescue.
Duke Energy will consider avoiding seeding with invasive species when replanting within
disturbed Wetland C area.
NCDNCR - SHPO October 12, 2023, Correspondence
Ms. Renee Gledhill -Earley, Environmental Review Coordinator (for Ramona Bartos, Deputy,
SHPO) provided the following response in the October 12, 2023, SHPO correspondence to the
USACE:
"We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would
be affected by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed."
"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."
No additional response to the NCDNCR - SHPO October 12, 2023, correspondence is provided
herein from WSP and Duke Energy.
Duke Energy U51AB Dam Decommissioning Project, Cliffside Steam Station WSP
Cleveland and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina December 2023
Duke Energy Progress, LLC

USEPA Reaion 4 September 25.2023. Email Correspondence
Mr. Todd Bowers, Water Division Quality Assurance Coordinator (USEPA Region 4 - Wetlands and
Stream Regulatory Section) provided the following response in the September 25, 2023, USEPA
correspondence to the USACE:
"At this time, EPA Region 4 has no site -specific comments or concerns associated with CWA
Section 404 regulation for the project as presented in the Public Notice."
No additional response to the USEPA September 25, 2023, correspondence is provided herein
from WSP and Duke Energy.
Ms. Donna Turner (adiacent landowner). October 24.2023. Email Correspondence
Ms. Donna Turner provided the following response in an October 24, 2023, email
correspondence to the USACE:
"My 1st and foremost concern is who exactly will be over seeing this project? As duke energy
doesn't have the reputation for self reporting, to which the deq allows... There is no mention of
"Exactly ", what type of material is to be moved, nor to where. 0.9 acres located where? Where
will erosion be located? Effect on broad river? Unavoidable functional loss to aquatic
environment? To what capacity? For what duration? Also, what tributaries in dam area that flow
in or out of broad river... will the site be lined prior to storm water channel? Will ANY CCR be
released into broad river, in any amount?"
Response
Regarding the question "who exactly will be over seeing this project," Duke Energy is
implementing ash basin closures and the supporting activities at the Rogers Energy
Complex/Cliffside Steam Station consistent with the North Carolina 2014 Coal Ash Management
Act (CAMA). The project must also be consistent with other Federal and North Carolina laws and
regulations as permitted and approved by various NCDEQ regulatory programs. Duke Energy is
directly responsible for completing ash basin closure projects and is overseeing that the
construction is completed in accordance with approved plans and permits.
Regarding the question "what type of material is to be moved," the overall project entails closing
the U51AB by removing CCR materials from the ash basin and placing them in an on -site landfill.
The related dam decommissioning requires removing soil from the U51AB Main and Saddle
Dams. Soil excavated during dam decommissioning will either be used within the ash basin for
final grading/restoration, for landfill operations and closure, orwill be stockpiled on -site for other
operational uses.
Regarding the question "to where 0.9 acres located where," the proposed action for the U51AB
Dam Decommissioning project at the Cliffside Steam Station will include the disturbance of
0.38-acre of a 0.9-acre forested wetland (Wetland C) at the Broad River, for the construction of
an outlet channel to the river. The attached Figure 5 (Jurisdictional Features Map) shows the
location of the 0.9-acre Wetland C, at the Broad River.
Duke Energy U51AB Dam Decommissioning Project, Cliffside Steam Station WSP
Cleveland and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina December 2023
Duke Energy Progress, LLC

Regarding the question "where will erosion be located," erosion may be located within the
construction limits of disturbance. Duke Energy has prepared E&SC plans and obtained the
necessary E&SC permits to construct the project consistent with ordinary construction practices.
Regarding the question "effect on broad river, unavoidable functional loss to aquatic
environment, to what capacity, and for what duration," an E&SC Plan has been prepared for the
U51AB DID project. Best Management Practices (BMPs) have been developed and subsequently
used within the construction footprint to control soil erosion and sediment transport offsite. No
fill material will be deposited into the Broad River; as such, no functional loss (including capacity
and duration) to waters of the United States will result.
Regarding the question "what tributaries in dam area that flow in or out of broad river," no
tributaries flow from the Broad River into the U51AB DID project area. The stormwater channel
routing design for the project, however, will include the reconnection of Streams 7 and 8 to the
Broad River. Both streams historically drained to the Broad River prior to the construction of the
U51AB; i.e., from the construction of the U51AB, both streams were historically filled. The
proposed action for the U51AB DD project will include the restoration of the hydrologic
connection for these two streams with the Broad River, via the establishment of stormwater
channels and an outlet channel at the river.
Regarding the question "... will the site be lined prior to storm water channel," the overall U51AB
will not be lined; however, consistent with the approved design and E&SC plans and permit the
site will be stabilized with appropriate BMPs and finally with vegetation. Stormwater channels
have been designed and will be constructed with linings that are suitable for the design
stormwater flows, such as riprap.
Regarding the question, "will ANY CCR be released into broad river, in any amount," CCR within
the U51AB has been removed and documented in accordance with approved excavation
monitoring plans. CCR removal verification will be submitted to and approved by NCDEQ. CCR
removal verification must be completed and accepted before the U51AB Main Dam is removed
and stormwater flows to the Broad River.
Closing
Duke Energy/WSP appreciates your attention to this project. If you have any questions or
comments, or need additional information, please contact James Cutler at [phone] or
james.cutler(,awsp.com and/or Sean Wallace at [phone] or sea n.wal lace(&wsp.com.
Sincerely,
WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc.
James D. Cutler, PWS
Senior Scientist
Duke Energy U51AB Dam Decommissioning Project, Cliffside Steam Station
Cleveland and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina
Duke Energy Progress, LLC
Sean R. Wallace, PMP, PWS
Associate Scientist, Assistant Vice President
WSP
December 2023

Attachments:
Cc: Sue Homewood (NC Division of Water Resources)
Joey Winston (NC Division of Water Resources)
Lori Tollie (Duke Energy)
Michael Clough (Duke Energy)
Shahid Rahu (Duke Energy)
Ken Daly (WSP)
Basak Gulec-Dincer (WSP)
Jan Gay (WSP)
Pam Ferral (WSP)
Duke Energy U51AB Dam Decommissioning Project, Cliffside Steam Station WSP
Cleveland and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina December 2023
Duke Energy Progress, LLC

JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES DOCUMENTS
• Figure 5 —Jurisdictional Features Map (updated to include the
new drainage feature within Wetland C)
• Wetland C — USACE Routine Determination Data Form —
Wetland Side
• Wetland C — USACE Routine determination Data Form —
Upland Side
• Wetland C —NC WAM Data Sheets
• Drainage Feature—NCDEQ-DW R Stream Identification Form
• Drainage Feature —NC SAM Data Sheets
• Drainage Feature —Photographic Log

tnorvllle Greensboro
o
Ra1Mph
Charlotte
Gre_ s If•_
Columbia
• rr? r
e 0 50 100
Miles
Figure 5. Jurisdictional Features
Map
Unit 5 Inactive Ash Basin
Dam Decommissioning Project
Rogers Energy Complex - Cliffside Steam Station
Cleveland and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina
Legend
Main Dam
�Decommissioning LOD
Boundary (13.36 acres)
Unit 5 Inactive Ash Basin
Z= (U5IAB) Closure Phases
1-5 LOD Boundary (75.34
acres)
County Boundary
C� Jurisdictional Wetland
\-/ Jurisdictional Stream
0 Stream Data Point
('DUKE
ENERGY.
NNS I )
Job No.
7818230105
Drawn By:
MJc
Reviewed
By: Jc
Date:
12/11/2023
The map shown here has been
created with all due and
reasonable care and is strictly
for use with WSP Environment
& Infrastructure Inc. (WSP)
project number 7818230105.
WSP assumes no liability, direct
or indirect, whatsoever for any
such third party or unintended
use.
9
e �
if d
Main Dam
f
Saddle Dam
< < - 7 1
7
�500 a ,00_0 , ) 166,
Feet -
.,
Y
- 4— o I
o
Within LOD
Feature Acreage Linear Feet
Wetland C 0.90 -
i New Drainage Feature - 142
• ! within Wetland C
Feature Total
i Wetland A 0.12 -
. i
i Wetland C 0.90 -
i
i Wetland M 0.58 -
•
i Stream 7 - 294
i
r Stream 8 - 256
I Stream 11 - 205
� I
- •� ' Stream 12 - 1200
i
t •,.: �'i New Drainage Feature
i 142
within Wetland C
I
'j Total 1.60 2097
i�z A -

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Cliffside City/County: Cliffside/Rutherford Sampling Date: 2November 2023
Applicant/Owner: Duke Energy State: NC Sampling Point: WC wet
Investigator(s): J. Gay Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.217047 Long:-81.768852 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Udorthents NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No x (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes x No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Previously beaver impacted area, with a small stream channel flowing through a breach in the Broad River levee
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required;
check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al)
_True Aquatic Plants (B14)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_Saturation (A3)
x Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131)
_Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (62)
_Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
x Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No x Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No x Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No x Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WC wet I
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Juglans nigra
40 Yes
FACU
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
20 Yes
FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66.7% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
60 =Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
30 20% of total cover:
12
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
FACW species 50 x 2 = 100
1.
Carpinus caroliniana
5 Yes
FAC
FAC species 10 x 3 = 30
2.
Ligustrum sinense
5 Yes
FACU
FACU species 45 x 4 = 180
3.
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
4.
Column Totals: 105 (A) 310 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.95
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
X 3 - Prevalence Index is 153.0'
10 =Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
5 20% of total cover:
2
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10 )
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Arundinaria gigantea
30 Yes
FACW
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
4•
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
9
m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
30 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
15 20% of total cover:
6
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10 )
1.
Bignonia capreolata
5 Yes
FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
5 =Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
3 20% of total cover:
1
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WC wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-14 10YR 5/3 100 Sandy
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
—Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11;
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soil
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Cliffside City/County: Cliffside/Rutherford Sampling Date: 2November2023
Applicant/Owner: Duke Energy State: NC Sampling Point: WC up
Investigator(s): J. Gay Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Levee Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.217167 Long:-81.768788 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Udorthents NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No x (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes x No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Levee Forest area, adjacent to the Broad River
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
—Surface Water (Al)
_True Aquatic Plants (1314)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
—High Water Table (A2)
—Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
_Saturation (A3)
_Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (B1)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (B2)
_Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
_Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
—Algal Mat or Crust (134)
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
—Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No x Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No x Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No x Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WC up I
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1. Juglans nigra
2. Fraxinus pennsylvanica
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
50% of total cover: 30
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1. Carpinus caroliniana
2. Ligustrum sinense
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
50% of total cover: 5
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10 )
1. Arundinaria gigantea
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover: 15
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10 )
1. Bignonia capreolata
2.
3.
4.
5.
Absolute Uormnant
% Cover Species?
40 Yes
60 =Total Cover
20% of total cover:
idicator
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
FACU
Number of Dominant Species
FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
4 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
6 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
66.7% (A/B)
IN
5 Yes FAC
5 Yes FACU
10 =Total Cover
20% of total cover: 2
30 Yes FACW
30 =Total Cover
20% of total cover: 6
5 Yes FAC
5 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 3 20% of total cover: 1
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
FACW species 50 x 2 = 100
FAC species 10 x 3 = 30
FACU species 45 x 4 = 180
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
Column Totals: 105 (A) 310 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.95
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WC up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type _LoC2 Texture Remarks
0-14 10YR 5/3 100 Sandy
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
—Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11;
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soil
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5
USACE AID#: NCDWR #:
Project Name Cliffside Date of Evaluation 2 November 2023
Applicant/Owner Name Duke Energy Wetland Site Name Wetland C
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization J.Gay/WSP
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Broad River
River Basin Broad USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03050105
County Rutherford NCDWR Region Mooresville
- Yes f4 No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude deci-de rees 35.217047/-81.768852
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? i; - Yes 4 No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? 4 Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
F Anadromous fish
r Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
r Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r Publicly owned property
r N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
r Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
F_ Designated NCNHP reference community
F Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
fi Brownwater
Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) f - Lunar f - Wind i[ - Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? i, - Yes i:i No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes i No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? is-- Yes fi No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS VS
i:i A i A Not severely altered
is - B is - B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <- 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only,
while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
is-- A (' A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
f - B f- B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
fi C i:i C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief -assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. i, - A is-- A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
i,i D 4 D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. 4 A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
i, - B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
i; - C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
4. Soil Texture/Structure - assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a. i, - A Sandy soil
i B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
i C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
C D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
C E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. (+' A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
C B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. (*- A No peat or muck presence

i; B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland - opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
f - A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
i'i B i B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use - opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
F A F_ A F A >_ 10% impervious surfaces
F B F B F B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F C F C F C >_ 20% coverage of pasture
7 D F D r D >_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
7 E F E F E >_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
Fv- F F F F F >_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
7 G Fv- G F G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent dainage and/or overbank flow from affectio the
assessment area.
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer - assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
i;i Yes f- No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
C- A >- 50 feet
fi B From 30 to < 50 feet
C C From 15 to < 30 feet
{ D From 5 to < 15 feet
{ E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
{+' <- 15-feet wide r- > 15-feet wide f- Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
(+` Yes - No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
4 Sheltered - adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
i; - Exposed - adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area - wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes
and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp
Forest only)
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the
assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
(' A (' A >_ 100 feet
(i B Cf B From 80 to < 100 feet
(' C (' C From 50 to < 80 feet
(' D {' D From 40 to < 50 feet
{' E {' E From 30 to < 40 feet
{' F {' F From 15 to < 30 feet
(' G C G From 5 to < 15 feet
f- H C H < 5 feet
9. Inundation Duration - assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
i' - A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
is_- B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
i'i C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition - assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
i'i A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
is - B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
i' - C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size - wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
f A A i" A >: 500 acres
C B B i" B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C c ` C ` C From 50 to < 100 acres
C D C' D ` D From 25 to < 50 acres
C E C' E ` E From 10 to < 25 acres
C F (' F i' F From 5 to < 10 acres
C' G G i' G From 1 to < 5 acres
(6- H ti H C' H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
f ' J f " J i J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
1 - K C_ K C' K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness - wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
I.-- A Pocosin is the full extent (>- 90%) of its natural landscape size.

f - B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas - landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
7 A C A >_ 500 acres
7 B C: B From 100 to < 500 acres
ii C f C From 50 to < 100 acres
C' D C' D From 10 to < 50 acres
- E C' E < 10 acres
F C' F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
131b. Evaluate for marshes only.
11 - Yes %` No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect - wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas >- 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directiions? If the assessment area is clear-cut,
select option "C."
i-A 0
fi B 1 to 4
C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition - assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
i.': A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
i.' - B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity - assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
I.-- A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
is B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).
17. Vegetative Structure - assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
:: Yes i:` No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
%i A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
oC� A (- A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
(` B (+' B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U f- C ( C Canopy sparse or absent
S ( A f A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
a
B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
g C C f C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
(A C A Dense shrub layer
t ( B f B Moderate density shrub layer
U) (6- C f+ C Shrub layer sparse or absent
Ci A Co A Dense herb layer
" B f B Moderate density herb layer
C C C Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags - wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
I.-- A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12-inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
%i B Not A
19. Diameter Class Distribution - wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBH.
Ei C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris - wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
I.-- A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
fi B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion - wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
C` A B C` C D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity - assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,

diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
f A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
f B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
t C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes
Wetland Assessment area was previously a ponded area with evidence of beaver impact. Recently, a breach in the levee allowed for a direct hydrologic connection
to the Broad River, greatly reducing the ability of the wetland to be inundated.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland C
Date
2 November 2023
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
J.Gay/WSP
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions
(Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
LOW
Water Quality Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

New Drainage Feature within Wetland C
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 30 August 2023
Project/Site: Cliffside
Latitude: 35.21726
Evaluator: J. Gay
County: Rutherford
Longitude:-81.76847
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent
30
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30
r
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 15.5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
✓ 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
✓ 2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
✓ 2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
✓ 1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
✓ 2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
✓ 1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
✓ 1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
✓ 3
9. Grade control
✓ 0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
✓ 0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
✓ No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 8.5 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
✓ 2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
✓ 1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
✓ 1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
✓ 0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
✓ 1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
✓ Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
✓
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
✓
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
✓
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
✓
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
✓
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
✓
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
✓
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
✓
0
0.5
1
1
1 1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: channel has formed in Wetland C due to a levee breach
Sketch:

FIELD ASSESSMENT
user manual version z.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any supplementary
measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
I NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT / SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Cliffside IP 2. Date of evaluation: 30 August 2023
3. Applicantlowner name: Duke Energy 4. Assessor name/organization: J.Gay/WSP
5. County: Rutherford 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Broad on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Broad River
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.21726/-81.76847
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream in Wetland C 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 50
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 3 7 Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 3 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? f Yes (- No
14. Feature type: Ci Perennial flow f Intermittent flow f Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: t" Mountains (M) fi Piedmont (P) f Inner Coastal Plain (1) {' Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic i l
valley shape (skip for f' a ~� (: b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip (-Size 1 (< 0.1 miz) a Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miZ) (' Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 miZ) (' Size 4 (z 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? f Yes (: No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
F Section 10 water F Classified Trout Waters F Water Supply Watershed ( C I C 11 f III Ci IV C V)
F Essential Fish Habitat F Primary Nursery Area F High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
F Publicly owned property F NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect F Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish F 303(d) List F CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
F Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
F Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ( Yes (_0 No
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
(i A Water throughout assessment reach.
( B No flow, water in pools only.
f C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
(: A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
f' B Not A
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
( A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
(: B Not A.
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
(: A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
f B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
C A < 10% of channel unstable
(: B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
( C > 25% of channel unstable
6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
( A C A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
(: B (i B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
f' C f C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric

Check all that apply.
F A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
FT B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
F C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
F E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
F G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
F I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
F J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather - watershed metric
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
t A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
f B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
OR C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
C Yes (W No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types -assessment reach metric
10a. C Yes fi No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
F A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses m . F F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) F m r- G Submerged aquatic vegetation
I� B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o -2m c 7 H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation N c 7 1 Sand bottom
F C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) s `m 7 J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
F D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots v 2 7 K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
F E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. (7 Yes (R. No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
FA Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
F B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
F C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffles sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain Streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) _
absent, Rare (R) = present but <- 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
Gravel (2 - 64 mm)
Sand (.062 - 2 mm)
Silticlay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ("Yes (a No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. CYes (: No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. r' No Water (3 Other:
12b. CYes C No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for size 3 and 4 streams.
7 F Adult frogs
Aquatic reptiles
Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
Beetles (including water pennies)
Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
Asian clam (Corbicula )
Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r- F Dipterans (true flies)
r- F Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
r- F Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
F F Midges/mosquito larvae
Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )

7 7 Other fish
7 F Salamanders/tadpoles
F F Snails
r— r— Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
F F Tipulid larvae
F F Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and
upland runoff.
LB RB
f: A {i A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
f B {' B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
f C {' C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: ditches, fill,
soil, compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
C A C A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 2: 6 inches deep
f: B to— B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
f C C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the
normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
to— Y to— Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
C N f'N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
F A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
F B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
F C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
I� D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
I� E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
F B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
F— C Urban stream (z 24 % impervious surface for watershed)
F D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
F E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
f A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
f: B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
f C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
fi A {i A C A to— A 2: 100-feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
f B f' B f' B f B From 50 to < 100-feet wide
f C f' C f` C f' C From 30 to < 50-feet wide
f D f' D f D (' D From 10 to < 30-feet wide
f E C` E fi E {' E < 10-feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
f A f: A Mature forest
f B f B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
f: C f C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
f D f D Maintained shrubs
f E f E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: I�
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
t o t" A t o t" A t o t" A Row crops
C' B t B C' B t B C' B t B Maintained turf
t" C t C t" C f C t" C t C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
C' D t D f' D f D f' D t D Pasture (active livestock use)

22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
C: A C: A Medium to high stem density
f B f B Low stem density
f C f C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10-feet wide.
LB RB
to— A C: A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
t" B f B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
t" C f C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition —First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
C A C A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
ti B to— B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C C C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. C Yes C: No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. f No Water C Other:
251b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
(` A <46 {` B 46 to < 67 {` C 67 to < 79 (` D 79 to < 230 {` E >> 230
Notes/Sketch:
channel begins within a wetland area. Channel has formed due to a levee breach

Cliffside U51AB Dam Decommissioning Project December 8, 20 23
Project No.7818230105 Rutherford and Cleveland Counties, NC
Client: Duke Energy
Site:
Cliffside Steam
Station -
Unit 5 In active Ash
Basin Dam
Decom m issioning
Project
Project # :
781823010 5
Description:
Drainage feature at
northern end of
Wetland C(newly
developed drainage
channel).
Photograph taken on
August 30,2023.
Photo:2
Prepared By: JDC
Checked By: PM ,
Page 1 of 2

Photographic Log
Cliffside U51AB Da m Decommissioning Project December 8, 20 23
Project No.7818230105 Rutherford and Cleveland Counties, NC
Prepared By JDC
Checked By: PF
Client: Duke Energy
Site:
Cliffside Steam
Station -
Unit 5 In active Ash
Basin Dam
Decom m issioning
Project
Project # :
7818230105
Description:
Drainage feature at
northern end of
Wetland C(newly
developed drainage
channel).
Photograph taken on
November 2, 2023.
Photo:4
Page 2of2

MEMO
TO: Michael Clough, PE
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy)
FROM: Ken Daly, PE, Basak Gulec Dincer, PE
WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc. (WSP)
SUBJECT: U51AB Dam Decommissioning Plan Outlet Channel Alternatives
Evaluation
Rogers Energy Complex - Cliffside Steam Station
DATE: December 13, 2023
INTRODUCTION
WSP prepared this memorandum to present alternative designs to the Unit 5
Inactive Ash Basin (U51AB) outlet channel (Channel 5). These alternatives were
developed with the objective of reducing wetlands impacts to Wetland C
Channel 5 as proposed in the U51AB Dam Decommissioning Plan (DDP), Rev 1,
dated October 12, 2023. WSP, prepared DDP Permit drawing CLS_C999.011.013
showing U51AB Channel 5 from the October 12, 2023, which is attached to this
memorandum.
A summary of alternative channel design options are discussed below. A
supporting figure and two attachments are also included with this
memorandum.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
As part of U51AB DDP final conditions stormwater design, a trapezoidal outlet
channel (Channel 5) is proposed to convey stormwater from the U51AB drainage
area through the Main Dam footprint and Wetland C to the Broad River.
Currently, Channel 5 proposes to impact 0.90 acre of Wetland C and 142 linear
feet of the New Drainage Feature which was identified in the follow up August
30, 2023 survey. A riprap gabion outlet channel is proposed from the end of
Channel 5 to transition the elevation change and convey stormwater down to
the riverbank. As shown in Figure 1 (Attachment 1), the proposed Channel 5
construction impacts Wetland C.
On behalf of Duke Energy, WSP submitted a Joint Individual Permit (IP) to the
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) regarding Wetland C impact on August 7,
2023. Following USACE's request for additional information, Duke/WSP
responded with a September 12, 2023, letter. USACE commented on
wsp. com

NX % I ) U51AB DDP Outlet Channel Evaluation
Rogers Energy Complex - Cliffside Steam Station
December 13, 2023
Duke/WSP's submittals in an October 24, 2023, letter with the following channel
design related comments/questions/requests:
(i) From comment 6: request to consider natural channel design and/or
evaluate alternatives to avoid or minimize wetlands impacts;
(ii) From comment 7: request to reevaluate riprap-lined channel design
considering natural channel design methods; and
(iii) From the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission October 12,
2024, letter second bullet comment: recommendation to use "bio-
engineering" method alternatives to the riprap gabion outlet
channel.
WSP prepared this memorandum summarizing the evaluation of the alternative
design options in response to USACE comments/questions/requests.
CHANNEL 5 ALTERNATIVES
Duke/WSP evaluated four Channel 5 alternatives to reduce the impact to
Wetland C and the New Drainage Feature. For comparison purpose each
alternative is riprap lined consistent with the proposed Channel 5 design and
has a similar hydraulic capacity. The proposed alternatives are presented in
Figures 2 through 5 (Attachment 1) and summarized as follows.
• Alternative Channel 5 (Figure 2): proposes the same Channel 5
alignment; however, increases the channel depth (from 2 to 3-ft), thereby
decreasing the channel bottom width (from 30 to 12-ft) and the top
width (from 42 to 30-ft) resulting in reducing the channel footprint and
disturbed area. Proposed impact to Wetland C will be reduced from 0.90
acre to approximately 0.64 acre and impact to the New Drainage
Feature is not reduced and remains at 142 linear feet.
• West-1 (Figure 3): Moving the channel west of the Channel 5 alignment
and connecting to the existing Main Dam primary/auxiliary spillway
outlet channel to the river resulting in reducing the disturbed area.
Proposed impact to Wetland C will be reduced from 0.90 acre to
approximately 0.47 acre and impact to the New Drainage Feature will be
avoided.
• West-2 (Figure 4): Moving the channel even further west (than West-1)
and connecting to the existing Main Dam primary/auxiliary spillway
outlet channel to the river resulting in reducing the disturbed area.
Proposed impact to Wetland C will be reduced from 0.90 acre to
approximately 0.38 acre and impact to the New Drainage Feature will be
avoided.
• East (Figure 5): Move the channel to the east of the Channel 5 alignment
along the east side of the wetlands resulting in reducing the disturbed
Page 2

NX % I ) U51AB DDP Outlet Channel Evaluation
Rogers Energy Complex - Cliffside Steam Station
December 13, 2023
area. Proposed impact to Wetland C will be reduced from 0.90 acre to
approximately 0.59 acre and the impact to the New Drainage Feature is
not reduced and will remain at 142 linear feet.
• Natural Channel Design (Attachment 2): Moving the channel slightly
west of the Channel 5 alignment resulting in reducing the disturbed
area. Proposed impact to Wetland C will be reduced from 0.90 acre to
approximately 0.78 acre and impact to the New Drainage Feature will be
reduced from 142 linear feet to approximately 20 linear feet.
The proposed channel alternatives, conceptual grading, channel dimensions,
estimated wetlands and new drainage feature disturbance areas, and earthwork
quantities are illustrated in Figures 1 through 5. We note that the grading
proposed in Figures 1 through 5 is approximate and prepared for purposes of
this evaluation. Grading design will need to be further refined, to connect to the
upstream U51AB channels and the downstream connection to the Broad River.
WSP does not expect that grading revisions will affect this evaluation outcome.
The channel dimensions, capacities, estimated wetlands and new drainage
feature disturbance areas, earthwork cut/fill quantities, and pros/cons of each
alternative are summarized in Table 1. Preliminary construction cost estimates
prepared for comparison purposes are reported in Table 2.
Duke/WSP evaluated numerous Channel 5 alternatives utilizing relevant
engineering design, topography constraints, construction costs, and adjacent
infrastructure constraints. Duke/WSP concludes that wetland avoidance is not
practicable, but wetland minimization is a feasible option. We note that the
Main Dam footprint abuts Wetland C/New Drainage Feature and limited
grading resulting in wetland disturbance is required to completely remove the
dam. In addition, we note that original terrain (before the dam and U51AB
construction) sloped towards and conveyed stormwater flow to the Wetland C
area. None of the alternatives presented in Attachment 1 avoid Wetland C
completely, however they minimize the disturbed area. In addition, some of the
alternatives can avoid disturbance to the New Drainage Feature. Evaluation
results indicate that moving Channel 5 to the west (alternatives West 1 and West
2) result in the least area of wetlands disturbance.
NATURAL CHANNEL DESIGN (NCD)
Based on USACE comments, WSP considered the feasibility of natural channel
design (NCD) for the U51AB Channels 1 through 5. WSP concluded that NCD
principles are not applicable for Channels 1 to 4 due to the steep longitudinal
channel slopes and because the terrain offers little to no space for floodplain
development. WSP concluded that NCD is viable for Channel 5 considering the
relatively flat channel slope with access to floodplain.
WSP prepared a Channel 5 preliminary design to evaluate the viability of NCD
principles and understand potential wetlands impacts. The Channel 5
Page 3

NX % I ) U51AB DDP Outlet Channel Evaluation
Rogers Energy Complex - Cliffside Steam Station
December 13, 2023
preliminary design is presented in Attachment 2 and the channel design
summary is included in Table 1 for comparison with the riprap-lined alternatives.
As part of this design, the Channel 5 gabion basket outlet is also replaced with a
step/pool sequence. Results indicate that approximately 0.78 acre of the
Wetland C area and 20 linear feet of the New Drainage Feature will require
earthworks and grading activities to achieve the preliminary design grades.
RIPRAP GABION BASKET ALTERNATIVE
For the alternative channel design options presented in Attachment 1, channel
outlet design to transition the elevation and convey stormwater from the end of
Channel 5 down to the riverbank has not been quantitatively developed. Riprap
gabion baskets as proposed in the original Channel 5 design (Figure 1) can be
used. However, WSP concludes that qualitatively, NCD methods can be applied
as an alternative to riprap gabion baskets.
Based on the Channel 5 NSD preliminary design, WSP concludes that a
step/pool sequence is a feasible alternative to the riprap gabion basket channel
currently proposed. Steps would consist of cross -vane structures (grade control
structure which reduces bank erosion) constructed of boulders with pools
between the cross -vane structures armoured with cobbles and angular rock. To
dissipate energy, this step/pool sequence meanders along the vertical profile
creating an undulating bed that promotes eddies and turbulence that increases
flow resistance and promotes bed and bank stability. However, utilizing NCD
may increase disturbance in Wetland C because NCD construction/installation
will likely need a larger area of disturbance to install these features compared to
riprap gabion baskets.
CONCLUSION
WSP developed five channel design alternatives (four riprap lined and one
designed using the NCD approach) to the U51AB DDP outlet channel. Evaluation
results indicate that moving Channel 5 to the west (alternatives West 1 and West
2) result in the smallest wetlands and new drainage feature impacts.
Pros and cons of the riprap lined channel alternatives are summarized in Table 1.
Preliminary construction cost estimates for riprap lined channels (Table 2) vary
from $270,000 to $660,000. Based on WSP experience with natural channel
design we conclude that the NCD channel approach would cost on the order of
$1,600 per lineal foot totalling approximately $670,000 and includes the
step/pool sequence to the Broad River. We note that the estimated
construction costs are for comparison purposes and exclude channel outlet
construction, safety planning, mobilization, demobilization, surveying, erosion
and sediment control, access roads, and contingency. Wetlands permitting
related project costs are also included in the cost estimates. Specifically, the
Page 4

NX % I ) U51AB DDP Outlet Channel Evaluation
Rogers Energy Complex - Cliffside Steam Station
December 13, 2023
potential cost of wetland and/or stream compensatory mitigation for each
design alternative is identified in Table 3.
Following Duke Energy's review of the proposed design alternatives and
selection of the preferred channel design, WSP will refine channel grading and
quantities. WSP is currently working on revising the IAB final conditions grading
plan based on U51AB actual excavation topography completed in November
2023. Revising the final conditions within the Main Dam footprint and outlet
channel will have to be performed in parallel.
ATTACHMENTS
CLS_C999.011.013 - Proposed Final Grades Stage 6
Table 1 - Channel 5 Alternatives Summary
Table 2 - Preliminary Construction Cost Estimates for Channal 5 Alternatives
Table 3 - Wetlands and Stream Mitigation Cost Summary
Attachment 1 -Alternative Channel 5 Design Options
Figure 1 - Channel 5 Current Design
Figure 2 - Alternative Channel Design - Alternative Channel 5
Figure 3 - Alternative Channel Design - West 1
Figure 4 - Alternative Channel Design - West 2
Figure 5 - Alternative Channel Design - East
Attachment 2 - Channel 5 Natural Channel Design
Page 5

I
G!
I
5
1
7
1�
REV.
9 MW \ IV
mw
�—BROAD RIVER
3 GABIONIUTLET
.201
\ _ _ 0
~.\ 11 11// \ \ \ \
545500
__o-_\ \7
LI BRUAR 3 O
. . . . . . . . . . . - � 02\ T \
I I I MIT OF FE Y 2 O + I
.......
NOTE THAT GRADING OF OUTLET CHANNEL (CHANNEL 5)—
_\ — — AND BROAD RIVER TIE IN ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE
BASED ON USACE AND NCDEQ WETLANDS PERMITTING / L / \ \ \ • • � \\� x5 \ \ \ � \ \ \ � � — — _— � � \ � \ �
00
-710
——720=—= — — _\ — _ -- —_:`BASIN OUTLET CHANNEL
5/
4V A
730
2 TOP OF SLOPE
_;J7
TOE OF SLOPE /
740
\\ \ 60
_— —___—_ \\ \ —\ \ l 1 I I /// G�� \fix \ \\ \ 730/
yy 770 /
780 CHANNEL 2
—790 \ \ l I I ) l / I > /f l l / O G� x SEE DRAWING CLS_C999.011.016
\ / / l / l I 5� °
FOR SECTIONS AT STATIONS
m 24+50 THROUGH 29+50
�° CHANNEL1
//11
I
/-A
\\v \0
/^o
\
3
I
E
0
\
M
O
o
0
a
a
�
CHANNEL 4 1
.201
o
UNIT 51
I
\ ,,°
0
780
544500
790
�190
I \ l \ All =8l0\
_ \ \ \\ \
-W I \ I I I I / / \ \\\�-4
co
ASH BASIN
1 10/12/2023 1 7818220026 DAM DECOMMISSIONING TJK SLS TJK BG KRD ISSUED FOR PERMIT - REV 1
0 04/17/2023 7818220026 DAM DECOMMISSIONING BAM BAM TJK BG KRD ISSUED FOR PERMITTING
REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE DES DFTR CHKD ENGR APPD DESCRIPTION
�0 _
REFERENCES:
1. ASH BASIN FACILITY BOUNDARIES PROVIDED BY DUKE
ENERGY.
2. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION WAS PRODUCED FROM
PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY
OBTAINED ON JULY 31, 2015 BY WSP. MAIN DAM DOWNSTREAM
AREA EXISTING CONDITIONS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WAS
DONE BY FLEMING ENGINEERING INC. (FEI) ON MAY 18, 2023.
3. SADDLE DAM REMOVAL IS NOT REQUIRED AND THIS
EMBANKMENT MAY BE LEFT IN PLACE IN FINAL CONDITIONS.
1 CHANNEL
\ .201
TITL�AIN DAM (RUTHE-070, SCOPE 8) AND SADDLE DAM
(RUTHE-072, SCOPE 3) DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
OGERS ENERGY COMPLEX - CLIFFSIDE STEAM STATION
WSP USA
2801YOENVIRONMENT
ROAD, INFRASTRUCTURE INC. PROPOSED FINAL GRADES _ STAGE r
2801 YORKMONT ROAD, SUITE 100 PROPOSED FINAL GRADES STAGE /•1 C V
CHARLOTTE, INC 28208
TEL. [phone]
FOR
N.C. ENG. LICENSURE: F-1253 ISSUED FOR PERMIT - REV 1
SEAL SCALE: AS SHOWN
' DUKE DWG TYPE: DWG
CA% ''+r
a�.0b�2 ENERC
Y DABE:010%72/2023 026
SEA L�
•
+ , � FILENAME: CLS_C999.011.012 PROPOSED FINAL GRADES -STAGE 6
�'. °t�l►'•.NGHtk�•'• DWG SIZE DRAWING NO.
ANSI D
22"x34" C L S C 9 9 9.011.013
DES: TJK
DFTR: SLS
CHKD: TJK
ENGR: BG
APPD: KRD
REVISION
1
0
rm
G
INCHES 1 2 3 ITENTHS 10' 20
30
10

U51AB DDP Outlet Channel Design Alternatives Evaluation
Rogers Energy Complex, Cliffside Steam Station
Rutherford County, North Carolina
Tahla. 1 - [hannel S Alternative.. Summary
Channel 5 Alternative
Channel
Bottom
Top
Length
Longitudinal
Channel
Channel
Estimated
Estimated
Cut
Fill
Channel Description
Pros
Cons
Depth (ft)
Width
Width
(ft)
Slope
Capacity
Lining
Wetlands
Wetlands
(CY)
(CY)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft/ft)
(cfs)
Disturbance
Disturbance
(ac)
N
DDP Design Rev
Minor grading in the U51AB exit area.
Largest area of wetlands disturbance
Current Design
Central location divides the wetlands leaving
(Attachment 1 -
2
30
42
211.0
0.0107
416.5
Class B
0.90
100.0%
0
2,180
small/isolated areas
Figure 1)
Riprap
Potentially challenging subgrade conditions for
construction.
DDP Design Rev 1
Minor grading in the IAB exit area
Slightly less area of wetlands disturbance
Alternative
alignment- reduced
Less fill required in comparison to design channel
Central location divides the wetlands leaving
Channel 5
Class B
bottom width/
Reduces wetlands disturbance compared to design
small/isolated areas
(Attachment 1 -
3
12
30
211.0
0.0107
420.4
Riprap
0.64
71.3%
0
1,850
increased depth.
channel
Potentially challenging subgrade conditions for
Figure 2)
construction
Channel starts from
Lower estimated wetlands disturbance compared to
Tree clearing and excavation west of the design
West 1
Class B
Channel high point,
design channel; under 0.5 acre
channel
(Attachment 1 -
3
16
34
286.0
0.0070
418.9
0.47
52.4%
2,088
775
alignment moved west.
Conveys flow to existing USIAB primary/auxiliary
Requires re -grading USIAB Channel 1 to Channel
Figure 3)
Riprap
outlet channel to the river
West-1 transition with a down chute
Channel West-1 alignment
Lowest estimated wetlands disturbance of the
Increased tree clearing and excavation area to the
upper areas moved further
alternatives
west of the proposed channel
West 2
west to avoid wetlands.
Conveys flow to existing USIAB primary/auxiliary
Channel 1 to Channel West-2 transition will require a
Class B
outlet channel to the river
down chute
(Attachment 1 -
3
16
34
380.0
0.0079
445.0
Riprap
0.38
42.3%
1,954
1,179
USIAB final grades need to be revised at the USIAB
Figure 4)
exit area
Channel 5 alignment moved
Shift wetlands impacts to the east and does not
Major excavation area to the east of the channel in
further east to avoid
divide the wetlands
the vicinity of the transmission tower
East
wetlands.
Insignificant reduction in wetlands disturbance
Class
Potentially challenging subgrade conditions for
(Attachment 1 -
3
12
30
341.0
0.0117
440.0
0.59
65.7%
3,000
1,834
Figure 5)
Riprap
construction
Natural Channel Design:
Natural stream design likely replicates conditions
Insignificant reduction in wetlands disturbance
combination of cross vanes,
before the dam and U51AB was constructed
Potentially challenging subgrade conditions for
Natural Channel
Boulder,
Rock and
step pools, and riffles
construction
Design
N/A
N/A
N/A
319.0
0.03 to 0.06
N/A
Rock,
0.78
86.9%
1,300
gravel -
(Attachment 2)
Riffles, Step
Pools
unknown
quantity
1. Existing Wetlands C Area = 0.9 ac
2. Channel side slopes are 31H:1V.
3. The wetlands disturbance acreages reported above are estimated based on preliminary grading. Actual acreages may change when the selected channels are graded with Main Dam footprint modification.

U51AB DDP Outlet Channel Design Alternatives Evaluation
Rogers Energy Complex, Cliffside Steam Station
Rutherford County, North Carolina
Table 2. Preliminary Construction Cost Estimates for Channel 5 Alternatives
CHANNEL ID
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
ENGINEER'S
ESTIMATED
QUANTITIY
UNITS
ESTIMATED
UNIT PRICE
ESTIMATED PRICE
COMMENTS
1-1
Clearing and Grubbing
0.90
AC
$13,000
$11,671
Wetlands C disturbed area
1-2
Cut (from Western/Eastern Slopes)
0
CY
$5.0
$0
See Table 1, earthworks based on AutoCAD volume analyses
1-3
Fill (for Channel Construction)
2,180
CY
$5.0
$10,900
See Table 1, earthworks based on AutoCAD volume analyses
Current Design
1-4
Riprap- Channel
528
CY
$102.0
$53,805
=(Top Width+3 ft)*Ch. Length*1.5 ft*(1/27), [riprap thickness=1.5 ft]
(Attachment 1-
1-5
8 oz/sy Geotextile - Channel
1,055
SY
$2.5
$2,638
=(Top Width+3 ft)*Ch. Length*(1/9)
Figure 1)
1-6
Erosion Control Matting - Cut Slopes
4,900
SF
$3.5
$17,150
Channel side slope area
1-7
Temporary Seeding -Cut/Fill Slopes
0.11
AS
$3,000
$337
Channel side slope area
1-8
Permanent Seeding -Cut/Fill Slopes
0.11
AC
$4,000
$450
Channel side slope area
1-9
Total Mitigation Cost
1
LS
$346,913
$346,913
See Table 3
Channel 5- Current Design Total
$443,864
2-1
Clearing and Grubbing
0.64
AC
$13,000
$8,320
Wetlands C disturbed area
2-2
Cut (from Western/Eastern Slopes)
0
CY
$5.0
$0
See Table 1, earthworks calculated based on length x width x depth
2-3
Fill (for Channel Construction)
1,850
CY
$5.0
$9,250
See Table 1, earthworks calculated based on length x width x depth
Alternative
Channe15
2-4
Riprap-Channel
387
CY
$102.0
$39,457
=(Top Width+3 ft)*Ch. Length*1.5 ft*(1/27), [riprap thickness=1.5 ft]
2-5
8 oz/sy Geotextile - Channel
774
SY
$2.5
$1,934
=(Top Width+3 ft)*Ch. Length*(1/9)
(Attachment 1-
Figure 2)
2-6
Erosion Control Matting - Cut/Fill Slopes
4,900
SF
$3.5
$17,150
Assume same as Item No. 1-6
2-7
Temporary Seeding -Cut/Fill Slopes
0.11
AC
$3,000
$337
Assume same as Item No. 1-7
2-8
Permanent Seeding -Cut/Fill Slopes
0.11
AC
$346,913
$39,024
Assume same as Item No. 1-8
2-9
1 Total Mitigation Cost
1
LS
1 $307,658
$307,658
See Table 3
Alternative Channel S Total
$423,130
3-1
Clearing and Grubbing
0.74
AC
$13,000
$9,584
Wetlands C disturbed area + Disturbed area outside Wetland C
3-2
Cut (from Western/Eastern Slopes)
2,088
CY
$5.0
$10,440
See Table 1, earthworks based on AutoCAD volume analyses
3-3
Fill (for Channel Construction)
775
CY
$5.0
$3,875
See Table 1, earthworks based on AutoCAD volume analyses
West
3-4
Riprap-Channel
588
CY
$102.0
$59,965
=(Top Width+3 ft)*Ch. Length*1.5 ft*(1/27), [riprap thickness=1.5 ft]
(Attachment 1-
3-5
8 oz/sy Geotextile - Channel
1,176
SY
$2.5
$2,939
=(Top Width+3 ft)*Ch. Length*(1/9)
Figure 3)
3-6
Erosion Control Matting - Cut/Fill Slopes
9,682
SF
$3.5
$33,887
Total cut/fill areas from Figure 3
3-7
Temporary Seeding -Cut/Fill Slopes
0.22
AC
$3,000
$667
Total cut/fill areas from Figure 3
31
Permanent Seeding -Cut/Fill Slopes
0.2
AC
$346,913
$77,108
Total cut/fill areas from Figure 3
3-�
Total Mitigation Cost
1
LS
$71,581
$71,581
See Table 3
Alternative Channel - West 1 Total
$270,046
4-1
Clearing and Grubbing
0.64
AC
$13,000
$8,343
Wetlands C disturbed area + Disturbed area outside Wetland C
4-2
Cut (from Western/Eastern Slopes)
1,954
CY
$5.0
$9,770
See Table 1, earthworks based on AutoCAD volume analyses
4-3
Fill (for Channel Construction)
1,179
CY
$5.0
$5,895
See Table 1, earthworks based on AutoCAD volume analyses
West
4-4
Riprap-Channel
781
CY
$102.0
$79,673
=(Top Width+3 ft)*Ch. Length*1.5 ft*(1/27), [riprap thickness=1.5 ft]
(Attachment 1-
4-5
8 oz/sy Geotextile - Channel
1,562
SY
$2.5
$3,906
=(Top Width+3 ft)*Ch. Length*(1/9)
Figure 4)
4-6
Erosion Control Matting - Cut/Fill Slopes
10,644
SF
$3.5
$37,254
Total cut/fill areas from Figure 4
4-7
Temporary Seeding -Cut/Fill Slopes
0.24
AC
$3,000
$733
Total cut/fill areas from Figure 4
4-8
Permanent Seeding -Cut/Fill Slopes
0.24
AC
$346,913
$84,769
Total cut/fill areas from Figure 4
4-9
1 Total Mitigation Cost
1
LS
1 $57,874
$57,874
See Table 3
Alternative Channel - West 2 Total
$288,217
5-1
Clearing and Grubbing
0.95
AC
$13,000
$12,312
Wetlands C disturbed area + Disturbed area outside Wetland C
5-2
Cut (from Western/Eastern Slopes)
3,000
CY
$5.0
$15,000
See Table 1, earthworks based on AutoCAD volume analyses
5-3
Fill (for Channel Construction)
1,834
CY
$5.0
$9,170
See Table 1, earthworks based on AutoCAD volume analyses
East
5-4
Riprap-Channel
625
CY
$102.0
$63,767
=(Top Width+3 ft)*Ch. Length*1.5 ft*(1/27), [riprap thickness=1.5 ft]
(Attachment 1-
5-5
8 oz/sy Geotextile - Channel
1,250
SY
$2.5
$3,126
=(Top Width+3 ft)*Ch. Length*(1/9)
Figure 5)
5-6
Erosion Control Matting - Cut/Fill Slopes
22,262
SF
$3.5
$77,917
Total cut/fill areas from Figure 5
5-7
Temporary Seeding -Cut/Fill Slopes
0.51
AC
$3,000
$1,533
Total cut/fill areas from Figure 5
5-8
Permanent Seeding -Cut/Fill Slopes
0.51
AC
$346,913
$177,295
Total cut/fill areas from Figure 5
5-9
Total Mitigation Cost
1
LS
$300,043
$300,043
See Table 3
Alternative Channel - East 1Total
$660,163
Natural Channel
5-1
Clearing and Grubbing
1.14
AC
$13,000
$14,782
Wetlands C disturbed area + Disturbed area outside Wetland C
Design
5-2
Natural Channel Construction
319
LF
$1,600.0
$510,400
Unit cost based on WSP experience with similar projects
(Attachment 2)
5-3
Total Mitigation Cost
1
LS
$148,398
$148,398
See Table 3
Alternative Channel - East 1 Total
$673,579
1. This preliminary cost estimate is prepared for comparison of the proposed alternatives and does not include construction cost items such as safety planning, mobilization, demobilization, surveying, erosion and sediment control, access roads, and
contingency.
2. Unit price estimates are based on Sequoia's December 6, 2023 dated email to WSP.
3. Riprap unit cost: $85/ton from Sequoia. Assume 1.2 tons/CY and $102/CY.

U51AB DDP Outlet Channel Design Alternatives Evaluation
Rogers Energy Complex, Cliffside Steam Station
Rutherford County, North Carolina
Table 3. Wetlands and Stream Mitigation Cost Summary
New Drainage
Channel 5 Design Alternative
Wetland C Impact (acre)
Cost ($)
Feature Impact
Cost ($)
Total Mitigation Cost
(linear feet)
Current Design
0.90
$136,728
142
$210,186
$346,913
(Attachment 1 - Figure 1)
Alternative
Channe15
0.64
$97,472
142
$210,186
$307,658
Attachment 1 - Fijzure 2
West 1
0.47
$71,581
0
$0
$71,581
(Attachment 1 - Figure 3)
West 2
0.38
$57,874
0
$0
$57,874
(Attachment 1 - Figure 4)
East
0.59
$89,857
142
$210,186
$300,043
(Attachment 1 - Figure 5)
Natural Channel Design
0.78
$118,794
20
$29,604
$148,398
(Attachment 2)
Potential mitigation costs based on NC Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) In -Lieu Fee Program rates for Standard Service Areas. Current NCDMS rates are
effective through June 30, 2024.
Wetland cost per credit = $76,150.13; Stream cost per credit = $740.09; Mitigation Ratio = 2:1 (wetland and stream).

NNSI) U51AB DDP Outlet Channel Evaluation
Rogers Energy Complex - Cliffside Steam Station
December 13, 2023
ATTACHMENT 1 -CHANNEL 5 DESIGN
ALTERNATIVES (RIPRAP LINED)

5
\ \ \ \ \\ BROAD RIVER
/ LIMIT OF MAY 2023 TOPO
80 o
\\\\\
\ m
00
680��\�\
-- \ \
\\ \o
y 720-1�
���--��/vvvvj✓✓\��y � vv vv � � I IIII I��� ��I�I� A\ � �//%//� ��
1 730 1\ \ \\V// A \ V A I I I I I
\ ?/\
CHANNEL 1
O
6 7 8 REV.
RIPRAP GABION/ /�� _ — _�� — �� 42'
OUTLET
6f1\ NEW DRAINAGE-
- —
\ \ .10 - FEATURE
_�� CHANNEL 5 - CURRENT DESIGN
I�IIII�IIII IIII//III\// �\ I I ESTIMATED DESIGN CHANNEL 5
III III I (( I I EARTHWORK:
IIIIIIIII I�IIIIIIIII I \ \ \ \ I \ I \ I CUT: 0 CU. YD.
FILL: 2,180 CU. YD.
II II
IIp�IIII�IIIIIIII���I��\\y � \
CHANNEL 5 A \ EXISTING WETLAND C
\\ \ \\ INVERT EL.: 672.0' TO 669.7' AREA = 0.90 ACRE
/0
\ \ SLOPE: 1 \ \ \ \ J
vvv v v , q9s boo
\\\Qx
0
��- CHANNEL2
60 0 60 120 FT 1. THE PROPOSED IAB GRADES ARE FROM "MAIN DAM AND SADDLE DAM DECOMMISSIONING PLAN, INACTIVE
ASH BASIN", DRAWING CLS_C999.011.007, DATED OCTOBER 12, 2023, PREPARED BY WSP.
2. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION WAS PRODUCED FROM PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS FROM
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY OBTAINED ON JULY 31, 2015 BY WSP. MAIN DAM DOWNSTREAM AREA EXISTING
CONDITIONS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WAS DONE BY FLEMING ENGINEERING INC. (FEI) ON MAY 18, 2023.
NNNTITLE
WSP USA Environment &
Infrastructure Inc.
2801 YORKMONT ROAD, SUITE 100
CHARLOTTE, INC 28208 FOR
MAIN DAM (RUTHE-070, SCOPE 8) AND SADDLE DAM
(RUTHE-072, SCOPE 3) DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
ROGERS ENERGY COMPLEX - CLIFFSIDE STEAM STATION
CHANNEL 5 CURRENT DESIGN
TEL: [phone] FAX: [phone]
ISSUED FOR REVIEW
LICENSURE: NC ENG: F-1253 NC GEOLOGY: C-247
SEAL I SCALE: AS NOTED DES: BG
DUKE
ENERGY®
DWG TYPE: DWG
DFTR: SS
JOB
BG
: /08/781822002623ElCHKD:
DATE: 12/08/2023
ENGR: BG
FILENAME: CLS_C999.011.012PROPOSED FINAL GRADES -STAGE 6-ALTCH5_2023.11.06.dwg
APPD: KRD
DWG SIZE
DRAWING NO.
REVISION
ANSI
11"x17"
FIGURE 1
0
1
Plotted By..Sams, Steve Sheet Set:Cliffside Dam Decom — Alt Channel Design Layout:Current Conditions December 12, 2023 11:15:26am \\corp.pbwan.net\GLB—E&I\US\USCLT500—CLT1\CAD\Duke\CliffSide\7818220026 Cliffside Closure Support\Plansheets\Dam Decommissioning Plan \Exhibit\Alt Channel Design\Alt Channel Design — Current Conditions.dwg

5
BROAD RIVER
/ LIMIT OF MAY 2023 TOPO
80/�
/ o
\\\
/ V A 90
/////
%////
(i BUFFER
00
5 - 680
J j710 \\ \ \\ I I /
12' BU
720_/s\ \ ✓ \\\ \ I 1 I ///
�� - �' \v��✓ \�,� v v � IIII I IIII v \ �//\
1 730�
\ \\
) 111
CHANNEL 1
REFERENCES:
6 7 $ 1 FIC731IRFREV.
RIPRAP GABION /i _ 30'
OUTLET
NEW DRAINAGE \ _ _ \ �_ _ _ \ 3H:1V °' 3H:1V
FEATURE \% _
i 12
GRADING SHOWS FIGURE 1 CONDITIONS.
ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL 5 WAS NOT —
1 ( �' GRADED AND WILL DIFFER BASED ON 12-FT. I / ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL 5 DESIGN
/ VAII BOTTOM WIDTH AND 3 FT. DEPTH
IIII I \ \ I I \�/
IIIIIIII III�III �II� III (� W77 I 1 I 1 / ESTIMATED ALTERNATIVE
ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL 5
IIII II II A \ I / CHANNEL 5 EARTHWORK:
I \ \ /
CHANNEL INVERT EL.: 672.0' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ CUT: 0 CU. YD.
IIIIII I II\\\ TO 669.T SLOPE: 1 % o A A \ \ \ \ \
FILL: 1,850 CU. YD.
EXISTING WETLAND C
\ \ AREA = 0.90 ACRE
vwA�M V \ V v V
_ A� 1 1 1 ESTIMATED DISTURBANCE \ \
9���VA A WITHIN WETLAND C A \
\\\\ \ \\\\\\\\\ \ AREA = 0.64 ACRE \ \ \ \ \ \
\A\V� V ASV\V
\\lo
12'BER i. \A\ ��VA\AVA\
CHANNEL 2
60 0 60 120 FT 1. THE PROPOSED IAB GRADES ARE FROM "MAIN DAM AND SADDLE DAM DECOMMISSIONING PLAN, INACTIVE
ASH BASIN", DRAWING CLS_C999.011.007, DATED OCTOBER 12, 2023, PREPARED BY WSP.
2. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION WAS PRODUCED FROM PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS FROM
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY OBTAINED ON JULY 31, 2015 BY WSP. MAIN DAM DOWNSTREAM AREA EXISTING
CONDITIONS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WAS DONE BY FLEMING ENGINEERING INC. (FEI) ON MAY 18, 2023.
" TITLE
MAIN DAM (RUTHE-070, SCOPE 8) AND SADDLE DAM
(RUTHE-072, SCOPE 3) DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
ROGERS ENERGY COMPLEX - CLIFFSIDE STEAM STATION
WSP USA Environment & ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL DESIGN - ALTERNATIVE
Infrastructure Inc. CHANNEL 5
2801 YORKMONT ROAD, SUITE 100
CHARLOTTE, INC 28208 FOR
TEL: [phone] FAX: [phone] ISSUED FOR REVIEW
LICENSURE: NC ENG: F-1253 NC GEOLOGY: C-247
SEAL SCALE: AS NOTED DES: BG
4115
DUKE DWG TYPE: DWG DFTR: SS
ENERGY® JOB NO: 7818220026 CHKD: BG
DATE: 12/08/2023 ENGR: BG
FILENAME: CLS_C999.011.012PROPOSED FINAL GRADES -STAGE 6-ALTCH5_2023.11.06.dwg APPD: KRD
DWG SIZE DRAWING NO. REVISION
ANSI 11"x17" FIGURE 2 0
-1
G)
N
d
1
Plotted By..Sams, Steve Sheet Set:Cliffside Dam Decom — Alt Channel Design Layout:Channel 5 December 12, 2023 11:16:01om \\corp.pbwan.net\GLB—E&I\US\USCLT500—CLT1\CAD\Duke\CliffSide\7818220026 Cliffside Closure Support\Plansheets\Dam Decommissioning Plan\Exhibit\Alt Channel Design\Alt Channel Design — Channel 5.dwg

BROA IVER
o\ \ \ LIMIT OF MAY 2023 TOPO \
-------- ----
/ FLOW TRANSITION - EVALUATE AND
POTENTIALLY REVISE EXISTING
CHANNEL DIMENSIONS AND LINING
j /1_ 12' BUFFER-
\
00
ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL WEST 1 CHANNEL
INVERT EL.: 674' TO 672' SLOPE 0.7% \ \� J 6 80 \\\\
1710
\ \
V/� y v y \� vy AA v v \ ��, A\ �� V A I \ G
o s
720
\\vv
730
If
11�II'I,IIIII,,I/
-
�
1 -
\ %/z/
I \ CHANNEL /
r-.8
�O \
3H:1V 3H:1V
NEW DRAINAGE \ \ \ _ _ _ - — \ _ 16'
FEATURE
\ o \��� —_— _—
��/� y — — — — — ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL WEST - 1
I� %A\i�AV�
\
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII� llI /�( \ \ I I I ESTIMATED ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL WEST 1
CHANNEL 5 LIMITS EARTHWORK:
I IIIIIIIIIIIII III II � /\ \ \ \ � \ /
1'IIII�II II I( l�\ (ORIGINAL DESIGN)I FILL 2 0788 CU. YD.
r- —
EXISTING WETLAND
\ \\\\\\ \ \\\\ AREA = 0.90 ACRE
_ ESTIMATED DISTURBANCE \ \
WITHIN WETLAND C A \ V A \ \
\ �\ AREA = 0.47 ACRE \ \ \
- -12�
BU RFER�c '\\ �� \ \\\\� \ \ 00 \ \\ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\ �\\\\90
\\\\\ o\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \
Y \ \ \ RAISE CHANNEL 1 \ \ I \ \
OUTLET AREA TO
EL. 674' \ \ \ I I \ \ \
DOWNCHUTE o 'O �2
FROM CHANNEL \ (EL. 678' O 674 )1 \ O
CHANNEL 2
REFERENCES:
60 0 60 120 FT 1. THE PROPOSED IAB GRADES ARE FROM "MAIN DAM AND SADDLE DAM DECOMMISSIONING PLAN, INACTIVE
ASH BASIN", DRAWING CLS_C999.011.007, DATED OCTOBER 12, 2023, PREPARED BY WSP.
2. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION WAS PRODUCED FROM PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS FROM
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY OBTAINED ON JULY 31, 2015 BY WSP. MAIN DAM DOWNSTREAM AREA EXISTING
CONDITIONS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WAS DONE BY FLEMING ENGINEERING INC. (FEI) ON MAY 18, 2023.
" TITLE
MAIN DAM (RUTHE-070, SCOPE 8) AND SADDLE DAM
(RUTHE-072, SCOPE 3) DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
ROGERS ENERGY COMPLEX - CLIFFSIDE STEAM STATION
WSP USA Environment & ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL DESIGN - WEST 1
Infrastructure Inc.
2801 YORKMONT ROAD, SUITE 100
CHARLOTTE, INC 28208 FOR
TEL: [phone] FAX: [phone] ISSUED FOR REVIEW
LICENSURE: NC ENG: F-1253 NC GEOLOGY: C-247
SEAL SCALE: AS NOTED DES: BG
DUKE DWG TYPE: DWG DFTR: SS
ENERGY® JOB : /08/781822002623ElCHKD: BG
DATE: 12/08/2023 ENGR: BG
FILENAME: CLS_C999.011.012PROPOSED FINAL GRADES -STAGE 6-ALTCH5_2023.11.06.dwg APPD: KRD
DWG SIZE DRAWING NO. REVISION
ANSI 11"x17" FIGURE 3 0
G)
W
d
1
Plotted By..Sams, Steve Sheet Set:Cliffside Dam Decom — Alt Channel Design Layout:Alt Channel West 1 December 12, 2023 11: 16: 37am \\corp.pbwan.net\GLB—E&I\US\USCLT500—CLT1\CAD\Duke\CliffSide\7818220026 Cliffside Closure Support\Plansheets\Dam Decommissioning Plan\Exhibit\Alt Channel Design\Alt Channel Design — West 1.dwg

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 REV.
I 34' I
\ \ \ \ \ \\ BROAD RIVER \ �/ �/ / — — — _ 7
—_ — 3H:1V " 3H:1V
NEW DRAINAGE 16' _
FEATURE
v v ` v V �I �/` ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL WEST - 2
680\ \ \ \ \ \
v v v v v v v \ �� //� 6,°
/ /// \ —\!— _.IIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII\
ESTIMATED ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL WEST 2
FLOW TRANSITION - EVALUATE AND EARTHWORK
POTENTIALLY REVISE EXISTING
CHANNEL 5 LIMITS
/ CHANNEL DIMENSIONS AND LINING / // // // / / / I I IIII \ / IIII II II II l�\ (ORIGINAL DESIGN) \ \ \ `\ \ / FILL: 1,1179 CU. YD.
\ vv
\ LIMIT OF MAY 2023 TOPO
��\�
\ / �\ / // /// \\ \ \ \ \\\\\\\ \\\\\� EXISTING WETLAND C B
A AREA = 0.90 ACRE
\ o ,� - vvvssv� 6� y vvy A\AV v v v V A V A \
0 1 -�0 x ESTIMATED DISTURBANCE \ \
WITHIN WETLAND C
\\\\\\\\\ —�� AREA = 0.38 ACRE \ \ \ \ \
_ 17 �\ v v v rr \ \ vvv v v \ \ v v y v\vy v
_ 10 \ /,// \ \ 6+ I 12' BUFFE#3 \ \ vvv A p0 \
ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL WEST 2 \ \ \\ �s I -\\ \ \ \ \ ` \ ` \ \ \ \ \ \\ ` C
CHANNEL INVERT EL.: 674' TO 671' ` \� \ os \\ \ / ' . . . . \ -\
/14 \\ \ SLOPE 0.8% \ s, \\ t9 \\ 1 i
\\\\90 \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ \ 1 \\\\
.i 720- j 1-1
\ \ \ \ \ \ ` \ 1 I I 1 I �• \ \\\
,\v��A�vv v ,-
30/ A v I �l �lll 11\� iA��� �� )A AV V A V \ I I A V G)
v v � f v \y � I V � v � - v \ \ I 1 ,
1
CHANNEL 1
DOWNCHUTE CHANNEL 2
✓ \ I I / I I / / / \ / 61cPs FROM CHANNEL 1 s8p
(EL. 678' TO 674')
TITLE
REFERENCES:
60 0 60 120 FT 1. THE PROPOSED IAB GRADES ARE FROM "MAIN DAM AND SADDLE DAM DECOMMISSIONING PLAN, INACTIVE
ASH BASIN", DRAWING CLS_C999.011.007, DATED OCTOBER 12, 2023, PREPARED BY WSP.
2. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION WAS PRODUCED FROM PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS FROM
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY OBTAINED ON JULY 31, 2015 BY WSP. MAIN DAM DOWNSTREAM AREA EXISTING
CONDITIONS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WAS DONE BY FLEMING ENGINEERING INC. (FEI) ON MAY 18, 2023.
TTj MAIN DAM (RUTHE-070, SCOPE 8) AND SADDLE DAM
(RUTHE-072, SCOPE 3) DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
ROGERS ENERGY COMPLEX - CLIFFSIDE STEAM STATION
WSP USA Environment & ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL DESIGN - WEST 2
Infrastructure Inc.
2801 YORKMONT ROAD, SUITE 100
CHARLOTTE, INC 28208 FOR
TEL: [phone] FAX: [phone]
ISSUED FOR REVIEW
LICENSURE: NC ENG: F-1253 NC GEOLOGY: C-247
SEAL I SCALE: AS NOTED DES: BG
DUKE
ENERGY®
DWG TYPE: DWG
DFTR: SS
JOB NO: 7818220026
CHKD: BG
DATE: 12/08/2023
El BG
FILENAME: CLS_C999.011.012PROPOSED FINAL GRADES -STAGE 6-ALTCH5_2023.11.06.dwg
APPD: KRD
DWG SIZE
DRAWING NO.
REVISION
ANSI
11"x17"
FIGURE 4
0
Plotted By..Sams, Steve Sheet Set:Cliffside Dam Decom — Alt Channel Design Layout:Alt Channel West 2 December 12, 2023 11:17:00am \\corp.pbwan.net\GLB—E&I\US\USCLT500—CLT1\CAD\Duke\CliffSide\7818220026 Cliffside Closure Support\Plansheets\Dam Decommissioning Plan\Exhibit\Alt Channel Design\Alt Channel Design — West 2.dwg

2 3 4 5
BROAD RIVER
\ _ NEW DRAINAGE
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ 61> — ti FEATURE
LIMIT OF MAY 2023\P\\\ \60
7,7
\\\\\ � x1-�//�-�-
LOO
- BUFFER I
\ / \ V� v�� III
/ \o CHANNEL 5 LIMITS
o l _ < I I�/ J j — ^ (ORIGINAL DESIGN) =6)S\ o
/ �� III `�, � � ��✓�/ — — �_�\ \ � � / �=6801710
12'
�— �%���/��v� ��'��v� ���� v \�s,A\`��\\V�\ I � /%/�/�BUFFER��•�
720-/�
1 730
\ ?/z//
CHANNEL 1
I � \
%— _ — �� % I 30' I
3H:1V 3H:1V
ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL EAST
CHANNEL INVERT EL.: 674' TO 670'
SLOPE 1.2% - — — 12'
�(\ W I I / / — _ ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL EAST - 1
�\ l D—
o ESTIMATED ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL EAST 1
EARTHWORK:
CUT: 3,000 CU. YD.
FILL: 1,834 CU. YD.
CO25' BUFFER
Q0 \ \ EXISTING WETLAND C
\AREA =090ACRE
70
ESTIMATED DISTURBANCE
WITHIN WETLAND C
\\� AREA = 0.59 ACRETI
\\\ \ \ \ \ OG \ \ \ \\ \ \ \\\ \ \ \
2��
\ Bi1FFEF��A\V°��VA\\\�\\V
/ I
CHANNEL 2 .
u
60 0 60 120 FT 1. THE PROPOSED IAB GRADES ARE FROM "MAIN DAM AND SADDLE DAM DECOMMISSIONING PLAN, INACTIVE
ASH BASIN", DRAWING CLS_C999.011.007, DATED OCTOBER 12, 2023, PREPARED BY WSP.
2. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION WAS PRODUCED FROM PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS FROM
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY OBTAINED ON JULY 31, 2015 BY WSP. MAIN DAM DOWNSTREAM AREA EXISTING
CONDITIONS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WAS DONE BY FLEMING ENGINEERING INC. (FEI) ON MAY 18, 2023.
" TITLE
MAIN DAM (RUTHE-070, SCOPE 8) AND SADDLE DAM
(RUTHE-072, SCOPE 3) DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
ROGERS ENERGY COMPLEX - CLIFFSIDE STEAM STATION
WSP USA Environment & ALTERNATIVE CHANNEL DESIGN - EAST
Infrastructure Inc.
2801 YORKMONT ROAD, SUITE 100
CHARLOTTE, INC 28208 FOR
TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone] ISSUED FOR REVIEW
LICENSURE: NC ENG: F-1253 NC GEOLOGY: C-247
SEAL SCALE: AS NOTED DES: BG
DUKE DWG TYPE: DWG DFTR: SS
ENERGY® JOB NO: 7818220026 CHKD: BG
DATE: 12/08/2023 ENGR: BG
FILENAME: CLS_C999.011.012PROPOSED FINAL GRADES -STAGE 6-ALTCH5_2023.11.06.dwg APPD: KRD
DWG SIZE DRAWING NO. REVISION
ANSI 11"x17" FIGURE 5 0
9 2 3 4 6 6 7 8 9 1
1
Plotted By..Sams, Steve Sheet Set:Cliffside Dam Decom — Alt Channel Design Layout:Alt Channel East December 12, 2023 11:17:39am \\corp.pbwan.net\GLB—E&I\US\USCLT500—CLT1\CAD\Duke\CliffSide\7818220026 Cliffside Closure Support\Plansheets\Dam Decommissioning Plan\Exhibit\Alt Channel Design\Alt Channel Design — East 1.dwg

NNSI)
USIAB DDP Outlet Channel Evaluation
Rogers Energy Complex - Cliffside Steam Station
December 13, 2023
ATTACHMENT 2 -CHANNELS NATURAL
CHANNEL DESIGN

I j � III I j l l
II III I 1
IIII IIIIII I I
I I IIII I I I 1
III IIII I 1
III IIII I I I
I I I i I i I I i I I I I
—A III III I I 16$°`
I
I I i III i l l l l I
I I
III I I
I III II I Ilo
III I
I I III I I I
I I ill i t 6� I I
II I I
I IIIII I I I
I I I I I I I I
III I o� I I 6$0
I I I I I I I I I o
I
B IIII li I I I I i /
I IIIII I I I I I
I
2
II II I II I /
I I I I I I I I I I i Ir I
I I I I I I III I I f
� I I III I I I I I I I I I
I I IIII III I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I� I I II I C I I I I I I I
I iI I I I I l l i l l l
I III II I \
it III IIII III
IIIII III IIII I
j
III IIII IIIIIIIIII I
I II
I I I III III I I I I I I I I I I I
I
l IIIIIIIII lili iil
III I I I
�I
I ro I
III
CO
Iilliil Iiilllll it
II I
IIII II IIII IIII II
I I I I III I I I I I
IIIIII I I
I I IIII I I I I
I I I I I � I III I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I III
Ili1 II I I I I I III I I
/�\I I I I I I I IIII 1 1
II, I IIII IIIIII II
I�/I I II II I II
�6
I I I I I I I I `\` /ter I ,IIIIII I 0
9Xg5
::0
I r- 0% r-.1 r, 67
EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
67
EXISTING WATER SURFACE
EXISTING OVERHEAD POWERLINE
PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR
66
PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR
PROPOSED CROSS VANE
PROPOSED STONE TOE
65
PROPOSED RIFFLE
PROPOSED LOG VANE
PROPOSED STEP POOL
EXISTING WETLAND AREA
IMPACTED WETLAND AREA
INCHES 1 2 3 TENTHS 10 20 30
1 1
5 6 7
v5�/�V
-
-673
671 672 — — — gg6 c0
668
� 669
670 /
/ 611 / '0
l l I ll 1/AIIIIII
/ / / IIIII III IIII
069 � // l / /llI I IIIII I I
�o / /l l llllllIIIIIII I
i//
��// / G WET
AREA EXISTI�0. 0 ACRE
6�
/ 6l6
s�
NEW DRAINAGE
FEATURE
ESTIMATED DISTURBANCE
WITHIN WETLAND C
AREA = 0.78 ACRE
6$3
yy<w�
1 OPTION 1 PLAN VIEW
1
("-2 OPTION 1 PROFILE VIEW
1
0 1 12/07/23 1 7818220026 1 LANDFILL
REV I DATE I JOB NO. I PROJECT TYPE
i
1 REV, 0
O
D
�7
Tm
/V
680
675
670 N
665 20 0 20 40 FT
e
657
30
m
10
TITLE
PLAN AND PROFILE OPTION 3
F
CHANNEL 5 - NATURAL CHANNEL DESIGN
WSP USA
ROGERS ENERGY COMPLEX - CLIFFSIDE STEAM STATION
CLEVELAND COUNTY, MOORSEBORO, NC
2801 YORKMONT ROAD, SUITE 100
CHARLOTTE, NC 28208
TEL: [phone] FAX: [phone]
FOR
ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LICENSURE: NC ENG: F-1253 NC GEOLOGY: C-247
SEAL
�' DUKE SCALE: AS SHOWN DES: SL
DWG TYPE: DWG DFTR: JDH
EN E RGY. JOB NO: 7818220026 CHl MTB
PROGRESS DATE: 12/07/2023 El MTB
FILENAME: PLAN AND PROFILE OPTION 3.dwg APPD: AAJ
DWG SIZE
DRAWING NO.
FIGURE NSD - 1
REVISION
ANSI
22"x34"
0
SL
JDH
MTB
MTB
CONCEPT DESIGN
DES
DFTR
CHKD
ENGR
DESCRIPTION
7 8 9 10
I I I I
Plotted By: Humpton, John Sheet Set: Cliffside Stream Restoration Concept Layout: XX PLAN AND PROFILE OPTION 3 December 12, 2023 11: 37: 47am P: \D7526\Project\DUKE ENERGY\Cliffside Stream Restoration\CAD\Civ\PLAN AND PROFILE OPTION 3.dwg

2 3 45 6 7 i8 2 REV. 0
0
J
Q
W
0
J
0
0
n
W
i
i
0
Q
0
i
z
0
Q
ry
0
1
cn
W
>
Q
w
Ln
W
0
J
i
r
0
w
z
W
W
0
W
0
ry
Qo
Ln
r
0
E
F
RIFFLE POOL SEQUENCE SECTIONS
d
13'
7 al
? Cl
i/\\i/\\i/\\i/\\i/\\i/\\i/\\i/\\i/\\i/\\i/\\i/\\i,
TYPICAL RIFFLE SECTION
15'
3'
I.
j/\ 2 2/\
/j/\\//\\//\
\//\\/\//\\/X
TYPICAL STRAIGHT POOL SECTION
HEADER STONES
FOOTER STONES
V 1 14 L/ \/ I wl / 1.)1 II I V L
(COMPACTED)
TVpI(-01 CTP:p_Pnnl I Ininr=p 1R01n1 (ZV(ZTP:KA
INCHES 2 3 (TENTHS 10 20 30
N I b
TYPICAL SECTION DIMENSION SUMMARY:
RIFFLE MAX DEPTH = 1.5'
RIFFLE MEAN DEPTH (db) = 0.9'
RIFFLE WIDTH = 13'
RC/W = 3
POOL DEPTH = 3 x db = 3'
REINFORCED BED MIX
�// Y
i
FILTER FABRIC
0 12/07/23 7818220026 LANDFILL
REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE
700 G
BIODEGRAD,
MATTING F
ALL BEN
TIE —I
TYPICAL CROSS SECTION AT POOL
SECTION D-D
PROPOSED POOL MAXIMUM TOP WIDTH 15'
STABLE SUBGRADE
8 OZ NONWOVEN
GEOTECHNICAL FILTER
FABRIC
TYPICAL
700 GRAM 100%
BIODEGRADABLE COIR MATTING
PLACED ON ALL BENCHES AND
TIE—IN SLOPES
CROSS
3'
BENCH
SECTION
SECTION C-C
AT
PROPOSED CHANNEL WIDTH
15'
5'
5'
I
0. 2'
5'
i
NOTE:
1. CROSS SECTION VIEW
LOOKING DOWNSTREAM
2. SPLASH BOULDERS SHALL
BE PLACED BELOW
HEADER BOULDER TO END
OF POOL
2 FT DEPTH OF
NCDOT #4, 57, AND
GABION STONE MIXED
(2FT DEPTH INCLUDES
SPLASH BOULDER
THICKNESS)
3LE SUBGRADE COMPACTED IN
3E LIFTS OF 8".
STEP (NTS
3'
BENCH
13 1
REINFORCED
CHANNEL BED OR
\
BACKFILL WITH
I
2-8" COBBLE
(NCDOT #57, 1,
AND GABION
STONE)
TITLE
TYPICAL SECTIONS
CHANNEL 5 - NATURAL CHANNEL DESIGN
ROGERS ENERGY COMPLEX - CLIFFSIDE STEAM STATION
WSP USA
CLEVELAND COUNTY, MOORSEBORO, NC
2801YORKMONTROAD, SUITE 100
FOR
CHARLOTTE, NC 28208
TEL: [phone] FAX: [phone]
ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LICENSURE: NC ENG: F-1253 NC GEOLOGY: C-247
SEAL
�'
DUKE SCALE: AS SHOWN
DES: SL
DWG TYPE: DWG
DFTR: JDH
ENERGY® JOB NO: 7818220026
CHKD: MTB
PROGRESS DATE: 12/07/2023
ENGR: MTB
FILENAME: STEP POOL DETAIL.dwg
APPD: AAJ
DWG SIZE
DRAWING NO.
REVISION
SL JDH MTB MTB CONCEPT DESIGN
ANSI
22"x34"
FIGURE NSD - 2
0
DES DFTR CHKD ENGR DESCRIPTION
7
8
9
10
I
NI
C)
F

2
3 4
5 6
7
3 IFE 0
0
0
Q
w
0
w
z
Q
>
0
0
i
>
u
i
0
Q
0
i
z
0
Q
w
0
cn
w
Q
w
U�
w
0
I
w
0
i
x
(3
w
z
w
w
0
i
w
0
Qo
N
Ln
0
i
a
Q0
N
r�
N
0
N
N
L
Q)
U
0
Q
w
w
z
Q
>
un
0
0
0
0
w
x
x
0
x
Q
a
0
u
0
0
L
O
0
ry
w
w
w
w
z
0
z
z
0
z
0
w
z
02
0
w
0
w
RIGHT VANE
ARM
CROSS VANE LEFT VANE
THROAT ARM
RIGHT CROSS VANE LEFT VANE
VANE ARM THROAT ARM
i i
NOTE:
20 - 30' CROSS VANE SHALL BE "U" SHAPED
B�-C�J�U� AND NOT IIVII SHAPED AT THE THROAT.
-
CHANNEL WIDTH @ STRUCTURE ARM TIE-IN VARIES
A-
ARM SLOPE 2% (±1 %)
O GEOTEXTILE
O _ FL
LINES
FABRIC
%I
O O _
Q Q
_ O O O
—A
o 0 0 0
o� o� o�
o� o� c
20 -30
OFFSET VANE ARM SLOPE
_
2% (± 1%) O )�
A
Q
KEY INTO BANK 6 FT m
oa,
o I'
0 B
o
0
0 ° oo
o
'C
W
VANE ARM SLOPE 2% (±1%) /j
op-o �;/
o
U o
_
SPLASH ROCKS PLACED DOWNSTREAM OF >/
'
o°
FOOTER BOULDER 3FT.
GEOTEXTILE--
FOR INDIVIDUAL STRUCTURE
Jo(
, D�
o�
O,
ELEVATIONS SEE ROCK FABRIC,
o
CROSS VANE STRUCTURE
TABLE, SHEET X
Jo
E
—F
FIRST HALF OF THE F
TO END OF VANE
LINED WITH
OFFSET CROSS VANE
CROSS VANE
PLAN
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
HEADER BOULDER
FOOTER BOULDER
(OFFSET 1/2 LENGTH)
SPLASH ROCK
CROSS VANE
PROFILE A - A'
STREAMBANK TIE
BELOW TOO nr: RONIv
SEE NOTE 9 FOR
NOT TO SCALE ADDITIONAL FOOTER
REQUIREMENTS
SECTION B-B'
PROFILE OF VANE ARM
CROSS VANE
CROSS SECTIONS B - B' AND C - C'
KEY EACH ARM OF CROSS
VANE A MINIMUM OF 6 FEET
DEEP INTO BANK
FOR INDIVIDUAL STRUCTURE
ELEVATIONS SEE ROCK
CROSS VANE STRUCTURE
TABLE, SHEET X
MAX 1.0'
0 ozo
COMPLETELY LINE 2 POOL LENGTH
WITH RIFFLE SUBSTRATE PLACED
TO 2.5 FT THICKNESS
VLV I L/\ I ILL
FABRIC
FLOW IN THE
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION
MBED
RT
SCOUR
POOL
CHANNEL WIDTH @ STRUCTURE ARM TIE—IN VARIES
D F
I VV ILI\ I\VIJf\J
(SEE NOTE 11)
SECTION C-C'
CROSS SECTION THROUGH CENTER OF CROSS VANE
E
/CENTER OF CHANNEL GRADE
CONTROL CAN CONSIST OF EITHER
1 OR 2 BOULDERS WHERE THE FLOW IS
Y CONCENTRATED NEAR THE CROWN (OR
/ m SADDLE SHAPE). IF USING 2 BOULDERS, THEY
SHALL BE ANGLED TOWARD ONE ANOTHER TO
Q LOCK AND FORM A LOW SPOT.
�w
/ N BACKFILL BETWEEN VANE ARM AND
STREAM BANK WITH GRAVEL MATERIAL
SALVAGED FROM EXISTING STREAM BED.
PLACE BACKFILL MATERIAL TO MATCH
HEIGHT OF VANE ROCK. MATERIAL SHOULD
CONSIST OF 2%8" COBBLE OR RIFFLE
SUBSTRATE AND BE APPROVED BY THE
FIELD ENGINEER.
/ SEE NOTE 6
KEYSTONES
C
NOTE:
SEE TYPICAL SECTIONS
FOR BANKFULL WIDTH
SPLASH ROCKS PLACED DOWNSTREAM OF
FOOTER BOULDER 3FT.
FIRST 1/2 OF POOL LENGTH (AT A MINIMUM, TO
END OF CROSS VANE ARMS) COMPLETELY LINED
WITH RIFFLE SUBSTRATE.
NOT TO SCALE
NOT TO SCALE
0 1 12/07/23 1 7818220026 1 LANDFILL SL JDH MTB MTB
REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE I DES IDFTRICHKDIENGR
INCHES 2 3 TENTHS 0 20 30 4 5 6
ROCK CROSS VANE
NOTES
1. ALL STONES ARE TO BE STRUCTURE STONE. STRUCTURE STONE IS DEFINED AS BLOCK LIKE, CUBICAL, OR
STRAIGHT EDGED BOULDERS.
2. GAPS BETWEEN BOULDERS SHALL BE MINIMIZED BY FITTING BOULDERS TOGETHER, PLUGGING WITH GABION
STONE OR COBBLE/BOULDER SIZE MATERIAL AS APPROPRIATE, AS APPROVED BY THE ON -SITE
ENGINEER/INSPECTOR, AND LINING WITH FILTER FABRIC.
3. DIMENSIONS AND SLOPES MAY BE ADJUSTED TO FIT BY THE ON -SITE ENGINEER/INSPECTOR OR QUALIFIED
REPRESENTATIVE.
4. CONTRACTOR WILL BE REQUIRED TO FIT BOULDERS TIGHTLY.
5. FOOTER BOULDERS AND VANE BOULDERS SHALL BE NATIVE STONE OR SHOT ROCK, CUBICAL OR
RECTANGULAR IN NATURE.
6. THERE SHALL BE NO DROP GREATER THAN 1.0 FOOT. VERTICAL TOLERANCE SHALL BE 0.1' FOR CROSS VANE
STRUCTURES.
7. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE PLACED ON THE UPSTREAM SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE TO PREVENT WASHOUT OF
SEDIMENT THROUGH BOULDER GAPS. FILTER FABRIC SHALL EXTEND FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE FOOTER
BOULDER TO THE FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION AND SHALL BE PLACED THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF STRUCTURE.
8. %2 THE POOL LENGTH OR POOL LENGTH TO THE END OF THE CROSS VANE ARMS (WHICHEVER IS GREATER)
SHALL BE LINED WITH RIFFLE SUBSTRATE. SPLASH ROCKS SHALL EXTEND A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 3 FEET
DOWNSTREAM OF THE FOOTER BOULDERS AND BE PLACED TO PROVIDE A ROUGH SURFACE SUCH THAT
ROCK EDGES PROTRUDE 0.3 TO 0.5 FT ABOVE THE BED SURFACE.
9. IF BEDROCK IS PRESENT DIRECTLY BELOW SURFACE BOULDER, FOOTING MAY NOT BE NECESSARY.
HOWEVER, BASED ON THE DEPTH TO BEDROCK, ADDITIONAL FOOTER BOULDERS MAY BE REQUIRED IN
ORDER TO SEAT FOOTERS ON BEDROCK. CHIP BEDROCK 0.5' FOR PLACEMENT AND SEAT FOOTER BOULDERS
IN BEDROCK AT THE DIRECTION OF THE FIELD ENGINEER. IF BEDROCK IS NOT ENCOUNTERED, ADDITIONAL
FOOTER BOULDERS WILL BE REQUIRED. IN THIS CASE ADDITIONAL TIER(S) OF FOOTER BOULDERS SHALL
EXTEND BELOW THE MAX SCOUR DEPTH (CHANNEL INVERT).
10. AS THE TAIL OF RIFFLE APPROACHES THE PROPOSED CROSS VANES, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT
THE RIFFLE SUCH THAT IT GRADUALLY REDUCES AND FANS OUT/TAPERS INTO THE BACKSIDE OF THE VANE
ARM AND DOES NOT IMPEDE OR BLOCK THE FLOW OF WATER THROUGH THE THROAT OF THE CROSS VANE.
11. KEYS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PERPENDICULAR TO STREAMBANKS AND EXTEND A MINIMUM OF SIX (6) FEET
PAST THE BACK OF THE FLOODPLAIN BENCH.
C = HEIGHT
(SHORTEST DIMENSION)
B=WIDTH
(INTERMEDIATE DIMENSION)
A = LENGTH
(LONGEST DIMENSION)
NOTE:
BACKFILL SHALL BE PLACED IN 8" LOOSE LIFTS AND COMPACTED USING
TRACKED EQUIPMENT OR AN EXCAVATOR BUCKET SUCH THAT THE
FUTURE SETTLEMENT IS KEPT TO A MINIMUM. BEFORE PLACEMENT OF
BACKFILL, CHANNEL SHALL BE EXCAVATED TO A STABLE SUBGRADE
(APPROVED BY THE TOWN OF LEESBURG'S ON -SITE ENGINEER).
FOOTER BOULDERS MUST HAVE AT LEAST ONE CONTACT POINT WITH
HEADER BOULDERS, AND MAY BE MORE ROUNDED THAN HEADER. FOR
VANE ARMS, MULTIPLE FOOTERS MAY BE REQUIRED FOR HEADER
STONE DEPENDING UPON HEADER BOULDER SIZE AND DEPTH TO
STABLE SUBGRADE. MINIMUM STRUCTURE DIMENSIONS SHALL BE +/-
0.5'.
WSP USA
2801 YORKMONT ROAD SUITE 100
CROSS VANE MATERIAL DIMENSIONS
STRUCTURE SIZE TABLE
A
B
C
HEADER BOULDER/
4'
3'
2'
VANE ARMS
FOOTER BOULDER
4'
3'
2'
CROSS VANE
STRUCTURES
SPLASH ROCKS/
3'
2'
2'
FLOOR ROCKS
NOTES:
ASSUMED ROCK DENSITY 165 LB/FT3
STRUCTURE STONE IS TO BE OF IGNEOUS OR METAMORPHIC ORIGIN,
UNLESS APPROVED BY THE TOWN OF LEESBURG'S FIELD ENGINEER OR
QUALIFIED REPRESENTATIVE.
FOOTER STONES SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) CONTACT POINT
WITH HEADER STONES. FOOTER STONES MAY BE MORE ROUNDED THAN
HEADER STONES. FOR VANE ARMS, MULTIPLE FOOTERS MAY BE
REQUIRED FOR HEADER STONES DEPENDING UPON HEADER STONE SIZE.
TITLE
ROCK CROSS VANE DETAIL
CHANNEL 5 - NATURAL CHANNEL DESIGN
ROGERS ENERGY COMPLEX - CLIFFSIDE STEAM STATION
CLEVELAND COUNTY, MOORSEBORO, NC
CHARLOTTE, NC 28208 FOR
TEL: [phone] FAX: [phone] ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LICENSURE: NC ENG: F-1253 NC GEOLOGY: C-247
SEAL DUKE SCALE: AS SHOWN
DWG TYPE: DWG
ENERGY® JOB NO: 7818220026
PROGRESS DATE: 12/07/2023
FILENAME: ROCK CROSS VANE DETAIL.dwg
DWG SIZE DRAWING NO.
ANSI FIGURE NSD - 3
CONCEPT DESIGN 22"X34"
DESCRIPTION
7 8 9 10
DES: SL
DFTR: JDH
CHKD: MTB
ENGR: MTB
APPD: AAJ
REVISION
0
A�
W
C)
F�

2
3
I
y
I
'7 i8 4 REV. O
w
E
-F
ROCK TOE REVETMENT
PLAN - POOL IN BEND
ABOVE TOE REVETMENT,
BANK TREATMENT VARIES.
1
3
TOP -DRESS AND FILL INTERSTICES WITH
TOPSOIL AND PLANT LIVE STAKES
ROCK TOE REVETMENT
TO MINIMIZE VOIDS AND FILL SPACES, VOID SPACES
MAY NEED TO BE HAND CHOKED TO ACHIEVE
AESTHETIC SLOPE AND STRUCTURAL STABILITY
NOT TO SCALE
ROCK TOE REVETMENT
CROSS SECTION A - A'
INCHES
NONWOVEN GEOTEXTILE
FILTER FABRIC
LIVE STAKE (TYP.)
LIVE STAKES CAN BE DRIVEN THROUGH INTERSTICES OR OPENINGS IN
THE ROCK TOE REVETMENT.
LIVE STAKES TO BE INSTALLED TO BACK OF FLOODPLAIN BENCH.
4:1 SLOPE
NORMAL BASE FLOW ELEVATION
1 - 2'
STRUCTURE ROCK
(ODD SHAPED; ANGULAR)
2-3 FT NCDOT CL II
2-3'
ROCK TOE REVETMENT
NOTES
1. ALL STRUCTURE ROCK TOE SHALL BE NCDOT CLASS III RIPRAP (LARGE ANGULAR ODD SHAPED) OR APPROVED BY THE
ON -SITE ENGINEER/INSPECTOR BEFORE INSTALLATION.
2. ROCK TOE REVETMENT SHALL BE PLACED SUCH THAT MATERIALS LOCK TOGETHER.
3. SELECT BACKFILL AND SOIL BACKFILL MATERIAL SHALL BE COMPACTED SUCH THAT FUTURE SETTLEMENT OF THE
MATERIAL IS KEPT TO A MINIMUM.
4. ASSUMED ROCK DENSITY = 165 LB/FT3.
/ 5. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED, SEAT REVETMENT IN BEDROCK AT DIRECTION OF THE ON -SITE ENGINEER/INSPECTOR.
6. ROCK TOE REVETMENT TO BEGIN AT CROSS VANE ARM AND END AT POINT OF TANGENCY (PT) / HEAD OF RIFFLE OR
BACK OF VANE ARM, IF PRESENT.
7. CONTRACTOR TO DIG 1" PILOT HOLES FOR PLACEMENT OF LIVE STAKES IN ROCK TOE REVETMENT.
8. CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL ROCK TOE REVETMENT TO A DEPTH 2-3' BELOW MAXIMUM POOL DEPTH INVERT THE ENTIRE
LENGTH OF THE ROCK TOE REVETMENT.
9. IN STRAIGHT POOLS, ROCK TOE REVETMENT IS TO BE INSTALLED ALONG BOTH THE RIGHT AND LEFT BANKS. ROCK TOE
INSTALLATION ALONG THE RIGHT BANK IS TO BE MIRROR IMAGE OF THE CROSS SECTION DETAIL SHOWN BELOW.
INSTALLATION GUIDELINES
NOT TO SCALE
STREAMBED INVERT AT MAX
POOL DEPTH
NOT TO SCALE
1. EXCAVATE A TRENCH ALONG THE TOE OF THE STREAMBANK TO 2-3 FT BELOW THE STREAMBED INVERT.
2. PLACE FILTER CLOTH ALONG THE BACKSIDE OF THE TRENCH. PLACE FILTER FABRIC LOOSELY AND EVENLY ON THE
PREPARED SLOPE AND SECURED WITH STAKES ON 2 FOOT CENTERS. ADJACENT STRIPS SHOULD OVERLAP 12 INCHES
AND BE STAPLED ON 12 INCH CENTERS. THE UPSTREAM OR UPSLOPE FILTER FABRIC SHOULD ALWAYS BE PLACED OVER
THE DOWNSTREAM OR DOWNSLOPE FILTER FABRIC. IF THE FILTER FABRIC IS TORN OR DAMAGED, IT SHOULD BE
REPAIRED OR REPLACED.
3. PLACE STRUCTURE ROCK STARTING IN THE BOTTOM OF THE TRENCH WORKING UP THE BANK. REMAINDER OF THE
TRENCH TO BE FILLED WITH ROCK REVETMENT MATERIAL. ROCK MAY HAVE TO BE HAND PLACED IN VOIDS TO ACHIEVE
THE DESIRED RESULTS OF LOCKING THE REVETMENT.
ROCK TOE REVETMENT
PLAN - STRAIGHT POOL
FLOW
POOL'
ROCK TOE REVETMENT MATERIAL DIMENSIONS
STRUCTURE SIZE TABLE
ROCK
NCDOT CLASS II RIPRAP
STRUCTURES
ROCK TOE REVETMENT MATERIAL SPECS
NCDOT CLASS II RIPRAP
ROCK TOE
NCDOT CLASS I RIPRAP
REVETMENT
GABION STONE
NOTES:
ASSUMED ROCK DENSITY 165 LB/FT3
BACKFILL SHALL BE PLACED IN 8" LOOSE LIFTS AND COMPACTED USING
TRACKED EQUIPMENT OR AN EXCAVATOR BUCKET SUCH THAT THE
FUTURE SETTLEMENT OF THE MATERIAL IS KEPT TO A MINIMUM.
STRUCTURE DIMENSIONS SHALL BE +/- 0.5'.
D=2-3 FEET
FLOW
ROCK TOE REVETMENT
TITLE
WSP USA
2801 YORKMONT ROAD, SUITE 100
CHARLOTTE, NC 28208 FOR
TEL: [phone] FAX: [phone]
LICENSURE: NC ENG: F-1253 NC GEOLOGY: C-247
SEAL
ROCK REVETMENT DETAIL
CHANNEL 5 - NATURAL CHANNEL DESIGN
ROGERS ENERGY COMPLEX - CLIFFSIDE STEAM STATION
CLEVELAND COUNTY, MOORSEBORO, NC
ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
DUKESCALE: AS SHOWN
DWG TYPE: DWG
ENERGY® JOB NO: 7818220026
PROGRESS DATE: 12/07/2023
FILENAME: ROCK REVETMENT DETAIL.dwg
DWG SIZE DRAWING NO.
ANSI FIGURE NSD - 4
0 12/07/23 7818220026 LANDFILL SL JDH MTB MTB CONCEPT DESIGN 22"X34"
REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE DES DFTR CHKD ENGR DESCRIPTION
1 2 5 TENTHS 10 20 30 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
DES: SL
DETR: JDH
CHKD: MTB
ENGR: MTB
APPD: AAJ
REVISION
O
0
F

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I 5 IF'E, 0
B - RIFFLE WITH BOULDER MINI -VANES AND LOG ROLLERS
c�
0
J
Q
w
0
w
J
LL
LL
0
w
c�
z
O
0
Q
c�
z
O
Q
m
O
w
m
Q
w
m
U)
w
0
�n
w
LL
J
u
0
m
w
z
w
w
0
0
w
O
w
Q0
N
T)
0
F
0
Ln
0
rq
N
O
N
N
m
0
0
J
Q
w
0
w
LL
w
ch
0
w
lh
z
O
x
x
0
Q
J
Q
0
u
0
c
0
0
0
E
0
0
L
0
T)
w
O
w
w
V)
z
0
z
0
z
m
0
w
O
J
w
E
-F
KEY BOULDERS MIN. 3 C
FEET PAST TOP OF BANK KEY LOGS MIN.
3 FEET PAST
10-15' BACK OF BENCH
BANK L
::FUL7
TOP OF BANK)
---------- rr ( I I
7
TOE OF SLOPE
FLOODPLAIN BENCH
67
TOE OF SLOPE
FILL BETWEEN STRUCTURES
WITH RIFFLE SUBSTRATE
(MIN. 2.5 FEET THICKNESS)
aA V,//) � /143
a -7
ac
PC
m
DOWNSTREAM GRADE
CONTROL STRUCTURE
(TYP. ROCK CROSS VANE)
LLANULL �� � TOE OF SLOPE TO TRANSITIONFLOODPLAIN BENCH F BENCH) v TO BACK
OF DOWNSTREAM
GRADE
WITH APPROVAL OF FIELD ENGINEER,
SHINGLE BOULDERS CAN BE ADDED
AGAINST THE HEADER BOULDERS AT THE
HEAD OF RIFFLE, IN LIEU OF FOOTER
BOULDER
Bl BOULDER MINI -VANE
RIFFLE
PLAN
C'
LOG ROLLER
- - - - - BANKFULL SLOPE = VARIES ALONG PROFILE
STRUCTURE SPACING
MICROPOOL � —
STRUCTURE DROP RIFFLE SUBSTRATE
GLIDE Q MIN. DEPTH = 2.5' STREAMBED
LOG ROLLER
M I CROPOOL \\�QBOULDER MINI-VA\NE /.\ W/ FOOTER BOULDERS \x \% \% STABLE S U B G RAD E
\/\\/\\/\\/ FILL BETWEEN STRUCTURES /\\/\\/
\//\//j j j / WITH RIFFLE SUBSTRATE \//\//\//\//\\
�� / (\N. 2.\FEET\ HICKNESS\ /\\/\\ \\\/��\�
RIFFLE WITH BOULDER STEPS AND LOGS
PROFILE A -A'
TOP DRESS
FLOODPLAIN BENCH
WITH EXISTING BED
MATERIAL. SEE
NOTE 6
RIFFLE WITH BOULDER STEPS AND LOGS
CROSS SECTION B-B'
INCHES TENTHS 0 20 30
1\11 1 LA__ JIJUJ 11\Y91 L
MIN. DEPTH = 2.5'
N
NOT TO SCALE
DOWNSTREAM GRADE
CONTROLSTRUCTURE
(TYP. ROCK CROSS VANE)
POOL
NOT TO SCALE
NOTES
1. RIFFLE WITH BOULDER MINI -VANES AND LOG ROLLERS IS A STREAM AND RIVER RESTORATION DESIGN FEATURE THAT INCORPORATES COARSE
SUBSTRATE MATERIAL, BOULDERS AND LARGE WOOD (LOGS) IN THE CHANNEL BOTTOM THAT WILL NOT BE MOBILIZED UNDER DEFINED FLOW
CONDITIONS. REPLACING (OR ADDING TO) THE NATIVE CHANNEL BED MATERIAL WITH LARGER DIAMETER ROCK AND LARGE WOOD CREATES A
RIFFLE THAT FUNCTIONS AS RIGID GRADE CONTROL AND A HABITAT FEATURE. LARGER ROCK MATERIAL AND WOOD ENHANCES FLOW DIVERSITY
AND TURBULENCE UNDER BASE FLOW CONDITIONS, PROMOTES AQUATIC HABITAT, NUTRIENT PROCESSING, AND RE -AERATION OF STREAM FLOW
BENEFITING WATER QUALITY. THE D100 PARTICLES OF THE RIFFLE ARE DESIGNED TO RESIST THE SHEAR STRESS ASSOCIATED WITH THE 100-YR
DESIGN STORM WHILE ALLOWING SMALLER SUBSTRATE PARTICLES TO BE MOBILIZED AND REPLACED BY UPSTREAM SEDIMENT SUPPLY.
2. RIFFLE SUBSTRATE SHALL BE QUARRIED STONE UNLESS NATIVE MATERIAL OF SIMILAR SIZE IS AVAILABLE ONSITE AND MEETS THE RIFFLE
SUBSTRATE SIZE REQUIREMENTS. ON -SITE ENGINEER/INSPECTOR MUST APPROVE THE USE OF ALL ONSITE NATIVE MATERIAL.
3. THE GRAVEL AND COBBLE SUBSTRATE USED FOR THIS DESIGN FEATURE SHALL BE PREFERENTIALLY HARVESTED FROM THE EXISTING CHANNEL
AND CUT AREAS ONSITE. ALL HARVESTED GRAVEL AND COBBLE SHALL MEET DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS. SORTING AND SIEVING OF THE HARVESTED
RIFFLE SUBSTRATE IS INCIDENTAL TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS STRUCTURE.
4. LOGS SHALL HAVE MINIMUM DIAMETER OF 2'. LOGS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 24 FEET. ALL LOGS SHALL BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHT WITH
LIMBS AND BRANCHES TRIMMED FLUSH. ALL LOGS SHALL SLOPE UPSTREAM IN THE DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
5. FOR INSTALLATION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE THE LENGTH OF THE RIFFLE, INSTALL STRUCTURES, INSTALL COIR FIBER MATTING, KEY
MATTING INTO THE RIFFLE TRENCH AND ALONG STRUCTURES, AND BACKFILL WITH THE RIFFLE SUBSTRATE TO THE ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THE
PROPOSED PROFILE.
6. FLOODPLAIN BENCHES ARE TO BE CONSTRUCTED FROM RIFFLE SUBSTRATE. INTERSTITIAL SPACES BETWEEN RIFFLE SUBSTRATE MATERIAL
ALONG FLOODPLAIN BENCH SHALL BE FILLED. TOPSOIL SHALL BE INTERMITTENTLY MIXED INTO GAPS TO HELP PROMOTE VEGETATIVE GROWTH.
FLOODPLAIN BENCH IS TO BE TOP DRESSED WITH EXISTING BED MATERIAL.
7. RIFFLE SUBSTRATE SHALL EXTEND A MINIMUM OF 3 FEET UPSTREAM OF THE POINT OF TANGENCY (PT) INTO THE GLIDE.
8. RIFFLE SUBSTRATE SHALL BE USED AS BACKFILL AROUND/BETWEEN ALL STRUCTURES AND BE USED TO CONSTRUCT THE FLOODPLAIN BENCH.
9. RIFFLE SUBSTRATE SHALL BE AT LEAST 2.5 FEET DEEP. RIFFLE SUBSTRATE SHALL BE PLACED AT A UNIFORM THICKNESS.
10. RIFFLE SUBSTRATE SHALL BE PLACED SUCH THAT, IN CROSS-SECTION, ITS LOWEST ELEVATION OCCURS IN THE CENTER OF THE CHANNEL AS PER
THE DETAIL.
11. RIFFLE SUBSTRATE SHALL BE COMPACTED USING TRACKED EQUIPMENT OR AN EXCAVATOR BUCKET SUCH THAT FUTURE SETTLEMENT OF THE
MATERIAL IS KEPT TO A MINIMUM. WITH APPROVAL FROM AND AT THE DIRECTION OF THE ON -SITE ENGINEER AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
INSPECTOR, RIFFLE MATERIAL MAY BE WASHED IN USING AN EXCAVATOR BUCKET PROVIDED ADEQUATE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS ARE
IN PLACE AND FUNCTIONING PROPERLY AT ALL TIMES.
12. THE SURFACE OF THIS STRUCTURE SHALL BE FINISHED TO A SMOOTH AND COMPACT SURFACE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LINES, GRADES, AND
CROSS -SECTIONS OR ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. THE DEGREE OF FINISH FOR INVERT ELEVATIONS SHALL BE WITHIN 0.1 FT OF THE
GRADES AND ELEVATIONS INDICATED.
13. RE -DRESSING OF CHANNEL AND FLOODPLAIN BENCH WILL LIKELY BE REQUIRED FOLLOWING INSTALLATION OF IN -STREAM STRUCTURES AND
SHALL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO CONSTRUCTION. MIGRATION OF FINES, ESPECIALLY AFTER RAINFALL EVENTS, IS TO BE EXPECTED AND
MAY REQUIRE RE -SHAPING OF THE CHANNEL AND RE -DISTRIBUTION OF RIFFLE SUBSTRATE MATERIAL TO MEET PROPOSED GRADES.
14. EXISTING STREAM BED MATERIAL (COBBLE -GRAVEL -SAND) MAY BE USED TO TOP DRESS AND FILL THE MATRIX OF THE RIFFLE SUBSTRATE AT THE
DIRECTION OF THE ON -SITE ENGINEER/INSPECTOR.
NOTE:
BACKFILL SHALL BE PLACED IN 8" LOOSE LIFTS AND COMPACTED
C = HEIGHT USING TRACKED EQUIPMENT OR AN EXCAVATOR BUCKET SUCH
(SHORTEST DIMENSION) THAT FUTURE SETTLEMENT IS KEPT TO A MINIMUM. MINIMUM
STRUCTURE DIMENSIONS SHALL BE +/- 0.5'. BEFORE PLACEMENT OF
BACKFILL, CHANNEL SHALL BE EXCAVATED TO A STABLE SUBGRADE
(APPROVED BY THE ON -SITE ENGINEER/INSPECTOR). FOOTER
BOULDERS MUST HAVE AT LEAST ONE CONTACT POINT WITH
HEADER BOULDERS, AND MAY BE MORE ROUNDED THAN HEADER.
B=WIDTH
(INTERMEDIATE DIMENSION)
A = LENGTH
(LONGEST DIMENSION)
TOP DRESS FLOODPLAIN
FLOODPLAIN BENCH BENCH
WITH EXISTING BED
MATERIAL. SEE °
NOTE 6.
MIN. 3'
LOG ROLLER
(SLOPE UP 1-2% IN THE
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION)
RIFFLE SUBSTRATE
KEY LOGS INTO STREAMBANK MIN. 3 FT MIN. DEPTH = 2.5'
PAST BENCH, INTO UNDISTURBED SOIL
RIFFLE WITH BOULDER STEPS AND LOGS
FLOODPLAIN
BENCH
RIFFLE SUBSTRATE
COIR MATTING
NOT TO SCALE
CROSS SECTION C-C'
TITLE
" ) CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE DETAIL
Z MATTING CHANNEL 5 - NATURAL CHANNEL DESIGN
WSP USA ROGERS ENERGY COMPLEX - CLIFFSIDE STEAM STATION
CLEVELAND COUNTY, MOORSEBORO, NC
2801 YORKMONT ROAD, SUITE 100
CHARLOTTE, NC 28208 FOR
TEL: [phone] FAX: [phone] ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LICENSURE: NC ENG: F-1253 NC GEOLOGY: C-247
SEAL SCALE: AS SHOWN DES: SL
:EY BOULDERS INTO
;TREAMBANK MIN. 3 FT
NOT TO SCALE
DUKEDWG TYPE: DWG DFTR: JDH
ENERGY® JOB NO: 7818220026 CHKD: MTB
PROGRESS DATE: 12/07/2023 ENGR: MTB
FILENAME: CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE DETAIL.dwg APPD: AAJ
DWG SIZE DRAWING NO. REVISION
ANSI FIGURE NSD - 5 0
0 12/07/23 7818220026 LANDFILL SL JDH MTB MTB CONCEPT DESIGN 22"X34"
REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE DES DFTR CHKD ENGR DESCRIPTION
6 7 8 9 10
I I I
A--�
0
C)
F--�

NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
IN -LIEU FEE REQUEST FORM

Print Form
DMS ILF Mitigation Request Statement of Compliance with §143-214.11 & 143-214.20
(link to G.S. 143-214.11)
Prior to accessing the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) In -Lieu Fee (ILF) program, all applicants
must demonstrate compliance with G.S. §143-214.11 and 143-214.20. All requests MUST include this
form signed and dated by the permit applicant or an authorized agent.
Compliance Statement:
I have read and understand G.S. § 143-214.11 and 143-214.20 and have, to the best of my
knowledge, complied with the requirements. I understand that participation in the DMS is
voluntary and subject to approval by permitting agencies.
Please check all that apply:
❑ Applicant is a Federal or State Government Entity or a unit of local
government meeting the requirements set forth in G.S. 143-214.11 and is not
required to purchase credits from a mitigation bank.
❑ Mitigation bank(s) in the hydrologic unit where the impacts will occur have
been contacted and credits are not currently available. (link to DWR list)
❑� There are no listed mitigation banks located in the hydrologic unit where
this impact will take place that offer the credit type I need
❑ The DWR or the Corps of Engineers did not approve of the use of a
mitigation bank for the required compensatory mitigation for this project.
❑ This is a renewal request and the permit application is under review. Bank
credits were not available at the time the application was submitted.
Enter date permit application was submitted for review:
LWT I have read and understand the DMS refund policies (attached)
initial here
Lori TollieDigitally signed by Lori Toll
Date: 02312.130742:43105'00' Lori Tollie
Signature of Applicant or Agent
12/13/2023
Date
Cliffside U51AB Dam Decommissioning
Project Name
Printed Name
Cliffside, NC
Location

DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES (DMS)
IN -LIEU FEE REQUEST FORM Revised Dec 2022
Complete requested information, sign and date, email to kelly.williams(a)ncdenr.gov . Attachments are acceptable for clarification
purposes (location map, address or lat long is required). Information submitted is subject to INC Public Records Law and may be
requested by third parties ...................................................
CONTACT INFORMATION APPLICANT'S AGENT APPLICANT
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
1. Business/Company Name
...........................................................................................
2. Contact Person
...............................................................................................
3. Street Address or P O Box
...............................................................................................
4. City, State, Zip
...............................................................................................
5. Telephone Number
WSP USA E&I Inc.
James Cutler
4021 Stirrup Creek Dr., Suite 100
..................................................................................................................
Durham, NC 27703
..................................................................................................................
[phone]
Duke Energy
...........................................................
Lori W. Tollie
500 Utility Drive
....................................................................................
Lewisville, NC 27012
....................................................................................
[phone]
6. E-Mail Address [e-mail] [e-mail]
PROJECT INFORMATION
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
7. Project Name Cliffside Unit 5 Inactive Ash Basin Dam Decommissioning
...............................................................................................................................................:........................................................................................................................................................................................................:
8. Project Location (nearest town, city) Cliffside, NC (unincorporated community)
s. Lat-Long coordinates or attach a map Latitude 35.217158 / Longitude-81.769195
..................................................................................................................................................:......................................................................................................................................................................................................
10. county Rutherford (majority of project) and Cleveland
11. River Basin & Cataloging Unit (8-digit) Broad River Basin / 8-digit I--IUC 03050105
(See Note 1)
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
12. Project Type "indicate owner type and Owner Type: O Government Q Private
write in project type (e.g. school, church, retail,
residential, apartments, road, utilities, military, Project Type: Electric Power Generation Facility
etc.)**
...................................................................................................................................................:.......................................................................................................................................................................................................
13. Riparian Wetland Impact (ac.) (e.g., 0.13) 0.38 acre (forested wetland; 0.76 acre at 2:1 mitigation ratio)
14. Non -Riparian Wetland Impact (ac.)
:.......................................................................................................................................................:
15. Coastal Marsh Impact (ac.)
...................................................................................................................................................... :
16. Stream Impact (ft.) (e.g. 1,234)
17. Riparian Buffer Impact (sq. ft.)
Include subwatershed if Jordan or Falls Lake:
18. Regulatory Agency Staff Contacts
USACE: Brooke Davis
................................................................................................................................. .
Check (_�) below if this request is for a:
❑ revision to a current acceptance
❑ renewal of an expired acceptance
❑ extension of unexpired acceptance
.................................................................................................................................................................................:
Warm Cool Cold
................................................................................................................................................................................. €
Zone 1:
NCDWR: Sue Homewood
Other:
By signing below, the applicant is confirming they have
read and understand the DMS refund policy attached to th
form.
Signature of Applicant or Authorized Agent:
Digitally signed by Lori Tollie
Lori Tollie Date: 2023.12.13 07:43:22-05'00'
Date: 12/13/2023
Note 1: For help determining the Cataloging Unit, visit "Find Your HUC" and use the search box to find your impact location.
For questions contact Kelly Williams at 919-707-8915 or kelly.williams(c)-ncdenr.gov or the main phone at 919-707-8976.
Save Form Print Form

Refund Policy for Fees Paid to DMS In -Lieu Fee Programs
Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to make clear the circumstances and process under which a
permittee can obtain a refund while simultaneously balancing customer service and responsible
business practices. This policy applies to all refund requests.
Policy Statement: The policy of DMS is to allow for refunds under certain conditions.
1. All refund requests must be made in writing to the DMS In -Lieu Fee Program Coordinator at
kelly.williams(@ncdenr.gov.
2. All refund requests are subject to fund availability. DMS does not guarantee fund availability for
any request.
3. The request must either come from the entity that made the payment or from an authorized agent.
Third parties requesting refunds must provide written authorization from the entity that made the
payment specifying the name and address of the authorized refund recipient.
4. Refund requests related to unintended overpayments, typographical errors or incorrect invoices
should be brought the attention of the In -Lieu Fee Program Coordinator as soon as possible. Such
requests are typically approved without delay.
5. Payments made under the incremental payment procedure are not eligible for refunds.
6. Refund requests made within nine months of payment to DMS will only be considered for requests
associated with projects that have been terminated or modified where the permittee's mitigation
requirements have been reduced. Such requests must be accompanied by written verification from the
permitting agency that the project has been cancelled, the permits have been rescinded or have been
modified, or the mitigation requirements have been reduced.
7. Refund requests made more than nine months from the payment date will only be considered for
permits that were terminated or modified to not require any mitigation. Such requests must be
accompanied by written verification from the permitting agency that the project has been cancelled, the
permits have been rescinded and/or mitigation is no longer required.
8. Refund requests not meeting the criteria specified above are not eligible for a refund.
9. Refund requests that meet the criteria above will be elevated to DMS Senior Management for
review. The following considerations apply to all refund requests:
a. availability of funds after consideration of all existing project and regulatory obligations
b. the date the payment was made
c. the likelihood DMS can use the mitigation procured using the payment to meet other
mitigation requirements
10. Once a refund has been approved, the refund recipient must provide a completed W-9 form to the
DMS In -Lieu fee Program Coordinator within two weeks in order to process the refund though the
State Controller's Office.
11. All decisions shall be final.