20241242 Ver 1_Response to 401 Permit Comments_20241219_20241220

113 Edinburgh South Drive
SWCA
Suite 120
Cary, North Carolina 27511
Tel [phone]
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
www.sw<a.<om
2136 Sound Science. Creative Solutions
December 19, 2024
Stephanie Goss
Supervisor, 401 and Buffer Permitting Branch
Division of Water Resources, NCDEQ
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
.Sh ALBEMARLE"
Albemarle U.S., Inc.
348 Holiday Inn Drive
Kings Mountain NC 28086
www.albemarle.com
By Electronic Mail: [e-mail]
Subject: Response to Request for Additional Information
Kings Mountain Lithium Mine Project
DWR# 20241242
SAW# 20018-00616
Dear Stephanie:
Thank you for the detailed comments you have provided on our 401 certification application, dated
October 31, 2024, and particularly your willingness to extend the response deadline. Our responses to
your request for additional information are provided below with reference to the additional
attachments provided. Should you have any additional questions or comments, please do not hesitate
to reach out to us.
Sincerely,
9-4�� 0"'-� ��k
John Kuhn, Albemarle USA Charlie Benton, SWCA
Mine Environmental Permitting Lead Sr. Natural Resources Team Lead
cc: Emily Greer USACE
Olivia Munzer, NCWRC
Attachments:
1. WOTUS Impact and Compensatory Mitigation Tables
2. Revised WOTUS Impact Maps
3. Figure S-1 Plan and Profile of South Creek Arch Culvert
4. Figure S-2 Plan and Profile for Culverts 63 and 64
5. Figure S-3 OSF-1 Hydrologic and Channel Network
6. Figure S-4 OSF 3 Hydrologic and Channel Network and Figure S-5 OSF 3 Plan and Profile of
Sediment Ponds
7. Figure S-6 WSB Embankment Existing and Proposed Topography and Figure S-7 WSB Grading
Plan and Sections

SWCAI ShALBEMARLE` Kings Mountain Lithium Mine Project
Response to Request for Additional Information
If the US Army Corps of Engineers requests a response to any comments received as a result of
the Public Notice, please provide the Division with a copy of your response to the USACE.
The comment period for the public notice of the 404 application has closed, and the USACE has
indicated that no public comments were received.
2. Please provide a stream and wetland mitigation table that specifically indicates whether
mitigation is proposed for each specific impact area, (or partial impacts) and the mitigation ratio
proposed for the specific impact area. For any impact areas that are not proposed for mitigation
please provide a site -specific justification.
Attachment 1 contains the requested stream and wetland mitigation table. We have adjusted the
impact areas as we developed our responses to your questions. Where appropriate, updated WOTUS
Impact Maps reflecting these changes are provided in Attachment 2.
The impact sites that have been adjusted include S1 (S-A05-PER), S4 (S-A05-PER), S10 (S-A02-INT), S12
(S-A04-PER), and P3 (WB-02-PUB). In addition, we have added a new impact site, S17 (S-1305-INT), to
account for impacts from haul roadside slopes.
3. At the Northern NPI Area:
a. Please explain why this area could not be shifted to the east or reconfigured to utilize more of
the unused area between the proposed infrastructure and the road to provide additional
avoidance and minimization at Impact Area 1.
The North NPI area is located in its current position and configuration to ensure the health and safety of
personnel working in that area. Health and safety considerations integrated into the current design
include:
Facilities located to be outside the blast/fly rock zone of the adjacent mining operation
Building locations and infrastructure design are purpose fit to ensure that:
o Adequate space is provided to allow mine fleet (large equipment) to safely
travel/navigate/turn within the area
o Adequate firefighting access is provided, and
o Utility offset requirements (electric power, gas, water) are met.
b. At Impact Area 1: Notwithstanding the item above [comment on Northern NPI Area], a
significant portion of the proposed impacts are for a stormwater pond. Please provide further
explanation of why a different stormwater collection/storage method is not feasible to reduce
the impacts to the stream at this location. NCDEMLR has a wide range of potential stormwater
control measures, many of which require less area or are more conducive to separate into
multiple smaller stormwater measures which may provide more flexibility in location.

SWCAI ShALBEMARLE` Kings Mountain Lithium Mine Project
The North NPI Area is located on an elevated pad (large area of fill) due to the undulating topography of
the area, which is otherwise unsuitable for foundation development. The stormwater pond is located on
this pad to provide a common collection point for contact stormwater runoff from the entire North NPI
area.
The pond's location provides for positive drainage of stormwater runoff through a force main
discharging at WSB-1. Even if smaller stormwater features were provided within the NPI area, a single
stormwater collection point would be required in order to allow the stormwater to be effectively and
efficiently conveyed by a single pipeline to WSB-1.
C. Section 4.1.1 notes that the stormwater from the pond in this area will be pumped to WSB-1
except during emergency overflow. As a result, the unimpacted section of stream A05 below the
proposed impact area will no longer receive hydrology from the watershed. Please update the
application to include the remaining portion of stream A05 as indirect impacts and adjust impact
tables and mitigation calculations accordingly.
The impact and mitigation table (Attachment 1) and WOTUS Impact Maps (Attachment 2, Figure 24)
have been updated to include the remaining reach of stream A05, to its confluence with another
stream, as an indirect permanent impact.
4. At Impact Area 2:
a. Please provide a more detailed plan that includes proposed contours.
Figure S-1 (Attachment 3) provides contour information for the proposed South Creek arch culvert
under the haul road.
b. It appears that the outlet of the culvert bisects an area with a braided stream channel and the
Division is concerned that all jurisdictional features will not remain functional after culvert
installation. Please provide a plan sheet of sufficient scale to document whether there will be
indirect impacts to any of the jurisdictional features.
Albemarle acknowledges DWR's comment and concern raised by it. Accordingly, we have modified the
alignment of the arch culvert to accurately reflect that outlet location (Attachment 2, Figure 25;
Attachment 3, Figure S-1). Based on the revised alignment of the arch culvert and the associated side
slopes, additional stream impacts have been calculated for Impact Area 2. The impact and mitigation
table (Attachment 1) and WOTUS Impact Maps (Attachment 2) have been updated to include these
additional impacts to S1 (S-A05-PER) and impacts to S17 (S-1305-INT).
C. The proposed roadway slopes are indicated as 3:1. Please explain why steeper slopes cannot be
utilized to further minimize this significant impact.
Safe roads for haulage need to be built in a stable fashion so road failures do not create hazardous
conditions. The design of the haul roads, with a 3:1 slope "shoulder" are designed to provide adequate
stability. The roads are crowned to provide adequate drainage to road BMPs. The shallower slope

SWCAI ShALBEMARLE` Kings Mountain Lithium Mine Project
reduces the potential for scouring of the shoulders or failure of the road, both of which would
contribute to an additional sediment load.
5. At Impact Area 3:
a. Please provide a detailed plan and profile designs for arch culverts 63 and 64.
Figure S-2 (Attachment 4) provides contour detail around these culverts.
b. Please explain why the sediment pond impacting stream A07 cannot be reconfigured to avoid
the impacts below the OSF-1 area.
Sediment Pond 62's location was chosen to take advantage of topography and to minimize the impact of
the project on the existing hydrology of the area. Other factors that make location below OSF-1
unsuitable include:
The narrow corridor of land not owned by Albemarle just south of the OSF-1, which presents
constraints on the pond location and the ability to channel water elsewhere
the presence of other jurisdictional waters (W-A03)
other project features such as haul roads and electrical infrastructure routing in the
immediate area.
C. Section 4.1.3 notes that a stormwater pond in this area will be utilized to maintain water quality
in downstream resources. Please clarify this statement as the plan sheet only indicates sediment
ponds in use within this area.
The ponds referenced in Section 4.1.3 provide both stormwater flow mitigation and sedimentation
control. The pond labels on the WOTUS Impact Maps (Attachment 2, Figure 25) have been updated (to
more accurately reflect the function of the ponds.
d. Please provide a description or plan sheet of how groundwater will be managed within the
impacted area.
Groundwater in the area will change during the life of the project as the topography changes. The OSFs
and RSF-A are not lined features. The built-up topography resulting from the OSF will cause a mounding
of the phreatic surface that follows the regional trend of closely following topography, and may slightly
increase baseflow in nearby creek channels. The general groundwater flow will not be unimpeded by the
construction of the OSF, or be intercepted by the collection ponds and will continue to discharge
downstream.
e. At Impact Area 3: It appears that the stormwater from the watershed in this area will be directed
into 2 sediment ponds. Please provide additional details for what drainage areas these sediment
ponds will capture and show the proposed outlets of the sediment ponds in order for the Division
to evaluate whether there will be any hydrological losses to the unimpacted section of stream
A07.
4

SWCAI ShALBEMARLE` Kings Mountain Lithium Mine Project
The two sediment ponds (Pond 62 and 63) associated with OSF-1 will capture and provide
sedimentation control for water directly contacting the OSF-1 structure and the haul roads surrounding
it. Figure S-3 OSF-1 Hydrologic Map (Attachment 5) indicates the topography of the drainage areas, the
drainage basins and indicates the discharge locations. Please note that DP 002 is the outlet of Pond 63,
while DP 003 is the outlet of Pond 62. DP 004 indicates the "run-on" drainage discharge location.
The total drainage basin area of 100.6 acres contributing to stream S-A07 is generally divided into two
areas:
• "run on" Areas RO1 and RO2 (totaling 84 acres), which will not be changed topographically
other than flow will be diverted around the structure and continue to be discharged into stream
S-A07 at DP004 as shown in the drawing.
• "runoff" (from the OSF structure, RF-1, RF-2, RF-3, and RF-4, totaling 16.8 acres ), which will be
directed to Ponds 62 and 63 for sedimentation control. This area, currently forested, will be
revegetated (grassed) within one year of commencement of construction.
The "run-on" flow (representing 84% of the total drainage in the area) will simply be diverted around
the structure before discharging into the same system as it currently does, while the runoff will be
collected in the sediment ponds before discharging. The runoff flow (16% of the drainage basin area)
may be slightly, but not significantly, changed due to the different land use. Specifically, runoff
coefficients for grassed areas (0.10 to 0.25) are nearly identical to those for undeveloped (0.10 to 0.30).
Overall, there will not be a significant change to the overall hydrologic flow contributing to stream reach
stream S-A07.
6. At Impact Area 4:
Please provide plans that clearly show proposed drainage areas and collection methods. The
narrative in Section 4.1.4 of the report indicates that surface and groundwater will be directed to
a stormwater pond, however the plan sheet also shows a sediment pond. The plan sheet does
not provide location of outlets of either structure. It is unclear that either of these features will
provide sufficient hydrology to maintain the existing uses in the unimpacted portions of streams
A-4 and A02 above the confluence of these channels.
Two ponds (WRC Pond 61 and SED Pond 64) are associated with the construction of RSF-A and OSF-3 as
shown on the WOTUS Impact Maps (Attachment 2, Figure 26). WRC Pond 61 is a stormwater collection
pond that will manage drainage from the RSF-A structure and the haul roads associated with it. The
stormwater collected in WRC Pond 61 will be conveyed by a pipeline to WSB-1 for sedimentation
control. The sedimentation pond 64 will collect stormwater and provide sedimentation control for the
OSF-3. The outlet for this pond will discharge toward stream S-A02 (Attachment 6, Figures S-4 and S-5).
Albemarle recognizes that the footprint for the RSF-A occupies the majority of the S-A02 and S-A04
drainage basins. As a result, the unimpacted section of these two streams below the proposed fill impact
area will receive significantly less hydrology from the watershed. The impact and mitigation table
(Attachment 1) and WOTUS Impact Maps (Attachment 2) have been updated to include these additional
impacts to S10 (S-A02-INT) and impacts to S12 (S-A04-PER).

SWCAI ShALBEMARLE` Kings Mountain Lithium Mine Project
7. At Impact Area 7:
Section 4.1.7 of the application states that "WSB-1 will be used to supply make-up water for the
concentrator plant and dust control. " Please provide a water use budget for future WSB-1 so
that the Division may evaluate any potential indirect losses to adjacent wetlands or downstream
existing uses.
Albemarle performed a water balance model to assessment pre -and post -development flows from WSB-
1, which included withdrawals for make-up and dust control water. Dust control water requirements are
expected to range from 3,000 to 12,000 gallons per day, and will normally be taken from the waters
being routed to WSB-1. Dust control water will only be withdrawn from WSB-1 if there is no, or
insufficient, stormwater flow from the mine pit, though the model assumes all dust control water is
taken from WSB-1 as a conservative measure.
The technical memo, Water Balance Model Comparison between Pre -Development and Post -
development Flows at the Kings Mountain Project, details the impact of the project on flows from
Executive Club Lake/WSB-1 and into the downstream hydrology. The memo concludes that flows from
will be higher than pre -development (current) current conditions. The post -development flows will be
higher because of the addition of additional watersheds (e.g., continued flows from dewatering the
mine pit, and flows from other features on the site that will be collected and transferred to WSB-1),
which are larger than the anticipated withdrawals for dust control and makeup water. In particular,
Figure 9 in Section 3.1.3 of this technical memo depicts the comparison between pre- and post -
development flows. The following is an extract from this technical memo.
3.1.3 Discharge from Executive Club Lake/Water Storage Basin 1
The existing Executive Club Lake is a former tailings impoundment remaining from previous
mining activities at the site. During the mine development, the previously breached
embankment will be restored to form the Water Storage Basin 1 (WSB-1), and the water level
will be controlled with an outlet structure. Contact water from the Project suitable for discharge
to the surrounding waters is discharged into WSB-1 prior to discharging into Kings Creek
downstream of Highway 85. A comparison of Predicted discharge from WSB-1 and No -
development flows discharged from Executive Club Lake are shown in Figure 9. The flow
increase observed during the mining phase of the project is the result of the contact water flows
discharged into WSB-1, including operational pit dewatering flows, Non-PAG Contact flows from
RSF-A and the ROM Pad, and treated PAG Contact Flows from RSF-X. These flows are added to
the existing watersheds contributing to WSB-1, including areas previously diverted around
Executive Club Lake. WSB-1 will be breached and allowed to return to pre -development
conditions once the mine enters the post -closure period, which accounts for the discharge spike
predicted in Mine Year 13, shown in Figure 9.

SWCAI ShALBEMARLE` Kings Mountain Lithium Mine Project
Figure 9: No -Development and Predicted Flows at Executive Club Lake / WS13-1
Source: Water Balance Model Comparison between Pre -Development and Post -development Flows at the Kings Mountain Project
b. Please clarify whether Executive Club Lake is proposed to be drained in order to complete the
WSR-1 modifications described in Section 4.1.7 of the application. Please provide a plan that
indicates the clean water management plan during embankment modifications.
During construction of WSB-1, the current plan is to lower the elevation of Executive Club Lake by a
relatively small amount to provide some freeboard and safety for construction crews. The pond level will
be lowered by pumping water over the dam and through W-1314 downstream of the dam. We do not
expect water quality to be significantly impacted by this approach.
The required safety freeboard and detailed water management plan will be developed during the
subsequent design phase of the project. Overall, an erosion and sediment control plan that complies
with the specific requirements of the Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual (North
Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission 2013) will be implemented and be submitted for approval
prior to construction.
It is unclear from the plans provided whether the modifications to the embankment will modify
the existing contours and/or hydrology such that indirect impacts would occur to the portion of
W-814 downstream of the new embankment. Please provide more detailed plans and/or an
analysis to address this concern.
Figures S-6 and S-7 (Attachment 7) provide existing and proposed contours for the WS13-1 embankment
modifications and reference for the remainder of this response.
The proposed construction work will comprise reinstating the dam to near its previous crest elevation.
This will include rebuilding the section of the dam that was breached at the end of the previous
operations. To control the pond level upstream of the dam, a decant pipe will be constructed through
the location of the current breach and the dam will be rebuilt over the top of the pipe. Water flow rates
through the decant pipe are expected to be similar or somewhat higher than the existing base flow
through the current breached section of the dam, with the discharge point at the same location where

SWCAI ShALBEMARLE` Kings Mountain Lithium Mine Project
water currently flows over the dam. Therefore, the existing hydrology below the dam will be maintained
sufficiently to preserve the function of wetland W-1314 and other jurisdictional features located below
the dam.
As indicated in Figures S-6 and S-7, reinstatement of the dam breach will not affect topography other
than within the breached section that will be filled, and a small section where the embankment toe
buttress will be constructed. The work required to rebuild the breached section of the dam will be
largely accomplished by accessing the area from the existing embankment. There may be some
temporary need to access areas beyond the footprint of the currently shown proposed dam raise for
construction activities and clearing. This disturbance corridor should be limited to less than 15 feet, and
appropriate temporary protective measures (such as timber mats, etc.) will be employed to avoid
impacts in areas of wetland W-1314 immediately adjacent to the embankment.
8. At Impact Area 9:
a. Please provide justification for the proposed stormwater discharge within wetland WB-B02. It
appears that further minimization is possible by realigning the stormwater conveyance and
riprap diffuser to an adjacent upland area.
It is not possible to realign the conveyance and riprap diffuser to the adjacent upland area. The location
of the conveyance is constrained by property boundaries and electrical transmission lines in the area,
and by the topography of the area (Figure 1).
ELECTRICAL
BULDNG%/ ,
RTrR CDNCENTRATOR
T BINs- TRH �y�/ECIGINNG
Ur,, vEMCl E �FN' "" OR
WASH BAY GATEISECURITY
OFHCE PI.AHTFEED
STOCKPILE
REAGENT AREA
T!R
GHNG
SCREENS ^.� ♦ LIGNiL \� Pdp N � .I
WASH BAT ROTARY DRYER
ELECTRICAL
' BLOWN
• f \ SEPARATIIIN
OIYCENTRATOR DIFFUSER
FrU EFYGNANGE j V
MPRL DMSBUILDNG �- Existing depression
yBUILDONG
• GM-4 I FN6 TIDN FUTURE OMS
FLOTATION
AKLA BULONG BULONG BUILDING R�LKFILL �.
ELECTRICAL BUILDING GHECWAM 1
THICKENING —W •/
i
GL N' AREA - � • .
RAGE 4f � ♦ -
CONCENTRATORWATER
FLFCTRICAL TREATMENT PLANT • �� i
Figure 1. Figure depicting the constraints of locating the riprap diffuser.
E-1

SWCAI ShALBEMARLE` Kings Mountain Lithium Mine Project
These constraints require that the conveyance cross the wetland W-A16 and a ridgeline formed by a
gravel road to reach the riprap diffuser at the top of WSB-1.
The riprap diffuser's location (within WB-1302 as noted) is driven by the presence of an existing depression
(Figure 1) that creates the WB-1302 feature between the diffuser and the rockfill check dam locations. This
feature will be utilized to reduce the effects of scouring by adding a rockfill check dam at its lower end, and
to contain and limit sedimentation deposition to that defined area, rather than spread out over a larger area.
During our inquiry to your question, we realized that the sedimentation in WB-1302 will create an impact
we had not initially considered. Accordingly, we have updated the submittal to indicate the impact to
this open water body between the diffuser and the rockfill check dam. The impact and mitigation table
(Attachment 1) and WOTUS Impact Maps (Attachment 2) have been updated to include this additional
impact to P3 (W13-1302).
b. Please clarify why the proposed intake structure is located within the upper section of WSB-1. It
would appear that an intake structure in this location has the potential to cause indirect impacts
to the hydrology of the unimpacted wetland system upstream of the pond.
Albemarle clarified the arrangement of the water intake in WSB-1 during a phone conference on
November 8, 2024, with Sue Homewood. Her subsequent 11/12/2024 email indicated this issue is
settled to her satisfaction and does not require further response.

Attachment 1
WOTUS Impact and Compensatory Mitigation Tables

SWCAI 3\ ALBEMARLE Kings Mountain Lithium Mine Project
Table 1. WOTUS Impact and Compensatory Mitigation Table - Wetlands
Impact
Site #
W1
Reason for
ImpactWetland
Impact Area 1
Impact Typ:7
Permanent
etland Nam(
W-001-PFO
Impact area
0.30
Wetland
PFO
Mitigation
2:1
Mitigation
0.60
W2
Impact Area 3
Permanent
W-07A-PSS
0.50
PSS
2:1
1.00
W3
Impact Area 4
Permanent
W-A01-PFO
0.02
PFO
2:1
0.04
W4
Impact Area 6
Permanent
W-1305-PEM
0.08
PEM
2:1
0.16
W5
Impact Area 6
Permanent
W-1305-PSS
0.10
PSS
2:1
0.20
W6
Impact Area 6
Permanent
W-1306-PFO
0.12
PFO
2:1
0.24
W7
Impact Area 7
Permanent
W-A39-PEM
0.03
PEM
2:1
0.06
W8
Impact Area 7
Permanent
W-1314-PFO
0.23
PFO
2:1
0.46
W9
Impact Area 8
Conversion
W-1314-PEM
0.83
PEM
1:1
0.83
W10
Impact Area 8
Conversion
W-1314-PEM
0.16
PEM
1:1
0.16
W11
Impact Area 8
Conversion
W-1314-PFO
0.32
PFO
1:1
0.32
W12
Impact Area 8
Conversion
W-1314-PFO
0.36
PFO
1:1
0.36
W13
Impact Area 8
Conversion
W-1314-PFO
0.20
PFO
1:1
0.20
W14
Impact Area 8
Conversion
W-1314-PFO
0.02
PFO
1:1
0.02
W15
Impact Area 8
Conversion
W-1314-PSS
1.69
PSS
1:1
1.69
W16
Impact Area 8
Conversion
W-1314-PSS
0.11
PSS
1:1
0.11
W17
Impact Area 9
Permanent
W-1314-PSS
0.06
PSS
2:1
0.12
W18
Impact Area 9
Permanent
W-1314-PSS
0.16
PSS
2:1
0.32
W19
Impact Area 9
Permanent
W-1314-PSS
0.06
PSS
2:1
0.12
W20
Impact Area 9
Permanent
W-A16-PEM
0.03
PEM
2:1
0.06
W21
Impact Area 9
Permanent
W-Al6-PSS
0.05
PSS
2:1
0.10
Total
6.43
Total
7.17

SWCAI 3\ ALBEMARLE Kings Mountain Lithium Mine Project
Table 2. WOTUS Impact and Compensatory Mitigation Table - Streams
ImpactStream
Site #
S1
Reason for Impact
Impact Area 1
Impact Type
Permanent
Stream Name
S-A05-PER
Stream Type
Perennial
..
(ft)
1202
Mitigation
Ratio
2:1
.. .
Credits
2404
S2
Impact Area 1
Permanent
S-0O2-PER
Perennial
346
2:1
692
S3
Impact Area 1
Permanent
S-0O3-INT
Intermittent
96
1:1
96
S4
Impact Area 2
Permanent
S-A05-PER
Perennial
527
2:1
1054
S5
Impact Area 3
Permanent
S-A07A1-INT
Intermittent
80
1:1
80
S6
Impact Area 3
Permanent
S-A07A-PER
Perennial
272
2:1
544
S7
Impact Area 3
Permanent
S-A07-INT
Intermittent
33
1:1
33
S8
Impact Area 3
Permanent
S-A07-PER
Perennial
1054
2:1
2108
S9
Impact Area 3
Permanent
S-A07-PER
Perennial
159
2:1
318
S10
Impact Area 4
Permanent
S-A02-INT
Intermittent
324
1:1
324
S11
Impact Area 4
Permanent
S-A04-INT
Intermittent
1,037
1:1
1,037
S12
Impact Area 4
Permanent
S-A04-PER
Perennial
750
2:1
1500
S13
Impact Area 5
Permanent
S-1308-PER
Perennial
116
2:1
232
S14
Impact Area 6
Permanent
S-1307-PER
Perennial
561
2:1
1122
S15
Impact Area 7
Permanent
S-A17-INT
Intermittent
226
1:1
226
S16
Impact Area 10
Permanent
S-A13-INT
Intermittent
446
1:1
446
Impact Area 2
Permanent
S-B05-INT
Intermittent
45
1:1
45
Total
En
7,274
Total
12,261

SWCAI 3\ ALBEMARLE Kings Mountain Lithium Mine Project
Table 3. WOTUS Impact and Compensatory Mitigation Table — Open Waters
Open Water
Impact Site # Reason for Impact
Impact Area 7
Impact Type
i
Name of Waterbody
i
Activity
Type
Impact area
(acres)
Mitigation
Ratio
�
Mitigation
Credits
Impact Area 8
Impact Area 9

Attachment 2
Revised WOTUS Impact Maps

.
-
`}�
-----
U)
.
.
.
.. �:
#«
S
.
|
|
.
q
§�\f\\®
)�
- - \
- - - - -
- - - -
_
--�
-- ---)
_/
E--
w � jam\
.
/
_®
Ir
D
>2
2 }
!
Wiz((
¢�
-
RE
R
� 0
» I
/
!
.
2 2
z f
.
u) )3)
|
LLJw
.
|
§$00
}
'
|
�� /
|
.
§
�
2
07\)\)
|\
zz=m=m
�
_ §
\){>§2e
�
|
\
|
�
.
2
|Im
«$
!W-
�
\!)§} 7
LLI
\)wQU)E
-
© /e ®
|
'|i
0. `m

1 1
1 1
1
I
1 1
i
1
1 1
1
1
1 1
II
1 1
1 1
II
1 1
1
1 1
1 1
0
Io
z:_
oq� '
1 E
I
1
1 E
1
` 1
_ - 1
I
1
1
I
i
1
1
E
1 v
d =
, I U
U
1 z z
I
1
1
1 I
1 ; 1
1 1
1
1 , 1
1
E ;
1 1
\ , 1
1 1
\ , 1
\ 1 \
\ 1 \
\ 1 \
\ I s 1
1 � 1
1 ,
ITI1
1 1
\ I 1
1 ,
\ 1 ,
\ 1 ,
-tl 1
t 1 1
t 1 1
t I 1
\ E
1 1 E ,
1 1
� I 1
1 1 1
\ 1 1
1
r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
a`
o�
o R
3a
o �
C� m

♦ D I
`♦ i
♦
D
1 <L
♦ �
♦ I U°
D E
♦ O ZQ
♦, (' /
♦�`,
0
/ � m
/ Q C
/ C � w ♦ 1
I
/ , m
I
/ \ m
/ 1 `� W o
♦ I `� a a
%% .. w `♦ `♦ U a a
`, a cmi o `♦ 1 `♦� W ,a m e
rrz z
`% z \ ¢ ♦♦ 1 z y♦ Q
` U I O
%
`, a I CY Z W%�w
UZ _ > m
` d � Q�C{w� _ � Y �
•,
/E ,
/ a ♦ K >. d d
gU W a W a
LL
♦♦ m E `, z
♦ U `
m
1 //u" ' \
1 \U
U'
1 ED 1 OF s `♦ z U
r w 1 c� ♦ � N ..-
1 ,N W o, a
1 >= <ut = 0 j N N
1 �a z� rs¢ ® W F i 0
o LL
m
%
♦
w
,. ♦ z z
w m o
w mo
O o o m o o
♦ w Z in �= in w=
0
a F III �S
— o
�la w
O w R R
C C
O' LL
Im Cf y m U
,I' O E E 0
�U • 0 o o O o
W ' y z' R E z K d
0
yE wz0z4,
U'
y Z R
CY `
a
WU0
` z:
1 o wl mm W a `°
1 (\\ E \ f (7 w a
,. Q • w I
BE
Qw
O \ r as
� C �
4 4 0 LL

}\
/
%
§J
(§\
_
�\\
%
\

Z
O
lW O
Z
b 1

�.
�|
..
- P k \\\
/\}\\
.
q k kk
\ \,\\7
§�\77`J
eaa/\
�_
LLJ
§ $ I / /
,
® ...
-
§co
~�
G y=
_
�B Co
§(z2
z ,
z ){{ w
)
so
m
■ )ƒf3§f
w/
&6}}6}
\
§ �
«�
§
e 0
0\_;{_;
�,§»t§»
§)/)j/)
A}�����
----
— - -------------------
---------
- - -
-- ---------
�
o|=�
)0
-- - — -- ---
/
�-
k § e
|
|
|
.
CY
\0 3
�!§§) S
)
\\/$k|0
_RE
\ /_}
oa `m

Attachment 3
Figure S-1 Plan and Profile of South Creek Arch Culvert

m(-
2\§
\ \ \ \ } \ \�
R1§
<
�
1111,61.
i
}
}Z
iZ
\
}Z
,
i
\
! }
`
� !
i }
\
}
r
�
!
}
�
;
!
Z
�
}
�
}
�
:
§
}
�\
--A
,
Z
�}
(
}i
\
ELEVATION a_,

Attachment 4
Figure S-2 Plan and Profile for Culverts 63 and 64

O O O O O
D T 3C00
W
of Z
LLJ J
J 0
I
C)J
o
U LL
of X
I\
LL
l
L LJ
UQ O
1
� Q
Z Z
H �
co O
of
Lu C�
O O O O O
� � � O 00
('13) NOUVA3-13
O
_N
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
i
LL
O O O O O
� � � O 00
Q
Q
O
ui
Co�
I
IrJ
UJ Co
of
U
Q°
O
I�
C)U-
Q
Z_ Z
H �
U O
W C�
I I I I I
O O O O O
m m m CD co
O co
('13) NOUVA3-13
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
i
H
W
LU
Cl)LL
3: C:)
LO
Lw
L
O J z_
Q O
Cl) a J
Q
U
Cl)
N
z
Q
Ch
o
LU
;
J
NW�/
z LL
Df
a Z
(D
z O
LL
U
J
a W
U)
J
Q
z U
z
o
> Q
Q d
�
6
a
J
W
i
V
N
Oz In LL
J
p
N
w O =
o of
z
U
u
a a LL
0
0
O
L
4-0
� z
z
0
O 2
U 0
z
ON Y
LU
J
y
W
m
J
Q
m
o F
� U
w O
a a
Cl)
U
LU
Q
O
Nv
LL
o
o
0
w
w
K
o
o
m
LL
w OC) CO
F
Y Z
a
>
J
<
m L
> � LL
m w d
m z N
U
Q
>
J
(�
x
o
x
c7
i
o
"w<
LL
O p
Q
U
z
z
z
0
00 2
0_ 10
0- Q
S
Cl)Cl)o
U
~
0
X
0
0
U
N
4
LU
Q
Q
O
LO
s
Z w
Q
O Q
LU C)
H U
U co
N
w
w
T
I
w 0
LL s
U
Q
ao
Q ~
O
N
O
Z
a
}
0
a
I�
6
Y

Attachment 5
Figure S-3 OSF-1 Hydrologic and Channel Network

M
Ch
N
z
/ G
w
�_� COS
z
J
LU
o �
_
D a _
Z
Z
LL
\ 7
O ` \ U _
C) � �U
p�c) p
Q
LL
W
�w0�\ (4 z�
Op
z
o —� o,
°Df
ofw� I � �Il U)
o
oLO
}_
N
w O
1 iZ�
m�
ce�
i
3 of
�
O
p
o
p
- LoIr Cl) Q p
Cl)
_ Ll
a �vv � Lr cfl 5 � O Q
— z,� sus, —� �� N U�
c
p(LL
O A
ry� —�� _ o U z O�
Q of
> _ LL p
_ ofLn p Z N J
�/ (O' U)000 Q
�
Z
� � Z
a-
F-
% U
t
z
Q
/
o -oss-
Q co
C)o
� 0 O
(0
CO
0
LL
Df LU
N / < LL
J
m
i
�=)10
y
2
m o
m
LU
o a
O
m
V U D
Z d
o
w
w O
\ l
li
w
o
aLL
¢Za
w-cl)
ow
w 7
' O/'
LLw�
oo
ow
w
<
O
~
CD
O W
04 LLL
Z
z H z a
i
Lu LU Lu
O of
U 2 Q
— — /
co
\ /
'o z Q o I-- LU
— � r
z

Attachment 6
Figure S-4 OSF 3 Hydrologic and Channel Network
Figure S-5 OSF 3 Plan and Profile of Sediment Ponds

Ch
\�
z
LU
o �
z
z
IL
co =
LL
N
o O
0O \\\
NO
O
O
Ir
d
m
�
LIJ O
i
LU
m
4-0
Z W
d
z
H
0
W
�/��
z
'J //�� V
f \/\ \ ':
OW J \d\ f V Q `~\\ M \
O
O
CO
11f
1
>Lo 0% �'� U V C7� e Off\
\ \
0 O \ \ \ \ :�. \M W r \ \\\
Lu
m
J
w O
\
/<
o-
U
z
Ow <Q,
2E
w
+,
�m� { z
w
a
O
(D
LL
O
-D LL
LU
5'` \ LLB\
w z
z W
� \\z A\ /
F- Lu U) vUi
����
LL"oz�
O 0 w
w o o
0- Z n L r�rA d
>> Oi W a
a0z ������ z� �\
o� z

I

Attachment 7
Figure S-6 WSB Embankment Existing and Proposed
Topography
Figure S-7 WSB Grading Plan and Sections