No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20241242 Ver 1_Response to 401 Permit Comments_20241219_20241220113 Edinburgh South Drive SWCA Suite 120 Cary, North Carolina 27511 Tel 919.29.292.2200 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: stephanie.goss@deq.nc.gov 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