19910043 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_19910202

IMPORTANT
To
WHILE YOU WERE OUTC--,-?
M 7--1/ e,--' Z
ofC
- 76 3G
Phone
AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION
TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL

Signed
N.C. Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
'0'
Printed on Recycled Paper
IMPORTANT
To
_
WHILE /YOU WERE OUT
M ?- 'd
j?
of
Phone lU da ?0/
AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION
TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
Signed
N.C. Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
??? Printed on Recycled Paper
tic, .-* "r
-/
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G..Martln, Governor
January 2
Dr. G. Wayne Wright
Corps of Engineers
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
Dear Dr. Wright:
a
4-
. 4 m al
t$ LO
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
In keeping with yor request, this office has circulated to interested
state review agencies U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Public Notice Action ID.
199101609 dated August 18, 1991 which describes a project proposal by the City
of Concord represented by Concord Engineering and Surveying, of Concord. The
project, involving wetland fill and clearing in the installation of 24,.000
feet of sewer interceptor is located southwest of Concord, in Cabarrus County.
The alignment involves six river crossings and, under the original design,
some fifteen acres of forested wetland would be impacted.
During early stages of the review, the Wildlife Resources Commission was
one of several agencies objecting, expressing concern or requesting more
information. I can now report to you that the state interposes no objection
to the project provided stringent environmental safeguards as generally set
forth below are closely adhered to throughout the construction and restoration
stages of the project. Agency recommendations which this viewpoint position
supports are as follows:
Wildlife Resources Commission: - in a memorandum of December 18
reported that final resolution of that agency's concerns will occur
provided the permit requires 1) contour and topography in all
disturbed areas be restored, 2) a detailed revegetation plan
(utilizing wetlands species) is submitted for review and acceptance
by that agency and 3) corridor width by permit condition is held
to a maximum of 50 feet and a narrower corridor be used where
practicable;
Division of Environmental Management - issued the required Section
401 Water Quality Certification on October 30. Certification No.
2641 contains important environmental safeguards;
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
it A
Dr. G. Wayne Wright
Page 2
January 2, 1992
Division of Archives and History - reported in a letter December
5 to Mr. Frank A. Rankin of Concord Engineering that .... "no
further work in connection with sites 31CA 210 and 31CA 211" is
required. This follows that agency's May 14 correspondence to
Concord Engineering requesting more information on those sites;
Division of Highways - would remind the applicant that all work
within the highway-rights-of-way will require review and approval
of detailed plans by the local D.O.T. District office;
Division of Land Resources - early in the review expressed concern
over the complexity of the project and its high potential for
creating sediment problems. It is the writer's understanding that
Concord Engineering has resolved many of these issues and a Sedi-
mentation and Erosion Control Plan has been recently approved.
Should you require additional input from the state on this matter, do not
hesitate to contact this office or the responding agencies.
Very sincerely,
4 Jo n R. Parker, Jr.
Inland '404 Coordinator
JRP : j r / aw
cc: Wildlife Resources Commission /
Division of Environmental Management/
Division of Archives & History
Division of Highways
Divison of Land Resources
Concord Engineering
COE, Asheville
?s.,.•srngo
S?
1W ?'?` F
v VF pun vON ?`
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
October 30, 1991
Regional Offices Mr. Frank A. Rankin, III
George T. Everett, Ph.D.
Director
Asheville Concord Engineering and Surveying, Inc. `
704/251-6208 post Office Box 268
Fayetteville Concord, North Carolina 28026-0268
919/486-1541
Mooresville Dear Mr. Rankin:
704/663-1699
Subject: Certification Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal
Raleigh Clean W4ter Act,
919/733-2314 Proposed Rocky River sewer line
Washington Project # 91255, COE# 199101609
919/946-6481 Cabarrus County
Wilmington
919/395-39W Attached-hereto is a copy of Certification No. 2641 issued
to City of Concord dated October 30, 1991.
Winston-Salem
919/896-7007
If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to
contact us.
Attachments
Sincerely,
6,eo ge T. Everett
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Regional Office
Mooresville DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Mr. John Parker
Central Files
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] / Pollution Prevention Pavs
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
AP - .-L
NORTH CAROLINA
Cabarrus County
CERTIFICATION
THIS CERTIFICATION is issued in conformity with the requirements
of Section 401 Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the United States
and subject to the North Carolina Division of Environmental
Management Regulations in 15 NCAC 2H, Section .0500 to City of
Concord pursuant to an application filed on the 26 day of
April, 1991'to construct 24,136 linear feet of 30-inch sewer line
down the Rocky River floodplain.
The Application provides adequate assurance that the
discharge of fill material into the waters of Rocky River and
adjacent wetlands in conjunction with the proposed sewer line in
Cabarrus County will not result in a violation of'applicable
Water Quality Standards and discharge guidelines.. Therefore, the
State of North Carolina certifies that this activity will-not
violate Sections 301, 302, 303, 306, 307 of PL 92'500 and PL
95-217 if conducted in accordance with the application and .
conditions hereinafter set forth.
Condition(s) of Certification:
1. That the activity be conducted in such a manner as to
prevent significant increase in turbidity outside the area
of construction or construction related discharge (increases
such that the turbidity in the Stream is 25 NTU's or less
are not considered significant).
2. The construction corridor shall be 50 feet in width except
that up to 2250 feet of sewer line may be constructed at up
to 75 feet of width. These later areas shall be recorded on
the plan and profile sheets and supplied to the Mooresville
Regional office at biweekly intervals. If clearing beyond
the 50 foot width is needed for more than 2250 linear feet of
sewer, the applicant shall notify the. Mooresville DEM
Regional office by phone and in writing at least two days
before construction to obtain DEM's written consent. With
this written consent, corridor width beyond 50 feet may be
approved for more than 2250 linear feet as noted above.
3. The permanent corridor after installation shall be 10 feet
wide except in locations which are needed for a reasonable
turning radius for equipment. These locations shall be
specified on a map and agreed upon by DEM.
4. Public vehicular access to the sewer line corridor after
construction shall be restricted with a locked gate system.

Certification continued
5. The construction corridor not required in the 10 foot
permanent easement shall be restored to its original contour
and-allowed to regrow into native woody and nonwoody
vegetation. Mowing or other intensive maintenance is not
allowed in the area outside the 10 foot easement as described
in condition 3.
.
Vidlations of any condition herein set forth shall result in
revocation of this Certification.
This Certification shall become null and void unless the above
conditions are made conditions of the Federal Permit.
• i
This the 30 day of October, 1991.
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
xk?
'?-'•
e rge T. Everett, 0 irector
WQC# 2641
9
e ^` srnn °
J J
? Owu. vOd
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, N a 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
,... W. Cc1ey, Jr., SecretEly
-'
Z:
k;1!?%.
Dr. George T.-Everett
Division of Environmental Management
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Dr.. EyQrett:
The attached U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Public Notice No. 1609 dated
4/18/91 describing a project proposed by The City of Concord
is being circulated-to interested state agencies for comments on applicable
Section 404 and/or Section 10 permits.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint"on the proposed
project and return this form by 5/15/91
Very sincerely,
John R. Parker, Jr.
404 Coordinator
REPLY This office objects to the project as proposed.
2 _j?Comments on this project are attached.
?' b.4- uo`f -
This office suppe-pts the project proposal.
No comment.
Signed -9 LI k,
Date
I 2)q)
Agency
JRP:jr/aw
P.O. Box 27687. Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
A - C...._I (?............:... J AFf:_._,..:..e A_.:,... G.....?....?_
j p+a STATpa
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
WATER QUALITY SECTION
FAX # [phone]
TELECOPY TO:
f

FAX NUMBER: 0 -)< 7
FROM: PHONE:
NO. OF PAGES, INCLUDING COVER SHEET:
COMMENTS:
cs_*
?d P O kA) I PA AT
410
1 I?7? - -
STATE
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
WATER QUALITY SECTION
FAX # [phone]
TELECOPY TO. 4
FAX NUMBER: 0 q - ),5 og: g
FROM: a OV PHONE: 9/q -7 33 5043
NO. OF PAGES, INCLUDING COVER SHEET:
COMMENTS :
? / a1w •

... dµ yT/17Eo
•? q.w?
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
WATER QUALITY SECTION
FAX # [phone]
TELECOPY TO:
wa4e""-
FAX NUMBER:
ou- C0?3-6)e `fe

FROM: O PHONE: 5M3
NO. OF PAGES, INCLUDING COVER SHEET:
COMMENTS:
? n ' l1
0
( lc?-j ?J/ ' (10)11? 6114V -
Ai? IV4 If
J-2?' 4aml -P?

CONC-<?RD
ENGINEERING &
SURVEYING, INC.
October 17, 1991
NDEHNR
Division of Environmental Management
P. O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Attn: Mr. John IL Dorney
Re: City of Concord. Rocky River Interceptor Sewer
Dear Mr Dorney:

As you suggested, I have reviewed with Concord's City Engineer the area's within the
wetland where we feel we may encounter conditions that would require clearing beyond the
typical 50' width. City Engineer Tim Lowder and myself feel that problems are most likely
to occur were the sewer depths are excessive. Of the 15,000 linear feet of sewer that is all
or partially within the wetland areas we feel that unsuitable subsurface conditions requiring
clearing in excess of 50' in width would be encountered on no more than 15% of this 15,000
LF length.
I trust this information will be useful. I hope to hear from you on this matter at your
earliest convenience. Thank you for your input and assistance.
Sincerely,
ENGINEERING & SURVEYING, INC.
j-
Frank A. Rankin, III, PE, RLS
cc: Steve Lund, COE
Allen Hardy, DEMMRO
John Parker, DCM
Tim Lowder, COC
Steve Slough, COC
NCSS • NSPS • ACSM • NSPE • PENC
P.O. Box 268 0 45 Spring Street, SW 0 Concord, NC 28026-0268 0 [phone] 0 Charlotte - [phone] • Fax - [phone]
KMO
DATE:
TO: SUBJECT:
??13? ? l 9 'I s ,ern
ca.P?,-? Cave co?Q ?
C
v
aviccfs
A 1
1 Gam- ??%?
cM? VIfU-9 /all From:
w? r
,y??.?s.5TA7E ct
North Carolina Department of Environment
Health and Natural Resources
??, aunn?' ? v? Printed on Recycled Paper
MEMO
DATE:
TO:
cmood-(4c,
0jo h
Uk

SUBJECT:
b r '5;
? '
I°

I'M" 0
cao 0?a- WC4

6?r 6il
1?? g'L
. I .,l

lVn??
SIEAT?E c,
Mnr m. i?
Nort Carolina Department of
Health and Natural Resources
?? QUAM Nom` a
?Co-? , w? I--,
e'&0)j /)
Envirl
4
n meat,
Printed on Recycled Paper
MEMO
DATE:
TO: SUBJECT:
C 'X-?
Cw -t,
?f Il
From:
?.iu. STATE ?.
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
Printed on Recycled Paper
Q¢ Quua ???
--' t AUG 3© 191 09:44
C?IYN?EErtRlNC &
SURVEYING, INC.
? ill C
P.1/3
1
L Tim r?slt+c
?i(ccztj/
15

DATE:
FAX 71RAN.%IISS7ON
- "Sb-
OA-- _ c1 ? A L--t -b -
CONTACT PERSON -L
BUSINESS OR LOCATION:
FAX NUMBER: i ! 19
T -f
FROM: Ld
NUMBER OF PAGES (Including cover sheet):
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES, CALL ASAP
(704) 7a6-5404 or [phone]
THIS TRANSMISSION FROM FAX #[phone]
COMMEI`iTS : Qd
11?? 6.F-- f 1--o I AJ aEL LL-^t A st.?-? 6

NCS:i • NSPS + ACSM + NSPE + P"tNC
PC Box 268 • 45 Spring Street. SW 9 Concord, NC 28026-0268 • [phone] a Charlotte - [phone] 9 Fax - [phone]
l
a AUG 30 '91 09:44 P.2/3?
C INEERING &
.SURV.EY 1 NG, .INC.
August 30, 1991

N.CM.E.H.NJL
Division, of Environmental Management
.P.O. Box 2768.7
Raleigh; NC 27611.7687
o
Attu: Donald IL Safrit, PE
cn
Re: City of Coaeord Rocky River Interceptor Sewer
Dear 'Mr. Safrit:
from a telephone conversation this morning.with a member. of your stall', John Seymour,
I learned that the Rocky- River Project has been put one hold. Based our the February 7,
1991 Division of Environmental Management Memorandum "Interpretation of Minimum
Criteria for Sewer Line" this project was submitted as a non•major.activity with regard to
an environmental assessment. This criteria states that a son-major activity is defined as
a sewer fine less than three miles runt length.or with a flow of less than one million gallons
per day. While Rocky River is about five miles in length, our design flow is 0.9 MGD. This
being an undeveloped area, 0.9 MGD is the best projection we have for the flow from the
developed basin.
It is my understanding that a hold was placed on this project because the proposed 30"
diameter pipe is physically capable of carrying in excess of LO MGD- On that basis, an 8"
sewer on a 1.64%,or steeper slope would have to be considered a major activity because it
would'be physically capable of carrying more than 1.O'MGD. Is it the Divisions' policy to
require an environmental assessment for every subdivision that is served by a three mile
or longer trunk of $" sewer on 1.64% or steeper slope? I think not. A reasonable person
would realize that the ability to carry a given flow does not equate to the availability of that
amount flow requiring transport. In the case of the proposed Rocky River Interceptor two
other factors are important. The first is the capacity of the receiving facility. The flows
stated on the permit application are not as important for the review of the proposed sewer
line as they are for keeping track of the utilized and unutilized capacity of the receiving
facility. Any flow determined is weighed against the existing capacity of that plant to accept
the flow. Simply because a pipe may be capable of transporting a given flow does not mean
the receiving facility is capable of accepting it for treatment,
NCSS • NSPS • ACSM' * NSPE • PENC
HQ Box 268 • 45 Spring Street, S.W. • Concord, NC 28026-0268. • [phone]'s Charlotte - [phone] • fax - [phone]
' JS

I AUG 30 '91 09:45
N.C.DYALN.IL
August 30, 1'291
Page 2
P.3/3
Given these limiting factors of projected flow volume and ability of the receiving facility to
accept flow for treatment, why have we designed a 30"pipe to transport this flow? Because
of size requirements associated with slope gradients promulgated by your division. The
minimum size pipe,for a slope between 0.058% and 0.067% is a 30" diameter. If you review
the plans you will find that our slopes run down to as flat as 0.060%. This is what has
dictated the size requirement of this interceptor. We stand by 0.9 MGD a our projected
developed flow.
This review process has been lengthy and fraught with. miscommunication. Plans have been
returned as incomplete or have languished unattended for matters that could have easily
been clarified with a phone call. Due to this I am requesting you give this matter your
personal attention. I would appreciate an answer from you in writing in the next 10 days
addressing the issues raised in this letter. As a Professional Engineer I, like you, am
charged with safeguarding the health and safety of the public. Once that duty is discharged,
however, I am also responsible for the best interests of my client. I feel my client, the City
of Concord, has been poorly served in this matter and I Dope you will assist me in seeing
they receive equitable treatment. If you feel that a meeting is necessary to more fully
discuss the issues I am available at your convenience.
I look forward to your response,
Sincerely,
ENGINEERING & SURVEYING, INC.
au. -?
Frank A. Rankin, IIIt PEI RLS
F'AR(ks

?col
NI"
EN'GINEER.ING&
SURVEYING, INC.
9 10fa?4??
July 17, 1991 e,. `?Ty
a,, b
C)
NCDEHNR
Mooresville Regional Office
Division of Land Resources
Land Quality Section
919 North Main Street
Mooresville, NC 28115 C AdQMUL-3
Attention: Jerry W. Cook
Regional Engineer
Re: Public Notice 1609
City of Concord. Rocky River Interceptor Sewer
Dear Mr. Cook:
I have reviewed your memorandum to John R. Parker, dated June 28, 1991, concerning this
project. I would like to offer the following observations and comments:
1. Has an environmental assessment been completed for this project?
No. According to the February 7, 1991 Division of Environmental Management
Memorandum "Interpretation of Minimum Criteria for Sewer Line" this project falls under
the non-major activity guidelines.
2. Stream crossings will be a major problem. They proposed dirt fill and removal. We
will be checking details but need a better alternative. Also construction traffic
(temporary crossings) will be a problem at streams and wetlands.
The type of stream crossing described in the Public Notice is currently being used
successfully by the City of Concord. City Engineer, Tim Lowder and I described this
process to Ken Knight with the Division of Wildlife Management on a walk through of the
Coddle Creek Interceptor Sewer. The Coddle Creek Interceptor is a very similar project
and we encouraged Ken to return and observe the process in operation. To visualize this
method as used in practice, please imagine a stream flowing from west to east and a sewer
being installed from south to north. As the sewer construction nears the steam, a pipe is
placed parallel to the flow on the north side of the stream bed and flow is diverted into the
pipe. The fill then acts as a dam such as would be found in a sediment basin and the pipe
NCSS • NSPS • ACSM ! NSPE • PENC
P.O. Box 268 9 45 Spring Street, S.W. • Concord, NC 28026-0 8 • (704) 786-? Charlotte
[phone] 0 Fax - [phone]
b
NCDEHNR
July 17, 1991
Page 2

discharges the stream flow downstream from the loose soil thereby minimizing erosion. The
contractor digs through the berm to place the sewer pipe. The berm shuts out the streams
water providing a reasonably dry ditch for sewer installation. When construction is
somewhere over halfway across the stream channel a pipe is placed parallel to the flow at
the south edge of the chef and the pipe at the north edge is removed and back filled.
The stream than flows through the new diversion pipe while construction continues across
the remainder of the stream channel. When the construction has proceeded into the
northern stream bank, the temporary fill and the diversion pipe are all removed. This type
of crossing has been used successfully many times and Mr. Lowder and I would be happy
to meet you at the Coddle Creek Sewer site and discuss this further. If you can determine
or devise a better alternative we would be most eager to learn of it.
Construction traffic and temporary crossings should pose no greater problems in this
project than on any other sewer of this nature.
3. The construction "pad" located over the line trench is not practical. Equipment will
be required to parallel the trench in order to place the pipe, haul it to the area being
worked, etc.
The temporary clay fill is to be used to temporarily stabilize the trench area during
construction through the most unstable wetland areas. While it is anticipated that in more
stable areas a 25' to SW work area will be utilized, it is not impossible nor unreasonable
through proper planning and coordination to construct this project on this 15' wide
temporary fill through the most unstable areas.
4. Excavated soil from trench will require a temporary stock pile area, this has not
been shown anywhere.
As with all line work, the trench excavation will be placed within the work area immediately
beside the excavation and will be backfilled around the sewer the same day it is excavated.
5. Due to the closeness of the line to the river, buffer zones will be a problem.
The line location has been determined in close consultation with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and is the location selected to minimize
impact to wetlands and the river.
f'

NCDEHNR
July 17, 1991
Page 3
6. Due to limited access areas to the site, construction traffic may have to use the line
for egress, etc.
This is the case for most construction of this type and does not represent a problem. Again,
Mr. Lowder and I would welcome the opportunity to walk the Coddle Creek project with you
and discuss this matter further.
Mr. Cook, I hope this information proves useful to you and I hope that you can arrange a
few hours to met with Mr. Lowder and myself to discuss this project in greater detail.
Please feel free to contact me at 704-332-9934.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
CONCORD ENGINEERING & SURVEYING, INC.
Frank A. Rankin, III, PE, RLS
FAR/se
cc: John R. Parker, Jr.
Jeh?:?Do?e'
Dennis Stewart
George T. Lowder
Steve Slough
J??nf
FATL' "
? to
v
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor George T. Everett, Ph.D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary July 12 , 1991 Director
Mr. Frank A. Rankin, III
Concord Engineering and Surveying, Inc.
Post Office Box 268
45 Spring Street, S.W.
Concord, North Carolina 28026-0268
Dear Mr. Rankin:
In response to your 24 June 1991 letter, thank you for
clarifying your need for maximum clearing of 75 feet for the City
of Concord Rocky River Sewer Line. We cannot approve a 401
Certification which allows a 75 foot wide corridor when
construction will only require a 25 to 30 foot wide corridor. To
approve a 75 foot wide corridor for the entire alignment would
allow the contractor to clear the entire 75 feet even when it was
not necessary.
Therefore, please provide documentation clearly showing where
and explaining why (with construction details and calculations) a
75 foot wide corridor is necessary. In the remainder of the
alignment, you will also need to advise us to the minimum width
needed for construction. Until we have this information, we will
not be able to act on your 401 Certification request.
Please call Allen Hardy of our Mooresville Regional office if
you need to discuss this matter.
Sincerely,
Jo n R q a6y, JRD/kls
Rankin.ltr/D-6
cc: Allen Hardy, MRO
Dennis Stewart, WRC
Steve Lund, COE REGIONAL OFFICES
Asheville JohpaygpjApr I WNesville Raleigh Washington Wilmington Winston-Salem
704/251-6208 919/486-1541 704/663-1699 919/733-2314 919/946-6481 919/395-3900 919/896-7007
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
-0" ,
CONGORD
ENGINEERING &
SURVEYING, INC.
July 25, 1991
NCDEHNR
Division of Environmental Management
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
ATTN: John R. Dorney
RE: City of Concord
Rocky River Interceptor Sewer
w.?RFC?t
4i
Thank you for your correspondence of July 12, 1991. I have reviewed these issues with Tim
Lowder, City Engineer, and with Allen Hardy of the Mooresville Regional Office.
As I discussed with,Allen., hoth;Mr. Lowder and myself would welcome the opportunity to
review on site the construction of Coddle Creek interceptor `Sewer with either him or you.
On this project you would have an opportunity to see that a contractor will only clear what
is necessary for the construction of the proposed sewer line. There is a strong economic
incentive for the contractor to clear only the minimum width needed for construction.
Clearing costs run in the neighborhood of $2,000.00 an acre. For a 25,000 LF project the
difference between clearing an area 50' wide and an area 75' wide is 14 acres. This
represents a potential savings of $28,000. And if the contractor can perform his
construction in an area only 25' wide this represents another $28,000.00 in potential savings.
Obviously it is in the contractors interest to clear only the minimum width of working area
required. The reason we have shown a 75' maximum working area is that under certain
subsurface conditions it may be necessary to lay the trench back far enough to comply with
applicable safety standards for the depth excavation and still have working room around
the edge of the trench. This type of situation is dependent on the type of subsurface
conditions which are impossible to predict with any certainty without extensive and
prohibitively expensive subsurface investigation of the proposed alignment. Again the 75'
width is an extreme measure in anticipation of the possibility of extreme conditions. It is
not the intent of this engineer, nor of the City of Concord to have a cleared area 75' wide
and 25,000' long at the completion of this project. It is our mutual intent to construct this
line in the narrowest width corridor possible. It will be part of the duties of the City
inspectors for the project to achieve this. This goal will be aided by the fact the contractor
will have a strong economic incentive to keep the corridor as narrow as possible.
NCSS • NSPS • ACSM • NSPE • PENC
P.O. Box 268 0 45 Spring Street, SW 0 Concord, NC 28026-0268 • [phone] 0 Charlotte - [phone] 0 Fax - [phone]

NCDEHNR
July 25, 1991
Page 2
The City plans to use a 50' wide corridor as a typical maximum. This is shown on sheet
12 of 15 of the documents accompanying the Public Notice. We will be happy to contact you
or Allen Hardy if, and each time, subsurface conditions are encountered that would
necessitate clearing beyond a 50' wide corridor. This would allow for your inspection and
input into the construction process and provide a means by which you can be assured the
construction of this project is being conducted so as to provide the least impact to water
quality and the environment.
I hope this letter has addressed your concerns about this project. Please contact me at 704-
786-5404 with any thoughts or questions you may have.
Sincerely,
ON RD EN EERING & SURVEYING, INC.
j Frank A. Rankin, III, PE, RLS
FAR/ks
cc: Steve Lund, COE
Allen Hardy. OEMMRO
John Parker, DCM
Tim Lowder, COC
Steve Slough, COC
-`
w?
ST:?rp
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
July 8, 1991
Mr. Frank A. Rankin
P.O. Box 268
Concord, NC 28026-0268
Dear Mr. Rankin:
Acy??, `?9 This office has recently received preliminary comments on the
City of Concord sanitary sewer interceptor project from the Division
of Land Quality. I understand that agency is presently reviewing your
sedimentation and erosion control plan. However, in the interim, they
have raised significant issues including the question about
preparation of an environmental assessment. I might add that earlier
comments from the Wildlife Resources Commission included that same
question.
You should respond to Jerry Cook on the subject matter included
in his June 28 memo and copy this office.
Very sincerely,
hn R. Parker, Jr.
Inlan '404 Coordinator
JRP:jr/aw
cc: John Dorney
Dennis Stewart
enclosure
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]

DIVISION OF LAND RESOURCES
LAND QUALITY SECTION
June 28, 1991
MEMORANDUM TO: John R. Parker, Jr.
Inland "404" Coordinator
FROM: Jerry W. Cook qNT-C?
Regional Engineer
RE: Public Notice No. 1609
SUBJECT: 30" Outfall Sewer
Rocky River
City of Concord
Cabarrus County, N. C.
We have received erosion and sediment control plans for this project which
will be reviewed starting next week or the week following. Several items have
surfaced during an initial review of information submitted and are as follows:
- Has an Environmental Assessment been completed for this project?
- Stream crossings will be a major problem. They proposed dirt fill and
removal. We will be checking details but need a better alternative.
Also, construction traffic (temporary crossings) will be a problem at
streams and in wetlands.
- The construction "pad" proposed located over the line trench is not
practical. Equipment will be required to parallel the trench in
order to place the pipe, haul it to area being worked, etc.
- Excavated soil from trench will require a temporary stockpile area,
this has not been shown anywhere.
- Due to the closeness of the line to the river, buffer zones will be a
problem.
- Due to limited access areas to the site, construction traffic may have
to use the line for egress, etc.
This line will not be easy to construct, with the potential for major
sedimentation problems during construction.
Call me if you have any questions.
f
.4
CONG?RD
ENGINEERING &
SURVEYING, INC.
June 24, 1991
N.C. Department of Environment
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, N. C 27626-0535
Attn: W. John R. Dorney
Re: City of Concord Rocky River Sewer Line
Dear Mr. Dorney:
Thank you for your correspondence of June 11, 1991. I would like to take this opportunity
to address some of the concerns raised in your letter.
First let me respond to your concern about the 75' wide corridor. If you will refer to our
details that accompanied the Corps of Engineers Public Notice you will note that the 75' is
described as maximum clearing limits. The details also show that a 50' work area is
typical. It is anticipated that during construction of this project 50' or less of width will be
utilized except where unusual or extreme conditions may be encountered. Some of these
conditions could be encountering solid sub-surface rock or excessively deep cuts where the
end of a ridge is crossed in order to avoid wetlands. Where possible construction will occur
within less than 50' possibly and area only 25' to 30' wide. Due to the cost of clearing the
contractor will try to have the smallest working area possible. Tim Lowder and myself
reviewed an active example of this type of construction practice nth Ten Knight with North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission on June 12, 1991. Your letter also mentions a 15'
to 18' access road. A closer look at the details provided with the public notice will show
that an area 15' wide directly over the proposed sewer will be temporarily stabilized to
support equipment during construction and then this stabilizing material will be removed
and the area returned to its original condition. The City of Concord is designing this sewer
to provide service to the proposed Kings Grant Project, and the proposed Concord Airport
now currently under design. In addition to these new uses the proposed sewer will provide
a means for eliminating three existing wastewater treatment plants. These plants threaten
the ecology of the riverine system from the discharge of untreated or improperly treated
sewage through the possibility of improper maintenance, malfunction, or loss of electrical
power. The City of Concord and the Charlotte Mecklenburg Utility Department have
discussed the possibility of extending the sewer line north along Rocky River to
NCSS • NSPS • ACSM • NSPE • PENC
PO. Box 268 • 45 Spring Street, S.W. 0 Concord, NC 28026-0268 • [phone] • Charlotte - [phone] 9 Fax - [phone]
41

Mr. John R. Dorney
June 26, 1991
Mecklenburg County and eliminating 2 existing and proposed private wastewater plants and
1 proposed municipal wastewater plants by transporting the wastes to the Rocky River
Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant. This would leave a 25 mile stretch of the Rocky
River system free from the possibilities of discharge of untreated or improperly treated
wastewater.
We have discussed both these matters with Allen Hardy of the Mooresville Regional Office
and also extensively with Ken Knight of the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission.
In an effort to balance all public interests we are currently conducting two surveys in the
affected reach. One is a survey of sites of possible archeological interest. This has been
coordinated with the Division of Archives and History. Currently there is a second follow
up survey of two sites scheduled to insure all pertinent information has been secured.
Additionally there is a report being prepared for the second wildlife survey conducted by our
biological consultant. This second survey was specifically directed towards a study status
shellfish. The preliminary finding from this second survey is that none of this study status
shellfish are present. This report should be forthcoming.
I appreciate your interest in our project and I hope you find this information useful. If you
have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone]. Thank you.
S' a ely
Frank A. Rankin, III, PE, RLS
FAR/se
cc: Steve Lund, COE
Allen Hardy, DEMMRO
John Parker, DCM
Richard Hamilton, WRC
Ken Knight, WRC
Tim Lowder, City of Concord
Steve Slough, City of Concord
.6 1 '»?
COIN C D
_.IENGINEERING &
SURVEYING, INC.
July 3, 1991
Mr. Randall C. Wilson
Non-Game Section Manager
Division of Wildlife Management
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604-1188
t
.??N rv
;ass
?C?? gat
?NZ?l
Re: Rocky River Interceptor Sewer
Environmental Assessment of Clams
Supplementary Report
Dear Mr. Wilson:
On April 16, 1991 Mr. Kurt Wright, with our firm, sent you a copy of the various surveys
we had conducted for the above project. Mr. Wright noted in that letter that according to
the February 7,1991 Division of Environmental Management Memorandum "Interpretation
of Minimum Criteria for Sewer Lines", this project falls under the non-major activity
guidelines. It was also noted in this letter that our Aquatic Biologist (Dr. Edward F.
Menhinick) proposed to conduct a supplementary study in May focusing on Lasimigona
decorata (the Carolina Heelsplitter clam). Attached is a copy of Dr. Menhinick's June 25th
supplementary report. Dr. Menhinick observed no evidence of Lasimigona decorata in his
study and from this evidence and from information of other studies, Dr. Menhinick
concludes that it is highly unlikely that Lasimigona decorata occurs in Rocky River,
especially in the area of proposed construction.
I am enclosing this material for your information, and I look forward to any questions or
comments you may have.
NCSS • NSPS • ACSM • NSPE • PENC
P.O. Box 268 • 45 Spring Street. S.W. 0 Concord, NC 28026-0268 • [phone] • Charlotte - [phone] 0 Fax - (704) 786-i=:
1#
Mr. Randall C. Wilson
July 2, 1991
Page 2
Thank you.
Sincerely,
CONCORD ENGINEERING & SURVEYING, INC.
Frank A. Rankin, III, PE, RLS
/ Vice President
` FAR/se
cc: Richard Hamilton, WRC
Ken Wright, WRC
John Parker, DCM
Don Safrit, DEM
Carolyn McCaskill, DEM
Allen Hardy, DEMMRO
Steve Lund, ACOE
Tim Lowder, City of Concord
Steve Slough, City of Concord

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF CLAMS
A SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT
ROCKY RIVER SANITARY SEWER INTERCEPTOR
CABARRUS COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared for Concord Engineering & Surveying Inc.
by
Edward F. Menhinick
Professor of Biology
University of North Carolina at Charlotte
Charlotte, North Carolina
June 25, 1991
j
Environmental Assessment . of Clams, Rocky River Sanitary Sewer Interceptor
This supplement completes the environmental impact analysis of the Rocky River sanitary sewer
interceptor for Cabarrus County, North Carolina. The initial report covering water quality and
fishes was submitted on March 8, 1991, but clams could not be included at that time because many
species of clams bury several feet down into the sediment during periods of cold weather.
Sampling techniques: Sampling consisted of the following:
1. Visually searching for clams. About 1/3 of the time was spent visually looking for clams.
Live clams can be seen crawling along the bottom or at the end of a trail, especially after a
heavy flood has dislodged them. The extended valves or the top part of the shells of buried
clams are often visible in stiller, undisturbed areas. Dead shells of clams are often present on
sand bars or on eroded areas of banks.
2. Raking areas of soft sedin-ent_ Sandy or silty areas where clams are buried can often be
raked, or examined manually for buried clams. Areas that are particularly fruitful include
sand bars downstream of islands, aquatic vegetation, or rocks, and areas of relatively
undisturbed sediment in "coves" along the side of the stream. About 1/3 of the collecting
time was spent raking these areas. Thousands of Asiatic clams, Corbicula fluminea, were
uncovered with this procedure, especially in faster flowing areas of coarse sand or fine
gravel.
3. Feeling for clams under banks. In sandy areas where there is a heavy bedload and where
most sediment is disturbed during times of flooding, the only secure habitats for clams are
near rocks or under banks. These conditions typify the upper reaches of Rocky River.
About 1/3 of the time was spent feeling under banks for clams, and that was the location of
the single specimen collected
Collections: The following locations were examined for clams:
UNCC 91-1: NC, Cabarrus Co.
Rocky River below Co. 1445 (Derita Road)
5.2 mi. NW of Harrisburg
June 1, 1991
E. F. Menhinick & P. M. Menhinick
This location was collected for clams on June 1, 1991. After approximately 4 man hours of
collecting, about 1000 live Asiatic clams, Corbicula fluminea were observed Numerous
shells of dead Asiatic clams were visible on exposed sand bars. No other species of clams
or snails were taken; no dead shells of other species were seen.
UNCC 91-14: NC, Cabarrus Co.
Rocky River behind Bonds Quarry
4.5 mi NNW of Harrisburg
June 6, 1991
E. F. Menhinick & Scott Diegmann
Clams were searched for at this location on June 1, 1991. After approximately four man
hours of collecting, about 1000 live Asiatic clams were observed Numerous shells of dead
Asiatic clams were visible on exposed sand bars. One Unionid clam, a male Villosa
delumbis, the eastern creekshell, was collected. No snails were observed
UNCC 91-3: NC, Cabarrus Co.

Rocky River behind Silver Maple Trailer Park Package WWTP, off Co. 1437
3.9 mi NNW of Harrisburg
June 6, 1991
E. F. Menhinick & Scott Diegmann
This site was examined for clams on June 6, 1991. Four man hours of collecting resulted in
the collection of approximately 1800 living Asiatic clams. This was the only bivalve
collected. Likewise, no snails (Gastropoda) were collected although likely locations such as
rocks and submerged logs were carefully examined
91-4: NC, Cabarrus Co.
Rocky River at NC 29
2.9 mi NNW of Harrisburg
May 31, 1991
E. F. Menhinick, P. M. Menhinick, E. S. Menhinick
Collections were made at this site on May 31, 1991. Because this was the first location
collected, approximately five man hours were spent at this location. About 1200 Asiatic
clams were the only mollusks observed at this location. No other clams, nor any snails were
seen.
Discussion and Recommendations.
Because I had collected about 50 unionids in sandy areas below islands in the Uwharrie River
on May 25, and because shifting sand was the predominate habitat in Rocky River, I fully
expected to collect more than one specimen there! Although dead clam shells were abundant in
the Uwharrie River along the shore, in stiller backwaters, and on exposed banks, there were no
dead unionids in Rocky River, a first sign that they might be entirely absent from that river.
Absence of snails was the next indication of problems with Rocky River. None were seen in
any of the areas examined. However, two species were collected from rocks in Rocky River at
NC 49, below the area of the proposed outfall: Physa (Physidae), and Goniobasis = Elimia
(Pleuroceridae).
The continually shifting bedload of Rocky River combined with textile and domestic pollution
from the Mooresville waste water treatment plant probably created an unfavorable habitat for
mollusks except for the tolerant Asiatic clam. Because it appeared that unionids were
completely absent from this section of the river, I was surprised to find the single specimen of
Villosa delumbis (unusual because of its orange foot). This is not a species of special status.
Lasimigona decorara, the Carolina heel sputter, occurs in Goose Creek, a tributary to Rocky
River in Union county. However, Dr. Keferl told me that the density of this species decreases
as the stream nears Rocky River, and he has not taken it from Rocky River. I therefore feel that
it is highly unlikely the Carolina heel splitter occurs in Rocky River, especially in the area of the
proposed construction, and I recommend that construction proceed under that assumption.
Yours truly,
SSW V. 74110
Edward F. Menhinick, Ph.D.
Professor of Biology

/ln ?1
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor June 11, 1991 George T. Everett, Ph.D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Concord Engineering and Surveying, Inc.
Attention: Mr. Kurt Wright
Post Office Box 268
Concord, North Carolina 28026-0268
Dear Mr. Wright:
Re: City of Concord Rocky River Sewer Line
The Division of Environmental Management has reviewed the
Town of Concord's 404 Permit application for the above mentioned
project. The Division of Environmental Management will need to
issue a 401 Certification before the Corps of Engineers can issue
any 404 permit.
We are uncertain why a 75 foot wide corridor is necessary
for this activity. We believe that most sewer lines can be
constructed in a 40 foot corridor with a 10 foot wide permanent
access road. Please document the need for a 75 foot wide
corridor and a 15 to 18 foot access road. I understand that you
have discussed the matter with Allen Hardy of our Mooresville
Regional office. Please provide him a copy of the information
you sent to me. I understand that you are conducting a survey
for endangered shellfish. Please send us a copy of this report
when it is completed. I can be reached at [phone] if you
have any questions.
Sincerely,
qJ ?hn R. Dorney
JRD/kls
Wright.ltr/401/D-4
cc: Steve Lund, COE
Allen Hardy, DEM MRO Regional Offices
John Parker, DCM
Asheville Fayetteville Mooresville Raleigh Washington Wilmington Winston-Salem
704/251-6208 919/486-1541 704/663-1699 919/733-2314 919/946-6481 919/395-3900 919/761-2351
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
7) l

eM STAi[
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G, Martin, Governor George T. Everett, Ph.D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary May 9, 1991 Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Dennis Stewart, Wildlife Resources Commission
FROM: Alan Clark, AC-
FROM: Quality Planning Branch
SUBJECT: Town of Concord - Carolando Sewer Line Project
MGD flow had to be exceeded.
A draft EA was circulated to the Wildlife Resources
Commission for the subject project. At the time the Town first
applied for a nondischarge permit for this sewerline, the minimum
criteria thresholds in effect at that time required that an EA be
prepared. The minimum criteria were interpreted to mean that an
EA was required for a publically funded sewer line that was
either greater than three miles in length or had a flow in excess
of one million gallons per day. However, based on direction from
the Secretary's office in February, the criteria were
reinterpreted to mean that both the three mile length an the one
As a result of the February reinterpretation, this project was
no longer subject to NCEPA review. However, we had received
WRC's comments and did not want to issue a permit for the project
until your agency's concerns had been addressed.
It is my understanding based on discussion with Melba McGee
that WRC is willing to consider this matter resolved pending
receipt of a letter from the Corps concerning the occurrence of
wetlands at the project site. Attached is a copy of an April 17,
1991 letter and General Permit from the Corps to the Town of
Concord authorizing construction of the 30-inch diameter
interceptor and lateral lines to serve the Carolando subdivision.
The 30-inch interceptor had already been permitted by DEM and is
now under construction. A 401 Water Quality Certification is
presently being prepared by DEM for the Carolando project.
In light of receipt of the Corps letter, it would appear that
this matter has been resolved. DEM will proceed with permit
review and issuance (if appropriate) of the Carolando sewerline.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.
cc: Melba McGee
Don Safrit
PoDu&m PremWm Pays
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
OS-09-91 14!34 FROM CITY OF CONCORD ID 704 786 761B P_ 2
.° N
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
?.' ? '% WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
(1? PO, am 1890
VYII,MtNC3TON, NORTH CAROLJNA28402•iB80
uv+cr REFER .TO April 27, 1991
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199101610 and General Permit No. CESAw-COST-N-060-0049
Mr. G..T,im Lowder
City of Concord Engineering Department
Post Office Box 308
Concord, North Carolina 28025
Dear Mr. Lowder:
On February 13, 1991, you applied for Department of the Army (DA) permit
authorization to place fill material into the waters and adjacent wetlands of
coddle Creek to facilitate the installation of a new 30-inch diameter sanitary
sewer°interceptor to serve a newly annexed area on the west side of Concord,
Cabarrue County, North Carolina. Prior to this application, Mr. N.E. Cochran,
your consulting engineer, requested DA authorization, on your behalf, to
construct lateral sewer lines off the proposed interceptor to serve the
Carolando Subdivision. Both of these projects were reviewed in the field by
you and Mr. Steven Lund of my Asheville staff on March 6, 1991.
On April 1, 1988, we renewed general permit No. CESAW-CO81-N-000-0049
(copy enclosed) that authorizes the maintenance, repair and installation of
aerial and subaquebus utility lines with attendant structures and the
discharge of excavated or fill materials, within construction/access
corridors, associated with utility line maintenance, repair and installation
in navigable waters and waters of the United States in the State of North
Carolina.
Your proposed work is authorized if you can comply with all permit
conditions. Please read the enclosed permit to prevent an unintentional
violation of Federal law. Please note that the 20-foot corridor includes all
land-disturbing activities (i.e., clearing, trenching, access fills,
stockpiling). Also note the requirement for non-erodible materials in
temporary stream crossings. The following additional special conditions also
apply to your proposed work and are necessary to assure that the work will
have minimal impact on the areas aquatic resources:
a. Where the utility line trench traverses Vatland areas, the upper
6 inches of topsoil will be stripped, stockpiled and returned to the surface
of the excavated area following pipeline installation.
b. All permanent disposal areas for overburden will be reviewed and
approved by the Corps of Engineers prior to utilization.
05-09-91 14:39 FROM CITY OF CONCORD ID 704 786 7818
r r
-2-
P. 9
c. Any construction access roads outside of the authorized 20-foot
construction corridor will be reviewed and approved by the Corps of Engineers
prior to beginning active construction work.
As this Department of the Army general permit does not relieve you of the
responsibility to obtain any other required approvals, you should contact
appropriate state and local agencies before beginning work.
If you have any questions or need to arrange for a field reviaw under
special conditions (a) and (b), please contact Mr. Steven Lund, Regulatory
Branch, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
ne Wrig
6
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
Copies Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. John Parker
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Past Office BOX 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post office sox 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. W.E. Cochran
W.E. Cochran and Son, Incorporated
191 Eastover Drive, SE
Concord, North Carolina 28205
r
DIVISION OF
M "15, 199
MEMORANDUM TO : John Dorney
FROM: D. Rex Gleason
PREPARED BY: Allen Hardy
SUBJECT: 401 Certification
Rocky River Interceptor Sewer
City of Concord
Cabarrus County, N. C.
MANAGEMENT
This office has conducted a review of the documents as
submitted for this project, and offers the following comments and
recommendations.
After rough calculation it appears that approximately 7500
linear feet of sewer line will be placed in the boundaries of
possible wetlands. Although interspersed throughout the entire
project of 24,136 linear feet, this 7500 linear feet, with a
proposed 75-foot wide clearing corridor, could result in the
disturbance of roughly 13-15 acres of wetlands, which appears to
be far more disturbance than is necessary. In discussions with
Mr. Kurt Wright, Design Engineer with Concord Engineering and
Surveying, Inc., it was indicated that a 75-foot wide corridor
was probably not necessary. Mr. Wright also stated that a
permanent access corridor would probably be left in the
right-of-way so that repairs and routine maintenance can be
performed. A conversation with Mr. Steve Slough, Utility
Department-City of Concord, indicated that an access corridor of
approximately 15-18 feet wide would try to be maintained.
A wetlands evaluation conducted in the field by yourself
revealed a rating of approximately 66-70%, which indicates there
to be a significant value for the wetlands. It appears that the
project meets the criteria necessary for an environmental
assessment. Upon your determination, you may want to make such a
request.

Page Two
It appears that the engineering or project design put more
emphasis into ways to ease construction operations instead of
ways to minimize the disturbance of wetlands. It is recommended
that the request for a 401 Certification be approved, provided
sufficient measures are taken to minimize as much wetlands
disturbance as possible and the environmental assessment receives
a favorable review.
WAH:sju

Page Two
It appears that the engineering or project design put more
emphasis into ways to ease construction operations instead of
ways to minimize the disturbance of wetlands. It is recommended
that the request for a 401 Certification be approved, provided
sufficient measures are taken to minimize as much wetlands
disturbance as possible and the environmental assessment receives
a favorable review.
WAH:sju
vLe
uU
u,•,
5T0
IMPORTANT
Date Ti
a WHILE YOU WERE OUT
M Lane
of
Phone 6 r
AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION
TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
Message fY1 UU'?
INI, -
Signed
N.C. Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
1 D, Printed on Recycled Paper
IMPORTANT
To
Date Time
WHILE YO WERE
0
M
of
Phone
AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION

Message

V
Signed
TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
N.C. Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
v vV3 Printed on Recycled Paper
4
SIVE
ww
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor Wi]lian W, Ccbey, Jr, , Se=tary
Dr. George T. Everett
Division of Environmental Management
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Dr_, Ev-erett:
The attached U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Public Notice No. 1609 dated
4/18/91 describing a project proposed by The City of Concord
is being circulated-to interested state agencies for comments on applicable
Section 404 and/or Section 10 permits.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed
project and return this form by 5/15/91
Very sincerely,
John R. Parker, Jr.
404 Coordinator
REPLY This office objects to the project as proposed.
Comments on this project are attached.
This office supports the project proposal.
1
No comment.
JRP:jr/aw
Signed
Date
Agency
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Action ID. 199101609 April 18, 1991
PUBLIC NOTICE
The CITY OF CONCORD, represented by CONCORD ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING,
INCORPORATED, ATTN. MR. KURT WRIGHT, POST OFFICE BOX 268, CONCORD, NORTH
CAROLINA 28026-0268 has applied for a Department of the Army (DA) permit TO
PLACE FILL MATERIAL INTO THE WATERS AND ADJACENT WETLANDS OF THE ROCKY RIVER
TO FACILITATE INSTALLATION OF A 30-INCH SANITARY SEWER INTERCEPTOR SOUTHWEST
OF CONCORD, Cabarrus County, North Carolina.
The following description of the work is taken from data provided by the
applicant and from observations made during an onsite visit by a
representative of the Corps of Engineers. Plans submitted with the
application show the proposed installation of 24,136 linear feet of 30-inch
diameter gravity interceptor sewer line along a segment of the Rocky River
from U.S. Highway 29 upstream to a point approximately 1,500 feet south of
Derita Road (S.R. 1445). Six river crossings are proposed with an average
length of 70 feet. One-half of the river channel would be spanned by fill
material obtained onsite at any given time during construction of the
crossing. This temporary fill would be removed following completion of each
crossing. A total of approximately 5,000 cubic yards of clay material would
be temporarily discharged into the Rocky River in this manner. Plans also
show the proposed clearing of a 75-foot-wide corridor along the length of the
project. The applicant states that this corridor width is necessary for
access and construction purposes. Roughly 15 acres of forested wetlands would
be cleared and grubbed by this activity as well as approximately 26.5 acres of
adjacent, forested uplands. The relationship of this cleared corridor to the
centerline of the sewer line is shown on the attached cross-sectional views.
In those wetland areas where the substrate is too soft to adequately support
equipment, a temporary fill access road is proposed. This road would measure
approximately 15 feet wide and 3 feet deep over a total of approximately 8,000
linear feet. Roughly 13,500 cubic yards of clay fill for this road would be
obtained onsite. In general, the proposed road would be required only in
wetlands upstream of manhole 38. Plans also show the discharge of
approximately 1,500 cubic yards of rock riprap below the ordinary high water
line of the river. This rock would be used to protect the line from erosion
at the six river crossings as well as at eight other locations where unstable
stream banks could threaten the sewer line. A total of approximately 1,550
linear feet of streambank would be lined with rock. In addition to the
activities described above, backfill, bedding, and excavated material would be
F
-2-
temporarily stockpiled in wetlands within the proposed corridor throughout the
length of the project. All fill in wetlands would be removed and the original
contours restored following completion of the work. The purpose of the
proposed work is to provide sanitary sewer service to newly annexed areas
within the City of Concord (see sheet 1 of 15). Plans showing the proposed
work are included with this public notice.
The State of North Carolina will review this public notice to determine
the need for the applicant to obtain any required State authorization. No
DA permit will be issued until the coordinated State viewpoint on the proposal
has been received and reviewed by this agency, nor will a DA permit be issued
until the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) has
determined the applicability of a Water Quality Certificate as required by
PL 92-500.
This application is being considered pursuant to Section 404(b) of the
Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Any person may request, in writing within
the comment period specified in the notice, that a public hearing be held to
consider this application. Requests for public hearing shall state, with
particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing.
The District Engineer has consulted the latest published version of the
National Register of Historic Places for the presence or absence of registered
properties, or properties listed as being eligible for inclusion therein, and
this worksite is not registered property or property listed as being eligible
for inclusion in the Register. Consultation of the National Register
constitutes the extent of cultural resource investigations by the District
Engineer, and he is otherwise unaware of the presence of such resources.
Presently, unknown archaeological, scientific, prehistorical, or historical
data may be lost or destroyed by work under the requested permit.
The District Engineer has determined, based on a review of data furnished
by the applicant and onsite observations, that the activity will not affect
species, or their critical habitat, designated as endangered or threatened
pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973. The Carolina heelsplitter
(Lasmigona decorata), a "study status" species of mollusk is known to occur in
tributaries of the Rocky River downstream of the project site. The applicant
intends to conduct a field survey for this mollusk as soon as water levels in
the river permit.
The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of
the probable impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed activity
and its intended use on the public interest. Evaluation of the probable
impacts which the proposed activity may have on the public interest requires a
careful weighing of all those factors which become relevant in each particular
case. The benefits which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the
proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. The
-3-
decision whether to authorize a proposal, and, if so, the conditions under
which it will be allowed to occur, are therefore determined by the outcome of
the general balancing process. That decision should reflect the national
concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. All
factors which may be relevant to the proposal must be considered including the
cumulative effects thereof. Among those are conservation, economics,
aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish
and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain values, land use, navigation,
shore erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water
quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs,
considerations of property ownership, and, in general, the needs and welfare
of the people. For activities involving the placement of dredged or fill
materials in waters of the United States, a permit will be denied if the
discharge that would be authorized by such permit would not comply with the
Environmental Protection Agencies' 404(b)(1) guidelines. Subject to the
preceding sentence and any other applicable guidelines or criteria, a permit
will be granted unless the District Engineer determines that it would be
contrary to the public interest.
Generally, the decision whether to issue this Department of the Army
permit will not be made until the DEM issues, denies, or waives State
certification required by Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The DEM
considers whether or not the proposed activity will comply with Sections 301,
302, 306, and 307 of the Clean Water Act. The application and this public
notice for the Department of the Army permit serve as application to the DEM
for certification.
Additional information regarding the Clean Water Act certification may be
reviewed at the offices of the Environmental Operations Section, North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management, Salisbury Street, Archdale
Building, Raleigh, North Carolina. Copies of such materials will be furnished
to any person requesting copies upon payment of reproduction costs.
The North Carolina Division of Environmental Management plans to take
final action in the issuance of the Clean Water Act certification on or after
May 13, 1991.
All persons desiring to make comments regarding the application for Clean
Water Act certification should do so in writing delivered to the North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management, Post Office Box 27687, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27611-7687, on or before May 6, 1991, Attention: Mr. John
Dorney.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will
be received in this office, Attention: Mr. Steven Lund, until 4:15 p.m.,
May 20, 1991, or telephone [phone].

W

a G) '.BBa
-A

C W (L
a o

D
C? } W

MW
?
wo
I
W U) a
e

?1 t
f1 ?? :
Y-
v
0<
U) 0
Im
U
z
r Z
W
N
aft
S z
IS
W
W
1 z
/. z
w
/may
I:': 1 LL
O
z
0

53

WL-ACE
PROP. MH 5
STA. 14.67.98
N
V6
PROP. MH 4
.STA. 10.38.10
PROP. Wi 3
A. 6.80.75
ROCKY \
RIVER
S EXISTING
LIFT STATION
(LIft Station)
PROP. MH I
STA. 0.00.00
. PROP. MH 6
-STA. 19.48.79
ROCKY RIVER
WL-ACE
s s?9 TOP of
NK
?0,
s PROP. MH 7
Cip? STA. 23.51.7
O x
ss o0
a,
sFc/mss 9% .
oti
P
PROP. MH 8
STA. 26.70.88 \
. A ASP
GENERAL NOTE :
FOR SHEETS 2 of 15 through II of 15 ;
THE FLOOD PLAIN OF ROCKY RIVEr2 CONTAINS
UPLAND LEVEES AND BARS AS WELL AS
OVERFLOW CHANNELS AND WET SLOUGHS
WHICH ARE TOO SMALL TO MAP.
PROPOSED 30•• LEGEND :
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
-h WETLAND LIMITS
-? SELECTED ROUTE

PROP. MH 2 WL-ACE WETLAND LIMITS AS
STA. 2'68.96 IDENTIFIED BY THE ARMY
t CORPS OF ENGINEERS
N ' ...... CLASS I RIPRAP
\Y: _ 'TOP of BANK
BLOCK 4 Continued
K
U.S. Migh
Y
'\ WL -ACE
PROP. MH 9
STA. 31- 3.61
X619 452.13. .. /
PROP. MH 10
STA. 34.39.40
tv�v
A
PROP. MH II
STA. 37.86,22
WL -ACE
wL-ACE
�Q
WL -ACE BLOCK 4 Continued
a If
CITY of -CONCORD
JOB No.
ROCKY RIVER
90-09-23
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
PROP. NIN 12
ROUTE LAYOYT
I" = 200'
Prepared by :
STA 4244.75
CONCORD ENGINEERING 8
SURVEYING, INC.
3 of 15
PROP. MH 13
STA, 44.36.98
by
LEGEND;
PROPOSED 30"
WETLAND LIMITS
O
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
SELECTED ROUTE
WL -ACE
WETLAND LIMITS AS
IDENTIFIED BY THE ARMY
MH la
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
STA. 48+19.96
-..---------
CLASS I RIPRAP
wL-ACE
�Q
WL -ACE BLOCK 4 Continued
CITY of -CONCORD
JOB No.
ROCKY RIVER
90-09-23
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
SCALE
ROUTE LAYOYT
I" = 200'
Prepared by :
SHEET
CONCORD ENGINEERING 8
SURVEYING, INC.
3 of 15

PROP. Wi 17
STA. 61.8428
PROPOSED 30"
INTERCEPTOR SEWER

BLOCK 4 Continued
WL-ACE

LEGEND :
WETLAND LIMITS
SELECTED ROUTE
WL-ACE WETLAND LIMITS AS
IDENTIFIED BY THE ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
CLASS I RIPRAP
V
W
Z
J
.Z
V
Q

u

WL-ACE WETLAND LIMITS AS
IDENTIFIED BY THE ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
CLASS I RIPRAP
O
=4cr
?V
?Q
12888• `\
WL-ACE
3g?
PROP. MH 22
STA. e2.alss4
h
pi
h
N '
PROP. MH 21
STA. 79.6L89
PROP. MH 23
STA. 65956.93
1
WL-ACE
bZ ' o
S?. ,?O \JER
G?
SIX ROP MH 12 Eta
fo'' C,oyFF?, P
S`sof? BLOCK 4 Continued
CITY of CONCO
ROCKY RIVER
'9 >• INTERCEPTOR SEV
ST?96+73 66 `TOP of 84NK
4
PROP. MH 25
STA. 91+96.23
'W
m ?-
O U
O
PROPOSED 30" ix
INTERCEPTOR SEWER -b"
LEGEND:
WETLAND LIMITS
SELECTED ROUTE PROP. MH 24
STA. 88,25.40
r
H
PROP. MH 31
STA. 120,08.62
W
LLI
J
V
F-
Q
MATCHLINE D

o-
0-
2 a
?O
Q?
PROP. MH 29
1L,? STA. 109.34.39
PROP. MH 27
STA. 99.9924
lV
t0
PROP. MH 28
STA. 105.06.86
554 0 INT RCEP70R S WER
PROP. MN 30 W TLAND
STA. 114.x4.52 LIMITS
LEGEND:
SELECTED ROUTE
a ALTERNATE ROUTE, (Not selected
V due to impact on wetlands)
-? WETLAND LIMITS
CITY of CONCORD, JOB No.
ROCKY RIVER 90-09-23
\ 217'49. INTERCEPTOR SEWER SCALE :
\ E T L A N D ROUTE LAYOUT I" % 200'
\A R E A Prepared by : SHEET
\ CONCORD ENGINEERING 8 6 of 15
SURVEYING, INC. .
BLOCK 4 Continued
A.
b
W
?i

1 a !
O
O
WETLAND
LIMITS
WETLAND
`AREA
PROPOSED 30"
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
?L
PROP. Mi 38
STA. 152.48.92
ge3
r
N
PROP. W 37
STA. 148976.44
WETLAND
AREA \
LIMIT
?i
h ?
PROP. NH 36
STA. 144.82.04
?q Tc
/?/? ENE G ,
1
"? 39 LEGEND :
STA. 157.9822
SELECTED ROUTE
*ALTERNATE ROUTE, (Not selected
due to impact on wetlands)
?- WETLAND LIMITS
I CLASS I RIPRAP
a
0
of
a
a
?Q
0
A
M

(Or
6
h
h?
BLOCK 4 Continued
CITY of CONCORD JOB No.
ROCKY RIVER 90-09-23
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
- • .• '--SCALE
ROUTE LAYOUT I" : 200
Prepared by " I
CONCORD SHEET
ENGINEERING 8,
SURVEYING, INC. 8 of 15
r
PROP. NH 35
STA. 139.82.04

TC'
WL-ACE
PROP. W 46
STA. 185.33.77
PROP. Mi 45
STA. 182.47.E
PROPOSED 30" /
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
a0 .
PROP. Mi 44
STA. 178.88 4
as
gym.
LEGEND :
SELECTED ROUTE
PROP. Mi 43 ---*ALTERNATE ROUTE, (Not selected
173IM70 due to impact on wetlands)
WETLAND LIMITS
WL-ACE WETLAND LIMITS AS IDENTIFIED
\ \? 13Y THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEE
CLASS I RIPRAP
PROP. W 42
3171. 171#34.4
WE7LAND
AR__ _
LIMITS
C)
O
.?
PROP. MH 40
STA. 161.98.93 BLOCK 4
/ .Continued
ITY of CONCORD JOB No.
?qg4 ROCKY RIVER 90-09-23
PROP W al INTERCEPTOR SEWER
STA. 166.51.57 SCALE
ROUTE LAYOUT I" = 200'
O°o 500
Prepared by : SHEET
CONCORD ENGINEERING 8 9 Of 15
SURVEYING, INC.

-LEGEND:
SELECTED ROUTE
-? ALTERNATE ROUTE, (Not selected
due to impact on wetlands)
?-z =WETLAND LIMITS
WL-ACE WETLAND LIMITS AS IDENTIFIED
BY THE ARMY CORPS-OF
ENGINEERS
....... ' CLASS I RIPRAP

. Y
Z
Q
m
O \
PROP. NH 49
STA. 194.63.49
296.
WL-AGE
?h
? wF0
?
v ? r
e
?P
=TLAND ` `
AREA
PROP. Mi 53
STA. 208.77.30
MATCHLINE I
OP. W 54
4. 213.09 .78
2-
Off'
WETLAND
LIMIT
?? 1 I I
PROP. MH 52
SS TA_ 204-96.62
PROP. Mi 51
STA. 20 \*49.58
POSV TOR SEWER
O
PROP. N. i -t9
STA. tW.60J0
BLOCK 4 Continued
CITY of CONCORD JOB No.
ROCKY RIVER 90-09-23
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
SCALE
ROUTE LAYOUT 1" = 200,
Prepared by :
E
SHEET
CONCORD
NGINEERING a
SURVEYING, INC. 10 of 15
I

t
v

PROP. NW 61
STA. 241.36.04
PROP. MH 60
STA. 237.22.97
WETLAND
AREA
PROP. NW 59
STA. 233.10.33
,TOP of BANK
LIMITS

PROP. Wi 58
STA. 228.3611
`PROP. W 57
STA. 223.55.
PROPOSED 30"
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
LEGEND:
co ° SELECTED ROUTE
acv 1 -? ALTERNATE ROUTE. (Not selected
due'to impact on wetlands)
WETLAND LIMITS
c
TOP of BANK
?N
g?
zs7Je Q?
PROPOSED MH 54
CLASS I RIPRAP
BLOCK 4 Continued
CITY of CONCORD JOB No.
ROCKY RIVER 90-09-23
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
SCALE :
ROUTE LAYOUT P = 200'
Prepared by : SHEET
CONCORD ENGINEERING

SURVEYING. INC. I I of 15

75'
a
w
a
UNDISTURBED
EARTH
s
30" SANITARY
SEWER
LEGEND:
W.L.- WATER LEVEL (Varies)
O.D. (B) - OUTSIDE DIAMETER AS
MEASURED AT THE BELL
NOTE : ADDITIONAL 25' CLEARING WIDTH (Opposing
bank) FOR VEHICULAR ACCESS AND
MANEUVERABILITY.
V
- 3' CLAY FILL OVER SWAMPY
AREAS FOR CONSTRUCTION
PURPOSES; TO BE REMOVED
AFTER CONSTRUCTION
BOX
OF TRENCH
W.L.
BLOCK 4 Continued
100' RIGHT OF WAY
,YJMUM LEARING WIDTH
.-1 30" SANITARY
SEWER
25' 25'
50' _ TYPICAL
Y
WIDTH OF WORK AREA Z
a
m
15• o
Clay fill in ampy areas w Q
W. 0
a 5'-4-
TRENCH WIDTH WO
(Outside box) 3

4'-10"
TFkENCH WIDTH
(inside box)
O.D. (B)
0

3
ar
OF
3
Cr
5
c
v
0
c
h
70'
7
mI a ?
o I 3 25
62' from t 30"
SANITARY SEWER
z
I~
z
la
l arc
?n
30'
CLEARING LIKTS

5'-4"
?? TRENCH WIDTH <\
\j t 563 00

?fl " ----
?- '
559.80 /
\` G
L° 0
a
+ o

555.00

NOTE :
1. MAXIMUM CLEARED AREA OF 75' BLOCK 4 Continued
(Work area typically 50' wide).
SCALE:
CROSS-SECTION at I"° 5'
Station 18+00
CESI JOB No.
90-09-23
Prepared by: SHEET
CONCORD ENGINEERING r3
13 of I5
SURVEYING, INC.
r
Y
1-
3
a
z
w
z
Q
a
w
a
t
c
i
i

U
O `o
a
w
0

5'-4'
?? TRENC WIDTH

y
i,? i
1558.'40
( j\ -
570.00
X564.00
BLOCK 4 Continued
iL
L
SCALE
CROSS-SECTION at 1° - 5'
Station C / 1+00 CESI JOB No.
90-09-23
Prepared by: SHEET
CONCORD ENGINEERING 8
14 of 15
SURVEYING, INC.
100' RIGHT OF WAY
30" SANITARY
SEWER 3
70' 30'
a
I

NOTES :
1. THE FIRST LIFT IS PLACED IN THE RIVER BED AND
THEN THE 30" SANITARY SEWER IS INSTALLED
HALF WAY ACROSS THE RIVER. THEN, FILL BLOCK 4 Continued
MATERIAL CAN BE REMOVED.
2. THE SECOND LIFT IS PLACED IN THE OPPOSING
SIDE OF THE RIVER AND THE REMAINING PORTION OF
THE 30" SANITARY SEWER IS INSTALLED. WHEN
THE 30" SANITARY SEWER IS COMPLETELY
INSTALLED ACROSS THE RIVER, THE SECOND LIFT
OF FILL IS THEN REMOVED AND THE BANKS
STABILIZED WITH FABRIC AND RIPRAP.
Y
Q 2
m Q
m
O LL
O
a n
O O
t.

CONTINUE ON WITH BRUSH MAT
UPSTREAM WITH LONG AXIS OF
BRUSH PARALLEL TO
DIRECTION OF FLOW
HIGH WATER LINE,
MINIMUM THICKNESS
AT TOP - 18"
ROCK DUMPED
IN PLACE
THICKNESS AT
BOTTOM 2'-0"
STREAM
BED

FASTEN BRUSH IN PLACE
BY USE OF STAKES AND WIRE
?. GRAVEL BED 6" THICK
(minimum) WHERE NEEDED
SLOPE NOT STEEPER THAN 1+ : I
FILTER FABRIC
STABLE
GRADE 3'-0" Min.
NOTE ;
WHERE THE SANITARY SEWER USE STEEL SPIKE
LINE CROSSES THE STREAM, OR SIMILAR TOOL
THE RIPRAP AND GRAVEL BED T TWIST WIRE
SHALL EXTEND COMPLETELY TI GHT
ACROSS THE CHANNEL BOTTOM
All rtprap shall consist of clean field stone or
rough unhewn quarry stone, resistant to the
action of air and water, and shall be class I.
Riprap shall be placed to a depth of 1.5 feet and
a minimum of 2.0 feet below the toe of the bank
to the top of the bank at locations shown on the
contract drawings and at locations determined by
the observer. This unit price paid for this item
shall be the actual square yards installed, as
approved by the observer.
BLOCK 4 Continued
TYPICAL CREEK BASIN SCALE :
STABILIZATION for Not to scale
CREEK CROSSING and
BANK PROTECTION C90-09B 23

Prepared by: UPPLEMENTARY
CONCORD ENGINEERING S DRAWING
SURVEYING, INC.
iot
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199101609
April 19, 1991
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Dear Mr. Dorney:
S Uno,
Enclosed is the application of the City of Concord, represented by Concord
Engineering and Surveying, Incorporated for a Department of the Army permit
and a State Water Quality Certification to place excavated/fill material in
the waters and adjacent wetlands of the Rocky River to facilitate construction
of a 30-inch diameter sanitary sewer interceptor near Concord, Cabarrus
County, North Carolina. Your receipt of this letter verifies your acceptance
of a valid request for certification in accordance with Section 325.2(b)(ii)
of our administrative regulations.
We are considering authorization of the proposed activity pursuant to
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and we have determined that a water
quality certification may be required under the provisions of Section 401 of
the same law. A Department of the Army permit will not be granted until the
certification has been obtained or waived.
In accordance with our administrative regulations, 60 days after receipt
of a request for certification is considered a reasonable time for State
action. Therefore, if your office has not acted on the request by June 19,
1991, the District Engineer will deem that waiver has occurred.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Steven Lund, telephone (704)
259-0857.
Sincerely,
G. e Wr t
hie Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
AM Adik
rill
I- APPLICATION F SPAR : ¢giE T OF THE ARMY PER al
0-1618 PP OVAL NO, 002-0036
,
E
;
(33 CFR 325) uv June 1992
I--j stte re
ting bu
taen et Tmis cal -tiori t idle ?rir aLGri is
e
swial0i;to avvai?? 5 ??11ts W, ri a3 ss 2{ ;hdff*0fity ,?d :,ate. ;fk sudit:; t» tat rss,ewlrx?
s.
?,
t
se
:. iS EriiCIJCd?y, SO Ciiil?y? 9Xi iIN t tI sour C'1 JFIJ}Lflzi& ilf=.f t').-a:rf ValrwQ 'r4 alata '?S s anc- C* TSP:0tif'Q a i'4 [EAes ".+ llf. V? cale+c-iion ca iI?ErJ rria?E?.
App-licationva :3r :er Or mcie ! Oirplex r it Ct .ar lNr'rv m ?'-4+;1tc'Ca' Jt1 3 e T* ii a.`f•1 Gsgetsatics, E'.Jmm t enu £gard; t? this titirdeti 2viif*iaie of arlj
,_j4?.{?
jW--ct --Peet i1'.'ills c0lecl rk of cIfo !•E3+abo,; ii 144;f} SJt?t-i ;: vtZ'-r {G': Mis G`ir':lQ{} ti) ${atly,;a t4'S 3Flwcas' Duactua!a- !at irliafrnattan
n
`++J;:y :204. afldiUfl, VA 222f } '- ,._ ? - Ol 2 t ? rs ?
3 ' ra4iCl s --id IR4,pon S; *-914 jotf7tson Oavi`d •?l?;i ay, =
i :iJ 2 -. ?, . 1?? f?. iiliCf 1X?t1 and- 3'?8r?;.:s21. t ±a}'!; r-_ 11350-3
t? s F=tFi#y"t33rs1?1 Acid Budge!, Y'11as rcgWri. DC- 20503.
vri6 Ou,,a
of {;ru Aiaty ;)alff si p c
Us; fi{
g
(afn i--$ 3uI1!QIiZeC t!y SaC11oaa 10 of {: a Bi ers aad haftijfS AC CI; ta;?9a Sei bon .1.13.:,1 me ::ki3ri Water ACt VJ
r
l
]
,ff
??
nn
t' d'rli?v6, i rJ; -'r sil, ;1i] J tCET a r-1 }2:F TS?.l u22+K? ttLE. Tl•;e?'4 IG y?i li£' jJCI iQ i_:34S. sa?tliiiiy ??ti Vitt-? i1T v: i?a?tll'r3 rt(?Lttty. Cli iV'CI?40 ?? Ule
.'t{v SLrd 4i: ;r'i
?y
Wiled stapes. trle S.is t'arcn of tiFf?jja or INN frnat&Il mau waters of ?P.43 "J"lu_d states. arl;. the lr?t 51 6 S16tUil Oi d(edged 1fidie t!$1 i0f Nth PtJrPJSO Of ."W001{ti IS
rill ace. l x13ta_r9. Ialtarraalsat4 rr7u;rfl 7 cr) this ,r]rtii Yr;ii be us":(" t;t vnludtirly ft z li In;;i ri:'r lift ntL n{_at ;aEiQn i1i tris aj3 is t3liCr1 is mado a matter of
Tr414a11 t53 icarlC3 . 3 ?uCiiC- `k tit cl l :Eti!t..•S::fa ti ;t e it c -M3-bon twy Jbr?U ,. J?i i} 3' ' .`` W'. y -ie ' 23ic - est€`a7 are ie'6'$
sswr in :3r-.'
rt
2-att :
`
i
A
l ,t
:.vt=aflwf' to h 1- ""' a':t'v iif ?3.3•.Ik%4?ne C0% n•`i Plju _'?.1c:5. It I tCa't rya 1(it..N:?11Fv' t_ a-:E =?i _I;NL?aJ. i e ? ..a;:l L7Jpi;C SID011 ??rrtilJi rW t{v3sJW
ar, a Permit t'a issued.
y T
?. t - - - a-.a 1.I _ii3....-_-:: ..t 1!a _
?_'L4 :?rI LTJ r3C a1Ja? LULa'Li3 Y'aa
? r?ttiy!Ce tK it Vily . _. i.}d ?4.G+?iI 1 •sr ,•}+N 4,11),tati
.i
-3'Ka9 3aii`3?Ja? ja?wyNafit S` +S f, ice-` •:5 ?a??F ?? .?r'pL: _ t .a .a. J .v -.a?i ._. ?fYti' :@.. ? t.+= lk.'i4..' 14 ?f '.3 iZ. ::.3..tiil?Mi 4':! av ia: 'w1 ac%vitj. 2'rtl y .it-..i1;?.?Yt
i at- iD (ios lac-flipielai+ if I, full will to feluirtad.
I. APPLICATION NUMBER 7la 63 dS5,igf)ed by CUfb;;t 3 NAME-. AUOAEv? . AtiD TI i.c OF A€.iFaiS.iFil.ZEID AGENT
..,,,-?,?..,.......,,,,.,.,?.,.-,.-.-'.. --"
--.- .--_ -• tvlvylivr,v i,i: uvr,is{j uii?;aic"a5 li:tvi$
?
-
2 NAME A9.{ia ArJDAESS O APPLICANT f
AJ^, f i ifetssiCun: at
City Engineer AiC t ? (Ott")
f
d
i ?
-- -
ty o
Concor
C - - --
P. O. Box 308 5tat? i?r.1 ;tx sr, nl:or,: istereyda3i?!u1 ari?8uttwnrs
'M;
Concord, NC 28025 - -- --?---
t7iBrttltiilti rK, QUilitj3 1-}t73ta1CY'.411dU19 lfi 1wil as Illy ij:yawa if' Ifld i?4k.d°a 4:fjil Vf llltJ permit applfy$hon and to
s i!>ililt, Iktl[i ii U /3E, aiai1j igltWf'aldl ii?3titt?tll1p11 in tii pp"t of 0'.8 8 11W:10f1.
AJC { ) N/A {Rusidtlrlcvi NATURE OF APP ANT ) DA IE
Arc (704 } 786-6161 _-_ _ __ tUft{ca? 5
)
?-- - - ---1 3-4-91
4. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTIVITY ` '- Tim Lowder, P . E . City Engineer
_?
.
aa. ACTIVITY
1. Construction fill necessary to build a mat over swampy areas to allow excavator and dump
trucks bringing in materials to install 30 inch .diameter gravity sewer pipe along Rocky
River. Original ground elevation to be restored after construction.
2. Also, construction fill necessary to temporarily fill in Rocky River at river crossings
to allow excavator to install 30 inch diameter gravity sewer pipe underneath Rocky River.
Fill to be removed after river crossing is completed.
3. General activity consists of the installation of 24,136 LF of 30" sanitary sewer and 61
manholes. Clearing width to install the 30" sanitary sewer is 75' wide.
4b PURPOSE
The purpose of the proposed construction activity is to install a 30 inch diameter gravity
interceptor sewer along portions of Rocky River for the City of Concord, NC, to serve portions
of newly annexed areas.
dc. 01SC1".ARGE OF OkEC*f:D OR FILL MATERIAL
1. Clay fill over swampy areas: Total linear footage in swampy areas 8000 LF. Per attached
drawing, width 15' of 3' deep fill. Total yardage of fill = 13,500 cyd.
2. River Crossings - 6 total: Top width fill = 15', side slopes 1:1.5, avg. height of
fill 10', avg. width Rocky River 70. Total yardage = 5,000 cyd
(Construction fill = onsite fill material)
ENG FORM 4345, AUf? 89 €0IMN OF APA t18 6. ()H'ii7t E1• (PI4,6X,ata att CEC,.V•ON)
a. t?AWES ANN AWJ%tzz s;S OF 3DJO!Nitit r-"te'st-;7-;iNNE=+;. LE:igs--F$S. CTC 1+VHG:.E AflOPcfi JW- RCrJvINS THE LYA7ERLYAY
See attached list "Property Owners, Rocky River Interceptor Sewer, City of Concord, NC .
CESI 90-09-23"
d. WATERCsC;OY arvfl l-OCATIOtt ON WnTEAt3Cti)7 Wtt6RE ACTw1I`t SxtSTS OR IS PfiGPU3Ett ----
Rocky River between Highway 29 to the South and Derita Road to the North (see site map)
7. LOCATION QN LAND WHERE ACTiVIFY EXISTS OR IS PROPOSED
ADDRES&
Rocky River between Highway 29 to the South and Derita Road to the North
STREET, AOAO, ROUTE OR OTHER AESCRIPTIvE LOCATION
Cabarrus NC 28025
COUNTY STATE. Zip CODE
City of Concord, NC
LOCAL GOVERNING BODY wrnI JURISDICTICit4 OVERBITE
a 14 aAY 0011it3n ut Ina acttytry hN winch authOntStutt. ly swltlhi ,uw c.xnt>iaio: C. YES , XNO
It anOwet 15 'Seri giva tetav'As. 4TYNh1Il and year lllb rdir"y was Cun;piaiW Ismjwaw the owtattr.y w.,ik tun lha drz :aUtlis
8. Ltat' an D WtNats of CANUItCations &W denials tecylYWS Win 0111W latheal, uuvistat4, state pr twat agmicaut !w. any %W41us" cwestru tion, rot "!Cos ar admr
acthr l" dfuaAwJ in ttiia appkAtion.
ISSUING AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL CENTIHCATiON NO. DAT9 OF APPLICATION DATE QF APPROVAL OATS OF DENIAL
N.C.D.E.H.N.R. Non Discharge Not received
Div. En.. Man. permit at this time.
N.C.D.O.T. Encroachment Not received
at this time
to. Appilcation Is hwe yy nude for s petmit at permits to ,uthome tow achvttlus desctttyed haluin. t camly that I ain ratntliat with the inlormacon tzintainetJ in the
application, and Ihm to the !Soar of my kmwi&jua and:*Iwf JIAJ- 3 trtwirtaitt+A is tfua, cumplulo, and UCaiatu. 1 Wuithul cattily 1681 1 W33032 the autnetity W
urukatake the pforooma t aeiwujos w! am boing as ilia iluiy aulihwttud 80GAt W thu alAyia ens -
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT 11ATE ;5,GtiATUR& OF AGENT DATE
Tim Lowder, P.E. City Engineer
The applfcatlon must be signed by the patson who U9slfes to uildeffahe the ptoposoo uctivey {appixtatti 1St it may ba Siomed by a Duty
awhorned agent if the StatBr11 f in block 3 haS bean tilled out and signed.
18 tl.S.C. Section 1001 provides that Whowmr, in any manor, within the jutisdittfian of any depe iaeol lu agency of The United States
known ly and v4tt>tly falsifies. concaals, sX COvms up by a0y tnCk. 3Cheme. or ddvlCe a mateuiat fact or snakes ariy raise, fictitious or fraudulent
ataWIM& td Of. rnpreaetttaliOns Of NMk tft Or uses any WO WnUM Of document knowbV same 10 Contain any 16140 40tl(us or
fraudulent sWeaveni or enfty. MW be lined root more thew! $10.000 or trnprt60t*d Fool morn than INO years, at Win.
1Aw4196 W EA4 P WAN 434%) - - --
U51..9t}4EltMleRflatTrrtiffl+.7 sacs, Tr..z

1O

W a o
c -
t: w
i w
?
\
LL. U
> N

Q.

...?
JJ (n W v
o
/
1l
J j
W- o

0: N O
I?
//,.tom J
m
U
z
r (7
> W
?l cr-
ar
C?
y ?
W
-1 z
is z
cr
SJ?4 0
_ z
O
53

/, (, /,Zz
WL-ACE
PROP. MH 5
STA 14.6 7.98
Co
N
V6
PROP. MH 4
.STA.10.3810
PROP. MH 3
A. 6+80.75
ROCKY
RIVER
EXISTING
LIFT STATION
(Lift Station)
PROP. W I
STA. 0#00,00
H?9?wQy„29
U.S.
BLOCK 4 Continued
PROP. MH 6 '
•STA. 19.48.79
ROCKY RIVER
WL-ACE
I of
NK
O'` S ?.p'S?C/. PROP. M11\7
is STa 23.51.7
Os
s ?? oo
2
PROP. MH 8
STA. 26.70.88 v
V?
GENERAL NOTE :
FOR SHEETS 2 of 15 through II of 15 ;
THE FLOOD PLAIN OF ROCKY RIVER CONTAINS
UPLAND LEVEES AND BARS AS WELL AS
OVERFLOW CHANNELS AND WET SLOUGHS
WHICH ARE TOO SMALL TO MAP.
z
PROPOSED 30" LEGEND :
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
=-Z) WETLAND LIMITS
-0 SELECTED ROUTE
PROP. MH 2 WL-ACE WETLAND LIMITS AS
STA. 2.68.96 IDENTIFIED BY THE ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
:,,,..,.. CLASS I RIPRAP
N
_ STOP of BANK
PROP. MH 14
STA. 48+19.96
\ WL -ACE
PROP. MH 9
STA. 31.23.61
PROP. MH 10
STA. 34.39.40
P
M
PROP. MH 11
STA. 37.86.22
WL -ACE
PH 12
14.75
PROP. MH 13
STA. 44.36.98
LEGEND:
PROPOSED 30" WETLAND LIMITS
INTERCEPTOR SEWER SELECTED ROUTE
WL -ACE WETLAND LIMITS AS
IDENTIFIED BY THE ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
CLASS I RIPRAP
`WL -ACE
BLOCK 4 Continued
CITY of .CONCORD
JOB No.
90-09-23
ROCKY RIVER
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
SCALE
WL -ACE
ROUTE LAYOUT
I" = 200'
Prepared by :
SHEET
Q
CONCORD ENGINEERING 8
SURVEYING, INC.
3 of 15

PROPOSED 30"
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
Mq
r
U
W
Z '
5 J
. Z
Q)
r
Q.
WL-ACE
LEGEND:
WETLAND LIMITS
SELECTED ROUTE
WETLAND LIMITS AS
IDENTIFIED BY THE ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
CLASS I RIPRAP
BLOCK 4 Continued

O
_?
?Q.
PROP. MH 26
STA. 96.73.66 TOP Of BANK
4
??43
PROP. MH 25
STA. 91.96.23 cc
PROPOSED 30"
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
LEGEND:
'W
O U
in O
it
-IZV
PROP. MH 24 A
STA. 88.25.40
WL-ACE
PROP. MH 23
STA. 85956.93
1
1

PROP. W 22
STA. 92.15.54
e?
h
N
PROP. MH
STA. 79.E
WL-ACE
529 o?
STA. OP. MH 3 2 ?O
or C, S??T PR
S? ?F
0 BLOCK 4 Continued
CITY of CONCORC
WETLAND LIMITS
SELECTED ROUTE
WL-ACE WETLAND LIMITS AS
IDENTIFIED BY THE ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
CLASS I RIPRAP

MATCHLINE D
w
Fi
PROP. Mi 31 GLA55 I
STA. 120.08.62 RIPRAP
334J0'
W
W
J
2
U
< 21749-
PROP. MH 27
STA. 99499.24
lV
t0
PROP. MH 28
STA. 105.06.86
v-
0.
2 a
CF' PROP. MH 29
>y,? STA. 109.34.39
5
PROPOSED 30"
INTERCEPTOR S WER
PROP. Mi 30 W TLAND
STA. 114.64 .52 LIMITS
\ LEGEND:
SELECTED ROUTE
ALTERNATE ROUTE, (Not selected
due to impact on wetlands)
?- WETLAND LIMITS-
(ETL`AND
\\EA\
CITY of CONCORD , JOB No.
ROCKY RIVER 90-09-23
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
SCALE
ROUTE LAYOUT I" = 200'
Prepared by : SHEET
CONCORD ENGINEERING & 6
f 15
SURVEYING, INC. o
•r
BLOCK 4 Continued

WETLAND
AREA
\ ?q
F?
i
0
N
a >
C
Y
U
O
4
P
00
?h-
WETLAND
LIMITS
a
PROP. MH 34
STA. 135+23.C
PROPOSED 30"
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
PROP. Mi 33
STA. 129+79.97
PROP. Mi 32
STA. 125.58.62
LEGEND:
WETLAND
LIMITS
N
\ I \
Mq? '
F
z
SELECTED ROUTE
---? ALTERNATE ROUTE, (Not selected
due to impact on wetlands)
o WETLAND LIMITS
BLOCK 4 Continued
h
CITY of CONCORD JOB No.
ROCKY RIVER 90-09-23
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
SCALE
ROUTE LAYOUT I" = 200'
PROP. MH 31 Prepared b
ERING &
STA. W 31.62 CONCORD ENGINE SHEET
SURVEYING, INC. 7 of 15
N
M

O
0
m
WETLAND
UMITS
WETLAND
"AREA
PROP. Mi 37
STA. 148.76.44
PROP. Mi 38 ?P
STA. 152.48.92
F?
3
as.
m
r
N
Ih
PROPOSED 30-
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
WETI AND
\AREA-

PROP. Mi 36
STA. 144.82.04
MIr
G
PROP. Mi 39 LEGEND :
STA. 157.98.92
*SELECTED ROUTE
--? ALTERNATE ROUTE, (Not selected
due to impact on wetlands)
?_--? WETLAND LIMITS
' CLASS I RIPRAP
a
0
ai
a
a
?g
O
r
or,
a
Fm.
/ 0P
0
A7 0q
h/
BLOCK 4 Continued
CITY of CONCORD JOB No.
ROCKY RIVER 90-09-23
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
- ..SCALE
ROUTE LAYOUT I" = 200
Prepared by : SHEET
CONCORD ENGINEERING 8
SURVEYING, INC. 8 of IS
PROP. M•1 35
STA. 139.82.04
..

WL-ACE
ti
PROP. Mi 46
STA. 185.33.77
PROP. Mi 45
STA. 182.47.E
PROPOSED 30"
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
. . NH 42
\3=A. 34.4 ?
WE7LAND
AREA
?
LIMITS
a0
PROP. Mi 44
STA. 178.88,14
o-a
gym.
PROP. Mi 43
17389.70

LEGEND:
SELECTED ROUTE
-? ALTERNATE ROUTE, (Not selected
due to impact on wetlands)
WETLAND LIMITS
WL-ACE WETLAND LIMITS AS IDENTIFIED
By THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEE
CLASS I RIPRAP
C?
O
i?
PROP. MH 40
STA. 161.98.93 ct BLOCK 4
/ Continued
ITY of CONCORD JOB No.
4s?64 ROCKY RIVER 90-09-23
PROP Mi 41 INTERCEPTOR SEWER
STA. 166.51.57 SCALE
/ ROUTE LAYOUT I" = 200'
qa\ 56
Prepared by : SHEET
CONCORD ENGINEERING & g of 15
SURVEYING, INC.

-LEGEND:
SELECTED ROUTE
--? ALTERNATE ROUTE, (Not selected
due to impact on wetlands)
WETLAND LIMITS
WL-ACE WETLAND LIMITS AS IDENTIFIED
BY THE ARMY CORPS-OF
ENGINEERS
CLASS I RIPRAP
X
PROP. dH 48
STA. 194.63.49
WL-ACE
"_TLAND ` `
AREA \
PROP. NH 53
STA. 208.77.30
WETLAND
LIMIT \

?o
or
MATCHLINE I
7PjMWH 54
9.747?-

PROP. W 52
STA. 204.9.62
PROP. MH 51
L 20 49.58
OSED 30
?TERCEPTOR !EWER
r ? Y•
0
PROP. %Fi 'r9
STA. 0 .60JO
BLOCK 4 Continued
CITY of CONCORD JOB No.
a` ?v ROCKY RIVER 90-09-23
oft INTERCEPTOR SEWER
\ w ?. WL-ACE SCALE
?k ROUTE LAYOUT I" = 200'
Q''?? n P Prepared b
: Y SHEET
CONCORD ENGINEERING &
U SURVEYING, INC. 10 of 15
i

i t
A

\ \
WETLAND
LIMITS

PROP. MH 61
STA 241.36.04
60
.22.97
PROP. MH
STA. 223.

WETLAND
AREA
PROP. MH 58
STA. 228#36J I

PROP. MH 59
STA. 233.10.33
LIMITS
PROPOSED 30"
INTERCEPTOR SEWER
x
`TOP of BANK
\ LEGEND:
SELECTED ROUTE
ALTERNATE ROUTE (Not
' selected
due
to impact on wetlands)

ti WETLAND LIMITS
CLASS I RIPRAP
BLOCK 4 Continued
a
M
n TOP of BANK CITY of CONCORD JOB No.
ROCKY RIVER 90-09-23
INTERCEPTOR SEWER SCALE :
?w ROUTE LAYOUT r = 20V

GG 1 Prepared by : SHEET
A` CONCORD ENGINEERING 8
SURVEYING. INC.
II of 15
?G
237je p
PROPOSED MH 54
K
r
100' RIGHT OF WAY
:IMUM.CLEARING WIDTH
VARIES
25'
50' Yl
WIDTH OF C
uai l:
a (clay fill In a
Y
0 5'-4"
\UNDISTURBED -
EARTH \ 4' 10"
TRENCH N
Inside b,
." O.D.?(E
1 3.5"
!, 30" SANITARY
SEWER I
AREA
areas) a
w
a
Q
Y
it 0
O
3
?..
30" SANITARY
SEWER
LEGEND:
W.L: WATER LEVEL (Varies)
O.D. (B) - OUTSIDE DIAMETER AS
MEASURED AT THE BELL
NOTE : ADDITIONAL 25' CLEARING WIDTH (Opposing
bank) FOR VEHICULAR ACCESS AND
MANEUVERABILITY.
- V CLAY FILL OVER SWAMPY
AREAS FOR CONSTRUCTION
PURPOSES, TO BE REMOVED
AFTER CONSTRUCTION
BOX M
OF TRENCH
BLOCK 4 Continued

3
z
z
W
z
t?
100' RIGHT OF AY I w
a
70' 30' 20'
3
cc
Z. x a 75' MAXIMU CLEARING LIMITS
3 a ?a

NOTE :
1. MAXIMUM CLEARED AREA OF 75'
(Work area typically 50' wide).
BLOCK 4 Continued
SCALE:
CROSS-SECTION at I"a 5•
Station 18+00
CESI JOB No.
90-09-23
Prepared by: SHEET
CONCORD ENGINEERING 8
13 of 15
SURVEYING, INC.
r
r
r

3
Or
H
z
ttl
z
a
o`
U1
a-
i

?

TRENC WIDTH y v ?,)
570.00
?
O `o
uI 64.00
y
I
558.40
14
BLOCK 4 Continued

CROSS-SECTION at SCALE
I" = 5'
Station, 71+00 CESI JOB No.
90-09-23
Prepared by: SHEET
CONCORD ENGINEERING & 14 Of (rJ
SURVEYING, INC.
100' RIGHT OF WAY
30" SANITARY
SEWER B70' 30'
I a
. i,
t
a
Y
Z
Q
LL
0
a
0
H
CONCRETEINCASEMENT
Y.
2
Q
m
U.
0
a
0
DUCTILE IRON PIPE
NOTES :
I. THE FIRST LIFT IS PLACED IN THE RIVER BED AND
THEN THE 30" SANITARY SEWER IS INSTALLED
HALF WAY ACROSS THE RIVER. THEN, FILL BLOCK 4 Continued
MATERIAL CAN BE REMOVED.
2. THE SECOND LIFT IS PLACED IN THE OPPOSING
SIDE OF THE RIVER AND THE REMAINING PORTION OF
THE 30" SANITARY SEWER IS INSTALLED. WHEN
THE 30" SANITARY SEWER IS COMPLETELY
INSTALLED ACROSS THE RIVER, THE SECOND LIFT
OF FILL IS THEN REMOVED AND THE BANKS
STABILIZED WITH FABRIC AND RIPRAP.
HIGH WATER LINE,
e p «
R
CONTINUE ON WITH BRUSH MAT
UPSTREAM WITH LONG AXIS OF
BRUSH PARALLEL 70
DIRECTION OF FLOW
MINIMUM THICKNESS
AT TOP - 18"
ROCK DUMPED
IN PLACE FASTEN BRUSH IN PLACE
BY USE OF STAKES AND WIRE
?. • : ' GRAVEL BED G" THICK
(minimum) WHERE NEEDED
THICKNESS AT
BOTTOM 2'-0"
STREAM
BED
STABLE
GRADE 1
SLOPE NOT STEEPER THAN I+ : I
FILTER FABRIC
NOTE ;
WHERE THE SANITARY SEWER USE STEEL SPIKE
LINE CROSSES THE STREAM, OR SIMILAR TOOL
THE RIPRAP AND GRAVEL BED T TWIST WIRE
SHALL EXTEND COMPLETELY TI GHT
ACROSS THE CHANNEL BOTTOM - '
All riprap shall consist of clean field stone or
rough unhewn quarry stone, resistant to the
action of air and water, and shall be class I.
Riprap shall be placed to a depth of 1.5 feet and
a minimum of 2.0 feet below the toe of the bank
to the top of the bank at locations shown on the
contract drawings and at locations determined by
the observer. This unit price paid for this item
shall be the actual square yards installed, as
approved by the observer.
BLOCK 4 Continued
TYPICAL CREEK BASIN SCALE :
STABILIZATION for Not to 3C41%
CREEK CROSSING and
BANK PROTECTION C90 9B23 No.:
Prepared by: [UPPLEMENTARY?
CONCORD ENGINEERING 8 DRAWING
SURVEYING, INC.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO
Regulatory Branch
April 17, 1991
Action ID. 199101610 and General Permit No.
Mr. G. Tim Lowder
City of Concord Engineering Department
Post Office Box 308
Concord, North Carolina 28025
Dear Mr. Lowder:
CESAW-C081-N-060-0049
,r-
799
On February 13, 1991, you applied for Department of the Army (DA) permit
authorization to place fill material into the waters and adjacent wetlands of
Coddle Creek to facilitate the installation of a new 30-inch diameter sanitary
sewer interceptor to serve a newly annexed area on the west side of Concord,
Cabarrus County, North Carolina. Prior to this application, Mr. W.E. Cochran,
your consulting engineer, requested DA authorization, on your behalf, to
construct lateral sewer lines off the proposed interceptor to serve the
Carolando Subdivision. Both of these projects were reviewed in the field by
you and Mr. Steven Lund of my Asheville staff on March 6, 1991.
On April 1, 1988, we renewed general permit No. CESAW-0081-N-000-0049
(copy enclosed) that authorizes the maintenance, repair and installation of
aerial and subaqueous utility lines with attendant structures and the
discharge of excavated or fill materials, within construction/access
corridors, associated with utility line maintenance, repair and installation
in navigable waters and waters of the United States in the State of North
Carolina.
Your proposed work is authorized if you can comply with all permit
conditions. Please read the enclosed permit to prevent an unintentional
violation of Federal law. Please note that the 20-foot corridor includes all
land-disturbing activities (i.e., clearing, trenching, access fills,
stockpiling). Also note the requirement for non-erodible materials in
temporary stream crossings. The following additional special conditions also
apply to your proposed work and are necessary to assure that the work will
have minimal impact on the areas aquatic resources:
a. Where the utility line trench traverses wetland areas, the upper
6 inches of topsoil will be stripped, stockpiled and returned to the surface
of the excavated area following pipeline installation.
b. All permanent disposal areas for overburden will be reviewed and
approved by the Corps of Engineers prior to utilization.

f ?
-2-
c. Any construction access roads outside of the authorized 20-foot
construction corridor will be reviewed and approved by the Corps of Engineers
prior to beginning active construction work.
As this Department of the Army general permit does not relieve you of the
responsibility to obtain any other required approvals, you should contact
appropriate State and local agencies before beginning work.
If you have any questions or need to arrange for a field review under
special conditions (a) and (b), please contact Mr. Steven Lund, Regulatory
Branch, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
Enclosure
Copies Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. John Parker
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. W.E. Cochran
W.E. Cochran and Son, Incorporated
191 Eastover Drive, SE
Concord, North Carolina 28205

1
ic
3?R D
j?. #ilNEERING &
SURVEYING, INC.
April 15, 1991
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Ref: ACTION ID -199101609
Subject: Rocky River Interceptor Sewer
0 1213
T
City of Concord, NC
CESI 90-09-23
Application for Department of the Army Permit
Engineering Form 4345
Dear Mr. Wright:
In accordance with your correspondence of April 10, 1991, I submit the following:
Reli MOA; February 6, 1990; DA/EPA; CWA 404 (b) (1)
a. Alternatives to the installation of an interceptor to serve the City's recently
annexed areas are (1) Do Nothing'-(2) Install a WWTP. The City is obligated
to provide public sanitary service to the recently annexed areas
consequently the Do Nothing alternative is not feasible. The alternative to
Doing Nothing and Installing an Interceptor Sewer is to install a WWTP. The
WWTP will require interceptor sewers and a Discharge Permit (NPDES).
Currently the City of Mooresville discharges into Rocky River along with
other small package WWTP. Installation of the interceptor sewer as
described in Engineering Form 4345 would potentially eliminate two of the
package WWTP discharges. It would also eliminate the need for securing an
NPDES permit to serve the newly annexed areas. Therefore, the proposed 30"
interceptor sewer along Rocky River to a lift station which would then pump
the wastewater to the City of Concord's sanitary sewer system ultimately
treating it in the Rocky River Regional WWTP (on Breeze Lane, Cabarrus
County) is the least environmentally damaging, alternative. (Ref EXHIBIT
A)
'?.?. SOX 2-'8 • ?? Sp':n? J' _or ?;'??/. • ????.. ?. `;C 71102.^. ??:^._ • __ 5404 • .? -7x..11 ??j.OCi.l • - -_

Mr. G. Wayne Wright
April 15, 1991
Page 2
b. Steps to minimize wetland losses. Please refer to EXHIBITS B & C. Also
please refer to 1" = 200' scale orthophoto drawings submitted with. the
application on March 7, 1991 which show various routes located in order to
mitigate wetland impact.
C. The project will require a sedimentation & erosion control permit. The
contractor is required to comply with these measures and the City of Concord
will be providing full time inspection to ensure these measures are carried
out. Sedimentation & erosion control measures will aid in mitigating
unavoidable impact on wetland areas. In addition fill materials utilized to
aid the contractor during installation must be removed after backfilling
procedures are completed and the contractor must restore the ground to
original elevation.
If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask.
Very. truly yours,
CONCORD ENGINEERING & SURVEYING, INC.
Kurt Wright, PE
cc: - NCDEM<.
Steve Lund
Tim Lowder