20190035 Ver 1_PLI_PN_CommentResponse_20190530_20190531

Staff Review
Does this application have all the attachments needed to accept it into the review process?
r Yes r No
ID#* Version* 1
20190035
Is this project a public transportation project?* r Yes
r No
Reviewer List:* Sue Homewood:eads\slhomevtood
Select Reviewing Office:* Winston-Salem Regional Office - [phone]
Submittal Type:*
Application Attachments
Does this project require a request for payment to be sent?*
r
Yes
r
No

Project Submittal Form
Please note: fields marked with a red asterisk below are required. You will not be able to submit the form until all
mandatory questions are answered.
Project Type: r New Project
r Pre -Application Submittal
r More Information Response
r Other Agency Comments
r For the Record Only (Courtesy Copy)
New Project - Please check the new project type if you are trying to submit a new project that needs an official approval
decision.
Pre -Application Submittal - Please check the pre -application submittal if you just want feedback on your submittal and
do not have the expectation that your submittal will be considered a complete application requiring a formal decision.
More Information Response - Please check this type if you are responding to a request for information from staff and
you have and ID# and version for this response.
Other Agency Comments - Please check this if you are submitting comments on an existing project.
Is this supplemental information that needs to be sent to the Corps?*
r Yes r No
Project Contact Information
Name: Kelly Thames
Who is subrritting the inforrration?
Email Address: [e-mail]
Project Information
Existing ID #: Existing Version:
20190035 1
20170001 (no dashes)
Project Name: Piedmont Lithium Project
Is this a public transportation project?
r Yes
r No
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
r Yes r No r Unknown
County (ies)
Gaston
Please upload all files that need to be submited.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docurrent
PLI_PN CommentResponse_20190530.pdf 20.13MB
Only pdf or loo files are accepted.
Describe the attachments:

Attached is the response to Public Notice Comments received during the public notice period associated with
the IP submittal.
V By checking the box and signing box below, I certify that:
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the
"Uniform Electronic Transactions Act")
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the INC General Statutes
(the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act');
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written
signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the online form."
Signature:
Submittal Date: Is filled inautorratically.

PIEDMONT
611 "IV M
May 31, 2019
Mr. David Shaeffer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Regulatory District
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 611
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262
Subject: Piedmont Lithium Project (SAW -2018-01129)
Reponses to Individual Permit Comments
Dear Mr. Shaeffer,
On behalf of Piedmont Lithium, Inc., HDR would like to thank you for your comments in response to their
Individual Department of the Army Permit application, submitted on December 30, 2018, for the proposed
construction of a hard rock lithium mine in Gaston County, North Carolina. Please see the following responses,
organized by the requesting party. Comments are in bold text, responses are provided in regular text.
At this time we would also like to notify you of a small change in the permit boundary that eliminates
approximately 8 acres from the southwestern corner of the project area. The acreage of the site is now 963 acres.
This reduction of project area will result in minor changes to the buffer setbacks which affects the location of the
proposed crossing of Beaverdam Creek; however, the proposed crossing of Beaverdam Creek will still span the
creek and will not impact the floodplain (Figure 1).
Additionally, since the IP submittal in December 2018, advanced engineering of the mine layout necessitated an
enlargement of the pit extents, refined the internal access road design, and identified the need for additional
erosion control measures. The pit extents have become larger to account for enhanced stability in the pit wall
design and additional mineralization discovered. This required locational shifts to the internal road alignment and
magazine location. Moreover, further analysis of drainage and best management practices indicated a need for
additional erosion control structures in two areas that also increased impacts. These additional impacts are
discussed in Question 3 along with respective mitigation needs.
hdrinc.com 440 S Church StreetSuite 1000Charlotte, NC 28202-2075
[phone]
Page 11

LEGEND
0 P Project Boundary
(963 a0.y
_ HDR Qelinealed
Streams
®HDR Delineated
Wetlands
0 HDR Delineated Ponds
100 -Year FEMA
Floodplain
— — Culverts
0 Fi5et 3 ECO
LEGEND: MINE FEATURES
Concentrator Plant Site
0 Pit Shell
Waste Rock
- ExistingRoad
Setback Buffers
100 Ft Lot Line Setback
200 Ft Structure Setback
300 Ft Residential Setback
Figure 1. Optimized site layout
J
Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
DESKTOP JD FEATURES
Desktop Streams
Desktop NWA Welland
APPROXIMATE IMPACTS
Delineated Stream
Impacts
PIIHYP;
Delineated Wetland
_ Delineated Pond
® Impacts
F4_ Desktop Stream
.. .::: Impacts
w. �.
�m Rom
:: ' � •���:::::: ' ...: awe
On behalf of Piedmont Lithium, Inc., HDR is submitting this response for the additional information request.
Should you have any questions or require additional information following your review of the enclosed materials,
please contact me at [phone] or kelly.thames�hdrinc.com.
Sincerely,
HDR, Inc.
Kelly mes, PWS Thomas Blackwell, PWS
Environmental Scientist Project Manager/Environmental Scientist
Attachments: Appendix A: Compiled Public Notice Comments
Appendix B: USACE PJD Verification
Appendix C: Design Drawings
Appendix D: Surface Water and Groundwater Monitoring Results
Appendix E: SHPO Coordination
cc: Patrick Brindle, Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
Kevin Andrews, Marshall Miller & Associates
Page 12

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
USACE:
1. During the pre -application meetings on August 23, 2018 and November 8, 2018, you or your agent
stated that Piedmont Lithium has drilled extensively throughout the Carolina Tin Spodumene Belt.
Please disclose the location of this exploratory drilling activity and explain why these sites were not
selected as the applicant's preferred alternative.
Piedmont has commenced exploratory drilling activities on two other parcels within the Carolina Tin-
Spodumene Belt (TSB) (Figure 2). These properties were not selected as the applicant's preferred alternative
because neither of the properties were a minimum of the 120 acres needed to warrant the development of an
assemblage of parcels, as defined by Siting Criteria C of the IP application. These properties may or may not
become part of future mining endeavors within the TSB; however, it is unknown at this time whether they will
be developed as such and an assemblage of properties would be necessary. All of these properties occur in
the same region as the preferred alternative and given the heterogeneity and topography of the landscape in
the region, potential future impacts on these properties would most likely be similar to those of the preferred
alternative.
n
LEGEND
K
Piedmont Lithium Mine
Site (883 so,)
Central Property (78 ac-)
Sunnyside Property (100 ac-)
T in = 2 miles
0 Miles 2
Y�
Cmrrr.
C�eRF
pC
P�
Figure 2. Piedmont Lithium's exploratory drilling locations
Crouse
k,-•c.e mrr • ir.
fiq
2. During the pre -application meetings on August 23, 2018, and November 8, 2018, you or your agent
stated that Piedmont Lithium has future plans for a lithium concentrate refinement facility 20 miles
away in Cleveland County. This facility would allow Piedmont Lithium to reduce the cost of the final
lithium product by avoiding shipment of lithium concentrate to China for refinement. Please disclose
any anticipated adverse impacts to waters of the United States associated with the development of
this facility and associated infrastructure (water, sewer, rail, gas, electricity, etc.).
The ability for Piedmont Lithium to construct their own conversion facility is dependent on a number of factors
Page 13
2
� T
C�eRF
pC
P�
Figure 2. Piedmont Lithium's exploratory drilling locations
Crouse
k,-•c.e mrr • ir.
fiq
2. During the pre -application meetings on August 23, 2018, and November 8, 2018, you or your agent
stated that Piedmont Lithium has future plans for a lithium concentrate refinement facility 20 miles
away in Cleveland County. This facility would allow Piedmont Lithium to reduce the cost of the final
lithium product by avoiding shipment of lithium concentrate to China for refinement. Please disclose
any anticipated adverse impacts to waters of the United States associated with the development of
this facility and associated infrastructure (water, sewer, rail, gas, electricity, etc.).
The ability for Piedmont Lithium to construct their own conversion facility is dependent on a number of factors
Page 13

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
including, but not limited to, investor funding, revenue success of producing lithium concentrate in the initial
years of the mine, and access to Class I rail infrastructure. After further investigation held subsequent to the
pre -application meeting, Piedmont has identified that the lithium conversion facility would most likely be
located in Gaston County, not Cleveland County, to maintain Piedmont Lithium's projects under one set of
municipal development regulations. The intent would be to locate the facility with direct access to natural gas,
Class 1 rail infrastructure and associated, existing infrastructure, eliminating the need to develop new
infrastructure.
It is unknown if, and when, a conversion facility will come to fruition; however, if constructed, the facility would
be located in the same region as the preferred alternative. Given the heterogeneity and topography of the
landscape in the region, the impacts of a future conversion facility would likely be similar for any site selected.
Furthermore, a future conversion site would likely be a relatively small facility and may result in minimal or no
impacts to jurisdictional waters. As a site has not been selected for a conversion facility, potential impacts
associated with the future facility are unknown at this time.
3. Figure 11 of the plans (Impact 14-16) shows a small section of Wetland 9 remaining. It appears that
the proposed fill would severely degrade the function of the remaining wetland and potentially isolate
the wetland from downstream waters. Therefore, this area should also be considered a loss of waters.
The entire acreage of Wetland 9 (0.18 ac.) will be included as a permanent impact. This increases the
originally submitted wetland impacts (0.14 ac.) by 0.04 acre. Please note that the original impact amount for
Wetland 9 (0.14 ac.) at a 2:1 ratio would require 0.28 acre of mitigation, which rounded up to the next quarter
acre would necessitate the purchase of 0.5 wetland credits. Mitigation for the entire 0.18 acre Wetland 9 at a
2:1 ratio would require 0.36 acre of mitigation, which rounded up to the nearest quarter acre would not
change the 0.5 wetland credit proposed.
We have evaluated the conceptual compensatory mitigation proposal included in the permit
application. We have determined that, if a permit is issued for the applicant's preferred alternative,
compensatory mitigation would be required at the following compensation ratios:
• 0.5:1 for Open Water (Wetland Credits)
• 2:1 for High Quality Wetlands (Wetland Credits)
• 1.75:1 for Medium Quality Wetlands (Wetland Credits)
• 1.5:1 for Low Quality Wetlands (Wetland Credits)
• 2:1 for High Quality Tributaries (Stream Credits)
• 1.75:1 for Medium Quality Tributaries (Stream Credits)
• 1.5:1 for Low Quality Tributaries (Stream Credits)
There is no change to wetland credits per the discussion above. There are two open water impacts (Impact
10 and Impact 15) that together total 0.16 acre of open water impacts. A 0.5:1 ratio as proposed by the Corps
would mitigate for 0.08 acre of open water that would be rounded up to a 0.25 acre wetland credit.
Perennial and intermittent channels provide different functions and ecosystems including biologic, hydrologic,
and geomorphologic characteristic differences. The stream function/quality indicators that are analyzed using
the NCSAM methodology are intended to be compared against a reference condition channel. Intermittent
channels are compared to a reference intermittent channel and perennial channels are compared to a
reference perennial channel. The distinction of flow regimes, not only in the scoring indicators of the
methodology but also in the fundamental basis of understanding how to rate a channel as a departure from a
reference condition, should be taken into account in determining mitigation ratios. Essentially, a high quality
perennial channel is not the same as a high quality intermittent channel nor is a low quality perennial channel
Page 14

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
the same as a low quality intermittent channel. Therefore, we respectfully submit the following stream
mitigation ratios in response to the Corp's proposed mitigation for this project:
• 2:1 for High Quality Perennial Tributaries (Stream Credits)
• 1.5:1 for High Quality Intermittent Tributaries (Stream Credits)
• 1:1 for Medium Quality Intermittent Tributaries (Stream Credits)
• 0.75:1 for Low Quality Intermittent Tributaries (Stream Credits)
We are proposing mitigation at a 1.5:1 ratio for High ratings for intermittent channels (Impacts 2, 6, 7, and 16),
a 1:1 ratio for a Medium rating for intermittent channels (Impacts 4-1, 4-2, 8-2, and 11), and 0.75:1 for a Low
rating for intermittent channels (Impacts 5 and 8-1). Table 1 (below) summarizes proposed mitigation.
Additional discussion and justification is also included below.
Table 1. Summary of proposed impacts and associated mitigation ratios.
^ Originally submitted impact amount for Impact 14 was 0.14 acre. Per comment from USACE, it was requested to include all of Wetland
9 in the impact calculations due to only a minor amount remaining after impact occurs. No change in credits proposed for this impact
were necessary as wetland credits are rounded up to the next quarter acre at a 2:1 ratio.
For example, Impacts 4-1 and 4-2 are channels that received Medium NCSAM ratings (Figure 3). These
impact locations have been degraded due to cattle influence, discharges to the channel, degraded adjacent
vegetation structure, and a narrow buffer. See Figure 3 and Photographs 1 and 2 for additional clarity on the
Medium rating. We originally submitted mitigation at a 0.5:1 ratio for these impacts and strongly believe that a
Page 15
NCSAM/
Amount
Credit
Credit
Credit Ratios
Ratios
Ratios
Proposed in
Impact #
Feature
NCWAM
of
Proposed
Proposed
Response to
Score
Impact
in IP
by Cors
Corps
Impact 1
Perennial
High
178 If
2:1
2:1
2:1
Stream 2
Intermittent
Impact
Stream 3
High
1,090 If
1:1
2:1
1.5:1
Impact 3
Perennial
High
249 If
2:1
2:1
2:1
Stream 8
Impact 4-1
Intermittent
Stream 8
Medium
337.5 If
0.5:1
1.75:1
1:1
Impact 4-2
Medium
211 If
0.5:1
1.75:1
1:1
Impact 5
Intermittent
Low
76.5 If
0
1.5:1
0.75:1
Stream 9
Impact 6
Intermittent
High
520 If
1:1
2:1
1.5
Stream 10
Impact 7
Intermittent
High
30 If
1:1
2:1
1.5
Stream 11
Impact 8-1
Intermittent
Stream 15
Low
312 If
0
1.5:1
0.75
Impact 8-2
Medium
813.5 If
0.5:1
1.75:1
1:1
Impact 9
Perennial
High
81 If
2:1
2:1
2:1
Stream 15
Impact 10
Pond 3
0.08 ac
-
0.5:1
0.5:1
Intermittent
Impact 11
Stream 12
Medium
917 If
1:1
1.75:1
1:1
Impact 12
Perennial
High
700 If
2:1
2:1
2:1
Stream 12
Impact 13
Perennial
High
55 If
2:1
2:1
2:1
Stream 12
Impact 14 ^
Wetland 9
High
0.18 ac
2:1
2:1
2:1
Impact 15
Pond 4
0.08 ac
-
0.5:1
0.5:1
Impact 16
Intermittent
High
240 If
1:1
2:1
1.5
Stream 13
^ Originally submitted impact amount for Impact 14 was 0.14 acre. Per comment from USACE, it was requested to include all of Wetland
9 in the impact calculations due to only a minor amount remaining after impact occurs. No change in credits proposed for this impact
were necessary as wetland credits are rounded up to the next quarter acre at a 2:1 ratio.
For example, Impacts 4-1 and 4-2 are channels that received Medium NCSAM ratings (Figure 3). These
impact locations have been degraded due to cattle influence, discharges to the channel, degraded adjacent
vegetation structure, and a narrow buffer. See Figure 3 and Photographs 1 and 2 for additional clarity on the
Medium rating. We originally submitted mitigation at a 0.5:1 ratio for these impacts and strongly believe that a
Page 15

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
1.75:1 ratio is too high — we would like to request a 1:1 ratio for Medium NCSAM ratings of intermittent
channels.
Impact 5 - Intermittent Stream 9
76.5 If delineated
(removal for pit construction) r
NCSAM: Low,
III
Proposed Mitigation Rato: 0.75:1 ll; Ir
57.5 stream credits Ji
LEGENO: MINE FEATURES
Lcn[eMralpr plan! SAe
�Prt SMI
MV,b. Rock Aru.
——Ee�Hinp Roads
Proposed Access ftoa¢s
Figure 3. Impacts 3-5.
Imps a Pere nnialStream 8• ...............................
h : • 249 1f delineated ...
r (removal for pit construction)
.. NCSAM: High ..... ...................... ..
Proposed Mitigation Rato: 2:1
488 stream credits
Impact 4-2 - Intermittent Stream 8
.1211 1f delineated
',](removal for pit construction)
•NCSAM: Medium
..... • • Proposed Mitigation Rato- 1-1 ...........
;;•;::::::::• ;:211 stream credits__
..........................................................................
.........................................................................
iImpact 4-1 - Intermittent Stream 8 I ...........'
337.5 1f delineated
:........:.............. (removal for pit construction) .....
............::::::::::::: NCSAM:Medium
Proposed Mitigation Rato: 1:1
...... 337.5 stream credits i
Photograph 1. Representative depiction of impact 4-1 reach.
Page 16
I DELINEATED FEATURES
,HDRnwnaaNe swurtl
-
. MOR lle -.W 1Nelyrbs
�HOR LMIrW�d Paw
FEANFyodp�ri
100•Yaxr
PROPOSEDIMPACT&
:.-•nexed saean,Impo� •--
,f
Impact 5 - Intermittent Stream 9
76.5 If delineated
(removal for pit construction) r
NCSAM: Low,
III
Proposed Mitigation Rato: 0.75:1 ll; Ir
57.5 stream credits Ji
LEGENO: MINE FEATURES
Lcn[eMralpr plan! SAe
�Prt SMI
MV,b. Rock Aru.
——Ee�Hinp Roads
Proposed Access ftoa¢s
Figure 3. Impacts 3-5.
Imps a Pere nnialStream 8• ...............................
h : • 249 1f delineated ...
r (removal for pit construction)
.. NCSAM: High ..... ...................... ..
Proposed Mitigation Rato: 2:1
488 stream credits
Impact 4-2 - Intermittent Stream 8
.1211 1f delineated
',](removal for pit construction)
•NCSAM: Medium
..... • • Proposed Mitigation Rato- 1-1 ...........
;;•;::::::::• ;:211 stream credits__
..........................................................................
.........................................................................
iImpact 4-1 - Intermittent Stream 8 I ...........'
337.5 1f delineated
:........:.............. (removal for pit construction) .....
............::::::::::::: NCSAM:Medium
Proposed Mitigation Rato: 1:1
...... 337.5 stream credits i
Photograph 1. Representative depiction of impact 4-1 reach.
Page 16

Photograph 2. Representative depiction of impact 4-2 reach.
Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
Impact 5 is an example of a channel that scored a Low NCSAM rating that was originally proposed to not
receive any mitigation credit. This channel is paralleled on the left bank by a road devoid of vegetation for the
entire impact length, there is little habitat present, and no biology was observed. We would like to request a
0.75:1 mitigation ratio for Low NCSAM ratings of intermittent channels.
Photograph 3. Representative depiction of impact 5 reach.
Lastly, as described in the introduction, refined engineering of the mine layout including pit optimization for
stability, internal access roads, erosion control needs, and the elimination of five parcels from the project
boundary was necessary (Figure 4). The pit extents have become larger to account for additional
mineralization discovered and enhanced stability in the pit wall design, which caused locational shifts to the
internal road alignment and magazine location. These design changes have created additional stream
impacts to accommodate the larger pit extents, and additional stream impacts to accommodate an additional
internal road crossing to access the new magazine location. Moreover, further analysis of drainage and best
Page 17

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
management practices indicated a need for additional erosion control structures in two areas that also
increase impacts.
Due to the greater pit extents subsequently causing the internal road realignment and location shift for the
magazine, an extension of Impact 2 by 56.5 linear feet will occur to account for the access road crossing to
the relocated magazine north of the north pit. A greater pit extent will extend Impact 6 stream impacts by
159.5 linear feet (Impact 6). An additional erosion control structure associated with the West Waste Rock area
will extend Impact 9 stream impacts by 253 linear feet. Lastly, a new impact area includes New Impact 18
(141 linear feet of impact), which is associated with a sediment pond for runoff from the concentrator plant
area.
LEGEND
IP Prajecl Boundary
1963 a0.y
_ HDR Delineated
Streams
HDR Delineated
-
Wetlands
0 HDR Delineated Ponds
100 -Year FEMA
Floodplain
Culverts
0 Feet 1,800
rcn = .ON fee[
LEGEND: MINE FEATURES
Concentrator Plant Site
0 Pit Shell
I.� waste Rock
ExistingRoad
Setback Buffers
100 Ft Lot Line Setback
200 Ft Structure Setback
F 300 Ft Residential Setback
Figure 4. Additional impacts overview
DESKTOP JD FEATURES
- Desktop Streams
® Desktop NWA Wetland
APPROXIMATE IMPACTS
Delineated Stream
Impacts
Delineated Wetland
Impacts
®Delineated Pond
Impacts
Desktop Stream
Impacts
Page 18

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
LEGEND ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::•.:::::::::::::::' DESKTOP JD FEATURES
.....................................................:
1P Project Boundary....... ::::::::::......::::::::::: Desktop Streams
(963 ac.y
..................................................... � Desktop NV41 Welland
_ HDR Qelinealed
Streams• ....................................._._........... APPROXIMATE IMPACTS
HDR Delineated Additional Stream
- Wetlands�.' Impact
0 HDR Delineated Ponds :::: ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ::::: ' :: ::::::.:::::::::::: Delineated Stream
Impacts
1D0 -Year FEMA ; , %tension of Impact 2 :::::::. ; : ; Delineated WLtland
Floodplain additional 56.5 If :::::::::::::::::: 0 Impacts
Culverts ::. of impact (crossing) ......:::::: Delineated Pond
::: :::: Impacts
Original Impact: 1,D90 If
I Feet 150 New Impact Total: 1,146.5 If _ Desktop Stream
Impacts
LEGEND: MINE FEATURES
Concentrator Plant Site
0 Pit Shelf
aI� Waste Rack
— ExistingRoad
Setback Buffers a
100 Ft Lot Line Setback
200 Ft Structure Setback
300 F! Reside ntial Setback
Figure 5. Impact 2 additional impacts
FLEGENID963
:::::::::::::.....................................P Project Boundary...................................................ac.Y:::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
HDR Delineated:::..............::::::::::::.........•.................
Streams
-HDR Delineated
Wetlands ; : - • extension of Impact 6 ;
0 HDR Delineated Ponds ... additional 159.5 If ;
. • • • • • • • • • . of impact (pit construction)
lap -Year FEMA — =
Flcodpiain ..... pr g1a Impact: 520 if -
- — Culverts : : ? New Impact Total: 579.5 If =
0 Feet ISO ............... ..... :S..�y:...........
:::::.::::::::::............................rr
LEGEND: MINE FEATURES • • .. • . - f
Concentrator Plant Site ; : ; ; ; ; ;
0 Pit Shelf �'-::..:: :.......... '
M1/asle Rack h
— ExistingRoad f• -
Setback Buffers:
it �:.... .............
100 Fl Lot Line Setback
200 Fl Structure Setback - -
DESKTOP JD FEATURES
Desktop Streams
Desktop NUN Welland
APPROXIMATE IMPACTS
_ Additional Stream
Impact
Delineated Stream
Impacts
0 Delineated Wetland
Impacts
Delineated Pond
Impacts
Desktop Stream '
y Impacts
300 Ft Residential Setback �;ri
..................
Figure 6. Impact 6 additional impacts
.............................
Page 19

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
LEGEND DESKTOP JO FEATURES
0 1P Project Boundary Desktop Streams
(963 ac.y
Desktop NWA Welland
_ HDR Delineated
Streams APPROXIMATE IMPACTS
FIDR Delineated Impacts Stream
0 Wetlands mpaats
HDR Delineated Ponds epac sled Stream
m
100 -Year FEMA
Floodplain Delineated Welland—
0 Impacts
CulVerts Delineated Pond
Impacts
r - - Desktop Stream
0 Feet 350 Impacts
. — — �• ... .....:. ...............
}.........
Extension of Impact 9 ; ; ; ; :: ;
additional 253 If of impact
LEGEND: MINE FEATURES ' ' ; (erosion control structure) • ; ; ; :: ;
Concentrator Plant Site
- Original Impact: 61 If
0 Pit ShellNew Impact fatal 334 If ......... .
Waste Rock
—Existing Road r1
Setback Buffers ::::::.:::...:.:::::::::::::::::::::::
100 Fl Lot Eine Setback .......
200 Ft Structure Setback :.......... ............................... .
.�.,........................................
300 Ft Residential Setback... •.. .... ... ; ........................ .
Figure 7. Impact 9 additional impacts
LEGLNo DESKTOP JO FEATURES
0 1P Project Boundary ; f Desktop Streams
(963 ac.y �7
• �!� Desktop HNA Welland
_ HDR Delineated
Streams APPROXIMATE IMPACTS
FIDR DelineatedDelineated Stream
0 mpacts
Wetlands
HDR Delineated Ponds Delineated WetlandImpacts
100 -Year FEMA Delineated Pond
Floodplain
Impacts
Culverts Desktop Stream
Impacts
0 Feet 350 �f.; . ; . ;
1 mcM = s 50 Me! :(•
..............
New Impact 18
r-
141 If of impact
[erosion control structure)
LEGEND: MINE FEATURES
Concentrator Plant Site ., f• :: : ::. : .. : ..:: •
0 Pit Shell
® Waste Rack
— Existing Road
Setback Buffers -
100 Fl Lot Line Setback
200 Ft Structure Setback~
Y
300 F1 Residential Setback�
Figure 8. New Impact 18
Page 110

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
Table 2 summarizes the revised total proposed mitigation credits for the project.
Table 2. Summary of credit totals
Page 111
Original
Additional
Credits Proposed
Revised Total
Feature
Proposed
Proposed
in Original IP
Credits
Impacts
Impacts
Submittal
Proposed
Perennial Streams
1,263 If
218 If
2,526
3,032
Credits:
Intermittent Streams
4,547.5 If
357 If
3,019.50
5,926
Credits:
Stream Totals:
5,810.5 If
575 If
5,545.50
8,958
Open Water Totals:
0.16 ac.
-
-
0.25
Wetland Totals:
0.18 ac.
0.5
0.50
Page 111

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
Division of Water Resources:
1. If the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requests a response to any comments received as a result of the
Public Notice, please provide the Division with a copy of your response to the USACE. [15A NCAC
02H .0502(c)].
All comments received as a result of the Public Notice are provided herein along with responses. Please see
Appendix A for the complete comments package provided by the USACE.
2. A complete review of the project cannot be conducted until the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has
verified all stream and wetland locations for the entire project. [1 SA NCAC 02H .0502(a)(7)].
Please see Appendix B for the USACE Preliminary Determination Verification of the site. HDR submitted a
package to Ms. Cathy Janiczak of the USACE on April 1, 2019, for the remaining areas to be verified. HDR
anticipates to receive the remainder of the verification the 1St week of June per email correspondence with
Ms. Janiczak. The remaining areas are illustrated on Figure 6A (dated 4/1/2019 (Appendix B).
3. DWR mitigation requirements cannot be determined until a site verification of intermittent and
perennial stream calls occurs. Please contact Alan Johnson at 704-235- 2200 to schedule a
verification. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(h) and S.L. 2017-10].
Please reference the USACE Preliminary Determination Verification (Attachment B). Additionally, on April 10,
2019, Mr. Alan Johnson of DWR and Ms. Kelly Thames of HDR conducted a site visit as requested.
4. Provide a site-specific detailed engineering plan, profile view, and cross-section of all proposed
impact areas. These drawings must include details regarding proposed final contours for fill/cut
areas, stream alignment in relation to pipe alignment, pipe slope, pipe burial, dissipater pad
requirements, temporary dewatering design and impacts, adjacent sediment and erosion control
measures, and plans for restoration of any temporarily impacted areas. [15A NCAC 02H .0502(b)].
Please find attached plan view, cross sections, sediment control maps and associated designs (ponds,
spillways, conveyance ditches, flumes, etc) for the West and East Waste Rock disposal areas (Appendix C).
Also included are maps and designs associated with the haul roads, mine pits, mine pit drainage control,
reclamation/regrade, plant site and subsequent drainage control. MM&A utilized Carlson Software —
SurvCADD version 2017 for all drainage design. All stream crossing culverts were designed to the 100 -year
storm and all internal road culverts for drainage were designed for the 25 -year storm per DEMLR.
5. Provide the results of the groundwater monitoring and modeling as mentioned in Section 6.4.3 to
document the statement "groundwater supply in the surrounding area is not expected to increase or
decrease due to activities at the proposed project site". [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(4)].
The groundwater monitoring is ongoing with the intent to provide baseline conditions until construction
commences. Surface water monitoring is also being conducted throughout the site to provide baseline
conditions. For both groundwater and surface water sampling, results from the May 2019 sampling event
have yet to be provided by the lab. Year-to-date data is attached in Appendix D.
The groundwater model is a complex and detailed process requiring the analysis of empirically derived
conductivity values, groundwater levels, and stream flow measurements. The development of this model is
ongoing and will be provided when complete. The intent is to model the effects on groundwater levels during
pit dewatering and to present the results in two public information meetings associated with rezoning.
Page 112

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
In addition to baseline groundwater and surface water monitoring, the applicant plans to install numerous
Observation Wells around the perimeter of the mine property and outside the perimeter (Appendix C). The
wells will primarily be used to monitor groundwater conditions at the permit boundary during the life of the
mine.
6. Clarify how stormwater runoff will be managed throughout the mine, including but not limited to
stormwater from haul roads, concentrator facility, and waste rock areas.
Please find attached detailed sediment control designs and associated maps depicting waste rock disposal
area sediment ponds, spillways, conveyance ditches and flumes. In addition, mine pit ponds, haul road
ditches, plant site ponds are included for the proposed facility (Appendix C). MM&A utilized Carlson Software
— SurvCADD version 2017 for all drainage design.
7. Please explain how the rock spoil rock areas have been designed to protect downstream water quality
(e.g. total height and stability, total acreages proposed to be "unstable" at one time, etc.)
Sediment control for both the East and West Waste Rock Disposal sites will be installed prior to any
disturbance. The waste rock will be placed in a controlled manner in maximum of ten (10') lifts. Final
configurations will have a fifty (50') lift with outslopes of 2:1 (H:V) and a twenty (20') wide bench. Total height
for West Waste Rock Disposal area is 1140' and the East Waste Rock Disposal Area is 900'. The stability of
both waste rock sites will have minimum static and seismic factors of safety of at least 1.5 and 1.2,
respectively. For added stability, the Division of Mining has also requested that overburden soil will be placed
in the interior core of the waste disposal sites while waste stone will be placed near the outslopes.
8. Provide documentation and/or a detailed technical analysis that shows that there will be no
secondary hydrological impacts to any of the retained stream features as a result of pit development.
[15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(4)].
The groundwater model is a complex and detailed process requiring the analysis of empirically derived
conductivity values, groundwater levels, and stream flow measurements. The intent is to model the effects on
groundwater levels during pit dewatering and any subsequent secondary hydrological impacts. The
development of this model is ongoing and will be provided when complete.
As mentioned in Question 5's response, the applicant will also commit to installing permanent groundwater
Observation Wells around the mine perimeter to monitor groundwater levels during operation. These wells will
be a different set than those used for baseline data collection; however, some existing groundwater
monitoring wells may be used for permanent Observation Wells if locality allows.
9. The application states that "the proposed discharge of dredge and fill material should not cause
increased chemical contamination levels within the aquatic ecosystem." Please provide a technical
basis for this statement, specifically addressing potential changes that may occur to the material
through the excavation and/or concentration processes and whether they may increase the potential
for chemical releases into the environment from the waste rock. [ISA NCAC 02H .0506(b)(4)].
The applicant has designed and implemented a sampling and analysis program that includes both waste rock
(overburden) and process tailings. With regard to waste rock, the program includes the sampling and testing
of 101 composited rock core samples from 13 different core holes distributed throughout the four main pit
areas. Sampled hole locations and depth intervals in the holes were designed to provide an evenly distributed
assessment of the proposed mine area. The core samples were collected by both Marshall Miller &
Associates (MM&A) and Piedmont Lithium geologists. The program also includes 10 process tailings samples
collected from pilot testing. Tailings sample collection was conducted by the Minerals Research Laboratory at
NC State University in Asheville, North Carolina.
Page 113

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
Analyses conducted on the waste rock and tailings samples includes Acid Base Accounting (ABA), "Whole
Rock" Elemental Determination and Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP). Where applicable,
the ABA analysis results were supplemented with Sulfur Fractionation (Sulfur Forms) analysis to better
determine the distribution of pyritic sulfur in select samples.
The results of the waste rock analysis indicate a low potential for the material to produce acidic conditions.
Paste pH values for the samples are typically between 9-10, with only shallower samples of saprolitic rock
exhibiting lower paste pH values in the 5-6 range. Total Sulfur for the waste rock samples is generally in the
range of 0.01 to 0.3 -percent, with only three of the 101 samples having a total sulfur content greater than 0.5 -
percent. Samples indicating a sulfur content greater than 0.2 percent were further analyzed using a sulfur
fractionation procedure. Results of the sulfur fractionation analysis indicate that the total pyritic sulfur (acid -
producing) present in the samples is very low. After consideration of the sulfur forms results, all waste rock
samples exhibit an excess alkalinity condition. Similarly, ABA analysis for the tailings samples indicate very
low Total Sulfur content (0.01 -percent), high paste pH values (9.0-9.6), and excess neutralization potential for
all tailings samples.
Waste rock and tailings samples were also analyzed to determine their elemental constituents, as a means
for better understanding the "whole rock" components of the materials. The elemental analysis results were
compared against various regulatory guidelines to screen for potentially problematic components.
The ABA and elemental analysis results were used as a guide to select a representative set of waste rock
and tailings samples for further testing via TCLP analysis. The TCLP procedure is a somewhat aggressive
test for detecting contaminants that may leach from the samples. Results of the TCLP testing were compared
against the EPA's "D" list, a list of regulatory levels for the "toxicity" characteristic as determined specifically
from the TCLP test. The TCLP results indicate that all of the samples yielded results well below D list levels.
In summary, the applicant has designed and implemented a sampling and analysis plan for both the waste
rock and tailings material expected to be produced from the proposed mining operation. Results of the testing
suggests that acidic drainage is not expected to be released from either the waste rock (overburden) or the
process tailings. In addition, consideration of whole rock elemental and TCLP test results does not indicate
the potential for leaching of contaminants, as defined by EPA's D list.
Page 114

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
NC Wildlife Resources Commission:
1. We recommend surveys for state -listed mussel and crayfish species within and downstream of the
site to determine if relocations are needed. Please contact W. Thomas Russ, the Foothills Aquatic
Wildlife Diversity Research Coordinator, at 828-659-3324 [e-mail].
The proposed site layout not only avoids impacts to Beaverdam and Little Beaverdam Creeks, but also avoids
impacts within their floodplains. Therefore, Piedmont will respectfully not grant this request at this time.
2. We recommend a minimum 100 -foot undisturbed buffer for perennial streams and a 50 -foot
undisturbed buffer for intermittent streams and wetlands.
The applicant will adhere to the Gaston County Unified Development Ordinance' that requires 30 -foot
vegetative buffers streams for development activities that are non-residential and below 24% imperviousness
(open pits are considered pervious). This also complies with DWR's Surface Water Classification Standardsz
for the site which is located in a Watershed Supply IV (WS -IV) watershed.
Moreover, the applicant's preferred alternative would avoid impacts to the entirety of Beaverdam Creek
(13,799 feet) and Little Beaverdam Creek (2,848 feet) and their FEMA floodplains. Impacts to Stream 2 have
been minimized through utilization of the footprint of an existing crossing for an access road, and impacts to
the majority of the stream have also been avoided (1,762 feet). Avoiding disturbance in the FEMA floodplain
will prevent impacts to the entirety of Wetlands 1, 3-8, and 11-14 (7.62 acres). Wetlands 2, 10, and 15-16
(0.40 acre) will also be avoided due to site design. Finally, adhering to the 300 -foot mining buffer setback as
required by Gaston County Zoning Ordinance, the preferred alternative also avoids impacts to an additional
10,603 feet of stream that are within this setback.
3. The applicant should avoid the removal of large trees at the edges of construction corridors. Due to
the decline in bat populations, trees should not be removed during the maternity roosting season for
bats (May 15 — August 15). Also, clearing of vegetation should be avoided during the migratory bird
nesting season, roughly March to August.
There is a 300 -foot setback buffer around the entire site in which the existing vegetation will not be disturbed
in the first 100 feet (0-100 feet). In the 100- to 300 -foot setback width, vegetation will not be disturbed unless
an erosion control structure is needed and in some cases, screening berms will be constructed. Large trees
will be avoided as much as possible. The majority of the largest trees observed on the site are located within
the 100 -Year FEMA floodplain, which will be avoided entirely.
Clearing trees would only occur as construction advances, which could potentially happen at any time of the
year; however, as discussed above there will be many areas where existing trees and vegetation will remain
in the 300 -foot setback and FEMA floodplains, which together encompass over 300 acres.
4. Incorporate the following elements into erosion and sediment control plans: minimize clearing and
grading, protect waterways, phase construction for larger construction sites (>25 acres), stabilize
soils as rapidly as possible (<2 weeks), protect steep slopes, establish appropriate perimeter
controls, employ advanced settling devices, implement a certified contractors program, and regularly
inspect erosion control measures.
http://cros3.revize.com/revize/gastoncounty/Documents/planning/UD02019/O201Chl5 Watershed%201018.pdf
2https://files.nc.gov/ncdeg/document-library/NC Guide SurfaceWater AUGUST1%202011 FINAL.pdf
Page 115

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
These best management practices will be employed.
5. Non-native plants should be removed from the seeding schedule. Avoid using Bermuda grass, redtop,
tall fescue, and lespedeza, which are invasive and/or non-native and provide little benefit to wildlife.
Consider an alternative mix of red clover, creeping red fescue, and a grain, such as oats, wheat, or
rye. Specifically, this project would be ideal for planting native, wildflower seed mixes that will create
pollinator habitat within the reclaimed areas. Pollinators are some insects (i.e., bees, moths, and
butterflies) and birds that play an important role in the reproduction of flowering plants, which
produce many fruits and vegetables. Habitat loss, disease, and other environmental changes have
caused a decline in pollinators. Please contact NCWRC for a list of suitable native plants for
reclamation.
For permanent cover, a native seed mix will be used that is heavy with leguminous species per the request of
Division of Mining. For temporary cover during the growing season (April 15 -August 15) browntop millet will
be utilized. For temporary cover during the dormant season (August 15 -April 15th) annual ryegrass will be
utilized.
The permanent cover will be used throughout the year with the respective mix of temporary cover at the
appropriate time. The permanent cover will be a mix of ERNMX-112 Flat Pea/Perennial Pea Mix (Naturalized)
and ERNMX-310 NC Steep Slope Mix. During reclamation a pollinator mix can be utilized. Table 3 (below) is
an example of a seeding schedule.
Table 3. Example of seeding schedule
Date
Seed
Planting Rate
Throughout
Flat Pea/Perennial Pea Mix (Naturalized)
25 lbs/acre
[ERNMX-112]
Throughout
NC Steep Slope Mix
45 lbs/acre
[ERNMX-310]
April 15 -August 15
browntop millet
10 lbs/acre
August 15 -April 15
Annual ryegrass
30 lbs/acre
6. Water discharges from the site should be proportional to the size of the receiving stream so the
hydrology of the stream is not altered, and all discharges should comply with NPDES permit
requirements. In particular, turbidity of the discharge should be maintained at or below the permit
requirement. High water discharge rates and turbidity can negatively impact aquatic resources within
and downstream of the site. Excessive silt and sediment loads can have numerous detrimental effects
on aquatic resources including destruction of spawning habitat, suffocation of eggs, and clogging of
gills of aquatic species.
Comment noted and all discharges will comply with NPDES permit requirements.
7. Existing culverts should be evaluated for their function and allowance for aquatic life and fish
passage. Generally, the culvert or pipe invert should be buried at least 1 foot below the natural
streambed (measured from the natural thalweg depth), or if culverts are less than 48 inches in
diameter, they should be buried to a depth equal to or greater than 20% of their size. If multiple
barrels are required, barrels other than the base flow barrel(s) should be placed on or near stream
bankfull or floodplain bench elevation (similar to Lyonsfield design). These should be reconnected to
floodplain benches as appropriate. This may be accomplished by utilizing sills on the upstream and
downstream ends to restrict or divert flow to the base flow barrel(s). Silled barrels should be filled
Page 116

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
with sediment so as not to entrap wildlife or support mosquito breeding conditions. Sufficient water
depth should be provided in the base flow barrel(s) during low flows to accommodate fish movement.
If culverts are longer than 40-50 linear feet, alternating or notched baffles should be installed in a
manner that mimics existing stream pattern. This should enhance aquatic life passage: 1) by
depositing sediments in the barrel, 2) by maintaining channel depth and flow regimes, and 3) by
providing resting places for fish and other aquatic organisms. In essence, base flow barrel(s) should
provide a continuum of water depth and channel width without substantial modifications of velocity
conditions. Sufficient water depth should be provided in the base flow barrel(s) during low flows to
accommodate fish movement. If culverts are longer than 40-50 linear feet, alternating or notched
baffles should be installed in a manner that mimics existing stream pattern. This should enhance
aquatic life passage: 1) by depositing sediments in the barrel, 2) by maintaining channel depth and
flow regimes, and 3) by providing resting places for fish and other aquatic organisms. In essence,
base flow barrel(s) should provide a continuum of water depth and channel width without substantial
modifications of velocity.
If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed to remain dry during
normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
Culverts or pipes should be situated along the existing channel alignment whenever possible to avoid
channel realignment. Widening the stream channel must be avoided. Stream channel widening at the
inlet or outlet end of structures typically decreases water velocity causing sediment deposition that
requires increased maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage.
Riprap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a manner
that precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures should be professionally
designed, sized, and installed.
Comments noted. See Appendix C for design drawings.
8. Sediment and erosion control measures should be installed prior to any land clearing or construction.
The use of biodegradable and wildlife -friendly sediment and erosion control devices is strongly
recommended. Silt fencing, fiber rolls and/or other products should have loose -weave netting that is
made of natural fiber materials with movable joints between the vertical and horizontal twines. Silt
fencing that has been reinforced with plastic or metal mesh should be avoided as it impedes the
movement of terrestrial wildlife species. These measures should be routinely inspected and properly
maintained. Excessive silt and sediment loads can have numerous detrimental effects on aquatic
resources including destruction of spawning habitat, suffocation of eggs, and clogging of gills of
aquatic species.
Comments noted. See Appendix C for design drawings. All erosion control measures will comply with
NPDES permit requirements.
9. We recommend reclaiming the relatively shallow sediment basins as wetlands, where practicable.
Piedmont will commit to reclaiming sediment basins, where practicable, as wetlands.
Page 117

Piedmont Lithium I SAW -2018-01129
Responses to Individual Permit Comments
May 31, 2019
Public Citizen — Ms. Andrea Webb:
Per an email from citizen Ms. Andrea Webb dated February 12, 2019, "If these and other questions are not
addressed by Piedmont Lithium and USACE property owners will be left in the dark not knowing the
wisest course to take. Therefore, a public hearing would be in the best interest of property owners as
this project moves forward."
It is the USACE's decision whether to grant a public hearing per this request; however, Piedmont would like it
known that there will be two public involvement meetings and a public hearing as a requirement of the
rezoning process in Gaston County.
NC State Historic Preservation Office:
1. Prior to the initiation of any ground disturbing activities within the project area, we recommend that a
comprehensive archaeological survey be conducted by an experienced archaeologist. The purpose of
this survey will be to locate archaeological sites and make recommendations regarding the eligibility
status of each site in terms of the NRHP.
On behalf of Piedmont Lithium and prior to the Individual Permit submittal, HDR retained TRC of Columbia,
SC to provide cultural resource surveys for archaeological and architectural resources that may be present on
and/or near the proposed project site. Survey methodology was approved via a May 17, 2018 email between
Ms. Harriet Richardson Seacat of HDR and Ms. Lindsay Ferrante of the Office of State Archaeology
(Appendix E).
One paper copy and one digital copy (PDF) of all resulting archaeological reports, as well as one
paper copy and one digital copy (MS Word) of the North Carolina site form for each site recorded,
should be forwarded to the Office of State Archaeology through this office for review and comment as
soon as they are available and in advance of any construction or ground disturbance activities.
Attached (Appendix E) is TRC's management summary of the site to date. When the remaining properties
are surveyed for cultural resources, the updated management summary and all reports as requested above
will be forwarded to the Office of State Archaeology as soon as they are completed. This is not an official
submittal to Office of State Archaeology.
NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Services:
"NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) reviewed the project described in the public
notice listed below. Based on the information in the public notice, the proposed project would NOT
occur in the vicinity of essential fish habitat (EFH) designated by the South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council, Mid -Atlantic Fishery Management Council, orthe NMFS."
No response necessary.
Cherokee Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Office:
Via an email on January 27, 2019, Ms. Elizabeth Toombs of the Cherokee Nation Tribal Historic
Preservation Office, requested the cultural resources survey for the proposed project.
TRC forwarded the project management summary (dated March 20, 2019) to Ms. Elizabeth Toombs on April
2, 2019. When the remaining properties are surveyed, an updated project management summary will be
provided. See Appendix E.
Page 118

Appendix A
Public Notice Comments

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
151 PATTON AVENUE
ROOM 208
ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28801-5006
March 14, 2019
Regulatory Division
Action ID: SAW -2018-01129
Mr. Patrick H. Brindle
Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
5706 Dallas-Cherryville Highway
Bessemer City, North Carolina 28106
Dear Mr. Brindle:
Please reference the application for an Individual Department of the Army Permit, submitted
on your behalf on December 30, 2018 by Mrs. Kelly Thames of HDR, Inc., to discharge fill
material into 5,810.5 linear feet of stream, 0.16 acre of impounded waters, and 0.014 acre of
wetlands for the construction of a hard rock lithium mine. The proposed project includes the
construction of a mine pit, waste rock area, roadways, a concentrator plant, and attendant
features. The project area is composed of approximately 971 acres and is centered in the vicinity
of 1501 Hephzibah Church Road in Bessemer City, North Carolina.
The project was advertised by public notice on January 17, 2019. Comments in response to
the notice were received from the National Marine Fisheries Service, the North Carolina
Department of Cultural Resources, the Cherokee Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Office, the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, and the North Carolina Division of Water
Resources. These comments are enclosed for your information. Please provide a detailed written
response to the comments.
In addition to conducting a public interest review which balances the reasonably expected
benefits against the reasonably foreseeable detriments, all Clean Water Act Section 404 permits
must meet guidelines for the specification of disposal sites for dredged or fill material under
Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1). These comments are being submitted pursuant to the Clean
Water Act Section 404(b)(1) guidelines (40 CFR 230).
We have completed our initial review of the application and determined that the following
additional information is necessary to expeditiously complete our permit decision:
1. During the pre -application meetings on August 23, 2018 and November 8, 2018, you
or your agent stated that Piedmont Lithium has drilled extensively throughout the
Carolina Tin-Spodumene Belt. Please disclose the location of this exploratory drilling
activity and explain why these sites were not selected as the applicants preferred
alternative.

-2-
2. During the pre -application meetings on August 23, 2018 and November 8, 2018, you
or your agent stated that Piedmont Lithium has future plans for a lithium concentrate
refinement facility 20 miles away in Cleveland County. This facility would allow
Piedmont Lithium to reduce the cost of the final lithium product by avoiding
shipment of lithium concentrate to China for refinement. Please disclose any
anticipated adverse impacts to waters of the United States associated with the
development of this facility and associated infrastructure (water, sewer, rail, gas,
electricity, etc.).
3. Figure 11 of the plans (Impact 14-16) shows a small section of Wetland 9 remaining.
It appears that the proposed fill would severely degrade the function of the remaining
wetland and potentially isolate the wetland from downstream waters. Therefore, this
area should also be considered a loss of waters.
We have evaluated the conceptual compensatory mitigation proposal included in the permit
application. We have determined that, if a permit is issued for the applicants preferred
alternative, compensatory mitigation would be required at the following compensation ratios:
0.5:1 for Open Water (Wetland Credits)
2:1 for High Quality Wetlands (Wetland Credits)
1.75:1 for Medium Quality Wetlands (Wetland Credits)
1.5:1 for Low Quality Wetlands (Wetland Credits)
2:1 for High Quality Tributaries (Stream Credits)
1.75:1 for Medium Quality Tributaries (Stream Credits)
1.5:1 for Low Quality Tributaries (Stream Credits)
The information requested above is essential to the expeditious processing of the application; please
submit one consolidated response to all comments by May 31, 2019. This information is required
pursuant to 33 CFR 325 Appendix B and 40 CFR 1506.5. If you do not submit this information within
the given timeframe, the application will be administratively withdrawn. Withdrawal of the application
does not preclude you from reopening the application at a later time, provided you submit the required
information. If you have any questions regarding these matters, please contact me at [phone] or
David.L. Shaeffergusace. army. mil.
Sincerely,
David L. Shaeffer
Project Manager
Charlotte Field Office
Enclosure
Digitally signed by
SHAE FFER.DAVI D.LEIGH.1260750573
DN: KUGovernment, ou=DoD,
ou=Pl,ou=SA,
cn=S HAEFFER.DAVI D.LEIGH.1260750573
Date: 2019.03.14 09:02:12 -04'00'
David L. Shaeffer
Project Manager
Charlotte Field Office
Enclosure

-3-
Copies Furnished:
Kelly Thames, HDR, Inc. (via e-mail - [e-mail])
Sue Homewood, NC Division of Water Resources (via email - [e-mail])

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
LINDA CULPEPPER
Director
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quaitty
February 19, 2019
DWR # 20190035
Gaston County
Piedmont Lithium Inc
Attn: Mr. Patrick Brindle
5705 Dallas-Cherryville Highway
Bessemer City NC 28016
Subject: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Piedmont Lithium Project
Dear Mr. Brindle:
On January 4, 2019, the Division of Water Resources —Water Quality Programs (Division)
received your application dated December 27, 2018, requesting a 401 Individual Water Quality
Certification from the Division for your project. The Division has determined that your
application is incomplete and cannot be processed. The application is on -hold until all of the
following information is received:
I. If the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requests a response to any comments received as a
result of the Public Notice, please provide the Division with a copy of your response to
the USACE. [15A NCAC 02H .0502(c)]
2. A complete review of the project cannot be conducted until the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers has verified all stream and wetland locations for the entire project. [15A
NCAC 02H .0502(a)(7)]
3. DWR mitigation requirements cannot be determined until a site verification of
intermittent and perennial stream calls occurs. Please contact Alan Johnson at 704-235-
2200 to schedule a verification. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(h) and S, L. 2017-10]
4. Provide a site-specific detailed engineering plan, profile view, and cross-section of all
proposed impact areas. These drawings must include details regarding proposed final
contours for fill/cut areas, stream alignment in relation to pipe alignment, pipe slope,
pipe burial, dissipater pad requirements, temporary dewatering design and impacts,
adjacent sediment and erosion control measures, and plans for restoration of any
temporarily impacted areas. [15A NCAC 02H .0502(b)]
_
North Catalina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1 1617 Mal( Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
� � r
919.101.9000

Piedmont Lithium Inc
DWR# 20190035
Request for Additional Information
Page 2 of 3
5. Provide the results of the groundwater monitoring and modeling as mentioned in
Section 6.4.3 to document the statement "groundwater supply in the surrounding area
is not expected to increase or decrease due to activities at the proposed project site".
[15A NCAC 02H .0566(b)(4)]
6. Clarify how stormwater runoff will be managed throughout the mine, including but not
limited to stormwater from haul roads, concentrator facility, and waste rock areas.
Please explain how the rock spoil rock areas have been designed to protect downstream
water quality (e.g. total height and stability, total acreages proposed to be "unstable" at
one time, etc.)
8. Provide documentation and/or a detailed technical analysis that shows that there will
be no secondary hydrological impacts to any of the retained stream features as a result
of pit development. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(4)]
9. The application states that "the proposed discharge of dredge and fill material should
not cause increased chemical contamination levels within the aquatic ecosystem."
Please provide a technical basis for this statement, specifically addressing potential
changes that may occur to the material through the excavation and/or concentration
processes and whether they may increase the potential for chemical releases into the
environment from the waste rock. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(4)]
Pursuant to Title 15A NCAC 02H .0502(e), the applicant shall furnish all of the above requested
information for the proper consideration of the application. Please respond in writing within 30
calendar days of receipt of this letter by sending one (1) copy of all of the above requested
information to the 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC
27699-1617 -OR- by submitting all of the above requested information through this
link: https://edocs.deg.nc.gov/Forms/Supplemental-Information-Form (note the DWR#
requested on the link is referenced above).
if all of the requested information is not received within 30 calendar days of receipt of this
letter, the Division will be unable to approve the application and it will be returned. The return
of this project will necessitate reapplication to the Division for approval, including a complete
application package and the appropriate fee.
Please be aware that you have no authorization under the Water Quality Certification Rules for
this activity and any work done within waters of the state may be a violation of North Carolina
General Statutes and Administrative Code.

Piedmont Lithium Inc
DWR# 20190035
Request for Additional Information
Page 3 of 3
Contact Sue Homewood at 336-776-9693 or Sue.Hom_ ewood2ncdenr.gov if you have any
questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
1
Karen Higgins, Supervisor
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
cc: Kelly Thames, HDR (via email)
David Shaeffer, USAGE Charlotte Regulatory Field Office (via email)
Olivia Munzer, NCWRC (via email)
Byron Hamstead, USFS (via email)
DWR MRO 401 files
DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
Filename: 20190035PiedmontLithium(Gaston)_401_IC_HOLD

9 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 9
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Kelly Thames
HDR, Inc.
FROM: Olivia Munzer, Western Piedmont Coordinator
Habitat Conservation
DATE: 18 February 2019
SUBJECT: Individual Permit Application for Piedmont Lithium Mine Project in Bessemer City,
Gaston County; USACE Action ID: SAW -2018-01129; DEQ Project No. 20190035.
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the subject
document. Comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (as
amended) and Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667e).
HDR, Inc., on behalf of Piedmont Lithium Inc., has submitted an Individual Permit (IP) application for
the proposed Piedmont Lithium Mine centered around 1501 Hephzibah Church Road in Bessemer City,
Gaston County, North Carolina. The approximately 971 -acre (ac) hard rock lithium mine would include
the construction of a 200 -ac open pit, a 145 -ac waste rock area, a concentrator plant site, access roads, and
applicable National Pollutant Discharge and Elimination System best management practices (BMP).
Little Beaverdam Creek, Beaverdam Creek, and their unnamed tributaries in the Catawba River basin
flow through the proposed site. The pit shell areas will impact 1,263 linear feet (If) of perennial stream
channel, 4,547.5 if of intermittent stream channel, 0.14 ac of wetlands, and 0.16 ac of ponds. Internal
access road stream crossing will impact 1781f of perennial stream channel and a stormwater BMP will
impact 551f of perennial channel.
We have records for the dwarf -flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora; Federal Threatened, State
Threatened), bigleaf magnolia (Magnolia macrophylla; State Threatened), bog turtle (Glyptemys
muhlenbergii; Federal Threatened Due to Similarity of Appearance; State Threatened), Virginia
spiderwort (Tradescantia virginiana; State Threatened), dwarf threetooth (Triodopsis fulciden; State
Special Concern), and bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus; State Threatened), which is protected by the
federal Bald and Eagle Protection Act, in the vicinity of the site. State significantly rare species found in
the area include seagreen darter (Etheostoma thalassinum), Carolina foothills crayfish (Cambarus johni),
striate button (Mesomphix pilsbryi), glade milkvine (Matelea decipiends), and Georgia holly (Ilex
longipes). Additionally, an undescribed crayfish occurs in Beaverdam Creek downstream of the project,
Mailing Address: Habitat Conservation Division • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

Page 2
18 February 2019
Piedmont Lithium Mine IP
USACE Action ID: SAW -2018-01129
and several state -listed aquatic mussels may occur in or downstream of the site. HDR conducted surveys
for federally -protected species and none were observed within the proposed mine site. The lack of
records from the site does not imply or confirm the absence of state -listed species. An on-site survey is
the only definitive means to determine if the proposed project would impact rare, threatened, or
endangered species. Additionally, the Eaker Farm Catawba Land Conservancy Easement occurs adjacent
to the proposed site.
We have concerns on the impacts of this project on aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources. Based upon
the Pre -Application Agency Meeting and IP, we offer the following recommendations minimize impacts
to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources.
1. We recommend surveys for state -listed mussel and crayfish species within and downstream of the
site to determine if relocations are needed. Please contact W. Thomas Russ, the Foothills Aquatic
Wildlife Diversity Research Coordinator, at 828-659-3324 or [e-mail].
2. We recommend a minimum 100 -foot undisturbed buffer for perennial streams and a 50 -foot
undisturbed buffer for intermittent streams and wetlands.
3. The applicant should avoid the removal of large trees at the edges of construction corridors. Due
to the decline in bat populations, tees should not be removed during the maternity roosting season
for bats (May 15 — August 15). Also, clearing of vegetation should be avoided during the
migratory bird nesting season, roughly March to August.
4. Incorporate the following elements into erosion and sediment control plans: minimize clearing
and grading, protect waterways, phase construction for larger construction sites (>25 acres),
stabilize soils as rapidly as possible (<2 weeks), protect steep slopes, establish appropriate
perimeter controls, employ advanced settling devices, implement a certified contractors program,
and regularly inspect erosion control measures.
Non-native plants should be removed from the seeding schedule. Avoid using Bermudagrass,
redtop, tall fescue, and lespedeza, which are invasive and/or non-native and provide little benefit
to wildlife. Consider an alternative mix of red clover, creeping red fescue, and a grain, such as
oats, wheat, or rye. Specifically, this project would be ideal for planting native, wildflower seed
mixes that will create pollinator habitat within the reclaimed areas. Pollinators are some insects
(i.e., bees, moths, and butterflies) and birds that play an important role in the reproduction of
flowering plants, which produce many fruits and vegetables. Habitat loss, disease, and other
environmental changes have caused a decline in pollinators. Please contact NCWRC for a list of
suitable native plants for reclamation.
Water discharges from the site should be proportional to the size of the receiving stream so the
hydrology of the stream is not altered, and all discharges should comply with NPDES permit
requirements. In particular, turbidity of the discharge should be maintained at or below the
permit requirement. High water discharge rates and turbidity can negatively impact aquatic
resources within and downstream of the site. Excessive silt and sediment loads can have
numerous detrimental effects on aquatic resources including destruction of spawning habitat,
suffocation of eggs, and clogging of gills of aquatic species.
Existing culverts should be evaluated for their function and allowance for aquatic life and fish
passage. Generally, the culvert or pipe invert should be buried at least I foot below the natural
streambed (measured from the natural thalweg depth), or if culverts are less than 48 inches in
diameter, they should be buried to a depth equal to or greater than 20% of their size. If multiple
barrels are required, barrels other than the base flow barrel(s) should be placed on or near stream
bankfull or floodplain bench elevation (similar to Lyonsfield design). These should be
reconnected to floodplain benches as appropriate. This may be accomplished by utilizing sills on
the upstream and downstream ends to restrict or divert flow to the base flow barrel(s). Silled
barrels should be filled with sediment so as not to entrap wildlife or support mosquito breeding

Page 3
18 February 2019
Piedmont Lithium Mine IP
USACE Action ID: SAW -2018-01129
conditions. Sufficient water depth should be provided in the base flow barrel(s) during low flows
to accommodate fish movement. If culverts are longer than 40-50 linear feet, alternating or
notched baffles should be installed in a manner that mimics existing stream pattern. This should
enhance aquatic life passage: 1) by depositing sediments in the barrel, 2) by maintaining channel
depth and flow regimes, and 3) by providing resting places for fish and other aquatic organisms.
In essence, base flow barrel(s) should provide a continuum of water depth and channel width
without substantial modifications of velocity.
If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed to remain dry
during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
Culverts or pipes should be situated along the existing channel alignment whenever possible to
avoid channel realignment. Widening the stream channel must be avoided. Stream channel
widening at the inlet or outlet end of structures typically decreases water velocity causing
sediment deposition that requires increased maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage.
Riprap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a manner
that precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures should be
professionally designed, sized, and installed.
Sediment and erosion control measures should be installed prior to any land clearing or
construction. The use of biodegradable and wildlife -friendly sediment and erosion control
devices is strongly recommended. Silt fencing, fiber rolls and/or other products should have
loose -weave netting that is made of natural fiber materials with movable joints between the
vertical and horizontal twines. Silt fencing that has been reinforced with plastic or metal mesh
should be avoided as it impedes the movement of terrestrial wildlife species. These measures
should be routinely inspected and properly maintained. Excessive silt and sediment loads can
have numerous detrimental effects on aquatic resources including destruction of spawning
habitat, suffocation of eggs, and clogging of gills of aquatic species.
9. We recommend reclaiming the relatively shallow sediment basins as wetlands, where practicable.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this permit application. For questions or comments, please
contact me at [phone] or olivia.munzer&ncwildlife.org.
cc: Sue Homewood, NC Division of Water Resources (NCDWR)
Alan Johnson, NCDWR
Byron Hamstead, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
W. Thomas Russ, NCWRC
David Shaeffer, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Shaeffer, David Leigh (Dave) CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
From: Randy Webb <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2019 9:48 AM
To: Shaeffer, David Leigh (Dave) CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Corps Action ID # SAW -2018-01129
Corps Action ID Number SAW -2018-01129
Dear Mr. Shaeffer,
Comments being elicited regarding the USACE's findings seems pointless. Q & A is more advantageous to current
property owners in the Piedmont Lithium proposed future mining and processing area. The possible environmental
degradation with regard to Beaverdam Creek, Little Beaverdam Creek, and their tributaries has been addressed.
However, the possible impact to underground aquifers and springs feeding our wells has not been addressed. The
breakup of rocks may lead to the leaching of excesses of various minerals and nitrates into our wells. Blasting may effect
the structural soundness and flow of wells.
If these and other questions are not addressed by Piedmont Lithium and USACE property owners will be left in the dark
not knowing the wisest course to take. Therefore, a public hearing would be in the best interest of property owners as
this project moves forward.
Respectfully,
Andrea Webb
PO Box 120
1035 Hephzibah Church Rd.
Crouse, NC 28033

�*4r�s d
(Sent via Electronic Mail)
Colonel Robert J. Clark, Commander
USACE Wilmington District
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403-1398
Dear Colonel Clark:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad ministration
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
Southeast Regional OfFloe
26313th Avenue South
St. Petersburg, Florida 33701-5505
http:ltsera. n mfs. noaa.gov
January 28, 2019
NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) reviewed the project described in the public
notice listed below. Based on the information in the public notice, the proposed project would
NOT occur in the vicinity of essential fish habitat (EFH) designated by the South Atlantic
Fishery Management Council, Mid -Atlantic Fishery Management Council, or the NMFS.
Present staffing levels preclude further analysis of the proposed work and no further action is
planned. This position is neither supportive of nor in opposition to authorization of the proposed
work.
Notice No.
Applicant(s)
Notice Date
SAW -2018-00987
Promenade on the Lake LLC
January 23, 2019
SAW -2016-02542
Person County; Mega Park
January 23, 2019
SAW -2011-01812
Live Oak Bank
January 22, 2019
SAW -2018-01129
Piedmont Lithium Inc
January 17, 2019
SAW -2018-02343
NCDOT; NC 150
January 10, 2019
SAW -2008-03183
NCDOT; Winston-Salem Northern
Beltway Eastern Section
January, 8, 2019
SAW -2018-00170
Tinsel Town LLC
December 21, 2018
Please note these comments do not satisfy consultation responsibilities under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. If an activity "may effect" listed species or critical
habitat under the purview of the NMFS, please initiate consultation with the Protected Resources
Division at the letterhead address.
Sincerely,
Pace Wilber for
Virginia M. Fay
Assistant Regional Administrator
Habitat Conservation Division
Ll

` Qu ,
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper Office of Archives and History
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
May 10, 2018
Harriet Richardson Seacat
HDR, Inc.
440 South Church Street, Suites 800, 900, & 1000
Charlotte, NC 28202-2075
Re: Piedmont Lithium Mining, Hephzibah Church Road, Whitesides Road, & Aderholdt Road, Crouse,
Gaston County, ER 18-0800
Dear Ms. Seacat:
Thank you for your submission of April 16, 2018, concerning the above referenced project. We have reviewed
the information provided and offer the following comments.
Three archaeological resources were identified during the cultural resources background investigation, which
consisted of both a records check and a limited reconnaissance survey. None of these sites have yet been fully
investigated or evaluated for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Based on topographic
conditions and the proximity to perennial streams, as well as the locations of structures on historic maps, there
is potential for additional archaeological sites to be present in the project area.
Prior to the initiation of any ground disturbing activities within the project area, we recommend that a
comprehensive archaeological survey be conducted by an experienced archaeologist. The purpose of this
survey will be to locate archaeological sites and make recommendations regarding the eligibility status of each
site in terms of the NRHP. Conditions may not warrant intensive survey with systematic shovel tests across the
entire project that the entire project area; however, all areas not intensively surveyed should still be investigated
with pedestrian reconnaissance. Please note that our office now requests consultation with the Office of State
Archaeology Review Archaeologist to discuss appropriate field methodologies prior to the archaeological field
investigation.
One paper copy and one digital copy (PDF) of all resulting archaeological reports, as well as one paper
copy and one digital copy (MS Word) of the North Carolina site form for each site recorded, should be
forwarded to the Office of State Archaeology through this office for review and comment as soon as
they are available and in advance of any construction or ground disturbance activities.
A list of archaeological consultants who have conducted or expressed an interest in contract work in
North Carolina is available at www.archaeology.ncdcr.gov/ncarch/resource/consultants.httn. The
archaeologists listed, or any other experienced archaeologist, may be contacted to conduct the
recommended survey.
We have determined that the project as proposed will not have an effect on any historic structures.
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.review&ncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
,/Ramona M. Bartos

Shaeffer, David Leigh (Dave) CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
From: Elizabeth Toombs <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 9:37 AM
To: Shaeffer, David Leigh (Dave) CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
Cc: Wallace, Nancy L CIV USARMY CESAW (US); Beckwith, Loretta A CIV USARMY CESAW
(US)
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: PUBLIC NOTICE SAW -2018-01129 Piedmont Lithium
(UNCLASSIFIED)
Many thanks for the update, Mr. Shaeffer. This Office will look forward to providing comments after reviewing the
report. Please let me know if there are any questions or concerns in the meantime.
Wado,
Elizabeth Toombs, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Cherokee Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Office PO Box 948
Tahlequah, OK 74465-0948
918.453.5389
-----Original Message -----
From: Shaeffer, David Leigh (Dave) CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 8:27 AM
To: Elizabeth Toombs <[e-mail]>
Cc: Wallace, Nancy L CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>; Beckwith, Loretta A CIV USARMY
CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>
Subject: <EXTERNAL> FW: PUBLIC NOTICE SAW -2018-01129 Piedmont Lithium (UNCLASSIFIED)
Ms. Toombs,
Please see below. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
David L. Shaeffer
Project Manager/Geographer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Charlotte Regulatory Office
Desk: 704-510-1437
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
Blockedhttp://corpsmapu.usace.army.miI/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0
-----Original Message -----
From: Thames, Kelly [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 9:25 AM
To: Shaeffer, David Leigh (Dave) CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: PUBLIC NOTICE SAW -2018-01129 Piedmont Lithium (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi David,
The cultural and architectural resources field work wrapped up just before the New Year and the results are still be
written up.
However, I spoke to the cultural resources program manager this morning and he said they will send the Cherokee
Nation a courtesy copy of the report upon completion.
Additionally, he also said that the field methodology and report was/is conducted in accordance with NC SHPO
regulations/standards and the preliminary results are that no significant cultural resources were identified.
Thanks,
Kelly
Kelly Thames, PWS
D 704.338.6710 M 704.996.9986
hdrinc.com/follow-us<BlockedBlockedhttp://hdrinc.com/follow-us>
From: Shaeffer, David Leigh (Dave) CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 8:18 AM
To: Thames, Kelly <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: PUBLIC NOTICE SAW -2018-01129 Piedmont Lithium (UNCLASSIFIED)
See below. Can you send me a separate pdf with just this information? I would pull it from the file but I am super busy
today.
Sincerely,
David L. Shaeffer
Project Manager/Geographer

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Charlotte Regulatory Office
Desk: 704-510-1437
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
BlockedBlockedhttp://corpsmapu.usace.army.miI/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0
From: Elizabeth Toombs [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2019 4:39 PM
To: Bates, Letticia D SP4 USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]
<mailto:[e-mail]> >
Cc: Shaeffer, David Leigh (Dave) CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]
<mailto: David. [e-mail]> >
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: PUBLIC NOTICE SAW -2018-01129 Piedmont Lithium (UNCLASSIFIED)
Many thanks for the review request, Ms. Bates. This email is to request the related cultural resources survey for this
proposed project.
Thank you for your time and any additional information.
Wado,
Elizabeth Toombs, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
Cherokee Nation
Tribal Historic Preservation Office
PO Box 948
Tahlequah, OK 74465-0948
918.453.5389
3

From: Bates, Letticia D SP4 USARMY CESAW (US) [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2019 11:28 AM
Cc: Shaeffer, David Leigh (Dave) CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]
<mailto: David. [e-mail]> >; Bates, Letticia D SP4 USARMY CESAW (US)
<[e-mail] <mailto: Letticia. [e-mail]> >
Subject: <EXTERNAL> PUBLIC NOTICE SAW -2018-01129 Piedmont Lithium (UNCLASSIFIED)
CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED
As you requested, you are hereby notified that Wilmington District, United States Army Corps of Engineers has issued a
Public Notice. The text of this document can be found on the Public Notices portion of the Regulatory Division Home
Page. Each Public Notice is available in ADOBE ACROBAT (.pdf) format for viewing, printing or download at
BlockedBlockedBlockedhttp://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Program/Public-Notices/
<BlockedBlockedBlockedhttp://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Program/Public-Notices/>
As with anything you download from the internet, be sure to check for viruses prior to opening. The current notice
involves:
ACTION ID#: SAW -2018-01129
APPLICANT: Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
Project Description: The Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers (Corps) received an application from Piedmont Lithium,
Inc. seeking Department of the Army authorization to impact 5,810.5 linear feet of jurisdictional stream channel, 0.14

acre of jurisdictional wetlands, and 0.16 acre of jurisdictional ponds/impoundments, associated with a lithium mine in
Gaston County, North Carolina.
Project Manager is: David L. Shaeffer [phone]
Issue Date: January 17, 2019
EXPIRATION DATE: 5:00 p.m., February 18, 2019
CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED

Appendix B
PJ D Verification

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW -25018-01129 County: Gaston U.S.G.S. Quad: NC- Lincolnton West
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Requestor: Piedmont Lithium, Inc
Patrick Brindle
Address: 5706 Dallas-Cherrvville Highway
Bessemer Citv, NC 28016
Telephone Number: 412-818-0376
E-mail: pbrindle(doiedmontlithium.com
Size (acres) 537 Nearest Town Crouse
Nearest Waterway Beaverdam Creek River Basin Santee
USGS HUC 03050102 Coordinates Latitude: 35.387869
Longitude: -81.286758
Location description: The review area is located 0.5 miles South of the intersection of Hephzibah Church Road and Whitesides
Road in Gaston Co. PIN(s): 215731. 213460. 213461. 159240.215730. 198928. 198472.205287. 159640. 159641. 159642. 159638.
159639,159637,218192,216007,218191.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
® There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate
and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated 12/6/2018. Therefore
this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory
mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection
measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any
way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may
request an approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
❑ There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403).
However, since the waters, including wetlands have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination
may not be used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is
merely an effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters, including wetlands at the project area, which
is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters,
including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland
delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ We recommend you have the waters, including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.

SAW -25018-01129
❑ The waters, including wetlands on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by
the Corps. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. We strongly
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once
verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided
there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
❑ The waters, including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the
Corps Regulatory Official identified below on DATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA)
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Catherine M. Janiczak at 704-510-1438 or
Catherine. M.Janiczak(d,u sace. armv.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: Basis For Determination: See the preliminary jurisdictional determination
form dated 02/21/2019.
D. Remarks: None.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you
must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 1OM15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by Not applicable.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office i9 aou donotobjecctE o35th8 obdetermination in this correspondence.**
,,7 JANICZA`K.CATHERINE.MARIE.15 DN:e-Ds,o-D.s.�me,nment,ou-DoD,ou-PVI,ou-USA,
Corps Regulatory Official. 35587066 Dn te- 2ICZAK.CATNEBINE 05'00' 535587066
O Date: 2019.02.21 15:33:37 -05'00'
Date of JD: 02/21/2019 Expiration Date of JD: Not applicable

SAW -25018-01129
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
http://corpsmapu.usace.anny.mil/cm_apex/Vp=136:4:0
Copy furnished:
Agent:
HDR
Thomas Blackwell
Address:
440 S. Church Street, Suite 1000
Charlotte, NC 28202
Telephone Number:
704-338-6720
E-mail:
Thomas.blackwell(&hdrinc.com

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Piedmont Lithium, Inc, Patrick Brindle File Number: SAW -25018-01129
Date: 02/21/2019
Attached is: See Section below
F-11 INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission) A
❑ PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission) B
❑ PERMIT DENIAL C
❑ APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
® PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPennits.asi)x
or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. AL
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section 11 of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section 11 of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.

SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn: Catherine M. Janiczak
CESAD-PDO
Charlotte Regulatory Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Catherine M. Janiczak, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North
Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal
Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 02/21/2019
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Piedmont Lithium, Inc, Patrick Brindle, 5706 Dallas-
Cherryville Highway,Bessemer City, NC 28016
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Piedmont Lithium JD, SAW -25018-
01129
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The review area is located 0.5 miles South
of the intersection of Hephzibah Church Road and Whitesides Road in Gaston Co. PIN(s): 215731, 213460, 213461,
159240, 215730, 198928, 198472, 205287, 159640, 159641, 159642, 159638, 159639, 159637, 218192, 216007,
218191.
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County: Gaston City: Crouse
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude: 35.387869 Longitude: -81.286758
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Beaverdam Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
® Field Determination. Date(s): 08/29/2018 & 10/24/2018
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Estimated amount of
Geographic authority to
Type of aquatic
Latitude (decimal
Longitude (decimal
aquatic resources in
resources (i.e.,
which the aquatic resource
Site Number
review area (acreage
'may be" subject (i.e.,
degrees)
degrees)
wetland vs. non -
and linear feet, if
Section 404 or Section
wetland waters)
applicable
10/404)
Stream 1
35.386835
-81.285924
10,269 linear feet
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Stream 2
35.393311
-81.258815
1,762 linear feet
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Stream 3
35.394279
-81.283198
1,122 linear feet
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Stream 4
35.393179
-81.281303
435 linear feet
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Stream 5
35.38626
-81.277881
2,438 linear feet
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Stream 6
35.3884
-81.284461
465 linear feet
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Stream 7
(Little
35.383906
-81.28861
2,848 linear feet
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Beaverdam
Creek)

Site Number
Latitude (decimal
degrees)
Longitude (decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount of
aquatic resources in
review area (acreage
and linear feet, if
applicable
Type of aquatic
resources (i.e.,
wetland vs. non -
wetland waters)
Geographic authority to
which the aquatic resource
'may be" subject (i.e.,
Section 404 or Section
10/404)
Stream 8
35.384698
-81.285579
1,131 linear feet
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Stream 9
35.384005
-81.286911
252 linear feet
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Stream 10
35.388701
-81.291907
797 linear feet
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Stream 11
35.388608
-81.291743
30 linear feet
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Stream 12
35.394342
-81.296986
917 linear feet
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Stream 13
35.396914
-81.300055
1,155 linear feet
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Stream 14
35.395466
-81.30229
1,085 linear feet
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Wetland 1
35.391017
-81.285861
0.28 acres
Wetland
Sec. 404
Wetland 2
35.384414
-81.278923
0.15 acres
Wetland
Sec. 404
Wetland 3
35.38938
-81.279634
3.19 acres
Wetland
Sec. 404
Wetland 4
35.388252
-81.283946
0.66 acres
Wetland
Sec. 404
Wetland 5
35.386738
-81.283946
2.21 acres
Wetland
Sec. 404
Wetland 6
35.384078
-81.287736
0.09 acres
Wetland
Sec. 404
Wetland 7
35.382078
-81.289641
0.38 acres
Wetland
Sec. 404
Wetland 8
35.384223
-81.288806
0.23 acres
Wetland
Sec. 404
Wetland 9
35.397122
-81.297864
0.18 acres
Wetland
Sec. 404
Wetland
10
35.396872
-81.299514
0.12 acres
Wetland
Sec. 404
Pond 1
35.391462
-81.285825
0.14 acres
Non -wetland
Sec. 404

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review
area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request and obtain an
approved JD (AID) for that review area based on an informed decision after having discussed the
various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide General
Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre- construction notification" (PCN), or
requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has
not requested an AID for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit
applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an official
determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the option to request an AID
before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing a permit
authorization on an AID could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being required or
different special conditions; (3) the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than
accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant
can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that
permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5)
undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting an AID
constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g.,
signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area
affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such
jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any
administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AID
or a PJD, the JD will be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AID, a proffered individual
permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be
administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic jurisdiction exists over
aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic
resources in the review area, the Corps will provide an AID to accomplish that result, as soon as is
practicable. This PJD finds that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be"
navigable waters of the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the
review area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
Estimated amount of
Geographic authority to
Type of aquatic
Latitude (decimal
Longitude (decimal
aquatic resources in
resources (i.e.,
which the aquatic resource
Site Number
review area (acreage
'may be" subject (i.e.,
degrees)
degrees)
wetland vs. non -
and linear feet, if
Section 404 or Section
wetland waters)
applicable
10/404)
Pond 2
35.387424
-81.284275
0.39 acres
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Pond 3
35.395618
-81.296819
0.08 acres
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
Pond 4
35.396979
-81.298363
0.07 acres
Non -wetland
Sec. 404
1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review
area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request and obtain an
approved JD (AID) for that review area based on an informed decision after having discussed the
various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide General
Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre- construction notification" (PCN), or
requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has
not requested an AID for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit
applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an official
determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the option to request an AID
before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing a permit
authorization on an AID could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being required or
different special conditions; (3) the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than
accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant
can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that
permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5)
undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting an AID
constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g.,
signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area
affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such
jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any
administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AID
or a PJD, the JD will be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AID, a proffered individual
permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be
administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic jurisdiction exists over
aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic
resources in the review area, the Corps will provide an AID to accomplish that result, as soon as is
practicable. This PJD finds that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be"
navigable waters of the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the
review area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources below where
indicated for all checked items:
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: Figure 6A, Figure 6B, Figure 6C, Figure 6D, Figure 6E, and Figure 6F (Dated
12/06/2018)
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
® Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
® USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1":24,000' Lincolnton West, NC (1993)
® Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Soils Survey of Gaston Co. (2017)_
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: USFWS NWI (2018)_
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
® FEMA/FIRMmaps: FEMA FIRM Panels 3710361000) and 3710362000)
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ®Aerial (Name & Date): Bing Aerial Imagery, dated 2017
or ®Other (Name & Date): Site photographs, dated March 15 and 2; April 3-4,
2018; August 17, 2018_
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been
verified by the Corus and should not be relied uuon for later iurisdictional determinations.
Digitally signed by
JANICZAK.CA JAN ICZAK.CATHERI NE.MARIE.153
5587066
THERINE.MARI DN: c-US,o-U.S.Government
ou-DoD, ou-PKI, ou-USA,
E.1535587066 153558ICZAKCATHERINEMARIE.
1535587066
Date: 2019.02.21 15:34:03 -05'00'
Signature and date of Regulatory
staff member completing PJD
02/21/2019
Signature and date of person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is
impracticable) t
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the
established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an
action.

Figure 6F
Figure 613
s
This portion of Beaverdam Creek
outside the Project Area boundary _
is not included with this submission:'`6 Im. ow. Aga
Figure 6E
Figure.6C
LEGEND
Project Area (614 ac.)
_.. Culverts
Potential Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.
'. Name: Piedmont Lithium Project
Applicant: Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
Location: 2.8 miles north of the Hephzibah Church
-. Road and Dallas Cherryville Highway
intersection in Gaston County, NC
Approximate Total Jurisdictional RPW Tributary: 24,706 linear feet ; Gaston County PID #: See Figure 3
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Wetlands: 7.49 acres y Date: 12/5/2018
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Pond: 0.68 acre Project Area: 614 acres
Approximate Total Uplands: 597.63 acres Figure 6D Center Coordinates: -81.286758°, 35.387869°
Approximate Total Site Acreage: 614 acres SAW #: 2018-01129
PIEDMONT LITHIUM PROJECT
PIEDMONT POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. - OVERVIEW
FIGURE 6A
PATH: IICLTSMAINIGIS DATAIGISIPROJECTSI71115_ PIEDMONTLITHIUM110089640_PIEDMONTLITHIUM17.2_ WORK _IN_PROGRESSIMAP_DOCSIMXDUD120181205_JDPKGMAPUPDAMS106A_PIEDMONTLITHIUM JD.MXD - USER: KTHAMES - DATE: 1 21512 01 8 PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION VERIFICATION
Delineated Streams
Delineated Wetlands
_
Delineated Ponds
DATA SOURCE: http://www.bing.com/maps
GPS POINTS WERE COLLECTED USING TRIMBLE GE07X AND
POST -PROCESSED
A
0 Feet 800
'. Name: Piedmont Lithium Project
Applicant: Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
Location: 2.8 miles north of the Hephzibah Church
-. Road and Dallas Cherryville Highway
intersection in Gaston County, NC
Approximate Total Jurisdictional RPW Tributary: 24,706 linear feet ; Gaston County PID #: See Figure 3
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Wetlands: 7.49 acres y Date: 12/5/2018
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Pond: 0.68 acre Project Area: 614 acres
Approximate Total Uplands: 597.63 acres Figure 6D Center Coordinates: -81.286758°, 35.387869°
Approximate Total Site Acreage: 614 acres SAW #: 2018-01129
PIEDMONT LITHIUM PROJECT
PIEDMONT POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. - OVERVIEW
FIGURE 6A
PATH: IICLTSMAINIGIS DATAIGISIPROJECTSI71115_ PIEDMONTLITHIUM110089640_PIEDMONTLITHIUM17.2_ WORK _IN_PROGRESSIMAP_DOCSIMXDUD120181205_JDPKGMAPUPDAMS106A_PIEDMONTLITHIUM JD.MXD - USER: KTHAMES - DATE: 1 21512 01 8 PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION VERIFICATION

LEGEND
Project Area (614 ac.)
I Photographs
Upland Data Points
® Wetland Data Points
- Culverts
Potential Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.
Delineated Streams
Delineated Wetlands
Delineated Ponds
DATA SOURCE: http://www.bing.com/maps
GPS POINTS WERE COLLECTED USING TRIMBLE GE07X AND
POST -PROCESSED m
0 Feet 350
��-.A dwp
Stream 1 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
9,196 linear feet
Pond 1 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
0.14 ac.
Wetland 1 - Potential Wetland
Waters of the U.S.
0.28 ac.
01 PIEDMONT
LIi H,t M
Stream 2 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
1,762 linear feet
Approximate Total Jurisdictional RPW Tributary: 24,706 linear feet
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Wetlands: 7.49 acres
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Pond: 0.68 acre
Approximate Total Uplands: 597.63 acres
Approximate Total Site Acreage: 614 acres
Stream 3 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
1,122 linear feet
Stream 4 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
t- M435 linear feet
Name: Piedmont Lithium Project
Applicant: Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
Location: 2.8 miles north of the Hephzibah Church
Road and Dallas Cherryville Highway
intersection in Gaston County, NC
Gaston County PID #: See Figure 3
Date: 4/27/2018
Project Area: 614 acres
Center Coordinates: -81.286758°, 35.387869°
SAW #: 2018-01129
PIEDMONT LITHIUM PROJECT
POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S.
_ FIGURE 613
PATH: %%CLTSMAIN%GIS_DATA%GIS%PROJECTS%71105_ PIEDMONTLITHIUM%10089640_PIEDMONMIT IUM%7.2_ WORK _IN_PROGRESSIMAP_DOCS%MXDUD120181205_ JDPKGMAPUPDATES106B-PIEDMONMIT IUM JD.MXD - USER: KTHAMES - DATE: 10&2018 PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION VERIFICATION

I LEGEND
Project Area (614 ac.)
jA�I Photographs
Upland Data Points
® Wetland Data Points
- Culverts
Potential Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.
Delineated Streams
Delineated Wetlands
F7 Delineated Ponds
NDATA SOURCE: http://www.bing.com/maps
GPS i
POINTS WERE
COLLECTED USING TRIMBLE GE07X AND
POS ESSED
01
A
0 Feet 300
Wetland 8 - Potential Wetland
Waters of the U.S.
0.23 ac.
01P I E DM� Itil T
L,i HIUM
Stream 1 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
9,196 linear feet
Approximate Total Jurisdictional RPW Tributary: 24,706 linear feet
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Wetlands: 7.49 acres
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Pond: 0.69 acre
Approximate Total Uplands: 597.63 acres
Approximate Total Site Acreage: 614 acres
540, _02 01Stream 6 - Potential Non- _44511ilill i.1 � J/
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
Wetland 3 - Potential Wetland
465 linear feet. s
`. Waters of the U.S.
I..
Wetland 4 - Potential Wetland + +
Waters of the U.S. �'
0.66 ac. _
Stream 5 - Potential Non -
r; a -_
r Pond 2 - Potential Non- = Wetland Waters of the U.S.
` 2,438 linear feet
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
0.39 ac.
Wetland 5
Wetland 5 - Potential Wetland
Waters of the U.S.
- 2.21 ac. I I
1 .
Wetland 6 - Potential Wetland
Waters of the U.S.
0.09 ac.
Stream 7 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
2,848 linear feet
Stream 8 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
1,131 linear feet
Stream 9 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
252 linear feet
PATH: IICLTSMAINIGIS DATAIGISIPROJECTSI71115_ PIEDMONTLITHIUM110089640_PIEDMONTLITHIUM17.2_ WORK _IN_PROGRESSIMAP_DOCSIMXDUD120181205_JDPKGMAPUPDATES106C PIEDMONTLITHIUM JD.MXD - USER: KTHAMES - DATE: 1 21612 01 8
J
Fff//AffffAM_0.15ac.
Wetland 2 - Potential Wetland
Waters of the U.S.
Name: Piedmont Lithium Project
Applicant: Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
J
Location: 2.8 miles north of the Hephzibah Church
1�
�
Road and Dallas Cherr ville Highway
Y g Y
intersection in Gaston County, INC
Gaston County PID #: See Figure 3
+
Date: 12/5/2018
Project Area: 614 acres
Center Coordinates: -81.286758°, 35.387869°
SAW #: 2018-01129 i
PIEDMONT LITHIUM PROJECT
POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S.
FIGURE 6C
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION VERIFICATION

LEGEND
Project Area (614 ac.)
I Photographs
0 Upland Data Points
® Wetland Data Points
- Culverts
Potential Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.
Delineated Streams
Delineated Wetlands
Delineated Ponds
DATA SOURCE: http://wvww.bing.com/maps
GPS POINTS WERE COLLECTED USING TRIMBLE GE07X AND
POST -PROCESSED m
0 Feet 300
Approximate Total Jurisdictional RPW Tributary: 24,706 linear feet
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Wetlands: 7.49 acres
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Pond: 0.68 acre
Approximate Total Uplands: 597.63 acres
Approximate Total Site Acreage: 614 acres
01PIEDMONT
LITHIUM
Wetland 8 - Potential Wetland
Waters of the U.S.
0.23 ac.
Stream 7 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
2,848 linear feet
PATH: IICLTSMAINIGIS_DATAIGISIPROJECTS171136_PIEDMONTLITHIUM110089640 PIEDMONTLITHIUM17.2_WORK_IN_PROGRESSIMAP_DOCSIMXDUD120181206_JDPKGMAPUPDATESI 6D PIEDMONTLITHIUM JD.MXD -USER: KTHAMES -DATE: 12162018
Wetland 5 - Potential Wetland
Waters of the U.S.
See Figure 6C
Stream 8 - Potential Non -
See Figure 6C
Stream 9 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
See Figure 6C
Wetland 6 - Potential Wetland
Waters of the U.S.
0.09 ac.
Wetland 7 - Potential Wetland
Waters of the U.S.
0.23 ac.
Name: Piedmont Lithium Project
Applicant: Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
Location: 2.8 miles north of the Hephzibah Church
Road and Dallas Cherryville Highway
intersection in Gaston County, NC
Gaston County PID #: See Figure 3
Date: 12/6/2018
Project Area: 614 acres
Center Coordinates: -81.286758°, 35.387869°
SAW #: 2018-01129
PIEDMONT LITHIUM PROJECT
POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S.
FIGURE 6D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION VERIFICATION

LEGEND
Project Area (614 ac.)
I Photographs
0 Upland Data Points
® Wetland Data Points
- Culverts
Potential Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.
�r Delineated Streams
- Delineated Wetlands
Delineated Ponds
DATA SOURCE: http://wvww.bing.com/maps
GPS POINTS WERE COLLECTED USING TRIMBLE GE07X AND
POST -PROCESSED m
0 Feet 300
Stream 10 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
797 linear feet
01P I E DM� Iy T
L."HIUM
Stream 11 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
30 linear feet
Stream 1 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
9,196 linear feet
Wetland 8 - Potential Wetland
Waters of the U.S.
See Figure 6D
Stream 7 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
2,848 linear feet
Approximate Total Jurisdictional RPW Tributary: 24,706 linear feet
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Wetlands: 7.49 acres
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Pond: 0.68 acre
Approximate Total Uplands: 597.63 acres
Approximate Total Site Acreage: 614 acres
Wetland 5 - Potential Wetland
Waters of the U.S.
See Figure 6C
Name: Piedmont Lithium Project
Applicant: Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
Location: 2.8 miles north of the Hephzibah Church
Road and Dallas Cherryville Highway
intersection in Gaston County, NC
Gaston County PID #: See Figure 3
Date: 12/6/2018
Project Area: 614 acres
Center Coordinates: -81.286758°, 35.387869°
SAW #: 2018-01129
PIEDMONT LITHIUM PROJECT
POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S.
_ FIGURE 6E
PATH: IICLTSMAINIGIS_DATAIGISIPROJECTS171136_PIEDMONTLITHIUM110089640 PIEDMONTLITHIUM17.2_WORK_IN_PROGRESSIMAP_DOCSIMXDUD120181206_JDPKGMAPUPDATESI 6E PIEDMONTLITHIUM JD.MXD -USER: KTHAMES -DATE: 12162018 PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION VERIFICATION

LEGEND
Project Area (614 ac.)
I Photographs
0 Upland Data Points
® Wetland Data Points
- Culverts
Potential Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.
�r Delineated Streams
- Delineated Wetlands
Delineated Ponds
DATA SOURCE: http://wvww.bing.com/maps
GPS POINTS WERE COLLECTED USING TRIMBLE GE07X AND
POST -PROCESSED m
0 Feet 300
Stream 13 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
1,155 linear feet
Stream 14 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
1,085 linear feet
Stream 1 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
1,073 linear feet on site
Approximate Total Jurisdictional RPW Tributary: 24,706 linear feet
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Wetlands: 7.49 acres
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Pond: 0.68 acre
Approximate Total Uplands: 597.63 acres
Approximate Total Site Acreage: 614 acres
01PIEDMONT
LITHIUM
Wetland 9 - Potential
Wetland Waters
of the U.S.
0.18 ac.
Pond 4
Stream 13
Wetland 10 - Potential
Wetland Waters
of the U.S.
0.12 ac.
F!. Pond 3 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
0.08 ac.
Stream 12 - Potential Non -
Wetland Waters of the U.S.
917 linear feet
A
0 Feet 200
Name: Piedmont Lithium Project
Applicant: Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
Location: 2.8 miles north of the Hephzibah Church
Road and Dallas Cherryville Highway
intersection in Gaston County, NC
Gaston County PID #: See Figure 3
Date: 12/6/2018
Project Area: 614 acres
Center Coordinates: -81.286758°, 35.387869°
SAW #: 2018-01129
PIEDMONT LITHIUM PROJECT
POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S.
_ FIGURE 6F
PATH: IICLTSMAINIGIS_DATAIGISIPROJECTS171136_PIEDMONTLITHIUM110089640 PIEDMONTLITHIUM17.2_WORK_IN_PROGRESSIMAP_DOCSIMXDUD120181206_JDPKGMAPUPDATESI 6F PIEDMONTLITHIUM JD.MXD -USER: KTHAMES -DATE: 12162018 PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION VERIFICATION

v
�r
LY•-}L-+rte'-"�
re 6E
iaure 613
r"�� Fiaure 6C
r
1
LEGEND
IP Project Boundary (963 ac.)
Previous Verification (614 ac.)
Culverts
Potential Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.
Delineated Streams
. Delineated Wetlands
Delineated Ponds
Desktop Streams
Desktop NWI Wetland
DATA SOURCE: http://www.bing.conVmaps
GPS POINTS WERE COLLECTED USING TRIMBLE GE07X AND
POST -PROCESSED
0 Feet 1,200
CTsv7��-
>n
Figure 6D
Name: Piedmont Lithium Project
Applicant: Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
Location: 2.8 miles north of the Hephzibah Church
Road and Dallas Cherryville Highway
Approximate Total Jurisdictional RPW Tributary: 39,167.5 linear feet intersection in Gaston County, NC
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Wetlands: 13.25 acres Date: 4/1/2019
Approximate Total Jurisdictional Pond: 0.68 acre Figure 6 Project Area: 963 acres
Approximate Total Uplands: 936.96 acres Center Coordinates: -81.286758°, 35.387869°
Approximate Total Site Acreage: 963 acres SAW #: 2018-01129
_ PIEDMONT LITHIUM PROJECT
01P I E DM N T POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. - OVERVIEW
L 1T H I V14
FIGURE 6A
PATH: %%CLTSMAIN%GIS_DATA%GIS%PROJECTS%71105_ PIEDMONTLITHIUM%10089540_PIEDMONTLITHIUM%7.2_ WORK _IN_PRGGRESSIMAP_DOCS%MXD%JD%20190028_JDPKG_REMAININGAREASI05A_PIEDMONTLITHIUM_JD.MXD - USER: KTHAMES - DATE: V112019 PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION VERIFICATION

Appendix C
Design Drawings

ON
1
Porvo N. $
O
'— �, r, �•5 a -- c
am
OB -
NOTES:
1. Sequence ofpit clearing to include stripping of East Pit,
South Pit, Central Pit, and North Pit. Sediment/Erosion
control for pit clearing stages to involve placement of
super silt fence (steel piles) in downslope areas of pits.
2. Disturbed ground during bridge construction, through the
use
of Best Management Practices (BMP) (e.g. sediment
fences, erosion control structures, diversion ditches, silt
fence, and revegetation measures), runoff will be
intercepted before it is able to reach the creek. Sediment
yield from disturbed areas will be managed by sediment
control structures and temporary and permanent
vegetation, such that any added sediment load to the
receiving stream is expected to be minimal during
construction activities. Drainage control structures, along
with the contemporaneous regrading and revegetation of
disturbed areas are expected to prevent or minimize the
contributions of suspended solids. Al disturbed areas will
be seeded as quickly as possible. Once the bridge
onstructionis completed, disturbed areas will be
reclaimed to further minimize runoff.
T WASTE RO _
0
—M --s I I w— 1111����RIJ
LEGEND
J 100 YR. FLOOD PLAIN
DELINEATED WETLANDS
> / DELINEATED PONDS
DELINEATED STREAMS
PROPOSED DITCHES
a �u PROPOSED FLUMES
/// BUILDING/STRUCTURE
II EWR DISPOSAL AREA
\
WWRDISPOSALAREA
O
EXTENTS OF MINE PITS
AND EXCAVATION
"TT,.
\
4
I
HAULROAD CULVERTS
HAULROAD SUMPS
OB -1
RECEPTOR WELLS
0
ROAD CLOSURE
SUPER SILT FENCE
OBSERVATION WELL
O O \\\\` PIEDMONT PROPERTY LINE
MI E PERMIT LINE
)NE
„ 25 FT MINE PERM T BUFFER
U 100 FT LOT BUFFER
200 FT STRUCTURES BUFFER
F 300 FT RESIDENTIAL BUFFER
SITE / MINE MAP
PLAN VIEW
CONTW R INTERVAL = 2 FEET
0 300 600 900
��l SCALE 1"�00'
Na. Dote Revisan
PIEDMONT LITHIUM, INC. DE'
DRAWN:RAM:E : JDP, cos
JDP, CDS
SHEET PIEDMONT LITHIUM CHECKED. MMA
LINCOLNTON WEST QUADRANGLE PCALROLE AnSs 5He
1 OF 1 \\' PIEDMONT GASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA T101 KITH I u rvti
FILE NO: Bl.ofi.K VA May, 2019 JP W CS JA

QMMM�
Q' 0

QMMM�
Q' 0

FE�� �- uG�v�-
1p0 _ cEE� ��� .� F���
C
�
���J J���Q-
��� Q' 0
�'�" JG�J ,��Q�'
�� ��" ��

1200 /— ROPOSEDWWR DISPOSAL AREA 1200
— — — — ---
FIN P L PHASE
1100 1100
SLOPE 2:1 IVITH BENCHE$ EVERY 50'Mi X.
1000 IN ELEVATION AND A CRO 3SING HAULROAD SYSTEM 1000
z z
0 3EDIMENT POI ID NO, I PHASE I I EL- 950 DITCH NO. 1 0
W 900 FwwR goo 'W
—..I- ----------- --------------------
----------- ---------- ----------- ------------ --------- --- ------------- ------------ ----- ---- - ----- ------- ------------- ------------- ----------- -------- ----------------------
800 — --- --- ------ 800
7001 UNDER RAIN No. 1 —APPROXIMrE ROCKLINJ EXISTII IG GRADE LINDE RDRAIN NO. 3 700
0,00 1,00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 19+00 20+00 21+00 22+00 23+00 24+00 25+00 26+00
VMR SECTION NO. 1
SCALE 1-100'
1200
PROPOSED IL
DISPOSAAREA 1200
E LOPE 2 1 WIT� BENCHES E ERY 50' MAX.
1100 FINAL I i ELEVATION ND A CROSSIN 3 HAULROAD 3YSTEM 1100
1000 FWWR DI PCH NO. 1 1000
0 11IR DITCH NO, 5 1 PHASEI I I EL. 95 HAULROAD 0
W
W 900 Fw -.0 900 1W
800
800
700 EXISTING �GDE �—1 PPROXIMATE 1OCKLINE 700
0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 19+00 20+00
VMR SECTION NO. 2
SCALE 1-100'
10 BE WRAPPED IN F'IL'TER CEO 111
MIRAFI IRON OR EQ UIVALLN I REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION P.M.
.... ..... MIN, I'OVLRIAP VEGUIAILD PERMIT No. NPDES No.
--- --------------
-- ---------- 20'BLNC11 PROPOSED WWR DISPOSAL AREA
(ORFLATIEW 2 SECTION NO. 1 AND NO. 2
5'
3'CUSIHON OF
PIEDMONT LITHIUM
ULROAD
PL no, ,
_PL
J/4'PLRP00fSLnpL 2
WASILROCK
2 P.OPOSEB LRM Prepared or.
2 PROPOSEDBLRM
(ORFLATIEW PIEDMONT Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
DRAINAGEDFICII Gaston County, NC
PROPOSED
ROCK UNDERDRAIN DETAIL BENCH SLOPE DETAIL TYPICAL WSTE FILL HAULROAD DETAIL
N.I.S. N.I.S. N.I.S. Scale As Shown
PLIT101 B-kley, W 05/10
1 DIESIGNED: JPJ )�W JP APPROVED JA — SEMON No.i — 2 J,
PHASE

1100 1100 1100 1100 1050 1050
1050
1000
w 950
900
850
1050 1050
z
O
Q
w
1000 w 1000
z
O
Q
w
950 w 950
1050 1000
z
O
Q
w
1000 w 950
z
O
Q
w
950 w 900
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50
WWR FLUME NO. 4
900 SCALE- V=50' 850
850 800
1000
950
z
O
Q
w
900 w
850
800
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50
SCALE: 1" = 50' SCALE: 1" = 50'
900 900
1000
0
Q 950
w
w
900
850
z
z
CHANNEL PROI'EC'1'ION
1000
O
O
1050
850
Q
Q
850
WWR FLUME NO.3
w
w
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
1050
1050
w
1100
1000
0
Q 950
w
w
900
850
800 0 800
TOP OF FLUMEz
x
U
O
0
m
BOTTOM OF FLUME
z
SCALE- 1 = 50
CHANNEL PROI'EC'1'ION
1000
O
NOTES:
1050
850
Q
j
WWR FLUME NO.3
w
CIIANNILL PROI'EC'1'ION S11AI-L BL ACCOMPLISl ILD DY'1'IIF.
800 0 800
TOP OF FLUMEz
x
U
O
0
m
BOTTOM OF FLUME
z
SCALE- 1 = 50
CHANNEL PROI'EC'1'ION
1000
O
NOTES:
1050
850
Q
5.0
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.3
w
CIIANNILL PROI'EC'1'ION S11AI-L BL ACCOMPLISl ILD DY'1'IIF.
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.A
w
1100
1100
800 0 800
TOP OF FLUMEz
x
U
O
0
m
BOTTOM OF FLUME
0— uwu i+uu i+ou 1+uu 1+ou s+uu s+ou nwu a+o0 2 2
5'
WWR FLUME NO. 2
SCALE- V=50' Cl -d Luring: GROUTED ROCK RIPRAP 850
TYPICAL FLUME DETAIL
800
1050
1000
z
O
950 Q
w
w
900
850
800
N.I.S. 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00
WWR FLUME NO. 7
1000 1000 1000 1000
950
W 900
850
950 950
z
O
F
Q z
w O
900 w Q 900
>
w
w
850 850
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50
WWR FLUME NO. 3
800
­=­
SCALE.
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
SCALE- 1 = 50
CHANNEL PROI'EC'1'ION
1000
2.5
NOTES:
1050
950
WWR FLUME NO. 5
5.0
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.3
z SCALE- V=50'
CIIANNILL PROI'EC'1'ION S11AI-L BL ACCOMPLISl ILD DY'1'IIF.
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.A
O
FOLLOWING ME'1'110D. A GREATER PROI'EC'1'ION CAN DE SUBS 'I'II'U'I'1LD
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
950
Q
FOR A LESSER Cl1ANNEL PRO 'ILC '1'ION SPLCIFICA'1'ON
1000
WWR FLUME NO.6
w
w
5.0
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.7
O���
z
O
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
900
Q
Q
950
w
SEE CI LWI
w
w
850
1 1
DIAML'ILROFS
'IWLLVE(12)INCIL.'IWLN'IY-FIVLPLRCLN'IBY
900
0— uwu i+uu i+ou 1+uu 1+ou s+uu s+ou nwu a+o0 2 2
5'
WWR FLUME NO. 2
SCALE- V=50' Cl -d Luring: GROUTED ROCK RIPRAP 850
TYPICAL FLUME DETAIL
800
1050
1000
z
O
950 Q
w
w
900
850
800
N.I.S. 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00
WWR FLUME NO. 7
1000 1000 1000 1000
950
W 900
850
950 950
z
O
F
Q z
w O
900 w Q 900
>
w
w
850 850
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50
WWR FLUME NO. 3
800
­=­
SCALE.
llFPI'll
(F'1')
SCALE- 1 = 50
CHANNEL PROI'EC'1'ION
WWR FLUME NO.1
2.5
NOTES:
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
950
2.0
5.0
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.3
2.0
CIIANNILL PROI'EC'1'ION S11AI-L BL ACCOMPLISl ILD DY'1'IIF.
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.A
2.0
FOLLOWING ME'1'110D. A GREATER PROI'EC'1'ION CAN DE SUBS 'I'II'U'I'1LD
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.5
2.0
FOR A LESSER Cl1ANNEL PRO 'ILC '1'ION SPLCIFICA'1'ON
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.6
2.5
5.0
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.7
O���
...... ... � � ... �� .... � ..... � .... � ... � �. -------...».......................................
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
900
Q
'1'IIICK DLANKE'1' ON 'III L DOI'1'OM ANll SIDES OF'IIIL CI LANN1LL .'III L
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
w
ROCK WILL DE A DURABLE, WELL GRADED ROCK WI'1'll A MEDIAN
DIAML'ILROFS
'IWLLVE(12)INCIL.'IWLN'IY-FIVLPLRCLN'IBY
REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION
w
WElGlfl OF 111L ROCK WILL DE ONE AND ONE -HALF (11/2)'11MLS BEL
PERMIT No. NPDES No.
MEDIAN DIA, 1 I'1LR OR SLIGIl'I'LY LARGER. '1'IIF. MA'11 RIAI SHALL
_
'1'II LN DE SLUSI I GROU'I'1LD WI'1'll A STANDARD GROUT' MLYI'URL OR
850
ONE APPROVEDDY'IRE ENGINEER. SHALE OR ANY MATERIAL 1'11KI
WILL SLAKE IN WATER SlIA11 NO'I DE USED.
PROPOSED WWR FLUME NO. 1 - NO. F
WWR DISPOSAL AREA
PIEDMONT LITHIUM
800
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00
SCALE- V=50'
FLUME
llFPI'll
(F'1')
DOI'1'OM WID'I'II
(F'1')
CHANNEL PROI'EC'1'ION
WWR FLUME NO.1
2.5
5.0
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.2
2.0
5.0
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.3
2.0
5.0
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.A
2.0
5.0
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.5
2.0
5.0
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.6
2.5
5.0
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.7
2.5
5.0
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP
WWR FLUME NO.8
2.0
5.0
GROU'I'1LD ROCK RIPRAP

1050 1050 1050 TOP OF FLUME1050 1100 1100
U TOP OF FL ME
v
O v Z
O
1000 1000 Q 1000 w 1000 Q 1050 v 1050
W w O ❑ O
x
w F w Q W Q
BOTTOM OF FLUME > >
W W
TOP F FLUME O
950 950 950 O 950 w 1000 1000 w
0+00 0+50 1+00
BOTTOM OF FLUME
0 o VR FLUME NO. 12 °
WV
~ 900 ° 900 Q950 950
Ij o W SCALE: V=50' 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50
W ° w
BOTTOM FFLUME z WWR FLUME NO. 13
850 850
m
SCALE: V=50'
0
0
800 m 800
0 1000 1000
750 750
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 TO OF FLUME
950 1. 950
WWR FLUME NO. 9 z
z
SCALE: V=50' zz o
Q 900 z 900 Q
W o W
I m w
B TTOM OF FL ME
850 o 850
m
1100 1100
O
800 800
z Z 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50
O O
Q 1050 1050 Q
W W WWR FLUME NO. 14
W W SCALE: V=50'
1000 1000
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
WWR FLUME NO. 10
SCALE: V=50'
SEE CHAR1'
1� �1
z z
5'
1000 1000 Ch..d Lvting: CROU'1'1EU ROCK RIPRAP
TYPICAL FLUME DETAIL
TOP OF LUME
950 950 NOTES
N.I.S.
O CHANNEL YRO'1'EC'1'ION S11AI.L HE ACCOMYHSl ILD BY'1'11 L
z FOLLOWING ME'1'110D. A GREATER YRO'1'EC'1'ION CAN DE SUBS 'I'1'I'U'I'1LD
Z FOR A LESSER CHANNEL PRO 'ILC '1'ION SYECIFICA'1'ON
z a Z
[) F O ��«......«...««...««....«.....«.........«««----�....«.....................................«
Q 9QQ w 9QQ Q'1'IHCKDLANKE'1'ON'I'IRLDO'I7'OMANll SIDESOF'IIILCILANN1LL.'1'lllL
W W > ROCK WILL DE A DURABLE, WELT. GRADED ROCK WI'1'll A MLDM
w DIAMF.'TEROF'IW1:LVLQ2)INC1us.'IW1:N'IY-FIVLPLRCLN'IBY REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION P.M.
W W WEIGIH OF 111L ROCK WILL DE ONE AND ONE -HALF (11/2)'1'IMLS'1'1lli PERMIT NO. _ NPOES No.
MEDIAN DIAM1L'1'1LR OR SLIGI rI'LY LARCILR . '1'1I L MA'1'ERML SHALL
BOTT M OF FLUME 1105N DE SLUS11 GROD'1'ED W1'1'l1 A STANDARD GROUT MLYI'URL OR
850 O 85D ONE APPROVEDDY'1'11L ENGINEER. SHALE OR ANY MATERIAL 1'11KI
° WILL SLAKE IN WArEKSHALL NO'T DE USED. PROPOSED WWR FLUME NO. 9 - NO. 14
WWR DISPOSAL AREA
PIEDMONT LITHIUM
800 800
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00
WWR FLUME NO. 11 �- Prepared For.
SCALE: V=50' PIED/AONT Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
"•°" Gaston County, NC
Scale As Shown
�V
PLIT101 Beckley, WV 05/19
DESIGNED: JP DRAWN: JP APPROVED JA WWR FLUMES J' k
FLUME
OP OF FLUME
x
C11ANN1LL YRO'1'EC'1'ION
WWR FLUME NO.D
U
O
5.0
CRO U'1'1LU ROCK RIk'RAY
z
2.0
5.0
0
m
BOTTOM OF LUME
2.5
�
CRO U'1'1LU ROCK RIk'RAY
WWR FLUME NO. 12
0
FLUME
llEYI'll
DO'1'1'OM WIU'l'll
C11ANN1LL YRO'1'EC'1'ION
WWR FLUME NO.D
2.5
5.0
CRO U'1'1LU ROCK RIk'RAY
WWR FLUME NO. 10
2.0
5.0
CRO U'1'1LU ROCK RIk'RAY
WWR FLUME NO. 11
2.5
5.0
CRO U'1'1LU ROCK RIk'RAY
WWR FLUME NO. 12
2.0
5.0
CRO U'1'1LU ROCK RIk'RAY
WWR FLUME NO. 13
2.0
5.0
CRO U'1'1LU ROCK RIk'RAY
WWR FLUME NO. IA
3.0
5.0
CRO U'1'1LU ROCK RIk'RAY

O
Z
900
D-111
(FE)
S'I'AI'ION
DLFIll
DOI'1'OM WIU'1'll
GI IANNEL YROI'LC'1'ION
0.0
ROCK RIPRAP
FROM '1'O
(FE)
TOP OF DITCH
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
WWR Dll CII NO.3
2.5
00+00 06+A6
ED
0.0
a
5.0
900
06+A6 07+A8
3.5
0.0
GROB ILD ROCK RLPRAY
WWR Dll CII NO.6
3.0
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
O
900
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
WWRllI'1'CI1N0.8
v 900
5.0
GROUTED ROCK x1PRAY
WWR D:':'Cll N0.9
TOP OF
ITCH
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
a
3.0
Z
CRO U' IED ROCK x1PRAY
z
Z
z
_____________
Z
Q 800
______
_____
______
______
❑
800
W
w
W
BOTTOM C DITCH
W
O
700
m
700
0+00
1+00 2+00
3+00
4+00 5+00
6+00
0
O
-----
Q 800
------
800 Q
w
-----
-----
------
- ❑
w
w
BOT
OM OF
DITCH
m
w
700
700
0+00
1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00
7+00
8+00
9+00
10+00 11+00
12+00 13+00
14+00
15+00 16+00 17+00
18+00
19+00 20+00
21+00
22+00
23+00
24+00
25+00 26+00 27+00
28+00 29+00
30+00
31+00
S'I'AI'ION
DLFIll
DOI'1'OM W0Y1'II
Cl IANNEL YROI'LC'1'ION
WWR DITCH NO. 1
1110
FROM
IF
IF
SCALE- 1" = 100'
00+00
16+62
6.5
0.0
ROCK RIPRAP
16+62
30+AO
6.0
0.0
CROU'I. ROCK RS'RAY
O
z
O
z
O
Z
O
900
❑
900
950
❑
950
900
❑ 900
950
z
❑ 950
T
P OF DITCH
°z
P OF DITCHaw
°
z
TOP O
DITCH
z
TOP OF DITCH
Fz
_~
w
p
O
_
p
_
o
p
O
_
o
pO
800
_
800
-
850
m
850
~
800
-
W
800
-
~ 850
w
850
ww
w
01
w
w
w
w
w
BOTTOM
DITCH
10
r
BOTTOM OF
DITCH
r
OTTOM OF DI CH
m
BOTTOM
OF DI
H J
lw
m
700
700
750
750
700700
750
750
0+00
1+00 2+00
3+00
4+00 5+00
6+00
7+000
8+00
0+00
1+8
2+00
0+00
1+00
2+00
3+00
j 4+00
0+00
1+00
X2+00
O
O
SCALE- 1" = 100'
FIZOSIAJION10
D-111
(FE)
S'I'AI'ION
DLFIll
DOI'1'OM WIU'1'll
GI IANNEL YROI'LC'1'ION
0.0
ROCK RIPRAP
FROM '1'O
(FE)
(F"1')
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
WWR Dll CII NO.3
2.5
00+00 06+A6
ED
0.0
ROCK RIYRAY
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
06+A6 07+A8
3.5
0.0
GROB ILD ROCK RLPRAY
WWR Dll CII NO.6
3.0
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
O
900
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
WWRllI'1'CI1N0.8
v 900
5.0
GROUTED ROCK x1PRAY
WWR D:':'Cll N0.9
TOP OF
ITCH
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
a
3.0
Z
CRO U' IED ROCK x1PRAY
z
Z
Q 800
❑
800
W
w
W
BOTTOM C DITCH
W
O
700
m
700
0+00
1+00 2+00
3+00
4+00 5+00
6+00
0
O
SCALE- 1" = 100'
FIZOSIAJION10
D-111
(FE)
D01'1'OM WIU'1'll
CIIANNEL YROI'LC'1'ION
00+00 05+55
2.5
0.0
ROCK RIPRAP
O
Z
900 ❑ 900
TOP OF ITCH
I
Z _
O v
Q 800 m
>
W
I BOTTOM C DITCH
O
m
700
Z
O
800 Q
w
W
700
0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+0g 6+00
WWR DITCH NO. 9
S('AI F- 1"=100'
S'I'AI'ION
r'ROM '1'O
D-111
(FE)
DOI'1'OM WIU'1'll
(F"1')
C11ANN1LL Yx01'EC'1'ION
00+00 05+07
2.5
0.0
ROCK RIPRAk'
900
O
Q 800
I
700
0+
SCALE- 1" = 100'
S'I'AI'ION
FROM '1'O
llEYI'll
IF E)
DOI'1'OM WII7'1'll
(r"1' )
Cl IANNEL-OI'EC'1'ION
00+00 01+20
2.5
0.0
ROCK RIYRAY
WWR DITCH NO. 7
SCALE- 1" = 100'
900
O
800 Q
w
700
00
S'1'A'1'ION
FROM '1'0
DLII'll
(F'1'.)
DOI'1'OM WID'1'll
(F'1')
Cl IANNEL Yx01'EC'1'ION
00+00 03+10
3.0
0.0
ROCK RIPRAP
900
Z
O
Q 800
>
W
700
0+
900
O
Q 800
I
700
0,
SCALE- 1" = 100'
S'1'A'1'ION
FROM '1'O
DLII'll
(F E)
DOI'1'OM WID'1'll
(F E)
Cl 1ANN1LL Yx01'EC'1'ION
00+00 03+63
3.5
0.0
ROCK RIYRAY
WWR DITCH NO. 8
SCALE- 1" = 100'
900
O
800 Q
I
700
70
S'1'A'1'ION
FROM '1'O
llEYI'll
(F'1'.)
D01'1'OM WIU'1'll
(r"1')
CHANNELYx01'EC'1'ION
00+00 05+60
2.5
0.0
ROCK RIYRAY
WWR DITCH NO. 10
crni F- 1" = Inn•
S'1'A'1'ION
FROM 1110
DLI -1'11
(F E)
DOI'1'OM WIll'1'Il
(F E)
C11ANN1LL Yx01'EC'1'ION
00+00 08+55
3.0
0.0
ROCK RIYRAY
Ch..d Lh�ffig: 18" ROCK x1PRAY
OR OU'I'L
GRD ROCK RIPRAl'
DEFI'll VARIES
2 2
TYPICAL WWR DITCH NO. 1 - NO. 6 DETAILS
N.I.S.
900
Z
O
800 Q
w
w
700
00
ll11'Cll
llLY'I'll
(FI')
EOI'1'OMWIDUI
(F'1')
Cl IANNEL YROI'LC'1'ION
WWRDFICIl NO.1
2.5
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
WWR Dll CII NO.2
2.0
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
WWR Dll CII NO.3
2.5
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
WWRDFICIl NO.1
2.0
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
WWR Dll CII NO.5
2.0
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
WWR Dll CII NO.6
3.0
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
WWRDFICI1N0.7
2.5
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
WWRllI'1'CI1N0.8
2.0
5.0
GROUTED ROCK x1PRAY
WWR D:':'Cll N0.9
2.0
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK x1PRAY
WWRDFICIl NO. 10
3.0
5.0
CRO U' IED ROCK x1PRAY
SCALE- 1" = 100'
S'1'A'1'ION UO
DLII'll
DOI'1'OM WIU'1'll
CHANNEL YROI'LC'1'ION
E00+00 01+72
3.0
0.0
ROCK RIYRAY
NOTES
Cl IANNEL YROI'LC'1'ION SI IALL DE ACCOMYLISII ill BY ONE OF'I1IL
FOLLOWING ML'1'IIODS ORA COMDINA'1'ION'1'l0'.RLOF. AGRFA'1'L12
PRO '1'LC'1'ION CAN DE SUBS 'I'1'I'U'ILD FOR A LESSER Cl IANNEL PRO 'ILC '1'ION
SPECIFICATION. SEE Cl IARI'S FOR SPECIFIED ML'1'l1011 .
DN'IIIL DOI'1'OM AND SIDES OF'I1IL CIIANNEL .'1'I05 ROCK WILL DE A
DURABLE ROCK WI'1'll A MEDIAN DIAML'1'1Lx (ll50) OF'IWELVE (12) IN.
'1'WEN'1'Y-FIVE YLRCEN'I BY WEIGII'1' OF BIL ROCK WILL DE ONE AND
ONE-HALF (1 1/2)'1'IMLS'1'IlL MEDIAN DIAML'1'ER OR SLIGITTLY
LARGEK .'1'IIL REMAINING SEVENTY-FIVE (75) YLRCEN'I WILL DE
WELL -GRADED MAT i CONSISTING OF SUFYICIEN'IROCK SMALL
ENOUGH 10 FILL DIE VOIDS BE'1'WLEN'BIL LARGER ROCKS. SHALE
OR MA'1'LRIAL'1'11KI WILL SLAKE IN WA'1'LR SlIALL NOT DL USED.
'1'I HCK DLANKL'1' ON'1'lllL D01'1'OM ANll SIDES OF'1'lllL CIIANNILL .'1'lllL
ROCK WILL DL A DURABLE, WELL GRADED ROCK WI'1'll A MEDIAN
DIAML'1'LR OF'I'WILLVE (12) INCIOLS .'1'W1LN'1'Y-FIVE YLRCLN'1' DY
WEIGII'1' OF'I1IL ROCK WILL DL ONE AND ONE-HALF (1 1/2)'1'IMLS'1'1 IF
MLDIANDIAML'1'EROR SLIGITTLYLARGER. '1'IILMA'1'ERIAI SHALL
'1'IIEN DL SLUSH GROUTED WI'1'll A S'T'ANDARD GROUT' MIXTURE OR
ONE APPROVEDDY'BIL ENGINEER. SHALE OR ANY MA'1'LRIAL 1'11KI
WILL SLAKE IN WA'1'LR SlIALL NOT DL USED.
3.) WORKING EDGE llI'1'CILES WILL DL CONS'IRUC'1'1:D
AND MAIN'1'AINEll AS NECESSARY 10 CONTAIN DESIGN FLOW.

r l.00a P .,it
1� �1 1.O1
R
100.00 ft.
LOPE Channel Design (Non -Erodible) STAGE STORAGE CURVE
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes WWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 1
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
0`£ Right Side Slope 2.00:1 790 STRUCTURE
OPOS FL E 0 Base Dimension: 100.00 769 )
Wetted Perimeter. 106.45 766 EME ENC SPIL AY (766.00)
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 148.27 787 PRIN OPAL PILLY (76 .00)
766
50 Channel Slope: 0.1000 765
Manning's n of Channel: 0.0423 784
Discharge: 205.45 cfs o 76z 0% C 0.2.04)
BENCH 2% Depth of Flow: 1.04 feet
Velocity: 1.39fps m 781
w 760
OS _ 1 Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap 779
P Freeboard: 1.00 feet 776
P
L 777
810 PROPOSED EMERGENCY SPILLWAY 77
7755
g50 N .0 B o � N.T.S. o t z a a s s 1 a s to n iz
PR ED R DITCH NO. 2 I..ODa rtccboard Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
STORAGE VOLUME COMPUTATIONS
LAI R
2 2 WWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 1
n
AO.00R
ELEV. Width LENGTH AREA AVG. INTERVAL STORAGE ACC. STAGE
Q Channel Design (Non -Erodible) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ac) AREA (ft) (ac -ft) STORAGE INTERVAL
dal, Equal Side Slopes(ac) (ac -ft) (ft)
Channel Type: Tra pezoi qua
A' Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1 775.00 N/A N/A 0.0003
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
/// 775.50 N/A N/A 0.4697 0.2450 0.50 0.1225 0.1225 0.50
Base Dimension: 40.00
776.00 N/A N/A 0.5133 0.5015 0.50 0.2506 0.3733 1.00
Wetted Perimeter. 41.65 776.50 N/A N/A 0.5326 0.5229 0.50 0.2615 0.6347 1.50
J / Area of Wetted Cross Section: 16.92 777.00 N/A N/A 0.5506 0.5416 0.50 0.2706 0.9055 2.00
�
Channel Slope: 40.0000 777.50 N/A N/A 0.5677 0.5592 0.50 0.2796 1.1651 2.50
Manning's n of Channel: 0.0423 776.00 N/A N/A 0.5843 0.5760 0.50 0.2660 1.4731 3.00
B / 776.50 N/A N/A 0.6003 0.5923 0.50 0.2962 1.7692 3.50
Discharge: 205.53 cis 0.6062 0.50 0.3041 2.0733 4.00
CENTERLI OF . x / - Depth of Flow: 0.41 feet 779.00 N/A N/A 0.6161
1 Velocity: 12.15 fps 779.50 N/A N/A 0.6325 0.6243 0.50 0.3122 2.3655 4.50
.. .. .. .. .. IVO MA O 8 _ � I -�/ 0.6406 0.50 0.3203 2.7056 5.00
i< II Ir --1\ Channel Lining: i6 inch Rock Rip -Rap Ra 760.00 N/A N/A 0.6487
WWR SEDIMEN 0.1 1 g P- P 0.6569 0.50 0.3265 3.0342 5.50
_ II -=F Freeboard: 1.00 feet 760.50 N/A N/A 0.6651
STONE ENERGY DISSIPATOR F- -fir 781.00 N/A N/A 0.6615 0.6733 os0 o.33ss 3.37os s.00
761.50 N/A N/A 0.6976 0.6695 0.50 0.3446 3.7157 6.50
-- 0
F PROPOSED EXIT CHANNEL 762.00 N/A N/A 0.7144 0.7060 0.5 0.3530 4.0667 7.00
P YPOSED EMERGENCY --- 0.7231 0.50 0.3615 4.4302 7.50
N.T.S. 762.50 N/A N/A 0.7316
`
-SPILLWAY ` 763.00 N/A N/A 0.7499 0.7406 0.50 0.3704 4.6006 6.00
-�
_PROPOSED EXIT CHANNEL 763.50 N/A N/A 0.7676 0.7569 0.50 0.3794 5.1601 6.50
TRASH RACK 764.00 N/A N/A 0.7657 0.7767 0.50 0.3664 5.5664 9.00
POND ACCESS ROAD
784.50 N/A N/A 0.6034 0.7915 0.50 0.3973 5.9657 9.50
_ + CREST EL. 790 0.6120 0.50 0A 0 6.3717 10.00
1 1'FREEB-RD 765.00 N/A N/A 0.6205
i 0.6293 0.50 0.4146 6.7663 10.50
+ EU ERDENDYSPILIw EPTH EMERGENCY SPILLWAY 785.50 N/A N/A 0.6360
CHAIN LINK FENCE NORMAL POOL 787 t'FREEBopaD 786.00 N/A N/A 0.6565 0.6472 0.50 0.4236 7.2099 11.00
\ 786.50 N/A N/A 0.6749 0.6657 0.50 0.4329 7.6426 11.50
` 767.00 N/A N/A 0.6940 0.6844 0.50 0.4422 6.1650 12.00
-----------------
-------- ______ 767.50 N/A N/A 0.9151 0.9046 0.50 0.4523 6.5373 12.50
50% CLEANOUT EL 782.04
766.00 N/A N/A 0.9349 0.9250 0.50 0.4625 6.9996 13.00
766.50 N/A N/A 0.9570 0.9459 0.50 0.4730 9.4726 13.50
PLAN VIEW: PROPOSED WWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 1 EXISTING GRADE 769.00 N/A N/A 0.9771 0.9670 0.50 0.4635 9.9563 14.00
64" DIA. RISER
SCALE: 1"=50' SLOPE + 769.50 N/A N/A 0.9675 0.9623 0.50 0.4912 10.4474 14.50
790.00 N/A N/A 0.9911 0.9693 0.50 0.4947 10.9421 15.00
(jCUTOFF TRENCH
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS) BOTTOM OF POND
850 850 54" DIA. BARREL PIPE
�E"'ST"
G GRADE FILL MATERIAL
50%CLEAT IOUT EL = 78 --�_ 2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
POOL EL= 6 .a _ TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
Z C .ACCESS Z
p CR STEL. 790.0 0 1 L N.T.S.
Q 800 800 Q 1
w �� - _ w
w w 2' �
BOTTOM EL. 185.0SUITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
750 CENTERLIECUTOFF TRNCH
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD TOP OF EMBANKMENT
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY RISER STRUCTURE ��
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 WITHIN t2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE 1•MIN. Y/",
CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL TRASH RACK SEM ERGENDY SPILLWAY
CONTENT \ FReBaonaD- ) I III 11 IIII IIII- REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION
\\�1 rnnlN. �. IIII Pll PII=IIP IIII ITV= zs. PERMIT No. NPDES No.
N.T.S. SKIMMER �pEM. - 1111, I,)1 11� IIII,IV,II,IIII,1111,'�s
SECTION B -B' s° iI_IIII=IIIIJW1-IJI-V11=11i1=IIII-1111-VII=/Ope
2`',`_1111=1111 J111=11i1= 1'11=Plhllil=1111,1111_Illl=llfl_1111=11 4'M
SCALE : 1'•=50'=lm=m_Im_Vi;_m-mllul_II-Iu 1=lm�ui_�m_II_ PROPOSED WWR SEDIMENT POND NI
M
850 850 r sARREL
�� PIPE WWR DISPOSAL AREA
EXISTING GRADE ,D .ACCESS .\ �\\'• .';//��/�/��////� /�� ��j/�/��////� PIEDMONT LITHIUM
CRE EL. SS ': � � � �
Z 50% CLEANO T EL - 782.04 POOL EL = 787. Z CLASS B STONE PAD JI CUT-OFF ANTI -SEEP
O_ O_ (4'X 4'X 1'MIN.) gNTIFLOTATION BLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW STABILIZED
800 800 TRENCH COLLAR
> j 2' DEEP OUTLET
W - W 1.1
w w ' Prepared For.
BOTTOM E785.0 PIEaMOhfT Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
NOTES "'"'"" Gaston County, NC
750 750 1. SEED AND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROL ON INTERIOR AND EXTE RIOR 51 DESLOPES.
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 2. INSTALL MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDARD 6.65.
3. INSTALL SKIM M ER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM BOTTOM OF BASIN. Scale AS Shown
4. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FT. BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPLING. NOT TO SCALE
SECTION A -A'
SCALE: 1" 50'
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL PUT101 Beckley. WV

850
.ACCESS
9 CUTOFF TRENCH
850
1OOft P'scboard
10 FT. AC SS
797.0
EXIS
ING GRADE
CREST EL. 800.0
50% CLEA
qOUT EL = 79
.0
POOEL = 797.0
N.T.S.
Z
17
1�.
O
. 786.0
2-1
O
Q 800
- -
800 Q
w
ti
w
W
8
BOTTOM L. 786.0
W
750
CENTE LINE 1111IFF TRENCH
750
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
N.T.S.
=1111=1111=IIII=IIIIJIII-IIII.II_III-III-1=IIII�IIII=1111=IIII-
850
BARREL
PIPE
Z
O_
CLASS B STONE PAD JI CUT-OFF ANTI -SEEP
(4'X 4'X 1'MIN.) ANTIFLOTATION BLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW L STABILIZED
800
TRENCH COLLAR
OUTLET
>
2' DEEP
W
W
1.1
X
55.00 fL
AC S
Channel Design (Non -Erodible)
o p
PR R U
N
7
p
p No
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00: 1
STAGE STORAGE CURVE
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
WWR SEDIMENT POND NO.2
\
L
'I
Base Dimension: 55.00
Wetted Penmeter. 59.71
P_ROPO D I�
m
Area ofwetted Cross section: 60.10
600
Channel Slope: 0.1000
799
OP OF STRUCTU
99)
'
0 E
N
Manning's n of Channel: 0.0423
796
EMERGENC
SPILLWAY (798.00)
.
p
U3
Discharge: 67.05 cfs
797
796
PRINCIPAL SPILL
Y(797.00)
`
I A
Z
co
Q O
Depth of Flow : 1.05 feet
795
m
Velocity: 1.12 fps
794
CENTERLINE CUTOFF RENCH
=
o
793
50% C Li EANOUT EL,79 .0
'
X
�
o
Channel Lining: inch Rock Rip -Rap
feet
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
o
'�
792
50% CLEANOUTE (793.0)
WWR SEDIMENT POND NO- 2
�
N
Oo
°'
w
791
p
PROPOSED EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
790
N.T.S.
789
.00tL P -b-rd
786
�T
787
786
O
SPI
IP
AY
1 �1
o.NzfL 1
0
1
2 3
4
Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
fL
STORAGE VOLUME COMPUTATIONS
Channel Design (Non -Erodible)
'
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
WWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 2
El'
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
'I
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
7
Base Dimension: 20.00
ELEV.
Width
LENGTH
AREA AVG. INTERVAL
STORAGE
ACC.
STAGE
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ac) AREA (ft)
(ac -ft)
STORAGE
INTERVAL
N�I
Wetted Perimeter. 21.89
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 8.80
(ac)
(ac -ft)
(ft)
ST E
i
1
Channel Slope: 40.0000
786.00
N/A
N/A
0.0914
P
Manning's n of Channel: 0.0423
767.00
N/A
N/A
0.1059 0.0986 1.00
0.0985
0.0985
1.00
I
0
786.00
N/A
N/A
0.1214 0.1136 1.00
0.1136
0.2121
2.00
Discharge: 106.47 cis
0.1294 1.00
0.1294
0.3415
3.00
_ O O E XIT ANNE L
---
Depth of Flow: 0.42 feet
Velocity: 12.10fps
769.00
790.00
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.1375
0.1543 0.1459 1.00
0.1458
0.4673
4.00
791.00
N/A
N/A
0.1718 0.1631 1.00
0.1630
0.6503
5.00
NOR OOL E
79
0
Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap
0.1809 1.00
0.1808
0.8311
6.00
`
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
792.00
N/A
N/A
0.1900
O
D A1-cF S
793.00
N/A
N/A
0.2089 0.1994 1.00
0.1994
1.0305
7.00
791.00
N/A
N/A
0.2265 0.2187 1.00
0.2186
1.2491
8.00
RO OR 11
N .3
795.00
N/A
N/A
0.2488 0.2387 1.00
0.2386
1.4677
9.00
PROPOSED EXIT CHANNEL
796.00
N/A
N/A
0.2696 0.2593 1.00
0.2593
1.7470
10.00
00+1,
N.T.S.797.00
N/A
N/A
0.2915 0.2807 1.00
0.2806
2.0276
11.00
796.00
N/A
N/A
0.3028 1.00
0.3140
0.3027
2.3303
12.00
799.00
N/A
N/A
0.3371 0.3256 1.00
0.3254
2.6558
13.00
P ND AC
S ROA
600.00
N/A
N/A
0.3609 0.3490 1.00
0.3489
3.0047
14.00
+ CREST EL. 600
C
I
LI FEN
�;RACK
)
t'FREEBOARD
+ EUERDENCYSPILLWAYDEPTH EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
0o
NORMAL POOL 797
V FREEBOARD
f
--------------------
PLAN VIEW:
PROPOSED WWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 2
---------------
-------
50% CLEANOUT EL 793
SCALE: 1"= 50'
36" DIA. RISER -----EXISTING
SLOPE +
GRADE
850
.ACCESS
9 CUTOFF TRENCH
850
CRST
10 FT. AC SS
797.0
EXIS
ING GRADE
CREST EL. 800.0
50% CLEA
qOUT EL = 79
.0
POOEL = 797.0
N.T.S.
Z
50% CLEANOL T EL = 793.0
Z
O
. 786.0
2-1
O
Q 800
- -
800 Q
w
ti
w
W
CUTOFF
BOTTOM L. 786.0
W
750
CENTE LINE 1111IFF TRENCH
750
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
850
Z
O
Q 800
W
750
SCALE: 1"= 50'
10
.ACCESS
9 CUTOFF TRENCH
BOTTOM OF POND
CRST
EL. 800.0 POOL EL =
797.0
EXIS
ING GRADE
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
50% CLEA
qOUT EL = 79
.0
1 L
N.T.S.
TOP OF EMBANKMENT
BOTTOM E
. 786.0
2-1
CENTS
LINE CUTOFFTRENCH
SUITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
COMPACTED T095% OF STANDARD
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50
SCALE: 1"= 50'
750
3+00
NOTES
1. SEED AND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROL ON INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SIDESLOPES.
2. INSTALL MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDARD 6.65.
3. INSTALL SKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM BOTTOM OF BASIN.
4. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FT. BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPLING. NOT TO SCALE
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL
9 CUTOFF TRENCH
BOTTOM OF POND
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
18' DIA. BARREL PIPE
L�
FILL MATERIAL
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
TYPICAL DRO DROP INLET DETAIL
- --
1 L
N.T.S.
TOP OF EMBANKMENT
2-1
SUITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
COMPACTED T095% OF STANDARD
RISER STRUCTURE
.
TRASH RACK MIN��`'�'y`'�"�'' <EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
=1111=1111 '1111_
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
WITHIN .2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
FREBBonaD-)IT�I
1'MIN. �. 1 1111= L IIII=IIII=IIII- I,y_
CUTOFF
TRENCH DETAIL CONTENT
SKIMMER�pEM__lll1-111,)111=I111,IIP,1111=1')1=IIII=1111 .
iI_IIII=11iIJIil-ili-1111=IIII=11i1=1Tl-ill-ldl= °pFy
5,5°
2,_IIII=1111 JI11=1111=1111=IIII=IIII=IIII➢-JIII=:111=711th- �'
N.T.S.
=1111=1111=IIII=IIIIJIII-IIII.II_III-III-1=IIII�IIII=1111=IIII-
850
BARREL
PIPE
Z
O_
CLASS B STONE PAD JI CUT-OFF ANTI -SEEP
(4'X 4'X 1'MIN.) ANTIFLOTATION BLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW L STABILIZED
800
TRENCH COLLAR
OUTLET
>
2' DEEP
W
W
1.1
750
3+00
NOTES
1. SEED AND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROL ON INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SIDESLOPES.
2. INSTALL MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDARD 6.65.
3. INSTALL SKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM BOTTOM OF BASIN.
4. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FT. BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPLING. NOT TO SCALE
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL

NQRMAI: POOL EL. 797.0
50% CLEANOUT EL7-3-
STONE
IBMWWR SEDIMENT P
ENERGY ISSIPATOR -�
PR OSED EMERGENCY _ �+
PILLWAY
PROP ED E!5(IT CAA NEL
PROPOSED WWR DITCH N
` ` PROPOSE LUME NO- 8
PQNDAQCES$R 12
CHAIN LINK FE
..
k
PLAN VIEW: PROPOSED WWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 3
SCALE: 1-50'
CECUTOFF TRENCH
850 850 EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
1 FT. ACCESS
REST EL. 800.
50% C ANOUT EL = 192.66 FILL MATERIAL
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
0 POOL EL = 79 .0 0 - �-
Q 800 800-
> > iL
W
W OTTOM EL. 78&0 W
1 Via- CENTERLIN CUTOFF TRE CH W 2'
750 EXIS ING GRADE 750
SUITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 COMPACTED T095% OF STANDARD
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
WITHIN .2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
SECTION B -B' CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL CONTENT
850
O
Q 800
W
W
750
SCALE: 1-50'
Width
(ft)
10 FT. ACCE SS
AREA
(ac)
CREST EL. E 10.0 50% CLEANOUT EL = 792.66
INTERVAL
(ft)
POOL EL = 7970
ACC.
STORAGE
(ac -ft)
2 - - - - A
786.00
BOTTOM EL. 78( .0
N/A
EXISI ING GRADE
ll
CENTER INE CUT FF71RENCH
787.00
Mar
N/A
0.0980
0.0908
1.00
0.0908
0.0908
1.00
788.00
N/A
N/A
0.1126
��i+♦j���%'�!i•���i�
i��i
0.1053
0.1961
2.00
789.00
F'1JTffi
N/A
0.1272
0.1199
1.00
0.1199
'64 �,,
3.00
790.00
N/A
N/A
0.1417
01worMAN,
1.00
0.1344
0.4504
4.00
791.00
N/A
N/A
0.1564
0.1491
1.00
0.1491
0.5995
5.00
792.00
N/A
N/A
0.1710
10
1.00
0.1637
0.7632
6.00
793.00
1
FA
0.1857
0.1783
1.00
0.1783
0.9415
7.00
791.00
N/A
N/A
0.2004
0.1931
1.00
0.1930
1.1345
8.00
795.00
N/A
N/A
0.2151
0.2077
1.00
0.2077
1.3423
9.00
796.00
N/A
N/A
0.2299
0.2225
1.00
0.2225
1.5648
10.00
����%_
�=,���®� Imo;•.
N/A
0.2446
0.2373
1.00
0.2372
.�
�'j/
798.00
N/A
N/A
0.2594
0.2520
1.00
0.2520
2.0540
12.00
799.00
N/A
N/A
0.2743
0.2669
1.00
0.2668
2.3209
13.00
800.00
N/A
N/A
NQRMAI: POOL EL. 797.0
50% CLEANOUT EL7-3-
STONE
IBMWWR SEDIMENT P
ENERGY ISSIPATOR -�
PR OSED EMERGENCY _ �+
PILLWAY
PROP ED E!5(IT CAA NEL
PROPOSED WWR DITCH N
` ` PROPOSE LUME NO- 8
PQNDAQCES$R 12
CHAIN LINK FE
..
k
PLAN VIEW: PROPOSED WWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 3
SCALE: 1-50'
CECUTOFF TRENCH
850 850 EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
1 FT. ACCESS
REST EL. 800.
50% C ANOUT EL = 192.66 FILL MATERIAL
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
0 POOL EL = 79 .0 0 - �-
Q 800 800-
> > iL
W
W OTTOM EL. 78&0 W
1 Via- CENTERLIN CUTOFF TRE CH W 2'
750 EXIS ING GRADE 750
SUITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 COMPACTED T095% OF STANDARD
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
WITHIN .2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
SECTION B -B' CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL CONTENT
850
O
Q 800
W
W
750
SCALE: 1-50'
N.T.S.
850
O
800 Q
W
W
750
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00
SCALE: 1-50'
�1.00R r'sc6oard
1 1 0.31 R
20.00 fL
Channel Design (Non -Erodible)
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
Base Dimension: 20.00
Wetted Penmeter. 21.39
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 6.40
Channel Slope: 40.0000
Manning's n of Channel: 0.0423
Discharge: 63.59 cis
Depth of Flow: 0.31 feet
Velocity: 9.94 fps
Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
PROPOSED EXIT CHANNEL
N.T.S.
TRASH RACK
CREST EL. 800
1'FREEBOARD
EU ERGENCY SIP -DEPTH EMERGENCY SPILI
NORMAL POOL 797 t' FREEBOARD
50% CLEANOUT EL 792.66
30" DIA. RISER - EXISTING GRADE
800
799
798
797
796
c 795
794
793
792
w 791
790
789
786
787
786
0
STAGE STORAGE CURVE
WWR SEDIMENT POND NO.3
1 2 3
Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
STORAGE VOLUME COMPUTATIONS
WWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 3
ELEV.
(ft)
Width
(ft)
10 FT. ACCE SS
AREA
(ac)
CREST EL. E 10.0 50% CLEANOUT EL = 792.66
INTERVAL
(ft)
POOL EL = 7970
ACC.
STORAGE
(ac -ft)
2 - - - - A
786.00
BOTTOM EL. 78( .0
N/A
EXISI ING GRADE
CENTER INE CUT FF71RENCH
N.T.S.
850
O
800 Q
W
W
750
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00
SCALE: 1-50'
�1.00R r'sc6oard
1 1 0.31 R
20.00 fL
Channel Design (Non -Erodible)
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
Base Dimension: 20.00
Wetted Penmeter. 21.39
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 6.40
Channel Slope: 40.0000
Manning's n of Channel: 0.0423
Discharge: 63.59 cis
Depth of Flow: 0.31 feet
Velocity: 9.94 fps
Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
PROPOSED EXIT CHANNEL
N.T.S.
TRASH RACK
CREST EL. 800
1'FREEBOARD
EU ERGENCY SIP -DEPTH EMERGENCY SPILI
NORMAL POOL 797 t' FREEBOARD
50% CLEANOUT EL 792.66
30" DIA. RISER - EXISTING GRADE
800
799
798
797
796
c 795
794
793
792
w 791
790
789
786
787
786
0
STAGE STORAGE CURVE
WWR SEDIMENT POND NO.3
1 2 3
Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
STORAGE VOLUME COMPUTATIONS
WWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 3
ELEV.
(ft)
Width
(ft)
LENGTH
(ft)
AREA
(ac)
AVG.
AREA
(ac)
INTERVAL
(ft)
STORAGE
(ac -ft)
ACC.
STORAGE
(ac -ft)
STAGE
INTERVAL
(ft)
786.00
N/A
N/A
0.0837
787.00
N/A
N/A
0.0980
0.0908
1.00
0.0908
0.0908
1.00
788.00
N/A
N/A
0.1126
0.1053
1.00
0.1053
0.1961
2.00
789.00
N/A
N/A
0.1272
0.1199
1.00
0.1199
0.3160
3.00
790.00
N/A
N/A
0.1417
0.1344
1.00
0.1344
0.4504
4.00
791.00
N/A
N/A
0.1564
0.1491
1.00
0.1491
0.5995
5.00
792.00
N/A
N/A
0.1710
0.1637
1.00
0.1637
0.7632
6.00
793.00
N/A
N/A
0.1857
0.1783
1.00
0.1783
0.9415
7.00
791.00
N/A
N/A
0.2004
0.1931
1.00
0.1930
1.1345
8.00
795.00
N/A
N/A
0.2151
0.2077
1.00
0.2077
1.3423
9.00
796.00
N/A
N/A
0.2299
0.2225
1.00
0.2225
1.5648
10.00
797.00
N/A
N/A
0.2446
0.2373
1.00
0.2372
1.8020
11.00
798.00
N/A
N/A
0.2594
0.2520
1.00
0.2520
2.0540
12.00
799.00
N/A
N/A
0.2743
0.2669
1.00
0.2668
2.3209
13.00
800.00
N/A
N/A
0.2891
0.2817
1.00
0.2817
2.6025
14.00
BOTTOM OF POND J � � \- 18" DIA. BARREL PIPE
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
N.T.S.
TOP OF EMBANKMENT ---
RISER STRUCTURE
' MIN.
TRASH RACK _�EMERGENCYSPILLWAY
FREEBOARD- 11➢=1t=1111-1111'1111=
1'MIN. P1.- =1111=1111=1111=1111=1111=1111= zs_
SKIMMER-� �eEM llll=1!11=llll_1111,1�11,1111=1111=1111=1111,�s/
a-`'��� 1111 111111 11111�11I11➢IIIf IIII IIII101111111JI Illi IIIIIl111111111111111II 11111111 11 �M'0+
IIII-1111-IIII-IIIIJIII-IIII-IIII�IIil�Il11 I =1111=1111=IIII=1111-
BARREL
PIPE
CLASS B STONE PAD 4
(4'X 4' X Y MIN.) ANTIFLO a ION BLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW CUT-OFF gNTI-SEEP STABILIZED
TRENCH COLLAR
2' DEEP OUTLET
1.1
NOTES
1. SEED AND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROL ON INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SIDESLOPES.
2. INSTALLA MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDARD 6.65.
3. INSTALLSKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM BOTTOM OF BASIN.
4. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FT. BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPLING. NOT TO SCALE
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL

900
0
Q 850
W
W
800
0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
10 FT. A CCESS
BARREL
SECTION B -B'
CREST L 840.0
SCALE: 1" 50'
I OOft P'scboard
LEANOUT E = 833.37
900
r
�-
P OL EL=837.0
.ACCESS
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
CLASS B STONE PADx
(4'X 4'X 1' MIN.) ANTIFLO A IONBLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW L CUT-OFF
TRENCH
CREST
CR STEL 840.0
- -
- �-
50% CLEANOI T EL = 833.37
BOI
OM EL. 826.0
EXIS ING GRADE
1 L
1 1.OA R
POO L EL =837.0 850
1[1
Q
W
DE
W
ti
�B.11M
W
EL. 626.0 EXISTING RADE
2. INSTALLA MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDARD 6.65.
H IN IN F N E
NTERLINE CUTOFF TRENCH 800
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
0+00
2
2
4. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FT. BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPLING.
SECTION A -A'
WITHIN .2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
SCALE: 1" 50'
CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL CONTENT
O 1C E S O D
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL
daooR
/
Channel Design (Non -Erodible)
R
S D
R C N
STAGE STORAGE CURVE
o
y`OQ
Channel T Trapezoidal, E side Slopes
wWR SEDIMENT POND N0.4
r)?\°
Dimensions, Left Side Slope 2900:1
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
CE TE LI
F T
0a
Base Dimension: 40.00
Wetted Perimeter. 44.64
639
OP
OF STRUCTURE
Area ofwened cross section: 43.64
O
R
EDIM NTP
4
/
636
EMERGENCY S
(636.00)
Channel Slope: 0.1000
837
PRINCIPAL
SPILLWAY (8337.00)7.00)
Manning's n of Channel: 0.0423
636
PO
�/ `\\
Discharge: 47.75 cfs
664
STO
I
Depth of Flow: 1.04 feet
o
833
50% CLEANO TEL 833.37
/ , =T
OQ�
Velocity: 1.09fps
832
Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap
831
/ m
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
w
630
829
PROPOSED EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
828
627
A
1
N.T.S.
.DOR F, -board
626
I` _
0
1
2
_
A
1�
Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
\
J1
0.31R
�
2 2
STORAGE VOLUME COMPUTATIONS
R P S D
F L
o'_
-_ -�� �
1s.00R
I
WR SEDIMENT POND N0.4
W
m
Channel Design (Non -Erodible)
/
1
ELEV.
Width
LENGTH
AREA AVG. INTERVAL
STORAGE
ACC.
STAGE
1
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
Dimensions Left Side Slope 2.00:1
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ac) AREA (ft)
(ac -ft)
STORAGE
INTERVAL
'j
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
(ac)
(ac -ft)
(ft)
C E T
3. 7
Base Dimension: 15.00
i
e(C
Wetted Perimeter. 16.39
826.00
N/A
N/A
0.0287
0.0355 1.00
0.0353
0.0353
1.00
Y
Area of wetted Cross Section : 4.64
627.00
N/A
N/A
0.0422
0.0492 1.00
0.0491
0.0844
2.00
O
y
Channel Slope: 40.0000
626.00
629.00
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.0561
0.0632 1 .00
0.0703
0.0632
0.1476
3.00
P S D
N
Y
°s�
Manning's n of Channel: 0.0423
0.0777 1.00
0.0776
0.2252
4.00
S IL
Y
-4-
9`'o
830.00
N/A
N/A
0.0850
OA
Discharge: 47.76 cfs
831.00
N/A
N/A
0.1000 0.0925 1.00
0.0924
0.3177
5.00
S
Depth of Flow: 0.31 feet
632.00
N/A
N/A
0.1153 0.1076 1.00
0.1076
0.4252
6.00
B'
�q$
Velocity: 9.86 fps
633.00
N/A
N/A
0.1310 0.1231 1.00
0.1231
0.5484
7.00
P
XI
H
E
&0p
Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap
834.00
N/A
N/A
0.1470 0.1390 1.00
0.1390
0.6873
8.00
°s
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
835.00
N/A
N/A
0.1635 0.1552 1.00
0.1552
0.8426
9.00
�O
q
836.00
N/A
N/A
0.1718 1.00
0.1802
0.1718
1.0144
10.00
837.00
N/A
N/A
0.1974 0.1666 1.00
0.1888
1.2031
11.00
m
PROPOSED EXIT CHANNEL
838.00
N/A
N/A
0.2146 0.2061 1.00
0.2061
1.4092
12.00
N.T.S.
839.00
N/A
N/A
0.2327 0.2237 1.00
0.2237
1.6330
13.00
840.00
N/A
N/A
0.2509 0.2418 1.00
0.2418
1.8747
14.00
ti
P
U E O. 1
+ CREST EL. 640
J
/-
�;RACK
1 1'FREEBOARD
+ EUERGENDY
SPITL DEPTH EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
R I O. 7
NORMAL POOL 837
1' FREEI D HD
PLAN VIEW:
PROPOSED WWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 4
50% CLEANOUT EL 833.37
SCALE: 1" 50'
30" DIA. RISER
SLOPE+
EXISTING GRADE
900
0
Q 850
W
W
800
0+00
0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
10 FT. A CCESS
BARREL
SECTION B -B'
CREST L 840.0
SCALE: 1" 50'
50%C
LEANOUT E = 833.37
900
r
�-
P OL EL=837.0
.ACCESS
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
CLASS B STONE PADx
(4'X 4'X 1' MIN.) ANTIFLO A IONBLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW L CUT-OFF
TRENCH
CREST
CR STEL 840.0
- -
- �-
50% CLEANOI T EL = 833.37
BOI
OM EL. 826.0
EXIS ING GRADE
Z
O
CENTER INE CUTOFF TRENCH
0+00
0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
2+50
BARREL
SECTION B -B'
SCALE: 1" 50'
PIPE
900
900
r
�-
.ACCESS
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
CLASS B STONE PADx
(4'X 4'X 1' MIN.) ANTIFLO A IONBLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW L CUT-OFF
TRENCH
CREST
CR STEL 840.0
- -
- �-
50% CLEANOI T EL = 833.37
OUTLET
Z
O
1 L
Z
O
Q 850
POO L EL =837.0 850
1[1
Q
W
DE
W
ti
�B.11M
W
EL. 626.0 EXISTING RADE
2. INSTALLA MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDARD 6.65.
800
NTERLINE CUTOFF TRENCH 800
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
0+00
0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
4. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FT. BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPLING.
SECTION A -A'
WITHIN .2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
SCALE: 1" 50'
900
0
850 Q
W
W
800
3+00 3+50 4+00
BOTTOM OF POND 18• DIA. BARREL PIPE
TYPICAL IDRROOP INLET DETAIL
N.T.S.
SKIMMER
TOP OF EMBANKMENT
�
MIN. o
TRASH RACK `'- <-EMERGENCYSPILLWAY
7 FREEBOARD- L )III IIII IIII 1 Iv
1'MIN. . w IIJ111=1111=IIII=IIV=1111_1111 �,.
9 CUTOFF TRENCH
i� 4
BARREL
PIPE
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
r
�-
FILL MATERIAL
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
CLASS B STONE PADx
(4'X 4'X 1' MIN.) ANTIFLO A IONBLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW L CUT-OFF
TRENCH
ANTI -SEEP STABILIZED
COLLAR
- -
- �-
2' DEEP
OUTLET
1 L
1.1
NOTES
2'�
1. SEED AND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROL ON INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SIDESLOPES.
SUITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
2. INSTALLA MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDARD 6.65.
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
3. INSTALL SKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM BOTTOM OF BASIN.
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
4. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FT. BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPLING.
NOT TO SCALE
WITHIN .2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL CONTENT
N.T.S.
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL

900
Z
O
Q 850
W
W
800
0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
10 FT. A CCESS
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
I OOft P'scboard
CREST L 840.0
SCALE: 1" 50'
50% CLEANOUTE =833.37
900
P OL EL=837.0
.ACCESS
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
-
CR STEL 840.0
Z
1 1.02 R
EXIS
ING GRADE
CENTER INE CUTOFF TRENCH
O
Q 850
POO L EL =837.0 850
Q
W
W
Ed?
ti
W
SCRE ERM NO. 3
BOTi MEL. 826.0 EXISTING RADE
800
C NTERLINE CUE.OFF TRENCH 800
0+00
0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
SECTION A -A'
SCALE: 1" 50'
90.00 fL
Channel Design (Non -Erodible)
STAGE STORAGE CURVE
WWR SEDIMENT POND NO.5
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
CHAI INK FENCE
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
Base Dimension: 90.00
640
P OF STRUCTURE
P NDA ESS ROAD
639
80.00)
Wetted Perimeter. 94.57
ROP
SED R CH NO. 10
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 94.11
836
EMER ENCY SPILL
AY (836.00)
Channel Slope: 0.1000
837
RINCIPAL SP LLWAY (837.
0)
WW
EDI NT DNO.
Mannings n of channel: 0.0423
836
Discharge: 104.20 cfs
635
Depth of Flow: 1.02 feet
-
Velocity: 1.11 fps
834
w
50% CLEAN UT EL 833.3
50% CL NOU
L. 83 .
J r
Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap
833
I`
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
832
/
831
PROPOSED EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
830
N.T.S.
ORMAL OL EL. 7.0
/
r I.ODa F,-br>ard
829
4ZI
RO
ED E GENIC
S WAY
06
1 L_ eon 1
Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
OF E
HA L
�/
A 1�
-2-11
2 2
CENTE CUTO REN
g0
20. 00 R
STORAGE VOLUME COMPUTATIONS
r
P OSED PRI L
/
WWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 5
AY
J
I�
Channel Design (Non -Erodible)
STONE E Y DISSIPATOR
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
ELEV.
Width
LENGTH
AREA AVG. INTERVAL
STORAGE
ACC.
STAGE
Z
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ac) AREA (ft)
(ac -ft)
STORAGE
INTERVAL
PR OSED WWR DITCH
Right Right Side Slope 2.00:1
(ac)
(ac -ft)
(ft)
I/ --
Base Dimension: 20.00
POND ACCESS
J
/
I%
Wetted Perimeter. 21.86
829.00
N/A
N/A
0.3901
J
I`
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 6.66
630.00
N/A
N/A
0.4015 1.00
0.4129
0.4013
0.4013
1.00
5�'
o
631.00
N/A
N/A
0.4363 0.4246 1.00
0.4246
0.8259
2.00
tid
Channel Slope: 0
Mannings n of Channel: 0.0423
832.00
N/A
N/A
0.4482 1.00
0.4601
0.4482
1.2741
3.00
!G�
633.00
N/A
N/A
0.4642 0.4721 1.00
0.4721
1.7462
4.00
Discharge: 104.20 cfs
834.00
N/A
N/A
0.5087 0.4964 1.00
0.4964
2.2426
5.00
/
Depth of Flow: 0.42 feet0.5211
635.00
N/A
N/A
1.00
0.5336
0.5211
2.7637
6.00
Velocity: 12.00
y fps
836.00
N/A
N/A
0.5586 0.5462 1.00
0.5461
3.3096
7.00
Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap
837.00
N/A
N/A
0.5843 0.5716 1.00
0.5715
3.8814
8.00
/
842B'
/
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
838.00
N/A
N/A
0.5972 1.00
0.6102
0.5973
4.4786
9.00
850
639.00
N/A
N/A
0.6365 0.6233 1.00
0.6234
5.1020
10.00
RO OSED BAFFLES
/
PROPOSED EXIT CHANNEL
840.00
N/A
N/A
0.6632 0.6499 1.00
0.6498
5.7518
11.00
860
N.T.S.
870
g
ROPOSED FLU 4 ��
`7°
9
+ CREST EL 840
BENCH E
g9�
�;RACK
)
1'FREEBDARD
+ EMERGEHCYSPILLWAYDEPTH EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
NORMAL POOL 837
t' FREEBDARD
PLAN VIEW: PROPOSED WWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 5
_
-------
50% CLEANOUT EL 833.39
SCALE: 1" = 50'
48" DIA. RISER- _
EXISTING GRADE
900
Z
O
Q 850
W
W
800
0+00
0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
10 FT. A CCESS
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
SECTION B -B'
CREST L 840.0
SCALE: 1" 50'
50% CLEANOUTE =833.37
900
P OL EL=837.0
.ACCESS
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
-
CR STEL 840.0
Z
BO OM EL. 826.0
EXIS
ING GRADE
CENTER INE CUTOFF TRENCH
0+00
0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
2+50
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
SECTION B -B'
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
SCALE: 1" 50'
900
900
SUITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
.ACCESS
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
CR STEL 840.0
Z
[1C
50% CLEANOI T EL = 833.37
Z
O
O
Q 850
POO L EL =837.0 850
Q
W
W
Ed?
ti
W
BOTi MEL. 826.0 EXISTING RADE
800
C NTERLINE CUE.OFF TRENCH 800
0+00
0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
SECTION A -A'
SCALE: 1" 50'
900
Z
O
850 Q
W
W
800
3+00 3+50 4+00
N.T.S.
BOTTOM OF POND J F _ I _�
30" DIA. BARREL PIPE
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
N.T.S.
RISER
SKIMMER
TRASH
TOP OF EMBANKMENT
EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
BARREL
PIPE
CLASS B STONE PAD -T CUT-OFF ANTI -SEEP
(4'X 4'XY MIN.) ANTIFLOTATION BLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW LTRENCH COLLAR STABILIZED
2' DEEP OUTLET
1.1
NOTES
1. SEED AND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROL ON INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SIDESLOPES.
2. INSTALLA MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDARD 6.65.
3. INSTALLSKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM BOTTOM OF BASIN.
4. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FT. BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPLING. NOT TO SCALE
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL
(jCUTOFF TRENCH
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
FILL MATERIAL
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
2-
SUITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
WITHIN .2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL CONTENT
N.T.S.
BOTTOM OF POND J F _ I _�
30" DIA. BARREL PIPE
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
N.T.S.
RISER
SKIMMER
TRASH
TOP OF EMBANKMENT
EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
BARREL
PIPE
CLASS B STONE PAD -T CUT-OFF ANTI -SEEP
(4'X 4'XY MIN.) ANTIFLOTATION BLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW LTRENCH COLLAR STABILIZED
2' DEEP OUTLET
1.1
NOTES
1. SEED AND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROL ON INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SIDESLOPES.
2. INSTALLA MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDARD 6.65.
3. INSTALLSKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM BOTTOM OF BASIN.
4. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FT. BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPLING. NOT TO SCALE
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL

OFF",
1\1 0
QMMM�
Q' 0ME

R

900
850
z
O
Q 800
w
I
750
700
Ow0
900
850
z
O
Q 800
W
I
750
700
0+00
20' BENCH
1Z�WASILROCK (OR PLA'1'IER)E— 2 % SLOPE
'
L—
T.'i 2
(OR PLA'1 IEW
BENCH / SLOPE DETAIL
N.I.S.
1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00
EWR SECTION NO. 1
SCALE: 1-50'
900
2+00
z
1
5+00 6+00
7+00 8+00 9+1
850
EWR SECTION NO. 2
850
z
SCALE: 1-50'
O_
EWRSEDIM
z
60'11AULROAll
800
Q
FEWRIITCHNO,l
1/4"—?
1
O
W
I
Z
2 PROPOSEDPLRM
800 Q
— _
3%SIDPF, —�
750
llRA1NACL lll'1'C11
>
---
--
PROPOSED 1 - 30" llIA. CMP
TYPICAL WASTE FILL HAULROAD DETAIL
PROPOSEDEWRDNNCIINO.6
W
TYPICAL PIPE DETAIL
NTS.
YROYOS1iU ACCESS ROAU
PROYOSL'.0 LOW WA'1'LR CROSSING
YRO.
750
2.0' MIN.
700
9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00
900
2+00
3+00 4+00
5+00 6+00
7+00 8+00 9+1
850
EWR SECTION NO. 2
z
SCALE: 1-50'
O_
EWRSEDIM
NT PONDNO.3
60'11AULROAll
800
Q
1/4"—?
1
W
I
Z
2 PROPOSEDPLRM
3%SIDPF, —�
750
llRA1NACL lll'1'C11
700
PROPOSED 1 - 30" llIA. CMP
TYPICAL WASTE FILL HAULROAD DETAIL
1+00
2+00
3+00 4+00
5+00 6+00
7+00 8+00 9+1
EWR SECTION NO. 2
SCALE: 1-50'
PROPOSED EWRDFI'CHNO. 6 SMIN. COVER
60'11AULROAll
1� �1 HAULROAD
1/4"—?
1
YL'.R POO'I' SLOYli
1
Z
2 PROPOSEDPLRM
3%SIDPF, —�
llRA1NACL lll'1'C11
PROPOSED 1 - 30" llIA. CMP
TYPICAL WASTE FILL HAULROAD DETAIL
PROPOSEDEWRDNNCIINO.6
N.I.S.
TYPICAL PIPE DETAIL
NTS.
YROYOS1iU ACCESS ROAU
PROYOSL'.0 LOW WA'1'LR CROSSING
YRO.
( LL. 777.() )
2.0' MIN.
1 J 1
(OR PLA'1'1'LR'1'O MA'1'Cll ROAU CRAUL)
(OR PLA:I-ILR'1'O MA'1'Cll ROAD CRADL)
20'MIN.
Ch..d Lvting: 18" ROCK RIPRAP
PROPOSED LOW WATER CROSSING
N.I.S.
ACCESS ROAD

SCALE: V=50'
850
850
z
O
Z
P OF FLUME
OF FLUME
TOP OF FLUME
zz
O
850
/-T,)P
O
ul
0
O
z
850
z
O
GROB ILD ROCK RLPRAY
EWR FLUME NO.1
2.0
0
z
O
Q
800
5.0
GROU'I'1LU ROCK RIk'RAY
OF
800 Q
w
w
GROU'I'1LU ROCK RIk'L2AP
°
w
w
BOTTOM OF F LUME
r
r
7500
750
BOTTOM OFF
UME
750
O
0+00
0+50 1+00
SCALE: V=50'
850
850
z
T
P OF FLUME
OF FLUME
z
�
O
z
O
M OF FLUME
/-T,)P
O
ul
0
O
EWR FLUME NO.3
O
Q 800
GROB ILD ROCK RLPRAY
EWR FLUME NO.1
2.0
5.0
800
>
2.0
5.0
GROU'I'1LU ROCK RIk'RAY
OF
j
w
GROU'I'1LU ROCK RIk'L2AP
W
w
r
w
750
BOTTOM OFF
UME
O
750
0+00
0+50
1+00
1+50
2+00
EWR FLUME NO. 5
SCALE: V=50'
900 900
850
w 800
750
850
O
Q
w
800 w
750
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50
EWR FLUME NO. 2
SCALE: V=50'
850 850
O
~¢ 800
W
W
BOTT
750
O
800 ~¢
>
W
W
750
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50
EWR FLUME NO. 6
SCALE: V=50'
900 ^^^
850
z
O
Q
w
w 800
750
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50
EWR FLUME NO. 3
SCALE: V=50'
O
Q
w
w
NOTES:
CHANNEL YROI'EC'1'ION SILALL BL ACCOMYLISl ILD BY'1'11 L
FOLLOWING MEI'llOD. A GR1LA'1'ER YROI'EC'1'ION CAN BE SUBS'I'1'I'UI'1:U
FOR A LESSER CIIANNL'.L PRO'1'EC'1'ION SYECIFICA'1'ON
'1'111CK BLANKUION '1'lllL BCYI'1'OM ANll SIDES OF 111L CHANNEL .'1'115
ROCK WILL BEA DURABLE, WELL GRADED ROCK WI'1'll A MEDIAN
DIAMLCI'ER OF'I'WELVE (12) INCHES. I WEN I Y -FIVE YERCEN'I BY
WEIG11'1' OF 111L ROCK WILL UE ONE ANll ONL-11ALF (1 1/2)'I'IMES'111E
MLUTAN DIAM1L'1'1LK Olt SLIGIl'I'LY LARGER . VILMAJERIALS11ALL
'BILN UE SLUS11 CRO U'1'1LU WI'1'llA S'I'ANDARU GROUTML(I'URE Olt
ONE APPROVLDBY'111L ENGINEER. SHALE OR ANY MATERIAL 111KI
WILL SLAKE IN WATER SHALE NOT BE USED.
FLUME
DLVI'll
(F..1. )
z
T
P OF FLUME
s
U
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK RLPRAY
EWR FLUME NO.2
M OF FLUME
5.0
O
ul
0
O
EWR FLUME NO.3
O
800 ~¢
>
W
W
750
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50
EWR FLUME NO. 6
SCALE: V=50'
900 ^^^
850
z
O
Q
w
w 800
750
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50
EWR FLUME NO. 3
SCALE: V=50'
O
Q
w
w
NOTES:
CHANNEL YROI'EC'1'ION SILALL BL ACCOMYLISl ILD BY'1'11 L
FOLLOWING MEI'llOD. A GR1LA'1'ER YROI'EC'1'ION CAN BE SUBS'I'1'I'UI'1:U
FOR A LESSER CIIANNL'.L PRO'1'EC'1'ION SYECIFICA'1'ON
'1'111CK BLANKUION '1'lllL BCYI'1'OM ANll SIDES OF 111L CHANNEL .'1'115
ROCK WILL BEA DURABLE, WELL GRADED ROCK WI'1'll A MEDIAN
DIAMLCI'ER OF'I'WELVE (12) INCHES. I WEN I Y -FIVE YERCEN'I BY
WEIG11'1' OF 111L ROCK WILL UE ONE ANll ONL-11ALF (1 1/2)'I'IMES'111E
MLUTAN DIAM1L'1'1LK Olt SLIGIl'I'LY LARGER . VILMAJERIALS11ALL
'BILN UE SLUS11 CRO U'1'1LU WI'1'llA S'I'ANDARU GROUTML(I'URE Olt
ONE APPROVLDBY'111L ENGINEER. SHALE OR ANY MATERIAL 111KI
WILL SLAKE IN WATER SHALE NOT BE USED.
FLUME
DLVI'll
(F..1. )
BO'1'1'OM WOTI'll
(F..1. )
CIIANNEL YROI'EC'1'ION
EWR FLUME NO.1
2.0
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK RLPRAY
EWR FLUME NO.2
2.0
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK RLPRAY
EWR FLUME NO.3
2.0
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK RLPRAY
EWR FLUME NO.1
2.0
5.0
GROB ILD ROCK RLPRAY
EWR FLUME NO.5
2.0
5.0
GROU'I'1LU ROCK RIk'RAY
EWR FLUME NO.6
2.0
5.0
GROU'I'1LU ROCK RIk'L2AP
900 900
850
w 800
750
850
800 w
750
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50
EWR FLUME NO. 4
SCALE: V=50'
SEE C11AR1'
�1
2 2
5'
Channel Lvting: GROU1'1LU ROCK RLPRAP
TYPICAL FLUME DETAIL

900
0
Z
900
O TOP OF ITCH m Z
O
- 800 3 800
10 w
W r w
BOTTOM OF DITCH J
700 00 700
0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00
EWR DITCH NO. 1
S('.AI F- 1 _'Inn'
S'I'AI'ION
FROM '1'O
11-111
(FE)
DOI'1'OM WID'1'll
(F"1')
CIIANNEL PROI'LC'1'ION
00+00 08+12
A.0
0.0
ROCK RIPRAP
900
0
Z
900
O
DLPI'll
(F'1'.)
DOI'1'OM WID'1'll
(F'1')
Cl IANNEL PROI'LC'1'ION
00+00
01+51
3.0
0.0
ROCK RIPRAP
01+51
11+85
T
P OF DITCH
ROCK RIPRAP
11+85
12+A3
3.0
0.0
ROCK RIPRAP
12+A3
13+00
3.0
m
GROB ILD ROCK RIPRAP
Z
O
Q 800
3.5
0.0
ROCK RIPRAP
Z
O
_ _ __________
-----
N
800
w
° O
Q 800
J_-____
--- _
-_
°
w
W
800
r
w
700
BOTTOM
O DITCH
Q
J
700
0+00
1+00
2+00
3+00
4+00
5+00
6+00
7+00
8+00
9+00
10+00
11+00
12+00
13+00
14+00
15+00
W
EWR DITCH NO. 4
SCALE- 1" = 100'
S'I'AI'ION
FROM '1'O
DLPI'll
(F'1'.)
DOI'1'OM WID'1'll
(F'1')
Cl IANNEL PROI'LC'1'ION
00+00
01+51
3.0
0.0
ROCK RIPRAP
01+51
11+85
A.5
0.0
ROCK RIPRAP
11+85
12+A3
3.0
0.0
ROCK RIPRAP
12+A3
13+00
3.0
0.0
GROB ILD ROCK RIPRAP
13+00
1A+20
3.5
0.0
ROCK RIPRAP
900
900
0
Z
900
Z mZ
O O
Q 800 3 800 Q
w
w
I � w w
700 BOTTOM OF ITCH 0 700
0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00
EWR DITCH NO. 2
SCALE- 1" = 100'
S'1'AMON DLVIll BOl'1'OM Wit) 111 Cl IANNEL PROI'LC'1'ION
FROM '1'O (FE) (F"1')
00+00 02+65 2.5 0.0 ROCK RIPRAP
02+65 02+8A 3.0 0.0 ROCK RIPRAP
0
Z
900
Ch..d Lvting: 18" ROCK RIPRAP
OR GROB ILD ROCK RIPRAP
llL III VARIES
1� �1
z z
TYPICAL EWR DITCH NO. 1 - NO. 6 DETAILS
Z-
DLPI'll
IF E)
DOI'1'OM WIll'1'll Cl IANNEL PROI'LC'1'ION
IF..1. )
00+00 01+35
3.0
0.0 CRO U' IED ROCK RIPRAP
01+35 08+91
3.0
0.0 ROCK RIPRAP
08+91 09+71
3.0
0.0 GROB ILD ROCK RIPRAP
09+71 11+80
3.0
0.0 ROCK RIPRAP
11+80 19+78
3.5
TOP
OF ITCH
Z
O
_ _ __________
-----
° O
Q 800
800
Q
J
-
W
_
700
BOI TOM OF
DITC
'o 700
0+00
1+00
2+00
3+00
4+00
5+00
6+00
7+00
8+00
9+00
10+00
11+00
12+00
13+00
14+00
15+00
16+00
17+00
18+00
19,00
20+00
900
Z
O
Q 800
w
I
700
0,
EWR DITCH NO. 5
SCALE- 1" = 100'
S'I'AI'ION
FROM '1'O
DLPI'll
IF E)
DOI'1'OM WIll'1'll Cl IANNEL PROI'LC'1'ION
IF..1. )
00+00 01+35
3.0
0.0 CRO U' IED ROCK RIPRAP
01+35 08+91
3.0
0.0 ROCK RIPRAP
08+91 09+71
3.0
0.0 GROB ILD ROCK RIPRAP
09+71 11+80
3.0
0.0 ROCK RIPRAP
11+80 19+78
3.5
0.0 ROCK RIk'RAk'
EWR DITCH NO. 6
S'I'AI'ION DEFI'll DOI'1'OM WIll'1'll GIIANNEL PROI'LC'1'ION
FROM '1'O IF E) IF..1. )
00+00 01+75 3.5 0.0 ROCK RIPRAP
01+75 09+57 3.0 11
ROCK RIPRAP
900
Z
O
800 Q
w
I
700
50
9(
0
Z
900
Z mZ
O O
Q 800 3 800 Q
> o >
w - - w
w r w
BOTTOM OF DI H
700 00 700
0+00 1+00 2+00
EWR DITCH NO. 3
SrAI F- 1" _'Inn'
S'1'A'1'ION
FROM '1'O
llEPI'll
DOI'1'OM WIU'1'll
Cl IANNEL PROI'LC'1'ION
00+00 01+62
2.5
0.0
ROCK RIPRAP
NOTES
Cl IANNEL PROI'LC'1'ION SHALL DE ACCOMPLISLI ill BY ONE OF'I11L
FOLLOWING ML'1'11ODS ORA COMDINA'1'ION'1'l0'.RLOF. AGR1iA'1'LR
PRO '1'LC'1'ION CAN DE SUBS 'I'1'I'U'ILD FOR A LESSER Cl IANNEL PRO 'ILC '1'ION
SPECIF'ICA'TION . SEE Cl hlltl'S FOR SPECIFIED ML'1'11011 .
0N'I1IL DOI'1'OM AND SIDES OF'I11L CIIANNEL .'1'lllL ROCK WILL DE A
DURABLE ROCK WI'1'll A MEDIAN DIAML'IER (ll50) OF'IWILLVE (12) IN.
'1'WEN'1'Y-FIVE PLRCEN'1BY WEIG11'1' OF'BI L ROCK WILL DE ONE AND
ONE-HALF (1 1/2)'1'IMLS'1'HL MLDIAN DIAMLIER OR SLICIl'1'LY
LARGER .'1'llli REMAINING SEVENTY-FIVE (75) PLRCEN'I WILL DE
WELL -GRADED MAT i CONSISTING OF SUFYICILA I' ROCK SMALL
ENOUGH 10 FILL 'DIE VOIDS BUI WL1LN'1'IIIL LARGER ROCKS. SHALL
OR MA'1'LRIAL'1'11KI WILL SLAKE IN WA'1'LR SHALL NOT DL USED.
'1'IIICK DLANKL'1' ON'I10'. DOI'1'OM ANll SIDES OF'I1IL CHANNILL .'1'lllL
ROCK WILL DL A DURABLE, WELL GRADED ROCK WI'1'll A MEDIAN
DIAME'1'1LR OF'I'WILLVE (12) INCIOLS .'1'W1LN'1'Y-FIVE PLRCLN'1' DY
WEIG11'1' OF'I11L ROCK WILL DL ONE AND ONE-HALF (1 1/2)'1'IMLS'1'1 IF
MEDIAN DIAMLIER OR SLIGIl'1'LY LARGER. '1'IIF. MA'I'DRA SHALL
'THEN DL SLUSH GROUTED WI'1'll A S'T'ANDARD GROUT' MIXTURE OR
ONE APPROVEDDY'11IF. ENGINEER. SHALL OR ANY MA'1'LRhll.'1'11KI
WILL SLAKE IN WA'1'LR SLIALL NOT DL USED.
3.) WORKING EDGE DriGILES WILL DL CONS'1'RUC'1'1:D
AND MAIN'1'AINEll AS NECESSARY 10 CONTAIN DESIGN FLOW.

LSP FOPOSED EY NO -1 \
MAL POOL EL. 2.0
PROPO EMERG_ CY
SPIY
_ _ - _ _ _ A -
PROPOS -XIT HA E
PROPMED LOW WAT CR SS G
STONE N _YD SI
PRO OS DF
SP LLV
50% LEA OL
850
WR ED
NT RINE
IN INK F N E
/
/
t
x
800
PLAN VIEW: PROPOSED EWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 1
SCALE: 1" 50'
850
6-O
PROPOSED EWR
N.T.S.
EXISTIN GRADE
1
1 0.97 R
1 1
0.35 R
30.00 R
ACC.
STORAGE
(ac -ft)
.ACCESS
771.00
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
N/A
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
C
CRE EL. 777.7
Base Dimension: 15.00
Wetted Perimeter. 34.32
Wetted Penmeter. 16.58
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 30.83
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 5.56
Channel Slope: 0.1000
0
C
50% ANOUT EL 762.04
Manning's n of Channel: 0.0423
Discharge: 31.88 cfs
Discharge:59.63 cfs
0
Depth of Flow: 0.35 feet
Velocity: 1.03 fps
Q 800
POOLE =782.0
Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
800
Q
PROPOSED EXIT CHANNEL
N/A
W
0.1386
-TRASH RACK
0.1384
0.3760
3.00
W
N/A
rLCUTOFF TRENCH
w
0.1525
1.00
0.1525
0.5285
4.00
Ed
N/A
N/A
0.1748
0.1673
BOTTOM EL. 1.0
0.1672
0.6957
5.00
777.00
N/A
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
750
CENTER NE CUTOFFT ENCH
1.00
0.1626
750
6.00
778.00
N/A
N/A
0+00
0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
2+50
0.1988
FILL MATERIAL
7.00
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
N/A
SECTION B -B'
0.2242
0.2156
1.00
1 L
1.2927
8.00
SCALE: 1"= 50'
N/A
N/A
0.2421
0.2331
1.00
0.2331
850
9.00
850
N/A
N/A
2-1
I�
1.00
0.2513
1.7770
XISTING GRADE
782.00
N/A
N/A
0.2798
0.2702
1.00
0.2702
10 ET. CCESS
11.00
783.00
N/A
N/A
SUITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
0.2898
1.00
CREST EL. 777.7
2.3369
12.00
784.00
N/A
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
0
0.3101
50%CLEA OUT EL 782.
0.3100
2.6469
0
785.00
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
WITHIN t2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
Q 800
0.3417
POOL EL = 82.0
1.00
800
a
CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL CONTENT
W
W
N.T.S.
Ed
z ti
Ed
OTTOM EL. 77 .0
750
CENTERLIN CUTOFF TRE CH 1
1 750
0+00
0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
2+50
SECTION A -A'
SCALE: 1" 50'
N.T.S.
100ft P'scboard
1
1 0.97 R
1 1
0.35 R
30.00 R
ACC.
STORAGE
(ac -ft)
Channel Design (Non -Erodible)
771.00
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
N/A
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
Base Dimension: 30.00
Base Dimension: 15.00
Wetted Perimeter. 34.32
Wetted Penmeter. 16.58
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 30.83
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 5.56
Channel Slope: 0.1000
Channel Slope: 40.0000
Manning's n of Channel: 0.0423
Manning's n of Channel: 0.0423
Discharge: 31.88 cfs
Discharge:59.63 cfs
Depth of Flow: 0.97 feet
Depth of Flow: 0.35 feet
Velocity: 1.03 fps
Velocity: 10.72 fps
Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap
Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
PROPOSED EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
PROPOSED EXIT CHANNEL
N.T.S.
Width
(ft)
LENGTH
(ft)
1..00fr rtccboard
1 1
0.35 R
2 2
ACC.
STORAGE
(ac -ft)
15.00 R
771.00
Channel Design (Non -Erodible)
N/A
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
Base Dimension: 15.00
772.00
Wetted Penmeter. 16.58
N/A
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 5.56
0.1126
Channel Slope: 40.0000
0.1125
Manning's n of Channel: 0.0423
1.00
Discharge:59.63 cfs
N/A
Depth of Flow: 0.35 feet
0.1317
Velocity: 10.72 fps
1.00
Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap
0.2376
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
774.00
PROPOSED EXIT CHANNEL
N/A
N.T.S.
0.1386
-TRASH RACK
0.1384
+ CREST EL. 785
1'FREEBOARD
+ EUERCERCYsaaLwnvoEaTR EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
NORMAL POOL 782 t' FREEBOARD
----------------- -- -
50% CLEANOUT EL 777.7 rK
24" DIA. RISER EXISTING GRADE
SLOPE-
BOTTOM OF POND -/ '\- 18" DIA. BARREL PIPE
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
N.T.S.
TOP OF EM BAN KMENT�
TRASH RACK -' "'""<- EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
7 111L e%naD- IIP=1�1�'=illylill=1'il--
.,n�/ 1•miR. .w IJIILIIII�I!II=1111=1111=1III= z.
SKIMMER
785
784
783
782
781
780
779
776
777
Ei 776
775
774
773
772
771
0
STAGE STORAGE CURVE
EWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 1
1 2 3
Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
STORAGE VOLUME COMPUTATIONS
EWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 1
STRUCTURE
783.00)
ELEV.
(ft)
Width
(ft)
LENGTH
(ft)
AREA
(ac)
AVG.
AREA
(ac)
INTERVAL
(ft)
STORAGE
(ac -ft)
ACC.
STORAGE
(ac -ft)
STAGE
INTERVAL
(ft)
771.00
N/A
N/A
0.1065
772.00
N/A
N/A
0.1187
0.1126
1.00
0.1125
0.1125
1.00
773.00
N/A
N/A
0.1317
0.1252
1.00
0.1251
0.2376
2.00
774.00
N/A
N/A
0.1454
0.1386
1.00
0.1384
0.3760
3.00
775.00
N/A
N/A
0.1597
0.1525
1.00
0.1525
0.5285
4.00
776.00
N/A
N/A
0.1748
0.1673
1.00
0.1672
0.6957
5.00
777.00
N/A
N/A
0.1906
0.1627
1.00
0.1626
0.6764
6.00
778.00
N/A
N/A
0.2070
0.1988
1.00
0.1988
1.0771
7.00
779.00
N/A
N/A
0.2242
0.2156
1.00
0.2156
1.2927
8.00
780.00
N/A
N/A
0.2421
0.2331
1.00
0.2331
1.5257
9.00
781.00
N/A
N/A
0.2606
0.2514
1.00
0.2513
1.7770
10.00
782.00
N/A
N/A
0.2798
0.2702
1.00
0.2702
2.0472
11.00
783.00
N/A
N/A
0.2998
0.2898
1.00
0.2897
2.3369
12.00
784.00
N/A
N/A
0.3204
0.3101
1.00
0.3100
2.6469
13.00
785.00
N/A
N/A
0.3417
0.3310
1.00
0.3310
2.9779
14.00
i� BARREL
~ PIPE
CLASS B STONE PAD
(4'X4'X 1'MIN.) ANTIFL TO TION BLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW CUT-OFF ANTI -SEEP STABILIZED
TRENCH COLLAR
2' DEEP OUTLET
1.1
NOTES
1. SEED AND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROL ON INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SIDESLOPES.
2. INSTALL MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDARD 6.65.
3. INSTALL SKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM BOTTOM OF BASIN.
4. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FT. BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPLING. NOT TO SCALE
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL

850
Z
O
Q 800
W
W
750
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
SECTION B -B'
SCALE: 1" 50'
850
EXISTING
100fr P'scboard
10 FT, ACCESS
10 .ACCESS
CREST EL. 780
12" DIA. BARREL PIPE
FILL MATERIAL
CRE Yr EL. 780
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
POOL EL=
50% CLE NO
IT EL = 774.0
2'1 � �
POOL E
L = 777.0
23;
BOTT MEL. 786.0
1
SU ITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
C NTERLINEC
TOFFTRENCH
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
WITHIN t2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
FREBBonaD-
t'MiN. �. =1111=1111=1111=1111=1111=1111= 2.g,
CONTENT
`
L
L1 0.g5R
e
iI_pll=VilJlu=ili=lul=llu=Vit=1lil-ilVvv
2`',`_1111=1111JI11=1111=1111=IIII=IIII=1111,111'=llll_llll_1111=JI 4'Ax
N.T.S.
STAGE STORAGE CURVE
=1111=1111=1111=1111=1111-1111.1 Il== -I Il-l'111�{=111I-1111=1111=1111-
EWR SEDIMENT POND N0.2
ROPOS WR DITCH .4
10.00tt
ry\
Channel Design (Non -Erodible)
780
TOP OF STRUCTURE
779
780.00
.. ..
.. .. .. .. ^O
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
778
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
EMER ENCY SPILLWAY (778.00)
_
PROPOSED R DITCH NO. 3
Base Dimension: 10.00
777
PRINCIPALS ILLWAY (777.00)
'
ro�
wetted Perimeter. 14.24
776
P R FLUME NO. 3
0,
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 11.28
m
q
2
775
+
qO
y0
Channel Slope: 0.1000
0
774
�6
Mannings n of Channel: 0.0423
773
Discharge: 10.73 ds
�CENTE `LINE CUT
FTRENCH
Depth of Flow: 0.95 feet
772
- - -
Velocity: 0.95 fps
771
'AL
Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap
.. .. .. .. POOL EL. 70
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
770
769
Y EW EDIMEN ND
PROPOSED EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
768
`
N.T.S.
1..00fr F, -board
0
1
z
PROPO /i F S
JL
Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
`
2 2
0.25 R
STORAGE VOLUME COMPUTATIONS
5 %CLEA UT L.
Y
4.
�O B
I
10.00ft
EWR SEDIMENT POND NO.2
TO ERG DI
_
I O _
Channel Design (Non -Erodible)
ELEV.
Width
LENGTH
AREA AVG. INTERVAL
STORAGE
ACC.
STAGE
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ac) AREA (ft)
(ac -ft)
STORAGE
INTERVAL
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
(ac)
(ac -ft)
(ft)
'
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
Base Dimension: 10.00
768.00
N/A
N/A
0.0187
I I
769.00
N/A
N/A
0.0300 0.0243 1.00
0.0243
0.0243
1.00
F
Wetted Perimeter. 11.13
0.0359 1.00
0.0359
0.0602
2.00
R :C:P L
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 2.66
770.00
771.00
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.0416
0.0478 1.00
0.0536
0.0478
0.1080
3.00
IL. W Y
Channel Slope: 40.0000
772.00
N/A
N/A
0.0662 0.0600 1.00
0.0600
0.1660
4.00
.�.
Manning's n of Channel: 0.0423
773.00
N/A
N/A
0.0725 1.00
0.0769
0.0725
0.2405
5.00
ED E GENC
SPI Y
Discharge: 22.70 ds
774.00
N/A
N/A
0.0920 0.0655 1.00
0.0654
0.3259
6.00
Depth of Flow: 0.25 feet
775.00
N/A
N/A
0.1053 0.0987 1.00
0.0986
0.4245
7.00
L`
PLSE IT CHA Of
Velocity: 8.55 fps
776.00
N/A
N/A
0.1121 1.00
0.1190
0.1121
0.5366
8.00
+
!V=
Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap
777.00
N/A
N/A
0.1330 0.1260 1.00
0.1259
0.6626
9.00
RO OS WR DIT NO. l m
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
778.00
N/A
N/A
0.1473 0.1401 1.00
0.1401
0.8027
10.00
/
779.00
N/A
N/A
0.1619 0.1546 1.00
0.1546
0.9572
11.00
780.00
N/A
N/A
0.1769 0.1694 1.00
0.1694
1.1266
12.00
PROPOSED EXIT CHANNEL
/ O
N.T.S.
ONDA E SROA
/
O
RACK
00
00
`8
) CREST EL. 760
t'FNEEBDARD
CHAIN N FENC
Op
9
+
) EMERGENCY SPiLIw DEPTH EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
NORMAL POOL 777
t' FREEBDARD
PLAN VIEW: PROPOSED EWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 2 50% CLEANOUT EL 774.05
SCALE: 1" 50'
15" DIA. RISER
EXISTING GRADE
850
Z
O
Q 800
W
W
750
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
SECTION B -B'
SCALE: 1" 50'
850
EXISTING
GRADE
10 FT, ACCESS
10 .ACCESS
CREST EL. 780
12" DIA. BARREL PIPE
FILL MATERIAL
CRE Yr EL. 780
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
POOL EL=
50% CLE NO
IT EL = 774.0
2'1 � �
POOL E
L = 777.0
23;
BOTT MEL. 786.0
BOTTOM EL.86.0
SU ITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
C NTERLINEC
TOFFTRENCH
Z
O
Q 800
W
W
750
850
Z
O
800 Q
W
W
750
2+50
XISTING GRAI 1E
PE CUTOFF TRENCH
10 FT, ACCESS
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
CREST EL. 780
12" DIA. BARREL PIPE
FILL MATERIAL
50% CLEA OUT EL = 774.)5
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
POOL EL=
77.0
2'1 � �
TOP
OF EMBANKMENT
23;
BOTTOM EL.86.0
SU ITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
CENTS INE CUTOFF TRENCH
1' MIN. .; �.„• �.,;..!: ;�,.
EMERGENCYSPILLWAY
- )Ili=11=1111=1111-1'li_
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50
SECTION A -A'
SCALE: 1" 50'
850
Z
O
800 Q
W
W
750
3+00
BARREL
PIPE
CLASS B STONE PAD T CUT-OFF ANTI -SEEP
(4'X 4'X 1'MIN.) ANTIFLOTATION BLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW LTRENCH STABILIZED
COLLAR
2' DEEP OUTLET
1.1
NOTES
1. SEEDAND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROLON INTERIORAND EXTERIORSIDESLOPES.
2. INSTALLA MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDARD 6.65.
3. INSTALLSKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM BOTTOM OF BASIN.
4. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FT. BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPLING. NOT TO SCALE
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL
PE CUTOFF TRENCH
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
BOTTOM OF POND
COs
12" DIA. BARREL PIPE
FILL MATERIAL
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
N.T.S.
2'1 � �
TOP
OF EMBANKMENT
SU ITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
RISER STRUCTURE
TRASH RACK-
1' MIN. .; �.„• �.,;..!: ;�,.
EMERGENCYSPILLWAY
- )Ili=11=1111=1111-1'li_
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
WITHIN t2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
FREBBonaD-
t'MiN. �. =1111=1111=1111=1111=1111=1111= 2.g,
CONTENT
SKIMMER
�QeM__llll=11,1Ill=1111=II1',II11�IU�,fll1,1111,
a l
CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL
e
iI_pll=VilJlu=ili=lul=llu=Vit=1lil-ilVvv
2`',`_1111=1111JI11=1111=1111=IIII=IIII=1111,111'=llll_llll_1111=JI 4'Ax
N.T.S.
\\\
=1111=1111=1111=1111=1111-1111.1 Il== -I Il-l'111�{=111I-1111=1111=1111-
850
Z
O
800 Q
W
W
750
3+00
BARREL
PIPE
CLASS B STONE PAD T CUT-OFF ANTI -SEEP
(4'X 4'X 1'MIN.) ANTIFLOTATION BLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW LTRENCH STABILIZED
COLLAR
2' DEEP OUTLET
1.1
NOTES
1. SEEDAND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROLON INTERIORAND EXTERIORSIDESLOPES.
2. INSTALLA MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDARD 6.65.
3. INSTALLSKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM BOTTOM OF BASIN.
4. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FT. BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPLING. NOT TO SCALE
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL

800
0
Q 750
W
700
O
50% C LEANOUT EL 754.86 10
FT. ACCESS
POOL EL = 57.0 C
1
EST EL. 760
BOTT MEL. 751.0
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
EXISTIR3 GRADE
I OOft P'scboard
NTERLINEC
TOFF TRENCH
- .........-
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
1L
1 L
L 1 1.05 R
2-1
SUI TABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
TOP OF EMBANKMENT
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
RISER STRUCTURE
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
WITHIN .2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
TRASH RACK
FREBeanao-
1'MIN.-
EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
Ili_!�1 �,III_I1=1'll=
CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL CONTENT
V MIN.
�peVP+ JIII I IIIIIIIII, IiI-1
SKIMMER��II�II-.IIIll-lill�l ll,
�
STAGE STORAGE CURVE
95.00 ft
EWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 3
OQ
P P
SE R DITCH'N .4` '
Channel Design (Non -Erodible)
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
760
OP
OF STEUCTURE
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
(760.00)
p
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
759
X
Base Dimension: 45.00
E R SE IMENT
PO D NOL3 _ _ _ _
Wetted Perimeter. 49.70
758
EM RGENCY
SPILLWAY
(758.0))
X
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 49.52
�O
I
757
PRINCIPAL PILLWAY
(75 .00)
5
\ NORMALPOYLEL.7770
Channel Slope: 0.1000
Manningsn of Channel: 0.0423
m
c
756
G�y�°
[�
I
Discharge: 54.66 cfs
X
Depth of Flow: 1.05 feet
755
5 % CLEANOU EL
Velocity: 1.11 fps
w
754
(754.66)
J
Lining:itch Rock Rip -Rap
Freeboard fee
753
ROPOSED EMERGENCY
PROPOSED EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
752
SPILLWAY _ _ _ _ _ _
N.T.S.
1.00a rt«br»rd
751
C
PROPOSED EXIT CHANNEL
0
1
2 3 4
5
6
L1
T
Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
STONE ENERGY OISSIPATOF?
2
0.93 fL I}
10.00 R
STORAGE VOLUME COMPUTATIONS
B• PROPOSED CIPAL
EWR SEDIMENT POND N0.3
o
SPIL AY
PROPOSED BAF LE
Channel Design (Non -Erodible)
ELEV.
Width
LENGTH
AREA AVG. INTERVAL
STORAGE
ACC.
STAGE
O
O
_ �
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ac) AREA (ft)
(ac -ft)
STORAGE
INTERVAL
A
Dimensio Side Slope 2.00:1
Rightns:Left
side Slope 2.00:1
(ac)
(ac -ft)
(ft)
50% CLEANO L. 7b4 .86 - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Base Dimension: 10.00
751.00
N/A
N/A
0.4016
\-
Wetted Penmeter. 11.91
0.4191 1.00
0.4169
0.4169
1.00
`
(J
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 4.63
752.00
753.00
N/A
N/A
N /A
N/A
0.4364
0.4714 0.4539 1.00
0.4539
0.8728
2.00
-91-C
Y Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y
Channel Slope: 40.0000
754.00
N/A
N/A
0.5066 0.4890 1.00
0.4890
1.3618
3.00
I�
Manning's n of Channel: 0.0423
755.00
N/A
N/A
0.5420 0.5243 1.00
0.5243
1.8860
4.00
�O 00
1
Discharge: 54.87
756.00
N/A
N/A
0.5775 0.5597 1.00
0.5597
2.4458
5.00
O d'
O
1
0. 3
Depth of Fl0.43 feet
757.00
N/A
N/A
0.6131 0.5953 1.00
0.5953
3.0410
6.00
0
Velocity: 11.84fps
758.00
N/A
N/A
0.6489 0.6310 1.00
0.6310
3.6720
7.00
Channel Lining: 18 inch Rock Rip -Rap
759.00
N/A
N/A
0.6848 0.6669 1.00
0.6668
4.3388
8.00
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
760.00
N/A
N/A
0.7208 0.7028 1.00
0.7028
5.0416
9.00
CENTERLINE CUTOFF TRENCH
PROPOSED EXIT CHANNEL
CHAIN LINK FEN
N.T.S.
' ^X,
\
4POSED EWR FLUME NO. 5 X X
TRASH RACK
.�
+ CREST EL. 760
o
T � O
+
1'FREEBOARO
1PJ
TCH�PG0�5 y
J 7�
+EU ERCENCY SPIL-DEPTH EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
1+
NORMAL POOL 757
1' FREEBOARD
m
PLAN VIEW: PROPOSED EWR SEDIMENT POND NO. 3
50% CLEANOUT EL 754.86
SCALE: 1" 50'
30" DIA. RISER -
EXISTING GRADE
800
0
Q 750
W
700
O
50% C LEANOUT EL 754.86 10
FT. ACCESS
POOL EL = 57.0 C
1
EST EL. 760
BOTT MEL. 751.0
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
EXISTIR3 GRADE
18" DIA. BARREL PIPE
NTERLINEC
TOFF TRENCH
800
0
750 Q
W
W
700
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
SECTION B -B'
SCALE: 1" 50'
800
Q 750
W
W
700
N.T.S.
CREST L. 760 50% CLEA OUT EL = 754.36
CUTOFF TRENCH
POOL EL=75.0
EXISTING G BADE
.�-------------------------------
-----------------------
OTTOM EL. 7
BOTTOM
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
BOTTOM OF POND
18" DIA. BARREL PIPE
FILL MATERIAL
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
- .........-
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
1L
N.T.S.
2-1
SUI TABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
TOP OF EMBANKMENT
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
RISER STRUCTURE
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
WITHIN .2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
TRASH RACK
FREBeanao-
1'MIN.-
EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
Ili_!�1 �,III_I1=1'll=
CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL CONTENT
V MIN.
�peVP+ JIII I IIIIIIIII, IiI-1
SKIMMER��II�II-.IIIll-lill�l ll,
�
N.T.S.
CREST L. 760 50% CLEA OUT EL = 754.36
POOL EL=75.0
EXISTING G BADE
.�-------------------------------
-----------------------
OTTOM EL. 7
BOTTOM
--------
1.0
CENTER INE CUTOFF I RENCH
800
O
750 Q
W
W
700
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50
SECTION A -A'
SCALE: 1" 50'
1, 4 BARREL
PIPE
CLASS B STONE PAD
(4'X4'X 1'MIN.)ANTIFL TO TION BLOCK SECTIONALVIEW CUT-OFF ANTI -SEEP STABILIZED
TRENCH COLLAR
2' DEEP OUTLET
1.1
NOTES
1. SEED AND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROL ON INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SIDESLOPES.
2. INSTALL MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDARD 6.65.
3. INSTALL SKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM BOTTOM OF BASIN.
4. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FT. BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPLING. NOT TO SCALE
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL

820
800
780
I \ \ \ \ \ \ \BOOFFFF\
000 �O
O ,o �O
W \
O C ETE UME 0SB1
� 000
PLA TAR APA
6" IA. C. P. PRI CIPAL SPI LWAY FT
0" ONC ETE RIS R
0>
00
S
0
��O X90
820
TONE NE Y S
B
TT
90
o ROAD TO NO
O
C4 \
C
000
FT
p0
0s
0
PLAN VIEW: PROPOSED SEDIMENT POND NO. SB1
SCALE: 1-50'
50'
820
800
780
0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 1+40 1+60 1+80 2+00 2+20 2+40 2+60
SECTION A -A'
SCALE: 1-20'
20'
820 820
800
780
,0'
I
� vFREEBOARD
I EMERGENcv SPI -Y DEPTH ff EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
NORMAL POOL 807.00 1FREEBOARD
25
1�
- - -
- - - _
POO
EL807.00
.
-
ANTI -SEEP
SFARILIiED
SETTLED OP OF EMBA
EL. 803.48
_ _ _ zS
KMENT EL. 81
EXIST
.00
NG GRADE
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
-
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
_
WITHIN .2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
BOTTOM EL 798.00
BOTTOM OF BASIN.
CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL
SPILLWAY CREST EL. 808.0
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL
N1 T ';
-
---
820
800
780
0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 1+40 1+60 1+80 2+00 2+20 2+40 2+60
SECTION A -A'
SCALE: 1-20'
20'
820 820
800
780
1
800
780
0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 1+40 1+60 1+80 2+00 2+20 2+40 2+60
SCALE: 1-20'
20'
1' Freeboard
2 2
75'-4"
SB1 Emergenry Spillway Capacity
22585 R,UdP-for25-yearR-(CFS)
Broadcrestetl Weir Equa -
Q=CLH�2
where:
Q -ow (ds7
Cinefficient=38
L=lof weir (G)
" 9t=ad (ft)
Q 225 es Dass, FI- (CFS)
C 38
L ]533
H 180
PROPOSED EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
N.T.S.
CLCUTOFF TRENCH
I
� vFREEBOARD
I EMERGENcv SPI -Y DEPTH ff EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
NORMAL POOL 807.00 1FREEBOARD
25
1�
EXISTING
GRADE
2 MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
ANTI -SEEP
SFARILIiED
2'1
_
2.5.11
----
3.48
Oh C.O. EL. 80T49 -
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
OOL EL. 807.0
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
_
WITHIN .2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
CONTENT
BOTTOM OF BASIN.
CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL
NOF iO SCALE
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL
N1 T ';
POOL
POOL EL.=
07.00
0%CLEANOU
EL.=803.48
BOTTOM EL. 98.00
1
800
780
0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 1+40 1+60 1+80 2+00 2+20 2+40 2+60
SCALE: 1-20'
20'
1' Freeboard
2 2
75'-4"
SB1 Emergenry Spillway Capacity
22585 R,UdP-for25-yearR-(CFS)
Broadcrestetl Weir Equa -
Q=CLH�2
where:
Q -ow (ds7
Cinefficient=38
L=lof weir (G)
" 9t=ad (ft)
Q 225 es Dass, FI- (CFS)
C 38
L ]533
H 180
PROPOSED EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
N.T.S.
N.T.S.
TRASH RACK
CLCUTOFF TRENCH
I
� vFREEBOARD
I EMERGENcv SPI -Y DEPTH ff EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
NORMAL POOL 807.00 1FREEBOARD
25
1�
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
FILL MATERIAL
2 MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
ANTI -SEEP
SFARILIiED
2'1
OUrLET
SUITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
WITHIN .2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
CONTENT
BOTTOM OF BASIN.
CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL
N.T.S.
TRASH RACK
CREST EL. 810
I
� vFREEBOARD
I EMERGENcv SPI -Y DEPTH ff EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
NORMAL POOL 807.00 1FREEBOARD
25
1�
RISER (90" x 92" CONCRETE BOX) \-EXISTING GRADE
2.19% SL
BOTTOM OF POND (EL. 7981 �EASE�
36" C.M.P. PIPE BARREL
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
N.T.S.
TOP OF EMBANKMENT
RISER STRUCTU RE
TRASH RACKS 1
SKIMMER
Stage Storage Curve
SB1
0.00 008 0.16 024 032 040 048
AREA (ac.)
810
OP �ei000 sT URE
BOs
V SPI
808 AV (808 00)
BO] PRIN LLWAY(80101
805
N� 805
> 804
W ---- -- 50
CLEAN OUT EL 0348
803
802
801
800
]ss
]96
0.0 06 12 18 24 38 36
Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
StaseymUScomp-t-,
e
ELE) with LEN n
]H ARE INTERVAL STORA E AGO
( A STORAGE NT RVAL
104 00 NIA NIA 0 2517 02329 2 00 04151 1294 ` 00107 00 NIA NIA 0 3324 03202 00 0 3202 2 0 145 9
K19
shapes aware eox
Top Eley 607
Base Elav X975 t RISCT
L-0 92 n
wen 90 In
Odfice Coagcungan 406IXG
Length of Crhrert
Wea Ceef43.13mganeA 333
Riserwees
Cohort Paramnen MINN.- Ir" Type I..nM
Qmlcmaovn MGO*d: •p-C&OWIL gacy I -I
L-0 160 1
13-te. 36 n
thtlatlr...t Eloy 791 1 Adtl I II Remave �
Fridw Coelcienl 0 T24
caleulanen
III*-. Toes CoelFcient 0508 n¢ad atatEbu 806 �
Ducharya 101010 cic
CONCRETE FLUME DESIGN
Plant Site Flume to SBi (outlet through berm)
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
Base Dimension: 10.00
Wetted Perimeter: 15.20
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 14.32
Channel Slope: 2.0000
Manning's In of Channel: 0.0135
Discharge: 214.27 cfs
Depth of Flow: 1.16 feet
Velocity: 14.96 fps
Channel Lining: Smooth Concrete
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
Plant Site Flume to SBi (downslope section)
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
Rig
htSide Slope 2.00:1
Base Dimension: 10.00
Wetted Perimeter: 12.04
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 4.97
Channel Slope: 50.0000
Mann in g's In of Channel: 0.0135
Discharge: 214.25 cfs
Depth of Flow: 0.46 feet
Velocity: 43.14 fps
Channel Lining: Smooth Concrete
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
BARREL
-PIPE
CLASS B STORE PAD }
(4' x6' x i' MIH.} ANTI FLOTATION BLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW L 7RfNC#iCpLypq
ANTI -SEEP
SFARILIiED
Y' DEEP
OUrLET
I.1
hHI7Es
I. SEED AND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROL ON INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SIDESWIPES.
2. INSTALL A MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDAR 6.65.
3. INSTALL SKIMMER ANO COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM
BOTTOM OF BASIN.
A. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FL BE7WEEN THE SKIMMER ANO COUPU NG.
NOF iO SCALE
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL
N1 T ';
Stage Storage Curve
SB1
0.00 008 0.16 024 032 040 048
AREA (ac.)
810
OP �ei000 sT URE
BOs
V SPI
808 AV (808 00)
BO] PRIN LLWAY(80101
805
N� 805
> 804
W ---- -- 50
CLEAN OUT EL 0348
803
802
801
800
]ss
]96
0.0 06 12 18 24 38 36
Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
StaseymUScomp-t-,
e
ELE) with LEN n
]H ARE INTERVAL STORA E AGO
( A STORAGE NT RVAL
104 00 NIA NIA 0 2517 02329 2 00 04151 1294 ` 00107 00 NIA NIA 0 3324 03202 00 0 3202 2 0 145 9
K19
shapes aware eox
Top Eley 607
Base Elav X975 t RISCT
L-0 92 n
wen 90 In
Odfice Coagcungan 406IXG
Length of Crhrert
Wea Ceef43.13mganeA 333
Riserwees
Cohort Paramnen MINN.- Ir" Type I..nM
Qmlcmaovn MGO*d: •p-C&OWIL gacy I -I
L-0 160 1
13-te. 36 n
thtlatlr...t Eloy 791 1 Adtl I II Remave �
Fridw Coelcienl 0 T24
caleulanen
III*-. Toes CoelFcient 0508 n¢ad atatEbu 806 �
Ducharya 101010 cic
CONCRETE FLUME DESIGN
Plant Site Flume to SBi (outlet through berm)
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
Right Side Slope 2.00:1
Base Dimension: 10.00
Wetted Perimeter: 15.20
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 14.32
Channel Slope: 2.0000
Manning's In of Channel: 0.0135
Discharge: 214.27 cfs
Depth of Flow: 1.16 feet
Velocity: 14.96 fps
Channel Lining: Smooth Concrete
Freeboard: 1.00 feet
Plant Site Flume to SBi (downslope section)
Channel Type: Trapezoidal, Equal Side Slopes
Dimensions: Left Side Slope 2.00:1
Rig
htSide Slope 2.00:1
Base Dimension: 10.00
Wetted Perimeter: 12.04
Area of Wetted Cross Section: 4.97
Channel Slope: 50.0000
Mann in g's In of Channel: 0.0135
Discharge: 214.25 cfs
Depth of Flow: 0.46 feet
Velocity: 43.14 fps
Channel Lining: Smooth Concrete
Freeboard: 1.00 feet

PLAN VIEW: PROPOSED SEDIMENT POND NO. SB2
SCALE: 1-30'
30'
PROPOSED H.D.P.E. PIPE EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
Inlet
Inlet Type:
Ke: 0.40
■ nverts
N.T.S.
Shape:
Circular
Material:
HDPE
Diameter:
30.00 In
Manning's n:
0.0120
Number of Barrels:
1
Inlet
Inlet Type:
Ke: 0.40
■ nverts
EL. 793.00
►1 Inlet Invert Elevation:
793.000 R
Outlet Invert Elevation:784.000
R
Length:
160.000 R
Slope:
5.63 h
Culvert Calculation
SB2
Discharge:
21.3000 cfs
Headwater Elevation:
795.508 R
Tailwater Elevation:
1.000 R
Downstream Velocity:
16.80 fUs
Downstream Flow Depth:
0.763 R
Flow Control Type:
Outlet Control, Gradually Varied Flow
I CREST EL. 796
1'FREEBOARD
I EMERGENcvsalLL—YDEPTH EMERGENCYSPILLWAY
NORMAL POOL 793 1' FREEFOARD t
1�
18" C.M.P. RISER EXISTING GRADE
2.8h SLOPE y
BOTTOM OF POND (EL. 788) �BnsE�
15" C.M.P. PIPE BARREL
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
N.T.S.
TRASH RACK
820 820
800
780
800
780
POOL
EL. 793.00
1+00 1+20 1+40
50A C . EL.7 0.42
Stage Storage Curve
2,
PROFILE A -A'
HAULR AD TO NORTH PIT
0+00
0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80
1+00 1+20 1+40
1+60 1+80 2+00 2+20 2+40 2+60 2+80 3+00
Stage Storage Curve
PROFILE A -A'
SCALE: 1— 20'
SB2
820
EMERGENCY
PI LLW 93.00)
820
0.02
SOh C.O. EL. 790.42
800
P LEL. 793.00
796
800
ARE
.y1
7
780
780
0+00
0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80
1+00 1+20 1+40
1+60
795
SECTION B -B'
SCALE: 1-20'
RIsw ParameEara root
Shape .��
vv Eley 792 tl
Riser
.
is Eler 788 a
- . meter 16 n
`aCoa.l9.smge,neral) J)6M
Length ofCulvert
. - • Co011M m g—ral) 333
gitaer M1Ha
.--.rtParamelary Inlet Na" InIHType IrrVelt(IIJ
_ :vlavvv Method: o Carlson Legacy •I -M4
�qIh 181] It
-nneter 15 n
Outlet Et- 783 1 I „�
Frrcoan CMN=We 0.11g4
CaloulaAvv
EIntrwo Lasa CoHtIaH% p.I;M Heaftmo,r Eley 792.531 It
Dgclrargo 6072 de
��s gds cru
Stage Storage Curve
SB2
EMERGENCY
PI LLW 93.00)
0.00
0.02
0.04 0.06
0.08
-OUTE 9042
796
ARE
(ac.)
795
794
793
0
792
m
W791
790
789
788
0.0
0.1
02 03
04
Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
storage vd— computations
SEE
ILIV.
VVITI LENGTH
ARIA AVG . IN IRVAL STORAGE
AGO .
STAGE
(ft)
(ft) (ft)
(ac) AREA (ft) (aft)
STORAGE
INTERVAL
(ac)
(aGft)
(ft)
/88.11
N/A NIA
11111
790.00
N/A N/A
00244 0012 200 00363
00363
200
79200
N/A N/A
0 0390 0031 7 2 00 0 0634
0 0997
4 00
793.00
N/A N/A
0 0475 00433 1 00 00433
01430
5 00
194.00
N/A N/A
00560 00415 100 00518
01948
600
796.00
N/A N/A 00753 00657 200 01314
03262
800
RIsw ParameEara root
Shape .��
vv Eley 792 tl
Riser
.
is Eler 788 a
- . meter 16 n
`aCoa.l9.smge,neral) J)6M
Length ofCulvert
. - • Co011M m g—ral) 333
gitaer M1Ha
.--.rtParamelary Inlet Na" InIHType IrrVelt(IIJ
_ :vlavvv Method: o Carlson Legacy •I -M4
�qIh 181] It
-nneter 15 n
Outlet Et- 783 1 I „�
Frrcoan CMN=We 0.11g4
CaloulaAvv
EIntrwo Lasa CoHtIaH% p.I;M Heaftmo,r Eley 792.531 It
Dgclrargo 6072 de
��s gds cru
EMERGENCY
PI LLW 93.00)
PRINCIPAL SPILLWAY
00)
-- 50%CLEA
-OUTE 9042
RIsw ParameEara root
Shape .��
vv Eley 792 tl
Riser
.
is Eler 788 a
- . meter 16 n
`aCoa.l9.smge,neral) J)6M
Length ofCulvert
. - • Co011M m g—ral) 333
gitaer M1Ha
.--.rtParamelary Inlet Na" InIHType IrrVelt(IIJ
_ :vlavvv Method: o Carlson Legacy •I -M4
�qIh 181] It
-nneter 15 n
Outlet Et- 783 1 I „�
Frrcoan CMN=We 0.11g4
CaloulaAvv
EIntrwo Lasa CoHtIaH% p.I;M Heaftmo,r Eley 792.531 It
Dgclrargo 6072 de

t9 ��
n1 a onnn Tn nlnoTu o1T
10,
W
PROPOS BAFFLES
(TYP. OF 3 EA.)
C2 \
OO
��O 0
PLAN VIEW: PROPOSED SEDIMENT POND NO. SB3
SCALE: 1-20'
20'
800
780
II
Q0
O
C7
A'
FE NERGY DISSIPA
LQ� CO \
L
800
780
760 760
0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 1+40 1+60
PROFILE A -A'
SCALE: 1— 20'
800 800
50% C.O. EL. 779.34
POOL EL. 781.00 _
780 780
760 760
0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20
SECTION B -B'
SCALE: 1— 20'
50% C.O. EL.
POOL EL. 781.00
779.34
I CREST EL. 784
1 FREEF-RD
EMERGENCY SPILT
I
2
2
Base Elev
5'
Drameper
SYiJ tmergen�y Spell Way (:apaaty
1.1
15.0] CFS Required flow for2Syearst—
800
780
760 760
0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 1+40 1+60
PROFILE A -A'
SCALE: 1— 20'
800 800
50% C.O. EL. 779.34
POOL EL. 781.00 _
780 780
760 760
0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20
SECTION B -B'
SCALE: 1— 20'
N.T.S.
TRASH RACK
1' Freeboard
I EMERGENCYSPILLWAYDEPTH
1 FREEFOARD
I CREST EL. 784
1 FREEF-RD
EMERGENCY SPILT
I
2
2
Base Elev
5'
Drameper
SYiJ tmergen�y Spell Way (:apaaty
1.1
15.0] CFS Required flow for2Syearst—
Orifice Coef.(BB u, generalj
Bro ,L sled Weir Equffi-
weir Coe1(3.33 m generag 333
G-CLH12
2. INSTALL A MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDAR 6.65.
WM1ere
G=fl cw (ds)
6#. 1 CariSon Legacy HDS•S
Gweir coefficient= 3.0
31) R
L=lengm orwelrfrc)
H=Head (rc)
f5 In
G 1509 Design FIOW (CFS)
775 R
C 30
p024
L 5 03
p 5BB
H 1 00
PROPOSED EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
N.T.S.
CLCUTOFF TRENCH
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
FILL MATERIAL
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
1 L-
2'1
SUITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
WITHIN .2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
CONTENT
CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL
N.T.S.
TRASH RACK
—
I EMERGENCYSPILLWAYDEPTH
1 FREEFOARD
I CREST EL. 784
1 FREEF-RD
EMERGENCY SPILT
I
THA Mev
5
18" C.M.P. RISER
BOTTOM OF POND (EL. 777)—/ Ir BASE
15" C.M.P. PIPE BARREL
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
N.T.S.
TOP OF EM BAN NM ENT
RISER STRUCTU RE
TRASH RACK— 1
SKIMMER
GRADE
Stage Storage Curve
SB3
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06
AREA (ac.)
]84
(84 00) STRUC
]83
82 O)
EM ERGENCYS
C]81
.oRINCIPAL SPILLWAY
W ]80
-- 50%CLEAN -O TEL. ]]03
ns
]]]
o o.1 0z 0a
Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
sto' 9 Vol--p-to"
E(E). (I) LE(I) Aac) AREA REA AVG INT(II) s*ac�rc) EAC
sT E I -AG ER
a ao-rc7 NT vAL
weerrammetem
—
Shape
—
THA Mev
791 $
Base Elev
777 R
Drameper
18 in
1.1
9:
Orifice Coef.(BB u, generalj
041000
weir Coe1(3.33 m generag 333
Cbl—LPararneters
2. INSTALL A MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDAR 6.65.
Caicola4un Method
6#. 1 CariSon Legacy HDS•S
Length
31) R
Diameter
f5 In
Met Invert Elev
775 R
FhehOn C00660HI
p024
Entrance LoBs CoaBcianl
p 5BB
Riser
Length of C.W.n
R raer InIe13
Inlet Name inlet Type Inven [RI
Add Edi
BARREL
Calculation
—PIPE
Heacih-oar El—
781.46
CLA55 B STORE PAD }
(4' K6' X i' MIH.) ANTIFLOTATION BLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW L 7RfNr
ANTI -SEEP
NT-5EECOLL" SIABlUaD
Y' DEEP
OUTLET
1.1
NOUS
I. SEED AND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROL ON INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SMESLOPES.
2. INSTALL A MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDAR 6.65.
3. INSTALL SKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM
BOTTOM OF BASIN.
A. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FL BE7WEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPU NG.
NOF i0 SCALE
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL
N1 Tc
Riser
Length of C.W.n
R raer InIe13
Inlet Name inlet Type Inven [RI
Add Edi
R—ie j
Calculation
Heacih-oar El—
781.46
Discharge
4.996
R
cls

�^O
ENERGY DISSIPATOR B
�QO
PROPOSED BAFFLES V
(TYP. OF 3 EA.)
PLAN VIEW: PROPOSED SEDIMENT POND NO. SB4
SCALE: 1-20'
20'
780
POOL EL 763.00 _ —
760
780
760
740
BARREL
� EMERDevcYSPIL—YDEPTH
1 FREEROARD
740
1' Freeboard
0+20 0+40
0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20
1+40 1+60 1+80
Y' DEEP
CpLypq
OUTLET
PROFILE A -A'
Wee C—k(3-33 in generaQ
rears
SCALE: 1— 20'
CulvertP—memre
780
Cakulalwn Met d:
3. INSTALL SKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM
780
J—
POOL EL. 763.00
_ _ _
O
760
2 2
18.7'
760
0+00
0+20 0+40
0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20
1+40
Seo E—gep� Spil—y Capacity
56.06 Required flow far 25year storm
SECTION B -B'
(cFs)
eroaasrened weir Egger
o=aH12
where:
R=II (Its)
Gweir coefficient= 3.0
8
�=iengm orweir(rc)
L-h_I,
0 5610 Design Flow(CES)
C 30
L 187
H 1 00
PROPOSED EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
EXPL SIVES
AZINE RO
Q C9
u
N.T.S.
CLCUTOFF TRENCH
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
SB
FILL MATERIAL
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
_-
��
O O
Lo
o OOL Wo
2'� L
O
SUITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
O
A
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
WITHIN .2% OPTIMUM MOISTURE
CONTENT
/
CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL
�^O
ENERGY DISSIPATOR B
�QO
PROPOSED BAFFLES V
(TYP. OF 3 EA.)
PLAN VIEW: PROPOSED SEDIMENT POND NO. SB4
SCALE: 1-20'
20'
780
POOL EL 763.00 _ —
760
780
760
740
BARREL
� EMERDevcYSPIL—YDEPTH
1 FREEROARD
740
0+00
0+20 0+40
0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20
1+40 1+60 1+80
Y' DEEP
CpLypq
OUTLET
PROFILE A -A'
Wee C—k(3-33 in generaQ
rears
SCALE: 1— 20'
CulvertP—memre
780
Cakulalwn Met d:
3. INSTALL SKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM
780
A. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FL BE7WEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPU NG.
POOL EL. 763.00
_ _ _
760
760
0+00
0+20 0+40
0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20
1+40
SECTION B -B'
SCALE: 1— 20'
N.T.S.
TRASH RACK
BARREL
� EMERDevcYSPIL—YDEPTH
1 FREEROARD
CREST EL. 766
�v FREEROARDFReeeoARo
EMERGENCY SPILT
t
__ _--- --__ _---
26
1
30" C.M.P. RISER
BOTTOM OF POND (EL. 766) O Ir EAI SE
24" C.M.P. PIPE BARREL
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
N.T.S.
TOP OF EMBANKMENT
RISER STRUCTU RE z
TRASH RACK— 1
SKIMMER
GRADE
Stage Storage Curve
SB4
0.00 0.03 0.06 0.09
AREA (ac.)
766PRUCTURE
(°s ooj sl
766
76a
E.ERGE SVILLw
064 0)
o
—vRw
Y (766 00
ED
762
50 %CLEAN -O E .761 76
761
766
6.6 6.1 02 Da
Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
St—gey 1--omp-t—,
SER
ELE) w(¢ 2 (C7H ARE INTERVAL ST
A) E
AREA STORAGE NTL
1ac( VA760 00 NA NA 0 0142762 00 NG, NG, 0 02E4 00213 2 00 0 0426 0 0426 2 00763 00 NA "A 0 0363 00323 0323 0 07,0 3 00
Riser Parameters
BARREL
Snapp
—PIPE
Top Eley
753 R
CLA55 B STORE PAD }
(4' K6' X i' MIH.} ANTIF TLD A IDN BLOCK SECTIONAL VIEW L 7RfNr
ANTI -SEEP
SFARIEIiED
Y' DEEP
CpLypq
OUTLET
1.1
Wee C—k(3-33 in generaQ
rears
I. SEED AND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROL ON INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SMESLOPES.
CulvertP—memre
2. INSTALL A MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDAR 6.65.
Cakulalwn Met d:
3. INSTALL SKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM
BOTTOM OF BASIN.
A. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FL BE7WEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPU NG.
NOF TO SCALE
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL
N1 T 1;
Stage Storage Curve
SB4
0.00 0.03 0.06 0.09
AREA (ac.)
766PRUCTURE
(°s ooj sl
766
76a
E.ERGE SVILLw
064 0)
o
—vRw
Y (766 00
ED
762
50 %CLEAN -O E .761 76
761
766
6.6 6.1 02 Da
Accumulative Storage (Acre -Ft)
St—gey 1--omp-t—,
SER
ELE) w(¢ 2 (C7H ARE INTERVAL ST
A) E
AREA STORAGE NTL
1ac( VA760 00 NA NA 0 0142762 00 NG, NG, 0 02E4 00213 2 00 0 0426 0 0426 2 00763 00 NA "A 0 0363 00323 0323 0 07,0 3 00
Riser Parameters
tool
Snapp
�C�cWer�
Top Eley
753 R
Base Eley
760 R
Di—wr
i0 m
DrAce Cool NI Mpa wal) 0.50W
Wee C—k(3-33 in generaQ
3,37p0
FiaprlMaq
CulvertP—memre
Inlet Name
Cakulalwn Met d:
0 Carlson Legacy HOS3
L-A
150 A
Diameter
24 m
Ousti-orl Ele. 757 1 Add
�Rlser
Length Of Colvert
INal Type Lwso B1
Fncfion Coa6ciem 024
_ Calcuiafi-
Emranre Loa. Coeili iBm .5 Headwater Elev 754 T
Diacnaiga 23644 ch

PLAN VIEW: PROPOSED SEDIMENT POND NO.
SCALE: 1-40'
40'
780 780
760 — — _ 760
0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 1+40 1+60 1+80 2+00 2+20 2+40 2+60
PROFILE A -A'
SCALE: 1" 20'
800 800
780
760
0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 1+40 1+60 1+80 2+00
SECTION B -B'
SCALE: 1-20'
780
760
TRASH RACK
1' Freeboard
I EMERDENcvsPILLWAVDEPTH
1 FREEROARD
I CREST EL. 776
1 FREEBOARD
EMERGENCY SPILT
2
2
25
21'
Y' DEEP
SBA Emergency Spillway Capacity
1.1
63.19 CFS Required flow for 25 year storm
Nons
3—,L rested Weir Equffii
I. SEED AND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROL ON INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SMESLOPES.
G-CLH12
2. INSTALL A MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDAR 6.65.
where
C=how (Its)
3. INSTALL SKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM
Gweir coefficient= 3.0
A. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FL BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPU NG.
L=lepgm orwelr(rc)
IT- Head (rc)
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL
N1 T 1;
C 6321 Design Flow(CES)
C 30
Riser edea
L 21 07
C.Iv ftpara rs
H 1 00
PROPOSED EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
Inlet Type nven lMl
N.T.S.
CLCUTOFF TRENCH
EXISTING GROUND (ABUTMENTS)
FILL MATERIAL
2' MAXIMUM IF NOT CUT TO BEDROCK
---------------
1 L—
2'� L
In
SUITABLE EARTHEN MATERIAL
COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD
PROCTOR MAX. DRY DENSITY
WITHIN t2h OPTIMUM MOISTURE
CONTENT
CUTOFF TRENCH DETAIL
N.T.S.
TRASH RACK
BARREL
I EMERDENcvsPILLWAVDEPTH
1 FREEROARD
I CREST EL. 776
1 FREEBOARD
EMERGENCY SPILT
T]
R
25
30" C.M.P. RISER
BOTTOM OF POND (EL. 769) —/ �__EAI SE --IJ
24" C.M.P. PIPE BARREL
TYPICAL DROP INLET DETAIL
N.T.S.
TOP OF EM BAN NM ENT
RISER STRUCTU RE
TRASH RACK— 1
SKIMMER
GRADE
Stage Storage Curve
SB5
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
AREA (ac.)
776
(776
n5 77
774
EME EN Cr SOL 74 00)
� na
CIPALSPIL--( 73
w772
— — 50 CLEAN-CUT E .771 8
771
770
709
0.0 02 04 0.6 0.0 10
Accumulative Storage (Acr&Ft)
stageyowmecomp-to"
E(EV Wit LENGTH ARE INTERVAL STORAGE
AGO
AREA STORAGE NT RVAL770 00 NA NA 0 0635 00311 1 00 0 0311 0 0311 1 00776 00 NIA NIA 0 AIE2 02194 -0 0 4— 0 9943 7 00
--tame—
Shape was .CncuIar
BARREL
—PIPE
L
R
CLASS BSTOREPAD — }
fNA-SEEP(46
LT
T
SIABlUaDr
Y' DEEP
CpLyq
OUTLET
1.1
Nons
In
I. SEED AND PLACE MATTING FOR EROSION CONTROL ON INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SMESLOPES.
2. INSTALL A MINIMUM OF 3 COIR FIBER BAFFLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRACTICE STANDAR 6.65.
3. INSTALL SKIMMER AND COUPLING TO RISER STRUCTURE OR DIRECTLY INTO EMBANKMENT 1 FT. FROM
BOTTOM OF BASIN.
A. THE ARM PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 6 FL BETWEEN THE SKIMMER AND COUPU NG.
NOF i0 SCALE
TYPICAL EMBANKMENT DETAIL
N1 T 1;
Stage Storage Curve
SB5
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
AREA (ac.)
776
(776
n5 77
774
EME EN Cr SOL 74 00)
� na
CIPALSPIL--( 73
w772
— — 50 CLEAN-CUT E .771 8
771
770
709
0.0 02 04 0.6 0.0 10
Accumulative Storage (Acr&Ft)
stageyowmecomp-to"
E(EV Wit LENGTH ARE INTERVAL STORAGE
AGO
AREA STORAGE NT RVAL770 00 NA NA 0 0635 00311 1 00 0 0311 0 0311 1 00776 00 NIA NIA 0 AIE2 02194 -0 0 4— 0 9943 7 00
--tame—
Shape was .CncuIar
Top FJev 773
R
Rises
Base Eley 768
R
Diamamr 30
In
orfic.ceel.lnBin genera4 D.cono
1
Length of Culvert
Waw Cpel.[333I-114"Mq 133
Riser edea
C.Iv ftpara rs
lot Name
Inlet Type nven lMl
CaIeW.Aon Alelhod: '0jC4d.-IegI r_rFa7S4
Length BD
R
Diameter 24
In
Oullellmrgn Elea 763.5
Frictran Coeduent 0.024
Calculapan
Entrance Los. Coelr—rR 0.500
Neadw9ter Eley TaW T
Ukl harge
21229 c1=_

I
E
i00 CIO of �
r Culvert for Impact 1
2
Flared ends and/or rip rap should be used to prevent scouring around the inlet and outlet of culverts.
Appropriate erosion and sediment controls, including silt fencing and/or straw bales, should be installed
parallel to the stream to prevent downstream impacts during installation.
Disturbance of the streambed and banks should be limited to that necessary to place the culvert.
Affected bank and bed areas should be restored to pre -project conditions following installation of the
culvert and the banks should be planted with native vegetation, consistent with that which existed prior
to the culvert installation. Seeded banks should be covered with mulch to accelerate plant growth.
800 _ 800
LENGTH OF IMPA T
220'
H/W = 5.44' r' EXISTING
PRO OSED NORTH GRADE
780 INV . 7 82.0 PIT H4,ULROAD 780
BURIED (BOTH NDS) FOR (2) X 180 L.F
AQUATIC LIFE PASSAGE COH X 10' W INV. 4.0
CNCRETE
760 BOX CULVERTS 760
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00
A -A'
Culvert for Impact 2
Extension
P
/ �L
C9
/ _S B4
0 100'
D INT�RVAL /
80 J
a
T E NO X50
760
780 LENGTH OF IMPACT 780
110'
PROPOSED
MAGAZINE
ROAD EXISTING REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION P.M.
H/W = 5.51' GRADE
760 _ 760 PROPOSED STREAM CROSSINGS
INV. 759.4 — — — — _ _ Impacts 1 and 2
1' — —
90 .F. PRELIMINARY
BURIED (BOTH ENDS) FOR
C X4'NCRETE Pre
AQUATIC LIFE�ASSAGE C t Lit For
:
BO CULVERT -] 740 Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
740
Gaston County, NC
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 Scale As Shown
B -B' '
POT101 Be Id -y, WV 05/19
DESIGNED: SM DRAWN: SM I APPROVED JA C7-Ce.dw

1000 1000 1000 1000
PROPOSED RADE
Z 1. Z Z Z
OF 800 800 OF 800
Q Q Q - 800 Q
W W W W
I w w w
EXI TING GROUN
600 600 600 600
0+00 5+00 10+00 15+00 20+00 25+00 30+00 35+00 40+00 45+00 50+00 55+00 0+00 5+00 10+00 15+00 20+00 25+00 30+00
HAUL ROAD - PLANT TO SOUTH PIT HAUL ROAD - CENTRAL PIT TO EAST PIT
V SCALE: 1"= 200' V SCALE: 1-200'
H SCALE: 1-500' H SCALE: 1-500'
1000 1000 1000 1000
PROPO ED GRADE PROPO EDGRADE
O ,fi i'�° -s.s7% O ZO 3.a%_200% Z
-2.8 % O
-L1 s°i .7gu0% _ 800 ~ 800 �'�a° 800 Q
Q 800 ___ Q
UJ w UJ UJ
I w w w
E ISTING GROU D
600 �EXISTINGGROUND 600 600 600
0+00 5+00 10+00 15+00 20+00 25+00 30+00 0+00 5+00 10+00 15+00 20+00 25+00
HAUL ROAD - PLANT TO NORTH PIT HAUL ROAD - PLANT THRU CENTRAL PIT
VS CALE: 1-200' V SCALE: 1-200'
H SCALE: 1-500' H SCALE: 1-500'
1000 1000
ROPOSEDG DE
Z Z
Q 800 440%_b 800 Q
W 2%;
W
W w
600 E ISTING GROU D 600
0+00 5+00 10+00 15+00 20+00 25+00 30+00
SURFACE W/NON TOXIC MIN. 12" DIA ROCK RIPRAP
NON/ACID FORMING
CRUSHED STONE
HAUL ROAD - MAGAZINE ROAD W- 80'
VS CALE: 1-200' W = 20' MAG INE ROAD
H SCALE: 1-500'
REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION P.M.
PERMIT No. NPDES No.
PROFILES - HAUL ROADS
SUMP MIN. COVER 1.0' OR
MIN. 12" DIA ROCK RIPRAP PIEDMONT LITHIUM
CULVERT i DIA OF PIPE WHICHEVER
IS GREATER
HAUL ROAD - TYPICAL
N.T.S.
Prepared For.
PIEDMONT Piedmont Lithium, Inc.
i1T11°" Gaston County, NC
Scale As Shown
vw=n
PLIT101 8luefielE, WV 05/19
DESIGNED: SM DRAWN: SM APPROVED JA HAULRMDS. dwk
PROPOSED GI DE
% -454% .32% -3-01, __L94°/
XI'TING
GROUN

840
820
O
800
780
SCALE: 1-100'
LEGEND
C' 100 YR. FLOOD PLAIN
DELINEATED WETLANDS
DELINEATED PONDS
DELINEATED STREAMS
HAUL ROAD CONTOURS
-r --r-- SILT FENCE
CULVERTS
D SUMPS
-X-X- ZONING FENCE
NG GROUND
\ \ HAUL ROA
\\ FACE-OFACEOFBR1D EABUTMENTS PLANT TO OUTH BIT
\ US
>.04%-i \` 6.91%-y
\ \ \ BRIDGE DECK EL 7900
HAULR AO 1D -R FLOODPIAI N EL. ]]4
PLANTT SOUTH PIT \ EXIST NO GROUND
-00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 1+40 1+60 1+80 2+00 2+20 2+40 2+60 2+80 3+00 3+20 3+40 3+60 3+
PROFILE A -A'
SCALE: 1-20'
840
820
O
800
780
BRIDGE NOTES:
1. Through the use of Best Management Practices (BMP)
(e.g. sediment fences, erosion control structures,
diversion ditches, silt fence, and revegetation measures),
runoff from disturbed ground during bridge construction
will be intercepted before it is able to reach the creek.
Sediment yield from disturbed areas will be managed by
sediment control structures and temporary and
permanent vegetation, such that any added sediment
load to the receiving stream is expected to be minimal
during construction activities. Drainage control
structures, along with the contemporaneous regrading
and revegetation of disturbed areas are expected to
prevent or minimize the contributions of suspended
solids. All disturbed areas will be seeded as quickly as
possible. Once the bridge construction is completed,
disturbed areas will be reclaimed to further minimize
runoff.

CLOSED TO THRU TRAFFIC
, LLL0
ENING —fd NO 2
Do
BERM NO 3
%\\\-A
NORTH
LAKE
Illyf
_
1 f�
E �
v
t
%\\\-A

PROPOSEDBACKFILL
gso gso
� 1r�
ORIGINAL GROUND
750 711
TYPICAL SOUTH PIT BACKFILL SECTION
PROPOSED BACKFILL
loo
�t
F goo goo
ORI�A-LrND
TYPICAL EAST SOUTH PIT BACKFILL SECTION
PROPOSEDBACKFILL
loo
w esg eso w
BERM TO BE
z
CONSTRUCTED OF EARTH
OR BOULDERS
ORIGINAL GROUND 10,
150 .00
TYPICAL EAST NORTH PIT BACKFI LL SECTION IIIIIIIIIIII-III
TEMPORARY HIGHWALL BERM
TYPICAL PIT BACKFILL SECTION
6' HIGH FENCE
2 HORIZONTAL TO I VERTICAL OF FINAL SLOPES WITH 2"X4"
FOR UNCONSOLIDATED MATERIAL. OPENINGS
SAFETY BENCHES
EXE p pkv
�AFETY BENCHES 2.
i=IDLID�ID
11m TYP. 11m TYP. QUARRY TO BE I�1
FILLED WITH 20'TYP
WATER
12
TYP. TYPICAL OVERBURDEN STORAGE SECTION WITH
30m P. BENCH
I 12° TYP
~ 30' TY P
a
11 TYP. LL
O
w IN
z
wR-Ep �~
z a PRT
EORAiN
30m P. w
°I o
m
lm TYP.
TYPICAL EARTHEN SCREEN BERM SECTION
1 I I
1 I
I PIEDMONT PROPERTY LINE
` MINE PERMIT LINE
25 FEET MINE PERMIT BUFFER
100 FEET LOT BUFFER
200 FEET STRUCTURES BUFFER
300 FEET RESIDENTIAL BUFFER
DETAILS
TYPICAL PIT CROSS SECTION TYPICAL RECLAMATION SECTION VIEWS
SECTION
IE FEET
PIT CROSS SECTION
SCALE: NTS
Na. Dote Revision
DESIGNED: SUP, cos
PIEDMONT LITHIUM, INC. DRAW JDPMMA
. CDS
SHEET PIEDMONT LITHIUM CHECKED.
DCAL L,A5 5HOWN
P I E DI X110 N T
1 of 1 LINCOLNTON WEST QUADRANGLE sTA�E: ,� SIR°�,
GASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Fzkk-nam:�LITH Ill M
N°�:
Blue(eM, VA May, 2019 JP SM CS JA

Sediment Structures - General
Construction Specifications
Sediment Pond, Sediment Ditches, Ditches and Flumes
Prior to installation of drainage structures the sites shall be cleared and grubbed of all organic and
unsuitable material. Topsoil material shall be removed and stockpiled. All obstructions will be removed
along the line as is necessary for the construction of the sediment pond, sediment ditches, ditches and
flumes.
Excavation
The completed sediment pond, sediment ditches, ditches and flumes will conform to the cross-sections
shown on the applicable design drawings. The indicated design depths are minimum requirements; the
actual depths may be greater. The constructed channels will be generally free -draining and low areas will
not exceed 0.5 foot in depth. All portions of the channel will be finished and smoothed, if necessary, for the
establishment of vegetative cover. Field adjustments may be made to conform to actual site conditions, if
the minimum design configurations, specifications, and proper functioning of the drainage structure are
maintained.
Vegetated Lining
Channels requiring vegetated lining shall be covered with a layer of soil having a minimum thickness of 12
inches. The soil lined channel shall be vegetated in accordance with approved WVDEP reclamation plan.
Riprap Lining
Rock riprap lining, when required, shall be placed in a 1.5 feet minimum thick blanket on the bottom and
sides of the channel. The rock will be non-toxic, non-acid producing, durable rock having a minimum slake
durability of 95% with a median diameter (D50) of 12 inches. Twenty-five percent by weight of the rock will
be 1.5 times the median diameter or slightly larger. The remaining seventy-five percent will be well -graded
material consisting of sufficient rock small enough to fill the voids between the larger rocks. Shale or material
that will slake in water shall not be used.
Maintenance
The sediment ponds, sediment ditches, ditches and flumes will be kept free of sediment and other debris
during the working life of the facility, so the flow of water will remain unimpeded. Maintenance of the ditches
and bench flumes will be conducted throughout the like of the refuse facility to ensure protection against
channel erosion.

DITCHES
SITE PREPARATION
Ditches - General Construction
Specifications
All obstructions and vegetative material will be removed along the line as is necessary for the
construction of the ditches.
EXCAVATION
The completed ditches will conform to the lines, grades, and cross-sections shown on the
applicable design drawings. The indicated design depths are minimum requirements; the actual
depths may be greater. The constructed channels will be generally free -draining and low areas will
not exceed one-half (05) feet in depth. All portions of the ditch will be finished and smoothed, if
necessary, for the establishment of vegetative cover. Field adjustments may be made to conform
to actual site conditions, if the minimum design configurations, specifications, and proper
functioning of the drainage structure are maintained.
VEGETATED LINING
Vegetated lining, when required, will be placed upon completion of final grade of ditch line, the
ditch shall be vegetated according to the reclamation plan.
ROCK RIPRAP LINING
Rock riprap lining, when required, will be placed in an eighteen (18) inch minimum thick blanket
on the bottom and sides of the channel. The rock will be non-toxic, non-acid producing, durable
rock having a minimum slake durability of ninety-five (95) percent and a median diameter (dso) of
twelve inches (12"). Twenty-five (25) percent by weight of the rock will be one and one-half (1-
1/2) times the median diameter or slightly larger. The remaining seventy-five (75) percent will be

Ditches - General Construction
Specifications
well -graded material consisting of sufficient rock small enough to fill the voids between the larger
rocks.
GROUTED ROCK RIPRAP LINING
Grouted rock riprap lining, when required, will be placed in an eighteen (18) inch thick blanket on
the bottom and sides of the channel. The rock will be non-toxic, non-acid producing, durable rock
having a minimum slake durability of ninety-five (95) percent. The sizing of the rock shall range
in nominal diameter from three (3) inches to eighteen (18) inches with a minimum median diameter
(dso) of twelve (12) inches. Twenty-five (25) percent by weight of the rock will be one and one
half (1 -'/2) times median diameter or slightly larger. Ten (10) percent of the rock shall be no
smaller than three (3) inches. The remaining sixty-five (65) percent of the rock will be graded
between three (3) and eighteen (18) inches. The grout shall be a sand/cement mixture with enough
water added to yield a workable consistency that will fully penetrate the rock riprap. The grout
mixture shall develop a twenty-eight (28) day compressive strength of three thousand (3000) psi.
The grout mixture shall be approved by the Engineer and/or Owner prior to placement.
WORKING EDGE DITCHES
Working edge ditches, when required, will be constructed in coarse refuse and maintained as
necessary to control surface drainage.
OUTLETS
The ditches will outlet as shown on the plans. The outlet area will be riprapped if necessary and
disturbed soil areas will be revegetated according to the reclamation plan.

Ditches - General Construction
Specifications
MAINTENANCE
The ditches will be kept free of sediment and other debris during the working life of the facility so
that the flow of water will remain unimpeded. If needed, critical sections will be covered with
rock.
RESTORATION OF SURFACE AND/OR STRUCTURES
The contractor will restore the surface and/or structures disturbed to a condition equal to that before
the work began and to the satisfaction of the Engineer and/or Owner and will furnish all labor and
material incidental thereto.
CLEANING UP
Surplus material, tools and temporary structures will be removed by the Contractor. All dirt,
rubbish and excess earth from the excavation will be hauled to an approved disposal area provided
by the Contractor and the construction site will be left clean to the satisfaction of the Engineer
and/or Owner.

Road Construction Specifications
Plans and Specifications for Haulroads
A series of haul roads are is proposed under this application. Haul road ditches, sumps, culverts,
and ponds will control the runoff from the haul roads.
A. Design drawings, plan view, map, construction specifications and cross sections
A plan view of the primary road is shown on the Site Plan Map. Profiles and cross sections are
included on Road Profiles and Cross Sections included herein.
Clearing and Grubbing — Clearing and grubbing shall be done as described in this
application.
Excavation — If excavation is required to construct the roads, excavations shall not
be steeper than 21-1: IV (Horizontal:Vertical) in soil or 0.251-1: IV in rock. Details
regarding road construction are provided in this section.
Culverts — Culverts shall be installed at the approximate locations shown on the
design drawings. Size requirements are included this section.
B. Road width, gradient, and surfacing materials
As shown on the Site Plan Map and Road Profiles and Cross Section Sheet, the total width for
the haul road shall be a maximum 100 feet. The overall grade will not exceed 10 percent and the
maximum pitch grade will not exceed 15 percent for 300 feet in each 1,000 feet. The grade on
the switchback curves will be reduced to less than the approach grade and will not be greater
than 10 percent.
C. Fill embankment and road cut
Embankment sections required for road construction shall be benched into the original ground
surface (or existing fill) as shown on the benching detail included on the Road Profiles and Cross
Section Sheet.
D. Culverts, bridges, and low-water crossing
Ditch culverts shall be installed beneath roadways at the approximate locations shown on the
drawings.

Road Construction Specifications
E. Drainage ditches and structures
The appropriate haul road ditches and sump will be installed at the approximate locations shown
on the drawings.
E Operation and maintenance procedures
Operation and maintenance procedures will consist of keeping a durable surface and keeping
sediment and drainage control structures maintained and operational. A road damaged by a
catastrophic event will be repaired as soon as practical after the damage has occurred.
G Certification and periodic inspection procedures
Access roads and haul roads shall be inspected as part of the weekly site inspections required for
the facility. Certification of road construction shall be included in the required quarterly and
annual reports.
K Abandonment and/or removal plan
Roads will be abandoned as soon as practical after they are no longer needed for construction or
reclamation operations. Regrade slopes shall be reshaped as necessary to be compatible with the
post -mining land use and revegetation requirements, and to compliment the natural drainage
pattern of the surrounding terrain.

Appendix D
Groundwater & Surface
Water Monitoring Year -to -
Date Data

Figure 1. Surface water and groundwater monitoring locations
LEGEND
IP Project Boundary
{983 ac.}'
Surface Water Collection
.
Sites
_ Pumping Well7&1�
S Observation Well
HOR Delineated
Streams
HDR Delineated Pond
® HDR Delineated
Wetlands
Desktop Streams
Desktop NWI Wetland
`•
100 -Year FEMA
Floodplain
Culverts
i inen = i eoo �xv
. a Feet 1.800
.
.
Figure 1. Surface water and groundwater monitoring locations

Table 1. Year-to-date surface water baseline monitorina results
Notes: NM - Not Measured
NS - Not Sampled
NA - Not Applicable, surface water standards for these constituents are hardness -dependent
NE - Not established
Table 2. Year-to-date qroundwater baseline monitorinq results
Location
Date
Turbidity
(NTU)
DO
(mg/L)
Field Measurements
Specific
Conductivity
(0/c m)
Temperature Arsenic Barium Cadmium Chromium
(°C) (Ng/L) (Ng/L) (Ng/L) (Ng/L)
Lead Lithium Mercury Manganese Selenium Silver
(Ng/L) (Ng/L) (Ng/L) (Ng/L) (Ng/L) (Ng/L)
Bicarbonate Carbonate
(CaCO3) (CaCO3)
(mg/L) (mg/L)
Total Total Total
Keldahl
CaCO3 Nitrogen
(mg/L) (mg/L) Nitrogen
(mg/L)
Nitrogen,
Total Dissolved Chloride Fluoride Sulfate Cyanide
NO2+NO3
(mg/L) Solids (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)
Metals
8/10/2018
4.91
5.97
11.73
675.0
Alkalinity
<10.0
16.6
Chlorophyll & Pheopytin
6.1
<5.0
Nitrogen
NS
NS
<10.0
<5.0
<5.0
140
160
<0.52
Location
Date
Turbidity
(NTU)
DO
(mg/L)
pH
Specific
Conductivity
(µs/cm)
ORP
(mV)
Temperature Arsenic Barium Cadmium Chromium
(°C) (pg/L) (pg/L) (pg/L) (pg/L)
Lead
(pg/L)
Lithium Manganese Selenium Silver Mercury
(pg/L) (pg/L) (pg/L) (pg/L) (pg/L)
Bicarbonate Carbonate
(CaCO3) (CaCO3)
(mg/L) (mg/L)
Total
CaCO3 Chlorophyll a Chlorophyll b Chlorophyll c
(mg/L) (mg/m^3) (mg/m^3) (mg/m^3)
Total
Chlorophyll a Total Nitrogen,
(Corrected) Pheophytin Nitrogen Ammonia Kjeldahl
(mg/m^3) (mg /m^3) (mg/L) (mg/L) Nitrogen
(mg/L)
Total Total
Nitrogen,
Suspended Dissolved Chloride Fluoride Sulfate Phosphorus Cyanide
NO2+ NO3
(mg/L) Solids Solids (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)
(mg/L) (mg/L)
<10.0
2/14/2019
8.52
15.55
6.17
61.3
298.1
6.1
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
10.4
<7.7
<7.7
<7.7
14.9
NS
<0.10
NS
NS
4.1
NM
NM
NM
NM
<0.050
NM
Site 1
3/21/2019
NM
12.50
6.55
147.8
179.7
9.8
<10.0
12.4
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
10.8
24.9
<10.0
<5.0
<0.20
21.7
<5.0
21.7 1
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
72.2 1
0.79
<0.10
<0.50
0.53
4.4
52.0
3.5
<0.10
2.6
<0.050
<0.0080
<0.10
4/23/2019
10.30
9.82
7.31
1 68.5
41.3
1 13.6
<10.0 1
17.3 1
<1.0
<5.0 1
<5.0
12.4 1
44
<10.0
1 <5.0
<0.20 1
22.7
<5.0
22.7
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
1 <5.0
<5.0
0.87
<0.10
<0.50
0.56 1
7.9
80
1 3.4
<0.10 1
2.6
<0.050
1 <0.0080
17
2/14/2019
7.91
19.04
6.59
55.8
251.7
7
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
66.5
NS
<0.10
NS
NS
<2.5
NM
NM
NM
NM
<0.050
NM
Site 2
3/21/2019
NM
12.19
6.93
145.6
108.9
10.6
<10.0
11.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
26.3
13.1
<10.0
<5.0
<0.20
23.1
<5.0
23.1
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
88.0
0.58
<0.10
<0.50
0.39
4.3
57.0
2.7
<0.10
1.2
<0.050
<0.0080
1.3
4/23/2019
9.40
10.70
7.21
64.4
7.5
13.5
<10.0
15.7
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
32.2
29.4
<10.0
<5.0
<0.20
25
<5.0
25
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5..0
<5.0
0.72
<0.10
<0.50
0.47
5.5
107
2.7
<0.10
1.2
0.051
<0.0080
120.5
2/14/2019
9.89 126.75
5.2
7.05
61.1
221.7
6.5
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
10.5
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
15.7
NS
<0.10
NS
NS
5.6
NM
NM
NM
NM
<0.050
NM
Site 3
3/21/2019
NM
11.80
6.97
151.3
132.2
10.2
<10.0
12.1
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
10.2
27.3
<10.0
<5.0
<0.20
21.5
<5.0
21.5
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
91.0
0.86
<0.10
<0.50
0.53
4.8
57.0
3.5
<0.10
2.7
<0.050
<0.0080
127
4/23/2019
10.8
9.60
6.92
68.0
45.2
13.9
<10.0
170.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
12.4
53.4
<10.0
<5.0
<0.20
22.9
<5.0
1 22.9 1
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
0.92
<0.10
<0.50
0.57
12.3
120
3.4
<0.10
2.7 1
<0.050
<0.0080
NM
2/14/2019
7.06
14.10
6.73
67.8
232.81
7.0
NS I
NS I
NS
NS I
NS
NS I
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
16.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
64.4
NS
<0.10
NS
NS
4.8
NM
NM
NM
NM
<0.050
NM
Site 4
3/21/2019
NM
12.80
7.03
156.5
119.5
10.6
<10.0
13.7
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
8.7
21.2
<10.0
1 <5.0
<0.20
24.8
<5.0
24.8
7.9
<5.9
<5.9
<5.9
107
0.90
<0.10
<0.50
0.54
5.4
66.0
3.6
<0.10
2.9
<0.050
<0.0080
0.16
4/23/2019
9.91
10.10
6.83
74.7
66.3
14.4
<10.0
20.3
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
10.1
39.1
<10.0
<5.0
<0.20
25.9
<5.0
25.9
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
20.5
0.95
<0.10
<0.50
0.61
8
75
3.4
<0.10
2.9
0.053
<0.6-0-80-
6.40
2/14/2019
10.22
14.41
6.32
50.7
190.9
6.8
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
6.6
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
61.0
NS
<0.10
NS
NS
3.2
NM
NM
NM
NM
<0.050
NM
Site 5
3/21/2019
NM 112.18
<10.0
6.61
140.4
122.4
10.3
<10.0
9.4
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
10.3
33.3
<10.0
<5.0
<0.20
13.7
<5.0
13.7
<6.4
<6.4
<6.4
<6.4
172
0.79
<0.10
<0.50
0.53
<3.3
48.0
3.6
<0.10
2.4
<0.050
<0.0080
<0.50
4/23/2019
10.2
9.92
6.71
57.0
45.6
14.2
<10.0
13.1
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
13.8
61.9
<10.0
<5.0
<0.20
15.3
<5.0
15.3
<5.0
1 <5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
0.84
1 <0.10
<0.50
0.55
4.8
102
3.5
<0.10
2.4
<0.050
1 <0.0080
49.4
2/14/2019
7.04
23.62
7.00
67.8
247.2
7.9
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
20.7
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
52.1
NS
<0.10
NS
NS
5.6
NM
NM
NM
NM
<0.050
NM
Site 6
3/21/2019
NM
12.43
6.82
157.1
148.81
11.0
<10.0 1
15.0 1
<1.0
<5.0 1
<5.0
7.5 1
24.0
<10.0
<5.0
<0.20
24.2
<5.0
24.2
8.9
<5.6
<5.6
1 <5.6
167
0.94
<0.10
<0.50
0.57 1
5.9
66.0
1 3.6
<0.10 1
2.9
<0.050
<0.0080
0.72
4/23/2019
10.1
9.62
7.05
74.5
80.8
16.1
<10.0
20.9
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
8.3
43
<10.0
1 <5.0
<0.20
25.2
<5.0
25.2
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
<5.0
1
<0.10
<0.50
0.63
9.6
101
3.4
<0.10
3.0
0.058
<0.0080
3/27/2019
2/14/2019
6.64
19.03
6.91
66.4
221.8
9.1
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
I NS I
NS
NS
NS
NS
19.7
<5.0
<5.0
14.6
7.5
NS
<0.10
NS
NS
7.2
NM
NM
NM
NM
<0.050
NM
Site 7
3/21/2019
NM
11.56
6.74
156.1
113.9
11.5
<10.0
16.3
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
6.4
23.3
<10.0
<5.0
<0.20
23.3
<5.0
23.3
10.2
<5.3
<5.3
<5.3
150
0.92
<0.10
<0.50
<0.55
6.5
65.0
3.7
<0.10
3.1
<0.050
<0.0080
82.5
4/23120191
9.65 1
9.44 1
6.91
71.6
88.8
17.0
<10.0
21
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
6.8
39.5
<10.0
1 <5.0
<0.20
24.2
1 <5.0
24.2 1
11.0
7.5
13.0
14.8<5.0
<5.0
1.1
<0.10
<0.50
0.62
10.8
84
3.5
<0.10
3.1
0.056
<0.0080
NCAC 2B Standards
<50
NE
6.0-9.0
NE
NE
NE
10.0
1000
NA
11
NA
NE
NE
5
NA
0.012
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
40
NE
NE
NE
NE
10
NE
500
250
1.8
250
NE
1 5
Notes: NM - Not Measured
NS - Not Sampled
NA - Not Applicable, surface water standards for these constituents are hardness -dependent
NE - Not established
Table 2. Year-to-date qroundwater baseline monitorinq results
Location
Date
Turbidity
(NTU)
DO
(mg/L)
pH
Specific
Conductivity
(0/c m)
Temperature Arsenic Barium Cadmium Chromium
(°C) (Ng/L) (Ng/L) (Ng/L) (Ng/L)
Lead Lithium Mercury Manganese Selenium Silver
(Ng/L) (Ng/L) (Ng/L) (Ng/L) (Ng/L) (Ng/L)
Bicarbonate Carbonate
(CaCO3) (CaCO3)
(mg/L) (mg/L)
Total Total Total
Keldahl
CaCO3 Nitrogen
(mg/L) (mg/L) Nitrogen
(mg/L)
Nitrogen,
Total Dissolved Chloride Fluoride Sulfate Cyanide
NO2+NO3
(mg/L) Solids (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)
8/10/2018
4.91
5.97
11.73
675.0
17.0
<10.0
16.6
<1.0
6.1
<5.0
NS
NS
NS
<10.0
<5.0
<5.0
140
160
<0.52
<0.50
0.17
233
3.3
0.32
12.9
<8.0
MW -1
3/27/2019
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
<10.0
19.1
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
84.2
NS
<5.0
<10.0
<5.0
<5.0
88.0
168
<0.52
<0.50
0.25
224
2.0
0.18
7.3
<8.0
4/24/2019
1.27
3.36
11.75
737
16.6
<10.0
18.7
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
78.2
<0.20
<5.0
<10.0
<5.0
<5.0
51.0
178
0.87
0.62
0.25
256.0
1.9
0.18
6.8
<8.0
8/9/2018
8.20
0.95
7.80
184.6
17.5
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
NS
NS
NS
<10.0
<5.0
79.1
<5.0
79.1
1.30
<0.50
0.91
135
2.5
<0.10
8.2
<8.0
MW -2
3/27/2019
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
180.0
NS
33.6
<10.0
<5.0
95.4
<5.0
95.4
1.40
<0.50
1.10
139
2.3
<0.10
5.4
<8.0
4/24/2019
4.79
0.15
7.98
203.9
17
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
167
<0.20
31.1
<10.0
<5.0
97.3
<5.0
97.3
1.4
<0.50
1.1
165
2.3
<0.10
5.3
<8.0
8/9/2018
8.70
5.59
9.06
106.9
17.7
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
NS
NS
NS
<10.0
<5.0
46.1
<5.0
46.1
0.88
<0.50
0.65
94.0
1.3
<0.10
2.9
<8.0
MW -3
3/27/2019
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
185.0
NS
12.5
<10.0
<5.0
47.9
<5.0
47.9
0.90
<0.50
0.76
85.0
1.3
<0.10
1.5
<8.0
4/24/2019
3.21
6.39
8.77
102.0
16.1
<10.0
5.2
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
185
<0.20
5.5
<10.0
<5.0
46.4
<5.0
48.2
0.99
<0.50
0.7
112.0
1.3
<0.10
1.6
<8.0
8/7/2018
13.10
7.11
9.20
120.5
18.4
<10.0
5.2
<1.0
25.7
<5.0
NS
NS
NS
<10.0
<5.0
44.2
<5.0
49.1
1.2
<0.50
1.10
93.0
1.0
1.1
4.1
<8.0
MW -4
3/27/2019
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
<10.0
5.4
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
222
NS
23.4
<10.0
<5.0
39.6
11.7
51.3
1.4
<0.50
1.2
93.0
<1.0
<0.10
1.3
<8.0
4/25/2019
2.23
6.15
9.08
113.0
16.5
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
228
<0.20
11.9
<10.0
<5.0
40.3
15.0
55.2
1.6
<0.50
1.2
127
<1.0
<0.10
1.1
<8.0
8/8/2018
14.7
4.04
11.97
169.7
20.4
221
485
1.3
328
39.9
NS
NS
NS
26.7
<5.0
1530
1800
3330
<0.52
<0.50
0.081
520
2.4
0.28
19.4
<8.0
MW -5
3/27/2019
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
<10.0
14.6
<1.0
6.2
<5.0
70.9
NS
<5.0
<10.0
<5.0
<5.0
88.0
193
<0.52
<0.50
<0.040
271
1.8
0.15
13.5
<8.0
4/25/2019
2.93
3.11
11.19
276.4
19.3
<10.0
12.9
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
151
<0.20
<5.0
<10.0
<5.0
<5.0
35.8
70.0
<0.52
<0.50
0.091
108.0
<1.0
<0.10
2.1
<8.0
8/9/2018
12.3
6.70
6.78
124.6
15.9
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
NS
NS
NS
<10.0
<5.0
64.5
<5.0
64.5
<0.52
<0.50
0.16
103
<1.0
<0.10
<1.0
<8.0
OW -1 S
3/27/2019
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
108
NS
12.8
<10.0
<5.0
69.6
<5.0
69.6
<0.52
<0.50
0.19
103
<1.0
<0.10
<1.0
<8.0
4/26/2019
5.71
6.40
6.92
127.9
14.9
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
109
<0.20
34.9
<10.0
<5.0
73.2
<5.0
73.2
<0.52
<0.50
0.17
157
<1.0
<0.10
<1.0
<8.0
8/7/2018
13.20
5.94
7.21
187.7
17.6
<10.0
5.5
<1.0
6.9
<5.0
NS
NS
NS
<10.0
<5.0
93.8
<5.0
93.8
<0.52
<0.50
0.26
132
1.7
0.16
1.2
<8.0
OW -1 D
3/27/2019
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
184
NS
63.9
<10.0
<5.0
100
1 <5.0
100
<0.52
<0.50
0.31
137
1.6
0.12
1.1
<8.0
4/26/2019
1.17
4.93
6.85
165.4
14.4
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
161
<0.20
<5.0
<10.0
<5.0
92.6
<5.0
92.6
1.0
0.75
0.27
155
1.5
<0.10
<1.0
<8.0
8/8/2018
49.4
5.68
6.42
113.8
18.9
<10.0
9.7
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
NS
NS
NS
I <10.0
<5.0
56.1
<5.0
56.1
<0.52
I <0.50
0.094
123
1.3
<0.10
<1.0
<8.0
OW -2S
3/27/2019
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
36.7
NS
8.1
<10.0
<5.0
61.1
<5.0
61.1
<0.52
<0.50
0.097
114
<1.0
<0.10
<1.0
<8.0
4/26/2019
9.26
1 5.18
6.54
113.8
16.0
<10.0
5.8
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
38.3
<0.20
19.3
<10.0
<5.0
61.9
<5.0
61.9
0.72
0.63
0.092
139
1.0
<0.10
<1.0
<8.0
8/8/2018
2.63
9.09
7.56
173.5
1 17.3
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
NS
NS
NS
<10.0
<5.0
89.1
<5.0
89.1
<0.52
<0.50
0.12
128
1.1
0.1
<1.0
<8.0
OW -21D
3/27/2019
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
108
NS
7.8
<10.0
<5.0
89.2
1 <5.0
89.2
<0.52
<0.50
0.17
125
1.1
1 <0.10
<1.0
<8.0
4/26/2019
0.96
5.14
7.28
166.2
15.7
<10.0
<5.0 1
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
100 1
<0.20
<5.0
<10.0
<5.0
93.3
<5.0
93.3
<0.52
<0.50
1 0.15
139
1.1
<0.10
<1.0
<8.0
8/9/2018
1.83
5.49
6.56
166.0
16.8
<10.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
NS
NS
NS
<10.0
<5.0
82.5
<5.0
82.5
<0.52
<0.50
0.25
121
1.7
<0.10
<1.0
<8.0
PW -1
3/27/2019
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
26.0
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
1060
NS
17.1
<10.0
<5.0
72.4
<5.0
72.4
<0.52
<0.50
<0.040
110
1.3
2.3
8.7
<8.0
4/25/2019
0.28
0.19
8.66
158.1
15.5
20.5
<5.0
<1.0
<5.0
<5.0
1000
<0.20
9.2
<10.0
<5.0
68.8
<5.0
68.8
0.57
0.56
<0.040
122
1.2
2.5
8.9
<8.0
NCAC 2L Standards
--
--
6.5-8.5
--
10
700
2
10
15
50
20
20
11
250
2
250
70
Notes: NM - Not Measured
NS - Not Sampled

Appendix E
SHPO Correspondence

From: Ferrante, Lindsay
To: RichardsonSeacat, Harriet
Subject: RE: [External] ER Request -Proposed Mine in Gaston County
Date: Thursday, May 17, 2018 4:01:16 PM
Attachments: imaae002.Dna
imaae003.Dna
Hello Harriet,
Thanks you for your email. Your methodology for this project sounds good to me; however, if you
are seeing consistently eroded soils and you are not in a particularly high probability area based on
topography and proximity to water or in an area where structures shown on historic maps, I think it
would be fine to bump your interval up to 60 meters.
Please feel free to reach out if you have any further questions.
Thanks,
Lindsay
Lindsay Flood Ferrante
Office of State Archaeology
Deputy State Archaeologist
[phone]
109 East Jones Street 1 4619 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-4619
■W8i9
ON 6 NC DEPARTMENT OF
■■W■s NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCE
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
Facebook Twitter Instaeram YouTube
From: RichardsonSeacat, Harriet [mailto: Harriet. [e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2018 12:03 PM
To: Ferrante, Lindsay <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: [External] ER Request -Proposed Mine in Gaston County
Hello Lindsay,
Regarding ER 18-0800, 1 am developing a scope for the work needed. In doing and per DCR

requirements, I wanted to confer with you regarding our methodology forth is. Typically in NC, we
conduct our survey based on probability, as follows:
In high to moderate probability areas, defined as locations less than 15 percent slope, not frequently
saturated or obviously previously disturbed, and any areas where buildings are depicted on available
historical topographic quadrangles or aerial photographs, we excavate shovel tests at 30 -meter
intervals. Low probability areas are subjected to controlled surface inspection, and any shovel tests
in these areas would be excavated at 60 -meter intervals based on professional judgment. Following
the excavation of shovel tests containing cultural material and where cultural material is
encountered on the surface, additional shovel tests would be excavated at 10 -meter intervals or
judgmentally to delineate site boundaries and assess site integrity.
Please let me know if you have agree with this approach or if you would suggest any modifications.
Thank you,
Harriet
Harriet L. Richardson Seacat, M.A.
D & M 256.614.9007
hdrinc.com/follow-us
From: DCR - Environmental_ Review [mailto:Environmental.Reviewlo�ncdcr.gov]
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 10:12 AM
To: RichardsonSeacat, Harriet <Harriet.RichardsonSeacatccDhdrinc.com>
Subject: RE: [External] ER Request -Proposed Mine in Gaston County
Our response is attached. Thank you.
Renee Shearin
Environmental Review Technician, State Historic Preservation Office
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
[phone] Office
renee.shearinCcDncdcr.gov
109 East Jones Street 1 4603 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
Please submit all Environmental Review projects to envi ron mental. revi ewan cd cr. gov. Only one project
per email.
Allow at least 30 days for our review. We try hard to complete the reviews in fewer days, but under state
and federal regulations we have a mandatory 30 days.

See http://www.hpo.ncdcr.aov/er/er email submittal.html for guidelines on submitting projectsfor
environmental review.
Do not send .zip, .tif files, downloads, or links to websites as we are not able to process these types of
items. The message size, including all attachments, should be no larger than 20 megabytes.
From: RichardsonSeacat, Harriet [mai Ito: Harriet. [e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2018 1:39 PM
To: DCR - Environmental—Review <Environmental. Review(@ncdcr.gov>
Cc: Blackwell, Thomas <Thomas.Blackwell(@hdrinc.com>
Subject: [External] ER Request -Proposed Mine in Gaston County
to Report Spam.
Hello,
rifled. Send all suspicious email as a�
Attached you will find materials relating to Piedmont Lithium's proposed lithium mining
operation in Gaston County. These are being provided for your review and comment based on
the potential application for a United States Army Corps of Engineers Section 404/401 permit.
If you need additional information, please contact me via email or phone, as provided below.
Most appreciatively,
Harriet
Harriet L. Richardson Seacat, M.A.
Senior Ethnographer
HDR
440 S. Church Street, Ste. 1000
Charlotte, NC 28202-2075
D & M 256.614.9007
harriet. richa rdso nseacat(a). hd ri nc. com
hdrinc.com/follow-us

621 Chatham Avenue
2nd Floor
Columbia, 5C 29205
803.933.9991 PHONE
803.933.9993 FAx
www.TRCsolutiDns.com
March 20, 2019
Kelly Thames
HDR
440 S. Church Street, Suite 1000
Charlotte, NC 28202-2075
Subject: Management Summary for the Phase I Cultural Resource Survey of the Proposed
Piedmont Lithium Mine Tract, Gaston County, North Carolina.
Dear Kelly:
Under contract with the HDR, TRC Environmental Corporation (TRC) conducted a Phase I
Cultural Resources (CR) survey for the proposed Piedmont Lithium Mine. The project area
consists of an approximately 963 -acre tract located four miles east of Cherryville, North
Carolina. In a letter dated May 10, 2018 the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) recommended a comprehensive archaeological survey of the tract due to the potential
for intact archaeological sites. The Phase I cultural resources survey was conducted in December
2018 and January 2019, The Architectural Survey was conducted in February of 2019. All work
was done in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of
1966, as amended, and its implementing regulations at 36 CFR § Part 800.
The archaeological area of potential effects (APE) consists of the proposed project area of
disturbance. The total APE for direct -effect encompasses 963 acres. The architectural APE
included the construction footprint and any areas that have a visual connection to the
construction footprint. Areas within the survey radius that were determined to be outside the
viewshed of the proposed Project due to terrain, vegetation, and/or modern development were
not considered part of the architectural APE. Approximately 779 acres have been surveyed to
date. The remaining acreage is awaiting landowner permission prior to accessing individual
properties (Figure 1).
Background Review
Prior to initiating field work, TRC personnel conducted research at the North Carolina Office of
the State Archaeologist (OSA) Archaeological Site Files for a background literature and records
search. Additional research was conducted via the North Carolina Historic Preservation Office's
(HPO) HPOWEB GIS Service. The purpose of this research was to locate any previously
identified archaeological sites, architectural resources, and previous investigations located within
the APE. The review revealed that there are no previously recorded archaeological sites within

L
j - y' � •�� '�+fes, .. -
,� S w
0 ,
GS0229
r �o
!� r
�. - 5 i t•�1
f=incf
Site 5
}
Resource 4 Resource 11
Resource 5
GS037fi
f Resource 13 Resource 10
Resource 1 Resource 12
Resource 8
Resource 9
Resource 2 GS0018-DEMOLISHED
Resource 6
Resource 7
' Resource 3
�,
rx
fir.. G50160,; - •.

the boundaries of the project area. There is one previously recorded architectural resource
present directly within the direct impact area (GS0229). This home site was revisited during the
course of the survey. The review identified four other previously surveyed architectural
resources (GS0018, GS0160, GS0231 and GS0376) within the project APE.
Archaeological Survey
The goals of the intensive cultural resources survey included systematic shovel testing and
pedestrian survey to locate any previously recorded or unrecorded archaeological sites located
within the project tract and access the NRHP eligibility status of the resources. Shovel tests
measuring 30 -centimeters in diameter were excavated at 30 -meter intervals across the project
area. All soils were sifted using 1/4 -inch screen and artifacts were collected and bagged according
to provenience. The surface was visually inspected for cultural materials in areas with greater
than 25 percent ground visibility and more than 15 percent slope. When positive shovel tests or
surface finds were encountered, additional shovel tests were excavated at 10 or 15 -meter
intervals in a grid pattern surrounding the initial positive test/find to determine the site
boundaries and more fully investigate the horizontal and vertical integrity of the deposits. During
the course of the survey shovel test were systematically excavated at 30 m (100 ft) intervals
across the accessible portions of Project APE. Shovel tests within a majority of the APE
exhibited eroded soils typical of the Piedmont.
Five Archaeological Sites and one isolated find were identified during the course of the survey.
The isolated find consisted of a single brick fragment. None of the sites are recommended
eligible for the NRHP.
Site 1 is a former house site and scatter of twentieth century artifacts. The house is no longer
extant. The area is heavily eroded and highly disturbed (Figure 2). The house that once stood at
this location has been destroyed. A push pile containing bricks and a separate push pile of large
rocks are present. Shovel tests were excavated to determine the extent of the site. Soils at the the
site were shallow consisting of a thin humic layer above a rocky clay subsoil. Artifacts recovered
from the surface and the humic layer include ironstone, stoneware, glass and nails. The historic
artifacts were mixed with modern refuse (plastic bottles, beer bottles). The site has been heavily
disturbed and impacted by modern dumping. These factors have compromised the integrity of
the site. There was no evidence of intact features and the likelihood of significant cultural
deposits is minimal. It is not eligible for the NRHP.
Site 2 was identified as a house site based on the presence of a brick lined well and a structural
foundation. Artifacts recovered and observed on the surface include building material (brick and
stone) window glass, container glass and nails. All artifacts were recovered from a surface
context. No artifacts were recovered from the shovel tests excavated at this site. The site is a
heavily disturbed former twentieth century house site. It does not possess the integrity required
for inclusion on the NRHP.
Site 3 is another former house site. The site was identified when a pile of bricks and the ruins of
a barn were observed east of Hephzibah Church Road (Figure 3). Shovel testing recovered glass,
nails and brick fragments. Modern garbage (plastic bottles, asphalt shingles, tile) was also
present and intermixed with the historic artifacts. The site is heavily disturbed. The house that
once stood here is no longer present. The barn is in poor condition and no longer in use. Soils at
the site were shallow and eroded. Subsoil was encountered immediately below the root mat
layer. The site is of a common type in rural North Carolina. It represents the remnants of an early

to mid -twentieth century farmstead. The integrity of the site has been compromised. It does not
meet the criteria required for inclusion on the NRHP.
Site 4 is an area of push piles and partially filled in pits related to the mid -twentieth century
lithium mining operation that was once active at this location (Figure 4). There were no
structural features or artifacts associated with this site. The site offers little in the way of research
potential and is not recommended for inclusion on the National Register.
Site 5 is the ruins of an early 20th century cabin/house (Figure 5). The house is dilapidated and in
poor condition. Shovel testing around the house did not recover any artifacts. The house is
present on historic topo maps. It does not possess the integrity or information potential required
for inclusion on the NRHP.
Figure 2. Site 1. Brick and stone pile.

f
Figure 3. Site 3. Brick and stone pile.
Figure 4. Site 4. Push piles associated with former lithium mine.

Architectural Survey
Subsequent to the archaeological survey, TRC's architectural historian conducted a field survey
of the project area. The purpose of the architectural survey was to identify historic architectural
properties aged 50 years or older within the project area and within the visual APE of the project
that are listed, or eligible for listing, in the NRNP. Two of the previously recorded architectural
resources (GS0160 and GS0231) had pervisouly been recorded as demolished. Resource
GS0018, the Hickory Grove School was revisited and also found to be demolished. Resource
GS0229, within the project tract, and resource GS0376, adjacent to the project tract, were
revisited and are recommended as "not eligible" for the NRHP.
Property GS0229, the Jonas D. Rudisill House, is a Folk Victorian style house with a reported
construction date of 1901(Gaston County, NC WebGIS 2019). The two-story dwelling features a
pyramidal roof covered in asphalt shingles, brick exterior, and a brick foundation (Figure 6).
Property GS0229 is recommended Not Eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criteria A, B, or
C. The property does not possess any particular historical significance at the local level and is
recommended not eligible under Criterion A. Background research did not reveal any
associations with a significant person or people and TRC recommends the property not eligible
under Criterion B. Property GS0229 was evaluated under Criterion C and does not appear to
possess significance in the area of architecture. The dwelling's integrity has been compromised
as a result of extensive alterations, which include the replacement of the original roof, the
enclosure of the porch frame, the replacement of most of the historic windows, the construction
of a rear addition, and the application of vinyl cladding.
Property GS0376, the Payseur House, is a ca. 1910 vernacular house in a dilapidated condition.
Tax assessor records do not provide an approximate date of construction for the dwelling. The
single story dwelling features a roof covered in corrugated metal, synthetic exterior siding, and a
brick pier foundation (Figure 7). A partially intact exterior brick chimney is attached to the
northwest elevation. Views of the remaining elevations could not be obtained from public right -
of way. The dwelling is located on a private drive on a 6.75 -acre parcel of land that includes a
modern mobile home and outbuildings.
The property does not possess any particular historical significance at the local level and is
recommended not eligible under Criterion A. Background research did not reveal any
associations with a significant person or people and TRC recommends the property not eligible
under Criterion B. Property GS0376 was evaluated under Criterion C and does not appear to
possess significance in the area of architecture. The dwelling is in a dilapidated condition and
represents a typical vernacular building type found throughout the region.
Thirteen above ground resources aged 50 years or older were identified within the construction
footprint or within the surrounding viewshed. The newly recorded resources are mid -twentieth
century homes that are currently occupied. The do not possess any unique architectural traits and
are not associated with significant historical persons or events. They do not meet the criteria
required for inclusion on the NRNP. TRC is currently preparing NC Structural Survey Cards to
obtain official state site numbers for these resources.
Summary
No significant cultural resources were identified within or adjacent to the proposed Piedmont
Lithium Mine Tract. No further cultural resources work is recommended for the areas that were
accessible for survey. Further survey is required for parcels that were not cleared for access.

T- H'I .f
��llm
Figure 6. Oblique view of Property GS0229 facade and northwest elevation; view southeast
F.. .f
- - - --- - _ ..............
vi
1C. � .
Figure 7. View of Property GS0376 west elevation; view east

Please let us know if there are any questions or concerns with these preliminary findings. TRC is
preparing a report for the work completed to date. Artifacts have been washed and analyzed. We
are currently waiting for official NC site numbers for the archaeological sites and newly
identified structures.
Sincerely,
I --I- r--�
Sean Norris, M.A., RPA
Program Manager, Archaeology

May 22, 2019
David L. Shaeffer
United States Army Corps of Engineers
Project Manager/Geographer
Charlotte Regulatory Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 611
Charlotte, NC 28262
Re: Piedmont Lithium Mine Site in Gaston County, North Carolina
Mr. David L. Shaeffer:
The Cherokee Nation (Nation) is in receipt of your correspondence about Piedmont Lithium
Mine Site in Gaston County, North Carolina, and appreciates the opportunity to provide
comment upon this project. Please allow this letter to serve as the Nation's interest in acting as a
consulting party to this proposed project.
The Nation maintains databases and records of cultural, historic, and pre -historic resources in this
area. Our Historic Preservation Office reviewed this project, cross referenced the project's legal
description against our information, and found no instances where this project intersects or adjoins
such resources. Thus, the Nation does not foresee this project imparting impacts to Cherokee
cultural resources at this time.
Additionally, the Nation requests a copy of the completed cultural resources survey with related
comments from the State Historic Preservation Office. The Nation requires that cultural resources
survey personnel and reports meet the Secretary of Interior's standards and guidelines.
However, the Nation requests that the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) halt all
project activities immediately and re -contact our Offices for further consultation if items of cultural
significance are discovered during the course of this project.
Additionally, the Nation requests that USACE conduct appropriate inquiries with other pertinent
Tribal and Historic Preservation Offices regarding historic and prehistoric resources not included
in the Nation's databases or records.
If you require additional information or have any questions, please contact me at your convenience.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
Wado,
Elizabeth Toombs, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
Cherokee Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Office
[e-mail]
918.453.5389
Mee of the Chief
Bill John Baker
GV7J DOF
Principal Chief
aP ch aSS9 �J
CHEROKEE NATION®
O-E0G.F3
P.O. Baa 948 • TahleyMk OK7446"M • 918-453.5000 • &h km.aRS
S. Joe Crittenden
Deputy Principal Chief
-0. KC iEJ �JJ
WPA DWA 01EOG.0
United States Army Corps of Engineers
Project Manager/Geographer
Charlotte Regulatory Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 611
Charlotte, NC 28262
Re: Piedmont Lithium Mine Site in Gaston County, North Carolina
Mr. David L. Shaeffer:
The Cherokee Nation (Nation) is in receipt of your correspondence about Piedmont Lithium
Mine Site in Gaston County, North Carolina, and appreciates the opportunity to provide
comment upon this project. Please allow this letter to serve as the Nation's interest in acting as a
consulting party to this proposed project.
The Nation maintains databases and records of cultural, historic, and pre -historic resources in this
area. Our Historic Preservation Office reviewed this project, cross referenced the project's legal
description against our information, and found no instances where this project intersects or adjoins
such resources. Thus, the Nation does not foresee this project imparting impacts to Cherokee
cultural resources at this time.
Additionally, the Nation requests a copy of the completed cultural resources survey with related
comments from the State Historic Preservation Office. The Nation requires that cultural resources
survey personnel and reports meet the Secretary of Interior's standards and guidelines.
However, the Nation requests that the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) halt all
project activities immediately and re -contact our Offices for further consultation if items of cultural
significance are discovered during the course of this project.
Additionally, the Nation requests that USACE conduct appropriate inquiries with other pertinent
Tribal and Historic Preservation Offices regarding historic and prehistoric resources not included
in the Nation's databases or records.
If you require additional information or have any questions, please contact me at your convenience.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
Wado,
Elizabeth Toombs, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
Cherokee Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Office
[e-mail]
918.453.5389