19930653 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_19930803

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
A14 0 1
ED F= F1
July 21, 1994
Gaston County
DEM Project # 93653
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Mr. Donald Carmichael
City of Gastonia
P.O. Box 1748
Gastonia, N.C. 28053-1748
Dear Mr. Carmichael:
FILE COPY
You have our approval to place fill material in 4.9 acres of wetlands or waters for the purpose
of raw water lines at Mountain Island dam to near Dallas , N.C., as you described in your
application dated 2 August 1993. After reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill is
covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 2664. This certification allows you to use
Nationwide Permit Number 12 when it is issued by the Corps of Engineers.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application.
If you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new
application. For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached
certification. An additional condition is that anti-seep collars shall be placed at no more than 150
foot intervals near wetland flag numbers 135, 133, 109, 10 and 8. In addition, you should get any
other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 30 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing,
send a written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to
the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification
and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Environmental Management under Section
401 of the Clean Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-
1786.
Sincerely,
to
ard, Jr. P.
V"_A&
irector
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Mooresville DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files
Mr. Bobby Jordan; J.N. Pease Associates
93653.1tr
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

A r c It ? t c c I u i c l: n it e c r a n t• I' 1 a ,? n< n ? I n t c r? ? a-
Page 7 of ? - -
Recipicitt's Name ? Do.YNEY _
Recipient's Company ?f
Recipient's FAX Number ?1/? - / 33-24-16
Project /II5?Az /
41
ezE
Commission Number 936'z7, .5'0
Date c1,a4- /f, /,9
Sender's Name ??
Sender's FAX Number (704).33:Z-6177
COMMENTS:
Y'i?CG
o7.s/cY ?S . ??iy.D.4 SEGc/ALG f ,??f/
- X4,kl

??i?E ra.? r.9GT ?.?E ?PJo,.IG-=G? ?.??lt.ltf
?i/? , ?Y?i 7ff l•??s 7- 01e r yj , V 71

J.N. Eerie Associatcs VO. Ito\ IS-25 2921 Iia:a In<Jcpcn4cncc 8h-0. c.hacluttc. NC ?MtH "04 1;
TA'd 96t-=c?6TGT nl Dn5su 9SHdd 'H"f wna-j TS:bT t766T-TT--lnr
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health ctnd Naturevl Resources
Division of Environmental Management
A
James B. Hunt. Jr., Governor
Jonathon B. Howes, Secretary
A, Preston Howard, Jr„ P.E., Director
July 8, 1.994
Mr. Bobby T. Jordan
J.N. Pease Associates
P n. Box 1977.5
Chark-me, N AC. 29219
Dear Mr. Jordan:
17FM Project #93653
Gaston County
On 2 August 1993, you requested a 401 Watei Quality Certification frorn the Division
of Environmental Management for your project (raw water line for the City of Gastonia)
located near South Fork Catawba River in Gaston County_ We wrote to you on 4 August
1993 discussing concerns that we have regarding the status of the EA/1-ONSI for this project
and placing it on hold until those concerns are addressed. As of today, we have not received
a response to our earlier letter. Unless we receive a response from you by 21 July 1994, we
will consider that you have withdrawn this application and are not interested in pursuing the
project at this time.
Please call me at 919-733-1786 if you have any questions or would like to discuss this
mattt'r-
Sincerely,
41o n R. Domey
Wetlands and Technical view Group
93653,clr
cc= M(x)resville DEM Regional Office
Wilmington l7istrict Corps of Engineers
Central Files
P0. BOX 29535, Ruleiy1 i, Ncx ll? C f-xvIh ?t-? 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Eraual Opportunity Atfirmativo Action Employer 1.+0% recycled/ 10% post-consuinor pope-
ce'd 96PF-=CL6T6T nl "DOSSd 3OU3d WE IAOdJ TS:VT b66T-TT--in
_ Yr1'
r ,R R E C E I V E D
OEC 16 1993
North Carolina
Department of AdminiStmtlon "'. OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Jarnes B. Hunt, Jr., Govemor
December. 15, 1993
Ms. Linda Sewall
N.C. Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Health
1330 St. Mary's Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626
Dear Ms. Sewall:
Katie G. Dorsett, Secretary
Re: SCH File #94--E-4300-0266; Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact for the Proposed Gastonia
Raw Water Line
The above referenced environmental impact information has been
reviewed through the State Clearinghouse under the provisions of
the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act. No comments were
made by any state/local agencies in the course of this review.
Therefore, no further environmental review a+-tion on your part is
required for the compliance with the Act.
Best regards.
Sincerely,
/7 j 115
Ms. Chrys Baggett, Director
State Clearinghouse
CB: jf
cc: Region F
116 West Jones Streer • Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-8003 • Telephone 919-733-"!2.321
State Courier il-01-00
(,?
AnEquaIOprxvtun, ty AitIri-itit.,A.t-tEmhl,,vcr "P
EO'd 96bct-7'L6T6T ni 'DnSSH H1503d 'WE Woaj FS:bT b66T-TT--IFlf
tG_I ' d ??Jlnl
S}ate of North Car, la
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Health
James B. Hunt, Jr„ Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
December 17, 1993
UIr. . Gary D. Hicks, Manager
City of Gastonia
pest Office Box 1748
Gastonia, North Carolina 28052
Dear Mr. Hicks:
1 ?
EDP F?Plt
Attached is a copy of a letter from the Nurth Carolina Department of
Administration indicating that the environmental review for the City of Gastonia's
proposed raw water line has been completed.
Since no comments were received, no further environmental review action is
needed. You may proceed with the plan review portion of this project.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Linda C. Sewall
Deputy Director
LCS/chh
attachment
cc: Mr. Wally E. Venrick
Mr. J. C. Lin
Mr. E. D. Herndon
Mr. Keith West
Mr. Robert J. Goldstein
P.O. Box 27687. Raleigh. North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] FAX.[phone]
An Equal OpportunOy Aifirmalive Action Employar 50% recycled/ I(M Post consumer paper
t7o"d 96tESU-GT5T 01 'DO550 3Sd3d 'N'f Wnaj F-S:tT tGGT-TT--inf

f
ffr
1 1 1994
WEILA D3 1
WATER OUi,df; ;

?, r i I. . t t• c t u r c• l'. n I' n ?• r a t II 1; 1' I .? ? I n r n 1; ( rI I r r r,? ?
Vr?e L
ltecipicnt's
Reciriellf'S C_OII1-?J,tll}' L' ???ti' - _ --?
_.'?$
Recipient's FAX Number
Project
Commission Number _92- 0 2 7- .O
Date
Sender's Name
Sender's FAX Number (704) 33--'-bI77
COMMENTS:
?D?/J? Y ,criyc:'GO.T?Q /S'?'? ,GE-T?f i?•s ?k?i??r?

/? ;'?=f(?`?PE ,4?F- ?c/2 T•5/E?P._ ?Ll?r'T/"U?ts' ,
?',?-Efi1.J'F Cc?.? TAGT' ? ?/C fi?r??G ? ?" ?i??rrit/E.?.?°_

(.T1, !'raSr AS`•n t (c 1'() Mw IH-?i "1?, 1 t.r In Jc( cn cn :c ISlcrl (liarl u+?. \C _'t4211; r17 S r, r.?
TCI'd B??T??, ? ? TF,T nl 'XIS,11 -Pl-l f •t!'C HFIn I ,Tl:9T 1-6FT-T1--]nl
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James E3, Hunt, Jr., Governor p I H N F
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A, Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Irrly X, 1T)4
Mr. Bobbv T. Jordan
J.N. Pease Associates
P.O. Box 19725
harloue,. N.C. 282'S
Dear Mr. Jordan:
T)FNI Project #9 365 -?
Gaston County
On 2 August 1993, you requested a 401 Water Quality Cottiflcation from the. Division
of Environmental '.Management for your project (raw water line fOr the City of Gastonia)
located near South Fork Catawba River in (iaston County. We wrote to you on 4 August
1991 discussing concerns that we have regarding the status of the EA/FONSI for thiq Project
and placing it on hold until those concerns are addressed. As of tc?day, we have not received
a rrsponsc to our carlicr lcttrr Unlcss we rrccivc a responsc front you by 21 lily 199.1, wr'
will consider that you have withdrawn this application and are not interested in pursuing ihr
project at this time.
Please call me at 919 Ti'i 1786 if you have any questions or would like to discuss this
matter.
Sincerely,
r ?
r_ _
Jo n R. Domey
Wetlands and Technical view Group
93653.c1r
cc: Mooresville DENI Regional Office
Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Ccntral Files
F'.Q. Box 79535, Rdoign, North c;cxolina Y76L6-U ib lelephclne V 19-i33-1017 FAX [phone]
An Erjuel (-)ppnrItrvly ArfirmrAvcr Acti')n Ernpkly„r rnr?yc%l(,J/ I pod c-Ona.mer piper
(-n cl 9`'ZT? l_,FTF, T fll 1pSS?? 119d 'r!'f [-in?jd RFI:9T t7RFT-TT--lnf
RECEIVED
DEC 1993
North C uolina
Department of Adminismation 1"- of CNYIFONMLNUL'
James B. Hunr, Jr., G(wemor
December 15, 1993
Ms. Linda Sewall
N.C. Department of Environment, Hrea?th,
anH Matt»ral Resources
Division of. Prvirunmental Health
1330 S`_. Mary's Street
Pal-ei_riii, Nnrth Carolina 27G26
Dear Ms. Sewall:
Katie G. Dorsett, ec tan'
Re: 5C1-1 File 494-E-4300-0256; Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Siniti_cant .impact for the Proposed C;astonia
R.,w Wari- r Line
The above referenced environmental impart. information has been
reviewed through the State Clearinqhouse under_ the provisions of
the North Carolina Environmental Pe_1icy Act. No comments were
made by any state/].Deal agenr.i.PS in the course of this review.
Therefore, no further env ronnenta! review action on your part s
required for the compliance with t!ne Act.
Best regards.
incoT-1y,
Ms. Chrys Baggett, Director
State Clearinghortse
CB : j f
cc: Region F
llb Wesr Jones street • Raleigh, North (';,n,ltn., ; ; hQ ?-7(Y`? • Tele?hnn? 91 _73311- }.'.
Sracr (??,u??cr 51.1 i??
4n:\tt,r7uiw,•1`1 ,rFrir?-.er
End °S-7T(7-7r_,STFT nl ?nS?F? ?S??dd 'rl'f IJnd? RH:9T t7F,(-,T-TT--Inf
nn -'I -4 tni
,t.te of North Car, .)a
Department of Environment.
Health and Natural Resources
DI\Asion of Environmental Health
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governer
Jonati,,an B. 1-owes. Secretary
December 17, 1993
Mr. Gerry D. Hicks, Manager
City of Gastonia
pnst Office Box 1748
Gastorda, '.North Carolina 8052
Dear Mr. Hicks:
CDFHNFlo
Attached is a copy or a letter frum t.lre North Carolina Department of
Administration inri.icating that the environmental re-,riew for the City of Gaston-kits
proposed raw water line has been completed.
Since no comments were received, no further ent*ironmental review action is
needed- You may proceed with the plan review portion of this project.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Siriceruly,

Linr7a C. Sewall
Deputy Director
LCS/c,hh
attachr cn
cc: &1r. Wally E. Venrick
Mr. J. (--;.Lin
NIr. F_ D. Herndon
?Xlr. K(-ith West
\9r. Rj)bcrt J. uolctstein
P Pox 27687. Rnleigh. North Carolina 2:61 1 1687 Tclophorne 919-733-2870 FAX [phone]
P.n ?-qua1 Cppcrtunlty Affi,mutivd Ar:tlon Emplryw E0% rricycled/ ' CfY, post-c-)najmm pacer
t-n'? - ?TE- Tr;T nl rl??N H? l 'IJ'r I.1n?d A ?n:qT bF6T-TT--71F
1
h.. State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr„ Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A, Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
July 8, 1994
Mr. Bobby T. Jordan
J.N. Pease Associates
P.O. Box 18725
Charlotte, N.C. 28218
Dear Mr. Jordan:
DEM Project #93653
Gaston County
WOM
ID F1
FILE CVrY
On 2 August 1993, you requested a 401 Water Quality Certification from the Division
of Environmental Management for your project (raw water line for the City of Gastonia)
located near South Fork Catawba River in Gaston County. We wrote to you on 4 August
1993 discussing concerns that we have regarding the status of the EA/FONSI for this project
and placing it on hold until those concerns are addressed. As of today, we have not received
a response to our earlier letter. Unless we receive a response from you by 21 July 1994, we
will consider that you have withdrawn this application and are not interested in pursuing the
project at this time.
Please call me at 919-733-1786 if you have any questions or would like to discuss this
matter.
Sincerely,
Jo n R. Dorney
Wetlands and Technical view Group
93653.clr
cc: Mooresville DEM Regional Office
Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Central Files
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10`16 post-consumer paper
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B, Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Augusts 4, 1993
Mr. Bobby T. Jordan
J.N. Pease Associates
P.O. Box 18725
2925 East Independence Blvd.
Charlotte, N.C. 28218
Dear Mr. Jordan:
IF
WOOK
I D EHNR
RE: Application for 401 Certification
City of Gastonia raw water line
Gaston County
DEM # 93653
On 2 August 1993, I received an application for a new raw
water line for the City of Gastonia. You attached copies of
excerpts from the ongoing Environmental Assessment for the
project. I will have to place this project on hold until the EA
has been cleared by the N.C. Clearinghouse. This is in
accordance 15A NCAC 01C.0402 (Limitations on Actions During NCEPA
Process) which prevents agency action (such as a 401
Certification) "which might limit the choice among alternatives
or otherwise prejudice the ultimate decision on the issue".
When this project has been cleared by the N.C.
Clearinghouse, please notify me by copy of the letter and I will
then activate the project. I can be reached at 919-733-1786 if
you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Jo n R. Dorney
We lands and Te nical Review Group
93653.hld
cc: Monica Swihart
Central Files
Mooresville DEM Regional Office
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
P E A S
A r c h i t c c t ti r c• F. n n c c r i n I' l a n Ili rt g
July 22, 1993
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Planning
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health
and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
E
I n t e r i o r s
21993
Reference: 48- and 54-Inch Raw Water Line
City of Gastonia
Gastonia, North Carolina
J.N. Pease Associates' Commission No. 93027-00
Subject: Nationwide Permit Section 401 Certification
Dear Mr. Dorney:
Enclosed for your review and approval are seven copies of the Nationwide Permit
Application, along with excerpts and maps taken from the Environmental Assessment
(EA) of the proposed raw water line (EA by Robert J. Goldstein and Associates, Inc.).
One copy of the Application with supportive excerpts and maps is being sent for
review to Mr. Steven W. Lund, Biologist, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville,
North Carolina.
All required applications and permits are currently being forwarded for plan review
to the Division of Environmental Health in Raleigh, North Carolina and also to the
Division of Environmental Management in Mooresville, North Carolina to obtain an
approved Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan.
Also enclosed are copies of letters from the Division of Parks and Recreation and the
Division of Archives and History.
Notification of the proposed project has also been made to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service by Robert J. Goldstein and Associates, Inc.
Your time and efforts in the expeditious resolution to this matter are greatly
appreciated. Please let me know if we can provide any further information.
Sincerely,
Bobby T. Jordan
BTJ/iw
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Donald E. Carmichael
Mr. John Shuler
J.N. Pease Associates I,O ling i8-2, ">2i I[atit Ind(-p(xlcnrc BINd ( harl)ltc. V( 28218 -01 1-0012.1

INFORMATION SHEET
NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE APPLICATION FOR,$ECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
A. NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS DISTRICT ENGINEER. (REFER TO
ITEM B. BELOW FOR DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT APPLICATION
REQUIREMENTS AND SPECIFICALLY NOTE NWP 26 DIFFERENCE.)
Certain nationwide permits require notification to the Corps of Engineers
before work can proceed. They are as follows:
NWP 5 (only for discharges of 10 to 25 cubic yards)
NWP 7
NWP 13 (only for stabilization activities in excess of 500 feet in length
or greater than an average of one cubic yard per running foot)
NWP 14 (only for fills in special aquatic sites, including wetlands, and
must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites)
NWP 17
NWP 18 (required when discharge exceeds 10 cubic yards or the discharge is
in a special aquatic site and must include a delineation of the affected
special aquatic site, including wetlands)
NWP 21 (must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites,
including wetlands)
NWP 26 (only for greater than 1 acre total impacts and must include a
delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands)
NWP 33 (must include a restoration plan of reasonable measures to avoid
and minimize impacts to aquatic resources)
NWP 37
NWP 38 (must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites,
including wetlands)
For activities that may be authorized by the above listed nationwide permits
that require notification, the applicant shall not begin work
a. Until notified that the work may proceed under the nationwide permit
with any special conditions imposed by the District Engineer, or
b. If notified that an individual permit may be required, or
c. Unless 30 days (calendar) have passed from the time a complete
notification is received by the District Engineer and no notice has been
received from the District Engineer, and required state approvals have been
obtained. Required state approvals include: 1) a Section 401 water quality
certification if authorization is requested for a discharge of dredged or fill
material, and 2) an approved coastal zone management consistency determination
if the activity will affect the coastal area.
6/10/92

-2-
Use of NWP 12 also requires notification to the District Engineer, but work
may not begin until written concurrence is received from the District
Engineer. The time periods described'above do not>,apply. Furthermore,
requirements to notify the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 'service (USFWS), the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the State Historic Preservation
Office (SHPO), as indicated below and on the notification form, do not apply.
B. APPLICATION TO DEM FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION.
Certain nationwide permits require an application to DEM in order to obtain
Section 401 water quality certification. They are NWP 6, NWP 12, NWP 15, NWP
16, NWP 17, NWP 21, NWP 33, NWP 34, NWP 38, and NWP 40.
Certain nationwide permits were issued general certifications and require no
application. They are NWP 3, NWP 4, NWP 5, NWP 7, NWP 20, NWP 22, NWP 23
(requires notification to DEM), NWP 25, NWP 27, NWP 32, NWP 36, and NWP 37.
The following nationwide permits were issued general certifications for only
limited activities: NWP 13 (for projects less than 500 feet in length), NWP
14 (for projects that impact waters only and are subject to SEPA or NEPA), NWP
18 (for projects with less than 10 cubic yards of fill in waters or wetlands),
and NWP 26 (for projects with less than or equal to one-third acre fill of
waters or wetlands. Projects that do not meet these criteria require
application for Section 401 water quality certifications.
C. NOTIFICATION/APPLICATION PROCEDURES.
The attached form should be used to obtain approval from the Corps of
Engineers and/or the N.C. Division of Environmental Management as specified
above. The applicant should make sure that all necessary information is
provided in order to avoid delays. One copy of the completed form is required
by the Corps of Engineers and seven copies are required by DEM. Plans and
maps must be on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper.
Endangered species requirement: For Corps of Engineers notifications only,
applicants must notify the'U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the National
Marine Fisheries Service regarding the presence of endangered species that may
be affected by the proposed project.
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
RALEIGH FIELD OFFICE HABITAT CONSERVATION DIVISION
P.O. BOX 33726 PIVERS ISLAND
RALEIGH, NC 27636-3726 BEAUFORT, NC 28516
Telephone [phone] Telephone [phone]
Historic resources requirement: For Corps of Engineers notifications only,
applicants must notify the State Historic Preservation Office regarding the
presence of historic properties that may be affected by the proposed project.
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
N.C. DIVISION OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY
109 EAST JONES STREET
RALEIGH, NC 27601 Telephone [phone]
Information obtained from these agencies should be forwarded to the Corps.
r 14
DEM ID: ?05 ACTION ID:
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #): 12
JOINT FORM FOR
NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
WILMINGTON DISTRICT ENGINEER WATER QUALITY PLANNING
CORPS OF ENGINEERS DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, _
P.O. BOX 1890 AND NATURAL RESOURC (, f
WILMINGTON, NC 28402-1890 P.O. BOX 29535
ATTN: CESAW-CO-E RALEIGH, NC 27626-0
Telephone [phone] ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNE
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE SENT T TH CttPS OF
ENGINEERS. SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF''
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT. PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: City of Gastonia
2. OWNERS ADDRESS: Post Office Box 1748
Gastonia, North Carolina 28053-1748
3. OWNERS PHONE NUMBER (HOME): N/A (WORK): [phone]
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL, ADDRESS,
PHONE NUMBER: Mr. Donald E. Carmichael, P.E.
City of Gastonia
Post Office Box 1748
Gastonia, NC 28053-1748 [phone]
5. LOCATION OF WORK (MUST ATTACH MAP). COUNTY: Gaston
NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Gastonia
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.): Extends for a distance
of 10 miles from Mt. Island Lake in northeastern Gaston County and is to continue
west, southwestward along an existing Duke Power R/W, crossing Dutchmans Creek,
Stanley Creek NC Hwy. 27- Smith Fork Catawha River, Little Long Creek. ending west
of SR 2327.
6. NAME OF CLOSEST STREAM/RIVER: South Fork Catawba River
7. RIVER BASIN: Catawba
8. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, SA, HQW, ORW,
WS I, OR WS II? YES [ ] NO [X] Classified as WS IV
9. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY? YES ( J NO (X]
IF YES, EXPLAIN.
10. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WATERS OF THE U.S., INCLUDING
WETLANDS, LOCATED ON PROJECT SITE: 0.5 Acre
6/10/92
R.
-2-
11. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WATERS OF THE U.S., INCLUDING WETLANDS, IMPACTED BY
THE PROPOSED PROJECT:
FILLED:
DRAINED:
FLOODED:
EXCAVATED: _
TOTAL IMPACTED: 4.9 Acre *Water line is first excavated, then backfilled to original contours.
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK (ATTACH PLANS): Total of 52,600 LF± (9.96 Miles)
of 54-inch and 48-inch raw water line
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: To provide the required current and projected water
needs to the residential, commercial, and industrial areas within the City of
Gastonia's service area.
14. STATE REASONS WHY THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE
CARRIED OUT IN WETLANDS. ALSO, NOTE MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND
IMPACTS. Due to the size of this proposed utility, a general "Cross-Country"
type route has been chosen. This route has the least environmental impact on
developed areas, since it parallels an existing R/W and is therefore more (OVER)
15. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
(USFWS) AND/OR NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE (NMFS) REGARDING THE PRESENCE
OR ANY FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING ENDANGERED OR THREATENED
SPECIES-OR CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE PERMIT AREA THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE
PROPOSED PROJECT. HAVE YOU DONE SO? YES (X] NO ( ]
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NMFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
16. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
(SHPO) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES IN THE PERMIT AREA WHICH
MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT?
HAVE YOU DONE SO? YES (X] NO [ ]
RESPONSE FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED BY DEM:
A. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, AND LAKES ON
THE PROPERTY. See Environmental Assessment Jurisdictional Wetland Maps,
Figures 8a, 8b, 8c, and 8d.
B. IF AVAILABLE, REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPH OF WETLANDS TO BE IMPACTED BY
PROJECT. None
C. IF DELINEATION WAS PERFORMED BY A CONSULTANT, INCLUDE ALL DATA SHEETS
RELEVANT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE DELINEATION LINE. N/A
D. IF A STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IS REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT, ATTACH
copy. N/A
E. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY? Duke Power R/W, Road Rights-of-
Way, Rural Residential Areas, Agricultural Areas, and Forests
F. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
N/A - IN --
OWNER'S SIGNATURE
Donald E. Carmichael, P.E.
DATE

economical. We have avoided wetlands where possible and feasible. Erosion
control measures (approved by the NC Department of Environmental Management,
Land Quality) will be implemented. We propose to cross all creeks, streams,
or rivers as close as possible to right angles and will maintain pre-existing
grades after construction.
,k

U.S. Fish & Wildlife
330 Ridgefield Court
Asheville, NC 28806
[phone]
Service U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
Room 75, Grove Arcade Building
37 patt'ery Park Ave.
Asheville, NC 28801-2714
[phone]
State Historic Preservation Office
NC Division of Archives & History
109 East Jones St
Raleigh, NC 27601
[phone]
Water Quality Planning
Division of Environmental Management
NC Dept. of Environment, Health &
Natural Resources
PO Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Attn: John Dorney
[phone]
Wildlife Resources Commission Fisheries Biologists
nisr_rict 7 District 8
Joe Mickey Chris Goudreau
Rt 2 Box 278 Rt 6 Box 685
State Road, NC 28676 Marion, NC 28752
[phone] [phone]
Counties Counties
Alleghany Avery
Ashe Burke
Stokes Caldwell
Surry McDowell
Watauga Mitchell
Wilkes Rutherford
Yancey
District 9
Micky Clemmons
Rt 1 Box 624
Waynesville, NC 28786
[phone]
Counties
Buncombe
Cherokee
Clay
Graham
Haywood
Henderson
Jackson
Macon
Madison
Polk
Swain
Transylvania
a
>-
z
U
..-.
Figure 1. Gastonia raw water trans-
mission line, project location
map, Gaston County, N.C.
Mecklenburg County
Robert J. Goldstein & Assoc., Inc.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
8480 Garvey Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
3.10. Jurisdictional Wetlands.
3.10.1. Introduction.
Wetlands are areas saturated with sufficient frequency and duration to produce
anaerobic soil conditions that normally support plants tolerant of low oxygen around their
roots. Wetlands are protected because they provide habitat for plant and animal species,
storage for floodwaters, groundwater recharge, and filter sediments, contaminants, and
excess nutrients from runoff, thereby protecting municipal water supplies. Wetlands may be
filled only under limited circumstances, of which the most important is the absence of non-
wetland alternatives.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) enforces water and wetland protection under
Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act, in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and N.C. Division of
Environmental Management (DEM). Jurisdictional wetlands are one of six categories of
"special aquatic sites" identified by EPA which carry special provisions under Section
404(b)(1) of the Clean Water Act. Jurisdictional wetlands are defined by three parameters:
hydrology, hydric soils, and hydrophytic vegetation. The wetland delineation method
presently in use by COE (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) describes methods for recognizing
each of these parameters, and also defines atypical jurisdictional wetlands that do not meet
all three criteria, such as wetlands altered or created by man or beavers.
Streams and impoundments that do not meet the wetland definition also fall under COE
jurisdiction if they are hydrologically connected to "navigable waters of the United States."
For purposes of this report, waters under COE jurisdiction that are referred to as "wetlands"
include forested wetlands, marshes, and bank-to-bank channels.
3.10.2. Methods.
Ecologists used the project plans provided by JNP, the Gaston County soil survey,
aerial photographs, and the U.S.G.S. topographic quadrangle to determine potential areas of
wetlands for field investigation. The entire water line corridor was examined on foot, and
jurisdictional wetlands delineated by the COE method (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) at
intervals chosen according to topographic, hydrologic, and vegetational indicators. A corridor
25 feet to the north side and 35 feet to the south side of the proposed centerline was
examined. Reed (1988), and U.S. Soil Conservation Service (1989) provided wetland plant
and hydric soil classifications, respectively.
Soil cores were taken with an 18-inch soil auger, and soil color (hue, value, and
chroma) determined using Munsell soil color charts. Predominant tree, shrub, woody vine,
and ground cover vegetation were identified, and determinations made as to whether each
plant community meets the criteria for hydrophytic vegetation. Hydrologic indicators (e.g.,
water marks, soil saturation, oxidized root channels, water-stained leaves) were recorded.
The wetland edges were marked with numbered flags, and distance and direction to each
wetland flag measured from a previous wetland flag or other landmark. Orange survey tape
was tied along the edge of the powerline ROW to facilitate location by surveyors and agency
personnel.
34
3.10.3. Results.
Thirty-five wetland areas were located in the proposed 60-foot wide raw water line
construction corridor, and are mapped as linear distances along the project corridor from east
to west (Table 8 and Figures 8a-8d). Large wetland areas occur in floodplains in association
with Chewacla soils. These are forested except where they have been cleared for road and
utility ROWs. Smaller bank-to-bank wetlands occur where the proposed project crosses
perennial or intermittent stream channels. The total jurisdictional wetland area in the water
line construction corridor is approximately 4.9 acres, including 3.6 acres of forested wetland,
0.8 acre of marsh wetland (mostly in powerline ROW), and 0.5 acre of bank-to-bank channel
wetlands.
Forested wetlands in the project area are dominated by sycamore (Platanus
occidentalis), swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii), river birch (Betula nigra), and
American elm (Ulmus americana). Associated understory species include red maple (Acer
rubrum), boxelder (Acer negundo), musclewood (Carpinus caroliniana), painted buckeye
(Aesculus sylvatica), silky dogwood (Corpus amomum), spicebush (Lindera benzoin), and
hazelnut (Corylus americana). Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), poison ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans), jewelweed (Impatiens capensis) and seedlings of canopy species
comprise the groundcover.
Marsh wetlands in the project area are dominated by grasses (Poaceae), soft bulirush
(Juncus effusus), sedges (Carex spp.), cattail (Typha latifolia), arrow arum (Peltandra
virginica), and shrub and tree seedlings. Most of the marsh wetlands occur in the 10-foot
wide strip where the project construction ROW overlaps the powerline ROW.
35
Table 8.

lag No. Jurisdictional wetland dimensions, by type, on the proposed Gastonia raw
water line corridor, Gaston County, N.C. Flag numbers correspond to Figures
8a-d.
Length Wetland Length Wetland
(ft.) Type Flag No. (ft.) Type
1-2 20 F 120-121 150 M,F,C
3-4 10 C 122-123 15 C
5-6 20 F,C 124-125 15 C
7-8 600 F,C 126-127 15 C
9-10 620 F 128-129 15 C
11-12 50 C 130-131 20 C
13-14 35 C 132-133 200 F
15-31 380 F 134-135 250 F
100-101 30 F,C 136-137 350 C
102-103 30 F,C 138-139 75 F
104-105 15 C 140-142 70 F
106-107 40 F,C 144-145 10 C
108-109 160 F,C 146-147 15 C
110-111 200 F 148-149 15 C
112-113 210 F 1001-1002 10 C
114-115 10 C 1003-1004 25 F
116-117 20 F,C 1005-1006 15 C
118-119 40 F,C
F - forested wetlands, dominated by trees; may include marsh where construction
ROW overlaps powerline ROW.
M - marsh wetlands, dominated by grasses, herbs, and shrubs.
C - bank-to-bank channel wetlands.
36
c?c I ?1\
cn 3 c`o '% O < 1 ? cl)
c co C V z ^
C) C DO
C o? o Q ?U
-0 U zC7 U
U) c W c)
_ y o• y z? Z c?0i?•`1\ I ?•
L- 00
0 !E
z °-'
w m \\
n cc
00 "
\ ?/A
I?I II V ?\\\ I l
I
/7
00
T. ?
!?r C r.,
r
_o
0
b°
?uC / n/1 (?? r:n;Eii.i;iii:E?'!.u:i?lf. N P ?r
v
r U -N
am --
Av

r
if
o0 o
O, O l .-
O

Q)
II?
?- To
L
.
C?-e

e k

o

Co

00 \\v •
1 0 ,, /I

C
O r
C
N c
? N
J o c 3 \
m o
to
J V
3
N
W
?Nx :Lill
C \
.C
41 c
/
C M L •V Z ^ ?'' rl ' 0 =? • ? 1 ?' r
04
3 0 Z c ; II • • .
4-0 cc :03
-r, u
\ z •
c H z )0 co
-oi a C7 o ao
> C3)
• // _ J.
. ??
w
cr-
\ 00 t "I,
o
I?u CNN
n 70
-IIL- ,
b(a,? cn
r
100-
o
o
a? :% k d?lll,,
> ; / ? 1 I LG? O ? ?
O
CD
C O
o
• •. ??
"p " .• -
gee / o i
Yl*
V• \
r • • I 1 • ii- ?_..1 o co
Zr (D
` C CD 0 o
I O w
• • / ???\\ ? / ^ A h0 ? J 3 v \
'\ 1
I
I

11
000 4)
C d C ~ ¦ ?i?
•
O . I .- lo/
3 U . 8 H ((D • I ^?
1? A s
cm cu C z,4 P-
COT
O N C
z - 00 Cry
c o ` U II I ,_-?
o
'r+ D U z C7 t.
'o0c Woo ?-
0 CL + o Z o I
CL 0)
Z ?. /
w cc 100
00
o /
? ' •
?/-? 11 I .. •/?• ?
00
a •? •
00 CP
II
\ I ?O
? ¦ N ?J
• N
r
800
4 \
z- ¦ o
800 • _ ' p
• N ?_
m 3
1 N
co l z
,01
W
m
cr-
?I? ' I • O
;' ?i _ ? 11 ? ? •\
? ? • ? (? ?/, i /? _ /?Z ? i ? ? l .-_ ?? 1 _ II ,? 111 w
?--
_ 4- c
c v
c(1) c
J O m '0 w
co 0
c AD /
N
? •? z ^ L J
m?O
-E M
00 cnO.c O
Z
3 Z
MCO 4J
u (D;6
II
c 0
O O Q N U
F- o
v n c ?., z
v O O ?o O
N a `n ao Z (n Z cc
/ Z D 0 000
J -? a U
z CD
z
W co
00
Ro
? O
LL
??7?77
i
00
I
•
J I •^
`• ! 1 ?/ O r• r r •?
\\\ ' I • • • • • • ` •
•
r •
O
o
• o 0
rte, \
O \
,
o
. v
loo
loo.
,.? %• ??.
sCreek
ta
elk
• • •
0
Vl
m
/ ?\ J
3 H
\ \
-7601
op,
3.1 1. Terrestrial Plant and Animal Habitats.
The project corridor contains utility and road rights-of-way, residential areas, croplands,
pastures, alluvial forests, mesic mixed hardwood forests, oak/hickory forests, pine/hardwood
forests, and cutover areas dominated by grasses, herbs, and stump sprouts. The N.C. Natural
Heritage Program (NHP) natural community classification system (Schafale and Weakley,
1990) is used where applicable, although much of the project corridor is disturbed and does
not readily conform to that classification. Descriptions of the amphibian, reptile, bird, and
mammal communities of the project area are based on Lee et al. 0 982), Martof et al. (1980),
Potter et al. 0 980), Webster et al. 0 985), and field observations.
3.11.1. Residential and Agricultural Areas.
Residential and agricultural areas, including roadsides and portions of utility rights-of-
way, contain large expanses of cultivated grass, crops, widely spaced trees, and patches of
brush. They are likely to support abundant domestic predators and introduced species that
reduce habitat suitability for many native species. Reptile and amphibian species are limited
to a few small, secretive snakes (Virginia and Storeria spp.), ground skink (Scincella lateralis),
Fowler's toad (Bufo woodhousei), and gray treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis). Predominant birds
include the introduced house sparrow (Passer domesticus), starling (Sturnus vulgaris), and
pigeon (Columba livia), and the native cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), robin (Turdus
migratorius), white throated sparrow (Zonotrichia a/bicollis), and mockingbird (Mimus
polyglottos). Gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), house mouse (Mus musculus), Norway rat
(Rattus norvegicus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), opossum (Didelphis virginiana), and big brown
bat (Eptesicus fuscus) are the typical mammals in these areas.
3.11.2. Cutover Areas.
Upland cutover areas and utility rights-of-way (where not used for lawns, crops, or
pasture) are dominated by grasses (Poaceae), broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), asters
(Asteraceae), goldenrod (Solidago spp.), blackberry (Rubes spp.), pine seedlings (Pious spp.),
and stump sprouts of oaks (Quercus spp.) and sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua).
Amphibians and reptiles in these areas include those of residential and agricultural areas, plus
black racer (Coluber constrictor), rough green snake (Opheodrys aestiva), six-lined racerunner
(Cnemidophorus sexlineatus), and a few frog and toad species (Acris crepitans, Pseudacris
triseriata, and Bufo woodhousei) in marshy areas. Birds of open cutover areas include the
bobwhite (Colinus virginianus), meadowlark (Sturnella magna), killdeer (Charadrius vociferus),
bluebird (Sialia sialis), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), American kestrel (Falco sparverius),
and red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis). Typical mammals include the harvest mouse
(Reithrodontomys humulis), cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus), woodland vole (Microtus
pinetorum), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), and red fox (Vulpes vulpes). White
tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) frequent open areas bordered by forests.
41
3.11.3. Upland Hardwood Forests.
Mesic mixed hardwood forests (Piedmont subtype) occur along moist slopes adjacent
to streams in the western two-thirds of the project corridor. These forests are dominated by
yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), red oak (Quercus rubra and Q. falcata), and beech
(Fagus grandifolia). The dominant understory species include flowering dogwood (Cornus
florida), mountain laurel Walmia latifolia), red maple, American holly (flex opaca), and big-leaf
magnolia (Magnolia macrophy//a). The latter species is considered "significantly rare" in North
Carolina by NHP, but is not listed as a protected species. The groundcover includes poison
ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), false Solomon's seal
(Smilacina racemosa), Solomon's seal (Polygonatum biflorum), and seedlings of canopy
species.
Oak/hickory forests (dry and dry-mesic) in the project area are dominated by white oak
(Quercus alba), northern red oak (Quercus rubra), black oak (Q. velutina), mockernut hickory
(Carya tomentosa), and pignut hickory (Carya glabra), with post oak (Quercus stellata) and
southern red oak (Quercus falcata) occurring on drier sites. Shortleaf pine (Pious echinata),
loblolly pine (Pious taeda) and Virginia pine (Pious virginiana) also comprise a significant
component of the canopy in some areas. Areas containing a majority of pines were mapped
as pine/hardwood forests (not an NHP classification), which is a successional stage that would
ultimately revert to oak/hickory forest if left undisturbed. Dominant understory species in
oak/hickory forests include red maple, flowering dogwood, sourwood (Oxydendrum
arboreum), deerberry (Vaccinium stamineum), strawberry bush (Euonymus americanus),
greenbriar (Smilax spp.), and grape (Vitis spp.). Groundcover plants include lowbush blueberry
(Vaccinium vacillans), pipsisewa (Chimaphila maculata), arrowhead heartleaf (Hexastylis
arifolia), cranefly orchid (Tipularia discolor), and running cedar (Lycopodium spp.).
Upland forests, including mesic mixed hardwood and oak/hickory forests support
diverse animal communities. The reptiles and amphibians of upland forests include terrestrial
salamanders (Ambystoma and P/ethodon spp.), tree frogs (Hyla spp.), American toad (Bufo
americanus), box turtle (Terrapene carolina), five-lined skink (Eumeces fasciatus), fence lizard
(Sceloporus undulatus), rat snakes (Elaphe spp.), kingsnakes (Lampropeltis spp.), and timber
rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus). Birds of upland forests include sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter
striatus), downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens), sapsucker (Sphyrapicus varius), ruby-
crowned kinglet (Regulus calendula), and many warblers (Parulidae) and finch and sparrow
species (Fringillidae). Upland forest mammals include those of residential and open areas, plus
gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), several bat species (Vespertilionidae), short-tailed shrew
(Blarina carolinensis), flying squirrel (Glaucomys volans), chipmunk (Tamiasstriatus), and other
rodents. Many reptiles, birds, and mammals require edge habitats (ecotones), the borders of
forests with adjacent open areas.
3.11.4. Bottomland Hardwood Forests.
Alluvial forests occur on floodplains of the larger streams in the project area where
levees are not well developed. They are dominated by swamp chestnut oak (Quercus
michauxii), river birch (Betula nigra), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), green ash (Fraxinus
pennsylvanica), and American elm (U/mus americana). Associated understory species include
42
red maple (Acer rubrum), boxelder (Acer negundo), musclewood (Carpinus caroliniana),
painted buckeye (Aesculus sylvatica), silky dogwood (Corpus ammomum), spicebush (Lindera
benzoin), and hazelnut (Corylusamericana). Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicerajaponica), poison
ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), cane (Arundinaria gigantea),
and seedlings of canopy species comprise the groundcover. Alluvial forests may or may not
be wetlands, depending on the presence of hydric soils, vegetation type, and hydrology.
Bottomland hardwood forests are species-rich, productive habitats. The remaining
stands in the project area occur along streams, where they provide migration corridors and
sanctuaries for many animals. Amphibian larvae requiring fish-free vernal pools depend on
bottomland forests. Many game animals such as wood duck (Aix sponsa), woodcock
(Scolopax minor), turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), and deer depend on bottomland forests.
Bottomland forest mammals include most of the upland species plus beaver (Castor
canadensis), mink (Mustela vison), and muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus).
Many bottomland hardwood forests in the urbanized Piedmont have been destroyed
by impoundments or conversion to agriculture and silviculture. Fragmentation of bottomland
hardwood forests reduces their habitat value, especially for animals requiring large home
ranges. Bottomland hardwood forests that do not meet the COE wetland definition receive
no legal protection, and are at risk from development.
3.12. Protected species and Natural Areas.
3.12.1. Protected Species.
Rare plant and animal species may be protected by the Federal Endangered Species Act
0 6 U.S.C. 1531-1543), administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and by two
North Carolina laws: the Plant Protection and Conservation Act (N.C.G.S. 19b 106: 202.12
to 22), administered by the N.C. Department of Agriculture (DOA), and the State Endangered
Species Act (N.C.G.S. 113: 331 to 337), administered by the N.C. Wildlife Resources
Commission (WRC). RJG&A ecologists consulted with FWS, WRC, DOA, and the N.C.
Natural Heritage Program (NHP) to determine which protected species might occur in the
project area.
Only one protected species is known from Gaston County: the state-threatened bog
turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii). Several plants, butterflies, and millipedes known from Gaston
County are designated as "significantly rare" or "candidate" species by federal or state
agencies, but currently have no legal protected status.
The bog turtle is recognized by its plain brown carapace, a large yellow to orange
blotch on each side of the head and neck, and its small size (maximum four-inch carapace).
It typically occurs in bogs, marshes, and other upland depression wetlands with an open
canopy. River floodplains do not offer suitable habitat for the bog turtle except where
hydrologic modifications (e.g. reservoirs) protect against scouring floods (Martof et al., 1980;
Alvin Braswell, N.C. Museum of Natural Sciences, pers. comm).
43
Suitable habitat for the bog turtle occurs in several areas along the powerline ROW
where small streams spread out into marshy areas. Soil compaction due to right-of-way
maintenance has created or enhanced shallow ponded areas. Bog turtles, if present, would
have been in hibernation at the time of the field reconnaissance (January 4-8,1993), and
would not have been detectable.
3.12.2. Natural Areas.
Natural areas are localities of unusual geology or areas supporting unusually diverse
plant and animal communities, often including rare species or disjunct populations. The west
bank of the South Fork Catawba River and supports a diverse community of alluvial forest on
the floodplain and mesic mixed hardwood forest on the adjacent slope, including a large
population of the rare bigleaf magnolia (Magnolia macrophy//a). An unpaved trail and several
benches are located in this area, indicating recreational use. The proposed water line route
lies in an intermittent channel at the base of the slope, bisecting this area.
Two additional rare plant species (candidates for state and/or federal listing) that occur
in the project area were mentioned in the scoping comments received (Stephen Hall, NHP,
letter 8 January 1993). Georgia aster (Aster georgianus) occurs within the Duke Power
transmission line ROW just east of N.C. 27, and is most readily identified during October.
Nestronia (Nestronia umbellula) also occurs in this vicinity, and can be located during most
of the summer and fall. NHP recommends that a qualified biologist mark locations of these
species and bigleaf magnolia during the appropriate seasons, and that project alignment and
construction activities be adjusted to minimize adverse impacts.
44
4.0. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES.
4.1. Introduction.
Three alternative water supply expansion plans were considered by J.N. Pease (1986),
and are briefly described in section 2.0. This section describes the environmental impacts of
the preferred raw water line alternative, with mitigation, in comparison with the no-build
alternative. Acreage calculations of impacts along the raw water line are based on a 60-foot
wide construction corridor.
4.2. Land Use, Forestry, and Agricultural Resources.
The no-build alternative will have little impact on land use in the project area or other
portions of Gaston County. Urban growth in Gaston County will be slower if the project is
not built, and current land uses including agriculture and timber production will be more
persistent.
The build alternative will directly affect approximately 35 acres of prime farmland soils.
Approximately 9.0 acres of alluvial forest, 7.5 acres of mesic mixed hardwood forest, 8.1
acres of oak/hickory forest, and 20.2 acres of pine/hardwood forest will be permanently
converted to utility line use. Approximately 2.0 acres of the project corridor actively managed
for timber production will be converted to utility line use. The N.C. Division of Forest
Resources recommends that trees cut for construction be marketed when possible. Forestry
impacts can be reduced by placing lines immediately adjacent to roads or rights-of-way to
avoid creating unmanageable strips of trees. Additionally, damage to residual trees inside or
adjacent to the construction corridor, including root disturbance, bark skinning, filling, spilled
fuel or oil, or erosion and sedimentation, can be minimized through proper construction
practices.
Most land use impacts of the project will be secondary and cumulative, resulting from
increased urbanization in portions of Gaston County far from the project area. The increased
availability of water will allow high-density residential, commercial, and industrial development
to displace low-density residential, agricultural, and forest uses, but will also increase land
values and the tax base. This will in turn create demand for additional highway construction,
sewerlines, and other infrastructure. The new water supply watershed protection rules
adopted by DEM will regulate the density of new development in Watershed Critical Areas,
including large portions of the project service area. Pressure on remaining undeveloped land
for recreation, watershed protection, and other uses will increase, and zoning will play an
important role in limiting and directing impacts. Recreational use of Crowder's Mountain State
Park, Lake Wylie, and Mountain Island Lake may increase.
4.3. Archaeological and Historical Resources.
No impacts to archaeological and historical resources are expected from this project,
based on the scoping letter from the N.C. Division of Archives and History (David Brook,
February 18, 1991).
45
4.4. Air Quality.
No direct negative impacts on air quality are associated with the operation of water
distribution systems. During construction, short term impacts on air quality, primarily an
increase in dust, will result from clearing and grading activities in the right-of-way.
Wind-blown dust from the small acreage of cleared land can be reduced by prompt seeding.
Short-term effects on air quality from carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic
compounds emitted by engine exhausts of construction equipment will be negligible. Impacts
on air quality from electric pumps are non-existent; impacts from back-up diesel-driven pumps
will be intermittent during testing or emergency use and in all cases negligible.
Negative secondary impacts on air quality may result when increased population results
in more emissions of pollutants from industrial users and transportation. Nationwide,
automobile lead emission as a percentage of the total lead emission has decreased. The
contribution to lead emissions from transportation decreased from 84% in 1980 to
approximately 34% in 1988, due to the phasing out of leaded gasolines. On the other hand,
nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and volatile organic compound emissions from motor
vehicles have changed little, as benefits from fuel efficiency and pollution control technology
were offset by the increase in vehicles. Urban growth may hamper efforts to bring Gaston
County into compliance with ozone and carbon monoxide standards. These secondary and
cumulative negative impacts on air quality may be reduced in the future by improved fuel
efficiency and engine design, or by advances in public transportation.
4.5. Noise Levels.
Short-term negative impacts of noise will be associated with construction activity, but
will limited to daylight hours. Once built, operational noise from the pumps will be
insignificant.
Secondary and cumulative negative impacts may accrue from induced growth requiring
expanded and additional transportation corridors. Highway design away from residences, the .
inclusion of buffers of earth mounds, walls, or forest stands where impacts are unavoidable,
and other methods of the N.C. Department of Transportation under the direction of the
Federal Highway Administration are available for mitigating noise impacts, and may be
required in state and federal EA and EIS studies of those projects.
4.6. Surface Water Resources.
The no-build alternative will have no impact on water resources, but will limit future
industrial, commercial, and residential growth. Areas currently served by private or
community wells will continue to rely on groundwater. The city or county may need to
extend municipal water supply to rural areas where contamination of wells has been
documented, but existing water supplies should be sufficient to cover this small additional
use.
46
Direct impacts of the build alternative during construction will include soil disturbance
and vegetation removal in the 60-foot wide construction corridor. Resulting erosion and
sedimentation in streams can be minimized using best management practices during
construction, and revegetating disturbed areas promptly. An Erosion and Sedimentation
Control Plan will be required, and must be approved by the DEM regional office (Mooresville)
prior to construction. Water line segments lying parallel to streams should be at least 50 feet
from stream banks (WRC recommendations). Stream crossings should be constructed at right
angles, and vegetation disturbance within 50 feet of stream banks should be kept to a
minimum. Oil, fuel, and emissions from construction vehicles may create temporary, localized
impacts. Routine maintenance of the water line and right-of-way after construction should
have negligible impacts on water resources.
Water withdrawn from Mountain Island Lake will be returned to the Catawba River
basin via Gastonia's three wastewater treatment plants on Long Creek, Catawba Creek, and
Crowders Creek. A fifteen mile segment of the Catawba River between Mountain Island Dam
and its confluence with the South Fork in Lake Wylie will experience reduced flows. Several
NPDES permitted dischargers occur along this segment, and minimum release flows from
Mountain Island Lake will be crucial in maintaining sufficient flow for wastewater assimilation.
The Catawba River basinwide management plan, scheduled for completion in 1994, will
establish the new target flows and wasteload assimilation capacities.
To meet both Gastonia's peak withdrawal need of 100 MGD and the state's target
instream flow, Duke Power may have to alter its operation of Mountain Island Dam during low
flow periods. Mean inflow to Mountain Island Lake is approximately 1,300 MGD. Peak
generating flow at the hydroelectric dam is 5,730 MGD, but the demand for electricity in the
service area is easily met at lower flows due to the contributions from nearby coal- and
nuclear-powered generating plants. Additional water storage facilities (tanks or reservoirs)
could be constructed to ease the burden on Mountain Island Lake during droughts, and would
also serve as protection for Gastonia against temporary water quality problems at the lake.
The build alternative will promote development at greater density than the no-build
alternative, with environmental consequences throughout the project service area. Increased
impervious surface area will decrease rainwater infiltration to the soil, leading to increased
peak stormflow in streams. Flood damage, soil erosion, stream bank destabilization, and
stormwater contamination of water supplies may result. The reduced infiltration may also
create lower low-flow conditions, and perennial streams may become intermittent (Hewlett,
1982). Removal of the forest canopy in areas of urban growth will alter structural habitat and
thermal and nutrient regimes, especially in the smaller streams, which consequently will alter
aquatic communities.
Long term stormwater impacts were addressed by a recent extension of the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program issued by EPA in November, 1990,
under authority of the Claen Water Act. Stormwater discharges from municipalities serving
100,000 or more persons, and certain industrial stormwater dischargers, are required to
submit stormwater management plans specifically to control contamination sources in the area
to be permitted. The program is delegated to the state by EPA, and is administered by the
47
N.C. Division of Environmental Management, Water Quality Section. The N.C. regulatory code
regarding wastewater discharges to surface waters 0 5A NCAC 2H.0100) was amended to
adopt the new regulations.
Impacts of effluent from the water treatment plant are not included in this report. A
separate Environmental Assessment of the proposed treatment plant on the new location will
be prepared at a future date.
4.7. Groundwater.
The no-build alternative will result in a proliferation of wells in areas of new
development. The build alternative will decrease reliance on groundwater. Many existing
private and community wells will be retired, and demand for new well installations will be
greatly reduced. Although groundwater usage will decrease, increased urbanization will create
additional threats of potential groundwater contamination of existing wells. Local
governments can enforce groundwater protection strategies through careful planning and
adherence to guidelines established by DEM (1990).
4.8. Aquatic Habitats.
Impacts of the build alternative on stream habitats, and strategies for minimizing
impacts, are the same as described for water resources (Section 4.6). Some streams in the
project area have been altered by urban and agricultural land uses, and additional urbanization
will have less biological impact than it would on streams in undeveloped areas. Dutchmans
Creek and its tributaries still support a diverse, relatively intact biological community which
could easily be lost due to urban impacts. The water supply watershed protection rules may
limit potential development density in protected portions of the Dutchmans Creek basin, but
the rules do not protect against channel modification or forest canopy removal. Siltation,
substratum disturbance, and changes in flow, thermal, and nutrient regimes may alter the
biological community.
Some vernal pools may be disturbed by water line construction, but others may be
inadvertently created if the resultant soil compaction reduces permeability in topographic
depressions. These created vernal pools may provide habitat for amphibians and bog turtles.
4.9. Jurisdictional Wetlands.
The no-build alternative has no direct wetland impacts, and will not promote wetland
loss or degradation from induced development as will the build alternative.
Wetland dimensions and approximate acreages in the 60-foot wide construction
corridor are summarized in Table 8 and illustrated in Figure 8. A total of approximately 4.9
acres will be directly affected, of which 3.6 acres is forested wetland, 0.8 acre is marsh/shrub
wetland, and 0.5 acre is bank-to-bank channel wetland.
48
Most of the proposed wetland crossings are at nearly 90 degree angles to streams, and
will cause the minimum possible wetland impacts. However, RJG&A ecologists identified two
areas along the project route where wetland impacts could be reduced by shifting the project
alignment, as described below.
The crossing of Dutchmans Creek is adjacent to a tributary that enters
from the east (wetland flags 7-10), where the Dutchmans Creek floodplain is
especially wide. This area is currently alluvial forest beyond the edge of the
powerline ROW. Options for reducing wetland impacts in this area include: (1)
placing the line within the Duke powerline ROW, so that no additional forest
clearing is necessary; using this option, the length of wetland traversed would
be approximately the same, but adverse ecological impacts would be
considerably less; (2) rerouting the project along SR 1918 from NC 273 (near
St. Josephs Church), to the Duke powerline ROW on the west side of
Dutchmans Creek; this option crosses the Dutchmans Creek floodplain at a
narrower point, and would traverse less jurisdictional wetland.
The crossing of the South Fork Catawba River will affect a broad
floodplain and intermittent tributaries on both sides of the river (wetland flags
132-145). This segment also traverses a public park containing a significant
natural area (Sections 3.12 and 4.11). Options for reducing wetland impacts
in this area include: (1) placing the line within the Duke powerline ROW, so that
no additional forest clearing is necessary; this option requires ascending a steep
bluff on the west bank of the river, but the elevation is no higher than other
points both east and west along the project route; thereby the length of
wetland traversed would be reduced on the west bank, impacts on aesthetic
values of the park would be reduced, and adverse ecological impacts would be
considerably reduced on both sides of the river; (2) beginning on the west bank
of the South Fork, rerouting the project southward around the hill and alongside
the existing dirt road, and rejoining the powerline right-of-way near S.R. 2003;
this option avoids the park, the bluff, and the floodplain wetlands on the west
bank.
Impacts during construction will be minimized by using proper erosion and
sedimentation controls constructed outside the wetlands whenever possible, and by limiting
temporary storage of excavated material to the up-slope side of the trench. Original land
contours will be restored with original topsoil as required under Nationwide Permit No. 12, and
natural wetland vegetation should recolonize the cleared area.
Secondary and cumulative impacts to wetlands throughout the project service area
may accrue as a result of induced urban development, as discussed in sections 4.2 and 4.6.
4.10. Terrestrial Habitats.
The no-build alternative will have no direct impact on terrestrial habitats, and will not
promote habitat loss or degradation from induced development, as will the build alternative.
49
The build alternative will directly affect approximately 9.0 acres of alluvial forest, 7.5
acres of mesic mixed hardwood forest, 8.1 acres of oak/hickory forest, 20.2 acres of
pine/hardwood forest, 5.6 acres of cutover forest (saplings 5 years old or less), and 29.1
acres of agricultural, residential, and other mowed areas. In the latter habitat type, ecological
impacts of the project will be insignificant because of the highly disturbed character of this
land and poor habitat quality.
Forested habitat loss is approximately 50.4 acres, but because the project is adjacent
to existing utility corridors (roads and powerlines), habitat fragmentation will not be significant
except where the water line diverges from the powerline ROW. The existing forest/field
ecotone will be destroyed, but a similar ecotone will be created and edge-dwelling species will
be unaffected in the long run.
Secondary and cumulative impacts to terrestrial habitats throughout the project service
area may accrue as a result of induced urban development, as discussed in sections 4.2 and
4.6. Higher density development induced by the build alternative will affect upland
communities, and reduced infiltration on developed uplands may adversely affect bottomland
communities.
4.11. Protected Species and Natural Areas.
The January, 1993 field reconnaissance could not ascertain the presence or absence
of bog turtles in the project area because the species hibernates underground at this time of
year. Provided that existing open-canopy wetlands are not drained during project
construction, no adverse impacts upon the bog turtle are expected. If existing forested
wetlands are converted to open-canopy wetlands, then the project may create additional
habitat suitable for bog turtles.
Several stands of bigleaf magnolia (Magnolia macrophylla), a non-protected rare
species, were found along the western half of the project corridor. The most significant of
these sites is on the west bank of the South Fork Catawba River, in an area used as a public
park. Impacts on park users and the bigleaf magnolia can be minimized by selecting a project
alignment through this area that avoids mature trees, and by minimizing root grubbing.
The population of Georgia aster reported in the powerline ROW east of N.C. 27 can be
avoided if construction crews are instructed to do so (Stephen Hall, scoping letter of 8
January 1993). The site should be marked in a manner that construction personnel can easily
recognize. Impacts to nestronia can be minimized by selecting a route that minimizes damage
and removal of those mature trees found to support this parasitic plant.
50
5.0. MITIGATION.
5.1. Legal and Regulatory Framework.
N.C. Gen. Statute 113A, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), established
standards for environmental documents (EA, EA/FONSI, EIS) when projects meet minimum
criteria, based on disturbed acreage, volume of withdrawal or discharge, and cost in public
dollars. These environmental documents must include mitigation measures proposed to
minimize adverse impacts. The measures recommended by most state agencies closely follow
good management practices and federal guidelines.
The public perception of mitigation is compensation. In the legal sense, mitigation has
two components, avoidance and compensation, with avoidance having supremacy. Mitigation
(avoidance to the extent practicable followed by compensation) of adverse impacts of
construction projects may take various forms under federal and state laws. Local ordinances
cannot preempt the requirement for compliance. Avoidance includes selecting a project route,
design, construction and maintenance plan that minimizes adverse impacts. Compensatory
mitigation may include restoration and enhancement of degraded wetlands or creation of
replacement wetlands, on or as close to the adversely affected project site as feasible.
Recently, DEM (4 December 1992) proposed formal adoption of Conceptual Wetland
Rules, including new mitigation ratio guidelines. DEM is currently receiving comments on the
proposal.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act and amendments (Clean Water Act) contains
sections pertinent to environmental document preparation. Section 401, administered by the
N.C. Division of Environmental Management (DEM), requires certification that discharges of
fill material will not unacceptably degrade water quality. Mitigation for potential water quality
impacts during construction is normally met by good management practices such as prompt
grassing of disturbed slopes, silt fences, and temporary detention ponds. Section 401
certification is required before a Section 404 permit can be obtained (see below).
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act is administered by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE), which issues Individual and Nationwide (General) dredge and fill permits for
projects affecting waters, including wetlands, of the United States under its jurisdiction. It
coordinates jurisdiction and permit issuance with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and
National Marine Fisheries Service, among other agencies. The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has ultimate authority for interpretation of the Act, and may overrule both COE
and FWS in deciding contested jurisdictional decisions.
Because water and wastewater lines often require placement in wetlands, and because
these lines are public utilities, they may qualify for COE Nationwide Permit 12 under the
Section 404 program. The version of Nationwide Permit 12 now in effect (Federal Register
Vol 56, No. 226, 22 November 1991) requires a pre-discharge notification to the COE District
Engineer to verify that the Nationwide Permit is applicable to the proposed project. Special
conditions to comply with Nationwide Permit 12 include written concurrence from DEM for
Section 401 consistency, compliance with the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531) and
National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470) and their amendments, a maximum
51
P 61
Robert J. Goldstein & Associates, Inc.
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNERS AND CONSULTANTS
8480 Garvey Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27804-3175
July 23, 1993
Mr. Bobby Jordan
J.N. Pease Associates
Charlotte, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Jordan:
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Robert J. Goldstein & Associates, Inc. (RJG&A) contacted Ms. Debbie Mignono of the
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) office in Raleigh regarding federally protected species along
the proposed Gastonia raw water line (State Project Review No. 93E 43000438) in Gaston
County, North Carolina. Ms. Mignono informed us that FWS has no records of federally
protected species in Gaston County. This information was obtained by telephone, thus we
do not have a written letter from FWS.
RJG&A also contacted the N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NHP), which maintains a
database of known populations of federally- and state-protected species In North Carolina.
The letter from Mr. Stephen Hall of NHP is attached, and confirms that no federally protected
species are known from the vicinity of the project.
Sincerely,
Gerald B. Pottern, M.Sc.
Senior Biologist
1V k)p
DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
January 8, 1993
Memorandum
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: Stephen Hall C7 4
SUBJECT: EA -- Water Supply Facilities, Gastonia
REFERENCE: 93-0435
The Natural Heritage Program database contains records for
several rare species of plants occurring within the vicinity of
the proposed project. A population of Georgia aster (Aster
georgianus), a candidate for both federal and state listing,
grows just east of NC 27 within the Duke Power right-of-way.
Populations of bigleaf magnolia (Magnolia macrophylla),
considered significantly rare in North Carolina, and nestronia
(Nestronia umbellula), another candidate for federal and state-
listing, also occur within this vicinity. The magnolia also
occurs close to the powerline just west of SR 2000 and along Long
Creek just west of the Catawba River.
Given the presence of several rare species potentially affected
by the proposed project, we recommend that the entire project
area be surveyed by a qualified biologist working during the
appropriate seasons of the year (the aster may not be
identifiable until October). Pipeline alignments and
construction sites for the treatment facility can then be
selected that minimize damage to the species mentioned or other
rare plants or animals discovered during the course of the
survey.
A
i
r
v ST? v
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
February 18, 1991
Robert J. Goldstein
Robert J. Goldstein & Associates
8480 Garvey Drive
Raleigh, N.C. 27604
Re: Waterline adjacent to Duke Power Easement,
Mecklenbu a county, ER 91-7807
Dear Mr. Goldstein:
Ga S ft7q
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of February 13, 1991, concerning the above
project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no properties
of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance which would
be affected by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the
project as currently proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 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, please contact Ms. Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
L"
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
109 East ones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807