1. Department of Environmental Quality
Draft Determination
Interbasin Transfer Certificate for Union County
Environmental Management Commission
July 14, 2016
Department of Environmental Quality

2. EMC – Draft Determination
§ L (i) Draft Determination
“Within 90 days after the Commission determines that the environmental document prepared in accordance with subsection (d) of this section is adequate or the applicant submits its petition for a certificate, whichever occurs later, the Commission shall issue a draft determination on whether to grant the certificate. The draft determination shall be based on the criteria set out in this section and shall include the conditions and limitations, findings of fact, and conclusions of law that would be required in a final determination. Notice of the draft determination shall be given as provided in subsection (c) of this section.”
Department of Environmental Quality

3. Requested Draft Certificate
Primary Applicant:
Union County
Source Basin:
Yadkin
Receiving Basin:
Rocky
Grandfathered Allowance:
N/A
Total Requested IBT
(2050 Demands):
23 MGD (avg. day/max month)
New Certificate, following G.S L(c-n)
Department of Environmental Quality

4. Proposed 23.0 mgd IBT: Yadkin to Rocky Mecklenburg
Lake Tillery
Cabarrus
Stanly
Norwood
Catawba River Basin
Proposed 23.0 mgd IBT: Yadkin to Rocky
Mecklenburg
Union
Monroe
Yadkin River Basin
Rocky River Basin
Existing 5.0 mgd Grandfathered IBT: Catawba to Rocky
South Carolina
Anson

5. Findings of Fact - §143-215.22L The EMC shall specifically consider:
The necessity, reasonableness, and proposed uses of water transferred
Present and reasonably foreseeable detrimental effects on the source basin
Cumulative effects on the source major river basin of any water transfer or consumptive water use currently authorized or projected in a Local Water Supply Plan.
Present and reasonably foreseeable beneficial and detrimental effects on the receiving basin
The availability of reasonable alternatives to the proposed transfer
Use of impoundment storage capacity, if applicable
Purposes and water storage allocations in a US Army Corps of Engineers multipurpose reservoir
Whether the service area of the applicant is located in both the source and receiving basin
Any other facts or circumstances reasonably necessary
Department of Environmental Quality

6. 1. Transfer Amount is Necessary and Reasonable for Proposed Uses
The county’s existing water supply will be insufficient to meet projected water demands through 2050
Anticipated population growth of county
Expansion of service area to parts of county not currently served
Current water supply:
5 mgd from grandfathered transfer from Catawba River
4 mgd from contract with Anson County
Water demand expected to grow from 7.7 mgd (2013) to
28.9 mgd (2050) with demand exceeding current supply ~2020
Department of Environmental Quality

7. 2. Minimal Detrimental Effects on the Source River Basin
CHEOPSTM (Computerized Hydro Electric Operations Planning Software) model used to evaluate impacts from proposed IBT
Future (2050) IBT model scenario shows minimal impact - a reduction of 9 inches to average monthly lake elevations for Period of Record (POR) and Drought 1 (from a single event that occurred in Aug 2002)
Even when modeling results showed an impact under future drought conditions with the proposed IBT, the elevation of Lake Tillery never dropped below the operating rules required in the FERC license
Department of Environmental Quality

8. Operating Levels and Important Elevations
10’-0”
Normal Summer Minimum EL ft. MSL
Full Pond EL ft. MSL
Normal Winter Minimum EL ft. MSL
Maximum Lake Drawdown EL ft. MSL (Hydropower Operating Limit)
Shallowest Public Water Supply Intake EL ft. MSL
Lowest Modeled Monthly Avg. EL ft. MSL (with Union County IBT)
1’-3”
2’-6”
22’-0”
Lake Tillery
Operating Levels and Important Elevations
5’-0”
Note: Red lines represent lake elevations established in FERC license

9. 2. Minimal Detrimental Effects on the Source River Basin (cont’d)
No impacts to public boat access areas (lowest modeled elevation remained over 2 ft. above minimum useable level for ramp access)
No modeled impacts to water supply intakes on Lake Tillery or Blewett Falls. Minimum modeled lake elevations remained well above all existing lake intakes
Minimal reduction in flow out of Lake Tillery due to IBT:
Flow never drops below minimum flow level for reservoir
Decreased hydropower generation: 0.5% for POR; <1% for Droughts 1&2
Local ordinances minimize secondary effects caused by growth in the county
Department of Environmental Quality

10. 3. Minimal Cumulative Effects on the Source Major River Basin
Modeling indicates that during Drought 2 ( ) conditions, the proposed IBT with future water-basin demands will have no detectable impacts to average monthly lake elevations of Lake Tillery.
During Drought 1 and POR conditions with the proposed IBT and future water demands, modeling indicates a single detectable impact to average monthly lake elevations: a 9-inch drop during most intense part of the drought in August 2002.
Impacts to downstream flow would be minimal due to management of the lake and inputs from the Rocky River
Department of Environmental Quality

11. 4. Insignificant Detrimental Effects on the Receiving Basin
Wastewater discharges into Rocky River IBT basin would increase, but would be permitted through NPDES
Possible SCI from development and urbanization will be mitigated by implementation of existing federal, state, and local protection programs
An existing population of the Carolina heelsplitter, a federally endangered freshwater mussel, is known to exist in 3 watersheds of Rocky River IBT basin. Stringent stormwater controls, buffer rules, and other mitigation measures to reduce sediment pollution have been enacted by Union County to protect the species.
Department of Environmental Quality

12. 5. Reasonable Alternatives to the Proposed Transfer Considered
IBT from Yadkin River IBT basin
Alt 1 – from Lake Tillery (preferred alternative)
Alt 2a & b – from Narrows or Tuckertown Reservoirs
Alt 3 – from Blewett Falls Lake
Alt 4 – from main stem of the Pee Dee River
Avoid IBT with alternative surface water
Alt 5 – from the Rocky River
IBT from Catawba River IBT basin
Alt 6 – increase transfer, replace existing grandfathered
Alt 7 – interconnection with Charlotte Water
IBT minimization alternatives
Alt 8 – groundwater withdrawal
Alt 9 – water demand management/conservation
Alt 10 – direct potable reuse
Alt 11 – wastewater returns from Rocky to Yadkin (Lake Tillery)
No action
Alt 12 - no additional water supply to Union County
Department of Environmental Quality

13. 6. Use of Impoundment Storage Capacity
Proposed transfer of water from Lake Tillery, part of the Duke Energy Progress-owned Yadkin-Pee Dee Hydroelectric Project
Duke Energy Progress will continue to comply with FERC operating rules as specified in their license (No. 2206)
Authorization from FERC and Duke Energy Progress will be required for construction of new intake and pump station, and withdrawal of water for non-hydropower purposes
Department of Environmental Quality

14. 7. Consistent with Purposes of Corps of Engineers Multi-Purpose Reservoir
Not applicable – the water to be withdrawn and transferred is not stored in a multipurpose reservoir constructed by the United States Army Corps of Engineers
Department of Environmental Quality

15. 8. Union County’s Service Area is Located in Both the Source and Receiving River Basins
The water transferred via the proposed IBT would serve the eastern two-thirds of the county, with most of the service area in the Rocky River IBT basin (receiving) and the southeastern tip of the county in the Yadkin River IBT basin (source)
Department of Environmental Quality

16. 9. Any Other Facts or Circumstances that are Reasonably Necessary
Specific conditions in the IBT certificate:
Submittal within 90 days of approval
Water Conservation Plan
Drought Management Plan
Compliance and Monitoring Plan
Quarterly Monitoring Reports
Ability to reopen, amend, and modify, if necessary
No selling of transferred water to water systems that are not co-applicants on the Certificate
Department of Environmental Quality

17. Draft Determination
Based on the 9 Findings of Fact presented, a draft determination is sought to issue an Interbasin Transfer Certificate to Union County authorizing a transfer not to exceed 23.0 mgd from the Yadkin River IBT basin to the Rocky River IBT basin.
Department of Environmental Quality

18. EMC – Draft Determination Requirement
§ L (i) Draft Determination
“Within 90 days after the Commission determines that the environmental document prepared in accordance with subsection (d) of this section is adequate or the applicant submits its petition for a certificate, whichever occurs later, the Commission shall issue a draft determination on whether to grant the certificate. The draft determination shall be based on the criteria set out in this section and shall include the conditions and limitations, findings of fact, and conclusions of law that would be required in a final determination. Notice of the draft determination shall be given as provided in subsection (c) of this section.”
Department of Environmental Quality

19. Action – Request Draft Determination
The Division of Water Resources is requesting that the Environmental Management Commission issue a draft determination on the Draft Interbasin Transfer Certificate for Union County to transfer up to 23.0 mgd from the Yadkin River IBT Basin to the Rocky River IBT Basin, thereby allowing the Draft Certificate to go out for public hearings before the EMC issues a Final Determination.
Department of Environmental Quality

20. Questions?
Department of Environmental Quality