Cranston's Mill Pond Raw Water Supply November 30, 2016
Prepared for: Virginia Marine Resource Commission (VMRC) Habitat Management Division 2600 Washington Avenue, 3rd Floor Newport News , Virginia 23607-0756
Prepared By Partners: RS RESTORATION SYSTEMS I LLC November 30, 2016
Director Paylor, Commissioner Bull, and Other Involved Virginia Agencies:
The Commonwealth has identified a need to develop water storage sites and diversify its water supply portfolio. Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Land Trust and Restoration Systems are private companies that are recognized in Virginia for finding innovative, market-based approaches to meeting environmental needs. These two companies formed a partnership in 2009 known as Cranston Mill Pond, LLC (CMP) focused on developing water resource-based projects in the Commonwealth of Virginia. With submittal of this Joint Permit Application CMP is seeking to become a partner to the Commonwealth in providing water storage and development of an innovative alternative solution to help address the Commonwealth’s significant water supply challenges in the Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Area. It is widely accepted, especially in the Eastern portion of the Commonwealth, that innovative, alternative sources of water supply are needed to reduce the amount of water currently withdrawn from groundwater sources, provide adequate additional water for future population and economic growth, and diversify water resource assets. We have participated in various aspects of the Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Advisory Committee’s efforts and have heard repeatedly from localities and industry representatives that their options for alternative sources of water are limited.
It is clear, not only from more than a decade of regional water supply planning as required by state law and regulation, but also from very recent deliberations of the statutorily-required Advisory Committee, that to meet future water needs for public consumption and economic development, the citizens of the Commonwealth need additional sources of water that don’t rely on deep groundwater aquifers and we must use the available water as efficiently as possible.
Cranston’s Mill Pond, a 50+ acre impoundment located in James City County, was constructed in 2011 and permitted by all necessary state and federal agencies to both meet current Dam Safety Regulations and to allow the additional capture of water quality. Therefore, there is no lengthy (potentially multiple-years long) construction period required for this water supply. Cranston’s Mill Pond presents an immediately available alternative to assist in meeting both the near-term groundwater reduction requirements for individual users and being a component of the solution for the long-term water supply demands for individual users and the region as a whole. Since the current release from the pond flows directly to tidal waters, any anticipated downstream impacts to flow, water quality, or existing beneficial uses would be negligible.
Our partnership has invested significant resources to support data collection and analysis efforts and contracted with third party engineering experts to generate necessary information that will assist the state agencies with their review of our proposal. We will provide whatever additional information is needed to expedite the review of the proposal.
Preliminary discussions with, and water yield analysis performed by, DEQ Staff have concluded that Cranston’s Mill Pond could be a viable alternative source to a public water supply and presents a potentially feasible asset towards building a diverse water portfolio.
Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application ______TABLE OF CONTENTS
CMP JPA Master Page Number:
1) Cover Letter to Virginia Agencies (Active Page Link)
2) Joint Permit Application 1 – 33
3) Attachments
Project Description, Purposes, and Alternatives Attachment 1 34 - 36 Permits Obtained for Nutrient Credit Facility and Dam Construction Attachment 2 37 - 80 Cranston’s Mill Pond Adjacent Property Owners Attachment 3 81 - 83 Department of Historic Resources – Detailed Archives Search Attachment 4 84 - 90 Cranston’s Mill Pond Declaration of Covenants Attachment 5 91 - 98 Structural Dimensions of Existing Earthen Dam and Concrete Spillway Attachment 6 99 - 102 DEQ Modeling Summary: Cranston’s Mill Pond Attachment 7 103 - 113 14-Month Record of On-Site Data Collection of Spillway Flows Attachment 8 114 - 124 Cranston’s Mill Pond Dam and Spillway Location Attachment 9 125 - 126 Release Valve Schematics and Staged-Storage Volumes Attachment 10 127 - 131 Proposed Project Use and Need Attachment 11 132 - 135 Proposed Withdrawals, Calculations and Justifications Attachment 12 136 - 138 Email Correspondence Between Jeff Corbin and Matthew Link Attachment 13 139 - 144 Cranston’s Mill Pond Surface Water Balance Evaluation Attachment 14 145 - 165 Cranston’s Mill Pond – Dam, Spillway and Pond Photos Attachment 15 166 - 171 STANDARD JOINT PERMIT APPLICATION
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) - Norfolk District 803 Front Street, ATTN: CENAO-WR-R Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC) Habitat Management Division Norfolk, Virginia 23510-1096 rd Phone: (757) 201-7652, Fax: (757) 201-7678 2600 Washington Avenue, 3 Floor Website: http://www.nao.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory.aspx Newport News, Virginia 23607-0756 Phone: (757) 247-2200, Fax: (757) 247-8062 Website: http://www.mrc.virginia.gov/hmac/hmoverview.shtm
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Virginia Water Protection Program Post Office Box 1105 Richmond, Virginia 23218 Phone: (804) 698-4000, Fax: (804) 698-4000 Websites: http://www.deq.virginia.gov/ http://www.deq.virginia.gov/Locations.aspx
The following instructions and information are designed to assist you in applying for permits from Federal, State, and Local regulatory agencies for work in waters and/or wetlands within the Commonwealth of Virginia. The intent is to provide general information on the permit process, not to act as a complete legal and technical reference.
JOINT PERMIT APPLICATION PROCESS
The Joint Permit Application (JPA) process and Standard JPA form are used by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC), the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), and the Local Wetlands Boards (LWB) for permitting purposes involving water, wetlands, and dune/beach resources, including, but not limited to, major water supply and water withdrawals projects (as defined in DEQ Regulation 9 VAC 25-210).
The Tidewater Joint Permit Application form may be used for most commercial and noncommercial projects in tidal waters, tidal wetlands, and coastal primary sand dunes and beaches in Virginia that require the review and/or authorization by local wetlands boards, the Virginia Marine Resources Commission, the Department of Environmental Quality, and/or the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Tidewater JPA may be downloaded from the same web page on which the Standard JPA is located: http://www.nao.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/JPA.aspx . If using the Tidewater JPA, follow the instructions provided with that form. Note that the Tidewater JPA form is not intended for noncommercial, riparian shellfish aquaculture projects (i.e., “oyster gardening”); the form for these types of projects may be obtained from http://www.mrc.virginia.gov/forms/abbrjpa.pdf or from the VMRC office.
The Standard JPA should not be used for minor water supply or water withdrawal projects, defined in DEQ Regulation 9 VAC 25-210 as a surface water withdrawal of less than 90 million gallons per month (mgm), unless filling or flooding of wetlands and streams occurs or if alteration of stream flow occurs. The application form for minor water supply or water withdrawals can be obtained from DEQ’s web site. In the case where fill, flooding, or alteration of flow occurs, please use the Standard JPA.
Please note that some health departments and local agencies, such as local building officials and erosion and sediment control authorities, do not use the Joint Permit Application process or forms and may have different informational requirements. The applicant is responsible for contacting these agencies for information regarding those permitting requirements.
REGULATORY AUTHORITIES OF PARTICIPATING AGENCIES: The USACE regulates activities in waters of the United States, including wetlands, under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §1344), Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. §403), and Section 103 of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. §1413).
The VMRC regulates activities on State-owned submerged lands, tidal wetlands, and dunes/beaches under Code of Virginia Title 28.2, Chapters 12, 13, and 14.
The DEQ regulates activities in state waters and wetlands under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §1341), under State Water Control Law (Code of Virginia Title 62.1), and Virginia Administrative Code Regulations 9VAC25-210 et seq., 9VAC25-660 et seq., 9VAC25-670 et seq., 9VAC25-680 et seq., and 9VAC25-690 et seq.
The LWBs regulate activities in tidal wetlands and dunes/beaches under Code of Virginia Title 28.2, Chapters 13 and 14.
LOCAL WETLANDS BOARD CONTACT INFORMATION:
Links to LWB information on the Web can be found at http://ccrm.vims.edu/permits_web/guidance/local_wetlands_boards.html. 1 Revised: December 2013
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 001 USACE FIELD OFFICE INFORMATION AND DEQ REGIONAL OFFICE INFORMATION: Answers to technical questions and detailed information about specific aspects of the various permit programs may be obtained from the USACE field office in your project area (please refer to the Contact Information on the Regulatory webpage at: http://www.nao.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory.aspx or call 757-201-7652), or from the DEQ regional office in your project area (please refer to http://www.deq.virginia.gov/Locations.aspx or call 804-698-4000). Applicants may also seek assistance with completing the informational requirements and/or submittals from private consulting and/or engineering firms for hire.
CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION ACT INFORMATION: Development within the 84 Counties, Cities, and Towns of “Tidewater Virginia” (as defined in §62.1-44.15:68 of the Code of Virginia) is subject to the requirements of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act. If your project is located in a Bay Act locality and will involve land disturbance or removal of vegetation within a designated Resource Protection Area (RPA), these actions will require approval from your local government and completion of Appendix C. The individual localities, not the DEQ, USACE, or Local Wetlands Boards, are responsible for enforcing Bay Act requirements and, therefore, local permits for land disturbance are not issued through this JPA process. Each Tidewater locality has adopted a program based on the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act and the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Designation & Management Regulations.
The Act and regulations recognize local government responsibility for land use decisions and are designed to establish a framework for compliance without dictating precisely what local programs must look like. The regulations address nonpoint source pollution by identifying and protecting certain lands called Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas. The requirements of the Bay Act may, however, affect the ultimate design and construction of projects. In order to ensure that these requirements are considered early in the permitting process, and to avoid unnecessary and costly delays, applicants should contact their local government as early in the process as possible. Individual localities may request information regarding existing vegetation within the RPA as well as a description and site drawings of any proposed land disturbance or vegetation clearing. Locality staff charged with ensuring compliance with the Bay Act will then evaluate project proposals and advise their Local Wetlands Boards of applicable Bay Act issues.
To determine if your project is located in a Bay Act locality (see map on page 31 or http://www.deq.virginia.gov/Programs/Water/ChesapeakeBay/ChesapeakeBayPreservationAct/LocalGovernmentOrdinances.aspx), learn more about Bay Act requirements, or find local government contacts, please visit the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality at http://www.deq.virginia.gov/Programs/Water/ChesapeakeBay/ChesapeakeBayPreservationAct.aspx.
HOW TO APPLY
Sections A through D below provide a general list of information and drawings that are required, depending on the type of project being proposed. Prepare all required drawings or sketches as detailed in the lists provided in Appendix D (Drawings) and according to the sample drawings provided in Appendix D.
Application materials should be submitted to VMRC: 1. If by mail or courier, use the address on page 1. 2. If by electronic mail, address the package to: [email protected] . The application must be provided in the .pdf format.
A. APPLICATIONS FOR PROJECTS INVOLVING IMPACTS TO TIDAL WATERS, WETLANDS, AND DUNES/BEACHES (INCLUDING SHORELINE STABILIZATION, PIERS, MARINAS, BEACH NOURISHMENT, BOATHOUSES, BOAT LIFTS, BREAKWATERS, AQUACULTURE ACTIVITIES, DREDGING, ETC.) SHOULD INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:
All applicable portions of Sections 1 through 28 of the JPA, including necessary attachments, information required for projects located in CBPA localities as required in Appendix C (a map of CBPA localities can be found on page 31). Adjacent Property Owner’s Acknowledgement Forms(1), as detailed in Appendix A. For projects with impacts to greater than 1 acre of wetlands, a functional values assessment(3). A set of 8 ½ x 11 inch drawings. If you can not include all of your project site on one page at a scale no smaller than 1” = 200’, you must submit a set of 8 ½ x 11 inch match-line drawings and a set of large-sized drawings at a scale no smaller than 1”= 200’. If oversized drawings are used, attach five copies of the oversized drawings to your application. In order for projects requiring LWB authorization to be considered complete, applications must include the following information (per Virginia Code 28.2-1302): “The permit application shall include the following: the name and address of the applicant; a detailed description of the proposed activities; a map, drawn to an appropriate and uniform scale, showing the area of wetlands directly affected, the location of the proposed work thereon, the area of existing and proposed fill and excavation, the location, width, depth and length of any proposed channel and disposal area, and the location of all existing and proposed structures, sewage collection and treatment facilities, utility installations, roadways, and other related appurtenances of facilities, including those on the adjacent uplands; a description of the type of equipment to be used and the means of access to the activity site; the names and addresses of record of adjacent land and known claimants of water rights in or adjacent to the wetland of whom the applicant has notice; an estimate of cost; the primary purpose of the project; and secondary purpose of the proposed project; a complete description of measures to be taken during and after alteration to reduce detrimental offsite effects; the completion date of the proposed work, project, or structure; and such additional materials and documentation as the wetlands board may require.”
2 Revised: December 2013
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 002 B. APPLICATIONS FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO CURRENT STATE PROGRAM GENERAL PERMIT (SPGP) AND INVOLVE IMPACTS TO NONTIDAL WATERS AND/OR WETLANDS:
Programmatic general permits may be issued in situations where a state, regional, or local authority has a regulatory program in place that provides a similar level of review as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). In such cases, the programmatic general permit avoids unnecessary duplication of effort by providing Corps authorization for certain activities provided they obtain the necessary state, regional, or local authorizations. Details may be found at http://www.nao.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/RBregional.aspx .
The following activities will be considered for coverage under the current State Program General Permit:
RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (DEVELOPMENT) ACTIVITIES (including attendant features) that involve the discharge of dredged or fill material causing the loss of not more than one acre of nontidal wetlands or waters, or the loss of not more than 2,000 linear feet of streams, unless otherwise excluded. LINEAR TRANSPORTATION (TRANSPORTATION) ACTIVITIES (including construction, expansion, modification, or improvement) that involve the discharge of dredged or fill material associated with the linear transportation projects not causing the loss of more than 1/3 acre of nontidal waters of the United States, including wetlands, unless otherwise excluded.
Mark the “SPGP” checkbox on page 7 of this application. All applicable portions of Sections 1 through 28 of the JPA, including necessary attachments. A conceptual compensatory mitigation plan(2) for 1) Development projects that impact greater than 1/10 of an acre of wetlands and open waters, or greater than 300 linear feet of stream bed, or 2) Transportation projects that impact any wetlands or open water, or greater than 300 linear feet of stream bed. A copy of the Corps’ confirmed waters and wetlands delineation (including data sheets) All information required for projects located in CBPA localities as required in Appendix C (a map of CBPA localities can be found on page 31). A copy of the FEMA flood insurance rate map or FEMA-approved local floodplain map for the project site (not applicable to <0.1 acre and < 300 linear feet projects by either Corps or DEQ). A set of 8 ½ x 11 inch drawings. If you can not include all of your project site on one page at a scale no smaller than 1” = 200’, you must submit a set of 8 ½ x 11 inch match-line drawings and a set of large-sized drawings at a scale no smaller than 1”= 200’. If oversized drawings are used, attach five copies of the oversized drawings to your application.
C. APPLICATIONS FOR OTHER PROJECTS THAT INVOLVE IMPACTS TO NONTIDAL WATERS AND/OR WETLANDS:
All applicable portions of Sections 1 through 28 of the JPA, including necessary attachments. A conceptual compensatory mitigation plan(2). A copy of the Corps’ confirmed waters and wetlands delineation (including data sheets). All information required for projects located in CBPA localities as required in Appendix C (a map of CBPA localities can be found on page 31), and a copy of the FEMA flood insurance rate map or FEMA-approved local floodplain map for the project site. For projects with impacts to greater than 1 acre of wetlands, a functional values assessment(3). A set of 8 ½ x 11 inch drawings. If you can not include all of your project site on one page at a scale no smaller than 1” = 200’, you must submit a set of 8 ½ x 11 inch match-line drawings and a set of large-sized drawings at a scale no smaller than 1”= 200’. If oversized drawings are used, attach five copies of the oversized drawings to your application.
D. WHEN USING THE JPA FORM AS A PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION (PCN) FOR A USACE NATIONWIDE PERMIT:
Mark the “PCN” checkbox on page 7 of this application. If you fail to mark this box, the PCN will be deemed incomplete and the USACE 45-day time clock will not start. All applicable portions of Sections 1 through 28 of the JPA, including necessary attachments and all information required for projects located in CBPA localities as required in Appendix C (a map of CBPA localities can be found on page 31) A set of 8 ½ x 11 inch drawings. If you can not include all of your project site on one page at a scale no smaller than 1” = 200’, you must submit a set of 8 ½ x 11 inch match-line drawings and a set of large-sized drawings at a scale no smaller than 1”= 200’. If oversized drawings are used, attach five copies of the oversized drawings to your application.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT
Upon receipt of an application, VMRC will assign a permit application number to the JPA and will then distribute a copy of the application and any original plan copies submitted to the other regulatory agencies that are involved in the JPA process. All agencies will conduct separate but concurrent reviews of your project. Please be aware that each agency must issue a separate permit (or a notification that no permit is required). Therefore, make sure that you have received all necessary authorizations, or documentation that no permit is required, from each agency prior to beginning the proposed work.
During the JPA review process, site inspections may be necessary to evaluate a proposed project. Failure to allow an authorized representative of a regulatory agency to enter the property, or to take photographs of conditions at the project site, may result in either the withdrawal of your permit application or denial of a permit.
For certain Federal and State permit applications, a public notice is published in a newspaper having circulation in the project area, is mailed to adjacent property owners, and/or is posted on the agency’s Web page. The public may comment on the project during a
3 Revised: December 2013
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 003 designated comment period, which varies from agency to agency. Some agencies accept comments upon receipt of the application or during the permit review process, while others only accept comments on draft permits. Comments are evaluated and a decision is made whether to revise a draft permit, issue a final permit, issue a final permit with special conditions, or to deny a permit. When applicable, the project will be heard by the appropriate LWB after a notice of public hearing has been advertised for at least once a week for two consecutive weeks in a local newspaper. VMRC will conduct the hearings for the localities that do not have a wetlands board. You may be responsible for bearing the costs for advertisement of public notices.
Public hearings are held by VMRC at their regularly scheduled monthly commission meetings under the following situations: Protested applications for VMRC permits which can not be resolved; projects costing over $50,000 involving encroachment over State-owned subaqueous land; and all projects affecting tidal wetlands and dunes/beaches in localities without a LWB. All interested parties will be officially notified regarding the date and time of the hearing and Commission meeting procedures. The Commission will usually make a decision on the project at the meeting unless a decision for continuance is made. If a proposed project is approved, a permit or similar agency correspondence is sent to the applicant. In some cases, notarized signatures, as well as processing fees and royalties, are required before the permit is validated. If the project is denied, the applicant will be notified in writing.
Permits or permit authorizations from some agencies may be provided via electronic mail. If the applicant wishes to receive their permit via electronic mail, please include an e-mail address at the requested place in the application.
PERMIT APPLICATION FEES
Do not send any permit application fees in with the JPA, since VMRC is not responsible for accounting for permit application fees required by other agencies. Fees are subject to change. Please consult agency Websites or contact agencies directly for current fee information.
USACE: Permit application fees are required for USACE Individual (Standard) permits. A USACE project manager will contact you regarding the proper fee and submittal requirements. DEQ: Permit application fees required by DEQ for VWP permits are provided on DEQ’s Website at http://www.deq.virginia.gov/Programs/Water/WetlandsStreams/Permits.aspx or on the Commonwealth of Virginia’s Website at http://leg1.state.va.us/000/reg/TOC09025.HTM#C0020. A DEQ project manager will contact you regarding the proper fee and submittal requirements after receiving your application package. After being contacted by the DEQ, mail the permit application fee and the Permit Application Fee Form to the address listed on the form. Please make sure that the applicant name and facility (project) name are the same as those reported in your JPA. VMRC: Permit fees are $25.00 for projects costing $10,000 or less and $100 for projects costing more than $10,000. Royalties may also be required for some projects. The proper fee and any required royalty is paid at the time of permit issuance by VMRC. VMRC staff will send the permittee a letter notifying him/her of the proper fees and submittal requirements. LWB: Permit fees vary. Contact the LWB in your locality or reference locality Websites for fee information and submittal requirements. Contact information for LWB may be found at http://ccrm.vims.edu/permits_web/guidance/local_wetlands_boards.html.
WETLANDS & WATERS DELINEATIONS
Wetlands/waters delineations must be performed using the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and applicable Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0) or Eastern Mountains and Peidmont Region (Version 2.0)) .Contact the appropriate USACE District office or field office to obtain a delineation confirmation by referencing the Contact Information on the Regulatory webpage at: http://www.nao.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory.aspx or call the Regulatory of the Day (ROD) at 757-201-7652.
INFORMATION REGARDING THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES
In order to find preliminary information regarding federal or state threatened or endangered species on your project site, you may contact the following agencies:
United States Fish and Wildlife Service 6669 Short Lane Gloucester, Virginia 23061 Voice: (804) 693-6694 Fax: (804) 693-9032 http://virginiafieldoffice.fws.gov/
Project Review Coordinator Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Natural Heritage Division 217 Governor Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Voice: (804) 786-7951 Fax: (804) 371-2674 http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/natural_heritage/index.shtml
4 Revised: December 2013
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 004 Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries Environmental Services Section 4010 West Broad Street Richmond, Virginia 23230-1104 (804) 367-1000 http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wildlife/
INFORMATION REGARDING FEMA-MAPPED FLOODPLAINS
You may obtain “Online Hazard Maps” for FEMA-mapped floodplains by visiting https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/wps/portal . Local governments also keep paper copies of FEMA maps on hand.
FOOTNOTES:
(1) Adjacent Property Owner Notification: When determining whether to grant or deny any permit for the use of state-owned submerged lands, the VMRC must consider, among other things, effects of a proposed project on adjacent or nearby properties. Discussing the proposed project with these property owners can be done on your own using the forms in Appendix A of this package. LWB must also consider the effects on adjacent properties and notify adjoining property owners of the required public hearings for all applications. The completed forms will assist VMRC and LWB in processing the application. The forms in Appendix A may be photocopied if more copies are needed.
(2) Conceptual mitigation plans, when required, should include all information stipulated by DEQ Regulations 9 VAC 25-210-80 and 9 VAC 25-210-116, or 9 VAC 25-[660-690]-50, -60, and -70, whichever is applicable to your project. Regulations may be obtained from DEQ’s web site at http://www.deq.virginia.gov/Programs/Water/WetlandsStreams.aspx.
Information on wetland and stream mitigation is available at http://www.deq.virginia.gov/Programs/Water/WetlandsStreams/Mitigation.aspx. The final compensatory mitigation plan will be required prior to commencement of impacts to waters and/or wetlands on your project site. If no mitigation is planned, submit a detailed statement explaining the reason(s) for no mitigation.
(3) A functions and values assessment consists of a narrative description of the existing functions and values of the wetlands and waters being impacted, the impact that the project will have on these functions and values, and information on the following: surrounding land uses and cover types; nutrient, sediment, and pollutant trapping; flood control and flood storage capacity; erosion control and shoreline stabilization; groundwater recharge and discharge; aquatic and wildlife habitat; and unique or critical habitats. Functional values may also include: water quality, floodflow desynchronization, nutrient import or export, stormwater retention or detention, recreation, education, aesthetics, or other beneficial uses. Also include the assessment methodology that was used.
(4) Wetland and waters boundary delineation map: For DEQ application purposes, this applies to all projects impacting more than 1/10 acre wetlands or open waters, or more than 300 linear feet of stream bed, and may apply in areas under a deed restriction or protective instrument, regardless of the amount of impacts. The information to be submitted includes the wetlands data sheets; the location of impacted and non-impacted wetlands, streams, open water, and the approximate limits of Chesapeake Bay Resource Protection Areas (RPAs); wetland types, noted according to their Cowardin classification or similar terminology; and a copy of the USACE delineation confirmation, or other correspondence from the USACE indicating their approval of the wetland and waters boundaries. If a Corps confirmation is not available at the time of application, it must be submitted as soon as it becomes available during the DEQ permit review.
5 Revised: December 2013
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 005 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1: Project Location Information………………………………………………………………………………………………. 7 Section 2: Applicant, Agent, Property Owner, and Contractor Information.……………...………………………………………. 8 Section 3: Description of Project, Purposes, Need, Use, and Alternatives…………………………………………………….... 8 Section 4: Previous Site Visits and/or Permits Related to the Proposed Work………………………………………………….. 9 Section 5: Project Costs……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 9 Section 6: Public Notification…………………………………………………………………………………………………….…….. 10 Section 7: Threatened and Endangered Species Information……………………………………………………………….…….. 10 Section 8: Historic Resources Information…………………………………………………………………………………………… 10 Section 9: Wetlands, Waters, and Dunes/Beaches Impact Information………………………………………………………….. 11 Section 10: Applicant, Agent, Owner and Contractor Certifications.………………………………………………………………. 12 Section 11: Private Piers, Marginal Wharves, and Uncovered Boatlifts……………………………………………………………. 14 Section 12: Boathouses, Gazebos, Covered Boat Lifts, and Other Roofed Structures Over Waterways……………………… 14 Section 13: Marinas and Commercial, Governmental, and Community Piers……………………………………………………. 14 Section 14: Free Standing Mooring Piles, Osprey Nesting Poles, Mooring Buoys, and Dolphins………………………………. 15 Section 15: Boat Ramps…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 15 Section 16: Tidal/Nontidal Shoreline Stabilization Structures ……………………………………………………………….……… 15 Section 17: Beach Nourishment………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 16 Section 18: Dredging, Mining, and Excavating………………………………………………………………………………………... 17 Section 19: Fill in Wetlands or Waters, or on Dunes/Beaches………………………..…………………………………………….. 18 Section 20: Nontidal Stream Channel Modifications for Restoration or Enhancement, or Temporary or Permanent Relocations ……………………………………………………………………...…………………………………………. 18 Section 21: Utility Crossings……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 19 Section 22: Road Crossings…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 20 Section 23: Private and Commercial Aquaculture Activities…………………………………………………………………………. 20 Section 24: Impoundments, Dams, and Stormwater Management Facilities……………………………………………………… 21 Section 25: Outfalls Not Associated with Proposed Water Withdrawal Activities…………………………………..…...………… 22 Section 26: Intakes, Outfalls, and Water Control Structures……………………………………………………………...………… 22 Section 27: Water Withdrawal Use, Need, and Alternatives………………………………………………………………………… 24 Section 28: Public Comments/Issues for Water Withdrawals………………………………………………………………………. 25 Appendix A: Adjacent Property Owner’s Acknowledgement Forms………………………………………………………………... 26 Appendix B: Certificate of Compliance With Corps of Engineers, Norfolk District, Regional Permit 17 For Private Piers……. 28 Appendix C: Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act Information…………………………………………………………………………. 29 Appendix D: Drawings……………………………………...... …………………………………………………………………………... 31
6 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 006 PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE ALL ANSWERS. If a question does not apply to your project, please print N/A (not applicable) in the space provided. If additional space is needed, attach extra 8 ½ x 11 inch sheets of paper.
CHECK ONE, if applicable: Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) SPGP (For Nationwide Permits ONLY)
1. PROJECT LOCATION INFORMATION (Attach a copy of a detailed map, such as a USGS topographic map or street map showing the site location and project boundary, so that it may be located for inspection. Include an arrow indicating the north direction.)
Street Address City/County/Zipcode 6616 Cranston's Mill Pond Road Toano, James City County, Virginia 23168 Subdivision Lot/Block/Parcel # Zoning A1, James City County Parcel # 22301000044 James City County Parcel # 22301000044 Name of water body(ies) within project boundaries and drainage area (acres or square miles) Cranston's Mill Pond - Drainage area of approximately 7.0 square miles (4483 acres Upper Yarmouth Creek)
Tributary(ies) to: ______Yarmouth Creek Basin: ______James Subbasin: ______Chickahominy (Example: Basin: James River Subbasin: Middle James River)
NA Special Standards (based on DEQ Water Quality Standards 9VAC25-260 et seq.): ______
Project type (check one) _____ Single user (private, non-commercial, residential) _____ Multi-user (community, commercial, industrial, government)
50.8 76 49.8 Latitude and longitude at center of project site: _____- 37° _____- 20 _____/ _____- _____-48 _____
Norge Quadrangle 1:24,000 USGS topographic map name: ______
HUC8: 02080206 8- digit USGS Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) for your project site (See http://cfpub.epa.gov/surf/locate/index.cfm ): ______If known, indicate the 10-digit and 12-digit USGS HUCs (see http://dswcapps.dcr.virginia.gov/htdocs/maps/HUExplorer.htm : ______HUC10: 0208020606 ______HUC12: 020802060604
Cranston's Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Name of your project (Example: Water Creek driveway crossing) ______
Is there an access road to the project? __ Yes __ No. If yes, check all that apply: __ public __ private __ improved __ unimproved Provide driving directions to your site, giving distances from the best and nearest visible landmarks or major intersections: 6616 Cranston's Mill Pond Road.
From I-64, take exit 227. Continue for 4 miles to Toano, Virginia. Turn right on Chickahominy Road (Route 631), in 2 miles turn left on Cranston's Mill Pond Road. The site is located approximately 1/2 mile on left. Gated access.
Does your project site cross boundaries of two or more localities (i.e. cities/counties/towns)? __ Yes __ No If so, name those localities:
FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Notes:
JPA#
7 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 007 2. APPLICANT, AGENT, PROPERTY OWNER, AND CONTRACTOR INFORMATION The applicant(s) is/are the legal entity to which the permit may be issued. The applicant(s) can either be the property owner(s) or the person/people/company(ies) that intend(s) to undertake the activity. The agent is the person or company that is representing the applicant(s). If a company, please use the company name that is registered with the State Corporation Commission (SCC), or indicate no registration with the SCC. Applicant(s) (For a company, use SCC-registered name) Agent (if applicable) (For a company, use SCC-registered name)
Mailing address Mailing address
City State Zip Code City State Zip Code
Phone number w/area code Fax Phone number w/area code Fax
Mobile/pager E-mail Mobile/pager E-mail
State Corporation Commission ID number (if applicable) State Corporation Commission ID number (if applicable)
Certain permits or permit authorizations may be provided via electronic mail. If the applicant wishes to receive their permit via electronic mail, please provide an e-mail address here: ______
Property owner(s), if different from applicant (For a company, Contractor, if known (For a company, use SCC-registered use SCC-registered name) name)
Mailing address Mailing address
City State Zip code City State Zip code
Phone number w/area code Fax Phone number w/area code Fax
Mobile/pager E-mail Mobile/pager E-mail
State Corporation Commission ID number (if applicable) State Corporation Commission ID number (if applicable)
3. PROVIDE A DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT, PROJECT PRIMARY AND SECONDARY PURPOSES, PROJECT NEED, INTENDED USE, AND ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED (Attach additional sheets if necessary) . The purpose must include any new development or expansion of an existing land use and/or proposed future use of residual land . Describe the physical alteration of surface waters . Include a description of alternatives considered to avoid or minimize impacts to surface waters, including wetlands, to the maximum extent practicable. Include factors such as, but not limited to, alternative construction technologies, alternative project layout and design, alternative locations, local land use regulations, and existing infrastructure . For utility crossings, include both alternative routes and alternative construction methodologies considered . For major surface water withdrawals, public surface water supply withdrawals, or projects that will alter in-stream flows, include the water supply issues that form the basis of the proposed project.
8 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 008 3. PROVIDE A DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT (Continued)
Date of proposed commencement of work (MM/DD/YYYY) Date of proposed completion of work (MM/DD/YYYY) ______Has any work commenced or has any portion of the project for Are you submitting this application at the direction of any State, which you are seeking a permit been completed? local, or Federal agency? _____Yes _____No _____ Yes _____ No
If you answered “yes” to either question above, give details stating when the work was completed and/or when it commenced, who performed the work, and which agency (if any) directed you to submit this application. In addition, you will need to clearly differentiate between completed work and proposed work on your project drawings.
Are you aware of any unresolved violations of environmental law or litigation involving the property? _____Yes ____No (If yes, please explain)
4. PREVIOUS SITE VISITS AND/OR PERMITS RELATED TO THE PROPOSED WORK (Include all Federal, State, and Local pre-application coordination or previous permits)
Agency Activity Permit/Project Action taken ** If denied, give reason for denial number, and and Date of explanation of non- Action reporting Nationwide permits previously used
** Issued, denied, site visit
5. PROJECT COSTS
Approximate cost of the entire project, including materials and labor: $______
Approximate cost of only the portion of the project affecting State waters (below mean low water in tidal areas and below ordinary high water mark in nontidal areas): $ ______
Cranston's Mill Pond is already constructed (2010) and fully permitted as a water quality facility. The final end user will incur undetermined costs to construct a water intake structure, water transfer infrastructure and, if necessary, a treatment facility.
9 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 009 6. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION (Attach additional sheets if necessary)
. Complete information for all property owners adjacent to the project site and across the waterway, if the waterway is less than 500 feet in width. If your project is located within a cove, you will need to provide names and mailing addresses for all property owners within the cove. . If you own the adjacent lot, provide the requested information for the first adjacent parcel beyond your property line. Property owner’s name Mailing address City State Zip code
Name of newspaper having general circulation in the area of the project: ______Address and phone number (including area code) of newspaper______
Have adjacent property owners been notified with forms in Appendix A? _____Yes _____No (attach copies of distributed forms)
7. THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES INFORMATION
Please provide any information concerning the potential for your project to impact state and/or federally threatened and endangered species (listed or proposed). Attach correspondence from agencies and/or reference materials that address potential impacts, such as database search results or your Corps’ waters and wetlands delineation confirmation. Contact information for the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage can be found on page 4 of this package.
8. HISTORIC RESOURCES INFORMATION
Note: Historic properties include but are not limited to archeological sites, battlefields, Civil War earthworks, graveyards, buildings, bridges, canals, etc. Prospective permittees should be aware that section 110k of the NHPA (16 U.S.C. 470h-2(k)) prevents the Corps from granting a permit or other assistance to an applicant who, with intent to avoid the requirements of Section 106 of the NHPA, has intentionally significantly adversely affected a historic property to which the permit would relate, or having legal power to prevent it, allowed such significant adverse effect to occur, unless the Corps, after consultation with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), determines that circumstances justify granting such assistance despite the adverse effect created or permitted by the applicant.
Are any historic properties located within or adjacent to the project site? ____ Yes ____ No _____ Uncertain If Yes, please provide a map showing the location of the historic property within or adjacent to the project site.
Are there any buildings or structures 50 years old or older located on the project site? ____ Yes ____ No _____ Uncertain If Yes, please provide a map showing the location of these buildings or structures on the project site.
Is your project located within a historic district? ____ Yes ____ No ____ Uncertain If Yes, please indicate which district: ______
10 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 010 8. HISTORIC RESOURCES INFORMATION (Continued)
Has a survey to locate archeological sites and/or historic structures been carried out on the property? ___ Yes ___ No ___ Uncertain
If Yes, please provide the following information: Date of Survey: ______
Name of firm: ______
Is there a report on file with the Virginia Department of Historic Resources? ____ Yes ____ No ___Uncertain
Title of Cultural Resources Management (CRM) report: ______
Was any historic property located? ____ Yes ____ No __ Uncertain
9. WETLANDS, WATERS, AND DUNES/BEACHES IMPACT INFORMATION
Report each impact site in a separate column. If needed, attach additional sheets using a similar table format. Please ensure that the associated project drawings clearly depict the location and footprint of each numbered impact site. For dredging, mining, and excavating projects, use Section 18. Impact site number Impact site number Impact site number 1 2 3 Impact description (use all that apply): F=fill EX=excavation S=Structure T=tidal NT=non-tidal TE=temporary PE=permanent PR=perennial IN=intermittent SB=subaqueous bottom DB=dune/beach IS=hydrologically isolated V=vegetated NV=non-vegetated MC=Mechanized Clearing of PFO (Example: F, NT, PE, V) Wetland/waters impact area (square feet)
Dune/beach impact area (square feet)
Stream dimensions at impact site (length and average width in linear feet, and area in square feet) Volume of fill below Mean High Water or Ordinary High Water (cubic yards) Cowardin classification of impacted wetland/water or geomorphological classification of stream Example wetland: PFO; Example stream: wide; bank eroding; braided channel; Example stream: ‘C’ channel Average stream flow at site (flow rate under normal rainfall conditions in cubic feet per second)
Contributing drainage area (acres or square miles)
11 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 011
11. PRIVATE PIERS, MARGINAL WHARVES, AND UNCOVERED BOAT LIFTS
If you plan to construct a private, residential pier, you may qualify to work in a non-reporting capacity under the Norfolk District Corps of Engineers’ Regional Permit 17 (RP-17).
A copy of RP-17 can be obtained by calling (757) 201-7652 or by visiting the Corps’ Website at: http://www.nao.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/RBregional.aspx . A copy of the RP-17 Certificate of Compliance is found in Appendix B of this application package. You should only sign and attach this form to the application if you have completely read and understood the terms and conditions of RP-17. Although no further written authorization will be required from the Corps, you may require a permit from the Virginia Marine Resources Commission and/or your local wetlands board. Please submit this application as instructed in order to obtain all required state and local permits.
In cases where the proposed pier will encroach beyond one fourth the waterway width (as determined by measuring mean high water to mean high water or ordinary high water mark to ordinary high water mark), the following information must be included before the application will be considered complete. For an application to be considered complete: 1. The Corps MAY require depth soundings across the waterway at increments designated by the Corps project manager. Typically 10-foot increments for waterways less than 200 feet wide and 20-foot increments for waterways greater than 200 feet wide with the date and time the measurements were taken and how they were taken (e.g., tape, range finder, etc.). 2. The applicant MUST provide a justification as to purpose if the proposed work would extend a pier greater than one-fourth of the distance across the open water measured from mean high water or the channelward edge of the wetlands. 3. The applicant MUST provide justification if the proposed work would involve the construction of a pier greater than five feet wide or less than four feet above any wetland substrate.
Number of vessels to be moored at the pier or wharf: ______In the spaces provided below, give the type (i.e. sail, power, skiff, etc.), size, and registration number of the vessel(s) to be moored
TYPE LENGTH WIDTH DRAFT REGISTRATION #
12. BOATHOUSES, GAZEBOS, COVERED BOAT LIFTS, AND OTHER ROOFED STRUCTURES OVER WATERWAYS
No. of vessels to be moored at the proposed structure: ______Will the sides of the structure be enclosed? _____Yes _____No Area covered by the roof structure ______square feet In the spaces provided below, give the type (i.e. sail, power, skiff, etc.), size, and registration number of the vessel(s) to be moored
TYPE LENGTH WIDTH DRAFT REGISTRATION #
13. MARINAS AND COMMERCIAL, GOVERNMENTAL, AND COMMUNITY PIERS
Have you obtained the Virginia Department of Health’s approval for sanitary facilities? _____Yes _____No You will need to obtain this authorization or a variance before a VMRC permit will be issued.
Will petroleum products or other hazardous materials be stored or handled at the facility? _____Yes _____No If your answer is yes, please attach your spill contingency plan.
Will the facility be equipped to off-load sewage from boats? _____Yes _____No
EXISTING: wet slips: ______dry storage: ______PROPOSED: wet slips: ______dry storage: ______
14 Revised: March 2014
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 014 14. FREE STANDING MOORING PILES, OSPREY NESTING POLES, MOORING BUOYS, AND DOLPHINS (not associated with piers)
Number of vessels to be moored: ______Type and number of mooring(s) proposed:______
In the spaces provided below, give the type (i.e. sail, power, skiff, etc.), size, and registration number of the vessel(s) to be moored
TYPE LENGTH WIDTH DRAFT REGISTRATION #
Give the name and complete mailing address(es) of the owner(s) of the vessel(s) if not owned by applicant (attach extra sheets if needed):
Do you plan to reach the mooring from your own upland property? _____Yes _____No If “no,” explain how you intend to access the mooring.
15. BOAT RAMPS
Will excavation be required to construct the boat ramp? _____Yes _____No
If “yes,” will any of the excavation occur below the plane of the ordinary high water mark/mean high water line or in wetlands? _____Yes _____No If “yes,” you will need to fill out Section 18 for this excavation. Where will you dispose of the excavated material?
What type of design and materials will be used to construct the ramp (open pile design with salt treated lumber, concrete slab on gravel bedding, etc.)?
Location of nearest public boat ramp Driving distance to that public ramp
______miles Will other structures be constructed concurrent with the boat ramp installation? _____Yes _____No If “yes,” please fill out the appropriate sections of this application associated with those other activities.
16. TIDAL/NONTIDAL SHORELINE STABILIZATION STRUCTURES (INCLUDING BULKHEADS AND ASSOCIATED BACKFILL, RIPRAP REVETMENTS AND ASSOCIATED BACKFILL, MARSH TOE STABILIZATION, GROINS, JETTIES, AND BREAKWATERS, ETC.) Is any portion of the project maintenance or replacement of an existing and currently serviceable structure? _____Yes _____No If yes, give length of existing structure: ______linear feet
If your maintenance project entails replacement of a bulkhead, is it possible to construct the replacement bulkhead within 2 feet channelward of the existing bulkhead? _____Yes _____No If not, please explain below:
15 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 015 16. TIDAL/NONTIDAL SHORELINE STABILIZATION STRUCTURES (Continued)
Length of proposed structure, including returns: ______linear feet
Average channelward encroachment of the structure from Maximum channelward encroachment of the structure from Mean high water/ordinary high water mark: ______feet Mean high water/ordinary high water mark: ______feet Mean low water: ______feet Mean low water: ______feet Maximum channelward encroachment form the back edge of the Maximum channelward encroachment from the back edge of the Dune ______feet Beach ______feet Describe the type of construction including all materials to be used (including all fittings):
Will filter cloth be used? ____Yes ____No What is the source of the backfill material? ______What is the composition of the backfill material? ______If rock is to be used, give the average volume of material to be used for every linear foot of construction: ______cubic yards What is the volume of material to be placed below the plane of ordinary high water mark/mean high water? ______cubic yards For projects involving stone: Average weight of core material (bottom layers): ______pounds per stone (Class______) Average weight of armor material (top layers): ______pounds per stone (Class______) Are there similar shoreline stabilization structures in the vicinity of your project site? _____Yes _____No If so, describe the type(s) and location(s) of the structure(s):
If you are building a groin or jetty, will the channelward end of Has your project been reviewed by the Shoreline Erosion the structure be marked to show a hazard to navigation? Advisory Service (SEAS)? _____Yes _____No _____Yes _____No If yes, please attach a copy of their comments.
17. BEACH NOURISHMENT
Source of material: ______Volume of material: ______cubic yards
Composition of material (percentage sand, silt, clay): Mode of transportation of material to the project site (truck, pipeline, etc.):
Describe the type(s) of vegetation proposed for stabilization and the proposed planting plan, including schedule, spacing, monitoring, etc. Attach additional sheets if necessary.
16 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 016 18. DREDGING, MINING, AND EXCAVATING
FILL OUT THE FOLLOWING TABLE FOR DREDGING PROJECTS
NEW dredging MAINTENANCE dredging
Hydraulic Mechanical (clamshell, Hydraulic Mechanical (clamshell, dragline, etc.) dragline, etc.)
Cubic yards Square feet Cubic yards Square feet Cubic yards Square feet Cubic yards Square feet
Vegetated wetlands
Nonvegetated wetlands
Subaqueous land
Totals Is this a one-time dredging event? ___Yes _____ No If “no”, how many dredging cycles are anticipated: ______(____ initial cycle in cu. yds.) (_____ subsequent cycles in cu. yds.) Composition of material (percentage sand, silt, clay, rock): Provide documentation (i.e. laboratory results or analytical reports) that dredged material from on-site areas is free of toxics. If not free of toxics, provide documentation of proper disposal (i.e. bill of lading from commercial supplier or disposal site).
Please include a dredged material management plan that includes specifics on how the dredged material will be handled and retained to prevent its entry into surface waters or wetlands. If on-site dewatering is proposed, please include plan view and cross section drawings of the dewatering area and associated outfall.
Will the dredged material be used for any commercial purpose or beneficial use? _____Yes _____No If yes, please explain:
If this is a maintenance dredging project, what was the date that the dredging was last performed? ______Permit number of original permit: ______(It is important that you attach a copy of the original permit.)
For mining projects: On separate sheets of paper, explain the operation plans, including: 1) the frequency (i.e., every six weeks, for example), duration (i.e., April through September), and volume (in cubic yards) to be removed per operation; 2) the temporary storage and handling methods of mined material, including the dimensions of the containment berm used for upland disposal of dredged material and the need (or no need) for a liner or impermeable material to prevent the leaching of any identified contaminants into ground water; 3) how equipment will access the mine site; and 4) verification that dredging: a) will not occur in water body segments that are currently on the effective Section 303(d) Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) priority list or that have an approved TMDL; b) will not exacerbate any impairment; and c) will be consistent with any waste load allocation/limit/conditions imposed by an approved TMDL. Have you applied for a permit from the Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy? _____Yes _____No
Contributing drainage area: ______square miles Average stream flow at site (flow rate under normal rainfall conditions): ______cfs
17 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 017 19. FILL (not associated with backfilled shoreline structures) AND OTHER STRUCTURES (other than piers and boathouses) IN WETLANDS OR WATERS, OR ON DUNES/BEACHES Source and composition of fill material (percentage sand, silt, clay, rock): ______
Provide documentation (i.e. laboratory results or analytical reports) that fill material from off-site locations is free of toxics. If not free of toxics, provide documentation of proper disposal (i.e. bill of lading from commercial supplier or disposal site). Documentation is not necessary for fill material obtained from on-site areas.
Explain the purpose of the filling activity and the type of structure to be constructed over the filled area (if any):
Describe any structure that will be placed in wetlands/waters or on a beach dune and its purpose:
Will the structure be placed on pilings? ____ Yes ____ No Total area occupied by any structure. ______Square Feet How far will the structure be placed channelward from the back How far will the structure be placed channelward from the back edge of the dune? ______feet edge of the beach? ______feet
20. NONTIDAL STREAM CHANNEL MODIFICATIONS FOR RESTORATION OR ENHANCMENT, or TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT RELOCATIONS If proposed activities are being conducted for the purposes of compensatory mitigation, please attach separate sheets of paper providing all information required by the most recent version of the stream assessment methodology approved by the Norfolk District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, in lieu of completing the questions below. Required information outlined by the methodology can be found at: http://www.nao.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/UnifiedStreamMethodology.aspx or http://www.deq.virginia.gov/Programs/Water/WetlandsStreams/Mitigation.aspx. . Has the stream restoration project been designed by a local, state, or federal agency? ____ Yes ____ No. If yes, please include the name of the agency here: ______.
Is the agency also providing funding for this project? _____ Yes _____ No
Linear feet of stream impact: ______
Contributing drainage area: ______acres or ______square miles Existing average stream flow at site (flow rate under Proposed average stream flow at site after modifications (flow rate normal rainfall conditions): ______cfs under normal rainfall conditions): _____cfs Explain, in detail, the method to be used to stabilize the banks:
Explain the composition of the existing stream bed (percent cobble, rock, sand, etc.):
18 Revised: December 2013
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 018 20. NONTIDAL STREAM CHANNEL MODIFICATIONS (Continued)
Will low-flow channels be maintained in the modified stream channel? _____Yes _____No. Describe how:
Will any structure(s) be placed in the stream to create riffles, pools, meanders, etc.? _____Yes _____No If yes, please explain:
21. UTILITY CROSSINGS
Type of crossing: _____overhead _____trenched _____directionally-drilled
Method of clearing corridor of vegetation (check all that apply): ______mechanized land clearing that disturbs the soil surface ______cutting vegetation above the soil surface Describe the materials to be used in the installation of the utility line (including gravel bedding for trenched installations, bentonite slurries used during direction-drilling, etc.) and a sequence of events to detail how the installation will be accomplished (including methods used for in-stream and dry crossings).
For overhead crossings over navigable waterways (including all tidal waterways), please indicate the height of other overhead crossings or bridges over the waterway relative to mean high water, mean low water, or ordinary high water mark:
Nominal system voltage, if project involves power lines: ______
Will there be an excess of excavated material? _____Yes _____No If so, describe the method that will be undertaken to dispose of, and transport, the material to its permanent disposal location and give that location:
Will any excess material be stockpiled in wetlands? _____Yes _____No If so, will the stockpiled material be placed on filter fabric or some other type of impervious surface? _____Yes _____No
19 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 019 21. UTILITY CROSSINGS (Continued)
Will permanent access roads be placed through wetlands/streams? ____Yes _____No If yes, will the roads be ______at grade or ______above grade (check one)?
Will the utility line through wetlands/waters be continually maintained (e.g. via mowing or herbicide)? ____Yes _____No
If maintained, what is the maximum width? ______feet
22. ROAD CROSSINGS
Have you conducted hydraulic studies to verify the adequacy of the culverts? _____Yes _____No If so, please attach a copy of the hydraulic study/report. Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) standards require that the backwater for a 100 year storm not exceed 1 foot for all road, culvert, and bridge projects within FEMA-designated floodplains.
Will the culverts be countersunk below the stream bottom? _____Yes _____No. If no, explain: ______
If the project entails a bridged crossing and there are similar crossings in the area, what is the vertical distance above mean high water, mean low water, or ordinary high water mark of those similar structures? ______feet above ______For all bridges proposed over navigable waterways (including all tidal water bodies), you will be required to contact the U.S. Coast Guard to determine if a permit is required of their agency.
On separate sheets of paper, describe the materials to be used, the method of construction (including the use of cofferdams), and the sequence of construction events. Include cross sections and profile plans of the culvert crossings including wing walls or rip rap.
23. PRIVATE AND COMMERCIAL AQUACULTURE ACTIVITIES
Please review VMRC regulations related to aquaculture activities if you are completing this section. An abbreviated application is available for certain private oyster gardening activities by a riparian owner. Also, separate information is required by the VMRC Fisheries Management Division for the review of commercial projects that may qualify for the Virginia Marine Resources Commission General Permit #4 FOR TEMPORARY PROTECTIVE ENCLOSURES FOR SHELLFISH. The VMRC aquaculture regulations can be found on the agency web page at: http://www.mrc.state.va.us/regulations/regindex.shtm. Please see regulations 4 VAC 20-335-10 et seq., 4 VAC 20-336-10 et seq., and 4 VAC 20-1130-10 et seq. Briefly describe your proposed aquaculture activity from the time of acquisition (seed, fingerlings, etc.) to time of harvest, and indicate which species you intend to culture. Attach additional sheets if needed.
Source of the animals/plants that you want to culture: ______Note: VMRC Regulation 4VAC 20-754 et seq. “Pertaining to the Importation of Fish, Shellfish or Crustacea” sets forth the requirements for importing organisms from out of state.
Describe below the number, type, and dimensions of the structures that will be used (e.g., 4’ x 2’ x 18” floats, 3’ x 3’ x 1’ bottom cages, etc.) and the overall dimensions of the area to be occupied by the aquaculture structures (e.g., two 40-foot by 10-foot bottom plots).
20 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 020 23. PRIVATE AND COMMERCIAL AQUACULTURE ACTIVITIES (Continued)
Will the structures be affixed to an existing structure? ____Yes _____No If so, describe the attachment below.
Will the structures be located on leased oyster planting ground? _____Yes _____No If so, give the following information: ______lease number ______plat file number
24. IMPOUNDMENTS, DAMS, AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES If the impoundment or dam is a component of a water withdrawal project, also complete Sections 26 through 28.
Will the proposed impoundment, dam, or stormwater management facility be used for agricultural purposes (e.g., in the operation of a farm)? For DEQ permitting purposes, a farm is considered to be a property or operation that produces goods for market. ___ Yes ___ No
What type of materials will be used in the construction (earth, concrete, rock, etc.)? ______
What is the source of these materials? ______Provide the dimensions of proposed impoundment, dam, or stormwater management facility, including the height and width of all structures.
Storage capacity* of impoundment: ______acre-feet Surface area** of impoundment: ______acres *should be given for the normal pool of recreational or farm ponds, or **should be given for the normal pool of recreational or farm ponds, or design pool for stormwater management ponds or reservoirs (the design pool for stormwater management ponds or reservoirs (the elevation the pond will be at for the design storm, e.g., 10-year, 24-hour elevation the pond will be at for the design storm, e.g., 10-year, 24-hour storm) storm) Is the proposed project excluded from the Virginia Dam Safety Regulations? ___ Yes ___ No ___ Uncertain
If not excluded, does your proposed project comply with the Virginia Dam Safety Regulations? ___ Yes ___ No ___ Uncertain
Does the proposed design include a vegetation management area per §10.1-609.2? ___ Yes ___ No ___ Uncertain
If your answer to these questions is no or uncertain, you should contact the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation’s Dam Safety Program at (804) 371-6095, or reference the regulations on the Web at http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/dam_safety_and_floodplains/index.shtml For stormwater management facilities: Design storm event: ______year storm Retention time: ______hours Current average flow: ______cfs Proposed peak outflow for the design storm provided above: ______cfs
Has the facility been designed as an Enhanced Extended Detention Basin or an Extended Detention Basin in accordance with the Minimum Standard 3.07 of the Virginia Stormwater Management Handbook, Volume I (published by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, 1999), or in accordance with the latest version of this handbook? _____Yes _____No
Will the impoundment structure be designed to pass a minimum flow at all times? _____Yes _____No If so, please give the minimum rate of flow: ______cfs
What is the drainage area upstream of the proposed impoundment? ______square miles How much of your proposed impoundment structure will be located on the stream bed? ______square feet
What is the area of vegetated wetlands that will be excavated and/or backflooded by the impoundment? ______square feet
What is the area and length of streambed that will be excavated and/or backflooded by the impoundment? ______square feet ______linear feet
Are fish ladders being proposed to accommodate the passage of fish? _____Yes _____No
21 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 021 25. OUTFALLS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED WATER WITHDRAWAL ACTIVITIES
Type and size of pipe(s): ______100' Broad Crested Weir
Daily rate of discharge: ______mgdTBD
If the discharge will be thermally-altered, provide the maximum temperature: ______N/A
Contributing drainage area: ______square7.0 (4483 ac) miles
Average daily stream flow at site:______cfsTBD
Have you received a Virginia Discharge Elimination System (VPDES) permit for the proposed project? ___ Yes ___ No. If yes, please provide the VPDES permit number: ______. If no, is there a permit action pending? ___ Yes ___ No. If pending, what is the facility name? ______.
The following sections are typically related to surface water withdrawal activities; Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license projects; or impacts likely to require instream flow limits. Examples of such projects include, but are not limited to, reservoirs, irrigation projects, power generation facilities, and public water supply facilities that may or may not have associated features, such as dams, intake pipes, outfall structures, berms, etc.
If completing these sections, enter “N/A” in any section that does not apply to the project.
26. INTAKES, OUTFALLS, AND WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES (INCLUDING ALL PROPOSED WATER WITHDRAWAL ACTIVITIES) For intakes: For outfalls: Type and size of pipe(s): ______TBD by End User Type and size of pipe(s): ______100' Broad Crested Weir Type and size of pump(s): ______TBD by End User Daily rate of discharge: ______mgdTBD Daily rate of withdrawal: ______mgdTBD If the discharge will be thermally-altered, provide the Velocity of withdrawal: ______fpsTBD maximum temperature: ______NA Screen mesh size:______inchesTBD / ______mm Contributing drainage area at discharge point(s): If other sizing units, please ______square7.0 miles specify:______Average daily stream flow at discharge Contributing drainage area at withdrawal point(s): point(s):______cfsTBD ______square7.0 miles Latitude and longitude of discharge point(s) (degrees, Average daily stream flow at withdrawal minutes, seconds): ______TBD point(s):______cfsTBD Average annual stream flow at withdrawal point(s): See Attachment 6 - Structural Dimensions of Existing ______cfsTBD Earthen Dam and Concrete Spillway Latitude and longitude of withdrawal point(s) (degrees, minutes, seconds): ______TBD For intakes and dams, use the table below to provide the median monthly stream flows in cubic feet per second (cfs) at the water intake or dam site (not at the stream gage; if there is not a gage at the intake or dam site, you will need to interpolate flows to the intake or dam site based upon the most closely related watershed in which there is an operational stream gage monitored by the United States Geologic Survey (USGS)). Median flow is the value at which half of the measurements are above and half of the measurements are below. Median is also sometimes referred to as the ‘50% exceedence flow’. The median flow generally must be calculated from USGS historical data. Please do not provide mean (average) flow.
Month Median flow (cfs) Month Median flow (cfs)
January 8.0 July 1.7
February 9.28 August 1.73
March 10.05 September 1.24
April 7.72 October 1.18
May 4.72 November 3.59
June 2.48 December 6.24
See Attachment 7 - DEQ Modeling Summary: Cranston's Mill Pond (See specifically, adjusted flows from USGS gage 02042500 Chickahominy River near Providence Forge) 22 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 022 26. INTAKES, OUTFALLS, AND WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES (Continued)
For interbasin transfer of water resources proposed from either the Chowan River, New River, Potomac River, Roanoke River, Big Sandy River, or Tennessee River basins to another river basin, provide the following information:
For the destination location (discharge point) of the transfer: N/A 8- digit USGS Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) (See http://cfpub.epa.gov/surf/locate/index.cfm): ______If known, indicate the 10-digit and 12-digit USGS HUCs (see http://dswcapps.dcr.virginia.gov/htdocs/maps/HUExplorer.htm: ______
Latitude and Longitude: _____- _____- _____/ _____- _____- _____
Describe the stream flow gages used, the type of calculations used (such as drainage area correction factors), and the period of record that was used to calculate the median flows provided in the table above. Generally, the period of record should span a minimum of 30 years.
See Attachment 7 - DEQ Modeling Summary: Cranston's Mill Pond (see specifically, Adjusted Flows from USGS Gage 02042500 Chickahominy River Near Providence Forge)
Provide any available historical low-flows at the intake or dam site. See Attachment 8 - 14-Month Record of On-Site Data Collection of Spillway Flows
See Attachment 7 - DEQ Modeling Summary: Cranston's Mill Pond (see specifically, Adjusted Flows from USGS Gage 02042500 Chickahominy River Near Providence Forge)
Describe how the proposed withdrawal at the intake or dam site will impact stream flows in term of rates, volumes, frequency, etc. (i.e. percent of the flow to be withdrawn, percent of withdrawal returned to the original source, etc.). No impact anticipated, even at zero required flow-by release downstream. The receiving waters of Yarmouth Creek, just below the spillway, are tidally influenced as documented in the Yarmouth Creek Watershed Management Plan. (Center for Watershed Protection. 2003. Yarmouth Creek Watershed Management Plan. James City County, James City, VA). The flow-by release for the much larger Little Creek Reservoir (less than 1/4 mile from the Cranston's Mill Pond and in the same watershed) is less than 400,000 GPD. See Section 27 for proposed withdrawal volume and rates.
Describe how the withdrawal of water will vary over time. For example, will the withdrawal vary by the time of year, by the time of day, or by the time of week? Examples of projects that should describe variable withdrawals include, but are not limited to: power plant cooling withdrawals that increase and decrease seasonally; golf course irrigation; municipal water supply; nurseries; ski resorts that use water for snowmaking; and resorts with weekend or seasonal variations.
Variations in withdrawal will depend on the ultimate end user.
Provide the amount of water that will be lost due to consumptive use. For the purpose of this application, consumptive use means the withdrawal of surface waters without recycling of said waters to their source or basin of origin. Examples of consumptive uses are water that is evaporated in cooling towers or by other means in power plants; irrigation water (all types); residential water use that takes place outside of the home; and residential water use both inside and outside of homes for residences served by septic systems. Projects that propose a transfer of water from one river basin to another and/or localities that sell water to other jurisdictions, should document the portion of the withdrawal that is not returned to the originating watershed.
Proposed monthly consumptive volume: ______TBD depending on the end user.
Attach a map showing the location of the withdrawal and the location of the return of flow.
See Attachment 9 - Cranston's Mill Pond Dam and Spillway Location
23 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 023 26. INTAKES, OUTFALLS, AND WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES (Continued)
For withdrawals proposed on an impoundment, provide a description of flow or release control structures. Include type of structure, size, capacity, and the mechanism used to control release. Provide a description of available water storage facilities. Include the volume, depth, normal pool elevation, unusable storage volume and dimensions. If applicable, stage-storage relationship at the impounding structure and volume or rate of withdrawals from the storage facility. ------See Attachment 6 - Structural Dimensions of Existing Earthen Dam and Concrete Spillway
See Attachment 10 - Release Valve Schematics and Staged-Storage Volume. NOTE: this application does not propose increases to existing pool elevation.
For withdrawals proposed on an impoundment, provide a description of flow or release control structures. Include type of structure, size, capacity, and the mechanism used to control release. For Current Release Structure:
See Attachment 6 - Structural Dimensions of Existing Earthen Dam and Concrete Spillway
See Attachment 10 - Release Valve Schematics and Staged-Storage Volume. NOTE: this application does not propose increases to existing pool elevation.
For Final Release Structure:
TBD - Final release control structure and design to be determined by end user.
27. WATER WITHDRAWAL USE, NEED, AND ALTERNATIVES Describe the proposed use of the water withdrawal. ______See Attachment 11 - Proposed Project Use and Need
Provide the following information at the water intake or dam site. Specify the units of measurement (i.e. million gallons per day, gallons per minute, cubic feet per second, etc.). 26 MGD ** Proposed maximum instantaneous withdrawal ______8.3 MGD ** Proposed average daily withdrawal ______26 Million Gallons ** Proposed maximum daily withdrawal ______257,300,000 Gallons ** Proposed maximum monthly withdrawal ______3,111,345,496 Gallons ** Proposed maximum annual withdrawal ______
Describe how the above withdrawals were calculated, including the relevant assumptions made in that calculation and the documentation or resources used to support the calculations, such as population projections, population growth rates, per-capita use, new uses, changes to service areas, and if applicable, evapotranspiration data and irrigation data.
See Attachment 12 - Proposed Water Withdrawals, Calculations and Justifications
** It is requested via this application that the total amount authorized for withdrawal be based upon real, in-field measurements. e.g., If the authorized average daily withdrawal is 10 Million Gallons per Day, but in-field measurements indicate that 15 MGD is exiting CMP, then an amount greater than 10 MGD should be allowed for withdrawal, contingent upon data submitted documenting the higher flow and justified withdrawal.
24 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 024 27. WATER WITTHDRAWAL USE, NEED AND ALTERNATIVES (Continued) For major surface water withdrawals, public water supply withdrawals, and projects that will alter instream flows, provide information to establish the local water supply need:
Existing supply sources, yields, and demands: ______See Attachment 11 - Proposed Project Use and Need
Peak day withdrawal: ______Average daily withdrawal: ______Safe yield: ______Lowest daily flow of record: ______Types of water uses: ______Existing water conservation measures and drought response plan, including what conditions trigger implementation: ______
Projected demands over a minimum 30-year planning period: ______
Projected demands in local or regional water supply plan (9 VAC 25-780 et seq.) or demand for the project service area, if that is smaller in area: ______See Attachment 11 - Proposed Project Use and Need Statistical population (growth) trends: ______Projected demands by use type: ______Projected demands without water conservation measures: ______Projected demands with long-term water conservation measures: ______
For surface water withdrawals other than public water supply, provide information or documentation that demonstrates alternate sources of water are available for the proposed project during times of reduced instream flow.
For Public Water Supplies, it is envisioned that Cranston's Mill Pond will be used in a conjunctive manner along with an additional municipal source(s).
For a Private water supply or Public/Private partnership (commercial, industrial, economic growth, etc.) Cranston's Mill Pond may provide a stand alone supply or be used in conjunction with another source.
Groundwater is currently the predominant source of water in the Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Area. However, due to over-allocation of the primary aquifer (Potomac), Virginia is actively looking for alternative sources of water. Cranston's Mill Pond would serve that purpose.
Provide information from the water supply plan that covers the area in which the proposed water withdrawal project is located. Include information from the plan that pertains to projected demand, analysis of alternatives, and water conservation measures. Discuss any discrepancies between the water supply plan and the proposed project. For projects that propose a transfer of water resources from the Chowan River, New River, Potomac River, Roanoke River, Big Sandy River, or Tennessee River basins to another river basin, information should be provided from the water supply plans for both the source and receiving basins.
See Attachment 11 - Proposed Project Use and Need
Provide an alternatives analysis for the proposed water withdrawal project, including the required range of alternatives to be analyzed; a narrative outlining the opportunities and status of regional efforts undertaken; and the criteria used to evaluate each alternative. The analysis must address all of the criteria contained in 9 VAC 25-210-115 C 2 and 9 VAC 25-210-115 C 3.
An alternatives analysis is not appropriate for this proposed project as the project itself IS AN ALTERNATIVE source of water that will be used in conjunction with an existing water supply source(s), to be determined at a later date. Cranston's Mill Pond serves as an alternative given that groundwater is likely no longer an option for new or additional water supply needs in Eastern Virginia. Cranston's Mill Pond is already constructed and permitted and, therefore, does not create the same types of environmental impacts as development of new reservoirs or other surface water intake options. In addition, the work to date of the Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Advisory Committee has identified existing surface water impoundments as an alternative worth pursuing.
25 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 025 27. WATER WITTHDRAWAL USE, NEED AND ALTERNATIVES (Continued)
Describe any existing, flow-dependent beneficial uses along the affected stream reach. Include both instream and offstream uses. Describe the stream flow necessary to protect existing beneficial uses, how the proposed withdrawal will impact existing beneficial uses, and any measures proposed to mitigate any adverse impacts that may arise. For projects that propose a transfer of water resources from the Chowan River, New River, Potomac River, Roanoke River, Big Sandy River, or Tennessee River basins to another river basin, this analysis should include both the source and receiving basins. For the purposes of this application, beneficial instream uses include, but are not limited to: the protection of fish and wildlife habitat; maintenance of waste assimilation; recreation; navigation; and cultural and aesthetic values. Offstream beneficial uses include, but are not limited to: domestic (including public water supply); agriculture; electric power generation; commercial; and industrial.
Downstream beneficial uses include indigenous aquatic life and wildlife. See information provided previously in Section 26 to determine stream flow impacts. No other beneficial offstream uses are currently occurring or envisioned for any future use. CMP is privately owned, operated and controlled to one foot above the existing pool elevation.
Describe the aquatic life known to be present along the affected stream reach. Describe aquatic life that may be impacted by the proposed water withdrawal. Include the species’ habitat requirements. For projects that propose a transfer of water resources from either the Chowan River, New River, Potomac River, Roanoke River, Big Sandy River, or Tennessee River basins to another river basin, this analysis should include both the source and receiving basins.
Downstream species and associated habitat are expected to be representative of those found in typical tidal freshwater systems in the Chickahominy River sub-basin. However, it is important to note that: 1) The stream segment running from the spillway for approximately 350’ up to Cranston’s Mill Pond Road (State Route 632) has been channelized due to over 100 years of property management and use; and 2) The segment extending approximately 200' from the road and through adjacent property has been altered due to transportation related activities. These activities include road, shoulder and culvert maintenance and have created localized degraded conditions including sedimentation. The stream system beyond this altered reach reflects more natural, unaltered habitat conditions. Since the stream reaches downstream of the spillway are tidal in nature, minimal impacts, if any, are expected to the habitat and species composition due to the proposed withdrawal.
28. PUBLIC COMMENTS/ISSUES FOR MAJOR WATER WITHDRAWALS OR INTERBASIN TRANSFERS
For new or expanded major surface water supply projects, use separate sheets of paper to summarize the steps taken to seek public input per 9 VAC 25-210-75, and identify the issues raised during the public information process.
For interbasin transfer of water resources proposed from either the Chowan River, New River, Potomac River, Roanoke River, Big Sandy River, or Tennessee River basins to another river basin, if public input was not required per 9 VAC 25-210-75, summarize on separate sheets of paper any coordination and/or notice provided to the public, local/state government, and interested parties in the affected river basins and identify any issues raised.
26 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 026 APPENDIX A
Adjacent Property Owner’s Acknowledgement Form
I, ______, own land next to/ across the water from/ in the same cove (print adjacent property owner’s name) as the land of ______. (print applicant’s name)
I have reviewed the applicant’s project drawings dated ______to be submitted for all (date of drawings) necessary Federal, State, and Local permits.
_____ I have no comment regarding the proposal
_____ I do not object to the proposal
_____ I object to the proposal
The applicant has agreed to contact me for additional comments if the proposal changes prior to construction of the project.
(Before signing this form, please be sure that you have checked the appropriate option above)
______Adjacent property owner’s signature
______Date
NOTE: IF YOU OBJECT TO THE PROPOSAL, THE REASON(S) YOU OPPOSE THE PROJECT MUST BE SUBMITTED TO VMRC IN WRITING. AN OBJECTION WILL NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A DENIAL OF A PERMIT FOR THE PROPOSED WORK. HOWEVER, VALID COMPLAINTS WILL BE GIVEN FULL CONSIDERATION DURING THE PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS.
27 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 027 APPENDIX A
Adjacent Property Owner’s Acknowledgement Form
I, ______, own land next to/ across the water from/ in the same cove (print adjacent property owner’s name) as the land of ______. (print applicant’s name)
I have reviewed the applicant’s project drawings dated ______to be submitted for all (date of drawings) necessary Federal, State, and Local permits.
_____ I have no comment regarding the proposal
_____ I do not object to the proposal
_____ I object to the proposal
The applicant has agreed to contact me for additional comments if the proposal changes prior to construction of the project.
(Before signing this form, please be sure that you have checked the appropriate option above)
______Adjacent property owner’s signature
______Date
NOTE: IF YOU OBJECT TO THE PROPOSAL, THE REASON(S) YOU OPPOSE THE PROJECT MUST BE SUBMITTED TO VMRC IN WRITING. AN OBJECTION WILL NOT NECESSARILY RESULT IN A DENIAL OF A PERMIT FOR THE PROPOSED WORK. HOWEVER, VALID COMPLAINTS WILL BE GIVEN FULL CONSIDERATION DURING THE PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS.
28 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 028 U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers Norfolk District Regional Permit 17 Certificate of Compliance Form
Please obtain and read a copy of the 13-RP-17 prior to completion of this form. Copies can be obtained by contacting the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Branch (Corps) at (757) 201-7652 or on our website at: http://www.nao.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/RBregional.aspx .
YES NO Is the proposed pier for private use ONLY?
YES NO Does the proposed pier extend LESS than ¼ the width of the waterway as measured from MHW to MHW or OHW to OHW (including channelward wetlands) based on the narrowest distance across the waterway regardless of the orientation of the proposed pier (MHW = mean high water line; OHW = ordinary high water line)?
YES NO Does the proposed pier and/or mooring structure(s) extend LESS than 300 feet from the mean high water line or ordinary high water line?
YES NO N/A If the proposed structure crosses wetland vegetation, is it of an open-pile design that has a maximum width of five (5) feet and a minimum height of four (4) feet between the decking and the wetland substrate?
YES NO N/A If the proposed pier is to include an attached open-sided roof designed to provide shelter, is the cumulative roof square footage less than 700 square feet?
YES NO N/A Is the total number of boat slips on the property less than or equal to two boat slips?
YES NO Have you confirmed that the proposed construction will not take place in one of the reaches which serve as habitat for federally threatened and endangered species, Federal Navigation Channels, and/or does not meet any of the requirements listed in the “V. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS #1-7” section of this permit?
YES NO N/A If the proposed work is in portions of any waterways listed in Special Condition 6, have you obtained an easement to cross government property from the Army Corps of Engineers Real Estate Office?
IF YOU HAVE ANSWERED “NO” TO ANY OF THE QUESTIONS ABOVE, THE REGIONAL PERMIT 17 WILL NOT APPLY AND YOU WILL NEED TO SUBMIT A JOINT PERMIT APPLICATION AND OBTAIN A SEPARATE PERMIT FROM THE CORPS BEFORE COMMENCING CONSTRUCTION.
IF YOU HAVE ANSWERED “YES” (OR “N/A”, WHERE APPLICABLE) TO ALL OF THE QUESTIONS ABOVE, YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REGIONAL PERMIT 17. PLEASE SIGN BELOW, ATTACH, AND SUBMIT WITH YOUR COMPLETED JOINT PERMIT APPLICATION. THIS SIGNED CERTIFICATE SERVES AS YOUR LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION FROM THE CORPS. YOU WILL NOT RECEIVE ANY OTHER WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE CORPS. HOWEVER, YOU MAY NOT PROCEED WITH CONSTRUCTION UNTIL YOU HAVE OBTAINED ALL OTHER NECESSARY STATE AND LOCAL PERMITS.
I CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND ALL CONDITIONS OF THE REGIONAL PERMIT 17 (13- RP-17), DATED AUGUST 14 2013, ISSUED BY THE US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, NORFOLK DISTRICT REGULATORY BRANCH (CENAO-WR-R), NORFOLK, VIRGINIA.
______Proposed work to be located at: Signature of Property Owner(s) or Agent ______Date______
Revision Date: August 2013
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 029 APPENDIX C
Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act Information
Please answer the following questions to determine if your project is subject to the requirements of the Bay Act Regulations:
1. Is your project located within Tidewater Virginia? ____Yes ____No (See map on next page) - If the answer is “no”, the Bay Act requirements do not apply; if “yes”, then please continue to question #2.
2. Please indicate if the project proposes to impact any of the following Resource Protection Area (RPA) features:
____ Tidal wetlands,
____ Nontidal wetlands connected by surface flow and contiguous to tidal wetlands or water bodies with perennial flow,
____ Tidal shores,
____ Other lands considered by the local government to meet the provisions of subsection A of § 9VAC 25-830-80 and to be necessary to protect the quality of state waters (contact the local government for specific information),
____ A buffer area not less than 100 feet in width located adjacent to and landward of the components listed above, and along both sides of any water body with perennial flow.
If the answer to question #1 was “yes” and any of the features listed under question #2 will be impacted, compliance with the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Designation and Management Regulations is required. The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Designation and Management Regulations are enforced through locally adopted ordinances based on the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (CBPA) program. Compliance with state and local CBPA requirements mandates the submission of a Water Quality Impact Assessment (WQIA) for the review and approval of the local government. Contact the appropriate local government office to determine if a WQIA is required for the proposed activity(ies).
The individual localities, not the DEQ, USACE, or the Local Wetlands Boards, are responsible for enforcing the CBPA requirements and, therefore, local permits for land disturbance are not issued through this JPA process. Approval of this wetlands permit does not constitute compliance with the CBPA regulations nor does it guarantee that the local government will issue land-disturbing permits for this project.
Notes for all projects in RPAs Development, construction, land disturbance, or placement of fill within the RPA features listed above requires a review from the locality and may require an exception or variance from the local Bay Act program or zoning ordinance. Please contact the appropriate local government to determine the types of development or land uses that are permitted within RPAs.
Pursuant to § 9VAC 25-830-110, on-site delineation of the RPA is required for all projects in CBPAs. Because USGS maps are not always indicative of actual “in-field” conditions, they may not be used to determine the site-specific boundaries of the RPA.
Notes for shoreline erosion control projects in RPAs Re-establishment of woody vegetation in the buffer may be required to mitigate for the removal or disturbance of buffer vegetation associated with your proposed project. Please contact the local government to determine the mitigation requirements for impacts to the 100-foot RPA buffer.
Pursuant to § 9VAC 25-830-140.5.a(4), § 9VAC 25-830-140.1, and § 9VAC 25-830-130 of the Virginia Administrative Code, the locality will use the information provided in this Appendix and in the project drawings, along with other information in this permit application and a WQIA, to make a determination that:
1. Any proposed shoreline erosion control measure is necessary and consistent with the nature of the erosion occurring on the site, and the measures have employed the “best available technical advice” 2. Indigenous vegetation will be preserved to the maximum extent practicable 3. Proposed land disturbance has been minimized 4. Appropriate mitigation plantings will provide the required water quality functions of the buffer (§ 9VAC 25-830-140.3) 5. The project is consistent with the locality’s comprehensive plan 6. Access to the project will be provided with the minimum disturbance necessary.
31 Revised: March 2014
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 030 31 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 031 APPENDIX D
APPENDIX D – Drawings
On the following pages, you will find sample drawings in plan and cross-sectional view that demonstrate the general format necessary for drawings. You should make sure to consult the detailed lists below to ensure that your drawings contain all of the necessary information. Failure to include all necessary information on your drawings may mean that your application is not considered complete by one or more agencies.
All projects will require the submittal of plan view and cross-sectional view drawings. These drawings should be drawn to a scale no smaller than 1 inch = 200 feet. The number of sets of drawings to be submitted is detailed in the HOW TO APPLY section starting on page 2 of this package. Drawings can be computer-generated or hand-drawn. Please be advised that some Local Wetlands Boards (LWB) require you to have a licensed engineer certify the drawings. You should contact your LWB to determine their specific requirements.
Plan view drawings should contain the following general informational items:
Name of project North arrow Scale Waterway name, if designated Existing contours Proposed contours (if available) Width of waterway from the mean high water level to the mean high water level (tidal areas), or the ordinary high water mark to the ordinary high water mark (nontidal areas) Direction of flood and ebb (tidal areas), and/or direction of flow in nontidal areas (if applicable) Mean low water level and mean high water level (tidal areas), or ordinary high water mark (nontidal areas) Landward limit of the dune or beach at the site
AND Plan view drawings should also contain the following specific informational items if they apply to the project:
Resource Impact/Protection-Specific Items: Limits: of existing wetlands, open water, or streams, including submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV); of proposed impact areas, such as fill areas (square feet or acres) or dredge areas; of Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act Resource Protection Area(s) (RPA), including the 100-foot buffer; of proposed clearing within the RPA buffer Location and type of existing vegetation within the 100-foot RPA buffer; location of proposed wetland planting areas (as restoration for temporary impacts or mitigation for permanent impacts); locations of existing and proposed stream channel(s), including all proposed riffle/pool complexes, bars, and bank stabilization structures; location of proposed riprap scour protection Historic/cultural resources Threatened/Endangered resources
Structure/Project-Specific Items: Existing and proposed structures, labeled as ‘existing’ and ‘proposed’, and their dimensions. These items may include pier(s), including L-heads, T-heads, platforms, and/or decks; roof(s) on roofed structures located over waterways, including boathouses; gasoline storage tanks and/or structures for collecting and handling hazardous material, including settling tanks for travel lift washdown water, paint chips, etc.; return walls; tie-ins to existing bulkhead(s) or riprap; utility line easement(s); utility line/road right(s)-of-way; aerial transmission line structure(s), including towers, poles, platforms, etc.; onsite or offsite dredged material disposal areas, including location of all berms, spillways, erosion and sediment control measures, outfall pipes, and aprons; temporary stockpiles of excavated material; temporary construction access facilities; risers and/or emergency spillways, labeled with their proposed invert elevations; design pool/normal pool for stormwater management ponds/impoundments/reservoirs; intakes and/or outfalls, including splash aprons, relative to mean high water, mean low water, or ordinary high water mark(s); anchoring devices and weights (mooring buoys), including the total swing radius Channelward encroachment of proposed structure(s) from mean high water and mean low water, or from ordinary high water mark For piers that cover ¼ or more of the waterway width: depth soundings, taken at the mean low water level (tidal areas) or the ordinary high water mark (nontidal areas) Distance(s) between structure(s) (piers, boathouses, catwalks, etc.) and mooring pile(s) Minimum distance between dredge cut and vegetated wetlands Latitude and longitude of all mooring structures, in degrees, minutes, and seconds End points and turning points along proposed bulkhead(s), labeled as such For bulkheads, measurements from each end point and each turning point along proposed bulkhead(s) to two fixed points of reference (labeled as such) Structure or method used to contain fill (hay bales, silt fences, etc.) Dimensions of impoundment, dam, or stormwater management facility and area of any vegetative management areas
32 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 032 APPENDIX D – Drawings (Continued)
Cross-section view drawings should contain the following General Informational items:
Name of project North arrow Scale Waterway name Mean low water and mean high water lines (tidal areas), and/or ordinary high water mark (nontidal areas) Direction of flood and ebb (tidal areas), and/or direction of flow in nontidal areas (if applicable) Existing contours of the bottom (depths relative to mean low water or ordinary high water mark) and the bank itself Existing contours of the dune or beach
AND Cross-section view drawings should also contain the following specific informational items if they apply to the project:
Resource impact/protection-specific Items: Riprap scour protection Proposed wetland planting areas, relative to mean high water and mean low water (tidal areas), or ordinary high water mark (nontidal areas) Depth of buried toe of riprap or marsh toe stabilization Base width, top width, and slope of stone/concrete stabilization structures
Structure/Project-Specific Items: Existing and proposed structures, labeled as ‘existing’ and ‘proposed’, and their dimensions. These items may include fill areas, labeled with square footage(s) or acreage(s) over vegetated wetlands and subaqueous bottom; berms, spillways, erosion and sediment control measures, outfall pipes, and aprons at onsite or offsite dredged material disposal area(s); bank grades; deadmen, sheeting, knee braces, etc., as used in the construction of bulkheads; filter cloth; weep holes; intakes and/or outfalls, including splash aprons, relative to mean high water, mean low water, or ordinary high water mark; risers and/or emergency spillways; low-flow channels; culverts, including their proposed invert elevations and diameters; anchoring systems for aquaculture structures; type of chain used to secure mooring buoys to subaqueous bottom For dredge projects, proposed contours of the bottom (depth relative to mean low water or ordinary water level) Bottom width of proposed dredge cut, projected side slope of cut, and estimated top width of cut Ponding depth of onsite or offsite dredged material disposal area Minimum distance between pier decking and vegetated wetland substrate (a.k.a. the “mud line”) Water depth below mean low water at the end of proposed boat ramps Depth of penetration of pilings and/or sheeting (bulkheads) Elevation of any proposed fill (including backfill) Structure or method used to contain fill (hay bales, silt fences, etc.) Design pool/normal pool elevation for stormwater management facilities/impoundments/reservoirs Vertical distance from the water surface (relative to mean high water or ordinary high water mark) for all aerial crossings (bridges or overhead utility lines) over navigable water bodies Depth below bottom of water body for submarine utility crossings Dimensions of impoundment, dam, or stormwater management facility through a cross-section of the structure(s); bottom elevation(s) of basin created; depth of pool; and depth(s) to structure(s) on the bottom.
33 Revised: July 2012
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 033 ATTACHMENT 1
Project Description, Purposes and Alternatives
Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 034 Project Description, Purposes, Need, Use, and Alternatives
JPA Section 3 PROJECT PRIMARY AND SECONDARY PURPOSES – The purpose of this project is to provide necessary raw water supply for municipal and public and private economic development needs within the Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Area. It is well documented that localities and other permittees that rely upon groundwater withdrawals from the deep Potomac aquifer can no longer plan to do so for existing and future water needs. The Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Advisory Committee and its workgroups have documented the need for alternative water supplies, including additional surface water sources and storage options. This proposal is the first-of-its-kind privately funded and permitted raw water supply that can be used to supplement existing and future raw water needs for municipalities, commercial and industrial facilities. The future intent is to transfer the ownership of the Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply to a locality or business.
PROJECT NEED – The need for additional raw water supplies within the Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Area is well documented and further described in the cover letter submitted with this application, as well as in Section 27 of this application.
INTENDED USE – The proposed use for water from the Cranston’s Mill Pond is to meet the need articulated in the State Water Resources Plan, the Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Advisory Committee, and the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission Water Supply Plan. Our proposed intent for permitting the Cranston’s Mill Pond as a water supply is for it to be used as a public or private supplemental source, likely in conjunction with an existing source, to meet a locality or industrial facility’s current and future water needs. We envision the permit, and water assets, to be transferred to a third party end user at a future date. For that reason, we request the Cranston’s Mill Pond be permitted for the full amount of usable water that it provides. Raw water from the Cranston’s Mill Pond will be used, at a future date, for an end-user as yet to be determined, to either supplement their current water supply to comply with the state-mandated cuts in permitted groundwater withdrawal amounts, or to accommodate for future population growth and/or water-dependent economic development. Opportunities for end-users may include supplementing a municipality’s existing water supply system, regional water supply and/or storage, stand-alone or supplemental water supply for an existing or future industrial facility, and others potential uses.
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 035 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED – No additional alternatives were considered for the purposes of this application. The Cranston’s Mill Pond dam and spillway have been permitted in accordance with the Virginia Dam Safety Program and is already approved by the Department of Environmental Quality as a nutrient credit facility. In its existing state, the Cranston’s Mill Pond can be used as a municipal or private water supply source with no alteration to the dam or spillway structure. Four 18-inch diameter release pipes are already integrated into the spillway structure, each capable of releasing up to 5 MGD. Current releases from the Pond are via overflow of the spillway (elevation 8.1 above MSL). The receiving waters of Yarmouth Creek, just below the spillway, are tidally influenced as documented in the Yarmouth Creek Watershed Management Plan. (Center for Watershed Protection. 2003. Yarmouth Creek Watershed Management Plan. James City County, James City, VA)
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 036 ATTACHMENT 2
Permits Obtained for Nutrient Credit Facility and Dam Construction
Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 037 Permits Obtained for Nutrient Credit Facility and Dam Construction
JPA Section 3 The Cranston’s Mill Pond is currently authorized and maintained as an operational impoundment per the Virginia Dam Safety Program (DCR Dam Inventory #09513) and is also permitted as a Nutrient Credit Facility by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality.
Permitting/Authorization Timeline * Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Conditional Operation and Maintenance Certificate Extension - 2/8/10 (Issued to prior owner Toano Fishing and Hunting Club) * Virginia Department of Environmental Quality nutrient offset facility authorization letter – 7/13/10 * Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Dam Alteration Permit – 10/15/10 * U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide 3 General Permit (Permit #NAO-2006-8301) – 11/18/10 * James City County Chesapeake Bay Board - Exception granted to work in Resource Protection Area and Special Use Permit – 12/9/10 * Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Dam Regular Operation and Maintenance Certificate – 9/15/11 * Virginia Department of Environmental Quality nutrient offset credit release letter – 12/1/11 ______* Supplemental Dam and Spillway Construction Information – Cranston’s Mill Pond Construction Plans
The Cranston’s Mill Pond is currently operational and in full compliance with all applicable state and local requirements and programs.
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 038
Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Conditional Operation and Maintenance Certificate Extension
Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 039 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 040 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 041
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Nutrient Offset Facility Authorization Letter
Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 042 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 043 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 044 Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Dam Alteration Permit
Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application
CMP JPA Master Page Number: 045 I) 1I118 11b \, I )ulT1c: net.: iI David A- Jot.. " ,," c.; C',~ \1 1 Nu.t untl RC"..;(,un..:... Ui~or
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA Dt.PARTMENT OFCO SERV A'fI O AND REC REATION
20) G(''' ~mnr 'ill"«! l< •.:bmnnd V'1'Ilnlll 2.n I Y·,mlll
J4C' ph II l)1~ 1"lit !ll l l J,lIIl 'ilti:1. , ~'iI. • h Rt· . \ll~rati'l tl P"ml il ])CaJ Dam 0" ncr_ \Il Wllr"- 'pcciiicd in the Ahernlillnl'CnTli t n1lC' t mmmCl1ce within tht! lim.: frume identified In lh not commence II ilhinthc prescribed lime frame, the p"unll shall ""pirc_ The appllcalll mo) pcti ti on the Board for a lime extensIOn Illr good COIlS!: and "ilh IJ[1Jated ~ " nstruclion sequence and nu lcSlUm." F('r generfll responsibilities rcgard illg II1;P"Cti ll IlS. r"purtm!! r':'luJn: ment~ , IIIdtntenanc~ , em"rgency aClion plan and c ~ crci sc s . ple,,* chel~ th. lalesl Dam Safel) Act. Impoundi ng Structure Regulalions. Ilnd GuiduJlcC Documents aV lIjl"hlL ut www,dcr.\'iruinia.go) . 11 VUlt hal C an) questions, pkasc contaC I I Il!)r ReglonuJ Dam Safel> Lnginc ...r nuted Ull your D.Jtr me III m) uddrc~, ab.)\c "Iin,er.:l1 . RLO~.1f/.ohert I _BC/llll'll ~P E., RH TA Dl vlsjon Dlrector Di\ i ~ itln ,)1' Dam :-UfClY& Fillmiploin r>.lalll1gl'mcllI ·\ Itl'ratlon I'ermil -\I kr:-lliun I'.:nnil ])atashcct State ('ork,' • Soli uml fflller Crm.,er.ul/I)/J • '\aturalll,>,IJagt • OlltdODr Necrention (,161111111/1 Chlf'j(1{1cak. RII)' Local 455iswnc<" Dam -"'I/ely and F/,mdpla/II Managemelll • Laml C II1I"I!TI'lIt/O/l CMP JPA Master Page Number: 046 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENTOFCON ERVATlO ANI)RECREA110N DlVISIO OF DAM AFEn' ViRGiNIA OfL AND WATER CO SERVATJO Dam Safety Conditional Operation and Maintenance Certificate Significant Hazard Dam, Inventory Number 09513 AIteration Permit This pennit entitles Toano Fishing and Hunting Club to alter Cranston Millpond Dam in Jamc$ City County pursuant to the provisions orthe Dam Safety Act (Section 10.1-604 et seq., Code of Virginia) and the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board (Board) Regulations promulgated thereunder and other requirements of the Board. This permit is issued to perJorm the alteration as noted on the two-year Alteration Pennit Data Sheet dated September 14,2010, and is effective September 16,2010 and expires September 30, 2012. Dav id A. Johnson Director, Department of Conservation pod Recreation CMP JPA Master Page Number: 047 J) TA SHEET - ALTER ATION PERMIT Department of Consen alton & Recreation Division of Dam Safety & Floodplain Management 203 Governor St r~ rt . Suitr 206 Richmond. VA 2321 ? ~2 094 \!.Im,· Ilr Dam: C r an~toru; M ill Pond Dam In\'cllIory I'\um bcr: 09513 1OC,iI I,)tI : Yarmouth C reek CllylCounty: James Cit)' Coun ty Owner: Crnn sfUn Mill Pond. LtC Dcsigtlcd by: Unknown .\lIn : 11 relll L.. FullS Constructed by: Unknown 57JS . f ,nhurn unJ Avenue \ddr~'s: Year Constructed (Modifled): 1964 Ctty,T,)\\ 117 ip: Richmond. V A 23231 Type' ol'Dam: Ea rrhfill Purpose: Recreation Drainag<, Area (S'I. Mi.): 7. 2 Type or Watershed: W ooded 1Runtl I 11Jlal Height (H.): J3.0 blc \"J li on: n o N"rm;11 1'001 He igh t (T'l): 9.0 Elev \LI\imulll Capacity (Acre Ft.): 935 Maxitl lll m Area (Acres): 148 ]\;,)rma l Cal\JcJly (Acr~ Ft.) : 234 • annal Area (Acres): 50 Si/e Classification: Smnll Hazard C lassification: Low Requ ired Spi II wa) Design Flood: 100~Y R Avai lable Sp Ll lway Design Flood: > 100 ~ YR 1,1)0 (l l Sptll\\'<1y' C'ol) crete Channel (Nole 'iSeelioll /3U). ( X liJcsil,'I1 Report by: Paut F. Henson, P. E. VA ff023860 I~mp'lf" ry LllJerge'l1cy Ac tion Plan fi led Wtli1: I \ ) \ l'g,m3 Dcpl. of i'mcr).!on cy M "nngclllcni , \' I I Ilcui ('oorUlnalor uf Emergency ScTVI C S Clryl\ollnty: James City Counly \1'1''"''''11011 RC\ ,,'weu :1I1 <1 Recommended for : 24~moll til AIt (' r;, t iOIl " erm it (0 9/1 6/10 - 09130112) for II jlgradcs a li d ,epair- prr plans a,"1 ~I",d ficatio.n s by Paul F. Henson. P.F:. V A #0 23860, el ated 8/18/2010. Dale: September 14,2010 t '\lnt urrencc with the Recommendation: ) , I / Ruhert IknncH, !'.E., R.A., Dir ector Date September 1 S, 20 I 0 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 048 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide 3 General Permit Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 049 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 050 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 051 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 052 James City County Chesapeake Bay Board – Exception Granted to Work in Resource Protection Area and Special Use Permit Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 053 Development Management James City County In I 1\ Mnunl Hay Rn,l(i p,O Bw( 878-1 Environmental Division Willi.1 l l1~burg, VA 21 1R7·R78 4 lOl-E Mo unts Bay Road P: 7,7-2- ~-f167 1 , Williamsburg, VA 231 85 devm,m;i!l j Jmes·ci t y,\'a . u~ IccEgov.com Code Compliance Environmental Division Planning nd Zoning 7:;7-2 -, '{-uh.::'ll 757-25~-6b7l! 757-253-0685 (ocieLomp'Wj.lme 'Clty V,l.LIS environ@jamcs·citY,Vd.lI S ' pldl ""Ilg@jdmes·city.va.lIS December 9, 2010 Mr, Brent Fults Cranston's Mill Pon d LLC c/o Earth sou rce Solutions, Inc 5735 La burnum Ave Richmond, VA 23231 RE: CBE-11-050 - Rehabilitation of Cranston's Mill Pond Dear Mr, Fults: En closed is a copy of the signed Resolution from the James City County Chesapeake Bay Board, granting the requested exception for the proposed encroachment into the Resource Protection Area (RPA). ' . As per the conditions of this Resol utio n, before receiving the Land Disturb~ng Permit for this project, a co py of the recordation of Deed of Covenants guaranteed of a $5 ,000 su rety must be submitted to our office. Please co ntact out office, if you have any que.stions regarding this Resolution or the require ments. ' Melanie Davis Senior Engineering Assistant 757 -253-6866 mdavis@james-city,va,us Enclosure cc , Koontz-Bryant PC Toano Fish & Hunt Club CMP JPA Master Page Number: 054 RESOLUTIO GRANTING AN EXCEPTION ON J C RE TAX PARCEL NO. 2230100044 WHEREAS. Mr. Paul F . Hinson. P of Ko ntz-Bryant PC on behalf of Mr. B rent Fu lts, Cranston's M il l Pond LL .. (the " A pplicant"), has appeared before the Chesapeake Bay Board of James C ity County (the " oard") on December 8, 20 I 0 to r q uest an exception to the use of the Resource Prot~ ct i on Area (the " RPA" ) on a parcel of property identified as J C R..C Tax Parce l 0.2230 I000-1 4 and further identified as th Toano H unt and F ish ' Iub pr perty at 6616 Cranstoll's Mil l Pond Road (the " Prop -Ii), ") as set forth in the application BE-I 1-050 for encroachment into the RPA buffer for the rehabilitation f Cranston's M il l Pond and; HEREAS, the Board has li stened to the arguments presented and has carefully considered all evidence entered into the record. OW . THEREFORE, fo llowing a public hearing, th e eh sapeake Bay Board of James City County by a maj ority vote of its memb r. FIN DS that: I . The exception request is the minimum necessary to a fford relief. 2. Granting the exc ptiOD vvill not confer upon the A pplicant any specia l privi lege denied by Chapter 23 , Chesapeake Bay Preservati n, of the James City County Code, to other property owners simi la rly ituated in the vicinil 3. The exception reque t will he in harmony with the purpose and in tent of Chapter 23 or the James ity County Cod e, and is not of ubstant ial d tri mnt to water quality 4. The .'ception request is not based on condit ions or c ircumstan s that are self created or seJf-impo d, nor does the requ st aris from condit ions or circumstances either permitted or non-confonning that are related to adj ac nt II parcel S. R asonabl and appropriat conditi ons are hereby imposed, as set fortil b low , which will pre 'ent the exc plian request from causin g a degradation of w ater qu ::dity. 6. [n grant in g this . c ption, the ~ IkJ\-\i ng c nJitions are hereby impos d to prevent this exceptioll request from c:lLl si ng de rad lion of water CJu a li ty: J) The appJ ican! must obtain a ll ath'r nece ary fedt'ral, tate, and 10 'al pemlit as required ~ r the proj ect. 2) The recordati n .Jf a atural p n Space (NOS) easem nt or a Deed of 'ovcnant over the entIre propl) d par el, in a ~ nn slJitable to the County ttom ey. CMP JPA Master Page Number: 055 - 2 3) The N S easement or Deed of ovenants shall be guaranteed through the provi -ion of th Ord inance contained in ections 23-10(3) Cd) and 23-17(c), v bie h is pro id ing a fonn of uret satisfactory to the County Attorney. The surety for the . S ea - m I t or Deed fCovenants hall be $5,000. 4) This xception reque t ap pr va l shall beco me null and void if constru ction has not begun by December 8, 20) J or all improv me nts incl ud ing th e requ ired easement are not com pl eted by that expiration date. 5) Written req uests for an xtension t an exception sha ll be submitte.d to the Env ironmental Di vision no later than 2 weeks prior to the exp iratio n date. Dav id Gussman;! Chair, Ch esap~ ak e Ba Board Scott J. Thol}t.s/ Secretary t o6.h~ Board Adoptd by th e Chesa peake Bay Bua rd of James City County, Virginia, th is 8th day of December 2010. CMP JPA Master Page Number: 056 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 057 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 058 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 059 Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Dam Regular Operation and Maintenance Certificate Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 060 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 061 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 062 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 063 Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Nutrient Offset Credit Release Letter Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 064 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 065 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 066 Supplemental Dam and Spillway Construction Information – Cranston’s Mill Pond Construction Plans Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 067 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 068 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 069 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 070 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 071 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 072 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 073 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 074 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 075 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 076 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 077 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 078 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 079 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 080 ATTACHMENT 3 Cranston’s Mill Pond Adjacent Property Owners Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 081 4 2 3 1 7 Cranston's Mill Pond 5 6 Legend Adjacent Parcels CMP Ownership *See supplemental attachment for detailed property owner info pertaining to each numbered parcel. 0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 Feet Base Mapping Provided By: ESRI Cranston's Mill Pond County Parcel Data Provided By: JCC Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Land Trust Adjacent Parcel Map 5735 S. Laburnum Ave Richmond Va. Ü (2016) 804-222-5114 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 082 CRANSTON'S MILL POND ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS Property Owner's Name Mailing Address City State Zip Code Parcel ID Parcel Map # THOMAS, NAOMI R 6750 CRANSTON'S MILL POND RD TOANO VA 23168 2230100042 1 GREENHOW, GINGER ESTATE C/O ULIUS R GREENHOW P O BOX 622 TOANO VA 23168-0622 2230100043 2 GEDDY, BERTRAND E JR 8297 RICHMOND ROAD TOANO VA 23168-9205 2230100026 3 TRUSTEE HIDDEN ACRES FARM, P.O. BOX 835 NORGE VA 23127-0835 2330100001 4 INC; WAYNE S NUNN COLONIAL HERITAGE LLC 7591 COPPERMINE DRIVE MANASSAS VA 20109-2671 2240100007 5 TOANO FISH & HUNT CLUB; 727 MEADOW VIEW RIDGE MANAKIN SABOT VA 23103-3144 2230100044 6 ROBERT A CARLE, THE MEADOWS JONS, MONTGOUSSAINT E 122 DREW ROAD WILLIAMSBURG VA 23185-5638 2230100041 7 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 083 ATTACHMENT 4 Virginia Department of Historic Resources – Detailed Archives Search Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 084 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 085 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 086 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 087 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 088 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 089 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 090 ATTACHMENT 5 Cranston’s Mill Pond Declaration of Covenants Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 091 II0 0014~8 DECLARATION OF COVENANTS PROPERTY OF Cranston Mill Pond. LLC (Owner) James City County, VIRGlNIA THIS DECLARATION OF COVENANTS (the "Declaration"), is made this l:2'::'aay of .JA t-lU~\"Ly , 20J..ff, by and between CRANSTON MILL POND. LLC, a Virginia limited liability company ("CMP" ), Owner, and the COUNTY OF JAMES CITY. VIRGINIA, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the "County"). WHEREAS, CMP is the owner of the certain property consisting of approximately 59.33 acres (the "Property"), which is more particularly shown on that certain plat entitled "Subdivision Plat of Cranston' s Mill Pond and Adjacent Property" number JCC-S-0049-2010 (the "Subdivision Plat") which is duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the County of James City, Virginia as Instrument No. IGtQ 1..7?:> '2'2 WH EREAS, CMP desires to comply with the respective conditions and terms of the Cranston's Mill Pond Nutrient Reduction Implementation Plan dated April 20, 20 10 among: CMP, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (" DEQ") and the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (" DCR") by imposing this DECLARATION OF COVENANTS upon said Property for the purpose of generating and transferring nutrient offsets pursuant to DEQ's point source nutrient trading program (§§ 62.1-44.19:12 et seq. of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended (the " Virginia Code") and 9 VA C 25-820-\ 0 et seq .) and DCR' s stormwater offset program (Virginia Code § 10. 1-603.8: I). WH EREAS, CMP desires to comply with the respective conditions and terms of the Nutrient Reduction Implementation Plan by imposing thi s Declaration of Covenants on the Property. WH EREAS, the County has adopted the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance, Chapter 23 of the James City County Code, as required by Chapter 21 of Title 10.1 of the Virginia Code to protect the Chesapeake Bay and its tri butaries from nonpoint source pollution within the Chesapeake Bay drainage area. WH EREAS, CMP desires to comply with the respective conditions and terms of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance, the James City County Code, and the Virginia Code and desires to preserve land in its natural condition as part of CMP's efforts to improve the quality of storm water runoff from the Property. WH EREAS, This Declaration of Covenants is imposed by CMP freely and voluntarily. NOW THEREFORE WITNESSETH: CMP does hereby declare, covenant and agree, for itself and its successors and assigns, that the Property shall be hereafter held, leased, transferred, and sold Cranston Mill Pond. LLC Cranston 's Mill Pond Page I Declaration of Restrictions CMP JPA Master Page Number: 092 subject to the following covenants and restrictions which shall run with the land and be binding on all parties and persons claiming under them. CM P hereby grants operational and nutrient offset transfer rights for the Property under the terms of the Nutrient Reduction Implementation Plan to Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Land Trust, LLC ("CBNLT"). CBNLT agrees to manage said Property according to the terms of this Declaration of Covenants and the Cranston Mill Pond Nutrient Reduction Implementation Plan. Covenants and Restrictions: The Property shall be preserved in perpetuity by prohibiting the following activities: I. A. Destruction or alteration of the Property except the following: (a) Alterations in accordance with plans approved by the Soil and Water Conservation Board in issuing an Alteration Permit effective September 16, 20 I 0, for Cranston Mill Pond Dam (Inventory Number 09513) pursuant to the terms of the Dam Safety Act (Virginia Code §§ 10.1 604 et seq.) and Dam Safety Regulations (4 VAC 50-20-10 et seq.) (collectively, the "Virginia Dam Safety Program"); (b) Alterations necessary to maintain the Property and Cranston Mill Pond Dam in accordance with the Dam Safety Program including removal of vegetation as required by Virginia Code § 10.1 609.2 and associated regulations; (c) Alterations to Cranston Mill Pond Dam authori zed by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality as necessary to implement the terms of the Nutrient Reduction Implementation Plan and ensure the success of the planned nutrient reductions and associated nutrient offsets and in conjunction with the construction, reconstruction, enhancement or maintenance of the dam and spillway; (d) Allerations as reasonably necessary to comply with local, state, or federal law or permit or appropriate court order; (e) Alterations depicted on the Subdivision Plat and the Site Plan (JCC-SP0093-2010); (f) Outdoor recreational activities including, but not limited to, canoeing, boating, hiking, camping, wildlife and botanical observation and studies, hunting, trapping and fi shing; (g) Non-commercial removal of trees for personal use (not to exceed 12 trees per year) on those portions of the Property outside the RPA (as shown on the Subdivision Pl at) for obtaining firewood for private use on the Property only; and Cranston Mill Pond, LLC Cranston 's Mill Pond Page 2 1112/2011 DeclaratI on of Restrictions CMP JPA Master Page Number: 093 (h) Alte(ations to const(uct stwctmes such as walkways, boa(dwalks, foot trails, wildlife observation or management structures, benches, picnic tables, fence posts and, ecological, biological, hydrological or chemical monitoring, observation or management equipment including, without limitation, monitoring wells, water control weirs or inter-pretive stations, or other stmctures provided that such facilities are constructed and maintained in acco(dance with all applicable local, federal, and state laws and a(c located outside the RPA. I. B. Destruction or altemtion of the Property except the following, pmvided each exception is approved in w(iting by the County Watershed Planner, which appmval shall not be unreasonably withheld : (i) Alterations to construct a dam observation deck and an equipment storage and work building outside the RPA provided that such facili ties are constructed and maintained in accordance with all applicable local, federal , and state laws; (j) Addition of signs constwcted in public right of ways by or on behalf of the Virginia Department of Transportation, the County, or other governmental agencies; (k) Removal of vegetation (where not p(ecluded by local, federal , or state law) when conducted for (i) removal of noxious or invasive plants, or (ii) limited aesthetic modifications not involving clearing o( removal of trees or limbs greater than three (3) inches in caliper unless dead, dying or di seased; and ( I) Planting of native species of plants by hand for aesthetic landscaping o( screening pur-poses. 2. Construction, maintenance, placement or relocation of any structures or fills including but not limited to buildings, and mobile homes, other than those which currently exist, except as authorized upon the written consent of the County Wate(shed Planner which approval sha ll not be umeasonably withheld. On the portion of the Pmperty outside the RPA, constmction and maintenance of an observation deck and an equipment sto(agc and work building shall be permitted upon the written consent of the County Watershed Planne( which approval shall not be umeasonably withheld. 3. Ditching, draining, diking, damming, filling, excavating, grading, plowing, flooding/ponding, mining, drilling, placing of tmsh and yard debris or removing/adding topsoil, sand, o( other materials other than that approved upon the written consent of the County Watershed Planner which approval shall not bc unreasonably withheld; howeve( no additional approval by the County Watershed Planner is needed for those activities authorized by the Alteration Permit or depicted on the Subdivision Plat Q( Site Plan. 4. Permitting livestock to graze, inhabit o( otherwise enter the Property; Cran ston Mill Pond , LLC Cranston's Mill Pond Page 3 1112/2011 Declaration of Restri ctions CMP JPA Master Page Number: 094 5. Harvesting, cutting, logging, and pruning of trees and plants (except as may otherwise be authorized in this Declaration), or using fertilizers and/or biocides other than what is approved upon the written consent of the County Watershed Planner. Harvesting, cutting and logging trees on the Property shall be permitted as necessary to implement the improvements approved by the Alteration Permit or depicted on the Subdivision Plat or Site Plan. Harvesting, cutting, and logging trees on those portions of the Property outside the RPA shall be permitted upon the written consent of the County Watershed Planner for the location of dam observation deck and an equipment storage and work building. Amendment: The covenants contained herein shaJi not hereafter be altered in any respect without the express written approval and consent of CMP or its successor in interest and the County. After recording, CMP or its successor may vacate or modify this declaration by providing a document signed by CMP or its successor in interest and the County. For portions of the Property outside of the RPA for which nutrient offsets are not then currently being generated and transferred: CMP or its successor in interest may amend or vacate this declaration by providing a document signed by the CMP or its successor and the County, provided the amendment or vacation of this declaration does not negatively affect the RPA or the areas within the Property that continue to generate and transfer nutrient offsets. Compliance Inspections and Enforcement: The County, DEQ and OCR and their authorized agents shall have the right to enter and go on the Property to inspect and take actions necessary to verify and enforce compliance with thi s Declaration. For safety reasons, the County, DEQ, and OCR shall, when possible, give CMP advance notification of on-site inspections. Each request for access by non-County, DEQ or OCR parties will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis by CMP. The restrictive covenants herei n shall be enforceable by any proceeding at law or in equity or administrative proceeding by the County, DEQ and OCR. Failure by the County, OEQ, OCR, CMP or any future owner to enforce any covenant or restriction contained herein shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. In the event of a vi olation of this Declaration, the County shall have th e ri ght to seek all appropriate legal and equitable relief, including but not limited to: reasonable attorney's fees and costs, the right to restore the Property to its pre-violation condition, and to assess the cost of such restoration as a lien against the Property. Separability Provision: The provisions hereof shall be deemed individual and severable and the invalidity or partial invalidity or unenforceability of anyone provision or any portion thereof shall not affect the val idity or enforceabi lity of any other provi sion thereof. Cranston Mill Pond, LLC Cran sto n's Mill Pond Page 4 111212011 Declarati on of ReSlnctlons CMP JPA Master Page Number: 095 Consent of Lender and Trustee: (Not Applicable) No Lien Held Referenced Document: Terms and Conditions of the Cranston Mill Pond Nutrient Reduction Implementation Plan dated A.f/z.1 \ 1.C) , 20 I 0 among: Cranston Mill Pond, LLC, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation are available upon written request. Document copies may be obtained with permission from: Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Land Trust, LLC. 5735 South Laburnum Avenue Richmond, Virginia 2323 I (SIGNATURE ON NEXT PAGE) Cranston Mill Pond, LLC Cranston 's Mill Pond Page 5 111212011 Declaration of Restricrions CMP JPA Master Page Number: 096 WITNESS the following signature the day and year first above written. BY : B 7544 P f?r-:eye ~ TI TLE: j11a I1CtJ ,!--= eel n£j" ;/1;1/PodJ fJLe , to wit: I, -n-ffRnl ~~V 'a notary public for the state and city aforesaid, do certify that Mb n P _ , whose name was signed on JJ.,I'liJA!V/ I) , 2011 in his capacity on that date to th foregoing document has acknowledged said document and signature before me in the city aforesaid. I Given under my hand and notarial seal this day of -",d1""""-,,,ruwy~,---_ , 2011 My commission expires .5. od ·d=D (3 VIRGINIA: CITY OF WlUIAMSBURG &. COUNTY OF JAM ES CITY This docu"",n\ "las aanltted to record on")::. n 1.3 20 I! at a: 1'1· _..-,/PM. The taxes Imposed by "irgi~la Code Section 58.1-801, 58.1-802 &'SS.I-SH hay. been paid. STATETAX LOCAL TAX ADDmONAL TAX $ $ $ Tfffi: BETSY B. WOOlRIDGE, ClERK BY~~~ Clerk Cran ston Mill Pond, LLC Cran ston's Mill Pond Page 6 1/ 12/2011 Decl aration of Res trictions CMP JPA Master Page Number: 097 OFFICIAL RECEIPT WILLIAMSBURG/ JAMES CITY COUNTY CIRCUIT DEED RECEIPT DATE, 01/13/11 TI ME, 14,14,41 ACCOUNT, 830CLR1100014 28 RECEIPT, 11000002004 CASHIER, LAB REG, WD45 TYPE, DEC PAYMENT, FULL PAYMENT INSTRUMENT 1100014 28 BOOK , PAGE, RECORDED, 01 / 1 3 /11 AT 14 , 14 ~RANTO R, CRANSTON MI LL POND LLC EX, N LOC , CO GRANTEE , JAMES CITY COUNTY OF VIRGINIA EX, N PCT, 100% AND ADDR ESS RECEIVED OF CHES APEAKE BAY NUTRIENT DATE OF DEED , 01/13/11 CHECK , $21 . 44 DESCRIPTION 1, 59 .33 ACRES CRANSTON MILL POND AND ADJACENT PAGES , 6 OP o 2, PROPERTY NAMES, o CONSIDERATI ON, .00 A/VAL, .00 MAP , PIN, 301 DEEDS 14.50 145 VSLF 1.50 106 TECHNOLOGY TRST FND 5 .00 350 POSTAGE . 44 TENDERED 21.44 AMOUNT PAID, 2 1 .44 CHANGE AMT , .00 CLERK OF COURT, BETSY B. WOOLRIDGE PAYOR I S COPY RECEIPT COPY 1 OF 2 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 098 ATTACHMENT 6 Structural Dimensions of Existing Earthen Dam and Concrete Spillway Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 099 Cranston’s Mill Pond Spillway Summary Earthen Dam Length – Approximately 400’ Width – 10’ at Crest Elevation – 15.0’ MSL Concrete Primary Spillway Length – 100’ Width – 13’ Elevation – 8.15’ MSL Emergency Spillway Length – Approximately 300’ Width – 30’ Elevation – 12.0’ MSL * See following schematics for detailed engineering drawings of dam and spillway dimensions. CMP JPA Master Page Number: 100 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 101 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 102 ATTACHMENT 7 DEQ Modeling Summary: Cranston’s Mill Pond Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 103 DEQ Modeling Summary: Cranston’s Mill Pond Introduction Cranston’s Mill Pond is a potential source of water supply located on Yarmouth Creek in the Chickahominy River Watershed. The 48 acre impoundment is located on the nontidal portion of Yarmouth Creek and outflows into the tidal portion of Yarmouth Creek, which flows into the Chickahominy River. The current storage capacity of the impoundment is approximately 43.68 million gallons (mg), with the potential to increase the capacity to 186.89 mg by raising the normal pool elevation of the reservoir by 6 feet. Proposed withdrawal rates from the impoundment include 4 Million Gallons per day (mgd) and 8 mgd. The goal of this modeling analysis is to estimate the potential impacts of the proposed withdrawal rates and volumes and/or alternative rates and volumes upon existing beneficial uses. Individual criteria were set to evaluate the level of success at preserving each beneficial use of critical importance to this project. Also, a safe yield for the withdrawal will be estimated based on proposed operational scenarios and likely beneficial use related permit conditions. Current water resource management practices no longer consider a “safe yield” estimate based on completely exhausting the supply of available water as being “safe”. DEQ’s operational definition of safe yield means “the highest volumetric rate of water that can be withdrawn by a surface water withdrawal during the Drought of Record since 1930, including specific operational conditions established in a Virginia Water Protection permit, when applicable.” The criteria evaluated to determine the safe yield include the following: To ensure minimal loss of downstream habitat, flushing flows the impoundment provides the downstream wetlands must be maintained in some capacity acceptable to the agencies. To provide a reasonable margin of safety for public water supplies, less than 30 days of storage remaining while providing a continuous demand during the drought of record will be considered unacceptable. Alternatives to continuous demand were evaluated to determine operable scenarios for an impoundment of this size. Model Input and Assumptions The modeling approach considered the reservoir as on-stream storage, with releases based on raw water demand, maintenance of flushing flows to preserve downstream habitat, and storage capacity remaining during the drought of record in the reservoir. The primary beneficial uses considered in the modeling input were: off-stream municipal water supply demand, and aquatic habitat in both upstream and downstream reaches of Yarmouth Creek. A number of techniques were used to evaluate the impacts to the beneficial uses including: Predictive modeling of reservoir release rules. Estimation of inflow to the reservoir, including additional groundwater contributions from the Yorktown-Eastover and Surficial Aquifers. Modeling of available storage fluctuations and their impact to available water supply, aquatic species, and groundwater flow regimes. Modeling the changes in water availability provided by raising the normal pool elevation of the impoundment. CMP JPA Master Page Number: 104 The time period for all modeling simulations was 1990-2003. Reservoir release, available storage volume, and withdrawal scenarios were toggled to determine operating conditions that maximize the use of the resource while protecting other beneficial uses in the watershed. The input values related to the reservoirs include combined initial storage, maximum storage, minimum storage, and stage-storage relationships, which were provided in a Surface Water Balance Evaluation Report conducted by Greeley and Hansen. The initial usable storage is 25.86 mg without raising the normal pool elevation, and 169.07 mg if the normal pool elevation was raised by 6 feet. Likely reservoir releases were based upon the inflow, typical agency recommendations to preserve downstream aquatic habitat, the stage-storage relationship, and proposed water demands. Assumptions utilized for this evaluation include the following: Inflow to the impoundment was evaluated through actual outflow data collected from August 2015 to the present, the VAHydro Rainfall-Runoff-Baseflow Model, and scaled down gage readings from USGS gage 02042500 of the Chickahominy River near Providence Forge to match the drainage area. The actual outflow data was assumed to produce the most accurate inflow estimates, but given the limited dataset (< 1 year), the VAHydro Model was used in long term simulations. The year 2002 was considered the drought of record, because the lowest flows in the watershed were indicated to have occurred during this period in both the VAHydro Model and the adjusted USGS gage data. The closest estimation of inflow during this period is necessary to conserve available storage while maintaining a minimum flow. In order to flush, the ability to release a relatively high rate of water (approximately 25th percentile flows) needs to maintained, or the reservoir needs to be full and therefore spilling during natural flushing events. Ecological flow literature suggests that a 25th percentile flow is considered to be a high pulse flow threshold, so for the purposes of this analysis, anything greater than the 25th percentile flow will be considered a flushing flow. Certain modeled scenarios incorporated conservation measures into the analysis to evaluate different adaptive management strategies in which withdrawals may be lowered or selectively curtailed in order to protect beneficial uses. Analysis of the Proposed Water System Comparative Analysis of Inflow Data Below are tables for comparison of inflow data. The VAHydro Modeled Inflows are based off of a 14 year model run from 1990-2003 and the adjusted flows from USGS Gage 02042500 Chickahominy River Near Providence Forge are from 74 years of record, while the Cranston Mill Pond Lasso data began in August of 2015 and goes through February of 2016. The recorded inflows from Cranston Mill Pond all occurred during a period where flows in the Chicahominy watershed were between the 25th percentile and the 95th percentile, which is characterized as “wet” conditions. In order to examine the full range of meteorological conditions, this analysis includes both the VAHydro Modeled Inflows and the Adjusted Flows from USGS Gage 02042500 Chickahominy River near Providence Forge. VAHydro Modeled Inflows, Cubic Feet Per Second (cfs) Month 5th 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile January 3.11 4.49 7.08 10.6 16.68 25.78 February 2.92 4.05 6.28 10.54 16.74 26.66 March 3.43 4.38 6.66 11.5 20.61 35.17 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 105 April 1.7 2.59 4.52 8.07 13.05 20.49 May 0.11 0.69 2.17 4.57 8.22 15.64 June 0.04 0.11 0.66 1.83 4.36 10.89 July 0.03 0.05 0.35 1.28 3.77 11.4 August 0.02 0.04 0.48 3.08 9.09 20.2 September 0.02 0.05 0.64 2.01 8.14 24.27 October 0.03 0.08 0.64 2.78 6.91 14.14 November 0.01 0.34 1.53 4.51 9.37 15.61 December 1.05 1.67 3.56 6.72 12.42 20.65 Totals 0.05 0.30 1.72 5.51 11.50 20.76 Adjusted Flows from USGS Gage 02042500 Chickahominy River Near Providence Forge, Cubic Feet Per Second (cfs) Month 5th 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile January 1.91 2.99 5.07 8.00 12.20 19.81 February 2.65 3.51 5.73 9.28 14.01 21.44 March 3.25 4.42 6.34 10.05 15.57 24.56 April 2.33 3.18 4.99 7.72 13.15 20.90 May 1.16 1.59 2.79 4.72 7.78 15.21 June 0.35 0.64 1.24 2.48 5.33 11.87 July 0.15 0.29 0.68 1.70 4.70 9.99 August 0.11 0.21 0.54 1.73 4.95 11.18 September 0.09 0.16 0.43 1.24 3.42 12.17 October 0.13 0.24 0.63 1.81 5.08 10.39 November 0.54 0.95 1.83 3.59 7.69 15.22 December 1.40 2.07 3.53 6.24 10.19 17.56 Totals 1.17 1.69 2.82 4.88 8.67 15.86 Recorded Inflows from CMP Lasso, Cubic Feet Per Second (cfs) Month 5th 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile August 1.89 2.15 3.15 4.13 7.01 10.85 September 3.38 3.99 5.11 8.01 9.42 12.59 October 2.4 2.54 3.19 4.52 8.43 21.88 November 4.86 5.33 5.62 6.36 7.39 10.43 December 5.3 5.37 6.23 7.34 8.31 13.59 January 5.62 5.78 6.48 7.42 8.83 12.15 February 6.36 6.99 7.28 8.34 10.44 17.28 Totals 2.75 3.56 5.45 7.04 8.87 13.76 It is worth noting that the VAHydro Modeled inflows give generally higher estimates than the Adjusted flows from USGS Gage 02042500 Chickahominy River near Providence Forge. This may be due to the models incorporation of groundwater flowrates specific to the project vicinity, where the gage drainage area hosts a range of varying geologic settings. For this analysis, it will be assumed that the VAHydro modeled data provides a safe margin between the measured flows and the adjusted gage data. CMP JPA Master Page Number: 106 Adaptive Management Approach to Operating Rules While evidence suggests a relatively high level of base flow contribution to the stream at this location, the period of inflow monitoring in Cranstons Mill Pond is short, and it is critical to avoid over-estimating inflows to any water supply system. If inflows to the impoundment are overestimated, there is a risk of endangering both the water supply and other beneficial uses. For this reason, it is reasonable to use an adaptive management approach, that is, to adapt rules governing the operation of the water supply system to changing conditions in order to take advantage of resources when they are available and have contingencies in place to ensure the protection of all beneficial uses when inflows are unusually low. The adaptive management of small impoundments such as this can lead to sustainable resource management for the future. Resource Impact Concerns A. Plant and Wildlife Resources a. Threatened and Endangered Species The proposed project potentially impacts 3 threatened species managed or regulated by the U.S. fish and Wildlife Service. The three threatened species that are thought to be within the proximity of concern are the Sensitive Joint-vetch, the Small Whorled Pogonia, and the Northern Long-eared bat. Provided no trees are felled as a result of the proposed project and no known hibernacula are identified, the Northern Long-eared bat should not be impacted by the proposed project. The Sensitive Joint-vetch and the Small Whorled Pogonia, however, are rare wetland plants that occur in fresh to slightly brackish tidal river systems, within the intertidal zone where populations are flooded twice daily. An additional species of concern was identified by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS), the Narrow Leave Spatterdock, another rare wetland plant that is especially vulnerable to the withholding of fresh water. Reservoir releases should be managed in order to protect these resources. b. Anadromous Fish Several Anadromous Fish species are located downstream of the proposed project. The Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (DGIF) provides guidance focusing on times of year during which certain species may be most sensitive to human activities such as construction and land clearing. Additionally, reservoir releases should be managed in sensitive times of the year in order to protect these resources. The time of year restrictions recommended by DGIF for this watershed are from February 15th to June 30th. c. Migratory Birds and Eagles The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service database indicates that 29 migratory birds and eagles are located within the vicinity of the proposed project site at various times of the year. It is not likely that the proposed project will impact these resources, provided no tree clearing occurs. It should be noted, however, that many of these species are known to exist in the area and all planned project activities should take these resources into account. B. Wetlands a. Tidal (Downstream) The oligohaline nature of the receiving Yarmouth Creek and tidal wetland community depend on the freshwater outflows provided by Cranston’s Mill Pond. According to VIMS, typical flushing times for tidal embayments in James River Watershed are 2-3 days. The circulation of water through the downstream wetland community is crucial to their continued ecological success. While any potential changes in salinity from reduced CMP JPA Master Page Number: 107 freshwater inflow are not likely to occur at a level that would impact the existing vegetation communities, this potential still needs to be properly assessed. b. Nontidal (Upstream) If the storage capacity of the impoundment were to be increased, upstream nontidal wetlands and stream reaches will be backflooded as a result of a raised normal pool elevation. All alternatives to minimize impacts to surface waters would need to be evaluated to determine that the project as proposed is the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative. Groundwater Interface A. Base flow The VAHydro Model accounts for the contribution of groundwater towards streamflow as a baseflow condition. The percentage of total inflow to the impoundment from groundwater in the model is in between 51 and 59 percent. The Greeley and Hansen Surface Water Balance Evaluation Report estimates the contribution of groundwater to impoundment inflow to range from 60 to 66 percent. This discrepancy, while relatively minute in the estimation of total inflow, has been attributed to the impoundment’s incision of the Yorktown-Eastover Aquifer in addition to the Surficial Aquifer. B. Yorktown-Eastover Aquifer Contribution DEQ Groundwater Characterization staff indicated that the Yorktown-Eastover Aquifer is located in the footprint of the project location and would likely contribute to the total inflow of Cranston’s Mill Pond. The aquifer in this location, however, is only partially confined and water levels from nearby clusters of state observation wells display substantial variation due to meteorological conditions (Figure 1). While the potential exists for an increased and more constant inflow to Cranston’s Mill Pond provided by the Yorktown-Eastover Aquifer, this aquifer is still influenced by meteorological conditions, and therefore does not guarantee more inflow to the impoundment than that which would be provided by the surficial aquifer alone. Therefore, allowable pumping limits should be based on remaining storage to enable this operation to leverage any additional contribution from this aquifer connection under real operating conditions, but prevent unexpected drops in storage due to less than expected baseflow contributions. Additional borings and measurements of local heads would be needed to make this determination. Figure 1: Water levels at well Cluster E. March 1996-May1997, Naval Weapons Station Yorktown. Note the differences in water level fluctuation between the two systems. The surficial aquifer (Columbia) has a total fluctuation of approximately 9 feet, while the Yorktown-Eastover Aquifer has a total fluctuation of about 5 feet. CMP JPA Master Page Number: 108 C. Potential for Recharge There is potential for the impoundment to refill with groundwater from both the Yorktown- Eastover and the Surficial Aquifers as a result of drawing down the impoundment. The head differential in water level of the lake versus the surrounding groundwater would likely lead to additional infiltration of groundwater into the lake. There are several limitations to this phenomena, however, including but not limited to the hydraulic conductivity of the surrounding aquifers and the stabilizing effect constant inflow to the lake would induce in water levels. The hydraulic conductivity of the Yorktown-Eastover and Surficial Aquifers would not change as a result of drawing down the lake, so the groundwater contribution to Cranston’s Mill Pond would remain relatively constant and may not refill the impoundment at a rate that would not present issues for maintaining flow downstream and maintaining pumping rates. Also, if the pond was constantly drawn down, water levels around the impoundment would eventually stabilize and any additional groundwater contributions to inflow would likely decelerate as a result. Alternatively, it is possible that an increase in normal pool elevation would diminish the ability of groundwater to infiltrate into the impoundment as the pond water level may be raised above the hydraulic gradient. In summation, the groundwater head change due to pumping out of the impoundment would make a negligible additional contribution to the groundwater flows already present. Potential Operable Scenarios After closer examination of the potential water supply system, the level of storage at the current normal pool elevation will not provide 30 days of storage at a 4 mgd average withdrawal rate when it is full. Therefore, the operable scenarios are all modeled under the assumption that the normal pool elevation was raised to 14 feet. A. 4 mgd Withdrawal Rate a. Constant Withdrawals i. 50% Allowable Diversion While the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries has typically recommend that a withdrawal system take no more than 10% of streamflow, for practicality reasons due to the size of the impoundment, desired withdrawal volumes, and the purposes of this analysis, it was determined that 50% of streamflow is a reasonable starting point to determine the feasibility of this impoundment as a reliable water supply source. The basis behind a 50% flow by stems from the balance between releases into a tidal reach of stream with more water availability and the sensitive ecosystems downstream. It was also assumed that the maximum release rate from the impoundment sluice pipes was 15 cubic feet per second (cfs). 4 mgd Withdrawal Rate 50% Stream Flowby, 15 cfs max release. Month Demand Average Mean Mean 90th 50th Percentile Storage Inflow Outflow Percentile Storage Remaining Remaining Storage (mg) (mg) Remaining (mg) 1 3.92628 38.44985 13.51514 5.6928 130.1 0 2 4.31007 57.7014 13.72195 6.8559 158.6 35.3 3 3.94789 83.06859 16.54518 9.27828 169 85.7 4 4.06213 76.76873 10.52937 5.75383 169 59.1 5 3.93956 54.97761 7.09752 2.94017 149.2 22.5 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 109 6 4.06213 32.71618 3.96291 1.65643 151.8 0 7 3.93956 13.67449 4.11308 1.3029 51.2 0 8 3.93533 28.83895 7.49486 3.33005 124.5 0 9 4.06213 39.16417 11.59441 7.73654 142.6 0 10 3.93956 36.81598 5.93859 2.72246 166.4 0 11 4.06213 29.91468 6.60834 2.51636 131.5 0 12 3.93956 29.26314 9.37816 4.47101 168.5 0 Averages 4.010528 43.44615 9.208293 4.521394 142.7 16.88333 It is evident that a 50% flow by condition will not allow for a supply of 30 days or more even during an average dry season. The flow-by was adjusted to 20% and a maximum sluice gate release to 5 cfs to determine if a constant withdrawal rate of 4 mgd while maintaining 30 days of storage can be feasible under these conditions. ii. 80% Allowable Diversion 4 mgd Withdrawal Rate 20% Stream Flowby, 5 cfs max release. Month Demand Average Mean Mean 90th 50th Percentile Storage Inflow Outflow Percentile Storage Remaining Remaining Storage (mg) (mg) Remaining (mg) 1 3.92628 82.28446 13.51514 4.27061 169 76.6 2 4.31007 114.1732 13.72195 6.88962 169 161.1 3 3.94789 128.1018 16.54518 9.16977 169 167.6 4 4.06213 136.4637 10.52937 4.98678 169 166.6 5 3.93956 109.6167 7.09752 2.38534 168.8 129.1 6 4.06213 67.43019 3.96291 1.44304 168.4 54.5 7 3.93956 27.34248 4.11308 0.7156 91.1 0 8 3.93533 47.26003 7.49486 2.88032 169 0 9 4.06213 54.03503 11.59441 7.89681 169 0 10 3.93956 49.30047 5.93859 2.44863 169 0 11 4.06213 45.5872 6.60834 1.49139 166.3 0 12 3.93956 53.91049 9.37816 3.84674 169 13.7 Averages 4.010528 76.29215 9.208293 4.035388 162.2167 64.1 While the average storage remaining was raised significantly in this scenario, there is still no storage remaining in an average year for 5 months out of the year. With these results, management strategies of this water source may need to be adjusted in order to utilize the resource when it is most readily available. b. Selective Curtailment Since the impoundment typically empties completely at certain times of the year, which also happen to be times in which resources may be particularly vulnerable, curtailment of withdrawals were viewed as a potential alternative for resource maximization. If an end user were to utilize this supply when available and another alternative supply such as groundwater when utilization of Cranston’s Mill Pond presents outlying concerns, then the CMP JPA Master Page Number: 110 supply can be maximized, and the impact on both resources can be minimized. i. 60% Allowable Diversion 4 mgd Withdrawal Rate 40% Stream Flowby, 5 cfs max release, Selective Curtailment 5 Months out of the Year. Month Demand Average Mean Mean 90th 50th Percentile Storage Inflow Outflow Percentile Storage Remaining Remaining Storage (mg) (mg) Remaining (mg) 1 3.92628 80.61878 13.51514 5.45999 169 43.1 2 4.31007 99.63481 13.72195 7.06675 169 136.5 3 3.94789 113.1431 16.54518 9.34757 169 142 4 4.06213 118.345 10.52937 5.31193 169 149.8 5 0.13118 121.6868 7.09752 5.16868 169 155.3 6 0 141.3003 3.96291 3.03699 169 168.4 7 0 149.5962 4.11308 3.60478 169 168.4 8 0 154.3296 7.49486 7.19983 169 169 9 0 156.6215 11.59441 11.27689 169 169 10 3.80838 122.9874 5.93859 3.1777 169 126.6 11 4.06213 76.23587 6.60834 2.29537 161.9 67.8 12 3.93956 62.03618 9.37816 4.60002 169 40.4 Averages 2.348968 116.3779 9.208293 5.628875 168.4083 128.025 This scenario presents a more promising result than a constant withdrawal. It is projected that a withdrawal regulated by these conditions would provide the reliability that would be expected out of a public water supply, while recognizing that the largest environmental release possible would be preferred by natural resource agencies. The operating rules for this scenario also achieved the objectives of maintaining flushing flows in critical times of the year by both releasing 40% of flows and keeping the impoundment full during the spring months allowing the impoundment to pass storms quickly. While the availability of groundwater as an alternative source was not specifically evaluated, it was assumed to be available for the purposes of this analysis. B. 8 mgd Withdrawal Rate a. Constant Since a 4 mgd rate of withdrawal cannot be accomplished with a 50% flowby and the average flow over the spillway is just over 8.5 mgd, it was assumed that an 8 mgd withdrawal cannot be accomplished with any significant environmental release and still retain the storage volume necessary in the event of a drought. b. Selective Curtailment Given that selective curtailment of a 4 mgd withdrawal would be required 5 months out of the year to provide the environmental release and reliability preferred for this project, it was deemed that an 8 mgd withdrawal would not be able to meet the conditions needed to be considered a safe and/or reliable yield. CMP JPA Master Page Number: 111 Conclusions It was determined through this analysis that selective curtailment of the withdrawal during the driest parts of the year can help the Cranston’s Mill Pond yield the withdrawal amounts needed to make Cranston’s Mill Pond a viable alternative source to a major public water supply and presents a potentially feasible asset towards building a diverse water portfolio. The safe yield of the system is 2.33 mgd if the operational rules are set in a way that allows a 4 mgd withdrawal for 8 months out of the year, then curtailment of the withdrawal from May through September. It is possible that the system yields more without an environmental release and if groundwater flows contribute more than anticipated, but given the uncertainty of both of these scenarios, a conservative approach was conducted. Adaptive resource management strategies can be implemented to maximize the utilization of this water supply resource after meeting a protective baseline given what is known and unknown about the system. CMP JPA Master Page Number: 112 References 1. McFarland, E. Randolph. (1997). Water Resources Investigations Report 99-4093: Hydrogeologic Framework and Ground-Water Flow in the Fall Zone of Virginia. U.S. Geological Survey. 2. McFarland, E. Randolph. (1999). Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-4021: Hydrogeologic Framework, Analysis of Ground-Water Flow, and Relations to Regional Flow in the Fall Zone Near Richmond, Virginia. U.S. Geological Survey. 3. Herman, Julie, Shen, Jian, and Huang, Jie. (2007). Tidal Flushing Characteristics in Virginia’s Tidal Embayments: Final Report submitted to the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. Center for Coastal Resources Management, Virginia Institute of Marine Science. 4. Kondolf, G.M and Wilcock, Peter. (1996). The Flushing Flow Problem: Defining and Evaluating Objectives. Water Resources Research, Vol. 32, pp. 2589-2599. 5. McFarland, E. Randolph and Bruce, T. Scott. (2006). U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1731: The Virginia Coastal Plain Hydrogeologic Framework. U.S. Geological Survey and Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. 6. Brockman, A.R., Nelms, D.L., Harlow, G.E. Jr., and Gildea, J.J. (1997). Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-4188: Geohydrology of the Shallow Aquifer System,Naval Weapons Station Yorktown, Yorktown, Virginia. U.S. Geological Survey. 7. Smith, Barry S. (2000). Water-Resources Investigations Report 00-4077 : Ground-Water Flow in the Shallow Aquifer System at the Naval Weapons Station Yorktown, Virginia. U.S. Geological Survey. CMP JPA Master Page Number: 113 ATTACHMENT 8 14-Month Record of On-Site Data Collection of Spillway Flows Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 114 14-Month Record of On-Site Data Collection of Spillway Flows Avg. Avg. Daily Depth Weekly Month Date Daily Flow Over Spillway Flow Rainfall (MGD) (Inches) (MGD) (inches) 07/31/15 6.65 1.31 0.34 1 08/01/15 3.74 0.89 0.00 08/02/15 6.90 1.34 0.00 08/03/15 3.39 0.84 0.00 08/04/15 4.20 0.97 0.00 08/05/15 3.62 0.87 0.00 08/06/15 15.40 2.29 43.90 1.50 08/07/15 11.04 1.84 0.01 08/08/15 6.24 1.26 0.00 08/09/15 6.08 1.23 0.00 08/10/15 6.47 1.29 0.00 08/11/15 16.22 2.38 1.70 08/12/15 27.01 3.34 0.01 08/13/15 5.78 1.19 78.84 0.02 08/14/15 8.46 1.54 0.01 08/15/15 3.83 0.91 0.00 08/16/15 5.17 1.11 0.03 08/17/15 3.13 0.79 0.00 08/18/15 2.30 0.65 0.03 08/19/15 1.99 0.59 0.03 08/20/15 3.42 0.84 28.30 0.05 08/21/15 2.96 0.76 0.05 08/22/15 1.92 0.57 0.02 08/23/15 5.09 1.10 0.01 08/24/15 6.68 1.32 0.24 08/25/15 7.02 1.36 0.00 08/26/15 7.26 1.39 0.00 08/27/15 8.34 1.52 39.27 0.00 08/28/15 2.53 0.69 0.00 08/29/15 7.31 1.40 0.01 08/30/15 2.89 0.75 0.00 08/31/15 3.86 0.91 0.05 2 09/01/15 3.88 0.92 0.00 09/02/15 3.74 0.89 0.07 09/03/15 4.12 0.95 28.32 0.00 09/04/15 4.25 0.97 0.00 09/05/15 5.22 1.11 0.03 09/06/15 5.39 1.14 0.00 09/07/15 6.60 1.30 0.01 09/08/15 7.80 1.46 0.06 09/09/15 10.07 1.73 0.01 09/10/15 9.94 1.71 49.27 0.44 09/11/15 12.81 2.03 0.00 09/12/15 9.56 1.67 0.51 Page 1 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 115 Avg. Avg. Daily Depth Weekly Month Date Daily Flow Over Spillway Flow Rainfall (MGD) (Inches) (MGD) (inches) 09/13/15 11.89 1.93 0.00 09/14/15 7.52 1.42 0.00 09/15/15 7.63 1.44 0.01 09/16/15 8.29 1.52 0.00 09/17/15 9.55 1.67 67.24 0.01 09/18/15 9.58 1.67 0.01 09/19/15 9.12 1.62 0.01 09/20/15 7.88 1.47 0.01 09/21/15 8.35 1.53 0.09 09/22/15 8.93 1.60 0.00 09/23/15 5.24 1.12 0.00 09/24/15 3.29 0.82 52.40 0.00 09/25/15 5.35 1.13 0.09 09/26/15 15.01 2.26 1.44 09/27/15 18.25 2.57 0.01 09/28/15 10.81 1.81 0.06 09/29/15 12.22 1.97 0.80 09/30/15 20.39 2.77 0.67 3 10/01/15 27.20 3.35 109.22 0.61 10/02/15 27.40 3.37 1.49 10/03/15 32.47 3.77 1.27 10/04/15 25.06 3.17 0.24 10/05/15 12.11 1.95 0.01 10/06/15 7.92 1.47 0.01 10/07/15 6.51 1.29 0.00 10/08/15 6.36 1.27 117.83 0.01 10/09/15 4.25 0.97 0.20 10/10/15 0.00 0.00 0.04 10/11/15 0.52 0.24 0.00 10/12/15 0.00 0.00 0.01 10/13/15 0.12 0.09 0.00 10/14/15 2.71 0.72 0.00 10/15/15 3.55 0.86 11.16 0.01 10/16/15 3.42 0.84 0.01 10/17/15 3.48 0.85 0.00 10/18/15 2.54 0.69 0.01 10/19/15 3.02 0.77 0.00 10/20/15 2.42 0.67 0.00 10/21/15 3.27 0.82 0.01 10/22/15 3.98 0.93 22.13 0.01 10/23/15 1.82 0.55 0.00 10/24/15 2.48 0.68 0.00 10/25/15 4.89 1.07 0.00 10/26/15 4.93 1.07 0.00 10/27/15 4.71 1.04 0.22 10/28/15 9.21 1.63 0.36 10/29/15 3.52 0.86 31.56 0.15 Page 2 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 116 Avg. Avg. Daily Depth Weekly Month Date Daily Flow Over Spillway Flow Rainfall (MGD) (Inches) (MGD) (inches) 10/30/15 5.02 1.09 0.00 10/31/15 3.27 0.82 0.00 4 11/01/15 5.00 1.08 0.01 11/02/15 5.87 1.21 0.26 11/03/15 5.77 1.19 0.00 11/04/15 3.83 0.91 0.09 11/05/15 20.50 2.78 49.26 1.28 11/06/15 10.22 1.75 0.00 11/07/15 7.96 1.48 0.26 11/08/15 7.36 1.40 0.00 11/09/15 9.29 1.64 1.34 11/10/15 35.26 3.99 0.38 11/11/15 9.88 1.71 0.01 11/12/15 7.17 1.38 87.13 0.01 11/13/15 5.61 1.17 0.00 11/14/15 4.78 1.05 0.00 11/15/15 5.19 1.11 0.00 11/16/15 5.50 1.15 0.00 11/17/15 5.60 1.17 0.00 11/18/15 6.37 1.27 0.00 11/19/15 11.05 1.84 44.10 0.97 11/20/15 11.37 1.87 0.02 11/21/15 6.16 1.25 0.03 11/22/15 5.84 1.20 0.00 11/23/15 5.19 1.11 0.00 11/24/15 5.25 1.12 0.00 11/25/15 6.20 1.25 0.00 11/26/15 5.91 1.21 45.92 0.01 11/27/15 6.11 1.24 0.01 11/28/15 6.77 1.33 0.00 11/29/15 7.02 1.36 0.02 11/30/15 6.90 1.34 0.22 5 12/01/15 8.71 1.57 0.15 12/02/15 8.20 1.51 0.06 12/03/15 7.20 1.38 50.90 0.06 12/04/15 6.34 1.27 0.00 12/05/15 6.23 1.25 0.00 12/06/15 5.99 1.22 0.01 12/07/15 7.98 1.48 0.00 12/08/15 7.77 1.45 0.01 12/09/15 7.90 1.47 0.01 12/10/15 6.52 1.29 48.72 0.00 12/11/15 6.97 1.35 0.00 12/12/15 6.50 1.29 0.00 12/13/15 6.97 1.35 0.01 12/14/15 7.31 1.40 0.02 12/15/15 5.50 1.16 0.00 Page 3 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 117 Avg. Avg. Daily Depth Weekly Month Date Daily Flow Over Spillway Flow Rainfall (MGD) (Inches) (MGD) (inches) 12/16/15 5.10 1.10 0.00 12/17/15 8.36 1.53 46.72 0.61 12/18/15 10.16 1.74 0.11 12/19/15 5.96 1.22 0.00 12/20/15 5.41 1.14 0.00 12/21/15 6.65 1.31 0.00 12/22/15 12.17 1.96 0.68 12/23/15 31.12 3.67 1.94 12/24/15 30.60 3.63 102.07 0.60 12/25/15 15.27 2.28 0.01 12/26/15 8.57 1.55 0.00 12/27/15 7.97 1.48 0.01 12/28/15 6.71 1.32 0.03 12/29/15 7.31 1.40 0.10 12/30/15 8.78 1.58 0.42 12/31/15 6.61 1.31 61.22 0.05 6 01/01/16 7.09 1.37 0.00 01/02/16 6.51 1.29 0.00 01/03/16 6.78 1.33 0.00 01/04/16 5.70 1.18 0.00 01/05/16 4.98 1.08 0.00 01/06/16 5.50 1.15 0.00 01/07/16 7.12 1.37 43.67 0.00 01/08/16 7.17 1.38 0.01 01/09/16 7.53 1.42 0.20 01/10/16 8.75 1.57 0.20 01/11/16 6.27 1.26 0.00 01/12/16 6.44 1.28 0.00 01/13/16 5.94 1.22 0.00 01/14/16 6.76 1.33 48.86 0.00 01/15/16 8.04 1.49 0.69 01/16/16 17.22 2.47 0.74 01/17/16 9.01 1.61 0.20 01/18/16 8.40 1.53 0.01 01/19/16 6.19 1.25 0.00 01/20/16 5.82 1.20 0.01 01/21/16 6.70 1.32 61.38 0.00 01/22/16 6.78 1.33 0.33 01/23/16 14.89 2.24 0.64 01/24/16 10.63 1.79 0.37 01/25/16 9.12 1.62 0.20 01/26/16 11.88 1.93 0.00 01/27/16 15.44 2.30 0.01 01/28/16 10.58 1.79 79.32 0.00 01/29/16 9.08 1.61 0.00 01/30/16 8.28 1.52 0.00 01/31/16 8.85 1.59 0.00 Page 4 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 118 Avg. Avg. Daily Depth Weekly Month Date Daily Flow Over Spillway Flow Rainfall (MGD) (Inches) (MGD) (inches) 7 02/01/16 8.22 1.51 0.07 02/02/16 7.58 1.43 0.07 02/03/16 12.07 1.95 0.46 02/04/16 25.06 3.17 79.15 0.74 02/05/16 27.02 3.34 0.18 02/06/16 12.13 1.96 0.70 02/07/16 6.65 1.31 0.02 02/08/16 7.70 1.45 0.00 02/09/16 7.20 1.38 0.04 02/10/16 8.31 1.52 0.01 02/11/16 8.26 1.52 77.27 0.00 02/12/16 7.04 1.36 0.00 02/13/16 8.22 1.51 0.00 02/14/16 7.33 1.40 0.00 02/15/16 10.41 1.77 0.35 02/16/16 24.51 3.13 0.74 02/17/16 13.83 2.14 0.00 02/18/16 9.60 1.67 80.95 0.00 02/19/16 9.23 1.63 0.00 02/20/16 8.73 1.57 0.00 02/21/16 7.82 1.46 0.11 02/22/16 8.00 1.48 0.09 02/23/16 12.70 2.02 0.07 02/24/16 15.05 2.26 0.05 02/25/16 9.86 1.70 71.40 0.03 02/26/16 7.22 1.39 0.05 02/27/16 6.57 1.30 0.34 02/28/16 7.62 1.44 0.00 02/29/16 7.14 1.37 0.00 8 03/01/16 7.85 1.46 0.00 03/02/16 6.93 1.35 0.09 03/03/16 6.18 1.25 49.52 0.00 03/04/16 10.25 1.75 0.48 03/05/16 7.46 1.42 0.00 03/06/16 6.76 1.33 0.00 03/07/16 7.92 1.47 0.01 03/08/16 7.54 1.43 0.00 03/09/16 4.08 0.95 0.00 03/10/16 6.40 1.28 50.41 0.00 03/11/16 6.43 1.28 0.00 03/12/16 6.35 1.27 0.00 03/13/16 6.97 1.35 0.04 03/14/16 6.92 1.35 0.02 03/15/16 7.66 1.44 0.17 03/16/16 7.49 1.42 0.00 03/17/16 6.93 1.35 48.75 0.00 03/18/16 6.69 1.32 0.00 Page 5 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 119 Avg. Avg. Daily Depth Weekly Month Date Daily Flow Over Spillway Flow Rainfall (MGD) (Inches) (MGD) (inches) 03/19/16 6.49 1.29 0.00 03/20/16 7.39 1.41 0.18 03/21/16 7.52 1.42 0.09 03/22/16 7.27 1.39 0.00 03/23/16 7.02 1.36 0.00 03/24/16 7.42 1.41 49.80 0.00 03/25/16 6.89 1.34 0.01 03/26/16 5.74 1.19 0.00 03/27/16 13.96 2.15 0.83 03/28/16 10.49 1.78 0.19 03/29/16 7.08 1.37 0.00 03/30/16 7.09 1.37 0.00 03/31/16 7.23 1.39 58.47 0.00 9 04/01/16 8.45 1.54 0.05 04/02/16 8.59 1.56 0.23 04/03/16 6.51 1.29 0.01 04/04/16 7.36 1.40 0.01 04/05/16 7.14 1.37 0.20 04/06/16 7.22 1.38 # 04/07/16 7.29 1.39 7.51 0.03 04/08/16 5.95 1.22 0.00 04/09/16 5.79 1.20 0.00 04/10/16 5.66 1.18 0.00 04/11/16 6.86 1.34 0.00 04/12/16 15.14 2.27 0.94 04/13/16 9.70 1.69 0.00 04/14/16 6.78 1.33 55.88 0.00 04/15/16 6.14 1.24 0.00 04/16/16 5.36 1.14 0.00 04/17/16 5.10 1.10 0.00 04/18/16 5.48 1.15 0.00 04/19/16 5.30 1.13 0.00 04/20/16 4.89 1.07 0.00 04/21/16 4.96 1.08 37.24 0.00 04/22/16 5.99 1.22 0.07 04/23/16 6.36 1.27 0.07 04/24/16 5.47 1.15 0.00 04/25/16 5.26 1.12 0.00 04/26/16 5.28 1.12 0.00 04/27/16 4.91 1.07 0.02 04/28/16 5.73 1.19 39.00 0.70 04/29/16 13.14 2.06 0.78 04/30/16 6.31 1.27 0.00 10 05/01/16 7.09 1.37 0.28 05/02/16 9.73 1.69 0.60 05/03/16 32.13 3.75 1.19 05/04/16 11.50 1.89 0.03 Page 6 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 120 Avg. Avg. Daily Depth Weekly Month Date Daily Flow Over Spillway Flow Rainfall (MGD) (Inches) (MGD) (inches) 05/05/16 8.42 1.53 88.32 0.02 05/06/16 40.91 4.40 0.02 05/07/16 16.96 2.45 1.47 05/08/16 9.27 1.64 0.00 05/09/16 7.20 1.38 0.00 05/10/16 11.47 1.89 0.33 05/11/16 9.18 1.62 0.05 05/12/16 8.36 1.53 103.34 0.00 05/13/16 8.02 1.49 0.05 05/14/16 8.43 1.54 0.09 05/15/16 7.00 1.36 0.00 05/16/16 6.97 1.35 0.00 05/17/16 24.36 3.11 1.47 05/18/16 18.20 2.56 0.16 05/19/16 9.37 1.65 82.35 0.00 05/20/16 8.49 1.54 0.01 05/21/16 22.36 2.94 0.86 05/22/16 14.46 2.20 0.07 05/23/16 22.53 2.96 0.62 05/24/16 15.10 2.26 0.24 05/25/16 8.43 1.54 0.00 05/26/16 7.46 1.42 98.83 0.00 05/27/16 6.90 1.34 0.00 05/28/16 6.24 1.26 0.00 05/29/16 7.84 1.46 0.21 05/30/16 15.31 2.29 1.01 05/31/16 12.32 1.98 0.01 11 06/01/16 7.89 1.47 0.00 06/02/16 7.28 1.39 63.79 0.00 06/03/16 8.03 1.49 0.32 06/04/16 11.07 1.84 0.32 06/05/16 15.58 2.31 0.13 06/06/16 17.47 2.50 0.70 06/07/16 8.45 1.54 0.00 06/08/16 5.52 1.16 0.00 06/09/16 4.85 1.06 70.96 0.00 06/10/16 4.75 1.05 0.00 06/11/16 4.97 1.08 0.00 06/12/16 5.25 1.12 0.00 06/13/16 9.28 1.64 0.00 06/14/16 4.30 0.98 0.00 06/15/16 5.03 1.09 0.00 06/16/16 6.61 1.31 40.19 0.99 06/17/16 24.22 3.10 0.44 06/18/16 8.64 1.56 0.00 06/19/16 6.60 1.30 0.00 06/20/16 6.75 1.32 0.00 Page 7 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 121 Avg. Avg. Daily Depth Weekly Month Date Daily Flow Over Spillway Flow Rainfall (MGD) (Inches) (MGD) (inches) 06/21/16 8.62 1.56 0.00 06/22/16 8.02 1.49 0.01 06/23/16 16.22 2.37 79.07 0.81 06/24/16 9.39 1.65 0.10 06/25/16 7.53 1.42 0.02 06/26/16 4.74 1.05 0.00 06/27/16 4.50 1.01 0.01 06/28/16 7.92 1.47 0.31 06/29/16 6.25 1.26 0.00 06/30/16 5.39 1.14 45.72 0.07 12 07/01/16 17.38 2.49 2.28 07/02/16 20.21 2.75 0.13 07/03/16 4.92 1.07 0.33 07/04/16 3.08 0.78 0.10 07/05/16 0.00 0.00 0.04 07/06/16 0.00 0.00 0.01 07/07/16 0.00 0.00 45.59 0.39 07/08/16 3.32 0.82 0.00 07/09/16 4.83 1.06 0.00 07/10/16 4.30 0.98 0.00 07/11/16 4.20 0.96 0.00 07/12/16 2.15 0.62 0.00 07/13/16 1.27 0.44 0.00 07/14/16 1.50 0.49 21.56 0.00 07/15/16 4.08 0.95 0.21 07/16/16 6.16 1.25 0.43 07/17/16 7.99 1.48 0.03 07/18/16 4.49 1.01 0.01 07/19/16 19.55 2.69 1.61 07/20/16 17.16 2.47 0.01 07/21/16 5.77 1.19 65.20 0.01 07/22/16 4.66 1.03 0.00 07/23/16 6.72 1.32 0.00 07/24/16 5.18 1.11 0.00 07/25/16 5.25 1.12 0.00 07/26/16 5.70 1.18 0.00 07/27/16 5.98 1.22 0.07 07/28/16 5.89 1.21 39.38 0.00 07/29/16 5.22 1.12 0.00 07/30/16 6.42 1.28 0.07 07/31/16 7.26 1.39 0.16 13 08/01/16 7.19 1.38 0.19 08/02/16 62.20 5.82 1.86 08/03/16 28.94 3.49 0.29 08/04/16 5.37 1.14 122.59 0.02 08/05/16 6.00 1.22 0.01 08/06/16 7.53 1.42 0.23 Page 8 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 122 Avg. Avg. Daily Depth Weekly Month Date Daily Flow Over Spillway Flow Rainfall (MGD) (Inches) (MGD) (inches) 08/07/16 8.09 1.49 0.06 08/08/16 23.35 3.03 0.04 08/09/16 30.30 3.60 0.37 08/10/16 21.37 2.85 0.00 08/11/16 15.97 2.35 112.61 0.00 08/12/16 3.53 0.86 0.00 08/13/16 3.53 0.86 0.00 08/14/16 3.76 0.90 0.00 08/15/16 4.22 0.97 0.00 08/16/16 3.96 0.93 0.00 08/17/16 3.93 0.92 0.00 08/18/16 3.40 0.84 26.33 0.00 08/19/16 2.93 0.76 0.00 08/20/16 3.60 0.87 0.00 08/21/16 4.73 1.04 0.00 08/22/16 3.66 0.88 0.00 08/23/16 3.16 0.80 0.00 08/24/16 3.12 0.79 0.00 08/25/16 3.65 0.88 24.84 0.00 08/26/16 2.67 0.71 0.00 08/27/16 2.52 0.69 0.00 08/28/16 2.35 0.66 0.00 08/29/16 2.32 0.65 0.00 08/30/16 3.12 0.79 0.00 08/31/16 2.89 0.75 0.00 14 09/01/16 2.58 0.70 18.45 0.00 09/02/16 2.21 0.63 0.11 09/03/16 6.00 1.22 0.21 09/04/16 3.74 0.89 0.00 09/05/16 4.60 1.02 0.00 09/06/16 4.46 1.00 0.00 09/07/16 6.36 1.27 0.01 09/08/16 6.74 1.32 34.12 0.01 09/09/16 7.97 1.48 0.00 09/10/16 7.09 1.37 0.00 09/11/16 5.66 1.18 0.00 09/12/16 5.60 1.17 0.00 09/13/16 8.75 1.57 0.00 09/14/16 4.91 1.07 0.00 09/15/16 4.86 1.06 44.84 0.00 09/16/16 2.11 0.61 0.00 09/17/16 0.95 0.36 0.00 09/18/16 1.32 0.45 0.01 09/19/16 9.16 1.62 1.12 09/20/16 21.88 2.90 0.96 09/21/16 15.35 2.29 0.86 09/22/16 14.95 2.25 65.71 0.81 Page 9 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 123 Avg. Avg. Daily Depth Weekly Month Date Daily Flow Over Spillway Flow Rainfall (MGD) (Inches) (MGD) (inches) 09/23/16 10.36 1.76 0.00 09/24/16 3.61 0.87 0.00 09/25/16 5.17 1.11 0.00 09/26/16 6.25 1.26 0.00 09/27/16 9.00 1.60 0.09 09/28/16 11.01 1.83 0.02 09/29/16 22.22 2.93 67.62 0.00 CUMULATIVE FLOW 3,560,521,532 GALLONS RUNNING AVERAGE 8,338,458 GPD CUMULATIVE FLOW 144,521,532 GPD ABOVE 8 MGD PER DAY NOTES: 1. VALVES WERE OPEN FROM 10-10-15 THRU 10-12-15. 2. VALVES WERE OPENED ON 7-1-16 AND CLOSED ON 7-5-16. WATER DID NOT RESUME FLOWING OVER SPILLWAY UNTIL 7-8-16 at 9:30 am. Page 10 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 124 ATTACHMENT 9 Cranston’s Mill Pond Dam and Spillway Location Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 125 Withdrawal Location / TBD Earthen Dam Concrete Spillway 100' Width Return of Flow Emergency Spillway 30' Width Legend Emergency Spillway 0 25 50 100 150 200 Feet Cranston's Mill Pond Base Mapping Provided By: ESRI Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Land Trust Dam and Spillway Location 5735 S. Laburnum Ave Richmond Va. Ü (2016) 804-222-5114 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 126 ATTACHMENT 10 Release Valve Schematics and Staged-Storage Volumes Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 127 Release Valve Location (Typical) Legend Low Level Drain Pipes 0 5 10 20 30 40 Feet Cranston's Mill Pond Base Mapping Provided By: ESRI Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Land Trust Low Level Drain Pipes & 5735 S. Laburnum Ave Richmond Va. Ü Release Valve Location 804-222-5114 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 128 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 129 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 130 Cranston's Mill Pond 6/2/2015 Elevation Storage Table McKinney & Company Calc By: SWG Elevation Total Volume Total Volume Total Volume Total Volume Incremental Volume (ft) (cu yd) (cu ft) (gal) (MG) (MG) 00 0 0 0 1 3.25 87.75 656.41 0.00066 0.00066 2 191.13 5160.51 38603.20 0.039 0.038 3 2474.29 66805.83 499741.01 0.50 0.46 4 15557.90 420063.30 3142283.52 3.14 2.64 5 44402.42 1198865.34 8968112.18 8.97 5.83 6 88250.65 2382767.55 17824292.66 17.82 8.86 7 149140.57 4026795.39 30122442.91 30.12 12.30 8 216258.08 5838968.16 43678401.32 43.68 13.56 9 298149.49 8050036.23 60218296.02 60.22 16.54 10 389876.31 10526660.37 78744682.90 78.74 18.53 11 498775.52 13466939.04 100739437.49 100.74 21.99 12 617021.98 16659593.46 124622088.88 124.62 23.88 13 765107.67 20657907.09 154531473.99 154.53 29.91 14 925292.04 24982885.08 186884471.84 186.88 32.35 15 1107322.97 29897720.19 223649895.88 223.65 36.77 16 1300448.26 35112103.02 262656086.64 262.66 39.01 17 1522669.42 41112074.34 307538872.10 307.54 44.88 18 1759446.42 47505053.34 355361551.51 355.36 47.82 19 2020471.85 54552739.95 408081771.20 408.08 52.72 20 2295864.90 61988352.30 463703869.38 463.70 55.62 21 2598481.42 70158998.34 524824387.08 524.82 61.12 22 2918224.24 78792054.48 589403963.54 589.40 64.58 23 3265429.67 88166601.09 659530259.45 659.53 70.13 24 3631435.48 98048757.96 733453733.92 733.45 73.92 25 4027107.09 108731891.43 813368913.84 813.37 79.92 26 4442399.05 119944774.35 897246884.53 897.25 83.88 27 4890089.95 132032428.65 987668582.52 987.67 90.42 28 5358802.50 144687667.50 1082336096.73 1082.34 94.67 29 5860724.46 158239560.42 1183711031.72 1183.71 101.37 30 6386416.50 172433245.50 1289886892.96 1289.89 106.18 31 6945780.30 187536068.10 1402863557.42 1402.86 112.98 32 7530386.26 203320429.02 1520938469.28 1520.94 118.07 33 8150131.44 220053548.88 1646110572.40 1646.11 125.17 34 8797777.55 237539993.85 1776917923.99 1776.92 130.81 35 9501084.50 256529281.50 1918967290.26 1918.97 142.05 36 10234681.32 276336395.64 2067134407.59 2067.13 148.17 37 11005680.25 297153366.75 2222855759.97 2222.86 155.72 38 11808461.47 318828459.69 2384996292.71 2385.00 162.14 39 12652870.62 341627506.74 2555544564.17 2555.54 170.55 40 13530057.61 365311555.47 2732713090.69 2732.71 177.17 41 14447019.22 390069518.94 2917915036.43 2917.92 185.20 42 15398769.03 415766763.81 3110143276.68 3110.14 192.23 43 16393219.31 442616921.37 3310995880.31 3311.00 200.85 44 17423419.16 470432317.32 3519068949.71 3519.07 208.07 45 18496159.61 499396309.47 3735734092.99 3735.73 216.67 46 19604718.37 529327395.99 3959633585.70 3959.63 223.90 47 20754438.78 560369847.06 4191846640.93 4191.85 232.21 48 21940610.07 592396471.89 4431421807.97 4431.42 239.58 49 23168821.80 625558188.60 4679488029.82 4679.49 248.07 50 24434324.71 659726767.17 4935086081.82 4935.09 255.60 Based on James City County GIS data interpolated to 1 foot contour intervals. CMP JPA Master Page Number: 131 ATTACHMENT 11 Proposed Project Use and Need Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 132 Proposed Project Use and Need Note - This document provided necessary information pertaining to the JPA Permit Application, Section 27. Ever since the extended drought that occurred from 1999-2002, the Commonwealth has realized that a more proactive approach to water resources planning was necessary. The enactment of the Regional Water Supply Planning Regulation in 2005 established a process to ensure that current and projected future water demands are met and that alternative sources of water supply are considered. The regulations require each locality to develop and submit a plan, either alone or in collaboration with other localities, by 2011. One of the purposes of the planning process, as defined in regulation, is to encourage, promote, and develop incentives for alternative water sources. Virginia’s State Water Resources Plan (published by DEQ in 2015) is a compilation and synthesis of the 48 local and regional water supply plans developed by local governments to assess their water supply needs from 2010 to 2040. While it includes many of the Commonwealth’s conclusions and recommendations, one that stands out for the purposes of this application is as follows – “Based on the projected 2040 demand, localities and regions will need additional storage. DEQ will assist, as appropriate, in any efforts to optimize the use of the resource (emphasis added).” The report also highlights the need for greater diversification in water supply sources throughout the Commonwealth, but in the Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Area particularly. More specific to the location of the Cranston’s Mill Pond and its potential to serve as a raw water supply, the report concludes that there is insufficient water in the Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Area to meet projected demands through 2040. The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality has concluded that the groundwater aquifer from which most of the water users in the Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Area obtain raw water is over-allocated and, as a result, will be reducing all currently permitted groundwater withdrawals (14 large permittees) by approximately 57%. DEQ has publicly stated that it intends to issue these revised permits to all permittees in the region by the end of 2016. James City County, in which Cranston’s Mill Pond is located, currently relies exclusively on groundwater (PDC Plan at Section 6-1). The Hampton Roads Planning District Commission Water Supply Plan (“PDC Plan”), written prior to DEQ’s proposed reductions in groundwater withdrawals, predicts that water demand in the York-James Peninsula will exceed the available water supply near the year 2040. By 2050, a shortage of 6 MGD is predicted. Under extreme conditions, the upper range of projected demand will exceed the lower range of supply by approximately 21 MGD in 2050 (PDC Plan at Section 6-8). The lack of definitive groundwater availability will hasten these estimates. The PDC Plan also concludes that alternatives should be developed not only to meet future water demands, but to help ensure the long-term viability of groundwater aquifers and watershed area (PDC Plan at Section 7-11). James City County commissioned CDM Smith to prepare an updated Water Supply Study in 2015. That study concluded that, under the current conditions, James City County would experience a deficit of 2.0 MGD in 2030 and 8.2 MGD by 2050. With the reductions in CMP JPA Master Page Number: 133 groundwater proposed by DEQ, James City County would experience an immediate deficit in water availability. Even if James City County obtained water under a contract with Newport News Water Works, a deficit is predicted as early as 2020. Neighboring localities, including New Kent County, will also face water deficits. The New Kent County Water Supply Plan predicts water shortages in certain parts of the County as soon as 2017, and a 1.5 MGD deficit by 2060. The plan highlights the need for New Kent County to develop alternative sources of water, outside of groundwater (New Kent County Water Supply Summary prepared by URS Corporation, August 31, 2010 at p. 4). Likewise, industrial water users in proximity to James City County, such as the WestRock paper mill in West Point, will need to find alternative water sources under the current groundwater reductions DEQ believes necessary to preserve the aquifer (current actual use = 20.09 MGD; DEQ proposing reduction in permitted withdrawal to 9.0 – 10.0 MGD). During the 2015 state legislative session, a bill was enacted establishing the Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Committee. The Committee is charged with, among other things, examining “options for developing long-term alternative water sources, including water reclamation and reuse, groundwater recharge, desalination, and surface water options, including creation of storage reservoirs” (emphasis added) and submitting recommendations to DEQ and the General Assembly no later than August 1, 2017. The legislature’s Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC) is also investigating the issues of water supply, need, and permitting and will issue a report in October 2016, before the start of the 2017 legislative session. The 2015 legislation that authorized the JLARC study (HJR623) states “WHEREAS, recent withdrawals of groundwater in eastern Virginia may have contributed to topographical and hydrological changes, including lower water tables, land subsidence, and higher risk of saltwater contamination of groundwater” and directs the Commission in its study to “consider the need for strategies and practices to preserve or increase the amount of groundwater and surface water available for future consumption.” This language strongly supports the importance of developing alternative solutions such as the Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply project described herein. At the inaugural meeting of the Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Committee, the patron of the enabling legislation (Delegate Hodges) presented to the Committee and stated “We do know that we need to do something and do it quickly. We need to act now before we are in a crisis situation. It takes time to come up with solutions and to implement them. We need to act now.” While much of the Committee’s work has been performed by several workgroups over the past year, much of the progress to date and current positions of the workgroups was summarized when the full Committee met on June 24, 2016. At that meeting, a number of statements were made, and questions posed, that demonstrate the critical near-term need for additional surface water sources, including the following. CMP JPA Master Page Number: 134 From the summary of the Alternative Sources of Supply Workgroup – “It is clear that some element of the use of surface water impoundments is going to be part of the solution set.” From DEQ staff presentation – “The challenge that we have is we are looking at reducing 30 MGD in permit reductions, but…in 30 years that is gone by the growth in the unpermitted sector. So this is the other factor that we have to balance.” From the general discussion of Committee members – “There is a need for an enhanced supply to meet future needs and to provide opportunities for economic development.” A follow-up question posed during the Committee discussion – “What will encourage private investment in such projects?” A follow-up question posed during the Committee discussion – “The more water that can be withdrawn from a surface water source, does that help this problem with groundwater?” Response from DEQ staff – “Yes, that is one of the options for this group to look at. To determine what the potential is for this type of alternative.” From discussions during the various Advisory Committee and workgroup meetings, it is well- accepted that limitations on water supply will not only adversely impact the Region’s ability to attract future water-dependent economic development, but that water uncertainty is impacting economic development now. The regional water supply plan developed for Hampton Roads, the updated Water Supply Study commissioned by James City County, and the reductions in groundwater withdrawals proposed by DEQ demonstrate the need for new water sources. These reports highlight the desire for additional surface water storage sites and the perceived inability to obtain the permits necessary for such projects. The proposed use for water from the Cranston’s Mill Pond is to meet the need articulated in the State Water Resources Plan, the Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Advisory Committee, and the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission Water Supply Plan. Our proposed intent for permitting the Cranston’s Mill Pond as a water supply is for it to be used as a supplemental source, likely in conjunction with an existing source, to meet a locality or industrial facility’s current and future water needs. We envision the permit, and water assets, to be transferred to a third party end user at a future date. For that reason, we request the Cranston’s Mill Pond be permitted for the full amount of usable water that it provides. The Cranston’s Mill Pond is already constructed and permitted as an operational impoundment and nutrient bank. There is no lengthy (potentially multiple-years long) construction period required for this impoundment. It presents an immediately available alternative to meet both the near-term groundwater reduction requirements and the long-term water supply demands for the region. CMP JPA Master Page Number: 135 ATTACHMENT 12 Proposed Withdrawals, Calculations and Justifications Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 136 Proposed Water Withdrawals, Calculations and Justifications Section 27 - WATER WITHDRAWAL USE, NEED, AND ALTERNATIVES “Provide the following information at the water intake or dam site. Specify the units of measurement (i.e. million gallons per day, gallons per minute, cubic feet per second, etc.).” Proposed maximum instantaneous withdrawal – 26 Million Gallons per Day Proposed average daily withdrawal – 8.3 Million Gallons per Day Proposed maximum daily withdrawal – 26 Million Gallons Proposed maximum monthly withdrawal – (8.3 MGD x 31 days) = 257,300,000 Gallons Proposed maximum annual withdrawal – 3,111,345,496 Gallons “Describe how the above withdrawals were calculated, including the relevant assumptions made in that calculation and the documentation or resources used to support the calculations, such as population projections, population growth rates, per-capita use, new uses, changes to service areas, and if applicable, evapotranspiration data and irrigation data.” The purpose of this permit request is to authorize the maximum amount of “Usable Water” that can be withdrawn from CMP for use as a supplemental water source. It is envisioned that this permit will be used in combination with another authorized water supply, thereby negating the need for emergency drought storage within CMP itself. While determining the Safe Yield is certainly necessary, and warranted, for stand-alone water supplies, the more relevant quantified yield for this permit application is “Mean Yield” or “Terminal Yield” – i.e., the total amount of water that can be withdrawn during average, or more typical, periods of precipitation and groundwater inflow. **It is requested via this application that the total amount authorized for withdrawal be based upon real, in-field measurements. e.g., If the authorized average daily withdrawal is 10 Million Gallons per Day, but measurements indicate that 15 MGD is exiting CMP, then an amount greater than 10 MGD should be allowed for withdrawal, contingent upon data submitted documenting the higher flow and justified withdrawal. CMP JPA Master Page Number: 137 Proposed maximum instantaneous withdrawal – Based on the maximum amount of usable water from the flow record July 31, 2015 – July 28, 2016. See Attachment 13, email from Jeff Corbin to Matthew Link documenting the Combined Possible Withdrawal, based on preliminary DEQ modelling runs. Proposed Average Daily Withdrawal - Based on real-time, on-site measured data for the 14- month period July 31, 2015 – September 29, 2016 (see Attachment 8 – 14-Month Record of On-Site Data Collection of Spillway Flows). Cranston’s Mill Pond is equipped with a 100' long concrete weir as its outfall structure. By measuring the depth of flow over the concrete weir, the flow passing over the weir can be calculated using the broad crested weir equation Q = CLH1.5, where in this equation: Q is the flow in cubic feet per second (cfs) C is a coefficient. (2.85 was used for this value which is appropriate for a weir of this length with shallow flow depths) L is the length of weir (100') H is the depth of flow in feet over the weir. Depth of flow is measured using an ultrasonic flow meter. The meter is connected to a "Lasso" device that transmits the flow depth every 15 minutes to a remote web site via cell phone signal. The depth data is downloaded from the web site and inserted into a spreadsheet. The spreadsheet averages the depths between the current and previous reading and uses this average flow depth to calculate a total flow volume for the time period. These volumes are summed and reported as daily volumes. The flow measurements were validated both by a third party engineering firm (see Attachment 14 – Cranston’s Mill Pond Surface Water Balance Evaluation Final Report, March 9, 2016) and Attachment 7 - DEQ Modeling Summary: Cranston's Mill Pond, specifically page 2 text stating, “The actual outflow data was assumed to produce the most accurate inflow estimates.”) Proposed maximum daily withdrawal – Same calculation as above for Maximum Instantaneous Withdrawal. Proposed maximum monthly withdrawal – Proposed average daily withdrawal (8.3 Million Gallons per Day) x 31 days. Proposed maximum annual withdrawal – Calculated from on-site data collected over a 14-month period. The total flow over the spillway for the most recent 12 months of that record was used to estimate the maximum annual withdrawal = 3,111,345,496 Gallons (see Attachment 8 – 14-Month Record of On-Site Data Collection of Spillway Flows). CMP JPA Master Page Number: 138 ATTACHMENT 13 Email Correspondence Between Jeff Corbin and Matthew Link Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 139 Tue 7/12/2016 7:49 PM Jeff Corbin [email protected] RE: As Requested - Cranston's Mill Pond Follow-Up Information To: 'Link, Matthew (DEQ)' [email protected] Cc: Scott Reed ([email protected]) Matthew – Thanks for your time on the phone today helping me better understand what a possible allowable withdrawal would be during the months where the latest model run shows that significant outflow is occurring in excess of the 4 MGD demand and sufficient 50Th percentile storage exists. Using the conversion of 1.54 cfs = 1 MGD, below are my calculated potential withdrawal amounts utilizing the excess outflow (also in attached spreadsheet). Please let me know if I did my calculations correctly. Month Demand Mean Outflow Combined Possible Withdrawal (in Model Run) (converted to MGD) (Demand + Mean Outflow) 1 3.81 0.78 4.51 2 4.19 5.04 9.24 3 3.94 0.0 3.94 4 4.06 5.0 9.06 5 3.93 0.86 4.79 6 4.06 0.57 4.62 7 3.93 9.1 13.02 8 3.93 22.7 26.69 9` 4.06 7.9 11.98 10 3.93 0.75 4.68 11 4.06 3.2 7.31 12 3.93 3.7 7.68 Thanks…jc Jeff Corbin Restoration Systems Senior Vice-President for Water Quality Markets & Mitigation (804) 389-4226 restorationsystems.com CMP JPA Master Page Number: 140 From: Link, Matthew (DEQ) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, July 08, 2016 7:36 AM To: Jeff Corbin Jeff, Below and attached are results from a model run of 2004. It appears inflows are similar to those that you have recorded thus far (approximately 8.9 mgd). I do want to caution anyone looking at these results that this is only one year and 2004 was one of the wettest years on record (>90th Percentile flows for the year at the Chickahominy River Gage at Providence Forge). That being said, the results indicate that storage does not get depleted as frequently as the 1990-2003 model run. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you want additional raw data. Thanks. 4 mgd Withdrawal Rate 100% Allowable Diversion, 2004. Month Demand Average Storage Mean Inflow Mean Outflow 90th 50th Percentile Remaining (mg) (cfs) (cfs) Percentile Storage Storage Remaining Remaining (mg) (mg) 1 3.8123475 24.8637618977005 6.90354430802707 1.08078377819733 25.8 25.8 2 4.1973695922673 25.2363171228846 13.9904731673089 7.77092187518131 25.8 25.8 3 3.94408134916932 4.46507633746948 4.6630813910821 0 11.6 3.7 4 4.06213141505376 15.3008438756828 15.8409104449205 7.7052030473252 25.8 25.8 5 3.93955798543184 13.8443503688913 4.78018106628202 1.33034057186843 25.8 16.6 6 4.06213141505376 8.4526990151358 8.71100381208453 0.879035598288153 25.1 7.8 7 3.93955798543184 25.831745928339 20.0841223275741 14.0012109172069 25.8 25.8 8 3.9353264516129 25.831745928339 41.147383384546 35.0594333639004 25.8 25.8 9 4.06213141505376 25.831745928339 18.3979422717594 12.1962057235739 25.8 25.8 10 3.93955798543184 19.2317309588165 7.32723943164275 1.15671618842231 25.8 23.7 11 4.06213141505376 25.3242151825063 11.3854916972419 5.0062126036948 25.8 25.8 12 3.93955798543184 25.4074927264103 11.9170943373947 5.77253238261523 25.8 25.8 Averages 4.0 19.96848 13.76237 7.663216 24.55833 21.51667 Matthew Link Water Withdrawal Permit Writer Office of Water Supply Department of Environmental Quality P.O. Box 1105, Richmond, VA 23218 804-698-4078 [email protected] www.deq.virginia.gov CMP JPA Master Page Number: 141 From: Jeff Corbin [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2016 7:58 AM To: Link, Matthew (DEQ); Powell, Doug Cc: Scott Reed ([email protected]); Kudlas, Scott (DEQ); Jeff Corbin Subject: RE: As Requested - Cranston's Mill Pond Follow-Up Information Thank You for making this additional info available quickly Matthew. The results are positive and as I anticipated. Under a worse case drought scenario, the CMP can provide 4 MGD throughout the year. As you mention in your email, under more normal (higher than drought) flows, higher yields would be available. While I understand why the drought scenario safe yield calculations must be performed, the majority of the time we live under a more normal precipitation/flow scenario. As we have documented for almost 12 months now, there is an average of 8.5 MGD exiting the pond, at full pool elevation, on any given day. The scenario that we have envisioned all along was to use the CMP as the primary source (i.e., use all available water) and supplement that volume (when necessary) via the existing groundwater wells. A conjunctive use of those two sources will yield a significant volume of water for the County’s current and future projected needs. Scott, Doug – Now that we have this revised information, please let me know when you are available to discuss a likely conjunctive use permitted withdrawal scenario and how that would be incorporated into a permit application. Thanks…jc Jeff Corbin Restoration Systems Senior Vice-President for Water Quality Markets & Mitigation (804) 389-4226 restorationsystems.com CMP JPA Master Page Number: 142 From: Link, Matthew (DEQ) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 3:49 PM To: Jeff Corbin Jeff and Doug, Scott asked me to forward this information to you. Below is the table and attached is the graph with stats from the modeling run with a 100% allowable diversion and no storage requirements at the current storage volume/pool elevation. The results indicate that with a constant withdrawal rate of 4 mgd, there would be no usable storage remaining 6 months out of the year in a 50th percentile inflow year. With no additional storage added, the pond would likely get drawn down pretty quickly with low inflows. In the 2002 drought, the pond would be projected to have 0 usable storage for approximately 7 months. That being said, the pond would also likely be able to refill pretty quickly so it would likely pass storm flows semi-frequently. This may allow for the ability to get higher yields during times of higher inflow, but that would have to be managed on a daily/instantaneous basis. I also took a look at a 100% diversion scenario with an increased storage volume and that reduced the months the pond was empty on a median year to 3. Let me know if you want me to provide that table as well. 4 mgd Withdrawal Rate 100% Allowable Diversion Month Demand Average Storage Mean Inflow Mean Outflow 90th 50th Percentile Remaining (mg) Percentile Storage Storage Remaining Remaining (mg) (mg) 1 3.9262797241379 20.1766158752146 13.5151351504565 6.84072276541226 25.8 25.8 2 4.31007445875769 22.2726374511163 13.7219528497321 7.42831765455936 25.8 25.8 3 3.9478892829279 21.5678640507988 16.545178486241 10.2476692366367 25.8 25.8 4 4.06213141505373 20.0375454640806 10.5293715406955 4.9265339887819 25.8 25.8 5 3.93955798543181 11.4053156640177 7.09751614908129 1.97231050468015 25.8 9.9 6 4.06213141505373 6.33992029727886 3.96291493254167 1.16733124709011 25.8 0.0 7 3.93955798543181 3.21414704431506 4.11307761920616 1.10113478267491 22.3 0.0 8 3.93532645161287 8.50012067566779 7.49485999583364 3.76628514087886 25.8 0.0 9 4.06213141505373 8.48375531590477 11.5944106576286 8.34089676224617 25.8 0.0 10 3.93955798543181 6.58737854893436 5.93858826369757 2.12396347573603 25.8 0.0 11 4.06213141505373 10.1966331653123 6.60833615367959 2.0942562694406 25.8 0.0 12 3.93955798543181 12.5543594686428 9.37816366481532 3.73100638584495 25.8 9.0 Averages 4 12.61136 9.208292 4.478369 25.50833 10.175 Please contact me at any time with questions or concerns. Thanks. CMP JPA Master Page Number: 143 Matthew Link Water Withdrawal Permit Writer Office of Water Supply Department of Environmental Quality P.O. Box 1105, Richmond, VA 23218 804-698-4078 [email protected] www.deq.virginia.gov CMP JPA Master Page Number: 144 ATTACHMENT 14 Cranston’s Mill Pond Surface Water Balance Evaluation Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 145 Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Land Trust, LLC Cranstons Mill Pond Surface Water Balance Evaluation Final Report Greeley and Hansen March 9, 2016 A. GENERAL Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Land Trust (CBNLT) is considering using Cranstons Mill Pond (CMP) as a reservoir for raw water supply. Since July 31, 2015, CBNLT has been collecting the reservoir level data at the spillway using a water level monitor in order to estimate surface water discharge from CMP. This report summarizes the results of a surface water balance evaluation of the CMP flows, including direct precipitation, surface water inflow, groundwater inflow and any other potential inflow sources. A preliminary evaluation of the groundwater inflow was also conducted based on available groundwater information and well data. B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. The water balance evaluation over the 7-month period from July 31, 2015 to February 29, 2016 indicates a daily average CMP outflow of 8.4 million gallons per day (MGD) with estimated average groundwater inflows ranging from 60% to 66% of the total inflow. 2. During the 7-month period, while there were periods of low inflow rates, these periods were infrequent and short, and CMP outflows increased quickly during or following precipitation events. 3. CMP appears to be geographically situated to receive groundwater flows, either directly or indirectly, from two aquifers – the shallow unconfined Quaternary aquifer and the underlying, confined Yorktown-Eastover aquifer. 4. Available long-term groundwater well level data indicates expected fluctuations during periods of low precipitation, with levels in the upper unconfined aquifer decreasing 4-5 feet from the average level while the lower aquifer was impacted minimally. 5. The historical groundwater level data illustrates that both aquifers have recovered quickly following drought periods. C. CRANSTONS MILL POND DRAINAGE AREA The location of CMP and its drainage area are shown on Figure 1 below. CMP has a 100-ft long spillway with the crest at El. 8.15. The bottom of the pond is at approximately El. 1.5. The pond has a water surface area of about 48 acres at the normal pool level of El. 8.27 (average based on the Lasso monitoring data). The total estimated storage volume at El. 8.27 is about 48 MG. The drainage area upstream of the spillway is approximately 7 square miles. The topography of the drainage area is fairly steep with elevations changing from sea level at the bottom of the pond to about El. 100 at high points. The drainage area also has many natural streams that may incise the shallow aquifers to receive groundwater inflow. The upper portion of the CMP drainage area is lightly developed whereas the lower portion is dominated by tracts of forest. The drainage area has a low percentage of impervious cover – approximately 9.3% based on the current GIS data acquired from James City County. 1 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 146 Figure 1 Location and Drainage Area of Cranstons Mill Pond Based on a review of the USGS topographic maps and information provided by CBNLT, there do not appear to be other inflow sources to CMP than direct precipitation on the pond, overland runoff from its drainage area and groundwater inflows to the streams and pond within the drainage area. D. DATA COLLECTION The following data was used for this study: 15-min CMP monitoring data from July 31, 2015 to February 29, 2016, including the water depth over the spillway, and local air temperature. Precipitation data from a private weather station Colonial Heritage KVAWILLI21. The drawings of the spillway and derived spillway discharge coefficient provided by McKinney & Company. CMP elevation-storage and elevation-area tables provided by CBNLT to estimate storage volume and ponding area at various water levels. Historical groundwater well data downloaded from USGS websites. 2 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 147 E. SURFACE WATER BALANCE EVALUATION The objective of the surface water balance evaluation is to estimate the groundwater component (base flow) in the pond inflow based on the pond level monitoring data at the spillway from July 31, 2015 to February 29, 2016. The evaluation methodology is described as follows. Using the reservoir water balance equation to calculate the pond inflows based on the measured outflow data. The reservoir water balance equation is depicted in the diagram below on Figure 2. Using published and USGS approved approaches to separate the daily pond inflow hydrograph to estimate the base flow (groundwater) quantity during the monitoring period. Three approaches were used and compared: BFlow Digital Filter (Arnold 1995), Recursive Digital Filter (Eckhardt, 2005), and PART (Rutledge 1993). Figure 2 Reservoir Water Balance Equation and Diagram DS = Q+P-E-I-R-Sd Precipitation, P Natural Inflow, Q Evaporation, E Sedimentation, Sd Reservoir Storage, S Seepage, I Release, R Where, S is calculated based on the elevation-storage table; P is precipitation data; E is estimated using Hargreaves Method which takes inputs of reservoir area data, temperature, etc. I is unknown and is neglected for this analysis; R is calculated using the depth over the spillway data and spillway discharge equation with a weir discharge coefficient of 2.85 based on McKinney Company’s measurement; Sd is unknown and neglected for this analysis; and Q is calculated based on the water balance equation which includes both stormwater runoff and groundwater flow. Note that Q does not include the flow from direct precipitation on the pond surface. 3 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 148 Figure 3 shows the precipitation and hydrographs of CMP total inflow and groundwater flow based on three different approaches for the period of July 31, 2015 through February 29, 2016. Note that the data from October 10 to October 13, 2015 was not used as the pond level dropped below the spillway and the low flow pipes were open. As shown in the figure, there is some discrepancy between different hydrograph separation approaches. Figure 4 shows the frequency plot of the CMP daily total outflow. Table 1 summarizes the statistics of the analysis results. Approximately 60-66% of the total inflow to CMP was from groundwater based on 7 months of monitoring data. This is consistent with the James City County wide general water budget number in the USGS report (Figure 15, Page 35, USGS 1980) in which the groundwater seepage to streams is about 65% the total flow to the streams. The daily data for the water balance calculation is shown in Appendix A. The weekly flow data is shown in Appendix B. Figure 3 Precipitation and Hydrographs During the Flow Monitoring Period 55 0.0 50 0.5 45 1.0 40 1.5 35 2.0 30 2.5 25 3.0 20 3.5 Daily Daily Flowrate (MGD) 15 4.0 Daily Precipitation (inch) 10 4.5 5 5.0 0 5.5 7/31/15 8/30/15 9/29/15 10/29/15 11/28/15 12/28/15 1/27/16 2/26/16 Precipitation CMP Inflow Groundwater - DF Groundwater - RDF Groundwater- PART Average Daily Outflow 4 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 149 Figure 4 Frequency Plot of Cranstons Mill Pond Daily Total Outflow 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 Daily Daily CMP Outflow (MGD) 5 0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent of Days Above the Flow Table 1 Summary of Flow Estimates based on Data from July 31, 2015 through February 29, 2016 Daily Groundwater Inflow (MGD) Daily Total Daily Total Digital Filter Recursive Parameter Outflow Inflow (MGD) PART (1) (DF) Digital Filter (MGD) Method Method (RDF) Method Min 1.86 1.46 1.34 1.34 1.46 Median 7.09 7.04 5.50 5.25 5.77 Max 35.80 38.44 9.97 9.58 9.40 Average 8.36 8.25 5.19 4.98 5.41 Percentage of Groundwater in Total Inflow 63% 60% 66% (1) Total Inflow does not include direct precipitation on the pond surface. F. GROUNDWATER Groundwater inflow to a surface water body is impacted by the hydrologic cycle processes and the characteristics of the aquifer(s) incised by the surface water body. It is also impacted by the groundwater withdrawals (pumping) from the same aquifers. Based on the USGS Groundwater Hydrology of James City County Report (USGS 1980), CMP is expected to receive groundwater inflows from two aquifers: one is the shallow unconfined aquifer called “Quaternary” and the other is the deeper confined Yorktown- Eastover aquifer. Additional information on these two aquifers is included in Appendix C. There are three USGS groundwater wells that are located within 10 miles from CMP and have historical level data available. The locations of the three wells are shown on Figure 5. Table 2 shows the local aquifer and range of the water levels in the wells as compared to the CMP water level. The data review showed expected fluctuations during periods of low precipitation. During the 2002 drought period, the water level in the shallow unconfined aquifer dropped about 4 to 5 feet compared to the most recent level measurements, whereas the level in the underlying confined aquifer dropped only about 2 feet compared 5 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 150 to the most recent level measurements. The historical groundwater level data also illustrates that both aquifers have recovered quickly following drought periods. Additional information on these wells is included in Appendix C. Figure 5 USGS Groundwater Wells near Cranstons Mill Pond Table 2 Historical Level at USGS Groundwater Wells near Cranstons Mill Pond USGS Groundwater Wells Parameter W1 W2 W3 USGS Well Number 56H 30 SOW 177F 56H 31 SOW 135B 57H 14 SOW 095 Land Surface Elevation 103 95 93 Upper Chesapeake Group Quaternary System Upper Chesapeake Aquifer (121CSPKU) (1) (110QRNR) Group (121CSPKU) Maximum 86 79 48 Groundwater Elevation Minimum 76 70 37 Groundwater Elevation 2015/2016 81 74 39 Groundwater Elevation CMP Water Elevation 8.15 8.15 8.15 (Spillway) (1) Based on USGS publication (USGS 1992, Table 1, Page A8), the upper part of the Chesapeake aquifer west of the bay in Virginia generally refers to the local Yorktown-Eastover aquifer. 6 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 151 REFERENCES USGS (1980). Groundwater Hydrology of James City County, Virginia. John F. Harsh. Water-Resources Investigations 80-961. USGS (1990). Conceptualization and Analysis of Ground-Water Flow System in the Coastal Plain of Virginia and Adjacent Parts of Maryland and North Carolina. John F. Harsh and Randell J. Laczniak. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1404-F. USGS (2006). Professional Paper 1731. Approximate altitude and configuration of the top of the Yorktown-Eastover aquifer in the Virginia Coastal Plain - Plate 24. Virginia Coastal Plain Hydrogeologic Framework. USGS (1992). The Regional Aquifer System Underlying the Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain in Parts of North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, and New York Summary. Henry Trapp, Jr., And Harold Meisler. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1404-A. Arnold, J.G., P.M. Allen, R. Muttiah, and G. Bernhardt (1995). “Automated Baseflow Separation and Recession Analysis Techniques.” Groundwater 33(6): 1010-1018. Eckhardt, K. (2005). “How to Construct Recursive Digital Filters for Baseflow Separation.” Hydrological Processes 19(2): 507-515. Rutledge, A.T. (1993). “Computer Programs for Describing the Recession of Ground-Water Discharge and for Estimating Mean Ground-Water Recharge and Discharge from Streamflow Records”. 7 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 152 Appendix A Cranstons Mill Pond Surface Water Balance Calculation CMP JPA Master Page Number: 153 Appendix A Estimated Groundwater Inflow (MGD) Daily Daily Average Daily Daily Average CMP Estimated BFlow Recursive Precipitation Water Depth Evaporation Storage PART Date (1) Water Outflow Total Inflow Digital Filter Digital Filter (10) (in) Over (4) Volume (MG) Volume (7) (8) (9) Method Elevation at (MGD) (5) (6) (MGD) Method Method Spillway (in) (3) (MG) (2) Spillway 7/31/2015 0.34 1.26 8.25 6.58 0.16 47.66 6.58 3.29 3.29 3.08 8/1/2015 0.00 0.87 8.22 3.81 0.16 47.17 3.48 3.42 3.24 3.23 8/2/2015 0.00 0.74 8.21 2.97 0.16 47.00 2.96 2.95 2.95 2.95 8/3/2015 0.00 0.80 8.22 3.34 0.16 47.08 3.58 2.98 2.95 3.17 8/4/2015 0.00 0.96 8.23 4.22 0.16 47.28 4.58 3.06 3.01 3.40 8/5/2015 0.00 0.84 8.22 3.64 0.16 47.13 3.65 3.14 3.01 3.65 8/6/2015 1.50 2.18 8.33 15.20 0.16 48.86 15.11 3.61 3.85 4.23 8/7/2015 0.01 1.84 8.30 11.10 0.20 48.42 10.85 4.31 4.29 4.89 8/8/2015 0.00 1.24 8.25 6.24 0.19 47.65 5.66 4.61 4.32 5.66 8/9/2015 0.00 1.21 8.25 6.02 0.19 47.60 6.16 4.71 4.38 5.08 8/10/2015 0.00 1.28 8.26 6.49 0.19 47.69 6.77 4.83 4.47 4.56 8/11/2015 1.70 2.25 8.34 16.07 0.18 48.95 15.26 5.30 5.18 4.10 8/12/2015 0.01 3.14 8.41 27.24 0.12 50.12 28.51 6.55 6.82 3.68 8/13/2015 0.02 1.17 8.25 5.78 0.12 47.55 3.30 3.30 3.30 3.30 8/14/2015 0.01 0.94 8.23 4.24 0.12 47.26 4.05 3.33 3.30 3.33 8/15/2015 0.00 0.88 8.22 3.88 0.12 47.18 3.93 3.38 3.28 3.39 8/16/2015 0.03 1.07 8.24 5.11 0.13 47.43 5.45 3.48 3.39 2.90 8/17/2015 0.00 0.77 8.21 3.14 0.10 47.04 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.49 8/18/2015 0.03 0.61 8.20 2.31 0.09 46.83 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 8/19/2015 0.03 0.53 8.19 1.98 0.09 46.74 1.94 1.94 1.94 1.94 8/20/2015 0.05 0.77 8.21 3.48 0.09 47.04 3.81 2.00 2.04 2.02 8/21/2015 0.05 0.64 8.20 2.46 0.10 46.87 2.32 2.09 2.02 2.11 8/22/2015 0.02 0.53 8.19 1.91 0.10 46.73 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 8/23/2015 0.01 1.07 8.24 5.02 0.10 47.43 5.81 2.00 2.11 1.84 8/24/2015 0.24 1.31 8.26 6.70 0.10 47.74 6.80 2.32 2.42 1.83 8/25/2015 0.00 1.35 8.26 7.08 0.10 47.78 7.23 2.67 2.73 1.82 8/26/2015 0.00 1.38 8.26 7.23 0.13 47.82 7.40 3.02 3.02 1.82 8/27/2015 0.00 1.52 8.28 8.33 0.13 48.00 8.64 3.39 3.38 1.81 8/28/2015 0.00 1.36 8.26 7.37 0.11 47.80 7.27 3.74 3.61 1.80 8/29/2015 0.01 0.68 8.21 2.57 0.11 46.93 1.79 1.79 1.79 1.79 8/30/2015 0.00 0.73 8.21 2.82 0.11 46.99 2.99 1.84 1.85 2.26 8/31/2015 0.05 0.91 8.23 3.87 0.09 47.22 4.13 1.96 1.98 2.85 9/1/2015 0.00 0.91 8.23 3.89 0.13 47.21 4.02 2.13 2.09 3.60 1 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 154 Appendix A Estimated Groundwater Inflow (MGD) Daily Daily Average Daily Daily Average CMP Estimated BFlow Recursive Precipitation Water Depth Evaporation Storage PART Date (1) Water Outflow Total Inflow Digital Filter Digital Filter (10) (in) Over (4) Volume (MG) Volume (7) (8) (9) Method Elevation at (MGD) (5) (6) (MGD) Method Method Spillway (in) (3) (MG) (2) Spillway 9/2/2015 0.07 0.89 8.22 3.78 0.13 47.19 3.80 2.26 2.18 3.79 9/3/2015 0.00 0.95 8.23 4.15 0.14 47.27 4.36 2.39 2.31 4.03 9/4/2015 0.00 0.96 8.23 4.21 0.14 47.28 4.36 2.54 2.42 4.29 9/5/2015 0.03 1.11 8.24 5.20 0.14 47.47 5.49 2.72 2.60 4.69 9/6/2015 0.00 1.14 8.24 5.39 0.15 47.51 5.59 2.93 2.77 5.14 9/7/2015 0.01 1.30 8.26 6.59 0.15 47.72 6.94 3.18 3.02 5.67 9/8/2015 0.06 1.43 8.27 7.91 0.15 47.89 8.15 3.51 3.35 6.28 9/9/2015 0.01 1.70 8.29 9.90 0.16 48.23 10.39 3.94 3.81 6.95 9/10/2015 0.44 1.70 8.29 9.94 0.15 48.24 9.52 4.39 4.16 7.71 9/11/2015 0.00 2.02 8.32 12.84 0.15 48.66 13.40 4.92 4.77 7.56 9/12/2015 0.51 1.63 8.29 9.46 0.15 48.15 8.44 5.37 4.95 7.43 9/13/2015 0.00 1.93 8.31 12.03 0.17 48.54 12.59 5.76 5.43 7.22 9/14/2015 0.00 1.42 8.27 7.57 0.16 47.88 7.07 6.06 5.45 7.04 9/15/2015 0.00 1.44 8.27 7.69 0.16 47.90 7.86 6.17 5.53 7.52 9/16/2015 0.00 1.51 8.28 8.29 0.12 47.99 8.51 6.32 5.64 8.03 9/17/2015 0.01 1.67 8.29 9.55 0.12 48.19 9.85 6.53 5.85 8.58 9/18/2015 0.01 1.67 8.29 9.58 0.10 48.20 9.67 6.77 6.02 9.17 9/19/2015 0.01 1.61 8.28 9.05 0.10 48.12 9.06 6.97 6.14 9.06 9/20/2015 0.01 1.47 8.27 7.91 0.09 47.94 7.81 7.08 6.15 7.81 9/21/2015 0.09 1.52 8.28 8.35 0.11 48.01 8.41 7.15 6.20 5.60 9/22/2015 0.00 1.59 8.28 8.93 0.11 48.10 9.13 7.28 6.31 4.02 9/23/2015 0.00 1.07 8.24 5.26 0.10 47.43 4.69 4.69 4.69 2.89 9/24/2015 0.00 0.81 8.22 3.28 0.10 47.09 3.04 3.04 3.04 2.07 9/25/2015 0.09 0.54 8.20 1.86 0.09 46.74 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 9/26/2015 1.44 1.63 8.29 9.44 0.07 48.15 9.04 1.77 2.02 1.98 9/27/2015 0.01 1.94 8.31 12.19 0.06 48.54 12.63 2.45 2.77 2.69 9/28/2015 0.06 1.21 8.25 5.92 0.09 47.60 4.99 2.93 2.88 3.70 9/29/2015 0.08 1.34 8.26 6.99 0.09 47.77 7.15 3.16 3.14 4.00 9/30/2015 0.68 2.16 8.33 14.18 0.09 48.84 14.45 3.74 3.92 4.33 10/1/2015 0.61 2.75 8.38 20.32 0.11 49.61 20.39 4.76 5.07 4.69 10/2/2015 1.49 3.28 8.42 27.38 0.12 50.31 26.21 6.15 6.54 5.10 10/3/2015 1.27 3.77 8.46 32.57 0.12 50.97 31.63 7.86 8.28 5.55 10/4/2015 0.24 3.17 8.41 25.13 0.12 50.16 24.12 9.36 9.30 6.06 2 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 155 Appendix A Estimated Groundwater Inflow (MGD) Daily Daily Average Daily Daily Average CMP Estimated BFlow Recursive Precipitation Water Depth Evaporation Storage PART Date (1) Water Outflow Total Inflow Digital Filter Digital Filter (10) (in) Over (4) Volume (MG) Volume (7) (8) (9) Method Elevation at (MGD) (5) (6) (MGD) Method Method Spillway (in) (3) (MG) (2) Spillway 10/5/2015 0.01 1.96 8.31 12.19 0.11 48.57 10.70 9.97 9.23 6.62 10/6/2015 0.01 1.45 8.27 7.82 0.11 47.92 7.26 7.26 7.26 7.26 10/7/2015 0.00 1.29 8.26 6.51 0.08 47.71 6.37 6.37 6.37 6.37 10/8/2015 0.01 1.26 8.26 6.35 0.09 47.67 6.40 6.37 6.26 6.04 10/9/2015 0.20 1.28 8.26 16.95 0.10 47.69 16.81 6.77 6.92 7.33 10/10/2015 0.04 10/11/2015 0.00 See Note (11) 10/12/2015 0.01 10/13/2015 0.00 10/14/2015 0.00 0.68 8.21 2.69 0.09 46.92 2.69 1.34 1.34 2.69 10/15/2015 0.01 0.85 8.22 3.59 0.09 47.14 3.89 1.49 1.51 2.86 10/16/2015 0.01 0.84 8.22 3.42 0.10 47.13 3.48 1.65 1.62 3.05 10/17/2015 0.00 0.85 8.22 3.49 0.09 47.14 3.59 1.80 1.74 2.73 10/18/2015 0.01 0.68 8.21 2.58 0.10 46.93 2.45 1.89 1.76 2.46 10/19/2015 0.00 0.77 8.21 3.06 0.09 47.04 3.27 1.96 1.84 2.42 10/20/2015 0.00 0.65 8.20 2.46 0.08 46.88 2.38 2.02 1.85 2.38 10/21/2015 0.01 0.79 8.22 3.33 0.08 47.06 3.57 2.09 1.94 2.02 10/22/2015 0.01 0.90 8.22 4.01 0.07 47.20 4.20 2.23 2.07 1.72 10/23/2015 0.00 0.52 8.19 1.87 0.07 46.72 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 10/24/2015 0.00 0.69 8.21 2.66 0.07 46.93 2.93 1.52 1.54 2.08 10/25/2015 0.00 1.06 8.24 4.91 0.07 47.41 5.46 1.72 1.80 2.97 10/26/2015 0.00 1.08 8.24 4.97 0.06 47.43 5.04 1.98 2.01 4.27 10/27/2015 0.22 1.04 8.24 4.80 0.05 47.38 4.52 2.19 2.16 4.52 10/28/2015 0.36 1.62 8.29 9.24 0.06 48.14 9.60 2.56 2.67 3.43 10/29/2015 0.15 0.77 8.21 3.81 0.08 47.04 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 10/30/2015 0.00 1.07 8.24 5.05 0.07 47.42 5.50 2.71 2.77 2.81 10/31/2015 0.00 0.81 8.22 3.37 0.07 47.08 3.10 2.82 2.74 3.02 11/1/2015 0.01 1.10 8.24 5.17 0.07 47.46 5.61 2.94 2.90 3.19 11/2/2015 0.26 1.18 8.25 5.90 0.07 47.56 5.73 3.15 3.06 3.36 11/3/2015 0.00 1.13 8.24 5.79 0.07 47.50 5.80 3.34 3.21 3.55 11/4/2015 0.09 0.90 8.22 4.10 0.07 47.20 3.74 3.45 3.19 3.74 11/5/2015 1.28 2.70 8.38 20.46 0.07 49.55 21.17 4.12 4.46 5.27 11/6/2015 0.00 1.73 8.29 10.23 0.07 48.28 9.04 4.95 4.71 7.52 3 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 156 Appendix A Estimated Groundwater Inflow (MGD) Daily Daily Average Daily Daily Average CMP Estimated BFlow Recursive Precipitation Water Depth Evaporation Storage PART Date (1) Water Outflow Total Inflow Digital Filter Digital Filter (10) (in) Over (4) Volume (MG) Volume (7) (8) (9) Method Elevation at (MGD) (5) (6) (MGD) Method Method Spillway (in) (3) (MG) (2) Spillway 11/7/2015 0.26 1.47 8.27 7.94 0.06 47.94 7.32 5.19 4.82 7.32 11/8/2015 0.00 1.40 8.27 7.42 0.08 47.85 7.41 5.35 4.92 7.12 11/9/2015 1.34 1.58 8.28 9.06 0.08 48.09 7.62 5.51 5.03 6.92 11/10/2015 0.38 3.92 8.48 35.80 0.08 51.17 38.44 6.83 7.41 6.73 11/11/2015 0.01 1.70 8.29 9.92 0.07 48.24 7.05 7.06 7.06 6.54 11/12/2015 0.01 1.38 8.27 7.22 0.07 47.82 6.86 6.86 6.86 5.94 11/13/2015 0.00 1.17 8.25 5.62 0.05 47.55 5.40 5.40 5.40 5.40 11/14/2015 0.00 1.04 8.24 4.75 0.05 47.39 4.64 4.64 4.64 4.64 11/15/2015 0.00 1.11 8.24 5.22 0.05 47.47 5.35 4.67 4.61 4.72 11/16/2015 0.00 1.15 8.25 5.53 0.05 47.52 5.63 4.72 4.60 4.80 11/17/2015 0.00 1.17 8.25 5.61 0.05 47.55 5.68 4.80 4.59 4.88 11/18/2015 0.00 1.26 8.26 6.31 0.05 47.67 6.48 4.89 4.65 4.96 11/19/2015 0.97 1.79 8.30 10.86 0.05 48.35 10.32 5.16 4.98 5.05 11/20/2015 0.00 1.82 8.30 11.25 0.05 48.40 11.35 5.58 5.36 5.14 11/21/2015 0.02 1.23 8.25 6.16 0.05 47.63 5.42 5.42 5.27 5.23 11/22/2015 0.03 1.20 8.25 5.85 0.06 47.59 5.83 5.44 5.21 5.17 11/23/2015 0.00 1.11 8.24 5.18 0.06 47.47 5.12 5.12 5.11 5.12 11/24/2015 0.00 1.12 8.24 5.28 0.06 47.48 5.35 5.13 5.03 5.32 11/25/2015 0.00 1.25 8.25 6.26 0.06 47.65 6.49 5.19 5.05 5.54 11/26/2015 0.01 1.20 8.25 5.92 0.04 47.59 5.89 5.26 5.02 5.77 11/27/2015 0.01 1.24 8.25 6.16 0.04 47.64 6.24 5.33 5.01 6.02 11/28/2015 0.00 1.32 8.26 6.75 0.04 47.75 6.90 5.42 5.06 6.29 11/29/2015 0.02 1.35 8.26 6.97 0.04 47.79 7.03 5.53 5.11 6.57 11/30/2015 0.22 1.52 8.28 8.33 0.04 48.01 8.30 5.69 5.25 6.86 12/1/2015 0.15 1.57 8.28 8.71 0.04 48.07 8.61 5.90 5.40 7.16 12/2/2015 0.06 1.51 8.28 8.21 0.04 47.99 8.10 6.08 5.51 7.48 12/3/2015 0.06 1.38 8.27 7.23 0.04 47.83 7.03 6.19 5.51 7.03 12/4/2015 0.00 1.26 8.25 6.28 0.04 47.66 6.16 6.16 5.46 6.16 12/5/2015 0.00 1.25 8.25 6.26 0.04 47.66 6.29 6.17 5.42 6.05 12/6/2015 0.01 1.20 8.25 5.98 0.04 47.59 5.94 5.95 5.36 5.95 12/7/2015 0.00 1.49 8.27 8.03 0.04 47.96 8.44 6.04 5.49 6.37 12/8/2015 0.01 1.46 8.27 7.86 0.04 47.93 7.85 6.20 5.56 6.85 12/9/2015 0.01 1.47 8.27 7.94 0.03 47.94 7.97 6.33 5.64 6.42 4 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 157 Appendix A Estimated Groundwater Inflow (MGD) Daily Daily Average Daily Daily Average CMP Estimated BFlow Recursive Precipitation Water Depth Evaporation Storage PART Date (1) Water Outflow Total Inflow Digital Filter Digital Filter (10) (in) Over (4) Volume (MG) Volume (7) (8) (9) Method Elevation at (MGD) (5) (6) (MGD) Method Method Spillway (in) (3) (MG) (2) Spillway 12/10/2015 0.00 1.28 8.26 6.63 0.03 47.70 6.42 6.39 5.59 6.02 12/11/2015 0.00 1.31 8.26 6.85 0.04 47.74 6.93 6.41 5.58 6.05 12/12/2015 0.00 1.31 8.26 6.67 0.04 47.73 6.70 6.44 5.56 6.08 12/13/2015 0.00 1.34 8.26 6.93 0.05 47.78 7.02 6.48 5.57 5.78 12/14/2015 0.02 1.39 8.27 7.32 0.06 47.84 7.41 6.53 5.60 5.49 12/15/2015 0.00 1.16 8.25 5.55 0.06 47.53 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.23 12/16/2015 0.00 1.09 8.24 5.10 0.05 47.45 5.06 5.07 5.07 5.07 12/17/2015 0.61 1.51 8.28 8.38 0.05 48.00 8.18 5.18 5.20 5.14 12/18/2015 0.11 1.74 8.30 10.26 0.06 48.29 10.47 5.49 5.49 5.22 12/19/2015 0.00 1.21 8.25 5.93 0.06 47.60 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.30 12/20/2015 0.00 1.14 8.24 5.41 0.06 47.51 5.37 5.30 5.21 5.37 12/21/2015 0.00 1.21 8.25 5.90 0.05 47.60 6.04 5.33 5.17 5.71 12/22/2015 0.68 2.13 8.33 14.16 0.04 48.80 14.50 5.70 5.77 6.07 12/23/2015 1.94 3.61 8.45 31.73 0.06 50.74 31.10 6.99 7.54 6.44 12/24/2015 0.60 3.63 8.45 30.67 0.06 50.77 29.95 8.75 9.05 6.85 12/25/2015 0.01 2.27 8.34 15.33 0.07 48.98 13.59 9.73 9.22 7.28 12/26/2015 0.00 1.55 8.28 8.61 0.06 48.05 7.74 7.74 7.74 7.74 12/27/2015 0.01 1.48 8.27 7.99 0.06 47.95 7.94 7.74 7.61 7.08 12/28/2015 0.03 1.31 8.26 6.67 0.06 47.74 6.48 6.48 6.48 6.48 12/29/2015 0.10 1.39 8.27 7.30 0.06 47.84 7.34 6.51 6.42 6.30 12/30/2015 0.42 1.57 8.28 8.79 0.06 48.07 8.53 6.62 6.46 6.13 12/31/2015 0.05 1.16 8.25 6.51 0.06 47.53 5.96 5.96 5.96 5.96 1/1/2016 0.00 1.37 8.26 7.09 0.06 47.81 7.42 6.01 5.96 5.98 1/2/2016 0.00 1.29 8.26 6.53 0.06 47.71 6.49 6.08 5.89 6.02 1/3/2016 0.00 1.32 8.26 6.73 0.04 47.74 6.80 6.13 5.84 5.69 1/4/2016 0.00 1.18 8.25 5.76 0.05 47.57 5.63 5.64 5.64 5.38 1/5/2016 0.00 1.08 8.24 5.00 0.05 47.43 4.91 4.91 4.91 4.91 1/6/2016 0.00 1.14 8.25 5.48 0.04 47.52 5.61 4.94 4.87 5.29 1/7/2016 0.01 1.38 8.26 7.16 0.03 47.82 7.47 5.05 4.97 5.71 1/8/2016 0.01 1.38 8.26 7.17 0.03 47.82 7.19 5.23 5.05 6.19 1/9/2016 0.01 1.42 8.27 7.53 0.04 47.88 7.61 5.39 5.14 5.97 1/10/2016 0.20 1.57 8.28 8.75 0.05 48.07 8.73 5.60 5.31 5.78 1/11/2016 0.00 1.26 8.25 6.27 0.05 47.66 5.92 5.73 5.26 5.60 5 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 158 Appendix A Estimated Groundwater Inflow (MGD) Daily Daily Average Daily Daily Average CMP Estimated BFlow Recursive Precipitation Water Depth Evaporation Storage PART Date (1) Water Outflow Total Inflow Digital Filter Digital Filter (10) (in) Over (4) Volume (MG) Volume (7) (8) (9) Method Elevation at (MGD) (5) (6) (MGD) Method Method Spillway (in) (3) (MG) (2) Spillway 1/12/2016 0.00 1.27 8.26 6.40 0.04 47.68 6.46 5.77 5.25 5.64 1/13/2016 0.00 1.22 8.25 5.99 0.05 47.62 5.97 5.80 5.21 5.68 1/14/2016 0.00 1.29 8.26 6.51 0.05 47.70 6.64 5.84 5.22 5.90 1/15/2016 0.69 1.47 8.27 8.02 0.05 47.94 7.40 5.92 5.28 6.14 1/16/2016 0.74 2.46 8.36 17.48 0.05 49.23 17.84 6.42 6.11 6.39 1/17/2016 0.20 1.60 8.28 8.96 0.05 48.10 7.61 6.90 6.11 6.65 1/18/2016 0.01 1.53 8.28 8.40 0.05 48.01 8.34 6.98 6.17 6.20 1/19/2016 0.00 1.25 8.25 6.21 0.05 47.66 5.90 5.89 5.89 5.81 1/20/2016 0.01 1.20 8.25 5.81 0.05 47.59 5.78 5.78 5.78 5.78 1/21/2016 0.00 1.31 8.26 6.66 0.05 47.73 6.85 5.82 5.75 6.15 1/22/2016 0.33 1.34 8.26 6.90 0.05 47.77 6.55 5.89 5.71 6.55 1/23/2016 0.64 2.22 8.33 14.71 0.03 48.91 15.03 6.26 6.29 7.61 1/24/2016 0.37 1.79 8.30 10.71 0.03 48.36 9.71 6.72 6.42 8.85 1/25/2016 0.20 1.61 8.28 9.15 0.04 48.13 8.70 6.90 6.48 8.70 1/26/2016 0.00 1.89 8.31 11.74 0.04 48.49 12.15 7.16 6.77 8.93 1/27/2016 0.01 2.30 8.34 15.48 0.04 49.02 16.04 7.68 7.34 9.16 1/28/2016 0.00 1.77 8.30 10.54 0.04 48.33 9.90 8.08 7.39 9.40 1/29/2016 0.00 1.61 8.28 9.09 0.04 48.12 8.93 8.18 7.37 8.93 1/30/2016 0.00 1.51 8.28 8.26 0.04 47.99 8.17 8.17 7.29 8.17 1/31/2016 0.00 1.57 8.28 8.82 0.05 48.07 8.95 8.20 7.28 7.72 2/1/2016 0.70 1.51 8.28 8.22 0.06 47.98 7.28 7.28 7.14 7.28 2/2/2016 0.07 1.43 8.27 7.62 0.06 47.89 7.50 7.29 7.04 7.04 2/3/2016 0.46 1.89 8.31 12.08 0.07 48.49 12.14 7.48 7.28 6.80 2/4/2016 0.74 3.12 8.41 24.68 0.07 50.10 25.38 8.32 8.49 6.57 2/5/2016 0.18 3.18 8.41 25.39 0.08 50.17 25.29 9.60 9.58 6.35 2/6/2016 0.70 1.95 8.31 12.18 0.08 48.56 9.72 9.73 9.41 6.13 2/7/2016 0.02 1.31 8.26 6.70 0.08 47.73 5.92 5.92 5.92 5.92 2/8/2016 0.00 1.45 8.27 7.73 0.07 47.91 7.98 6.00 5.97 6.31 2/9/2016 0.04 1.34 8.26 7.19 0.07 47.77 7.07 6.11 5.93 6.75 2/10/2016 0.01 1.52 8.28 8.35 0.05 48.01 8.63 6.24 6.02 7.16 2/11/2016 0.00 1.51 8.28 8.23 0.05 47.99 8.25 6.41 6.08 7.61 2/12/2016 0.00 1.39 8.27 7.28 0.05 47.84 7.18 6.51 6.05 7.17 2/13/2016 0.00 1.50 8.28 8.15 0.04 47.98 8.34 6.60 6.11 7.21 6 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 159 Appendix A Estimated Groundwater Inflow (MGD) Daily Daily Average Daily Daily Average CMP Estimated BFlow Recursive Precipitation Water Depth Evaporation Storage PART Date (1) Water Outflow Total Inflow Digital Filter Digital Filter (10) (in) Over (4) Volume (MG) Volume (7) (8) (9) Method Elevation at (MGD) (5) (6) (MGD) Method Method Spillway (in) (3) (MG) (2) Spillway 2/14/2016 0.00 1.40 8.27 7.33 0.05 47.85 7.24 6.69 6.08 7.25 2/15/2016 0.35 1.75 8.30 10.40 0.04 48.30 10.44 6.85 6.29 7.66 2/16/2016 0.74 3.11 8.41 24.56 0.06 50.08 25.41 7.68 7.59 8.09 2/17/2016 0.00 2.12 8.33 13.81 0.06 48.79 12.57 8.53 7.81 8.56 2/18/2016 0.00 1.67 8.29 9.57 0.06 48.20 9.04 8.70 7.76 9.04 2/19/2016 0.00 1.63 8.29 9.24 0.06 48.15 9.25 8.73 7.73 8.74 2/20/2016 0.00 1.58 8.28 8.86 0.07 48.08 8.87 8.76 7.67 8.46 2/21/2016 0.11 1.45 8.27 7.77 0.08 47.91 7.54 7.54 7.52 7.54 2/22/2016 0.09 1.50 8.27 8.12 0.06 47.97 8.13 7.56 7.43 7.39 2/23/2016 0.07 2.00 8.32 12.61 0.07 48.62 13.24 7.79 7.72 7.23 2/24/2016 0.05 2.25 8.34 14.94 0.07 48.95 15.27 8.28 8.14 7.08 2/25/2016 0.03 1.70 8.29 9.93 0.07 48.24 9.25 8.58 8.07 6.93 2/26/2016 0.05 1.38 8.26 7.20 0.07 47.82 6.78 6.79 6.79 6.79 2/27/2016 0.34 1.30 8.26 6.56 0.07 47.71 6.08 6.08 6.08 6.08 2/28/2016 0.00 1.40 8.27 7.40 0.08 47.85 7.62 6.13 6.08 6.32 2/29/2016 0.00 1.35 8.26 7.02 0.08 47.79 7.04 6.22 6.04 6.59 (1) Colonial Heritage Station KVAWILLI21 (2) Daily average level calculated based on 15-min Lasso Technologies Water Level Monitor Data (3) Spillway crest Elevation 8.15 based on record drawings by McKinney Company. (4) CMP spillway outflow calculated based on discharge coefficient of 2.85, provided by McKinney Company. (5) Calculated using Hargreaves Method. (6) Based on elevation-storage data provided by McKinney Company. (7) Calculated using water balance equation. The inflow does not include the direct precipitation on the pond surface itself. (8) Arnold, J.G., P.M. Allen, R. Muttiah, and G. Bernhardt (1995). “Automated Baseflow Separation and Recession Analysis Techniques.” (9) Eckhardt, K. (2005). “How to Construct Recursive Digital Filters for Baseflow Separation.” (10) Rutledge, A.T. (1993). “Computer Programs for Describing The Recession Of Ground-Water Discharge And For Estimating Mean Ground-Water Recharge and Discharge from Streamflow Records”. (11) Water level dropped below spillway crest and low flow pipes were open. No accurate level measurement was available. 7 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 160 Appendix B Cranstons Mill Pond Weekly Flow Data Week Ending CMP Outflow CMP Inflow Groundwater Groundwater Groundwater Date (MGD) (MGD – DF – RDF - PART (MGD) (MGD) (MGD) 8/6/2015 5.68 5.71 3.21 3.19 3.39 8/13/2015 11.28 10.93 4.80 4.68 4.47 8/20/2015 3.45 3.45 2.73 2.71 2.60 8/27/2015 5.53 5.72 2.48 2.50 1.87 9/3/2015 4.07 4.05 2.30 2.26 2.87 9/10/2015 7.02 7.21 3.32 3.16 5.82 9/17/2015 9.63 9.67 5.88 5.37 7.63 9/24/2015 7.48 7.40 6.14 5.51 5.80 10/1/2015 10.13 10.02 2.90 3.04 3.27 10/8/2015 16.85 16.10 7.62 7.61 6.14 10/15/2015 7.74 7.79 3.20 3.26 4.29 10/22/2015 3.19 3.28 1.95 1.83 2.40 10/29/2015 4.61 4.52 2.00 2.03 3.05 11/5/2015 7.12 7.24 3.22 3.19 3.56 11/12/2015 12.51 11.96 5.97 5.83 6.87 11/19/2015 6.27 6.21 4.90 4.78 4.92 11/26/2015 6.56 6.49 5.31 5.15 5.33 12/3/2015 7.48 7.46 5.73 5.27 6.77 12/10/2015 7.00 7.01 6.18 5.50 6.26 12/17/2015 6.69 6.66 5.92 5.41 5.55 12/24/2015 14.87 14.68 6.12 6.22 5.85 12/31/2015 8.74 8.22 7.25 7.13 6.71 1/7/2016 6.25 6.33 5.54 5.44 5.57 1/14/2016 6.95 6.93 5.62 5.21 5.82 1/21/2016 8.79 8.53 6.24 5.87 6.16 1/28/2016 11.32 11.15 6.95 6.63 8.46 2/4/2016 11.26 11.19 7.85 7.41 7.50 2/11/2016 10.82 10.41 7.14 6.99 6.60 2/18/2016 11.59 11.46 7.37 6.81 7.85 2/25/2016 10.21 10.22 8.18 7.75 7.62 3/3/2016 7.05 6.88 6.30 6.25 6.44 B-1 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 161 Appendix C Cranstons Mill Pond Additional Information on Aquifers and USGS Groundwater Well Data Quaternary Aquifer Data The Quaternary aquifer consists of the saturated Quaternary sediments that cover most of the James City County. The upper surface of the water table ranges from several feet to as much as 40 feet or below land surface (USGS 1980). The thickness of the Quaternary aquifer near CMP is approximately 40-50 ft based on USGS (Figure 7, USGS 1980). The Quaternary aquifer is recharged directly by precipitation. Water in the aquifer moves from areas of high water levels (generally corresponding to land-surface highs) toward streams, lakes, and swamps (generally corresponding to land-surface lows). The Quaternary aquifer is a source of recharge to the underlying aquifer system. There is one USGS groundwater well that is located within 5 miles from CMP and has historical data available for the shallow aquifer (see Figure 5 in the report). C-1 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 162 372314076480402 - 56H 31 SOW 135B o Web link: http://groundwaterwatch.usgs.gov/AWLSites.asp?S=372314076480402&ncd=ltn&a=1&d =1 o The land surface altitude is 95.00feet above NGVD29. The well is 30-ft deep and was completed in "Quaternary System" (110QRNR) local aquifer. o Groundwater level data is available from 1979-08-07 through 2015-07-16 with a total of 152 field measurements. See Figure C-1. Figure C-1 Groundwater Level at Well 56H 31 SOW 135B During the 2002 drought period, the water level at this well reached its lowest point, which was about 4 feet lower compared to the most recent level in 2015/2016. Yorktown-Eastover Aquifer Data The Yorktown-Eastover aquifer is overlain by the Quaternary aquifer. The estimated thickness ranges from 50-225 feet (USGS 1980). A map prepared by USGS (USGS 2006) shows the top of the Yorktown- Eastover aquifer in the CMP watershed area varies from El. 50 to 75 (NGVD29 datum), which is above the bottom of CMP (about El 1.5) and some segments of the stream beds in the CMP watershed. In a USGS report (USGS 1990), a model simulated potentiometric surface map for prepumping steady-state conditions (Figure 33, Page F42) showed that the water level in the Yorktown-Eastover aquifer could vary from El 40 to 20 (sea level datum) with decreasing level towards coastal water and major river valleys. In the same report, a model simulated prepumping flow direction map (Figure 41, Page F50) showed that C-2 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 163 the groundwater may flow out of the Yorktown confined unit in the vicinity of the CMP watershed. These documents indicate that CMP is likely to receive groundwater inflow from Yorktown-Eastover aquifer. There are two USGS groundwater wells that are located within 10 miles from CMP and have historical data available (see Figure 5). These two wells were identified as completed in the Upper Chesapeake Group (121CSPKU) local aquifer. Based on USGS publication (USGS 1992, Table 1, Page A8), the upper part of the Chesapeake aquifer west of the bay in Virginia generally refers to the local Yorktown- Eastover aquifer. 372315076415001 - 57H 14 SOW 095 o Web link: http://groundwaterwatch.usgs.gov/AWLSites.asp?S=372315076415001&ncd o The land surface altitude is 93.00 feet above NGVD29. The well is 123-ft deep and was completed in "Upper Chesapeake Group" (121CSPKU) local aquifer. o Groundwater level data is available from 1978-09-21 through 2016-02-02 with a total of 189 field measurements. See Figure C-2. Figure C-2 Groundwater Level at Well 57H 14 SOW 095 C-3 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 164 372506076511706 - 56H 30 SOW 177F o Web link: http://groundwaterwatch.usgs.gov/AWLSites.asp?S=372506076511706&ncd o The land surface altitude is 103.00 feet above NGVD29. The well is 60-ft deep and was completed in "Upper Chesapeake Group" (121CSPKU) local aquifer. o Groundwater level data is available from 1985-04-11 through 2015-07-16 with a total of 331 field measurements. See Figure C-3. Figure C-3 Groundwater Level at Well 56H 30 SOW 177F The USGS well 57H 14 showed 8-10 feet of variations over the 38-year monitoring period. During the 2002 drought period, the level was about 2-ft lower compared to the most recent level measurements. It appears that the water level at this site is less impacted by the precipitation. The USGS well 56H 30 also showed 8-10 feet of variations over the 30-year monitoring period. During the 2002 drought period, the level was about 5-ft lower compared to the most recent level measurements. Note that the water elevation in this well is higher than the estimated top of the Yorktown-Eastover aquifer described in other USGS reports. C-4 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 165 ATTACHMENT 15 Dam, Spillway and Pond Photos Cranston’s Mill Pond Raw Water Supply Joint Permit Application CMP JPA Master Page Number: 166 100 - Foot Concrete Spillway \ Access Walkway \ Impoundment Looking Upstream 100 - Foot Concrete Spillway \ Access Walkway \ Impoundment Looking Upstream CMP JPA Master Page Number: 167 Aerial View of Cranston's Mill Pond Impoundment and 100 - Foot Concrete Spillway Aerial View of Cranston's Mill Pond Impoundment and 100 - Foot Concrete Spillway CMP JPA Master Page Number: 168 Aerial View of Cranston's Mill Pond Impoundment (Upper Watershed) View of Spillway During Drawdown Maintenance Activity Flow From 16" Steel Release Pipes CMP JPA Master Page Number: 169 View from Access Walkway of Spillway at Outflow View of 100 - Foot Concrete Spillway and Release Pipes (2 of 4) Under Construction During 2010 CMP JPA Master Page Number: 170 View of Marine Butterfly Valve (1 of 4) in Open Position Shown During Drawdown Maintenance Activity View of 16" Steel Release Pipes (2 of 4) in Open Position During Drawdown Maintenance Activity CMP JPA Master Page Number: 171