20201654 Ver 1_USACE Correspondence_20210511

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
151 PATTON AVENUE
ROOM 208
ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28801-5006
May 11, 2021
Regulatory Division
Subject: Public Notice Comments and Request for Additional Information for Action ID
Number SAW-2020-00632 - Mulberry Gap Farms in Madison County
Mr. Richard Kelly
Mulberry Farm — Madison LLC
1126 Upper Thomas Branch Road
Marshall, North Carolina 28753
Dear Mr. Kelly:
The Corps of Engineers (Corps) is reviewing your application for the School of
Wholeness and Enlightenment (SOWE). The project involves the development of a 448-
acre site including the development of 76 cabins, two school buildings, horticultural
building, event center, dining hall, gym, wholeness center, four staff houses,
administrative building, roadways, and seven beaver dam analogue (BDA) structures.
The project proposes to fill 0.108 acre of wetland, temporarily impact 268 ft (0.67 acres)
of unnamed tributaries (UTs) to Thomas Branch, and permanently impact 1,695 ft of
Hopewell Branch, Thomas Branch, and UTs to Thomas Branch. The proposed School
of Wholeness and Enlightenment is a residential education center located near the
Town of Marshall, Madison County, North Carolina.
In response to your application and the ensuing Public Notice, the Corps submits the
following comments for your review and response. Your response and supporting
information are necessary in order to complete review of your proposal.
1. The applicant states its purpose and need as "Ecosystem enhancements support
the overall mission of SOWE, which is to provide a supportive environment
where individuals can work on self-improvement based on an enlightened and
harmonious relationship with the Earth."The Corps believes the project may be
reasonably achieved, including the development of SOWE and ecological
enhancements, without the need to convert existing streams and wetlands to
open water through the construction of beaver dam analogs (BDA) structures.
The BDA design elevations, lining of upper pond area with impermeable
clay/sand, and the installation of an "agri-drain" appear to primarily focus on
allowing the maximum level of inundation to protect adjacent development
infrastructure opposed to focusing on ecosystem enhancements. There is a

-2-
broad field of practice dedicated to stream and wetland restoration that would
provide ecosystem enhancements without converting existing streams and
wetlands to open water.
2. As this project involves the conversion of streams and wetlands to open water,
the Corps believes the impacts and resultant inundation constitute a loss of
streams and wetlands. The applicant has not submitted a practicable alternative
or any documents outlying how impacts have been avoided and/or minimized. If
it is determined that there is no practicable alternative and impacts have been
avoided and minimized, compensatory mitigation would be required for the
impacts associated with conversion for all flooded streams and wetlands.
3. All agencies previously noted the monitoring plan is insufficient to prove
ecological uplift, rather it states it will help determine "no deleterious downstream
ecological effects."The Corps recommends the development of a more robust
monitoring plan to document the changes within the impact areas and add
success criteria to provide a measure of ecological uplift. The current application
only proposes to measure air temperature, water temperature and precipitation
and document site changes through photographs seasonally for three years. In
addition, the current plan does not identify any measurable success criteria. As
discussed with you in multiple pre -application meetings, a more robust
monitoring plan is needed to document ecological uplift, including elements such
as: reference reach metrics, groundwater data, herbaceous/woody stem density
quantitative/qualitative vegetation surveys, water depth measurements, stream
flows, monitoring well measurements, and wildlife surveys, etc. The current
monitoring plan notes that BDAs will be inspected after large storms (i.e., 3-inch
rain in a 24-hour period) and seasonally. The Corps recommends quarterly
inspections and after large storm events (i.e. 10-year storm events or 2-inch rain
events in a 24-hour period) at a minimum. Frequent inspections will be necessary
to ensure BDA stability as well as properly assess and implement corrective
actions when the BDAs do blow out.
4. The Administration Building is designed to span across Thomas Branch. The
Corps believes the disturbances associated with the construction, maintenance,
and operation of this building could compromise the ecological function of
Thomas Branch. We believe the positioning of a building in close proximity to a
BDA structure will compromise the BDA's ability to properly enhance the
ecosystem and will prioritize the building infrastructure over the ecosystem's
natural functions.
5. The Corps requests a plan view be submitted noting the location of each
structure and bank stabilization features, including elevation profiles.

-3-
6. On April 14, 2021, the Corps sent a letter notifying the Applicant that undertaking
activities in areas outside of the Corps jurisdiction associated with the proposed
development project does not imply that our office will necessarily approve the
proposed impacts to Water of the United States (WoUS) currently under review
or any future proposal to impact WoUS on this property. The ongoing clearing,
grading, and construction activities will not affect the Corps' current review or any
future proposed impacts to WoUS. These activities within the development
project area will not be an adequate justification for authorization of the proposed
impacts currently under review or authorization of future impacts.
Agency comments received in response to the PN are attached for your review and
response. Please copy the Corps on all responses to these comments.
Until the requested information is provided, we will not be issuing a permit for this
project. This information needs to be submitted to the Corps on or before June 14,
2021. Failure to respond to this request for information will result in administrative
withdrawal of your application.
Your prompt attention to this request is appreciated. Please do not hesitate to
contact me at [phone], ext. 4224, or via email at
brandee.c.boggs(cr�usace.army.mil should you have additional questions.
Sincerely,
r3izx�a.2 gwd-
Brandee Boggs
Regulatory Specialist
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
cc w/enclosures:
Mr. Byron Hamstead
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
/1r. Andrew Moore
North Carolina Division of Water Resources
2090 U.S. Highway 70
Swannanoa, North Carolina 28778
:)IO3LVT
.
g\-\ MAY 17 2021 L L
Water Quality Regional Operations
Asheville Regional Office

-4-
Ms. Sue Homewood
North Carolina Division of Water Resources
450 W. Hanes Mill Road
Suite 300
Winston Salem, North Carolina 27105
Ms. Andrea Leslie
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
645 Fish Hatchery Road
Marion, North Carolina 28752
Mr. Todd Bowers
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 4
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Mr. Clement Riddle
ClearWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
145 7th Avenue West
Suite B
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28792

DocuSign Envelope ID: D9737C7B-8B78-48D3-B93C-5C2E894DFA5E
ROY COOPER
Governor
DIONNE DELLI-GATTI
Secretary
S. DANIEL SMITH
Director
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
April 15, 2021
DWR # 20201654
Madison County
Mulberry Farm — Madison LLC
Attn: Mr. Richard Kelly
1126 Upper Thomas Branch Road
Marshall, NC 28753
Subject: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Mulberry Gap Farms
Dear Mr. Kelly:
On February 2, 2021, the Division of Water Resources (Division) received your application dated
February 2, 2021, requesting a 401 Water Quality Certification from the Division for your project. On
February 17, 2021 we notified you that the project would require an Individual 401 Water Quality
Certification and on March 4, 2021 the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued a Public Notice for
the proposed project which completed the application process and began the Division's review period in
accordance with 15A NCAC 02H .0506. The Division has determined that your application is incomplete
and cannot be processed. The application is on -hold until all of the following information is received:
1. If the USACE requests a response to any comments received as a result of the Public Notice,
please provide the Division with a copy of your response to the USACE. [15A NCAC 02H
.0502(c)]
2. The Division believes the overall project purpose may be achieved by avoiding the impacts
associated with the beaver dam analog (BDA) structures. Please explain why the ecological
function of the streams and wetlands on site cannot be improved using natural channel design
techniques such as in -stream structures to provide bedform diversity and floodplain access
and/or by removing invasive vegetation and re-establishing native vegetation. Please be aware
that if it is determined that impacts to the streams and wetlands associated with the BDAs
cannot be avoided, then the conversion of streams and wetlands to open water will be
considered a loss of existing use and will require mitigation. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(1)]
3. The project proposes to impact a wetland (NJW1) that the USACE has determined is not subject
to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Please clarify whether the subject wetland is
eligible for permitting under the 15A NCAC 02H .1300 rules for discharges • -•/
and isolated waters. You must provide documentation that the wetland e. !+,-
' j fin '• .•f: ,] �1
isolated previously used by the USACE (see I j L � PII.
MAY 1 7 2021 ---
North Carolina Department of Envlronmental Quality I Divisiono60,tteirg,644 Regional operations
512 North Salisbury Street 11617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North 1#giorial Office
919.707.9000

DocuSign Envelope ID: D9737C7B-8B78-48D3-B93C-5C2E894DFA5E
Mulberry Farm — Madison LLC
Request for Additional Information
Page 2 of 3
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Surface%20Water%20Protection/401/Policies Gui
des Manuals/cwa jurisdiction following rapanos120208.pdf). Please note that if the wetland is
not eligible for coverage under 15A NCAC 02H .1300 then there is currently no permitting
mechanism to apply for impacts to the wetland and you should consider modifying your project
to avoid impacts to the wetland. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)]
4. It appears that there may be another non -jurisdictional wetland proposed for impact, depicted
on Figure 5A, associated with the road network in the vicinity of the School of Business Wisdom.
The feature is depicted in pink hatching and the road appears to cross it. Please clarify if impacts
to this wetland will be avoided. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)]
5. There is a wetland at the lower end of the stream enhancement reach. Will this wetland be
impacted in any way (e.g. construction access) during stream enhancement activities? If so, how
will the wetland be restored following construction? [15A NCAC 02H .0506 (a)(6) and (7) and
15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2))
6. How will the disturbed areas, and in particular the stream banks, associated with the culvert
removals be stabilized and/or restored? 115A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2)]
7. Please confirm stormwater from built upon area will be transported via dispersed flow and
vegetated conveyances. Please provide additional details regarding the stormwater treatment
plan for the welcome center parking lot. The Division of Water Resources will be responsible for
review and approval of any stormwater management plan associated with the development.
[15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(3)]
Pursuant to Title 15A NCAC 02H .0502(e), the applicant shall furnish all of the above requested
information for the proper consideration of the application. Please respond in writing within 30
calendar days of receipt of this letter by sending one (1) copy of all of the above requested information
to the 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 OR by
submitting all of the above requested information through this
link: https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Supplemental-Information-Form (note the DWR# requested on
the link is referenced above).
If all of the requested information is not received within 30 calendar days of receipt of this letter, the
Division will be unable to approve the application and it will be denied as incomplete. The denial of this
project will necessitate reapplication to the Division for approval, including a complete application
package and the appropriate fee.
Please be aware that you have no authorization under the Water Quality Certification Rules for this
activity and any work done within waters of the state may be a violation of North Carolina General
Statutes and Administrative Code.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 11617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-1617
919.707.9000
1

roSan
Envelope ID: D9737C7B-8B78-48D3-B93C-5C2E894DFA5E
Mulberry Farm — Madison LLC
Request for Additional Information
Page 3 of 3
Please contact Sue Homewood at 336-776-9693 or [e-mail] if you have any
questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
DocuSipned by:
,' ,ff Patrol`
8FB19B649002478..
Jeffrey Poupart, Section Chief
Water Quality Permitting Section
Division of Water Resources
cc: Clement Riddle and Alea Tuttle, ClearWater Environmental Consultants (via email)
Brandee Boggs, USACE Asheville Regulatory Field Office (via email)
Andrea Leslie, NCWRC (via email)
Byron Hamstead, USFWS (via email)
DWR ARO 401 files
DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
..4
D_EQ1
Oyrfwi M Eorken dMib
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 11617 Mali Service Center I Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-1617
919.707.9000

DocuSign Envelope ID: D9737C7B-8B78-48D3-B93C-5C2E894DFA5E
ROY COOPER
Governor
DIONNE DELLI-GATTI
Secretory
S. DANIEL SMITH
Director
Ms. Brandee Boggs
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
Subject Project: Mulberry Gap Farms
Dear Ms. Boggs:
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
April 15, 2021
Corps Action ID# SAW-2020-00632
DWR# 20201654
Madison County
On behalf of the Division of Water Resources (Division), we respectfully request that you consider the
following comments within your review of the 404 Individual Permit request for the above referenced
property:
1. The applicant states that the purpose of the project is the development of the School of
Wholeness and Enlightenment (SOWE), a residential education and training center, and that
ecosystem enhancements support the overall mission of SOWE. The application was submitted
requesting coverage under the Nationwide Permit program, and as such, no alternatives analysis
was provided in the application. The Division believes that the project purpose may be
reasonably achieved, including the development of SOWE and ecological enhancements,
without the need to convert existing streams and wetlands to open water through the
construction of beaver dam analog (BDA) structures. There is a broad field of practice dedicated
to stream and wetland restoration that may be implemented at the site that would provide
ecosystem enhancements but would not require the conversion of streams and wetlands to
open water.
2. As this project involves the conversion of streams and wetlands to open water, the Division
believes the impacts and resultant flooding constitute a loss of streams and wetlands.
Consistent with current USACE procedures, if it is determined that there is no practicable
alternative and impacts have been avoided and minimized, compensatory mitigation should be
required for the impact by conversion for all flooded streams and wetlands.
3. During a site visit by resources agencies on March 25, 2021 it was apparent that the applicant
has begun construction of the project prior to receiving all approvals. The conductance of
activities in areas outside of Section 404/401 jurisdiction associated with the proposed
development project should not imply that applications will be approved as proposed and
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1 1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
919.707.9000

DocuSign Envelope ID: D9737C7B-8B78-48D3-B93C-5C2E894DFA5E
Corps Action ID# SAW-2020-00632
DWR# 20201654
Page 2 of 2
should not be taken into account when reviewing alternatives analyses provided by the
applicant.
4. The Division has requested additional technical information from the applicant and requests
that the USACE also consider the attached letter during the review of the application.
Thank you for your considering the Division's comments during your review of this Individual Permit. If
you have any questions, please contact Sue Homewood at 336-776-9693 or
[e-mail]
cc: Clement Riddle and Alea Tuttle, ClearWater
Andrea Leslie, NCWRC (via email)
Byron Hamstead, USFWS (via email)
DWR ARO 401 files
DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
D_E
Spin ewe IC
Sincerely,
Jeffrey Poupart, Section Chief
Water Quality Permitting Section
Division of Water Resources
Environmental Consultants (via email)
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality 1 Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 11617 Mall Servlce.Center 1 Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
919.707.9000

IlrAM
1021
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Aoll
lorAl
Cameron Ingram, Executive Director
April 1, 2021
Brandee Boggs
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
1TR\
L‘-, MAY 1 7 2021
SUBJECT: Mulberry Gap Farms 'ater Quality Regional Operations
Thomas Branch, Hopewell Branch, and UTs, Madison County Asheville Regional Office
Dear Ms. Boggs:
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) reviewed an
application to fill 0.108 acre of wetland, temporarily impact 268 ft (0.67 acres) of unnamed
tributaries (UTs) to Thomas Branch, and permanently impact 1,695 ft of Hopewell Branch, Thomas
Branch, and UTs to Thomas Branch for the development of a residential education center in Madison
County. NCWRC staff visited the site on November 12, 2020 and March 25, 2021. Our comments
on this application are offered for your consideration under provisions of the Clean Water Act of
1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et. seq.) and Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667d).
Project activities should not impact wild trout and do not need to be avoided during a trout
moratorium.
The project involves the development of a 448-acre site called the School of Wholeness and
Enlightenment. The development entails roads, various residential, instructional, and administrative
buildings, roads, and parking areas. Many of the buildings would border inundated areas created by
beaver dam analogs, or small dams constructed of wood, rock, and soil.
Components of the project include the following:
• Construction of seven beaver dam analog structures, which would impact 1,695 ft of stream and
0.079 acre of wetland through either structure placement or inundation. Most of these impacts
are proposed under a Nationwide Permit (NWP) 27 (aquatic habitat restoration). A subset of
these impacts (46 ft of stream and 0.002 acre of wetland) involve one BDA-created pond that
would be underlain with a clay layer to retain water, and these impacts are proposed under a
NWP 39 (residential development).
• Removal of five culverts on UTs to Thomas Branch.
Mailing Address: Habitat Conservation • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

Mulberry Gap Farms
Hopewell Br, Thomas Br, Madison Co
Page 2 April 1, 2021
• Stream enhancement on 268 ft of Thomas Branch.
• Installation of one culvert on Thomas Branch and one culvert on UT to Hopewell Branch,
impacting a total of 40 ft of channel. Fill of 0.029 acre of wetland for roads and other
infrastructure.
Beaver dam analogs (BDAs) have been used extensively in the western US to establish better
floodplain connection, raise water table levels, and restore/create riparian habitats, including
wetlands. However, there have been limited attempts to apply BDAs in the eastern US, and few
examples exist in the Southeast. NCWRC recognizes the potential benefits of the creation of a
mosaic of stream, pond, wetland, and upland habitats behind BDA structures. However, we have a
number of concerns with the use of BDAs as designed for the Mulberry Gap Farms project, which
we outline below.
• Although six of seven of the BDA impact areas are proposed through NWP 27 as ecological
restoration, it appears that they will have limited ecological value as designed. Almost all of the
BDAs will.be placed downstream of areas that will be excavated to provide deeper pools. The
application notes that at least 50 percent of the inundated areas will be at least 4 ft deep (often 5-8
ft deep). The larger BDA complex on Thomas Branch appears to be more of a step -pool pond
system, with BDAs stretched across the entire floodplain and each BDA set at elevations that will
likely flood the upstream area to the next BDA. The emphasis on deeper water behind the BDAs
will limit the development of wetland areas and the establishment of rooted vegetation. Instead,
open water may dominate much of the impacted area, and perhaps the only vegetation that will
succeed may be on the fringes of the inundated areas.
• It is difficult to understand how deep the water may be behind each BDA. We request that a
series of bathymetric maps be developed that show the depth of water across the landscape at
various levels of inundation. These maps should also indicate the height of the BDA structures.
An alternative would be a set of maps that show the profile of the valley punctuated by each
BDA.
• At a pre -application meeting, agency staff recommended that the applicant develop a robust
monitoring plan to document the changes within the impact areas and to provide a measure of
ecological uplift. The application proposes to measure water temperature and precipitation and
document site changes through photographs. A more robust monitoring plan is needed to
document ecological uplift, including elements such as quantitative/qualitative vegetation
surveys, water depth measurements, stream flows, monitoring well measurements, and wildlife
surveys.
• We recommend establishing success criteria for the project to support the use of NWP 27. These
success criteria could be modeled on mitigation success criteria (e.g., vegetation success,
monitoring well criteria). The monitoring plan should be carefully designed to gauge the degree
to which the site is meeting these criteria. Adaptive management should be required if success
criteria are not met.
• Beaver dams are inherently transient and not fixed to particular locations in the stream network.
We are concerned about the potential for BDA blow-out. The application notes that BDAs will
be inspected after large storms (i.e., 3-inch rain in a 24-hour period) and seasonally. We
recommend quarterly inspections at a minimum, as frequent inspections will be necessary to
ensure BDA stability.
• Due to the concerns about BDA function and stability, we recommend phasing this work by
implementing a BDA design in one place (e.g., Hopewell Branch) to start. This BDA should be
closely monitored for stability and ecological uplift.
1

Mulberry Gap Farms Page 3 April 1, 2021
Hopewell Br, Thomas Br, Madison Co
• Although the application states that native vegetation will be planted in the BDA areas, no plant
list is provided. We request a List of herbaceous plants, shrubs, and trees to be planted, as well as
a planting plan, which provides a map of the likely areas to be planted.
• NCWRC does not support the construction of in -line ponds. The BDA associated with the 0.36-
acre pond that will be underlain with a clay liner and fitted with an agri-drain will essentially
function as an in -line pond.
The application proposes 240 ft of stream enhancement on Thomas Branch, and information on the
structures to be used is provided. We ask that a plan view map be provided, noting the location of
various structures and bank stabilization features.
We offer the following additional recommendations to minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial
wildlife:
1. Work should be accomplished as quickly as possible and vigilance used in sediment and erosion
control during site preparation, construction, and clean up. Disturbed areas near streams should
be seeded, mulched and/or matted as soon as possible, preferably at the end of each work day.
2. In -stream work (including BDA construction) should be done in the dry, with flows pumped
around work areas.
3. Seeding specifications have not been provided. Seeding mixes should not include invasive
species, such as Tall Fescue and Sericea Lespedeza. Permanent seed mixes should be comprised
of native grasses and forbs. We recommend using pollinator -beneficial species, in particular.
4. Any erosion control matting used should be free of plastic or nylon mesh, as this type of mesh
netting frequently entangles wildlife and is slow to degrade, resulting in a hazard that may last for
years.
5. Effective stormwater management is essential in minimizing impacts to downstream waters. We
recommend the use of Low Impact Design techniques, such as grassed swales and pervious
pavement; curb and gutter, catch basins, and underground piping of stormwater should be
avoided. As stormwater runoff from pavement can cause short-term temperature spikes in
downstream waters, mechanisms to lower stormwater temperature should be incorporated into
the stonnwater management design.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. Please contact me at (828)
400-4223 if you have any questions about these comments.
Sincerely,
Andrea Leslie
Mountain Region Coordinator, Habitat Conservation Program
ec: Clement Riddle, ClearWater Environmental
Sue Homewood & Andrew Moore, NC Division of Water Resources
Byron Hamstead & Karla Quast, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Chris Goudreau, NCWRC

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
April 1, 2021
Brandee Boggs
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
Dear Brandee Boggs:
3C1174
MAY 1 7 2021
Water Quality Regional Operations
Asheville Regional Office
Subject: Mulberry Farms Commercial Development; Madison County, North Carolina
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the information provided in the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) public notice dated March 4, 2021, wherein you solicit our
comments regarding project -mediated impacts to federally protected species. We submit the
following comments in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e); the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. §4321
et seq.); and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543) (Act).
Project Description
According to the information provided, the proposed project would entail the construction of a
commercial development on approximately 448 partially forested acres near Marshall, North
Carolina. The proposed School of Wholeness and Enlightenment (SOWE) would entail the
construction and operation of 76 cabins, two school buildings, horticultural building, event
center, dining hall, gym, wholeness center, four staff houses, administrative building, roadways,
appurtenances, and several beaver dam analogue (BDA) structures resulting in impacts to 2,243
linear feet of streams (0.1622 acres) ad 0.108 acres of wetland.
The Applicant's August 28, 2020, Wildlife Biodiversity Assessment characterizes a variety of
onsite habitat types including: developed open space, abandoned agricultural fields, planted pine
plantation, successional forest, riparian areas, wetlands, and open water. Construction activities
for this project began sometime before March 25, 2021, which include significant excavation,
grading, and stockpiling of soils. The extent of tree clearing (proposed and completed) is
unknown.
Federally Protected Species
The information provided in Attachment D of the Pre -Construction Notification characterizes
habitats and species that may occupy the site. However, the information provided lacks an
effects analysis for each federally protected species known from Madison County, North
Carolina that may occur in the project's action area (50 CFR 402.02).

The following comments and guidance information below are intended to help project
proponents develop a comprehensive biological evaluation that supports prudent species
effect determinations from the action agency:
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/madison.html
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project review/assessment guidance.html
https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/section7/ba guide.html
Federally Protected Species — Gray bat (Myotis grisescens)
The public notice indicates that the USACE is not aware of the presence of federally protected
species within the project area. The information provided in the Applicant's Wildlife
Biodiversity Assessment provides acoustic evidence suggesting that gray bats forage onsite, but
that "there are no potential roosting sites for gray bats on the SOWE property". However, the
Applicant also states that "this report is not intended to fulfill regulatory and permitting
obligations." Based on the information provided, the Applicant's findings as they relate to
federally protected species are not definitive at this time. Please be aware that when information
provided is incomplete, imprecise, or contradictory, we must err on the side of caution for the
federally protected species. We reiterate our request for a comprehensive biological
evaluation that supports a prudent effect determination for this species.
This species is known to roost in caves, mines, bridges, culverts, dams, and buildings. If the
Applicant has not done so already, we request that the action area be systematically evaluated for
the presence of potential roosting habitat for this species. Artificial roost structures should be
inspected for bat use prior to modification or removal. We also request that the Applicant
identify and map portions of the action area that contain suitable foraging and commuting habitat
for this species. This animal primarily forages over water and nearby riparian vegetation, from
treetop level down to two meters above the ground (LaVal et al. 1977), but it has also been
documented foraging over land. Foraging of gray bats is strongly correlated with open water of
rivers, streams, lakes, reservoirs, ponds and wetlands. The bats eat a variety of flying aquatic
and terrestrial insects present along aquatic habitats. Gray bats are not known to feed in areas
along rivers or reservoirs where the forest has been cleared (LaVal et al. 1977). Forested areas
along the banks of streams and lakes serve as corridors for travel and as protective feeding cover
for newly volant young (Tuttle 1979, Brady et al. 1982, Moore et al. 2017). The Applicant's
biological evaluation should assess project -mediated effects of the action (50 CFR 402.02) to
potential roosting, forage, and commuting habitat. To this end, quantifying the extent and timing
of proposed tree clearing activities would be informative.
We encourage the Applicant to consider the following measures in the interest of avoiding and/or
minimizing impacts to this animal:
• Limit the extent of riparian tree clearing to what is unavoidable and necessary for the
expressed purpose of the project.
• Accomplish any necessary tree clearing activities outside gray bat active season (March
15 — November 15).
• Confine construction and operation activities on or adjacent to streams to a single side of
the channel to minimize loss of forage and commuting habitat for gray bat.
• Mark, delineate, and protect riparian vegetation within designated "tree -save" areas that
may provide forage and commuting habitat for gray bat.
2

• Replant disturbed areas with native vegetation that may provide forage and commuting
habitat for gray bat.
• Limit any proposed night work to what is necessary for the expressed purpose of the
project and to maintain safety in active work areas.
• Orient temporary and permanent lighting away from riparian and upland habitats that
may be used for forage and commuting during the gray bat active season
• Limit the number of fixtures, hours of illumination, and light intensity to the lowest levels
necessary to maintain human health and safety.
• Use warmer colored lighting (Correlated Color Temperature <3,000K).
• Avoid the use of metal halide or mercury light fixtures.
• Use light fixtures that minimize Light trespass/light spillage (BUG rating of 1-0-1 or less).
• Minimize height of outdoor lighting to reduce light trespass/light spillage (<25 feet above
lowest adjacent grade).
• Position lights to maintain dark zone corridors along riparian habitats and adjacent
uplands that may be used for forage and commuting.
Federally Protected Species —Northern long-eared bat (Mvotis septentrionalis)
According to the information provided, suitable summer roosting habitat may be present in the
project area for the federally threatened northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis).
However, the final 4(d) rule for this species (effective as of February 16, 2016), exempts
incidental take of northern long-eared bat associated with activities that occur greater than 0.25
miles from a known hibernation site, and greater than 150 feet from a known, occupied maternity
roost during the pup season (June 1 — July 31). Based on the information provided, the project
(anticipated to require some amount of tree removal) would occur at a location where any
incidental take that may result from associated activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule. Although
not required, we encourage the Applicant to restrict tree clearing activities during the active
season for this species (April 1 — October 15).
Federally Protected Species — Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
The project area lies within the range of the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and suitable
nesting habitat may be present onsite. The bald eagle has been removed from the federal list of
endangered and threatened species due to its recovery. However, this species is afforded legal
protection by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d) and the Migratory
Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712). If they have not done so already, we request that the
Applicant evaluate the action area for bald eagle nests. If any active nests are located within the
action area, we request that project -mediated disturbance be restricted from mid -January through
July in order to prevent adverse impacts during the egg -laying period until the young fledge.
General Comments and Concerns
The installation of BDA structures has been emphasized as a significant component of the
project and has been proposed to enhance aquatic habitat onsite. The Service recognizes the
potential ecological benefits associated with creating stream and wetland complexes and does not
discount the applicability of using BDA structures to facilitate habitat creation in western North
Carolina. However, the Service is concerned that the project as proposed would not appreciably
enhance aquatic habitat onsite. Moreover, we are concerned that the primary purpose of the
BDA structures are to create amenity features for the associated commercial development and

not to enhance aquatic habitat as proposed. Several aspects of the project design are evidence for
this concern:
1) We understand that the principal purpose of the project is to construct a commercial
development (residential education and training center).
2) The BDA design appears to be restricted in ways to accommodate the associated
commercial development, not vice versa. The BDA design elevations, lining of pond
areas with impermeable clay/sand, and the installation of a pond leveling structure would
ensure a maximum extent of inundation to protect adjacent development infrastructure.
We are concerned that these design elements are not intended to mimic natural processes
and are therefore limited in their ability to enhance aquatic habitat.
3) Design plans call for the construction of buildings immediately adjacent to streams and
wetlands. Some buildings are designed to span across streams or wetlands. We are
concerned that disturbances associated with the construction, maintenance, and operation
of these buildings over the lifetime of the project will compromise the ecological function
of adjacent streams and wetlands. Therefore, we believe the positioning buildings in
close proximity to BDA structures is poorly suited to enhance aquatic habitat.
4) The Service believes that the monitoring effort as proposed, (Attachment B of the Pre -
Construction Notification) is not intended to ensure ecological uplift of aquatic habitats.
Rather, the Applicant states that, "Monitoring results will be utilized to determine that the
project presents no deleterious downstream ecological effects." The Applicant proposes
to report rainfall, air temperature, water temperature, and photos from 22 locations once
per year for three years. The Service believes that the proposed plan is short-sighted and
inadequate to document any ecological uplift that may result from the proposed action.
The monitoring plan does not identify any measurable success criteria and lacks standard
elements such as reference reach metrics, groundwater data, herbaceous/woody stem
density, etc. The plan does not adequately address the need for adaptive management
over the lifetime of the project. The proposed plan instills little confidence that the
purpose of these BDA structures is to enhance aquatic habitat since it is not designed to
ensure or measure ecological uplift.
5) Construction activities have begun onsite. As of March 25, 2021, hundreds of cubic '
yards of soil have been excavated and stockpiled adjacent to streams within the action
area. We are concerned about the Applicant's commitment to begin construction without
providing notice to this office and before section 7 consultation requirements have been
complete. Reference is made to 50 CFR 402.09 which requires that, "the Applicant shall
make no irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources with respect to the agency
action which has the effect offoreclosing the formulation or implementation of any
reasonable and prudent alternatives which would avoid violating section 7(a)(2) of the
Endangered Species Act." We are concerned that the Applicant's commitment to begin
project construction at this time may significantly complicate the agency review process.
Section 9 of the Act and federal regulations pursuant to the section 4(d) of the Act
prohibit the taking of endangered and threatened species, respectively, without special
exemption. Please be aware that the Service cannot eliminate or reduce the Applicant's
liability for the taking of endangered and threatened species that has already occurred.
We offer the following general recommendations for the Applicant's consideration in the interest
of minimizing impacts to natural resources:
4

Erosion and Sediment Control
Measures to control sediment and erosion should be installed before any ground -disturbing
activities occur. Grading and backfilling should be minimized, and existing native vegetation
should be retained (if possible) to maintain riparian cover for fish and wildlife. Disturbed areas
should be revegetated with native vegetation as soon as the project is completed. Ground
disturbance should be limited to what will be stabilized quickly, preferably by the end of the
workday. Natural fiber matting (coir) should be used for erosion control as synthetic
netting can trap animals and persist in the environment beyond its intended purpose.
A complete design manual, which provides extensive details and procedures for developing
site -specific plans to control erosion and sediment and is consistent with the requirements of the
North Carolina Sedimentation and Pollution Control Act and Administrative Rules, is available
at: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/lr/publications
Stream Buffers
Natural, forested riparian buffers are critical to the health of aquatic ecosystems. They
accomplish the following:
1. catch and filter runoff, thereby helping to prevent nonpoint-source pollutants from
reaching streams;
2. enhance the in -stream processing of both point- and nonpoint-source pollutants;
3. act as "sponges" by absorbing runoff (which reduces the severity of floods) and by
allowing runoff to infiltrate and recharge groundwater levels (which maintains stream
flows during dry periods);
4. catch and help prevent excess woody debris from entering the stream and creating
logjams;
5. stabilize stream banks and maintain natural channel morphology;
6. provide coarse woody debris for habitat structure and most of the dissolved organic
carbon and other nutrients necessary for the aquatic food web; and
7. maintain air and water temperatures around the stream.
Forested riparian buffers (a minimum 50 feet wide along intermittent streams and 100 feet wide
along perennial streams [or the full extent of the 100-year floodplain, whichever is greater])
should be created and/or maintained along all aquatic areas. Within the watersheds of streams
supporting endangered aquatic species, we recommend undisturbed, forested buffers that are
naturally vegetated with trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation and extend a minimum of
200 feet from the banks of all perennial streams and a minimum of 100 feet from the banks of all
intermittent streams, or the full extent of the 100-year floodplain, whichever is greater.)
Impervious surfaces, ditches, pipes, roads, utility lines (sewer, water, gas, transmission, etc.), and
other infrastructures that require maintained, cleared rights -of -way and/or compromise the
functions and values of the forested buffers should not occur within these riparian areas.
Floodplains
Executive Order 11988 requires federal agencies (and their designated nonfederal
representatives) to consider and protect floodplain functions. We believe the examples of
flooding in this area of North Carolina highlight the importance of avoiding the long- and
short-term impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of floodplains and that we
5

should avoid any direct or indirect support of floodplain development. Therefore, we do not
believe the subject project should be built in the 100-year floodplain or in any way result in the
alteration of the 100-year floodplain.
Pollinator Habitat
Pollinators, such as most bees, some birds and bats, or other insects, including moths and
butterflies, play a crucial role in the reproduction of flowering plants and in the production of
most fruits and vegetables. Declines in wild pollinators are a result of loss, degradation, and
fragmentation of habitat and disease; while declines in honey bees has also been linked to
disease. The rusty -patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis) historically occurred in North Carolina's
Mountain and Piedmont provinces. Although not required, we encourage the Applicant to
consider our recommendations below to benefit the rusty -patched bumble bee and other
pollinators. Moreover, the creation and maintenance of pollinator habitats at this site may
increase the value of the project for the community and help reduce the spread of invasive
exotic plants. Please consider the following:
1. Sow native seed mixes in disturbed areas or in designated pollinator areas with plants
that bloom throughout the entire growing season.
2. Taller growing pollinator plant species should be planted around the periphery of the
site and anywhere on the site where mowing can be restricted during the summer
months. Taller plants, left un-mowed during the summer, would provide benefits to
pollinators, habitat to ground nesting/feeding birds, and cover for small mammals.
3. Low growing/groundcover native species should be planted in areas that need to be
maintained. This would provide benefits to pollinators while also minimizing the
amount of maintenance such as mowing and herbicide treatment. Milk weed species
are an important host plant for monarch butterflies.
4. Avoid mowing of flowering plants. Designated pollinator areas show be mow only
50% of the plant height, but no lower than 8 inches.
5. Avoid mowing outside the active season for rusty -patched bumble bee and other
pollinators (April 15 — October 15).
6. Leave slash piles, mulch piles, or loose dirt piles along woodland edges. These areas
provide nesting habitats and/or nest materials for some pollinators.
7. Avoid the use of pesticides and specifically neonicotinoids.
8. Additional information regarding plant species, seed mixes, and pollinator habitat
requirements can be provided upon request.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Mr. Byron
Hamstead of our staff at [e-mail], if you have any questions. In any future
correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-21-078.
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor
6

I
References
Brady, J. T., T. H. Kunz, M. D. Tuttle, and D. E. Wilson. 1982. Gray bat recovery plan. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, CO.
LaVal, R. K., R. L. Clawson, M. L. La Val, and W. Caire. 1977. Foraging behavior and
nocturnal activity patterns of Missouri bats, with emphasis on the endangered
species Myotis grisescens and Myotis sodalis. Journal ofMammalogy.58:592-599.
Moore, Patrick R., T.S. Risch, D.K. Morris, and V. Rolland. 2017. Habitat use of female gray
bats assessed using aerial telemetry. Journal of Wildlife Management 81(7):1242-1253.
Tuttle, M. D. 1979. Status, causes of decline and management of endangered gray bats. Journal
of Wildlife Management. 43: 1-17.

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper Secretary D. Reid Wilson
April 5, 2021
Nancy Wallace
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Wilmington District
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801
nancy.wallace(&,usace.army.mil
Re: Construct The School of Wholeness and Enlightenment (SAW-2020-00632), Upper Thomas Branch
Road (35.865203, -82.725897), Marshall, Madison County, ER 21-0683
Dear Ms. Wallace:
Thank you for your email of March 4, 2021, regarding the above -referenced undertaking. We have
reviewed the submittal and offer the following comments.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-814-6579
or [e-mail]. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
1.4,,r Ramona Bartos, Deputy
(-) State Historic Preservation Officer
1301EIVr
41- MAY 17 202f
Water Quality Regional Operations
Asheville Regional Office
Location: 109 Gast Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6898