20090106 Ver 1_401 Application_20090109

0 9- 0 1 0 6
CLEARWATER ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
January 29, 2009
Ms. Liz Hair
US Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-2638
P A I

JAN 3 ? 2009
?NR w SOR?P ?8??
?S AND S
RE: The Biltmore Company and West Side, LLC
Biltmore Estate Bridge
Buncombe County, North Carolina
Ms. Hair,
The attached Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) is being submitted on behalf of The
Biltmore Company and West Side, LLC. The Biltmore Estate is comprised of several
tracts of land on both sides of the French Broad River in Asheville, Buncombe County,
North Carolina. The Biltmore Company and West Side, LLC are seeking Nationwide
Permits 14/25 under Section 404 and Section 10 to construct a bridge over the French
Broad River.
Should you have any questions regarding the attached PCN and supplemental
information please do not hesitate to contact me at 828-698-9800. A copy of this
package has been sent to Mr. David McHenry of the NC Wildlife Resources Commission
for review. A copy of this application has also been submitted to the NC Division of
Water Quality, Raleigh Central Office and Mr. Kevin Barnett of the NC Division of
Water Quality, Asheville Regional Office.
Respectfully,
Rebekah L. Newton R. Xementddle, P.W.S
Project Biologist Principal
Copy Furnished:
NC Wildlife Resources Commission - David McHenry
NC Division of Water Quality, Raleigh - Cyndi Karoly (5 copies)
NC Division of Water Quality, Asheville - Kevin Barnett
718 Oakland Street
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28791
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
www, cwenv. com
Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Please provide the following info:
1. Project Name: Biltmore Estate Bridge Construction
2. Name of Property Owner/Applicant: The Biltmore Company and West Side, LLC
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: C1earWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
*Agent authorization needs to be attached.
4. Related/previous Action ID numbers(s): 2008-01150
5. Site Address: Across French Broad River at Biltmore Estate Drive
6. Subdivision Name: N/A
7. City: Asheville
8. County: Buncombe
9. Lat: 35.552192N Long: 82.587045W (Decimal Degrees Please)
10. Quadrangle Name: Asheville
11. Waterway: French Broad River
12. Watershed: Upper French Broad 06010105
13. Requested Action:
X Nationwide Permit # 14/25 and Section 10
General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre-Application Request
...............................................................................................................................................
The following information will be completed by the Corps office:
AID:
Prepare File Folder Assign number in ORM Begin Date
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404
Project Description/Nature of Activity/Project Purpose:
Site/Waters Name:
Keywords:
CLEARWATER ENVIROloAMNTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Department of the Army
Wilinington District, Corps of Engineers
Attn: Ken Jolly, Chief Regulatory Division
PO Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
-and-
NC Division of Water Quality
Attn: Cyndi Karoly.
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
1, the current landowner/managing partner of the property identified below, hereby
authorize ClearWater Environmental Consultants, Inc. (CEC) to act on my behalf as my
agent during the processing of permits to impact Wetlands and Waters of the US that are
regulated by the Clean Water Act and the Rivers and Harbors Act.
CEC is authorized to provide supplemental information needed for permit processing at
the request of the USACE or DWQ.
Property Owner of Record: -The Biltmore Company and West Side, LLC
Property Owner Address: 1 North Pack Square
Asheville, NC 28801
Phone number: 828-225-6745
Property Location: Asheville, NC
Owner/Managing partner Signature:
Date: `Z / 7 S/6
718 Oakland Street
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28791
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
www, cwenv. com
VN A 7F,,
aP JAN 3 0 2009
? ? ? ? ? o . ? DENR-v? Tr')aMWp RBRANO
WOOS AP1D S
0 9 -0 1 0 6
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps: X? Section 404 Permit X ? Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14/25 or General Permit (GP) number: n/a
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ? Yes X[__1 No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
X? 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Express ? Riparian Buffer Authorization
PAID
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
? Yes X? No For the record only for Corps Permit:

? Yes X? No
If. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program. ? Yes X? No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ? Yes X? No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes X? No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Biltmore Estate Bridge
2b. County: Buncombe County
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Asheville
2d. Subdivision name: N/A
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: N/A
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: The Biltmore Company and West Side, LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No. Deed Book 2163; Page No. 0847.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): Mr. Chuck Pickering
3d. Street address: 1 North Pack Square
3e. City, state, zip: Asheville, North Carolina 28801
3f. Telephone no.: 828-225-6745
3g. Fax no.: 828-225-6111
3h. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent X? Other, specify: Owner
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: Mr. Clement Riddle
5b. Business name
(if applicable): ClearWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
5c. Street address: 718 Oakland Street
5d. City, state, zip: Hendersonvill, North Carolina 28791
5e. Telephone no.: 828-698-9800
5f. Fax no.: 828-698-9003
5g. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 2 of 11
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): 963602577570 and 964703046537
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 35.552192 Longitude: - 82.587045
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size: The entire estate is approximately 5,550 acres; the
proposed bridge is across the French Broad River
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to French Broad River
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: B
2c. River basin: Upper French Broad 06010105
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The proposed bridge is located within the Biltmore Estate property boundary. The right (northeast) bank of the French
Broad River is adjacent to pastoral and agricultural land and has a very narrow riparian corridor; there is a single track dirt
road that runs parallel to the river in this location. The left (southwest) bank of the French Broad River is adjacent to
wooded land; there is a single track dirt road that runs parallel to the river in the location of the bridge. General land use
in the vicinity is agricultural, pastoral, and recreational.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
There is one small wetland within the project boundary totaling approximately 0.002 acre.
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
The French Broad River is the only stream within the project boundary; it runs perpendicular to the bridge corridor which
is approximately 85 feet wide.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The Biltmore Estate is comprised of two large parcels of land. The northeast side of the property is accessed from US
Highway 25. This portion of the property is open to the public and contains the Biltmore house, gardens, winery, and
other amenities. The southwest portion of the property is accessed from NC Highway 191. At this time, this portion of the
property is accessible only to Biltmore employees and contains pastoral land, the vineyard for the winery, and a few small
buildings. Currently, there is no access across the French Broad River within estate property. Employees who conduct
tasks on the southwest portion of property must exit the estate and travel on US Highway 40 to access the other side of
the property. The purpose of the proposed project is to provide access to the southwestern portion of the property from
the north eastern portion of property within estate boundaries. Construction of the bridge would allow easy access to the
southwestern side of the property for estate workers and eventually public patrons.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The project includes construction of a bridge over the French Broad River. The bridge will have one support on the right
and left banks of the river and two support structures at even intervals within the river. The contractor will construct a
temporary gravel bed at the location of each support within the river. Each gravel bed will provide a working surface of
approximately 335 square feet, the base of each gravel bed will be approximately 1,440 square feet. A temporary bridge
will then be constructed from the bank to the gravel bed. Once situated on the gravel bed, the contractor will drill the
piers/piles to support the bents. Each pier/pile will be 4 feet in diameter and tied into bedrock; one bent will rest on top of
a pair of piers/piles. Contractors will use caisson construction to build a water tight shaft, in which to install the piers/piles.
Each bridge support will be comprised of one bent and two piers/piles. The piers/piles will be the only structural
components in the water (during normal flow) and on the river bed. At each support on the banks (right and left banks),
rip rap will be used to stabilize the river bank. Total length of rip rap on each bank will be approximately 85 linear feet
Page 3of11
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past? ? Yes X? No ? Unknown
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made? ? Preliminary ? Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company:
Name (if known): Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for X? Yes ? No ? Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions. Other projects have been applied for and/or permitted on the
Biltmore Estate property. One Nationwide permit directly associated with the bridge construction was applied for and
permitted (listed first below). To the best of the agent's knowledge, four other permits have been applied for and/or
permitted at the estate.
Action ID DWQ Project # Application Date Issue Date Note
2008-01150 n/a 03/24/08 05/06/08 Geotech for bridge
Unknown n/a 07/28/08 Pending Land Rover ferry
200430056 Unknown Unknown 11/05/03 Raft access dredging
2007-01489-311 Unknown Unknown 11/15/07 NW for pond
2008-03123 07-0602 10/27/08 Pending IP for pond restoration
o. ruture rroject mans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes X? No
6b. If yes, explain.
Initially, the bridge will only be used by estate employees. There are dirt/gravel roads on each side of the river that the
bridge will connect. This is not a phased project; however, once access is provided to the southwest portion of property,
additional development may occur in the future. At this time, development plans for the southwest portion of the property
have not been started. Representatives from the Biltmore Estate met with Tom Walker, David Baker, and Liz Hair of the
US Army Corps of Engineers on October 24, 2008 to discuss this project and the potential for new development on the
west side.
Page 4 of 11
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
X? Wetlands X? Streams - tributaries ? Buffers
? Open Waters ? Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number - Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non-404, other) (acres)
Temporary T
W1 X? P ? T Fill Seep at base of ? Yes X? Corps 0
002 ac
large rock X? No X? DWQ .
W2 ? PEI T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W3 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W4 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W5 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W6 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts 0.002 ac
!h. Comments: Wetland is a very small pool at the base of a large rock near the river.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number - (PER) or (Corps - 404, 10 stream length
Permanent (P) or intermittent
DWQ -non-404
width
(linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? ,
other) (feet) feet)
S1 X? P ? T Installation of French Broad X? PER X? Corps 8 If
piers/piles (4) River ? INT X? DWQ 260 ft (0.001 ac)
S2 X? P ? T Rip rap installation French Broad X? PER X? Corps 85 If
on banks River ? INT X? DWQ 260 ft (0.062 ac)
S3 ? P X? T Installation of French Broad X? PER ? Corps 40 ft
gravel beds (2) River ? INT ? DWQ 260ft (0.033 ac)
S4 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S6 ? P ? T El PER El Corps
? INT ?DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 1331f
(0.
096 ac)
J1. VV)11111VHLCI.
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
ne U.S. then individual) list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number - (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
01 ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
0. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
Pond ID
b Proposed use or purpose (acres)
num
er of pond
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
.g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
? Yes ? No if yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
? Neuse ? Tar-Pamlico ? Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba ? Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number - Reason Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or for Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
Temporary T impact required?
B1 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B2 ? P ? T ? Yes
? No
B3 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
Page 6 of 11
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The project was designed to make use of piers/piles, which will be drilled into place. Piers/piles require less impact than
supports that would span the entire width of the bridge.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
During construction, a temporary gravel bed will be constructed at each bent location. A temporary bridge will then be
built from the bank to the gravel bed. This method has considerably less impact when compared to construction of a
causeway or "land bridge" that would cause impact over its entire length. The bridges and gravel beds will be removed
upon completion of construction.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State? ? Yes X? No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ? Corps

2c.
If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project? ? Mitigation bank

El Payment to in-lieu fee program
? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ? Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ
oa. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? ? Yes ? No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.

Zone 6c.
Reason for impact 6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier 6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 8 of 11
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ? Yes X? No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.

Comments: El Yes El No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? n/a %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ? Yes X? No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: This project does not require a SMP
because the only construction associated with the project is that of the bridge. There is no drainage basin involved with
construction of the bridge. The bridge will connect two roads that are currently existing.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
? Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ? DWQ Stormwater Program
? DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
? Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ? NSW
apply (check all that apply): ? USMP
? Water Supply Watershed
? Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ? No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
? Coastal counties
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply ? HQW
? ORW
(check all that apply): ? Session Law 2006-246
? Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? ? Yes ? No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ? Yes ? No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ? Yes ? No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
F. Supplementary Information
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ? Yes ® No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ? Yes ? No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.) ? Yes ? No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ? Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? ®Yes ? No
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The Biltmore Estate Bridge project site is located within the French Broad River Subbasin 04-03-02. Approximately 75
percent of this subbasin is forested and the total land mass includes approximately 806 square miles (516,000 acres).
The Biltmore Estate Bridge project area is comprised of less than 1 acre (0.002 square miles). Construction of the bridge
will open up access to approximately 3070 acres (4.7 square miles) on the southwest side of the French Broad River
All
.
of the land mass included within the Biltmore Estate Bridge project area and the southwest property accounts for less
than 0.5 percent of the land mass of the basin. These percentages alone, limit significant cumulative effects on the
watershed. The southwest portion of the property is within the Biltmore House viewshed. Because of this
and in an
,
effort to preserve the viewshed, any development on the southwest side of the French Broad River will be limited and
heavily restricted. Currently, there are no plans to construct a new entrance on NC Highway 191; therefore
additional
,
development will not occur as a result of the presence of an attraction entrance (as with heavy development in Biltmore
Village). Past activities within the subbasin include logging; agricultural, commercial, and residential development; and
road building. Agricultural and residential development, and road building in the vicinity remains active; continued and
future development of the watershed is independent of activities proposed within the Biltmore Estate Bridge project site
.
Impacts within the Biltmore Estate Bridge project boundary include the construction of a bridge. Stream and wetland
impacts are necessary for the construction at the site. Activity within the Biltmore Estate Bridge project boundary should
not result in a significant impairment of the water resources on site or interfere with the productivity and water quality of
the existing aquatic ecosystem.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the nrnnnenrl nrn Gor+ ,.; i.. t.i.. ..
r. r , r _J ., , avw oki a capaclly VI Lilt SubjeGi iacday.
Wastewater will not be generated by construction of the bridge.
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
h
bi ? Yes ® No
a
tat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
i
t
? ? Yes ® No
mpac
s
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. El Raleigh
? Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered S
ecies or Desi
t
d C
iti
l
p
gna
e
r
ca
Habitat?
FWS county data and Natural Heritage Program Virtual Workroom.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes ®No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
South Atlantic Habitat and Ecosystem IMS. Impact will not occur in a marine system.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
t
t
N
ti
®Yes ? No
s
a
us (e.g.,
a
onal Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
National Parks Service; National Register of Historic Places; National Register Information System database.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ® Yes ? No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: On June 15, 2007, Mr. Bradley Ridnour, PE, of Vaughn & Melton
Consulting Engineers requested that FEMA evaluate the effects that the proposed brid
e would have
th
fl
d
g
on
e
oo
hazard
information shown along the French Broad River. On June 3, 2008, a Conditional Letter of Map Revision was issued to
the Buncombe County Manager based on the information submitted by Mr. Ridnour.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FEMA Map Service Center; Map Panel 37021 C0312C
R. Clement Riddle 4a L" 01.28.09
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Page 11 of 11
* - Approximate Site Location
Data 0 2408 N AV T E GA nr TeleACas
CLEARWATER
Biltmore Estate Environmental Consultants, inc. Site Vicinity Map
Buncombe County 718 Oakland Street MapQuest
North Carolina Hendersonville, NC 28791 Figure 1
828-698-9800
0 20,08 hbpOuest Inc' "q%
82035'00" W 82034'00" W WGSR4 R?033'0C)" W
L
C
d
n
u
(Y

c
c
CC
Ir
O
Lr
n-
Z
O
O
N
m
O
L!)
m
k ^? L
c
4? L
i
7.
0 x
7\.1,
C
LC.
WrSCOA 0^)o?o?nn11
MNjTN 0 S 1 MILE --- v- vv YT
6- ®000 FEET 0 500 1000 METERS
Map created with TOP01®Ca2003 National Geographic (www.nationalgeographic.convtopo)
CLEARWATER
Biltmore Estate Environmental Consultants, Inc. USGS Toho Map
Buncombe County 718 Oakland Street Asheville Quad
North Carolina Hendersonville, NC 28791 Figure 2
828-698-9800
Figure 3
Project Plans

' m _

M
0 s!
0 W _ N
-
W N
M
z w
Q ~

016' Q
000'0 9+b1 0

m
W U
+
z
0 W
Q
Z

J w
4 O
m N Q

0 Ln
? m m
' i
' - p
a co
000
00+bi
IAd
0 D W Z
~
M w' o

M J W V
i
W4
11 11 11 11 W Z
N
(. C O J 1- LL W m OJ
D H Z 0 0
\w V ma 00
O ,o-
in"
° I 0
="

w o g :F
w
J
HOLD
w --I° j
o -
oY .e;8 ~ ~

Oza

0-H

. ° 0 o

°
0
0- L,
0 N
z +
z OI ' S6l 'i
000'Ob+£I'0+S OA m
°
N= d o
OO+bl "0 m
\ IHM Uc\ zy i'.% m m
O
0
N OF WU .~. y

M
wO~
a
v
V)
I
\. \ V'1 ?
OO
co
cr
O V
10 O J mQ JQ 1y
lalO? as I M w)jd
M C?VI 3L, V) -<V)
QP> <V) co NJ,-.
I m ^W? \ _ ?J
`
LL^J
> UW
m
J W J n.-Hr
L -.. ?. ()-
Jroa W w
z
=m
bir-8\q+£t`VIS / V)
v)?H
LL V) 0
I HI I UKJ
LL \
'\ \ r ,

UQa) WO
I OW
`

Wes' N
mp
I
or U::)

?•/
C Er cc
_. _
CL V) ?d
`

m
O
a
w
oo ,..\
/

I woo
Q J
J
w w c Z

to CL \
V) 0.0 00 V)
0.0

"i co
N
/
/

+
+ I W
mid C ; / m

C?Nf.? X
HI ?'
/ >-
I
LL LL w
n0
/ >-<

w
_ J -\

- / av
i
o
H O Q
x

I LL 0

0
U
:
HI
W I `

/- N

H p
H Z0
``
HO
W
JO

0
0 WO

F-H
Q W
co Q
U N
+
a I O
W
M W ty
D
O LL LLOJ
ON 'gym Q J NM
N
H
F O XJ
I V- ~ J
H W>- wj<Q
o MZ.N.
Co ?' I fYY
CL U W w
U- a _
F- 3 y wmd

~

Q +i I W I Q0
I o
m Z
R' Z
< m
° m
o OO
m a - 3C-ilv
i
\
a
V) 0
°
o m
° I r >
Q 0
°+ W
I- H I
°° a
o IL r
av d°
? \ 07
``
p
OQi J
QJ I N I
cc
N
Z
H
'
LL i
v w
0 OD+Zi HJ
v' ?- -, w
Ifl m
" W I ° W a O -im
° H W
/
L
0 O N I f U H 2 cDCCH W dO Z
z+
:J
w Z3

I U1 Q v v°d p O 'S'Jy

?
mda w Z 3 w h oa d? d
(40u x
J
x
N W z
W

0 0
°
V
'
'
CL "o LL U
W w t
Q HW /
? /
d-w
H on CO ko
C? \. c
-cr L,
-<V)
cr c o -Z 0= -ty

Wb--WOO _0
W / / / N
V
U

N - Z
VN JM J 09 N \\ \ / //.. 3f?{n

'4 00'
0- La M 1,

X1
H . \?
\ \
"
?
. \ ?. `
a .
?
\ .

W
pm ?.
\ \
\ \\
,
?\?
.
ui r-: I .
`
SOW ?\\ \\:\.?`?•\`""' ?,_ .-. '' (L V)
_j I cc v)Q:H
,
LLNU \
co w
\\
?
~
.
-•.\
?\\ v, Zm
\ \ut
\
\KH+ .a+
'
?\
\ \ \

\ \
\ \
0 `
\
\
% LL0
\
\
\\`
\
\
UJ
`\\`\ .P
Cc 'J \

\\ \

\
N C?N?? 3LL V) '•\ \

0 00+01

%

z
o? p
0_ 0 O O 0 O 0 O O o
O
N O m
N .-. (71 T C T 091
.-r - - - ^-, Q1
-. o
-

m ?M

z
X O - N
W N
.\ >
Z tY w
a

01 6' 9 I 'l
0 a
°
000'09+y1 '04-S lAd O cr
U m r
F- m
0
cr u V)
p
° o
z
i g o U- g N
H Z
0
? C
~ U-
w
I 1• J

a
Co ;
O
o
1
? N M° 1

I
I
L
F X-
+° '"' J r
'_' '?
O x
cn

m
' OIL,
9961 N N O In 0 In
Q W
m
r
° a'
w
co
P 000
0 0+bI •p+S
IAd p O
.. N {
F ,
y
Z
. M IA T
J Q y ?
W O a
11 II II II 11 Z
H
r
a Q O J 1 Q' ~W
mw
D H 00
?w V CS) H F o 0
a$
L
J
F d
L
Hlnw
MHO I _
o a ~ H
a a

oza
mHm 00
a1a.U
I
o N

z
Z
°
000'Ob+£1'D+S JAd
m° L
N OO+y[ i

X= o }
CO CO
N O =>- wo
I mM <I+ L., ?
Q~. T °
M

o
0
Q..
~

I
V)

N \\` W... /P ...

`
`-
0
0
0

U
!p
Iw.10
OOl z m

a
M J
MH \?.N m a J Q '?
? •\
00
\ W d Q

a J
W ... ` Q
a J
L) I
M IPI a
x X
-tea, (40 3 li N a In

a+w a) CNJ -J
..wa
-

WnJ
W
W?
-
F•
d F , -

.?. • ..

/.
J
IJ-I?a J
w 2
N
..
a?
..
6I;V'1S d\ ---. _
WOO
0- (A

W ? NCH
` - ?VmJ

LL 0
w \
Or
/-r
V
Jo
_
, Wr I

J ?O
wM
N I
r -
\\
U aW 1 O .. ?..
` ..
I 0 ` ` ..
01 01 O
Z I I *+ " 00+£l \
a_
a W
\ w c Z
a
i
O
0

N O CD
c TI 0 a
co N o
Cjn
oo
tb
N In?
I I +
ZN.
F + M
W
Z^J I :
maa w
I w
U w 3?v~i
-
C?In(3 x
LLI
I
W Z
J
I

U O
X
I -
HI
w
N O
F a0

z WO
°

L
m
LL +
°^
M Z D O _? ?mQ
µ I T J
H C4
In
1
V W
Z W
J

Z I

w
Q
C LO
a¢

J

z
Q

0
O

m
a
o

\.

\
Q-
V) 00 I 0
o W x m a
m a h0
\
J
w I N
N N OO+ZI W
... lO?
... ? W
V O -
F- I
Z ..W o en I M
Z3 I
C7 r-
Q
U o
O':
d QZ

w
Z
3
o
J
OF _1
??/ CL
Ob0
b
C?C?
N X
d

L IHII i Q F yJ2
z m O \ ?d,
Y
p a .
CL a
a x I r y o
a ,v LLI V
Z
`'
CL
H 0
In 1- I

co
W w
m °
to
" -
- O
\
m M.4 J I I C f \
O

zlnwa I o

^`°
`
aaoir
J J J O
CLUInz I Q
'
\\
H+ W -`--

\
w C
, w P
\ ?ma
Z

M 1
Q
m

`'- ' 3C?N ?
CL1 L, in
Om
?-

CM z
L) Woo
\. ?:. ` ..
?0 F11
aW m.. \`

H \ \ ? -
-
T
0
Iv-
moc?
wow

\ \
\
a+? I \ \\ \ ,? \ \ \ m

I
•
?, 0-V)
W
J
HFa-a

I
m? m0,
\\.\' \••
`\\
\•\=H 0
\ \\ \ '•±H
m
\

\\
. NmH
JHF+
l
fl
0`
\
r Ur\

\

0 00+01

z

L 'ok o

O
O O
O 01
O O O
O O 0
O db
3
O of 10 r
O1 9 T
of m T
ONi

=QQQQQQ=l!ti
by 4 ¦ , 4 ¦
F.
a4o?l,?
1
v
vch-v
in
selW
o ado???
W
?Np
tA4 4 ¦ 4 ¦
1
a4o???
1
v
ofn h?
?QOvI??

a ti
N??

e nk
?
L
i
? ?QO??1?C

}
Z
a.
O
U
W
O
J
a-1
mi
W
I?
co
I cli
1 N
Z W
a
0
i W
m
O U,
z
Q j 06
O N
W
?/'?
V J Cr W
in H
a
W o
u
u
Q r
I W m
co
O
H
U O
O z
co 00
O O
00
5 N N
mm- \ \
` > =° 0 0
6m? m0E nr? ..
FE - a?7s W W
i H H
0 0 o a s
?q?s oO
g o`a
gk CO N
n & O
m CO
6
ou
4
0
W
W
°
o

o
C N
Z
g
a
to
N
V

In
SSSSSSSS
SNolsvaY
CLEARWATER
Biltmore Estate Environmental Consultants, Inc. Aerial Photo
Buncombe County 718 Oakland Street Google Earth
North Carolina Hendersonville, NC 28791 Figure 4
828-698-9800
FRENCH Hf?(W)
RAF,R -_,
AFPRC'1:d?1AT{ SG1iE
p C 5CO FFF7
/ f "`
/ , / I MAIIOiIAI I100D iM5UR1> f40CORN
? • f j j f / ?.. ZONE
x FILM
{ . ,,: ';/'?'%//r • , ,: ,, r`rk '1+ FLOOD INSURAICE PATE MAP
, ; j / r',/?/j'f j ,! ? /./?' ' s\ bUh117 BE l.OU.Nly.
? ? fi ?'??? - j / /. ?` 'n-?.y ?' r'r ti.I N'01011 CAKOLIN'A
? f 'j /i is / /f ??i` j/'??, ?'r AND INCOKFORATED UtE1S
ZONE
f?/ '? PulEl 312 OF 641
X X/"
ZONE x-- ; / ? `//
r -- • ? MAP MONIER
II 1 ? ? (-4- E?.I?WE Bill:
ZONI x '` ` ?' i 'e µ11r sr tl9s
1 : ???` :' 4C ?tH Fnkrr f. Frresm.cv Mu F-0 Alp-I
r?AE(
«? t??' r,, ., /M1c 1 Y 1 s ia.1 n^ M^w ata.o aY^er, Y r
I? i?l
ZONE K I x ?. 1 w..?. a + ',?rT u.• r.n .."../ a =i lirw ?. .
e-n w-.:n mn?_rs nYm -. rx Y.tiea.e-1 n un 6YS m :-r
"--'t '+....?...?`''?? ? .. _; ••. +»au r.s..? .. a r !nm ln:.Y rw :rr,r q:.rc n.. ?.. ?.
_ r»rl'+?K ;nkr;. IfL-"-NJ. 'l4v:O lrlVi ll -ttwv =?0^Y ,v?+
* - Approximate Site Location
CLEARWATER Flood Insurance Rate Map
Biltmore Estate Environmental Consultants, Inc. FEMA Map Service Center
Buncombe County 718 Oakland Street Panel 37021CO312C
North Carolina Hendersonville, NC 28791
828-698-9800 Figure 5
Attachment A
Previous Permit Authorization
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action 1D. 2008-01150 County: Buncombe
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner / Authorized Agent: The Biltmore Company and West Side, LLC
Attn: Mr. Chuck Pickering
Address: 1 North Pack Square
Asheville, NC 28801
Telephone No.: [phone]
Size and location of property (water body, road name/number, town, etc.): The project area is located
within the boundaries of the Biltmore Estate on the French Broad River in Asheville, Buncombe
County, North Carolina. Coordinates for the site are 35.5521 north and 82.5870 west.
Description of projects area and activity: The permittee is authorized to bore 6 to 10 holes in order
determine the integrity of subsurface material within the French Broad River.
Applicable Law: ® Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344)
® Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act, 33 USC 403)
Authorization: Regional General Permit Number:
Nationwide Permit Number: 6
Your work is authorized by the above referenced permit provided it is accomplished in strict accordance with the
attached conditions, the comments in the attached letter from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission,
and your submitted plans. Any violation of the attached conditions or deviation from your submitted plans may
subject the permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order and/or appropriate legal action.
This verification of the use of Nationwide Permit 6 does not imply that this office will necessarily approve any
future proposal to impact waters of the United States at this location.
This verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below unless the nationwide authorization
is modified, suspended or revoked. If, prior to the expiration date identified below, the nationwide permit
authorization is reissued and/or modified, this verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified
below, provided it complies with all requirements of the modified nationwide permit. If the nationwide permit
authorization expires or is suspended, revoked, or is modified, such that the activity would no longer comply with
the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit, activities which have commenced (i.e., are under construction) or
are under contract to commence in reliance upon the nationwide permit, will remain authorized provided the activity
is completed within twelve months of the date of the nationwide permit's expiration, modification or revocation,
unless discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify, suspend or revoke the
authorization.
Activities subject to Section 404 (as indicated above) may also require an individual Section 401 Water Quality
Certification. You should contact the NC Division of Water Quality (telephone [phone]) to determine
Section 401 requirements.
This Department of the Army verification does not relieve the permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other
required Federal, State or local approvals/permits.
If there are any questions regarding this verification, any of the conditions of the Permit, or the Corps of
Engineers regulatory program, please contact Lori Beckvy#h at 828-271-7980.
Corps Regulatory Official: -Lori Beckwith Date: May 6, 2008
Expiration Date of Verification: May 6, 2010
-2-
Determination of Jurisdiction:
A. ? Based on preliminary information, there appear to be waters of the US including wetlands within the above
described project area. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory
Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
B. ® There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area subject to the
permit requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a
period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
C. ® There are waters of the US and/or wetlands within the above described project area subject to the permit
requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the
law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years
from the date of this notification.
D. ? The jurisdictional areas within the above described project area have been identified under a previous action.
Please reference jurisdictional determination issued _. Action ID
Basis of Jurisdictional Determination: The stream channel on the property is the French Broad River, a Section
10 water.
Appeals Information: (This information does not apply to preliminary determinations as indicated by paragraph A.
above).
Attached to this verification is an approved jurisdictional determination. If you are not in agreement with that
approved jurisdictional determination, you can make an administrative appeal under 33 CFR 331. Enclosed you will
find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal
this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Program
Attn: Lori Beckwith, Project Manager
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the
criteria for appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of
the date of the NAP. Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address within 60
days from the Issue Date below.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official: Lori Beckwith
Issue Date: MaV 6, 2008 Expiration Date: Five years from Issue Date
SURVEY PLATS, FIELD SKETCH, WETLAND DELINEATION FORMS, PROJECT PLANS, ETC.,
MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE FILE COPY OF THIS FORM, IF REQUIRED OR AVAILABLE.
Copy Furnished: Clearwater Environmental Consultants, Inc., Attn: Mr. Clement Riddle, 718 Oakland
Street, Hendersonville, NC 28791
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please visit http://regulatory.usacesurvey.com/ to complete the survey online.
Attachment B
Conditional Letter of Map Revision
Federal Emergency Management Agency
e4ARTM
yjT Washington, DC 20472
J•
xo nw North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program
d?gNn S?GJ4 Cooperating Technical State June 3, 2008
CERTIFIED MAIL IN REPLY REFER TO:
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Case No.: 07-04-4863R
Ms. Wanda Greene Community Name: Buncombe County, NC
(Unincorporated Areas)
Manager, Buncombe County
205 College Street Community No.: 370031
Asheville, NC 28801
Dear Ms. Greene:
We are providing our comments with this enclosed Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR), on a
proposed project within your community that if constructed as proposed, could revise the effective Flood
Insurance Study report and Flood Insurance Rate Map for your community.
If you have any questions regarding floodplain management regulations for your community or the National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in general, please contact the Floodplain Administrator for your community.
If you have any technical questions regarding this CLOMR, please contact the North Carolina Floodplain
Mapping Program (NCFMP) at [phone] ext. 106, or the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) Map Assistance Center toll free at 1-877-336-2627 (1-877-FEMA MAP). Additional information
about the NFIP is available on FEMA's website at http://www..fema.gov/business/jifip, and additional
information about the NCFMP is available at littp://www.ncfloodmaps.com.
Sincerely,
L&A 0-A0&P'-'

Beth A. Norton, CFM, Program Specialist
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Engineering Management Branch
Mitigation Directorate
List of Enclosures:
Conditional Letter of Map Revision
John K. Dorman, Program Director
North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program
cc: Mr. Bradley S. Ridnour, P.E., Vaughn & Melton
Ms. Cynthia Barcklow, Buncombe County Engineer
Mr. John Gerber, P.E., CFM, North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program
JUN 5 2008 L °1

OtiVp R k
Federal Emergency Management Agency
O ^w
Washington, D.C. 20472
?igND s
CERTIFIED MAIL IN REPLY REFER TO:
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Case No.: 07-04-4863R
Ms. Wanda Greene Community: Buncombe County, NC
Manager, Buncombe County (Unincorporated Areas)
205 College Street Community No.: 370031
Asheville, NC 28801
104
Dear Ms. Greene:
This responds to a request that the Department of Homeland Security's Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) comment on the effects that a proposed project would have on the effective Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) and Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report for your community, in accordance
with Part 65 of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) regulations. In a letter dated June 15, 2007,
Mr. Bradley S. Ridnour, RE, of Vaughn & Melton Consulting Engineers, requested that FEMA evaluate
the effects that a proposed bridge would have on the flood hazard information shown along the French
Broad River on the effective FIRM and FIS report. The proposed project will include the construction of a
new bridge that will have three spans and a total length of about 264 feet. The proposed project will
impact flooding along the French Broad River from a point approximately 5,050 feet upstream of Interstate
40 until a point approximately 12,680 feet upstream of Interstate 40. The area of the proposed project is
shown on Buncombe County, North Carolina and Incorporated Areas FIRM number 37021C0312C, dated
May 6, 1996. The area of the proposed project is also shown on preliminary North Carolina FIRM number
3700963700J, dated September 28, 2007.
All data required to complete our review of this request for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision
(CLOMR) were submitted with letters from Mr. Ridnour.
To determine the changes in flood hazards that will be caused by the proposed project, we compare the
hydraulic modeling reflecting the proposed project (referred to as the proposed conditions model) to the
hydraulic modeling used to prepare the FIS (referred to as the effective model). If the effective model does
not provide enough detail to evaluate the effects of the proposed project, an existing conditions model must
be developed to provide this detail. This existing conditions model is then compared to the effective
model and the proposed conditions model to differentiate increases or decreases in flood hazards caused by
more detailed modeling from increases or decreases in flood hazards that will be caused by the proposed
project.
Please note that the preliminary FIRM and FIS report reflects redelineated floodplains for the French Broad
River. However, the effective analyses for the French Broad River will remain valid.
We reviewed the submitted data and the data used to prepare the effective FIRM for your community and
determined that the proposed project meets the minimum floodplain management criteria of the NFIP. The
submitted existing conditions HEC-RAS hydraulic computer model, dated January 4, 2008, based on
updated topographic information, was used as the base conditions model in our review of the proposed
conditions model for this CLOMR request. We believe that, if the proposed project is constructed as
2
shown on the preliminary construction drawings titled, "Bridge Over French Broad River Layout" and
"Bridge Over French Broad River Elevation and Details," dated June 2007, and the data listed below are
received, the floodplain boundaries of the base (1-percent-annual-chance) flood and a 0.2-percent-annual-
chance flood will be delineated as shown on the annotated FIRM map and topographic work map.
The submitted existing conditions HEC-RAS version 3.1.3 hydraulic computer model was converted from
HEC-2 and contains more up-to-date topographic information and survey data than the effective model.
When compared to the effective model, the existing conditions model reflects increases in the Base Flood
Elevations (BFEs) along the French Broad River, with a maximum increase of 0.4 foot at a point
approximately 9,990 feet upstream of Interstate 40.
The proposed conditions model incorporates the proposed project into the existing conditions model.
When we compared the existing conditions model to the proposed conditions model, we determined that
the proposed project reflects increases in BFEs along French Broad River, with a maximum increase of 0.2
foot just upstream of the new bridge which is approximately 9,990 feet upstream of the I-40 Bridge.
The updated existing conditions and proposed project will have the following impacts when compared to
the effective flood hazard information:
Base Flood Elevations
When compared to the effective data the BFEs will increase along the French Broad River, with a
maximum increase of 0.6 foot approximately 9,990 feet upstream of the I-40 Bridge.
1-Percent Annual Chance Floodplain
When compared to the effective data, the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), the area that would be
inundated by the base flood, will have negligible increase. These increases are not observable at mapping
scale and therefore no revisions to the SFHA boundaries will occur.
1-Percent Annual Chance Floodwav
When compared to the effective data, the floodway boundary increases by a maximum of 25 feet in the
vicinity of the proposed bridge, which is approximately 9,990 feet upstream of the I-40 Bridge.
Upon completion of the project, your community may submit the data listed below and request that we
make a final determination on revising the effective FIRM and FIS report.
• With this request, your community has complied with all requirements of Paragraph 65.12(a) of
the NFIP regulations. Compliance with Paragraph 65.12(b) also is necessary before FEMA can
issue a Letter of Map Revision when a community proposes to permit encroachments into the
effective regulatory floodway that will cause increases in BFE in excess of those permitted under
Paragraph 60.3(d)(3). Please provide evidence that your community has, prior to approval of the
proposed encroachment, adopted floodplain management ordinances that incorporate the increased
BFEs and revised floodway boundary delineations to reflect post-project conditions, as stated in
Paragraph 65.12(b).
• Detailed application and certification forms must be used for requesting final revisions to the
maps. Therefore, when the map revision request for the area covered by this letter is submitted,
Form 1, entitled "Overview & Concurrence Form," must be included.
• The detailed application and certification forms listed below may be required if as-built conditions
differ from the preliminary plans. If required, please submit new forms or annotated copies of the
previously submitted forms showing the revised information.
Form 2, entitled "Riverine Hydrology & Hydraulics Form"
Form 3, entitled "Riverine Structures Form"
Hydraulic analyses, for as-built conditions, of the base flood; the 10-percent-, 2-percent-, and
0.2-percent-annual-chance floods; and the regulatory floodway, together with topographic work
map showing the revised floodplain and floodway boundaries, must be submitted with Form 2.
• A copy of the effective FIRM for the entire area of revision, annotated to reflect the as-built
conditions 1-percent and 0.2-percent annual chance floodplain and floodway boundaries along the
French Broad River. As previously indicated, a preliminary restudy encompasses the area for
which this CLOMR is being issued. Upon completion of the project for which this CLOMR is
issued, please comply with one of the following requirements:
• If the preliminary study becomes effective before completion of the proposed project,
the revised SFHA boundary delineations must tie into the SFHA and floodway
boundary delineations established by the study at the upstream and downstream ends
of the revision.
• If the LOMR submittal for the proposed project is received before the preliminary
study becomes effective, then the revised SFHA and floodway boundary delineations
must tie into the currently effective information.
• Effective October 1, 2007, FEMA revised the fee schedule for reviewing and processing requests
for conditional and final modifications to published flood information and maps. In accordance
with this schedule, the current fee for this map revision request is $4,800 and must be received
before we can begin processing the request. Please note, however, that the fee schedule is subject
to change, and requesters are required to submit the fee in effect at the time of the submittal.
Payment of this fee shall be made in the form of a check or money order, made payable in U.S.
funds to the National Flood Insurance Program, or by credit card (Visa or MasterCard only). The
payment, along with the revision application, must be forwarded to the following address:
Using, U.S. Postal Service:
North Carolina MT-2 LOMC Depot
Administrator
P.O. Box 300025
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-0025
Using Overnight Service:
NC MT-2 LOMC- Collection System
c/o Dewberry & Davis, Inc.
2301 Rexwoods Drive, Suite 200
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
• As-built plans, certified by a registered professional engineer, of all proposed project elements.
0 Community acknowledgement of the map revision request.
• A copy of the public notice distributed by your community stating its intent to revise the regulatory
floodway, or a statement by your community that it has notified all affected property owners and
affected adjacent jurisdictions.
• Evidence of notification of the property owners impacted by increases in the 1-percent annual
chance water surface elevations and widening of the 1-percent annual chance floodplain and
floodway along the French Broad River. The property owners' written acceptance of the increases
is required for the LOMR to become effective on the date of issuance.
After receiving appropriate documentation to show that the project has been completed, FEMA will initiate
a revision to the FIRM and FIS report. The North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program (NCFMP) will
review all revision requests in accordance with the FEMA Cooperating Technical Partners initiative. For
more information on this initiative, we encourage you to visit the dedicated portion of the FEMA Flood
Hazard Mapping website at bttp://www..fenia.gov/plan/Sreveiit/ffim/ctp main.shtm or visit the NCFMP
website at http://www.ncfloodmaps.coni. Because the BFEs would change as a result of the project, a 90-
day appeal period would be initiated, during which community officials and interested persons may appeal
the revised BFEs based on scientific or technical data.
The basis of this CLOMR is, in whole or in part, a bridge project. NFIP regulations, as cited in
Paragraph 60.3(b)(7), require that communities assure that the flood-carrying capacity within the altered or
relocated portion of any watercourse is maintained. This provision is incorporated into your community's
existing floodplain management regulations. Consequently, the ultimate responsibility for maintenance of
the bridge rests with your community.
This CLOMR is based on minimum floodplain management criteria established under the NFIR Your
community is responsible for approving all floodplain development and for ensuring all necessary permits
required by Federal or State law have been received. State, county, and community officials, based on
knowledge of local conditions and in the interest of safety, may set higher standards for construction in the
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). If the State, county, or community has adopted more restrictive or
comprehensive floodplain management criteria, these criteria take precedence over the minimum NF1P
criteria.
If you have any questions regarding floodplain management regulations for your community or the NFIP in
general, please contact the Consultation Coordination Officer (CCO) for your community. Information on
the CCO for your community may be obtained by calling the Director, Federal Insurance and Mitigation
Division of FEMA in Atlanta, Georgia, at [phone]. If you have any technical questions regarding
this CLOMR, please contact the NCFMP at [phone] ext. 106, or the FEMA Map Assistance
Center, toll free, at 1-877-FEMA MAP (1-877-336-2627).
Sincerely,
L80-h omor-ft>?
Beth A. Norton, CFM, Program Specialist For: William R. Blanton Jr., CFM, Chief
Engineering Management Branch Engineering Management Branch
Mitigation Directorate Mitigation Directorate
Attachment C
Jurisdictional Determination Information
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project/ Site: Biltmore Estate Date: 9-4-2008
Applicant / Owner: Chuck Pickering County: Buncombe
Investigator: CEC State: NC

Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes X No Community ID: WL
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No X Transect ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No X Plot ID:
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Impatiens capensis H FACW 9.
2. Urtica dioica H FAC+ 10.
3. 11.
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 2/2=100%
Remarks:
The vegetative criterion has been met.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
Other X Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12"
X No Recorded Data Available Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: 0-4 (in.) Secondary Indicators:

Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0-2 (in.) Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
x Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
The hydrologic criterion has been met.
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Rosman fine sandy loam Drainage Class: well drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluventic Haplumbrepts Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No X
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-8 10YR 3/2 10YR 5/8 few/faint
8-12 10YR 3/1
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors - Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
The hyric soil criterion has been met.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampling Point
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No Within a Wetland? Yes X No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Sampling point within a wetland; wetland as the base of large rock outcrop.
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: NC County/parish/borough: Buncomeb City: Asheville
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.552192° N, Long. 82.587045° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: French Broad River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows: French Broad River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 06010105 Upper French Broad
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the review
area. [Required]
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Z Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain: French Broad River is a navigable water at the Wilson Bridge east of Brevard.
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "waters of the U.S. within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
? TNWs, including territorial seas
® Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
? Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
? Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 100 linear feet: 260 width (ft) and/or 0.6 acres.
Wetlands: 0.002 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable) :3
? Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.
SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.I. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW: French Broad River.
Summarize rationale supporting determination: French Broad River is a navigable water at the Wilson Bridge east of Brevard.
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": Wetland is next to the river and effected by high flows.
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbodya is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
? Tributary flows through Pick List tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW':
Tributary stream order, if known:
' Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply
Tributary is: ? Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Pick List.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
? Silts ? Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Pick List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Pick List
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Pick List. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
? Bed and banks
? OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
? clear, natural line impressed on the bank ?
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving ?
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ?
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
? sediment deposition ?
? water staining ?
? other (list):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
El Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
? High Tide Line indicated by: ?
? oil or scum line along shore objects
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
ine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
'A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Pick List. Explain:
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick List
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (YIN) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
® TNWs: 100 linear feet 260 width (ft), Or, 0.6 acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: 0002 acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
? Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section I11.13. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section 111.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
? Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
? Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
? Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):"
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
? Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
'0 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
? Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
? If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
? Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
? Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
? Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
? Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24,000 Asheville.
? USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
? National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
? FEMA/FIRM maps:
? 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
? Photographs: El Aerial (Name & Date):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project / Site: Biltmore Estate Date: 94-2008
Applicant / Owner: Chuck Pickering County: Buncombe
Investigator: CEC State: NC

Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes X No Community ID: UPL
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No X Transect ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No X Plot ID:
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liriodendron tulipifera T FAC 9.
2. Diospyros virginiana T FAC 10.
3. Llgustrum sinense S FAC 11.
4. Rosa multiflora S UPL 12.
5. Oxalis dillenii H NI 13.
6. Celastrus orbiculatus V NI 14.
7. Phytolacca americana H FACU+ 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 3/7=43%
Remarks:
The vegetative criterion has not been met.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
Other Inundated
-Saturated in Upper 12"
X No Recorded Data Available Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: >12 (in.) Secondary Indicators:

Depth to Free Water in Pit: >12 (in.) Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
_ Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: >12 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
The hydrologic criterion has not been met.
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Rosman fine sandy loam Drainage Class: well drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluventic Haplumbrepts Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No X
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-8 10YR 4/4
8-12+ l OYR 4/6
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
The hyric soil criterion has been met.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes
Remarks:
No X Is the Sampling Point
No X Within a Wetland? Yes_ No X
No X
Sampling point within an upland.