20190185 Ver 1_PCN application package_20190211

Staff Review
Does this application have all the attachments needed to accept it into the review process?
r Yes r No
ID#*
20190185
Version* 1
Is this project a public transportation project?* r Yes
r No
Reviewer List:* Kevin Mitchell:eads\rkmitchell
Select Reviewing Office:* Asheville Regional Office - [phone]
Submittal Type:*
401 Application
Does this project require a request for payment to be sent?*
r
Yes
r
No
How much is r $240.00
*
owed? r $570.00

Project Submittal Form
Please note: fields marked with a red asterisk below are required. You will not be able to submit the form until all
mandatory questions are answered.
Project Type: r New Project
r Pre -Application Submittal
r More Information Response
r Other Agency Comments
r For the Record Only (Courtesy Copy)
New Project - Please check the new project type if you are trying to submit a new project that needs an official approval
decision.
Pre -Application Submittal - Please check the pre -application submittal if you just want feedback on your submittal and
do not have the expectation that your submittal will be considered a complete application requiring a formal decision.
More Information Response - Please check this type if you are responding to a request for information from staff and
you have and ID# and version for this response.
Other Agency Comments - Please check this if you are submitting comments on an existing project.
Project Contact Information
Name: Anna Priest
Who is subrritting the information?
Email Address: [e-mail]
Project Information
Project Name: Laurel Branch
Is this a public transportation project?
r Yes
r No
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
r Yes r No r Unknown
County (ies)
Transylvania
Please upload all files that need to be submited.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docurrent
1003 PCN application package.pdf 2.33MB
Only pdf or lqm files are accepted.
Describe the attachments:
V By checking the box and signing box below, I certify that:
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the
"Uniform Electronic Transactions Act")
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes

(the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act');
I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written
signature; AND
I intend to electronically sign and submit the online form."
Signature:
Submittal Date:

CiLearWater
C1earWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
www cwenv corn
February 11, 2019
David Brown Karen Higgins
US Army Corps of Engineers NC DEQ, Division of Water Quality
Asheville Regulatory Field Office 1617 Mail Service Center
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208 Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-2638
RE: Laurel Branch Permitting
Nationwide Permit 29 Application
Transylvania County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Brown and Ms. Higgins:
The attached Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) is being submitted on behalf of property
owners Elizabeth Parker and Margaret Bear. The project site is located on East Fork Road,
Eastatoe, North Carolina 28712. The applicant is seeking a Nationwide Permit 29 for the
construction of a small hydroelectric turbine adjacent to Laurel Branch for residential
purposes.
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 application has been
sent to Ms. Andrea Leslie of the NC Wildlife Resources Commission and Byron Hamstead
of the US Fish and Wildlife Service for review. A courtesy copy of this application has
also been sent to Kevin Mitchell at the NC Division of Water Resources Asheville Regional
Office.
Respectfully,
Anna Priest, P.W.S.
Environmental Scientist
Copy Furnished:
NC Wildlife Resources Commission Andrea Leslie
US Fish and Wildlife — Byron Hamstead
NC Division of Water Resources — Kevin Mitchell
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, NC 28801
828-698-9800 Tel
R. Clement Riddle, P.W.S.
Principal

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
SAW — 201 - BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder F] Assign Action ID Number in ORM
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Laurel Branch Hydrodam
2. Work Type: Private 17 Institutional Government ❑ Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form Bad and 63e]:
The purpose of the proposed project is to install a small hydroelectric turbine adjacent to Laurel
Branch for residential purposes.
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A41:
Elizabeth Parker and Margaret Bear
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 – or ORM Consultant 1D Number]: 29
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 65b]:
7. Project Location -Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form B1b]:
35.12564, -82.74683; E Fork Rd, Brevard, NC 28712, unmarked gravel driveway is immediately
west of Laurel Branch confluence with East Fork French Broad River.
8. Project Location -Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form 131a]: 8582-01-8723-000
9. Project Location – County [PCN Form A2b]: Transylvania
10. Project Location – Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Eastatoe
11. Project Information – Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form B2a]: Laurel Branch
12. Watershed / 8 -Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form B2c]: French Broad 06010105
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404 Section 10 & 404
Regulatory Action Type:
Standard Permit Pre -Application Request
✓ Nationwide Permit # 29 Unauthorized Activity
Regional General Permit # Compliance
Jurisdictional Determination Request F-1 No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

C�er. r
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Attn: Scott McLendon, Chief Regulatory Division
PO Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
-and-
NC DWR, Webscape Unit
Attn: Karen Higgins
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
I, the current landownerhnanaging 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 jurisdictional determination requests and permits to impact Wetlands and Water of
the US subject to Federal jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10
of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. CEC is authorized to provide supplemental information as
needed at the request of the USACE or DWR.
Additionally, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, US Army Corps of Engineers
to enter upon the property herein described for the purposes of conducting onsite investigations and
issuing a determination associated with Wetlands and Waters of the US subject to Federal
jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors
Act of 1899.
Property Owner of Record -
Property Owner Address: 1'W
Phone Number: 40 t "' S t+ — !
Email address: C . GOA^
Property Location:
Owner/Managing partner Sip
Owner/Managing printed nal
Date:
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Phone: [phone]
www.owenv.com

92/10/2018
Transylvania County - Basic Search
Parcel #: 8582018723000
Basic Search Real Estate Search Tax Bill Search
View Pro Record for this Parcel View Tax Bill Information
Parcel *: 6582018723000 Tax Year: 2019 Account S. 70462040
Owner Information
Tax Codes
Parker Elizabeth P && Bear Margaret G
IC ADVLTAX - COUNTY TAX
The Highland Building
FR05ADVLTAX - CONN FIRE TAX
675 Seminole Ave Ste 112
Unqualified
Atlanta, GA 30307
900,000
Property Information
F7-- Township
Land (Units/Type): 807.620
Eastatoe
ddress:
00395026411
Deed Information
Local Zoning
Date: 08/2017 Book. 00813 Page: 0601
0
Plat Book: Page:
2017WD
Legal Description
Old Ma
East Fork Rd
Propertm Values
Buildln
BXF:
nd: 5 088 0101
Market: 5 088 01
eased: 5 088 01
Deferred: 1 01
Sales Information
No. Book PageMonthYearinstrumentQual/UnQualImproved Price
1 001020050 05
2002RW
Unqualified
Vacant
0
002960202 07
1987WD
Unqualified
Vacant
900,000
3 00323065112
1989WD
Unqualified
Vacant
0
00395026411
1995QC
Unqualified
Vacant
0
5 00813060108
2017WD
Qualified
Vacant
4,673.000
1►ICI'7l%�S�irt l:L��.Tl. f t�i�i B fi �Tf'a IJ�RC�u�.fi�:� GftL
Return to Basic Searc
Sales Search Help
TRANSMANU
--COUNTY
NONTH GAROCINA
Transylvania County Web Site
All information on this site is prepared for the inventory of real property found within Transylvania County. All data Is complied from recorded
deeds, plats, and other public records and data. Users of this data are hereby notified that the aforementioned public information sources
should be consulted for verification of the information, All Information contained herein was created for the Transylvania County's internal use.
Transylvania County, Its employees and agents make no warranty as to the correctness or accuracy of the information set forth on this site
whether express or implied, in fact or in law, including without limitation the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular
use.
If you have any questions about the data displayed or technical problems related to this website, please email Jessica McCall
1.7.95.271
https:/ltax.transylvaniacou*.org/Vfew.aspx?prld=1877946 1/1

�ot WA 4g9
o �
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
® Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ❑ Yes © No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
Q 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
le. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes © No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes Q No
1f. 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 ® No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1h
below.
❑ Yes ® No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes Q No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Laurel Branch Hydroelectric Turbine
2b. County:
Transylvania
2c. Nearest municipality 1 town:
Eastatoe
2d. Subdivision name:
East Fork
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
nla
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Elizabeth Parker and Margaret Bear
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
00813/0601
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
nla
3d. Street address:
675 Seminole Ave, Ste 112
3e. City, state, zip:
Atlanta, GA 30307
3f. Telephone no.:
404-314-4151
3g. Fax no.:
nla
3h. Email address:
nla
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
Q Agent ❑ Other, specify:
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:
Ms. Anna Priest
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
ClearWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
5c. Street address:
32 Clayton St
5d. City, state, zip:
Asheville, NC 28801
5e. Telephone no.:
828-698-9800
5f. Fax no.:
n/a
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
$582-01-8723-000
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): I Latitude: 35.12564
Longitude: -82.74683
1c. Property size:
807.62 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Laurel Branch (Murr Creek)
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C; Tr, HQW
2c. River basin:
French Broad 06010105
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existinla conditions on the site and the aeneral land use in the vicinity of the nmiAr:t at tha timA of thin
application:
The project site is a large tract of mostly pristine hardwood forested land. There is an existing residential structure and an additional residential home
currently under construction. The project site has existing roads and infrastructure. Photos of existing site conditions are included (Appendix 1).
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 9,270
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the proposed project is to install a small hydroelectric turbine adjacent to Laurel Branch for residential purposes. Refer to Appendix 2.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
See Appendix 3.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the ❑ Yes Q No ❑ Unknown
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property 1
project(including all priorphases) in the 2ast7 Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type ❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
of determination was made?
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 []Yes © No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions
6. Future Project Pians
6a. Is this a phased project? ❑ Yes Q No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands x❑ Streams – tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetiand Impacts
It there are wetland
impacts proposed on the
site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
I 2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
5
S2 P
W2 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W3 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W4 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
-
W5 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W6
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
S6 -
Choose oner—
2g. Total
Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
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.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 P
Type In (Other)
Laurel Branch
PER
Corps
7
5
S2 P
Stabilization
Laurel Branch
PER
Corps
7
8
S3 -
Choose one
_
S4 -
Choose one
-
S5 -
Choose one
_
S6 -
Choose oner—
_
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
13
3i. Comments:
S1 is a weir for purpose of diverting a portion of the stream to the hydro -electric turbine. S2 is the outlet protection.
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water
Name of waterbody
Choose one
Yes/No
impact number
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody
Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
B3 -
type
Temporary T
B4 -
01 -
Yes/No
Choose
B5 -
02 -
Yes/No
Choose
03 -
Choose
04 -
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water Impacts
4g. Comments:
S. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction or000sed. then complete the chart below_
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c. 5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
(acres)
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
Filled Excavated
P1
Choose one
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
137 -
P2
Choose one
Yes/No
5f. Total:
B2 -
5g. comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
6c.
Reason for impact
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
5k. Method of construction:
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
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 anv impacts reouire mitioation. then you MUST fill out Section D of this form
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
137 -
Yes/No
B2 -
YestNo
B3 -
YestNo
B4 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6 -
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
til. comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
See supplemental information.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
See supplemental information.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for ❑ Yes X❑ No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
projects ❑Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
Type: Choose one Quantity:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type: Choose one Quantity:
Type: Choose one Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete If Making a Pavment to In -lieu Fee Proaram
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
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 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6g.
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ❑X 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.-
equired:
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 7 of 10

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
❑ Yes © No
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
., cis------
�. vwn.racamans erneni roan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
0.01%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes © No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
The project is less than 12°% impervious.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local ovemment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
❑ Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
apply (check all that apply):
❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
❑ Yes ❑ No
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
ElCoastal counties
❑HQW
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
❑Session Law 2008-246
[]Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
X❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑x Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary information I
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federellstatellocal) funds or the [I Yes Q 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 Oyes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPAISEPA)?
1c. 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)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in1 [:]YesQ No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
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 project includes the development of a small hydroelectric turbine for a single residential property. The project would not result in additional
impacts that could impact nearby downstream water quality.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
48. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
On-site wastewater will be treated by a septic system.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ❑X No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
El Yes No
impacts?
5c. if yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
-
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
FWS county data and Natural Heritage Program GIS data. Additionally, CEC consulted the FWS's "Northern Long -Eared Bat Consultation Areas" map
for Transylvania County. The project is not located within a county with any known occurrences of hibemacula or maternity sites.
R GQ w41w1 U. -I. 6.1 -161a -a 10%----
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ❑ Yes ❑X 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 ❑ Yes ❑X No
status (e.g., National 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 Register of Historic Places records maintained by the NC State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). It is the opinion of CEC, that the
proposed project is not likely to threaten the integrity of nearby historically regulated sites as they occur >1 mile from the project site.
S. 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:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
NC Floodplain Mapping Program. Map panel 37008546OW (effective October 2, 2009).
R.OeKevit
ApplicantlAgent's Printed Name Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant isprovided.)
Page 10 of 10

Supplemental Information
Section D.
la. The property owners have proposed installing a hydroelectric turbine and associated
infrastructure to avoid installation of powerlines and associated grid utilities. Due to the remote
location of the property, by remaining "off the grid," the impacts necessary to install the turbine
will be significantly less than traditional electric utility infrastructure.
1 b. The turbine and infrastructure will be constructed with minimal impacts. The weir design will
always allow the 7Q10 (0.70 cfs) to bypass the turbine, resulting in minimal impact to the stream.
Associated infrastructure for the turbine including the cross -vane, intake, trough, and outlet, will
also be constructed mostly by hand, and when equipment is necessary the upmost precautions will
be taken to ensure minimal impact to the stream.

Figures

■
Laurel Branch
.<' z
�
�
�
�
�
�
%
fll )
�
Approximate [
Project Location
■■r
�
..- , ■
2 - L�
k7 r ^ .
w !�14 q y\!kA . e.
P 16
` f
# O 5,000 10,000
© f'Feet
Drawn by- APP 1029.201sccProject #669I I
� ..
Transylvania Count GfflrMLer Vicinity Map
Nom Carolina FIgm!
ge�_k
. +moi NorthCarolina 2880

Laurel Branch

Laurel Branch

N
Laurel Branch
Legend
Panels
Political Areas
Stream Centerline
Cross sections
Levee
Flood Hazard Areas
� AE
,rAr Floodway(AE)
0.295 Chance Annual Flood Hazard
Future Conditions 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard
North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program

icABEE
SSOCIATES, A.
PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYING
Eric S. McAbee, PLS Fax [phone]
J. Barry West, PLS Telephone [phone]
Wallace S. McAbee, PLS (Emeritus)
3 McAbee Trail Fairview North Carolina, 28730
www. mcabeesurvey.com Firm License Number: C-694
NO. DATE DESCRIPTION BY SITE PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY OF: DATE: //-7-/5
ELIZABETH PARKER & MARGARET BEAR PROJECT #: 12384
DRAWING #: G-18-4557
Figure 6 DRAWN BY: AMW
SCALE: I "=40'
PIN: 8562-01-8723
NUMBER 6 TOWNSHIP
TRANSYLVANIA COUNTY, N.C.

Figure 7.1—Intake Design

ILL.
approx. 20 2'x
2' rocky
Figure 7.2 —Outlet Protection
Nofes:
- place 2` x 2'rocks below
chine ouflef to profecf
sfreambed from erosion
FLOW
I
Strew Mbed

3
O
Ana
LLM
.� R
D
L
w-- U
Figure 7.3 —Outlet Protection
Y

Appendix 1
Photographs

I
4
_
_
•}
+� t � f �
M1 M

lkV/ a mc k,
44
_ .moi � ��#� •�"' � _ f �}. r
eyk
Flo
op
„ _ _ i rD r E
t ,

PO
y '
+ f
�' SF r• FT
1 sG
'}„ L
�' ■ y� '

Appendix 2
Hydrocycle Engineering, P.C. Technical Memorandum

•-�. HydroCycle
Engineering, PC
Technical Memorandum
Project: Laurel Branch Microh dro System - Hydrologic Evaluation
Location: Laurel Branch, East Fork Road, Transylvania County, North Carolina
Client: Margaret Bear and Elizabeth Parker
Date: January 30, 2099
Prepared by: Timothy Ormond, P.E., HydroCycle Engineering
Background
The Bear -Parker residence is currently being constructed on a mostly forested parcel located off
of East Fork Road in Transylvania County, North Carolina (Figure 1). In an effort to create a
sustainable homestead powered by renewable energy, a microhydro system is being designed
to supply electric power to the residence using flow from Laurel Branch, a tributary of the East
Fork of the French Broad River. Figure 2 shows a layout of the proposed system in relation to
the residence. HydroCycle Engineering was retained by the client to evaluate the available flow
for the microhydro system and assist with the evaluation required for permitting the system.
Figur' 1. Vicinity map of Bear -Parker residence and microhydro site.
HydroCycle Engineering • 1 Haywood St, Suite 401, Asheville, NC 28801 - 828.989-8075 - www.hydroQicle-eno.com

Laurel Branch Mcmhydm System — N ydrologwc EvalaaWm. Trari$Ovarr a County, North Carolina
,18rx19t 3b.2�1g
Figure 2. Sita mIp of Bear- Parker residence and microhydro system
� Engi ee ing, PC Z
(

Laurel Branch Microhydro System — Hydrologic Evaluation, Transylvania County, North Carolina
January30, 2019
Methodology
Tim Ormond, P.E., Principal Engineer at HydroCycle Engineering, reviewed available site plans,
microhydro system design drawings and project -related documents and conducted a site visit
on October 1, 2018 to view the proposed microhydro system site location and observe stream
conditions.
Photographs of Laurel Branch in the vicinity of the proposed intake for the microhydro system
are provided in Figures 3 and 4. The proposed intake for the microhydro system has an
approximate latitude/longitude location of 357'19.357"N/82°44'42.648"W at an elevation of
approximately 2,618 feet.
for the microhydro system.
HydroCycle 3
Engineering, PC

Laurel Branch Microhydro System — Hydrologic Evaluation, Transylvania County, North Carolina
January 30, 2019
for the microhydro system.
The approach for this evaluation was to determine the climatic year 7 -day, 10 -year low -flow
discharge (7Q10) for the proposed intake location on Laurel Branch. Because Laurel Branch
itself is ungauged and does not have available stream gauge data, statistical data available from
other United States Geological Survey (USGS) stream gauges in the vicinity of the project
location were reviewed and evaluated. Five gauges were selected based on their proximity to
the proposed microhydro site and the number of years of record available. These five gauges
are shown in red circles in Figure 5. Three of the selected stream gauges had records of 70
Hydrogde
(5 Engineering, PC
4

Laurel Branch Microhydro System — Hydrologic Evaluation, Transylvania County, North Carolina
January 30, 2019
years or more while the remaining two gauges had record lengths of approximately 30 years
each.
Mal" AI_j
PMM:.Agn
VW. sRttR6
jMVW:7.s
shL 2WIMs
�&,�Mw rI .
%ft. r�+r„tikr
LUperirta
"7111 Yn .1 Oft
it AAAX�
OL. ON
few M_M .
I"" IL MW
pvmy Y -{fir
1!'4+■ 9!k13
IMUR 11b
LA7* rt
7� i3.kaaaar
'r'
I FYltaj iY l Y r 1
4a1'4�4 as 1
LFR Iiizi
-
j1Y*� i L
OQ+M: @AM
M: s is r;W7 ;..siai
+Wrnksl: sit
ants
IRwgl ZW
86443M
Flow bibrM
a ase
sta, r�ailus may: �ssr►
Dr nW. 45A ;YrlRiq:s.sa+.
ROW...amsaftw IOTi: 7.Oi11!
iaq:si: DAM
taWA:,.,i.a �J
Ifff.
W AIA
AIA
iOEM + IMM1+'r1k*}4 i sF'iU+6q WDivi}i+�Uk LO
a;
4I
,.WI
my
asaar A
Figure S. USGS stream gauges used in 7Q3LO evaluation.
1
da, VMe .-A.i*z
„nfinAw_ 'iLi
PUM ois,a
from soma
PMWM t V
Flow statistics for these five gauges, including 7Q10 statistics, were obtained from the 2016
USGS publication entitled "Low -Flow Characteristics and Flow -Duration Statistics for Selected
USGS Continuous -Record Streamgaging Stations in North Carolina Through 2012."
A
4
These flow statistics were then normalized based on contributing drainage area at the stream
gauges to yield flows in units of cubic feet per second per square mile (cfsm) and the
normalized average flow statistics from these five gauges were then applied to the Laurel Branch
watershed at the proposed microhydro system intake. The contributing watershed area at the
Laurel Branch intake location was delineated and determined to be approximately 1.07 square
miles. The contributing Laurel Branch watershed is shown in Figure 6.
kms) Engiineeering, PC
5

Laurel Branch Microhydro System — Hydrologic Evaluation, Transylvania County, North Carolina
January30, 2019
rIgure a. Laurel israncn watersnen at proposed microhydro site.
Findings
The findings of the gauge evaluation are presented in the following tables and figure. Table 1
shows the results of the 7Q1O evaluation along with other flow statistics. The resulting 7Q1O
value for the microhydro site intake location at Laurel Branch was determined to be 0.70 cfs.
Table 2 shows the determination of available daily mean flow above 7Q1O versus the percent of
time the flow would be expected to be available on an annual basis. The data from Table 2 is
shown in a graphical form in Figure 7. These flow statistics were provided to the microhydro
system design team to be used in the sizing of the system and intake structure.
, HydroCycle 6
Engineering, AC

Laurel Branch Microhydro System - Hydrologic Evaluation, Transylvania County, North Carolina
January 30, 2019
Table 1. Results of 7010 Evaluation
Station m
LI565
Station No.
� 30Q2
742
Watershed
Arca
Area Weighted Discimrges (ds/sq. mi.)
Mean Da1iy
Discharge
Area
Weighted
MDD
ds ds tis ds Sq. Mi. 7410 30V WM10 742 (+:fs)
(tisJaq mile)
422
03439000
52.0 92.0
63.0 79.0
67.9
0.77
1.35
0.93
1.16
235
3.46
413
03409500
72.0 134.0
86.0 115.0
103.0
0.70
L30
0.83
L12
344
3.34
414
03440000
7.0 14.0
8.7 12.0
20
0.60
1,20
0.74
L03
35.8
3.06
416
03441000
23.0 45.0
29.0 3&0
1 40.4
0.57
1.11
0.72
0.94
128
3.17
420
03443000
193.0 374.0
249.0 314.0
296.0
0.65
1.26
0.84
1.06
978
3.30
Average
Laurel Branch irtake I
0.70 L33 I
R87 L14
I L07
0.66
1-25
1 0.81
1.06
N/A
3.27
Dela Source:
Low -Flow Characteristic and Flow -Dunton Statistics for Selected USGS Continuous-Rewid Streemgaging Stations In North Carolina Through 2012 (Scientific Investigations Report 20154001Versien
11, March 2026, J. Curtis Weaver et aIJ
Abbreviations:
3I)Q2 = 30 -day; 2 -year law -pow discharge
7Q10 = dinetic year 7 -day, 10yhe3r low -flow discharge
7Q2 = 7 -day, 2 -year low4low discharge
W7Q10 - wintw7day, 10yrearlow4law discharge
ds = cuibicfeet per second
dam = wbie feet per second per square utile
MOD = Mean D.Ily Discharge
Table 2. Daily Mean Flow abnva 7010
ba45ou,ac.
L-41- Dunmrishio, and Flow-Dunti.n Stmistlo Jnr SlkcW VSSS Contirlu.us-Rasord Sheaneaging stations in WnN Carolina enough 291215dentifit 1-0gations Report 2111SAIDDIVen#un LI, Mandl 2015, J. Curtis Weaver at d.)
7Q16- di -tic ye.174W ]gy.ar I -now distharg.
0 HydroCyde 7
*,
,w.Engineering, PC
Watershed
Duration of Dally Mw
aan Fla, Pnr
rned as )0(( Pernapgilw, Pwcmtam of Dladhergq, EVal or Lara Then Wheeled What, XX Percent of The. (ds)
Stader m
Arc
Rh SM lath IM 25M 29th sm 5e14h 75th 79ds 90N Sten a5u, 95tlh
Lamm I- Weighted Peroomis Waighr.d P.r4ndse Weighted PeruntlY Weighted Peromdk Weighted Percentile WeigM.d ForaneY Weighted
412
67.9
72.0
Las 850 1.25 122.0 200 18$0 277 279.0 4.11 409.0 6.02 5360
7.89
413
103.0
106,0
1.03 ]28.0 124 ]83.0 1.78 277.0 2,69 412.0 4.011 5940 5.73 778.0
7.55
414
IV
10.0
0.05 13.0 1.11 19.0 1.62 290 2A8 43,0 3.68 620 5.30 BOA
6.84
416
40.4
34.0
11.84 420 1,04 62.0 1.53 99.0 245 151.0 3.74 227.0 5.62 303.0
7.91
420
296.0
2820
0.95 3480 1.18 521.0 L76 7940 2.68 11500 3.89 17000 5,74 2300.0
7.77
Average (tis)
0.95 L16 I.70 261 3AS Sm
Percent
Percent Tinr Available lAnnmlp
9a%91nG 75li 50th 25% lab
54
ba45ou,ac.
L-41- Dunmrishio, and Flow-Dunti.n Stmistlo Jnr SlkcW VSSS Contirlu.us-Rasord Sheaneaging stations in WnN Carolina enough 291215dentifit 1-0gations Report 2111SAIDDIVen#un LI, Mandl 2015, J. Curtis Weaver at d.)
7Q16- di -tic ye.174W ]gy.ar I -now distharg.
0 HydroCyde 7
*,
,w.Engineering, PC

Laurel Branch Microhydro System — Hydrologic Evaluation, Transylvania County, North Carolina
January 30, 2019
&a
1.0
rLn
sp
e
3.0
2B
SA
o.0
Laurel Branch Microhydro System Evaluation
Available Flow Above 7Q10 (cfs)
' --8 ---4
,..r Ra 'AM 4= xm WAG nm 8U% 9" 1u[m
PwcWaFTlma R wb aumU Wa on AmuW Baps
Figure 7. Available flow above 7010 versus cement of time flow
expected on an annual basis.
Reference
Low -Flow Characteristics and Flow -Duration Statistics for Selected USGS Continuous -Record
Streamgaging Stations in North Carolina Through 2012 (Scientific Investigations Report 2015-
5001 Version 1. 1, March 2016, J. Curtis Weaver et al.)
e E gimes ng, K
8

Appendix 3
Turbine Description and Design

Appendix 3 - Turbine Description and Design
Turbine capacity:
The turbine's capacity is designed on electricity demand and is based on the available
design head and an (estimated) design flowrate:
- Previous electricity demand: peak in Jan 17, 2250 kWh _). 2500 kWh per month
- Design Capacity: 3.7 kW
- Design discharge: 3.53 cfs (100 I/s) (based on field visits and flow measurements
and initially estimated to be available approximately 345 days per year)
Design head: 2 x 12.5 ft (approx. 2 x 3.81 m)
- Target efficiency: 50%
- Target TSR: 0.5
The design turbine power (3.70 kW) is based on the client's peak power demand in 2016-17
(2250 kWh), 8300 operating hours per year, an (estimated) flowrate of 3.53 cubic feet per
second (100 I/s), an available total head of 25ft (7.62m) and a system efficiency of cp = 0.5.
Two runners will be installed each with a capacity of 1.85M It is assumed that the turbine
can be operated during all seasons throughout the year as the temperatures are not low
enough to freeze the streamflow and the annual rain distribution is fairly constant (low
discharge, source. National Weather Service, US Dept. of Commerce).
Site installation
The turbine intake will be placed at a location of the Laurel Branch where natural pools and
stepped reaches of the stream are found (as depicted and visualised in Figure A2:1). Two
pools (used for intake and outfall) will be connected via a wooden trough into which the
turbines will be installed. Figure A2.2 presents an overview of the micro -hydro system to be
installed. It consists of an intake (1), a 1.5ft (0.45m) wide chute (2), two turbines with 1.5ft
wide runners, a generator to be mounted on the outside of the chute (3) and an outlet (4).
The system will be located to the right of the stream and will connect two natural pools with
the chute.
The upper pool will be modified to manipulate and divert the water as follows: Several locally
sourced rocks will be employed to form a cross vane, which serves to control and divert the
flow. A 1ft wide and 2" high sluice gate will be installed which assures that the 7Q10 (0.70fs)
discharge stays in the main stream at all times. The turbine intake chute consists of an
orifice into which the discharge above the 7Q10 enters. The orifice is designed to allow a
discharge of up 3.53cfs. Figures A2:3 and A2A present visualisations of the system in the
vicinity of the intake. In the blow-up, Figure A2:4, the intake structure and the debris -rack are
marked as (3), or (1), respectively and the rock -vane is marked as (2). The lower orifice plate
is exactly the same height as the sluice gate opening in the main stream ensuring that no
water will enter the chute at very low flow (up to 7Q10) and hence all the water will remain in
the stream. The cross -vane, (2), comprises rocks, approx. 2ft in diameter ensuring that the

water level in the pool will be maintained at 2ft above the bottom of the pool except for very
low flows. The rock vane has a 2" x 1ft opening, which functions as an underflown sluice
gate which will allow a discharge of 7Q10. In order to calculate the flowrates through the
orifice and the sluice gate the following (standard) equations were applied:
Sluice gate discharge equation:
7Q10=CG*WG*dG* 2gH
where
7Q10 = mimimum discharge to be left in the stream
CG = Gate discharge coefficient taken as 0.5 (conservative estimate to ensure minimum of
7Q10)
WG = Gate width (1 ft)
dG = Gate height (2")
H = Upstream water depth in pool
Orifice dischaMe flowe uation:
QTUI* =Co *Wo *do * 2gh
where
Qm,6= Turbine's design flowrate
Co = Orifice discharge coefficient taken as 0.6 (standard value for rectangular orifices)
Wo = Orifice width (1.5ft)
do = Orifice height (2")
h =Water depth above orifice centroid calculated as h=H- (dG+ d�12)
Figure A2:5 presents a cross-section of the intake depicting the 18" -wide orifice (intake to log
chute), the rock vane and the 12" -wide sluice gate including all relevant dimensions in
inches. This environmentally -friendly micro -hydro system requires adaptation to the local
conditions and the exact flowrates through the intake and through the sluice gate will be
carefully monitored after initial installation via in situ stream velocity and water depth
measurements.
The log chute into which the turbine runners will be installed will be made from locally
sourced wood (and will be similar to the one depicted in Figure A2:6) and will be 1.5ft wide
and approximately 1ft deep. The water in the chute will accelerate (and get shallower) on its
way towards the runner and will impact with the runner. The turbine -runner is a newly
developed impulse -driven device and it has a similar operating principle to a pelton wheel.
Instead of a round (highly -pressurised) water jet the water in the chute will be directed onto
the runner which reverses the water by it's cups (see Figure A2:7). The outflow of the first
runner will be collected by the chute and the water will be accelerated again before it
approaches the second runner. The speed of the runner will be controlled by a standard
off-the-shelf generator to allow a tip -speed -ratio of 0.5, which is when the runner reaches its
optimum power generation.

Figure A2:8 depicts the outlet area and the water from the chute will be returned to the
downstream pool as shown. The bottom of the pools is rock so erosion of sediments is not a
problem. The log chute will end one foot above the pool water level, similar to the one shown
in Figure A2:9. A more detailed view of the design of the chute outflow is provided in Figure
A2:10, which presents a longitudinal section of the outflow. A few large, locally -sourced
rocks might be placed into the pool to allow for the remaining energy to be dissipated
naturally.

-
-
���
. � . . . © . �
• .
-
.4
vw
-
��
_.
��
-
-

Figure A2:2: System overview
Figure A2:3: Tap view of upper pool including rock vane and chute intake

Figure A2:4: Blow up of cross -vane and chute intake
Figure A2:5: Cross-sectional view of Intake including dimensions in inches

Figure A2:6: Example of a wooden log chute

Figure AZT CAD drawing of the turbine runner with nozzle and runoff grid
Figure A2:8: Chute outlet area