20150088 Ver 2_IP Permit Package_20190328

Staff Review
Does this application have all the attachments needed to accept it into the review process?
r Yes r No
ID#*
20150088
Version* 2
Is this project a public transportation project?* r Yes
r No
Reviewer List:* Sue Homewood:eads\slhomevtood
Select Reviewing Office:* Winston-Salem 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
Who is subrritting the inforrration?
Email Address: [e-mail]
Project Information
....................................................................................................................................................................................
Project Name: Asheville Airport Apron Expansion
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)
Buncombe
Please upload all files that need to be submited.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docurrent
999 IP Permit Package.pdf 7.52MB
Only pdf or lqm files are accepted.
Describe the attachments:
Individual Permit Package for the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project.
V By checking the box and signing box below, I certify that:
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
o 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")
o 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: Is filled inautonatically.

CLearWaLer
C1earWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
www.cwenv.corn
March 26, 2019
Mr. David Brown
US Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-2638
Ms. Karen Higgins
NC DWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 N. Salisbury Street, 9"' Floor
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
RE: Asheville Regional Airport Apron Expansion Project
Buncombe County, North Carolina
Mr. Brown and Ms. Higgins,
The attached Individual Permit application is being submitted on behalf of the Greater Asheville
Regional Airport Authority represented by Mr. Lew Bleiweis. The applicant is seeking permit
authorization for impacts associated with the Apron Expansion of the Asheville Regional Airport.
The project site will include 2.27 acres of apron pavement to add one or two remain overnight
(RON) aircraft parking positions, approximately 100,000 square yards of earthwork, construction
of a retaining wall, and relocation of an existing fence in Buncombe County, North Carolina.
A copy of this package has been sent to Mr. Byron Hamstead of the US Fish and Wildlife Service
and Ms. Andrea Leslie of the NC Wildlife Resources Commission for review. A copy of this
application has also been submitted to Mr. Kevin Mitchell of the NC Division of Water
Resources, Asheville Regional Office and Ms. Sue Homewood of the NC Division of Water
Resources, Winston-Salem Office. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 828-698-9800 if you
have any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Anna Priest, P.W.S.
Project Manager
R. Clement Riddle, 4PW.'s
Principal
Copy Furnished:
US Fish and Wildlife Service — Byron Hamstead
NC Wildlife Resources Commission — Andrea Leslie
NC Division of Water Resources, Asheville Regional Office — Kevin Mitchell
NC Division of Water Resources, Winston-Salem Office — Sue Homewood
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, NC 28801
828-698-9800 Tel

Individual Permit Application for U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers Section 404 Permit
and
North Carolina 401 Water Quality Certification
March 26, 2019
Applicant:
my
alOal�rnille
PONT
Take
e 4 lacy VMV Ou6
Greater Asheville Regional Airport Authority
Attn: Lew Bleiweis
61 Terminal Drive, Suite 1
Fletcher, North Carolina 28732
Project Location:
61 Terminal Drive
Fletcher, North Carolina 28732
Prepared by:
C1earWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
828-698-9800

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
SAW — 201 -
BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Asheville Airport Apron Expansion
2. Work Type: Private ❑ Institutional ❑ Government ❑ Commercial ❑✓
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
Expansion of existing airport apron for additional overnight aircraft parking.
4. Property Owner/ Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]:
Greater Asheville Regional Airport Authority
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]: ClearWater Environmental Consultants
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]:
See Attached
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form 131b]:
35.434592, -82.537273; 61 Terminal Dr, Fletcher, NC 28732
8. Project Location - Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form 131a]: 9643523284
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Buncombe
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Fletcher
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: French Broad River
12. Watershed / 8 -Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: French Broad 06010105
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404
Regulatory Action Type:
8 Standard Permit
Nationwide Permit #
❑ Regional General Permit #
❑ Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑✓ Section 10 & 404
❑Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
0 Compliance
7 No Permit Required

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
ENG
Form Approved -
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
OMB No. 0710-0003
33 CFR 325. The proponent agency is CECW-CO-R.
Expires. 01-08-2018
The public reporting burden for this collection of information, OMB Control Number 0710-0003, is estimated to average 11 hours per response, Including the time
for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of
information. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or burden reduction suggestions to the Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services,
at whs_mc-aIgg gsd,mjx.dd-dod-iinforrnatign-co Ile tions _ maiiLml1. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall
be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT
RETURN YOUR APPLICATION TO THE ABOVE EMAIL.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authorities: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403; Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act,
Section 103, 33 USC 1413; Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule 33 CFR 32(�-332. Principal Purpose: Information provided on this form
will be used in evaluating the application for a permit. Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and
local government agencies, and the public and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by Federal law, Submission of requested Information
Is voluntary, however, If information Is not provided the permit application cannot be evaluated nor can a permit be issued. One set of original drawings or gond
reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this application (see sample drawings and/or instructions)
and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity_ An application that is not completed in full will be returned.
System of Record Notice (SORN). The information received is entered into our permit tracking database and a SORN has been completed (SORN #A1 145b)
and maybe accessed at the following website: htlo,/L Rcld,deiense.govlPdvagylSORNslndex/DOD-wid"ORN-Article-VtewlArticW-570115/a1145b-ce.ascx
(ITEMS 1 THRU 4 T BE FILLED BY THE CORPS)
1. APPLICATION NO.
2. FIELD OFFICE CODE
3. DATE RECEIVED
14. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETE
(ITEMS BELOW TO BE FILLED BYAPPLICAN7)
5. APPLfCANTS NAME
8_ AUTHORIZED AGENTS NAME AND TITLE (agent is not required)
First - Lew Middle - Last- Bleiweis
First - R. Middle -Clement Last - Riddle
Company - Greater Asheville Regional Airport Authority
Company - ClearWater Environmental Consultants, Inc,
E-mail Address - [e-mail]
E-mail Address-anna®cwenv.com
6. APPLICANTS ADDRESS;
9. AGENTS ADDRESS:
Address- 61 Terminal Dr, Suite 1
Address- 32 Clayton St
City - Asheville State - NC Zip -28732 Country -USA
City - Asheville State - NC Zip -28801 Country -USA
7. APPLICANTS PHONE NOs. w/AREA CODE
10. AGENTS PHONE NOs. WAREA CODE
a. Residence b. Business a Fax
a. Residence b. Business c. Fax
828-684-2226 828-654-3404
828-695-9800
STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
11. 1 hereby authorize, R. Clement Riddle/ClearWater to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to fumish, upon request,
supplemental information In support of this permit application. _N.
} l p
�12 r til
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE
NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE (see instructions)
Asheville Airport Apron Expansion
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN (if applicable)
14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (if applicable)
French Broad River
Address 61 Terminal Dr.
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Latitude: -N 35.434592 Longitude: -W -82.537273
City - Fletcher State- NC Zip- 28732
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN (see Instructions)
State Tax Parcel ID 4643523284 Municipality Fletcher
Section - Township - Range-
ange-
ENG FORM 4345, MAY 2018 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. Page 3 of 1

17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
From Asheville take I-26 East to exit 40 for NC -280 toward Arden. Tum right an NC -280. In 0.2 miles turn right onto Terminal Drive.
18. Nature of Activity (Description of project, Include afl features)
See attached.
18. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions)
See attached.
USE BLOCKS 20-23 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20.. Reason(s)for Discharge
See attached.
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type In Cubic Yards,
Type Type Type
Amount in Cubic Yards Amount in Cubic Yards Amount in Cubic Yards
Clean fill and culverts - 100,000 cy.
22. Surface Area In Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled (see instructions)
Acres 0,22 acres of wetland
or
Linear Feet 467 linear feet of stream
23. Description of Avoidance, Minimization, and Compensation (see instructions)
See attached.
ENG FORM 4345, MAY 2018 Page 3 of 2

24. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? ElYes ❑X No IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
25. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbcdy pr more than can be anlered here, please attach a supplemental list).
a. Address- See attached.
city - State - Zip -
b. Address -
City - State - Zip -
c. Address -
City - State - Zip -
d. Address -
City - State - Zip -
e. Address -
City - State - Zip -
26. List of Other Certificates or Approvals/Denfals received from other Federai, State, or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application,
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL" IDENTIFICATION DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
NUMBER
USAGE AJD SAW -2018.00173 April 2, 2018
Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building, and flood plain permits
27. Application is hereby made for permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that this information In this application is
complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the worts described herein or am acting as the duty authorized agent of the
applicant. - ^
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The Application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly
authorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U,S.C, Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States
knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent
statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent
statements or entry, shall be fined not more than $14,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
ENG FORM 4345, MAY 2018 Page 3 of 3

CLparWaLer
Department of the Almy
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 Sheet
Raleigh, North Carolina 27544
I, 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 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 14
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, 1 authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, US Arany Corps of Engineers
to enter upon the property herein described for the purposes of conducting onsite investigations and
issuing a deternination 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: Greater Asheville Regional Airport Authority
Property Owner Address:
61 Terminal Drive, Suite I
Fletcher, NC 28732
Phone Number: [phone]
Email address: [e-mail]
Property Location:
South area of Terminal and Ramp
Owner/Managing partner Signature: '�r 17 - 6. ���--•.-�� - �-
Owner/Managing printed name: Michael A. Reisman, A.A.E., Deputy Executive Diector
Date: -1 - �-1 - l 9
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Phone: [phone]
WWW.QWCDV.COM

Parcel Information

3/26/2019 Buncombe County Tax Lookup - Property Card
COUNTY OF BUNCOMBE, NORTH CAROLINA
Web Property Record Card
9643-52-3284-00000
r<< Back to Parcel Details
Date Printed: 3/26/2019
Owner Information
Parcel Information
Total Property Value: 57,789,800
Deed Book/Page
Qualified
Status:
Active
Owners:
GREATER ASHEVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY
Deed Date:
6/30/2017
Address:
61 TERMINAL DR
Deed Book/Page:
5565/1196
5
FLETCHER NC 28732-6201
Plat Book/Page:
0000/0000
Property Location:
97 TERMINAL DR
Legal Reference:
SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED
Taxing Districts
PREFAB METAL BLDING
Location:
97 TERMINAL DR
County:
Buncombe County
Class:
GVMT OWNED
City:
ASHEVILLE
Neighborhood:
AIRPORT ROAD FRONT
Fire:
Subdivision:
School:
Sub Lot:
Conservation/Easement: N
Flood:
N
Ownership History
Transfer Date
I Price
I Legal Reference
Deed Book/Page
Qualified
IVacant When Sold
I Seller Names
06/30/17
$o
I SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED
1 5565 / n96
No: A
No
CITY OF ASHEVILLE
Acres Land I Bldgs
570-59121,032,000136,471,3(
Land Data Total Acres: o
Impr Assessed I Desc
0 157,789,800lEXM
71,300 57>789,800EXM
Land Value: ether Tmmnvementc
21,032,000
Assessment
Deferred Taxable
0 0
0 0
Vahie: 996_,00
Improv#
Description
Year Units
1
1 ST UB OR BARN
1996 504 Square Feet
2
1 ST UB OR BARN
1996 195 Square Feet
3
STOP, PASS ELEV
2017 1 Per Each
4
FRAME/ALUM. CANOPY
1996 256 Square Feet
5
CANOPY COMMERCIAL QY 2017 2,100 Square Feet
6
OPEN PARK PAVILION
1996 752 Square Feet
7
PREFAB METAL BLDING
2006 8,280 Square Feet
8
PREFAB METAL BLDING
2oo6 3,450 Square Feet
9
PREFAB METAL BLDING
2oo6 3,470 Square Feet
10
1 ST UB OR BARN
1996 28o Square Feet
Com. Bldg ID Bldg Class Sq Feet Bsmt SgFt Bsmt Finished Year Built Grade Condition Value
1 MASONRY 76,000 0 0 1965 B N 12,564,500
Section
https://tax.buncombecounty.org/Propert
SgFt #Stories
PASSENGER TERMINAL
LJn Sketched SubPmas:
PASSENGER TERMINAL
CPTB: 38000 P 9800: C=2.60
Section
https://tax.buncombecounty.org/Propert
SgFt #Stories
PASSENGER TERMINAL
38,000 1
PASSENGER TERMINAL
38,000 1
yCard.aspx
1/4

3/26/2019 Buncombe County Tax Lookup - Property Card
Com. Bldg ID Bldg Class Sq Feet Bsmt SgFt Bsmt Finished Year Built Grade Condition Value
2 PREFAB MET 7,020 0 0 1995 C N 229,8o0
CFPM
( 2788
Section I SgFt I # Stories
FINISHED METAL BLD 2,788 1
Com. Bldg ID Bldg Class Sq Feet Bsmt SgFt Bsmt Finished Year Built Grade Condition Value
PREFAB MET 5,984 0 0 1993 C N 188,500
https://tax.buncombecounty.org/PropertyCard.aspx
2/4

3/26/2019
Buncombe County Tax Lookup - Property Card
Com. Bldg ID Bldg Class Sq Feet Bsmt SgFt Bsmt Finished Year Built Grade Condition Value
15 MASONRY 1,923 0 0 1968 C N 272,9001
Section
SgFt
#
Stories
PARKING
STRUCTURES
414,770
5
A
PARKING
STRUCTURES
22,560
4
A
https://tax.buncombecounty.org/PropertyCard.aspx 3/4

3/26/2019 Buncombe County Tax Lookup - Property Card
Total Building Value: 36,471,300
https://tax.buncombecounty.org/PropertyCard.aspx 4/4

Adjoining Property Owner
Mailing Labels

George Basham
15 Hidden Creek Dr
Arden, NC 28704
Jesse Ray Gibson
201 Heyden Ridge Dr
Clarkesville, GA 30523
David and Martha Kachman
35 Bran Rick Ln
Arden, NC 28704
Christopher Lee McFalls
249 Jones Rd
Fletcher, NC 28732
Peggy McKinney
11 Nathan Dr
Arden, NC 28704
Alvin Joseph Case Jr
233 Arrowhead Trl
Easley, SC 29642
Gail Barbara Green
10 Nathan Dr
Arden, NC 28704
Woodrow and Patricia Mack
5 Hidden Creek Dr
Arden, NC 28704
James Edney McKinney
16 Nathan Dr
Arden, NC 28704
Minkles LLC
10200 David Taylor Dr
Charlotte, NC 28262

Arturo Osorino and Nancy Maximo -Martinez J Hall Waddell
PO Box 761 PO Box 629
Mountain Home, NC 28758 Hendersonville, NC 28793
Priscilla Moss Walker GF Linamar LLC
130 Hoots Dr 2169 Hendersonville Rd
Hendersonville, NC 28792 Arden, NC 28704
Wild River Corp Riveter Property Holdings LLC
1075 E 20th St 132 King St
Chico, CA 95928 Brevard, NC 28712
NC State University Henderson County
Endowment Fund Board of Trustees 516 N Mills River Rd
Campus Box 7501 Mills River, NC 28759
Raleigh, NC 27695
Warrior Golf Management LLC Jai Prabhu LLC
15 Mason Rd 31 Airport Park Rd
Irvine, CA 92618 Fletcher, NC 28732

Jai Prabhu Restaurant LLC Youngblood Oil Co Inc.
PO Box 759 PO Box 2590
Fletcher, NC 28732 Hendersonville, NC 28793

Asheville Airport Apron Expansion
Legend
Project Boundary
Adjacent Property Owners
COutlying Buncombe and Henderson Parcels
Buncombe and Henderson Counties,
North Carolina
[LearWaker
32 Clayton St
Asheville, NC 28801
0 600 1,200 2,400
Feet
Adjacent Property Ownership
Label Map

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
Conservation............................................................................................................................................20
INTRODUCTION TO PROJECT...................................................................................1
9.2
1.1
Project Location......................................................................................................................................... l
7
1.2
Jurisdictional Waters.................................................................................................................................1
2.0
General Environmental Concerns............................................................................................................21
BACKGROUND AND PRIOR PROJECT HISTORY.................................................2
3.0
Avoidance..................................................................................................................................................9
EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS.....................................................................................4
9.6
3.1
Soils........................................................................................................................................................... 4
9.7
3.2
Fish and Wildlife Use of the Project Site..................................................................................................4
Alternatives Conclusion...........................................................................................................................12
3.3
Threatened and Endangered Species......................................................................................................... 4
9.9
3.4
Cultural Resources..................................................................................................................................... 5
4.0
7.1
PROJECT PURPOSE.......................................................................................................6
5.0
Conservation............................................................................................................................................20
PROPOSED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT....................................................................7
9.2
5.1
Apron Expansion Plans..............................................................................................................................
7
6.0
20
DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVES..............................................................................8
General Environmental Concerns............................................................................................................21
6.1
Avoidance..................................................................................................................................................9
9.6
6.2
Minimization and Justification of Impacts..............................................................................................12
9.7
Fish and Wildlife Values.........................................................................................................................
6.3
Alternatives Conclusion...........................................................................................................................12
Flood Hazards..........................................................................................................................................
7.0
9.9
CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION PLAN.........................................................................13
9.10
7.1
NC Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)............................................................................................13
9.11
Navigation...............................................................................................................................................
7.2
Summary..................................................................................................................................................13
Shore Erosion and Accretion...................................................................................................................
8.0
9.13
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES ........15
9.14
8.1
Factual Determination.............................................................................................................................15
9.15
Water Quality (Stormwater Management)...............................................................................................
8.2
Potential Impacts on Physical and Chemical Characteristics of the Aquatic Ecosystem .........................15
Energy Needs...........................................................................................................................................
23
8.3
Potential Impacts to Biological Characteristics of the Ecosystem...........................................................16
9.18
8.4
Potential Impacts on Special Aquatic Sites.............................................................................................17
9.19
Mineral Needs.........................................................................................................................................
8.5
Potential Effects on Human Use Characteristics.....................................................................................19
Considerations of Property Ownership....................................................................................................
24
8.6
Summary..................................................................................................................................................19
24
9.0
PUBLIC INTEREST CONSIDERATIONS..................................................................20
9.1
Conservation............................................................................................................................................20
9.2
Economics...............................................................................................................................................
20
9.3
Aesthetics................................................................................................................................................
20
9.4
General Environmental Concerns............................................................................................................21
9.5
Wetlands..................................................................................................................................................21
9.6
Historic Properties...................................................................................................................................
21
9.7
Fish and Wildlife Values.........................................................................................................................
21
9.8
Flood Hazards..........................................................................................................................................
22
9.9
Floodplain Values....................................................................................................................................22
9.10
Land Use..................................................................................................................................................
22
9.11
Navigation...............................................................................................................................................
22
9.12
Shore Erosion and Accretion...................................................................................................................
22
9.13
Recreation................................................................................................................................................23
9.14
Water Supply and Conservation..............................................................................................................
23
9.15
Water Quality (Stormwater Management)...............................................................................................
23
9.16
Energy Needs...........................................................................................................................................
23
9.17
Safety.......................................................................................................................................................23
9.18
Food and Fiber Production......................................................................................................................
23
9.19
Mineral Needs.........................................................................................................................................
24
9.20
Considerations of Property Ownership....................................................................................................
24
9.21
Needs and Welfare of the Public.............................................................................................................
24
10.0 SECONDARY AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS.........................................................25
11.0 SUMMARY......................................................................................................................26

1. Vicinity Map
2. USGS Topographic Map
3. Stream and Wetland Map
4. Soils Map
5. Impact Map
6. Alternatives Map
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF APPENDICES
US Army Corps of Engineer Verification Letter
US Fish and Wildlife Service Letter
NC Natural Heritage Program
Natural Resources Memo
NC State Historic Preservation Office Letter
Acceptance Letters from Mitigation Services and Bank
NC WAM and SAM Forms
in

1.0 INTRODUCTION TO PROJECT
The applicant, Asheville Regional Airport (AVL), proposes to construct an additional
apron and associated infrastructure. The project, known as the Asheville Airport Apron
Expansion, will include:
• 2.27 acres (11,000 square yards) of apron pavement to add one or two remain
overnight (RON) aircraft parking positions
• Approximately 100,000 square yards of earthwork
• Construction of a retaining wall
• Relocation of the existing fence
1.1 Proiect Location
The Asheville Airport Apron Expansion will be located south of Asheville in
Buncombe County, North Carolina. Specifically, the project area will be
immediately south of the existing airport apron on the Airport property. A site
vicinity map is included for review (Figure 1). To access the site from Asheville,
take I-26 East to Exit 40 (Airport Road/NC Highway 280). Turn right (south)
onto Airport Road and continue approximately 1.25 miles. Past the airport, turn
right (north) onto Old Fanning Bridge Road. The project site is to the right (east)
of Old Fanning Bridge Road. In general, the site is bordered to the north and east
by the existing airport, to the south by Airport Road, and to the west by the
French Broad River. A USGS topographic map is included for review (Figure 2).
1.2 Jurisdictional Waters
Streams within the project boundary are unnamed tributaries to Cane Creek, a
tributary to the French Broad River. The unnamed tributaries and wetland make
up the sole hydrologic system on site. The unnamed tributaries are classified by
the NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) as class "C" waters. A "Preliminary
Jurisdictional Determination" was issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) on April 2, 2018 under Action ID SAW -2018-00173. A stream and
wetland map is included for review (Figure 3). An "Existing Site Conditions"
section (Section 3.0) has been included in this application for review and further
describes the jurisdictional waters on site.
The site contains the following amounts of jurisdictional waters within the project
boundary:
Proiect Boundary Totals
Feature
Amount
Unit
Stream A
398*
linear feet
Stream B
69
linear feet
Wetlands
0.22
acres
Open Water
0
acres
*Amount does not include the length of an existing 50 -foot culvert.
1

2.0 BACKGROUND AND PRIOR PROJECT HISTORY
The applicant received a permit for stream and wetland impacts on November 19, 2008
associated with the Asheville Regional Airport North General Expansion Project. The
Action ID associated with this project is 2007-03766-311.
The applicant received a permit for stream and wetland impacts on October 28, 2011
associated with the Asheville Regional Airport North General Expansion Project. The
Action ID associated with this project is SAW -2010-00036.
A preliminary field review for the on-site presence of wetlands was conducted by Three
Oaks Engineering in December 2017. This review identified two jurisdictional streams
(totaling approximately 467 LF) within the project area and confirmed the presence of a
jurisdictional wetlands (approximately 0.22 acres). A site visit to confirm the findings
was held with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on February 12, 2018 and a
preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (J.D.) was issued by USACE on April 2, 2018
(Action ID SAW -2018-00173) (Appendix A).
Delta Airport Consultants prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Terminal
Expansion project. The final EA is dated July 2018. A Finding of No Significant
Impacts (FONSI) was issued on July 31, 2018.
During preparation of the EA, the following agencies were consulted in the preparation of
this project:
The State Clearinghouse disseminated the document to the following agencies:
• North Carolina (NC) Wildlife Resources Commission
• NC Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) - Waste Management, Inactive
Hazardous Sites Branch
• NC DEQ- Waste Management, Solid Waste Section
• NC Department of Agriculture
• NC Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
• NC Department of Transportation
• NC Department of Natural and Cultural Resources (DNCR) Natural Heritage
Program
• DPS- Division of Emergency Management
• Land of Sky Regional Council
Responses were received from the following agencies:
• North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
• North Carolina DEQ -Waste Management
• North Carolina DEQ- Waste Management, Solid Waste Section
• NC DNCR Natural Heritage Program
A public notice was placed in the Asheville Citizen -Times newspaper on June 7, 2018
announcing the FAA was accessing the project for potential environmental impacts. The

notice stated the public could review a draft Environmental Assessment (EA) at various
locations, issue comments, and request a public meeting. The public review period lasted
for 30 days. No comments or requests for a public meeting were made.
The table below summarizes the project history:
Date
Action
November 19, 2008
DWR and Corps issued permit USACE
Action ID 2007-03766-311 for 1,535 linear
feet of perennial stream, 138 linear feet of
intermittent stream, and 0.359 acres of
wetlands.
March 9, 2010
Pre -application meeting for caro Facility.
April 2010
Submittal of permit application for cargo
facility.
May 20 -June 18, 2010
Public Notice comment period for cargo
facility.
July 19, 2010
AVL received comments in response to the
Public Notice.
August 13, 2010
AVL responds to comments.
September 2, 2010
Agency meeting held to discuss the parallel
taxiway.
Application for the cargo facility is
October 2010
withdrawn/returned by the Corps and
DWR.
February 1, 2011
Site verification for airport property.
February 9, 2011
Corps issues Notification of Jurisdictional
Determination.
DWR issued 401 certification.
Corps issued an Individual Permit for 1,796
October 2011
linear feet of perennial stream and 0.09
acres of wetland impact. USACE Action
ID 2010-00036
Permit modifications accepted by agencies
for Phase 2 work include modifications to
February 19, 2013
mitigation plan for 571 linear feet of stream
and 0.9 acres of wetland. USACE Action
ID 2010-00036
Modified 404/401 impacts authorized total:
May 3, 2016
90 -foot culvert, 1,430 bank stabilization,
and 0.03 acres of wetland fill. USACE
Action ID 2010-00036
April 5, 2016
DWR issued Permit # 07-1841 v6.
April 2, 2018
Wetland delineation verification by Corps.

3.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
The project site consists of grassed areas maintained by the airport and adjacent to the
existing runway. The site is sloping with an average elevation of approximately 2,100
feet above mean sea level (MSL).
3.1 Soils
The Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project area is located within the
Mountains physiographic region of North Carolina and more specifically the
Broad Basins Ecoregion. Soils in this ecoregion are characterized as mostly deep,
well -drained, loamy to clayey Ultisols, although there are variations between the
uplands, the high and low terraces, and the floodplains. Soil series present on site
include: Urban land and Udorthents-Urban Land complex. A soils map and
legend have been attached for review (Figure 3).
3.2 Fish and Wildlife Use of the Proiect Site
Wildlife species inhabiting the site are limited to small mammals, birds, and
aquatic species that may be present in the small streams on site. The airport
property is surrounded by a 16 -foot high wildlife fence and a heavily maintained
grass safety area. For airport safety, this fence restricts large wildlife from
entering the airport property. Although site-specific studies and inventories
documenting species utilization of the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project
area have not been conducted, general observations of wildlife use were recorded
during the wetland and stream delineation. There were no significant findings.
3.3 Threatened and Endangered Species
CEC has conducted a file review of records maintained by the US Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) and North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP).
The desktop literature review involved a review of the FWS list of protected
species in Buncombe County and the Skyland USGS Topographic Quad on which
NHP identifies current and historic occurrences of listed species for that locale.
The NHP database identifies no Element Occurrences (EO) for species with a
Federal status of threatened or endangered within a 2 -mile radius of the project
site.
The Proposed Action would take place on airport property, on previously
disturbed ground. According to the USFWS Asheville Field Office, no federally
listed species or their habitats occur in the project area. The US Fish and Wildlife
Service issued a letter dated August 25, 2017 stating concerns regarding
impervious surfaces, stormwater runoff, and stream and wetland impacts
(Appendix B).
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program did not offer comment when
consulted during project scoping (Appendix C).
4

According to the Natural Resources Memorandum prepared by Delta Airport
Consultant, Inc. and Three Oaks Engineering dated February 23, 2018 (Appendix
D), the site does not contain suitable habitat for any of the federally protected
species in Buncombe County, as listed by USFWS. No adverse impacts to federal
and state -listed endangered and threatened species are anticipated.
3.4 Cultural Resources
The SHPO office indicated in a letter dated September 1, 2017: "We have
conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which
would be affected by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project
as proposed" (Appendix E).

4.0 PROJECT PURPOSE
The purpose of the Proposed Action is to accommodate existing (immediate) and
anticipated demand for aircraft parking space at the terminal, specifically parking
for aircraft to remain overnight (RON).

5.0 PROPOSED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
The proposed project calls for the development of an apron expansion and associated
infrastructure. The existing terminal apron currently accommodates nine aircraft parking
positions for aircraft to remain overnight (RON). Airport management reports that,
depending on the day, there are between six and eight aircraft that remain overnight
(RON), and an additional two that are based at AVL for maintenance make-up and
charters that do not require gates, but take up ramp space. Airport management
anticipates a third based aircraft to join the existing two on the ramp, requiring additional
ramp space.
The need for the project is the present deficiency in aircraft parking spaces. The need for
additional space was also documented in the 2013 Master Plan Update (MPU). As cited
in the 2013 MPU, "it is desirable for the terminal apron to be sized to accommodate at
least one or two additional aircraft beyond those projected to accommodate late arriving
or departing flights, changes in airline flight schedules, charter activity, a new entrant
service carrier, or aircraft diversions from other airports due to weather. Therefore, the
Airport should plan to accommodate at least 10 or 11 remain overnight (RON) aircraft
parking positions."
5.1 Apron Expansion Plans
The applicant proposes to permanently impact 467 linear feet of stream channel to
achieve the project purpose through the development of the proposed facility and
associated infrastructure. There are 2 permanent stream impacts associated with
development of the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion. Impacts have been
identified on the site plan, which is enclosed for review (Figure 5). Fill for the
project will include clean fill dirt. Permanent fill impacts associated with facility
construction are listed in the table below.
Impact Linear Feet
1
398
2
69
Total
467
The applicant proposes to permanently impact 0.22 acres of wetland to achieve
the previously stated project purpose through the development of the proposed
facility and associated infrastructure.
Impact Acre
3 0.22
Total 0.22
7

6.0 DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVES
This discussion of alternatives is submitted by the applicant to assist the Wilmington
District, Corps in evaluating the application for authorization to discharge dredged or fill
material into waters of the United States, including wetlands, under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1344 at the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion in
Buncombe County, North Carolina.
An analysis of the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines (Guidelines) requirements for
consideration of alternatives as required by 40 C.F.R. 230.10(a) is set forth below.
The Guidelines' alternatives requirements provide that "no discharge of dredged or fill
material shall be permitted if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge
which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem, so long as the
alternative does not have other significant adverse environmental consequences." [See
40 C.F.R. 230.10(a) (emphasis added).] The record must contain "sufficient information
to demonstrate that the proposed discharge complies with the requirements of Section
230.10(a) of the Guidelines. The amount of information needed to make such a
determination and the level of scrutiny required by the Guidelines is commensurate with
the severity of the environmental impact (as determined by the functions of the aquatic
resource and the nature of the proposed activity) and the scope/cost of the project." [See
Corps/EPA Memorandum to the Field "Appropriate Level of Analysis Required for
Evaluating Compliance with Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines Alternatives Requirements," p.
2, dated August 23, 1994, hereinafter the "Memorandum."] As noted in the
Memorandum on pages 3-4, the 404(b)(1) Guidelines "only prohibits discharges when a
practicable alternative exists which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic
ecosystem." [See Memorandum.] "If an alleged alternative is unreasonably expensive to
the applicant, the alternative is not practicable." [See Guidelines Preamble, "Economic
Factors," 45 Federal Re ig ster 85343 (December 24, 1980).]
Practicable alternatives for the project are those alternatives that are "available and capable
of being done after taking into consideration costs, existing technology, and logistics in
light of overall project purposes." [See 40 C.F.R. 230.10(a)(2).] Clarification is provided
in the Preamble to the Guidelines on how cost is to be considered in the determination of
practicability. An alternative site is considered "available" if it is presently owned by the
applicant or "could reasonably be obtained, utilized, expanded or managed in order to
fulfill the basic purpose of the proposed activity." 40 C.F.R. § 230.10(a)(2).
The intent is to consider those alternatives, which are reasonable in terms of the overall
scope and cost of the proposed project. The term economic [for which the term "costs"
was substituted in the final rule] might be construed to include consideration of the
applicant's financial standing, or investment, or market share, a cumbersome inquiry
which is not necessarily material to the objectives of the Guidelines.
8

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 404(b)(1) Guidelines state that, "we have
chosen instead to impose an explicit, but rebuttable presumption that alternatives to
discharges in special aquatic sites are less damaging to the aquatic ecosystem, and are
environmentally preferable." Of course, the general requirements that impacts to the
aquatic system not be acceptable also applies. This presumption "...contains sufficient
flexibility to reflect circumstances of unusual cases" (249 Fed. Reg., 85339, December
24, 1980). It is clear from these stipulations that a preferable alternative may allow
filling in certain wetland areas and subsequent mitigation and/or management of other
areas.
6.1 Avoidance
The applicant was willing to consider sites other than the proposed project site for
development of the proposed facilities at the airport. A set of criteria was
developed to aid in the search for a site and ultimate selection of a site.
6.1.1 Site Criteria
A. Location
In order to meet the stated project purpose, it is imperative that the
project be located within the immediate vicinity of the existing
airport.
B. Site Availability and Land Use Compatibility
The apron expansion must be sited on existing airport property in a
location that does not hinder existing airport functions or future
expansion.
C. Site Accessibility
The apron expansion needs to be adjacent to the existing terminals.
6.1.2 Proiect Alternatives
The project as proposed, along with seven alternatives, were considered
when determining the most practical alternative. A map which includes
alternative locations within existing airport property is included for review
(Figure 6).
A. Areas North of Existing Apron
The area identified as "A" on Figure 6 was evaluated for
consideration for this project. The area immediately north of the
existing apron is adjacent to the terminals, however, an existing
building for airport operations was recently built in that area
(Criteria B). Due to the new building and area immediately north
of building being used as an apron for general aviation, location
"A" was excluded as a probable location for this project.
9

B. Area East of Existing Apron
The area identified as `B" on Figure 6 was evaluated for
consideration for this project. Area `B" is the location of the
Asheville Regional Airport terminals, parking, and operational
facilities (Criteria B). Location `B" was excluded as a probable
location for this project.
C. Area Immediately North West of Existing Runway
The area identified as "C" on Figure 6 was evaluated for
consideration for this project. Area "C" is on property owned by
the Airport and by the City of Asheville. Area "C" is not adjacent
to the existing terminal, requiring additional infrastructure, access,
and security needed for RON parking.
Runway access could be provided for this area; however, road
access would present a challenge (Criteria Q. The existing
roadway system would require truck traffic to travel approximately
4 miles via Pinner Road, Glen Bridge Road, and Bradley Branch
Road to access I-26 from the north or necessitate construction of a
new road to access Old Fanning Bridge Road approximately 1 mile
south. Road access is not practical for this location. Due to the far
proximity from the existing terminal, location "C" was excluded as
a probable location for this project.
D. Area Immediately North of General Aviation Area
The area identified as "D" on Figure 6 was evaluated for
consideration for the project. Area "D" is not adjacent to the
existing terminal, requiring additional infrastructure, access, and
security needed for RON parking.
Area "D" is the location of the Asheville Regional Airport North
General Expansion Project. RON aircraft parking should be
separated from general aviation activities due to differing site
requirements (Criteria B). Pavement design and geometrical
requirements differ greatly for RON aircraft parking facilities
when compared to general aviation. Therefore, due to the far
proximity from the existing terminal, location "D" was excluded as
a probable location for this project.
E. Area North of Existing Runway
The area identified as `B" on Figure 6 was evaluated for
consideration for the project. Area "E" is not adjacent to the
existing terminal and is currently being used for general aviation
activities.
10

Area "E" is a runway safety area and an instrument landing system
(ILS) critical area. A runway safety area is designed to reduce the
risk of damage or injury if an airplane overshoots or undershoots a
landing. The ILS critical area must remain clear as planes
approach the airport for landing. Buildings, vehicles, or other
planes in the ILS broadcast path could cause incorrect information
to be transmitted to pilots. For obvious safety reasons, buildings
and airport infrastructure cannot be located in runway safety areas
or ILS critical areas (Criteria B). Due to its current use and far
proximity, location "E" was excluded as a probable location for
this project.
F. Area Immediately South West of Existing Runway
The area identified as "F" on Figure 6 was evaluated for
consideration for the project. Area "F" is not adjacent to the
existing terminal, requiring additional infrastructure, access, and
security needed for RON aircraft parking.
A portion of Area "F" is west of Old Fanning Bridge Road. This
area was eliminated because of the inability to transport planes
across the road (Criteria A). Area "F" east of Old Fanning Bridge
Road is isolated from the runway because of the runway safety
area (Criteria B). Although Area "F" could be accessed through
the runway area, this is being reserved for the parallel taxiway
(Criteria B). Additionally, streams and wetlands exist in this area.
Due to the far proximity from the existing terminal, location "F"
was excluded as a probable location for this project.
G. No -Build
The proposed Asheville Airport Apron Expansion will provide the
necessary improvements to accommodate the growing demand for
aircraft parking space at the terminal. The project as proposed can
not be completed without the stream and wetland impacts applied
for in this application. If the project is not completed, the demands
for aircraft overnight parking will not be met.
H. Project As Proposed
The project as proposed meets the stated project purpose and is
within the project selection criteria listed above. The proposed
project site area is adjacent to the existing terminal allowing for
RON aircraft parking. Construction within the proposed project
area will not hinder existing airport activities and is not in a critical
or safety area. Wetlands and stream impacts have been reduced to
the minimum amount necessary to complete the project. The
project as proposed is the most feasible and least damaging
practical alternative.
11

6.2 Minimization and Justification of Impacts
Wetlands and stream impacts have been reduced to the minimum amount
necessary to complete the project.
The proposed Asheville Airport Apron Expansion will provide the necessary
improvements to accommodate the growing RON aircraft parking demand for the
WNC region. AVL is the only FAA air traffic control towered airport in WNC,
as well as, the only FAA part 139 certificated airport and the only airport
equipped to adequately serve this market. AVL is an essential part of the
economic development of the area and air transportation is a growing component
for the airport and region.
The Asheville Regional Airport has a need to expand in order to meet the needs of
the regional aviation industry. Airport property is linear in nature and limited by
the existing boundaries of the French Broad River, Interstate 26, and NC Highway
280. Due to the limited real estate available for aviation use with access to
taxiways, runway systems, and public roadways, the proposed development area
is the airport's best alternative and most feasible development parcel to
accommodate the proposed apron expansion.
It is the purpose of this project to meet the economic development needs of the
Asheville, Buncombe County and Western North Carolina by providing RON
aircraft parking with approximately 2.27 acres (11,000 square yards) of apron
pavement, 100,000 square yards of earthwork, construction of a retaining wall,
and relocation of the existing fence. The proposed layout has been designed to
meet FAA design criteria.
6.3 Alternatives Conclusion
This discussion of alternatives, together with the documents submitted by the
applicant in support of the 404 Permit, shows that the project complies with the
Guidelines. As this analysis clearly demonstrates the project is designed to avoid
and minimize impacts to the site to the maximum extent practicable while
maintaining a rational project design.
12

7.0 CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION PLAN
The Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project will cause unavoidable impact to 467
linear feet of stream and 0.22 acres of wetlands associated with the development. The
following mitigation plan is provided in support of this permit application; the mitigation
measures are described below.
7.1 NC Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)
The applicant proposes to mitigate for unavoidable impacts (467 linear feet of
stream) at a mitigation activity ratio of 1:1 through payment into the NC Division
of Mitigation Services (DMS) in -lieu fee program and the Anderson Farms
Mitigation Bank. In a letter dated January 8, 2019, DMS has indicated they are
willing to accept payment for the wetland impacts for the Asheville Airport Apron
Expansion project. In a letter dated January 23, 2019, the Anderson Farms
Mitigation Bank indicated they are willing to accept payment for the stream
impacts for the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project. The acceptance
letters are enclosed for review (Appendix F).
7.2 Summary
The applicant is proposing to mitigate for 467 linear feet of unavoidable stream
impacts. Compensatory mitigation will be in the form of payment into the DMS.
The tables below summarize the stream mitigation requirements for unavoidable
impacts associated with the development of the Asheville Airport Apron
Expansion.
Basic Mitigation Requirement - Streams
Impact
Linear Feet Compensatory
Basic Mitigation
Mitigation Ratio (x:1) Requirement
of Impact Mitigation Ratio (x:1)
Requirement
1
398 1
398
2
69 1
69
Total Impacts
467
Total Mitigation
467
Requirement
Basic Mitigation Requirement - Wetlands
Impact Acres of
Compensatory Basic Mitigation
Impact
Mitigation Ratio (x:1) Requirement
3 0.22
1 0.22
Total
Mitigation
0.22
Requirements
The tables below summarize the stream mitigation proposed by the applicant for
unavoidable impacts associated with the development of the Asheville Airport
Apron Expansion.
13

Proposed Mitigation — Streams and Wetlands
On December 17, 2018, C1earWater Environmental completed NC Wetland
Assessment Method (WAM) and Stream Assessment Method (SAM) forms for
the above-mentioned impacts (see attached Appendix G). The outcome from
these forms is that Stream 1 and 2 as well as Wetland 1 are of low quality.
14
Linear
Mitigation
Total
Feet/Acres Type
Activity Ratio
Credit
of Mitigation
x: l
Bank
467 Restoration
1
467
Total Stream
467
467
DMS
0.22 Restoration
1
0.22
Total Wetland
0.22
0.22
On December 17, 2018, C1earWater Environmental completed NC Wetland
Assessment Method (WAM) and Stream Assessment Method (SAM) forms for
the above-mentioned impacts (see attached Appendix G). The outcome from
these forms is that Stream 1 and 2 as well as Wetland 1 are of low quality.
14

8.0 US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES
The EPA interim regulations providing guidance for specification of deposit on sites for
dredge and fill material were published on September 17, 1993, in 40 C.F.R. 230 per
Section 404(b)l. Sub -Parts A through I pertain to dredge and fill permits, and apply to
project sites similar to this project.
Sub -Part D presents a summary of compliance criteria for the 404(b)(1) guidelines. This
section references and defines practicable alternatives and indicates that a dredge and fill
permit shall not be issued if practicable alternatives exist. Alternatives reviewed, detailed
in Section 6.0, were assessed for compliance with 404(b)(1) guidelines.
Additional EPA guidance is presented related to general regulatory criteria, wildlife
value, and human health guidelines. The discharge of dredge and fill material is
considered permittable under these guidelines if the discharge activity: does not
contribute to violation of state water quality standards; does not violate toxic effluent
standards; does not jeopardize the continued existence of species listed as threatened and
endangered pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 and subsequent
amendments; does not cause degradation to any marine sanctuaries; does not contribute
to significant degradation of "waters of the United States;" does not adversely affect
human health as it pertains to water supply; does not adversely impact wildlife, the food
chain, and special aquatic sites; does not contribute to the discharge of pollutants that
may affect the food web; does not have negative effects on the productivity of the aquatic
ecosystem, or their physical values; and does not have adverse impacts on recreation,
aesthetic, or economic values. Additionally, the applicant is required to minimize
potential adverse impacts on the aquatic ecosystem.
8.1 Factual Determination
The Corps is required to determine both potential short-term and long-term effects
of a proposed discharge of dredge and fill material on the physical, chemical, and
biological components of an aquatic environment.
8.2 Potential Impacts on Phvsical and Chemical Characteristics of the Aquatic
Ecosystem
Sub -Part C of the 40 C.F.R. 230 guidelines lists six physical and chemical
characteristics that must be assessed during the permit review, and the effects of
which must be determined to be minimal on the aquatic ecosystem.
8.2.1 Substrate
Fill material will be placed in jurisdictional streams and wetlands. Fill for
the project will include clean fill dirt. Any discharge will consist of
suitable fill material and will not include any trash, debris, car bodies,
asphalt, etc. Proper sediment and erosion control devices will be installed
prior to and during construction to ensure that the bottom elevation of
remaining streams and wetlands on the property will not change.
15

8.2.2 Suspended Particulate/Turbidity (Sediment and Erosion Control)
During construction activities on the site, there may be a minimal increase
in suspended particulates that may lead to increased turbidity downstream.
However, the increase is anticipated to be minimal and temporary due to
the installation and maintenance of proper sediment and erosion control
measures during construction and shortly thereafter.
8.2.3 Water Quality
The proposed discharge of dredge and fill material should not cause
increased chemical contamination levels within the aquatic ecosystem.
Specifically, changes in clarity, color, odor, and taste of water in addition
to possible chemical contamination shall be minimized or reduced. All
discharges of dredge and fill material will be controlled with sediment and
erosion control measures. The applicant will be concurrently applying for
a DWR Water Quality Certification.
8.2.4 Current Patterns in Water Circulation
The discharged fill material will modify current water circulation patterns
by obstructing flow, changing direction or velocity of water, and changing
velocity or flow of circulation in the channels proposed for relocation;
however, water circulation and patterns will be re-established in the
stream channels provided by DMS as mitigation.
8.2.5 Normal Water Fluctuations
The discharge of fill material associated with this project is not anticipated
to have any significant effect on the downstream hydrologic regimes.
8.2.6 Salinity
Because this project is located inland and away from tidally influenced
waters and wetlands, no modification to the salinity of on-site or adjacent
waters is expected.
8.3 Potential Impacts to Biological Characteristics of the Ecosystem
Sub -Part D of the 40 C.F.R. 230 guidelines specify three areas of concern in
which disposal of dredge and fill material can affect the biological components of
the ecosystem. These components are threatened and endangered species, fish,
crustaceans, mollusks, other aquatic organisms in the food web, and wildlife.
8.3.1 Threatened or Endangered Species
According to the Natural Resources Memorandum prepared by Delta
Airport Consultant, Inc. and Three Oaks Engineering, on February 23,
2018, the Proposed Action would take place on airport property, on
previously disturbed ground. According to the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) Asheville Field Office, no federally listed
species or their habitats occur in the project area. The North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program did not offer comment when consulted during
project scoping. As of October 2017, the USFWS lists twelve federally
16

protected species for Revised 2/2/15 Buncombe County. According to a
field visit conducted in December 2017, suitable habitat for these species
is not present within the study area; therefore, no adverse impacts to these
species are likely as a result of the Proposed Action.
8.3.2 Fishes, Crustaceans, Mollusks, and other Aquatic Organisms in the
Food Web
Discharges of dredge and fill material can alter the food web by impacting
animals such as invertebrates that make up the basis of a food chain. The
release of contaminants or an increase in turbidity has the potential to
negatively affect certain aspects of the food web. Such releases may also
potentially increase the levels of exotic species.
Impacts to primary food chain production within the waters of the US and
wetlands will occur on the project site; however, food chain production
will be re-establish over time in the streams provided by DMS as
mitigation. Net impacts to primary food chain production are expected to
be minimal.
8.3.3 Other Wildlife
The discharge of dredge and fill material has the potential to negatively
effect breeding and nesting areas, escape cover, travel corridors, and
preferred food sources for resident and migrant wildlife species.
Although some evidence of wildlife usage was apparent on site, because
the project area is within close proximity to an existing airport facility,
which is surrounded by a wildlife fence and grassed safety area, wildlife
habitat is minimal, and many wildlife species are restricted from the site.
Noise pollution, denuded vegetation, and anthropogenic activity make this
area less desirable for resident and migrant wildlife. While a loss of
wildlife habitat for stream -dependent species may result from construction
of the project, the proposed mitigation will compensate for any minor loss
of habitat.
8.4 Potential Impacts on Special Aquatic Sites
Sub -Part E of the 40 C.F.R. 230 guidelines address considerations for potential
impacts on special aquatic sites, which include: sanctuaries and refuges,
wetlands, mud flats, vegetated shallows, coral reefs, and riffle -pool complexes.
17

8.4.1 Sanctuaries and Refuges
The discharge of dredge and fill material has the potential to negatively
effect adjacent sanctuaries and wildlife refuges by impacting water
quality, decreasing wildlife habitat, increasing human access, and creating
the need for frequent maintenance activity, resulting in the establishment
of undesirable plant and animal species, which can change the balance of
habitat type. There are no sanctuaries or refuges in the project vicinity;
therefore, impacts to sanctuaries or refuges will not occur as a result of
development of the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project.
8.4.2 Wetlands
The discharge of dredge and fill material has the potential to adversely
effect wetlands including wetland substrate, hydrology, and vegetation.
Discharges can lead to a loss of wetland values, such as wildlife habitat,
flood storage, and groundwater recharge. The discharge of fill material
will impact 0.22 acres of wetlands on site. The impacted wetlands will be
properly mitigated using the Division of Mitigation Services In -Lieu Fee
program.
8.4.3 Mud Flats
Discharges of dredge and fill material has the potential to negatively effect
mud flats that exist along inland lakes, ponds, and riverine systems. There
are no mud flat communities within the project boundary; therefore, loss
of these ecosystems will not occur as a result of development of the
Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project.
8.4.4 Vegetated Shallows
Vegetated shallows are permanently inundated areas that contain rooted
aquatic vegetation. This type of habitat generally exists within estuarine
and marine environments; and some freshwater lakes and rivers. No
vegetated shallow habitats exist within the project boundary; therefore, no
impacts to this ecosystem will occur as a result of development of the
Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project.
8.4.5 Coral Reefs
Coral reefs typically exist within marine ecosystems. Coral reefs do not
exist within the project boundary; therefore, no impacts to this ecosystem
will occur as a result of development of the Asheville Airport Apron
Expansion project.
8.4.6 Riffle -Pool Complexes
Discharge of dredge and fill material into or upstream of riffle -pool
complexes has the potential to negatively affect water quality and wildlife
value. Fill in the form of culverts has the potential to be placed into riffle -
pool complexes. The impacted riffle -pool complexes will be properly
mitigated using the Division of Mitigation Services In -Lieu Fee program.
18

8.5 Potential Effects on Human Use Characteristics
Sub -Part F of the 40 C.F.R. 230 guidelines address potential effects on human use
of wetlands and waterways. Factors including water supply, recreational and
commercial fisheries, water -related recreation, aesthetics, and parks and similar
preserves are considered within this portion of the guidelines. No effects on
human use characteristics are anticipated as a result of the proposed development
of the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project.
8.5.1 Municipal and Private Water Supply
The public water supply will not increase or decrease as a result of
proposed activities within the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project
boundary.
8.5.2 Recreational and Commercial Fisheries
Discharges of dredge and fill material has the potential to negatively effect
recreational and commercial fisheries. Opportunity for recreational and
commercial fisheries is not present on site. The amount and quality of
recreational and commercial fisheries will not increase or decrease as a
result of proposed activities with the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion
project boundary.
8.5.3 Water -Related Recreation
Proposed activities within the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project
boundary will not increase or decrease waterborne recreation within the
project vicinity.
8.5.4 Aesthetics
Aesthetically, the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project will be
similar to other facilities currently present within the airport property
boundary. The project is not expected to diminish the aesthetic value of
the area or cause disharmony from an aerial or neighboring view.
8.5.5 Parks, National and Historical Monuments, National Beach Shores,
Wilderness Areas, Research Sites, and Similar Preserves
No areas as described above will be affected by the proposed development
within the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project boundary.
8.6 Summary
Based on the EPA guidelines identified within 40 C.F.R. 230, and enumerated
herein, a number of potential environmental impacts have been presented and
subsequently addressed. The proposed permanent impact to 467 linear feet of
streams and 0.22 acres of wetlands will not cause any off-site adverse impacts.
Mitigation offered through payment in to the DMS will compensate for any on-
site impacts.
19

9.0 PUBLIC INTEREST CONSIDERATIONS
When reviewing this application, the Corps is required to consider the project in terms of
the public interest. In considering the public interest, the Corps must evaluate the
probable impacts of the project and evaluate the "benefits which reasonably may be
expected to occur from the proposal against reasonably foreseeable detriments." In
balancing these interests, the Corps must consider the public and private need for the
proposed project, the practicability of using reasonable alternative locations, and the
extent and permanence of the beneficial and/or detrimental impacts of the project. The
Corps also considers the following public interest factors:
conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns,
wetlands, historic and cultural resources, fish and wildlife values, flood
hazards, floodplain values, land use, navigation, shore erosion and
accretion, recreation, water supply and water quality, energy needs, safety,
food and fiber production, mineral needs, and considerations of the
property ownership.
Pursuant to 33 C.F.R. 323.6, a determination that the project is not contrary to the public
interest must be achieved before permit issuance. Public interest considerations are listed
in 33 C.F.R. 320.4 (a)(1) and are discussed below.
Furthermore, the Corps regulations state that a permit will be granted unless the district
engineer determines that it would be contrary to the public interest.
The applicant has extensively evaluated these factors through the planning process and
believes that the proposed project is clearly in the public interest.
9.1 Conservation
The applicant is not proposing preservation as a component of the
Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project; however, those projects
completed by the DMS in association with this project will be preserved in
perpetuity.
9.2 Economics
The project will provide an overall benefit to the local economy of
Buncombe County. During and upon completion of construction, the site
will provide job opportunities associated with the development,
maintenance, and operation of the proposed facilities.
9.3 Aesthetics
Aesthetically, the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project will be
similar to other facilities currently present within the airport property
boundary. The facility will be designed in an aesthetically pleasing
manner that is consistent with the existing facilities at the site. The project
is not expected to diminish the aesthetic value of the area or cause
disharmony from an aerial or neighboring view.
20

9.4 General Environmental Concerns
Other than stream and wetland impacts, proposed development activities
within the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project boundary will have
no significant identifiable impacts upon other environmental components.
9.5 Wetlands
The discharge of dredge and fill material has the potential to adversely
effect wetlands including wetland substrate, hydrology, and vegetation.
Discharges can lead to a loss of wetland values, such as wildlife habitat,
flood storage, and groundwater recharge. While a loss of wetlands may
result from construction of the project, the proposed mitigation should
compensate for any lost functions and values.
9.6 Historic Properties
According to the Short Form Environmental Assessment for the Terminal
Apron Expansion project dated July 2018, the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) has confirmed that there would be no impacts
to historic or cultural resources as a result of the proposed construction.
Additionally, the EA states according to the 2013 MPU, no National
Register of Historic Places (NRHP)-listed or eligible properties are located
within the airport boundaries. Coordination with the North Carolina SHPO
conducted during project scoping confirmed no anticipated impact to
historic resources as a result of the proposed construction.
9.7 Fish and Wildlife Values
Riparian and wetland areas provide habitat for many types of wildlife
because of their diverse and productive plant communities, complex
structure, and close proximity to surface water. Wildlife may be
permanent residents of riparian and wetland areas or occasional visitors
that use the areas for food, water, or temporary shelter.
Food availability varies with the type of vegetation in riparian and wetland
areas, but includes fruit, seed, foliage, twigs, buds, insects, and other
invertebrates. Trees and shrub produce a variety of foods that are eaten by
many animals and may be especially important sources of nutrition during
the winter months. Grasses and herbaceous vegetation provide seeds and
forage both within riparian and wetland areas and along the forest border.
The stream environment provides moving water for many animals to
drink, feed, swim, and reproduce. Water is also available on the moist
vegetation and in wetlands that are often associated with riparian areas.
These areas, both permanent and temporary, are especially important for
amphibians and macro -invertebrates.
21

Riparian and wetland areas provide a sheltered environment for many
species of animals to feed, rest, and reproduce. Animals use these areas to
seek shelter from extreme weather and to escape predators and human
activity. Riparian and wetland areas may also provide important travel
corridors for some species, and are frequently used as stop -over points for
migratory birds.
Although some evidence of wildlife usage was apparent on site, because
the project area is within close proximity to an existing airport facility
wildlife habitat is minimal. Noise pollution, denuded vegetation, and
anthropogenic activity make this area less desirable for resident and
migrant wildlife. While a loss of wildlife habitat for stream -dependent
species may result from construction of the project, the proposed
mitigation should compensate for any lost functions and values.
9.8 Flood Hazards
It is likely that some tributaries on the property will flood occasionally due
to natural fluctuations in weather patterns that increase precipitation. The
activities taking place within the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion
project boundary are not expected to increase or decrease the natural rate
of flooding at the site or downstream.
9.9 Floodplain Values
The project will not impact designated 100 -year floodplains within the
Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project boundary. Therefore, flood
stages and frequencies should not increase or decrease as a result of the
activities.
9.10 Land Use
The proposed project will be in compliance with local zoning regulations
and ordinances. The project is consistent with surrounding land use and
development.
9.11 Navigation
All tributaries within the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project
boundary are tributaries to the French Broad River. The French Broad
River is a navigable -in -fact water at the Wilson Bridge east of Brevard.
The project will not have direct effects on the French Broad River;
therefore, activities proposed within the Asheville Airport Apron
Expansion project boundary are not likely to effect navigation.
9.12 Shore Erosion and Accretion
The project should have minimal effects on erosion and runoff. An erosion
control plan will be implemented as part of the construction plan for the
project. During the construction process, BMPs will be followed. These
BMPs may include the construction of swales, erosion and sediment control
22

structures, turbidity barriers, and other measures that will prevent sediment
transport off the project site and into other waters. Use of devices such as
silt screens, staked hay bales, temporary grassing, wind rowing of
vegetation, and other mechanisms to prevent turbidity may be employed. A
post -construction stormwater plan will also be implemented as a part of this
project. The DWR and the City of Asheville will be given the opportunity
to review and approve the post -construction Stormwater plan.
9.13 Recreation
Proposed activities within the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project
boundary will not increase or decrease waterborne recreation on site or in
the project vicinity.
9.14 Water Supply and Conservation
The public water supply will not increase or decrease due to proposed
activities within the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project boundary.
9.15 Water Quality (Stormwater Management)
The Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project will comply with all local
and State regulations (G.S. 143-214.7 Stormwater Control for Public
Airports) regarding stormwater management. The applicant will be
concurrently applying for a NC Division of Water Resources Water
Quality Certification as the stormwater management plan is still in design
phase.
The applicant will receive approval for stormwater management prior to
construction.
9.16 Energy Needs
Activities taking place within the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion
project boundary, during construction and at full operation, are not
expected to significantly increase energy demands beyond the capacity of
the local facility. Energy will not be produced as a result of the proposed
activities within the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project boundary.
9.17 Safety
The proposed project will be designed with the maximum possible
considerations for public safety. The proposed activities within the
Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project boundary will not increase or
decrease public safety.
9.18 Food and Fiber Production
The proposed activities within the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion
project boundary will not increase or decrease food and fiber production.
23

9.19 Mineral Needs
The project fulfills no current mineral needs. No mining activities are
proposed as part of the development of the Asheville Airport Apron
Expansion.
9.20 Considerations of Property Ownership
The applicant owns the property proposed for development and has the
inherent right to develop the land in a reasonable and responsible manner,
which includes adhering to all Federal, State, and local regulations.
Property Owner of Record:
Greater Asheville Regional Airport Authority
61 Terminal Dr, Ste 1
Fletcher, NC 28732
9.21 Needs and Welfare of the Public
The project will positively address the needs and welfare of the public by
expanding and improving the existing airport facilities at the Asheville
Regional Airport in Buncombe County, North Carolina.
24

10.0 SECONDARY AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
The Asheville Airport Apron Expansion 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 project area
is comprised of approximately 2.27 acres (11,000 square yards). All of the land mass
included within the project site accounts for less than 0.003 percent of the land mass of the
basin. These percentages alone, limit significant cumulative effects on the watershed.
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 Asheville Airport Apron Expansion project
boundary.
Impacts within the project boundary include the construction of an aircraft parking area to
extend the existing apron and associated infrastructure. Stream and wetland impacts are
necessary for the construction at the site. Activity within the Asheville Airport Apron
Expansion 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.
25

11.0 SUMMARY
The development of the Asheville Airport Apron Expansion involves the expansion of the
aircraft parking area adjacent to the existing aircraft apron. Alternatives have been
evaluated and the project "As Proposed" is the least damaging practical alternative.
Potential impacts to the physical and chemical characteristics of the ecosystem, biological
characteristic of the ecosystem, impacts on special aquatic sites, and potential effects on
human use characteristics will be minimal. The project is not contrary to the public
interest and will aid in the continued growth of the Asheville Regional Airport and
Buncombe County.
26

- t.
Rd
H1911 Viaa
Country
CIO
Vista Or 0
Asheville Airport Apron Expansion
0
'Ar don
Brifte
D
f.
0
Asheville
1 '0
Region at
Airport W, %
9 1P
�,o 6 6roq Tj A 19 ljif R d
8 f6a mi
0-441 Golf Lin
'O's, Bridge Rd
11� $01, SZ 13
Mills cc
RiveT
z
0 2,0004000 8,000
'3 ChID01 N 0- Rd
Feet
Drawn by: APP 12.17.2018 CEC#999
Buncombe County, CLearWaLer Vicinity Map
North Carolina Figure 1
32 Clayton St
Asheville, NC 28801

Asheville Airport Apron Expansion
V '� - '..met - { rte° -ar,; .,1,' y _ - - •-; V
"
room
r
T
1 { s
F� � f a' +� I � * JVD- � �'� � °I .®.— '' } ' *.+�' s ° • I # �� .
s f i
} n 1. 4 r ,'� +M _ i� ..111+. •Y _ 1,
M go.
�Y',C`� 4�r'.4+Y �� _ � ly "� — ♦ � ;IAV ,, 'i►—� • ��.�
# ' ',
Site Location 1` '3 , N,
tA its
i L6e. v
4, i. 'ti4 I J *; ./-•L._T' A� it t .
I T4a
I ,
N
Legend
Limit of Disturbance `,
Property Boundary F 0 1,000 2,000 4,000
,.: Feet
wnC#
9R! D . '+° �1
Buncombe County, CLear V aLer USGS Map
North Carolina Skyland Quadrangle
32 Clayton St Figure 2
Asheville, NC 28801

Asheville Airport Apron Expansion
UX
'i, P.P
_:.
Legend
— Stream
Culvert
N
Wetland
Limit of Disturbance
Q Soil Types
Ux - Urban land
UhE - Udorthents-Urban
0 50 100 200
land complex
-
Feet
Drawn by: APP 12.17.2018 CEC#999
j
CLear V aLer
Soil Map
Buncombe County,
North Carolina
Figure 3
32 Clayton St
Asheville, NC 28801

Asheville Airport Apron Expansion
i M
1-1
Legend
Wetland
Stream
Culvert
Proposed 1 ft Contours
Limit of Disturbance
Drawn by: APP
Buncombe County,
North Carolina
J
l i
Al
-21 N
'871 WW
MW
s
i
0 50 100 200
Feet
CLearaLer Impact Area
32 Clayton St Figure 4
Asheville, NC 28801

Asheville Airport Apron Expansion
5 i a
9
n
_"
44
;.492A �-=
`► 4 `111•'
as
4 t.t z
_. &
�t
IN
;Pee
Legend
Alternative Locations `.� - N
Limit of Disturbance _� ,,,.'+'.. �.. -I
Streams
Q Property Boundary
-- � 0 750 1,500 3,000
L___, City of Asheville Property
A
Feet
:y
Buncombe County, CLearaLer Alternative Locations
North Carolina Figure 6
32 Clayton St
Asheville, NC 28801

Appendix A
US Army Corps of Engineer Verification Letter

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action ID: SAW -2018-00173 County: Buncombe U.S.G.S. Quad: Skyland
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner: Greater Asheville Regional Airport Authority / Attn: Michael Reisman
Address: 61 Terminal Drive, #1
Fletcher, NC 28732
Telephone Number: 828-684-2226 ext. 13253
Size (acres):
4.85 acres
Nearest Town:
Fletcher
Nearest Waterway:
UT to French Broad
Coordinates:
35.433265 -82.537726
River Basin/ HUC:
French Broad
Location description: The site is located at the Asheville Regional Airport, near long-term parking lot, in Asheville,
NC. Coordinates are 35.433265 -82.537726.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
X There are waters, including wetlands, on the above described project area, that may be subject to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands, have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently
accurate and reliable. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process,
including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation
requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat
all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an
appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
There are wetlands on the above described property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However, since the
waters, including wetlands, have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be
used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely
an effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction overall of the waters, including wetlands, at the project area,
which is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have
the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland
delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the
Corps.
B. Approved Determination
_ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements
of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and 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.
_ There are waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described property 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.
_ We recommend you have the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to
accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation
that can be verified by the Corps.
_ The waters of the U.S. including wetlands on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been
verified by the Corps. If you wish to have the delineation surveyed, the Corps can review and verify the survey upon

completion. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA and/or RHA
jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied
upon for a period not to exceed five years.
_ The waters of the U.S. including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on . 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.
_ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (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.
_ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(LAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management to determine their requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material,
construction or placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the
Army permit may constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If
you have any questions regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Amanda Jones at
828-271-7980, ext. 4225 or [e-mail].
C. Basis for Determination:
See attached preliminary jurisdictional determination form.
The site contains wetlands as determined by the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountain and Piedmont
Region (version 2.0). These wetlands are adjacent to stream channels located on the property that exhibit indicators
of ordinary high water marks. The stream channels on the site are unnamed tributaries to the French Broad River
which ultimately drains to the Gulf of Mexico.
D. Remarks:
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate
participation in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the
Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to
this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 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:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 1OM15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801

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 by N/A (Preliminary -JD).
**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:
Amanda Jones
Issue Date of JD: April 2, 2018 Expiration Date: N/A Preliminary JD
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 complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at
http://corl2smapu.usace.gM.mil/cm apex/Vp=136:4:0.
Copy furnished:
Three Oaks Engineering, Attn: Russell Chandler (via email)

Appendix B
US Fish and Wildlife Service Letter

QPPZegFNT dF rye' VISIT W,L�DLIFE
4� ti United States Department of the Interior
o
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
RCFi S. ^ rn nE
160 Zillicoa Street Suite #B
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
August 25, 2017
Ms. Mary Ashburn Pearson
Delta Airport Consultants, Inc.
9711 Farrar Court, Ste. 100
Richmond, VA 23236
Dear Ms. Ashburn:
Subject: Proposed Asheville Regional Airport Terminal Apron Expansion, Buncombe County,
North Carolina
We received your email of August 11, 2017, requesting our comments on the subject project.
The following comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.§ 4321 et seq.); the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 703); and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
We have concerns about the increase in impervious surfaces to the project area. Studies' have
shown that areas of 10- to 20 -percent impervious surface (such as roofs, roads, and parking lots)
double the amount of storm -water runoff compared to natural cover and decrease deep infiltration
(groundwater recharge) by 16 percent. At 35- to 50 -percent impervious surface, runoff triples, and
deep infiltration is decreased by 40 percent. Above 75 -percent impervious surface, runoff is
5.5 times higher than natural cover, and deep infiltration is decreased by 80 percent. Additionally,
the adequate treatment of storm water in development areas is essential for the protection of water
quality and aquatic habitat in developing landscapes. Additionally, these impervious surfaces
collect pathogens, metals, sediment, and chemical pollutants and quickly transmit them (via
storm -water runoff) to receiving waters. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, this
nonpoint-source pollution is one of the major threats to water quality in the United States, posing
one of the greatest threats to aquatic life, and is also linked to chronic and acute illnesses in human
populations from exposure through drinking water and contact recreation.
'Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group (15 federal agencies of the United States Government).
Published October 1998, Revised August 2001. Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes, and Practices.
GPO Item No. 0120-A; SuDocs No. A 57.6/2:EN 3/PT.653. ISBN -0-934213-59-3.

Increased storm -water runoff also directly damages aquatic and riparian habitat, causing
stream -bank and stream -channel scouring. In addition, impervious surfaces reduce groundwater
recharge, resulting in even lower than expected stream flows during drought periods, which can
induce potentially catastrophic effects for fish, mussels, and other aquatic life. Accordingly, we
recommend that all new developments, regardless of the percentage of impervious surface area
they will create, implement storm -water -retention and -treatment measures designed to replicate
and maintain the hydrograph at the preconstruction condition in order to avoid any additional
impacts to habitat quality within the watershed.
Where detention ponds are used, storm -water outlets should drain through a vegetated area prior to
reaching any natural stream or wetland area. Detention structures should be designed to allow for
the slow discharge of storm water, attenuating the potential adverse effects of storm -water surges;
thermal spikes; and sediment, nutrient, and chemical discharges. Also, because the purpose of
storm -water -control measures is to protect streams and wetlands, no storm -water -control measures
or best management practices should be installed within any stream (perennial or intermittent) or
wetland.
We are also concerned about the stream and wetland impacts associated with this project, and
assume we will have the opportunity to provide comments on the permit application to the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers. Be aware that we will be requesting mitigation for any impacts that
cannot be avoided.
According to our records and a review of the information you provided, no federally listed species
or their habitats occur in the project area. Therefore, we believe the requirements under section 7
of the Endangered Species Act are fulfilled. However, obligations under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act must be reconsidered if. (1) new information reveals impacts of this
identified action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously
considered, (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this
review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat is determined that may be affected by the
identified action.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Allen Ratzlaff of our staff at
828/258-3939, Ext. 229. Please reference our log number 4-2-17-511 in any correspondence
pertaining to this project.
E -Copy:
Andrea Leslie, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, andrea.lesliekncwildlife.org

Appendix C
NC Natural Heritage Program

wa vlFp-
Worth Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
Natural Heritage Program
Governor Roy Cooper Secretary Susi H_ Hamilton
June 25, 2018
Attn: Crystal Best
North Carolina Clearinghouse
RE: Clearinghouse 18-0316
Dear North Carolina Clearinghouse:
NCNHDE-6332
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide information about
natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database, indicates that there are
no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or conservation/managed areas
within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there may be no documentation of natural
heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have
been surveyed. The results of this query should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists.
In the event that rare species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may
update our records.
The attached 'Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that have been
documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these records suggests that
these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area if suitable habitat exists. Tables of
natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile radius of the project area, if any, are also
included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one -mile radius of the project
area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for guidance. Contact
information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Di rectory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation planning, project
review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria for regulatory decisions.
Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published without prior written notification to the
NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP
data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a Dedicated Nature
Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water Management Trust Fund easement, or Federally -listed
species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance, please
contact Rodney A. Butler at rodney.butlericDncdcr._qov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
MAILING ADDRESS: Telephone: [phone]D7 LOCATION:
1651 Mail Service Center www.ncntip.org 121 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27659-1651 Raleigh, NC 27603

7
O
T
E
R
�
�
C7 M
cn
C7
43)DC
m
a�
eo �c
N
a
C6cc
O R
O:
C7
C7
C7 0
CD
0
U 0
N
O
a
c
mm
m
w
�mm�
c
m.2-
a
°�
a� c
E m
w m w m
e
Q
o
a
E
z
U
9�
�� _ �W
.2)W
U)
c
W
_
f/)
U
Z
0
N
N
O C
60
o
Ra
Sg
N
c
U
d
iLL
Cn
N
C
J
N
J
30
Q:
Qj
p
O
J
O N
J
i
�
J _ 0
f6
0)
N
IC
C.)i
t7
4
�
� �
4
u-)
>
F, C
N
f H , O
C9
@
c
Q
M
V
47.(D
CD
N
o
m;
U
c c
Yi_m
r(,) U
r0' d- co -j�
N
O
d d
w
Qr
0Y!
2
2
2
m
@v
Fw
o=
O C NO
Z
Rtm rOM
N
U 00
w
N N Nuj
i0+
N
N
N
d
C
O O)
o
0N
C
4
co
N
O
Op �
N TU
N= O
o
Z d=
O M c Z
N td,0
J d pin
O
O V
0Oj
co
OaZ
NN
N` 7
NN
U j,
d
QIC
N
_
d
•�
pc
8
,,�
d
•
L w 7,
+�+
a
Y
N
Q
rMn
Q..
•+ m to O
c
A
Z
d
r£
O)
c
cn
C
a
vrr7,
d 7 C (�
,o
m
E
d
C m
rn
N
N =
a
*Z
C
d c'
° d L
Q g o
d m m v,
,Q
V
c
N:Z
3
F4N
3
3 U
L
Op
p
a
U) CD
d
i
O
E
N£
C
�
CL
C O C'a C
oc
R
L
L
N
O
0 L)z
um
ca
0
y E
o.
n U
-0
N
U
U)
(D o
O
a tU
(n (n
in
in m
d
W
i
O
a "
C yo
r.+
E
CL
_
c
CD
CL
Mu>1
cm
cu
m
m
Ira C
:3
m
LL -0 m
E
_
E
E
E
r
O
O
c
O -Eg
ca
c a
Z
N75
m C
f.E
a
�
7 o f
O
cc W
o
c
x
X x
a
Q p m
c T �
E
O
0)
d
N .0
Q T
O
O
m
CD
C� � �
O
C
� � m
m N
N m
a�
C
d
L
O
O E
T
w -`O
C C C
r
0) 0)
rn 0�i
ate+
E..�
T
m
U
m c
U W
o
D-
a
(n
o m m
❑ O
a coN n
CL
+ T
Z
v
.J.
d
C O 0
N o
p
00
N
d
M
CO
d
a
E a U N
o
o
K
00
It
It 0)
o
0)
Lo°
'
��m�Q
w O
��
cfW
M
M
M co
r
M
CO N
m
O J
c o
L
L
fn
�'.Z t• a 7 C
U 3
x E
N
v
IL
IL
IcnMNO
CD
m ..
L. L j 7 p U
@ c
O
m
d
E
aci c a
c m
m
c 3r,
m
3
m
E
c
ca
Q
dim
ia,c
6 0
�arc;o O
N
O
L
O N
N
O fA L
m N
L
N
E 7
O
L
:Z._
C
ca
15
a, x `O
El CU
E
Q
m
o
-m
cc LL
IL
m
ca fN0
ZU>
!+'0p
ZLVLIL
', m
1p i ca O�
2413m2
o
0 S

r
M
O
00
Tl -
CD CD
CA
0
�L
ca
W
N
M
CO
(0
i
L
11w
r,
z
z
Y �zs
�O
O
LO
gip®
O i$ S
th
O O E 2 J
E�Ln
O C W E
= E
.ezcry�
w.
O O �Z'�N
NLLgS
co
0
M
N
m
m
a

Appendix D
Natural Resources Memo

NATURAL RESOURCES MEMORANDUM
Extend Terminal Apron for Asheville Regional Airport
Asheville, Buncombe County, North Carolina
DELTA AIRPORT
CONSULTANTS, INC.
EER/N4,
.
W p
N�d�33N19
February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION --
1
2.0 WATER RESOURCES----------------------------------------------------------------------1
3.0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES---------------------------------------------------------------2
3.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.---------------------------------------------------2
3.2 Clean Water Act Permits-----------------------------------------------------------------3
3.3 Coastal Area Management Act Areas of Environmental Concern --------------3
3.4 Construction Moratoria------------------------------------------------------------------3
3.5 N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules -----------------------------------------------------------3
3.6 Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters -----------------------------3
3.7 Wetland and Stream Mitigation --------------------------------------------------------3
3.7.1 Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts -------------------------------------------3
3.7.2 Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts -----------------------------------------------3
3.8 Endangered Species Act Protected Species -------------------------------------------4
3.9 Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act --------------------------------------11
3.10 Endangered Species Act Candidate Species ----------------------------------------11
3.11 Essential Fish Habitat------------------------------------------------------------------- 11
4.0 REFERENCES------------------------------------------------------------------------------12
AppendixA......................................................................................................................15
Figure1. Vicinity Map...............................................................................................16
Figure 2. Project Study Area Map..............................................................................17
Figure 3. Jurisdictional Features Map........................................................................18
Figure 4. Designated Trout Watersheds Map.............................................20
AppendixB...................................................................................................................... 20
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Water resources in the study area........................................................................ 1
Table 2. Physical characteristics of water resources in the study area .............................. 2
Table 3. Jurisdictional characteristics of water resources in the study area ...................... 2
Table 4. Jurisdictional characteristics of wetlands in the study area ................................. 2
Table 5. Federally protected species listed for Buncombe County ................................... 4
Three Oaks #17-621 i February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Asheville Regional Airport (AVL) is proposing to expand the existing terminal apron
at their facility located in Buncombe County, North Carolina. A vicinity map (Figure 1)
and project study area map (Figure 2) are located in Appendix A. The following Natural
Resources Memorandum (NRM) has been prepared to comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Order
1050. IF, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, and environmental regulations
of the state of North Carolina.
METHODOLOGY AND QUALIFICATIONS
A desktop review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) data was
conducted on December 4, 2017. Field work was conducted on December 5, 2017. The
principal personnel contributing to this document were:
Principal
Investigator: Russell Chandler
Education: B.A. Anthropology, 2012
Experience: Environmental Specialist, Three Oaks Engineering, 2017 -Present
Environmental Assistant, SCDOT, 2013-2017
Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations, GPS, wetland and stream
assessment, document preparation
Investigator: Cody Parks
Education: B.S. Wildlife Management, 2015
Experience: Environmental Specialist, Three Oaks Engineering, 2017 -Present
Ecologist, Corblu Ecology Group, 2016-2017
Wildlife Biologist/Ecologist, Apogee Environmental, 2013-2016
Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations, GPS, wetland and stream
assessment, species identification, document preparation
2.0 WATER RESOURCES
Water resources in the study area are part of the French Broad River basin [U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Unit 06010105. Two streams were identified in the study area
(Table 1). The location of each water resource is shown in Figure 3 (Appendix A). The
physical characteristics of these streams are provided in Table 2.
Table 1. Water resources in the studv area
NCDEQ Index Best Usage
Stream Name Map ID Number Classification
UT 1 to French Broad River SA 6-(54.75) B
UT2 to French Broad River SB 6-(54.75) B
Three Oaks #17-621 1 February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
Table 2. Physical characteristics of water resources in the study area
No ponds are in the study area. The identified features flow through pipes before
daylighting in the study area. The pipes appear to be part of the stormwater drainage
system that capture flows from parking areas, the terminal area, and runway associated
with the airport. These unnamed features flow southeast into another culvert which appears
to drain to the French Broad River.
The French Broad River is designated as a Class B water by the North Carolina DEQ.
There are no designated anadromous fish waters or Primary Nursery Areas (PNA) present
in the study area. There are no designated High -Quality Waters (HQW) or water supply
watersheds (WS -I or WS -II) within 1.0 mile downstream of the study area. The 2014 Final
303(d) list of impaired waters does not list Higgins Branch as an impaired water.
3.0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES
3.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.
Two jurisdictional streams were identified in the study area (Table 3). The location of the
streams is shown on Figure 3 (Appendix A). North Carolina Division of Water Resources
(NCDWR) stream identification forms are included for these streams in Appendix B. All
jurisdictional streams in the study area have been designated as cool water streams for the
purposes of stream mitigation.
Table 3. Jurisdictional characteristics of water resources in the studv area
Bank
Bankfull
Water
Channel
0.22
Mitigation
Map ID
Height (ft)
Width ft
Depth (in)
Substrate
Velocity
Clarity
Perennial Yes
Not Subject
SB
69
Sand and
Not Subject
Total
SA
2
4-6
3
Moderate
Clear
Ri ra
Sand and
SB
2
4-6
2
Moderate
Clear
Ri ra
No ponds are in the study area. The identified features flow through pipes before
daylighting in the study area. The pipes appear to be part of the stormwater drainage
system that capture flows from parking areas, the terminal area, and runway associated
with the airport. These unnamed features flow southeast into another culvert which appears
to drain to the French Broad River.
The French Broad River is designated as a Class B water by the North Carolina DEQ.
There are no designated anadromous fish waters or Primary Nursery Areas (PNA) present
in the study area. There are no designated High -Quality Waters (HQW) or water supply
watersheds (WS -I or WS -II) within 1.0 mile downstream of the study area. The 2014 Final
303(d) list of impaired waters does not list Higgins Branch as an impaired water.
3.0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES
3.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.
Two jurisdictional streams were identified in the study area (Table 3). The location of the
streams is shown on Figure 3 (Appendix A). North Carolina Division of Water Resources
(NCDWR) stream identification forms are included for these streams in Appendix B. All
jurisdictional streams in the study area have been designated as cool water streams for the
purposes of stream mitigation.
Table 3. Jurisdictional characteristics of water resources in the studv area
One jurisdictional wetland was identified within the study area (Figure 3). Wetland
classification and quality rating data are presented in Table 4. The wetland in the study area
is within the French Broad River basin (USGS Hydrologic Unit 06010105). United States
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) wetland determination forms for this wetland are
included in Appendix B.
Table 4. Jurisdictional characteristics of wetlands in the study area
Map ID
NCWAM Hydrologic
Classification Classification NCWAM Rating
Compensatory
WA
Map
0.22
Mitigation
River Basin
ID
Length ft.
Classification Required
Buffer
SA
448
Perennial Yes
Not Subject
SB
69
Intermittent Yes
Not Subject
Total
517
One jurisdictional wetland was identified within the study area (Figure 3). Wetland
classification and quality rating data are presented in Table 4. The wetland in the study area
is within the French Broad River basin (USGS Hydrologic Unit 06010105). United States
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) wetland determination forms for this wetland are
included in Appendix B.
Table 4. Jurisdictional characteristics of wetlands in the study area
Map ID
NCWAM Hydrologic
Classification Classification NCWAM Rating
Area ac.)
WA
Headwater Forest Riparian Low
0.22
Total
0.22
Three Oaks #17-621 2 February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
3.2 Clean Water Act Permits
Any impacts to the streams or wetlands identified in the project area will require a Section
404 permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers as well as a Section 401 Water Quality
Certification (WQC) from the NCDWQ. An appropriate Nationwide permit or an
Individual permit will be utilized. The US Army Corps of Engineers and state regulatory
agencies will have the final discretion for the appropriate permit.
3.3 Coastal Area Management Act Areas of Environmental Concern
Buncombe County is not subject to Coastal Area Management regulations.
3.4 Construction Moratoria
There will be no construction moratoria associated with the proposed apron expansion.
While Buncombe County is one of the 25 designated trout counties of North Carolina, the
project area does not fall within a designated trout watershed by USACE or NCDWR. A
depiction of the project area on a Designated Trout Watersheds map is depicted on Figure
4 (Appendix A).
3.5 N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules
No streamside riparian zones within the study area are protected under provisions of the
Neuse River Buffer Rules administered by NCDWR. Table 3 indicates that no streams are
subject to buffer rule protection.
3.6 Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters
No features within the study area have been designated by the USACE as a Navigable
Water under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act.
3.7 Wetland and Stream Mitigation
3.7.1 Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts
The Asheville Regional Airport will attempt to avoid and minimize impacts to streams and
wetlands to the greatest extent practicable in choosing a preferred alternative and during
project design. At this time, no final decisions have been made regarding the location or
design of the preferred alternative.
3.7.2 Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts
The Asheville Regional Airport will investigate potential on-site stream and wetland
mitigation opportunities once a final decision has been rendered on the location of the
preferred alternative. If on-site mitigation is not feasible, mitigation could be purchased
from Anderson Farms Mitigation Bank to offset stream impacts. If no stream mitigation
credits are available through an existing mitigation bank, mitigation will be purchased
through North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality's Division of Mitigation
Services (NC DMS).
As there are currently no wetland credits available through a bank that services the project
area, if required, wetland mitigation will be purchased through NC DMS.
Three Oaks #17-621 3 February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum
Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
3.8 Endangered Species Act Protected Species
As of October 19, 2017, the United States Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) lists twelve federally
protected species for Buncombe County (Table 5). A brief description of each species'
habitat requirements follows, along with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on
survey results in the study area. Habitat requirements for each species are based on the
current best available information from referenced literature and/or USFWS.
Table 5. Federally protected species listed for Buncombe County.
E — Endangered
T— Threatened
T(SIA) - Threatened due to similarity of appearance
MA-NLAA — May Affect -Not Likely to Adversely Affect
* Historic record (the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago)
Three Oaks #17-621 4
February 23, 2018
Federal
Habitat
Biological
Scientific name
Common Name
Status
Present
Conclusion
GIYP temys muhlenbergii
Bog turtle
T (S/A)
N
Not required
Glaucomys
Carolina northern
E
N
No effect
sabrinus coloratus
flying squirrel
Myotis grisescens
Gray bat
E
N
No effect
Myotis septentrionalis
Northernblotng-eared
T
N
No effect
Erimonax monachus
Spotfin chub
T
N
No effect
(turquise shiner)*
Alasmidonta raveneliana
Appalachian elktoe
E
N
No effect
Bombus affinis
Rusty -patched
E
N
No effect
bumble bee*
Microhexura montivaga
Spruce -fir moss
E
N
No effect
spider
Epioblasma Florentina
Tan riffleshell*
E
N
No effect
walker (=E. walkeri)
Solidago spithamaea
Blue Ridge
T
N
No effect
Goldenrod
Sagittaria fasciculata
Bunched arrowhead*
E
N
No effect
Sarracenia rubra ssp.
Mountain Sweet
E
N
No effect
jonesii
Pitcherplant
Geum radiatum
Spreading avens
E
N
No effect
Spiraea virginiana
Virginia spiraea*
T
N
No effect
Gymnoderma lineare
Rock gnome lichen
E
N
No effect
E — Endangered
T— Threatened
T(SIA) - Threatened due to similarity of appearance
MA-NLAA — May Affect -Not Likely to Adversely Affect
* Historic record (the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago)
Three Oaks #17-621 4
February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
Bog turtle
USFWS optimal survey window: April 1 — October 1 (visual surveys); April 1 -June 15
(optimal for breeding/nesting); May 1 -June 30 (trapping surveys)
Habitat Description: Bog turtle habitat consists of open, groundwater supplied (spring fed),
graminoid dominated wetlands along riparian corridors or on seepage slopes.
These habitats are designated as mountain bogs by the NCNHP, but they are
technically poor, moderate, or rich fens that may be associated with wet pastures
and old drainage ditches that have saturated muddy substrates with open canopies.
Plants found in bog turtle habitat include sedges, rushes, marsh ferns, herbs, shrubs
(tag alder, hardback, blueberry, etc.), and wetland tree species (red maple and silky
willow). These habitats often support sphagnum moss and may contain carnivorous
plants (sundews and pitcherplants) and rare orchids. Potential habitats may be
found in western Piedmont and Mountain counties from 700 to 4500 feet elevation
in North Carolina. Soil types (poorly drained silt loams) from which bog turtle
habitats have been found include Arkaqua, Chewacla, Dellwood, Codorus
complex, Hatboro, Nikwasi, Potomac — Iotla complex, Reddies, Rosman, Tate —
Cullowhee complex, Toxaway, Tuckasegee — Cullasaja complex, Tusquitee,
Watauga, and Wehadkee.
Biological Conclusion: Not Required
Species listed as threatened due to similarity of appearance do not require Section
7 consultation with the USFWS. In addition, this project is not expected to affect
the bog turtle because no suitable habitat is present within the study area. A review
of the October 2017 NCNHP database on December 4, 2017, indicates no known
bog turtle occurrence within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Carolina northern flying squirrel
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: May — October; coldest days in coldest winter
months (nest box surveys)
Habitat Description: There are several isolated populations of the Carolina Northern
flying squirrel in the mountains of North Carolina. This nocturnal squirrel prefers
the ecotone between coniferous (red spruce, Fraser fir, or hemlock) and mature
northern hardwood forests (beech, yellow birch, maple, hemlock, red oak, and
buckeye), typically at elevations above 4,500 feet mean sea level. In some
instances, the squirrels may be found on narrow, north -facing valleys above 4,000
feet mean sea level. Both forest types are used to search for food and the hardwood
forest is used for nesting sites. Mature forests with a thick evergreen understory
and numerous snags are most preferable. In winter, squirrels inhabit tree cavities
in older hardwoods, particularly yellow birch.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat for the Carolina northern flying squirrel does not exist in the study
area. The elevation at the project study area is between 2,104 to 2,136 ft above sea
level, and is not high enough for the flying squirrel. Therefore, surveys were not
conducted. A review of the October 2017 NCNHP records on December 4, 2017,
Three Oaks #17-621 5 February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
indicates no known Carolina northern flying squirrel occurrences within 1.0 mile
of the study area.
Gray bat
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: June 1 -August 15 (summer); January 15 -
February 15 (winter)
Habitat Description: Gray bats are known mainly from the cave regions of the Southeast
and Midwest. They live in colonies in caves, utilizing different caves for summer
roosting and winter hibernating. Summer caves are usually within one half mile
of a river or reservoir, which provides foraging habitat. During the summer,
females give birth and rear the young in maternity caves, while males and
yearlings roost in separate bachelor caves. Caves preferred for hibernation are
typically deep, vertical caves with a temperature between 42 and 52 degrees
Fahrenheit. Gray bats are highly selective in choosing suitable caves, and nine
known caves are thought to provide hibernation space for 95 percent of the
population. Migration from summer to winter caves begins in September and is
mainly complete by the beginning of November.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat for the gray bat is not present within the study area. There are no
bridges within the study area. Existing culverts are less than five feet in diameter
and do not provide suitable habitat. There is at least one abandoned mine within
a mile of the project footprint (U.S. Geological Survey 2016b). A review of the
October 2017 NCNHP records on December 4, 2017, indicates the closest EO for
gray bat is approximately 5.5 miles northwest of the study area. There are no
known gray bat occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area, as such, the
proposed action is consistent with the final Section 4(d) rule, codified at 50 C.F.R
§ 17.40(o) and effective February 16, 2016. Section 7 responsibilities are
therefore considered fulfilled.
Northern long-eared bat
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: June 1 — August 15
Habitat Description: In North Carolina, the Northern long-eared bat (NLEB) occurs in
the mountains, with scattered records in the Piedmont and coastal plain. In
western North Carolina, NLEB spend winter hibernating in caves and mines.
During the summer, NLEB roosts singly or in colonies underneath bark, in
cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees (typically >3 inches dbh).
Males and non -reproductive females may also roost in cooler places, like caves
and mines. This bat has also been found, rarely, roosting in structures like barns
and sheds, under eaves of buildings, behind window shutters, in bridges, and in
bat houses. Foraging occurs on forested hillsides and ridges, and occasionally
over forest clearings, over water, and along tree -lined corridors. Mature forests
may be an important habitat type for foraging.
Biological Conclusion: No effect
Three Oaks #17-621 6 February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
Suitable habitat for the Northern long-eared bat does not exist within the study area
or in the vicinity of the study area. A review of the October 2017 NCNHP records
on December 4, 2017, indicates the closest EO for Northern long-eared bat is
mapped approximately 2.5 miles northeast of the study area; however, the bat was
a rabies lab specimen and the actual location of its capture is unknown. There are
no known occurrences within 1.0 miles of the study area. The proposed action does
not require separate USFWS consultation on the grounds that the proposed action
is consistent with the final Section 4(d) rule, codified at 50 C.F.R. § 17.40(o) and
effective February 16, 2016. Section 7 responsibilities are therefore considered
fulfilled. A review of the USFWS Asheville Field Office website
(http://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project—review/NLEB—in_WNC.html) was
also conducted for consistency with NCNHP records. This project is located
entirely outside of the highlighted areas (12 -digit HUC) that the USFWS has
determined to be representative of areas that may require consultation.
Spotfin chub
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: September — November (tributaries); year round (large
rivers)
Habitat Description: Ideal habitat for spotfin chub consists of large creeks and medium-
sized rivers that have clear water over large substrate such as gravel, boulder and
bedrock. The fish typically avoids silty areas as well as sand. The spotfin chub had
a much larger historic range, but due to development much of the habitat has been
destroyed. Now, the species is isolated to four tributary systems in western North
Carolina and eastern Tennessee.
Biological Conclusion: No effect
Suitable habitat for the Spotfin chub does not exist within the study area.
Additionally, a review of the October 2017 NCNHP database on December 4, 2017,
indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 miles of the study area.
Appalachian elktoe
USFWS optimal survey window: year round
Habitat Description: Habitat for the Appalachian elktoe ranges from shallow, medium-
sized creeks to rivers with fast flowing water. It can be found in riffles, runs, and
shallow pools and prefers silt -free, coarse sand and gravel substrate stabilized by
cobble, boulders and bedrock. The elktoe is rarely found in unstable substrates.
There are 10 counties with known occurrences of the Appalachian elktoe and one
county, Buncombe, with a historic occurrence. It is found in the mountain streams
of these counties and the range spans into eastern Tennessee.
Biological Conclusion: No effect
Suitable habitat for the Appalachian elktoe does not exist within the study area.
Additionally, a review of the October 2017 NCNHP database was conducted on
December 4, 2016, and no records were found within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Rusty -patched bumble bee
USFWS optimal survey window: April 1 — October 1 (visual surveys)
Three Oaks #17-621 7 February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
Habitat Description: Rusty -patched bumble bee habitat consists of open areas such as
prairies, woodlands, marshes, agricultural landscapes, and residential parks and
gardens. These habitats support sufficient food supply (i.e. nectar and pollen
from diverse and abundant flowers) and undisturbed nesting sites and
overwintering sites for queens. These habitats often support flowering species
with relatively shallow corollas due to the short tongue of the bee.
Biological Conclusion: Not Required
The rusty -patched bumble bee is considered Historic for Buncombe County;
therefore, surveys are not required. A review of the October 2017 NCNHP
records on December 4, 2017, indicates no known rusty -patched bumble bee
occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Spruce -fir moss spider
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: May - August
Habitat Description: The spruce -fir moss spider occurs in a few mountains in Western
North Carolina and parts of Eastern Tennessee. This species lives in high elevation
(> 5,000 feet mean sea level) spruce -fir forests consisting of Fraser fir and red
spruce. Within these forests the spider can be found in damp but well -drained moss
mats that grow on large rocks beneath the canopy. This is a sensitive species so the
conditions must be just right for survival. This particular type of habitat supports
the spiders' construction of its tube -shaped web, which is formed between and
through the moss mat and the rock surface.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable high elevation habitat for the spruce -fir moss spider does not exist within
the study area; elevations in the study area range from 2,104 to 2,136 ft above sea
level. Additionally, no spruce -fir forests are present. Due to this lack of suitable
habitat, surveys were not necessary. A review of the October 2017 NCNHP
database on December 4, 2017, indicates no known occurrence within 1.0 mile of
the study area.
Tan riffleshell
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: year round
Habitat Description: Tan riffleshell habitat consists of headwaters, riffles, and shoals in
sand and gravel substrate. Historically, they were found in the French Broad and
Hiawassee Rivers of North Carolina but currently, they are only known to be
located in Tazewell County, Virginia.
Biological Conclusion: No effect.
Three Oaks #17-621 8 February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
No suitable habitat exists in the survey area. A review of the October 2017 NCNHP
database on December 4, 2017, indicates no known occurrence within 1.0 mile of
the study area.
Blue Ridge goldenrod
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: July -September
Habitat Description: Blue Ridge goldenrod, endemic to the Appalachian Mountains of
North Carolina and Tennessee, occurs in the High Elevation Rocky Summit natural
community generally at or above elevations of 4,600 feet above mean sea level
along cliffs, ledges, balds, and dry rock crevices of granite outcrops of the higher
mountain peaks. This early pioneer herb usually grows in full sun on generally
acidic soils of shallow humus or clay loams that are intermittently saturated. The
encroachment of woody vegetation such as ericaceous shrubs can eliminate the
goldenrod through competition and shading. Roan Mountain bluet, Heller's
blazing star, and spreading avens are a few of its common associate species.
Biological Conclusion: No effect
Suitable high elevation habitat for the Blue Ridge goldenrod does not exist within
the study area. Elevations in the study area range from 2,104 to 2,136 ft above sea
level. Additionally, no spruce -fir forests are present. Therefore, surveys for this
species were not necessary. A review of the October 2017 NCNHP database on
December 4, 2017, indicates no known occurrence within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Bunched arrowhead
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: mid May -July
Habitat Description: Bunched arrowhead, endemic to the southern Appalachian Mountains
of North Carolina and upper Piedmont of South Carolina, is rooted in shallow water
seepage areas of bogs, wooded swamps, and deciduous woodlands. This early -
successional perennial herb occurs in Swamp Forest -Bog Complex (Typic
Subtype) and Southern Appalachian Bog (Southern Subtype) natural communities.
A known occurrence also occurs in a maintained power line right-of-way along the
headwaters of a river. The plant requires a slight but continuous and steady flow
of cool, clean water that saturates or floods but does not stagnate. The species
typically occurs in sandy loam soils found underneath a 10-24 inch deep layer of
muck, sand, and silt. Undisturbed occurrences are usually located just below the
origin of the seep on gently sloping terrain at the bluff -floodplain ecotone. While
shaded areas contain the most vigorous plants, it will also grow in either full sun or
partial shade beneath red maple, black gum, and alder at the base of steep slopes.
Biological Conclusion: No effect.
Suitable habitat for Bunched arrowhead does not exist within the study area.
The study area is regularly maintained and mowed, and incurs too much
disturbance for suitable habitat to occur. A review of the October 2017 NCNHP
database on December 4, 2017, indicates no known occurrence within 1.0 mile of
the study area.
Three Oaks #17-621 9 February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
Mountain sweet pitcher plant
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: April -October
Habitat Description: Mountain sweet pitcher plant, endemic to the Blue Ridge Mountains
of North and South Carolina, is found along stream banks and in shrub/herb-
dominated, seepage -fed mountain bogs (Southern Appalachian Bog -Southern
Subtype). Both stream bank and bog habitats are usually situated along
intermittently exposed to intermittently flooded level depressions associated with
valley floodplains. These habitats, typically on soils of the Toxaway or Hatboro
series, contain deep, poorly drained, saturated soils of loam, sand, and silt with a
high organic matter content and medium to high acidity. A few occurrences of the
pitcher plant also grow in cataract bogs, either in thin strips along the edges of
waterfalls or on soil islands over granite rock faces, where sphagnum and other bog
plant species line the sides. This early successional species relies on natural
disturbance (e.g., drought, water fluctuation, periodic fire, ice damage) to maintain
its habitat by preventing the establishment of later successional woody seedlings.
Biological Conclusion: No effect
Suitable habitat for Mountain sweet pitcher plant does not exist within the
study area. The study area is regularly maintained and mowed, and incurs too much
disturbance for suitable habitat to occur. A review of the October 2017 NCNHP
database on December 4, 2017, indicates no known occurrence within 1.0 mile of
the study area.
Spreading avens
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: June — September
Habitat Description: Spreading avens occurs in areas exposed to full sun on high -elevation
cliffs, outcrops, and bases of steep talus slopes. This perennial herb also occurs in
thin, gravelly soils on grassy balds near summit outcrops. This species prefers a
northwest aspect, but can be found on west-southwest through north-northeast
aspects. Forests surrounding known occurrences are generally dominated by either
red spruce -Fraser fir, northern hardwoods with scattered spruce, or high -elevation
red oaks. Spreading avens typically occurs in shallow acidic soil (such as the Burton
series) in cracks and crevices of igneous, metamorphic, or metasedimentary rocks.
Soils may be well drained, but almost continuously wet, with soils at some known
populations subject to drying out in summer due to exposure to sun and shallow
depths. Known populations occur at elevations between 4,296 and 6,268 feet. Blue
Ridge goldenrod, Heller's blazing star, and Roan Mountain bluet are a few of its
typical associate species.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Habitat for spreading avens in the form of scarps, bluffs, cliffs, and escarpments
on mountains, hills, and ridges above 4,200 feet is not present in the study area.
Elevations in the study area range from 2,104 to 2,136 ft above sea level. A review
of the October 2017 NCNHP database on December 4, 2017, indicates no known
occurrence of this species within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Virginia spiraea
Three Oaks #17-621 10 February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: May -early July
Habitat Description: Virginia spiraea occurs in flood -scoured, high -gradient sections of
rocky river banks of second and third order streams, often in gorges or canyons.
This perennial shrub grows in sunny areas on moist, acidic soils, primarily over
sandstone. The shrub tends to be found in thickets with little arboreal or herbaceous
competition along early successional areas that rely on periodic disturbances such
as high -velocity scouring floods to eliminate such competition. Virginia spiraea
also occurs on meander scrolls and point bars, natural levees, and other braided
features of lower stream reaches, often near the stream mouth. Scoured, riverine
habitat sites are found where deposition occurs after high water flows, such as on
floodplains and overwash islands, rather than along areas of maximum erosion.
Occurrences in depositional habitats are found among riparian debris piles, on fine
alluvial sand and other alluvial deposits, or between boulders.
Biological Conclusion: No effect
Suitable habitat for Virginia spiraea does not exist within the study area. Therefore,
surveys were not necessary for this species. A review of the October 2017 NCNHP
database on December 4, 2017, indicates no known occurrence of this species
within 1.0 mile of the study area.
3.9 Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act
Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies
of open water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically
within 1.0 mile of open water.
A desktop -GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1.13 -mile
radius (1.0 mile plus 660 feet) of the project limits, was performed on December 4, 2017,
using 2010 color aerials. The French Broad River is the only water body large enough but
is not sufficiently open enough to be considered. Additionally, a review of the NCNHP
database on December 4, 2017, revealed no known occurrences of this species within 1.0
mile of the project study area. Due to the lack of habitat, known occurrences, and minimal
impact anticipated for this project, it has been determined that this project will not affect
this species.
3.10 Endangered Species Act Candidate Species
As of December 15, 2017, the USFWS has no listed Candidate Species for Buncombe
County.
3.11 Essential Fish Habitat
There is no Essential Fish Habitat located within the project study area. Essential Fish
Habitat will not be impacted or effected.
Three Oaks #17-621 11 February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
4.0 REFERENCES
Burt, W.H. and R.P. Grossenheider. 1976. A Field Guide to the Mammals: North America
North of Mexico. 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 255 pp.
Conant, R. and J.T. Collins. 1991. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians (Eastern
and Central North America). 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 450 pp.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1, U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.
Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Environmental Laboratory. 1992. Clarification and Interpretation of the 1987 Manual,
memorandum from Major General Arthur E. Williams.
Harp, J.M. 1992. A Status Survey of the Spruce -fir Moss Spider, Microhexura montivaga
Crosby and Bishop (Araneae, Dipluridae). Unpubl. report to the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission, Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program, and
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Asheville, North Carolina. 30 pp.
Harrar, E.S. and J.G. Harrar. 1962. Guide to Southern Trees. New York: Dover
Publications. 2nd ed. 709 pp.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey, and J.R. Harrison III. 1980. Amphibians and
Reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia. Chapel Hill: The University of North
Carolina Press. 264 pp.
National Geographic. 1999. Field Guide to the Birds of North America. 3rd ed. Washington,
D.C. National Geographic Society.
NatureServe. 2017. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web
application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available
http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. (Accessed: December 4, 2017).
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality. 1995.
Guidance for Rating the Values of Wetlands in North Carolina. Fourth version.
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality .
French Broad River Basinwide Water Quality Plan. Raleigh, North Carolina.
https:Hfiles.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/BPU/BPU/French_Broad/F
rench%20Bro ad%20PIans/2005%20Plan/FBR%2OFinal%2OEntire%20PIan.pdf
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality.
Water Quality Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2014 Final 303(d) list.
https:Hfiles.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303 d/2014/2014_30
3dlist.pdf
N.C. Department of Transportation. 2008. Invasive Exotic Plants of North Carolina.
Three Oaks #17-621 12 February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
Newcomb, L. 1977. Newcomb's Wildflower Guide. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
490 pp.
Peterson, R.T., editor. 1980. A Field Guide to the Birds of Eastern and Central North
America. 4th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 384 pp.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the
Carolinas. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. 1183 pp.
Rhode, F.C., R.G. Arndt, D.G. Lindquist, and J.F. Parnell. 1994. Freshwater Fishes of the
Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. Chapel Hill: University of North
Carolina Press. 222 pp.
Schafale, M.P. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina: Fourth
Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, NCDEHNR. Raleigh, North Carolina. 208 pp.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service
(MRCS). 2009. Soil Survey of Buncombe County, North Carolina.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service
(MRCS). 1998. Hydrologic Units -North Carolina (metadata). Raleigh, North
Carolina.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain
Region Version 2.0, ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR -
10 -20. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation
Service (MRCS). 2016. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States,
Version 8.1 L.M. Vasilas, G.W. Hurt, and J.F. Berkowitz (eds.). USDA, NRCS, in
cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Threatened and Endangered Species in North
Carolina: Buncombe County. Updated October 19, 2017.
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/buncombe.html
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii).
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/listed_Species/bog_turtle.html. (Accessed:
December 4, 2017).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Carolina northern flying squirrel (Glaucomys
sabrinus https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/listed_species/Carolina_northern_
flying_squirrel.html. (Accessed: December 4, 2017).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Gray bat (Myotis grisescens).
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/listed_Species/gray_bat.html. (Accessed:
December 4, 2017).
Three Oaks #17-621 13 February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Northern long-eared bat (Myotis
septentrionalis).
https://www. fws.gov/Midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/nlebFactSheet.html.
(Accessed: December 4, 2017).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Spotfin chub (Erimonax monachus).
https://www. fws.gov/asheville/htmis/listed_species/spotfin_chub.html.
(Accessed: December 4, 2017).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Appalachain elktoe (Elliptio raveneliana).
https://www. fws.gov/asheville/htmis/listed_species/Appalachian_elktoe.html.
(Accessed: December 4, 2017).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Rusty -patched bumblebee (Bombus affinis).
https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/insects/rpbb/index.html. (Accessed:
December 4, 2017).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Spruce -fir moss spider (Microhexura
montivaga). https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/es_spruce-
fir moss_spider.html. (Accessed: December 4, 2017).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Tan riffleshell (Epioblasma florentina walkeri).
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecpO/profile/speciesProfile?s1d=1247. (Accessed: December
4, 2017).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Spreading avens (Geum radiatum).
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/es_spreading_avens.html. (Accessed:
December 4, 2017).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1993. Spreading Avens Recovery Plan.
Atlanta, Georgia.. 32 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Virginia spiraea (Spiraea virginiana).
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/es_virginia_Spiraea.html. (Accessed:
December 4, 2017).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1992. Virginia Siraea (Spiraea virginiana)
Recovery plan. Newton Corner, Massachusetts. 47 pp.
United States Geollogical Survey (USGS). 1978. Skyland, North Carolina, Topographic
Quadrangle (7.5 -minute series).
Weakley, Alan S. (Working Draft of September 2012). Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia,
Georgia, northern Florida, and surrounding areas. University of North Carolina
Herbarium, North Carolina Botanical Garden. Chapel Hill, NC. 924 pp.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell, and W.C. Biggs. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia,
and Maryland. Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press. 255 pp.
Three Oaks #17-621 14 February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
Appendix A
Figures
Three Oaks #17-621 15 February 23, 2018

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Three Oaks #17-621 16 February 23, 2018

Prepared For:
DELTA AIRPORT
CONSULTANM TING
Asheville Regional Airport
Terminal Expansion
Vicinity
Map
Buncombe County, North Carolina
Date:
February 12, 2018
Scale:
1 in = 1 miles
0 0.5 1
17-621
2
-_
CAP
I TRC
Miles
1 ,"hh
N
a
°
I'
C4
Lake Julian a
Royal Pine's
isat
i
crave
-4
�t
Q,8
�
,Y- — — —
1 HendersonG�,c■�--
d�
Buncombe Gia
f
qq
.AShavill. I
i
1FdLgional — Fletcher
lAirPbV
High Visna
f
l
Country
l
Club
�,
l C2BO,j
�
I rt f
f
a°
0
\Sv" 4
■
py
¢,
B roadrnoo r
7yff
Golf Links t7d'
,�yLSer Bridged �`
Mil Is Rimer
Legend
Sources: Esri, HERE, Del-orme, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P,
Study Area - 4.85ac
NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri KorreVsri
(Thailand), Mapmylndia, NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors,,,�Vd
the GIS User Community
Prepared For:
DELTA AIRPORT
CONSULTANM TING
Asheville Regional Airport
Terminal Expansion
Vicinity
Map
Buncombe County, North Carolina
Date:
February 12, 2018
Scale:
1 in = 1 miles
Job No.:
17-621
Drawn By:
Checked By:
CAP
I TRC
Figure

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
Figure 2. Project Study Area Map
(Overlaid on Topography Map)
Three Oaks #17-621 17 February 23, 2018

500 1,000
i
•4,
2,000
Feet
� " '•,.
Legend
Study Area - 4.85ac
p%Eft f Prepared For:
DELTA AIRPORT
CONSULTANTS, INC
•r-- MMN&. E,
..
la,
v y /
_7
'-_-- f
.
Y� RR__
i gR
m
1v
I
USGS The National Map: National Boundaries Dataset, National
Elevation Dataset, Geographic Names Information System, National
Hydrography Dataset, National Land Cover Database, National
Structures Dataset, and National Transportation Dataset; U.S. Census
Bureau - TIGER/Line; HERE Road Data
Asheville Regional Airport
Terminal Expansion
USGS
Topographic
Map
Buncombe County, North Carolina
Date:
February 12, 2018
Scale:
1 inch = 1,000 feet
Job No.:
17-621
Drawn By:
Checked By:
CAP
I TRC
Figure
2

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
Figure 3. Jurisdictional Features Map
(Overlaid on Aerial Photograph)
Three Oaks #17-621 18 February 23, 2018

mak\ EERry,��
i
• W
A)
`941le33tli`��''
Prepared For:
DELTA AIRPORT
CONSULTMM INC
Asheville Regional Airport
Terminal Expansion
Jurisdictional Features
Map
Buncombe County, North Carolina
Date:
February 12, 2018
Scale:
1 inch = 100 feet
Job No.:
17-621
Drawn By:
I Checked By:
CAP
I TRC
Figure

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
Figure 4. Designated Trout Watershed Map
Three Oaks #17-621 19 February 23, 2018

Legend
Trout Watershed
Not a Trout Watershed
9
IV
19
C 0 M B E
694
7. North FO -alt 7(
ij 70
81 Bl-
iltvno For -
74
146
280
Miles
5 10 20
rN EMOMIll 1 &q
R-4 0-
.11.j
Designated Trout Watersheds
6 1 A%r
Buncombe County r1spfpint
North Carolina

Natural Resources Memorandum Asheville Regional Airport, Buncombe County, N. C.
Appendix B
Stream and Wetland Forms
Three Oaks #17-621 20 February 23, 2018

Stream SA
NG DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 2/12/2018
Project/Site: Asheville Regional Airport
Latitude: 35.433265
Evaluator: Three Oaks Engineering - R. Chandler, C. Parks
county: Buncombe
Longitude: -82.537726
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 33
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
❑
Ephemeral Intermittenterennia
e.g. Quad Name: Skyland, 24k
if> 19 or perennial if 2! 30•
✓
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
A. Geomor holo Subtotal = 15
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
12'. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
❑
1
❑
2
❑
3
✓
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
0
1
(1
2
✓
3
❑
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
❑
1
❑
2
Yes = 3 ✓
3
❑
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
❑
2
❑✓
3
❑
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
❑
1
❑✓
2
❑
3
❑
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
✓
2
❑
3
❑
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
Bank Height (ft): 2 ft
Bankfull width (ft): 4-6 ft
Water depth (in): 5 - 18 in
Channel substrate -QF:gl>f� Gravel, Cobble, Bedrock
Velocity -fast, o e te, slow iprap
Clarity ear, ightly turbid, turbid
i
❑✓
2
3
❑
8. 1leadcuts
0
1
2
❑✓
3
❑
9. Grade control
0
0.5
❑✓
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
6
M 1
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
❑✓
Yes = 3
El
a artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 9 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 ❑
1
❑
3 ❑
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0 ❑
1
❑
2 ✓ 3 ❑
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
✓
0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
(1
1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 H
❑
0.5 ✓ 1
1 Q 1 1 5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Q
Yes = 3 ✓
C. Biology (Subtotal= 9
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2 1
0
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
❑✓
2 1 ❑
0 LJ
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
❑✓
1 ❑ 2 2
3 Ej
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
❑✓
1 2 Lj
3
22. Fish
0
❑
0.5 ✓ 1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
Q
0.5 ✓ 1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
El
0.5 ❑ 1 ❑✓
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5 1 ❑✓
1 5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Othe =
'perennia4 streams may also be identified using other methods See p. 35 of manual.
NQteS: 4 Gambusia holbrooki were observed during the field review. Crayfish claw was found during site visit.
Sketch:
Bank Height (ft): 2 ft
Bankfull width (ft): 4-6 ft
Water depth (in): 5 - 18 in
Channel substrate -QF:gl>f� Gravel, Cobble, Bedrock
Velocity -fast, o e te, slow iprap
Clarity ear, ightly turbid, turbid

Stream SB
NG DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 2/12/2018
Project/Site: Asheville Regional Airport
Latitude: 35.433265
Evaluator: Three Oaks Engineering - R. Chandler, C. Parks
county: Buncombe
Longitude: -82.537726
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 28
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
❑
Ephemeral <ntermitten Perennial
e.g. Quad Name: Skyland, 24k
if> 19 or perennial if 2! 30•
1.5
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
A. Geomor holo Subtotal = 10.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
12'. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
❑
1
❑
2
❑✓
3
1.5
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
0
1
15. Sediment on plants or debris
2
�/
3
(1
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
0
1
0.5
2
1 1 5
3
24. Amphibians
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
❑
2
❑✓
3
❑
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
❑
1
❑✓
2
❑
3
❑
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
P/1
1
❑
2
❑
3
❑
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
✓
i
❑
2
3
❑
8. 1leadcuts
0
1
✓
2
❑
3
❑
9. Grade control
0
0.5
❑✓
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
6
W1 1
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
❑✓
Yes = 3
El
a artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 10.5 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
❑
1
El
2 Z ❑
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
❑
1
❑
2 3 ❑✓
14. Leaf litter
1.5
✓
1
0
0.0 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
22. Fish
0.5
(1
1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0
0.5
I
1 1 5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
24. Amphibians
No = 0
El
Yes = 3 ✓
C. Biology (Subtotal = 7
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
✓1
2 1
0
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
❑✓
2 1 ❑
0 LJ
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
❑✓
1 ❑ 2 2
3 Ej
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1 2 Lj
3
22. Fish
0
0.5 Lj 1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
✓
0.5 1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
El
0.5 ❑✓ 1 ❑
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5 ✓ 1 ❑
1 5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Othe =
'perennia4 streams may also be identified using other methods See p. 35 of manual.
NQteS: No biological organisms observed during field review.
Sketch:
Bank Height (ft): 2 ft
Bankfull width (ft): 4-6 ft
Water depth (in): 5 - 18 in
Channel substrate -QF:gl>f� Gravel, Cobble, Bedrock
Velocity -fast, o e te, slow iprap
Clarity ear, ightly turbid, turbid

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: _Asheville Reg. Airport Terminal Expansion City/County: Buncombe
Applicant/Owner: _Greater Asheville Regional Airport Authority state: NC
Investigator(s); Three Oaks Engineering - C. Parks, R. Chandler Section, Township, Range: Asheville
Sampling Date; _12/5/2017
_ Sampling Point: UPL WA -2
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): _Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): _Flat Slope (%): _0-3
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR-N Lat; 35.433118 Long; _ 82.537916 Datum: NAD -83
Soil Map Unit Name: _Udorthents-Urban land complex, 2-50% slopes NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes = No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ✓ Soil F v L or Hydrology = significantly disturbed? NO Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes = No ❑
Are Vegetation= , Soil❑✓ , or Hydrology D naturally problematic? Nb (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No_I Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No_ ✓ within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0✓
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
❑ Surface Water (A1) ❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
❑ High Water Table (A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
[] Drainage Patterns (1310)
❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
[] Moss Trim Lines (1316)
❑ Water Marks (B1) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No Q Depth (inches): _Absent
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No Q Depth (inches): X12"
❑
n
Saturation Present? Yes No' ' Depth (inches): _>12"
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

Asheville Reg. Airport Terminal Expansion
VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' Rad ) % Cover Species? Status
1.
6.
0 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 15' Rad
1.
2.
0 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' Rad )
1.
4.
U = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0
Sampling Point:_UPL WA -2
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
X1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is:53.01
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
5' Rad Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. Andropogon virginicus 15 Yes FACU (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Rubus pensilvanicus 20 Yes FACU
• Sapling -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
6.
7.
50% of total cover: 17.5
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' Rad )
1.
35 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 7
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
4.
5.
0 Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation /
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0 Present? Yes n No=
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Mowed and maintained regularly
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Asheville Reg. Airport Terminal Expansion
to the depth needed to document the indicator or
Sampling Point: _UPL WA -2
Depth Matrix Redox Features
- inches Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Texture Remarks
0-6 10YR 5/4 100 SL
6-12+ 10YR 6/4 90 7.5YR 5/8 10 C M SL
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11;
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced
MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
D Dark Surface (S7)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _0— No ❑✓ —
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Asheville Reg. Airport Terminal Expansion City/County: Buncombe
Applicant/owner: Greater Asheville Regional Airport Authority State: NC
Investigator(s): Three Oaks Engineering - C. Parks, R. Chandler Section, Township, Range: Asheville
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain/TOS Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0-3
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR-N Lat; 35.433199 Long; -82.537761 Datum: NAD -83
Soil Map Unit Name: Udorthents-Urban land complex, 2-50% slopes NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrolo is conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes J v l No Q (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil F7 Jor Hydrology= significantly disturbed? NO Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes= No
Are Vegetation= Soil=, , or Hydrology= naturally problematic? Nh (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
Sampling Date: 12/5/2017
_ Sampling Point: Wet WA -2
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes" ✓0 No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes I v I Nowithin a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes J V L No
Remarks:
WAM: Headwater Forest
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
❑ Surface Water (A1)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑✓ Drainage Patterns (1310)
✓❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (616)
❑ Water Marks (131)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (133)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
❑✓ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0
No= Depth (inches): Absent
Water Table Present? Yes ❑
No ✓ >12"
Depth (inches):
4"
I�
n
Saturation Present? Yes Q
No ❑ Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

Asheville Reg. Airport Terminal Expansion
VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicato
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' Rad ) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
6.
0 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 15' Rad
1.
2.
5.
6.
0 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' Rad )
1.
3.
4.
5.
U = Total Cover
50% of total cover 0 20% of total cover: 0
Sampling Point: Wet WA -2
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (ASB)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = BIA =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
❑✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
0 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
5' Rad Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. Juncus effusus 60 Yes FACW (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Typha latifolia 25 Yes OBL Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
6.
7.
50% of total cover: 42.5
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' rad )
1.
85 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 17
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
0
= Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0 Present? Yes n No=
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Mowed and maintained regularly
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Asheville Reg. Airport Terminal Expansion
Sampling Point: Wet WA -2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type, Loc' Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 4/2 100 SL
3-12 10YR 4/2 60 5YR 4/6 40 C M/PL SL
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
[] Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
p Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced
MS=Masked Sand Grains. 'Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (172)
0 Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
❑✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑✓ No ❑
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

Prepared For:
DELTA AIRPORT
CONSULTANM TING
Asheville Regional Airport
Terminal Expansion
Vicinity
Map
Buncombe County, North Carolina
Date:
February 12, 2018
Scale:
1 in = 1 miles
0 0.5 1
17-621
2
-_
CAP
I TRC
Miles
1 ,"hh
N
a
°
I'
C4
Lake Julian a
Royal Pine's
isat
i
crave
-4
�t
Q,8
�
,Y- — — —
1 HendersonG�,c■�--
d�
Buncombe Gia
f
qq
.AShavill. I
i
1FdLgional — Fletcher
lAirPbV
High Visna
f
l
Country
l
Club
�,
l C2BO,j
�
I rt f
f
a°
0
\Sv" 4
■
py
¢,
B roadrnoo r
7yff
Golf Links t7d'
,�yLSer Bridged �`
Mil Is Rimer
Legend
Sources: Esri, HERE, Del-orme, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P,
Study Area - 4.85ac
NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri KorreVsri
(Thailand), Mapmylndia, NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors,,,�Vd
the GIS User Community
Prepared For:
DELTA AIRPORT
CONSULTANM TING
Asheville Regional Airport
Terminal Expansion
Vicinity
Map
Buncombe County, North Carolina
Date:
February 12, 2018
Scale:
1 in = 1 miles
Job No.:
17-621
Drawn By:
Checked By:
CAP
I TRC
Figure

500 1,000
i
•4,
2,000
Feet
� " '•,.
Legend
Study Area - 4.85ac
p%Eft f Prepared For:
DELTA AIRPORT
CONSULTANTS, INC
•r-- MMN&. E,
..
la,
v y /
_7
'-_-- f
.
Y� RR__
i gR
m
1v
I
USGS The National Map: National Boundaries Dataset, National
Elevation Dataset, Geographic Names Information System, National
Hydrography Dataset, National Land Cover Database, National
Structures Dataset, and National Transportation Dataset; U.S. Census
Bureau - TIGER/Line; HERE Road Data
Asheville Regional Airport
Terminal Expansion
USGS
Topographic
Map
Buncombe County, North Carolina
Date:
February 12, 2018
Scale:
1 inch = 1,000 feet
Job No.:
17-621
Drawn By:
Checked By:
CAP
I TRC
Figure
2

Prepared For:
DELTA AIRPORT
CONSULTANM INC
Asheville Regional Airport
Terminal Expansion
Jurisdictional Features
Map
Buncombe County, North Carolina
Date:
February 12, 2018
Scale:
1 inch = 100 feet
Job No.:
17-621
Drawn By:
Checked By:
CAP
I TRC
Figure

Stream SA
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 2/12/2018
Project/Site: Asheville Regional Airport
Latitude: 35.433265
Evaluator: Three Oaks Engineering - R. Chandler, C. Parks
county: Buncombe
Longitude: -82.537726
Total Points:
Stream is least intermittent 33
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
at
Ephemeral Intermittent erennia
e.g. Quad Name: Skyland, 24k
ifs 19 or perennial if 30
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal= 15
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
12' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0 ❑
1
❑
2
❑
3
✓
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
0.5
2
✓
3
0.t
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0 El
1
El
0
0.
3
❑
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
❑
2
❑✓
3
❑
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
❑✓
2
❑
3
❑
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
✓
2
Note$; 4 Gambusia holbrooki were observed during the field review. Crayfish claw was found during site visit.
3
❑
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
✓❑
2
Sketch:
3
❑
8. Headcuts
0 F1
1
2
❑✓
3
Lj
9. Grade control
0
0.5
❑✓
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0 El
1
F1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
❑✓
Yes = 3
171
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrolow (Subtotal = 9 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 ❑
1
❑
2 0
3 ❑
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0 ❑
1
❑
2 ✓
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
✓
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 F
0.t
3
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.
23. Crayfish
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
24. Amphibians
0
Yes = 3
✓
C. Biologv (Subtotal = 9
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
✓1
2 1
0 LJ
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
0
2 1 ❑
0 LJ
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
0
1 ❑ 2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
L2LJ
1 1 2
Lj
3
22. Fish
0
0.5 L✓j 1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5 ✓ 1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5 ❑ 1 Q
1.5 LJ
25. Algae
0
LJ
0.5 1 Q1
1.5 El
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0,75; OBL = 1.5 Othe =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Note$; 4 Gambusia holbrooki were observed during the field review. Crayfish claw was found during site visit.
Sketch:
Bank Height (ft): 2 ft
Bankfull width (ft): 4-6 ft
Water depth (in): 5 - 18 in
Channel substrate -<aFJDQD Gravel, Cobble, Bedrock
Velocity -fast, o e te, slow iprap
Clarity ear, ightly turbid, turbid

Stream SB
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 2/12/2018
Project/Site: Asheville Regional Airport
Latitude: 35.433265
Evaluator: Three Oaks Engineering - R. Chandler, C. Parks
county: Buncombe
Longitude: -82.537726
Total Points:
Stream is least intermittent 28
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
at
Ephemeral Qntermitten Perennial
e.g. Quad Name: Skyland, 24k
ifs 19 or perennial if 30
3 ✓
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal= 10.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
12' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
❑
1
❑
2
[✓
3
3 ✓
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
✓
1
L2LJ
2
✓
3
0
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
0.5 Lj 1
1
El
2
0
3
0.
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1.5
1
❑
2
❑✓
3
❑
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
❑✓
2
❑
3
❑
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
✓
1
2
3
❑
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
✓
1
❑
2
3
❑
8. Headcuts
0
Q
1
✓
2
❑
3
Lj
9. Grade control
0
0.5
❑✓
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
✓
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
❑✓
Yes = 3
171
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. HVdrologv (Subtotal = 10.5
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
✓1
1
El
2 0
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
❑
1
❑
2
3 ✓
14. Leaf litter
1.5
✓
1
L2LJ
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
F
0.t
0.5 Lj 1
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5 1
0.
24. Amphibians
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
1.5 LJ
No = 0
0
LJ
Yes = 3
✓
C. Biologv (Subtotal = 7
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
✓1
2 1
0 LJ
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
0
2 1 ❑
0 LJ
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
0
1 ❑ 2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
L2LJ
1 1 2
Lj
3
22. Fish
0
✓
0.5 Lj 1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
✓
0.5 1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5 ❑✓ 1 ❑
1.5 LJ
25. Algae
0
LJ
0.5 1✓j 1 ❑ 1
1.5 El
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0,75; OBL = 1.5 Othe =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Note$; No biological organisms observed during field review.
Sketch:
Bank Height (ft): 2 ft
Bankfull width (ft): 4-6 ft
Water depth (in): 5 - 18 in
Channel substrate -®FJtDQD Gravel, Cobble, Bedrock
Velocity -fast, o e te, slow iprap
Clarity ear, ightly turbid, turbid

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action ID: SAW -2018-00173 County: Buncombe U.S.G.S. Quad: Skyland
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner: Greater Asheville Regional Airport Authority / Attn: Michael Reisman
Address: 61 Terminal Drive, #1
Fletcher, NC 28732
Telephone Number: 828-684-2226 ext. 13253
Size (acres):
4.85 acres
Nearest Town:
Fletcher
Nearest Waterway:
UT to French Broad
Coordinates:
35.433265 -82.537726
River Basin/ HUC:
French Broad
Location description: The site is located at the Asheville Regional Airport, near long-term parking lot, in Asheville,
NC. Coordinates are 35.433265 -82.537726.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
X There are waters, including wetlands, on the above described project area, that may be subject to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands, have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently
accurate and reliable. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process,
including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation
requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat
all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an
appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
There are wetlands on the above described property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However, since the
waters, including wetlands, have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be
used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely
an effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction overall of the waters, including wetlands, at the project area,
which is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have
the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland
delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the
Corps.
B. Approved Determination
_ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements
of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and 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.
_ There are waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described property 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.
_ We recommend you have the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to
accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation
that can be verified by the Corps.
_ The waters of the U.S. including wetlands on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been
verified by the Corps. If you wish to have the delineation surveyed, the Corps can review and verify the survey upon

completion. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA and/or RHA
jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied
upon for a period not to exceed five years.
_ The waters of the U.S. including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on . 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.
_ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (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.
_ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(LAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management to determine their requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material,
construction or placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the
Army permit may constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If
you have any questions regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Amanda Jones at
828-271-7980, ext. 4225 or [e-mail].
C. Basis for Determination:
See attached preliminary jurisdictional determination form.
The site contains wetlands as determined by the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountain and Piedmont
Region (version 2.0). These wetlands are adjacent to stream channels located on the property that exhibit indicators
of ordinary high water marks. The stream channels on the site are unnamed tributaries to the French Broad River
which ultimately drains to the Gulf of Mexico.
D. Remarks:
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate
participation in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the
Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to
this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 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:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M 15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801

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 by N/A (Preliminary -JD).
**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:
Amanda Jones
Issue Date of JD: April 2, 2018 Expiration Date: N/A Preliminary JD
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 complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at
http://corl2smapu.usace.gM.mil/cm apex/Vp=136:4:0.
Copy furnished:
Three Oaks Engineering, Attn: Russell Chandler (via email)

SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at htip://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Re ug latoryProgramandPermits.aspx or
Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the
permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your
objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal
the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the
permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit
having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer
will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form
and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of
this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer
within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of
this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form must be received by
the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Greater Asheville Regional Airport
Authority / Attn: Michael Reisman
File Number: SAW -SAW -2018-00173
Date: April 2, 2018
Attached is: See Section below
❑
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission)
A
❑
PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission)
B
❑
PERMIT DENIAL
C
❑
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
®
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at htip://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Re ug latoryProgramandPermits.aspx or
Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the
permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your
objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal
the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the
permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit
having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer
will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form
and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of
this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer
within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of
this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form must be received by
the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the preliminary JD.
The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps
district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the record
of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to clarify the
administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may
Provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR OUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
appeal process you may contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division,
Attn: Amanda Jones
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
828-271-7980, ext. 4232
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
also contact:
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
CESAD-PDO
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
Date:
of appellant or
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
Telephone number:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn.: Amanda Jones, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington,
North Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele,
Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

BLANK PAGE

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD) FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JD: April 2, 2018
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Greater Asheville Regional Airport Authority / Attn: Michael Reisman
61 Terminal Drive, #1
Fletcher, NC 28732
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
CESAW-RG-A, SAW -2018-00173,
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The site is located at the Asheville Regional Airport, near long-term parking lot, in Asheville, NC.
Coordinates are 35.433265 -82.537726.
State: NC County/parish/borough: Buncombe City: Fletcher
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): 35.433265 -82.537726
Universal Transverse Mercator: N/A
Name of nearest waterbody: UT to French Broad
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date: December 29, 2017
® FieldDetermination. Date(s): 02/21/18
Use the table below to document aquatic resources and/or aquatic resources at different sites
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION
Site
Centered Coordinates
Estimated Amount
Type of Aquatic
Geographic
Number
(decimal degrees)
of Aquatic Resource
Resources
Authority to Which
in Review Area
Aquatic Resource
Latitude Longitude
(linear feet or acre)
"May Be" Subject
WA
35.433265
-82.537726
0.22 acre
® Wetland
® Section 404
❑ Non -wetland Waters
❑ Section 10/404
SA
35.43328
-82.537731
448 if
® Wetland
® Section 404
❑ Non -wetland Waters
❑ Section 10/404
SB
35.433047
-82.537109
691f
® Wetland
® Section 404
❑ Non -wetland Waters
❑ Section 10/404
❑ Wetland
❑ Section 404
❑ Non -wetland Waters
❑ Section 10/404
❑ Wetland
❑ Section 404
❑ Non -wetland Waters
❑ Section 10/404
❑ Wetland
❑ Section 404
❑ Non -wetland Waters
❑ Section 10/404
❑ Wetland
❑ Section 404
❑ Non -wetland Watersi
❑ Section 10/404

1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review
area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request and obtain an
approved JD (AID) for that review area based on an informed decision after having discussed the
various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide General
Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre- construction notification" (PCN),
or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant
has not requested an AID for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the
permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make
an official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the option to
request an AID before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that
basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation
being required or different special conditions; (3) the applicant has the right to request an individual
permit rather than accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit
authorization; (4) the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with
all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps
has determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit
authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered individual permit) or
undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit authorization based on a PJD
constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area affected in any way by that
activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any
administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in
any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will
be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively appealed
pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it becomes appropriate to
make an official determination whether geographic jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the
review area, or to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review
area, the Corps will provide an AID to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD
finds that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of the U.S.
on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review area that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
SUPPORTING DATA
Data reviewed for preliminary JD (check all that apply) - Checked items should be included in subject file.
Appropriately reference sources below where indicated for all checked items:
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of preliminary JD requester:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of preliminary JD requester.
® Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rational:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ Wetland
❑ Section 404
❑ Non -wetland Waters
❑ Section 10/404
❑ Wetland
❑ Section 404
❑ Non -wetland Waters
❑ Section 10/404
❑ Wetland
❑ Section 404
❑ Non -wetland Watersl
❑ Section 10/404
1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review
area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request and obtain an
approved JD (AID) for that review area based on an informed decision after having discussed the
various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide General
Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre- construction notification" (PCN),
or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant
has not requested an AID for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the
permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make
an official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the option to
request an AID before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that
basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation
being required or different special conditions; (3) the applicant has the right to request an individual
permit rather than accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit
authorization; (4) the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with
all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps
has determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit
authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered individual permit) or
undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit authorization based on a PJD
constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area affected in any way by that
activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any
administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in
any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will
be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively appealed
pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it becomes appropriate to
make an official determination whether geographic jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the
review area, or to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review
area, the Corps will provide an AID to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD
finds that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of the U.S.
on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review area that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
SUPPORTING DATA
Data reviewed for preliminary JD (check all that apply) - Checked items should be included in subject file.
Appropriately reference sources below where indicated for all checked items:
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of preliminary JD requester:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of preliminary JD requester.
® Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rational:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.

❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® USGS map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Skyland.
® Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) Soil Survey.
Citation: Buncombe County, NC
❑ National wetlands inventory (NWI) map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) / Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date):
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been verified by the Corps and
should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional determinations.
Amanda Jones, December 29, 2017 Greater Asheville Regional Airport Authority / Attn:
Signature and date of Regulatory Michael Reisman
staff member completing Signature and date of person requesting
preliminary JD preliminary JD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining the
signature is impracticable)
Two copies of this Preliminary JD Form have been provided Please sign both copies. Keep one signed copy for your record
and return a signed copy to the Asheville Regulatory Field Office by mail or e-mail.
US Army Corps of Engineers -Wilmington District
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the established time
frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an action.

Appendix E
NC State Historic Preservation Office Letter

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Barton, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Sccrctars, Susi 11. I lamilton
September 1, 2017
Kim Marcia
Delta Airport Consultants, Inc.
9711 Farrar Court
Suite 100
Office of Archivrs and 1 listory
Deputy Secretin, Kevin Cherry
KMarcia a,deltaairport.com
Richmond, VA 23236
Re: Expansion of existing terminal apron, Asheville Regional Airport, ER 17-1624
Dear Ms. Marcia:
Thank you for your letter of August 23, 2017, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
[e-mail]. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above -referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
L_aL �,—&JJT
Ramona M. Bartos
Location: 109 Fast Jones Strcct, Ralcigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 \tail Sen icc Ccntcr, Ralcigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

North Carolina Historic Preservation Office — Project Submittal
Project Name: Expand Terminal Apron
Project Location: Asheville Regional Airport (AVL)
61 Terminal Drive, Suite 1
Fletcher, NC 28732-9442
Buncombe County
Project Contact Information: Mary Ashburn Pearson
Delta Airport Consultants
9711 Farrar Court, Suite100
Richmond, VA 23236
804-275-8301/ fax [phone]
[e-mail]
Project Description:
The Proposed Action is the expansion of the existing terminal apron at AVL. The Proposed Action is to
take place entirely on airport property, adjacent to the existing commercial terminal building apron. No
property interest acquisition is anticipated to be needed. No significant road changes are anticipated -
the construction haul road will be on the existing road system. The project site has been previously
disturbed. The tasks which make up this environmental effort are listed and described individually
below. These details are estimates, as the design phase has not been completed.
• Terminal apron expansion (approximately 11,000 square yards (SY) of additional pavement)
• Approximately 100,000 SY of earthwork and the construction of a retaining wall — See attached
USGS Map
• Wetlands delineation and wetlands/stream mitigation- from previously collected wetland data,
it is anticipated that approximately 0.1 -acres of wetlands and approximately 500 -LF of stream
would be impacted
• Relocation of existing fence
• The possible loss of a portion of the adjacent parking lot (likely the first (northern -most) row)
No known historic properties are located within or immediately adjacent to the project area. See
attached SHPO search.
The direct Area of Potential Effect (APE) for the proposed project is approximately ± 3 acres; the indirect
APE has been conservatively estimated at ± 24 acres. (See attached Exhibit)
Funding for the project is anticipated to be provided by a grant from the Federal Aviation Administration
(90%), the State (5%) and local funds (5%) for the remainder.
Project Area Map:
See attached
Site Photographs:
See attached

LAwtrvts:ifUVJ-Avg-I•KUP'-U%ocis.awg uaruur.0
♦ • • f r� �� � L / �+� � iii Z A � 4
/4 ,
_ 7 v'_';=
�1tl.'S Y
Ir
fAIRPORT "= oT/;'
PROPERTY LINES :' _ h'l IF!Aq,' ".
/ f
14�
4
PROPERTY LINE AND USGS EXHIBIT
ASHEVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT
w. d e l t o o, r p o r t. c o m
LDRAWN BY: SAH I CHECKED BY: AMI I SCALE; t' .2000' I DATE: AUGUST 2017

LU (a
W
o�
d -H
aen
gi
o
CL
lu)
lw
i0
cg W lz
a. W
Q J
W
V
Al
m�

fir
". 'A
1111,1 - .+� � f `' +� � . �'_ �F,*' •i. r.
� 41 � � `�. "' ,�. j .rv3` _.r. 'fir.• `'�j � . � �}-
�. � ,` � + Vii.~ r .r �+' - � -•�� r' _f
Ao f
i ,15
Air
1

Appendix F
Acceptance Letters from Mitigation Services and Bank

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
secretary
TIM BAUMGARTNER
Director
Asheville Regional Airport Authority
61 Terminal Drive, Suite 1
Fletcher, NC 28732
Project: Asheville Airport Apron Expansion
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
January 8, 2019
Expiration of Acceptance: 7/9/2019
County: Buncombe
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts shown below.
River Basin Impact Location Impact Type Impact Quantity
(8 -digit HUC]
French Broad 06010105
Riparian Wetland 1 0.22
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010 and
15A NCAC 02B .0295 as applicable. Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
cc: Clement Riddle/Anna Priest, agent
Sincerely,
James. B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
7.17 W. Jones Street 11652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
919.707.8976

AFFP, LLC
372 Merriman A venue
Asheville, NC 28801
January 23, 2019
Lew Bleiweis, A.A.E., Airport Director
Greater Asheville Regional Airport Authority
61 Terminal Drive, Suite 1
Fletcher, NC 28732
RE: Request to purchase Stream Mitigation Credits from Anderson Farm Stream Mitigation
Bank
Dear Mr. Bleiweis:
We have received your inquiry, via ClearWater Environmental, to purchase 467 stream
mitigation credits from the Anderson Farm Stream Mitigation Bank, located in the French Broad
River Basin Hydrologic Unit 06010105. We have the 467 credits available to sell according to the
following terms: Purchase price of $480 per credit, with a total purchase price of $224,160.
We also require a 10% down payment of the total to be held in our escrow account until Army
Corps of Engineers approves the credit sale. This deposit is fully refundable in the event that
the project is withdrawn from consideration or does not receive approval for construction.
Please send a letter indicating that you agree to these terms along with the $22,416 down
payment.
Thank you for your interest. Please contact Lisa Fancher at 828-253-0095 x215 with questions.
41
r.
Kristy U�quhart
AFFP, LLC

Appendix G
NC WAM and SAM Forms

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ® Yes ❑ No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d) -listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d) -listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
® Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ❑A Not severely altered
❑B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
®B ®B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief —assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
®C ®C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑D ❑D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
Accompanies user manuai version a.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
999/AVL Apron Expansion
Date of Evaluation
12/17/18
Applicant/Owner Name
Asheville Airport
Wetland Site Name
W1
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
CEC
Level III Ecoregion
Blue Ridge Mountains
Nearest Named Water Body
French Broad River
River Basin
French Broad
USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit
06010105
County
Buncombe
NCDWR Region
Asheville
❑ Yes ® No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
35.433264, -82.537727
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ® Yes ❑ No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d) -listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d) -listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
® Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ❑A Not severely altered
❑B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
®B ®B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief —assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
®C ®C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑D ❑D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ❑A Sandy soil
®B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ®A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
❑B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ®A No peat or muck presence
❑B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
❑C ❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use —opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
®A
®A
❑A
> 10% impervious surfaces
❑B
❑B
❑B
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
❑C
❑C
❑C
>_ 20% coverage of pasture
❑D
❑D
❑D
>_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
®E
®E
®E
>_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
❑F
®F
❑F
>_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
❑G
❑G
❑G
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
❑A >_ 50 feet
®B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
05 15 -feet wide ❑> 15 -feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
❑Yes ®No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
El Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet
❑B ❑B From 80 to < 100 feet
®C ®C From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E ❑E From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F ❑F From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G ❑G From 5 to < 15 feet
❑ H ❑ H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration —assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
®A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
❑B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
❑C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
❑A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
®B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
❑C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size —wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT
WC
FW (if applicable)
❑A
❑A
❑A
>_ 500 acres
❑B
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
❑D
n
From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E
n
From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F
❑F
❑F
From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G
❑G
n
From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H
❑H
n
From 0.5 to < 1 acre
01
01
El
From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
❑J
❑J
❑J
From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K
❑K
®K
< 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (>_ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A
❑A
>_ 500 acres
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
❑D
From 10 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E
< 10 acres
®F
®F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas >— 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
❑A 0
®B 1 to 4
❑C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
❑B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
®C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
®B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
o ❑A [-]A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ®C ®C Canopy sparse or absent
o ❑A ❑A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B ❑B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C ®C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A ❑A Dense shrub layer
®B ®B Moderate density shrub layer
U) ❑C ❑C Shrub layer sparse or absent
-0 ❑A ❑A Dense herb layer
_ ®B ®B Moderate density herb layer
❑C ❑C Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not A
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
❑B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
®C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
V
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
❑A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
®B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name WA Date of Assessment
12/17/18
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization
CEC
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Condition
Function Sub -function Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -surface Storage and
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Retention Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Hydrology
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Habitat
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
user manual version z. -i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): 999/AVL Apron Expansion 2. Date of evaluation: 12/17/2018
3. Applicant/owner name: Asheville Airport 4. Assessor name/organization: CEC
5. County: Buncombe 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: French Broad on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: French Broad River
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.433268, -82.537781
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): S1 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 450
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2-6 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 2-10 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow E] Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ® Mountains (M) ❑ Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑A J ®B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mil) ®Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miz) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mit)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
El Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? []Yes ®No
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not A
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
®A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
®B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
®B ®B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
®A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
®D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
®G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses F, 0 ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) E ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation y ❑I Sand bottom
EIC Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) r Co ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
®D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11 c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ®Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
® ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tad poles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
®B ®B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >— 6 inches deep
❑B ®B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ❑C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
®Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
❑N CAN
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
®D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
®E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
®B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
®C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
®D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
®C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB
RB
❑A ❑A ❑A
❑A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B
❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
®C ❑C ❑C
❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ®D ❑D
n From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ®E
®E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure —
streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Mature forest
❑B ❑B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
®C ®C
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D
Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
®C ®C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
®C ®C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑ B 46 to < 67 [_1C 67 to < 79 [_1D 79 to < 230 ❑ E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name 999/AVL Apron Expansion
Stream Category Mb2
Date of Assessment 12/17/2018
Assessor Name/Organization CEC
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
NA
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology
LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
user manual version z. -i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): 999/AVL Apron Expansion 2. Date of evaluation: 12/17/2018
3. Applicant/owner name: Asheville Airport 4. Assessor name/organization: CEC
5. County: Buncombe 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: French Broad on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: French Broad River
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.433081, -82.537110
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): S2 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 20
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 1-3 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 2-4 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: E] Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ® Mountains (M) ❑ Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑A J ®B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mil) ®Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miz) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mit)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
El Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? []Yes ®No
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not A
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
®A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
®A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
®B ®B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
®D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
®G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses F, 0 ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) E ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
❑B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation y ❑I Sand bottom
EIC Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) r Co ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
®D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11 c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ❑Yes ®No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tad poles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
®B ®B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >— 6 inches deep
®B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
ON CAN
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
®D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
®E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
®C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
®D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
®C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB
RB
❑A ❑A ❑A
❑A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B
❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
®C ®C ❑C
❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D
n From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ®E
®E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure —
streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Mature forest
❑B ❑B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
®C ®C
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D
Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
®C ®C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
❑A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
®B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
®C ®C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑ B 46 to < 67 [_1C 67 to < 79 [_1D 79 to < 230 ❑ E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name 999/AVL Apron Expansion Date of Assessment 12/17/2018
Stream Category Mb2 Assessor Name/Organization CEC
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
LOW
(4) Microtopography
NA
NA
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
LOW
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
MEDIUM
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW