HomeMy WebLinkAbout20060964 Ver 1_Other Agency Comments_20051123United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
November 23, 2005
Mike Summers
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Bridge Maintenance Unit
1565 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1565
Dear Mr. Summers:
This letter is in response to your request for comments from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)
on the potential environmental effects of the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 85 on US 258 over
Deep Creek, Edgecombe County, North Carolina (TIP No. B-4934). These comments provide scoping
information in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661-
667d) and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act requires that all federal action agencies (or their designated
non-federal representatives), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,
funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally-listed threatened or endangered species. A biological assessment/evaluation may be prepared to
fulfill the section 7(a)(2) requirement and will expedite the consultation process. To assist you, acounty-
by-county list of federally protected species known to occur in North Carolina and information on their
life histories and habitats can be found on our web page at http://nc-es.fws.Pov/es/count fr.html .
The Tar spinymussel (Elliptio steinstansana) is known to occur a few miles downstream of the project
area in the Tar River, and in the Tar River immediately upstream of its confluence with Fishing Creek
(Deep Creek flows into Fishing Creek immediately upstream of Fishing Creek's confluence with the Tar
River). It is possible that Tar spinymussels may inhabit Deep Creek in the project vicinity. A mussel
survey extending, at a minimum, 400 meters downstream and 100 meters upstream of the project limits
should be conducted.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely to
adversely affect) a listed species, you should notify this office with your determination, the results of your
surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects of the action on listed species, including
consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects, before conducting any activities that might affect
the species. If you determine that the proposed action will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse,
direct or indirect effect) on listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence.
For bridge replacement projects, the Service recommends the following general conservation measures to
avoid or minimize environmental impacts to fish and wildlife resources:
1. Wetland, forest and designated riparian buffer impacts should be avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent practical;
2. If unavoidable wetland or stream impacts are proposed, a plan for compensatory mitigation to
offset unavoidable impacts should be provided early in the planning process. Opportunities to
protect mitigation areas in perpetuity via conservation easements, land trusts or by other means
should be explored at the outset;
3. Off-site detours should be used rather than construction of temporary, on-site bridges. For
projects requiring an on-site detour in wetlands or open water, such detours should be aligned
along the side of the existing structure which has the least and/or least quality of fish and wildlife
habitat. At the completion of construction, the detour area should be entirely removed and the
impacted areas be planted with appropriate vegetation, including trees if necessary;
4. Wherever appropriate, construction in sensitive areas should occur outside fish spawning and
migratory bird nesting seasons. In waterways that may serve as travel corridors for fish, in-water
work should be avoided during moratorium periods associated with migration, spawning and
sensitive pre-adult life stages. The general moratorium period for anadromous fish is February 15
-June 30;
5. New bridges should be long enough to allow for sufficient wildlife passage along stream
corridors;
6. Best Management Practices (BMP) for Protection of Surface Waters should be implemented;
7. Bridge designs should include provisions for roadbed and deck drainage to flow through a
vegetated buffer prior to reaching the affected stream. This buffer should be large enough to
alleviate any potential effects from run-off of storm water and pollutants;
8. The bridge designs should not alter the natural stream and stream-bank morphology or impede
fish passage. To the extent possible, piers and bents should be placed outside the bank-full width
of the stream;
9. Bridges and approaches should be designed to avoid any fill that will result in damming or
constriction of the channel or flood plain. if spanning the flood plain is not feasible, culverts
should be installed in the flood plain portion of the approach to restore some of the hydrological
functions of the flood plain and reduce high velocities of flood waters within the affected area.
We reserve the right to review any federal permits that may be required for this project, at the public
notice stage. Therefore, it is important that resource agency coordination occur early in the planning
process in order to resolve any conflicts that may arise and minimize delays in project implementation. In
addition to the above guidance, we recommend that the environmental documentation for this project
include the following in sufficient detail to facilitate a thorough review of the action:
1. A clearly defined and detailed purpose and need for the proposed project;
2. A description of the proposed action with an analysis of all alternatives being considered,
including the "no action" alternative;
A description of the fish and wildlife resources, and their habitats, within the project impact area
that may be directly or indirectly affected;
4. The extent and acreage of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, that are to be impacted by
filling, dredging, clearing, ditching, or draining. Acres of wetland impact should be
differentiated by habitat type based on the wetland classification scheme of the National
Wetlands Inventory (NWI). Wetland boundaries should be determined by using the 1987 Coms
of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and verified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers;
5. The anticipated environmental impacts, both temporary and permanent, that would be likely to
occur as a direct result of the proposed project. The assessment should also include the extent to
which the proposed project would result in secondary impacts to natural resources, and how this
and similar projects contribute to cumulative adverse effects;
6. Design features and construction techniques which would be employed to avoid or minimize
impacts to fish and wildlife resources, both direct and indirect, and including fragmentation and
direct loss of habitat;
7. If unavoidable wetland or stream impacts are proposed, project planning should include a
compensatory mitigation plan for offsetting the unavoidable impacts.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Please continue to advise us during
the progression of the planning process, including your official determination of the impacts of this
project. If you have any questions regarding our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at (919) 856-
4520, ext. 32.
Sincerely,
(Lc W ~.
,, 1 ~ Pete Benjamin
~~~ Ecological Services Supervisor
cc: William Wescott, USACE, Washington, NC
Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC