20191366 Ver 1_20191003_ltr_USFWS_NCDOT_B-4605_20191007

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
October 3, 2019
Philip S. Harris III
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Environmental Analysis Unit
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Dear Mr. Hams:
This letter is in response to your letter of September 26, 2019 which provided the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) with the biological conclusion of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation that the replacement of Bridge No. 5 on SR 1777 over Chicod Creek in Pitt County
(STIP No. B4605) may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the federally proposed endangered
Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus) and the federally proposed threatened Neuse River Waterdog
(Necturus lewisi). The following response is provided in accordance with Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
According to information provided, an aquatic survey was conducted at the project site on November
7, 2017. The survey extended I00.meters upstream and 400 meters downstream of SR 1777. Neither
of the federally proposed listed species was found, and habitat quality for the two species was not
optimal. Based on the survey results and other available information, the Service concurs with your
conclusion that the proposed action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the Carolina
Madtom and Neuse River Waterdog. Although these species are currently only proposed to be listed,
this concurrence will be valid if and when the species become listed. It is understood that the
federally endangered Tar River Spinymussel (Parvaspina steinstansana), the federally threatened
Yellow Lance (Elliptio lanceolata), and the federally proposed threatened Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia
masoni) will be addressed by utilizing the Programmatic Biological Opinion for mussels.
We believe that the requirements of Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA have been satisfied. We remind you
that obligations under Section 7 consultation 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 in this review; (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 determined that may be
affected by this identified action. If you have any questions regarding our response, please contact
Mr. Gary Jordan at [phone] (Ext. 32).
Sincerely,
Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor

Electronic copy:
Tom Steffens, USACE, Washington, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC