20120535 Ver 1_Complete File_20020722

K.
QPPS?ENT Ox United States Department of the Interior
o T
a FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
_ a Post Office Box 33726
qC3 `9p Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
July 15, 2002
Mr. Mike Penny
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis 1548 Mail Service Center
"~w.?'
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Penny:
This responds to your letter of October 3, 2001, requesting comments on nine bridge replacement
projects. Five of these projects are within the area covered;by this office. Our biologist working
on projects of the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) at that time, Tom
McCartney, requested survey data on federally protected species from the consultant, Wilbur
Smith Associates. The requested information was supplied to the Service in late March 2002 at
Mr. McCartney's retirement. In the transition to a new NCDOT biologist, the new material was
filed under the assumption that comments had been provided. The US Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) regrets the delay in providing these comments and appreciates your efforts to bring this
oversight to our attention. This report provides scoping information in accordance with
provisions of the Fish and Wildlife, Coordination Act (FWCA) (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). This report
also serves as initial scoping comments to federal and state resource agencies for use in their
permitting and/or certification processes for this project.
The bridges scheduled for replacement are:
A B-3680, Moore County, Bridge No. 2 on US 151501 over CSX Railroad;
B-3830, Columbus County, Bridge No. 363 and 364 on SR 1947 over Friar Swamp;
X13. B-4093, Cumberland County, Bridge No. 81 on SR 1728 over Gum Log Creek
Vl? ?. B-4205, Montgomery County, Bridge No. 133 on SR 1310 over Doomas Creek, and;
?s ?-B-4273, Scotland/Hoke Counties, Bridge No. 47 on US 401 over the Lumber River
General Fish and Wildlife Habitat and Wetlands
For each project, we recommend the following conservation measures to avoid or minimize
adverse environmental impacts to fish and wildlife resources:
1. Wetland impacts should be avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practical as
outlined in Section 404 (b)(1) of the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1977. Areas
exhibiting high biodiversity or ecological value important to the watershed and region
should be avoided. Wherever appropriate, construction in sensitive areas should occur
outside fish spawning and migratory bird nesting seasons.
2. 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 or adjacent to existing, roadways, utility corridors, or previously developed
areas in order to minimize habitat fragmentation and encroachment. At the completion of
construction, the entire detour area, including any previous detours from past construction
activities, should be entirely removed and the impacted areas should be planted with
appropriate, endemic vegetation, including trees if necessary;
3. If unavoidable wetland impacts are proposed, every effort should be made to identify
compensatory mitigation sites in advance. Project planning should include a detailed
compensatory mitigation plan for offsetting unavoidable wetland impacts. Opportunities
to protect mitigation areas in perpetuity, preferably via conservation easement, should be
explored at the outset;
4. 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 15;
Best Management Practices (BMP) for Protection of Surface Waters should be
implemented; and,
6. Activities within designated riparian buffers should be avoided or minimized.
Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are those plant and animal species for which the Service
remains concerned, but further biological research and field study are needed to resolve the
conservation status of these taxa. Although FSCs receive no statutory protection under the ESA,
we would encourage the NCDOT to be alert to their potential presence, and to make every
reasonable effort to conserve them if found. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
should be contacted for information on species under state protection.
Federally Protected Species
The Natural Resources Technical Reports (NRTR) make determinations that a project will not
affect a particular species, primarily plants, based on surveys in the recent past. If actual
construction is several years away, the Service believes such determinations are premature and
2
that additional surveys will be required. It would be more appropriate to note that suitable
habitat or the actual species was not found during preliminary surveys and such evidence
provides early indications that the project is not likely to adversely affect the species.
Effect determinations for plants based on surveys within the project area may require work at a
particular time of year for accurate identification. The biological conclusions of the NCDOT for
plants should include the time of year that a survey was conducted, the person hours of
surveying, and the approximate size of the area surveyed. Surveys should be done within two or
three years of actual construction for those species inhabiting stable and/or climax communities.
Plant species that utilize disturbed communities, e.g., Michaux sumac (Rhus michauxii) and
Cooley's meadowrue (Thalictrum cooleyi), should be done within two years of actual
construction if vegetation disturbing activities, e.g., regular mowing or timber harvesting, occur
at the project site.
If surveys for a federally protected species should determine that a given project would adversely
affect the species, a biological assessment (BA) may be prepared to fulfill the section 7(a)(2)
requirement and in determining whether formal consultation with the Service is necessary.
Please notify this office with the results of the surveys for the listed species that may occur in the
project area. Please include survey methodologies and an analysis of the effects of the action,
including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects.
Project Specific Comments
B-3680 (Moore County, Bridge No. 2 on US 15/501 over CSX Railroad)
The NRTR presents three design alternatives for the bridge replacement that vary in
environmental impacts. Based on Table 2 (p. 8), the Service recommends Alternative 1 since it
is the only alternative that would avoid all impacts to Piedmont alluvial forest and has the least
amount of impacts on mixed mesic hardwood forest. Table 3 shows that impacts to jurisdictional
wetlands for the Alternatives 1-3 are 1. 10, 1.44, and 2.85 acres, respectively. However, these
tabular data do not seem to correspond to the photographic presentation of the alternatives.
These figures indicate that Alternative 2 would avoid most wetlands in the project area while
Alternative 1 would cross a wetland just east of US 1. The Service recommends future design
work seek to further minimize impacts to wetlands, especially forested wetlands which provide
valuable wildlife habitat.
The NRTR accurately notes the four federally protected species for Moore County. The report
states that habitat for the Cape Fear shiner (Notropis mekistocholas), red-cockaded woodpecker
(RCW) (Picoides borealis), and American chaffseed (Schwalbea americana) do not exist in the
project area. Surveys for Michaux sumac (Rhus michauxii) did not find the plant. Data on
known locations of these species available to the Service indicate that they have not been found
in the immediate vicinity of the project. Therefore, current data suggests that the project will not
impact species protected by the ESA.
3
B-3830 (Columbus County, Bridge No. 363 and 364 on SR 1947 over Friar Swamp)
The NRTR for these two bridge replacements has not been released and design alternatives are
still under consideration. The major issues for this project include impacts to wetlands, state-
designed Outstanding Resource Water (ORW) that flow into Lake Waccamaw, and the Federally
threatened Waccamaw silverside (WS) (Menidia extensa), a small (1.2 to 2.6 inches) fish
endemic to the lake where it occurs in schools near the surface in open water. Furthermore,
critical habitat has been designated for the WS that includes all of the lake up to the mean high
water level that generally includes the lower reaches of stream flowing into the lake up to SR
1947. If a temporary detour bridge is required, this structure should be on the side of the existing
structure away (north) from the lake. Such placement would avoid issues of adverse
modification to critical habitat. Impacts can also be minimized by not installing "weep holes" or
other structures on the bridge that would allow run-off or degrade water quality in the creek or
lake. Overall, water run-off from structures should be minimized or avoided if at all possible.
The NCDOT should use BMPs and effective sediment and erosion control measures to minimize
debris and sediment entering the creek and lake. Finally, potential impacts would be minimized
if construction is performed outside the WS spawning period of March through July.
The wetlands in the project enhance the water quality of Lake Waccamaw and provide high
quality fish and wildlife habitat. Every effort should be made to minimize temporary impacts
and avoid the permanent loss of such areas.
In addition to the WS, the other federally protected species in Columbus County include the
RCW, shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) (under the jurisdiction of the National
Marine Fisheries Service), Cooley's meadowrue (Thalictrum cooleyi), and rough-leaved
loosestrife (Lysimachia asperulaefolia). The NCDOT should determine project impacts on these
species through either a thorough comparison of habitat requirements with conditions at the site
or actual field surveys.
The Carolina pygmy sunfish (Elassoma boehkei), a FSC, has been reported near the project site.
These small fish occur in heavy vegetated shallows of ponds, sloughs, and creeks. This FSC
would benefit from all measures to preserve water quality and prevent the loss of vegetated
wetlands.
B-4093 (Cumberland County, Bridge No. 81 on SR 1728 [Middle Road] over Gum Log
Canal)
The NRTR states that two alternatives are under consideration for the project. Alternative 1.
would construct the new bridge at the same location and use a temporary detour bridge.
Alternative 2 would construct a new bridge approximately 20 feet upstream of the existing
structure. Both alternatives would have the same permanent impacts, 0.02 acre, on jurisdictional
wetlands. If Alternative 2 is implemented, the NCDOT should discuss the removal of the
existing structure and the restoration of the waterway and associated wetlands at that site.
4
The Service does not concur with the preliminary determination that the project would have no
effect on the small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides), a Federally threatened perennial
plant. This species is generally known from open, dry, deciduous woods with acid soil. The
NRTR states that the species is characteristic of moist hardwood slopes and along stream
bottoms "usually" in association with white pine. The Biological Conclusion (p. 14) is based on
the absence of hardwood forests "dominated" by white pine. We do not believe that this plant
requires woodlands with, or dominated by, white pine, but that white pine is often present in the
forests containing the plant. The Service recommends that future conclusions be based on field
surveys.
In general, the Service can accept the preliminary determination that the project would have no
effect on the RCW, Saint Francis satyr (Neonympha mitchelhi francisci), pondberry (Lindera
melissifolia), rough-leaved loosestrife, Michaux's sumac, and American chaffseed. Records
available to the Service indicate that none of the listed species of Cumberland County have been
reported to occur near the project site.
Table 5 of the NRTR shows that two mussels designated as FSC have potential habitat within the
project area. These are the Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia masani) and yellow lampmussel
(Lampsilis cariosa). The Service recommends that effective erosion and sedimentation control
be used during all construction to minimize any impacts to these mussel species.
B-4205 (Montgomery County, Bridge No. 133 on SR 1310 [Lovejoy Road] over Dumas
[Doomas] Creek)
Some documents for the project state that the bridge crosses Doomas Creek while other
documents give the name as Dumas Creek. We will use the latter in our comments and future
planning document should indicate the correct name.
The NRTR considers three alternatives, a new structure immediately downstream (Alternative 1),
a new structure immediately upstream (Alternative 2), and replacement at the existing location
with offsite detours on existing roads (Alternative 3). Table 2 (p. 12) presents impacts to
jurisdictional water and wetlands. While there are only minor differences in impacts to wetlands,
Alternative 1 has much greater permanent impacts to Dumas Creek (232 feet) versus the 32 feet
for both Alternatives 2 and 3. The Service does not support Alternative 1 and would recommend
Alternative 3.
The NRTR presents a biological conclusion for three federally listed animals and two plants. All
conclusions are that the project would have no effects on these species. The conclusions for the
three animals, the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), eastern cougar (Felis concolor
couguar), and RCW were based on the absence of suitable habitat or, in the case of the cougar,
the absence of recent evidence that the species exists in the area. The conclusions for the two
plants, Schweintz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) and smooth coneflower (Echinacea
laevigata) were based on field surveys which appear adequate. Occurrence data presently
available to the Service indicate that the species most likely to occur near the project are
5
Schweintz's sunflower and Carolina creekshell (Villosa vaughaniana), a FSC. The NCDOT
should carefully monitor the project area prior to construction to ensure that Schweintz's
sunflower does not colonize the area.
Table 4 of the NRTR shows that two mussels designated as FSC have potential habitat within the
project area. These are the Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni), Brook floater (Alasmidonta
varicosa), Savannah lilliput (Toxolasma pullus), and Carolina creekshell. The Service
recommends that effective erosion and sedimentation control be used during all construction to
minimize any impacts to these mussels species.
B-4273 (Scotland/Hoke Counties, Bridge No. 47 On US 401 over the Lumber River)
The NRTR considers two alternatives: replacement at a new location, approximately 70 feet
upstream of the existing structure (Alternative 1) and replacement at the same location
(Alternative 2). Table 1 indicates that Alternative 2 would have less impacts on important plant
communities such as cypress-gum swamp and coastal plains bottomland hardwoods. Table 2
shows that Alternative 2 would have less impacts (2.46 acres) on jurisdictional wetlands than
Alternative 1 (4.45 acres). Based on these data, the Service, considers Alternative 2 to be the
least damaging to fish and wildlife habitat in the project area,
Table 3 accurately reflects the federally protected species known to occur in Scotland and Hoke
Counties. The determinations that the project would have no effect on four species (RCW, Saint
Francis' satyr, rough-leaved loosestrife, and American chaffseed) based on an absence of suitable
habitat appear accurate. The systematic surveys for two plants with potential habitat, Canby's
dropwort (Oxypolis canbyi) and Michaux's sumac, did not find these species and present
sufficient evidence that the species do not occur in the project area in June 2001. Occurrence
data available to the Service indicate that no Federally protected species have been reported in
the project area.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on these projects. Please continue to advise
us of the progression of the planning process, including your official determination of the
impacts of these bridge replacements. If you have any questions regarding these comments,
please contact Howard Hall at 919-856-4520, Ext. 27.
Sincerely,
,.!roe XZe<,e_
Garland B. Pardue, Ph.D.
Ecological Services Super-visor
6
cc: Ted Bisterfeld, USEPA, Atlanta, GA
David Timpy, USACE, Wilmington NC
John Hennessy, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC v'
David Cox, NCWRC, Northside, NC
7