20120285 Ver 1_Other Agency Comments_20070326

\jeo sr, 2,s n
F UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECyTiOWAiGE11
r' y' REGION 4 / =MTtW�LRE�a
ATLANTA FEDERAL c=FC a E 1EGm1i4 OFF CF
Z3�o? 61 FORSYTH STREETS
�Tq� pFOSEr'1 ATLANTA GEORGIA 30303 8960
PEAR 0 7
March 1 2007^ /,y
Jaw
Ms Jennifer Harris P E /-/I
North Carolina Turnpike Authority ����� �"��
1578 Mail Service Center UAUTY SECTION
Raleigh North Carolina 27699 1578
RE USEPA Comments Agency Scopm>3 Comments
Gaston East West Connector Toll Project From I 85 to Charlotte Outer Loop
Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties TIP Project Number U 3321
Dear Ms Harris
The U S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 4 Office has reviewed
the information dated January 25 2007 from the North Carolina Turnpike Authority
(NCTA) for the proposed Gaston East West Connector toll project EPA understands
that the proposed facility is expected to be a 4 lane divided highway that would be
connected to Interstate 85 west of Gastonia to the 1485 Charlotte Outer Loop There are
sixteen (16) detailed study alternatives with an estimated 11 to 12 interchanges proposed
between the two project termini The total length of the proposed 4 lane divided
highway is approximately 22 3 miles involving the mayor crossings at the South Fork of
the Catawba River and the Catawba River
This project had been in the North Carolina Department of Transportation
( NCDOT) U S Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) and Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) Section 404/NEPA Merger 01 process From EPA s viewpoint under NEPA it
is important to provide a historical perspective on this proposed project as it was the first
formal elevation (Conflict /Dispute Resolution) under the Merger process to go to the 4
agency Review Board As you aware several resource agencies were concerned that the
new locations alternatives by themselves did not meet the pnmary purpose and need
including the relief of congestion and poor Level of Service (LOS) along major portions
of 185 and US 29/US 74
EPA potentially has outstanding environmental concerns regarding the proposed
project as it relates to the onginal purpose and need signed by the Mergei agencies on
May 15 2002 and the development of reasonable alternatives to meet the purpose and
need EPA recognizes that the NCTA has de- eloped a new (revised) purpose and need
statement but has retained the 16 new location alternatives that had been developed while
NCDOT was the lead State transportation agency
Intemet Address (URL) http//www9pagov
Recycled /Recyclable Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30/ Postconsumer)

a
EPA s brief to the NCDOT Merger 01 Process Review Board dated September
27 2004 is an enclosure to this scoping letter Some of the same issues addressed in the
brief are still applicable to the NCTA s project development However EPA
acknowledges that the estimated cost has increased dramatically from earlier NCDOT s
estimates (i e between $600 $700 million) to NCTA s estimated cost $715 million to
$1525 billion (January 2007 dollars) EPA has not completed its review of the entire
Proposed Gaston East West Connector Preliminary Traffic and Revenue Study Final
Report dated October 12 2006 Some follow up scoping comments may be provided to
FHWA and NCTA after the completion of this review EPA acknowledges that NCTA
recommends phasing (3 phases) of the currently proposed project and that toll /no toll
options will be considered and addressed in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(DEIS)
EPA has several primary environmental concerns that were previously identified
from past project scoping activities Merger process information and NCTA s website
documents including potential direct impacts to waters of the U S (Jurisdictional
streams and w--tlands water quality) potential air quality impacts including Mobile
Source Air Toxics (MSATs) indirect and cumulative impacts to air and water quality
from the proposed project and other major regional projects the potential inability to find
compensatory mitigation for jurisdictional impacts potential impacts to terrestrial forests
prime farmlands and other human and natural environment resources and an inability of
the new facility to reduce congestion (and thereby improving air quality) along the I 85
and US 29/US 74 corridors Each of these environmental concerns is further discussed
below
Purpose and Need/Detailed Study Alternatives
EPA has reviewed the purpose (and need) statements provided on NCTA s
website EPA is concerned that the needs for some of these purposes have not been
clearly established including the need for improving a high speed safe regional travel
service along the US 291US 74 intra state corridor The Interstate 85 and US 29/ US 74
corridors generally run parallel throughout the project study area In some locations
these two major regional facilities are within a `/4 of a mile from each other in Gaston
County From past land use development and the lack of facility access controls US
29/US 74 no longer serves as a regional high speed facility One of the primary
purposes of I 85 multi lane facility is to serve as the regional high speed facility between
western Gaston County and the Charlotte area Without some improvements to I 85 and
nearby local connectors EPA is concerned that the proposed new location Gaston East
West connector will not fully address the congestion and poor LOS along the primary
east west high speed route within Gaston County
The 16 new locations alternatives carried forward from the NCDOT Merger 01
process are the same alternatives being considered by the NCTA and FHWA For the
administrative record EPA abstained from signing the concurrence form (CP 2) on
carrying forward these 16 detailed study alternatives EPA primarily abstained because
NCDOT and FHWA would not consider a combination of alternatives including new

location alternatives with some (limited) improve existing options along I 85 and US
29/US 74 EPA is requesting that FHWA in close coordination with NCTA and NCDOT
reconsider some improvements to the existing regional facilities as a part of this overall
regional project
In the report entitled Review Board Summary of the Evaluation of Improve
Existing Roadways Alternatives Gaston County East West Connector Study dated June
10 2005 there were issues brought forward that are still relevant to the proposed toll
facility In Section 7 0 of this report there were issues identified that indicated that
impro. ing existing roadways (i e Scenarios 4 4+ 4a and 8) would not meet the
project s original purposes and needs However EPA believes that the report failed to
address a combination of alternatives to address regional travel needs including a new
location connector component with additional improvements to 185 US 29/US 74 and
north south feeder roads By itself the new location connector was not forecasted to
substantially improve congestion along 1 85 and US 29/US 74 in the design year and that
a number of critical locations along these existing highways would continue to operate at
a LOS F+ The fact that the new connector is proposed as a potential toll facility only
reduces the likelihood that regional east west travel between Gaston and Mecklenbuig
Counties will substantially improve in the future
The comprehensive land use plans of both Gaston and Mecklenburg County show
that southeast Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County as high growth areas
(Section 6 2 of the above referenced report) Nonetheless the entire area around
Charlotte could be equally described as high growth areas including all the areas around
1 485 the Charlotte Outer Loop east of Charlotte towards Mint Hill southeast of
Charlotte towards Pineville north of Charlotte towards Lake Norman along the Interstate
77 comdor etc The statement that the Catawba River forms a natural barrier between
southeastern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County is true However the
report does not address any consideration for improvements to the multi lane bridges
over the Catawba River for I 85 or US 29/US 74 EPA s primary concern is that the new
connector facility (toll or otherwise) is going to induce uncontrolled growth and
development south southwest and west of Gastonia induce travel demand and
continue to place unreasonable burdens on local north south feeder routes A new east
west connector will not address the poor LOS on a number of these routes including NC
279 NC 274 and US 321 EPA believes that there is a potential misconception that all
of the future travel demand in the region will be between southeastern Gaston County and
western Mecklenburg County While Charlotte is a mayor employment center the new
east west connector facility only addresses typical commuting travel and not the
numerous local trips to schools shopping religious facilities etc that will be in the
Gastonia area Local 2 -lane roadways such as NC 279 and NC 274 are not designed to
handle the future travel demands spurred by the proposed new connector With a new
east west connector and potentially induced development in the project study area (which
is predominantly rural in nature) the capacity of other vital services such as wastewater
treatment water supply electricity etc may also be impacted

Clean Water Act Sections 401, 402 and 404
EPA requests that FHWA and NCTA fully consider and address in the NEPA
document the detailed study alternatives that avoid and minimize water quality impacts
including direct and indirect and cumulative impacts to the streams wetlands and riparian
areas within the project study area A quantitative ICI analysis would be appropriate for
this project as it is expected to induce substantial vehicle travel as well as increase
development in rural portions of Gaston County It is important to consider not only the
typical 300 foot right -of way impacts but also the number and documented need for
free flowing interchanges and toll collection facilities The NEPA document should also
identify the specific traffic need for each of the 1 I to 12 proposed interchanges as these
expanded right of way facilities typically cause the greatest impacts to streams (and
associated wetlands) Alternative design considerations including Single point Urban
Interchanges (SPUI) and compressed clover leafs should be identified and discussed in
the EIS in order to reduce the right of way and construction footprint impacts All
reasonable avoidance and minimization measures planned by the transportation agencies
need to be identified and evaluated in the EIS including where applicable the reduction
of fill slopes and median widths at stream and wetland crossings According to one of
the NCTA meetings NCTA has identified approximately 300 separate jurisdictional
areas within the 16 new location corridors
According to general file information EPA understands that there are potential
impacts to Crowders Creek Blackwood Creek McGill Branch Catawba Creek the
South Fork of the Catawba River the Catawba River (Lake Wylie) and numerous
unnamed tributaries to these watercourses NCTA should consider bridging all major
stream systems as part of its efforts to avoid and minimize potential impacts to waters of
the U S Proposed bridge locations and lengths should be identified in the DEIS From
past meeting conversations EPA understands that the total linear feet of stream impacts
for some of the 16 alternatives may exceed 30 000 linear feet This potential total impact
far exceeds a baseline average per mile of stream impact for this area of the state NCTA
should also consider the elimination of interchanges and separate toll collecting plazas (2)
as part of its overall avoidance and minimization strategy The proposed
interchange /ramp toll plaza proposed at Dixie River Road in Mecklenburg County near I
485 is an example of an interchange that might be considered for modification or
elimination due to its close proximity to a nearby stream Similarly the two
interchanges /ramp toll plazas proposed between the ones proposed at US 321 and NC
274 and that are located at Wilson Road and Jarmian Road are also close to one another
and may need to be considered for elimination (From Figure 1 4 Preliminary Traffic and
Revenue Study 9/5/06) In this area of Gaston County US 321 and NC 274 are less than
4 miles apart with 4 proposed interchanges (combined with 3 toll plazas) between the two
existing roadways
The EIS should also consider detailed compensatory mitigation for direct impacts
to jurisdictional streams and wetlands and provide a conceptual plan that includes
opportunities for on site mitigation Indirect and cumulative impacts to water quality
resulting from a new location facility need to be quantatively assessed in the DEIS

including specific provisions and conditions for stormwater control FHWA regulations
and policy allow for full mitigation of all project impacts including indirect and
cumulative impacts EPA requests that NCTA and FHWA fully explore all possible
methods of directly addressing mitigation for indirect and cumulative effects of the
proposed project including long term impacts to water quality It should be noted that
opportunities for on site mitigation or even off site compensatory mitigation within this
hydrologic cataloguing unit (HUC) for stream impacts may be very difficult to find
Considenng the width of both the South Fork of the Catawba River and the
Catawba River near the eastern termini of the proposed toll facility the NCTA and
FHWA should consider the new crossing alternatives that are perpendicular to these
major rivers in order to minimize impacts to the floodplain and a.sociated riparian areas
NCTA will be required to obtain a CWA Section 402 NPDES (National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System) stormwater permit as well as the CWA Section 401 water
quality certification from NCDWQ
Clean Air Act
As identified in the NCTA s start of study and scopmg meeting notification the
proposed project study area is within the Charlotte Gastonia Rock Hill 8 hour non
attainment area for ozone EPA requests that a detailed analysis and disclosure be
conducted regarding air conformity requirements for the combined Gaston East West
Connector project As part of this analysis the NCTA may also need to consider the
potential cumulative effects to air quality from the Monroe Bypass and Connector
projects (R 3329 and R 2559) which is another potentially large NCTA candidate
project as well as other NCDOT TIP projects proposed in Mecklenburg Union and
Gaston counties (e g R 2248E R -2248F R 4902 R 3101 R 2632A U -2507 U 3603
U 3633 etc)
This proposed NCTA project might also be a pilot for a full quantitative analysis
for Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSATs) that are required to be analyzed under Section
202 of the Clean Air Act and are more fully addressed in the Final Rule on Controlling
Emissions of Hazardous Air Pollutants from Mobile Sources (66 Federal Register 17229
3/29/2001)
FHWA s recently provided NCTA with a presentation on its interim guidance for
MSATs There are several technical issues that EPA may be in disagreement with
FHWA including the threshold criteria for performing a quantitative assessment and the
available methods (i e Modeling) for performing an analysis
Because of proposed expansion plans at Charlotte Douglas International Airport
(CDU) including substantial increased freight capacity EPA believes that a more
robust analysis needs to be conducted including an MSAT indirect and cumulative
impact analysis It is clear that the proposed east west connector would service the
CDU s proposed expansion plans (Page 14 of the Review Board Summaiy 6/10/05)
This quantitative MSAT analysis might include the development of an emissions

inventory obtaining near roadside baseline monitoring data, an evaluation of the
potential health impacts (including cancer risk estimates based upon published values) for
the different detailed study alternatives and the increased emissions projected from
additional diesel equipment and aircraft at CDU The analysis should include the
identification of existing and potential near - roadside sensitive receptors such as day
care facilities nursing homes hospitals etc Please feel free to contact Dr Kenneth L
Mitchell or one of his staff within the EPA Region 4 s Air Toxics Assessment and
Implementation Section at mitchell ken(a)epa gov or by telephone at 404 562 9065 for
further guidance on performing a technically sound project specific analysis for the 21
MSAT compounds that are found for highway projects Attached to this letter is an
alternative method that NCTA and FHWA may want to consider in performing a
technically defensible MSAT analysis for this project
Prime Farmlands
EPA notes NCTA s comment in the start of study letter and also recognizes that
the project study area and surrounding areas near Charlotte are going through a land use
change from rural /agricultural to suburban EPA recommends that NCTA perform a full
analysis on how the different alternatives (with emphasis on the new location
alternatives) will also effect land use changes and conversions of prime agricultural land
to non agricultural uses The DEIS should also specifically address the direct impacts to
prime farmland from potentially 22 miles of new right of -way (e g A new 300 foot
ROW facility permanently converts /impacts 36 4 acres per mile of highway not
including interchanges toll facilities rest areas etc that are typically expanded beyond
300 feet and the ROW can be as much as 1 000 feet at interchanges) This direct loss of
agricultural crop production can have a long term and compounded effect on a regional
economy Furthermore the 1981 Farmland Protection Policy Act requires that Federal
agencies provide for avordance and minimization measures to prime farmlands f the term
in this context refers to prime farmlands which includes prime and unique farmlands as
well as farmlands classified as of being of Statewide and locally significant) FHWA
and NCTA should clearly identify what avoidance and minimization measures were
considered in the development of detailed study alternatives In performing a pnme
farmland analysis it is also important to consider what prime farmland soils are actually
zoned for development uses versus what is planned for development Generic land use
plan designations that change current prime farmlands to development uses need to be
considered as part of the prime farmlands impacted by the proposed project

Historic and Archeological Properties
The DEIS should fully address the eighteen (18) potential historic properties
identified along the new location alternatives as well as any archeological sites EPA
understands that the preliminary archeological survey will be competed in the near future
and recommends that it be done in close coordination with the NC Dept of Cultural
Resources
Other Potential NEPA Cross cutters
The NCTA should consider some of other potential NEPA Cross cutters in the
DEIS including Executive Order 13112 on Invasive Species and requirements under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Reform Act (MBTRA) of 2004 The U S Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) should be consulted regarding an analysis of avian Federal Species of
Concern (FSOC) and potential requirements and considerations under MBTRA
Similarly NCTA and FHWA should consult with FWS regarding Bald eagles
(Halzaeetus leucocephalus) concerning requirements under the Endangered Species Act
of 1973 and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940 as amended According
to a recent NCTA meeting Bald eagle nests may be located within the project study area
near the Catawba River
Should you have any questions concerning specific Clean Water Act
requirements including stream and wetland mitigation issues please feel free to contact
Ms Kathy Matthews at [phone] Should you have any other questions about
these comments please feel free to contact the EPA Merger Team Representative
Christopher Militscher at [phone]
Sincerely
Heinz J Mueller Chief
NEPA Program Office
w /Attachment and Enclosure
Cc Clarence Coleman FHWA
Scott Mcl. endon USACE
John Hennessy NCDWQ
Brian Cole USFWS

Attachment
Gaston East West Connector
Project Scoping Comments
Alternative MSAT Analysis
FHWA and NCTA may wish to consider an alternative approach to performing a
technically defensible MSAT analysis using real baseline air sampling data FHWA s
interim guidance includes three general levels of analysis including No analysis for
l projects with no potential for MSAT effects a Qualitative analysis for projects with
i low potential MSAT effects and a Quantitative analysis to differentiate alternatives for
projects with higher potential MSAT effects Furthermore FHWA s interim guidance
highlights several possible scenarios whereby a proposed project would require a
quantitative assessment for projects with higher potential MSAT effects EPA believes
that for a portion of the proposed Gaston East West Connector facility there is a higher
potential for MSAT effects in eastern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County
especially in consideration of the Charlotte Douglas International Airport proposed
freight expansion facilities Increased truck traffic diesel equipment aircraft flights and
other near road sources of MSATs could present a cumulative impact on air quality
considering that the Gaston East West Connector would service a substantial portion of
the increased freight capacity and increased truck and commuter traffic
While air modeling is an essential tool in performing any type of air quality
analysis air models still require validation and calibration based upon actual
concentrations of pollutants or in this case MSATs There is current uncertainty in the
regulated community (Lead Federal Agencies such as FHWA FAA etc ) on which air
models will provide reliable quantitative MSAT results
EPA has performed reliable and accurate sampling and analysis of MSATs and
other toxic air compounds for more than a decade FHWA and NCTA possess current
data on Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) volumes as well as potential projected
AADT levels for the design year FHWA and NCTA can also accurately predict what the
current and future projected truck traffic increases might be for the new connector
facility By taking baseline air samples for the primary MSATs that FHWA has
identified at vulnerable populations (e g Schools nursing homes hospitals day care
facilities etc FHWA Intermin Guidance 2/14/07) along several alternatives a
proportional analysis can be reasonably made The following proportion can be used to
calculate future MSAT concentrations at vulnerable or sensitive receptor location at
near roadway (within several hundred feet) conditions
Current AADT Baseline Y Concentration for MSAT B = Future AADT* Future Z
Concentration for MSAT B
where
1 Y is expressed in parts per million (ppm) or parts per billion (ppb) or milligrams or
micrograms per cubic meter of air (mg/m3 or ug/m3)i
1
�l

B is the specific air toxic compound sampled and analyzed for at near road conditions
Z is the future concentration of the air toxic compound expressed in ppm ppb mg/m3 or
ug/m3
* Future AADTs may be adjusted to account for increased projected percentages of truck
traffic
The future Z concentration (for probable or known cancer causing MSATs
Benzene 1 3 butadienne Acetaldehyde Formaldehyde Benzo[a]pyrene) can then be
compared to EPA published slope cancer risk concentrations to determine the
probability of increase (or decrease) in potential near road cancers resulting from the
new facility from a particular alternative Projected increases in cancer exceeding certain
probabilities of risk (e g 1 x 103) may require the Lead Federal Agency (e g FHWA) to
consider possible project specific avoidance and minimization measures (e g Placing a
noise wall near a nursing home — this barrier can potentially carry MSATs above the
breathing zone ) or actual mitigation (e g Relocate the nursing home)
Without identifying sensitive (FHWA s vulnerable) receptors and obtaining
accurate baseline air sampling data on average or worst case meteorological conditions
air models by themselves may not be the most reliable method of predicting future
conditions especially considering the highly vaned localized effects of topography fixed
emissions sources etc FHWA has developed sophisticated traffic forecasting models
that should reduce a great deal of the guess work on what future AADT volumes will
be along a given alternative corridor The proportional calculation as shown above is
possibly the most accurate and reliable means available to develop a technically sound
MSAT quantitative analysis
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires that all project impacts
be identified that are reasonably foreseeable The direct indirect and cumulative
impact from the expanded CDU airport freight facility is understood by EPA to be
reasonably foreseeable FHWA NCDOT and its consultant identified this expanded
freight facility in conjunction with the purpose and need for the Gaston East -West
Connector facility when NCDOT was the lead state transportation agency Future EPA
regulations or legally enforceable requirements for cleaner fuels advanced emission
control technologies etc are not believed by EPA to be reasonably foreseeable as
mitigating factors to reduce or minimize MSAT effects to vulnerable populations
Future regulations or market based voluntary emission reductions from mobile sources
may or may not occur within the design life of many proposed highway projects
Should NCTA have any questions concerning this alternative MSAT quantitative
analysis approach and its technical validity please feel free to contact EPA s Christopher
Militscher or FHWA s Mr Eddie Dancausse at [phone] x 112
To covert concentrations in air (at 25°C) from ppm to mg/m3 mg/m3 = (ppm) x
(molecular weight of the compound) /24 45 For example Acrolein 1 ppm = 2 29 mg/m3