HomeMy WebLinkAbout20201935 Ver 1_U-6251 Buncombe CE_20210318v2019.1 U-6251 Type I(A) CE Page 1
•
Type I or II Categorical Exclusion Action Classification Form
STIP Project No. U-6251
WBS Element 49281.1.1
Federal Project No. 1302100
A. Project Description:
Construct access road for Haakon Industries in Enka Commerce Park, Buncombe County, NC.
B. Description of Need and Purpose:
The project provides access to industrial sites which will creates jobs and enhance the economic
development potential of Buncombe County.
C. Categorical Exclusion Action Classification:
Type I(A) - Ground Disturbing Action
D. Proposed Improvements:
The project will include an access road (Enka Heritage Road) on new location from US 19/23 West to
Walk Off Way. Total length of three lane roadway will be 0.21 mile.
E. Special Project Information:
The Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) and Tribal Consultation Responses are attached to the
CE.
The Cultural Resources Evaluation (Section 106) is currently in process and will be an amendment to the
CE.
NOTE: The following Type I(C) Actions (NCDOT-FHWA 2019 CE Agreement, Appendix A) only
require completion of Sections A through D to substantiate and document the CE classification: 1,
5, 8 (signs and pavement markings only), 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, and 20; or several other Type I
Action subcategories identified in past NCDOT-FHWA CE Programmatic Agreements (see
Appendix D). Pre-approval as a CE does not exempt activities from compliance with other
federal environmental laws.
v2019.1 U-6251 Type I(A) CE Page 2
F. Project Impact Criteria Checklists:
F2. Ground Disturbing Actions – Type I (Appendix A) & Type II (Appendix B)
Proposed improvement(s) that fit Type I Actions (NCDOT-FHWA CE Programmatic Agreement,
Appendix A) including 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 12, 18, 21, 22 (ground disturbing), 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, &/or 30;
&/or Type II Actions (NCDOT-FHWA CE Programmatic Agreement, Appendix B) answer the project
impact threshold questions (below) and questions 8 – 31.
• If any question 1-7 is checked “Yes” then NCDOT certification for FHWA approval is required.
• If any question 8-31 is checked “Yes” then additional information will be required for those questions
in Section G.
PROJECT IMPACT THRESHOLDS
(FHWA signature required if any of the questions 1-7 are marked “Yes”.) Yes No
1 Does the project require formal consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) or National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)? ☐
2 Does the project result in impacts subject to the conditions of the Bald and Golden
Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA)? ☐
3 Does the project generate substantial controversy or public opposition, for any
reason, following appropriate public involvement? ☐
4 Does the project cause disproportionately high and adverse impacts relative to low-
income and/or minority populations? ☐
5 Does the project involve a residential or commercial displacement, or a substantial
amount of right of way acquisition? ☐
6 Does the project require an Individual Section 4(f) approval? ☐
7
Does the project include adverse effects that cannot be resolved with a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) under Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA) or have an adverse effect on a National Historic
Landmark (NHL)?
☐
If any question 8-31 is checked “Yes” then additional information will be required for those questions in
Section G.
Other Considerations Yes No
8 Is an Endangered Species Act (ESA) determination unresolved or is the project
covered by a Programmatic Agreement under Section 7? ☐
9 Is the project located in anadromous fish spawning waters? ☐
10
Does the project impact waters classified as Outstanding Resource Water (ORW),
High Quality Water (HQW), Water Supply Watershed Critical Areas, 303(d) listed
impaired water bodies, buffer rules, or Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)? ☐
11 Does the project impact Waters of the United States in any of the designated
mountain trout streams? ☐
12 Does the project require a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Individual
Section 404 Permit? ☐
13 Will the project require an easement from a Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) licensed facility? ☐
v2019.1 U-6251 Type I(A) CE Page 3
Other Considerations for Type I and II Ground Disturbing Actions (continued) Yes No
14
Does the project include a Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
(NHPA) effects determination other than a No Effect, including archaeological
remains? ☐
15 Does the project involve GeoEnvironmental Sites of Concerns such as gas
stations, dry cleaners, landfills, etc.? ☐
16
Does the project require work encroaching and adversely affecting a regulatory
floodway or work affecting the base floodplain (100-year flood) elevations of a
water course or lake, pursuant to Executive Order 11988 and 23 CFR 650 subpart
A?
☐
17 Is the project in a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) county and substantially
affects the coastal zone and/or any Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ☐
18 Does the project require a U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) permit? ☐
19 Does the project involve construction activities in, across, or adjacent to a
designated Wild and Scenic River present within the project area? ☐
20 Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) resources? ☐
21 Does the project impact federal lands (e.g. U.S. Forest Service (USFS), USFWS,
etc.) or Tribal Lands? ☐
22 Does the project involve any changes in access control or the modification or
construction of an interchange on an interstate? ☐
23 Does the project have a permanent adverse effect on local traffic patterns or
community cohesiveness? ☐
24 Will maintenance of traffic cause substantial disruption? ☐
25 Is the project inconsistent with the STIP, and where applicable, the Metropolitan
Planning Organization’s (MPO’s) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)? ☐
26
Does the project require the acquisition of lands under the protection of Section 6(f)
of the Land and Water Conservation Act, the Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Act,
the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act, Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA),
Tribal Lands, or other unique areas or special lands that were acquired in fee or
easement with public-use money and have deed restrictions or covenants on the
property?
☐
27 Does the project involve Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) buyout
properties under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)? ☐
28 Does the project include a de minimis or programmatic Section 4(f)? ☐
29 Is the project considered a Type I under the NCDOT Noise Policy? ☐
30 Is there prime or important farmland soil impacted by this project as defined by the
Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA)? ☐
31 Are there other issues that arose during the project development process that
affected the project decision? ☐
v2019.1 U-6251 Type I(A) CE Page 4
G. Additional Documentation as Required from Section F (ONLY for questions marked ‘Yes’):
v2019.1 U-6251 Type I(A) CE Page 5
H. Project Commitments (attach as Green Sheet to CE Form):
NCDOT PROJECT COMMITMENTS
STIP Project No. U-6251
Enka Heritage Access Road
Buncombe County
Federal Aid Project No. 1302100
WBS Element 49281.1.1
1. Best Management Practices(BMP) for erosion control as prescribed by construction plans will be
required throughout construction. NPDES Forms will be required per the NC DOT General Permit.
v2019.1 U-6251 Type I(A) CE Page 6
I. Categorical Exclusion Approval:
STIP Project No. U-6251
WBS Element 49281.1.1
Federal Project No. 1302100
Prepared By:
Date Roger D. Bryan, Division 13 Environmental Program Supervisor
Prepared For:
Reviewed By:
Date Mike Clark, Division 13 Project Engineer
Approved • If NO grey boxes are checked in Section F (pages 2
and 3), NCDOT approves the Type I or Type II
Categorical Exclusion.
☐ Certified
• If ANY grey boxes are checked in Section F (pages 2
and 3), NCDOT certifies the Type I or Type II
Categorical Exclusion for FHWA approval.
• If classified as Type III Categorical Exclusion.
Date Steve Cannon, P.E., Division 13 Project Development Engineer
North Carolina Department of Transportation
FHWA Approved: For Projects Certified by NCDOT (above), FHWA signature required.
Date for John F. Sullivan, III, PE, Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
NC Department of Transportation
200'3
0
0'
2
0
0'DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINALUNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETEDREVISIO NS HYDRAULICSROADWAY DESIGNENGINEERENGINEER R/W SHEET NO.SHEET NO.PROJECT REFERENCE NO. U-6230 06-M AR-2020 10:13S:\DDC\Projects\Buncom be\Enka Park\Heritage_psh.dgnwccarver AT DIV13-314826L 8/17/99
INCOMPLETE PLANSDO NOT USE FOR R/W ACQUISITIONDOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINALUNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED100200100PLANS097CPCPCP9WVHOMINY CREEK
HOMINY CREEKPUMPHOUSE20652065206520652065206520652065 2
0
6
02060206020602060
206020602060
20602060206020602055205520552055
20552055
20552055205520552055205520552055 205520552055 2055205520552
0502050 20502050
20502050205020502050
2050205020452
04
5
2045
204520452045
2045204520452
0452045204520452045
204020402
0
4
0 204020402040EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEMW-1ABANDONEDMW-4MW-2ABANDONEDMW-3MW-52105
DUMP
S
T
E
R
6
YDC
O
MP
OST COMMI
NG
LE
DP
AP
E
RP
L
AS
TICH
OP
P
E
RWOOD H
OP
P
E
RGL
ASS
REF
.
TRASH
RE
F
.
4
8
"
h
D
OCK109EVEVD
U
MP
S
TE
R6
Y
DCOMP
OS
T
C
OMMIN
GLE
D
P
AP
E
R
P
LAS
TICH
OP
P
E
RWOOD HO
PP
E
RGL
ASS
DRIVE-IN HCHCHOMI
NY CREEKU.S. HI
GHWAY
1
9/
2
3
~~~2064.7'ELE. AT F/LSTORM INLET 2065.1'ELE. AT F/LSTORM INLET 2077.1'ELE. AT F/LSTORM INLET24"CMP15"CMP15"CMP24"CMP 24"CMPINV:2072.5'INV:2072.5'INV:2056.4'INV:2056.3'INV:2054.8'INV:2056.5'S
S10+0011+0012+0010+0011+0012+0013+0014+0015+0016+0017+0018+0019+0020+0021+0022+0023+0024+0025+0025+95.72P
C
=
1
4
+
9
0.6
0PT = 24+22.2710+00
11+00
12+00
12+30.34
2071'2073'2075'2074'2074'2070.5'xx
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
xxx
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
xx
W V WVRUINSRUINSRUINSRECREATION FIELDGATERAMP CATWALKCATWALKCATWALKCATWALK
RIP-RAP CATWALKGATEGATEGATERUINSRUINSGATEGATESIGNSTEPS~WVHYDWVWOOD & DIRTGRAVEL
May 4, 2020
Roger Bryan
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division Thirteen
55 Orange Street
Asheville, NC 28801-2340
Re: U-6230, Enka Commerce Park Access Road
Mr. Roger Bryan:
The Cherokee Nation (Nation) is in receipt of your correspondence about U-6230, Enka
Commerce Park Access Road, and appreciates the opportunity to provide comment upon this
project. Please allow this letter to serve as the Nation’s interest in acting as a consulting party to
this proposed project.
The Nation maintains databases and records of cultural, historic, and pre-historic resources in this
area. Our Historic Preservation Office reviewed this project, cross referenced the project’s legal
description against our information, and found no instances where this project intersects or adjoins
such resources. Thus, the Nation does not foresee this project imparting impacts to Cherokee
cultural resources at this time.
However, the Nation requests that the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
halt all project activities immediately and re-contact our Offices for further consultation if items
of cultural significance are discovered during the course of this project.
Additionally, the Nation requests that NCDOT conduct appropriate inquiries with other pertinent
Tribal and Historic Preservation Offices regarding historic and prehistoric resources not included
in the Nation’s databases or records.
If you require additional information or have any questions, please contact me at your convenience.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
Wado,
Elizabeth Toombs, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
Cherokee Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Office
elizabeth-toombs@cherokee.org
918.453.5389
April 30, 2020
Attention: Roger D. Bryan
NC Department of Transportation
55 Orange Street
Asheville, NC 28801-2340
Re. THPO # Project # Project Description
2020-193-180 U-6230 Enka Commerce Park Access Road in Enka, Buncombe Co., NC
Dear Mr. Bryan,
The Catawba have no immediate concerns with regard to traditional cultural properties,
sacred sites or Native American archaeological sites within the boundaries of the
proposed project areas. However, the Catawba are to be notified if Native American
artifacts and / or human remains are located during the ground disturbance phase
of this project.
If you have questions please contact Caitlin Rogers at 803-328-2427 ext. 226, or e-mail
Caitlin.Rogers@catawba.com.
Sincerely,
Wenonah G. Haire
Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
Catawba Indian Nation
Tribal Historic Preservation Office
1536 Tom Steven Road
Rock Hill, South Carolina 29730
Office 803-328-2427
Fax 803-328-5791
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street Suite #B
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
May 13, 2020
Bryan Ro ger
Division 13 Environmental Officer
55 Orange Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Subject: 20-271; U-6251 Enka Park Access Road; Buncombe Co, NC
Dear Bryan Roger,
This responds to your email received by our office on April 20, 2020, concerning the subject
project. We have reviewed the information presented and submit the following comments and
recommendations in accordance with the provisions of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. §§1531-1543); the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as
amended (16 U.S.C. §§661-667e); the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §1251 et seq.); the Migratory
Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. §§703-712); and the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.
§4321 et seq.).
Project Summary
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to construct .20 miles of
industrial access for a new manufacturing facility in Enka Commerce Park of Buncombe County,
NC. Project includes the installation of a traffic signal and completing the bridge construction
over Hominy Creek. Surrounding land use is dominated by commercial and residential
developments. This, along with maps, was the only information provided.
We offer the following recommendations in the interest of protecting federally threatened and
endangered species, migratory birds, as well as other fish, wildlife, and natural resources.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
In accordance with section 7 (a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act and 50 CFR Part 402.01,
before any federal authorization/permits or funding can be issued for this project, it is the
responsibility of the appropriate federal regulatory/permitting and/or funding agency(ies) to
determine whether the project may affect any federally endangered or threatened species (listed
species) o r designated critical habitat. A species list for counties in North Carolina can be found
online here: https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/nc_counties.html. If it is determined
that this project may affect any listed species or designated critical habitat, you must initiate
section 7 consultation with this office. Please note that federal species of concern are not legally
protected under the Endangered Species Act and are not subject to any of its provisions,
including section 7, unless they are formally proposed or listed as endangered or threatened.
2
Suitable summer roosting habitat may be present in the project area for the federally threatened
northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis). However, the final 4(d) rule (effective as of
February 16, 2016), exempts incidental take of northern long-eared bat associated with activities
that occur greater than 0.25 miles from a known hibernation site, and greater than 150 feet from
a known, occupied maternity roost during the pup season (June 1 – July 31). Based on the
information provided, the project would occur at a location where any incidental take that may
result from associated activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule. Although not required, we
encourage you to conduct any associated tree clearing activities outside the pup season
(June 1 to July 31) and/or active season (April 1 to October 31) to reduce the chance of
impacting unidentified maternity roosts.
Migratory Birds
The MBTA (16 §U.S.C. 703-712) prohibits the intentional taking, killing, possession,
transportation, and importation of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests, except when
specifically authorized by the Department of the Interior. To avoid impacts to migratory birds,
we recommend conducting a visual inspection of any migratory bird nesting habitat within the
project area during the migratory bird nesting season of March through September and avoiding
impacting the nests during the migratory bird nesting season. If birds are discovered nesting near
the project area during years prior to the proposed construction date, we recommend that the
NCDOT, in consultation with US Fish and Wildlife Service, develop measures to discourage
birds from establishing nests within the project area by means that will not resu lt in the take of
birds or eggs; or avoid construction activities during the nesting period.
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Construction activities near streams, rivers, and lakes have the potential to cause water pollution
and stream degradation if measures to control site runoff are not properly installed and
maintained. In order to effectively reduce erosion and sedimentation impacts, best management
practices specific to the extent and type of construction should be designed and installed during
land-disturbing activities and should be maintained until the project is complete and appropriate
stormwater conveyances and vegetation are reestablished on the site.
A complete design manual, which provides extensive details and procedures for developing
site-specific plans to control erosion and sediment and is consistent with the requirements of the
North Carolina Sedimentation and Pollution Control Act and Administrative Rules, is available
at:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/lr/publications
For maximum benefits to water quality and bank stabilization, riparian areas should be forested;
however, if the areas are maintained in grass, they should not be mowed. We recommend
planting disturbed areas with native riparian species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service can
provide information on potential sources of plant material upon request.
Stream Buffers
3
Natural, forested riparian buffers are critical to the health of aquatic ecosystems. They
accomplish the following:
1. catch and filter runoff, thereby helping to prevent nonpoint -source pollutants from
reaching streams;
2. enhance the in-stream processing of both point - and nonpoint-source pollutants;
3. act as “sponges” by absorbing runoff (which reduces the severity of flood s) and by
allowing runoff to infiltrate and recharge groundwater levels (which maintains stream
flows during dry periods);
4. catch and help prevent excess woody debris from entering the stream and creating
logjams;
5. stabilize stream banks and maintain natural channel morphology;
6. provide coarse woody debris for habitat structure and most of the dissolved organic
carbon and other nutrients necessary for the aquatic food web; and
7. maintain air and water temperatures around the stream.
Forested riparian buffers (a minimum 50 feet wide along intermittent streams and 100 feet wide
along perennial streams [or the full extent of the 100 -year floodplain, whichever is greater])
should be created and/or maint ained along all aquatic areas. Within the watersheds of streams
supporting endangered aquatic species, we recommend undisturbed, forested buffers that are
naturally vegetated with trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation and extend a minimum of
200 feet from the banks of all perennial streams and a minimum of 100 feet from the banks of all
intermittent streams, or the full extent of the 100 -year floodplain, whichever is greater.)
Impervious surfaces, ditches, pipes, roads, utility lines (sewer, water, gas, transmission, etc.), and
other infrastructures that require maintained, cleared rights-of-way and/or compromise the
functions and values of the forested buffers should not occur within these riparian areas.
Stream Crossings
In the event that the project requires stream crossings, we recommend the following:
Bridges or spanning structures should be used for all permanent roadway crossings of streams
and associated wetlands. Structures should span the channel and the floodplain in order to
minimize impacts to aquatic resources, allow for the moveme nt of aquatic and terrestrial
organisms, and eliminate the need to place fill in streams and floodplains.
Bridges should be designed and constructed so that no piers or bents are placed in the stream,
approaches and abutments do not constrict the stream c hannel, and the crossing is perpendicular
to the stream. Spanning some or all of the floodplain allows the stream to access its floodplain
and dissipate energy during high flows and also provides for terrestrial wildlife passage. When
bank stabilization is necessary, we recommend that the use of riprap be minimized and that a
riprap-free buffer zone be maintained under the bridge to allow for wildlife movement. If fill in
the floodplain is necessary, floodplain culverts should be added through the fill t o allow the
stream access to the floodplain during high flows.
If bridges are not possible and culverts are the only option, we suggest using bottomless culverts.
Bottomless culverts preserve the natural stream substrate, create less disturbance during
4
construction and provide a more natural post -construction channel. Culverts should be
sufficiently sized to mimic natural stream functions and habitats located at the crossing site;
allow for water depth, volume (flow), and velocity levels that will permit aquatic organism
passage; and accommodate the movement of debris and bed material during bank -full events.
Widening the stream channel must be avoided.
If you have questions about these comments ple ase contact Ms. Claire Ellwanger of our staff at
828/258-3939, Ext. 42235. In any future correspondence concerning these projects, please
reference our Log Number 20-271.
Sincerely,
-- original signed –
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor
NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
Enka Heritage Access Road
Buncombe County, North Carolina
STIP U-6251
Federal Aid Project No. 1302100
WBS Element No. 49281.1.1
THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Division 13
December 2020
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................... 1
2.0 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 1
3.0 TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITIES .......................................................................... 1
4.0 PROTECTED SPECIES ........................................................................................... 1
4.1 Endangered Species Act Protected Species .......................................................... 1
4.2 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act ................................................................. 5
5.0 WATER RESOURCES ............................................................................................. 6
6.0 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................... 6
6.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S. ..................................................................... 6
7.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... 7
Appendix A Figures
Figure 1. Vicinity/ Project Study Area Map
Appendix B Qualifications of Contributors
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Coverage of terrestrial communities in the study area.................................. 1
Table 2. ESA Federally protected species listed for Buncombe Co.…………………2
Table 3. Stream in study area ......................................................................................... 6
Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-6251, Buncombe County, N.C.
1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to construct an
access road from US 19/23 to Walk Off Way to serve Haakon Industries (STIP U-6251)
in Buncombe County (Figure 1). The following Natural Resources Technical Report
(NRTR) has been prepared to assist in the preparation of a document for the purposes of
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or the State Environmental Policy Act
(SEPA).
2.0 METHODOLOGY
All work was conducted in accordance with the NCDOT Environmental Coordination
and Permitting’s Preparing Natural Resources Technical Reports Procedure and the latest
NRTR Template (November 2017). Field work was conducted on December 9, 2020. If
necessary, jurisdictional areas identified in the study area were verified by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the North Carolina Division of Water Resources
(NCDWR). One jurisdictional stream is present within the study area. The principal
personnel contributing to the field work and document is provided in Appendix B.
3.0 TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITIES
One terrestrial community was identified in the study area. Terrestrial community data
are presented in the context of total coverage of each type within the study area (Table 1).
Table 1. Coverage of terrestrial communities in the study area
Community Dominant Species (scientific name) Coverage
(ac.)
Disturbed-Maintained Poplar, Red Oak, Bamboo 0.50
Total 0.50
4.0 PROTECTED SPECIES
4.1 Endangered Species Act Protected Species
As of December 9, 2020 the United States Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) lists fifteen
federally protected (threatened or endangered) species, under the Endangered Species Act
(ESA) for Buncombe County, NC (Table 2). For each species, the presence or absence
of habitat is included below along with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on
survey results in the study area. The entire study area is within an existing industrial
site and has been severely disturbed. A comment letter from USFWS is also attached.
Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-6251, Buncombe County, N.C.
2
Table 2. ESA federally protected species listed for Buncombe County.
Scientific Name Common Name Federal
Status
Habitat
Present
Biological
Conclusion
Glyptemys muhlenbergii Bog Turtle T (S/A) No N/A
Glaucomys sabrinus
coloratus
Carolina northern
flying squirrel E No No Effect
Myotis grisescens Gray bat E No No Effect
Myotis septentrionalis Northern long-eared
bat T No MA-NLAA
Erimonax monachus Spotfin Chub* T No No Effect
Alasmidonta raveneliana Appalachian elktoe E No No Effect
Bombus affinis Rusty-patched bumble
bee* E No Not Subject
Microhexura montivaga Spruce-fir moss spider E No No Effect
Epioblasma florentina
walker Tan riffleshell* E No No Effect
Solidago spithamaea Blue Ridge Goldenrod T No No Effect
Sagittaria fasciculata Bunched arrowhead* E No No Effect
Sarracenis rubra ssp.
Jonesii
Mountain Sweet
Pitcherplant E No No Effect
Geum radiatum Spreading avens E No No Effect
Spirea virginiana Virginia sprirea* T No No Effect
Gymnoderma lineare Rock gnome lichen E No No Effect
E - Endangered
T - Threatened
T(S/A) - Threatened due to similarity of appearance
MA-NLAA - May Affect – Not Likely to Adversely Affect
MA-LAA - May Affect – Likely to Adversely Affect
NE - No Effect
* - Historic record (the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago)
Bog Turtle
USFWS optimal survey window: April 1 – Oct 1 (visual)
Biological Conclusion: Not Subject
Suitable habitat for the Bog Turtle is unlikely within the project study area, as the
study area does not contain bogs, fens, and/or marshy meadows and lacks the
mucky soils that are often associated with this species. A review of NHP records
on December 10, 2020 indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the
study area. Species listed as threatened due to similarity of appearance are not
currently subject to review.
Carolina Northern Flying Squirrel
USFWS optimal survey window: May – October
Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-6251, Buncombe County, N.C.
3
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat for the Northern flying squirrel is unlikely within the project
study area, as a desktop review reveals the maximum elevation reached at any
point within the study limits is too low to support the growth of the high-elevation
mixed birch and fir forest habitat that the Northern flying squirrel requires. A
review of NHP records on December 10, 2020 indicates no known occurrences
within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Gray Bat
USFWS optimal survey window: May 15 – August 15 (structure)
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
No structures will be constructed or impacted by the project. Hominy Creek
flows through the study area but will not be impacted. A review of NHP records
on December 10, 2020 indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the
study area.
Northern Long-Eared Bat
USFWS optimal survey window: May 15 – August 15 (summer)
Biological Conclusion: MA- NLAA
On December 9, 2020, the NCDOT surveyed the project area and no suitable
habitat or signs of bat presence were evident. The project site is also more that 10
miles from a known HUC for NLEB. See the USFWS for 4d Rule applicability.
Spotfin Chub
USFWS optimal survey window: September – November
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Historic Record. No suitable habitat within impacted area. A review of NHP
records on December 10, 2020 indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of
the study area.
Appalachian elktoe
USFWS optimal survey window: March 1 – November 1
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The stream that occurs within the study area is small (<4 feet width) and thereby
unsuitable for elktoe. No know occurrences exist within Hominy Creek
downstream of the project. A review of NHP records on December 10, 2020
indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Rusty-Patched Bumble Bee
USFWS optimal survey window: early June to mid-August
Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-6251, Buncombe County, N.C.
4
Biological Conclusion: Not Subject
Suitable habitat for the Rusty-Patched Bumble Bee is unlikely within the project
study area, as there are no natural grasslands or prairies within the study limits.
Additionally, the study area consists of heavily maintained and disturbed grass
areas which would prevent sources of nectar and pollen from accumulating, thus
limiting the available food sources for the Rusty-Patched Bumble Bee. A review
of NHP records on December 10, 2020 indicates no known occurrences within 1.0
mile of the study area. No Section 7 survey or biological conclusion is currently
required for the Rusty-Patched Bumble Bee.
Spruce-fir moss spider
USFWS optimal survey window: May - August
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat for the spruce-fir moss spider is unlikely within the project study
area, as a desktop review reveals the maximum elevation reached at any point
within the study limits cannot support the high-elevation habitat this species
requires. A review of NHP records on December 10, 2020 indicates no known
occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Tan Riffleshell
USFWS optimal survey window: March 1 – November 1
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The record is historic and the stream is too small to provide habitat for the mussel
species. A review of NHP records on December 10, 2020 indicates no known
occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Blue Ridge Goldenrod
USFWS optimal survey window: July – September
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Blue Ridge Goldenrod habitat consist of rock outcrops, ledges and cliffs at high
elevations (>4600 feet). No suitable habitat exists on the project. A review of
NHP records on December 10, 2020 indicates no known occurrences within 1.0
mile of the study area.
Bunched arrowhead
USFWS optimal survey window: mid-May through July
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat (bogs/seeps) for Bunched arrowhead was not present within the
project study area. A review of NHP records on December 10, 2020 indicates no
known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-6251, Buncombe County, N.C.
5
Mountain Sweet Pitcher Plant
USFWS optimal survey window: April - October
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat (bogs) for Mountain Sweet Pitcher Plant are not present with the
study area. A review of NHP on December 10, 2020 indicates no known
occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Spreading Avens
USFWS optimal survey window: June – September
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat (high elevation cliffs, outcrops, and grassy balds) do not exist
within the study area. A review of NHP on December 10, 2020 indicates no
known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Virginia spirea
USFWS optimal survey window: May – early July
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
No suitable habitat exists within the project area. A review of NHP on December
10, 2020 indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Rock gnome lichen
USFWS optimal survey window: Year round
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat (high elevation cliffs, deep river gorges) does not exist within the
project area. A review of NHP on December 10, 2020 indicates no known
occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
4.2 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
The bald eagle is protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, and
enforced by the USFWS. Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forests
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 1.0-mile
radius of the project limits, was performed on December 10, 2020 using color aerials. No
water bodies large enough or sufficiently open to be considered potential feeding sources
were identified. Since there was no foraging habitat within the review area, a survey of
the project study area and the area within 660 feet of the project limits was not
Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-6251, Buncombe County, N.C.
6
conducted. Additionally, a review of the NHP database on December 10, 2020 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
5.0 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. There are no designated High Quality Waters (HQW) or water supply
watersheds (WS-I or WS-II) within or within 1.0 mile downstream of the study area. No
construction moratoria are necessary for the project. The two streams are listed in Table
3.
Table 3. Streams in the study area
Stream Name Map ID
NCDWR
Index
Number
Best Usage
Classification
Bank
Height
(ft)
Bankfull
width
(ft)
Depth
(in)
Hominy Creek C 5 40 12-36
UT to Hominy Creek Site 1 C 3 8 12-24
6.0 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
6.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.
Two jurisdictional streams were identified in the study area. No wetlands are located
with the project study area. A new culvert will be installed in the UT to Hominy Creek
that will result in approximately 180 linear feet of impact. Compensatory mitigation will
be required.
Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-6251, Buncombe County, N.C.
7
7.0 REFERENCES
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, 2018. Final 2016 Category 5 Assessments – 303(d)
List. Last Updated March 2018. https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303
d/2016/2016_NC_Category_5_303d_list.pdf
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, 2018. Riparian Buffers Protection Program. Last
Updated 2018. https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/water-resources-permits/
wastewater-branch/401-wetlands-buffer-permitting/riparian-buffers-protection
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 2018. Find Your HUC. Last Updated
February 2018. https://ncdenr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/PublicInformation/index.html?appid=ad3a85
a0c6d644a0b97cd069db238ac3
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 2018. NC Surface Water
Classifications. Last Updated 2018. https://ncdenr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.
html?id=6e125ad7628f494694e259c80dd64265
North Carolina Department of Transportation, 2020. Threatened and Endangered Animal Species: Survey
Window and Responsibility. Last Updated June 2020. https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/
Environmental/Compliance%20Guides%20and%20Procedures/Animal%20Survey%20Windows
%20Threatened%20Endangered%20Species%2020110408.pdf
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2018. Asheville Ecological Services Field Office – Bog Turtle. Last
Updated November 2011. https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmls/listed_species/bog_turtle.html
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2018. Asheville Ecological Services Field Office – Carolina Northern
Flying Squirrel. Last Updated November 2011. https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmls/listed_
Species/Carolina_northern_flying_squirrel.html
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2018. Asheville Ecological Services Field Office – Gray Bat. Last Updated
November 2011. https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmls/listed_species/gray_bat.html
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2018. Environmental Conservation Online System – Rusty Patched Bumble
Bee. Last Updated 2018. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp0/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=I0WI
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2020. Optimal Survey Windows for North Carolina’s Federally Threatened
and Endangered Plant Species. Last Updated March 2019. https://www.fws.gov/nc-es/plant/plant_
survey.html
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2018. Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office – Mountain Golden
Heather. Last Updated August 2017. https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/es_mountain_golden_
heather.html
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2018. Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office – Small Whorled Pogonia.
Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-6251, Buncombe County, N.C.
8
Last Updated August 2017. https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/es_small_whorled_pogonia.html
U.S. Geological Survey, 2016. Marion Quadrangle, North Carolina, 7.5-Minute Series. Last Updated
2016.
Appendix A
Figures
200'3
0
0'
2
0
0'DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINALUNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETEDREVISIO NS HYDRAULICSROADWAY DESIGNENGINEERENGINEER R/W SHEET NO.SHEET NO.PROJECT REFERENCE NO. U-6230 06-M AR-2020 10:13S:\DDC\Projects\Buncom be\Enka Park\Heritage_psh.dgnwccarver AT DIV13-314826L 8/17/99
INCOMPLETE PLANSDO NOT USE FOR R/W ACQUISITIONDOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINALUNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED100200100PLANS097CPCPCP9WVHOMINY CREEK
HOMINY CREEKPUMPHOUSE20652065206520652065206520652065 2
0
6
02060206020602060
206020602060
20602060206020602055205520552055
20552055
20552055205520552055205520552055 205520552055 2055205520552
0502050 20502050
20502050205020502050
2050205020452
04
5
2045
204520452045
2045204520452
0452045204520452045
204020402
0
4
0 204020402040EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEMW-1ABANDONEDMW-4MW-2ABANDONEDMW-3MW-52105
DUMP
S
T
E
R
6
YDC
O
MP
OST COMMI
NG
LE
DP
AP
E
RP
L
AS
TICH
OP
P
E
RWOOD H
OP
P
E
RGL
ASS
REF
.
TRASH
RE
F
.
4
8
"
h
D
OCK109EVEVD
U
MP
S
TE
R6
Y
DCOMP
OS
T
C
OMMIN
GLE
D
P
AP
E
R
P
LAS
TICH
OP
P
E
RWOOD HO
PP
E
RGL
ASS
DRIVE-IN HCHCHOMI
NY CREEKU.S. HI
GHWAY
1
9/
2
3
~~~2064.7'ELE. AT F/LSTORM INLET 2065.1'ELE. AT F/LSTORM INLET 2077.1'ELE. AT F/LSTORM INLET24"CMP15"CMP15"CMP24"CMP 24"CMPINV:2072.5'INV:2072.5'INV:2056.4'INV:2056.3'INV:2054.8'INV:2056.5'S
S10+0011+0012+0010+0011+0012+0013+0014+0015+0016+0017+0018+0019+0020+0021+0022+0023+0024+0025+0025+95.72P
C
=
1
4
+
9
0.6
0PT = 24+22.2710+00
11+00
12+00
12+30.34
2071'2073'2075'2074'2074'2070.5'xx
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
xxx
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
xx
W V WVRUINSRUINSRUINSRECREATION FIELDGATERAMP CATWALKCATWALKCATWALKCATWALK
RIP-RAP CATWALKGATEGATEGATERUINSRUINSGATEGATESIGNSTEPS~WVHYDWVWOOD & DIRTGRAVEL
Appendix B
Qualifications of Contributors
Principal Investigator: Roger D. Bryan
Education:
• B.S., Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences – North Carolina State University 1988
• M.S., Fisheries Science – Virginia Tech, 1993
Experience:
• Environmental Program Supervisor, Division 13, NC Department of
Transportation, 1999-Present
• Fisheries Biologist, Fish and Wildlife Associates, Inc., 1991-1999
Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations and assessments, threatened and
endangered species assessments, aquatic and terrestrial community assessments,
environmental document preparation, Corps/DWR permit compliance inspections, and
resource agency coordination.