20210244 Ver 1_20210303_ltr_USFWS_NCDOT_HO-0002C_20211216

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh ES Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
March 3, 2021
Philip S. Harris III, P.E.
NC Depailment of Transportation
Environmental Analysis Unit
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Dear Mr. Harris:
This letter is in response to your letter of March 1, 2021 which provided the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) with the biological conclusion of the North Carolina Depailuient of
Transportation (NCDOT) that the proposed installation of broadband conduit along US 74 from
I-95 in Lumberton to I-40 in Wilmington in Robeson, Columbus, and Brunswick Counties (STIP
No. HO-0002C) may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the federally threatened wood
stork (Mycteria americana). In addition, NCDOT has determined that the action will have no
effect on all other federally listed species in Robeson, Columbus, and Brunswick Counties, with
the exception of the northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis, which has previously been
addressed through a Programmatic Biological Opinion). 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 your submitted information, wood stork nest surveys were conducted along US 74
within the project study area during January 2021. No wood storks or wood stork nests were
observed. However, it is noted that the surveys were conducted outside the normal survey
window of April 15 — July 15. Given the fact that the broadband conduit will be located within
existing NCDOT right-of-way and that installation will involve minimal disturbance, the
potential to affect wood storks is insignificant and/or discountable. Therefore, the Service
concurs with your conclusion that the action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the
wood stork. The Service also concurs that the action will have no effect on all other listed species
with the exception of the previously addressed northern long-eared bat.
Please note that there is an error in your discussion of the northern long-eared bat. The
referenced Programmatic Biological Opinion actually does not provide incidental take coverage
for this species because the activities of the action are not currently prohibited under the ESA
4(d) rule for the species. However, this may change if/when the northern long-eared bat is
relisted as endangered and the 4(d) rule no longer applies.
We believe that the requirements of Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA have been satisfied for the C
section of HO-0002. We understand separate concurrence requests will be made for the A and B
sections. 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 gary iordanafws.gov .
Electronic copy:
Chris Rivenbark, NCDOT, Raleigh, NC
Jason Dilday, NCDOT, Raleigh, NC
Eric Alsmeyer, USACE, Wake Forest, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Sincerely,
IGkluci,/ 1/(P-ctelf)\- go
Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
2