20161268_USFWS Comments_20140107

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636 -3726
January 7, 2014
Mr. Brad Shaver
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403 -1343
Dear Mr. Shaver:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the Supplemental Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) for the proposed SR 1409 (Military Cutoff Road)
Extension and proposed US 17 Hampstead Bypass, New Hanover and Pender Counties, North
Carolina (TIP No. U -4751 and R- 3300). Given the upcoming formal consultation under Section
7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531- 1543), the Service offers the
following comments regarding federally threatened and endangered species.
As you know, the Service has been actively involved for several years in early coordination on
this project through the combined NEPA/404 Merger Process, and many of our previous
comments and recommendations are reflected in the SDEIS. Since the July 2011 release of the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), a preferred alternative has been selected and
project design changes have occurred. These project design changes include an additional
interchange and additional road lanes at the northern end of the project. This SDEIS describes
and provides justification for those changes. In addition, the SDEIS provides information on
potential service roads that was not included in the DEIS.
As stated in the SDEIS, the Service concurred with the selection of alternative M1 +E -H as the
Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA) selected on May 17, 2012.
We supported M1 +E -H as the LEDPA primarily because it has the least impacts to federally
threatened and endangered species. Since the selection of the LEDPA, further refinements in the
location and design of the northern interchange have occurred. With regard to the northern
interchange, the Service supports the conclusions of the SDEIS. Specifically, we support the
current reduced design of the northern interchange which minimizes adverse effects to the
federally endangered red - cockaded woodpecker (RCW, Picoides borealis).
Despite substantial and successful efforts to minimize adverse effects to RCWs, it appears that
the current project design would still likely require an unavoidable take of one active RCW
group. This one RCW group is part of the Coastal North Carolina Primary Core Recovery
Population within the Mid - Atlantic Coastal Plain Recovery Unit. Given the fact that the Coastal
North Carolina Primary Core Population is still far from achieving its minimum size required for
delisting (350 potential breeding groups), the loss of even one potential breeding group is

significant. We continue to emphasize the serious nature of addressing the loss of this one group
in the upcoming additional coordination that is referred to in the SDEIS.
The Service acknowledges that, as a result of minimization of impacts to RCWs, additional
impacts to wetlands will be incurred. Although the Service has a vested interest in conserving
wetlands, we believe that it is justifiable to incur additional wetland impacts in order to reduce
the level of take on RCWs down to just one group. In conjunction with NCDOT's proposed
acquisition and restoration of habitat adjacent to Holly Shelter Game Land, the current project
design would likely not preclude Holly Shelter Game Land from reaching its RCW recovery
goals in the long term. However, selecting an alternative with fewer wetland impacts but with a
higher level of take of RCWs may preclude Holly Shelter from reaching its recovery goals and
would weigh heavily in the Service's jeopardy analysis in the upcoming formal Section 7
consultation. The Service would also object to the issuance of a Section 404 permit for an
alternative with a take of more than one RCW group. We believe successful compensatory
mitigation for wetland impacts is much easier to obtain than offsetting impacts to
RCWs. Opportunities to offset impacts to RCWs are substantially fewer than opportunities to
mitigate for wetlands. RCWs are a much more limited resource than are wetlands.
In Section 5.6.4.3 the SDEIS states that the project likely will adversely affect the federally
endangered rough - leaved loosestrife (Lysimachia aesperulaefolia). While this may ultimately
prove to be the case, the Service believes that refinements in final design could possibly avoid
adverse effects to this species, thus avoiding formal Section 7 consultation for rough - leaved
loosestrife. We will continue to provide input on this issue through the Merger Process.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review this project. If you have any questions
regarding our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at (919) 856 -4520 (Ext. 32).
Sincerely,
Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
Electronic copy: Jay McInnis, NCDOT, Raleigh, NC
Kim Gillespie, NCDOT, Raleigh, NC
Rachelle Beauregard, NCDOT, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA, Atlanta, GA
David Wainwright, NCDWR, Raleigh, NC
Steve Sollod, NCDCM, Raleigh, NC