Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFY18-CRISI_NC-PAIRS_Wilmington(P5740)_CE-signed_031621FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 1 of 11 Expiration 10/31/2021 OMB No. 2130-0615 Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION WORKSHEET For Agency Use: Categorical Exclusion Signature Approval Date of Class of Action Determined by FRA: 11/18/2019 Date Completed Document was Received by FRA: 3/12/2021 Reviewed By: Michael Johnsen Date: 3/15/2021 Concurrence by Approving Official: Date: For Agency Use: Section 4(f) Evaluation Will the Project result in the use of a resource protected by 49 U.S.C. §303 [Section 4(f)] of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966? If answer ‘YES,’ please include Section 4(f) documentation, and coordination letters. YES NO For Agency Use: FRA Required Mitigation Does FRA require additional mitigation for this Project? If answer ‘YES,’ please indicate additional mitigation in Section V below. YES NO Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 156 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 2130-0615. All responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection, including suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collection Officer, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E.., Washington D.C. 20590. 3/16/2021 FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 2 of 11 Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION WORKSHEET The purpose of this worksheet is to assist Project Sponsors in gathering and organizing materials for environmental analysis required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), particularly for projects that may qualify as Categorical Exclusions (CE). CEs are categories of actions (i.e. types of projects) that the FRA has determined, based on its experience, typically do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and which generally do not require the preparation of either an environmental impact statement (EIS) or an environmental assessment (EA). Decisions to prepare EAs and EISs are made by FRA. The Project sponsor is responsible for providing FRA with a sufficient level of documentation and analysis to help inform FRA’s determination that a CE is the appropriate NEPA class of action. Documentation and analysis may include background research, results of record searches, field investigations, field surveys, and any past planning or studies. Submission of the worksheet by itself does not meet NEPA requirements. FRA must concur in writing with the CE recommendation for NEPA requirements to be met. Instructions for completing this CE worksheet are available on the FRA website at: https://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0550. Please complete and submit the completed form in MS Word electronic format. Submit the following documents along with this worksheet: 1. Map(s) or diagram(s) of the Project area that identify locations of critical resource areas, wetlands, potential historic sites, or sensitive noise receptors such as schools, hospitals, and residences. 2. Map(s) or diagram(s) of the proposed modifications to existing railways, roadways, and parking facilities. 3. Copies of all agency correspondence particularly with permitting agencies. 4. Representative photographs of the Project area. 5. Any technical memoranda or report(s) developed to support this CE worksheet. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Sponsor Name NCDOT Rail Division Date Submitted to FRA FRA Funding Program or other FRA Action Triggering NEPA Fiscal Year 2018 - Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Program (CRISI) Project Sponsor Contact NCDOT Rail Division – Ron Lucas Project Sponsor Phone 919-747-7019 Project Sponsor E-mail address rglucas@ncdot.gov Proposed Project Title NCDOT Piedmont-Atlantic Intermodal Rail System (PAIRS): Proposed Improvements to the CSX Railroad SE Line (the “Beltline”) Railroad and Crossings – STIP P-5740 (“Wilmington Beltline Improvements”) Location (Include Street Address, City or Township, County, and State) Beginning at latitude: 34.259376 and longitude: -77.999587 at CSX Davis Yard in Navassa and ending at latitude: 34.219262 and longitude: -77.946673 near 2nd Street in Wilmington, New Hanover and Brunswick Counties for approximately thirteen (13) track miles. FRA NEPA Contact Michael M. Johnsen FRA NEPA Contact 202-493-1310 FRA NEPA Contact E-mail address michael.johnsen@dot.gov FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 3 of 15 Description of Project: Fully describe the Project. The description should focus on Project elements that may be of environmental concern, such as: widening an embankment to stabilize roadbed; repairing or replacing bridge pier foundations, extending culverts, adding rip-rap in a waterway; earthwork and altering natural (existing) drainage patterns and creating a new water discharge; contaminated water needing treatment; building a new or adding on to a shop building; fueling or collection of fuel or oil and contaminated water; building or extending a siding; and building or adding on to a yard. Where applicable fully describe the operational characteristics of the facility to be improved by the Project and any anticipated operational changes that may result. P-5740: This is predominantly a rail and tie replacement project, with crossing safety improvements. Minimal work will be done outside of the existing alignment and right-of-way therefore, impacts are limited. Proposed Improvements to the CSX Railroad SE Line (the “Beltline”) include tie & rail rehabilitation/replacement (approximately 13 miles) predominantly on existing alignment, a 2500’ curve realignment near Love Grove (King Street) at the old ACL Hilton Rail Yard, super-elevation at the turning wye and upgraded turnouts. (see Exhibit 1, Vicinity Map in the Appendix). Improvements to 24 existing highway grade crossings and three selected closures along with two, one-block connector streets for connectivity (see Exhibits 1-1,1-2 and 1-3 Rail Crossing Maps in Appendix). Signal upgrades and crossing surface improvements from the CSX Transportation (CSXT) Davis Yard in Navassa to South Second Street in Wilmington, Brunswick and New Hanover Counties are proposed. This program of tie and rail rehabilitation and installation of a new train signal system will upgrade the railroad infrastructure from Class 1 to Class 2 Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) track safety designation between Davis Yard and 3rd Street. Moveable bascule railroad bridges over two branches of the Cape Fear River will have superstructure rehabilitation to assure continued system integrity to carry anticipated rail volumes. Minor right of way acquisition is required to accommodate proposed roadway modifications. The improved overall safety to the train operations along the length of the Wilmington Beltline is coupled with the increase in train speed from 10 mph to 25 mph and increased crossing safety. The crossing safety upgrades stem from the Wilmington Traffic Separation Study (or “TSS”, 2017). In a joint cooperative effort with the City of Wilmington and CSXT, Wilmington Urban Area MPO, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) completed the Wilmington TSS, focusing on 26 existing at-grade roadway-railroad crossings (another crossing was added in 2019) along a 6-mile portion of the CSXT rail line which runs from the Port of Wilmington to Pembroke, NC. The TSS study evaluated the CSXT rail line, as well as any planned or programmed railroad and roadway improvements within the study area. The process involved public input and involved a series of meetings to gather information and receive public comments on proposed recommendations. These recommendations included the safety improvements and closures at existing street/rail grade crossings in the City of Wilmington as detailed in this document and implementation project. The crossing upgrades at each location, as well as other project elements, are included in the Appendix as “Map Key Proposed Improvements”. FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 4 of 15 II. FRA CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION Please list the CEs below that the Project best fits within. FRA CEs and guidance are found at: https://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0550 CE Category (9): Maintenance or repair of existing railroad facilities, where such activities do not change the existing character of the facility, including equipment; track and bridge structures; electrification, communication, signaling, or security facilities; stations; tunnels; maintenance-of-way and maintenance-of-equipment bases. CE Category (12): Minor rail line additions, including construction of side tracks, passing tracks, crossovers, short connections between existing rail lines, and new tracks within existing rail yards or right-of-way, provided that such additions are not inconsistent with existing zoning, do not involve acquisition of a significant amount of right-of-way, and do not significantly alter the traffic density characteristics of the existing rail lines or rail facilities. CE Category (17): The rehabilitation, reconstruction or replacement of bridges, the rehabilitation or maintenance of the rail elements of docks or piers for the purposes of intermodal transfers, and the construction of bridges, culverts, or grade separation projects that are predominantly within existing right-of-way and that do not involve extensive in-water construction activities, such as projects replacing bridge components including stringers, caps, piles, or decks, the construction of roadway overpasses to replace at-grade crossings, construction or reconstruction of approaches or embankments to bridges, or construction or replacement of short span bridges. CE Category (19): Installation, repair and replacement of equipment and small structures designed to promote transportation safety, security, accessibility, communication or operational efficiency that take place predominantly within the existing right-of-way and do not result in a major change in traffic density on the existing rail line or facility, such as the installation, repair or replacement of surface treatments or pavement markings, small passenger shelters, passenger amenities, benches, signage, sidewalks or trails, equipment enclosures, and fencing, railroad warning devices, train control systems, signalization, electric traction equipment and structures, electronics, photonics, and communications systems and equipment, equipment mounts, towers and structures, information processing equipment, and security equipment, including surveillance and detection cameras. CE Category (22): Track and track structure maintenance and improvements when carried out predominantly within the existing right-of-way that do not cause a substantial increase in rail traffic beyond existing or historic levels, such as stabilizing embankments, installing or reinstalling track, re- grading, replacing rail, ties, slabs and ballast, installing, maintaining, or restoring drainage ditches, cleaning ballast, constructing minor curve realignments, improving or replacing interlockings, and the installation or maintenance of ancillary equipment. If no CE category applies, contact FRA, as the Project may require an EA or EIS. FRA will officially designate the Project as a CE only after conducting a Class of Action determination. FRA may request the applicant or project sponsor to submit documentation to demonstrate that the specific conditions or criteria for the CEs are satisfied and that significant environmental effects will not result. FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 5 of 15 III. PROJECT INFORMATION Analyze and identify potential impacts from both construction and changes to operations (where applicable) for each resource type below. Where appropriate, the Project sponsor may commit to mitigation measures to avoid, reduce, or minimize impacts, including the use of Best Management Practices (BMP). Identify any mitigation measures necessary to comply with other laws or regulations in each section (e.g. Clean Water Act Section 404) and consider the impacts from mitigation. A. Affected Environment: Briefly describe the ecosystems and environmental conditions in the area affected by the Project (defined as broadly as necessary to evaluate potential impacts and address Project area habitats). The linear project area is made up of a variety of ecosystem and environmental conditions including the urban and industrial areas of Wilmington, residential and apartments, commercial areas as well as areas of natural beauty west of the Northeast Cape Fear River. These natural areas include open waters, marshes, and swamps/wetlands through Eagles Island. Due to the proposed improvements being predominantly on existing location (rehabilitation in place, with the exception of a 2,500’ realignment near King Street), impacts to these resources are not anticipated. The sole rail line realignment noted above is proposed in a formerly-disturbed area that was the ACL Hilton Rail Yard site. The two one-block connector roads are adjacent to the rail line and on formerly platted right-of-way in a residential area. See the Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) in the Appendix. B. Location & Land Use: Briefly describe the existing land use of the Project site and surrounding properties and resources and identify and discuss any potential inconsistencies the Project might have with local land use plans and policies. The project area is made up of a variety of land use conditions including industrial areas, swamp/marsh lands, rivers, the downtown area of Wilmington, and the Port. This project is consistent with local land use plans and policies and does not propose to change land use or zoning. The project is pursuant to implementing the signed 2017 Wilmington Traffic Separation Study agreement between the City, CSX, NCDOT and the MPO, and is therefore consistent with the local plans and policies. C. Cultural Resources: Is the Project of the type where there is no potential to affect historic properties? Yes, explain how the Project is not the type of activity that has the potential to cause effects on historic properties, assuming historic properties are present. (Continue to D) No, there is potential to affect historic properties, if present Through Section 106 research and review of project components, as well as coordination with the NC SHPO, it was determined that the project will have no adverse effect on the National Register-eligible Seaboard Airline Railway/Atlantic Coast Line Railroad or the National Register Listed Wilmington Historic District. Please see December 15, 2020 letter in Appendix. If No: Is the Project governed by a Federal agency program alternative established under Advisory Council on Historic Preservation regulations (36 CFR 800.14)? Guidance on exempted activities is available on FRA’s website here: (https://railroads.dot.gov/elibrary/section-106-program-comment-rail-row-appendix-exempted-activities- list) Yes, include the program alternative (Continue to D) The individual project elements are included in the table in the Appendix. This table list each element, as well as any applicable Exempted Activity. Items that did not relate to an Exempted Activity were examined fully by FRA cultural resources personnel. These were coordinated with the NC SHPO, who returned a finding of No Adverse Effect. No, there is no applicable program alternative. FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 6 of 15 Identify and describe the Area of Potential Effect (APE), the procedures to determine the existence of cultural resources, any resource(s) identified in the APE, and then describe any potential effect of the Project on the resource(s). Have you consulted with the State Historic Preservation Office? No, contact FRA Yes, describe and attach relevant correspondence. Please see attached correspondence with the SHPO in the Appendix. What resources of interest to Federally-recognized Native American Tribes are known to be present in the Project area? The Catawba Indian Nation was sent a letter dated May 20, 2020 detailing the project and asking for any information that would be helpful in evaluating potential environmental impacts of the project including recommendation of alternates to be studied. The comments would be used in the preparation of a NEPA/SEPA Environmental Document, in accordance with the State and/or National Environmental Policy Act. The given deadline to respond was June 12, 2020 so that the comments could be used in the scoping of this project. The Catawba Indian Nation did respond in a letter dated January 5, 2021. 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. D. Parks and Recreational Facilities: Are there any publicly owned park, wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or recreational area of national, state, or local significance within or directly adjacent to the Project area? No, include a short statement describe efforts to identify parks and recreational facilities in the Project area. While there are many parks and recreational facilities that exist in the Wilmington area, parks and recreational facilities are not found in the project study area. Identification of parks and recreational facilities in the project area was made via desktop level GIS and Google Earth mapping review, and yielded no publicly owned parks, wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or recreational areas of national, state, or local significance within or directly adjacent to the project study area. Yes, include a detailed description of the property, including map or drawing, describe the recreational uses of the property, any unique characteristics of the property, any consultations with the entity with legal jurisdiction over the property, and the potential impact on the property. E. Transportation: Would the Project have any effect (beneficial or adverse) on transportation including but not limited to other railway operations, road traffic, or increase the demand for parking? No, explain why the Project would have no effect (beneficial or adverse) on transportation. Yes, describe potential transportation, traffic, and parking impacts, and address capacity constraints and potential impacts to existing railroad and highway operations. Also, summarize any consultation that has occurred with other railroads or highway authorities whose operations this Project will impact. An objective of the project is to increase track efficiency and reliability by increasing the condition and speed of the track from 10 mph to 25 mph in some areas; thus, reducing transit time to the Port and reducing congestion and waiting at crossings. This would be a beneficial effect. The project also consists of three at-grade crossing closures with the addition of two 1-block connector roads to support the low-volume traffic diverting from the closures. The benefit to the closure of low-volume, redundant crossings is improved safety. FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 7 of 15 F. Noise and Vibration: Are there any sensitive receptors in the Project area? No, describe why there are no sensitive receptors (residences, parks, schools, hospitals, public gathering spaces) in or near the Project area. (Continue to G), explain why the Project would have no effect (beneficial or adverse) on transportation. The project is proposed to be constructed upon the existing location of the operating CSX Wilmington “Beltline” freight rail line. The proposed improvements are predominantly tie and rail replacement. The project does not propose to induce new traffic growth or introduce new service. The new welded rail structure will reduce noise and vibration as compared to existing conditions. Three crossings will be closed, thereby removing the safety-mandated locomotive horn warning blasts form these three locations, thereby lessening overall noise in those three locations. The realignment near King Street at Love Grove will pass the Dorothy B. Johnson Pre-K Center preschool (off of Nixon Street) and the D.C. Virgo Middle School (off of McRae Street). It is not anticipated that the closest point of the rail line will be relocated closer to D.C. Virgo Middle School. However, the realigned portion of track nearest to the Dorothy B. Johnson Pre-K Center will be approximately 170 feet closer at approximately 950 feet distance. There is intervening vegetation and trees between the relocated line and the Pre-K. The remainder of the project is built upon existing location and will not increase noise levels nor change service. It will provide overall reduced noise levels due to reduced warning horn blasts and quieter wheel/rail interfaces. The crossings at 6th, 7th, 12th, Clay and King Streets will receive crossbucks and flashers with warning bells that do not currently exist. While the bells will create new noise, there is a net reduction of noise at these sites as the warning bells are quieter when compared to the existing train horn, wheel and engine noise at crossings. Yes, will the Project change the noise and/or vibration exposure of the sensitive receptors when applying the screening distances for noise and vibration assessment found in FRA’s and the Federal Transit Administration’s most recent noise impacts assessment guidance manuals. Such changes in exposure might include changes in noise emissions and/or noise events, or changes in vibration emissions and/or vibration events. If the Project is anticipated to change the noise or vibration exposure of sensitive receptors, complete and attach a General Noise and/or Vibration Assessment. Describe the results of the Assessment and any mitigation that will address potential impacts. G. Air Quality: Describe any impacts to air quality from the Project, whether beneficial or adverse. Is the Project located in a Non-Attainment or Maintenance area? No, identify any air emissions increases or benefits that the project will create. (Continue to H) The project is not located within a Non-Attainment or Maintenance area. Based upon research into NCDEQ designation status for each NAAQS pollutant, and USEPA records, New Hanover County is in attainment for Ozone, PM2.5, and carbon monoxide. The county also has a SO2 Monitor Meeting 75 PPB 2010 1-HR SO2 Standard. As the project does not increase service or frequency, but decreases wait times for motorists at crossings, it is anticipated that the project will result in a net benefit (though minimal) in air quality. Yes, for which of the following pollutants: Carbon Monoxide (CO) Ozone (O3), volatile organic compounds or Nitrous Oxides (NOx) Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5) Will the Project, both during construction and operation, result in new emissions of criteria pollutants including Carbon Monoxide (CO), Ozone (O3), volatile organic compounds, or Nitrous Oxides NOx, Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5)? No Yes, Attach an emissions analysis for General Conformity regarding CO, O3, PM10 or PM2.5, and NOx. FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 8 of 15 Based on the emissions analysis, will the Project increase concentrations of ambient criteria pollutants to levels that exceed the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, lead to the establishment of a new non-attainment area, or delay achievement of attainment? No Yes H. Hazardous Materials: Does the Project involve the use or handling of hazardous materials? No (continue to I) Yes, describe the use and measures that will mitigate any potential for release and contamination. I. Hazardous Waste: Is the Project site in a developed area or was it previously developed or used for industrial or agricultural production? No, describe the steps taken to determine that hazardous materials are not present on the Project site. (Continue to J) Yes The Project site is in a developed area. The NCDOT GeoEnvironmental Section of the Geotechnical Engineering Unit performed a Phase I field investigation on January 14, 2020 for the above referenced project to identify geoenvironmental sites of concern. Identified sites of concern are included in the Phase I report in an effort to assist the project stakeholders in reducing or avoiding impacts to these sites. Sites of concern may include, but are not limited to, underground storage tank (UST) sites, dry cleaning facilities, hazardous waste sites, regulated landfills and unregulated dumpsites. Twenty-Seven (27) sites of concern were identified within the proposed study area. It is anticipated that low monetary and scheduling impacts will result from these sites. See Appendix – GeoEnvironmental Phase I Report. If yes, is it likely that hazardous materials will be encountered by undertaking the Project? (Prior to acquiring land or a facility with FRA funds, consult with FRA regarding the potential presence of hazardous materials) Yes, complete a Phase I site assessment and attach. No, explain why it is unlikely that hazardous materials will be encountered. Due to the proposed construction methods (mainly rehabilitation in place) hazardous wastes are not likely to be a project concern. See Appendix for Phase I report. If a Phase I survey was completed, is a Phase II site assessment recommended? No, explain why a Phase II site assessment is not recommended. Due to the proposed construction methods (mainly rehabilitation in place) the Phase I notes that hazardous wastes are not likely to be a project concern. Yes, provide a copy of the Phase II site assessment and describe mitigation and clean-up measures to remediate any hazardous materials present identified in the Phase II site assessment, and describe what steps will be taken to ensure that the local community is protected from contamination during construction and operation of the Project. J. Property Acquisition: Is property acquisition needed for the Project? No (continue to K) Yes, indicate how much property and whether the acquisition will result in relocation of businesses or individuals. Property acquisition is not anticipated as being needed for the Project, although CSX property will be FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 9 of 15 needed for the curve realignment. The relocation at the former Hilton Yard is on CSX right-of-way, as is the Henry Street to Clay Street connector roadway. The Kidder Street Extension is proposed to be built upon the previously dedicated alignment and property owned by the City of Wilmington.  Note: acquiring property prior to completing the NEPA process and receiving written FRA concurrence in the NEPA recommendation may jeopardize Federal financial participation in the Project K. Community Impacts and Environmental Justice: Is the Project likely to result in impacts to adjacent communities? Impacts might be both beneficial (e.g. economic benefits) or adverse (e.g. reduction in community cohesion). No, describe the steps taken to determine whether the Project might result in impacts to adjacent communities. (Continue to L) Yes, characterize the socio-economic profile of the affected community, including the presence of minority or low-income populations. A Community Impact Assessment (CIA) was conducted for this study with findings and recommendations summarized below. See Appendix – CIA report. The Project is not likely to result in adverse impacts to adjacent communities. Based upon the track replacement and crossing safety aspects of the project, it is unlikely to cause disproportionate EJ burdens. No decision was made in the development of the project that would disproportionately cause an EJ community to bear more than their share of the impacts resulting from the project. Likewise, crossing safety improvements brought about during this project will provide enhanced safety for the entire corridor. Findings: • Impacts to bicycle facilities are not expected to occur, though improvements to crossing conditions and facilities will enhance crossing safety. • Impacts and temporary closures to sidewalk facilities in the area are anticipated to occur during construction. Twenty-three rail crossings are expected to be improved as a part of this project, among those are S. 16th Street, S. 17th Street, and Princess Place Drive. Construction is expected to occur within existing right-of-way and will upgrade the sidewalk facilities on these crossings. The improvements are anticipated to improve connectivity and increase pedestrian safety in the Project area. • Temporary construction impacts will result as pedestrian facilities at S. 16th Street, S. 17th Street, and Princess Place Drive rail crossings are improved. Impact are expected to be temporary in nature, and only during construction. Pedestrian facility improvements are anticipated to improve connectivity and increased pedestrian safety in the Project area. • The project proposes to close three redundant existing at‐grade crossings (Martin Street near Hooper Street, Martin Street portion near 6th Street, and Clay Street) and improve 23 existing at‐ grade crossings. The construction impacts will be temporary in nature, and the adjacent redundant crossings will allow continued freedom of movement after the construction is completed. • Rick Pearsall (Chief of Operations for Wilmington Fire Department) noted “The proposed improvements could cause a minor delay (regardless of call type) of up to 70 seconds additional travel time for this unit responding southeast/southwest of Market. This includes responses to Forest Hills Elementary covered by Fire Station 2 located on Park Ave. Alternate routes and/or additional dispatches from units located at Wilmington Fire Headquarters’, downtown, may be a result”. Also, “The area of most concern was the district directly south of Fire Station 3 located on Cinema Drive.” • While minority and low-income populations are present in the Project area, no notably adverse community impacts are anticipated with this project; thus, impacts to minority and low-income populations are not disproportionately high and adverse. Due to the nature of the safety upgrades, FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 10 of 15 and in-place rail rehabilitation, benefits and burdens resulting from the Project are anticipated to be equally distributed throughout the community. No disparate impacts are anticipated under Title VI and related statutes. Recommendations: • The NCDOT Project Manager should coordinate with NCDOT Work Zone Traffic Control to evaluate the necessary level of bicycle/pedestrian access accommodation during construction. • Although inadequate lighting is not related to the railroad and upgraded crossings, consideration of additional lighting should be addressed locally. • The NCDOT Project Manager should coordinate with local business and property owners on any construction impacts prior to construction. • The NCDOT Planning Engineer should coordinate with local EMS officials to ensure EMS travel time is adequate, in the corridor. • Public involvement activities, held on February 24 and 25, 2020, and public involvement at four points during the TSS process ensured full and fair participation of all potentially affected communities in the transportation decisions-making process. • Because notable Spanish, Other Indo-Euro, and Asian/Pacific language-speaking populations requiring language assistance are located within the DCIA, the NCDOT Project Planning Engineer consulted with NCDOT Public Involvement to determine appropriate measures assuring meaningful public involvement to satisfy the requirements of Executive Order 12898. • The NCDOT Project Planning Engineer should coordinate with NCDOT Division of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transport to evaluate the inclusion if appropriate of bicycle/pedestrian facilities in project design, as well as the necessary level of bicycle/pedestrian access accommodation during construction. • The NCDOT Project Planning Engineer coordinated with NCDOT Public Involvement to develop a public involvement outreach plan (Public Involvement meeting took place February 24 and February 25, 2020) that incorporated the necessary local stakeholders and was in accordance with all necessary FHWA and NCDOT guidelines. Additionally, four points of public involvement were held during the TSS process. Describe any potential adverse effects to communities, including noise, visual and barrier effects. Indicate whether the Project will have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on minority or low-income populations. Describe outreach efforts targeted specifically at minority or low-income populations. No potential adverse effects anticipated. L. Impacts On Wetlands: Does the Project temporarily or permanently impact wetlands or require alterations to streams or waterways? No, describe the steps taken to determine that the Project is not likely to temporarily or permanently impact wetlands or require alterations to streams or waterways. (Continue to M) Yes, show wetlands and waters on the site map and classification. Describe the Project’s potential impact to on-site and adjacent wetlands and waters and attach any correspondence with the US Army Corps of Engineers. The project is likely to temporarily or permanently impact wetlands but will not require alterations to streams or waterways. The existing rail line from the Davis Yard across the Brunswick River and Cape Fear River will be improved with new ties and new rail on the existing location (see Exhibit 1). All the work will be done with the existing railroad right-of-way (varying from approximately 40 feet in width to 100 feet). There will additionally be no in-water work for the rehabilitation to the rail bridge crossings. CSX is anticipating wetland impacts to the delineated Wetland WK for proposed upgrades at MP SE FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 11 of 15 362.5. The amount of impact is estimated to be less than 1/3 of an acre of tidal wetland. NCDOT believes that this project should be eligible for Nationwide Permit 14 (linear transportation projects) since it will impact no more than 1/3 acre of tidal, freshwater wetlands. However, the USACE have the final decision as to whether a particular project is eligible for a Nationwide Permit or if an Individual Permit would be needed. This decision by the USACE will follow the 404 (b) (1) guidelines of the Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. During that process, NCDOT will ensure that the project has been designed and constructed to avoid and minimize all adverse impacts, both temporary and permanent, to Waters of the United States to the maximum extent practicable. During that process, mitigation in all its forms (avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, reducing, or compensating for resource losses) will be addressed in the permit application to the extent necessary to ensure that the individual and cumulative adverse environmental impacts are no more than minimal. The USACE will decide if compensatory mitigation is required. If it is required, credits will be obtained either from a private mitigation bank or from the NC Division of Mitigation Services in-lieu fee program. See Appendix – Approved Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination. Is a Section 404 Permit necessary? Yes, attach all permit related documentation See description above. The permit will be applied for in early spring of 2021. No M. Floodplain Impacts: Is the Project located within the 100-year floodplain or are regulated floodways affected? No (Continue to N) Yes, describe the potential for impacts due to changes in floodplain capacity or water flow, if any and how the Project will comply with Executive Order 11988. There are three areas where the rail line is within the FEMA 100-year regulatory floodplain, including Eagles Island and the crossings of the Northeast Cape Fear River extending from Smith Creek on the Wilmington side of the project area. Impacts are not likely because there will be no changes to the floodplain capacity or water flow due to project construction. For these reasons, the project is in compliance with Executive Order 11988. If impacts are likely, attach scale maps describing potential impacts and describe any coordination with regulatory entities. N. Water Quality: Are protected waters of special quality or concern, or protected drinking water resources present at or adjacent to the Project site? No, describe the steps taken to identify protected waters of special quality or concern, or protected drinking water resources present at or adjacent to the Project site. A desktop level review of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality GIS mapping of special waters and protected drinking water resources yielded none within the project site. Yes, describe water resource and the potential for impact from the Project, and any coordination with regulatory agencies. O. Navigable Waterways: Does the Project cross or have an effect on a navigable waterway? No (Continue to P) Yes, describe potential for impact and any coordination with US Coast Guard. The project crosses navigable waterways, including the Cape Fear River, Toomers Creek, Northeast Cape Fear River, and Burnt Mill Creek. Despite no in-water work for the rail bridge crossing, coordination was begun with the US Coast Guard, and NCDOT received correspondence from Mr. Hal R. Pitts, Chief, FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 12 of 15 Bridge Branch, Fifth Coast Guard District, Portsmouth, VA. He indicated that a bridge maintenance project plan would be needed. This coordination with the Coast Guard will continue, and the bridge maintenance project plan will be submitted prior to construction to ensure compliance with Section 9 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. P. Coastal Zones: Is the Project in a designated coastal zone as defined in 16 U.S.C. 1453(1)? No (Continue to Q) Yes, describe coordination with the applicable coastal state(s) regarding consistency with the coastal zone management plan and attach the coastal state’s finding if available. The Project is in a designated coastal zone as defined in 16 U.S.C. 1453(1). Coordination with the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) will not be needed due to the Project being consistent with coastal zone management plans. Q. Prime and Unique Farmlands: Does the Project impact any prime or unique farmlands? No, describe the steps taken to identify impacts to prime or unique farmlands. USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey mapping was utilized to identify prime or unique farmlands within the project area and is shown on the Farmland Soils Map in the Appendix. The Project will not impact any prime or unique farmland due to work in these project improvement areas being completed within existing maintained rail right-of-way in areas shown as farmlands. Additionally, the areas shown as prime or unique farmland as shown on the Farmland Soils Map are (after a review of aerial photography, the NRTR, and field research) currently residential development, marshes, wetlands, and urban development. Yes, describe potential for impact and any coordination with the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the US Department of Agriculture. R. Critical Habitat and Threatened or Endangered Species: Are there any designated critical habitat areas (woodlands, prairies, wetlands, rivers, lakes, streams, and geological formations determined to be essential for the survival of a threatened or endangered species) within or directly adjacent to the Project site? No, describe the steps taken to identify critical habitat within or adjacent to the Project site. Yes, describe them and the potential for impact. There are designated critical habitat areas within or directly adjacent to the Project site. On June 24, 2019, a field biologist from Moffatt & Nichol surveyed the Project site for Threatened and Endangered Species. Potential habitat for the Atlantic sturgeon and shortnose sturgeon in the Cape Fear River exists within the project area. Potential habitat also exists for the West Indian manatee in the project area. There is potential foraging and nesting habitat for the wood stork as well. A biological conclusion of May Affect – Not Likely to Adversely Affect was found for each of these four species. This conclusion was made based on the work being completed within existing rail right-of-way, additionally with no in- water work. See the NRTR in the Appendix. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) also identified that the project area includes anadromous fish spawning areas and primary nursery areas. These are not anticipated to be impacted for the same reasons as discussed above. Of the four species with habitat in the project area, no individuals of the species were observed in the field during the June 24, 2019 site visit. A biological conclusion of May Affect – Not Likely to Adversely Affect was found for each of these four species. This conclusion was made based on all the work being done within existing rail right-of-way, with no in-water work. The North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NC WRC) and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) have identified specific construction moratoriums for sturgeon and manatees, but since there is no in-water work, these standards will not have to be adhered to for Project construction. FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 13 of 15 Are any Threatened or endangered species located in or adjacent to the Project? No, describe the steps taken to identify the presence of endangered species adjacent to the Project site. Yes, describe them and the potential for impact. See description above. S. Public Safety: Will the Project result in any public safety impacts? No, describe method used to determine whether the Project results in any safety or security impacts. The Project will not result in negative public safety impacts. An objective of the project is to improve public safety. The Traffic Separation Study (TSS) completed in 2017 identified multiple areas in need of improvement. This Project will achieve the goals set in the TSS, and increase motorist and rail crossing safety. Yes, describe the impacts to safety or security and any measures that would need to be taken to provide for the safe and secure operation of the Project during and after its construction. T. Cumulative Impacts: A “cumulative impact" is the impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts may include ecological (such as the effects on natural resources and on the components, structures, and functioning of affected ecosystems), aesthetic, historic, cultural, economic, social, or health, whether direct, indirect, or resulting from smaller actions that individually have no significant impact. Determining the cumulative environmental consequences of an action requires delineating the cause-and-effect relationships between the multiple actions and the resources, ecosystems, and human communities of concern. Are cumulative impacts likely? No Yes, describe the impacts: Cumulative impacts are not likely or anticipated. The project will not substantially alter travel patterns, affect access to properties in the area, or open areas for development or redevelopment. Due to its minimal transportation impact-causing activities, this project will neither influence nearby land uses and zoning, nor stimulate growth. Therefore, a detailed cumulative impacts study will not be necessary. U. Indirect Impacts: “Indirect impacts” are those that are caused by the action and are later in time or farther removed in distance but are still reasonably foreseeable. Indirect impacts may include growth inducing effects and other effects related to induced changes in the pattern of land use, population density or growth rate, and related effects on air and water and other natural systems, including ecosystems. Are Indirect impacts likely? No Yes, describe the impacts: Indirect impacts are not likely or anticipated. The project will not substantially alter travel patterns, reduce travel time, affect access to properties in the area, or open areas for development or redevelopment. Due to its minimal transportation impact-causing activities, this project will neither influence nearby land uses and zoning, nor stimulate growth. Therefore, a detailed indirect and cumulative impacts study will not be necessary. V. Mitigation: Describe all mitigation measure commitments which address identified impacts that have been incorporated into the Project, if any. What is the Project sponsor’s plan to enforce and monitor the mitigation proposed? This project should be eligible for Nationwide Permit 14 (linear transportation projects) as it will impact no more than 1/3 acre of tidal, freshwater wetlands. However, the USACE has the final decision as to whether a particular project is eligible for a Nationwide Permit or if an Individual Permit would be needed. This FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 14 of 15 decision by the USACE will follow the 404 (b) (1) guidelines of the Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. During that process, NCDOT will ensure that the project has been designed and constructed to avoid and minimize all adverse impacts, both temporary and permanent, to Waters of the United States (WOTUS) to the maximum extent practicable. During that process, mitigation in all its forms (avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, reducing, or compensating for resource losses) will be addressed in the permit application to the extent necessary to ensure that the individual and cumulative adverse environmental impacts are no more than minimal. The USACE will decide if compensatory mitigation is required. If it is required, credits will be obtained either from a private mitigation bank or from the NC Division of Mitigation Services in-lieu fee program. The project crosses navigable waterways, including the Cape Fear River, Toomers Creek, Northeast Cape Fear River, and Burnt Mill Creek. Despite no in-water work for the rail bridge crossing, coordination was begun with the US Coast Guard, and NCDOT received correspondence from Mr. Hal R. Pitts, Chief, Bridge Branch, Fifth Coast Guard District, Portsmouth, VA. He indicated that a bridge maintenance project plan would be needed. This coordination with the Coast Guard will continue, and the bridge maintenance project plan will be submitted prior to construction to ensure compliance with Section 9 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. What are FRA’s additional mitigation requirements (if any)? None required. W. Public Notification: Briefly describe any public outreach efforts undertaken on behalf of the Project, if any. Indicate opportunities the public has had to comment on the Project (e.g., Board meetings, open houses, special hearings). Feedback was received, and responsive alterations were made to the proposed upgrades. For the current Categorical Exclusion process, a Stakeholder Kickoff Meeting and Local Officials’ Meeting (LOM) were held on February 12, 2020. These attendees were notified through an e-mailed letter. Two (2) drop in open- house public meetings were held, one on February 24, 2020 and the other on February 25, 2020 in Wilmington. Notification was via press releases, online NCDOT postings, and by a mailout to 490 residences/addresses in the area. 53 citizens attended these two open-house meetings. One comment was received, and it inquired about the closure near Princess Place Drive and suggested the rail line be converted to a trail. Additionally, there were ample opportunities for public involvement during the Traffic Separation Study (2017). Has the Project generated any public discussion or concern, even though it may be limited to a relatively small subset of the community? Indicate any concerns expressed by agencies or the public regarding the Project. Rick Pearsall (Chief of Operations for Wilmington Fire Department) noted “The proposed improvements could cause a minor delay (regardless of call type) of up to 70 seconds additional travel time for this unit responding southeast/southwest of Market. This includes responses to Forest Hills Elementary covered by Fire Station 2 located on Park Ave. Alternate routes and/or additional dispatches from units located at Wilmington Fire Headquarters’, downtown, may be a result”. Also, “The area of most concern was the district directly south of Fire Station 3 located on Cinema Drive.” X. Related Federal, State, or Local Actions: Does the Project require any additional actions (e.g., permits) by other Agencies? Attach copies of relevant correspondence. It is not necessary to attach voluminous permit applications if a single cover agency transmittal will indicate that a permit has been granted. Describe permitting issues in the relevant resource discussion above. Section 106 Historic Properties Section 401/404 of the Clean Water Act; Wetlands and Water Quality Section 402 of the Clean Water Act FRA F 217 (08/2018) FRA CE Page 15 of 15 USCG 404 Navigable Waterways Migratory Bird Treaty Act Endangered Species Act Threatened and Endangered Biological Resources Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Safe Drinking Water Act Section 6(f) Land and Conservation Act Other State or Local Requirements (Describe) Possibly Section 408.