The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20170938 Ver 1_CSX Environmental Report 07.28.17_20170731, hk amec foster wheeler I CAROLINA CONNECTOR INTERMODAL RAIL TERMINAL AND SECOND MAINLINE IMPROVEMENTS EDGECOMBE AND NASH COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA Environmental Report Section 404/401 Joint Individual Permit Support USACE Action ID SAW -2016-02338 Prepared for: How tomorrow moves 400 1840 CSX Intermodal Terminals, Inc. and CSX Transportation, Inc. 550 Water Street Jacksonville, Florida 32202 Prepared by: Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 4021 Stirrup Creek Drive, Suite 100 Durham, North Carolina 27703 28 July 2017 Rject No. 643009004 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................... ES -1 1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................1 1.1 BACKGROUND......................................................................................... 3 1.2 SCOPING AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ................................................. 4 2 PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED...................................................................... 5 2.1 PROJECT PURPOSE................................................................................ 6 2.2 PROJECT NEED....................................................................................... 7 3 PROPOSED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT...........................................................9 3.1 CCX INTERMODAL RAIL TERMINAL....................................................... 9 3.1.2 CCX Intermodal Rail Terminal — Lead Tracks ................................ 10 3.1.3 Rocky Mount to Bricks Second Mainline ........................................ 10 4 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS.............................................................................12 4.1 PRACTICABLE ALTERNATIVES FRAMEWORK (40 C.F.R. § 230.10 (A)) 12 4.2 PROJECT PURPOSE.............................................................................. 12 4.2.1 Applicant's Stated Purpose and Need ........................................... 13 4.2.2 The USACE's Basic Project Purpose and Determination of Water Dependency............................................................................................. 14 4.2.3 The USACE's Overall Project Purpose and Alternatives Analysis. 14 4.3 ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT.......................................................... 14 4.4 IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES................................................... 16 4.4.1 Proposed Project Criteria............................................................... 16 4.4.2 Range of Alternatives..................................................................... 19 4.5 LEVEL 1 ALTERNATIVES PRACTICABILITY ANALYSIS ...................... 20 4.6 LEVEL 2 ALTERNATIVES....................................................................... 21 4.6.1 Alternative Site Descriptions.......................................................... 21 4.7 LEVEL 2 POTENTIAL IMPACTS.............................................................23 4.7.1 Resource Considerations............................................................... 23 4.7.2 Site Development Considerations.................................................. 48 4.7.3 Level 2 Conclusions.......................................................................61 4.8 LEVEL 3 ANALYSIS................................................................................ 62 4.8.1 Intermodal Terminal.......................................................................62 4.8.2 Second Mainline............................................................................ 63 4.8.3 Summary of Level 3 Analysis and Selection of Preferred Design.. 64 5 WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES & RIPARIAN BUFFERS .........................65 5.1 DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT...................................65 5.1.1 Wetlands........................................................................................ 65 5.1.2 Streams..........................................................................................69 5.1.3 Open Waters.................................................................................. 73 5.1.4 Riparian Buffers............................................................................. 74 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 5.2 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS............................................ 75 5.2.1 Wetlands........................................................................................ 75 5.2.2 Streams..........................................................................................78 5.2.3 Open Waters.................................................................................. 79 5.2.4 Riparian Buffers............................................................................. 79 6 WETLAND/STREAM COMPENSATORY MITIGATION PLAN .........................82 7 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND IMPACTS................................................... 84 7.1 LAND USE...............................................................................................84 7. 1.1 Description of Affected Environment.............................................. 84 7.1.2 Potential Environmental Impacts....................................................86 7.2 AESTHETICS & VISUAL RESOURCES.................................................. 87 7.2.1 Description of Affected Environment.............................................. 87 7.2.2 Potential Environmental Impacts....................................................88 7.3 GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY............................................................ 89 7.3.1 Description of Affected Environment.............................................. 89 7.3.2 Potential Environmental Impacts....................................................89 7.4 SOILS...................................................................................................... 90 7.4.1 Description of Affect Environment.................................................. 90 7.4.2 Potential Environmental Impacts....................................................92 7.5 BIOTIC COMMUNITIES..........................................................................93 7.5.1 Description of Affected Environment.............................................. 93 7.5.2 Potential Environmental Impacts....................................................95 7.6 AQUATIC COMMUNITIES......................................................................96 7.6.1 Description of Affected Environment.............................................. 96 7.6.2 Potential Environmental Impacts....................................................98 7.7 WATER RESOURCES / FLOODPLAINS................................................ 99 7.7.1 Description of Affected Environment.............................................. 99 7.7.2 Potential Environmental Impacts.................................................. 100 7.8 PROTECTED SPECIES........................................................................ 107 7.8.1 Description of Affected Environment............................................ 107 7.8.2 Potential Environmental Impacts.................................................. 109 7.9 CULTURAL RESOURCES.................................................................... 110 7.9.1 Description of Affected Environment............................................ 110 7.9.2 Potential Environmental Impacts.................................................. 114 7.10 SOCIOECONOMICS AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ..................... 114 7.10.1 Description of Affected Environment............................................ 114 7.10.2Potential Environmental Impacts.................................................. 116 7.11 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS................................................................... 117 7.11.1 Description of Affected Environment............................................ 117 7.11.1 Potential Environmental Impacts.................................................. 119 7.12 NOISE AND VIBRATION....................................................................... 119 7.12.1 Description of Affected Environment............................................ 119 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline 130 Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina 130 Project No. 643009004 131 TABLE OF CONTENTS 131 8.2 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS .......................................... Page 7.12.Potential Environmental Impacts .................................................... 121 7.13 AIR QUALITY........................................................................................ 122 7.13.1 Description of Affected Environment ............................................ 123 7.13.2Potential Environmental Impacts .................................................. 124 7.14 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION..................................................... 127 7.14.1 Description of Affected Environment ............................................ 127 7.14.2Potential Environmental Impacts .................................................. 128 8 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS.................................................................................130 8.1 DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ................................. 130 8.1.1 Spatial Scope............................................................................... 130 8.1.2 Temporal Scope........................................................................... 131 8.1.3 Resources Affected...................................................................... 131 8.2 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS .......................................... 132 8.2.1 Human Environment.................................................................... 132 8.2.2 Natural Environment.................................................................... 134 9 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS...................................................................135 10 REFERENCES.................................................................................................141 iv Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Project Site Location Figure 2 CCX Project Component Figure 3 Second Mainline Project Component Figure 4a NRCS Soils Figure 4b NRCS Soils Figure 4c NRCS Soils Figure 4d NRCS Soils Figure 5a USGS Topographic Map Figure 5b USGS Topographic Map Figure 6a NWI Map Figure 6b NWI Map Figure 6c NWI Map Figure 6d NWI Map Figure 7a Jurisdictional Waters Map Figure 7b Jurisdictional Waters Map Figure 7c Jurisdictional Waters Map Figure 7d Jurisdictional Waters Map Figure 7e Jurisdictional Waters Map Figure 7f Jurisdictional Waters Map Figure 7g Jurisdictional Waters Map Figure 7h Jurisdictional Waters Map Figure 71 Jurisdictional Waters Map Figure 7j Jurisdictional Waters Map Figure 7k Jurisdictional Waters Map Figure 71 Jurisdictional Waters Map Figure 8a Proximity to Conserved Lands Figure 8b Recreation and 6(f) Figure 9a Floodplain Map Figure 9b Floodplain Map Figure 10a Cultural Resources Figure 10b Cultural Resources Figure 10c Cultural Resources Figure 10d Cultural Resources Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Alternatives Analysis Figures Appendix B Wetland/Stream Field Data Forms: USACE Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Wetland Determination Data Forms; NC WAM Wetland Assessment Forms; NCDWR Stream Identification Forms; NC SAM Stream Assessment Forms Appendix C Field Conditions Photographic Log Appendix D Professional Land Survey of Jurisdictional Features Appendix E Wetland and Stream Impact Drawings Appendix F Riparian Buffer Impacts Appendix G Swift Creek Mitigation Plan Appendix H Flood Study and No -Rise Certification Appendix I Stormwater Management Plan Appendix J Protected Species Biological Assessment Appendix K Cultural Resources Assessment Appendix L Community Impact Analysis Appendix M Report of Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Appendix N Noise and Vibration Analysis Assessment Reports Appendix O Air Quality Analysis Report Appendix P Traffic and Transportation Study Report iv Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS Abbreviation or Acronym Definition ACM Asbestos -containing materials APE Area of Potential Effect AR Agricultural and residential AST Aboveground Storage Tank ASTM American Standard for Testing and Materials BFE Base Flood Elevation BG Block Groups BGEPA Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act BMP Best management practices CCX Terminal Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal CEQ Council on Environmental Quality CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation & Liability Act CIA Community Impact Analysis CLOMR Conditional Letter of Map Revision CMP Corrugated metal pipe CREATE Noise Model Based on FTA General Transit Noise Assessment CSX CSXIT and/or CSXT CSXIT CSX Intermodal Terminals, Inc. CSXT CSX Transportation, Inc. CTS Cooperating Technical State CWA Clean Water Act DA Department of the Army DCIA Direct Community Impact Area DSA Demographic Study Area DWR Division of Water Resources E&SC Erosion and Sediment Control ECOS Environmental Conservation Online System EDR Environmental Data Resources, Inc. EJ Environmental Justice EPA Environmental Protection Agency ER Environmental Report ESA Environmental Site Assessment ETJ Extraterritorial jurisdiction FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FIRM Floodplain Insurance Rate Maps V Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Abbreviation or Acronym Definition FIS Flood Insurance Study FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact FPA Floodplain Administrator FRA Federal Railroad Administration -ft Feet FTA Federal Transit Administration GIS Geographic Information System GPS Global Positioning System HAP Hazardous air pollutants HUC Hydrologic Unit Code IES Illuminating Engineering Society IMD Incident Management Database IP Individual Permit JD Jurisdictional Determination LAST Leaking Aboveground Storage Tank LBP Lead-based paint LED light -emitting diode (two -lead semiconductor light source) LEDPA Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative LEP Limited English Proficiency LF Linear Feet LNAPL Light non -aqueous phase liquid LOMR Letter of Map Revision LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank LWCF Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act mph Miles per hour NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NC North Carolina NCAC North Carolina Administrative Code NCDAQ North Carolina Division of Air Quality NCDEQ North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality NCDMS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services NCDOT North Carolina Department of Transportation NCDWR North Carolina Division of Water Resources NCFMP NC Floodplain Mapping Program NCNHP North Carolina Natural Heritage Program NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NFIP National Flood Insurance Program Vi Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Abbreviation or Acronym Definition NGO Non-governmental organizations NHPA National Historic Preservation Act N Ib/ac/yr Pounds of nitrogen per acre per year NNSR Nonattainment New Source Review NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NSW Nutrient Sensitive Waters NWI National Wetlands Inventory OHSCP Oil and Hazardous Substance Contingency Plan OSA Office of State Archaeology PCN Pre -Construction Notification P Ib/ac/yr Pounds of phosphorus per acre per year PM Particulate matter PRMP Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration REC Recognized environmental conditions RI Remedial Investigation ROW Right-of-way RPWs Relatively Permanent Waters SFHA Special Flood Hazard Area SHPO State Historic Preservation Office SHWS State Hazardous Waste Sites SIP State Implementation Plan sq. ft. Square feet SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan TIS Traffic Impact Study TPY Tons Per Year US United States USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers USCB United States Census Bureau USDA United States Department of Agriculture USDOT United States Department of Transportation USEPA US Environmental Protection Agency USFWS USFWS Endangered Species USGS United States Geological Survey UST Underground Storage Tank UXO Universal crossover Vii Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Abbreviation or Acronym Definition VAT Virginia Avenue Tunnel VOC Volatile organic compounds Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CSX Intermodal Terminals, Inc. (CSXIT) and CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT), subsidiaries of CSX Corporation, a Virginia Company, intend to construct a new intermodal freight terminal, known as the Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal (CCX Terminal), and associated reconstruction of former second mainline track, known as the Rocky Mount to Bricks Second Mainline Improvements (Second Mainline). CSXIT and CSXT are separate business entities under CSX Corporation, however, for the exclusive purpose of this Environmental Report, "CSX" represents "CSXIT" and/or "CSXT." The Project Area is approximately 829 acres and is comprised of the two components, the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline, as shown in Figure 1. The CCX Terminal is generally located along the western edge of Edgecombe County, north of the City of Rocky Mount, and between the existing CSX mainline and Old Battleboro Road. The Second Mainline component is part of the CSX North End Subdivision, which runs along the county line between Edgecombe County and Nash County, North Carolina, and generally runs parallel to the I-95 corridor. This Environmental Report (ER) provides documentation of the human environment, the natural environmental and cultural resources that occur within the Project Area, as well as proposed impacts to these resources. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has requested the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline Projects be permitted as a single and complete project as part of their interpretation of the Section 404/401 permitting process. CSX contends that both the CCX Terminal and the Second Mainline Projects have separate and independent utility as it is defined under the Federal Register Volume 72, Issue 47 (March 12, 2007). However, CSX has agreed to combine the two components under one application at this time to help facilitate the permitting process. This submittal is made subject to the rights of CSX under Section 10501(b) of the Federal Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995 and Section 20106 of the Federal Railroad Safety Act which are expressly preserved and not waived. In support thereof, the following information is submitted for the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline Projects, which information is true and correct to the best of our knowledge. The CCX Terminal is a transformational, state-of-the-art facility that is designed to serve two primary purposes, the first of which includes the ability to provide accessible intermodal rail transportation services for eastern and central North Carolina, thereby enhancing economic growth in the region. The second purpose of the terminal would be to serve as a transfer facility, or "hub" for intermodal containers moving between various markets connected by the CSX network. The positive impacts of the CCX Terminal will ripple throughout the State of North Carolina, including: ES -1 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 • $310 million in public benefits • $125 million to the state economy • Up to 40% reduction in logistics costs for North Carolina businesses and ports • $16 million of savings on highway maintenance costs • 655,000 -ton reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in North Carolina, the equivalent of removing 138,000+ vehicles from the road for one year • Reduction in 16 million truck miles on North Carolina roads each year, the equivalent of 270,000 fewer truck trips per year All of these benefits fulfill the definition of public interest for this important project. The Second Mainline component consists of the reconstruction of former second mainline track on CSX's 1-95" corridor from Milepost A117.5 (Rocky Mount, NC) to A104.9 (Whitakers, NC). The reconstruction generally will be within the existing CSX right-of-way (ROW). However, some limited additional right-of-way is being acquired to allow the second mainline to be constructed to today's industry standards requiring a slightly larger footprint than the track cross section that was removed from service in the early 1980's. A detailed Alternatives Analysis was conducted to evaluate potential project sites along the CSX 1-95" corridor. The alternatives analysis reviewed potential impact to environmental, economic, and socioeconomic resources, as well as cultural resources. A total of twelve sites were included in the initial screening action. Among the group of twelve sites, three site locations were determined to meet five functional criteria, or key business characteristics. These three sites subsequently were advanced in the alternative analysis investigation as potentially suitable sites, or action alternatives, for the CCX Terminal. Fine -level screening was conducted for the three remaining site alternatives (action alternatives) from the initial site screening. The No Build Alternative (No Action Alternative) was also considered. During fine -level screening, the site alternatives were evaluated on their potential to impact natural/environmental resources and cultural resources. Constraints to development for each site were also considered in the screening process. Some of the important selected screening resources included: relocations, air quality, cultural and historic resources, threatened and endangered species and water resources. The comparative analysis of preliminary estimated impacts to water resources for the three sites indicate that potential impacts and associated mitigation costs would likely be comparable for each for the three sites. Based on the evaluation of all the alternative sites, the Rocky Mount site is the preferred project alternative. This selection is buoyed ES -2 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 by strong positive support by the public and private sectors within the City of Rocky Mount, as well as representatives and residents of both Edgecombe and Nash Counties. To complete the construction of the CCX Terminal and the Second Mainline, permanent impacts to wetlands and streams will be necessary for this non -water dependent project. The anticipated Section 404 Individual Permit for the development of the two projects is mostly within the Upper Tar River Subbasin (HUC 03020101) and requires mitigation for impacts to 23.35 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, 10,297 linear feet (LF) of "Relatively Permanent Waters" (RPWs), and 10.35 acres of Zone 1 and 6.70 acres of Zone 2 riparian buffers. The proposed impacts will require approximately 43.08 wetland credits, 16,149.4 stream credits, and 41.10 Tar -Pamlico Riparian Buffer Compensatory Mitigation Credits. All required compensatory mitigation will be obtained through off-site permittee - responsible mitigation activities utilizing a watershed approach. The Swift Creek — Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan (Appendix G) was designed to achieve a landscape scale conservation outcome based on the priorities of both local and regional environmental advocacy groups and the Federal and State regulatory and resource agencies. A detailed analysis of existing conditions has been completed to identify relevant beneficial and adverse effects associated with the proposed action. During design, impacts to land use, aesthetics & visual resources, geology & topography, soils, biotic & aquatic communities, air quality, traffic and transportation, and hazardous materials have been minimized or avoided. Hydraulic analyses have been conducted on all floodplain crossings, and no increases in 100 -year flood elevations have been identified. Project specific Noise and Vibration Analysis and Assessment Reports (Appendix N) have been prepared to demonstrate that the proposed project will not have a significant impact in regards to noise or vibration. The Project Area intersects with one known historic district, however, a memorandum of agreement with state and federal agencies addresses mitigation for this impact. With proposed site best management practices, no adverse impacts to federally protected species are anticipated. A project specific Stormwater Management Plan (Appendix 1) has been prepared to demonstrate how the CCX Terminal can be constructed in a manner that meets or exceeds these stormwater quality and quantity requirements. A community impact assessment has been completed to determine potential socioeconomic and environmental justice impacts from the proposed project. Thirteen residences and one business have been (or likely will be) relocated as a result of property ES -3 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 acquisition. No additional socioeconomic or significant environmental justice impacts are expected. ES -4 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 1 INTRODUCTION CSX Intermodal Terminals, Inc. (CSXIT) and CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT), subsidiaries of CSX Corporation, a Virginia Company, intend to construct a new intermodal freight terminal, known as the Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal (CCX Terminal), and associated reconstruction of former second mainline track, known as the Rocky Mount to Bricks Second Mainline Improvements (Second Mainline). CSXIT and CSXT are separate business entities under CSX Corporation, however, for the exclusive purpose of this Environmental Report, "CSX" represents "CSXIT" and/or "CSXT." The Project Area is approximately 829 acres and is comprised of the two components, the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline, as shown in Figure 1. The CCX terminal consists of approximately 670 acres, and is generally located along the western edge of Edgecombe County, north of the City of Rocky Mount, and between the existing CSX mainline and Old Battleboro Road (Figure 2). The Second Mainline component is part of the CSX North End Subdivision, which runs along the county line between Edgecombe County and Nash County, North Carolina, and generally runs parallel to the I-95 corridor (Figure 3). This Second Mainline reconstruction segment runs from Milepost A117.5 (south of CCX) through the intermodal facility north to Milepost A104.9 and encompasses approximately 159 acres. These areas extend north from the City of Rocky Mount through the Town of Battleboro, and north of the Town of Whitakers, North Carolina. The project primarily consists of agricultural land with few residential and commercial buildings and woodlands dispersed throughout. College Road, a secondary road, bisects the site near the western portion (Figure 2). Other roadways of note include Old Battleboro Road (northeast boundary of site) and Fountain Park Drive (southern section). The western boundary of the CCX Terminal abuts the North End Subdivision of the existing CSX mainline known as the A -Line and the proposed Second Mainline. Beech Branch, unnamed tributaries and associated wetlands, agricultural/recreational ponds, and agricultural ditches are also present within the CCX Terminal. Beech Branch is the northeast boundary of the site. Two unnamed tributaries of Beech Branch traverse the central portion of the site. An unnamed tributary of Compass Creek traverses the southern portion of the CCX Terminal. Two cemeteries and a telecommunications tower are present within the CCX Terminal Project Area, as well as a commercial business and a number of scattered, single-family residential lots, abandoned home site, and abandoned agricultural buildings. The project site is located within the Tar -Pamlico River Basin and is therefore subject to the specific river basin riparian buffer rules. 1 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 The CCX Terminal is a transformational, state-of-the-art facility that will create jobs locally and throughout the state, spur economic development and create competitive advantages for North Carolina businesses and ports by lowering shipping costs. Project benefits to the community and the state include the following job creation projections: • 250 - 300 construction jobs • Up to 300 long-term positions for terminal operations (150 CSX positions) • CSX positions will average $60,000 annually • Over time, up to 1,500 jobs statewide The CCX Terminal will create a distinct competitive advantage for North Carolina businesses by driving down logistics costs by up to 40 percent (%). The positive impact of the CCX Terminal will ripple throughout the state including: • $310 million in public benefits • $125 million to the state economy • Up to 40% reduction in logistics costs for North Carolina businesses and ports • $16 million of savings on highway maintenance costs • 655,000 -ton reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in North Carolina, the equivalent of removing 138,000+ vehicles from the road for one year • Reduction in 16 million truck miles on North Carolina roads each year, the equivalent of 270,000 fewer truck trips per year All of these benefits fulfill the definition of public interest for this important project. CSX has a proven track record of fostering economic growth in regions where terminals are located. Two recently developed intermodal terminals have brought fulfillment and distribution centers from companies like Target and Proctor & Gamble in Chambersburg, Pennsylvania; and Amazon, FedEx and Walmart in Winter Haven, Florida. This Environmental Report (ER) provides documentation of the current environmental and cultural resources that occur within the Project Area, as well as proposed impacts to these resources. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) requested for the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline to be permitted as a single and complete project as part of their interpretation of the Section 404/401 permitting process CSX contends that both the CCX Terminal and the Second Mainline have separate and independent utility. However, CSX has agreed to combine the applications at this time to help facilitate the permitting process. This submittal is made subject to the rights of CSX under Section 10501(b) of the Federal Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995 and Section 20106 of the Federal Railroad Safety Act which are expressly preserved and not 2 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 waived. In support thereof, the following information is submitted for the subject project, which information is true and correct to the best of our knowledge. This ER provides documentation of the current ecological and physical condition of jurisdictional waters and other resources that occur within the project site. Further, this document describes the approach to wetland mitigation outlined in the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 (b)(1) guidelines and followed by the State of North Carolina, to include avoidance and minimization of jurisdictional waters impacts and compensation for unavoidable jurisdictional waters impacts. 1.1 BACKGROUND The construction of a new intermodal rail terminal and reconstruction of the Second Mainline in eastern North Carolina are part of CSX's system -wide improvements to improve a critical route along the 1-95 corridor", one of the more congested routes in the southeast. Further, the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline are indirect components of the National Gateway Initiative, a public-private infrastructure agreement that CSX launched in 2008 to create a highly efficient freight transportation link between the Mid - Atlantic ports and the Midwest. When completed, the National Gateway will provide greater capacity for product shipments in and out of the Midwest, improve service reliability and transit times, reduce highway congestion, and create thousands of jobs that directly or indirectly support the National Gateway. The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) forecasts that by 2020, overall freight tonnage hauled in the United States will have grown by 70% from 1998 levels. An intermodal rail terminal can help alleviate impact on North Carolina's road infrastructure since one intermodal train can eliminate as many as 280 trucks from the highway. The National Gateway infrastructure initiative is designed to address the ever-increasing demands placed on the nation's capacity -strained freight network by enhancing three CSX rail corridors that run though Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia. These corridors include: • The 1-70/1-76 Corridor between Washington, District of Columbia (DC) and northwest Ohio via Pittsburgh • The 1-95 Corridor between North Carolina and Baltimore, Maryland via Washington, DC • The Carolina Corridor between Wilmington and Charlotte, North Carolina In March 2009, CSX initiated National Gateway Phase 11, which consists of six projects in the Washington, DC area. These privately -funded projects were split into multiple phases and includes the award-winning reconstruction of the 4,000 -foot long Virginia Avenue 3 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Tunnel (VAT) project. Today, five of the six projects have been completed. The VAT project will be completed in 2018 to complement the opening of the newly renovated Panama Canal widening project, which is anticipated to result in a large increase in intermodal freight traffic along the eastern seaboard and its ports/harbors. Another main benefit of these projects is reducing the freight bottlenecks in and around the nation's capital which has a significant impact to the passenger rail service within the area. Completion of the VAT will contribute higher volume of freight train traffic flowing southward on the 1-95 corridor. Therefore, the CCX Terminal and the Second Mainline Projects are necessary to accommodate the additional traffic in a safe, fluid and efficient manner. 1.2 SCOPING AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT CSX is committed to working closely with the community through each stage of the project. Throughout this process, CSX has and will continue to maintain open lines of communication to listen to residents, provide information, and answer questions. Community outreach efforts to date have included four public open house events for members of the community to talk directly to CSX representatives. CSX has presented information regarding phases of the project, proposed concept designs, potential jobs and community partnerships. The community open house events were as follows: 1. Wednesday, July 27, 2016, 6:00-8:OOpm, at the Edgecombe County Administrative Building Auditorium, Tarboro, North Carolina 2. Thursday, July 28, 2016, 6:00-8:OOpm, at Nash Community College Brown Auditorium Business & Industry Center, Rocky Mount, North Carolina 3. Thursday, December 8, 2016, 4:00-7:OOpm, at the Imperial Centre for the Arts and Sciences in Rocky Mount 4. Tuesday, June 13, 2017, 6:00-8:OOpm, at the Imperial Centre, Rocky Mount —this event was in cooperation with the NCDOT to present information regarding the project, road closures, traffic, and other transportation issues and to answer questions from the public. CSX will continue to provide progress updates through the project website at www.csx.com/carolinaintermodal, public forums and community partnerships. On the CCX website, there is also an email account where interested parties can submit questions and comments about the project, ccxintermodal(a)-gmail.com. 4 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 2 PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED The CCX Terminal is a transformational, state-of-the-art facility that is designed to serve two primary purposes, the first of which includes the ability to provide accessible intermodal rail transportation services for eastern and central North Carolina, thereby enhancing economic growth in the region. The second purpose of the terminal would be to serve as a transfer facility, or "hub" for intermodal containers moving between various markets connected by the CSX network. In response to the growth of intermodal transportation, CSX is continuously exploring opportunities to expand its' intermodal service and network that serves two-thirds of the U.S. population. Modern supply chain logistics, just -in -time manufacturing and deployment, and leaner organizations have revolutionized the way industrial transport freight business is conducted. The changes to the supply chain have caused the need for modifications to the intermodal freight transport process to continue to be a viable form of freight transportation. The transportation of consumer goods in shipping containers is growing, spreading into new markets, and at the same time adapting to meet the needs of the customers. As highway and rail systems are modernized and integrated, supporting the needs of regional businesses and industries will continue to be the primary justification for public investments in the transportation system. The ability to quickly and efficiently move goods to various markets throughout the country is vital to the United States' economy. The intent of CSX's system -wide reconstruction efforts, such as the Second Mainline improvements in North Carolina, is to increase safe, fluid, and efficient train/freight movement. Most of these improvements involve either extending existing siding tracks or connecting existing sidings to obtain the ability to handle 15,000 -foot trains. Additionally, improvements include providing sufficient vertical clearance and operating capacity to operate trains with double -stacked intermodal containers. Focused upgrades are placed on several corridors around the eastern United States, including the three corridors described in Section 1.1 for the National Gateway; Chicago, Illinois, to Jacksonville, Florida, and Richmond, Virginia, to Savannah, Georgia. These efforts will allow the country's rail infrastructure to safely support increased freight volumes, including traffic coming from the east coast ports to the Mid -West and vice versa. CSX contends both the CCX Terminal and the Second Mainline Project have separate and independent utility as it is defined under the Federal Register Volume 72, Issue 47 (March 12, 2007). However, CSX has agreed to combine the two components under one application at this time to help facilitate the Section 404/401 permitting. 5 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 2.1 PROJECT PURPOSE In 2011, CSX initiated the Hub -and -Spoke Model, centered on a newly constructed intermodal terminal in North Baltimore, Ohio, to streamline segments of its' intermodal business. Shipping containers are quickly transferred between trains and trucks with the use of high efficient, electric rail -mounted gantry cranes, making transshipments by rail competitive with highway carriers. As part of a commitment to provide reliable, punctual rail service, CSX is completing several rail capacity projects that will improve passenger rail service and freight traffic in and around the eastern and central North Carolina region. Once completed, these new features will allow freight trains to keep moving with greater efficiently and with more fluidity among key US consumer and industrial markets and the eastern US ports that connect US consumers to the global economy. Regional transportation fluidity expands and improves freight rail service by alleviating freight bottlenecks in the region, increasing rail and highway by reducing the number of semi -trucks on regional highways. The purpose of the Second Mainline component is to perform reconstruction and upgrades to the two sections of former second mainline track in the North End Subdivision of the A -Line. This subdivision has become a critical route along the 1-95 corridor and one of the more congested southern routes along the CSX rail system. CSX is committed to this continued effort to modify the existing railroad infrastructure to provide sufficient vertical clearance and operating capacity for CSX to operate double -stacked, domestic - container, rail traffic cars throughout the system. Double -stack trains can deliver twice as many goods on one trip, resulting in improved efficiency and cost savings. These efforts will allow America's rail network to support increased freight volumes, including traffic coming from the ports. The new CCX Terminal will help CSX better serve customers while reducing highway congestion, improve the environment, and position the immediate region for economic growth. The Second Mainline will improve train fluidity and provide reliability and competitive advantage of intermodal rail traffic through the region through the increased use of double -stack intermodal trains. The Second Mainline will also create a more fluid and efficient rail route along the 1-95 corridor that links the Mid -Atlantic ports with Midwestern economic markets. Furthermore, the upgrades align with the National Gateway Initiative and other track improvements in the region between Washington, DC, and other southern ports. C. Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 The CCX Terminal will be a hub for the southern portion of CSX's extensive intermodal network. At full build, the CCX Terminal will handle approximately 400,000 loads annually. As a hub facility, the CCX Terminal will increase access to national and global markets and lower shipping costs by up to 40%. Lowering inland transportation costs for importers and exporters will help make ports like Wilmington and Morehead City more attractive for shippers from around the world. Intermodal transportation leverages the benefits of truck and rail transportation. CSX will work collaboratively with trucking firms to ensure freight is routed quickly and efficiently. Typically, rail ships the freight over long distances while trucks transport freight from the intermodal terminal to its destination. The CCX Terminal will utilize both trains and trucks for shipping from the terminal. 2.2 PROJECT NEED The greater Raleigh metro area is one of the largest growing markets to which the CSX mainline connects; however, this large area of business and industry does not have an intermodal terminal to serve local business or connecting freight needs. The proposed facility's proximity to existing distribution, highway and port infrastructure, as well as its role in the overall CSX intermodal network, are critical aspects of the project's purpose and the ability to facilitate economic and environmental benefits within the State of North Carolina. North Carolina is an important intermodal market in the eastern United States. It provides access to goods from across the globe with ports in Wilmington and Morehead City. The recent upgrades to the Panama Canal doubles its shipping capacity by adding a new lane of traffic allowing for a larger number of ships, and increasing the width and depth of the lanes and locks allowing larger ships to pass. It is anticipated that approximately 10% of the cargo that travels from Asia to the US will shift from the west coast to the east coast ports. Due to the predicted increase of freight and ship size, the Port of Wilmington expanded its turning radius to accommodate the larger post-Panamax vessels that will be traveling through the Panama Canal. Currently, the only intermodal facility that North Carolina ports have access to is the Queen City Express in Charlotte, an intermodal rail service from the Port of Wilmington to Charlotte. The CCX Terminal would enable the Port of Wilmington to provide import and export capabilities to another region of the state and give the Port of Morehead City convenient access to an intermodal facility. An increase in fluidity between the ports and businesses is crucial since seaports move more than 99% by volume and 65% by value of overseas cargo. With US port container traffic expected to double or triple by 2030, it is imperative to incorporate new infrastructure to the rail system to accommodate future demands. 7 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Based on the current and growing freight rail needs within the eastern and central North Carolina region, the area plays an important role as an intermodal market in the eastern US, and exhibits characteristics of an expanding economy contributing to significant continued growth in intermodal traffic. Based on the current capacity of the CSX 1-95 corridor, and specifically for the A -Line, CSX has identified the need for an additional mainline or siding in an effort to streamline both freight and passenger rail. The area was previously serviced by a double mainline track and the existing bridges retain a two -track capacity, identifying the area as a key location for two mainlines or an additional siding to the existing mainline. The legacy Second Mainline structures were constructed on 13 -ft track centers. The current CSX and industry standards call for new rail infrastructure to be constructed with adjacent tracks on 15 -ft track centers. Fourteen -foot track centers are acceptable for adequately operating a railroad safely and are used in environmentally sensitive situations. It is CSX's intention that the track centers throughout the Second Mainline Project will consist of upgrades to 14 -ft track centers to minimize impacts to natural resources in the area. Further, the proposed bridge improvements will contribute to the safety of the existing rail operations by providing an appropriate road bed to access the existing single mainline and will allow the existing two track capacity to meet current safety and design standards. M. Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 3 PROPOSED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT The Proposed Action is comprised of two components representing two different types of railroad infrastructure: the CCX Terminal and the Second Mainline reconstruction. The CCX Terminal component is subdivided into two elements; the intermodal terminal facility and the associated lead tracks that will connect the terminal to the Second Mainline. The Second Mainline consists of the reconstruction of former second mainline track from Milepost A117.5 (southern Milepost) to A104.9 (northern Milepost). The reconstruction will be within the existing CSX right-of-way (ROW). However, to be constructed to today's industry standards, the new track will require a slightly larger footprint than the track cross section that was removed from service in the early 1980's. Descriptions of the project components and construction elements comprising the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline Projects are presented below. These project components, as areas of work, are also shown on Figures 2 and 3 3.1 CAROLINA CONNECTOR INTERMODAL RAIL TERMINAL The CCX Terminal will include the construction of an approximately 670 -acre site, located within Edgecombe County north of the City of Rocky Mount, and northeast of the intersection of US -64 and 1-95. The terminal will be located along the mainline tracks, known as the A -Line, a strategic location on CSX's rail network, and Old Battleboro Road. The CCX Terminal will be equipped with state-of-the-art sustainable technology to efficiently load, unload, and/ reposition shipping containers while serving the Raleigh market and the North Carolina ports. The CCX Terminal will provide critical infrastructure to support economic growth and improve transportation options for North Carolina businesses as well as increase their access to national and global markets. Initially, the phase 1 facility infrastructure will generally consist of multiple yard tracks, paved areas for truck movement, lighting, fencing, rail -mounted gantry cranes, straddle carriers, and buildings to support terminal operations. Both phases and all impacts are comprehensively addressed in this permit documentation and application. Trucks will enter and exit the site from Old Battleboro Road, then along Morning Star Church Road, crossing US -301 to State Highway 4, and then primarily to 1-95 to reach their destination. It is anticipated that this intermodal rail terminal will reduce truck volume by approximately 270,000 trucks per year mainly along the interstate corridor. M Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 3.1.2 CCX Lead Tracks Trains arriving and departing at the CCX Terminal will be possible with new dual lead tracks extending north and south of the facility diverging off CSX's mainline tracks. The lead tracks will extend 1.2 miles to the north and 2.3 miles to the south. These tracks will allow fluidity of traffic and are critical for getting trains in and out the terminal without creating disruptions to the mainline service route. 3.2 ROCKY MOUNT TO BRICKS SECOND MAINLINE CSX plans to restore double track to the mainline service route between Milepost A117.5 to A104.9, within an approximately 159 -acre corridor. Two phases of construction will occur in this phase of the project. The southern phase will occur between Milepost A117.5 and Milepost A112.06 and consist of minor track shifts within the existing CSX ROW and the installation of a universal crossover (UXO) plus an additional crossover. Double mainline track currently exists in this portion of the service route. The track shifts are necessary to accommodate the construction of the terminal lead tracks adjacent to a cemetery. The additional crossover with the UXO allows for a terminal train to enter and/or exit with passing trains. The northern phase will occur between Milepost A112.06 and Milepost A104.9 and consist of the reconstruction of second mainline track. This phase will connect the existing double mainline track running from Milepost A141.0 to A112.06 and the existing double mainline track running from Milepost A104.9 to A97.3. This project will also include the rehabilitation of five railroad bridges and the installation of an additional universal crossover on the northern end. The northern portion of the project was once double track and taken out of service in the early 1980's due to decrease in service route demand. Today, this service route is one of the highest tonnage service routes on CSX's system. Once the terminal is constructed and active, tonnage will continue to increase on the service route. By completing the track shifts, reconstruction of the second mainline, and installation of the two universal crossovers between Milepost A117.5 and A104.9, CSX will have over 43 miles of continuous double track service with the ability to move from Track 1 or Track 2 either in a northbound or southbound direction. This will aid in the fluidity of existing traffic along the service route during peak demands while accommodating the additional traffic coming to and from the terminal. 10 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 The Second Mainline improvements and reconstruction work would happen with or without the presence of the proposed CCX Terminal. However, the potential of the proposed CCX project has prioritized the scheduling of this work. 11 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 4 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS 4.1 PRACTICABLE ALTERNATIVES FRAMEWORK (40 C.F.R. § 230.10 (A)) Per the USACE evaluation, no discharge of dredged or fill material shall be permitted if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem, so long as the alternative does not have other significant adverse environmental consequences. An alternative is practicable if it is available and capable of being done after taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics considering overall project purposes. Additionally, USACE guidance provides that, when an activity associated with the discharge of dredged or fill material in a special aquatic site does not require access or proximity to that special aquatic site to fulfill its basic purpose, the activity is not "water dependent." If the activity is not water dependent, then the applicant must demonstrate that practicable alternatives that do not include impacts on special aquatic sites do not exist or are not available to the applicant, and that the proposed project would have less of an adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem than other available alternatives. The evaluation of practicable alternatives is based on the range of reasonable alternatives set forth in Section 4.4. The alternatives analysis forms the basis from which the USACE will identify practicable alternatives and determine whether the Proposed Project Area is the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA). 4.2 PROJECT PURPOSE As indicated above, establishing the purpose and need for a project is a key initial step in the USACE's process of evaluating the Proposed Project's compliance with the Guidelines. USACE regulations establish a three-part process for developing the official purpose of a project. As described below, one statement is provided by the applicant, and the other two are determined by the USACE: • The applicant develops and clearly states an overall purpose and need in the application to the USACE • The USACE determines the "basic" purpose of the project, which informs the conclusion as to whether the project is water dependent under Section 404(b)(1) of the CWA • The USACE determines the "overall" purpose of the project 12 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 These three statements of the Proposed Project's purpose and need form the basis by which the USACE will evaluate compliance of the Project with the Guidelines, including the range of practicable alternatives to the Proposed Project. These statements are also used as part of the analysis required under National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Although the three statements were developed to meet distinct objectives within the USACE's evaluation of compliance with the Guidelines, it is expected that the alternatives analysis will overlap with and may, in most cases, provide the information required for the evaluation of alternatives under NEPA. Additionally, while consideration may be given to the applicant's pronouncement of the Proposed Project's basic and overall purpose, the USACE is the ultimate arbiter of that conclusion and is entitled to determine the final statements without undue influence of the applicant's views. 4.2.1 Applicant's Stated Purpose and Need An applicant's stated purpose and need is an expression of the underlying goals for a proposed project. The USACE takes an applicant's purpose and need into account when determining the USACE's overall purpose. The principal goal is to support the economic competitiveness of the State of North Carolina by ensuring the state has an intermodal rail terminal with sufficient capacity to provide for existing and future intermodal demand and reduce time, monetary costs, and congestion. Additional goals are to: • Promote the efficient movement of freight • Encourage intermodal connectivity • Enhance state and local economic development • Promote safe and secure railroad operations • Assure environmental sustainability The goals of the project are consistent with the following objectives: • To stimulate economic development and redevelopment throughout central North Carolina through job creation, increasing the tax base, and lowering the price of consumer goods • To reduce truck "vehicle miles travelled," which saves lives, reduces pollution, and conserves highway capacity. For every freight train, an average of 250 semi -trucks are taken off the highway system • To provide necessary infrastructure to support current and future distribution needs of business and industry 13 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 • To focus federal, state, local and private (i.e., railroad and other private entities) investments and resources at the Carolina Connector Terminal. 4.2.2 The USACE's Basic Project Purpose and Determination of Water Dependency The Guidelines require that the USACE determine whether a project is water dependent. CSX submits that the basic purpose of the Proposed Project resulting in the discharge of dredged or fill material is: "To construct a new Intermodal Rail Terminal in central North Carolina to provide intermodal service to business and industry" (Proposed Action). Based on the standard used by the USACE, the Proposed Project is not water dependent. Accordingly, as a part of the alternatives analysis contained herein, the application will rebut the presumptions employed by the USACE. 4.2.3 The USACE's Overall Project Purpose and Alternatives Analysis Under NEPA regulations, alternatives to be evaluated must be reasonable. The Guidelines also require evaluation of practicable alternatives. USACE uses the overall project purpose to identify the range of potential alternatives that will be evaluated. If an alternative does not meet the applicant's need, as determined by USACE, it may be rejected from further consideration. Taking into consideration the above criteria, CSX submits that the overall purpose of the Proposed Project is: "To build and operate an Intermodal Rail Terminal, along with lead tracks and a second mainline, along the CSX A -Line in Central North Carolina". 4.3 ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT Having established the basic and overall purposes of the Proposed Project, it is incumbent upon the applicant to identify and evaluate a full range of alternatives considering the overall purpose of the Proposed Project. The goal of this process is to identify and consider the broadest range of possible alternatives, working to narrow the scope of alternatives to the range of reasonable and practicable alternatives that could meet the overall purpose of the Proposed Project. Through the process of developing the purpose and need, as well as the overall project purpose, CSX applied those basic project concepts to a full array of available alternatives to guide the identification of a "reasonable range" of alternatives as required by NEPA. In identifying and developing this list of alternatives, CSX has considered and included alternatives falling within the following categories: 14 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 • The proposed alternative • Alternatives that would involve no discharges of dredged or fill material into the waters of the US (such as the "no action" alternative) • Alternative site locations, including those that might involve less adverse impact to waters of the US • On-site alternatives that would involve less adverse impact to waters of the US (which would include modifications to the alignment or design options in the physical layout and operation of the project to reduce the amount of impacts to the waters of the US) • Alternatives that would involve greater adverse impact to waters of the US but avoid or minimize other significant adverse environmental consequences including offsite and on-site options The range of potential reasonable alternatives that was considered also included alternative routes and alternative alignments. The range of reasonable alternatives identified in the initial NEPA analysis (through application of the above purpose and need and overall project purpose to the full panoply of alternatives) screened out unreasonable alternatives resulting in the reasonable alternatives addressed in the Level 1 analysis. The range of reasonable alternatives identified below forms the starting point for the evaluation of practicable alternatives for the project and determination of the LEDPA, which will become the proposed alternative. In support of the identified alternatives, CSX is providing documentation that demonstrates that the proposed site is necessary with the least environmentally damaging design and will take place in the least environmentally damaging location. CSX believes that it has captured each reasonable alternative and component necessary for the USACE to reach its decision on the LEDPA as well as satisfy its obligations under NEPA. Once the appropriate range of reasonable alternatives is identified, the practicability analysis of the project alternatives is conducted in three levels: 1. Level 1 Analysis is a screening process used to refine a larger number of identified reasonable alternatives with respect to consistency with the Proposed Project's purpose and need, as defined by CSX as well as the overall project purpose, as defined by the USACE. 2. Level 2 Analysis reviews those alternatives that survive Level 1 Analysis and employs the more rigorous practicability standards under the Guidelines, including their potential to impact environmental, economic, and socioeconomic resources, 15 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 as well as cultural resources. The goal of Level 2 Analysis is to identify the preferred project location. 3. Level 3 Analysis reviews different site development layouts within the preferred project site. 4. Taking into consideration all the above, the final step of the alternatives practicability analysis is to identify the LEDPA from among the Level 3 site layouts within the preferred project site. 4.4 IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES The range of alternatives included in this analysis was generated to satisfy the purpose and need of the Proposed Project. 4.4.1 Proposed Project Criteria CSX recognizes that certain criteria are necessary to specify the minimum needs and conditions that would meet the operational requirements for construction of the terminal. It is important to acknowledge at the outset that the principal concern of CSX in serving as the applicant for this Proposed Project is to serve the best interests of its clients and make sure that the LEDPA adheres to the purpose and needs of the Proposed Project, as set forth above. Ultimately, the LEDPA must be able to accommodate the operational and budgetary needs of the end clients for the Proposed Project to be a success. A set of functional criteria were established by CSX for initially screening sites for development of a new intermodal rail terminal in central North Carolina. The functional criteria are requirements for meeting the Project Purpose and Need and serve as the principal component of the initial screening process to identify potentially suitable sites for development. Sites that meet these initial criteria, i.e., first level screening, are further evaluated as the project proceeds through the NEPA process. The five functional criteria are presented as follows, in no particular order: 1. A site with a minimum of 425 contiguous acres of usable land for development 2. A site with proximity and accessibility to a major highway 3. A site with appropriate shape and configuration, including existing topography to support railroad operations 4. A site located adjacent to the CSX mainline (and specifically for this proposed Intermodal Rail Terminal, additionally located on the CSX A-line) 5. A site within a 60 -mile radius of the City of Raleigh, North Carolina (specific for this proposed Intermodal Rail Terminal) 16 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 4.4.1.1 Descriptions of Criteria Specific characteristics of each of the five functional criteria for site screening are described below. The descriptions include a rationale for criterion use; i.e., why each criterion is critical from an operations, safety and functional standpoint for the operation of a regional intermodal rail terminal in central North Carolina. The five criteria are presented in no particular order of importance. However, meeting all five functional criteria is required for a site to be a considered a reasonable alternative; i.e., potentially suitable for development. Minimum of 425 contiguous acres of usable land A regional intermodal rail terminal requires a large parcel of land, or assemblage of parcels, of at least 425 acres of usable land to accommodate several operations required for an intermodal rail terminal. Space is needed for: (1) lead tracks entering and exiting the facility, support/storage tracks, and preferably tangent process (working) tracks for loading and unloading freight containers with rail -mounted gantry cranes; (2) paved areas that can accommodate approximately 2,800 wheeled parking units and 2,200 stacked units/containers; (3) employee parking; (4) operations and maintenance buildings, including a check-in/check-out gate system; (5) lighting and security features; and (6) areas for stormwater management and vegetative buffers. These features, when combined, result in the need for at least 425 acres of usable land for the overall facility. Proximity and accessibility to a major highway An intermodal rail terminal requires efficiencies in the transfer of goods from one mode to another. For this reason, an intermodal terminal in central North Carolina must be sited near a major highway so that semi -trucks can easily access the intermodal rail terminal. Specifically, the major highway should have controlled access, which directs vehicles to a limited number of entrance and exit points, thereby reducing conflicts and improving overall safety and mobility. Major highways offer the highest travel speeds and therefore allow the most efficient movement of truck -bound freight, which is often time sensitive. Both the major highway and connecting roadways should not prohibit the movement of intermodal truck traffic, but rather allow for effective truck ingress and egress to the intermodal terminal. The relationship to a major highway is critical to efficiencies in the supply chain and connections to the Mid -Atlantic markets. Roadways of lower functional classification have lower speeds, which generally require vehicles to negotiate multiple signalized intersections, and other physical limitations that are not conducive to the safe and efficient truck movement. 17 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Appropriate shape and configuration The appropriate shape and configuration of a site is critical given the horizontal and vertical requirements for freight railroads. Typical trains serving intermodal terminals are 7,500 to 14,000 -ft in length. The entering and exiting track lengths need to be one to two miles in length each and the site itself another mile in length, approximately. This requires that tracks must diverge from a mainline to arrive and depart such a facility in a manner that keeps the mainline clear for the passage of through train traffic. Additionally, because of efficiency requirements, it is essential to allow for long, straight track lengths to be able to maintain track speeds entering and leaving the terminal. These factors result in the need for sites that are long and generally rectangular with the long dimension parallel to the mainline. Long, linear sites provide the most efficient train movements and internal truck traffic circulation and facilitate optimum cargo handling between rail and truck. The minimum width of the site needs to be approximately 1,500 -ft to accommodate a series of parallel tracks. Overall, an intermodal site including lead tracks needs to be at least four to five miles long and up to 1,500 -ft wide. Adjacency to CSX Mainline and location on CSX A -Line The purpose of the intermodal terminal is to accommodate the efficient transfer of freight between rail and truck. For this reason, a CSX intermodal terminal in central North Carolina needs to be adjacent and abutting to the CSX mainline and specifically for this project on the CSX A -Line. Site location on the CSX mainline allows trains to move directly from the mainline to the rail terminal, as well as back to the mainline in as short a time as possible. This scenario is similar to typical interstate highway rest areas that allow easy access to and from the highway. By locating the terminal adjacent to the mainline, interference (interaction) with other freight or passenger trains or vehicles will be minimized and the potential for the creation of isolated parcels and non -compatible land uses between the mainline and the intermodal terminal will be eliminated. Additionally, by locating the intermodal terminal along the mainline, CSX will be able to leverage existing dedicated resources to ensure safe and efficient access into and out of the facility. Railroads typically devote most of their maintenance resources to mainlines, since these are the routes that are used by long-distance trains. Secondary lines are not as critical to intercity operations and are subsequently maintained to different federal standards. This scenario is like the maintenance resources that are dedicated to interstate highways versus those that are committed to neighborhood streets. The allocated resources are all important, but for different reasons. Location within 60 -mile radius of City of Raleigh A site location in close proximity to the Raleigh consumptive market allows the intermodal terminal to provide intermodal service into and out of that market directly. Distances more 18 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 than 60 miles would result in a decrease in economic efficiency; i.e., fuel, maintenance, and labor costs for rail and/or truck would increase to a point of diminishing returns. 4.4.2 Range of Alternatives The goal of providing an exhaustive list of alternatives that meet the above needs of CSX for the CCX Terminal is twofold: (1) to disclose and evaluate potential environmental impacts that may result from the proposed project and retained alternatives; and (2) to evaluate the proposed alternative's ability to fulfill the project purpose and need consistent with criteria provided. CSX arrived at its proposed alternative after conducting the required stages of increasingly thorough analysis, while balancing the environmental impacts discussed in this analysis with economic, technological, and safe concerns. A total of twelve sites were included in the initial screening action (See Appendix A Figure 1). The twelve sites were provided by CSX, with Site 9 (Wilson County), Site 10 (Johnston County) and Site 11 (Cumberland County) suggested by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT). The results of the initial site screening action are presented in Table 4-1. The key business characteristics as stated in Table 4-1 comprise the functional criteria. Data entries for sites in red text indicates that the associated functional criterion standard was not met. Data entries for sites in green text indicates that the associated functional criterion standard was met. 19 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Table 4-1. Candidate Sites Subjected to Initial Site Screening Action and Key Business Characteristics Key Business Project Near Major Shape and Adjacent to Proximity to Characteristics Size Highway with Configuration Mainline Major Market Suitable Access Land Accommodates Adjacent >_1 0,000 Drayage Site Location Area Distance to Processing to ft along Distance (acres) Highway (miles) Track (Y/N) Main ine Mainline (miles) 1 - North Benson 350 6 Yes Yes 13,000 32 2 — Four Oaks 486 3 Yes Yes 13,000 30 3 - Four Oaks A 350 4 No Yes 12,000 32 4 - Four Oaks B 250 2 No Yes 9,000 32 5 - Four Oaks C 230 7 No Yes 7,000 32 6 - South Smithfield 150 1 No Yes 9,000 30 7 - Selma A 450 1 Yes Yes 10,000 31 8 - Selma B 400 3 Yes Yes 10,000 31 9 - Lucama 400 2 No Yes 10,000 52 10- Benson 650+ 1 No No 0 32 11 — South Wade A 400 2 Yes Yes 12,000 55 12 — Rocky Mount 485* 5 Yes Yes 13,000 56 "Note: 48b acres denotes original proposed project site boundary. 4.5 LEVEL 1 ALTERNATIVES PRACTICABILITY ANALYSIS Level 1 of the alternatives practicability analysis evaluates the range of reasonable alternatives identified above for their ability to best satisfy the purpose and need criteria of the Proposed Project. This step of the analysis is intended to identify on a macro level which of the alternatives might reasonably meet the purpose and need; those alternatives that clearly do not meet the requisite criteria were not considered further within this analysis. Among the group of twelve sites, three site locations were determined to meet all five functional criteria, or key business characteristics. The sites included: Rocky Mount, Four Oaks, and Selma A. The first site occurs primarily in Edgecombe County, while the second two sites are both located within Johnston County. These three sites subsequently were advanced in the alternative analysis investigation as potentially suitable sites, or action alternatives, for the construction of the CCX Terminal. 20 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 4.6 LEVEL 2 ALTERNATIVES Fine -level screening was conducted for the three remaining site alternatives (action alternatives) from the initial site screening. The fine -level screening was comprised of a comparative analysis of the three site alternatives to facilitate the anticipated review under the NEPA process. The No Build Alternative (No Action Alternative) is also presented herein. During fine -level screening, the site alternatives were evaluated on their potential to impact natural/environmental resources and cultural resources. Constraints to development for each site were also considered in the screening process. The screening criteria were selected from resources that were readily quantifiable. These resources would typically require permits or approvals under the proposed development action. Although not every resource that could be examined was considered for the fine -level screening of alternatives, the resources that were selected for this analysis were presumed to be potential key constraints to project development. The selected resources included: air quality, cultural and historic resources, threatened and endangered species, and water resources. Water resources were further comprised of, wetlands, streams, riparian buffers, open waters and stormwater. The site development considerations included: highway network and access, utilities, noise, zoning, solid and hazardous waste, socioeconomics, and other considerations. 4.6.1 Alternative Site Descriptions Rocky Mount Site The Rocky Mount site is approximately 485 acres and is located along the boundary line between Edgecombe and Nash Counties and wholly within Edgecombe County north of the city of Rocky Mount, and northeast of the intersection of US -64 and 1-95 (Appendix A Figure 1A). The site primarily consists of agricultural land with residential and commercial buildings and woodlands dispersed throughout. College Road, a NCDOT secondary road, bisects the site in the southern portion of the site. Beech Branch, unnamed tributaries and associated wetlands, agricultural/recreational ponds, and agricultural ditches are also present within the study area. Two cemeteries and a telecommunications tower are present on site. Edgecombe County is North Carolina's 46th largest county and 49th most populous county. The US Census estimates the population has decreased almost 3% since 2010. The county has one city (Rocky Mount) and nine towns, including the county seat, Tarboro. Much of the county is rural/agricultural with several named swamps traversing the Tar River. The Tar River bisects the middle of the county, and flows primarily in an eastward direction. Transportation through the county is primarily by 1-95, US Highway 21 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 13 (US -13), US -64, US Highway 258 (US -258), and US Highway 301 (US -301), many state highways, and railways. The nearest major city is Raleigh, approximately 50 miles southwest. The environmental conditions on the approximately 485 -acre site were evaluated in May 2016 to address environmental permitting and site development constraints. The investigation comprised a desktop review of readily available information, i.e. mapping, literature and database records. Four Oaks Site The Four Oaks site is approximately 486 acres and is in Johnston County southwest of the town of Four Oaks near the intersection of 1-95 and Interstate 40 (1-40) (Appendix A Figure 1 B. The site consists primarily of agricultural land and undeveloped woodlands. In addition, several single-family residences are located on site. Hogpen Branch, Bernal Branch, Little Bernal Branch, Stony Fork, Juniper Swamp, unnamed tributaries and associated wetlands, and agricultural/recreational ponds are also present within the proposed site. Johnston County is North Carolina's 11th largest county based on size. The county seat is Smithfield, and the county has ten other towns, including Selma. The population of Johnston County, approximately 178,000 in 2013, has been growing rapidly; furthermore, in recent years, it has been one of the fastest growing counties in North Carolina and the US. Much of the county remains rural/agricultural in character, but areas in the northwest have become "bedroom communities" for residents working in the Research Triangle area of central North Carolina. Transportation through the county is provided by two interstate highways (1-95 and 1-40), several state highways, and railroad lines. The nearest major city is Raleigh, approximately 23 miles to the north. The northern portion of the county is in the Piedmont ecoregion, and the central and southern portions of the county are in the Southeastern Coastal Plains ecoregion. The Neuse River watershed drains most of the county and has been important in the history of the county related to development and transportation. The Neuse River crosses the "fall line" between the Piedmont and Coastal Plain regions within Johnston County. The environmental conditions on the approximately 486 -acre site were evaluated in March 2016 to address environmental permitting and site development constraints. The investigation comprised a desktop review of readily available information, i.e., mapping, literature, and database records. 22 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Selma A Site The Selma A site is approximately 450 acres in size and is in Johnston County, generally between 1-95 to the east, the Town of Selma to the west, and the Town of Micro to the north (Appendix A Figure 1C). The study area is primarily comprised of agricultural land and woodland. Interspersed within the agricultural areas are single-family residences and commercial/industrial facilities. Little Creek, Burnt Stocking Branch, unnamed tributaries and associated wetlands, and agricultural/recreational ponds are also present within the proposed site. Information regarding Johnston County is described in detail in the Four Oaks section above. The Selma A site is located approximately 20 miles to the southeast of Raleigh. The environmental conditions on the approximately 450 -acre site were evaluated in July 2014 to address environmental permitting and site development constraints. The 2014 investigation comprised a desktop review of readily available information, i.e., mapping, literature, and database records, and a limited groundtruthing effort. No Build Alternative Under the No Build Alternative (No Action Alternative), the proposed action is not implemented; i.e., no CCX Terminal is constructed. 4.7 LEVEL 2 POTENTIAL IMPACTS The following sections describe the various issues considered in this alternatives analysis. Where specific issues have varying degrees of impact on different alignment alternatives, quantified impacts for each route are provided. 4.7.1 Resource Considerations 4.7.1.1 Air Quality Air Quality Status The US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in 40 CFR 50 for the following criteria pollutants: sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 10 microns (PM,o), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5), carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (03), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and lead (Pb). 23 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Stationary Source Air Quality Permitting Requirements Air quality regulations are contained in two subchapters of the North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC). Regulations that limit air pollution emissions from stationary sources located within North Carolina are codified under NCAC Title 15A - Environment and Natural Resources, Chapter 02 — Environmental Management, Subchapter 02D - Air Pollution Control Requirements (15A NCAC 02D). Stationary source air quality permitting procedures are codified under Subchapter 02Q — Air Quality Permit Procedures (15A NCAC 02Q). The air quality permitting requirements to which the terminal will be subject are dependent on the types and quantities of air pollutants potentially emitted from the facility. Based on the limited information regarding the design of the proposed terminal that is available, it is assumed that the facility will be a minor source under the federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program as potential emissions of all criteria pollutants will be less than the 250 Tons Per Year (TPY) applicability threshold and nonbiogenic greenhouse gas emissions will be less than 100,000 TPY. We have also assumed that the facility will be a minor source of federal hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). Prior to beginning construction, the project will need to assess the need to obtain a construction and operation permit in accordance with the procedures of 15A NCAC 02Q .0300. If an air quality permit is required, the permit must be obtained prior to beginning construction. The North Carolina Division of Air Quality (NCDAQ) will issue or deny the permit application within 90 days of receipt of a complete application [15A NCAC 02Q .0312]. A public notice or public hearing will likely not be required for the proposed facility. However, NCDAQ may designate any facility with significant public interest relevant to air quality as being subject to these requirements [15A NCAC 02Q .0306]. Public notice and public hearing requirements may delay the issuance of the permit by 60 to 135 days, respectively. Construction may begin upon receipt of a construction and operation permit. If the CCX Terminal has the potential to emit greater than 100 TPY of any criteria pollutant, it will be considered a major source under the Title V operating permit program. As such, the project will be required to submit a Title V operating permit application within 12 months of beginning operations in accordance with the procedures of 15A NCAC 02Q .0500. It is assumed that the facility will not be subject to the Title V operating permit program, i.e., the facility's potential emissions will be less than 100 TPY of any criteria pollutant. The proposed CCX Terminal will likely be classified as a minor source with respect to both the PSD and Title V permitting programs. 24 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Rocky Mount Site The Rocky Mount site is in an area, comprised of Nash and Edgecombe counties, classified as attainment for all criteria pollutants, although the area is designated as maintenance for the 1997 ozone standard. Because the site is in an area designated as being in attainment with the NAAQS, the proposed project is potentially subject to regulation under the federal PSD program and not under the federal Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) program. Under the PSD program, sources that emit more than 250 TPY of any criteria pollutant are subject to the requirements of major source PSD permitting, except for 28 specifically listed source categories. For the 28 specifically listed source categories, the PSD major source applicability threshold is 100 TPY. The proposed intermodal rail terminal does not fall under any of the listed source categories. Therefore, the 250 TPY threshold is the relevant construction permit regulatory threshold for the proposed facility. Four Oaks Site The Four Oaks site is in an area, comprised of Johnson, Chatham, Durham, Franklin, Granville, Orange, Person, and Wake counties, classified as attainment for all criteria pollutants, although the area is designated as maintenance for the 1997 ozone standard. Therefore, the stationary source air quality permitting requirements under the Rocky Mount site alternative listed above are applicable to the Four Oaks site alternative. Selma A Site The Selma A site is in an area, comprised of Johnson, Chatham, Durham, Franklin, Granville, Orange, Person and Wake counties, classified as attainment for all criteria pollutants, although the area is designated as maintenance for the 1997 ozone standard. Therefore, the stationary source air quality permitting requirements under the Rocky Mount site alternative listed above are applicable to the Selma A site alternative. No Build Alternative Under the No Build Alternative, no construction activities would take place; therefore, there would be no short-term air quality impacts from construction or long-term impacts from rail operations. 4.7.1.2 Cultural and Historic Resources Rocky Mount Site On May 27, 2016, background research was completed at the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in Raleigh. The background research was conducted to identify any known cultural resources that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRNP). The project area is in Edgecombe County, outside the City of Rocky 25 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Mount. A one mile radius around the project area was used as the screening level Area of Potential Effect (APE). No previously identified archaeological sites are present within the project area; however, several sites exist within the mile screening level APE. Fifteen SHPO surveyed sites are present within the one mile APE of the Rocky Mount site and two are known to occur on the Rocky Mount site. Site ED0624 (Henry Odom Tenant House) is in the center of the proposed site and was added to the SHPO listing in 1998. Site ED1625 (Marks Chapel School) was located adjacent to a cemetery in the southwestern portion of the site, however the building was previously demolished. The remaining 13 sites are located within the one mile APE of the site, but are outside of the Project Area. Two NRHP listed properties (St. John's Episcopal Church and Bellemonte) are present within the one mile APE of the Rocky Mount site. Aerial review indicates one active cemetery exists within the site located approximately 1,500 -ft southeast of the intersection of Wesleyan Boulevard and College Road, adjacent to and east of the CSX A -Line. Table 4-2 presents information on historical properties within the APE for the Rocky Mount site. A background literature search was conducted to identify if any known cultural resources are present within the project area and within a one mile radius of the project area. This research does not satisfy the requirements for the Section 106 process, which may be required if federal permits are needed, which is highly likely. Section 404 of the CWA requires that projects authorized by the USACE do not adversely affect historical properties which are listed or eligible for listing on the NRHP. Should a finding of adverse effect be received it is likely that coordination with SHPO will be required. In addition, mitigation for impacts may be required. Cultural resources are protected by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). The Section 106 process consists of consultation with state and federal agencies, consultation with Native American tribes by the lead federal agency, and the identification and evaluation of cultural resources for inclusion in the NRHP. Based on our knowledge of the regulations and the project area, similar projects, and previous coordination with SHPO staff, a Phase I compliance study for cultural resources may be necessary to satisfy the requirements for the Section 106 process. A Phase I compliance study would consist of an archaeological survey and an architectural survey. The APE for the architectural study would be established in consultation with SHPO prior to the study. The results of the Phase I compliance study would be submitted to the lead federal agency for review prior to submittal to SHPO. The compliance report would describe the field methodology, identified cultural resources, and recommendations on NRHP eligibility for each identified cultural resource. 26 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Four Oaks Site On May 27, 2016, background research was completed at the SHPO in Raleigh. The background research was conducted to identify any known cultural resources that are listed on the NRHP. The project area is in Johnston County, outside the Town of Four Oaks. A one mile radius around the project area was used as the screening level APE. No previously identified archaeological sites are present within the project area or the mile screening level APE. No SHPO surveyed sites or NRHP listed properties are present within the one mile APE of the Four Oaks site. Coordination and/or compliance reporting with SHPO, the USACE, Native American tribal representatives, and/or other interested parties will be necessary during regulatory permitting to assure that the project is in compliance with federal and state laws and regulations. One cemetery was found within the site according to the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Topographic Map of Four Oaks, North Carolina Quadrangle. The cemetery is located approximately 350 -ft east of Parkertown Road and adjacent north of the CSX A - Line. Due to the need for a Federal Section 404 permit, an intensive cultural resources field survey and report would have to be performed for the permit application. Table 4-2 presents information on historical properties within the APE for the Four Oaks site. A background literature search was conducted to identify if any known cultural resources are present within the project area and within a one mile radius of the project area. This research does not satisfy the requirements for the Section 106 process, which may be required if federal permits are needed, which is highly likely. Section 404 of the CWA requires that projects authorized by the USACE do not adversely affect historical properties which are listed or eligible for listing on the NRHP. Based on our knowledge of the regulations and the project area, similar projects, and previous coordination with SHPO staff, a Phase I compliance study for cultural resources may be necessary to satisfy the requirements for the Section 106 process as previously discussed for the Rocky Mount site. Colmn A (Zito On April 10, 2014, background research was completed at the SHPO in Raleigh. The background research was conducted to identify any known cultural resources that are listed on the NRHP. The project area is in Johnston County, outside the Town of Selma. A one mile radius around the project area was used as the screening level APE. No previously identified archaeological sites or NRHP-listed properties are present within the project area or within the mile screening level APE. While no NRHP-listed properties are 27 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 located within the project area or within the screening level APE, there are identified structures that have been surveyed and noted, but are not NRHP-listed. Several properties have been surveyed but are not listed on the NRHP. The Lizzie Mill Village (JT -0126, JT -0050) is located approximately 0.5 mile west of the project area, while the Gary Crumpler Log House (JT0724) is located approximately 0.2 mile south of the project area. One property, the Iredell Brown House (JT0695), was present within the project area but is no longer extant. It is not known if archaeological deposits are associated with the former Iredell Brown House site. Three properties, the Carolyn Court Motel (JT0701) (no longer extant), the JM Driver House (JT0733), and the Gibson Fitzgerald Store (JT0748), are located within the APE and are not listed on the NRHP. There are eight known cemeteries identified on the Kenly West USGS topographic map that are located within 0.5 mile of the project area. No known cemeteries are located within the project area. All existing cemeteries in the area may not be recorded on the Kenly West or Selma USGS topographic maps and additional unrecorded cemeteries could be present in the project area and surrounding mile radius of the project area. There is a NRHP-listed historic district located in the Town of Selma, approximately 1.5 miles west of the project area. The West Selma Historic District (JT1514) dates circa 1880-1961 and consists of a residential -mixed use containing houses, churches, a railroad station, and various private companies. It is bounded by West Richardson Street, North Brevard Street, Railroad Street, and North Pollock. Table 4-2presents information on historical properties within the APE for the Selma A site. A background literature search was conducted to identify if any known cultural resources are present within the project area and within a one mile radius of the project area. This research does not satisfy the requirements for the Section 106 process, which may be required if federal permits are needed, which is highly likely. Section 404 of the CWA requires that projects authorized by the USACE do not adversely affect historical properties which are listed or eligible for listing on the NRHP. Based upon our knowledge of the regulations and the project area, similar projects, and previous coordination with SHPO staff, a Phase I compliance study for cultural resources may be necessary to satisfy the requirements for the Section 106 process as previously discussed for the Rocky Mount site. No Build Alternative 28 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 No effects on cultural or historical resources would be expected from implementing the No Build Alternative. Table 4-2. Historical properties within the APE for the Rocky Mount Site, Four Oaks Site, and Selma A Site Resource Within Within Mile Surveyed NRHP Listed Project Area APE Rocky Mount Site ED0014 — St. John's Episcopal Church No Yes Yes Yes ED0621 — Battle House No Yes Yes No ED0622 — Daughtry Tenant House No Yes Yes No; No Longer Extant ED0623 — East Carolina Industrial No Yes Yes No Training School ED0624 — Henry Odom Tenant House Yes Yes Yes No ED0639 — Phillips Farm No Yes Yes No ED0640 — Phillips House No Yes Yes No; No Longer Extant ED0641 — Braswell Tenant House No Yes Yes No; No Longer Extant ED 1625 — Marks Chapel School Yes Yes Yes No; No Longer Extant NSO491 — (Battleboro Main Street No Yes Yes No Buildings) NSO492 — (former T.P. Braswell & Son No Yes Yes No General Merchandise Store) NSO493 — (Battleboro Storefronts) No Yes Yes No NSO494 — F.M. Rawlings House No Yes Yes No NSO495 — E.A. Williams House No Yes Yes No NS0915 - Bellemonte No Yes Yes Yes Four Oaks Site Selma A Site JT1514- West Selma Historic District No Yes Yes Yes JT0701- Carolyn Court Motel No Yes Yes No; No Longer Extant JT0050- Lizzie Mill Village No Yes Yes No JT0733- JM Driver House No Yes Yes No JT0695- Iredell Brown House Yes Yes Yes No; No Longer Extant JT0724- Gary Crumpler Log House No Yes Yes No 29 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 4.7.1.3 Threatened and Endangered Species Plants and animals listed as federally threatened and endangered are protected under the Endangered Species Act (PL 92-205), which is administered and enforced by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Region 4. The bald eagle is federally protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. USACE Individual Permit (IP) and Nationwide Permit General Conditions require that projects authorized by the USACE do not adversely affect federally protected species. Should a finding of adverse effect be presumed by the USACE, it is likely that coordination with the USFWS will be required to avoid impacts or minimize impacts to the practicable extent (Section 7 Consultations). Rocky Mount Site A current list of federally endangered and threatened plant and animal species for Edgecombe County was compiled from the USFWS Endangered Species List (USFWS Information, Planning, and Conservation System [IPaC], Version 1.4) was reviewed on May 8, 2016 and subsequently confirmed on June 23, 2016. According to the literature and records review, three federally protected animal species and no federally protected plant species occur within Edgecombe County (see Table 4-3). Suitable habitats for the bald eagle, red -cockaded woodpecker, and Tar River spinymussel most likely do not occur within the proposed Project Area. Therefore, the proposed project is likely to have no effect on these species. However, an on-site field survey to search for protected species or their preferred habitats on the Rocky Mount site was not conducted as a part of this analysis. A field survey of the project area for protected species will be necessary as a component of the USACE regulatory permitting process. Should the project development have an adverse impact to known populations or individuals of protected species or their habitats, consultations with the USFWS may provide remedies during the USACE regulatory permitting process. Four Oaks Site A current list of federally endangered and threatened plant and animal species for Johnston County was compiled from the USFWS Endangered Species List (USFWS Information, Planning, and Conservation System [IPaC], Version 1.4) was reviewed on May 8, 2016 and subsequently confirmed on June 23, 2016. According to the literature and 30 Within Within Mile Resource Surveyed NRHP Listed Project Area APE JT0748- Gibson Fitzgerald Store No Yes Yes No 4.7.1.3 Threatened and Endangered Species Plants and animals listed as federally threatened and endangered are protected under the Endangered Species Act (PL 92-205), which is administered and enforced by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Region 4. The bald eagle is federally protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. USACE Individual Permit (IP) and Nationwide Permit General Conditions require that projects authorized by the USACE do not adversely affect federally protected species. Should a finding of adverse effect be presumed by the USACE, it is likely that coordination with the USFWS will be required to avoid impacts or minimize impacts to the practicable extent (Section 7 Consultations). Rocky Mount Site A current list of federally endangered and threatened plant and animal species for Edgecombe County was compiled from the USFWS Endangered Species List (USFWS Information, Planning, and Conservation System [IPaC], Version 1.4) was reviewed on May 8, 2016 and subsequently confirmed on June 23, 2016. According to the literature and records review, three federally protected animal species and no federally protected plant species occur within Edgecombe County (see Table 4-3). Suitable habitats for the bald eagle, red -cockaded woodpecker, and Tar River spinymussel most likely do not occur within the proposed Project Area. Therefore, the proposed project is likely to have no effect on these species. However, an on-site field survey to search for protected species or their preferred habitats on the Rocky Mount site was not conducted as a part of this analysis. A field survey of the project area for protected species will be necessary as a component of the USACE regulatory permitting process. Should the project development have an adverse impact to known populations or individuals of protected species or their habitats, consultations with the USFWS may provide remedies during the USACE regulatory permitting process. Four Oaks Site A current list of federally endangered and threatened plant and animal species for Johnston County was compiled from the USFWS Endangered Species List (USFWS Information, Planning, and Conservation System [IPaC], Version 1.4) was reviewed on May 8, 2016 and subsequently confirmed on June 23, 2016. According to the literature and 30 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 records review, four federally protected animal species and one federally protected plant species occur within Johnston County (see Table 4-3). Suitable habitats for the bald eagle, red -cockaded woodpecker, dwarf wedgemussel, Tar River spinymussel, and Michaux's sumac most likely do not occur within the proposed project area. Therefore, the proposed project is likely to have no effect on these species. However, an on-site field survey to search for protected species or their preferred habitats on the Four Oaks site was not conducted as a part of this analysis. A field survey of the project area for protected species will be necessary as a component of the USACE regulatory permitting process. Should the project development have an adverse impact to known populations or individuals of protected species or their habitats, consultations with the USFWS may provide remedies during the USACE regulatory permitting process. .qalma A Rita The list of federally protected species compiled for the Four Oaks site is applicable to the Selma A site. Suitable habitat for the red -cockaded woodpecker may occur within the proposed project area. Suitable habitat for the bald eagle, dwarf wedgemussel, Tar River spinymussel, and Michaux's sumac is most likely not available on the project site. However, an on-site field survey to search for protected species or their preferred habitats on the Selma A site was not conducted as a part of this analysis. A field survey of the project area for protected species will be necessary as a component of the USACE regulatory permitting process. Should the project development have an adverse impact to known populations or individuals of protected species or their habitats, consultations with the USFWS may provide remedies during the USACE regulatory permitting process. No Build Alternative Under the No Build Alternative, no construction activities would take place; therefore, there would be no impacts to federally listed, threatened or endangered, plant or animal species. 31 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Table 4-3. Federally protected species potentially occurring within Edgecombe County (Rocky Mount site) and Johnston County (Four Oaks site and Selma A site), as based on USFWS IPaC database queries Common Scientific Status General Habitat Type Name Name Edgecombe County Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus BGEPA Coastlines, rivers, large lakes or streams Red- Picoides Mature pine forests, typically with very sparse cockaded borealis E understory. Trees with redheart disease are preferred woodpecker for cavity excavation. Tar River Elliptio Lives in relatively silt -free uncompacted gravel and/or spinymussel steinstansana E course sand in fast -flowing oxygenated stream reaches. Johnston County Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus BGEPA Coastlines, rivers, large lakes or streams Red- Picoides Mature pine forests, typically with very sparse cockaded borealis E understory. Trees with redheart disease are preferred woodpecker for cavity excavation. Lives on muddy sand, sand and gravel bottoms in Dwarf Alasmidonta E creeks and rivers of various sizes. Requires areas of wedgemussel heterodon slow to moderate current, with good water quality and Tar River Elliptio E Lives in relatively silt -free uncompacted gravel in fast- spinymussel steinstansana flowing, well oxygenated stream reaches. Michaux's RhusE Grows in sandy or rocky open woods in association sumac michauxii with basic soils. E - Federally endangered BGEPA — Federally protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 4.7.1.4 Water Resources Floodplains The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) guidelines states that any new structures built within an identified 100 -year flood zone (Zone AE) must have its lowest floor, at minimum, 1 -ft above the established Base Flood Elevation (BFE) at the building site. Section 404 of the CWA requires that projects authorized by the USACE to comply with 32 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 applicable Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) approved state or local floodplain management requirements. Placing fill in a floodplain for the purpose of adding a culvert or road crossing is permitted; however, it is likely that such development would impact BFEs in the proposed development zone. NFIP regulations also state that no new structures may be developed within a regulatory floodway unless the developer provides a No -Rise certification which has been reviewed and sealed by a licensed surveyor or engineer. Rocky Mount Site Floodplain Development The site is bisected by one named stream, Beech Branch, located near the north end of the site. Based on the current Effective Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for Nash County dated July 7, 2014, Beech Branch has a mapped regulated flood zone within the proposed site (Appendix A Figure 3A). To develop the site, Beech Branch may have to be contained in a closed system to covey flow across the site assuming the development criteria of placing fill to accommodate required development area. The existing box culverts, which are approximately 140 -ft long would likely need to be extended to an approximate length of 1,750 -ft to completely contain the stream within the site boundary. A planning level analysis of alternatives must be completed to determine if a crossing with a culvert can be achieved without causing a rise in flood elevations. If a rise results from culvert extensions, then a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) will be required by the local Floodplain Administrator (FPA). If the culvert extensions do not cause a rise, then general floodplain permit from the FPA will be required prior to issuing building permit. Floodway Development The proposed site development would likely impact BFEs as well as impact a regulatory floodway in the proposed development zone. The local FPA for Edgecombe County, acting under local building ordinances, may require a CLOMR and a "No Rise" certification be initiated before a building permit can be issued, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) upon completion of the project. Four Oaks Site Floodplain Development The site is bisected by four named streams, Stony Fork, Bernal Branch, Little Bernal Branch, and Hogpen Branch. Based on the current FIS for Johnston County, dated December 2, 2005, Bernal Branch, Little Bernal Branch, and Stony Fork have mapped regulated flood zone within the proposed site (Appendix A Figure 3B). To develop the 33 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 site, Bernal Branch and Little Bernal Branch would need to be contained in a closed system to convey flow across the site assuming the development criteria of placing fill to accommodate required developable area. Bernal Branch could be contained within a closed culvert system from the north (upstream) extent of the site to connect to the existing culvert under the existing rail line at the downstream extent of the site. This would require placement of approximately 2,600 LF of culvert providing a minimum cross sectional area associated with the existing 144 -inch culvert downstream. As modeled for the effective FIS, the downstream culvert is elliptical having a width of approximately 13 - ft and a height of approximately 14.5 -ft. Extension of the existing culvert would result in an increase of the 100 -year flood elevation of approximately 8 -ft at the new upstream face of the culvert to be located at the upstream extent of the site. The increase would impact several rural properties north of the site by widening the effective floodplain in the area of the new backwater flooding. To reduce the upstream impacts, a second parallel culvert of similar cross sectional area could be placed to provide conveyance that would result in an increase of approximately 2 -ft. Little Bernal Branch would need to be contained within a culvert and join Bernal Branch at the current confluence through use of a large junction box. This would require an approximately 1,500 LF of closed system culvert to extend upstream to limits of the site Floodway Development The proposed site development would likely impact BFEs as well as impact a regulatory floodway in the proposed development zone. CLOMR and LOMR may be required upon completion of the project. Selma A Site Floodplain Development The site is bisected by two named streams: Little Creek (Near Micro) and Burnt Stocking Branch. Based on the current FIS for Johnston County, dated December 2, 2005, Little Creek has a mapped regulated flood zone within the proposed site (Appendix A Figure 3C), however, development of this site would not likely require culverting of the stream. Burnt Stocking Branch is not within a regulatory floodplain, however. It should be noted, however, that a Preliminary FIS update to Johnston County was expected to be completed by mid -year 2015 and could change the flood zone designation for drainages on the site. The discussion regarding NFIP guidelines, FEMA compliance, potential BFE impacts, and potential issuance of a CLOMR and compliance, as presented above for the Four Oaks site alternative, is applicable to the Selma A site alternative. 34 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Floodway Development Based on the current Effective FIS for Johnston County, dated December 2, 2005, no regulatory floodways exist within the proposed development zone, including the rail corridor. Section 404 of the CWA requires that projects authorized by the USACE do comply with applicable FEMA approved state or local floodplain management requirements. No Build Alternative Under the No Build Alternative, no construction activities would take place; therefore, there would be no impacts to floodplains. Wetlands Jurisdictional waters of the US, including streams and wetlands, are defined by 33 CFR Part 328.3 et al. and are protected by Section 404 and other applicable sections of the CWA (33 USC 1344). Impacts to these regulated resources are administered and enforced by the Wilmington District of the USACE, as well as other federal and state government agencies. Jurisdictional wetlands are defined in the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual and the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain regional supplement. These techniques use a multi -parameter approach, which requires positive evidence of three criteria for a determination of existence of wetlands: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology. A preliminary jurisdictional waters screening was completed to assess the potential presence/absence of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, and to approximate the potential jurisdictional boundaries on the Rocky Mount, Four Oaks, and Selma A sites. Remote -sensing research included a review of the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) online Wetlands Mapper (Appendix A Figures 4A, 4B and 4C), the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Edgecombe County Soil Survey (Appendix A Figure 5A) and Johnston County Soil Survey (Appendix A Figures 5B and 5C), and the USGS digital 7.5 -minute topographic maps (Appendix A Figures 6A, 6B and 6C), for the respective alternative sites. A field delineation or USACE verification of jurisdictional waters was not conducted nor was information depicted on the sources list above field verified as a part of this analysis. Table 4-4 presents acreage and/or linear foot values of estimated impacts to potential wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers on the Rocky Mount, Four Oaks, and Selma A sites. 35 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Rocky Mount Site The site is located within the Tar -Pamlico River Basin and is bisected by Beech Branch, a tributary of the Tar River. Although the proposed site is located within fairly well -drained soils, approximately a quarter of the site contains poorly drained soils, which can create wetland areas. The USFWS NWI (Appendix A Figure 4A) depicted two freshwater forested/shrub wetland areas totaling approximately 10.9 acres and 3.1 acres of freshwater ponds within the proposed site. The history of farming, residential, and industrial development in the area has altered the local hydrology, as well as changing stream locations and converting wetlands to agricultural fields or commercial/industrial areas. Construction of transportation networks, such as roads and rail, have created extensively ditched areas that could affect the reach of waters of the US. An accurate determination of jurisdictional waters (streams and wetlands) can only be accomplished through detailed field evaluation and delineation. Such evaluation could reduce the estimated area of wetlands in the project area. It is assumed that most of the forested portions of the site underlain by hydric soil may be jurisdictional wetlands. It is also presumed that portions of the agricultural land (planted or fallow) which are characterized as wet farm fields may be jurisdictional wetlands. Therefore, an estimated 123 acres, of the mapped predominantly hydric soils and soil areas with hydric inclusions are potential wetlands (Appendix A Figure 5A). This is a preliminary estimate based on soil mapping, analysis of aerial photographs, and our experience with similar sites in similar settings. This estimate will likely change based on field evaluations and verification by the USACE. Based on limited project information, it is likely that the site will be completely developed/disturbed, thereby resulting in impacts to most all wetlands (Table 4-4). A CWA permit will be required from both the USACE (Section 404) and The North Caroline Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) (Section 401). Since impacts to wetlands from the proposed project will be greater than '/2 -acre (based on complete site development), a USACE/NCDEQ Joint IP application will be required. There is no designated regulatory review period for IPs and this process usually can take nine months to approximately one year to complete. Compensatory mitigation will likely be required for wetland impacts. Mitigation requirements are described in Section 4.7.1.5 below. Four Oaks Site The project is located within the Neuse River watershed and is bisected by Bernal Branch, Little Bernal Branch, Stony Fork, and Juniper Swamp. While the proposed site is located within fairly well -drained soils, approximately a fifth of the site contains poorly drained soils, thereby creating the potential for wetland areas. The USFWS NWI (Appendix A 36 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Figure 4B) depicted two freshwater forested/shrub wetland areas totaling approximately 4.4 acres and 3.3 acres of freshwater ponds within the proposed site. The history of farming, residential, and industrial development in the area has altered the local hydrology, as well as changing stream locations and converting wetlands to agricultural fields or commercial/industrial areas. Construction of transportation networks, such as roads and rail, have created extensive ditched areas that could affect the reach of waters of the US. An accurate determination of jurisdictional waters (streams and wetlands) can only be accomplished through detailed field evaluation and delineation. Such evaluation could reduce the estimated area of wetlands in the project area. It is assumed that most of the forested portions of the site underlain by hydric soil may be jurisdictional wetlands. It is also presumed that portions of the agricultural land (planted or fallow) which are characterized as wet farm fields may be jurisdictional wetlands. Therefore, an estimated 96 acres, or the mapped predominantly hydric soil area and areas with hydric inclusions, are potential wetlands (Appendix A Figure 513). This is only a preliminary estimate based on soil mapping, analysis of aerial photographs, and our experience with similar sites in similar settings. This estimate will likely change based on field evaluations and verification by the USACE. Based on limited project information, it is likely that the site will need to be nearly completely developed/disturbed, thereby resulting in impacts to most all wetlands (Table 4-4). The discussion regarding USACE and NCDWR regulatory permitting, as presented above for the Rocky Mount site alternative, is applicable to the Four Oaks site alternative. Mitigation requirements are described in Section 4.7.1.5 below. Selma A Site The project is located within the Neuse River watershed, at the headwaters of Burnt Stocking Branch and along the run of Little Creek. The project area is located within a large, flat inter-riverine area with poor drainage and clayey subsoils that tend to pond water for long periods, creating broad areas of wetlands. The history of farming, residential, and industrial development in the area has altered the local hydrology, as well as changing stream locations and converting wetlands to agricultural fields or commercial/industrial areas. Construction of transportation networks, such as roads and rail, have created extensive ditched areas that could affect the reach of waters of the US. An accurate determination of jurisdictional waters (streams and wetlands) can only be accomplished through detailed field evaluation and delineation. Such evaluation could reduce the estimated area of wetlands in the project area. The USFWS NWI (Appendix A Figure 4C) depicted three freshwater forested/shrub wetland areas totaling approximately 31 acres and 4 acres of freshwater ponds within the 37 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 proposed site. However, there are four soil types depicted on the Soil Survey (Appendix A Figure 4C) that are classified as predominantly hydric, and wetlands are often found in association with these hydric soils. There are approximately 175 acres of predominantly hydric soils depicted on the soils map which occur within the proposed site. It is assumed that the forested portions of the site underlain by hydric soil may be jurisdictional wetlands. Therefore, of the 175 acres of hydric soil depicted on the Johnston County Soil Survey, an estimated 140 acres of the mapped area are likely to be potential wetlands (Appendix A Figure 5C). This analysis was only a preliminary estimate based on soil mapping, analysis of aerial photographs, and our experience with similar sites in similar settings. This estimate will likely change based on field evaluations and verification by the USACE. Based on limited project information, it is likely that the site will need to be nearly completely developed/disturbed, thereby resulting in impacts to most all wetlands (Table 4-4). The discussion regarding USACE and NCDWR regulatory permitting, as presented above for the Rocky Mount site alternative, is applicable to the Selma A site alternative. Mitigation requirements are described in Section 4.7.1.5 below. No Build Alternative Under the No Build Alternative, no construction activities would take place; therefore, there would be no impacts to wetlands. Table 4-4. Estimated impacts to wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers for the Rocky Mount Site, Four Oaks Site, and Selma A site Resource Type Estimated Impacts via Alternative Sites Rocky Mount Four Oaks Selma A Wetland (acres)' 14 to 122.8 7.8 to 96 34 to 144.7 Stream (linear feet)2 13,506 to 25,156 19,294 to 21,648 7,260 Riparian Buffer (acres) 31.95 41.2 15.6 IEstimated wetland impacts are based on NWI Tor the low estimate and the high estimate is based on NKU6 hydric soils map forested polygons. 2Estimated stream impacts are based on USGS blue -line streams and NRCS soil survey streams for the low estimate. The high estimate combines USGS blue -line streams and potential streams determined from aerial imagery and topographic maps. Streams Rocky Mount Site The site is located within the Upper Tar River watershed (Hydrologic Unit Code [HUC] 03020101). One stream system is depicted on the USGS Topographic Map (Appendix A Figure 6A), Beech Branch. According to the NCDEQ Classifications and Standards 38 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Review Branch, Beech Branch has been classified as Class B; Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW), a restrictive classification with special performance requirements for new development. Field classification and NCDEQ verification of the stream would be required for environmental permitting with the USACE and NCDEQ. The methods for determination of stream classification must be conducted in accordance with the NCDEQ stream evaluation protocols in Identification Methods for the Origins of Intermittent and Perennial Streams, Version 4.11. Limited project information suggests that the site will need to be nearly completely developed/disturbed, thereby resulting in impacts to jurisdictional streams (Table 4-4). Therefore, a CWA permit will be required from both the USACE (Section 404) and the NCDEQ (Section 401). Since impacts to streams from the proposed project will be greater than 300 LF, a USACE IP application will be required. There is no designated regulatory review period for IPs and this process usually can take nine months to approximately one year to complete. Compensatory mitigation will likely be required for stream impacts. Mitigation requirements are described in Section 4.7.1.5 below. Four Oaks Site The site is located within the Upper Neuse watershed (HUC 03020201). Many stream systems traverse the site including Bernal Branch, Little Bernal Branch, Hogpen Branch, and Stony Fork. According to the NCDEQ Classifications and Standards Review Branch, all four streams have been classified as Class B; NSW, a restrictive classification with special performance requirements for new development (see Appendix A Figure 6B). Field classification and NCDEQ verification of those streams would be required for environmental permitting with the USACE and NCDEQ. The methods for determination of stream classification must be conducted in accordance with the NCDEQ stream evaluation protocols in Identification Methods for the Origins of Intermittent and Perennial Streams, Version 4.11. Based on limited project information, it is likely that the site will need to be nearly completely developed/disturbed, thereby resulting in impacts to jurisdictional streams (Table 4-4). The discussion regarding USACE and NCDEQ regulatory permitting, as presented above for the Rocky Mount site alternative, is applicable to the Four Oaks site alternative. Mitigation requirements are described in Section 4.7.1.5 below. Ralmn A Rita The site is located within the Upper Neuse watershed (HUC 03020201). Two stream systems are depicted on the NRCS Johnston County Soil Survey (Appendix A Figure 5C) 39 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 of the site, Burnt Stocking Branch and Little Creek. Three unnamed tributaries to Burnt Stocking Branch are also depicted. According to the NCDEQ Classifications and Standards Review Branch, both streams have been classified as Class C; NSW, a restrictive classification with special performance requirements for new development. Field classification and NCDEQ verification of those streams would be required for environmental permitting with the USACE and NCDEQ. The methods for determination of stream classification must be conducted in accordance with the NCDEQ stream evaluation protocols in Identification Methods for the Origins of Intermittent and Perennial Streams, Version 4.11. Based on limited project information, it is likely that the site will need to be nearly completely developed/disturbed, thereby resulting in impacts to jurisdictional streams (Table 4-4). The discussion regarding USACE and NCDEQ regulatory permitting, as presented above for the Rocky Mount site alternative, is applicable to the Selma A site alternative. Mitigation requirements are described in Section 4.7.1.5 below. No Build Alternative Under the No Build Alternative, no construction activities would take place; therefore, there would be no impacts to streams. Table 4-4 includes estimates of total stream length on the three alternative sites. Stream length was based on available NRCS map data. Riparian Buffers Rocky Mount Site The site is located within the Tar -Pamlico River Basin and is therefore subject to the Tar - Pamlico River Basin Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 0213 .0259). These conservation rules apply to perennial and intermittent streams located on either the most recent USGS topographic quadrangle or the NRCS County Soil Survey map. Figures 5A and 6A in Appendix A depict those streams on the site which are subject to these rules. These stream features will require a 50 -ft buffer on both sides of the stream, from the top of the stream bank outward. Under these rules, certain uses of the buffer are classified as exempt, allowable, allowable with mitigation, or prohibited. If activities or uses which are allowable or allowable with mitigation are planned for this site, a Tar -Pamlico River Buffer Authorization and determination of "no practical alternatives" must be obtained from NCDEQ. A Riparian Buffer Authorization Form for the Tar -Pamlico River Buffer Authorization will be required. This application would also include wetland and stream impacts as described above if necessary. If activities or uses which are prohibited are planned for this site, a minor variance or major variance may be requested from NCDEQ. Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 The regulatory review period for NCDEQ staff to issue or deny a buffer authorization is 45 days. There is no designated regulatory review period for variances and this process can take approximately one year to complete. Compensatory mitigation will likely be required for buffer impacts. Mitigation requirements are described in Section 4.7.1.5 below. The Tar -Pamlico River Riparian Buffer Rules also require intensive site stormwater development controls to diffuse flow of runoff and nutrient reduction, which is discussed in further detail in the sections below. Four Oaks Site The site is located within the Neuse River Basin and is therefore subject to the Neuse River Basin Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0233). The rules apply to perennial and intermittent streams located on either the most recent USGS topographic quadrangle or the NRCS County Soil Survey map. Figures 5B and 6B depict those streams on the site which are subject to these rules. These stream features will require a 50 -ft buffer on both sides of the stream, from the top of the stream bank outward. Under these rules, certain uses of the buffer are classified as exempt, allowable, allowable with mitigation, or prohibited. If activities or uses which are allowable or allowable with mitigation are planned for this site, a Neuse River Buffer Authorization and determination of "no practical alternatives" must be obtained from NCDEQ. A Riparian Buffer Authorization Form for the Neuse River Buffer Authorization will be required. This application would also include wetland and stream impacts as described above if necessary. If activities or uses which are prohibited are planned for this site, a minor variance or major variance may be requested from NCDEQ. The regulatory review period for NCDEQ staff to issue or deny a buffer authorization is 45 days. There is no designated regulatory review period for variances and this process can take approximately one year to complete. Compensatory mitigation will likely be required for buffer impacts. Mitigation requirements are described in Section 4.7.1.5 below. The Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules also require intensive site stormwater development controls to diffuse flow of runoff and nutrient reduction, which is discussed in further detail in the sections below. .,Pima A Rite The site is located within the Neuse River Basin and is therefore subject to the Neuse River Basin Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0233). The rules apply to perennial and 41 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 intermittent streams located on either the most recent USGS topographic quadrangle or the NRCS County Soil Survey map. Figures 5C and 6C depict those streams on the site which are subject to these rules. These stream features will require a 50 -ft buffer on both sides of the stream, from the top of the stream bank outward. The discussion regarding buffer use classification, Neuse River Buffer Authorization, regulatory review, and stormwater controls, as presented above for the Four Oaks site alternative, is applicable to the Selma A site alternative. Compensatory mitigation will likely be required for buffer impacts. Mitigation requirements are described in Section 4.7.1.5 below. No Build Alternative Under the No Build Alternative, no construction activities would take place; therefore, there would be no impacts to riparian buffers. Table 4-4 includes estimates of riparian buffer area (acreage) on the Rocky Mount site, Four Oaks site and Selma A site. Riparian buffer area was based on stream features depicted on the most recent NRCS and/or USGS map data. Open Water Rocky Mount Site The USFWS NWI map (Appendix A Figure 4A) for the site was reviewed. Multiple freshwater ponds totaling approximately 3.1 acres were depicted on the map. Additionally, features which appear to be drainage ditches are shown on the aerial photograph. Under certain conditions, these features may be classified as jurisdictional. Impacts to these features likely will be included in the Section 404 permit application as described above unless they are determined to be isolated, non -jurisdictional waters. Mitigation for impacts to these features may not be required. However, the NCDEQ may review impacts to these ponds under their regulatory review process for issuance of an Isolated and Other Non -404 Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters Permit. Four Oaks Site The USFWS NWI map (Appendix A Figure 4B) for the site was reviewed. Multiple freshwater ponds totaling approximately 3.3 acres were depicted on the map. An additional freshwater pond is not mapped on the USFWS NWI database; however, the pond is visible on the aerial photograph (central portion of site). CS Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 The permitting process for impacts to open waters as described above for the Rocky Mount site alternative, is applicable to the Four Oaks site alternative. Selma A Site The USFWS NWI map (Appendix A Figure 4C) for the site was reviewed. Multiple freshwater ponds totaling approximately 4.0 acres were depicted on the map. Additionally, features which appear to be drainage ditches are shown on the aerial photograph. Under certain conditions, these features may be classified as jurisdictional. The permitting process for impacts to open waters as described above for the Rocky Mount site alternative, is applicable to the Selma A site alternative. No Build Alternative Under the No Build Alternative, no construction activities would take place; therefore, there would be no impacts to open water (freshwater ponds). Stormwater Rocky Mount Site Construction Stormwater All development projects in North Carolina that disturb an acre or greater of land require an approved Erosion and Sediment Control (E&SC) Plan. The Edgecombe County Unified Development Ordinance requires that any new development, or activity that disturbs greater than one-half acre of land to establish, expand, replace or modify a commercial facility, is required to submit a stormwater management plan, signed and sealed by a qualified professional. E&SC Plans must be produced in accordance with the North Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual dated May 2013. Projects that meet the requirements of the manual are automatically covered by a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater General Permit NCG0100000 for construction - related activities. Post -Construction Stormwater Post -development runoff rate for the one-year storm must be attenuated to the predevelopment runoff rate for the one-year storm. Nitrogen loading contributed by the new development is restricted to 4.0 pounds of nitrogen per acre per year (N lbs/ac/yr) and 0.4 pounds of phosphorus per acre per year (P lbs/ac/yr) in the Tar -Pamlico River basin. Nutrient offset credits can be purchased to offset a maximum allowable nitrogen nutrient loading threshold of 10.0 N lbs/ac/yr, no limit is set for phosphorus loading. Nutrient loading offset credits in the Tar -Pamlico basin can currently be purchased for 43 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 $8.60/lb N and $382.41/lb P (these fees are subject to change on July 1, 2017). Nutrient offset credit purchases are only necessary if post -development nutrient loading is calculated to be above the 4.0 N Ib/ac/yr and 0.4 P Ib/ac/yr loading targets. The worst- case cost estimate for nitrogen loading assumes the maximum allowable purchase of offset credits, the difference between the target loading amount of 4.0 N Ib/ac/yr and the offsite threshold of 10.0 N Ib/ac/yr. Worse case cost estimates for phosphorus are based off a preliminary phosphorus load calculation completed assuming a generalized site layout. The worst-case cost estimate can be reduced through implementation of stormwater best management practices (BMPs) during site design and construction. Industrial Stormwater Permit The NPDES Phase I regulations require that certain industrial facilities obtain a special stormwater permit. Transportation sites (Category vii), which have vehicle maintenance shops, equipment cleaning operations, or airport deicing operations, are required to obtain a NPDES Industrial Stormwater Permit (NCG080000). Only those portions of this proposed site which fall under this category will be required to obtain this permit and to meet the associated permit requirements. This permit requires the implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), secondary containment for all bulk storage of liquid materials, semi-annual analytical stormwater monitoring, and semi- annual qualitative stormwater monitoring. Four Oaks Site Construction Stormwater All development projects in North Carolina that disturb an acre or greater of land require an approved E&SC Plan. Johnston County has been designated as a local authority to approve E&SC plans. E&SC Plans must be produced in accordance with the North Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual, dated May 2013. This manual includes BMPs for reducing erosion and sedimentation during construction. This requires proper site preparation techniques, surface stabilization, runoff control measures, diffuse flow through the riparian buffer, inlet and outlet protection, and stream protection. Additionally, monthly inspections and inspections after rain events totaling over one-half inch will be required until the site development construction is deemed completed and stabilized by Johnston County staff. Post -Construction Stormwater As part of the Neuse River Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0235), certain local governments, including Johnston County, are required to implement a stormwater management plan, as part of the Neuse River Nutrient Sensitive Waters stormwater 44 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 management strategy. In 2000 and most recently in 2008, the Johnston County Board of Commissioners adopted the revised Johnston County Stormwater Management Ordinance to address those requirements. Under this ordinance, any activity that disturbs more than one acre of land or creates more than 17,000 square feet (sq. ft.) of impervious surface is required to obtain a Stormwater Management Plan permit. The Stormwater Management Plan requires that stormwater generated on the site be conveyed and treated within BMPs, which should be designed and maintained per the Johnston County 2008 Storm Water Design Manual. Post -development peak runoff rate for the one-year storm must be attenuated to the pre -development peak runoff rate for the one-year storm. Nitrogen loading contributed by the new development is restricted to 3.6 N lbs/ac/yr. The required nitrogen reduction can be obtained via on-site treatment in BMPs, through purchase of nutrient offset credits, or a combination of both. However, if the nitrogen export from the site is greater than 6 N lbs/ac/yr, the site owner must use on-site treatment to bring nutrient load down to 6 N lbs/ac/yr before offset credits can be utilized. The nutrient loading can be calculated through the DEQ online nutrient accounting tool. Nutrient offset credits can be purchased through a private mitigation bank or the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). A letter from Johnston County, as authorizing the purchase of nutrient offset credits, is required. The cost of nutrient offset within the watershed of this site is currently $21.02 per pound of nitrogen to be reduced. Industrial Stormwater Permit The discussion regarding the relevancy of a NPDES Industrial Stormwater Permit and associated implementation of a SWPPP, as presented above for the Rocky Mount site alternative, is applicable to the Four Oaks site alternative. Selma A Site Construction Stormwater The discussion regarding the submittal and approval of a E&SC plan by Johnston County, as presented above for the Four Oaks site alternative, is applicable to the Selma A site alternative. Post -Construction Stormwater The discussion regarding Stormwater Management Plan review (Johnston County), stormwater attenuation and BMPs, and nitrogen reduction and mitigation through purchase of nutrient off -set credits, as presented above for the Four Oaks site alternative, is applicable to the Selma A site alternative. Industrial Stormwater Permit 45 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 The discussion regarding the relevancy of a NPDES Industrial Stormwater Permit and associated implementation of a SWPPP, as presented above for the Rocky Mount site alternative, is applicable to the Selma A site alternative. No Build Alternative Under the No Build Alternative, no construction activities would take place; therefore, there would be no impacts to stormwater runoff. 4.7.1.5 Mitigation Compensatory mitigation will be required for wetland impacts exceeding 0.1 acre, for stream impacts exceeding 150 LF, and for riparian buffer impacts within the Tar -Pamlico River Basin and the Neuse River Basin. Mitigation credits must be purchased through a private mitigation bank, DMS (in lieu fee), or a permittee -responsible mitigation plan. Costs of wetland and stream mitigation credits are highly variable and are dependent upon quantity and type of credits that must be purchased. Rock Mount Site The range of mitigation costs for impacts to wetlands, streams, and/or riparian buffers were estimated based on current fee schedules. Table 4-5 presents the breakdown of the potential compensatory mitigation costs for impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and streams and riparian buffers on the site given the potential for complete site utilization, as well as the upgrades necessary for road and rail service. Four Oaks Site The range of mitigation costs for impacts to wetlands, streams, and/or riparian buffers were estimated based on current fee schedules. Table 4-5 presents the breakdown of the potential compensatory mitigation costs for impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and streams and riparian buffers on the site given the potential for complete site utilization, as well as the upgrades necessary for road and rail service. Selma A Site The range of mitigation costs for impacts to wetlands, streams, and/or riparian buffers were estimated based on current fee schedules. Table 4-5 presents the breakdown of the potential compensatory mitigation costs for impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and streams and riparian buffers on the site given the potential for complete site utilization, as well as the upgrades necessary for road and rail service. 46 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Table 4-5. Potential mitigation costs for impacts to wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers for the Rocky Mount site, Four Oaks site, and Selma A site ' Estimated stream impacts are based on USGS blue -line streams and NRCS soil survey streams for the low estimate. The high estimate combines the low estimate streams and potential streams determined from aerial imagery and topographic maps. 2 Rocky Mount site and Selma A site have numerous agricultural ditches that may be considered jurisdictional by the USACE and are included in the high estimated cost for streams. 'Estimated wetland impacts are based on NWI for the low estimate and the high estimate is based on a desktop wetland determination. 4Estimated wetland cost are reflected on a 2:1 mitigation ratio required by USACE and NCDWR. CVA Low High Low High Fee Category Cost/Unit Unit Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Impacts Impacts Mitigation Mitigation Costs Costs Rocky Mount Site Tar -Pamlico River Basin Riparian $1.16 Sq. Ft. 1,391,813 1,391,813 $1,614,503 $1,614,503 Buffer Stream' 2 $394 LF 13,506 25,156 $5,321,364 $9,911,464 Riparian Wetland 3,4 $71,772 Acre 12.5 97.23 $1,794,300 $13,956,783 Non -Riparian Wetland $51,782 Acre 1.5 25.55 $155,346 $2,646,060 Total Estimated Mitigation Cost Range $8,885,513 $28,128,810 Four Oaks Site Neuse River $1.16 Sq. Ft. 1,875,297 1,875,297 $2,175,344.52 $2,175,344.52 Riparian Buffer Stream' $394 LF 19,294 21,648 $7,601,836.00 $8,529,312.00 Riparian Wetland 3,4 $71,772 Acre 7.75 89.75 $1,112,466 $12,883,074 Non -Riparian Wetland 3,4 $51,782 Acre 0 6.25 $0 $647,275 Total Estimated Mitigation Cost Range $10,889,647 $24,235,006 Selma A Site Neuse River Riparian Buffer $1.16 Sq. Ft. 683,599 683,599 $792,974.84 $792,974.84 Stream' 2 $394 LF 7,260 7,260 $2,860,440.00 $2,860,440.00 Riparian Wetland 3,4 $71,772 Acre 31.00 130.13 $4,449,864 $18,679,381 Non -Riparian Wetland 3,4 $51,782 Acre 3.00 14.55 $310,692 $1,506,856 Total Estimated Mitigation Cost Range $8,413,970.84 $23,839,651.76 ' Estimated stream impacts are based on USGS blue -line streams and NRCS soil survey streams for the low estimate. The high estimate combines the low estimate streams and potential streams determined from aerial imagery and topographic maps. 2 Rocky Mount site and Selma A site have numerous agricultural ditches that may be considered jurisdictional by the USACE and are included in the high estimated cost for streams. 'Estimated wetland impacts are based on NWI for the low estimate and the high estimate is based on a desktop wetland determination. 4Estimated wetland cost are reflected on a 2:1 mitigation ratio required by USACE and NCDWR. CVA Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 4.7.2 Site Development Considerations 4.7.2.1 Highway Network and Access Access to the state maintained road network is approved with a NCDOT driveway permit. Improvements to NCDOT roads that may be required or desired to accommodate the site will need an encroachment agreement with the NCDOT, and extension or modification of utilities on state maintained right of way will require a third -party encroachment agreement. All of these permits are submitted to the NCDOT District Engineer, and depending on size of development he has authority to review and approve or send to the NCDOT offices in Raleigh for additional review and comment. This project will also be reviewed by the Raleigh NCDOT staff and local District staff. A turn -around time of three weeks' minimum for review submittals is anticipated, as they are funding a portion of the project. Anticipating two to three review cycles, permit approval is likely to require eight to twelve weeks from submittal to approval. This will be dependent on the required off-site improvements included with site development. NCDOT can require a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) for developments generating 3,000 trips per day, or developments within 1,000 -ft of an interchange. It is expected the District Engineer to request a TIS for each site, and expect a four-week review and resubmit timeframe. This can generally be concurrent with site development plan and is not normally a critical path review for this type of project. The TIS and approval by NCDOT will be helpful with public perception of the development. Rocky Mount Site Appendix A Figure 7A depicts the existing transportation network in the vicinity of the Rocky Mount site. Primary street access to the Rocky Mount site is anticipated to be from 1-95 approximately five miles northwest of the site. Highway access would likely be via Old Battleboro Road to Morning Star Church Road to Red Oak Battleboro Road to State Highway 4 (NC -4) to 1-95. Old Battleboro Road is located along the northeastern portion of the site and is likely the best access for operations. According to NCDOT, no nearby roads or highways have truck restrictions. College Road will likely be rerouted within the site, which will require coordination with Edgecombe County and NCDOT. If the ramp/service road configuration does change, the project will also go to the Control of Access committee for review and approval. This effort can be accomplished with the plan development, and should not add time to approval process. Based on the proposed access and improvements described above, it is anticipated that significant involvement from the central NCDOT office will occur. The process can be 48 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 expedited based on experience by working directly with NCDOT Special Projects section to achieve the desired outcome with less "formal" review cycles. Four Oaks Site Appendix A Figure 7B depicts the existing transportation network in the vicinity of the Four Oaks site. Primary street access to the Four Oaks site is anticipated to be from 1-40, which intersects 1-95 approximately three miles southwest of the site. US Interstate access would likely be via Camelia Road to Raleigh Road to Woodall Dairy Road to 1-40. Camelia Road is located at the northwest portion of the site and is likely the best access for operations. Oliver's Grove Road, Iris Road, and Parkertown Road will need to be filled or rerouted within the site and will require coordination with Johnston County and NCDOT. If the ramp/service road configuration does change, the project will also go to the Control of Access committee for review and approval. This effort can be accomplished with the plan development, and should not add time to approval process. Based on the proposed access and improvements described above, it is anticipated that significant involvement from the central NCDOT office would occur. The process can be expedited based on experience by working directly with NCDOT Special Projects section to achieve the desired outcome with less "formal" review cycles. Selma A Site Appendix A Figure 7C depicts the existing transportation network near the Selma A site. Primary street access to the proposed facility location is anticipated to be from 1-95 via Batton Road, while secondary access will likely be from US -301, which runs generally parallel to 1-95 and is approximately one mile to the west in this location. If there was a desire to investigate alternative access to 1-95 by creating an interchange at Lizzie Mill Road, a Federal Highway Administration Interchange Justification Report and Request for Break in Control of Access would be required, with that process taking eight to twelve months to develop, review, and obtain approval, if possible. The proximity of the rest area exit could create issues for an interchange at this location. If the ramp/service road configuration does change, the project will also go to the Control of Access committee for review and approval. This effort can be accomplished with the plan development, and should not add time to approval process. Based on the proposed access and improvements described above, it is anticipated that significant involvement from the central NCDOT office. The process can be expedited based on experience by working directly with NCDOT Special Projects section to achieve the desired outcome with less "formal" review cycles. 49 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 No Build Alternative Under the No Build Alternative, no construction activities would take place; therefore, there would be no impacts to the local and regional transportation networks. 4.7.2.2 Utilities Rocky Mount Site Based on a review of the Edgecombe County Geographic Information System (GIS) website, public water is provided to the Rocky Mount site by the City of Rocky Mount. Electricity is provided to this area by Dominion Energy, Edgecombe-Martin County EMS, and the City of Rocky Mount. Natural gas is provided to this area by Rocky Mount Public Utilities. Wastewater would most likely be disposed through the Edgecombe County wastewater system. Use of the public sewer would require connecting into the system. Four Oaks Site Based on a review of the Johnston County GIS website, public water is provided to the northern portion of the Four Oaks site by Elevation Water District. Electricity is provided to this area by Duke Power. Natural gas is provided to this area by Piedmont Natural Gas Company. No sewer lines were depicted in the area of the site on the Johnston County GIS map. Wastewater would be disposed in an on-site septic system, or to the Johnston County wastewater system if the proposed location is deemed unsuitable for on-site wastewater septic system treatment. However, the county's wastewater system would have to be extended to the site. Selma A Site Based on a review of the Johnston County GIS website, public water lines have been constructed in the project area. Connections to these lines would likely be required. Electricity is provided to this area by the Town of Selma and Duke Power. Natural gas is provided to this area by Piedmont Natural Gas Company. No sewer lines were depicted in the area of the site on the Johnston County GIS map. Wastewater would be disposed in an on-site septic system, or to the Johnston County wastewater system if the proposed location is deemed unsuitable for on-site wastewater, septic system treatment. However, the county's wastewater system would have to be extended to the site. No Build Alternative Under the No Build Alternative, no construction activities would take place; therefore, there would be requirement to connect to existing utilities, or construction of new utility connections. 50 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 4.7.2.3 Noise Noise is sound that is produced at levels that can be harmful and may be considered as unwanted by surrounding community, properties and residences. The Noise Control Act of 1972 (PL 92-574) and Executive Order (EO) 12088, require that federal agencies assess the impact of noise to the environment. Guidelines for noise have been established by the USEPA based on a calculation of noise by the Daytime and Nighttime averages, referred to as the Day/Night Levels (Ldn). The Ldn is reported as A -weighted decibels (dBAs) that occur within a 24-hour period (Table 4-6). (USEPA 1974) Table 4-6. USEPA Standard Noise Levels for Various Community Types Community Day Night Average (Ldn — dBA) Rural 35 to 50 Quiet Suburb 50 Normal Suburb 55 Urban Residential 60 Noisy Urban 65 Very Noisy Urban 70 Noise levels can vary depending on setting, built environment, and distance to the noise source. Noise levels by environment can be variable with levels at 40 decibels (dB) for wilderness areas and 90 dB for urban areas. Rural communities typically have lower dBs than their urban counterparts with rural communities around 50 dB or less. The USEPA has calculated that an individual exposed to a noise level of 73 dB for eight hours a day for 40 years would have a hearing loss smaller than 5 dB for 96% of the population. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is one of multiple agencies within the USDOT that regulates intermodal transportation. The FRA has established Railroad Noise Emission Compliance Regulations at 49 CFR 210, which prescribes compliance requirements for enforcing railroad noise emission standards. Additionally, in order to aid in compliance with environmental regulations and guidelines related to noise and vibration, the FRA has developed guidance documents and assessment procedures for assessing train noise, horn noise, and vibration impacts from major rail projects. Rocky Mount Site Edgecombe County has established noise regulations under Article III, Section 10-81 through 10-81 of the Code of Ordinances (current as of August 6, 2007). The noise ordinance states it is "unlawful for any person to create, assist in creating, permit, continue or permit continuance of any unreasonably loud, disturbing or unnecessary noises in the 51 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 county", but no specific decibel thresholds are established. The ordinance does not include specific exemptions. A baseline noise -level survey was not conducted for the Rocky Mount site (i.e., at the physical location) during the alternative analysis phase; however, it is expected that the site would have noise levels typical of a rural to suburban environment. Ambient noise within the project area generally consists mainly of existing transportation (highway and railroad), industrial/commercial/agricultural activities, rural, and natural sounds (i.e., moderate voice, wind, wildlife, and similar sounds). Several commercial/agricultural facilities are interspersed within the rural residential landscape, and these facilities could generate noise that would be heard at nearby receptors. Four Oaks Site Johnston County has established noise regulations under Article II, Section 12-31 through 12-33 of the County Code of Ordinances (current as of April 7, 2014). The noise ordinance prohibits "the creation, causing, or allowing of any unreasonably loud or disturbing noise in the county", but no specific decibel thresholds are established. The ordinance includes specific exemptions for "noises generated, made or created during the regular operations of a manufacturing or industrial facility" as long as the facility "has taken reasonable steps not to cause, create or allow unreasonably loud or disturbing noise not necessarily inherent to such manufacturing or industrial facility." Additionally, the ordinance has exemptions for construction operations and for noise from trains and other railroad rolling stock, when operated in a proper manner. A baseline noise -level survey has not been conducted for the Four Oaks site (i.e., at the physical location); however, it is expected that the site would have noise levels typical of a rural to suburban environment. Ambient noise within the project area generally consists mainly of existing transportation (highway and railroad), commercial/agricultural activities, rural, and natural sounds (i.e., moderate voice, wind, wildlife, and similar sounds). Several commercial/agricultural facilities are interspersed within the rural residential landscape, and these facilities could generate noise that would be heard at nearby receptors. Ralmn A Rita The discussion regarding the Johnston County noise ordinance as presented above for the Four Oaks site alternative, is applicable to the Selma A site alternative. A baseline noise -level survey has not been conducted for the Selma A site (i.e., at the physical location); however, it is expected that the project area would have noise levels typical of a rural environment surrounded by an active transportation corridor. Ambient noise within the project area consists mainly of transportation (highway and railroad), 52 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 commercial/agricultural activities, rural, and natural sounds (i.e. moderate voice, wind, wildlife, and similar sounds). Several commercial/agricultural facilities are interspersed within the rural residential landscape, and these facilities could generate noise that would be heard at nearby receptors. 1-95 contributes traffic noise to the southern portion project area. This section of 1-95 conveys heavy commercial truck and other traffic through the area. A rest area is located on 1-95 adjacent to the southern project area, and vehicle noise originating from this area would be noticeable near the rest area (vehicles idling, entering and leaving the area, and visitors entering and leaving vehicles). Noise -sensitive receptors within and adjacent to the project area include areas associated with single family housing. Residences are located throughout the project area and tend to be located on larger lots, except for a cluster of approximately 120 mobile homes and 20 single-family residences near the intersection of Lizzie Mill Road and Allied Mills Road. An in-home daycare facility is listed at 912 Lincoln Street, located approximately 1,100 -ft south of Lizzie Mill Road and the project area. There are no other known sensitive receptors in the form of schools, churches, or hospitals within or adjacent to the project area. The project area is primarily rural residential, agricultural, or undeveloped land. No Build Alternative Under the No Build Alternative, no construction activities would take place; therefore, there would be no short-term noise impacts from construction or long-term impacts from rail operations. 4.7.2.4 Zoning Rocky Mount Site As shown on Figure 8A in Appendix A, the Rocky Mount site is located entirely within the City of Rocky Mount Zoning District. The site is zoned A-1 (agricultural) and 1-2 (heavy industrial). The A-1 District is intended to provide for land situated on the fringe of the urban area that is agricultural in nature. The 1-2 District provides a location for manufacturing and related industries. Development of the site will require a Rezoning Process, conducted by Edgecombe County. Four Oaks Site As shown on Figure 8B in Appendix A, the Four Oaks site is divided into Johnston County zoning in the western portion and the Town of Four Oaks zoning in the eastern portion. The western portion of the site is zoned AR (agricultural and residential). The eastern 53 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 portion of the site is zoned is also zoned AR. Development of the site will require a Rezoning Process, conducted by Johnston County. Selma A Site As shown on Figure 8C in Appendix A, the Selma A site is divided into Johnston County zoning in the eastern portion and the Town of Selma zoning in the western portion. The eastern portion of the site is zoned AR. The western portion of the site is zoned R20 (single family residential with a minimum lot size of 20,000 sq. ft. utilizing public water), I- 1 (light industrial), and 1-2 (heavy industrial). Development of the site will require a Rezoning Process, conducted by Johnston County. No Build Alternative Under the No Build Alternative, no construction activities would take place; therefore, there would be no need for rezoning. 4.7.2.5 Solid and Hazardous Waste An independent data research company, Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) of Milford, Connecticut, provided a government agency database search report for each of the three alternatives. The EDR report was reviewed for information pertaining to storage and/or reported releases of hazardous substances and petroleum products on the site, and on surrounding properties that may affect the site. All properties listed in the report that do not have sufficient information for mapping their location are called orphan sites and are listed separately. Orphan sites are properties in government records reports prepared by commercial database vendors that cannot be geographically located (i.e., mapped or geocoded) due to an inadequate or incomplete address in the government database or computer map files. The review of these EDR reports does not constitute a full due diligence investigation. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment on the selected site is recommended to determine the likelihood that any identified facilities represent recognized environmental conditions in relation to the site or the surrounding properties. A Phase II Environmental Site Assessment may be necessary depending on the findings of the Phase I. A Phase I is intended to satisfy one of the requirements to permit the user to qualify for the innocent landowner, adjoining property owner, or bona fide prospective purchaser limitations on liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) (landowner liability protections). The Phase I should be conducted in general accordance with the scope and limitations of American Standard for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E 1527-13, "Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: 54 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process" and the USEPA's All Appropriate Inquiries rules. Additionally, asbestos surveys on all structures planned for demolition are required under State of North Carolina (10A NCAC 41C .0601 — Asbestos Hazard Management Program) and federal (40 CFR Part 61, Subpart M — National Emission Standard for Asbestos) asbestos regulations. Once identified, asbestos -containing materials (ACMs) may be required to be abated from the structures prior to demolition. ACMs identified in the structures, but not required to be abated, may be left in place during demolition activities; however, it is recommended that these materials be segregated from other demolition debris to reduce disposal costs. Lead-based paint (LBP) surveys would be recommended on all structures planned for demolition as well, since the segregation of LBP -coated surfaces from remaining demolition debris will reduce demolition disposal costs. As an alternative, some structures, primarily single-family residences, may be moved intact and relocated off the site, providing ACMs within the structures are not rendered friable during the relocation effort. Rocky Mount Site The EDR did not identify any portion of the Rocky Mount Site on the regulatory databases reviewed. There were no indications that the past or present uses of the site have created recognized environmental conditions in relation to the site or its surroundings. The EDR identified seven facilities on the regulatory lists within the established search radii from the site that may require further investigation, due to distance, regulatory information, and interpreted hydraulic gradient with respect to the site. In order to meet the ASTM Standard, file reviews were performed on these facilities in order to gain additional information on the potential impact to the project site. • The Hospira Facility (4285 North Wesleyan Blvd) is located approximately 4,000 - ft northwest of the site. This facility is listed on the State Leaking Aboveground Storage Tank (LAST) list dated February 5, 2016, the State Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) list dated February 5, 2016, and the Incident Management Database (IMD) dated July 21, 2006. Due to distance from the project site, this facility is not considered a recognized environmental condition. • The Schlage Lock Company (3551 North Wesleyan Blvd) is located approximately 1,300 -ft northwest of the site. This facility is listed on the State Underground Storage Tank (UST) list dated February 5, 2016 and the State Brownfields list 55 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 dated January 4, 2016. There is a Finalized Brownfields Agreement on this facility. Review of USGS topographical maps reveals groundwater flows towards the northwest. This facility is hydraulically downgradient of the project site and is not considered a recognized environmental condition. • Dominion Virginia Power (3791 North Wesleyan Blvd) is located approximately 1,500 -ft northwest of the site. This facility is listed on the State LAST list dated February 5, 2016 and on the SPILLS 90 list dated September 27, 2012. Records indicate that the listing is a mineral oil leak from a transformer on a downgradient property and is therefore not considered a recognized environmental condition. • Honeywell International (3475 North Wesleyan Blvd) is located approximately 800 - ft west-southwest of the site. This facility is listed on the State Hazardous Waste Sites (SHWS) lists dated February 15, 2016, the State Aboveground Storage Tank (AST) list dated February 5, 2016, the State LAST list dated February 5, 2016, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act — Small Quantity Generators (RCRA- SQG) list dated December 9, 2015, and the IMD dated July 21, 2006. Records indicate that the leak is a light non -aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) located under the building. Review of USGS topographical maps reveals groundwater flows towards the southwest. Because the LNAPL is defined and downgradient, this facility is not considered a recognized environmental condition. • Mitchell Engineering Company, formerly CECO Building Systems, (100 Red Iron Rd) is located approximately 400 -ft west of the site. This facility is listed on the SHWS lists dated February 15, 2016, the State UST list dated February 5, 2016, the State LUST list dated February 5, 2016, and the IMD dated July 21, 2006. Records indicate that USTs were removed from the facility, and there was no indication of a release. Records indicate the presence of hexavalent chromium and manganese in groundwater near a former waste disposal area. The report reviewed reveals one of the groundwater flow components in the waste disposal area flows towards the east and therefore may be hydraulically upgradient of the Rocky Mount site. For this reason, the Mitchell Engineering Company/CECO Building Systems is identified as a recognized environmental condition. • SHEETZ Store 447 (3715 North Wesleyan Blvd) is located approximately 1,300 -ft northwest of the site. This facility is located on the State UST list dated February 5, 2016 and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act — Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators (RCRA-CESQG) list dated December 9, 2015. Review of USGS topographical maps reveals groundwater flows towards the northwest. This facility is hydraulically downgradient of the project site and is not considered a recognized environmental condition. 56 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 • Moore's Building Supply (Hwy 301 N.) is located approximately 1,500 -ft west of the site. This facility is listed on the State UST list dated February 5, 2016. Review of USGS topographical maps reveals groundwater flows towards the west. This facility is hydraulically downgradient of the project site and is not considered a recognized environmental condition. No orphan sites were identified within the search radii of the Rocky Mount Site. Per the EDR, property tax information indicated that heating oil had been used in buildings located within the Rocky Mount site. Thus, there is a potential that ASTs or USTs are located within the Rocky Mount site, particularly on homestead/farmsteads. Although the actual presence of heating oil ASTs or USTs has not been confirmed, this finding indicates a condition of a material threat to the environment and the Rocky Mount site and is therefore identified as a recognized environmental condition. Four Oaks Site The EDR did not identify the Four Oaks site on the regulatory databases reviewed. There are no indications that the past or present uses of the site have created recognized environmental conditions in relation to the site or its surroundings. The EDR identified one facility on the regulatory lists within the established search radii from the site that may require further investigation. Due to distance, regulatory information, and interpreted hydraulic gradientwith respect to the site, the following facility may impact the site. To meet the ASTM Standard, file reviews were performed on this facility to gain additional information on the potential impact to the project site. • Ray's Garage & Auto Service (8835 Hwy 301 South) is located approximately 1,500 -ft south of the site. This facility was listed on the State LUST list dated November 06, 2015 and the IMD dated July, 2006. This facility was given a low- risk classification and a Close Out data of April 14, 2005 on the LUST regulatory list. This facility drains away from the site is and not considered to be a recognized environmental condition. No orphan sites were identified within the search radii of the Four Oaks site. Selma A Site The EDR did not identify the Selma A site on the regulatory databases reviewed for this assessment. There are no indications that the past or present uses of the site have created recognized environmental conditions in relation to the site or its surroundings. 57 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 The EDR report identified no facilities on the regulatory lists within the established search radii from the site that may require further investigation. No orphan sites were identified within the search radii of the Selma A site. 4.7.2.6 Socioeconomics EO 12898 (59 FR 7629) instructs federal agencies to identify and address, within the scope of the proposed programs, policies and activities that are disproportionately high in and/or may have potentially adverse effects on human health or environmental effects that may occur if such projects are being implemented. According to the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) guidelines, US Census data are typically used to determine minority and low-income population percentages in the affected area of a project to conduct a qualitative assessment of potential environmental justice impacts. Rocky Mount Site Edgecombe County is identified as the primary impact area for socioeconomic resources and it is this region that is identified as the area of impact for the consideration of environmental justice for the site alternative. The Rocky Mount site alternative is in the western portion of Edgecombe County and within Census Tract 206. Census community facts compared Census Tract 206, Rocky Mount, Edgecombe County, North Carolina, and the United States for the year 2014. The census community comparisons are shown in Table 4-7. Table 4-7. Rocky Mount Site Census Data Socioeconomic Community Fact Comparison Census Rocky Edgecombe North United Tract Mount County Carolina States 206 Median Household $32,979 $36,724 $49,799 $46,693 $53,422 Income Individuals Below 27.7% 25.5% 25.3% 17.6% 15.6% Poverty Percentage Race Percentages: White 33.7% 33.5% 38.8% 69.6% 72.4% African-American 60.9% 61.3% 57.4% 21.5% 12.6% American -Indian 0.1% 0.6% 0.3% 1.2% 0.9% Asian 0.2% 1.0% 0.2% 2.4% 4.8% Some other race 5.1% 3.6% 2.3% 3.1% 6.4% 58 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Four Oaks Site Johnston County is identified as the primary impact area for socioeconomic resources, and it is this region that is identified as the area of impact for the consideration of environmental justice for the site alternative. The Four Oaks site alternative is in the southwest portion of Johnston County and within Census Tracts 415.01 and 412.01. Census community facts compared Census Tracts 415.01 and 412.01, Johnston County, North Carolina, and the United States for the year 2014. The census community comparisons are shown in the Table 4-8. Table 4-8. Four Oaks Site Census Data Socioeconomic Community Fact Comparison Census Census Johnston North United Tract Tract County Carolina States 415.01 412.01 Median Household $47,529 $50,149 $49,799 $46,693 $53,422 Income Individuals Below 12.0% 22.8% 16.4% 17.6% 15.6% Poverty Percentage Race Percentages: White 84.6% 82.2% 78.5% 69.6% 72.4% African-American 6.8% 11.8% 15.1% 21.5% 12.6% American -Indian 3.2% 0.0% 0.4% 1.2% 0.9% Asian 1.8% 2.2% 0.7% 2.4% 4.8% Some other race 0.5% 2.7% 3.1% 3.1% 6.4% Two or more races 3.1% 1.6% 2.2% 2.3% 2.9% Selma A Site Johnston County is identified as the primary impact area for socioeconomic resources, and it is this region that is identified as the area of impact for the consideration of environmental justice for the site alternative. The Selma A site alternative is in the east -central part of Johnston County and within Census Tract 403.01. Census community facts compared Census Tract 403.01, Selma, Johnston County, North Carolina, and the United States for the year 2014. The census community comparisons are shown in Table 4-9. 59 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Table 4-9. Selma A Site Census Data Socioeconomic Community Fact Comparison Census Johnston North United Tract Selma County Carolina States 403.01 Median Household $24,858 $23,498 $49,799 $46,693 $53,422 Income Individuals Below Poverty 41.2% 42.1% 16.4% 17.6% 15.6% Percentage Race Percentages: White 53.7% 50.3% 78.5% 69.6% 72.4% African-American 20.7% 28.3% 15.1% 21.5% 12.6% American -Indian 1.8% 0.1% 0.4% 1.2% 0.9% Asian 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 2.4% 4.8% Some other race 22.6% 19.8% 3.1% 3.1% 6.4% Two or more 1.2% 1.4% 2.2% 2.3% 2.9% races No Build Alternative Under the No Build Alternative, no construction activities would take place; therefore, there would be no disproportionately high or potentially adverse effects on human health or environmental effects to minority or low-income populations. 4.7.2.7 Property Acquisition Due to recent decisions regarding the proposed CCX Terminal, CSX generally will not use eminent domain to acquire the properties associated with each site for the intermodal terminal. Direct land negotiations with each property owner will be required, and therefore sites with fewer underlying property owners will be preferable. In addition, a site would only be considered viable if all the landowners agree to option their property. A GIS database review was conducted on each of the three proposed project sites to identify the number of underlying property owners. The review indicated that there are 12 property owners underlying the Rocky Mount site, 58 property owners underlying the Four Oaks site, and 48 property owners underlying the Selma A site. These estimates of property owners could change as the site boundaries are finalized. .11 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 4.7.3 Level 2 Conclusions Level 2 of this alternatives analysis focused on three potential sites, Rocky Mount, Four Oaks, and Selma A, which were selected from an Initial Screening process that included a total of twelve sites. For each of the three site alternatives, the potential constraints for construction and operation of the proposed facility and the current environmental conditions were determined. The analysis also included a determination of the role of federal, state, and local regulatory review and permitting. The No Build Alternative (No Action Alternative) was also presented herein. As indicated previously in Section 4.6, the fine -level site screening criteria were selected from resources that were readily quantifiable. These resources would typically require permits or approvals under the proposed development action. Although not every resource that could be examined was considered for the fine -level screening of alternatives, the resources that were selected for this analysis were presumed to be potential key constraints to project development. The selected resources included: air quality, cultural and historic resources, threatened and endangered species, and water resources. Water resources further comprised, wetlands, streams, riparian buffers, open water, and stormwater. The site development considerations included: highway network and access, utilities, noise, zoning, solid and hazardous waste, socioeconomics, property acquisition and other considerations. Among the set of resources, water resources and property acquisition issues are presumed to be critical components in the potential development of any of the three site alternatives. Please note that further detailed studies will further refine the actual wetland and stream impacts. Impacts to cultural or historical resources, or potential impacts to listed (protected) species, may be minimal for each site; therefore, a significant difference in the degree of impact among the sites would not be expected. A significant difference in the degree of impact among the sites, as related to stormwater, noise, air, solid/hazardous waste, and socioeconomics would also not be expected. Highway network and access does not appear to be an issue for any of the three site alternatives. The amount of effort associated with re -zoning any of the three sites may not vary significantly. Critical components for site selection have been summarized in Table 4-10. 61 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Table 4-10. Level 2 Analysis, Critical Components Comparison Site Name Rocky Mount Four Oaks Selma A Stream Impacts (USGS) 13,506 LF 19,294 LF 7,002 LF Wetland / Open Water Impacts (NWI) 14.0 ac 7.7 ac 34 ac Potential Relocations 5 34 24 Approximate Affected Parcels 20 78 49 The comparative analysis of preliminary estimated impacts to water resources for the three sites indicate that potential impacts and associated mitigation costs would likely be comparable for each for the three sites. The Rocky Mount site would result in impacts to the fewest properties and would require the fewest relocations of the three sites. Based on the evaluation of all the alternative sites, the Rocky Mount site is the preferred project alternative. Strong positive support for the Rocky Mount site was provided by the public and private sectors of the City of Rocky Mount, as well as Edgecombe and Nash Counties. 4.8 LEVEL 3 ANALYSIS Following the selection of the preferred project alternative (Rocky Mount site) under the Level 2 alternatives analysis, the permittee developed various iterations of the intermodal terminal and second mainline, in an effort to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands and streams. 4.8.1 Intermodal Terminal Three on-site design alternatives were developed to determine which site layout would minimize impacts to the greatest practicable extent. Design Alternative 1 and 2 are on- site design alternatives which were rejected due to increased impacts. These generalized alternatives are presented below and in Appendix A. A significantly minimized site layout has not been presented as part of the Level 3 analysis, as a smaller footprint would not meet the purpose and need of the intermodal facility, and would therefore not be economically feasible to construct and operate. 4.8.1.1 Design Alternative 1 Design Alternative 1 depicts a site layout variation with the site shifted towards the north to maintain a greater buffer off of the commercial businesses along Fountain Park Drive. Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 This alternative would require greater impacts to Beech Branch to the north, and would also impact the Powell -Battle -Jones Cemetery to the south. Additionally, it would require the piping or filling of approximately 8,558 LF of streams, filling of approximately 20.06 acres of wetlands, and filling if approximately 1.88 acres of open water ponds. Due to the greater amount of wetland and stream impacts, the potential for floodplain or floodway issues associated with the significant Beech Branch impacts, and the impacts to the Powell -Battle -Jones Cemetery, this alternative was not selected. 4.8.1.2 Design Alternative 2 Design Alternative 2 depicts another site layout variation with the site shifted towards the east to avoid the Seegars Fence Company, to avoid impacts to the Powell -Battle -Jones Cemetery and the Mark's Chapel Cemetery, and to minimize impacts to the Beech Branch floodplain and floodway. Although this alternative would minimize impacts to these other facilities, it would require the filling or piping of approximately 8,161 LF of stream, the filling of approximately 23.03 acres of wetlands, and the filling of approximately 1.76 acres of open water ponds. Due to the significantly greater impacts to environmental resources, this alternative was not selected. 4.8.1.3 Proposed Site Layout For the proposed site layout, impacts to Beech Branch were avoided to the greatest practicable extent. Wetland impacts were further reduced by shifting the site layout slightly closer to the CSX mainline track. This shift also decreased impacts to open waters. Impacts to adjacent cemeteries were completely avoided. A summary of the three alternative on-site alternatives is presented in Table 4-11. Table 4-11. Level 3 On -Site Alternative Comparison Design Alternative Wetland Impacts (acre) Stream Impacts (linear feet) Open Water Impacts (acre) Other Impacts Design Alternative 1 20.06 8,558 1.88 1 cemetery Design Alternative 2 23.03 8,131 1.76 None Proposed Alternative 19.56 8,170 1.63 None 4.8.2 Second Mainline Efforts to avoid and minimize impacts along the Second Mainline consisted adjustment of track placement, including track centers and shoulders. Specifically, the roadbed (shoulder width) in wetland areas for the Second Mainline was reduced from 15 -ft (CSX 63 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 standard) to 12 -ft to reduce impacts by the bridges. The design change primarily encompassed the Lane Swamp/Swift Creek watershed and resulted in a reduction in wetland impact of 0.76 acres, including elimination of impacts to wetlands M -LT and MM - SM. Stream impacts increased by 103 LF following the minimization efforts, but impacts to stream S-20 were eliminated. 4.8.3 Summary of Level 3 Analysis and Selection of Preferred Design Following selection of the preferred project alternative (Rocky Mount site) under the Level 2 alternatives analysis, various iterations of the site layout were developed which met the purpose and need of the project. The Proposed Alternative was the third option reviewed, and reduced impacts on the project site to the greatest practicable extent. Design of the second mainline reconstruction was modified smaller than normal track spacing within environmentally sensitive areas to reduce impacts. The positive attributes of Proposed Alternative are summarized below: • An optional alignment was studied by design engineers to extend lead tracks in either direction from the yard, but was ultimately rejected due to increased impacts both to the environmentally sensitive areas and adjacent properties along the CSX ROW. • The preferred design will avoid impacting the two cemeteries within the southern portion of the yard, as achieved by the shifting of the locations of Support Tracks and Process Tracks. • The preferred design will avoid impacting the floodplain along Beech Branch at the north end of the yard, as achieved by the relocation of the wye track to the south end of the yard. This action eliminates the potential for impacts to downstream water quality from fill impacts to the floodplain along Beech Branch. • The preferred design incorporates changes in track locations, which in turn reduces impacts to wetlands and stream (i.e., Streams SG and SI and Wetland 1). 64 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 5 WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES & RIPARIAN BUFFERS Waters of the US, including streams and wetlands, are defined by 33 CFR Part 328.3 et al. and are protected by Section 404 and other applicable sections of the CWA (33 USC 1344). Impacts to these regulated resources are administered and enforced by the Wilmington District of the USACE, as well as other federal and state government agencies. The waters of the US that occur within the Project Area and proposed impacts to those waters are discussed in this section 5.1 DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 5.1.1 Wetlands The Project Site was evaluated for potentially jurisdictional wetlands using the Routine On -Site Determination Method as defined in the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain regional supplement (Environmental Laboratory 2010). This technique uses a multi -parameter approach which requires positive evidence of three criteria: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. Areas exhibiting wetland characteristics within the project site were considered potentially jurisdictional waters. The landward limits of these wetlands were marked (flagged) in the field with labeled survey tape tied to vegetation or stakes. The location of each flag marked during the field delineation was collected using a hand-held Global Positioning System (GPS) device. The wetland delineation was conducted within the CCX terminal section from September to October 2016 and the Second Mainline component from December 2016 to February 2017. Each area identified as a wetland on the site was also evaluated using NC WAM To facilitate the wetland delineation, an in-house review of potentially jurisdictional waters was conducted. The review was comprised of the NRCS Edgecombe and Nash Counties Soil Survey GIS data (Figures 4a and 4b), the USGS digital 7.5' topography (Figures 5a and 5b [Drake 1963, Rocky Mount 1998, and Whitakers 1961, North Carolina Quadrangles]), and the USFWS NWI GIS data (Figures 6a and 6b). These maps were used to direct the wetland delineation and to highlight areas having listed hydric soils or topographic configurations suggesting the presence of wetland areas. Soil map units occurring within the site were identified in Section 5.2.3 of the ER. The USFWS NWI map depicts the following features within the project site (Figures 6a and 6b): • A Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland, which encompasses Beech Branch, is mapped in the northern portion of the project site and two Freshwater 65 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Forested/Shrub Wetlands, which encompass Compass Creek and Hornbeam Branch, are mapped along the southern lead tracks of the site. • Three Freshwater Emergent Wetlands and one Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland are mapped within the central portion of the project site. Fifty-eight jurisdictional wetland areas and two non -jurisdictional isolated wetlands were delineated within the project site. The locations/boundaries of these areas are shown on Figures 7a through 71). The wetland areas, their corresponding NC WAM classification and overall wetland rating (assessment score), areal extent, and general location are presented in Table 5-1. The NC WAM overall ratings for the delineated wetland areas vary from low to high. The vegetative composition of the wetland plant communities within the site is described in Section 7.5.1 of this ER. The recorded wetland determination field data forms and the NC WAM data forms are included in Appendix B. Ground level photography of current site conditions for the wetland areas is provided in Appendix C. Table 5-1. Wetlands within the Project Site Wetland ID NC WAM Classification / Area General Site Location Overall Rating (acres) CCX Terminal Riparian Wetlands A Headwater Forest / High- 10.82 Intermodal (southern) forested / Low-clearcut E Headwater Forest / Medium- 5.89 Intermodal (central) High H Headwater Forest / Medium- 2.17 Intermodal (central) High Bottomland Hardwood Forest I (Low) Headwater Forest 9.02 Intermodal (northern) (High) J Floodplain Pool / High 0.25 Intermodal (northern) K Floodplain Pool / High 0.14 Intermodal (northern) L Floodplain Pool / High 0.24 Intermodal (northern) M Floodplain Pool / High 0.28 Intermodal (northern) N Bottomland Hardwood Forest 1.97 Intermodal (northern) l Medium O Headwater Forest / Low 0.32 Intermodal (northern) (linear wetland) P Headwater Forest / Low 0.35 Intermodal (northern) (linear wetland) Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Wetland ID NC WAM Classification / Area General Site Location Overall Rating (acres) O Headwater Forest / Low 0.20 Intermodal (northern) (linear wetland) E -LT Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.04 Intermodal Lead Tracks l High (southern) F -LT Headwater Forest / Low 0.01 Intermodal Lead Tracks (linear wetland) (southern) G -LT Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.38 Intermodal Lead Tracks l High (southern) J -LT Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.32 Intermodal Lead Tracks l High (southern) S -LT Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.01 Intermodal Lead Tracks / High (central) M -LT Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.01 Intermodal Lead Tracks l Medium (northern) M' -LT Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.13 Intermodal Lead Tracks l High (southern) MA -SL Headwater Forest / High 0.05 Intermodal Lead Tracks (southern) O -LT Headwater Forest / Low 0.09 Intermodal Lead Tracks (linear wetland) (southern) P -LT Headwater Forest / Medium 0.21 Intermodal Lead Tracks (linear wetland) (southern) S -LT Basin Wetland / Low 0.04 Intermodal Lead Tracks (southern) T -LT Headwater Forest / Low 0.07 Intermodal Lead Tracks (linear wetland) (southern) W -LT Headwater Forest / Low 0.17 Intermodal Lead Tracks (linear wetland) (northern) CCX Riparian Wetlands Subtotal Area 33.18 Non -riparian Wetlands B Basin Wetland (High) / 10.87 Intermodal (southern) Hardwood Flat (High) C Highwood Flat / High 0.64 Intermodal (southern) D Basin Wetland / Medium 0.20 Intermodal (southern) CCX Non -Riparian Wetlands Subtotal 11.71 Isolated Wetlands - Non jurisdictional F Basin Wetland / Medium 0.04 Intermodal (central) G Basin Wetland / High 0.21 Intermodal (central) CCX Non -jurisdictional Isolated Wetlands 0.25 Subtotal CCX Total Jurisdictional Wetlands Area 44.89 C� Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Wetland ID NC WAM Classification / Area General Site Location Overall Rating (acres) Second Mainline Riparian Wetlands A -SM Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.09 Second Mainline (southern) l High AA -SM Headwater Forest / Medium 0.06 Second Mainline (northern) B -LT Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.13 Second Mainline (southern) l High B -SM Bottomland Hardwood Forest 1.04 Second Mainline (southern) l High BB -SM Headwater Forest / Low 0.61 Second Mainline (northern) C -SM Bottomland Hardwood Forest 1.21 Second Mainline (southern) l High CC -SM Headwater Forest / Low 0.07 Second Mainline (northern) D -SM Bottomland Hardwood Forest 1.03 Second Mainline (southern) l High DD -SM Headwater Forest / Low 0.12 Second Mainline (northern) EE -SM Riverine Swamp Forest / High 0.27 Second Mainline (northern) FF -SM Riverine Swamp Forest / High 20.38 Second Mainline (northern) GG -SM Headwater Forest / Medium 0.75 Second Mainline (northern) H -SM Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.35 Second Mainline (southern) l High HH -SM Riverine Swamp Forest / High 0.47 Second Mainline (northern) II -SM Riverine Swamp Forest / High 2.03 Second Mainline (northern) JJ -SM Headwater Forest / Low 0.61 Second Mainline (northern) (linear wetland) KA -SM Headwater Forest High 0.02 Second Mainline (southern) KK -SM Headwater Forest / Medium 1.51 Second Mainline (northern) L -SM Headwater Forest / Low 0.66 Second Mainline (southern) (linear wetland) LL -SM Headwater Forest Medium 0.71 Second Mainline (northern) MA -SM Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.15 Second Mainline MM -SM Riverine Swamp Forest / High 1.79 Second Mainline (northern) .: Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Wetland ID NC WAM Classification / Area General Site Location Overall Rating (acres) N -SM Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.63 Second Mainline (southern) l High NN -SM Headwater Forest / Low 0.04 Second Mainline (central) (linear wetland) Q -SM Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.31 Second Mainline (southern) Medium R -SM Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.14 Second Mainline (southern) l Medium U -SM Headwater Forest Low (linear 0.18 Second Mainline (southern) wetland) X -SM Headwater Forest / Low 0.09 Second Mainline (northern) Y -SM Headwater Forest / Low 0.03 Second Mainline (northern) Z -SM Headwater Forest / Low 0.09 Second Mainline (northern) Second Mainline Total Jurisdictional 35.57 Wetlands Project Site Grand Total Jurisdictional 80.46 Wetlands A request for Verification of Jurisdictional Determination (JD) was submitted, on behalf of CSX, to the USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office for the delineated wetland areas within the CCX Terminal section of the site. The USACE JD review was conducted on October 19 and December 8, 2016, by the USACE and on October 19 and 27, 2016. The landward limits of the jurisdictional wetlands (flag points) within the CCX terminal area were surveyed by a registered Professional Land Surveyor (Appendix D). The Preliminary JD and Approved JD have not been issued for the project site to date. The landward limits of the jurisdictional wetlands within the Second Mainline areas were mapped using hand- held GPS units. Wetlands F and G are isolated basin wetlands within the central portion of the Intermodal Terminal. Therefore, neither wetland is subject to Section 404 regulatory jurisdiction (USACE). 5.1.2 Streams Potentially jurisdictional streams on the CCX Terminal site were evaluated from September to October 2016 and the Second Mainline Project component from December 2016 to February 2017. Potential streams were evaluated using the NCDWR Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and Their Origins Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 (Version 4.11), effective September 1, 2010 (Division of Water Resources 2010). The linear extents of these surface waters were marked (flagged) in the field with labeled survey tape tied to vegetation or stakes. The location of each flag marked during the field delineation was collected using a hand-held GPS device. Each stream reach was also evaluated using the North Carolina Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM) per the methodology outlined in the NC SAM Draft User Manual, effective March, 2013 (NC Stream Functional Assessment Team 2013). The NC SAM is a field method used to determine the level of stream function relative to the reference condition for each of 29 general categories of North Carolina streams. To facilitate the stream evaluation, an in-house review of potentially jurisdictional streams within the site was performed. The review of the project site comprised the NRCS Edgecombe and Nash Counties Soil Survey GIS data (Figures 4a and 4b)), the USGS digital 7.5' topography (Figures 5a and 5b) (Drake 1963, Rocky Mount 1998, and Whitakers 1961, North Carolina Quadrangles), and the USFWS NWI GIS data (Figures 6a and 6b). These maps were used to direct the stream evaluation and highlight areas having topographic configurations suggesting the presence of drainage features. The USGS topographic map depicts numerous features within the site (Figures 5a and 5b): Beech Branch and four associated unnamed tributaries, Compass Creek and two associated unnamed tributaries, and Hornbeam Branch and one associated unnamed tributary. Forty-two potentially jurisdictional stream features were classified and delineated within the site (Figures 7a through 71). The NCDWR Stream Identification scores and classifications are presented in Table 5-2 for these streams, as well as the NC SAM overall stream ratings (assessment scores), reach lengths, and general location. Within the CCX Terminal area, Stream SB and Stream SC historically comprised one reach; however, recent land use practices, particularly timber harvesting, have altered the connectivity between these two streams. Stream SB occurs within a forested wetland and Stream SC occurs within the southern timber clear-cut (imbedded within a narrow forested buffer). The recorded stream identification field data forms and the NC SAM data forms are included in Appendix B. Ground level photography of current site conditions for the stream features is provided in Appendix C. 70 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Table 5-2. Streams within the Project Site 71 NCDWR Stream NC SAM Reach Stream ID Classification (Score) Overall Length General Site Location Rating (linear feet) CCX Terminal Stream SB Intermittent (22.5) High 734 Intermodal Terminal (southern portion) Intermittent/Perennial Intermodal Terminal Stream SC breakpoint (29.25) Medium Low 2,343 (southern portion) Intermittent (19) High Stream SD Perennial (40/33.5) (forested) 1,650 Intermodal Terminal Intermittent (20.75/25.25) Low (ag. (central portion) Field) Stream SE Perennial (37.5/30.5) High 2,713 Intermodal Terminal (central portion) Stream SEB Intermittent (24.5) High 216 Intermodal Terminal (central portion) Stream SEC Perennial (35) High 234 Intermodal Terminal (central portion) Stream SED Ephemeral/Intermittent Medium 184 Intermodal Terminal break point (18) (central portion) Perennial (30.5) High (forested) Intermodal Terminal Stream SEE Ephemeral/Intermittent Low (ag. 730 (central portion) break point (18.75) Field) Stream SF Intermittent (20.5) High 403 Intermodal Terminal (southern portion) Stream SG Intermittent (19.5) High 1,340 Intermodal Terminal Perennial (35.5) (northern portion) Stream SGA Intermittent (26/23.5) Medium 841 Intermodal Terminal (northern portion) Stream SI Intermodal Terminal (Beech Perennial (44.5/45.5) High 2552 (northern portion) Branch) Stream S1 Perennial (38.5) High 87 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (southern) Stream S2 Perennial (39) High 134 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (southern) Stream S4 Perennial (42.5) High 189 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (southern) Stream S6 Perennial (32) High 869 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (southern) Stream S7 Ephemeral/Intermittent Low, refer to SC (Formerly 335 Intermodal Terminal - Lead break point (18.5) Tracks (southern) Stream S8 Perennial (30) High 44 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (southern) 71 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 72 NCDWR Stream NC SAM Reach Stream ID Classification (Score) Overall Length General Site Location Rating (linear feet) Stream S10 Perennial (30.5) High 86 Intermodal Terminal (central portion) Stream S12 Perennial (45.5) High 58 Intermodal Terminal (central portion) Stream S13 Intermittent (27.5) Medium 224 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (northern) Stream Perennial (30.5) High 186 Intermodal Terminal - Lead S13A Tracks (northern) Stream S22 Intermittent (22.5) High 57 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (southern) CCX Total Reach 16,209 Second Mainline Stream S1 Perennial (38.5) High 235 Second Mainline (southern segment) Stream S2 Perennial (39) High 744 Second Mainline (southern segment) Stream S3 Intermittent (29) High 613 Second Mainline (southern segment) Stream S4 Perennial (42.5) High 337 Second Mainline (southern segment) Stream S6 Perennial (32) High 939 Second Mainline (southern segment) Stream S8 Perennial (30) High 141 Second Mainline (southern segment) Stream S9 Perennial (30.5) High 2,201 Second Mainline (southern segment) Stream S10 Perennial (30.5) High 49 Second Mainline (central segment) Stream Intermittent (26.5) High 281 Second Mainline S11A (central segment) Stream S13 Intermittent (27.5) Medium 250 Second Mainline (northern segment) Stream S14 Intermittent (29.5) High 1,097 Second Mainline (northern segment) Stream S16 Intermittent (28) High 1,532 Second Mainline (northern segment) Stream S17 Perennial (Swift Creek) High 271 Second Mainline (43) (northern segment) Stream S18 Perennial (30.5) High 1,109 Second Mainline (northern segment) Stream S19 Intermittent (24) Medium 408 Second Mainline (northern segment) 72 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 NCDWR scoring and classification: <19= ephemeral; 19 to <30 = intermittent; >_30 = perennial The USACE JD review for the CCX terminal was conducted on October 19 and December 8, 2016 by the USACE and on October 19 and 27, 2016 by NCDWR. The Preliminary JD for the project site has not been issued to date. NCDWR reviewed the delineated streams within the Second Mainline areas on April 28, 2017. The landward limits of the jurisdictional streams within the Second Mainline were mapped using handheld GPS units. 5.1.3 Open Waters Four open water features (Ponds 1, 2, 3, and 4) occur within the central portion of the site (Figures 7a through 71. These manmade surface waters are generally confined by spoil material (berms) and are not considered wetlands. However, all four ponds connect to waters of the US via streams or agricultural drainage ditches. The acreage values of the ponds are as follows: • Pond 1: 0.22 acre • Pond 2: 1.37 acre =�=[H[i1 Elto]M. �' • Pond 4: 0.30 acre (non -jurisdictional pond) The four ponds were included in the request for Verification of JD to the USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office. The USACE JD review was conducted by Samantha Dailey (USACE) and Jennifer Burdette (NCDWR) concurrent with the inspection of the delineated wetlands and streams (October and December 2016). The Preliminary JD and the Approved JD for the project site have not been issued to date. NCDWR issued the 73 NCDWR Stream NC SAM Reach Stream ID Classification (Score) Overall Length General Site Location Rating (linear feet) Stream S20 Intermittent (25) High 225 Second Mainline (northern segment) Stream S21 Intermittent (25.5) High 347 Second Mainline (southern segment) Stream S22 Intermittent (22.5) High 240 Second Mainline (southern segment) Stream S23 Intermittent (20) High 34 Second Mainline (central segment) Second Mainline Total Reach 11,053 Project Site Grand Total Reach 27,262 NCDWR scoring and classification: <19= ephemeral; 19 to <30 = intermittent; >_30 = perennial The USACE JD review for the CCX terminal was conducted on October 19 and December 8, 2016 by the USACE and on October 19 and 27, 2016 by NCDWR. The Preliminary JD for the project site has not been issued to date. NCDWR reviewed the delineated streams within the Second Mainline areas on April 28, 2017. The landward limits of the jurisdictional streams within the Second Mainline were mapped using handheld GPS units. 5.1.3 Open Waters Four open water features (Ponds 1, 2, 3, and 4) occur within the central portion of the site (Figures 7a through 71. These manmade surface waters are generally confined by spoil material (berms) and are not considered wetlands. However, all four ponds connect to waters of the US via streams or agricultural drainage ditches. The acreage values of the ponds are as follows: • Pond 1: 0.22 acre • Pond 2: 1.37 acre =�=[H[i1 Elto]M. �' • Pond 4: 0.30 acre (non -jurisdictional pond) The four ponds were included in the request for Verification of JD to the USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office. The USACE JD review was conducted by Samantha Dailey (USACE) and Jennifer Burdette (NCDWR) concurrent with the inspection of the delineated wetlands and streams (October and December 2016). The Preliminary JD and the Approved JD for the project site have not been issued to date. NCDWR issued the 73 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 On -Site Determination for Applicability to the Tar -Pamlico Riparian Buffer Rules on December 7, 2016. The extents of these jurisdictional features were surveyed and this survey is included in Appendix D. Ground level photography of current site conditions for the ponds is provided in Appendix C. 5.1.4 Riparian Buffers Review of the State of North Carolina Buffer Regulations indicate the project is located within the Tar Pamlico river basin with buffer rules and is subject to state riparian buffer rule regulations. The Tar Pamlico Riparian Buffer Rule establishes a 50 -ft wide riparian buffer adjacent to surface waters in the Tar Pamlico River Basin (intermittent streams, perennial streams, lakes, ponds, and estuaries), excluding wetlands. For the purpose of this Rule, a surface water shall be present if the feature is approximately shown on either the most recent version of the soil survey map prepared by the NRCS or the most recent version of the 1: 24,000 scale (7.5 minute) quadrangle topographic maps prepared by the USGS. Riparian buffers adjacent to surface waters that do not appear on either of the maps may not be subject to this Rule. Among the 42 streams identified within the study area, 17 streams were shown on the USGS topographic map. These features will be subject to the Tar Pamlico River Riparian Buffer Rule unless determined otherwise by NCDWR. The 17 streams mentioned above as well as 6 other stream channels and one pond are also shown on the NRCS Soil Surveys of Edgecombe and Nash Counties, North Carolina, throughout the study area. These features are subject to the Tar Pamlico Buffer Riparian Buffer Rule as determined by NCDWR. Edgecombe County does not have any additional riparian buffer requirements; it defers to the Tar Pamlico Buffer Rule. Nash County, per its Code of Ordinances Appendix A Article XII Section 12.3.4.3, an area within 50 -ft of intermittent and perennial streams, ponds, lakes and estuarine waters in the basin where development is not allowed. These areas are shown on either the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic map or the NRCS Soil Survey map unless the owner can show that the activity has been approved by NCDWR. Certain allowable uses within the buffer are described in 15A NCAC 2B .0259. A discussion with Nash County planner, Adam Carson, on May 4, 2017, confirmed that the county's riparian buffer rules were written to mirror the Tar Pamlico Buffer Rule. The City of Rocky Mount does not have any additional riparian buffer requirements; it defers to the Tar Pamlico Buffer Rule 74 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 5.2 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 5.2.1 Wetlands To complete the construction of the CCX Terminal and the Second Mainline, permanent impacts to wetlands and streams will be necessary. Table 5-3 presents the proposed impacts to the jurisdictional wetland areas on the project. The Plan Views and Cross - Section drawings depicting the proposed impacts to wetlands, streams and riparian buffers within the project site are included in Appendix E. Wetlands F and G are isolated basin wetlands within the central portion of the Project Site. Therefore, neither wetland is subject to Section 404 regulatory jurisdiction (USACE). An Isolated and Other Non -404 Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters Permit is required by the NCDEQ when a proposed project involves impacts to wetlands or waters that the USACE determines are not jurisdictional under Section 404 of the CWA (15A NCAC 02H .1300 Isolated Wetlands and Waters [non -404] Rules). However, based on personal communication with Jennifer Burdette of the NCDWR on May 5, 2017, the proposed impacts to Wetlands F and G from site development are approved. This approval from Ms. Burdette was based on the combined area of the wetland impact and the permitting threshold under Section 15A NCAC 02H .1305 (c)(2); i.e., impacts less than 1/3 of an acre of isolated classified surface waters may be approved. With these considerations, Wetlands F and G are not shown in Table 5-3. Table 5-3. Proposed Impacts to Wetlands within the Project Area. Wetland ID NC WAM Classification / Area General Site Location Overall Rating (acres) CCX Terminal Riparian Wetlands Wetland A Headwater Forest High -forested / 2.17 Intermodal Terminal Low -clear-cut (southern portion) Wetland E Headwater Forest Medium / High 4.34 Intermodal Terminal (central portion) Wetland H Headwater Forest Medium / High 1.72 Intermodal Terminal (central portion) Wetland I Bottomland Hardwood Forest 3.55 Intermodal Terminal (Low) - Headwater Forest (High) (northern portion) Wetland J Floodplain Pool / High 0.25 Intermodal Terminal (northern portion) Wetland N Bottomland Hardwood Forest / 0.07 Intermodal Terminal Medium (northern portion) 75 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Wetland ID NC WAM Classification / Area General Site Location Overall Rating (acres) Wetland O Headwater Forest / Low (linear 0.32 Intermodal Terminal wetland) (northern portion) Wetland P Headwater Forest / Low (linear 0.17 Intermodal Terminal wetland) (northern portion) Wetland Q Headwater Forest / Low (linear 0.07 Intermodal Terminal wetland) (northern portion) Wetland B -LT Bottomland Hardwood Forest / 0.10 Intermodal Terminal - Lead High Track (southern segment) Wetland E -LT Bottomland Hardwood Forest / <0.01 Intermodal Terminal - Lead High Track (southern segment) Wetland F -LT Headwater Forest / Low (linear 0.01 Intermodal Terminal - Lead wetland) Track (southern segment) Wetland G -LT Bottomland Hardwood Forest / 0.45 Intermodal Terminal - Lead High Track (southern segment) Wetland J -LT Bottomland Hardwood Forest / 0.44 Intermodal Terminal - Lead High Track (southern segment) Wetland M -LT Bottomland Hardwood Forest / 0 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Medium .01 Track (northern segment) Wetland M' -LT Bottomland Hardwood Forest / 0.13 Intermodal Terminal - Lead High Track (southern segment) Wetland MA -LT Headwater Forest / High 0.04 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Track (southern segment) Wetland O -LT Headwater Forest / Low (linear 0.09 Intermodal Terminal - Lead wetland) Track (southern segment) Wetland P -LT Headwater Forest / Medium 0.21 Intermodal Terminal - Lead (linear wetland) Track (southern segment) Wetland S -LT Basin Wetland / Low 0.04 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Track (southern segment) Wetland T -LT Headwater Forest / Low (linear 0.07 Intermodal Terminal - Lead wetland) Track (southern segment) Wetland W -LT Headwater Forest / Low (linear 0.17 Intermodal Terminal - Lead wetland) Track (northern segment) CCX Riparian Wetlands Impact Subtotal Area 14.42 Non -riparian Wetlands Wetland B Basin Wetland (High) - Hardwood 5.14 Intermodal Terminal Flat (High) (southern portion) CCX Non -Riparian Wetlands Impact Subtotal 5.14 CCX Total Jurisdictional Wetlands Impact Area 19.56 Second Mainline Riparian Wetlands Wetland A -SM Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.01 Second Mainline `Z Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Wetland ID NC WAM Classification / Area General Site Location Overall Rating (acres) Wetland AA -SM Headwater Forest / Medium <0.01 Second Mainline (northern segment) Wetland B -SM Hgh mland Hardwood Forest / 0.51 Second Mainline (southern segment Wetland BB -SM Headwater Forest / Low 0.05 Second Mainline (northern segment) Wetland CC -SM Headwater Forest / Low 0.06 Second Mainline (northern segment) Wetland D -SM Hgh mland Hardwood Forest / 0.04 Second Mainline (southern segment Wetland DD -SM Headwater Forest / Low 0.12 Second Mainline (northern segment) Wetland EE -SM Riverine Swamp Forest / High 0.14 Second Mainline (northern segment) Wetland FF -SM Riverine Swamp Forest High 2.43 Second Mainline (northern segment) Wetland HH -SM Riverine Swamp Forest / High <0.01 Second Mainline (northern segment) Wetland JJ -SM Headwater Forest / Low (linear 0.26 Second Mainline (northern wetland) segment) Wetland LL -SM Headwater Forest / Medium 0.02 Second Mainline (northern segment) Wetland MA -SL Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.15 Second Mainline Wetland R -LT Bottomland Hardwood Forest / <0.01 Second Mainline (southern Medium segment) Wetland Y Headwater Forest <0.01 Second Mainline Second Mainline Total Jurisdictional Wetlands 3.79 Impacts Project Site Grand Total Wetland Impacts 23.35 Approximately 0.46 acre of temporary wetland impacts will occur from the bridge rehabilitation activities. The temporary wetland impacts will result from temporary work bridges and temporary causeway construction. Tree clearing required for the temporary work bridges and causeway construction will be completed by non -mechanized methods. Trees removed during this effort will be transported to upland areas for disposal. Sediment and erosion control measures will be installed per the approved E&SC Plan. After completion of the bridge construction, the temporary causeways will be removed followed by the removal of the temporary bridges. All temporary ramps and laydown areas will be removed and restored to pre -construction conditions. Sediment and erosion control measures will be removed once the site is stabilized. The minimal impact associated with the placement of additional pilings to the bridge piers of the five existing structures is 77 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 required to meet the current construction codes and safety standards of CSX. Maintenance and rehabilitation is required to strengthen the existing bridge piers of the five structures to accommodate CSX's current 14 -ft track centers standard. The bridges are currently built to accommodate 13 -ft track centers. 5.2.2 Streams To complete the construction of the CCX Terminal and the Second Mainline, permanent impacts streams will be necessary. Table 5-4 presents the proposed impacts to the stream features on the project. The Plan Views and Cross -Section drawings depicting the proposed impacts to wetlands, streams and riparian buffers within the project site are included in Appendix E. Site development will include the placement of fill material in named surface waters within the Project Area. Table 5-4. Proposed Impacts to Streams within the Project Area. Stream ID NCDWR Stream Impact Area (linear General Site Location Classification feet) CCX Terminal Stream SB Intermittent 269.4 Intermodal Terminal (southern portion) Stream SC Perennial 35.4 Intermodal Terminal (southern portion) Stream SC Intermittent 127.5 Intermodal Terminal (southern portion) Stream SD Intermittent 1,124.8 Intermodal Terminal (central portion) Stream SD Intermittent 168.7 Intermodal Terminal (central portion) Stream SE Perennial 2,149.1 Intermodal Terminal (central portion) Stream SEC Perennial 235.7 Intermodal Terminal (central portion) Stream SED Intermittent 184.7 Intermodal Terminal (central portion) Stream SEE Perennial 444.4 Intermodal Terminal (central portion) Stream SG Perennial 1,119.2 Intermodal Terminal (northern portion) Stream SI (Beech Perennial 664.2 Intermodal Terminal Branch) (northern portion) Stream S2 Perennial 88.4 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (southern) 78 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Stream ID NCDWR Stream Impact Area (linear General Site Location Classification feet) Stream S4 Perennial 130.8 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (southern) Stream S6 Perennial 736.2 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (southern) Stream S6 Perennial 165.7 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (southern) Stream S7 Intermittent 324.8 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (southern) Stream S8 Perennial 36.1 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (southern) Stream S12 Perennial 42.8 Intermodal Terminal (central portion) Stream S13 Perennial 206.4 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (northern) Stream S13A Perennial 148.5 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (northern) Stream S22 Intermittent 71.1 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (southern) CCX Site Stream Impact Subtotal 8,473.9 Second Mainline Stream S1 Perennial 47.2 Intermodal Terminal - Lead Tracks (southern) Stream S14 Intermittent 682.5 Second Mainline (northern segment) Stream S16 Intermittent 1,093.7 Second Mainline (northern segment) Stream S17 Perennial (Swift Creek) 0 (Bridging) Second Mainline (northern No forms, too much water segment) Second Mainline Stream Impact Subtotal 1,823.4 Grand Total Project Site Stream Impacts 10,297.3 5.2.3 Open Waters Pond 1 (0.22 acres), Pond 2 (1.37 acres), and Pond 4 (0.04 acres), will be impacted during construction of the intermodal terminal. Mitigation for impacts to these ponds will not be required, however, the riparian buffer adjacent to Pond 2 will be mitigated for. 5.2.4 Riparian Buffers To complete the construction of the CCX Terminal and the Second Mainline, permanent impacts to riparian buffers will be necessary. Table 5-5 presents the proposed impacts to riparian buffers within the project site. The Tar -Pamlico River Basin Riparian Buffer Rule (15 NCAC 02B .0259) is the management strategy for maintaining and protecting existing 79 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 riparian buffers in the Tar -Pamlico Basin. The Table of Uses in Item 6 of the Buffer Rule sets out the uses and their designations under this Rule as exempt, allowable, allowable with mitigation, or prohibited. This table was utilized to determine if mitigation will be required for riparian buffer impacts, as shown in Table 5-5. The Riparian Buffer Authorization Form is presented in Appendix F. The Plan Views and Cross -Section drawings depicting the proposed impacts to wetlands, streams and riparian buffers within the project site are included in Appendix E. Table 5-5. Proposed Impacts to Riparian Buffers within the Project Area Stream Name * Reason for Impact * Buffer Mitigation Required (Yes/No) Zone 1 Impact (Acres) Zone 1 Impact (Sq Feet) Zone 2 Impact (Acres) Zone 2 Impact (Sq. Feet) Z1+Z2 Total Impact (Acres) Z1+Z2 Total Impact (Sq. Feet) CCX Terminal Stream SB Rail terminal Yes 0.39 16,989 0.25 10,891 0.64 27,880 Stream SC Rail terminal No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stream SC Rail terminal Yes 0.09 3,920 0.09 3,920 0.18 7,840 Stream SD Rail terminal No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stream SD Rail terminal Yes 1.59 69,260 1.09 47,480 2.68 116,740 Stream SE Rail terminal Yes 2.92 127,195 1.92 83,635 4.84 210,830 Stream SEC Rail terminal No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stream SEC Rail Terminal No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stream SG Rail terminal Yes 1.53 66,647 1.03 44,867 2.56 111,514 Stream SI Crossing No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stream S2 Crossing No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stream S4 Crossing No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stream S6 Crossing Yes 0.79 34,412 0.33 14,375 1.12 48,787 Stream S6 Crossing No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stream S8 Crossing Yes 0.13 5,663 0.08 3,485 0.21 9,148 Stream S12 Crossing Yes 1.06 46,174 0.73 31,799 1.79 77,973 Stream S13 Crossing No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stream S13A Crossing No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stream S22 Crossing No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pond 2 Rail terminal Yes 1.04 45,302 0.76 33,106 1.8 78,408 CCX Subtotals 9.54 415,563 6.28 273,557 15.82 689,120 Second Mainline :91 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 81 Buffer Zone 1 Zone 2 Z1+Z2 Z1+Z2 Stream Reason for Mitigation Zone 1 Impact Zone 2 Impact Total Total Name * Impact * Required Impact (Sq Impact (Sq. Impact Impact (Yes/No) (Acres) Feet) (Acres) Feet) (Acres) (Sq. Feet) Stream S1 Crossing No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stream S14 Crossing Yes 0.81 35,284 0.42 18,295 1.23 53,579 Stream S16 Crossing No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stream S17 (Swift Crossing No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Creek) Second Mainline Subtotals 0.81 35,284 0.42 18,295 1.23 53,579 Grand totals 10.35 450,846 6.70 291,853 17.05 742,699 81 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 6 WETLAND/STREAM COMPENSATORY MITIGATION PLAN In the absence of suitable existing private wetland, stream, and riparian buffer mitigation bank credits and in -lieu of purchasing credits from the North Carolina Department of Mitigation Services (NCDMS), all required compensatory mitigation will be obtained through off-site permittee -responsible mitigation activities utilizing the watershed approach (see Appendix G Mitigation Plan [Appendix L for mitigation banker correspondence]). The Swift Creek- Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan (PRMP) was designed to achieve a landscape scale conservation outcome based on the priorities of both local and regional environmental advocacy groups and the Federal and State regulatory and resource agencies. Located within the same watershed as the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline Project is Swift Creek (see Figure 1 in Appendix A). The Swift Creek Subbasin in particular has been identified as possibly the most significant lotic creek ecosystem remaining along the Atlantic Seaboard (Alderman, et al., 1993). Swift Creek is a major tributary of the Tar River, flowing southeast from Henderson in Vance County, then through Warren, Franklin, Nash, and Edgecombe counties to its confluence with the Tar River above Tarboro in Edgecombe County. The overall goal of the mitigation site selection process was to enhance and improve the protection of this critical resource. On-going communications with both the State and Federal Resource Agencies and the Tar River Land Conservancy communicated the importance to consider the needs of the local community as an important aspect of the mitigation approach. This included both the availability of public lands for recreation and the support and protection of rural lifestyles. Based on the guidance of these and other key stakeholders, and to meet the requirements of an acceptable mitigation plan as defined by the state and federal regulatory agencies, the proposed Swift Creek- PRMP (Mitigation Project) was designed to preserve, restore, and enhance approximately 207.5 acres of wetlands and 24,019 LF (-4.5 miles) of unnamed headwater tributaries within approximately 593 acres of property to be permanently protected in the Swift Creek watershed, a tributaries of Tar River defined as critical priority areas needing protection by the NCDWR, the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, and the Tar River Land Conservancy. Finally, the proposed Mitigation Project satisfies the requirements of Department of the Army (DA) permits issued in accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) Esq Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 and Sections 9 and 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and includes the twelve components required by the 2008 USEPA and USACE 33 C.F.R. Parts 325 and 332 & 40 C.F.R. Part 230 (Mitigation Rule) and Regulatory Guidance Letter (RGL) 08-03, issued in October, 2008. Proposed mitigation activities are not anticipated to adversely impact protected species or cultural resources. This PRMP, includes specific goals and objectives for water resource mitigation, as well as site selection factors, site protection, baseline conditions of the mitigation site, mitigation work plan, maintenance plan, performance standards, monitoring requirements, long term management plans, adaptive management provisions, and financial assurances for its success. Additionally, this Mitigation Project satisfies the requirements and provisions of 15A NCAC 02B .0258 (Tar -Pamlico River Basin -Nutrient Sensitive Water Management Strategy), 15A NCAC 0213 .0295 (Consolidated Mitigation Buffer Rule), and 15A NCAC 02B .0240 (Nutrient Offset Payments). Mitigation for impacts to buffers associated with the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline Project will be accomplished through the establishment of buffers (-300-ft) within the Mitigation Project. The Mitigation Project is designed to reestablish approximately 45.28 acres of riparian buffer along the proposed restoration reaches and permanently preserve approximately 69.89 acres of riparian buffer. Based on the current design and assumptions for the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline, the Tar -Pamlico Nutrient offsets for the project are not required. If Tar -Pamlico Nutrient Offsets are required for this project due to changes in the design or other reasons, the Applicant reserves the opportunity to supply the required Tar -Pamlico Nutrient Offsets credits through an approved nutrient offset bank or through the establishment of a permittee -responsible nutrient program, subject to the review and approval of the appropriate agencies. The Mitigation Project is designed to achieve a meaningful landscape conservation outcome based on the guidance of the local and regional environmental groups as well as satisfy the requirements of the State and Federal resource agencies. The Swift Creek Mitigation Project is presented in Appendix G. 83 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 7 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND IMPACTS An interdisciplinary team of environmental scientists, biologists, planners, economists, engineers, archaeologists, historians, and others with knowledge or experience related to the Proposed Project, has analyzed the proposed action in light of existing conditions and has identified relevant beneficial and adverse effects associated with the proposed action. A detailed evaluation of the Proposed Project on the human and natural environment is presented below. 7.1 LAND USE 7.1.1 Description of Affected Environment Land use is defined as the way people use and develop land, including uses such as agricultural, residential, and industrial. To estimate land use and land cover within the Project Area, the 2011 National Land Cover Database (NLCD2011) was utilized. The data show generalized land cover classifications as derived from satellite mapping. A summary of the land cover types contained in NLCD2011 are provided in Table 7-1 and Table 7-2 below. Cropland and pasture constitutes the largest land cover both in the Project Area and within a 1 -mile radius. Specific land use/land cover along the project include transportation infrastructure (existing roads and railway), agricultural fields (crops and pasture) interspersed with patches of forested areas in various stages of growth, and extensive wetland/floodplain areas along Swift Creek. Commercial, industrial, and residential areas are located along the proposed project and include Honeywell Aerospace, Pfizer Corporation, Draka Elevator Products, Cummins Rocky Mount Engine Plant, Berry Plastic, and numerous other commercial facilities accessed from Highway 301 or the railroad. Commercial businesses are located to the south of the project site, and the Edgecombe Genco coal- fired power station is located adjacent to the north side of the project site. The existing railroad also services the Edgecombe Genco coal-fired power station, which includes a small railroad yard with coal railcars adjacent to the proposed Second Mainline improvements. The proposed project also passes through the community of Whitaker which has residential and commercial development along the existing railroad. 84 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Table 7-1. Specific Land Cover Types within the Project Area and within a 1 -Mile Radius Land Cover Acres within Project Limits % of Project Limits Acres within 1 mile of Proposed Project % within 1 mile of Proposed Project Cultivated Crops 312.8 33.4% 4952.8 25.2% Hay/Pasture 6.0 0.6% 612.2 3.1% Deciduous Forest 55.9 6.0% 1253.3 6.4% Evergreen Forest 84.6 9.0% 1631.8 8.3% Mixed Forest 18.5 2.0% 306.9 1.6% Shrub/Scrub 89.5 9.6% 1071.4 5.5% Herbaceous 53.5 5.7% 866.2 4.4% Barren Land 0.0 0.0% 44.9 0.2% Woody Wetlands 133.9 14.3% 3458.4 17.6% Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands 21.1 2.3% 810.1 4.1% Open Water 0.0 0.0% 238.9 1.2% Developed, High Intensity 1.2 0.1% 317.7 1.6% Developed, Low Intensity 50.5 5.4% 1186.7 6.0% Developed, Medium Intensity 14.0 1.5% 824.0 4.2% Developed, Open Space 93.9 10.0% 2074.6 10.6% Table 7-2. Generalized Land Cover within the Project Area and within a 1 -Mile Radius 7.1.1.1 Public Lands and Scenic, Recreational, and State Natural Areas Numerous stewardship and protected areas sources were reviewed, including the USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States, the National Conservation Easement Database, USDA NRCS Conservation Stewardship Program, the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) and multiple non-governmental organizations, to develop a database of protected and conserved lands in or near the Project Area. It should be noted 85 % of Project % within 1 mile Land Cover Limits of Proposed Project Cropland/Pasture 34.1% 28.3% Vegetated/Undeveloped 32.3% 26.3% Wetland/Open Water 16.6% 22.9% Developed 17.1% 22.4% 7.1.1.1 Public Lands and Scenic, Recreational, and State Natural Areas Numerous stewardship and protected areas sources were reviewed, including the USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States, the National Conservation Easement Database, USDA NRCS Conservation Stewardship Program, the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) and multiple non-governmental organizations, to develop a database of protected and conserved lands in or near the Project Area. It should be noted 85 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 that this database is not an exhaustive list, but gives an indication of the protected areas within the Project Area. 7.1.1.2 Existing Public/conservation lands in vicinity of project One conservation easement is located within the Project Area. It occurs in the Second Mainline section north of the intermodal site. The natural area is owned by the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program and was given a Moderate ranking by the NCNHP. The rail line currently traverses through the conservation easement; therefore, no additional disturbance of the natural area is anticipated. All conservation easements in the vicinity of the CCX Terminal site are owned by either the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program, the NCDMS or Ducks Unlimited. The conservation lands in the vicinity of the project site can be found on Figure 8a. 7.1.1.3 Section 6(f) of LWCF Section 6(f) properties are recreation resources funded under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (LWCF). The LWCF was established to assist in preserving, developing, and assuring accessibility of outdoor recreation resources to all citizens of the United States (NPS 2016). Conversion of these lands for uses other than for outdoor recreation must be approved by the U.S. Department of the Interior. Direct impacts to these resources are prohibited unless there are no feasible and prudent alternatives for the use of the properties and the project incorporates all possible measures to avoid or minimize harm to such properties (NPS 2012). According to the LWCF North Carolina has received approximately $79 million over the past 50 years. Edgecombe County has received $1.04 million for 17 projects, and Nash County has received $569,395 for 10 projects. There are no Section 6(f) properties within the Study Area (Figure 8b). The closest 6(f) property is the Rocky Mount Sports Complex, located at 600 Independence Drive in Nash County, approximately 750 -ft west of the proposed southern rail limit. The proposed project would not be visible from the 6(f) property. 7.1.2 Potential Environmental Impacts It is expected that some land use changes would occur as a result of project implementation. Direct project impacts would include conversion of agricultural and residential land to the intermodal terminal and its associated transportation infrastructure. Indirect project impacts would include conversion of nearby residential and agricultural Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 properties to commercial services (gas stations, restaurants and other service facilities) to support the construction and operation of the proposed facility. As there are no 6(f) properties within the study area and no proposed disturbance to public lands occurring along the project, the proposed project is not expected to impact any public lands or scenic, recreational or state natural areas. 7.2 AESTHETICS & VISUAL RESOURCES 7.2.1 Description of Affected Environment The physical, biological, and cultural features of an area combine to make the visual landscape character both identifiable and unique. Scenic integrity indicates the degree of unity or wholeness of the visual character. Scenic attractiveness is the evaluation of outstanding or unique natural features, scenic variety, seasonal change, and strategic location. Where and how the landscape is viewed affect the more subjective perceptions of its aesthetic quality and sense of place. Views of a landscape are described in terms of what is seen in foreground, middle ground, and background distances. In the foreground, an area within 0.5 mile of the observer, details of objects are easily distinguished in the landscape. In the middle ground, normally between 1 and 4 miles from the observer, objects may be distinguishable but their details are weak and they tend to merge into larger patterns. Details and colors of objects in the background, the distant part of the landscape, are not normally discernible unless they are especially large and standing alone. The impressions of an area's visual character can have a substantial influence on how it is appreciated, protected, and used. The general landscape character of the study area is described in this section. Currently the project site includes generally agricultural areas (open fields) interspersed with patches of forested areas in various stages of growth. Several residences are within and adjacent to the project site. The western portion of the Project Area includes the existing railroad and several commercial/industrial areas, including Honeywell Aerospace, Pfizer Corporation, a commercial business park, and numerous other commercial facilities accessed from Highway 301 or the railroad. Commercial businesses are located to the south of the project site, and the Edgecombe Genco coal-fired power station is located adjacent to the north side of the project site. To the east of the project site are agricultural and wooded areas interspersed with several residences, all accessed from Old Battleboro Road. Views of the Project Area would likely be up to distances in the foreground (0 to 0.5 mile) or middle ground (1 to 4 miles) from local roads and other nearby residential areas. Scenic attractiveness of the portion of the Project Area adjacent Esq Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 to the project site is common, and scenic integrity is low because of land disturbance resulting from adjacent commercial/industrial development, the existing railroad, and the coal-fired plant adjacent to the north side of the property. 7.2.2 Potential Environmental Impacts Commercial/industrial development of all or a portion of the site under this alternative would result in effects to existing scenic resources within the Project Area. Removal of existing trees and site grading and surfacing would affect the scenic integrity of portions of the proposed property having a rural or naturally appearing landscape character. Noise and/or waste light could also be generated, depending on the size and kind required for site implementation. There would be a minor visual change in the landscape as a result of the construction of the new facility. Based on criteria developed by the US Forest Service (1995) to rate scenic quality, overall scenic values of the Project Area are low because of the relatively low relief, lack of significant visual features, and the similarity to surrounding areas. There may be some moderate visual impacts during construction and operation, but these impacts are not out of character with the existing industrial/commercial and rail activities that currently occur. Lighting at the proposed facility is required for security, safety and operations. Light can cause pollution when it becomes a nuisance to adjacent properties. Light pollution (light trespass) is best described as artificial light that is allowed to illuminate, or intrude upon, areas not intended to be lit. Exterior lighting at the CCX Terminal will be designed to prevent over -lighting, energy waste, glare, light trespass and sky glow. The project site will utilize energy efficient LED high mast lighting for the exterior site lighting. The masts will be between 80 -ft to 100 -ft in height and the luminaires will be designed and installed with full cutoff fixtures where no light is emitted at or above the horizontal plane. The exterior lighting system is designed to provide the minimum lighting necessary to ensure adequate vision, comfort and safety in working areas and to not cause glare or direct illumination onto adjacent properties or streets. High mast poles will generally be spaced 300 -ft to 500 -ft apart and are located not closer than 100 -ft to the property boundary. Roadway lights will be designed and installed as cutoff luminaires that will not exceed IES (Illuminating Engineering Society) illuminance recommendations. With the exception of government mandated roadway lighting the project will have luminaires designed and installed to prevent light trespass. Lighting levels at the entrances to the project is on average 1 foot- candles and not greater than 2 foot-candles. Light trespass at the property boundary is :: Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 calculated to be not greater than 0.1 foot-candles. The majority of the exterior lighting is located well within the property boundary; only the minimum required lighting for safe work and operations is designed and installed leaving large parts of the property and much of the property boundary with zero detectable light levels. The CCX Terminal will consider the placement of vegetated soil berms and buffer/open space plantings to improve the scenic attractiveness of portions of the CCX Terminal area and to provide a vegetative screen to facility operations. Berms and plant installation will be strategically placed to maximize the screening effect. The vegetation will consist of tree and shrub species which are common to Rocky Mount and the Inner Coastal Plain Physiographic Region of North Carolina. Species with medium to rapid growth rates such as loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), yaupon holly (Ilex vomitoria), wax myrtle (Morella cerifera), sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana), and others may be used. The shrub species would be interspersed within tree species to maximize understory screening as the canopy vegetation matures 7.3 GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY 7.3.1 Description of Affected Environment The project site is in the Inner Coastal Plain Physiographic Region North Carolina and are based in the Yorktown and Duplin Formations, Undivided, as formed during the Tertiary period (66-2.58 million years ago). The Yorktown Formation features fossiliferous, blue gray clay with fine sand often concentrated in lenses. The Duplin Formation primarily contains coarser grained sand with shell material, sometimes with sandy marl and limestone and blue gray in color (NCGS 1985). The Yorktown and Duplin Formations, Undivided, are overlain by the Wicomico and Sunderland Terrace Formations of Pleistocene age, 2.58 million to 11,700 years ago. The project site is in the "Rolling Coastal Plain" USEPA Level IV Ecoregion of the "Southeastern Plains" USEPA Level III Ecoregion. (USEPA 2017). 7.3.2 Potential Environmental Impacts Edgecombe and Nash Counties are located approximately 102 -ft to 128 -ft above mean sea level. Potential impacts to topography associated with the proposed action would be limited to ground -disturbing activities occurring during site preparation and construction. Most of the ground disturbance would be limited to surface soils; consequently, impacts from the proposed construction would be minor. The project has been designed so as not to pose a substantial erosion hazard. However, where erosion hazards may exist, the use of BMPs, including erosion and turbidity control structures, would substantially reduce the Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 potential for erosion and siltation of drainages. Streams, such as Beech Branch, will be engineered with culverts that will allow water to continue to flow uninterrupted. Ground - disturbing activities associated with the proposed project would be localized and would not have major impacts on sensitive or regionally significant geologic or physiographic features. 7.4 SOILS 7.4.1 Description of Affect Environment The project site includes the following soil series that are mapped: Altavista, Autryville, Aycock, Bibb, Dogue, Duplin, Exum, Goldsboro, Grantham, Gritney, Lumbee, Lynchburg, Meggett, Norfolk, Rains, Roanoke, State, Tomotley, Udorthents, Wagram, Wehadkee, and Wickham. Figure 4 depicts the soil types (map units). These soils vary in drainage. Most of the soils are composed of sand, clay, and loam. Table 7-3 presents the soil types and their respective hydrologic soil groups. Hydrologic soil groups are based on the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long -duration storms. Table 7-3. Soil Types within the Project Site Map Unit Symbol Soil Type' Hydric Soil Group Edgecombe County AaA Altavista fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes C AuB Autryville loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes A AyA Aycock very fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes B AyB Aycock very fine sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes B BB Bibb soils A/D DgA Dogue fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes C DpB Duplin sandy loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes C ExA Exum very fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes C GoA Goldsboro fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes B Gr Grantham very fine sandy loam B Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Map Unit Symbol Soil Type' Hydric Soil Group Gt Grantham -Urban land complex C/D GyC Gritney fine sandy loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes D Lu Lumbee fine sandy loam B/D LyA Lynchburg fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, Southern Coastal Plain B/D Me Meggett loam C/D NoA Norfolk loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes A NoB Norfolk loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes A RaA Rains fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, Southern Coastal Plain B/D Ro Roanoke loam C/D StB State loamy sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes B WaB Wagram loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes A Wh Wehadkee silt loam B/D WkB Wickham sandy loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes B Nash County AaA Altavista sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, rarely flooded C AbA Altavista -Urban land complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes, rarely flooded C Bb Bibb loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded A/D BoB Bonneau loamy sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes B GoA Goldsboro fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes B GrB Gritney sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes D Me Meggett loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded C/D NoA Norfolk loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes A NoB Norfolk loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes A NuB Norfolk -Urban land complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes A RaA Rains fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, Southern Coastal Plain B/D 91 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Map Unit Symbol Soil Type' Hydric Soil Group Rb Rains -Urban land complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes B/D To Tomotley fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded B/D Ud Udorthents, loamy C Ur Urban land Wh Wehadkee loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded B/D WkA Wickham fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, rarely flooded B Source: USDA NRCS Soil Data Mart. 2 Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink -swell potential, soils that have a high-water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. 7.4.2 Potential Environmental Impacts Implementation of standard site preparation techniques would enable development of the proposed project. To minimize potential erosion, siltation, and soil compaction during excavation, site preparation, and other construction activities, BMPs will be incorporated as part of the Proposed Action, including standard erosion and siltation prevention measures, i.e., watering for dust suppression, use of netting and silt fencing, etc. With implementation of the standard BMPs described above, construction -related impacts to soils would be minimal and localized to the proposed project footprints. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Action would result in only minor, site-specific, short-term impacts to soils and not significant. WA Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 7.5 BIOTIC COMMUNITIES 7.5.1 Description of Affected Environment 7.5.1.1 Wildlife Communities The Project Area provides suitable habitat for common wildlife species. During the field investigations, a variety of wildlife species or their scat was observed, including white- tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), coyote (Canis latrans), raccoon (Procyon lotor), gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), red -shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), black vulture (Coragyps stratus), pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus), downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens), Eastern phoebe (Sayornis phoebe), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata), golden -crowned kinglet (Regulus satraps), yellow-rumped warbler (Dendroica coronata), and Northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis). Other mammal species that are potentially present along the corridor include: bats, fox, bobcat (Lynx rufus), mice, rats, armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus), and Eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus). Additional bird species that are likely to occur in these habitats are: Mississippi kite (Ictinia mississippiensis), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), sharp -shinned hawk (Accipter striatus), Cooper's hawk (A. cooperii), osprey (Pandion haliaetus), barred owl (Strix varia), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), red bellied woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus), Eastern kingbird (Tyrannus tyrannus), Carolina chickadee (Parus carolinensis), tufted titmouse (P. bicolor), Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), Northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), Eastern bluebird (Sialic sialis), American robin (Turdus migratorius), white eyed vireo (Vireo griseus), solitary vireo (Vireo solitaries), and Northern parula (Setophaga americana). Wading bird colonies within or near the Project Area. Species included in these colonies include but are not limited to: black -crowned night -heron (Nycticorax nycticorax), yellow - crowned night -heron (Nycticorax violaceus), great blue heron (Ardea herodius), snowy egret (Egretta thula), and great egret (Casmerodius albus). 7.5.1.2 Plant Communities Wetland plant communities within the delineated areas of the project site include headwater forest, basin wetland, floodplain pool, hardwood flat, bottomland hardwood 93 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 forest, and riverine swamp forest. Each area identified as a wetland on the site was also evaluated using the North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) as outlined in the NC WAM User Manual (Version 4.1) (NC Wetland Functional Assessment Team 2010), effective October 2010. The NC WAM is a field method used to determine the level of function of a wetland relative to the reference condition for each of 16 North Carolina general wetland types. NC WAM was created to be used for project planning, alternatives analysis, compliance and enforcement, mitigation planning, and tracking functional replacement. Botanical taxonomic nomenclature presented below is in accordance with Weakley (2015). The canopy and shrub strata of the headwater forest community are comprised of yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), red maple (Acer rubrum), and swamp gum (Nyssa biflora). The canopy and shrub strata of the basin wetland and floodplain pool communities include sweetgum (Liquidambarstyraciflua), red maple, yellow poplar, swamp gum, and smooth highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum). The hardwood flat community consists of sweetgum, red maple, yellow poplar, sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana), and water oak (Quercus nigra). The canopy and shrub strata of the bottomland hardwood forest community are comprised of red maple, green ash, yellow poplar, river birch (Betula nigra), swamp cottonwood (Populus heterophylla), swamp tupelo, sugarberry (Celtis laevigata), and elderberry (Sambucus canadensis). The canopy and shrub strata of the riverine swamp forest community include red maple, sweetgum, black willow (Salix nigra). Common plant species occurring in the groundstory stratum of these wetland communities include muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), common greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), coastal white -alder (Clethra alnifolia), switchcane (Arundinaria tecta), false -nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica) and, in the riverine swamp forest, smartweed (Persicaria sp). Fern species included a mix of Virginia chain fern (Woodwardia virginica), netted chain fern (Woodwardia areolata), cinnamon fern (Osmundastrum cinnamomeum), royal fern (Osmunda regalis), and southern lady fern (Athyrium asplenioides). Upland plant communities within the site include loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) plantation, oak hickory forest, mixed hardwood forest, agricultural fields, and maintained habitats (yards, roads, right-of-ways). These communities are found throughout the site. Loblolly pine is the dominant species in the canopy and shrub strata of the loblolly pine plantation. The shrub and groundstory strata include wax myrtle (Morella cerifera), sweetgum, sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), muscadine, common greenbrier, Carolina jessamine (Gelsemium sempervirens), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), and panicgrass (Panicum sp.). The canopy stratum of the oak hickory forest includes a moderate 94 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 assemblage of hardwood species, including southern red oak (Quercus falcata), post oak (Quercus stellata), water oak, mockernut hickory (Carya alba), yellow poplar, sweetgum, red maple, sugarberry, American elm (Ulmus americana), and black gum (Nyssa sylvatica). Plant species present in the shrub and groundstory strata include saplings and seedlings of the hardwood species, sourwood, black cherry (Prunus serotina), American holly (Ilex opaca), flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), persimmon (Diospyros virginiana), devil's walking stick (Aralia spinosa), blueberry (Vaccinium sp.), common greenbrier, muscadine, Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Virginia -creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), and poison ivy. Japanese stilt -grass and Chinese privet are also present in this upland plant community, in dense pockets or as scattered occurrences. The mixed hardwood forest habitat includes many of the plant species that were common to the oak hickory forest habitat, with the addition of loblolly pine as a canopy and subcanopy associate. Old field upland areas are also present within the site. These ruderal areas often occurred adjacent to agricultural fields and consist of opportunistic plant species. The largest old field area occurs in the northwest corner of the CCX Terminal. The vegetation includes goldenrod (Solidago sp.), ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), sericea lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata), panicgrass, winged sumac (Rhus copallinum), and seedlings of sweetgum and loblolly pine. Narrow vegetated strands are present along many of the agricultural drainage ditches within the CCX Terminal. The vegetation included a mix of shrubs, forbs, vines, and grasses. 7.5.2 Potential Environmental Impacts Implementation of the Proposed Project would result in direct impacts to plant communities. Taking into consideration the large amount of similar plant communities in the area regionally and locally, the loss of the existing vegetation would be considered a minor impact. USGS LCI was utilized to quantify forestry and agricultural habitats within the underlying Upper Tar River (03020101) and Fishing Creek (03020102) Watersheds. A very small portion of the proposed Second Mainline extends into the Fishing Creek Watershed near the town of Bricks, North Carolina. The USGS LCI indicated approximately 360,507 acres of forestry land are located within the Upper Tar Watershed and 260,607 acres within the Fishing Creek Watershed. USGS LCI also indicated approximately 320,471 acres of agricultural cropland are located within the Upper Tar Watershed and 207,980 acres within the Fishing Creek Watershed. Furthermore, the surrounding area consists of very similar vegetative habitats and approximately 0.01 % of the total forested area within the Upper Tar Watershed, and less 95 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 than 0.01% of the Fishing Creek Watershed, would be impacted. In addition, the impacts to agricultural lands are approximately 0.01% of the total forested area within the Upper Tar Watershed, and less than 0.01 % of the Fishing Watershed. The percentage loss or transformation of vegetation within the corridor in this context would be relatively small. Indirect impacts are possible if the existing vegetation is part of a larger system which relies on these particular plant communities for regional propagation and genetic diversity. Due to the large amount of similar habitat and plant communities surrounding the Project Area; however, this impact is minor. 7.6 AQUATIC COMMUNITIES 7.6.1 Description of Affected Environment 7.6.1.1 Habitat The streams within the proposed Project Area are warmwater streams dominated by sand, which have slow -flowing lower gradients, with moderate to high discharges. Streams in the proposed Project Area include Swift Creek, Beech Branch, Compass Creek, Hornbeam Branch, and their unnamed tributaries, located within the Upper Tar River watershed (HUC 03020101). These resources are blackwater streams typical of the Atlantic coastal plain, though Swift Creek is a larger perennial stream compared to the other resources in the Project Area. Swift Creek has been identified as one of the most significant lotic creek ecosystem remaining along the Atlantic Seaboard (Alderman, et al., 1993), and is the most biologically diverse stream basin occurring in the Tar -Pamlico River Basin (NCNHP 1997). Blackwater streams are more common in the coastal plain than whitewater streams and alluvial rivers, and often face oxygen depletion during summer months because of increased temperatures. Furthermore, the oxygen concentrations in the hyporheic zones of smaller blackwater streams, such as the unnamed tributaries, are low to anoxic during the warmer months (Smock and Gilinsky 1992). Light is a limiting factor to primary production in blackwater streams because of canopy development and light attenuation, and as a result, they tend to have low rates of primary production and are primarily heterotrophic systems. Emergent, floating, and submerged aquatic plants are important contributors to the primary production of the streams, and are important because they stabilize the banks of these streams as well as supply cover and food, influence stream temperature, and provide nutrient input to the streams (Felley 1992). Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Habitats within the streams in the proposed Project Area were reviewed in October 2016, including the completion of NC SAM assessment forms, discussed in Section 5. Observed habitats included emergent vegetation, snags and woody debris, undercut banks and root mats. 7.6.1.2 Fish Fish communities of the Atlantic coastal plain are diverse, comprised of common warmwater fish species such as sunfishes and black basses (Centrarchidae), darters (Percidae), minnows (Cyprinidae), suckers (Catostomidae), and catfishes (Ictaluridae). The smaller streams in the proposed Project Area are likely limited to common Centrarchidae, such as bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), along with shiners (Notropis), topminnows (Fundulus), and darters (Etheostoma). However, the Swift Creek basin has a high species diversity, and though it covers less than 300 square miles, it provides habitat for more than 7% of the fish species found on the North American continent north of Mexico, and provides habitat for nearly 29% of the fish species present in the Atlantic drainages in North Carolina (Alderman et al 1993). 7.6.1.3 Shellfish Most of the freshwater mussel species known to occur in the US are distributed in the Southeast. The dominant mussel species in Atlantic coastal streams is the introduced Asiatic clam (Corbicula sp.), but multiple native species reside in larger perennial streams. The Swift Creek basin supports at least nine rare mussel species: Tar River spinymussel (Elliptio steinstansana), triangle floater (Alasmidonta undulata), yellow lance (Elliptio lanceolate), Roanoke slabshell (Elliptio roanokensis), Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni), yellow lampmussel (Lampsilis cariosa), squawfoot (Strophitus undulatus), eastern lampmussel (Lampsilis radiata), and notched rainbow (Villosa constricts) (Prince 2017). The Swift Creek basin supports some of the most extensive populations of these species (Alderman et al. 1993). The dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) is also a potential rare species in the proposed Project Area. A field reconnaissance of the streams within the proposed Project Area was conducted in October 2016. There were no observations of mussels, except for Asiatic clams, though suitable habitat was observed. Subsequently, a formal mussel survey was conducted in November 2016. The survey results indicated that the study area supports a freshwater mussel fauna of at least four species in Beech Branch and an unnamed tributary to Beech Branch, two species in Compass Creek, and very low abundance of three species in Swift Creek. Other streams evaluated do not contain suitable habitat, and are characterized by WA Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 poor habitat atypical of the target species. Species observed during the survey included eastern elliptio (Elliptio complanata), variable spike (Elliptio icterina), northern lance (Elliptio fisheriana), paper pondshell (Utterbackia imbecillis), and Asiatic clams. Rare species were not observed, though appropriate habitat is present in Swift Creek, Beech Branch, and Compass Creek; thus, there is the potential for additional species to occur within and downstream of the study area (Three Oaks Engineering 2016). 7.6.2 Potential Environmental Impacts 7.6.2.1 Habitat Potential impacts to aquatic habitat would likely be limited to de minimus direct loss attributed to culvert extensions or bridge supports. Habitat conversion is not likely to occur upstream or downstream, as culverts and/or bridges would be designed per regulatory guidance, and would be constructed to convey flow without changing stream hydrological characteristics. In addition, adherence to erosion control standards would minimize the potential for any adverse impacts downstream, such as sedimentation, during and after construction. 7.6.2.2 Fish Potential impacts to the fish community within the proposed Project Area would likely be limited to the temporary displacement of fish during construction, and de minimus habitat loss in areas where the stream bed has been subjected to culvert extensions or bridge supports. Fish typically vacate the area during construction, and return shortly following construction activities; direct loss of fish is unlikely to occur. Culverts would be appropriately designed for fish passage following construction completion, and adherence to erosion control standards would minimize the potential for any adverse impacts downstream, such as increases in turbidity, during and after construction. 7.6.2.3 Shellfish Based on November 2016 mussel survey results, impacts to rare species are unlikely to occur in the reaches evaluated. Strict adherence to erosion control standards would minimize the potential for adverse impacts to occur downstream of the proposed Project Area (Three Oaks Engineering 2016). .; Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 7.7 WATER RESOURCES / FLOODPLAINS 7.7.1 Description of Affected Environment Waters of the US, including streams and wetlands, are described above in Section 5 7.7.1.1 Surface Water Surface waters include streams, rivers, lakes and reservoirs. The CCX Terminal site is located within the Beech Branch -Tar River watershed 10 -digit HUC 0302010109 within the Upper Tar subbasin 8 -digit HUC 03020101, part of the Inner Coastal Plain Physiographic Region. Contained within the 10 -digit HUC are three 12 -digit HUCs: Buck Swamp -Tar River, Compass Creek, and Beech Branch. The Tar River originates on the eastern edge of Person County, North Carolina. From there it flows southeasterly approximately 215 miles through seven counties before emptying into the Pamlico River. The surface water classification listed for the Tar River based on the most recent NCDEQ surface water data (NCDEQ 2017a) is "C". This classification includes waters protected for uses such as secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish consumption, aquatic life including propagation, survival and maintenance of biological integrity, and agriculture. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other uses involving human body contact with water where such activities take place in an infrequent, unorganized, or incidental manner. The Tar River is also classified as NSW' based on the most recent NCDEQ surface water data (NCDEQ 2017a). The NSW classification provides additional nutrient management for waters that are subject to excessive growth of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation. Named surface waters that occur within the project site include Beech Branch, Compass Creek, Swift Creek, and Hornbeam Branch. Compass Creek, Swift Creek, and Hornbeam Branch are classified as "C" and NSW waters at the locations where these creeks cross the project site. Beech Branch is classified as "B" and NSW waters at the location where this creek crosses the project site. The "B" classification includes waters protected for all Class "C" uses in addition to primary recreation use. Primary recreational activities include swimming, skin diving, water skiing, and similar uses involving human body contact with water where such activities take place in an organized manner or on a frequent basis. A small portion of the proposed Second Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) is a supplemental classification in North Carolina intended for waters needing additional nutrient management due to excessive growth of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation. Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Mainline extends into the Fishing Creek Watershed near the town of Bricks, North Carolina. 7.7.1.2 Floodplains The FEMA Floodplain Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) were used to determine if areas within the project site are located within the designated 100 -year floodplain. The 1% annual chance (100 -year) flood has been adopted by the FEMA as the base flood for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. A 100 -year storm event (or base flood) has a 1% annual chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. The 100 - year floodplain, shown on a Flood Insurance Rate Map, is also called a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), where the NFIP's floodplain management regulations must be enforced by the community as a condition of participation in the Program. Review of the FIRM Community -Panel Numbers 37065C 3850K, 3851 K, 3860K, 3861 K, 3862J, 3863J, 3873J, 3874K, 3875K, 3885K, 3886K, and 3887L for Edgecombe County indicate the project corridor crosses through 100 -year flood zones associated with seven of the stream crossings (Figures 9a & 9b). 7.7.1.3 Groundwater Groundwater refers to subsurface hydrologic resources that are used for domestic, agricultural, and industrial purposes. Groundwater is stored in natural geologic formations called aquifers. The project site is underlain by the Upper Cape Fear aquifer. The Upper Cape Fear aquifer is present in the western portions of the coastal plain at elevations of 295 -ft to -2401-ft, averaging -326-ft. The Upper Cape Fear aquifer ranges from 8 -ft to 3,294 -ft thick and averages 184 -ft thick. The aquifer comprises very fine to coarse sands and occasional gravels. Wells typically yield 200 to 400 gallons per minute (NCDEQ 2017c). 7.7.2 Potential Environmental Impacts 7.7.2.1 Floodplains The construction of the Proposed Project will require fill within portions of FEMA SFHA Zone A floodplains; therefore, a Letter of Map Revision based on Fill (LOMR-F) will be required. Per FEMA regulations, a LOMR-F is submitted for properties on which fill has been placed to raise a structure or lot to or above the BFE. Since Zone A SFHAs are not based on a detailed study with base flood elevations, a 100 -year base flood elevation will 100 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 need to be determined as part of the development plan and prior to any fill placement within this area. As part of the project development, coordination will be required between FEMA and the Edgecombe and Nash County Floodplain Administrators, as well as meeting any pertinent requirements presented in the County Floodplain Ordinances. Since portions of the project are located in FEMA designated Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA), hydraulic analyses have been prepared per federal and state requirements to understand the impact of the project on effective floodplain, floodways and NC non - encroachment areas. The hydraulic analyses follow the standards contained in the NCDOT Guideline for Drainage Studies and Hydraulic Design and CSX Drainage Criteria. Any work within a FEMA designated Special Flood Hazard Area must be in compliance with the NFIP. The analyses have been conducted in accordance with the following NFIP key regulations and orders: Title 44 CFR parts 59, 60, 65 and 70, Federal Executive Order 11988, and NC Executive Order 123. Additionally, the State of North Carolina is designated as a Cooperating Technical State (CTS) meaning that the State, as managed by North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program (NCFMP), assumes primary ownership and responsibility of the NFIP. Therefore, proposed improvements (including adding, changing, replacing, or removing any structure) on a FEMA regulated stream must be documented and receive approval from local community or the NCFMP, if the community requests assistance with review. Therefore, the hydraulic models and accompanying report and no -rise certification must be submitted to the corresponding local communities for review and approval. Table 7-4 presents the drainage area, flow, and structure size and type for each floodplain crossing within the Project Area. A summary of floodplain crossings within the Project Area are presented below, documentation and no -rise certifications are presented in Appendix H. 101 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Table 7-4. Drainage Area, Flow, and Structure Size and Type for Streams Crossing the Project Area Crossing Drainage Flow, Q Upstream Proposed Permitting Area (CFS) for Existing Structures Type & Jurisdiction (acres) 100 -year Structure Type & Size Storm Event Size Tar River - NA 27,7002 9' Span Bridge 9' Span Bridge Rocky Mount Backwater (Backwater) Hornbeam 3,878.4' 2,0802 12'x 7' Pipe Arch 60' Span Bridge Rocky Mount Branch Compass 4,697.6' 2,7302 32' Span Bridge 32' Span Bridge Rocky Mount Creek Beech 3,500.8' 1,2702 12.5' x 4.6' Box Triple 12'x 6' Box Rocky Mount Branch Culvert & 11.5' Culverts CMP Culvert Swift Creek 135,014.43 11,7772 0 310' Span 0 310' Span Project is bridge with 16 bridge with 16 within both 4.25' piers 4.25' piers Rocky Mount • 185' Span 0 185' Span extraterritorial bridge with 9 bridge with 9 jurisdiction 4.25' piers 4.25' piers • 95' Span 95' Span (ETJ) and Bridge with 4 Bridge with 4 Edgecombe 4.25' piers 4.25' piers County • 90' Span 0 90' Span Bridge with 4 Bridge with 4 4.25' piers 4.25' piers • 870' Span 0 870' Span Bridge with 47 Bridge with 47 4.25' piers 4.25' piers • Bridge width increased by 3' for all bridges Note: 1. urainage area calculated using Streamstat. 2. The flow values are from FIS Study 37127CV000D, Revised July 7, 2014 3. Drainage area taken from the FIS Study 37127CV000D, Revised July 7, 2014 Tar River Backwater The Tar River crosses the existing CSX mainline on the northeast side of the City of Rocky Mount, North Carolina. The proposed crossing alignment at rail station 6172 is parallel to the existing tracks and not on Tar River but is inundated by backwater. Although the majority proposed improvements are north of this crossing, the southernmost portion is inundated by backwater from the Tar River. The impacted area is located just south of Airport Road between the City of Rocky mount, Nash County to the west and Edgecombe County to the east. 102 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 FIRM map numbers 3720386100K, 3720385100K, 3720386000K, and 3720385000K, dated June 18, 2013 contains the immediate upstream vicinity, the crossing, and downstream portions of Tar River. The proposed crossing is shown on this panel to be in Zone AE. Hydraulic analysis is not required for this crossing since it is not located within the floodway, however a hydraulic analysis was completed to ensure the proposed changes will not cause impacts to the 100 -year floodplain. The proposed changes will not cause in any increase in the 100 -year flood elevations and will not cause any measurable changes to the existing 100 -year floodplain. Hornbeam Branch Hornbeam Branch crosses two existing CSX mainline tracks on the northeast side of the City of Rocky Mount, North Carolina. The proposed crossing alignment is parallel to the existing tracks. This crossing of Hornbeam Branch is unique in that three jurisdictions contain a portion of the crossing. The City of Rocky Mount and Nash County lie to the west side, upstream of the crossing, while Edgecombe County is on the east, downstream side of the crossing. Since the crossing is within the City of Rocky Mount the permitting authority is limited to Rocky Mount. Downstream of this crossing Hornbeam Branch flows into Compass Creek which empties into the Tar River. FIRM map numbers 3720386100K, 3720385100K, 3720386000K, and 3720385000K, dated June 18, 2013 contains the immediate upstream vicinity, the crossing, and downstream portions of Tar River. The proposed crossing is shown on this panel to be in Zone AE. The hydraulic analysis of the proposed changes indicates the changes will not cause in any increase in the 100 -year flood elevations and will not cause any measurable changes to the existing 100 -year floodplain. Compass Creek Compass Creek is in the Coastal Plain region of Tar -Pamlico river basin (8 -digiti HUC 03020101) and surrounded by Nash County to the west and Edgecombe County to the east. It crosses the existing railroad via a bridge, constructed in the early 1900's. Flow is from west to east and ultimately flows to Tar River. 103 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 This crossing is within the City of Rocky Mount. The proposed crossing is shown on FIRM Map No. 3720386100J. Panel No. 3861 is in Zone AE. The hydraulic analysis of the proposed changes indicates the changes will not cause in any increase in the 100 -year flood elevations and will not cause any measurable changes to the existing 100 -year floodplain. Beech Branch Beech Branch is located in the Coastal Plain region of Tar -Pamlico river basin (8 -digiti HUC 03020101) and surrounded by Nash County to the west and Edgecombe County to the east. It crosses the existing CSX mainline via two structures, a 12.5 -ft x 4.6 -ft box culvert and an 11.5' corrugated metal pipe (CMP). Flow is from west to east and ultimately flows to Tar River. This crossing is within the City of Rocky Mount. The proposed crossing is shown on FIRM Map No. 3720386100J. Panel No. 3863 is in Zone AE. The hydraulic analysis of the proposed changes indicates the changes will not cause in any increase in the 100 -year flood elevations and will not cause any measurable changes to the existing 100 -year floodplain. Swift Creek Proposed Permanent Changes Swift Creek crosses the existing CSX mainline north the Town of Whitakers, North Carolina. The proposed improvements are to widen the existing crossings 3' on the Edgecombe County side of the rail line. Nash County lies on the west side of the track, Edgecombe County is on the east, and small portion of Rocky Mounty's extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) lies on the most southeastern side of track in the 100 -year floodplain. Swift Creek eventually empties into the Tar River much further downstream. The proposed changes are located within Edgecombe County and the southern -most crossing is located within Edgecombe County and within the City of Rocky Mount based on the northern -most extension of Rocky Mount's Extraterritorial Jurisdiction limit. The proposed crossings are shown on FIRM Map No. 3720386100J. Panel No. 3863 is in Zone AE. 104 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 The hydraulic analysis of the proposed changes indicates the changes will not cause in any increase in the 100 -year flood elevations and will not cause any measurable changes to the existing 100 -year floodplain. 7.7.2.2 Stormwater Development of this project is subject to the stormwater quality and quantity requirements set forth by the Tar -Pamlico Basin NSW requirements (NC Administrative Code - 15A NCAC 02B .0100, .0200, .0300), NPDES Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) requirements, and Phase II post -construction control requirements (Session Law 2006-246, NC Administrative Codes - 15A NCAC 02H 1000 - 1020, 15A NCAC 02H .0126). NCDEQ issued a NPDES Phase II MS4 Permit to the City of Rocky Mount which has a stormwater program and Stormwater Management Plan to implement these regulations. A project specific Stormwater Management Plan (included in Appendix 1) has been prepared to demonstrate how the CCX Terminal can be constructed in a manner that meets or exceeds these stormwater quality and quantity requirements. These requirements include the following: Compliance with the Tar -Pamlico Nutrient St • No increase in peak flows resulting from 1 -year, 24-hour rainfall event • Total Nitrogen Export less than or equal to 4.0 pounds/acre/year, with "buy down" or offset available if the site reaches 10 pounds/acre/year. Greater than 10 pounds/acre/year cannot be approved. • Total Phosphorous Export less than or equal to 0.4 pounds/acre/year, with "buy down" or offset available. City of Rocky Mount Runoff Rate Controls • No increase in peak flows resulting from 1, 10, or 25 -year, 24-hour rainfall event 7.7.2.2.1 Stormwater Management The CCX Terminal utilizes six wet ponds to provide most water quality treatment and to meet peak flow attenuation requirements. Where ponds abut and discharge to riparian buffers, ponds are equipped with level spreaders that release water from the first flush (1- 105 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 inch rainfall event) from the pond in a period of two to five days. The level spreaders are sized to go above and beyond the minimum requirement of 10 -ft of width for every cubic foot per second. High flow bypasses are included to safely control and direct high flows from the ponds to the adjacent land and minimize buffer/wetland disturbance. In most cases, this means that high flows are released from the pond's riser either directly to the new stormwater piping for the project or to riprap protected areas at the ends of site culverts. This helps to minimize overall impacts to wetlands, streams, and provides a stabile point of discharge. Channelized offsite drainage area reaching the site is conveyed through the site without detention and is not included in the model. Ballasted areas are modeled as separate "ponds" to simulate the effect of any throttling of flows through the underdrain system and resultant temporary storage of rainwater within the interstitial ballast area. In some cases, the ponds included with this project not only meet the minimum standard, but also exceed the required size by several fold. Additionally, the ponds as designed go above and beyond the requirements in the following ways and provide treatment above and beyond the prescribed values: • 10 -ft wide safety shelf above permanent pool (6 -ft required) • 10 -ft littoral shelves around pond perimeter and most forebays • Additional depth/volume In all cases, peak flow attenuation is achieved for the 25 -year rainfall event or beyond. The Tar Pamlico NSW Rule imposes a 4.0 pounds per acre per year (Ib/ac/yr) nitrogen loading limit and a 0.4 Ib/ac/yr phosphorus loading limit on new development. The proposed stormwater BMPs reduce nutrients from the new developed areas below buy - down thresholds. The proposed improvements to the property will meet or exceed all appropriate stormwater management regulations, therefore, this project complies with the applicable water quality and quantity requirements. The site specific Stormwater Management Plan (Appendix 1) provides detailed discussion, calculations, and background information to support this project's stormwater management approach. 7.7.2.2.2 Erosion Control Proper sedimentation and erosion control planning and implementation will be essential for this project. Detailed erosion control plans will be prepared and submitted under 106 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 separate cover as appropriate during permitting progression. It is foreseen that all of the permanent ponds included within this Stormwater Management Plan will act as temporary sediment control devices at some point in construction phasing. The construction sequence for the erosion control plan will detail phasing requirements, which will include removal of any sediment accumulation from the ponds prior to converting them to their permanent condition. All culvert and pipe ends will be designed to be non-erosive with appropriate end protection measures such as riprap dissipaters and grade controls. Additionally, the erosion control design will include construction entrances, additional temporary sediment basins, silt fence, tree protection fence, inlet protection, ground cover, dust control, etc. as needed to obtain a Land Disturbance Permit from the NCDEQ Division of Land Resources. 7.7.2.3 Groundwater There are no known groundwater issues within the Project Area. Impacts to groundwater would not be anticipated from the proposed project. 7.8 PROTECTED SPECIES 7.8.1 Description of Affected Environment Plants and animals listed as federally threatened and endangered are protected under the Endangered Species Act (P.L. 92-205) (ESA) which is administered and enforced by the USFWS. The bald eagle is federally protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). A current list of federally endangered and threatened species for Edgecombe and Nash Counties was compiled from the NCNHP database (NCNHP 2017a), USFWS Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS) (USFWS 2017b), and the Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office website (USFWS 2017c). Table 7-5 presents the results of the records search for Edgecombe and Nash Counties. Three queries of elemental occurrences each encompassed a one -mile radius of the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline sites for the NCNHP database search. 107 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Table 7-5. Current List of Federally Endangered, Threatened and Protected Species in Edgecombe and Nash Counties, North Carolina (USFWS 2017) and their Habitat Types Common Scientific Status General Habitat Type County Name Name Bald eagle Haliaeetus BGEPA Forested habitats for nesting and roosting, Edgecombe, leucocephalus and expanses of shallow fresh or salt Nash water for foraging. Nesting habitat generally consists of densely forested areas of mature trees that are isolated from human disturbance. Red -cockaded Picoides E Mature pine forests, specifically those with Edgecombe, woodpecker borealis longleaf pines averaging 80 to 120 years Nash old and loblolly pines averaging 70 to 100 years old. Pine trees with red -heart disease are preferred for cavity nesting. Suitable foraging habitat typically exhibits sparse understory (minimal hardwood regeneration). Fire (control burning) is important in maintaining suitable foraging and nesting habitat. Dwarf Alasmidonta E Creeks and rivers of varying sizes (down Nash wedgemussel heterodon to approximately 6 -ft wide), with slow to moderate flow. Preferred substrates range from coarse sand, to firm muddy sand to gravel. Often occurs within submerged root mats along stable streambanks Tar River Elliptio E Relatively fast flowing, well -oxygenated, Edgecombe, spinymussel steinstansana circumneutral pH water in sites prone to Nash significant swings in water velocity, with a substrate comprised of relatively silt -free loose gravel and/or coarse sand. Michaux's Rhus E Sandy or rocky open woods in association Nash sumac michauxii with basic soils. Species survives best in areas where some form of disturbance has provided an open area. Several populations in North Carolina are on highway rights -of way, roadsides, or on the edges of artificially maintained clearings. E Federally endangered BGEPAFederally protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 108 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 A literature search, desktop habitat assessment, and on-site ground-truthing was conducted to determine the likelihood of the presence or absence of each of the above listed species. The above list was used as the baseline for the on-site habitat assessment and survey. A general field reconnaissance was performed of the CCX Terminal site in September and October 2016, and the Second Mainline in December 2016 and January and February of 2017. The purpose of the reconnaissance was to evaluate the plant communities within the sites with respect to the quantity and quality of habitat and the potential for occurrence by threatened and endangered species. In addition, freshwater mussel surveys were conducted on the CCX Terminal site on October 26 and 27, 2016, and the Second Mainline area on November 15 and 16, 2016 (Three Oaks Engineering 2016 and 2016a). 7.8.2 Potential Environmental Impacts Based on the (1) review of the existing literature and databases for known occurrences of protected species, (2) field surveys conducted on the CCX Terminal site on October 26 and 27, 2016 and the Second Mainline area on November 15 and 16, 2016, (3) freshwater mussel survey conducted on November 15 and November 16, 2016 and (4) implementation of BMPs, we have determined the proposed construction of the CCX Terminal and the associated reconstruction of the Second Mainline is not likely to disturb the bald eagle, may affect, but not likely to adversely affect the Tar River spinymussel, or dwarf wedgemussel and will have no effect on the red -cockaded woodpecker or Michaux's sumac (Table 7-6). The Biological Assessment and the supporting reports are included in Appendix J. Table 7-6. Determination of Effect and Justification for Federally Protected Species within the Project Area. Species Determination of Justification Effect Bald eagle Not likely to disturb All impacts will be >1 mile from an active bald eagle nest; design and location of structures/lines will minimize adverse effects from electrocution and collision. Red -cockaded woodpecker No effect No suitable nesting or foraging habitat identified on or near the project site. Dwarf wedgemussel May affect, not likely Unsuitable habitat and BMPs will minimize to adversely affect. adverse effects to species by protecting river and creek systems. Tar River spinymussel May affect, not likely Unsuitable habitat and BMPs will minimize to adversely affect. adverse effects to species by protecting river and creek systems. Michaux's sumac No effect Unsuitable habitat or the species was not present. 109 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 7.9 CULTURAL RESOURCES Section 404 of the CWA requires that projects authorized by the USACE do not adversely affect historical properties which are listed or eligible for listing on the NRHP. Cultural resources are protected by Section 106 of the NHPA. The Section 106 process consists of consultation with state and federal agencies, consultation with Native American tribes by the lead federal agency, and the identification and evaluation of cultural resources for inclusion in the NRHP. The Cultural Resources Assessment reports are provided in Appendix K. 7.9.1 Description of Affected Environment 7.9.1.1 Archaeological Resources Between October 10 and December 16, 2016, a Phase I archaeological survey of the Project Area was completed. The ultimate goals of this investigation were to identify archaeological resources within the study area, make recommendations about the NRHP eligibility status of each resource, and determine if the proposed undertaking will have adverse effects on properties eligible for the NRHP. Criteria used for assessing NRHP eligibility and project effects are set forth in 36 CFR, Part 60.4 (NRHP eligibility criteria) and 36 CFR Part 800 (project effects). Prior to fieldwork, archaeological survey methods were discussed with Dr. John Mintz at the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology (OSA) and determined to reflect an adequate survey approach. The archaeological study area, including potential property purchases, covers an approximately 291 -hectare (ha) (720 -acre) area and an associated 11.28 -hectare (ha) (27.87 -acre) [9.7 -kilometer (km)] rail corridor associated with the proposed lead tracks north and south of the tract parallel to and east of the existing CSX A -Line. The impacts associated with the intermodal facility itself will include the construction of the intermodal terminal area, including multiple yard tracks, buildings, electric rail -mounted gantry cranes, paved areas for truck movement, stormwater management basins, and ancillary facilities with appropriate buffers from surrounding land uses. The archaeological survey was confined to the project APE for direct impacts (described above): the 291 -ha rail yard tract and the 6.02 -mile rail corridor. To consider possible indirect project impacts, the APE for historic architecture/resources included the Project Area and a 400- to 800 -meter (m) (0.25- to 0.5 -mile) zone beyond the Project Area limits. Official records maintained by the OSA in Raleigh indicate that no archaeological sites have been previously recorded in the survey area. Expanding the search to a 1 -mile radius revealed that 28 archaeological sites have been recorded within the project vicinity. 110 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Twenty-seven of these resources were listed as ineligible for the NRHP and one site was not formally evaluated. As a result of the archaeological survey, seven newly recorded sites and five isolated finds were documented within the survey area (Table 7-7). Sites 31 ED384**-31 ED388** represent nineteenth to twentieth-century domestic artifact scatters associated with the occupation of the Odom-Cooper-Flye Farm property (ED1639), a previously recorded historic district associated with a large agricultural operation that dated from the late 19th century. This district was recommended as eligible for the NRHP in 1998 and was revisited during the historic architectural survey for the current project (see van den Hurk et al. 2017). These archaeological resources have been significantly impacted by many years of cultivation and related agricultural activities. These sites lack depositional integrity and contextual clarity, are unlikely to retain significant archaeological data that would contribute to a better understanding to the settlement and use of the study area, and are considered ineligible for the NRHP under all criteria. Site 31 ED389** represents a redeposited scatter of brick foundation elements from a possible tobacco barn. This site is also recommended as ineligible for the NRHP under all criteria based on its redeposited nature. The Powell -Battle -Jones Cemetery (31 ED395**) is protected under North Carolina law and will be preserved, but it is recommended ineligible for the NRHP due to abandonment and previous disturbance. All five isolated finds are recommended as ineligible for NRHP listing due to their isolated nature. Identified cultural resources are shown on Figures 10a -10d. Table 7-7. Identified Archaeological Resources within the Project Area. Site No. Type NRHP and Management Recommendations 31 ED384** Homestead Ineligible; no further work 31 ED385** Homestead Ineligible; no further work 31 ED386** Homestead Ineligible; no further work 31 ED387** Homestead Ineligible; no further work 31 ED388** Homestead Ineligible; no further work 31 ED389** Redeposited structural debris Ineligible; no further work 31 ED395** Powell -Battle -Jones Cemetery Ineligible; preservation 31 ED390** Isolated find Ineligible; no further work 31 ED391 ** Isolated find Ineligible; no further work 31 ED392 Isolated find Ineligible; no further work 31 ED393** Isolated find Ineligible; no further work 31 ED394** Isolated find Ineligible; no further work 111 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 7.9.1.2 Historic/Architectural Resources Between December 1, 2016 and February 9, 2017 an architectural survey and evaluation of the Project Area was completed. The ultimate goals of this investigation were to identify architectural resources within the study area, make recommendations about the NRHP eligibility status of each resource, and determine if the proposed undertaking will have adverse effects on properties eligible for the NRHP. Criteria used for assessing NRHP eligibility and project effects are set forth in 36 CFR, Part 60.4 (NRNP eligibility criteria) and 36 CFR Part 800 (project effects). To address potential direct and indirect effects, the APE with respect to the proposed project is defined as including 1) those resources located within the Project Area or within a 0.25 -mile (1,320 -ft) radius of the tract, and 2) any resources beyond the 0.25 -mile (0.4 - km) radius for which visual elements related to the project would have the potential to introduce an adverse effect. For the portion of the project involving changes along the existing rail corridor to the north and south of the facility tract, due to the limited scope of proposed changes to add lead tracks, the APE is defined as including historic properties on parcels lying adjacent to the existing railroad right-of-way. Records at the SHPO in Raleigh, as well as those on the HPOWEB GIS Web Service, show that five historic structures/properties have been recorded in the APE. The Odom- Cooper-Flye Farm Property and the associated Henry Odom Tenant House were recorded within the Project Area during a 1997 historic architecture survey. One other resource recorded during a 1984-1985 survey, Marks Chapel School and cemetery, was recorded along the western edge of the Project Area. Historic architectural resources near the study tract include East Carolina Industrial Training School and the Bellemonte House. The SHPO determined the Odom-Cooper-Flye Farm, Henry Odom Tenant House, East Carolina Industrial Training School, and Bellemonte House eligible for the NRHP. SHPO found Marks Chapel School to be ineligible for the NRHP. The historic architecture/resources survey and evaluations revealed that 24 historic resources are located within the Project Area or the APE for indirect impacts (Table 7-8). Of these resources, the Odom-Cooper-Flye Farm Property (including the Henry Odom Tenant House) and the East Carolina Industrial Training School were confirmed to still be eligible for the NRHP. Marks Chapel School is no longer present, but the associated twentieth-century cemetery remains in an outparcel to the Project Area. It was also determined that the NRHP-eligible Bellemonte house has been moved to a location outside the project APE. The ten remaining historic resources are recommended ineligible for the NRHP under all criteria. 112 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Table 7-8. Architectural Resources within the Project Area/APE Resource Name NRHP/Management Recommendations ED0623 East Carolina Industrial Training School Eligible; no adverse effect; no further work ED0624 Henry Odom Tenant House Contributor to the Odom-Cooper-Flye Farm ED1625 Marks Chapel School/Cemetery Building no longer present; cemetery outparceled from project area; no further work ED1639 Odom-Cooper-Flye Farm Confirmed eligible for NRHP; adverse effect; mitigation ED1641 House Ineligible; no further work ED1642 House Ineligible; no further work ED1643 House Ineligible; no further work ED1644 House Ineligible; no further work ED1645 House Ineligible; no further work ED1646 Jones Tenant House Ineligible; no further work ED1649 Battleboro Cemetery, Cemetery Drive Ineligible; no further work Commercial Building, 12446 NC -97 Ineligible; no further work ED1650 West, Rocky Mount Commercial Building, 12601 NC -97 Ineligible; no further work ED1651 West, Rocky Mount Commercial Building, 1450 Atlantic Ineligible; no further work ED1652 Avenue, Rocky Mount House, 105 E. Battleboro Avenue, Ineligible; no further work ED1653 Battleboro NS0915 Bellemonte NRHP listed; moved 2016; no longer in APE NS1534 House Ineligible; no further work NS1535 Office Ineligible; no further work NS1536 House Ineligible; no further work NS1537 House & Store Ineligible; no further work Commercial Building, 105 Gelo Road, Ineligible; no further work NS1543 Rocky Mount Commercial Building, 2551 N. Church Ineligible; no further work NS1544 Street, Rocky Mount Commercial Building, 2245 N. Church Ineligible; no further work NS1545 Street, Rocky Mount 113 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Resource Name NRHP/Management Recommendations Commercial Building, 2151 N. Church Ineligible; no further work NS1546 Street, Rocky Mount 7.9.2 Potential Environmental Impacts As designed, it appears that the proposed project will have no effect on significant archaeological resources. No further archaeological investigation is recommended. However, it appears that the CCX Terminal will have an adverse effect on the NRHP- eligible Odom-Cooper-Flye Farm property. It does not appear that the proposed undertaking will affect the East Carolina Training School or any other NRHP-listed or eligible properties. Impacts to the Odom-Cooper-Flye Farm property will be addressed in a project Memorandum of Agreement, to be coordinated with all interested parties to include appropriate minimization and mitigation measures for impacts to this protected historic resource. 7.10 SOCIOECONOMICS AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE Socioeconomic and Environmental Justice (EJ) impacts were evaluated based on a comparison of large and small scale readily available Census data, labor statistics, aerial photography, and site reconnaissance. Nearby residences and businesses adjacent to the proposed intermodal yard and second mainline improvements were identified to determine potential direct and indirect impacts. Negative and positive affects to the local population surrounding the proposed project were evaluated using the datasets. Refer to Appendix L for further methodology and details on defining EJ communities and potential EJ impacts. 7.10.1 Description of Affected Environment 7.10.1.1 Socioeconomics A Community Impact Analysis (CIA) was completed for the CCX Terminal site (Appendix L). The area evaluated in the CIA is called the Direct Community Impact Area (DCIA). The DCIA included the area within the Project Area as well as all properties that could be directly affected by the project. It takes into account contiguous neighborhoods with sole access points to roads within the proposed facility. The proposed CCX Terminal is located entirely within Edgecombe County, with a portion of the Project Area falling within the municipal limits of the City of Rocky Mount. The entire DCIA is within the extraterritorial planning jurisdiction of the City of Rocky Mount. The Project Area encompasses land that 114 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 has been purchased by CSX for the CCX Terminal and for associated track improvements between E. Battleboro Avenue in the Battleboro Community and just south of Cool Spring Road (NC -97). In addition, emergency access and maintenance driveways would be purchased along the railroad mainline. The project spans an industrial corridor that follows the N. Wesleyan Boulevard (US -301) west of the railroad with the rural area to the east. Most of the DCIA is rural and undeveloped, with farms and low-density residential development the most prominent features. The DCIA also includes a coal-fired power plant adjacent to the northern boundary of the CCX Terminal and east of the Second Mainline northern area. A few light industrial businesses and site of a former State women's prison are located to the south of the CCX Terminal and along the eastern boundary of the Second Mainline southern area. 7.10.1.2 Environmental Justice The Demographic Study Area (DSA) represents all US Census Tract Block Groups (BG) that overlap the Project Area. An Analysis of Potential EJ Impacts was completed to fully investigate the potential impacts the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline will have on low- income or minority, i.e. EJ, populations, as per EO 12898 (Appendix L). The US Census Bureau (USCB) American Community Survey data was used to compare the population in the DSA to Nash County and Edgecombe County populations, to determine whether the DSA contains any notable EJ populations at the BG level. The data was also used to determine whether the DSA meets the threshold for Limited English Proficiency (LEP). Two thresholds can result in an EJ determination for minority populations, which includes all races that are non-white and Hispanic populations that are also white (refer to Tables 10-1, 10-2, and 10-3). These two thresholds further include: • Any Block Group where 50% or more of the population is minority, or "majority minority," is considered to have a notable EJ presence. • Any Block Group with a minority population at least ten percentage points higher than the county average would also have a notable EJ presence. Two thresholds are used for an EJ determination based on low-income: • Any Block Group where the percentage of the population in any of the poverty categories — Below Poverty Level, Very Poor or Near Poor equals or exceeds 25% of the total population of that Block Group. 115 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 • Any Block Group where the percentage of the population in any of the poverty categories — Below Poverty Level, Very Poor or Near Poor exceeds the county average by five percentage points or more. Four EJ communities were observed within the CCX Terminal DCIA during the field visit. Country Estates Mobile Home Park, Inlet Lane Mobile Home Park, and Holiday Estates Mobile Home Park are located east of the CCX Terminal along Old Battleboro Road. Based on field visit observations, these are home to low-income populations. A fourth mobile home community is located along Windywood Lane off College Road, adjacent to the CCX Terminal. Based on field visit observations, this is a low-income and minority community. Census data indicates a notable presence of minority and low-income populations meeting the criteria for EJ populations within the DSA, and minority and low-income communities were observed within the DCIA during the field visit and were noted by the local planner. Appendix L provides the USCB poverty information for the DSA, and further identifying that the criteria for EJ populations was met in all but one of the eight BGs that comprise the DSA. 7.10.2 Potential Environmental Impacts 7.10.2.1 Socioeconomics Approximately 446 acres of land within the CCX Terminal are part of the Edgecombe County Northwest Voluntary Agricultural District, and would be converted to a non- agricultural use by the project. Approximately 338 acres of agricultural land within the CCX Terminal have been purchased by CSX for the project, and will therefore be taken out of agricultural production. The City of Rocky Mount Planning Director reported that the project would not likely have an impact on development of the adjacent farm land. The majority of trucks accessing the CCX Terminal would travel between 1-95 and the facility along a route consisting of NC -4, Red Oak Battleboro Road (SR 1524) in Nash County, which becomes Morning Star Church Road (SR 1412) in Edgecombe County, and Old Battleboro Road (SR 1400). This route avoids the residential neighborhoods in the DCIA which are located to the south; thus, impacts from increased truck traffic to these communities would be minimized. In addition to increased truck and other vehicular traffic, residential and commercial relocations will occur at the intermodal site. Thirteen households and one business have been (or likely will be) relocated as a result of property acquisition for this project. 116 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 CSX has projected that the intermodal terminal will create 250 to 400 short-term construction jobs and 300 long-term positions for operations. 7.10.2.2 Environmental Justice Thirteen households and one business have been (or likely will be) relocated as a result of property acquisition for this project. The negotiated real estate transactions included allowances for a negotiated number of months to allow time for relocation. The relocation of households will have some level of impact on the relocates, but presumably the negotiated real estate transactions have provided satisfactory compensation. The project is also compatible with the existing land use. While minority and low-income populations are present in the DSA, no notably adverse community impacts are anticipated with this project; thus, impacts to minority and low-income populations do not appear to be disproportionately high and adverse. Benefits and burdens resulting from the project are anticipated to be equitably distributed throughout the community. No disparate impacts are anticipated under Title VI and related statutes. 7.11 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 7.11.1 Description of Affected Environment A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was completed for the Proposed Project in November 2016 (Report of the Phase I ESA is included in Appendix M). The purpose of the Phase I ESA was to identify recognized environmental conditions (RECs). RECs include the presence or likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products due to releases to the environment or because there is a potential for future releases to the environment. The Phase I ESA identified the following environmental concerns: Three USTs were located at the Flye property within the project site. One 300 -gallon fuel oil UST was observed under the rear deck of the house. One gasoline and one diesel UST of unknown volume were observed located northeast of the house near a pair of filling pumps. The vegetation around the filling pumps was observed to be stressed. The former CECO Building Systems / Mitchell Engineering Company facility (100 Red Iron Road) is located approximately 400 -ft north-northwest and upgradient of the project site. The facility was listed on the State UST database with three USTs located onsite. The facility maintained and removed USTs including one 500 -gallon gasoline mix UST (removed in 1990), one 500 -gallon gasoline diesel UST (removed in 1988) and a 1,000- 117 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 gallon diesel UST (removed in 1996). The facility was also listed on the State LUST list and the State IMD databases for a release of diesel on July 29, 1996, during the removal of the 1,000 -gallon UST. Soil samples collected during the tank removal were determined to be above detection limits, but below the regulatory limits. No further action was necessary, and the incident was closed on August 30, 2000. The current facility (Mitchell Engineering Company) is listed on the State Hazardous Waste Sites database. A Phase II Remedial Investigation (RI) Report of the former CECO Building Systems Facility (AECOM, 2013) indicates the presence of three primary areas of environmental impact - the Embankment Area where paint waste material was disposed of; the waste disposal area where paint, lumber, and paper were disposed of; and, a former UST location. Compounds detected in soil above the NCDEQ Preliminary Soil Remediation Goal in one or more of the three primary areas of impact included several metals but most notably hexavalent chromium and manganese, in addition to petroleum related volatile organic compounds. Hexavalent chromium and manganese were identified in groundwater above the North Carolina unrestricted use groundwater standards (North Carolina Title 15A Subchapter 2L Section .0200 of the NCAC or NC 2L Standard) in the waste disposal area. Tetrachloroethene was identified above the NC 2L Standard in the former UST location area. The report indicates groundwater flows in several directions onsite. The RI report indicates that one of the groundwater flow components in the waste disposal area flows towards the east and therefore the manganese impacted groundwater may be hydraulically upgradient and flow into the project site. Ground surface in areas of the project site containing solid waste and debris did not appear to be stained and the materials did not appear to be the source of a release. The waste and debris were identified in the Phase I ESA as a housekeeping issue that may require coordination for proper disposal with a general subcontractor. Based on field observations made during the Phase I ESA, the waste and debris do not constitute a release of petroleum products or hazardous substances and therefore are not a REC. However, if significant staining is observed during removal, the waste and debris may be considered a REC in the future. Drums identified within the project site will require proper disposal but to not constitute a release of petroleum products or hazardous substances and thus are not considered to be a REC. 118 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 7.11.1 Potential Environmental Impacts Construction and operation of the Proposed Project has a low potential to generate hazardous waste. Heavy construction equipment will be used to construct the rail corridor and diesel locomotives will be utilized to haul freight. A Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures Plan (SPCCP); SWPPP; and Oil and Hazardous Substance Contingency Plan (OHSCP) would be developed to show locations and quantities of waste material generated and provide disposal requirements. 7.12 NOISE AND VIBRATION 7.12.1 Description of Affected Environment 7.12.1.1 Noise Noise is typically defined as unwanted or undesirable sound, where sound is characterized by small air pressure fluctuations above and below the atmospheric pressure. The basic parameters of environmental noise that affect human subjective response are: (1) intensity or level; (2) frequency content; and (3) variation with time. The FRA relies upon the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) noise and vibration impact assessment procedures. The Screening and General Noise Assessment was completed in accordance with methodologies contained in the FRA CREATE Noise and Vibration Assessment Methodology, dated December 2007. The initial review of the project aerial maps determined noise sensitive areas and/or receivers of interest were present within or adjacent to the proposed action. The FRA recommends applying a screening procedure to determine if there is a likelihood of noise impact from a project, with areas defined by the screening distances sufficiently large enough to encompass all potentially impacted locations. In accordance with FRA guidelines, screening distances are determined based on train activity characteristics; i.e. trains per day, speed and length of cars and number of locomotives/train. A total of 22 separate train events were measured during the test period. The train pass - by were a combination of CSX freight trains (14) and Amtrak passenger trains (8). The monitored freight train consists varied from two to three locomotives and 23 to 142 rail cars in length under varying speeds and loads. 119 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Based on the field work and the existing train characteristics observed (see Appendix N), the train activity is considered high level due to the sounding of the horns at grade crossings. Therefore, the noise screening distance used is 1,500 -ft for unobstructed line of sight according to CREATE Noise and Vibration Assessment methodology. The screening distance was applied from the centerline of existing track. Based on aerial photography and field trips to the Project Area, several residential communities were identified within 1,500 -ft from the track centerline. Based on the CREATE noise assessment methodology and the current operation characteristics, the buffer distance, where the 80 dB(A) extends, is 157 -ft. The number of existing residences that fall within the buffer distance is 112 residences 7.12.1.2 Vibration Ground -borne vibration is the oscillatory motion of the ground about some equilibrium position that can be described in terms of displacement, velocity or acceleration. Because sensitivity to vibration typically corresponds to the amplitude of vibration velocity within the low frequency range of most concern for environmental vibration (roughly 5-100 Hz), velocity is the preferred measure for evaluating ground -borne vibration from rail projects. The FRA/FTA ground -borne vibration impact criteria are based on land use and train frequency. Vibration sensitive receptors are classified in three categories. Category 1 receptors are those buildings where low ambient vibrations are essential for the operations conducted within the building. An example of Category 1 receptor is a building in which research using electron microscopes is conducted. Category 2 receptors consist of single family residences as well as apartment or townhouse buildings. Category 3 receptors include churches, schools and other commercial buildings that do not house vibration sensitive equipment. Industrial buildings that are mainly used for manufacturing are not included in this category. As per FRA/FTA guidelines, the screening distance is 200 -ft for Category 2 receivers (residential). This means that, according to FTA, in the absence of measurements or in- situ testing, it is safe to assume that vibration levels beyond 200 -ft from the track will not cause an impact to residential locations. Based on aerial photography and field trips to the project site, it was determined that there are residences within the screening distance of 200 -ft. This includes residential communities within the Town of Rocky Mount, Battleboro and Whitakers. Hence, the General Vibration Assessment is required. Therefore, it was decided to conduct vibration measurements field work before completing the vibration assessment. The same train events measured in the noise study were measured for the vibration study. 120 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 The future operating speed is the same as existing track rated speed of 60 miles per hour (mph). Furthermore, there are no additional trains operating on the mainline tracks, based on information provided by CSX. Future vibration impacts are determined from 1) assessing source vibration levels; 2) adjusting source levels for future speeds and conditions; 3) estimating vibration levels using known fall-off rates, i.e. decrease in vibration versus distance. Based on train vibration source levels measured in the Project Area, curves of vibration level versus distance were established and estimated impact distances are determined from these curves. 7.12.2 Potential Environmental Impacts 7.12.2.1 Noise Project specific Noise and Vibration Analysis and Assessment Reports (Appendix N) have been prepared to demonstrate that the proposed project will not have a significant impact in regards to noise. The mainline operations through the study area will not experience an increase in operations due to the intermodal terminal. Based on information provided by CSX, the new intermodal terminal is expected to receive a total of 16 trains movement associated with the terminal. These 16 trains are equally split between inbound and outbound trains. In addition, the train movement in the yard are slower and the trains engines are not expected to sound the horn. Freight trains arriving and departing the intermodal terminal will use a different spur track as access to the north and south of the terminal. The intermodal full operation predicted sound levels (Ldn) are 58 dB(A) at the western property limit adjacent to residential communities, which is below existing sounds levels of 80dB(A) at 60 -ft, adjacent to College Road grade crossings. Finally, it is expected that the proposed construction of the CCX Terminal will not cause a significant annoyance noise impact per FRA/FTA criteria. In addition, the CCX Terminal will consider the use of vegetated soil berms and vegetated buffers to provide a physical and vegetative visual screen of the facility operations, and to dampen noise that may filter out to the adjacent community. Soil berms and plant installation will be strategically placed to maximize the screening effect. Soil berms will not be contiguous due to ecological and land use constraint issues. However, the terminal will consider vegetated buffers (natural and planted) in areas that will not support soil berms. 121 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 7.12.2.2 Vibration It should be noted that the maximum rated operating speed for the existing and future case is 60 mph. Therefore, there number of potential impacted residences will not change between the existing and future scenarios and there will be no additional impacted residences for the additional track construction on the rail mainline. Future case intermodal terminal vibration levels will be much lower than mainline due to much lower operating speeds in the facility. It is expected that cranes, truck operations, and yard jockey operations will not cause any significant vibration levels. Based on the train slow speed operation, it is estimated that vibration buffer distance for the intermodal terminal is 370 -ft from the lead tracks and these distances will fall within the intermodal terminal itself. Therefore, it is expected that there are no residential parcels that are impacted due to vibration from the intermodal terminal operation. The mainline rail operation will not cause vibration impact based on the assumption that the speed (60 mph) will remain the same for both existing and future scenarios. Furthermore, there are no vibration impacts expected due to intermodal terminal operations, as it will be limited to 370 -ft from the rail spurs in the terminal itself which does not include residential receivers. It is expected that the proposed CCX Terminal will not cause a significant annoyance vibration impact per FRA/FTA criteria for frequent events. 7.13 AIR QUALITY Common air pollutants that cause health, environmental, and property damage are emitted by sources all over the United States. The USEPA calls these pollutants "criteria air pollutants" because the agency has regulated them by developing criteria (science - based guidelines) as the basis for setting permissible levels in the ambient air. One set of limits (primary standard) protects human health; another set of limits (secondary standard) protects human welfare by preventing environmental and property damage. A geographic area that meets or does better than the primary NAAQS is called an attainment area, areas that do not meet the primary NAAQS are called nonattainment areas. Areas that were originally designated as nonattainment but which have improved their air quality sufficiently to have been redesignated to attainment are called maintenance areas. The criteria air pollutants are: CO, Os, particulate matter (PM), including PM less than 10 microns in diameter (PM,o) and PM less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5), SO2, oxides 122 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 of nitrogen (NOO, and Pb. In addition, NOX and volatile organic compounds (VOC), are regulated by USEPA as ozone precursors. In addition to the federal NAAQS for criteria pollutants, NCDEQ has also adopted ambient air quality standards in the NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2D Section 0400. 7.13.1 Description of Affected Environment The CCX Terminal will be situated in the Inner Coastal Plain region of Eastern North Carolina near the City of Rocky Mount, which is in Edgecombe County. The regional climate is impacted by a variety of influences, from the Appalachian Mountains to the west and the Atlantic Ocean to the east, including the Gulf Stream. The Bermuda High is a predominant climatological feature during the summer months, providing calm winds and clear conditions that can result in a degradation of air quality. The Rocky Mount NAAQS evaluation area, which includes all of Nash and Edgecombe counties, is designated as attainment for all criteria pollutants. However, prior to January 5, 2007, Nash and Edgecombe counties were designated as nonattainment for the 1997 8 -hour ozone standard of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). As a result, Nash and Edgecombe counties are currently designated as a maintenance area for the 1997 ozone standard. This designation, valid until 2027, requires additional scrutiny of potential air quality impacts. Criteria air pollution emissions from sources located in the Rocky Mount maintenance area, as presented in the 2014 National Emissions Inventory [https-//www.epa.gov/air- emissions-inventories/2014-national-emissions-inventory-nei-data], are summarized in Table 7-9. These values include emissions from point sources (i.e., stationary sources that have individual air permits), nonpoint sources, i.e., stationary sources that do not have individual air permits, mobile on -road sources, i.e., cars, trucks, and mobile non - road sources, i.e., construction vehicles. Table 7-9. Air Emissions from Sources in the Rocky Mount Maintenance Area Pollutant Emissions (tons per year) Edgecombe County Nash County Total CO 8,231 15,592 23,822 NOX 2,488 3,215 5,702 PM10 2,546 2,758 5,305 PM2.5 643 779 1,422 SO2 90.5 74.5 165 123 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 VOC 11,659 13,638 25,297 CO2e 294,077 766,796 1,060,873 7.13.2 Potential Environmental Impacts Air pollution emissions will be generated by a number of sources associated with the CCX Terminal. These emission sources include vehicles used during the construction and operation of the facility, site grading and storage piles during facility construction, asphalt paving during facility construction, and process equipment during facility operation. Air pollution emissions were quantified for two time periods: construction of the terminal and on-going operation of the terminal. Air quality analyses associated with each of these time periods are described below. 7.13.2.1 Construction Phase Air Emissions Construction -phase air emissions generated by the following activities were quantified: • Fuel combustion emissions from the operation of off-road construction equipment, i.e., off road dump trucks, drum rollers, soil compactors, farm tractors, excavators, bulldozers, graders, loaders, backhoes, forklifts, hostler trucks, asphalt pavers, and asphalt compactors) on-site • Fuel combustion emissions from the operation of on -road construction equipment, i.e., asphalt dump trucks, water trucks, to and from the site • Fuel combustion emissions from the operation of personal vehicles to transport construction workers to and from the site • Fugitive dust emissions from wind erosion and storage piles • Volatile organic compound emissions from asphalt paving operations Fuel combustion emissions were calculated using USEPA's MOVES2014a model. Fugitive dust and asphalt paving emissions were calculated using emission factors published by USEPA. A summary of potential air emissions for the construction phase, in terms of TPY is presented in Table 7-10. A detailed discussion of the emissions calculation methodology for the fuel combustion sources and asphalt paving operations is provided in Appendix O with the conformity analysis. Details regarding the fugitive dust emissions calculations are presented in Appendix O. 124 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Table 7-10. Air Emissions during Terminal Construction 7.13.2.2 Operational Phase Air Emissions Operational -phase air emissions generated by the following activities were quantified: • Fuel combustion emissions from the operation of trucks to transfer containers to and from the terminal • Fuel combustion emissions from the operation of personal vehicles to transport CCX staff to and from the terminal • Fuel combustion emissions from the operation of locomotive engines at the terminal • Fuel combustion emissions from the operation of hostler trucks used at the terminal. Fuel combustion emissions from the transfer trucks, personal vehicles, and hostler trucks were calculated using USEPA's MOVES2014a model. Fuel combustion emissions from the locomotives were calculated using emission factors published by USEPA. A summary of potential air emissions for the operational phase is presented in Table 7-11. A detailed discussion of the emissions calculation methodology is provided in Appendix O with the conformity analysis. 125 Air Emissions (TPY) Pollutant Vehicles Fugitive Dust Asphalt p Paving Total Nonroad Onroad Unpaved Roads Wind Erosion and Storage Piles CO 9.22 19.6 28.8 NOX 30.6 18.3 48.8 PM10 1.51 1.50 187 1.10 191 PM2.5 1.46 1.38 18.7 0.62 22.2 SO2 0.032 0.035 0.07 VOC 2.89 2.95 8.7 14.5 CO2e 5,742 33.0 5,775 7.13.2.2 Operational Phase Air Emissions Operational -phase air emissions generated by the following activities were quantified: • Fuel combustion emissions from the operation of trucks to transfer containers to and from the terminal • Fuel combustion emissions from the operation of personal vehicles to transport CCX staff to and from the terminal • Fuel combustion emissions from the operation of locomotive engines at the terminal • Fuel combustion emissions from the operation of hostler trucks used at the terminal. Fuel combustion emissions from the transfer trucks, personal vehicles, and hostler trucks were calculated using USEPA's MOVES2014a model. Fuel combustion emissions from the locomotives were calculated using emission factors published by USEPA. A summary of potential air emissions for the operational phase is presented in Table 7-11. A detailed discussion of the emissions calculation methodology is provided in Appendix O with the conformity analysis. 125 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Table 7-11 Air Emissions during Terminal Operation Pollutant Air Emissions (TPY) Vehicles Locomotive EnginesTotal Nonroad Onroad CO 2.68 21.30 4.81 28.8 NOx 4.61 43.5 17.9 66.0 PM10 0.73 3.30 0.42 4.45 PM2.5 0.71 3.04 0.40 4.15 SO2 0.006 0.024 0.57 0.60 VOC 0.39 3.67 0.69 4.75 CO2e 1 940 12,870 1 1,842 1 5,652 Note that the rail -mounted gantry cranes installed at the site will be electric and will not result in any air emissions. In addition, because the site will be automated, other nonroad equipment typical of other intermodal terminals will not be used at the CCX Terminal. Finally, minimal ancillary process equipment that will generate air pollution emissions, i.e., comfort heating systems, emergency generators, will be installed on-site; emissions from these sources were not estimated. These sources would be covered under requirements for stationary sources. 7.13.2.1 Regulatory Requirements for Air Quality — General Conformity Because the project is in a NAAQS maintenance area for the 1997 8 -hour ozone standard and is receiving federal permits, a general conformity applicability analysis is required for the ozone precursors NOx and volatile organic compounds (VOC). A general conformity analysis must show that the emissions from both construction and operation of the intermodal terminal would conform to the ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Rocky Mount maintenance area and not impede the area from maintaining its attainment status. For an ozone maintenance area, if a proposed project results in potential NOx and VOC emissions that are less than 100 TPY, the project is deemed to conform to the SIP and no further analyses are required. Because the construction and operation phases will take place at different times, they must be evaluated separately. Project activities that must be included in a general conformity review include those identified above. General conformity analyses exclude air emissions generated by stationary sources that are permitted 126 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 through NCDEQ's air quality permitting program. However, as previously discussed, there will be minimal stationary air emission sources installed at the CCX Terminal. Conformity emissions are evaluated on an annual basis. Construction of the terminal is expected to take about a year and three months. Construction emissions from year one were assumed to begin on January 1 and proceed through December 31 as a worst-case estimate. As presented in Tables 13-2 and 13-3, NOX and VOC emissions during either the construction phase or operation phase will not exceed the 100 TPY conformity threshold. Thus, the CCX Terminal will not trigger additional conformity requirements for NOX or VOC. 7.13.2.2 Anticipated Project Impacts Within the Rocky Mount ozone maintenance area, it is anticipated that the CCX Terminal will result in increased air emissions during both the construction and operation phases. However, these emissions increases will conform with the ozone SIP for the Rocky Mount maintenance area. Statewide, operational emissions from CCX will be more than offset by a reduction in emissions due to an estimated 15.9 million fewer truck vehicle miles traveled on North Carolina highways by 2022 (CCX Rocky Mount Report 2016). 7.14 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION 7.14.1 Description of Affected Environment A preliminary traffic study was completed in February 2017 to evaluate the effect of this proposed improvement on traffic patterns in the area (see Appendix P). A study area was determined for evaluation which included the 12 intersections listed below: • NC -4 and NC -48 (signalized) • NC -4 and Hart Farm Road (unsignalized) • NC -4 and West Battleboro Avenue (unsignalized) • NC -4 and Red Oak Battleboro Avenue (unsignalized) • US -301 and Red Oak Battleboro Road (signalized), • Morning Star Church Road and Old Battleboro Road (unsignalized) • US -301 and College Road (unsignalized) • US -301 and Thomas A. Betts Parkway (signalized) • US -301 and Instrument Drive (signalized) • Fountain School Road and Old Battleboro Road (unsignalized) • Cool Spring Road and Old Battleboro Road (signalized) 127 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 • Cool Spring Road and Tanner Road (unsignalized) Per the City of Rocky Mount, there are currently no known significant future developments in the area outside of the CCX Terminal project that will likely affect traffic volumes and patterns in the area. The Rocky Mount Metropolitan Transportation Plan has one fiscally constrained project within the study area that is expected to be constructed by 2040 and is included in the No -Build (2040) scenario as follows: • Widen NC -48 from a two-lane roadway to a four -lane roadway between Homestead Road and NC -4 For the analysis, it was assumed that the south leg at the NC -4 and NC -48 intersection would be widened to include two lanes in the southbound direction and two lanes in the northbound direction, one exclusive northbound left -turn lane and one shared through/right-turn lane. The signal phasing at this intersection was assumed to be the same phasing as in the existing signal plan received from NCDOT and the City of Rocky Mount, which is split phasing on the northbound and southbound approaches. 7.14.2 Potential Environmental Impacts 7.14.2.1 No -Build (2040) analysis Level of service analyses were conducted for all the study area intersections for the No - Build (2040) AM and PM peak hours. The volumes used in the No -Build (2040) analysis are shown in Appendix P. Figure 3, Table 3 and the summary level of service results are shown in Appendix P. As shown in the table, all study area intersections are projected to operate acceptably during the AM and PM peak hours in the No -Build (2040) scenario with no movements or approaches anticipated to operate below LOS D. 7.14.2.2 Build (2040) Analysis CSX staff indicated that most of the trucks accessing the facility would be traveling north and south along 1-95. As a result, the preferred route between 1-95 and the proposed facility is a route that traverses NC -4, Red Oak Battleboro Road and Old Battleboro Road. For the analysis, most of the truck traffic to and from the facility were sent to 1-95 via this preferred route; however, a portion of the truck traffic was sent north and south along US - 301, while another portion was sent to 1-95 via a route along US -301 and Thomas A. Betts Parkway. Employees working at the proposed facility are anticipated to be primarily local 128 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 trips; however, there may also be some regional trips. Thus, employee trips were distributed to the surrounding area via several routes. The truck trip distribution percentages and resulting truck trips, employee trip distribution percentages and resulting employee trips, total site trips and volumes used in the Build (2040) analysis are shown in Appendix P on Figures 4 through 9. As shown in Appendix P on Table 5, all study area intersections are projected to continue operating acceptably during the AM and PM peak hours in the Build (2040) scenario, with no movements or approaches anticipated to operate below LOS D. The NCDOT provided a letter, dated May 22, 2017, which outlines NCDOT plans to upgrade and improve road infrastructure in the vicinity of the proposed project. This letter has been included in Appendix P. 7.14.2.3 Other Considerations The proposed facility is anticipated to result in a relatively large amount of truck traffic being added to the study area roadways not only in the peak hour but also throughout the day. The scope of the preliminary traffic study was to determine the operational improvements at study area intersections that would be needed to accommodate the additional traffic. Considerations for items such as intersection radii may need to be adjusted to adequately accommodate the projected truck traffic, pavement enhancements may be needed to address the addition of heavy vehicles, and additional improvements may be needed to serve ancillary development brought by the presence of the facility. These considerations are not included in this analysis. 129 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 8 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS This section includes a brief discussion of cumulative impacts that may occur as a result of the Proposed Project. Cumulative impacts (40 CFR 230.11(g) and 40 CFR 1508.7, RGL 84-9) are those impacts that result from the incremental impact of an action added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions in the future. These cumulative impacts can result from individually minor direct and indirect but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time. NEPA requires that federal projects undergoing NEPA analysis consider cumulative impacts. The CEQ has provided a framework for addressing cumulative effects as part of an environmental assessment, "Considering Cumulative Effects Under the National Environmental Policy Act" (CEQ, 1997). This guidance places a priority on "counting what counts" within a defined geographic (spatial) and time (temporal) boundary when considering cumulative impacts. 8.1 DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT The Project Area is located near the border of Edgecombe and Nash Counties, North Carolina. Both counties are traditionally rural agricultural counties, which have seen an increase in development pressure since 2006. This development pressure is the result of infrastructure improvements, including the US 64 Bypass and construction of a new portion of interstate 1-540 allowing for workers in and around Raleigh to live in rural communities and commute to work, as well as a slight reduction in agricultural activity due to tobacco buy-out (NCLDP 2006, ECLDP 2007). 8.1.1 Spatial Scope The proposed project is the construction of an intermodal terminal and reconstruction of a second main line in the vicinity of the intermodal terminal. The project is meant to as a regional intermodal hub which will allow for efficient intermodal transfer of freight from Mid -Atlantic ports and the greater Raleigh area onto CSX's rail system. However, regional growth would not act cumulatively with the proposed project to impact those resources described in this document. Other projects and development within Edgecombe, Nash, and possibly Halifax counties could act cumulatively with the proposed project. Therefore, for the purpose of this cumulative impacts assessment, the Proposed Project could act cumulatively with projects in Edgecombe, Nash, and Halifax Counties. 130 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 8.1.2 Temporal Scope The Proposed Project will be located within an area that has historically been used for rural residential and agricultural uses. Development along the existing rail corridor has been on-going with properties to the west and north of the project site already being developed for commercial uses. In addition, the Second Mainline Project will be completed along an existing rail -line. These historic land uses have previously resulted in habitat conversion and fragmentation and ditching of wildlife habitats and water resources. At this time, no additional large land development or transportation projects have been publicly announced within the spatial scope. Therefore, the temporal scope for potential cumulative impacts can reasonably be expected to include the build -out of the proposed project, and include potential unforeseen future development that the project could spur. For these reasons, the timeframe for this cumulative impacts assessment will begin with the development of the proposed project and extend for 20 years. 8.1.3 Resources Affected The 2007 Edgecombe County Land Development Plan and the 2006 Nash County Land Development Plan were reviewed to determine if any known future projects could have the potential to, when combined with the project, result in an additional cumulative impact. The Edgecombe County Land Development Plan indicated a desire for the county to promote growth throughout the county, in an attempt to counteract recent demographic changes that have resulted in a reduction of the county population over time. The project is located within the existing Rocky Mount municipal ETJ, which indicates that the county/city has designated this area as a future growth area and is compatible with and suitable for future annexation. Additional land development is not proposed for Nash County. The second mainline reconstruction will take place on the border of Nash and Edgecombe counties and will generally be completed within an existing railroad bed. The majority of the area within Nash County that could be impacted by the second mainline reconstruction is located within a zone outside of the Nash County zoning jurisdiction and is designated as within Rocky Mount municipal planning jurisdiction. These designations indicate that the counties/municipalities in the vicinity of the project site are actively looking to develop the areas surrounding the project site. This desire for directed growth could include additional development that could act cumulatively with the proposed project to impact the resources described in this document. Therefore, this 131 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 cumulative impacts assessment will focus broadly on air quality, noise & vibration, water resources, biotic communities, socioeconomic impacts, and traffic & transportation. The existing condition for each of these resources has been described above. 8.2 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Cumulative Impacts associated with the project could result from the project acting in concert with existing industrial sources, including the power plant located north of the project site, and encouraging additional commercial/industrial development within the surrounding region due to proximity to an intermodal freight terminal. These impacts, in both temporal and spatial scope, can broadly be interpreted as cumulative impacts to the human and natural environment. Cumulative impacts to the human environment can include air quality, noise & vibration, socioeconomic impacts, and traffic and transportation impacts. Cumulative impacts to the natural environment can include water resources and biotic community impacts due to potential development within the area introducing additional fragmentation of habitat impacts to an area that has already been impacted. 8.2.1 Human Environment Cumulative Impacts to the human environment could occur if impacts from the project act cumulatively with existing uses in the area, including the power plant north of the site and industrial sites west of the site, and due to potential future development, which could occur due to proximity to an intermodal freight terminal. At this time, there are no known large industrial, commercial, or transportation projects planned in the foreseeable future within the Edgecombe, Nash, and Halifax county region (ECLDP 2007, NCLDP 2006, NCDOT 2017). With no known large projects planned in the region, it will be assumed that all additional development will be conducted in accordance to local zoning laws, and state and federal regulations. These laws and regulations have been designed to direct development to be completed in an environmentally sensitive manner, similar to the proposed project. The NCDOT provided a letter, dated May 22, 2017, which outlines NCDOT plans to upgrade and improve road infrastructure in the vicinity of the proposed project. This letter has been included in Appendix P. According to this letter, additional environmental impacts are not expected to occur as part of these infrastructure improvements. Large scale development projects within the region surrounding the project site would be directed by local zoning to future growth areas/land development areas. These future growth areas/land development areas were developed to direct commercial and industrial 132 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 development to smaller growth corridors, which will allow county growth while limiting the impacts of development on the rural nature of the region. Cumulative impacts to air quality are likely to be non-existent to minor, as the air quality model that was developed for the project, and described in Section 7.13 above, included existing industrial development. Should large commercial or industrial projects come into the area due to the intermodal terminal, air quality modeling should be conducted to determine if the air quality environment is impacts. The proposed project is located within an area that has already been impacted by industrial development, and is located adjacent to the existing CSX A -Line. Cumulative noise & vibration impacts are not anticipated. Additional train movement along the A -Line and re -constructed second mainline is expected as more freight is moved by rail, however, this rail corridor has been in service for over 100 years and noise & vibration is expected along a major rail corridor. Cumulative impacts to socioeconomic factors are expected to be minor over time. Industrial or commercial development may impact small farms or rural communities, which may be considered EJ communities. Additional development at the region surrounding the project could bring higher paying jobs into the region. These job opportunities and increased tax base could help off -set additional cumulative impacts to residents of the area. Increased development is often preceded by upgrades to existing infrastructure to support the development. These infrastructure improvements could cumulatively benefit the region. Infrastructure improvements can off -set increased traffic pressures caused by increased development. On a regional scale, the proposed intermodal terminal is expected to reduce truck miles driven, as the purpose of the project is to move more freight by rail. Project benefits to the community and the state include the following job creation projections: • 250 - 300 construction jobs • Up to 300 long-term positions for terminal operations (150 CSX positions) • CSX positions will average $60,000 annually • Over time, up to 1,500 jobs statewide The CCX Terminal will create a distinct competitive advantage for North Carolina businesses by driving down logistics costs by up to 40 percent (%). The positive impact of the CCX Terminal will ripple throughout the state including: 133 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 • $310 million in public benefits (overtime) • Highway congestion, improved highway safety, savings in highway maintenance costs and improved air quality. • $125 million to the state economy (over time) • $16 million of savings on highway maintenance costs (over time) • 655,000 -ton reduction in CO2 emissions in North Carolina (the equivalent of removing 138,000+ vehicles from road for one year) • 16 million reduction in truck miles on North Carolina roads each year (the equivalent of 270,000 fewer truck trips per year) 8.2.2 Natural Environment The Proposed Project is in an area that has historically been utilized for agricultural production. To make the area suitable for agricultural production, the landscape has previously been extensively modified to allow for successful crop production. The landscape has been extensively altered by land clearing for crops, ditching, and roads. This historical landscape alteration has resulted in fragmentation of forest habitat and extensive modification of natural drainage systems. The project has been studied to determine if the intermodal freight terminal and associated second mainline reconstruction could act cumulatively with historic landscape fragmentation and potential future commercial and industrial development to increase habitat and surface water degradation further. Cumulative impacts from additional landscape fragmentation are unlikely to occur as a result of the project. The existing landscape has been extensively altered both upstream and downstream of the project site. The project site and second mainline reconstruction has been designed to prevent additional surface water impairment, through the use of appropriate sized bridges and culverts. 134 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 9 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Environmental Report Summary Project Location: Edgecombe and Nash Counties, North Carolina Project Title: CSX Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Assessed By: Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. et al. This ER was prepared to facilitate the construction of the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline Projects by CSX. The CCX Terminal is generally located along the western edge of Edgecombe County, north of the City of Rocky Mount, and between the existing CSX mainline and Old Battleboro Road. The Second Mainline component is part of the CSX North End Subdivision, which runs along the county line between Edgecombe County and Nash County, North Carolina, and generally runs parallel to the 1-95 corridor. This Second Mainline reconstruction segment runs from CSX Milepost A117.5 (south of CCX) through the intermodal facility north to Milepost A104.9. The Proposed Action will impact a total of 23.35 acres of wetlands, 10,297.3 LF of streams, 1.63 acres of open waters, and 745,312 sq. ft. of riparian buffers (452,588 sq. ft. in Zone 1 & 292,724 sq. ft. in Zone 2). The ER was prepared pursuant to CEQ regulations, Title 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508, as they implement the requirements of the NEPA of 1969, 42 U.S. Code § 4321, et seq. The ER considered all potential impacts of the Proposed Action and alternatives. The Mitigated Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is identified below as the preferred option among the list of potential options (recommendations) for the review of the project by regulatory agencies under NEPA. The Mitigated FONSI presented below generally summarizes the Proposed Action, the alternatives analysis (action alternatives), the environmental impacts of the Proposed Action, and the mitigative actions. 135 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Recommendation FONSI. (This project will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment and will not result in highly controversial adverse public reaction; therefore, an environmental impact statement is not required.) X Mitigated FONSI. (Use of mitigation may allow the federal agencies to comply with NEPA's procedural requirements by issuing an Environmental Assessment and FONSI, or `mitigated FONSI', based on the agency's commitment to ensure the mitigation that supports the FONSI is performed, thereby avoiding the need to prepare an environmental impact statement.) An Environmental Impact Statement is required. Project Description / Proposed Action The Project, as proposed by CSX, is comprised of two components, the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline. The Proposed Action consists of approximately 829 acres, and is located along the western edge of Edgecombe County, north of the City of Rocky Mount, generally between the CSX A -Line and Old Battleboro Road. The CCX Terminal is generally located along the western edge of Edgecombe County, north of the City of Rocky Mount, and between the existing CSX mainline and Old Battleboro Road. The Second Mainline component is part of the CSX North End Subdivision, which runs along the county line between Edgecombe County and Nash County, North Carolina, and generally runs parallel to the 1-95 corridor. The project is located within the Upper Tar River Subbasin (HUC 03020101), The CCX Terminal is a transformational, state-of-the-art facility that is designed to serve two primary purposes, the first of which includes the ability to provide accessible intermodal rail transportation services for eastern and central North Carolina, thereby enhancing economic growth in the region. The second purpose of the terminal would be to serve as a transfer facility, or "hub" for intermodal containers moving between various markets connected by the CSX network. The positive impacts of the CCX Project will ripple throughout the State of North Carolina, including: • $310 million in public benefits • $125 million to the state economy • Up to 40% reduction in logistics costs for North Carolina businesses and ports • $16 million of savings on highway maintenance costs 136 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 • 655,000 -ton reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in North Carolina, the equivalent of removing 138,000+ vehicles from the road for one year • Reduction in 16 million truck miles on North Carolina roads each year, the equivalent of 270,000 fewer truck trips per year All of these benefits fulfill the definition of public interest (i.e., public interest test) for this important project. The Proposed Action comprises two components representing two different types of railroad infrastructure: the CCX Terminal and the Second Mainline Projects. The CCX Terminal component is further subdivided into two elements: the intermodal rail terminal and the lead tracks that will connect the CCX Terminal to the Second Mainline. The Second Mainline component consists of the reconstruction of former second mainline track on CSX's 1-95" corridor from Milepost A117.5 (Rocky Mount, North Carolina) to A104.9 (Whitakers, North Carolina). The reconstruction generally will be within the existing CSX right-of-way (ROW). However, some limited additional right-of-way is being acquired to allow the second mainline to be constructed to today's industry standards requiring a slightly larger footprint than the track cross section that was removed from service in the early 1980's. Alternatives Analysis A detailed Alternatives Analysis was conducted to evaluate potential project sites along the CSX 1-95" corridor. The alternatives analysis reviewed potential impact to environmental, economic, and socioeconomic resources, as well as cultural resources. A total of twelve sites were included in the initial screening action. Among the group of twelve sites, three site locations were determined to meet five functional criteria, or key business characteristics. These three sites subsequently were advanced in the alternative analysis investigation as potentially suitable sites, or action alternatives, for the CCX Terminal. Fine -level screening was conducted for the three remaining site alternatives (action alternatives) from the initial site screening. The No Build Alternative (No Action Alternative) was also considered. During fine -level screening, the site alternatives were evaluated on their potential to impact natural/environmental resources and cultural resources. Constraints to development for each site were also considered in the screening process. Some of the important selected screening resources included: relocations, air quality, cultural and historic resources, threatened and endangered species and water resources. 137 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 The comparative analysis of preliminary estimated impacts to water resources for the three sites indicate that potential impacts and associated mitigation costs would likely be comparable for each for the three sites. Based on the evaluation of all the alternative sites, the Rocky Mount site is the preferred project alternative. This selection is buoyed by strong positive support by the public and private sectors within the City of Rocky Mount, as well as representatives and residents of both Edgecombe and Nash Counties. Environmental Impacts and Mitigative Actions To complete the construction of the CCX Terminal and Second Mainline, permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and streams will be necessary for this non -water dependent project. The project (approximately 829 acres) will result in unavoidable impacts to 23.35 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, 10,297.3 LF of RPWs, and 10.39 acres of Zone 1 and 6.72 acres of Zone 2 riparian buffers. The proposed project impacts will require approximately 43.08 wetland credits, 16,149.4 stream credits, and 41.25 Tar - Pamlico Riparian Buffer Compensatory Mitigation Credits. In the absence of suitable existing wetland mitigation bank credits, all required compensatory mitigation will be obtained through off-site permittee -responsible mitigation activities utilizing the watershed approach. The Swift Creek — PRMP was designed to achieve a landscape scale conservation outcome based on the priorities of both local and regional environmental advocacy groups and the Federal and State regulatory and resource agencies. A detailed analysis of existing conditions has been completed to identify relevant beneficial and adverse effects associated with the proposed action. During design, impacts to land use, aesthetics & visual resources, geology & topography, soils, biotic & aquatic communities, air quality, traffic and transportation, and hazardous materials have been minimized or avoided. Hydraulic analyses have been conducted on all floodplain crossings, and no increases in 100 -year flood elevations have been identified. Project specific Noise and Vibration Analysis and Assessment Reports (Appendix N) have been prepared to demonstrate that the proposed project will not have a significant impact in regards to noise or vibration. With proposed site best management practices, no adverse impacts to federally protected species are anticipated. A project specific Stormwater Management Plan (Appendix 1) has been prepared to demonstrate how the CCX Terminal can be constructed in a manner that meets or exceeds these stormwater quality and quantity requirements. A community impact assessment has been completed to determine potential socioeconomic and environmental justice impacts from the proposed project. Thirteen residences and one business have been (or likely will be) relocated as a result of property acquisition. No additional socioeconomic or significant environmental justice impacts are expected. Finally, the Project Area intersects one known historic district. Impacts to the historic Odom-Cooper-Flye Farm property will be addressed in a 138 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 project Memorandum of Agreement, to be coordinated with all interested parties (including state and federal agencies) to include appropriate minimization and mitigation measures for impacts to this protected historic resource. The CCX Terminal will consider the use of vegetated soil berms and vegetated buffers to improve the scenic attractiveness of portions of the Project Area, provide a physical and vegetative visual screen of the facility operations, and to dampen noise that may filter out to the adjacent community. Soil berms and plant installation will be strategically placed to maximize the screening effect. Soil berms will not be contiguous due to ecological and land use constraint issues. However, the terminal will consider vegetated buffers (natural and planted) in areas that will not support soil berms. These mitigative actions support the recommendation to use the Mitigated FONSI as the preferred option among the list of potential options for the review of the Proposed Action by regulatory agencies under NEPA. Proposed Action and No Action Alternative As part of the Mitigated FONSI, the Proposed Action was compared to the No Action Alternative with respect to potential effects to various attributes (resources, etc.). Table 9.1 presents the results of this comparative analysis. Under the No Action Alternative, the CCX Terminal and the Second Mainline components would not be constructed. As such, the many benefits from the project would not be realized, including the creation of jobs locally and throughout North Carolina, increased economic development, and the creation of competitive advantages for North Carolina businesses and ports through the lowering of shipping costs. Table 9-1. Effects Summary for the No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives Attributes (ER Section) Alternatives No Action Proposed Project Waters of the US Impacts (5.2) 0 -- Land Use (7.1) 0 - Aesthetics and Visual Resources (7.2) 0 - Geology and Topography (7.3) 0 0 Soils (7.4) 0 - Biotic Communities (7.5) 0 - Aquatic Communities (7.6) 0 - Water Resources/Floodplains (7.7) 0 - Protected Species (7.8) 0 0 139 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Attributes (ER Section) Alternatives No Action Proposed Project Cultural Resources (7.9) 0 -- Socioeconomics and EJ (7.10) 0 -- Hazardous Materials (7.12) 0 0 Noise & Vibration (7.13) 0 - Air Quality (7.14) 0 0 Traffic & Transportation (7.15) 0 - Cumulative Impacts (8) 0 - Note: + = Beneficial Effect -- = Moderate Effect - - - = Severe Effect - =Minimal Effect 0 = No Significant Effect Definitions of Impacts 1. Beneficial - No adverse effect anticipated. Effect would provide a favorable, advantageous and/or improved condition. 2. Severe - Complete destruction, disruption, violation of standards, incompatibility, disturbance, or surpassing capability of the attribute under consideration. 3. Moderate - Considerable destruction, disruption, violation of standards incompatibility, disturbance or surpassing of capability of the attribute. However, the effect can be minimized through further study and mitigation. 4. Minimal - Temporary or minor destruction, disruption, violation of standards, incompatibility, disturbance or surpassing of capability of the attribute. This effect can be mitigated through standard design, construction or operational procedures. 5. No Significant Effect No effect anticipated. 140 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 10 REFERENCES Alderman, J.M., A.L. Braswell, S.P. Hall, A.W. Kelly, and C. McGrath. 1993. Biological Inventory: Swift Creek subbasin. NC Wildlife Resource Commission, Raleigh, North Carolina. 133 pp. CEQ. 1981. Scoping Guidance, Memorandum of General Councils, NEPA Liaisons and Participants Scoping. April 30, 1981. Notice of availability published in 46 FR 25461, May 7, 1981. CEQ. 1997. Environmental Justice Guidance under the National Environmental Policy Act. http-//www.nepa.gov/nepa/regs/ej/justice.pdf. December 10, 1997. Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79-31. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. Division of Water Resources. 2010. "Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their Origins, Version 4.11 ". North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Resources. Raleigh, NC. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS. Environmental Laboratory. 2010. "Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0)," Technical Report ERDC/EL TR -10-20. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS. Executive Order 11988. 1977. Floodplain Management. May 24, 1977. Executive Order 12088. 1978. Federal Compliance with Pollution Control Standards. October 13, 1978. Executive Order 12898. 1994. Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low -Income Populations. February 16, 1994. Felley, J.D. 1992. "Medium -low —gradient streams of the Gulf coastal plain," p 233-269 in Hackney, C. T., S. M. Marshall, and W. H. Martin (ed.). 1992. "Biodiversity in the Southeastern United States: Aquatic Communities, Vol. 1." John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, USA. FEMA. 2014. Federal Emergency Management Agency. ArcGIS Base Data (June 1, 2014); FIRM Panels 9643 and 9644, Effective Date January 6, 2010. 141 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 FEMA. 2017. Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Mapping Products. Website accessed May 2, 2017. NCDEQ. 2015. Air Quality Rules, Emission Control Standards. Available at: https-//deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/air-quality/air-quality-rules/rules/emission- control-standards. Accessed January 20, 2017. NCDEQ. 2017a. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Classifications and Standards. Available at: https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water- resources/planning/classification-standards. Accessed January 18, 2017. NCDEQ. 2017b. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, 303(d) Files. Draft 2016 303(d) List (updated June 6, 2016). https-//deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/classification- standards/303d/303d-files. Website accessed January 18, 2017. NCDEQ. 2017c. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, North Carolina Aquifers. http://www.ncwater.org/?page=525. Website accessed January 18, 2017. NCDEQ. 2017d. Available Ambient Data. Available at: https://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/ambient/AmbtSite.jsp?loggerList=UH&date=01 %2F1 9%2F2017. Accessed January 20, 2017. NCDEQ. 2017e. Attainment Status of National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Available at: https-//deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/air-quality/air-quality-planning/attainment. Accessed January 20, 2017. NCDOT Rail. 2016. Evaluation of a Proposed Intermodal Terminal (CCX) in Rocky Mount. Prepared for the North Carolina Department of Transportation, Rail Division. Prepared by WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff Project Team. July 2016. NCGS. 1985. Geologic Map of North Carolina. Available at: https-//deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/north-carolina- geological-survey/ncgs-maps/1985-geologic-map-of-nc. Accessed April 19, 2017. NC Wetland Functional Assessment Team. 2010. "N.C. Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) User Manual, Version 4.1". North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team. Raleigh, NC. NC Stream Functional Assessment Team. 2013. "N.C. Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM) Draft User Manual". North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team. Raleigh, NC. 142 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP), Division of Parks and Recreation, Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 1997. Biological Conservation Database. NCNHP. 2017. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Natural Heritage Program Data Services. http://ncnhp.org/web/nhp/database-search. Website accessed March 16, 2017. NCSHPO. 2017. North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office. NCSHPO GIS Web Service (http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/. Website accessed January 6, 2017. NRCS. 2017. US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Buncombe County Soil Survey geographic information system. Prince, A. 2017. The Upper Tar River Basin: Swift Creek and Fishing Creek Subbasins. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP). Available at: http://www.ncwildlife.org/Portals/0/Learning/documents/Species/img_7bl c_forest memo2.pdf. Accessed February 14, 2017. R. F. Webb and Associates, AMEC Foster Wheeler and Commonwealth Heritage Group. February 17, 2017. Draft Report, Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of the Proposed Central Carolina Intermodal Facility, Edgecombe County, North Carolina. 192 pp. Schafale, M.P., and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the natural communities of North Carolina, third approximation. N.C. Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, N.C. 325 pp. Smock, L.A. and E. Gilinsky. 1992. Coastal Plain Blackwater Streams. pp 271-311 in Hackney, C. T., S. M. Marshall, and W. H. Martin (ed.). 1992. Biodiversity in the Southeastern United States: Aquatic Communities, Vol. 1. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, USA. 780 pp. Three Oaks Engineering. 2017a. CSX Central Carolina Intermodal Facility Rocky Mount, Edgecombe County Community Impact Assessment. April 28, 2017. 26 PP. Three Oaks Engineering. 2017b. Memorandum: Analysis of Potential Environmental Justice Impacts, CSX Line of Road Project, Nash and Edgecombe Counties, North Carolina. Three Oaks Engineering. April 28, 2017. 7pp. Three Oaks Engineering. 2016. Freshwater Mussel Survey Report — CSX Central Carolina Intermodal Facility, Nash and Edgecombe Counties, North Carolina. Three Oaks Engineering. December 2016. 23 pp. 143 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004 Three Oaks Engineering. 2016. Freshwater Mussel Survey Report — CSXT A -Line, Nash and Edgecombe Counties, North Carolina. Three Oaks Engineering. December 2016. 34 pp. USCB. 2017. Quickfacts: Edgecombe County, North Carolina. Available at: https-//www.census.gov/quickfacts/. Accessed January 12, 2017. USEPA. 1974. Information on levels of environmental noise requisite to protect public health and welfare with an adequate margin of safety. Report 550/9-74-004, Washington, DC USEPA. 1998. Final guidance for incorporating environmental justice concerns in EPA's NEPA compliance analysis. USEPA. 2017. Level III and IV Ecoregions of the Continental United States. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/eco-research/level-iii-and-iv-ecoregions-continental- united-states. Accessed April 19, 2017. USFWS. 2017a. US Fish and Wildlife Service. Information Planning and Conservation (IPaC) database. http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Website accessed March 17, 2017. USFWS. 2017b. US Fish and Wildlife Service. ECOS Environmental Conservation Online System. http://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/. Website accessed March 17, 2017. USFWS. 2017c. US Fish and Wildlife Service. Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office. https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/. Website accessed March 17, 2017. USFWS. 2016. US Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory Wetlands Mapper. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/. Website accessed December 30, 2016. USGS. 2017. US Geological Survey. Skyland, North Carolina digital 7.5' topography. Weakley, A.S. 2015. Flora of the Southern and Mid -Atlantic States. UNC Herbarium, North Carolina Botanical Garden, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 1320 pp. Weakley, M.P. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina - Fourth Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. March 2012. 208 pp. 144 Environmental Report 28 July 2017 Carolina Connector Intermodal Rail Terminal & Second Mainline Edgecombe & Nash Counties, North Carolina Project No. 643009004