20090822 Ver 1_Information Letter_20050804

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
August 1, 2006 9is?Fy9 G o
ST ?0
9ya 9 ? C?V
gP !?°ii 4 ?? O
Mr. William T. Goodwin, Jr., P.E.
Bridge Project Development Unit Head
Attention: Mr. Dennis Pipkin, Project Development Engineer
North Carolina Department of Transportation
,1551 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1551
Dear Mr. Goodwin:
Subject: Bridge Replacements in North Carolina - Catawba County (TIP No. B-4456),
Cleveland County (TIP No. B-4468), Gaston County (TIP Nos. B-4517 and B-4519),
Iredell County (TIP No. B-4553), and Rutherford County (TIP No. B-4632)
We have reviewed the subject bridge replacement projects and are providing the following
comments in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C.
661-667e); the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703, et seq.) (META); and section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
Fish and Wildlife Resources - The information provided for these six projects does not include
detailed descriptions of the structures that will replace the existing bridges; therefore, our
comments are general. We will provide more substantive comments when the categorical
exclusions are prepared. In all cases we recommend that an existing bridge be replaced with a
new bridge, and we request that National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents for these
projects consider replacing existing bridges with new bridges as an alternative. If an alternative
is chosen that does not replace an existing bridge with a new bridge, such as an alternative that
involves the replacement of an existing bridge with a culvert, we request that the NEPA
document include an evaluation as to why an alternative of replacing an existing bridge with a
new bridge was not chosen.
We recommend that each new bridge design include provisions for the roadbed and deck
drainage to flow through a vegetated buffer prior to reaching the affected stream. This buffer
should be large enough to alleviate any potential effects from the runoff of storm water and
pollutants. The bridge designs should not alter the natural stream or the stream-bank
morphology or impede fish passage. Any piers or bents should be placed outside the bank-full
ed to avoid any fill that will
The bridges and aPProaches el or flshouldoobedpd a n? f spanning the flOOdplain is
width of the streams. lain Portion of the approaches
velocities of
result in the damming or constriction of the ch the ilo lain and reduce high not feasible, culverts should cal installed of the floodp
restore some of the hydrologi
rior to any gTOund"disturbing
floodwaters within the affected areas• lace p hi most
Measures to control erosion and sedimentation should be in p
constructing the new bridge through staged
activities . Wet concrete should never be allowed to come ies° contact with a stye
in place
c by
acts e be eplaced ff site rout
ases we prefer that a bridg traffic to existing o native plant
construction or by detouring end that only
we strongly recomm ecies (such as
etating disturbed areas, be found, that noninvasrVeof the exotic
le many
When reseeding/reveg Wii
adequate seed source cannot reestablish themselves efforts rover beneficial to
species be used or, if an ]ants can . species outweighs any
amrual ryeused until native p species, including tall
typically used in erosion-con el?Vasive na nature of tl'ese Spave
plan t species specie we now know may provide. Exotic sP redtop (a
some wildlife sp edeza (eastern Asia species),
erosion-c( ntrol or wildlife benefits they and Keritucky.bluegrass.
short-term Korean an d Sericea lesp
n and often result to
Sudan grass and Bermuda grass (native v Africa
fescue (native to Eurasia)> demmental to the
choke out native vegetation
ecies),
Eurasian sp.
(native to Eurasia and northern Canada),
monocultures that prove to be of little benefit to wildlife and canbe ve
killing, possession,
ecosystem as a whole. .712) P arts'
rohibit the taking, p
U.S.C 703
. the bald eagle), their eggs, avoid
Migratory Birds -' he MBTA(16 birds (including?ent of the bitenor. To es and any
an d importation of migratory the DeP
transportation, specifically authorized by a visual inspection of thebird nesting
and nests, except when sp end conducting the migratory story birds, we recommend
area during in the project
impacts to migratory within the project Transportation
other migratorybird nesting atorybirds are discovered nesg t of through September. Ifbridges, the North CazolinaD r nesting season (March
on the existing the migratory ears prior to the
season--March including
n the bridges during Y
impact area, acting the nests during o take
measures to
oul el
should avoid imp
)overed nesting with sults es by means th at wil notoresult in the
hough September).
, birds are disc on the bridg
proposed constructi . on If date the NCDOT, in con
s, or the NCDOT should avoid construction an d demolition aetivitie's during
discourage birds from establishing nests
of the birds or egg rimarily to the
the nesting period, ecies are . limited p
Listed SpeCjeS "Our comments about listed sp
Federally species an d federal species of concern
ed sp ncourage the NCDOT to
]mown locations of list acts and imp
s muhlenbergii) occurs in Gaston County. o We should ell those ely in surveys
who participates actively
The bog turtle (Clemmy turtle. If impacts are anticipated, you
ission,
assess habitat for the bog Wliile the bog turtle technically does not require
contact the North Carolina Wildlife Resources °
and conservation efforts for the bog turtle.
2

ecies of concern, and the NCDOT is actively managing
section ,7 consultation, it is a sp species.
mitigation sites or parts of sites for this our Log No 4-2-06-358. The
, an
TIP No. $_4456, Bridge over urbanized Interstate area 40).> It will be replaced in place
Catawba County - within an occurrences of federally listed
existing bridge is over Interstate e ( ro ect will affect any listed this p 3
species off-site detour will be used, and there are no known
near the project area; therefore, we do not believe
species. Run federally Creek, our Log No. 4-2-06-359.
Cleveland County - TI1 d No. B-4469, Bridge over Sandy threatened end
indicate occurrences of To ectare We area for this
his naniora) near the p ]
Our records for Clevelan County suitable habitat in the project.
dwarf-flowered t a sess(m n s and surveying any May.
conducting period of March through May
species during its flowering p our Log No. 4-2-06-360. The
Gaston County - T? Nosunflower B-4517, Bridge over Crowder's Ctzii) Georgia aster
the project area
occur in Gaston County' We endangered Schweimtz's a candidatetfor federal listing, t in st through
recommend conducting habitat assessments and surveying any suitable habita
(SymphYotrichum georgia habitat
mid-November. The
. h e best time to survey for Schweinitz's sunflower is late Augu
is October through o en, and
for Georgia aster a candidate for
for these specie'
October. The best time to survey , the Georgia aster is currently
Georgia aster is foul' d in ough habitats not similar to federally listed that of the Sch ears that there are wetlands south an
ften Th
often disturbed areas. area. We recommend avoiding these wetlands
often
federal listing and could be listed in the near f It app
northwest of the bridge, within the proj ect study ar ar y
suitable habitat for the bog turtle.
n Creek, OUT Lo9N°• 4-2-06-361. The
and surveying any. 4Bridge over Little Log ro ect area
any suitable habitat County, We
Gaston. ounty -TIP No. B-4519 also occur in Gaston
in the P
endangered Schweinitz's sunflower and Georgia aster subject bridge crossing, Little
recommend conducting habitat assessments and surveyin of g the
the North Carolina Natural Heritage
ecies. Approximately 0.5 mile downstream Meadow
for these sp Meadow Bog, listed by turtle in Friday
Long are occurrences of thee btroogltur encourage the NCDOT
Creek flows into Friday
Progr am as a state significant site. There
bog that sediment does not
. Since the and the bog turtle occur downstream, e with a bridge and ensure t to replace aconstruction sod
Creek the existing bridg throughout project
measures are e place and maintained the site and impact the downstream bog' No 4-2-06-362.
leave Fourth Creek, our Log No in Iredell
4553, Bridknown ge over occurrences of federally listed sp listed
Iredell County -TIP No. B ect will affect any
According to our records there atherefore we do not believe this proJ
County or near the project area;
I.lo.4-2-06-363. The
species. TIP No. B-4632, Bridge over Railroad, our Log
dwarf-flowered heartleaf and small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides)
Rutberfotrd threatened
federally l 3

and the federally endangered white irisette (Sisyrinchium dichotomum) occur in Rutherford
County. We recommend conducting habitat assessments. and surveying any suitable habitat in
the project area for these species during their flowering period of March through May for
dwarf-flowered heartleaf, mid-May through early July for small whorled pogonia, and late May
through July for white irisette. There is winter habitat for the federally endangered Indiana bat
(Myotis sodalis) in Rutherford County. A visual survey of the bridge should be conducted to
ensure that bats are not using the bridge for temporary roosting. The NCDOT should check for
caves and mines near the project area and within its right-of-way. If there are no caves or mines
within or near the project area and if no Indiana bats are discovered using the bridge as a
temporary roosting site, the NCDOT can determine that the project will have no effect on the
Indiana bat. However, if there are caves or mines in the area and if the caves or mines will be
directly or indirectly impacted by the project, consultation should be initiated with this office
If we can be of assistance or if you have any questions about these comments, please contact
Ms. Denise Moldenhauer of our staff at 828/258-3939, Ext. 226.
Sincerely,
1811
P. Cole
/ Field Supervisor
cc:
Ms. Marla J. Chambers, Western NCDOT Permit Coordinator, North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission, 4614 Wilgrove-Mint Hill Road, Suite M, Charlotte, NC 28227
Mr. Brian Wrenn, North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Central Office, 2321 Crabtree
. Blvd., Suite 250, Raleigh, NC 27604
Ms. Polly Lespinasse, Mooresville Regional Office, North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301, Mooresville, NC 28115
Mr. Steve Lund, Asheville Regulatory Field Office, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 151 Patton
Avenue, Room 208, Asheville, NC 28801-5006
4