NEPA_Document_EA.pdf

U. S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

Catoctin Mountain Park Thurmont, Maryland

Catoctin Mountain Park Environmental Assessment for the Bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot PuBLic REviEw

NovEmBER 2013

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division and U.S. Department of the Interior

National Park Service Catoctin Mountain Park

Environmental Assessment

Bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot in Catoctin Mountain Park

November 2013

INTRODUCTION

Catoctin Mountain Park (the park) includes approximately 5,872 acres of federally owned land in Thurmont, Frederick County, Maryland. The park offers a variety of experiences to its visitors such as hiking, camping, wildlife viewing, and fly-fishing and maintains historic structures constructed by the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) in the 1930s. The National Park Service (NPS), in cooperation with Federal Highway Administration Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFLHD), is proposing to rehabilitate/reconstruct the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot near the park’s visitor center, as well as the double culvert at the Camp Misty Mount entrance.

PURPOSE AND NEED

The purpose of the proposed action is twofold:

to provide adequate flow capacity at the bridge across Blue Blazes Creek to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot so that vehicular and pedestrian access can be maintained, while being sympathetic to the park’s cultural and natural resources; and to improve stream flow through the double culvert at the entrance to Camp Misty Mount to preserve existing cultural and natural resources.

In spring 2011, the already damaged bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot, which serves as an overflow lot for the park’s visitor center, suffered additional severe damage due to a storm event that caused high water in Blue Blazes Creek. A temporary Bailey bridge (loaned to the Park from Frederick County) has been installed over the existing structure to maintain vehicle and pedestrian access to/from the Blue Blazes Parking Lot. However, the Bailey bridge could be reclaimed by Frederick County at any time.

OVERVIEW OF ALTERNATIVES

This Environmental Assessment (EA) examines four alternatives: a no action alternative (alternative 1) and proposed improvements (alternatives 2, 3, and 4). Alternatives 3 and 4 each include two design alternatives (identified in the document as alternative 3A, 3B, 4A, and 4B, respectively). The NPS has identified alternative 3A as their preferred alternative because this alternative best meets the project’s purpose and objectives and would result in the fewest impacts on natural, cultural, and aesthetic resources and visitor experience.

Implementation of the NPS preferred alternative would result in short-term minor adverse and long-term, beneficial impacts on hydrology and water quality; short-term minor adverse and long-term beneficial impacts on wetlands; short-term minor adverse and long-term beneficial impacts on wildlife and wildlife habitat; long-term moderate adverse impacts on historic districts and structures; and short-term moderate adverse and long-term beneficial impacts on visitor use and experience.

PUBLIC COMMENT: NOTE TO REVIEWERS AND RESPONDENTS

If you wish to comment on this Environmental Assessment, you may post comments electronically at http://parkplanning.nps/gov/cato or you may mail comments within 30 days to the name and address below. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Requests for further information can be directed to the address below:

Mel Poole, Superintendent Catoctin Mountain Park 6602 Foxville Road Thurmont, MD 21788

CATOCTIN MOUNTAIN PARK

BRIDGE TO THE BLUE BLAZES PARKING LOT

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

NOVEMBER 2013

iii

CONTENTS

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................................... v

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................................. v

Acronyms ..................................................................................................................................................................... vi

Purpose and Need

Introduction

Purpose of and Need for Action

Project Background

Relationship to Laws, Executive Orders, Policies, and Other Planning Efforts

Scoping Process and Public Participation

Alternatives

Introduction

Description of Alternatives

Value Analysis Study

Mitigation Measures

Alternatives/Elements Considered but Dismissed from Further Analysis

Environmentally Preferable Alternative

Summary Comparison of the Alternatives

Affected Environment

Hydrology and Water Quality

Wetlands

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

Historic Structures and Districts

Visitor Use and Experience

Environmental Consequences

General Methology for Establishing Impact Thresholds and MEasuring Effects by Resource

Impacts on Hydrology and Water Quality

Impacts on Wetlands

Impacts on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

Impacts on Historic Structures and Districts

Impacts on Visitor Use and Experience

Consultation and Coordination

The Scoping Process

Future Compliance Needs/Permits iv

List of Preparers

Bibliography ........................................................................................................................................................... Ref-1

Appendix A: Relevant Correspondence .................................................................................................................... A-1 v

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No. Description Page

1 Project Location Map

2 Bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot Study Area

3 Camp Misty Mount Double Culvert Study Area

4 Camp Misty Mount Double Culvert Replacement

5a Park Central Road Drainage – Outfall Channel Layout

5b Park Central Road Drainage – Outfall Channel Section

6 Alternative 2

7 Alternative 3

8 Alternative 4

9 Hydrology

10 Wetland Delineation Map

11 Wetland Delineation Map – Bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot

12 Wetland Delineation Map – Camp Misty Mount Double Culvert

13 Historic Structures and Districts – Bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot ... 63

14 Historic Structures and Districts – Camp Misty Mount Double Culvert

LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Description Page

1 Summary Comparison of the Alternatives

2 Summary of Environmental Consequences vi

ACRONYMS

ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation BMP best management practices CCC Civilian Conservation Corps CEQ Council on Environmental Quality CFR Code of Federal Regulations CWA Clean Water Act DO Director’s Order EA Environmental Assessment EFLHD Federal Highway Administration Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration GHG greenhouse gas GRS-IBS Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil-Integrated Bridge System HAER Historic American Engineering Record IPaC U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Information, Planning, and Conservation

System LCS National Park Service List of Classified Structures MDE Maryland Department of the Environment MDNR Maryland Department of Natural Resources MIHP Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act National Register National Register of Historic Places NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NPS National Park Service OHWM ordinary high water mark the park Catoctin Mountain Park PDDM Project Development and Design Manual (FHWA) PEPC Planning, Environment, and Public Comment web-site (NPS) RCB reinforced concrete box SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer (Maryland Historical Trust Preservation

Office) USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USC U.S. Code USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

PURPOSE AND NEED

INTRODUCTION

The National Park Service (NPS), in coordination with the Federal Highway Administration Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFLHD), has prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to rehabilitate/reconstruct the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot, and the double culvert over Blue Blazes Creek, at the entrance to Camp Misty Mount in Catoctin Mountain Park (the park). The park occupies approximately 5,872 acres within Frederick County in northern Maryland. The park offers a variety of experiences to its visitors such as hiking, camping, picnicking, wildlife viewing, cross-country skiing, and fly-fishing and maintains historic structures constructed by the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) in the 1930s, such as the cabins at Camp Misty Mount and stone walls near the visitor center.

This EA describes four alternatives, including three action alternatives and the no action alternative, and analyzes the potential impacts these alternatives would have on the natural, cultural, and human environment. This EA has been prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended [42 United States Code (USC) 4332(2) (C)]; the implementing regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) [40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1500-1508.9]; the Department of the Interior NEPA regulations (43 CFR Part 46); and NPS Director’s Order #12:

Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis and Decision-Making (DO-12) and the accompanying DO-12 Handbook (NPS 2001).

Compliance with 36 CFR 800 section 106 is being completed separately from and concurrent to the NEPA process, and is not included in this EA. Applicable cultural resource information, including potential impacts associated with the proposed alternatives, is documented in this EA, but does not constitute section 106 compliance.

PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION

PURPOSE

The purpose of the proposed action is twofold:

to provide adequate traffic flow capacity at the bridge across Blue Blazes Creek to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot so that vehicular and pedestrian access can be maintained, while being sympathetic to the park’s cultural and natural resources; and to improve stream flow through the double culvert at the entrance to Camp Misty Mount to preserve existing cultural and natural resources.

NEED

The project is needed at this time to address continued damage and declining conditions at the existing bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot and the Camp Misty Mount double culvert. Several years of damage culminated in a spring 2011 heavy rainfall and high water event in Blue Blazes Creek causing the severe damage and collapse of a wing wall.

Improvements are needed at the existing bridge to address collapse of the southeast wingwall;

apparent settlement of the east abutment breastwall, which is leaning toward the stream;

undermining of both abutments and all of the wingwalls;

development of a large scour hole downstream from the bridge; and a functionally obsolete bridge railing system.

The bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot is not passable on its own. A temporary Bailey bridge, a prefabricated, portable truss bridge, was loaned to the park from Frederick County and has been installed over the existing bridge to maintain vehicle and pedestrian access to/from the Blue Blazes Parking Lot.

The Bailey bridge is not a permanent solution and could be removed by Frederick County at any time.

Improvements to the culvert at the Camp Misty Mount entrance are needed to address the following conditions:

The existing culvert is starting to fail due to undercutting.

The culvert headwalls, which are listed on the National Register of Historic Places, are being undermined

The embankments beyond the wingwalls are becoming eroded. The streambed at the outlet headwall has eroded approximately 6-12 inches and the stream may be piping under the culvert barrels.

Sink holes are developing in both of the gravel shoulders.

The existing culvert is undersized and the volume of flow frequently exceeds culvert capacity. This is made worse by debris build up within the pipes.

The barrels of the culvert are in poor condition and exhibit signs of abrasion and corrosion along the flowline and some loss of the barrel floor at the inlet end.

OBJECTIVES

Project objectives build from the project purpose and identify those goals that are “critical to meet if NPS is to consider the proposal successful” (NPS 2001). Project objectives should be grounded in the park’s purpose, significance, and mission goals; relevant legislation; the park’s Foundation Document (NPS 2012b) and Resource Stewardship Strategy (NPS 2013b); or other NPS standards and guidelines.

Project objectives should be broad enough to allow for a reasonable range of alternatives without narrowing the focus or intentionally excluding an alternative. The following project objectives have been identified for the proposed action:

Provide distinct pedestrian and vehicular use of the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot, while ensuring safety.

Improve drainage systems associated with the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot and the Camp Misty Mount culvert

Improve stream flow conditions at the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot

Preserve the historic integrity of the remaining features of the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot and the Camp Misty Mount culvert, where possible

Maintain the park-like appearance of the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot

Reduce debris concerns associated with the existing culvert at the Camp Misty Mount entrance

PROJECT BACKGROUND

SITE LOCATION/DESCRIPTION

Catoctin Mountain Park is located in Thurmont, Frederick County, Maryland approximately 60 miles northwest of Baltimore and 15 miles north of Frederick, Maryland (figure 1). The bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot (figure 2) and the double culvert at Camp Misty Mount (figure 3) are located with the park’s boundaries, proximal to Park Central Road. The Blue Blazes Parking Lot serves as an overflow lot for the visitor center, which is located on the opposite side of Park Central Road. The visitor center and the Blue Blazes Parking Lot are situated near the entrance to the park, off State Route 77. The Blue Blazes Parking Lot is abutted to the north and west by forest, to the east by the Blue Blazes Creek, and to the south by Route 77. The bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot is a 22-foot by 8.9-foot timber beam structure with masonry abutments built by the CCC in 1939.

Environmental Assessment for the Bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot Thurmont, Maryland

U. S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

Source: USGS 7.5 minute Blue Ridge Summit, Maryland Quadrangle

Figure 1

Project Location Map

NORTH

0 1,000 Feet

Park Boundary

LEGEND

Approximate Study Area Boundary

Project Location

Bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot

Camp Misty Mount Double Culvert

Bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot Thurmont, Maryland

U. S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

Figure 2

Bridge to Blue Blazes Parking Lot Study Area

NORTH

0 100 Feet

Source: Frederick County, MD GIS Orthophotography

Visitor Center Blue Blazes Parking Lot

B lu e Bla ze s C re ek

Bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot

Blue Blazes Creek

Big Hunting Creek

Visitor Center Parking

Pa rk

C en tr al

R oad

Bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot Thurmont, Maryland

U. S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

Figure 3

Camp Misty Mount Double Culvert Study Area

NORTH

0 100 Feet

Source: Frederick County, MD GIS Orthophotography

Pa rk

C en tr al

R oa d

B lu e Bla ze s C re ek

Camp Misty Mount Double Culvert

Misty Mountain Cabins

Camp Misty Mount is located approximately 1 mile north of the visitor center, off Park Central Road.

Camp Misty Mount is abutted on the north, south, and west by forested areas, and to the east by Park Central Road. The Blue Blazes Creek runs north to south near the eastern border of Camp Misty Mount.

The double culvert at the entrance to Camp Misty Mount includes two 16-inch by 24-inch elliptical corrugated metal pipes with two stone masonry headwalls (each approximately 3.5 feet by 10 feet).

The Bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot and the Camp Misty Mount double culvert are situated approximately 1-mile apart on Blue Blazes Creek and, due to their deteriorating conditions, are restricting streamflow.

The bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot has sustained continued damage over several years which culminated in a spring 2011 heavy rainfall and high water event in Blue Blazes Creek causing the severe damage and collapse of a wing wall. Features of the bridge have been identified as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (National Register), although the bridge itself is not eligible. For example, the stone headwalls on either side of the bridge have been nominated and approved for listing on National Register as part of the Catoctin Mountain Park Historic District. The existing bridge is currently in poor condition. The main problems with the structure include the collapsed southeast wingwall;

apparent settlement of the east abutment breastwall, which is leaning toward the stream; undermining of both abutments and all of the wingalls; a large scour hole located downstream from the bridge; and a functionally obsolete bridge railing system (FHWA 2011). In addition, due to its current condition, the culvert associated with the existing bridge no longer supports fish passage. The trout population within Blue Blazes Creek has declined substantially in recent years. Although some trout have been observed in Blue Blazes Creek, upstream of the bridge to the Blue Blazes Park Lot, no reproduction is occurring. Blue Blazes Creek is classified as 3P Natural Trout Waters, indicating that it is a natural trout water body, and is a primary trout stream for the state of Maryland. The existing Bailey bridge is not a permanent solution, does not improve stream flow, and could be removed by Frederick County at any time, if a need arises.

The double culvert at Camp Misty Mount is starting to fail due to undercutting. This culvert is currently undersized and, similar to the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot, does not support fish passage. In April 2011, the culvert was plugged with debris, which resulted in overtopping. The barrels of the culvert are in poor condition and exhibit signs of abrasion and corrosion along the flowline and some loss of the barrel floor at the inlet end. The streambed at the outlet headwall has eroded about 6-12 inches, and it is possible the stream is piping under the culvert barrels. The main problems with the double culvert are undermining of the culvert headwalls and wingwalls, erosion of the embankments beyond the wingwalls, and sinkholes in both of the gravel shoulders (FHWA 2011). It appears the volume of flow frequently exceeds the capacity of the double culvert, and that flow may be further restricted by debris that has accumulated in front of and inside the pipes. The Camp Misty Mount Historic District, which encompasses the subject double culvert, is listed on the National Register.

PURPOSE AND SIGNIFICANCE OF CATOCTIN MOUNTAIN PARK

The legislative purpose, significance, and mission help shape a national park and guide management practices for each individual park. The park is unique in that it is not guided by one comprehensive enabling legislation. Instead, management and operation of the park are guided by a variety of federal legislation and Executive Orders including New Deal legislation (1930s), Executive Order 7496 (1936), and Public Law 2852 (1942) (NPS 2008a), as well as park-specific documents such as the Resource Stewardship Strategy and the Foundation Document, both of which are described in the “Relevant Planning Documents” section below. The purpose of each National Park outlines the reasons for which a park was set aside as part of the national park system and provides fundamental criteria against which the appropriateness of all plan recommendations, operational decisions, and actions are tested. A park’s National Register documentation explains why the park is nationally significant and describes those resources that contribute to its significance. Lastly, the park mission statement summarizes the NPS’ understanding of why a park was created and why it matters to Americans.

Catoctin Mountain Park was established with the purpose of providing “quality recreational opportunities in the Catoctin Mountains… while protecting and conserving the park’s natural and cultural environment as envisioned by New Deal conservation programs” (NPS 2012b). As described in the Foundation Document in a letter dated December 1945, President Harry S. Truman determined the park would be retained by NPS in order to protect “historical events of national and international interest” (NPS 2012b).

The park is significant because it

“is an early and continuing example of conservation practices resulting in the regeneration of an eastern deciduous forest.”

“provides outstanding scenic values at the transition of the Monocacy River Valley and the Catoctin Mountains in the Piedmont Plateau and Blue Ridge geologic provinces.”

“provides diverse outdoor recreation opportunities in a mountain setting near the population centers of the mid-Atlantic region.”

“provides exceptional aquatic habitat for fishing and other recreational activities.”

“was one of 46 recreational demonstration areas established in the 1930s, and represents an outstanding example of New Deal era programs to restore the landscape for conservation and recreation purposes.”

“is the site of the oldest operating cabin camps in the nation, constructed especially for persons with disabilities, and is one of the original locations that the Office of Strategic Services trained.”

“protects the cultural heritage of the Catoctin Mountains that dates back 3,500 years, ranging from stone tool making to agriculture to charcoal production” (NPS 2012a).

The park’s mission is to 1) preserve Catoctin Mountain Park resources; and 2) provide for the public enjoyment and visitor experience of Catoctin Mountain Park (NPS 2008a).

RELATIONSHIP TO LAWS, EXECUTIVE

ORDERS, POLICIES, AND OTHER PLANNING

EFFORTS

The NPS is governed by laws, regulations, and management plans before, during, and following any management action. The following are applicable to the proposed action.

RELEVANT LAWS AND POLICIES

NPS Organic Act of 1916

By enacting the NPS Organic Act of 1916, Congress directed the U.S. Department of the Interior and the NPS to manage units “to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and wildlife therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such a manner and by such a means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations” (16 U.S.C. section 1). Congress reiterated this mandate in the Redwood National Park Expansion Act of 1978 by stating that the NPS must conduct its actions in a manner that will ensure no “derogation of the values and purposes for which these various areas have been established, except as may have been or shall be directly and specifically provided by Congress” (16 U.S.C. section 1a-1). Despite these mandates, the Organic Act and its amendments afford the NPS latitude when making resource decisions that balance resource preservation and visitor recreation.

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as Amended

NEPA was passed by Congress in 1969 and took effect on January 1, 1970. This legislation established the country’s environmental policies, including the goal of achieving productive harmony between human beings and the physical environment for present and future generations. It provided the tools to implement these goals by requiring that every federal agency prepare an in-depth study of the impacts of “major federal actions having a significant effect on the environment” and alternatives to those actions. It also required that each agency make that information an integral part of its decision-making process. NEPA also requires that agencies make a diligent effort to involve interested members of the public before agencies make decisions affecting the environment. NEPA is implemented through regulations of the CEQ (40 CFR 20 1500-1508). In turn, the NPS has adopted procedures to comply with the act and the CEQ regulations, as found in Director’s Order 12 (NPS 2001) and its accompanying handbook.

Clean Water Act

The Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1344 et seq.), as amended, is the primary federal law in the United States governing water integrity. The goal of the CWA is to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s water.” Waters of the United States generally include tidal waters, lakes, ponds, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), and wetlands.

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as Amended

The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), as amended, protects buildings, sites, districts, structures, and objects that have significant scientific, historic, or cultural value. The act established affirmative responsibilities of federal agencies to preserve historic and prehistoric resources. Effects on properties that are listed on or which are eligible for listing on the National Register must be taken into account in planning and operations. Any property that may qualify for listing on the National Register must not be inadvertently transferred, sold, demolished, substantially altered, or allowed to deteriorate.

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act

Section 106 requires federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) is then afforded a reasonable opportunity to comment. The historic preservation review process mandated by section 106 is outlined in regulations issued by the ACHP. Revised regulations, known as “Protection of Historic Properties” (36 CFR Part 800), were updated on August 5, 2004.

Historic Sites Act of 1935

The Historic Sites Act of 1935 declares the preservation of historic sites, buildings, objects, and properties of national significance for public use as a national policy. It authorizes the Secretary of the Interior and the Director of the NPS to restore, reconstruct, rehabilitate, preserve, and maintain historic or prehistoric sites, buildings, objects, and properties of national, historical, or archeological significance.

NPS Management Policies

The NPS Management Policies 2006 (NPS 2006) sets the framework and provides the direction for actions of the NPS. Adherence to its policies is mandatory unless specifically waived or modified by the Director of the NPS or certain departmental officials, including the U.S. Secretary of the Interior. Actions under this EA are guided in part by these management policies.

This EA assesses the effects of the alternatives on park resources and values and provides information used in determining if these effects would cause impairment or unacceptable impacts. NPS Management Policies 2006 requires an analysis of potential effects to determine whether or not actions would impair park resources (NPS 2006). To assess the impacts of the proposed action, policies relating to resource protection were considered during EA preparation.

RELEVANT EXECUTIVE ORDERS

Executive Order 11990: Protection of Wetlands

This executive order directs federal agencies to avoid, to the extent possible, the long-term and short-term adverse impacts associated with the destruction or modification of wetlands and to avoid direct or indirect support of new construction in wetlands wherever there is a practicable alternative. A fundamental element of this executive order is the adoption of a “no net loss of wetlands” goal, which the NPS wetlands policy was derived from. In addition, the NPS will strive to achieve a longer-term goal of net gain of wetlands Service-wide (NPS 2006).

Executive Order 11988: Floodplain Management

This executive order directs federal agencies to avoid, to the extent possible, the long-term and short-term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of floodplains and to avoid direct or indirect support of floodplain development wherever there is a practicable alternative.

RELEVANT PLANNING DOCUMENTS

State of the Park Report (September 2013)

This report provides an overview of the condition of the park’s natural and cultural resources, the visitor experience, and park infrastructure. The report assesses the status of each resource (good condition, caution, or significant concern) and the trend of its condition (improving, unchanging, or deteriorating), while noting the degree of confidence in the assessment (high, medium, or low). A summary of stewardship activities and accomplishments is also included in the report to demonstrate the park’s efforts to maintain or improve resource conditions. The report is intended to serve as a resource for future planning efforts by identifying issues and challenges facing the park (NPS 2012d).

Foundation Document (June 2012)

The Foundation Document, which outlines the park’s purpose, significance, interpretive themes, and fundamental resources and values, is intended to serve as guidance for all future actions in the park. The document also establishes planning and data needs, assesses the importance and condition of key resources and values, and identifies key park-wide issues. As part of the resource and value analysis, the document considers not only the condition of each, but also identifies pertinent trends, threats to the resource, opportunities for improvement, applicable laws and policies, and data and planning needs to ensure protection of the resource. The document also serves as a means for maintaining a clear understanding of priority resources and values, consistency in park decisions, and open communication with stakeholders and park employees (NPS 2012b)

Resource Stewardship Strategy (June 2013)

The Resource Stewardship Strategy serves as management guide to for research, resource management, and resource education programs at the park. The document includes discussions and recommendations related to fundamental and other resources and values, the status of resource knowledge, indicator selection and condition assessment, comprehensive strategies and activities, strategies integral to the success of other strategies and activities, and funding the park’s resource stewardship. In relation to these topics, the document identifies measureable goals and strategies and makes recommendations for achieving acceptable resource conditions over time. The Resource Stewardship Strategy draws from existing Executive Order, the NPS Organic Act, and the park’s enabling legislation as well as the findings of previous planning documents and management efforts such as the park’s Inventory and Monitoring Program, Natural Resource Condition Assessment, and the State of the Park Report (NPS 2013b).

EFLHD Field Trip Report (November 2012)

This report summarizes the results of the field trip held to discuss the scope of repairing or replacing the historic bridge at the park and identifies possible issues associated with the project. The summary discusses several logistical issues related to the project planning and construction and identifies elements to be included in the project and preliminary alternatives. The report also includes drawings of the existing site conditions (FHWA 2012).

SCOPING PROCESS AND PUBLIC

PARTICIPATION

Scoping is an early and open process to determine the breadth of environmental issues and alternatives to be addressed in a NEPA document. Scoping is used to identify which issues need to be analyzed in detail and which can be eliminated from in-depth analysis. It also allocates assignments among the EFLHD and NPS interdisciplinary team members and/or other participating agencies; identifies related projects and associated documents; identifies permits, surveys, consultation, and other requirements; and creates a schedule that allows adequate time to prepare and distribute the EA for public review and comment before a final decision is made. Typically, both internal and public scoping is held to address these elements. Public scoping includes any interested agency or agency with jurisdiction by law or expertise to obtain early input.

An internal scoping meeting/site visit was held on November 29, 2012 at the site, where members of the EFLHD and NPS staff and their consultants met and discussed existing issues and concerns to be addressed within the EA. Agency and public scoping for this project began in February 2013.

Internal, public, and agency scoping efforts are described in “Chapter 5: Consultation and Coordination” and relevant agency correspondence is included in Appendix A. The interested public and agencies will have an opportunity to further review and comment on this EA during a 30-day review period. Issues and Impact Topics

ISSUES

During the scoping process, specific considerations and concerns were identified as critical to replacing the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot and the culvert at the entrance to Camp Misty Mount. Along with the purpose, need, and objectives for the proposed action, these topics guided the development of alternatives and contributed to the selection of impact topics, as identified in the next section. Issues associated with this project include the following:

Sensitive Historic Structures/Historic Districts. The abutments of the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot have been identified as eligible for listing on the National Register, as a contributing element in the Catoctin Mountain Park Historic District. Additionally, the Camp Misty Mount culvert is a contributing resource within the Camp Misty Mount Historic District. Both of these historic resources are in poor condition.

Temporary Bailey Bridge. Permanent vehicular access to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot is needed. A Bailey bridge is currently providing access to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot. This bridge is on loan from Frederick County and could be removed at any time.

Pedestrian Access. Permanent pedestrian access between the visitor center and the Blue Blazes Parking Lot should be included in the proposed alternatives to support safe access for visitors and park staff between the parking lot and the visitor center.

Aesthetics. The bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot is within the Catoctin Mountain Park Historic District and, due to its proximity to the park entrance, is one of the first elements of the park to be observed by visitors. Therefore, elements of a new access to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot, including the access structure itself, rip rap, and guardrails, should be designed to have minimal intrusion on the surrounding aesthetics.

Maintenance. Due to budget and staffing constraints, access to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot should be designed to require minimal annual maintenance.

Visitor Services Disruptions. During construction, parking may not be accessible within the Blue Blazes Parking Lot, which serves as the overflow lot for the park visitor center, and supports bus parking. In addition, temporary lane closures near the park entrance may be required.

IMPACT TOPICS ANALYZED IN THIS EA

Impact topics are resources within the study area that could be affected, either beneficially or adversely, by the range of alternatives presented in this EA. Impact topics considered in this document were identified based on the issues raised during scoping, site conditions, federal laws, regulations, Executive Orders, NPS Management Policies 2006, Director’s Orders, and staff knowledge of the park’s resources.

Impact topics identified and analyzed in this EA are listed below along with reasons for the selection of each impact topic. Each impact topic is further discussed in detail in “Chapter 3: Affected Environment” of this document. Potential impacts to resources from the proposed alternatives are discussed in “Chapter 4: Environmental Consequences.”

Hydrology and Water Quality

NPS Management Policies 2006 states that the NPS will “take all necessary actions to maintain or restore the quality of surface waters and ground waters within the parks consistent with the Clean Water Act and all other applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations” (NPS 2006). Two major streams, Big Hunting Creek and Owens Creek, flow through the park and drain its main watersheds. Big Hunting Creek serves as the receiving waters for Blue Blazes Creek, a perennially flowing stream which bisects each of the study areas. The proposed action would have direct impacts on Blue Blazes Creek. Both Blue Blazes Creek and Big Hunting Creek maintain a high water quality that supports abundant aquatic communities, including a viable population of brook trout, the only native trout species in the region.

Owens Creek is located in the northern portion of the park, upstream of the project area, and is not likely to be impacted by the proposed action. However, the proposed action would impact stream flow through the Blue Blazes Creek, particularly in the location of the Camp Misty Mount culvert and the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot, and could also impact hydrologic conditions in downstream portions of Hunting Creek. During construction, best management practices (BMPs) would be implemented to ensure water quality is not adversely impacted. Improved stream flow could improve water quality within Blue Blazes Creek. Therefore, the impact topic of hydrology and water quality is retained for further analysis.

Wetlands

Executive Order 11990, “Protection of Wetlands” and NPS Procedural Manual 77-1: Wetland Protection (NPS 2012a) requires an examination of impacts on wetlands. The wetland delineation conducted for the project area identified 0.024 acres of palustrine forested wetlands and 95.4 linear feet of perennial stream channel within the study area at the Camp Misty Mount double culvert. It also identified 698.84 linear feet of perennial stream channel within the study area at the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot. The proposed action has the potential to impact these wetlands. Therefore, the impact topic of wetlands is retained for further analysis.

The replacement of the double culvert at Camp Misty Mount and replacement of the bridge to Blue Blazes Parking Lot would improve the function for riverine habitat, including trout passage. In addition, the proposed action would not result in adverse impacts on hydrology or fauna that exceed minor intensity; would not cause a cumulative total of more than 0.25 acres of new, long-term adverse impacts on natural wetlands; and implementation of the proposed action would meet the criteria of Procedural Manual 77-1, Appendix 2: Best Management Practices and Conditions for Proposed Actions with the Potential to Have Adverse Impacts on Wetlands. Therefore, pursuant to section 4.2.1(h) of Procedural Manual 77-1, the proposed action meets the criteria for “Actions designed to restore degraded (or completely lost) wetland, stream, riparian, or other aquatic habitats or ecological process” and is excepted from the requirements for a Wetlands Statement of Findings and compensation requirements (NPS 2012a). This exception specifies that “short-term wetland disturbances that are directly associated with and necessary for implementing the restoration may be allowed under this exception,” which would account for the minimal and temporary wetland impacts that would occur in connection with replacement of the double culvert at Camp Misty Mount.

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

NPS policy, as laid out in NPS Management Policies 2006, is to “maintain as parts of the natural ecosystems of parks all plants and animals native to park ecosystems” (NPS 2006). The park provides habitat for a variety of species including many birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and fish. During construction of the proposed action, there could be a temporary disturbance and displacement of wildlife, especially aquatic species. Some animals may temporarily relocate to areas outside the study area, but this would not be expected to have a long-term adverse effect upon local populations. Wildlife would be expected to reoccupy the study area following construction. In the long term, the proposed action would improve fish passage, including the native brook trout, through the culverts at the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot and at Camp Misty Mount and could restore natural habitat within the Blue Blazes Creek. Blue Blazes Creek is classified as 3P Natural Trout Waters, indicating the creek is a natural trout habitat. Therefore, the impact topic of wildlife and wildlife habitat is retained for further analysis.

Historic Structures and Districts

A historic structure is defined by the NPS as “a constructed work, usually immovable by nature or design, consciously created to serve some human act” (NPS 2002a). The park contains a number of historic structures that have been determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, including the stone abutments associated with the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot and the Camp Misty Mount double culvert. These features have also been identified as contributing resources within the Catoctin Mountain Park Historic District and Camp Misty Mount Historic District, respectively. The proposed action would impact the integrity of the historic features of the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot and the Camp Misty Mount double culvert. Therefore, the impact topic of historic structures and districts is retained for further analysis.

Visitor Use and Experience

Enjoyment of park resources and values by the people of the United States is part of the fundamental purpose of all parks (NPS 2006). The NPS strives to provide opportunities for forms of enjoyment that are uniquely suited and appropriate to the natural and cultural resources found in parks. The visitor experience encompasses interpretation, viewsheds, understanding, enjoyment, human health and safety, circulation, and accessibility of the study area. The proposed action would result in changes to these elements. Specifically, the proposed action would restore permanent visitor access to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot at the Park’s Visitor Center, and would also enhance visitor safety in this location by providing distinct vehicular and pedestrian access across the bridge. Therefore, the impact topic of visitor use and experience is retained for further analysis.

IMPACT TOPICS DISMISSED FROM FURTHER ANALYSIS

The following presents an overview of impact topics that were considered but ultimately dismissed from further analysis in this EA. An impact topic was initially considered but dismissed from further analysis if it was determined that the resource is not present in the study area or because any potential impacts would be less than minor, typically temporary, and localized. The regulatory and non-regulatory context and baseline conditions relevant to each impact topic also were analyzed in the process of determining if a topic should be retained or dismissed from further analysis. An outline of background information used in considering each topic is provided below along with the reasons for dismissing each topic from further analysis.

Geologic Hazards

NPS Management Policies 2006 state that the NPS is charged with preserving naturally occurring geologic processes, such as landslides, floods, shoreline processes, etc., and trying to avoid the placement of new facilities in geologically hazardous areas. There are no known geohazards located within the study area. Therefore, the impact topic of geohazards was dismissed from further analysis.

Geological Resources

According to NPS Management Policies 2006, the NPS will (1) assess the impacts of natural processes and human-related events on geologic resources; (2) maintain and restore the integrity of existing geologic resources; (3) integrate geologic resource management into NPS operations and planning; and

(4) interpret geologic resources for park visitors. Examples of important geologic resources in parks include geysers and hot springs in geothermal systems; cave and karst systems; canyons and arches in erosional landscapes; sand dunes, moraines, and terraces in depositional landscapes; and dramatic or unusual rock outcrops and formations. Although the geologic resources of the park are an important part of the natural systems associated with Catoctin Mountain, unique geologic features do not exist in the project area. As such, proposed the action would not result in impacts on geologic resources. Therefore, the impact topic of geologic resources is dismissed from further analysis.

Soils and Topography

NPS policy is to protect the natural abundance and diversity of all naturally occurring communities. The NPS Management Policies 2006 (NPS 2006) and other NPS policies provide general direction for the protection of soils. The dominant soil types in the study area at the Camp Misty Mount double culvert is the Ravenrock-Rohrersville complex along 3 to 15 percent slopes in extremely stony substrate. These soils are described locally as a hydric soil due to 15 percent inclusions of the Lantz soil series. The study area around the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot is predominantly underlain by Foxville and Hatboro soils along 0 to 3 percent slopes, which are listed locally as a hydric soil due to 45 percent inclusions of the Hatboro soil series (NRCS 2012). Although the proposed action could result in the temporary displacement of soils during construction activities, soil conditions would be generally unchanged and there would be no changes in topography. Therefore, the impact topic of soils and topography is dismissed from further analysis.

Vegetation

NPS policy is to protect the natural abundance and diversity of all naturally occurring communities. NPS Management Policies 2006 (NPS 2006) and other NPS and park policies provide general direction for the protection of vegetation. Vegetation within the project area consists primarily of a rich riprap community mixed with wetland and upland communities. Native wetland vegetation within the project area includes facultative species such as red maple (Acer rubrum), American hornbean (Carpinus caroliniana), as well as facultative wetland and obligate wetland species such as skunk cabbage (Symplocarpus foetidus), jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), and smallspike false nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica). Some nonnative plant species are also found in wetlands, including the invasive species Nepalese browntop (Microstegium vimineum). Upland communities in the project area are forested with mature assemblages of the Oak- Hickory-Tulip tree cover type. Of the species associated with this cover type, tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera) is typically the dominant tree species in the upland riparian community next to Blue Blazes Creek. Co-dominant species in the overstory can include American beech (Fagus grandifolia), white oak (Quercus alba), northern red oak (Quercus rubra), and red maple (Nyssa sylvatica). The understory is comprised of smaller canopy species, atop a sparsely vegetated herbaceous stratum with scattered native wildflowers and ferns such as spotted wintergreen (Chimaphila maculata) and Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides). Nonnative, invasive plant species are also found in riparian uplands near small clearings, trails, and roadsides, including Nepalese browntop and Japanese barberry (Berberis thunbergii). The proposed action is not anticipated to have a noticeable impact on vegetation. Therefore, the impact topic of vegetation is dismissed from further analysis.

Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species

Based on a review of rare, threatened, and endangered species data for the project area, using the USFWS Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPaC), there are no federally listed species within the vicinity of the project. One federally listed species, the threatened swamp pink (Helonias bullata) was identified as potentially occurring within Frederick County, Maryland. However, based on conditions observed during the field visit, swamp pink is unlikely to occur in the anticipated impact area (i.e., the immediate vicinity of the Camp Misty Mount double culvert and the bridge to the Blue Blazes Parking Lot). Wetlands identified to the north (and upstream) of the Camp Misty Mount culvert could have the potential to serve as swamp pink habitat but would be avoided and protected during construction activities using erosion and sediment control practices. In a letter dated March 13, 2013, the USFWS concurred that, “[e]xcept for occasional transient individuals, no federally proposed or listed endangered or threatened species are known to exist within the project impact area” (see appendix A). Therefore, the impact topic of rare, threatened, and endangered species is dismissed from further analysis.

Floodplains

Executive Order 11988, “Floodplain Management” and NPS DO 77-2: Floodplain Management (NPS 2003) requires examination of impacts on floodplains and potential risk involved in placing facilities within floodplains. The project area is not within a designated 100- or 500-year floodplain and the proposed action would not result in impacts to existing floodplains. Therefore, the impact topic of floodplains is dismissed from further analysis.

Air Quality

The 1963 Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) requires land managers to protect air quality. Section 118 of the Clean Air Act requires parks to meet all federal, state, and local air pollution standards, and NPS…