E_NASA WALLOPS ISLAND BRIDGE FHWA CE.pdf

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

VA ST NASA 1(9)

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

Project Number: VA ST NASA 1(9) Date: 3/28/2023

Project Name: Wallops Island Causeway Bridge Replacement

Location: NASA Wallops Flight Facility Accomack County, Virginia

CE Category 23 CFR 771.117(d)(13): Bridge replacement projects that do not meet the constraints in paragraph (e) of this section but do meet the criteria for a CE in the CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) and paragraph (a) of this section.

See 23 CFR 771.117 for full description of CE categories, including additional requirements when applying (c)26-28.

Project Description The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) propose to replace the Wallops Island Causeway Bridge over Cat Creek at Goddard Space Flight Center’s Wallops Flight Facility, in Accomack County, VA. The existing bridge was constructed in 1959 and is approaching the end of its anticipated service life.

It is 1,284 feet long, 27 feet wide, and has a cast-in-place concrete deck supported by four prestressed concrete beams on concrete piers. The bridge is located on the two-mile long Causeway Road connecting the mainland with Wallops Island. The proposed project would address structural deficiencies and improve safety by meeting current roadway and bridge design standards. The new bridge would be approximately 40’ wide and would be constructed parallel to the existing structure. The bridge would be approximately 30 feet lower in elevation than the existing bridge. The causeway approaches would be realigned at each end of the new bridge.

The existing bridge would remain in use during construction but would be demolished when the new bridge is completed. Temporary bridges and/or barges would be needed to allow construction of the new bridge and demolition of the existing bridge.

Environmental Commitments and Mitigation Measures

• Oysters within the construction limits will be relocated in consultation with the Virginia Marine Resources Commission

• Concrete generated during demolition of the existing bridge will be reused or repurposed to the extent practicable. Current possibilities include use of the material by NASA for a proposed breakwater, or donation to the VMRC offshore artificial reef program.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40/section-1508.4 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40/section-1508.4 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-23/section-771.117#p-771.117(a) https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=842bb87055f89f1d0ff242f2b9e20ff7&mc=true&node=pt23.1.771&rgn=div5#se23.1.771_1117

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

• Compensatory wetland mitigation will be implemented in consultation with the US Army Corp of Engineers and Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. FHWA anticipates the use of on-site mitigation to meet permitting requirements.

• The project ground disturbance impacts and increased impervious surface will result in the need to provide permanent Storm Water Management. On-site treatment is not considered feasible due to the near-sea-level elevations; therefore, the purchase of nutrient credits is anticipated.

• Habitat assessment and presence/absence surveys for bats will be conducted. Data from these surveys, in coordination with USFWS, will inform time of work and other mitigations required to perform the bridge replacement during the proposed construction period, 2024-2027

• Vegetation removal will not occur from April 1 – November 15 to protect bats and migratory birds.

• Construction crews will not perform work if turtles are present in the work zone. Turtle monitors will be present during pile driving, vessel movement, and other potential stressor activities. Additional conservation measures related to Marine Species and Essential Fish Habitat are included in the attached programmatic consultations with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Summary of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Compliance Marine Species/ NOAA- FHWA consulted with the NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service, Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office, Protected Resource Division (GARFO PRD) in accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. The FHWA GARFO 2018 Not Likely to Adversely Affect Programmatic Consultation was utilized. A verification form containing project information and relevant conservation measures was submitted to NOAA on December 8, 2022. GARFO PRD provided concurrence on December 12, 2022.

Terrestrial Species/ US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)- FHWA consulted with the USFWS Virginia Field Office in accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. AN official Species List was obtained through the USFWS IPaC website (Code 2023-0012907). The list of federally regulated species subject to Section 7 consultation includes: the Northern Long-Eared Bat (NLEB, endangered), Eastern Black Rail (threatened), Piping Plover (threatened), Red Knot (threatened), Green Sea Turtle (threatened), Hawksbill Sea Turtle (endangered), Kemp’s Ridley Sea Turtle (endangered), Leatherback Sea Turtle (endangered), and Loggerhead Sea Turtle (threatened). FHWA submitted a project review package to USFWS on December 20, 2022. The Project Review Documentation package also included conferencing information and determinations for three additional species: Tricolored Bat (proposed endangered), Little Brown Bat (species of special concern and state endangered) and Monarch Butterfly (candidate). A not

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04) likely to adversely affect determination was reached for all species. A proposal to conduct additional survey for bats in 2023 was also included. A self-verification form was provided by USFWS which serves as concurrence for the project. No additional response from USFWS was received. The bat survey is scheduled for Spring 2023 and will be coordinated with the USFWS Virginia Field Office.

Summary of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Compliance In August 2020, FHWA initiated NHPA Section 106 consultation with the Virginia Department of Historic Resources (VDHR), Chickahominy Indian Nation, Catawba Indian Nation, Nansemond Indian Nation, Pamunkey Indian Tribe, Pocomoke Indian Nation, and Rappahannock Tribe. The consultation letter contained a project description, map of the Area of Potential Effect (APE), and a proposal to conduct archaeological survey within the APE.

Responses were received from VDHR and the Pamunkey Indian Tribe concurring with the survey proposal. The archaeological survey was conducted in November 2020. The survey included both terrestrial and underwater investigations. No archaeological sites were identified.

The bridge structure itself was also determined to be ineligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The survey report was submitted to VDHR and the tribes mentioned above in January 2021. The report and project information were sent to The Chickahominy Indians Eastern Division was contacted in January 2021. On February 9, 2021, VDHR concurred with the report and stated that np properties would be affected by the undertaking. Additional correspondence was submitted to the Tribes in January/February 2023 containing a determination that no historic properties would be affected by the undertaking. The Catawba Indian Nation concurred with the determination on March 1, 2023.

Additional Agency Coordination and Compliance Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)- FHWA consulted with the NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service, Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO) in accordance with the Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation Management Act. FHWA utilized the programmatic EFH consultation process. A verification form containing project information and relevant conservation measures was submitted to NOAA on December 13, 2022. No response was received. Per the terms of the programmatic consultation, FHWA may proceed if a response is not received within 30 days.

Shellfish and Public Shellfish Grounds: In August 2020, FHWA sent a scoping letter to the Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC) and the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) requesting comments about the undertaking. The responses from VMRC and VIMS noted that the Bridge crosses over public shellfish grounds. VMRC recommended that a survey of shellfish resources be conducted. FHWA conducted the presence/absence survey on May 27, EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

2021 and determined that oyster beds are present within a portion of the project area. A preliminary density survey was also performed within a representative portion of the oyster bed resulting in a density of 12.5 oysters per square foot. FHWA provided the survey results to VMRC and VIMS. Based on the survey, VMRC/VIMS recommends the shell and clusters within the project footprint be relocated to an adjacent and un-impacted reef area. It is not necessary to move them back upon project completion. VMRC continues to recommend that stringent erosion and sediment control measures should be used during any construction or maintenance on the bridge to protect shellfish in the area. Additionally, VMRC recommends that demolished bridge materials be considered for placement on artificial reefs in the area. The VMRC Artificial Reef Program can be contacted to determine which materials would be acceptable for placement on artificial reefs. Coordination between FHWA and the artificial reef program has been initiated.

Wetlands and Waters of the U.S.: A wetland and waters of the U.S. survey and delineation was conducted in August 2020. The project area was found to contain vegetated tidal wetlands, tidal mudflats, and open water. The report was submitted to the US Army Corp of Engineers. In November 2020, the Army Corp provided a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination. The Determination is valid for five years. The delineation will be used to determine final project impacts and compensatory mitigation requirements. Permanent wetland impacts have been minimized during the design process.

Navigational Clearance and 408 compliance- In August 2020, a scoping letter was sent to the US Army Corp of Engineers and numerous other Federal, State and Local agencies. In response to the scoping letter, the Army Corp submitted a letter containing several comments. The comments identify Cat Creek as a portion of the Waterway on the Coast of Virginia (WCV) and the Virginia Inside Passage (regulated navigational waterways). The comments also request verification that the bridge will provide equal or greater clearance and Title 33 Section 408 review by the Corp is required. In follow-up to the Army Corp comments, FHWA provided additional information about the 2018 coordination with the Coast Guard and other justifications for the lower bridge. The follow-up contained additional information about the current condition of Cat Creek. The navigational aids (buoys, signs, etc) have been removed from the channel due to hazardous shoaling (sediment accumulation). There are no plans or funding to dredge the channel, but it is still part of the WCV, contains Public Shellfishing Grounds, and could be restored in the future. In response to the FHWA follow-up, the US Army Corp stated that 408 review will be needed, in coordination with the US Coast Guard. The Army Corp expressed concerns about the significant elevation change and the need to maintain the potential for commercial navigation. Additional coordination with the Coast Guard, including published notifications to mariners, regarding the proposed bridge replacement. On May 11, 2021, the US

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

Coast Guard issued a preliminary navigational clearance determination for the bridge with a 12.8’ vertical clearance. The determination is valid for three years. Final approval from USCG and Section 408 approval from the Army Corp will still be needed.

Geotechnical Borings:

In August 2021, FHWA prepared a categorical exclusion and obtained environmental permits for the geotechnical investigations needed to plan the replacement bridge. The work involved geotechnical investigation of subsurface conditions via borehole drilling along the existing causeway and bridge leading to Wallops Island from the mainland. Eight borings were drilled within the channel and intertidal area along the existing bridge piers using a drill rig mounted on a barge. To avoid site disturbance, the barge and drill rig were put in the water at an off-site location and moved to the drill site by boat. No fill was installed to perform this task. Twelve additional borings are proposed within upland areas of the existing causeway embankment. The upland sites were accessed by the causeway road and are within the maintained roadway clear zone. The work was covered by FHWA categorical exclusion 23 CFR 771.117 (c)(24): Localized geotechnical and other investigation to provide information for preliminary design and for environmental analyses and permitting purposes. The project qualified for Section 404 coverage under Nationwide Permit 6, Survey Activities.

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

Categorical Exclusion Recommendation:

On the basis of the environmental impact information in the statutory compliance file, with which I am familiar, I believe the project should be categorically excluded from further NEPA analysis.

Ryan Kimberley Environmental Protection Specialist

Federal Highway Administration

Date

Categorical Exclusion Determination:

On the basis of the environmental impact information in the statutory compliance file, with which I am familiar, I am categorically excluding the described project from further NEPA analysis. The project meets the 23 CFR 771.117(a) definition of a categorical exclusion. No unusual circumstances per 23 CFR 771.117(b) apply.

Kevin S. Rose Environmental Team Leader

Federal Highway Administration

Date

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

Appendix A: Environmental Checklist

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act:

• Are Federally-listed species potentially present in the study area? ☒Yes ☐No

If Yes, effects determination:

☐No Effect ☒May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect ☐May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act:

• Are historic properties known to be present in the study area? ☐Yes ☒No

If Yes, will they be impacted by the project? ☐Yes ☐No

• Will previously undisturbed ground be disturbed?

☒Yes ☐No

• Effects determination:

☒No Historic Properties Affected ☐No Adverse Effect ☐Adverse Effect, MOA Executed

• Was tribal consultation completed? ☒Yes ☐No

Water and Wetlands:

• Section 404 of the Clean Water Act

Are impacts to Waters of the US anticipated? ☒Yes ☐No If Yes, approval anticipated:

☐Nationwide Permit (NWP) ☐Regional General Permit ☒Individual Permit

• Section 401 of the Clean Water Act ☐NWP certified by State ☒Individual Certification

• Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) Will the land disturbance threshold likely be exceeded to require a permit and SWPPP?

☒Yes ☐ No

• Is post-construction stormwater management review/approval anticipated? ☒Yes ☐No

• ☒Project is consistent with Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands

Floodplains:

• Is the project in a FEMA floodplain?

☒Yes ☐No ☐ Floodplain not mapped

• ☒ Project is consistent with Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management

Section 4(f) of the USDOT Act:

• Does the project meet the Section 4(f) exemption for Federal lands transportation facilities under

Section 1119(c)(2) of MAP-21, 23 U.S.C. 138(a)? ☐Yes ☒No

• Is there a use of a Section 4(f) property in the study area? ☐Yes ☒No

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

If Yes, De Minimis Finding:☐ Programmatic:☐ Individual 4(f): ☐ Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund:

• Was the property purchased with grant funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund?

☐Yes ☒No

• If Yes, was documentation of approval from National Park Service Director received for the conversion or replacement of 6(f) property? ☐Yes ☐No

Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972:

• Is the project in a Coastal Zone? ☒Yes ☐No

• If yes, will a Federal Consistency Review be completed? ☒Yes ☐No

Right of Way:

• Is the project completely within the transportation facility’s right-of-way? ☒Yes ☐No

• If no, will the project require relocations or easements? ☐Yes ☐No

Hazardous Waste and Materials:

• Are hazardous materials or contamination exceeding regulatory thresholds (as set by U.S. EPA, County Environmental Health, etc.) present? ☒Yes ☐No

• If Yes, is the nature and extent of the hazardous materials or contamination fully known? ☐Yes ☒No, plan for securing information provided in Notes Section 7(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act:

• Are there Wild and Scenic Rivers? ☐Yes ☒No ☐Eligible If Yes, has review by the river-administering agency been completed? ☐Yes ☐No

Clean Air Act:

• Is the project in a non-attainment area? ☐Yes ☒No

If Yes, is the project on the Transportation Improvement Program(TIP)/State Implementation Plan(SIP)? ☐ Yes ☐No

Highway Traffic and Construction Noise Regulations:

• ☐ The proposed project is a Type I project (highway on a new location, substantial horizontal or vertical alteration, new through or auxiliary lanes). Noise analysis is required.

• ☐ The proposed project is a Type II project (retrofit for noise abatement).

• ☒ The proposed project is a Type III project (noise analysis not required).

• ☐ Does not apply.

Environmental Justice and Title IV Act:

• Is an Environmental Justice population, as identified in Executive Order 12898, present?

☐Yes, explanation provided in Notes section ☒No

• Will the project induce disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority, low income, or special groups? ☐Yes, additional analysis is needed ☐No Farmland Protection Policy Act for Highway Projects:

• Does the project displace, require acquisition of, or require an easement from farmland?

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

☐Yes ☒No Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change

• Have greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate change considerations been integrated into the planning, design, acquisition and/or construction processes? ☒Yes ☐No Comments: See below.

• Have GHG emissions or reductions been quantified for the expected lifetime of the action?

☒Yes ☐No Comments: The project would not increase the roadway capacity and would not result in a net long-term change to GHC emissions. Short-term GHG increases will occur during construction, but impacts will be minimized using environmentally sensitive design and best management construction practices.

• Does the project consider biogenic carbon dioxide sources, carbon stock, and the project’s overall carbon footprint? ☒Yes ☐No Comments: FHWA and NASA are exploring the use of artificial pozzolans (concrete additives) to reduce the carbon footprint. Environmental Product Declarations will be compiled if available. NASA/FHWA will determine the feasibility of reusing concrete derived during demolition. NASA intends to analyze and document any data related to carbon footprint reductions or improvements.

• Does the project include resilience and adaptation measures to address climate change?

☒Yes ☐No Comments: The bridge elevation and scour protection have been designed using long-term sea level modeling. The models anticipate sea-level rise. See 2021 FHWA hydraulics report.

Does the project affect any other resources not listed above? Explain below and list anticipated permits:

- Hazardous materials including lead paint and asbestos may be present within the existing bridge structure. The construction contractor will identify any potentially hazardous materials and handle/dispose of them using appropriate measures and following any applicable regulations.

- The project will require numerous environmental permits including ESC/SWM, NPDES, 401 Water Quality Certification, 404 dredge/fill permit, and US Coast Guard Permit.

Project NASA 1(9) Wallops Island Causeway Bridge Replacement, Accomack County, Virginia Date: December 20 2022 CONSULTATION CODE: 2023-0012907; USFWS Virginia Field Office Project Review Documentation

Step 1: Description of Action- The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) propose to replace the Wallops Island Causeway Bridge over Cat Creek at Goddard Space Flight Center’s Wallops Flight Facility, in Accomack County, VA. The existing bridge was constructed in 1959 and is approaching the end of its anticipated service life. It is 1,284 feet long, 27 feet wide, and has a cast-in-place concrete deck supported by four prestressed concrete beams on concrete piers. The bridge is located on the two-mile long Causeway Road connecting the mainland with Wallops Island. The proposed project would address structural deficiencies and improve safety by meeting current roadway and bridge design standards. The new bridge would be 40’ wide and would be constructed parallel to the existing structure. The causeway approaches would be realigned at each end of the new bridge. The existing bridge would remain in use during construction but would be demolished when the new bridge is completed. Temporary bridges and/or barges would be needed to allow construction of the new bridge and demolition of the existing bridge. Construction of the new bridge would likely begin in 2025 and continue for two or more years.

Step 2: Action Area- The project area has been mapped in the IPaC system and is depicted on the enclosed map. The action area includes the footprints of the new bridge, realigned causeway approaches, and temporary bridges. Habitats include tidal wetlands, tidal mud flats, open water, causeway embankment, and the bridge structure.

Latitude/Longitude: 37.8522, -75.490206

Step 3a: Official Species List: An official species was downloaded from IPaC and is attached (Consultation Code 2023-0012907, 12/20/22). A species determination table is provided below. The list of federally regulated species subject to Section 7 consultation includes: the Northern Long-Eared Bat (NLEB, endangered), Eastern Black Rail (threatened), Piping Plover (threatened), Red Knot (threatened), Green Sea Turtle (threatened), Hawksbill Sea Turtle (endangered), Kemp’s Ridley Sea Turtle (endangered), Leatherback Sea Turtle (endangered), and Loggerhead Sea Turtle (threatened).

This Project Review Documentation package includes conferencing information and determinations for three additional species:

Tricolored Bat (proposed endangered), Little Brown Bat (species of special concern and state endangered) and Monarch Butterfly (candidate).

CONSULTATION CODE: 2023-0012907; USFWS Virginia Field Office Project Review Documentation

Step 3b: NLEB- FHWA has discontinued use of the assisted determination key for NLEB 4(d) rule because of the endangered status of the species. The project will include limited tree trimming/removal and the removal of a bridge that could provide suitable habitat for NLEB or other bat species. A habitat assessment and presence/absence survey will be conducted during the 2023 active season including acoustic and emergence surveys. Data from these surveys, in coordination with USFWS, will inform time of work and other mitigations required to perform the bridge replacement during the proposed construction period, 2024-2027. The survey will use the “USFWS Range-wide Indiana bat and NLEB survey guidelines”. A review of the Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources (VDWR) NLEB Winter Habitat and Roost Tree on-line mapping tool did not identify any nearby sites. The area is not within mapped karst geology.

Step 3c: Critical Habitat: There are no critical habitats at this location

Step 4: Suitable Habitat- An assessment of suitable habitat is provided in the table below. The project is being coordinated with NASA, the Virginia Marine Resources Commission, the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, and the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). FHWA provided determinations of Not likely to Adversely Affect (NLAA) or no effect for all marine species regulated by the NOAA Section 7 program. A copy of the NOAA Section 7 concurrence is enclosed. Consultation with the NOAA Fisheries program related to essential fish habitat is ongoing. The VDWR Fish and Wildlife Information Service (FWIS) was used to obtain NLEB winter/summer habitat maps, in addition to USFWS species profiles and information (ECOS). US Geological Survey and Virginia Department of Geology and Mineral Resource (DGMR) maps confirmed that Karst geology is not present on or near the site.

The site consists of marsh and intertidal mud deposits. Data was obtained from the Virginia Division of Natural Heritage Biotics Data System and the VDWR Fish and Wildlife Information Service. The VDWR Time of Year restriction guidance document was also referenced.

Step 5: Determinations- Section 7 determinations for each species are provided in the table below.

Step 6: Project Review Package- A determination of Not likely to adversely Affect (NLAA) or No effect was reached for all species. An online Section 7 project review certification letter is attached. The project review package will be sent to the Virginia Field Office for Review.

CONSULTATION CODE: 2023-0012907; USFWS Virginia Field Office Project Review Documentation

Species Determination Table:

Species / Resource Name

Species/Habitat Presence in Action Area

Sources of Info

ESA Section 7 Determination

Project Elements that support determination

Critical Habitat Not present VAFO CH

MAP TOOL

No effect There are no documented critical habitats at this location

Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis (endangered)

Suitable habitat present, no current survey conducted;

There are trees and shrubs with a diameter greater than 3” growing along the causeway embankment at the edge of the tidal marsh. The bridge structure may also be suitable habitat for bats

USFWS,

FWIS, DGMR

(not karst area), site photos, site inspections

Not Likely to Adversely Affect (NLAA);

Habitat assessments and presence/absence surveys will be conducted within the project footprint during the 2023 active season. Acoustic and emergence surveys will be conducted by approved wildlife biologists using the following guidelines and forms:

https://www.fws.gov/media/range-wide-indiana-bat-and-northern-long-eared-bat-survey-guidelines https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/appendix-d-bridge-culvert-bat-assessment-form-april-2020.pdf

Data from these surveys, in coordination with USFWS, will inform time of work and other mitigations required to perform the bridge replacement during the proposed construction period, 2025-2027.

Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavus (proposed endangered)

Suitable habitat present, no current survey conducted

USFWS,

FWIS

NLAA Habitat assessment and presence/absence surveys will be conducted as outlined above. Data from these surveys, in coordination with USFWS, will inform time of work and other mitigations required to perform the bridge replacement during the proposed construction period, 2025-2027.

https://www.fws.gov/media/range-wide-indiana-bat-and-northern-long-eared-bat-survey-guidelines https://www.fws.gov/media/range-wide-indiana-bat-and-northern-long-eared-bat-survey-guidelines https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/appendix-d-bridge-culvert-bat-assessment-form-april-2020.pdf https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/appendix-d-bridge-culvert-bat-assessment-form-april-2020.pdf

CONSULTATION CODE: 2023-0012907; USFWS Virginia Field Office Project Review Documentation

Little Brown Bat Myotis lucifugus (species of special concern)

Suitable habitat present, no current survey conducted

USFWS,

FWIS

NLAA Habitat assessment and presence/absence surveys will be conducted as outlined above. Data from these surveys, in coordination with USFWS, will inform time of work and other mitigations required to perform the bridge replacement during the proposed construction period, 2024-2027.

Eastern Black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis ssp.

jamaicensis) (threatened)

Suitable habitat present, species not present

USFWS,

FWIS, survey report (2022)

No effect NASA completed three rounds of surveys from May 1 – June 6, 2022, to capture peak potential eastern black rail auditory activity during the breeding season. No visual or auditory observations of eastern black rails were recorded during surveys. The report was previously transmitted to USFWS by NASA

Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus) (endangered)

Suitable habitat not present

USFWS,

NASA,FWIS

No Effect Suitable habitat exists several thousand feet to the east; work will not impact nesting or foraging grounds;

Red knot (Calidris canutus rufa) (threatened) not present

USFWS,

NASA, FWIS

No Effect Forages on Wallops Island during migration; The work would not impact nesting grounds or impact available foraging habitat; work will occur several thousand feet from nearest beach foraging area.

Green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas) (threatened)

Suitable habitat present, species not present

USFWS,

NOAA, NASA

No effect NOAA data indicates species not present; The project will not impact nesting grounds which are farther to the south;

Hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) present, species present

USFWS,

NOAA, NASA

NLAA No known Occurrences at Wallops Island; The project will not impact nesting grounds which are farther to the south; Construction crews will not perform work if turtles are present in the work zone.

Turtle monitors will be present during pile driving, vessel movement, and other potential stressor activities. See NOAA Section 7 consultation for additional conservation measures

CONSULTATION CODE: 2023-0012907; USFWS Virginia Field Office Project Review Documentation

Kemp's Ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys kempii) present

USFWS,

NOAA, NASA

NLAA The limited footprint would not significantly impact available foraging habitat. Construction crews will not perform work if turtles are present in the work zone. Turtle monitors will be present during pile driving, vessel movement, and other potential stressor activities. See NOAA Section 7 consultation for additional conservation measures

Leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) present

USFWS,

NOAA, NASA

NLAA The limited footprint would not significantly impact available foraging habitat. Construction crews will not perform work if turtles are present in the work zone. Turtle monitors will be present during pile driving, vessel movement, and other potential stressor activities. See NOAA Section 7 consultation for additional conservation measures

Loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) (threatened) present

USFWS,

NOAA, NASA

NLAA The limited footprint would not significantly impact available foraging habitat. Construction crews will not perform work if turtles are present in the work zone. Turtle monitors will be present during pile driving, vessel movement, and other potential stressor activities. See NOAA Section 7 consultation for additional conservation measures

Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus (Candidate)

No suitable habitat present

The project area does not contain areas with milkweed, meadows, etc.

No effect N/A

ATTACHMENTS

A) Maps and photos B) Preliminary plans C) Official Species list D) NOAA Sec 7 consultation (signed version on file) E) Online verification Letter

ATTACHMENT A, WALLOPS ISLAND CAUSEWAY BRIDGE MAPS AND PHOTOS

Satellite Imagery of project location and vicinity

USGS topographical map excerpt, Wallops Island, VA quad

Existing bridge view looking east toward Wallops Island

View of existing bridge from the western abutment, facing southeast

Rendering of proposed bridge

Attachment B- Preliminary Plans

December 20, 2022

United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

Virginia Ecological Services Field Office

6669 Short Lane Gloucester, VA 23061-4410

Phone: (804) 693-6694 Fax: (804) 693-9032

In Reply Refer To:

Project Code: 2023-0012907 Project Name: Wallops Island Causeway Bridge Replacement

Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location or may be affected by your proposed project

To Whom It May Concern:

The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Any activity proposed on National Wildlife Refuge lands must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.

The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat.

12/20/2022 2

A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.

If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at:

http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF

Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to protect native birds from project-related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional, resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more information regarding these Acts see https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations.php.

The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan (when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize the production of project-related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and their resources to the project-related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and recommended conservation measures see https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to-birds.php.

In addition to MBTA and BGEPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/ executive-orders/e0-13186.php.

We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Project Code in the header of this

12/20/2022 3 letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office.

Attachment(s):

Official Species List USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries Migratory Birds

12/20/2022 1

Official Species List This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action".

This species list is provided by:

Virginia Ecological Services Field Office 6669 Short Lane Gloucester, VA 23061-4410

(804) 693-6694

Project Summary Project Code: 2023-0012907 Project Name: Wallops Island Causeway Bridge Replacement Project Type: Bridge - Replacement Project Description: Replace existing bridge with a new bridge. The new bridge will be located immediately north/parallel to the existing. Minor realignment of the causeway at the approaches will occur. The existing bridge will be demolished. Temporary bridges and/or barges will be used for construction and demolition.

Project Location:

Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@37.85198815,-75.48994793729457,14z

Counties: Accomack County, Virginia https://www.google.com/maps/@37.85198815,-75.48994793729457,14z https://www.google.com/maps/@37.85198815,-75.48994793729457,14z

1.

Endangered Species Act Species There is a total of 9 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.

Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species.

IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce.

See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions.

NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

Mammals

NAME STATUS

Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9045

Endangered

Birds

NAME STATUS

Eastern Black Rail Laterallus jamaicensis ssp. jamaicensis No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10477

Threatened

Piping Plover Charadrius melodus Population: [Atlantic Coast and Northern Great Plains populations] - Wherever found, except those areas where listed as endangered.

There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6039

Threatened

Red Knot Calidris canutus rufa There is proposed critical habitat for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1864

Threatened https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9045 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10477 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6039 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1864

12/20/2022 4

Reptiles

NAME STATUS

Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas Population: North Atlantic DPS There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6199

Threatened

Hawksbill Sea Turtle Eretmochelys imbricata There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3656

Endangered

Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle Lepidochelys kempii There is proposed critical habitat for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5523

Endangered

Leatherback Sea Turtle Dermochelys coriacea There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1493

Endangered

Loggerhead Sea Turtle Caretta caretta Population: Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1110

Threatened

Critical habitats

THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S

JURISDICTION.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6199 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3656 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5523 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1493 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1110

USFWS National Wildlife Refuge Lands And Fish Hatcheries Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS OR FISH HATCHERIES WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA.

http://www.fws.gov/refuges/

2.

3.

Migratory Birds Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act .

Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.

The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.

The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.

50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)

The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found below.

For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

NAME

BREEDING

SEASON

American Oystercatcher Haematopus palliatus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8935

Breeds Apr 15 to Aug 31

Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities.

Breeds Oct 15 to Aug 31 https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/laws-legislations/migratory-bird-treaty-act.php https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/laws-legislations/bald-and-golden-eagle-protection-act.php https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds/species http://ebird.org/ebird/map/ https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8935

NAME

BREEDING

SEASON

Black Skimmer Rynchops niger This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5234

Breeds May 20 to Sep 15

Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 25

Gull-billed Tern Gelochelidon nilotica This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9501

Breeds May 1 to Jul 31

King Rail Rallus elegans This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8936

Breeds May 1 to Sep 5

Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9679

Breeds elsewhere

Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds May 1 to Jul 31

Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds May 10 to Sep 10

Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria interpres morinella This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA

Breeds elsewhere

Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA

Breeds elsewhere

Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480

Breeds elsewhere

Willet Tringa semipalmata This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Apr 20 to Aug 5 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5234 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9501 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8936 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9679 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480

3.

Probability Of Presence Summary The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report.

Probability of Presence ( )

Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.

To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.

The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical…