Categorical Exclusion Form (NEPA).pdf

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

GWMP MVT(5)

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division REVISED NEPA Categorical Exclusion

Project Name: George Washington Memorial Parkway Mount Vernon Trail, Replace Bridge 23 and 24

Date: 7/25/2022

Project Number: GWMP MVT(5)

Location (City, County, State):

Fairfax County, Virginia

CE Category 23 CFR 771.117 (c)(23): Federally funded projects (i) That receive less than $6,000,000.

NOTE: This NEPA CE has been updated to include revisions to the Section 7 compliance.

This document will replace and supersede the 7/19/2019 version.

Project Description

The National Park Service (NPS) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) propose to replace Bridges 23 and 24 of the Mount Vernon Trail (MVT). This project increases safety for MVT users, improves the overall life-cycle of the trail network, and maintains the integrity of the natural and cultural resource along the George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP).

This project will provide equipment, materials, supervision, personnel and temporary traffic control for the improvement of the MVT Bridges 23 and 24. This project replaces timber Bridges 23 and 24 that are located in Dyke Marsh between Tulane Drive and Belle View Blvd. Bridge 24, a 20 -foot long bridge located near Bridge 23, is included to reduce mobilization and administration costs. Work to be completed includes demolition, removal, and appropriate disposal of construction entrances and temporary mulched detours (± 2000 feet long), signing/barricading, and temporary fencing, 200 (±5) ft. of the asphalt path at the approaches, 1018 linear feet of decking, stringers, headers, chain railing, and approximately 220 piles.

Work to be completed includes assemblage, construction, and installation of pressure treated piles (several over water) using vibratory hammers or similar methods ( diesel impact hammers are not permitted), pressure treated materials for headers, stringers, blocking and decking to conform to AW AP standards, typical MVT bridge pedestrian safe rails (wood and steel) using pressure treated lumber. Also to include milled and overlay of about 100' of damaged concrete pavement at bridge approaches.

Bridge 23 to be replaced in-kind using helical piles and "top-down" construction. Work to match the existing pile locations. The 12 foot wide deck to be replaced to provide a 10 foot wide clear zone, and to include an "overlook" widening with a bench to match the existing "overlook".

Bridge 24 to also be replaced in-kind.

GWMP MVT(5)

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division REVISED NEPA Categorical Exclusion

Summary of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Compliance

On May 7, 2019, FHWA conducted a query of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPac) database. The consultation identified one federally regulated species known to exist in the project vicinity- the Northern Long Eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis). The project was determined to be consistent with activities analyzed in the USFWS January 5, 2016, Programmatic Biological Opinion (PBO).

In 2022 the Northern Long Eared Bat was proposed for listing as an endangered species. As such, use of the 4(d) rule was invalidated by FHWA. A new species list was obtained from IPaC on July 19, 2022. In addition to the Northern Long Eared Bat, the updated list included a candidate species, the Monarch Butterfly (Danaus plexippus). No suitable habitat for the Monarch butterfly has been documented in the project area. The project would have no effect on the butterfly. For the Northern Long Eared Bat, FHWA used the Programmatic Biological Opinion for Transportation Projects within the Range of the Indiana Bat and Northern Long Eared Bat. A consistency letter was obtained from the Virginia Ecological Field Office. For the purposes of Section 7 consultation, the project “bridges” were deemed boardwalks and not considered suitable habitat. The tree cutting time of year restriction was revised to include the entire active season, April 1 – November 15.

Endangered Species Act - Federally-Listed Species under Jurisdiction of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries)

• Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum)

• Atlantic Sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus) - Chesapeake Bay Unit 2 – Potomac River

• Atlantic Sturgeon Designated Critical Habitat: Main stem from the Little Falls Dam downstream to where the main stem river discharges at its mouth into the Chesapeake Bay – full bank width

The proposed project to replace two timber boardwalk bridges along the Mount Vernon Trail would include the installation of helical piles within designated critical habitat for Atlantic sturgeon. Federal Highway Administration, Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division, evaluated the potential for the proposed action to impact shortnose or Atlantic sturgeon or destroy or adversely modify the Atlantic sturgeon’s critical habitat.

In order to avoid impacts to shortnose and Atlantic sturgeon, a time of year restriction prohibiting all in-water work will be implemented from February 15 to June 30 of any given year. The new bridges would be replaced essentially in-kind, resulting in minimal permanent impacts. Temporary impacts would be minimal due to the proposed construction methodology.

Therefore, FHWA has determined that the proposed project would have no effect on the shortnose or Atlantic sturgeon.

GWMP MVT(5)

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division REVISED NEPA Categorical Exclusion

On July 25, 2022, the NOAA Section 7 Mapper was queried to confirm the validity of the previous information. No additional species were documented. The species range and critical habitat do not extend into or overlap the project area, but are recorded approximately ½ mile downstream; therefore, the in-water restriction will be implemented to ensure conservation of the species. The project would have no effect on the NOAA regulated species.

Summary of Bald and Gold Eagle Protection Act Compliance

On May 9, 2019, FHWA queried the Center for Conservation Biology Mapping Portal and determined there are two known nests within 660 feet of the project boundaries: FF1801 (38.774716, -77.05069) and FF1402 (38.769458, -77.052299). FHWA contacted the USFWS Northeast Region Eagle Coordinator. On July 10, USFWS provided avoidance and minimization strategies to avoid disturbance of eagles. For Bridge 24, no time of year restriction was recommended as long as the project proceeds as currently proposed, which will provide adequate landscape and distance buffers. For Bridge 23, USFWS recommends implementation of a time-of-year restriction of December 15 – June 30 on project activities occurring between the point where the trail enters the northern perimeter of FF1402’s 330-foot primary buffer south to where it crosses the marshes’ main stream channel (approximately 520 linear feet of trail). Additionally, USFWS recommends a time-of-day restriction for all other activities within 660 feet of FF1402. All work should be conducted from 8 AM – 5 PM. On July 25, 2022, a review of the CCB mapping portal confirmed that the nest data is still valid. No new nests were documented in the project vicinity, Summary of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act Compliance

On April 18, 2019, the GWMP Section 106 Coordinator completed an Assessment of Actions Having an Effect on Historic Properties. The assessment concluded that the project would have no adverse effect on historic properties. The project was also found to qualify for streamlined review under the 2008 Servicewide Programmatic Agreement; therefore, no additional coordination with the State Historic Preservation Office, or Tribal Historic Preservation Offices, is required.

Additional Agency Coordination and Compliance

The GWMP superintendent signed a categorical exclusion on April 19, 2019. The document cites NPS CE C.11, Minor trail relocation, development of compatible trail networks on logging roads or other established routes, and trail maintenance and repair.

Environmental Commitments and Mitigation Measures

• Trees that are located close to the area of disturbance shall be protected as to avoid any damage or injury to the tree and root system, National Park Service staff shall be consulted during pre-construction to advise regarding limb pruning and root pruning of trees that could sustain damage from construction activities. If trees not otherwise identified as being removed

GWMP MVT(5)

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division REVISED NEPA Categorical Exclusion for the project, are damaged or injured, the contractor shall provide NPS full compensation for the loss in value provided the monetary value is determined in a credible and acceptable manner.

Vehicular traffic and storage of materials within the drip line of trees is not permitted without prior approval from an NPS representative. The contractor shall provide at least two weeks prior notice to the start of construction so that NPS can help coordinate tree protection.

• The project's contractor will conduct a field visit prior to the construction, with NPS staff, to review which shrubs and trees need to be removed and which can be avoided. The NPS shall review and approve any other trees or vegetation that may need to be removed as part of this project.

• The new helical piles shall be installed in the same locations as the existing piles and not exceed previous limits of disturbance. Care shall be taken to avoid any additional ground disturbance within the wetlands.

• Staging areas near the project area shall make use of the existing paved trail. If construction logistics require the use of additional staging areas, protective measures to avoid ground disturbance will be implemented. These measures will require the use of geotextile, timber matting, pallets, or other suitable material to eliminate ground disturbance. The NPS will review and approve the location of any proposed staging areas, as well as proposed methods to avoid disturbance.

• Any temporary trail detours shall be designed to avoid ground disturbance, Geotextile or other suitable separation material would be placed directly on the ground surface. The temporary trail surface would be placed directly on the separation material. After construction, the temporary trail will be carefully removed by hand to avoid ground disturbances. The NPS will review and approve the location of any proposed temporary trails, as well as proposed methods to avoid disturbance.

• Any park infrastructure impacted during the project, including but not limited to paved and unpaved roadways, walkways, turf, shall be restored to pre-construction conditions upon completion of the project.

• In the event that artifacts are inadvertently discovered during construction work, workers on-site will notify the project leader and GWMP Cultural Resource Management immediately and work stopped until the site can be examined or otherwise determined okay to proceed with construction work.

• Tree clearing will not occur during the Northern Long Eared Bat pup season from June 1- July 31.

GWMP MVT(5)

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division REVISED NEPA Categorical Exclusion

• For Bridge 23, no work will occur from December 15 – June 30 between the point where the trail enters the northern perimeter of FF1402’s 330-foot primary buffer south to where it crosses the marshes’ main stream channel (approximately 520 linear feet of trail).

• A time-of-day restriction will be imposed for all other activities within 660 feet of FF1402. All work should be conducted from 8 AM – 5 PM.

• In order to avoid impacts to shortnose and Atlantic sturgeon, a time of year restriction prohibiting all in-water work will be implemented from February 15 to June 30 of any given year.

GWMP MVT(5)

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division REVISED NEPA Categorical Exclusion

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.

Ryan Kimberley Environmental Team Leader (acting) Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division Federal Highway Administration

RYAN DEFOREST

KIMBERLEY

Digitally signed by RYAN

DEFOREST KIMBERLEY

Date: 2022.07.25 13:51:01 -04'00'

GWMP MVT(5)

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division REVISED NEPA Categorical Exclusion

Appendix A: Environmental Screening Form

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act:

Are Federally-listed species present in the study area? Yes, species listed in Notesi No If Yes, effects determination:

No Effect May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect Is a Biological Assessment needed? Yes No

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, a Phase I Archeological Investigation is needed No Effects determination:

No Historic Properties Affected No Adverse Effect Adverse Effect, MOA Needed Is tribal consultation needed? 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 disturbance threshold likely be exceeded and require a permit and SWPPP?

Yes, see Notes for information regarding requirementsii No Is Stormwater Management Review/Approval anticipated? Yes No

Project is consistent with Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands Water permit mitigation measures must be incorporated into project.

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 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

GWMP MVT(5)

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division REVISED NEPA Categorical Exclusion

Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972:

Is the project in a Coastal Zone? Yes No If yes, is a Federal Consistency Review needed? Yes No

Right of Way:

Is the project is completely within Federal right-of-way? Yes No If no, will the project require relocations or easements? Yes No Number of Easements________ Number of Relocations________

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 If Yes, review by river-administering agency is required.

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 (not applicable since it is a trail)

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).

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?

Yes No Does the project affect any other resources not listed above? Explain below and list anticipated permits:

Erosion and Sediment Control Review, NPDES (if disturbance is 1 acre or greater), 404/USACE permit, 401

Water Quality Cert.

i Federally-listed species in County:

ii NPDES Permit Requirements:

Memorandum

Subject: GWMP MVT(5) Federally Protected Species, Designated Critical Habitat, and Essential Fish Habitat

Date: July 25, 2022

From: Ryan Kimberley Environmental Protection Specialist Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

To: File

Endangered Species Act - Federally-Listed Species under Jurisdiction of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries)

Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) Atlantic Sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus) - Chesapeake Bay Unit 2 – Potomac River Atlantic Sturgeon Designated Critical Habitat: Main stem from the Little Falls Dam downstream to where the main stem river discharges at its mouth into the Chesapeake Bay – full bank width

The proposed project to replace two timber boardwalk bridges along the Mount Vernon Trail would include the installation of helical piles within designated critical habitat for Atlantic sturgeon. Federal Highway Administration, Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division, evaluated the potential for the proposed action to impact shortnose or Atlantic sturgeon or destroy or adversely modify the Atlantic sturgeon’s critical habitat.

This project will replace timber Bridges 23 and 24 in Dyke Marsh between Tulane Drive and Belle View Boulevard. Bridge 24 is 20 feet long and will be replaced in kind along its existing alignment. Bridge 23 is approximately 1,000 feet long and will also be replaced along its current alignment using the existing pile locations to the extent possible. The bridge deck will be widened by two feet to enhance safety. A small section of the bridge will be slightly realigned to preserve a large oak tree. Work to be completed includes demolition of the existing bridges, construction of the new bridges, repaving of the bridge approaches, temporary trail access, temporary construction access, and repaving of an adjacent segment of the Parkway.

Disturbance to the site will be minimized by using a top-down construction method instead of operating within the wetlands and stream. Pile replacement areas will be stabilized immediately to minimize erosion. Temporary turbidity curtains will be installed within the perennial channel to control potential sediment during in-water pile replacement. After repairs are completed, would be restored to pre-construction conditions. The proposed project would maintain existing pile locations, and will not include any additional riprap or other fill, and so would not destroy or adversely modify the critical habitat.

In order to avoid impacts to shortnose and Atlantic sturgeon, a time of year restriction prohibiting all in-water work will be implemented from February 15 to June 30 of any given year. The new bridges would be replaced essentially in-kind, resulting in minimal permanent impacts. Temporary impacts would be minimal due to the proposed construction methodology.

Therefore, FHWA has determined that the proposed project would have no effect on the shortnose or Atlantic sturgeon.

On July 25, 2022, the NOAA Section 7 Mapper was queried to confirm the validity of the previous information. No additional species were documented. The species range and critical habitat do not extend into or overlap the project area, but are recorded approximately ½ mile downstream; therefore, the in-water restriction will be implemented to ensure conservation of the species. The project would have no effect on the NOAA regulated species.

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV):

Bathymetric mapping was not obtained for this project, and so topographic mapping extends only to the vicinity of Mean Low Water (MLW). The new bridges would be replaced essentially in-kind using the existing pile locations, resulting in no permanent impacts to SAV.

Construction methods have been specified to avoid disturbance to the extent possible. No temporary structures or dewatering are proposed. Temporary impacts would be negligible.

Essential Fish Habitat (EFH):

The 2018 amendments to the Magnuson-Stevens Act set forth a mandate for NMFS, regional Fishery Management Councils (FMC), and other Federal agencies to identify and protect EFH of economically important marine and estuarine fisheries. A review of the NMFS database indicates eight EFH species are present near the project area and no Habitat Areas of Particular Concern.

The eight EFH species are: Little Skate, Atlantic Herring, Red Hake, Winter Skate, Clearnose Skate, Windowpane flounder, Bluefish, and Summer Flounder.

The project would include the in-kind replacement of two pedestrian bridges, including the placement of 212 helical piles in tidally-influenced wetland areas (93 square feet PFO impacts, and 68 square feet of PEM impacts). These impacts are nearly identical to the existing pile impacts, so no permanent loss of EFH will occur.

The project would temporarily impact an area potentially utilized by EFH species. Ground disturbance and associated sedimentation will be minimized by the use of a “top down” construction method and same day soil stabilization. The piles will be “screwed” into the ground and not driven using a pile driver or other percussive device. This will minimize potential acoustic impacts.

The FHWA has determined that the replacement of the bridges would result in slight temporary adverse effects to EFH; however, the effect on EFH would not be substantial and the minimization measures would appropriately mitigate for the adverse effects. The project would not result in any long-term adverse effects to EFH.

Endangered Species Act - Federally-Listed Species under Jurisdiction of the US Fish and Wildlife Service

On May 7, 2019, FHWA conducted a query of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPac) database. The IPac list was verified on December 17, 2019. The consultation identified one federally regulated species known to exist in the project vicinity- the Northern Long Eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis). The project was determined to be consistent with activities analyzed in the USFWS January 5, 2016, Programmatic Biological Opinion (PBO). The Action may affect the northern long-eared bat;

however, any take that may occur as a result of the Action is not prohibited under the ESA Section 4(d) rule adopted for this species at 50 CFR §17.40(o). As a voluntary conservation measure, FHWA will not conduct any tree clearing during the Northern Long Eared Bat pup season from June 1- July 31.

In 2022 the Northern Long Eared Bat was proposed for listing as an endangered species. As such, use of the 4(d) rule was invalidated by FHWA. A new species list was obtained from IPaC on July 19, 2022. In addition to the Northern Long Eared Bat, the updated list included a candidate species, the Monarch Butterfly (Danaus plexippus). No suitable habitat for the Monarch butterfly has been documented in the project area. The project would have no effect on the butterfly. For the Northern Long Eared Bat, FHWA used the Programmatic Biological Opinion for Transportation Projects within the Range of the Indiana Bat and Northern Long Eared Bat. A consistency letter was obtained from the Virginia Ecological Field Office. For the purposes of Section 7 consultation, the project “bridges” were deemed boardwalks and not considered suitable habitat. The tree cutting time of year restriction was revised to include the entire active season, April 1 – November 15.

Summary of Bald and Gold Eagle Protection Act Compliance

On May 9, 2019, FHWA queried the Center for Conservation Biology (CCB) Mapping Portal and determined there are two known nests within 660 feet of the project boundaries: FF1801 (38.774716, -77.05069) and FF1402 (38.769458, -77.052299). FHWA contacted the USFWS Northeast Region Eagle Coordinator. On July 10, USFWS provided avoidance and minimization strategies to avoid disturbance of eagles. For Bridge 24, no time of year restriction was recommended as long as the project proceeds as currently proposed, which will provide adequate landscape and distance buffers. For Bridge 23, USFWS recommends implementation of a time-of-year restriction of December 15 – June 30 on project activities occurring between the point where the trail enters the northern perimeter of FF1402’s 330-foot primary buffer south to where it crosses the marshes’ main stream channel (approximately 520 linear feet of trail). Additionally, USFWS recommends a time-of-day restriction for all other activities within 660 feet of FF1402. All work should be conducted from 8 AM – 5 PM.

On July 25, 2022, a review of the CCB mapping portal confirmed that the nest data is still valid. No new nests were documented in the project vicinity, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

NORFOLK DISTRICT

FORT NORFOLK

803 FRONT STREET

NORFOLK VA 23510-1011

31 December 2019

Virginia Special Projects Regulatory Section NAO-2019-02067 (Dyke Marsh, unnamed Potomac River tributary)

Federal Highway Administration c/o Mr. Kevin Rose 21400 Ridgetop Circle Sterling, VA 20166

Dear Mr. Rose:

This is in regard to your proposed project to replace existing open-pile footbridges 23 and 24 of the Mount Vernon Trail that cross wetlands and other waters associated with an unnamed tributary to the Potomac River, in Fairfax, Virginia. The proposed work is depicted on the attached marked up project drawings (3 sheets) entitled Erosion & Sediment Control Plan, Trail Bridge #23 that our office received from Mr. Ryan Kimberley (Federal Highway Administration) on 20 December 2019.

Upon review of your application, attached project plans, and further clarification from your office, it appears that your project does not involve a permanent or temporary discharge of dredged or fill material in waters of the U.S., nor does it include any structure or activity in, over, or under a navigable water of the U.S. Therefore, your proposed project as described does not require Department of the Army authorization pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (RHA). This letter does not address nor include any consideration for geographic jurisdiction on aquatic resources and shall not be interpreted as such.

Should your plans change or should you wish to obtain a jurisdictional determination from the Corps, please contact this office immediately to determine if a CWA or RHA permit is required for those changes.

Please note that we are relying on the information and data provided by the applicant or agent in the permit application. If such information and data subsequently prove to be materially false or materially incomplete, this no permit required determination may be suspended or revoked and/or the Government may institute appropriate legal proceedings. Please obtain all required State and local approvals prior to commencing with the proposed work.

CENAO-WRR-C

SUBJECT: NAO-2019-02067

We sincerely appreciate your efforts to comply with the Federal laws. If you have any further questions about the Corps’ regulatory program, please contact me at (757) 201- 7488 or via email at david.a.knepper@usace.army.mil.

Sincerely, David A. Knepper Environmental Scientist Virginia Special Projects

Regulatory Section

Enclosures

Impact Site Number 1, Piers 1-58 PFO- Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Pile installations: 116 x 1' diameter Piers Permanent Impact/fill- 93 square feet

PFO Wetland boundary

GWMP MVT-5 WETLAND IMPACT DRAWINGS

US Army Corps of Engineers Norfolk District Regulatory Branch

Received by DAK Date: 20 Dec 2019

Impact Site Number 1, Piers 1-58 PFO- Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland 116 piles x 1' diameter (0.8 sf each) Permanent Impact/Fill- 93 square feet

PFO Wetland Boundary

Impact Site Number 2- Piers 59-64 CNV- Channel, Non Vegetated 12 piles, 1' diameter (0.8 sf per) Permanent Impact- 4 cy fill Stream Impact- 16 linear feet x 60 feet wide span

CNV Boundary

Impact Site Number 3- Piers 65-106 PEM- Freshwater Emergent Wetland 84 Piles, 1' diameter (0.8 sf each) Permanent Impact/Fill- 68 square feet

PEM Boundary

U S A rm y C orps of Engineers N orfolk D istrict R egulatory Branch R eceived by D A

K

D ate: 20 D ec 2019

Impact Site Number 3- Piers 65-106 PEM- Freshwater Emergent Wetland 84 Piles, 1' diameter (0.8 sf each) Permanent Impact/Fill- 68 square feet

PEM Boundary

U S A rm y C orps of Engineers N orfolk D istrict R egulatory Branch R eceived by D A

K

D ate: 20 D ec 2019

COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Street address: 1111 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219

Mailing address: P.O. Box 1105, Richmond, Virginia 23218 www.deq.virginia.gov

Matthew J. Strickler Secretary of Natural Resources

David K. Paylor Director

(804) 698-4000 1-800-592-5482

November 26, 2019

Mr. Ryan Kimberley Federal Highway Administration 21400 Ridgetop Circle Sterling, Virginia 20166 Via email: ryan.kimberley@dot.gov

RE: Federal Consistency Determination for the George Washington Memorial Parkway, Replacement of Mount Vernon Trail Bridges 23 and 24, Federal Highway Administration, Fairfax County, DEQ 19-122F.

Dear Mr. Kimberley:

The Commonwealth of Virginia has completed its review of the Federal Consistency Determination (FCD) for the above-referenced project. The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is responsible for coordinating Virginia's review of FCDs submitted under the Coastal Zone Management Act and responding to appropriate officials on behalf of the Commonwealth. This letter is in response to the FCD received October 3, 2019, from the Federal Highway Administration. The following agencies and locality participated in this review:

Department of Environmental Quality Department of Game and Inland Fisheries Department of Conservation and Recreation Marine Resources Commission Department of Health Department of Historic Resources Department of Transportation Fairfax County

In addition, the Northern Virginia Regional Commission was invited to comment on the proposal.

Replacement of Mount Vernon Trail Bridges 23 and 24

FHWA FCD, DEQ 19-122F

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in cooperation with the National Park Service (NPS), proposes to replace and realign Mount Vernon Trail (MVT) Bridges 23 and 24 within the George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP) in Fairfax County, Virginia. The project will replace timber Bridges 23 and 24 in Dyke Marsh between Tulane Drive and Belle View Boulevard.

Bridge 24 is 20 feet long and will be replaced in kind along its existing alignment.

Bridge 23 is approximately 1,000 feet long and will also be replaced along its current alignment using the existing pile locations to the extent possible. The bridge deck will be widened by two feet to enhance safety. A small section of the bridge will be slightly realigned to preserve a large oak tree. Work to be completed includes demolition of the existing bridges, construction of the new bridges, repaving of the bridge approaches, temporary trail access, temporary construction access, and repaving of an adjacent segment of the Parkway.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

In accordance with 15 CFR §930.2, the public was invited to participate in the review of the FCD. Public notice of this proposed action was published in the OEIR Program Newsletter and on the DEQ website from October 11, 2019 through November 8, 2019.

No public comments were received in response to the notice.

FEDERAL CONSISTENCY UNDER THE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT

Pursuant to the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, federal activities located inside or outside of Virginia’s designated coastal management area that can have reasonably foreseeable effects on coastal resources or coastal uses must be implemented in a manner consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the Virginia Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Program. The Virginia CZM Program consists of a network of programs administered by several agencies. The DEQ coordinates the review of FCDs with agencies administering the enforceable and advisory policies of the Program.

FEDERAL CONSISTENCY CONCURRENCE

Based on our review of the consistency determination and the comments submitted by agencies administering the enforceable policies of the Virginia CZM Program, DEQ concurs that the proposal is consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the Program provided all applicable permits and approvals are obtained as described below. If, prior to implementation, the proposed activities should change significantly and any of the enforceable policies of the Virginia CZM Program would be affected, pursuant to 15 CFR, Part 930, Subpart C, §930.46(a), FHWA must submit supplemental information to DEQ for review and approval. However, other state approvals which may apply to this project are not included in this consistency concurrence. Therefore, the applicant must ensure that this project is constructed and operated in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations.

FEDERAL CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS

According to information in the FCD, the proposed project would have no effect on the following enforceable policies: dunes management; point source pollution control; and shoreline sanitation. The agencies responsible for the administration of the enforceable policies of the Virginia CZM Program generally agree with the determination. FHWA must ensure that the proposed action is consistent with the aforementioned policies. In addition, DEQ encourages the FHWA to consider project impacts to the advisory policies of the Virginia CZM Program in accordance with 15 CFR §930.39(c). The analysis which follows responds to the discussion of the enforceable policies of the Virginia CZM Program that apply to this project and review comments submitted by agencies that administer the enforceable policies.

1. Fisheries Management. According to the FCD (page 2), project involving ground disturbance have the potential to impact aquatic organisms both on-site and downstream. FHWA will implement strict erosion and sediment control practices, and other Best Management Practices (BMP), to minimize impacts.

1(a) Agency Jurisdiction. The fisheries management enforceable policy is administered by the Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC) (Virginia Code §28.2-200 to §28.2-713) and the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (DGIF) (Virginia Code §29.1-100 to §29.1-570). In addition, the Virginia Department of Health (VDH) Division of Shellfish Sanitation (DSS) is responsible for protecting the health of the consumers of molluscan shellfish and crustacea by ensuring that shellfish growing waters are properly classified for harvesting, and that molluscan shellfish and crustacea processing facilities meet sanitation standards.

1(b) Agency Findings.

(i) Virginia Marine Resources Commission

VMRC finds that the project has the potential to impact aquatic species through erosion.

While VMRC has no objection to the FHWA’s finding of consistency, VMRC’s final consistency recommendation cannot be reached until completion of its permit review.

(ii) Department of Game and Inland Fisheries

DGIF finds that an area of the Potomac River immediately downstream of the project area has been designated an Anadromous Fish Use Area.

(iii) Department of Health

VDH-DSS did not indicate that the project would affect shellfish resources under its jurisdiction.

1(c) Requirement. The FHWA must submit a Joint Permit Application (JPA) to VMRC for its review to ensure the protection of fisheries resources. Any permit issued by the VMRC will specify necessary special conditions for the project.

1(d) Recommendations. DGIF offers the following recommendations for the protection of fisheries resources from project activities.

Adhere to a time-of-year restriction from February 15 through June 30 of any year to ensure protection of anadromous fishes associated with instream work.

Conduct instream activities during low or no-flow conditions.

Use non-erodible cofferdams or turbidity curtains to isolate the construction area.

Block no more than 50% of the streamflow at any given time.

Stockpile excavated material in a manner that prevents reentry into the stream.

Restore original streambed and streambank contours.

Revegetate barren areas with native vegetation.

Implement strict erosion and sediment control measures Use matting made from natural/organic materials such as coir fiber, jute, and/or burlap to minimize potential wildlife entanglements resulting from use of synthetic/plastic erosion and sediment control matting.

Install concrete, whether by the Tremie method, grout bags or the traditional pouring of concrete, only “in the dry” so that the concrete has hardened and cured prior to contact with open water, to minimize harm to the aquatic environment and species.

Construct stream crossings via clear-span bridges, due to future maintenance costs associated with culverts and the loss of riparian and aquatic habitat.

However, if this is not possible, countersink culverts below the streambed at least 6 inches or use bottomless culverts to allow passage of aquatic organisms.

Install floodplain culverts to carry bankfull discharges.

1(e) Conclusion. This project will be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the fisheries management enforceable policy of the Virginia CZM Program provided the applicant obtains and complies with any conditions contained in a VMRC permit issued for the protection of fisheries resources, and the implementation of appropriate erosion and sediment control measures.

2. Subaqueous Lands Management. According to the FCD (page 2), construction of Bridge 23 will include helical piles within the stream channel to support the timber bridge. Longer spans are not feasible with this bridge type. Impacts will be minimized by reusing the existing pile locations to the maximum extent practicable.

2(a) Agency Jurisdiction. The management program for subaqueous lands establishes conditions for granting or denying permits to use state-owned bottomlands based on considerations of potential effects on marine and fisheries resources, tidal wetlands, adjacent or nearby properties, anticipated public and private benefits, and water quality standards established by the Department of Environmental Quality. The program is administered by the Virginia Marine Resources Commission (Virginia Code §28.2-1200 to §28.2-1213).

2(b) Agency Findings. VMRC finds that the project crosses state-owned subaqueous lands and will require a permit. While VMRC has no objection to the FHWA’s finding of consistency, VMRC’s final consistency recommendation cannot be reached until completion of its permit review.

2(c) Requirement. FHWA must coordinate with VMRC through the JPA process to obtain a permit for proposed impacts to subaqueous lands.

2(d) Conclusion. The proposed action will be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the subaqueous lands management enforceable policy of the Virginia CZM Program, provided FHWA obtains and complies with the conditions of a VMRC issued permit.

3. Wetlands Management. According to the FCD (page 2), helical piles will be driven into wetland areas. No feasible alternative exists to avoid the wetlands, but impacts will be minimized to the extent practicable. Temporary impacts due to construction will also occur. Construction access impacts will be minimized by using a "top down" construction methodology that allows construction from the bridge deck instead of using a parallel access road.

3(a) Agency Jurisdiction. The wetlands management enforceable policy is administered by the Virginia Marine Resources Commission (tidal wetlands) (Virginia Code §28.2-1301 through 28.2-1320) and the Department of Environmental Quality through the Virginia Water Protection Permit program (tidal and non-tidal wetlands) (Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:20 and Water Quality Certification pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act).

3(b) Agency Findings.

(i) Virginia Marine Resources Commission

VMRC finds that the project may require a tidal wetlands permit from the Fairfax County Wetlands Board.

(ii) Department of Environmental Quality

The Virginia Water Protection (VWP) Permit program at DEQ-NRO finds that a VWP permit may be required should impacts to surface waters be necessary.

3(c) Requirements. Review of the project for surface water and wetland impacts by DEQ, VMRC and the local wetlands board is initiated by the submission of a JPA to VMRC. The VWP Permit staff at DEQ-NRO reserves the right to provide comments upon receipt of a JPA requesting authorization to impact state surface waters. DEQ VWP Permit staff will review the JPA in accordance with the VWP permit program regulations and current program guidance.

3(d) Recommendations. In general, DEQ recommends that stream and wetland impacts be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. To minimize unavoidable impacts to wetlands and waterways, DEQ recommends the following practices:

Operate machinery and construction vehicles outside of stream-beds and wetlands; use synthetic mats when in-stream work is unavoidable.

Preserve the top 12 inches of trench material removed from wetlands for use as wetland seed and root-stock in the excavated area.

Erosion and sediment controls should be in place prior to clearing and grading, and maintained in good working order to minimize impacts to state waters. The controls should remain in place until the area is stabilized.

Place heavy equipment, located in temporarily impacted wetland areas, on mats, geotextile fabric, or use other suitable measures to minimize soil disturbance, to the maximum extent practicable.

Restore all temporarily disturbed wetland areas to pre-construction conditions and plant or seed with appropriate wetlands vegetation in accordance with the cover type (emergent, scrub-shrub, or forested). The applicant should take all appropriate measures to promote revegetation of these areas. Stabilization and restoration efforts should occur immediately after the temporary disturbance of each wetland area instead of waiting until the entire project has been completed.

Place all materials which are temporarily stockpiled in wetlands, designated for use for the immediate stabilization of wetlands, on mats, geotextile fabric in order to prevent entry in state waters. These materials should be managed in a manner that prevents leachates from entering state waters and must be entirely removed within thirty days following completion of that construction activity. The disturbed areas should be returned to their original contours, stabilized within thirty days following removal of the stockpile, and restored to the original vegetated state.

Flag or clearly mark all non-impacted surface waters within the project or right-of-way limits that are within 50 feet of any clearing, grading, or filling activities for the life of the construction activity within that area. The project proponent should notify all contractors that these marked areas are surface waters where no activities are to occur.

Employ measures to prevent spills of fuels or lubricants into state waters.

3(e) Conclusion. The project will be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the wetlands management enforceable policy of the Virginia CZM Program, provided the applicant obtains and complies with the conditions of any necessary permits issued by the local wetlands board or the VWP Permit program at DEQ-NRO.

4. Nonpoint Source Pollution Control. The FCD (page 2) states that the project is not expected to disturb more than 10,000 square feet and would not be subject to erosion and sediment control review. The final area of disturbance will be confirmed during design. An Erosion and Sediment Control review certification will be obtained if the area of proposed disturbance exceeds the threshold. FHWA will implement strict erosion and sediment control practices and BMP measures to minimize impacts.

4(a) Agency Jurisdiction. The DEQ Office of Stormwater Management (OSWM) administers the nonpoint source pollution control enforceable policy of the Virginia CZM Program through Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Law and Regulations (VESCL&R) and Virginia Stormwater Management Law and Regulations (VSWML&R).

In addition, DEQ is responsible for the issuance, denial, revocation, termination and enforcement of the Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activities related to municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) and construction activities for the control of stormwater discharges from MS4s and land disturbing activities under the Virginia Stormwater Management Program.

4(b) Requirements.

(i) Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater Management Plans

Federal agencies and their authorized agents conducting regulated land-disturbing activities on private and public lands in the state must comply with VESCL&R and VSWML&R, including coverage under the general permit for stormwater discharge from construction activities, and other applicable federal nonpoint source pollution mandates (e.g. Clean Water Act-Section 313, federal consistency under the Coastal Zone Management Act). Clearing and grading activities, installation of staging areas, parking lots, roads, buildings, utilities, borrow areas, soil stockpiles, and related land-disturbing activities that result in the total land disturbance of equal to or greater than 2,500 square feet in Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas would be regulated by VESCL&R.

Accordingly, the FHWA must prepare and implement an erosion and sediment control (ESC) plan to ensure compliance with state law and regulations.

Land-disturbing activities that result in the total land disturbance of equal to or greater than 2,500 square feet in Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area would be regulated by VSWML&R. Accordingly, the FHWA must prepare and implement a Stormwater Management (SWM) plan to ensure compliance with state law and regulations. The ESC/SWM plan is submitted to DEQ-NRO which serves the area where the project is located for review for compliance. The FHWA is ultimately responsible for achieving project compliance through oversight of on-site contractors, regular field inspection, prompt action against non-compliant sites, and other mechanisms consistent with agency policy. [Reference: VESCL 62.1-44.15 et seq.]

(ii) General VPDES Permit for Discharges of Stormwater from Construction

Activities (VAR10)

The owner or operator of projects involving land-disturbing activities of equal to or greater than 1 acre is required to register for coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Stormwater from Construction Activities and develop a project-specific Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Construction activities requiring registration also include land disturbance of less than one acre of total land area that is part of a larger common plan of development or sale if the larger common plan of development will collectively disturb equal to or greater than one acre. The SWPPP must be prepared prior to submission of the registration statement for coverage under the general permit and the SWPPP must address water quality and quantity in accordance with the VSMP Permit Regulations. General information and registration forms for the General Permit are available at:

http://www.deq.virginia.gov/Programs/Water/StormwaterManagement/VSMPPermits/Co nstructionGeneralPermit.aspx. [Reference: Virginia Stormwater Management Act 62.1- §44.15 et seq.] VSMP Permit Regulations 9 VAC 25-870-10 et seq.].

4(c) Recommendation. DEQ-NRO recommends that consideration should be given to using permeable paving where appropriate, and that denuded areas are promptly revegetated following construction work.

4(d) Conclusion. The project is consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the nonpoint source pollution control enforceable policy of the Virginia CZM Program, provided the activities comply with applicable ESC and SWM requirements.

5. Air Pollution Control. The FCD (page 2) states that the project is located in Fairfax County, which is designated as an 8-Hour ozone nonattainment area. The proposal will not result in increased air pollution since it promotes the use of non-motorized transportation and will not result in an increased capacity. BMPs will be implemented to minimize air pollution during construction.

5(a) Agency Jurisdiction. The DEQ air program implements the federal Clean Air Act to provide a legally enforceable State Implementation Plan for the attainment and maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This program is administered by the State Air Pollution Control Board at DEQ (Virginia Code §10-1.1300 through §10.1- 1320).

5(b) Agency Findings. According to the DEQ Air Division, the project site is located in an ozone (O3) non-attainment area and emission control area for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), which are contributors to ozone pollution.

5(c) Recommendation. All precautions should be taken to restrict the emissions of VOCs and NOx during construction principally by controlling or limiting the burning of fossil fuels.

5(d) Requirements.

(i)…