Categorical Exclusion Form (NEPA).pdf

For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in

Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later.

Get Adobe Reader Now!

http://www.adobe.com/go/reader

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04) NP MD CHOH 206(1), 913(1), 928(1), etc.

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

Project Number: NP MD CHOH 206(1), 913(1), 928(1), etc. Date: 7/5/2022

Project Name: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park, Lock 25, Dargan Bridge, Fifteen Mile Creek Bridge, and Culvert 82

Location: National Park Service, Chesapeake and Ohio National Historical Park Montgomery, Washington, Allegany & Frederick Counties, Maryland

CE Category 23 CFR 771.117 (c)(28): Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings, if the actions meet the constraints in paragraph (e) of this section.

NPS CE Citation: 3.3.C.18 Construction of minor structures, including small improved parking lots, in previously disturbed or developed areas.

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

Project Description

NP CHOH 206(1), 913(1), 928(1):

PMIS # 249241 Structure Number 3100-0001P, Lock 25 Bridge and Structure Number 3100-0039, Lock 25 Box Culvert: Replace the existing bridge, pave bridge approaches and address bicyclist and pedestrian safety concerns with a new bridge rail. Repoint and reset stone masonry on the existing box culvert wingwalls, replace the box culvert railing and timber bollards at the approaches with steel-backed timber guardrail. Bridge and box culvert will be closed during the construction. County: Montgomery County, MD.

PMIS # 249245 Structure Number 3100-0005P Dargan Bridge: Replace the existing bridge, pave bridge approaches, address bicyclist and pedestrian safety concerns with a new bridge rail.

Bridge will be closed during the construction. County: Washington County, MD.

PMIS # 249247 Structure Number 3100-0013 Fifteen Mile Creek Bridge: Replace the existing bridge, pave bridge approaches and address bicyclist and pedestrian safety concerns with a new bridge rail. Bridge will be closed during the construction. County: Allegany County, MD.

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)

PMIS # 227524 Culvert 82 (39°18'26.70"N, 77°35'7.70"W): This structure was added during the 70% design. In May of 2018, a large flash flood on Little Catoctin Creek washed out Culvert 82 (comprised of masonry with a 16-foot span). The canal embankment and towpath also washed out. Leave the remnants of the existing historic culvert in place. Construct a new pedestrian bridge, approximately 115 feet long, over the existing culvert. Reconstruct the gravel trail approaches, replace an existing 18-inch metal pipe with a plastic pipe. The trail traffic will continue using the existing low water crossing during the construction. County: Frederick County, MD.

Environmental Commitments and Mitigation Measures

For Lock 25, Dargan Bridge and Fifteen Mile Creek projects:

• Minimum clearing distance of 3 inches is required between the low chord of the bridge and the top of coping on the lock walls at Edward’s Ferry (Lock 25 project).

• Work must avoid remnants of the historic pivot bridge foundation at Edward’s Ferry (Lock

25 project).

• Archeological monitoring during excavation is required at all sites.

For Culvert 82 project:

• An additional assessment of effects is required if temporary bridge remains 5 years from construction date or is proposed as final solution. As this bridge is proposed as an interim measure, a final management solution will be designed and reviewed separately with additional assessment of effects of any proposed future action.

• Equipment staging must be limited to previously disturbed areas as approved by park Resources Management staff.

Summary of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Compliance Listed species for the four sites include Northern Long Eared Bat (Threatened), Indiana Bat (Endangered) and the Monarch Butterfly (Candidate). The National Park Service determined the proposed project actions will have no effect to listed species. There are no known maternity or roost trees for Northern Long Eared Bat in the project vicinities. The trees that will be removed are not suited habitat for the listed bats, or the candidate butterfly. The Federal Highway Administration, Eastern Federal Lands, concurs with the National Park Service’s determination of no effect to listed species as a result of the proposed project actions.

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

Summary of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act Compliance The C&O Canal is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Additionally, a large portion of the canal is designated a National Historic District. The Lock 25 box culvert’s stone masonry will be repaired to match existing. Instructions will be added to the project to take photos before the repair, match the repairs to the existing appearance and to reuse as much of the existing stone as possible. The CO will have to approve any new stone sources. The existing Culvert 82 will not be disturbed during the construction of the new bridge at this site. On June 22, 2022, the National Park Service informed the Federal Highway Administration, Eastern Federal Lands, that the Maryland State Historical Preservation Office determined the proposed actions would have no adverse effect on historic properties.

Additional Agency Coordination and Compliance The projects need erosion and sediment control (ESC) and stormwater management (SWM) approvals or exemptions from the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). MDE is in the process of reviewing the applications for ESC and SWM. MDE is also reviewing the projects for floodplain and stream temporary and permanent impacts. There are no wetland impacts associated with the proposed projects. The US Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District, (Corps) may issue a Nationwide Permit (NWP) or other general permit, for the temporary crossing at Culvert 82. However, the NWP(s) or general permit which cover temporary crossings are non-reporting permits, as such, if the Corps does not respond to the permit request after 45 days of receipt, the applicant can assume coverage under the NWP(s) or other general permit for the temporary crossing at Culvert 82. The Corps’ received the application on May 19, 2022.

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.

____________________________________ _July 5, 2022_ Nicholle Braspennickx 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, see Notesi ☒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

If Yes, De Minimis Finding:☐ Programmatic:☐ Individual 4(f): ☐

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

Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund:

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

• 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)

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

Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) ESC, SWM approvals or exemptions. MDE floodplain / stream channel alteration (temporary) approval. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers general permit, including NWP, for temporary stream impacts at Culvert 82.

i Federally-listed species per U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s IPaC:

2022-07-05T09:59:19-0400

NICHOLLE MARIE BRASPENNICKX

2022-07-06T11:02:11-0400

KEVIN S ROSE

National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park

Date: 06/22/2022

Categorical Exclusion Documentation Form (CE Form)

Project: Replacement of Lock 25, Dargan, Fifteen Mile Creek Bridges & Rehabilitation of Lock 25 Culvert

PEPC Project Number: 108408

Description of Action (Project Description):

This project will replace three public, vehicular bridges in the Chesapeake & Ohio (C&O) Canal National Historical Park at

Edwards Ferry (Mile Marker 30.84), Dargan Bend Recreation Area (MM 64.89), and Fifteen Mile Creek Campground (MM

140.77). An existing culvert beneath the roadway at Edwards Ferry will also be rehabilitated as part of this project. Both the bridges at Dargan Bend and Fifteen Mile Creek are experiencing significant deterioration and have reached the end of their service life, at Edward's Ferry a temporary bridge was installed as an interim measure (see PEPC 99957) which will be removed and replaced with a permanent structure with this contract. The proposed bridges are designed by the Federal

Highway Administration, Eastern Federal Lands Division (FHWA-EFLD) and will be constructed to carry live loads of HL-

93 vehicles. Tasks associated with the work will include (but not limited too) mobilization, establishment of site controls, earthwork, concrete work, masonry work, bridge work, fencing, site restoration, and demobilization. Geotechnical investigations for these structures have already been completed in accordance with PEPC 98189.

The proposed bridge at Edwards Ferry will replace the temporary steel spanner bridge that was installed by NPS staff in 2021 in an effort to allow visitors to gain access to the Edwards Ferry Boat Ramp until the permanent bridge is designed and constructed. The bridge spans Lock #25 of the C&O Canal and vehicles must cross the towpath in order to gain access to the

Potomac River. The proposed multi-beam steel bridge will measure 40-foot long by 12-foot wide (10-foot-wide travel lane) and include timber decking and railings. The bridge will be set in concrete abutments, which will be anchored with eight (8), 9-5/8" diameter micro-piles in each abutment. An archaeological assessment was conducted by NPS in 2021 when the temporary bridge was placed and found the remnants of historic pivot bridge footings behind the lock walls. Protection of the historic structures had been incorporated into the design to ensure that the bridge will clear the lock walls and pivot bridge footings. There will be a minimum 3-inch clear distance between the low chord of the bridge and the top of coping on the lock walls. Re-paving for this bridge will extend up to Jarboe's Store limit on the riverside and beyond the existing trail counter loop system on the landside.

The flume culvert under the roadway adjacent to Lock 25 will also be rehabilitated as part of this project. The existing stacked stone masonry wingwalls will be repaired or rebuilt so that their characteristic matches the original. The existing timber guardrail that has failed will also be replaced with a new steel-backed timber guardrail.

The proposed bridge at Dargan Bend will replace a multi-beam steel bridge with timber decking that built in 1969 and reconstructed in 1985. The bridge spans the C&O Canal and vehicles must cross the towpath in order to gain access to the

Dargan Bend Boat Ramp on the Potomac River. The proposed multi-beam steel bridge will measure 42-foot long by 12-foot wide (10-foot-wide travel lane) and include timber decking and railings. The bridge will be set in concrete abutments, which will be anchored with sixteen (16), 9-5/8" diameter micro-piles in each abutment. Paving for the approaches of this bridge will extend to the edge of the boat ramp on the riverside and to the flared section of the parking area on the landside.

The proposed bridge at Fifteen Mile Creek will replace a multi-beam steel bridge with timber decking that built in 1969 and reconstructed in 1995. The bridge spans the C&O Canal and vehicles must cross the towpath in order to gain access to the

Fifteen Mile Creek Campground. The proposed multi-beam steel bridge will measure 42-foot long by 12-foot wide (10-foot-wide travel lane) and include timber decking and railings. The bridge will be set in concrete abutments, which will be anchored with sixteen (16), 9-5/8" diameter micro-piles in each abutment. Paving for the approaches of this bridge will extend approximately 40-feet from the edge of the bridge on the landside and approximately 60-feet from the edge of the bridge on the riverside. The timber shoring structure in the canal prism supporting the existing bridge will also be removed as part of this project.

Project Locations:

Location 1

County: Allegany State: MD

Location 2

County: Washington State: MD

Location 3

County: Montgomery State: MD

Mitigation(s):

• Boring Location Restrictions for Edward's Ferry.

Comment: BH21-01 must be set back 9 feet from the lock-chamber face of the coping stones on Lock 25. It also must be placed in the footprint of the road or at the immediate shoulder. Placement should avoid the buried walls of the Bypass Flume. BH21-02 must be placed in the footprint of the road or its immediate edge to avoid potential archeological resources.

CE Citation: 3.3.C.9 Repair, resurfacing, striping, installation of traffic control devices, repair/replacement of guardrails, etc., on existing roads.

CE Justification:

This project includes routine maintenance/replacement of vehicular bridges that have exceeded their service life. Two of the bridges span the canal prism while the third spans Lock 25 and bypass flume. The new bridge to cross Lock 25 will no longer bear weight on the historic masonry walls of the lock by installing new concrete abutments on either side of the lock. No significant impacts to the human or natural environment will occur.

Decision: I find that the action fits within the categorical exclusion above. Therefore, I am categorically excluding the described project from further NEPA analysis. No extraordinary circumstances apply.

Signature

Superintendent: Date:

John Noel for Tina Cappetta

Extraordinary Circumstances:

If implemented, would the proposal... Yes/No Explanation

A. Have significant impacts on public health or safety? No The project will mitigate concerns associated with visitor safety for three different public use areas in the park.

B. Have significant impacts on such natural resources and unique geographic characteristics as historic or cultural resources; park, recreation, or refuge lands; wilderness areas;

wild or scenic rivers; national natural landmarks; sole or principal drinking water aquifers; prime farmlands; wetlands

(Executive Order 11990); floodplains (Executive Order

11988); national monuments; migratory birds; and other ecologically significant or critical areas?

No No impacts to significant or unique resources will occur.

C. Have highly controversial environmental effects or involve unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources (NEPA section 102(2)(E))?

No The project involves replacement-in-kind of modern vehicular bridges and will not cause controversial effects.

D. Have highly uncertain and potentially significant environmental effects or involve unique or unknown environmental risks?

No The project involves replacement-in-kind of modern vehicular bridges and will not create uncertainty in potential environmental effects.

E. Establish a precedent for future action or represent a decision in principle about future actions with potentially significant environmental effects?

No The project includes routine replacement of modern vehicular bridges. This routine practice will not create a new precedent for future actions.

F. Have a direct relationship to other actions with individually insignificant, but cumulatively significant, environmental effects?

No The project will not cause cumulatively significant effects when considering other related projects.

G. Have significant impacts on properties listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, as determined by either the bureau or office?

No The extant vehicle bridges are not included in the

National Register nomination for the C&O Canal

NHP Historic District. The new bridge at Edwards

Ferry will avoid resting on the walls of the lock and will also avoid archeological remnants of the historic pivot bridge located here. No significant impacts to historic properties or elements will occur.

H. Have significant impacts on species listed or proposed to be listed on the List of Endangered or Threatened Species, or have significant impacts on designated Critical Habitat for these species?

No No listed species are known from the project area.

I. Violate a federal, state, local or tribal law or requirement imposed for the protection of the environment?

No No law or regulation will be violated.

J. Have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on low income or minority populations (EO 12898)?

No The project will not affect low income or minority populations.

K. Limit access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites on federal lands by Indian religious practitioners or adversely affect the physical integrity of such sacred sites (EO 130007)?

No No known Native American sites are included within the project area.

L. Contribute to the introduction, continued existence, or spread of noxious weeds or non-native invasive species known to occur in the area or actions that may promote the introduction, growth, or expansion of the range of such species (Federal Noxious Weed Control Act and Executive

Order 13112)?

No The project area only includes developed areas and structures so will not contribute to the spread of invasive species.

2022-06-22T14:13:58-0400

JOHN NOEL

Letter of Compliance Completion

To: Joseph Reed

From: CHOH Compliance Coordinator

Subject: NEPA and NHPA Clearance: Replacement of Lock 25, Dargan, Fifteen Mile Creek Bridges & Rehabilitation of

Lock 25 Culvert (PEPC: 108408)

NEPA and NHPA Compliance Complete. For complete compliance information see PEPC Project 108408.

The Superintendent and Interdisciplinary team have reviewed the scope of work and supporting documentation provided in the Planning, Environment, and Public Comment (PEPC) system, and all applicable associated compliance documentation and consultation (e.g. National Environmental Policy Act, National Historic Preservation Act, Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Wilderness Act, Tribal consultation under EO13175, and other related laws and policies).

The subject proposed project/action(s), therefore, is/are now cleared for all compliance requirements. Project plans and specifications are approved, project funds may be released, and construction and/or project implementation can commence with the following mitigations and conditions/stipulations.

Required Mitigations - For the proposed project actions to be within compliance requirements during construction and/or project implementation, the following mitigations must be adhered to:

• Minimum clearing distance of 3 inches is required between the low chord of the bridge and the top of coping on the lock walls at Edward’s Ferry.

• Work must avoid remnants of the historic pivot bridge foundation at Edward’s Ferry.

• Archeological monitoring during excavation is required at all sites.

Categorical Exclusion Documentation Form (CE Form)

Project: Culvert 82 Bridge Replacement

PEPC Project Number: 108411

Description of Action (Project Description):

This project will re-establish towpath continuity along the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal at Mile Marker (MM) 52.51 in

Brunswick, MD by replacing a previous bridge over the failed Culvert 82 at Little Catoctin Creek. An existing failed corrugated metal pipe under the towpath on the downstream side of the culvert will also be replaced with a reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) as part of this projects. The stabilization of the earthen embankments beneath the proposed bridge will not be completed under this project, that work will take place under a future project once funding is available. Geotechnical investigation has already been completed under PEPC 96203. The previously proposed bridge project (PEPC 79800) using fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) material, has been replaced by this one.

Originally constructed from 1832 - 1833, Culvert 82 collapsed in 1847 & 1924 and was subsequently rebuilt. It sustained extensive damage in 1972 & 1987 with varying degrees of repairs. As a result of a high intensity precipitation event in May of 2018, large magnitude flash flooding occurred on the Little Catoctin Creek watershed which overtopped park assets in the area and severed the 184.5-mile-long trail system. The former Culvert 82 (comprised of masonry with a 16-foot span) washed out along with the canal embankment and towpath; the previous bridge over top the culvert was washed away in the flood.

The breach in the towpath measured approximately 55-feet wide from top of bank to top of bank and continues to widen. An engineering study completed in 2008 identified that the upstream B&O Railroad Culvert has a greater capacity for flow than

Culvert 82 and directs the flow at a skew (angle) to the downstream historic canal culvert. This makes Culvert 82 more prone to destruction due to the increased hydraulic pressures on the west side of the channel. Following the full breach in 2018, An interim low-water pedestrian bypass was installed by the park in 2018 to allow visitors to detour around the breach (see

PEPC 81625). However, the bypass is frequently inundated during high water events, compelling visitors to cross along the adjacent active CSX railroad line. The establishment of the bridge and towpath continuity is necessary to increase visitor safety and restore maintenance access through the area.

The proposed temporary bridge is designed by the Federal Highway Administration, Eastern Federal Lands Division

(FHWA-EFLD). This project will restore access through the area for the towpath with a new bridge (capable of carrying pedestrians, equestrians, and vehicular traffic for H-5 vehicles under 10,000 lbs.) and remove the interim pedestrian bypass.

The bridge will consist of a steel truss with timber decking, measuring 115 feet long by 8' wide, and be set on concrete abutments with six 7" diameter micropiles at the upstream and downstream approaches. The bridge will span the 55-foot breach and provide set-back from the unstable banks. Disturbance for this project will consist of excavation for the concrete abutments and for the replacement of the drainage pipe on the downstream side of the breach, as well as re-grading of the towpath. Class IV riprap will be placed at the outfall channel of the of new RCP. A concrete headwall will also be installed at the outlet of the RCP. Tasks associated with the work will include (but not limited too) mobilization, establishment of site controls, earthwork, concrete work, bridge work, fencing, site restoration, and demobilization. Future projects will focus on stabilizing the banks and treatment of the culvert. The proposed bridge is a temporary installation while funding is sought for planning, design, and construction of a permanent solution.

Project Locations:

Location

County: Frederick State: MD

District: 06 Section:

Geo. Marker: 52.51 (Milepost) Other:

There are no required mitigations identified.

CE Citation: 3.3.C.18 Construction of minor structures, including small improved parking lots, in previously disturbed or developed areas.

CE Justification:

While the interim bridge will comprise a modern element to the landscape, a modern pedestrian bridge has existed in the same area since 1996 until the 2018 flash flood. The bridge associated with this project will be an interim measure to provide continued visitor access until a permanent solution can be identified and planned. Because of the previous use of a modern bridge in this area and the temporary nature of the current proposal, this project will not cause any significant, adverse effects to the human or natural environment.

Decision: I find that the action fits within the categorical exclusion above. Therefore, I am categorically excluding the described project from further NEPA analysis. No extraordinary circumstances apply.

Signature

Superintendent: Date:

John Noel for Tina Cappetta

Extraordinary Circumstances:

If implemented, would the proposal... Yes/No Explanation

A. Have significant impacts on public health or safety? No This project will provide a safer means of conveying visitors along the towpath, as opposed to the current interim solution of a low-water crossing.

B. Have significant impacts on such natural resources and unique geographic characteristics as historic or cultural resources; park, recreation, or refuge lands; wilderness areas; wild or scenic rivers;

national natural landmarks; sole or principal drinking water aquifers;

prime farmlands; wetlands (Executive Order 11990); floodplains

(Executive Order 11988); national monuments; migratory birds; and other ecologically significant or critical areas?

No The proposed project will replace a modern pedestrian bridge with another modern, albeit larger, pedestrian bridge. No significant impacts to unique resources will occur.

C. Have highly controversial environmental effects or involve unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources (NEPA section 102(2)(E))?

No The project is not likely to cause any controversial effects.

D. Have highly uncertain and potentially significant environmental effects or involve unique or unknown environmental risks?

No No uncertainties exist regarding the installation of the bridge.

E. Establish a precedent for future action or represent a decision in principle about future actions with potentially significant environmental effects?

No The park does not intend to use pedestrian bridges in other areas of the park where culverts may fail. For this project, the bridge will be temporary and will be replaced by an identified, final solution for the area which could include reconstruction of the culvert.

F. Have a direct relationship to other actions with individually insignificant, but cumulatively significant, environmental effects?

No This project does not directly relate to other projects that could create cumulatively significant effects.

G. Have significant impacts on properties listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, as determined by either the bureau or office?

No The project area includes several structures individually listed on the National Register within the C&O Canal NHP Historic District.

These structures will not be significantly affected by the project.

H. Have significant impacts on species listed or proposed to be listed on the List of Endangered or Threatened Species, or have significant impacts on designated Critical Habitat for these species?

No No known listed species are known from the project area.

I. Violate a federal, state, local or tribal law or requirement imposed for the protection of the environment?

No No laws or regulations will be violated.

J. Have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on low income or minority populations (EO 12898)?

No The project will not affect low income or minority populations.

K. Limit access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites on federal lands by Indian religious practitioners or adversely affect the physical integrity of such sacred sites (EO 130007)?

No No known Native American sites occur within the project area.

L. Contribute to the introduction, continued existence, or spread of noxious weeds or non-native invasive species known to occur in the area or actions that may promote the introduction, growth, or expansion of the range of such species (Federal Noxious Weed

Control Act and Executive Order 13112)?

No The project area does not include natural areas and will not contribute to the spread of invasive species.

2022-06-22T14:20:16-0400

JOHN NOEL

Letter of Compliance Completion

To: Joseph Reed

From: CHOH Compliance Coordinator

Subject: NEPA and NHPA Clearance: Culvert 82 Bridge Replacement (PEPC: 108411)

NEPA and NHPA Compliance Complete. For complete compliance information see PEPC Project 108411.

The Superintendent and Interdisciplinary team have reviewed the scope of work and supporting documentation provided in the Planning, Environment, and Public Comment (PEPC) system, and all applicable associated compliance documentation and consultation (e.g. National Environmental Policy Act, National Historic Preservation Act, Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Wilderness Act, Tribal consultation under EO13175, and other related laws and policies).

The subject proposed project/action(s), therefore, is/are now cleared for all compliance requirements. Project plans and specifications are approved, project funds may be released, and construction and/or project implementation can commence with the following mitigations and conditions/stipulations.

• An additional assessment of effects is required if temporary bridge remains 5 years from construction date or is proposed as final solution. As this bridge is proposed as an interim measure, a final management solution will be designed and reviewed separately with additional assessment of effects of any proposed future action.

• Equipment staging must be limited to previously disturbed areas as approved by park Resources Management staff.