Categorical Exclusion Form (NEPA).pdf

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04) Replacement of Miner’s Road Bridge

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

Project Number: NP PIRO 11(2) Date: 8/22/2023

Project Name: Replacement of Miner’s Road Bridge

Location: Painted Rocks National Park, National Park Service Alger, MI

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.

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

Project Description This project will consist of the removal and replacement of the Miners River Bridge. The bridge consists of a concrete and steel beam deck that includes concrete abutments and wingwalls, stone riprap, and a combination wood and steel guardrail on each side. Federal Highways Administration bridge inspections conducted in 2015 and 2021 revealed that the bridge, which is at least 63 years old, is damaged. This includes cracking in the abutments and wingwalls, scouring around the edges of the abutments and wingwalls, and general deterioration of the concrete and steel. A lamprey barrier is attached to the south side of the bridge, but would not be modified as part of this project. Replacement of the 20' long x 30' wide bridge will entail the (1) partial demolition and removal of the steel bridge, (2) the reestablishment of associated riprap,

(3) the construction/placement of a new bridge.

Environmental Commitments and Mitigation Measures Tree removal will occur outside of the active season for northern long-eared bats.

If previously unknown archeological materials are discovered during activities, then work should stop. Consultation and coordination with the NPS and Missouri SHPO must occur before work resumes.

If streambank stabilization is needed, the use of native materials and bioengineering techniques should be used to the greatest extent possible.

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04) Replacement of Miner’s Road Bridge

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

No wastewater, fuels, or other harmful fluids should be discharged into the river; best management practices to prevent the discharge of sediments into the river should be in place prior to site disturbance.

Bridge should be of similar structure and aesthetic quality as that which existed previously; scenic character of the area should be maintained. History and/or Cultural are not listed as outstandingly remarkable values for this NRI segment.

Litter and construction debris should be contained daily and completely removed offsite and disposed of out of sight and beyond the 100-year floodplain upon project completion.

Summary of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Compliance FHWA obtained an official species list of threatened and endangered species through the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system on 01/30/2023. The following species have the potential to occur in the project vicinity:

In their PEPC CE documentation form, dated 09/28/2022, the NPS determined the proposed project would have no effect on terrestrial or marine species protected under the Endangered Species Act as no suitable habitat for terrestrial species is present in the project action area, and no in-water work would occur.

FHWA concurred with the NPS’s determination of no effect to threatened or endangered species in a memo to file on

Summary of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act Compliance Michigan SHPO was consulted through their online Section 106 database on August 16, 2022.

The NPS recommended a finding of "no historic properties affected". SHPO concurred with this determination in a August 31, 2022 letter.

Additional Agency Coordination and Compliance Describe all coordination to and from agencies not already discussed above. If EFL is not the lead NEPA agency, reference the lead Federal agency’s NEPA decision document here.

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04) Replacement of Miner’s Road Bridge

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

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.

Trenton Craig Environmental Protection Specialist Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division 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(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.

Kevin S. Rose Environmental Team Leader Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division Federal Highway Administration

Date

TRENTON

CHRISTOPHER

CRAIG

Digitally signed by TRENTON

CHRISTOPHER CRAIG

Date: 2023.10.11 10:45:48 -04'00'

KEVIN S

ROSE

Digitally signed by KEVIN

S ROSE

Date: 2023.10.11 10:50:48 -04'00'

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04) Replacement of Miner’s Road Bridge

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

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

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04) Replacement of Miner’s Road Bridge

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

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) Replacement of Miner’s Road Bridge

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

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

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

National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore Date: 08/01/2023

Categorical Exclusion Documentation Form (CE Form)

Project: Replace Miners River Bridge PEPC Project Number: 71679 Description of Action (Project Description):

This project will consist of the removal and replacement of the Miners River Bridge. The bridge consists of a concrete and steel beam deck that includes concrete abutments and wingwalls, stone riprap, and a combination wood and steel guardrail on each side. Federal Highways Administration bridge inspections conducted in 2015 and 2021 revealed that the bridge, which is at least 63 years old, is damaged. This includes cracking in the abutments and wingwalls, scouring around the edges of the abutments and wingwalls, and general deterioration of the concrete and steel. A lamprey barrier is attached to the south side of the bridge, but would not be modified as part of this project. Replacement of the 20' long x 30' wide bridge will entail the

(1) partial demolition and removal of the steel bridge, (2) the reestablishment of associated riprap, (3) the construction/placement of a new bridge.

The existing bridge has been determined ineligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

The proposed new bridge would consist of a box beam supported by micropiles. The existing abutments and wingwalls will be left in place, with some removal of existing stone riprap anticipated. The new bridge would be constructed in the same alignment of the existing bridge and would require closing the Miners Beach Road for a few months. Construction is tentatively scheduled to occur in September 2024 - April 2025 to reduce potential impacts to visitors, commercial use permit holders, and resources.

Disturbance is anticipated to be restricted largely to the existing road and bridge extent, with removal of as few trees as possible on the north side of the bridge. Materials and equipment would be staged on Miners Beach Road, which is paved.

Approximately 1,500 cubic yards of gravel roadbase may be obtained from a commercial quarrying facility outside of the park to support the new bridge. Remains of the demolished bridge, consisting generally of concrete, steel beams and rebar, and rock rip rap would be stored in an existing paved staging area within the park for eventual disposal at an approved commercial dump facility outside of the park.

Measures to protect natural resources will be implemented prior to, during, and after construction. These include scheduling construction to not interfere with wildlife, treating for potential entry of invasive plants and animals (including lamprey), monitoring water quality, minimizing downstream flow of construction debris, and revegetating disturbed areas.

Water quality parameters will be monitored prior, during, and after bridge replacement in Miners River. Reaches upstream and downstream of the impacted site will be assessed in addition to the bridge site. A water quality sonde, conductivity meters, and passive samplers (Hester-Dendy) will be deployed; water will be collected for total suspended solids and nutrient testing. Equipment will be cabled to downed and/or living trees or secured to rebar or cement blocks placed in the stream bed. Surveys for stream stability, riparian vegetation, macrophytes, and mussels will be completed. Macroinvertebrates will be preserved and identified for sensitivity indices.

The NPS has incorporated a diverse team of subject matter experts to consider potential impacts of the project to natural and cultural resources and visitor use. The project is being headed by the NPS Denver Service Center in collaboration with PIRO and NPS Midwest Region staff, with design and planning input provided by FHWA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S.

Geological Survey. The public will be notified of the potential project and comments and concerns will be addressed.

Project Locations:

Location County: Alger State: MI

Mitigation(s):

Tree removal will occur outside of the active season for northern long-eared bats.

If previously unknown archeological materials are discovered during activities, then work should stop. Consultation and coordination with the NPS and Missouri SHPO must occur before work resumes.

If streambank stabilization is needed, the use of native materials and bioengineering techniques should be used to the greatest extent possible.

No wastewater, fuels, or other harmful fluids should be discharged into the river; best management practices to prevent the discharge of sediments into the river should be in place prior to site disturbance.

Bridge should be of similar structure and aesthetic quality as that which existed previously; scenic character of the area should be maintained. History and/or Cultural are not listed as outstandingly remarkable values for this NRI segment.

Litter and construction debris should be contained daily and completely removed offsite and disposed of out of sight and beyond the 100-year floodplain upon project completion.

CE Citation: 3.3.C.19 Construction or rehabilitation in previously disturbed or developed areas, required to meet health or safety regulations, or to meet requirements for making facilities accessible to the handicapped.

CE Justification:

Project would replace the existing bridge with a new bridge within previously disturbed areas, and increase public safety due to replacing a functionally obsolete bridge.

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:

David Horne

DAVID HORNE Digitally signed by DAVID HORNE Date: 2023.08.01 10:11:39 -04'00'

Extraordinary Circumstances:

If implemented, would the proposal... Yes/No Explanation A. Have significant impacts on public health or safety? No The road will be closed during construction and construction will be timed to occur during low season.

The road terminates at nearby Miners Beach and is not used to access private lands or federal facilities aside from the beach parking lot and two associated trails. Potential water quality concerns to the Miners River and Lake Superior associated with demolition and construction are minor and will be mitigated.

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 Project impacts to natural resources will be minor or temporary in nature. The bridge has been recommended ineligible for the National Register of Historic Places. No other cultural resources have been identified. Recreation impacts will be minor and construction will be scheduled to occur in low season. Construction extent will be limited to previously disturbed areas and a few trees on either side of the existing structure.

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

No The bridge replacement is a standard action and will occur primarily in previously disturbed areas. Alternative uses of the bridge and associated road have not been considered but are generally not in the interest of the NPS or visiting public.

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

No The anticipated impacts associated with the project are well understood and the action is very common throughout NPS units.

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

No The project is a straightforward replacement of an existing bridge to allow for continued safe use of the road and provide access to important park facilities at Miners Beach.

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

No There is no direct relationship to other actions and no cumulatively significant environmental 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 No historic properties have been identified in the project area.

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 Northern long-eared bat have been identified in the surrounding area, but not within the bridge itself.

Construction will be scheduled to occur at times when the bats would not be roosting in adjacent trees of 3-inch diameter or more, though more recent wildlife surveys have not observed these animals in few trees that would potentially be felled as part of the project.

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

No The project will retain the lamprey barrier, which is in place to protect native species of fish in the river, and be scheduled to occur at a time when lamprey have not been shown to actively use the river.

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

No Low income or minority populations will not be disproportionately affected by the project.

K. Limit access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites on federal lands by Indian religious practitioners or

No Ceremonial use of the project area and adjacent Miners Beach have not been demonstrated through previous adversely affect the physical integrity of such sacred sites

(EO 130007)?

consultation with tribes traditionally associated with the park.

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 will incorporate treatment of noxious weeds and non-native invasive species. This includes monitoring equipment, surveying the project area for invasive species, and treating any identified species including noxious weeds. The lamprey barrier will remain in place and construction will occur at a time when lamprey and not typically using the river, or at least not spawning.

National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore Date: 09/28/2022

ASSESSMENT OF ACTIONS HAVING AN EFFECT ON HISTORIC

PROPERTIES

A. DESCRIPTION OF UNDERTAKING

1. Park: Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore

2. Project Description:

Project Name: Replace Miners River Bridge Prepared by: Wesley Wills Date Prepared: Telephone:

PEPC Project Number: 71679 Locations:

County, State: Alger, MI Describe project:

This project will consist of the removal and replacement of the Miners River Bridge. The bridge consists of a concrete and steel beam deck that includes concrete abutments and wingwalls, stone riprap, and a combination wood and steel guardrail on each side. Federal Highways Administration bridge inspections conducted in 2015 and 2021 revealed that the bridge, which is at least 63 years old, is damaged. This includes cracking in the abutments and wingwalls, scouring around the edges of the abutments and wingwalls, and general deterioration of the concrete and steel. A lamprey barrier is attached to the south side of the bridge, but would not be modified as part of this project. Replacement of the 20' long x 30' wide bridge will entail the

(1) demolition and removal of the steel bridge and the supporting abutments, (2) the reestablishment of bridge footings and associated riprap, (3) the construction/placement of a new bridge.

The existing bridge has been determined ineligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

The proposed new bridge would consist of a box beam supported by micropiles. The existing abutments and wingwalls will be left in place, with some removal of existing stone riprap anticipated. The new bridge would be constructed in the same alignment of the existing bridge and would require closing the Miners Beach Road for a few months. Construction is tentatively scheduled to occur in September 2023 - April 2024 to reduce potential impacts to visitors, commercial use permit holders, and resources.

Disturbance is anticipated to be restricted largely to the existing road and bridge extent, with removal of as few trees as possible on the north side of the bridge. Materials and equipment would be staged on Miners Beach Road, which is paved.

Approximately 1,500 cubic yards of gravel roadbase may be obtained from a commercial quarrying facility outside of the park to support the new bridge. Remains of the demolished bridge, consisting generally of concrete, steel beams and rebar, and rock rip rap would be stored in an existing paved staging area within the park for eventual disposal at an approved commercial dump facility outside of the park.

Measures to protect natural resources will be implemented prior to, during, and after construction. These include scheduling construction to not interfere with wildlife, treating for potential entry of invasive plants and animals (including lamprey), monitoring water quality, minimizing downstream flow of construction debris, and revegetating disturbed areas.

The NPS has incorporated a diverse team of subject matter experts to consider potential impacts of the project to natural and cultural resources and visitor use. The project is being headed by the NPS Denver Service Center in collaboration with PIRO and NPS Midwest Region staff, with design and planning input provided by FHWA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S.

Geological Survey. The public will be notified of the potential project and comments and concerns will be addressed.

Area of potential effects (as defined in 36 CFR 800.16[d]) The project is located where the Miners River passes under a concrete and steel bridge on Miners Beach Road at coordinates

46.488283 latitude by -86.540527 longitude, which is approximately 7.5 miles northeast of downtown Munising. The project includes replacing the concrete and steel bridge with a new bridge. This will include a new box beam bridge with micropile foundations while leaving the existing abutments and wing walls intact, demolition of the existing bridge deck and railing and some of the surrounding riprap and concrete within the river channel within 20 feet of the structure, and grading the adjacent slopes up to 10 feet from the existing bridge and Miners Beach Road. The surrounding landscape is heavily forested and the bridge is in a depressed area that can only be observed from approximately 300 feet away only on Miners Beach Road. Ground disturbance would be concentrated in areas that were previously disturbed for construction of the original bridge and subsequent road repair and paving projects. The area of potential effects measures approximately 685 feet east-west along the road by 50-85 feet north-south. The anticipated general maximum depth of ground disturbance is 8 feet deep within 10 feet of the bridge, to approximately 30 feet deep to place the micropiles. Disturbance outside of this area include removal of a few fir trees adjacent to the bridge, repaving of Miners Beach Road up to 240 feet away from the edge of the bridge, replacement of the existing curb and gutter, and revegetation. This includes planting small shrubs and native grasses and placement of erosion control fabric and waddles. Materials and equipment would be staged on adjacent paved or graveled portions of Miners Beach Road. The demolished bridge, consisting generally of concrete, steel beams and rebar, and rock rip rap would be stored in an existing paved staging area within the park for eventual disposal at an approved commercial dump facility outside of the park.

3. Has the area of potential effects been surveyed to identify historic properties?

No

X Yes

Source or reference:

4. Potentially Affected Resource(s):

Archeological Resources Present: No

Archeological Resources Notes: The entire project area was previously surveyed by Northern Michigan University in 2007 using pedestrian survey. The project area was surveyed again by an NPS archeologist using pedestrian survey in 2 m transects in August 2021 by a staff archeologist that meets the Secretary of Interior Standards for Historic Preservation. No archeological sites have been identified in the APE.

Historical Structures/Resources Present: No

Historical Structures/Resources Notes: The Miners River Bridge was determined ineligible for the National Register of Historic Places with concurrence received from SHPO via a May 4, 2022 letter.

Cultural Landscapes Present: No

Ethnographic Resources Present: No

Ethnographic Resources Notes: TBD - will need to wait for tribal response to consultation

5. The proposed action will: (check as many as apply)

No Destroy, remove, or alter features/elements from a historic structure

No Replace historic features/elements in kind

No Add non-historic features/elements to a historic structure

No Alter or remove features/elements of a historic setting or environment (inc. terrain)

No Add non-historic features/elements (inc. visual, audible, or atmospheric) to a historic setting or cultural landscape

No Disturb, destroy, or make archeological resources inaccessible

No Disturb, destroy, or make ethnographic resources inaccessible>

Yes Potentially affect presently unidentified cultural resources

No Begin or contribute to deterioration of historic features, terrain, setting, landscape elements, or archeological or ethnographic resources

No Involve a real property transaction (exchange, sale, or lease of land or structures)

Other (please specify):

6. Supporting Study Data:

(Attach if feasible; if action is in a plan, EA or EIS, give name and project or page number.)

Michigan SHPO was consulted through their online Section 106 database on August 16, 2022. The NPS recommended a finding of "no historic properties affected" for the undertaking. SHPO concurred with this determination in a August 31, 2022 letter.

B. REVIEWS BY CULTURAL RESOURCE SPECIALISTS

The park 106 coordinator requested review by the park's cultural resource specialist/advisors as indicated by check-off boxes or as follows:

[ X ] Anthropologist Name: Wesley Wills Date: 09/02/2022

Check if project does not involve ground disturbance [ ] Assessment of Effect: No Potential to Cause Effect X No Historic Properties Affected No Adverse Effect Adverse Effect Streamlined Review Recommendations for conditions or stipulations:

Doc Method: Standard 4-Step Process

[ X ] Archeologist Name: Ashley Barnett Date: 06/15/2022

Check if project does not involve ground disturbance [ ] Assessment of Effect: No Potential to Cause Effect No Historic Properties Affected X No Adverse Effect Adverse Effect Streamlined Review

[ X ] Historian Name: Ronald Cockrell Date: 06/14/2022

Check if project does not involve ground disturbance [ ] Assessment of Effect: No Potential to Cause Effect X No Historic Properties Affected No Adverse

Effect Adverse Effect Streamlined Review

[ X ] Historical Architect Name: John Rosemurgy Date: 06/09/2022

Check if project does not involve ground disturbance [ ] Assessment of Effect: No Potential to Cause Effect X No Historic Properties Affected No Adverse Effect Adverse Effect Streamlined Review Recommendations for conditions or stipulations: Refer to Ron Cockrell's comments which identify the need to engage the park's CRM team as part of the conceptual planning process. Please respond to the following items under the NHPA / CRM tab: Area of Potential Effect B. Have NRHP resources been identified? Archeology / ARPA / NAGPRA / Sacred Sites I. Is the location information associated with these sites (such as in caves, contain burials, or at the request of the Native American group(s) to be considered sensitive and/or restricted information? Update 6/14/2022 - Park reply to B.

above is No. Park reply to I. above - TBD depends on outcome of tribal consultation effort, letters and emails anticipated to be sent May 27, 2022.

[ X ] Historical Landscape Architect Name: Marla McEnaney Date: 06/03/2022

Check if project does not involve ground disturbance [ ] Assessment of Effect: No Potential to Cause Effect X No Historic Properties Affected No Adverse Effect Adverse Effect Streamlined Review

[ X ] Other Advisor Name: Geoffrey Burt Date: 06/14/2022 Comments: This consensus determination is based upon a review of comments by CRM Team members. When individual CRM Team member comments differ, this shall serve as the final determination of effect and consultation method. Park must adhere to any review comments and stipulations marked on the Mitigations page in PEPC.

Check if project does not involve ground disturbance [ ] Assessment of Effect: No Potential to Cause Effect X No Historic Properties Affected No Adverse Effect Adverse Effect Streamlined Review

No Reviews From: Curator, 106 Advisor

C. PARK SECTION 106 COORDINATOR'S REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Assessment of Effect:

No Potential to Cause Effects

X No Historic Properties Affected No Adverse Effect Adverse Effect

2. Documentation Method:

[ X ] A. Standard 36 CFR Part 800 Consultation Further consultation under 36 CFR Part 800 is needed.

[ ] B. Streamlined Review Under the 2008 Servicewide Programmatic Agreement (PA) The above action meets all conditions for a streamlined review under section III of the 2008 Servicewide PA for Section 106 compliance.

Applicable Streamlined Review Criteria (Specify 1-16 of the list of streamlined review criteria.)

[ ] C. Undertaking Related to Park Specific or Another Agreement The proposed undertaking is covered for Section 106 purposes under another document such as a park, region or statewide agreement established in accord with 36 CFR 800.7 or 36 CFR 800.14.

[ ] D. Combined NEPA/NHPA Process Process and documentation required for the preparation of an EA/FONSI or an EIS/ROD to comply with Section 106 is in accord with 36 CFR 800.8.c.

[ ] E. Memo to Project File

3. Consultation Information

SHPO Required: Yes SHPO Sent: Aug 16, 2022 SHPO Received: Aug 31, 2022

THPO Required: Yes THPO Sent: Jul 5, 2022 THPO Received:

SHPO/THPO Notes: All tribes traditionally associated with the park were sent letters and no responses were received.

Advisory Council Participating: No Advisory Council Notes:

Additional Consulting Parties: No

4. Stipulations and Conditions: Following are listed any stipulations or conditions necessary to ensure that the assessment of effect above is consistent with 36 CFR Part 800 criteria of effect or to avoid or reduce potential adverse effects.

5. Mitigations/Treatment Measures: Measures to prevent or minimize loss or impairment of historic/prehistoric properties: (Remember that setting, location, and use may be relevant.)

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:

If previously unknown archeological materials are discovered during activities, then work should stop.

Consultation and coordination with the NPS and Missouri SHPO must occur before work resumes.

If streambank stabilization is needed, the use of native materials and bioengineering techniques should be used to the greatest extent possible.

No wastewater, fuels, or other harmful fluids should be discharged into the river; best management practices to prevent the discharge of sediments into the river should be in place prior to site disturbance.

Bridge should be of similar structure and aesthetic quality as that which existed previously; scenic character of the area should be maintained. History and/or Cultural are not listed as outstandingly remarkable values for this NRI segment.

Litter and construction debris should be contained daily and completely removed offsite and disposed of out of sight and beyond the 100-year floodplain upon project completion.

6. Assessment of Effect Notes:

Michigan SHPO was consulted through their online Section 106 database on August 16, 2022. The NPS recommended a finding of "no historic properties affected" for the undertaking. SHPO concurred with this determination in a August 31, 2022 letter.

D. RECOMMENDED BY PARK SECTION 106 COORDINATOR:

Compliance Specialist:

NHPA Specialist

Lara Bender

Date:

E. SUPERINTENDENT'S APPROVAL

The proposed work conforms to the NPS Management Policies and Cultural Resource Management Guideline, and I have reviewed and approve the recommendations, stipulations, or conditions noted in Section C of this form.

Signature

Superintendent:

Date:

David Horne

LARA BENDER Digitally signed by LARA BENDER Date: 2022.09.28 11:25:55 -04'00'

DAVID HORNE Digitally signed by DAVID HORNE Date: 2022.09.28 15:30:14 -04'00'

August 23, 2023

United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

Michigan Ecological Services Field Office

2651 Coolidge Road Suite 101 East Lansing, MI 48823-6360

Phone: (517) 351-2555 Fax: (517) 351-1443

In Reply Refer To:

Project Code: 2023-0039811 Project Name: MI PIRO 11(2)

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:

Official Species List The attached species list identifies any Federally threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project or may be affected by your proposed project. The list also includes designated critical habitat if present within your proposed project area or affected by your project. This list is provided to you as the initial step of the consultation process required under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act, also referred to as Section 7 Consultation.

Under 50 CFR 402.12(e) (the regulations that implement section 7 of the Endangered Species Act), the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. You may verify the list by visiting the IPaC website (https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/) at regular intervals during project planning and implementation. To update an Official Species List in IPaC: from the My Projects page, find the project, expand the row, and click Project Home. In the What's Next box on the Project Home page, there is a Request Updated List button to update your species list. Be sure to select an "official" species list for all projects.

Consultation requirements and next steps Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 requires that actions authorized, funded, or carried out by Federal agencies not jeopardize Federally threatened or endangered species or adversely modify designated critical habitat. To fulfill this mandate, Federal agencies (or their designated non-Federal representative) must consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service if they determine their project may affect listed species or critical habitat.

There are two approaches to evaluating the effects of a project on listed species.

Approach 1. Use the All-species Michigan determination key in IPaC. This tool can assist you in making determinations for listed species for some projects. In many cases, the determination key https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/

08/23/2023 2 will provide an automated concurrence that completes all or significant parts of the consultation process. Therefore, we strongly recommend screening your project with the All-Species Michigan Determination Key (Dkey). For additional information on using IPaC and available Determination Keys, visit https://www.fws.gov/media/mifo-ipac-instructions (and click on the attachment). Please carefully review your Dkey output letter to determine whether additional steps are needed to complete the consultation process.

Approach 2. Evaluate the effects to listed species on your own without utilizing a determination key. Once you obtain your official species list, you are not required to continue in IPaC, although in most cases using a determination key should expedite your review. If the project is a Federal action, you should review our section 7 step-by-step instructions before making your determinations: https://www.fws.gov/office/midwest-region-headquarters/midwest-section-7-technical-assistance. If you evaluate the details of your project and conclude “no effect,” document your findings, and your listed species review is complete; you do not need our concurrence on “no effect” determinations. If you cannot conclude “no effect,” you should coordinate/consult with the Michigan Ecological Services Field Office. The preferred method for submitting your project description and effects determination (if concurrence is needed) is electronically to EastLansing@fws.gov. Please include a copy of this official species list with your request.

For all wind energy projects and projects that include installing communications towers that use guy wires, please contact this field office directly for assistance, even if no Federally listed plants, animals or critical habitat are present within your proposed project area or may be affected by your proposed project.

Migratory Birds Please see the “Migratory Birds” section below for important information regarding incorporating migratory birds into your project planning. Our Migratory Bird Program has developed recommendations, best practices, and other tools to help project proponents voluntarily reduce impacts to birds and their habitats. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act prohibits the take and disturbance of eagles without a permit. If your project is near an eagle nest or winter roost area, see our Eagle Permits website at https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management/eagle-permits to help you avoid impacting eagles or determine if a permit may be necessary.

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/partner/council-conservation-migratory-birds.

We appreciate your consideration of threatened and endangered species during your project https://www.fws.gov/midwest/EastLansing/te/pdf/MIFO_IPAC_instructions_v1_Jan2021.pdf https://www.fws.gov/office/midwest-region-headquarters/midwest-section-7-technical-assistance https://www.fws.gov/office/midwest-region-headquarters/midwest-section-7-technical-assistance https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fws.gov%2Fprogram%2Feagle-management%2Feagle-permits&data=05%7C01%7Ccarrie_tansy%40fws.gov%7Ce74c6d1d81174abb589a08da925dbc62%7C0693b5ba4b184d7b9341f32f400a5494%7C0%7C0%7C637983228538153301%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fuYsjQCobLUltwqK7CLjY6E%2BAETDH243OMOOrPn5Scw%3D&reserved=0 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fws.gov%2Fprogram%2Feagle-management%2Feagle-permits&data=05%7C01%7Ccarrie_tansy%40fws.gov%7Ce74c6d1d81174abb589a08da925dbc62%7C0693b5ba4b184d7b9341f32f400a5494%7C0%7C0%7C637983228538153301%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fuYsjQCobLUltwqK7CLjY6E%2BAETDH243OMOOrPn5Scw%3D&reserved=0

08/23/2023 3 planning. Please include a copy of this 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 Wetlands

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:

Michigan Ecological Services Field Office 2651 Coolidge Road Suite 101 East Lansing, MI 48823-6360

(517) 351-2555

08/23/2023 4

PROJECT SUMMARY

Project Code: 2023-0039811 Project Name: MI PIRO 11(2) Project Type: Bridge - Replacement Project Description: The work consists of replacing the Miners River Bridge. Additional work includes guardrail replacement, roadway reconstruction at the approaches, riprap placement, and other miscellaneous work.

Soil disturbing activities include clearing and grubbing, bridge replacement, and roadway reconstruction. The total disturbed area for the project is approximately 0. 73 acres. The receiving waters are Miners River and Lake Superior.

Approximately 0. 05 acres of new impervious surface will be created by the reconstructed roadway.

The Runoff Coefficient prior to construction is 0.44. The Runoff Coefficient after construction will be 0.38.

Project Location:

The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@46.4883662,-86.54087941532308,14z

Counties: Alger County, Michigan https://www.google.com/maps/@46.4883662,-86.54087941532308,14z https://www.google.com/maps/@46.4883662,-86.54087941532308,14z

08/23/2023 5

1.

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES

There is a total of 8 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. Note that 1 of these species should be considered only under certain conditions.

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

Canada Lynx Lynx canadensis Population: Wherever Found in Contiguous U.S.

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

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3652

Threatened

Gray Wolf Canis lupus Population: U.S.A.: All of AL, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, IA, IN, IL, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MO, MS, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NV, NY, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, VA, VT, WI, and WV; and portions of AZ, NM, OR, UT, and WA. Mexico.

There is final critical habitat for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4488

Endangered

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

Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavus No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515

Proposed Endangered https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3652 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4488 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9045 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515

08/23/2023 6

BIRDS

NAME STATUS

Piping Plover Charadrius melodus Population: [Great Lakes watershed DPS] - Great Lakes, watershed in States of IL, IN, MI, MN, NY, OH, PA, and WI and Canada (Ont.)

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

Endangered

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

This species only needs to be considered under the following conditions:

Only actions that occur along coastal areas during the Red Knot migratory window of MAY

1 - SEPTEMBER 30.

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

Threatened

INSECTS

NAME STATUS

Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743

Candidate

FLOWERING PLANTS

NAME STATUS

Pitcher's Thistle Cirsium pitcheri No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8153

Threatened

CRITICAL HABITATS

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

JURISDICTION.

YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S) MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL

ABOVE LISTED SPECIES.

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.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6039 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1864 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8153 http://www.fws.gov/refuges/

08/23/2023 7

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

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 Dec 1 to Aug 31

Black-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9399

Breeds May 15 to Oct 10

Bobolink…