Categorical Exclusion Form (NEPA).pdf

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(05)

VA NP BLRI 1G27

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

Project Number: VA NP BLRI 1G27 Date: 7/25/2024

Project Name: Rehabilitate James River Bridge (5140-0160P)

Location: Blue Ridge Parkway, MP 63.6 Amherst and Bedford Counties, Virginia

CE Category 23 CFR 771.117(c)(22): Projects, as defined in 23 U.S.C. 101, that would take place entirely within the existing operational right-of-way [...]

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

Project Description The FHWA and NPS propose to rehabilitate the James River Bridge in Amherst and Bedford Counties, Virginia. The James River Bridge is an 11-span steel girder bridge with a concrete deck. The bridge, which was built in 1959, spans the James River, the floodplain, a CSX railroad, State Route 501, a historic canal, and walking trails. A pedestrian walkway bridge is located under the roadway bridge deck and is supported by the bridge piers. Routine and preventative maintenance are needed to extend the service life of the bridge. Sidewalk and masonry repairs at the adjacent James River Visitor Center are also proposed.

Proposed bridge work will include the following: cleaning and sealing minor cracks; removing non-woody vegetation on piers; cleaning and patching spalls, large cracks, and exposed rebar;

cleaning and painting graffiti and concrete stains; repairing damaged mortar and missing stonework at the bridge abutments and pedestrian walkway; cleaning and painting the steel beams on the pedestrian walkway; removing existing delaminating asphalt; shot blasting the deck surface; installing a weatherproof membrane; replacing the existing wearing surface;

regrading bridge approaches to tie into decreased bridge pavement depth and resolve settlement at the eastern bridge approach; replacing rocker bearings with elastometric bearings. Work at the visitor center would include sidewalk replacement, curb repointing, masonry resetting, stone wall repointing, accessibility ramp replacement, kiosk resetting and fence replacement. Minor ground disturbance and tree removal would be required to complete the sidewalk and stone wall repairs.

No in-water work or impacts to aquatic resources are proposed.

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(05)

Environmental Commitments and Mitigation Measures

• Best management practices will be used to prevent erosion and control sediment

• The bridge structure contains active and inactive cliff swallow nests. The following conservation measures will be implemented:

o No disturbance to birds, bird nests, and bird eggs between April 15 until July 31 o Schedule work activities, if possible, between August 1 and April 14.

o If avoidance is not feasible, nests shall be removed while birds are not present or actively nesting between August 1 and April 14. Nests can be removed by scraping, pressure washing, or other suitable methods. The structure shall be inspected three times per week during the active season to remove any partial nests.

o Netting is not permitted due to the risk of entanglement.

o A qualified wildlife Biologist is required for bird nest inspections and removal.

• Qualified biologists contracted by FHWA conducted a survey in May 2023 and determined that bats are actively roosting within the bridge structure. A time of year restriction cannot be implemented due to the temperature-sensitive construction activities which require warmer temperatures to apply and cure; therefore, the following conservation measures will be implemented for any bridge work conducted between April 1-November 15:

o To protect bat species, exclusionary measures will be implemented as outlined in Section 5.3 of the bat survey report, dated “06/20/2023”.

o These temporary measures will be removed after construction.

o The bridge will continue to provide suitable habitat.

o Exclusionary measures are not required from Nov 16- March 31.

• The sidewalk and stonewall repointing near the visitor center will require removal of six trees. The tree cutting will occur during the inactive season. No tree cutting will occur from April 1 – November 15.

Summary of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Compliance FHWA consulted with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

FHWA obtained official species lists from USFWS IPaC system. Species present within the action area (see project file) included Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis), Tricolored Bat (Perimyotis subflavus), Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni), James Spinymussel (Parvaspina collina), and Monarch Butterfly (Danaus plexippus). Also, as a species of special concern in the state of Virginia, the consultation included Little Brown Bat (Myotis lucifugus).

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(05)

In spring 2023, FHWA contracted the services of a qualified biologist to conduct a bat survey at the James River Bridge. On May 19 and 20, 2023, FHWA’s contractor was on site at the James River Bridge; Evidence of bats, including guano and staining, was documented on piers and expansion joints in multiple locations. A borescope was used to document the presence of 10-20 Big Brown bats (Eptesicus fuscus) in one of the expansion joints, and the acoustic survey revealed the presence of Gray Bats (Myotis grisescens). Further, Bats were seen emerging from the structure at two locations. Although the survey did not specifically identify NLEB, the FHWA and NPS assumed that the species could be present.

On August 2, 2023, FHWA used the determination key for the FHWA, FRA, FTA Programmatic Consultation for Transportation Projects affecting NLEB or Indiana Bat and it was determined to be “not applicable”, and an individual consultation would be needed. FHWA assumed that NLEB could be present in the structure, and that FHWA will not be able to observe the Time-Of- Year Restriction (TOYR) due to the specific nature of the repair work, which requires warmer temperatures to perform. To protect NLEB and other bat species, conservation measures will be implemented. Temporary exclusionary measures will be installed as outlined in Section 5.3 of the bat survey report, dated “06/20/2023”. The conservation measures will support a determination of “not likely to adversely affect” for the NLEB.

Following the August 2, 2023, project review submittal, the USFWS recommended collection of bat guano and DNA analysis to determine which bat species were utilizing the bridge. In spring 2024, FHWA procured a qualified contractor to perform the work. On May 15, 2024, FHWA’s contractor was on-site at the James River Bridge and sampled the corresponding bridge piers that were identified in the bat survey report, dated “06/20/2023”. The findings of the bat guano collection and lab analysis revealed the Big Brown Bat (Eptesicus fuscus) and Eastern Red Bat (Lasiurus borealis) to be present, and no federally listed or proposed species were identified based on the DNA analysis of collected guano.

On July 19, 2024, FHWA coordinated with the USFWS and presented the findings of the survey and DNA analysis; USFWS responded and requested submittal of a revised project review package with the survey and DNA analysis information, and once submitted, the USFWS concurs with our determinations of effect and the ESA Section 7 consultation is complete. As such, on July 24, 2024, FHWA submitted a revised project review package to the USFWS that contained supplemental information of the survey findings and DNA analysis to support the following determinations of effect: the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect (NLAA), the Northern long-eared bat, Tricolored bat, Gray Bat, and Little Brown Bat; and the project would have no effect on the Atlantic Pigtoe, James Spineymussel, and the Monarch Butterfly.

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(05)

Summary of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act Compliance The NPS was the lead Federal agency for Section 106 compliance. Based on the proposed undertaking, the NPS determined that the project required standard consultation with the SHPO pursuant to 36 CFR 800.

The James River Bridge and the James River Developed Area are determined to be historic properties. Although, the project will involve minor actions related to rehabilitation of the James River Bridge and Visitor Center, these activities were determined to have no adverse effect on historic properties.

On August 22, 2022, the NPS consulted with the SHPO, and requested concurrence with the determination of effect; on September 16, 2022, NPS received SHPO concurrence on the no adverse effect determination based on the the following conditions (Mitigation/Treatment Measures):

• Any, and all, specimens, samples, or artifacts collected as part of this research project (and not consumed in analysis) remain property of the federal government and shall be accessioned and cataloged into the park unit's museum collection whether they are stored at an NPS facility or placed on loan to an agreed upon repository. Contact the park museum collection manager for accession and catalog information prior to commencing field research. For projects involving consumptive analysis, ensure that reports contain results. Copies of all research reports (and, when feasible, raw data and field notes) shall be cataloged into the museum archive.

• All official and non-official records created from this project (textual, electronic, audiovisual, or visual) shall be accessioned and cataloged in the park’s archives collection.

Section 106 is complete.

Additional Agency Coordination and Compliance None.

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(05)

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.

Michael Setering 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(05)

Appendix A: Environmental Checklist

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act:

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

If Yes, effects determination:

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

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act:

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

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

• Will previously undisturbed ground be disturbed?

☒Yes ☐No

• Effects determination:

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

• Was tribal consultation completed? ☐Yes ☒No

Water and Wetlands:

• Section 404 of the Clean Water Act

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

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

• Section 401 of the Clean Water Act Is Water Quality Certification anticipated? ☐Yes ☒No If Yes, certification is:

☐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(05)

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?

☐Yes ☒No

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(05)

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change

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

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

☐Yes ☒No Comments:

• Does the project consider biogenic carbon dioxide sources, carbon stock, and the project’s overall carbon footprint? ☐Yes ☒No Comments:

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

☒Yes ☐No Comments:

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

N/A