Report_NEPA.pdf

Categorical Exclusion Form ACE Basin National Wildlife Refuge

Charleston County, SC

Project: ACBA 100(1) Date: August 4, 2015

Project description, including location:

The Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division, of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), is proposing to make repairs along Perimeter Road (Route 100) within ACE Basin National Wildlife Refuge in Charleston County, South Carolina. The project consists of resurfacing approximately 1.96 miles of Perimeter Road, including rehabilitation of 0.22 miles of earthen causeway across an intertidal mash, and other miscellaneous work. The work includes removing subgrade material to a depth of approximately six inches below the subgrade and backfilling of unsuitable areas with unclassified borrow. After establishing the subgrade, a geotextile will be laid and an aggregate surface course will be placed over the geotextile. The embankment at the earthen causeway is eroding, and will be stabilized with geotextile reinforced soil, with topsoil placed for turf establishment. The rehabilitation will take place within the existing roadway footprint.

Mitigation Measures:

Archaeological: Create a protective buffer area around Pineberry or Barn Landing and Pineberry Battery.

Archaeological: Contract the services of a qualified archaeologist to monitor all ground disturbing activities at Pineberry Landing parking area.

Describe the category used to exclude the action from further NEPA:

FWS: 516 DM 2.3A (2) 1.7 Routine and continuing government business, including such things as supervision, administration, operations, maintenance, renovations, and replacement activities having limited context and intensity.

23 CFR 771.117 (c) (26): Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (including parking, weaving, turning, and climbing lanes), if the action meets the constraints in paragraph (e) of this section.

23 CFR 771.117(e) Actions described in (c)(26), (c)(27), and (c)(28) of this section may not be processed as CEs under paragraph (c) if they involve:

(1) An acquisition of more than a minor amount of right-of-way or that would result in any residential or non-residential displacements;

No right-of-way acquisitions are required for this project.

(2) An action that needs a bridge permit from the U.S. Coast Guard, or an action that does not meet the terms and conditions of a U.S. Army Corps of

No permits are needed from the U.S.

Coast Guard. This action meets the terms and conditions of the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers nationwide or general permit under section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899;

Engineers Managed Tidal Impoundment General Permit.

(3) A finding of “adverse effect” to historic properties under the National Historic Preservation Act, the use of a resource protected under 23 U.S.C.

138 or 49 U.S.C. 303 (section 4(f)) except for actions resulting in de minimis impacts, or a finding of “may affect, likely to adversely affect” threatened or endangered species or critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act;

In a letter dated January 5, 2015 the Service concurred that the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect threatened and endangered species. In a letter dated July 27, 2015 the South Carolina Department of Archives and History concurred that the project, as noted, should not adversely impact the project sites and features.

(4) Construction of temporary access, or the closure of existing road, bridge, or ramps, that would result in major traffic disruptions;

No major traffic disruptions would result from the project.

(5) Changes in access control; Access control would not change as a result of the project.

(6) A floodplain encroachment other than functionally dependent uses (e.g., bridges, wetlands) or actions that facilitate open space use (e.g., recreational trails, bicycle and pedestrian paths); or construction activities in, across or adjacent to a river component designated or proposed for inclusion in the National System of Wild and Scenic Rivers.

The project would not impact a river component designated or proposed for inclusion in the National System of Wild and Scenic Rivers.

Describe any public or agency involvement effort conducted:

On December 8, 2014 the FHWA sent a letter to the Service requesting concurrence that the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect any Federally-listed species or habitat. By the Service webpage, IPac, the determination was made that no critical habitat is within the project limits. In a letter dated January 5, 2015 the Service concurred that the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect threatened and endangered species. This fulfills the requirements under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended.

On July 7, 2015 the Service sent a letter to the South Carolina Department of Archives and History (DAH) requesting concurrence that the project would have “no adverse effect” on historic properties. The FWS proposed the use of a protective buffer area around Pineberry or Barn Landing and Pineberry Battery, and also proposed archaeological monitoring during construction at the Pineberry Landing parking area. In a letter dated July 27, 2015 the DAH concurred that the project, as noted, should not adversely impact the project sites and features.

DAH also concurred with the proposed mitigation measures. This fulfills the requirements under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended.

23 CFR 771.117 Categorical exclusions (CEs) are actions which meet the definition contained in 40 CFR 1508.4, and, based on past experience with similar actions, do not involve significant environmental impacts.

The proposed action will: YES NO Induce significant impacts to planned growth or land use for the area x

Require the relocation of significant numbers of people x

Have a significant impact on any natural, cultural, recreational, historic, or other resource x

Involve significant air, noise, or water quality impacts x

Have significant impacts on travel patterns x Otherwise, either individually or cumulatively have any significant environmental impacts x

If any box is checked yes, the action may not be categorically excluded and an EA or EIS must be prepared. If none are checked yes, attach Environmental Screening Form, notes from consultation with agencies and/or the public, notes of site visits and any other material related to the environmental impact of the proposal. This becomes the NEPA piece of the statutory compliance file.

Environmental Screening Form

Project ACBA 100(1) Date: August 4, 2015

Yes

No Don’t

Know

1. Described fully in one of the list of categorically excluded actions? x

2. Consultation with any affected agencies or tribes complete? x

3. Site visit completed? x

4. Are any significant impacts possible on the following physical, natural, or cultural resources?*

A. Geological resources - soils, bedrock, streambeds, etc.

B. From geohazards?

C. Air Quality, Traffic, or from Noise

D. Water Quality or Quantity

E. Streamflow characteristics x

F. Marine or Estuarine Resources

G. Land Use, including agricultural lands

H. Rare or unusual vegetation-old growth timber, riparian, alpine, etc.

I. Species of special concern (plant or animal; state or federal listed or proposed for listing) or their habitat

J. Unique ecosystems, biosphere reserves, World Heritage sites

K. Unique or important wildlife or wildlife habitat

L. Unique or important fish or fish habitat

M. Introduce or promote non-native species (plant or animal)

N. Recreation resources

O. Visitor experience, aesthetic resources

P. Cultural resources, cultural landscape, etc.

Q. Minority and Low Income Populations

R. Socioeconomics

S. Energy Resources

Yes

No Don’t

Know

T. Other agency or tribal land use plans or policies

U. Resource, including energy, conservation potential

V. Urban quality, gateway communities, etc.

W. Long term management of resources or land/resource productivity

* Insert the word “none” in the “no column” if the reason that a resource is not impacted is because the resource is not found in the project area.

This form is meant to be annotated with relevant information, such as notes of site visit, personnel conducting the site visit, agency officials contacted and their responses, etc. A site visit is required to complete this form, and so is required to categorically exclude a project (sec 3-4), prepare an EA or prepare an EIS.

If the answers to questions 1-3 are yes, and all answers to number 4 are no, complete the categorical exclusion checklist. If any of the answers to question 4 are don’t know, complete an EA. If any are answered yes, either a mitigated EA or EIS is required.

United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

176 Croghan Spur Road, Suite 200 Charleston, South Carolina 29407

Mr. Kevin S. Rose

Environmental Compliance Inspector Federal Highway Administration 21400 Ridgetop Circle Sterling, VA 20166-6511

January 5, 2015

Re: FW ACBA 100(1), Refuge Road Rehabilitation, ACE Basin National Wildlife Refuge, Charleston County, SC FWS Log No. 2015-1-0109

Dear Mr. Rose:

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has received your December 8, 2014, letter regarding a road rehabilitation project within the ACE Basin National Wildlife Refuge, Charleston, County, SC. The Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division of theFederal Highway Administration (FHWA) proposes to rehabilitate Refuge Perimeter Road (Route 100) that connects the refuge entrance to a boat ramp on the Dawho River. Pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), FHWA is seeking consultation with the Service regarding impacts to federally protected species that may beaffected bythe project.

The proposed work will include removing subgrade road material and back filling with suitable soils. Ageotextile fabric will be laid down and a course aggregate will be placed over the fabric to serve as the road surface. A section ofthe road is an earthen causeway through salt marsh and iseroding. The eroded areas will bestabilized using geotextile reinforced soil then stabilized with topsoil and turfplacement. There will be no realignment associated with this project and the rehabilitation will take place within the existing footprint of the road. Best Management Practices will be implemented in order to avoid sediment impacts to surface waters.

OnDecember 12, 2014, the Service requested additional information regarding the proposed project. We sought specific information on road construction, survey methods, and whether staff from the ACE Basin were involved in the development for this project. Ms. LanaLauof the FHWA provided a response with the requested information on December 18, 2014. Even though no surveys for threatened and endangered (T&E) species were performed, the FHWA determined that the project may affect, but would not adversely affect any federally listed species. This determination was made afterdiscussions with ACE Basin refugestaff who indicated no concerns regarding T&E species. In contribution to the determination, all construction would be performed within the road's existing footprint thereby causing minimal vegetative disturbance.