Report_NEPA.pdf

1 Project Setup

2 Funding

3 Internal Scoping / IDT Tasks

4 Natural/Cultural Compliance

5 Internal Documents / Comments

6 Public Communication

7 Public Documents & Comment Analysis

8 Close Project

Print Forms

Project Home

Compliance Summary

ESF

NEPA

Mitigations

NHPA / CRM

NHPA / CRM

Specialist Reviews Other Compliance / Consultations Print Forms

Print Print Preview

GWMP > Repair of the CIA/FHWA Bridge Overpass (3300-003P)

National Historic Preservation Act/CRM (Edit)

Form Prepared: 08/28/2015 Data Entered By: Bradley Krueger

Area of Potential Effect Area of Potential Effect: The Area of Potential Effect (APE) is the CIA Overpass Bridge, a feature of the George

Washington Memorial Parkway cultural landscape, and its surrounding environs.

Area of Potential Effect Document:

Question Answer A. Has the area been surveyed? Yes George Washington Memorial Parkway NRHP nomination

95000605 (1995); George Washington Memorial Parkway North Section CLI (2009); Mount Vernon Trail Extension Phase I Archeological Survey (2006)

B. Have NRHP resources been identified? Yes C. Ground disturbance involved? Yes

D. Archeological resources present? No Notes: Both prehistoric and historic archeological sites are located in the general vicinity of the work area, however, surveys around the CIA Interchange were completed in 2006 and 2009 that encountered no archeological resources. Ground disturbing activities associated with the proposed project have a low potential to adversely impact archeological resources.

E. Historic structures/resources present?

Yes

Property Name Location NR Status LCS Park # George Washington Memorial Parkway

Fairfax County, Arlington County, City of Alexandria

(VA)

Notes: Proposed project involves repair to the CIA Overpass (that passes over the George Washington Memorial Parkway) and adjacent roadway and exit ramp. The George Washington Memorial Parkway is not anticipated to be impacted by the proposed activities.

F. Cultural landscapes present? Yes

Property Name Location NR Status LCS Park # George Washington Memorial Parkway - North, Cultural Landscape, CLAIMS 600170

Notes: Proposed project will occur within the cultural landscape of the historic George Washington Memorial Parkway- North Section. Repairs to the overpass and roadway will be performed in kind and are not expected to result in visually conspicuous alterations. Temporary visual impacts related to construction activities and equipment will occur.

G. Ethnographic resources affected? No Notes:

(Subtype, have interested parties been contacted?)

Archeology/ARPA/NAGPRA/Sacred Sites Surveyor(s):

ARCH Survey Required: No Started:

Completed:

Report Generated: No Where housed:

ARPA Permit Required: No Permit Number:

Question Answer Notes/Dates of contacts No

Home | Parks | Project / Search | Reports | Tools | Admin | Logout

Page 1 of 3PEPC - National Historic Preservation Act (Edit)

1/13/2016https://pepc.nps.gov/nhpa.cfm?mode=view&projectId=60171

H. Are there any Native American sacred or culturally sensitive sites, locales (such as clan gathering or other cultural event), or landscapes present in the project area?

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?

No

J. Have the associated Native American groups been consulted as to the project potential impacts, if any, to sacred or sensitive sites, locales, or landscapes?

No

K. Is implementation of the project likely to disturb human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or objects of cultural patrimony, as defined by NAGPRA?

No

L. Is an approved plan of action in place to address inadvertent discoveries of human remains, funerary objects, sacred sites, or objects of cultural patrimony?

No

M. Will the project result in the intentional excavation of human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or objects of cultural patrimony?

No

The Proposed action will: (Check as many as apply)

Question Answer N. Destroy, remove, or alter features/elements from a historic structure. No O. Replace historic features/elements in kind Yes P. Add nonhistoric features/elements to a historic structure No Q. Alter or remove features/elements of a historic setting or environment (inc. terrain) No R. Add nonhistoric features/elements (inc. visual, audible, or atmospheric) to a historic setting or cultural landscape

No

S. Disturb, destroy, or make archeological resources inaccessible No S2. Disturb, destroy, or make ethnographic resources inaccessible No T. Potentially affect presently unidentified cultural resources No U. Begin or contribute to deterioration of historic fabric, terrain, setting, landscape elements, or archeological or ethnographic resources

No

V. Involve a real property transaction (exchange, sale, or lease of land or structures) No Other(please specify)

Supporting Documentation Data None Entered

Supporting Documentation File Upload No files.

Assesment of Effect Assesment of Effect: No Adverse Effect

No Adverse Effect

Documentation Method Streamlined Review

Streamlined Review Streamlined Review Activity: 3. Repair/Resurfacing/Removal of Existing, Roads, Trails and Parking Areas.

Explanation:

SHPO/THPO

SHPO Required: No THPO Required: No

Page 2 of 3PEPC - National Historic Preservation Act (Edit)

SHPO/THPO Notes:

ACHP

ACHP Participating: No ACHP Participating Notes:

Additional Consulting Parties Additional Consulting Parties: No Additional Consulting Parties Notes:

Conditions/Stipulations Recommendations for Conditions or Stipulations:

See mitigations in Section C.5 and conditions and stipulations in Section B.

Superintendent Approval Date: 10/28/2015

Last Updated Date: 10/29/2015 Last Updated By: bradley_krueger

PEPC Guide - Inside NPS - NPS.gov - Disclaimer - Accessibility - Privacy Policy

Page 3 of 3PEPC - National Historic Preservation Act (Edit)

1 Project Setup

2 Funding

3 Internal Scoping / IDT Tasks

4 Natural/Cultural Compliance

5 Internal Documents / Comments

6 Public Communication

7 Public Documents & Comment Analysis

8 Close Project

Print Forms

Project Home

Compliance Summary

ESF

NEPA

Mitigations

NHPA / CRM

NHPA / CRM

Specialist Reviews Other Compliance / Consultations Print Forms

Print Help

View ESF Form (2015 version)

GWMP > Repair of the CIA/FHWA Bridge Overpass (3300-003P) (60171)

Environmental Screening Form

A. Project Information Form Initiated: 08/28/2015 Notes / Status:

B. Project Description (please see the data in Step 1 Project Setup.)

1. Is project a hot topic (controversial or sensitive issues that should be brought to attention of Regional Director)?

No

C. Resource Effects to Consider (Tailor the following to meet individual park/unit project needs.)

Please see section F (Instructions for Determining Appropriate NEPA Pathway) prior to completing this section. Also, use the process described in DO-12, 2.9 and 2.10; 3.5; 4.5(G)(4) and (G)(5) and 5.4(F) to help determine the context, duration and intensity of effects on resources.

Identify potential effects to the following physical, natural, or cultural resources

Answer Data Needed to Determine / Notes

1. Geological resources - soil, bedrock, streambeds, etc. No Effects

2. From geohazards No Effects

3. Air Quality Negligible Effects

Proposed rehabilitation will have temporary effects to air quality due to construction equipment and activities, such as concrete repair, painting, and roadway overlay replacement.

4. Soundscapes Negligible Effects

Proposed rehabilitation will have temporary effects to soundscapes due to noise from construction equipment and activities.

5. Water quality or quantity Negligible Effects

Proposed rehabilitation will have temporary effects to site drainage, as some inlets will be protected/closed-off and water diverted during construction activities. Also, increased contaminates from new asphalt.

6. Streamflow characteristics No Effects

7. Marine or estuarine resources No Effects

8. Floodplains or wetlands No Effects

9. Land use, including occupancy, income, values, ownership, type of use

No Effects

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

No Effects

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

12. Unique ecosystems, biosphere reserves, World Heritage sites

No Effects

13. Unique or important wildlife or wildlife habitat No Effects

14. Unique, essential or important fish or fish habitat No Effects

15. Introduce or promote non-native species (plant or animal) No Effects

16. Recreation resources, including supply, demand, visitation, activities, etc.

No Effects

17. Visitor experience, aesthetic resources Minor Effects

Proposed rehabilitation will have temporary effects to visitor experience due to minor traffic disruption on the GWMP during construction activities.

18. Archeological resources

Home | Parks | Project / Search | Reports | Tools | Admin | Logout

Page 1 of 5PEPC - Environmental Screening Form (Edit)

1/13/2016https://pepc.nps.gov/esfNew.cfm?menuLink=true&mode=view&projectId=60171&CFID=...

Negligible Effects

Proposed rehabilitation could potentially impact unknown archaeological resources during ground disturbing activities (both prehistoric and historic sites are within the vicinity of the project area).

19. Prehistoric/historic structures Minor Effects

Proposed rehabilitation will replace damaged elements of the CIA Overpass in-kind (both historic and non-historic fabric). There will be no real perceptible change to the physical characteristics of the overpass. The overpass will soon become a historic structure (as part of the GWMP NRHP nomination update), so all work must adhere to the Secretary of Interior's Standards for rehabilitation to historic structures.

20. Cultural landscapes Negligible Effects

Proposed rehabilitation will have temporary effects to the cultural landscape due to potential traffic congestion during construction activities.

The CIA Overpass is a contributing element to the GWMP- North Section's cultural landscape.

21. Ethnographic resources No Effects

22. Museum collections (objects, specimens, and archival and manuscript collections

No Effects

23. Socioeconomics, including employment, occupation, income changes, tax base, infrastructure, concessions

No Effects

24. Minority and low income populations, ethnography, size, migration patterns, etc.

No Effects

25. Energy resources No Effects

26. Other agency or tribal land use plans or policies No Effects

27. Resource, including energy, conservation potential, sustainability

No Effects

28. Urban quality, gateway communities, etc. No Effects

29. Long-term management of resources or land/resource productivity

Minor Effects

Proposed rehabilitation will have benefits to long-term management of the CIA Overpass due to improved structural conditions. Failure to conduct these repairs could result in further degradation of the structure and accelerated loss of integrity. The overpass will soon become a historic structure (as part of the GWMP NRHP nomination update), so all work must adhere to the Secretary of Interior's Standards for rehabilitation to historic structures.

30. Other important environmental resources (e.g. geothermal, paleontological resources)?

No Effects

Comments:

More information provided in addendum: No

Park ESF Addendum Questions & Answers List:

The ESF Addendum Questions & Answers for Park 'George Washington Mem Pkwy' (GWMP).

ESF Questions Answer Data Needed to Determine

1. Alter scenic features, viewsheds, be visually intrusive or add to a degraded visual condition?

No

2. Yes Temporary diversion of surface water due to inlet protection during construction activities.

Page 2 of 5PEPC - Environmental Screening Form (Edit)

Change the pattern of surface water flow, alter hydrologic processes or affect erosion?

3. Involve any ground disturbance (digging depth)? Is the area of disturbance in known previously disturbed soil (e.g.

utility, road repair, poles, wells, etc.)?

Yes Temporary installation of traffic-controlling devices and perimeter fencing. Potential ground disturbance may occur during curb replacement.

5. Changes in dark conditions, natural night skies, or glare?

No

6. Change the need or demand for park operation, police or emergency services?

No

7. Create an attractive nuisance? No

8. Affect park trails or trail usage? No

9. Change congestion levels, traffic volumes or traffic safety conditions for vehicles, pedestrians, or bicyclists?

Yes Temporary traffic congestion is possible during construction activities (planned one-lane road closures on GWMP under CIA Overpass).

10. Affect current or planned visitor services, recreation resources, access, or available parking?

No

11. Change or impede accessibility? No

12. Involve issues or concerns for park neighbors or organizations or generate media attention?

Yes Proposed rehabilitation will be a benefit to the neighboring CIA Headquarters and its employees.

13. Maintain, create or change a public or employee safety or health hazard?

Yes Proposed rehabilitation will benefit the safety and longevity of the CIA Overpass.

14. Require the removal of a tree over 30 feet tall or 8 inches in diameter, or several smaller trees in one location?

15. Disturb vegetation (i.e. cut or remove) that does not appear to have been disturbed within the last 3-5 years?

Yes Proposed rehabilitation includes trimming vegetation at the eastbound lane towards the southbound GWMP on-ramp.

16. Occur within 10 feet of a creek or shoreline?

No

17. Involve construction activity? Yes Proposed rehabilitation includes construction activities such as concrete repair, painting, and roadway overlay replacement.

18. Affect what people see when they enter, drive, boat, walk or otherwise visit along the parkway or in the park?

Yes Proposed rehabilitation will result in temporary visual impacts due to construction equipment and activities.

Completion of the project will have a benefit to the appearance of the overpass (i.e., repair damaged areas).

19. Significantly alters the way GWMP does business?

No

20. Occur within 3 feet of the park boundary? No

Park Addendum List

No files.

D. Mandatory Criteria

If implemented, would the proposal... Answer Data Needed to Determine A. Have significant impacts on public health or safety? No 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

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

No

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

No

No

Page 3 of 5PEPC - Environmental Screening Form (Edit)

2.A. If so, plan name: Plan Project ID:

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

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

No

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

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

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

No

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

No

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

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

For the purpose of interpreting these procedures within the NPS, any action that has the potential potential to violate the NPS Organic Act by imparing park resources or values would constitue an action that triggers the DOI exception for actions that threaten to violate a federal law for protection of the environment.

E. Other Information (Please answer the following questions/provide requested information.)

Question Answer

1. Are personnel preparing this form familiar with the site? Yes 1.A. Did personnel conduct a site visit? No (If yes, attach meeting notes re: when site visit took place, who attended etc.)

2. Is the project in an approved plan such as a General Management Plan or an Implementation Plan with an accompanying environmental document?

2.B. Is the project still consistent with the approved plan? (If no, you may need to prepare plan/EA or EIS.)

2.C. Is the environmental document accurate and up-to-date?

FONSI: No ROD: No (NEPA Information) Approved:

3. Are there any interested or affected agencies or parties?

3.A. Did you make a diligent effort to contact them?

4. Has consultation with all affected agencies or tribes been completed?

(If yes, attach additional pages re: consultations, including the name, dates, and a summary of comments from other agencies or tribal contacts.)

5. Are there any connected, cumulative, or similar actions as part of the proposed action?

(If yes, attach additional pages re: consultations, including the name, dates, and a summary of comments from other agencies or tribal contacts.)

F. Instructions for Determining Appropriate NEPA Pathway

First, always check DO-12, section 3.2, "Process to Follow" in determining whether the action is categorically excluded from additional NEPA analyses. Other sections within DO-12, including sections 2.9 and 2.10; 3.5; 4.5(G)

(4) and (G)(5), and 5.4(F), should also be consulted in determining the appropriate NEPA pathway. Complete the following tasks: conduct a site visit or ensure that staff is familiar with the site's specifics; consult with affected agencies, and/or tribes; and interested public and complete this environmental screening form.

If your action is described in DO-12 section 3.3, "CEs for Which No Formal Documentation is Necessary," follow the instructions indicated in that section.

If your action is not described in DO-12, section 3.3, and IS described is section 3.4, AND you checked YES or identified "data needed to determine" impacts in any block in section D (Mandatory Criteria), this is an indication that

Page 4 of 5PEPC - Environmental Screening Form (Edit) there is potential for significant impacts to the human environment, therefore, you must prepare an EA or EIS or supply missing information to determine context, duration, and intensity of impacts.

If your action is described in section 3.4 and NO is checked for all boxes in section D (Mandatory Criteria), AND there are either no effects or all of the potential effects identified in Section C (Resource Effects to Consider) are no more than minor intensity, usually there is no potential for significant impacts and an EA or EIS is not required. If, however, during internal scoping and further investigation, resource effects still remain unknown, or are at the minor to moderate level of intensity, and the potential for significant impacts may be likely, an EA or EIS is required.

In all cases, data collected to determine the appropriate NEPA pathway must be included in the administrative record.

Last Updated Date: 10/29/2015 Last Updated By: bradley_krueger

PEPC Guide - Inside NPS - NPS.gov - Disclaimer - Accessibility - Privacy Policy

Page 5 of 5PEPC - Environmental Screening Form (Edit)

Species Conclusions Table

Project Name: GWMP 210(1)

Date: 01/13/2016

Species Name/Critical Habitat

Potential Habitat Present?

Species Present?

Critical Habitat Present?

ESA / Eagle Act Determination Notes / Documentation Summary (include full rationale in your report)

Northern Long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis)

No No No Effect No habitat present within project action area as work will remain within the roadway footprint.

VADCR Natural Heritage species search indicates no presence of NLE bat in the project action area.

Bald Eagle No No Eagle Act Permit required No nests within 660' and not within a concentration area. Unlikely to disturb nesting Bald Eagles.

Critical Habitat No

Layers: VA Eagle Nest Locator

Map Center [longitude, latitude]: [-77.14071750640869, 38.95550432333387]

Map Link:

http://www.ccbbirds.org/maps/#layer=VA+Eagle+Nest+Locator&zoom=15&lat=38.95550432333387&lng=-77.14 071750640869&legend=legend_tab_7c321b7e-e523-11e4-a-a0-0e0c41326911&base=Street+Map+%28MapQuest%29

Report Generated On: 01/13/2016

The Center for Conservation Biology (CCB) provides certain data online as a free service to the public and the regulatory sector. CCB encourages the use of its data sets in wildlife conservation and management applications. These data are protected by intellectual property laws. All users are reminded to view the Data Use Agreement to ensure compliance with our data use policies. For additional data access questions, view our Data Distribution Policy, or contact our Data Manager, Marie Pitts, at mlpitts@wm.edu or 757-221-7503.

Report generated by The Center for Conservation Biology Mapping Portal.

To learn more about CCB visit ccbbirds.org or contact us at info@ccbbirds.org

CCB Mapping Portal http://www.ccbbirds.org/maps/#layer=VA Eagle Nest Locator&zoom=15&lat=38.95550432333387&lng=-77.14071750640869&legend=legend_tab_7c321b7e-e523-11e4-aaa0-0e0c41326911&base=Street Map (MapQuest) http://www.ccbbirds.org/maps/#layer=VA Eagle Nest Locator&zoom=15&lat=38.95550432333387&lng=-77.14071750640869&legend=legend_tab_7c321b7e-e523-11e4-aaa0-0e0c41326911&base=Street Map (MapQuest) http://www.ccbbirds.org/maps/#layer=VA Eagle Nest Locator&zoom=15&lat=38.95550432333387&lng=-77.14071750640869&legend=legend_tab_7c321b7e-e523-11e4-aaa0-0e0c41326911&base=Street Map (MapQuest) http://www.ccbbirds.org/resources/data-use-agreement/ http://www.ccbbirds.org/resources/data-distribution-policy/ http://www.ccbbirds.org/maps/ http://www.ccbbirds.org

IPaC - Information for Planning and Conservation ( ): A project planning tool to helphttps://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/ streamline the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service environmental review process.

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

GWMP 210(1) CIA

Overpass Bridge IPaC Trust Resource Report Generated January 13, 2016 01:01 PM MST, IPaC v2.3.2

This report is for informational purposes only and should not be used for planning or analyzing project level impacts. For project reviews that require U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service review or concurrence, please return to the IPaC website and request an official species list from the Regulatory Documents page.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/

IPaC Trust Resource Report

01/13/2016 01:01 PM Page 2Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) v2.3.2

US Fish & Wildlife Service

IPaC Trust Resource Report

NAME

GWMP 210(1) CIA Overpass Bridge

LOCATION

Fairfax County, Virginia

DESCRIPTION

The project work consists of rehabilitation of the CIA overpass bridge structure and resurfacing of the south side bridge approach and southbound ramp that leads to the CIA entrance to the facilities.

IPAC LINK

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/project/

TQ6SV-TCOSF-CG7IS-MFHKW-7A4VY4

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Contact Information Trust resources in this location are managed by:

Virginia Ecological Services Field Office 6669 Short Lane Gloucester, VA 23061-4410

(804) 693-6694 https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/project/TQ6SVTCOSFCG7ISMFHKW7A4VY4 https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/project/TQ6SVTCOSFCG7ISMFHKW7A4VY4

01/13/2016 01:01 PM Page 3Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) v2.3.2

Threatened

Endangered Species Proposed, candidate, threatened, and endangered species are managed by the of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.Endangered Species Program

This USFWS trust resource report is for informational purposes only and should not be used for planning or analyzing project level impacts.

For project evaluations that require FWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an official species list from the Regulatory Documents section.

of the Endangered Species Act Federal agencies to "request of theSection 7 requires Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency.

A letter from the local office and a species list which fulfills this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an official species list from the Regulatory Documents section in IPaC.

The list of species below are those that may occur or could potentially be affected by activities in this location:

Mammals Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis

CRITICAL HABITAT

has been designated for this species.No critical habitat https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A0JE

Critical Habitats There are no critical habitats in this location http://www.fws.gov/endangered/ http://www.fws.gov/endangered/laws-policies/section-7.html https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A0JE

01/13/2016 01:01 PM Page 4Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) v2.3.2

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Migratory Birds Birds are protected by the and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act Bald and Golden Eagle

.Protection Act

Any activity which results in the of migratory birds or eagles is prohibited unlesstake authorized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ( ). There are no provisions for1 allowing the take of migratory birds that are unintentionally killed or injured.

Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in the take of migratory birds is responsible for complying with the appropriate regulations and implementing appropriate conservation measures.

Additional information can be found using the following links:

Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/ birds-of-conservation-concern.php Conservation measures for birds http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/ conservation-measures.php Year-round bird occurrence data http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/ akn-histogram-tools.php

The following species of migratory birds could potentially be affected by activities in this location:

American Oystercatcher Haematopus palliatus

Year-round https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0G8

American Bittern Botaurus lentiginosus

Season: Wintering https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0F3

Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus

Year-round https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B008

Black-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus

Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0HI

Blue-winged Warbler Vermivora pinus

Season: Breeding

Cerulean Warbler Dendroica cerulea

Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B09I

Fox Sparrow Passerella iliaca

Season: Wintering http://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/laws-legislations/migratory-bird-treaty-act.php http://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/laws-legislations/bald-and-golden-eagle-protection-act.php http://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/laws-legislations/bald-and-golden-eagle-protection-act.php http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/birds-of-conservation-concern.php http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/birds-of-conservation-concern.php http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/conservation-measures.php http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/conservation-measures.php http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/akn-histogram-tools.php http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/akn-histogram-tools.php https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0G8 https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0F3 https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B008 https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0HI https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B09I

01/13/2016 01:01 PM Page 5Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) v2.3.2

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern

Bird of conservation concern Kentucky Warbler Oporornis formosus

Season: Breeding

Least Bittern Ixobrychus exilis

Season: Breeding

Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus

Season: Wintering https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0FU

Pied-billed Grebe Podilymbus podiceps

Season: Breeding

Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor

Season: Breeding

Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea

Season: Breeding

Purple Sandpiper Calidris maritima

Season: Wintering

Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus

Year-round

Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus

Season: Wintering

Short-eared Owl Asio flammeus

Season: Wintering https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0HD

Snowy Egret Egretta thula

Season: Breeding

Willow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii

Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0F6

Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina

Season: Breeding

Worm Eating Warbler Helmitheros vermivorum

Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0FU https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0HD https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0F6

01/13/2016 01:01 PM Page 6Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) v2.3.2

Refuges Any activity proposed on lands must undergo a 'CompatibilityNational Wildlife Refuge Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

There are no refuges in this location http://www.fws.gov/refuges/

01/13/2016 01:01 PM Page 7Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) v2.3.2

Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory Impacts to and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation underNWI wetlands Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal Statutes.

For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army .Corps of Engineers District

DATA LIMITATIONS

The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery.

Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis.

The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.

Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site.

DATA EXCLUSIONS

Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters.

Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory.

These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.

DATA PRECAUTIONS

Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate federal, state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may affect such activities.

Wetland data is unavailable at this time.

http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/ http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx