ENCLOSURE C

DESCRIPTION OF AQUATIC HABITAT Environmental Assessment Form June 2004 S.R. 0522, Section 5BN, Safety Improvement Project Huntingdon County,

Part 1 - Enclosure C Description of Aquatic Habitat

8. A. AQUATIC HABITATS

(1) – (5) Describe aquatic Habitats including: food chain production, general habitat, habitat for threatened and endangered plant and animal species, and environmental study areas (sanctuaries/refuges).

1) Food Chain Production The food chain production in is a mixture of common macroinvertebrate species typical of a cold-water fishery such as stone fly larvae (Plecoptera) and water pennies. The stream provides open water habitat for aquatic species. The general habitat is also typical of a coldwater fishery. The adjacent wetland’s existing vegetation may provide a source of food and shelter for various wildlife species. Wetlands W1, W3, W4 are hydrologically connected to Blacklog Creek and may provide food chain support through the exportation of organic matter during high flows.

2) General Habitat The Blacklog Creek is located within the Basin. Blacklog Creek is a fourth order stream and a tributary of , which eventually flows into the . Blacklog Creek is classified as a Cold Water Fishery (CWF) (Chapter 93, Title 25, of the Pennsylvania Code). Blacklog Creek, from its headwaters to Byron Church, is designated by the PFBC as a Stream Section Having Verified Trout Reproduction (PFBC 2002 Listing). This section of Blacklog Creek is north of the project area, however the section of Blacklog Creek within the project area is listed by the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC) as an Approved Trout Water (2004 Listing) by the PFBC. The watershed of Blacklog Creek is predominately described as forested and mountainous. The watershed has a drainage area of approximately 170.16 square kilometers (65.7 square miles) in size. Blacklog Creek is characterized as an upper perennial (R3) stream with a high gradient with moderately fast water flow. Blacklog Creek is a large stream approximately 12 meters (40 feet) wide with boulder streambed and intermittent riffles. The streambed appears to be well defined and the banks very stable. There is a large quantity of rock deposit in the riverbed and along the banks. Five intermittent watercourses were also identified in the project area. Descriptions of the intermittent streams are provided in the Wetland Identification and Delineation Report, SR 0522, Section 5BN, March 2002 (Enclosure A). No in stream work will be conducted in Blacklog Creek between March 1 and June 15 unless prior approval is granted by the PFBC.

1 Environmental Assessment Form June 2004 S.R. 0522, Section 5BN, Safety Improvement Project Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania

Four wetlands (W1, W3, W4 and W4A) totaling 0.157 ha (0.388ac) were identified and delineated throughout the project corridor. The methodology, findings and supporting documentation regarding the wetland delineation are contained in Enclosure A (Wetland Identification and Delineation Report, SR 0522, Section 5BN, March 2002). The wetland boundaries were approved during a jurisdictional determination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE), Baltimore District and Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) on February 19, 2002. The wetland habitat types included Palustrine Emergent, Palustrine Scrub-Shrub and Riverine systems. These wetlands contain various vegetation such as Northern Spicebush (Lindera benzoin), Red Maple (Acer rubrum), American Elm (Ulnus americana), spotted touch-me-knot (Impatiens capensis), purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), hop sedge (Carex lupulina) and false nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica). The aquatic/wildlife diversity and abundance function is low to moderate for these wetlands. These wetlands are small in size and do not offer high-quality habitat in large part due to their location adjacent to existing S.R. 0522, however occasional ponding of water in these areas may provide some amphibian breeding areas.

3) Habitat for Threatened and Endangered Species The Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources’s (PADCNR) Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI), U.S. Fish and Wildlife service (USFWS), Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC), and Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC) were contacted for a listing of endangered and threatened species and unique or natural communities in the vicinity of the project area. All of the agencies reported that no such species or communities have been identified within the project area. However, potential Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis) roosting habitat is present throughout the project area and a field view was held 4/9/02 with the USFWS to determine possible impacts to this habitat for the federal and state endangered species. Correspondence and minutes from the 4/9/02 field view are attached at the end of Enclosure C.

4) Environmental Study Areas No environmental study areas such as sanctuaries or refuges are present in the study area. No stream relocation, enclosure, or dredging will be needed as part of the proposed improvement project.

5) Instream Macroinvertebrate Communities. No stream relocation, enclosures, or dredging is anticipated for this project, therefore no description of instream macroinvertebrate communities has been provided.

2 Environmental Assessment Form June 2004 S.R. 0522, Section 5BN, Safety Improvement Project Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania

B. WATER QUANTITY AND STREAM FLOW

(1) – (6) Describe water quantity and streamflow, including: natural drainage patterns, flushing characteristics, current patterns, groundwater discharge for baseflow, natural recharge area for ground and surface waters, and storm and floodwater storage and control.

1) Natural Drainage Patterns Blacklog Creek has a drainage area of approximately 170.16 square kilometers (65.7 square miles). The watershed ranges in elevation from 207.26 meters (680 feet) up to 612.65 meters (2,010 feet). The land cover within the watershed is forested and a small amount of coverage (10%) is developed by low density residential areas. This upper perennial (R3) stream has a high gradient with moderately fast water flow. Blacklog Creek is a large stream approximately 12.2 meters (40 feet) wide with boulder streambed and intermittent riffles. The five intermittent streams within the project area primarily carry surface water runoff to Blacklog Creek. They may also carry water from seasonal groundwater seeps. Under existing conditions Blacklog Creek will overtop the section of S.R. 0522 within the project area during a 100-year flood event.

Natural drainage patterns of Blacklog Creek are typical of perennially flowing, cold-water fishery, at the project’s location in the watershed. A riffle-run-pool complex is characteristic of the stream within the project area. The identified and delineated wetlands adjacent to Blacklog Creek may at times of the year, especially during periods of high groundwater, have a minor effect on the overall current and drainage pattern depending upon the quantity of water they retain or release.

2) Flushing Characteristics The streambed of Blacklog Creek appears to be well defined and stable within the project area. There is a large quantity of rock deposit in the riverbed and along portions of the banks upstream of the project area. The banks widen towards the lower portion of the project area and just upstream of an old weir located in Blacklog Creek. The banks become steeper again downstream of the weir (and the project area) as Blacklog Creek approaches Orbisonia. The stream banks are densely vegetated on the west side of the creek, while the east side of the creek has dense vegetation close to the creek followed by the S.R. 0522 roadway surface and grassed shoulders in the outer floodplain areas. The densely vegetated wooded banks are very stable.

3 Environmental Assessment Form June 2004 S.R. 0522, Section 5BN, Safety Improvement Project Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania

4) Groundwater Discharge for Baseflow Blacklog Creek does not contribute to groundwater discharge for baseflow to adjacent systems. Blacklog Creek is mainly a transport mechanism at this location carrying surface water to Aughwick Creek. The adjacent wetlands (W1, W3, and W4), however, may contribute intermittent baseflow to the creek.

5) Natural Recharge Area for Ground and Surface Waters The section of Blacklog Creek flowing through the project area has a minimal natural recharge area for ground and surface waters. Due to Blacklog Creek’s moderately steep banks and composition of large rocks along such banks, the amount of natural recharge is minimal due to a limited supportive area, which lacks dense vegetative cover and ponding within the defined banks. The adjacent wetlands also contribute minimally to natural recharge area from rainfall, utilizing much of the water that enters the system.

6) Storm and Floodwater Storage and Control Wetlands W1, W3, and W4 are directly linked to Blacklog Creek and have low to moderate storm and floodwater storage control due to their small size in relation to their watershed and low to moderate vegetative cover. Wetlands W3 and W4 also have constricted outlets which may increase their ability to hold runoff and moderate the discharge into the creek during flood events. However, these wetlands do contribute on a cumulative basis to desynchronize flow by soil capillary storage and frictional roughness of vegetation.

C. WATER QUALITY

(1) – (4) Describe water quality including: prevention of pollution, sedimentation control and patterns, salinity distribution, and natural water filtration.

1) Preventing Pollution In general, water quality of Blacklog Creek is consistent with its Chapter 93 designation as a cold-water fishery. The coarse texture of the unconsolidated bottom and lack of dense vegetation within the stream channel make it unlikely that the stream is highly functional in prevention of pollution, sedimentation control and patterns, and natural water filtration.

4 Environmental Assessment Form June 2004 S.R. 0522, Section 5BN, Safety Improvement Project Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania

2) Sedimentation Control and Patterns Opportunity for sedimentation control within the project area is minimal, however Wetland W4 and Waters W4 and WB may provide retention and filtering of sediment during storm events

3) Salinity Distribution The project area does not fall near a coastal zone, therefore salinity distribution in regards to Blacklog Creek and surrounding wetlands is not an issue.

4) Natural Water Filtration

Wetlands W1, W3 and W4 are directly linked to Blacklog Creek and contain Atkins silt loam which has moderately slow to moderate permeability possibly allowing water to stand for a period of time sufficient to allow for moderate filtration. These wetlands have the ability to desynchronize flow by soil capillary storage and frictional roughness of vegetation, however due to their size these functions may be limited.

D. RECREATION

(1) – (6) Describe recreation, including: game species, non-game species, fishing, hiking, observation (plant/wildlife), other:

1) Game Species No public land is located within the project area therefore recreational opportunities associated with game species are limited.

2) Non Game Species No public land is located within the project area therefore recreational opportunities associated with non game species are limited.

3) Fishing Fishing is one of the primary recreation uses within the project area. This section of Blacklog Creek is stocked by the PFBC. However, no official access is maintained by the PFBC.

4) Hiking Hiking may occur in and around the project area, however there were no obvious hiking trails noted within the project area.

5) Observation While abundant plant and animal life exist within the surrounding forest, there are limited viewing areas for observation of plants and/or wildlife

5 Environmental Assessment Form June 2004 S.R. 0522, Section 5BN, Safety Improvement Project Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania

within the project area. Opportunities for observation of plants and/or wildlife may increase with the addition of the parking area.

6) Other No other recreational opportunities were identified within the project area.

E. UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM PROPERTY

Describe upstream and downstream property.

The project area begins approximately 609.6 meters (2,000 feet) north of the bridge over Blacklog Creek and extends northward to the southern limit of the Borough of Orbisonia. The project area is situated within the Appalachian Mountain Section of the Ridge and Valley Physiographic Province of Pennsylvania. The watershed upstream and downstream of the project area is primarily comprised of steep mountainous forested slopes. Blacklog Narrows Gap is very steep and narrow, offering little design flexibility without significant mountainside involvement.

SR0522 is a major north-south route in Huntingdon County and the highway provides regional access to Interstates 70/76 and to the south and to State Routes 22 and 322 to the north. The local communities of Shade Gap to the south and Orbisonia and Shirleysburg to the north rely on SR 0522 for access and support from larger communities to the north and south.

A section of the Blacklog Narrows Historic District is located adjacent to SR 0522 (Enclosure D, Figure 2). The District parallels Blacklog Creek for approximately 671meters (2,200 feet) along SR 0522. The northern end of the District extends another 213 meters (700 feet) north, parallel to SR 0522 but set back approximately 61meters (200 feet) northeast of the roadway. Contributing resources to the Historic District include the remnants of Rockhill and Winchester Furnaces and Cromwell Mill. The historic district includes historic industrial resources, contemporary lime kiln, and various connecting roads. The National Historic Landmark portion of the Shade Gap Branch of east Broad Top Railroad is located adjacent to the project area, but does not lie within the project area limits.

F. OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS DETERMINED BY SITE INVESTIGATION

Describe other environmental factors determined by the site investigation.

No additional environmental factors of concern were determined during the field investigation within the project area.

6

MEMORANDUM OF MEETING

DATE: February 26, 2002 Revised March 8, 2002 MEETING DATE: February 19, 2002

PLACE: SR 0522, Section 5BN Project Site – Parking Area across from Cromwell Mill TIME: 1:00 PM

SUBJECT: S.R. 0522, Section 5BN Cromwell Township, Huntingdon County KCI Job Order No. 18-87005

ATTENDEES: Vince Greenland – PENNDOT District 9-0 Carl Edwards – PENNDOT District 9-0 Stu Kehler – PENNDOT District 9-0 Kristen Swan – PENNDOT District 9-0 Caesar Tagliati – PENNDOT District 9-0 Debby Nizer – US Army Corps of Engineers John Blacksmith – DEP Orlando Dizo - DEP Paul Ford – KCI Technologies Barbara Hoehne – KCI Technologies Deborah Henson – KCI Technologies Ben Reiman – KCI Technologies

The purpose of this meeting was to serve as the Jurisdictional Determination and Section 404/Chapter 105 Pre-Application Field View for SR 0522, Section 5BN. A copy of the List of Attendees is included as Attachment 1. The following items were discussed.

General Project Information

1. Mr. Greenland and Ms. Hoehne provided an overview of the project, describing the project limits and the proposed horizontal and vertical realignments to improve safety through the corridor. Ms. Hoehne noted that the proposed roadway typical section consists of two (2) 12-foot lanes and 8-foot shoulders.

2. Ms. Hoehne distributed half-size plans, profiles, and cross sections showing the existing roadway and topography, proposed roadway, and wetlands. MEMORANDUM OF MEETING Page 2 of 5 KCI Job Order No. 18-87005 February 19, 2002

Jurisdictional Determination

3. The wetlands were reviewed from south to north, with the following revisions proposed by Ms. Nizer: • Wetland W5 – Station 537+30, Rt. to Station 538+20 – The classification of this portion of Wetland W5 will be changed from PEM to R4 (intermittent channel). • Station 546+30, Lt. to Station 548+00, Lt. – KCI will delineate the existing intermittent overflow channel along the creek in this area. • Wetland W4 – Station 549+10, Rt. to Station 550+30, Rt. – The classification of this portion of Wetland W4 will be changed from PEM to R4 (intermittent channel). • Wetland W1 – Station 555+40, Lt. to Station 558+60, Lt. –The classification of this wetland will be changed from PFO/PSS to PSS. • Station 564+00, Rt. to Station 565+00, Rt. – Mr. Reiman noted that the area is used for roadside parking and appeared to have recently received fill material. This recent disturbance has created small isolated pockets that detail some runoff. Limited hydrophytic vegetation was observed, but the soils do not indicate that this area is a wetland. Ms. Nizer noted that she did not need to review this area and that it does not need to be delineated as a wetland since hydric soils are not present.

These revisions will be incorporated into the Final Wetland Identification and Delineation Report.

4. Using a 1:1 replacement ratio, area from the Aughwick Creek Advance Wetland Compensation Site will be used to mitigate for the impacts from this project on the vegetated wetlands (PEM and PSS). Mr. Blacksmith and Ms. Nizer were in agreement with the use of the banking site for this project.

Section 404/Chapter 105 Pre-Application Field View

5. Mr. Dizo noted that the existing and proposed 100-year floodplain will need to be added to the plans.

6. Mr. Blacksmith recommended that Ms. Hoehne contact Andy Patterson at the Huntingdon County Conservation District regarding the question about the use of the General or Individual NPDES permit for the Section 5BS portion of this project. (February 21, 2002 – At Mr. Patterson’s recommendation, Ms. Hoehne spoke with Mr. Bob Cadwallader (DEP). He noted that the requirement for an Individual NPDES Permit relating to impacts to Threatened and Endangered Species and their MEMORANDUM OF MEETING Page 3 of 5 KCI Job Order No. 18-87005 February 19, 2002

habitats was intended for the Bog Turtle. For the Section 5BS project with impacts to a potential habitat for the Indiana Bat, the General NPDES Permit will be acceptable.)

7. A 1 (h): 1 (v) rock embankment is proposed from Station 541+25, Lt. to Station 543+50, Lt. and Station 549+25, Lt. to Station 551+50, Lt. Mr. Dizo noted that the steepest allowable fill slope adjacent to the creek is 1.5 (h) : 1 (v). If the proposed alignment is shifted to the east, this will increase impact to the Blacklog Narrows Historic District . One objective of this project is to reduce impacts to this historic district. KCI will review holding the toe of fill slopes in these locations, flattening the fill slope to 1.5 (h) : 1 (v), and reducing the flat area behind the proposed guiderail.

8. Mr. Blacksmith noted that there is an existing surface sewage discharge from the David W. and Sharon K. Leidy property to the swale at Station 550+85, Rt. He stated that KCI will need to address their understanding of Cromwell Township’s plans for providing sanitary sewer in the project area in the permit application.

9. From Station 549+00, Lt. to Station 551+00, Lt., KCI will propose a relocated channel similar in width to the existing channel.

10. Mr. Blacksmith noted that the impacts to the riverine wetland throughout the project should be calculated and they should be mitigated on site at a replacement ratio of 1:1 with new plantings to reestablish the riparian corridor along the creek. The location of the existing parking area which is to be removed, Station 544+00, Lt. to Station 546+00, Lt. was noted as a potential area for this mitigation. Ms. Nizer noted that seedlings and saplings, not seeds, should be planted of the same species that currently exist in the project area. This issue will be reviewed by PENNDOT and KCI.

11. Mr. Dizo noted that an H&H Report with a HEC-RAS Analysis will be required for this project since it is anticipated that there will be construction in the Floodway of Blacklog Creek. The floodway and existing and proposed 100-year floodplain will be presented in the H&H Report. KCI will determine if the project is located in an area of a detailed FEMA study. If it is, then no increase in the 100-year floodplain is allowed. If it is not located in the area of a detailed FEMA study, then an increase of 1 foot is allowed from the existing 100-year floodplain to the proposed 100-year floodplain. KCI will prepare a supplement to include this work in the contract.

12. In response to Mr. Ford’s question regarding the existing stream cross sections for the HEC-RAS Analysis, Mr. Dizo noted that the existing contours that KCI received from PENNDOT could be used to generate these sections. (In Ms. Hoehne’s MEMORANDUM OF MEETING Page 4 of 5 KCI Job Order No. 18-87005 February 19, 2002

subsequent discussions with KCI’s Chief of Surveys regarding the H&H Report, he noted that these existing contours will not accurately reflect the bottom of the creek elevations. KCI is proposing to include field surveys to obtain stream cross sections in the supplement for the H&H Report).

13. Mr. Greenland noted that in the alternatives analysis in the Joint Permit Application, KCI should include a discussion of the alternative locations reviewed for the parking lot and the reasons for dismissing each.

14. Mr. Greenland noted that KCI should relocate the proposed township road to be centered on the existing driveway, Station 551+00, Rt. This will allow the preservation of several trees between the township road and the Leidy property. It will also allow for the connection of the driveway serving properties 6 (Himes, Barben, & Caspar) and 7 (Scott) to the proposed township road. This revision to the proposed township road location will also eliminate the kink in the proposed driveway at township road Station 11+90, Rt. KCI will provide the revised plans, profile, and cross-sections to Mr. Greenland.

15. KCI will provide revised plan, profile, and cross sections of the parking lot, Station 547+72, Lt. to Mr. Greenland.

SR 0522, Section 5BS

16. Following the Section 5BN meeting, Mr. Kehler, Mr. Ford, Mr. Reiman, Ms. Hoehne, and Ms. Henson reviewed Wetland W8, Station 492+00, Rt., in Section 5BS. The purpose of this site visit was to determine if the areas of temporary impact identified in Ms. Hoehne’s February 7, 2002 fax to Mr. Kehler could be replanted to re- establish a forested wetland (PFO). Due to the forest community at this location (early/mid successional with limited understory growth), it was agreed that these areas could be considered temporary impacts and re-planted after construction. This will result in a permanent PFO impact of 0.045 acres which is less than the 0.05 acres available in the Aughwick Creek Advance Wetland Compensation Site. Mr. Kehler will complete the mitigation narrative and the ledger sheet for the Aughwick Creek Advance Wetland Compensation Site and forward them to Ms. Hoehne for Sheladia’s inclusion in the Joint Permit Application. MEMORANDUM OF MEETING Page 5 of 5 KCI Job Order No. 18-87005 February 19, 2002

We believe that the above accurately reflects what transpired at this meeting. However, we will appreciate comments involving a difference in understanding of what occurred. Unless we are notified in writing to the contrary within ten (10) days after receipt, we will assume that all in attendance concur in the accuracy of this transcription. cc: All Attendees Mr. Nevin Myers – C.C. Johnson and Malhotra Mr. Robert Anderson – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mr. Kevin Mixon – PA Game Commission Mr. J.R. Holtsmaster – PA Fish and Boat Commission Mr. Andy Patterson – Huntingdon County Conservation District