DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS
400 HIGH POINT DRIVE, SUITE 600
COCOA, FLORIDA 32926

REPLY TO September 24, 2013
ATTENTION OF

North Permits Branch

Cocoa Permits Section

SAJ-2012-01564(SP-A WP)

Mr. Jay Harrington

North Florida Ecological Services Office
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

7915 Baymeadows Way, Suite 200
Jacksonville, Florida 32256-7517

Dear Mr. Harrington,

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is currently developing an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for a privately-proposed project by All Aboard Florida to provide reliable and
convenient intercity passenger rail transportation between Orlando and Miami, Florida, by

maximizing use of existing transportation corridors. This transportation service

ould offer a

safe and efficient alternative to automobile travel on the Interstate-95 corridor (I-95), add

transportation capacity within that corridor and encourage connectivity with other
transportation, all without governmental operating subsidies. Because the projec

modes of
may impact

waters of the United States within the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
the Corps has agreed to be a cooperating agency in the development of the EIS. Asa cooperating
agency, the Corps has assumed responsibility for completing consultation with the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service for the proposed EIS. A draft EIS is expected to be published in|
Register in October 2013.

The applicant’s preferred alternative for the North/South corridor occurs withirl

the Federal

the right-of-

way of the existing Florida East Coast Railroad from Miami to Cocoa, Florida and will include

in-water work at fifteen (15) distinct locations within the project footprint. Addit
project would require improvements which will impact wetlands and uplands util

onally the -
ized by

federally listed species. The applicant has completed a Biological Assessment (BA), Attachment
1, which outlines the specific locations and impacts associated with the proposed wok. The
Corps has reviewed the BA and completed an evaluation of the impacts the work may have on
the West Indian manatee, Audubon’s crested caracara, wood stork, Everglades snail kite, red-
cockaded woodpecker, Florida scrub-jay, eastern indigo snake. Based on information available

from the applicant (Biological Assessment, Attachment 1) our initial determinatid
follows:

Based upon review of the Wood Stork Key for South Florida dated May 18, 20

ns are as

0, the

proposed project resulted in the following sequential determination: A > B > C > E = “Not likely

to adversely affect” the wood stork. This determination is based on the project ng

it being located

within 2,500 feet of an active colony site; impacts to suitable foraging habitat (SFH) will be

greater than 0.5 acre, project impacts to SFH are within the Core Foraging Area (
colony site, prior to construction the applicant would provide SFH compensation
with the CWA section 404(b)(1) guidelines and is not contrary to the Habitat May
Guidlines; habitat compensation would be within the appropriate CFA or within t|
of a Service-approved mitigation bank; and habitat compensation replaces foragin|

FA) of a
jn accordance
agement
ne service area
ig value,


consisting of wetland enhancement or restoration matching the hydroperiod of th
affected, and provides foraging value similar to, or higher than, that of impacted

wetlands
etlands.

Based upon review of the North and South Florida Eastern indigo snake key dated August 13,
2013, the proposed project would result in the following sequential determination: A > B > C =
“not likely to adversely affect” the Eastern indigo snake. This determination is bdsed on the

project not being located in open water; Commitments in the EIS will include the|
Service's Standard Protection Measures For The Eastern Indigo Snake (August 1|
site preparation and project construction; there are gopher tortoise burrows, hole’
other refugia where a snake could be buried or trapped and injured during project|

use of the

2, 2013) during
, cavities, or
activities; the

project will impact less than 25 acres of xeric habitat supporting less than 25 active and inactive

gopher tortoise burrows; any permit will be conditioned such that all gopher torto}

ise burrows,

active or inactive, will be evacuated prior to site manipulation in the vicinity of the burrow. If an
indigo snake is encountered, the snake must be allowed to vacate the area prior to additional site

manipulation in the vicinity. Any permit will also be conditioned such that holes,
snake refugia other than gopher tortoise burrows will be inspected each morning

cavities, and
efore planned

site manipulation of a particular area, and, if occupied by an indigo snake, no work will

commence until the snake has vacated the vicinity of proposed work.

Based upon review of the Manatee Key dated April 2013, the proposed project
the following sequential determination: A>B>C>E>N>O>P = “not likelj
affect’. This determination is based on the project is located in waters accessible
directly or indirectly affects manatees; project is other than the activities listed aby
not located in an Important Manatee Area; project includes dredging of less than
yards; project is for dredging a residential dock facility or is a land-based dredgin|
Project impacts to submerged aquatic vegetation, emergent vegetation or mangro
beneficial, insignificant, discountable or no effects on the manatee; project propo
follow standard manatee conditions for in-water work and requirements, as appro}
proposed activity, prescribed on the maps; if project is a residential dock facility,
stabilization, or dredging, the determination of “may affect, not likely to adversel}
appropriate and no further consultation with the Service is necessary.

The applicant has identified and surveyed the project area for the Florida sorub
applicant has confirmed the presence of the species within the project area, but 0
work area. Surveys completed by the applicant suggest the Florida scrub-jay is uj
the existing and future tracts. As such the Corps has determined the proposed rai
affect, not likely to adversely affect” Florida scrub-jay.

The applicant has identified areas of suitable habitat, soil, and elevations for th
mole skink and Florida sand skink. Additional surveys are being completed by t
will be coordinated with your office upon completion. Given the information cy
the Corps has determined the proposed rail addition “may affect, not likely to ad
Blue-tailed mole skink or Florida sand skink.

The Corps has determined the proposed work will have “no effect” to the Flor!
Everglade snail kite, red-cockaded woodpecker, and piping plover based on lack

would result in
to adversely
to manatees or

Ove; project is

50,000 cubic

g£ operation;

e will have

nent elects to

priate for the

shoreline
affect” is

rjay. The
ntside of the
plikely to cross
addition “may

ie Blue-tailed
e applicant and
nrently available
ersely affect”

da panther,
lof suitable

habitat, known species range within the project area, and/or lack of visual confirmation during

surveys of the project corridor.



Because the project occurs with the jurisdictional ranges of both the U.S. Fishiand Wildlife
Service, North and South Florida Ecological Services Field Offices the effect det ‘inations in
this letter are specifically tailored to the North Florida Ecological Service Office Pursuant to
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act we request your concurrence with these| determinations
within 30 days. A separate consultation tequest has been submitted to the South Florida
Ecological Services Office. You are reminded that the Corps is acting as a cooperating agency
on the proposed EIS; all required compensatory mitigation measures will be inchided as
commitments in the EIS and may eventually be applied to a Department of the ry permit
should the Corps evaluate and approve the project for compliance with Clean Water Act and
Rivers and Harbors Act.

Please advise if you agree with the above determinations or provide a date when formal
consultation would commence. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact
Andrew Phillips at the letterhead address, by telephone at 321-504-3771 extensio 14, or by.
email at andrew.w.phillips@usace.army.mil.

Sincergly;
AL Irene Sadowski
Chief, Cocoa Permits Section
Enclosure

Copies Furnished: (electronically)
FRA; Mary Hassell