Mining Impacts related to Cray?shes DAHE: July 12, 2017 APPROVAL: Harold Ward -- Director Guide to Consideration of Potential Mining-related Impacts on the Guyandotte River and Big Sandy River Cray?shes The following information shall serve as guidance regarding consideration of the Federally Endangered Guyandotte River cray?sh, Cambarus veteronus, and the Federally Threatened Big Sandy River cray?sh, Cambarus callianus, to potential impacts wrought by mining activities. The information includes an initial key to determine which protective measures, if any, are needed in consideration o?mitigation for an action. Also, an adaptive management plan designed to prevent and mitigate for any impacts from sedimentation emanating from the action. These processes, along with the existing permit provisions designed to protect all wildlife, are considered suf?cient to protect aquatic species, including Federal species. As such, the anticipates no impacts to the species if these and all permit provisions are adhered to; therefore, the calculated direct and incidental take associated with projects that meet and maintain these criteria is zero. INITIAL KEY TO CONSIDERATION OF IMPACTS T0 CRAYFISHES 1.) Does the proposed action occur within a watershed of known occurrence for or within the described range of the threatened or endangered cray?sh species? I Yes-??-go to step 2 I no further action needed 2.) Does the proposed action immediately impact a 3""1 order stream segment or larger within a known occurrence HUG-10 watershed or does the proposed action directly impact a tributary to a 3rd order stream segment that is less than 500m from the con?uence with a 3rd order stream segment or larger? 9 Yes-?--?go to step 3 provide standard benthicfhabitat/water quality data required to assess the impacts of the proposed action, provide results for baseline analyses, no further action needed 3.) Conduct physical habitat assessment to determine the potential for cray?sh colonization. Based upon the results of the survey, was potential habitat for the species present in the impacted stream segment? 0 Yes, potential habitat to step 4 No, potential habitat not habitat survey results including photo documentation, no further action needed 4.) Conduct presence/absence survey for the cray?sh species via approved cray?sh surveyor. Were cray?sh species located in the surveyed stream segment? a Yes, cray?sh species present?mgo to step 5 I No, cray?sh species not present?-?-provide survey results, no further action needed Pl 5.) Complete a protection and enhancement plan (PEP) and Incidental Take statement for the identi?ed cray?sh species and include documentation within section of the permit. Also, include a consultation closure letter from the US Fish and Wildlife Service. WATER QUALITY PROTECTIVE MEASURES NEEDED FOR CRAYFISHES As part of the permit conditions associated with the proposed action, all applicable water quality standards are expected to be met, both for human health and the health of aquatic life, including endangered species. Since no information exists within the published, peer-reviewed literature to suggest that any additional parameters or water quality criteria are needed to protect these species, it is surmised that the existing criteria are protective. These criteria include numeric criteria established to protect aquatic life ?om all known toxicants and stressors as well as narrative criteria designed to evaluate aquatic life from a community perspective that incorporates all short-term and long-term stressors in a waterbody. The reaches affected by this action are expected to maintain water quality standards (as compared to baseline conditions) and are not expected to be deleteriously impacted by the proposed action. However, as a precaution to the potential impacts from deposited sediment on the cray?sh species? habitat emanating from the proposed action, an adaptive management plan will be employed. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE MACTS OF SEDIMENTATION EMANATIN FROM MINING ACTIONS IMPACTING FEDERALLY THREATENED AND ENDANGERED CRAYFISI-IES The following guidance will be used to monitor and mitigate for any extraneous impacts from sedimentation emanating from the proposed action. At the ?rst three (3) BOO-meter stream segments, continuous or interrupted by tributary, of the action or discharge, sediment monitoring stations will be established and periodically inspected. In the absence of an annual high precipitation event, the sediment monitoring stations will be monitored using the standard USEPA Rapid Bioassessment Protocol measures of sediment deposition and embeddedness applied throughout the reach. The sediment monitoring stations will be monitored following each annual high precipitation event. The results of each monitoring event will be compared to the initial evaluation for the location and, if a signi?cant decline in the scoring is detected, mitigative actions will be performed to restore potential habitat within that stream reach. A signi?cant decline in the sediment evaluations will be considered with a 5-point reduction in the scoring for either of the evaluation measures or when a narrative category declines for both measures both sediment deposition and embeddedness decline ?'om ?optimum? conditions to ?suboptimum?). Mitigation for potential habitat lost due to the impacts from sedimentation emanation ?om the proposed action shall include restoration of the habitat feature described as the most limiting factor affecting the occurrence of these cray?shes?slab boulders. At a rate of one hundred (100) slab boulder structures per 300-meter station, the stream reaches impacted will be augmented with the lacking habitat. These structures, along with natural features, will be surveyed for occupancy, as the monitoring of these reaches for continued impacts from sedimentation persists throughout the duration of the permit. It is not expected that sedimentation from a permitted action should displace any species, including cray?sh, as the annual monitoring of benthic invertebrates associated with the action is designed to detect such impacts. P2 Guide to Consideration of Potential Mining-related Impacts on the Guyandotte River and Big Sandy River Crayfishes The following information shall serve as guidance regarding consideration of the Federally Endangered Guyandotte River cray?sh, Comborus veteronus, and the Federally Threatened Big Sandy River cray?sh, Camborus to potential impacts wrought by mining activities. The Information includes an initial key to determine which protective measures, If any, are needed in consideration of/mitigatlon for an action. Also, an adaptive management plan designed to prevent and mitigate for any impacts from sedimentation emanating from the action. These processes, along with the existing permit provisions designed to protect all wildlife, are considered suf?cient to protect aquatic species, including Federal species. As such, the anticipates no impacts to the species ifthese and all permit provisions are adhered to; therefore, the calculated direct and incidental take associated with projects that meet and maintain these criteria is zero. 1.) 2.) 3.) 4.) INITIAL KEY TO CONSIDERATION OF IMPACTS TO CRAYFISHES Does the proposed action occur within a watershed of known occurrence for or within the described range of the threatened or endangered (TM) crayfish species? Yes go to step 2 No no further action needed Does the proposed action immediately impact a 3" order stream segment or larger within a known occurrence HUG-tic watershed or does the proposed action dlrectly Impact a tributary to a 3"d order stream segment that is less than 500m from the con?uence with a 3?rd order stream segment or larger? Yes go to step 3 standard quality data required to assess the impacts of the proposed action, provide results for baseline analyses, no further action needed Conduct physical habitat assessment to determine the potential for crayfish colonization. Based upon the results of the survey, was potential habitat for the species present in the impacted stream segment? Yes, potential habitat present go to step 4 No, potential habitat not present provide habitat survey results including photo documentation, no further action needed Conduct presence/absence survey for the Tails cray?sh species via approved cray?sh surveyor. Were cray?sh species located in the surveyed stream segment? Yes, Tail: cray?sh species go to step 5 No, crayfish species not present provide survey results, no further action needed P3 5.) Complete a protection and enhancement plan (PEP) and Incidental Take statement for the identi?ed res crayfish species and include documentation within section H-4 of the permit. Also, includes consultation closure letter from the US Fish and Wildlife Service. WATER QUALITY PROTECTIVE MEASURES NEEDED FOR CRAVFISHES As part of the permit conditions associated with the proposed action, all applicable water quality standards are expected to be met, both for human health and the health of aquatic life, including endangered species. Since no information exists within the published, peer?reviewed literature to suggest that any additional parameters or water quality criteria are needed to protect these species, it is surmised that the existing criteria are protective. These criteria include numeric criteria established to protect aquatic life from all known toxicants and stressors as well as narrative criteria designed to evaluate aquatic life from a community perspective that Incorporates all short-term and long~term stressors in a waterbody. The reaches affected by this action are expected to maintain water quality standards [as compared to baseline conditions) and are not expected to be deieteriousiy impacted by the proposed action. However, as a precaution to the potential impacts'from deposited sediment on the cray?sh species? habitat emanating from the proposed action, an adaptive management plan will be outplayed. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE IMPACTS OF SEDIMENTATION EMANATING FROM MINING ACTIONS IMPACT I N6 F-EDERALLY THREATENED AND ENDANGERED CRAYFISHES The following guidance will be used to monitor and mitigate for any extraneous impacts from sedimentation emanating from the proposed action. At the ?rst three (3) SOD-meter stream segments, continuous or interrupted by tributary, of the action or discharge, sediment monitoring stations will be established and periodically inspected. in the absence of an annual high precipitation event, the sediment monitoring stations will be monitored using the standard USEPA Rapid Bioassessment Protocol measures of sediment deposition and embedd'edness applied throughout the reach. The sediment monitoring stations will be monitored following each annual high precipitation event. The results of each monitoring event will be compared to the initial evaluation for the location and, if a signi?cant decline in the scoring is detected, mitigative actions will be performed to restore potential habitat within that stream reach. A significant decline in the sediment evaluations will be considered with a 5-point reduction in the scoring for either of the evaluation measures or when a narrative category declines far both measures both sediment deposition and embed-dedness decline from ?optimum? conditions to "suboptlmunf?l. Mitigation for potential habitat lost due to the impacts from sedimentation emanation from the proposed action shall include restoration of the habitat feature described as the most limiting factor affecting the occurrence of these crayfishes?siab boulders. At a rate of one hundred (100) slab boulder structures per BOO-meter station, the stream reaches impacted will be augmented with the lacking habitat. These structures, along with natural features, will be surveyed for occupancy, as. the monitoring P4 of these reaches for continued innpacts from sedimentation persists throughout the duration of the permit, It is not expected that sedimentation from a permitted action should displace any species, including crayfish, as the annual monitoring of benthic invertebrates associated with the action is designed to detect such impacts. P5