Final Environmental Impact Report - Whittier Bridge/I-95 ...

In the period leading up to the submission ofthe DEIR, MassDEP and the MassDOT team have
consulted on several occasions and MassDOT has provided additional information subsequent to
the filing ofDEIR in order to clarify how the project will conform to MassDEP's regulatOlY
requirements. MassDEP and MassDOT's will continue to collaborate in order to comprehensively
address the environmental impacts ofthe project while keeping the project on schedule.
Wetlands
Need for a Variance
MassDEP's review regarding potential impact to wetlands and waters was conducted at
conceptual level appropriate for MEPA process and not detailed permit level review. Notices of
Intent (NOIs) have been submitted to Newburyport, Amesbury and Salisbury conservation
commissions to conduct the proposed work located in wetland resource areas and buffer zones.
MassDOT indicated that a Vilriance from Wetlands Regulations would not be needed as direct
impacts proposed to BVW are less than 5,000 square feet in anyone municipality (see Chapter 8,
page 8·19, MassDEP·4) and no direct impact is proposed to salt marsh. However, the
information submitted was not sufficient for MassDEP to conclude that the stormwater
regulatory standards specified in the Wetland and Water Quality Celiification regulations at 310
CMR 1O.05(6)(k) and 314 CMR 9.06(6)(a), respectively, have been met. MassDEP has met and
exchanged information with MassDOT multiple times to resolve this issue. MassDEP and
MassDOT will continue to work through the issues until the project is in full compliance with
applicable regulations.
Resource Area Disturbance Threshold
The project proposes impacts that are near but do not exceed size thresholds that would require a
Variance from the Commissioner for alterations to resource areas. In Amesbury, bordering
vegetated wetland impacts proposed are 4,960 square feet, while projects impacting greater than
5,000 square feet require a Variance. MassDOT and MassDEP agree that it is imperative to
ensure that there are no inadvertent impacts to wetland resource areas during construction
beyond those currently proposed. For example, due to design·build nature ofthis project, the
contractor may find it necessary to require access through the salt marsh to reconstruct the
existing bridge and build the new bridge, either through a temporary road or boats. All practical
measures must be taken to avoid and minimize impacts to wetland resource areas. In the FEIR
MassDOT has agreed to propose a management system that will avoid problems that could lead
to unpermitted wetland resource area alteration and environmental degradation that is difficult
and costly to restore. As pmi ofthat commitment, MassDOT will confirm in the FEIR the
process it will adopt to ensure that access and staging areas will not impact resource areas, that
contractors will be made explicitly aware oftheir compliallce obligations under the wetland
regulations and the conservation commission orders, and that an Environmental Monitor who is
experienced in erosion and sedimentation control management, wetland replacement, and other
mitigation techniques will be hired for project construction oversight and contractor compliance
training through the post construction monitoring period. MassDEP is also concemed that
another potential unanticipated impact to'wetland resource areas immediately adjacent to Route
1.95 project area is that the contractor may by necessity need to locate work yards or lay down
areas. Depending on the amount ofadditional impact that may be required to site work yards or
lay down areas which MassDEP agrees are necessary to further the project, it is possible that the
2