19970176 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_19970206

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P. E., Director
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Col. Terry Youngbluth
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Dear Col. Youngbluth:
A&4?
?EHNFi
March 13, 1997
Dare County
WQC 401 Project #970176
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions, to conduct maintenance dredging and
beach disposal or waters for the purpose of removing shoals and refurbishing the beach at Rodanthe, Avon or
Rollinson Channels or disposing of the material from Rollinson Channel in an upland diked disposal basin,
as you described in your revised application dated 12 March 1997. After reviewing your application, we have
decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Numbers 3123, 3120 or 3105. This
Certification replaces one issued on 11 March 1997.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If you
change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application. If total
wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required
as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the
conditions listed in the attached certification. In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local
permits before you go ahead with your project. Also this approval will expire when the accompanying 404 or
CAMA permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing.
You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written
petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its conditions
are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-1786.
S' c lyAHo `n
? y
tod,, Jr
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Washington Field Office
Washington DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Domey
Central Files
Jenny Owen; Corps of Engineers
Joe Lassiter; Quible & Associates
970176.1tr
Division of Water Quality • Environmental Sciences Branch
Environmental Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
?LJiYM w
UT
?Numbeq-
1 -y

®SECYOU ! WIL
CLu[LL?
® SEE YOD y _,
U`RGE,

r
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY rt {` `;
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS,
F.
P.O. BOX 1890 I ' " ?
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890 DEC 2 7 08
IN REPLY REFER TO g
j tNA WETLANDS GROUP
CESAW-EP-PE-97-28-0006 Dew ? yr _ ''
PUBLIC NOTICE
and
NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) FOR
MAINTENANCE OF RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON CHANNELS
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, DECEMBER 1996
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers is preparing to perform maintenance dredging of the Rodanthe and
Rollinson channels (Attachment 1). Due to severe shoaling, these two projects located
in Pamlico Sound along the Outer Banks of North Carolina require maintenance
dredging to restore the channels to their previously authorized project depths.
The recommended plan includes the dredging of the channels and harbors at
Rodanthe and Rollinson. The sandy, coarse-grained dredged material from the outer
portions of the channels will be placed in the designated beach disposal sites. During
some maintenance dredging events, such as the upcoming dredging, the coarse-
grained material from Rodanthe will be stockpiled in an upland area on the east side of
Highway 12, 1.5 miles north of Rodanthe Harbor, using the control-of-effluent method
of disposal. The material will then be hauled by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) to areas along Highway 12 that are susceptible to beach
washover. Fine-grained, muddy material from the inner portions of the Rollinson and
Rodanthe channels and all harbor material will be placed within the previously used
upland diked disposal sites that are adjacent to the Rollinson and Rodanthe Harbors.
Although dredging of the Avon Channel is addressed in the Environmental Assessment
(EA) for Maintenance of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson channels Dare CountV, North
Carolina, December 1996, the Avon project will not be dredged in FY 1997.
Dredging will be accomplished by a hydraulic pipeline dredge and material will be
removed to a depth of 8 feet below mean low water (mlw) (-6 feet mlw plus 2 feet
overdepth). A dredging contractor will be selected by competitive bidding and dredging
will begin in February 1997 and be completed by April 30, 1997. This proposed action
will result in the excavation of 118,000 cubic yards of material from Rodanthe and
300,000 cubic yards from Rollinson.
The above referenced EA, which addresses the potential environmental impacts of
the proposed work, is being circulated for 30 day public review concurrently with this
Public Notice. Based on comments received during the review period, it is anticipated
that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) will be prepared.
A letter dated August 16, 1995, was sent to the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management (NCDEM) requesting that a general water quality
certification, pursuant to Section 401 (PL 95-217), be issued for disposal of dredged
material on ocean beaches in North Carolina. To date, a draft version of this general
certification has been completed, however, a final version has not. The proposed
beach disposal would be covered under this general certification, when it is finalized. A
Section 404(b)(1) (PL 95-217) Evaluation and Statement of Findings has been
prepared and signed and is included as Appendix B of the EA. Special Use Permits for
beach disposal and control-of-effluent disposal alongside Highway 12 will be obtained.
The proposed beach disposal sites for the Rodanthe and Rollinson channels are
located within the boundaries of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore, therefore, the
National Park Service will issue Special Use Permits for those areas.
Pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, a Water
Quality General Certification (WQC #3024) for Corps of Engineers dredging activities
using upland diked disposal sites was issued on September 6, 1995. A letter
requesting that the proposed sites at Rodanthe and Rollinson be included under
General Certification No. 3024 will be sent to the NCDEM concurrently with the EA and
Public Notice. An updated Section 404(b)(1) Evaluation and Statement of Findings has
been completed and signed and is included as Appendix C of the EA.
A Section 401 Water Quality Certificate (WQC) will be,required for the control-of-
effluent disposal of dredged material from the Rodanthe channel. A letter requesting
that a Section 401 WQC be issued for this work is being sent to the NCDEM
concurrently with the EA and Public Notice. An updated Section 404(b)(1) Evaluation
and Statement of Findings for this method of disposal has been completed and signed
and is included as Appendix D of the EA. The Highway 12 site for Rodanthe is located
within the boundaries of the Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge, therefore, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) will issue a Special Use Permit for that area.
The proposed action has been evaluated for adherence to the requirements of
Executive Order 11988, Flood Plain Management. The proposed action is located
within the 100-year flood plain; however, there are no feasible upland alternative sites.
Adverse impacts to natural flood plain resources have been minimized; therefore, the
proposed action complies with all applicable State and local flood plain ordinances and
with Executive Order 11988.
The proposed project has been evaluated under Executive Order 11990,
Protection of Wetlands. The only wetlands that would have the potential to be
impacted by the proposed project are those associated with the upland diked disposal
areas. As discussed in the EA, the proposed disposal sites are flanked by wetland
2
areas, however, all dredged material will be placed in the upland portions of the
disposal sites. Therefore, the proposed work will not impact wetlands.
The project will not impact species currently on the Federal list of threatened or
endangered species.
No archaeological or historical resources would be affected by the proposed
maintenance dredging or the disposal of the dredged material in the upland diked
disposal sites or in the Highway 12 site. The area to be dredged is a previously
dredged channel and the upland disposal areas have been previously utilized for
dredged material disposal. Impacts from vehicles and construction equipment used in
placing dredged material on the beaches are discussed in the following paragraphs.
Project requirements have been coordinated with Richard Lawrence, Chief,
Underwater Archaeology Unit (UAU), Office of State Archaeology, Division of Archives
and History, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources. According to
Mr. Lawrence, the beach disposal areas occur within two archaeological subdivisions of
the coast: North Hatteras Beach, extending from Cape Hatteras to Pea Island and
South Hatteras Beach, extending from Cape Hatteras to Ocracoke. The UAU site files
list 25 wrecks for the North Hatteras Beach unit and 3 wrecks for the South Hatteras
Beach unit. Of the southern wrecks, one is within a proposed disposal area, 0003SHB,
recorded January 1995. There are other wrecks known to exist on the beach and
offshore of both areas but none are believed to be in the area of effect.
The greatest threat to this wreck is impact by heavy equipment operating on the
beach. Disposal, per se, is not regarded as a threat. In order to assure that damage
does not occur, the following steps will be taken:
1) Sometime during the winter of 1997, prior to dredging, the known wreck will be
visually relocated. Compass bearings and tape measurements will then be taken from
established or recoverable datum points so that the wreck location can be
reestablished just prior to beach disposal. This is necessary because the wreck is
likely to be naturally covered with sand within a few months of their initial recording.
2) A few weeks prior to project maintenance, the wreck or its documented
location will be relocated and flagged so that it can be avoided by heavy equipment. In
addition, other portions of the project area will be visually inspected to assure that no
other wreckage has been uncovered in the interim between location documentation and
project construction. Any new wreck finds will be flagged for avoidance.
The proposed action is being coordinated with the North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management for a consistency determination with the North Carolina Coastal
Area Management Act.
A list of Federal, State, and local agencies with whom this activity is being
coordinated is included as Attachment 2.
The decision whether to perform this work will be based on an evaluation of the
probable impact, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed activity on the public
interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and
utilization of important resources. The benefits which reasonably may be expected to
accrue from the proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable
detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered,
including the cumulative effects thereof, among those are conservation, economics,
aesthetics, general values, flood hazards, flood plain values, land use, navigation,
shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water
quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations
of property ownership, and in general, the needs and welfare of the people.
This public notice is being distributed to all known interested persons concurrent
with performance of work. For accuracy and completeness of record, all data in
support of or in opposition to the work should be submitted in writing, setting forth
sufficient detail to support convictions. Any person who has an interest which may be
affected by the proposed project may request a public hearing. The request must be
submitted in writing to the District Engineer within 30 days of the date of this notice and
must clearly set forth the interest which may be affected and the manner in which the
interest may be affected by this activity. All correspondence should refer to the title,
number, and date of this notice. For further information or to receive a copy of the EA,
contact Ms. Jenny Owens, Environmental Resources Section, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Post Office Box 1890, Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890, telephone
[phone].
?figbColonrmy
Xistrie y
aine
er
Attachments
4

L
ryy? '' ty ? '?
`. Sound
I i
,YRRELL r N
' DARE s
t t

DE
0
,/CARTERET
R.
PROJECT LOCATION
RODANTHE AND ROLLINSON
(HATTERAS) CHANNELS
Scale in miles
S 0 S io
mil 1?f
t,
t Opp
tS
A
Go t
t
4°' t
HATTERAS
(ROLLINSON CHAN
a ii ac k rv?e r, 4- 1

List of Federal, State, and Local Agencies
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Fifth Coast Guard District
Director, Office of Environmental Compliance,
U.S. Department of Energy
Director, Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance,
U.S. Department of Interior
EIS Review Section, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IV
Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IV
Federal Highway Administration
Area Director, Forest Service, USDA
Habitat Conservation.Division, Beaufort Marine Fisheries Center,
National Marine Fisheries Service
Office of Ecology and Conservation, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
State Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Energy and Resources Division, U.S. Department of Interior
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
National Park Service
North Carolina Division of Water Resources
North Carolina State Clearinghouse
North Carolina Department of Transportation
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Officer
North Carolina Wildlife Federation
North Carolina Aquarium at Fort Fisher
CAMA Officer, Dare County
Cape Fear Community College
Cape Fear River Research Institute
Dare County Oregon Inlet and Waterways Commission
Center for Environmental Health
Conservation Council of North Carolina
Environmental Defense Fund
American Rivers
National Audubon Society
Attachment 2
•
List of Federal, State, and Local Agencies (cont.)
National Wildlife Federation
North Carolina Coastal Federation
North Carolina Wildlife Federation
Sierra Club
Librarian, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources
State Library of North Carolina
Randall Library, UNC-Wilmington
UNC-Chapel Hill Library
Joyner Library, East Carolina University
All U.S. Senators and Representatives for the State of
North Carolina
Dare County Board of Commissioners
County Manager, Dare County
Town Managers
Mayors
Postmasters
2 Attachment 2
D L,, Q

ENT OF Tye/ZF
9
ql
7 S
'1fgRCH ,$a
?-e
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
January 24, 1997
Lieutenant Colonel Terry R. Youngbluth
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
RF0,F/EEL
L1QN ;
Dear Colonel Youngbluth:

This is the report of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) on the Environmental Assessment (EA) for Maintenance
Dredging of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channels, Dare County,
North Carolina. This EA was announced in Public Notice (PN) ID
#CESAW-EP-PE-97-28-0006, dated December 19, 1996. This report is
submitted in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d), and Section 7
of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531-1543).
According to information provided in the EA and PN, the
Wilmington District, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
proposes to perform maintenance dredging on the named channels.
Sandy dredged material from the Rollinson and Avon channels which
is suitable for beach disposal would be placed in designated
disposal sites on nearby beaches. Sandy material from the
Rodanthe project would be placed in the designated beach disposal
site near the town or in an upland disposal site 1.5 miles north
of Rodanthe Harbor on Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
(PINWR). Non-sandy dredged material from Rodanthe and Rollinson
Harbors would be placed in upland diked disposal areas. The
total amount of material expected to be dredged is approximately
618,000 cubic yards (cy). The PN states that only work at
Rodanthe and Rollinson Channel would be done in fiscal year 1997.
This work would begin in February 1997 and be completed by April
30, 1997.
The purpose and need for this work are given in the introduction
of the EA. The alternatives considered by the Corps are given in
Section 4 of the EA. The Service considers these section
adequate.

Wetlands and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)
The EA states (pp. 11-12) that no wetlands would be impacted by
the proposed dredging. However, some wetlands adjacent to the
upland diked disposal areas "have the potential to be impacted."
The EA does not specify the nature of any impacts, but the
possibility of excessive sediment runoff from the disposal areas
is a cause for concern. The Service recommends that the Corps
identify all potential adverse impacts to project area wetlands
and describe the measures which would to be used to mitigate
these impacts.
The EA indicates (p. 10) that some SAV areas could be adversely
affected. The Service agrees with the benefits provided by SAV
which are given in the EA, and we consider these areas to have
very high value to fish and wildlife resources. The EA does not
quantify the expected loss of SAV areas. The Service recommends
that the Corps develop a quantitative assessment of SAV which
will be loss as a direct result of the project and develop a plan
for compensatory mitigation.
Disposal on Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
Current project plan calls for the disposal of all beach quality
dredged material (>90% sand) from the Rodanthe channel (total of
118,000 cy) at a 12-acre, upland site approximately 1.5 miles
north of Rodanthe and within PINWR. The EA states (p. 5) that
this disposal plan has been approved by all concerned agencies,
including the Service.
While the Service would not object to the placement of beach
quality sand in the designated disposal area, personnel of the
PINWR are concerned that current sediment evaluation procedures
may not be sufficient to ensure the compatibility of the dredge
material for use on the refuge (Dennis Stewart, PINWR, personal
communication, January 13, 1997). At the present time, the
Service is consulting with Dr. Robert Dolan and seeking
clarification on the sediment evaluation procedures (Dwight
Cooley, PINWR, personal communication, January 23, 1997). The
Service cannot support the proposed disposal plan until the
compatibility of the dredged material for use on the refuge is
conclusively established. We encourage the Corps to continue
coordination with personnel at PINWR to ensure that disposal does
not adversely impact refuge resources or operations.
Section 7
Section 5.06 of the EA considers project impacts on species
protected by the ESA. The Service's primary concern involves
potential impacts to sea turtle nesting which may occur on North
Carolina beaches from May 1 through September 30. The Corps
should note that the ending date of actual sea turtle nesting is
September 30, not August 30 as noted in the PN. The PN states
that the work would occur from February through April 30, 1997.
The Service is pleased that the Corps is endeavoring to avoid
adverse impacts to sea turtles. We agree that the seasonal
limits for beach disposal are satisfactory. In addition, the
Corps needs to ensure that their beach disposal does not render
these areas unsuitable for sea turtle nesting due to compaction
or the formation of escarpments.
The PN states that the project will not impact species currently
on the federal list of threatened or endangered species. Based
on the information in the EA, the Service concurs that this
project is not likely to adversely affect any federally-listed
endangered and threatened species, their formally designated
critical habitat, or species currently proposed for federal
listing under the ESA, as amended. Therefore, we believe that
the requirements of Section 7 of the ESA have been satisfied. We
remind you that obligations under Section 7 consultation must be
reconsidered if: (1) new information reveals impacts of this
identified action that may affect listed species or critical
habitat in a manner not previously considered; (2) this action is
subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this
review; (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat
determined that may be affected by the identified action.
Summary
The EA states (p. 21) that the Corps anticipates that a Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) will be prepared for this
project. At the present time, the Service cannot support such a
finding until the concerns discussed above have been thoroughly
addressed and suitable conservation measures are incorporated
into project plans. The Service appreciates the opportunity to
comment on this project. If you have any questions regarding
these comments, please contact Howard Hall at 919-856-4520,
ext.27.
Sincerely,
YJ'o hnM. H ner
perviso
FWS/R4:HHall:1/24/97:WP:A:dare.197
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
James a Hunt, Jr., G ovemor
Jonathan & Howes, Secretary
Steven J. Levitas, Deputy Secretary
T4
?EHNF?
Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
FAX:[phone]
FAX TO: a6 Z,. s.s; ?,, I FAX NUMBER: qI - ;26, -/.?6d
FROM: &r f P: ce
PHONE: q ly-- 773-I 9A-
NO.OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS SHEET: a
..-, k
Mail Completed Application to!
pivisi0n of Water Quality
NC Department of Environmentr Health,
and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh. NC 27607-6445•
ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Ph. [phone]
DEM ID:
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
1. DATE: March 6, 1997
2. NAMEIADDRES.S.: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Distdct
,°,n ;.;,,.•
..Id?MRir, M .f x,;•4vA ., l,b.??», .h 4:ak„'S7.k aa. r?.. d?i.eS •.1ru•,iw. Yi6w??., ?b?i;oi lEdT}56 )• ?el?V?iiVa iQ+a iu?e+s`yV??d. ,u o4i 4r;1., {r ad oi. 4)+;,;h dt•i..N ,,.,. ,.a h,4k1h it i
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
3. RESPONSIBLE INDMOUAL: Terry R. Youngbluth
Colonel. U.S. Army
District Engineer
4. INAAME OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTACT: Jenny Owens
TELEPHO?? HUMBER: [phone]
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance dredging of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channels as discussed in the
Environmental Assessment (EA)l for Maintenance Dredqinq of Rodanthe. Avon. and Rollinson Channels. Dare
nnty. North Carolina. Decembe
7. DESCRIPTION QF PROPOSED WORK: The proposed action covers the dredging and disposal of dredged
material from the Rollinson, Avon, and Rodanthe Channels, Dare County, North Carolina. The proposed dredging
would >,e perrormed by a hydraulic pipeline dredge and the coarse-grained (sandy) material from the channel
would be placed in the designated beach disposal areas. The proposed action is described in detail in Section
3.00 of the above-referenced EA.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPO,SEP_WMK: Severe shoaling in the subject channels severely limits navigability to
recreational and commercial vessels. Maintaining the channels to their previously authorized depths would
alleviate this problem. In addition, the proposed method of disposal would provide badly needed sand to the
designated beaches-
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY I :Q IN: February 1997
10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 90 days
11. DISCHARGE-4F:
X Dredged Material
_ Fill Material
12. LCEITION OF DISCHARGE
Municipality; Rollinson, Avon, and Rodanthe, North Carolina
County: Dare
Drainage Basin: Tar-Pamlico Basin
Receiving Waters: Atlantic Ocean
/ J 'k I'HR-ki f-177 f 14 - DO USHk_r_ W 1 U'I 1 NU I UN
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable
r. W4/b4
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COM.P{?IC?N: The material proposed for
discharge is naturally occurring coarse-grained to fine-grained sand and is not contaminated or polluted.
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION-IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LQCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS .,A HQW. OR 0R1N.?
X YES (circle one) NO
17. NUMBER OF ACRES OR VOLUME OF WETLANDS IM_ PACTED BY THg PRQPQSED PR„ sQAECT:
Filled: None
Excavated: None
A;T? ,ll P g d done
18. STATE REASONS WHY THg APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE Q_ IRRIF&
OUT AS PLANNED. ALSO. NOTE-MEASURES _TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS:
Maintenance dredging of the subject channels is necessary to restore them to navigable depths. The
proposed method and location of disposal will provide sand to the designated beach areas. Any dredge
pipeline that must cross over wetlands will be burlapped and welded to provide protection from leakage.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 40i GE. TIFIQATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON >LkiIS
PROPE133YT
YES -1, NO IF YES. EXPLAIN:
1 certify that all information contained herein or in support thereof is true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
r.g g?; r'/?
C_ E. Shufo , Jr., RV/
Acting Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division
Date: 7
Attachments
For prompt processing, submit:
"Seven (7) copies of completed application
"Drawings of proposed dredge and disposal sites
'Copies of previous 401 Certifications
TOTAL P.04

.
To '•;. ?
y
%
t
? '`
/
i e
Da
e".?•- ? `?
? 3??
? .
V1F1-111 R E O
Urt
r

r
? 3- Area God , b"?r'? ,` ? Ex?t'e Sion +.
w

?ELEPON D
!WM P
A
E CALL
`
?
-
S
,
-
2
G
ALLE0.?3T,®SE, © ?LLC 4LL AGAI x
p
g?
MAO S ENT ;. -''s
Sla
DT QED
O qLL ` r f G ?' '1
? + r A f r "` q
f -
?
2 Y
. 4
1us
?MeSS'age . 4
,
V

H

Yi RCN C?l!i. '!,. ?-

is ?? # ' ys t .Operator -r ? 3y 7°'
? ,.

FICIENGI t- _?- ? ;?^
MAR.-12'97(WED) 10:59 QCIBLE&ASSQCIATES TEL:[phone] P. 001
QUIBLE AND
ASSOCIATES,
P.C.
c0
Engineers - Environmentalists
Planners
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL
TO: ?e - vvlLe '-Tr'! - -7 3 3 - qq. .
FROM:
DATE: S 62-2 --TOTAL NUTABER OF PA ES:
(including this page
AS REQUESTED EED RESPONSE A.S.A.P.
-FOR YOUR INFORMATION PLEASE PHONE TO DISCUSS
FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT PLEASE SIGN AND RETURN
FOR CONSIDERATION AND -PLEASE REPLY VIA FAX
APPROVAL--PLEASE REPLY VIA MAIL

COWENTS:
CO fe l L v rev, - d rt d
NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY
The information contained in this facsimile transmittal is privileged and confidential,
and is intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor
the employee or, agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient,
any disclosure of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this trans-
mittal in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately and
return the transmission to the firm set out above immediately.
8 Juniper Trail
Post Office Drawer 870
Kitty Hawk, North Carolina 27949-0870
Phone; (919)Z61-3300 Fax: [phone]
MAR.-12'97(WED) 10:59 QCIBLE&ASSOCIATES TEL:[phone] P.002
Quible
Oulble & Assoclotes, RC.
P.O. DYo.mbr 870
ENCINEM - ENVIRONMENTAL= - PLANNERS IGUy NO", NC 27949
SINCE 1959 P wm: 919.261.3300
f-mt: 919.761-1260
F. AMUNd O«la, P.C., R.LL
H.W. IN G 1e1t.IL P.E.
Joseph S Lamer, C.E.P.
Senn C. Boyle, P.E.
March 4,199?
Mr_ Phil Kadela
US Army Corps of Engineers
PO Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Re: Graveyard of the Atlantic Museum - Spoil Retention Area
Dear Mr. Kadela:
Per our discussions, enclosed for your information are the plan view plat and associated permit
applications that Quible and Associates, P.C. has prepared and submitted to the State of North
Carolina Divisions of Water Quality and Land Quality respectively, for Stormwater Management
and Sedimentation and Erosion Control. The purpose of those submittals is to obtain the required
State approvals for construction of an upland 3 acre hydraulic spoil retention area proposed as an
alternate disposal site for the dredged spoil material from Roffinson Channel, Dare County, North
Carolina. It is our understanding that once these approvals are in place the alternate disposal site
can be included in the current consistency determination from the Division of Coastal
Management and in the 401 Water Quality Certification for the entire COE dredging project that
is currently underway.
Thank you for your attention to this information Ifyou have questions please contact me at 919-
26I-3300.
Sincerely,
Quible and Associates, P.C.
h S. Lassiter, CFI'
Project Manager, cc: Graveyard of the Atlantic Museum

MAR.-12'97(WED) 11:00 QCIBLE&ASSOCIATES TEL:[phone] P.003
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
Fort Raleigh National Historic Site Wright Brothers National Memorial
IN REPLY REPEL TO: Cape Hatteras National Seashore
Route 1. Box 675
Manlea, North Carolina 27954-7708
L30 (SU P)(CARA)
February 21, 1997
Mr_ Joseph Lassiter
Quible and Associates
S Juniper Trail
P. 4. Box 870
Kitty Hawk, North Carolina. 27949
Dear Mr. Lassiter.
I have reviewed your proposal to place spoil material at the future site of the Graveyard of the
Atlantic Museum. The material will be generated from the Army Corps of Engineers' dredging
project at Rollinson's Channel, Haueras Inlet. Cape Hatteras Nadonal Seashore is not opposed
to this project as long as all associated CAMA permits are obtained and it causes no water
drainage problems on adjacent properties. Since an F..nvuenmental Assessment is already m plane
for the museum site, the National Park Service does not need to issue any additional permits.
Sincerely,
`7 f
Gam' .
Russell W. Berry, Jr.
Superintendent
MAR.-12'97(WED) 11:00 QCIBLE&ASSOCIATES
State ofNorth Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Washington Regional Office
Janus B. Hunt, Jr., Govc=or
-Jonathan B. Howes, Semanry
TEL:[phone]
P. 004
0 i
E> FE Flat
DIVISION OF WATER. QUALITY
March 6, 1997
Graveyard of Atlantic Museum
Attn: Mr. Joseph K. Sehwarzer
P-0. Box 191
Hatteras, NC 27943
Subject: Permit NO. SW7970301
- -' - - Dredge Spoil Disposal
General Permit Stormwater
Dare County
Dear Mr. Schwarzer:
The Washington Regional Office received the completed
Stormwater Application for the subject project on March 3, 1997.
Staff review of the plans and specifications has determined that
the project, as proposed, will comply with the Stormwater
gagulations set forth in Title 15A NCAC 2H.1000. We are forwarding
Permit No. SW7970301 dated March 6, 1997 to Mr. -7oseph K.
Schwarzer.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until
rescinded and shall be subject to the conditions and limitations as
specified therein.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this
permit are unacceptable, you have the right to request an
adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days
following receipt of this permit. This request must be in the form
of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of the North
Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the office of
Administrative Hearings, F.O. Drawer 27447, Raleigh, NC 27611-7447.
Unless such demanas are made this permit shall be final and
binding. '

943 Washington Square 1V14 Wad&gm North Cerd%a 27889 Telephone 919-M-6481 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Afrumaii m Action Employcr
MAR.-12'97NED) 11:00 QCIBLE&ASSOCIATES TEL:[phone] P.005
Graveyard of Atlantic museum
Mr. Joseph K. Schwarzer
March 6, 1997
Page Two
if you have any questions, or need additional information
concerning this matter, please contact Bill Moore at (919) 946-
6481, extension, 264.
Sincerely,
RThos pe
Water Quality Supervisor
Washington Regional Office
cc: hn Parker - DM
Quible and Associates
Dare county Inspections
Washington Regional Office
Cantral Files
MAR.-IT 97RED) 11:00 QCIBLE&ASSOCIATES TEL:[phone] P.006
State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. =7970301
- STATE. OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTl?N'P OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
STATE STORKWATER 3EMENT PERMIT
GENERAL PEPJUT
In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143,
General Statutes of North Carolina as amended, and other applicable
laws, Rules and Regulations
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
Graveyard of Atlantic Museum
Dare County
FOR THE
construction, operation and maintenance of stormwater management
systems in compliance with the provisions of 15A NCAC 2H.1000
(hereafter referred to as the nstormwater rules") and the approved
storiawater management plans and specifications, and other
supporting data as attached and on file with and approved by the
division of Water Quality and considered a part of this permit for
dredge spoil disposal at the property of Graveyard of Atlantic
Museum located at Hatteras, NC.
The permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until
rescinded and shall be subject to the following specific conditions
and limitations.
I_ DESIGN STANDARDS
1. No new built-upon area is proposed.
2. Approved plans and specifications for projects covered by
this permit are ineorporatad by reference and are
enforceable parts of the permit.
3. No stormwater piping in addition to the existing piping
shall be allowed except:
3
MAR.-12'97(WED) 11:01 QUIBLE&ASSOCIATES TEL:[phone] P. 007
a. That minimum amount necessary to direct runoff
beneath an impervious surface such as a road.
b. That minimum amount needed under driveways to
- provide access to lots.
II. SCHEDULE OF COMPLI"CE
1. Grasslined swales, vegetated buffers and other Dest
Management Practices used for stormwater runoff control
shall be adequately maintained throughout the life of the
project.
2. The permittee shall at all times provide adequate erosion
control measures in conformance with the approved Erosion
Control 131an-
3. The permittee shall submit all information requested by _
the Director or his representative within the time frame -
specified in the written information request.
III. GENt AL CONDITIONS
1. Failure to. abide by the conditions and limitations
contained in this permit may subject the Permittee to an
enforcement action by the division of Water Quality, in
accordance with North Carolina General Statutes 143-
215.6A to 143.215.60.
2. The permit may be modified, revoked or terminated fQr
cause. The filing of a request for a permit
modification, or termination does not void any permit
condition.
3. The issuance of this permit does not prohibit the
Director from reopening and modifying laws, rules, and
regulations contained in Title 15A of the North Carolina
Administrative Code, Subchapter 2H.1000; and North
Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 et.al.
4. The following items will require a modification to the
prarmit ;
a. Any revision to the approved plans, regardless of
size
b. Project name change
c. Transfer of ownership
d. Redesign or addition to the approved amount of
built-upon area.
4
MAR.-12'97RED) 11:01 QCIBLE&ASSOCIATES TEL:[phone] P.008
e. Further subdivision of the project area
E. In addition, the Director may determine that other
revisions to the project should require a
- modification to the permit.
5. For any additions or modifications of the previously
permitted built-upon area, the permittee shall submit to
the Director revised plans and specifications and shall
receive approval prior to construction.
6. The Director may notify the permittee when the permitted
site does not meet one or more of the minlinum
requirements of the permit. Within the time frame
specified in the notice, the permittee shall submit a
written time schedule to the Director for modifying the
site to meet minimum requirements. The permittee shall
provide copies of revised plans and certification in
writing to the Director that the changes have been made.
7. The permit is not transferable to any person except after
notice to and approval by the Director. The Director may
require modification or revocation and reissuance of the
permit to change the name and incorporate such other
requirements as may be necessary. A formal permit
request must be submitted to the Division of Water
Quality accompanied by the appropriate fee, documentation
from both parties involved, and other supporting
materials as may be appropriate. The approval of this
request will be considered on its merits, and may or may
not be approved.
S. The issuance of this permit does not preclude the
Permittee from complying with any and all statutes,
rules, regulations, or ordinances which may be imposed by
other government agencies (local, state and federal)
which have jurisdiction.
Permit issued this the 6 th day of March, 1997.
NORM CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
D- A. Preston Howard,-Jr., P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Permit Number SN7970301
5
MAR.-12'97(WED) 11:02 QCIBLE&ASSOCIATES TEL:[phone] P.009
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resourwa
Washington Regional Office
James S. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
DIVISXOR OF LARD RESOURCES
.LAND. QUALM SECTIOIR
March 10, 1997
or
Graveyard of the Atlantic Nuaeum
ArM: Mr. Joseph K. ,Srhwarzer, Director
Post Office nox 391
Hatteras, North Carolina 27943
RE: Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan
Graveyard of the 'Atlantic Museum 'F'ill Site
Hatteras: - Dare county
prainage Basin: Pasquotank
varte Deceived: Marcn 3, 3.997
Responsible Part': Graveyard of the Atlantic Mi geum
Dear Mr. Schwarzex

R

This office has completed its review of the erosion aml_
sedimentation control -plan for the rAferanced 3 acre -d1.istLn -bA-nb 3:
we have determined the submitted 161ant for the spoiliag of ' d???et
material as fill for Eature construction, if properly
implemented, will mee't' tae miniMUm requirem into of the -Mt atnd
hereby issue this L92tM OF APPROVAL.
In 19731.the Sedimentation. Pollution Control Act (copy-
available upon request) was ertAoted. It eatablished.•:a
performance oriented program re.uirl3nq a prejeOt ov?--er qr
developer to protect adjoining natural reso=cea aund.vropart,i:4ai
both during and after 'construction, from the effects :.of
aaael.oxated erosiorx, it is YouR RR RS.M TY to uizde etancT aril
comply with the requiremerits of the Act.
In addition to aay above listed madificatiot.s or cortdataic?ilt .
the following also apply to the approved plan.:
-- an erosion And sedimentattion control plan Is'
'
only valid for 3 years following the date 'of
initial ap'rovatl, if no land-41sturbing
activity has noon undertaken.
943 Wsehington Square Mall, Washington, Norm Caroina 27869 7eiepnan?,9?i3/84?r6dS1 ' 'BT J -3716
An Equal Opportunhy-NRr ta'eve Action r;MMoyer 50% rmde&.1b% pest-cosa?timer'p??er - r ?
PO/60 "d 91:6T z6, 01 JEW 9Ta9i66T6:)M-i
MAR.-12'97RED) 11:02 QCIBLE&ASSOGIATES TEL:[phone] P. 010
Graveyard of the Atlanti o xuze%m
A`I'TN: mr. Joseph R. Schwaraer, Director ' .
March 10, 1997
` .
Page '-:
-- a copy of the latest a 6011 erosion iL 3-•
control plan must be on file at the job site ;

-- a buffer zone, sufficrient to restrain visible:
must be provided and maintaifted--
sedimentation
,
between the land-disturbing activity and piny ' ' '
adjacent property or watercourse:
--- new or afPectecl isYopan mur t be $t an anq
that can be retained by vegetative cover;

barrenQpes. M= be pxg?r3 d with a, araimia
-gd
ROW auffidient to r"t'rain erosion wiwi• ,•
Wor)ULUOL-Ada of completion of any plisse.

,rh or 'f final) of 9?mding J38B_ GRJSU IN JPU-r
(rauc
in the approved seedin r specific a-Uons nor.. iz. :
it an amr-?! substitute for the grovidi.ng
of a ground cover) ;
-- a permanent ground- gmrgr, sufficient to:
restrain erosion, mgt be 'V? i ed within ;
shorter of 30 working or 120 cilendar ftyg - "
after COAP.1etion of oonstkuation !or
development; and.,
-- this approval is not sutometi.ca7l.y •transferr .
with a change in project ownersbip.
pla4
Be advised that to ensure compliance with the a ovbd.
,.
and the program raguiretnentg, unannounced' periddi'c imsp e' ;V "
will be made. xf the-implemented plan is detarmxarie'to.bb '
inadequate, this office my require that it be revle@ . d :to obiap.1i
with s'ta'te law. Failure to comply with any.part cifae--Apprqvd•
' .,
s?l]:tr in
plan or with any requireunts of this progre(m, could-.eee
the taking of appropriate legal acticwi against the 6 cxar1.Y-
reaponsibl+e party (Gx aveyaad of the Atl antic Huseiam•) 'time
is the assessing of a-civil p=mlt•y of up to $5iaO pPX'day fdr
earn clay the alto is but or compliance.
in recognizing the desirability of early coord.i uat+iop :of ;r
sediment atico oontrol, we believe it would be bervaf uaial Xor y+o%
and your contractor td arrange is preoonetrubtiolm coixtertWeex to
,
d1scuss the requiremeets of the approved erosion and.' `
-y±iu - w.ouxd'
sedimentation control plan. It would be apparec f ates: if
.
contact this office to advise Richard Peed (919-9?lb=6?4??,

1701£0-d 11:(1 146, OT JEW 91229-6616: XU-1 dNH3Q
MAR.-12'97RED) 11:03 QCIBLE&ASSOCIATES TEL:[phone]
Graveyard a? the atlantic Museua
AWIM: Mr. Joseph It. Schwarzer, Director
March lU, 1997
page 3
P. 011
374) of the construction startup date, contractor and- :an an-sxta
contact person or. please, complete *and return the $'it;idhed
Project information sheet to the above named.
The land-disturbing activity described in th.la - plain' MAY
require approval or peftitting from 6,tbar Federal, State or• lbeal'
agencies. These could include the U. S. Army Carps • 4f
under Article 404 ju:i?isdictson, tha D Visaxan of ftter
Surface Water Section under stQrmumter regulations (aoittaOt • VI1`Z-
Maore, 919-945-648I, ext. 7rS$) county, catty or town 'ac e7iC 9
under other local ordinances. or other approvals that i* be
required. This approval, can=t' Supersede any other ap&6varl; nr,
permit.
sincerely4rdk Mcclain, : . S:.
Assistant Regibnal-1969iieer
FHM:pm
Enclosures
cc : Joe Lassiter, Qtiibl.e and "sociataS
Richard Watts, Division of Coastal Management

VO/K 'd LI; ZT Z5. OE .leW 9wiSM516: zP.?
li • 5?
YlH3a

• v
4
MAR.-12'97(WED) 11:03 QCIBLE&ASSOCIATES TEL:[phone] P. 012
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON 01MIar OWP9 of EMINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON.NgaT>•ICARou mA964M-1890
FAMY TO
n March 11, 1997
Errvironmontal Resowce5 Section
Mr. Preston Pate
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Hm4ronment,
Haaltb, and Natund Resources
Morehead City Field Office
Hestron Plaza 71
151 A Highway 24
Morehead City, Nonh Carolina 28557
Dear Mr. Pate:
We, request modification of our Consistency Determination CD9& 43,
dated February 7. 1997, to include a 3-acre upland diked disposal Site for disposal
of dredged rnaterW from Rubinson Channel, Dare County, North Carolina, The
disposal site is on the property of the Graveyard of Atlantic Museum, located on
NC Highway 12, adjacent to the Hatteras Ferry Terminal.
The use of the site is being covrdinatcd with Mr. Joe Lassiter, Quible and
Associates, Kitty Hawk, North Carolim Mr. J agsiter is obtaining uU other
required permits for the projeet,
If you have further questions or need additional information, please contact
us.
Sincerely,
CF:
CESAW-EP-PE/Owens
CESAW-CO-MJMoore
Terry P, Youngbluth
Colonel, U,S. Army
District Eng!Aew
Z0/ZB d NDIEJNIMIM 30usn 9z:0i L65Z-Tj iW
?04aLq i-)0
iW

US Army Corps
of Engineers®
Wilmington District
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT- IMPACT
FOR

MAINTENANCE DREDGING OF
RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON
CHANNELS
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
FEBRUARY 1997
y
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
MAINTENANCE OF RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON CHANNELS
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
FEBRUARY 1997
1.00 INTRODUCTION
The project consists of the maintenance dredging of three small navigation
projects, located in Pamlico Sound along the Outer Banks of North Carolina. The three
areas are the channels and harbors at Rodanthe and Rollinson and only the channel
portion of the project at Avon (Figure 1). As stated in the Environmental Assessment.
Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe. Avon, and Rollinson Channels. Dare County.
North Carolina. December 1996 (EA), there is no available upland disposal site near
Avon that could accommodate the fine-grained material that would be dredged from
Avon Harbor. Therefore, maintenance dredging of Avon Harbor will not be performed
at this time.
2.00 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
Dredged material from the Rodanthe, Rollinson and Avon channels, which is
suitable for beach disposal (sandy) will be placed in designated disposal sites on
nearby beaches. The EA indicated that sandy material from Rodanthe may also be
placed in an upland site on the east side of Highway 12, where it could be used by the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to help protect the highway from
beach overwash. However, based on coordination with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS), the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) and
NCDOT, it has been decided that the sandy dredged material from Rodanthe will not be
placed in the Highway 12 site but will be placed in the designated beach disposal site.
Dredged material from Rodanthe and Rollinson Harbors that is not suitable for beach
disposal (muddy/silty) will be placed in upland diked disposal sites.
Dredging will be accomplished by a hydraulic pipeline dredge and material will be
removed to a depth of 8 feet below mean low water (mlw) (-6 feet mlw plus 2 feet
overdepth). Dredging of the Rollinson channel and the outer ends of the Avon and
Rodanthe channels will take place between November 1 and April 30 of any given year
to minimize impacts to significant resources. Based on coordination with the North
Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries, dredging of Avon Harbor and Rodanthe Harbor,
from inside the harbors to one-half mile from shore, will take place between November
1 and February 28 of any given year.
The dikes surrounding the upland disposal sites will be constructed in a manner to
guarantee a minimum of 2 feet of freeboard during operations. All dikes will be seeded
and grassed in accordance with a Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan.
3.00 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
U.S. Army Engineer District, Wilmington. Environmental Assessment. Maintenance
Dredging of Rodanthe Avon and Rollinson Channels Dare County North Carolina
December 1996. This report will be referenced throughout the Finding Of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) as the EA.
4.00 PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION
The project was coordinated with National Marine Fisheries Service, Beaufort, NC,
National Marine Fisheries Service, St. Petersburg, Florida, North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management, North Carolina Division of Coastal Management,
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, North Carolina Division of Water
Resources, North Carolina Department of Transportation, North Carolina Division of
Marine Fisheries, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, U. S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Manteo, NC and Raleigh, NC, National Park Service, Cape Hatteras,
NC, Cape Hatteras Electric Membership Corporation, and Dare County.
On December 19, 1996, the EA was mailed to Federal and State agencies and the
interested public for a 30-day review and comment period. As a result, letters were
received from the USFWS, the EPA, and several agencies of the State of North
Carolina, including the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources. Copies of the letters received are included as attachment 1.
5.00 RESULTS OF PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION
All comments received on the EA were considered in making the decision to sign
the FONSI. Pertinent comments from each commenter are summarized and addressed
below.
U S Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) letter of January 24, 1997.
COMMENT: The EA states that no wetlands would be impacted by the proposed
dredging. However, some wetlands adjacent to the upland diked disposal areas "have
the potential to be impacted." The EA does not specify the nature of any impacts, but
the possibility of excessive sediment runoff from the disposal areas is a cause for
concern. The Service recommends that the Corps identify all potential adverse impacts
2
to project area wetlands and describe the measures which would be used to mitigate
these impacts.
RESPONSE: The only wetlands in the project vicinity are those associated with the
upland diked disposal areas. All work will take place in the upland portion of the
disposal sites. The contractor will be required to have a Sedimentation and Erosion
Control Plan, which will require the placement of silt fences around the dikes (during
construction) to prevent sediment runoff into adjacent wetlands. As stated in"the EA, no
wetlands will be adversely impacted by the project. Additionally, paragraph 2 of Section
2.3.16 of Specifications for Maintenance Dredging in Silver Lake Harbor. North
Carolina Rollinson Channel North Carolina, and Rodanthe. North Carolina. 9
December 1996 (attachment 2) further ensures the protection of wetlands.
COMMENT: The EA does not quantify the expected loss of submerged aquatic
vegetation (SAV) areas. The Service recommends that the Corps develop a
quantitative assessment of SAV which will be lost as a direct result of the project and
develop a plan for compensatory mitigation.
RESPONSE: No dredging or placement of dredged material will occur in waters
outside of the authorized channel. Because no loss of SAV is anticipated outside the
authorized channel, no mitigative measures are planned.
COMMENT: While the Service would not object to the placement of beach quality sand
in the designated disposal area, personnel of the Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
(PINWR) are concerned that current sediment evaluation procedures may not be
sufficient to ensure the compatibility of the dredge material for use on the refuge. The
Service cannot support the proposed disposal plan until the compatibility of the dredged
material for use on the refuge is conclusively established. We encourage the Corps to
continue coordination with personnel at PINWR to ensure that disposal does not
adversely impact refuge resources or operations.
RESPONSE: Noted. During coordination with PINWR it was decided that all sandy
dredged material from the Rodanthe Channel would be placed in the designated beach
disposal site.
COMMENT: The Corps should note that the ending date of actual sea turtle nesting is
September 30, not August 30 as noted in the Public Notice.
RESPONSE: Noted.
COMMENT: We agree that the seasonal limits for beach disposal are satisfactory. In
addition, the Corps needs to ensure that their beach disposal does not render these
areas unsuitable for sea turtle nesting due to compaction or the formation of

escarpments.
RESPONSE: As stated in the EA, sand compaction will be tested on beach disposal
areas. If sand compaction exceeds 500 cone penetrometer units (CPU's), tilling of the
beach will be performed. The formation of escarpments within the disposal areas is not
expected since all material will be placed at the +6 feet m.s.l. contour and below.
However, visual inspections of the disposal areas will be conducted to determine if
escarpments are present. If escarpments are found, and the elevation of the placed
material is within the maximum allowable elevation of +6 feet (plus or minus 0.5 foot),
the escarpment will be removed.
COMMENT: The EA states that the Corps anticipates that a FONSI will be prepared for
this project. At the present time, the Service cannot support such a finding until the
concerns discussed above have been thoroughly addressed and suitable conservation
measures are incorporated into project plans.
RESPONSE: All comments received on the EA have been considered and addressed
in the FONSI. We find that the proposed project has no significant impacts.
U S Environmental Protection Aaency (EPA) letter of January. 3. 1997.
COMMENT: Given the biological importance of the SAV habitat and its potential for
even incidental harm from this project, we believe that the District should formulate the
deliverables of the construction contract such that bidders will be required to protect this
valuable resource by all practicable means.
RESPONSE: See Section 2.3.16, Protection of Water Resources and Wetlands and
Section 2.3.17, Protection of Fish and Wildlife Resources of Specifications for
Maintenance Dredainci in Silver Lake Harbor North Carolina. Rollinson Channel. North
Carolina and Rodanthe North Carolina 9 December 1996 (attachment 2). In addition,
a pre-work conference will be conducted. The pre-work conference will give the
contractor and representatives from the Corps an opportunity to discuss important
aspects of the project, such as the protection of SAV. During the conference, we will
inform the contractor of the occurrence of SAV in the project vicinity, its importance as a
fishery habitat, and the importance of protecting the habitat. Further, the contractor will
be instructed to route pipelines, where practicable, so as to avoid SAV.
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) memorandum of
November 19. 1996.
COMMENT: The N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission supports the recommendations
of the Division of Marine Fisheries as stated in their memorandum of January 16, 1997.
4
RESPONSE: Noted.
National Marine Fisheries Service, memorandum of January 13. 1997
COMMENT: The EA does not adequately justify the proposed construction of a 100-
foot-wide by 6-foot-deep by 5,336-foot-long channel at Rodanthe.
RESPONSE: The EA discusses the maintenance of an existing channel of previously
authorized dimensions, not construction of a new channel. The EA's focus is on
change in disposal alternatives.
COMMENT: According to the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
(NCDCM), current usage of the basin is dominated by boats less than 25 feet in length
which would not require a channel of such large dimensions.
RESPONSE: Based on information provided by a seafood business owner at
Rodanthe Harbor, 20 to 30 commercial fishing boats use the Harbor. Two of these
boats are 35-40 feet in length with drafts of 4 feet; the remaining boats are 20-28 feet in
length. Two years ago there were as many as 5 of the larger boats using Rodanthe
Harbor, however, shoaling of the channel now prevents safe passage of these boats
into the Harbor (Mr. Tillman Gray, personal communication, January 24, 1997). As
stated in ER-1110-2-1457. Hydraulic Design of Small Boat Navigation Projects. 24-
June-1985, channel width is based on: vessel size, vessel maneuverability, traffic
congestion, and the effects of wind, waves, and currents. This ER further states that
"increased width is necessary for adverse wind, wave, and current conditions..." such
as those conditions characteristic of the open water of Pamlico Sound.
COMMENT: We are also concerned that the EA does not adequately address the
impacts of the proposed dredging on SAV. The document predicts SAV impacts to be
minimal, but provides no quantification of SAV losses to support this conclusion. Based
on our knowledge of the project area and coordination with the NCDCM and North
Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries, we do not agree with this conclusion. Project
related losses of SAV should be quantified and alternatives that avoid and minimize
these predictable losses should be addressed. The EA should also address mitigative
measures to be taken to offset losses of SAV.
RESPONSE: The identification and mapping of SAV was based on the best
information available. Although the National Marine Fisheries Service has mapped
numerous areas of SAV throughout North Carolina, the areas in the vicinity of
Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson have not been mapped. Based on a telephone
conversation with Randy Ferguson of the National Marine Fisheries Service on January
27, 1997, there is currently no active SAV monitoring program in North Carolina.
According to Mr. Ferguson, the photography that was used to identify SAV at Rodanthe
(1994) is the most up-to-date photography that clearly shows SAV. See response
addressing SAV on page 2 for further information.
COMMENT: Section 2.01 page 1. paragraph 4. This section states that the channel
was last dredged in 1965, but does not indicate whether it was dredged to the
authorized dimensions. The EA should be revised to clarify this issue.
RESPONSE: According to the 1965 Annual Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30.
Chief of Engineers U S Army Civil Works Activities Volume 2. page 340, dredging of
Rodanthe Harbor, to project dimensions, was completed in March 1965.
COMMENT: Section 2 01 page 1 paragraph 4. We question whether a project that
has not been maintained in thirty years can realistically be called maintenance.
RESPONSE: Although the project has not been dredged in over 30 years, periodic
studies are conducted by the Corps of Engineers to determine whether or not a project
is justified to remain on Congress' "active" list. The most recent justification study for
Rodanthe Harbor was completed in February 1995. The study identified an average
annual benefit of $210,000 (from commercial fisheries), thus justifying the need to keep
Rodanthe Harbor on the "active" list. Therefore, since Rodanthe has remained "active"
since its construction in 1965, dredging of the channel (to authorized dimensions) is
considered maintenance dredging.
COMMENT: No information is provided (e.g., the number and size of boats currently
using the channel) to justify the need for the project. The EA should be revised to
provide justification for the work and documentation of the need for the proposed
channel dimensions.
RESPONSE: See the response on page 5, which addresses this issue.
COMMENT: Section 3.01 Rodanthe cage 4, paragraph 4. This section addresses the
proposed disposal of sandy dredged material at an upland site where it can be used by
the North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) as fill to protect and restore NC
Highway 12 from beach overwash. It would appear that the need for beach fill to
protect the highway is the "need" dictating the size of the proposed channel. If this is
the case, it is inappropriate and the document should clarify this issue.
RESPONSE: The dimensions of the Rodanthe channel were authorized by Congress
in 1945. It is the Corps of Engineers' responsibility to maintain the project to its
authorized dimensions unless sufficient information is provided to warrant a channel of
smaller dimensions. The "need" for sand by NCDOT has no bearing on the channel
dimensions that will be dredged during the upcoming maintenance dredging. As
discussed in Section 2 of this FONSI, based on coordination with the USFWS, it has
6
been determined that the sandy dredged material from Rodanthe will be placed in the
designated beach disposal site and will not be used by NCDOT.
COMMENT: Section 5.03 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) page 10 paragraphs
1 and 3. This section addresses the value of SAV to fishery resources and
differentiates between patchy and dense habitat. The document makes an issue of the
fact that no dense beds will be impacted by the channel, implying that a lesser value is
assigned to patchy SAV. We believe this is inaccurate since recent studies have
determined that patchy beds provide habitat value equivalent to dense beds. We
recommend that the EA be revised so that the reader will not conclude that patchy beds
are less important to fisheries and that losses of patchy beds can be characterized as
minimal impact.
RESPONSE: The comparison of the occurrence of dense beds of SAV versus patchy
beds of SAV was intended to quantify the SAV that exists in the project area. It was not
our intent to imply that patchy SAV was less valuable than dense SAV.
COMMENT: Section 5.03.1 Rodanthe, page 11. paragraph 1. Grab and vibracore
samples were taken from the channel, however, we do not believe that the number of
samples is sufficient to reach a conclusion of minimal impact. If benthic sampling is
used as a basis for a determination of minimal impact, additional sampling will be
necessary.
RESPONSE: The grab and vibracore samples that were taken from the Rodanthe
channel were used predominately for grain size analysis of dredged material. The
samples were not used to make any objective, quantifiable determination regarding
impacts to SAV. The determination of minimal impact was based on all work occurring
within the authorized channel.
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries Memorandum of January 16 1997
RODANTHE
COMMENT: The Division does not see the need for the 100 ft. channel width, based
on the size vessels that are utilized.
RESPONSE: See response on page 5 that addresses this issue.
COMMENT: Since the channel hasn't required any maintenance for thirty-two years,
it's obvious that rapid shoaling or filling of the channel is not a problem. This agency
recommends a 50 ft. wide channel, which would reduce the overall impacts on the area.
RESPONSE: The Rodanthe channel has not been dredged since 1965, when it was
7
dredged to the authorized width of 100 feet. Dredging of the channel to only 50 feet will
not only prohibit the use of the channel by several of the fishing boats that currently use
Rodanthe Harbor, but will most likely result in a need to dredge more frequently. We
believe that dredging the Rodanthe channel to the authorized width of 100 feet every
20 to 30 years would have less of an overall impact on the environment than dredging a
50 foot channel, which may need to be maintained more frequently. For these reasons,
it is our intent to dredge the channel to its original authorized width of 100 feet.
COMMENT: The Division recommends that the original authorized channel depth of -6
feet MLW be maintained and not the -8 feet MLW as stated the proposed action
section.
RESPONSE: It was not our intent to imply that the entire channel will be dredged to -8
feet MLW. The channel will be dredged to the authorized depth of -6 feet MLW with 2
feet allowed for "over-dredging." Because dredging to an exact depth, along the entire
length of a channel is difficult, standard procedure is for the contractor to be allowed 2
feet of overdepth. This guarantees that the channel will be no less than 6 feet deep at
any given point. It should be noted that for the FY 1997 dredging of Rodanthe Harbor,
due to the limited capacity of the upland disposal sites, no overdredging at Rodanthe
will be allowed. The Rodanthe Harbor and entrance channel will be dredged to -6 feet
only.
COMMENT: The dredging moratorium is March 1 through October 31. This will ensure
the environmental integrity of the area is protected during critical times of usage by the
previously mentioned species.
RESPONSE: See attachment 3, which includes correspondence between the NCDMF
and the Corps of Engineers regarding the dredging window for the subject project.
COMMENT: The information provided relative to SAV's in the area is inadequate.
RESPONSE: See response on page 5 regarding SAV.
COMMENT: On site visits and aerial photography should be current, not over two
years old.
RESPONSE: The EA should have stated that the initial onsite visit was made in
October 1994. Several other site visits were made to the project area before report
preparation, including a visit on November 9, 1996.
AVON

COMMENT: The Division recommends the 100 ft. channel width, be reduced to 50 ft.
width.
RESPONSE: Based on information provided by a seafood business owner (Mr. Gray,
personal communication, January 30, 1997) at Avon Harbor, 10 to 15 commercial
fishing boats use the Harbor. These boats range in size from 19-25 feet in length.
According to Mr. Gray, as with Rodanthe Harbor, shoaling of the Avon channel now
prevents safe passage of larger boats into the Harbor. As stated in ER-1110-2-1457.
Hydraulic Design of Small Boat Navigation Projects. 24-June-1985, channel Width is
based on: vessel size, vessel maneuverability, traffic congestion, and the effects of
wind, waves, and currents. This ER further states that "increased width is necessary for
adverse wind, wave, and current conditions..." such as those conditions characteristic
of the open water of Pamlico Sound.
COMMENT: The recommendation of -6 ft. MLW applies to this channel also.
RESPONSE: See response on page 8 that addresses this issue.
COMMENT: The same dredging moratorium would apply, as well as the comments
relative to SAVs.
RESPONSE: See previous responses to these issues. Based on the 1994 aerial
photography of the Avon Channel, no (0 acres) SAV occurs within the limits of the
authorized channel. No dredging or placement of dredged material will occur in waters
outside of the authorized channel.
ROLLINSON
COMMENT: The requested updated SAV information should also be available for this
portion of the project.
RESPONSE: As previously stated, the identification and mapping of SAV was based
on the best information available. There is no updated SAV information available for
the project area. No SAV will be impacted outside of the authorized channel.
Approximately 2 acres of SAV will be dredged within the channel.
6.00 ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES
As stated in the EA, the proposed work has been reviewed for compliance with the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, and informal coordination with the
USFWS and NMFS has been completed. As stated above, the USFWS has identified
no endangered species, threatened species, or critical habitats that would be affected
by the proposed project. Therefore, the requirements of the Endangered Species Act
9
of 1973, as amended, have been satisfied.
7.00 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
The following commitments must be fulfilled:
Dredging at Rollinson Channel and the outer ends of the Avon and Rodanthe
Channels will be performed between November 1 and May 1 of any given year.
Dredging at Avon Harbor, Rodanthe Harbor, and within one-half mile of shore at Avon
and Rodanthe will be performed between November 1 and February 28 of any given
year. Any changes to these dates will be coordinated with all interested agencies,
including the NCDMF, the NCDCM, and the USFWS.
The dredge pipeline will be routed to the greatest extent practicable so as to avoid
SAV.
8.00 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
There are no known areas of controversy or major unresolved issues associated
with the proposed action. Comments received during the coordination of the
referenced EA failed to note any additional categories of environmental impacts.
9.00 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI)
The proposed action will not significantly affect the quality of the human
environment: therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared.
DATE:
Attachments
10
.
t
w'
h. O ?? r In
? ?'• t
? ? t
? % t
t t
% t t
% l
\ ? t t 1
`•% ---- ?tfe Sound ?? i
Njb c to
i
i
I ? ? tJ
I f
/'TYRRELL o s
DARE
t a
t
ROD&T
C. I
a

4N
-
- `?
^ J
-,--CARTERET
t
t
,- t
a
t c?
t
t
G? t
4 HA-uERAS
(ROLLINSON CHANNEL)
N
Figure 1
Action: EP
CF: DX
CO
PS?ENT OF TyF United States Department of the Interior
O?P ?yR
y o FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
?'9RCHH 3 yea Raleigh, North Carolina 27636 3726
January 24, 1997
Lieutenant Colonel Terry R. Youngbluth
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Dear Colonel Youngbluth:
This is the report of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) on the Environmental Assessment (EA) for Maintenance
Dredging of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channels, Dare County,
North Carolina. This EA was announced in Public Notice (PN) ID
#CESAW-EP-PE-97-28-0006, dated December 19, 1996. This report is
submitted in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d), and Section 7
of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531-1543).
According to information provided in the EA and PN, the
Wilmington District, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
proposes to perform maintenance dredging on the named channels.
Sandy dredged material from the Rollinson and Avon channels which
is suitable for beach disposal would be placed in designated
disposal sites on nearby beaches. Sandy material from the
Rodanthe project would be placed in the designated beach disposal
site near the town or in an upland disposal site 1.5 miles north
of Rodanthe Harbor on Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
(PINWR). Non-sandy dredged material from Rodanthe and Rollinson
Harbors would be placed in upland diked disposal areas. The
total amount of material expected to be dredged is approximately
618,000 cubic yards (cy). The PN states that only work at
Rodanthe and Rollinson Channel would be done in fiscal year 1997.
This work would begin in February 1997?and be completed by April
30, 1997.
The purpose and need for this work are given in the introduction
of the EA. The alternatives considered by the Corps are given in
Section 4 of the EA. The Service considers these section
adequate.
? i

J
Wetlands and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)
The EA states (pp. 11-12) that no wetlands would be impacted by
the proposed dredging. However, some wetlands adjacent to the
upland diked disposal areas "have the potential to be impacted."
The EA does not specify the nature of any impacts, but the
possibility of excessive sediment runoff from the disposal areas
is a cause for concern. The Service recommends that the Corps
identify all potential adverse impacts to project area wetlands
and describe the measures which would to be used to mitigate
these impacts.
The EA indicates (p. 10) that some SAV areas could be adversely
affected. The Service agrees with the benefits provided by SAV
which are given in the EA, and we consider these areas to have
very high value to fish and wildlife resources. The EA does not
quantify the expected loss of SAV areas. The Service recommends
that the Corps develop a quantitative assessment of SAV which
will be loss as a direct result of the project and develop a plan
for compensatory mitigation.
Disposal on Pea.Island National Wildlife Refuge...
Current project plan calls for the disposal of all beach quality
dredged material (>90% sand) from the Rodanthe channel (total of
118,000 cy) at a 12-acre, upland site approximately 1.5 miles
north of Rodanthe and within PINWR. The EA states (p. 5) that
this disposal plan has been approved by all concerned agencies,
including the Service.

While the Service would not object to the placement of beach
quality sand in the designated disposal area, personnel of the
PINWR are concerned that current sediment evaluation procedures
may not be sufficient to ensure the compatibility of the dredge
material for use on the refuge (Dennis Stewart, PINWR, personal
communication, January 13, 1997). At the present time, the
Service is consulting with Dr. Robert Dolan and seeking
clarification on the sediment evaluation procedures (Dwight
Cooley, PINWR, personal communication, January 23, 1997). The
Service cannot support the proposed disposal plan until the
compatibility of the dredged material for use on the refuge is
conclusively established. We encourage the Corps to continue
coordination with personnel at PINWR to ensure that disposal does
not adversely impact refuge resources or operations.
Section 7
Section 5.06 of the EA considers project impacts on species
protected by the ESA. The Service's primary concern involves
potential impacts to sea turtle nesting which may occur on North

Carolina beaches from May 1 through September 30. The Corps
should note that the ending date of actual sea turtle nesting is
September 30, not August 30 as noted in the PN. The PN states
that the work would occur from February through April 30, 1997.
The Service is pleased that the Corps is endeavoring to avoid
adverse impacts to sea turtles. We agree that the seasonal
limits for beach disposal are satisfactory. In addition, the
Corps needs to ensure that their beach disposal does not render
these areas unsuitable for sea turtle nesting due to compaction
or the formation of escarpments.
The PN states that the project will not impact species currently
on the federal list of threatened or endangered species. Based
on the information in the EA, the Service concurs that this
project is not likely to adversely affect any federally-listed
endangered and threatened species, their formally designated
critical habitat, or species currently proposed for federal
listing under the ESA, as amended. Therefore, we believe that
the requirements of Section 7 of the ESA have been satisfied. We
remind you that obligations under Section 7 consultation must be
reconsidered if: (1) new information reveals impacts of this
identified action that may affect listed species or critical
habitat in..a manner not previously considered; (2) this action is
subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this
review; (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat
" determined that may be affected by the identified action.
Summary
The EA states (p. 21) that the Corps anticipates that a Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) will be prepared for this
project. At the present time, the Service cannot support such a
finding until the concerns discussed above have been thoroughly
addressed and suitable conservation measures are incorporated
into project plans. The Service appreciates the opportunity to
comment on this project. If you have any questions regarding
these comments, please contact Howard Hall at 919-856-45204,
ext.27.
Sincerely,
John M. H ner
Superviso_
' FWS/R4:HHall:1/24/97:WP:A:dare.197

1'4 .- Vr-r I HLf9114 rdJ: •yly-I JJ-yJ! 1 Jdl I LJ y( lz •Jt f . vi/ VJ
?-. NORTH CAROLINA SX4TF CLEARMSHOUSE
17-6 WEST JO 4-FS STAFFT
RAL7T H NORTH CAROLINA ZT603-8003
01-23-97
Cl
!M T =R GV=vMMr NTAL RFVTcW C0f4Mr*4TS
MAT-L7D T ??R7N
ARMY C^R3?!? n;- * ?;?-er=ERR MRS- CHRYS RAGGFTT
JENNY ^TRCC?gR
pf" BOY M7n V C STAT- CLFARINGHOUSE
WiLtM'yl
PROJECT nl:{^,--,r---ac•
ENV. ASSP;c* - D^ P-^:Scn PATMTc; ANlf:F DRFnGTka n= RODANTH=p AV"Nv
AMD R7LLTN'?^., rReNIvl-tS L-rA'rF'l TK Tu' PAMLIC0 SOUND ALr,)N-- Talc
MITSP RAN'v': ` ^?f
ASS--SS-
THE ar>7yr- ,°^ 4-nr 1=15 n^FM rUQyT7T=3 TO THE W^?TH CARULJ?IA
2?1T=Rrf?V?^x:,•-, -dt ?cZr±?sl DRI !rSSS. AS 4 q;:St:-LT ?F T44E RFVTFkl THE FQLLG'WrNC-
IS St1RMl'"r"' f°''MM'"MTS WC OF
X ) rf"AMPNTS 4TTACH=D
SPOULD Y')'.i °--l'- AVV 0 F"TnNS. ?!_rASP CALL TVIS =:3F=IC= (9I4) 733-7232-
tote vT_?
ry i
-.?.. "-i I naui W4 ran-VIJ-r vv-yJt 1 JCUI LJ '.9( IZ-0t r. UZIUJ
. 0
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, 11
Health and Natural Resources 4 • 0
Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs
IT
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor C
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary LD H N R
Richard E. Rogers, Jr., Acting Director
XEMORMDDM
TO. Chrys Baggett
state Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee 11 j
Environmental Review Coordinator
RE: 97-0424 Maintenance Dredging Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channel,
Dare County
DATE: January 22, 1997
V
The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources has reviewed
the subject proposal. This department ask that careful consideration be given
to the attached suggestions.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
attachments
RECEMED
JAN 2 3 ]991
N.C. STATE CLEA.RNGHOUSF
,.
' P.O. Box 27687. ? FAX [phone]
12aleigh, Norih Carolina 2761 1-7687 Nif An Equal Opportunity/Affirma`'ve Action Employer
919-715-4148 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumor paper
NC DEPT ADMIN Fax:[phone] Jan 23 '97 12:37 P. 03/05
JAN-22-1997 12=43 FS0 TO 0 1919717.887' P.02/0
9 -7 - 014-Lf
TO: Stephen B. Benton, DCM Consistency Coordinator
TEMOUGx: P. A. Wojciechowski, DW permit Coordinator
FROMf Sara E. Winslow, Biologist Supamw .j
SUMECT: CD96-43 - USACOE - EA Maintenance Dredging Rodanthe, Avon, and
Rollinson Channel
DAM. January16, 1997
The following comments by the North Caro':;ina Division of Marine Fisheries are
` provided pursuant to General Statute 113-131. The Division has reviewed the EA and
approves of the project with the following modifications.
Pamlico Sound functions as a nursery area for spot, croaker, weakfish, red drum,
spotted seatrout, flound% blue crabs, shrimp and other commercially and recreationally
important species- viable oyster and clam resources exist through out the area. SAVs
provide valuable habitat for the above mentioned species at various life stages.
Rodanthe
The proposed maintenance dredging for Rodanthe Channel is 5,336 & long, 100 fr.
wide, to a depth of -6 ft.. NEW. Maintenance dredging of this channel has not been
necessary since original construction in 1965.
The Division does not see the need for the 100 ft. channel width, bated on the size
vessels that are utiUed. Since the channel hasn't required any maintenance for thirty-two
years, it's obvious that rapid shoaling or filling of the channel is not a problem. This agency
recommends a 50 ft. wide channel, which would reduce the overall impacts on the area.
Also, the Division recommends that the original authorized ebannel depth of -6 :ft. MLW be
maintained and not the -8 ft_ MLW as stated in the proposed action section. 71to EA states
that based on telephone conversations with this agency and others that the dredging window
r of November 16 to April 30 is acceptable for this project- CQntac: has been made with
appropriate DMF staff, no one has been contacted relative to the dredging window and the
time frame stated in the EA is not correct. The dredging moratoricurn is March 1 through
NC DEPT ADMIN Fax:[phone] Jan 23 '97 12:38 F. 04.105
JPN-22-1997 12:43 FPCIM
Tn 0 1919715%: - p_i13/C,3
f
0
October 31. This will ensure the environmental integrity of the area is protected dur;ng
critical times of usage by the previously meationed species. The information provided
relative to SAVs is the area is inadequate. On site tiisits and aerial photography should be
current, not over two years old.
J
I 6m
The proposed maintenance dredging for Avon Channel is 3.5 miles long, 100 fL
wide, to a depth of -6 ft. MLW. Maintenance dredging of this channel has not been
necessary since 1996.
The Division recommends the 100 & channel width, be reduced to 50 ft. width.
Maintenance has not been required for eleven years. This recommendation is based on the
same points as those mentioned for Rodanthe Channel. The recommendation of ••6 ft. MW
applies to this channel also. The same dredging meratornim would apply, as well as the
commcrnts relative to SAVs.
The proposed maintenance of Rollinson Chan a l is 5 miles, 100 ft. wide and -12 ft.
Maintenance of this channel was last accomplished in 1988. The requested updated SAV
information should also be available for this portion of the project.
in summary, the Division approves of the maintenance of Rodanthe and. Avon
channels with the width reduced to 50 ft., the depth of the channels not to exceed the
previously authorized depth (-6 ft.), and the moratorium time frame corrected. Up to date
SAV assessments must be made for all three locations.

IUA' ?L F.4?_S
IVI. LU 1 ?'11N'111V
MEMORANDUM
rdX-yly-IJJ 7J11
JdlI GJ VI It - Jv
I . V.J/ VJ
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: William Wescott
N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission
RE: 97-0424 EA Maintenance Dredging Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channel
DNI'L: January 22,1997.
The N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission supports the recommendations of the Division of
Marine Fisheries as stated in their memorandum of January 16,.1997.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.

_.__. _. ._ _.-__ ...... ..._.. _. _..._....._.`.... w.n' -•:.w,i.. !.z'=.rv"_dd' _ _ .cav?c....-txrrnm ti6rr?-?? xs^.. ...??... .;,:3
UNITED STATES +DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administimtlon
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
Southeast Regionali'Office
9721 Executive Center.Drive N
St. Petersburg, Florida 33702
January 13, 1997
Lt. Colonel Terry R. Youngbluth
District Engineer, Wilmington District
Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Attention Jenny Owens
Dear Lt. Colonel Youngbluth:
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has reviewed the
Environmental Assessment (EA),- Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe,,
Avon, and Rollinson Channels, Dare County, North Carolina, December
1996. .The EA was prepared to address the proposed dredging at. the
Roll nson and Rodanthe Channels. No work is currently proposed at
A"von. ' TYie following comments are provided for your consideration.
General Comments
The EA does not adequately justify the proposed construction of a
100-foot-wide by 6-foot-deep -by 5,336-foot-1ong channel at
Rodanthe. According to the North Carolina Division of Coastal
--j., .Management (NCDCM), .current usage .. of the basin is dominated . by
L .. . hannel--
boats ess;..than••-25 ,feet in -•length which -would -not requ'ire_a c ;_-
_: -of.,such large dimensions. We are.also concerned that'the EA-does-,
not adequately- address .the impacts ..of,. the proposed -dredging -on -
submerged.. aquatic :-vegetation -(SAV) . The -document predicts. SAV_ .
impacts to be-minimal., but provides no quantification of SAV losses
to. support this conclusion. Based on our. knowledge.of the project
area and coordination. with the NCDCM and North.Carolina Division of
Marine Fisheries, we do not agree with this conclusion. The EA
should be revised to address the justification and need for the
project as currently proposed. Project related losses of SAV
should be quantified and alternatives that avoid and minimize these
predictable losses should be addressed. The.EA should also address
mitigative measures to be taken to offset losses of. SAV.
Specific Comments
2.00 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND HIRTORY
x`2.01 Rodanthe

..
Page 1, paragraph A. The document states that-.the channel was last
dredged in 1965, but does not indicate whether it was dredged to
the authorized dimensions. The EA should :be revised to clarify
this issue. Accordingly, we question whether a project that has
not been maintained in thirty years can realistically be called
maintenance.
Also, no information is provided (e.g., the number and size of
boats currently using the channel) *to justify the need for the
project. The EA should be revised to provide justification for
the work and documentation of the need for the proposed channel
dimensions.
3.00 PROPOSED ACTION
3.01 Rodanthe
Page 4, paragraph 4. This section addresses the proposed disposal
of sandy dredged material at an upland site where it can be used by
the North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) as fill to
protect and restore NC Highway 12 from beach overwash. It would
appear that the need for beach fill to protect the highway is the
"need" dictating the size of the proposed channel. If this is the
case, it is inappropriate and the document should clarify this
issue.

5.00 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
5.03 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)
Page 10a paragraphs 1 and 3. This section addresses the value of
SAV to fishery resources and differentiates between patchy and
dense habitat... The .document?..makes. an .=issue of .-the: fact that..no
...
dense -beds :.wi-il:- be impacted :by?rthe . -channel=,:. implying. --
that. a lesser-
:. value is. assigned to--patchy SAV.: -We believe. this is inaccurate
since recent:- studies ..have determined - that. patchy - beds - provide
habitat value. equivalent to dense beds.' We- recommend that the EA -
be revised so that the reader will not conclude that patchy beds
are less important to fisheries, and that losses of patchy beds can
be characterized as.minimal impact.
5.03.1 Rodanthe
page 11, paragraph 1. .This section addresses the probable
occurrence of SAV in what is described as a "poorly defined"
existing channel. Grab and vibracore samples were taken from the
channel, however, we do not believe that the number of samples is
'Murphey, Patricia L. and Mark S. Fonseca. 1995. Role of high
and low energy seagrass beds as nursery areas for Penaeus duorarum
in North Carolina. Marine Ecology Progress Series, Vol. 121:91-98.

sufficient to reach a conclusion of minimal impact. If benthic
sampling is used as a basis for a determination of minimal impact,
_ additional sampling will be necessary. For acceptable sampling
protocol to assess SAV occurrence in the channel, contact Mark
Fonseca at National Marine Fisheries Service, Beaufort Laboratory,
101 Pivers Island Road, Beaufort, North Carolina, 28516.
We appreciate the opportunity the opportunity to provide these
comments.
4Sincer ,
Andr7s Mager, r.
Assistant Regional Director
Habitat Conservation Division
x
cc: FWS, ATLA, GA
FWS, Raleigh, NC
EPA, ATLA, GA
NCDEHNR, Raleigh, NC
NCDEHNR, Morehead City, NC
SAFMC, Charleston, SC
F/SEO2
i?
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Roger N. Schecter, Director

A4jWLA
-Mdmm
E3EHNR
01/07197
Lt-Colonel Terry R. Youngbluth District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
REFERENCE: CD96-43
EA Maintenance Dredging Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollison Channels
Dear Lt.Colonel Youngbluth:
The State of North Carolina received your consistency
determination dated 12113196 concerning a proposed Federal Activity
pursuant to 15 CFR 930.30 on 12130196. Your determination, which
we have assigned the number CD96-43, has been circulated to the
appropriate state agency reviewers for comment. We have requested
that our reviewers respond by 01117197 and, provided no serious
problems are identified, will provide the state's position on this
proposal on or before 01123197.
Should you have any questions concerning our program or the
status of the review, please call me at [phone].
9
Siri e ely? --?
'Ste hen B. Benton
Consistency Coordinator
P.O. Box 27687, N1W 14 FAX [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 'V? C An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-2293 - 50% recycled/10% post-consumer paper
tr
It,-11 STgT?s 0 0
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
?F = 100 ALABAMA STREET, S.W.
P-14 Pa011?°? ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-3104
JAN V 1tfi7
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Lieutenant Colonel Terry R. Youngbluth
District Engineer, Wilmington
P.O. Box 1890
Attn: Ms. Jenny Owens
Environmental Resources Branch
Subject: Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) for Maintenance Dredging of
Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channels, Dare County, NC
Dear Lieutenant Colonel Youngbluth:
Pursuant to Section 309 of the Clean Air Act, EPA, Region 4
has reviewed the subject document which discusses the
environmental consequences of excavating the noted channels and
depositing the material in designated beach/upland disposal
sites. Work on Avon Harbor will be examined in a forthcoming EA
when an acceptable upland disposal site for.its fine-grained
material is located. The channel deepening (maintenance) will be
accomplished by hydraulic pipeline as this method is deemed to be
both the most effective and efficient.
Dredging always has some adverse water quality impacts and
in this instance the proximity of submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAV) is an additional matter of concern to us. Given the
biological importance of the SAV habitat and its potential for
even incidental harm from this project, we believe that the
District should formulate the deliverables of the construction
contract such that bidders will be required to protect this
valuable resource by all practicable means. We are willing to
leave the details of how this will be accomplished to your staff
specialists, but would appreciate receive a copy of the
stipulations for our review/comment prior to actual dredging.
environmental impact statement format.
With this enjoinder in effect coupled with the absence of
any other apparent and/or compelling adverse effects attendant to
the action we have no significant objections to the use of an EA
as the evaluation model rather than the more comprehensive
Recycied/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable 01 Based Inks on 1000/6 Recyded Paper (40%Postconsumer)

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this action. If
we can be of further assistance in this matter, Dr. Gerald Miller
(404-562-9626) will serve as initial point of contact.
Sincerely, 11
Tmz:?'!iv "f tw
Heinz-J. Mueller, Chief
Office of Environmental Assessment

I
U.S- DEPARTMENT OF HOUSI 1ltm DRBM DHNffiQPl?lfT
SOUTHEAST/ CARIBBEAN
Environmental Dlvr6ion
?* *c
Richard B. Russell Federal Building
's 75 Spring Street, S.W.
pL ryE
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3388
December 30, 1996
Ms. Jenny Owens
Environmental Resources Division
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Dear Ms. Owens:
This letter is in reference to the Environmental Assessment
for Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson
Channels for Dare County, North Carolina dated December, 1996.
Our review indicates that due to the nature and location of
your proposed project, there will be no significant impact to any
current HUD projects. Therefore, we have no objections to, or
comment on this proposal.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this
project. If you have questions on this comment please contact
Linda Poythress, Environmental Protection Specialist at
404-331-3167.
Sincerely,
Thomas A. Fich
Supervisory Environmental
Officer
Southeast/Caribbean
Attachment 2
Excerpt from
SPECIFICATIONS
FOR
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
IN
SILVER LAKE HARBOR, NORTH CAROLINA
(TEACHES HOLE AND BIG FOOT SLOUGH)
AND
ROLLINSON CHANNEL, NORTH CAROLINA
(HATTERAS TO HATTERAS INLET)
AND
RODANTHE, NORTH CAROLINA
U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, WILMINGTON
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
9 DECEMBER 1996
z,
2.3.12 TRAINING OF CQRACTOR PERSONNEL IN POLLON CONTROL
Contractor personnel shall be trained in environmental protection, and shall
conduct environmental protection meetings monthly. The training and meeting agendas
shall include methods of detecting and avoiding pollution; familiarization with pollution
standards, both statutory and contractual; and installation and care of facilities (vegetative
covers, and instruments required for monitoring purposes) to ensure adequate and
continuous environmental pollution control. Personnel are to be informed of provisions for
hazardous and toxic materials container labeling and for managing Material Safety Data
j Sheets (MSDS). Anticipated hazardous or toxic chemicals shall also be reviewed.
V
2.3.13 DISPOSAL OF DISCARDED MATERIALS
Discarded materials that cannot be treated as solid wastes shall be handled as
approved by the Contracting Officer.
2.3.14 PROTECTION OF MIGRATORY BIRD SPECIES
All construction personnel shall be advised that migratory birds are protected
under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, as amended. The contractor may be held
responsible for harming or harassing the birds, their eggs or their nests as a result of the
construction. In order to meet these responsibilities, the Contractor shall conduct
monitoring of the construction area from 1 April through 31 August, if construction
activities occur during that period. If nesting birds are found, the Contracting Officer shall
be contacted for instructions.
2.3.15 PROTECTION OF AIR RESOURCES
The Contractor shall keep construction activities under surveillance, management,
and control to minimize pollution of air resources. All activities, and work performed by the
Contractor in accomplishing the specified construction shall be in strict accordance with
the all applicable Federal, State and local emission and equipment and process
performance laws and standards. Monitoring of air quality at the construction site(s) shall
be the responsibility of the Contractor.
2.3.16 PROTECTION OF WATER RESOURCES AND WETLANDS
The Contractor shall not pollute groundwater or any body of surface water,
including the Atlantic Ocean, estuaries, rivers, streams, creeks, marshes, swamps, canals,
ditches, lakes, or ponds. For the.purpose of this specification, pollution includes spilling,
leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, discharging, injecting, dumping, or
disposing of harmful substances into the environment. Harmful substances, including, but
not limited to, fuels, oils, bitumens, calcium chloride, and acids shall not be allowed to
pollute any waters. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to investigate and comply with
all applicable Federal, State, and local laws concerning water pollution control. All work
under this contract will be performed in such a manner that objectionable conditions will
not be created in any groundwater or surface waters.
01430-7

It is the responsibility of the Contractor to comply with all Federal, State and local
laws pertaining to dredging and disposal of dredged material. In addition, it is the
responsibility of the Contractor to assure that no wetlands are adversely affected by
dredging, disposal of dredged material, or associated operations (including land-based `
support activities) conducted under this contract. Any disposal or leakage of dredged
material, outside the disposal area designated in this contract or not in compliance with
placement criteria in this contract, even if unintentional, is the responsibility of the
Contractor, and is subject to removal by the Contractor at his own expense upon the
request of the Contracting Officer. Upon discovery of such misplaced material, the
Contractor shall immediately take corrective action to stop the continued misplacement of
dredged material, and shall contact the Contracting Officer's Representative for further
instructions. The Contractor is responsible for monitoring all water and wetland areas
affected by construction activities. In the event that water quality violations result from the
Contractor's operation, the Contractor shall suspend the operation or operations causing
the pollution, and such suspension shall not form the basis for a claim against the Federal
Government.
2.3.17 PROTECTION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES
The Contractor shall take such measures as may be required and perform all work
in a manner that minimizes the disturbance of or interference with fish and wildlife, or fish
and wildlife habitat. Measures will be taken to prevent polluting or fouling the water. All
wash waters or waste shall be handled in accordance with applicable Federal, State and
local laws prior to release into any natural water body.
2.3.18 PROTECTION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES
Species listed as endangered or threatened receive a high level of protection under
the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (PL 93-205), as amended. Endangered or
threatened species, including whales, sea turtles, manatees, and shortnose sturgeon,
may be encountered in the project area during construction of this project. In addition, all
marine mammals, including porpoises and dolphins, are protected under the Marine
Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (PL 92-522), as amended. Therefore, the Contractor shall
take such measures as may be required to assure that any activities conducted as a part
of this contract do not kill, injure, capture, pursue, harass, or otherwise harm any of these
species. Specific types of equipment and operations pose different types of hazards, so
specific protective measures will vary depending upon the type of operation being
conducted. Protected species frequently occur in North Carolina waters and the
Contractor should plan the work accordingly.
NOTIFICATION AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR INCIDENTS INVOLVING
PROTECTED SPECIES - Incidents involving the death or injury of any protected species
shall be reported to the Contracting Officer immediately. Also, the Contractor will prepare
and provide to the Contracting Officer written records detailing the incident within 24 hours
of its occurrence.

)are known to be used
PROJECT SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS -North Carolina beach?
Y for nesting by the loggerhead sea turtle, a federally listed threatened species. Should
work occur during the nesting season (May 1 thru November 15), the Contracting Officer,
under separate contract, will have sea turtle nest monitoring and relocation performed to
minimize potential adverse impacts to this species. This separate contractor will be
traversing the entire project area daily to locate and remove sea turtle nests to a hatchery
outside of the project area.
.11
Specific Contractor requirements for this project are as follows:
(a) Through the period of sea turtle nesting and hatching (May 1 through November
15), construction pipes that are placed parallel to the shoreline will be placed as far
landward as possible when passing over completed sections of the project.
Temporary storage of pipes and equipment shall be off the beach, but not in wetland
areas. If beach storage is considered necessary, prior approval will be obtained from the
Contracting Officer. If approval is granted, pipes and equipment shall be placed as far
landward as possible.
(b) During construction, visual inspections of the disposal areas will be conducted to
determine if escarpments greater that 18 inches high and 100 feet in length are present.
If escarpments exceeding these dimensions are found, and the elevation of the placed
material is within the maximum allowable elevation +6.0 feet NGVD (plus or minus 0.5
foot), the escarpment will be removed within 24 hours of receiving approval from the
Contracting Officer by forming a smooth slope from the top of the placed material to the
foreshore slope of the placed material. If the elevation of the placed material exceeds the
maximum allowable elevation, material lying above the maximum allowable elevation will
be removed and redeposited within other sections of the designated disposal area and
within the allowable tolerances. NOTE: During the sea turtle nesting season,
escarpments may not be leveled until results of daily sea turtle monitoring have been
reviewed by the Contracting Officer and his approval granted for escarpment leveling.
Escarpment leveling may only take place during daylight hours.
(c) If, during the course of conducting work, a sea turtle nest is disturbed by
construction activities, the Contractor will mark the nest location and cover the eggs, by
hand, with at least 6 inches of sand. All beach disturbing activities will be stopped within a
100-foot radius of the nest to prevent further damage and the Contracting Officer notified
immediately. Work in this area will not resume until the nest has been relocated and the
Contracting Officer grants approval.
(d) During the period of sea turtle nesting and hatching (May 1 through November
15), all beach lighting associated with project construction shall be minimized to the
maximum extent practicable while maintaining compliance with all safety requirements.
Reduced wattage and special fixtures or screens to reduce illumination of adjacent beach
and nearshore waters shall be used if practical. Shielded low pressure sodium vapor
lights are recommended for all lights on the beach.
01430-9
(e) If a dead, injured or sick sea turtle, or any other endangered or threatened i
species is found in the project area by the Contractor, it must be left undisturbed and the
Contracting Officer notified immediately.
2.3.19 PROTECTION AND RESTORATION OF LANDSCAPE AND MARINE
VEGETATION DAMAGES
The Contractor shall restore all landscape features and marine vegetation
damaged or destroyed during construction operations outside the limits of the approved
work areas. All landscape features damaged or destroyed during construction operations
that were not identified for removal shall be restored. Any vegetation or landscape feature
damaged shall be restored as nearly as possible to its original condition. This work will be
accomplished at the Contractor's expense.
2.3.20 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL
The Contractor shall establish and maintain quality control for environmental
protection of all items in this section. The Contractor shall record on daily quality control
reports or attachments thereto, any problems in complying.with environmental laws and
regulations, and corrective actions taken.
2.4 WORKAREA PLAN
The Contractor shall include a Work Area Plan showing the proposed activities in
each portion of the project area and identify the areas of limited use or nonuse. The Plan
shall include measures for marking the limits of use areas. The Contractor shall include
drawings identifying the areas of limited use or nonuse and show locations of any
proposed temporary excavations or embankments for haul roads, stream crossings,
material storage areas, structures, sanitary facilities, stockpiles of earth materials, and
disposal areas for excess earth material and unsatisfactory earth materials.
The Contractor's field offices, staging areas, stockpile storage, and temporary buildings
shall be designated areas on the drawings or as approved. Temporary movement or
relocation of Contractor facilities shall be only on approval by the Contracting Officer.
Prior to any construction, the Contractor shall mark the areas within the designated
work areas that are not required to accomplish work to be performed under this contract
and which are to be protected. Isolated areas within the general work area which are to
be saved and protected shall be marked or fenced. Monuments and markers shall be
protected during construction. Where construction operations are to be conducted during
darkness, the markers shall be visible in the dark. The Contractor shall convey to his
personnel the purpose of marking and protection of all necessary objects.
2.5 POST CONSTRUCTION CLEANUP
The Contractor shall clean up areas used for construction and remove all signs of
temporary construction facilities; Contractor office, storage and staging areas; quarry and
borrow areas; and all other areas used by the Contractor during construction. Any
disturbed areas shall be graded and filled as approved by Contracting Officer.
G
C
C
?c
h
e
2
C
p
n
c
c
ti
a
a
rc
01430-10
s
x
J
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Marine Fisheries
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Bruce L. Freeman, Director
MEMORANDUM
?EHNR
February 3, 1997
TO: Jenny Owens
USACOE - Wilmington Office
FROM: P.A. Wojciechowski
SUBJECT: DREDGE AND FILL PERMIT
EA Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channels,
Dare County
Attached is the Division's reply for the above referenced project.. If you have any
questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.
PAW/bc
P.O. Box 769, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557-0769 Telephone [phone] FAX 919-7?r,-11?F4
State of North CaQa
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Marine Fisheries
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Bruce L. Freeman, Director
MEMORANDUM:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT
DATE:
Jenny Owens, USACOE - Wilmington District
Sara E. Winslow, Biologist Supervisor

A4
,low 1111112101111111,11M
?EHNR
EA Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channels, Dare
County
February 1, 1997
The Division of Marine Fisheries received your letter dated January 27, 1997,
r requesting that the dredging window be extended to May 1. Through our telephone
conversation last week, you indicated that the Corp would be requesting a one month
extension. However, the May 1 date stated in the letter is two months.
As indicated in the original memorandum (January 16, 1997) relative to this project,
Pamlico Sound is a very important nursery area for various species of finfish and
invertebrates. This is especially true when associated with SAVs. The environmental
integrity of the area must be protected during the critical times of usage by these species.
This agency conducts juvenile stock assessment sampling throughout these areas.
Fifty-five species of finfish and invertebrates have been captured in these areas. Spot, blue
crabs, spotted seatrout, summer flounder, and red drum have been the most abundant
commercially and recreationally important species.
Through numerous meetings between the Division and the Corps relative to dredging
moratoriums, these time frames have been well known. The Division remains concerned with
the associated impacts as a result of the project as in the previous comments.
This agency has not requested the moratorium associated with the Rollinson Channel
portion. of the project. The EA stated that SAVs were only patchy throughout the alignment.
r , The information you supplied me January 30, 1997, states that approximately 2 acres of SAV
P.O. Box 769, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557-0769 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
. _ c....-. n„_,.... n tr.... _.%'_ ? _.. _ _ c._...t,...,,. Snot_ -
Jenny Owens
January 31, 1997
Page Two
will be dredged within the channel. This amount is about 16.5% of the total bottom area of
the proposed channel (100 ft. x 5 miles). While this portion is significant, the public benefits
to be derived from this specific project renders this affect acceptable.
The section in the EA relative to the Rodanthe Channel also stated that the SAVs were
scattered and somewhat patchy. Reference the information you supplied on January 30, 1997
approximately 2 acres of SAV are present within the maintenance alignment. Based on
Division sampling in the area the SAVs throughout this area of the sound are extensive. This
agency recommends that the maintenance in the basin and within one-half mile of the shore be
restricted to the moratorium time frame. That area outside the one-half mile distance would be
allowed to occur within the requested moratorium time frame, but will be completed by May
1.
It was stated in the information supplied (01/30/97) that no SAVs will be impacted with
the Avon portion of the project. The Division requests that the requested moratorium be
adhered to for the basin and within one-half mile of the shoreline. That portion outside that
distance could occur within the moratorium time frame, but will be completed by May 1.
If you have any questions within the next week, contact Harrel B. Johnson, NC DMF,
s District Manager (919-264-3911).
cc: P. Wojciechowski
H. Johnson
File
i
{
i

?w7
t
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. Box 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROUNA28402-1890
t ?Tn ONOF January 27, 1997
Environmental Resources Section
Ms. Sara Winslow
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
1367 U. S. 17, South
Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
Dear Ms. Winslow:
This letter is in reference to the dredging window discussed in your January 16, 1997,
memorandum which provided comments on the Environmental Assessment Maintenance
Dredging of Rodanthe Avon and Rollinson Channels Dare County North Carolina
December 1996. Due to the extensive number of dredgIn
g projects underway in the
Wilmington District, the Corps of Engineers will be unable to complete the dredging of these
channels within the designated dredging window. Funding is available for Fiscal Year 1997
and availability of funding for future maintenance is uncertain. Therefore, we would like to
request that the dredging window be extended to May 1, for the Fiscal Year 1997
maintenance dredging.
The maintenance dredging for these projects will begin as soon as all environmental
issues are resolved, therefore, we would like to request that your response to Jenny Owens,
at FAX [phone], as soon as possible.
If you have any questions in regard to this request, please contact Jenny Owens, at
[phone].
Sincerely,
Copy Furnished:
Mr. Steve Benton
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Frost Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
11dlle_" .
C. E. Shuford, Jr., P. E.
Acting Chief
Engineering and Planning Division
7 s ? t.
Environmental Rev?ew Tracking Sheet
DWQ - Water Quality Section
1
v
?F
X9
MEMORANDUM '4
0

TO: 37
Env. Sciences Branch Technical Support Branch i
* Wetlands ? Coleen Sullins, P&E
? John Dorney ? Dave Goodrich, P&E, NPDES `tio?
s
? Eric Galamb (DoT) ? Carolyn McCaskill, P&E, State
,Greg Price (airports, COE) ? Bradley Bennett, P&E, Stormwater
? Steve Kroeger (utilities) ? Ruth Swanek, Instream Assess. (modeling)
? ? Carla Sanderson, Rapid Assess.
* Bio. Resources, Habitat, End. Species ?
? Trish MacPherson
? Kathy Herring (forest/oRw/xQw) Operations Branch
? ? Dianne Wilburn, Facility Assessment
* Toxicology ? Tom Poe, Pretreatment
? Larry Ausley ? Lisa Martin, Water Supply Watershed

Regional Water Quality Supervisors
.Planning Branch ? Asheville ? Mooresville ? Washington
? ? Fayetteville ? Raleigh ? Wilmington
? Winston-Salem
FROM: Michelle Suverkrubbe, Planning Branch
RE-
j6
c.- -3) Ctn.

Attached is a copy of the above document. Subject to the requirements of the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act, you are being asked to review the document for potential significan t impacts
to the environment, especially pertinent to your jurisdiction, level of expertise or permit authority.
Please check the appropriate box below and return this form to me along with your written comments, if
any, by the date indicated.
Thank you for your assistance. Suggestions for streamlining and expediting this process are
greatly appreciated!
Notes:
You can reach me at:
phone: [phone], ext. 567 fax: [phone] e-mail: [e-mail]
mis:lcircmemo.doc
c'
r
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
December 13, 1996
IN REPLY REFER TO
Environmental Resources Section
Dear Madam or Sir:
Enclosed is a copy of the Environmental Assessment, Maintenance Dredging of
Rodanthe. Avon. and Rollinson Channels, Dare Countv. North Carolina. December
1996. The Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared in accordance with the
Council on Environmental Quality and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulations for
implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.
Based on information contained in the EA, we expect that the proposed Federal
action, which consists of maintenance dredging utilizing upland diked disposal, beach
disposal, and control-of-effluent disposal, will not significantly affect the quality of the
human environment and that an Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared.
The EA is being circulated for review and comments. If we do not receive comments
from you by January 23, 1997, we will assume that you have none.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact
Ms. Jenny Owens, Environmental Resources Branch, at [phone]..
Sincerely,
Terry Rf oun&4uth
Lieutey r t Colonel, U.S. Army
District Enaineer
Enclosure
' ? `* "" ,
? ??
( %.

US Army Corps
of Engineers®
Wilmington District
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
FOR
MAINTENANCE DREDGING OF
RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON
CHANNELS
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
DECEMBER 1996
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources •
Division of Water Quality -'C*v 1 21
James R Hunt, Jr., Govemor
Jonathan R Howes, Secretary ID E H N FI
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
January 21, 1997
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dorn( \ "
From: Greg Price
Subject: Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollison Channels EA
Dare County
EHNR #97-0424
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities which
impact waters of the state including wetlands. The following comments are offered in response
to the EA.
This project will require a 401 Certification issued for return water from upland contained
disposal areas, beach disposal, and control-of-effluent disposal, requiring written concurrence
from DWQ.
The applicant is reminded that endorsement of an EA/FONSI by DWQ would not preclude the
denial of a 401 Certification upon application if wetland impacts have not been avoided and
minimized to the maximum extent practicable. Questions regarding the 401 Certification should
be directed to Greg Price (733-1786) in DWQ's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
cc: Michelle Suverkrubbe
Environmental Sciences Branch • 4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE OF RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON CHANNELS
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Table of Contents
4

ITEMS
PAGE NO.
1.00 INTRODUCTION ................................................. 1
2.00 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND HISTORY ........................... 1
2.01 Rodanthe ............................................1
2.02 Avon ................................................2
2.03 Rollinson ............................................. 2
3.00 PROPOSED ACTION ............................................. 3
3.01 Rodanthe ............................................ 4
3.02 Avon ................................................ 5
3.03 Rollinson ............................................. 6
4.00 ALTERNATIVES ................................................. 6
4.01 Open Water Disposal ................................... 7
4.02 No Action Alternative ................................... 7
5.00 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ....................................... 7
5.01 Water Quality ......................................... 7
5.02 Marine and Estuarine Resources .......................... 9
5.03 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) ..................... 10
5.03.1 Rodanthe ..................................... 11
5.03.2 Avon ......................................... 11
5.03.3 Rollinson ...................................... 11
5.04 Wetlands ............................................. 11
5.05 Terrestrial Resources .................................. 12
5.06 Threatened and Endangered Species ..................... 12
5.07 Archaeological/Historical Resources ....................... 15
5.08 Recreation and Aesthetic Resources ...................... 16
5.09 Hazardous and Toxic Waste (HTW) ....................... 17
5.10 Air Quality ........................................... 17
6.00 RELATIONSHIP TO N.C. COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT PROGRAM .... 18
7.00 COORDINATION ................................................ 18
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE OF RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON CHANNELS
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Table of Contents (CON'T)
ITEMS
PAGE NO.
8.00 LIST OF RECIPIENTS ........................................... 18
9.00 REFERENCES ................................................. 20
10.00 FINDING ..................................................... 21
FIGURES
(All figures follow page 21 of the EA)
FIGURE 1: Project Location
FIGURE 2: Channel from Pamlico Sound to Rodanthe, NC
FIGURE 3: Upland Disposal Areas, Rodanthe, NC
FIGURE 4: Avon Harbor
FIGURE 5: Rollinson Channel, NC
FIGURE 6: Upland Disposal Area, Hatteras, NC (Rollinson Channel)
FIGURE 7: Proposed Beach Disposal Area, Rodanthe, NC
FIGURE 8: Proposed Highway 12 Disposal Site, Rodanthe, NC
FIGURE 9: Proposed Beach Disposal Area, Avon, NC
FIGURE 10: Proposed Beach Disposal Area, Hatteras, NC
FIGURE 11: Submerged Aquatic Vegetation, Rodanthe, NC
FIGURE 12: Submerged Aquatic Vegetation, Avon, NC
FIGURE 13: Submerged Aquatic Vegetation, Rollinson Channel
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF CHANNEL SEDIMENTS
FIGURE A-1: Sediment Sampling Stations, Rodanthe, NC
FIGURE A-2: Sediment Sampling Stations, Avon, NC
FIGURE A-3: Sediment Sampling Stations, Rollinson Channel
TABLE A-1: Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channels, Grain Size Analysis
TABLE A-2: Rodanthe Channel, Grain Size Analysis
APPENDIX B: EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES (FOR BEACH
DISPOSAL)
APPENDIX C: EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES (FOR RELEASE
OF EFFLUENT FROM UPLAND DIKED DISPOSAL SITES)
APPENDIX D: EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES (FOR CONTROL-
OF-EFFLUENT DISPOSAL)
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE OF RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON CHANNELS
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
1.00 INTRODUCTION
Due to severe shoaling, three small navigation projects, located in Pamlico
Sound along the Outer Banks of North Carolina, require maintenance dredging to
restore the channels to their previously authorized project depths. The three areas are
the channels and harbors at Rodanthe and Rollinson and only the channel portion of
the project at Avon (Figure 1). There is no available upland disposal site near Avon
that could accommodate the fine-grained material that would be dredged from Avon
Harbor. Therefore, maintenance dredging of Avon Harbor is not addressed in this
Environmental Assessment (EA).
Dredged material from the Rollinson and Avon channels, which is suitable for
beach disposal (sandy) would be placed in designated disposal sites on nearby
beaches. The sandy material that would be dredged from the Rodanthe project would
be placed in the designated beach disposal site at Rodanthe or in an upland disposal
site that is 1.5 miles north of the Rodanthe harbor, on the east side of Highway 12. For
the 1997 maintenance dredging of the Rodanthe channel, all beach quality sand would
be placed in the the site on the east side of Highway 12 (see Section 3.01 for a
complete discussion). Dredged material from Rodanthe and Rollinson Harbors that is
not suitable for beach disposal (muddy/silty) would be placed in upland diked disposal
sites. The purpose of this EA is to address the environmental impacts of the
maintenance dredging and dredged material disposal.
2.00 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND HISTORY
2.01 Rodanthe.
The River and Harbor Act of March 2, 1945 authorized a channel 5,336 feet long
and 100 feet wide to a depth of 6 feet at mean low water (miw) from the mouth of
Blackmar Gut westward into Pamlico Sound. Through the gut the channel was
authorized to a depth of 6 feet at mlw for a width of 60 feet and a length of 1,000 feet
into an 80- to 100-foot wide turning basin (Figure 2).
Maintenance dredging of this channel with disposal of dredged material in two
upland disposal sites, located next to the harbor (Figure 3), was discussed in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement, Maintenance of Navigation Projects on Sounds of
North Carolina, dated July 1976 (USAED 1976). However, maintenance dredging has
not been necessary for this channel since its original construction in 1965 when 75,408
cubic yards of material were removed.
2.02 Avon.
The project at Avon, North Carolina consists of a direct channel 6 feet deep, 100
feet wide, and 3.5 miles long, to a basin, 6 feet deep, 100 feet wide, and 300 feet long
(Figure 4). The original project alignment was authorized by the River and Harbor Act
of March 2, 1945 as specified in House Document (HD) 316/76/1, however, the present
alignment was authorized by Section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of July 14, 1960
as specified in the Detailed Project Report, approved May 5, 1965.
The previously referenced FEIS (USAED 1976) discusses maintenance dredging of
the Avon channel. Since original construction in 1947, when 79,857 cubic yards of
material were removed, the project has been maintained a total of seven times. The
last maintenance dredging was performed in 1986, when a hydraulic pipeline dredge
placed approximately 14,539 cubic yards of material in two upland diked disposal sites,
located adjacent to the harbor.
2.03 Rollinson.
The initial channel from Pamlico Sound to Hatteras Basin, 6 feet deep by 100
feet wide and approximately 5 miles long, was authorized by the River and Harbor Act
of August 30, 1935 as specified in HD 218172/1. On October 23, 1962, channel depth
was increased to 12 feet in HD 457/87/2. A 6-foot deep basin was specified for
Hatteras Basin on March 2, 1945, in HD 457/87/2 and increased to 12 feet deep on
October 23, 1962, in HD 457/87/2 (Figure 5).
Maintenance dredging of this channel, with disposal of dredged material in a
privately-owned upland diked area, adjacent to the harbor (Figure 6) was also
discussed in the FEIS (USAED 1976). Since original construction in 1937, when
78,348 cubic yards of material were removed, the channel has been maintained a total
of 15 times. The last maintenance dredging was performed in 1988; a hydraulic
pipeline dredge placed approximately 56,000 cubic yards of material in the nearby
upland diked disposal site.
3.00 PROPOSED ACTION
The proposed action involves maintenance dredging of the three projects,
described above, with the sandy, coarse-grained material from the outer portions of the
channels being placed in the designated beach disposal sites. As discussed in detail in
Section 3.01, during some maintenance dredging events, such as the upcoming
dredging, the coarse-grained material from Rodanthe would be placed in an upland
2
area on the east side of Highway 12 (Figure 7), using the control-of-effluent method
disposal. The material would then be used by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) to aid in protecting Highway 12 from beach washover. Fine-
grained, muddy material from the inner portions of the Rollinson and Rodanthe
channels and all harbor material would be placed within the designated upland diked
disposal sites. Dredging at Avon would begin at the outer end of the channel, where
sediments are coarse-grained and suitable for beach disposal, and would cease near
the entrance to the harbor where fine-grained material would be encountered. See
Appendix A for sediment analyses and sample locations.
Hydrographic surveys of all three projects have been completed and specific
quantities required for the next maintenance dredging operation are discussed in
Sections 3.01 through 3.03.
Dredging would be accomplished by a hydraulic pipeline dredge and material
would be removed to a depth of 8 feet below mean low water (mlw) (-6 feet mlw plus 2
feet overdepth). A dredging contractor would be selected by competitive bidding and
dredging would take place between November 16 and April 30 of any given year to
minimize impacts to significant resources.
As stated previously, upland diked disposal, beach disposal, and control-of-effluent
disposal would be used for this project. Bottom sediments from each of the three
channels and harbors were sampled to make a determination regarding the suitability of
dredged material for beach disposal and control-of-effluent disposal. This sampling and
analyses of grain size distributions are discussed further in Appendix A. Dredged
material that is suitable for beach disposal is defined as having a sand content of 90%
or greater and a mud/silt content of 10% or less. In general, sediments from the outer
ends of the channels to the harbor entrances were coarse-grained and suitable for
beach disposal and sediments in and adjacent to the harbors were fine-grained and
considered unacceptable for beach disposal (Appendix A). For this reason, it is
proposed that materials dredged from areas that contain good, beach quality sand, be
placed on the beach and materials dredged from areas that contain muddy/silty
sediments be placed in upland diked disposal sites. As a result of coordination with
interested agencies, the material pumped to the beaches may be placed below the limit
of the wave uprush zone to minimize alterations and impacts to the upland portion of
the beaches. The wave uprush zone is the part of the beach wetted by the normal
wave uprush. See section 5.06 for further details regarding beach disposal.
The dikes surrounding the upland disposal sites would be approximately 14 feet
above mlw and constructed in a manner to guarantee a minimum of 2 feet of freeboard
during operations. All dikes would be seeded and grassed in accordance with a
Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan.
3
Equipment (bulldozers, etc.), which may be required for construction of the dikes,
including the placement of effluent weirs, discharge and outlet pipes, would be on- and
off-loaded so as to avoid impacts to wetlands. The effluent pipe would be extended
waterward of emergent wetlands. If necessary, construction mats would be used to on-
and off-load equipment. The dredge pipeline may cross over, but not result in the fill of,
high or low marsh to reach the disposal areas. Where the pipeline crosses the marsh,
joints would be burlapped and welded to provide protection from leakage.
Although, the proposed actions for Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson, are very
similar, the specifics of dredged material disposal are unique to each area and are
discussed in the following sections. It should be noted that three of the four upland
disposal sites, discussed in the following paragraphs, were designated and addressed
in the FEIS, Maintenance of Navigation Projects on Sounds of North Carolina, dated
July 1976. These three sites are the one at Rollinson and the two sites at Rodanthe
harbor. The site that has not been previously addressed is the site next to Highway 12
that would be used for the coarse-grained material from the Rodanthe channel.
3.01 Rodanthe.
In order to restore the channel to Rodanthe to its authorized depth, it is estimated
that 118,000 cubic yards of material would need to be removed. Based on grain size
analysis of sediment samples from the channel and harbor at Rodanthe, material
dredged from the harbor, to a point approximately 300' east of channel marker #6 (See
Appendix A) contained less than 90% sand and, therefore, is considered unsuitable for
beach disposal. This material would be placed in the two upland diked disposal sites
that are located adjacent to Rodanthe Harbor. As shown in Figure 3, each of these
disposal sites consists of approximately 2 acres of upland area, bordered by a wetland
fringe between the upland and Pamlico Sound. Dredged material would be placed only
in the upland portions of these sites.
The material to be dredged from the outer end of the channel to a point near
channel marker #6, consists of beach quality sand. It is anticipated that during most
future maintenance dredging events, the coarse-grained (beach quality) material,
approximately 100,000 cubic yards, would be placed in the designated beach disposal
site (Figure 7). However, for the upcoming maintenance dredging of Rodanthe, the
dredged material would be placed on the east side of Highway 12, 1.5 miles north of
Rodanthe Harbor. Figure 8 shows boundaries of this disposal site, which is
approximately 12 acres in size. Based on coordination with the NCDOT and the Cape
Hatteras Electric Membership Corporation, the site boundaries are at least 20' east of
the edge of Highway 12 and at least 50' from power lines and power poles. Throughout
this document, this disposal area will be referred to as the "Highway 12" disposal site.
The material placed in the Highway 12 site would be used by the NCDOT to aid in
protecting the highway from beach washover. Details regarding NCDOT's use of this
4
dredged material are described in the following paragraphs. As shown in Table A-1,
one sediment sample taken at the outer end (west end) of the Rodanthe harbor was
96% sand while a second one, taken nearby, was approximately 66% sand. It is
thought that this second sample may represent a small lense of fine-grained material
since all other samples in the main channel consisted of at least 90% sand. However,
plans are for the dredging to begin in the middle of the channel, between channel
markers #6 and #4 and proceed towards the ends of the channel. When fine-grained
material is encountered, the dredge would cease pumping to the beach or to the
Highway 12 disposal site and begin pumping material into one of the two upland
disposal sites.
In March of 1992, the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM)
and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) issued permits to the NCDOT for
placement of "temporary" sandbags on the beachfront, approximately 61/2 miles north
of Rodanthe Harbor (just north of the USFWS Headquarters), to protect a 4000' section
Highway 12 from beach washover. Due to frequent washover, NCDOT planned to
move this section of Highway 12 inland several hundred feet. It was thought that
relocation of the highway would greatly lessen the washover problem. Consequently,
one condition of the permits issued for the sandbags, was that they were to be removed
when the relocation of Highway 12 was completed. The relocation of this portion of the
highway was completed in the fall of 1995, however, the sandbags remained in place
until just recently, when a judge ordered that they be removed (removal of all sandbags
was completed on November 15, 1996).
Although the subject section of Highway 12 has been moved several hundred feet
inland, it is still vulnerable to beach washover. As a result, in early October 1996, the
State of North Carolina informed the Corps of Engineers that NCDOT wanted to
investigate the possibility of replacing the sandbagged area with dredged material. On
October 23, 1996, representatives from Dare County, NCDOT, the USFWS, the
National Park Service (NPS), the North Carolina Division of Water Resources
(NCDWR), the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM), and the
Corps of Engineers met to discuss options that would meet the Corps' need for disposal
of dredged material and NCDOT's need for material to protect Highway 12. The
proposed plan, agreed upon by all present, is for the dredged material to be placed in
the Highway 12 disposal site, where it would be easily accessible to NCDOT. A berm
would be constructed parallel to Highway 12 and the dredged material would be placed
east of the berm so that the effluent could be directed toward the ocean (control-of-
effluent disposal). The dredged material would be allowed to dry out, at which time
NCDOT would haul (by truck).the dried sand to areas along the beach where it is most
needed, i. e. areas where the sandbags had been located. This area is approximately
41/2 miles north of the designated Highway 12 disposal site.
5
3.02 Avon.
It is estimated that approximately 200,000 cubic yards of material would have to be
removed from the Avon channel in order to reach the previously authorized project
depth. Results of grain size analysis indicate that sediments from the outer end of the
channel to an area near the harbor entrance are coarse-grained and are suitable for
beach disposal (Appendix A). The proposed beach disposal area begins at a point 1.15
miles south of Avon harbor and extends north 3.1 miles (Figure 9).
The previously used upland disposal sites at Avon Harbor are no longer useable
and a new upland disposal site, which would be suitable for the fine-grained material
from the harbor, is not available. Therefore, this document only addresses current and
future dredging and disposal of the coarse-grained material from the channel leading
into the harbor, and not the harbor, itself, or any fine-grained material outside the
harbor entrance. If, in the'future, a suitable upland disposal site becomes available, an
EA, which covers the harbor portion of the Avon project, would be prepared and
circulated for 30-day review.
3.03 Rollinson.
To restore the Rollinson channel and harbor to its previously authorized depth
would require the removal of approximately 300,000 cubic yards of material. Based on
the grain size analysis, samples from the inner harbor, out to Channel marker #32,
contained a high percentage of muddy/silty sediments that would not be suitable for
beach disposal. Material dredged from these areas would be placed in the 9.5-acre
upland diked disposal site, located south of Rollinson Harbor (Figure 6). The estimated
quantity of material to be placed in this upland diked disposal site is 75,000 cubic yards.
Sediment samples taken from Channel marker #32, out to the end of the channel,
near Channel markers #42RC and #44, contained a high percentage of beach quality
sand. Material dredged from this portion of the channel, estimated to be approximately
225,000 cubic yards, would be placed in the designated beach disposal site. The
beach disposal site begins at a point 0.85 miles south of the harbor and extends north
5.85 miles, to a point north of Frisco, North Carolina. The southernmost portion of this
site has been previously designated and used for beach disposal of dredged material
from the channel to Hatteras (Ferry Channel) (Figure 10).
4.00 ALTERNATIVES
The alternatives to dredging of the subject channels were addressed in the
previously referenced FEIS (USAED 1976). Major alternatives were to maintain the
existing channels or to discontinue dredging of these channels. Without dredging (no
6
action), shoaling in the subject channels and harbors would make them unusable to
many types of recreational and commercial vessels.
Three methods of dredged material disposal would be used for this project. These
include upland diked disposal of the fine-grained material from the Rodanthe and
Rollinson channels, beach disposal of coarse-grained material from Rodanthe, Avon,
and Rollinson channels, and control-of-effluent disposal of coarse-grained material from
Rodanthe channel. During the upcoming maintenance dredging, and in the future,
should NCDOT need material to protect Highway 12, the control-of-effluent method of
disposal of coarse-grained material from Rodanthe would be used. One other method
of dredged material disposal considered for this project was open water disposal.
4.01 Open Water Disposal.
Open water disposal would produce more negative environmental impacts than
beach disposal, upland diked disposal, or control-of-effluent disposal. Because of
potential impacts to Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) and benthic resources, open
water disposal would not be an option for this project.
4.02 No Action Alternative.
Failure to implement maintenance dredging of the subject channels would severely
limit navigation in these areas. In addition, failure to use the three disposal methods,
described above, would make the proposed maintenance dredging very costly, as the
existing upland sites do not have the capacity to hold all of the material needed to
restore the channels and harbors to their authorized project depths; other disposal sites
would have to be located and obtained. In addition, failure to use beach disposal and
control-of-effluent disposal for this project would deprive the designated beach disposal
areas and the area adjacent to Highway 12 of badly needed material.
5.00 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
5.01 Water Quality.
The North Carolina water quality classification assigned to the Pamlico Sound, in
the vicinity of the project is SA (15A NCAC 2B .0317). SA waters are suitable for
commercial shell fishing and all other tidal saltwater uses including primary and
secondary recreation, and fish propagation.
A letter dated August 16, 1995, was sent to the Division of Environmental
Management requesting that a general water quality certification, pursuant to Section
401 (P.L. 95-217), be issued for disposal of dredged material on ocean beaches in
7
North Carolina. To date, a draft version of this general certification has been
completed, however, a final version has not. The proposed beach disposal would be
covered under this general certification, when it is finalized. A Section 404(b)(1) (PL
95-217) Evaluation and Statement of Findings has been prepared and signed and is
included as Appendix B. Special Use Permits for beach disposal and control-of-effluent
disposal alongside Highway 12 would be obtained. The proposed beach disposal site
for the Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson channels is located within the boundaries of the
Cape Hatteras National Seashore, therefore, the National Park Service would issue
Special Use Permits for those areas.
Pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, a Water
Quality General Certification (WQC #3024) for Corps of Engineers dredging activities
using upland diked disposal sites was issued on September 6, 1995. A letter
requesting that the proposed sites at Rodanthe and Rollinson be included under
General Certification No. 3024 will be sent to the NCDEM concurrently with this EA. An
updated Section 404(b)(1) Evaluation and Statement of Findings has been completed
and signed and is included as Appendix C.
A Section 401 Water Quality Certificate (WQC) will be required for the control-of-
effluent disposal of dredged material from the Rodanthe channel. A letter requesting
that a Section 401 WQC be issued for this work will be sent to the NCDEM concurrently
with this EA. An updated Section 404(b)(1) Evaluation and Statement of Findings for
this method of disposal has been completed and signed and is included as Appendix D.
The Highway 12 site for Rodanthe is located within the boundaries of the Pea Island
National Wildlife Refuge, therefore, the USFWS would issue a Special Use Permit for
that area.
A Section 404(a) Public Notice for the proposed work would be mailed for a 30 day
comment and review period prior to award of the contract.
Salinity in the vicinity of the project ranges from 17 parts per thousand (ppt) to 19
ppt (Harned and Davenport, 1990). No significant impact to the salinity of the area is
expected to occur as result of the proposed action.
The proposed work will be coordinated with the Dare County Mosquito Control
Office. No significant mosquito problems are anticipated in conjunction with the
proposed work.
No significant adverse impacts to water quality are expected to occur as a result of
the proposed work. Turbidity associated with dredging and disposal would be short-
term in duration and end following dredging. The sediments in the area are not
anticipated to be contaminated with toxic substances since the site is well removed
from any known sources of pollution (see Section 5.09).
8
No adverse impacts to groundwater resources are expected to occur as a result of
the proposed activity.
5.02 Marine and Estuarine Resources.
Waters in the project vicinity provide habitat for an abundance of estuarine and
marine organisms and support both commercial and recreational fisheries for crabs,
clams, oysters, scallops, shrimp, and finfish. Based on telephone conversations with
the North Carolina Division of Health Services, Shellfish Sanitation Office, and the
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries, the dredging window of November 16
to April 30 is acceptable for this project. Most areas in the vicinity of the project are
closed to shellfishing and the project area is at esignated as a primary nursery area.
Any impacts on marine and estuarine resources as a result of dredging would be
considered minor and temporary.
The impacts of beach disposal below the limit of wave uprush on marine resources
would be minor and confined to the immediate vicinity of the disposal area and the time
frame in which the disposal occurred. Intertidal benthic invertebrates, including mole
crabs, coquina clams, amphipods, isopods, and polychaetes, would be covered by
dredged material in the beach disposal area. Some burrowing up through overburden
would occur. Recolonization would be expected to begin as soon as the disposal
operation ends. These invertebrates serve as an important food source for surf-feeding
fish and shorebirds. Other than affecting benthic food sources in the immediate
disposal area, no adverse effects to fishes should be expected in the vicinity of the
dredging and disposal activities.
Due to some uncertainty regarding the impacts of beach renourishment, in 1994,
the Wilmington District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers contracted with the University of
North Carolina at Wilmington (UNCW) to perform a literature review regarding impacts
of beach renourishment in the southeastern United States. Based on the literature
review, UNCW was to make management recommendations to minimize impacts and to
make recommendations regarding additional monitoring efforts that may be warranted.
The report, entitled A Review and Synthesis of Data on Surf Zone Fishes and
Invertebrates in the South Atlantic Bight and the Potential Impacts from Beach
Renourishment, was completed in May 1996 and made four recommendations. The
four recommendations were in regard to timing of renourishment, sediment texture
(compatibility), duration of renourishment, and amount of beachfront renourished at one
time. The Wilmington District will follow the recommendations of this report to the
greatest extent practicable.
Maintenance dredging of the subject projects is not expected to cause significant
impacts to estuarine and marine resources.
9
5.03 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV).
In addition to fisheries resources present in the project area, submerged aquatic
vegetation (SAV) is also present. The predominant type of seagrass found in the
project vicinity is eelgrass (Zostera marina). SAV is usually found in shallow waters (<7'
deep) and provides habitat for larval and juvenile fish and shellfish, including gray trout,
red drum, spotted sea trout, mullet, spot, pinfish, pigfish, gag grouper, white grunt,
silver perch, summer and southern flounder, pink and brown shrimp, blue crabs, hard
shell clams and bay scallops. Seagrass beds are also frequented by adult spot,
spotted sea trout, summer and southern flounder, pink and brown shrimp, blue crabs,
hard shell clams, and provide primary habitat for the bay scallop (Ferguson et. al,
1989). SAV also provides food for many species of birds.
Very little seagrass was found in the sediment samples that were taken from the
Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson channels, however, some samples did contain
seagrass. Specifics regarding each channel are discussed in sections 5.03.1 through
5.03.3. The discussion of seagrass beds is based on a site visit in October of 1994 and
analysis of aerial photography, dated March 7, 1994..
Seagrass beds are very dynamic habitats, therefore, the conditions that would
exist at the time of the proposed dredging may differ somewhat from the conditions
described. in the following paragraphs. For the purpose of discussion, SAV will be
described as either "patchy" or "dense." Patchy SAV is characterized by isolated or
sparse clumps, for which a well-defined boundary is not discernible. Dense SAV is
characterized by very dense clumps, where the individual clumps are not discernible,
but the limits or boundaries of the seagrass beds are fairly distinct. Based on the site
visit and analysis of aerial photography, it may be concluded that the proposed
dredging would not traverse any dense beds of SAV, but may traverse areas that
contain patchy distributions of SAV. Any clumps of SAV that are in the channel would
be destroyed by maintenance dredging, however, most of SAV is outside the existing
channel limits and should remain unharmed.
According to Lisa Wood of the NMFS (Personal Communication), seed germination
of eelgrass begins in early December of any given year and the dredging may have an
effect on the eelgrass beds during this time. This potential effect would be the result of
the increases in turbidity caused by dredging, however, according to Ms. Wood, there is
no documentation to support this theory. Therefore, according to NMFS, the proposed
dredging window of November 15 to April 30 would not cause significant impacts to
SAV and would be acceptable for this project.
The dredge pipeline would be routed so as to avoid eelgrass beds, if practical.
10
5.03.1 Rodanthe
The aerial photography of Rodanthe shows a poorly-defined channel, however,
adjacent sandbars and seagrass beds are well-defined. Figure 11 shows the limits of
SAV near the Rodanthe channel. It should be noted that the boundaries depicted in
Figure 11 include both patchy and dense distributions of SAV. On the north side of the
channel, dense seagrass is found near the harbor and parallels the channel for
approximately 2500 feet. This line of dense seagrass is approximately 700 feet north of
the channel. On the south side of the channel the SAV is much less dense and
consists mostly of patchy, isolated clumps. These isolated clumps of SAV exist within
50 feet of the channel and are more predominant south of the channel. Only one
sediment sample from the Rodanthe Channel contained seagrass and it was found in 5
feet of water, between Channel markers #3 and #4. Based on the occurrence of
seagrass in only one sample and analysis of aerial photography, which showed that the
dense areas of SAV are several hundred feet from the channel, maintenance dredging
of the channel at Rodanthe would have minimal impact on SAV.
5.03.2 Avon
At Avon Harbor, dense SAV is present north of the channel (Figure 12). The SAV
boundary parallels the channel and is approximately 50 feet north of the outer edge of
the channel limits. Patchy SAV is present on the south side of the channel, but in most
areas is several hundred feet outside the channel limits. Traces of eelgrass were found
in several sediment samples taken at Avon Harbor, howeverwater depths in these
areas were only two to three feet deep, providing favorable conditions for growth of
SAV. Based on the site visit and available aerial photography, maintenance dredging
would not take place in areas of densely distributed SAV, therefore, impacts to SAV as
a result of the maintenance dredging would be minor.
5.03.3 Rollinson
Based on the aerial photography of Rollinson channel, densely distributed SAV
parallels both the north and south sides of the channel, however, the boundary of SAV
is at least 100' from the channel in most areas. There is one small area, near Channel
marker #33, where clumps of SAV extend into the channel (Figure 13). The water
depth here was approximately 7.5' deep and the sediment sample extracted from this
area contained some eelgrass. With the exception of this area, the SAV boundaries
+ are outside the channel limits and maintenance dredging would have only minor
impacts on SAV.
5.04 Wetlands.
The only wetlands that would have the potential to be impacted by the proposed
11
project are those associated with the upland diked disposal areas. As discussed in
Section 3.00, the proposed disposal sites are flanked by wetland areas, however, all
dredged material disposal would take place in the upland portions of the disposal sites.
Therefore, the proposed work would not impact wetlands.
5.05 Terrestrial Resources.
Impacts to terrestrial resources would result from the use of the upland diked
disposal sites and for the control-of-effluent site for placement of dredged material.
Since the upland disposal sites were used for disposal during original construction of
the channels and past maintenance dredging events, they have become vegetated with
scrub-shrub vegetation that is typical of dredged material disposal islands. Types of
vegetation on the proposed upland diked disposal sites include the following: spartina
(Spartina patens), sea oats (Uniola paniculata), marsh elder (Iva frutescens), wax
myrtle (Myrica cerifera), marsh pennywort (Hydrocotyl unbellata), greenbrier (Smilax
bona-nox), and a few small red cedars (Juniperus virginiana). The existing vegetation
would be destroyed by dredged material disposal, however, the sites would be
expected to revegetate with similar species within one to two years after disposal is
complete.
The Highway 12 disposal site, which would be used for control-of-effluent disposal,
is a highly disturbed area. This area contains remnants of the old Highway 12, some
open, sandy areas, and low-lying grasses and shrubs. Existing vegetation would be
destroyed by dredged material disposal, however, the site would be expected to
revegetate with similar species within one to two years after disposal is complete.
The project would not impact prime and unique farmland.
5.06 Threatened and Endangered Species.
The proposed work has been reviewed for compliance with the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended. The following species may occur in the project area
and must be considered:
SPECIES
Red wolf
Red-cockaded woodpecker
Roseate tern
Bald eagle
Peregrine falcon
Seabeach amaranth
West Indian manatee
Leatherback sea turtle
Green sea turtle
Hawksbill sea turtle
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Canis rufus
Picoides borealis
Stema dougallii dougallii
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Falco peregrinus
Amaranthus purnilus
Trichechus manatus
Dermochelys coriacea
Chelonia mydas
Eretmochelys irnbricata
STATUS
Experimental Population
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Endangered
12
SPECIES
Loggerhead sea turtle
Kemp's ridley sea turtle
American alligator
Finback whale
Humpback whale
Right whale
Sei whale
Sperm whale
Shortnose sturgeon
S/A - similarity of appearance
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Caretta caretta
Lepidochelys kempii
Alligator mississippiensis
Balaenoptera physalus
Megaptera novaeangliae
Eubaleana glacialis
Balaenoptera borealis
Physeter catodon
Acipenser brevirostrum
STATUS
Threatened
Endangered
Threatened(S/A)
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
A small number of red wolves have been introduced into the Alligator River
National Wildlife Refuge, however, the distance from the refuge to the project area is
such that the red wolf would not be impacted by the project.
The red-cockaded woodpecker is a resident of mature (70+ years) pine forests of
the project region. A site visit conducted by the Corps of Engineers on October 25 - 26,
1994 revealed that the project areas offer no habitat for this species. As no habitat for
red-cockaded woodpeckers was found, the species is believed to be absent from the
area, therefore, the proposed action would not affect this species.
The roseate tern is most frequently found in North Carolina as a transient between
March and mid-May in the spring and late-July to October in the fall (Potter, et al.,
1980). Currently, nesting by this species in the U. S. is restricted to isolated locales in
New England and Florida. Due to the nonbreeding status in the proposed disposal
areas and the abundance of nearby habitat, which would not be affected by the beach
disposal, the proposed project should not affect the roseate tern.
The bald eagle and peregrine falcon would be expected to occur only as migrants
or winter residents within the project area. Due to their mobility, habitat disturbances
resulting from the project should not affect these species.
Seabeach amaranth is an annual or perennial plant that usually grows between
the seaward toe of the dune and the mean high water line and predominantly near inlet
areas. A survey of beaches in the project area, by Corps of Engineers personnel in
1994 and 1995 revealed no amaranthus plants. Due to the absence of seabeach
amaranth within the project area, this species would not be affected by the proposed
beach disposal.
The manatee occurs in both salt and freshwater habitats and has been found in
estuaries in the State. In addition, all listed species of sea turtles occur in the waters off
the North Carolina Coast and within coastal inlets and sounds. Pipeline dredges are
not known to take manatees or sea turtles, therefore the proposed dredging would not
13
affect this species.
In North Carolina the green sea turtle, the Kemp's ridley sea turtle, and the
loggerhead sea turtle are known from estuarine and oceanic waters, whereas the
leatherback and the hawksbill are known principally from oceanic waters. All of these
species are considered to be residents of North Carolina waters primarily from the
spring through the fall although occasional winter records exist for loggerheads, greens,
and Kemp's ridleys. Of these three species, only the loggerhead is considered to be a
regular nester in North Carolina, while the green nests occasionally in the State and the
Kemp's ridley has been documented to nest in the State only once.
Sea turtles are known to nest on ocean beaches in North Carolina between May 1
and August 30. The sea turtle nesting season begins in early spring, increases to a
peak in late spring to mid-summer, and declines until completion in late summer
(August). The loggerhead sea turtle (threatened) is known to nest all along North
Carolina's coast, with numbers gradually increasing toward the south. The green sea
turtle generally nests in more southern parts of the country but has been known in
recent years to nest sporadically in southeastern portions of North Carolina. Sea turtles
known to nest in the project area include the loggerhead sea turtle and the green sea
turtle. Disposal of dredged material on the subject beaches would have a beneficial
affect to the nesting sea turtles through the restoration of lost habitat.
Beach disposal at Rodanthe, Rollinson, and Avon would be routinely scheduled to
take place between November 16 and April 30 of any given year, to the maximum
extent practicable, to avoid impacts to nesting sea turtles. Should project construction
extend into the sea turtle nesting season as a result of project delays, construction
would only be done after coordination with the NMFS and the USFWS, and approval of
a turtle nesting and relocation program by the USFWS and the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission (NCWRC). Sand compaction would be tested on beach
disposal areas. If sand compaction exceeds 500 cone penetrometer units (CPUs),
tilling would be performed. Since the work would be performed by a hydraulic pipeline
dredge, which is not known to take sea turtles, and the work would be scheduled to
occur between November 16 and April 30 of any given year, no loss of sea turtle nests
is anticipated. The formation of escarpments within the disposal area would not be
expected to occur since the material would be placed at the +6 feet m.s.l. contour and
below.
. Through the placement of material at or below the +6 feet m.s.l. elevation and the
testing of the material for compaction and subsequent tilling, if required, the placement
of dredged material on the oceanfront beach of Rodanthe, Avon, and Hatteras
(Rollinson channel) is not likely to adversely affect threatened or endangered sea
turtles. If it is determined that beach disposal would occur during the sea turtle nesting
season (May 1 through November 15), formal consultation in accordance with Section 7
14
of the Endangered Species Act, as amended, would be initiated.
The American alligator is listed as threatened due to its "similarity of appearance"
to the endangered crocodile; therefore, the requirements of Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act do not apply.
Whales occur in North Carolina only in the waters off the coast, outside of the
project impact zone (Cooper et al., 1977). Therefore, the proposed action would not
impact any species of whales.
The shortnose sturgeon ranges along the Atlantic seaboard from the Saint John
River in New Brunswick, Canada, to the Saint Johns River, Florida. It is known from
North Carolina in both the Cape Fear River system and the Great Pee Dee River
system. There are no records of the shortnose sturgeon from the project area. If
shortnose sturgeons are in:the project area, they could be forced to leave areas being
dredged, however, due to the mobility of the species, they could easily avoid the slowly
moving dredge cutterhead. The proposed actions are not likely to affect this species.
The piping plover is a species of potential concern near the project area. The
piping plover is a fairly common winter resident along the beaches of North Carolina
(Potter et. al., 1980). The species normally nests on the Atlantic coastal beaches
between April 1 and July 31. According to Tom Henson of the WRC, piping plovers
nest at Hatteras Inlet and at the point at Cape Hatteras. However, all beach disposal
would occur more than 1 mile from these areas, therefore, no impacts to nesting piping
plovers would occur. Due to the abundance of adjacent beach habitat which would be
unaffected by the proposed maintenance actions, wintering piping plovers are not likely
to be affected.
5.07 Archaeological/Historical Resources.
No archaeological or historical resources would be affected by the proposed
maintenance dredging or the disposal of the dredged material in the upland diked
disposal sites or in the Highway 12 site. The area to be dredged is a previously
dredged channel and the upland disposal areas have been previously utilized for
dredged material disposal. The proposed control-of-effluent site is located in the area
where Highway 12 previously existed (before it was relocated in 1995) and is, therefore,
highly disturbed. Should unanticipated archaeological or historical remains be
encountered during the proposed maintenance dredging operation, or within any of the
disposal areas, they would be evaluated pursuant to Federal agency responsibilities
under the National Historic Preservation Act.
Impacts from vehicles and construction equipment used in placing dredged
material are discussed below. Project requirements have been coordinated with
15
Richard Lawrence, Chief, Underwater Archaeology Unit (UAU), Office of State
Archaeology, Division of Archives and History, North Carolina Department of Cultural
Resources. According to Mr. Lawrence, the beach disposal areas occur within two
archaeological sub-divisions of the coast: North Hatteras Beach, extending from Cape
Hatteras to Pea Island, and South Hatteras Beach, extending from Cape Hatteras to
Ocracoke. The UAU site files list 25 wrecks for the North Hatteras Beach unit and 3
wrecks for the South Hatteras Beach unit. Of the northern wrecks, one is within the
Avon beach disposal area. This is wreck 0025NHB, recorded January, 1995. Of the
southern wrecks, one is within a proposed disposal area; this is, 0003SHB, recorded
January, 1995. There are other wrecks known from the beach and offshore of both
areas but none are believed to be in the area of effect.
The greatest threat to these wrecks is impact by heavy equipment operating on
the beach. Disposal, per se, is not regarded as a threat. In order to assure that
damage does not occur, the following steps will be taken:
1) Sometime during the winter of 1997, prior to dredging, the two known wrecks will
be visually relocated. Compass bearings and tape measurements will then be taken
from established or recoverable datum points so that the wreck locations can be
reestablished just prior to beach disposal. This is necessary because the wrecks are
likely to be naturally covered with sand within a few months of their initial recording.
2) A few weeks prior to project maintenance, the wrecks or their documented
locations will be relocated and flagged so that they can be avoided by heavy
equipment. In addition, other portions of the project area will be visually inspected to
assure that no other wreckage has been uncovered in the interim between location
documentation and project construction. Any new wreck finds will be flagged for
avoidance.
There are no other archaeological survey requirements for the proposed beach
disposal.
5.08 Recreation and Aesthetic Resources.
The subject channels and harbors are used extensively by recreational and
commercial vessels and the proposed maintenance dredging would allow safe
navigability of these areas. The proposed upland disposal areas are quite disturbed
due to their past use for dredged material disposal. The disposal site at Rollinson has
an existing dike, however, the site at Rodanthe, although previously used for dredged
material disposal, does not have an existing dike. Therefore, the proposed action
would not result in any notable changes to the landscape at Rollinson, but would
somewhat alter the landscape at Rodanthe. The landscape at the Highway 12 site
would be temporarily modified by the construction of a berm and by the disposal of
16
material, however, it is anticipated that the landscape would return to its present state
after NCDOT removes the dredged material from the site.
The ocean, beach, dunes, and beach vegetation offer natural scenery that is
aesthetically appealing to many. The area of wave uprush where disposal of dredged
material is proposed is extensively used for recreational activities such as swimming,
walking, sunbathing, and surf fishing. To minimize impacts on these activities, beach
disposal would be limited to November 16 through April 30.
The impacts to beach recreation and aesthetics are expected to be short-term and
minor. The dredged material to be discharged may contain some silt; however, this
fine-grained material would not be retained in the beach profile but would be quickly
winnowed by wave action. The appearance of the beach would likely be only
temporarily degraded. Disposal would result in a temporary widening of the beaches,
which should improve the recreation and aesthetics of these areas.
5.09 Hazardous and Toxic Waste (HTW).
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers standard tiered approach was used to analyze
the potential for encountering contaminated sediments in the areas to be dredged.
According to this analysis, before any chemical or physical testing of sediments may be
conducted, a reason to believe that the sediments may be contaminated must be
established. The sediments in the channels to be dredged are derived from sediment
transport and deposition by wind and tidal currents. The probability of the sites being
contaminated by pollutants is low since they are not within the vicinity of any known
dumping activities, industrial outfalls, or contaminated waters. Sediments that would be
dredged and placed on the beach are fine-to-medium grained sandy materials.
Therefore, no further analyses or physical and chemical testing of the sediments is
recommended.
5.10 Air Quality.
The project is located within the jurisdiction for air quality of the Wilmington
Regional Office of the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources. The ambient air quality for Dare County has been determined to be in
compliance (attainment area) with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This
project is not anticipated to create any adverse effect on the air quality of this
attainment area.
In accordance with 40 CFR 93.153 for nonattainment and maintenance areas,
conformity determinations with the State Implementation Plan are required for Federal
actions if certain exemptions are not met. However, since the project is in an
attainment area, a conformity determination is not required.
17
6.00 RELATIONSHIP TO N.C. COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Based on the information presented within this environmental assessment, the
proposed maintenance dredging of the subject channels and dredged material disposal
is consistent with the approved Coastal Management Program of the State of North
Carolina and the Dare County Land Use Plan (1994 update). During coordination of
the EA, the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management will review the information
presented herein and furnish a consistency position on the proposed work.
7.00 COORDINATION
Representatives from the following agencies were contacted regarding the
proposed action:
National Marine Fisheries Service, Beaufort, NC
National Marine Fisheries Service, St. Petersburg, Florida
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
North Carolina Division of Water Resources
North Carolina Department of Transportation
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
North Carolina Division of Health Services
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh, NC
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Manteo, NC
National Park Service, Cape Hatteras, NC
Cape Hatteras Electric Membership Corporation
Dare County
8.00 LIST OF RECIPIENTS
This EA is being circulated for a 30-day review and comment period to the
following concerned agencies and individuals.
Federal Agencies
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Fifth Coast Guard District
Director, Office of Environmental Compliance,
U.S. Department of Energy
18
Director, Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance,
U.S. Department of Interior
EIS Review Section, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IV
Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IV
Federal Highway Administration
Area Director, Forest Service, USDA
Habitat Conservation Division, Beaufort Marine Fisheries Center,
National Marine Fisheries Service
Office of Ecology and Conservation, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
State Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture
Energy and Resources Division, U.S. Department of Interior
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
National Park Service
State Agencies
North Carolina Division of Water Resources
North Carolina State Clearinghouse
North Carolina Department of Transportation
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Officer
North Carolina Wildlife Federation
North Carolina Aquarium at Fort Fisher
Local Agencies
CAMA Officer, Dare County
Cape Fear Community College
Cape Fear River Research Institute
Dare County Oregon Inlet and Waterways Commission
Conservation Groups
Center for Environmental Health
Conservation Council of North Carolina
Environmental Defense Fund
American Rivers
National Audubon Society
19
National Wildlife Federation
North Carolina Coastal Federation
North Carolina Wildlife Federation
Sierra Club
Libraries
Librarian, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources
State Library of North Carolina
Randall Library, UNC-Wilmington
UNC-Chapel Hill Library
Joyner Library, East Carolina University
Elected and Local Officials
All U.S. Senators and Representatives for the State of
North Carolina
Dare County Board of Commissioners
County Manager, Dare County
Town Managers
Mayors
Postmasters
9.00 REFERENCES
Cooper, J. E., S. S. Robinson and J. B. Funderburg, editors. 1977. Endangered and
Threatened Plants and Animals of North Carolina. North Carolina State Museum
of Natural History, Raleigh, North Carolina. 444 pages.
Ferguson, R.L., J. A. Rivera, and L. L. Wood. 1989. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation in
the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine System. National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS), NOAA, Project No. 88-10, Beaufort Laboratory, Beaufort, North Carolina.
68 pages.
Hackney, C. T., M. H. Posey, S. W. Ross, and A. R. Norris. 1996. A Review and
Synthesis of Data on Surf Zone Fishes and Invertebrates in the South Atlantic
Bight and the Potential Impacts from Beach Renourishment. University of North
Carolina at Wilmington (UNCW), Wimington, North Carolina. 111 pages.
Harnad, D. A. and M. S. Davenport. 1990. Water-Quality Trends and Basin Activities
20
and Characteristics for the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine System, North Carolina
and Virginia. U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 90-398, prepared in
cooperation with the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources. 164 pages.
Potter, E. P., J. F. Parnell, and R. P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. University
of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.
U.S. Army Engineer District, Wilmington. July 1976. Final Environmental Impact
Statement Maintenance of Navigation Projects on Sounds of North Carolina North
Carolina. 258 pages.
Wood, Lisa. NMFS. Personal Communication, January 17 and January 23, 1995.
10.00 FINDING
The proposed action should not significantly affect the quality of the human
environment; therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will probably not be
required. If this opinion is upheld following circulation of this EA, a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) will be signed and circulated.
21
? ? s
? t t
I ? f t ? ?
b`?Sound
,
,"TYRRELL N
DARE
oil a

HYD E
a
-'CARTERET
- a.
u
ROD
` a
? ovn
tg
?o ?
4 }{ATTERAS
(ROLLINSON CHANNEL)
N

Figure 1
f
E
r s•r• wust
1 `
r v w ileg
_
° ROOANTHE i
6 0 / <
` g
v l
1000 f
rAr[N
< ??.,,?.. ?„ ter:. •. ••„`.....- ?"
DETAIL OF BASIN
?- SCALE OF FEET
f ?
DARE COUNTY
D
3
o
0
G
2
D
6'X IOO' CHANNEL
UL
z

F~
T
9

f
r NN
0
Z
1
s

a
z
s
n y

w _
Q
O
n
a
z
1
CHANNEL FROM PAMLICO SOUND
TO
RODANTHE, NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE OF FEET
O 1000 8000 12000
Figure 2
M
N
LL
c
f
it
g
io
W
NS'idW
ONV-Idn
• cl ..?• A...?
•`. ivia3lew aaa3aa •• ' '
?S M Sir OZ9 9'
NS2?b?W
Its. 1
A? ? 1
-73NNVH?)
02K Y1S s„???ua jvti e µ £3N117SYi1 7,?NNY1q 7?NV?LLN9"
H S-1 b W 1?
of
Z
C)
110
m r --? - -
i
?r
2,99 b• -A ,9.• .29 bt
..?... _...r.r.r?.., ....?.....w=mmml!o ..?. •
ONVIdn
?;;'.., • . , . ' w...?,,, t....,,,,,, ,.,,,.,.?,,,, ' ; X15
^*?>; • ' 1d1831dW 03Ja380 `i4
a r" d`? I
HS?b?IN
w
?o
stl M,",%9%

PROJECT
BASIN
I00' X 300'

_--.-----_ i AVON rc j
--__---
6?X 100
--
--
--- t,"'
- Oc

'N
DETAIL OF BASIN ?t?
SCALE Of FEET LOCAOTT MAP
oe a ao tae s qo
SCAU w rtes

Q r•

J
0
s
N
3 S ML-f: .

3Mi.'
' X 100'
O
G

Imi AV N Ira

DARE COUNTY Mi.

y
O
V
l
2
Q
M
V
CLA
9UXTOW
Q
CAPE
NATTERAS

AVON HARBOR
NORTH CAROLINA-
SCALE OF MILES

TYPICAL SECTION O 1 2 3 4
Figure 4
v\ #o
\r a.z rbJ
J\ 5
0 \ \
?V \
Q! ?
R17BBLE ??
BREAKWATER
f OI
N

DETAIL OF BASIN 4YL
AT HATTERAS
SCALE Of ttLT - \ \ '
o Soo ace goo
\

~ ROLUNSON CHANNEL
\`? _? 12' X 100' i....-•
WAL N
"

14
Zod
00
'
\\

, L '
' ??? tYL \? DU RANT PT.
P A ... \?
\
$A#pr SAY

- L-t • ? ? E ??"ti
_ M- `:,_ va O G E A N
9„ N,?IG
A
t ?
A
co"~S? ? 9s
"? ol
r

w.L.w.
----------- ---
1
s IOC
TYPICAL SECTION
HATTERAS
Distances on meosored from basin at Hatteras.
ROLLINSON CHANNEL,
NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE OF MILES
0 1 2 S
Figure 5

EN Np.
R
Qpt-ft' GENERAL
95AG
? Rem
0G
DISPOSAL AREA
HATTERAS, NC
(ROLLINSON CHANNEL)
SCALE: 1:12,000
Figure 6
Round P.arafnoA.-
Bay j , , 't1}
W I L D L I F E
Highway 12 Disposal Site
R E F /U_ G (approximate location)
sync ??y _
Pauli Ditfhr
s•
.? _l,d
Uncle J'uam ?? `' "? `• t
Lanaisr ' i O
Greens Pt ?-•??? ?„+ ? 1?
a
BIacfiner Gul :.••a ?' E 1 0
Cam. 1, of
Rodanthe-
J. 7
U-
pis: t 4_
.zL r ffllf: t
North Drain
Aunt Phoebes '. Proposed Beach Disposal Area
c?T
Marsh - U) and Highway 12 Site
Rodanthe, North Carolina
Scale: 1:24,000
From: Rodanthe, NC USGS Quad
Figure 7
z
Q
w
U
O
U
H
z
Q
J
H
Q
1 ^
1
r
r ?
. ? . rv
w
z
a ?
LL. -
U3
O
r
W
O „
C
a ?v
Q e
1 e =-
i
1 '
i " e
,
,
?a
7
f
t
4
+? ca

c?
• f4
N O
cu
o U

LLJ
a
U CL
W

CV L

Z
C
A .,
C
cu
3 -
cu

0) o

l
I
I
s?
I N
iQ
t=
?O
1=
t
\I
1
g
F ri
u I
1
1
? I
I
I
's
Figure 8
co
sig
CIO
-- pw
u.
Otter Pond Pt
Gibbs FY
•. i3
1 `L
f
w
co
I Q
12 0
vo :. 600(
?? fs •G $plre - - FEET
Az.
41
_-
ZIP
..Black- c Q -
Hammock? )?,a - 20'
PROPOSED BEACH DISPOSAL AREA
c <s cow AVON, NC
SCALE: 1:24,000
•.`AS __ FROM: USGS QUADS
BUXTON.NC
Figure 9
Q
r
ID
rn
LL

• • . . ... 1 ... 1 . • 1 1 1 1 • ???//1 '

. 1 1 1 .. •
.....
l
.• . . • .. • • ... • • • • ......................... :

J.A

/
\
r••.?•••..••. ••• ••.... •••:..•:.11..•11•• VY
\
?•.•••...•••..•...•.•.•..• ....• ••....
•
'

• .. •
• • . • ... .................
........: :..
...
... ...:.::..
?11L ??a= = 4
... ..::: ...........
..: ... .......... .
:•• ::: :: .: .::: •••.••••••••••
1

..........: :.. .........................

... ...................................... .

......... ..........................................

. ............................................

•. •. •. • • •. 040. • • -%ft
••:.:?.; .. 0:00:0 .: •.; •. •.; •.. el
00. 00.
•. •• •• ••. ••. ••:•. ••. ••. •• ••. ••. •• • ••.
•
•. ••• . 00. 00"
• ••• •••• • •. • •. • •••: • •••• •••
0-.'000 00
000 .0 0 0
000 004 00: 00 0.. 0.:,. 000 *00

RODANTHE, NC
Al

.= = Navigation Channel
C? Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) x
-----• Limit of visibility of SAV in photos
SCALE: 1" _ -1000'
" based on aerial photos. dated March 7.1934
Figure 11
. •.. -••• - .? sl1229 = a
ter:.,: -•_
10.
••• r
• • • •? . -base : ,::
40
1•••••111111.1 : /?•f Kim°. • ..tom ?•l}?•
................. . ?•= ?-. -- ice- ;c:?;
•11••11••'1.11111 ?• t -? ? •lY'_..-
r..............
----•--1111111• •.•a t ??? .?a_ •?'•?N• f:/r :'? •t
?• 111111111•• •1 ?? ? fir ? ???
•11111111.11-?•.•? -• 'Q%J?,;j CZ.•
•1•••••111•• -+?? KM ti:?: ?c_.
•1111.1 ?•.. . ? :?,tiw
*/ •1.11.111••• ?1 -????' r t =?•i ?•
%
+••11111111••• -? • ?? •- • ? ?f•
•LI.1 ••111• •_?_• -:? S ?.:'-:1`?r. r
_ AVON NC
- - - Navigation Channel
Offer Pond Pt _? ?•? Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)
..-.-?. Limit of visibility of SAV in photos
SCALE 1"=-10W
Tom=== based on aerial photos, dated March 7,1994
Figure 12
I?•.• '•'•'•; a '?111ctsciri•C•f?acj?lei Beacon
X.x
%
• • • • • • • • • • • •
t,••• •• • • • • • H N ?sYr• • •• • sS
%
• •
Ile
00
45
401
0.4
_ JL s - •
-?' ••
ROLLINSON CHANNEL
?? • / -- - .. Navigation Channel
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAN)4`
S C limit of Visibility of SAV in photos
?? ,, - ?• J' SCALE Z" _ «1000'
.f? \ L based on aerial photos. dated March 7.1994
Figure 13
APPENDIX A
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF CHANNEL SEDIMENTS
RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON CHANNELS
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Sediment sampling, using a Peterson grab sampler, was performed by the Corps
of Engineers at Rollinson, Rodanthe, and Avon. Due to the limited capacity of the
upland disposal areas at Rodanthe Harbor, vibracore sampling was also performed.
This additional sediment analysis was thought to be necessary in order to more
accurately determine the volume of the fine-grained sediments that would have to be
placed in the upland disposal sites. This additional sediment analysis was completed
by the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR).
Samples were taken by the Corps of Engineers at Avon, NC on July 29, 1994 and
samples at Rodanthe and Rollinson were taken on October 25th and 26th, 1994. It
should be noted that samples were extracted only from the surface of the bottom.
Sampling stations were positioned by reference to channel markers and by estimating
the distance between the markers. At Rodanthe, samples were taken approximately
every 1000 feet, and at Avon and Rollinson, samples were taken approximately every
2000 feet. Figures A-1 through A-3 show the approximate sampling locations at each
of the three projects. At the time of sampling, a bathymetric survey of Avon had been
completed, therefore at Avon, an attempt was made to extract the sediment samples
from known shoaled areas within the channel. A bathymetric survey for the Rodanthe
and Rollinson channels was not available at the time of sampling, so all samples were
taken near the centerline of the channel.
Sediment samples were sent to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' South Atlantic
Division (SAD) Laboratory in Marietta, Georgia, for grain size -sieve analysis.
The NCDWR extracted the vibracore samples from Rodanthe in October of 1996
and they were sent to the GeoTechnologies, Inc. laboratory in Raleigh, North Carolina.
Samples were taken along the centerline of the channel and spacing between sample
stations was approximately 600' (Figure A-1).
The sample locations and results of grain size analyses are summarized in Figures
A-1 through A-3 and Tables A-1 through A-2. Copies of the actual laboratory results
(grain size distribution graphs) are available from the Corps of Engineers'
Environmental Resources Section, upon request.
A-1
+ + + +
LO
/ 00
t
c /
M /
/
i•
/
r.. C
''O^^
V V/
J 0
d E
CL m
E CL
m C
V) O
E c
c
(D
cn U
m
C
O
U
O
Z
N
L
C
N
.O
O
Q.'
O
Q?
0-
E
U)
2
O
U
T
.Q
0
N
a-
C
VJ
CD
c
O
L
O
d.

+ +

:a
t .
U
J
+
O
N
Q z W
w
o?? s
J O (h
O W W
¢ LL
LL
O
U

~ a
N
Q ¢ e
U
?j
Q J U
W = a
N N Y
H W m a
z
W
Z> m
N (D N
>
pp W q
>
a, W
>

x a
Z m m
w
+ S N C w
I ,
w
4 j cr a
LO w ((D
R •-
Z 1- ?
I >
Ul O
W ('1
W a
U CO v m
O
LU L, O ^ O m a) N
U m
s
w
so a a ?
R
_
X J
O
W 1 w N
r N , ¢ o
W W O
¢> a ¢
o U
c
a

'I Of

z m

o
U) 0 z ¢ w °

- z
z
(I r

U O
(n O W
N

O

0
v Z)
m

IL 7_ '? •-• ^
IV

z
b a .:
+ z
a x ;? Z Jo J .?-

w
w
LL
Z
N

J +
Q
m U

_P
Q)
Y
N
c
c

Q
L

BASIN
GX I00• x sod ®
--A-21 1
-- A-4?? ,,yy l AVON
? 6• x goo' 3?_.---? i ?-I' 1
.--- 8 - t--
DETAIL Of BASIN
SCALE Of FEET
w • w ea

?

x •4CICCi

•?-•
l %?

sc `? ?? t ? • ??
`? Cc

/ apCa:?r .•??
t c

' t
g
F

f
0s
? E • ?
v
0
5

0
`
? l' ti?A???rA-7 E
t' .Ss? $- 6 ? to « p
w L e
CARE COUNTY i
i

_
iP,
11

'n

V
? oto? sNO.ls
? Njio ?
wa

?rcT?ac
ts`- ?Ka
i
t/AttE?A
uFE
NaTlERaf SAMPLnTG STATIONS
AVON HARBOR,
?-# Navigation Aids NORTH CAROLINA
*R-# Sediment Samples SCALE Of MiLCS
? c 1 2 3 ?
Figure A-2
Fiaure A-3
RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON CHANNELS
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
AREA
SAMPLED
SAMPLE #
LOCATION
% SAND
% SILT MEDIAN
GRAIN SIZE
RODANTHE R-1 100' NW of DM #3 96 4 0.180
R-2 between DM #3 & DM #4 89 11 0.190
R-3 DM #4 95 5 0.180
R-4 between DM #4 & DM #6 89 11 0.180
R-5 30'N of DM #6 43 57 0.065
R-6 outside throat of harbor 17 83 0.045
R-7 inside throat of harbor 23 77 0.017
AVON A-1 in harbor 22 78 0.016
A-2 channel to harbor mouth 24 76 0.022
A-3 mouth of harbor 47 53 0.063
A-4 DM #8 98 2 0.350
A-5 between DM #6 & DM #8 98 2 0.510
A-6 DM #6 80 20 0.130
A-7 1000' from DM #6 89 11 0.160
A-8 2500' from DM #6 84 16 0.160
A-9 7500' from DM #6 96 4 0.170
A-10 10,000' from DM #6 89 11 0.150
ROLLINSON H-1 between DM #42RC & DM #4 95 5 0.180
H-2 1000' N of DM #39 98 2 0.190
H-3 200' NW of DM #38 74 26 0.095
H-4 200' NW of DM #36 93 7 0.120
H-5 400' NE of DM 935 94 6 0.120
H-6 100' NNE of DM #34 78 22 0.100
H-7 300' E of DM #33 91 9 0.180
H-8 100' E of DM #32 93 7 0.200
H-9 50' W of DM #30 14 86 0.039
H-10 500' NW of DM #30 11 89 0.032
H-11 40' E of DM #HR 7 93 0.057
H-12 inside throat 41 59 ( 0.052
Table A-1. Results of grain size analysis - Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson
Channels. Samples extracted by Corps of Engineers using a
Peterson Grab sampler.
N
N
H
a
w
0
CIO
+A
ti
w
cn

V
w
z
a
w
w
a

?' z z z z z z z

Od
S
S O\ N
? M

'-.
' ?
(ON oo
ON ?
00
,-? M
00 to en [- 00

O
O O
O t?
O\ O
O` M
M ?t
00 o0
O\

O O CN cV N
Q\ O\ C? M
C t-- to 00 10 _4
k" C)

ON
?
ON
?
00
oo
M

efi
S p
O O? 00 M 00 M
? 0
(ON 0
00 N 06

MI
S p
O rn to O Q\
\O 00
O?
ON O\
O? N
O\
M 0O
tVl O S O N p
\ O
O
C, .
W)

a 00 M Wn
O M
d
p\
O\ 00
O\ DD M
O O O O S gj
d cV d' \0 N
A
G7
co
y
N
at
at
W r-
42
G 0
O r-
.26 .r.
as
as
U
N ZVI::
O LL
H
cqs
y O
x z
co
O)
to C
_O N
Q O
O
E U
Co
f A L
V/
^'. O
W cn
W
C
.Co
C (D
U a
O
O
0 (n
a'
'Fn c
O O
L
cii cu
- .C
N U
.N ?
O O
?.z
0)>,
4--
0 -0
:3 cu
CO
a) x
0? a)
N
Q
..O
c4
_N
Q.
E
cn
N
0
U
(Q

APPENDIX B
MAINTENANCE OF RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON CHANNELS
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES
40 CFR 230
(FOR BEACH DISPOSAL)
MAINTENANCE OF RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON CHANNELS
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES
40 CFR 230
Section 404 Public Notice No.CESAW-EP-PE-97-28-0003
Review of Compliance (230.10(a)-(d)) Preliminary1/ Final 2/
A review of the NEPA Document
indicates that:
a. The discharge represents the least
environmentally damaging practicable
alternative and if in a special aquatic
site, the activity associated with the
discharge must have direct access or
proximity to, or be located in the aquatic
ecosystem to fulfill its basic purpose (if no,
see section 2 and NEPA document);
b. The activity does not:
1) violate applicable State water quality
standards or effluent standards prohibited
under Section 307 of the CWA; 2) jeopardize
the existence of federally listed endangered
or threatened species or their habitat; and
3) violate requirements of any federally
designated marine sanctuary (if no, see section
2b and check responses from resource and
water quality certifying agencies);
c. The activity will not cause or contribute
to significant degradation of waters of the
U.S. including adverse effects on human
health, life stages of organisms dependent
on the aquatic ecosystem, ecosystem diversity,
productivity and stability, and recreational,
aesthetic, and economic values (if no,
see section 2);
d. Appropriate and practicable steps have
been taken to minimize potential adverse
impacts of the discharge on the aquatic
ecosystem (if no, see section 5).
Proceed to Section 2
', 1, 2/ See page B-6.
YESI-1 N01_1" YES X N01_1
YESI-1 N01_1' YES1 X I N01_1

YESI-1 N01_1" YES X l N01_I
YESI-1 N01_1' YES X l N01_1
B-1
2. Technical Evaluation Factors (Subparts C-F)
Not Signifi- Signifi-
N/A cant cant`
a. Physical and Chemical Characteristics
of the Aquatic Ecosystem (Subpart C)
(1) Substrate impacts.
(2) Suspended particulates/turbidity
impacts.
(3) Water column impacts.
(4) Alteration of current patterns
and water circulation.
(5) Alteration of normal water
fluctuations/hydroperiod.
(6) Alteration of salinity
gradients.
I ? X I I
I I I I
I J X I I
I I X I I
I I I I
I ! X I I
I I I I
I X I
I I I I
I X I
Biological Characteristics of the
Aquatic Ecosystem (Subpart D)
(1) Effect on threatened/endangered
species and their habitat.
(2) Effect on the aquatic food web.
(3) Effect on other wildlife (mammals,
birds, reptiles, and amphibians).
I I I I
I X I
I I X I I
I I I I
I X I I
c. Special Aquatic Sites (Subpart E)
(1) Sanctuaries and refuges-
(2) Wetlands.
(3) Mud flats.
(4) Vegetated shallows..
(5) Coral reefs.
(6) Riffle and pool complexes.
I X I I I
X I I I
X
I X I I i
I X I 1
I X I I I
d. Human Use Characteristics (Subpart F)
(1) Effects on municipal and private
water supplies.
(2) Recreational and commercial
fisheries impacts.
(3) Effects on water-related recreation
(4) Aesthetic impacts.
(5) Effects on parks, national and
historical monuments, national
seashores, wilderness areas,
research sites, and similar
preserves. I
Remarks: Where a check is placed under
the significant category, preparer add explanation below.
I I I I
I X I I I
I I I I
I I X I I
I X I
I I X I
I I
I I
I I
I I
X I
Proceed to Section 3
"See page B-6.
B-2
Evaluation of Dredged or Fill Material (Subpart G) 3/
a. The following information has been
considered in evaluating the biological
availability of possible contaminants in
dredged or fill material. (Check only
those appropriate.)
(1) Physical characteristics .......................................IN
(2) Hydrography in relation to
known or anticipated -
sources of contaminants ........................... . ..........IXI
(3) Results from previous
testing of the material
or similar material in -
the vicinity of the project ..................................... I_I
(4) Known, significant sources of
persistent pesticides from -
land runoff or percolation ..................................... I_I
(5) Spill records for petroleum
products or designated
(Section 311 of CWA) -
hazardous substances ....................................... I_I
(6) Other public records of
significant introduction of
contaminants from industries,
municipalities, or other -
sources .............................................. ...I_I
(7) Known existence of substantial
material deposits of
substances which could be
released in harmful quantities
to the aquatic environment by -
man-induced discharge activities ............... ................ I_I
(8) Other sources (specify) .......................................I_I
List appropriate references.
Reference: EA "Maintenance of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channels
Dare County, North Carolina, " December 1996
b. An evaluation of the appropriate information in 3a
above indicates that there is reason to believe the
proposed dredge or fill material is not a carrier of
contaminants, or that levels of contaminants are sub-
stantively similar at extraction and disposal sites and
not likely to result in degradation of the disposal site. - -
The material meets the testing exclusion criteria. YES I X I NO
Proceed to Section 4
', 3/, see page B-6.
B-3
4. Disposal Site Determinations (230.11(f)).
a. The following factors as appropriate,
have been considered in evaluating the
disposal site.
(1) Depth of water at disposal site .................................
(2) Current velocity, direction, and _
variability at disposal site .....................................
(3) Degree of turbulence ........................................ (X?
(4) Water column stratification ....................................
(5) Discharge vessel speed and _
direction .................................................
(6) Rate of discharge ........................................ .. IXI
(7) Dredged material characteristics
(constituents, amount and type _
of material, settling velocities) .................................
(8) Number of discharges per unit of _
time ......................................................
(9)' Other factors affecting rates and _
patterns of mixing (specify) .................................. ..I
List appropriate references.
Reference: EA "Maintenance of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channels
Dare County, North Carolina, " December 1996
b. An evaluation of the appropriate factors in
4a above indicates that the disposal site
and/or size of mixing zone are acceptable ................... YES NO
5. Actions to Minimize Adverse Effects (Subpart H).
All appropriate and practicable steps have been taken,
through application of recommendations of 230.70-230.77,
to ensure minimal adverse effects of the proposed
discharge. List actions taken.... ............................ YES NO
For water quality see Section 5.01 of the EA.
For marine and estuarine resources see Section 5.02 of the EA.
For submerged aquatic vegetation see Section 5.03 of the EA.
For wetlands and terrestrial resources see Sections 5.04 and 5.05 of the EA
For threatened and endangered species see Section 5.06 of the EA.
Return to section 1 for final stage of compliance review. See also
note 3/, page B=6.
`See page B-6.
B-4
6. Factual Determinations 2-30.111.
A review of appropriate information as identified in
items 2-5 above indicates that there is minimal
potential for short- or long-term environmental
effects of the proposed discharge as related to:
a. Physical substrate at the disposal site
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5). YES IXI NO I_I*
b. Water circulation, fluctuation, and salinity
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5). YES IXI NO 1_1-
c. Suspended particulates/turbidity
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5). YES IXI NO 1_1-
d. Contaminant availability
(review sections 2a, 3, and 4). YES IXI NO I_I*
e. Aquatic ecosystem structure and function YES IN NO IS
(review sections 2b and c, 3, and 5).
f. Disposal site - -
(review sections 2, 4, and 5). YES IXI NO
g. Cumulative impact on the aquatic
ecosystem. YES IXI NO I_I*
h. Secondary impacts on the aquatic _
ecosystem. YES IXI NO
7. Findings.
a. The proposed disposal site for discharge of
dredged or fill material complies with the _
Section 404(b)(1) guidelines ................................. IX1
b. The proposed disposal site for discharge of
dredged or fill material complies with the
Section 404(b)(1) guidelines with the _
I_I
inclusion of the following conditions: ...........................
*See page B-6.
B-5
C. The proposed disposal site for discharge of
dredged or fill material does not comply with
the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines for the
following reasons(s):
(1) There is a less damaging practicable alternative ..................... 1_1
(2) The proposed discharge will result in significant _
degradation of the aquatic ecosystem ............................ 1_I
(3) The proposed discharge does not include all
practicable and appropriate measures to minimize _
potential harm to the aquatic ecosystem ........................... 1_1
8.
Date:
Date:
*A negative, significant, or unknown response indicates that the permit application may not be in compliance
with the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines.
1/ Negative responses to three or more of the compliance criteria at this stage indicate that the proposed
projects may not be evaluated using this "short form procedure." Care should be used in assessing
pertinent portions of the technical information of items 2 a-d, before completing the final review of
compliance.
2/ Negative response to one of the compliance criteria at this stage indicates that the proposed project does
not comply with the guidelines. If the economics of navigation and anchorage of Section 404(b)(2) are to be
evaluated in the decision-making process, the "short form evaluation process is inappropriate."
3/ If the dredged or fill material cannot be excluded from individual testing, the "short-form" evaluation
process is inappropriate.
TERRY R. YOUNGBLUTH
Lieutenant Colonel, EN
Commanding
B-6
APPENDIX C
MAINTENANCE OF RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON CHANNELS
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES
40 CFR 230
(FOR RELEASE OF EFFLUENT FROM UPLAND DIKED DISPOSAL SITES)
MAINTENANCE OF RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON CHANNELS
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES
40 CFR 230
Section 404 Public Notice No. CESAW-EP-PE-97-28-0004
1. Review of Compliance (230.10(a)-(d)) Preliminary 1/ Final 2/
A review of the NEPA Document
indicates that:
a. The discharge represents the least
environmentally damaging practicable
alternative and if in a special aquatic
site, the activity associated with the
discharge must have direct access or
proximity to, or be located in the aquatic
ecosystem to fulfill its basic purpose (if no,
see section 2 and NEPA document);
b. The activity does not:
1) violate applicable State water quality
standards or effluent standards prohibited
under Section 307 of the CWA; 2) jeopardize
the existence of federally listed endangered
or threatened species or their habitat; and
3) violate requirements of any federally
designated marine sanctuary (if no, see section
2b and check responses from resource and
water quality certifying agencies);
c. The activity will not cause or contribute
to significant degradation of waters of the
U.S. including adverse effects on human
health, life stages of organisms dependent
on the aquatic ecosystem, ecosystem diversity,
productivity and stability, and recreational,
aesthetic, and economic values (if no,
see section 2);
d. Appropriate and practicable steps have
been taken to minimize potential adverse
impacts of the discharge on the aquatic
ecosystem (if no, see section 5).
Proceed to Section 2
", 1, 2/ See page C-6.
YES1_1 N01_1- YES X I N01_1
YESI_1 N01_1'° YES X J N01_1
YESI_1 N01_1' YES X N01_1
YESJ_) N01_1" YES X J N01-I
C-1
2. Technical Evaluation Factors (Subparts C-F)
Not Signifi- Signifi-
N/A cant cant'
a. Physical and Chemical Characteristics
of the Aquatic Ecosystem (Subpart C)
(1) Substrate impacts.
(2) Suspended particulates/turbidity
impacts.
(3) Water column impacts.
(4) Alteration of current patterns
and water circulation.
(5) Alteration of normal water
fluctuations/hydroperiod.
(6) Alteration of salinity
gradients.
I I X I I
I I I I
I X I
I X I
I I I I
I X I I
I I I I
I X I
I I I I
I X I
b. Biological Characteristics of the
Aquatic Ecosystem (Subpart D)
(1) Effect on threatened/endangered
species and their habitat.
(2) Effect on the aquatic food web.
(3) Effect on other wildlife (mammals
birds, reptiles, and amphibians).
I I I I
I ? X 1 I
I L X I I
I I I I
I 1 X I I
c. Special Aquatic Sites (Subpart E)
(1) Sanctuaries and refuges.
(2) Wetlands.
(3) Mud flats.
(4) Vegetated shallows.
(5) Coral reefs.
(6) Riffle and pool complexes.
I X I I I
I I X I I
I X I I I
1 I X I
I X I I I
X I I I
d. Human Use Characteristics (Subpart F)
(1) Effects on municipal and private
water supplies.
(2) Recreational and commercial
fisheries impacts.
(3) Effects on water-related recreation
(4) Aesthetic impacts.
(5) Effects on parks, national and
historical monuments, national
seashores, wilderness areas,
research sites, and similar
preserves. i
Remarks: Where a check is placed under
the significant category, preparer add explanation below.
I I I I
X I I I
I I I I
I X I
I X I
I I X I
I I
I I
I I
I I
X I I
Proceed to Section 3
'See page C-6.
C-2
3. Evaluation of Dredged or Fill Material (Subpart G) 3/
a. The following information has been
considered in evaluating the biological
availability of possible contaminants in
dredged or fill material. (Check only
those appropriate.)
(1) Physical characteristics .......................................JXJ
(2) Hydrography in relation to
known or anticipated -
sources of contaminants ......................................JXJ
(3) Results from previous
testing of the material
or similar material in -
the vicinity of the project ..................................... I_I
(4) Known, significant sources of
persistent pesticides from -
land runoff or percolation ..................................... I_I
(5) Spill records for petroleum
products or designated
(Section 311 of CWA) -
hazardous substances ....................................... J_J
(6) Other public records of
significant introduction of
contaminants from industries,
municipalities, or other -
sources .............................................. ...J_J
(7) Known existence of substantial
material deposits of
substances which could be
released in harmful quantities
to the aquatic environment by -
man-induced discharge activities ............... ................ J_I
(8) Other sources (specify) ....................................... J_I
List appropriate references
Reference: EA "Maintenance of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channels
Dare County, North Carolina, " December 1996
b. An evaluation of the appropriate information in 3a
above indicates that there is reason to believe the
proposed dredge or fill material is not a carrier of
contaminants, or that levels of contaminants are sub-
stantively similar at extraction and disposal sites and
not likely to result in degradation of the disposal site. - -
The material meets the testing exclusion criteria. YES J X I NO
Proceed to Section 4
`, 3/, see page C-6.
C-3
4. Disposal Site Determinations (230.11(f)).
a. The following factors as appropriate,
have been considered in evaluating the
disposal site.
(1) Depth of water at disposal site ............................... .. IN
(2) Current velocity, direction, and _
variability at disposal site ................................... .. IXI
(3) Degree of turbulence ...................................... .. IXI
(4) Water column stratification .................................. ..IXI
(5) Discharge vessel speed and _
direction ................................................ . IXI
(6) Rate of discharge ........................................ .. IXI
(7) Dredged material characteristics
(constituents, amount and type _
of material, settling velocities) ............................... .. IXI
(8) Number of discharges per unit of _
time ................................................... ...IXI
(9) Other factors affecting rates and
patterns of mixing (specify) ................................. ..11
List appropriate references.
Reference: EA "Maintenance of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channel s
Dare County, North Carolina, " December 1996
b. An evaluation of the appropriate factors in
4a above indicates that the disposal site
and/or size of mixing zone are acceptable ................... YES IXI NO
5. Actions to Minimize Adverse Effects (Subpart H).
All appropriate and practicable steps have been taken,
through application of recommendations of 230.70-230.77,
to ensure minimal adverse effects of the proposed
discharge. List actions taken ................................ YES IXI NO
For water quality see Section 5.01 of the EA.
For marine and estuarine resources see Section 5.02 of the EA.
For submerged aquatic vegetation see Section 5.03 of the EA.
For wetlands and terrestrial resources see Sections 5.04 and 5.05 of the EA
For threatened and endangered species see Section 5.06 of the EA.
Return to section 1 for final stage of compliance review. See also
note 3/, page C-6.
`See page C-6.
C-4
6. Factual Determinations (230.11).
A review of appropriate information as identified in
items 2-5 above indicates that there is minimal
potential for short- or long-term environmental
effects of the proposed discharge as related to:
a. Physical substrate at the disposal site
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5). YES IXI NO
b. Water circulation, fluctuation, and salinity
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5). YES IXI NO
C. Suspended particulates/turbidity
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5). YES IXI NO
d. Contaminant availability - -
(review sections 2a, 3, and 4). YES IXI NO
e. Aquatic ecosystem structure and function YES IXI NO
(review sections 2b and c, 3, and 5).
f. Disposal site - -
(review sections 2, 4, and 5). YES IXI NO
g. Cumulative impact on the aquatic
ecosystem. YES IXI NO
h. Secondary impacts on the aquatic
ecosystem. YES IXI NO
7. Findings.
a. The proposed disposal site for discharge of
dredged or fill material complies with the _
Section 404(b)(1) guidelines .................................IXI
b. The proposed disposal site for discharge of
dredged or fill material complies with the
Section 404(b)(1) guidelines with the _
I_I
inclusion of the following conditions: ...........................
*See page C-6.
C-5
C. The proposed disposal site for discharge of
dredged or fill material does not comply with
the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines for the
following reasons(s):
(1) There is a less damaging practicable alternative .....................
(2) The proposed discharge will result in significant _
degradation of the aquatic ecosystem ............................
(3) The proposed discharge does not include all
practicable and appropriate measures to minimize _
potential harm to the aquatic ecosystem ...........................
8.
Date:
Date:
*A negative, significant, or unknown response indicates that the permit application may not be in
compliance with the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines.
1/ Negative responses to three or more of the compliance criteria at this stage indicate that the proposed
projects may not be evaluated using this "short form procedure." Care should be used in assessing
pertinent portions of the technical information of items 2 a-d, before completing the final review of
compliance.
21 Negative response to one of the compliance criteria at this stage indicates that the proposed project does
not comply with the guidelines. If the economics of navigation and anchorage of Section 404(b)(2) are to be
evaluated in the decision-making process, the "short form evaluation process is inappropriate."
3/ If the dredged or fill material cannot be excluded from individual testing, the "short-form" evaluation
process is inappropriate.
TERRY R. YOUNGBLUTH
Lieutenant Colonel, EN
Commanding
C-6
i
APPENDIX D
MAINTENANCE OF RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON CHANNELS
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES
40 CFR 230
(FOR CONTROL-OF-EFFLUENT DISPOSAL)
MAINTENANCE OF RODANTHE, AVON, AND ROLLINSON CHANNELS
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES
40 CFR 230
Section 404 Public Notice No. CESAW-EP-PE-97-28-0005
1. Review of Compliance (230.10(a)-(d)l Preliminary1/ Final 2/
A review of the NEPA Document
indicates that:
a. The discharge represents the least
environmentally damaging practicable
alternative and if in a special aquatic
site, the activity associated with the
discharge must have direct access or
proximity to, or be located in the aquatic
ecosystem to fulfill its basic purpose (if no,
see section 2 and NEPA document); YESI-1 N01-1' YESI X I N0I-1
b. The activity does not:
1) violate applicable State water quality
standards or effluent standards prohibited
under Section 307 of the CWA; 2) jeopardize
the existence of federally listed endangered
or threatened species or their habitat; and
3) violate requirements of any federally
designated marine sanctuary (if no, see section
2b and check responses from resource and
water quality certifying agencies); YESI-1 N01-1" YESI X I N01-1
c. The activity will not cause or contribute
to significant degradation of waters of the
U.S. including adverse effects on human
health, life stages of organisms dependent
on the aquatic ecosystem, ecosystem diversity,
productivity and stability, and recreational,
aesthetic, and economic values (if no, - -
see section 2); YESI_I N01-11- YESI X I N0I-1
d. Appropriate and practicable steps have
been taken to minimize potential adverse
impacts of the discharge on the aquatic - - - -
ecosystem (if no, see section 5). YESI-1 N01-1* YESI X 1 N0I-1
Proceed to Section 2
", 1, 2/ See page C-6.
D-1
2. Technical Evaluation Factors (Subparts C-F)
Not Signifi- Signifi-
N/A cant cant"
a. Physical and Chemical Characteristics
of the Aquatic Ecosystem (Subpart C)
(1) Substrate impacts.
(2) Suspended particulates/turbidity
impacts.
(3) Water column impacts.
(4) Alteration of current patterns
and water circulation.
(5) Alteration of normal water
fluctuations/hydroperiod.
(6) Alteration of salinity
gradients.
I I I I
I I X I I
I I I I
I 1 X I I
I I I I
I I I I
I ! X I I
b. Biological Characteristics of the
Aquatic Ecosystem (Subpart D)
(1) Effect on threatened/endangered
species and their habitat.
(2) Effect on the aquatic food web.
(3) Effect on other wildlife (mammals,
birds, reptiles, and amphibians).
I I I I
I 1 X I I
I X I
I 1 I I
I L X I I
c. Special Aquatic Sites (Subpart E)
(1) Sanctuaries and refuges.
(2) Wetlands.
(3) Mud flats.
(4) Vegetated shallows.
(5) Coral reefs.
(6) Riffle and pool complexes.
I I X I I
I I X I I
I X I
I X I
I X I I I
I X I I I
d. Human Use Characteristics (Subpart F)
(1) Effects on municipal and private
water supplies.
(2) Recreational and commercial
fisheries impacts.
(3) Effects on water-related recreation.
(4) Aesthetic impacts.
(5) Effects on parks, national and
historical monuments, national
seashores, wilderness areas,
research sites, and similar
preserves. I
Remarks: Where a check is placed under
the significant category, preparer add explanation below.
I I I I
I X I I I
I I I I
X
I 1 X I I
I I X I
I I
I I
I I
I I
X I
Proceed to Section 3
"See page C-6.
D-2
3. Evaluation of Dredged or Fill Material (Subpart G) 3/
a. The following information has been
considered in evaluating the biological
availability of possible contaminants in
dredged or fill material. (Check only
those appropriate.)
(1) Physical characteristics .......................................IXI
(2) Hydrography in relation to
known or anticipated _
sources of contaminants ......................................IXI
(3) Results from previous
testing of the material
or similar material in _
the vicinity of the project ..................................... 1_I
(4) Known, significant sources of
persistent pesticides from _
land runoff or percolation ..................................... 1_1
(5) Spill records for petroleum
products or designated
(Section 311 of CWA) _
hazardous substances ....................................... I_I
(6) Other public records of
significant introduction of
contaminants from industries,
municipalities, or other _
sources .............................................. ...I_1
(7) Known existence of substantial
material deposits of
substances which could be
released in harmful quantities
to the aquatic environment by _
man-induced discharge activities ............... ................ I_I
(8) Other sources (specify) ....................................... I_I
List appropriate references.
Reference: EA "Maintenance of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channels
Dare County, North Carolina, " December 1996
An evaluation of the appropriate information in 3a
above indicates that there is reason to believe the
proposed dredge or fill material is not a carrier of
contaminants, or that levels of contaminants are sub-
stantively similar at extraction and disposal sites and
not likely to result in degradation of the disposal site.
The material meets the testing exclusion criteria. YES I X I NO
Proceed to Section 4
*, 31, see page C-6.
D-3
4. Disposal Site Determinations (230.11(f)).
a. The following factors as appropriate,
have been considered in evaluating the
disposal site.
(1) Depth of water at disposal site .................................
(2) Current velocity, direction, and _
variability at disposal site ..................................... 1X1
(3) Degree of turbulence ........................................ 1Xj
(4) Water column stratification ........................ ............
(5) Discharge vessel speed and _
direction ....................................... ..........
(6) Rate of discharge :.............................. ......... ..
(7) Dredged material characteristics
(constituents, amount and type _
of material, settling velocities) ...................... ...........
(8) Number of discharges per unit of _
time ......................................... .............
(9) Other factors affecting rates and _
patterns of mixing (specify) ....................... ........... ..I
List appropriate references.
Reference: EA "Maintenance of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channels
Da re County, North Carolina, " December 1996
b. An evaluation of the appropriate factors in
4a above indicates that the disposal site
and/or size of mixing zone are acceptable ................... YES IXI NO 1_1*
5. Actions to Minimize Adverse Effects (Subpart H).
All appropriate and practicable steps have been taken,
through application of recommendations of 230.70-230.77,
to ensure minimal adverse effects of the proposed
discharge. List actions taken ................................ YES 1X1 NO
For water quality see Section 5.01 of the EA.
For marine and estuarine resources see Section 5.02 of the EA.
For submerged aquatic vegetation see Section 5.03 of the EA.
For wetlands and terrestrial resources see Sections 5.04 and 5.05 of the EA
For threatened and endangered species see Section 5.06 of the EA.
Return to section 1 for final stage of compliance review. See also
note 3/. page C-6.
*See page C-6.
D-4
6. Factual Determinations (230.11).
A review of appropriate information as identified in
items 2-5 above indicates that there is minimal
potential for short- or long-term environmental
effects of the proposed discharge as related to:
a. Physical substrate at the disposal site
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5). YES IXI NO
b. Water circulation, fluctuation, and salinity
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5). YES IXI NO
c. Suspended particulates/turbidity _ _
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5). YES IXI NO
d. Contaminant availability _ _
(review sections 2a, 3, and 4). YES IXI NO
e. Aquatic ecosystem structure and function YES IXI NO IS
(review sections 2b and c, 3, and 5).
f. Disposal site
(review sections 2, 4, and 5). YES IXI NO 1_1-
g. Cumulative impact on the aquatic
ecosystem. YES IXI NO I_I*
h. Secondary impacts on the aquatic _ _
ecosystem. YES IXI NO I_I*
7. Findings.
a. The proposed disposal site for discharge of
dredged or fill material complies with the _
Section 404(b)(1) guidelines .................................IXI
b. The proposed disposal site for discharge of
dredged or fill material complies with the
Section 404(b)(1) guidelines with the _
inclusion of the following conditions: ...........................
I_I
`See page C-6.
D-5
c. The proposed disposal site for discharge of
dredged or fill material does not comply with
the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines for the
following reasons(s):
(1) There is a less damaging practicable alternative ..................... I_I
(2) The proposed discharge will result in significant _
degradation of the aquatic ecosystem ............................ I_I
(3) The proposed discharge does not include all
practicable and appropriate measures to minimize _
potential harm to the aquatic ecosystem ........................... I_I
8.
Date:
Date:
*A negative, significant, or unknown response indicates that the permit application may not be in compliance
with the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines.
1/ Negative responses to three or more of the compliance criteria at this stage indicate that the proposed
projects may not be evaluated using this "short form procedure." Care should be used in assessing
pertinent portions of the technical information of items 2 a-d, before completing the final review of
compliance.
2/ Negative response to one of the compliance criteria at this stage indicates that the proposed project does
not comply with the guidelines. If the economics of navigation and anchorage of Section 404(b)(2) are to be
evaluated in the decision-making process, the "short form evaluation process is inappropriate."
3/ If the dredged or fill material cannot be excluded from individual testing, the "short-form" evaluation
process is inappropriate.
TERRY R. YOUNGBLUTH
Lieutenant Colonel, EN
Commanding
D-6
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Col. Terry Youngbluth
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Dear Col. Youngbluth:
T WT
4 : VA
4?jj
OOL
ED F= F=1
March 11, 1997
Dare County
WQC 401 Project #970176
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions, to conduct maintenance dredging and
beach disposal or waters for the purpose of removing shoals and refurbishing the beach at Rodanthe, Avon and
Rollinson Channels, as you described in your application dated 9 March 1997. After reviewing your
application, we have decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3123 or
3120.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If you
change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application. If total
wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required
as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the
conditions listed in the attached certification. In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local
permits before you go ahead with your project. Also this approval will expire when the accompanying 404 or
CAMA permit expires unless otherwise specked in the General Certification.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing.
You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written
petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its conditions
are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water
AcL If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-1786.
Sincerely,
4y.eston k d, J . P.E.
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Washington Field Office
Washington DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Domey
Central Files
Jenny Owen; Corps of Engineers
970176.1tr
Division of Water Quality - Environmental Sciences Branch
Environmental Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Aff irmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
REPLYTO March 6, 1997
ATTENTION OF
Environmental Resources Section
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607-6445
Dear Mr. Dorney:
o 0
... Tn
it .1 p
n ?O
m ??
As requested, we are providing the enclosed application for Water Quality
Certification, pursuant to Section 401 of Public Law 95-217, for discharge of
dredged material in the designated beach disposal areas at Rollinson, Avon,
and Rodanthe, North Carolina. These projects are discussed in detail in the
Environmental Assessment. Maintenance Dredaina of Rodanthe. Avon. and
Rollinson Channels. Dare County, North Carolina, December 1996, that was
mailed to your office on December 19, 1996.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Ms. Jenny
Owens, Environmental Resources Section, at [phone].
Sincerely,
C. E. Shuford, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief
Engineering and Planning Division
Enclosure (7)
401 Application

Mail Completed Application to:
Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607-6445-
ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Ph. [phone]
DEM ID:
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
1. DATE: March 6, 1997
2. NAME/ADDRESS: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
3. RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL: Terry R. Youngbluth
Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
4. NAME OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTACT: Jenny Owens
TELEPHONE NUMBER: [phone]
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance dredging of Rodanthe, Avon, and Rollinson Channels as discussed in the
Environmental Assessment (EA) for Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe. Avon, and Rollinson Channels. Dare
County. North Carolina. December 1996.
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The proposed action covers the dredging and disposal of dredged
material from the Rollinson, Avon, and Rodanthe Channels, Dare County, North Carolina. The proposed dredging
would be performed by a hydraulic pipeline dredge and the coarse-grained (sandy) material from the channel
would be placed in the designated beach disposal areas. The proposed action is described in detail in Section
3.00 of the above-referenced EA.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Severe shoaling in the subject channels severely limits navigability to
recreational and commercial vessels. Maintaining the channels to their previously authorized depths would
alleviate this problem. In addition, the proposed method of disposal would provide badly needed sand to the
designated beaches.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: February 1997
10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 90 days
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material
_ Fill Material
12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Rollinson, Avon, and Rodanthe, North Carolina
County: Dare
Drainage Basin: Tar-Pamlico Basin
Receiving Waters: Atlantic Ocean
n
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: The material proposed for
discharge is naturally occurring coarse-grained to fine-grained sand and is not contaminated or polluted.
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS SO HQW, OR ORW?
X YES (circle one) NO
17. NUMBER OF ACRES OR VOLUME OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT:
Filled: None
Excavated: None
Total Impacted: None
18. STATE REASONS WHY THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT AS PLANNED. ALSO. NOTE MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS:
Maintenance dredging of the subject channels is necessary to restore them to navigable depths. The
proposed method and location of disposal will provide sand to the designated beach areas. Any dredge
pipeline that must cross over wetlands will be burlapped and welded to provide protection from leakage.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY?
_ YES X NO IF YES, EXPLAIN:
I certify that all information contained herein or in support thereof is true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
C. E. Shuford , Jr., P. V
Acting Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division
Attachments
Date: 31-711'7
For prompt processing, submit:
*Seven (7) copies of completed application
*Drawings of proposed dredge and disposal sites
*Copies of previous 401 Certifications
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Roger N. Schecter, Director
Colonel Terry R. Youngbluth
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402

March 11, 1997
F= F1

?,4 RFc??LF?
^? c/FNC
?s
Reference: Consistency Determination CD96-43, Dredging of Rollinson Channel, Dare Co.
Dear Colonel Youngbluth:
We have completed our review of your request for minor modification of the earlier consistency
approval of the maintenance dredging of Rollinson Channel, Dare County. The proposed modification
is to change the spoil disposal area from ocean beach disposal to a three-acre upland, diked disposal
area on NC Hwy 12 near the Hatteras Ferry Terminal.
My records show that you have received approval of the 401 Water Quality Certification, a
general permit for stormwater control and a sedimentation and erosion control plan. The proposed
modification is consistent with the Dare County Land Use Plan. Based on our review we have
determined that the proposed modification is consistent with North Carolina Coastal Management
Program.
If you have any questions regarding our finding, please contact Steve Benton or Caroline Bellis,
Division of Coastal Management, at 919-733-2293. Thank you for your consideration of the North
Carolina Coastal Management Program.
Sincerely,
?a Roger Schecter
CC: Richard Watts
John Sutherland
Sara Winslow
John Dorney
Patrick McLain
Coleman Long
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
December 13, 1996
IN REPLY REFER TO
Environmental Resources Section
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607-6445
Dear Mr. Dorney:
?R04" X99
?S
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, has completed the
enclosed study, Environmental Assessment, Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe, Avon,
and Rollinson Channels, Dare County, North Carolina, December 1996. The purpose
of this Environmental Assessment (EA) is to address the environmental impacts of
maintenance dredging utilizing upland diked disposal, beach disposal, and
control-of-effluent disposal.
As discussed in Section 5.01 of the EA, a letter dated August 16, 1995, was sent
to the Division of Environmental Management requesting that a general water quality
certification, pursuant to Section 401 (Public Law 95-217) of the Clean Water Act of
1977, as amended, be issued for disposal of dredged material on ocean beaches in
North Carolina. To date, a draft version of this general certification has been
completed, however, a final version has not. We would like to request that the
proposed beach disposal be covered under this general certification, when it is
finalized.
Pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, a Water
Quality General Certification (WQC #3024) for Corps of Engineers dredging activities
using upland diked disposal sites was issued on September 6, 1995. We would like to
request that the proposed sites at Rodanthe and Rollinson be included under this
General Certification (WQC #3024).
In addition, enclosed for your review is an application for Water Quality
Certification, pursuant to Section 401 of Public Law 95-217, for discharge of dredged
material on the east side of Highway 12 (control-of-effluent disposal). This is
discussed, in detail, in Section 3.01 of the enclosed EA.

-2-
There will be a 30-day review and comment period for this EA. We would
appreciate any comments on the EA and a statement regarding the status of the
request for 401 Water Quality Certification for beach disposal, upland diked disposal,
and control-of-effluent disposal for the proposed projects.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact
Ms. Jenny Owens,. Environmental Resources Section, at [phone].
Sincerely,
UJ - ' 00?awo?-4
- - C. E: Shuford, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering
and Planning Division
Enclosures
(7 copies of the 401 Application)
Mail Completed Application to:
Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607-6445
ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Ph. [phone]
DEM ID:
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
1. DATE: December 13, 1996
2. NAME/ADDRESS: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
3. RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL: Terry R. Youngbluth
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
4. NAME OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTACT: Jenny Owens
TELEPHONE NUMBER: [phone]
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance dredging of Rodanthe Channel as discussed in the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe. Avon, and Rollinson Channels Dare County.
North Carolina. December 1996 (enclosed).
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The proposed action covers the dredging and disposal of
dredged material from Rodanthe Channel, Dare County, North Carolina. The proposed dredging would be
performed by a hydraulic pipeline dredge and the coarse-grained (sandy) material from the channel would
be placed in a 12-acre upland disposal site, which is 1.5 miles north of Rodanthe, on the east of Highway
12 (Highway 12 disposal site). The control-of-effluent method of disposal would be used and the
estimated quantity to be dredged and placed in the Highway 12 disposal site is 100,000 cubic yards. The
proposed action is described in detail in Section 3.01 of the above-referenced EA.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Severe shoaling in the Rodanthe Channel has severely limited
navigability to recreational and commercial vessels. Maintaining the channel to its previously authorized
depth would alleviate this problem. In addition, the proposed method of disposal would provide beach
quality material to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) for use in protecting
Highway 12 from beach washover.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: February 1997
10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 30 days
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material
Fill Material
12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Rodanthe, North Carolina
County: Dare
Drainage Basin: Tar-Pamlico Basin
Receiving Waters: Atlantic Ocean
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: The material proposed for
discharge is naturally occurring coarse-grained to fine-grained sand. The material to be dredged is not
contaminated or polluted.
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS9A_) HQW OR ORW?
X YES (circle one) NO
17. NUMBER OF ACRES OR VOLUME OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT:
Filled: None
Excavated: None
Total Impacted: None
18. STATE REASONS WHY THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT AS PLANNED. ALSO, NOTE MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS:
Maintenance dredging of the subject channel is necessary to restore it to navigable depths. The proposed
method and location of disposal will provide a suitable upland site for dredged material disposal, while also
meeting the needs of NCDOT in protecting Highway 12 from beach washover. Any dredge pipeline that
must cross over wetlands will be burlapped and welded to provide protection from leakage.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY?
-YES X NO IF YES. EXPLAIN:
I certify that all information contained herein or in support thereof is true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
Date:
46? . C. E. Shuford, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division
Attachments
For prompt processing, submit:
*Seven (7) copies of completed application
*Drawings of proposed dredge and disposal sites
*Copies of previous 401 Certifications

Pouu,d 1:au„uor?_
Bay
IV I L. D L I F E
- Highway 12 Disposal Site
R E F lU G (approximate location)
?
9
14 t
f

Paut Bilfk? ._ - S?

r ' O

14
Uncle Jimu
tY
Landi

Greens Pt
O
c t•? R
Rod anthe•__°?

.. - `-

North Drain
Aunt Phoebcs
Marsh

L'.

Proposed Beach Disposal Area
and Highway 12 Site
Rodanthe, North Carolina
Scale: 1:24,000
From: Rodanthe, NC USGS Quad

Z
Q
W
U
O
U
F-
Z
Q
J
Q
c?
c
O
CB
U
O
Z
L
C
co
-O
O
rlr

? - ? m cn
\
_
1 N N
O

N
LLJ
J

? a
U
C14

f

2
,
t ?
1 ?
W Y
6
O
Z W ??

0
?
IQ
.
U1

X
?

?
I e
?

1

I _
-
1

t
{
i
/ A.
Mail Completed Application to:
Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607-6445
ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Ph. [phone]
DEM ID:
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
1. DATE: December 13,1996
2. NAME/ADDRESS: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
3. RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL: Terry R. Youngbluth
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
4. NAME OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTACT: Jenny Owens
TELEPHONE NUMBER: [phone]
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance dredging of Rodanthe Channel as discussed in the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe. Avon, and Rollinson Channels. Dare County,
North Carolina. December 1996 (enclosed).
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The proposed action covers the dredging and disposal of
dredged material from Rodanthe Channel, Dare County, North Carolina. The proposed dredging would be
performed by a hydraulic pipeline dredge and the coarse-grained (sandy) material from the channel would
be placed in a 12-acre upland disposal site, which is 1.5 miles north of Rodanthe, on the east of Highway
12 (Highway 12 disposal site). The control-of-effluent method of disposal would be used and the
estimated quantity to be dredged and placed in the Highway 12 disposal site is 100,000 cubic yards. The
proposed action is described in detail in Section 3.01 of the above-referenced EA.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Severe shoaling in the Rodanthe Channel has severely limited
navigability to recreational and commercial vessels. Maintaining the channel to its previously authorized
depth would alleviate this problem. In addition, the proposed method of disposal would provide beach
quality material to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) for use in protecting
Highway 12 from beach washover.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: February 1997
10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 30 days
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material
Fill Material
W
W,
12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Rodanthe, North Carolina
County: Dare
Drainage Basin: Tar-Pamlico Basin
Receiving Waters: Atlantic Ocean
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: The material proposed for
discharge is naturally occurring coarse-grained to fine-grained sand. The material to be dredged is not
contaminated or polluted.
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS/'AZ HQW. OR ORW?
X YES (circle one) NO
17. NUMBER OF ACRES OR VOLUME OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT:
Filled: None
Excavated: None
Total Impacted: None
18. STATE REASONS WHY THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT AS PLANNED. ALSO. NOTE MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS:
Maintenance dredging of the subject channel is necessary to restore it to navigable depths. The proposed
method and location of disposal will provide a suitable upland site for dredged material disposal, while also
meeting the needs of NCDOT in protecting Highway 12 from beach washover. Any dredge pipeline that
must cross over wetlands will be burlapped and welded to provide protection from leakage.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY?
YES X NO IF YES. EXPLAIN:
I certify that all information contained herein or in support thereof is true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
Date: 'Zqj'
.-N-L- C. E. Shuford, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division
Attachments
For prompt processing, submit:
"Seven (7) copies of completed application
"Drawings of proposed dredge and disposal sites
*Copies of previous 401 Certifications

Round RoulY110A..
Bay
W I L D L I F E i•: ?
- - Highway 12 Disposal Site
R E F !U (approximate location)
9 1:
\` iii ?:•:.M ?
.5 Lr
Pains Dit k?
p
e. 1 d
<k =. CO
Uncle Jiimm l 0:
sing : i • o
<_.. w
Greens Pt ?. CO
;,,: %
?, a
O.
Btackrrcat Gut ?': - "•`-, O
Rodanthe•

-?.,?.
North Drain
Aunt Phoebcs
Marsh

+-'
-X E
L
,

Proposed Beach Disposal Area
and Highway 12 Site
Rodanthe, North Carolina
Scale: 1:24,000
From: Rodanthe, NC USGS Quad
1r

to
N 0
1 N I-
y - O U
C C

a
U Z
?

CA o

t ?
• ? I

I .?
Z t?

r 1
z !
z w 1
W O Y; I Q

U
W J
?i
Q a Ae a - Y '
co

J O

Q Q ? F v " !
e '
m
l

e I
1 "
?
I j

I ? VE ? A
v u
RA "

u
1
Mail Completed Application to:
Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607-6445
ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Ph. [phone]
DEM ID:
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
1. DATE: December 13, 1996
2. NAME/ADDRESS: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
3. RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL: Terry R. Youngbluth
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
4. NAME OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTACT: Jenny Owens
TELEPHONE NUMBER: [phone]
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance dredging of Rodanthe Channel as discussed in the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe. Avon, and Rollinson Channels. Dare County.
North Carolina. December 1996 (enclosed).
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The proposed action covers the dredging and disposal of
dredged material from Rodanthe Channel, Dare County, North Carolina. The proposed dredging would be
performed by a hydraulic pipeline dredge and the coarse-grained (sandy) material from the channel would
be placed in a 12-acre upland disposal site, which is 1.5 miles north of Rodanthe, on the east of Highway
12 (Highway 12 disposal site). The control-of-effluent method of disposal would be used and the
estimated quantity to be dredged and placed in the Highway 12 disposal site is 100,000 cubic yards. The
proposed action is described in detail in Section 3.01 of the above-referenced EA.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Severe shoaling in the Rodanthe Channel has severely limited
navigability to recreational and commercial vessels. Maintaining the channel to its previously authorized
depth would alleviate this problem. In addition, the proposed method of disposal would provide beach
quality material to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) for use in protecting
Highway 12 from beach washover.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: February 1997
10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 30 days
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material
Fill Material
12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Rodanthe, North Carolina
County: Dare
Drainage Basin: Tar-Pamlico Basin
Receiving Waters: Atlantic Ocean
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: The material proposed for
discharge is naturally occurring coarse-grained to fine-grained sand. The material to be dredged is not
contaminated or polluted.
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS4A HQW. OR ORW?
X YES (circle one) NO
17. NUMBER OF ACRES OR VOLUME OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT:
Filled: None
Excavated: None
Total Impacted: None
18. STATE REASONS WHY THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT AS PLANNED. ALSO. NOTE MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS:
Maintenance dredging of the subject channel is necessary to restore it to navigable depths. The proposed
method and location of disposal will provide a suitable upland site for dredged material disposal, while also
meeting the needs of NCDOT in protecting Highway 12 from beach washover. Any dredge pipeline that
must cross over wetlands will be burlapped and welded to provide protection from leakage.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY?
YES X NO IF YES. EXPLAIN:
I certify that all information contained herein or in support thereof is true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
w Date: w
--N-4- C. E. Shuford, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division
Attachments
For prompt processing, submit:
`Seven (7) copies of completed application
"Drawings of proposed dredge and disposal sites
"Copies of previous 401 Certifications
Ioined t:oanaoa-.
• Bay
W I L D L I F E r•:.? ='1 Highway 12 Disposal Site
R E F /U G (approximate location)
Pau1s Ditfh
`.:•l , O
a.
J
Uncle .Timm 1 CO
I'An O
0:
Greens Pt
sf rc a
Blaclzar Gut i'^,•' _ 10
the-
1'.f
=
ldorrh Drain _-
' campgrCtJ
Aunt Phoebes Proposed Beach Disposal Area
Mardi
7u) f; and Highway 12 Site
u C' ;
:- Rodanthe, North Carolina
cap Scale: 1:24,000
-i = ?' From: Rodanthe, NC USGS Quad

1 - $ a% ca

n N
N (II
y o U
C
Z
a
L
) C14
.
N N
M
c6

0) o

t I
1
l_ I

U3

!
z w
w IQ
C)
w ?.
g I=
o

Q o 1
J
Q
a
gr ?
I

1 ? g o I

I I

1 n, S e
1
?
_ e
i
f
{
!'

Mail Completed Application to:
Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607-6445
ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Ph. [phone]
DEM ID:
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
1. DATE: December 13,1996
2. NAME/ADDRESS: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
3. RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL: Terry R. Youngbluth
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
4. NAME OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTACT: Jenny Owens
TELEPHONE NUMBER: [phone]
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance dredging of Rodanthe Channel as discussed in the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe. Avon, and Rollinson Channels. Dare County.
North Carolina. December 1996 (enclosed).
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The proposed action covers the dredging and disposal of
dredged material from Rodanthe Channel, Dare County, North Carolina. The proposed dredging would be
performed by a hydraulic pipeline dredge and the coarse-grained (sandy) material from the channel would
be placed in a 12-acre upland disposal site, which is 1.5 miles north of Rodanthe, on the east of Highway
12 (Highway 12 disposal site). The control-of-effluent method of disposal would be used and the
estimated quantity to be dredged and placed in the Highway 12 disposal site is 100,000 cubic yards. The
proposed action is described in detail in Section 3.01 of the above-referenced EA.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Severe shoaling in the Rodanthe Channel has severely limited
navigability to recreational and commercial vessels. Maintaining the channel to its previously authorized
depth would alleviate this problem. In addition, the proposed method of disposal would provide beach
quality material to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) for use in protecting
Highway 12 from beach washover.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: February 1997
10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 30 days
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material
Fill Material
i
12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Rodanthe, North Carolina
County: Dare
Drainage Basin: Tar-Pamlico Basin
Receiving Waters: Atlantic Ocean
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: The material proposed for
discharge is naturally occurring coarse-grained to fine-grained sand. The material to be dredged is not
contaminated or polluted.
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS 9Q HQW. OR ORW?
X YES (circle one) NO
17. NUMBER OF ACRES OR VOLUME OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT:
Filled: None
Excavated: None
Total Impacted: None
18. STATE REASONS WHY THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT AS PLANNED. ALSO. NOTE MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS:
Maintenance dredging of the subject channel is necessary to restore it to navigable depths. The proposed
method and location of disposal will provide a suitable upland site for dredged material disposal, while also
meeting the needs of NCDOT in protecting Highway 12 from beach washover. Any dredge pipeline that
must cross over wetlands will be burlapped and welded to provide protection from leakage.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY?
YES X NO IF YES. EXPLAIN:
I certify that all information contained herein or in support thereof is true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
Date:
C. E. Shuford, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division
Attachments
For prompt processing, submit:
"Seven (7) copies of completed application
*Drawings of proposed dredge and disposal sites
*Copies of previous 401 Certifications

----- Ifotnrd I:ara.uouC.=------
Bay
tV I L D L I F E r•: +.?

- Highway 12 Disposal Site
R E F ?U G (approximate location)

.3 v

0

UndeJimmY mD

Greens Pt
?-^v =
Blw.k wrGut?1'"'Z,' - ffa.; ?- 100_
1 ON/

Arorth Drain

Aunt Phoebes
Marsh U
C
-
.

i
tL
Proposed Beach Disposal Area
and Highway 12 Site
Rodanthe, North Carolina
Scale: 1:24,000
From: Rodanthe, NC USGS Quad
f
G
Z
Q
w
U
O
U
H
Z
Q
J
Q
(9
N ?
in
O
Q
CA
J
N
M
3
s
co
2
I
1
I
, Pl.
s?
l?
i
iN
Q
lr
1
\11,
I
F
_ I
I
I
I
1
CO
O
CIS
U
O
Z
m
s
cu
O
1
3
Y
i
t
W
Z
W
O
Y
W
C g-
Q ° -
1 ^
1 '
i
1
4
l
i
Mail Completed Application to:
Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607-6445
ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Ph. [phone]
DEM ID:
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
1. DATE: December 13, 1996
2. NAME/ADDRESS: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
3. RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL: Terry R. Youngbluth
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
4. NAME OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTACT: Jenny Owens
TELEPHONE NUMBER: [phone]
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance dredging of Rodanthe Channel as discussed in the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe. Avon, and Rollinson Channels. Dare County.
North Carolina. December 1996 (enclosed).
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The proposed action covers the dredging and disposal of
dredged material from Rodanthe Channel, Dare County, North Carolina. The proposed dredging would be
performed by a hydraulic pipeline dredge and the coarse-grained (sandy) material from the channel would
be placed in a 12-acre upland disposal site, which is 1.5 miles north of Rodanthe, on the east of Highway
12 (Highway 12 disposal site). The control-of-effluent method of disposal would be used and the
estimated quantity to be dredged and placed in the Highway 12 disposal site is 100,000 cubic yards. The
proposed action is described in detail in Section 3.01 of the above-referenced EA.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Severe shoaling in the Rodanthe Channel has severely limited
navigability to recreational and commercial vessels. Maintaining the channel to its previously authorized
depth would alleviate this problem. In addition, the proposed method of disposal would provide beach
quality material to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) for use in protecting
Highway 12 from beach washover.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: February 1997
10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 30 days
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material
Fill Material
12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Rodanthe, North Carolina
County: Dare
Drainage Basin: Tar-Pamlico Basin
Receiving Waters: Atlantic Ocean
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: The material proposed for
discharge is naturally occurring coarse-grained to fine-grained sand. The material to be dredged is not
contaminated or polluted.
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS(§k HQW. OR ORW?
X YES (circle one) NO
17. NUMBER OF ACRES OR VOLUME OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT:
Filled: None
Excavated: None
Total Impacted: None
18. STATE REASONS WHY THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT AS PLANNED. ALSO. NOTE MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS:
Maintenance dredging of the subject channel is necessary to restore it to navigable depths. The proposed
method and location of disposal will provide a suitable upland site for dredged material disposal, while also
meeting the needs of NCDOT in protecting Highway 12 from beach washover. Any dredge pipeline that
must cross over wetlands will be burlapped and welded to provide protection from leakage.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY?
YES X NO IF YES. EXPLAIN:
I certify that all information contained herein or in support thereof is true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
_ Date: 47- C. E. Shuford, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division
Attachments
For prompt processing, submit:
"Seven (7) copies of completed application
"Drawings of proposed dredge and disposal sites
"Copies of previous 401 Certifications

Y

Bay
W I L D L I F E

R E F !U G
_

`
?
PaYls Dil fk . . J ??
_

Highway 12 Disposal Site
(approximate location)

O

. a.
? •
??
?
1
r
0
ts
r
r
Uncle J
Greens Pt L
Blac - ar Out'

North Dram
Aunt Phoebes
Marsh
..?..={i. ui
rn
Zf OFF ...? ?::_ a
s•?n .c.._-
`ampgrt:: 1.._ C
G•.
LZ
L. =z'+-
Proposed Beach Disposal Area
and Highway 12 Site
Rodanthe, North Carolina
Scale: 1:24,000
From: Rodanthe, NC USGS Quad

Z
Q
w
U
O
U
Z
Q
J
Q

cu
c
7o
N cu
o U
Q. -C
N
0 Z
N
r
M
3 cc
rn o
_ C?-
s
1
\ R A °? Y
t
t
w
z
o - g
w
O
Y
w
Q a ?° y -
X
( F _
Q ? -
1
t R- p ° e
1 ^
1
t
t --
m
LO
N
w
J
Q
U
N
I
I
t
i
I
. N
I Q
1=
1
I
I
g ri i
n ?
I
I
I
I
I
1
t
4
M
Mail Completed Application to:
Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607-6445
A'TTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Ph. [phone]
DEM ID:
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
1. DATE: December 13, 1996
2. NAME/ADDRESS: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
3. RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL: Terry R. Youngbluth
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
4. NAME OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTACT: Jenny Owens
TELEPHONE NUMBER: [phone]
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance dredging of Rodanthe Channel as discussed in the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe. Avon, and Rollinson Channels. Dare County,
North Carolina. December 1996 (enclosed).
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The proposed action covers the dredging and disposal of
dredged material from Rodanthe Channel, Dare County, North Carolina. The proposed dredging would be
performed by a hydraulic pipeline dredge and the coarse-grained (sandy) material from the channel would
be placed in a 12-acre upland disposal site, which is 1.5 miles north of Rodanthe, on the east of Highway
12 (Highway 12 disposal site). The control-of-effluent method of disposal would be used and the
estimated quantity to be dredged and placed in the Highway 12 disposal site is 100,000 cubic yards. The
proposed action is described in detail in Section 3.01 of the above-referenced EA.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Severe shoaling in the Rodanthe Channel has severely limited
navigability to recreational and commercial vessels. Maintaining the channel to its previously authorized
depth would alleviate this problem. In addition, the proposed method of disposal would provide beach
quality material to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) for use in protecting
Highway 12 from beach washover.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: February 1997
10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 30 days
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material
Fill Material
12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Rodanthe, North Carolina
County: Dare
Drainage Basin: Tar-Pamlico Basin
Receiving Waters: Atlantic Ocean
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: The material proposed for
discharge is naturally occurring coarse-grained to fine-grained sand. The material to be dredged is not
contaminated or polluted.
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A_WATERSHED CLASSIFIED A SA HOW. OR ORW?
X YES (circle one) NO `-
17. NUMBER OF ACRES OR VOLUME OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT:
Filled: None
Excavated: None
Total Impacted: None
18. STATE REASONS WHY THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT AS PLANNED. ALSO. NOTE MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS:
Maintenance dredging of the subject channel is necessary to restore it to navigable depths. The proposed
method and location of disposal will provide a suitable upland site for dredged material disposal, while also
meeting the needs of NCDOT in protecting Highway 12 from beach washover. Any dredge pipeline that
must cross over wetlands will be burlapped and welded to provide protection from leakage.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY?
YES X NO IF YES. EXPLAIN:
I certify that all information contained herein or in support thereof is true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
Date:
C. E. Shuford, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division
Attachments
For prompt processing, submit:
*Seven (7) copies of completed application
*Drawings of proposed dredge and disposal sites
*Copies of previous 401 Certifications
--•-- Round Ramin
Bay
?..
?V I L D L I F E t•:: it
- Highway 12 Disposal Site
R E F !U G_ (approximate location)
Pails Dilfk? __ 1
t O
_- ' ==_k CO
Uncle. i=m CO
L4ndi lot
Greens Pt ?-??? • ` CO
l_ q .ff r a..
BIackurarGut a
?i'"•`?'' • c.•- •`_? ? O
of
a

I
> {j55SS
e eeeeee,??????.
n a..._ 7Sel
1 X =
th D
d
N ,-
or
r
,
:ampgrc?:
-
j i
Aunt Phorbcs r ' ! 5:
Marsh (Q? (n

Proposed Beach Disposal Area
and Highway 12 Site
Rodanthe, North Carolina
Scale: 1:24,000
From: Rodanthe, NC USGS Quad
r

g N (a

^ -
CV
1 N L-
-
~ o U
r
; N
7t:!
t
j
U
C14
Z

ca

CD O

t I
• ? I
t - I
s
U3

N
z ui
Q >-
w
U
-
O a am a - g 10

J I
Q a ^
g v ., ? I
a a
Q e m_
-
I

g- i

1 e _ I

u I
- p

e ?

s

Mail Completed Application to:
Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607-6445
ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Ph. [phone]
DEM ID:
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
1. DATE: December 13, 1996
2. NAME/ADDRESS: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
3. RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL: Terry R. Youngbluth
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
4. NAME OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTACT: Jenny Owens
TELEPHONE NUMBER: [phone]
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance dredging of Rodanthe Channel as discussed in the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe. Avon, and Rollinson Channels. Dare County,
North Carolina. December 1996 (enclosed).
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The proposed action covers the dredging and disposal of
dredged material from Rodanthe Channel, Dare County, North Carolina. The proposed dredging would be
performed by a hydraulic pipeline dredge and the coarse-grained (sandy) material from the channel would
be placed in a 12-acre upland disposal site, which is 1.5 miles north of Rodanthe, on the east of Highway
12 (Highway 12 disposal site). The control-of-effluent method of disposal would be used and the
estimated quantity to be dredged and placed in the Highway 12 disposal site is 100,000 cubic yards. The
proposed action is described in detail in Section 3.01 of the above-referenced EA.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Severe shoaling in the Rodanthe Channel has severely limited
navigability to recreational and commercial vessels. Maintaining the channel to its previously authorized
depth would alleviate this problem. In addition, the proposed method of disposal would provide beach
quality material to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) for use in protecting
Highway 12 from beach washover.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: February 1997
10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 30 days
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material
Fill Material

12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Rodanthe, North Carolina
County: Dare
Drainage Basin: Tar-Pamlico Basin
Receiving Waters: Atlantic Ocean
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: The material proposed for
discharge is naturally occurring coarse-grained to fine-grained sand. The material to be dredged is not
contaminated or polluted.
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED ASSAI HQW. OR ORW?
X YES (circle one) NO
17. NUMBER OF ACRES OR VOLUME OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT:
Filled: None
Excavated: None
Total Impacted: None
18. STATE REASONS WHY THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT AS PLANNED. ALSO. NOTE MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS:
Maintenance dredging of the subject channel is necessary to restore it to navigable depths. The proposed
method and location of disposal will provide a suitable upland site for dredged material disposal, while also
meeting the needs of NCDOT in protecting Highway 12 from beach washover. Any dredge pipeline that
must cross over wetlands will be burlapped and welded to provide protection from leakage.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY?
YES X NO IF YES. EXPLAIN:
I certify that all information contained herein or in support thereof is true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
Date: A ??: Al
C. E. Shuford, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division
Attachments
For prompt processing, submit:
*Seven (7) copies of completed application
*Drawings of proposed dredge and disposal sites
*Copies of previous 401 Certifications
I
--- Rowtd I:ammoa- -
Bay 1. , l
«' ii L D L I F E
` Highway 12 Disposal Site
R E F -U G :14 . (approximate location)
9 ? rr
-f?11
Paul; -A
o
z1=:; CL
:._ CO
Unde J'uam`' •I-:-- t 1
Lsnding? ?1 O
g U-
Greens Pt ?`=-? :• •'?;? CO
.:"
BlacF•uu:rGut--J? O
`'w*': • ?. •??_? ?' O
Ad
_;
7? j,
North Drain
`amps
Aural Phoebes
Marsh iQ . U)
Ca
?-= a .
Proposed Beach Disposal Area
and Highway 12 Site
Rodanthe, North Carolina
Scale: 1:24,000
From: Rodanthe, NC USGS Quad
t
1
$ +?
I - cu
U) C

1 N N (B
- o U
N -C
;
t
j Z
a
U

cC .r
-I` .a
rn o

t I

•
z2
"
1
V
1 .. ? l

w
z
?

RN
Z
ll]

W I
Q
U =
U1 ^ 8 12

Z
J ? I
1
Q 4- F " ^ '
Q e -

F .; I

' e I !

v ? g! p u
1
I
e
^ !
I
f
? I
I

Mail Completed Application to:
Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607-6445
ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Ph. [phone]
DEM ID:
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
1. DATE: December 13, 1996
2. NAME/ADDRESS: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
3. RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL: Terry R. Youngbluth
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
4. NAME OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTACT: Jenny Owens
TELEPHONE NUMBER: [phone]
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance dredging of Rodanthe Channel as discussed in the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for Maintenance Dredging of Rodanthe. Avon, and Rollinson Channels. Dare County.
North Carolina. December 1996 (enclosed).
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The proposed action covers the dredging and disposal of
dredged material from Rodanthe Channel, Dare County, North Carolina. The proposed dredging would be
performed by a hydraulic pipeline dredge and the coarse-grained (sandy) material from the channel would
be placed in a 12-acre upland disposal site, which is 1.5 miles north of Rodanthe, on the east of Highway
12 (Highway 12 disposal site). The control-of-effluent method of disposal would be used and the
estimated quantity to be dredged and placed in the Highway 12 disposal site is 100,000 cubic yards. The
proposed action is described in detail in Section 3.01 of the above-referenced EA.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Severe shoaling in the Rodanthe Channel has severely limited
navigability to recreational and commercial vessels. Maintaining the channel to its previously authorized
depth would alleviate this problem. In addition, the proposed method of disposal would provide beach
quality material to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) for use in protecting
Highway 12 from beach washover.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: February 1997
10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 30 days
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material
Fill Material

12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Rodanthe, North Carolina
County: Dare
Drainage Basin: Tar-Pamlico Basin
Receiving Waters: Atlantic Ocean
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: The material proposed for
discharge is naturally occurring coarse-grained to fine-grained sand. The material to be dredged is not
contaminated or polluted.
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS Ak HQW. OR ORW?
X YES (circle one) NO
17. NUMBER OF ACRES OR VOLUME OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT:
Filled: None
Excavated: None
Total Impacted: None
18. STATE REASONS WHY THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT AS PLANNED. ALSO. NOTE MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS:
Maintenance dredging of the subject channel is necessary to restore it to navigable depths. The proposed
method and location of disposal will provide a suitable upland site for dredged material disposal, while also
meeting the needs of NCDOT in protecting Highway 12 from beach washover. Any dredge pipeline that
must cross over wetlands will be burlapped and welded to provide protection from leakage.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY?
YES X NO IF YES. EXPLAIN:
I certify that all information contained herein or in support thereof is true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
t
Date:
C. E. Shuford, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division
Attachments
For prompt processing, submit:
"Seven (7) copies of completed application
*Drawings of proposed dredge and disposal sites
*Copies of previous 401 Certifications

Round I:am?'10A.`
Bay ?.. ? -, .
?V I L D L I F E }c•:" Highway 12 Disposal Site
R E F fU G ' (approximate location)
l: .
9

Paul;
, .
_ a•

a

uncle Timm `" k' 1
T
z 1
IsadinY
: O
_
7 `i??
= ?
?
•
=
a W
a a
Greens Pt
0
BlaaEvwr Cut v w+ _ ••<' _ 10
a:
o_

AlOrIA Drain

Aunt Phoebes
Marsh U)

L
Proposed Beach Disposal Area
and Highway 12 Site
Rodanthe, North Carolina
Scale: 1:24,000
From: Rodanthe, NC USGS Quad

1 N

\ a
f
g U
$ ?F N

i

! i

z

i
- - !
,
z w
W IQ
U r =
O

U U3
f- a "
am a - g 1=

x
J o I
"
i
Q 0.
z F v ""
i

? a r I

1 R= , k
_ P ? I

I

? e

1

t

M
cn c
O
N cu
O U
CL
N
0
N Z
3 C13
.? -0
o
z C?