19970839 Ver 1_Complete File_19971007

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, ATO?FA
Health and Natural Resources �aj
Division of Water Ouality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor p � H N F-I
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
October 7, 1997
Mr. Coleman Long
Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Environmental Resources Section
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402 -1890
Dear Mr. Long,
Re: Certification Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act,
Proposed use of hopper dredge with overflow - Military Ocean Terminal at Sunny
Point (MOTSU) dredging
WQC Project #970839, COE# 199502844
New Hanover County
Attached hereto is a copy of Certification No.3161 issued to U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers dated October 7, 1997.
If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact us.
Attachments
P ly,
S'
Howard, Jr. .E.
wqc 3161
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Wilmington, Field Office
Wilmington DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Domey
Mr. John Parker, Division of Coastal Management
Central Files
John Hefner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services
Jim Gregson, Wilmington DCM
Division of Water Quality • Non - Discharge Branch
Enviro. 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

NORTH CAROLINA 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
THIS CERTIFICATION is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section
401 Public Laws 92 -500 and 95 -217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Regulations in 15 NCAC 2H, Section .0500 to U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers in New Hanover County pursuant to an application filed on the
2nd day of September 1997 to utilize a hopper dredge with overflow for the dredging of the
Military Ocean Terminal at Sunny Point (MOTSU).
The application provides adequate assurance that the dredging of Cape Fear River will
not result in a violation of applicable Water Quality Standards and discharge guidelines.
Therefore, the State of North Carolina certifies that this activity will not violate the
applicable portions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306, 307 of PL 92 -500 and PL 95 -217 if
conducted in accordance with the application and conditions hereinafter set forth.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you submitted in your
application, as described in the Public Notice or as modified below. If you change your
project, you must notify us and you may be required to submit a revised application. For
this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed below. In addition, you
should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project
including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion control, Coastal Stormwater, Non -
discharge and Water Supply watershed regulations.
Condition(s) of Certification:
1. In order to protect endangered species and other fishery resources, dredging shall
be limited to the period from October through May of any year. If work must occur
from June through September, DWQ shall be notified in writing and personnel
designated as manatee observers shall be provided with the authority to take immediate
precautionary measures if manatees are observed in the dredging area
2. The mixing zone for this dredging operation shall not exceed 700 meters from the
dredge. The turbidity water quality standard (25 NTUs) is applicable outside of this
mixing zone. This certification may be reopened to at least require water quality and
biological monitoring if the turbidity water quality standard is exceeded outside of the
mixing zone.
3. The dredging operation shall not prevent free passage of marine organisms.
Violations of any condition herein set forth shall result in revocation of this
Certification and may result in criminal and/or civil penalties. This Certification shall
become null and void unless the above conditions are made conditions of the Federal 404
and/or coastal Area Management Act Permit. This Certification shall expire upon expiration
of the 404 or CAMA permit.
If this Certification is unacceptable to you you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing
upon written request within sixty (60) days following receipt of this Certification. 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, P.O. Box
27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611 -7447. If modifications are made to an original Certification,
you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing on the modifications upon written request

within sixty (60) days following receipt of the Certification. Unless such demands are
made, this Certification shall be final and binding.
This the 7th day of October 1997
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
a nH ,J .P
WQC 3161

John Dorney
From: FRANK YELVERTON [ Frank. Yelverton @SAW02.usace.army.milj
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 1997 11:38 AM
To: carol ine _bellis @mail.ehnr. state. nc.us; john 0dem.ehnr. state. nc.us
Subject: Seasonal Restrictions for MOTSU
Frank
�J 5
C1
hope this is the last time I'll need to bother you on the MOTSU permit. The 1995 permit for
MOTSU (199502844) did not have strict seasonal window conditions because of national
defense issues. The following condition was on the permit regarding dredging:
(�IUy
"To protect endangered species and other fishery resources, it is recommended that activity
IWt
be limited to the period from October through May of any year. If work must occur from June
Uu
through September, personnel designated as manatee observers should be provided with the
�`Jl
authority to take immediate precautionary measures if manatees are observed in the zone of
".
activity
For national defense reasons, we request that this conditionik remairyin lieu of the standard
i -
fisheries window condition. After all,the only change requested to the permit is hopper
dredging with overflow. Hopper dredging without overflow is currently permitted and is
occurring for the second time. If hopper overflow is permitted, dredging will take about half
the time. For the use of hopper dredges, we will of course continue to comply with the NMFS
Section 7 requirements to monitor the inflow screens for turtles and shortnose sturgeon
during the appropriate seasons.
Frank
�J 5
C1

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402 -1890
Action ID No. 199502844 August 28, 1997
PUBLIC NOTICE
MILITARY TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT COMMAND, MILITARY OCEAN
TERMINAL, SUNNY POINT, Southport, North Carolina 28461 -5000, has applied for a
modification to its Department of the Army (DA) permit that authorizes the DEEPENING,
WIDENING AND MAINTENANCE OF ACCESS CHANNELS, THE DEEPENING,
WIDENING AND MAINTENANCE OF CONNECTING CHANNELS AND BASINS,
WIDENING OF THE CENTER BASIN AND THE TRANSPORTATION OF DREDGED
MATERIAL FOR OCEAN DISPOSAL ON THE CAPE FEAR RIVER, MILITARY OCEAN
TERMINAL, SUNNY POINT (MOTSU), SOUTHPORT, Brunswick County, North Carolina.
The application for the basic work was advertised by public notice on May 11, 1995. The DA
permit for the basic work was issued on July 27, 1995. Work was last completed in October
1996, and was performed by bucket and barge dredged with disposal of dredged material in
Wilmington Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site (ODMDS). Periodic maintenance using
clamshell, hydraulic pipeline, or hopper dredge (without overflow) is authorized by the existing
permit until July 27, 2005. The expiration date of the authorization is to remain unchanged.
The proposed modification involves adding the ALTERNATIVE MAINTENANCE
METHOD OF HOPPER DREDGING WITH OVERFLOW WITH DISPOSAL IN THE
ODMDS. Hopper dredges can hold about twice as much sediment if the dredge is allowed to
overflow water to obtain an economic load. This will reduce overall dredging time and costs.
The following description of the work is taken from data provided by the applicant assisted
by the Environmental Resources Section, Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers. Plans
submitted with the application for permit modification are the same as in the May 11, 1995
public notice, as the area to be maintained is the same and the average annual maintenance
volume remains about 1 million cubic yards. Plans showing the maintenance area are included
with this public notice.
Impacts associated with overflow of a hopper dredge are described in the Environmental
Assessment (EA), Use of Horner Dredge with Overflow as an Additional Maintenance Dredging
Method for Portions of Wilmington Harbor, North Carolina, July 1997, Wilmington District
Corps of Engineers. In summary, the EA indicates that the turbidity and suspended sediment
plume from the overflow of a hopper dredge was monitored twice in Wilmington Harbor March
27, 1997. One of the events was the overflow of sediments from the south basin at MOTSU.
The results indicates that both suspended sediments and turbidity levels approached background

levels within 1,600 feet of the dredge. Temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen were not
altered by overflow.
Additional determinations after publication of the EA indicate that if the background
sedimentation rate in the areas surrounding MOTSU is 1.0 cm per year, the proposed hopper
dredging with overflow would add at most an additional 0.55 cm per year. There are no primary
nursery or shell fishing areas located near the MOTSU facility that could be impacted by the
dredging alternative.
By letter of June 12, 1995, the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management ( NCDCM)
agreed that the basic work was consistent with the North Carolina Coastal Zone Management
Plan. The applicant has determined that the proposed additional work is also consistent with this
Plan and has submitted this determination to the NCDCM for their review and concurrence.
Pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, on May 11, 1995, the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality ( NCDWQ) issued Water Quality Certification No. 2668, for the basic
work. The applicant has applied to the NCDWQ for a modification of this Certification.
The requested Department of the Army (DA) permit modification will be denied if any
required State or local authorization and/or certification is denied. The permittee is required to
present plans to the District Engineer a minimum of two (2) weeks before commencement of any
maintenance, and all maintenance must be performed according to Federal, State, and local
permits and regulations governing such activities at the time the maintenance is undertaken. A
condition of the basic permit, recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), indicates that dredged materials may not be placed in the Wilmington Offshore Dredged
Material Disposal Site (ODMDS) after June 30, 1998, without reevaluation. This reevaluation is
in process.
This application for permit modification is being considered pursuant to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Any person may request, in writing within the comment
period specified in this notice, that a public hearing be held to consider this application.
Requests for public hearing shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public
hearing.
The District Engineer has consulted the latest published version of the National Register of
Historic Places for the presence or absence of registered properties, or properties listed as being
eligible for inclusion therein, and this site is not registered property or property listed as being
eligible for inclusion in the Register. Consultation of the National Register is the extent of
cultural resource investigations by the District Engineer, and he is otherwise unaware of the
presence of such resources. Presently, unknown archeological, scientific, prehistorical, or
historical data may be lost or destroyed by work under the requested permit modification.
2

The District Engineer, based on available information, is not aware that the proposed
additional activity would affect species, or their critical habitat, designated as endangered or
threatened pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
The decision, whether to modify this permit, will be based on an evaluation of the probable
impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed additional work and its intended use on
the public interest. Evaluation of the probable impacts that the proposed activity may have on
the public interest requires a careful weighing of all those factors that become relevant in each
particular case. The benefits that may be expected to accrue from the proposal must be balanced
against its foreseeable detriments. The decision whether to authorize a proposal, and if so the
conditions under which it will be allowed to occur, are therefore decided by the outcome of the
general balancing process. That decision should reflect the national concern for both protection
and use of important resources. All factors that may be relevant to the proposal must be
considered including the cumulative effects of it. Among those are conservation, economics,
aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values,
flood hazards and flood plain values (according to Executive Order 11988), land use, navigation,
shore 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. For activities involving the placement of
dredged or fill materials in waters of the United States, a permit will be denied if the discharge
that would be authorized would not comply with the Environmental Protection Agencies'
404(b)(1) guidelines. Subject to the preceding sentence and any other applicable guidelines or
criteria, a permit will be granted unless the District Engineer decides that it would be contrary to
the public interest.
The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State and local
agencies and officials; Indian Tribes and other interested parties to consider and evaluate the
impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps of
Engineers to decide whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for this proposal. To
make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species, historic
properties, water quality, general environmental effects and the other public interest factors
listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA)
and /or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA). Comments are also used to decide the need for a public hearing and to decide the
public interest of the proposed activity.
Generally, the decision whether to modify this Department of the Army (DA) permit will
not be made until the North Carolina Division of Water Quality ( NCDWQ) modifies, denies, or
waives State certification required by Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The NCDWQ
considers whether the additional, proposed work will comply with Sections 301, 302, 306, and
307 of the Clean Water Act. The application and this public notice for the Department of the
Army (DA) permit serves as application to the NCDWQ for modification of certification.
3

Additional information regarding the Clean Water Act certification may be reviewed at the
offices of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), 4401 Reedy Creek Road,
Raleigh, North Carolina. Copies of such materials will be furnished to any person requesting
copies upon payment of reproduction costs.
All persons wanting to make comments regarding the application for Clean Water Act
certification should do so in writing delivered to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
4401 Reedy Creek Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27607, on or before September 22, 1997,
Attention: Mr. John Dorney.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will be received in
this office, Attention: Mr. Allen Davis, until 4:15 p.m., September 26, 1997, or telephone
(910) 251 -4466.
4

�O *H O� twOwttwt
�� tpMloot M tit, wew "lot
AREA DREDGED ANNUALLY
SOUTH WHARF
WHARF
q t
REAVES POINT CNANM�l i ' `
NORT SIN i`
OW � ENTRANCI CHANAEI
�f" u o
v
AREA NOT EDGED
ROUTINELY DR
7 f/
t. ` •.� • AYH . •
CAPE
ITIES HAVE A FEAR
34 °FT MLW WITH
MOTSU NAVIGATION REDGING
PROJECT DEPTH OOVERDEpTH D
ALLOWABLE
U /PFR..i� m DNIGNT CHANNEL
RIVER
2 FT
,rS-0 navigation faeilities.
Current MO =
1�
,i

+
PROJECTED SLOPE INTERCE PT `-
+ E 231T000 PNOPOSEO CHANNEL PRISM LINE f BASIN N0.1
EXISTING CHANNEL MtSN LINE
_tiM ............ ►NWECTED AO►E INTEIICEPT -- ` �..
PROPOSED CHANNEL PRISM LINE ~v
+ E 2311000 4 � •�, EXISTING CHANNEL PRI&W ilrc -
� s
EVES POST O WCL
OAIQ
1 1
+ E 2320000 + + + + +
+ +
160 0 300 "0 NO 1200 1500
SCALE IN FEET
Figure 3a. Proposed improvements, MOTSU South Basin (Basin No. 1) Z�hTA1F`�"3ATTSiEM01TM

c"0041- "ItISA LIA
­IN
"WEC0.0 SLOPE
91
Orr, H1E/
CjLQ > ; -
pitiliA 0W
L
ol
SLOPE
"WoIAO +
LOWER MIDNIGHT CHMWL
basin (Basin
MATS
CenterOT
3b olp IIA
Flgure
E Woo
+ E 2111000
vSLOPf. ""Mw:Epl
21%100
_AV
+ , 2 315000
+ E 2320000
-zoo 1500
Bo
0 -100 'A
8 300
"F
S, v FEf,
'" cm— 114
S
wS lk cwolAA
b1401ESS OUR ELfotA
blSED Sfs,(Evl•

I I I
+ E 2116000 + +
+ E 1117000 + +
i \ \
+E13f0000 \ \`+ ` \ \+
\1
4. E 2319000 '� +
s
+ + +
'.�3;--n
1
+
I I
I1fo 0 300 600 900 1200 1000
fCAI[ IM FEET
LO9IM MOMMIT CKAW&L
Figure 3c. MOTSU North Basin (Basin No-3). No improvements planned,
1. CO►ROOR ATIOMf �q 0 M.L.N.
Current conditions will be maintained. _• c9[0 "a M0117M IS a., "" fu PL"*
000110 NAT fYfA M. T 93
aAEeT- ,4:z 4F Z
+ + +
'.�3;--n
1
+
I I
I1fo 0 300 600 900 1200 1000
fCAI[ IM FEET
LO9IM MOMMIT CKAW&L
Figure 3c. MOTSU North Basin (Basin No-3). No improvements planned,
1. CO►ROOR ATIOMf �q 0 M.L.N.
Current conditions will be maintained. _• c9[0 "a M0117M IS a., "" fu PL"*
000110 NAT fYfA M. T 93
aAEeT- ,4:z 4F Z

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...
1101
vt all'O* 4v Itso
jo
V,t (So tl
5- B,4*
W,
ASO
...................... .
"Ol; ,%tl
%%61 t Vq.
�,oiZ�M
SlSlq ITO '%
1 %6t %,t %a la L tj rj
aoA
�� 4u og S�aO
00
MI I
�ff)i
sasoo
OlollvKt'-,�

`i oc� PN
IERMt�AL
MI�ZTPR �ZN�
sc� FEET
Cape Fear -�'�er
rel
rar
G
or,
Vo eE�cH 4
ial disposal site, �A '
dredged mater
TS.0 confined
5 . '10 up
Figure
SEE x
I ,
v
rel
rar
G
or,
Vo eE�cH 4
ial disposal site, �A '
dredged mater
TS.0 confined
5 . '10 up
Figure
SEE x

September 19, 1997
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorncy
FROM: Eric Reek
RE: MOTSU Dredging
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed the Environmental Assessment for the dredging of Military
Ocean Terminal Sunny Point (MOTS[). Based on this review, DWQ believes the following
recommendations be made:
The dredging operations will not cause chronic toxicity to marine organisms and (ill not prevent the \
free passnle- W -m4ine organisms.
Dredge overflow in MOTSU shall be restricted to the normal dredging window for the Cape Fear
River.
If there is a fish kill in the vicinity of active dredging operations these operations will be suspended
until such time as it can be demonstrated that further dredging will not cause further fish kills.
1)
!L°
)UV,
The mixing zone shall extend) feet above and below dredging operations.
cp
v
i
�dMS
f

September 19, 1997
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney
FROM: Eric Meek
RE: MOTSU Dredging
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed the Environmental Assessment for the dredging of Military
Ocean Terminal Sunny Point ( MOTSU). Based on this review, DWQ believes the following
recommendations be made:
1) The dredging operations will not cause chronic toxicity to marine organisms and will not prevent the
free passage of marine organisms.
2) If there is a fish kill in the vicinity of active dredging operations these operations will be suspended
until such time as it can be demonstrated that further dredging will not cause further fish kills.
km /(9
'/ C7.,-4e
(Ct I/
(1/1� /� G"
J
- \,GW
IV I
IV
\�Q
101
n
n1\Vn
� Ilk

SEP 24 '97 10 :49AM US CORPS ENGINEERS WILM NC P.1
Facsimile Transmittal Meader Sheet
NAME I OFFICE SYMBOL T9L9PHONE NUMBER
FROMi
Wilmington District,
Voice (910) 251 -4840
Frank Yeiverton
Corps or Engineers
FAX [phone]
To:
NCDWQ
Voice [phone]
John_Domey
FAX [phone]
� erio_Etselt'
Classiflostlon
Number of PApes
Precedence
4
NqNS
NONE
pnamemg natter sheeq
U.B. Army Corps of Bnonaars - Wllmin ®ton District
Peat Office Box 9000
Wikninpton, North Carolina 911409 -1090
I
REMARKS
AUTHORIZED RELEASER'S
OIONATURE
i I k.
Date Time _
sap, 24,1997 /0 y'
Attached are the mixing zone determinations for MOTSU. If you have any questions,
let me know. They should also be applicable to the river, since MOTSU would be a
worst case as our March 27, 1997 overflow monitoring indicated.
D�-
Frank'
'X-
Q C_
a
c.

SEP 24 '97 10 :49AN US CORPS ENGINEERS WILM NC P.2
September 24, 1997
MEMORANDUM FOR: John Dorney /Eric Fleek, NCDWQ
FROM: Frank Yelverton, USACOE
THRU: Phil Payonk, USACE f4
SUBJECT: Mixing Zone Determination for MOTSU
1. We used the Corps' Waterway Experiment Station (WES) "Dredge Model"
to estimate the edge of the mixing zone for hopper dredge overflow. I discussed
this model in detail with the model experts at WES. We used a total suspended
solids (TSS) model because a model was not available for turbidity. We
assumed that when the TSS due to overflow dropped out, so would the
associated turbidity, The "Dredge Model" was calibrated with the data obtained
March 27, 1997 from the overflow of the hopper dredge McFarland with dredge
material from the MOTSU south basin (30% sand 70°x6 slit /clay).
2. The enclosed table and chart indicate the output from the model
assuming a sampling depth of 2 meters (other depths don't show much
difference in the model). The values are in TSS mg1l above background (29
mg /1), This data closely reflects that data obtained during March 27, 1997
sampling, Certainly when the TSS values are 1 or less above background, you
can conclude that turbidity levels are not impacted. However since background
surface and mid depth turbidity levels were 14 -16 NTU's, we suggest that a TSS
of 5 or less would not result in total NTU's being greater than 25. This being the
case, the plume mixing zone would be goo meters bong and 150 meters wide, at
the most.
3. If the MOTSU results (worst case due hl tier-percent silt/clay) are applied
to the Wllrnington Harbor Ship Channel, the 1r�del verifi our earlier comment
that we do not believe the plume would esker ur ery areas 300 yards
either side of the ship channel,
4. If you have any questions, call me of 910 -251 -4640. \ '! L o
��l -
a W a /'

i
SEP 24 '97 10 :50AM US CORPS ENGINEERS WILM NC
.-NM MMN r
N _
'W M u1 h• u7 C71r
6.
- --
q��� g Nor- V'�u►N�
•� 0= Je- O Cl►ZQ! N
g N comI N
Q cm
IL
a � CVV r
.O
N w r! r r
�yy
(.a
P.3

cr
Y � NATO
+
q
+ r its 2EG:KK wvew
y eat°
S
I A-
Y iih� A

r
MILITARY OCEAN TERMINAL, SUNNY POINT ( MOTSU)
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
1. DATE: August 28, 1997
2. NAME /ADDRESS OF AGENT: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402 -1890
3. RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL AT MOTSU:
COMMANDER, 1303rd Major Port Command
Director of Public Works
ATTN: MTESU -PW /Hauck
Military Ocean Terminal, Sunny Point
Southport, North Carolina 28461 -5000
4. NAME OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTACT: Frank Yelverton
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (910) 251 -4640
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance of Military Ocean Terminal, Sunny Point
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: MOTSU is a military port terminal which
serves the public as an important national defense facility. MOTSU was recently
authorized to deepen and widen the terminal's basins and entrance channels. This
work was completed in October 1997. Periodic maintenance using clamshell, hydraulic
pipeline, or hopper dredge (without overflow) is authorized. This application requests
adding the alternative maintenance method of hopper dredging with overflow with
disposal in the Wilmington Harbor Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site. Hopper
dredges can hold about twice as much sediment if the dredge is allowed to overflow
water to obtain an economic load. This will reduce overall dredging time and costs.
The basins at MOTSU are currently maintained and are anticipated to be
maintained on a 1 year frequency. The average annual volume to be removed from
these channels is about 1 million cubic yards.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Greater dredging efficiency without adverse
impacts to the environment.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: Fall 1997

10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 1-4 months each year
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material (overflow from a hopper dredge)
Fill Material
12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Southport, North Carolina
County: Brunswick
Drainage Basin: Cape Fear
Receiving Waters: Cape Fear River
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable due to tides
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: Samples of
bottom sediments from the basin at MOTSU were collected in 1992 and tested to evaluate
the toxicity and bioaccumulation potential of chemical contaminants which may be
associated with those maintenance sediment materials (Ward et al., 1993). These site
specific test results indicate that the maintenance sediments meet the testing criteria of the
Environmental Protection Agency's Ocean Dumping Regulations and Criteria and are,
therefore, acceptable for transportation for ocean dumping under Section 103 of the
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended. Chemical tests
were again performed on sediment samples taken in 1996 from MOTSU. The results of
these tests also indicate that the sediments are acceptable for ocean disposal (USACE,
1997). Based on these results, the maintenance material is not considered to be
contaminated.
Impacts associated with overflow of a hopper dredge are described in the
Environmental Assessment (EA), Use of Hopper Dredge with Overflow as an Additional
Maintenance Dredginq Method for Portions of Wilminqton Harbor, North Carolina,
dated July 1997, Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In summary, the
EA indicates that the turbidity and suspended sediment plume from the overflow of a
hopper dredge was monitored twice in Wilmington Harbor (March 27, 1997). One of
the events was the overflow of sediments from the south basin at MOTSU. The results
indicate that both suspended sediments and turbidity levels approached background
levels within 1,600 feet of the dredge. Temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen
were not altered by overflow.
0a

Additional determinations, after publication of the EA, indicate that if the
background sedimentation rate in the areas surrounding MOTSU is 1.0 cm per year,
the proposed hopper dredging with overflow would add, at most, an additional 0.55 cm
per year. There are no primary nursery or shellfishing areas located near the MOTSU
facility that could be impacted by the dredging alternative.
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS SA, HQW, OR
ORW?
YES
X 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: See 7, 8, and 17.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR
USE ON THIS PROPERTY?
X YES NO IF YES, EXPLAIN:
Water Quality Certificate No. 2668 issued May 11, 1995 - Improvements to
Navigation Basins and Entrance Channels at MOTSU.
I certify that all information contained herein or in support thereof is true and correct
to the best of my knowledge.
� I DATE:
C. E. Shufor , Jr., P. E. �
Acting Chie , Engineering
and Planning Division

REFERENCES:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District. 1997. Tier I Evaluation of Dredge
Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal, Wilmington Harbor and Military Ocean
Terminal, Sunny Point, North Carolina.
Ward, J. A., M. R. Pinza, M. E. Barrows, and J. Q. Word. 1993. Ecological Evaluation
of Proposed Dredged Material From Wilmington Harbor and Military Ocean
Terminal, Sunny Point, North Carolina. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, North Carolina District, Under a Related Services Agreement with the
U.S. Department of Energy Contract DE- AC06 -76RLO 1830 by Battelle, Pacific
Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352.

DCM97 -31
#JA11
CONSISTENCY PROGRAM - COMMENT DATA TRACKING SHEET
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
EMERGENCY DREDGING, BOUY 19 AT BOGUE CHANNEL & AIWW, BOGUE INLET
Document Date: 08/12/97 Received Date: 08/12/97
DUEDATES ................... ...............................
Response To: U.S.
Army Corps
of Engineers
Due Date: 08/13/97
Extended To:
RESPONSE FROM REVIEWERS
DUE:
08/13/97
Consistency Deadline:
Extended To:
Extended To:
COMMENTS .....................
...............................
Date
Comments Objections
Division
Reviewer
Resp.
Recd.
Y/N Y/N
DCM Field........
Jones
DCM Planner......
DCM Other ........
Div Mar Fish.....
Taylor
Div Land Qual....
Wildlife Res.....
Wescott
Div Wat Qual .....
Dorney
Div Health Ser...
NC DOT ...........
— /
—/—
– –
State Prop Off ...
Div Water Res ....
Div Comm Asst ....
Arch & History...
Parks & Rec ......
Hall
Under Wat Arch ...
Wilde- Ramsing
OTHER REVIEWERS ...
(Not Entered
in Tracking Database)
.......
Date
Comments Objections
Division
Reviewer
Resp.
Recd.
Y/N Y/N
Review Active
Tracking Sheet Printed: 09/02/97

CONSISTENCY PROGRAM - COMMENT DATA TRACKING SHEET
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
DCM97 -30 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
EMERGENCY DREDGING, DRUM INLET CHANNEL
Document Date: 08/08/97 Received Date: 08/08/97
DUE DATES ................... ...............................
Response To: U.S.
Army Corps
of Engineers
Due Date: 08/11/97
Extended To:
RESPONSE FROM REVIEWERS DUE:
08/08/97
Consistency Deadline:
Extended To:
Extended To:
COMMENTS....................
...............................
Date
Comments Objections
Division
Reviewer
Resp.
Recd.
YIN YIN
DCM Field........
Jones
DCM Planner......
DCM Other........
Div Mar Fish .....
McCoy
Div Land Qual....
Wildlife Res.....
Wescott
Div Wat Qual .....
Dorney
Div Health Ser...Benton
NC DOT ...........
— /
—/—
– –
State Prop Off ...
Div Water Res ....
Div Comm Asst ....
Arch & History...
Parks & Rec ......
Hall
Under Wat Arch ...
Wilde- Ramsing
OTHER REVIEWERS ...
(Not Entered
in Tracking Database)
.......
Date
Comments Objections
Division
Reviewer
Resp.
Recd.
YIN YIN
Review Active
Tracking Sheet Printed: 09/02/97

g3
g� 0
MILITARY OCEAN TERMINAL, SUNNY POINT ( MOTSU)
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
DATE: August 28, 1997
2. NAME /ADDRESS OF AGENT:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402 -1890
3. RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL AT MOTSU:
COMMANDER, 1303rd Major Port Command
Director of Public Works
ATTN: MTESU -PW /Hauck
Military Ocean Terminal, Sunny Point
Southport, North Carolina 28461 -5000
4. NAME OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTACT: Frank Yelverton
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (910) 251 -4640
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance of Military Ocean Terminal, Sunny Point
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: MOTSU is a military port terminal which
serves the public as an important national defense facility. MOTSU was recently
authorized to deepen and widen the terminal's basins and entrance channels. This
work was completed in October 1997. Periodic maintenance using clamshell, hydraulic
pipeline, or hopper dredge (without overflow) is authorized. This application requests
adding the alternative maintenance method of hopper dredging with overflow with
disposal in the Wilmington Harbor Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site. Hopper
dredges can hold about twice as much sediment if the dredge is allowed to overflow
water to obtain an economic load. This will reduce overall dredging time and costs.
The basins at MOTSU are currently maintained and are anticipated to be
maintained on a 1 year frequency. The average annual volume to be removed from
these channels is about 1 million cubic yards.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Greater dredging efficiency without adverse
impacts to the environment.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: Fall 1997

10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 1-4 months each year
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material (overflow from a hopper dredge)
Fill Material
12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Southport, North Carolina
County: Brunswick
Drainage Basin: Cape Fear
Receiving Waters: Cape Fear River
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable due to tides
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: Samples of
bottom sediments from the basin at MOTSU were collected in 1992 and tested to evaluate
the toxicity and bioaccumulation potential of chemical contaminants which may be
associated with those maintenance sediment materials (Ward et al., 1993). These site
specific test results indicate that the maintenance sediments meet the testing criteria of the
Environmental Protection Agency's Ocean Dumping Regulations and Criteria and are,
therefore, acceptable for transportation for ocean dumping under Section 103 of the
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended. Chemical tests
were again performed on sediment samples taken in 1996 from MOTSU. The results of
these tests also indicate that the sediments are acceptable for ocean disposal (USACE,
1997). Based on these results, the maintenance material is not considered to be
contaminated.
Impacts associated with overflow of a hopper dredge are described in the
Environmental Assessment (EA), Use of Hopper Dredae with Overflow as an Additional
Maintenance Dredqinq Method for Portions of Wilmington Harbor, North Carolina,
dated July 1997, Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In summary, the
EA indicates that the turbidity and suspended sediment plume from the overflow of a
hopper dredge was monitored twice in Wilmington Harbor (March 27, 1997). One of
the events was the overflow of sediments from the south basin at MOTSU. The results
indicate that both suspended sediments and turbidity levels approached background
levels within 1,600 feet of the dredge. Temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen
were not altered by overflow.

Additional determinations, after publication of the EA, indicate that if the
background sedimentation rate in the areas surrounding MOTSU is 1.0 cm per year,
the proposed hopper dredging with overflow would add, at most, an additional 0.55 cm
per year. There are no primary nursery or shellfishing areas located near the MOTSU
facility that could be impacted by the dredging alternative.
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS SA, HQW, OR
ORW?
YES
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: See 7, 8, and 17.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR
USE ON THIS PROPERTY?
X YES NO IF YES, EXPLAIN:
Water Quality Certificate No. 2668 issued May 11, 1995 - Improvements to
Navigation Basins and Entrance Channels at MOTSU.
I certify that all information contained herein or in support thereof is true and correct
to the best of my knowledge.
C. E. Shufor , Jr., P.E1.
Acting Chie , Engineering
and Planning Division
DATE: y /�

REFERENCES:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District. 1997. Tier I Evaluation of Dredge
Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal, Wilmington Harbor and Military Ocean
Terminal, Sunny Point, North Carolina.
Ward, J. A., M. R. Pinza, M. E. Barrows, and J. Q. Word. 1993. Ecological Evaluation
of Proposed Dredged Material From Wilmington Harbor and Military Ocean
Terminal, Sunny Point, North Carolina. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, North Carolina District, Under a Related Services Agreement with the
U.S. Department of Energy Contract DE- AC06 -76RLO 1830 by Battelle, Pacific
Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352.

g3
9"70
MILITARY OCEAN TERMINAL, SUNNY POINT ( MOTSU)
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
DATE: August 28, 1997
2. NAME /ADDRESS OF AGENT: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402 -1890
3. RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL AT MOTSU:
COMMANDER, 1303rd Major Port Command
Director of Public Works
ATTN: MTESU -PW /Hauck
Military Ocean Terminal, Sunny Point
Southport, North Carolina 28461 -5000
4. NAME OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTACT: Frank Yelverton
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (910) 251 -4640
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance of Military Ocean Terminal, Sunny Point
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: MOTSU is a military port terminal which
serves the public as an important national defense facility. MOTSU was recently
authorized to deepen and widen the terminal's basins and entrance channels. This
work was completed in October 1997. Periodic maintenance using clamshell, hydraulic
pipeline, or hopper dredge (without overflow) is authorized. This application requests
adding the alternative maintenance method of hopper dredging with overflow with
disposal in the Wilmington Harbor Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site. Hopper
dredges can hold about twice as much sediment if the dredge is allowed to overflow
water to obtain an economic load. This will reduce overall dredging time and costs.
The basins at MOTSU are currently maintained and are anticipated to be
maintained on a 1 year frequency. The average annual volume to be removed from
these channels is about 1 million cubic yards.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Greater dredging efficiency without adverse
impacts to the environment.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: Fall 1997

10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 1 -4 months each year
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material (overflow from a hopper dredge)
Fill Material
12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Southport, North Carolina
County: Brunswick
Drainage Basin: Cape Fear
Receiving Waters: Cape Fear River
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable due to tides
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: Samples of
bottom sediments from the basin at MOTSU were collected in 1992 and tested to evaluate
the toxicity and bioaccumulation potential of chemical contaminants which may be
associated with those maintenance sediment materials (Ward et al., 1993). These site
specific test results indicate that the maintenance sediments meet the testing criteria of the
Environmental Protection Agency's Ocean Dumping Regulations and Criteria and are,
therefore, acceptable for transportation for ocean dumping under Section 103 of the
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended. Chemical tests
were again performed on sediment samples taken in 1996 from MOTSU. The results of
these tests also indicate that the sediments are acceptable for ocean disposal (USACE,
1997). Based on these results, the maintenance material is not considered to be
contaminated.
Impacts associated with overflow of a hopper dredge are described in the
Environmental Assessment (EA), Use of Hopper Dredqe with Overflow as an Additional
Maintenance Dredginq Method for Portions of Wilminqton Harbor, North Carolina,
dated July 1997, Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In summary, the
EA indicates that the turbidity and suspended sediment plume from the overflow of a
hopper dredge was monitored twice in Wilmington Harbor (March 27, 1997). One of
the events was the overflow of sediments from the south basin at MOTSU. The results
indicate that both suspended sediments and turbidity levels approached background
levels within 1,600 feet of the dredge. Temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen
were not altered by overflow.

Additional determinations, after publication of the EA, indicate that if the
background sedimentation rate in the areas surrounding MOTSU is 1.0 cm per year,
the proposed hopper dredging with overflow would add, at most, an additional 0.55 cm
per year. There are no primary nursery or shellfishing areas located near the MOTSU
facility that could be impacted by the dredging alternative.
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS SA, HQW, OR
ORW?
YES
X 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: See 7, 8, and 17.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR
USE ON THIS PROPERTY?
X YES NO IF YES, EXPLAIN:
Water Quality Certificate No. 2668 issued May 11, 1995 - Improvements to
Navigation Basins and Entrance Channels at MOTSU.
I certify that all information contained herein or in support thereof is true and correct
to the best of my knowledge.
C. E. Shufor , Jr., P.�.
Acting Chie , Engineering
and Planning Division
t
DATE: y// %7

REFERENCES:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District. 1997. Tier I Evaluation of Dredge
Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal, Wilmington Harbor and Military Ocean
Terminal, Sunny Point, North Carolina.
Ward, J. A., M. R. Pinza, M. E. Barrows, and J. 0. Word. 1993. Ecological Evaluation
of Proposed Dredged Material From Wilmington Harbor and Military Ocean
Terminal, Sunny Point, North Carolina. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, North Carolina District, Under a Related Services Agreement with the
U.S. Department of Energy Contract DE- AC06 -76RLO 1830 by Battelle, Pacific
Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352.

Action ID No. 199502844
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402 -1890
PUBLIC NOTICE
August 28, 1997
MILITARY TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT COMMAND, MILITARY OCEAN
TERMINAL, SUNNY POINT, Southport, North Carolina 28461 -5000, has applied for a
modification to its Department of the Army (DA) permit that authorizes the DEEPENING,
WIDENING AND MAINTENANCE OF ACCESS CHANNELS, THE DEEPENING,
WIDENING AND MAINTENANCE OF CONNECTING CHANNELS AND BASINS,
WIDENING OF THE CENTER BASIN AND THE TRANSPORTATION OF DREDGED
MATERIAL FOR OCEAN DISPOSAL ON THE CAPE FEAR RIVER, MILITARY OCEAN
TERMINAL, SUNNY POINT (MOTSU), SOUTHPORT, Brunswick County, North Carolina.
The application for the basic work was advertised by public notice on May 11, 1995. The DA
permit for the basic work was issued on July 27, 1995. Work was last completed in October
1996, and was performed by bucket and barge dredged with disposal of dredged material in
Wilmington Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site (ODMDS). Periodic maintenance using
clamshell, hydraulic pipeline, or hopper dredge (without overflow) is authorized by the existing
permit until July 27, 2005. The expiration date of the authorization is to remain unchanged.
The proposed modification involves adding the ALTERNATIVE MAINTENANCE
METHOD OF HOPPER DREDGING WITH OVERFLOW WITH DISPOSAL IN THE
ODMDS, Hopper dredges can hold about twice as much sediment if the dredge is allowed to
overflow water to obtain an economic load. This will reduce overall dredging time and costs.
The following description of the work is taken from data provided by the applicant assisted
by the Environmental Resources Section, Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers. Plans
submitted with the application for permit modification are the same as in the May 11, 1995
public notice, as the area to be maintained is the same and the average annual maintenance
volume remains about 1 million cubic yards. Plans showing the maintenance area are included
with this public notice.
Impacts associated with overflow of a hopper dredge are described in the Environmental
Assessment (EA), Use of Horner Dredge with Overflow as an Additional Maintenance Dredaing
Method for Portions of Wilmington Harbor, North Carolina, July 1997, Wilmington District
Corps of Engineers. In summary, the EA indicates that the turbidity and suspended sediment
plume from the overflow of a hopper dredge was monitored twice in Wilmington Harbor March
27, 1997. One of the events was the overflow of sediments from the south basin at MOTSU.
The results indicates that both suspended sediments and turbidity levels approached background

levels within 1,600 feet of the dredge. Temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen were not
altered by overflow.
Additional determinations after publication of the EA indicate that if the background
sedimentation rate in the areas surrounding MOTSU is 1.0 cm per year, the proposed hopper
dredging with overflow would add at most an additional 0.55 cm per year. There are no primary
nursery or shell fishing areas located near the MOTSU facility that could be impacted by the
dredging alternative.
By letter of June 12, 1995, the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management ( NCDCM)
agreed that the basic work was consistent with the North Carolina Coastal Zone Management
Plan. The applicant has determined that the proposed additional work is also consistent with this
Plan and has submitted this determination to the NCDCM for their review and concurrence.
Pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, on May 11, 1995, the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality ( NCDWQ) issued Water Quality Certification No. 2668, for the basic
work. The applicant has applied to the NCDWQ for a modification of this Certification.
The requested Department of the Army (DA) permit modification will be denied if any
required State or local authorization and /or certification is denied. The permittee is required to
present plans to the District Engineer a minimum of two (2) weeks before commencement of any
maintenance, and all maintenance must be performed according to Federal, State, and local
permits and regulations governing such activities at the time the maintenance is undertaken. A
condition of the basic permit, recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), indicates that dredged materials may not be placed in the Wilmington Offshore Dredged
Material Disposal Site (ODMDS) after June 30, 1998, without reevaluation. This reevaluation is
in process.
This application for permit modification is being considered pursuant to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Any person may request, in writing within the comment
period specified in this notice, that a public hearing be held to consider this application.
Requests for public hearing shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public
hearing.
The District Engineer has consulted the latest published version of the National Register of
Historic Places for the presence or absence of registered properties, or properties listed as being
eligible for inclusion therein, and this site is not registered property or property listed as being
eligible for inclusion in the Register. Consultation of the National Register is the extent of
cultural resource investigations by the District Engineer, and he is otherwise unaware of the
presence of such resources. Presently, unknown archeological, scientific, prehistorical, or
historical data may be lost or destroyed by work under the requested permit modification.
2

The District Engineer, based on available information, is not aware that the proposed
additional activity would affect species, or their critical habitat, designated as endangered or
threatened pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
The decision, whether to modify this permit, will be based on an evaluation of the probable
impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed additional work and its intended use on
the public interest. Evaluation of the probable impacts that the proposed activity may have on
the public interest requires a careful weighing of all those factors that become relevant in each
particular case. The benefits that may be expected to accrue from the proposal must be balanced
against its foreseeable detriments. The decision whether to authorize a proposal, and if so the
conditions under which it will be allowed to occur, are therefore decided by the outcome of the
general balancing process. That decision should reflect the national concern for both protection
and use of important resources. All factors that may be relevant to the proposal must be
considered including the cumulative effects of it. Among those are conservation, economics,
aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values,
flood hazards and flood plain values (according to Executive Order 11988), land use, navigation,
shore 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. For activities involving the placement of
dredged or fill materials in waters of the United States, a permit will be denied if the discharge
that would be authorized would not comply with the Environmental Protection Agencies'
404(b)(1) guidelines. Subject to the preceding sentence and any other applicable guidelines or
criteria, a permit will be granted unless the District Engineer decides that it would be contrary to
the public interest.
The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State and local
agencies and officials; Indian Tribes and other interested parties to consider and evaluate the
impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps of
Engineers to decide whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for this proposal. To
make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species, historic
properties, water quality, general environmental effects and the other public interest factors
listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA)
and /or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA). Comments are also used to decide the need for a public hearing and to decide the
public interest of the proposed activity.
Generally, the decision whether to modify this Department of the Army (DA) permit will
not be made until the North Carolina Division of Water Quality ( NCDWQ) modifies, denies, or
waives State certification required by Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The NCDWQ
considers whether the additional, proposed work will comply with Sections 301, 302, 306, and
307 of the Clean Water Act. The application and this public notice for the Department of the
Army (DA) permit serves as application to the NCDWQ for modification of certification.

Additional information regarding the Clean Water Act certification may be reviewed at the
offices of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), 4401 Reedy Creek Road,
Raleigh, North Carolina. Copies of such materials will be furnished to any person requesting
copies upon payment of reproduction costs.
All persons wanting to make comments regarding the application for Clean Water Act
certification should do so in writing delivered to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
4401 Reedy Creek Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27607, on or before September 22, 1997,
Attention: Mr. John Dorney.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will be received in
this office, Attention: Mr. Allen Davis, until 4:15 p.m., September 26, 1997, or telephone
(910) 251 -4466.
S

1,�.�'

CORT• OT ,NO,cc.s
REAVES PaNr CHANAV
„' a� �«�ou ►y w fol uow WA M4
ypM1
UALLY
DREDGED ANN
ma=r
4
AREA NOT
• ROUTINELY D
UPPER MIDN,dHr CHANNN
HAVE R L/ FF
VIGATION 3A4CFT MLW %glTH RIVER
PPIOX NRDEPTH OF DREDGING.
PR03ECT OVERDEPTH
2 F,r ALLOWABLE
Current MOT navigation facilities.
low
KME t:a000 T � OF �

/
/
E 2315000 + + t�
REAVES PONT CHAAWI —
+ E 2320000 + + + }
tao 0 300 600 500 1200 1500
_ .
SCALE IN FEET
MOTES$ A
Figure 3a. Proposed improvements, MOTSU South Basin (Basin No. 1) 1: �d"T3iEMTMMAD`�1M Tp A`ST0�AI TE "�t
ANE
SeT N NpF r1
+ E 2316OW + +
+
+ +
PROJECTED SLOPE INTERCEPT
BASH N0.1
+ E 2311000 PROPOSED CHANNEL PRISM LINE
_r }
+ a
EXISTING CHANNEL PRISM LINE
.• �••� /
\
.. /
/
yam•• "
/
PROJECTED SLOPE INTERCEPT
........ �r
'
PROPOSED CHANNEL PRISM LINE
+ E 2311000 �- / / / /
4
i..
EXISTING CHANNEL PRISM LINE
+
/
/
E 2315000 + + t�
REAVES PONT CHAAWI —
+ E 2320000 + + + }
tao 0 300 600 500 1200 1500
_ .
SCALE IN FEET
MOTES$ A
Figure 3a. Proposed improvements, MOTSU South Basin (Basin No. 1) 1: �d"T3iEMTMMAD`�1M Tp A`ST0�AI TE "�t
ANE
SeT N NpF r1

Ar
00"El-
CIA
ExtSt ,4�
PWROSE0 s, or E tit
?%wEC -mo
NX
tko.,l
loEvtCc?l
SLOE J" A-
Ar "ou
Er SL cs A-Nt "
A E0
"'03ic,
S,00
?wo
ISO
"Well-
+ WL ?ftlSYA'-lV4E
ctkNvk
Eli$
LOWER WDNK:HT CMMWL
Baste �as�
Ptopos ea irnpt °ve�ents,
A- t 21201,10
1500
900
6
500
SOLE
IVIA Co 10
so, SSjf
%. GNP� —.,-

A
+ E 2316000 + + + + +
i 'x 3;--m
+ E 2317000 + +
+
} +
1-
+ E 2315000 \ \ +
+ �.•
+ +
,�•
aim No. 3.
+ E 2315000 + + .
+
••�,
+ E 2320000
I
I I
I I
II
ISO 0 300 600 SOO 1200 1800
SCALE IN FEET
LOWER 1.DNDNT Cww1EL
Figure 3c. MOTSU North Basin (Basin
No.3). No improvements planned,
NOTESI
will be maintained.
1- CONTOUR ELEVATIONS REFER TO LOCAL Y.L.W.
2- GRID BASED ON NORTH CAROL NA STATE PLANE
Current conditions
COORDINATE STSTU. " 63

� a1Q u�a�0 11
Q s
c�
'N+NpyON \Y'l \M
n
C✓� %'��' ;1��' � d r � ��wv'r° }y.y�M ..fit ,{'t � .
SIR .
A010 .11wo
,`0c-
x
0
Oo � �mZt.M
Is
t�
r

R�1 N N\- A
E NIA E
PRA aG Z N�
N� p0
SUN
5•
Figure
by
t!
'9 01
-dear
Cape
1r.1
A4
r.G" isp °sal slte D
vaE eE a�etial d
end wedged m
�OTSU
r
of

970741
MILITARY OCEAN TERMINAL, SUNNY POINT ( MOTSU)
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
1. DATE: August 28, 1997
2. NAME /ADDRESS OF AGENT: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402 -1890
3. RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL AT MOTSU:
COMMANDER, 1303rd Major Port Command
Director of Public Works
ATTN: MTESU -PW /Hauck
Military Ocean Terminal, Sunny Point
Southport, North Carolina 28461 -5000
4. NAME OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTACT: Frank Yelverton
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (910) 251 -4640
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance of Military Ocean Terminal, Sunny Point
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: MOTSU is a military port terminal which
serves the public as an important national defense facility. MOTSU was recently
authorized to deepen and widen the terminal's basins and entrance channels. This
work was completed in October 1997. Periodic maintenance using clamshell, hydraulic
pipeline, or hopper dredge (without overflow) is authorized. This application requests
adding the alternative maintenance method of hopper dredging with overflow with
disposal in the Wilmington Harbor Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site. Hopper
dredges can hold about twice as much sediment if the dredge is allowed to overflow
water to obtain an economic load. This will reduce overall dredging time and costs.
The basins at MOTSU are currently maintained and are anticipated to be
maintained on a 1 year frequency. The average annual volume to be removed from
these channels is about 1 million cubic yards.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Greater dredging efficiency without adverse
impacts to the environment.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: Fall 1997

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402 -1890
IN REPLY REFER TO September 3, 1997
Environmental Resources Section
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27687 -7687
Dear Mr. Dorney:
2537
9'7 0i"�
I have enclosed an Application for 401 Water Quality Certification, pursuant to
Section 401 of Public Law 95 -217, for an additional maintenance dredging method for
the Military Ocean Terminal, Sunny Point ( MOTSU). We are applying for this
certification on behalf of MOTSU.
MOTSU, located on the lower Cape Fear River, is a military port terminal which
serves the public as an important national defense facility. MOTSU was recently
authorized to deepen and widen the terminal's basins and entrance channels. This
work was completed in October 1996. Periodic maintenance using clamshell, hydraulic
pipeline, or hopper dredge (without overflow) is authorized. This application requests
adding the alternative maintenance method of hopper dredging with overflow. A
request has also been made to modify the Department of the Army (DOA), Corps of
Engineers permit to allow hopper dredge overflow. This modification request was
advertised by DOA public notice dated August 28, 1997, with Action ID No. 199502844.
A copy of the public notice is enclosed.
Should you have any questions concerning the application, please contact
Mr. Frank Yelverton, Environmental Resources Section, Wilmington District, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, (910) 251 -4640.
Sincerely,
C. E. Sh ord, Jr., E.
Acting hief, Engineering
and Planning Division
Enclosure (7 copies)

-2-
Copy Furnished:
Mr. Jim Bushardt
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405 -3845
COMMANDER, 1303rd Major Port Command
Director of Public Works
ATTN: MTESU -PW /Hauck
Military Ocean Terminal, Sunny Point
Southport, North Carolina 28461 -5000

10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 1 -4 months each year
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material (overflow from a hopper dredge)
Fill Material
12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Southport, North Carolina
County: Brunswick
Drainage Basin: Cape Fear
Receiving Waters: Cape Fear River
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable due to tides
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: Samples of
bottom sediments from the basin at MOTSU were collected in 1992 and tested to evaluate
the toxicity and bioaccumulation potential of chemical contaminants which may be
associated with those maintenance sediment materials (Ward et al., 1993). These site
specific test results indicate that the maintenance sediments meet the testing criteria of the
Environmental Protection Agency's Ocean Dumping Regulations and Criteria and are,
therefore, acceptable for transportation for ocean dumping under Section 103 of the
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended. Chemical tests
were again performed on sediment samples taken in 1996 from MOTSU. The results of
these tests also indicate that the sediments are acceptable for ocean disposal (USACE,
1997). Based on these results, the maintenance material is not considered to be
contaminated.
Impacts associated with overflow of a hopper dredge are described in the
Environmental Assessment (EA), Use of Hopper Dredqe with Overflow as an Additional
Maintenance Dredqinq Method for Portions of Wilmington Harbor, North Carolina,
dated July 1997, Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In summary, the
EA indicates that the turbidity and suspended sediment plume from the overflow of a
hopper dredge was monitored twice in Wilmington Harbor (March 27, 1997). One of
the events was the overflow of sediments from the south basin at MOTSU. The results
indicate that both suspended sediments and turbidity levels approached background
levels within 1,600 feet of the dredge. Temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen
were not altered by overflow.
2

Additional determinations, after publication of the EA, indicate that if the
background sedimentation rate in the areas surrounding MOTSU is 1.0 cm per year,
the proposed hopper dredging with overflow would add, at most, an additional 0.55 cm
per year. There are no primary nursery or shellfishing areas located near the MOTSU
facility that could be impacted by the dredging alternative.
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS SA, HOW, OR
ORW?
YES
X 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: See 7, 8, and 17.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR
USE ON THIS PROPERTY?
X YES NO IF YES, EXPLAIN:
Water Quality Certificate No. 2668 issued May 11, 1995 - Improvements to
Navigation Basins and Entrance Channels at MOTSU.
I certify that all information contained herein or in support thereof is true and correct
to the best of my knowledge.
DATE: y
C. E. Shufor , Jr., P.L.
Acting Chie , Engineering
and Planning Division
3

REFERENCES:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District. 1997. Tier I Evaluation of Dredge
Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal, Wilmington Harbor and Military Ocean
Terminal, Sunny Point, North Carolina.
Ward, J. A., M. R. Pinza, M. E. Barrows, and J. Q. Word. 1993. Ecological Evaluation
of Proposed Dredged Material From Wilmington Harbor and Military Ocean
Terminal, Sunny Point, North Carolina. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, North Carolina District, Under a Related Services Agreement with the
U.S. Department of Energy Contract DE- AC06 -76RLO 1830 by Battelle, Pacific
Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352.

I_
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402 -1890
IN REPLY REFER TO August 29, 1997
Environmental Resources Section
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27687 -7687
Dear Mr. Dorney:
I have enclosed an application for Water Quality Certification, pursuant to
Section 401 of Public Law 95 -217, for use of the hopper dredge CURRITUCK
with overflow or sidecast dredge as additional maintenance dredging methods
for the Drum Inlet connecting channel, Carteret County, North Carolina. The
environmental assessment (EA) for the proposed action is also enclosed.
Messrs. Jim Gregson and Greg Price, formerly with your Division, have been
involved in field trips and /or discussions on this project.
Should you have any questions concerning the application, please contact
Mr. Frank Yelverton, Environmental Resources Section, at (910) 251 -4640.
4'
SEP i

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
DATE: August 22, 1997
2. NAME /ADDRESS: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
Post Office 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: Frank Yelverton
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (910) 251 -4640
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance of Drum Inlet
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: Construction of the Drum Inlet channel was
completed in March 1997. Maintenance of the connecting channel (Tangents A, B, and C)
(figure 1) was anticipated to be every 2 -3 years with a volume of 100,000 cubic yards.
Maintenance was to be performed by a hydraulic pipeline dredge with disposal on the beach of
Core Banks. However with experience following construction, maintenance in the connecting
channel will probably be every 3 -6 months with 30,000- 90,000 cubic yards of sand removed
during each event. Because of the increased frequency with relatively small volumes, the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers sidecast dredges and hopper dredge CURRITUCK need to be added
as maintenance dredging options for the connecting channel.
A sidecast dredge has two drag arms (one on each side) that "vacuum" the sediment as
the arms drag along the bottom. The sediment is pumped through a discharge pipe that is
above the water surface and perpendicular to the dredge. The discharge pipe extends about
60 feet beyond the side of the dredge. This pipe distance and force from the pumps generally
results in the sediment being deposited 85 to 100 feet from the dredge. The sediment is
discharged on the side of the channel where the predominant currents would tend to move the
sediment away from the channel. The Corps of Engineers has three sidecast dredges (all
operated by the Wilmington District), and one would generally be available to maintain Drum
Inlet.
The hopper dredge CURRITUCK has drag arms similar to a sidecast dredge, but the
sediment is pumped into the dredge's hopper. The water in the hopper is overflowed to
provide an economic load of sand since the dredged slurry entering the hopper contains about

20 percent sand and 80 percent water. Once the hopper is full of sand (about 300 cubic
yards), the sediment is taken to nearshore ocean waters (normally -6 to -10 feet mean low
water) where the split hull hopper is opened and the sediments are deposited. The
CURRITUCK is the only small hopper dredge the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has (operated
by the Wilmington District) that is capable of maintaining Drum Inlet, and commercial hopper
dredges as small as the CURRITUCK do not exist. Due to the high demand for this dredge
outside of the District, it is only available in North Carolina about 6 months each year (August -
October and December - February). When available, the hopper dredge CURRITUCK will be
used, instead of a sidecast dredge, for removal of shoals in the connecting channel.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK:. Use of a hydraulic pipeline dredge with disposal on
the beach is the only method currently allowed for the maintenance of the Drum Inlet
connecting channel. Due to recreational fishing and sea turtle and colonial waterbird nesting,
hydraulic pipeline dredging with disposal on the beach of Core Banks is permitted from
December 15 to March 31. Since shoals block the connecting channel at other times of the
year, the sidecast dredge or the hopper dredge CURRITUCK may be needed at any time of
the year.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: Fall 1997
10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 2 -4 weeks every 3 -6 months
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material (overflow from a hopper dredge, and discharge from a
sidecast dredge)
Fill Material
12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Atlantic, North Carolina
County: Carteret
Drainage Basin: White Oak River
Receiving Waters: Core Sound and Atlantic Ocean
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable, due to tides
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: Based on sediment
borings in the dredged channel and vicinity, all sediments to be dredged are greater than 94
percent sand. Also, the sediments are distant from any known sources of pollution. The
environmental assessment indicates that turbidity and suspended sediments associated with the
hopper overflow and sidecast discharge should not adversely impact the environment.

15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS SA, HQW, OR ORW?
X YES (ORW) 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: See 7, 8, and 17.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE
ON THIS PROPERTY?
X YES NO IF YES, EXPLAIN:
Water Quality Certificate No. 2981 issued March 25, 1995 - Maintenance of Drum Inlet.
The proposed action is for the same project, except that sidecast dredging and hopper
dredging with the CURRITUCK would be included as maintenance methods for the connecting
channel.
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, J ., P.�. /
Acting Chief, gineering and
Planning Division

N470000
N4175M
N416M
N412600
N410000
N407600
E27971500 CJ.H000U0 [covcvvv • - -- - - -- ----
E2797500 E2800000
E2802600 E2805000 E2807500 E2810000
FIGURE I.
SEAGRASS BEDS ON 1997 PHOTOGRAPHY
AT DRUM INLET, NC
j
SCALE: 1" = 2000'
,
1996 GRASS BEDS j
1997 GRASS BEDS
I Feet
2000 0 2000
4000
GRID BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE (NAD83) `TOf"uF""oiisaiN[LeNCwrn oislne:r.
nY
N11 ~ITON,'gnlll ---Hy
DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: MAY 17. 1997
1997 GRASS BEDS DIGITIZED FROM PHOTOGRAPHY
AMERICAN GEOGRAPHIC DATA INC.
5110 OLEANDER DRIVE SUITE 108
DATED MAY 17, 1997
WILMINGTON. NC 28403
(910) 39 2 -14 96
1996 GRASS BEDS DIGITIZED FROM PHOTOGRAPHY
DATED MAY 23. 1996
i
N420000
N417500
N416000
N412600
N410000
N407500

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
DATE: August 22, 1997
2. NAME /ADDRESS: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
Post Office 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: Frank Yelverton
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (910) 251 -4640
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance of Drum Inlet
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: Construction of the Drum Inlet channel was
completed in March 1997. Maintenance of the connecting channel (Tangents A, B, and C)
(figure 1) was anticipated to be every 2 -3 years with a volume of 100,000 cubic yards.
Maintenance was to be performed by a hydraulic pipeline dredge with disposal on the beach of
Core Banks. However with experience following construction, maintenance in the connecting
channel will probably be every 3 -6 months with 30,000- 90,000 cubic yards of sand removed
during each event. Because of the increased frequency with relatively small volumes, the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers sidecast dredges and hopper dredge CURRITUCK need to be added
as maintenance dredging options for the connecting channel.
A sidecast dredge has two drag arms (one on each side) that "vacuum" the sediment as
the arms drag along the bottom. The sediment is pumped through a discharge pipe that is
above the water surface and perpendicular to the dredge. The discharge pipe extends about
60 feet beyond the side of the dredge. This pipe distance and force from the pumps generally
results in the sediment being deposited 85 to 100 feet from the dredge. The sediment is
discharged on the side of the channel where the predominant currents would tend to move the
sediment away from the channel. The Corps of Engineers has three sidecast dredges (all
operated by the Wilmington District), and one would generally be available to maintain Drum
Inlet.
The hopper dredge CURRITUCK has drag arms similar to a sidecast dredge, but the
sediment is pumped into the dredge's hopper. The water in the hopper is overflowed to
provide an economic load of sand since the dredged slurry entering the hopper contains about

20 percent sand and 80 percent water. Once the hopper is full of sand (about 300 cubic
yards), the sediment is taken to nearshore ocean waters (normally -6 to -10 feet mean low
water) where the split hull hopper is opened and the sediments are deposited. The
CURRITUCK is the only small hopper dredge the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has (operated
by the Wilmington District) that is capable of maintaining Drum Inlet, and commercial hopper
dredges as small as the CURRITUCK do not exist. Due to the high demand for this dredge
outside of the District, it is only available in North Carolina about 6 months each year (August -
October and December - February). When available, the hopper dredge CURRITUCK will be
used, instead of a sidecast dredge, for removal of shoals in the connecting channel.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK:. Use of a hydraulic pipeline dredge with disposal on
the beach is the only method currently allowed for the maintenance of the Drum Inlet
connecting channel. Due to recreational fishing and sea turtle and colonial waterbird nesting,
hydraulic pipeline dredging with disposal on the beach of Core Banks is permitted from
December 15 to March 31. Since shoals block the connecting channel at other times of the
year, the sidecast dredge or the hopper dredge CURRITUCK may be needed at any time of
the year.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: Fall 1997
10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 2 -4 weeks every 3 -6 months
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material (overflow from a hopper dredge, and discharge from a
sidecast dredge)
Fill Material
12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Atlantic, North Carolina
County: Carteret
Drainage Basin: White Oak River
Receiving Waters: Core Sound and Atlantic Ocean
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable, due to tides
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: Based on sediment
borings in the dredged channel and vicinity, all sediments to be dredged are greater than 94
percent sand. Also, the sediments are distant from any known sources of pollution. The
environmental assessment indicates that turbidity and suspended sediments associated with the
hopper overflow and sidecast discharge should not adversely impact the environment.

15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS SA. HOW. OR ORW?
X YES (ORW) 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: See 7, 8, and 17.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE
ON THIS PROPERTY?
X YES NO IF YES, EXPLAIN:
Water Quality Certificate No. 2981 issued March 25, 1995 - Maintenance of Drum Inlet.
The proposed action is for the same project, except that sidecast dredging and hopper
dredging with the CURRITUCK would be included as maintenance methods for the connecting
channel.
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, J /, P. t.
Acting Chief, Ogineering and
Planning Division

N420000
14417800
N416000
N412600
N410000
N407500
127916M E2800000 E2902500 E2806000 E2807600 E2810000
E2797500 E2800000
E2802500
FIGURE I.
SEAGRASS BEDS ON 1997 PHOTOGRAPHY
AT DRUM INLET, NC
SCALE: 1" = 2000'
�",�
1996 GRASS BEDS
® �,__,�
1997 GRASS BEDS
Feet
2000 0 2000
4000
GRID BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE (NAD83) M1Op1QO� "41°
caw a 9V09RERE
w111�1910" NORI" GI1a1M �Y
DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: MAY 17. 1997
1997 GRASS BEDS DIGITIZED FROM PHOTOGRAPHY
A74ERICAN DE00RAPW DATA iNC.
57100LEANDEII OVINE, SUITE 108
DATED MAY 17. 1997
NMM916TON. NC 29403
1910) 392 -1499
1996 GRASS BEDS DIGITIZED FROM PHOTOGRAPHY
DATED MAY 23. 1998
E2805000 E2807500 E2810000
N420000
N417500
N415000
N412500
N410000
N4075M

1LA
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
DATE: August 22, 1997
2. NAME /ADDRESS: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
Post Office 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: Frank Yelverton
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (910) 251 -4640
5. TYPE OF APPLICATION: New Application
6. PROJECT NAME: Maintenance of Drum Inlet
7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: Construction of the Drum Inlet channel was
completed in March 1997. Maintenance of the connecting channel (Tangents A, B, and C)
(figure 1) was anticipated to be every 2 -3 years with a volume of 100,000 cubic yards.
Maintenance was to be performed by a hydraulic pipeline dredge with disposal on the beach of
Core Banks. However with experience following construction, maintenance in the connecting
channel will probably be every 3 -6 months with 30,000- 90,000 cubic yards of sand removed
during each event. Because of the increased frequency with relatively small volumes, the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers sidecast dredges and hopper dredge CURRITUCK need to be added
as maintenance dredging options for the connecting channel.
A sidecast dredge has two drag arms (one on each side) that "vacuum" the sediment as
the arms drag along the bottom. The sediment is pumped through a discharge pipe that is
above the water surface and perpendicular to the dredge. The discharge pipe extends about
60 feet beyond the side of the dredge. This pipe distance and force from the pumps generally
results in the sediment being deposited 85 to 100 feet from the dredge. The sediment is
discharged on the side of the channel where the predominant currents would tend to move the
sediment away from the channel. The Corps of Engineers has three sidecast dredges (all
operated by the Wilmington District), and one would generally be available to maintain Drum
Inlet.
The hopper dredge CURRITUCK has drag arms similar to a sidecast dredge, but the
sediment is pumped into the dredge's hopper. The water in the hopper is overflowed to
provide an economic load of sand since the dredged slurry entering the hopper contains about

01
20 percent sand and 80 percent water. Once the hopper is full of sand (about 300 cubic
yards), the sediment is taken to nearshore ocean waters (normally -6 to -10 feet mean low
water) where the split hull hopper is opened and the sediments are deposited. The
CURRITUCK is the only small hopper dredge the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has (operated
by the Wilmington District) that is capable of maintaining Drum Inlet, and commercial hopper
dredges as small as the CURRITUCK do not exist. Due to the high demand for this dredge
outside of the District, it is only available in North Carolina about 6 months each year (August -
October and December - February). When available, the hopper dredge CURRITUCK will be
used, instead of a sidecast dredge, for removal of shoals in the connecting channel.
8. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK:. Use of a hydraulic pipeline dredge with disposal on
the beach is the only method currently allowed for the maintenance of the Drum Inlet
connecting channel. Due to recreational fishing and sea turtle and colonial waterbird nesting,
hydraulic pipeline dredging with disposal on the beach of Core Banks is permitted from
December 15 to March 31. Since shoals block the connecting channel at other times of the
year, the sidecast dredge or the hopper dredge CURRITUCK may be needed at any time of
the year.
9. PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO BEGIN: Fall 1997
10. DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 2 -4 weeks every 3 -6 months
11. DISCHARGE OF:
X Dredged Material (overflow from a hopper dredge, and discharge from a
sidecast dredge)
Fill Material
12. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE:
Municipality: Atlantic, North Carolina
County: Carteret
Drainage Basin: White Oak River
Receiving Waters: Core Sound and Atlantic Ocean
13. NATURE OF RECEIVING WATERS:
Type: Coastal
Nature: Salt
Direction of Flow: Variable, due to tides
14. TYPE OF DISCHARGE INCLUDING CHEMICAL COMPOSITION: Based on sediment
borings in the dredged channel and vicinity, all sediments to be dredged are greater than 94
percent sand. Also, the sediments are distant from any known sources of pollution. The
environmental assessment indicates that turbidity and suspended sediments associated with the
hopper overflow and sidecast discharge should not adversely impact the environment.

It
15. PROJECTED FUTURE VARIATION IN THE NATURE OF THE DISCHARGE: None.
16. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS SA, HQW, OR ORW?
X YES (ORW)
m
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: See 7, 8, and 17.
19. HAVE ANY SECTION 401 CERTIFICATES BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE
ON THIS PROPERTY?
X YES NO IF YES, EXPLAIN:
Water Quality Certificate No. 2981 issued March 25, 1995 - Maintenance of Drum Inlet.
The proposed action is for the same project, except that sidecast dredging and hopper
dredging with the CURRITUCK would be included as maintenance methods for the connecting
channel.
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, J ., P.�. 2and
Acting Chief, gineerin
Planning Division

E2797600
I
N420000
"417000
N416000
N4126M
N410000
N407500
E28000U0 E2802500
E2805000 E2807600 E2810000
E2797500 E2800000
E2802500
FIGURE I.
SEAGRASS BEDS ON 1997 PHOTOGRAPHY
AT DRUM INLET, NC
SCALE: 1" = 2000'
jpF ,l
1996 GRASS BEDS
1997 GRASS BEDS
Feet
2000 0 2000
4000
GRID BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE (NAD83( I rRaoucto N,w nlew~ e6m" .C—Mi.
cart a MAWR&
�MU4MTOIl raRm u11aU1a� er
DATE Of PHOTOGRAPHY! MAY 17. 1997
1897 GRASS BEDS DIGITIZED FROM PHOTOGRAPHY
AMERICAN GEOOMM/IC OATH INC.
DATED MAY 17, 1997
6710OLFANOEM ORNL SUITE 106
WILMINGTON. NC 28403
(9101 392.1498
1998 GRASS BEDS DIGITIZED FROM PHOTOGRAPHY
DATED MAY 23. 1 988
E2805000 E2807500 E2810000
N420000
N417500
N416000
N412500
N410000
N407500

1 I
1l,l1
US ARMY CORPS
OF ENGINEERS
Wilmington District
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
USE OF THE HOPPER DREDGE CURRITUCK
WITH OVERFLOW OR SIDECAST DREDGE
AS ADDITIONAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING METHODS
FOR DRUM INLET
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
AUGUST 1997

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
USE OF THE HOPPER DREDGE CURRITUCK
WITH OVERFLOW OR SIDECAST DREDGE
AS ADDITIONAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING METHODS
FOR DRUM INLET
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Headinq
Page No.
1.00 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................... ..............................1
2.00 PURPOSE AND NEED ............................................................ ..............................1
3.00 DREDGING AND DISPOSAL METHODS ................................ ..............................2
3.01 Hydraulic Pipeline Dredge ............................................ ..............................2
3.02 Sidecast Dredges and the Hopper Dredge CURRITUCK ...........................3
4.00 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ................................................. ..............................4
4.01 Water Quality ................................................................ ..............................4
4.02 Aquatic Resources ....................................................... ..............................5
4.03 Endangered Species .................................................... ..............................8
4.04 Development and Economic Justification ..................... ..............................9
4.05 Inlet Stability ................................................................. ..............................9
5.00 COORDINATION ..................................................................... .............................10
6.00 CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION FOR NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ............................................... .............................10
7.00 LIST OF RECIPIENTS ............................................................ .............................10
8.00 POINT OF CONTACT ............................................................. .............................13
9.00 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS ...................................... .............................13
10.00 REFERENCES ...................................................................... .............................14
11.00 FINDING ................................................................................ .............................14
u

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
USE OF THE HOPPER DREDGE CURRITUCK
WITH OVERFLOW OR SIDECAST DREDGE
AS ADDITIONAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING METHODS
FOR DRUM INLET
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd)
TABLES
(Follows Page 14)
TABLE 1. Sidecast Dredge Discharge in Tangent A, Drum Inlet, North Carolina.
TABLE 2. Sidecast Dredge Discharge in Tangent B, Drum Inlet, North Carolina.
TABLE 3. Shoals Enlarged by Sidecast Dredging at Drum Inlet, North Carolina.
FIGURES
(Follows Tables)
FIGURE 1. Seagrass Beds on 1997 Photography at Drum Inlet, North Carolina.
ATTACHMENTS
(Follows Tables and Figures)
ATTACHMENT A. Evaluation of Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
USE OF THE HOPPER DREDGE CURRITUCK
WITH OVERFLOW OR SIDECAST DREDGE
AS ADDITIONAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING METHODS
FOR DRUM INLET
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
August 1997
1.00 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The maintenance of Drum Inlet was discussed in detail in the
environmental assessment (EA) dated January 1995, and letter amendment
dated April 28, 1995 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 1995x).
According to that EA, maintenance of the bar channel (inlet area, seaward of
Tangent C, figure 1) would be by sidecast dredge or the hopper dredge
CURRITUCK and maintenance of the connecting channel (Tangents A, B, and
C) would be by hydraulic pipeline dredge with disposal on the beach of Core
Banks. This new EA adds using a sidecast dredge or the hopper dredge
CURRITUCK for the maintenance of the connecting channel.
Maintenance frequency of the connecting channel was anticipated to be
every 2 -3 years with a volume of 100,000 cubic yards. However with experience
following construction, maintenance in the connecting channel will probably be
every 3 -6 months with 30,000- 90,000 cubic yards of sand removed during each
event. Because of the increased frequency with relatively small volumes the
sidecast dredges and the CURRITUCK need to be added as maintenance
options for the connecting channel. Disposal by the sidecast dredge would be
either north or south of the channel depending on which way the predominant
current is flowing (generally north during the warmer months and south during
the cooler months). The CURRITUCK would dispose of the sand in the
nearshore ocean area.
2.00 PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose of this EA is to discuss the need for and impacts of using a
sidecast dredge or the hopper dredge CURRITUCK with overflow as additional
maintenance dredging methods for the Drum Inlet connecting channel. This EA
is also intended to amend the EA for the Maintenance of Drum Inlet, Carteret
County, North Carolina (USACE, 1995a) to include these additional
maintenance methods.

The following reasons show why these additional maintenance methods
are needed:
a. Maintenance frequency of the connecting channel is greater than
anticipated.
b. Due to recreational fishing and sea turtle and colonial waterbird
nesting, hydraulic pipeline dredging with disposal on the beach of Core Banks is
permitted from December 15 to March 31. Shoals block the connecting channel
at other times of the year.
c. Mobilizing a hydraulic pipeline dredge with 1 -2 miles of pipeline to the
beach disposal area for small shoals is not practical.
The following are in addition to the indicated need:
a. Sidecast dredging and hopper dredging with overflow in the connecting
channel should not adversely impact the environment.
b. The increased frequency of maintenance of the connecting channel will
not alter the economic justification of the project, due to the efficiency of the
sidecast dredge and the CURRITUCK.
3.00 DREDGING AND DISPOSAL METHODS
The existing and proposed dredging and disposal methods in the
connecting channel are described below:
3.01 Hvdraulic Pipeline Dredge. According to USACE, 1995a, only
maintenance dredging in the connecting channel is allowed by hydraulic pipeline
dredge. The dredged material would be pumped to the beaches of Core Banks
north or south of the inlet and placed below the limit of the wave uprush zone to
minimize alterations and impacts to the upland portion of the beach. The wave
uprush zone is the part of the beach wetted by the normal wave uprush. The
beach is owned by the National Park Service, Cape Lookout National Seashore
(Service), and a Special Use Permit is required from the Service prior to any
disposal activities. Maintenance efforts in this channel with a hydraulic pipeline
dredge were anticipated to involve dredging approximately 100,000 cubic yards
every 2 -3 years. This maintenance would be done at the same time as the
maintenance of the waterway in Core Sound in order to eliminate the high cost
for separate mobilization.
2

Hydraulic pipeline dredging is restricted to the connecting channel
because seaward of Tangent C (figure 1) the wave environment is too intense
for conventional pipeline dredge operations. The channel dimensions are too
restrictive for use of an ocean - certified pipeline dredge.
Initial dredging of the connecting channel was completed by hydraulic
pipeline dredge in March 1997. After the dredge left the area, the channel
began to rapidly shoal. Therefore under emergency procedures (Memorandum
of Agreement [MOA] between the Wilmington District and the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, signed December
1986), the sidecast dredge FRY removed about 88,000 cubic yards of sand from
the connecting channel between April 11 and 30, 1997. This material was
deposited adjacent to the north side of Tangents A and B (figure 1), since north
was the predominant direction the currents were flowing. Emergency dredging
was again required under the MOA in early August 1997, just prior to publication
of this EA. The CURRITUCK was to remove about 50,000 cubic yards from the
connecting channel with disposal in the nearshore ocean waters.
3.02 Sidecast Dredqes and the Hopper Dredqe CURRITUCK. Sidecast
dredging with disposal adjacent to the channel is currently only allowed for
maintenance of the bar channel with disposal adjacent to the channel. Hopper
dredging with the CURRITUCK is currently only allowed for maintenance of the
bar channel with disposal in nearshore ocean waters.
A sidecast dredge has two drag arms (one on each side) that "vacuum" the
sediment as the arms drag along the bottom. The sediment is pumped through a
discharge pipe that is above the water surface and perpendicular to the dredge.
The discharge pipe extends about 60 feet beyond the side of the dredge. This
pipe distance and force from the pumps generally results in the sediment being
deposited 85 to 100 feet from the dredge. The sediment is discharged on the
side of the channel where the predominant currents would tend to move the
sediment away from the channel. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has three
sidecast dredges (all operated by the Wilmington District), and one would
generally be available to maintain Drum Inlet.
The CURRITUCK has drag arms similar to a sidecast dredge, but the
sediment is pumped into the dredge's hopper. The water in the hopper is
overflowed to provide an economic load of sand, since the dredged slurry
entering the hopper contains about 20 percent sand and 80 percent water.
Once the hopper is full of sand (about 300 cubic yards), the sediment is taken to
nearshore ocean waters (normally -6 to -10 feet mean low water [m.l.w.]) where
the split hull hopper is opened and the sediments are deposited. The
CURRITUCK is the only small hopper dredge the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
has (operated by the Wilmington District) that is capable of maintaining Drum
t3

Inlet, and commercial hopper dredges as small as the CURRITUCK do not exist.
Due to the high demand for this dredge outside of the District, it is only available
in North Carolina about 6 months each year (August - October and December -
February). When available, the CURRITUCK will be used, instead of a sidecast
dredge, for removal of shoals in the connecting channel.
The use of the sidecast dredge and the CURRITUCK will probably be
needed for maintenance of the connecting channel every 3 -6 months year -
round. As detailed below, these maintenance alternatives and anticipated
frequency should have minimal impact on the environment.
4.00 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The Drum Inlet environment is discussed in detail in USACE, 1995a. This
EA will primarily add information related to the monitoring data collected
April 22, 1997, while the sidecast dredge FRY was operating under emergency
procedures in the Drum Inlet connecting channel.
4.01 Water Quality. The North Carolina water quality classification
assigned to the Drum Inlet area (White Oak Basin) is SA/ORW. SA waters are
suitable for commercial shellfishing and all other tidal salt water uses including
primary and secondary recreation, and fish propagation. ORW (Outstanding
Resource Waters) are unique and special waters of exceptional state or national
recreation or ecological significance which require special protection to maintain
existing uses. The North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) standard
for turbidity for SA/ORW is 25 NTU's. There is no NCDWQ suspended sediment
standard for the area.
Two discharge events from the sidecast dredge FRY were monitored in the
connecting channel where the dredge was working on April 22, 1997. The first
discharge monitored on the dredged material was from the western to the
eastern end of Tangent A. The sediments in Tangent A are about 94 percent
sand and represents the lowest percentage of sand in the connecting channel
since Tangent A is the greatest distance from the inlet. Table 1 generally
indicates a major reduction in suspended sediment concentration and turbidity
with distance from the dredge (the low value at the surface 100 feet from the
discharge pipe was probably due to sampling a clear water pocket). Both
parameters neared background values at 1,500 feet from the dredge. Samples
were not taken beyond 1,500 feet because the turbidity plume associated with
the discharge was no longer visibly evident.
The surface and bottom background turbidity values measured April 22,
1997, were both below 25 NTUs (6 and 14, respectively). At 1,500 feet from the
0

dredge during the discharge test, both the surface and bottom values were 25
NTUs or less (Table 1). This turbidity plume is generally confined to the near
channel area out to 1,500 feet since the dredge is steering into tidal currents
averaging about 1 knot.
The second discharge monitored on the dredged material was from the
eastern to western end of Tangent B. The sediments in Tangent B are about 95
percent sand and contain a higher percentage of sand than Tangent A since
Tangent B is closer to the inlet. Table 2 indicates a general reduction in
suspended sediment concentration and turbidity with distance from the dredge.
Both parameters neared background values at 2,000 feet from the dredge.
Samples were not taken beyond 2,000 feet because the turbidity plume
associated with the discharge was no longer visibly evident.
The surface and bottom background turbidity values for the second
discharge were also both below 25 NTUs (9 and 13, respectively). At 2,000 feet
from the dredge during the discharge test, both the surface and bottom values
were less than 25 NTUs (table 2). As with the first test, the turbidity plume is
generally confined to the near channel area out to 2,000 feet since the dredge is
steering into tidal currents averaging about 1 knot.
Monitoring of turbidity and suspended solids levels in the overflow from the
CURRITUCK has not been performed. However, since the purpose of the
CURRITUCK is to retain sediment in the hopper, the turbidity and suspended
solids levels in the overflow should be less than that monitored for the sidecast
dredge FRY.
Based on the above information, the proposed action should not adversely
impact water quality.
The North Carolina Division of Water Quality will concurrently review this
EA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' request for a Section 401 (P. L. 95-
217) Water Quality Certificate to authorize the work that may impact water
quality under the proposed action. Also, the Section 404(b)(1) evaluation for the
discharge of dredged material is included (Attachment A).
4.02 Aquatic Resources. The only changes to resources from the 1995
Drum Inlet EA (USACE, 1995a) are (1) the increased turbidity and suspended
solids levels associated with discharge from the sidecast dredge and overflow
from the CURRITUCK, and (2) enlarging existing shoals adjacent to the
channel where the sidecast dredge discharges and deposition in the near
shore ocean area by the CURRITUCK.
5

Increased Turbidity and Suspended Solids Levels. As indicated in
section 4.01, the increased turbidity and suspended solids levels associated with
discharge from the sidecast dredge return to background or near background
levels relatively close to the dredge. The dredges could perform maintenance
work at Drum Inlet for 2-4 weeks every 3 -6 months, but when onsite the dredges
do not work continuously. The sidecast dredge usually operates 10 hours per
day (6:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.). The sidecast may dredge a shoal for 20 -30
minutes, and take another 20 -30 minutes to reposition the dredge at the
beginning of the shoal (vessel heads into the current to maintain steerage).
Considering repositioning time and run time to and from the dock at the
beginning and end of the 10 -hour day, the dredge may be moving sediment on
an intermittent basis 4 -5 hours per day.
The hopper dredge CURRITUCK also operates about 10 hours per day.
This vessel dredges an average of 20 minutes to load the hopper (about 300
cubic yards), but about 30 -40 additional minutes are needed for a round trip to
the nearshore ocean disposal location. Considering round trip time to the ocean
and run time to and from the dock at the beginning and end of the 10 -hour day,
the dredge may be moving sediment and overflowing the hopper on an
intermittent basis 3 -4 hours per day.
Due to the low levels of turbidity and suspended solids, intermittent
occurrence, small relative area affected, and lack of primary nursery areas in the
vicinity, marine fishery resources should not be adversely affected.
Enlarginq Existinq Shoals and Deposition in the Nearshore Ocean
Area. All the sediment excavated by a sidecast dredge is deposited adjacent to
the channel where the predominant currents will tend to reduce return of the
sediments to the channel. For example, all the sediments removed by the
sidecast dredge FRY in April 1997 (87,649 cubic yards, 18 days of the period
April 11 - 30, 1997) were placed on the north side of the channel because the
predominant current was running north. According to the captain of the sidecast
dredge FRY, this deposition raised elevation of the shoals adjacent to the
channel up to 2 -3 feet in a total of 3 areas adjacent to the north side of Tangents
A and B. The elevation change of the areas affected by the discharge can not
be accurately determined since a pre- dredging elevation survey was not taken
that included the existing shoaled areas adjacent to the channel.
Aerial photography was taken of the Drum Inlet area on February 16, 1997
(shortly after hydraulic pipeline dredging began in the connecting channel and
was still in Tangent A), and on May 17, 1997, after the emergency sidecast
dredging was complete. Comparison of the photography from these dates
indicates that the areas where the sidecast dredge deposited the sand were

existing shoals, with some of the area on the February photography appearing
intertidal. However, the May 17, 1997, photographs do appear to indicate more
intertidal areas adjacent to the north side of the channel than the February
photographs.
Extensive elevation surveys were performed on May 20 and July 22, 1997
(after emergency sidecast dredging), in the area within 300 feet of the north
edge of Tangents A and B. This data is summarized in table 3. In the area
surveyed on May 20, 1997, about 0.38 acres were 6 inches or less above mean
high water (m.h.w.), and 5.41 acres were above m.l.w. The rest of the area was
subtidal. As indicated above, some of this area was probably intertidal before
sidecast dredging began. The same area was again surveyed on July 22, 1997.
On July 22, 1997, no areas remained above m.h.w., and 3.87 acres were above
m.l.w. (intertidal). Between the May and July surveys, about 55 percent of the
volume of sand on the shoals was dispersed by wind waves and currents in the
open sound. Since this change occurred in about two months, establishing a
permanent area above m.h.w. should be precluded because of an anticipated
maintenance frequency of 3 -6 months, and when available, the CURRITUCK will
be used, instead of a sidecast dredge, for removal of shoals in the connecting
channel.
However, these elevated areas could become permanent features. If so,
benthic resources in the shoals would be suppressed if sidecast dredging is
frequent. Nevertheless, these areas could provide some habitat enhancement
such as loafing and foraging areas for waterbirds, and seagrass beds could
establish on the leeward side of the shoals. This condition will be monitored for
at least the first 2 years of maintenance. Monitoring will include change in
elevation and areal extent of the shoals, and establishment of seagrass beds.
The Drum Inlet area is heavily used by commercial and recreational
fishermen. For example, the area is open to the mechanical harvest of clams
(North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries [NCDMF], 1997). During each
dredging event, the areas where disposal occurs will be at least temporarily
unavailable (due to decreased water depth) for mechanical harvesting.
Excluded from the mechanic harvest area are oyster and clam leases and known
seagrass beds. No leases are located near the project area. Several leases are
located on the mainland near Atlantic, and one lease is located on the Core
Banks side about 6 miles south of Drum Inlet. Therefore, no leases will be
affected by the proposed action.
Based on seagrass mapping, no seagrasses are within 800 feet of the
channel alignment (figure 1). This mapping was based on May 23, 1996, and
F

May 17, 1997, aerial photography; and July 22, 1997, field verification of the
May 1997 photography. Due to the distance to the nearest grass beds, dredging
of the connecting channel by sidecast dredges or the hopper dredge
CURRITUCK should not impact these resources.
The CURRITUCK will dispose of up to 300 cubic yards of sand in the
nearshore (6 -10 feet m.l.w.) ocean area during each dredging cycle (up to 10
times per 10 -hour day). The sand disposed in the active wave environment will
quickly dissipate and should not appreciably affect the nearshore environment.
4.03 Endangered Species. The proposed action will not affect listed
species under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or
the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Endangered species were
discussed in USACE, 1995a. That EA also discussed the year -round use of the
sidecast dredges and the hopper dredge CURRITUCK in the inlet. The May 2,
1995, Biological Assessment also discussed two species (piping plover and
seabeach amaranth) under the jurisdiction of the USFWS (USACE, 1995b). The
NMFS in their letter dated January 31, 1995, did not indicate impacts on listed
species, and the USFWS provided their Biological Opinion on June 30, 1995
(USFWS, 1995). This EA would extend the operation of the sidecast dredges
and the CURRITUCK year -round into the connecting channel as an additional
method of maintenance dredging.
The NMFS listed species have not changed since the 1995 EA. As
indicated in the 1995 EA for species under the NMFS jurisdiction, the operation
of sidecast dredges and the hopper dredge CURRITUCK are not believed
harmful to sea turtles because of the small size of the dragheads, slow speed of
the vessels, and the low suction levels (NMFS, 1991). None of the whales
should be impacted by the proposed action since all the dredging, disposing,
and maneuvering actions would be in the sound or close to the beach and in
shallow water. The shortnose sturgeon has been documented recently for the
Cape Fear River (Moser and Ross, 1993), but no other populations are known
from North Carolina. Therefore, species under the NMFS jurisdiction will not be
affected by the additional maintenance methods.
The only listed species change since the 1995 EA under the USFWS
jurisdiction that may occur in waters affected by the additional proposed
maintenance methods is the manatee (Trichechus manatus). The manatee is a
rare visitor to the area. All of the presently designated critical habitat is in
Florida. From 1919 to 1994 a total of 13 manatees had been observed in
Carteret County (an average of less than one every 5 years), with the most
observed in any year was two. The nearest observation to Drum Inlet was of a
E:3

single individual at Davis in September 1983 and 1993, about 10 miles from the
project area (Schwartz, 1995). Cold winter water temperatures will probably
keep the species from overwintering in the project area. Foods which are used
by the manatee in North Carolina are unknown. In Florida, their diet consists
primarily of vascular plants. Project maintenance will involve no dredging of or
disposal near submerged grass beds and minimal change to the physical habitat
of the estuary. Overall estuarine and nearshore productivity should remain
unchanged throughout the project area. Therefore, potential food sources for the
manatee should not be affected.
The dredging equipment used for maintenance of the project is slow
moving and the crew is on constant watch due to the narrow channels in which
the vessels are operating. In the rare event that a manatee is observed by the
crew, dredging operations will stop until the manatee leaves the area.
Therefore, since the occurrence of a manatee is rare, the potential food source
will not be affected, and dredging operations will stop if a manatee is observed
in the area, the proposed action will not affect the manatee.
All other species under jurisdiction of the USFWS are terrestrial and the
proposed action will not impact terrestrial habitats. Therefore, no affect is
anticipated on such species.
4.04 Development and Economic Justification. As indicated in USACE
1995a, "pressure for waterfront development will continue with or without the
inlet as will the desire for increased dock space." Such development has
continued in the Sealevel and Atlantic areas. Although some of the proposed
development may be partially based on the presence of Drum Inlet, justification
for the maintenance of the inlet was not based on such development. As
indicated in USACE, 1995a, justification was based solely on cost reduction to
the existing commercial fishing fleet.
The increased frequency of maintenance of the connecting channel will
not alter the economic justification of the project due to the efficiency of the
sidecast dredge and the CURRITUCK. Maintenance by the sidecast dredge and
the CURRITUCK are about $2.00 and $1.60 per cubic yard of sand,
respectively. Economic justification for maintenance of the connecting channel
was based on using a hydraulic pipeline dredge with disposal on the beaches of
Core Banks. Such maintenance would cost about $5.00 per cubic yard.
4.05 Inlet Stabilitv. The USACE, 1995x, indicated that Drum Inlet has
matured from its formative stage, and natural conditions such as inlet migration
"will not prevent the maintenance of a navigable channel across the ocean bar
9

or through the interior channels." This is still the case. As indicated above,
maintenance frequency will be greater than initially anticipated, but with the
additional alternatives of using the CURRITUCK and sidecast dredges, the inlet
and connecting channel should remain open indefinitely.
5.00 COORDINATION
Representatives from the agencies listed below were contacted regarding
the proposed action and preparation of this EA. Representatives from these
agencies were involved in the April 22, 1997, field trip regarding discharge from
the sidecast dredge FRY in the connecting channel at Drum Inlet. The purpose
of the April trip was to familiarize the agencies with the operations of a sidecast
dredge and to monitor the discharge from the dredge.
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission*
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Marine Fisheries Service
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency*
* Agencies contacted, but were not able to attend the field trip.
6.00 CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION FOR NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Based on the information presented above, the proposed action is
consistent with the Carteret County 1991 Land Use Plan Update and the Coastal
Management Program of the State of North Carolina, to the maximum extent
practicable.
7.00 LIST OF RECIPIENTS
This EA is being circulated for a 30 -day review to the following agencies
and individuals.
Federal Agencies
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Forest Service, USDA
10

Federal Aqencies (cont'd)
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Center for Environmental Health
National Marine Fisheries Service
U.S. Department of Interior
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fifth Coast Guard District
Federal Highway Administration
Soil Conservation Service, USDA
U.S. Naval Port Control Office
U.S. Department of Energy
United States Coast Guard
Postmasters
State Aqencies
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources
State Clearinghouse
Libraries
UNC- Chapel Hill Library
Librarian, North Carolina Environmental Resources Library
UNC - Wilmington Library
State Library of North Carolina
Duke University Library
East Carolina University - Joyner Library
Elected Officials
All U.S. Representatives and Senators for North Carolina
Honorable Bruce Ethridge
Honorable Paul Tyndall
Honorable G. Malcolm Fulcher, Jr.
Chairman, Carteret County Commissioners
Mayors
11

Local Aqencies
North Carolina Council of Governments Region P
Carteret County Development Council
Morehead City Building Inspector
Conservation Groups
Conservation Council of North Carolina
North Carolina Environmental Defense Fund
Sierra Club
National Audubon Society
National Wildlife Federation
North Carolina Coastal Federation
North Carolina Wildlife Federation
Carteret County Crossroads
Izaac Walton League
Col leges /Universities
UNC Institute of Marine Science
Duke University Department of Geology
Cape Fear Community College
Companies and Individuals
Carteret - Craven EMC
Carteret County News -Times
Morehead City Shipping Co.
Williams and Haywood, Inc.
T.D. Eure Construction Co.
Wilmington Shipping Company
Sailcraft, Inc.
Texasgulf, Inc.
Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Company
Stevens Towing Company
Stroud Engineering
Timber and Land Management
Aviation Fuel Terminals
George Davenport
Grady Davis
John Hooten
T. 0. Talton
12

Companies and Individuals (cont'd)
Don Taylor
R. T. Jones
Luther Smith and Son
Lloyd Wood
Alex Malpass
Galvin Mason
R. W. Chambers
John Fussel
Frank Hatsel
Walter Gentry
Haywood Weeks
William Whaley
Anne McCrary
Vince Bellis
Ray Brandi
Orrin Pilkey
Claude Brown
W. D. Aman
8.00 POINT OF CONTACT
Any comments or questions regarding this EA should be addressed to
Mr. Frank Yelverton, Environmental Resources Section, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Wilmington District, PO Box 1890, Wilmington, North Carolina
28402 -1890. Telephone contact is 910- 251 -4640.
9.00 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
For the first 2 years of maintenance, the shoals enlarged by the sidecast
dredge will be monitored annually or after each dredging event, whichever is
more frequent. Monitoring will include change in elevation and areal extent of
the shoals and establishment of seagrass beds. Monitoring results will be
coordinated with all interested parties. When available, use of the CURRITUCK
is preferred versus use of a sidecast dredge for removal of shoals in the
connecting channel.
13

10.00 REFERENCES
Moser, M. L. and S. W. Ross. 1993. Distribution and Movements of Shortnose
Sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) and Other Anadromous Fishes of the
Lower Cape Fear River, North Carolina. Final Report to the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Wilmington District, May 1993. 112 pp.
National Marine Fisheries Service. 1991. Biological Opinion, Dredging of
Channels in the Southeastern United States from North Carolina Through
Cape Canaveral, Florida. November 25, 1991.
N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries. 1997. Mike Marshall, personal
communication.
Schwartz, F.J. 1995. Florida Manatees, Trichechus manatus (Sirenia
Trichechidae), in North Carolina 1919 -1994. Brimleyana No. 22:53 -60.
June 1995.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District. 1995a. Environmental
Assessment, Maintenance of Drum Inlet, Carteret County, North Carolina.
Environmental Resources Section, January 1995.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District. 1995b. Biological
Assessment on findings of may affect on piping plover and seabeach
amaranth by the maintenance of Drum Inlet. Environmental Resources
Section. May 2, 1995.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Biological Opinion of the effects on the
Federally- threatened piping plover and seabeach amaranth by the
maintenance of Drum Inlet. Raleigh Field Office. June 30, 1995.
11.00 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.
14

1ppp 1152
150p 1
k�otsl' \Nesk
REND �E��G� �� ��REc�\�N
GG MP PSS GvRRE

ISCHARGE' CRUM INLET,
CARTERET COUNTY' NC
SIDE
t)RECGE FRY D PATE. 412y97
T ABBE 2' TEST Z, S FRY
pREDGE -_ PricelFrank yewertoll. �
2 RECpRpER., Greg l---
TEST NUMBER
Tangent B
� T211001S
�pCp,T14N'. for example.
perlstation (feet)Idepth' gT)
SAMPLE LABELS: Test num --T
BOTTOM ( �
LE (S) 5-7 FEET Turbidity Suspended
Ml-
gp,CKGR � OUN (By)
from D`scharge
pistance
� 100
500
1000
2000 _
SURFACE SP, r, TemP Salirnty Seds. (mg/"
1 FOOT Time i (NTU`s)
Suspended °F) (PP) 21
Turbidity (24 hr) t
Il)
30
1200 64
Temp- Salinity .,.
Time NTU s) seds. (mg.
(PPt) (- 22
(24 hr) ` (° F) 29- 9
1200 68
1
TY (mots): �
T VEL OCI
CURREN ►RECTION, East
COMPASS CURREN T D
19
1�
VLOOD TIDE
CHANNEL DEPTH (tees):
46
27
27
46

Table 3. Shoals Enlarged by Sidecast Dredging at Drum Inlet, NC, Spring 1997
Maximum Elevation (feet)
Above MLW
Average Elevation (feet)
Above MLW
Area (acres)
Above MHW
Area (acres)
Above MLW
Decrease (May -July)
% Decrease
Volume of sand (cubic yards)
Above MLW
Decrease (May -July)
% Decrease
SHOALS ENLARGED ADJACENT TO CONNECTING CHANNEL
May 20, 1997 Survey July 22, 1997 Survey
2.5 1.3
MLW - mean low water
MHW - mean high water (+ 2 feet MLW)
1.10
0.38
5.41
9,360
1.54
28%
5,171
55%
R.:
3.87
4,189

N420000
N417500
N416000
N4126M
N410000
N407600
E2797500 E2800000
E2802500 E2805000 E28075M E2810000
FIGURE I.
SEAGRASS BEDS ON 1997 PHOTOGRAPHY
AT DRUM INLET, NC
SCALE: 1" = 2000' I `�'l
1996 GRASS BEDS
1997 GRASS BEDS
Feet
2000 0 2000
4000
GRID BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE (NAD83) Fllooaio Nle TMeu4~fNQsRe4as '
cars or 91a1ITfl L
,LMI MK NoR1" CAAO/ W
DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: MAY 17. 1997
1887 GRASS BEDS DIGITIZED FROM PHOTOGRAPHY
AMERICAN GEOGRAPHIC DATA INC.
WIG OLEANDER DRIVE. SUITE 108
DATED MAY 17, 1997
VALMINGTON. NC 28403
(9101392 -1498
1888 GRASS BEDS DIGITIZED FROM PHOTOGRAPHY
DATED MAY 23, 1996
N420000
N4175M
N416000
N412500
N410000
W75M

ATTACHMENT A
SECTION 404(B)(1) (PUBLIC LAW 95 -217) EVALUATION
Use of Sidecast Dredge or Hopper Dredge CURRITUCK with
Overflow as Additional Maintenance Dredging Methods for
Drum Inlet, North Carolina

SECTION 404(B)(1) (PUBLIC LAW 95 -217) EVALUATION
Use of Sidecast Dredge or Hopper Dredge CURRITUCK with
Overflow as Additional Maintenance Dredging Methods for
Drum Inlet, North Carolina
Evaluation of Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines
40 CFR 230
1. Review of Compliance (230.10(a) -(d))
Review of the NEPA Document indicates:
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 A -6
A -1
Preliminary 1/ Final 2/
YESI 1 N01 1* YESIXI N011
YESI 1 NOI I* YESIXI N011
YESI 1 Not I* YESIXI N011
YESI 1 NOI I* YESIXI N011

Not Signifi- Signifi-
2. Technical Evaluation Factors (Subparts C -F) N/A cant cant*
a. Physical and Chemical Characteristics
of the Aquatic Ecosystem (Subpart C)
(1)
Substrate impacts. I
I X I I
(2)
Suspended particulates /turbidity I
I I I
impacts.
I X I I
(3)
Water column impacts. I
I X I I
(4)
Alteration of current patterns I
I I I
and water circulation. I
I X I I
(5)
Alteration of normal water I
I I I
fluctuations /hydroperiod. I
I X I I
(6)
Alteration of salinity I
I I I
gradients. I
I X I I
b. Biological Characteristics of the
Aquatic
Ecosystem (Subpart D)
(1)
Effect on threatened /endangered I
I
species and their habitat. I
I X I
(2)
Effect on the aquatic food web. I
X I I
(3)
Effect on other wildlife (mammals, I
I I I
birds, reptiles, and amphibians). I
I X I I
C. Special Aquatic Sites (Subpart E)
(1)
Sanctuaries and refuges. I
X I I I
(2)
Wetlands. I
X I I
(3)
Mud flats. I
X I I
(4)
Vegetated shallows. I
X I I I
(5)
Coral reefs. I
X I I
(6)
Riffle and pool complexes. I
X I
d. Human
Use Characteristics (Subpart F)
(1)
Effects on municipal and private I
I I I
water supplies. I
X I
(2)
Recreational and commercial I
I
fisheries impacts.
X I I
(3)
Effects on water - related recreation.)
I X I I
(4)
Aesthetic impacts. I
I X I
(5)
Effects on parks, national and I
I
historical monuments, national I
I I I
seashores, wilderness areas,
I I
research sites, and similar
I I
preserves.
X I
Remarks:
Where a mark is placed under
the
significant category, preparer add
explanation
below.
Proceed to Section 3
*See page A -6
A -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. (Mark 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IXI
(9) Known, significant sources of
persistent pesticides from _
land runoff or percolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
(5) Spill records for petroleum
products or designated
(Section 311 of CWA) _
hazardoussubstances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I_
(6) Other public records of
significant introduction of
contaminants from industries,
municipalities, or other _
sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(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
(6) Other sources (specify) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . I
List appropriate references.
EA "Maintenance of Drum Inlet, Carteret County,
North Carolina," dated January 1995
EA "Use of Sidecast Dredge or Hopper Dredge CURRITUCK with
Overflow as Additional Maintenance Dredging Methods for
Drum Inlet, North Carolina," dated August 1997
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 IXI NO 1_1*
Proceed to Section 4
*, 3/, see page A -6
A -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 . . . . . . . . . . .
. 1XI
(2) Current velocity, direction, and
variability at disposal site . . . . . . . . . . . .
_
. 1XI
(3 ) Degree of turbulence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 1 X I
(4) Water column stratification . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 1X1
(5) Discharge vessel speed and
_
direction. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .
1 X I
(6) Rate of discharge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 1X1
(7) Dredged material characteristics
(constituents, amount and type
of material, settling velocities) . . . . . . . . . . .
_
.1X1
(8) Number of discharges per unit of
_
time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. I X I
(9) Other factors affecting rates and
patterns of mixing (specify)
List appropriate references.
EA "Maintenance of Drum Inlet, Carteret County,
North Carolina," dated January 1995
EA "Use of Sidecast Dredge or Hopper Dredge CURRITUCK with
Overflow as Additional Maintenance Dredging Methods for
Drum Inlet, North Carolina," dated August 1997
b. An evaluation of the appropriate factors in
4a above indicates that the disposal site
and /or size of mixing zone are acceptable . . . .YES 1XI
NO 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 1XI
NO 11*
See sections 4.01 through 4.03 and 9.00 of the 1997 EA.
Return to section 1 for final stage of compliance review. See also
note 3/, page A -6.
*See page A -6
A -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 11*
b. Water circulation, fluctuation, and salinity
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5).
YES 1X1 NO 11*
C. Suspended particulates /turbidity
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5).
_
YES XI NO 11*
d. Contaminant availability
(review sections 2a, 3, and 4).
YES 1X1 NO 11*
e. Aquatic ecosystem structure and function
YES 1X1 NO I_1*
(review sections 2b and c, 3, and 5).
f. Disposal site
(review sections 2, 4, and 5).
YES IXI NO 11*
g. Cumulative impact on the aquatic
ecosystem.
YES 1X1 NO 1*
h. Secondary impacts on the aquatic
ecosystem.
YES 1X1 NO 11*
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
inclusion of the following conditions:
_
I
*See page A -6
A -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.
C.E. Shu rd, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering
and Planning Division
Date: O�° I$P,7
*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
7,_ short-form" evaluation process is inappropriate.
MI.

1 I
US ARMY CORPS
OF ENGINEERS
Wilmington District
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
USE OF THE HOPPER DREDGE CURRITUCK
WITH OVERFLOW OR SIDECAST DREDGE
AS ADDITIONAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING METHODS
FOR DRUM INLET
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
AUGUST 1997

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
USE OF THE HOPPER DREDGE CURRITUCK
WITH OVERFLOW OR SIDECAST DREDGE
AS ADDITIONAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING METHODS
FOR DRUM INLET
• CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Headinq
Paqe No.
1.00 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................... ..............................1
2.00 PURPOSE AND NEED ........................................................... ..............................1
3.00 DREDGING AND DISPOSAL METHODS ................................ ..............................2
3.01 Hydraulic Pipeline Dredge ............................................ ..............................2
3.02 Sidecast Dredges and the Hopper Dredge CURRITUCK ...........................3
4.00 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ................................................. ..............................4
4.01 Water Quality ................................................................ ..............................4
4.02 Aquatic Resources ....................................................... ..............................5
4.03 Endangered Species .................................................... ..............................8
4.04 Development and Economic Justification ..................... ..............................9
4.05 Inlet Stability ................................................................. ..............................9
5.00 COORDINATION ..................................................................... .............................10
6.00 CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION FOR NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ............................................... .............................10
7.00 LIST OF RECIPIENTS ............................................................ .............................10
8.00 POINT OF CONTACT ............................................................. .............................13
9.00 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS ...................................... .............................13
10.00 REFERENCES ...................................................................... .............................14
11.00 FINDING ................................................................................ .............................14

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
USE OF THE HOPPER DREDGE CURRITUCK
WITH OVERFLOW OR SIDECAST DREDGE
AS ADDITIONAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING METHODS
FOR DRUM INLET
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd)
TABLES
(Follows Page 14)
TABLE 1. Sidecast Dredge Discharge in Tangent A, Drum Inlet, North Carolina.
TABLE 2. Sidecast Dredge Discharge in Tangent B, Drum Inlet, North Carolina.
TABLE 3. Shoals Enlarged by Sidecast Dredging at Drum Inlet, North Carolina.
FIGURES
(Follows Tables)
FIGURE 1. Seagrass Beds on 1997 Photography at Drum Inlet, North Carolina.
ATTACHMENTS
(Follows Tables and Figures)
ATTACHMENT A. Evaluation of Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines.
11

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
USE OF THE HOPPER DREDGE CURRITUCK
WITH OVERFLOW OR SIDECAST DREDGE
AS ADDITIONAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING METHODS
FOR DRUM INLET
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
August 1997
1.00 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The maintenance of Drum Inlet was discussed in detail in the
environmental assessment (EA) dated January 1995, and letter amendment
dated April 28, 1995 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 1995a).
According to that EA, maintenance of the bar channel (inlet area, seaward of
Tangent C, figure 1) would be by sidecast dredge or the hopper dredge
CURRITUCK and maintenance of the connecting channel (Tangents A, B, and
C) would be by hydraulic pipeline dredge with disposal on the beach of Core
Banks. This new EA adds using a sidecast dredge or the hopper dredge
CURRITUCK for the maintenance of the connecting channel.
Maintenance frequency of the connecting channel was anticipated to be
every 2 -3 years with a volume of 100,000 cubic yards. However with experience
following construction, maintenance in the connecting channel will probably be
every 3 -6 months with 30,000- 90,000 cubic yards of sand removed during each
event. Because of the increased frequency with relatively small volumes the
sidecast dredges and the CURRITUCK need to be added as maintenance
options for the connecting channel. Disposal by the sidecast dredge would be
either north or south of the channel depending on which way the predominant
current is flowing (generally north during the warmer months and south during
the cooler months). The CURRITUCK would dispose of the sand in the
nearshore ocean area.
2.00 PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose of this EA is to discuss the need for and impacts of using a
sidecast dredge or the hopper dredge CURRITUCK with overflow as additional
maintenance dredging methods for the Drum Inlet connecting channel. This EA
is also intended to amend the EA for the Maintenance of Drum Inlet. Carteret
County, North Carolina (USACE, 1995x) to include these additional
maintenance methods.

The following reasons show why these additional maintenance methods
are needed:
a. Maintenance frequency of the connecting channel is greater than
anticipated.
b. Due to recreational fishing and sea turtle and colonial waterbird
nesting, hydraulic pipeline dredging with disposal on the beach of Core Banks is
permitted from December 15 to March 31. Shoals block the connecting channel
at other times of the year.
c. Mobilizing a hydraulic pipeline dredge with 1 -2 miles of pipeline to the
beach disposal area for small shoals is not practical.
The following are in addition to the indicated need:
a. Sidecast dredging and hopper dredging with overflow in the connecting
channel should not adversely impact the environment.
b. The increased frequency of maintenance of the connecting channel will
not alter the economic justification of the project, due to the efficiency of the
sidecast dredge and the CURRITUCK.
3.00 DREDGING AND DISPOSAL METHODS
The existing and proposed dredging and disposal methods in the
connecting channel are described below:
3.01 Hvdraulic Pipeline Dredge. According to USACE, 1995a, only
maintenance dredging in the connecting channel is allowed by hydraulic pipeline
dredge. The dredged material would be pumped to the beaches of Core Banks
north or south of the inlet and placed below the limit of the wave uprush zone to
minimize alterations and impacts to the upland portion of the beach. The wave
uprush zone is the part of the beach wetted by the normal wave uprush. The
beach is owned by the National Park Service, Cape Lookout National Seashore
(Service), and a Special Use Permit is required from the Service prior to any
disposal activities. Maintenance efforts in this channel with a hydraulic pipeline
dredge were anticipated to involve dredging approximately 100,000 cubic yards
every 2 -3 years. This maintenance would be done at the same time as the
maintenance of the waterway in Core Sound in order to eliminate the high cost
for separate mobilization.
E

Hydraulic pipeline dredging is restricted to the connecting channel
because seaward of Tangent C (figure 1) the wave environment is too intense
for conventional pipeline dredge operations. The channel dimensions are too
restrictive for use of an ocean - certified pipeline dredge.
Initial dredging of the connecting channel was completed by hydraulic
pipeline dredge in March 1997. After the dredge left the area, the channel
began to rapidly shoal. Therefore under emergency procedures (Memorandum
of Agreement [MOA] between the Wilmington District and the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, signed December
1986), the sidecast dredge FRY removed about 88,000 cubic yards of sand from
the connecting channel between April 11 and 30, 1997. This material was
deposited adjacent to the north side of Tangents A and B (figure 1), since north
was the predominant direction the currents were flowing. Emergency dredging
was again required under the MOA in early August 1997, just prior to publication
of this EA. The CURRITUCK was to remove about 50,000 cubic yards from the
connecting channel with disposal in the nearshore ocean waters.
3.02 Sidecast Dredqes and the Hopper Dredqe CURRITUCK. Sidecast
dredging with disposal adjacent to the channel is currently only allowed for
maintenance of the bar channel with disposal adjacent to the channel. Hopper
dredging with the CURRITUCK is currently only allowed for maintenance of the
bar channel with disposal in nearshore ocean waters.
A sidecast dredge has two drag arms (one on each side) that "vacuum" the
sediment as the arms drag along the bottom. The sediment is pumped through a
discharge pipe that is above the water surface and perpendicular to the dredge.
The discharge pipe extends about 60 feet beyond the side of the dredge. This
pipe distance and force from the pumps generally results in the sediment being
deposited 85 to 100 feet from the dredge. The sediment is discharged on the
side of the channel where the predominant currents would tend to move the
sediment away from the channel. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has three
sidecast dredges (all operated by the Wilmington District), and one would
generally be available to maintain Drum Inlet.
The CURRITUCK has drag arms similar to a sidecast dredge, but the
sediment is pumped into the dredge's hopper. The water in the hopper is
overflowed to provide an economic load of sand, since the dredged slurry
entering the hopper contains about 20 percent sand and 80 percent water.
Once the hopper is full of sand (about 300 cubic yards), the sediment is taken to
nearshore ocean waters (normally -6 to -10 feet mean low water [m.l.w.]) where
the split hull hopper is opened and the sediments are deposited. The
CURRITUCK is the only small hopper dredge the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
has (operated by the Wilmington District) that is capable of maintaining Drum
3

Inlet, and commercial hopper dredges as small as the CURRITUCK do not exist.
Due to the high demand for this dredge outside of the District, it is only available
in North Carolina about 6 months each year (August - October and December -
February). When available, the CURRITUCK will be used, instead of a sidecast
dredge, for removal of shoals in the connecting channel.
The use of the sidecast dredge and the CURRITUCK will probably be
needed for maintenance of the connecting channel every 3 -6 months year -
round. As detailed below, these maintenance alternatives and anticipated
frequency should have minimal impact on the environment.
4.00 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The Drum Inlet environment is discussed in detail in USACE, 1995a. This
EA will primarily add information related to the monitoring data collected
April 22, 1997, while the sidecast dredge FRY was operating under emergency
procedures in the Drum Inlet connecting channel.
4.01 Water Quality. The North Carolina water quality classification
assigned to the Drum Inlet area (White Oak Basin) is SA/ORW. SA waters are
suitable for commercial shellfishing and all other tidal salt water uses including
primary and secondary recreation, and fish propagation. ORW (Outstanding
Resource Waters) are unique and special waters of exceptional state or national
recreation or ecological significance which require special protection to maintain
existing uses. The North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) standard
for turbidity for SA/ORW is 25 NTU's. There is no NCDWQ suspended sediment
standard for the area.
Two discharge events from the sidecast dredge FRY were monitored in the
connecting channel where the dredge was working on April 22, 1997. The first
discharge monitored on the dredged material was from the western to the
eastern end of Tangent A. The sediments in Tangent A are about 94 percent
sand and represents the lowest percentage of sand in the connecting channel
since Tangent A is the greatest distance from the inlet. Table 1 generally
indicates a major reduction in suspended sediment concentration and turbidity
with distance from the dredge (the low value at the surface 100 feet from the
discharge pipe was probably due to sampling a clear water pocket). Both
parameters neared background values at 1,500 feet from the dredge. Samples
were not taken beyond 1,500 feet because the turbidity plume associated with
the discharge was no longer visibly evident.
The surface and bottom background turbidity values measured April 22,
1997, were both below 25 NTUs (6 and 14, respectively). At 1,500 feet from the
Ell

dredge during the discharge test, both the surface and bottom values were 25
NTUs or less (Table 1). This turbidity plume is generally confined to the near
channel area out to 1,500 feet since the dredge is steering into tidal currents
averaging about 1 knot.
The second discharge monitored on the dredged material was from the
eastern to western end of Tangent B. The sediments in Tangent B are about 95
percent sand and contain a higher percentage of sand than Tangent A since
Tangent B is closer to the inlet. Table 2 indicates a general reduction in
suspended sediment concentration and turbidity with distance from the dredge.
Both parameters neared background values at 2,000 feet from the dredge.
Samples were not taken beyond 2,000 feet because the turbidity plume
associated with the discharge was no longer visibly evident.
The surface and bottom background turbidity values for the second
discharge were also both below 25 NTUs (9 and 13, respectively). At 2,000 feet
from the dredge during the discharge test, both the surface and bottom values
were less than 25 NTUs (table 2). As with the first test, the turbidity plume is
generally confined to the near channel area out to 2,000 feet since the dredge is
steering into tidal currents averaging about 1 knot.
Monitoring of turbidity and suspended solids levels in the overflow from the
CURRITUCK has not been performed. However, since the purpose of the
CURRITUCK is to retain sediment in the hopper, the turbidity and suspended
solids levels in the overflow should be less than that monitored for the sidecast
dredge FRY.
Based on the above information, the proposed action should not adversely
impact water quality.
The North Carolina Division of Water Quality will concurrently review this
EA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' request for a Section 401 (P.L. 95-
217) Water Quality Certificate to authorize the work that may impact water
quality under the proposed action. Also, the Section 404(b)(1) evaluation for the
discharge of dredged material is included (Attachment A).
4.02 Aquatic Resources. The only changes to resources from the 1995
Drum Inlet EA (USACE, 1995a) are (1) the increased turbidity and suspended
solids levels associated with discharge from the sidecast dredge and overflow
from the CURRITUCK, and (2) enlarging existing shoals adjacent to the
channel where the sidecast dredge discharges and deposition in the near
shore ocean area by the CURRITUCK.
l•'1

Increased Turbiditv and Suspended Solids Levels. As indicated in
section 4.01, the increased turbidity and suspended solids levels associated with
discharge from the sidecast dredge return to background or near background
levels relatively close to the dredge. The dredges could perform maintenance
work at Drum Inlet for 2-4 weeks every 3 -6 months, but when onsite the dredges
do not work continuously. The sidecast dredge usually operates 10 hours per
day (6:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.). The sidecast may dredge a shoal for 20 -30
minutes, and take another 20 -30 minutes to reposition the dredge at the
beginning of the shoal (vessel heads into the current to maintain steerage).
Considering repositioning time and run time to and from the dock at the
beginning and end of the 10 -hour day, the dredge may be moving sediment on
an intermittent basis 4 -5 hours per day.
The hopper dredge CURRITUCK also operates about 10 hours per day.
This vessel dredges an average of 20 minutes to load the hopper (about 300
cubic yards), but about 30 -40 additional minutes are needed for a round trip to
the nearshore ocean disposal location. Considering round trip time to the ocean
and run time to and from the dock at the beginning and end of the 10 -hour day,
the dredge may be moving sediment and overflowing the hopper on an
intermittent basis 3 -4 hours per day.
Due to the low levels of turbidity and suspended solids, intermittent
occurrence, small relative area affected, and lack of primary nursery areas in the
vicinity, marine fishery resources should not be adversely affected.
Enlarainq Existinq Shoals and Deposition in the Nearshore Ocean
Area. All the sediment excavated by a sidecast dredge is deposited adjacent to
the channel where the predominant currents will tend to reduce return of the
sediments to the channel. For example, all the sediments removed by the
sidecast dredge FRY in April 1997 (87,649 cubic yards, 18 days of the period
April 11 - 30, 1997) were placed on the north side of the channel because the
predominant current was running north. According to the captain of the sidecast
dredge FRY, this deposition raised elevation of the shoals adjacent to the
channel up to 2 -3 feet in a total of 3 areas adjacent to the north side of Tangents
A and B. The elevation change of the areas affected by the discharge can not
be accurately determined since a pre- dredging elevation survey was not taken
that included the existing shoaled areas adjacent to the channel.
Aerial photography was taken of the Drum Inlet area on February 16, 1997
(shortly after hydraulic pipeline dredging began in the connecting channel and
was still in Tangent A), and on May 17, 1997, after the emergency sidecast
dredging was complete. Comparison of the photography from these dates
indicates that the areas where the sidecast dredge deposited the sand were
R

existing shoals, with some of the area on the February photography appearing
intertidal. However, the May 17, 1997, photographs do appear to indicate more
intertidal areas adjacent to the north side of the channel than the February
photographs.
Extensive elevation surveys were performed on May 20 and July 22, 1997
(after emergency sidecast dredging), in the area within 300 feet of the north
edge of Tangents A and B. This data is summarized in table 3. In the area
surveyed on May 20, 1997, about 0.38 acres were 6 inches or less above mean
high water (m.h.w.), and 5.41 acres were above m.l.w. The rest of the area was
subtidal. As indicated above, some of this area was probably intertidal before
sidecast dredging began. The same area was again surveyed on July 22, 1997.
On July 22, 1997, no areas remained above m.h.w., and 3.87 acres were above
m.l.w. (intertidal). Between the May and July surveys, about 55 percent of the
volume of sand on the shoals was dispersed by wind waves and currents in the
open sound. Since this change occurred in about two months, establishing a
permanent area above m.h.w. should be precluded because of an anticipated
maintenance frequency of 3 -6 months, and when available, the CURRITUCK will
be used, instead of a sidecast dredge, for removal of shoals in the connecting
channel.
However, these elevated areas could become permanent features. If so,
benthic resources in the shoals would be suppressed if sidecast dredging is
frequent. Nevertheless, these areas could provide some habitat enhancement
such as loafing and foraging areas for waterbirds, and seagrass beds could
establish on the leeward side of the shoals. This condition will be monitored for
at least the first 2 years of maintenance. Monitoring will include change in
elevation and areal extent of the shoals, and establishment of seagrass beds.
The Drum Inlet area is heavily used by commercial and recreational
fishermen. For example, the area is open to the mechanical harvest of clams
(North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries [NCDMF], 1997). During each
dredging event, the areas where disposal occurs will be at least temporarily
unavailable (due to decreased water depth) for mechanical harvesting.
Excluded from the mechanic harvest area are oyster and clam leases and known
seagrass beds. No leases are located near the project area. Several leases are
located on the mainland near Atlantic, and one lease is located on the Core
Banks side about 6 miles south of Drum Inlet. Therefore, no leases will be
affected by the proposed action.
Based on seagrass mapping, no seagrasses are within 800 feet of the
channel alignment (figure 1). This mapping was based on May 23, 1996, and
7

May 17, 1997, aerial photography; and July 22, 1997, field verification of the
May 1997 photography. Due to the distance to the nearest grass beds, dredging
of the connecting channel by sidecast dredges or the hopper dredge
CURRITUCK should not impact these resources.
The CURRITUCK will dispose of up to 300 cubic yards of sand in the
nearshore (6 -10 feet m.l.w.) ocean area during each dredging cycle (up to 10
times per 10 -hour day). The sand disposed in the active wave environment will
quickly dissipate and should not appreciably affect the nearshore environment.
4.03 Endanqered Species. The proposed action will not affect listed
species under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or
the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Endangered species were
discussed in USACE, 1995a. That EA also discussed the year -round use of the
sidecast dredges and the hopper dredge CURRITUCK in the inlet. The May 2,
1995, Biological Assessment also discussed two species (piping plover and
seabeach amaranth) under the jurisdiction of the USFWS (USACE, 1995b). The
NMFS in their letter dated January 31, 1995, did not indicate impacts on listed
species, and the USFWS provided their Biological Opinion on June 30, 1995
(USFWS, 1995). This EA would extend the operation of the sidecast dredges
and the CURRITUCK year -round into the connecting channel as an additional
method of maintenance dredging.
The NMFS listed species have not changed since the 1995 EA. As
indicated in the 1995 EA for species under the NMFS jurisdiction, the operation
of sidecast dredges and the hopper dredge CURRITUCK are not believed
harmful to sea turtles because of the small size of the dragheads, slow speed of
the vessels, and the low suction levels (NMFS, 1991). None of the whales
should be impacted by the proposed action since all the dredging, disposing,
and maneuvering actions would be in the sound or close to the beach and in
shallow water. The shortnose sturgeon has been documented recently for the
Cape Fear River (Moser and Ross, 1993), but no other populations are known
from North Carolina. Therefore, species under the NMFS jurisdiction will not be
affected by the additional maintenance methods.
The only listed species change since the 1995 EA under the USFWS
jurisdiction that may occur in waters affected by the additional proposed
maintenance methods is the manatee (Trichechus manatus). The manatee is a
rare visitor to the area. All of the presently designated critical habitat is in
Florida. From 1919 to 1994 a total of 13 manatees had been observed in
Carteret County (an average of less than one every 5 years), with the most
observed in any year was two. The nearest observation to Drum Inlet was of a
0

single individual at Davis in September 1983 and 1993, about 10 miles from the
project area (Schwartz, 1995). Cold winter water temperatures will probably
keep the species from overwintering in the project area. Foods which are used
by the manatee in North Carolina are unknown. In Florida, their diet consists
primarily of vascular plants. Project maintenance will involve no dredging of or
disposal near submerged grass beds and minimal change to the physical habitat
of the estuary. Overall estuarine and nearshore productivity should remain
unchanged throughout the project area. Therefore, potential food sources for the
manatee should not be affected.
The dredging equipment used for maintenance of the project is slow
moving and the crew is on constant watch due to the narrow channels in which
the vessels are operating. In the rare event that a manatee is observed by the
crew, dredging operations will stop until the manatee leaves the area.
Therefore, since the occurrence of a manatee is rare, the potential food source
will not be affected, and dredging operations will stop if a manatee is observed
in the area, the proposed action will not affect the manatee.
All other species under jurisdiction of the USFWS are terrestrial and the
proposed action will not impact terrestrial habitats. Therefore, no affect is
anticipated on such species.
4.04 Development and Economic Justification. As indicated in USACE
1995a, "pressure for waterfront development will continue with or without the
inlet as will the desire for increased dock space." Such development has
continued in the Sealevel and Atlantic areas. Although some of the proposed
development may be partially based on the presence of Drum Inlet, justification
for the maintenance of the inlet was not based on such development. As
indicated in USACE, 1995a, justification was based solely on cost reduction to
the existing commercial fishing fleet.
The increased frequency of maintenance of the connecting channel will
not alter the economic justification of the project due to the efficiency of the
sidecast dredge and the CURRITUCK. Maintenance by the sidecast dredge and
the CURRITUCK are about $2.00 and $1.60 per cubic yard of sand,
respectively. Economic justification for maintenance of the connecting channel
was based on using a hydraulic pipeline dredge with disposal on the beaches of
Core Banks. Such maintenance would cost about $5.00 per cubic yard.
4.05 Inlet Stability. The USACE, 1995x, indicated that Drum Inlet has
matured from its formative stage, and natural conditions such as inlet migration
"will not prevent the maintenance of a navigable channel across the ocean bar
9

or through the interior channels." This is still the case. As indicated above,
maintenance frequency will be greater than initially anticipated, but with the
additional alternatives of using the CURRITUCK and sidecast dredges, the inlet
and connecting channel should remain open indefinitely.
5.00 COORDINATION
Representatives from the agencies listed below were contacted regarding
the proposed action and preparation of this EA. Representatives from these
agencies were involved in the April 22, 1997, field trip regarding discharge from
the sidecast dredge FRY in the connecting channel at Drum Inlet. The purpose
of the April trip was to familiarize the agencies with the operations of a sidecast
dredge and to monitor the discharge from the dredge.
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission*
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Marine Fisheries Service
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency*
* Agencies contacted, but were not able to attend the field trip.
6.00 CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION FOR NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Based on the information presented above, the proposed action is
consistent with the Carteret County 1991 Land Use Plan Update and the Coastal
Management Program of the State of North Carolina, to the maximum extent
practicable.
7.00 LIST OF RECIPIENTS
This EA is being circulated for a 30 -day review to the following agencies
and individuals.
Federal Aqencies
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Forest Service, USDA
10

Federal Aqencies (cont'd)
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Center for Environmental Health
National Marine Fisheries Service
U.S. Department of Interior
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fifth Coast Guard District
Federal Highway Administration
Soil Conservation Service, USDA
U.S. Naval Port Control Office
U.S. Department of Energy
United States Coast Guard
Postmasters
State Agencies
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources
State Clearinghouse
Libraries
UNC- Chapel Hill Library
Librarian, North Carolina Environmental Resources Library
UNC - Wilmington Library
State Library of North Carolina
Duke University Library
East Carolina University - Joyner Library
Elected Officials
All U.S. Representatives and Senators for North Carolina
Honorable Bruce Ethridge
Honorable Paul Tyndall
Honorable G. Malcolm Fulcher, Jr.
Chairman, Carteret County Commissioners
Mayors
11

Local Agencies
North Carolina Council of Governments Region P
Carteret County Development Council
Morehead City Building Inspector
Conservation Groups
Conservation Council of North Carolina
North Carolina Environmental Defense Fund
Sierra Club
National Audubon Society
National Wildlife Federation
North Carolina Coastal Federation
North Carolina Wildlife Federation
Carteret County Crossroads
Izaac Walton League
Colleqes /Universities
UNC Institute of Marine Science
Duke University Department of Geology
Cape Fear Community College
Companies and Individuals
Carteret - Craven EMC
Carteret County News -Times
Morehead City Shipping Co.
Williams and Haywood, Inc.
T.D. Eure Construction Co.
Wilmington Shipping Company
Sailcraft, Inc.
Texasgulf, Inc.
Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Company
Stevens Towing Company
Stroud Engineering
Timber and Land Management
Aviation Fuel Terminals
George Davenport
Grady Davis
John Hooten
T. 0. Talton
12

Companies and Individuals (cont'd)
Don Taylor
R. T. Jones
Luther Smith and Son
Lloyd Wood
Alex Malpass
Galvin Mason
R. W. Chambers
John Fussel
Frank Hatsel
Walter Gentry
Haywood Weeks
William Whaley
Anne McCrary
Vince Bellis
Ray Brandi
Orrin Pilkey
Claude Brown
W. D. Aman
8.00 POINT OF CONTACT
Any comments or questions regarding this EA should be addressed to
Mr. Frank Yelverton, Environmental Resources Section, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Wilmington District, PO Box 1890, Wilmington, North Carolina
28402 -1890. Telephone contact is 910- 251 -4640.
9.00 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
For the first 2 years of maintenance, the shoals enlarged by the sidecast
dredge will be monitored annually or after each dredging event, whichever is
more frequent. Monitoring will include change in elevation and areal extent of
the shoals and establishment of seagrass beds. Monitoring results will be
coordinated with all interested parties. When available, use of the CURRITUCK
is preferred versus use of a sidecast dredge for removal of shoals in the
connecting channel.
13

10.00 REFERENCES
Moser, M. L. and S. W. Ross. 1993. Distribution and Movements of Shortnose
Sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) and Other Anadromous Fishes of the
Lower Cape Fear River, North Carolina. Final Report to the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Wilmington District, May 1993. 112 pp.
National Marine Fisheries Service. 1991. Biological Opinion, Dredging of
Channels in the Southeastern United States from North Carolina Through
Cape Canaveral, Florida. November 25, 1991.
N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries. 1997. Mike Marshall, personal
communication.
Schwartz, F.J. 1995. Florida Manatees, Trichechus manatus (Sirenia
Trichechidae), in North Carolina 1919 -1994. Brimleyana No. 22:53 -60.
June 1995.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District. 1995a. Environmental
Assessment, Maintenance of Drum Inlet, Carteret County, North Carolina.
Environmental Resources Section, January 1995.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District. 1995b. Biological
Assessment on findings of may affect on piping plover and seabeach
amaranth by the maintenance of Drum Inlet. Environmental Resources
Section. May 2, 1995.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Biological Opinion of the effects on the
Federally- threatened piping plover and seabeach amaranth by the
maintenance of Drum Inlet. Raleigh Field Office. June 30, 1995.
11.00 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.
14

CA RTERET COUNV, NC
E DRUM INLET,
DGE FRY piSCHARG ' DATE 4122+97
E
TEST 2,r�1DEGAST DR FRY kYelverton
TABI -E 2' DREDGE'. '--�� PER. Greg Pli�elFran
TEST NUMBER.
- rangeot 5
RECUR W.
p�T1. 0N, th., for example. 12110cIS
tQC feet)IdeP
LS� Test numberlstation
SAMPLE LAKE
cAMPLE (S)
Distance if from Discharge
Meet)
-r 100
500
1000
200
o
knots): �•'�
CURRENT vELOCI f`(( East
Ass CURRENT p1RECT1ON-
COMP
FLOOD TIDE
CHANNEL DEPTH (feet)

Table 3. Shoals Enlarged by Sidecast Dredging at Drum Inlet, NC, Spring 1997
SHOALS ENLARGED ADJACENT TO CONNECTING CHANNEL
May 20, 1997 Survey
Maximum Elevation (feet) 2.5
Above MLW
Average Elevation (feet) 1.10
Above MLW
Area (acres) 0.38
Above MHW
Area (acres) 5.41
Above MLW
Decrease (May -July) 1.54
% Decrease 28%
Volume of sand (cubic yards) 9,360
Above MLW
Decrease (May -July) 5,171
% Decrease 55%
MLW - mean low water
MHW - mean high water (+ 2 feet MLW)
July 22, 1997 Survey
1.3
W.:
M We
3.87
4,189

N420000
N417500
N416000
N412600
N410000
N407500
CZ/u/-
E2797500 E2800000
E2802500
FIGURE I.
SEAGRASS BEDS ON 1997 PHOTOGRAPHY
AT DRUM INLET, NC
SCALE: 1"= 2000'
��,1
1996 GRASS BEDS
� 'm 1
1997 GRASS BEDS
. Feet
2000 0 2000
4000
GRID BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE (NAD83) O1Oi00060F
U. ofk Hom cwNx>.0 ar
DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: MAY 17. 1997
1997 GRASS BEDS DIGITIZED FROM PHOTOGRAPHY
AMERICAN GEOGRAPHIC DATA INC.
5710 OLEANDER ORWL SUITE 108
DATED MAY 17, 1997
WILMINGTON. NC 28403
(9101392 -1498
1996 GRASS BEDS DIGITIZED FROM PHOTOGRAPHY
DATED MAY 23. 1996
E2805000 E2807500 F2810000
N420000
N4175M
N416000
441250
N410000
N40750C

ATTACHMENT A
SECTION 404(B)(1) (PUBLIC LAW 95 -217) EVALUATION
Use of Sidecast Dredge or Hopper Dredge CURRITUCK with
Overflow as Additional Maintenance Dredging Methods for
Drum Inlet, North Carolina

SECTION 404(B)(1) (PUBLIC LAW 95 -217) EVALUATION
Use of Sidecast Dredge or Hopper Dredge CURRITUCK with
Overflow as Additional Maintenance Dredging Methods for
Drum Inlet, North Carolina
Evaluation of Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines
40 CFR 230
1. Review of Compliance (230.10(a) -(d))
Review of the NEPA Document indicates:
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 A -6
A -1
Preliminary 1/ Final 2/
YESI 1 N01-1* YESIXI N011
YESI 1 NOI 1* YESIXI N01-1
YESI 1 N01 1* YESIXI N011
YESI 1 N01-1* YESIXI N01-1

2. Technical Evaluation Factors (Subparts C -F)
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.
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).
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.
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.
Remarks: Where a mark is placed under
the significant category, preparer add
explanation below.
Proceed to Section 3
*See page A -6
A -2
Not Signifi- Signifi-
N/A cant cant*
X
X
X
X
X
X
I I I I
X I
I I X I
I I I I
I X I
I x l I I
I X I I
I X I I I
I X I
X I I I
I X I I I
X
X
X
X
X

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. (Mark only
those appropriate.)
(1) Physical characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IXI
(2) Hydrography in relation to
known or anticipated _
sources of contaminants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I X_ 1
(3) Results from previous
testing of the material
or similar material in _
the vicinity of the project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I X I
(9) 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) _
hazardoussubstances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(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
( B ) Other sources ( specify) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . I I
List appropriate references.
EA "Maintenance of Drum Inlet, Carteret County,
North Carolina," dated January 1995
EA "Use of Sidecast Dredge or Hopper Dredge CURRITUCK with
Overflow as Additional Maintenance Dredging Methods for
Drum Inlet, North Carolina," dated August 1997
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 IXI
Proceed to Section 4
*, 3/, see page A -6
A -3
NO I I*

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 . . . . . .
. . . . . . IXI
(2)
Current velocity, direction, and
variability at disposal site . . . . . . .
_
. . . . . . IXI
( 3 )
Degree of turbulence . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . J X J
(4)
Water column stratification . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . IXI
(5)
Discharge vessel speed and
_
direction . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .
. . . . . 1 X I
(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)
List appropriate references.
EA "Maintenance of Drum Inlet, Carteret County,
North Carolina," dated January 1995
EA "Use of Sidecast Dredge or Hopper Dredge CURRITUCK with
Overflow as Additional Maintenance Dredging Methods for
Drum Inlet, North Carolina," dated August 1997
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*
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 1-1*
See sections 4.01 through 4.03 and 9.00 of the 1997 EA.
Return to section 1 for final stage of compliance review. See also
note 3/, page A -6.
*See page A -6
A -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 1XI NO 11*
b. Water circulation, fluctuation, and salinity
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5).
YES 1X1 NO 1-1*
C. Suspended particulates /turbidity
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5).
YES 1XI NO 1 1*
d. Contaminant availability
(review sections 2a, 3, and 4).
YES 1XI NO 11*
e. Aquatic ecosystem structure and function
YES IXI NO I_1*
(review sections 2b and c, 3, and 5).
f. Disposal site
(review sections 2, 4, and 5).
YES 1XI NO 11*
g. Cumulative impact on the aquatic
_
ecosystem.
YES 1XI NO 11*
h. Secondary impacts on the aquatic
ecosystem.
YES 1XI NO 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
*See page A -6
0
A -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 . . . . . . . .
(3) The proposed discharge does not include all
practicable and appropriate measures to minimize
potential harm to the aquatic ecosystem . . . . . . .
8.
C.E. Shu rd, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering
and Planning Division
Date: 0l°1?17
*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.
0
A -6