29-17 Enivronmental Assessment

US Army Corps
of Engineers
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
SOUTH ATLANTIC DIVISION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
tECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
M- MHD CITN
JUNE 1995

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
JUNE 1995
Table of Contents
Items
Page No.
1.00 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................... 1
2.00 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND HISTORY ......................... 1
3.00 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE ................................ 2
4.00 PURPOSE AND NEED ........................................... 2
4.01 Current Disposal Method .................................... 2
4.02 Alternative Disposal Methods Investigated ....................... 2
4.03 Preferred Disposal Method ................................... 3
5.00 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT ...................... 3
5.01 Dredging and/or Disposal Alternatives .......................... 3
5.01.1 Clamshell or Bucket and Barge Dredge .................. 3
5.01.2 Hopper Dredging .................................... 3
5.01.3 Upland Diked Disposal ............................... 3
5.02 No -Action Alternative ....................................... 4
6.00 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ......................................
4
6.01
Water Quality .............................................
4
6.02
Estuarine Resources .......................................
5
6.03
Terrestrial Resources .......................................
6
6.04
Beneficial Use .............................................
7
6.05
Threatened and Endangered Species ..........................
8
6.06
Archaeological/Historical Resources ...........................
9
6.07
Recreation and Aesthetic Resources ..........................
10
6.08
Development .............................................
10
6.09
Executive Order 11988, Flood Plain Management ................
10
6.10
Executive Order 11990. Protection of Wetlands ..................
11
6.11
Air Quality ...............................................
11
7.00 RELATIONSHIP TO LAND USE PLANS ............................. 11
RECEIVED i
DEC 0 S 2016
DCM- NIHD CITY

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
JUNE 1995
Table of Contents (cont'd)
Items
Paae No.
8.00 RELATIONSHIP TO NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM ...... 12
............................................
9.00 PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT ............................. 12
9.01 Scoping................................................. 12
9.02 Fish and Wildlife Coordination ............................... 12
9.03 Other Agencies and Organizations ............................ 13
10.00 LIST OF RECIPIENTS .......................................... 14
11.00 POINT OF CONTACT .......................................... 16
12.00 REFERENCES ............................................... 17
Figures
(Follows Page No. 17)
Figure 1: Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound & Beaufort Harbor,
North Carolina.
Figure 2: Wainwright Island -Sites A, B. C, and D Location Map.
Attachments
Attachment A: Section 404(B)(1) (Public Law 95-217) Evaluation.
Attachment B: Onsite Scoping Meeting - List of Attendees.
Attachment C: Responses to the March 27, 1995, Scoping Letter.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016 ii
DCM- MHD CITY

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
JUNE 1995
1.00 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project involves changing the method of dredge disposal for the continued
as -needed maintenance dredging in the Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and
Beaufort Harbor at Wainwright Slough (see section 4.00). The site is located
approximately 5 miles northeast of the Cedar Island Ferry Landing in Carteret County,
North Carolina (see Figure 1). The channel is dredged approximately once every three
to four years.
Historically, dredged material has been placed at the toe -of -the -bank on the
channel (east) side of Wainwright Island (see Site A, Figure 2). Due to the location of
this disposal area, the dredged material has quickly returned to the channel. To correct
this situation, the material would be discharged in upland areas (see Figure 2, site D)
and directed overland to the non -channel (west) side of the island.
The maintenance dredging will remove materials lying above the plane of 9 feet
below mean low water (m.l.w.) (-7 feet m.l.w. plus 2 feet of allowable overdepth) within
the designated limits of the channel. Approximately 30,000 cubic yards of material
consisting of fine -to -medium grained sand may be removed from the channel by a
hydraulic pipeline dredge. The work will be accomplished in late fall -early winter of
each year as needed and completed prior to the April 1 onset of the colonial waterbird
nesting season.
2.00 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND HISTORY
The project was authorized by the River and Harbor Act of August 30, 1935. The
channel was originally dredged in 1935. Fifteen maintenance dredgings occurred in
various portions of the channel through 1968, since that time the channel has been
maintained on an as -needed basis. The last maintenance dredging was completed in
late 1991. Emergency dredging by the special purpose dredge CURRITUCK was
RECEV tvly 1994.
DEC 0 8 2016
OCM- MHO CITY

3.00 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
Environmental issues and concerns associated with maintenance dredging of
Wainwright Slough and the discharge of dredged material on or around Wainwright
Island are addressed in the Final Environmental Statement. Maintenance of the
Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor North Carolina, dated
August 1976 and are being incorporated into this environmental assessment (EA) by
reference.
4.00 PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose of the project is maintenance of the AIWW channel in Wainwright
Slough to ensure navigation safety for commercial and sports fishermen and
recreational boaters. Ongoing maintenance of this project will result in positive
economic impact in the form of continued opportunities for waterborne commerce in the
Carteret County area.
4.01 Current Disposal Method
At the present time, dredged material is placed within a sandbagged area at the
toe -of -the -bank on the channel side of Wainwright Island. Due to the inadequate size
and the location of the existing disposal area, much of the dredged material flows back
into the channel area north of the island.
4.02 Alternative Disposal Methods Investigated
To address the problems associated with the current disposal method, the
following disposal options have been investigated:
a. Alternative 1 - Control of Effluent. The material would be placed in upland
areas of the island and directed overland to the open water on the non -channel (west)
side of the island (see Figure 2, Site D). The discharge would be guided to avoid areas
containing submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV).
b. Alternative 2 - Sandbagged Retention Area. Sandbags would be placed along
the shoal line to confine 4 to 5 acres of open water on the non -channel side of the
island (see Figure 2, Site B). The discharge would be pumped into this confined area.
c. Alternative 3 - Unconfined Toe -of -the -Bank. Dredged material would be
pumped to the toe -of -the -bank on the non -channel (west) side of the island (see Figure
2, Site C).
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 Z016
DCM- MHD CITY

4.03 Preferred Disposal Method
The preferred method of disposal is by control of effluent (Alternative 1) at Site D.
This method has the least damaging environmental impacts of the considered
alternatives and is the most cost effective and efficient method of material disposal for
the maintenance dredging of Wainwright Slough. The discharge will be guided to
elevate'idesired portions of the island. A low sand berm will be constructed above the
mean high water (m.h.w.) line on the western shoreline to contain the effluent and allow
solids (sand) to settle and renourish and elevate the island. The berm will be
reconstructed as necessary as the area behind it is elevated by the disposal material.
It is anticipated that most of the effluent flowing over the berm into Core Sound will
consist primarily of discharge water containing a minimal amount of suspended solids.
Any solid material passing over the berm should not significantly impact existing
aquatic resources. Upon completion of the work, the retention berm will be graded to
achieve desired shoreline and upland elevations.
5.00 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
5.01 Dredging and/or Disposal Alternatives
5.01.1 Clamshell or Bucket and Barge Dredge
Use of a clamshell or bucket and barge dredge with disposal on Wainwright
Island would involve double handling of dredge disposal material. Compared to
hydraulic pipeline dredging, these methods are less productive and not cost or time
efficient for the proposed activity. Additionally, they would not provide for the beneficial
uses of the dredged material.
5.01.2 Hopper Dredging
Emergency maintenance of Wainwright Slough was conducted in 1994 to remove
a shoal in the channel near Wainwright Island. This method involved use of the special
purpose dredge CURRITUCK with open water disposal. Open water disposal of
dredged material is used only in emergency dredging situations.
5.01.3 Upland Diked Disposal
Construction of an upland dike on Wainwright Island would not provide the habitat
variety essential to the various colonial waterbird species that now or could utilize the
island for nesting and breeding, The National Audubon Society opposes this disposal
retention method.
RECEIVED
3
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

6.02 No -Action Alternative
As stated in section 4.01, the current disposal area adjacent the channel is not
well located and is inadequate in size. Dredged material pumped into this site quickly
returns to the channel. This results in more frequent maintenance dredging operations.
There are no feasible alternative upland disposal sites in the area. Benefits to colonial
waterbirds utilizing the island (see section 6.04) would not be realized with the no -
action alternative.
6.00 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
6.01 Water Quality
The North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (NCDEM) has
designated the waters surrounding Wainwright Island as SA/NSW/ORW waters. SA
waters are suitable for commercial shellfishing and all other tidal salt water uses
including primary and secondary recreation, and fish propagation. Nutrient sensitive
waters (NSW) require limitations on nutrient inputs. Outstanding Resource Waters
(ORW) are unique and special waters of exceptional state or national recreation or
ecological significance which require special protection to maintain existing uses.
NCDEM will concurrently review this EA and the Corps' 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 in Attachment A.
Turbidity associated with dredging and disposal will be at a low level, short term in
duration, and end following dredging due to the low silt content in the coarse -to -
medium grain sand removed from the bottom. The dredged sediments are not
anticipated to be contaminated with toxic substances, since the site is well removed
from any known sources of pollution. Visual inspection revealed no indication that the
island is or has been a disposal area for hazardous or toxic waste materials.
Salinity in the vicinity of the project averages 30 parts per thousand (ppt) and
seldom drops below 20 ppt within Core Sound. No significant change in salinity is
expected to occur in the surrounding waters of Wainwright Island as a result of the
proposed action.
No significant adverse impacts are expected to occur to water quality or to ground
water resources as a result of the proposed activity.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

6.02 Estuarine Resources
The principal users of the waterway connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort
Harbor are commercial fishermen and recreational boaters. Commercial usage
primarily consists of transporting fresh fish, shellfish, and menhaden for market (Corps
of Engineers, 1994).
General estuarine habitats in the project area include sounds, inlets, bays, and
tributary marsh creeks. The 1988 map entitled "NOAA -Coastal Ocean Program
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Study" (National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS),
1991) published by the NMFS Beaufort Laboratory indicates that submerged aquatic
vegetation (SAV) habitat may be present on both sides of the waterway in the
Wainwright Island area and throughout Core Sound in general. Eelgrass (Zostera
marina), shoalgrass (Halodule wri htii , and widgeon grass (Ruppia maritima) occur
throughout Core Sound.
Dredge and fill operations can remove or bury SAV and make bottoms unsuitable
for SAV habitat. Dredging may result in depth, turbidity, current, or salinity changes
detrimental to SAV, however, the channel area to be dredged is not mapped as
containing SAV resources.
It is anticipated that the effluent discharge may affect SAVs and/or their shallow
water habitat off the western shoreline of the island. Construction of the shoreline sand
berm to control the effluent will minimize the amount of suspended solids entering the
open water. It is anticipated that most residual suspended solids will settle in the area
between the retention berm and any SAV.
The presence of SAVs (eelgrass and widgeon grass) in non -channel sites around
the island was verified by the NMFS on May 3, 1995. They advise that eelgrass can
tolerate 25 percent burial of plant height for short periods without increasing mortality
or reducing productivity.
The location and extent of SAVs will be determined using pre -project
interpretation of June 1995 aerial photography. During that month, a base line sub -
meter accuracy SAV map will be compiled using Geographic Positioning System (GPS)
technology. A seagrass boundary will be staked parallel to the island's western
shoreline (near Site C, Figure 2). This boundary will be included on the work site plan.
After disposal operations are complete, a seagrass inventory and impact assessment
will be conducted by the NMFS. This information will be compared with the pre -project
data. If it is determined that SAV resources have been adversely impacted,
compensatory mitigation will be provided in accordance with the recommendations of
the NMFS.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

The nearest oyster or clam leases are on the mainland side of Core Banks near
the town of Atlantic and will not be impacted by the project. Public oyster resources are
not located within the immediate project area but are abundant in other areas of Core
Sound. Oysters will not be adversely impacted by the project.
Core Sound is open to the mechanical harvest of clams except in SAV habitat
areas and within oyster and clam leases. However, the mechanical clam harvest line
stops just south of Wainwright Island. Hard clams (Mercenaria mercenaria) may be
taken by hand in shallow water not subject to shifting sand due to tidal flows. NCDMF
advised that clam density is not expected to be significant in the vicinity of Site B (see
Figure 2); they did not express concern for project impacts to clams.
The NCDMF advised that bay scallops may be present on the southwest side of
the island. Due to their mobility, it is not anticipated that the scallop resource will be
adversely impacted by turbidities or sediments generated along the shoreline by the
effluent discharge.
Core Sound also provides habitat for an abundance of other estuarine and marine
organisms. Blue crabs, shrimp, and finfish are taken by commercial and recreational
fishermen from this estuary. Larval fish and shrimp migrate to and from primary
nursery areas throughout the Sound. The nearest primary nursery area is Cedar Island
Bay located to the southeast of Wainwright Island; this nursery area will not be
impacted by the project. However, to protect migrating larvae and other sensitive
aquatic fauna during periods of high biological activity, dredging activities will be limited
to the period between October 1 and March 31.
6.03 Terrestrial Resources
Terrestrial resources on Wainwright Island on the highest elevations include
mixed shrub thickets, sparsely vegetated areas, and unvegetated areas comprised of
sand and shells. The shoreline fringe areas contain sparse or no vegetation to the
marsh or high tide line. There are no areas on the island that would be classified as
maritime forest habitat.
Because it is isolated from the mainland and the Outer Banks, no predators are
found on Wainwright Island, a factor critical to the survival of colonial waterbird
species. Breeding and nesting activities occur from April 1 through August 31 of each
year. Dredging and disposal activities will be limited to the period from October 1
through March 31 to protect the colonial waterbirds and their habitat during the
breeding and nesting season.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

6.04 Beneficial Use
The preferred disposal alternative would: (1) Provide for satisfactory disposal of
maintenance dredging material; (2) stabilize the existing upland limits of the island;
(3) enhance or create habitat for colonial waterbird species such as royal terns and
sandwich terns, snowy egrets (Earetta thula thula), tri-colored herons (Evretta tricolor),
and glossy ibis (Pleaadis falcinellus falcinellus); and (4) existing habitat would be
preserved and expanded for breeding brown pelicans, herring gulls (Lanus argentatus
smithsonianus) and great black -backed gulls, and wading birds such as black -crowned
night herons (Nvcticorax nvcticorax hoactli , great egrets (Casmerodius albus e retta ,
and little blue herons (Florida caerulea caerulea).
Wind and wave erosional forces have significantly reduced Wainwright Island
from its original 16-acre size. It is a national bird sanctuary owned by the National
Audubon Society. The island is one of North Carolina's most important nesting sites for
colonial waterbirds (Parnell 1995). In 1991 the island supported North Carolina's
largest colony of nesting royal terns (Sterna macima maxima) (6,337 pairs) (Corps of
Engineers, 1993) and many sandwich terns (Sterna sandvicensis acuflavidus). It
presently supports the State's second largest colony of nesting brown pelicans
(Pelecanus occidentalis carolinensisl (950 pairs). Suitable bare ground nesting and
breeding habitat for terns has diminished greatly due to wind and wave erosion and
vegetation growth. Nesting habitat for brown pelicans is now threatened. Royal and
sandwich terns abandoned the island in 1994.
Colonial waterbird nesting sites in North Carolina have been reduced almost 50
percent from the mid 1970's to the late 1980's (Golder 1995, Bain 1989, Parnell and
Soots 1979). As a result, more and more birds utilize the remaining but rapidly eroding
breeding and nesting islands. Although colonial waterbird populations within North
Carolina are not presently declining. this may not be the situation in the near future
(Parnell 1995). Crowding increases the potential for a catastrophic loss of birds by
disease, weather related events (e.g., hail storms), or by human activities.
The National Audubon Society supports the placement of dredged sand in such a
way as to protect the pelican and wading bird nesting habitats while restoring the tern
nesting habitat. They recommended that a fringe of vegetation be left on the eastern
and northern sides of the island to provide habitat for pelicans and that no material be
placed on the northwestern finger of the island. Similar landscaping actions have
proven to work successfully on South Pelican and Ferry Slip Islands in the lower Cape
Fear River (Golder 1995).
RECEIVED
DEC 0 S 2016 7
DCM- MHD CITY

6.05 Threatened and Endangered Species
The proposed work has been reviewed for compliance with the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended. Informal consultation was initiated with telephonic
requests on March 16, 1995, for the North Carolina endangered species lists from the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the NMFS. Based on these listings, the
following species may occur in the project area and must be considered:
SPECIES
Leatherneck sea turtle
Kemp's ridley sea turtle
Loggerhead sea turtle
Green sea turtle
Arctic peregrine falcon
Roseate tern
Bald eagle
Piping plover
Red -cockaded woodpecker
Rough -leafed loosestrife
Seabeach amaranth
Eastern cougar
American alligator
Dismal Swamp
southeastern shrew
Sei whale
Sperm whale
Finback whale
Right whale
Hawksbill sea turtle
Leatherback sea turtle
Shortnose sturgeon
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Dermochelvs coriacea
Lepidochelvs kem
Caretta caretta
Chelonia mvdas
Falco peregrinus tun rius
Sterna douaaltii dou allii
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Charadrius melodus
Picoides borealis
Lvsimachia asperulaefolia
Amaranthus umilus
Felis concolor couguar
Alligator mississippiensis
Sorex longirostris fisheri
Balaenoptera borealis
Phvseter macrocephalus
(catodon)
Balaenoptera phvsalus
Balaena lg acialis
Eretmochelvs imbricata
Dermochelvs coriacea
Acioenser brevirostrum
STATUS
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
The eastern cougar, rough -leafed loosestrife, Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew,
and red -cockaded woodpecker should not be affected by the proposed work, as
Wainwright Island does not contain suitable habitat for these species. Furthermore,
their presence on the island is highly unlikely since it is isolated by surrounding waters
and situated far from the nearest mainland area.
Sea turtle nesting habitat is confined to oceanfront beaches. They would be
expected to appear along the North Carolina coast between May 1 and November 15.
Due to its estuarine location, Wainwright Island would not provide suitable nesting
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

habitat for any sea turtles. Green, Kemp's ridley, and loggerhead turtles may feed in
the project area, however, the NMFS has determined that hydraulic pipeline dredges
are unlikely to adversely affect sea turtles.
Due to the estuarine location of the project, none of the whales would be impacted
by the proposed work.
The arctic peregrine falcon and the bald eagle may migrate through the area or
occur as winter residents in eastern North Carolina. Wainwright Island does not
provide suitable nesting, resting, or feeding habitat for these species. The project
should not adversely affect the falcon or the bald eagle.
The shortnose sturgeon may be found in the area. It has been documented for
the Cape Fear River (Moser and Ross, 1993), but no other populations are known
within coastal North Carolina. Due to their mobility, this species should not be affected
by the work as there is no direct evidence that dredging negatively impacts migrating
shortnose sturgeon (Moser and Ross, 1993).
Seabeach amaranth is an annual or perennial plant only found on oceanfront or
ocean inlet beaches. Because of its presumed absence in estuarine environments, this
plant should not be impacted by the project.
The piping plover is a winter resident of the beaches of North Carolina. Due to its
estuarine location, Wainwright Island does not provide suitable nesting or feeding
habitat for this oceanfront inhabitant, The roseate tern infrequently visits the area but
is not known to nest here. The project should not adversely affect these species.
The American alligator is no longer a threatened species and is listed only for
similarity of appearances purposes. Section 7 consultation requirements no longer
apply to this species.
In summary, it has been determined that the proposed project, as described in
section 1.00, is not likely to adversely impact or affect any listed threatened or
endangered species or their critical habitat.
6.06 Archaeological/Historical Resources
The project area was visually inspected on May 3, 1995, by Mr. Mark Mathis,
Archaeologist, North Carolina Division of Archives and History. Mr. Mathis commented
that no archaeological survey has been previously conducted on the island (Attachment
C). The field inspection demonstrates the site contains substantial undisturbed and
potentially significant cultural deposits. Mr. Mathis recommends that archaeological
testing be conducted across the island to: (a) document the nature, extent, and
RECENCu
DEC 0 S 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

condition of the cultural deposits; (b) evaluate the significance of the deposits with
regard to the National Register of Historic Places; and (c) develop, if warranted, an
appropriate impact mitigation plan.
A copy of the State field report (Mathis 1995) will be supplied upon written
request. In summary, large numbers of sand and clay Middle and Late Woodland
Period (AD 800 -1500) ceramics were found on the surface. The island contains a
heavy covering of shell midden, particularly on its northern and western sides. The
southern and eastern sides appear to have been previously disposed upon, and this
material may be hiding any remaining midden.
Impacts to the site will be limited to covering of artifact deposits and possible
damage from heavy equipment. Prior to project commencement, an archaeological
survey will be implemented which will assess National Register of Historic Places
eligibility. If the Corps and State agree that the site is significant, some restrictions may
be placed on the manner in which heavy equipment is operated.
6.07 Recreation and Aesthetic Resources
Wainwright Island lies within Core Sound which is part of the second largest
estuarine system in the eastern United States. The area affords opportunities for many
boating and other saltwater recreational activities including swimming, finfishing,
shellfishing, water skiing, and bird and other nature observing and exploration
activities. The proposed maintenance dredging work will only have short-term and
minor impacts, if any, on the recreational activities and natural aesthetics of the
estuarine environment. As discussed in section 6.04, the work will be beneficial to
colonial bird populations.
6.08 Development
Due to the isolation of the work site, it is not anticipated that commercial or
residential development opportunities will be enhanced or hindered by the proposed
work. Most of the surrounding area is comprised of public land or areas not considered
prime development property. Cape Lookout and Cape Hatteras National Seashores lie
to the east; the Cedar Island National Wildlife Refuge is situated southeast. The
nearest mainland areas are comprised of Federal and State regulated wetlands, areas
protected from development activities. Commercial fishing traffic is not expected to
increase in the future in Core Sound.
6.09 Executive Order 11988, Flood Plain Management
The proposed disposal area is located within the 100-year flood plain. However,
as discussed in section 5.03, there are no feasible upland alternative sites. As
RECEIVED to
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

discussed elsewhere in this EA, adverse impacts to natural flood plain resources have
been minimized; therefore, the proposed action complies with all applicable State and
local flood plain ordinances and with Executive Order 11988, Flood Plain Management,
6.10 Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands
The proposed action has been evaluated under Executive Order 11990,
Protection of Wetlands. The shoreline of Wainwright Island contains regularly flooded
tidal wetlands characterized by the presence of scattered fringe areas of saltmarsh
cordgrass (S artina alterniflora) and unvegetated intertidal flats. Impacts to wetlands
will be minimized by construction of the effluent retention berm above the m.h.w. line.
It is anticipated that any adversely impacted tidal wetlands will quickly recover or
reestablish along the shoreline limits below the effluent retention berm. Elevation
contouring by control of effluent may present opportunities to create and expand (both
tidal and intertidal) wetlands beyond the amount that may be affected by the proposed
disposal work. If deemed appropriate and necessary, sprigs will be planted at proper
elevations to accelerate the establishment of wetland vegetation.
Additionally, a low function and value wetland area vegetated by Phraomites
australis has been established within the upland portion of the island. Concern for this
area was not expressed by respondents to the scoping letter or attendees at the
scoping meeting.
6.11 Air Quality
The project is located within the jurisdiction for air quality of the Wilmington
Regional Office of the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources. The ambient air quality for Carteret County has been determined to be in
compliance (attainment area) with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This
project is not anticipated to create any adverse effect on the air quality of this
attainment area.
7.00 RELATIONSHIP TO LAND USE PLANS
The Carteret County Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Land Use Plan of
March 1991 classifies the waters of Core Sound as ORWs. The proposed dredging
and dredged material disposal would not result in significant adverse effects to the
lands and waters on and around Wainwright Island; therefore, the proposed action
does not conflict with the land use plans for Carteret County,
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016 11
DCM- MHD CITY"

5.00 RELATIONSHIP TO NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM
Based on information presented within this EA, the proposed maintenance
dredging of Wainwright Slough by pipeline dredge with disposal on Wainwright Island
by control of effluent is consistent with the approved Coastal Management Program of
the State of North Carolina and the 1991 Carteret County Land Use Plan. During
coordination of the EA, the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management will review
the information presented herein and furnish a consistency position on the proposed
work.
9.00 PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT
9.01 Scoping
On March 27, 1995, a scoping letter was sent to Federal and State agencies,
interest groups, and the public to request identification of significant resources; issues
of concern; and recommendations for studies considered necessary. Further
coordination was conducted during an onsite scoping meeting held on May 3, 1995
(see Attachment B for list of attendees). Responses to the scoping letter are presented
in Attachment C. The letters noted support for the project, suggestions for beneficial
uses of dredged material, and concerns needing to be addressed.
9.02 Fish and Wildlife Coordination
The USFWS, by letter dated April 25, 1995, identified fish and wildlife resources
in the project area and discussed potential project-related.impacts... Recommendations
of that report were considered during project development. The following paragraphs
present these recommendations and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' response to
each.
The Service recommended that the planning include the following considerations:
USFWS Recommendation: As much sediment as possible should be placed
above the high tide line on the existing island, consistent with the creation of suitable
nesting habitat for colonial birds. These efforts should be coordinated with the National
Audubon Society, the North Carolina's Wildlife Resources Commission, and the
Service's Habitat Management Biologist.
RECEIVED 12
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Corps Response: This EA is being circulated for comment to the suggested
parties. All recommendations for creating suitable colonial waterbird habitat will be
considered.
USFWS Recommendation: Sediment which cannot be placed above the high
tide line should be used to expand the area of habitat for colonial waterbird nesting in
areas which are now intertidal and subtidal. Although the Service does not endorse the
elimination of estuarine shallows, the Service would not oppose the restoration of the
historic area of the island reduced by erosion. They recommend using historic data to
determine the former extent of the island and limit disposal in intertidal and subtidal
areas to the historic "footprint" of the island.
Corps Response: To minimize impacts to SAVs, wetlands, and other estuarine
resources, direct disposal will not encroach beyond the existing high ground limits of
the island. As stated in section 4.03, control of effluent disposal is the most cost
effective and efficient method of dredged material disposal for the maintenance
dredging of Wainwright Slough. Restoration of the island to its historic limits could be
pursued by the National Audubon Society under the cost sharing procedures of Section
204 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-580). The Corps
would be a willing cosponsor of such a proposal.
USFWS Recommendation: The Service recommends that the Corps eliminate
the use of a sandbag retention wall from the planning process.
Corps Response: The preferred disposal method, Alternative 1 - Control of
Effluent (see section 4.02), does not involve use of a sandbag retention area.
USFWS Recommendation: TheServicerecommends that the Corps' planning
process include a carefully considered work schedule which would avoid periods of
high biological activity.
Corps Response: As stated in section 6.03, all dredging and disposal work will
be conducted between October 1 and March 31 to avoid periods of high aquatic and
terrestrial biological activity.
9.03 Other Agencies and Organizations
Representatives from the following agencies and organizations were contacted
regarding the proposed action:
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
RECEJVED 13
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
North Carolina Division of Archives and History
National Marine Fisheries Service
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Audubon Society
University of North Carolina -Wilmington (Dr. James Parnell)
10.00 LIST OF RECIPIENTS
This EA is being circulated for 30-day review to the following agencies and
individuals:
Federal Agencies
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV
Forest Service, USDA, Southeastern Area
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
National Resource Conservation Service, USDA
U.S. Department of Energy
U.S. Coast Guard
Postmasters
State Agencies
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Division of Environmental Management
Division of Marine Fisheries
State Clearinghouse
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016 la
DCM- MHD CITY

Libraries
UNC-Chapel Hill Library
Librarian, North Carolina Environmental Resources Library
UNC-Wilmington Library
North Carolina State Library
Duke University Library
Elected Officials
Honorable Jean Preston
Honorable Jonathan Robinson
Honorable Beverly M. Perdue
Honorable Patrick J. Ballentine
Honorable Walter B. Jones, Jr.
Honorable Lauch Faircloth
Honorable Jesse Helms
Chairman, Board of Carteret County Commissioners
Mayors
Local Agencies
North Carolina Council of Governments Region P
Carteret County Economic 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 Wildlife Federation
Carteret County Crossroads
Izaac Walton League
Colleges/Universities
UNC Institute of Marine Science
Duke University Department of Geology
Cape Fear Community College
RECEIVED 15
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Companies and Individuals
Carteret -Craven EMC
Jacksonville Daily News
Carteret County News -Times
Morehead City Shipping Company
Williams and Haywood, Inc.
T.D. Eure Construction Company
Wilmington Shipping Company
Sailcraft, Inc.
Texasgulf, Inc.
Stevens Towing Company
Stroud Engineering
Land Management Group, Inc.
George Davenport
Grady Davis
John Hooten
T.O. Talton
R.T. Jones
Luther Smith and Son
Lloyd Wood
Alex Malpass
Calvin Mason
R.W. Chambers
John Fussell
Frank Hatsel
Walter Gentry
William Whaley
Anne McCrary
Vince Bellis
Ray Brandi
Orrin Pilkey
James Parnell
Claude Brown
W.D. Amen
11.00 POINT OF CONTACT
Any comments or questions regarding this EA should be addressed to
Mr. Ernest Jahnke, Engineering and Planning Division, Environmental Resources
Section, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, PO Box 1890, Wilmington,
North Carolina 28402-1890. Telephone contact is [phone].
RECEIVED 16
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

12.00 REFERENCES
Bain, Harold C., Jr. 1989. Trends in Site Utilization Among Colonial Waterbirds
in North Carolina Estuaries. Master of Science Thesis, University of North Carolina -
Wilmington.
Ferguson, Randolph L.; Wood, Lisa L.; and Pawlak, Brian T. 1988. SAV Habitat
from Drum Inlet to Ocracoke Inlet, North Carolina. (Map). National Ocean Service,
Photogrammetry Branch, Nautical Charting Division, Rockville, MD.
Golder, Walker. 1995. Sanctuary Manager for the National Audubon's North
Carolina Coastal Island Sanctuary Program, Wilmington, North Carolina. Personal
Communication. May 1995.
Kimmel, Richard H. 1995. Cultural Resources Assessment of the Wainwright
Island Vicinity, Carteret County, North Carolina. Memorandum dated May 8, 1995, on
file. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington, North Carolina.
Mathis, Mark A. 1995. Archaelogical Field Inspection of Wainwright Island -
31CR273, Core Sound, Carteret County, North Carolina.
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.
Parnell, James F. 1995. Professor of Ornithology, University of North Carolina -
Wilmington. Personal Communication. May 3, 1995.
Parnell, James F. and R.F. Soots, Jr. 1979. Atlas of colonial waterbirds of North
Carolina estuaries. UNC Seagrant Publication. UNC-SG-78-10. June 1979
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.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Colonial Waterbird Database Program. Contract
No. DACW54-88-H-0012. Updated 1993.
. 1994. Limited Reevaluation Report and Draft
Environmental Assessment for Drum Inlet, Carteret County, North Carolina, June,
1994.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

YAl1YINa—___
I' TYPICAL SECTION — — II
C A R T E R E T
wrarr
awAr
RECEIVED
rtuma
COUNTY
PAY C/ C0 $'00/0 I
SANDAatrr
DISPOSALIOSAL ARIA ratty
Nam '
t
4
0
.aNrr
auwr
SAND BAG Mileage in the t11Paa91, .01". Y R Maaawad EaalNavd has the
DISPOSAL YEA
tan I"~
NwIN and of M.i.wigNt flaaaN.
WATERWAY CONNECTING
PAMLICO SD. a BEAUFORT HARBOR,
NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE a MILES
CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON,N.C.
MAP REVISED SEPTEMBER 1967
FIGURE 1
DCM- MHD CITY

ATTACHMENT A
SECTION 404 (B)(1) (PUBLIC LAW 95-217) EVALUATION
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES
40 CFR 230
Section 404 Public Notice No. CESAW-EP-PE-95-16-0005
1. Review of Compliance (230.10(a)-(d))
A review of the NEPA Document
indicates that:
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);
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 6.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
Preliminary 11
YESI_I N01_1-
Final 2/
YESI X I N0I-1
YESI_1 NO[-1- YESI X I N0I-1
YESI-1 N01-1-
YESI-1 N01-1-
YESI X I N01_1
YESIXI NOI_I
DCM- MHD CITY

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
fluctu atio ns/hyd roperiod.
(6) Alteration of salinity
gradients.
b. Biological Characteristics of the
Aquatic Ecosystem (Subpart D)
(1) Effect on threatenediendangered
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.
Not Signifi- Signifi-
N/A cant cant*
I I I I
I X I
I I X I
I I I I
I X I
I
I 1
X I I
I X I
I
I X I
I
I x l
I
I X
I I
( X I
I I
I
I I
I I
I I
X I
I I
X I
I 1
X I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
X I I
Remarks: Where a check is placed under
the significant category, preparer add explanation below.
Proceed to Section 3
'See page 6.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 Z016 A2
DCM- MHD CITY

3. Evaluation of Dredged or Fill Material (Subpart G) 3/
a. The following information has been
considered in evaluating the biological
availability of possible contaminants in
dredged or fill material. (Check only
those appropriate.)
(1) Physical characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IXI
(2) Hydrography in relation to
known or anticipated
sources of contaminants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .IXI
(3) Results from previous
testing of the material
or similar material in _
the vicinity of the project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I_I
(4) Known, significant sources of
persistent pesticides from _
land runoff or percolation ............................ I ....... I_I
(5) Spill records for petroleum
products or designated
(Section 311 of CWA) _
hazardous substances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _
(6) Other public records of
significant introduction of
contaminants from industries,
municipalities, or other
sources.............................................I_I
(7) Known existence of substantial
material deposits of
substances which could be
released in harmful quantities
to the aquatic environment by
man -induced discharge activities .............. ................. I_I
(8) Other sources (specify) .................................. .. I_I
List appropriate references.
Reference: Environmental Assessment, Maintenance Dredging Wainwright Slough Waterway
Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret CountyNorth Carolina, dated June
1995.
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 ILC I NO LI'
Proceed to Section 4
', 3/, see page 6.
DECEIVED
DEC 08 2016 A3
DCM- MHD CITY

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 . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I —I
(4) Water column stratification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
(5) Discharge vessel speed and
_
direction .............................................
I_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...............................................I_I
(9) Other factors affecting rates and
patterns of mixing (specify)
List appropriate references.
Reference: Environmental Assessment, Maintenance Dredging
Wainwriaht Sough. Waterway
Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret County,
North Carolina, dated June
1995.
b. An evaluation of the appropriate factors in
4a above indicates that the disposal site
_
andlor size of mixing zone are acceptable . . . .. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . YES IXI NO
5. Actions to Minimize Adverse Effects (Subpart H).
All appropriate and practicable steps have been taken,
through application of recommendations of 230.70-230.77,
to ensure minimal adverse effects of the proposed
_
discharge. List actions taken ................................
YES IN NO I_I'
For water quality see Section 6.01 of the EA.
For benthos see Section 6.02 of the EA.
For fisheries see Section 6.02 of the EA.
For threatened and endangered species see Section 6.05 of the EA.
Return to section 1 for final stage of compliance review. See also
note 31, page 3.
'See page6. RE-CGCCIV q,ED
A4
DEC 0 8 Z016
DCM- MHD CITY

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 I_I'
b. Water circulation, fluctuation, and salinity
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5).
YES IXI
NO I_I
C. Suspended parficulatestturbidity
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5).
YES IXI
NO I_I'
d. Contaminant availability
_
(review sections 2a, 3, and 4).
YES IXI
NO I_I'
e. Aquatic ecosystem structure and function
YES IXI
NO I_I
(review sections 2b and c, 3, and 5).
f. Disposal site
(review sections 2, 4, and 5).
YES IXI
NO I_I-
g. Cumulative impact on the aquatic
ecosystem,
YES IXI
NO
h. Secondary impacts on the aquatic
_
ecosystem.
YES IXI
NO I_I'
7. Findings.
a. The proposed disposal site for discharge of
dredged or fill material complies with the _
Section 404(b)(1) guidelines . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . IXI
b. The proposed disposal site for discharge of
dredged or fill material complies with the
Section 404(b)(1) guidelines with the _
inclusion of the following conditions: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
'See page 6.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 Z016 A5
DCM- MHD CITY

Q
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 reapons(s):
(1) There is a less damaging practicable alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . _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 . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . _
V
William R. Dawson, P.E.
Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division District Engineer Q
Date: Date: I�
'A negative, significant, or unknown response indicates that the permit app ication 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.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016 A6
DCM_ MHD CITY

ATTACHMENT B
ONSITE SCOPING MEETING
MAY 3, 1993
LIST OF ATTENDEES
National Audubon Society
National Marine Fisheries Service
North Carolina Division of Archives and History
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, Morehead City Regional Office
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management, Wilmington Regional Office
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Northside Office, Raleigh
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Habitat Conservation Office,
Washington, North Carolina
University of North Carolina - Wilmington
RECEIVED
DEC p 8 2016
DCM_ A4HD CITY

ATTACHMENT C
RESPONSES TO THE MARCH 27, 1995, SCOPING LETTER
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

0
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
April 20, 1995
William R. Dawson, PE
Chief, Engineering and Planning Division
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, N.C. 28402-1890
Re: Dredge Disposal Modification, Wainwright Island,
Carteret County, ER 95-8737
Dear Mr. Dawson:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of April 13, 1995, concerning the above project.
Our records indicate that there are no recorded archaeological or historic resources
on Wainwright Island. However, the island has never been surveyed for sites.
Based on similar islands in the region, it is quite possible that prehistoric remains
may have at one time existed on the island, assuming it is not a man-made spoil
island.
Mark Mathis of our Office of State Archaeology will participate in the field visit to
the site on May 3, 1995. If there are any changes in plans please contact him at
919f733-7342.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill -Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 9 1 9f733-4763.
Sirigerely,
/I) VIA
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
r-ALCEIVED
r"FC 0 8 2016
D �11r IMHD CITY

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission P
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
May 4, 1995
Mr. Earnest Jahnke
Environmental Resources Section
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Dear Mr. Jahnke:
The trip to Wainwright Island on Wednesday, May 3, 1995 was very informative. I
believe that the method of disposal which involves control of effluent with discharge directed
overland (sites C and D) to the open water on the non -channel side (west side) of the island
would be significantly enhance the island for colonial nesting birds and only minimally impact
the shallow water habitat I agree that toe -of -the -bank disposal would be the least desirable of
alternatives that have been discussed.
Thank you for arranging the trip. Please contact me if additional information is needed at
this stage of review.
Sincerely,
Franklin T. McBride, Manager
Habitat Conservation Program
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

NationW_��,Audubon Society
May 11, 1995
Mr. Ernie Jahnke
Environmental Resources Section
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Dear Mr. Jahnke:
I am writing in response to requests
the proposed disposal of dredged sand on
at the junction of Core and Pamlico Sounds,
Carolina.
North Carolina
Coastal Islands Sanctuary
10 E. Greensboro St., #7
Wrightsville Beach, NC 28480
[phone]
for comments regarding
Wainwright Island located
Carteret County, North
Wainwright Island, owned and protected as a wildlife
sanctuary by the National Audubon Society, has long been a vital
nesting site for many species of colonial waterbirds. Deposition of
dredged sand on portions of the island has created habitat suitable
for nesting terns and pelicans, while habitats that existed prior to the
disposal of dredged sand on the island have supported nesting
wading birds. The island once supported North Carolina's largest
colony of Royal and Sandwich terns, and continues to support the
state's second largest colony of Brown Pelicans. However, erosion
and vegetation growth in recent years has eliminated the nesting
habitat for Royal and Sandwich Terns which abandoned the island in
1994, and threatens the nesting habitat for Brown Pelicans. Erosion
has also greatly reduced the island from its original size of 16 acres.
The National Audubon Society supports the deposition of
dredged sand on the island in a manner that will restore nesting
habitat for waterbirds and restore the island, as nearly as possible, to
its original size. Of the disposal sites proposed in "figure 2" of the
letter dated March 27, 1995, dredged sand placed on sites D, C and B
would accomplish this. Audubon recommends that a fringe of
vegetation be left on the eastern. and northern sides of the island to
provide habitat for pelicans and that no material be placed on the
RECEIVE[
northwestern finger of the island. To restore the island to its original
size, Audubon recommends that material be placed in site B and that
DEC 0 S Z016
sand bags be used if deemed necessary or effluent be controlled to
minimize the impact on surrounding shallows and restore the vital
DCM- MHD CI
waterbird habitat that has been lost to erosion.
n..,e., o.-, . r"

Nesting waterbirds occupy Wainwright Island from 1 March to
1 September, therefore Audubon recommends that all activity on
and adjacent to the island be completed between September and
March.
From the mid 1970's to the late 1980's, North Carolina's coast
experienced an almost 50% reduction in the number of active nesting
sites used by colonial waterbirds. Thus, those sites that remain are
increasingly important. The 1993 Atlas of Colonial Waterbirds of
North Carolina Estuaries (Parnell et al. 1995) includes loss of nesting
habitat as a major threat to the state's waterbirds.
We, at Audubon, appreciate the opportunity to comment on
this project and look forward to working closely with the Corps to
ensure that Wainwright Island continues to provide a safe haven for
nesting waterbirds.
Please call me if you have any questions.
Since ly,
,-,AL
Walker Golder
Sanctuary Manager
Literature Cited
Parnell, J. F., W. W. Golder and T. M. Henson. 1995. 1993 atlas of
colonial waterbirds of North Carolina estuaries. NC Sea Grant
Publication UNC-SG-95-02. Raleigb, North Carolina.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

RCV BY:Wilmington District ; 5-11-95 ; 16:07
USACE-Reg, Branch;t 1
State of North Carolina
Department of Envlronment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes. Secretary
Roger N. SChoctor. Director May 11, 1995
William F- Dawson, Chief
En&,sing and Planning Division
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Postdt" Fax Note 7671
0216 5- i/
O°a°i� /
To rnit ah�Ec
FMMe '-0Cii c /
OOA)ea' OC'
00, bet M
pf� M
At1 "
Fuck ��j�' 2�
Fuc•
1MgOtHNCE: DCNDS-19: Sroping. Modification of Disposal Method, Wainwright Island
Dear Mr, Dawson -
Thu Division of Coastal Management would like to thank you for the opportunity to participate in the site
meeting held May 3, 1995, Wainwright Island in Cwtemt County, NG The meeting was held to disc= and invite
continent on the various alternatives which have been pmposed for the disposal of drudged material from the AIW W
on Wainwright Island. As a suppletnent to the discussions held oncite. we offer the following comments:
1. we would consider Alternative B to be the lent preferred alternative. A large eta of didloa bottom
habitat would he lost and there are potential significant impacts on submerged aquatic vegetation and other
eswarise resomom
2. Alternative C would impact a large amount of wolads, especially If e86remt were unconfnod.
3. The corriNnation WD alternative d1SCassod at the site meeting would COW digrosal of me dredged
material on the hiltba sandy portion of the island with the effluent being fsected downslope, westwand
towards the w=. We feel that this alternative could bo acoq*No provided the material is contained
landward of the coastal wetlands vegetation line by a sandbag retaining structure.
4. A Consistency Derumtnailon will be required for the proposal N Its natal form, pursuant to 15 CFR 930
Subpart C - Consistency for Federal Activities.
It you have any questions regarding our comma" pkase ooattrct me or Steve 6enm DMOon of Coasw
Matazement. at [phone]. Thank you for your consideradon elf the North Cuoiina Coastal Managw=t
Program.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
Sincerely,
Caroline J. Bellis
cc Preston Pate, Assistant Director, Division of Coasts Management
Charles Jones. Division of Coastal Management, Morehead City
Ernest Jahnke, US Army Carps of Engineers, Wilmington District
P.n. Rny 776R7. thrfwbh. Nash Carolina 27671-76R7 Taloohotro 019-7334293 FAX 010-73 -lhQs

= c UNITED STATES oEPARTMENi OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
•� �^ NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
Southeast Fisheries Science Center
Beaufort Laboratory
101 Pivers Island Road
Beaufort, NC 28516-9722
May 8, 1995
MEMORANDUM FOR: Gordon Thayer
FROM: Lisa Wood
SUBJECT: Wainwright Island Project
On May 3, 1995, I visited Wainwright Island with
representatives from Wilmington District U.S. Army Corp of
Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Audubon Society, CAMA,
N.C. State Fisheries, UNC-Wilmington (Dr. Pernell), and the
Archaelogy Society to discuss alternative disposal methods for
maintenance dredging of Wainwright Slough.
Adverse conditions for locating seagrass habitat were
observed. Strong winds prior to our visit created turbid water
conditions and cloudy skies prevented sunlight from illuminating
the bottom. Sampling with a rake, we found Zostera marina and
Ruppia maritima throughout Site B. Seagrass was not observed on
the north side of the island. Over the past two years, the north
side of the island experienced severe erosion. Most of the
representatives supported depositing spoil on Site C to expand the
nesting area for pelicans etc. There is a low berm between Site C
and B. Effluent will flow down the berm into the area containing
seagrass in Site B. The COE asked if the seagrasses could tolerate
any degree of burial.
I posed this question to Mark Fonseca. Mark explained recent
research shows Zostera marina can tolerate 25% burial of plant
height for short periods. The research suggested a thin layer of
sediment greater than 25t of the height of the smallest plant will
significantly increase mortality and reduce productivity. Can the
COE control the amount of effluent flowing down the berm in the
seagrass habitat?
SUGGESTIONS
1- Review 1995 aerial photographs for seagrass distribution and
make a field trip under better atmospheric and water qualilty
conditions.
2- Map boundaries of seagrass habitat and island with GPS for
baseline data. Position stakes along boundaries for future
reference.
3- Discuss ways to control effluent to avoid smothering
seagrass.
CC: Ernie Jahnke
Larry Hardy
on Sechler RE�,L,vE u
DEC 0 8 2016
DC'M- MHD CITY

State of North Cap .na
-Department of -Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Marine Fisheries
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Bruce Freeman, Director
May 5, 1995
Mr. Ernie Jahnke
Environmental Resources Section
P. O. Box. 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Dear Mr. Jahnke:
I�EHPsi
As a result of reviewing the proposed spoil disposal modifica-
tion of Wainwright Island and the on -site visit May 3, 1995, the
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries would like the
following concerns addressed in the upcoming environmental
assessment.
The presence of sea grass beds, i.e. Halodule wriahtii,
Zostera marina or Runnia maritime hard clams and bay scallops that
may be buried by the deposition of spoil material will be the main
concern of the Division. Another investigation of the site on the
southwest side of the island needs to be conducted on a clear,
calm day to determine the presence and density of these species.
Bay scallops, if any, present on the southwest side of the
island could be relocated east of the channel to the seagrass
bed(s) there. The density of clams is not expected to be signifi-
cant in the vicinity of the "Site B" area. Dredge spoil disposal
on any significant sea grass concentrations should be avoided or
impact should be minimized. How much gradual covering by sand over
time the sea grass can withstand is unknown and any areas covered
with grass should be separated from spoil effects.
If the combination of Sites C and D with effluent directed
toward Site B is pursuant as the preferred alternative, the
Division at this time would recommend the use of sand bag retention
REC EI'�,wall to reduce turbidity and contain the spoil material.
DEC 0 S 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
DLT:rrm
cc: Mike Street
Melba McGee
Sincerely,
,Z &wl.
David L. Taylor
P.O. Cox 769, Morehead CO. North Carolina 28557-0769 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Er ploym 50% recycledl 10% poet -consumer paper

United States Department of the Interior a a�
� a
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE .uwmwm�
~�aen s + Ecological Services %
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
April 25, 1995
Mr. William R. Dawson
Chief, Engineering and Planning Division
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Dear Mr. Dawson:
This responds to your March 27, 1995 request for scoping comments
from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on the proposal
by the Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers (Corps) to modify
the method of disposal for dredge material from the maintenance
dredging of the Wainwright Slough portion of the Waterway
connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret County,
North Carolina. These comments are provided in accordance with the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667d) and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). This letter is provided on
a planning aid basis and does not constitute the report of the
Department of the Interior as required by Section 2(b) of the Fish
and Wildlife Coordination Act.
The current disposal method involves toe -of -bank placement on the
channel side (east) of Wainwright Island. This disposal site is at
capacity and material placed in this area quickly returns to the
channel. The Corps is currently considering three alternatives to
alleviate this problem: (1) control of effluent with discharge
directed overland to the open water on the non -channel (west) side
of the island; (2) toe -of -bank disposal on the non -channel side
with confinement by a sandbag retention wall; and, (3) toe -of -bank
disposal on the non -channel side without confinement.
Concerns of the Service and Recommendations for Environmental
Document
The Service recognizes the problems of the current disposal method
and the need for modifications. The Service also is aware that
Wainwright Island is an important nesting site for colonial
waterbirds and that the island is managed by the National Audubon
R Society. The habitat value of the island for nesting waterbirds
bam reduced by erosion and the growth of vegetation.
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Therefore, the Service believes that a major objective of this
disposal plan should be to enhance the value of the island as a
nesting site for colonial waterbirds without significant adverse
impacts to other fish and wildlife resources in the area.
In light of this objective, the Service recommends that the corps'
planning include the following considerations:
1. As much sediment as possible should be placed above the high
tide line on the existing island. However, this placement
should be consistent with the creation of suitable nesting
habitat for colonial waterbirds. Sediment placed above the
high tide line should be properly contoured and at a proper
height to maximize the habitat value of the area. The final
configuration of sediment above the high tide line should be
coordinated with the National Audubon Society, the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, and the Service's
Habitat Management Biologist Bob Noffsinger, who may be
reached at [phone].
2. Sediment which cannot be placed above the high tide line
should used to expand the area of habitat for colonial
waterbird nesting in areas which are now intertidal and
subtidal . While the Service does not endorse the
elimination of estuarine shallows, the Service would not
oppose the restoration of the historic area of this island
which has been reduced by erosion. Therefore, the Service
recommends that the Corps' use historic data to determine
the former extent of the island and limit disposal in
intertidal and subtidal areas to the historic "footprint" of
the island.
3. The Service does not support the construction of hard,
erosion control structures in marine or estuarine areas.
The Service believes that the use of a sandbag wall to
retain the sediment would be an undesirable precedent which
could lead to increased efforts by others to erect such
structures. Therefore, the Service recommends that the
Corps eliminate the use of a sandbag retention wall from the
planning process.
4. Any dredging and disposal project during a time of high
biological activity can produce adverse, environmental
impacts to species such as sea turtles and/or anadromous
R E C EIVLJ
fish, among others. Therefore, the Service recommends that
the Corps' planning process include a carefully considered
DEC 0 8 2016 work schedule which would avoid periods of high biological
activity.
DC M- M H D rThe attached pages identify the Federally -listed endangered,
threatened, and candidate species which occur in Carteret County,
North Carolina. The section of the environmental document
regarding protected species should contain the following
information:

1. A review of the literature and other information;
2. A description of any listed species or critical habitat that
may be affected by the action;
3. An analysis of the "effect of the action", as defined by CFR
402.02, on the species and habitat including consideration
of direct, indirect, cumulative effects, and the results of
related studies;
4. A description of the manner in which the action may affect
any species or critical habitat;
5. Summary of evaluation criteria used as a measure of
potential effects; and
6. Determination statement based on evaluation criteria.
Candidate species refers to any species being considered by the
Service for listing as endangered or threatened but not yet the
subject of a proposed rule. These species are not legally
protected under the Act or subject to its provisions, including
Section 7, until formally proposed or listed as threatened or
endangered. New data could result in the formal listing of a
candidate species. This change would place the species under the
full protection of the Endangered Species Act, and necessitate a
new survey if its status in the project corridor is unknown.
Therefore, it would be prudent for the project to avoid any adverse
impact to candidate species or their habitat. The North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program should be contacted for information on
species under State protection.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments
and we look forward to continued involvement with the Corps on this
project. If you have any questions, please call Howard Hall at
919-856-4520 (ext. 27). l-
Supervisor
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

REVISED APRIL 19, 1SS5
Carteret County
Mammals
Eastern cougar Felis concolor cououar) - E
ftdA
Said eagle (Haliaeetus louucoceohalus) - E
peregrine falcon (Falco peregdnus tggQJuil) - T
Red cockaded woodpecker Pic I e borealis) - E
Roseate tom (Stems dougal douaalRil - E
Piping plover (Charaddus mel u) - T
Reptiles
Green sea turtle (Che(onla mydas) - T
Kemp's (Atlantic) Ridley sea turtle (Leoidochelys kempi) - E
Leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelvs corlaceal - E
Loggerhead sea turtle ar caretta) - T
Plants
Rough -leaved loosestrife (Lysimachla asoerulaefofia) - E
Seabeach amaranth (Amaranthus oumeus) - T
Sea turtles when 9n the water" are under the jurisdiction of. the National Marine Fisheries Service and
should be contacted concerning your agency's responsibilities under Section 7 of the Endangered. spades
Act. Their address Is:
National Marine Fisheries Service
U.S. Department of commerce
9450 Koger Boulevard
Duval Building
St. Petersburg, Florida 33702
There are species which, although not now Rated or officially proposed for listing as endangered or
threatened, are under status review by the Service. These 'Candidate'(Cl and C2) spades are not legally
protected under the Act, and are not subject to any of Its provlslons, including Section 7, until they are
formally proposed or listed as threatened or endangered. We are providing the below list of candidate
spades which may occur within the project area for the purpose of giving you advance notification. These
species may be listed In the future, at which time they will be protected under the Act. In the meantime,
we would appreciate anything you might do for them.
Birds
Bachman's sparrow (Aimophlia vest vi per) - C2
Black rail (j a,_. terellus lamakxnsh; - C2
Henslow's sparrow (Ammodramus I will) - C2
RECEIVED Reptiles
Northern diamondback terrapin (Matademys terrapin teffa in) - C2
DEC 0 8 2016
Amphibians
Carolina crawfish frog (Rana areoiata caapit - C2
DCM- MHD CITY
Crustaceans
Croatan crayfish (Procambams ilumimanus► - C2

Carteret County Icont'd)
REVISED APRIL 19, 1995
Insects
Carter's noctuid moth (Soartiniohaoa carteraeI - C2
Plan
Carolina goldenrod Solida o utp chra) - C2
Chapman's sedge arex Chaomanii) - C2
Dune blue curls (Trichostema 12.) - C2
Loose waterm(Ifoil (Mvrioohvilum laxum) - C2
Pondsplce s a aestivalis) - C2
Savanna camylopus (Camvloous carorinae) - C2
Savanna cowbane (Oxyoons ternat ) - C2
Smooth bog -asphodel ofi Idia Ig abral - C2
Venus flytrap (Dionaea muscioula) - C2
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

EO Sr.r
�1A r,
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION IV
345 COURTLAND STREET. N.E.
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30365
APR _
Colonel Robert J. Sperberg
District Engineer, Wilmington
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Attn: Mr. Earnest Jahnke
Environmental Resources Branch
Subject: Changes to the Maintenance Design for the Wainwright
Slough Portion of the Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound
and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret County, NC
Dear Colonel Sperberg:
Pursuant to your request of March 27, 1995, EPA, Region 4 has
reviewed the subject proposal which discusses the environmental
consequences of altering the current dredge disposal regimen on
Wainwright Island. After an examination of the information
provided and conversations with Environmental Resources, technical
staff we suggest that a variation of Option B and C be examined in
more detail. Shallow water habitat would be covered with
maintenance material with each of these options, but by putting the
material immediately adjacent to the present shoreline and using
some kind of confining measure (sand bags/tubes) the overall
footprint could be minimized.
This notwithstanding, it is not clear to us that shallow water
habitat is a limiting factor in system functioning; whereas
providing some long-term protection to Wainwright Island which is
relatively unique has obvious merit. It should be noted that the
entire island appears to be at risk from erosional processes;
hence, the no -action alternative has its own adverse ramifications.
For example, we understand that the island receives a great deal of
use as a rookery and this capability would be lost if it were
inundated.
On the basis of the scope of the proposal we have no
significant objections to your plans to use an EA as the evaluation
model rather than the more comprehensive environmental impact
statement format.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
Prided on Recycled Paper

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this action. If
we can be of further assistance in this matter, Dr. Gerald Miller
(404-347-3776 VM 6853) will serve as initial point of contact.
Sincerely,
Lck'- Wf fW
Heinz J. Mueller, Chief
Environmental Policy Section
Federal Activities Branch
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

0
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
lames B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
May 18, 1995
William R. Dawson, P.E.
Chief, Engineering and Planning Division
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, N.C. 28402-1890
Re: Dredge Disposal Modification, Wainwright Island,
Carteret County, ER 95-8737
Dear Mr. Dawson:
Division or Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr.. Director
On May 3, 1995, an on -site inspection was conducted at Wainwright Island by a
number of agency representatives, including Archaeologist Mark Mathis, who
prepared the enclosed field inspection report. The following comments concerning
the proposed disposal project are based on Mr. Mathis's report.
As noted in our letter of April 20, 1995, no archaeological resources had been
recorded on the island. However, during the recent inspection, an extensive
deposit of prehistoric shell was observed along the eroding western shore of the
island and recorded as 31CR273.
Based on Mr. Mathis's observations and the historical use of the island for dredge
disposal, portions of the interior and eastern side of the island are covered with old
dredge materials. At the time of the inspection, the island was inhabited by a
substantial population of nesting pelicans and evaluation of the extent of the
cultural remains across the island was impossible. However, we believe the site
probably contains substantial undisturbed and potentially significant cultural
deposits.
Prior to initiation of any new disposal and ground disturbing activities, we
recommend that archaeological testing be conducted across the island. The
purpose of the test excavations should be to (a) document the nature, extent, and
condition of the cultural deposits; (b) evaluate the significance of the deposits with
regard to the National Register of Historic Places; and (c) develop, if warranted, an
appropriate impact mitigation plan.
We appreciate your including Mr. Mathis in the recent inspection and hope these
comments will assist you in the project planning process. If you have questions
REuEl concerning the field report, please contact Mr. Mathis at 919n33-4763.
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY 9&
109 Fes: Jones Sceet •Raleigh, North Carolina 27i•4i-2g07

William R. Dawson
May 18, 1995, Page 2
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill -Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
(k David )Book
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
Enclosure
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

r
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WIi.MINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 189050�
wu.MlNoroN, NORTH c+tRa,ru,ze+oz-le90
nAftrro September 5, 1995
AT'IdfgN Of _.-
Environmental Resources Section
Dear Madam or Sir:
Enclosed for your information is a copy of the
August 1995.
An Environmental Assessment was distributed for public
comments on June 26, 1995. After review and consideration of
the comments received, we have determined that the proposed
action will not significantly affect the quality of the human
environment; therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will
not be prepared. Also enclosed is a copy of the Notice of
Availability for the signed Finding of No Significant Impact,
which is being provided to the general public.
Thank you for your interest in this project and for your
comments. If you have any questions regarding this project,
please contact Mr. Ernest Jahnke, Environmental Resources Section,
at [phone].
District Engineer
Enclosures
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
ream m laftorwe ►aw

September 5, 1995
Environmental Resources Section
Dear Madam or Sir:
Enclosed for your information is a copy of the
st 1995.
An Environmental Assessment was distributed for public
comments on June 26, 1995. After review and consideration of
the comments received, we have determined that the proposed
action will not significantly affect the quality of the human
environment; therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will
not be prepared. Also enclosed is a copy of the Notice of
Availability for the signed Finding of No Significant Impact,
which is being provided to the general public.
Thank you for your interest in this project and for your
comments. If you have any questions regarding this project,
please contact Mr. Ernest Jahnke, Environmental Resources Section;
at [phone].
Enclosures
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
Sincerely,
Robert J. Sperberg
Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
CESAW-EP-PE/J a r/4581
CESAW-EP-PE/ 9 /
CESAW-EP/Dawson/s/
CESAW-DX/Burch
Cf9fiM-BPf�htrfa
CES
CESAW-DE/COL Sperberg/s/
CALL BETSY 0 4643 TO PICK UP WHEN SIGNED.
CESAW-EP/Files
File: n:A3002pndr\wpdoc\wainrite.fns

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY
C ESAW-EP-PE-95-16-0010
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
September 5, 1995
A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the following U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers activity is available.
Project: Maintenance Dredging, Wainwright Slough, Waterway Connecting
Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret County, North Carolina.
The Environmental Assessment, Maintenance Dredging, Wainwright Slough Waterway
Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret County, North Carolina, was
circulated to Federal and State agencies and the public on June 26, 1995. After review
and consideration of the comments received, the FONSI was signed on August 31,
1995.
Copies of the FONSI may be requested from or further questions addressed to
Mr. Ernest Jahnke, Environmental Resources Section, at (910) 2514581,
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

US Army Corps
of Engineers
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
SOUTH ATLANTIC DIVISION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
RECEIVFr) AUGUST 1995
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SEPTEMBER 1995
Table of Contents
Items
Page No.
1.00
EXISTING PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED ACTION ...........
1
2.00
INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE .................................
1
3.00
PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION .............................
1
4.00
RESULTS OF PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION ..................
3
4.01 NMFS; letter of July 10, 1995...................................
3
4.02 USFWS....................................................
4
4.03 USEPA; (Telephonic Response) July 14, 1995 .....................
4
4.04 NCDMF; letter of July 19, 1995..................................
5
4.05 North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (NCDEM);
letters of
May 11, 1995, and July 19, 1995................................
5
4.06 North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) .. .........
6
4.07 NCWRC. Scoping Response letter of May 4, 1995 . ................
7
4.08 North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources. Scoping letter comments
of May 18,1995.............................................
7
5.00
ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES .........................
7
6.00
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS .................................
8
6.01 Cultural Resources ...........................................
8
6.02 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) ............................
8
6.03 North Carolina Coastal Management Program ......................
8
7.00
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS .......................................
8
8.00
REFERENCES ..................................................
8
9.00
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI) .......................
9
List of Fiqures
Figure 1: Locality Map (Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound & Beaufort Harbor,
North Carolina . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
RECEIVE6ent 1
DEC 0 8 2016
List of Attachments
(Follows Page 9)
Letters Received During The 30-Day Comment Period,
DCM- MHD CITY

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SEPTEMBER 1995
1.00 EXISTING PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED ACTION
The project involves changing the method of dredge disposal for the continued
as -needed maintenance dredging in the Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and
Beaufort Harbor at Wainwright Slough. The site is located approximately 5 miles
northeast of the Cedar Island Ferry Landing in Carteret County, North Carolina (see
Figure 1). The channel is dredged approximately once every three to four years.
Historically, dredged material has been placed at the toe -of -the -bank on the
channel (east) side of Wainwright Island. Due to the location of this disposal area, the
dredged material has quickly returned to the channel. The proposed action is to
discharge the dredged material in upland areas on Wainwright Island and direct it
overland to the non -channel (west) side of the island. The work will be accomplished in
late fall -early winter of each year as needed and completed prior to the April 1 onset of
the colonial waterbird nesting season.
2.00 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
U.S. Army Engineer District, Wilmington. June 1995. Environmental Assessment,
Maintenance Dredging, Wainwright Slough, Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and
Beaufort Harbor, Carteret County, North Carolina, dated June 1995,
3.00 PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION
During June 1995, the above reference was mailed to Federal and State agencies
and the interested public for a 30-day review and comment period. As a result, letters
were received from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS); the North Carolina
Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF); the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA); and the North Carolina State Clearinghouse. Copies of the letters received
are included as Attachment 1. Telephonic responses were received from the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the USEPA.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

I TYPICAL SECTION 11
C A R T E R E T
COUNTY
S.
a-INA,
RECEIVE
DEC 0 8 2016 an L'«
DCM- MHn r%ITV
I S C
\aL
YID o
dEd"
L*LIaeALrtr NAP
MYt M Ntt
P d
AN
CEDAR
ISL A RO
ve
IY
•r
i/
d�
✓unK
:rarmc
RO
(*
n L.
SS •• r N
/ V r
4AG "I
OOMS•t SRN
4
O
t
'AUA WNfO• iR tht throuth xrdta," is wwSMdd Ss tk wd fRP /M
MMth "d N W9i•,wriOM 31wOh-
WATERWAY CONNECTING
PAMLICO SO. a BEAUFORT HARBOR,
NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE eE NILES
x o r • •
CORPS OF ENGINEERS WIL UNGTON.KC
NAP REVISED SEPTEMSER 1967 '..
tliawma -

4.00 RESULTS OF PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION
All comments received on the environmetal assessment (EA) were considered in
making the decision to sign the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). Pertinent
comments from each commentor are summarized and addressed below.
4.01 NMFS: letter of July 10, 1995.
COMMENT: The construction and utilization of a diked upland disposal
area was not adequately described or considered. The EA should provide the
basis for the determination that the habitat needs of waterbirds outweigh the need
to maximize avoidance of impact to submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) habitat.
RESPONSE: The EA adequately considers confined upland disposal. The
proposed plan is an upland disposal plan which addresses colonial nesting
waterbirds, SAVs, and other aquatic resources. Using the low berm, the proposed
plan maximizes containment of dredged material to protect SAVs and other
aquatic resources. Its removal after disposal minimizes impacts to waterbirds.
Construction of a diked upland disposal area would create a water retaining
depression that would prevent succession of vegetation essential to colonial
waterbird nesting habitat. Audubon prefers disposal that would form a dome of
material or other sloping that would prevent ponding of water. Section 4.03 of the
EA discussed the proposed construction of a low sand berm along the shoreline
and above the mean high water (m.h.w.) line to contain the discharge material
and allow solids (sands) to settle and renourish and elevate the island. The low
berm would be rebuilt as needed as elevations increase during disposal
operations. When disposal is finished, the berm would be graded to prevent
ponding. It is anticipated that the berm minimizes impacts to SAVs and other
aquatic resources.
Additionally, during the onsite scoping meeting held May 3, 1995, the North
Carolina Department of Cultural Resources (NCDCR) identified an extensive
deposit of prehistoric shell along the eroding western shore of the island (see
paragraph 4.08). The NCDCR and the Corps will conduct a survey to assess the
extent, location, and significance of the cultural deposits to determine whether the
construction of the low retention berm would adversely impact historic resources.
To minimize potential impacts to these resources, material to construct the berm
can be taken from areas of the island identified as not containing cultural resource
deposits or from newly disposed material.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM_ A4HD CITY

COMMENT: NMFS is also concerned that the EA may overstate the
tolerance of SAV to burial by dredged material. While it is true that SAV may
tolerate short periods of burial without ill effects, the depth tolerance and duration
factors vary from site to site and are not well defined. This argues strongly for the
selection of an alternative that avoids this impact rather than risking SAV habitat
loss due to miscalculations on the part of contractors performing the work. If
Alternative 1 is to remain the preferred alternative, the EA should address the
need for onsite monitoring during construction to ensure that either SAV habitat is
avoided or that burial of SAV is within limits specified by the NMFS.
RESPONSE: Information on the burial tolerance of SAVs was obtained from
the NMFS. As stated in Section 6.02 of the EA, prior to beginning disposal, the
NMFS will identify the location and extent of SAVs off the western side of
Wainwright Island using recent aerial photography. A base line submeter
accuracy SAV map will be compiled using Geographic Positioning (GPS)
technology. They will stake a sea grass boundary parallel to the shoreline that
will be included in the work site plan (Wood, 1995). Upon completion of the work,
a post -construction seagrass inventory and impact assessment will be conducted
by the NMFS. This information will be compared with the pre -project data to
determine the need for remedial action. If acceptable to the NCDCR, the
shoreline retention berm will be constructed to minimize the amount of solid
material entering open water that might adversely impact SAVs.
The dredging and disposal will be monitored by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers' dredge inspectors. The Audubon Society has also committed to
monitoring the work to ensure that either SAV habitat is avoided or that SAV
burial is within limits specified by the NMFS (Golder, 1995). We will work with the
NMFS to develop written standards and procedures for monitoring impacts of the
disposal operation on SAV.
4.02 USFWS.
COMMENT: The Service is "no-actioning" the EA for disposal of dredged
material on Wainwright Island (Hall, 1995).
RESPONSE: Noted. Their response to the project scoping is contained in
the EA, Attachment C.
4.03 USEPA: (Telephonic Response) July 14, 1995 (see Attachment C of the
EA). (EPA telephonically advised that the comments in their scoping response letter of
April 20, 1995, were applicable to the EA.)
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

COMMENT: After examining the information provided in the Corps scoping
letter, we conclude that shallow water habitat would be covered with all proposed
alternatives. We suggest disposal immediately adjacent the western shoreline
within an offshore retention area of sandbags or tubes. It is not clear to us that
shallow water habitat is a limiting factor in system functioning; whereas providing
some long-term protection to Wainwright Island which is relatively unique has
obvious merit. It should be noted that the entire island appears to be at risk from
erosional processes; hence, the no -action alternative has its own adverse
ramifications.
RESPONSE: The suggested alternative would impact more estuarine
bottom and likely more SAV than the preferred alternative. Section 6.04 of the EA
discussed the ongoing problem of erosion on the island. The USFWS
recommended restoration of the island to its original configuration. The Audubon
Society is in favor of reclaiming area lost to erosion. The Corps has proposed
that the Audubon Society and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) participate in restoration of the historic limits of the island under the
cost sharing procedures of Section 204 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1992. No response has been received to this proposal.
4.04 NCDMF: letter of July 19, 1995.
COMMENT: The EA adequately addresses the Division's concerns. To
protect the white shrimp that tend to migrate during the fall, dredging should take
place only during the November 1 - March 31 time period.
RESPONSE: Agreed. Dredging and disposal will be accomplished only
during the period November 1 - March 31 of each year.
4.05 North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (NCDEM):
letters of May 11, 1995 (Scoping Response, see Attachment C of the EA), and
July 19, 1995.
COMMENT: (May 11, 1995) We would consider Alternative B to be the
least preferred alternative. A large area of shallow bottom habitat would be lost
and there are potential significant impacts on submerged aquatic vegetation and
other estuarine resources. The combination C/D alternative discussed at the site
meeting would entail disposal of the dredged material on the higher sandy portion
of the island with the effluent being directed downslope, westward to the water.
We feel this alternative could be acceptable provided the material is contained
landward of the coastal wetland vegetation line by a sandbag retaining structure.
Alternative B is the least preferred alternative. A large area of shallow bottom
habitat would be lost and there are potential significant impacts on submerged
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

aquatic vegetation and other estuarine resources. Alternative C would impact a
large amount of wetlands, especially if effluent were unconfined.
RESPONSE: These comments support the Corps' preferred alternative of
upland control -of -effluent disposal. A low sand berm, rather than a sandbag
retention dike, will be constructed along the shoreline to minimize effluent impacts
to coastal wetlands and other aquatic resources. Upon completion of the work,
the berm will be graded and sloped to create natural shoreline contours. This will
establish a shoreline more suitable to wetland vegetation growth and provide
natural habitat beneficial to colonial nesting waterbirds utilizing intertidal areas.
COMMENT: (July 19, 1995) DEM endorses the Corp's preferred alternative
disposal method for protecting water quality. The project may require a 401
Certification for upland contained disposal areas (WQC #2668), certain
maintenance dredging activities in coastal waters (WQC #1332R), and written
concurrence from DEM.
RESPONSE: The application for 401 Water Quality Certification for the
proposed project was forwarded by letter dated June 28, 1995.
4.06 North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM).
COMMENT: We agree with your determination that the proposed activity is
consistent with the North Carolina Coastal Management Program, provided the
following conditions are met:
a. To control effluent runoff at Site D, a low sand berm is to be constructed
above the m.h.w. line. This sand berm shall be constructed above the coastal
wetlands vegetation line as well.
b. A 401 Water Quality Certification is received from the NCDEM.
c. An approved sedimentation and erosion control plan is required for the
project. This plan must be submitted to the NC Division of Land Resources at
least 30 days prior to the onset of work.
RESPONSE: As required, the sand berm will be constructed above the
m.h.w. line and above coastal wetlands vegetation. Prior to berm construction, a
representative of the NCDCM, Morehead City Regional Office, will be requested
to identify the coastal wetlands vegetation line for this purpose.
An application for a 401 Water Quality Certification was forwarded to the
NCDEM on June 28, 1995.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

At least 30 days prior to construction, a sedimentation and erosion control
plan will be filed with the Washington Regional Office of the NC Division of Land
Resources.
4.07 NCWRC. Scoping Response letter of May 4, 1995 (see Attachment C of
the EA). (No response received to the EA.)
COMMENT: The Commission believes that the method of disposal which
involves control of effluent with discharge directed overland (Sites C and D) to the
open water on the non -channel side (west side) of the island would significantly
enhance the island for colonial nesting birds and only minimally impact the
shallow water habitat. We agree that toe -of -the -bank disposal would be the least
desirable of alternatives that have been discussed.
RESPONSE: These comments support the Corps' preferred alternative of
upland control -of -effluent disposal.
4.08 North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources. Scoping letter
comments of May 18, 1995 (see Attachment C of the EA).
COMMENT: We recommend that (based on a May 3, 1995, field inspection)
archeological testing be conducted to (a) document the nature, extent, and
condition of cultural deposits; (b) evaluate the significance of the deposits with
regard to the National Register of Historic Places; and (c) develop, if warranted,
an appropriate impact mitigation plan.
RESPONSE: The requested survey will be conducted to assess these
concerns.
5.00 ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES
Informal consultation was initiated by telephone on March 16, 1995, with the
USFWS and the NMFS. The EA stated that the proposed project was not likely to
adversely impact any listed endangered or threatened species or their critical
habitat. Comments to the contrary were not received from the USFWS or the
NMFS or any other recipient of the EA.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

6.00 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
The following commitments must be fulfilled:
6.01 Cultural Resources - A preliminary survey to assess potential project
impacts on cultural resources from the proposed work will be conducted on August 16,
1995, by the NCDCR and the Corps. No work will be undertaken that would adversely
impact cultural deposits.
6.02 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation 1SAVI - Impacts to SAVs will be assessed
on information compiled by the NMFS. If appropriate, further measures will be taken to
minimize adverse impacts to SAV.
6.03 North Carolina Coastal Management Program - Prior to beginning any
dredging or disposal activity, coastal wetland vegetation will be identified for avoidance
during sand berm construction; a 401 Water Quality Certification will be obtained from
the NCDEM; and, at least 30 days prior to beginning work, a sedimentation and erosion
control plan will be filed with the NC Division of Land Resources.
7.00 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Comments received during the coordination of the EA failed to note any additional
categories of environmental impacts. There are no remaining unresolved issues.
8.00 REFERENCES
Hall, Howard. 1995- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, Raleigh,
North Carolina. Personal Communication. July 25, 1995.
Golder, Walker. 1995. Sanctuary Manager for the National Audubon's North Carolina
Coastal Island Sanctuary Program, Wilmington, North Carolina. Personal
Communication. May 3, 1995.
Wood, Lisa. 1995. National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science
Center, Beaufort Laboratory, Beaufort, North Carolina. Personal Communication.
May 24, 1995.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

9.00 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI)
The proposed action will not significantly affect the quality of the human
environment; therefore, an environmental impact statement will not be prepared.
Date: f 31, lgg5
Attachment
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
/ c
,�p� Robe J. Sperberg
(/ Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
k.iltjtoplwr iL Boating
Xajor, U; ASW a
Acting Mtrit > '

ATTACHMENT 1
LETTERS RECEIVED DURING THE 30-DAY COMMENT PERIOD
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
'...m Habitat Conservation Division
9721 Executive Center Drive North
St. Petersburg, Florida 33702
July 10, 1995
Colonel Robert J. Sperberg
District Engineer, Wilmington District
Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Attention Ernest Jahnke
Dear Colonel Sperberg:
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has ,reviewed the
Environmental Assessment (EA), Maintenance Dredging, Wainwright
Slough, Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor,
Carteret County, North Carolina, dated June 1995. The proposed
project involves changing the method of dredged material disposal
for the continued as -needed maintenance dredging in Core Sound at
Wainwright Slough northeast of the Cedar Island Ferry Landing in
Carteret County, North Carolina. The following comments are
provided for your consideration.
The EA does not adequately describe or consider the alternative of
the construction and utilization of a diked upland disposal area on
Wainwright Island. The preferred alternative (Alternative 1) is
for unconfined disposal with controlled effluent release back into
the water rather than diked confinement in the same area. The
discussion of a diked disposal site alternative is brief and
incomplete. According to the EA, the National Audubon Society is
opposed to the diked upland disposal alternative based on the
impacts on colonial nesting waterbird habitat even though it
clearly maximizes avoidance of impacts to submerged aquatic
vegetation (SAV) habitat. The EA should incorporate the benefits
and impacts of all alternatives and provide the basis for the
determination that the habitat needs of waterbirds outweigh the
need to maximize avoidance of impacts to SAV habitat.
We are also concerned that the EA may overstate the tolerance of
SAV to burial by dredged material. While it is true that SAV may
tolerate short periods of burial without ill effects, the depth
tolerance and duration factors vary from site to site and are not
well defined. This argues strongly for the selection of an
R E Ci ENV 2ternative that avoids this impact rather than risking SAV habitat
Rs due to miscalculations on the part of contractors performing
the work. If it is determined that Alternative 1 is to remain the
DEC 0 8 201$referrea alterative, the EA should address the need for on -site
DCM— MHD CITY
GProued M !socy,'be Pt.—
Qd

monitoring during project construction to ensure that either SAV
habitat is avoided or that any burial of SAV is within limits
specified by the NMFS.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments.
S
V
AnVeas Mage Jr.
Assistant Reqional Director
cc: FWS, ATLA, GA
FWS, Raleigh, NC
EPA, ATLA, GA
NCDEHNR, Raleigh, NC
NCDEHNR, Morehead City, NC
FJSE02
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 Z016
pCM- MHD CITY

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources ( e
Division of Marine Fisheries
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor p H N F1
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Bruce L. Freeman, Director
July 19, 1995
Mr. Ernest Jahnke
Environmental Resources Section
U. S. Army Corps of,Engineers
Wilmington. District
P. O. Sox 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Dear Mr. Jahnke:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Wainwright
Island Spoil Disposal Project Environmental Assessment. The
Division's concerns were addressed quite adequately in the
document. There is one point, however, that I/failed to mention in
my May 5, 1995 letter or in subsequent conversations.
Wainwright channel is a major migratory route for adult white
shrimp in the fall as they make their way around from the mouth of
the Neuse River to Core Sound. Upon further consideration, I do
not think the October 1 start date for dredging (which I may have
suggested) is appropriate due to the fact that during warmer
weather, the white shrimp tend to migrate later in the fall.
November 1 through March 31 should be the time period in which
dredging can take place.
I trust this change can be incorporated in actual practice
even if not in the assessment document itself.
Sincerely,
David L. Taylor
DLT:rrm
cc: Katy West
Melba McGee
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
D C M- M H [:lb 12r ' P69, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557-0769 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Ewa] OooanunitV Affirmative Action Emplover

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
JamesR Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan H Howes Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
July 19, 1995
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dorm
Monica Swihart
From: Greg Price ,A/
1,\ s + i
EDO E-=
Subject: Maintenance Dredging Wainwright Slough
Carteret County
EHNR #95-0953, DEM WQ #10993
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of Environmental
Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification
for activities which may impact waters of the State including wetlands. The following
comments are offered in response to the EA.
1. The DEM endorses the COE's preferred alternative disposal method for protecting water
quality.
2. This project may require a 401 Certification issued for wAum water from upland
contained disposal areas (WQC #2668), requiring written concurrence from DEM.
3. If approved, this project may require a 401 Certification issued for certain maintenance
dredging activities in the coastal navigable waters (WQC #1332R), requiring written
concurrence from DEM.
The COE is reminded that endorsement of an EA by DEM would not preclude the denial of
a 401 Certification upon application if wetland impacts have not been avoided and
minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Greg Price (733-1786) in
DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
RECEi V ED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MAIL? CITY
EnviroammW Sciea Branch 4401 Reedy Creek Road Ralcigh. North Carolina 27607
TclgV 919-733-9960 FAX # [phone]
An Fqual Op{aawo:n Arras Aa Ee'Ooya 50% rocrkdll m paa mammc! pap«

State of North C olina
Department of t, .vironment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Roger N. Schecter, Director
Colonel Robert J. Sperborg
U,S, Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P,O, Box 1990
Wilmington, NC 28402.1890
August 22. 1995
REFERENCE: CD95.16 EA Maintenance Dredging Wainwright Slough (Modification of Disposal Method)
Dear Colonel Sperberg:
The State of North Carolina has complcLed its review pursuant to 15 CFR 930 Subpart C - Consistency for
Federal Activities, of tine referenced document, dated June, 1995. for the proposed maintenance dredging of
Wainwright Slough with disposal on Wainwright Island. The combination CD disposal alternative discussed at the
site meeting in May is to be employed, with disposal of the dredged material on Use higher sandy portion of the
island and the effluent being directed downslope, westward towards the water. Based upon our review- we agree
with your detmnination that the proposed activity is consistent with the North Carofina Coastal Management
Program, provided the following conditions are meL
1. To control effluent runoff at Site D. a low sand berm is to be constructed above the mean high water
line. This sand berm shall be constructed above the coastal wetlands vegetation line as well.
2. A 401 Water Quality Certification is received from the NC Division of Environmental hi"ement.
3, An approved sedimentation and erosion control plan is required for the project. This plan must be
submitted to the NC Division of Land ResmTes at least 30 days prior to the onset of work,
If you have any questions regarding our funding or conditions, please contact Steve Benton or Caroline
Beilit, Division of Coastal Management, at [phone], Thank you for your consideration of the North Carolina
Coastal Management Program.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
Sincerely,
Roger N. Schccter
DCM- 4HD(
!�Charles Tones, Division of Coastal Management, Morehead City
Melba McGee, Policy and Development
C-heys Baggett. NC State Clearinghouse
Patrick McClain, Division of Land Resources
Jim Gregson, Division of Environmental Management
finest Jahnke, US Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
P.O. Box 27687, Rdeigh, North Corolina 27611-7687 Tolephone 919,733-2293 FAX 919-733-WS
An Equal Opporl niry AflOmofte Aaron Employer 50%racyclow 10%post-ca rur„er panaf

Attachment F — 2006 CAMA Consistency Determination
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

FMA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
September 2, 2006
William F. Adams, Chief
Environmental Resources Section
Wilmington District Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
SUBJECT: CD06-042 - Consistency Concurrence for the Proposed Maintenance Dredging of
Wainwright Slough and Reestablishment of Wainwright Island, Carteret County
(DCM#20060061)
Dear Mr. Adams:
The Division of Coastal Management received (July 10, 2006) a consistency determination from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) finding that the proposed maintenance dredging of Wainwright
Slough and reestablishment of Wainwright Island in Carteret County would be consistent with the
State's coastal management program. According to the project description the Corps proposes to
reestablish Wainwright Island to approximately size of 16-19 acres (approximately 9 feet high with
1:20 slopes). The project will involve the direct discharge of dredged material below the plane of
MHW until enough high ground is established. Once this is accomplished discharge will be conducted
consistent with the 1995 EA/FONSI (CD95-16).
North Carolina's coastal zone management program consists of, but is not limited to, the Coastal Area
Management Act, the State's Dredge and Fill Law, Chapter 7 of Title I SA of North Carolina's
Administrative Code, and the land use plan of the County and/or local municipality in which the
proposed project is located. It is the objective of the Division of Coastal Management (DCM) to
manage the State's coastal resources to ensure that proposed Federal activities would be compatible
with safeguarding and perpetuating the biological, social, economic, and aesthetic values of the State's
coastal waters.
To solicit public comments, DCM circulated a description of the proposed project to State agencies
that would have a regulatory interest. No comments asserting that the proposed activity would be
inconsistent with the State's coastal management program were received. The comments received
have been attached for reference.
DCM has reviewed the submitted information pursuant to the management objectives and enforceable
policies of Subchapters 15A NCAC 07H and 15A NCAC 07M of Chapter 7 of Title 15A of North
REC E I VEina's Administrative Code which are a part of the State's certified coastal management program
DEC $ 400 Commerce Avenue, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557.3421
0 2016 Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycled \ 10% Post Consumer Paper
DCM- MHD CITY

and concurs that the proposed Federal activity, as conditioned below, is consistent, to the maximum
extent practicable, with the enforceable policies of North Carolina's coastal management program.
In order to be found consistent with North Carolina's coastal management program, DCM
requires that dredging operations not be undertaken from April I" to Sept 3uh of any year to
protect the migration of white shrimp unless agreed to by the North Carolina Division of
Marine Fisheries. The "Finding of No Significant Impact for Maintenance Dredging,
Wainwright Slough, Waterway Connecting Pamlico South and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret
County, North Carolina" (August 1995) accepted the requirement not to dredge from
November 1 st through March 31" of any year.
• In order to be found consistent with North Carolina's coastal management program, DCM
requires that dredging and disposal operations be conducted consistent with the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality 401 Water Quality Certification (#061064) issued on July
28, 2006.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) requests that dredging operations be
avoided, if possible, during the colonial bird nesting period of April I ' to August 3 1 " of any year.
Additionally, the NCWRC requests, if possible, that the reestablished slope of Wainwright Island be in
the range of 1:25 through 1:30 rather than the proposed 1:20 to further facilitate bird nesting.
Should the proposed action be modified, a revised consistency determination could be necessary. Thi<
might take the form of either a supplemental consistency determination pursuant to 15 CFR 930.46, or
a new consistency determination pursuant to 15 CFR 930.36. Likewise, if further project assessments
reveal environmental effects not previously considered by the proposed development, a supplemental
consistency certification may be required. If you have any questions, please contact Stephen Rynas at
252-808-2808. Thank you for your consideration of the North Carolina Coastal Management
Program.
Cc: Charles S. Jones, Division of Coastal Management
Maria Tripp, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Noelle Lutheran, NC Division of Water Quality
Mike Street, NC Division of Marine Fisheries
Tere Barrett, Division of Coastal Management
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
Sincerely,
Doug Huggett
Manager, Major Permits and Consistency Unit
Page: 2

e��
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley,'Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
July 13, 2006
TO: John Fear
NC National Estuarine Research Reserve
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, NC 28557-5421
FROM: Stephen Rynas, AICP; Federal Consistency Coordinator
SUBJECT: Consistency Determination Submission for the Proposed Maintenance Dredging of
Wainwright Slough and Reestablishment of Wainwright Island (DCMk20060061)
LOCATION: . Wainwright Island, Northeast of Cedar Island and Southwest of Portsmouth Island, Core
Sound, Carteret County, North Carolina
The above listed document is being circulated for review and comment by August 4, 2006. Your
responses will assist us in determining whether the proposed project would be consistent with the State's
Coastal Management Program. If the,proposed project does not conform to your requirements, please
identify the measures that would be necessary to bring the proposed project into conformance. If you
have any additional questions regarding the proposed project you may contact me at 252-808-2808 or
e-mail me at: "stephen. rynas @ ncmai [met".
REPLY
No Comment.
This office supports the project as proposed.
Comments to this project am attached.
This office objects to the project as proposed.
z
Signed: r tm �s:.r Date: � v��
c.�
CORRECTIONS
Please identify any corrections, additions, or deletions that should be made in terms of contact information.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DC"- MHD CITY
RETURN COMPLETED FORM
to
Stephen Rynas. Federal Consistency Coordinator
NC Division of Coastal Management
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City. NC 28557-3421

r �
NCDENR P1 nr
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natura esour s
Division of Coastal Management 1 11006
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Director MU�GRoss Jr.tretary
e�ssi y DCN1
MEMORANDUM
July 13, 2006 j
TO: Bonnie Divito
DCM - Coastal Engineer ' -
-DCM - Raleigh Office
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638 1
FROM: Stephen Rynas, AICP; Federal Consistency Coordinator
SUBJECT: Consistency Determination Submission for the Proposed Maintenance Dredging of
Wainwright Slough and Reestablishment of Wainwright Island (DCM#20060061) .
LOCATION: Wainwright Island, Northeast of Cedar Island and Southwest of Portsmouth Island, Core
Sound, Carteret County, North Carolina
The above listed document is being circulated for review and comment by August 4, 2006. Your
responses will assist us in determining whether the proposed project would be consistent with the State's
Coastal Management Program. If the proposed project does not conform to your requirements, please
identify the measures that would be necessary to bring the proposed project into conformance. If you
have any additional questions regarding the proposed project you may contact me at 252-808-2808 or
e-mail me at: "stephen.rynas@ncmai].net".
REPLY
No Comment.
This office supports the project as proposed.
Comments to this project are attached.
This office objectkto the pr ' 13 as proposed. ,'
Signed: Date: / 040
CORRECTIONS
Please identify any corrections, additions, or deletions that should be made in terms of contact information.
RETURN COMPLETED FORM
to
RECEIVEDStephen Rynas, Federal Consistency Coordinator
NC Division of Coastal Management
400 Commerce Avenue
DEC U 8 2016 Morehead City, INC 28557.3421
DCM- MHD CITY

r
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley; Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
July 13, 2006
TO: Maureen Will
Planning
DCM Morehead City Office
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, NC 28557-3421
FROM: Stephen Rynas, AICP; Federal Consistency Coordinator
SUBJECT: Consistency Determination Submission for the Proposed Maintenance Dredging of
Wainwright Slough and Reestablishment of Wainwright Island (DCM#20060061)
LOCATION: Wainwright Island, Northeast of Cedar Island and Southwest of Portsmouth Island, Core
Sound, Carteret County, North Carolina
The above listed document is being circulated for review and comment by August 4, 2006. Your
responses will assist us in determining whether the proposed project would be consistent with the State's
Coastal Management Program. If the proposed project does not conform to your requirements, please
identify the measures that would be necessary to bring the proposed project into conformance. If you
have any additional questions regarding the proposed project you may contact me at 252-808-2808 or
e-mail me at: "stephen.rynas@ncmai).net".
REPLY
No Comment.
This office supports the project as proposed.
Comments to this project are attached.
his 9office objects t the project as proposed. fy�/
Signed: ,��, Dater 9 v ,
CORRECTIONS
Please identify any corrections, additions, or deletions that should be made in terms of contact information.
RETURN COMPLETED FORM
Rto
EcEgVEp Stephen Rynas. Federal Consistency Coordinator
NC Division of Coastal Management
DEC 400 Commerce Avenue
0 8 2016 Morehead City, NC 28557-3421
DCA4_ N`HD CITY

�r
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Michael F. Easley, Governor Division of Marine Fisheries
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
TO: Stephen Rynas
Federal Consistency Co rdinator
FROM: Mike Street_
DATE: July 21, 2006
.IV cs-0
C4f
SUBJECT: Consistency - Proposed Maintenance Dredging of Wainwright Slough and
Reestablishment of Wainwright Island
DCM # 20060061 / Carteret County
Attached is the Divisions' reply for the above referenced project. If you have any questions,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
MS/sw
RECEIVED
DEC 08 2016
°CM' MHD Ciro
3441 Arendell Street, P.O. Box 769, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557 One
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ Internet: www.ncdmf.net NorthCarolina
An Equal Opponunity/AKrmahve Action Employer -50% Recycled UO'h post Consumer Paper Naturally

AAA
v
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley,Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
July 13, 2006
TO: Mike Street
NCDENR'- Division of Marine Fisheries
P.O. Box 769
Morehead City, NC 28557-0769
FROM: Stephen Rynas, AICP; Federal Consistency Coordinator
SUBJECT: Consistency Determination Submission for the Proposed Maintenance Dredging of
Wainwright Slough and Reestablishment of Wainwright Island (DCMN20060061)
LOCATION: Wainwright Island, Northeast of Cedar Island and Southwest of Portsmouth Island, Core
Sound, Carteret County, North Carolina
The above listed document is being circulated for review and comment by August 4, 2006. Your
responses will assist us in determining whether the proposed project would be consistent with the State's
Coastal Management Program. If the proposed project does not conform to your requirements, please
identify the measures that would be necessary to bring fhe proposed project into conformance. If you
have any additional questions regarding the proposed project you may contact me at 252-808-2808 or
e-mail me at: "stephen.rynas@ncmai[.net".
REPLY
No Comment.
This office supports the project as proposed.
Comments to this project are attached.
This office objects to the project as proposed.
Signed: 4A-,_ J t) • /JPIAA -Ad L
Date: LD D
Please identify any corrections, additions, or deletions that should be made in terms of contact information.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
RETURN COMPLETED FORM
to
Stephen Rynas, Federal Consistency Coordinator
NC Division of Coastal Management
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, NC 28557-3421
l7ilt'�i1U'.'.
DCM- WUHD CITY !

APPENDIX G - Statement of Project Support
From the National Audubon Society
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

AUCIUDOn NORTH CAROLINA
December 6, 2016
Robert Neal, P.E.
Moffatt & Nichol
272 N. Front Street, Suite 204
Wilmington, NC 28401
Re: Wainwright Island
Dear Mr. Neal,
7741 Market Street, Unit D
Wilmington, NC 2841r-g444
Tel:gto-686-7527
Fax:gro-686-7587
www•.ncaudubon.org
www.audubon.org
The National Audubon Society is aware of Carteret County's plans to dredge approximately
40,000 CY of sand from Wainwright Slough in Pamlico Sound. We are also aware that the County
proposes to place the material on or adjacent to Wainwright Island, which is owned and managed by the
National Audubon Society.
The National Audubon Society supports the initiative to use the dredge material to enhance bird
nesting and foraging habitat on Wainwright Island. We may provide additional comments pertaining to
the project after review of the detailed plans and permit application.
I understand that National Audubon Society will be provided 30 calendar days to provide any
additional comments from the time Carteret County provides a copy of the submitted application to the
Audubon Society.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Walker Golder
Director, Atlantic Flyway Coast Initiative
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

APPENDIX H — Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) Survey
RECEIVED
DEC 08 2016
DCM- A4HD CITY

Submerged Aquatic
Vegetation Survey Report
Wainwright Slough, NC
Prepared by:
moffatt & nichol
4700 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27609
RECEIVED
. DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
Presented to:
Carteret County
December 8, 2016

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ................
2. Methodology ...............
3. Results and Discussion
4. Summary .....................
5. References ..................
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DDT
3
5
6
8
9
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 2

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
1. Introduction
Carteret County intends to dredge approximately 30,500 cubic meters (40,000 cubic yards) of material from
the federally authorized channel of Wainwright Slough, Ranges 2, 2A and 3, near Cedar Island, south Pamlico
Sound (Figure 1; Map 1 Appendix). Dredged sediment will be placed on the adjacent Wainwright Island. The
project will restore navigation depths to the authorized channel for recreational boating and commercial
fishing vessels. The channel will be dredged to -7 MLLW with an additional 0.6 meters (2 feet) of overdepth
tolerance, resulting in a maximum depth of disturbance down to -9 MLLW. The project maintains compliance
with the federal authorization for the channel. The sediment placement will be used to help create nesting
and foraging bird habitat by open placement of the material adjacent to Wainwright Island. Sediment
placement will occur over a maximum footprint of 4.2 hectares (10.5 acres) up to an elevation matching the
existing Wainwright Island. The slopes and grades of the material placement will be constructed to
encourage nesting and foraging bird activities to the extent reasonable.
Figure 1: Project Location Map
Moffatt & Nichol was contracted to perform a submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) survey in the general
vicinity of the 33 hectare (81.6-acre) disposal site (Wainwright Island). Protocols used for this study were
provided by and discussed with the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (Gregg Bodnar) and
NOAA Fisheries Habitat Conservation Division (Ken Riley) prior to sampling. State and federal resource
agencies required the survey as a measure to help identify potential impacts the project may create for any
R� C FW3A hMV within the proposed work areas.
DEC Q
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 3
DCM- MHD CITY

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report Carteret County
Site Description
Wainwright Island is a small dredge spoil island that is constantly subject to wave action and erosion. The
island is inundated much of the time with only a small portion of land (less 46 square meters [500 square
feet]) currently remaining above the water. The small remnant island is dominated by Spartina alterniflora.
Signs of bird use were evident as central areas of the island were trampled and covered in guano; no species
were noted during this sampling period.
Pamlico Sound is one of the largest estuaries in the United States (NCSU 2016). Offshore waters support a
diverse recreational and commercial fishery, with species such as red drum, speckled trout, blue crab,
oysters, and other shellfish often found in abundance. Fishing activity was noted in the project area during
the time of this study as evidenced by the presence of two pound nets extending across the island. Although
a detailed fishery assessment was not part of this study, mullet and cow nose rays were observed while
snorkeling in the area.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM-
Moffatt& Nichol I Page 4

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
2. Methodology
A Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping exercise was conducted to determine potential locations of
existing SAV based on high -resolution imagery. GIS was also used to establish the sampling regime for this
study. Transects were established in a north/south direction every 100 meters to cover the 32.4-hectare (80-
acre) area of interest, for a total of ten transects. Sampling locations were placed every 50 meters along each
transect. In areas of known SAV presence based on aerial imagery, transects were placed every 50 meters.
Starting points for the sample transects were randomly selected. In total, there were 87 sampling locations
established for field reconnaissance.
Percent cover and shoot density were the main SAV parameters noted in the survey. At each sampling
location, a metal garden rake was used to determine presence or absence of SAV. If SAV was found, three
0.25-square-meter quadrats were randomly placed within the SAV beds and percent cover was estimated. All
SAV species in the quadrat were identified, shoots were counted, and other features in the area were noted,
including presence of shell or floating SAV debris.
The depth of the water at each sampling location was surveyed with a marked PVC pole. A water quality
sampling device (YSI Model 556) was used to sample water quality parameters (e.g. dissolved oxygen, pH,
salinity, and temperature) at the beginning of sampling effort. Pictures were taken to characterize the site
and provide photographic evidence of SAV presence.
Data collected in the field included:
• Survey date and time
• Location (latitude and longitude)
• Surveyors name
• Wind speed/direction
• Turbidity
• Tidal stage and tendency (i.e., flood or
ebb)
• Species present/absent
• Percent cover
• Shoot density
• Sediment type
• Depth
• Other prominent features (e.g. pound
nets, shell presence)
RECEIVE®
DEC 0 8 2016
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 5

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
3. Results and Discussion
The SAV survey was conducted on September 21, 2016 by Moffatt & Nichol, with assistance from the North
Carolina Division of Coastal Management. Weather conditions were favorable throughout the entire
sampling period. Wind speeds were less than 5 mph out of the northeast and the day was mostly overcast
with storms to the north and east of the site. There was high turbidity in the Sound with approximately 0.3-
meter (one -foot) of visibility during the sampling period. The tide was low in the morning and rising
throughout the sampling period; however the tidal range in this area is less than 1 meter (3 feet) and did not
affect sampling activities.
The sampling regime (Map 2-Appendix) was loaded into a Trimble Global Positioning System (GPS) unit
(Geoexplorer 2008) that was used to direct the captain along transect lines to sampling points. At each
location, one person raked the bottom 3-4 times to feel for seagrass presence, one person used a PVC
measuring pole to conduct depth measurements, and the GPS location was marked. A majority of locations
were sampled from the boat. Presence or absence of SAV noted on aerial imagery and from raking sites was
confirmed through snorkeling surveys. Five locations contained SAV [G2-4, F2-3]; however, only 1-2 shoots
(<1% cover) were found in only five quadrats sampled from those locations (Map 3-Appendix). Shoal grass
(Halodule wrightii) was the only species noted. The shoots encountered were not growing and had senescent
leaves (Figure 2). All other sample areas had no signs of seagrass when raking from the boat. While
snorkeling to sample, reconnaissance revealed sparse presence of H. wrightii. One patch of eel grass (Zostera
marina) that found growing out of an eroded piece of marsh mud platform that seem to have come from the
adjacent island (Figure 2). There was floating H. wrightii in some of the sampling locations but this would be
expected, as there are records of large SAV beds to the east and west of the site (See Map 2-Appendix).
Collected data is summarized and available in the Appendix.
Figure 2. Example ofH. wrightii found at sampling locations near the
RECEIVEDremnant Wainwright Island
DEC 0 8 2016
The sediment in most cases was sandy,
with some areas of mud that may have
been remnants of a nearby marsh
platform. While raking some locations
there was loose shell material as part of
the benthic material. Upon inspection,
oyster shell was the prominent loose
material type. Some depressions in the
sand had detrital SAV, mainly H. wrightii
that had settled. No rhizomes were
found in the quadrats in the sample area
or in sites noted during reconnaissance
surveys near Wainwright Island.
Substrate conditions do not appear to be
a limiting factor in seagrass
establishment. Species such as Halodule
wrightii can be found on a wide variety
DC,1- MHD CITY
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 6

iiiiiiiiiiiiiii
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
of substrates ranging from silty mud to course sand with varying amounts of mud. Most bed maintenance
and new shoot production probably occurs through rhizome elongation irrespective of substrate conditions.
There were no anomalous results in this snapshot of water Table 1: Water quality data collected
quality data that would indicate any reason for seagrass Wainwright Slough, NC
absence (Table 1 provides summary data of water
temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and salinity). For the
most part, conditions in the study area are conducive to
supporting seagrasses. Optimum temperatures for H. wrightii
are similar to those of Thalassia, and range between 20 —
30oC (Phillips 1960), well within the range of temperatures at
the time of this survey (26oQ. Halodule has been reported in
abundance in salinities ranging from 12.0 - 38.5 ppt (Phillips
1960) — in line with the 21.3 ppt noted at the site. The pH of
Date/Time 9/21/16
10:30am
Water 26
temperature (°C)
Dissolved oxygen 89.3
N
DH 6.21
Salinity (ppt) 21.6
water at the time of the survey does not appear to be a
limiting factor and is only relevant with respect to the plant's
ability to conduct photosynthesis; leaves of seagrasses have a low capacity for extracting inorganic carbon
under normal pH and salinity conditions, with photosynthesis limited by the availability of inorganic carbon
under various light conditions (Beer and Koch 1996).
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
D"'- PV HD r„-.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 7

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
4. Summary
In summary, SAV presence was virtually non-existent in the sampling area around Wainwright Island. Only 1-
2 shoots (<i% cover) were found in five quadrats sampled during this investigation. There is no obvious
explanation for why SAV growth is limited in this portion of Pamlico Sound. About 80,000 hectares of marine
bottom are dominated by Halodule in Core and Pamlico Sounds in North Carolina, where Halodule occurs
away from the main body of its distribution farther south. The species is common in Texas and Florida (and
the Caribbean) but does not extend any farther north than Cape Hatteras (Ferguson et of 1993). Seagrass
distribution in the targeted study area may be affected by factors that affect seagrass composition and
distribution throughout its range including turbidity or sediment load in the water column and the
cumulative effect of increased turbidity and dredging and spoil disposal, boat propeller scarring, and shrimp
trawling.
Based on the results of this analysis, SAV populations are not expected to be impacted by proposed dredging
in Wainwright Slough and subsequent material placement on Wainwright Island.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 8

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
S. References
Beer S, Koch E. 1996. Photosynthesis of marine macroalgae and seagrasses in globally changing CO2
environments. Marine Ecology Progress Series 141: 199-204
Ferguson, Randolph L., B.T. Pawlak, L.L. Wood. 1993. Flowering of the seagrass Halodule wrightii in North
Carolina, USA. Aquatic Botany, Volume 46, Issue 1, Pages 91-98
NC State University. 2016. Coastwatch. https://ncseagrant.ncsu.edu/coastwatch/previous-issues/2012-
2/summer-2012/the-oamlico-sound-fishing-gem-of-north-carolina/. Accessed November 28, 2016.
Phillips RC. 1960.Observations on the ecology and distribution of the Florida seagrasses. Professional Paper
Series No. 2. Florida State Board Consery Mar Lab, St. Petersburg, FL. Appendices
RECEIVE®
DEC 08 2016
DDM_
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 9

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Map Appendix
Map 1: SAV Survey Location
RECEW
DEC p S 2016 Map 2: Sampling Regime, including transects and sampling locations
DCM- MHD CITY Moffatt&Nichol Page10

RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- IUHD CITY
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report Carteret County
Map 3: Field -sampled Survey Points and Survey Results
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 11

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report Carteret County
Photo Appendix
Photo 1: Remnant of Wainwright Island from the channel looking east. Note PVC poles marking
pound net.
RECEiVL-,j
DEC 0 8 2016
Photo
TY 2: Remnant patch of Wainwright Island. Existing channel to the right of this photo.
D C M - fly H D C
Moffatt& Nichol I Page 12

RECEIVE®
DEC 0 8 2016
DC M- PV#HD CITY
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Photo 3: Zostera clump found growing on remnant marsh platform.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 13

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
. 6ar�eret Count � ��`
Raw Data Appendix
Crew: Meg Goecker, Adam Efird,.
Gregg Bodnar, Captaln Billy
Dater09-21.2016
Ad)acent shoreline.
remnants of Wainwright
Island near channel
Temp (oC): 26
DO,& pH: 89.3; 6.21
Wind
40eed/direction:<5mph /
Salinity (ppt):216
�. '
Tidelevel:'Low tide and Asing
duringsampling
Turbidity:'fi)gh turbidity, no
Secchitaken.. , .
'Transect
fi, pt
Time
Picture
#
depth..
(m)'
% Cover by species
(Zm, Hw, Rm)
>- ,
Notes.
A10
9.32
1.2
sand
A9
9.35
1
sand
A8
9.35
1
sand
A�
9.36
0.9
sand
A6
9.38
0.86
sand
AS
9.4
0.92
sand
A4
9.41
1.1
sand
A3
9.42
1.15
sand
A2
9.44
1.3
sand
Al
9.46
1.25
sand
B1
9.52
1.4
sand
B2
9.53
1.4
sand "
B3
9.54
1.5
sand, shell, muddy- break
through hardpack
B4
9.56
1.4
muddy, shell
B5
9.58
1.3
muddy, sand
B6
9.59
0.8
sand
B7
10
0.9
sand
88
10.01
1
1
1sand
B9
10.02
1.1
sand
B10
10.03
1.2
sand
C9
10.05
1.1
sand
C8
10.06
0.9
sand
C7
10.07
0.8
sand
C6
10.09
0.8
sand
C5
10.11
0.8
sand
C4
10.12
1.3
sand, shell
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 14

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Transect
#, pt Time
Picture
#
depth
(m)
% Cover by species
(Zm, Hw, Rm)
Notes
C3
10.14
1.4
sand,shell
C2
10.15
1.5
sand/mud, shell
C1
10.17
1.6
can't reach, pound net - GPS
pt.
01
10.18
1.7
can't reach
D2
10.19
1.7
can't reach
D3
10.2
1.25
sand/mud, shell
D4
10.21
1.2
sand
D5
10.22
1
sand, shell
D6
10.23
0.9
duck blind GPS, sand
D7
10.24
0.7
sand
D8
10.26
0.8
sand
D9
10.27
1
sand
E9
10.31
0.9
sand, grass floating
F9
10.33
0.8
sand
G9
10.34
0.8
sand, shell
G10
10.35
0.9
sand/mud, shell
H9
10.38
0.8
sand
110
10.39
0.8
sand
19
10.4
0.9
sand
18
10.41
1
sand
17
10.43
1.2
sand
16
1.2
sand, shell a lot
IS
10.46
148-048
1.2
sand,shell
14
10.47
483
1.2
sand, shell, soft bottom
13
10.49
1.2
sand, close to marsh island -
Spartina scarp
12
10.52
484-487
1.6
muddier, can't reach with
rake
11
10.52
489-490
1.8
can't reach
11
10.55
1.6
sand, course, Hw floating
blades
12
6
7.6 feet
can't reach
t2W.19
5 feet
can't reach
(W O g
(WC
1.1
0
0
<1% Hw
single shoot, patch through
transect. Very sparse
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 15

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Transect
#, pt
Time
Picture
#
depth
(m)
% Cover by species
(Zm, Hw, Rm)
Notes
G3
11.22
1.2
0
0
<1% Hw
sandy layer with shell below
G4
11.3
1.1
0
0
<1% Hw
single shoot
F4
11.35
1
0
0
0
sand
F3
11.39
1.2
<1% Hw
0
0
two shoots Hw
F2
11.41
1.1
0
<1% Hw
0
in pound net lead
F5
11.56
1.2
sand, seagrass detritus
raked from bottom
E5
11.57
1.5
sand, shell
E6
1.4
sand, shell
F6
12.01
1.1
sand, seagrass detritus
raked from bottom
F7
12.02
1.1
sand, seagrass detritus
raked from bottom
E7
12.04
1.2
sand
E8
12.06
1.1
sand, detritus, picture of
mud
F8
12.08
1.1
sand
F8.5
12.1
1
sand
E8.5
12.12
1.3
sand
RECEIVED
DEC 0 S 2016
DCM- Nr.HD CITY
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 16

ATTACHMENT I — Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Assessment
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Essential Fish Habitat
Assessment for Channel
Dredging and Wainwright
Slough Dredge Placement
Proj ect
Carteret County, North Carolina
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
Prepared for:
Carteret County
Submitted to:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration Fisheries
Prepared by:
"'q
Moffatt & nicho!
4700 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27609
December 6, 2016

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment Carteret County / NOAA Fisheries
Table of Contents
1. Introduction.................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Site Description.........................................................................................................................2
1.2 Project Description....................................................................................................................2
2. Description of Alternatives..........................................................................................................3
2.1 Alternative 1: No Action............................................................................................................3
2.2 Alternative 2: Applicant's Preferred Alternative— Maintaining navigability and restoring
WainwrightIsland.....................................................................................................................3
3. Essential Fish Habitat..................................................................................................................3
3.1 Habitat Elements.......................................................................................................................3
3.1.1 Estuarine Emergent Wetlands...............................................................................................5
3.1.2 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation/Seagrass..............................................................................5
3.1.3 Aquatic Bed (Tidal Freshwater)..............................................................................................6
3.1.4 Estuarine Water Column/Creeks............................................................................................6
3.1.5 Primary Nursery Areas...........................................................................................................7
4. Managed Species.........................................................................................................................7
4.1 SAFMC, MAFMC, and NMFS-managed Species........................................................................7
4.1.1 Black Sea Bass (Centropristis striato)..............................................................................9
4.1.2 Bluefish............................................................................................................................9
4.1.3 Butterfish (Peprilus triacanthus).....................................................................................9
4.1.4 Summer Flounder (Paralichthys dentatus).....................................................................9
4.1.5 Penaeid and Rock Shrimp (Penaeus spp. and Sicyonia spp.)..........................................9
4.1.6 Snapper Grouper Management Group.........................................................................10
4.1.7 Coastal Migratory Pelagics............................................................................................10
4.1.8 Highly Migratory Species..............................................................................................10
4.1.9 Spiny Lobster.................................................................................................................10
4.2 ASMFC-managed Species........................................................................................................11
REC E iVf1� 1PDE4-DMF............................................................................................................................11
DEC 0 8 2�'S Potential Impacts to EFH...........................................................................................................11
Cm- V. H r E I T term and Temporary Impacts........................................................................................12
Moffatt & Nichol I TOC

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
5.2 Permanent and Long-term Impacts
5.3 Managed Species Effects Determination
12
13
5.3.1 NCDEQ-DMF Managed Species Impacts.......................................................................15
6. Summary....................................................................................................................................15
7. Reference..................................................................................................................................16
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DC -Ma— MHD CITY
Moffatt & Nichol I TOC

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
1. Introduction
Carteret County intends to dredge approximately 40,000 cubic yards (CY) of material from the federally
authorized channel of Wainwright Slough, Ranges 2, 2A, and 3, near Cedar Island, south Pamlico Sound
(Figure 1) in North Carolina. The purpose of this document is to assess impacts to essential fish habitat (EFH)
resulting from the project's Preferred Alternative, which includes placement of dredged sediment on the
adjacent Wainwright Island. The project will restore navigation depths to the authorized channel for
recreational boating and commercial fishing vessels.
Figure 1: Project Location Map
The Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 USC 1801 et seq.) requires the US
Secretary of Commerce to develop guidelines assisting regional fisheries management councils on the
identification and creation of management and conservation plans for EFH. Each council is required to amend
existing fisheries management plans (FMP) to include EFH designations and conservation requirements. The
act also requires federal agencies to consult with the Secretary of Commerce on all actions, or proposed
actions, authorized, funded, or undertaken by the agency that might adversely affect EFH.
All EFH is defined as "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth
to maturity" (16 USC 1802(10)). "Waters" include aquatic areas and their associated physical, chemical, and
Rc olo ical roperties that are used by fish and may include aquatic areas historically used by fish where
� CTO 45DSubstrate" includes sediment, hard bottom structures underlying the waters, and associated
DEC mdfi biological communities. "Necessary' means the habitat is required to support a sustainable fishery and the
species' contribution to a healthy ecosystem. "Spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity'
DCM- MHD CITY Moffatt & Nichol I Pagel

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
covers a species' full life cycle. The designation of EFH is required only for species or species units for which
councils have developed FMPs.
1.1. Site Description
Carteret County is in southeastern North Carolina within the Tidewater Region of the Atlantic Coastal Plain
physiographic province. Topography in the area consists of nearly level and gently sloping land that drains
primarily into Pamlico Sound, one of the largest estuaries in the United States (NCSU 2016). Wainwright
Slough is approximately five miles northeast of the Cedar Island Ferry Landing in Carteret County. The
channel connects Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, and Wainwright Slough serves as a conduit for
passage of commercial and recreational anglers between Beaufort Harbor and Pamlico Sound (Figure 1). The
survey area established for this study in which EFH habitat has been investigated is a 100-acre area
encompassing the potential dredge disposal site (Wainwright Island) and adjacent waters immediately
surrounding the island. Wainwright Island is a small dredge spoil island that is constantly subject to wave
action and erosion. The island is inundated much of the time with only a small portion of land (less than 500
square feet) currently remaining above water. The small remnant island is dominated by Spartino
alterniflora.
1.2. Project Description
The proposed action responds to the following underlying needs:
• Budget shortfalls in the USACE navigation maintenance program have led to significant shoaling of
Wainwright Slough due to no recent maintenance activities within the channel.
• Wainwright Slough has become impassible in some areas by commercial and recreational vessels.
There are potential economic, health, and safety impacts as a result.
• Wainwright Slough is the only marked navigable route for local fishing vessels in this area of Pamlico
Sound.
The project was authorized under the River and Harbor Act of 1899 (amended August 30, 1935). The channel
was originally dredged in 1935. Fifteen documented maintenance activities occurred in portions of the
channel through 1968, with occasional maintenance dredging occurring after 1968 on an as -needed basis
(USACE 1995a). The channel historically was dredged approximately once every three to four years, but due
to budget shortfalls in the US Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) navigation maintenance program, the channel
has not been dredged for many years. Historically, dredged material has been placed at the toe -of -the -bank
on the channel (east) side of Wainwright Island. Due to the disposal area's location, dredged material tends
to return to the channel in a relatively short amount of time. Historically, scoping and permitting
requirements for Wainwright Slough were managed and completed by the USACE Wilmington District - South
Atlantic Division, and culminated in an Environmental Assessment (EA) dated June 1995. A Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) for Maintenance Dredging at Wainwright Slough was issued in August 1995
(USACE 1995b). The EA and associated FONSI covered the action to place dredge material on the island's
non -channel side.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
n Moffatt & Nichol Page 2
CITY

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment Carteret County / NOAA Fisheries
2. Description of Alternatives
This section describes the alternatives evaluated for responding to the shoaling within the channel and the
disposal of dredge material to restore Wainwright Island. The analysis of alternatives is based on meeting the
project purpose and need as defined (restore commercial and recreational navigation through Wainwright
Slough to maintain and sustain economic benefits from the local commercial fishing industry, recreational
fishing, and local tourism), in addition to minimizing adverse environmental consequences. This EFH report
focuses on impacts resulting from the Preferred Alternative. The alternatives evaluated include:
• Alternative 1— No Action
• Alternative 2 —Applicant's Preferred Alternative — Maintaining navigability and restoring Wainwright
Island
2.1. Alternative 1: No Action
The "No Action" alternative involves maintaining existing conditions of the Wainwright Slough channel.
USACE has not been able to perform maintenance activities in the channel; therefore, navigation would
remain impassible and potentially dangerous in the future. The potential for economic, health, and safety
impacts would remain and possibly become more significant with time.
2.2. Alternative 2: Applicant's Preferred Alternative - Maintaining Navigability
and Restoring Wainwright Island
In an attempt to reestablish the channel navigability, Carteret County is seeking a permit that would allow
dredging and placement of materials to restore Wainwright Island.
Approximately 40,000 CY would be dredged from the federally authorized channel of Wainwright Slough,
Ranges 2, 2A, and 3, with sediment placement occurring adjacent to Wainwright Island. The dredging would
restore navigation depths to the authorized channel for recreational boating and commercial fishing vessels.
The channel would be dredged to -7 MLLW with an additional 2 feet of overdepth tolerance, resulting in a
maximum depth of disturbance down to -9 MLLW. The project maintains compliance with the channel's
federal authorization, and the sediment placement will be used to help create nesting and foraging bird
habitat by open placement of the material adjacent to Wainwright Island. Sediment placement will be
located on the west side of the existing island to reduce erosion back into the channel and will occur over a
maximum footprint of 10.5 acres up to an elevation matching the existing Wainwright Island.
3. Essential Fish Habitat
3.1. Habitat Elements
Pursuant to the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Public Law 94-265) and the
1996 amendments to the Act, known as the Sustainable Fisheries Act (Public Law 104-297), an EFH
consultation was requested by NOAA Fisheries for the proposed project. For the North Carolina coast, this
requires that EFH be identified for all fish species managed by the South Atlantic Fisheries Management
R E�,?VLMF1�C), the Mid -Atlantic Fisheries Management Council (MAFMC), and NOAA National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS). This EFH assessment's objective is to determine whether the actions for the
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM-1VHD CITY Moffatt & Nichol I Page 3

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment Carteret County / NOAA Fisheries
proposed project "may adversely affect" designated EFH for relevant managed fisheries species within the
proposed project area.
A list of EFH habitat types and their presence or absence in the project area is provided in Table 1.
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) is found in both SAV/seagrass and tidal freshwater (aquatic bed)
habitat categories. Habitats are described in more detail in the following sections.
Table 1: EFH Types Potentially Found in Project Area
EFH Type
Found in
Project Area
Inshore
*
Estuarine emergent wetlands
Yes
*
Estuarine forested wetlands
No
*
Estuarine shrub/scrub (mangrove)
No
•
Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV)/Seagrass
Yes*
*
Oyster reef and shell bank
No
•
Intertidal flats/mud bottoms
No
*
Palustrine emergent and forested (freshwater)
No
•
Aquatic bed (tidal freshwater)**
Yes
•
Estuarine water column/creeks
Yes
Marine
•
Live/hard bottom
No
*
Coral and coral reef
No
*
Artificial/man-made reef
No
•
Sargassum
No
*
Water column
No
SAV was not found in the project area; however, potential SAV habitat is present in the general project
vicinity.
** Includes SAV in shallow areas.
Figure 2 (following page) depicts locations of EFH areas in Pamlico Sound within the proposed action area.
The EFH identified in the Fisheries Management Plans (FMP) amendments of the SAFMC that are in proximity
to this site include Estuarine Water Column/Creeks, Estuarine Emergent Wetlands, and Aquatic Beds (Tidal
Freshwater). Those identified in the MAFMC that are present within the project area include SAV/Seagrass
and Estuarine Water Column/Creeks. Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) are subsets of designated
EFH. Under the South Atlantic HAPC, SAV is a designated HAPC and can be found in proximity of the droject
area.
REECE W ED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 4

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
Figure 2: EFH Area Locations
3.1.1. Estuarine Emergent Wetlands
Estuarine Emergent Wetland includes all tidal wetlands dominated by erect, rooted, herbaceous hydrophytes
(excluding mosses and lichens). These wetlands occur in tidal areas where salinity due to ocean -derived salts
is equal to or greater than 0.5 percent and that are present for most of the growing season during most
years. Perennial plants usually dominate these wetlands and vegetation cover is typically above 80 percent.
These wetlands are typically dominated by marsh grasses such as Sportina species, needlerush (Juncus spp.),
and narrow leaved cattail (Typho angustifolia). Estuarine emergent wetlands are nutrient -rich with high
primary productivity, allowing these habitats to support a diversity of fish, invertebrates, and coastal birds.
Managed fish species use these marshes during multiple life stages because they provide nursery habitat for
juveniles and foraging for adults. Estuarine emergent wetland habitat is present on the existing Wainwright
Island.
3.1.2. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation/Seagrass
The shallow waters (6 feet deep or less) of Pamlico Sound provide habitat and potential habitat for SAV beds.
NCMFC defines SAV habitat as area currently vegetated with one or more appropriate SAV species or has
been vegetated by one or more species within the past 10 growing seasons, as well as meets the average
growing conditions needed (water depth of 6 feet or less, average light availability [Secchi depth of one foot
or more], and limited wave exposure.
/SAAV habitats are typically rich in invertebrates and serve as important foraging areas, in addition to providing
PAE 0]aEWEi'Iuy-And adult fish refuge from predators. SAV also plays a role in stabilizing sediment, nutrient
DEC2016 Moffatt & Nichol Page 5
P"'''- �""HD CITY

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment Carteret County,
cycling, reduction of wave energy, and provision of organic matter that supports complex food webs (North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission [NCWRC], 2005). For these reasons, SAV habitat is considered
Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) for several managed fish species. The distribution and
composition of SAV habitat is influenced by several factors; among the most important factors are salinity,
light, nutrient levels, and wave action.
Because SAV distribution, abundance, and density varies seasonally and annually in response to climatic
variability coupled with its sensitivity to other stressors, large-scale SAV changes may occur. Major threats to
SAV habitat include water quality degradation from dredging activities, excessive nutrient and sediment
loading, plus the emerging threat of accelerated sea level rise, barrier island stability, and increasing water
temperatures (Deaton et al. 2010).
Moffatt & Nichol was contracted to perform a submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) survey in the general
vicinity of the 100-acre disposal site (Wainwright Island). Protocols used for this study were provided by and
discussed with the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (Gregg Bodnar) and NOAA Fisheries
Habitat Conservation Division (Ken Riley) prior to sampling. State and federal resource agencies required the
survey as a measure to help identify potential impacts the project may create for any existing SAV within the
proposed work areas.
SAV presence was virtually non-existent in the sampling area around Wainwright Island. Only 1-2 shoots (<1%
cover) were found in five quadrats sampled during this investigation. There Is no obvious explanation for why
SAV growth is limited in this portion of Pamlico Sound, although significant wave exposure and movement of
water was observed in the field. Wave exposure in shallow water could possibly affect SAV populations.
About 309 square miles of marine bottom are dominated by Holodule wrightii in Core and Pamlico Sounds in
North Carolina, where Halodule occurs away from the main body of its distribution farther south. The species
Is common in Texas and Florida (and the Caribbean) but does not extend any farther north than Cape
Hatteras (Ferguson et al 1993). Seagrass distribution in the targeted study area may be affected by factors
that affect seagrass composition and distribution throughout its range, including turbidity or sediment load in
the water column and the cumulative effect of increased turbidity and dredging and spoil disposal, wave
exposure, boat propeller scarring, and shrimp trawling. Even though SAV presence was virtually non-existent,
it is recognized that SAV habitat potential is present in the general vicinity of the project and throughout
Pamlico Sound.
3.1.3. Aquatic Bed (Tidal Freshwater)
Aquatic bed habitats in the project area include the soft bottom substrate of the Pamlico Sound. This habitat
type is comprised of sand as well as inorganic muds, organic muds, and peat. Nutrients are typically provided
by riverine sources and transported via wind tides in addition to lunar tidal exchange. The abundance of
benthic macroalgae in this habitat supports a high diversity of invertebrates that are an important fishery
food source. Shallow areas less than 6 feet deep within this habitat type can also support SAV populations
(Street et al. 2005).
3.1.4. Estuarine Water Column/Creeks
The estuarine water column extends from the estuarine bottom to the surface waters and is especially
R� C iD it directly affects all other estuarine aquatic habitats (NCWRC 2005). This habitat is
�'characterized racterized by the oligohaline (estuarine) waters present in Pamlico Sound with seasonally variable salinity
DEC 0
CITY
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 6

RECE
DEC 0
Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
levels. Distinct zones within the water column can be defined by parameters such as salinity, temperature,
and dissolved oxygen. Water column zonation continually fluctuates and is a function of tidal dynamics,
season, nutrient levels, and ocean proximity. Fish and shellfish often exploit distinct resources within the
water column based on species -specific diet, behavior, and morphology. For example, pelagic fishes (live
higher in the water column) and demersal fishes (bottom dwelling) have adapted to take advantage of these
different habitats, and favorable spawning and feeding conditions can occur at varying locations at different
times of the year.
3.1.5. Primary Nursery Areas
While not a single specific EFH type, Primary Nursery Areas (PNA) are composed of several EFH types and are
state -designated waters that are used by marine and estuarine fishes and invertebrates during early
development. Secondary Nursery Areas (SNA) typically occur in the lower reaches of streams and bays.
Nursery areas are designated and regulated by NC Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF) and NCWRC in some
areas. These areas are typically shallow waters with soft bottom substrate that are surrounded by marshes
and wetlands. The abundance of refuge, foraging habitat, and food resources present in these areas result in
the successful development of many sub -adult organisms (Beck et al. 2000). Nursery areas are considered
HAPC for several managed fish species. There are no designated Primary or Secondary Nursery Areas within
the project area.
4. Managed Species
4.1. SAFMC, MAFMC, and NMFS-managed Species
SAFMC and MAFMC have developed FMPs for several species, or species units (SAFMC 2008; MAFMC 2008),
although not all of these species are found in the project area. Highly migratory species' FMPs and Atlantic
billfish FMPs were developed by the Highly Migratory Species Management Unit, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, NMFS (NMFS, 1999a; NMFS, 1999b). As part of each FMP, the council designates not only EFH, but
also HAPC, a subset of EFH that refers to specific locations required by a life stage(s) of that managed species.
Table 2 presents the species or species units for which EFH and/or HAPC exist, and the occurrence of these
species within the project area.
The sections that follow describe managed species that are found in the project area and their associated
EFHs.
Table 2: Project Area Managed Species, EFH and HAPC
Present in
Life Stages Present
Designated EFH in
HAPC in
Species
Project Area
in Project Area
Project Area
Project Area
Mid -Atlantic Fisheries Management Council (MAFMC)
Atlantic mackerel (Scomber
scombrus)
No
None
None
None
Atlantic surfclam(Spisula
solidissima)
No
None
None
None
Black sea bass' (Centropristis
No
None
None
SAV•
Bluefish (Pomatomus solatrix)
Yes
Juveniles, Adults
Estuarine Water
None
Column/Creeks
DCM- YND CITY
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 7

Essential Fish Habitat AssessmentNCAA Fisheries
Butterfish (Peprilus
Eggs, Larvae,
Estuarine Water
triocanthus)'
Yes
Juveniles, Adults
Column/Creeks
None
Spiny dogfish (Squalus
acanthius)
No
None
None
None
Longfin squid (Loligo pealei)
No
None
None
None
Monkfish (Lophius americanus)
No
None
None
None
Ocean quahog (Artica islandica)
No
None
None
None
Estuarine Water
Summer Flounder (Paralichthys
Larvae, Juveniles,
Column/Creeks, SAV,
dentatus)
Yes
Adults
Aquatic Beds, Estuarine
SAV
Emergent Wetlands
Scup (Stenotomus chrysops)
No
None
None
None
Shortfin squid (Illex
illecebrosus)
No
None
None
None
Tilefish (Lopholatilus
chamaeleonticeps)
No
None
None
None
South Atlantic Fisheries Management Council SAFMC)
Penaid and Rock Shrimp
Estuarine Water
Larvae, Juveniles,
Column/Creeks, SAV,
(Penaeus spp. and Sicyonio
Yes
Adults
Aquatic Beds, Estuarine
None
spp')
Emergent Wetlands
Estuarine
Estuarine Water
Water
Snapper grouper management
Larvae, Juveniles,
Column/Creeks, SAV,
Column/
unit
Yes'
Adults
Estuarine Emergent
Creeks, SAV,
Wetlands
Estuarine
Emergent
Wetlands
Golden crab (Chaeceon fenneri)
No
None
None
None
Spiny Lobster (2 Species)
Estuarine Water
Spiny lobster (Panulirus argus)
Eggs, Larvae,
Column/Creeks, SAV,
Slipper lobster (Scyllarides
Yes
Juveniles, Adults
Aquatic Beds, Estuarine
None
nodifer)
Emergent Wetlands
Coastal migratory pelagic
s
Larvae, Juveniles,
Estuarine Water
species
Yes
Adults
Column/Creeks
None
Sargassum (Sargassum spp.)
No
None
None
None
Calico scallop (Agopecten
gibbus)
No
None
None
None
Coral, coral reef, and live/hard
bottom habitat
No
None
None
None
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
Highly migratory species
Yes (Bluefin
Estuarine Water
(sharks, tuna, swordfish)
Tuna)
Juveniles
Column/Creeks, SAV,
None
Aquatic Beds
Billfish
No
I None
None
I None
Source: MAFMC, 2008; SAFMC, 2008; NMFS, 1999a, 1999b.
1 No EFH or HAPC designated for black sea bass by MAFMC is located in the project area; however, black sea bass are
included in the snapper grouper management unit under SAFMC.
2 No EFH or HAPC designated for butterfish by MAFMC is located in the project area; however, because of catch
records of butterfish, the estuarine waters of Pamlico Sound are included as "inshore" EFH.
3 Species from this management unit that have been recorded near the project area include black sea bass, red
i C Eli and Atlantic spadefish.
4 Spanis mackerel is the only species from this management unit recorded in the vicinity of the project area.
DEC p 8 2fiffiential SAV habitat; SAV presence was not noted during field surveys
Moffatt & Nichol Page 8
DC1A" AfH® CITY

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
4.1.1. Black Sea Bass (Centropristis striata)
The black sea bass is a demersal species found from Maine to Florida that are opportunistic feeders and
accept a variety of food sources. As juveniles and adults, this species is associated with submerged structures
in estuarine and marine waters. Spawning occurs offshore from May to October along the continental shelf in
an area extending from southern New England to North Carolina. Eggs are generally hatched on the
continental shelf near large estuaries, but eggs have also been found in bays in North Carolina. Juvenile Black
Sea Bass enter estuaries during late spring and early summer to forage on invertebrate prey and small fish.
This species is typically not found in the Pamlico Sound, but fishing reports from NCDMF have shown
presence of this species in the last 10 years. MAFMC does not currently designate any EFH or HAPC areas for
black sea bass within the project area, however, SAFMC considers black sea bass one of the 70 species
included in the Snapper Grouper Management Unit. All tidal and estuarine waters, including emergent
wetlands, estuarine water column and potential SAV habitat are designated EFH for this species. Additionally,
potential SAV habitat within the project area is considered HAPC for this species.
4.1.2. Bluefish
Bluefish are primarily pelagic fish found over the continental shelf (NOAA 2016a). Adults are piscivorous (fish -
eating) and feed on small bait fish in inshore and estuarine habitats. While not typically found in oligohaline
waters such as Pamlico Sound, bluefish do occur within the project area based on nearby fishing records.
Spawning takes place on the continental shelf at different times of the year depending on location, and eggs
are not found in estuarine waters. However, as larvae develop, they may cross into inshore and estuarine
waters.
There are no EFH areas designated for eggs and larvae within the study area, but EFH exists for juveniles and
adults within the estuarine water column/creeks. No HAPC for bluefish adults and juveniles has been
identified in this area.
4.1.3. Butterfish (Pepri►us triacanthus)
Butterfish spawning occurs offshore, but eggs and larvae can be found in estuaries. All life stages may make
use of estuaries during growth. MAFMC has designated both inshore and offshore EFH for all life stages of
butterfish. Inshore EFH is defined as the estuarine "mixing zone" where fresh and saline waters converge.
Appropriate potential habitat exists within the project area for butterfish and local fishing records indicate
butterfish have been documented in Pamlico Sound; therefore, the estuarine water column has been
included as EFH for this species.
4.1.4. Summer Flounder (Para►ichthys dentatus)
The summer flounder is estuarine -dependent and is found along the Atlantic coast from Maine to Florida.
Spawning occurs from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras between October and May along the continental shelf in
waters 30 to 60 feet deep. In later winter and spring, larvae enter estuaries to develop into juveniles. In the
fall, juveniles migrate to the open ocean. Adult summer flounder utilize estuaries on a seasonal basis.
MAFMC designates all tidal estuarine waters, including estuarine emergent wetlands, potential SAV habitat,
and aquatic beds as EFH for all life stages except eggs. SAV habitat that does occur in Pamlico Sound is also
considered a HAPC for summer flounder.
DEC
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 9
DCi'v1- I HD CITY

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment •
4.1.5. Penaeid and Rock Shrimp (Penaeus spp. and Sicyonia spp.)
Penaeid shrimp (white, pink, and brown shrimp) are estuarine -dependent species of commercial and
ecological significance. Penaeid shrimp spawn offshore where both larval and postlarval development occurs.
Currents carry postlarval shrimp into estuaries, where they are distributed based on salinity and substrate
preferences. As shrimp grow, they migrate to higher salinity areas before returning to offshore spawning
areas. All tidal and estuarine waters within the project area, including estuarine emergent wetlands,
potential SAV habitat and aquatic beds are designated as EFH for penaeid shrimp.
4.1.6. Snapper Grouper Management Group
The Snapper Grouper Management Group includes more than 70 species that are managed by the SAFMC.
Red grouper, Atlantic spadefish, and black sea bass are species within this group that have been documented
near or within the project area. Black sea bass have been previously discussed, and have been documented
in Pamlico Sound.
Red grouper spawn from early winter to late spring and occur in shallow nearshore reef habitats. Juveniles
move to deeper waters at sexual maturity and movements of adults are extensive, but are not well known.
While not typically found in oligohaline waters, local fishing reports have documented presence of this
species within Pamlico in or near the project area.
Atlantic spadefish are opportunistic bottom feeders that utilize a variety of brackish water and nearshore
habitats. Spawning occurs from May to September and juveniles are typically found in estuarine waters while
adults are typically found in nearshore areas. Atlantic spadefish have been documented in local fishing
reports in or near the project area.
4.1.7. Coastal Migratory Pelagics
The only coastal migratory pelagic species found near the project area is the Spanish mackerel. Spanish
mackerel spawn from May to September (SAFMC 1998), with eggs and larvae using pelagic habitats and
juveniles moving into estuaries for use as nursery areas. While typically not found in oligohaline waters such
as Pamlico Sound, Spanish mackerel do occur in the area based on commercial fishing data. Estuarine water
column/creek habitats are designated as EFH by SAFMC in the management of this unit because prey items
for species in this unit are typically estuarine dependent. There are no HAPCs designated by SAFMC for
Spanish mackerel in the project area.
4.1.8. Highly Migratory Species
Atlantic bluefin tuna juveniles are the only highly migratory species with EFH in the project area (NOAA
2009). Bluefin tuna generally spawn in the Gulf of Mexico, continuing to the mid -east coast of Florida where
they remain until development into juveniles. Juveniles can be found from North Carolina waters to coastal
waters in the northeastern United States. Adults are pelagic and can be found from the Gulf of Mexico to
waters off the northeastern United States coast. The project area and general project vicinity contains EFH
for juvenile bluefin tuna in the estuarine water column/creeks, potential SAV areas, and aquatic bed habitats.
4.1.9. Spiny Lobster
Spiny lobster and slipper lobster have EFH for all life stages within the project area. EFH includes estuarine
R�'6 mks, aquatic bed, and SAV (NOAA 2016b). The spiny and slipper lobster larvae are typically
t frl PVenn oc%an in the epipelagic zone of the Caribbean Sea, Gulf of Mexico, and the straits of Florida.
DEC 0 8 2016
D CITY
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 10

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
Post -larvae and juveniles occupy shallow waters of bays, lagoons, and reef flats, habitats supported by the
production of seagrasses, benthic algae, phytoplankton, and detritus. As the lobsters increase in size, they
move towards deeper waters in bays, reefs, and nearshore areas. As adults, they can be found in deeper
waters both nearshore and offshore.
4.2. ASMFC-managed Species
The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) coordinates additional conservation and
management of states' shared nearshore fishery resources. Member states include North Carolina, South
Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode
Island, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Maine. Species managed by the ASMFC that are found in the
Pamlico Sound and nearshore waters include: American eel (Anguilla rostrato), Atlantic croaker
(Micropogonias undulatus), Atlantic menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus), black sea bass, blueback herring (Aloso
oestivalis), bluefish, red drum (Sciaenops ocellatus), spot (Leiostomus xanthurus), spotted sea trout
(Cynoscion nebulosus), southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma), striped bass (Moron saxatilis), summer
flounder, and weakfish (Cynoscion regalis).
4.3. NCDEQ-DMF
The Fisheries Reform Act of 1997 (FRA) prompted NCDEQ-DMF to begin the process of developing FMPs for
all commercially or recreationally important species and fisheries that are found in state marine or estuarine
waters, with the goal of ensuring the long-term sustainability of these fisheries. Species with existing or in -
development management plans include: river herring [blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis) and alewife (Alosa
pseudoharengus)], shrimp (Penaeus spp.), striped bass, southern flounder, blue crab (Callinectes sapidus), red
drum, oysters (Crassostrea virginica), hard clams (Mercenaria mercenaria), bay scallop (Argopecten
irradians), kingfish (Menticirrhus americanus), and striped mullet (Mugul cepholus).
5. Potential Impacts to EFH
Historic and present stressors to fish and EFH communities in the Pamlico Sound have occurred as a result of
fluctuations in nutrient loading, turbidity, and salinity as well as increased fishing pressures. Turbidity and
wave exposure are important factors in affecting the distribution of habitat quality near the project area.
Impacts created by the Preferred Alternative are primarily localized short-term impacts and will not have a
permanent additive effect on fish and EFH stressors within the project area.
Actions taken during project design and implementation phases will ensure that the Applicant's Preferred
Alternative avoids or minimizes direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to identified essential fish habitat and
associated species in proximity to the project. The work will be conducted using a hydraulic dredge and
pipeline system. The work will be conducted on a 24-hour day schedule with completion expected prior to
April 1, 2017. The material placement site will be constructed to discourage sediment from flowing back into
the navigation channel. The contractor will erect temporary sand dikes along the flow way of the placement
site to help direct the dredge slurry away from the navigation channel. The dikes will be constructed from the
initial dredge material to reduce disturbance of the placement area. The dikes will be extended and
& C EiVd&& a fashion to help limit the turbidity plume leaving the work area.
DEC 0 S 2016
DCM- IVHD CITY Moffatt & Nichol Page 11

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment •
5.1. Short-term and Temporary Impacts
Construction associated with the Preferred Alternative would take place in Pamlico Sound, and include
channel dredging and the subsequent placement of dredged material around Wainwright Island.
Construction activities will produce noise, turbidity, and siltation, thereby creating short-term, localized
impacts to EFH identified in the project area and possibly to targeted management species. Dredging
activities could create a short-term decrease in dissolved oxygen. Many, if not all, of the fish species with EFH
within the project area would be expected to escape the area during construction activities, and construction
disturbances would not be expected to be lethal to any fish species with EFH within the project area.
At the ecosystem level, increased turbidity could result in reduced ecosystem productivity (ability of the
ecosystem to produce and export energy) and nursery value by elimination of organisms that cannot easily
flee construction activities, and the displacement of mobile organisms. For individual organisms, turbidity can
impair visual predation success, predator avoidance, and an organism's ability to take in oxygen through
clogging of respiratory organs. Siltation could alter SAV and invertebrate animal communities within the
project area. Again, these potential impacts are expected to be short term and temporary in nature. Mobile
animals would likely avoid the area during the construction phase, but likely return once construction is
complete and pre -construction conditions return. Benthic organisms would likely recover rapidly post -
construction, as most benthic communities (including SAV) are resilient and recolonize quickly after short-
term impacts (Ellis 2009, Dernie 2003).
5.2. Permanent and Long -Term Impacts
While dredging construction activities and placement of dredged material will create short-term and
localized impacts on EFH within the project area, long-term and permanent impacts are expected to be
minimal for the Preferred Alternative. The area has been dredged historically and EFH resources such as SAV
are limited to non-existent based on field surveys. Growth of SAV is affected by salinity, wave exposure,
nutrient concentrations, light, and turbidity. The Preferred Alternative would have no effect on salinity,
nutrient concentrations, light, and wave exposure. During a SAV survey conducted in September 2016, only
single shoots of Holodule wrightii were found in a few locations within the project area. Coverage of SAV was
limited to less than 1% of the surveyed area. Wave exposure appeared to be one of the most significant
limiting factors for SAV in the surveyed area based on field observations. The nearest state -mapped SAV
locations (APNEP/NCDEQ 2011) are more than 1,000 feet from the proposed placement area of dredged
material around Wainwright Island.
Dredged material would likely settle and stabilize quickly in the placement area. In addition, no negative
impacts to the area containing the existing Wainwright Slough channel would be expected, as these channels
are generally lower in productivity due to low levels of light penetration and a disturbed bottom.
Dredge material placement within the proposed footprint of the restored island will displace any benthic
habitat located within this 10.5-acre area, and create temporary impacts to the existing emergent estuarine
wetland located on the current Wainwright Island. However, the re-establishment of a 10.5-acre island will
create significantly more emergent wetland habitat than currently exists at the site.
FE�E;VC0
DEC 0 820,6
�P"IHD TY
c►
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 12

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
5.3. Managed Species Effects Determination
The Preferred Alternative should create minimal localized and short-term effects within the project area for
identified managed species. Most species are mobile and should be able to avoid construction activities
during the construction phase of the project. This section evaluates impacts to SAFMC, MAFMC, NMFS, and
NCDEQ-DMF managed species, but does not include an evaluation of impacts to ASMFC-managed species.
ASMFC is primarily a deliberative body, coordinating the conservation and management of states' shared
fishery resources. In general, short-term impacts include potential mortality in earlier life stages for managed
species, and some limited displacement and habitat disturbance in later life stages. Long-term impacts are
minimal and generally involve the potential disruption of dispersion within Pamlico Sound for earlier life
stages of managed species. Table 3 provides a summary of both short-term and long-term potential impacts
for SAFMC, MAFMC, and NMFS-managed species within the project area.
Table 3: Potential Short- and Long -Term Impacts to Project Area EFH Species
Species
Impact Type
Eggs
Larvae
Juveniles
Adults
-Mortality from
Short -Term
N/A
Mortality from
constructionDisplacement
and
Impacts
construction
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
and habitat
Black sea bass (Centropristis
disturbance
striata)
Limited potential
Long -Term
N/A
disruption of
N/A
N/A
Impacts
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
-Mortality from
Short -Term
construction
Displacement and
Bluefish (Pomatomus
Impacts
N/A
N/A
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
and habitat
solatrix)
disturbance
Long -Term
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Impacts
-Mortality from
Short -Term
Mortality from
Mortality from
construction
Displacement and
Impacts
construction
construction
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
and habitat
disturbance
Butterfish (Peprilus
Low density in
triaconthus
project area,
Low density in
but limited
project area, but
Long -Term
Potential
limited potential
N/A
N/A
Impacts
disruption of
disruption of
dispersion in
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
Pamlico Sound
-Mortalityfrom
-Mortalityfrom
Summer Flounder
Short -Term
construction
constructionDisplacement
and
aralichthysdentatus)
Impacts
N/A
-Displacement
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
C%
and habitat
and habitat
C V
disturbance
disturbance
DEC
DCJ"bl- IMoffatt & Nichol Page 13
V'HD CITY

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
Species
Impact Type
Eggs
Larvae
Juveniles
Adults
Long -Term
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
impacts
-Mortalityfrom
-Mortalityfrom
Short -Term
construction
construction
Displacement and
Impacts
N/A
-Displacement
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
Penaid and Rock Shrimp
and habitat
and habitat
(Penaeus spp. and Sicyonia
disturbance
disturbance
Limited potential
spp•)
Long -Term
N/A
disruption of
N/A
N/A
Impacts
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
-Mortality from
-Mortality from
Short -Term
construction
construction
Impacts
N/A
-Displacement
-Displacement
-Displacement and
and habitat
and habitat
habitat disturbance
Snappergrouper
disturbance
disturbance
management unit
Limited potential
Long -Term
N/A
disruption of
N/A
N/A
Impacts
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
-Mortality from
Short -Term
Mortality from
Mortality from
construction
Displacement and
Impacts
construction
construction
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
and habitat
Spiny Lobster (2 Species)
disturbance
Spiny lobster (Panulirus
argus)
Low density in
Low density in
Slipper lobster (Scyllarides
project area,
project area, but
nodifer)
Long -Term
but limited
limited potential
Impacts
Potential
disruption of
N/A
N/A
disruption of
dispersion in
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
P
Pamlico Sound
Short -Term
Mortality from
DisplacementDisplacement
and
N/A
and habitat
Impacts
construction
disturbance
habitat disturbance
Coastal migratory pelagic
species
Limited potential
N/A
disruption of
N/A
N/A
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
Displacement
N/A
N/A
and habitat
N/A
Highly migratory species
Long -Term
disturbance
(sharks, tuna, swordfish)
Impacts
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
DEC 0 8 2016
DC M- M. H D CITY Moffatt & Nichol Page 14

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
, Carteret County / NOAA Fisheries
5.3.1. NCDEQ-DMF Managed Species Impacts
In addition to the SAFMC, MAFMC, and NMFS-managed EFH species, NCDEQ-DMF has developed or is in the
process of developing FMPs for many species found in North Carolina waters, including red drum, southern
flounder, striped bass, blue crab, striped mullet, hard clams, and kingfish. Impacts to flounder are similar to
impacts listed for summer flounder in the previous table. Potential impacts to red drum, kingfish, river
herring, striped bass, hard clams, bay scallops, oysters, blue crabs, and striped mullet are addressed below.
The red drum is an estuarine -dependent species with foraging areas throughout Pamlico Sound. Red drum
typically arrive in Pamlico Sound in the spring, with a second arrival often occurring in the fall as fish begin a
southerly migration from Mid -Atlantic States. Both juvenile and adult red drum may occur in the project area
but are mobile enough to avoid construction activities. Kingfish have a similar life history to the red drum in
Pamlico Sound. Juveniles and adult kingfish may occur in the project area, but are a highly mobile species,
therefore impacts will be minimal.
River herring and striped bass are anadromous fish whose adult life stages live in lower estuaries and marine
waters. Juveniles and adults are mobile enough to avoid construction disturbance in the project area.
Potential impacts to hard clams in the project area include increased short-term turbidity and siltation that
could clog the respiratory and feeding structures of hard clams that may result in limited mortality. Mortality
of hard clams in the direct area of dredge placement would be high, as clams are sessile and would not be
able to escape construction impacts. In this area, habitat alteration for the hard clam would be permanent.
Impacts to oysters and bay scallops would be similar to hard clams, however, no live oysters or bay scallops
were observed during a field visit in September 2016.
Blue crabs occupy various marine and estuarine habitats throughout their life cycle. Mating occurs in
estuaries, followed by spawning near coastal inlets from April to June and August to September in North
Carolina. Weather, water quality conditions, proximity to inlets, wind direction, and hours of dark flood tide
impact breeding productivity in blue crabs. Impacts affecting eggs and larvae from noise, turbidity, and
siltation may occur but should be short term. Juveniles and adults are mobile and would be able to escape
construction disturbance.
Striped mullet are catadromous (move from freshwater to ocean to spawn) species that live in fresh and
estuarine waters until moving to high salinity estuarine and nearshore marine waters to spawn in winter and
early spring. Larvae develop in marine offshore environments, and would not be present in Pamlico Sound.
Immature striped mullet move to estuaries during the winter and generally occupy estuarine waters until
spawning. Juveniles and adults may be present near the project area, but are mobile and would be minimally
impacted by turbidity, siltation, and noise resulting from construction activities.
6. Summary
The Preferred Alternative includes the dredging of approximately 40,000 CY from a federally authorized
channel and placement of that dredge material to restore approximately 10.S acres of emergent salt marsh
habitat at Wainwright Island. The Preferred Alternative would likely result in primarily short-term, localized,
p taand`t�emporary adverse effects to EFH and managed species, but project design, implementation, and
R `C �trn�rFWii measures under consideration would keep these impacts to a minimum, as well as reduce the
possibility
DEC 0$7MW--
long-term impacts. Short-term impacts would include increased
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 1S
DCM- N;HD CITY

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment Carteret County �I
siltation, and noise from construction activities, but most managed species found in this area are highly
mobile and would be able to escape construction disturbance and eventually return to the area post -
construction. Aquatic substrate impacted by siltation should recover after construction, and turbidity would
be limited to the immediate construction area.
SAV habitats were found to be minimal to non-existent within the project area, so impacts to SAV resources
will be minimal for this project. Species that utilize SAV habitats for foraging and refuge from predators likely
will not be impacted since current SAV resources are limited. Additionally, the Preferred Alternative will have
no long-term, adverse effects on the ecosystem benefits provided by SAV, including the provisioning of
organic matter for localized food webs, stabilizing sediment, nutrient cycling, and reduction of wave energy.
The Preferred Alternative, while reducing available sandy benthic habitat within the project area, will also
create over 10 acres of emergent estuarine wetland (a designated EFH within the project area) in an area
where benthic habitat has been impacted by exposure to waves. A re-established Wainwright Island would
also provide valuable new nesting and foraging habitat for coastal birds. The Preferred Alternative could
result in increased long-term SAV colonization and general benthic habitat improvements adjacent to the re-
established island.
7. Reference
Albemarle -Pamlico National Estuary Partnership (APNEP), NCDECL 2011. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation GIS
data based on 2006-2008 Aerial Imagery. Available at htti)://www.nconemap.com. Accessed: November
2016.
Beck, M.W., K.L. Heck Jr., K.W. Able, D.L. Childers, D.B. Eggleston, B.M. Gillanders, B. Halpern, C.G. Hayes, K.
Hoshino, T.J. Minello, R.J. Orth, P.F. Sheridan, and M.P. Weinstein. 2001.'The Identification, Conservation,
and Management, of Estuarine and Marine Nurseries for Fish and Invertebrates." Bioscience. 51(8): 633-641.
Deaton, A.S., W.S. Chappell, K. Hart, J. O'Neal. 2010. North Carolina Coastal Habitat Protection Plan. NC
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Marine Fisheries.
Dernie, K.M, M.1, Kaiser, and R.M. Warwick. 2003. "Recovery rates of benthic communities following physical
disturbance." Journal of Animal Ecology. 72: 1043-1056.
Ellis, B.O. 2009. "Year Five (Final) Submersed Aquatic Vegetation Survey, Currituck Sound, Whalehead Bay-
Currituck Heritage Park." Memorandum to John Hennessy, Environmental Supervisor, National Park Service,
Assistance and Compliance Oversight Unit.
Ferguson, Randolph L., B.T. Pawlak, L.L. Wood. 1993. Flowering of the seagrass Holodule wrightii in North
Carolina, USA. Aquatic Botany, Volume 46, Issue 1, Pages 91-98
Mid -Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC). 2008. Fishery Management Plans. Available at
http://www.mafmc.org/fishery-management-plans/. Accessed: November 2016.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- M,HD CITY Moffatt & Nichol I Page 16

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment Carteret County / NOAA Fisheries
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).1999. Essential fish habitat: A marine fish habitat conservation
mandate for federal agencies. Revised 08/04. NMFS, Habitat Conservation Division, Southeast Regional
Office, St. Petersburg, Florida.
NMFS. 1999a. Final fishery management plan for Atlantic tuna, swordfish, and sharks, including the revised
final environmental impact statement, final regulatory impact review, the final regulatory flexibility analysis,
and the final social impact assessment. Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Springs, Maryland.
NMFS. 1999b. Amendment 1 to the Atlantic billfish fishery management plan, including the revised final
environmental impact statement, final regulatory impact review, the final regulatory flexibility analysis, and
the final social impact assessment. Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Springs, Maryland.
North Carolina State University (NCSU). 2016. Coastwatch.
https://ncseagrant. ncsu.edu/coastwatch/previous-issues/2012-2/sum mer-2012/the-pamlico-sou nd-fishina-
gem-of-north-carolina/. Accessed November 2016.
NC Wildlife Resources Commission. 2005. North Carolina Wildlife Action Plan. Raleigh, NC. Available at
http://www.ncwildlife.org/pg07 WildlifeSpeciesCon/pg7c1 3.htm. Accessed: November 2016.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 2009. Final Amendment 1 to the 2006
Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan, Essential Fish Habitat. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Sustainable Fisheries,
Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Silver Spring, MD. Public Document. pp. 395.
NOAA 2016a. https://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/hcd/bluefish.htm. Accessed November 21,
2016.
NOAA 2016b. http://www.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/newinv/index.htmi. Accessed: November 21,
2016
South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC). 2008. Fishery Management Plans. Available at
http://safmc.net/fishery-management-plans-amendments/. Accessed: November 2016.
SAFMC. 1998. Final Habitat Plan for the South Atlantic Region: Essential Fish Habitat RegVirements for
Fishery Management Plans of the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council. The Shrimp Fishery
Management Plan, The Snapper Grouper Fishery Management Plan, The Coastal Migratory Pelagics Fishery
Management Plan, The Spiny Lobster Fishery Management Plan, Charleston, South Carolina: South Atlantic
Fishery Management Council, 457p. plus Appendices and Amendments. http://www.safmc.net/resource-
Iibrary/fishery-management-plans-amendments. Accessed: November 2016.
Street, M.W., A.S. Deaton, W.S. Chappell, and P.D. Mooreside. 2005. North Carolina Coastal Habitat
Protection Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Marine
Fisheries, Morehead City, North Carolina. 656 pp.
RECEIVED
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 17
DCM- MI-1® CITY

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment I Carteret • • •
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Wilmington District. 1995a. Environmental Assessment
Maintenance Dredging Wainwright Slough Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor.
Carteret County, North Carolina.
USACE Wilmington District. 1995b. Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI): "Maintenance Dredging,
Wainwright Slough Waterway connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor." Carteret County, North
Carolina.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 18

ATTACHMENT J: Biological Assessment of Federally Listed Protected Species
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- WmHD CITY

Protected Species Evaluation
Wainwright Slough, Carteret County, NC
Introduction
The purpose of this report is to identify the federally protected species found in the Carteret County area
and to determine likely impacts to these species as a result of proposed actions to dredge Wainwright
Slough with deposition of spoil material adjacent to Wainwright Island.
Site Description
Carteret County is in southeastern North Carolina within the Tidewater Region of the Atlantic Coastal Plain
physiographic province. Topography in the area consists of nearly level and gently sloping land that drains
primarily into Pamlico Sound, one of the largest estuaries in the United States. Wainwright Slough is
approximately five miles northeast of the Cedar Island Ferry Landing in Carteret County. The channel
connects Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, and Wainwright Slough serves as a conduit for passage of
commercial and recreational anglers between Beaufort Harbor and Pamlico Sound.
Project Description
Carteret County intends to dredge approximately 30,500 cubic meters (40,000 cubic yards) of material
from the federally authorized channel of Wainwright Slough, Ranges 2, 2A and 3, near Cedar Island, south
Pamlico Sound (Figure 1; Map 1 Appendix). Dredged sediment will be placed adjacent to Wainwright
Island. The project will restore navigation depths to the authorized channel for recreational boating and
commercial fishing vessels. The channel will be dredged to -7 MLLW with an additional 0.6 meters (2 feet)
of over depth tolerance, resulting in a maximum depth of disturbance down to -9 MLLW. The project
maintains compliance with the federal authorization for the channel. The sediment placement will be
used to help create nesting and foraging bird habitat by open placement of the material adjacent to
Wainwright Island. Sediment placement will occur over a maximum footprint of 4.2 hectares (10.5 acres)
up to an elevation matching the existing Wainwright Island. The slopes and grades of the material
placement will be constructed to encourage nesting and foraging bird activities to the extent reasonable.
Listed Species
Carteret County, North Carolina
Threatened and Endangered Species
Common Name
Scientific name
Federal Status
Record Status
American alligator
Alligator mississippiensis
T (S/A)
Current
Green sea turtle
Chelonia mydas
T
Current
Hawksbill (=carey) sea turtle
Eretmochelys imbricata
E
Historic
Kemp's (=Atlantic)
ridley sea turtle
Lepidochelys kempii
E
Current
Leatherback sea turtle
Dermochelys coriacea
E
Current
Loggerhead sea turtle
Caretta caretta
T
Current
R EC rAip�ng plover
Ci a �.�
Charadrius melodus
T
Current
1
DEC 0 8 2016
DC,M- MI -ID CITY

Red -cockaded woodpecker
Red knot
Roseate tern
Shortnose sturgeon
West Indian manatee
Rough -leaved loosestrife
Seabeach amaranth
Definitions of Federal Status Codes:
Picoides borealis
Calidris canutus rufa
Sterna dougallii dougallii
Acipenser brevirostrum
Trichechus manatus
Lysimachia asperulaefolia
Amaranthus pumilus
E Current
T Current
T Current
E Current
E Current
E Current
T Current
E = Endangered. A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
T = Threatened. A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of
its range."
T(S/A) = threatened due to similarity of appearance
https://w .fws.goy/raleigh/soecies/cntylist/carteret.html. Accessed December 6, 2016
Species Evaluation
American alligator: The American alligator is a species endemic to the southeastern United States.
Alligators inhabits freshwater wetlands, such as marshes and cypress swamps from Texas to North
Carolina and are not found in the open ocean or in saltwater habitats.
Status: The Wainwright Slough project area does not contain habitat suitable for this species.
Sea Turtles: Sea turtles are migratory species found in open ocean environments. Listed species may be
found along the North Carolina coast between May land November 1. Several species may feed in the
project area (especially green, Kemps and loggerheads) or migrate through the Sound, but the National
Marine Fishery Service has determined that hydraulic pipeline dredges are unlikely to adversely affect
sea turtles.
Status: Sea turtle nesting habitat is confined to oceanfront beaches. Due to its estuarine location,
Wainwright Island would not provide suitable nesting habitat for this species.
Piping plover: The piping plover is a winter resident of the beaches of North Carolina while nesting
further north. Birds usually return to the same areas for nesting every year. Nest sites are simple
depressions or scrapes in the sand.
Status: Due to its estuarine location, Wainwright Island does not provide suitable nesting or feeding
habitat for this beach oriented species.
Red -cockaded woodpecker: Red -cockaded woodpeckers live in groups and utilize large, live pine trees
(usually long leaf pine) on uplands as nesting sites for their colonies. They forage in the adjacent pine
woodlands.
Status: The Wainwright Slough project area does not contain habitat suitable for this species.
Red knot: Red knots migrate in large flocks northward through the contiguous United States mainly
April -June and southward July -October. Nesting occurs further north and some locations (such as the
Chesapeake Bay) provide critical feeding sites during migration. The preferred habitat for these
�CCEIVC;�
DEC 0 8 2016
DC41A_ WjHD CITY

shorebirds is primarily seacoasts on tidal flats and beaches, less frequently in marshes and flooded
fields.
Status: Although there is a remote possibility that red knots may pass through this area as part of their
migratory pathway, the Wainwright Slough project area does not contain suitable nesting habitat nor
feeding opportunities for this species.
Roseate tern: The preferred habitat for the roseate tern is bay/sound, lagoon, river mouth/tidal river,
and tidal flat/shore areas. This tern nests further north and migrates to and from the Caribbean and
Central/South America.
Status: This seabird may infrequently visit the project area on its migratory journey but is not known to
nest here. Project activities should have no impact on roseate terns.
Shortnose sturgeon: The shortnose sturgeon spawns in Georgia in February and in Connecticut in
April/May. This species lives and reproduces in large freshwater rivers and prefers deep pools. They can
migrate to and through nearshore saltwater environments. This species has been found in the Cape
Fear Rive but no other populations are known within North Carolina.
Status: It is highly unlikely that shortnose sturgeon would be found in the Wainwright Slough project
area. These offshore environments do not provide suitable spawning habitat for the species. Even if
sturgeon were migrating through the area, this species would not be affected by proposed activities due
to its mobility.
West Indian manatee: Manatees are generally found in warmer waters from Florida and the Gulf of
Mexico to the Caribbean Sea. These herbivorous marine mammals generally prefer bay/sound, lagoon,
river mouth/tidal river habitats that offer copious amounts of submerged aquatic vegetation for
consumption. Georgia coastal areas are the usual northernmost limits of the manatee range due to an
intolerance for cold water. However, individual sightings have been documented further north,
including in North Carolina.
Status: It is highly unlikely that manatees will be affected by this project. This species' normal range is
further south and if an infrequent migrant does come through this portion of Pamlico Sound, there is
insufficient feeding habitat to attract these marine mammals.
Rough -leaved loosestrife: Rough -leaved loosestrife is an erect, herbaceous, rhizomatous perennial.
This species occurs most often in shrub scrub wetlands especially in ecotones between longleaf pine
uplands and pond pine pocosins in moist, sandy or peaty soils with low vegetation that allows for
abundant sunlight to the herb layer.
Status: The Wainwright Slough project area does not contain habitat suitable for this species.
Seabeach amaranth: The seabeach amaranth is an annual plant found only on oceanfront or ocean inlet
beaches. This species is intolerant of competition and prefers non -vegetated sites. Seabeach amaranth
is found within scattered locations along the coast from South Carolina to New York.
Status: The Wainwright Slough project are does not contain habitat suitable for this species.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- WHD CITY

Summary
A determination has been made that the proposed project is not likely to adversely impact or affect any
federally listed threatened or endangered species or their critical habitat. This determination has been
based on a brief analysis of conditions and habitat potential in the project area compared with individual
species' documented presence or absence, life requisites, and feeding or nesting requirements.
RECEIVED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- FIND CITY

ATTACHMENT K — SHPO Letter
RIS CEIVEQ
PE1-0 8 2016

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Brutus, Administrator
Governor Pat McCrory
Secretary Susan Klutlz
November 30, 2016
Jerry McCrain, Ph.D
Moffatt & Nichol
4700 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27609
Re: Dredge Wainwright Slough, Carteret County, ER 16-2174
Dear Dr. McCrain:
Thank you for your letter of November 22, 2016, concerning the above project.
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.review(alncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
Ramona M. Bartos
RECENED
DEC 0 8 2016
DCM- VHD CITY
Location: 109 Fast Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Addrear: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 TelephondFaot: (919) 807-65701807-6599