2021 Southern Shores CAMA Major Permit_Forms&SuppInfo

TOWN OF SOUTHERN SHORES SHORE PROTECTION PROJECT

NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT

MAJOR PERMIT APPLICATION

Prepared for:

The Town of Southern Shores

Prepared by:

Coastal Protection of North Carolina, Inc.
4038 Masonboro Loop Road
Wilmington, North Carolina 28409

Submitted to:

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Coastal Management
Wilmington Regional Office

March 2021

C OASTAL P ROTECTION E NGINEERING OF N ORTH C AROLINA, I NC.

Town of Southern Shores Shore Protection Project
NCDCM Major Permit Application
Contents
1 FORMS .............................................................................................................................................. 1
Form DCM MP-1 .......................................................................................................... 1
Form DCM MP-2 .......................................................................................................... 5
Form DCM MP-3 .......................................................................................................... 8
2 Supplemental Information, per Forms DCM MP-1 and DCM MP-2 ....................................... 10
Per Form MP-1, Section 6a: Project Narrative ........................................................... 10
2.1.1 Project Scoping and History ........................................................................................... 10
2.1.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................................................... 12
2.1.3 Construction Schedule .................................................................................................... 13
2.1.4 Borrow Areas and Sediment Analysis .......................................................................... 17
2.1.5 Summary of Consistency wit State Sediment Criteria…………………………………20
Per Form MP-1, Section 6d: A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other
instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties ......................... 24
Per From MP-2, Section 6f: Adjacent Riparian Owner Return Receipts ..................... 24
Per Form MP-1, Section 6h: Agent Authorization Form .............................................. 25
Per Form MP-1, Section 6j: Ocean Hazard AEC Notice for Southern Shores ............ 26
2.6 Permission Letter and Ocean AEC Hazard Notices from Adjacent Towns…………….28

Appendices
Appendix A: Work Plans
Appendix B: Professional Archaeological Assessment
Appendix C: Geotechnical Report
Appendix D: Survey Report

Form DCM MP-1 Application for Major Permit Development

C OASTAL P ROTECTION E NGINEERING OF N ORTH C AROLINA, I NC.
1

1 FORMS
Form DCM MP-1
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
(last revised 12/27/06) North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT

1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name
Town of Southern Shores
Project Name (if applicable)
Southern Shores Shoreline Protection Project
Applicant 1: First Name
Cliff
MI

Last Name
Ogburn
Applicant 2: First Name

MI

Last Name

If additional applicants, please attach an additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address
5375 N. Virginia Dare Trail
PO Box

City
Southern Shores
State
NC
ZIP
27949
Country
USA
Phone No.
252 – 261-2394 ext.
FAX No.
252 – 255-0876
Street Address (if different from above)

City

State

ZIP
-
Email
[e-mail]

2. Agent/Contractor Information
Business Name
Coastal Protection Enigineering of North Carolina, Inc.
Agent/ Contractor 1: First Name
Kenneth
MI
n/a
Last Name
Willson
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
Brad
MI
n/a
Last Name
Rosov
Mailing Address
4038 Masonboro Loop Road
PO Box

City
Wilmington
State
NC
ZIP
28409 Phone No. 1
910 - 309 - 1905 ext.
Phone No. 2
- - ext.
FAX No. Contractor #
Federal ID # 020623951
Street Address (if different from above)
N/A
City
N/A
State
N/A
ZIP
N/A -
Form DCM MP-1 Application for Major Permit Development

C OASTAL P ROTECTION E NGINEERING OF N ORTH C AROLINA, I NC.
2

Email
[e-mail]
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple)
Dare
Street Address
Oceanfront shoreline of Southern Shores plus ~1,000' to the
south into Kitty Hawk and ~1,000' north into the Town of
Duck) and offshore waters
State Rd. #
N/A
Subdivision Name
N/A
City
N/A
State
NC
Zip
N/A -
Phone No.
N/A - - ext.
Lot No.(s) (if many, attach additional page with list)
N/A, , , ,
a. In which NC river basin is the project located?
Pasquotank
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Atlantic Ocean
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
Natural Manmade Unknown
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
Atlantic Ocean
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
Yes No
f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
work falls within.
Southern Shores

4. Site Description
a. Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.)
21,625 feet (Placement Project Limits including taper
sections)
b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
1,989,007 s.f. (Placement Area including dune corridor);
51,095,880 (Borrow Area A)
c. Size of individual lot(s)
N/A, , ,
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
NWL (normal water level)
MHW to 14.33' (1.2') NAVD88 NHW or NWL
e. Vegetation on tract
Typical beach and dune vegetation in areas not eroded completely.
f. Man-made features and uses now on tract
The tract includes single and multi-family residential homes. The beachfront is utilized for recreational activities.
g. Identify and describe the existing land uses adjacent to the proposed project site.
Single and multi-family residences, recreational beach uses.
h. How does local government zone the tract?
Low and medium density residential

i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
Yes No NA
j. Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? Yes No
k. Has a professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy.

If yes, by whom?
Yes No NA

Tidewater Atlantic Research (at
offhshore borrow area)
l. Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a
National Register listed or eligible property?
Yes No NA
Form DCM MP-1 Application for Major Permit Development

C OASTAL P ROTECTION E NGINEERING OF N ORTH C AROLINA, I NC.
3

m. (i) Are there wetlands on the site?

(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site?

(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted?
(Attach documentation, if available)
Yes No

Yes No

Yes No
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
Structures within the proposed area are serviced with on-site septic tanks.
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
Municipal
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
None.

5. Activities and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? Commercial Public/Government
Private/Community
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
The Town of Southern Shores is focused on implementing a shoreline management program that will provide shoreline
protection for 19,608 feet of oceanfront shoreline thereby maintaining the tax base of the Town. Once completed, the beach will
provide recreational opportunities for residents and homeowners and will serve as protection from chronic erosion and storm-
induced erosion.
c. Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type of
equipment and where it is to be stored.
A hydraulic hopper dredge will be used to obtain and transport material from the offshore borrow area to the beach. A sand dike
will be constructed on the seaward side of the discharge area. The sand slurry will be discharged behind the temporary dike,
and excess water will be directed parallel to the shoreline and around the edge of the dike. Bulldozers, front-end loaders and
other earth moving machines will be used to shape the beach to the design profile. Three staging areas will be established for
this project: the public parking lot on Byrd St. (in the Town of Kitty Hawk), and a grassy area and a volleyball court near Hillcrest
Drive. Construction access points will be located in proximity to these three construction staging areas as well as an additional
area at Station 0+00 near the pier.
d. List all development activities you propose.
The proposed action includes sand placement along 21,625 feet of Southern Shores This fill includes a ~1,000 foot taper
section on the north end extending into the Town of Duck and a ~1,000 foot taper on the south end extending into the Town of
Kitty Hawk. Sand will be obtained from an Outer Continental Shelf borrow area known as “Borrow Area A” located offshore Dare
County using cutterhead and/or hopper dredges. Material will be transported from the borrow area to the beach via submerged
pipeline from a cutterhead dredge, or direct transport to a nearshore pump-out location via hopper dredge. A temporary shore-
parallel sand dike will be constructed in the discharge area to reduce turbidity of slurry within the nearshore. Material on the
beach and dunes will be shaped and graded using earth moving machines. Sand fencing and vegetation will be placed along
the existing dune.
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? Maintenance of the 2017 Project and
new work (expanded fill area)
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 2,015,635 (1,989,007 within fill area and
26,628 within staging areas) Sq.Ft or
Acres

g. Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public access way or other area that
the public has established use of?
Yes No NA
h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
The placement location is the oceanfront beach and dunes within the Town of Southern Shores, within the reach authorized in
the design template
i. Will wastewater or stormwater be discharged into a wetland?

If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water?
Yes No NA

Yes No NA
Form DCM MP-1 Application for Major Permit Development

C OASTAL P ROTECTION E NGINEERING OF N ORTH C AROLINA, I NC.
4

j. Is there any mitigation proposed?
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
Yes No NA
6. Additional Information
In addition to this completed application form, (MP-1) the following items below, if applicable, must be submitted in order for the application
package to be complete. Items (a) – (f) are always applicable to any major development application. Please consult the application instruction
booklet on how to properly prepare the required items below.
a. A project narrative.
b. An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale. Please give the present status of the
proposed project. Is any portion already complete? If previously authorized work, clearly indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish
between work completed and proposed.
c. A site or location map that is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
e. The appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DEQ.
f. A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such
owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in which
to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
Name: Kat Too, LLC Phone No. n/a
Address: 4010 Hermitage Rd., Richmond, VA 23227
Name: Christopher & Victoria Scordo Phone No. n/a
Address: 6460 Coralberry Ct., Longmont, CO 80503
Name: Phone No. n/a
Address:
Name: Phone No. n/a
Address:

Name: Phone No. n/a
Address:

g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, permittee, and issuing dates.
CAMA Major Permit #59-17 issued on May11, 2017
Dept. of Army SAW Action ID #2014-02204 (modification of Town
of Kitty Hawk permit to include Southern Shores)

h. Signed consultant or agent authorization form, if applicable.
i. Wetland delineation, if necessary.
j. A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront and inlet areas. (Must be signed by property owner)
k. A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A 1-10), if necessary. If the project involves expenditure of
public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.

7. Certification and Permission to Enter on Land
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in the application. The
project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to enter on
the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow-up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date March 8, 2021 Print Name Kenneth Willson, Agent, Coastal Protection Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.

Signature ___________________________
Form DCM MP-1 Application for Major Permit Development

C OASTAL P ROTECTION E NGINEERING OF N ORTH C AROLINA, I NC.
5

Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-3 Upland Development
DCM MP-4 Structures Information
Form DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill

C OASTAL P ROTECTION E NGINEERING OF N ORTH C AROLINA, I NC.
5

Form DCM MP-2
EXCAVATION and FILL
(Except for bridges and culverts)

Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP-1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation and/or fill activities. All values should be given in feet.

Access
Channel (NLW
or NWL)
Canal Boat Basin Boat Ramp Rock Groin Rock
Breakwater
Other (excluding shoreline
stabilization)
Length 21,625' fill area; 16,064.11’
(borrow area A)
Width 327’ (average fill area);
3,180.66 (borrow area A);
Avg.
Existing
Depth
NA NA
-11.5’ to 14.33’ NAVD88
(existing grade within fill area);
-70.0 to -48.0’ (borrow area A)
Final
Project
Depth
NA NA
-11.5’ to 15.00’ NAVD88 (final
grade within fill area); -68'.0 to
-58.5'’ (borrow area A)

1. EXCAVATION This section not applicable
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in
cubic yards.
1,824,312 (estimated fill volume of 1,216,208 cy plus 50% to account
for losses encountered during dredging and beach volume lost to
potential storm before construction)

b. Type of material to be excavated.
Beach quality sand

c. (i) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
CW SAV SB
WL None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
NA

d. High-ground excavation in cubic yards.
None

2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL This section not applicable
a. Location of disposal area.
Oceanfront shoreline of the Town of Southern Shores
spanning 19,608' with two ~1,000' taper sections to the
north and south of the main fill area.

b. Dimensions of disposal area.
21,625 ft. by 327 ft.

c. (i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
Yes No NA
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.
Easements pending
d. (i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
Yes No NA
(ii) If yes, where?
N/A

Form DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill

C OASTAL P ROTECTION E NGINEERING OF N ORTH C AROLINA, I NC.
6

e. (i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh (CW),
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or other
wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the number of
square feet affected.
CW SAV SB
WL None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
Beach nourishment

f. (i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
Yes No NA
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
4,809,633 sq. ft. of fill will be placed from MHW to seaward toe-
of-fill

3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION This section not applicable
(If development is a wood groin, use MP-4 – Structures)
a. Type of shoreline stabilization:
Bulkhead Riprap Breakwater/Sill Other:
nourishment
b. Length: 21,625 ft.
Width: 327 ft.
c. Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL:235 ft.

d. Maximum distance waterward of NHW or NWL: 262 ft.

e. Type of stabilization material:
Sand

f. (i) Has there been shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months?
Yes No NA
(ii) If yes, state amount of erosion and source of erosion amount
information.
Approximately -2.9 ft./yr. based on monitoring conducted in May
2019 and June 2020 within the Project Area.

g. Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level.
Bulkhead backfill Riprap
Breakwater/Sill Other 4,809,633 sq. ft.
h. Type of fill material.
sand

i. Source of fill material.
Offshore Borrow Area

4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES This section not applicable
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. (i) Will fill material be brought to the site? Yes No NA
If yes,
(ii) Amount of material to be placed in the water
(iii) Dimensions of fill area
(iv) Purpose of fill

b. (i) Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands/marsh (CW),
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
CW SAV SB
WL None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas:

5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion
controlled?
A sand dike will be constructed seaward of the fill area during the
placement of beach fill. This temporary structure will allow the
sandy material to settle out before the water reenters the Atlantic
Ocean. In addition, the nourishment sand will be low in silt, which
improves the retainment quality of the material.

b. What type of construction equipment will be used (e.g., dragline,
backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
Hydraulic hopper dredges and pipeline, bulldozers, front-end-
loaders and other earth moving machines.

Form DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill

C OASTAL P ROTECTION E NGINEERING OF N ORTH C AROLINA, I NC.
7

c. (i) Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project?
[x] Yes No NA
(ii) If yes, explain what type and how they will be implemented.
Submerged and partially submerged sections of pipeline will be
clearly marked with lit buoys to reduce hazards to navigation.

d. (i) Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project
site? Yes No NA
(ii) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts.
N/A

March 8, 2021
Date
Southern Shores Shore Protection Project
Project Name
Town of Southern Shores, c/o/ Cliff Ogburn
Applicant Name
Kenneth Willson, Agent, Coastal Protection Engineering, Inc.
Applicant Signature

C OASTAL PROTECTION E NGINEERING OF N ORTH C AROLINA, I NC.
8

Form DCM MP-3
UPLAND DEVELOPMENT
(Construction and/or land disturbing activities)

Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP-1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
GENERAL UPLAND DEVELOPMENT
a. Type and number of buildings, facilities, units or structures
proposed.
None

b. Number of lots or parcels.
None

c. Density (give the number of residential units and the units per acre).
None

d. Size of area to be graded, filled, or disturbed including roads,
ditches, etc.
Temporary staging areas at Byrd Street parking lot: 14,692
sq. ft. (0.34 ac.) with 121 l.f, construction access; Hillcrest
Dr. grassy area: 5,827 sq ft (0.13 ac) with 362 l.f.
construction access; Hillcrest Dr. volleyball court: 6,109 sq
ft (0.14 ac) with 362 l.f. construction access; Station 0+00
construction access 210 l.f. Total staging area is 26,628 sq
ft (0.61 ac).

e. If the proposed project will disturb more than one acre of land, the
Division of Land Resources must receive an erosion and
sedimentation control plan at least 30 days before land-disturbing
activity begins.
(i) If applicable, has a sedimentation and erosion control plan been
submitted to the Division of Land Resources?
Yes No NA
(ii) If yes, list the date submitted:

f. List the materials (such as marl, paver stone, asphalt, or concrete)
to be used for impervious surfaces.
None

g. Give the percentage of the tract within the coastal shoreline AEC to
be covered by impervious and/or built-upon surfaces, such as
pavement, building, rooftops, or to be used for vehicular driveways
or parking.
No new impervious surfaces will be constructed

h. Projects that require a CAMA Major Development Permit may also
require a Stormwater Certification.
(i) Has a site development plan been submitted to the Division of
Water Quality for review?
Yes No NA

(ii) If yes, list the date submitted: _____________ i. Give the percentage of the entire tract to be covered by impervious
and/or built-upon surfaces, such as pavement, building, rooftops, or
to be used for vehicular driveways or parking.
No new impervious surfaces will be constructed

j. Describe proposed method of sewage disposal.
None

k. Have the facilities described in Item (i) received state or local
approval?
Yes No NA
If yes, attach appropriate documentation.
l. Describe location and type of proposed discharges to waters of the
state (e.g., surface runoff, sanitary wastewater, industrial/
commercial effluent, “wash down” and residential discharges).
None

m. Does the proposed project include an innovative stormwater
design?
Yes No NA
If yes, attach appropriate documentation.

C OASTAL PROTECTION E NGINEERING OF N ORTH C AROLINA, I NC.
9

m. Describe proposed drinking water supply source (e.g., well,
community, public system, etc.)
None

n. (i) Will water be impounded? Yes No NA
(ii) If yes, how many acres?

o. When was the lot(s) platted and recorded?
N/A

p. If proposed development is a subdivision, will additional utilities be
installed for this upland development?
Yes No NA

March 8, 2021
Date
Town of Southern Shores, c/o Cliff Ogburn
Project Name
Kenneth Willson, Agent, Coastal Protection Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.
Applicant Name

Applicant Signature

10

2 Supplemental Information, per Forms DCM MP-1 and DCM MP-2
Per Form MP-1, Section 6a: Project Narrative
2.1.1 Project Scoping and History
The Town of Southern Shores is one of four towns within Dare County, including Duck, Kitty Hawk, and Kill
Devil Hills seeking to implement simultaneous shore protection projects to help mitigate the threat of long-term
erosion and storm damage which pose a continual threat to the oceanfront shoreline. The first of these four towns
to express interest in obtaining permits and implement a shore protection project was the Town of Kill Devil Hills
which, along with the Town of Kitty Hawk, was originally part of a federally authorized beach nourishment
project within Dare County. However, due to shortfalls in federal funding, the project was never constructed and
is not anticipated in the foreseeable future. Therefore, on September 14, 2011, the Town of Kill Devil Hills held
an interagency scoping meeting in Washington, NC with representatives from various state and federal agencies
including the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (DCM), North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC), United State Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The purpose of the meeting was to present the scope
of a proposed locally sponsored shoreline protection project and to develop an agreed upon permitting approach
and scope for the required environmental documentation. One outcome of the meeting was the decision to
develop a “Project Information Document” that would provide the USACE with a summary of the relevant
existing environmental documentation and biological data that pertains to the proposed Kill Devil Hills Shore
Protection Project. The information provided within the document was to be used to assist the USACE in
determining the appropriate environmental documenting requirements. Following the submittal of the document,
the USACE responded that due to the likelihood of determining a Finding of No Significant Impacts (FONSI),
an Environmental Assessment (EA) would be the recommended approach regarding the required environmental
documentation.

Following the 2011 interagency meeting, two other beach towns in Dare County (Kitty Hawk and Duck)
expressed interest in pursuing their own shoreline protection projects in light of continued erosion on their
respective shorelines. Considering that all three towns were proceeding with similar nourishment projects,
constructing these projects within the same year, either concurrently or sequentially, would reduce mobilization
costs to the towns. Subsequently, an additional interagency meeting was held on June 19, 2013 with
representatives from many of the same agencies to discuss proposed permitting and environmental documentation
approaches for all three towns, (Kill Devil Hills, Kitty Hawk, and Duck). During the meeting it was determined
that each town should apply for their own set of permits and develop their own separate EAs. However,
representatives from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) agreed that while individual EAs could be drafted for each of the three proposed projects, a single
regional EFH assessment and a single batched Biological Assessment (BA) could be submitted to satisfy
consultation requirements with NMFS and USFWS (i.e., under the Magnuson-Stevens Act and Endangered
Species Act, respectively) for the Towns of Duck, Kitty Hawk, and Kill Devil Hills.

Because the project involved the use of OCS borrow areas, which fall under the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management (BOEM) jurisdiction, and placement of material on the beach, which falls under the USACE’s
jurisdiction, it was determined that BOEM and the USACE would act as joint-lead agencies for NEPA purposes
and would prepare joint NEPA documents. BOEM and the USACE agreed to participate in the required
Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7 consultations; the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery and Conservation
Management Act Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation (Section 305); the National Historic Preservation Act

11

Section (NHPA) Section 106 process; and the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) Section 307 consistency
process.

In a letter from BOEM to the USACE dated December 2, 2014, the environmental documentation and permitting
approach as described above was codified. It stated that lead agency in Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section
7 consultation for potential impacts on protected species would be determined by jurisdiction. The BOEM was
determined to be the lead agency and would consult with NMFS concerning potential effects from dredging
activities for species under their purview (i.e. swimming turtles and whales). The USACE was determined to be
the lead agency and consult with UFWS concerning effects from placement activities for species under their
purview (i.e. nesting sea turtles). BOEM and the USACE consulted jointly with NMFS Habitat Conservation
Division on EFH and requested NMFS to assign conservation recommendations by jurisdiction. The USACE was
the lead agency for the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106 and notified the State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) and relevant Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPO). The USACE and BOEM
worked together with the North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources (NCDENR), to
ensure compliance with Section 307 of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA).

Following the submittal of the three EAs, Department of Army (DA) Individual Permits were issued to each of
the three towns for the 2017 beach nourishment event (SAW-2014-02202, SAW-2014-02203, and SAW-2014-
02204). Consultations with NMFS Protected Resource Division concluded with the issuance of Biological
Opinion on May 16, 2016. Consultations with USFWS concluded with the issuance of a Biological Opinion on
November 4, 2015, respectively. Consultation with NMFS Habitat Conservation Division in regard to EFH
concerns resulted in a "no staffing" email with one recommendation. DCM issued Major Permits to each town
as well (Town of Duck, #132-15; Town of Kitty Hawk, #133-15; and Town of Kill Devil Hills, #134-15).

An additional interagency scoping meeting convened on January 31, 2017 to discuss the Town of Southern Shores'
desire to place beach fill material within a limited area of the Town's oceanfront shoreline. Due to the project's
proximity to Kitty Hawk and their intention to construct the project in tandem with the other three beach town
projects, regulatory agencies determined the applicant should apply for their own separate CAMA Major permit
and modify Kitty Hawk's existing DA Individual permit. During consultation with the federal partners, the
batched BA was also amended to include Southern Shore's project-specific information. DCM subsequently
issued a CAMA Major Permit #59-17 to the Town of Southern Shores while the DA issued a modification of the
Town of Kitty Hawk's Individual Permit SAW-2014-02204.

In 2017, the four towns cost-shared and implemented a beach nourishment project that involved the placement of
approximately 3.9 million (M) cubic yards of material over nearly 8.3 miles of oceanfront shoreline. Material
used for the project was obtained from two offshore borrow areas within the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) in
federal waters. Great Lakes Dredge and Dock performed the dredging work in 153 days using three (3) hopper
dredges; the Liberty Island, Dodge Island and Padre Island. Dredging began on May 23, 2017, placing material
at the Town of Duck and was concluded on October 23, 2017 with nourishment at the Town of Kitty Hawk.

The beach fill design for the 2017 project at the Town of Southern Shores included a berm of varying width (100-
160 feet) at elevation +6.0 feet NAVD. The main placement area began at the southern town limit (baseline station
0+00) at the Kitty Hawk/Southern Shores border and extended 1,500 feet northward. A taper section extended
and additional 1,000 feet with the fill terminating at baseline station 25+08. Dunes that had undergone significant
scarping were to be reshaped along the 2,500 feet of shoreline as needed and were constructed at an elevation no
higher than +23.4 feet NAVD88.

Subsequent to the completion of the 2017 nourishment event and based on interest expressed by all four beach
towns to pursue an additional nourishment event in the future, an interagency meeting convened on April 29,

12

2020 to discuss the permitting and environmental documentation approach that would be required for the future
project. During the meeting, it was decided that each town would pursue their own respective set of permits. In
order to satisfy NEPA documentation requirements, however, it was decided that one collective EA would be
developed and would be inclusive of site-specific information for all four beach towns. It was also determined
that the project-related actions, as presented during the scoping meeting, should be covered by the 2020 South
Atlantic Regional Opinion (SARBO) and the 2017 North Carolina Coastal Beach Sand Placement Statewide
Programmatic Biological Opinion. As such, the issuance of a new biological opinion as part of the federal
consultation process with NMFS and USFWS are not anticipated.
2.1.2 Proposed Action
The proposed action is a one-time beach nourishment project that would include sand placement along a total of
21,625 feet (4.1 miles) of oceanfront shoreline and dunes within Southern Shore’s town limits.

The main placement area of the proposed project begins at the southern town limit (baseline station 0+00) at the
Kitty Hawk/Southern Shores border. The main placement area extends 19,608 northwards. Taper sections extend
approximately 1,000 feet to the south and to the north of this main fill area. Dunes that have undergone significant
scarping will be reshaped along a portion of this section of oceanfront shoreline as needed (Appendix A, sheets 3-
11). The total fill area below MHW is 4,809,633 square feet (110.4 acres), and the total fill area above MHW is
1,098,007 square feet (45.7acres), for a total disturbed area of 6,798,640 square feet (156.1 acres).

The proposed construction template consists of an approximate 25-100-foot-wide berm at an elevation of +6 feet
NAVD88. Dunes that require reshaping will be constructed at an elevation no higher than +15.0 feet NAVD88
with a dune crest width of 24.0 feet NAVD88. Complete plan view and cross-sectional drawings of the proposed
project are provided in Appendix A, sheets 12-15.

Construction of the preferred design along with 5 years of advanced fill would require 1,216,208 cubic yards of
fill material obtained from Borrow Area A. Actual volume dredged from the borrow area will likely require up
to an additional 20% to account for losses during dredging; therefore, the total estimated dredge volume is
1,459,450 cubic yards. The BOEM lease request for excavating material from within Borrow Area A will include
additional volume in the unlikely event a storm eroded the Towns' shoreline prior to the construction of the
project. In total, the amount of material that could be excavated from the borrow area would be 1,824,312 cy, or
50% more than the 1,216,208 cy of fill required by the preferred design and advanced fill. Following the
construction of the 2017 project, an after-dredge survey revealed that Borrow Area A still contained 12,829,500
cy of material, therefore this borrow area contains enough volume for this project along with the other three towns'
proposed projects.

Material will be obtained from the borrow area using a hopper dredge, a cutterhead dredge, or a combination of
the two. In the case of a cutterhead dredge, sand will be transported from the borrow area to the beach as a slurry
via pipeline; use of a hopper dredge would involve transport to a nearshore pump-out location, and subsequent
pumping to the beach via pipeline. A sand dike will be constructed on the seaward side of the discharge area. The
sand slurry will be discharged behind the temporary dike, and excess water will be directed parallel to the
shoreline and around the edge of the dike. Once discharged onto the beach, the material will be shaped and graded
using loaders, dozers, and other earth moving equipment.

Three staging areas will be established for this project. The first staging area is located within the public parking
lot at Byrd Street in the Town of Kitty Hawk. This parking lot, which abuts the beach, will also include a
construction corridor by which machinery can access the beach (Appendix A, sheet 3). Two additional staging
areas will be in proximity to Hilcrest Drive within a grassy area and a volleyball court Appendix A, sheet 10).

13

These two staging areas will include a construction corridor as well. Finally, an additional construction access
point will be located just north of the Kitty Hawk pier, extending from the public parking lot at the Hilton Garden
Inn onto the beach (Appendix A, sheet 3). No impervious surfaces or alterations to the dunes will be required for
use of these areas.

The Town will install sand fencing to trap windblown sand and encourage dune growth along the portions of the
dune in accordance with either 15A NCAC 07K .0212 or 15A NAC 07H .0311(c). If sand fencing is to be
installed under 15A NAC 07H .0311(c), the Town will limit fencing installation to the face of the constructed
dune and will complete the installation after October 31.

A number of measures will be employed to avoid or minimize the risk to biological and natural resources within
the project area. These measures are described in Table 1. below.

Table 1. Conservation/Monitoring measures implemented to avoid or minimize environmental risks
Conservation/Monitoring Measure
Borrow Area
Design
The size and shape of the borrow areas have been designed such that a minimum number
of turns will be required by the hopper dredge, which increases dredge efficiency and
reduces the potential for sea turtle entrainment.

Dredge Type Construction of the project will be accomplished using cutterhead suction dredges, trailing
suction hopper dredges, or a combination of the two. To minimize impacts from hopper
dredging, the project will follow the standard hopper dredging conditions outline in the
2020 South Atlantic Regional Biological Opinion.
Dredge
Positioning
Navigation and positioning software will be used by the contractor to accurately track the
dredge location. The software will provide real-time dredge positioning and digging
functions to allow color display of dredge shape, physical feature data as found in
background Computer Aided Design (CAD) charts and color contour matrix files from
hydrographic data collection software described above. The software will also provide a
display of theoretical volume quantities removed during actual dredging operations.

Dredge anchors will not be placed any further than 200 feet from the edge of the areas to
be dredged. The dredge contractor will be required to verify the location of the anchors with
real time positioning each and every time the anchors are relocated.
Pipeline
Positioning
The pipeline alignment along the beach will be placed to avoid potential piping plover
habitat or sea turtle nests. The alignment will be coordinated with, and approved by, the
USACE. As-built positions of the pipeline will be recorded using GPS technology and
included in the final construction observation report.
Pipeline
Observations
Observations and assessments of the pipeline during construction will be performed to
avoid pressurized leaks from the pipeline couplings or other equipment that may result in
sediment plumes, siltation and/or elevated turbidity levels. The Towns, along with the
associated engineer, will coordinate with the dredgers and have in place a mechanism to
cease dredge and fill activities in the event that a substantial leak is detected in the event
that a substantial leak is detected (leaks resulting in turbidity that exceed state water quality
standards). The contractor will cease dredge and placement activities until an appropriate
repair of the affected equipment has been completed.

14

Construction
Observations
Several initiatives will be undertaken by the Town, the Engineer, or his duly authorized
representative to monitor construction practices. Construction observation and contract
administration will be periodically performed seven days/week, approximately twelve
hours/day during periods of active construction. Most observations will be during daylight
hours; however, random nighttime observations may be conducted. The Town, the
Engineer, or his duly authorized representative will provide onsite observation by an
individual with training or experience in beach nourishment and construction observation
and testing, and that is knowledgeable of the project design and permit conditions. The
project manager will coordinate with the field observer. Multiple daily observations of the
pump-out location will be made for quality assessment and quality control (QA/QC) of the
material being placed on the beach. The construction contractor will provide observations
24 hours per day during construction.
Sediment
Compatibility
The Sediment Criteria Rule provides beneficial guidelines for both grain size and percent
weight of calcium carbonate. However, other important characteristics such as organic
content, heavy mineral content and color are not addressed. These aspects of the beach
material will be considered. Maintaining adherence to this sediment criteria rule for material
placed on the beach will reduce adverse impacts to the beach invertebrate community and
would also reduce effects to sea turtle nest construction and incubation of the eggs. Multiple
daily observations of the active placement locations will be made for QA/QC of the material
being placed on the beach. The individual will collect a representative sub-surface (6 in.
below grade) grab sediment sample at not less than 200-foot intervals along the newly
constructed berm to visually assess grain size, wet Munsell color, granular, gravel, and silt
content. Each sample will be archived with the date, time, and location of the sample.
Samples will be collected during beach observations. The sample will be visually compared
to the acceptable sand criteria. If determined necessary by the Engineer, or his duly
authorized representative, quantitative assessments of the sand will be conducted for grain
size, wet Munsell color, and content of gravel, granular and silt. A record of these sand
evaluations will be provided within the Engineer’s daily inspection reports and submitted
to USACE and DCM for verification. Following construction, compaction of placed fill
material will be inspected by the Town, the Engineer or his duly authorized representative
in coordination with the DCM and USACE. Compaction monitoring will begin after the
material has been graded and dressed to the final slope and a period of time will be allowed
for finer particles to be washed away and final settling of the material to occur prior to
compaction monitoring. If the fill material appears to have a higher degree of compaction
than that which is acceptable additional testing such as cone penetration testing will be
considered. After subsequent testing, if it is determined that tilling is necessary to reduce
compaction based on consultation with the appropriate agencies, the contractor will till the
beach to a minimum depth of 36 inches throughout the constructed portion of the beach to
loosen the compaction of the placed material. Beach tilling will only be performed as a
result of an identified compaction problem based on agency consultation. Beach
compaction monitoring and, if necessary, tilling would ensure that project impacts on sea
turtle nesting are minimized.

15

Escarpments Visual surveys of escarpments will be made along the beach fill area immediately after
completion of construction. Escarpments in the newly placed beach fill that exceed 18
inches for greater than 100 ft. shall be graded to match adjacent grades on the beach.
Removal of any escarpments during the sea turtle hatching season (May 1 through
November 15) shall be coordinated with the NCWRC, USFWS and the USACE. The
likelihood of escarpment formation can be reduced by incorporating a beach design that
closely resembles the native beach in terms of berm elevation, sediment size, and sediment
sorting characteristics. The proposed project will be designed with a berm elevation of +6
ft. NAVD88, and sediment characteristics that fall within the ranges required by the North
Carolina State Sediment Criteria.
Water Quality During construction, shore parallel berms will be constructed on the beach to reduce
nearshore turbidity impacts. These berms are designed such that the slurry will run parallel
to shore, allowing sediment to settle out before the water is returned to the ocean. Turbidity
monitoring during construction will be managed by the contractor. The contractor will be
responsible for notifying the construction engineer in the event that turbidity levels exceed
the state water quality standards. Measures that could be taken to subsequently reduce
turbidity include moving the dredge to a different location, or asking the contractor to
extend the berm, which would allow more time for fines to settle out before the water flows
back into the ocean.
West Indian
Manatee and
Whale
Monitoring
During construction or dredging activities, the contractor will adhere to the “Guidelines for
Avoiding Impacts to the West Indian Manatee” created by the USFWS. Full-time NMFS-
certified endangered species observers will be present on the hopper dredge(s) to alert
dredge operators of any whales or manatees in the area. In the event a whale or manatee is
spotted, the ship’s captain will make proper maneuvers to avoid collisions or injury to the
marine mammals. Vessel operators will abide by the 10 kt (18.5 km/h) speed restrictions in
any Dynamic Management Areas (DMAs) that may be established while underway.
Operators will abide by NMFS Southeast Region marine mammal viewing guidelines and
maintain 50 yds. from sea turtles and dolphins and 100 yds. from whales. Vessel operators
will also follow the restricted vessel approach of 500 yds. established for North Atlantic
right whales. Participation in the Right Whale Early Warning System is required; therefore,
dredging within right whale critical habitat from December through March will follow the
protocol established within the Early Warning System (NMFS, 1995).

16

Sea Turtle
Monitoring and
Relocation
Trawling
Risk of entrainment will be reduced by use of a sea turtle deflector on the dredge's draghead.
Every effort will be made to keep the dredge pumps disengaged when the hopper dredge
dragheads are not firmly on the bottom. Also, the rotating cutterhead will not be lifted from
the sediment surface during operations. Additionally, full-time NMFS-certified protected
species observers will be present on the hopper dredge to document any sea turtle activity
and monitor turtle takes through screening of inflow and/or outflow. Dredging operations
will abide by the terms and conditions deemed necessary to minimize hopper dredging
impacts to sea turtles set forth in the 2020 South Atlantic Regional Biological Opinion
(SARBO).

On the beach, artificial lighting used during nighttime construction activities will be angled
or shielded to reduce deterrence of sea turtle nesting and hatchling disorientation. A sea
turtle nest monitoring and avoidance/relocation plan will be implemented through
coordination with USFWS and NCWRC. This monitoring will be performed by trained
individuals knowledgeable of the beach construction operations.

Should hopper dredges be utilized, the proposed project may employ relocation trawling as
a means to reduce the potential for entrainment. If relocation trawling is implemented,
standard relocation trawling conditions will be observed as set forth by NMFS, including
specification for trawl time, handling, holding conditions, take and release and any tagging,
etc.

A sea turtle nest monitoring plan will be implemented through coordination with USFWS
and NCWRC. Dare County is included in surveys conducted by Network for Endangered
Sea Turtles (N.E.S.T), the volunteer organization which performs systematic surveys of the
northern Outer Banks from the Virginia border to the southern tip of Nags Head. Surveys
are performed throughout the nesting season (May through August), and include daily
morning patrols to mark and protect newly laid nests, as well as monitoring during
incubation period and emergence. These surveys have been performed since 1981. Because
the proposed project includes nourishment during the summer months (nesting season),
monitoring will be needed to identify, and subsequently avoid burial or excavation of,
existing nests during construction. This monitoring will be performed by trained individuals
knowledgeable of the beach construction operations. In addition to monitoring surveys, nest
relocation will be implemented by highly trained individuals and in coordination with the
appropriate agencies.

17

Bird Monitoring Although a project-specific bird monitoring plan will not be developed, existing programs
established by the State, Cape Hatteras National Seashore, and other entities are anticipated
to continue monitoring piping plovers, rufa red knots, and other bird species along portions
of the Outer Banks in Dare County.

In addition, all personnel involved in the construction process along the beach will be
trained to recognize the presence of piping plovers and red knots prior to the initiation of
beach construction. Personnel will be provided photos of each species, which will be
required to be kept at the construction site for quick reference. A contractor representative
authorized to stop or redirect work will conduct a shorebird survey prior to 9:00 am each
day of sand placement activities. The survey will cover the work area and any locations
where equipment is expected to travel. The contractor will note any observance of red knots
or piping plovers and submit observations to the USACE Wilmington District Office the
next calendar day.
2.1.3 Construction Schedule
The inclement weather typically encountered during the winter months offshore the northern outer banks makes
dredging difficult and often reduces dredging efficiencies, especially when cutterhead dredges are used. Elevated
sea states pose a substantial safety risk to crews and equipment, while weather-related down times raise costs and
reduce efficiency. As such, the Town proposes a year-round construction window with a high likelihood that
construction would occur during the calmer and safer summer months. A year-round construction window would
provide the contractor the most flexibility and provide a safer and more economical work environment. To allow
for the greatest scheduling flexibility, no start and end date will be specified; rather, this will remain at the
discretion of the contractor, and will be based on equipment availability and weather conditions. The Duck project
could be constructed independently, or concurrently with the other three towns' projects. Based on estimated
production rates, the Southern Shores project will likely require approximately 2.5 months if constructed
independently. If all four projects are constructed concurrently, the entire project would likely be completed within
5 months. These timeframes are based on the production rates for hopper dredges achieved during the 2017 multi-
town project and the 2010-2011 Nags Head project.
2.1.4 Borrow Areas and Sediment Analysis
Beach quality sand will be dredged from Outer Continental Shelf borrow areas using a self-contained ocean-
certified hopper dredge, a cutterhead pipeline dredge, or a combination of the two. The borrow area, "Borrow
Area A" was previously used during the 2017 Dare County Multi-Beach Nourishment project and is located
entirely within federal waters, i.e. seaward of the Three Nautical Mile Line, placing it under the BOEMs
jurisdiction (Appendix A, sheets 1 and 2).

Coastal Protection Engineering, Inc. of North Carolina (CPE) conducted a comprehensive sand search using a
systematic methodology involving three sequential phases of investigation. Phase I involves a comprehensive
desktop study that examined previously collected information within the geologic context of the investigation
area in order to identify features with the highest potential of containing project compatible sand. Results of
jetprobe investigations of several shoal features offshore Dare County by CPE in 2013 as part of a feasibility
study for the Town of Kill Devil Hills were also considered during this phase. Details of the findings of Phase I
can be found in the full geotechnical report (Appendix C, beginning on page 15) Surveying, sampling and analysis
of the Kitty Hawk native beach was also conducted during Phase I. In keeping with the requirements set forth in
the North Carolina State Sediment Criteria, CPE performed shore-perpendicular topographic and bathymetric
surveys of the native beach to determine the beach profile. The locations of the profiles surveyed by CPE were

18

based off a data set previously collected by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District. Each profile
was surveyed from a point 150 ft. landward of the vegetation line seaward out to an elevation no less than -25 ft.
NAVD88. Of the profiles surveyed, characterization of the Kitty Hawk native beach was generated from samples
collected along five generally evenly spaced profiles within the Kitty Hawk project area: 0+00, 50+00, 110+00,
160+00 and 210+00 (Appendix C, page 13, Figure 7).

As required by the State Sediment Criteria, samples were taken at 13 locations along each of the 5 sampling
profiles, including: the dune, toe of dune, mid-berm, berm crest, mean high water, mean tide level, mean low
water, trough, bar crest and at -12.5, -15.0, -17.5 and -20.0. In total, CPE collected a total of 65 samples within
the proposed project area in Kitty Hawk. The composite summary and grain size analysis results are displayed in
Error! Reference source not found. of this project narrative. Additionally, the results of sediment analyses for
each sediment sample can be found within the Beach Composite Summary Tables provided in Appendix 4 of the
attached Appendix C.

Along with ensuring compatibility of the sand characteristics, the State Sediment Criteria also require
quantification of clasts (rocks and shell) greater than 3-inches in diameter present on the native beach. As such,
CPE conducted a pre-construction survey in June 2020 to determine the background levels of clasts (rocks) greater
than 3-inches that exist along the Town of Duck's oceanfront beach between MLW and the frontal toe of the dune.
Per the updated State Sediment Criteria language, the number of 3-inch clasts were quantified within five (5)
10,000 sq ft.2 sections along the beach. Results identified 16 clasts greater than 3-inches within the survey area.
The criteria stipulate that borrow area material greater than 3-inches in diameter that is placed in the project area
is considered incompatible if it is more than twice the background level that existed on the native beach before
the project began. Since the June 2020 survey, the State has updated their guidance again and now also require a
survey, using the same methodology described above, to determine the total number of sediments greater than or
equal to one inch in diameter. Although this survey has not been conducted at this time, the applicant will perform
it prior to the implementation of the proposed project.

Information gathered during the Phase I archival literature studies regarding the geological setting of the project
area give no indication that hardbottom habitats are present within or in the vicinity of the borrow area.
Additionally, previous geotechnical and geophysical investigations conducted by the USACE have not indicated
the presence of hardbottoms in the area. Finally, analysis of the sidescan sonar data acquired by CPE for the
present project indicated no presence of hardbottom habitats or consolidated rock exposures or outcroppings
within or in the vicinity of the borrow areas.

Phase II investigations involved reconnaissance level geophysical surveys in order to 1) define the extent of
sediment layers identified during Phase I research of past jetprobe data and historic vibracore and surface sediment
data; 2) develop a vibracore plan to be implemented during Phase III investigations, and 3) identify potential
environmental or cultural resources for avoidance during Phase III vibracore investigations.

Results of the geotechnical investigations, including geophysical (sonar) surveys, vibracores, hydrographic
surveys, archaeological resource surveys and sand compatibility analyses, were performed to develop the final
borrow area designs. Design considerations for the proposed borrow areas included:

• Construction of the project may be accomplished using a hopper or cutterhead dredge
• Location of sufficient sand to construct the four proposed beach nourishment projects for the Towns of
Duck, Southern Shores, and Kill Devil Hills
• Beach compatible sand with similar mean grain size and sorting of the project beaches
• Avoidance of environmentally sensitive areas such as hardbottom, seagrass beds, etc.
• Avoidance of potentially significant cultural resources

19

• Avoidance of nearshore impacts due to wave refraction over borrow areas

The proposed design cuts for Borrow Area A are displayed in sheets 16 and 17 of Appendix A. Borrow Area A
has been divided into seven different design cuts with cut depths ranging from -58.5 to -68.0 ft. (Figure 1). The
sediment compatibility analysis, as discussed in section 3.1.2 and 3.1.3, determined that the offshore borrow
material in Borrow Area A meets the compatibility requirements established by the North Carolina Coastal
Resources Commission (CRC) prior to the 2017 nourishment event. It is the position of the applicants engineering
consultant that the previous sediment compatibility analysis (Table 1) remains valid for Borrow Area A. Through
correspondence with Division of Coastal Management staff, the applicant was notified that DCM has some
concerns about the compatibility of the material in areas previously dredged. Cuts A3, A4, and A5 have been
identified as portions of the borrow area not previously dredged during the 2017 construction project. Collectively
these three cuts contain 5,153,700 cy of material. Given concerns expressed by DCM staff regarding sediment
compatibility of portions of the borrow area previously dredged, the applicant requests DCM consider
conditioning the permit to require the applicant to conduct updated bathymetric surveys and sediment sampling
of portions of the borrow area previously dredged (Cuts A1, A2, A6, and A7) to evaluate the potential for infilling
and sediment compatibility, prior to construction of the project. The additional bathymetric surveys and sediment
sampling would need to demonstrate sediment compatibility of any sediment that has infilled previously dredged
areas. It is the applicant’s intent to conduct such surveys and sediment sampling/analysis during the months of
April and May of 2020. In order to maintain the project schedule, the applicant has determined that permit
decisions need to be made prior to August 2021. The recommended course of action would allow for DCM to
continue its permit review while providing the applicant time to conduct the further investigations, which would
be incorporated into bidding documents prior to the project being advertised for bid.

Table 1. Results of the compatibility analyses performed for Borrow Area A and C. Allowable limits for the Town of Kitty Hawk
native beach are defined by Rule 15A NCAC 07H.0312.
Parameter Kitty Hawk Native
Beach Allowable Limits Borrow Area A
Wet/Dry Munsell Color 5/7 n/a 5/6
Mean Grain Size (mm) 0.38 n/a 0.36
Sorting (Phi) 1.41 n/a 1.47
Silt (%) (<0.0625mm) 0.94 5.94 0.83
Granular (%)
(2mm < and < 4.76mm) 6.38 11.38 1.42
Gravel (%) (>4.76mm) 1.64 6.64 0.47
Carbonate 2.0 17.0 1.0

20

Figure 1. Map of Borrow Area A, showing preliminary design cuts and estimated volumes.

To determine project impacts on potentially significant submerged cultural resources, Tidewater Atlantic
Research (TAR) carried out a background literature review and supervised a cultural resource investigation of the
proposed borrow areas. The resulting cultural resource report compiled by TAR is provided in Appendix B. A
registered archaeologist from TAR identified 9 magnetic anomalies in the vicinity of Area A, 4 of which were
considered potentially significant (Appendix A, sheet 16). As a result, three buffer areas were established within
Borrow Area A – two are located within the borrow area and one is located partially outside the western perimeter
(Appendix A, sheet 16). These areas will be avoided during dredging.
2.1.5 Summary of Consistency with State Sediment Criteria
Provided below is a summary of how each criterion stipulated in 15A NCAC 07H .0312 Technical Standards for
Beach Fill Standards have been adhered to. Those criteria not considered applicable to the project, such as those
pertaining to projects utilizing a borrow area located in a maintained navigation channel, have been omitted.

Table 2. Statement of consistency with each criterion within the 15A NCAC 07H .0312 Technical Standards for Beach Fill
Standards, and location of information within the supporting documentation.
Section (15A
NCAC 07H
.0312)
Description Statement of Consistency:

21

(1)(c) Topographic and
Bathymetric Surveys
Shore-perpendicular bathymetric and topographic surveys of the beach,
were conducted in April 2014 and May 2015 along transects spaced
approximately 1,000 ft apart within the project area. Please refer to Dare
County, NC Duck - Kitty Hawk - Kill Devil Hills 2015 Hydrographic and
Topographic Survey Report (Appendix D) for a description of methodology
and cross section plots.
(1)(d) Beach Sediment Sampling
Locations
13 sediment samples were collected from 5 representative beach profiles
along the project area, spaced no more than 5,000 ft. apart. Samples were
taken from each of the morphodynamic zones specified: 1 sample was
collected at MLW and 6 samples were collected both seaward and
landward of the MLW. Please refer to Beach Characterization section
under Phase 1 Investigations in Appendix C: Comprehensive Marine Sand
Search and Borrow Area Design Report
(1)(e)
Values for four (4) Sediment
Grain Size Categories
(Individual Samples)
Mechanical seive analysis was performed on each of the samples. The
percent by weight of each of the 4 grain size categories (fine, sand,
granular, and gravel) for each individual sample is provided in the
Percentage of Material by Sediment Grain Size Category table in Appendix 4
of the Comprehensive Marine Sand Search and Borrow Area Design Report
(Appendix C).
(1)(f)
Composite Values for four
(4) sediment grain Size
Categories
Composite values of the percent by weight of each of the 4 grain size
categories were developed. Please refer to the Percentage of Material by
Sediment Grain Size Category table in Appendix 4 of the Comprehensive
Marine Sand Search and Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix C).
Summary values can also be found in the text of the report on Page 16
(1)(g) Percent Calcium Carbonate
Carbonate analysis was performed on a composite sample of all sediment
samples along each of the 5 profiles. Please refer to the Profile Line
Composite Summary Table in Appendix 4 of the Comprehensive Marine
Sand Search and Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix C). Summary
values can also be found in the text of the report on Page 16
(1)(h) Total Number of Clasts > 3
inches (76 mm) in diameter
In June 2020, as per the updated State Sediment Criteria language, CPE
conducted a survey to quantify the number of 3-inch clasts within five (5)
10,000 sq ft.2 sections along the beach. Results identified 17 clasts greater
than 3-inches within the survey area.

(2)(c) Seafloor Bathymetry and
Sonar Imagery
Over the course of two surveys (June 2014 and October 2014) seafloor
surveys were conducted such that 100 percent coverage of each submarine
borrow area was obtained. Both single beam bathymetry and high
resolution sides scan sonar imagery were collected. Please refer to
descriptions of the Phase II Investigations and Phase III Investigations in the
Comprehensive Marine Sand Search and Borrow Area Design Report
(Appendix C). More specifically, figures 21 and 22 show the bathymetric
coverage of the borrow areas and figures 27 and 28 show the sidescan
mosaic of the area verifying 100% coverage.
(2)(d)
Geophysical imaging of
seafloor subsurface
(Subbottom Survey)
Over the course of two surveys (June 2014 and October 2014) geophysical
imaging of the seafloor subsurface was used to characterize each
submarine borrow area. A sub-bottom profiler was used to survey
tracklines spaced approximately 30-m apart, which greatly exceeds the
state standard. Please refere to Phase II Investigations and Phase III
Investigations in the Comprehensive Marine Sand Search and Borrow Area
Design Report (Appendix C). More specifically, figures 16 and 17 show the
tracklines along which data were collected. Also refer to Appendix 9 of
Appendix C.

22

(2)(e) Vibracore Spacing, Number,
and Recovery Depth
Sediment sampling of Borrow Area A and C used a 271B Alpine Pneumatic
vibracore, configured to collect undisturbed sediment cores up to 20 ft. in
length. Material is fed into a 3 inch diameter plastic core liner, which is
split and sampled. Vibracores were collected at 1,000-foot spacing. 51
vibracores were collected within Borrow Area A for an average acreage per
core of 23. Refer to figures 21 and 22 in the Comprehensive Marine Sand
Search and Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix C) for spacing of
vibracores within each borrow area. All vibracores within a given borrow
area cut section penetrated and recovered material from below the
proposed cut depth (i.e. all vibracores within a section marked cut to -65 ft.
recovered material from at least a depth of -65 ft.) Please refer to Figures
21 and 22 and the vibracore logs in Appendix 11 of the Comprehensive
Marine Sand Search and Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix C) to verify
depths recovered.
(2)(g)
Grain size analysis of
individual vibracore samples
and borrow area composites
Mechanical seive analysis was performed on each of the samples. The
percent by weight of each of the 4 grain size categories (fine, sand,
granular, and gravel) for each individual sample is provided in the
Percentage of Material by Sediment Grain Size Category table in Appendix
16 of the Comprehensive Marine Sand Search and Borrow Area Design
Report. Weighted composite values of the percent by weight of each of the
4 grain size categories were developed for each core and ultimately
composite values were developed for each borrow area. These composites
are also provided in the Percentage of Material by Sediment Grain Size
Category table in Appendix 16 of the Report. Summary values for each
borrow area are provided in Table 6 of the report?
(2)(h) Vibracore calcium carbonate
composites
Carbonate analysis was performed on each vibracore sample. A weighted
percent calcium carbonate value was computed for each vibracore. These
values were used to determine the weighted percent calcium carbonate
composite value for Borrow Area A and C. Please refer to the Cumulative
Percents and Computed Distributions table in Appendix 16 of the Report
(Appendix C) for individual sample percentage and weighted composite
vibracore percentage. Please refer to the Composite Data Table in
Appendix 16 of the Report for weighted composite vibracore and borrow
area percentage. Summary values for each borrow area can also be found
in the text of the Report in Table 6.

(3)(b) Fine-Grained Size Sediment
Compatibility
The average percentage by weight of fine-grained sediment in each borrow
site does not exceed the average percentage by weight of fine-grained
sediment of the recipient beach characterization plus five percent. See
Table 1 of the project narrative, and Table 6 of the Comprehensive Marine
Sand Search and Borrow Area Design Report.
(3)(c) Granular Size Compatibility
The average percentage by weight of granular sediment in each borrow site
does not exceed the average percentage by weight of fine-grained
sediment of the recipient beach characterization plus five percent. See
Table 1 of the project narrative, and Table 6 of the Comprehensive Marine
Sand Search and Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix C).
(3)(d) Gravel Size Compatibility
The average percentage by weight of gravel in each borrow site does not
exceed the average percentage by weight of fine-grained sediment of the
recipient beach characterization plus five percent. See Table 1 of the
project narrative and Table 6 of the Comprehensive Marine Sand Search
and Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix C).

23

(3)(e) Calcium Carbonate
Compatibility
The average percentage by weight of calcium carbonate in each borrow
site does not exceed the average percentage by weight of fine-grained
sediment of the recipient beach characterization plus 15 percent. See
Table 1 of the project narrative and Table 6 of the Comprehensive Marine
Sand Search and Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix C).

(4)(a) Sediment Excavation Depths
All vibracores within a given borrow area cut section penetrated and
recovered material from below the proposed cut depth (i.e. all vibracores
within a section marked cut to -65 ft. recovered material from at least a
depth of -65 ft.).

24

Per Form MP-1, Section 6d: A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other
instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties
The Town is currently in the process obtaining the necessary easements to construct the project.
Per From MP-2, Section 6f: Adjacent Riparian Owner Return Receipts
Adjacent riparian owner notifications were sent certified mail. The certified mail receipts are provided below-
once the certified signature cards are returned, they will be submitted to CAMA.

25

Per Form MP-1, Section 6h: Agent Authorization Form

26

Per Form MP-1, Section 6j: Ocean Hazard AEC Notice for Southern Shores

27

28

Permission Letter and Ocean AEC Hazard Notices from Adjacent Towns

29

30

31

32

33

34

Appendix A: Work Plans

35

Appendix B: Professional Archaeological Assessment

36

Appendix C: Geotechnical Report

37

Appendix D: Survey Report

38

Appendix E: Letters of Permission for Construction Access Points and Staging Area