RE [External] RE CAMA Permits #87-21 #113-21 #137-21 #126-21 - Updated Surveys of the Beach Nourishment Projects

Hi Heather,

Thanks for the response. To confirm, the larger construction set I was referring to is the same set that I provided to you via email on September 23, 2021. Our intentions are to take
the new survey data, update the construction fill template, and show on these plans both the updated fill template and the “permitted limits of fill” in terms of landward limit, limits
of the dune where present, the seaward berm crest, and the toe of fill. That will allow easy review for DCM, USACE, and DWQ with respect to any areas where the updated construction
template may differ from what was included on the permit drawings. We will also plan on providing the MHW and FLSNV on those maps as well.

Kind Regards,

Ken Willson

Senior Project/Program Manager

Main: 910-399-1905

Mobile: [phone]

[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>

Coastal Protection Engineering

4038 Masonboro Loop Road

Wilmington, NC 28409

From: Coats, Heather <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2022 8:52 AM
To: Ken Willson <[e-mail]>
Cc: Pullinger, Robert C <[e-mail]>; Pelletier, Josh R SAW <[e-mail]>; Howell, Jonathan <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: CAMA Permits #87-21 / #113-21 / #137-21 / #126-21 - Updated Surveys of the Beach Nourishment Projects

Hi Ken,

I’m sorry for the slow response on this- it did get buried amongst all the other emails and then I’ve been tied up this week with things needing immediate attention.

So to confirm, the construction drawing set for SS, KDH & KH is the same set you previously sent me for Kitty Hawk, right? It hasn’t changed since then? And that is what you’re referring
to as far as wanting to stick with the “larger plan set”? If there haven’t been any further changes to the construction plan set that you previously sent, I’d say it’s fine for our
purposes (DCM) to use that to update with new survey conditions.

As far as the seaward toe permit condition, as we previously discussed, we realize there will be some level of change in the project area over time that will impact that seaward toe
limit. But we’ve also evaluated a certain area of impact during the permit process- so significant changes may need to be reevaluated. That’s part of where the updated plans with current
conditions comes in- minor adjustments are to be expected- but if there are significant changes to the permitted area of impact- resource agencies may want/need that updated info.

I’m also copying Josh and Chris on this so they can weigh in on their respective processes if different- particularly in regard to changes to the seaward toe of fill.

And then finally, for the MHW/FLSNV lines, if you can include the lines on the updated plans and also provide the point files, that would be great.

Let me know if you still have any questions or still want to discuss- I’m available this afternoon if you want to talk to clarify anything further.

Thanks,

Heather

From: Ken Willson <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> >
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 9:47 PM
To: Coats, Heather <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> >
Subject: [External] RE: CAMA Permits #87-21 / #113-21 / #137-21 / #126-21 - Updated Surveys of the Beach Nourishment Projects

CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam. <mailto:[e-mail]>

Hi Heather,

Can you give me a call tomorrow so we can talk this through. It’s one of only 2 things left I need to resolve before submitting our proposal for construction services to the Towns and
County and was hoping to wrap it up by COB tomorrow.

Thanks,

Ken Willson

Senior Project/Program Manager

Main: 910-399-1905

Mobile: [phone]

[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>

Coastal Protection Engineering

4038 Masonboro Loop Road

Wilmington, NC 28409

From: Ken Willson
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2022 11:28 AM
To: Heather Coats <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> >
Subject: RE: CAMA Permits #87-21 / #113-21 / #137-21 / #126-21 - Updated Surveys of the Beach Nourishment Projects

Hi Heather,

I’m not sure if this question has been addressed yet. If I missed it, I apologize, but this is different than the question about the Southern Shores FLSNV. Feel free to give me a call
if you want to discuss.

Thanks,

Ken Willson

Senior Project/Program Manager

Main: 910-399-1905

Mobile: [phone]

[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>

Coastal Protection Engineering

4038 Masonboro Loop Road

Wilmington, NC 28409

From: Ken Willson
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2022 4:07 PM
To: Heather Coats <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> >
Subject: CAMA Permits #87-21 / #113-21 / #137-21 / #126-21 - Updated Surveys of the Beach Nourishment Projects

Heather,

As we’ve discussed previously, one of the conditions in the subject permits states that:

We are thinking through the logistics of this. Through the permit process we created a specific set of drawings for each Town to support the permit applications. However, for the construction
of the project, we’ve created one set of plans for Duck, and a separate all inclusive set of plans for So. Shores, Kitty Hawk, and Kill Devil Hills. This is the version the contractors
have been provided. Each set does have some differences in terms of the type of information provided. Moving forward, we would like to stick with the larger plan set as opposed to
modifying the permit drawings. I was wondering if it would be ok if in order to satisfy this condition, we update our construction drawings as the updated surveys are obtained for
each project. The construction drawings would show 1) the updated conditions; 2) the construction fill template based on the updated conditions; and 3) the landward and seaward limits
of fill included in the permit drawings. I have uploaded the current version of the construction plans for the 3 southern towns here: Construction Drawings <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/coa
stalprotectioneng-my.sharepoint.com/:f:/p/kwillson/EtRBBWOf0bRDuQlC-tvAX2ABJZFP-h1qZvCi10itNEhb9g?e=CyoMtx__;!!HYmSToo!M2yp8suHeXM1f5jhS17QsMuDo-x38ZR7-4qHBhXX3iXwfmU_1wQlgHHHFfbM_C6FDn1a9Q$>
so that you can evaluate whether updating this version would serve your purpose.

As we’ve discussed, the expectations are that in some locations the seaward limit of fill may extend beyond the limits that were shown on the permit drawings, but as stated in Note 7
on the permit drawings, “The seaward toe of beach fill line as shown, is not fixed and rather is subject to change based on the conditions of the nearshore bathymetry at the time of
construction.”

Our intent is to also provide the pre-project MHW line on these plans as well. However, I wanted to see if there was a certain format that you all like to receive the MHW line data
and the FLSNV data. Do you all want a CAD file or a point file or a drawing? Just let us know and we can make it happen.

Kind Regards,

Ken Willson

Senior Project/Program Manager

Main: 910-399-1905

Mobile: [phone]

[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>

Coastal Protection Engineering

4038 Masonboro Loop Road

Wilmington, NC 28409