15800_HYDRO SCIENTIFIC & VON CESEN, HENRY_19951204

CAMA AND DREDGE AND FILL11 �.1. '0158w")
GENERAL GEC 0 8 05
PERMIT .�
as authorized by the State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources and the Coastal Resources Commission
in an area of environmental concern pursuant to 15A NCAC l
Ap plicant Name Phone Number
,
Address
City State Zip
Project Location (County, State Road, Water Body, etc.)
Type of Project Activity
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Pier (dock) length
Groin length
number
Bulkhead length
max. distance offshore
SKETCH ::; _.....
1
{•-vi-
Basin, channel dimensions ,
cubic yards
Boat ramp dimensions
Other
This permit is subject to compliance with this application, site
drawing and attached general and specific conditions. Any
violation of these terms may subject the permittee to a fine,
imprisonment or civil action; and may cause the permit to be-
come null and void.
This permit must be on the project site and accessible to the
permit officer when the project is inspected for compliance.
The applicant certifies by signing this permit that 1) this pro-
ject is consistent with the local land use plan and all local
ordinances, and 2) a written statement has been obtained from
adjacent riparian landowners certifying that they have no
objections to the proposed work.
In issuing this permit the State of North Carolina certifies that
this project is consistent with the North Carolina Coastal
Management Program.
Af
- J (SCALE:
/ % f
i
..1
applicant's signature
permit officer's signature
� I
issuing date expiration date
\
attachments 1 L) L)
application fee --�—

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources LT54A,
A
Wilmington Regional Office
Division of Coastal Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor C) E H N■ i
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Roger N. Schecter, Director
December 15, 1995
CERTEMD MAEL Z 177 235 441
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. C. William Barker
224 Seacreast Drive
Wrightsville Beach, NC 28480
Subject: General Permit issued to Hydro -Scientific, Inc.
Dear Mr. Barker:
This letter is with reference to General Permit # 015800-D issued on December 4, 1995 to Hydro -
Scientific (Henry von Oesen). The permit was issued for the purpose of the maintenance dredging of
approximately 750 cubic yards of material from the existing basin serving his multiple dock system.
We have in our files the letter of objection which you submitted to this office and which our records
indicate we received on March 13, 1995. In this letter you make reference to certain sections of the
rules on which this Division processes permits and you also refer to the ordinances of the Town of
Wrightsville Beach. The rule which you reference as .1205(k) does limit slips to no more than four
for facilities approved using this General Permit for the construction of piers: docks: and boat
houses...., however in this instance the request was for maintenance dredging using the regulations
found in section .1500 of T15A: 07H. The original facility was authorized by State Permit #230 in
the early 1970's and there is no specific slip limitation imposed by that permit. Your contention that
this facility poses an environmental hazard to the adjacent waters and marine animals is one of the
potential impacts evaluated by the State prior to the first approval of the facility in the early 1970's and
again in the early 1980's when a subsequent request for maintenance dredging was received and
approved and it was also a consideration of the General Permit process for the current approval. In all
three situations it was determined that the facility does not constitute an environmental hazard and
authorizations were issued. We have learned that the present request involves the reduction of slips
from 10 to 9 which we view as a non -marina. The overboard discharge of wastes of any nature is in
violation of local, State and federal laws. Any such instances observed or reported and verified will
be dealt with accordingly.
Based on the information in your original letter we did inquire of the Town of Wrightsville Beach
concerning the zoning irregularity in March of 1995. We learned that on December 11, 1975 - S
tD
150.18 RENTING OF DOCKS PROHIBITED was added or amended to the Town's Zoning
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, N.C. 28405-3845 • Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Mr. C. William Barker
December 15, 1995
Page Two
Ordinances. However, (D) of the Section excludes those piers, docks or other moorings in existence
on 12-11-19975, with the exception that modifications or new construction shall conform to the terms
of this section. Apparently over the years the Town had provided building permits, to Hydro -Scientific
in order to alter the configuration of the finger piers several times. We were told that legal proceeding
were in process with reference to the zoning question. Because our rules require that all permits issued
be in compliance with all Local, State and federal rules, ordinances, requirements etc. we advised
Hydro -Scientific of our findings on March 22, 1995 and received an agreement to suspend the
processing of the request until the issue was resolved. We further informed the applicant that the scope
of the requested maintenance was such that a T15A:07H .1500 General Permit was available if the final
decision on zoning was in his favor. (copy enclosed)
We were contacted by the applicant in August 1995 and were told that the zoning issue was settled and
requested that we proceed with the processing of his permit. We contacted Town officials to verify this
information and were told that there had been a resolution reached. Based on that information a permit
was issued but no work was done.
In December the applicant requested that we issue another permit so that the work could be
accomplished. The subject permit was the result. At the time of that issuance we had not been
contacted by the Town with regard to the suit which was filed in October 1995. We were also
contacted by you and you expressed your concerns regarding the language on the face of the
authorization document. I have high lighted the actual regulations and language which govern the
determination of the issuance of the permit on the copy of the permit I have enclosed for your review.
At present the permit has been suspended but not revoked. I have evaluated the current dock and piers
with respect to what I can measure on various aerial photographs as compared to current existing
conditions. Based on what I have observed I have requested a meeting with the Town to discuss my
findings and opinion of the facility.
Please accept my apologies for our earlier failure to notify you concerning our action on this matter.
I hope you understand that we did not rush to issue the subject permit but only did so on the advice we
received from the Town that the matter was resolved and that the facility had obtained grandfathered
status. The environmental concerns that you expressed are important ones to us also and, as I stated
above, were considered at several points in time during the life of this facility prior up to and including
the latest permit action. We have determined, during each of those reviews, that no significant adverse
environmental impacts would result from the action requested. The lack of proper human behavior
associated with facilities of this nature, unfortunately does not fall within the permit review process.
Also, the improper disposal of wastes, as stated above, also requires other or additional regulations.

Mr. C. William Barker
December 15, 1995
Page Three
If you have questions concerning the above or if I can be of any other assistance in this matter, please
advise.
Sincerely,
C�
C. Robert Stroud, Jr.
District Manager
cc: Roger Schecter, DCM
Preston Pate, DCM
Richard Rogers, EHNR
Dave Heeter, NCAG
Tony Caudle, Wrightsville Beach
Ken Shanklin, Attorney
Carter Lambeth, Attorney
Hydro -Scientific, Inc.
V. M. Morrison
s: \cama\bob\barker. ltr