19951193 Ver 1_Complete File_19960122

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources ` • •
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary ID E
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
January 22, 1996
Mr. Tom Barbee
The U.S. Marine Corps
Environmental Management Dept.
1105 Michael Road
Camp Lejeune, NC 28542-2521
Dear Mr. Barbee;
Re: Modification of 401 Certification
Construction of Milcon P-933 Training Facility
Project #951193, COE #199505124
Onslow County
In response to our recent telephone call, condition #2 of Certification Number 3043 is
hereby modified to read:
"2. A draft mitigation plan shall be submitted to N.C. DEM before filling begins."
All other conditions shall remain the same.
Please call Mr. John Dorney of my staff at 919-733-1786 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
?eston Howard, Jr., P
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Wilmington Field Office.
Wilmington DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Mr. John Parker; Division of Coastal Management
Central Files
John Townson; Camp Lejeune - Environmental Management Dept.
Steve Kroeger, DEM
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
"2-01-1995 4:31PM FROM
f
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
FOR = 'ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
FOR MCON P-933
MULTIPURPOSE RANGE COMPLEX,
MARINE CORPS BASE, CAMP LEJEUNE,
..NORTH CAROLINA
Pursuant to the Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40
CFR Parts 1500-1508) implementing the procedural provisions of
the National Environmental Policy Act, the Department of the Navy
hereby gives notice that an environmental assessment (EA) has
been prepared and that an environmental impact statement will not
be prepared for the proposed construction and operation of a
Muln a Complex (MPRC) in the Greater Sand Run Area
(G Corps Base (MCB), Camp Le3eune, orth Carolina.
As discussed in the EA, the proposed action involves the
construction and operation of an MPRC in the south central
portion of the recently acquired GSRA of MCB, Camp Lejeune. This
range is designed to provide collective maneuver and live fire
training to- certify qualification of individual and platoon level
tank and light armored vehicle crews in concert with dismounted
infantry. This range is needed to meet updated Marine Corps
training doctrine and-evolving weaponry.
The MCB, Camp Lejeune's land holdings remained virtually
unchanged from 1941 until 1992, due to significant growth in
technical training requirements (because of the complexity and
lethality of modern weapons systems, highly maneuverable forces,
and high, speed aircraft), MCB Camp Lejeune's available facilities
were not able to satisfy many basic Fleet Marine Force training
requirements. Congress approved funding for the purchase of a
parcel of land contiguous to MCB, Camp Lejeune in 1992, :The
Marine Corps subsequently acquired the 41,100 acre GSRA to
provide a partial solution to the long term and increasing
training deficiencies faced by the Marine Corps.
The Record of Decision for the Final Environmental impact
statement for the Proposed Expansion and Realignment of the
Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, Onslow County, North Carolina
(August, 1991) stated that specific projects for development and
operation in the GSRA would be evaluated and documented in
accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. The EA
for the MPRC evaluates the potential impacts of a no action
alternative and the -proposed action.
The proposed action is the preferred alternative: Construction
and operation of a MPRC in the south central GSRA. This range is
the largest of the proposed ranges planned for the GSRA, with the
tank trails and targetry located in a rectangle approximately
1,000 meters wide by 4,000 meters long (988 acres). The MPRC
will consist of four tank maneuver trails, stationary and moving
targets, and the capacity to provide simultaneous, combined tank,
light armor vehicle, dismounted infantry and attack helicopter
training. In support of the tank maneuver range there will be
P. 2
12-13-1995 3:12PM FROM P.2
X
various support facilities including a storage building, a
control tower, a field service bathroom, and covered bleachers.
A surface-„danger zone, or safety fan, encompassing about 6,•4604
acres will receive spent projectiles from any weapons used on the
range which do not remain in the immediate target areas. Long
term explosive hazard or potential contamination to groundwater
will not be created because only non-explosive steel or copper-
jacketed ordnance will be used on the proposed MPRC.
The no action alternative consists of a continuation of the
status quo. Implementation of the no action alternative would
mean that the Marine Corps will continue to experience training
shortfalls,, necessitating continued use of off-base facilities in
an attempt to minimize identified training deficiencies.
The following listed issues are discussed in the EA:
water quality;
fire suppression and fire control;
natural resources (vegetation, wildlife, wetlands);
cultural resources;
airspace requirements;
noise;
traffic, and
public access and safety.
Proper water quality standards will be maintained. Requisite
State construction permits, water well construction permits and
water quality certification, wastewater permits, and stormwater
permits will be obtained for both construction and operation of
the proposed range. Potential siltation of surface waters or
wetlands during construction will be. controlled by strict
adherence to erosion and sedimentation control measures.
Fire suppression and control measures will include the expansion
of the current MCB, Camp Lejeune fire response capability through
the addition of personnel and equipment. A new fire control plan
which includes site-specific response measures for the GSRA has
been prepared and separate memoranda of understanding have been
executed between MCB, Camp Lejeune, the State of North Carolina,
and the U. S. Forest Service wherein the signatories pledge
mutual fire response assistance.
The Natural Heritage Inventory for GSRA located one Federally-
listed endangered plant species, rough-leaved loosestrife
(Lvsimachia asperulaefolia). All known sites for this endangered
plant lie outside the areas proposed for MPRC development.
Consultation with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
resulted in a "no effect" determination for the rough-leaved
loosestrife. No Federally-listed threatened or endangered plants
or animals have been identified which would be impacted by the
proposed action.
2
12-01-1995 4:32PM FROM P.d

There will be impacts to vegetation caused by the construction
and operation of the MPRC. About 104 acres of vegetation will be
cut and stumps removed for the construction of buildings.,
targets, and trails. Approximately 385 acres of vegetation will
be cut and its height maintained near ground level in an early to
mid-successional state to provide line-of-sight to the targets.
Included in this 385 acres are 113 acres of bottomland hardwood
forest which provide wildlife habitat. This concern was factored
into range design and hardwood bottomland vegetation was avoided
to the maximum extent possible.
In the effort to-avoid or minimize wetlands impacts, a rectangle
of 1,815 acres in the south central GSRA was surveyed and
wetlands delineated therein.. About 85 percent of this rectangle
qualified as jurisdictional wetlands. Within this larger
rectangle, various locations and range designs for the smaller
988 acre MPRC rectangle were evaluated which could meet
operational needs,. but which would minimize wetlands impacts.
The optimal design for the MPRC will result in the filling of
102.19.acres of wetlands. A Section 404 permit from the corps of
Engineers will be required for filling the wetlands from the
construction of the MPRC. All wetlands impacts will be mitigated
through the use of a mitigation banking program. The Marine
corps, in consultation with the Wilmington District Corps of
Engineers and the State of North Carolina, is developing
appropriate guidelines and procedures for this mitigation effort.
Mitigation will be accomplished in the southern pocosin area of
the GSRA where the wetlands mitigation bank is being established.
This pocosin area was selected for the mitigation bank because it
represents an extremely valuable wetland resource. -It was
extensively drained and damaged by pattern ditching done for
timber operations by the previous-owner'.
To identify cultural resources, a preliminary survey of medium to
high probability areas was conducted in areas ofpotential effect
from the construction and operation of the MPRC. The survey
revealed the presence of six sites within the proposed surface
danger zone, but not within the potential construction areas or
maneuver areas of the range. Prior to operation of the proposed
range, additional investigation of the six sites and coordination
with the State Historic Preservation Officer will be done.
A restricted airspace will be required for safe operation of the
MPRC and other ranges in the GSRA. A proposal for restricted
airspace has been filed by the Marine Corps with the Federal
Aviation Administration that will assure safety and minimize
impacts to local aviation. Mitigation measures to minimize
impacts on civil aviation contained in the restricted airspace
proposal include: stratification of the proposed restricted
airspace into. three layers (0 to 6,999 feet; 7,000 to 9,999 feet;
and 10,000 to 17,999 feet above ground level) and division of the
GSRA into a north sector and a south sector to allow for the
selective activation of the appropriate sector(s). Most of the
MPRC operations will take place in the lowest layer between 0 to
3
12-01-1995 4:33PM FROM P.5
.r y .
6,999 feet above ground level. Real time management of the
proposed restricted airspace will ensure that when operations are
not planned for the MPRC, the restricted airspace will be opened
to civil aviation and non-participating military aircraft.
During MPRC operations, civil aviation will be requested to fly
over the highest active layer (usually O to 6,999 feet above
ground level) of proposed'GSRA restricted airspace. If the
aircraft cannot abide this request, it will be routed slightly to
the east around the proposed GSRA restricted airspace. In all
cases of aviation emergencies, training exercises will be
interrupted to allow civil aviation to pass through the proposed
GSRA restricted airspace.
A noise analysis study of the planned MPRC operations was
conducted and indicates that no unacceptable noise levels would
be experienced outside the-boundaries of MCB Camp Lejeune.
Temporary minor traffic impacts associated With the MPRC would
occur intermittently during the construction phase. To minimize
impacts, customary signs, flagmen, and. scheduling to reduce
impacts during high local traffic times will be employed. once
operational, the MPRC will have minimal impacts on traffic.
Public access control will be accomplished by constructing gates
at all GSRA key entry points and by posting NO TRESPASSING signs
in accordance with military regulations at 200 foot intervals
around the periphery. Additional barricades, and patrols will be
utilized as needed to. ensure public awareness and safety.
No significant impacts are expected to air quality, geology,
topography, soils or'hydrology as a result of the construction
and use of the proposed MPRC.
Based on information gathered during preparation of the EA, the
Marine Corps finds that construction and operation of a
Multipurpose Range *Complex in the Greater Sandy Run Area of
Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune will not significantly affect the
quality-of the human environment.
A copy of the environmental assessment is available from
Commanding General, Consolidated Public Affairs office, Marine
Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, North Carolina '28542-0004.
Telephone: [phone]. A limited number of copies of the
document are available to fill single copy requests.
111 ??- 1995 liw4W4
Date G. HOWARD
Major Ge eral, U.S. Marine Corps
Commanding General, Marine Corps Base
4
Division of Environmental Management
s Ecological Assessment Group
January 17, 1996
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dorne?' 7
From: Steven Kroeger
Subject: Review of: Fin 1: Environmental Assessment for P-333 Multi-Purpose
Range Complex, USMC, Camp Lejeune: Project Number 96-0444)
This environmental assessment (EA) discusses impacts associated with the
development of military training facilities and grounds within the Greater Sandy Run area at
Camp Lejeune. The Division of Environmental Management has been working with Camp
Lejeune on this project and is waiting for the "Greater Sandy Run Wetlands Mitigation
Banking Plan." This plan should be submitted soon.
cc: Monica Swihart
:.h

ass
2 ? $' y

v
sa1e11V lelu0wu1ano6aalui pue an1le!s160-l 10 a01110
Kt-Sd
aaE)aW eglaVy
:01 Nannu
(sluawwoo goelle pue Agoads) aagl0
Vd3S pue Vd3N
to suo!slnojd aql japun paj!nbai aq lsnw S13 Ilnd
papaau lou luawalels /!ouals!suo0
(pagoelle sluawwoo) papaau luawalelS Aoualslsuo0 ?
(pagoe)le sluawwoo) lelsJ9naluo0 10afad
paloeluoo uaaq lou seq lueo!lddV Fj
paloeluoo uaaq seq lueo!lddVn
(pallo (sal) (l!joglne) sluawwoo pagoelle U1 palels
suosew lot luawdolanap aagpnl jol papuawwo0ea ION
-asuodsaj lenp!nipul alaldwoo aaMa!nau asnoH-u l
(pal!o (sai)Aluoylne/paUoell'e
sluawwoo) Aouabe bu!punl (q palejodjooui sa6uego
an!luelsgns V o!l!oads 1! luawdolanap aagljnl Jol papuawwooeu
(pag0elie sluawwoo) bu!uagl6uajis
jot suoilepuawwooai ql!M luawdolanap jaglinl jot papuawwooau
(pa?oago uaaq aneq sapj l!wjad) papaau (s)i!w'ad E]
anaddy ?
Ma!naJ alaldwoo of uoilewiolui luaio!llnsul
luawwo0 ON
pasodoid se loafoid of uo!loafgo ON El
jobeueN leuo!6aa tq palaldwoo pue pal!dwoo aq of asuodsai 901110 leuo1698
(algeoildde lie Noago) asuodsaa
: (oua6y(aaMa!naa asnoH-ul :ale( :uo!6a8l110 u6l$ a96eueyj
'?ZEL[TM$ EOiuoyl SMd wales-uoisu!M D

luawabeueN1 !eiuawua!nua a sa0gl0 ? uol6u!wl!M ?
(,(l!oacls) jag10 ? uollealoau pue sjaedA
"' luellnsuo0 luawa6euelN 1eise00
< uol6u!gseM
Jelsod p!ne(? saoanosau puel luellnsuo0 jeuo!lealoau E]
uo!l0@IOJd Uo!le1Peu ? sa0mosau isajod A iaau!6u3 (l!!enp pueq E g61a1eu
luoujabeueV4 alseM p!IOS[:] aMPHMJ? jeleMpunoa0E] al[!nsaaooW
glleaH JUJU@wua1nu3n saojnosouaaleME] JoleMEl
8111naiia/ed ?
fiuluueld JaleM? luawabeuelnl lelseo0k
'
???? J!d?
?
saljagsld auue JaleM pue poss
' seajy Olu 11VE1 911!nagsy?
alnau asnoH•ul
M eaIy @01110 leuo16aa auogdl901110 leuo!60a
?? U? 1(f• elV fi w V I1 :Moleq pal Ipu! SE paMa!naJ bu!eq si loofaad s!ql
:(au!Ipeap uu!1) a ( asuodsaa ale(] :ale( :/luno0 :jagwnN 1001oad
wjod Ma!naa 100(wd
SJ1e11y leluawuaano6.i8luf pue 0nile!s160-1 10 a01110
/-jejq!l iooli'AIL u! p@leool 10afoad <
? s961nosaH lejnleN pue <yl!eaH )u?<?--=-° J ,' :: wedaQ

SITE ANALYSIS
Proposed Coastal Marsh
Mitigation Site
Camp Lejeune, Onslow County
ESI Project ER96-021.12
Prepared for:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
Prepared by:

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
1100 Wake Forest Road, Suite 200
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Tel [phone] Fax [phone]
March 1997
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
.`' I. INTRODUCTION ...............................................1
Project need ............................................ 1
Site History ............................................. 1
Methodology ............................................4
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS ......................................... 9
Topography and Soils ...................................... 9
Plant Communities ....................................... 11
Study Site ........................................11
Reference Marsh Ecosystem ........................... 11
Hydrology .............................................12
Existing Condition .................................. 12
Historic Condition .................................. 13
III. SITE RESTORATION............ .............................14
Grading Plan ........................................... 14
Planting Plan ........................................... 20
IV. SUMMARY .................................................23
V. REFERENCES ................................................24

r
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Reference Tidal Salt Marsh ................................. 12
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Location Map ........................................... 2
Figure 2. Aerial Photo ............................................ 3
Figure 3. Reference Marsh Site Locations ............................... 6
Figure 4. Site 'A' Boundary Survey ................................... 7
Figure 5. Site 'B' Boundary Survey ................................... 8
Figure 6. Soils Map ............................................. 10
Figure 7. Current Surface Topography At Site "A" ....................... 15
Figure 8. Proposed Restored Surface At Site "A" ........................ 16
Figure 9. Conceptualized Grading Plan At Site "A" ....................... 17
Figure 10. Cross-Sections through Transects At Site "A" .................... 16
Figure 11. Fill Thickness And Proposed Restored Surface Site "B" ............. 19
Figure 12. Projection Of Original Land Surface Site "B" ..................... 21
Figure 13 Wetland Planting Communities .............................. 22
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROPOSED COASTAL MARSH MITIGATION SITES
CAMP LEJEUNE, ONSLOW COUNTY
1. INTRODUCTION
Project Need
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is investigating the use of two sites
totaling approximately 3.5-acres (ac) 0.6 hectares [ha]) at Camp Lejeune Marine Base in
Onslow County as a possible coastal marsh mitigation site (Figure 1). These sites would
provide a means to compensate for highway-related impacts in tidal marsh communities.
NCDOT recognizes that successful issuance of Section 404 permits for proposed highway
improvements is often contingent upon submission of a mitigation plan that provides full and
adequate compensation for unavoidable wetland impacts. Advance mitigation planning and
implementation has the potential to serve as an efficient management tool which concentrates
resources to restore or enhance significant wetland areas. Advance mitigation planning can
also provide an avenue for conflict resolution between NCDOT and resource agencies early in
the permit/planning process, thereby saving time and resources. Unpredictability regarding
whether a project may be approved can be reduced by establishing pre-approved mitigation
sites and plans. The purpose of this study is to determine the feasibility of restoring the study
sites to tidal salt marsh wetlands.
Site History
In response to needs brought on by World War II, approximately 86,100 acres (34845 ha) (16
percent of Onslow County) was established as the Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base. Today
the base is approximately 153,440 acres (62,100 ha) and is used to train naval and marine
personnel in infantry maneuvers, amphibious assaults, and weapon systems. While base lands
are managed under a natural resource plan, base activities have modified the surrounding
landscape.
The two study sites total approximately 3.5 ac (1.6 ha) of filled land adjacent to the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW) at the southern end of Marine Corps property (Figure 2).
Historically, the study sites appear to. have supported a high salt marsh (upper marsh) grading
to an intertidal salt marsh along the AIWW. Approximately 20 years ago, the elevation was
artificially raised by placing approximately 7500 cubic yards (CY) [5734 cubic meters (m3) of
fill material on a wedge shaped area of approximately 3.2 ac (1.3 ha) (Site A). A raised
causeway of approximately 0.3 ac (0.1 ha) (Site B) is located adjacent to Site B.
Approximately 700 CY (535 m3) of fill was placed in a linear arrangement extending in a north-
south direction, possible as part of a relic landing or roadway system. With the change in
1
Le un . '
Creek
1 F
11 Y..• R S E R V A T -N
M• {
rrt, Y +t „ r
?1;1,?,. 1 17 KE 6L'1 C.I /
AoCa "yro? 4 ?4c': War T FiencR. '
r¢•Jl ??`?"'?,r?F j ". Pom.J?\ \i ?ufn my Ron
3
Waif r C - ` 172
LEJ

- Vim.
?yRrtd?
A SNESI N? `' Ae. BeaY ?r%E?Jbr r
+Nd n, CrEeL i r • P
Shall Rxk
Lndin'
%
whu. ? t\ n9 ?„
' ?I taetding + S e t ,
.1! .
Cre,
e!?J _
•.3 - -- rk
aE
172 \+'J ' - - ! ~
Y 7. a? .r
•i ` ?/A?
I-'T t ?. 4 J v a
:t'Tt1t ? +.,? ] ._'ri .. kf '?I ht-..•«.:.?ll it _ + . ? .... ,
? I IDE?
CREEK N?
I
Pdir°l

Study Area

y }"''fl1 1'"'fi' 1'I .;P - J7t LN. 1•F I, rAtiF µ? M^ ,s1wr-t yt ;, ...+.:;ri i:!?t1 t,•r
•il . •: f
.,. > i . S . J F uiv'iY , >,*-y y}. >; .cL? J, ??• +r.p•.`\ Y: (` J
r e!7f
- `fr"?t v ii'1: `? •e ?, : Y'.yht' ,t S ?' f I r"P ` H ?'i
%
5.11 ?•: o [w r ?'" , at'i'. ?.I `i'raY.•'_?li""r' S?! 1`tF t'. : 1 a_y:}, t S 7 lrti F' u. :F J t. .
?! 1. `L tl, ??I 1rrniY" cTn, iSt? i 7 ^ 7, ffr7r1t3rttfi `?1'i. i rJ1x ?S t r c t\` t tt 1+? r
rr ?. • -J r .1na, t7' r+i "t.,1?r ? ?? ?t.'.:.7, ? i -..i i i ? J r
E 1 9' It I ,1 {Yf si .r+h`'t ?f {`fxSJ".7?•c f t i.rtHi t ,
"'?, e? eyln1-'•-rf ?5 ?r 4 r 7.?:.7i,1+'ai?S" ! 4>t! ,i I,- ?.
Hi?.? tf 3t??r" ?' j.i »% 4'al , [?„7?,r,H Y•t; .,",1 ty" d ll d ?4 ?. IY i, i.. + t r
i Ct ,.4^ Ott,?,P "tt' •, tIc• s 1 .r
ib i ?r}1 i '1.^U, R 3a }, r"?i+F? ?'Irf.' ?1 ei a. • F . ]1 " 1
a?3Y P?y¢¢ + +1 X f ht ;E;.
ri r.. N S? 3S 1 1 y ? r j"?,{ a ;t Jti. i rl r
,?,`0: ti•.7?,rr"S^y•f??•7e,r.`?? m=';`7; n '#, ,.Fy y Cp;t'}'`j?t ?rs1 ,•M :T.j i•; i; ?l ;I F < ,Gl''?,
1,KZ I.J .W .? 1 1 17' )l{< ..'kL T ,( c +-S 1 •`.? l { :'ti .
S ff .. ?t': i'3•?1r1'nj x'"' ".Yr?r w? ti} t A ? _ It1
r .4,r S"rg+t} ?•'+t?trl-•R,`l `?,?,r d:..;'Srt?r'?• ?.`7k 3r tr.,, ••`F{ t,.r TI".el r + ` !. ;e t? Lr ;.,'!•
lv wT=1°13 .?+'?'! 4-ti:x? -Sr ta.. ?C;-4''r,•='vT?'i-?3+tr+tL2 t; ?'.;?. I !{ 1y r1 S7 P ar
rey ? f +"'i ,f ", > ,?. 1.+?.?F .. .,,,,,•? 1 Sri, r .J r 1.4 rl r.f l 't .. :.1. T
(f r •, ?h St1?Sr }.1 r +t. t+ ttd I l +.}'Ya,,c'r i r• < r: rt ,?. ' Is I f
r .•
' p , , t1 t . '?ttrt^ i f s fcL
:5:; 1SQ <S 1 tl? t?f ttT 'fr ],} E 1 .1J ? flc J J +i
+77r.
,, ( Y:ltts A r }1 l
'! sr r1 1 / F, ;11t> d{ y1? 1 tl { kw y 1 rf 1
;C ,.14t? c f f f, I } .2 J I_, rj - Cr
. +S'SS ?ii?ul ~ ?1 i i r' JI ,' 11' ?'+1 tr`L{' 1'•Y' ? ? t, it °? ,:
?.rr s r
^. ? ; ?:ci JS 1t? ff t, t ? Il "c f 1 J 1 )5t' 1? pt. e ?? ', o ?. ,. t1 t It.
t r ,. ,I 1 I
c l 0 1 2 miles i
0 1 K771 I is 1} t a 1. t!, nC It: !
A produced With Permisabn, North Cerolin I ' I (t ,,! ! i 1 r
Attu and Gazottoor• DaLorme. Freoport ME 1883 1 ?j 7 ' f I }
!.1 r .Ili S I } ' r, I `li` etc 1
Environmental Figure: 1
Services, Inc. Location Map
1100 Wake Forest Marsh Mitigation Site Project: ER9s021.12
Road, Suite 200 Onslow County, North Carolina
Raleigh, NC 27604 Date: MARCH 1997
2
elevation, the sites no longer experience tidal flooding, allowing for colonization by upland
plant communities dominated by loblolly pine (Pious taeda) and a variety of shrubs and
grasses.
Methodology
NCDOT provided aerial photography and defined the project limits of the proposed mitigation
site. Existing information was evaluated through the use of: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
topographic mapping; Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey for Onslow
County (USDA 1992); and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory (NWI)
mapping.
Field surveys were undertaken by project ecologists on July 15-16, 1996 and February 27,
1997 to evaluate existing plant communities and to determine existing site conditions. Plant
species were identified by strata (canopy, shrub, herb). Soil samples were taken to
characterize substrate conditions, and estimates of elevation gradient changes were noted.
The tidal salt marsh system adjacent to the study sites was considered to be appropriate for
reference marsh purposes. The natural marsh landform, soils, and hydrological characteristics
will be emulated by restoration of the study sites. In order to characterize the reference
marsh, 10, 10.76-feet square (ft2) (1-meter square [m2]) plots were randomly established
(Figure 3) to determine species composition and percent cover. Importance values (Brower et
ai. 1990) were calculated for encountered species. This information has been used in
development of a conceptual planting plan.
Project geologists used a series of 23 exploratory soil borings to determine the depth of fill and
to delineate the fill/native soil boundary within the study sites. Four transects within Site A,
paralleling the AIWW, were established for soil borings. Transects were spaced at 100-ft (30
m) intervals with the first transect located approximately 50 ft (15 m) inshore from the
waterway. A total of 14 soil borings were conducted within the boundaries of Site A. Nine
soil borings were conducted uniformly within the boundaries of Site B. Using hand augers, soil
borings were advanced to a depth where the presence of native soil was encountered.
Transect and boring locations for site A are presented in Figure 4, while Figure 5 presents
boring locations within Site B. Soil boring locations and the limits of fill were flagged and
surveyed for Site A. In addition, the ground surface elevation at each soil boring location was
surveyed for vertical elevation to assist in determining depth of fill material. Soil boring
locations and the limits of fill boundary were located and delineated using laser technology for
Site B.
4
Topographic surfaces for the existing land surface and the probable historic surface were
developed using SURFER (a surface mapping software package). A conceptual grading plan
was developed by overlaying the. two surfaces (existing land surface and historic marsh
surface), and transect cross-sections were generated. These data were used to generate an
estimation of the volume of material to be removed as part of the site restoration.
5
!w+
r-7
1 '.Z
30. 4WO
/v 1
?f
0 300 Feet
0 91.5 Meters r
linv ices, Inc. mental
ervices, c.
I I00 Wakc Forest
Road, Suite 200
Raleigh, NC 27004
Reference Marsh Site Locations
Marsh Mitigation Site
Onslow County, North Carolina
a...
Figure: 3
Project: ER96021.12
Date: MARCH 1997
6
'OAAA10 7A MKICI AAI I nurr, /.1111/ /D IC

0
0
r? O c? O

?? O O

O
zr

u
zy

C' Y a
l_O
O
n
0
40
f
UV

CA ,..

(D
(D
C'r
I
r ?

0
d
tz1 (n Q M
O
Z
Z D to
Q h
V
ggo M s
i
I f (0 O
$ P n Q ?_ Q c-
-PS o ?
`D QF
z = o nn o

O
n
l
l
A 0
-
92 A Na
ri g
P
C:
Q
3? Q

8
O

O II 4>0
O
^^
U) O
0 U

4'l?c ?o
r9
^
UV O

^ss
Uv

O

.w ?J?
W \/
® O

G?
uv

N^o

z
' -sx, NORTH REF: NAD 83
-Poo

0
0
p
rn >>?
AA+?! 01
`C`F'7?flC
If2 4h
Environmental 9fTE A BOUNDARY 9UFiVEY FIGURE
1100 Wake Services,ake Inc. Forest DNorth epartment of Carolina ON&OW COLUN ALA M 9M 4
Road, Suite 200 Transportation ONSI_OW COLINN, NOM CAAOLM
Raleigh, NC 27604 NCDOT MARCH 97

II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Topography and Soils
Site A consists of a slightly undulating, table-like mound of fill that rises approximately 2 to
3 feet (0.6 to 0.9 m) above adjacent salt marshes. The surface of the table undulates with
a variation in elevation of approximately 1.5 feet (0.5 m). Site B consists of the remnant of
a causeway ranging from 30 ft (9 m) to 40 ft (12 m) wide and approximately 400 ft (122 m)
long. The adjacent salt marsh appears to be a flat, depositional surface with some drainage
channels and pools of undetermined depth.
Based upon the Onslow County soil survey (USDA 1992) Site A is a wedge of Pactolus fine
sand (Aquic Quartzipsamments), bounded on the southwest by Bohicket silty clay loam (Typic
Suitaquents) and on the northeast by the Muckalee loam (Typic Fiuvaquents). Site B appears
to be a linear extension of the Pactolus map unit associated with Site A (Figure 6).
The Pactolus series consists of moderately well drained and somewhat poorly drained soils on
uplands and stream terraces. These soils typically form in coarse-textured sediments with
slopes ranging from 1 to 3 percent. However, at the study sites, soil encountered are finer
than the Pactolus description. The fill material is estimated to have been placed in the marsh
some time in the mid to late 1970s. Soil borings indicate that the thickness of fill on site
range from 4.5 ft (1.4 m) to less than 1 ft (0.3 m), decreasing in thickness back into the
maritime forest area that forms the inland boundary of the study site.
The Bohicket series characterized as very poorly drained soils in tidal marshes that are less
than 3 ft (0.9 m) above sea level. These soils form in silty and clayey sediments washed from
the drainage areas of freshwater streams and have slopes less than 1 percent.
The Muckalee series consists of poorly drained soils on low floodplains. These soils form in
moderately coarse-textured, recent-alluvium sediments, with slopes ranging from 0 to 2
percent. The seasonal high water table ranges from 0.5 ft (0.2 m) to 1.5 ft (0.5 m) below the
surface. It is possible that the areas mapped as Muckalee consist of soils which were
disturbed by human activities (such as dredging the AIWW) or represent the remnant of a
floodplain that predates the AIWW and has become tidal salt marsh.
Soil borings confirm the presence of fill material, which is composed of slightly clayey to silty,
very fine to fine sandy soils. This material is similar to the underlying sediments and soils of
the adjacent maritime forest located northwest of Site A. Soils underlying fill material appear
to consist of intergrades of the Bohicket and Muckalee series.
9
10
The soil borings indicate that the fill is generally deeper in the portions of the site near the
AIWW and shallows to an end on the inland boundary along an old dune line that supports a
maritime forest. In the 23 soil borings -installed at the study sites, the overburden material
encountered were relatively uniform and very similar to mineral sediments underlaying organic
rich surface stratum of the Muckalee loam adjacent to the north, as well as being very similar
to materials comprising the underlying sediments and adjacent soils in the maritime forest.
The source of fill is likely dredge spoil from the AIWW, or fill from adjacent uplands.
Plant Communities
Study Sites
Distribution and composition of plant communities within the study sites reflect past
disturbance to topography, soils, and hydrology. The primary factor affecting vegetation
structure is the placement of 2 to 3 ft (0.6 to 0.9 m) of fill material on the historic salt marsh.
Fill material has eliminated the influence of tidal flow, which has allowed for the establishment
of a mixed-age pine forest on elevated land within Site A. The pine forest occurs as a
monotypic stand of loblolly pine. Sparse shrub and herbaceous layers include wax myrtle
(Myrica cerifera), silverling (Baccharfs halimifolia), and broomsedge (Andropogon sp.). Site B
generally supports a shrub and herbaceous community with species similar to those described
at Site A.
Reference Marsh Ecosystem
In order to restore a tidal salt marsh wetland for mitigation purposes, a reference marsh
community was selected. The area of proposed restoration should attempt to emulate the
reference salt marsh ecosystem in soils, hydrology, and vegetation. Relatively undisturbed salt
marshes adjacent to the northeast and southwest sections of the study sites were selected
for reference characterization. The reference marshes do not exhibit an obvious gradient
slope, but plant species composition indicate high (Juncus roemareianus) and intertidal
(Spartina alterniflora) salt marsh zones with interlacing tidal creeks. Chapman (1960) found
that a high marsh is flooded irregularly and has a minimum of at least 10 days of continuous
exposure to the atmosphere; an intertidal marsh is flooded daily and has a maximum of nine
days of continuous exposure.
Table 1 depicts importance values (IV) for reference marsh species. Importance values are
based on a scale of 0-100%, higher values indicate greater importance to the community.
Reference tidal salt marshes are dominated by smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora, IV =
38%), salt grass (Distichlis spicata, IV = 28%),' and black needlerush (Juncus roemerianus).
To a lesser extent, sea oxeye (Borrichia frutescens, IV = 4%) occurs in slightly elevated areas
and glasswort (Saficornia europaea, IV = 5%) is present in shallow, sandy depressions.
11
Table 1. Reference Tidal Salt Marsh

Species
Frequency Relative
Frequency
Coverage Relative
Coverage Importance
Value (IV) %
Borrichia frutescens 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.01 4
Distichlis spicata 0.5 0.28 22.5 0.28 28
Juncus roemaerianus 0.5 0.28 22.0 0.25 27
Spartina alternif/ora 0.6 0.33 34.0 0.43 38
Salicornia europaea 0.1 0.06 2.5 0.03 5
Hydrology
Existing Condition
At the time of the initial site visit (July 15-16), groundwater elevations at the two study sites
ranged from the surface to 1.5 ft (0.5 m) below surface; standing water was observed in
shallow, on-site depressions. It is assumed these conditions were due to several days of
heavy rainfall associated with the passage of Hurricane Bertha, four days prior to the site visit.
However, under normal conditions, the groundwater table is expected to be 1.5 to 2 feet (0.5
to 0.6 m) below the surface (USDA 1992).
The relative elevation of the study sites, the lack of a confining layer, the natural forestation
by loblolly pine, and the proximity of adjacent salt marshes suggest that a fresh groundwater
lens, floating on denser saline groundwater with some tidally influenced fluctuations of the
water table, represents the current hydrological conditions of the study sites. This is typical
for shallow, unconfined groundwater in coastal areas (Fetter 1980). The fresh groundwater
lens is expected to be influenced by riparian groundwater inputs from the adjacent maritime
forest: It is expected that the fresh groundwater is flowing towards the AIWW, as well as
seeping into the adjacent salt marsh. Typically at the boundary between the fresh and saline
groundwaters, a mixing zone is present characterized by salt concentrations intermediate
between. the two extremes. Determining the thickness of the freshwater lens, as well as the
location of the zone of mixing, were not part of this study.
Field observations indicate sediments comprising the fill are well sorted and relatively uniform
sized sand, suggesting that porosity and hydraulic conductivity are relatively high with
conductivity values ranging from 10'5 cm/sec to 1' cm/sec (Fetter, 1980). No evidence of
flooding or development of hydric conditions were present in overburden soils. Based upon
12
these observations, it is appears that the overburden soils behave like typical well sorted sands
and drain rapidly. Therefore, it is unlikely wetland hydrology is achieved within the overburden
soils during the growing season. Current conditions indicate that Sites A and B do not support
jurisdictional wetlands.
Historic Condition
Based upon data from topographic maps, NWI maps, the Onslow County soil survey, aerial
photographs, and field observations, it is expected that prior to disturbance the study sites
consisted of tidal salt marsh rising no more than 2 to 3 feet (0.6 to 0.9 m) above sea level.
The marsh extended approximately 500 feet (152 m) inland from the AIWW grading from
intertidal marsh to a maritime forest which is present along the relict dune line. The adjacent
salt marshes probably represent conditions closely resembling historical conditions prior to the
placement of fill. Historically, the sites were regularly inundated by high tides and accumulate
waterborne sediments, as occurs in adjacent marshes today. These sites historically
represented an area of contact between the Bohicket and Muckalee soil map units.
13
Ill. SITE RESTORATION
Salt marshes along the coast of North Carolina flourish where the accumulation of sediments
is equal to or greater than the rate of land subsidence and there is protection from the
destructive energy of waves and storms. Vegetation of these marshes, mainly halophytic
grasses and rushes, develops in zones due to physical and chemical variables such as tidal
flooding frequency, flooding duration, and soil salinity.
Tidal energy represents the main force in salt marsh ecology which influences a wide range
of physiographic, chemical, and biological processes. These processes, in turn, influence the
species that occur on the marsh and their productivity (Mitsch and Gosselink 1986). The
lower and upper limits of the marsh are set, in part, by the tidal amplitude. The lower limit is
determined by the depth and duration of flooding (Chapman 1960). The upland side of the salt
marsh usually extends to the limit of flooding on extreme high tides; between mean high water
and extreme high water of spring tides (Beeftink 1977).
The successful restoration of degraded or obliterated salt marshes will be dependent upon:
1) the removal of objects which impede or prevent the normal influence of tidal energy within
the salt marsh system; and 2) a marsh surface elevation conducive to salt marsh plant
survival.
Grading Plan
As previously discussed, soil borings indicate that the fill material on-site ranges in thickness
from 4.5 feet 0.4 m) to less than 1 foot (0.3 m). The fill is probably dredged spoils from the
adjacent AIWW, or the result of grading adjacent uplands.
Using data from the survey, and soil borings, a topographic surface map representing existing
conditions and the estimated historical conditions of Site A was prepared using SURFER
software. The existing ground surface and historical land surface are presented in Figures 7
and 8. Figure 9 presents the two surfaces overlain to show the difference in elevations
expected. The expected volume of soil to be removed from Site A is approximately 7,500 CY
(5734 m) . Figure 10 depicts cross-sectional views through the four transects depicting the
existing ground surface profile and the proposed restored land profile at site A.
Soil boring data obtained at Site B were used to prepare a topographic map of the estimated
historical land surface (Figure 11). Based upon soil boring data, the expected volume of soil
to be removed is approximately 700 CY(535 m3). A conceptual projection of the proposed
restored land surface at Site . B is presented in Figure 12. Data sheets documenting
calculations of the volume of fill to be removed at both sites are included in Appendix A.
14
ER94018.20/0NSL0ALL.DWG/JMM/PA i
o ?o
0
?o
0
0
CAW
a ?
-S
O
Cr
O
O
O
C"
1?
A
fD
'rJ
(D
fD
c+
9

CE
2T
?J
O ?
0
IK
0c"2
pW
Vu
d
. e _
0
d
0
?do
,00
7 Q
_w
? de
o ?
Oo 0
o?
Z
NORTH REF: HAD 83
Iv

M
N NNN 777777-",
?
r7 pQpQ
X WWN,u.
...+aaWN?"?'y,N_

2 NNgNNNNNNNNQjNNN 2
1,00 ,a ?D 1,00 pp"'
?
A
? O

R ^N
NW AAA
(f??++?lA C
I
VV<Am1U-O'M1UO C'd(-1.w
N r 0 M C7

5161„-
,?s N
NrunruNNN tort
UiNN
UI?rUI"?a"'tlU

n '3
Q 'f
<

1

4

A
1
12 tl ? D
dm?OmVVV VmO?N??? N ?
P Q
"0
= .
.
f+t !?
=L Pu Vp?V.44-,j W20 n
Q O 3

Ip1?
$y > .
= l
1"

YQ
o
?
LA
Q
N z
`
,9
'D
i 9
j
0 n n N
lf`

(O rD
7

0 Environmental
Services. Inc. North Carolina
1100 Wake Forest Department of
Road, Suite 200 Tumportation
Raleigh. NC 27604
CURRENT SURFACE TOPOGRAPHY AT SITE A
ONSLOW COUNTY MARSH SITE
ONSLOW COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT
FIGURE
7
MARCH 97

ER94018.20/ONSLOALLDWG/JMM/PJS

0
Cn
0
F-+
0
0
K Pkft°
065g
IN* -I
9
+

e ? \ I
_ + III
I ? I
e
+ - ??

4
?? o + \ ?
e
J I
+ a?1
O?

2SSS1`??SSZSSS? O
pp
l'1
NNN
I I I I Nf
N
1
II
I I
'WN M
wW N, 11, AAWN'..'
N
0
0 0
NruiuNro N?p,D, D?O?D,oro z
00-b%q r- 0 M TI M >
,
."
0,010
NNO A..16 (1 iNOVAV S
°
O Z ;
<
Z
-0
Ow
J4 OWN ^0 NO Q ? Q ? Q
-
11UU
N ci- Q
O Q
r0 3
Jlr??ru?a+?? rl
?;A ?t
W^WWWWWA^oWW 0 Q ?
N
W OWVV.i`+aoofu o.noo
U-4 -4+W^^Wf1i?
A
c} O
S?
t7d
Q
't1 to
"
O "
Q- C+
0
0
5r - n
0
(O0 ,
O Q
L
M
Q
ices. north Carolina
Services. Inc.
c. Department of
1100 oad, Wake
Suite 200 Forest Transportation
Road,
f2 R
Raleigh, NC 27804
L __j
O S- G I
0 / Ix'
v
\ ? I
®? 1
e? 1\ ?
i

A
(D

Z
NORTH REF: HAD 83

0
?i

N
m

?
1

O y
c??rrc 4
pROpOSM FMTOFM S"ACE AT SITE A
ONSLOW COUNTY MARSH SITE
ONSLOW COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT
FIGURE
8
MARCH 97
rPOAM R 10 /1)MC1 n01 I Mr /.IMA /P.M

Iii

0
0
su
co
01 ?.
o ?
(D
m
e+
r
O
O
\C"
O?Y
'Ile
(v
' 0"j
M
jVJ_
? a
e
® CD
1
{
C
'+-0 z
Q
0 (D
Ul 7
nS? rp c+
Q 0
N? C
U
-t? C+ Q
fl o n
n
m
Q
\ 1
y
Y
Z
NOR1N REP NAD e3

N
rn
'qT
CC??1'TlC
Environmental CONCEIP UALQ.ED GRADNQ PLAN AT SITE A FIGURE
North Carolina
ii00 Rake Inc. Department or ONSLOW COUNTY MAFM SITE 9
Road, Suite 200 Transportation ON&OW COUNTY, NORTH CAROLNA
Raleigh. NC 276" NCDOT MARCH 97
ER94018.2i1/Cli U1rI.I..DWr,/JMM/PJS

6.00

4.00

n
? 2.00
C
O
'Po

0.00
01

-2.00 Cr4

O) -4 00

2513700
6.00
4.00
? 2 00
c
O

0.00
-2.00
-4 00

- ? JT
1

Cross- Section Through Transact JI-1-1 -

Existing Ground Surface
- - - Proposed Ground Surface -

2513700
6.00

4.00

? 2.00
C
O

ILI 0 00

-2.00

-4.00
2513700
6 00
4 00
v 2 00

0 00
-2 00
-4 00
2513800 2513900 2514000
Fasting
L.-1?91W
25142OU

Cross- Section Through Transact JI-1-2 -

- Existing Ground Surface -
---- -- •--- - • - - - --- - - Proposed Ground Surface -

2513700 2513800
2513900 2514000
Easting
2514100
2514200
I
Environmental CROSS-SECTIONS THRO" TRANSEM AT SITE A FIGURE
Services. Inc. North Carolina 10
1100 like Forest Department of SHOWNC3 E (WW AND PROPOSED SURFACES
1 ?2 Road, Suite 200 Transportation ONSLOW COUHN MARSH MIT KMON SITES
Raleigh. NC 27604 ONSLOW COUNTY, NORTH CAROLNA MARCH 97
2513800 2513900 2514000 2514100 2519200
Fasting
2513800 2513900 2514000 2514100 2514200
Fasting
19
The adjacent marshes and the apparent historical surface display symmetrical depressions with
an irregular distribution, which is not typical for undisturbed salt marshes. The proximity of
Sites A and B to areas used by the Marine Corps for training, including live-fire exercises,
suggest that the depressions may be the result of human activity, specifically artillery fire.
Therefore, there remains the possibility of unexploded ordinance in and around the study site,
and care should be exercised during grading operations to minimize the risk to personnel.
Planting Plan
A planting plan is proposed to stabilize the surface after removal of fill material and re-
contouring of the site, which will facilitate re-vegetation of the site by desired tidal salt marsh
species. Reference marsh data, on-site observations, and review of available literature, were
used to develop the planting plan. The plan consists of: 1) acquisition of available wetland
species; 2) implementation of proposed surface topography improvements; and 3) planting of
selected species.
Targeted plant species are listed below:
Tidal Salt Marsh
A. Shrub-Marsh Complex
1. False Willow (Baccharis angustifolia)
2. Marsh Elder (Iva frutescens)
B. High Marsh
1. Black Needlerush (Juncus roemerianus)
2. Salt Grass (Distichlis spicata)
C. Intertidal Marsh
1. Smooth Cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora)
It is suggested that the shrub-marsh plant community be established above the 3.5-ft (1.0-m)
contour elevation. Bare root or 1-gallon containers of false willow and marsh elder should be
planted on 5-ft (1.5-m) centers (1,742 stem/acre [705 stem/hectare]) within this zone. High
marsh species of black needle rush and salt grass should be planted between the 2.0-ft to
3.5-ft (0.6 to 1.0 m) contour elevation. Tuber/rhizomes of these species should be planted
on 3-ft (0.9 m) centers (4840 stems/acre [1959 stem/hectare]) within this zone. Intertidal
marsh species of smooth cordgrass should be planted as tuber/rhizomes on 3-foot (0.9 m)
centers (4840 stem/acre [1959 stem/hectare]) below the 2.0-ft (0.6 m) contour (Figure 13).
20
N
- T ?
T
N (D
U
T O) ??
W `
?jJ L U
!?? N N
Q u.. a D
m ?
--o
c:
m
'O
?Q c
Z, o
j (n as
? cU
crio
1 t6O
? _Z
?.C c:
Oro
co U
o?
c o
oc?
c
QUO
oir
n`_ o
? c
co 0
c ?
W u
CJ
L_ .,V.
W ?
------------
21
- N r
N
0 3:
C9 (D U
r ¢ ¢
.' w Q
- L -
?L(?
L
as V
^^``
W
?J O
-?
N co
E a O aNi 0
_ E =U
E U EC:?
0
O c) 2o
U 0) m
a Nv
-}-? -a
2 c? o
cCS ? ..
r- i ca
73-
o o Tr
w
2
z
U ? co
c o c c o
C? z CJ O CJ
?aa?i uoi?? i,a13 'ri/
22
IV. SUMMARY
The proposed mitigation sites consist of 3.5 ac (1.6 ha) of filled land which presently supports
a mixed-age pine forest. Fill material exist to a depth of 4.5 ft (1.4 m) and consists of slightly
clayey to silty, very fine to fine sand. The fill material has eliminated the influence of tidal
flow across the sites.
Based on model results, the removal of 7500 CY (5734 m) of fill material within Site A and
700 CY (535 m3) of fill material within Site B, to a depth consistent with the elevation of the
adjoining reference tidal salt marsh will provide a soil and hydrological environment conducive
to restoration of the site. Re-vegetation of the mitigation site with plant species identified
within the reference tidal marsh will facilitate development of a typical tidal salt marsh
community.
Restoration of these sites will promote local tidal salt marsh diversity through the re-
establishment of lost physical, chemical, and biological wetland functions.
23
V. REFERENCES
Beeftink, W.G. 1977. "Salt Marshes." in The Coastline, R.S.K. Barnes, ed. Wiley, New
York, NY pp. 93-121
Brower, J.E., J.H. Zar, and C. N. von Ende. 1990. Field and Laboratory Methods for
General Ecology. William C. Brown Publishers, Debuque, IA.
Chapman, V.J. 1960. Salt Marshes and Salt Deserts of the World. Interscience, New York,
NY. 392 p.
Fetter, C.W. 1980. Applied Hydrogeology. University of Wisconsin. Oshkosh, WI. 488 p.
Mitsch, W.J. and J.G. Gosselink eds. 1986. Wetlands. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York,
NY. 539 p.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1992. Soil Survey of Onslow County, North
Carolina, USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service.
24
VOLUME COMPUTATIONS for Site A
UPPER SURFACE
Grid File: C:/EXCEL/LEJUNE.GRD
Rows: 0 to 32766
Cols: 0 to 32766
Grid size as read: 50 cols by 45 rows
Delta X: 11.0204
Delta Y: 10.8864
X-Range: 2.51367E + 006 to 2.51421 E + 006
Y-Range: 299166 to 299645
Z-Range: 1.00138 to 4.4894
LOWER SURFACE
Grid File: C:/EXCEL/OLDSURF.GRD
Rows: 0 to 32766
Cols: 0 to 32766
Grid size as read: 50 cols by 45 rows
Delta X: 11.0204
Delta Y: 10.8864
X-Range: 2.51367E+006 to 2.51421E+006
Y-Range: 299166 to 299645
Z-Range: -0.360531 to 4.1
VOLUMES
Approximated Volume by
Trapezoidal Rule: 206333
Simpson's Rule: 206039
Simpson's 3/8 Rule: 206626
CUT & FILL VOLUMES
Positive Volume [Cuts]: 206333
Negative Volume [Fills]: 0
Cuts minus Fills: 206333 (7642 c.y.)
AREAS
Positive Planar Area
(Upper above Lower): 117753
Negative Planar Area
(Lower above Upper): 0
Blanked Planar Area: 140907
Total Planar Area: . 258660
Positive Surface Area
(Upper above Lower): 117832
Negative Surface Area
(Lower above Upper): 0
RAESI\PROJECT\1994\ER94-018.20\EDITOR 1. W PD
VOLUME COMPUTATIONS for site B
UPPER SURFACE
Level Surface defined by Z = 0
LOWER SURFACE
Grid File: C:/EXCEL/ONSLOW/CAUSWY2.GRD
Rows: 0 to 32766
Cols: 0 to 32766
Grid size as read: 7 cols by 50 rows
Delta X: 7.4646
Delta Y: 6.86741
X-Range: -86.8656 to -42.078
Y-Range: -205.961 to 130.542
Z-Range: -1.96979 to -0.808773
VOLUMES
Approximated Volume by
Trapezoidal Rule: 19342.8
Simpson's Rule: 19341
Simpson's 3/8 Rule: 19340.9
CUT & FILL VOLUMES
Positive Volume [Cuts]: 19342.1
Negative Volume [Fills]: 0
Cuts minus Fills: 19342.1 (716.4 c.y.)
AREAS
Positive Planar Area
(Upper above Lower): 15071.2
Negative Planar Area
(Lower above Upper): 0
Blanked Planar Area: 0
Total Planar Area: 15071.2
Positive Surface Area
(Upper above Lower): 15071.7
Negative Surface Area
(Lower above Upper): 0

GSRA Wetlands Mitigation Development
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
Source: Greater Sandy Run Area Master Development Plan
&iu ti Project Mitigation Area Plan age 2
CU
Z
yy ?
'0 C
C 7
O 4)
L ?
(U
E
u o
0 U

0 8 z0 V1
=
0 a Q ?- ?- Z
o
a
o
>
> W z
M o ¢ U

a
z
W
v
a
s O
Un-w
0 0 S L) U Z Na
+ MWQU

Ic = 3 U O O Q Z Z D
0 CL -i
V m
S
O
G W

1
a 3
U- L/I p CL
0
O W Q Z
c , x 2X 8 Ozr_rU-
CL D

' ?U
?Z
ml
N J?
a?
0
C7 U?
Q
W Z
Oa ZO
? Q V
Z
a
Z C a o C.?w O
W _ Qom` Z ZG.

L'i ` ? Z
Z
? 4 it c 0
A

:2
CL

i
• ?Z`? Z -?
. G W Q Q
I .
-A
1 l41
PRO,
Z
t: 0
i i? i
J w w
J W C
W
Z Z
Z a {
U C{ J
W U-i
? I 11
v
r
? Illy
U II
l iu
.I
c U?
\\ ? Z?
'O cl
\\ c =I
O dl
J
47
o ?1
C? U
a
U.A
? 4 *
W
2 N
i
a?
r
z o
V a
Q Z
ZI-OO
?O:ZaZ
w p a M W
cr n.w COQ
D Z L W U
2CF-t_>O
?-Ul 3n-' w V)
n.ZQ¢
0ofW J
0-©¢w
B.
3
5
s
BOUNDARY FOR
NCOOT PROJECT U2107
Pi r. caSiING ??T. = i\CRTHi\C ?ASTING

?3 243s63o•sct
2 P5 258s32 0
i L05st?°7888.u^.L-_-179.793
3003:239335 %032,13-626.572 1 205 2°_80C9.=_000 <<:4737.6_ 1
20^e ^.t:a37A 702i2s ei'i28.290 2054'Z3%7QC.7_7 2L':4t 3.895
.
-
7r a _ _ 2a3s;Os,SrC =_2i
2C°' 23777. =
_

' .172
z/.^_ •O^ tC
't7!.'t .:i^'14 '?? 2t'-- 282__

30UNOARY FOR BIG SHAKEY
SWAMP MITIGATION AREA
_- a CZ'_•NG 'scc v?
...- <_ -- 2- Z.
i
2000
2"64
cc 0)
cc 0)
Oi p
c ?
P Z•
O < LC0 2C63
n N•
200 2-6
L w?•
VITIGATION AREA
FOR NCOCT °ROJECT
;-2406
;3.00 ACRES
I J
[643 ?'. 15.00 ACRES
2C+?
2"5^
LC 53
Z>!.'7
_.S 2 L•
Z--Tt- _
L^.
^[ ^_ . _ 2.^.16 2014
2024 2043
3 •2042
Ot7 2041
040
„18 022 S9.
?t9 .t 2023
2C25
2CL017
020
36
2C35
2734 2033
032
2030 i
FIGURE 18.
.BOUNDARY OF
BIG SHAKEY SWAMP
NOT TO SCALE
7 & Da.tt
BOUNDARY FOR
NCOOT PROJECT R-2406
t•
BOUNDARY FOR PCCOSIN
MITIGATION AREA
BOUNDARY FOR 6'-RNED
PINE PLANTATION MITIGATICN AREA
'CRT,-:NG
• *'ti ;° OCtI 266'^1 ? ?•
-vv3
6004
4CC2
-013 MITiGATICN ^ . - A
FOR NC--OT =4C..EC-"
4019 R - 24C6
4020 t13.C0 ACRES
-016
ter' 'CCt
BOUNDARY FCR
NCOOT PROJECT R-2406.
PT. d !NORTHING I EASTING
4011 1 30241 3.5571 2442888.616 1
4012 -L304663.2 331 2463986.273 I
1 40131 30551 4.2681 2442195.708 I
40, a! 303286 2211 2661 125.570" I
I
40161303002
4017!302974 16t1266'7C9.i12 !
BOUNDARY -CR
NCDOT ?3CJEC" .:2:07
?'. iJ i NCRTHING =.45. ING '
1 40141 30'286 22'' 26- 125. 76 1
4n t i, l 303n07 468. 7661 722 °9C I
' in 171 7tn7076 .61; 7 •7110 •'7 1
4018130,14 601o1tCct6"'?7
6?2C?3n487c?Sa.2--'c?90i.. '
S
4005 PCCOSiN MITIGAT:CN AREA /
`
v17:GA7C. -A -/ =067
=CR ?iCCO" ==?O.:ECT
u2107 4011
28.00 ACRES
6L'RNED PINE PLANTATION
4008 MITIGATION AREA
6010 POCOSIN MI TIGA1.ICN AREA
4015
4009
4000
FIGURE 19.
BOUNDARY OF
POCOSIN AND BURNED PINE PLANTATION
NOT TO SCAS
rkrwA wry & Davis
27

SCALE 1'= 500'
Figure 10. Restoration Areas LAND MANAGEMENT
of Sandy Run Swamp GROUP, INC
February 17, 1997
NCDOT
Haws Run Mitigation Site
Pender/Onslow Counties, NC
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., G ove mor
Jonathan B. Howesy Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
May 30, 1997
Dr. V. Charles Bruton
Permits and Mitigation Unit Head
North Carolina Department of. Transportation
#1 Wilmington Street
Raleigh, NC, 27611
AdOhNdffMWdft
[D EHNFi
Subject: Site Analysis for Proposed Coastal Marsh Mitigation Site, Camp
Lejeune U.S. Marine Corps Base
Onslow County
Jacksonville Bypass, U-2107
Dear Dr. Bruton:
The referenced document has been reviewed by this office. The North
Carolina Department of Transportation has applied for a 401 Water Quality
Certification for the Jacksonville Bypass. 404/401 wetland fill permits for this
project will be conditioned upon restoration of coastal marsh wetlands to
mitigate impacts. The highway project involves approximately 0.04 acre of fill
in coastal marsh. If grading and planting efforts are demonstrated to be
successful; the mitigation plan should satisfy the mitigation requirement.
Based upon our review of the document, DWQ offers the following comments:
NCDOT has located an appropriate site for coastal marsh mitigation. The
grading and planting plan proposed by NCDOT should result in the successful
restoration of 3.5 acres of an historic tidal salt marsh community. This will
result in additional area for storage of floodwaters and shoreline stabilization.
The site should also provide valuable estuarine habitat.
The document states there is a potential for unexploded ordnance to be
encountered during site construction. It is unclear whether NCDOT intends to
make efforts to locate and remove all unexploded ordnance from the site, or if
weapons will simply be avoided and left onsite following construction. In the
document, NCDOT recommends that construction staff should take caution
during grading operations to avoid live materiel. We suggest that the Marine
Corps should be tasked to perform a site inspection and remove all potentially
dangerous materiel and associated military equipment prior to any mitigation
work being done onsite. The mitigation site is intended to replace lost
functions and values of coastal marsh habitat, and should therefore be made
safe as wildlife habitat. Furthermore, assuming the Marine Corps may be
using the mitigation area during future training exercises, will monitoring
efforts be coordinated with the Marines to ensure safety? NCDOT should
request that the Marine Corps limit activities within the boundaries of the
mitigation area to passive foot traffic, in order to minimize disturbance of new
plantings.
Environmental Sciences Branch • 4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled1100/6 post consumer paper
Dr. V. Charles Bruton Memo
May 12, 1997
Page 2 of 2
The document includes a thorough discussion of existing site conditions and
proposed restoration efforts. However, no monitoring proposal is included. A
monitoring plan will be necessary to demonstrate success of NCDOT's
mitigation efforts. No construction schedule has been provided. When does
NCDOT intend to grade and plant the site? When should the review agencies
anticipate receipt of as-built plans? The document should also be augmented
with a discussion of long-term disposition of the site. We assume the site will
remain under Marine Corps ownership. NCDOT should discuss how ongoing
training maneuvers may affect the site. We appreciate Camp Lejeune's
training mission, and do not expect the mitigation site to be placed off-limits.
However, we would need some assurance that the site will be maintained as a
wetland in perpetuity. Also, a construction and planting schedule should be
provided. Since this site is to be used as a bank for a number of projects, a site
map identifying areas of the property for which each project will be debited.
This map should be updated each time the site is utilized for a project. Please
provide a written response to the issues raised in this letter.
This document is labeled as a "Site Analysis", although NCDOT has since
informed us that it is to be interpreted as a full mitigation plan. However, the
document is incomplete as a mitigation plan, since the construction schedule,
monitoring plan/success criteria, and long-term site plans are not included.
We strongly discourage NCDOT from distributing a mitigation plan in this
format in the future.
Thank you for providing us an opportunity to review this mitigation plan.
Questions regarding this mitigation site as it relates to the Jacksonville Bypass
application should be directed to Cyndi Bell or Eric Galamb at [phone].
Sincerely
Cynd/i Bell
cc: Eric Galamb, DWQ, Raleigh
John Dorney, DWQ, Raleigh
Scott McLendon, COE, Wilmington
Jim Gregson, DWQ, Wilmington
Dave Schiller, NCDOT
CLMRSH DOC
NOV 21 '97 09:53AM
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Watar Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Russ Lea.
Triangle Wetland Consultants INe
1700 Dixie Trail
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
Russ,
ILI
A&4
on? L-i
"low r?A
D E H N R
18 Nov. 1997
NCWRP staff made a site visit to the salt marsh mitigation bank proposed by
Triangle Wetland Consultants near Swansboro, N.C. on 28 Oct. 1997' The site is an
island comprised of existing salt marsh and dredge spoil. With excavation (of the
deposited dredge spoil) to specific elevations consistent to the salt marsh and proper
planting techniques, a restored salt marsh could be established. The fact that there is a
large atnount of material to be removed to obtain the proper elevations could be a
determining factor as to whether this site is appropriate for restoration.
There are however reservations as to the long-term success of the project with the
current plan of developing the remainder of the island for residential use. It would be.
neeeysary to see the final plan for development to see whether there would be a. potential
for impact to the proposed mitigation bank.
post-ir Fax Note 7671
none
Sincerely,
Z Z_ (?
Larry L. Hobbs
Wetlands Restoration Program
1P /
P.1/1
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]M FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 90% rocycled/ 10% post-consumer paper