20091089 Ver 1_CAMA Permit Application_20091014

ANCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
James H. Gregson
Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ms. Cyndi Karoly
Env. Biological Supervisor
Division of Water Quality Wetlands Unit
FROM: David Moye
Interim District Manager
Coastal Management Division
943 Washington Sq Mall
Washington, NC 27889
DATE: 13 October 2009
SUBJECT: CAMA Application Review
APPLICANT: NC Division of Marine Fisheries
I RKE DD
GC i 1 4 2009
DENR - WATER QUALITY
";E DS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
PROJECT LOCATION: In the Neuse River near the Town of Oriental between Pierce and
Whitaker Creeks off Whitehurst Point in Pamlico County, North Carolina.
PROPOSED PROJECT: Applicant proposes to enlarge the boundaries of an existing reef structure
and add new material in 3 locations within the enlarged reef boundary.
Please indicate below your position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by 3
November 2009. Please contact David W. Moye at 252-948-3852, if you have any questions regarding
the proposed project. When appropriate, in depth comments with supporting data are requested.
REPLY This office has no objection to the project as proposed.
This office has no comment on the proposed project.
This office approves of the proposed project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This office objects to the proposed project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
Signed Date
Dee Freeman
Secretary
p g- 1 0 8 9
Respond to David Moye
Washington Regional Office
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889
Rhone: 252-946-6481 1 FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer
NorthCarolina
Naturally
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries c/o Dr. Louis B. Daniel III, Director
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: In the Neuse River near the Town of Oriental between Pierce and
Whitaker Creeks off Whitehurst Point in Pamlico County, North Carolina
Photo Index - N/A
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2,701,000 Y: 474,000 GPS Rover File: N/A
Oriental Quad. (lower right corner)
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA & D/F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - N/A
Was Applicant Present - N/A
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received - 10/12/2009
Office - Washington
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Pamlico County
Land Classification From LUPs - Conservation (Water)
(B) AEC(s) Involved: EW, PTA
(C) Water Dependent: YES
(D) Intended Use: Public/Government
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - N/A
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - Artificial Reef
Planned - Enlarge Reef boundary and add concrete reef balls, concrete pipe
material and limestone marl
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: N/A
Source - N/A
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
(A) Vegetated Wetlands
z
(B) Non-Vegetated Wetlands X234,785 ft Reef material
River bottom
(C) Other
(D) Total Area Disturbed: ±5.39 acres (±234,785 sq. ft.)
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SA-HQW, NSW
Open: Yes
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The NC Division of Marine Fisheries proposes to enlarge the boundaries of an
existing reef structure and add new material in 3 locations within the enlarged reef boundary.
NC Division of Marine Fisheries
c/o Dr. Louis B. Daniel III, Director
Pamlico County
Project setting
The North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries (NC DMF) Artificial Reef Program
has an existing reef structure (AR-396) in the Neuse River located between Pierce Creek
and Whitaker Creek off Whitehurst Point near Oriental, in Pamlico County, North Carolina.
The existing reef was authorized by the US Army Corps of Engineers as a 1 acre site via
SAWKS274-72 issued 8 December 1972 and SAWC077-N-069-089-0083 issued 13
January 1977.
The material used to create the reef was not placed at the location of the permitted
1 acre site. The existing reef material covers a footprint of ±9.3 acres in 2 locations ±475
yards southwest of the original. permitted location. The larger of the 2 existing areas
covers ±7.2 acres and is comprised of tires and scrap steel. This material projects 0.8' to
2.3' above the bottom substrate and is located in water depths between 12' to 16' deep at
normal water level (NWL). The smaller area covers ±2.1 acres and is comprised of
limestone riprap scattered over the site and projecting no more than 1.5' above the
substrate in water depths between 16' to 18' at NWL.
The reef is located in water classified SA-HQW, NSW by the Environmental
Management Commission. The area surrounding the reef is open to shellfishing. The
Neuse River is Coastal Water as classified by the N.C. Marine Fisheries and N.C. Wildlife
Resources Commissions.
Project description
The NC DMF proposes to expand the boundaries of the reef to encompass ±63
acres (±2,757,474 ft2) of which ±232,132 ft2 (±5.32 acres) will be filled with new structure.
The enlargement of the reef boundaries includes a 100' wide buffer around the perimeter
of the site that accounts for ±13.5 acres or 21.4% of the total site. No work is proposed on
the existing tire/scrap steel site or limestone marl area. New work is proposed in three
distinct locations within the expanded reef boundaries as described below,
1) Proposed reef ball material field - located in the center of the site along the near
shore boundary in an area 300' by 134'(±0.92 acre). The 300' will be divided into
three ±100 sections with the following material in each section;
Site 4a - deployment of a maximum of 50 reef balls. The reef balls are 4' wide by
2.9' high with a surface area of 75 ft2.
Site 4b - future deployment of a maximum of 50 reef balls. The reef balls will be 4'
wide by 2.9' high with a surface area of 75 ft2.
Site 4c - future deployment of a maximum of 50 reef balls. The reef balls will be 4'
wide by 2.9' high with a surface area of 75 ft2.
NC Division of Marine Fisheries
c/o Dr. Louis B. Daniel III, Director
Pamlico County
Page Two
The water depth ranges from 10' to 12' across the three sections and a minimum
navigation clearance of 6' above the concrete structures will be maintained. Chart 4
depicts the location and material description of the reef ball material field.
2) Proposed concrete pipe material field -located in the southwest corner of the site in
an area 425' by 345' (±3.37 acres). The 425' will be divided into three ±140
sections with the following material in each section;
Site 1 - 272 tons of 12", 15", and 18" by 8' and 12' long concrete pilings.
Site 2 - 398 tons of 24" and 30" by 8' concrete pipe.
Site 3 - 242 tons of concrete rubble, 42" by 8' concrete pipe, and various concrete
wet well risers.
The water depth ranges from 10' to 15' across the three sections and a minimum
navigation clearance of 6' above the concrete structures will be maintained. Chart 5
depicts the location and material description of the concrete pipe material field.
3) Proposed limestone marl mound material field - located along the midline of the site
toward the downstream (northeast) end in an area 218' by 220' (±1.1 acres).
Approximately 150 tons of limestone marl riprap will be installed in mounds, with
each mound having a radius of 25' and a maximum height of 6' above the bottom
substrate. The water depth in the proposed location ranges from 11' to 14' and a
minimum navigation clearance of 6' above the riprap will be maintained. The
applicant is proposing three mounds at the present time with a maximum of eight
total mounds in the future in this 1.1 acre project area. Chart 6 depicts the location
and material description of the limestone marl material field.
Anticipated impacts
The project as proposed will result in the filling ±234,785 ft2 (5.39 acres) of River
bottom associated with the reef construction. The project as proposed will result in
localized turbidity as a result of the material deployment. If successful, the project should
result in additional shellfish and finfish habitat in this area of the Neuse River.
David W. Moye - 12 October 2009
Oriental Reef
AR-396
Project Narrative
This summary is intended to describe the existing configuration and background
of the Oriental Artificial Reef Site and to describe the proposed expansion and
enhancement.
The Oriental Reef is located approximately 900 yards off Whitehurst Point in 7-17
feet of water. This site was developed from 1973 through 1988 using materials
commonly used in artificial reef construction of the era. The site presently consists of:
21,820 tires; a barge load of scrap metal and at minimum 150 tons of fossil rock (marl).
The tires and scrap metal constitute a single 7.2 acre material field. The fossil limestone
marl material field is a single 2.1 acre field, totaling 9.3 acres of material associated with
the site. At present, the site offers minimal effectiveness as estuarine habitat to finfish
and invertebrate species.
Through the years tire bundles have separated from each other to the extent that
there is minimal vertical profile (height) of reef structure. Vertical profile of the fossil rock
mounds has been estimated at less than one foot due to subsidence into soft sediments.
The scrap metal has some vertical profile, but the quantity of functional material is
minimal.
The North Carolina Artificial Reef Program has undergone a refocusing in 2009.
The Program has shifted from enhancement and research of oceanic artificial reefs to
the estuarine reef system. In July of 2009 the Artificial Reef Program began a five year
federally funded project to assess, monitor and develop the estuarine reef system as
enhanced essential fish habitat. Therefore many estuarine reefs must be enlarged or
altered to accommodate these enhancements.
The NCDMF in conjunction with the Town of Oriental proposes to expand and
enhance the Oriental Reef. The NCDMF held a public meeting in Oriental about the
expansion project in July 2008. The meeting was open to the public and was met with
only positive comments. The expansion of this reef site poses difficult challenges with
existing material fields, therefore little latitude is available (please reference the
accompanying charts for further details). When the reef was created the electronic
navigation aid in use was LORAN-C. The inaccuracies of LORAN-C created a problem
of material placement within the permitted area, and therefore NOAA navigation charts
do not accurately depict the true location of the material (Chart 1). In reality, the buoyed
material field and the described permitted reef site on charts are not one in the same.
The current permitted reef site size is 1.0 acres and the existing material fields,
over 475 yards to the SW, cover approximately 9.3 acres. The marl material field is
located at the SW corner of the proposed site and the tire/scrap steel material field is
located NNE of the marl field near the shallow border of the proposed reef site (Chart 1).
The branch of NOAA that oversees the charting of obstructions and artificial reefs
(National Ocean Service, NOS) will not move the permitted site without a certified multi-
beam sonar survey of the "Fish Haven" area to confirm the area is void of reef material.
The cost of a survey has been estimated at $5,000.00 minimum. With the estuarine reef
project and the existing material field inaccuracies, an alternative is to enlarge the site to
encompass the permitted reef site, the charted "Fish Haven' and the existing reef
material fields.
The North Carolina Division. of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF) has surveyed the
permitted reef site, the material fields and the entire proposed reef site using side scan
SONAR. Additional surveys using SCUBA and bottom profiling equipment have given
the NC DMF a comprehensive view of the proposed expanded site. Bottom type was
identified using the methods described above and consists of hard packed sand and soft
muddy bottom (see section 2 in Review of Artificial Reef Sitting Procedures for further
details). This information allows the NCDMF to select the best suited materials and
allows for adjustments to provide the best possible project.
In order to protect the reef site from stray trawling activities and to safeguard
trawlers from loss of gear and personal injury, a 100 foot buffer zone is incorporated into
the proposed site. This buffer extends around the perimeter of the reef site and is
accountable for approximately 13.5 acres of the 63 acre proposed reef site.
A four sided polygon was chosen to give an identifiable outline to buoy and mark
on navigational charts. This outline allows for four buoys, one to mark each corner of
the reef site.
Material fields are separated by varying distances to allow for undisturbed bottom
which can be utilized as corridors to other fields, increase heterogeneous bottom and the
associated flora and fauna and aid in the overall usefulness of the artificial reef.
Increasing bottom heterogeneity 1) increases the productivity of the reef by increasing
the "edge effect" between habitats, (this edge is usually the site of higher species
diversity due to the combination of multiple habitats), 2) increases the surface area of
exposed material to biofouling organisms; and 3) increases the available habitat for
species to forage on and off the reef site. The addition of hard substrate in this area will
provide habitat for spawning of numerous estuarine species such as Red Drum,
Speckled Trout and others. The proposed reef site is located within the vicinity of oyster
beds and oysters are present on existing reef material. Additional hard substrate will
create opportunity for oyster spat and other sessile invertebrate settlement and allow for
refuge from anoxic/hypoxic events. Please see section 3 in Review of Artificial Reef
Sitting Procedures for further details. These factors all increase the potential size of the
reef site to the proposed 63 acres.
Proposed enhancement will include the placement of at least 1000 tons of
reinforced concrete pipe, concrete dock headers and concrete wet wells. Approximately
20-50 Reef BaIIsTM and three 6ft high mounds of Class B and larger riprap will also be
incorporated in to the enhancement. The total number of mounds and Reef BaIIsTM are
unknown at this time as interest in the project is increasing, but locations have been set
aside for these additional enhancements (Chart 4 & 6). The deployment of the proposed
material plus existing material fields will cover approximately 22.9% of the permitted site
and allow for additional enhancements within the next five years.
It is hoped that this project will continue for three to five years if necessary to fully
develop the proposed expanded reef site (approximately 60% material footprint). All
materials identified for use in artificial reef enhancements have been subjected to
stringent criteria set forth in North Carolina's Artificial Reef Plan and have been identified
in supplemental literature (see Review of Artificial Reef Sitting Procedures).
Dem MP-1
APPLICATION for n 9- 1 0 8 9
Major Development Permit
(last revised 12/27/06)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name Project Name (if applicable)
Nc Division Of Marine Fisheries
--- --------------------- AR-396, Oriental Reef
Applicant 1 First Name MI Last Name
Harry C. Hardy
Applicant 2. First Name MI Last Name
Gregory W Bodnar
f additional applicants; please attach an additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address PO Box City State
3441 Arendell Street 769 Morehead City NC
ZIP Country Phone No. FAX No.
28557 0769 Carteret 252 - 726 - 7021 ext. 8053 252 - 726 - 9218
Street Address (if different from above) City State I
ZIP
?uian
Craig [e-mail], Gregg. [e-mail]
2. Agent/Contractor Information
Business Name

Agent/ Contractor 1 First Name MI Last Name
N/A N/A N/A
Agent/ Contractor 2. First Name MI Last Name
N/A N/A N/A
Mailing Address PO Box City State
N/A N/A N/A N/A
ZIP Phone No. 1 Phone No. 2
N/A N/A - - ext N/A - ext.
FAX No Contractor #
N/A
N/A
Street Address (if different from above) City State ZIP
N/A N/A N/A N/A -
Email
N/A
<Form continues on back>
Form DCM MP-1 (Page 2 of 4)
3. Project Location
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
County (can be multiple) Street Address I State Rd #
Pamlico N/A N/A
Subdivision Name City State Zip
N/A N/A N/A N/A -
Phone No. Lot No. (s) (if many, attach additional page with list)
N/A - - ext N/A,
a In which NC river basin is the project located? b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Neuse River Neuse River, 900 yds SE of Whitehurst Point, near
Oriental
c Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade? d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project <_
®Natural ?Manmade ?Unknown Neuse River
e Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction? f If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the prop(
?Yes ®No work falls within
State Waters
F4. Site Description
?a. Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft ) b. Size of entire tract (sq ft.)
N/A 2,757,474
c Size of individual lot(s) d Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high wat,
NWL (normal water level)
(If many lot sizes; please attach additional page with a list) 0 ?NHW or ®NWL
e. Vegetation on tract
None
I
f Man-made features and uses now on tract
21,820 tires. scap steel and fossil limestone rock (marl)
g Identify and describe the existing land uses adjacent to the propos ed project site
Residental
h. How does local government one the tract? i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
N/A (Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
?Yes ?No ®NA
I Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal?
k Has a professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy.
If yes, by whom?
1. Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a
National Register listed or eligible property?
i
i
to ._ ..?
sed
I
I
r) or
i
i
?Yes ®No
?Yes ®No ?NA
?Yes ?No ®NA
<Form continues on next page>
Form DCM MP-1 (Page 3 of 4)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
m (i) Are there wetlands on the site? ?Yes ®No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? ?Yes ®No
? II
(iii) It yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? ?Yes ®No
i (Attach documentation, if available)
I t n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities
N/A
i
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
N/A
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
N/A
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.
Construction of this reef site will enhance essential fish habitat for estuarine dependent finfish species and provide
recreational fishing opportunity in the waters of Pamlico Sound.
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.
Placement of concrete dock headers, concrete precast units (unused wet well sections), reinforced concrete pipe, Reefballs
and fossilized limestone marl. All materials have been identified as suitable materials for estuarine artificial reef work. All
deployments will be done from the surface using the NC DMF 135 ft LCU (landing craft ) vessel, or smaller barges from
South River Facility.
d. List all development activities you propose.
Development of this artificial reef using the above mentioned materials, this 63 acre site will provide approximately a 22.9%
material footprint coverage consisting of existing and proposed materials. Limestone material will be deployed in mounds
approximately 6 feet in height, Reef Balls will be deployed as single units 3 feet in height and other materials deployed to
various heights. Minimum vertical clearance requirement of 6 ft will be strictly adheared to.
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? Both
f What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 63 water bottom acres ?
Sq.Ft or ®Acres
g Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public accessway or other area ®Yes ?No ?NA
that the public has established use of?
h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
All deployments will be made on the reef site. Deployment of concrete and limestone materials outlined in form MP-2 as
necessary to complete project.
I. Will wastewater or stormwater be discharged into a wetland? ?Yes ?No ®NA
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water? ?Yes ?No ®NA
I. Is there any mitigation proposed?
?Yes ?No ®NA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal
<Form continues on back>
Form DCM MP-1 (Page 4 of 4) APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
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 DENR
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 Phone No.
Address
Name Phone No.
Address
Name Phone No.
Address
g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, permittee, and issuing dates
Latest -- COE Permit # - SAWC077-N-069-089-0083
NC Division of Marine Fisheries , 1/13/77
Original -- COE Permit # - SAWKS274-72
NC Division of Marine Fisheries, 12/8/72
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 y knowledge.
Date Print Name c'?2/?
Signature ?' ??
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
(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.
Length
Width
Avg. Existing
Depth
Final Project
Depth
F Access Other
Channel
(NLW or Canal Boat Basin Boat Ramp Rock Groin Rock
Breakwater (excluding
shoreline
NWL? _ stabilization)
2,989ft (leg 1)
3,166ft (leg 3)
1,225ft (leg 2)
I (leg 4)
NA NA 12 ft, (7-17 ft)
Vertical
NA NA Clearance
1 6 ft
1. EXCAVATION ®This section not applicable
a Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in b Type of material to be excavated.
cubic yards. N/A
N/A
c (1) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlands/marsh d. High-ground excavation in cubic yards.
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SIB), N/A
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:
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL ®This section not applicable
a Location of disposal area. b Dimensions of disposal area
c
(i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
[]Yes ?No ?NA
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.
d. (i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
[]Yes ?No ?NA
(ii) If yes, where?
e (i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh f
(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:
(i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
[]Yes ?No ?NA
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION
(If development is a wood groin, use MP-4 - Structures)
®This section not applicable
a. Type of shoreline stabilization b. Length _
?Bulkhead ?Riprap ?Breakwater/Sill ?Other.Width.
c Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL: d Maximum distance waterward of NHW or NWL:
e Type of stabilization material
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
g Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level
Bulkhead backfill Riprap
Breakwater/Sill Other
i. Source of fill material
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. (i) Will fill material be brought to the site? OYes [:]No El NA
If yes,
(ii) Amount of material to be placed in the water
Proposed is the placement of
1 Approximatley 1000 tons of reinforced concrete pipe
concrete dock headers and concrete wet wells.
2 Approximately 20-50 Pallet sized (oft w X 3ft h) Reef Balls
3 Approximately (3) 6 ft high mounds of Class B riprap
and/or larger riprap Future development will add a maximum
of 5 mounds totalling 8 mounds. Will adhere to all restrictions
(iii) Dimensions of fill area 2 989ft x 1 225ft x 3.166ft x 601 ft =
63 acres
Depth range of proposed site = 7ft to 17ft Minimum
clearance 6ft
(iv) Purpose of fill
To create estuarine essential fish habitat and to enhance
recreational fishing opportunities.
In Type of fill material.
?This section not applicable
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 NNone
(ii) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas
N/A
5. GENERAL _
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion b. What type of construction equipment will be used (e.g., dragline.
controlled? backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
The weight of the fill material is 2 times water weight, fill material 135 ft Landing craft, and front end loaders working onboard vessel
will partially subside into substrate and the protected location - ------ - ------ -
will deter movement of fill material from natural processes.
Materials are common to artificial reef construction and have
proved to be durable and stable
c- (i) Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project? d (i) Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project
®Yes ?No ?NA site? ?Yes NNc ?NA
(ii) If yes, explain what type and how they will be implemented.
4th class yellow can buoy made of solid foam. Buoys will be
anchored to the bottom with appropiate grade chain which
terminates at a concrete block sinker weighing 1000 lbs. Buoys
are equipped with an internal RADAR reflector and reflective
bands. The four destinguishable corners of the four sided
ploygon will be marked with a single buoy, totalling four buoys to
mark the reef site Each buoy is marked with
AR ###
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
1-800-682-2632
Date
AR-396, Oriental Reef
Project Name
NC Division of Marine Fisheries
Applicant Na
Applicant Signature J
(ii) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts.
0 \EN7- TOWN OF ORIENTAL
Post Office Box 472
Oriental, North Carolina 28571
0 -- [phone] • Fax [phone]
9Th CAPC? www.townoforiental.com
[e-mail]
May 27, 2009 COPY
Gregg Bodnar
NC Division of Marine Fisheries
3441 Arendell Street
Morehead City, NC 28557
Reference: Oriental Artificial Reef (AR-396) Revitalization Project
Dear Mr. Bodnar,
In this brief summary of the reef revitalization project we will show the overwhelming support, the
importance to the local economy, and the benefit of the reef to the health of the Neuse River.
The original reef was developed during the years from 1973 through 1985 using primarily used
tires - a construction technique that is no longer acceptable. The majority of the tires have washed
away and /or scattered in a large area on and around the site.
When the condition of the reef and the possibility of restoring it came to the attention of the citizens
of Oriental and the Town Board of Commissioners, there was an immediate "demand" to do
everything possible to restore the reef.
The Town committed to taking the lead in raising funds, applying for grants and filing any
applications or information with State and Federal agencies. The Town worked very closely and
continues to work closely with the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries to make the
restoration of the reef happen.
To date, $18,500 has been raised and donations continue to come in. Listed below are the major
contributors to the project and shows the diverse and overwhelming support for the reef restoration:
Harold Bate Foundation (New Bern) $ 10,000 Grant
Sale of Rain Barrels 2,250 Labor donated to modify the pickle barrels
Yamaha (Marine Group Company) 1,400 Donation or Generator for raffle
Individual Donations 1,100 (In addition to purchase of raffle tickets)
West Marine 700 Barbeque and percent of store sales
Pamlico County Community Foundation 560
Yamaha 500 Hats donated and sold
Pamlico County Committee of 100 500
Oriental Rotary Club 500
Donations in Memory of Loved Ones 500
Eastern Carolina Saltwater Fishing Club 250
Red Drum Fishing Tournament 200
Over the past years employment in the local fishing industry has steadily declined. Poor water
quality of the Neuse River has received national attention. One of the exciting aspects of restoring
the reef is the addition of an oyster nursery. Oysters have a remarkable ability to filter and clean
river water. This project may lead to re-establishing the oyster population in the Neuse River. The
oyster nursery may attract a large number of people interested in the science, in duplicating the
project, and in the water cleaning ability of the oysters.
We expect the reef to substantially increase the fish population and the amount of recreational
fishing. Along with the oyster nursery, the reef could easily become a destination for kayaking,
canoeing, snorkeling, and diving. Some job creation will be directly related to the increased amount
of fishing but many other jobs will be created due to the "domino affect" of the reef.
The artificial reef will serve not only the recreational anglers from Pamlico County and the
surrounding Counties but also from far beyond. The reef will promote tourism, create jobs, enhance
our natural resources and improve the water quality of the Neuse River.
We have been working on this project for two years. The Town, the surrounding communities, and
all of the contributors are looking forward to the revitalization of the Oriental Artificial Reef.
Sincerely,
// -11??,
Will' Sage
NTdy6r - Oriental
W ??
W tt Cutler
Former Town Manager - Oriental
Local Project Coordinator
Rain Barrel Up Fitter
Enclosures
9
7
Ron Zielinski
The proposed Oriental Reef AR-396 has my endorsement, and I look forward to
working with you on the project in the future.

Lower Neuse Riverkeeper D
RE: Verification of correct buoy type for North Carolina estuarine
reef AR-396 (Oriental)
Flynn,
Thomas
Gregg:
Yellow buoys meet our requirements. They should be lettered A, B, etc
if lighted they should have slow flashing yellow lights; Fl Y 4s or FL Y 6s
Tom
Thomas W. Flynn
LCDR USCG Retired
Aids to Navigation Project Officer
For PA., NJ., DE., and NC.
Tel: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
Teddy Roosevelt: "Educate a man in mind and not in morals and you educate a menace to society."
-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 11:21 AM
To: Flynn, Thomas
Subject: Verification of correct buoy type for North Carolina estuarine reef AR-396 (Oriental)
Tom,
I am almost finished with the permitting process for our Oriental Reef (AR-396), which will allow me to
send in a modified PATON application with the correct GPS locations of our buoys. I had an individual
who would be reviewing the permit ask if we had documentation concerning the correct type of buoy
from the Coast Guard. Could you verify that our current buoys are correct for the area.
4th class yellow can buoy
Solid foam
Unfiled Notes Page 1
anu rrotecuon Tian lk-hrr) a researcn neea Tor more baseline data on juvenile abundances, specifically
on shell bottom areas (Street et al. 2005).
Enhanced estuarine reef habitat (artificial reefs and oyster sanctuaries) can be wide ranging in
materials from concrete and shipwrecks to naturally occurring raterials like shell and marl. These
materials provide suitable substrate for colonization of estuarine flora and fauna. Enhanced estuarine
reef habitat can also vary in effectiveness as suitable habitat in estuarine waters. Naturally occurring
EFH consists of habitats such as: seagrass, natural oyster reef and hardbottom. Oyster reefs have
historically been a principal habitat in estuarine systems because of the three dimensional complex
structure and suite of associated benthic fauna (Harding & Mann 2001). Oysters form extensive reefs
throughout the U.S. east coast and research concerning the role of oyster reefs as essential fish habitat
has been limited to intertidal reefs (Lehnert & Allen 2002). Through habitat degradation by fishing gear
and other anthropogenic disturbances, there is now a critical need to evaluate oyster sanctuaries and
enhanced estuarine reefs as habitat for estuarine fishes (Lenihan et al. 2001). Subtidal oyster reefs may
be more important to commercial finfish than intertidal reefs, because subtidal reefs often provide the
only structured habitat in submerged areas (Grabowski et al. 2000). All oyster sanctuary and estuarine
reef sites within North Carolina are subtidal.
Currently the State of North Carolina maintains 7 estuarine reefs (Chart 1). These reefs range
from the Albemarle Sound to the Neuse River covering multiple watersheds and habitats.
The following information has been developed for an estuarine artificial reef off Oriental, NC
(AR-396). The reef is located in the Neuse River approximately 900 yards off Whitehurst Point (Chart 1)
and sits in approximately 7-17 feet of water over a sediment gradient transitioning from hard sandy
sediment in the shallow waters to soft muddy sediment in the deeper sections. For further information
on location, enhancement, etc for the Oriental Reef (AR-396), please review the accompanying CAMA
documentation.
Page 1 3
Table of Contents
Section 1 Background .................................................................................3
Section 2 Sitting Methods ..........................................................................4
Section 3 Essential Fish Habitat, Habitat Areas of Particular Concerns
and Managed Species ................................................................6
Section 4 Estuarine Reef Material Categories .......................................14
Literature Cited ...........................................................................................18
This document is intended for use by multiple agencies and organizations as a reference
guide and therefore all sections may not be applicable.
Objectives
Existing estuarine reefs will be enhanced through various materials suitable for reef
development (See Estuarine Reef Material Categories). Potential new estuarine reef sites will follow
these guidelines from inception, and any enhancements/enlargements will also follow these guidelines
when applicable. Estuarine reefs provide accessible coastal fishing opportunities to anglers while
providing EFH to juvenile and sublegal estuarine dependent finfish, as well as hard substrate for a
variety of sessile invertebrates. All necessary permits and compliance approvals will be obtained before
construction begins. The reasoning for this document is to begin efforts to enhance existing estuarine
reefs and to enlarge estuarine reefs to accommodate future construction. Estuarine reefs to be
enhanced/enlarged and potential new estuarine reef sites will be chosen based on a variety of factors
including: location of estuarine reef to existing EFH, availability of suitable materials, dominant finfish
composition, water quality and geographical location.
Section 2
Sitting Methods
Artificial reef construction can be wide ranging in material types from concrete modules to
steel shipwrecks and naturally occurring materials like shell and marl. All materials will be deployed
from NC DMF vessels used in deployment of such materials or contracted out to marine construction
firms. The primary construction vessel in the NC DMF fleet is the 1600 class LCU "WEST BAY". This
vessel has been used in both artificial reef and oyster sanctuary construction and is well suited to the
task. Other secondary vessels such as clutch planting barges may also be utilized as available.
Prior to any construction plans a side scan SONAR mosaic of the site will be reviewed to identify
possible construction sites within the permitted area. If further investigation is warranted, a video
assessment of the site will be performed using SCUBA divers. Particular interest will be given to certain
criteria. 1)-Proximity to existing EFH. The main objective to reef construction is to supplement existing
EFH with man made materials. This would be counter productive if existing natural EFH was damaged
during the process. All efforts will be made to place material and new estuarine reefs sites in acceptable
areas by using the CAMA process. 2) Availability of suitable materials. Material selection is a process
that takes into account all the criteria mentioned here in addition to stability/durability and bottom
type. Stability/durability is a concern in any reef construction project. The most optimal site is one that
satisfies the definition of EFH over the longest timeframe possible. Events such as hurricanes, prevailing
winds and current movement are taken into account at each site. Bottom type is also crucial in that
sitting a material on the wrong bottom type will reduce its stability/durability and effectiveness as EFH.
3) Dominant finfish composition. Materials that best fit certain metrics of habitat complexity could be
identified for a dominant species. 4) Water quality. Factors such as hypoxic/anoxic events and other
events of poor water quality can severely reduce the effectiveness of EFH. 5) Geographical location.
Commercial fishing interests, major waterways and other anthropogenic conflicts will shape the process
of enhancing/enlarging existing estuarine reefs and the sitting of potential new estuarine reef sites.
Paee 1 4
Site evaluation Methods
1. GIS will be utilized to develop a comprehensive data set of all existing and proposed
involvement
a. existing EFH will be documented
b. Side Scan pre mission planning
c. production of visual references for regulation and permitting
2. Potential site, including surrounding bottom will be side scanned to create a
comprehensive mosaic of site
a. items to be identified
i. existing material
ii. permitted reef site
iii. potential expansion dimensions
iv. unknown objects to be identified
3. Roxanne bottom profiling will be utilized to create a mosaic of existing bottom type
4. Development of sampling matrix for site
a. sampling stations will be identified through side scan and GIS
i. unknown objects
ii. sediment type (depth and extent)
5, Visual confirmation through SCUBA
a. divers will confirm all unknown objects and sediment type for each sampling
station identified
i. water quality at surface and bottom
1. salinity, dissolved oxygen, temperature, secchi disk
ii. object type
iii. water depth
iv. predominant sediment type
v. predominant sediment depth (up to 7 feet)
6. Materials will be identified based on
a. availability
b. sediment type
c. durability and stability
7. All data will be utilized in GIS to develop comprehensive map of proposed construction
Sitting methods
After site evaluations and material identification has been approved, sitting of reef
materials will begin. As previously mentioned, the primary construction vessel in the NC DMF fleet
is the 1600 class LCU "WEST BAY". This vessel has been used in both artificial reef and oyster sanctuary
construction and is well suited to the task. Other secondary vessels such as clutch planting barges may
also be utilized as available.
Page 1 5
• Site evaluations and side scan sonar mosaics of reef site are used to determine
appropriate sitting sites within estuarine reef boundaries
o GPS coordinates are identified to develop a patch reef site
• Support vessels deploy high profile visual marking floats to identify sitting site
• GPS plotters onboard deployment vessel are marked to identify relative position of
sitting site to deployment vessel
• Artificial Reef personnel continually monitor location of deployment vessel to insure
accuracy
• After deployment support vessel may use onboard side imaging sonar or side scan sonar
equipment to accurately mark boundaries of patch reef and gather accurate GPS
numbers to add to database
Section 3
Essential Fish Habitat, Habitat Areas of Particular
Concerns and Managed Species
Table 1 shows the categories of EFH and Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) for
managed species which were identified in the Fishery Management Plan Amendments of the South
Atlantic Fishery Management Council and which may occur in southeastern states. Table 2 lists 77 fish
species by life history stages which may occur in the vicinity of the project area and are managed under
MSFCMA. These fish species and habitats require special consideration to promote their viability and
sustainability. The potential impacts of the proposed action on these fish and habitats can be seen in
Table 1 and are discussed below.
Estuarine Water Column
The estuarine water column is defined as a medium of transport for nutrients, larvae and
migrating organisms between river systems and the open ocean. The impact of this project is expected
to be permanent and utilize space within the water column which may in turn alter currents and
velocities in the immediate vicinity. This project will not impede the flow of waters to or from wetland
areas nor the ocean waters. This project intends to add hard substrate on which multiple organisms,
including biofouling species (oysters, mussels, tunicates, etc), motile invertebrates (crabs) and finfish
(both transient and resident species) may utilize to at multiple life stages from spawn through adult.
The addition of hard substrate will enhance the available habitat used by the estuarine finfish
assemblages and the associated estuarine biofouling community and increasing the available habitat will
help to increase the available stock of estuarine dependent species. Adding hard substrate will also
provide a refuge for motile vertebrates and invertebrate from anoxic/hypoxic events by providing
habitat that is raised above the anoxic/hypoxic conditions (Lenihan et al. 2001). The impacts on the
estuarine water column are expected to be minimal and short term.
Page 1 6
Table 1. Categories of Essential Fish Habitat and Habitat Areas of Particular Concern in Southeast United
States (1)(N/A= Not Applicable; NS =Not Significant)
E

9.
1(

SSENTIAL FISH HABITAT Present within or
adjacent to
project area Impacts from
enhancement of
estuarine artificial reefs
stuarine Areas
Aquatic Beds NO N/A
Estuarine Emergent Wetlands NO N/A
Estuarine Scrub/shrub Mangroves NO N/A
Estuarine Water Column YES permanent
Intertidal Flats YES NS
Oyster Reefs & Shell Banks YES NO
Palustrine Emergent & Forested Wetlands NO N/A
Seagrass YES NO
arine Areas
Artificial/Manmade Reefs NO N/A
). Coral & Coral Reefs
- _----- NO N/A
Live/Hard Bottoms NO N/A
Sargassum NO N/A
Water Column NO N/A
Page 1 7
Table 1 (cont). Categoriesof Essential Fish Habitat and Habitat Areas of Particular Concern in Southeast
United States (1) (N/A= Not Applicable; NS == Not Significant)
GEOGRAPHICALLY DENFINED HABITAT AREAS OF Present within or 'Impacts from
PARTICULAR CONCERN adjacent to enhancement of
1 project area estuarine artificial reefs
I
Area-Wide
14. Council -designated Artificial Reef NO N/A
Special Management Zones
I I
15. Hermatypic (reef-forming) Coral Habitat
& Reefs
16. Hard Bottoms
17. Hoyt Hills
NO I N/A
I
NO N/A
NO I N/A
18. Sargassum Habitat NO N/A
19. State-designated Areas Important for YES NO
Managed Species
20. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation(SAV) YES NO
North Carolina
21. Big Rock NO N/A

22. Bogue Sound NO N/A
i
23. Cape Fear, Lookout & Hatteras (sandy shoals)
YES
NS
24. New River NO N/A
25. The Ten Fathom Ledge NO N/A
26. The Point NO N/A
'Areas shown are identified in Fishery Management Plan Amendments of the South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council and are included in Essential Fish Habitat: New Marine Fish Habitat Mandate for
Federal Agencies. February 1999. (Tables 6 and 7).
Page 1 8
Table 3. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Species of Pamlico, Pamlico Sound and its Tributaries, North
Carolina
Source: NMFS, Beaufort, No rth Carolina, October 1999.
E = Eggs, L = Larval; J = Juvenile-, A = Adult; N/A = Not Found
---------- -- --,-- -- -------------------------
Water Body --- - ------ ------- ------ -------- -- ------- -----------
Water Body
EFH Fish Species _ __ _____
---- -------------------
--- EFH Fish Species
--
-----------------------------------
Pamlico Sound Pamlico Sound
--
Bluefish -- ------------------------------------
E L J A --- - --------- ------------ --- -------- -- -- ---
Gray trig--erfish -----------------------------------
N/A
_ -------- - -- ----
Summer flounder -- -- ---------------------------
L J A --- --------- ------------ -------------------------------------- ---
Yellow ack -----------------------------------
NA
-----------
Gag grouper --------- ----------
J ---------- ------------ --------------------------------------
Blue runner --
N/A
- --- - ---------- -------
Gray snapper ,-- ---
J ,-- -- --- ..-- - ---- -- ---- ---
Crevalle jack ---------------------------------
N/A
--- -----
Dolphin - --- - -- - _ ------ -
N/A -------- ------------ --
Barjack -------------------------- - -
N/A
------
Cobia -- - -- ------- - - -----------
E L J A --- --------- ------ -- - --
Greater amberjack -- -------- ------- -
N/A
-
King mackerel -- - ------- - ---- -
J A --------- ------------ -------------------------------------- --
Almaco Jack -----------------------------------
N/A

Spanish mackerel
J A --------------------------------------- ---
Banded rudderfish -----------------------------------
N/A
-
Black sea bass
L J A ---------- --------------------------------------------------- ,
Spade fish --- - -- ---------------------
N/A

Spiny dogfish - ,-- - - ------ ------ --
E L J A - ,--------- -----
White grunt
N/A
-- ---- __ _
Brown shrimp - ---------- --------------
E L J A ---- ---------- ----------------------------------------------------
Hogfish
N/A
-.----- -------
Pink shrimp ---------- --
E L J A -------------------------------------- T--
Puddingwife -----------------------------------
N/A
- -
White shrimp ---- -------
E L J A --------- ------------ -------------------------------------- --
Blackfin snapper -----------------------------------
N/A
_
Atlantic bigeye tuna --
N/A ----- - ------ -------- ------- -------- T
Red snapper
N/A
----- ------ -

Atlantic bluefin tuna -

N/A
------ - ------- ---
Cubera snapper
--- - -- -- ------ --
N/A
- -
Skipjack tuna -
N/A - , ------- --
Silk snapper ---- -------- - - ---- -
N/A
- - - --------
Longbill spearfish - ------
N/A --- --..---------------------------------- --
Blueline tilefish --- -------- --
N/A
--
Shortfin mako shark ----- -------- -----------
N/A --- --------- --- - ------ -
Sand tilefish
N/A

Blue shark -----
N/A --------- ------------ -------------------------------------- --
Bank sea bass -----------------------------------
N/A

Spinner shark

N/A --------- ------------ ----- -----------------------
T --
Rock sea bass
-- -------
N/A

Swordfish -
N/A --

------ -----
Grasby
-- -------- ------------ -------------------------- ---
N/A
--------------- - - - --------------- -
Page 1 9
Yellowfin tuna N/A Speckled bird N/A
Blue rip-rapin N/A Yellowedge grouper N/A
White rip-rapin N/A Coney N/A
-- ----------- -- - ----- -------- --
Sailfish --
N/A --
Red bird
N/A
_. - -- - ----- ------- --------- - -, ----
Calico scallop ---- ---------
N/A
Jewfish i
N/A
-- --- -------- --------- --------- -
Scalloped hammerhead shark
N/A -
Red grouper
N/A
----- - --- 1111 -------
Big nose shark - - - ---
N/A
Misty grouper
N/A
Black tip shark N/A Warsaw grouper N/A
Dusky shark N/A Snowy grouper N/A
_ ----------------------- ------ --
Night shark -- -- ; -
N/A --- - - _
Yellowmouth grouper __ _ _
N/A
------------------------------------------ -----------------------
Sandbar shark -------- -- _- _;
1A -- - - - -
Scamp -
N/A

Silky shark _ --
N/A --- ._
Sheepshead
J A
_ ---- - --------- -- --- --- -
Tiger shark
N/A
Red porgy
N/A
--
Atlantic sharpnose shark ---- ___
N/A
Longspine porgy
N/A
Longfin mako shark N/A Scup N/A
Whitetip shark N/A Little tunny N/A

-- ---- - -- ---- ----- ---------------------- ----------
-
Thresher shark
-------------------------------------------------- --- --

N/A
---------- -----

------
Intertidal Flats
Existing estuarine reef sites within Pamlico Sound and its associated tributaries are in proximity
to intertidal flats, but have been located in water depths that allow for navigation over the sites by
adherence to minimum depth requirements for the area. This allows for adequate separation between
the reef site and intertidal flats. Any turbidity elevations that do arise are expected to be temporary and
within the immediate vicinity of the project area. These intertidal flats are far enough from the project
area that no impacts will occur as a result of the project.
Oyster Reefs and Shell Banks
These natural habitat types are not present in the immediate area of this project and thus
impacts from turbidity increases or smothering from this activity will not affect this habitat type.
Page 1 10
Seagrass and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)
No seagrass/SAV is located within the project areas. There is shallow water in the vicinity of
reef sites that may contain habitat suitable for seagrass. However, given the nature of the substrate ,
depth of water needed and the natural turbidity of the water near the reef sites, seagrass/SAV are not
likely to be present. Impacts to any seagrass/SAV that might be present in waters adjacent to the
project area are expected to be additional turbidly from fill operations and would be negligible or
minimal and short-lived.
State-Designated Areas Important for Managed Species
Primary and Secondary Nursery Areas are designated by the INC Marine Fisheries Commission
and are defined as tidal saltwaters that provide essential habitat for the early development of
commercially important fish and shellfish. This project is located in subtidal waters and is far enough
from both primary and secondary areas that this project will not have adverse impacts.
Cape Fear, Lookout & Hatteras (sandy shoals)
The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council has designated the areas of Pamlico Sound
adjacent to Hatteras and Ocracoke Islands as important nursery and pupping grounds for the sand bar
shark. Sand bar sharks are known to seasonally migrate along the eastern coastal United States.
Juvenile sandbar sharks remain in shallow waters until late fall at which time they move south and
further offshore, and return in the summer months (FLMNH 2003). Deploying materials on the Oriental
estuarine reef (AR-396) is of far enough distance from this HPAC that deployments will not impact the
sand bar shark due to the migrations to deeper waters of this shark during the winter months.
Unconsolidated Soft Bottom
Surface sediments of a soft bottom can act as habitat for a variety of microscopic plants and
benthic epifauna/infauna species. These organisms may serve as food sources for many other
organisms. These organisms in turn are prey items for larger, economically important fishery species
such as red drum, summer flounder, spot, Atlantic croaker, weak fish, and striped bass.
The project areas consist of subtidal hard/firm and soft bottom ranging in depth from 7ft to 17ft
NVGD. These subtidal bottoms can be subject to vigorous trawling/ fishing activities. The flora/fauna
communities are a function of the frequently disturbed regime which varies both temporally and
spatially. Given the nature of environment and human induced stressors on these communities the
dominant organisms are opportunistic in nature and thus are adapted to a relatively rapid colonization
and recovery.
The activities proposed have been demonstrated to have minimal affects overall on this EFH
type, but it is important to consider post-settlement growth that may occur in these areas. This habitat
serves many life history stages for a multitude of species. Designed into the reef are corridors of
undisturbed bottom to allow for a heterogeneous bottom that should increase diversity through "edge
effect". These organisms may be indirectly affected by filling of the substrate. Given the mobility of the
organisms and the extensive areas of soft bottom the area of disturbance is likely to have no significant
adverse effects.
Page 1 11
Additional Project Area Concerns
In addition to EFH species in Table 1, prey species such as spot, croaker, and pinfish may also
occupy the waters of Pamlico Sound during; varying life stages. The proposed project will not adversely
affect prey species populations.
Impact Summary for Essential Fish Habitat
The objectives of this project are to enhance, enlarge and develop estuarine reefs within the
estuarine system of North Carolina for the restoration/conservation of essential fish habitat. The areas
to be used for continued development are in established estuarine reefs maintained by the DIME.
Artificial/manmade reefs are deployed to change habitats from a soft substrate to a hard
substrate system or to add vertical profile to low profile (< 1m) hard substrate systems. These reefs are
generally deployed to provide fisheries habitat in a desired location that provides some measurable
benefit to several different species as well as humans. When manmade reefs are constructed, they
provide new hard substrate similar in function to newly exposed hard bottom (Goren 1985). Aside from
the often obvious differences in the physical characteristics and nature of the materials involved in
creating a manmade reef, the ecological succession and processes involved in the establishment of the
epibenthic assemblages (i.e. oysters) occur in a similar fashion on natural hard substrates and man-
placed hard substrates (Wendt et al. 1989). Finfish use natural and manmade hard substrates in very
similar ways and often interchangeably (Sedberry 1988). The changes in species composition and local
abundance of important species in a specific area are often seen as the primary benefits of artificial reef
deployment activities.
Additional benefits of artificial/manmade reefs placed on soft bottoms are the increase of
diversity and edges. The increase of biotic diversity is accomplished by adding hard substrate where
none existed. This in turn will attract organisms that settle on hard bottom but cannot settle on a
shifting bottom, and in turn attract predators that feed on these sessile organisms. Edges can be
described as areas of transition between habitat types. Edges can also create areas of high diversity,
more so than over continuous areas of one habitat type. This has come to be known as the edge effect
principle. The edge created by deploying multiple patch reefs of hard substrate onto a soft bottom
habitat may also create a habitat of its own. The edge habitat is a culmination of the two habitats (i.e.
soft and hard substrates) because it is inhabited by a characteristic set of species. By adding hard
substrate to a soft bottom habitat the possible effect is that a third habitat is created. This has been
observed on reefs where reef fishes congregate to graze on algae and are afforded the sense of security.
Sheepshead, on the other hand, patrol the edge of the substrate foraging out into the soft bottom
habitat but continuously return to hard substrate.
The physical characteristics of manmade reef habitat may result in differences in the observed
behavior of fish species on or around such structures in contrast to behavior observed on equivalent
areas of natural hard bottoms (Bohnsack 1989). Some reef structures, particularly those of higher
profile, seem to yield generally higher densities of managed and non-managed species than a more
widely spread, lower profile, natural hard bottom (Roundtree 1989).
Oysters have often been described as the "keystone" species in an estuary (Bahr & Lanier 1981)
and provide significant surface area as habitat. Sometimes compared to submerged aquatic vegetation
in the mid-Atlantic states, the oyster comrnunity has been identified as critical to a healthy estuarine
ecosystem. Oyster reefs can remove, via filter feeding, large amounts of particulate material from the
water column, and release large quantities of inorganic and organic nutrients that will benefit other co-
Page 1 12
inhabitants of the reef (Haven and Morales-Alamo 1970; Dame & Dankers 1988; Dame et al. 1989)
Oysters are a major biofouling organism expected to colonize the newly deployed reef material.
The ecological role of the reef as structure, providing food and protection, contribute to its
value as a critical fisheries habitat. The three-dimensional reef provides more area for attachment of
oysters and other sessile organisms and creates more habitat niches than occur on the surrounding flat
or soft bottom habitat. Clams, mussels, anemones, polychaetes, amphipods, sponges, and many species
of crabs are part of the reef community. The invertebrates recycle nutrients and organic matter and are
prey for many finfish. Red and black drum, striped bass, sheepshead, weakfish, spotted seatrout,
summer and southern flounder, oyster toadfish, and other fish are frequent members of the reef
community.
Artificial/manmade reefs are known to promote extensive invertebrate communities and
enhance habitat for reef fish and other fish species, including cryptic, tropical, and gamefish species, as
well as many of commercial or recreational significance. The success of a reef and its contributions to
stock enhancement varies geographically and is determined by a wide range of complex parameters,
including existing habitat, physical limitations, material design, reef configuration, reef management,
and the health of the targeted species complex, which in turn is reliant on effective fisheries
management locally, regionally, and nationally. This potential is further enhanced since domestic reef
programs today possess better information and improved technology and are more focused in using this
tool towards specific stock enhancement and fishery management needs.
For species which may be to some degree habitat-limited, the establishment of additional
suitable habitat targeted to specific life-history stages may improve survival. Additional manmade
habitat designed specifically to promote survival of targeted species in "protected" areas could
potentially enhance existing ecosystems or create new ones to fill in gaps where essential fish habitat
had been damaged, lost, or severely over-fished.
Perhaps the most important contribution that manmade reef technology can provide for
fisheries management efforts would be to create additional habitat and fisheries to mitigate user groups
for perceived loses due to hurricanes, disease, overfishing, and habitat loss. Coupled with positive
effects of oyster sanctuaries and adjacent cultch planted sites, more accessible estuarine reefs would
increase benefits to user groups.
Deployment sequencing and distance from known pupping grounds will help negate impacts to
the nursery/pupping grounds for the sand bar shark. Other free swimming organisms will be able to
avoid the area directly affected by project activities and move to other soft bottom habitat and thus
impacts to these organisms shall be minimal. Any impacts to these organisms will be outweighed by the
benefits of providing additional hard substrate by increasing food resources, available hard substrate,
potential spawning habitat, etc to the system.
Some impacts to EFH will be permanent since the deployment of reef material onto soft bottom
will change the availability of the bottom under the material. The other impact is the loss of estuarine
water column due to the "high profile" nature of the mounds being built, although minimal in that water
flow will not be impeded, it is permanent.
In contrast to the permanent impacts to the existing EFH, the ecological functions of estuarine
reefs are numerous and may become an essential component of the estuarine system. While a few EFH
types will be subject to temporary impacts and other EFH categories will have permanent impacts, these
disturbances are trade-offs that will increase biomass of finfish species to help restore the population,
Page 1 13
create habitat in a hard substrate limited system and support high diversity and multiple ecological
functions. Enhancement of the existing estuarine reefs and development of new estuarine reefs is not
expected to cause any significant adverse impacts to any managed species and in fact will hopefully
facilitate the recovery of Pamlico Sound and its beneficiaries.
Section 4
Estuarine Reef Material Categories
Materials identified for use in artificial reef construction have been reviewed by the NC
artificial reef program to determine adequate stability and durability, are made of suitable
materials that will not pose a threat to wildlife, are deployed safely and effectively, and follow
guidelines for suitable artificial reef materials published by the Gulf and Atlantic States Marine
Fisheries Commissions (Lukens & Selberg 2004). Materials identified here do not encompass
the full range of potential materials. This is intended to be a living document due to the
dynamic nature of reef construction. Materials may be added or removed to this list as views
concerning what are "acceptable" material changes. This document is not intended to
promote, encourage or exclude the use of particular materials, rather to give a comprehensive
classification of potentially acceptable materials. All materials used are clean of contaminates
prior to deployment following required regulations specific to the type of material.
Page 1 14
Article I. Concrete and related
Section 1.01 Designed reef modules
(a) Reef balls, Waffle crete, Hex cones, Reefmaker pyramids, NCDMF "H" units, etc
(i) These materials are generally units weighing less than 1 ton, non-reinforced, and have been
designed to be utilized in artificial reef construction.
Section 1.02 Pre-Cast
(a) Box culvert, manhole sections, catch basins, knockout box, wing walls, buoy sinkers (USCG and
DMF), reinforced concrete pipe.
(i) These materials are generally units weighing less than 2 tons, can be reinforced with metal
rebar or wire mesh, and were designed for applications other than reef material
Section 1.03 Scrap
(a) Rubble, slab, bridge railing, dock panels, curb, sidewalk
(i) Various dimensions and weights, mayor may not be reinforced, and may have been
removed from a construction site. These materials are clean of any contaminates
(hydrocarbons, etc) before deployment.
Article II. Fiberglass
(a) Tool grade fiberglass boat molds
(i) Various dimensions, keeping in mind stability of individual units
Article III. Natural
Section 3.01 Rock
(a) Lime stone, marl, granite, dredge material
(i) Natural materials that are mined from the Earth, these materials are stable and durable.
Section 3.02 Shell
(a) Mollusk (clam, oyster, whelk)
(i) Harvested from natural organisms made of calcium carbonate
Page 1 15
Article IV. Metal
Section 4.01 Vessels
(a) Trawler, freighter, barge, tanker, crew boat, tug, military, motor vessel, sailboat, etc
(i) Vessels are of various sizes and profiles, and will be noted for individual minimum vertical
clearance
Section 4.02 Military Equipment
(a) Tanks, armored personnel carrier
(i) Equipment of various sizes and profiles, and will be noted for individual minimum vertical
clearance. Military equipment is known to hold up well do to their rugged construction.
Section 4.03 Bridge components
(a) Bridge span, etc
(i) Spans are typically obsolete swing bridge spans. Spans and other components have been
cleaned of hydrocarbons, asphalt, etc.
Section 4.04 Aircraft
(a) Fixed wing, helicopter (Military and Civilian)
(i) Aircraft construction is very rigorous due to the high stress tolerances of flight.
Page 1 16
x
= m
t
Ch J
? CD
d ? ?i N\ ??r W
? IV
2 _
s
a?? ?xtf
Lo n3 `'?

,o a Gqf,

em
sm
a
to

E

m
sN
.
N ¢°

Q .
?\

r
C">

Q

i
? y.
F>
M
i
Q
7F ;
N
d5
M

F

Ch.
t7? C
N

? e
?. v
`gym

C
C
}
2
L
C
a
a
ry,
a
c
v
LL
a
C
X
LL
2
C
C
R
L
t
i
C
Z
i
R
r
Literature Cited
Bahr, L.M. and W.P. Lanier. 1981. The ecology of intertidal oyster reefs of the South
Atlantic coast: a community profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological
Service, Washington, D.C. 105pp.
Bohnsack, J. 1989. Are high densities of fishes at artificial reefs the result of habitat limitation or
behaviorial preference? Bulletin of Marine Science 44(2): 631-645.
Dame, R. F. and N. Dankers. 1988. Uptake and release of materials by a Wadden Sea mussel
bed. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 118:207-216.
Dame, R. F., J.D. Spurrier, and T.G. Wolaver . 1989. Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus
processing by an oyster reef. Marine Ecology Progress Series 54: 249-256.
Florida Museum of Natural History. 2003 (FLMNH). http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu
Goren, M. 1985. Succession of benthic community on artificial substratum at Elat (Red Sea).
Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 38: 19-40.
Grabowski, J.H., D. Pettipas, M.A. Dolan, A.R Hughes, and D.L.Kimbro. 2000. The economic and
biological value of restored oyster reef habitat to the nursery function of the estuary. NC
Sea Grant, Morehead City, NC, FRG # 97-EP-6, 29p.
Harding, J.M., R. Mann. 2001. Oyster reefs as fish habitat: opportunistic use of restored reefs by
transient fishes. Journal of Shellfish Research 20(3):951-959.
Lehnert, R.L., D.M. Allen. 2002. Nekton use of subtidal oyster shell habitat in Southeastern U.S.
estuary. Estuaries 25(5):1015-1024.
Lenihan, H.S., C.H. Peterson, J.E. Byers, J.H. Grabowski, G.W. Thayer, and D.R. Colby. 2001.
Cascading of habitat degradation: oyster reefs invaded by refugee fishes escaping stress.
Ecological Applications 11(3):764-782.
Lukens, R.R. and Selberg, C. February 2004. Guidelines for Marine Artificial Reef Materials,
Second Edition. GSMFC. Ocean Springs, MS.198pp.
Roundtree, R.A. 1989. Association of fishes with fish aggregation devices: effects of structure
size on fish abundance. Bulletin of Marine Science 44:960-972.
Sedberry, G. R. 1988. Food and feeding of Black Sea Bass, Centropristis striota, in live bottom
habitats in the South Atlantic Bight. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society
104:35-50.
Street, M.W., A.S. Deaton, W.S. Chappell, and P.D. Mooreside. 2005. North Carolina Coastal
Habitat Protection Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Division of Marine Fisheries, Morehead City, NC. 656 pp.
Page 1 18
Wendt, P. H. , D. M. Knott , and R. F. Van Dolah . 1989. Community structure of the sessile biota on five
artificial reefs of different ages. Bulletin of Marine Science 44:1106-1122.
Page 1 19

r
?T { *1
1
C?
¦
i
U-
ID a)
L) M
M O
{ N a) m
v rt
o?S
0 a
m co cm w
G ,L
• c
A; 0
CL
r
ca 1-1 CL 1-1
s°

_.-i. %

a p
m
m
0
4 k , ? t, tG '1?2 I
y _
? V I 4'4 ? ? ?? ? K J A ? n
40
r lJ r ?' ?Y r? J ?, OltI6R?.y? s L' . `}
r
cl?
7 0,P
r
.,lJ
l
Cf) co
?. lr
!slie 0 ° d1 oM ?, co
(D (0 CD c (0
0 r-_ 0 P- O r-
r'f
G //tt
I'L
03
R' y? `h l} F `l fib, w z Z W Z L VU L
k
z
,L "a CO -0 0 13 CO -0 Cy -0 co F -2 4) (D 4) 00 a) q
r- r r
° 00 00 0 C) 00
k. a- co m co co co
1. A•

a
?o
o-
E
f Qa
u

W

>
0 a)
C?

a

Z
TV
(D
Q -.L
O)o
0)

r?
C7
0
0
tt

C
•
_

?. =r
(D
C)

D 3
0
(m
0
=

.-?

.?•F

C

IW
V?
-mss
Q.
m
X.
rt
(D
cu
Dc
CL
JW
Cf)
0
(D
(D
. 4V
r MP-
(D
E-L

F

t
? 3 I _

}

1 1,

k ?

} x

' t O

?
s

R?
Q?
T
rf
0
0
0
CD

?D

¢y ? C t4
(D 3 Cr
(n 0
rx

0 (m

M

Q ...?
:r
?. 0
(D M

?•
Q. C.
_ ?
tD
r'
(D -1
? ?. 0
h! N
0)
(D
0
a1
0 ?
(D N
7
ri
c
C
CD
m
m
0
CD
y i
f
boD
f Y4
I
i
x
(3ti
N
-7
(D
I
Q
0
d 0
N
s,
W
w
W

V/•
rt
0
N•
4TM?
0
0
(D
O
CL ((DD
3 co
3
C w
n
n
(D
w
0
0
(D

Y
'? II
ti . I
j
;F
i s
?S
cl?CL
00 a)
??
ai
L)

L

U

a?

C V

v
o •? ?
CD
N
N
m . LL >
L O
a) CD
C14
=
O : E
L M C

O
E

N

•
L
W
lY

I-
cl? CL
r ?
0 4
t L
Il
N ? r
p ' N
V
a)
N
O
Q?
C
L
i
? xf
1 r' ,?., r ham'
4
• III ?5 .;_ ,?.
O n
a

.
ID

e s
1.

O

•
YI '
??
r
lJ l
? i
T J?

a x

F
_ £ F
1. ?
•J? ? t
i
y
I
1
• ' CL lw
L
ol:
??
=c L- 0? m c;
E E
N -? m - E 21
L+
? 0 E
o (n CL Co m
H ? 0 L
m CL
70
M
'? ?
0.5 1 tU r '
L 40-
(? 1
Q J 'CIO ? `F' :3
3
m"01306
LL 0
2 0 CL p O L
LL 0 m Z
L- CL
C

J? •rf h
J
a

h •

.
h? 1

III

. k.
? .Y t
x[17[ ?
1
[•J

W

C

?I
E
J

x
w
4
W

0
CL
2
v)
0y
(0
co
r
a)
as
V)
C4
E
Q
o•
7

m
a
sc
o' z
n
a
a ?
a -? W
°D a
m
C
'V

ti•
N
-n (D
3 3 -49
X = X X tD
B a 3 ash. B 4 oa
(1) 0 (D Cr CL 2)
.-, Zf rr-, -19-0 .-. -.h -0 r,
O O O
O`C `W O TC CA) O*< C Q
(D CD M (D W (D CD 0
N M 0 BCD 0 (D 3
..49 -49
-44
(D r-4- (D Cr
...(? Y) .+
tD
C ?• o
-n p
ZD of
x a
(D 0
N
N
s
O
N
A
Qt
W
O
0
(D N
(
A (D
Ct)
A

N ?
(D =37 (D
Cn
cn O ? ,_?

go
(D r,
U) (D (n
7D Co C)7
o
- (D m
Lo
m cCDQ
y ?
o (Q-
(D
= `(D=3
N co
C)7 c
Q
.
g
(D
°
(
D
x Q-0
? ?oLo
3 'S

o (D
(D E!' (D
(D Z:)

? LU

v (D (D
(D 3 Z
(D (D

N
y
L
V
w
O
L
Q
N
L
N
v
L
W
5Y
E
E
O
CD
L

m

U? N
LD AW
N 05
d'
r
co
ct?
a
r
cv-
r
c

I G M
`X, ..
U k.
-
a
- N

W
U
0
O
d../
C
L
L ?
m
r.L
C
ax -0
++ Y
f0
V
bo c
x
w li
rti b
d,1 r ?
- w L
Z
r r 0
r N U)
C
Q
4.0 >
N
04
T-
L 10
l EL
V '
iV
4f
L
0
,Q
CL
/
V }r
rid
V
Rf ?//
x
w yL
V
? 0

'_ ?0+

N ?
CL

M0-

m '
t
V C? ? L
0

a
of
W
N ay
Cl) u
U)
g co
X U
U)
4
04
?t
C4
q
0
.L-
AW
OD N
>
cr)
M
LL
O
1 O
t Lj7
LJC)
o
\ r
¦7T--wAJ

LL

Lc) CL .(D
CL 0

m

?
t
V

0
CL
0
L
0.
4
a
c
m
?cOMy( L Q
Z A O
U
Z co 'o
.o
? n
Q?
a
w

C
CL
L
td

L4
E
R
N

m
a
s
=
a?W
m

m _
M=T I
o
ma
0
(n
m
CL
r
3
0 O
rMIL
o
CD
0
0'
O
O
o (D
CD
(D
r-r
CL
Z
2)
p"F`
FDtio
min
'
CL

a !w
3 r
C)
°
a _
0
O (D
? x 3
cn &
CA)
" ?

3 o
r(a
3
o
0
CF)
N
y :3
03
y

Ch !? !D
=

cr
r

1)

CL "
cn (D
o
o

?•
CL
:3

3

=

t'D CL
cn
r+
...w
M 3
?p n' ..
OD to

N
IN
L
M iv

Q s
?Q s

? O
? C
co
.-r
Vl =
¢t CD

(D
QCi)
: x

.
(D
N('y °
o
00
-n 0
co
1 ?
' ?D N -n

7i (/) <
m (D
(Dr o 0
ca
N (D
c?
N
CD 3
(D
c
0
(D

CD LO
?,.
N
o ai

4D
3

cD

C)
v

Q s