20010324 Ver 1_Complete File_20010305

MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney Regional Contact: Steen huis/Lutheran
Non-Discharge Branch WQ Supervisor: Bick Shiver
Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name Carteret County Beach Nourishment County Carteret
Project Number 01 0324 County2
Recvd From DCM Region Wilmington
Received Date 315101 Recvd By Region
Project Type beach nourishment
Certificates Stream Stream Impacts (ft.)
Permit Wetland Wetland Wetland Stream Class Acres Feet
Type Type Impact Score Index Prim. Supp. Basin Req. Req. ME
CAMA Waters O YO N I 99-(4) SB ? 30,500.
F-F-JOY ON 1 7- F_ . F_
Mitigation Wetland
MitigationType TYpe Acres Feet

Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? Q Y O N Did you request more info? Q Y Q N
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? Q Y O N
Is Mitigation required? Q Y O N Recommendation: Q Issue O Issue/Cond O Deny
Provided by Region: Latitude (ddmmss) Longitude (ddmmss)
Comments:
CONTROL MEASURES ARE USED TO PREVENT TURBIDITY FROM EXCEDDING 25 NTU'S
OUTSIDE THE PROJECT AREA. NOELLE LUTHERAN 09/24/2002
Modification received on January, 2004. This office has no objection to this erect as imposed
provided that all of the conditions of Water Quality Certification #3400 are met.
r i
the 401 Water Quality Certification was issued on 2/4/04. NML
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 1
pi-03---? L1
C A r4*AC.+-
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Donna D. Moffitt, Director
December 30, 2003
MEMORANDUM:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Applicant:
Project Location:
Mr. John R. Domey
Environmental Biological Supervisor
Division of Water Quality
Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
CAMA/DREDGE & FILL Permit Application Review
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
VVFTLANDS / 401 OROUp
JAN 0 2 2004
WA1-?R 01 AWY SECTION
Town of Emerald Isle (Major Modification of #124-01)
Carteret County, east end of Emerald Isle beach, and the nearshore waters of the
Atlantic Ocean.
Proposed Project: Proposes to use a hopper dredge to dredge material from an offshore borrow area
and place the 160,000 yds (3) of sand on the beach at the east end of the Town of
Emerald Isle to replace material that was lost during Hurricane Isabel.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by
January 19, 2004. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please contact Ted Tyndall at
[phone]. When appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza II, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
SIGNED Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]$WWrnet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal opportunity \Affirmative coon mployer -50% ecyc e o Post Consumer Paper
DCM % DWQ %
Development Type F=
= (14300 1601 435100093 1625 6253) (243GO 1602 435100095 2341)

I. Private, non-commercial
development that does not involve 5250 100%(S250) 0% (SO)
the filling or excavation of any
wetlands or open water areas:
II. Public or commercial development
that does not involve the filling or 5400 100°; (5400) 0°a (SO)
excavation of any wetlands or open
water areas:
Ill. For development that involves the
filling and/or excavation of up to 1
acre of wetlands and/or open water
areas, determine if A. B, C. or D
below applies:
III(A). For Private, non-commercia!
development, If General water Quality 5250 100°6 (5250) C°„ (SO)
Certification No.3301 (see aCacbeC)
can be applied:
:IIjS): Fcr pu:Gc pr c;mmercial
development, if General waver Quality S, 100°0 (5400) 0°,0 (SO)
Certifca;ion No.3301 (see a"ac"ed)
can be applied:
III(C). If Genera: Water Qualily
Certification No. 3301 (see aCached)
could be applied, but DCM staff
determined that additional revie.v ar,d S4G0 60°? (5240) 4C°/ ($160)
wri"en DWQ concurrence is needzd
because of concerns related to water
Guali'y or aquatic life:
III(D). If General ?Vater Quality
Cert;fca;ion No. 3301 (see attac;ned) S» 0 60°,o (5240) ?3?0 (S160)
can not be applied:
IV. For development that involves
the filling and/or excava;:on of m--,e
S "
63','. (5285)
?C°o ($190)
than one acre of wetlands and/or
open water areas:
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
APPLICANT'S NAME: Town of Emerald Isle
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Carteret County, east end of Emerald Isle beach, and the nearshore
waters of the Atlantic Ocean
Photo Index - 2000: 481-484 1995: 461-464
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2,618,800 Y: 344,400 Salter Path Quad "LL"
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA and D& F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - November 21, 2003
Was Applicant Present - No
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received Complete - December 22, 2003
Office - Morehead City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Town of Emerald
Land Classification From LUP - Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: PT, EW, OH
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Public Beach
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - N/A
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - Dune walkovers
Planned - None
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: 2'/year
Source - DCM Long-term Annual Erosion Rate maps
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION:
[AREA]
DREDGED FILLED OTHER
(A) Vegetated Wetlands
(B) Non-Vegetated Wetlands
EW and PTA of Atlantic Ocean 7,000,000 ft'- 4,875,000 ft2
(C) Other
Ocean Hazard dry sand/upper beach 4,875,000 W
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 16,750,000 ftz
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SB Open: Yes
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to use a hopper dredge to dredge material from an
offshore borrow area and place the 160,000 yds3 of sand on the beach at the east end of the Town of
Emerald Isle to replace material that was lost during Hurricane Isabel.
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT:
EMERALD ISLEXARTERET COUNTY
PAGE #2
---------------------------
9. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION:
Project Setting
Back in 2001, Carteret County with the Towns of Pine Knoll Shores, Indian Beach and
Emerald Isle as co-applicants was issued CAMA Major Permit #124-01 to renourish approximately
16.8 miles of beach. As part of the permitting process, the applicant was required to produce an
Environmental Impact Statement. During this process, three borrow areas called Borrow Areas A,
131, and B2 were identified. Phase I of the project which included Pine Knoll Shores and Indian
Beach was completed in April 2002. Phase 2 which included eastern and central Emerald Isle was
completed in March 2003. Phase 3 includes much of the western end of Emerald Isle and is
currently scheduled to begin in the winter of 2005.
In September of 2003, Hurricane Isabel hit Bogue Banks and according to Town surveys,
approximately 152,000 yds3 of sand was lost between V and 24'h streets. FEMA conducted a
poststorm damage assessment and authorized renourishment totaling 128,000 yds3 under Project
Work Sheet PW #874. Since phase 1 and 2 have been completed, and in order to comply with
Condition #5 of the CAMA permit, which states "any request to carry out additional activities
within an area where nourishment activities have been completed will require modification of this
permit" the applicant has submitted this major modification to CAMA Major Permit #124-01.
Project Description
The Town of Emerald Isle proposes to hydraulically excavate 160,000 yds3 of beach quality
sediment from the previously approved borrow area A located approximately 1.5 to 3.0 miles
offshore of Indian Beach and eastern Emerald Isle. As before, shallow excavations (2' to 3' deep)
would be made by a hopper dredge and the material then pumped to the beach. Sediment would
be spread via land-based equipment and the area between the crest of the active beach face and the
low watermark then shaped. The project would run from the 100 block to the 4200 block of
Emerald Isle or some 19,500 feet in length. According to the applicant, two or three discrete
sections of fill would be placed within the project area and separated by one or more "no-work
zones". Fill volumes would be varied so as to taper gradually into the existing nourished beach.
Fill would be placed no higher than 7' NGVD. The applicant proposes a construction schedule of
March 2004 with a contingency construction period of 1-15 April 2004 to allow opportunities to
coordinate mobilization and construction with the Beaufort Entrance Channel and the county's 933
nourishment project. If the timing is such that this does not take place, the applicant proposes to
conduct the project from November 16, 2004 through March 31, 2005.
A more detailed project description can be found in the application package (attached). In
this packet, the applicant describes the specific steps being proposed to ensure environmental
protection.
Anticipated Impacts
Approximately 160,000 yds3 of beach quality material would be excavated from Borrow
Area A and pumped onto the eastern end of the beach at Emerald Isle and the adjacent nearshore
waters of the Atlantic Ocean. Within the previously approved Borrow Area A site, approximately
160 acres of ocean bottom could be impacted by the dredging activities, while approximately 111
acres of nearshore bottom would be impacted by the deposition of the material below the mean
high water line. Similarly, another 111 acres of recently nourished dry sand beach/upper beach
would be directly impacted with this re-renourishment. One would expect the physical and
environmental impacts of this project to be similar to those discussed in the original EIS and
addressed in the original permit issued back in 2001. The additive effects of additional material
being pumped on top of the material that was just pumped onto the beach earlier this year now
becomes most critical.
Again the project would not reduce the existing public rights of the beach. The "Public
Trust Doctrine" and the State Property Sovereignty Rules preserve the rights of all citizens of
North Carolina for use of these resources. Permanent easements were sought from oceanfront
property owners for the original nourishment project and subsequent maintenance. As with all
nourishment projects, there would be a temporary use of the beach by the public during beach
nourishment activities.
M. Ted Tyndall - Morehead City Office - December 30, 2003
CDSE COASTAL. SCIENCE & ENGINEERING PLLC
804 ARENDELL ST (1) MOREHEAD CITY NC 28557 • TEL [phone] • FAX [phone] • EMAIL cse®coosrolscience.com
December 19, 2003
Mr. Ted Tyndall
N. C. Division of Coastal Management
151-B Highway 24
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Re: Bogue Banks Beach Nourishment Project, Phase 2, Town of Emerald Isle
Modification to Major CAMA Permit No. 124-01
Dear Ted:

On behalf of the Town of Emerald Isle, we respectfully submit the attached documents for modification
to the existing Major CAMA Permit for the Bogue Banks Beach Nourishment Project. Included with
this submittal are application documents, drawings, project description and a check for $250.00.
The work in this modification includes placement of approximately 130,000 cubic yards of beach quality
sand on the beaches at the east end of the Town of Emerald isle. This nourishment project will replace
material lost from the beach as a result of Hurricane Isabel. The scope of the work under this
modification includes strict adherence to the conditions of the original CAMA permit and subsequent
minor modification.
Your attention to this matter at your earliest convenience is appreciated. If it becomes necessary or
advisable, we would be glad to meet the DCM and other state agency staff to discuss this modification.
Please call me if you have any questions or need additional information.
Sincerely,
COASTAL SCIENCE & ENGINEERING, PLLC
J. W. Forman, Jr., P.E.
Senior Engineer
Attachment:
CC: Frank Rush, Town Manager, Town of Emerald Isle
Mickey Sugg, USACE, Wilmington District
Tim Kana, CSE, Columbia
T E: C 1 9 2003
MAJOR CAMA PERMIT APPLICATION
EMERALD ISLE POST-ISABEL BEACH RENOURISHMENT
18 December 2003
Applicant:
Town of Emerald Isle
7500 Emerald Drive
Emerald Isle North Carolina
Submitted to:
Division of Coastal Management
Morehead City Regional Office
151-B Highway 24
Morehead City North Carolina
Form DCM-NIP-1
APPLICATION
(To be completed by all applicants)
1. APPLICANT
a. Landowner: Town of Emerald Isle
clo Town Manager
Name Mr. Frank Rush
Address 7500 Emerald Drive
City Emerald Isle State NC
Zip 28594
Fax [phone]
Day Phone [phone]
b. Authorized Agent:
Coastal Science & Engineering PLLC
Name c/o JW Forman, PE, Project Engineer
Address 804 Aren dell Street
b. City, town, community or landmark
Emerald Isle
c. Street address or secondary road number
Beach front from 1" Street
thru Howe Street (4200 block) Emerald Isle
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? ? Yes No
Within city above MHW; owned by state below MHW
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) Atlantic Ocean
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or filling activities.
Excavation and filling by dredge and pipeline;
beach nourishment
City Morehead City State NC
Zip 28516
Fax [phone]
252.222-0976
c. Project name (if any)
Emerald Isle Post-Isabel Beach Renourishment
Day Phone
)VOTE: Permit %0 be irsued in name of landowner(f), and/or
project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. County Carteret
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both?
Maintenance of an existing project
c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use? Public use
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed
project. If more space is needed, please attach
additional pages.
See attached under Project DBSCdDtion.
and METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
Revised 03/95
Form DCNI-MP-1
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract 3.7 miles by 500 feet
b. Size of individual lot(s) NIA
c. Approximate elevation of tract above MHW or
NW L Berm at •7 k NGVD (r5 K MNNn with loglatlcs activltles on
construct on erm testae o nature unes an d vegetation
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
Mixed sand (FSIMS/CS) and shell (-25%)
e. Vegetation on tract Sand placement seaward of vegetation
f. Man-made features now on tract _
Dune walkovers, seawalls, and fishlnD Dlers
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (Consult the local land use plan.)
Tables attached
Conservation Transitional
Developed Community
Rural Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
Tables attached
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? -1 Yes No
(Attach zoning corWUance certificate, if applicable)
Tables attached
j. Has a professional archaeological assessment been
done for the tract? -1 Yes No
If yes, by whom? Tidewater Atlantic Research Inc
(Appendix B of EIS)
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National
Register listed or eligible property?
Yes of No
1. Are there wetlands on the site? Yes No
Coastal (marsh) Other
If yes, has a delineation been conducted?
(Attach documentation, if available)
r„
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
Wastewater In Emerald Isle by subsurface treat-
ment and/or package plants with on-site disposal
n. Describe location and type of discharges to waters
of the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industrial /commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.)
See attached under Project Description Turbidi
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
Potable water In Emerald Isle provided by
municipal and private water utilities; source is
wells
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
• A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then
forward a copy of the deed or other instrument under
which the owner claims title, plus written permission
from the owner to carry out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by 11" white paper. (Refer to
Coastal Resources Commission Rule 71.0203 for a
detailed description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
adequate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers regarding that agency's use of larger
drawings.) A site or location map is a part of plat
requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed to
guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the
Revised 03195
Form DChf-NIP-1
site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
• A Stormwater Certification, if one is necessary
• 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. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
Mailings from Town of Emerald Isle are proceeding
• A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
CAMA Permit #124.01
US Army Corps of Engineers Permit # 200000362
• A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public lands, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.
NC EPA EIS dated 31 October 2000 with revisions
and supplements of May 20011 federal NEPA final
EA dated 19 October 2001
' , ,) (J
6. 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 conditions
and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact,
grant permission to representatives of state and federal
review agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this
permit application and follow-up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
This is the 18 day of December 2003
Print Name Mr. Frank Rush
Signature 7--,( /l &4
Landowner or Authorized Agent
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
_ DCM MP-3 Upland Development
_ DCM MP-4 Structures Information
_ DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
_ DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE: Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided at the bottom of each form.
Revised 03/95
Form DCM-MP-2
EXCAVATION
AND FILL
(Except bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-I. Be sure to complete all
other sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or
fill activities. All values to be given in feet.
Average Final
Existing Project
Length Width Depth Depth
Access
channel
(MLW) or (NWL)
Canal
Boat
basin
Boat
ramp
Rock
groin
Rock
breakwater
Other
(Excluding
shomLim FIII
stabiliution)

.
vZ .,

19,500 500 -2 MLW +8 MLW
and below
Excavation:
Area A 7,000
1,000 -45 MLW -48 MLW

1. EXCAVATION
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below
MHW or NWL in cubic yards Up to 160,000
b. Type of material to be excavated See attached
under Project Description Borrow Area characteristics
c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAVs) or other wetlands? Yes ? No
d. Highground excavation in cubic yards, None
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED
MATERIAL
a. Location of disposal area
See sheets 1 and 2 on work plats
b. Dimensions of disposal area See attached under
Project Description FIII Placement on Beach
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
Yes ? No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner. Easements for areas above MHW are being obtained
d. Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance? ? Yes No
If yes, where? Future beach fill will be necessary
for maintenance and replacement
Revised 03195
Form DCb14LP-2
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes ? No
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
? Yes No
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION
a. Type of shoreline stabilization NIA
Bulkhead Riprap
b. Length N/A
c. Average distance waterward of MHW or NWL
d. Maximum distance waterward of MHW or NWL
N/A
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
N/A
(Source of information)
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material
NIA
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed below
water level NIA
(1) Riprap
(2) Bulkhead backfill
h. Type of fill material NIA
i. Source of fill material MIA
4. OTHER FILL ACTMTEB
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
? Yes No
See attached under
Project Description Fill Placement on Beach
If Yes,
(1) Amount of material to be placed in the
water See' below
(2) Dimensions of fill area See attached under
Project Description
(3) Purpose of fill Beach nourishment
b. Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes ? No
If Yes,
(1) Dimensions of fill area
(2) Purpose of fill
'Placement above water, with slurry forming fill -50%
above MLW, 50% below MI-W. See attached under
Project Description Fill Placement on Beach
S. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? See attached under
Project Description Turbidity and
METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
b. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic
dredge)?
Self-loading hopper dredge
c. Will wetlands be cr: ssed in transporting equipment
to project site? Yes ? No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
Mr. Frank Rush for Emerald Isle
AppUcant or Project Name
-Z--,f,4 " 1'
Signature
Iz1/6'-3
Date
Revised 03195
Tert Addendum to Forms DCM-MP-I and DCM-MP-1 for "Emerald Lvle Post-Isabel !leach Renomrishment "
Attached Comments for
"Emerald Isle Post-Isabel Beach Renourishment" Permit Application
3.d. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE OF PROPOSED PROJECT
PURPOSE AND USE
Project Setting - Bogue Banks is a 25-mile-long barrier island along the southern margin of
Carteret County (Sheet 1 of 16). It comprises about one-third of the county's ocean shoreline and
is the only developed and vehicle-accessible beach in the area. The remaining 55 miles of barrier
islands of the county, including Shackleford Banks and Core Banks up to Ocracoke Inlet, are
inaccessible wildlife preserves that will remain undeveloped in perpetuity as part of the Cape
Lookout National Seashore. The western two-thirds of Bogue Banks from Pine Knoll Shores to
Emerald Isle (beach survey lines 76 to 8 on Sheet 2) has sustained severe erosion and damage to
numerous structures since 1995 as a result of five landfall hurricanes. This -16.8-mile length of
Bogue Banks has a sand deficit compared to adjacent beaches which has left property unprotected
and has diminished recreational use of the beach. The county and local municipalities initiated a
beach nourishment project under CAMA Permit #124-01 and USACE Permit #200000362 to
restore the sand deficit and provide improved storm protection and recreational beach area.
Phase 1 (Pine Knoll Shores and Indian Beach) was completed in April 2002 (see CSE 2003a), and
Phase 2 (eastern and central Emerald Isle) was completed in March 2003 (total -3.7 million cubic
yards, see CSE 2003b). For various reasons, the total amount of nourishment accomplished in
Phases 1 and 2 was approximately 65 percent of the permitted volume (-5.6 million cubic yards)
for the Phase 1 and Phase 2 reaches. Approximately 800,000 cubic yards (cy) are scheduled for
placement along western Emerald Isle during Phase 3 (anticipated in winter 2005).
Hurricane Isabel - On 18 September 2003, Hurricane Isabel made landfall about 35 miles east
of Bogue Banks, damaging the nourished beach. FEMA conducted a poststorm damage assess-
ment of Emerald Isle, and the town provided a survey of the beach (Attachment 1) documenting
loss of -152,000 cubic yards between the 100 block (1" Street) at the Indian Beach town line and
24`h Street. This area is referenced as Reach 3 - Emerald Isle East in CAMA Permit #124-01 and
USACE Permit #200000362. Erosion also occurred between 24`h Street and Ebb Tide Drive in
isolated sections, but the net change due to Isabel for this area was accretion totaling 24,000 cy.
This reach is referred to as Reach 2 under the previously issued nourishment permits. On 4
Text Addendum to Forms DCM-hfP-I and DCM-M11-2 Jor "Emerald Isle Post-Isabel Beach Renourishment "
December 2003, FEMA [under their established program for poststorm restoration of improved
projects, 44CFR 206.226(h)] submitted a Project Work Sheet (PW #874, Attachment 2) authoriz-
ing renourishrrnent totaling 128,000 cy along 31,111 linear feet of shoreline (see Attachment 2).
Because of operational limitations, it is not practical to distribute small renourishment volumes
over long shoreline distances. The Town of Emerald Isle has identified areas that appear to have
sustained the greatest sand losses within the Phase 2 project area (Table 1). These areas comprise
about 10,000 linear feet (cumulative) along an 19,500-ft length of shoreline between the 100
block (1" Street) and the 4200 block (near Howe Street). The applicant proposes to renourish the
majority of shoreline segments listed in Table 1 in accordance with the FEMA-approved renour-
ishment volume. It has been determined that dredging operations will be most cost efficient if the
FEMA-approved renourishment is placed mainly in two or three discrete reaches encompassing the
majority of areas listed in Table 1 and extending no more than 3,000 ft in either direction from
the point(s) where the dredge pipe is brought to shore. It is anticipated that renourishment cen-
tered in two or more discrete areas will leave no-work area(s) in between.
TABLE 1. Areas along eastern and central Emerald Isle that experienced the greatest sand
losses during Hurricane Isabel (18 September 2003). See Attachment 1. These localities are
within the FEMA-approved renourishment reach under PW #874 (Attachment 2).
[Note: Approximate total shoreline length 100 block to 4200 block 0 19,500 linear feet]

Locality
Applicable Profile Lines Approximate
Shoreline Length
(linear ft)
1 100-200 blocks 47, 47a, 48 1,000
2 400 block 46 500
3 1000-1400 blocks 41, 41a, 42, 42a, 43 2,500
4 1700-1900 blocks 38a, 39, 39a 1,500
5 2400-2600 blocks 35a, 35b, 36 1,500
6 2900-3100 blocks 34, 34a, 35 1,500
7 3400 block 33 500
8 4000-4200 blocks 31a, 31b, 32 1,500
Total 10,500

Text Addendum to Fors DCM-MP-I and DCA4-MP-2 for " Grnerald Isle Post-Isabel Beach Renoarishinew -
Project Description - The proposed project consists of excavating by hydraulic dredge up to
160,000 cubic yards (cy) of beach-quality sediment from previously approved ocean borrow area
A, situated 1.5-3.0 miles offshore of Indian Beach and eastern Emerald Isle (Sheets 8-11).
Shallow excavations (-2-3 ft deep, typical) (Sheet 8) would be made by hopper dredge and
pumped via submerged pipe to the beach. The FEMA-approved renourishment area will consist of
two or three short reaches totaling up to 12,500 ft (cumulative) along an 19,500-ft length of
shoreline from the 100 block to the 4200 block of Emerald Isle (Sheet 3). Sediment would be
spread via land-based equipment and shaped into a recreational beach between the existing crest of
the active beach face and the low watermark. Approximately 50 percent of the excavations would
be deposited between existing mean low water and the outer bar (about 500-750 ft offshore). The
remaining excavations would be placed above existing mean low water and graded to match the
natural beach with berm elevations at approximately +7 ft NGVD (-+5 ft above mean high water)
(Sheets 3-7). The fill quantity for each reach varies according to the site-specific erosion losses
during Isabel. Typical rates of fill will range from 16 cy/ft to 24 cy/ft (see Sheets 4-7).
It is anticipated that two or three discrete sections of fill will be placed within the designated
project area separated by one or more no-work zones as shown on Sheet 3. Poststorm surveys
(Attachment 1) show that erosion was greatest in the area around 10" to 14`h Streets (1000 to 1400
blocks) and in the vicinity of Ocean Reef Villas and the western regional beach access (2400-2600
blocks). Dredge pipelines will be positioned to spread sand in either direction from designated
pipe "landing" sites. The fill volumes will be varied so as to taper gradually into the existing
nourished beach. Final determination of the number of areas to receive fill (see Table I and Sheet
3), the section lengths, unit fill volumes, and alongshore limits will be dictated by conditions at the
time of construction and the operational and scheduling limitations of the dredging contractor.
Borrow Area Characteristics. Three offshore borrow areas (A, B 1, 132) have been authorized
for use under CAMA Permit #124-01 and USACE Permit #200000362 (detailed in the final EA for
the project, CSE 2001). The proposed project will use sediments from a portion of borrow area A
(see Sheets 9-13). Previously dredged portions of borrow area A and the proposed portion of
borrow area A (7,000 ft by 1,000 ft area totaling -160 acres) are shown on Sheet 9. Because of
the nature of hopper dredging, only about 30 percent of the proposed borrow area will be directly
impacted. Areas adjacent to the narrow cuts made by each pass of the hopper dredge will be
undisturbed. Borrow area A is dominated by sandy sediments and is situated seaward of the

Test Addendum to Forms DCM-MP-I and DCh1-MI'-2 for "Emerald Isle Post-Isabel Beach Renourishment
littoral zone in water depths averaging over 45 feet (ft). The sediment characteristics for the
proposed borrow area are: mean size = 0.398 mm, percent calcium carbonate = 39.5, and percent
mud = 3.7. See Sheets 14-16 for detailed sediment characteristics on the beach before and after
Phases 1 and 2. Borrow area A has composite overfill ratios of about 1.28. Portions of the
proposed borrow area(s) will be left undisturbed so that biological recovery may be accelerated via
recruitment from adjacent areas. The anticipated impacted area for excavations represents <0.02
percent of the ocean bottom off Bogue Banks within state territorial waters (3-mile limit).
Fill Placement on Beach. Sediment from borrow area A will be excavated by ocean-certified
hopper dredge, pumped to the beach, and distributed alongshore with the aid of land-based equip-
ment and open-ended training dikes. The slurry mixture of sediments and seawater will be dis-
charged parallel to shore seaward of the existing dry beach with the aid of a temporary dike
pushed up about 100 ft seaward of the berm crest. Coarsest sediments will tend to settle out near
the discharge point and finer sediments will tend to wash down-profile and be discharged in the
surf zone, where they will build up the underwater profile. Muddy sediments are expected to wash
seaward of the outer bar before settling. The final distribution of grain sizes across the littoral
zone is expected to be similar to the natural gradation that presently exists (ie, fining in the
offshore direction). (See as-built sediment data in Sheets 14-16.)
The final dimensions of the renourished beach will vary according to the site-specific storm losses.
The landward 25-75 ft will consist of subaerial beach (dry-sand berm and upper beach face)
shaped to match a natural profile. Typical elevations will range from +7 ft NGVD near the crest of
the existing berm to 0 ft NGVD along the beach face. Below the mid-beach-face contour, waves
will rework and shape the nourishment sediments into a natural profile. Nourishment sand is
expected to partially fill the inner trough between the existing beach face and outer bar, a width of
-500 ft. The outer bar will provide a natural toe for the fill. Only the most landward sections of
the nourishment profile above mean high water (see Sheets 4-7) are controllable during construc-
tion.
Turbidity. The project will produce temporary and localized increases in turbidity, normally
associated with dredging operations. Because -96 percent of the excavated material is in the sand-
size class or larger, it will settle almost immediately and not remain in suspension. Silts, which
constitute a major portion of the mud percentage, likewise have rapid settling rates measured in
4

Text Addendum to Forms DCM-MP-I and DC"-MP-2 fur "Emerald Isle Post-Isabel Beach Renourishment
minutes. The clay-sized particles released with the slurry have the longest settling times and may
leave localized plumes for hours. The effect of the project on turbidity levels in the surf zone is
expected to fall within the natural range of turbidities associated with fair weather and storm
conditions. The construction methodology provides for separation of fines during loading of
hopper dredges. Mechanical shaping of the fill berm will preclude formation of settling basins
where fines may concentrate and be buried under the nourished beach. Turbidity measurements
during Phases I and 2 indicated that turbidity associated with construction activities remained
localized, was short-lived, and tended to produce sediment concentrations no greater than the
background range of turbidities. (See CSE 2003a, 2003b.)
Purpose and Need - The Town of Emerald Isle recognizes the oceanfront beach and adjacent
properties are a valuable public economic and ecological resource. FEMA has an established pro-
gram that provides incentives to communities if a protective beach is maintained along developed
shorelines. They desire to protect these valuable resources. From an economic perspective, the
need for the proposed post-Isabel beach renourishment project is to protect and preserve the
largest portion of the town's overall economy and tax base. Property damages and dune erosion
during Isabel were minor along Emerald Isle compared with damages after Hurricane Floyd in
September 1999 (see CSE 2000). Nearly all walkovers remained intact, and debris on the beach
was insignificant. The purpose of the proposed project is to restore the width of the beach to its
prestorm condition. The proposed volume represents less than 5 percent of the volume placed
during Phases 1 and 2.
Project Planning Objectives - In maintaining the beach nourishment project, the Town of
Emerald Isle has several objectives that the project must meet. Those objectives are summarized
as follows:
• Preservation of the environmental, cultural and aquatic resources of the town and Carteret
County.
• Provide an easily accessible recreational beach available to all citizens of the town and the
county.
• Provide protection of oceanfront property as a resource of tax revenues to the town and the
county.
• Maintain the economic viability of tourism, the town's and the county's largest industry.
5

Text Addendum to roans DCM-MP-1 and DCM-MP-2 %r "Emerald Isle Post-Isabel Beach Renourishmcnt -
PROJECT FORMULATION
Fill Profile - CAMA Permit #124-01 and USACE Permit #200000362 outline the original
formulation and data sources for the Bogue Banks nourishment project - Phases 1 and 2. Fol-
lowing completion of Phase 2 (April 2003), CSE (2003b) documented the nourishment volumes
placed along the Town of Emerald Isle. Hurricane Isabel impacted the project on 18 September
2003. CSE resurveyed -30 profile lines (Attachment 1) and documented nourishment volume
losses totaling 128,000 cy along eastern and central Emerald Isle. FEMA representatives
inspected the beach after Isabel and reviewed Attachment 1, subsequently authorizing poststorm
renourishment totaling 128,000 cy under Project Work Sheet PW #874 (Attachment 2). The fill
profile and project dimensions of the proposed project are based on the FEMA authorization plus
25 percent to account for uncertainties in the pumping and placement of material. This volume
will restore Phase 2 project area sand volumes to prestorm conditions. The renourishment will be
accomplished by adding sand from a nonlittoral source (borrow area A) at variable rates so as to
replace the eroded material. The original project (CAMA Permit #124-01) was formulated for a
longevity of "10 years." The proposed renourishment is intended to maintain this longevity.
METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
The proposed fill will be placed by ocean-certified hopper dredge(s) between the seaward crest of
the existing dry beach and the outer bar. Only the profile above high water is controllable in
nourishment construction. Intertidal and underwater portions of the profile will be subject to
natural adjustment by waves. The fill will be placed no higher than +7 ft NGVD (the natural
elevation of the berm).
Equipment - Ocean-certified hopper dredge - Self-propelled hopper dredges with built-in,
pump-out capability borrowing from area A will be used. Ocean-certified equipment typically
requires -25 ft minimum operational depth and is efficient for excavating shallow cuts of the order
1-2 ft (Sheet 8). During excavation and loading, the slurry drains via scuppers discharging some
fines in situ and leaving coarser material in the hopper compared to the excavated material. When
loaded, the dredge travels to a temporary mooring and submerged pipeline near the project site. It
hooks up to the pipeline and pumps the material from the hopper to the beach where it is spread
mechanically by dozers. This is the same type of dredging equipment that was used for construe-
tion of Phase I and most of Phase 2.
Test Addendum to Forms DCM-MP-I acid DCM-MP-2 /or '-'Emerald We I'bst-Isabel Beach Renourishment "
Construction Schedule - The proposed project involves a relatively small volume of sand
(<160,000 cy). Based on Phases l and 2 project experience, one ocean-certified dredge can exca-
vate and place on the order of 10,000-15,000 cy in a 24-hour period. The average production per
day varies widely according to transportation distance and specifications of the project. In any
case, it is anticipated that the proposed construction will be accomplished in approximately two
weeks. Depending on the availability of dredges and opportunities to complete the work around
the same time as other dredging work is being accomplished in the county (to reduce mobilization
costs, etc), the applicant anticipates a construction schedule of March 2004, If equipment is
unavailable or permits for the proposed project are issued after the available construction window,
the project will be conducted between 16 November 2004 and 31 March 2005.
Work will progress in sections within the borrow area(s) and along the beach. The borrow area
will be left to adjust naturally and to recolonize while other areas are being excavated. Fill place-
ment along the beach will typically involve completion of 400-700 ft per day. Construction activ-
ities will involve movement of heavy equipment and pipe along -I mile reaches over a period of
1-2 weeks. Once a section is complete, piping and heavy equipment will be shifted to a new sec-
tion and the process repeated. As soon as practicable, sections will be graded and dressed to final
slopes and left to respond naturally. Other than equipment staging areas, individual lots in the
project area will experience disruption due to construction for several days or less, in general. Fill
sections will be left to adjust naturally as soon as the required volumes are pumped into place and
confirmed by surveys.
Land-based equipment will be brought to the site over public roads and will enter the beach
through existing permanent accesses or temporary accesses. Any alteration of dune vegetation/
topography necessary for equipment access will be performed in consultation with state regulatory
agencies, local officials, and property owners. Temporary accesses will be restored to precon-
struction conditions at the conclusion of work in a given reach or combination of reaches. Daily
equipment staging will be on the constructed beach seaward of the dune line and any native vege-
tation. Construction contracts will provide for proper storage and handling of oils, chemicals, and
hydraulic fluids, etc., necessary for operation in accordance with state and federal regulations.
Consistent with CAMA Permit #124-01 and USACE Permit #200000362, construction will take
place within the previously approved environmental window (16 November through 31 March).
Test Addendum to Forms DCA1-til1'-l and DCAI-MP-2 lor "Emerald Isle Post-Isabel Beach Renourislunent "
The applicant requests agency consideration of a possible contingency construction period of
1-15 April 2004 so as to allow opportunities to coordinate mobilization and construction
with a similar project in Beaufort Entrance Channel and the county's 933 nourishment
project. This time extension would potentially allow the applicant and FEMA to experience
savings in dredge mobilization totaling upward of $1 million.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Phases 1 and 2 of the Bogue Banks beach nourishment project were conducted under special
conditions for environmental protection as described in Attachment 3. The applicant proposes to
implement the same protection measures as detailed in Attachment 3 with regard to:
• Construction only during permitted time periods.
• Implementation of turtle monitors onboard hopper dredges.
• Implementation of turtle trawling and relocation measures during periods when water
temperatures exceed 57° centigrade.
• Continuation of semi-annual biological monitoring of the borrow areas and beach along
Bogue Banks.
• Daily monitoring of construction.
• Daily sediment sampling and testing.
Results of biological monitoring to date (CSA 2002, 2003) show recovery of benthic organisms to
preproject levels in the borrow area and good progress toward recovery along the fill areas of
Phases 1 and 2. Ghost crabs and surf fish have returned to similar or higher levels than preproject
conditions and seabeach amaranth have expanded over 100-fold compared with preproject condi-
tions. Postproject turtle nesting and numbers of hatchlings exceed preproject numbers. Postproj-
ect beach sediment data show a general fining of the material and reduction in percentage of shell
material in surface samples along the beach (see Sheets 14-16).
The proposed renourishment will impact -8 percent of the total length of Bogue Banks. It will
consist of at least two reaches along an -4-mile shoreline length, leaving undisturbed sections
from which recruitment of benthic organisms can occur. Biological monitoring for Phases 1 and 2
confirms that all species present before nourishment have repopulated the nourished beach by
varying degrees depending on the species.
8
tJ
Teat Addendurn to Forms DCM-MP-land DCM-MP-1 for "Emerald Isle Post-Isabel Beach Reno unshinent
4. LAND AND WATER CHARACTERISTICS
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land classification of the site?
The following is provided based on query of planning staff in the Town of Emerald Isle.
Municipality (Site) Land-Use Classification
Emerald Isle Developed
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
Low-density residential
i. Is the proposed project consistent with applicable zoning?
Municipality (h) Zoning (I) Zoning Consistency
(Tract/Proposed Project)
Emerald Isle Residential Yes
9

Teat Addendum to Forms DCAI-MP-! and DCM-MP-2 for " Emerald lcle Post-Leabel Beach Renouri.chment"
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Deed - All project areas below mean high water (MHW) are within the 3-mile limit and are,
therefore, owned by the State of North Carolina, not by the federal government. All project areas
above MHW are within Carteret County, but are owned by individual landowners. Easements for
nourishment activities have been obtained for Emerald Isle properties in the proposed project area
and were applicable during Phase 2 construction between January and March 2003.
Work Plats - Drawings by the project engineer are attached to this application and are included
in the packages sent to oceanfront landowners.
Names and Addresses of Adjacent Property Owners - Certified mail receipts for the required
notification of beachfront property owners adjacent to the three contiguous areas to be filled as
shown on Sheet 3 of 16 are provided with this permit application. Certified mail (green) cards will
be provided to the Division of Coastal Management as they arc received.
Compliance with NC Environmental Policy Act - An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
and a NEPA final Environmental Assessment (EA) have been submitted and accepted for the
Bogue Banks nourishment project (EA dated 19 October 2001). The proposed work is considered
to be an integral part of the already permitted project, and the issues associated with the project are
the same but applicable in this case over only a small portion of the permitted areas.
10
Test Addendum to Forms DCM-MP-1 and DCM-MP-2 /r)r "Emerald hde Post-Lsubel Bench Renourishmerrt "
REFERENCES
CSA. 2002 (March). Bogue Banks beach nourishment: June 2001. First pre-dredge environmental monitoring
study for Carteret County, Town of Pine Knoll Shores, Town of Indian Beach, and Town of Emerald Isle,
North Carolina. Coastal Science Associates Inc (CSA), Columbia, SC, 37 pp + appendices.
CSA. 2002 (June). Bogue Banks beach nourishment: November 2001. Second pre-dredge environmental
monitoring study for Carteret County, Town of Pine Knoll Shores, Town of Indian Beach, and Town of
Emerald Isle, North Carolina. CSA, Columbia, SC, 32 pp + appendices.
CSA. 2002 (November). Bogue Banks beach nourishment: June 2002. First postdredge environmental
monitoring study for Carteret County, Town of Pine Knoll Shores, Town of Indian Beach, and Town of
Emerald Isle, North Carolina. CSA, Columbia, SC, 50 pp + appendices.
CSA. 2003 (May). Bogue Banks beach nourishment: November 2002. Second post-dredge environmental
monitoring study for Carteret County, Town of Pine Knoll Shores, Town of Indian Beach, and Town of
Emerald Isle, North Carolina. CSA, Columbia, SC, 48 pp + appendices.
CSE. 2000. Survey report 2000, Bogue Banks, North Carolina. Survey Report for Carteret County, Beaufort,
NC; CSE, Columbia, SC, 32 pp + Appendices I-IV.
CSE. 2001. Environmental assessment, Bogue Banks beach nourishment project. EA submitted in conjunction
with the National Environmental Policy Act and Federal Review of Permit Application ID 200000362;
prepared for USAGE, Wilmington, NC; CSE, Morehead City, NC, 162 pp + appendices.
CSE. 2003a. Bogue Banks beach nourishment project, Carteret County, North Carolina: 2001 Phase I - Towns
of Pine Knoll Shores and Indian Beach. Final Report for Town of Pine Knoll Shores and Town of Indian
Beach, North Carolina; CSE, Morehead City, NC, Volumes 1-11.
CSE. 2003b. Bogue Banks beach nourishment project, Carteret County, North Carolina: 2002 Phase 2 - Town
of Emerald Isle. Final Report for Town of Town of Emerald Isle, North Carolina; CSE, Morehead City, NC,
Volumes 1-111.
CSE Baird-Stroud. 1999. Shoreline assessment and preliminary beach restoration plan, Bogue Banks, North
Carolina. Executive Summary for Carteret County, North Carolina; CSE Baird LLC, Columbia, South
Carolina, and Stroud Engineering PA, Morehead City, North Carolina, 38 pp.
11

a CO
m
o, o
o UQ a o ` c .-
N 4 om
. Q a N
OlQ- 2 C ! W U L
li N u f9 N
p > cn N O
U U ?? N fa •' N
cn =3
m N > j U [1
m 0) a)
d O U N N a
ps a (L) 0
8_QUQ ?m L U U U
U Q m N N a ,E I?
J CO m c p .0 L1
J OU) U C O p L cQc
Z N r Y W N a?i t 'm G
Y? 01 W o Cl LL C? H z
wo c v; z a © a w
a vi v CL U
E U ~ U v/
v 7 D U )
_ [1
"I CU cu
N =2 U Z, o 3 m a)
aW O U N O D U
O C
m 0) m N cc F U
wQ t > c C
Q- Q a O C)
N °z ? o a? ? o CL o
6 -2 C w z 4 W a)
LL 3CL) CO _m J Q U
z 3 y 5 Q o N can? O N
p °
-0 F- o co ° N
N U
U N N 12 Cc: LOL .O 3 co
iu = = a+
ao E-.
w w o a) Lo V
Z ?? cu
oo c
U N O? q ; 4. E
o o (1)
w? 0
LO U) m m t o Z
v, C S? N L p? f4 ?
` ~ O
$ 3l U `o o o O C
• V
N ° in c (D N 4- v)
m v E°cti Eca>a? ;? LL
CU 0
)
3 0 0
? • CIQ a LL 'c .0 LL (n co ? W •
O
N O
n? co W • al
S'` I J'° o` a) r 0
Ur, ?>>? n,?, l ?m y J v1 a z E
i))?? T d u. ??i e Q LJ
1 ? •.. ? a Do iao • ?
- 3
CL 0
co `
O o ° U
? it a)
N
co d
? 4 n lq al
o N?LZ _ C
z s ) E
=
o c
,It Qd
• Z a) o
•
v V ?' aci
o N
L U
O 7 .e ? y ? a) f0
U) U z Cn awm

z C) Op
11 _ ?- v
V)
o z ? S'iwll uenol r co Z
p
V-
/ . r _ ru o N
f
O C3 C:) in \ Q ~ W
o o = l\Sls1tccc? _ o
0 o
fO O Q
.. m 10 r`i o. J
Ln
Q W
10 o Z
2 .r
u ° w C)
o J
Q.
v
0
\
LLJ
rr? f.ll'l.. N
00
Ski Lr'
Z
O rrL^^L
V /
Q
7z' v
o
rn 0 o
,p r4
v' O
C
D
q \00 Ski N ru Z
O^\Q\? Q T U Q
C p J
J •' N
(,n
O c o C
S - J lc T
W
O :, ,tr.Y c?oqq ?--l o
1, Ln
ZO { w m o c Z L
d y Z W 43)
..'D ' o ` : a7 c O
;6, cu: u
?b -e ( G
O
cl C) 00 / d Ul 55 ? v
E 00
# -VI
_ m ?5?s"cc11 C aE o lu
dS
V
in u ° a
4Q m O
a W M L C v a) O U n7
)
0m
O, tpp'
76 F- z I ?' N L V a
.t.R;. O L `a O ?n (J C d
Q Z E p o:3 Zr A O m
U) w cu u +
m vcj . 2 a) n
Ln V M N Vl ice' N
d 2000 c w° 90 r?
y `2Q1hsue i m cu E a r O V)
o G? d ^ 2 °u :E w
•'i' a' '? M N N
d
t w aaii ro E
p ,o w ruo. 2 Z 8 C -'
p M F. v > Z, (N v
O O mtntn? M
~
T.. 14 N M
4 M ? M r0
Z E
E
z; ?1S?ti m Q W
M1 o 1 M U
ld; O
M c a
CL 0
O
W '
d 0 2000 M u rn
l1 oN M .6 c2
o O
M
1 ? p « _
M
W M m fq U
d ? N
W M , O
OQ
l9 C
O In N !li
? C) 1 ? O N
x` M Z (1) O
W d'
1 ti L
„lam Pro' n OeclEnd ' y v
a j re I a n 8 o g Howe Street - W E
a. w co
M
\SOOfj I? ? jw- cr 'O co
? Q W O \ m
_ r -? o - II co
i U In --- T
N
O - r _ m 2 O (n S11WI 1
.1 1
E Fes- -? a u O umo, --? coa C
w_ i rf _ O?
N? I- O t _ o -^ a
r a N a
0 - E
co - m -v cU
co f-
??'0p0 Match
line
? -v
_ z ?- ' 1?-
I' co
r l L co µ 5pp I `r
-1 ?-A I _
-'
O
-?' CO
n -1 _LTi _ I O
O v
Cl)
z
' I L
c7 ?
_=-f _JJJ •_ J?8 = I
? _-I? I I--
? I
_
rr??= s
(AM I _ s a
ET
1 1L

a a

F--p
0

m
-- 1 N

C

- 4 I ca

C

N CD
U'j

1
a_
co _ N

N = [ 1?i-_ I
- r
g
m
M

- cu

- -v

-°
c
N
c E
.N-. co N
oa a
a
N o
Q
T N
= o m
? Q
-p m
O
N a o
O O .C
w`2 a.a
II II
E
?I E
JI 3
I m
3
I
I
a I-
0) o
Cl)
L
O
Q.
Q
O
-C
(a
C
.c
D)
O
c
Q)
C
^U^''
W
O cn
Q, O
0
-Q N
0
O E
0- co
N
N
Q w
U_ o
_ f o o -1 c
1° I IrI I- I 3 12
d O
w T 1 P 0 8
?? I T? O - aNi N
rn
r r I - ! cu
t7 +J </i m
Ui 0 co 'D
-?, - `
p
0 C:) z i.
co CY) In -0
m lo
--- M E CL
_
w rn a?
k a
F- co
CL cu 15
O N
g? I e co a r
v H aTOO e _ _ Match E o
c a
tt?]II- .o o \}' I line z (1) 0
N ?
IT- 0
a. w ca
0. Z
a
E
? L
Cu N
N L O
Co N C
m _N C
O C N
E
Q
L
'71
? ~ N N
C
C O C
1] 0)
7 •D
O (O a)
? 0
U CL C
3 o 0
co N
m E
U O O cp
a) E .-
o .E o 3
Q U N
(O O U
R C N
2 O 0 N
CL m
L a) M O
O ?o .
c ? iu
(O
N
N
3 .-
QO) o
N C N O
O C
O CO
N o
¢
LLJ
a Q U)
LO
c LO
CD Z

cn
W 3
c
O W
LO
N O < o

N cn
LO
Z
c? M
0 0
C) o
O

z
CD
co co
N o : r o - >,
c ;
1 Q

co Cf) O
CD
C)
LO
m (v
.2 LU
Q : O
O ?5 a> U)

N

a
3 Cn

Cj)

M (n ° 0 M
U CD U N
= o
0 -8,
?• N ' lLl N L 5

M
I
; •?

a m

Ll.

= o
o
m

a
.°c w E -0
N °
T- 7 N CC) N ?¢
. ?. i >- C ca
cu
vI 0
C Q
L N cu

W
O

Q) N o o
a
LL 0- t ?Z O p N0.0 CD

I _? z
'a oa o Qw
a?

U a uj
>
o
F- E o O V o

J
O
W
O
z ci ri C
as o

O ?d
LO -0
V) (D
? E
tii •
d An
Z
O a) 0

O
LO
-
O
U')
O Ul)
'
O
LO
O H U5
U
N r ?- r N

(GA ON 11) UOII BA813 co
a w
co
O
)
0
C
Cfl . 0
Q ?n
LLJ

O
a Q C
LO
LO
C:) W

E
: CD
:E
J
CD
-Z?
T -

o CD
>
U)
;
O Q
z r 3 E
E E

a- a- LLJ

•= co M _0 z

4- O
N_ O
N U)
O
: p
O
z
CD O
M M
N n
: : d
N _
a
m
?O

O
rn o U
I CD M
•++
Q)
W
D CO
(D co
V : O 3

CD
CD CD O
O W 0 E
0

M
M a) o
U
Q 1 v ? o J o

V E
0
0
8
C
) -_
LO
N 0
L "It 15
-:5 o v

a) co
? o
C1 ; W o = co E
z
/
Q) 2
C13 CO
I
G) co
3
N C CO ?_ -
N 0 D

0
W
E
?,cco
O
CD o
? (D
F-

(Q .
c
*1
m
co C-)
LO
.E-
E
-2-0-
z E
N> g a? U «
Q ? ?O U = p L?L O> J c

W
w •
N
o C
0 t0
e- cv) p
c o z cv ri IL 0
Q

U-
a-
0
t ?
o p ?
:
O O

C/)
U
W o
ai O
Ln Co C

. . . . Q a L
O Z a? O
in C:

O LO O LO O In O LO O U -o af
N r- r ' r N C L
O m U
(aA9N 4) uO ilen 013
aww

C) CD
0 0 4-
LU a?
o a Q n
L : LO > Z
E :? W
J G
co LLJ
o U)
Z U)
,. ?. E :D
cn U) : o p
d ? W
0 0 c
CD (D co
Z
.F.. N N o
= L a
CD M p z
w
co N / •? co cu O
U) 20
U
a) E
00 C? (D W
r I: ; M E o CO
O s
/?
U)
O ?/
T 3 V
N O
M C)
o W o f Of
m a)
` ? U o
? - N
o
EL E
O
N
Z -j
o N
U- .0 cu
?W E OW _0M (n
a) C*
C13 CO Q)
_ N t-
cu a)
r_ >- (40 U) E cu E
U) CD r_
C1 I E m c
++ > 3
n N R3 `D
W O 0 N ?` cts N
N - oo
W 4. i >• .s m
uj Lo E E- = r of
z E
o ? ? Q W
co Q w'? > U o
o a o u o o c
CD zc) a 3
a ¢0
a? o 0
co W `? ..
Fi?E
Q) A)
0
Z o to c
W 'r E
O 'C
fit I it! III I C z a) o
F,Tnc
LO O LO O LO O LCD O LO O V o
N N r- ' N w L
U
0 a) co
WAON 11) U011BA013 a E w co
C°
C)
o a '0

Q Q "
W z

o Q L
Ln
U)
T
Z
° W
T) LLI
s 2
CD
Q CD
O :
4) -F
0
Z CO LO
o CO
a
(n U) E

LO Z
C'7
O C'7
O 0
Cll LU
O O U)
CN C4 0 CD m z
C'7 N 0 O

U) -
w CL z

0
co

CD
M (D
E C)
N Lc) c
U ? W
M M (n
G

O
L _
_ (n

N > 3

CD °
M W o E M

:

:

: C/) a)
a)
CD
. V o J ON
J ?

f E
o
Q a?
o
Lo
0 o o U
E
c? O N L (D -5
153 o d. U
N
'? Q J d O J
W LL o 0 m }-
w
M -ri ry? ^` N
_0
Ln
OD
CD cu
` Cl) O C E
L I Q fn
o
U 1
CC)
N
m `
a?

Q?
: : ?
rn C
d' Q)
?, C .?.+ 7
3 r-
W
LL O d
CL W N
t N = 2-3
3 0
?
Co
w zz- Z3 O .
a) ? f° F--

_
LO O
Z
- W
v? w o ? >
1 U o
oa
o
8 -
0
U b O
O z CN ri a o
Q
i-
l
L

Q) U
CV

j O
O d
Z j Ln ? co C=
O
'
.
LJ I .
O
Q a- ?-
O Z CU O
- CD
O LO O LO O LO O LO O U n
N r r ' r r N c
o L
`
U
(anJN :4) u01}en013 a w co

W
J
Q w

J
?
U) W CO U) 00
0 KS O Z m
O
a
3
O r--

O L
Cl)
o Z U

m I ro
Q
(W
o U)
CL o
m U)
O

o U
w

• o
a
Q
~
o
. cl
O
N
_
0 O
ct
, Q nT
O
- m?
Cl) a .. co
f
ai M
J
Q
l
C
)
J \- E
Cl)
C)
Z Q
w Q a ) .

w Ca.

U) < p

O?
.
'
w . .
mo
J
w O

m a?
N
?/
vJ

w
47 N

U) Q W
0
w
.0
N

3
IL m a °-
G? C) O
O?

o
L
w
U) N
Z f

O O d
_
., QI
C
U

m _
Q
U o .
0 CL

p
(n
E
X :
o h
Q
W w
>
(L

J G

O J

t
(1)

0 :3
z m o
F y c
0)
3 w
Z >
75

Z

'
O
w wm
a
2 C m 4- ?p
O y
U d 'N C
N VI u
1--1 0
u • y m
?- m
CD
0) E
J A O 0 N N ? N m T O m ^ MQ L
U )? ra fu L n O 8 M a1 In
a1 Q N y 5 0 .= U nm L
00
U Q
li)h 1 V O 6 p E N N Of V V .- N h
•/,1 ?a L O U A C 3
F,• 4 4' A O U C'J f7 f7 f7 0 N N O M O
1? pQy¢, o `pp? ?
O W 0 C/) 7.• a e V '(? V Cm') V N R V N b Q Z L
J u MML _ qm Z Z
A N O
>
N
W o o `+ _
4 = m s o 3 E
Emononr, u,rnrn m O
° ov8 0 Evn?N V?aN A / a
y A m s o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m C Q
o z y o y /
w? kr d u €AOa v v ;a W
A N m
ZZ 1 ?! z QIg o o /
a Y A a o A _m Q a N / Q
` O
?fn'Ua` a,,n.-N`O?Nnm?c o O Z N 2
Q 9'o d _
= U ?N ;O N R O Q• / O
/t
m
? Q v `m aiayN:on.m?nmm L° Q!
`1c,
wZ 3 n n m .2:0 w,r,rq,toooo I O
J D ,.._ _. _ i ? g Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q m
o a v
3{' n O C)
1
R
n J \ v
o v
C) CD ' \
O
r4
\ o
w
m ?
w
ct:f
o
w
i O
r-i
?? V)
=
1
JJ/4/ JAYOg
O
I ?
0
a)
1 ?
1 '' Ad6,o
Tn d?
1 0
0
2
Q w
\ U `o
0
J c
a
3
a
? Q F°-
Previously Dredged
h
a
Q N fY :'?!': 7.:1 j?1,:1};1?: ?t•:?`?•"?t,l7i',?ii 1•''l.? ?.'?l::?:,`??.?',":( ','.4:. . ? t.??.•4.?,?.. •?.,? .,.
Q ° o? :.Proposed Post-Isabel Renourishment borrow area=;
W ` O O !??iti ?y::• i.•(:. :''r,.'.r?:#?•>';:i:,•r+:r ^;. r.?.•'.ti?p??;t;G?,?.`?r?:: r,. ..•,?;y F-'S'?'r'f.' :+' ?
7 CL
_
Q O O '? s:a ':x.40?: 's'''^Y? i'g.' `•?C:(,: 3' .:i .'. .;/1"r°yi'i?ii'''i??';'eaT N
1 CD
O c
1 3 04 ii )i 000'L V L
O a» w \ a a
! Ce =Q za)0
d° E2Q \"iv
O a) Q U) o'
•--> L
I m a. U > \ W
U
O m f
WEa))
n.wm
N N

C N

,o N

.n

o

m ?

«
N

m
(V

m
?

?
•
O
?
N O

w
N
N
?
tND
0 y
y
N
.Nl1 pp
N
?(?l
N N N N J (O [D b ?
? m
?

n

.
O Z

N Z

n
Y N N ?p ?`R?p{ a p
p
N pp
N < O

Z n r, n c? -? .
w ? w ? w ? w
N 3

N • a- 0 co
N
Z
O C - co
O Q ?? O u• E O
LL.^?8 U z C E O
O
J Q W ? +C:)
C:>
N t
Z = o cn
g?L Q C. Q
Qm?{- N? 3 Z
\; a Q W O
O Q
O Q m
U)
W - m
O ( lc:) Z
Q
?
J d W
W 'J
ZO
_ Z
ax ,
U)
co _U
d r-<
m A r J
Z),
i ?_
W Z
F- a I t --+------•-- --
?, Z Y m I Q I I-
al U
71
w I• . o o Q
J 4 i 2
<- m
R I • ?^ m i ?- °o
W °°I k a ,? k d" I Z N
F,• ' • L'p I 0 ?
<I ` I U) co
??/w/ an8og '^
' I
4 aD
o ?o
¦
s i Qw
I = o^ I o
I ¦ "Y U I J C
t: •
M ¦
I
T
r • • I `' E
I O Q cn
° I za)0
?? - c
- --------I
0 0 0 ? E ?
" ¦ ¦ 0. W co
LL a
O
U (x I
z U `?tP
g ? Cep ?
a co I_
w ,'? -
J
w J
Zz
d Y _
c
0
cu
U
O
J
cu
a)
Q
0
L
O
m
Q
f6
a)

E
LO
N
O
v
co
U
06

Z
0
0
0
N
w o0
Q °-
U
O
a?
• to
u c
Q
(0
O
Q
0
O
m
LL co
W
Z
_
F- Q
-' o r
o
??I
I
r-
---
--•-
-----• -
-----?--
I
<z --
s
m I Q
? ?I
I

t -kn •
`
° m •

o

w R I
I:
el ?
•

4- •
R
°
ry
-k

-k O

m
w I•
I
? ?
?s
4 v
qV
I

m m•

::
i

r
s

s

s I

I
"
onsou
I

I
• •^
U
?
?
e

I m m m m.

id
?a
?I?
?o
By
?N
?^ I
I

• I
I ;? i„ = I
I ? 14 <? = I
I ?
N s? a? =? °? I
I V• :n 1q it ,
M-

P

I ie ^
I
l$ v Vol ? S s
)T ? ? w I
g I
I?
s . I

a
-----I

mq nY

I-
w
U
orf
l11
a-
U)
N0
0?
w
C)
LL
2
F--
w
w
U)
v
z E
Qw
U o
J c
CL 3
IL 0
`D
Cl)
O
O
N
N
n
U
U
a)
0
co
T
U
a)
a
?
W a)
N L
o An
C
Q CL
z a) 0
F. N C:
LU
f`9 L
0a,U
?Ea1°i
CL wCO

O C tD
U
LL?l O
_ v O
c
W 0
U Q

U J
CD
(p
Z t

Z =a cu
?, Ci
N
p co
g Vie: Q Q CO
a co e 3 o o
e: a O . W o 2 Q
" a O` U
U)
W Sr 0

O m

m C

G
?
o
o U
W J
O Q
Z
Y
U
a
-0
o
= ¢
U
F cu i
CL <
R CO
Z J 13 ? 2 2$ U
W ?.
0 ?
c /
q I a I ?

?
TI i^ i °' I? • Q I U
w
? m b ?
? ? ? I
Q R ? .

n k i ? • • \.J
W ,. l? • r M
Q

m m?

?
I
N
• I L11 `
1 R p '" R E

Ia?ul ansog I `` R I W
I m g m (n
g s
m
I •
z

In
RZ, ?
• ?
R
i a
s I
I
w • r
4 ? •
a m R
e?
I • I °'
m : r I N

?.------•------J • is • •
I F- m
• Z E
I
I s?
?
B ? I
I Q w
o
=
I s a i n s I IL 0

I ?s
• s^ a^ c? ?
° I
I <a
?' rs <? : I

I ¦ rb r
o
I
n a r $v ^ • ?

g? 84 ?g I
U

'`
I ? '1 • ?? °
? I N

go
?
h
s
•
?
?
?
•
I o
w - E
I : I o
•

• p•
c
p
°r uS r o =• I F- N N
•
I --- -- -I w
s --- --- --- ---
?
"` ra ta
a awm

0 _ co
? U
0
U N
•

C M
cu =
U
f J
Q !^
a)
_
F- > -°
Z S
f1 (17
O
C
u
v/
0
L
_
U si ? ?-R
a c,ef ? CV Q
< co Q
?
o o
[
w r m V
U)
0 d

J
a C)
z
FL 0
_ ?- ¢ U)
Q C) r--, p U
I

W Z
J 10 14

<z ? co
i
Q
W

N I (?

y
?, J
cn I?
q
$ a
?? I
3 1
Q
o I
I s ?
m:. m? p l U

? ?
w ?'
I?
u• R
i ry
1 E
??
r? I
"' i
Z
m w `I. •
?? ? ms mg I N
? `

4

'
_I$ •

?o
??g

c
Ro

? .: I
I )
0 a
a
LLJ E
'i4i ?nsoa I ? o

4
m&
I 00

? I
I R,n . Rc ?= ?? I

0 4 <: I
I '
• I N
R2? gg
1 I
Ilk f„ 1 =$ Sr 1 ° p ? ' f0

I
s l ?
<$ ?
=a
a I
I Qw
v o
I o ": I nJ.
n
o
I? a <$ I ? " ? I .

1 ? ..
4
I
U. o a„ -
-s ?, I
$ I

s_ g? ?° I v
i T I o

g
t co
a
`
r
I
w E
N

' I Qa
$
a I z m o
I
------ W v
a)

m- mT
" cu
0: Em
_
?' _ CL wco
O
4-
0
v

a?
U 0
W s

m
Q
F-
'
'
N. N 0 N
i N N N M
: N N yy y y
V U U U: U (l UI U U' () U U, u
d
' U
y y
1 y N, y; N N
U
y
N
y N) N (/) N N N
N N N N
N' N N N N N N N
N
Qi N N
' a n "

a U U U
, U
U
!d? U' N; U N N y U y
N N N
g N

N
n
E
'
vi vi W C/) vi Ui! U) vi vi vi
ui: N
E W, E Q
E E E E
U
?
?
, •
? I I z
Cl) ui

Utoco V'N' Co rn olm --t rM', CO
10 M
O
U 0 n o iC6 0 of C6 NIN o) tn: o
N M M M M'N C) IM M vl to N
'.M U o? 0); v: cl UDM N CI
m O N NI to CY) Lo o N Co ro
M
Q

o M C N
u ui
C d
?1
_ to E
97
N
m U

3 o V L N O Q) Mi0 W-

h
C co'n M tnl s{ O) U,itA O.O l (0 n!n
(o to
0

a m
U

d
0
M
C C M (D10 0'[O^.N 0, C"

CD
.
7

\?
m
m y
c M; N
O
;
4° ojg9 -C?410??o'q

q M
d
N n c,)
E 3 ?;. N Vi M
tD
09 99i
'O'oOq
f
p
C:
o H
L
° w 0 ?
R 9
W
, °
i
>2? c I 2 ° m
(U° o t E C m E E I-
Q Z m m
m
F- C «. C n O N N n N O. Co M M O Co
O d M v v V v V tA,V I V, V v M to
N
3 an? n N' co: N' } M A
(?p y t0A tA1VINIV'?N
V V N to
tO y
i J
O m •C
C 0 O O O O O 6:16 O oo 0;0 o o'o
Z C
'O o
J .
N C O OI O'I Oli O, O',O O O
O a

m C 0) Z
mn

C U)

N
? •D
N
N
N m
d 3 .C N ?i O N M
C)
m d
w
to

.L CO a 'C y

E pp c
O ?6 tp c E
n V M 0 N n' to o n rn n' M

8 E N M M MIN M cin V,M M M v: o

W)
',M

d E (D (p M o V o) O,

M o:M v;n',m c? (o
E M O
M M
M
N N M co

00
M

r 4)
C

O
d „• C c o'o 0 oio 0 0:0 0 0 0 0.0 0 tm ,
•
,
c o 0 C.;C.',o,CD 0 C. 0 0 o

N u' 13
O C 3

mo E
m

1 a
nd
U
a _
m C y N'N N N N N NIN N N N C141 04 m N N N1 NI N':. N'N N N
? W
cr - e?'o E
c 14991?
' a?R°9C?19°
,°q4 Y 00
E0. o U
?-
j y t0
b d' d d d d d d d d t0 N l6
o 4 LL LL LL U. LL LL LL? E m m 7; 7 71 7 ?, 7 m j
-?
717 7 E c
2
t m
N m N C
d N w.
N N
N N
N
N
N (V
NiN
N
N
a0 00
N'iN
a0', V?
N',•-
?'

N N

Nd ? ._

Ni N; N.,NN N N

N

N D
d

C

c m m
w F
a
I
m m
cn
Z C
U N N t o?o
c m 0>
m
N d U N __0
U
lCp
d N d m E %
E •Z 2
W nO
(o to t(')•O
U-) to
'7 V n U?t.Mj
M
h N
M MLq
N a
d
W aNjto to ii V: MN
n co to 'T, r O N

m?
?$tr
y , M c
E
N ; a
?--
? U c
i NE
C? yQ
oc fn nN Q ui
m `o

d o
Y Yi t

2 a c

_

°Oo

°o o o

oo
++ O

o
+
ol
0
0
?i+
001
o
?I+
0
o
+
0 0
o 0
+ +
a0)
tm
=
'- c
m o
to
ninln n n:n
olOO,(o'vNO
o'+ + + +
n
ro
+
n
m
+
d
m o
m
v-
V O
J
N +

O + OtfY

? O tn'n 0,0 0 0 0
L
d
m
10
+1ton O:(p0)N
N co
O,,p.O ?1?',
n
co

d c
y
C
Q
m e C
U Z N N to n O
iN (n n a0 Of.
N1 N
N M (o
N N Q Z Q CL U) N N M co
Q .Z..
Z
Q. 0
Q
U
O
O
N d
C
N a)
i E
L1J ? L
O to

Za)0
H N C
-
LU
Co
` L
0
Q0c
o
w E m
CL wco
(D
I
o ° ° o -o'- o!z
aD 0 0 0'o a:o a o o o o 0 0 o o 0 0 0
co M, M O W N (D V OD N O' V O N O CO O) (D V M CD a0 M (1)
` M Q) • co V n a0 Q) W t0 co V, n I N (D . Lo u t0 t0 0 O M V O 1 0
CL () ?NM V (D V(DMnn!tAoc,2 66M c2 N nnnco
I•
° ° ° ° 0 °
a) v to o '0 0 0 0 0 0 to o to 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 jo
'N OIL N'? N-N N'io NIO O V O- M N C) M N N N O O M
i 0 q! 0, Ol0 O.O O O 010 O O O O O O O O O O O O o O'O
!CD O1IO 6,6 OIO 0,0 OIIO Olo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (D 0 OIO
I
? I I
i
?.. i I
E o o \° \ o' o' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o0 oo0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a? o'o°loo°°oo 0 00oooooaoo0
'n(DD)?NLO -W a) NN O (D O O rn n 000rnn v rn ;rn
NI o) (D V n! rn tALq'ON O?MO-N-000)MO'V:a)O(DMniO
A '.-- O!O C14 .-?? ?:O?O'O 0 O CO N O O M (V O r o- 0- t0;0
d I
I
C
E
Ur E!?} O) 0) V. V N i O V: O r V O (D .- N N co Q) 0 0 V LO (A N ? (D , M
?••? ? to (0: n co rn n n m n N. n O' CO CA O .- r CO O CO O V 0) M m N
_ iM N N U?N N;0 V N N,N N,N N V N ('M N N M N M N N M N VIN
N I O O O O O CD CD O O O' O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O j 0
4 N'
a a? m (L) a) N a) a)
U U U U U U U
m m m m ?a m m
v d? min U t? d y? U t d y v t?? a) y v t d rn U t a? y U t m y? U'; t
a) O C 2 m a) C elm a) C N' m a) C m a) C? m 0 C? m a) C? m a)
L m l L a) . C a) . L () L a) L a) L a) L d
CL m U; a) E' 0,s2 W El U :2 a) E 072 a) E U 2 a) E U 'O a) E U 'O_ m E U ?
? O o (D N F' 0 ca F- ! a a) N ?- a) a) ?- 0 Co a) (D ° a) a) ?- !
J,F mm 3F- -co a) co (D 3Hmm 3F- C°m mm 3Com 3~ mmi i a) ,
co
3
E 0 J J. J J J 0
y I
0 W W o I M co (D (D (D (D ! to t0 (A 0 0 Lo to 0 CO w w co (D (D (D (D
Z O
?I
V O'I 0 0 0 0 1 0 O ?- .-- i (Y N N N M r M r M r r r M t0 (O (A(A
C r r r r r r i r r r r r r r
U # C
m
d i
m ,
(B C i
C C O n n n n r (D (D V7 (D a) 00 a0 co ao a0 ao a0 O O O O M M M' M
m O w (D (D (D (D V V V V CO CO M' M t0 t0 (O t0 t0 t0 t0 t0 n n n n N N N N
m r o; + + + + +•. + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + t't
n n n n 6) rn a) O M c,)m1c) n n n nNN(V NCO co W ao a)OCO ob
U M M M aJ N N N N n n n, n - - .- n n n n M M M co a) M M M
O M Cr) M M V V V V V V 'q! V i0 (O to r0 (O (O t0 t0 (D co (D (D (D (D (D (D
m
000o
O (D O
CAIN c
co v to r
I
o l o G' O
N;N O!C`
o0Olc
O!O O1c
c e c o
?(D N d
O 0 O C•
LO N' ?
O l0 N c
N N N (`
O'O O;c
a
(
m'N vIt
o,o UIF
m' E ?Iz
O a) miF
F-; m m,
c
(D cD (D a
(o T U
r r r
?
co cocoa
t t t ?
n n n r
M CO M o
n n n r
0
LO
U) (D
a?
W =
-I (J)
m
i ?
I
°
Q
r N Q
Q
z
oI Wc
r O G
i O Q
w
CO
U
r °
MAWM
I W
I
OI M=
M W C7
0 /^ O
Q C)
N
wo
E
i ?
0
I
00
r
I CD
N
E
co
i ?
Q w
U_ 0
U, J C
CL 30
? Q
r >I O
Q z
L)
0
C c
CU m
E
o
Q0-
Z a) o
N C
CD
W
(9
C t
U
00)
0? Eac)
awm
cn
r-
w
O
CO

W
U) O
W L
U)
J
? m
E <

O
=3 Q
O
c
Q
m
N F N N N N N N N N N
V $?; U V U U U U U U U U
q N N N N N U1 N N N
U U U? U U U y V U N N y NI N NC? N
' U U
U U N U Q
d N N N N N g N N N N

a N C ucil

C m N N
N N N N N y N N
E E ?n N N N 2 N VI U
d', N N N Nj N N"
T ?/1 a N N CL d

m
Z
?cn C,(6 ui 66Cd C6C6C6 ~E6(6('uiuiui(6 U)V)
LL ?-I'6C6?Ncdvi N.
L) U)

E WW
U- U-

O
V ?-• 01 In N 'C I? a0 '- N

m O O N CO:: O N
f0
N M
o M
O •
CD O
U'I O O f0, 0 '- Cl 10 10 M 7

ml O N 7,O O N n 0 W Ol
V O
U -. f'1 r, N '- CO m ,a co

m CO NIco 0 all n c6 N
' co

L

U) w

)
t
V
c
V Y M N
I U N M
I co m N, N M
a a e '. ?
H I 4-
U
m r q N' N I O
t C

O aa}}
C f`? OMD N N N 0 'R n

N
.= O N O O N r O i0

/0
O cm

C
j? G d,M m

r M M N V O N O
(D OIN to
m C' O) M M M N aD o 10 o
E ,_ . 10 N •Q V' M n M y

G N C4 OD M 0 M V'
m C ?0 O VV M O V
E; M N. ?-. v in O v,

a

W
« AC9014Ro9999949 Q a 'N
R44iRg44444 jy44o4R4?4 V m
O?
m '
Z Z •C
y
Zn?G?
E O
?E
?E L)
CO
J
wm c?

C m pO
G ErnN'ooMOm??rnMm

> ?0 MI O N O M N M V
V R In V N V 'Q I
V 'V V' ??

?0
'C E
M r O W N 0) N M
10 O' f0 t{ 1n aD N M
1n l0
1n
n
W0
?
' m E
M v' N N 10 m a0
L > m i c) w n O f0
` ? O
m Q
?-- F Of V n
m
O O Oj0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
i0
O {p m
h I
.
V V
V
O
?'O.O O OIO 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 V V I V N V
m d V V
?O O 610 O OHO O O a Q
a

CD

N Q p O m

?mm?

N J

o w I j

N a

°h, =

N "? VJ

O
-a
O
N
co
0
a
M
0
N
0
CI
n
p C14
q V a
m m N E (W
C
O f
+7 O
i O N DI O N
ILO
M f
f0 M M V M M of
V
V C Ela
0 .
0 N N
' V t
0 ? M c
0 v
M C
M s
N M M M E cIt
l1 e-I
O V N ?'c C
E
m
0) m E c p }
I
7
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O ?.
F
1
l
l 'I
N
ADO O 0i0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , M v n m M I M a
? 0 010 O OIO O 0', O W
-0
L
a ? y
X
7 d y y d. L...
3
a I •D U

Q m y

c 6 E
M M'M MMMM M M M M N
m?g99 mq ?q???
m
H LL
U
m
m M M MIM M M M M M m
am44 9R44444
m 'M MIM M M co M N?
amii99 0I44MI
W
L
a

c L° a y
[` y

m A m m d d d
LLLL LLLL U.
o
o v6r;? 'p

N

CO -6
E A 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
N
„oQaQaaQa Q
y cncichMOScic?c>chY E i cr 7 7 7 7 0
c' c' a
L°
Ao'QQQQQ 5
N c =In, MCSAchcb" =-

O C 00

r-
E Q[ m w w;!
n "E
0 l N

r a
7a u u it
a)
fn

o

Z m
m m W

fn- J
N

W
ul'

O4
-
1'
N

7

N

N

N

M

N

0

q

n

I

N

ul

a

? I?

W'In

n

DN

t

M

N

-

O

N

M

7In

T

I

O

N Q.
t

a p
N O m
O
d
q° c
N

0
fn
N

O W
N

V
a) (1)

C
co

L
m E
It ? q
m m q n• to H m

q
e E
e' E m
Z E

C m
C
m?
co v
y

`s

r
4
c

o

o o?
oog

+ + +
N M O)

o
o

+
O)

0
o

+
O

0
o

+
M

0
o

+
t
0

?

+
V

0
o

+
O

$

+
U)

0

$

+
n m

>
¢

N

Q v

m
w

z

•' c',
moo

q a
m jp'+

"

°P

u?
OO

+ +
N

co
n

+
M

m
n

+

i

+

n
m

+

n
o

+
n m

>
Q

r

a N

cn,Mco
d wvM

q +.+ +
m Y
n'O

n
rn

+

o rn
0?

+ +
1
0

n
v?

+
v d'

>'
¢ p
?
II
N Co O)

) C

•a Q W

(

p

N
M
1?] p
1(i
N
t00
fN0
tn0
N.O
12 I
I
n
A
M ,
to
O
'
o .
}
°
?
o I
v ,
a C
0 v v v v m a , ? ? N L 2 r
i
.
.v
a ?A m
'11o n 2
O E
m w
0
v 2 L
a b aq a a
cu
Z U) Q IO
U
O
2
0-
? C
N
111
O
Q d
Z N O
C
o w
w
L
0(D
m
wEa)
a.Wco
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mike Street, Division of Marine Fisheries
David McHenry, Wildlife Resources Commission
Reneee Gledhill-Earley, Dept. of Cultural Resources
John Dorney, Division of Water Quality - Raleigh
Noel Lutheran, Division of Water Quality - Wilmington
FROM: M. Ted Tyndall
Morehead City strict Manager

l 5 ??
i
SUBJECT: Modification Request for CAMA Major Permit #124-01 issued to Carteret County
and the Towns of Pine Knoll Shores, Indian Beach, and Emerald Isle
DATE: September 4, 2002
Attached is a permit modification request from Coastal Science & Engineering, LLC acting
as agent, requesting to modify CAMA Major Permit #124-01 issued to Carteret County and the
Towns of Pine Knoll Shores, Indian Beach and Emerald Isle for beach nourishment activities.
According to the attached request dated August 9, 2002, the permittee currently proposes to
modify the boundaries of the borrow area B2 to allow excavations up to 400 feet south of the
permitted south boundary, to modify the boundaries of borrow area B2 to disallow all excavations
within 400 feet south of the prescribed north boundary or in waters shallower than 30' NGVD, and
to increase the permitted excavation depth from 4' to 6' in areas "1", "2", and "3" of borrow area
B2. Also, according to a second attachment dated August 21, 2002, the permittee proposes some
changes in the volumes and lengths of nourishment for phase 2 including: 1) placing approximately
1,570,000 cubic yards on 24,000 feet westerly from the Emerald Isle/Indian Beach town line, and
2) continuing Phase 2 westwardly from the base project limit some 6500 or 6600 linear feet
involving 240,000 cubic yards. Finally, the applicant proposes some specifications for dune
construction discussed in the EIS for those areas where there is insufficient sand in the dune for
flood protection. Reasons for the modifications along with timing commitments can be found
throughout the three attachments.
The Division of Coastal Management would like to respond to the permittee's request as
quickly as possible and would ask that you respond directly to Mr. Doug Huggett by September 14,
2002 with any comments. As always, the DCM appreciates your efforts and cooperation.
Attachments
cc: Doug Huggett - Major Permits Coordinator, DCM
151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza ll, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled 110%a Post Consumer Paper
4
w
Cm, SE COASTAL SCIENCE & ENGINEERING LLC
PO BOX 8056 COLUMBIA SC 29202 • TEL [phone] • FAX [phone] • EMAIL [e-mail]
August 9, 2002
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
Regulatory Field Office
USACE, Wilmington District
PO Box 1890
Wilmington NC 28402-1890
Mr Ted Tyndall
NC Division of Coastal Management
151B Hwy 24
Morehead City NC 28557
RE: Bogue Banks Beach Restoration Project (Federal Permit 200000362)
Request for Permit Modification (CSE 2058-01-4)
Gentlemen:
I am writing on behalf of the holders of the above-reference permit (Carteret County, Town of
Emerald Isle, Town of Indian Beach, and Town of Pine Knoll Shores) to request a modification
of the permitted borrow areas. Specifically, we request the following.
1) Modify the boundaries of borrow area B2 to allow excavations up to 400 feet (ft) south of
the permitted south boundary.
2) Modify the boundaries of borrow area B2 to disallow all excavations within 400 ft south
of the prescribed north boundary or in water depths shallower than 30 ft NGVD.
3) Increase the permitted excavation depth from 4 ft to 6 ft in areas "1 ", "2", and "3" of
borrow area B2.
The above-requested changes are illustrated on Sheet 1 (large format). Coordinates for the
referenced areas are given on Sheet 1.
Reasons for Modifications
• Experience of Phase 1 (Pine Knoll Shores and Indian Beach).
• Additional confirmation of sediments and bathymetry in borrow area B2.
• Need to reduce the possibility of turtle takes during Phase 2.
• Need to reduce operational delays due to buried tires in the borrow areas.
• Desire to reduce construction time so as to avoid portions of the permitted periods when
water temperatures are attractive to turtles (eg, temperatures >57°F).
r
w
Mr. Mickey Sugg I Mr. Ted Tyndall August 9, 2002
RE: Request for Permit Modification (Federal Permit 200000362) [2058-01-4] Page 2
COS E
Experience During Phase 1
Table 1 summarizes the work accomplished during Phase 1 (Pine Knoll Shores and Indian
Beach). A total of 1,733,580 cubic yards (cy) were placed via hopper dredge along 6.75 miles
between 26 November 2001 and 11 April 2002. This represents about 80 percent of the
contracted volume. The full scope of Phase 1 was not accomplished because of operational
delays associated with buried tires in borrow areas B 1 and B2 along with work stoppages
following turtle takes on 15 December and 11 April.
Approximately 60 percent of the project was obtained from borrow areas B 1 and B2, and -40
percent from borrow area A. All tires were obtained from borrow areas B 1 and B2. Based on
review of the dredging records, it appears the majority of tires were excavated along the northern
half of borrow area B 1 in water depths less than 35 ft. Upon determination of where most of the
tire encounters occurred, the contractor was directed to avoid the inshore lane of borrow area
B 1. The incidence of tires dropped significantly after this measure was taken.
Four turtles were taken on December 15 at the easternmost end of borrow area B1. Water
temperatures that day were above 57°F. Turtle-trawling and other mitigation measures were
implemented beyond those required under the permit following the December turtle takes.
Phase 2 Excavation Plan
Phase 2 will consist of placement of up to -2.4 million cubic yards along the easternmost -5-6
miles of Emerald Isle. The preferred borrow area is a portion of B2, because of its proximity to
the site and quality of sediments.
Between May and July 2002, CSE collected 60 additional borings in the southern half of borrow
area B2 and central portion of borrow area A. Cores are numbered B2-41 through 132-90 and
A101 through A112. The sediment quality data for each core is given on Sheets 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and
7. Tables 2 and 3 provide key sediment statistics, including mean grain size, overfill ratios (RA),
percent mud, and percent CaCo3 (shell/limestone). Appended to this letter is a set of sheets
giving detailed grain-size distribution data for each core. Core logs are shown on Sheet 1 for
two representative transects along the central and southern margin of borrow area B2.
The results of the May-July 2002 borings were combined with previous data. (See Final Envi-
ronmental Assessment, Appendix E, Geotechnical Data.) Tables 4 and 5 list groups of cores and
combine the results statistically for four sub-areas within borrow area B2 as shown on Sheet 1.
Groups of cores are those falling within the designated boundaries of each sub-area. Table 6
(following page) summarizes the sediment quality and quantities for sub-areas 1, 2, and 3 in bor-
row area B2. Sub-areas 1, 2, and 3 represent -22 percent of the permitted area of borrow area
B2.
CSE analyzed the grain-size distribution of all cores and selected three sub-areas of borrow area
B2 ("1 ", "2", and "3"), which are considered to contain better quality sediments to a deeper
depth than other permitted borrow areas (as measured by RA's, percent mud, percent coarse
material, etc). While sediments vary through the column in each core (see core logs on Sheet 2),

Mr. Mickey Sugg I Mr. Ted Tyndall August 9, 2002
RE: Request for Permit Modification (Federal Permit 200000362) [2058-01-4] Page 3
COSE
the composite grain-size distributions and sediment types are very similar. Mud content in the
sub-areas averages 6.7 percent (Table 4) and falls within accepted standards. Mud is generally
in the form of minor thin lenses (flasers less than 0.05 ft thick) or distributed through sand layers
as soft mud. This form of mud is expected to disperse rapidly during the process of dredging and
not form permanent deposits on the beach. Sub-areas 1, 2, and 3 do not contain significant
sections of stiff silt/clay based on the available borings. It is the applicants' desire to avoid
excavations and permanent placement of clay-sized material. As per terms of the permit, the
contractor will be directed to avoid such areas should they be encountered during construction.
TABLE 6. Summary of sediment types in borrow area B2 - sub-areas 1, 2, and 3.
Represents the coarse shell fraction; predominant shell type is Donaxsp.
MS (medium sand), PS (poorly sorted), S-CS (strongly coarse skewed).
Incorporating the mud percentage.]

Sub- Average

Water

Area
Volume (cy)
Number Average

Core
Mean

% %

Coarser

Sediment
Area
Number
D
e
p,h
(acres) @ 6.0 ft
Section of
Cores
L
n)th Size
(mm)
Mud
t man
Description" RA.**
(
? (
B2-1 40 76.8 -743,000 14 5.2 0.381 5.2 13.8 MS,PS,S-CS 1.28
B2.2 38 78.0 --755,500 9 5.9 0.322 8.0 11.7 MS,PS,S-CS 1.40
B2-3 39 114.8 -1,111,100 17 6.3 0.349 7.2 11.8 MS,PS,S-CS 1.32
1,2,3 39 269.6 -2,610,000 40 5.8 0.350 6.7

12.4
7

MS,PS,S CS

1.34
Operational Considerations
The present permit prescribes maximum excavation depths of 3.0 ft in borrow area A and 4.0 ft
in borrow areas B 1 and 132. These depths were established as a result of recommendations by
resource agencies. It is generally believed that shallow cuts via hopper dredges allow more rapid
recolonization of the sea bed by benthic organisms (Dr R Van Dolah, SC Dept Natural
Resources, pers comm, August 2000). They also yield sediments that have already been washed
once in the hopper prior to discharge onto the beach.
Offsetting the favorable advantages of hopper dredges are slower production rates and a greater
tendency to entrain turtles compared with conventional cutterhead suction dredges. During
bidding for Phase 1, dredging contractors indicated the permitted borrow area sections are too
thin for cutterhead dredges. A minimum embankment thickness of -5-6 ft is generally required
for ocean-certified cutterhead dredges (K Smith, Weeks Marine Construction, July 2001).
Therefore, CSE has collected the present geotechnical data for purposes of confirming a thicker
borrow area section and encouraging bids using conventional pipeline dredges.
Following are considered to be the primary advantages of modifying the permit to allow up to 6-
foot-thick excavations via cutterhead dredge in portions of borrow area 132:

Mr. Mickey Sugg I Mr. Ted Tyndall August 9, 2002
RE: Request for Permit Modification (Federal Permit 200000362) [2058-01-41 Page 4
CSC
1) The potential for another turtle take will greatly diminish. NMFS has indicated that there
is no recorded incident of a turtle being taken by a cutterhead dredge.
2) The daily production rate per dredge is likely to be higher than the rate per hopper
dredge, thus shortening the overall period of construction and environmental impacts.
3) It will improve the chances of staying within the permitted environmental window for
dredging while accomplishing the permitted scope of work.
4) Cutterhead dredges are expected to encounter fewer tires because the required borrow
area will be smaller.
5) By restricting dredging to the southern margin of borrow area B2 and shifting it up to
400 ft seaward, water depths will average about 39 ft and will likely reduce the incidence
of tires which, in Phase 1, tended to be concentrated closer to the 30-foot-depth contour.
The permit holder plans to request bids for alternate equipment (hopper dredges and cutterhead
dredges) so that the economic and environmental advantages and disadvantages of each may be
weighed prior to selection of a contractor.
Sediment Quality
The standard measure of sediment quality for nourishment projects is the overfill ratio (RA),
which quantifies the degree of similarity and performance stability between the borrow
sediments and the native beach sediments. As detailed in the final Environmental Assessment
for the project, CSE adopted a conservative native grain-size distribution based on samples taken
from the base of the foredune, dry beach, beach face, and low-tide terrace. Finer sediments
found in the trough and outer bar are not included in the composite native beach. The permitted
borrow areas have RA's (composites) ranging from -1.15 (borrow area A) to -1.58 (borrow area
B 1). Borrow area B2 (prenourishment composite) was 1.5 based on 40 cores obtained prior to
Phase 1 (Final EA, App E, Table E-1). With the addition of 60 cores to a deeper depth and
identification of the most favorable -20 percent of borrow area B2, CSE has determined revised
composite RA's as follows (see Table 5):
132-Area 1 = 1.28
B2-Area 2 = 1.40
132-Area 3 = 1.32
132-Areas 1-3 combined = 1.34
Mud accounts for 0.067 of this ratio (ie, 6.7 percent mud of the deposit contains material finer
than 0.0625 mm mean diameter).
Calcium carbonate (eg, shell or calcite material) averages 42 percent for 132-Areas 1, 2, and 3.
The majority of shell material (-70 percent) consists of crushed shell having mean diameters of
less than 2 mm. Approximately 12 percent of 132-Areas 1, 2, and 3 consists of sediments coarser
than 2 mm. The majority of material coarser than 2 mm was found to be in the form of small
clams common to the surf zone (eg, Donax sp). Isolated, large shell clasts (Quahog sp) were
found in 22 percent of the borings in borrow area B2 and 92 percent of the new borings in
borrow area A (A101-A1 12). Experience during Phase I confirmed there was a higher
'4 ,
4
Mr. Mickey Sugg I Mr. Ted Tyndall August 9, 2002
RE: Request for Permit Modification (Federal Permit 200000362) [2058-01-4] Page 5
COSE
percentage of coarse shell material and quahogs taken from borrow area A. Based on the lower
incidence of large shells in borrow area B2, CSE recommends the majority of Phase 2 material
be obtained from borrow area B2. There appears to be no consistent pattern for the occurrence
of Quahog shells in 132-Areas 1, 2, and 3. The core logs on Sheet 2 note the presence and depth
of Quahogs in applicable borings.
Summary
CSE is submitting this request for permit modification to allow excavations up to 6 ft deep in
borrow area B2 (sub-areas 1, 2, and 3), to allow shallower excavations (to 4 ft deep) up to 400 ft
south of borrow area B2, and to disallow all excavations within 400 ft of the northern boundary
of borrow area B2 or in water depths less than 30 ft. Sediment quantity in borrow area 132-Areas
1, 2, and 3 is considered more favorable as outlined herein and illustrated on Sheets 2 through7.
If deeper excavations are permitted, alternative equipment including conventional cutterhead
dredges may operate. This would potentially reduce the construction time and duration of
environmental impacts. A cutterhead dredge would reduce the probability of a turtle take.
Please contact our office as soon as possible if you require additional information. Enclosed
with your copies of this letter are three sets of attachments for your distribution to corresponding
resource agencies.
Thank you for your consideration.
Yours truly,

Timothy W Kana PhD (NC PG 1752)
Project Director
Enclosures
cc: Carteret County, Greg Rudolph
Town of Emerald Isle, Mayor Art Schools
Town of Pine Knoll Shores, Mayor Robert Gallo
Town of Indian Beach, Mayor Buck Fugate
CSE, Bill Forman

TABLE 1. Bogue Banks Nourishment Project - Phase 1
Pine Knoll Shores and Indian Beach
SUMMARY
Dates of 1st and Last Pumping: 26 November 01 thru 11 April 02
Dates down for Turtles: 15 Dec. thru 26 Dec; 11 April thru 12 April; etc.
PINE KNOLL SHORES INDIAN BEACH TOTAL
Contracted
Volumes (cy): 1,402,983 cy 770, 233 cy 2,173,216 cy
Contracted
Lengths (ft): 24,475 ft 13,727 ft 38,202 ft
(4.6 miles) (2.6 miles) (7.24 miles)
Volume Placed (cy)
Surveyed in Place: 1,276,586 cy 456,994 cy 1,733,580 cy
(80% contracted volume)
Lengths
Completed (ft) 25,475 ft 10,225 ft 35,700 ft
(93.5% contracted length)
Stations/Locality: 1+00 to 254+75 254+75 to 320+00
(Town Line to Town Line) 330+00 to 363+00
372+00 to 379+00
Contractor: Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company
Hopper Dredges: Manhattan Island, Sugar Island, Dodge Island
Total Loads: 719 (58% from 131; 42% from A)
Tire Trawling: 9.5 days (21-24 Dec, 26-31 Dec)
Turtle Trawling: 35 days (21 Dec 01-5 Jan 02; 24 Mar 02-12 Apr 02)
Dates/Locality(ies)/#s of Turtle Takes:
e.g. 15 Dec. 2 K-R's, 2 Loggerheads East End of 61
12 Apr. 1 K-R Area A
Est. Hopper Volumes A 722,281 cy (42%)
Taken Out Of: B 981,734 cy (58%)
Total 1,704,015 cy (100%)
Est. number of tires taken in A, 131, 62:
By Dredge
A) 0
B1) 6,671
B2) 391
By Trawler
61) 1,500

TABLE 2. Bogue Banks Offshore Sediment Characteristics May - July 2002 Survey August 2002

Locality -water 10 Recovery Interval Grain Size Distributlone %Coarser % % Sedltnent
(Borrow Area) Depth (Ft) Lgth (Ft) (Ft) Mean (mm) Std Dev. (mm Skewness Then 2 mm Mud Carbonate Description'
A 47 A-101 3.3 0-3.3 0.333 0.361 -0.413 13.2 6.0 36.6 MS,ps,sc-s
Supplementary 46 A-102 3.5 0.3.5 0.367 0.364 -0.323 12.7 3.9 39.7 MS,ps,sc-s
May-June 02 47 A-103 4.4 04.4 0.405 0.350 -0.231 14.4 5.1 43.0 MS,ps,sc-s
Samples 47 A-104 2.4 0-2.4 0.375 0.376 -0.314 12.5 3.9 48.3 MS,ps,sc-s
48 A-105 4.2 0-4.2 0.475 0.439 -0.182 10.1 2.9 45.3 MS,ps,c-s
49 A-106 2.7 0-2.7 0.279 0.399 -0.598 8.9 2.1 29.0 MS,ps,sc-s
47 A-107 3.5 0.3.5 0.333 0.366 -0.412 12.5 4.3 41.6 MS,ps,sc-s
48 A-108 3.4 0-3.4 0.375 0.396 -0.334 10.4 4.0 41.8 MS,ps,sc-s
55 A-109 4.6 0.4.6 0.449 0.361 -0.139 13.7 4.2 65.7 MS,ps,sc-s
48 A-110 3.6 0-3.2 0.661 0.361 0.131 23.6 2.8 31.7 CS,ps,sym
51 A-111 2.5 0-2.5 0.634 0.386 0.084 19.3 2.5 68.7 CS,ps,sym
52 A-112 2.5 0-2.5 0.414 0.386 -0.279 12.7 5.8 44.3 MS,ps,sc-8
B2 39 82-41 3.2 0-3.2 0.433 0.378 -0.150 11.7 5.2 56.3 MS,ps,c-s
Supplementary 35 B2-42 6.4 0.6.4 0.283 0.392 -0.452 6.7 7.8 35.4 MS,ps,sc-s
May-July 02 45 B2-43 3.7 0.3.7 0.242 0.387 -0.606 8 5.6 28.2 FS,ps,sc-a
Samples 45 B244 3.6 0.3.6 0.336 0.337 -0.303 14.4 8.8 49.6 MS,ps,sc-s
39 82-45 4.6 04.6 0.310 0.347 -0.346 11.8 8 32.7 MS,ps,sc-s
45 13246 3.8 0-3.8 0.286 0.338 -0.344 10.2 18.1 34.3 MS,ps,sc-s
38 8247 3.6 0-1.6 0.688 0.373 0.266 21.1 3.6 50.0 CS,ps,f-s
42 8248 6.9 0.6.9 0.322 0.344 -0.338 11.2 2.5 41.4 MS,ps,sc-s
40 8249 5.0 0-5.0 0.315 0.362 -0.322 8.5 9.6 28.9 MS,ps,sc-s
47 B2-50 2.6 0.1.4 0.312 0.381 -0.366 9 3.4 47.2 MS,ps,sc-s
40 B2-51 4.5 04.5 0.352 0.342 -0.224 11.7 3.9 40.3 MS,ps,sc-s
43 B2-52 6.2 0.6.2 0.299 0.361 -0.352 8.7 11.7 32.1 MS,ps,sc-s
45 132.53 2.8 0-2.8 0.490 0.315 -0.045 23.2 2.6 50.1 CS,ps,c-s
41 B2.54 4.2 04.2 0.263 0.349 -0.503 10.6 5.1 30.5 MS,ps,sc-s
44 82-55 3.9 0-3.9 0.317 0.385 -0.547 12.9 2.5 26.7 MS,ps,sc-s
40 B2-56 4.3 04.3 0.491 0.390 -0.136 14.3 1.8 63.5 CS,ps,sc-s
40 B2-57 2.6 0-2.6 0.440 0.367 -0.230 16.7 3.4 46.7 MS,ps,sc-s
42 82.58 4.0 04 0.202 0.598 -1.324 1.6 2.2 15.4 MS,mws,sc-s
38 B2-59 5.0 0.3.6 0.341 0.377 -0.333 11.3 13.4 31.9 MS,ps,sc-s
39 82-60 6.5 0.6.5 0.402 0.322 -0.179 18.2 8.4 39.0 MS,ps,sc-s
39 82.61 5.4 0.5.4 0.406 0.349 -0.169 14.2 4.5 40.7 MS,ps,c-s
41 B2-62 7.3 0.7.3 0.290 0.353 -0.398 9.7 12.9 32.3 MS,ps,sc-s
42 132-63 4.5 04.5 0.278 0.352 -0.429 9.6 21.1 38.7 MS,ps,sc-s
38 82-64 6.9 0-5.9 0.303 0.342 -0.385 12.4 11.6 29.8 MS,ps,sc-s
41 82-65 4.4 04.4 0.341 0.327 -0.258 15.1 9.4 53.9 MS,ps,sc-s
36 82-66 5.9 0-5.9 0.442 0.369 -0.095 12.1 6.9 51.5 MS,ps,c-s
39 82-67 6.0 0-6.0 0.355 0.340 -0.238 13.1 10 46.7 MS,ps,sc-s
39 82-68 6.7 0-6.7 0.363 0.362 -0.254 10.1 5.1 50.2 MS,ps,sc-s
42 B2-69 6.2 0-5.8 0.384 0.337 -0.158 13 9.1 57.0 MS,ps,sc-s
40 B2-70 7.8 0-7.8 0.329 0.352 -0.321 11.3 8.2 45.0 MS,ps,sc-s
42 82-71 6.6 0-6.1 0.462 0,335 -0.080 18.3 7.4 46.9 MS,ps,sc-s
39 B2-72 8.3 0-8.3 0.315 0362 -0.399 11.2 6.5 43.9 MS,ps,sc-8
42 82.73 7.2 0-6.8 0.414 0.374 -0.198 11.9 3.8 44.4 MS,ps,sc-s
42 B2.74 6.5 0-6.3 0.282 0.383 -0.486 8.8 3.3 16.5 MS,ps,sc-s
36 B2-75 4.8 04.5 0.336 0.323 -0.241 14.6 7.8 44.3 MS,ps,sc-s
40 B2-76 5.6 04.9 0.883 0.417 0.091 19.6 5.3 52.0 MS,ps,c-s
41 82-77 5.8 0-5.9 0.407 0.349 -0.168 13.3 7.5 46.2 MS,ps,sc-s
42 B2-78 5.7 0-5.7 0.408 0.331 -0.187 17.1 11.6 46.0 MS,ps,sc-s
43 B2.79 6.4 0.5.7 0.436 0.345 -0.132 14.9 12.2 55.2 MS,ps,sc-s
41 B2-80 6.7 0-67 0.361 0.350 -0.289 13.6 9.2 37.7 MS,ps,sc-s
43 132-81 5.9 0-5.3 0.349 0.354 -0.306 12.3 11 45.6 MS,ps,sc-s
41 B2-82 7.2 0-6.2 0.38 0.35 -0.241 13.7 15.2 35.1 MS,ps,sc-s
42 82-83 5.1 04.8 0.464 0.342 -0.112 17.8 12.9 55.8 MS,ps,sc-s
38 82.84 6.5 0.6.7 0.225 0364 -0.588 7.9 9.5 25.7 MS,ps,sc-s
37 82.85 8.8 0-9.0 0.265 0.345 -0.441 10.2 9.7 39.3 MS,ps,sc-s
35 B2-86 6.5 0-6.4 0.352 0.360 -0.154 8.6 4.6 41.6 MS,ps,c-s
35 82-87 6.3 0-6.2 0.296 0.360 -0.437 11.1 4.8 37.1 MS,ps,sc-s
36 B2-88 7.7 0-7.7 0.219 0.398 -0.758 8.3 5.8 25.4 MS,ps,sc-s
36 82-89 7.1 0-7.1 0.252 0.508 -0.889 4.1 4.3 36.2 FS,ms,sc-s
33 82-90 6.8 0-6.8 0.447 0.364 -0.037 12.5 3.2 50.2 MS,ps,ns
1,

TABLE 3 Bogue Banks - Phase 2 sediment Compatibility Prepared August 2002

Revised Overfill Roflos Bated On Additional Beach Sampling • July 2002
Borrow Sample Type Recovery Interval sediment % Mud Moment Meoeures x V OveAltl Rdlo (t„)
Area ID Length (R) Description" to Indicated M-phi-b Sigma-b (Mb-MN/SDn (SDb/SDn) W/O Mud With Mud
(B) sump Interval

A A101 Core 3.3 13 MS.ps,sc-s 6.0 1.587 1.469 -0.20 2.00 1.28 1.34
Supplementary A102 Core 3.5 3.5 MS.ps.sc-s 3.9 1.444 1.457 -0.40 1.98 1.23 1.26
May-July 2002 A103 Core 4.4 4.4 MS,ps,sc-s 5.1 1.306 1.516 -0.59 2.06 1.19 1.24
Samples A104 Core 2.4 2.4 MS,ps,sc-s 3.9 1.411 1.410 -0.44 1.92 1.25 129
A105 Core 4.2 4.2 MS,ps,c-s 2.9 1.074 1.189 -0.90 1.62 1.05 1.08
A106 Core 2.7 21 MS,ps,sc-s 2.1 1.829 1.325 0.13 1.80 1.36 1.38
A107 Core 3.5 3.5 MS,ps,sc-9 4.3 1.587 1.450 -0.20 1.97 1.27 1.31
A108 Core 3.4 3.4 MS,ps,sc-s 4.0 1.416 1.335 -0.44 1.82 1.17 111
A109 Core 4.6 4.6 MS,ps,sc-s 4.2 1.156 1.471 -0.79 2.00 1.15 1.19
A110 Core 3.2 3.2 CS,ps,n-s 2.8 0.597 1.469 -1.55 2.00 1.05 1.08
A111 Core 2.5 2.5 CS.Ps,n-s 2.5 0.657 1.372 -1.47 1.87 1.04 1.07
At 12 Core 2.5 2.5 MS.ps,sc-s 5.8 1.273 0.414 -0.63 0.56 1.02 1.08
82 B2-41 Core 3.2 0-3.2 MS,ps,c-s 5.2 1.209 1.404 -0.72 1.91 1.14 1.19
Supplementary 82-42 Core 6.4 0-6.4 MS.ps,sc-s 7.6 1.823 1.352 0.12 1.84 1.35 1.43
May-July 2002 132-43 Core 33 0-3.7 FS,ps,sc-s 5.6 2.049 1.368 0.43 1.86 1.50 1.56
Samples B2-44 Core 3.6 0-3.6 MS,ps,sc-s 8.8 1.574 1.570 -0.22 2.14 1.31 1.40
82-45 Core 4.6 0-4.6 MS,ps,sc-s 8 1.688 1.527 -0.07 2.08 1.32 1.40
82-46 Core 3.8 0-3.8 MS,ps,sc-s 18.1 1.808 1.566 0.10 2.13 1.41 1.59
132-47 Core 3.6 0-1.6 CS,ps,t-s 3.6 .540 1.424 -1.63 1.94 1.04 1.07
B2-48 Core 6.9 0-6.9 MS.ps,sc-s 2.5 1.633 1.537 -0.14 2.09 1.28 1.31
B2-49 Core 5.0 0-5.0 MS,ps,sc-s 9.6 1.668 1.466 -0.09 1.99 1.30 1.40
82-50 Core 2.6 0.1.4 MS.ps.sc-s 3.4 1.682 1.393 -0.07 1.90 1.30 1.33
82-51 Core 4.5 0-4.5 MS,Ps,sc-8 3.9 1.505 1.549 -0.31 2.11 1.27 1.31
132-52 Core 6.2 0-6.2 MS,ps,sc-s 11.7 1.742 1.469 0.01 2.00 1.35 1.47
82-53 Core 2.8 0-2.8 CS.ps,c-s 2.6 1.028 1.668 -0.96 2.27 1.17 1.20
82-54 Core 4.2 0-4.2 MS.ps,sc-s 5.1 1.927 1.520 0.26 2.07 1.48 1.53
82-55 Core 3.9 0-3.9 MS,ps,sc-s 2.5 1.660 1.379 -0.10 1.88 1.30 1.32
82-56 Core 43 0-4.3 CS,ps,sc-s 1.8 1.025 1.358 -0.97 1.85 1.10 1.12
82-57 Core 2.6 0-2.6 MS,ps,sc-s 3.4 1.185 1.448 -0.75 1.97 1.15 1.18
82-58 Core 4.0 0-4 MS,mws,sc-s 2.2 2.308 .743 038 1.01 150 3.52
82-59 Core 5.0 0-3.6 MS,ps,sc-s 13.4 1.553 1.409 -0.25 1.92 1.24 1.37
132-60 Core 6.5 0-6.5 MS.ps,sc-s 8.4 1.316 1.636 -0.57 2.23 1.24 1.32
82-61 Core 5.4 0-5.4 MS,ps,c-s 4.5 1.300 1.518 -0.59 2.07 1.18 1.23
82-62 Core 7.3 0-7.3 MS.ps.sc-s 12.9 1.788 1.502 0.07 2.04 1.38 1.51
82-63 Core 4.5 0-4.5 MS.ps,sc-s 21.1 1.848 1.507 0.15 2.05 1.40 1.61
82-64 Core 69 0-6.9 MS,ps,sc-s 11.6 1.722 1.547 -0.02 2.10 1.35 1.47
82-65 Core 4.4 0-4,4 MS.ps,sc-s 9.4 1.552 1.614 -0.25 2.20 1.31 1.40
82-66 Core 5.9 0-5.9 MS,ps,c-s 6.9 1.178 1.437 -0.76 1.96 1.15 1.22
B2-67 Core 6.0 0-6.0 MS,ps,sc-s 10 1,493 1.555 -0.33 2.12 1.27 1.37
132-68 Core 6.7 0.6.7 MS,ps.sc-s 5.1 1.462 1.468 -0.37 2.00 1.23 1.28
82-69 Core 6.2 05.8 MS,ps,sc-s 9.1 1.381 1.568 -0.48 2.13 1.23 1.32
B2-70 Core 7.8 0-7.8 MS,ps,sc-s 8.2 1.603 1.505 -0.18 2.05 1.29 1.37
132-71 Core 6.6 0-6.1 MS,ps,sc-s 7.4 1113 1.577 -0.85 2.15 1.16 1.23
132-72 Core 8.3 0-8.3 MS,ps,sc-s 6.5 1.667 1.468 -0.09 2.00 1.31 1.38
82-73 Core 7.2 0-6.8 MS,ps,sc-s 3.8 1.273 1.418 -0.63 1.93 1.15 1.19
B2-74 Core 6.5 0-6.3 MS,ps,sc-s 3,3 1.826 1.385 0.12 1.88 1.28 1.31
B2-75 Core 4.8 0-4.5 MS.ps,sc-s 7.8 1,575 1.629 -0.22 2.22 1.34 1.42
132-16 Core 5.6 0-4.9 MS,ps,c-s 5.3 .593 1.263 -1.56 1.72 1.02 1.07
82-77 Core 5.8 0-5.9 MS,msc-s 7.5 1.296 1.518 -0.60 2.07 1.18 1.26
B2-78 Core 5.7 0-5.7 MS.ps,sc-s 11.6 1.295 1.596 -0.60 2.17 1.22 1.34
82-19 Core 6,4 0-5.7 MS,ps,sc-s 12.2 1.197 1.537 -0.73 2.09 1,17 1.29
82-80 Core 6.7 0-6.7 MS,ps,sc-s 9.2 1.471 1.513 -0.36 2.06 1.25 1.34
82-81 Core 5.9 0-5.3 MS,ps,sc-s 11 1.518 1.496 -0.30 2.04 1.25 1.36
02-82 Core 7.2 0-6.2 MS,ps,sc-s 15.2 1.396 1.514 -0.46 2,06 1.22 1.37
82-83 Core 5.1 0-4.8 MS,ps,sc-s 12.9 1.109 1.547 -0.85 2.10 1.15 1.28
132-84 Core 6.7 0-6.7 MS,ps,sc-s 9.5 2.152 1.460 0.57 1.99 1.68 1.78
82-85 Core 8.8 0-8.8 MS,ps,sc-s 9,7 1917 . 1.535 0.25 2,09 1.46 1.56
B2-86 Core 6.5 0-6.4 MS,ps.c-s 4.6 1.506 1.475 -0.31 2.01 1.25 1.30
132-87 Core 6.3 0-6.2 MS,ps.sc-s 4.8 1.755 1.474 0.03 2.01 1.35 1.40
B2-88 Core 7 7 0-73 MS.ps,sc-s 5.8 2188 1.329 0.61 1.81 1.68 1.74
82-89 Core 7.1 0-7.1 FS.ms.sc-s 4.3 1.990 978 0.35 1.33 140 1.44
B2-90 Core 6.8 0-6.8 MS.ps.ns 3.2 1.162 1.457 -0.78 1.98 1.15 1.18
"CS-Coarse Sand, MS-Medium Sand, FS-fine s and
ms-moderately sorted, mess-moderately well sorted, ws- well sorted, ps-po orly sorted
c-s coarse skewed, sc-s str ongly coarse skewed, Fs fine skewed, sym - symmetrical size distribution
' These samples have a limi ting acceptable depth for ex cavation based on recovered cores
(ie. Underlying material is considered less suitable for nourishment).

TABLE 4 Boyue Banks Offshore Sedknent Characterisfics May - July 2002 Survoy August 2002
Locality -Water ID Recovery Interval Grain-Size Distributions %Coarser % % Sediment
(BorrowArw) Depth Length (n) Mean (mm) Std Dev. (mm) Skawness Than 2 mm Mud Carbonate Description'
(n) (n)
132 42 82-48 6.9 0-6.9 0.322 0.344 -0.338 11.2 2.5 41 MS,ps,sC-s
Area 1 40 8249 5.0 0-5.0 0.315 0.362 -0.322 8.5 9.6 29 MS,ps,sc-3
40 B2-51 4.5 0-4.5 0.352 0.342 -0.224 11.7 3.9 40 MS,ps,sc-s
43 B2-52 6.2 0.6.2 0.299 0.361 -0.352 6.7 11.7 32 MS,ps,sc-s
45 B2-53 2.8 0-2.8 0.490 0.315 -0.045 23.2 2.6 50 CS,ps,c-s
41 B2-54 4.2 0-4.2 0.263 0.349 -0.503 10.6 5.1 31 MS,ps,so-s
40 B2-58 4.3 0d.3 0.491 0.39 -0.136 14.3 1.8 64 CS,ps,sc-S
40 82-57 2.6 0-2.6 0.440 0.367 -0.230 16.7 3.4 47 MS,ps,sc-s
39 82-80 6.5 0-6.5 0.402 0.322 -0.179 18.2 8.4 39 MS,pS,sc-s
39 B2-61 5.4 0.5.4 0.406 0.349 -0.169 14.2 4.5 41 MS,ps,c-s
42 B2-74 6.5 0-6.3 0.282 0.383 -0.486 8.8 3.3 18 MS.ps.saS
36 82-75 4.8 0-4.5 0.336 0.323 -0.241 14.6 7.8 44 MS,ps,sc-S
40 B2-78 5.6 0-4.9 0.663 0.417 0.091 19.6 5.3 52 MS,ps,c-s
33 B2-90 6.8 0.6.8 0.447 0.364 -0.037 12.5 3.2 50 MS.ps,ns
Averages 40 14 Cores 5.2 0d.1 0.961 0.344 -0.202 13.6 5.2 41 MS,ps,sc-e
82 39 B2-45 4.6 0-4.6 0.310 0.347 -0.346 11.8 8.0 33 MS,ps,sc-s
Area 2 38 B2-64 6.9 0-5.9 0.303 0.342 -0.385 12.4 11.6 30 MS,ps,sc-S
41 82-85 4.4 0-4.4 0.341 0.327 -0.258 15.1 9.4 54 MS,ps,sc-S
36 B2-08 5.9 0-5.9 0.442 0.369 -0.095 12.1 6.9 52 MS,ps,cs
39 B2-67 6.0 0-6.0 0.355 0.340 -0.238 13.1 10.0 47 MS,ps,sc-s
38 B2-64 6.7 0-87 0.225 0364 -0.588 7.9 9.5 26 MS,ps,sc-s
37 B2-85 8.8 0-8.8 0.265 0.345 -0.441 10.2 9.7 39 MS,ps,sc-s
35 B2-86 6.5 06.4 0.352 0.360 -0.154 8.6 4.6 42 MS.ps.c-s
36 B2-e 3.1 0-3.1 0.346 0.341 -0.304 14.4 2.2 37 MS,ps,sc-s
Averages 38 9 Cores 5.9 0.6.7 0.322 0.343 -0.296 11.7 8.0 40 MS,ps,sc-s
B2 39 82-41 3.2 0-3.2 0.433 0.378 -0.150 11.7 5.2 56 MS,ps,c-s
Area 3 35 B2-42 6.4 0-6.4 0.283 0.392 -0.452 6.7 7.8 35 MS,ps,so-s
39 82-88 6.7 0-6.7 0.363 0.362 -0.254 10.1 5.1 50 MS,ps,sc-S
42 B2-69 6.2 0-5.8 0.384 0.337 -0.158 13.0 9.1 57 MS,ps,sc-S
40 B2-70 7.8 0-7.8 0.329 0.352 -0.321 11.3 8.2 45 MS,ps,sc-9
42 B2-71 6.6 0.6.1 0.462 0.335 -0.080 18.3 7.4 47 MS,ps,sc-s
39 B2-72 8.3 0-8.3 0.315 0.362 -0.399 11.2 6.5 44 MS,ps,sc-s
42 B2-73 7.2 0-6.8 0.414 0.374 -0.198 11.9 3.8 44 MS.ps,SC-s
41 B2-77 5.8 0-5.9 0.407 0.349 -0.168 13.3 7.5 46 MS,ps,sc-s
42 B2-78 5.7 0.5.7 0.408 0.331 -0.187 17.1 11.6 46 MS,ps,so-s
43 82-79 6.4 0-5.7 0.436 0.345 -0.132 14.9 12.2 55 MS,ps.sc-S
41 B2-80 6.7 0-6.7 0.361 0.350 -0.289 13.6 9.2 38 MS,ps,sc-s
43 B2-81 5.9 0-5.3 0.349 0.354 -0.306 12.3 11.0 46 MS,p9,sc-s
35 B2-87 6.3 0-6.2 0.296 0.360 -0.437 11.1 4.8 37 MS,ps,so-s
36 B2-88 7.7 0-7.7 0.219 0.398 -0.758 8.3 5.8 25 MS,pS,so-s
36 82-89 7.1 0-7.1 0.252 0.508 -0.889 4.1 4.3 36 FS,ms,sc-s
36 B2-7 2.3 0-2.3 0.330 0.361 -0.360 11.4 2.5 30 MS,ps,sc-s
Averages 39 17 Cores 6.3 0-6.1 0.349 0.357 -0.301 11.6 7.2 43 MS,ps,sc-s
Overall 82-40 Cores
Averages 39 Areas 1-3 5.6 0.6.6 0.350 0.347 -0.264 12.4 6.7 42 MS,ps,so-s
B2 45 B2-53 2.8 0-2.8 0.49 0.315 -0.045 23.2 2.6 50 CS,ps.c-s
Applicable 41 B2-54 4.2 0-4.2 0.263 0.349 -0.503 10.6 5.1 31 MS,ps,sc-s
Cores Along 40 B2-57 2.6 0-2.6 0.44 0.367 -0.230 16.7 3.4 47 MS,ps,sc-s
82 South- 42 B2-63 4.5 0-4.5 0.278 0.352 -0.429 9.6 21.1 39 MS,ps,sc-s
Boundary 41 82-65 4.4 0-4.4 0.341 0.327 -0.258 15.1 9.4 54 MS,ps,sc-s
39 B2-67 6.0 0-6.0 0.355 0.34 -0.238 13.1 10.0 47 MS.ps.sc-s
42 82-69 6.2 0-5.8 0.384 0.337 -0.158 13.0 9.1 57 MS.pS.sc-S
42 B2-71 6.6 0-6.1 0.462 0.335 -0.080 18.3 7.4 47 MS,ps.SC-S
42 B2-73 7.2 0-6.8 0.414 0.374 -0.198 11.9 3.8 44 MS,ps.sc-s
41 B2-77 5.8 45.9 0.407 0.349 -0.168 13.3 7.5 46 MS.ps.W-s
43 82-79 6.4 0-5.7 0.436 0.345 -0.132 14.9 122 55 MS.pS,sC-S
43 82-81 5.9 0-5.3 0.349 0.354 -0.306 12.3 11.0 46 MS.p9.sc-s
42 B2-83 5.1 44.8 0.464 0.342 -0.112 17.8 12.9 56 MS,ps,sc-s
43 A-63 3.5 40.5 0.247 0.415 -0.610 5.7 6.6 16 FS,ps,sc-s
43 A-66 3.3 43.3 0.306 0.351 -0.395 10.7 4.2 31 MS,ps,sc-S
44 A-67 1.7 41.7 0.947 0.402 0.404 38.3 1.9 78 CS.ps,st-s
Averages 42 16 Cores 4.8 0.4.4 0.392 0.336 -0.195 15,3 8.0 44 MS,ps,sc-s
e ,
TABU 5 Boguo links - Phase 2 SedlmeM CompotkbRRy Prepared August 2002
Revb" OverN Rahn. Bawd On AddMOnal Ieoch Samping - Jury 2002
Borrow Sample Type Recovery IMervol SedW-nt % Mud M-.f Meo.ures x If O-fM Rdb (RA)
Ana 10 Length (1D Descdpllon" to IrKkated MpHb Sgmab (Mb-Mn)/SDn (SDb/SDn) W/O Mud WRh Mud
12 82-48 Core 6.9 06.9 MS,m.sc-. 2.5 1.633 1.537 -0.14 2.09 1.28 1.31
Sspp WltoFy 02-49 Cae 5.0 06.0 MS,p.,.-. 9.6 1.668 1.466 -0.09 1.99 1.30 1.40
May--'* 2002 B261 Core 45 04.5 MS,ps,sc.s 3.9 1.505 1.549 -0.31 2.11 1.27 1.31
Samples 8262 Core 6,2 06.2 MS,p... -. 11.7 1.742 1.469 0.01 2.00 1.35 1.47
0263 Cae 2.8 0-2.8 CS,p.,c-. 2.6 1.028 1.668 -0.96 2.27 1.17 1,20
8264 Cae 4.2 0-4.2 MS,ps,ac-s 5,1 1.927 1.520 0.26 2,07 1.48 1.63
8266 Core 43 04.3 CS,p.,.-s 1.8 1.025 1.358 -0.97 1.85 1.10 1.12
0267 Core 2.6 0-2.6 MS,p.,.c-s 3.4 1.185 1,448 -0.75 1.97 115 1.18
82.60 Core 6.5 06.5 MS,p.,30-3 8.4 1.316 1.636 -0.57 2.23 1.24 1.32
8261 Cae 5.4 06.4 MS,p.,c-s 4.5 1.300 1.518 -0.59 2.07 1.18 1.23
B2-74 Coro 6.5 D6.3 MS,p.,.c-. 3.3 1.826 1,385 0.12 1,88 1.28 1.31
02-75 Cae 4.8 04.5 MS,p.,sc-. 7.8 1.575 1,629 .022 2.22 1.34 1.42
82-76 Cae 5.6 0d9 MS,ps,os 5.3 .593 1.263 -1.56 1.72 1.02 1.07
B2-00 Cae 6.8 06.8 ms,m,ns 3.2 1.162 1.457 -0.78 1.98 1.15 1.18
B2-Ana I Avenges Core 5.2 0.5.1 MS,p.,W-s 5.2 1,391 1.539 -0.47 2.09 1.23 1.28
8245 Cae 4.6 0d6 MS,ps,sc-s 8 1.688 1.527 -0.07 2.08 1.32 1.40
02-04 Core 6.9 06.9 Ms,m--. 11.6 1.722 1.547 -0.02 2.10 1.35 1.47
82-05 Costs 44 04.4 MS,p.,ac-s 9.4 1.552 1.614 -0.25 2,20 1.31 1.40
8266 Coro 5.9 06.9 MS,p.,c-s 6.9 1,178 1.437 -0.76 1.96 1.15 1.22
B2.67 Cae 6.0 06.0 MS,p.,sc-. 10 1.493 1.555 -0.33 2.12 1.27 1.37
8284 Core 6.7 0-6.7 MS,ps,sc-s 9.5 2.152 1.460 0.57 1.99 1.68 1.78
82-05 Core 8.8 08.8 MS.p.,--s 9.7 1.917 1,535 0.25 2.09 1.46 1.36
8286 Cae 6.5 06.4 MS,p.,c-s 4.6 1,506 1.475 -0.31 2.01 1.25 1.30
B26 Core 3.1 O-3.1 MS,M,ec-s 2.2 1.532 1.552 -0,28 2.11 127 1.29
B2-Ana 2 Ana 2 Con 5.9 0.5.7 M3,pe,sc-s 8.0 1.636 1.516 -0.14 2.10 132 1.40
8241 Core 3.2 O-3.2 MS,p.,c-s 5.2 1.209 1.404 -0.72 1.91 1.14 1.19
8242 Core 6,4 04.4 Ms,p.,ac-s 7.6 1.823 1.352 0.12 184 1.35 1.43
8268 Cae 6.7 061 MS,ps,sca 5.1 1.462 1.468 -OX 2.00 1.23 1.26
8269 Cae 6.2 06.8 Ms,m.sc-. 91 1.381 1,568 -0.48 2.13 1.23 1.32
82-70 Cae 7.8 0.7.8 Ms,p.,sc-s 8.2 1.603 1.505 -0.18 2,05 1.29 1,37
82-71 Core 6.6 0-61 MS,ps,sca 7.4 1.113 1.577 -0OA5 2.15 1.16 1.23
B2-73 Cae 7.2 06.8 MS,ps,ac-s 3.8 1.273 1.418 .063 1.93 1.15 1.19
B2-77 Core 5.8 06.9 MS,ps,sc. 7.5 1.296 1,518 -0.60 2.07 1.18 1.26
B2-78 Cae 5.7 06.7 MS,p.,..-. 11.6 1.295 1.596 -0.60 2.17 1.22 1.34
82-79 Cae 6,4 06.7 MS,ps,.c-. 12.2 1.197 1.537 -0 .73 2.09 1,17 1.29
8280 Core 6.7 G6.7 MS,m..-s 9.2 1.471 1.513 -0.36 2.06 1.25 1.34
B281 Core 5.9 06.3 MS,ps,sc-s 11 1.518 1,496 -0.30 2.04 1.25 1.36
8287 Cae 6,3 06.2 MS,ps,.c-. 4.8 1.755 1.474 0,03 2.01 1.35 1.40
8288 Core 7.7 0.73 MS,p.,.c-s 5.8 2.188 1.329 0.61 1,81 1.68 1.74
B289 Cae 7.1 0.7.1 FS,rm,.o. 4.3 1.990 .978 0.35 1.33 1.40 1.44
B2-7 Core 2.3 0-2,3 MS,p.,sc-. 2.5 1.598 1.470 -0 .19 2.00 1.28 1.31
B2-Ana 3 Area 3 Con 6.3 0-6.1 MS'p.,sc-. 7.2 1.519 1.486 -0.30 2.02 1.25 1.32
8263 Cae 2,8 0-2.8 Cs,ps,c-s 2.6 1.028 1.668 -0.96 2.27 1.17 1.20
8264 Cae 4.2 0d.2 MS,p.,.c-s 5.1 1.927 1.520 0.26 2.07 1.48 1.53
8267 Core 2.6 0.2.6 MS.p.sc-s 3.4 1,185 1.448 -035 1.97 1.Is 1.18
8263 Core AS 045 MS.p.,sc-s 21.1 1.848 1.507 0.15 2.05 1.40 1.61
8265 Cae 4.4 0-4.4 Ms,M -. 9.4 1.552 1.614 -0.25 2.20 1.31 1.40
8267 Cae 6.0 06.0 MS,P..sc-s 10 1.493 1.555 -0.33 2.12 1.27 1.37
B269 Cae 6.2 06.8 MS,pssc-s 9.1 1.381 1.568 -0.48 2.13 1.23 1.32
82-71 Cae 6,6 06.1 Ms,p.,.c-s 7.4 1.113 1.577 -0.85 2.15 1.16 1.23
82-73 Cae 7.2 D6.8 MS,p.,.c-s 3.8 1.273 1.418 0,63 1.93 1.15 1.19
82.77 Cae 5.8 06.9 Ms,ps,sc-s 7.5 1.296 1.518 1060 2.07 1.18 1.26
82-79 Cae 6.4 05.7 MS,ps,sc-s 12.2 1.197 1.537 -0.73 2.09 Liz 1.29
8281 Core 5.9 D5.3 Ms,m.c-s 11 1.518 1.496 0.30 2.04 1.25 1.36
8283 Cae 5.1 0-48 MS,ps,.e-s 12.9 1.109 1.547 -0.85 2.10 1.15 1.28
Adz Cae 15 00.5 Fs,m..c-. 6.6 2.020 1269 0.39 1,73 1.49 1.56
A66 Cae 3.3 0-3.3 MS,p1,.0-9 4.2 1.707 1.509 -0.04 2.05 1.34 1.38
A67 Cae 1.7 0-17 CS, p.,.i., 1.9 078 1.3)5 -2.26 1.79 X102 -1.04
B2-South Appllcafde Con 4.8 0-4A MS,p.,sc-s 8.0 1.351 1.512 -0.52 2.14 1.23 1.31
Margin Cons
Non FoNOwkmg RA.sbmado Finci ELS
comp"Re Groups t4off-Bench(MZ 1.725phi; Std Dey=. 773 phi)
Sample ID Type Soaee Interval Sedir-t % Mud M-nf Measures x y RA
(feet) D-Iphon• to lncicated Mphib Sgmob (Mb-Mn)/SOn (SDb/SDn) (SPM'84)
same interval
Bono. Area Areal Cores 14 Core, 06.1 MS.ps,sca 5.2 1.391 1.539 -0.47 2.09 1.23 118
B2 Area2 Core, 9Cae, 06.1 MS.p,,sca 8.0 1.636 1.546 014 2.10 1.32 1.40
Area3 Cores 17 Cores 06.1 MS,p.sca 7 2 1.519 1.486 -0.30 2.02 1.25 1.32
Arens 1,2,3 Cores 40 Cores 0-5.6 MS,ps,sc-s 6.7 1.516 1.527 -0.30 2.08 1.27 IN
South Mag'vs pO,,able Cor, Cores 16 Core, Od4 MSpssca 8.0 1351 1.572 1052 2.14 123 1.31
"CS Coarse Sa d. MSMealun Sad; F"rse sad
ms-derotWY soiled: mws-derotelY WON sated: ws-weN salad. ps- poa)y sorted
cal coin skewed, - str ongly Coate skewed; fs nne skewed sym - symmemcci sae alslrRxsNOn
' These samples have o Wndksg acceptable depth fa excavollon based on nco,ered coos
00 lhdenyNV monna o considered tea LNoble for nouurmenf)
w ?
? a
? h o
1lwll UMO1
?RZ9Z
C
3( 0009Z9Z
?k 1
1
O
N rr??1{
OOObZ9Z
_J
fF?
K • X
Ww
Irv
K? x
400
X?'1m
J? m
?? ,:I J? w
v/ 3 ? i vDi
N N R
t
a a c? o
' r

`
I
°
N m
cn
<
; : i .
a od co F
E
' m

h a Q

L o
o
I. ?Z?
ti
w

O O
0 Al
a
oa
? a i ji o a w w ? ? E
I J
I
?
w
II
'IV w F d (i ? m
L
n
I ?a
k 'g V co
-i
?a •
L
O
I,
a
A
I

• •

?
a m

Q

a s

a -i
• O
O) L U V N .r [D L ? N N N N ('? M t+1 M
EL
Q m N N R ^
b C O
i M O n T R C I? o m
M ~ ^ a py fD N
l
Z
A p
N
N N
N ti
N N
M /`
')
M n
Q 0
N
N tD CO O N Cl ? )
O O

W ?
p
N
? ry((rypppppp
}(( h f?
O N W I?
.?3 N N N N N N N N N N C Q N N N N
N
W

O
01 O
m N
W M
Q N
rn
ul W
N M
(n W
M M
(n N
M
W N
r Q
N O M
W O M
N
¢ c m M Q W (n 0 W (n m N I? V O ^ O ?n u1
Z { o ? ° N c p m ? a(o M n ? a0 $ .Y, 2) 3

N

E

O W W

O W

r O

?

? O

? O

N M

N CA

N M

N Q Q

O (n

r (P

O
O
N
m
'•
?

O
B Z aa
M .
}
M .
Ct M M M M M a
a
M p
p
N7 QQ
C7 M M ?}}
M M M
L
'
o a

N ?+
c
l
c
c
O
V M
v 0 U w m
w U
w w
a
a (U
a m
¢ U
a 'O
a 4)
a •r
a m
a L
a .-
a
z M w ? °
i w w w w
N u/ 0
0 Q P, W
O

N

; (n

CW
7

O N

O v)

N N ..?, N

O
p (
(p
t0
(V ^Q
Q (Wp

N M
Ov ?O
O
N
O
'
O
N
ti
(M
D
OI
c co m Q ?.. W 0 1n (D T CI M O M N N W W
M
W T
o) O
W
In O
Q M
O 0)
m (V c
'??+
O (D N f?
co N 1-
W O
it C
`
?'i
?
?
}
} O tV Oi I?
t
p tD
O (V
t0 N
t
p
W O S O W O (` W m ?p
N W ID (NO (D f
A O a
a
?
?
O p W
? N S pp
S
N Z1 (p
(p ?}
(p
(p
(p
IS W
N
N
N
N
N W M
N (
i
N
N
N
N
C
(? Y N N N N N N d
? Q
3 tO
N m
N (O
N m
N W
N m
N m
N W
N m
N

N
65
4 po
N
In
M h
O u)
? Q m O^0
r ppNp s ue} O
.-

n
p?
C N

h O
O
0 r

0

n .
-
M ( M

?

? O)

o (h

0 Q

g m

Q

Q
m m

Pi
n
rn
'
[A
M
O
h
M
(n
7 = v?i m (?n (?p h `t 4' t (8i ? m (iti 0 t i I n c o v) i v rn o

d m
OD M
O fp
(n N
O
N Sj
M ?O}
M ? N{
M f7
M yM
M N M N
W (n O
O O W r
W W M W
r
M a
} Q a
{ In, A
yNy
•
-
y
a OOOZZ9Z h a
4... m \ N" 42 x
x,n v lam
3 000OZ9Z X\ g.
v
r- xm? d v
?S C xmo o,l
as /$ .?
s
A 000819Z+
? y
Qn \
-1
e x X? ;e
?,y! < x c
f
G y m
3[ 0009[92+Wax
r
Y.
r-?? )C X
1C`,i? l 4
y
3: OOOV 19 Z+
'X' m
m ' N \
e
r{ Y x
/Xx
4 OOOZI9Z i' 0 1 m xv,
?r $ o
co M \ ;
l ?? ? Q X >? ? ch ? ? 11
d ???? \C x /C y` N ` d
C? m ,v1
_? yd o
m
y=a X v 4
I r ? (?
_f ?r ?fp. a
3 000019Z
z z _
M
Ml
N
tO ?
U N
W
• cc
(0
N
d
c
cc
01
C
J
U K
E
M ?
m 11
`O o
wp
(a m ? (NOp
y I I N U N
`xx N N 5
N
C
p ¢ N
E 04 0
E
o o' 0 ? c
n Q. m °
L U2 ¢ 22Z5 >
Y a a a m W
? N r
rr - ?_ • X
z z z

S ?
C
M M
M
60Ud 6 lsn9ntJ :Diva loll
aDSOdONd-8902\SlNINd 3(118\990Z\V1VQ\83AN3S\:3 :H1Vd 9MQ
1.
z
(O
C?

e
4
m
• e
e x
.

X
d
8
?S
?o
\.i' ? • e
ft e
\ ma
\/yh` R a
? R
n
? m
oy im r zo
10 A, 0 <
1 ? x mR ti e
K ?
r, mm`
0 U? m d
X9!
c
x, 03 x,
t
Q K L L
n
b
r ?' R
?. R
i\ U
X,.. •
?k
CY)
Fem. ? i ?v J `` ?
72
i? RI ?? i i? y R R\•1
\
/
t ? -6 ? '? e ? ,? ? p R ? v
I R m
o 16
r? {`
>:
HIIJ
a
c
III ' ? _
c w
c in
u
a ? N ? zZOo
V
F ? m ti ti
? VV ? U N ?
Z o
= II,o n wN?,
= Q=
III ?I,V °m L a ?
m
'o

.
° a u`ri

- a
i o a LL z

CN
m
a
tLf

w

Y £
o ? ;? z
m a
C
o Q Q
U
w
o
?' =
Q

ZN?
m
U o
m?? n
9c m w
•

ilwll
co
W

0. }iwij u011MOx3
c
? N M ? In
I I I

cfl
I
MOJJ08 N - _-----

O
L
•
p m
-
Z
• 1?
m
• m S 7
4,t...
4
,
6
m

m -Z .1
N v
m ?

m 6p ( c,
?

3 `o c,

r
M
d
11 IJ' 14
8 ?
n m

m r
co
^
co m
t
m
3
2

O
m a
S
m
m
m
7
co
? r
m
ACHIM
ti

m
00
Ill. ;'I: r r
r-

m
FYI

m co

n

m
1
M
p, I;
s;iwil U
M0Jlo8
aa)I NC ? Lo
? M ? In CO
Jiwi? u01JEAeox3
leoidAi 4
gwil uogeneox3
leoidAi g -?
N M V M Co
I I I I
c0
d
Q
O
t
0
m

N g?
? a (F

U
3 .
I
a
N ?
'sly' 'I -
q d T N
m
?
m 171 u
r,
l N
C7
m ?
I rn
O
?
L
m _

C

v
t
O

l r III °o I N
ilf
m ,--

m
h cl
?t
a
N
m e-
00
n \ O O
? ? I :.tll j I fJ r. D
II ii a II it .-tl ? ?.
U
C ?
n? co
C
CL _
m
N z
? 1I
4
C
CO 'E
it W
a?
c
o i
N
E
a ?
m N
x L
c -
o E
yT N
O U)
N N
C
'C c y
? O
N =
C 3 O
co v a
O
CL
t
Y OC V w
m 4--
(O U
c S _d
U)
cX_d C??
L l Cp
El ??
L
C
fU)
o p y
0,! a I'?If [ ICI tl _D ;rl M
m N
0
V it i1 ??'il?' V ? C
m m ?
C
m
' N
1 Al-, M ilr 177,
N M V to Co
}iwil U0111 e0x3
leoidAj_ ?
ZOCZ 6 isno 1V :31VQ 10-id d:)-ASOZ\SJ-NlNd 3(1-18\9S02\V1VQ\83A83S\:3 :H1Vd OMQ
8
z
m
N
N
U LO N
N3 ? b R i
• I ?
- m

m?o

i

m
•

?? sm

•/ / /

/ r•?
Oa

¢

y
?
q? I
1 R
?
l
Z ? 1
N I O
d
c?
S

} U

•
r.
O
O

\ N
` o
O
v
liJ
?'la
V
cT -a
w
61 7 rzo `o 'O
a a ?'
I j c ? Z N N
o ? ? w w
o ? a x
III ill V m E a ii
w s
d -
a +:
J C N
N a
o a U(n
J
y
°
ca

.Q L .
v v
Si TNT ww? ftS Q)
L i
?w
za°w
° C C'-
a) co
O
LL
z° w U)
00

CO.

\ Q n
a
CIS
-00
a?
M

M
R ? \

\s
a ?

Ct?

c M
? P
07 ?\1
N
d /
?. D
Cl?
O O
OU`?
U•
U
z 21 ?
? a
ZOU 6 isnond :3uvQ sold WW- 90Z\S1NINd 9nlg\9902\V1VQ\8AA83S\:D :H1Vd oMQ
ZOOZ 6 1Sf19f v 31V(j 10?d ba-990Z\S1NIad 3imS\gSOZ\V1VQ\8AA83S\::) :H1Vd 9MQ
Z002 6 isnond :Diva io-id 90'950Z\S1NIbd 3nH8\g50Z\V1VQ\d3AN3S\;:) H1Vd JMQ

i
P
J, ?N
)?
- . C
N

s 4a) -a

•
i
I
i
ro ? •
I •
?"
tl
••11
I ??

?I -
I
i
C
k ?
1 ¢K -
h T "
nn
?y, I to
I I
• r? r
cQ a ? n q
Y ?? I a '?

n w a

?
Q I

I U '?

?? a y Qy_ Q Q, a
c i

m

?? I
i
I
q

b ^ 'fin
F w
s?
9o

B
b

•
uo? r.c
U?
• • a
0
d
Y Y ?^ C
d
?X.d,
U
a
?/ gym'- 9. ?•
O " ll v
L
- F,f e
N w
0
CID
0
O,
f y
CID
? n
• p?
ZOOZ 6 isnond :31va lord WWL-Mk?UC\51rnad :11 it1\ki?UG\v1vU?a?na?J?•J •nlvd Z)IvlU

J m ?
?
o

_?' Nom=
a$ l (IO ?
U a?

7 .15 N ? ?N(^?' a' may 3$ "' C i.fl ?.
$ h
o r ?,
?o EaU ?
a '? a
a aww ?
w ? `E a?
w mz I ?I;V ?FdtL z° m w CfJ Z
C
1 I'I
I I
1t
M V ?'I
I I •
?I I
II
? v
I? I 1
a ° \
oa

• o% I

O
T T L y 1 ?~

i

V• a - _ 4

U
D a
f • •M •
•
•
•
I
pp I

v?

f ?a
x
, [ C.

< I

a
.?
?
1
`
k
1???1

M ?.
1 a v \

4 .

O 1
?
I
I ? ?

50

o?
U•
?G
U
•
?z
U •
?C
V:
ZOOZ 6 1Sf19f v :31VQ ioid
L0-9902\S1NINd 3(118\9902\V1V(1\N3Ad3S\::) :HlVd 9MQ
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT:
CARTERET COUNTY/CARTERET COUNTY
PAGE #2
9. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION:
Project Setting
Bogue Banks is a barrier island with a southwest facing ocean shoreline stretching some 25
miles between Bogue Inlet to the west and Beaufort Inlet to the east. Bogue Banks is surrounded by
Bogue Sound to the north and Onslow Bay of the Atlantic Ocean to the south. The project area
includes the beaches reaching from the town limits of Pine Knoll Shores and Atlantic Beach to the
western end of Emerald Isle, approximately one mile east of Bogue Inlet. Included are the towns of
Pine Knoll Shores, Indian Beach, Emerald Isle and the unincorporated area of Salter Path. The
project area includes 16.8 miles of shoreline. The western two-thirds of Bogue Banks from Pine
Knoll Shores to Emerald Isle has been severely damaged by five landfall hurricanes since 1995. An
Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for the project has been prepared and submitted and is currently
being reviewed in the state clearinghouse. The applicant has provided an excellent summary of the
project proposal that can be found in the attached narrative on pages 1 through 10.
Project Description
The proposed project consists of excavating by hydraulic dredge and placing up to 8 million
cubic yards of beach-quality sediment along 16.8 miles of Bogue Banks. The project runs from the
Atlantic Beach/Pine Knoll Shores town line to Shipwreck lane in western Emerald Isle.
Nourishment sand would be excavated from up to three borrow areas (labeled A, B 1 and B2) by
hopper dredge or hydraulic dredge and placed along as many as six contiguous reaches. Shallow
excavations (2'-3') would be made and the material pumped onto the beach. Sediment would be
spread via land-based equipment and shaped into a beach between the existing toe of the foredune
and the low watermark. Approximately 50 percent of the excavations would be deposited between
existing mean low water and the outer bar located some 500' to 700' offshore. The remaining
material would be placed above existing mean low water and graded to match the natural beach with
berm elevations at approximately +7 ft NGVD (+5' above MHW). The fill quantities vary for each
reach according to the profile deficit, background erosion rate, and quality of the fill material.
The fill area measures approximately 90,000' in lengthX 1000' in width. The borrow areas
measure: (A) 11,000' X 10,000' in -45' of water ; (B 1) 27,000' X 1,000' in -35' of water; and (B2)
27,000' X 1,000' in -35' of water. These areas are shown on sheets 11, 12, 13 and 14 of the
application. The project would be built in 1 to 2 mile sections, optimizing the disposition of
pipeline. Sections would be pumped into place with the aid of temporary dikes pushed up by
bulldozers in the surf zone. Daily operations would directly impact some 500' to 1000' of shoreline.
It is anticipated that individual communities would assume responsibility for project execution
within a particular reach thus controlling the timing of implementation, scale, and scope of work.
According to the applicant, under normal circumstances, a single dredge would require 180 to 300
days to construct the beach. The applicant proposes to perform the construction during winter
months to avoid the tourist season, turtle-nesting season, and periods of highest biological
productivity. As construction progresses, sections would be graded to final contours, dressed to
eliminate low areas, and opened for use by the public. According to the applicant, support
equipment would be shifted out of completed sections as soon as practicable, such that construction
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
APPLICANT'S NAME: Carteret Co. c/o County Manager, Robert Murphy
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Carteret County, Bogue Banks beaches including Pine Knoll Shores,
Salter Path, Indian Beach, Emerald Isle, located from Pine Knoll Shores/Atlantic Beach boundary to
Shipwreck Lane in Emerald Isle, and includes the near shore waters of the Atlantic Ocean
Photo Index - 2000: 474 through 487 and 507 through 509
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2,643,400 Y: 348,600 (Pine Knoll Shores and Indian Beach town lines)
Mansfield, Salter Path, Swansboro Quads - Coordinates measured from "LL" on Mansfield Quad
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA and D& F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit -Many times (latest 2/23/01)
Was Applicant Present - NO
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received Complete - February 9, 2001
Office - Morehead City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plans - Carteret Co., Pine Knoll Shores, Indian Beach and Emerald Isle
Land Classification From LUP - Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: OH, EW, PT
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Public Beaches
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - N/A
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - Dune walkovers, seawalls, fishing piers
Planned - None
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: Varies from 2' to 3'/yr
(H) Source - DCM Long-term Annual Erosion Rate Maps
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
DREDGED FILLED OTHER
(A) Vegetated Wetlands
(B) Non-Vegetated Wetlands
Near shore waters of Atlantic Ocean 2.58 sq. miles 1,756 acres
(C) Other
Dry sand/upper beach 310 acres
kli) i otai area insturoect: Approximately square miles
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SB Open: Yes
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes a beach nourishment project along 16.8 miles of Bogue
Banks from the Atlantic Beach/Pine Knoll Shores town line to Shipwreck Lane in Emerald Isle.
Nourishment sand would be dredged from borrow areas in offshore and near shore areas.
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney Regional Contact: J. Steenhu9s
Non-Discharge Branch WQ Supervisor: Rick Shiver
Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name Carteret County Beach Nourishment County Carteret
Project Number 01 0324 County2
Recvd From DCM Region Wilmington
Received Date 315101 Recvd By Region
Project Type beach nourishment
Certificates Stream
Permit Wetland Wetland Wetland Stream Class Acres Feet
Type Type Impact Score Index Prim. Supp. Basin Req. Req.
CAMA Waters PT -@N F_ 99-(4) SB I - 30,500. I -
Mitigation Wetland
MitigationType Type Acres Feet
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? O Y ON Did you request more info? 0 Y 0 N
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? 0 Y 0 N
Is Mitigation required? 0 Y 0 N Recommendation: 0 Issue (W Issue/fond 0 Deny
Provided by Region: Latitude (ddmmss) Longitude (ddmmss)
Comments:
This office has no objections to the eject if all the issues in the EIS have been addressed,
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 1
North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Mi0bael F. Easley, Governor
Vkliam G. Ross Jr., Secretary
:,Donna D. Moffitt, Director
February 26, 2001
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Mr. John R. Dorney
Environmental Biological Supervisor
Division of Water Quality
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
F.I?WA
NCDENR
SUBJECT: CAMA/DREDGE & FILL Permit Application Review
Applicant: Carteret County c/o Robert Murphy, County Manager
Project Location: Carteret County, Bogue Banks beaches including Pine Knoll Shores, Salter Path,
Indian Beach, Emerald Isle, located from Pine Knoll Shores/Atlantic Beach
boundary to Shipwreck Lane in Emerald Isle, and includes the near shore waters
of the Atlantic Ocean.
Proposed Project: Proposes a beach nourishment project along 16.8 miles of Bogue Banks.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form
by March 19, 2001. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please contact Ted
Tyndall at [phone]. When appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
L This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
SIGNED ±!?4 DATE - ' 11? 0
Morehead City Di rict \ 151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza 11
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY \ AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED / 10% POST CONSUMER PAPER
O?o? W AT ?9pG
r
? Y
Attachment
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Corps of Engineers WilmingtonField Office
Wilmington DWQ Regional Office
File copy
Central Files
Doug Huggett, DCM
Dave Clark; Carteret County Engineer
V
OEM
Michael F. Easley
Governor
Sherri Evans-Stanton, Acting Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
Division of Water Quality 1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Wetlands/401 Unit: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
ACF W AT `c9QG
r
o 1411::? -C
March 23, 2001
Carteret County
DWQ Project # 010324
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Mr. Robert Murphy
Carteret County Manager
Courthouse Square
Beaufort, NC 28516
Dear Mr. Murphy:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed
below, to dredge 2.58 square miles of beach front for the purpose of conducting a beach
renourishment project along Bogan Banks from Atlantic Beach/Pine Knoll shores to
shipwreck Lane is Emerald Isle as described in your application dated March 5, 2001. After
reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality
Certification Number 3274. In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local
permits before you go ahead with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and
Erosion Control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Water shed
regulations. This approval will expire when the accompanying 404 or CAMA permit
expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your
application except as modified below. If you change your project, you must notify us and you
may be required to send us a new application. If the property is sold, the new owner must be
given a copy of this Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying
with all conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre,
compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) (6) and
(7). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached
certification and any additional conditions listed below.
1. DWQ staff recommended that the CAMA Permit be conditioned to address all issues
raised in the EA or EIS. - - - - -
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an
adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter.
To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North
Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447,
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless
you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of
the Clean Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-
9646.
?jeh
NMENR
Michael F. Easley
Governor
Sherri Evans-Stanton, Acting Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
Division of Water Quality 1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Wetlands/401 Unit: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

P?
O
Co
M
J
O
O
C
D
Z
4-
O
4)
a

CL
o

AI (.; E. i(ll)
:
GO AL N
•, MO

N
N : O

t M

E
O
L
O G)

;
Ill
N
O 0
O
I! Ill I !Jill 1111 1
O
LO O LO O LO O LO O In O '
N (N r- ' ?- N
WAON - 4) UOIIBAG13

/?
N
C
M
N
TOM
LO
C -
? V
C N
•? m
f+
W
ii

d
CL

1

o
N
Q ;
o
C
O U)
It m
d
O
M
E
O
o U.
00
O ?
r
U
O
U )
G0 N
LO II N
C?Oy N
II 7
LL ?
E
:3 a
•E- E m
M E A
AO
E
X
w
N N ?- ?- ' ?- ?-
(GAON - 4) u014eAG13
Lk
0
0
ti
0
U( 4

O
O
O
O '
N
DUNE CONSTRUCTION

Survey
Line #

tation Dune
Base
Elevation
(100 yr
Flood
Level)
(ft NGVD) Existing
Dune
Volume
above 100
yr flood
level
(cy/ft)
cy/ft to Add
above Base
Elevation to
Achieve 8 cy/ft

(Cy/ft)
Volume to Add

between
Stations

(Cy)
Approximate
Linear Feet of
Dune
Construction

(ft)
46 407+38 12.6 2.2 5.8 3190 550
45a 413+00 12.6 3.0 5.0 2750 550
45 418+35 12.6 5.0 3.0 1650 550
44a 424+00 12.6 5.0 3.0 1650 550
43a 435+00 12.6 2.0 6.0 3300 550
43 440+43 12.6 2.0 6.0 3300 550
42a 446+00 10.6 4.4 3.6 1980 550
42 451+23 10.6 4.4 3.6 1980 550
38a 490+00 11.6 0.0 8.0 4400 550
38 495+36 11.6 1.0 7.0 3850 550
37a 501+00 11.6 7.5 0.5 275 550
37 506+46 11.6 4.5 3.5 1925 550
34a 539+00 11.6 2.0 6.0 3300 550
30a 600+00 12.6 6.9 1.1 605 550
Subtotals: 34,155 7,700
26a 657+00 12.6 3.9 4.1 2255 550
24a 683+00 12.6 3.8 4.2 2310 550
Subtotals: 4,565 1,100
23a 699405 12.6 6.7 1.3 715 550
23 704+57 12.6 4.2 3.8 2090 550
21 726+66 12.6 1.2 6.8 3740 550
Subtotals: 6,545 1,650
A1.)( ?,
Dune Construction Specification for
Bogue Banks Beach Nourishment Project
2002 Phase 2: Town of Emerald Isle
DUNE CONSTRUCTION: Some of the beach profiles in the Project area have insufficient sand in the dune for
flood protection. The Contractor is required to place dunes at these stations.
a. Volume: The Plans show which stations will require dune construction. Two cubic yards/foot
numbers are shown on the profiles requiring dune construction: cy/ft in the dune and cy/ft in the 7-ft elevation
berm. The shape of the placed dune will necessarily vary, depending on topography, but the requirement is for
the specified cy/ft to be placed above the specified elevation to form a dune. (This elevation varies along the
beach, since the flood level varies along the island.)
b. Amount of Work: Before construction start the Engineer will provide a lot-by-lot listing of which
lots or portions of lots are to have dunes constructed. At this time profile data are available only at the profile
lines in the Plans, which are 500-600 feet apart. No additional compensation will be provided for dune
construction shown in the Plans. The Contractor should expect to perform linear feet of dune construction up to
the number of stations in the Plans requiring dunes multiplied by 550 feet. If more dune construction than this is
required, Owner will negotiate a price with Contractor for additional construction and compensation.
c. Protection: No dunes will be constructed underneath existing structures. At the locations where
dunes are constructed, existing vegetation may be covered. Care shall be taken not to disturb or cover vegetation
landward of the new dune or at locations along the beach where new dunes are not bei c d
d. Permits: Prior to construction, Owner will obtain a CAMA permit ford t t t
lot-by-lot listing is available. Au ;
?1102
Coastal Science & Engineering PIIC I of 4 Dune Construction Specification
[2058-011 August 23, 2002 Emerald Isle, North Carolina
77
z
18
m?
t?€
r a
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
G 1 _
1 I
1
CL.
1 I i ?
1 I I ? a
1 1
?n , I I
I
H
LO
1 I I S
1 1 i ?
1 I T '
1 I CJ
1 I ?C
CO)
1 I;; I
`. I z
I
' -------------- -----I
7g g
1 Y L IF a a A
1
r-?
1 L-J
? 9 1
1 .
tin 1
1
Z 1
r` 1
1
1
Z
w
U, c
ZW
.; a z
Q ? `? `? d ao co
o> Q O N 3Q I 3p
m A I O O
E m c$ c
b v = C $ S
D; p +I +I +I
Y V? N R N M
t t ! .0 m m
? O O O
p c Ct? x
ui N m m m
a a a a a a

I
T
G

? u
III ?
? ? ?
m
w
cvvC, va ?a..v •=+•u iv !d ZO-8501\S1NItld 3m8\BBOZ\V1VQ\213A213$\:Q :H1Vd 9MQ
Mr. Mickey Sugg I Mr. Ted Tyndall August 21, 2002
RE: Request for Permit Modification (Federal Permit 200000362) [2058-01-4] Page 2
(SE
opportunity to perform Alternate 1 and Alternate 2 during this same period or the next available
period (16 November 2003 to 15 April 2004).
The maximum length of Phase 2 along Emerald Isle will be 37,100 feet (7.0 miles) if both
Alternates are accomplished. The contractor will work generally from east to west. In the event
portions of Alternate 1 and 2 are incomplete on or around 15 April, work will be suspended until
the subsequent permitted period. CSE will coordinate termination of work in early April such
that an appropriate fill taper is left along the beach.
The Town of Indian Beach has expressed interest in completing the westernmost 2800 feet of
Phase 1 that could not be accomplished in 2002 as a result of the mandatory suspension of work
on 12 April. Should time and budgets permit, and the Town of Indian Beach secure a separate
agreement with the Phase 2 contractor, up to 2800 linear feet (--160,000 cy) of Indian Beach will
also be completed bringing the maximum project length under Phase 2 to -7.5 miles. Phase 1
(Pine Knoll Shores and Indian Beach) involved a total of 7.2 miles.
Please contact our office if you require additional information. Enclosed with your copies of this
letter are three sets of small format attachments from my 9 August letter, and a summary project
plan.
Thank you for your consideration.
Yours truly,

Timothy W Kana PhD (NC PG 1752)
Project Director
Enclosures
cc: Carteret County, Greg Rudolph
Town of Emerald Isle, Mayor Art Schools
Town of Pine Knoll Shores, Mayor Robert Gallo
Town of Indian Beach, Mayor Buck Fugate
CSE, Bill Forman

Cs COASTAL SCIENCE & ENGINEERING LLC
PO BOX 8056 COLUMBIA SC 29202 • TEL [phone] • FAX [phone] • EMAIL [e-mail]
August 21, 2002
Mr. Mickey T. Sugg
Regulatory Field Office
USACE, Wilmington District
PO Box 1890
Wilmington NC 28402-1890
Mr Ted Tyndall
NC Division of Coastal Management
151 B Hwy 24
Morehead City NC 28557
RE: Bogue Banks Beach Restoration Project (Federal Permit 200000362)
Request for Permit Modification - Additional Information (CSE 2058-01-4)
Gentlemen:

MO
This letter provides additional information regarding our 9 August request for permit
modification for the Bogue Banks beach restoration project. As per your request of August 21, I
am enclosing a project plan map for Phase 2 showing the planned boundaries. We wish to
construct the following lengths and volumes:
Phase 2 - Base Project Area - 16 November 2002 through 31 March 2003
with possible extension through 15 April 2003. No work will be performed between 16 April
and 15 November 2003.
Lem; 24,000 ft westerly from town line Emerald Isle/Indian Beach
Volume: 1,570,000 cubic yards
Phase 2 - Alternates 1 and 2 - Time and budget permitting, the Town of Emerald Isle wishes
to continue Phase 2 westward from the base project limit as follows.
Alternate 1:
Length: 6,600 ft
Volume: 240,000 cubic yards
Alternate 2:
Length: 6,500 ft
Volume: 240,000 cubic yards
The contractor will be required to accomplish the Base Project during the November to April
permit period. Depending on production rates and budgets, the contractor will have an

Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
0
L
t71
50
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h/ Mid Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 13.820 13.637 13.637
-0.750 -0.875 2.513 2.479 16.116
-0.500 -0.625 3.158 3.117 19.233
-0.250 -0.375 3.230 3.187 22.420
0.000 -0.125 2.365 2.334 24.754
0.250 0.125 3.201 3.158 27.912
0.500 0.375 3.438 3.392 31.304
0.750 0.625 2.825 2.788 34.092
1.000 0.875 3.643 3.594 37.686
1.250 1.125 4.133 4.078 41.764
1.500 1.375 4.313 4.256 46.020
1.750 1.625 4.558 4.497 50.517
2.000 1.875 3.313 3.269 53.786
2.250 2.125 7.977 7.871 61.657
2.500 2.375 12.087 11.927 73.584
2.750 2.625 13.108 12.935 86.518
3.000 2.875 8.628 8.514 95.032
3.250 3.125 2.959 2.920 97.952
3.500 3.375 0.685 0.676 98.628
3.750 3.625 0.818 0.807 99.436
4.000 3.875 0.177 0.174 99.610
>4.0 0.395 0.390 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area A
Sample Date 3-6 June' 02
Core # Composite
Cores A101 - A112
Mean 0.412 mm
Std. Deviation 0.366 mm
Skewness -0.232
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.34
% finer than 4.00 ph i 0.39
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.274 -1.871 -0.762 0.019 1.721
75 84 95 99
2.527 2.701 2.999 3.615
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.280 0.412
Standard Deviation 1.448 0.366
Skewness -0.232
Kurtosis -1.202
Dispersion 0.597
Standard Deviation 0.957 0.515
Deviation from Normal -33.93%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.970 1.220
Standard Deviation 1.732 1.604
Skewness (1) -0.434 -0.455
Skewness (2) -0.668
Kurtosis 0.406 0.796

Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
I I ?
80
70
60
0
L 50
v?
s
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Urn Re
h! Mid Point
h! Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 13.210 12.737 12.737
-0.750 -0.875 2.540 2.449 15.187
-0.500 -0.625 2.860 2.758 17.944
-0.250 -0.375 3.070 2.960 20.904
0.000 -0.125 2.180 2.102 23.006
0.250 0.125 2.730 2.632 25.639
0.500 0.375 3.050 2.941 28.580
0.750 0.625 2.890 2.787 31.366
1.000 0.875 3.290 3.172 34.539
1.250 1.125 4.210 4.059 38.598
1.500 1.375 4.870 4.696 43.294
1.750 1.625 7.570 7.299 50.593
2.000 1.875 5.100 4.918 55.511
2.250 2.125 11.810 11.388 66.898
2.500 2.375 14.420 13.904 80.802
2.750 2.625 10.580 10.202 91.004
3.000 2.875 4.890 4.715 95.719
3.250 3.125 1.770 1.707 97.426
3.500 3.375 0.650 0.627 98.052
3.750 3.625 1.070 1.032 99.084
4.000 3.875 0.020 0.019 99.103
>4.0 0.930 0.897 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area A
Sample Date 3-6 June' 02
Core # A-112
Interval 0-2.5
Mean 0.414 mm
Std. Deviation 0.386 mm
Skewness -0.279
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 103.71
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.90
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 i6 25 5o
-2.198 -1.790 0.676 0.189 1.730
75 84 95 99
2.396 2.578 2.962 3.730
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.273 0.414
Standard Deviation 1.374 0.386
Skewness -0.279
Kurtosis -1.020
Dispersion 0.592
Standard Deviation 0.946 0.519
Deviation from Normal -31.15%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.951 1.211
Standard Deviation 1.627 1.534
Skewness (1) -0.478 -0.480
Skewness (2) -0.703
Kurtosis 0.460 0.883

Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
0
0
L 50
.Lm 3
ao
30
20
10
11116 11101,
III
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h/ Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 19.360 19.291 19.291
-0.750 -0.875 4.250 4.235 23.525
-0.500 -0.625 4.850 4.833 28.358
-0.250 -0.375 4.950 4.932 33.290
0.000 -0.125 3.680 3.667 36.957
0.250 0.125 5.330 5.311 42.268
0.500 0.375 5.750 5.729 47.997
0.750 0.625 5.110 5.092 53.089
1.000 0.875 5.650 5.630 58.719
1.250 1.125 5.470 5.450 64.169
1.500 1.375 4.650 4.633 68.802
1.750 1.625 4.160 4.145 72.947
2.000 1.875 2.570 2.561 75.508
2.250 2.125 5.330 5.311 80.819
2.500 2.375 6.210 6.188 87.007
2.750 2.625 7.340 7.314 94.320
3.000 2.875 3.730 3.717 98.037
3.250 3.125 1.130 1.126 99.163
3.500 3.375 0.290 0.289 99.452
3.750 3.625 0.310 0.309 99.761
4.000 3.875 0.010 0.010 99.771
>4.0 0.230 0.229 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area A
Sample Date 3-6 June' 02
Core # A-111
Interval 0-2.5
Mean 0.634 mm
Std. Deviation 0.386 mm
Skewness 0.084
Sediment Type
COARSE SAND
Poorly Sorted
Near Symmetrical
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.36
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.23
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.080 -1.844 -1.194 -0.674 0.598
75 84 95 99
1.950 2.379 2.796 3.214
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 0.657 0.634
Standard Deviation 1.372 0.386
Skewness 0.084
Kurtosis -1.281
Dispersion 0.599
Standard Deviation 0.961 0.514
Deviation from Normal -29.95%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.592 0.594
Standard Deviation 1.786 1.596
Skewness (1) -0.003 -0.028
Skewness (2) -0.068
Kurtosis 0.299 0.725
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
I I ?
80
70
60
c
L
v)50
s
3
40
i
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
ss Limits
h! Mid Point
h! Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
r
-1.000 -1.125 23.780 23.594 23.594
-0.750 -0.875 4.500 4.465 28.058
-0.500 -0.625 5.340 5.298 33.356
-0.250 -0.375 5.750 5.705 39.061
0.000 -0.125 4.390 4.356 43.417
0.250 0.125 5.310 5.268 48.685
0.500 0.375 4.550 4.514 53.200
0.750 0.625 3.070 3.046 56.246
1.000 0.875 3.370 3.344 59.589
1.250 1.125 3.730 3.701 63.290
1.500 1.375 3.080 3.056 66.346
1.750 1.625 3.500 3.473 69.818
2.000 1.875 2.500 2.480 72.299
2.250 2.125 5.700 5.655 77.954
2.500 2.375 7.000 6.945 84.899
2.750 2.625 8.240 8.175 93.075
3.000 2.875 4.660 4.623 97.698
3.250 3.125 1.530 1.518 99.216
3.500 3.375 0.030 0.030 99.246
3.750 3.625 0.590 0.585 99.831
4.000 3.875 0.010 0.010 99.841
>4.0 0.160 0.159 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area A
Sample Date 3-6 June' 02
Core # A-110
Interval 0-3.2
Mean 0.661 mm
Std. Deviation 0.361 mm
Skewness 0.131
Sediment Type
COARSE SAND
Poorly Sorted
Near Symmetrical
Very Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.79
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.16
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.265 -2.041 -1.425 -0.921 0.323
75 84 95 99
2.119 2.468 2.854 3.214
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 0.597 0.661
Standard Deviation 1.469 0.361
Skewness 0.131
Kurtosis -1.418
Dispersion 0.564
Standard Deviation 0.887 0.541
Deviation from Normal -39.58%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.521 0.455
Standard Deviation 1.946 1.715
Skewness (1) 0.102 0.068
Skewness (2) 0.043
Kurtosis 0.258 0.660
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
I
80
70
60
a°
v? 50
.m
3
40
I
30
20
10
0-
2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h/ Mid Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 13.670 13.667 13.667
-0.750 -0.875 3.190 3.189 16.857
-0.500 -0.625 3.880 3.879 20.736
-0.250 -0.375 4.160 4.159 24.895
0.000 -0.125 3.340 3.339 28.234
0.250 0.125 4.130 4.129 32.364
0.500 0.375 4.320 4.319 36.683
0.750 0.625 2.400 2.400 39.082
1.000 0.875 4.050 4.049 43.131
1.250 1.125 3.880 3.879 47.011
1.500 1.375 3.700 3.699 50.710
1.750 1.625 3.610 3.609 54.319
2.000 1.875 2.670 2.669 56.989
2.250 2.125 6.850 6.849 63.837
2.500 2.375 10.500 10.498 74.335
2.750 2.625 12.920 12.917 87.253
3.000 2.875 8.050 8.048 95.301
3.250 3.125 2.780 2.779 98.080
3.500 3.375 0.040 0.040 98.120
3.750 3.625 1.450 1.450 99.570
4.000 3.875 0.010 0.010 99.580
>4.0 0.420 0.420 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area A
Sample Date 3-6 June' 02
Core # A-109
Interval 0-4.6
Mean 0.449 mm
Std. Deviation 0.361 mm
Skewness -0.139
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.02
finer than 4.00 phi 0.42
coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 18 25 50
-1.993 1.679 0.817 -0.242 1.452
75 84 95 9
9

2.513
2.687
2.991
3.6
5
21
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)

Mean 1.156 0.449
Standard Deviation 1.471 0.361
Skewness -0.139
Kurtosis -1.376
Dispersion 0.604
Standard Deviation 0.972 0.510
Deviation from Normal -33.92%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.935 1.107
Standard Deviation 1.752 1.584
Skewness (1) -0.295 -0.318
Skewness (2) -0.455
Kurtosis 0.333 0.695
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area A
Sample Date 3-6 June' 02
Core # A-108
Interval 0-3.4
Mean 0.375 mm
Std. Deviation 0.396 mm
Skewness -0.334
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 102.36
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.59
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Class Limits
hi Mid Point
hi Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 10.650 10.404 10.404
-0.750 -0.875 2.040 1.993 12.397
-0.500 -0.625 2.540 2.481 14.879
-0.250 -0.375 2.500 2.442 17.321
0.000 -0.125 1.690 1.651 18.972
0.250 0.125 2.660 2.599 21.571
0.500 0.375 3.190 3.116 24.687
0.750 0.625 2.990 2.921 27.608
1.000 0.875 3.990 3.898 31.506
1.250 1.125 4.610 4.504 36.010
1.500 1.375 5.080 4.963 40.973
1.750 1.625 5.530 5.403 46.376
2.000 1.875 5.570 5.442 51.817
2.250 2.125 11.790 11.518 63.335
2.500 2.375 15.880 15.514 78.849
2.750 2.625 10.320 10.082 88.931
3.000 2.875 6.250 6.106 95.037
3.250 3.125 2.120 2.071 97.108
3.500 3.375 0.890 0.869 97.978
3.750 3.625 0.950 0.928 98.906
4.000 3.875 0.520 0.508 99.414
>4.0 0.600 0.586 100.000
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.180 -1.678 -0.385 0.527 1.917
75 84 95 99
2.438 2.628 2.998 3.796
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.416 0.375
Standard Deviation 1.335 0.396
Skewness -0.334
Kurtosis -0.739
Dispersion 0.597
Standard Deviation 0.956 0.516
Deviation from Normal -28.39%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.121 1.386
Standard Deviation 1.506 1.462
Skewness (1) -0.528 -0.533
Skewness (2) -0.834
IKurtosis 0.552 1.003
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
? I
70
60
0
0
M
tT 50
W
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h! Mid Point
hi Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 12.560 12.509 12.509
-0.750 -0.875 1.640 1.633 14.142
-0.500 -0.625 2.460 2.450 16.592
-0.250 -0.375 2.380 2.370 18.962
0.000 -0.125 1.570 1.564 20.526
0.250 0.125 2.120 2.111 22.637
0.500 0.375 2.150 2.141 24.778
0.750 0.625 1.760 1.753 26.531
1.000 0.875 2.130 2.121 28.653
1.250 1.125 2.510 2.500 31.152
1.500 1.375 3.270 3.257 34.409
1.750 1.625 3.410 3.396 37.805
2.000 1.875 2.910 2.898 40.703
2.250 2.125 7.800 7.768 48.471
2.500 2.375 15.860 15.795 64.267
2.750 2.625 15.270 15.208 79.474
3.000 2.875 12.910 12.857 92.331
3.250 3.125 4.820 4.800 97.132
3.500 3.375 1.310 1.305 98.436
3.750 3.625 0.840 0.837 99.273
4.000 3.875 0.310 0.309 99.582
>4.0 0.420 0.418 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area A
Sample Date 3-6 June' 02
Core # A-107
Interval 0-3.5
Mean 0.333 mm
Std. Deviation 0.366 mm
Skewness -0.412
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.41
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.42
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25
1 50
-2.762 -2.149
_
0.560 0.532 2.274
75 84 95
1

99
2.676 2.838 3.139 3.668
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.587 0.333
Standard Deviation 1.450 0.366
Skewness -0.412
Kurtosis -0.772
Dispersion 0.540
Standard Deviation 0.838 0.559
Deviation from Normal -42.18%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.139 1.517
Standard Deviation 1.699 1.651
Skewness (1) -0.668 -0.671
Skewness (2) -1.047
Kurtosis 0.556 1.010
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90 j
i i
80
70
60
0
L 50
v?
.a
3
40
30
20
10
0-
2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Lim Its
1 Mid Point
1 Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 9.040 8.899 8.899
-0.750 -0.875 1.380 1.359 10.258
-0.500 -0.625 1.640 1.614 11.872
-0.250 -0.375 1.650 1.624 13.497
0.000 -0.125 1.110 1.093 14.589
0.250 0.125 1.520 1.496 16.086
0.500 0.375 1.970 1.939 18.025
0.750 0.625 1.780 1.752 19.778
1.000 0.875 2.350 2.313 22.091
1.250 1.125 2.680 2.638 24.729
1.500 1.375 2.490 2.451 27.181
1.750 1.625 3.050 3.003 30.183
2.000 1.875 2.390 2.353 32.536
2.250 2.125 7.450 7.334 39.870
2.500 2.375 16.050 15.800 55.670
2.750 2.625 22.640 22.288 77.958
3.000 2.875 14.850 14.619 92.577
3.250 3.125 5.440 5.355 97.933
3.500 3.375 0.170 0.167 98.100
3.750 3.625 1.590 1.565 99.665
4.000 3.875 0.160 0.158 99.823
>4.0 0.180 0.177 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area A
Sample Date 3-6 June' 02
Core # A-106
Interval 0-2.7
Mean 0.279 mm
Std. Deviation 0.399 mm
Skewness -0.598
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Leptokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.58
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.18
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 5o
-2.454 -1.718 0.236 1.278 2.410
75 84 95 99
2.717 2.853 3.113 3.644
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.839 0.279
Standard Deviation 1.325 0.399
Skewness -0.598
Kurtosis 0.138
Dispersion 0.477
Standard Deviation 0.725 0.605
Deviation from Normal -45.27%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.544 1.833
Standard Deviation 1.309 1.386
Skewness (1) -0.661 -0.685
Skewness (2) -1.308
Kurtosis 0.845 1.376
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
a'
M 50
3 ?
40
I
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h! Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 10.220 10.076 10.076
-0.750 -0.875 1.930 1.903 11.979
-0.500 -0.625 2.600 2.563 14.542
-0.250 -0.375 2.810 2.770 17.312
0.000 -0.125 2.390 2.356 19.669
0.250 0.125 3.910 3.855 23.524
0.500 0.375 5.270 5.196 28.719
0.750 0.625 5.210 5.137 33.856
1.000 0.875 8.300 8.183 42.039
1.250 1.125 9.870 9.731 51.770
1.500 1.375 9.490 9.356 61.126
1.750 1.625 8.070 7.956 69.082
2.000 1.875 4.510 4.446 73.529
2.250 2.125 7.970 7.858 81.386
2.500 2.375 7.520 7.414 88.800
2.750 2.625 6.050 5.965 94.765
3.000 2.875 3.370 3.322 98.087
3.250 3.125 1.270 1.252 99.339
3.500 3.375 0.180 0.177 99.517
3.750 3.625 0.330 0.325 99.842
4.000 3.875 0.060 0.059 99.901
>4.0 0.100 0.099 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area A
Sample Date 3-6 June' 02
Core # A-105
Interval 0-4.2
Mean
Std. Deviation
Skewness
0.475 mm
0.439 mm
-0.182
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.43
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.10
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.192 -1.667 -0.368 0.321 1.205
75 84 95 99
2.047 2.338 2.768 3.182
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.074 0.475
Standard Deviation 1.189 0.439
Skewness -0.182
Kurtosis -0.728
Dispersion 0.606
Standard Deviation 0.976 0.509
Deviation from Normal -17.93%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.985 1.058
Standard Deviation 1.353 1.349
Skewness (1) -0.162 -0.229
Skewness (2) -0.483
Kurtosis 0.638 1.053
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
I
70
60
0
M
L 50
40
30
20 f
I
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class LImRs
hl Mid Point
! Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 12.750 12.521 12.521
-0.750 -0.875 1.780 1.748 14.269
-0.500 -0.625 2.490 2.445 16.714
-0.250 -0.375 2.580 2.534 19.248
0.000 -0.125 1.900 1.866 21.114
0.250 0.125 2.630 2.583 23.696
0.500 0.375 3.030 2.976 26.672
0.750 0.625 2.660 2.612 29.284
1.000 0.875 3.500 3.437 32.721
1.250 1.125 4.470 4.390 37.111
1.500 1.375 4.960 4.871 41.982
1.750 1.625 5.040 4.949 46.931
2.000 1.875 3.380 3.319 50.250
2.250 2.125 8.570 8.416 58.666
2.500 2.375 12.630 12.403 71.069
2.750 2.625 15.380 15.104 86.173
3.000 2.875 8.600 8.445 94.618
3.250 3.125 2.930 2.877 97.496
3.500 3.375 0.970 0.953 98.448
3.750 3.625 0.590 0.579 99.028
4.000 3.875 0.500 0.491 99.519
>4.0 0.490 0.481 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area A
Sample Date 3-6 June' 02
Core # A-104
Interval 0-2.4
Mean 0.376 mm
Std. Deviation 0.376 mm
Skewness -0.314
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.83
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.48
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.648 -2.076 0.573 0.360 1.981
75 84 95 9
9

2.565
2.714
3.033
3.7
3
81
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)

Mean 1.411 0.376
Standard Deviation 1.410 0.376
Skewness -0.314
Kurtosis -0.940
Dispersion 0.584
Standard Deviation 0.929 0.525
Deviation from Normal -34.12%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.071 1.374
Standard Deviation 1.644 1.596
Skewness (1) -0.554 -0.571
Skewness (2) -0.914
Kurtosis 0.554 0.949
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
i
90
80
70
60
0
.L 50
vs
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h! Mid Point
h! Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 14.510 14.351 14.351
-0.750 -0.875 2.720 2.690 17.041
-0.500 -0.625 4.120 4.075 21.116
-0.250 -0.375 3.650 3.610 24.726
0.000 -0.125 2.470 2.443 27.168
0.250 0.125 3.190 3.155 30.323
0.500 0.375 3.000 2.967 33.290
0.750 0.625 2.280 2.255 35.545
1.000 0.875 2.520 2.492 38.038
1.250 1.125 2.620 2.591 40.629
1.500 1.375 3.300 3.264 43.893
1.750 1.625 3.280 3.244 47.137
2.000 1.875 2.620 2.591 49.728
2.250 2.125 6.880 6.804 56.532
2.500 2.375 11.730 11.601 68.134
2.750 2.625 15.710 15.538 83.671
3.000 2.875 10.510 10.395 94.066
3.250 3.125 3.700 3.659 97.725
3.500 3.375 1.120 1.108 98.833
3.750 3.625 0.740 0.732 99.565
4.000 3.875 0.030 0.030 99.595
>4.0 0.410 0.405 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area A
Sample Date 3-6 June' 02
Core # A-103
Interval 0-4.4
Mean 0.405 mm
Std. Deviation 0.350 mm
Skewness -0.231
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.11
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.41
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.241 -1.869 -0.847 -0.222 2.010
75 84 95 99
2.610 2.758 3.064 3.557
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.306 0.405
Standard Deviation 1.516 0.350
Skewness -0.231
Kurtosis -1.337
Dispersion 0.573
Standard Deviation 0.905 0.534
Deviation from Normal -40.31%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.956 1.307
Standard Deviation 1.802 1.649
Skewness (1) -0.585 -0.579
Skewness (2) -0.784
Kurtosis 0.368 0.714
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
i I
90
so
i
70
60
0
M
= 50
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h/ Mid Point
h! Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 12.920 12.747 12.747
-0.750 -0.875 2.390 2.358 15.105
-0.500 -0.625 2.780 2.743 17.847
-0.250 -0.375 2.850 2.812 20.659
0.000 -0.125 2.010 1.983 22.642
0.250 0.125 2.730 2.693 25.335
0.500 0.375 2.850 2.812 28.147
0.750 0.625 2.130 2.101 30.249
1.000 0.875 2.680 2.644 32.893
1.250 1.125 3.140 3.098 35.991
1.500 1.375 3.950 3.897 39.888
1.750 1.625 4.120 4.065 43.952
2.000 1.875 3.150 3.108 47.060
2.250 2.125 7.800 7.695 54.755
2.500 2.375 13.770 13.585 68.341
2.750 2.625 14.720 14.522 82.863
3.000 2.875 11.160 11.010 93.873
3.250 3.125 3.740 3.690 97.563
3.500 3.375 1.340 1.322 98.885
3.750 3.625 0.600 0.592 99.477
4.000 3.875 0.270 0.266 99.743
>4.0 0.260 0.257 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area A
Sample Date 3-6 June' 02
Core # A-102
Interval 0-3.5
Mean 0.367 mm
Std. Deviation 0.364 mm
Skewness -0.323
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.36
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.26
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.245 -1.821 -0.668 0.219 2.096
75 84 95 99
2.615 2.776 3.076 3.548
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.444 0.367
Standard Deviation 1.457 0.364
Skewness -0.323
Kurtosis -1.031
Dispersion 0.572
Standard Deviation 0.903 0.535
Deviation from Normal -38.02%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.054 1.401
Standard Deviation 1.722 1.603
Skewness (1) -0.605 -0.602
Skewness (2) -0.852
Kurtosis 0.422 0.838
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
M
.a
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h/ Mid Point
h! Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 13.170 13.022 13.022
-0.750 -0.875 1.790 1.770 14.791
-0.500 -0.625 2.340 2.314 17.105
-0.250 -0.375 2.410 2.383 19.488
0.000 -0.125 1.650 1.631 21.119
0.250 0.125 2.150 2.126 23.245
0.500 0.375 2.120 2.096 25.341
0.750 0.625 1.620 1.602 26.943
1.000 0.875 1.880 1.859 28.802
1.250 1.125 2.400 2.373 31.175
1.500 1.375 2.920 2.887 34.062
1.750 1.625 3.350 3.312 37.374
2.000 1.875 2.380 2.353 39.727
2.250 2.125 7.770 7.682 47.410
2.500 2.375 13.470 13.318 60.728
2.750 2.625 18.130 17.926 78.653
3.000 2.875 14.560 14.396 93.049
3.250 3.125 4.280 4.232 97.281
3.500 3.375 1.230 1.216 98.497
3.750 3.625 0.760 0.751 99.249
4.000 3.875 0.220 0.218 99.466
>4.0 0.540 0.534 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area A
Sample Date 3-6 June' 02
Core # A-101
Interval 0-3.3
Mean 0.333 mm
Std. Deviation 0.361 mm
Skewness -0.413
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.14
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.53
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.698 -2.133 -0.619 0.459 2.299
75 84 95 99
2.699 2.843 3.115 3.667
Moment Measures (ph!) (mm)
Mean 1.587 0.333
Standard Deviation 1.469 0.361
Skewness -0.413
Kurtosis -0.822
Dispersion 0.523
Standard Deviation 0.807 0.572
Deviation from Normal -45.08%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.112 1.507
Standard Deviation 1.731 1.661
Skewness (1) -0.686 -0.687
Skewness (2) -1.044
Kurtosis 0.516 0.960
?.;

-: f
_ ?.
f
t
i
r
4

1

?
f 3
.7
3
i
`
((

i

t
1

1
9]?
3
1
?:
i
?

6
{{[?[
!tt
i
{'t
I
? i

3
?

7
!
j
j.
d

a

E
F t
-!
_.. --

t
i -.
3

l
I
_ �; j
� -
-
-
- -
a
a'
.,
_
- -
-- �, �
�
_ -
_ - _..
- �
_ -�
-
-:: �
�
R-
>. �
-
_. _- S
-
__-
aya
_.. 9
'.
�,
_
_ -_
_ 4 _-. _ - _ -
a
-_
-:. �
_.
- ::
�
--
- -_
-�
- -
�
rr
3
... �
-:.
�
-
s.
_ _ -
-' �-
_ _
�
..
- �
..�
-
_ _.
� _
i _
-.. a
___ �
_.
�
_-
__
-_
_
� -
_
_ {
_.
-_ �
�
:-
-. ,
_- -
- -_ _
_ _ -
_ - _ _

Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100

90
80
70
so
0
0
L
50
2
3
40
30
20
10
0

-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 12.829 12.530 12.530
-0.750 -0.875 2.655 2.593 15.123
-0.500 -0.625 3.271 3.194 18.317
-0.250 -0.375 3.336 3.258 21.575
0.000 -0.125 2.709 2.646 24.222
0.250 0.125 4.024 3.930 28.152
0.500 0.375 4.974 4.858 33.010
0.750 0.625 4.880 4.766 37.776
1.000 0.875 7.054 6.890 44.666
1.250 1.125 8.678 8.476 53.142
1.500 1.375 7.032 6.868 60.010
1.750 1.625 3.928 3.836 63.846
2.000 1.875 1.741 1.701 65.547
2.250 2.125 3.190 3.116 68.662
2.500 2.375 4.515 4.410 73.072
2.750 2.625 6.930 6.768 79.841
3.000 2.875 8.812 8.607 88.447
3.250 3.125 6.106 5.964 94.412
3.500 3.375 1.253 1.224 95.636
3.750 3.625 3.675 3.589 99.225
4.000 3.875 0.274 0.268 99.493
>4.00 0.519 0.507 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 17-Jul-02
Core # 62-90
Interval 0-6.8
Mean 0.447 mm
Std. Deviation 0.364 mm
Skewness -0.037
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Near Symmetrical
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 102.385
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.51
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.112 -1.726 -0.681 0.050 1.157
75 84 95
99

2.571
2.871 1
3.370
3.734
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.162 0.447
Standard Deviation 1.457 0.364
Skewness -0.037
Kurtosis -1.146
Dispersion 0.650
Standard Deviation 1.081 0.473
Deviation from Normal -25.78%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.095 1.116
Standard Deviation 1.776 1.660
Skewness (1) -0.035 -0.083
Skewness (2) -0.189
Kurtosis 0.435 0.828
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 17-Jul-02
Core # B2-89
Interval 0-7.1
Mean 0.252 mm
Std. Deviation 0.508 mm
Skewness -0.889
Sediment Type
FINE SAND
Moderately Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Very Leptokurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.9225
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.10
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Class Limits
(phi) Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 4.131 4.093 4.093
-0.750 -0.875 0.554 0.549 4.642
-0.500 -0.625 0.762 0.755 5.398
-0.250 -0.375 0.841 0.833 6.231
0.000 -0.125 0.652 0.646 6.877
0.250 0.125 0.980 0.971 7.848
0.500 0.375 1.326 1.314 9.161
0.750 0.625 1.206 1.195 10.357
1.000 0.875 1.572 1.557 11.914
1.250 1.125 1.914 1.897 13.811
1.500 1.375 2.958 2.931 16.741
1.750 1.625 6.668 6.607 23.349
2.000 1.875 7.667 7.597 30.946
2.250 2.125 19.748 19.568 50.514
2.500 2.375 20.264 20.079 70.592
2.750 2.625 16.902 16.747 87.340
3.000 2.875 8.301 8.225 95.565
3.250 3.125 2.831 2.805 98.370
3.500 3.375 0.751 0.744 99.113
3.750 3.625 0.667 0.661 99.774
4.000 3.875 0.131 0.130 99.904
>4.00 0.097 0.096 100.000
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.408 -0.632 1.437 1.804 2.243
75 84 95 99
2.566 2.700 2.983 3.462
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.990 0.252
Standard Deviation 0.978 0.508
Skewness -0.889
Kurtosis 3.006
Dispersion 0.428
Standard Deviation 0.648 0.638
Deviation from Normal -33.71%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 2.068 2.127
Standard Deviation 0.632 0.863
Skewness (1) -0.277 -0.434
Skewness (2) -1.690
Kurtosis 1.861 1.945
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
i
90
80
70
60
a°
C 50
v?
,a
3
40
30
i
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 8.423 8.273 8.273
-0.750 -0.875 0.867 0.851 9.124
-0.500 -0.625 0.973 0.956 10.080
-0.250 -0.375 0.970 0.952 11.032
0.000 -0.125 0.704 0.692 11.724
0.250 0.125 0.922 0.906 12.630
0.500 0.375 1.080 1.061 13.690
0.750 0.625 0.864 0.849 14.539
1.000 0.875 1.136 1.116 15.654
1.250 1.125 1.410 1.385 17.040
1.500 1.375 1.920 1.885 18.925
1.750 1.625 2.387 2.344 21.269
2.000 1.875 2.103 2.066 23.335
2.250 2.125 5.751 5.649 28.984
2.500 2.375 10.294 10.110 39.094
2.750 2.625 15.048 14.781 53.875
3.000 2.875 20.894 20.523 74.398
3.250 3.125 15.936 15.653 90.051
3.500 3.375 5.441 5.344 95.395
3.750 3.625 3.681 3.616 99.011
4.000 3.875 0.578 0.568 99.579
>4.00 0.429 0.421 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 17-Jul-02
Core # B2-88
Interval 0-7.7
Mean 0.219 mm
Std. Deviation 0.398 mm
Skewness -0.758
Sediment Type
FINE SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Very Leptokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.8105
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.42
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 5o
-3.136 -1.961 1.062 2.074 2.684
75 84 95 99
3.010 3.153 3.482 3.749
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 2.188 0.219
Standard Deviation 1.329 0.398
Skewness -0.758
Kurtosis 1.132
Dispersion 0.471
Standard Deviation 0.716 0.609
Deviation from Normal -46.14%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 2.108 2.300
Standard Deviation 1.045 1.347
Skewness (1) -0.552 -0.629
Skewness (2) -1.841
Kurtosis 1.603 2.383
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
I
80
i
70
60
OR
0
= 50
v.
3
40
30
20
I
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(pho Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 11.229 11.081 11.081
-0.750 -0.875 1.616 1.595 12.676
-0.500 -0.625 2.067 2.040 14.716
-0.250 -0.375 2.028 2.001 16.717
0.000 -0.125 1.440 1.421 18.138
0.250 0.125 2.016 1.990 20.128
0.500 0.375 2.147 2.119 22.246
0.750 0.625 1.683 1.661 23.907
1.000 0.875 2.023 1.997 25.904
1.250 1.125 2.532 2.498 28.402
1.500 1.375 3.250 3.208 31.610
1.750 1.625 3.637 3.589 35.199
2.000 1.875 2.668 2.633 37.833
2.250 2.125 6.369 6.286 44.118
2.500 2.375 10.439 10.302 54.420
2.750 2.625 13.657 13.478 67.898
3.000 2.875 15.623 15.418 83.316
3.250 3.125 9.456 9.332 92.648
3.500 3.375 4.076 4.023 96.670
3.750 3.625 2.095 2.067 98.737
4.000 3.875 0.511 0.505 99.242
>4.00 0.768 0.758 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 17-Jul-02
Core # B2-87
Interval 0-6.2
Mean 0.296 mm
Std. Deviation 0.360 mm
Skewness -0.437
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.3319
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.76
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.581 -1.953 -0.340 0.887 2.393
75 84 95 99
2.865 3.018 3.396 3.880
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.755 0.296
Standard Deviation 1.474 0.360
Skewness -0.437
Kurtosis -0.618
Dispersion 0.575
Standard Deviation 0.909 0.532
Deviation from Normal -38.32%
Graphic phi Inman Folk & Ward
parameter 1952 1957
Mean 1.339 1.691
Standard Deviation 1.679 1.650
Skewness (1) -0.627 -0.626
Skewness (2) -0.995
Kurtosis 0.593 1.108
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
I
70
i
I
60
OR
L
Of 50
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 8.811 8.637 8.637
-0.750 -0.875 1.866 1.829 10.467
-0.500 -0.625 2.946 2.888 13.355
-0.250 -0.375 3.036 2.976 16.331
0.000 -0.125 2.585 2.534 18.865
0.250 0.125 3.215 3.152 22.017
0.500 0.375 4.170 4.088 26.104
0.750 0.625 3.980 3.901 30.006
1.000 0.875 6.038 5.918 35.924
1.250 1.125 7.425 7.278 43.203
1.500 1.375 6.576 6.446 49.649
1.750 1.625 4.176 4.094 53.743
2.000 1.875 2.219 2.175 55.918
2.250 2.125 2.753 2.698 58.616
2.500 2.375 4.523 4.433 63.049
2.750 2.625 7.301 7.157 70.206
3.000 2.875 9.814 9.620 79.826
3.250 3.125 9.510 9.322 89.149
3.500 3.375 6.070 5.950 95.099
3.750 3.625 2.961 2.903 98.001
4.000 3.875 1.426 1.398 99.400
>4.00 0.613 0.600 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 17-Jul-02
Core # B2-86
Interval 0-6.4
Mean 0.352 mm
Std. Deviation 0.360 mm
Skewness -0.154
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 102.0138
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.60
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 51 - 16 25 50
-2.044 -1.497 -0.278 0.432 1.521
75 84 95 99
2.875 3.112 3.496 3.929
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.506 0.352
Standard Deviation 1.475 0.360
Skewness -0.154
Kurtosis -1.099
Dispersion 0.670
Standard Deviation 1.132 0.456
Deviation from Normal -23.28%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.417 1.452
Standard Deviation 1.695 1.604
Skewness (1) -0.062 -0.135
Skewness (2) -0.308
Kurtosis 0.473 0.838
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80 I
70
60
o
.m?50
3
40
30
20 f
I
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(phi) Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 10.414 10.230 10.230
-0.750 -0.875 1.514 1.488 11.718
-0.500 -0.625 1.800 1.768 13.486
-0.250 -0.375 1.656 1.626 15.112
0.000 -0.125 1.198 1.177 16.289
0.250 0.125 1.720 1.690 17.978
0.500 0.375 2.148 2.110 20.088
0.750 0.625 2.042 2.006 22.094
1.000 0.875 2.794 2.745 24.839
1.250 1.125 2.947 2.895 27.734
1.500 1.375 2.593 2.547 30.281
1.750 1.625 2.070 2.033 32.315
2.000 1.875 1.377 1.352 33.667
2.250 2.125 3.422 3.362 37.029
2.500 2.375 6.369 6.256 43.285
2.750 2.625 10.110 9.931 53.216
3.000 2.875 17.129 16.826 70.042
3.250 3.125 14.933 14.669 84.711
3.500 3.375 7.471 7.339 92.050
3.750 3.625 4.693 4.610 96.660
4.000 3.875 1.393 1.369 98.029
>4.00 2.007 1.971 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 17-Jul-02
Core # B2-85
Interval 0-9.0
Mean 0.265 mm
Std. Deviation 0.345 mm
Skewness -0.441
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.8011
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.97
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.551 -1.879 -0.061 1.014 2.669
75 84 95 99
3.085 3.238 3.660
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.917 0.265
Standard Deviation 1.535 0.345
Skewness -0.441
Kurtosis -0.634
Dispersion 0.583
Standard Deviation 0.927 0.526
Deviation from Normal -39.62%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.588 1.949
Standard Deviation 1.650 1.664
Skewness (1) -0.655 -0.649
Skewness (2) -1.078
Kurtosis 0.679 1.096
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
i
90
I
80
70
so
a°
t1
v?
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 8.038 7.911 7.911
-0.750 -0.875 1.190 1.171 9.083
-0.500 -0.625 1.459 1.436 10.519
-0.250 -0.375 1.474 1.451 11.970
0.000 -0.125 1.095 1.078 13.048
0.250 0.125 1.398 1.376 14.424
0.500 0.375 1.531 1.507 15.932
0.750 0.625 1.301 1.281 17.213
1.000 0.875 1.589 1.564 18.776
1.250 1.125 1.666 1.640 20.416
1.500 1.375 1.745 1.717 22.133
1.750 1.625 1.781 1.753 23.886
2.000 1.875 1.277 1.257 25.143
2.250 2.125 3.344 3.292 28.435
2.500 2.375 6.168 6.072 34.506
2.750 2.625 11.025 10.852 45.358
3.000 2.875 18.520 18.230 63.588
3.250 3.125 18.344 18.056 81.644
3.500 3.375 8.817 8.679 90.323
3.750 3.625 4.213 4.147 94.470
4.000 3.875 2.961 2.915 97.385
>4.00 2.657 2.615 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 17-Jul-02
Core # B2-84
Interval 0-6.7
Mean 0.225 mm
Std. Deviation 0.364 mm
Skewness -0.588
Sediment Type
FINE SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Very Leptokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.5951
% finer than 4.00 phi 2.62
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.475 -1.621 0.513 1.972 2.814
75 84 95 99
3.158 3.318 3.795
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 2.152 0.225
Standard Deviation 1.460 0.364
Skewness -0.588
Kurtosis 0.037
Dispersion 0.545
Standard Deviation 0.849 0.555
Deviation from Normal -41.86%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.916 2.215
Standard Deviation 1.402 1.522
Skewness (1) -0.640 -0.639
Skewness (2) -1.231
Kurtosis 0.932 1.871
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
i
80
70
60
L 50
rn
•d
3
40
30
i
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hi Mid Point
hi Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 18.051 17.754 17.754
-0.750 -0.875 3.056 3.006 20.760
-0.500 -0.625 4.178 4.109 24.869
-0.250 -0.375 3.931 3.866 28.735
0.000 -0.125 2.603 2.560 31.295
0.250 0.125 3.510 3.452 34.748
0.500 0.375 3.318 3.263 38.011
0.750 0.625 2.335 2.297 40.307
1.000 0.875 2.572 2.529 42.837
1.250 1.125 2.749 2.704 45.541
1.500 1.375 4.272 4.202 49.742
1.750 1.625 4.590 4.515 54.257
2.000 1.875 3.311 3.256 57.513
2.250 2.125 7.147 7.029 64.543
2.500 2.375 10.338 10.169 74.711
2.750 2.625 10.197 10.029 84.741
3.000 2.875 8.114 7.981 92.721
3.250 3.125 3.833 3.770 96.492
3.500 3.375 1.431 1.407 97.899
3.750 3.625 0.632 0.621 98.521
4.000 3.875 0.830 0.816 99.337
>4.00 0.674 01663 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 16-Jul-02
Core # B2-83
Interval 0-4.8
Mean 0.464 mm
Std. Deviation 0.342 mm
Skewness -0.112
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.6692
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.66
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.394 -2.061 -1.146 -0.492 1.514
75 84 95 99
2.507 2.732 3.151 3.897
Moment Measures (phi) (MM)
Mean 1.109 0.464
Standard Deviation 1.547 0.342
Skewness -0.112
Kurtosis -1.441
Dispersion 0.609
Standard Deviation 0.984 0.506
Deviation from Normal -36.40%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.793 1.033
Standard Deviation 1.939 1.759
Skewness (1) -0.372 -0.372
Skewness (2) -0.500
IlKurtosis 0.344 0.712
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
0
0
M
50
of
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h/ Mid Point
h! Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 13.898 13.692 13.692
-0.750 -0.875 2.188 2.156 15.848
-0.500 -0.625 2.901 2.858 18.707
-0.250 -0.375 3.148 3.102 21.808
0.000 -0.125 2.394 2.359 24.167
0.250 0.125 3.185 3.138 27.306
0.500 0.375 3.133 3.087 30.393
0.750 0.625 2.294 2.260 32.653
1.000 0.875 2.504 2.467 35.119
1.250 1.125 2.784 2.743 37.862
1.500 1.375 3.655 3.601 41.463
1.750 1.625 4.259 4.195 45.659
2.000 1.875 3.423 3.372 49.031
2.250 2.125 7.731 7.616 56.647
2.500 2.375 10.267 10.114 66.762
2.750 2.625 12.364 12.180 78.942
3.000 2.875 10.723 10.564 89.506
3.250 3.125 5.541 5.459 94.965
3.500 3.375 1.831 1.804 96.768
3.750 3.625 1.128 1.111 97.879
4.000 3.875 1.084 1.068 98.947
>4.00 1.068 1.053 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 16-Jul-02
Core # B2-82
Interval 0-6.2
Mean 0.380 mm
Std. Deviation 0.350 mm
Skewness -0.241
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.5042
% finer than 4.00 ph i 1.05
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.472 -2.008 -0.737 0.066 2.032
75 84 95 99
2.669 2.870 3.255
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.396 0.380
Standard Deviation 1.514 0.350
Skewness -0.241
Kurtosis -1.189
Dispersion 0.619
Standard Deviation 1.006 0.498
Deviation from Normal -33.55%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.066 1.388
Standard Deviation 1.803 1.699
Skewness (1) -0.535 -0.535
Skewness (2) -0.781
Kurtosis 0.459 0.829
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
i
80
I
70
60
0
L 50
Z
3
I
40
30
20 f
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h! Mid Point
hi Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 12.508 12.328 12.328
-0.750 -0.875 2.102 2.071 14.399
-0.500 -0.625 2.898 2.856 17.255
-0.250 -0.375 2.681 2.642 19.897
0.000 -0.125 1.885 1.858 21.755
0.250 0.125 2.619 2.581 24.336
0.500 0.375 2.809 2.768 27.104
0.750 0.625 2.198 2.166 29.270
1.000 0.875 2.657 2.619 31.889
1.250 1.125 2.871 2.829 34.718
1.500 1.375 3.598 3.546 38.264
1.750 1.625 4.192 4.131 42.395
2.000 1.875 3.101 3.056 45.451
2.250 2.125 7.461 7.353 52.804
2.500 2.375 11.140 10.979 63.783
2.750 2.625 12.354 12.175 75.959
3.000 2.875 12.509 12.328 88.287
3.250 3.125 5.977 5.891 94.178
3.500 3.375 2.527 2.491 96.668
3.750 3.625 1.704 1.679 98.348
4.000 3.875 0.785 0.773 99.121
>4.00 0.892 0.879 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area 132
Sample Date 16-Jul-02
Core # B2-81
Interval 0-5.3
Mean 0.349 mm
Std. Deviation 0.354 mm
Skewness -0.306
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.4662
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.88
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.367 -1.885 -0.610 0.310 2.155
75 84 95 99
2.730 2.913 3.333 3.961
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.518 0.349
Standard Deviation 1.496 0.354
Skewness -0.306
Kurtosis -1.023
Dispersion 0.611
Standard Deviation 0.989 0.504
Deviation from Normal -33.91%
Graphic phi Inman Folk & Ward
parameter 1952 1957
Mean 1.152 1.486
Standard Deviation 1.761 1.671
Skewness (1) -0.569 -0.559
Skewness (2) -0.812
Kurtosis 0.481 0.883
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
I
90
80
70
60
a°
M
50
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
I Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 13.667 13.567 13.567
-0.750 -0.875 2.133 2.117 15.684
-0.500 -0.625 2.602 2.583 18.267
-0.250 -0.375 2.767 2.747 21.014
0.000 -0.125 1.844 1.831 22.844
0.250 0.125 2.593 2.574 25.418
0.500 0.375 2.797 2.777 28.195
0.750 0.625 2.016 2.001 30.197
1.000 0.875 2.298 2.281 32.477
1.250 1.125 2.307 2.291 34.768
1.500 1.375 3.020 2.998 37.766
1.750 1.625 3.954 3.926 41.692
2.000 1.875 3.427 3.402 45.094
2.250 2.125 8.461 8.399 53.493
2.500 2.375 12.525 12.434 65.927
2.750 2.625 11.894 11.807 77.734
3.000 2.875 11.106 11.025 88.760
3.250 3.125 5.541 5.500 94.260
3.500 3.375 0.543 0.539 94.799
3.750 3.625 3.425 3.400 98.199
4.000 3.875 0.418 0.415 98.614
>4.00 1.397 1.386 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 16-Jul-02
Core # B2-80
Interval 0-6.7
Mean 0.361 mm
Std. Deviation 0.350 mm
Skewness -0.289
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.7327
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.39
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.484 -2.012 -0.719 0.209 2.146
75 84 95 99
2.692 2.892 3.515
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.471 0.361
Standard Deviation 1.513 0.350
Skewness -0.289
Kurtosis -1.088
Dispersion 0.598
Standard Deviation 0.959 0.515
Deviation from Normal -36.65%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.086 1.440
Standard Deviation 1.806 1.740
Skewness (1) -0.587 -0.546
Skewness (2) -0.772
Kurtosis 0.530 0.912
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
l
c
L 50
v?
3
40 i
30
? I
20
I
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits Mid Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 15.065 14.901 14.901
-0.750 -0.875 3.405 3.368 18.269
-0.500 -0.625 4.185 4.139 22.409
-0.250 -0.375 3.850 3.808 26.217
0.000 -0.125 2.765 2.735 28.952
0.250 0.125 3.465 3.427 32.379
0.500 0.375 3.485 3.447 35.826
0.750 0.625 2.410 2.384 38.210
1.000 0.875 2.700 2.671 40.880
1.250 1.125 2.875 2.844 43.724
1.500 1.375 3.695 3.655 47.379
1.750 1.625 4.090 4.045 51.424
2.000 1.875 3.110 3.076 54.500
2.250 2.125 7.505 7.423 61.924
2.500 2.375 9.975 9.866 71.790
2.750 2.625 11.235 11.113 82.903
3.000 2.875 8.075 7.987 90.890
3.250 3.125 4.280 4.233 95.124
3.500 3.375 1.585 1.568 96.691
3.750 3.625 0.825 0.816 97.507
4.000 3.875 1.250 1.236 98.744
>4.00 1.270 1.256 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 16-Jul-02
Core # B2-79
Interval 0.0-5.7
Mean 0.436 mm
Std. Deviation 0.345 mm
Skewness -0.132
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.1
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.26
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.032 -1.735 -0.918 -0.330 1.662
75 84 95 99
2.572 2.784 3.243
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.197 0.436
Standard Deviation 1.537 0.345
Skewness -0.132
Kurtosis -1.384
Dispersion 0.634
Standard Deviation 1.043 0.485
Deviation from Normal -32.14%
Graphic phi Inman Folk & Ward
parameter 1952 1957
Mean 0.933 1.176
Standard Deviation 1.851 1.680
Skewness (1) -0.394 -0.379
Skewness (2) -0.491
Kurtosis 0.344 0.703
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
i
80
70
i
60
= 50
vs
.m
3
40
i
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h/ Mid Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 17.324 17.086 17.086
-0.750 -0.875 2.992 2.951 20.036
-0.500 -0.625 3.431 3.384 23.420
-0.250 -0.375 3.269 3.225 26.645
0.000 -0.125 2.050 2.021 28.666
0.250 0.125 2.806 2.767 31.433
0.500 0.375 2.842 2.803 34.236
0.750 0.625 2.045 2.017 36.253
1.000 0.875 2.235 2.204 38.458
1.250 1.125 2.477 2.443 40.901
1.500 1.375 3.188 3.144 44.045
1.750 1.625 3.395 3.349 47.393
2.000 1.875 2.890 2.850 50.244
2.250 2.125 7.262 7.162 57.406
2.500 2.375 10.956 10.805 68.211
2.750 2.625 9.475 9.344 77.555
3.000 2.875 11.622 11.462 89.017
3.250 3.125 5.853 5.772 94.789
3.500 3.375 1.751 1.726 96.516
3.750 3.625 2.244 2.213 98.729
4.000 3.875 0.572 0.564 99.293
>4.00 0.717 0.707 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 16-Jul-02
Core # B2-78
Interval 0-5.7
Mean 0.408 mm
Std. Deviation 0.331 mm
Skewness -0.187
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.3944
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.71
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.363 -2.024 -1.092 -0.378 1.979
75 84 95 99
2.682 2.891 3.280 3.870
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.295 0.408
Standard Deviation 1.596 0.331
Skewness -0.187
Kurtosis -1.388
Dispersion 0.600
Standard Deviation 0.962 0.513
Deviation from Normal -39.71%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.899 1.259
Standard Deviation 1.991 1.799
Skewness (1) -0.542 -0.526
Skewness (2) -0.678
Kurtosis 0.332 0.711
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
0-0
rso
LM
3
40
30
i
20
10 i
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(phi) Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 13.473 13.295 13.295
-0.750 -0.875 2.854 2.816 16.111
-0.500 -0.625 3.611 3.563 19.674
-0.250 -0.375 3.614 3.566 23.240
0.000 -0.125 2.595 2.560 25.800
0.250 0.125 3.635 3.587 29.387
0.500 0.375 3.762 3.712 33.098
0.750 0.625 2.882 2.844 35.942
1.000 0.875 3.157 3.115 39.058
1.250 1.125 3.392 3.347 42.405
1.500 1.375 4.206 4.150 46.555
1.750 1.625 4.080 4.026 50.581
2.000 1.875 2.937 2.898 53.479
2.250 2.125 6.455 6.370 59.849
2.500 2.375 9.005 8.886 68.735
2.750 2.625 10.754 10.612 79.346
3.000 2.875 10.284 10.148 89.494
3.250 3.125 5.537 5.464 94.959
3.500 3.375 2.089 2.062 97.020
3.750 3.625 1.154 1.139 98.159
4.000 3.875 0.858 0.847 99.006
>4.00 1.007 0.994 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 16-Jul-02
Core # B2-77
Interval 0-5.9
Mean 0.407 mm
Std. Deviation 0.349 mm
Skewness -0.168
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.3422
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.99
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 1
25 50
-2.091 -1.736 -0.760 _
0.078 1.714
75 84 95 99
2.648 2.865 3.255 3.998
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.296 0.407
Standard Deviation 1.518 0.349
Skewness -0.168
Kurtosis -1.301
Dispersion 0.643
Standard Deviation 1.062 0.479
Deviation from Normal -29.99%
Graphic phi Inman Folk & Ward
parameter 1952 1957
Mean 1.052 1.273
Standard Deviation 1.812 1.662
Skewness (1) -0.365 -0.374
Skewness (2) -0.527
Kurtosis 0.377 0.750
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90 i
80 I
70
60
OA
0
=
RM 50
3
ao
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Lim Its
(phi) Mid Point
I Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 20.069 19.567 19.567
-0.750 -0.875 2.969 2.894 22.461
-0.500 -0.625 4.294 4.187 26.648
-0.250 -0.375 4.307 4.200 30.848
0.000 -0.125 3.411 3.326 34.174
0.250 0.125 5.494 5.357 39.531
0.500 0.375 6.366 6.207 45.738
0.750 0.625 5.551 5.413 51.151
1.000 0.875 7.387 7.203 58.353
1.250 1.125 8.833 8.612 66.965
1.500 1.375 9.049 8.822 75.788
1.750 1.625 7.100 6.923 82.710
2.000 1.875 3.077 3.000 85.711
2.250 2.125 4.369 4.259 89.970
2.500 2.375 2.807 2.737 92.707
2.750 2.625 2.111 2.059 94.766
3.000 2.875 1.900 1.853 96.618
3.250 3.125 1.503 1.465 98.083
3.500 3.375 0.886 0.864 98.947
3.750 3.625 0.726 0.708 99.655
4.000 3.875 0.193 0.188 99.843
>4.00 0.161 0.157 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 16-Jul-02
Core # B2-76
Interval 0-4.9
Mean 0.663 mm
Std. Deviation 0.417 mm
Skewness 0.091
Sediment Type
COARSE SAND
Poorly Sorted
Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 102.5629
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.16
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.604 -2.258 -1.308 -0.598 0.697
75 84 95 99
1.478 1.857 2.782 3.519
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 0.593 0.663
Standard Deviation 1.263 0.417
Skewness 0.091
Kurtosis -0.847
Dispersion 0.587
Standard Deviation 0.934 0.523
Deviation from Normal -26.07%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.275 0.415
Standard Deviation 1.583 1.555
Skewness (1) -0.267 -0.220
Skewness (2) -0.275
Kurtosis 0.592 0.995
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
so
80
70
60
i
0
L '
Lm 50
40
I I
30
20
I
it
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(phi) Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 14.980 14.642 14.642
-0.750 -0.875 1.720 1.681 16.323
-0.500 -0.625 2.430 2.375 18.698
-0.250 -0.375 2.440 2.385 21.083
0.000 -0.125 1.640 1.603 22.686
0.250 0.125 2.610 2.551 25.237
0.500 0.375 2.920 2.854 28.091
0.750 0.625 2.640 2.580 30.671
1.000 0.875 3.340 3.265 33.936
1.250 1.125 3.840 3.753 37.689
1.500 1.375 3.640 3.558 41.247
1.750 1.625 3.300 3.225 44.473
2.000 1.875 1.990 1.945 46.418
2.250 2.125 3.950 3.861 50.279
2.500 2.375 5.850 5.718 55.996
2.750 2.625 8.950 8.748 64.744
3.000 2.875 13.220 12.922 77.666
3.250 3.125 10.780 10.537 88.203
3.500 3.375 6.270 6.128 94.331
3.750 3.625 0.280 0.274 94.605
4.000 3.875 4.660 4.555 99.159
>4.0 0.860 0.841 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 16-Jul-02
Core # B2-75
Interval 0-4.5
Mean 0.336 mm
Std. Deviation 0.323 mm
Skewness -0.241
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 102.31
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.84
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 5o
-3.029 -2.434 -0.798 0.227 2.232
75 84 95 99
2.948 3.150 3.772 3.991
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.575 0.336
Standard Deviation 1.629 0.323
Skewness -0.241
Kurtosis -1.189
Dispersion 0.612
Standard Deviation 0.990 0.503
Deviation from Normal -39.21%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.176 1.528
Standard Deviation 1.974 1.927
Skewness (1) -0.535 -0.519
Skewness (2) -0.792
Kurtosis 0.572 0.934
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
9o
80
70
60
0
50
LM
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hi Mid Point
1 Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 8.920 8.775 8.775
-0.750 -0.875 1.534 1.509 10.283
-0.500 -0.625 1.895 1.864 12.148
-0.250 -0.375 1.887 1.856 14.004
0.000 -0.125 1.412 1.389 15.392
0.250 0.125 1.860 1.829 17.222
0.500 0.375 1.945 1.913 19.135
0.750 0.625 1.573 1.548 20.683
1.000 0.875 2.040 2.007 22.689
1.250 1.125 2.462 2.422 25.111
1.500 1.375 2.931 2.884 27.995
1.750 1.625 4.130 4.063 32.058
2.000 1.875 3.750 3.689 35.746
2.250 2.125 9.437 9.284 45.030
2.500 2.375 13.265 13.049 58.079
2.750 2.625 15.104 14.857 72.936
3.000 2.875 12.660 12.454 85.390
3.250 3.125 7.646 7.521 92.911
3.500 3.375 3.281 3.227 96.139
3.750 3.625 0.251 0.247 96.386
4.000 3.875 2.917 2.870 99.255
>4.00 0.757 0.745 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 16-Jul-02
Core # B2-74
Interval 0-6.3
Mean 0.282 mm
Std. Deviation 0.383 mm
Skewness -0.486
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Leptokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.6575
% finer than 4.00 ph i 0.74
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 5o
-2.288 -1.626 0.083 1.239 2.345
75 84 95 99
2.791 2.972 3.412 3.978
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.826 0.282
Standard Deviation 1.385 0.383
Skewness -0.486
Kurtosis -0.205
Dispersion 0.573
Standard Deviation 0.906 0.534
Deviation from Normal -34.63%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.528 1.800
Standard Deviation 1.445 1.485
Skewness (1) -0.566 -0.571
Skewness (2) -1.005
Kurtosis 0.744 1.329
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
? I
80
i
70
60
0-0
E 50
LM
3
40
I ?
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 12.270 11.908 11.908
-0.750 -0.875 2.520 2.446 14.354
-0.500 -0.625 3.330 3.232 17.585
-0.250 -0.375 3.530 3.426 21.011
0.000 -0.125 2.700 2.620 23.632
0.250 0.125 3.850 3.736 27.368
0.500 0.375 4.160 4.037 31.405
0.750 0.625 3.190 3.096 34.501
1.000 0.875 3.880 3.766 38.267
1.250 1.125 4.130 4.008 42.275
1.500 1.375 5.110 4.959 47.234
1.750 1.625 6.550 6.357 53.591
2.000 1.875 4.120 3.998 57.589
2.250 2.125 8.350 8.104 65.693
2.500 2.375 9.280 9.006 74.699
2.750 2.625 11.690 11.345 86.044
3.000 2.875 8.470 8.220 94.264
3.250 3.125 3.310 3.212 97.477
3.500 3.375 0.370 0.359 97.836
3.750 3.625 1.340 1.300 99.136
4.000 3.875 0.570 0.553 99.689
>4.0 0.320 0.311 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 01-Jul-02
Core # B2-73
Interval 0-6.8
Mean 0.414 mm
Std. Deviation 0.374 mm
Skewness -0.198
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 103.04
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.31
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 5o
-2.115 -1.706 -0.623 0.092 1.609
75 84 95 99
2.507 2.705 3.057 3.724
Moment Measures (phi) (mm
Mean 1.273 0.414
Standard Deviation 1.418 0.374
Skewness -0.198
Kurtosis -1.134
Dispersion 0.629
Standard Deviation 1.030 0.490
Deviation from Normal -27.38%
Graphic phi Inman Folk & Ward
parameter 1952 1957
Mean 1.041 1.230
Standard Deviation 1.664 1.554
Skewness (1) -0.341 -0.366
Skewness (2) -0.561
Kurtosis 0.431 0.808
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
a?
t50
.a
3
40
30
20
X's
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(phi) Mid Point
(phi) Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 11.375 11.164 11.164
-0.750 -0.875 1.989 1.952 13.116
-0.500 -0.625 2.394 2.349 15.466
-0.250 -0.375 2.219 2.178 17.643
0.000 -0.125 1.543 1.514 19.158
0.250 0.125 2.048 2.010 21.168
0.500 0.375 2.267 2.225 23.393
0.750 0.625 1.881 1.846 25.238
1.000 0.875 2.365 2.321 27.560
1.250 1.125 2.870 2.817 30.377
1.500 1.375 3.176 3.117 33.493
1.750 1.625 3.875 3.803 37.296
2.000 1.875 2.764 2.713 40.009
2.250 2.125 7.462 7.323 47.332
2.500 2.375 11.685 11.468 58.800
2.750 2.625 14.076 13.815 72.615
3.000 2.875 14.722 14.448 87.064
3.250 3.125 6.878 6.751 93.814
3.500 3.375 2.977 2.922 96.736
3.750 3.625 1.682 1.650 98.386
4.000 3.875 0.753 0.739 99.125
>4.00 0.891 0.875 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 01-Jul-02
Core # B2-72
Interval 0-8.3
Mean 0.315 mm
Std. Deviation 0.362 mm
Skewness -0.399
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.8922
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.87
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.302 -1.789 -0.439 0.718 2.308
75 64 95 99
2.791 2.947 3.351 3.958
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.667 0.315
Standard Deviation 1.468 0.362
Skewness -0.399
Kurtosis -0.740
Dispersion 0.585
Standard Deviation 0.931 0.524
Deviation from Normal -36.55%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.254 1.605
Standard Deviation 1.693 1.625
Skewness (1) -0.623 -0.608
Skewness (2) -0.902
Kurtosis 0.518 1.016
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
i i
80
I
70
I
60
0
M
t 50
.LM
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(phi) Mid Point
h/ Weight
lam Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 18.691 18.301 18.301
-0.750 -0.875 3.086 3.022 21.323
-0.500 -0.625 3.727 3.649 24.972
-0.250 -0.375 3.578 3.503 28.476
0.000 -0.125 2.482 2.430 30.906
0.250 0.125 3.513 3.439 34.345
0.500 0.375 3.452 3.380 37.726
0.750 0.625 2.730 2.673 40.398
1.000 0.875 3.155 3.089 43.487
1.250 1.125 3.486 3.413 46.900
1.500 1.375 4.143 4.056 50.957
1.750 1.625 4.703 4.605 55.561
2.000 1.875 3.048 2.984 58.546
2.250 2.125 6.901 6.757 65.302
2.500 2.375 7.359 7.205 72.507
2.750 2.625 7.717 7.556 80.063
3.000 2.875 9.033 8.845 88.908
3.250 3.125 5.641 5.523 94.431
3.500 3.375 2.323 2.275 96.706
3.750 3.625 1.542 1.510 98.216
4.000 3.875 0.708 0.693 98.909
>4.00 1.115 1.091 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area 62
Sample Date 01-Jul-02
Core # B2-71
Interval 0-6.1
Mean 0.462 mm
Std. Deviation 0.335 mm
Skewness -0.080
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 102.1303
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.09
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.431 -2.100 -1.190 -0.498 1.441
75 84 95 99
2.582 2.861 3.313
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.113 0.462
Standard Deviation 1.577 0.335
Skewness -0.080
Kurtosis -1.430
Dispersion 0.634
Standard Deviation 1.043 0.485
Deviation from Normal -33.87%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.835 1.037
Standard Deviation 2.026 1.833
Skewness (1) -0.299 -0.304
Skewness (2) -0.412
1Ku 0.336 0.720
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
I j
80
70
60
Oe
r50
vs
,a
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(Phi) Mid Point
h1 Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 11.537 11.280 11.280
-0.750 -0.875 2.083 2.036 13.316
-0.500 -0.625 2.546 2.489 15.805
-0.250 -0.375 2.653 2.594 18.398
0.000 -0.125 1.908 1.866 20.264
0.250 0.125 2.722 2.661 22.925
0.500 0.375 2.933 2.867 25.792
0.750 0.625 2.351 2.298 28.090
1.000 0.875 2.793 2.730 30.821
1.250 1.125 3.015 2.947 33.768
1.500 1.375 3.345 3.270 37.039
1.750 1.625 3.604 3.523 40.562
2.000 1.875 2.557 2.500 43.062
2.250 2.125 6.564 6.417 49.479
2.500 2.375 9.647 9.432 58.911
2.750 2.625 12.068 11.799 70.709
3.000 2.875 14.346 14.026 84.735
3.250 3.125 8.196 8.013 92.748
3.500 3.375 3.105 3.036 95.784
3.750 3.625 2.158 2.110 97.894
4.000 3.875 1.007 0.985 98.879
>4.00 1.147 1.121 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 01-Jul-02
Core # B2-70
Interval 0-7.8
Mean 0.329 mm
Std. Deviation 0.352 mm
Skewness -0.321
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 102.2833
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.12
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.262 -1.771 -0.481 0.431 2.264
75 84 95 99
2.826 2.987 3.435
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.603 0.329
Standard Deviation 1.505 0.352
Skewness -0.321
Kurtosis -0.977
Dispersion 0.618
Standard Deviation 1.004 0.499
Deviation from Normal -33.27%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.253 1.590
Standard Deviation 1.734 1.656
Skewness (1) -0.583 -0.566
Skewness (2) 0.826
Kurtosis 0.501 0.891
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
8o
70
so
00
=
CD 50
3
40
I
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h! Mid Point
h! Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 13.277 13.039 13.039
-0.750 -0.875 2.391 2.348 15.387
-0.500 -0.625 3.223 3.165 18.551
-0.250 -0.375 3.406 3.345 21.896
0.000 -0.125 2.608 2.561 24.457
0.250 0.125 3.545 3.481 27.939
0.500 0.375 3.629 3.564 31.503
0.750 0.625 2.723 2.674 34.177
1.000 0.875 2.973 2.919 37.096
1.250 1.125 3.076 3.020 40.117
1.500 1.375 3.429 3.367 43.484
1.750 1.625 3.847 3.778 47.262
2.000 1.875 2.787 2.737 49.998
2.250 2.125 6.415 6.300 56.298
2.500 2.375 8.656 8.500 64.798
2.750 2.625 8.047 7.902 72.701
3.000 2.875 8.868 8.709 81.409
3.250 3.125 8.221 8.073 89.483
3.500 3.375 4.093 4.020 93.503
3.750 3.625 2.726 2.677 96.180
4.000 3.875 1.374 1.349 97.529
>4.00 2.516 2.471 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 01-Jul-02
Core # B2-69
Interval 0-5.8
Mean 0.384 mm
Std. Deviation 0.337 mm
Skewness -0.158
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.829
% finer than 4.00 phi 2.47
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.282 -1.856 -0.702 0.039 2.000
75 84 95 99
2.816 3.080 3.640
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.381 0.384
Standard Deviation 1.568 0.337
Skewness -0.158
Kurtosis -1.304
Dispersion 0.678
Standard Deviation 1.152 0.450
Deviation from Normal -26.52%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.189 1.460
Standard Deviation 1.891 1.778
Skewness (1) -0.429 -0.416
Skewness (2) -0.586
Kurtosis 0.453 0.811
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
i
90
80
70
60
a'
M
r 50
yr
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
! Mid Point
0/70 Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 10.290 10.120 10.120
-0.750 -0.875 2.785 2.739 12.859
-0.500 -0.625 3.648 3.588 16.447
-0.250 -0.375 3.437 3.380 19.827
0.000 -0.125 2.295 2.257 22.084
0.250 0.125 3.246 3.193 25.277
0.500 0.375 3.054 3.004 28.280
0.750 0.625 2.302 2.264 30.544
1.000 0.875 2.892 2.844 33.387
1.250 1.125 3.180 3.127 36.515
1.500 1.375 3.833 3.770 40.284
1.750 1.625 4.043 3.976 44.260
2.000 1.875 3.486 3.428 47.688
2.250 2.125 9.538 9.380 57.068
2.500 2.375 11.330 11.142 68.210
2.750 2.625 11.173 10.987 79.197
3.000 2.875 8.824 8.678 87.875
3.250 3.125 5.637 5.544 93.419
3.500 3.375 2.661 2.617 96.037
3.750 3.625 1.926 1.894 97.931
4.000 3.875 0.925 0.910 98.841
>4.00 1.179 1.159 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 01-Jul-02
Core # B2-68
Interval 0-6.7
Mean 0.363 mm
Std. Deviation 0.362 mm
Skewness -0.254
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.6848
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.16
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 18 25 50
-1.832 -1.467 -0.531 0.228 2.062
75 84 95 99
2.654 2.888 3.401
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.462 0.363
Standard Deviation 1.468 0.362
Skewness -0.254
Kurtosis -1.080
Dispersion 0.647
Standard Deviation 1.074 0.475
Deviation from Normal -26.86%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.179 1.473
Standard Deviation 1.710 1.592
Skewness (1) -0.516 -0.483
Skewness (2) -0.640
Kurtosis 0.424 0.822
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
0-0
r?
v?
3 ? I
40
30 i
I
20
I
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(phi) Mid Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 13.223 13.051 13.051
-0.750 -0.875 2.105 2.078 15.129
-0.500 -0.625 2.753 2.717 17.845
-0.250 -0.375 2.882 2.844 20.689
0.000 -0.125 1.908 1.883 22.572
0.250 0.125 2.897 2.859 25.431
0.500 0.375 3.022 2.982 28.413
0.750 0.625 2.492 2.459 30.872
1.000 0.875 3.034 2.995 33.867
1.250 1.125 3.244 3.202 37.069
1.500 1.375 3.500 3.454 40.523
1.750 1.625 3.478 3.432 43.955
2.000 1.875 2.647 2.612 46.567
2.250 2.125 6.195 6.114 52.682
2.500 2.375 9.618 9.492 62.174
2.750 2.625 9.391 9.268 71.442
3.000 2.875 11.778 11.625 83.067
3.250 3.125 7.550 7.452 90.519
3.500 3.375 3.628 3.581 94.100
3.750 3.625 3.065 3.025 97.125
4.000 3.875 1.224 1.208 98.333
>4.00 1.689 1.667 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 11-Jun-02
Core # B2-67
Interval 0-6.0
Mean 0.355 mm
Std. Deviation 0.340 mm
Skewness -0.238
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.3208
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.67
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.450 -1.969 -0.670 0.212 2.140
75 84 95 99
2.827 3.031 3.574
Moment Measures (Phi) (mm)
Mean 1.493 0.355
Standard Deviation 1.555 0.340
Skewness -0.238
Kurtosis -1.173
Dispersion 0.646
Standard Deviation 1.071 0.476
Deviation from Normal -31.12%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.181 1.501
Standard Deviation 1.851 1.765
Skewness (1) -0.519 -0.501
Skewness (2) -0.723
Kurtosis 0.498 0.869
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90 j
I
80
70
60
a
= 50
.m
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h! Mid Point
ht Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 12.322 12.113 12.113
-0.750 -0.875 2.466 2.424 14.537
-0.500 -0.625 3.748 3.685 18.221
-0.250 -0.375 3.754 3.690 21.911
0.000 -0.125 2.864 2.815 24.727
0.250 0.125 4.291 4.218 28.945
0.500 0.375 4.999 4.914 33.859
0.750 0.625 4.522 4.445 38.303
1.000 0.875 5.821 5.722 44.025
1.250 1.125 6.054 5.951 49.976
1.500 1.375 5.355 5.264 55.240
1.750 1.625 4.079 4.010 59.250
2.000 1.875 2.366 2.326 61.576
2.250 2.125 5.453 5.360 66.936
2.500 2.375 7.677 7.547 74.482
2.750 2.625 8.598 8.452 82.934
3.000 2.875 9.369 9.209 92.144
3.250 3.125 4.529 4.452 96.595
3.500 3.375 1.115 1.096 97.691
3.750 3.625 1.659 1.631 99.322
4.000 3.875 0.294 0.289 99.611
>4.00 0.395 0.389 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 11-Jun-02
Core # B2-66
Interval 0-5.9
Mean
Std. Deviation
Skewness
0.442 m m
0.369 mm
-0.095
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.7314
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.39
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.146 -1.734 -0.651 0.016 1.251
75 84 95 99
2.515 2.779 3.160 3.701
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.178 0.442
Standard Deviation 1.437 0.369
Skewness -0.095
Kurtosis -1.221
Dispersion 0.650
Standard Deviation 1.081 0.473
Deviation from Normal -24.76%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.064 1.126
Standard Deviation 1.715 1.599
Skewness (1) -0.109 -0.164
Skewness (2) -0.314
Kurtosis 0.427 0.803
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
i
80
70 I
i
60
OA
0
L 50
m
M
3
40 1
i
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
1 Mid Point
h! Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 12.556 12.379 12.379
-0.750 -0.875 1.722 1.697 14.076
-0.500 -0.625 2.138 2.107 16.184
-0.250 -0.375 2.170 2.139 18.323
0.000 -0.125 1.505 1.484 19.807
0.250 0.125 2.062 2.033 21.839
0.500 0.375 2.162 2.132 23.971
0.750 0.625 1.798 1.773 25.744
1.000 0.875 2.253 2.221 27.966
1.250 1.125 2.404 2.370 30.335
1.500 1.375 1.640 1.617 31.952
1.750 1.625 3.012 2.969 34.922
2.000 1.875 2.284 2.252 37.174
2.250 2.125 5.784 5.702 42.876
2.500 2.375 8.033 7.919 50.795
2.750 2.625 14.771 14.563 65.358
3.000 2.875 14.451 14.247 79.605
3.250 3.125 10.530 10.382 89.987
3.500 3.375 4.967 4.897 94.883
3.750 3.625 2.418 2.384 97.268
4.000 3.875 1.089 1.074 98.342
>4.00 1.682 1.658 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 11-Jun-02
Core # B2-64
Interval 0-6.9
Mean 0.303 mm
Std. Deviation 0.342 mm
Skewness -0.385
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.4307
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.66
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.676 -2.087 -0.522 0.645 2.475
75 84 95 99
2.919 3.106 3.512
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.722 0.303
Standard Deviation 1.547 0.342
Skewness -0.385
Kurtosis -0.869
Dispersion 0.586
Standard Deviation 0.933 0.524
Deviation from Normal -39.67%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.292 1.686
Standard Deviation 1.814 1.755
Skewness (1) -0.652 -0.641
Skewness (2) -0.972
Kurtosis 0.543 1.009
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
0-0
M 50
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h/ Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 9.694 9.609 9.609
-0.750 -0.875 1.658 1.644 11.253
-0.500 -0.625 1.756 1.741 12.994
-0.250 -0.375 1.686 1.671 14.665
0.000 -0.125 1.264 1.253 15.918
0.250 0.125 1.852 1.836 17.754
0.500 0.375 1.964 1.947 19.701
0.750 0.625 1.502 1.489 21.190
1.000 0.875 1.878 1.862 23.051
1.250 1.125 2.246 2.226 25.278
1.500 1.375 2.884 2.859 28.136
1.750 1.625 2.908 2.883 31.019
2.000 1.875 2.414 2.393 33.412
2.250 2.125 4.480 4.441 37.853
2.500 2.375 4.756 4.715 42.567
2.750 2.625 10.298 10.208 52.776
3.000 2.875 18.992 18.826 71.602
3.250 3.125 11.766 11.663 83.265
3.500 3.375 12.372 12.264 95.529
3.750 3.625 0.020 0.020 95.549
4.000 3.875 0.076 0.075 95.625
>4.00 4.414 4.375 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 11-Jun-02
Core # B2-63
Interval 0-4.5
Mean 0.278 mm
Std. Deviation 0.352 mm
Skewness -0.429
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Leptokurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.88
% finer than 4.00 phi 4.38
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.310 -1.701 0.011 1.219 2.682
75 84 95 99
3.073 3.265 3.489
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.848 0.278
Standard Deviation 1.507 0.352
Skewness -0.429
Kurtosis -0.728
Dispersion 0.570
Standard Deviation 0.898 0.537
Deviation from Normal -40.41%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.638 1.986
Standard Deviation 1.627 1.600
Skewness (1) -0.642 -0.665
Skewness (2) -1.099
Kurtosis 0.595 1.147
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
0
M
50
W
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(phi) Mid Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 9.784 9.717 9.717
-0.750 -0.875 1.861 1.849 11.565
-0.500 -0.625 2.154 2.139 13.705
-0.250 -0.375 2.152 2.137 15.842
0.000 -0.125 1.611 1.600 17.442
0.250 0.125 2.188 2.173 19.615
0.500 0.375 2.327 2.311 21.926
0.750 0.625 1.883 1.870 23.796
1.000 0.875 2.101 2.087 25.883
1.250 1.125 2.295 2.279 28.162
1.500 1.375 2.928 2.908 31.069
1.750 1.625 3.467 3.443 34.513
2.000 1.875 2.911 2.891 37.403
2.250 2.125 6.796 6.749 44.152
2.500 2.375 7.564 7.511 51.664
2.750 2.625 8.746 8.686 60.350
3.000 2.875 12.195 12.111 72.460
3.250 3.125 13.071 12.981 85.441
3.500 3.375 12.364 12.279 97.720
3.750 3.625 0.022 0.021 97.741
4.000 3.875 0.014 0.014 97.755
>4.00 2.260 2.245 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 11-Jun-02
Core # B2-62
Interval 0-7.3
Mean 0.290 mm
Std. Deviation 0.353 mm
Skewness -0.398
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.6936
% finer than 4.00 phi 2.24
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 18 25 50
-2.179 -1.638 -0.225 0.894 2.445
75 84 95 99
3.049 3.222 3.445
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.788 0.290
Standard Deviation 1.502 0.353
Skewness -0.398
Kurtosis -0.781
Dispersion 0.587
Standard Deviation 0.934 0.523
Deviation from Normal -37.79%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.498 1.814
Standard Deviation 1.724 1.632
Skewness (1) -0.549 -0.578
Skewness (2) -0.894
Kurtosis 0.474 0.967
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
I
90
80
70
60
a0
.L Lm 50
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 14.481 14.234 14.234
-0.750 -0.875 2.477 2.434 16.669
-0.500 -0.625 3.203 3.149 19.818
-0.250 -0.375 3.011 2.960 22.777
0.000 -0.125 2.231 2.193 24.971
0.250 0.125 3.343 3.286 28.257
0.500 0.375 3.901 3.835 32.092
0.750 0.625 3.398 3.340 35.431
1.000 0.875 4.639 4.560 39.991
1.250 1.125 5.277 5.187 45.178
1.500 1.375 4.741 4.660 49.838
1.750 1.625 3.564 3.504 53.342
2.000 1.875 1.877 1.845 55.187
2.250 2.125 4.114 4.044 59.231
2.500 2.375 8.364 8.222 67.453
2.750 2.625 11.680 11.481 78.934
3.000 2.875 10.804 10.620 89.554
3.250 3.125 5.990 5.888 95.442
3.500 3.375 2.618 2.573 98.016
3.750 3.625 1.498 1.472 99.488
4.000 3.875 0.248 0.244 99.731
>4.00 0.273 0.269 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 11-Jun-02
Core # B2-61
Interval 0-5.4
Mean 0.406 mm
Std. Deviation 0.349 mm
Skewness -0.169
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.7333
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.27
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.359 -1.948 -0.819 0.002 1.512
75 84 95
99

2.664
2.869
3.231
1
3.667
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.300 0.406
Standard Deviation 1.518 0.349
Skewness -0.169
Kurtosis -1.280
Dispersion 0.621
Standard Deviation 1.011 0.496
Deviation from Normal -33.43%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.025 1.187
Standard Deviation 1.844 1.707
Skewness (1) -0.264 -0.300
Skewness (2) -0.472
Kurtosis 0.404 0.797
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70 j
60
a° I
t 50
.v0
m
3
40
30
20 j
10
i
i
0'
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits Mid Point
1 Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 18.033 18.150 18.150
-0.750 -0.875 2.780 2.798 20.948
-0.500 -0.625 3.332 3.354 24.302
-0.250 -0.375 2.684 2.701 27.004
0.000 -0.125 1.903 1.915 28.919
0.250 0.125 2.559 2.576 31.495
0.500 0.375 2.590 2.607 34.102
0.750 0.625 2.109 2.123 36.225
1.000 0.875 2.550 2.567 38.792
1.250 1.125 2.798 2.816 41.608
1.500 1.375 3.114 3.135 44.743
1.750 1.625 3.578 3.601 48.344
2.000 1.875 2.768 2.786 51.131
2.250 2.125 5.489 5.524 56.655
2.500 2.375 6.807 6.851 63.506
2.750 2.625 9.255 9.316 72.822
3.000 2.875 13.410 13.497 86.319
3.250 3.125 7.700 7.750 94.069
3.500 3.375 2.578 2.595 96.664
3.750 3.625 2.110 2.123 98.787
4.000 3.875 0.626 0.630 99.417
>4.00 0.580 0.583 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 11-Jun-02
Core # B2-60
Interval 0-6.5
Mean 0.402 mm
Std. Deviation 0.322 mm
Skewness -0.179
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 99.35415
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.58
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 161 25 50
-2.532 -2.175 -1.192 _
0.435 1.899
75 84 95 99,
2.790 2.957 3.340 3.835
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.316 0.402
Standard Deviation 1.636 0.322
Skewness -0.179
Kurtosis -1.420
Dispersion 0.596
Standard Deviation 0.955 0.516
Deviation from Normal -41.62%
Graphic phi Inman Folk & Ward
parameter 1952 1957
Mean 0.882 1.221
Standard Deviation 2.075 1.873
Skewness (1) -0.490 -0.484
Skewness (2) 0.634
Kurtosis 0.329 0.701
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
so
o
t 50
M
.s
3
40
i
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h/ Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 11.450 11.260 11.260
-0.750 -0.875 1.530 1.505 12.764
-0.500 -0.625 1.900 1.868 14.633
-0.250 -0.375 1.870 1.839 16.472
0.000 -0.125 1.440 1.416 17.888
0.250 0.125 2.330 2.291 20.179
0.500 0.375 2.680 2.635 22.814
0.750 0.625 2.290 2.252 25.066
1.000 0.875 3.130 3.078 28.144
1.250 1.125 4.260 4.189 32.334
1.500 1.375 5.850 5.753 38.086
1.750 1.625 7.960 7.828 45.914
2.000 1.875 4.920 4.838 50.752
2.250 2.125 8.010 7.877 58.629
2.500 2.375 7.970 7.838 66.467
2.750 2.625 10.980 10.798 77.264
3.000 2.875 11.390 11.201 88.465
3.250 3.125 5.870 5.772 94.237
3.500 3.375 2.290 2.252 96.489
3.750 3.625 1.970 1.937 98.427
4.000 3.875 0.790 0.777 99.203
>4.0 0.810 0.797 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 11-Jun-02
Core # B2-59
Interval 0-3.6'
Mean 0.341 mm
Std. Deviation 0.377 mm
Skewness -0.333
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Leptokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.69
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.80
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.705 -2.040 -0.314 0.743 1.961
75 84 95 99
2.698 2.900 3.335 3.935
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.553 0.341
Standard Deviation 1.409 0.377
Skewness -0.333
Kurtosis -0.707
Dispersion 0.623
Standard Deviation 1.016 0.494
Deviation from Normal -27.86%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.293 1.516
Standard Deviation 1.607 1.618
Skewness (1) -0.416 -0.452
Skewness (2) -0.817
Kurtosis 0.672 1.127
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
I
80
' i
70
60
o j
L 50
.LM
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(Phi) Mid Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 1.570 1.565 1.565
-0.750 -0.875 0.240 0.239 1.805
-0.500 -0.625 0.390 0.389 2.194
-0.250 -0.375 0.310 0.309 2.503
0.000 -0.125 0.390 0.389 2.892
0.250 0.125 0.530 0.528 3.420
0.500 0.375 0.840 0.838 4.258
0.750 0.625 0.750 0.748 5.005
1.000 0.875 0.930 0.927 5.933
1.250 1.125 1.240 1.236 7.169
1.500 1.375 1.710 1.705 8.874
1.750 1.625 2.370 2.363 11.237
2.000 1.875 2.410 2.403 13.640
2.250 2.125 13.260 13.222 26.862
2.500 2.375 24.540 24.469 51.331
2.750 2.625 31.630 31.539 82.870
3.000 2.875 13.430 13.391 96.261
3.250 3.125 2.620 2.612 98.873
3.500 3.375 0.060 0.060 98.933
3.750 3.625 0.980 0.977 99.910
4.000 3.875 0.010 0.010 99.920
>4.0 0.080 0.080 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 04-Jun-02
Core # B2-58
Interval 0-4.0
Mean 0.202 mm
Std. Deviation 0.598 mm
Skewness -1.324
Sediment Type
FINE SAND
Moderately Well Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Very Leptokurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.29
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.08
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-1.591 0.748 2.045 2.215 2.486
75 84 95 99
2.688 2.771 2.976 3.517
Moment Measures (hi) (mm)
Mean 2.308 0.202
Standard Deviation 0.743 0.598
Skewness -1.324
Kurtosis 8.388
Dispersion 0.260
Standard Deviation 0.440 0.737
Deviation from Normal -40.73%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 2.408 2.434
Standard Deviation 0.363 0.519
Skewness (1) -0.216 -0.388
Skewness (2) -1.718
Kurtosis 2.067 1.931
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
a?
v? 50
.a
3
40
30
i
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
1 Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 16.750 16.648 16.648
-0.750 -0.875 2.540 2.525 19.173
-0.500 -0.625 2.690 2.674 21.847
-0.250 -0.375 2.680 2.664 24.510
0.000 -0.125 1.990 1.978 26.488
0.250 0.125 3.010 2.992 29.480
0.500 0.375 3.270 3.250 32.730
0.750 0.625 2.400 2.385 35.116
1.000 0.875 3.270 3.250 38.366
1.250 1.125 3.620 3.598 41.964
1.500 1.375 4.200 4.175 46.139
1.750 1.625 6.200 6.162 52.301
2.000 1.875 5.090 5.059 57.360
2.250 2.125 10.430 10.367 67.727
2.500 2.375 11.760 11.689 79.416
2.750 2.625 10.690 10.625 90.041
3.000 2.875 6.340 6.302 96.342
3.250 3.125 2.270 2.256 98.599
3.500 3.375 0.690 0.686 99.284
3.750 3.625 0.490 0.487 99.771
4.000 3.875 0.050 0.050 99.821
>4.0 0.180 0.179 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 04-Jun-02
Core # B2-57
Interval 0-2.6
Mean 0.440 mm
Std. Deviation 0.367 mm
Skewness -0.230
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.61
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.18
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.550 -2.153 -1.064 -0.188 1.657
75 84 95 99
2.406 2.608 2.947 3.396
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.185 0.440
Standard Deviation 1.448 0.367
Skewness -0.230
Kurtosis -1.239
Dispersion 0.575
Standard Deviation 0.909 0.532
Deviation from Normal -37.19%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.772 1.067
Standard Deviation 1.836 1.691
Skewness (1) -0.482 -0.488
Skewness (2) -0.686
Kurtosis 0.389 0.806
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80 j
70
60
I
e
L 50
v?
.a
3 I
40
i
30 I
I
20 i
10
0 - (11 111, ..... . ... ..
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h! Mid Point
h! Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 14.450 14.317 14.317
-0.750 -0.875 2.830 2.804 17.121
-0.500 -0.625 3.650 3.616 20.737
-0.250 -0.375 3.650 3.616 24.354
0.000 -0.125 2.750 2.725 27.078
0.250 0.125 4.040 4.003 31.081
0.500 0.375 4.500 4.459 35.539
0.750 0.625 3.630 3.597 39.136
1.000 0.875 4.420 4.379 43.515
1.250 1.125 4.850 4.805 48.321
1.500 1.375 7.040 6.975 55.296
1.750 1.625 9.240 9.155 64.451
2.000 1.875 4.420 4.379 68.830
2.250 2.125 6.900 6.836 75.666
2.500 2.375 8.660 8.580 84.247
2.750 2.625 8.540 8.461 92.708
3.000 2.875 4.620 4.577 97.285
3.250 3.125 1.600 1.585 98.871
3.500 3.375 0.580 0.575 99.445
3.750 3.625 0.400 0.396 99.841
4.000 3.875 0.020 0.020 99.861
>4.0 0.140 0.139 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 04-Jun-02
Core # B2-56
Interval 0-4.3
Mean 0.491 mm
Std. Deviation 0.390 mm
Skewness -0.136
Sediment Type
COARSE SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.93
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.14
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.187 -1.831 -0.850 -0.191 1.310
75 84 95 99
2.226 2.493 2.875 3.306
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.025 0.491
Standard Deviation 1.358 0.390
Skewness -0.136
Kurtosis -1.204
Dispersion 0.613
Standard Deviation 0.993 0.503
Deviation from Normal -26.89%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.821 0.984
Standard Deviation 1.671 1.549
Skewness (1) -0.292 -0.314
Skewness (2) -0.471
Kurtosis 0.408 0.798
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
0
M 5^
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 12.980 12.937 12.937
-0.750 -0.875 1.190 1.186 14.123
-0.500 -0.625 1.680 1.674 15.798
-0.250 -0.375 1.350 1.346 17.143
0.000 -0.125 1.030 1.027 18.170
0.250 0.125 1.350 1.346 19.516
0.500 0.375 1.560 1.555 21.070
0.750 0.625 1.260 1.256 22.326
1.000 0.875 1.680 1.674 24.001
1.250 1.125 2.210 2.203 26.204
1.500 1.375 2.860 2.851 29.054
1.750 1.625 4.720 4.704 33.759
2.000 1.875 3.750 3.738 37.496
2.250 2.125 11.220 11.183 48.679
2.500 2.375 17.360 17.303 65.982
2.750 2.625 18.750 18.688 84.671
3.000 2.875 11.130 11.093 95.764
3.250 3.125 3.160 3.150 98.914
3.500 3.375 0.690 0.688 99.601
3.750 3.625 0.300 0.299 99.900
4.000 3.875 0.030 0.030 99.930
>4.0 0.070 0.070 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 06-Jun-02
Core # B2-55
Interval 0-3.9
Mean 0.317 mm
Std. Deviation 0.385 mm
Skewness -0.547
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Very Leptokurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.33
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.07
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-3.516 -2.673 -0.462 1.113 2.269
75 84 95 99
2.621 2.741 2.983 3.281
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.660 0.317
Standard Deviation 1.379 0.385
Skewness -0.547
Kurtosis -0.254
Dispersion 0.467
Standard Deviation 0.709 0.612
Deviation from Normal -48.58%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.139 1.516
Standard Deviation 1.602 1.658
Skewness (1) -0.705 -0.726
Skewness (2) -1.320
Kurtosis 0.766 1.538
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90 j
I
80
i
70
60
.so, 50
3
40
i
30
20
I
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(phi) Mid Point
i Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 10.700 10.643 10.643
-0.750 -0.875 1.430 1.422 12.065
-0.500 -0.625 1.980 1.969 14.034
-0.250 -0.375 1.720 1.711 15.745
0.000 -0.125 1.180 1.174 16.919
0.250 0.125 1.670 1.661 18.580
0.500 0.375 1.790 1.780 20.360
0.750 0.625 1.530 1.522 21.882
1.000 0.875 1.660 1.651 23.533
1.250 1.125 1.870 1.860 25.393
1.500 1.375 2.020 2.009 27.402
1.750 1.625 1.790 1.780 29.182
2.000 1.875 1.120 1.114 30.296
2.250 2.125 1.850 1.840 32.136
2.500 2.375 4.380 4.356 36.493
2.750 2.625 17.630 17.535 54.028
3.000 2.875 24.270 24.140 78.168
3.250 3.125 11.110 11.050 89.218
3.500 3.375 2.830 2.815 92.033
3.750 3.625 5.820 5.789 97.822
4.000 3.875 0.030 0.030 97.852
>4.0 2.160 2.148 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 06-Jun-02
Core # B2-54
Interval 0-4.2
Mean 0.263 mm
Std. Deviation 0.349 mm
Skewness -0.503
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Leptokurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.54
% finer than 4.00 phi 2.15
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 51 -16 25 50
-2.695 -1.992 0.196 1.197 2.693
75 84 95 99
2.967 3.132 3.628
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.927 0.263
Standard Deviation 1.520 0.349
Skewness -0.503
Kurtosis -0.495
Dispersion 0.489
Standard Deviation 0.746 0.596
Deviation from Normal -50.90%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.468 1.876
Standard Deviation 1.664 1.683
Skewness (1) -0.736 -0.701
Skewness (2) -1.127
Kurtosis 0.689 1.301
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
0
.L 50
.m
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(pho Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 23.430 23.223 23.223
-0.750 -0.875 3.230 3.202 26.425
-0.500 -0.625 3.940 3.905 30.330
-0.250 -0.375 3.420 3.390 33.720
0.000 -0.125 2.350 2.329 36.049
0.250 0.125 3.460 3.429 39.479
0.500 0.375 3.540 3.509 42.987
0.750 0.625 2.470 2.448 45.436
1.000 0.875 3.080 3.053 48.488
1.250 1.125 2.760 2.736 51.224
1.500 1.375 2.530 2.508 53.732
1.750 1.625 2.200 2.181 55.912
2.000 1.875 1.430 1.417 57.330
2.250 2.125 3.060 3.033 60.363
2.500 2.375 5.710 5.660 66.022
2.750 2.625 12.620 12.509 78.531
3.000 2.875 13.630 13.510 92.041
3.250 3.125 5.380 5.333 97.373
3.500 3.375 0.290 0.287 97.661
3.750 3.625 2.180 2.161 99.822
4.000 3.875 0.010 0.010 99.831
>4.0 0.170 0.169 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 04-Jun-02
Core # B2-53
Interval 0-2.8
Mean 0.490 mm
Std. Deviation 0.315 mm
Skewness -0.045
Sediment Type
COARSE SAND
Poorly Sorted
Coarse-Skewed
Very Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.89
% finer than 4.00 ph i 0.17
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.735 -2.423 -1.564 -0.861 1.138
75 84 95 99
2.679 2.851 3.139 3.655
Moment Measures (phi) (MM)
Mean 1.028 0.490
Standard Deviation 1.668 0.315
Skewness -0.045
Kurtosis -1.627
Dispersion 0.530
Standard Deviation 0.820 0.566
Deviation from Normal -50.84%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.644 0.808
Standard Deviation 2.208 1.947
Skewness (1) -0.224 -0.252
Skewness (2) -0.353
Kurtosis 0.260 0.644
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
so
80
70
60 I
r
Lm 50
3
40
30
i
20
I
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h! Mid Point
hi Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 8.726 8.663 8.663
-0.750 -0.875 1.788 1.775 10.439
-0.500 -0.625 2.293 2.277 12.715
-0.250 -0.375 2.157 2.141 14.857
0.000 -0.125 1.672 1.660 16.517
0.250 0.125 2.245 2.229 18.746
0.500 0.375 2.443 2.426 21.171
0.750 0.625 2.048 2.033 23.204
1.000 0.875 2.672 2.653 25.857
1.250 1.125 3.147 3.124 28.981
1.500 1.375 4.432 4.400 33.381
1.750 1.625 4.465 4.433 37.814
2.000 1.875 3.233 3.210 41.024
2.250 2.125 4.981 4.945 45.969
2.500 2.375 6.767 6.718 52.687
2.750 2.625 10.007 9.935 62.622
3.000 2.875 15.969 15.855 78.477
3.250 3.125 9.702 9.632 88.109
3.500 3.375 3.745 3.719 91.827
3.750 3.625 5.374 5.336 97.163
4.000 3.875 0.055 0.055 97.218
>4.00 2.802 2.782 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 04-Jun-02
Core # B2-52
Interval 0-6.2
Mean 0.299 mm
Std. Deviation 0.361 mm
Skewness -0.352
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 100.7242
% finer than 4.00 phi 2.78
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.079 -1.516 -0.078 0.919 2.400
75 84 95 99
2.945 3.143 3.649
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.742 0.299
Standard Deviation 1.469 0.361
Skewness -0.352
Kurtosis -0.808
Dispersion 0.637
Standard Deviation 1.049 0.483
Deviation from Normal -28.61%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.533 1.822
Standard Deviation 1.611 1.588
Skewness (1) -0.538 -0.527
Skewness (2) -0.828
Kurtosis 0.603 1.045
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
i
I j
80
70
I
60
0
= 50
.s
3
40
30
20
I
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(phi) Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 11.894 11.717 11.717
-0.750 -0.875 2.359 2.324 14.041
-0.500 -0.625 2.969 2.925 16.965
-0.250 -0.375 2.992 2.948 19.913
0.000 -0.125 2.346 2.311 22.223
0.250 0.125 3.237 3.188 25.412
0.500 0.375 3.541 3.488 28.900
0.750 0.625 3.021 2.976 31.876
1.000 0.875 3.599 3.545 35.421
1.250 1.125 3.883 3.825 39.247
1.500 1.375 4.034 3.974 43.221
1.750 1.625 3.916 3.857 47.078
2.000 1.875 2.488 2.451 49.529
2.250 2.125 4.378 4.312 53.841
2.500 2.375 6.220 6.127 59.968
2.750 2.625 8.941 8.808 68.776
3.000 2.875 11.644 11.471 80.247
3.250 3.125 11.561 11.389 91.636
3.500 3.375 3.833 3.776 95.412
3.750 3.625 3.758 3.702 99.113
4.000 3.875 0.026 0.025 99.139
>4.00 0.874 0.861 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 04-Jun-02
Core # B2-51
Interval 0-4.5
Mean 0.352 mm
Std. Deviation 0.342 mm
Skewness -0.224
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.5144
% finer than 4.00 ph i 0.86
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.153 -1.723 -0.583 0.218 2.027
75 84 95 99
2.886 3.082 3.473 3.742
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.505 0.352
Standard Deviation 1.549 0.342
Skewness -0.224
Kurtosis -1.209
Dispersion 0.638
Standard Deviation 1.052 0.482
Deviation from Normal -32.06%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.250 1.509
Standard Deviation 1.832 1.703
Skewness (1) -0.424 -0.434
Skewness (2) -0.629
Kurtosis 0.418 0.798
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
i
90
80
70
60
M
t 50
3
40
30
20 LX
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(phi) Mil Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 9.160 8.968 8.968
-0.750 -0.875 1.430 1.400 10.368
-0.500 -0.625 1.780 1.743 12.111
-0.250 -0.375 1.930 1.890 14.000
0.000 -0.125 1.560 1.527 15.528
0.250 0.125 2.480 2.428 17.956
0.500 0.375 2.810 2.751 20.707
0.750 0.625 2.440 2.389 23.096
1.000 0.875 3.380 3.309 26.405
1.250 1.125 4.110 4.024 30.429
1.500 1.375 5.030 4.925 35.353
1.750 1.625 5.190 5.081 40.435
2.000 1.875 3.330 3.260 43.695
2.250 2.125 6.980 6.834 50.529
2.500 2.375 12.490 12.228 62.757
2.750 2.625 11.410 11.171 73.928
3.000 2.875 11.600 11.357 85.285
3.250 3.125 6.840 6.697 91.982
3.500 3.375 3.180 3.113 95.095
3.750 3.625 2.490 2.438 97.533
4.000 3.875 1.140 1.116 98.649
>4.0 1.380 1.351 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 15-May-02
Core # B2-50
Interval 0-1.4
Mean 0.312 mm
Std. Deviation 0.381 mm
Skewness -0.366
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Leptokurtic
Total weight (gram) 102.14
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.35
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.423 -1.709 0.049 0.894 2.231
75 84 95 99
2.774 2.972 3.492
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.682 0.312
Standard Deviation 1.393 0.381
Skewness -0.366
Kurtosis -0.595
Dispersion 0.632
Standard Deviation 1.037 0.487
Deviation from Normal -25.52%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.510 1.750
Standard Deviation 1.462 1.519
Skewness (1) -0.493 -0.504
Skewness (2) -0.916
Kurtosis 0.779 1.134
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
i
80
70
60
0
Lm 50
3
40
30
I
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
I Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 8.628 8.510 8.510
-0.750 -0.875 2.094 2.065 10.575
-0.500 -0.625 2.748 2.710 13.286
-0.250 -0.375 2.790 2.752 16.038
0.000 -0.125 2.000 1.973 18.010
0.250 0.125 2.910 2.870 20.881
0.500 0.375 3.146 3.103 23.984
0.750 0.625 2.814 2.776 26.759
1.000 0.875 3.578 3.529 30.288
1.250 1.125 3.542 3.494 33.782
1.500 1.375 3.238 3.194 36.976
1.750 1.625 3.190 3.146 40.122
2.000 1.875 2.246 2.215 42.337
2.250 2.125 5.312 5.239 47.577
2.500 2.375 8.416 8.301 55.878
2.750 2.625 12.994 12.816 68.694
3.000 2.875 15.250 15.042 83.735
3.250 3.125 9.100 8.976 92.711
3.500 3.375 0.178 0.176 92.887
3.750 3.625 5.762 5.683 98.570
4.000 3.875 0.056 0.055 98.625
>4.00 1.394 1.375 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 06-Jun-02
Core # B2-49
Interval 0-5.0
Mean 0.315 mm
Std. Deviation 0.362 mm
Skewness -0.322
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.386
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.37
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-1.909 -1.425 -0.253 0.592 2.323
75 84 95 99
2.855 3.007 3.593
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.668 0.315
Standard Deviation 1.466 0.362
Skewness -0.322
Kurtosis -0.921
Dispersion 0.605
Standard Deviation 0.974 0.509
Deviation from Normal -33.54%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.377 1.692
Standard Deviation 1.630 1.575
Skewness (1) -0.580 -0.537
Skewness (2) -0.760
IKurtosis 0.539 0.909
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
0
t
v. 50
.s
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(phi) Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 11.293 11.152 11.152
-0.750 -0.875 2.176 2.149 13.301
-0.500 -0.625 3.236 3.196 16.497
-0.250 -0.375 2.942 2.905 19.402
0.000 -0.125 1.939 1.915 21.317
0.250 0.125 2.921 2.885 24.202
0.500 0.375 3.107 3.068 27.270
0.750 0.625 2.745 2.711 29.981
1.000 0.875 3.535 3.491 33.472
1.250 1.125 3.441 3.398 36.870
1.500 1.375 2.787 2.752 39.622
1.750 1.625 1.717 1.695 41.318
2.000 1.875 0.768 0.758 42.076
2.250 2.125 1.643 1.623 43.699
2.500 2.375 3.392 3.349 47.048
2.750 2.625 18.227 17.999 65.047
3.000 2.875 22.575 22.293 87.340
3.250 3.125 9.457 9.339 96.679
3.500 3.375 1.739 1.718 98.397
3.750 3.625 1.124 1.110 99.507
4.000 3.875 0.332 0.328 99.834
>4.00 0.168 0.166 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 15-May-02
Core # B2-48
Interval 0-6.9
Mean 0.322 mm
Std. Deviation 0.344 mm
Skewness -0.338
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.2658
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.17
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.181 -1.716 -0.539 0.315 2.541
75 84 95 99
2.862 2.963 3.205 3.636
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.633 0.322
Standard Deviation 1.537 0.344
Skewness -0.338
Kurtosis -1.092
Dispersion 0.506
Standard Deviation 0.776 0.584
Deviation from Normal -49.55%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.212 1.655
Standard Deviation 1.751 1.621
Skewness (1) -0.759 -0.745
Skewness (2) -1.026
IKurtosis 0.405 0.792
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
0
= 50
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
! Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 21.350 21.097 21.097
-0.750 -0.875 4.990 4.931 26.028
-0.500 -0.625 5.660 5.593 31.621
-0.250 -0.375 5.590 5.524 37.144
0.000 -0.125 3.910 3.864 41.008
0.250 0.125 5.930 5.860 46.868
0.500 0.375 6.610 6.532 53.399
0.750 0.625 5.660 5.593 58.992
1.000 0.875 6.140 6.067 65.059
1.250 1.125 5.830 5.761 70.820
1.500 1.375 4.760 4.704 75.524
1.750 1.625 3.540 3.498 79.022
2.000 1.875 1.700 1.680 80.702
2.250 2.125 2.710 2.678 83.379
2.500 2.375 3.140 3.103 86.482
2.750 2.625 3.130 3.093 89.575
3.000 2.875 2.980 2.945 92.520
3.250 3.125 2.690 2.658 95.178
3.500 3.375 1.620 1.601 96.779
3.750 3.625 2.970 2.935 99.713
4.000 3.875 0.090 0.089 99.802
>4.0 0.200 0.198 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 06-Jun-02
Core # B2-47
Interval 0-1.6
Mean 0.688 mm
Std. Deviation 0.373 mm
Skewness 0.266
Sediment Type
COARSE SAND
Poorly Sorted
Fine-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.2
% finer than 4.00 ph i 0.20
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.019 -1.816 -1.258 -0.802 0.370
75 84 95 99
1.472 2.300 3.233 3.689
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 0.540 0.688
Standard Deviation 1.424 0.373
Skewness 0.266
Kurtosis -0.795
Dispersion 0.610
Standard Deviation 0.986 0.505
Deviation from Normal -30.77%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 0.521 0.470
Standard Deviation 1.779 1.655
Skewness (1) 0.085 0.109
Skewness (2) 0.190
Kurtosis 0.419 0.910
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
i
80
70
60 E
j
L 50
to
3
40
30
20
i
10 j
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
hi Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 10.320 10.191 10.191
-0.750 -0.875 2.050 2.024 12.215
-0.500 -0.625 2.130 2.103 14.318
-0.250 -0.375 2.070 2.044 16.362
0.000 -0.125 1.470 1.452 17.814
0.250 0.125 2.220 2.192 20.006
0.500 0.375 2.490 2.459 22.465
0.750 0.625 2.010 1.985 24.449
1.000 0.875 2.370 2.340 26.790
1.250 1.125 2.940 2.903 29.693
1.500 1.375 3.480 3.436 33.129
1.750 1.625 3.530 3.486 36.615
2.000 1.875 2.660 2.627 39.242
2.250 2.125 4.950 4.888 44.130
2.500 2.375 5.830 5.757 49.886
2.750 2.625 7.240 7.149 57.036
3.000 2.875 13.140 12.975 70.011
3.250 3.125 13.390 13.222 83.233
3.500 3.375 6.220 6.142 89.375
3.750 3.625 6.310 6.231 95.606
4.000 3.875 2.220 2.192 97.798
>4.0 2.230 2.202 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 15-May-02
Core # B2-46
Interval 0-3.8
Mean 0.286 mm
Std. Deviation 0.338 mm
Skewness -0.344
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.27
% finer than 4.00 phi 2.20
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.135 -1.641 -0.294 0.809 2.504
75 84 95 99
3.094 3.281 3.726
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.808 0.286
Standard Deviation 1.566 0.338
Skewness -0.344
Kurtosis -0.897
Dispersion 0.644
Standard Deviation 1.065 0.478
Deviation from Normal -31.97%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.493 1.830
Standard Deviation 1.788 1.707
Skewness (1) -0.565 -0.555
Skewness (2) -0.818
Kurtosis 0.501 0.962
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
I
90
80
70
60
0
0
t50
.s
3
40
30
20
Ar,
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 12.000 11.809 11.809
-0.750 -0.875 1.770 1.742 13.550
-0.500 -0.625 2.100 2.067 15.617
-0.250 -0.375 2.220 2.185 17.802
0.000 -0.125 1.510 1.486 19.288
0.250 0.125 2.170 2.135 21.423
0.500 0.375 2.400 2.362 23.785
0.750 0.625 1.970 1.939 25.723
1.000 0.875 2.490 2.450 28.174
1.250 1.125 2.730 2.686 30.860
1.500 1.375 3.300 3.247 34.107
1.750 1.625 3.640 3.582 37.689
2.000 1.875 2.660 2.618 40.307
2.250 2.125 7.730 7.607 47.914
2.500 2.375 10.360 10.195 58.109
2.750 2.625 9.430 9.280 67.388
3.000 2.875 11.710 11.523 78.912
3.250 3.125 10.260 10.096 89.008
3.500 3.375 4.650 4.576 93.584
3.750 3.625 3.490 3.434 97.018
4.000 3.875 1.530 1.506 98.524
>4.0 1.500 1.476 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 15-May-02
Core # B2-45
Interval 0-4.6
Mean 0.310 mm
Std. Deviation 0.347 mm
Skewness -0.346
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.62
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.48
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.551 -1.977 -0.456 0.657 2.301
75 84 95 99
2.915 3.126 3.603
Moment Measures (phi) (MM)
Mean 1.688 0.310
Standard Deviation 1.527 0.347
Skewness -0.346
Kurtosis -0.869
Dispersion 0.626
Standard Deviation 1.023 0.492
Deviation from Normal -33.01%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.335 1.657
Standard Deviation 1.791 1.741
Skewness (1) -0.539 -0.536
Skewness (2) -0.831
Kurtosis 0.558 1.013
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
i
80
i
70
i ?
60 % I
e
M Cn
50
3
i
40 I
30 j
20 I
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(phi) Mid Point
h! Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 14.570 14.386 14.386
-0.750 -0.875 1.910 1.886 16.272
-0.500 -0.625 2.260 2.231 18.503
-0.250 -0.375 2.280 2.251 20.754
0.000 -0.125 1.540 1.521 22.275
0.250 0.125 2.060 2.034 24.309
0.500 0.375 2.100 2.073 26.382
0.750 0.625 1.650 1.629 28.011
1.000 0.875 2.160 2.133 30.144
1.250 1.125 2.960 2.923 33.067
1.500 1.375 3.550 3.505 36.572
1.750 1.625 4.180 4.127 40.699
2.000 1.875 2.810 2.774 43.474
2.250 2.125 6.880 6.793 50.267
2.500 2.375 9.660 9.538 59.805
2.750 2.625 11.110 10.970 70.774
3.000 2.875 10.910 10.772 81.546
3.250 3.125 9.020 8.906 90.452
3.500 3.375 3.690 3.643 94.096
3.750 3.625 3.030 2.992 97.087
4.000 3.875 1.550 1.530 98.618
>4.0 1.400 1.382 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 15-May-02
Core # B2-44
Interval 0-3.6
Mean 0.336 mm
Std. Deviation 0.337 mm
Skewness -0.303
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.28
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.38
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.775 -2.244 -0.786 0.333 2.240
75 84 95 99
2.848 3.069 3.576
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.574 0.336
Standard Deviation 1.570 0.337
Skewness -0.303
Kurtosis -1.046
Dispersion 0.617
Standard Deviation 1.001 0.500
Deviation from Normal -36.24%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.141 1.508
Standard Deviation 1.927 1.846
Skewness (1) -0.570 -0.556
Skewness (2) -0.817
Kurtosis 0.510 0.948

Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
? i
90
I
80
70
60
a°
L 50
3 40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 8.080 7.998 7.998
-0.750 -0.875 1.030 1.020 9.018
-0.500 -0.625 1.390 1.376 10.394
-0.250 -0.375 1.290 1.277 11.671
0.000 -0.125 0.960 0.950 12.621
0.250 0.125 1.330 1.317 13.938
0.500 0.375 1.590 1.574 15.512
0.750 0.625 1.240 1.227 16.739
1.000 0.875 1.720 1.703 18.442
1.250 1.125 2.040 2.019 20.461
1.500 1.375 2.760 2.732 23.193
1.750 1.625 2.970 2.940 26.133
2.000 1.875 2.430 2.405 28.539
2.250 2.125 5.820 5.761 34.300
2.500 2.375 10.530 10.424 44.724
2.750 2.625 15.930 15.769 60.493
3.000 2.875 17.410 17.234 77.727
3.250 3.125 11.280 11.166 88.893
3.500 3.375 4.750 4.702 93.595
3.750 3.625 4.040 3.999 97.595
4.000 3.875 1.230 1.218 98.812
>4.0 1.200 1.188 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 15-May-02
Core # B2-43
Interval 0-3.7
Mean 0.242 mm
Std. Deviation 0.387 mm
Skewness -0.606
Sediment Type
FINE SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Very Leptokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.02
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.19
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25
1

50
-2.716 -1.735 0.599 1.654 2.584
75 84 95 99
2.960 3.140 3.588
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 2.049 0.242
Standard Deviation 1.368 0.387
Skewness -0.606
Kurtosis 0.317
Dispersion 0.546
Standard Deviation 0.851 0.554
Deviation from Normal -37.77%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.870 2.108
Standard Deviation 1.271 1.442
Skewness (1) -0.562 -0.592
Skewness (2) -1.304
Kurtosis 1.095 1.669
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
a°
r50
v?
3
40
30 f
20
i
I
10
I
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
1 Mid Point
1 Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 6.769 6.698 6.698
-0.750 -0.875 1.603 1.586 8.284
-0.500 -0.625 2.094 2.072 10.356
-0.250 -0.375 2.142 2.120 12.476
0.000 -0.125 1.619 1.602 14.078
0.250 0.125 2.399 2.374 16.452
0.500 0.375 2.540 2.513 18.965
0.750 0.625 2.021 2.000 20.965
1.000 0.875 2.578 2.550 23.515
1.250 1.125 3.077 3.045 26.560
1.500 1.375 4.108 4.064 30.625
1.750 1.625 4.145 4.101 34.726
2.000 1.875 3.028 2.996 37.722
2.250 2.125 7.331 7.254 44.976
2.500 2.375 11.801 11.678 56.654
2.750 2.625 14.504 14.352 71.006
3.000 2.875 13.010 12.874 83.880
3.250 3.125 8.658 8.567 92.447
3.500 3.375 3.377 3.341 95.788
3.750 3.625 2.510 2.483 98.271
4.000 3.875 0.671 0.664 98.935
>4.00 1.077 1.065 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 06-Jun-02
Core # B2-42
Interval 0-6.4
Mean 0.283 mm
Std. Deviation 0.392 mm
Skewness -0.452
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Leptokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.0608
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.07
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-1.898 -1.268 0.202 1.122 2.358
75 84 95 99
2.828 3.004 3.441
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
an 1.823 0.283
Standard Deviation 1.352 0.392
Skewness -0.452
Kurtosis -0.337
Dispersion 0.606
Standard Deviation 0.978 0.508
Deviation from Normal -27.70%a
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.603 1.854
Standard Deviation 1.401 1.414
Skewness (1) -0.539 -0.539
Skewness (2) -0.907
Kurtosis 0.681 1.131
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
OA
?50
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(Phi) Mid Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 11.790 11.663 11.663
-0.750 -0.875 2.800 2.770 14.433
-0.500 -0.625 3.300 3.264 17.697
-0.250 -0.375 3.710 3.670 21.367
0.000 -0.125 2.740 2.710 24.078
0.250 0.125 3.750 3.710 27.787
0.500 0.375 3.830 3.789 31.576
0.750 0.625 3.440 3.403 34.979
1.000 0.875 4.220 4.174 39.153
1.250 1.125 5.670 5.609 44.762
1.500 1.375 6.520 6.450 51.212
1.750 1.625 5.860 5.797 57.009
2.000 1.875 3.620 3.581 60.590
2.250 2.125 7.330 7.251 67.841
2.500 2.375 9.130 9.032 76.872
2.750 2.625 9.080 8.982 85.854
3.000 2.875 6.940 6.865 92.719
3.250 3.125 3.720 3.680 96.399
3.500 3.375 1.160 1.147 97.547
3.750 3.625 0.960 0.950 98.496
4.000 3.875 0.570 0.564 99.060
>4.0 0.950 0.940 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area B2
Sample Date 15-May-02
Core # B2-41
Interval 0-3.2
Mean 0.433 mm
Std. Deviation 0.378 mm
Skewness -0.150
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.09
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.94
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-1.962 -1.601 -0.630 0.062 1.453
75 84 95 99
2.448 2.698 3.155 3.973
Moment Measures (phi) Orn)
Mean 1.209 0.433
Standard Deviation 1.404 0.378
Skewness -0.150
Kurtosis -1.140
Dispersion 0.655
Standard Deviation 1.094 0.469
Deviation from Normal -22.14%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.034 1.174
Standard Deviation 1.664 1.553
Skewness (1) -0.252 -0.268
Skewness (2) -0.406
Kurtosis 0.429 0.817
?

i
-_ ?
t.?
i
i
f
i
i
f

- t
_ f
{.
_.
-. _-...
f
I ?
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
80
70
60
0
= 50
v?
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hl Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 15.676 15.332 15.332
-0.750 -0.875 2.510 2.455 17.788
-0.500 -0.625 3.147 3.078 20.866
-0.250 -0.375 3.032 2.965 23.831
0.000 -0.125 2.182 2.134 25.965
0.250 0.125 3.048 2.982 28.947
0.500 0.375 3.178 3.108 32.055
0.750 0.625 2.439 2.386 34.441
1.000 0.875 2.877 2.814 37.255
1.250 1.125 3.067 2.999 40.255
1.500 1.375 3.553 3.475 43.729
1.750 1.625 3.969 3.881 47.611
2.000 1.875 2.892 2.829 50.440
2.250 2.125 6.092 5.959 56.398
2.500 2.375 8.127 7.948 64.347
2.750 2.625 10.867 10.629 74.975
3.000 2.875 12.227 11.959 86.934
3.250 3.125 6.555 6.411 93.345
3.500 3.375 2.851 2.788 96.133
3.750 3.625 1.874 1.833 97.965
4.000 3.875 0.686 0.671 98.636
>4.00 1.394 1.364 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area - B2
Sample Date May - July'02
Sample Area B2 - South Margin
Applicable Cores
Mean 0.392 mm
Std. Deviation 0.336 mm
Skewness -0.195
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 102.24
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.36
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.459 -2.052 -0.932 -0.113 1.961
75 84 95 99
2.751 2.939 3.398
Moment Measures (hi) (mm)
Mean 1.351 0.392
Standard Deviation 1.572 0.336
Skewness -0.195
Kurtosis -1.320
Dispersion 0.627
Standard Deviation 1.026 0.491
Deviation from Normal -34.73%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.003 1.323
Standard Deviation 1.935 1.794
Skewness (1) -0.495 -0.484
Skewness (2) -0.665
Kurtosis 0.408 0.780
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
I
90
80
70
60
a°
L 50
.m
3
40
30
20 i
I
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
(phi) Mid Point
h! Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 12.646 12.419 12.419
-0.750 -0.875 2.123 2.085 14.504
-0.500 -0.625 2.734 2.684 17.188
-0.250 -0.375 2.690 2.641 19.830
0.000 -0.125 1.966 1.931 21.760
0.250 0.125 2.789 2.739 24.499
0.500 0.375 3.064 3.009 27.508
0.750 0.625 2.565 2.519 30.027
1.000 0.875 3.244 3.185 33.213
1.250 1.125 3.620 3.555 36.768
1.500 1.375 3.838 3.769 40.537
1.750 1.625 3.889 3.819 44.356
2.000 1.875 2.677 2.628 46.984
2.250 2.125 6.031 5.922 52.906
2.500 2.375 8.701 8.544 61.451
2.750 2.625 11.058 10.859 72.309
3.000 2.875 12.389 12.166 84.475
3.250 3.125 8.102 7.956 92.431
3.500 3.375 3.199 3.141 95.573
3.750 3.625 2.469 2.425 97.998
4.000 3.875 0.926 0.909 98.906
>4.00 1.114 1.094 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area - B2
Sample Date May - July'02
Sample Area B2- Area 1,2&3
Mean 0.350 mm
Std. Deviation 0.347 mm
Skewness -0.264
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.83
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.09
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5
1

16

25

50
-2.369 -1.890 0.611 0.292 2.127
75 84 R051 99

2.805
2.990 1
3.454
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.516 0.350
Standard Deviation 1.527 0.347
Skewness -0.264
Kurtosis -1.105
Dispersion 0.634
Standard Deviation 1.042 0.486
Deviation from Normal -31.75%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.190 1.502
Standard Deviation 1.800 1.710
Skewness (1) -0.521 -0.512
Skewness (2) -0.747
Kurtosis 0.484 0.871
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
90
i
80
I
70
60
0
0
rr
.L Of 50
3
40
30
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
hi Mid Point
! Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 12.046 11.772 11.772
-0.750 -0.875 2.232 2.182 13.954
-0.500 -0.625 2.798 2.734 16.688
-0.250 -0.375 2.809 2.745 19.433
0.000 -0.125 2.003 1.957 21.391
0.250 0.125 2.777 2.714 24.105
0.500 0.375 2.897 2.831 26.935
0.750 0.625 2.259 2.208 29.143
1.000 0.875 2.669 2.608 31.751
1.250 1.125 3.017 2.949 34.700
1.500 1.375 3.705 3.621 38.321
1.750 1.625 4.298 4.200 42.521
2.000 1.875 3.323 3.248 45.768
2.250 2.125 8.089 7.905 53.674
2.500 2.375 11.145 10.892 64.566
2.750 2.625 12.010 11.737 76.302
3.000 2.875 11.489 11.228 87.531
3.250 3.125 6.667 6.515 94.046
3.500 3.375 2.454 2.398 96.444
3.750 3.625 1.929 1.885 98.329
4.000 3.875 0.725 0.709 99.038
>4.00 0.984 0.962 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area - B2
Sample Date May - July '02
Sample Area B2- Area 3
Mean 0.349 mm
Std. Deviation 0.357 mm
Skewness -0.301
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 102.32
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.96
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.234 -1.776 -0.563 0.329 2.134
75 84 95 99
2.722 2.921 3.349 3.987
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.519 0.349
Standard Deviation 1.486 0.357
Skewness -0.301
Kurtosis -1.010
Dispersion 0.621
Standard Deviation 1.012 0.496
Deviation from Normal -31.91%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.179 1.497
Standard Deviation 1.742 1.648
Skewness (1) -0.548 -0.537
Skewness (2) -0.773
Kurtosis 0.471 0.878
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area - B2
Sample Date May - July '02
Sample Area B2- Area 2
Mean 0.322 mm
Std. Deviation 0.343 mm
Skewness -0.298
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Mesokurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.90
% finer than 4.00 phi 1.54
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Class Limits
(phi) Mid Point
hl Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 11.952 11.729 11.729
-0.750 -0.875 1.810 1.777 13.506
-0.500 -0.625 2.408 2.363 15.869
-0.250 -0.375 2.401 2.357 18.226
0.000 -0.125 1.786 1.753 19.979
0.250 0.125 2.491 2.445 22.423
0.500 0.375 2.866 2.812 25.236
0.750 0.625 2.522 2.475 27.711
1.000 0.875 3.289 3.228 30.938
1.250 1.125 3.630 3.562 34.500
1.500 1.375 3.468 3.403 37.904
1.750 1.625 3.203 3.143 41.047
2.000 1.875 2.135 2.096 43.142
2.250 2.125 5.067 4.972 48.115
2.500 2.375 8.035 7.886 56.000
2.750 2.625 10.186 9.997 65.997
3.000 2.875 13.170 12.925 78.922
3.250 3.125 10.503 10.307 89.229
3.500 3.375 4.944 4.852 94.081
3.750 3.625 3.090 3.032 97.114
4.000 3.875 1.373 1.348 98.461
>4.00 1.568 1.539 100.000
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.510 -1.947 -0.486 0.479 2.310
75 84 95 99
2.924 3.123 3.576
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.636 0.322
Standard Deviation 1.546 0.343
Skewness -0.298
Kurtosis -1.032
Dispersion 0.635
Standard Deviation 1.044 0.485
Deviation from Normal -32.46%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.319 1.649
Standard Deviation 1.805 1.739
Skewness (1) -0.549 -0.545
Skewness (2) -0.829
Kurtosis 0.530 0.926
Grain Size (mm)
4.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 0.25 0.125 0.063
100
i
90
I
80
70
60
o
?50
.m
3
40
30 Xle /I
20
10
0
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Grain Size (phi)
Class Limits
h/ Mid Point
h/ Weight
ram Weight % Cumm. Wt %
>-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000
-1.000 -1.125 13.942 13.766 13.766
-0.750 -0.875 2.327 2.298 16.064
-0.500 -0.625 2.995 2.957 19.021
-0.250 -0.375 2.858 2.822 21.844
0.000 -0.125 2.110 2.083 23.927
0.250 0.125 3.099 3.060 26.986
0.500 0.375 3.431 3.388 30.374
0.750 0.625 2.915 2.878 33.252
1.000 0.875 3.773 3.726 36.978
1.250 1.125 4.214 4.161 41.139
1.500 1.375 4.342 4.287 45.427
1.750 1.625 4.166 4.113 49.540
2.000 1.875 2.571 2.539 52.079
2.250 2.125 4.936 4.874 56.952
2.500 2.375 6.922 6.835 63.787
2.750 2.625 10.977 10.839 74.626
3.000 2.875 12.508 12.350 86.976
3.250 3.125 7.136 7.046 94.022
3.500 3.375 2.198 2.170 96.193
3.750 3.625 2.389 2.359 98.552
4.000 3.875 0.678 0.670 99.221
>4.00 0.789 0.779 100.000
Project Bogue Banks Ph-2
Location Borrow Area - B2
Sample Date May - July'02
Sample Area B2- Area 1
Mean 0.381 mm
Std. Deviation 0.344 mm
Skewness -0.202
Sediment Type
MEDIUM SAND
Poorly Sorted
Strongly Coarse-Skewed
Platykurtic
Total weight (gram) 101.28
% finer than 4.00 phi 0.78
% coarser than -1.00 phi 0.00
Percentiles
1 5 16 25 50
-2.389 -1.954 -0.757 0.088 1.795
75 84 95 99
2.758 2.940 3.363 3.917
Moment Measures (phi) (mm)
Mean 1.391 0.381
Standard Deviation 1.539 0.344
Skewness -0.202
Kurtosis -1.235
Dispersion 0.632
Standard Deviation 1.036 0.488
Deviation from Normal -32.67%
Graphic phi
parameter Inman
1952 Folk & Ward
1957
Mean 1.091 1.326
Standard Deviation 1.848 1.730
Skewness (1) -0.381 -0.396
Skewness (2) -0.590
Kurtosis 0.438 0.816
_
- -
_ __ _
- - j
i
?-_
?-..
_ -
- - _
- - -
- _ tk-:
I
t-[.
_ _ _ _

_ _ _ -
- _ ?
I
- ?
i _:
-_.-
-_
7

- -

. - -
- - k
,f
f,
,.
- ?-
?._-.
-.
_ -- i
_.. - ?
+ -
_ - - - f
£ + €
_

- -

_
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT:
CARTERET COUNTY/CARTERET COUNTY
PAGE #3
activities in a given reach would disrupt normal beach use for only a month or so at any locality.
The finished sections would be allowed to adjust to natural processes for several months and where
applicable, dune fencing and/or dune plantings installed.
Anticipated Impacts
Overall, approximately 8,000,000 cubic yards of sandy material would be excavated form the
near shore and offshore areas and pumped onto the beach and near shore waters of the Atlantic
Ocean. Approximately 2.58 square miles of ocean bottom would be affected as a result of the
excavation activities, while approximately 2,066 acres of near shore waters and beach area would be
filled by the nourishment project.
According to the EIS being circulated, beach nourishment project involve three primary areas
of controversy: 1) funding, 2) physical impacts, and 3) environmental issues. These issues are
heavily addressed in the EIS and it would be difficult to address them all in this field report.
Therefore, only a quick summary of the potential impacts will be presented.
Funding - Final funding for the proposed project is uncertain at this time. However, it would
most likely involve mostly local funds. According to the EIS, approximately 64% of the project
would be funded by property owners located in special tax districts on Bogue Banks.
Physical Impacts - The physical impacts of beach nourishment depends on many factors
including frequency of storms, the background erosion rates as well as long-term processes
controlling shoreline change at a particular site. Nourishment would add to the littoral budget a
measure of sediment that would become subject to onshore/offshore as well as longshore transport.
The nourished beach would be expected to adjust to daily and seasonal variations in waves and tides.
Environmental Impacts - The primary environmental impacts of nourishment relate to
mortality of in-situ organisms, changes in habitat, mobilization of fine-grained sediments, and
pollution due to accidental spills during construction. The EIS discusses the littoral processes
including the tides, hurricanes, waves, dimensions of littoral zone, littoral transport and erosion rates.
Cultural, water and marine resources are discussed in the EIS. In addition both offshore and near
shore resources are examined in detail. Degrees of impacts to benthic invertebrates, demersal fishes
and crustaceans, and shorebirds would be expected. There is the potential for impact to threatened
and endangered species including the whales, manatees, piping plover, roseate tern, sea turtles,
shortnose sturgeon, and to the seabeach amaranth.
The project would not reduce the existing public rights of the beach. The "Public Trust
Doctrine" and the State Property Sovereignty Rules preserve the rights of all citizens of North
Carolina for use of resources located below the mean high water line. Permanent easements are
being sought from oceanfront property owners for construction and maintenance of the project.
There would however be a temporary loss of the use of the beach by the public during beach
nourishment activities.
M. Ted Tyndall, Morehead City Office - Feb. 25, 2001
Development Type FEE DCM % DWQ %
(143001601435100093 1625 6253 (243001602 435100095 2341)
1. Private, noncommercial
development that does not Involve $250 100%($250) 0%($0)
the filling or excavation of any
wetlands or open water areas:
II. Public or commercial development
that does not involve the filling or $400 100%($400) 0% (SO)
excavation of any wetlands or open
water areas:
III. For development that involves the
filling and/or excavation of up to 1
acre of wetlands and/or open water
areas, determine if A, B, C, or D
below applies:
III(A). For Private, non-commercial
development, If General water Quality 5250 100%($250) 0% (SO)
Certification No.3301 (see attached)
can be applied:
III(B): For public or commercial
development, if General water Quality 5400 100%($400) 0% (SO)
Certification No.3301 (see attached)
can be applied:
III(C). If General Water Quality
Certification No. 3301 (see attached)
could be applied, but DCM staff
determined that additional review and $400 60%(S240) 409,6 (S160)
written DWQ concurrence is needed
because of concerns related to water
quality or aquatic life:
III(D)
If General Water Quality
tion No. 3301 (see attached) S400 60%(S240) 40% (S160)
be applied:
development that involves
F
g and/or excavation of more
fillin
5475
60%(S285)
40% (5190)
acre of wetlands and/or
e
ter areas:
Form DCM-MF-1
APPLICATION
(To be completed by all applicants)
b. City, town, community or landmark
Pine Knoll Shores, Salter Path, Indian Beach, Emerald Isle
1. APPLICANT
c. Street address or secondary road number
Beach front from Shipwreck Lane (Emerald Isle) to
a. Landowner: Carteret County
c/o County Manager Pine Knoll Shores/Atlantic Beach boundary
Name Mr. Robert Murphy d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? ? Yes No
Address Courthouse Square Within city above MHW; owned by state below MHW
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
City Beaufort State NC creek, sound, bay) Atlantic Ocean
Zip 28516 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
b. Authorized Agent:
Name Mr. Dave Clark, PE, County Engineer
Address Carteret County Courthouse Square
City Beaufort State NC
Zip 28516 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
c. Project name (if any)
Bogue Banks Beach Nourishment
NOTE. Permii %Q be issued in name of landowner(s), and/or
Project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. County Carteret
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or filling activities.
Excavation and filling by dredge and pipeline;
beach nourishment
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? New work
c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use? Public use
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed
project. If more space is needed, please attach
additional pages.
See attached under Project Description, and
METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
Revised 03/95
Form DCM-MP-1
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract 16.8 miles by 1000 feet
b. Size of individual lot(s) WA
c. Approximate elevation of tract- above MHW or
N VL . Berm at +7 ft NGVD (+5 ft MHW) with logistics activities
on construction berm seaward of natural dunes and vegetation
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
Mixed sand (FS/MS/CS) and shell (-25%)
e. Vegetation on tract Sand placement seaward of vegeta-
tion, except where dunes are too low for storm protection
f. Man-made features now on tract
Dune walkovers, seawalls, and fishing piers
g. What is the CAMA Land
classification of the site? (comak
Tables attached for each municipality
Conservation
Developed
Rural
Use Plan land
du toast land use plan.)
_ Transitional
_ Community
Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
Tables attached for each municipality
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? ? Yes No
(Attach Zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
Tables attached for each municipality
j. Has a professional archaeological assessment been
done for the tract? ? Yes No
If yes, by whom? Tidewater Atlantic Research Inc
(Appendix B of EIS)
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National
Register listed or eligible property?
Yes ? No
1. Are there wetlands on the site? Yes ? No
Coastal (marsh) Other
If yes, has a delineation been conducted?
(Artach documentation, if avagable)
Jr,?? ? LUU?I
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
Wastewater on Bogue Banks by subsurface treatment
and/or package plants with on-site disposal
n. Describe location and type of discharges to waters
of the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industrial /commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.)
See attached under Project Description Turbidity
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
Potable water on Bogue Banks provided by municipal
and private water utilities; source is wells
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
• A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then
forward a copy of the deed or other instrument under
which the owner claims title, plus written permission
from the owner to carry out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by I V white paper. (Refer to
Coastal Resources Commission Rule 7J.0203 for a
detailed description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
adequate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers regarding that agency's use of larger
drawings.) A site or location map is a part of plat
requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed to
guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the
Form DCM-MP-1
site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
• A Stormwater Certification, if one is necessary.
• 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. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name Mailings from each community are proceeding
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
• A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
None for beach nourishment
• A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Ad (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public lands, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.
NC EPA review of EIS is underway
This application is being submitted concurrently
j;
6. 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 conditions
and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact,
grant permission to representatives of state and federal
review agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this
permit application and follow-up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
?-v--??
This is the c24 day of'VQ0nuca?r , 2001 .
Print Name Dave Clark, PE
Signature ( Y
landowner or Authorized Agent
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
? DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
DCM MP-3 Upland Development
DCM MP-4 Structures Information
DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE: Please sign and date each attachment In the
. space provided at the bottom of each form.
Revised 03195
Form DCM-MP'-2
EXCAVATION
AND FILL
(Except 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.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or
fill activities. All values to be given in feet.
Average FtW
Exbdit Projed
Access
channel
(MLW) or (NWL)
Canal
Boat
basin
Boat
ramp
Rock
groin
Dock
breakwater
Other
(Excluding FIII
shoreline
stabilization)
Excavation:
Area A 11,000 10,000 -45 MLW
Area 81 27,000 1,000 -35 MLW
Area B2 27,000 1,000 -35 MLW
-48 MLW
-39 MLW
-39 MLW

1. EXCAVATION
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below
MHW or NWL in cubic yards Up to 8,000,000
b. Type of material. to be excavated See attached
under Project Description Borrow Area Characteristics
c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAVs) or other wetlands? Yes ? No
d. Highground excavation in cubic yards None
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED
MATERIAL
a. Location of disposal area
See sheets 1 and 2 on work plats
b. Dimensions of disposal area See attached under
Project Description Fill Placement on Beach
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
Yes ? No
if no, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner.
Easements for areas above MHW are being obtained
d. Will a disposal area be available for ..future
maintenance? ? Yes No
If yes, where? Future beach fill will be necessary
for maintenance and replacement
o-..:-..d a,2me
Form DCM-MP-2
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes ? No
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
?. Yes No
3. SHORELINE STABEUZATION
a. Type of shoreline stabilization .
WA Bulkhead Riprap
b. Length WA
c. Average distance waterward of MHW or NWL
WA
d. Maximum distance waterward of MHW or NWL
WA
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
WA
(Source of inforrm ion)
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material
WA
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed below
water level
(1) Riprap WA
(2) Bulkhead backfill
h. Type of fill material
WA
i. Source of fill material WA
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
? Yes No
See attached under
Project Description Fill Placement on Beach

If yes,
(1) Amount of material to be placed in the
water See' below
(2) Dimensions of fill area See attached under
Project Description
(3) Purpose of fill Beach nourishment
b. Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
-.Yes ? No
If yes,
. (1) Dimensions of fill area
(2) Purpose of fill
'Placement above water, with slung forming fill approximately 50%
above MLW, 50% below MLW. See attached under Project Description
Fill Placement on Beach
5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? See attached under
Project Description Turbidi and
METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
b. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic
dredge)?
Hydraulic dredge
c. Will wetlands be Grassed in transporting equipment
to project site? Yes ? No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
Dave Clark, PE, for Carteret County
t or Proj N
-'e /Nil I Yt
?J-O-? L&dzJ'V Sao 1
Date
Revised 03/95
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project"
Attached comments for "Rogue Banks Beach Nourishment" Permit Application
3.d. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE OF PROPOSED PROJECT
PURPOSE AND USE
Project Setting - Bogue Banks is a 25-mile-long barrier island along the southern margin of
Carteret County (Sheet 1 of 14). It comprises about one-third of the county's ocean shoreline and is
the only developed and vehicle-accessible beach in the area. The remaining 55 miles of barrier
islands of the county, including Shackleford Banks and Core Banks up to Ocracoke Inlet, are
inaccessible wildlife preserves that will remain undeveloped in perpetuity as part of the Cape
Lookout National Seashore. The western two-thirds of Bogue Banks from Pine Knoll Shores to
Emerald Isle (beach survey lines 76 to 8 on Sheet 2) has sustained severe erosion and damage to
numerous structures since 1995 as a result of five landfall hurricanes. This --16.8-mile length of
Bogue Banks has a sand deficit compared to adjacent beaches which has left property unprotected
and has diminished recreational use of the beach. The county and local municipalities propose a
beach nourishment project to restore the sand deficit and provide improved storm protection and
recreational beach area.
Project Description - The proposed project consists of excavating by hydraulic dredge up to 8
million cubic yards (cy) of beach-quality sediment from ocean borrow areas (designated A, B 1, and
B2 in water depths averaging 35-45 feet), situated 0.5-3.0 miles offshore of Pine Knoll Shores,
Indian Beach, and Emerald Isle (Sheets 11-14). Shallow excavations (--2-3 ft deep, typical) (Sheet
10) would be made by hopper dredge or specialty suction dredge and pumped via submerged pipe to
the beach. The nourishment area consists of six reaches totaling 16.8 miles and designated (1)
Emerald Isle-West, (2) EI-Central, (3) EI-East, (4) Indian Beach-Salter Path, (5) Pine Knoll Shores-
West, and (6) PKS-East (Sheets 3a-3f). Sediment would be spread via land-based equipment and
shaped into a recreational beach between the existing toe of the foredune and low watermark.
Approximately 50 percent of the excavations would be deposited between existing mean low water
and the outer bar (about 500-750 ft offshore). The remaining excavations would be placed above
existing mean low water and graded to match the natural beach with berm elevations at
approximately +7 ft NGVD (-+5 ft above mean high water) (Sheets 4-9). The fill quantity for each
reach varies according to the profile deficit, background erosion rate, and quality of the fill material
(overfill factor).
Coordination with Municipalities. It is anticipated that individual communities would assume
responsibility for project execution within a particular reach and control the timing of implementa-
tion, scale, and scope of the work (up to the maximum quantities listed herein). However, the
county, on behalf of municipalities along Bogue Banks, is requesting a permit for the entire project
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project"
so that the full scope of work can be coordinated. As such, the county requests permit(s) that will
allow the municipalities of Pine Knoll Shores, Indian Beach, Emerald Isle, and the unincor-
porated area of Salter Path (c/o Carteret County) to implement nourishment in their respec-
tive reaches under the same permit. An EIS for the project has been prepared and submitted for
review (presently approved by NCDENR offices and in review with state "clearinghouse" agencies,
January 2001).
Borrow Area Characteristics. Three offshore borrow areas (A, B 1, B2) are proposed based on
extensive borings in 1999 and 2000 off Bogue Banks (detailed in the EIS for the project). All areas
are dominated by sandy sediments and are situated seaward of the littoral zone in water depths
averaging 35-48 feet (ft). See Sheets 11-14 for detailed sediment characteristics. Borrow area A has
composite overfill ratios of about 1.16. Borrow areas B 1 and B2 have composite overfill ratios of
about 1.97 to 2.19. Because nourishment pumping costs increase with distance, it is anticipated that
borrow areas B 1 and B2 will yield lower unit construction costs that borrow area A. However,
because of sediment quality differences and higher overfill ratios, more volume will have to be
excavated from borrow areas B 1 and B2 to equal the performance of sediments from borrow area A.
The nourishment plan for each reach optimizes the borrow area and cost, based on best-available
information. The applicant requests permits that allow any combination of reach and borrow
areas. Assuming the average excavation depth is 3 ft, borrow area(s) totaling a maximum of -2.58
square miles will be required to provide up to 8 million cubic yards. If all sediment is derived from
borrow A, approximately 5.1 million cubic yards will be required, encompassing an area of 1.65
square miles. Portions of the borrow area(s) will be left undisturbed so that biological recovery may
be accelerated via recruitment from adjacent areas. The anticipated impacted area for excavations
represents 2.1 to 3.4 percent of the ocean bottom off Bogue Banks within state territorial waters (3-
mile limit).
Fill Placement on Beach. Sediment from borrow areas A, B1, and/or B2 will be pumped to the
beach and distributed alongshore with the aid of land-based equipment and open-ended training
dikes. The slurry mixture of sediments and seawater will be discharged parallel to shore between the
toe of the existing foredune and a temporary dike pushed up about 150-200 ft seaward of the fore-
dune. Coarsest sediments will tend to settle out near the discharge point and finer sediments will
tend to wash down-profile and be discharged in the surf zone, where they will build up the under-
water profile. Muddy sediments, which comprise <4 percent of the borrow deposits in total, are
expected to wash seaward of the outer bar before settling. The final distribution of grain sizes across
the littoral zone is expected to be similar to the natural gradation that presently exists (ie, fining in
the offshore direction). The indicated fill profiles (Sheets 4-9) show the "base" fill quantity (if
overfill ratios were 1.0 and the borrow and native sediment matched perfectly) and the extra volume
required to account for "overfill." The overfill portion shown on the drawings represents the
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project"
?.., L;;J1
anticipated maximum volume required if borrow areas B 1 or B2 are used. This portion of the fill
volume will be reduced if borrow area A is used.
The final dimensions of the nourished beach will vary according to the site-specific deficit and
particular borrow area used. The landward 100-250 ft will consist of subaerial beach (dry-sand berm
and upper beach face) shaped to match a natural profile. Typical elevations will range from +7 ft
NGVD at the toe of the foredune (most landward edge of nourishment) to 0 ft NGVD along the
beach face. Below the mid beach face contour, waves will rework and shape the nourishment
sediments into a natural profile. Nourishment sand is expected to partially fill the inner trough
between the existing beach face and outer bar, a width of -500 ft. The outer bar will provide a
natural toe for the fill. Only the most landward sections of the nourishment profile above mean high
water (see Sheets 3a-3f) are controllable during construction. The underwater section will be
controlled by waves and will vary with the contours according to conditions at the time of
placement.
Turbi it . The project will produce temporary and localized increases in turbidity, normally
associated with dredging operations. Because -96 percent of the excavated material is in the sand-
size class or larger, it will settle almost immediately and not remain in suspension. Silts which
constitute a major portion of the mud percentage, likewise, have settling rates measured in minutes,
not hours. The clay-sized particles released with the slurry have the longest settling times and may
leave localized plumes for hours. The effect of the project on turbidity levels in the surf zone is
expected to fall within the natural range of turbidities associated with fair weather and storm
conditions. The construction methodology provides for separation of fines either during loading of
hopper dredges or during discharge along the beach. Mechanical shaping of the fill berm will
preclude formation of settling basins where fines may concentrate and be buried under the nourished
beach.
Purpose and Need - Carteret County and the communities on Bogue Banks recognize the ocean-
front beaches and adjacent properties as a valuable public economic and ecological resource. They
desire to protect these valuable resources. From an economic perspective, the need for the proposed
Bogue Banks beach nourishment project is to protect and preserve the largest portion of the
county's overall economy. Tourism is, by far, the largest industry in Carteret County. The industry
contributes -$208 million annually to the economy of Carteret County, with a direct payroll of more
than $38 million to over 3,400 workers.
Bogue Banks represents less than 1 percent of Carteret County's land area but accounts for -43
percent (over $2 billion of the county's $5.4 billion tax base) of Carteret County's ad valorem
property tax base (1997). Approximately 61 percent of all locally generated revenues in the county
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Rogue Banks Nourishment Project"

derive from property taxes with the remainder from sales taxes, occupancy taxes, and fees. Nearly
80 percent of Carteret County's tax levy funds Carteret County schools. Out of 8,483 students in
Carteret County schools, only 537 (6.3 percent) reside on Bogue Banks (1997-98). Thus, property
owners on Bogue Banks provide almost half the funds for county schools but make up less than 10
percent of the school population. Any reduction of the effective subsidy derived from Bogue Banks
property and economic activity would result in increased property taxes over the remainder of the
county. Loss of the first row of oceanfront properties (which alone comprise nearly 10 percent of
the county tax base) would result in a county-wide tax increase of $0.05/$100 (from $0.51/$100 to
$0.56/$100; 2000-2001 fiscal year) to make up for the reduced tax base.
Oceanfront properties represent an inordinate share of total property tax revenues to the Bogue
Banks municipalities. Emerald Isle has a total tax base of $1,000,000,000 with $300,000,000 of
the tax base deriving from oceanfront property. The loss of the oceanfront row of properties in
Emerald Isle would result in a property tax increase of -$0.09/$100 from $0.195/$100 to
$0.285/$100. Pine Knoll Shores has a total tax base of $415,000,000 with -45 percent
($185,000,000) of the tax base deriving from oceanfront property. The loss of the oceanfront row in
Pine Knoll Shores would result in a property tax increase of $0.13/$100 from $0.16/$100 to
$0.29/$100. Indian Beach has a total tax base of --$100,000,000 with $60,000,000 of the tax base
deriving from oceanfront property. The loss of the oceanfront row of properties in Indian Beach
would result in a property tax increase of $0.26/$100 from $0.17/$100 to $0.43/$100.
The county also recognizes the beaches of Bogue Banks as a valuable ecological resource. Of over
70 miles of barrier island shoreline located in Carteret County, Bogue Banks is the only developed
portion. The remainder, made up of Shackleford Banks and Core Banks to Ocracoke Inlet, will
remain undeveloped in perpetuity as part of the Cape Lookout National Seashore. Bogue Banks
serves to draw human activity away from the pristine beaches and ecosystems of Shackleford and
Core Banks. The health of the beach environment is essential to a positive experience for the beach
visitor. The damage associated with severe storms results in the loss of high oceanfront dunes, scrub
and maritime forests. Easily accessible wide dry beach areas, high dunes and maritime forests
harbor a wide range of wildlife resources and, because of the effects of erosion, are becoming
increasingly rare along North Carolina's shoreline.
The sportfishing industry in Carteret County is second in size only to Dare County. The health of
those activities (including fishing, boat building, and outfitting and supply) is dependent on the
health of the marine environment.
Project Planning Objectives - In undertaking the beach nourishment project, Carteret County has
several objectives that the project must meet. Those objectives are summarized as follows:
4
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project"
• Preservation of the environmental, cultural and aquatic resources of the county.
• Provide an easily accessible recreational beach available to all citizens of the county.
• Provide protection of oceanfront property as a resource of tax revenues to the municipalities of
Bogue Banks and the county.
• Maintain the economic viability of tourism, the county's largest industry.
PROJECT FORMULATION
Fill Profile - Beach nourishment may be performed at a continuum of scales, depending on the
goals of the project, availability of borrow sediment, method of construction, and budget. Since the
proposed project area has not been nourished, there are no site-specific data to use as a guide other
than the existing natural profile and available erosion rate estimates. Nearby Atlantic Beach has
been nourished twice, but its sediment characteristics (after nourishment) differ from those in the
proposed project area.
CSE Baird-Stroud (1999) evaluated the condition of the beach and inshore zone along Bogue Banks,
using the profile volume method (Kana, 1993; Kana and Mohan, 1996). This method establishes
site-specific criteria by which volume deficits can be determined against an ideal or desirable profile
volume (ie, one which contains sufficient dimensions to sustain daily, seasonal, and storm
fluctuations of the beach without significant damage to the backshore). The profile volume method,
if performed to the estimated depth of closure, integrates all cross-shore variations in profile
geometry and is therefore insensitive to the timing of surveys.
Prior analyses (CSE Baird-Stroud, 1999) demonstrated that there is a profile deficit averaging -40
cubic yards per foot (cy/ft) along the 16.8-mile reach from western Emerald Isle to Pine Knoll
Shores (profiles 8-76), compared to the existing profile volume along Atlantic Beach. Considering
the fact that Atlantic Beach sustained Hurricanes Dennis and Floyd (1999) as well as Fran (1996)
with only minor damage compared to other sections of Bogue Banks, its profile volume yields a
rational minimum value. During final design, the profile volume will be analyzed quantitatively to
estimate the level of protection provided.
The desired fill volume is one that restores the deficit (with respect to the criteria and goals of the
project) and adds "advance nourishment" to increase longevity. Advance nourishment is generally
related to the anticipated average annual losses from the project area (ie, the background erosion
rate). The Bogue Banks Beach Preservation Task Force evaluated projects which factored in 5-year,
10-year, and 20-year advance nourishment requirements based on best-available background erosion
rates. It was the decision of the task force to formulate the project around the 10-year nourishment
project (ie, initial deficit averaging 40 cy/ft plus 10-year advance nourishment averaging 10 cy/ft).
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project"
This provides a reasonable time period over which the first project can be evaluated and provides a
project scale that is practical for dredging. Small-scale projects do not afford economies of scale
during construction and result in more frequent nourishments and the associated disruption to normal
beach use by people and animals. Bogue Banks is generally considered a good candidate site for
nourishment because its background erosion rate is relatively low and it is less exposed to north-
easters because of its sheltering by Cape Lookout.
METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
The proposed fill will be placed by hydraulic dredge between the base of the foredune and the outer
bar. Only the profile above high water is controllable in nourishment construction. Intertidal and
underwater portions of the profile will be subject to natural adjustment by waves. Given the rela-
tively high back-beach elevations along most of Bogue Banks and the issue of easements for con-
struction, the majority of the fill will be placed no higher than +7 ft NGVD (the natural elevation of
the berm) and seaward of the existing toe of the foredune and all development. Along portions of
eastern Emerald Isle, a low dune (elevations <+12 ft NGVD) will be constructed as part of the
project to prevent the dredge slurry from flowing landward across developed property (where the
foredune is missing).
Equipment
• Ocean-certified hopper dredge - Self-propelled hopper dredges with built-in, pump-out
capability are feasible for borrow areas A, B1, and B2. Ocean-certified equipment typically
requires -25 ft minimum operational depth and is efficient for excavating shallow cuts of the
order 1-2 ft (Sheet 10). During excavation and loading, the slurry drains via scuppers
discharging some fines in situ and leaving coarser material in the hopper compared to the
excavated material. When loaded, the dredge travels to a temporary mooring and submerged
pipeline near the project site. It hooks up to the pipeline and pumps the material from the
hopper to the beach where it is spread mechanically by dozers.
• Ocean-certified suction dredge equipped for shallow cuts - This "dustpan" dredge (so
nicknamed) is used primarily for beach nourishment involving thin borrow areas offshore.
The dredge works most efficiently if the borrow area is close to the project area (e.g.,
excavations paralleling the beach less than one mile offshore). The slurry is pumped directly
to the beach via submerged pipeline and distributed with the aid of dozers and other land-
based equipment. In contrast to self-contained hopper dredges, the excavations are pumped
only once and therefore transfer more fines to the beach according to the quality of the
sediment in the borrow area. Unit costs may be substantially lower than all other methods if
the pumping distances are short. This method is considered most feasible for borrow areas
B1 and B2.
6
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Rogue Banks Nourishment Project"

Construction Schedule - The proposed project involves a substantial volume of sand (>4.5 million
cubic yards in-place after gradual erosion of overfill). Based on project experience elsewhere, one
ocean-certified dredge can excavate and place on the order of 15,000-30,000 cy in a 24-hour period.
The average production per day varies widely according to transportation distance and specifications
of the project. In any case, a substantial period of time will be required to complete the project. For
example, if production averages 20,000 cy/day, upward of 400 calendar days (-13 months) will be
required to place the base volume plus overfill for all six reaches. It is anticipated that three reaches
(#6 PKS-East, #5 PKS-West, and #4 IB/SP) will be scheduled for nourishment in 2001-2002, pend-
ing results of community funding referendums and receipt of permits. Other reaches would be
completed no earlier than the 2002-2003 construction window. Reaches 4-6 comprise about 40
percent of the project length and about 45 percent of the nourishment volume requirement.
Work will progress in sections within the borrow area(s) and along the beach. The borrow area will
be left to adjust naturally and to recolonize while other areas are being excavated. Fill placement
along the beach will typically involve completion of 200-500 ft per day. Construction activities will
involve movement of heavy equipment and pipe along -1 mile reaches over a period of 2-3 weeks.
Once a section is complete, piping and heavy equipment will be shifted to a new section and the
process repeated. As soon as practicable, sections will be graded and dressed to final slopes and left
to respond naturally. Other than equipment staging areas, individual lots along the oceanfront will
experience disruption due to construction for one month or less, in general. Fill sections will be left
to adjust naturally as soon as the required volumes are pumped into place and confirmed by surveys.
Land-based equipment will be brought to the site over public roads and will enter the beach through
existing permanent accesses or temporary accesses. Any alteration of dune vegetation/topography
necessary for equipment access will be performed in consultation with state regulatory agencies,
local officials, and property owners. Temporary accesses will be restored to preconstruction condi-
tions at the conclusion of work in a given reach or combination of reaches. Daily equipment staging
will be on the constructed beach seaward of the dune line and any native vegetation. Construction
contracts will provide for proper storage and handling of oils, chemicals, and hydraulic fluids, etc.,
necessary for operation in accordance with state and federal regulations.
Preliminary discussions with environmental agencies indicate construction during colder months is
favored because biological productivity tends to be lowest then. Construction during winter also
avoids disruption of the peak tourism season.
The following two general construction schedules were the two workable conclusions reached in the
EIS. Both are requested for this permit.
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project "
Construction during limited "environmental" windows between 1 November and 15 May
• Advantages - Direct environmental impacts occur during periods of lowest biological
productivity. Avoids prime tourist season. Yields early benefits if the project can be
initiated in fall 2001.
• Disadvantages - A five-to-six month construction window is insufficient to complete the
entire project unless more than one dredge is used. Each dredge introduces large
mobilization costs, increasing the total cost of the project. The narrower the dredging
window, the fewer contractors will be willing to bid the project, further raising the cost of
construction. Down time for weather is more likely during winter than summer. Delays
project benefits for at least one year if the winter 2001-2002 construction window is missed.
Construction during two or more seasons within limited "environmental" windows
• Advantages - The only viable schedule in the event only one dredge is available for the
project. Generally similar environmental advantages but produces direct impacts over
multiple seasons rather than one (not along the same project reaches).
• Disadvantages - Will require at least two mobilizations, increasing the project costs.
Postpones project benefits (wider beach, improved storm protection, etc.) for the areas
uncompleted during the first window. Causes disruption to habitats over multiple seasons
instead of one.
Requested Construction Schedule - We request the two above schedules, namely, construction
during environmental windows which may extend into the fall and spring. Specifically, we request
permission to commence construction as early as 1 November and continue construction as late as
15 May, and during multiple years, if necessary.
8
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project"
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
We expect that reviewing agencies will specify environmental monitoring. Based on our under-
standing to date, we propose the following:
1) Biological monitoring aboard each dredge during all hours of operation, except in January and
February. Any encounters with endangered or threatened species will be recorded and reported
to the appropriate agencies.
2) Sea turtle crawl and nest monitoring will take place each morning on the nourishment beach
between the calendar dates specified by the agencies. Nest relocation will be performed by
qualified personnel prior to construction of that project section.
3) The beach sampling, benthic sampling, and fish trawls as listed in the program outlined in
Appendix C of the EIS.
4) Sampling for mud content in the placed nourishment sand.
5) Other environmental sampling specified as conditions in the permits.
9
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Rogue Banks Nourishment Project"
4. LAND AND WATER CHARACTERISTICS
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land classification of the site?
The following is provided based on query of planning staff in each municipality and the county.
Municipality (Site)
Pine Knoll Shores
Indian Beach
Salter Path
Emerald Isle
Land-Use Classification
Developed
Developed
Developed, Conservation
,Developed
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
i. Is the proposed project consistent with applicable zoning?
Municipality
(Tract/Proposed Project)
Pine Knoll Shores
Indian Beach
Salter Path
Emerald Isle
(h) Zoning* (i) Zoning Consistency
R/C/I/Rec Yes
R Yes
R Yes
R/C Yes
[*R - residential / C - commercial / Rec - recreational / I - institutional]
10
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project"
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Deed - All project areas below mean high water (MHW) are within the 3-mile limit and are,
therefore, owned by the State of North Carolina, not by the federal government. All project areas
above MHW are within Carteret County, but are owned by individual landowners. Pine Knoll
Shores and Indian Beach are now actively pursuing easements. Applicant requests that permitting
proceed for the overall project, with the condition that each community's section would be
permitted once easements are complete for that community.
Work Plats - Drawings by the project engineer are attached to this application and are included
in the packages sent to oceanfront landowners.
Names and Addresses of Adjacent Waterfront Landowners - This permit applies to four dif-
ferent communities, and each of those towns is assembling copies of this application for mailing to
oceanfront landowners. In view of the unusually large number of mailings, which will take some
time, applicant requests that permitting proceed while registered mailings are underway. Once
each community completes and transmits the receipts to the agencies, permitting could then be
completed.
AEC Hazard Notice - A hazard notice signed by the county is attached to this application.
Compliance with NC Environmental Policy Act - An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
has been submitted for interagency review, comments have been received, the EIS has been revised,
and a final EIS has been submitted for agency review. As of the date of submittal of this application,
final approval of the EIS has not yet been received. Therefore, this permit application is being
submitted concurrently with the final EIS review process, with the understanding that this applica-
tion cannot be approved until the EIS is accepted.
11
AEC HAZARD NOTICE
Project Is In An: x Ocean Erodible Area
Date Lot Was Platted: N/A
This notice is intended to make you, the applicant, aware
of the special risk; and conditions associated with
development in this area, which is subject to natural
hazards such as storm:, erosion and currents. The rules of
the Coastal Resources Commission require that you
receive an AEC Hazard Notice and acknowledge that
notice in writing before a permit for development can be
issued.
The Commission's rules on building standards, oceanfront
setbacks and dune alteration are designed to minimize, but
not eliminate, property loss from hazards. By granting
permits, the Coastal Resources Commission does not
guarantee the safety- the development and assumes no
liability for future dan°,age to the development.
The best available irsormation, as accepted by the Coastal
Resources Commission, indicates that the annual ocean
erosion rate for the aria where your property is located is
1 - 3 feet per year.
The rate was esta",Lshed by careful analysis of aerial
photographs of the c"astline taken over the past 50 years.
Studies also indicate that the shoreline could move as
much as 25 feet landward in a major storm.
The flood waters in a maior storm are predicted to be about
12 feet deep in tills area.
Preferred oceanfront protection measures are beach
nourishment and relocation of threatened structures.
Hard erosion control structures such as bulkheads,
seawalls, revetment., Groins, jetties and breakwaters are
prohibited. Temporarv devices, including sand bags, may
be allowed under certain conditions.
High Hazard Flood Area Inlet Hazard Area
SPECIAL NOTE: This hazard notice is required for
development in areas subject to sudden and massive
storms and erosion. Permits issued for development in this
area expire on December 31 of the third year following the
year in which the permit was issued. Shortly before work
begins on the project site, the Local Permit Officer will
determine the vegetation line and setback distance at your
site. If the property has seen little change and the proposed
development can still meet the setback requirement, the
LPO will inform you that you may begin work. It is impor-
tant that you check with the LPO before the permit expires
for official approval to continue the work after the permit
has expired. Generally, if foundation pilings have been
placed and substantial progress is continuing, permit
renewal may not be necessary. If substantial progress has
not been made, the permit must be renewed and a new
setback line established. It is unlawful to continue work
after permit expiration without this approval.
For more information, contact:
Local Permit Officer
Address
Locality
This structure shall be relocated or dismantled within two
years of becoming imminently threatened.
The applicant must acknowledge this information and
requirements by signing this notice in the below space.
Without the proper signature, the application will not be
cor lete.
t3 a %R C ? P. E.
r
.Applicant's Signature
a4 CTOA(ACLr of Q
Date
Phone
Revised 11193
`a

oN
? m

<m
o ?
f co

a
y

K
S2

N
N
o
, N
E
H
E
a
L)
vc T 3
a
o m
o ? cE w
s
N ;
N ~ p O
ii
2
LU U)
M G
?Eo O=
Co ?W?
E :, o
E 013- Er- 11
O U. -F G U. •+ 01
A
?O~ cc
4
0
N e
E fd
4
14
Tf 5 ? II L .s ivy
1 ? ? G?4 ?r ... (y0tl1
c +) b? x d.F a u;
W
z?
a CO)
=L
?m
O
trh z
5
0
rx?
V

a
W

S2 a
?o
q

$

$
CL LL z
• . 0 0 a

J
W
I
U

a
co
m
t5
'Q
a
-?
k4
v
0
0
m
r
N
IL
a U co

a
ui
Y 'G
uvi m zo
Q
W
CO
°
E3 v
a Ln o
f W o N
F-
55-? g V)
z
Q? W a?
00
• Ln QU
L
m
zN
Y VI ? z
W Q
Z O
CL v=i W
$ E
r z
ts g
`n v
d m 0 lgil
;.j ° d ?
z
?Z ^_
a
r
d
°v
M
U5
N n7 Cd
00
9
l1J ?
U
+
o n
C
?^+ ~ Cl C 0
j a
v ? Jb a
_ M
o E
® a
?'lul an8og z,-. r4 ri
.1wn umOi
'?IIIA
r` N
wpm UMOI
y
Q
a
LnZ
WWI
.e
x
n
0
N
1
I
I

11 e?
1
c?

11
1
11
I1
1
N
,11 \
?1 \
11 ??\
1
1
.1
11
d
0
r

? N
0
a
C ?
r
? R S 0 $
t
N
Z
1-•1

11
,
11
h
`1 \, c
1
\

Ist
w
Ln
d, \
o
er?n;;
> > L
N
Ia?
0 C +?+ Z
v ? 7E O1 ? r-1
f -35 8
I ?
• I I
I
o I
I I
L= _
?o
o ?
v
g ? E
n
c
w
.j z r- :3
z
W
a y
il
75 tD
z?B E
?m? )
E
20
F-
1-4 3 z
o
ci
s o
z
b
O
cc
a
i11 'c ?
Awn UMOL ? a+ O
a
11
E E
11 I ?? z
1 C C
'2 C
fA U o
? ? rj;j 11 ' J f f 111 n,? CA
Y o 1.1 '1 E i I I
w ^
11 iC I
I
i;'? 111 Z I
I I
$ 1
II
4Wt1UNA1;
LM 11 O tl
??, - 1 I v ?YS
a.i
? ? 11 V
lz it I
WAM "WA.
p 11 ? r?i
1
\1 ?
""' cn 111 ? >
l ? v ? ? 111 \` C ++
1 c o
C4?
Z Z
1 \
v ? N 11
1 ?G ?y E
x I r i11 ;
H
o ? _111 ?1 .? ? ?
r it ? Eg?°c
1 It 1 E Z
i? m a
1 H
111 z
t i1 g W
1 o l
1 (/1
11 \1 GG
f 1 1 11 1
w ?? 11 O
\ Z
1 ,
Z 11 ,
/ n S o d 11
111 '?1
9"n umol
?I

r2 ?
w?
W \t' 1,
e. ?

won uMol :.r
?

a k

to ? u

won 1 ?
?-
?
O
a
a \ °,1
0
ce i w
a ?
0

t
d

n 8 0
H
11 1 ?
1 {6
1 E
jE
:3 y vLi
1 1 ?°n I C
TD
1,11 I
Z ?
i11 11 oc ?y
11 3 E rn
1 I ?? =3 3 ? ? g
lil; ! E =
Z I
it
1 I
1
11 ,I
1
11 ?
1 ?
11 I
1 ,
11 I
1 Ln
v
11 ?
1 11 1
1 ?
1 I
1 I
1 1 UJ
II i
d
11 I
? W
1 I
11
1 dam'
1 ?
I1 i
1 ? 1
it I
11
I
11
11 ?
1 I
11

it

1
11 I
11
t
i
1
1

it I
1
u
W
11
u
z
11

II
1
II I

1
R
go
0
C
iz
E
10
g 0 E
z
Z ? o

a
v

W C
7
?j z
LLLLII ?Q?
a cis
M
V
CC
g
a
W
V)
Z
x

wwnuNcl

r.-
V)
B
a.
o
o F

In
C jL
wwn Iwnl '?
T I
a ?, K
a
e
(? Izy ? u
WPM
? u

1 r

-' r

N
v
a
o'

a \
0

\? O
* N
H
0
uj ` o
t
/ n 8 o a
b
0
ce
IN
11 ,
11 i
1
IT '
I II 1
II 1
11 I
I? ,
II
1
II
11 ?
1
?1 1
11 I
1
II 1
II I
II
11 1
I 1
II
11 ?
1
II ,
It
1
11
I1 1
1
11 ' A
II i a
1
II 1
1 ; 1' ?Y17
II 1 ??
1
I'
1 1
1
I 1 11
11
1 1
II '
1 i
II I
1
II ? 1
I1 I
1
II
I1 ?
1 '
11 1
II 1
II ?
1 I
1 '
j1 1
1 1
11 I
1 `^
V 1
I 1 II
1
II 1
.1 1
t
z
1••1
63
0

_.: E
:0 :3
2
?TD
z 1
is

Z_
C
W
E -
E fE?iU?
!
X
r
?
i I I
1 19 m

i i
t^
?
3
V

Y1

L+

i N

z Z
O
G?z
W Q?y++

E
?, = 8
H
m
T
V
E f 'E ?

0
g'=0
z
LI
?V?
a

1 z
z
o =
V)
z

sown uMoi
11
fh
fag ? '„ tO ?
VAM
a
too,
'O
y
3
?o
" -
1a N
I;R
1
1
?V
O'
1
Nt\.i1
D
1 1

v

Lam,
n
a n 8 o g
e
0
ti
d
II
I 1
?
'S

1
_ ...
I c c
E E
?i
?
c
IL
1 ? c 0
3E
?

i l I E v
rn
=33 ,1
? 8
'm
I 1 ?f ?
y
I ' c Q V ,-?

Ln 02 '

1
I

I ? _
1I ?
I E

I ;
I ? ?
?
I

11

1
1 ?
c
1

!
'
o
Z?'
11
??,
1 ?? ?z GCT0
LLI
=
1
? cc
?
1

1 i 1.
1
a f
I
_
11 I ;?`
? Ln
11 $ ?
? E tx?
"$ La _
V

I ? ?'Qo?E
11 ' ?vg'cc
a

l I ? , 3 w
1 .?

1
1
1

I ? V)
`? 1 1 ?
11 ?
1
11
O
Z
i wn

b
W
ce
a

W ? --ice
? °r
nwn,wni .
I?
n
d
0

er

O

1

? o
NZ
wom WWI
K
0
N
?o

? r
l r
I 8 o H
t N
?I
o'
? N
r
w
c

_ E
.... i
V)

Z th

C
'2 cn
? o 3 0 a

=

iI '\
I
I ?$?
'C ? i I
I I i ds ro
II Ln
Z I i

1
11 i
I ?
I
` 7_0
?
-

I 1
1 I ?
1
i I
1
g 3
I
?
I
I
?
I
I
1'
it 1

I
II 1,
I
C
11 ,
I
I I W
I
' I ? ?
?Z iii
?
1
II t cl z
I
o ? a
III 1 ???'C1
' ; 47
ill 1? Z'?? E
it m
I _ V
$L
III ' E?_
I '
I I I =`ol
iI 0 E z
;Lpc? a
Z-o _
II I __
I
I V?g7
D
!I O
z
z II ,
11
E3
LL I I J?
a
w
0
t
m

- - -
- - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -
. .. --- O

O
; O ? c
F= ?
U a

p

; 8
Q o?
W a ?-

N ?.., O

a
c?
I`
Z
`a I
ao 3

i
co

o
.- o
J O r I O W

m ?,..,
O C
ca
a) C
co
CD
_ ?I I I
CZ
co
co

I
U

LN
E -- ---;- ----; --- -- --------- --- ---- O w E
W ; ; • ' ; y ?
m z
tQ w
00

•?
LL
O a m m
------.----- •--------- p
CY)

O c
C\l

?
O O y
c 'S
------------- ------
O

p
a ?

O a
O
fi ? to ?
N N T O LO O L O T E
•- -
y
E
WAJN - 1;) UOIIBAG13
,D
_ -`
cc c
c E i c
W
LL ?
O
Z -: cV
v
r-
w
0

;
; CD
CD
U)
- - - - - - - -
- . - - -
- - - - co

o

N
`

N _

CO
O
O
W a

N
0
I I ; QU
z

=3 oo
C?

O
CD
C6 LO 2 J > I F-
co p c c O i
I O
o U

L N _ cz
a) ca
CD I
cz c
o w

one J LL
?j

co

I o
0 I I w
I- ; O
o U
_ Q
%
o
mo a
Lm o V
ugi E
W ?N zYC
m W mZ
m
O a m m

m o m
--- ------ --- ----------- --- ------ ---------- --
C\l

i --- ----------------- -- 00
i ae

N
T
O In O In O O
to m W EZ
m m
N T T E

WAJN 4) UOIIBA013
E
fle

W c E2
w
o
U.
Z,r:
nj
v
0

r
' O
--- ---- ---- .--- - - - - p
co
M ?
I
o ;
I J? cn
o

O

L
I
06
- - - - - - ' - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -
1

0
N
(L
L,L Q L)

C\j ? ?,
cis T I Z
CD I Z

r
'+ S J
C C .> '
OT- O W

Cl)
m
c 0
=_ RS co
CD a) C (0 to
J LL O
W I J
U

O
LO

Ill
- - - --- - - - - --- - - - -
p w
E
r
a.+ z j c

0 w o
wmz

• coo
•
'
O a mm

..
p
'C .
a? G - - - - - - - --

.
'
O

M

%
Cr)

L c

• ;
Lo
'

?(D C
C :

-- -------- ------

p

C m

r
)
C\l

ii E
E
O c .e 's 5
- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - '- - - - - - ' p
N m
r
m

O m O
m E ..
N N T O LO O LO O L

T T
1 1 M
?.+ E
?? O

WAJN - 4) UOIIBA013 Mi
E m w
O N
z •= cV vi
v
,S

- ,------. - - O
co

g
4 . J of
m
O
O >` O 1 O (JJ
QU

? .r r
I I ; Z

I-
ui
In Lo = J > v? ; I
O
- O U
W
%4-- C r
--- -
C p
ca cn
d
?? I
O
4-9
I

Q
t Lo CU
v ,• C

_ _ E
m

Q
•

O
U
m
~

• W
mt

--
-----
---
'
p m
-- ------- ----
CY)

C
d
.?

V -- ------ --- 'C w a Q a --- :', - -- -----------

c: -- O

N
V1
m
a
H c 4
d E
_

-----------------
r
o, m
V! O
, Q m
Y y ??
m

O m O
?ti E
N N LO O LO O LO O
T LO
r H W °' E
?'
1 1 ?? CCC
WAON -4
1
?
c
ov= c
?cE r
011. H ae 6:6
Z •= tV C i
v
0
CID
r
d
m
L

--- ---- p
CC)
C
O
U Q o O>

O
O

'-
O
L N

O W
a coo C
Q V
C\j
V as
co
I
-
co 0 I I
CID
co 4 LO = J > T
O N I
O -
W
N 0 O C
0 CU - 11 I I ? co
c
J LL ? ? ? ? I ' co
O

I v
o I I f J
t LO V
Cl) _
a

---- ------- O =
? L
z

?+
+
N c
f- o
. w ? Z
a ? it
m

cc • m
p
d , CY)
LL
w
?£ m
?
a
'
"
-- -- --,------,---
; -----
•? E
d -- O

> • C\I

l
?:Ca E E
c
3ww

0 CA
s
- --- -------------- - -- ----------- O tOoem
T 2 N A
A
Ug)
r
m m >
, m ? E o

U)

O fill

U) O In O LO O
O
LO
co °' m
'$
N N T T T T
o
E

(aAJN - :4) UOIIBA813 =
m
co
?s??
? _ - -
?
-
;
?
c
y?cE o

Z V.: N vi
0
o?
, O m
------------------ ------ -
O
to U N
O m
a-
00 p a ?
O N L N p a V
`a
ca I 1 Z
c v
rn 1
L 2 J > T I ; ; p U
V? CO C c O N - - - - - - - O W
m a? _o cu ca c11 1 1 Co co
W C Q) CD co
N I ° ]
o I I I I •' p U till
cn LO U
p %ft.00
Y - •- c w
Z 2 'c
CL w m z
RIM
a. mm
•? M a,
s
tat (D
V S IE o r
-----, --- ---- --- In
(D W •; N m
g C "
Q
c
3 w w ; m E
-------------
- - ---- ------ ----------g ,?s
T o ?aR to
, N O
N N LO O Lc) O to O LO
N E
1 1
T S 79
E
(QAJN -:4) UOIJBA813
2
c
m c E
0? Im *
z •= cV c+i
Q
3
m
LT
CM CL
?8
0 ?
N
I

9
'd'
tlJ ?
C Vs
? S
F4
N
v
r r'
f O?rO
N•
f.'
n'
W
U
Cl)
O
H
H
O
Z
d
o ?
m
C
3
0
m°
z
1.
t.

t

M
p .1 <.
CV) O ..?t .
,
!. R1

r•1, rr'
?.1
r ? f

U
U)
O
H
O
Z
o?
0
A
Cp m
m
R cn
6 O
6
0
L
C ?
U g
73 0)
r
C
Q U ?
9

a
w E
L
ZU)
7
W mZ
7
amm
W
QZ
?0
W
0 CO
W CO
U0
a. L)

CD
F_
110N ao N (0 CD
In LO
U m, i
}" E to
Q ? LL?YM ? J 9' 1
Ln C In r N
LO
co L 8
+ + + N
N "J c,
co
M
O p
N
co
N
rn +
O
J ; r) co + ao
tn-
Z
7N •
Y
LU + +
P-4 =
a cn
., . u . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ••19'A2
+ o
N EEE
f
cl z
a dS
Q LJ7 R 4 J2
C m $ cs
wZ 0
n o
10-
........ ................... ......
i 4 : A AZ
a..l
0 m
110
in ; p
J ?a g $ a
F C
H p?
Lr,
w
01
w c
a)
X X X x X X X
U
U
J
J
ZO--
Y
w
Z0.
= .
a cn '
r
ry
110N
p r
f, 2+
a t?
Mt M+
04
N lem- LO
S? _M
rn U rn
M N V
M M n p "' N Mt M+
t ?
n
t N V
v
o v Lo N N
N+ M+
7 p ? U
M
+ ?+
?+ U
r1O . . . . . . .. . . . . . ... . .. . . N
rl M
? S ?+ Mt N+ M
? U

. . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . .o. . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .; •, C9 '.9L
N
V)
? o+
v m
n

............ ....... . AF k . .
O
- .o ','I . . .q. . .;
. ;.
. . . . . . . . • . .AL
i pp
a
m

. . . . . . . . . c z
. . 1:?.
. .
'. . . . . .
.
'
O
Q
N r r7 i
9 U.
. . . . . . . . .
z
j r.

O
VVV /I

. . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . ui ?%
7 ... .4C9L
4

C C
CO
:
O

tun)

:..
......... .
.. 0.. O
......... ........
. ..
.......
0

LU X:
w
:... ........: ......... ..... .......... ........... v

k _ k k k k k d
U
ZV

Np ?

m
r0 ?
V ?
rl
V ao?a
cO
M

Z 04
Q U
LO

m
t 0
LO 'o 8
_ cn

Np W U O
+? U') O
?+ C
ap
t0 ?.. N o N
t L+ ?} +
(?
' N
p v (o Up
v
U+
z
M i-.
0

N+

+
?
N d

A
c U

C) cc

F

1 co

Mt cn

t

+

S
+ Mt
J
J
U. zO.
= .
a cn
o ° 0
U U Z
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , •, l9'A'L
e

....... ;. ....... j 2.. ..... ..... .....,... N

Z
z U ........ .. ........;.
LO AL W

yN? $j
o ,
??O U rj 12 Z
LL'J
J
U
?
?
r
f
1
?Q

........... .. \_
= .. .n ........ ;.A .x ........ .
R .._........ ...........CSAt
U
LED c
.
.. DL z
...
... . • . n ^ A IR, R,. ^
.... , . O
.. .....
Q
Q 8 R g s ' n AL

. ... ..

+ . . .. . . . . . . . . . .4GAL `?

• MS

U
1
E
...... ........... .... 4
. o. N.. .... ................... . .....,..
It)
J cs
U O

?"?..
• 46
N

In ........................
'M ......... . ........ A . aL f
0
L
ft; Lu
W

o a) 0

74 X h X x X X
?QUQ
Q m
J
0---
D
L U
Z= .
a V)
m

w

n
??m -
n o w v-
E + N?
rn
Q O? ° N O
cn N7 ?t
p N LO
t ?p yq Nt + C?- N+ j S
d` V t0 f0 G m
+ V + a; + Q Ll
n
N - C? NN
(O LO
M M }
a0 M N+ +
N
r C14 U ?
bbb + + 4-
04
n
M+ °r + ?+ N+ T ?+
M N
_
N C,4+ . . . . .
d `
+ t LV N+ ?+ N+
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
o
a
• o
. . . . . . . W.., . . . . . . . . .
X9 At
R oB z
............. ....... .. ... .. ......... ^...4... .:?.......... . ............. ...... ....esAi
a + d+ a?

........
.. . ... ...... ......
. ..O...... .. ....... . . E
; z ; Ai

't d
C
C
. . ;. .. to r, .. .CC ?.YL

O
. ?. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '
,
w .09 AL 0
C 1A
o N E
J
(n
: E
~ p '6
?. . . . . . . . .• . . . . . . . . . . . •. .
. .
LS. 0
Q
Ln
W = q
W

O LL
7 : 9! R ? 7i 6i
x• x k x x x x
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO March 10, 2001
Regulatory Division
Action 1D. 200000362
%ir. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
1621 Mailing Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 21699-1621
Dear Mr. Dorney:
Enclosed is the application of Carteret County, c/o: Mr. Robert Murphy- County Mana?er.
Courthouse Square, Beaufort NC 28516, for a Department of the Army (DA) Permit to dredge
and discharge approximately 8.0 million cubic yards of material into Section 10 Navigable Waters
and Section 404 Waters to nourish approximately 16.8 miles of beaches along the eastern section
of Bogue Banks Barrier Island from Emerald Isle to Pine Knoll Shores, in Carteret County, North
Carolina.
Your receipt of this letter verifies your acceptance of a valid request for certification in
accordance with Section 325.2(b)(11) of our administrative regulations. This request has bccn
taken out of the CAMA GP 1980-00291 process, and is being processed under our Individual
Permit procedures.
We are considering authorizing the proposed activity pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act, and we have determined that a water quality certification may be required under the
provisions of Section 401 of the same law. A Department of the Army permit will not be granted
until the certification has been obtained or waived.
In accordance with our administrative regulatiotr, 60 days after receipt of a request fir
certification is a reasonable time for State action. Therefore, if you have not acted on the request
by May 16, 2001, the District Engineer will deem that waiver has occurred.
Afhank you for your time and cooperation. Please contact me at telephone [phone], if
you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Mickey Sugg
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
Enclosure
Copy Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. Doug Huggett
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
MAJOR CAMA PERMIT APPLICATION
BOGUE BANKS BEACH NOURISHMENT
January 24, 2001
Applicant:
County of Carteret
Courthouse Square
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
Carteret County
Submitted to:
Division of Coastal Management
Morehead City Regional Office
151-B Highway 24
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
DCM-MP 1
APPLICATION
(To be completed by all apptlcants)
b. City, town, community or landmark
1. APPLICANT Pine Knoll Shores, Salter Path, Indian Beach, Emerald Isle
a. Landowner: Carteret County
C/o County Manager
Name Mr. Robert Murphy
Address' Courthouse Square
City Beaufort
State NC
Zip 28516 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
b. Authorized Agent:
Name Mr. Dave Clark, PE, County Engineer
Address Carteret County Courthouse Square
City Beaufort State NC
Zip 28516 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
Project name (if any)
Bogue Banks Beach Nourishment
NOTE: Permit will be irJued in name of landowner(s), and/or
project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. County Carteret
c. Street address or secondary road number
Beach front from Shipwreck Lane (Emerald Isle) to
Pine Knoll Shores/Atlantic Beach boundary
d. Is proposed work within city limits or plannin,
jurisdiction? ? Yes No
Within city above MHW; owned by state below MHW
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river
creek, sound, bay) Atlantic Ocean
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, anc
excavation and/or filling activities.
Excavation and filling by dredge and pipeline;
beach nourishment
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? New work
c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use? Public use
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed
project. If more space is needed, please attach
additional pages.
See attached under Project Description, and
METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
Revised 03/95

AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract 16.8 miles by 1000 feet
b. Size of individual lot(s) WA
c. Approximate elevation of tract above MHW or
N) rL - Berm at +7 ft NGVD (+5 ft MHW) with logistics activities
on construction bean seaward of natural dunes and vegetation
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
Mixed sand (FS/MS/CS) and shell (-25%)
e. Vegetation on tract Sand placement seaward of vegeta-
tion, except where dunes are too low for storm protection
f. Man-made features now on tract
Dune walkovers, seawalls, and fishing piers
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (Consuk the local land use plan.)
Tables attached for each municipality
Conservation Transitional
Developed Community
Rural Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
Tables attached for each municipality
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? ? yes No
(Attach Zoning compliance cerrificwe, if applicable)
Tables attached for each municipality
j. Has a professional archaeological assessment been
done for the tract? ? Yes No
If yes, by whom? Tidewater Atlantic Research Inc
(Appendix B of EIS)
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National
Register listed or eligible property?
Yes ? No
1. Are there wetlands on the site? Yes ? No
Coastal (marsh) Other
If yes, has a delineation been conducted?
(Attach docum %tation, if available)
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
Wastewater on Bogue Banks by subsurface treatment
and/or package plants with on-site disposal
n. Describe location and type of discharges to waters
of the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industrial /commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.)
See attached under Proiect Description Turbidity
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
Potable water on Bogue Banks provided by municipal
and private water utilities, source is wells
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
• A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims tide
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then
forward a copy of the deed or other instrument under
which the owner claims title, plus written permission
from the owner to carry out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by I 1 " white paper. (Refer to
Coastal Resources Commission Rule 7J.020.3 for a
detailed description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
adequate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers regarding that agency's use of larger
drawings.) A site or location map is a part of plat
requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed to
guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the

r 4s'"T
1
iite. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
• A Stormwater Certification, if one is necessary
• 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. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name Mailings from each community are proceeding
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
• A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
None for beach nourishment
• A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public lands, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.
NC EPA review of EIS is underway
This application is being submitted concurrently
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in response to this
application wi11 allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to conditions
and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and wi11 be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact,
grant permission to representatives of state and federal
review agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this
permit application and follow-up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
This is the cl?4 day ofvQ?? 2001 ,
Print Name Dave Clark PPEn
Signature ?X - &a Landowner or Authorized Agent
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
? DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
DCM MP-3 Upland Development
DCM MP-4 Structures Information
DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE: Please sign and date each attachment In the
space provided at the bottom of each form.
ern DCM-MP-2
EXCAVATION
AND FILL
(Except bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-I. Be sure to complete all
other sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or
fill activities. All values to be given in feet.
Average Ftnat
Eadsting Project
Length Width DeDth DeDth
Access
channel
(MLW) or (NWL)
Canal
Boat
basin
Boat
ramp
Rock
groin
Rock
breakwater
Other
(Excluding Fill
shoreline
stabilization)
Excavation:
Area A 11,000 10,000
Area B1 27,000 1,000
Area 132 27,000 1,000

?
.3
A"
90,000 1,000 -2 MLW +8 MLW
and below
-45 MLW -48 MLW
-35 MLW -39 MLW
-35 MLW -39 MLW
1. EXCAVATION
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below
MHW or NWL in cubic yards Up to 8,000,000
b. Type of material. to be excavated See attached
under Project Description Borrow Area Characteristics
c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAVs) or other wetlands? Yes ? No
d. Highground excavation in cubic yards None
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED
MATERIAL
a. Location of disposal area
See sheets 1 and 2 on work plats
b. Dimensions of disposal area See attached under
Project Description Fill Placement on Beach
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
Yes ? No
if no, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner.
Easements for areas above MNW are being obtained
d. Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance? ? Yes No
If yes, where? Future beach fill will be necessary
or maintenance and replacement
Revised 03,195
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes ? No
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
? Yes No
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION
a. Type of shoreline stabilization
WA Bulkhead Riprap
b. Length
WA
c. Average distance waterward of MHW or NWL
WA
d. Maximum distance waterward of MHW or NWL
WA
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
WA
(Source of information)
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material'
WA
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed below
water level
(1) Riprap WA
(2) Bulkhead backfill
h. Type of fill material WA
i. Source of fill material WA
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
? Yes No
See attached under
Project Description Fill Placement on Beach
If yes,
(1) Amount of material to be placed in the
water See' below
(2) Dimensions of fill area See attached under
Project Description
(3) Purpose of fill Beach nourishment
b. Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
-.Yes ? No
If yes,
(1) Dimensions of fill area
(2) Purpose of fi11
'Placement above water, with slurry forming till approximately 50%
above MLW, 50% below MLW. See attached under Project Description
Fill Placement on Beach
5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? See attached under
Project Description Turbidi and
METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
b. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic
dredge)?
Hydraulic dredge
c. Will wetlands be cr; ssed in transporting equipment
to project site? Yes ? No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
Dave Clark, PE, for Carteret County
A tort'roj N
Signature
? -Q1_'1LJL &sv Q:q 1
Date
Revised 03/45
r'
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project"
Attached comments for "Bogue Banks Beach Nourishment" Permit Application
3.d. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE OF PROPOSED PROJECT
PURPOSE AND USE
Project Setting - Bogue Banks is a 25-mile-long barrier island along the southern margin of
Carteret County (Sheet 1 of 14). It comprises about one-third of the county's ocean shoreline and is
the only developed and vehicle-accessible beach in the area. The remaining 55 miles of barrier
islands of the county, including Shackleford Banks and Core Banks up to Ocracoke Inlet, are
inaccessible wildlife preserves that will remain undeveloped in perpetuity as part of the Cape
Lookout National Seashore. The western two-thirds of Bogue Banks from Pine Knoll Shores to
Emerald Isle (beach survey lines 76 to 8 on Sheet 2) has sustained severe erosion and damage to
numerous structures since 1995 as a result of five landfall hurricanes. This -16.8-mile length of
Bogue Banks has a sand deficit compared to adjacent beaches which has left property unprotected
and has diminished recreational use of the beach. The county and local municipalities propose a
beach nourishment project to restore the sand deficit and provide improved storm protection and
recreational beach area.
Project Description - The proposed project consists of excavating by hydraulic dredge up to 8
million cubic yards (cy) of beach-quality sediment from ocean borrow areas (designated A, B 1, and
B2 in water depths averaging 35-45 feet), situated 0.5-3.0 miles offshore of Pine Knoll Shores,
Indian Beach, and Emerald Isle (Sheets 11-14). Shallow excavations (-2-3 ft deep, typical) (Sheet
10) would be made by hopper dredge or specialty suction dredge and pumped via submerged pipe to
the beach. The nourishment area consists of six reaches totaling 16.8 miles and designated (1)
Emerald Isle-West, (2) EI-Central, (3) EI-East, (4) Indian Beach-Salter Path, (5) Pine Knoll Shores-
West, and (6) PKS-East (Sheets 3a-3f). Sediment would be spread via land-based equipment and
shaped into a recreational beach between the existing toe of the foredune and low watermark.
Approximately 50 percent of the excavations would be deposited between existing mean low water
and the outer bar (about 500-750 ft offshore). The remaining excavations would be placed above
existing mean low water and graded to match the natural beach with berm elevations at
approximately +7 ft NGVD (--+5 ft above mean high water) (Sheets 4-9). The fill quantity for each
reach varies according to the profile deficit, background erosion rate, and quality of the fill material
(overfill factor).
Coordination with Municipalities. It is anticipated that individual communities would assume
responsibility for project execution within a particular reach and control the timing of implementa-
tion, scale, and scope of the work (up to the maximum quantities listed herein). However, the
county, on behalf of municipalities along Bogue Banks, is requesting a permit for the entire project
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project "
so that the full scope of work can be coordinated. As such, the county requests permit(s) that will
allow the municipalities of Pine Knoll Shores, Indian Beach, Emerald Isle, and the unincor-
porated area of Salter Path (c/o Carteret County) to implement nourishment in their respec-
tive reaches under the same permit. An EIS for the project has been prepared and submitted for
review (presently approved by NCDENR offices and in review with state "clearinghouse" agencies,
January 2001).
Borrow Area Characteristics. Three offshore borrow areas (A, B l, B2) are proposed based on
extensive borings in 1999 and 2000 off Bogue Banks (detailed in the EIS for the project). All areas
are dominated by sandy sediments and are situated seaward of the littoral zone in water depths
averaging 35-48 feet (ft). See Sheets 11-14 for detailed sediment characteristics. Borrow area A has
composite overfill ratios of about 1.16. Borrow areas B 1 and B2 have composite overfill ratios of
about 1.97 to 2.19. Because nourishment pumping costs increase with distance, it is anticipated that
borrow areas B 1 and B2 will yield lower unit construction costs that borrow area A. However,
because of sediment quality differences and higher overfill ratios, more volume will have to be
excavated from borrow areas B 1 and B2 to equal the performance of sediments from borrow area A.
The nourishment plan for each reach optimizes the borrow area and cost, based on best-available
information. The applicant requests permits that allow any combination of reach and borrow
areas. Assuming the average excavation depth is 3 ft, borrow area(s) totaling a maximum of -2.58
square miles will be required to provide up to 8 million cubic yards. If all sediment is derived from
borrow A, approximately 5.1 million cubic yards will be required, encompassing an area of 1.65
square miles. Portions of the borrow area(s) will be left undisturbed so that biological recovery may
be accelerated via recruitment from adjacent areas. The anticipated impacted area for excavations
represents 2.1 to 3.4 percent of the ocean bottom off Bogue Banks within state territorial waters (3-
mile limit).
Fill Placement on Beach. Sediment from borrow areas A, B l, and/or B2 will be pumped to the
beach and distributed alongshore with the aid of land-based equipment and open-ended training
dikes. The slurry mixture of sediments and seawater will be discharged parallel to shore between the
toe of the existing foredune and a temporary dike pushed up about 150-200 ft seaward of the fore-
dune. Coarsest sediments will tend to settle out near the discharge point and finer sediments will
tend to wash down-profile and be discharged in the surf zone, where they will build up the under-
water profile. Muddy sediments, which comprise <4 percent of the borrow deposits in total, are
expected to wash seaward of the outer bar before settling. The final distribution of grain sizes across
the littoral zone is expected to be similar to the natural gradation that presently exists (ie, fining in
the offshore direction). The indicated fill profiles (Sheets 4-9) show the "base" fill quantity (if
overfill ratios were 1.0 and the borrow and native sediment matched perfectly) and the extra volume
required to account for "overfill." The overfill portion shown on the drawings represents the
2
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Rogue Banks Nourishment Project"

anticipated maximum volume required if borrow areas B 1 or B2 are used. This portion of the fill
volume will be reduced if borrow area A is used.
The final dimensions of the nourished beach will vary according to the site-specific deficit and
particular borrow area used. The landward 100-250 ft will consist of subaerial beach (dry-sand berm
and upper beach face) shaped to match a natural profile. Typical elevations will range from +7 ft
NGVD at the toe of the foredune (most landward edge of nourishment) to 0 ft NGVD along the
beach face. Below the mid beach face contour, waves will rework and shape the nourishment
sediments into a natural profile. Nourishment sand is expected to partially fill the inner trough
between the existing beach face and outer bar, a width of -500 ft. The outer bar will provide a
natural toe for the fill. Only the most landward sections of the nourishment profile above mean high
water (see Sheets 3a-3f) are controllable during construction. The underwater section will be
controlled by waves and will vary with the contours according to conditions at the time of
placement.
Turbidity. The project will produce temporary and localized increases in turbidity, normally
associated with dredging operations. Because --96 percent of the excavated material is in the sand-
size class or larger, it will settle almost immediately and not remain in suspension. Silts which
constitute a major portion of the mud percentage, likewise, have settling rates measured in minutes,
not hours. The clay-sized particles released with the slurry have the longest settling times and may
leave localized plumes for hours. The effect of the project on turbidity levels in the surf zone is
expected to fall within the natural range of turbidities associated with fair weather and storm
conditions. The construction methodology provides for separation of fines either during loading of
hopper dredges or during discharge along the beach. Mechanical shaping of the fill berm will
preclude formation of settling basins where fines may concentrate and be buried under the nourished
beach.
Purpose and Need - Carteret County and the communities on Bogue Banks recognize the ocean-
front beaches and adjacent properties as a valuable public economic and ecological resource. They
desire to protect these valuable resources. From an economic perspective, the need for the proposed
Bogue Banks beach nourishment project is to protect and preserve the largest portion of the
county's overall economy. Tourism is, by far, the largest industry in Carteret County. The industry
contributes -$208 million annually to the economy of Carteret County, with a direct payroll of more
than $38 million to over 3,400 workers.
Bogue Banks represents less than 1 percent of Carteret County's land area but accounts for --43
percent (over $2 billion of the county's S5.4 billion tax base) of Carteret County's ad valorem
property tax base (1997). Approximately 61 percent of all locally generated revenues in the county
3
, I , I Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project"
derive from property taxes with the remainder from sales taxes, occupancy taxes, and fees. Nearly
80 percent of Carteret County's tax levy funds Carteret County schools. Out of 8,483 students in
Carteret County schools, only 537 (6.3 percent) reside on Bogue Banks (1997-98). Thus, property
owners on Bogue Banks provide almost half the funds for county schools but make up less than 10
percent of the school population. Any reduction of the effective subsidy derived from Bogue Banks
property and economic activity would result in increased property taxes over the remainder of the
county. Loss of the first row of oceanfront properties (which alone comprise nearly 10 percent of
the county tax base) would result in a county-wide tax increase of -$0.05/$100 (from $0.51/$100 to
$0.56/$100; 2000-2001 fiscal year) to make up for the reduced tax base.
Oceanfront properties represent an inordinate share of total property tax revenues to the Bogue
Banks municipalities. Emerald Isle has a total tax base of $1,000,000,000 with -$300,000,000 of
the tax base deriving from oceanfront property. The loss of the oceanfront row of properties in
Emerald Isle would result in a property tax increase of $0.09/$100 from $0.195/$100 to
$0.285/$100. Pine Knoll Shores has a total tax base of $415,000,000 with -45 percent
($185,000,000) of the tax base deriving from oceanfront property. The loss of the oceanfront row in
Pine Knoll Shores would result in a property tax increase of $0.13/$100 from $0.16/$100 to
$0.29/$100. Indian Beach has a total tax base of $100,000,000 with $60,000,000 of the tax base
deriving from oceanfront property. The loss of the oceanfront row of properties in Indian Beach
would result in a property tax increase of -$0.26/$100 from $0.17/$100 to $0.43/$100.
The county also recognizes the beaches of Bogue Banks as a valuable ecological resource. Of over
70 miles of barrier island shoreline located in Carteret County, Bogue Banks is the only developed
portion. The remainder, made up of Shackleford Banks and Core Banks to Ocracoke Inlet, will
remain undeveloped in perpetuity as part of the Cape Lookout National Seashore. Bogue Banks
serves to draw human activity away from the pristine beaches and ecosystems of Shackleford and
Core Banks. The health of the beach environment is essential to a positive experience for the beach
visitor. The damage associated with severe storms results in the loss of high oceanfront dunes, scrub
and maritime forests. Easily accessible wide dry beach areas, high dunes and maritime forests
harbor a wide range of wildlife resources and, because of the effects of erosion, are becoming
increasingly rare along North Carolina's shoreline.
The sportfishing industry in Carteret County is second in size only to Dare County. The health of
those activities (including fishing, boat building, and outfitting and supply) is dependent on the
health of the marine environment.
Project Planning Objectives - In undertaking the beach nourishment project, Carteret County has
several objectives that the project must meet. Those objectives are summarized as follows:
4
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Rogue Banks Nourishment Project"

• `Preservation of the environmental, cultural and aquatic resources of the county.
• Provide an easily accessible recreational beach available to all citizens of the county.
• Provide protection of oceanfront property as a resource of tax revenues to the municipalities of
Bogue Banks and the county.
• Maintain the economic viability of tourism, the county's largest industry.
PROJECT FORMULATION
Fill Profile - Beach nourishment may be performed at a continuum of scales, depending on the
goals of the project, availability of borrow sediment, method of construction, and budget. Since the
proposed project area has not been nourished, there are no site-specific data to use as a guide other
than the existing natural profile and available erosion rate estimates. Nearby Atlantic Beach has
been nourished twice, but its sediment characteristics (after nourishment) differ from those in the
proposed project area.
CSE Baird-Stroud (1999) evaluated the condition of the beach and inshore zone along Bogue Banks,
using the profile volume method (Kana, 1993; Kana and Mohan, 1996). This method establishes
site-specific criteria by which volume deficits can be determined against an ideal or desirable profile
volume (ie, one which contains sufficient dimensions to sustain daily, seasonal, and storm
fluctuations of the beach without significant damage to the backshore). The profile volume method,
if performed to the estimated depth of closure, integrates all cross-shore variations in profile
geometry and is therefore insensitive to the timing of surveys.
Prior analyses (CSE Baird-Stroud, 1999) demonstrated that there is a profile deficit averaging --40
cubic yards per foot (cy/ft) along the 16.8-mile reach from western Emerald Isle to Pine Knoll
Shores (profiles 8-76), compared to the existing profile volume along Atlantic Beach. Considering
the fact that Atlantic Beach sustained Hurricanes Dennis and Floyd (1999) as well as Fran (1996)
with only minor damage compared to other sections of Bogue Banks, its profile volume yields a
rational minimum value. During final design, the profile volume will be analyzed quantitatively to
estimate the level of protection provided.
The desired fill volume is one that restores the deficit (with respect to the criteria and goals of the
project) and adds "advance nourishment" to increase longevity. Advance nourishment is generally
related to the anticipated average annual losses from the project area (ie, the background erosion
rate). The Bogue Banks Beach Preservation Task Force evaluated projects which factored in 5-year,
10-year, and 20-year advance nourishment requirements based on best-available background erosion
rates. It was the decision of the task force to formulate the project around the 10-year nourishment
project (ie, initial deficit averaging 40 cy/ft plus 10-year advance nourishment averaging 10 cy/ft).
5
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project"
This provides a reasonable time period over which the first project can be evaluated and provides a
project scale that is practical for dredging. Small-scale projects do not afford economies of scale
during construction and result in more frequent nourishments and the associated disruption to normal
beach use by people and animals. Bogue Banks is generally considered a good candidate site for
nourishment because its background erosion rate is relatively low and it is less exposed to north-
easters because of its sheltering by Cape Lookout.
METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
The proposed fill will be placed by hydraulic dredge between the base of the foredune and the outer
bar. Only the profile above high water is controllable in nourishment construction. Intertidal and
underwater portions of the profile will be subject to natural adjustment by waves. Given the rela-
tively high back-beach elevations along most of Bogue Banks and the issue of easements for con-
struction, the majority of the fill will be placed no higher than +7 ft NGVD (the natural elevation of
the berm) and seaward of the existing toe of the foredune and all development. Along portions of
eastern Emerald Isle, a low dune (elevations <+12 ft NGVD) will be constructed as part of the
project to prevent the dredge slurry from flowing landward across developed property (where the
foredune is missing).
Equipment
• Ocean-certified hopper dredge - Self-propelled hopper dredges with built-in, pump-out
capability are feasible for borrow areas A, B1, and B2. Ocean-certified equipment typically
requires -25 ft minimum operational depth and is efficient for excavating shallow cuts of the
order 1-2 ft (Sheet 10). During excavation and loading, the slurry drains via scuppers
discharging some fines in situ and leaving coarser material in the hopper compared to the
excavated material. When loaded, the dredge travels to a temporary mooring and submerged
pipeline near the project site. It hooks up to the pipeline and pumps the material from the
hopper to the beach where it is spread mechanically by dozers.
• Ocean-certified suction dredge equipped for shallow cuts - This "dustpan" dredge (so
nicknamed) is used primarily for beach nourishment involving thin borrow areas offshore.
The dredge works most efficiently if the borrow area is close to the project area (e.g.,
excavations paralleling the beach less than one mile offshore). The slurry is pumped directly
to the beach via submerged pipeline and distributed with the aid of dozers and other land-
based equipment. In contrast to self-contained hopper dredges, the excavations are pumped
only once and therefore transfer more fines to the beach according to the quality of the
sediment in the borrow area. Unit costs may be substantially lower than all other methods if
the pumping distances are short. This method is considered most feasible for borrow areas
B 1 and B2.
6
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project"
Construction Schedule - The proposed project involves a substantial volume of sand (>4.5 million
cubic yards in-place after gradual erosion of overfill). Based on project experience elsewhere, one
ocean-certified dredge can excavate and place on the order of 15,000-30,000 cy in a 24-hour period.
The average production per day varies widely according to transportation distance and specifications
of the project. In any case, a substantial period of time will be required to complete the project. For
example, if production averages 20,000 cy/day, upward of 400 calendar days (-13 months) will be
required to place the base volume plus overfill for all six reaches. It is anticipated that three reaches
(#6 PKS-East, #5 PKS-West, and #4 IB/SP) will be scheduled for nourishment in 2001-2002, pend-
ing results of community funding referendums and receipt of permits. Other reaches would be
completed no earlier than the 2002-2003 construction window. Reaches 4-6 comprise about 40
percent of the project length and about 45 percent of the nourishment volume requirement.
Work will progress in sections within the borrow area(s) and along the beach. The borrow area will
be left to adjust naturally and to recolonize while other areas are being excavated. Fill placement
along the beach will typically involve completion of 200-500 ft per day. Construction activities will
involve movement of heavy equipment and pipe along -1 mile reaches over a period of 2-3 weeks.
Once a section is complete, piping and heavy equipment will be shifted to a new section and the
process repeated. As soon as practicable, sections will be graded and dressed to final slopes and left
to respond naturally. Other than equipment staging areas, individual lots along the oceanfront will
experience disruption due to construction for one month or less, in general. Fill sections will be left
to adjust naturally as soon as the required volumes are pumped into place and confirmed by surveys.
Land-based equipment will be brought to the site over public roads and will enter the beach through
existing permanent accesses or temporary accesses. Any alteration of dune vegetation/topography
necessary for equipment access will be performed in consultation with state regulatory agencies,
local officials, and property owners. Temporary accesses will be restored to preconstruction condi-
tions at the conclusion of work in a given reach or combination of reaches. Daily equipment staging
will be on the constructed beach seaward of the dune line and any native vegetation. Construction
contracts will provide for proper storage and handling of oils, chemicals, and hydraulic fluids, etc.,
necessary for operation in accordance with state and federal regulations.
Preliminary discussions with environmental agencies indicate construction during colder months is
favored because biological productivity tends to be lowest then. Construction during winter also
avoids disruption of the peak tourism season.
The following two general construction schedules were the two workable conclusions reached in the
EIS. Both are requested for this permit.
7
Teti Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project"
Construction during limited "environmental" windows between 1 November and 15 May
• Advantages - Direct environmental impacts occur during periods of lowest biological
productivity. Avoids prime tourist season. Yields early benefits if the project can be
initiated in fall 2001.
Disadvantages - A five-to-six month construction window is insufficient to complete the
entire project unless more than one dredge is used. Each dredge introduces large
mobilization costs, increasing the total cost of the project. The narrower the dredging
window, the fewer contractors will be willing to bid the project, further raising the cost of
construction. Down time for weather is more likely during winter than summer. Delays
project benefits for at least one year if the winter 2001-2002 construction window is missed.
Construction during two or more seasons within limited "environmental' windows
• Advantages - The only viable schedule in the event only one dredge is available for the
project. Generally similar environmental advantages but produces direct impacts over
multiple seasons rather than one (not along the same project reaches).
• Disadvantages - Will require at least two mobilizations, increasing the project costs.
Postpones project benefits (wider beach, improved storm protection, etc.) for the areas
uncompleted during the first window. Causes disruption to habitats over multiple seasons
instead of one.
Requested Construction Schedule - We request the two above schedules, namely, construction
during environmental windows which may extend into the fall and spring. Specifically, we request
permission to commence construction as early as 1 November and continue construction as late as
15 May, and during multiple years, if necessary.
8
Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project"
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
We expect that reviewing agencies will specify environmental monitoring. Based on our under-
standing to date, we propose the following:
1) Biological monitoring aboard each dredge during all hours of operation, except in January and
February. Any encounters with endangered or threatened species will be recorded and reported
to the appropriate agencies.
2) Sea turtle crawl and nest monitoring will take place each morning on the nourishment beach
between the calendar dates specified by the agencies. Nest relocation will be performed by
qualified personnel prior to construction of that project section.
3) The beach sampling, benthic sampling, and fish trawls as listed in the program outlined in
Appendix C of the EIS.
4) Sampling for mud content in the placed nourishment sand.
5) Other environmental sampling specified as conditions in the permits.
9
. Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Bogue Banks Nourishment Project"
4a LAND AND WATER CHARACTERISTICS
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land classification of the site?
The following is provided based on query of planning staff in each municipality and the county.
Municipality (Site)
Pine Knoll Shores
Indian Beach
Salter Path
Emerald Isle
Land-Use Classification
Developed
Developed
Developed, Conservation
Developed
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
i. Is the proposed project consistent with applicable zoning?
Municipality
(Tract/Proposed Project)
Pine Knoll Shores
Indian Beach
Salter Path
Emerald Isle
(h) Zoning* (i) Zoning Consistency
R/C/I/Rec Yes
R Yes
R Yes
R/C Yes
[*R - residential / C - commercial / Rec - recreational / I - institutional]
10
. Text Addendum to Permit Application for "Rogue Banks Nourishment Project"
5., ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Deed - All project areas below mean high water (MHW) are within the 3-mile limit and are,
therefore, owned by the State of North Carolina, not by the federal government. All project areas
above MI-IW are within Carteret County, but are owned by individual landowners. Pine Knoll
Shores and Indian Beach are now actively pursuing easements. Applicant requests that permitting
proceed for the overall project, with the condition that each community's section would be
permitted once easements are complete for that community.
Work Plats - Drawings by the project engineer are attached to this application and are included
in the packages sent to oceanfront landowners.
Names and Addresses of Adjacent Waterfront Landowners - This permit applies to four dif-
ferent communities, and each of those towns is assembling copies of this application for mailing to
oceanfront landowners. In view of the unusually large number of mailings, which will take some
time, applicant requests that permitting proceed while registered mailings are underway. Once
each community completes and transmits the receipts to the agencies, permitting could then be
completed.
AEC Hazard Notice - A hazard notice signed by the county is attached to this application.
Compliance with NC Environmental Policy Act - An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
has been submitted for interagency review, comments have been received, the EIS has been revised,
and a final EIS has been submitted for agency review. As of the date of submittal of this application,
final approval of the EIS has not yet been received. Therefore, this permit application is being
submitted concurrently with the final EIS review process, with the understanding that this applica-
tion cannot be approved until the EIS is accepted.
g . _
g°
z=
•
?
E a
co
tpyy?

a? ?$ m m
k' mo
3
?g o
c
X00
?
o
- a
2
6 c E
ELL
oo

?Z
O
O
v
_
N OC O
s3 ? W

U, - 49
O S
1 R
?
? ,;, roc

a 3: 02
3t cc o m 8?
O r W
c f c
p g
O Ii •Lp a U. Cn

, it
e
?^ m
'

.. A` ? ri 4
s
J ` c
v
e m J

Sa

d
+
?+i _
U
CUO)
fi.
2 ?J`z-
4 ?, k
H' a a

Vi,
Y

' ? TN+ Jt '
iS f a3 ?
ti/tir`.
~ 'r
y

r?
.Z ti ? e

C F
? N
_ s

a ?
f3? L
s g? s .g S
a' tai X F` z
• 4 O O a
a v
m
`o
m .-
m
L
Q
a
c
J e O?
a
Q U m

.1
a
U
Z.2 C
F' M o
W co z
fi
Coo
(L
W
J
0 ?
u
W

•
•
a

• cJ

vJ

d
? L O
0
f a c
H
2? Q
U
Qm
'CS
S-'
mot.
O
N
b0
0
0
LLJ
QUJv
N
0
ON
Y O1
W
ZO
a ?n
u
am
j
n4
r,
0
Ln

w
E
LLJ
r.
U
O
r
d
Ln
U1
N
C
?rrv
0
ful an8og

O
L

Z
0
1? C
L9_
g
a
W
Z ad c'3
.o

2
U
Q
W
m
0
Q
cn
W
E
Z

?
C
d
O a+
r
Z
0
G °
z

a? ?1ppU'
C y
Or- C

C
L5
14 25
CC
Z W
Cid
b ?h
?
? )
?
?
c" E
pp
??
1
QQ
O m
c

na v

a

?
a
L

r j "'
W ? E??.?

cn s tn ...it V

W
ce
n
qwn -L
,
aN
war, Lvwi
w i
C
0
h
7
0

M
I
I ?
_ a
i
,r
?* o
M v
a
a- °
Ln',
m <
N
N`.t
N
LLJ c
W o,
co/
r
'r
i?
? ??aae
1
1 ?
11
1
11
1
11
1 ,1
11
1
® 1
1
L!9
?1N
11
11
1
,
1
'l1
1
.1
1
\1 1'1
?I
11
1
1 11 c
1
11 '?
A
E
'1 w
Ln
y d1',
,\1
,
t-u
Z
1-?
V
V,
:U
E
++
E E a
M
> >

Z
C ?
? C
3 ?
= ?
a N
'?''

1
4
-?ffp? mr-
1
i

E r
p
S
3

88 a
Ln

C F
E
? v
z z
o
z

,q a?
? w o
E3 QQ?++ ??qq3
a
7S
? c
c?
?
?
p

E pc +-i
L Q
iJ

V
?-
o
m
'E
go
y
Z
O?Z ? O G

0
Z
Q
W
2
a
vjwf1 w.ol
=. ? „ 111 o I ?+ ? ? ?,
u
i
1 I p
111 ?i ? [O r? z Z$
` Rt 1 1
?C
(J
e
_ qu1 u r_
dto ?
F7, 1 p I
sip- 1 , O j I i
11 Z I
qwn u"i I 1 I +? 6?p
. =tt- j 11 ' E ? v3
Fl X11 ? v, C .tl
11
cti .;r ' I c
S$ s
I
gun u"0' =? o I ? cn
II ? c?
?± 11 0
`+, tl,
l ?. ? ? 11 1 ?. e
1?^,; K 11 1
6i E
g
11 '
11 1 €O z -?
?o
~
11 JZ b' z
M ? d
c
1 a
1 ? N 11
.a
11
11 '? o W ? ? ?
p'1 p? 1 r? i-i
a ?' 11 ?pP'_E
1111 ,'11 ? y ? T
c ' n > v?jf
o`, i 1 " 3 N
rv \?, j l , p p C
_E
La Q)
1
1 _
f U
'o`mE Z
1i 1 g rn w
vccc
it 3v 0
?
t
- 11 3 W
1 1 1, (n
w ? o, 1 1 1
1
co 11
11 1 Z
v z 1
\1 ,
J ? ? 1
k 11 '1
? ?_n 8 o fl ? 111
1.11 ?1

W
0
2
a

i

1
±? o
1
?y
a
°
1 EEC
> > ?
L
j
i
1 1
n
I
1
1

? i?
t
1
I
1
I ?
Z
X
1
1 'p ?yz
3P
1
® m
g? .- r,
8
1 Eei3?
f f
?
:
11
1
I 3
Vi u
'E a
0
r
1
1 .0
I
¢ M
-

1
' I ^
1
1 ? G I i '
I
1 Z ? I
I
I 1 I

I
? yp
v?

1 1
? ? O ?
1
1
1 I 3
?v
1
; ? ? s
1
1
i
? I 8
1
1
I I ?
?
1 ?

I'1 'I ? ?
'tR C a

Q
I 1 ual
1 I
oC n? w r
0
I Q Z F-
U
i '
' w
?

I 1 Q
+ R
a c15 c?
1
I
??
??B
I
1
1 0 E
1
1 q?
?
1 I
' ' arm-
M :
t?° r M

s
Z$ Li U
-"
1
E-6`E @
I?? I -6
1
II 1 t
o
? ° ? E
11 I v c c

1
I E 0.
11
1
' p Z
?v g
I1
' 0.8 =
z
cn

" z
z
z II ;
? I
I'
it
I
I ,
g\
=k
u l-
fI!
acn I Ln
ce
sumn upol
2 J
Q -
054

n
0
e
y N
C ?!1

? n

x o

?
o

0

W
f
W
? ? n 8 o H
C?
G
i
w+ln wnl -
I1/\I ?'IIl' ,?1 ?
'l
/ 1 III
I
O._
O .V) -? an
.u
o?
•ir
sjWm lwol,
n ?S 1
,win U
a
y M
N
,o

? rl
0
r. .

0

?o
0
0
c
L

V
i
W
x P
W O1
?r
? ? n B o fl

W
N
Z
1-1
Y
i
1
1
I
;
?I
1
;
? I
? I
?r
I
it 1
I I
11 ;
1
Ln
?? I
1 ;
?? I
c
oo
?? i a
1 a?
? 1 ? ? tPi
?.11 i ? 1
1
? ?1 I A
1 1
?1 ,
1 I
11 I
?
?1 ° 1
?, 1
I '
j1 1
?1 I
? , 1
? ? II
1
? 1 1
1
1 I
1 ;
I ;
, In
v 1
1 ' 1
?? I
?. ?1 1
1 _ 1
V"
E a
r'
:3 :3 t

Z
V6 v it.
c 3: 72

C
E ff
? ;5' N
c?u
:3 ON
E I I
I d c?

I 1
r?z i i 1
I
I I
^ = 2

X
?0
g 3

w

Z r
.?Z G?zo
^ ?o+ cr3

Gl
?
y
3
p
B E
10 N ? ?i
Eoo o d'
t a c
E
D _
U
I
E ' Q
W
? o ?
cog E Z
c

_E
3a
?
a

o =
12

O
Z

w
O
a

VA„ n uuol 1 I 1 ?'
E o
a?
A-- :u?
I
E E
v
rt 11 I ?t5
c z-
3 -2 C

o rn
I I I ?? 33
?
8
Ec
u N

I I
a `° In 11 Ln
?z I 1
'-
y I
t 1 ? ?
,?]J
41- I

` 1
_
I
?
In I
E
I
1 ? 1 I ,
3 ?
g

ce -. ?
a 1 ? a
.
QD ?? '
Inz -
u $
I I I 8 O
?
- I
u 1
kwal
1
T
1

, C
'
I
? ., ? ._ c
1 11 I a
a,
K ?
t ? 1 t
`" ?.o
6i E
Z?z

ti ?b? ?z Z
GB Z

cy a

v

N

11 c d5 r;5

C i1
O ' ? j li

1 -?81

n'
?;
E
C
It $ L
,, E=
I
La a)

2
1 ERIE
I

x o
II
IV
o ?
.-i 0
=
? r o E
Z
I I .? g
?v
i-
ca
'` 11 I5g w

w
I 1 V)
12

I1
?
I 1 Z
.J I
u 1
° n 9 1o H L? I i
I1 I
awn -
G
W
O
a
1--
LN
a N =F
I
?Z -
0
t ,Iwoi
gµgl uwol..?

a
u
O
?e
v N
a 14???
k ,
0
`p
n
L
N ,1
o
N
o ?
?D L
H
w
f °
J
? ? n 8 o fl

I?
V /
z
tl` ,
it
?T
II `
11
1 ,
I
II
I I `'
I 1
II
I '
II 1
I `
II '
I I
I
I I 1'
I I
I I
I '1
I I I
I I
t I 'I
I
II
I II ?'
I
I t
I I I'
II I
I
II 1 C
0 1 D.
I I
II
I I 'I
I
I
II 1
I I
it
1 1
I II
1
II 1
II I
1 1
I I
II
I '
it 1
I I
I? ? 1
II I
I
II I
It
1
II I
II
I
it I

:Ll

E
w
M
? )
M

+rz
S3: -2
rn
m c
E? =3 3? ?? S
f f 92

I Q U ?
I 1 1 n
y
z ' I 1
i i I

3
?
p E
Ln
01

O
a+

J Z ? 'C
f0 H
E ? ?o
iJ Q
r
T o
C C
f0 E
V
z
0
z
G °
5=
a d5 r?
t0
2
V
a
Z
TTW
12
O
z
N
d
d
N
W
Q?
v
00
v
CD
L
m
O
O
00
r C
= Z `

Q (J N

O w a
a m
O
I- ¢ U
Z M)
Z
O

U
F
o w
o
co U)
i
U)
O
;
U ?

O
O J
Q

CL
II
0
L2
a
C w E
a
c
n z
wmz
n no
?
2 O m
O amm

° c

LU
C

CD E
O t
N

r-
c O
O ?

y O
C ?
H
C
o
a Q m >
2mC
fA cp r m
co E$=° m
so x'>
_
M CU
_ C
7
m c E m c
iW/1 oe '?
V
O
-
Z r Ci 5
LO
N N LO O O LO
T T
(aAON - J;) UOIJBAa13
v

4-
0

m
m
O r
O Cl)
co
i
V
N
LNO
0
E
ui
mme
LL
N
.C
N c
U
8
U a
?,
Q (J N
O w a
Q U m
z
Z
O 4j

0 H
0
co w
c
c

0
a
o U
O
LO
_!
Q
? .U

v a
o =
E
•? Z . c
H 0
m
Z
W
"s 7 U
am
0 m
M

E

o

o
CD E
D
s
N
m
cg
E Es

D > y C
o
r- a
=
o ?
v a)
y ? ? O
C ?

W m
W
_
y C `
Q
m 0

m
m
0,E
I
??
?
EB
0
=
m
co
E =>
fN C C
_
U) W j C
c E m
y.bsm
o

Z,: N M
u,
N LO O O N In
T T
1 1
(OADN -11) UOIIBA813

00
I I i

o c6
'- I
N
a>
C ;,
V @ I
I
CD
T -j ; m ;

+-+

C
+- I I •
C C O r - ,- - ?
cu
t M o
N
O .
-J ii 2 oC •
W

o

W . °O C
•

Q

M , Q c co
u
z
,

w
S ° H
Q?
v? C O
0 o c Q N
3 w ;
0
f ---,--- -- 0

LO

N p

N

r ° O
O
tC)
T T
(CIADN - 4) UOIIBAG13
v
w
0
T
a?
m
L
cn
M .. c
Q g
w n. m
W
Q
Z U
'
O
L r
U ?
U
O
U e
U
P
CL
`
w m
E
Q y N
Z
W mZ
0 0 U
amm
o
cm E
C: a)
Z
3
C 'C
E
O y
C O
O C o a..
? O) m
y O
C r'
Q W m
p M C
a C? m m
W O
(D E
W r.- m
y
? r.. E
E S p m
>
c
Wit
vWi3e?f
Z .= N M
v
w
0
ti
a?
d
t
a
L
v/
V
m
_M
V
LL
i
O I
O
O
. c
g
U
?
Q
O w a-'s)
d co c
Q U
Z
Z
O

O W
(C) U)
U)

O
a
U
O J
Lo Q
^ U

?
o
%mo e
V
O
O = W
E
rtr Z

D me 0
Umz
w
U
IX Rm
O CL mm
O
CY) ]
C ?
LU
j
cm E
C m
O H
N ° m

E
E
m'
O
y .
> w
c o

r 0 0
-V 0) m
O
y
C ?
O f0 m
Y N y
y r- C
m m >

N N C m
3 .- E
1? 9-6,8
6
$p m
n E
' C C a
C
? . c E m
W
W
0
0
Z ': N M
N " Lo O Lo O m O l!)
N T , T
' T
(aADN -:4) UOIJBAal3
O
i
O
t
O
C
'a
LL
U)
m
v
r-
w
0

a,
m
t
U)
O
O
0:) L
. c
Z U CD
U Cl
W a
O LL' a ) m
Q
O ?
Z
Z
0 I?
U
CD
p CO
co "
U)
Cl)

a
U
p
o Q
LO _U
2-
a.
O w E
Z Y C
N
' V mZ
c w
0 7 U
co
CL [n co
O
O ?.
C7 C

E
c
co
CD
t

C\j
C '
C

E
o
7
O

C) y
7
c o

O
T 0
fD ce ?a
fV 0
O
y
C ?
Q tD m
Y H y{
m m >

O (D cu E
E Q, C
co , m
y

wo
E ?
>y
ES
0
x=` >
?0 tu
c E m
_
O? Noe?f7

Z
LO o
N N r O ? O m p r
1 (OAUN -11) UOIJBA913
w
0
rn
m
--- ......... 0 a
00
J+ CC) c
U = Z
o LO U 6U S
Cep W J _rn
N r O Of ¢U c
C? N ?
C U ?
cr? CO 0 a) a)
0 CD
?- c c O nJ o U
CC CU O cu cu -C W _ (D ( ? O W
i I CD U)
U)
? s
O
J
Cf) LO
• Q
U
0 CL
a? ;--------- o° c w
C ¢ t
•?• z c
i
°' o W co Z
ca ,
O O U
_ N
V i O d m m
¦.?
CY)
LL 21
.. O C . m v -X q) L°
.L.
V C?y? co E
Q> > v , m
O s
O N
C CL ?g
E E
---- p >o h
O c .eo
T? o
U CO CV to
N O
, C r
O co m
y L,
mm>
O O m mE°
CV CV LO 0 LO O t{) p coo °' E
T r ? p3 CVjE7
1 ? T t O N
(OADN - 4) U01jena13 E=B p
vcLap
_=ca
c E m
0 y'R
Z''
cV ri

z
t
0
m
d
m

N
0
0
ro
c
0
:a
m
ro
U
W
u W ?
0
L O
O
O L cl)
Z

c
F O
V U N
a?
J y ?

co
Q U c

70
-
CD
a(Di
' )

M

§lL n

co
M

c c
O cuo

2 :
M L)
0
cu
X m
m

..
W

Q Z
O

? W
O to
m cn

Q O
D (.5

a3 ? O
c

n
c
3 roU)
m c ?

0 0 m
?
ro a
i
> a
O 0 co
m w0

r-
.u o m m
aoN 0 (D
N (
Z U '
M
CD
?. WQ m E o,
Q m E <o V)
Q rn
Ln LC + ?
c M a .,
LO CD
N
N "? C
w QU ^
N co
LO (D
C) +
Q
O M N w
c0 't LO t
r LL
It
tJ f\ &
J co _ t
J o cn co
? LI
Zo . m y
a cn
O V
m
- a
Y
C 9 Z
a m to c
d' Z o ^ : o O
Z X _
0
L
O
N L5 Os'si a
m ?
E L
LLJ " $ S O
d
H E a v C
J Ln at N
C_
L
W Qn
'V
X x X z ? ?
."U
Z U
g
Q
J
J
0.
Ln.
oC
w
Z=0 .
CL C/)
N n0
$ m
U U

? N
_ V
n
Y

n
nor+ M
to .D t
LO
r _
a ?
p N
of f N ? n i(7
[D M _ M
_ M
Q, rn U rn
t!j N
e7 ro
M N V a:)
M M n N rj M
' O
n M U ?D
N y
U O7 iC) N N
N M M M M
° U
n M U -
t N
.y
? ry
$ if1 ? N M
h U
O U
V- 1
N
461
V)
V)I
yy.... 0 1
ay O
((((JJJJ ED N
Qa c
Q c
W F-a
C
flki
I?
IL

a
i
. . . Y
0
N

l1!

n
U
.
L9 9L
C
Z

0
N C
C 0
Ln 1 W
\ a dS
?'
\ r

C
Q +
W

? ? H
v?
ri

n

n
V

O
Q)
=3

n o U w

. ... . . . . . l! - rf. g n ?? L
. 1

`? d c1 n : 0

?' N b . .. ',vs'.ai
O 44
E L a
LLJ

'
'
J v)
g ls
L
.9 E
O
W _p O
LU fo

o.
,4s a2 c
U
? X X k
i d

U
Z
v
nu
10(
Q W
D
N C
m
U U
o
z
n N
o
U

N o
b U
q
U U
O
A
a

O ?
? o -

Z r-I
CD o
(? U

C

C;
aoN ? K '?
z O
Z M
M r.cojY a) 04
U V)
Q? U
m? v7 M N
U LOT c
a m
Q (>
r-,
F e?
M o
tD LnN ^ N LO M
p
4 (\?\
c ?
C) _ v
Z N
-vb
o ?
°r to ( _ M o
o co co 711 IM
0
J
J
0...;.
Y?
Zo
.q Z •
CL V
. . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '.l'S •9L
MERL
-
?. o
Z

r

?a.+

. N
^
z Z .

o
o X9 #Z

; C

V1
Z o N r 32
Z
• v,N U 1
rj m Z
U LLJ (L)L
7 U
......... ...... a
. ...
R
QW
N ? f0
Z
Q.. o

d _?

$ R

? Q
? 2 9 _
U Q
VI

_
Q) (((?///J
4-1
2
Q)
. m?
r E oB

b0
C)

N
?
. .
o
b 'Sig .91
O C O
g a n n O
J 8 ?

U
ev
n .
v
U
.. : .. .... .0 o V- O
?. .. ...
'
" O cn
JJ Ln
19 1s
a
t O f0
(a
ui
W i
d 0
°....
QS 9L

r
,r P
g U
A o
a Q

1-'
n
m ?
0

N

v
n o ~omi co '"
a0N h rim
97
0) OD
?r
E g u? + N
E Cmn ?o
Q N ? o N O
N
_ N
00
O
tO,p _ M N CD
pp p N N
R N
00 c
m
N r p! N
co Ki N M N
O, N (n
N - - - - - \V
n
o> ? c0 t0
N C
00
N ? ? E
J
J
Z V)
Y
wo .
CL !_
NO N N IV
O Y _ S`
N
U
m .Q
? d
`r C
o
N
U z
_ ll.l
< LLJ _
a m •`
ri -
Z ° K v a'
o
Q Y y J
w- rya Q N
- - - - .Ct 9i ..C CD
" O
o'
V) 1
U
CD C)
w N o A .91 v?..3 O
E t
~ ()
W a ~ _? E
J '- °
E c. U'
?.. O
J Ls 9'r fl
Lij
C
W - O C
c, o ?2)
+ ?t
.91 a oa
x
x x ???`? _ x x x x x
I , •,
AEC HAZARD NOTICE
Projerc0!5 In An: x Ocean Erodible Area
Date Lot Was Platted: N/A
This notice is intended to make you, the applicant, aware
of the special risks and conditions associated with
development in this area, which is subject to natural
hazards such as storrns, erosion and currents. The rules of
the Coastal Resources Commission require that you
receive an AEC Hazard Notice and acknowledge that
notice in writing before a permit for development can be
issued.
The Commission's rules on building standards, oceanfront
setbacksanddunealterationaredesigned torninimize,but
not eliminate, property loss from hazards. By granting
permits, the Coastal Resources Commission does not
guarantee the safety of the development and assumes no
liability for future damage to the development.
The best available information, as accepted by the Coastal
Resources Commission, indicates that the annual ocean
erosion rate for the area where your property is located is
1 - 3 feet per year.
The rate was established by careful analysis of aerial
photographs of the coastline taken over the past 50 years.
Studies also indicate that the shoreline could move as
much as 22 feet landward in a major storm.
The flood waters in a major storm are predicted to be about
_12 feet deep in this area.
Preferred oceanfront protection measures are beach
nourishment and relocation of threatened structures.
Hard erosion control structures such as bulkheads,
seawalls, revetments, groins, jetties and breakwaters are
prohibited. Temporary devices, including sand bags, may
be allowed under certain conditions.
This structure shall be relocated or dismantled within two
years of becoming imminently threatened.
The applicant must acknowledge this information and
requirements by signing this notice in the below space.
1lrithout the proper signature, the application will not be
co lete.
r i P. E,
Applicant's Signature I-
C:?4 0,A
Date
High Hazard Flood Area Inlet Hazard Area
SPECIAL NOTE: This hazard notice is required for
development in areas subject to sudden and massive
storms and erosion. Permits issued for development in this
area expire on December 31 of the third year following the
year in which the permit was issued. Shortly before work
begins on the project site, the Local Permit Officer will
determine the vegetation line and setback distance at your
site. If the property has seen little change and the proposed
development can still meet the setback requirement, the
LPO will inform you that you may begin work. It is impor-
tant that you check with the LPO before the permit expires
for official approval to continue the work after the permit
has expired. Generally, if foundation pilings have been
placed and substantial progress is continuing, permit
renewal may not be necessary. If substantial progress has
not been made, the permit must be renewed and a new
setback line established. It is unlawful to continue work
after permit expiration without this approval.
For more information, contact:
Local Permit Officer
Address
Locality
Phone
Revised 11193