20011519 Ver 2_More Info Letter_20110930

Dever"y ;eves Perdue Caleen H, Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor i r e ecior Secr?;iarv
September 30, 2011
CERTIFIED MAIL. RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
7011 0110 0000 9947 6923
SECOND REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Dear Colington Harbour HOA:
DWQ Project # 01-1519 V2
Dare County
On July 18 2011, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your oppl'ication dated
July 12, 2011 to impact 30,000 sq. ft of waters by dredging and fill 2,360 sq. ft. to
construct two jetties along with other bulkhead replacement/improvements on the
subject property, On August 17t", DWQ requested addiiional 'information which was
received on September 2, 2011, The additional information addressed the concern for
impacts to SAV beds with a field survey encountering no SAV beds in the vicinity of the
proposed jetties/dredging, The additional information provided a copy of the
hydraulic analysis and trarsport modeling report entitled "Colington Harbor Jetty
Evaluation" by consulting engineer William Dennis, P.E. The additional' information
provided in the report did r,.ot address all of the initial concerns and in turn raises
additional questions.
The additional information did not address the minimization potential to reduce the
width of jetties. The jetty evaluation report states "All plans assume that 'h4 existing
timber jetties will be replaced with stone (p. 27)," However, Colinglon Harbor HOA is
not constructing its jetties from stone, but from vinyl sheet piling. Phis change in
construction material allows the spacing between jetties to !:De reduced due to the
elimination of both the 2:1 side slope and 10-ft stone aprons at the toe of slope for the
N rh(? k , ")?v]s1,n SV?:?crQuality Ir°2met ??? wur?15-I ;_r ?ih. o_
9 W iii n i b Square riot= 1 nor c 7??One y,
?? ",Pur t_n, NC 27889 A X 2-52-946-921 North+Caralina
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recy.:, ed'10% Post Consumer Paper ;Vatulully
Page 2 of 4
stone jetties as was planned for in the jetty evaluation report. Please either reduce the
width of the le;tties or explain why this cannot be practically accomplished'.
The additional information did not address the minimization potential' to reduce the
length of the jetties. The jetty evaluationreport states a general rule of thumb is to
extend the je¢tles to a point at or near the existing contour but that "this rule ofthumb
is associated with inlets along open coasts and may not be strictly applicable to sound
side harbors (p. 7). Also, the jetty evaluation report states "the effect of the improved
ebb jet should extend about 200 to 250 feet beyond the end of the jetty (p. 27)." This
finding supports a design where jetties are shortened from their proposed lengths by at
least 200 feet and can still expect to maintain the same scour effects sought by
Colingfon Harbor HOA. Please either reduce the length of the je i ties or explain why
this cannot be practically accomplished.
The additional information did not address the avoidance potential to relocate the
northern jetty to avoid the need for dredging and align the jetties with the existing
natural channel running in a general south southwest direction. In the Army Corps of
Engineers engineering manual cited in the jetty evaluation report (Coastal Engineering
Manual, EM, 1110-2-1100; Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Washington, DC, August 2008) Section V-5-6(a) states that:
"Navigation channels are normally aligned as much as possible with natural
channels in the pre-project bottom contours. This approach has several
important advantages: initial and maintenance dredging are usually
minimized; and currents typically take this path in line with the channel, a
preferred condition for navigation. The effect of predominant winds and
wo,. es, as w el! os currents, on navigation should be considered. A channel
oriented to line with these forces typically serves navigation best. "
Please either address the alignment of the proposed channel such that it is aligned
with the natural channel or explain why this cannot be practically accomplished..
The additional information did not address the NCDMF concern of fish migration and
DWQ water quality concerns of flushing with respect to openings or slots incorporated
into the jetty design. The Corps' Coastal Engine eringg Manual Section V-5-7-(3c)
proposes methods "`'to promote flushing and prevent stagnation including gaps
between perimeter structures and shore, openings within the perimeter structure itself
(e.g. segments, baffles, culverts), overlapping wave protective structures to act as
scoops to passing water flow, and mechanical agitation." Please incorporate
slots/openings into the jetty design or explain why this cannot be practically
accomplished.
Potential for Application Modification
A Water Quollty C;ertific;ation represents a determination by the Division that the
activity, for which the federal permit or license is being required, is not expected to
result in a degradation of state surface water quality standards for Waters f the State.
Our review must determine whether a proposed project will remove or degrade the
Page 3' of 4
existing uses of surface waters. Through a thorough review of the project, our staff has
determined that significant existing uses are present ;r the waters as described in 1'5A
NCAC '2B .0222 and provided by 15A NCAC 2H .0506. The NC Division of Marine
Fisheries has objected to your project siting "significant adverse impacts" to important
fish habitat. I am hereby notifying you that this project, in the state that it is currently
proposed, would be in violation of 15A NCAC 2H.0506, and in accordance with 15A
NCAC 2H .0507(e), your application for a 401 Water Quality Certification will be
recommended for denial.
You may either provide the additional information as requested above or you may
modify your current application to move, reconfigure and/or redesign the impacts
labeled on the plans as northern (610 I;f.) and southern (570 l.f.) j'ett'es to minimize the
need for dredging, minimize impacts to SAV habitat and shallow soft bottom, improve
flushing characteristics and allow for fish migration, and minimize navigation hazard
posed fr7rn 600 Lf. structures.
Should you choose to modify. your project from its current proposal you must submit
modified plans to both Division of Water Quality and Division of Coastal Management.
Please contact Jonathan Nowell of DCM for modification procedures at 252-808-2808.
Required Response
Please submit your intentions in writing within 30 days of the receipt of this letter as to
your i-tentions to modify or not modify your permit application to Amy Adams,
Wet ands, Buffers, Sformwater, Compliance and Permitting (VgBSCP) Unit.
Unless we receive either your plan of action and a proposed time schedule to provide
additional information or your modified project application as requested above, we
will move toward denial of your application as submitted on July 18, 2011 per 15A
NCAC 2H .0506. We have placed this project on hold as incomplete until we receive
this information.
-)cerely,
For Cole,- n H'. S Ains
Page 4 of 4
Filename: 01-1519V2®Golington_3641 -NOideny/oa