20011836 Ver 3_CAMA Application_20120312

The Town of Holden Beach
Incorporated 1969
110 Rothschild Street
Holden Beach North Carolina 28462
Karen A Higgins
NCDENR DWQ
Wetlands Buffers Stormwater Compliance and Permitting
512 N Salisbury Street, Floor 9
Raleigh, NC 27604 1170
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
RE Town of Holden Beach — Dredge and Beach Fill
DWQ project 444-02+9— ID I — I la &in V.& 2&12
Dear Ms Higgins
Please find the additional information you requested in your February 29 2012 letter
Enclosed are
• Five (5) hard copies of the complete permit application including all associated maps
• A CD of the above materials in PDF format
• The application fee check
Please contact us if you need any additional information
avid Hew
Town Manager
Mayor J Alan Holden
Mayor Pro Tern Don Glander
Commissioners Sheila Young, Dennis Harrington Sandy Miller & Ray Lehr
Town Manager David W Hewett

AM/T
Y 1 I 1
P.O. BOX 20336
CHARLESTON, SC 29413 -0336
TEL: [phone]
FAX: 843 - 414 -0155
www.appliedtm.com
Ms. Holley Snider
NCDCM Wilmington Office
127 Cardinal Drive Ext.
Wilmington, NC 28405 -3845
RE: Permit Application Submittal
Holden Beach Nourishment Project
Dear Ms. Snider,
December 15, 2011
Enclosed please find the permit application for a proposed beach nourishment of the central
portion of Holden Beach utilizing an offshore borrow area. Applied Technology & Management,
Inc. (ATM) is submitting this application on behalf of the Town of Holden Beach.
The proposed nourishment project is designed to offset long -term erosion, protect upland
properties from storm damage, provide environmental restoration, and enhance the recreational
beach along approximately 4.2 miles of shoreline. Based on 10 years of monitoring of previous
nourishment projects, additional spreading benefits will also occur to adjacent shoreline reaches
as the project undergoes natural adjustment to local waves and water levels. A pre - application
agency scoping meeting was held in Wilmington, NC on August 10, 2010 for this project.
Note that this permit application is independent of the proposed terminal groin project on the
eastern end of Holden Beach. The two projects will not overlap in beach fill placement area,
have different borrow sources, have different purposes, and likely will occur on different
schedules /timing.
The enclosed application from and attachments describe the proposed project. Please do not
hesitate to contact me with any questions regarding this permit application.
Sincerely,
r`
v
Fran Way, P. E.
Enclosures:
PERMIT APPLICATION which includes:
• Application Fc
• Attachment A
• Attachment B
• Attachment C
• Attachment D
• Attachment E
• Attachment F
arms and Check
— Project Purpose and Description
— Permit Drawings
— Offshore Borrow Site Characterization
— Supporting Studies and Data
— Adjacent Property Owner Information
— Applicant's Letter of Authorization
Coastal, Environmental, Marine, and Water Resources Engineering

PERMIT APPLICATION
for
Central Reach Beach Nourishment
Project
Town of Holden Beach, NC
taro.
$ sta 119 \i
a
Z ft - NGVD29 -30 -20 -15 -12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12
Applicant:
Town of Holden Beach
PO Box 449
Supply, NC 28462
Prepared by:
Applied Technology and Management, Inc.
PO Box 20336
Charleston, SC 29413 -0336
December 15, 2011

Table of Contents
DCM Application Forms and Check
Attachment A Project Purpose and Description
Attachment B Permit Sheet Drawings
Attachment C Borrow Area Information and Sediment Compatibility
Attachment D Supporting Studies and Data
Attachment E Adjacent Property Owner Information
Attachment F Applicant's Letter of Authorization

Major Development Pormitiast revised 12127106)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name
Project Name (if applicable)
Town Of Holden Beach
Central Reach Beach Nourishment
Applicant 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Last Name
David
W
Hewett
Way
Applicant 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
Last Name
n/a
n/a
n/a
Phlegar
If additional applicants, please attach an additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
State
PO Box 449
449
Supply
Charleston
NC
ZIP
Country
Phone No.
FAX No.
28462
USA
910 - 842 -
6488 ext.
910 -
842 - 9315
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
843 414 1050
ZIP
110 Rothschild Street
Holden Beach
NC
28462 -
Email
State
ZIP
360 Concord Street, Suite 300
david.hewett @hbtownhall.com
Charleston
SC
2. Agent/Contractor Information
Business Name
Applied Technology & Management, Inc. (ATM)
Agent/ Contractor 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Fran
J
Way
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
Sam
-
Phlegar
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
PO Box 20336
20336
Charleston
SC
ZIP
Phone No. 1
Phone No. 2
29413
843 - 414 -1040
ext.
ext.
FAX No.
Contractor #
843 414 1050
n/a
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
ZIP
360 Concord Street, Suite 300
Charleston
SC
29401 -
Email
fway @appliedtm.com
<Form continues on back>
252 -808 -2808 cc 1- 888- 4RCOAST cc www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 2 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple)
Street Address
State Rd. #
Brunswick
781 Ocean Boulevard West to 240 Ocean Bouldevard East
1116
Subdivision Name
City
State
Zip
n/a
Holden Beach
NC
28462-
Phone No.
Lot No.(s) (if many, attach additional page with list)
910 - 842 - 6488 ext.
See Attachment E, , , ,
a. In which NC river basin is the project located?
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Lumber
Atlantic Ocean
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
®Natural ❑Manmade ❑Unknown
Atlantic Ocean
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
®Yes ❑No
work falls within.
n/a
4. Site Description
a. Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.)
b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
22,000 feet (entire island = 43,000 ft. of shoreline)
8,363,520 sq. ft. ( -192 acres) = beach fill footprint
c. Size of individual lot(s)
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
n /a, I I
NWL (normal water level)
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
varies 0 to +14 ft. NGVD ®NHW or ❑NWL
e. Vegetation on tract
None. Project will occur seaward of existing dune vegetation and does include a dune enhancement.
f. Man -made features and uses now on tract
Holden Beach Pier - recreation
g. Identify and describe the existing land uses adjacent to the proposed project site.
Oceanfront property owner uses include residential and commercial
h. How does local government zone the tract?
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
Residential /Multifamily /Commercial
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
®Yes ❑No ❑NA
j. Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? ❑Yes ®No
k. Hasa professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. ®Yes ❑No ❑NA
If yes, by whom? Offshore Borrow Area = T.A.R.(see
attachments C,D)
I. Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
National Register listed or eligible property?
<Form continues on next page>
252 -808 -2808 cc 1- 888- 4RCOAST cc www.nccoastalmanagement.net

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 3 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
m. (i) Are there wetlands on the site? ❑Yes ®No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? ❑Yes ®No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? ❑Yes ❑No
(Attach documentation, if available)
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
Centralized municipal wastewater facility, landward of project limits
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
Drinking water for the Town of Holden Beach is supplied by the Brunswick County water system
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
NC DOT and private stormwater systems exist. Curb and gutter systems, french drains, swales, underdrain systems.
5. Activities and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use?
❑Commercial ®Public /Government
❑ Private /Community
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
See project description in Attachment A
c. Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where it is to be stored.
See project description in Attachment A
d. List all development activities you propose.
See project description in Attachment A
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both?
Both (a component of ongoing beach
management plan)
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project?
192 ❑Sq.Ft or ®Acres
g. Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public accessway or other area
❑Yes ®No ❑NA
that the public has established use of?
h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
See project description in Attachment A
i. Will wastewater or stormwater be discharged into a wetland?
❑Yes ❑No ®NA
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water?
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA
j. Is there any mitigation proposed?
❑Yes ®No ❑NA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
<Form continues on back>
252 -808 -2808 cc 1- 888- 4RCOAST cc www.nccoastalmanagement.net

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 4 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
6. Additional Information
In addition to this completed application form, (MP -1) the following items below, if applicable, must be submitted in order for the application
package to be complete. Items (a) — (0 are always applicable to any major development application. Please consult the application
instruction booklet on how to properly prepare the required items below.
a. A project narrative.
b. An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross - sectional drawings) drawn to scale. Please give the present status of the
proposed project. Is any portion already complete? If previously authorized work, clearly indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish
between work completed and proposed.
c. A site or location map that is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
e. The appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DENR.
f. A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such
owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in
which to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
Name See Attachment E, list of adjacent oceanfront property owners. Return receipts will Phone No.
be provided at a later date
Address
Name: See Attachment E Phone No.
Address
Name: See Attachment E Phone No.
Address
g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, permittee, and issuing dates.
See Attachment A for more description. CAMA Permit No. 14 -02 (issued 2/1/02),
USACE Permits 200101101 (2/28/02), No. 200500935 (3/9/06) NCDWQ Permit No. 20011836 (2/02)
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization form, if applicable.
i. Wetland delineation, if necessary.
j. A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront and inlet areas. (Must be signed by property owner)
k. A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A 1 -10), if necessary. If the project involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
7. Certification and Permission to Enter on Land
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in the application.
The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to
enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow -up
monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date 12 -15 -2011
Print Name _Fran Way_
Signature � -e ^
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
®DCM MP -2 Excavation and Fill Information ❑DCM MP -5 Bridges and Culverts
❑DCM MP -3 Upland Development
❑DCM MP -4 Structures Information
252 -808 -2808 cc 1- 888- 4RCOAST cc www.nccoastalmanagement.ne

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 5 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
252 -808 -2808 cc 1- 888- 4RCOAST cc www.nccoastalmanagement.net

Form DCM MP -2
EXCAVATION and FILL
(Except for bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP -1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation and /or fill activities. All values should be given in feet.
1.
Access
❑This section not applicable
a.
Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in
b.
Other
Channel
Canal
Boat Basin
Boat Ramp
Rock Groin
Rock
(excluding
C.
(NLW or
d.
High - ground excavation in cubic yards.
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
Breakwater
shoreline
NWL)
number of square feet affected.
stabilization)
Length
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
22,000
Width
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
380
Avg. Existing
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-7 to +9.5
Depth
Holden Beach shoreline
22,000 ft alongshore, cross -shore width varies (250 -420 ft)
C.
(i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
d.
NGVD (fill)
Final Project
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-7 to +9.5
Depth
(i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands /marsh
f.
(i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
(CW) submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
NGVD (fill)
1.
EXCAVATION
❑This section not applicable
a.
Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in
b.
Type of material to be excavated.
cubic yards.
beach compatible sand
1,600,000 cy (beach fill placement + 20 %, see Attachment A)
C.
(i) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlands /marsh
d.
High - ground excavation in cubic yards.
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
n/a
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
Borrow area for beach nourishment (see Attachments A and C)
2.
DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL
El This section not applicable
a.
Location of disposal area.
b.
Dimensions of disposal area.
Holden Beach shoreline
22,000 ft alongshore, cross -shore width varies (250 -420 ft)
C.
(i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
d.
(i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
❑Yes ®No ❑NA
❑Yes ®No ❑NA
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.
(ii) If yes, where?
e.
(i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands /marsh
f.
(i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
(CW) submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
®Yes ❑No ❑NA
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
Approximately 140 acres below MHW
OWL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
Beach Nourishment (see Attachment A)
252 -808 -2808 :. 1- 888- 4RCOAST :. www.nccoastaimana-gement.net revised. 12126106

Form DCM MP -2 (Excavation and Fill, Page 2 of 3)
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION ®This section not applicable
(If development is a wood groin, use MP -4 — Structures)
a. Type of shoreline stabilization: b. Length:
❑Bulkhead ❑ Riprap ❑Breakwater /Sill ❑Other: n/a Width:
C. Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL: n/a d. Maximum distance waterward of NHW or NWL:
e. Type of stabilization material:
n/a
g. Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level
Bulkhead backfill Riprap
Breakwater/Sill Other
i. Source of fill material.
f. (i) Has there been shoreline erosion during preceding 12
months?
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, state amount of erosion and source of erosion amount
information.
h. Type of fill material.
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES El This section not applicable
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. (i) Will fill material be brought to the site? ®Yes ❑No ❑NA
If yes,
(ii) Amount of material to be placed in the water 1,000,000
cy (below MHW)
(iii) Dimensions of fill area 192 acres
(iv) Purpose of fill
To increase beach width and volume for shore protection
(see Attachment A for more description)
b. (i) Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands /marsh (CW),
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas:
Placement will only occur on beach and sandy nearshore
bottom
5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion b. What type of construction equipment will be used (e.g., dragline,
controlled? backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
Contractor shall employ temporary sand berms and dikes to control offshore hopper dredge; typical land -based (tracked and wheeled)
erosion and turbidity during active filling. equipment on land (dozers, loaders, etc.)
C. (i) Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project?
®Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
(ii) If yes, explain what type and how they will be implemented.
Dredging contractor will be required to meet USCG requirements
12 -15 -2011
Date
Holden Beach Central Reach Nourishment
Project Name
d. (i) Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project
site? ❑Yes ®No ❑ NA
(ii) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts.
Fran Way
licant Name
Applicant Signature
252 -808 - 2808.. 1- 888- 4RCOAST.. www.nccoastaimana-gement.net
revised. 12126106

Form DCM MP -2 (Excavation and Fill, Page 3 of 3)
252 -808 - 2808.. 1- 888- 4RCOAST.. www.nccoastaimanapement.net revised. 12126106

ATTACHMENT A
PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Attachment A
Town of Holden Beach Nourishment
Project Purpose and Description
Applicant: Town of Holden Beach
PO Box 449
Supply, NC 28462
Proposed Project: Holden Beach Nourishment
Waterway: Atlantic Ocean
Location: Holden Beach Shoreline Central Reach (22,000 ft of linear shoreline)
Lat. 33° 54.8516'
Long. 78° 16.0674'
Applied Technology & Management
PO Box 20336
Charleston, SC 29413 -0336
843/414 -1040
1. Project Purpose and Need
Holden Beach is a 9 -mile long transgressive barrier island located in Brunswick County,
North Carolina (ref. Permit Sheets 1 and 2), where long -term and episodic storm erosion
continually threatens the coastal environmental habitats, recreational beach, tourism,
and upland development on the island. Consequently, the Town of Holden Beach,
referred to herein as the "Town," has undertaken several beach nourishment projects to
protect and enhance its shoreline. All nourishment activities have proven valuable in
providing a healthy beach system as well as a storm buffer to reduce losses to
homeowners and the Town as well as State and Federal infrastructure. The Town plans
to continue this process to maintain its healthy beach and to minimize short and long-
term erosion effects, and has established a dedicated funding source (Beach
Preservation /Access & Recreation /Tourism [BPART] Fund) which includes funds for
beach management.
The purpose of the proposed project, which is a component of the Town of Holden
Beach's comprehensive beach management program, is to provide beach restoration
along eroding sections of shoreline sufficient to maintain the island's restored protective
and recreational beachfront and natural dune system.
2. Project Site History
There are essentially two reaches of beach that are historically nourished on Holden
Beach:
1) Central Reach (baseline Station 40 +00 west to Station 270 +00)

2) East End (Station 40 +00 east to Lockwoods Folly Inlet)
Figure 1 presents these two reaches with Holden Beach and USACE beach fill
placements since 2001. Since 2002, Holden Beach has performed beach nourishment
activities along the Central Reach under CAMA Permit No. 14 -02, NCDWQ Permit No.
20011836, and USACE Permits No. 200101101 and No. 200500935. The Town most
recently modified its existing permits in early 2009 to allow a FEMA- sponsored
nourishment to mitigate for Hurricane Hanna damages.
Over the last decade, the Town has not placed material on the East End beach (area of
highest historical erosion rates) and has relied on USACE shallow draft waterway
maintenance dredging projects for East End sand placement to help offset continued
erosion. It is noted that the Town's nourishment projects are completely funded by the
Town, from permitting through design, construction, and monitoring. The proposed
nourishment is located within the Central Reach and is independent of any activities
associated with Lockwoods Folly Inlet or Shallotte Inlet.
The USACE placed approximately 525,000 cy of material in early 2002 along portions of
the Central Reach as beneficial placement of dredged material from the deepening of
Wilmington Harbor (i.e., the "Section 933 Project "). The USACE also has plans for
future nourishments of the Central Reach via the Brunswick County Beaches 50 -yr
coastal storm damage reduction project. However, funding and other issues have
resulted in ongoing delays of the USACE 50 -yr project on Holden Beach. As a result, no
near -term USACE Central Reach nourishment projects are anticipated.
The general goal of the proposed project is to maintain a healthy, wide beach. At a
minimum, the goal of the Town's beach management plan is no net reduction in sand
volume; however, it is believed that a larger nourishment needs to occur to "get ahead"
of the background erosion and increase the current beach widths. The backbone of the
Town's nourishment activities since 2001 was the Federal Section 933 project
associated with the Wilmington Harbor deepening.
3. Project Description
The proposed activity involves a Town - funded beach fill and stabilization plan. The
proposed project will place approximately 1,310,000 cubic yards (cy) of beach quality
sediment, dredged from an offshore borrow source, along approximately 22,000 linear
feet (If) of shoreline between Ocean Boulevard East (OBE) 262 and Ocean Boulevard
West (OBW) 781 (ref. Permit Sheets 3 -15). These addresses coincide with Holden
Beach baseline monument Stations 40 +00 and 260 +00, respectively. Both addresses
and baseline stations are provided on permit drawings. The proposed borrow area
P

Legend
2001 ( -48 CY /ft) USACE
2002 ( -22 CY /ft) HB
t -- 2002 ( -32 CY /ft) USACE
E 2003 ( -4 CY /ft) HB
E -- 2004 ( -45 CY /ft) USACE
2004 ( -27 CY /ft) HB
c 2006 ( -24 CY /ft) USACE
2006 (-19 CY /ft) HB
E 2008 ( -34 CY /ft) HB
-- 2009 ( -40 CY /ft) USACE
2009 (-19 CY /ft) HB
2010 ( -40 CY /ft) USACE
2011 ( -15 CY /ft) USACE
m m m
O O O
ti ti ti
w N CO
O O .O_.
O O O
O O O
O O O
M N r
M
O
d
O
0
O
m
O
Q
O
0
m
�
O
N
r
O
�
O
O
O
+
N
r
m
.�.
M
M
M
ti
CO
O
O
O
O
O
O
O 0
O
O
C
0
O
C
+
O
0
0
0
0 +
M O
O
+
O
O
+
O
O
O
CO
ti
O M
. M...,
M
O
O
O
O
O
a'
00
e
00
w
m m m
O O O
ti ti ti
w N CO
O O .O_.
O O O
O O O
O O O
M N r
M
O
1
m m
m0
m0
Q
O
Lo O
O
M
M
N
O O
M
O
O
O
O
O
+
0
00 m
m
O
O
O
O
ti
CO
'�
CO
o0
o
O O
N
CJ
O
4 O
M
p0
0
"
O
O
O
O
O
O
a'
00
e
00
w
M
0
O
O +
+
0
0
+
N
N
o
0
p
O O
a a
00
o
0
N
°
N NO p O
2009�
?n08
2008-
0
00 °o
,
°o
00
00
1
Figure 1:
Holden Beach Nourishment Activity Since 2001. Note only USACE projects occur on "East -End"
(HB= Holden Beach)
2003
2001
.va.�
m m
m0
m0
Q
O
Lo O
O
M
M
N
O O
M
O
O
O
O
O
+
0
0
0
00 ti
V O
O
0
V
p
O
O
O
m
o0
m
p
Figure 1:
Holden Beach Nourishment Activity Since 2001. Note only USACE projects occur on "East -End"
(HB= Holden Beach)
2003
2001
.va.�
..m.
LU
W
W
W
m
o0
m
p
O
0 0
0
0
0
0
co
00
e
00
w
M
0
0
00 °o
°O
°o
00
00
0
0
0
O
C
O
M
0
O
M
N
$�
o
0
020-1
201.
r
-
0 2,500 5,000 10,000 Feet
I i i i i I i i i i I
IU
U 1 1 APPLIED TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT
RulkAR

extends from -1.8 to 3 miles offshore, southeast of Lockwoods Folly Inlet. More detailed
descriptions of the beach fill, borrow area, and construction methods are provided below.
3.1. Beach Fill
The beach nourishment design includes the placement of up to 1,310,000 cy of `in- place'
sand between Stations 40 +00 and 260 +00. Refer to Permit Sheets 3 -15 for fill
placement plan views. The fill placement density will average -70 cy /ft along the
eastern half of the project and -55 cy /ft along the western half. The Holden Beach pier
at Station 175 +00 represents the delineation of the eastern and western portions of the
project. Taken as a whole, the average fill placement density is -60 cy /ft along the
entire length of the project, including tapers. Tapers at each end of the main fill extend
along the last - 1,500 -2,000 ft of the project limits and are included to reduce the "bulge"
effect in the shoreline which can accelerate end losses.
The selected design includes a dune feature at elevation +9.5 ft NGVD29 to
repair /enhance existing dunes. The dune feature will be constructed seaward of the
existing dune scarp and feature a crest width of typically 25 ft (ref. Permit Sheet 16).
The dune construction is proposed to enhance the dune system in general as well as to
offset dune scarping from Hurricane Irene as well as other significant episodic storm
events that occur during elevated water levels. Figure 2 presents a photo of the typical
scarping following Hurricane Irene. Note that constructed dunes will not impact existing
dune vegetation and that vegetation sprigging of the constructed dune is planned.
lop, - --
Dune Sand and I' 77ff77
Vegetation
Loss
Figure 2: Typical Dune sand and vegetation loss (Station 150 +00).
/' c

The dune will transition at 1V:5H slope to a variable width beach berm at elevation +7 ft
NGVD29. Construction berm widths typically average between 140 and 190 ft. From
the seaward berm crest, a foreshore construction slope of 1V:15H extends seaward to
the intersection with the existing profile. Refer to Sheet 16 for typical beach fill cross-
sections.
Initial adjustment of the construction berm to conform to a more natural slope is
anticipated to occur over typically the first 6 -12 months following construction. After this
initial equilibration, the average increase in beach width is anticipated to vary from -70-
100 ft along the eastern half to -55 -75 ft along the western half of the project. Some
variation in equilibrated beach widths is expected. It is noted that the estimated
maximum fill placement quantity will be 1,310,000 cy, with final quantities to be
determined based on economics and need at the time of construction. The final required
fill volume, location, and distribution will be determined immediately prior to project
construction and be based upon immediate pre- construction beach condition surveys.
Final fill placement will be limited to the project limits proposed herein.
3.2. Borrow Area
A 590 acre offshore borrow area has been identified, located between -1.8 and 3 miles
offshore of the Long Beach section of Oak Island and to the southeast of Lockwoods
Folly Inlet (refer to Figure 3 and Sheet 17). Borrow area existing elevations range from -
33 to -39 ft NGVD29. Estimated volume yield of compatible beach sand for a cut depth
of 2 ft (minimum /conservative) is 1.9 million cubic yards (cy) and up to 3.3 million cy for a
3.5 ft cut depth. Given an orderly excavation sequence, the borrow area as delineated
could thus provide sufficent sand for 2 to 4 large ( >500,000 cy each) nourishment
projects. It is noted that quantities of borrow materials to be excavated will be typically
15 -25% larger than the "in place" beach fill quantity due to the overfill factor and losses
inherent to the hydraulic dredging and conveyance process.
Table 1: Estimated Borrow Area (BA) Volume Yield for Differina Dredge Cut Deaths
A shallow dredge cut is planned (less than 4 ft) due to the presence of compatible
materials in the upper layer, generally underlain by marginal material, then by unsuitable
materials (buried hardbottom and /or unacceptable percentages of silts and clays). Due
to this relatively shallow layering of suitable materials, borrow area location, and winter
weather conditions (i.e., dredging environmental window), an offshore hopper dredge will
P
Dredge Cut
Area
Depth
Volume
(Acres)
(ft)
(cy)
Notes
590
3.5
3,337,000
Maximum cut
2
1,907,000
Conservative , minimum cut
A shallow dredge cut is planned (less than 4 ft) due to the presence of compatible
materials in the upper layer, generally underlain by marginal material, then by unsuitable
materials (buried hardbottom and /or unacceptable percentages of silts and clays). Due
to this relatively shallow layering of suitable materials, borrow area location, and winter
weather conditions (i.e., dredging environmental window), an offshore hopper dredge will
P

be required and is well- suited to excavate the borrow materials. The proposed borrow
area is a typical size for an offshore borrow area where a shallow dredge cut is
proposed. A larger footprint allows the hopper equipment to operate in long "lanes" to
maximize production. Note that the USACE 2007 North Myrtle Beach borrow area was
approximately 730 acres, with dredge cuts as shallow as 1 -2 ft and also utilized a hopper
dredge.
Borrow area cross sections are provided on Sheets 18 -20.
Refer to Attachment C for more details on the borrow area and sediment compatibility.
Figure 3: Photo Taken during Seismic Data Collection to Show Approximate Distance from Shore
3.3. Construction Methods
Typical heavy marine construction equipment will be utilized for the project. Dredging
and beach fill initial placement will occur hydraulically via an offshore certified hopper
dredge. Once the hopper removes a load of sand from the borrow area, the dredge will
travel to a designated transfer station where the sand will be pumped through a
temporary pipeline to the beach fill area. Temporary sand berms /dikes, and various
piping techniques will be utilized to control the flow of sand, direct the slurry parallel to

shore, and minimize resulting turbidity in the nearshore zone. Heavy equipment
including tracked bulldozers, wheeled pipe moving trucks, etc. will be utilized at the
beach fill placement site to grade the beach fill to the construction template landward of
the mean high water line.
Beach nourishment is estimated to require -120 days. The project is anticipated to
occur in winter 2012/2013, however this may change based on future erosion and wave
activity.
4. Impact Summary
Refer to Application Form MP -1 and MP -2, for estimated impacts of construction fill
placement and borrow area excavation. No wetlands or submerged hardbottom
resources will be impacted by the project.
4.1. Natural Resources
The 2010 NC Coastal Habitat and Protection Plan (CHPP) presents a comprehensive
analysis related to potential impacts to natural resources related to beach nourishments
and offshore borrow areas (Deaton et al., 2010). In terms of borrow areas, the CHPP
sites two studies that found "that year to year variability in the benthic community, in
addition to multiple hurricanes during the monitoring period, made effects from the
project difficult to determine, suggesting that the effect of beach nourishment is minimal
compared to the natural variability of the system (Posey and Alphin 2001; Posey and
Alphin 2002) ".
The CHPP also states "Hopper dredges tend to have long shallow dredge cuts and
unimpacted ridges between cuts which facilitate recruitment into dredged areas while
pipeline dredges have deep cuts."
In terms of benthic recovery on the beach, the CHPP found that "the rate of reported
biological recovery on nourished intertidal beaches has varied from about one month to
one year, but in some cases longer." Holden Beach has an established
macroinvertebrate monitoring plan for ghost crabs, Donax clams, and mole crabs which
has typically shown insignificant differences between "project" and "control' transects.
The Town proposes to continue this monitoring plan for the proposed project.
The 2011 NC Beach and Inlet Management Plan (BIMP) identified seabeach amaranth,
piping plover, colonial waterbirds, loggerhead sea turtles, green sea turtles, West Indian
manatees as the primary protected species in the Region 1 area (which includes Holden
Beach).
M.

Sea Turtles
The loss of nesting beaches is a concern for sea turtle managers. Some studies have
found that beach nourishment has the potential to help threatened and endangered sea
turtle populations by providing increased or improved nesting habitat that would
otherwise be unavailable, especially in areas where beaches have eroded to the point
where little nesting habitat was available prior to the nourishment (Byrd 2002, Ernest and
Martin 1999).
Therefore, there will likely be a long -term benefit regarding available sea turtle nesting
habitat. However, construction activities related to the proposed project does have the
potential to harm sea turtles or interfere with their nesting activities. To manage these
potential impacts, the construction methodology will include measures to avoid or
minimize impacts to sea turtles and their nesting habits, and typical post- project
monitoring will be conducted.
Piping Plovers
Figure 4 presents the proposed project relative to US Fish and Wildlife Service
designated critical habitat for the piping plover. As seen in this figure, the western end of
Holden Beach is designated as critical habitat and is approximately 11,000 feet from the
proposed beach fill. The project also does not occur in DCM designated Inlet Hazard
Areas.
5. Project Longevity
The proposed project volume is similar in magnitude to the volume that has been placed
on Holden Beach in smaller, shorter projects over the last 10 years. Results of the
Town's ongoing monitoring plan indicate that the beach nourishment activities over the
past 10 years have been sufficient to offset background and storm erosion (including
both Tropical Storm Hanna and Hurricane Irene) to where the beach is generally in a
healthier condition currently than it was in 2000.
Monitoring data also shows that the beach fill placed along the central -east reaches of
the island have fed the beaches to the west portion of the island over time, via net littoral
transport. Given the monitored performance of the project and historical erosion rates,
the proposed project is anticipated to provide -7 -10 years of benefits in terms of
increased beach width compared with present conditions. It is noted that future wave
activity (from tropical storms, nor'easters, etc.) cannot be forecast and project longevity
is directly related to this. Additionally, the beach fill may not erode uniformly and
monitoring will be conducted to document project performance and any maintenance
needs.

CO m m m m > >> >>
CO co CO m CO > >> >0 0 0 0 0 0 1. OD 00 �U) ��0 0o a~o �0 1-
O oo N Q�
M p 0 0 p 0 0 0 O
t
p p 0 0 0 C p+ 0 p 0
O ° ++ O +0000,00)
t M N
O p O 0 0 � 0 p (De p O M M M
M
N O
�f
Legend
Proposed Beach Fill Template
Piping Plover Critical Habitat (2002)
DCM Inlet Hazard Areas
• Station Street Index
>>
00
�p N
00
O 0
00
t +
00
O ti
N �
O
>>
U) U)
O
p
00
00
00
W
N �
O
W
w w w w w
mm
mmm mmm
Tea m,mmm> > > >0O0 000p0000 °°
00 00 O 0 �� �ti ti tea) wN �r° ���
:D 0 0 ° 0 0 0 0 0 °+ ++ + O ++ 0 0 00
p O Ot C O 0 M N 00 . O ... 0...' . O nF
n CO M N N p.:., :...0 O O O O O
N
FIGURE 4
Proposed Holden Beach Fill Template in relation to piping plover and inlet hazard area (IHA) designations
GIS plover layer obtained from httpH:criticalhabitat.fws.gov, 2008 aerial from USGS, IHA layer from DCM
2,500 5,000 10,00
Feet
�u ffl�
APPED TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT
T

6. Long -term Monitoring
The Town of Holden Beach has two existing monitoring plans that it proposes to
continue for this project: 1) Beach Nourishment Monitoring Plan and 2)
Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Plan. Both these plans have been utilized for beach fill
related activities dating back to 2002 and establish a suitable baseline for any future
studies.
7. References
Byrd, J. 1. (2002). The Effect of Beach Nourishment on Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Caretta
caretta) nesting in South Carolina. (MS Thesis, College of Charleston).
Deaton, A.S., W.S. Chappell, K. Hart, J. O'Neal, B. Boutin. 2010. North Carolina Coastal
Habitat Protection Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources. Division of Marine Fisheries, NC. 639 pp.
Dean and Dalrymple. (2002). Coastal processes with engineering applications.
Cambridge University Press.
Ernest, R. G. and R. E. Martin. (1999). Martin County beach nourishment project sea
turtle monitoring and studies, 1997 annual report and final assessment.
Ecological Associates, Inc. pp. 93.
Moffatt & Nichol, 2011. NC Beach and Inlet Management Plan — Final Report. Prepared
for DCM. April, 2011.
National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (2008). Recovery
Plan for the Northwest Atlantic Population of the Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Caretta
caretta), Second Revision. National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD.
P

ATTACHMENT B
PERMIT SHEET DRAWINGS

-
goo
D w a n _
0 n _
o
onm
- m �
o
o
o ow
o
3
z
� O
W
IT
IT
c
m
(n O
Q
CD
'c =
r
O
nW
n
0 CID
�
0
D
C
K
m
z
Z O
z
O r
=•
D
IT
;u
N
CD
O
O .�.
�
N
N
�
W
_ - �
080
D
m
O A Z
r
z
� O
z O
IT
IT
c
m
m
z
m
c
O
z
o
K
D
C
K
m
m
W
A
IT
;u
N
O
W
�
N
N
�
W
C?
�
_ - �
080
D
m
O A Z
r
O�
O
z O
W = T
z
mnx
n =O
z
I r O
Oo
O
Z z
Z 7
N A W
D
�m0
O
:ATION A:A08- 1683 \17.0 CAD \02 \x \COS \DWG03.DWG
so \—TO U.S. 17 NORTH CAROLINA
�P (NOT TO SCALE)
-'--TO U.S. 17 �3�
1
N s�
P
Marsh
y� Cedar Grove Rd SW
------ HOLDEN
BEACH
n
Stanbvry Rd S
W
oN
OAS p
_ A
IN - RACOASTAL WATFq
Seashare Rd SW o6, e� \s Pt Y, _Q - - 0VHOPwaCAB ovHOPI,
�o
Ra h0 � - "r--�1 MOnt9omery Slouc
Fw�cgO _ _ ANK O can Blvd E �� �� 'Li -
r 1
�eaCh� Ocean Blvd W 3 2 ... .. O. `.. 10 1
_ _ ... -.
1 ;•
6, . 7 i 7 21 21 7
x' 22
;S�r101den 5 2
5
_— LIMITS 23 2
BFJ�CH NOURISHMENT z1�o 22
27 26 28
I- 24 2s 2a �o a z7 zs 1.8 MILES±
RW LW O
25 31 Mu (A) � `S -
RFG 26 97 ^ „ 31 29 WHIS 31rsh4� n FO/ /y
29
I ION Llny. 32 S Sh ee�o b S ski 3 i 1 3 S°m
see nor !�
29 S bk Sh 31 33 31 • 29 Y
! J j 32 31 — f
i 29 � � 29 . Ir �3y 32 2 �_ 33 /� 9 � � I 34
32 29
/ \ /LJ 34
33 34 37 �
33� 34 S Sh
33
33 !i 31�' Sh 31 A- _ _ 32 32 32 34 _3 ! 37
f \ S Sh 32 33 h3?/ OFFSHORE
3 32 \ 1 33 \\ 3 I ' / 34 / \P`/ BORROW
35 3a / A / 35 SITE
3..
A CHOR E OSIVFS ��
3 Fe
Sh 45� -
33 1. 'i /U { e n - 5
\ k t g 36` %
37
- 3 �, 36
�I S
35 / ; "� 3 / \ _38 3 NAUTICAL MILE LIMIT \ �� �'� A 3s �yao �C�v�� ���° �\ 40
0 7000 40
Scale in Feet

LOCATION A:\08- 1687\17.0 CAO\02\x\CDS\owc23.DWO
p o N 1 1 I
-
O O +
N O + + 0 I 11
?} O zo
N . , i D D p ON O v - O O } O
O } O O
0 + } p O O O -, O O } } 4.0 O O
} s} p p O
O°
I i
I i
I i
I � i
i
I SHT
HOLDEN + T SHT
BEACH SHT SHT SHT SjT S6T S5 4 3
SHT SH- 10 9
SHT SHT 4 S13 12
15
0 4000
Scale in Feet
ATLANTIC OCEAN
FOLLY EWOODT
USGS 2008 AERIAL I
n
- nn
o lo
D w o
_
o
- o
- m
o -
o
o ow
o
3
m
CID
0
(n 0
0
*a
U)
m
m
0 W
W
0v
m
�
0
Z
Z p
-n
r
(n
=T
Cn
CD
m
o
m
�•
D
z
z
IM
C
C
`o
W
IM m
z
m
o
z
C
K
K
m
m
IM
W
A
IM
A
N
O
,
o
N
N
O
N
w
_
W
�
_ D
O o O
O Z 0
IM O O
z --1 O
W = T Z
mnx
n =O z
= r O
o O
Z Z Z7
N A W D
m n O
LOCATION A:\08- 1687\17.0 CAO\02\x\CDS\owc23.DWO
p o N 1 1 I
-
O O +
N O + + 0 I 11
?} O zo
N . , i D D p ON O v - O O } O
O } O O
0 + } p O O O -, O O } } 4.0 O O
} s} p p O
O°
I i
I i
I i
I � i
i
I SHT
HOLDEN + T SHT
BEACH SHT SHT SHT SjT S6T S5 4 3
SHT SH- 10 9
SHT SHT 4 S13 12
15
0 4000
Scale in Feet
ATLANTIC OCEAN
FOLLY EWOODT
USGS 2008 AERIAL I

w So
D w a D _
S w
-
- m
o
o ow
o
u
W
(A O
m D
co
o -0
o m + r
M o D
0 o z
z cn <
z0 m
0 = D
�(n
03 +
CD cri
0 = o
1E 1 1
_ - -i
Or ° O
D
O AO Z
�_
z
� O
Z -1 O
Co-)- _
m
m
C
m
m
z
.
-13
n =O
z
C
O
Z
o
D
N A m
>
C
K
m
m
W
--C-D5 _ _
_
A
-7.7
-7.9
m
-
N
13.2
MCKIM & CREED, DATED MAY 2011
13.6
WO
W
N
N
�
W
-14,2
VEGETATION LINE
O
�
_ - -i
Or ° O
D
O AO Z
�_
f51
�j
n
Z -1 O
Co-)- _
= T
Z
m
mn x
.
-13
n =O
z
= r m
O
O
Z Z
Z 7
N A m
>
m n
O
OCATON A:\08- 1687\17.0 CAD\02\x\CDS\DWG05.Dwc
2
U
0
U
w
50 +00 (226 OVBE)
CCEANVi Ew BLVD - L
D E
0
W
D
Q
Y I
U
ttl
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL
LEGEND
r7-77-1 CONSTRUCTION
BERM AND DUNE
- - - - MEAN HIGH WATER
- - - MEAN LOW WATER
40 +00 (264 OVBE)
8.7
9.0
.2
2.1
0.3
-0.6 -
f51
�j
7.5
- 79
-1.1
-1
-1.7
Co-)- _
�g
_ 0.4
=2,5
-3.2
SEAWARD BERM CREST
.
-13
. -3.4
4
17
-1.8
5 -� s
SEAWARD TOE OF FILL
-5.6
_ -
-2.8
-7.1
- - -
-7.7
--C-D5 _ _
_
-4 :0
-4.7
-
-7.7
-7.9
1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
- -
8.7
9.0
7.2
-9.8q
.5
.8
. 19:9
1
N
1,1��
-10.5
4
17
_ 7 9.8
-10.9
-11.4
- - _ �.0
-LD
-11.8
- - -
. -12.4
NOTES
12.8
1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200
13.2
MCKIM & CREED, DATED MAY 2011
13.6
2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
13.9
3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
Scale in Feet
-14,2
VEGETATION LINE

- ��
o lo
D w o
o� _
_0
-
o -
o
o
r
z
W
z � O
� 2
m
m
cn o
*'
pq
m
D
=
cn
o co
rn�
o
D
+ r
M
0
cri D
O z
m
m
m
m
k1.6
G
z 0
m
0
D
_
N
(
w
3
W
nni
�'
o
�
W
O
�
Co
D
m
O Z
r
z
C O
z � O
m
m
C
m
m
z
n =O
:
C
O
Z
o
D
N A m
Tm0
D
C
K
m
m
m
m
k1.6
m
A
m
_
N
O
W
p
N
N
�
W
O
�
_ - �
080
D
m
O Z
r
O
O
z � O
m = T
Z
mnx
n =O
:
I r O
O
O
Z m
Z 7
N A m
Tm0
D
O
ArioN A:\08- 1687\17.0 cAO\oz\x\cos\owcos.owc
LEGEND
0
CONSTRUCTION
T"T ® BERM AND DUNE
MEAN HIGH WATER
- MEAN LOW WATER
70 +00 (148 OVBE)
JL-1_J
ocEaNViEw e�-vo E
60 +00 (184 OVBE)
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL
.. 1.,9 L
77
IF
-0.7
. - . . - -- -
- .
1.0
- .
k1.6
4182
-8'
. -62 - -
-8.3
--7.5
--8.2
_
SEAWARD BERM CREST
_8.9
. -8.1
-8.2
-8.0
-8.3
-8.0
-8.5
SEAWARD TOE OF FILL
_8.0
9.0
-8.1
9.4
-8.4
- .8
-8.8
-8,7
9.3
-9.7
9.7
-10,5
-- -- --
-10 - _
_ - -- -- -- --
N
-10.8
10.5° -11.4
e 11.3
e -12.0
11.8
- -12.4
12.2
. -1zs
k -12.7
K -13.2
. -13.3
• NOTES
-13.5
1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200
13,8
- MCKIM & CREED, DATED MAY 2011
12. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
-1,3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOI@ in Feet
- 45 -
- - - - - - - -
-15 VEGETATION LINE
15.1

D w a o _
om
o
oo -
-
u
o ow
� 2
(n O (n
m D
�= -4
M +'r
0 Cn z
z (A
z m
o = D
�� o
03
cri
O
_ D
Or ° 0
O AO Z �_
z -1 0 0
m = T Z
>00
o = O T
I r O 0
Z O Z Z
N A W D
�m0 O
Co
LocArioN v:\08- 1687\17.0 cvo\oz\x\cos\
owcozowc
pr - LEGEND
CONSTRUCTION
3 � o o ® BERM AND DUNE
- --
- MEAN HIGH WATER
o � ° - • • - • • - MEAN LOW WATER
0
80 +0-o( 114 OVBE) ocEANViEw ewo E
90 +00 (121 OVBW) LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL
- - - - -. 13.9..
11.
11. 10.7 - - - - -
10. - -
12. 11.6
7:
6.
..5 2
1.3
_ - 4
K_Q� 07 -- -- - - -
-o.a
1.a
-2.4
3.7
-4.5 3. j.5
k 6.1 y4.3
7.3 ` "J 5
x 5. /.4
-6.4
-7.9 6.7
k -8.0 . -7.4
-8.0
--7.8 -7.8
` -''g SEAWARD BERM CREST -7.8
-8.3 -7.8
--8.2 -8,1
K 8.7 . -8.1
SEAWARD TOE OF FILL -8.2
= -9.2
--9.6
L -10 . -15-2 -- __ -- --
- - - -11.0
N
-11.2
-1,.7
-12.4
-12.6
e -13.2
• -13s NOTES
. -1 4.2 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200 - - - - - MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
- -15 - _15.4 -2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
16.4 3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet 17.1
VEGETATION LINE
� O
O
m �
� m
m
C
Z D
O C
�
C �
� W
W
W _
A
m
�� N
_ A
O
W
N N
N
N W
W
O �
�
owcozowc
pr - LEGEND
CONSTRUCTION
3 � o o ® BERM AND DUNE
- --
- MEAN HIGH WATER
o � ° - • • - • • - MEAN LOW WATER
0
80 +0-o( 114 OVBE) ocEANViEw ewo E
90 +00 (121 OVBW) LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL
- - - - -. 13.9..
11.
11. 10.7 - - - - -
10. - -
12. 11.6
7:
6.
..5 2
1.3
_ - 4
K_Q� 07 -- -- - - -
-o.a
1.a
-2.4
3.7
-4.5 3. j.5
k 6.1 y4.3
7.3 ` "J 5
x 5. /.4
-6.4
-7.9 6.7
k -8.0 . -7.4
-8.0
--7.8 -7.8
` -''g SEAWARD BERM CREST -7.8
-8.3 -7.8
--8.2 -8,1
K 8.7 . -8.1
SEAWARD TOE OF FILL -8.2
= -9.2
--9.6
L -10 . -15-2 -- __ -- --
- - - -11.0
N
-11.2
-1,.7
-12.4
-12.6
e -13.2
• -13s NOTES
. -1 4.2 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200 - - - - - MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
- -15 - _15.4 -2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
16.4 3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet 17.1
VEGETATION LINE

s�
o lo
D w o _
0m
o
oo -
- �o
0
i
W
(n 2
(n Q cf)
D
(D
m
^� = co
l J O
o (D r
M cn D
0 ll^ zZ
C
V/ G
o D m
=T (n o
ao
M m o
0 0
_ D
O o O
O AO Z �_
z O O
m
mnx
o = :
= r O O
Z � Z Z7
N A W >
�m0 O
Co � O
m c m
m m z
o c
Z D �
C
K
LocArloN A:\08- 1687\17.0 cAD\oz\x\cos\
Dwcoa.Dwc 7.
IF IF
IF IF
71 8
� LEGEND
®CONSTRUCTION
BERM AND DUNE
g — - - — MEAN HIGH WATER
° 100 +00 (157 OVBW) - " — MEAN LOW WATER
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL
90 +00 (121 OVBW)
— — — 7 6
8
e -1.3 1
2
3
7
-6.2
-7.6
. -7.9
-z7
. -82 SEAWARD BERM CREST
a.o
8.1
x 8.1 8
R 8.
8.2
. as SEAWARD TOE OF FILL '-
R -9.0
10.5
k 11.1
NK -,2, -
. -1za -,
-12.9 -,
-13.7 -1
-14,2 NOTES 1
_ 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200 - ia�a— MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011 �
2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
" 15'9 3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet
16'4 VEGETATION LINE
m m
m
W _
A
m
_ A
O
W
O N
N
N W
W
O �
�
Dwcoa.Dwc 7.
IF IF
IF IF
71 8
� LEGEND
®CONSTRUCTION
BERM AND DUNE
g — - - — MEAN HIGH WATER
° 100 +00 (157 OVBW) - " — MEAN LOW WATER
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL
90 +00 (121 OVBW)
— — — 7 6
8
e -1.3 1
2
3
7
-6.2
-7.6
. -7.9
-z7
. -82 SEAWARD BERM CREST
a.o
8.1
x 8.1 8
R 8.
8.2
. as SEAWARD TOE OF FILL '-
R -9.0
10.5
k 11.1
NK -,2, -
. -1za -,
-12.9 -,
-13.7 -1
-14,2 NOTES 1
_ 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200 - ia�a— MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011 �
2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
" 15'9 3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet
16'4 VEGETATION LINE

D w o
o lo
0m =
o
_ o��
w 00
i
W l^
2 (n
(n O
* a D
= 0
co 00
o m + r
c M o D
0 O z
z cn
z m
o = D
= N
n 3 (3i
_ D
080
O AO Z �_
Z O O
m = T Z
mnx
n =O z
= r m O
Z o Z Z7
N A W >
m 0 O
N � I Z
Co
LocArloN A:\08- 1687\17.0 cAD\oz\x\cos\
Dwcoe.Dwc IF
LEGEND
® CONSTRUCTION
°r BERM AND DUNE
120 +00 (241 OVBW) MEAN HIGH WATER
- • • - • • - MEAN LOW WATER
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL 110 +00 (197 OVBW)
8
4. -
0.5
-1.3
J17
-3.5
=33.� -4.0
-4.1
-6.3
-7.4 -8.D
e -8.1 ` -8-1
% e., -7.9 SEAWARD BERM CREST . _,.9
8.0
x 7.9 x -g.0
fi 7.9 -7.9
8.0 R 8.4
SEAWARD TOE OF FILL
8.4 8.g
k 8.7 fi 9.2
R 9.6 -
- - K 10.2 -1 O -10.7
. -10.8 -11.3
^ -11.5 K -10.7
N - 12.1 ° -11.3
13.3
e -
e -11.8
fi -14.2
^ -12.1
. -,4J
= -,s.o NOTES
,s.s 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200 ,ss MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
-173 7 s 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet
VEGETATION LINE
. -17.9
� O
O
m �
� m
m
�
Z D
o �
�
C �
� W
W
W _
A
m
� N
_ A
O
W
J N
N �
�
O �
�
Dwcoe.Dwc IF
LEGEND
® CONSTRUCTION
°r BERM AND DUNE
120 +00 (241 OVBW) MEAN HIGH WATER
- • • - • • - MEAN LOW WATER
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL 110 +00 (197 OVBW)
8
4. -
0.5
-1.3
J17
-3.5
=33.� -4.0
-4.1
-6.3
-7.4 -8.D
e -8.1 ` -8-1
% e., -7.9 SEAWARD BERM CREST . _,.9
8.0
x 7.9 x -g.0
fi 7.9 -7.9
8.0 R 8.4
SEAWARD TOE OF FILL
8.4 8.g
k 8.7 fi 9.2
R 9.6 -
- - K 10.2 -1 O -10.7
. -10.8 -11.3
^ -11.5 K -10.7
N - 12.1 ° -11.3
13.3
e -
e -11.8
fi -14.2
^ -12.1
. -,4J
= -,s.o NOTES
,s.s 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200 ,ss MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
-173 7 s 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet
VEGETATION LINE
. -17.9

s�
o lo
D w o
om =
_
- o��
o
i
W
o
o
o ow
o
2 (q
(n O
� a D
m
� � N
W
O M - r
0 Cii z
rF = 1
z l^ /
z O m
O D
(n
03 +
O CD U1
0
_ D
Or ° O
O A Z r
z OHO n
m = T Z
mnx
o a: Z:
I r O O
Z 00 Z Z
N A Im D
�m0 O
N � I Z
_ �
� O
O
m �
� m
m
�
Z D
o �
�
C �
� W
W
W A
A
m
�� N
N W
O
W
p� N
N
N W
W
O �
�
.owc
LEGEND
w ®CONSTRUCTION
BERM AND DUNE
140 +00 (311 OVBW) 1 - - - - MEAN HIGH WATER
130 +00 (279 OVBW) MEAN LOW WATER
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL
11.2 - .9 L�l
7 1.3
- 0.5
. � -1.3
-2.B -2.9
-3.7 -3.8
= -4.7
-4
- �
4.63 -
-
-5.9 -7.9
. -8.2
-7.3
,-8.3
= -8.0
SEAWARD BERM CRE:TOE ` -'a
-7.6
7.3 . -7.9
7.7 e -8.0
8.3 SEAWARD OF FILL -8.4
.B
9.3
R 9.8
.- 0.6
N � . -1.7
119
. -1 .2
_ 4g - _NOTES
15.7 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
-
0 200 MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
. -16J 3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet
% -169 VEGETATION LINE

w So
D w a o _
0m
o
oo -
-
o ow
i
W
2 (q
(n O
� a D
m
o (D + r-
M (.n D
0 O z
z cn
z m
o = D
�� cri
0 3 W
CD
0 w
i.)1
_ 0 D
O o O �
O AO Z �_
z -1 0 0
03 = T Z
mnx
o a: z
I r O 0
Z 00 Z Z
N A Im D
m 0 O
Co
LocArloN A:\08- 1687\17.0 cAD\02\x\cos\0wcII
.0wc
LEGEND
J
o � CONSTRUCTION
m 0 ® BERM AND DUNE
MEAN HIGH WATER
J z
- • • — • • - MEAN LOW WATER
OCEANVIEW BLVD W --
150+00 (347 OVBW) 74DWARD LIMIT OF FILL
— _ 4
1 .3
— — 4 —
. -3.8
= -7.2
R -7.4
. -zs
SEAWARD
—7.7 BERM CREST
R -7.9
- .3
-E.6 SEAWARD TOE OF FILL
x 11.0
10.7
11.4
N . ,zfi
k 12.5
fi -13.1
. -14.a
- - -15 - _ _ " -146 NOTES
15-0 - -- _ _ _ 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200
-15.5 MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
16.0 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
16s 3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet 16
.9 VEGETATION LINE
� O
O
m �
� m
m
�
Z D
o �
�
C �
� W
W
W _
A
m
�� N
_ A
o _
W
(p N
N
N W
_
O �
�
.0wc
LEGEND
J
o � CONSTRUCTION
m 0 ® BERM AND DUNE
MEAN HIGH WATER
J z
- • • — • • - MEAN LOW WATER
OCEANVIEW BLVD W --
150+00 (347 OVBW) 74DWARD LIMIT OF FILL
— _ 4
1 .3
— — 4 —
. -3.8
= -7.2
R -7.4
. -zs
SEAWARD
—7.7 BERM CREST
R -7.9
- .3
-E.6 SEAWARD TOE OF FILL
x 11.0
10.7
11.4
N . ,zfi
k 12.5
fi -13.1
. -14.a
- - -15 - _ _ " -146 NOTES
15-0 - -- _ _ _ 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200
-15.5 MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
16.0 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
16s 3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet 16
.9 VEGETATION LINE

n
s�
o lo
D w oa _
� D
EF
o W
o� -
o
i
o
o ow
W l^
2 (n
(n O
� a D
m
= i)1
co 00
o m + r
C M w D
0 Cn z
s
z G
z �m
o = D
=T�
n 3 (3i
O
Co
Co m c
m m o D N A= o �
Z T O =
z c
C m
m W O
O a: O m � m A
D
0
O O
m x
o n =
I r OZ
A Im 0 m�_ O Z T O Z D O Z
LocArloN A:\08- 1687\17.0 cAD\oz\x\cos\DwcI
z.Dwc
LEGEND
Q ° 1 CONSTRUCTION
- � o ® BERM AND DUNE
MEAN HIGH WATER
�' - • • - • • - MEAN LOW WATER
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
170 +00 (427 OVBW) LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL 160 +00 (385 OVBW)
1.5
x 14.3 4.9
v�
1.4
0.6
- - - - 0.2
- -2
-2.4 -3.9
-3.0 -3.8
--3.4 -4.0
-4.4 -44Lb
5.8 - - -
-6.4 - - 5:6 -
6.5
R 5.9
-7.3 R 6.8
% -7.4 SEAWARD BERM CREST ' T3
HOLDEN BEACH -7.8 7.3
FISHING PIER ° -8'1 . -7.7
-8.2
_8.9 SEAWARD TOE OF FILL -8.4
-9.3
_ fi 9.9 fi 9.2
1 0
10.9 -
11.4 . -1 15
- 10.6 --11.0
-11.2 . -12.5
Nx -11.7 -1 30
fi -12.3 -13.6
12.8 -14.0
k 13.6 x -14.6
R 14.0
14s -NOTES
1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
� MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
0 200 -,s.s 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet
`16'S VEGETATION LINE
N W
W
O �
�
z.Dwc
LEGEND
Q ° 1 CONSTRUCTION
- � o ® BERM AND DUNE
MEAN HIGH WATER
�' - • • - • • - MEAN LOW WATER
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
170 +00 (427 OVBW) LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL 160 +00 (385 OVBW)
1.5
x 14.3 4.9
v�
1.4
0.6
- - - - 0.2
- -2
-2.4 -3.9
-3.0 -3.8
--3.4 -4.0
-4.4 -44Lb
5.8 - - -
-6.4 - - 5:6 -
6.5
R 5.9
-7.3 R 6.8
% -7.4 SEAWARD BERM CREST ' T3
HOLDEN BEACH -7.8 7.3
FISHING PIER ° -8'1 . -7.7
-8.2
_8.9 SEAWARD TOE OF FILL -8.4
-9.3
_ fi 9.9 fi 9.2
1 0
10.9 -
11.4 . -1 15
- 10.6 --11.0
-11.2 . -12.5
Nx -11.7 -1 30
fi -12.3 -13.6
12.8 -14.0
k 13.6 x -14.6
R 14.0
14s -NOTES
1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
� MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
0 200 -,s.s 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet
`16'S VEGETATION LINE

s�
o lo
D w oa _
� D
oo� W
-
-
o
o ow
o
i
W
_ cn
(n 0
D
C7 CD
co (r -0
M +'r
0 o z
z (n
z m
o = D
N
CD +
CD O w
0
_ D
O o O
O AO Z �_
Z -1 O n
m = T Z
mnx
n =O z
I r O O
Z 00 Z Z
N A Im D
gym( O
N � I Z
Co
LocArloN A:\08- 1687\17.0 cAO\02\x\cos\owcI
3.owc
LEGEND
o ®CONSTRUCTION
BERM AND DUNE
MEAN HIGH WATER
� - • • - • • - MEAN LOW WATER
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL 180 +00 (457 OVBW)
.10.3 _- - -
8.3 8.5
3 .6
2.8
-3.5 3.1
-3.9 3.7
-3.2
- - _ %5519
R -6.9
6.3
-7.7
K 7.1
x 7.a SEAWARD BERM CREST 71
.
7.2
R 7.9
r 7.2
R 8.0
., -zr:4
" -a 3 SEAWARD TOE OF FILL
R -8.6
. _7agi
^ -9.0
K Bd?7
-9.6
-10.2
-10.7 -- -10 - -- -- -- --
-11.4
fi -10.3
_ �8 k -11.4
N= -13.7 ^ -11.8
-12.3
-14.3
-12.7
-143 -
. -16.0
. -16.5 NOTES
,_166 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200 " -171 MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
R -n e 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet
17.e VEGETATION LINE
= -18.0
� O
O
m �
� m
m
�
Z D
o �
�
C �
� W
W
W _
A
m
� N
_ A
O
W
� N
N W
W
O �
�
3.owc
LEGEND
o ®CONSTRUCTION
BERM AND DUNE
MEAN HIGH WATER
� - • • - • • - MEAN LOW WATER
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL 180 +00 (457 OVBW)
.10.3 _- - -
8.3 8.5
3 .6
2.8
-3.5 3.1
-3.9 3.7
-3.2
- - _ %5519
R -6.9
6.3
-7.7
K 7.1
x 7.a SEAWARD BERM CREST 71
.
7.2
R 7.9
r 7.2
R 8.0
., -zr:4
" -a 3 SEAWARD TOE OF FILL
R -8.6
. _7agi
^ -9.0
K Bd?7
-9.6
-10.2
-10.7 -- -10 - -- -- -- --
-11.4
fi -10.3
_ �8 k -11.4
N= -13.7 ^ -11.8
-12.3
-14.3
-12.7
-143 -
. -16.0
. -16.5 NOTES
,_166 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200 " -171 MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
R -n e 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet
17.e VEGETATION LINE
= -18.0

s�
o lo
o
D w n
om
o�� -
-
00 w
i
W
2 (n
cn o
� a D
�0
=
W
N �
o m + r
M w D
0 O z
z cn
z m
O D
=T 0
0 3 co
+
O C)
_ D
0 o O
O AO Z �_
Z -1 0 0
m = T Z
mnx
n = T
= r O 0
Z o Z Z7
N A Im D
gym( O
_ �
� O
O
m �
� m
m
C
Z D
O C
�
C �
� W
W
W _
A
m
_ A
O
W
_ O
N W
W
O �
�
4.Dwc
LEGEND
0 0
o w
a CONSTRUCTION
BERM AND DUNE
o � `o MEAN HIGH WATER
Q � — • • — • • — MEAN LOW WATER
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL 200 +00 (545 OVBW)
o.
-4.1
9 . _4.8
.5 � . -5.2�
0 � 5.4
.5
X46
423 1
7.4
7.8 6.9.4
8.0 SEAWARD BERM CREST
R -7.3
,
-7.5
0 . -7.6
SEAWARD TOE OF FILL x_7.6
5 R -7.8
. -8.1
4
—8,6
fi 1 -49,6 —
0.0
e -10.8
N—11.5
k -11.8
e -12.3
2 -13.1
2 -13.7 - — — —
_ _ ,_138 NOTES
. -14.3 _ —1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200 MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet
.159 VEGETATION LINE
R 16.5

D w oa D _
o ow
i
W
_ cf)
(A O
* a D
O N
= O
M rn r
0 O z
z C /
z O m
O D
(n N
0 3
CD t
O 0
_ m
C
m
m m z C
C K m m
W A
m N W O � W
D
OO O
O O
m x
o n a: �_ n Z O Z D O Z Z
:
I r
0Z
A Im 0 m--I I
LocArloN A:\08- 1687\17.0 cAO\oz\x\cos\owcI
a.owc
- LEGEND
®CONSTRUCTION
BERM AND DUNE
220 +00 (672 OVBW) - - - - MEAN HIGH WATER
- • • - • • - MEAN LOW WATER
L-
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
210 +00 (585 OVBW)
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL
11s _
1s 10
- - .9 8,7
9
- - 8
0 0.
x
2140 �►"�"" . .
= -2.8
x -3.s
-F
-7.0 --7,4
-7.9 SEAWARD BERM CREST . -7.8
-8.0 R -8.0
x -7.7 -8.0
ARD TOE OF FILL as
R -7.8 SEAW
8.9
9.4
R g9Z0 9.8
=io.i K_ nb1.2
-11.0
N .%1.7
-11.5
- 3.2
K -1
13.6
2.1
. -ize -14.0
< -13.4 fi -14.6
" -14.0 NOTES
_ _ _ - ' -'4.4 C-15 - - 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200 MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
= -15s 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
. -15.9 3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet
-1s.3 VEGETATION LINE
W N
N
W
O �
�
a.owc
- LEGEND
®CONSTRUCTION
BERM AND DUNE
220 +00 (672 OVBW) - - - - MEAN HIGH WATER
- • • - • • - MEAN LOW WATER
L-
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
210 +00 (585 OVBW)
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL
11s _
1s 10
- - .9 8,7
9
- - 8
0 0.
x
2140 �►"�"" . .
= -2.8
x -3.s
-F
-7.0 --7,4
-7.9 SEAWARD BERM CREST . -7.8
-8.0 R -8.0
x -7.7 -8.0
ARD TOE OF FILL as
R -7.8 SEAW
8.9
9.4
R g9Z0 9.8
=io.i K_ nb1.2
-11.0
N .%1.7
-11.5
- 3.2
K -1
13.6
2.1
. -ize -14.0
< -13.4 fi -14.6
" -14.0 NOTES
_ _ _ - ' -'4.4 C-15 - - 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200 MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
= -15s 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
. -15.9 3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet
-1s.3 VEGETATION LINE

w So
D w a o _
0
o
oo -
-
o ow
i
W
2 (q
cn o
* a D
CD N
� � N
co
v
o M - r
0 o z
z C /
z o m
o D
CD +
CD 0O
,�. O
_ D
0 o O
O AO Z �_
Z O n
m = T Z
mnx
n =O :
= r m O
Z o Z Z7
N A Im D
�m0 O
N � I Z
Co
LocArloN A:\08- 1687\17.0 cAD\02\x\cos\Dwc16
.Dwc
-p LEGEND
®CONSTRUCTION
BERM AND DUNE
� - - - - MEAN HIGH WATER
230 +00 (667 OVBW) - •• - ••- MEAN LOW WATER
240 +00 (705 OVBW)
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL
12,7
0
8 .1
'7 1.5
a 2
-1.3
-za
-3.3
-3.9
- -46
- - -5,5
-7.0 " 7.8
-6.6 -7.B
-7,5 SEAWARD BERM CREST -7.9
-7.8 --8'o
" -7.7 -8.0
" za " -az
" e.1 SEAWARD TOE OF FILL " -a4
8.4 . -8.8
-9.0 " -9.7
-10 - - -10.6
-9.8 - -
_
- - -10.2 - -11.7
10.8
N = -12.4
" 112 " -12.9
" -12.0
x -13.2
"- 2.7
x -13.9
" -13.0 x 14.4
2 13.6
NOTES
. 140 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
-14.4 -
- - MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
0 200 - - - -1 5-o-- - - 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
° -154 3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet
" -159 VEGETATION LINE
� O
O
m �
� m
m
�
Z D
o �
�
C �
� W
W
W _
A
m
� N
_ A
o _
W
_ o
N W
_
O �
�
.Dwc
-p LEGEND
®CONSTRUCTION
BERM AND DUNE
� - - - - MEAN HIGH WATER
230 +00 (667 OVBW) - •• - ••- MEAN LOW WATER
240 +00 (705 OVBW)
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL
12,7
0
8 .1
'7 1.5
a 2
-1.3
-za
-3.3
-3.9
- -46
- - -5,5
-7.0 " 7.8
-6.6 -7.B
-7,5 SEAWARD BERM CREST -7.9
-7.8 --8'o
" -7.7 -8.0
" za " -az
" e.1 SEAWARD TOE OF FILL " -a4
8.4 . -8.8
-9.0 " -9.7
-10 - - -10.6
-9.8 - -
_
- - -10.2 - -11.7
10.8
N = -12.4
" 112 " -12.9
" -12.0
x -13.2
"- 2.7
x -13.9
" -13.0 x 14.4
2 13.6
NOTES
. 140 1. HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
-14.4 -
- - MCKIM &CREED, DATED MAY 2011
0 200 - - - -1 5-o-- - - 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
° -154 3. HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
SCOT@ ICl Feet
" -159 VEGETATION LINE

w So
D w a o _
0
o
oo -
-
i
W
2 (q
cn o
* a D
CD N
o m + r
c M o D
0 o z
rF = 1
G
z o m
o D
N
0 3 O
CD +
CD
0 0
0
II E 1 II
_ - -i
O o O
D
O A Z
r
z
� O
zO�O
m
m
C
m
m
z
(D =
T
C
O
Z
o
D
N A Im
D
C
03
m
m
m
m
A
m03
m
_
N
O
W
_
N
N
W
O
�
_ - -i
O o O
D
O A Z
r
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL
O
zO�O
mnm x
(D =
T
= r O
o
O
Z Z
Z7
N A Im
D
gym(
N � I
O
Z
)CATION A:\08-1687\17.0 CAD\02\x\CDS\DWC17.DWO
260 +00 (785 OVBW)j
OCEANVIEW BLVD W
1250 +00 (745 OVBW)l
LEGEND
®CONSTRUCTION
BERM AND DUNE
- - - - MEAN HIGH WATER
- - - MEAN LOW WATER
LANDWARD LIMIT OF FILL
8.6
8.1
10 -
6
.7
8.
8.6
- - - -
_
- - -
-0 -
8.7
4"5
- -
17
0.4 -
-0.5
- -
- - - - - - -
0
- - - - -1 -
-
-0.2 -
-
-1.3
-17. -..
-.
-2.1
_M
-2.a
ISEAWARD BERM CREST
-2.9
3302
-3.2
_
-3.7
- -
=-4.
R
-4.3
-5.5 5
- -
��-
- - - -
- -
-4 3 - -
-5.6 6"0
- -
5�3
fi
6752
-7.5
-7.9
-8.0
-7.9
-7.6
ISEAWARD TOE OF FILL
.
-77
-7.8
-7.9
-7.8
-8.2
-7.7
_
-8.5
-8.9
-9.6
-
N
�
-11,9
-12.3
" -,2.3
x -13.5
-14.2
-
-
- -
- -NOTES
- -
15.9
1.
HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED BY
0 200
- -
' 6.9
MCKIM & CREED, DATED MAY 2011
-
-17.8
2.
ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NGVD 29 FEET
3.
HOLDEN BEACH HAS NO STATIC
Scale in Feet
-ias
VEGETATION LINE

o
D w a o _
om
o
- oo
- o 00
3
W
T
2
w 0
CD
a
�� mm
0 mD D O
= W r
m m
Z
Z o D n G
=. =m
�� m�
03 F
M m r
o p
Iv 1
_ - �
O o O
D
o
�_
O
Z � O
m
m
C
m
m
z
n =O
:
C
O
z
o
NAm
K
m
m
W
A
m
N
O
W
_
O
N
W
O
�
_ - �
O o O
D
O AO Z
�_
O
Z � O
= T
Z
m
mn x
n =O
:
= r m
o
O
Z Z
Z7
NAm
m n
O
OCATON A:\08- 1687\17.0 CAO\oz\x\cos\owczz.owc
20
15
.. 10
z 5
z
z 0
0
Q
� —5
W —10
—15
—20
O
O
O
20
15
.. 10
O
5
Z
z 0
0
Q
� —5
W —10
—15
—20
O
O
HORIZONTAL
o 200
Scale in Feet
STA 90 +0 PROFILE
DUNE CREST ELEVATION 9.5' (25.0' WIDE TYP)
/ 5:1 (H:V) CONSTRUCTION SLOPE (TYP)
BERM ELEVATION 7.0' (140' -190' WIDE TYP)
\ 15:1 (H:V) CONSTRUCTION SLOPE (TYP)
\
BEACH FILL ~
CONSTRUCTION
TEMPLATE
LEGEND
— — — — EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
MHW +2.7' NGVD
MLW -2.0' NGVD
O O O O O O O O O O O
N P7 'd- Lr) O r- 00 O O
CROSS SHORE DISTANCE (FEET)
STA 200 +00 PROFILE
BERM ELEVATION 9.5' (25.0' WIDE TYP)
5:1 (H:V) CONSTRUCTION SLOPE (TYP)
BERM ELEVATION 7.0' (140' -190' WIDE TYP)
15:1 (H:V) CONSTRUCTION SLOPE (TYP)
BEACH FILL \
CONSTRUCTION
TEMPLATE
O
C14 r1t) O 0
VERTICAL
o 20
Scale in Feet
MHW +2.7' NGVD
MLW -2.0' NGVD
O O O
In c0 O- 00 O O
CROSS SHORE DISTANCE (FEET)

n
nn
> w o n
o
0 v _
_ o��
- 0
o ow
W
D
2
cn O
n
:E 5:
CD
-n
co
O r-
0
c M CD
m D
m
z
O G
z
m
o C
=.
O
N
o
NAm
CC
MCCD
m
m
m
>y
_ — �
O o O
D
O A Z
r
z
� O
z0O
m
m
C
m
m
z
o a� {q
q
o =
T
C
O
z
o
NAm
18 mao
C
K
m
m
W
A
m
N
HB
-09
o
W_
J
N
N
_
W
O
�
_ — �
O o O
D
O A Z
r
O
z0O
= m
z
m
mn x
O
o a� {q
q
o =
T
= r O
o
O
Z Z
Z7
NAm
18 mao
�m0
O
CCATioN A:\08- 1687\17.0 CAO\02\x\COS\owc18.owc
{� CBA -10 {� CBA -11
LOCKWOOD FOLLY INLET TIDAL DATUMS
2.7' MEAN HIGH WATER o
1.0' NAVD 88HB-05
0.5' MEAN SEA LEVEL N51000 N510ootw
0.0' NGVD 29 Q o 0 0� o
-2.0' MEAN LOW WATER o d ° ° aoa
� a
.o 0
NOTES:
1. ALL ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED
a
°
NGVD 29, FEET
2. HORIZONTAL COORDINATES ARE NC
GRID (NAD83)
° h
BCB- 03 —V -66 �� CBA -16
o a� {q
q
HB -07
Q �° o{ BCB- 03 —V -64
°�
A BCB-
a
03 —V -65
O
18 mao
o
d 1 HB -08
HB
-09
N4900T
HB -12
�° i o� °�•Q— Q HB
-11 -07
HB -11
-02
O q a
0
0
19 a° e o HB -11
°� °�
0
N48o oa Iw
°° BCB-
P
° Q Qoe
03 -V -83A
o
HB -10
�-
a
+
HB -11 -09
:Q a
CBA -21A
0
o
CBA -23
=J
a °ov doo o a'Q ° 35 HB
° HB -14
-11 -06
-
o HB -11 -03
o
O
HB -13
C�
HB -15
N47000
20
..
a °�
a
�d
Q a
°
FHB
°g -1108
HB -1 1 -04
S
4
Q
13CB- 03
-V -38
HB -18 a
-37
HB -1
b° 0
n
HB -11 -05
00
°
N45000 w
rb TEO -1 T
0... ) n
0
r
o °
N45000 w
T
0 1000
,
n,
Scale in Feet

w So
D w a o _
0m
o
oo -
-
3
W
cn 0
CD Co
� a
= O
o Co ;a O
0 O F
`< z m
z 0 C) G
�N D
n s
M m
o p
II v 1 II
z
D
`o
�_
O
C
z�O
m
m
C
m
m
z
n =O
:
C
O
Z
o
D
N A m
D
C
03
m
m
m
m
A
m03
m
_
N
o
W
_
�
N
N
_
�
o
_ — �
080
D
O Z
�_
O
O
z�O
mnx
n =O
:
= r m
o
O
Z Z
Z7
N A m
D
m 0
O
OcATON A:\08- 1687\17.0 CAO\02\x\cos\owc1e.owc
LEGEND
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
—25
—25
v —30
—30
v
o —35
—
—
—
_ _
—
— _ _
—
—
—35
o
�a —40
—40
�a
—45
—45
O
000000000
0O
0
O
O
O
N
n
14-
Lr)
(0
Il-
00
0)
O
3.5' PROPOSED DREDGE DEPTH (TYP)
—25
—25
v —30
—30 v
o —35
—
— —
-
- --
—
—
— —
—
-
-�
—
—
—
—35 0
�a —40
—40 �a
L—45
—45 Ld
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
U')
(C)
I-
00
O
O
_
N
r4)
�
U')
(0
I-
00
O
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
po
—25
—25
v —30
—30
v
—35
— —
— —
—
- -
- --
—
— —
—35
0
o
a —40
—40
a
—45
—45
Ld
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
n
�
Lo
c0
I-
0O
0)
O
N
r7
-
HORIZONTAL
VERTICAL
o
250
o
25
Scale in
Feet
Scale in
Feet

w So
D w a o _
0m
o
o�^ -
-
3
W
cn o
* a
CD
O
o m0 � O
`<z �m
z CMG
o C m
�(n
n� W
M m
o p
II v 1 II
z
D
`o
r
O
C
z � O
IM
IM
C
m
m
z
n =O
z
C
O
Z
o
D
K
D
C
K
m
W
m
W
A
IM
;u
_
N
o
W
_
�
N
N
�
o
_ — �
080
D
O Z
r
O
O
z � O
m=
z
mnx
n =O
z
I r O
Oo
O
Z Z
Z 7
N A W
D
frail 0
O
)CATION A:\08- 1687\17.0 CAO\oz\x\cos\DWGZO.DWO
LEGEND
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
-25
-25
D
-30
-30 v
Z
-35
—
—
—
- -
--
—
— —
- -
- -
--
—
— -35 0
Z
-40
-40 Q
-45
-45
°°°°°°°°°°°
o O O
°o o °o 0
o
O O
O —
O O
N n
O O O O O O
14- 1.0 c0 I- 00 O O 0
3.5' PROPOSED DREDGE
DEPTH (NP)
-25
-25
D
-30
-30
Z
Z
-35
-
—
—
—
—
- -
- -
--
—
—
—
—
—
-35
0
—
—
—
-
- -
--
Z
-40
-40
Q
-45
-45
uj
O O O
O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O
O O O
O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O
I- CO 0)
O
_ N n -q- Lo (o r- 0 0 m O
_ N n �
to co
N N
N N N N N N N N 1'7 1'7 1'7 1'7 1'7
P7 P7
-25
-25
D
-30
-30 v
Z
-35
—
- -_
—
—
—
- - - --
-35 0
—
—
—,—
_
Z
-40
-40 Q
-45
-45
ui
O O
O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O
O O
O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O
c0 I-
CO rn
O
N n � to ED I- 00 m O
N
n
HORIZONTAL
VERTICAL
o
250
o
25
Scale in Feet
Scale in Feet

w So
D w a o _
0m
o
o�^ -
-
3
W
cn o
CD Co
� a
= O
o m3 ;a ;00
0 O F
`< z m
z o C) G
�N n
03 m
o p
II v I II
z
D
`o
r
IM O
C
z � O
IM
IM
C
m
m
z
n =O
:
C
O
Z
o
D
K
D
C
K
m
W
m
W
Z —35
A
IM
;u
_
N
— —
—
—
0
W
N
O
N
N
W
—
o
—
_ — �
080
D
O Z
r
IM O
O
z � O
W = T
Z
mnx
n =O
:
I r O
Oo
O
Z Z
Z
N A W
D
frail 0
O
)CATION A:\08- 1687\17.0 CAO\02\x\cos\owc21.DWO
LEGEND
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
—30
—30
Z —35
-
—
— —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—35 Z
o —40
—40 0
Q —45
—45 Q
—50 —50
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
O — N I'7 � U-) co I- 00 O O — N 17 Lo cD I- 00 CY)
3.5' PROPOSED DREDGE DEPTH (TYP)
—30
—30
Z —35
—
—
—
- -
- -
--
—
—
—
—
—35 v
o —40
- -
- -
--
—
—
—
—40 0
Q —45
—45 Q
L
—50 —50
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0
O O O O O o O 0 O 0 0 0 O O O o O 0 O
m O 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N n n n n n n n n n
—30
—30
Z —35
—
—
—
—
—
— -
—35 v
o —40
—
- --
—
—
—
--
—40 0
Q —45
—45 Q
Ed —50 —50
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0
0 O O O O0 O 0 O O O 0 O
0 � co 0 �
� 0)
HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
o 250 o 25
Scale in Feet Scale in Feet

ATTACHMENT C
BORROW AREA INFORMATION AND
SEDIMENT COMPATIBILITY

Attachment C
Additional Information on the Offshore Borrow Area and Sediment
Criteria Compatibility
1. Data Collection
The Town of Holden Beach completed several offshore data collection events in order to identify
potential beach compatible sand borrow sources as presented in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Borrow Area Data Collection and Analysis Studies
The above data collection studies built on prior reconniassance level surveys by the USACE
Wilmington District, USGS, and others as described in the Holden Beach Beach Management
Planning and Borrow Area Investigation (ATM, 2009). Copies of the pertinent reports (b)
through (d) above are provided in Attachment D of this permit application package. Other
studies /data can be provided upon request (see references at the end of this attachment).
C -1
Event
Date
Description /Notes
Report
Reconnaissance
4 areas targeted in over
Offshore Seismic
a.
Seismic Survey
Jan 2010
1,600 ac of offshore
Survey Study, April
bottom
2010
Offshore Vibracore
b.
Vibracores Phase I
Oct -Nov 2010
19 vibracores collected
Analysis, ATM Inc.
January 2011
Magnetometer; side
scan and multibeam
Remote Sensing and
bathymetry survey;
Offshore Borrow Area
c.
Borrow Area
May -Jun 2011
additional sub - bottom
Investigation Phase
Refinement Survey
survey of 125 ac buffer
II, July 2011
area in primary borrow
area
Geotechnical
Investigation for the
d.
Vibracores Phase II
Aug 2011
11 vibracores collected
Town of Holden
Beach, Phase II.
Athena Technologies,
Inc. October 2011
The above data collection studies built on prior reconniassance level surveys by the USACE
Wilmington District, USGS, and others as described in the Holden Beach Beach Management
Planning and Borrow Area Investigation (ATM, 2009). Copies of the pertinent reports (b)
through (d) above are provided in Attachment D of this permit application package. Other
studies /data can be provided upon request (see references at the end of this attachment).
C -1

2. Sediment Criteria Requirements for Offshore Borrow Areas
In general, all of the data collected complies with DCM's 2008 sediment criteria standards (15A
NCAC 07H.0312 Technical Standards For Beach Fill Projects). Supporting data and analysis is
summarized below and in Attachment D.
3. Natural and Cultural Resources Considerations
During the 2011 Offshore Borrow Area Investigation Phase II, an evaluation of potential
hardbottom and submerged arcaheological resources was undertaken. Side -scan sonar, multi -
beam bathymetry, and sub - bottom data were collected and analyzed. Additionally, a marine
archaeological study was performed by Tidewater Atlantic Research (TAR). Results indicate
that no significant exposed hardbottom or archaeological features were found within the study
area. In general, the study area was composed of sandy material, with gentle sand wave
geomorphology present.
The limits of the hardbottom /natural resource investigation was significantly larger than the
borrow area due to the Division of Coastal Management (DCM) 500 m (1,640 ft) buffer
requirement. As a result, the hardbottom study area encompassed approximately 1,625 acres,
including the proposed borrow area. The complete TAR report is provided with report (c)
referenced in Section 1.
4. Sediment Compatibility of Beach and Borrow Area
Sediment compatibility was assessed by methods outlined in the 2003 USACE Coastal
Engineering Manual (CEM) and DCM's sediment criteria standards, via comparison of proposed
borrow area composited material to that of the native beach.
Native Beach
In order to characterize the native beach sediments prior to beach nourishment projects which
commenced in earnest in 2001 -2002, ATM utilized sand samples collected by the USACE
Wilmington District in 1998. These samples were utilized for the same purposes by ATM in
2001, associated with planning for the Town's first locally- sponsored beach fill to extend the
C -2

length of the USACE Section 933 Wilmington Harbor Deepening project in 2002. Samples
collected by the USACE included four (4) baseline stations along the island, specifically Stations
40 +00, 120 +00, 180 +00, and 240 +00. These stations are spaced 6,000 -8,000 ft apart and are
the best characterization of the pre- engineered beach native condition. Note that the proposed
project does not place sand east of Sta 40 +00 or west of Sta 260 +00. Sediment grab samples
were taken at the toe of dune, berm crest, MHW, MTL, MLW, and at 2 ft vertical intervals from 2
ft to 24 ft depth. Sample grain size statistics were averaged in a cross shore manner and then
alongshore, to result in the following native beach composite:
Table 2: Composited native beach sediment characteristics from 1998 USA CE sampling
Composited
Average
Mean
Grain Size
Sorting
Percent
Fines
mm
Phi
%
0.24
0.72
2.0
Previous calculations for upland sand source projects (not for hydraulic placement) utilized
samples only to -12 ft depth. For a larger, hydraulically placed project as proposed, the full
cross -shore sampling is used. Percent carbonate, percent gravel and granular fractions are not
available from the 1998 USACE data. However,other sources (Moffatt &Nichol, 2011; Rice,
2003; Williams, 2005) indicate average percentages of carbonate (2.7 %) and gravel (0.55 %) for
the Holden and Ocean Isle Beach vicinity.
Offshore Borrow Area
The offshore borrow area indicated in the permit drawings has been delineated based on over
100 miles of seismic, bathymetric, sidescan, magnetometer remote sensing surveys completed
between 2010 and 2011. In addition, a total of thirty two (32) vibracores (25 by the Town taken
to supplement 7 by the USACE) were collected within the limits of the borrow area to
characterize the existing sediments. Vibracore spacing is approximately 1,000 ft or less.
Although several potential offshore sites were initially investigated by the Town (ATM, April
2010), the current site was deemed to be most suitable and practical from a sediment quality
and quantity perspective.
The total volume of suitable material for beach fill in the borrow area is estimated at 3.337
million cubic yards. Phase I vibracore analysis is reported in ATM, January 2011.
C -3

Supplemental remote sensing is reported in ATM, July 2011. An additional eleven (11)
vibracores were collected, split, logged, and analyzed in August 2011 by Athena Technologies,
Inc. Between 1 and 3 sub - samples of each vibracore were analyzed using standard ASTM
methods. Athena's summary report (October 2011), including core logs, photos, and grain size
curves are provided in Attachment D. Figure 1 below presents an example vibracore log and
analysis.
DEPTH
(ft)
a
w CLASSIFICATION or MATERIALS
w Depths and elevations based on measured values
REC.
jtw
xiL
O¢
REMARKS
0.0
mn
Fine SAND, trace carbonate /sit, well graded,
S,
very loose, subround- subangular, olive gray
C]
Sample #HB- 19- 11Carb, Depth = 4.0'
(5Y -412), {SW).
Mean (mm): 0.29, Phi Sating: 1.00
Fines (230): 1.07% (SW)
m
Carbonate (0 - 4'): 13.4%
3.1
Silty fine SAND, little carbonate, well graded,
k)ase, few burrows, @ 3.5 to 3.83' - medium
SAND, some silt, litte carbonate, @ 5.4 to 5,7-
t„
coarse carbonate gravel, @ 3.96- color grades
d,
Sample #HB -19-2, Depth = 5.4'
to very dark greenish gray (10Y 311) from, dark
m
Mean (mm): 0.44, Phi Sating: 1.66
gray (5Y- -411), (SW -SM).
=
Fines (230): 8,47% (SW -SM)
5.7
Silty fine SAND with fine carbonate gravel, very
6.2
loose, vM dark greenish gray (1 0Y -3I1 , (GM),
SILT, very soft, high water content, @ 7.15-
coarse carbonate fragment, very dark greenish
72
gray (10Y- -311), (MH).
Silty fine - medium SAND grading to medium
SAND, well graded, very loose, interbedded
with Silty medium SAND, trace carbonate, very
loose, @ 7.58' - organic debris, @ 8.2 to 9.0' -
few silty medium SAND rip-up dasts, very dark
greenish gray (10Y- -311), (SW -SM).
9.0
Figure 1: Example boring log and analysis. Typically 2 -3 grain size sub - samples were analyzed per
boring, within the upper layer of suitable sand.
The 2011 vibracores and seismic surveys were utilized to refine the borrow area limits, and
resulted in a uniform recommended cut depth of 3.5 ft. This upper layer of sediment is typically
fine to medium gray or tan sand. The following figure presents a conservative estimate of sand
thickness for the proposed borrow site.
C -4

50000
Z
a�
c
48000
O
Z
46000
2246000 2248000 2250000 2252000 2254000
Easting (ft)
Figure 2: Conservative sand thickness within the offshore borrow area based on all borings. Finer sand
material generally underlies this layer while a -2 ft or larger buffer exists to the mud /hardbottom layer.
The data were compiled and analyzed to arrive at a composite grain size to represent the
existing material in the borrow area. This was accomplished via a volumetric weighting, where
each core was assigned an influence area (acreage) and vertically composited to the cut depth.
Composite sediment characteristics for the borrow area are provided in Table 3.
Table 3: Composite sediment characteristics for the proposed 590 acre offshore borrow area, assuming a
3.5 cut death
Mean
.,..
.
oo 40 '
Proposed
Percent
3.0
00 .
Borrow Area
Grain Size
(phi)
4.5 3.5' '
2.0
2.0
Gravel
■
r
Fines
Carbonate
r
0 '
5.9 '
�
r
4.0
�9
Thickness (ft)
0.35
1.26
2.1
r
5.0
8
Composite
r
4.2
5.0
7
i 5.8
3.p
6
4
4.0
+
3.5
4.0
3
'
2.5
5.4
°
2
1.5
� 4.0
r '
1
4.0
4.0
2.0
0.5
®-
4.2 ■
r
0
2.0 1
2246000 2248000 2250000 2252000 2254000
Easting (ft)
Figure 2: Conservative sand thickness within the offshore borrow area based on all borings. Finer sand
material generally underlies this layer while a -2 ft or larger buffer exists to the mud /hardbottom layer.
The data were compiled and analyzed to arrive at a composite grain size to represent the
existing material in the borrow area. This was accomplished via a volumetric weighting, where
each core was assigned an influence area (acreage) and vertically composited to the cut depth.
Composite sediment characteristics for the borrow area are provided in Table 3.
Table 3: Composite sediment characteristics for the proposed 590 acre offshore borrow area, assuming a
3.5 cut death
All of the above criteria (mean grain size, % gravel, % granular, % fines, and % carbonate) are
required according to DCM's 2008 sediment criteria. Percent `gravel' essentially refers to large
C -5
Mean
Sorting
Percent
Percent
Percent
Percent
Grain Size
(phi)
Gravel
Granular
Fines
Carbonate
(mm)
Borrow
Area
0.35
1.26
2.1
3.4
5.0
12.4
Composite
All of the above criteria (mean grain size, % gravel, % granular, % fines, and % carbonate) are
required according to DCM's 2008 sediment criteria. Percent `gravel' essentially refers to large
C -5

shells or limestone (e.g., coquina) rock. Percent granular essentially refers to shell -hash.
Percent carbonate also essentially tests for shell and shell material. The presence of potential
mud balls (i.e., cohesive sediments) would be reflected in high percent fines.
Based on the composite grain size characteristics of the borrow area, the material meets the
sediment criteria requirements as shown in Table 4.
Table 4: Summary of conformance of proposed project with DCM sediment compatibility criteria
5. Compatibility and Overfill Ratio
In addition to confirmation that the composite borrow area sediment characteristics meet the
DCM sediment criteria as discussed above, an evaluation of compatibility utilizing the well
known overfill ratio was completed. The overfill ratio, which is an indicator of borrow area
sediment compatibility, provides an estimate of the additional volume of sand required to result
in the target quantity on the beach due to initial losses where the borrow area physical
characteristics are not identical to that of the native beach. Overfill ratios were computed using
the Dean Method (Dean and Dalrymple, 2002) and the Shore Protection Manual (SPM)
Adjusted Overfill Ratio in the ACES computer program. Table 5 below presents these results.
C -6
Mean
Sorting
Percent
Percent
Percent
Percent
Grain Size
(phi)
Gravel
Granular
Fines
Carbonate
(mm)
Borrow
Area
0.35
1.26
2.1
3.4
5.0
12.4
Composite
Native
Beach
0.24
0.72
0.6
n/a
2.0
2.7
Composite
DCM
Native +
Native +
Native +
Native +
Sediment
5%
5%
5%
15%
Criteria
N/A
Threshold
5
5
7
17.7
Status
OK
OK
OK
OK
5. Compatibility and Overfill Ratio
In addition to confirmation that the composite borrow area sediment characteristics meet the
DCM sediment criteria as discussed above, an evaluation of compatibility utilizing the well
known overfill ratio was completed. The overfill ratio, which is an indicator of borrow area
sediment compatibility, provides an estimate of the additional volume of sand required to result
in the target quantity on the beach due to initial losses where the borrow area physical
characteristics are not identical to that of the native beach. Overfill ratios were computed using
the Dean Method (Dean and Dalrymple, 2002) and the Shore Protection Manual (SPM)
Adjusted Overfill Ratio in the ACES computer program. Table 5 below presents these results.
C -6

Table 5: Overfill Ratio Calculations for Holden Beach Nourishment with Offshore Borrow Source
An overfill ratio of 1.0 indicates a "perfect match" of the borrow sand to the existing beach sand,
and similar behavior /performance under the effects of waves and currents would be expected.
Overfill ratios between 1.0 and 1.5 are desirable. Overfill ratios exceeding 1.5 means the
borrow material may be unstable when placed on the native beach. In this case, the composite
mean grain size of the borrow area slightly exceeds that of the native beach, but the borrow
materials are more poorly sorted than the native beach, resulting in an Adjusted SPM overfill
ratio of 1.09.
Based on the analysis conducted, the identified borrow source meets or exceeds the accepted
coastal engineering criteria for beach placement at the project site, from both overfill ratio and
sediment characteristic perspectives. Likely excavation by a hopper dredge will facilitate a
vertical mixing of the sediment prior to placement on the beach, or a true composite of the upper
excavated layer.
6. Potential Physical Impacts as a Result of Borrow Area Excavation
During construction, the construction contract technical specifications will require the dredge
plant to maintain logs of position (via differential GPS) and depth of cut (based on a real time
tide readings) during all dredging operations. The contractor will also be required to submit
these logs to the Town on a weekly basis. Since pockets of undesirable material could be
encountered (due to inherent limitations of discrete core samples and seismic track lines), the
contract documents will require that the beach fill site be monitored continuously during active
dredging and any occurrence of undesirable material at the beach fill site result in immediate
shutdown, notification of the Town, and moving of the dredge to another portion of the borrow
area.
C -7
Mean Grain
Size
Sorting
Overfill Ratio
(mm)
M
Adjusted
SPM
Dean
Native Beach
0.24
0.72
Borrow
0.35
1.26
1.09
1.0
An overfill ratio of 1.0 indicates a "perfect match" of the borrow sand to the existing beach sand,
and similar behavior /performance under the effects of waves and currents would be expected.
Overfill ratios between 1.0 and 1.5 are desirable. Overfill ratios exceeding 1.5 means the
borrow material may be unstable when placed on the native beach. In this case, the composite
mean grain size of the borrow area slightly exceeds that of the native beach, but the borrow
materials are more poorly sorted than the native beach, resulting in an Adjusted SPM overfill
ratio of 1.09.
Based on the analysis conducted, the identified borrow source meets or exceeds the accepted
coastal engineering criteria for beach placement at the project site, from both overfill ratio and
sediment characteristic perspectives. Likely excavation by a hopper dredge will facilitate a
vertical mixing of the sediment prior to placement on the beach, or a true composite of the upper
excavated layer.
6. Potential Physical Impacts as a Result of Borrow Area Excavation
During construction, the construction contract technical specifications will require the dredge
plant to maintain logs of position (via differential GPS) and depth of cut (based on a real time
tide readings) during all dredging operations. The contractor will also be required to submit
these logs to the Town on a weekly basis. Since pockets of undesirable material could be
encountered (due to inherent limitations of discrete core samples and seismic track lines), the
contract documents will require that the beach fill site be monitored continuously during active
dredging and any occurrence of undesirable material at the beach fill site result in immediate
shutdown, notification of the Town, and moving of the dredge to another portion of the borrow
area.
C -7

The contractor will also be required to mark the limits of the borrow area with buoys and
maintain such for the duration of the work. Storage of equipment will be limited to the areas
surveyed as potential borrow areas, as no hardbottom is located within these limits
Bathymetry surveys indicate a gradually sloping bottom moving from north to south within the
borrow area. The proposed shallow cut will not create a significant "depression" as a result of
dredging. Located a minimum of 1.8 miles from shore, any refraction or redistribution of wave
energy is expected to be recovered before the affected waves arrive on shore.
The USACE Wilmington District's Dare County, NC Hurricane Protection and Beach Erosion
Control project (2000), included a study to examine to effects on wave transformation and
shoreline change resulting from offshore dredging on a larger scale as part of an erosion control
program for Dare County Beaches. The project included several offshore borrow sites from
which sediment could be extracted for beach nourishment projects for the next 50 years. Wave
transformations were modeled using STWAVE and shoreline change as well as net and gross
longshore transport potentials were modeled using GENSIS along the project site. Several
borrow sites encompassing 7 square miles of ocean floor were identified, each between 0.5 and
2 miles off shore, in water depths between 30 and 60 feet relative to MSL.
Dredging depths were designed between 8 and 10 ft below the existing seabed. Input wave
conditions were hindcast from a 20 -year period between 1976 and 1995 from Wave Information
Studies (WIS). The wave transformations were performed over the projected fully excavated
borrow site conditions at the end of the 50 -year project life. The report states that dredging will
have minor impact on waves shoreward of the borrow sites. The impacts do vary along the
extent of the project length where wave height is increased in some areas but decreased in
others relative to the non dredging scenario. The magnitude of change in wave height ranged
from +3% to -5 %, which the authors describe as "generally small ". Shoreline changes are
similarly reported as variable but generally small. It is noted that the proposed borrow area for
Town of Holden Beach is within the same offshore locational range but has shallower cut depths
(and much smaller overall area) which would be anticipated to reduce potential adverse impacts
on wave propagation /transformation and resulting shoreline changes.
The most similar, nearby comparable project was the USACE's Grand Strand Storm Damage
Reduction Project in South Carolina in 2007/2008. Analysis of the potential impacts of three
C -8

offshore borrow sources was included in the Environmental Assessment ( USACE SAD, 2007).
The distance offshore, water depths, and dredging cut depth are all similar to that of the
proposed Holden Beach offshore borrow area (also note that both Holden Beach and Grand
Strand projects are within the larger Long Bay coastal segment which extends from Cape Fear
to Winyah Bay, SC and thus wave conditions would be generally similar).
The USACE completed a literature review and applied the STWAVE model to predict pre- and
post- dredging wave climate at the borrow area and near shore. Potential impacts, based on
predicted changes in the nearshore wave climate were documented as minimal, and stated the
following conclusion:
All the significant physical qualities of the Myrtle borrow areas are within the ranges of
those study areas which were found to exhibit acceptable sand removal plans.
For the proposed Holden Beach offshore borrow area, physical impacts (i.e., wave
transformation and sediment transport) are expected to be minimal due to the distance from the
Long Beach /Oak Island shoreline (> 1.8 miles) and very shallow cut depth over a broad area.
The relative cut depth to water depth ratio is under 10 %.
7. Potential Biological Resources Impacts as a Result of Borrow Area
Excavation and Beach Fill Placement
Previous studies and monitoring of biological resources were completed for the Wilmington
Harbor Deepening Project and the Section 933 Project (Versar, 2004). The disposal of material
on the beach will have some short term negative impacts including the temporary increase in
turbidity during the disposal operation and the smothering or otherwise displacement of
organisms that live in or near the beach foreshore. Turbidity caused by the disposal operation
normally does not persist more than one or two tidal cycles (12 to 24 hours) following the
cessation of the disposal operation. With regard to the smothering or displacement of the
nearshore organisms, studies by the University of Virginia for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
on Pea Island have shown that the organisms generally return to the area in about one year.
Assuming an average renourishment interval of 6 -8 years typically, the nearshore organisms
would not be completely eliminated from the area as a result of the disposal operation, and
C -9

should recover within 1 -2 years. Similarly, studies associated with the DeBordieu beach
nourishment project in SC (CEG, 2009) as well as USACE studies in NJ (2001) indicate
relatively rapid recovery of the benthic communities within offshore borrow areas and the
intertidal /beach fill placement areas following construction.
No exposed hardbottom was detected in either the proposed borrow area or the 500 m buffer
area (refer to TAR, 2011).
8. References
Applied Technology and Management, Inc.(ATM), 2009. Holden Beach Beach Management
Planning and Borrow Area Investigation. Charleston, SC.
Applied Technology and Management, Inc.(ATM), 2010. Holden Beach Offshore Seismic
Survey Study. Charleston, SC.
Applied Technology and Management, Inc. (ATM), 2011. Holden Beach Offshore Vibracore
Analysis. Charleston, SC.
Athena Technologies, Inc., 2010. Geotechnical Investigation for the Town of Holden Beach,
Brunswick County, North Carolina. McCIellanville, SC.
Athena Technologies, Inc., 2011. Geotechnical Investigation for the Town of Holden Beach
Phase II, Brunswick County, North Carolina. McCIellanville, SC.
Coastal Eco -Group (CEG). 2009. DeBordieu Colony Beach Nourishment Project, Debidue
Island, SC: Third Post - Dredge Beach and Borrow Area Benthic
Macroinvertebrate /infauna monitoring report. Prepared for DeBordieu Colony Permit No.
2003 -1 W- 309 -PR.
C &C Technologies. 1999. Geophysical Subbottom profiling and mapping of offshore sediment
deposits, hardbottom and top of rock: Long Bay (Ocean Isle), NC. Prepared for U.S.
Army Engineer District, Wilmington, NC.
C &C Technologies. 2003. Geophysical Subbottom profiling and mapping of offshore sediment
deposits and hardbottoms: Offshore of Holden Beach and Oak Island, NC. Prepared for
U.S. Army Engineer District, Wilmington, NC.
Moffatt & Nichol, 2011. NC Beach and Inlet Management Plan — Final Report. Prepared for
DCM. April, 2011.
Rice, 2003. Native Sediment Characteristics of North Carolina Beaches. Report by Tracy
Monegan Rice, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Raleigh, NC. July 2003.
C -10

Thompson, E. F, Lin, L., and Jones, D.L. 1999. Wave Climate and Littoral Sediment Transport
Potential, Cape Fear River Entrance and Smith Island to Ocean Isle Beach, North
Carolina, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center,
Technical Report CHL- 99 -18. Prepared for the U.S. Army Engineer District, Wilmington.
101 P.
Tidewater Atlantic Research (TAR). 2011. A Phase I Remote - Sensing Submerged Cultural
Resource and Hard Bottom Survey of a Proposed Borrow Area off Brunswick County,
North Carolina. Washington, NC
US Army Corps of Engineers, 2000. Final Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact
Statement on Hurricane Protection and Beach Erosion Control, Dare County Beaches
(Bodie Island Portion), Dare County, NC.
US Army Corps of Engineers, 2001. The New York District's Biological Monitoring Program for
the Atlantic Coast of New Jersey, Asbury Park to Manasquan Section Beach Erosion
Control Project, Final Report. Prepared by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways
Experiment Station Vicksburg, MS.
US Army Corps of Engineers, 2007. Environmental Assessment for Grand Strand Storm
Damage Reduction Project, North Myrtle Beach, Myrtle Beach & Surfside Beach, South
Carolina, Horry & Georgetown Counties.
USGS, 2005. Geologic Framework Studies of South Carolina's Long Bay from Little River Inlet
to Winyah Bay, 1999 - 2003; Geospatial Data Release. U.S. Geological Survey Open -
File Report 2005 -1346
Versar, 2004. Year 2 Recovery from Impacts of Beach Nourishment on Surf Zone and
Nearshore Fish and Benthic Resources on Bald Head Island, Caswell Beach, Oak
Island, and Holden Beach, North Carolina, Final Study Findings. Prepared for USACE
Wilmington District under Contract No. DACW54 -00 -D -0001 by Versar, Inc. Columbia,
Maryland, January 2004.
Williams, G., 2005. Presentation on Sediment Compatibility for Beach Nourishment in North
Carolina. Tri- Services Infrastructure Conference, St Louis, MO. 3 August 2005.
C -11

Holden Beach Offshore Borrow Area Volumetric Summary, Cut Depth = 3.5 ft
Core ID
Core Rep. Volume
(cy)
Volume
Weighting
Factor
Mean Grain
Size (mm)
Sorting
(phi)
Gravel
%
Granular
%
Fines ( #230) %
Carbonate
%
HB -05
112,933
3.38%
0.30
1.03
0.9
1.8
3.7
15.2
HB -07
129,873
3.89%
0.22
0.90
0.4
1.1
4.8
10.9
HB -08
129,873
3.89%
0.56
1.42
4.1
5.0
4.3
20.2
HB -09
124,227
3.72%
0.30
1.41
2.1
2.9
6.0
18.9
HB -10
118,580
3.55%
0.30
1.47
1.7
5.1
7.0
12.1
HB -11
129,873
3.89%
0.38
1.40
1.9
4.6
5.8
12.6
HB -12
101,640
3.05%
0.29
1.01
0.6
2.6
3.9
10.5
HB -13
135,520
4.06%
0.35
1.22
1.7
2.5
2.9
11.8
HB -14
129,873
3.89%
0.56
1.86
6.3
9.0
10.6
18.4
HB -15
101,640
3.05%
0.28
1.15
0.8
2.3
2.9
10.7
HB -16
124,227
3.72%
0.36
1.32
1.5
3.8
3.3
17.8
HB -17
90,347
2.71%
0.69
1.62
7.8
8.1
7.1
10.8
HB -18
141,167
4.23%
0.57
1.75
8.4
3.6
4.7
18.2
HB -19
146,813
4.40%
0.29
1.00
0.7
1.7
1.1
13.4
HB11 -01
107,287
3.21%
0.22
0.91
0.4
0.5
3.3
12.7
HB11 -02
112,933
3.38%
0.27
1.16
2.5
1.8
3.7
9.5
HB11 -03
112,933
3.38%
0.45
1.36
1.2
4.7
6.8
11.1
HB11 -04
155,283
4.65%
0.32
1.66
3.4
4.4
9.6
9.1
HB11 -05
149,637
4.48%
0.22
1.14
0.8
2.1
5.3
9.1
HB11 -06
84,700
2.54%
0.27
1.00
0.4
1.3
1.4
11.5
HB11 -07
101,640
3.05%
0.39
1.04
0.5
2.6
6.1
10.8
HB11 -08
101,640
3.05%
0.35
1.58
3.3
5.9
8.3
17.3
HB11 -09
79,053
2.37%
0.33
1.19
0.8
3.5
2.8
13.0
HB11 -10
95,993
2.88%
0.31
1.08
0.4
2.1
3.0
11.6
HB11 -12
56,467
1.69%
0.32
1.09
1.4
3.6
2.4
16.7
CBA -16
67,760
2.03%
0.23
0.52
0.0
0.6
1.6
3.0
BCB- 03 -V -65
56,467
1.69%
0.30
1.06
0.6
2.6
5.2
7.3
CBA -21
79,053
2.37%
0.47
0.96
2.0
2.8
1.5
7.0
BCB- 03 -4 -83A
79,053
2.37%
0.27
1.57
3.2
4.0
9.2
6.3
BCB- 03 -V -38
73,407
2.20%
0.49
1.26
0.4
3.3
4.8
6.8
CBA -23
50,820
1.52%
0.21
1.05
1.1
2.9
6.8
5.5
BCB- 03 -V -64
56,467
1.69%
0.21
1.23
1.3
3.2
9.7
8.6
Gross Average: - 0.35 1.23 2.0 3.3 5.0 11.8
Total Volume: 3,337,180 - - - - - -
Weighted A - 2.1 3.4 5.0

ATTACHMENT D
SUPPORTING STUDIES

Attachment D
List of Supporting Studies and Borings
Table 1: Studies included in Attachment D
No.
Event
Date
Collected
Description /Notes
Report
Oct -Nov
Offshore Vibracore
1
Vibracores Phase 1
2010
19 vibracores collected
Analysis, ATM Inc.
January 2011
Magnetometer; side
scan and multibeam
Remote Sensing and
May -Jun
bathymetry survey;
Offshore Borrow Area
2
Borrow Area Refinement
2011
additional sub - bottom
Investigation Phase
Survey
survey of 125 ac buffer
11, July 2011
area in primary borrow
area
Geotechnical
Investigation for the
3
Vibracores Phase 11
Aug 2011
11 vibracores collected
Town of Holden
Beach, Phase 11.
Athena Technologies,
Inc. October 2011
Archaeological and
Seismic, Sidescan, and
Included Appendix
4
Hardbottom
May 2011
Magnetometer Data
A to Report #2
Investigation
Collection
5
Multi -Beam Bathymetry
May -Jun
Multi -Beam Bathymetry
Included as Appendix
2011
Data Collection
B to Report #2
6
USACE Vibracore Data
2003 &
7 vibracores within
n/a
2004
proposed borrow area
NOTE 1 — Borrow area delineation has progressively been refined throughout the data
collection phases. Final borrow area delineation is presented in the permit drawings.
NOTE 2 - Athena Phase 1 vibracores (Report #1) include borings taken outside of the proposed
borrow area. These boring logs and grain size distributions have been excised from Report #1.
Note that Report #1 summary tables 1 and 2 do include these additional borings which lie
outside the limits of the proposed borrow area. This data was not utilized in the borrow area
suitability analysis.
NOTE 3 — Three copies of the Archaeological Report (Report #4) have been submitted to the
Underwater Branch of the NC Department of Cultural Resources (DCR); as requested by Dr.
Mark Wilde - Ramsing of DCR and in coordination with Dr. Gordon Watts of TAR.

Attach D - Report 1
Geotechnical Investigation for the Town of Holden Beach
Brunswick County, North Carolina
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Prepared For:
Applied Technology & Management, Inc.
360 Concord Street, Suite #300
Charleston, SC 29401
The Town of Holden Beach
110 Rothschild Street
Holden Beach, NC 28462
December 22nd, 2010

Athena Technologies, Inc. Attach D - Report 1
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, FL 29458
Geotechnical Investigation for the Town of Holden Beach
Brunswick County, North Carolina
Athena Technologies, Inc. (Athena) was contracted by Applied Technology & Management,
Inc. (ATM) and the Town of Holden Beach to collect nineteen (19) sediment cores from a proposed
sediment borrow area located approximately four (4) miles east southeast of Lockwood Folly Inlet,
Brunswick County, North Carolina. The field effort took place in October and November, 2010.
Field Sampling Methods
The Holden Beach field effort was completed in two events: the first took place on October
21St, and the second on November 10', 2010. Athena utilized our 30 foot sample platform, RV
Artemis, which is equipped with Trimble DGPS (sub -meter accurate) interfaced with Hypack and a
Sitex CVS -106 fathometer (accurate to 0.1'), to navigate to the proposed sample locations provided
by ATM (Figure 1). Once on station, the vessel was immobilized using a triple point anchor
system. Water depths at each vibracore location were verified utilizing a weighted measuring tape.
Athena's custom designed and built vibracore system was deployed from the vessel. This
system consists of a generator with a mechanical vibrator attached via cable directly to the sampler
apparatus. The sample barrel was a three inch, 16 gauge steel tube. The sample barrel was lowered
to the sea -floor through a moon pool in the deck of the vessel by attaching lengths of drill stem. The
vibracore machine was then turned on and the sample barrel was allowed to penetrate until it
reached target depth or refusal. The sample barrel was then retrieved using an electric winch. Once
the sample was on deck, the sample barrel was cut, capped, labeled and measured. A vibracore
summary containing the final coordinates, water depths, and penetration and recovery can be found
in Table 1.
The cores were then opened, photographed, logged, sub - sampled, and stored at Athena's
facility in McClellanville, South Carolina. Core logs and high resolution photo mosaic plates of the
cores have been included as Appendix A. The cores were logged according to the Unified Soil
Classification System (USCS). Sediment color designation was determined using the Munsell Soil
Color Chart and visual estimates of carbonate and silt percentages were determined utilizing a
Comparison Chart for Visual Percentage Estimation by Terry and Chilingar (1955). Laboratory
grain size analyses were performed on thirty -six (36) sediment samples and carbonate content
analyses were performed on nineteen (19) sediment samples. Laboratory analyses were performed by
WPC /Terracon of Jacksonville, Florida. A letter stating the lab's United States Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) validation is included as Appendix B.
The final report was produced using gINT Professional Software.
Geotechnical Investigation for the Town of Holden Beach
,ATHEp1A Brunswick County, North Carolina
TECHNOLOGIES. INC. October /November 2010
HME&

Athena Technologies, Inc. Attach D - Report 1
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, FL 29458
Geological Characteristics of Vibracore Samples
A total of thirty -six (36) grain size analyses and nineteen (19) carbonate burn analyses were
performed on samples collected from the vibracores. Grain size analyses were performed on two (2)
samples from each core, with the exception of HB -02 and HB -06. Grain size analyses were
performed on one (1) sample from HB -02 and HB -06, due to the core lengths and the lithologic
nature of the cores. One (1) carbonate burn analysis, using the Twenhofel and Tyler (1941)
method, was performed for each vibracore. The proposed sediment subsample intervals for the cores
were discussed with ATM, and agreed upon by both ATM and Athena.
Mean grain size for all samples ranged from 0.19 mm (fine sand) at HB -07 -1, to 0.83 mm
(medium sand) at HB -17 -2. The average mean grain size for all analyses was 0.38 mm (fine sand).
Sorting values for the samples ranged from 0.67 phi (moderately well sorted) at HB -12 -1, to 2.15
phi (very poorly sorted) at HB -17 -1. Average sorting for all sediment samples was 1.29 phi (poorly
sorted sand) (Table 2).
Silt percentages among the sediment samples ranged from 1.07% at HB -19 -1, to 16.19% at
HB -02 -1. Average silt percentage for all samples was reported to be 5.17 %. Generally speaking, a
layer of clean sand (i.e., sand with less than 5% silt) overlies older, sheltered marine or back barrier
sediments that typically have higher silt content. Cores HB -02, HB -09, HB -11, and HB -14 had less
than 1' of clean sand overlying the older sediment. Sample ID HB -19 -1 reported the lowest silt
percentage (1.07 %) and the greatest amount (greater than 3') of overlying clean sand (Table 2).
Carbonate percentages for the samples collected from the nineteen (19) vibracores range
from 7.3 %, at HB -04 (0 — 4'), to 20.2 %, at HB -08 (0 — 3'). The average carbonate content for all
nineteen (19) samples is 13.94% (Table 2).
Attached Figures & Tables
Figure 1: Location Map
Table 1: Vibracore Summary
Table 2: Grain Size Data Summary
Appendix A: Core Logs, Core Photos, Grain Size Curves, and Granularmetric Reports
Appendix B: WPC /Terracon Lab Validation Letter
Geotechnical Investigation for the Town of Holden Beach
A�HEH& Brunswick County, North Carolina
TECHNOLOGIES. INC. October /November 2010
f�. ME&

Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, FL 29458
Attach D - Report 1
��..._....... -... —
22
e RF ,Gs f21 0 r 22
Ot=MARC o N 26
23 80,530b ;see mots = : 0 27 ?ty
W "LW Qr
31 Maw
29 , A
14"S 31 Q
DIN-
22 21
S 5tr 31 O a
33 /Met F� -- _4 29 a�
32 � 1-19 31
32 ;aa
31
33 34 31 (D
34
339
32
0 0
0 0
J') �p
Figure 1: Holden Beach Vibracore Locations
ueotecnmcai investigation tor the i own or Holden tseacn
A�HEH& Brunswick County, North Carolina
TECHNOLOGIES. INC. October /November 2010
KZ.SME&

Attach D - Report 1
Table 1: Vibracore Summary
Town of Holden Beach
Brunswick County, NC
Station ID
Time
Date
East (x)
North (y)
Water Depth
(feet)
Penetration
(feet)
Recovery (feet)
Notes
HB -01
9:21:26
11/10/2010
2249843.2
53711.54
36.3
6.0
5.2
Refusal encountered at -6' below sediment surface.
HB -02
8:51:27
11/10/2010
2250864.79
53496.66
36.5
8.5
7.6
Refusal encountered at -8.5' below sediment surface.
HB -03
8:21:21
11/10/2010
2249646.32
52478.74
36.0
7.0
6.6
Refusal encountered at -7' below sediment surface.
HB -04
7:56:22
11/10/2010
2250642.22
52267.33
35.8
9.0
8.3
Refusal encountered at -9' below sediment surface.
HB -05
7:29:49
11/10/2010
2250465.88
51223.96
35.7
10.0
8.1
HB -06
6:40:04
11/10/2010
2249150.38
51131.08
34.8
4.0
3.2
Refusal encounterd at -4' below sediment surface. Multiple attempts made.
HB -07
2:04:01
10/21/2010
2250268.94
50250.15
33.7
11.0
10.0
HB -08
1:33:14
10/21/2010
2248768.84
49405.43
34.3
10.0
8.5
HB -09
1:05:11
10/21/2010
2250099.19
49364.34
33.8
10.5
8.3
HB -10
12:31:42
10/21/2010
2250317.37
48116.51
35.0
10.0
9.0
HB -11
11:58:51
10/21/2010
2248384.85
48448.06
36.3
9.0
8.0
Refusal encountered at -9' below sediment surface.
HB -12
11:32:58
10/21/2010
2247458.61
48898.92
34.7
9.0
8.8
Refusal encountered at -9' below sediment surface.
HB -13
10:59:31
10/21/2010
2247403.28
47139.74
36.8
8.0
5.3
Refusal encountered at -8' below sediment surface.
HB -14
10:25:57
10/21/2010
2248518.21
47441.24
38.0
7.0
5.0
Refusal encountered at -7' below sediment surface.
HB -15
9:58:38
10/21/2010
2249861.99
46980.17
37.5
10.0
9.3
HB -16
9:29:09
10/21/2010
2249573.27
45570.88
38.3
6.5
5.9
Refusal encountered at -6.5' below sediment surface.
HB -17
8:57:23
10/21/2010
2248612.88
45689.76
40.3
7.0
6.1
Refusal encountered at -7' below sediment surface.
HB -18
8:12:36
10/21/2010
2247294.07
45940.66
40.3
8.5
6.1
Refusal encountered at- 8.5' below sediment surface.
HB -19
7:34:57
10/21/2010
2246186.55
46230.18
39.7
10.0
9.0
AwHEHA
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
4 of 118

Table 2: Grain Size Data Summary
Town of Holden Beach
Brunswick County, NC Attach D - Report 1
Core ID
Sample ID
Sample Interval
Top Depth (feet)
Sample Interval
Bottom Depth
(feet)
Mean Size (mm)
Sorting (phi)
Percent Passing
4230 Sieve
Percent
Carbonate
HB -01
Carbonate
0.0
4.0
--
--
--
9.7
HB -01 -1
0.0
2.2
0.27
1.17
4.42
--
HB-01-2
2.2
4.0
0.27
0.90
3.11
--
HB-02
HB -02-1 /Garb
0.0
4.0
0.29
1.31
16.18
12.7
HB -03
Carbonate
0.0
4.0
--
--
--
15.1
HB -03 -1
0.0
2.9
0.28
0.89
2.48
--
HB-03-2
2.9
5.0
0.32
1.09
3.56
--
HB -04
Carbonate
0.0
4.0
--
--
--
7.3
HB -04 -1
0.0
1.7
0.22
0.83
2.20
--
HB-04-2
1.7
4.0
0.29
0.90
3.39
--
HB -05
Carbonate
0.0
4.0
--
--
--
15.2
HB -05 -1
0.0
2.8
0.30
0.95
3.59
--
HB-05-2
2.8
4.0
0.31
1.35
3.99
--
HB -06
HB -06 -1 /Garb
0.0
3.0
0.39
1.22
2.83
18.6
HB -07
Carbonate
0.0
4.0
--
--
--
10.9
HB -07 -1
0.0
2.2
0.19
0.71
3.83
--
HB-07-2
2.2
4.5
0.28
1.22
6.45
--
HB -08
Carbonate
0.0
3.0
--
--
--
20.2
HB -08 -1
0.0
1.8
0.53
0.87
1.91
--
HB-08-2
1.8
4.1
0.59
2.01
6.85
--
HB -09
Carbonate
0.0
4.0
--
--
--
18.9
HB -09 -1
0.0
3.9
0.30
1.44
5.95
--
HB-09-2
3.9
5.9
0.55
1.69
6.17
--
HB -10
Carbonate
0.0
3.0
--
--
--
12.1
HB -10 -1
0.0
3.3
0.29
1.46
6.62
--
HB-10-2
3.3
5.0
0.52
1.70
13.13
--
HB -1I
Carbonate
0.0
3.0
--
--
--
12.6
HB -11 -1
0.0
1.6
0.38
1.13
4.97
--
HB-11-2
1.6
4.0
0.38
1.63
6.58
--
HB -12
Carbonate
0.0
3.0
--
--
--
10.5
HB -12 -1
0.0
1.8
0.24
0.67
1.86
--
HB-12-2
1.8
4.0
0.34
1.38
6.03
--
HB -13
Carbonate
0.0
3.0
--
--
--
11.8
HB -13 -1
0.0
2.5
0.36
1.18
1.62
--
HB-13-2
2.5
4.0
0.33
1.32
6.11
--
HB -14
Carbonate
0.0
1.0
--
--
--
18.4
HB -14 -1
0.0
0.7
0.63
1.04
1.75
--
HB-14-2
0.7
4.0
0.54
2.07
12.80
--
HB -15
Carbonate
0.0
3.0
--
--
--
10.7
HB -15 -1
0.0
2.6
0.26
1.03
1.94
--
HB-15-2
2.6
4.0
0.32
1.48
5.50
--
HB -16
Carbonate
0.0
3.0
--
--
--
17.8
HB -16 -1
0.0
2.1
0.40
1.22
2.25
--
HB-16-2
2.1
4.0
0.29
1.47
4.98
--
HB -17
Carbonate
0.0
2.3
--
--
--
10.8
HB -17 -1
0.0
1.4
0.48
0.82
4.71
--
HB-17-2
1.4
4.0
0.83
2.15
8.77
--
HB -18
Carbonate
0.0
3.0
--
--
--
18.2
HB -18 -1
0.0
1 2.3
1 0.72
1 1.92
1 4.12
1 --
HB-18-2
2.3
4.0
0.27
1.42
5.82
--
HB 19
HB -19 -1 /Garb
0.0
4.0
0.29
1.00
1.07
13.4
HB -19 -2
4.0
5.4
0.44
1.66
8.47
--
4^01
Aw"EHA
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, FL 29458
Appendix A:
Attach D - Report 1
Core Logs, Core Photos, Grain Size Curves, and Granularmetric Reports
Geotechnical Investigation for the Town of Holden Beach
AXHEHA Brunswick County, North Carolina
TECHNOLOGIES. INC. October /November 2010
[.. ffMK

Attach D - Report 1
Borinq Designation HB -05
DRILLING LOG
DIVISION
INSTALLATION
SHEET 1
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Lockwood Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32dO NAD 1983
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,250,466 Y = 51,224
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 35.7 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
11 -10 -10 07:29 11 -10 -10 07:37
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 8.1 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 10.0 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
d• W
0-i
ELEV.
(ft)
DEPTH
(ft)
w
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
Depths and elevations based on measured values
%
REC.
'L
04
REMARKS
0.0
Fine SAND, trace carbonate, poorly graded,
very loose, subround - subangular, olive gray
(5Y -5/2), (SP).
LO
Sample #HB -05 -1, Depth = 2.8'
°
Mean (mm): 0.30, Phi Sorting: 0.95
1.8
°_°
Fines (230): 3.59% (SW)
Fine SAND, little carbonate, trace silt, well
graded, loose, subround - subangular, @ 1.8 to
2.0' = grain size /carbonate % increases slightly,
@ 2.2' = sand dollar fragment, dark gray
2.8
0
(5Y-4/1), (SW).
.o
cv
Sample #HB -05 -2, Depth = 4.0'
a
o
Mean (mm): 0.31, Phi Sorting: 1.35
0o
Fines (230):3.99% (SW)
:
Silty fine/medium SAND, little carbonate, well
=
Carbonate (0 - 4'): 15.2%
°
graded, subround - subangular, grain size
increases with depth, @ 5.4 to 5.75' = medium
a
sand /fine carbonate gravel, little coarse sand
clasts, very dark greenish gray (1 OY -3/1),
(GW -GM).
:a
5.8
Silty fine /medium SAND, few fine gravel clasts,
interbedded layers of CLAY, little carbonate,
well graded, subround - subangular, burrows,
very dark greenish gray (5GY -3/1), (SM).
8.1
Loss of Recovery..
10.0
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 29 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
20
-5
ato]

-
-
Scale in Feet
}` Attach D - Report 1
Photo Mosaic Image
4
"y
9
a
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
- -rrc
Athena Technologies, Inc.
<
1293 Graham Farm Road
1
6
=
00-
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
s r -
-
Scale in Feet
_
Photo Mosaic Image
4
"y
9
a
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
<
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
5
101
30 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
a
30
70
- --
20
--
- -
80
10
- -' -- -- '------
.- -
- - - --
90
0
—
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -05 #HB -05 -1 1-1
1 SW
#zoo -3.67
#230 - 3.67
1.93 1.76
-1.68
7.54
0.95
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -09 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,250,466
Northing (Y, ft):
51,224
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fax [phone]
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
31 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -05 #HB -05 -1
Analysis Date: 12 -09 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,250,466
Northing (ft):
51,224
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/1
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
86.47
Wash Weight (g):
83.36
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 3.67
#230 - 3.59
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.19
0.22
0.19
0.22
4
-2.25
4.76
0.38
0.44
0.57
0.66
5
-2.00
4.00
0.14
0.16
0.71
0.82
7
-1.50
2.83
0.53
0.61
1.24
1.43
10
-1.00
2.00
0.64
0.74
1.88
2.17
14
-0.50
1.41
1.14
1.32
3.02
3.49
18
0.00
1.00
1.60
1.85
4.62
5.34
25
0.50
0.71
2.52
2.91
7.14
8.25
35
1.00
0.50
3.63
4.20
10.77
12.45
45
1.50
0.35
11.99
13.87
22.76
26.32
60
2.00
0.25
23.75
27.47
46.51
53.79
80
2.50
0.18
22.08
25.53
68.59
79.32
120
3.00
0.13
12.06
13.95
80.65
93.27
170
3.50
0.09
2.54
2.94
83.19
96.21
200
3.75
0.07
0.10
0.12
83.29
96.33
230
4.00
0.06
0.07
0.08
83.36
96.41
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.29
2.67
2.42
1.93
1.45
1.13
-0.09
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.76
0.30
0.95
-1.68
7.54
32 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
--
80
10
- - -;--
..........
90
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -05 #HB -05 -2 1-1
1 SW
#zoo -4.21
#230 - 4 21
2.12
1.67
-1.83
7.1
1.35
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -09 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM. Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,250,466
Northing (Y, ft):
51,224
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
33 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -05 #HB -05 -2
Analysis Date: 12 -09 -10
Analyzed By: CRM. Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,250,466
Northing (ft):
51,224
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -3/1
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
83.20
Wash Weight (g):
79.89
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 4.21
#230 - 3.99
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
1.03
1.24
1.03
1.24
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.31
0.37
1.34
1.61
4
-2.25
4.76
0.17
0.20
1.51
1.81
5
-2.00
4.00
0.52
0.63
2.03
2.43
7
-1.50
2.83
1.06
1.27
3.09
3.70
10
-1.00
2.00
1.04
1.25
4.13
4.95
14
-0.50
1.41
1.77
2.13
5.90
7.08
18
0.00
1.00
2.62
3.15
8.52
10.23
25
0.50
0.71
3.78
4.54
12.30
14.77
35
1.00
0.50
5.15
6.19
17.45
20.96
45
1.50
0.35
6.95
8.35
24.40
29.31
60
2.00
0.25
11.88
14.28
36.28
43.59
80
2.50
0.18
21.80
26.20
58.08
69.79
120
3.00
0.13
17.72
21.30
75.80
91.09
170
3.50
0.09
3.58
4.30
79.38
95.39
200
3.75
0.07
0.33
0.40
79.71
95.79
230
4.00
0.06
0.18
0.22
79.89
96.01
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.45
2.83
2.62
2.12
1.24
0.60
-0.99
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.67
0.31
1.35
-1.83
7.1
34 of 118

DRILLING LOG DIVISION
1. PROJECT
Town of Holden Beach
Lockwood Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, NC
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
X = 2,250,269 Y = 50,250
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
i
Athena Technologies
4. NAME OF DRILLER
P. McClellan
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
® VERTICAL i VERTICAL
Q INCLINED
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 11.0 Ft.
0
ELEV. DEPTH w CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
(ft) (ft) a Depths and elevations based on measured value
w
0.0
Fine SAND, trace carbonate/silt, poorly graded,
very loose, subround, @ 1.75'- mud rip -up
clast, @ 2.17'- medium SAND lense, dark
grayish brown (2.5Y -4/2), (SP).
99 •'.'•
Attach D - Report 1
boring ueslgnatlon mb -ut
INSTALLATION SHEET 1
OF 1 SHEETS
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM :HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
DISTURBED i UNDISTURBED (UD)
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
14. WATER DEPTH 33.7 Ft.
STARTED iCOMPLETED
15. DATE BORING ' 10 -21 -10 14:04 10 -21 -10 14:12
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 10 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
A. Freeze
0-i
s R% Ca REMARKS
My
2.5. Silty tine to medium SANU, little carbonate, very
loose, burrows, very dark gray (2.5Y-3/1), SM .
3.0 Fine to medium SAND, some silt, little
carbonate, poorly graded, loose,
3.3 subround -suban ular, light gray (5Y-7/1), SP .
Fine SAND and silt, little carbonate, loose,
Fine SAND and silt, little carbonate, loose
grading to silty fine SAND, some carboate,
loose, subround, burrows @ 4.54' - sand infilled
burrow, very dark gray (5Y -3/1), (SP -SM).
Silty fine SAND and fine to coarse carbonate
gravel, very loose, very dark gray (5Y -3/1),
(GM).
Silty CLAY, medium stiff, @ 8.25' and 9.75'-
fine organic debris, very dark blueish gray
(5B -3/1), (CL).
End of Boring
Sample #HB -07 -1, Depth = 2.2'
° Mean (mm): 0.19, Phi Sorting: 0.71
°=° Fines (230): 3.83% (SP)
cv I Sample #HB -07 -2, Depth = 4.5'
o Mean (mm): 0.28, Phi Sorting: 1.22
m Fines (230):6.45% (SW -SM)
= Carbonate (0 - 4'): 10.9%
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 39 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
M
5
IM

0
5
---
Attach D - Report 1
1
6
�y
2
7
�-
Holden Beach,
-
North Carolina
October 2010
H B -07
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
s'
t-
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
5 ?J
10
40 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170 200 230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
m 60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
....:`.........
80
%
10
_
. ...............
90
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -07 #HB -07 -1 1-1
1 SP
#200 - 3.4.83 01
#230 -
2.62
2.43
-2.01
9.06
0.71
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -09 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,250,269
Northing (Y, ft):
50,250
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fa x
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
41 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -07 #HB -07 -1
Analysis Date: 12 -09 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,250,269
Northing (ft):
50,250
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SP
Munsell:
Dry - 2.5Y -4/2
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
92.58
Wash Weight (g):
89.03
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 4.01
#230 - 3.83
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
-2.25
4.76
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5
-2.00
4.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
7
-1.50
2.83
0.21
0.23
0.21
0.23
10
-1.00
2.00
0.12
0.13
0.33
0.36
14
-0.50
1.41
0.34
0.37
0.67
0.73
18
0.00
1.00
0.53
0.57
1.20
1.30
25
0.50
0.71
1.06
1.14
2.26
2.44
35
1.00
0.50
2.13
2.30
4.39
4.74
45
1.50
0.35
4.27
4.61
8.66
9.35
60
2.00
0.25
5.81
6.28
14.47
15.63
80
2.50
0.18
21.34
23.05
35.81
38.68
120
3.00
0.13
42.92
46.36
78.73
85.04
170
3.50
0.09
9.55
10.32
88.28
95.36
200
3.75
0.07
0.58
0.63
88.86
95.99
230
4.00
0.06
0.17
0.18
89.03
96.17
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.48
2.99
2.89
2.62
2.20
2.01
1.03
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
2.43
0.19
0.71
-2.01
9.06
42 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
a
30
70
20
_._ _........
80
10
-- - - -�t- - - -...
90
- -
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -07 #HB -07 -2 1-1
1 SW -SM
#zoo -6.6.45 65
#230 -
2.25
1.84
-1.74
6.99
1.22
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -09 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,250,269
Northing (Y, ft):
50,250
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fa x
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
43 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -07 #HB -07 -2
Analysis Date: 12 -09 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,250,269
Northing (ft):
50,250
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/1
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
81.42
Wash Weight (g):
76.16
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 6.65
#230 - 6.45
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.45
0.55
0.45
0.55
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.21
0.26
0.66
0.81
4
-2.25
4.76
0.20
0.25
0.86
1.06
5
-2.00
4.00
0.07
0.09
0.93
1.15
7
-1.50
2.83
0.56
0.69
1.49
1.84
10
-1.00
2.00
1.35
1.66
2.84
3.50
14
-0.50
1.41
1.70
2.09
4.54
5.59
18
0.00
1.00
2.09
2.57
6.63
8.16
25
0.50
0.71
3.02
3.71
9.65
11.87
35
1.00
0.50
4.68
5.75
14.33
17.62
45
1.50
0.35
6.15
7.55
20.48
25.17
60
2.00
0.25
10.17
12.49
30.65
37.66
80
2.50
0.18
19.74
24.24
50.39
61.90
120
3.00
0.13
20.13
24.72
70.52
86.62
170
3.50
0.09
5.09
6.25
75.61
92.87
200
3.75
0.07
0.39
0.48
76.00
93.35
230
4.00
0.06
0.16
0.20
76.16
93.55
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.95
2.76
2.25
1.49
0.86
-0.64
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.84
0.28
1.22
-1.74
6.99
44 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
Borinq Designation HB -08
DRILLING LOG
DIVISION
INSTALLATION
SHEET 1
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Lockwood Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32dO NAD 1983
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,248,769 Y = 49,405
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 34.3 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
10 -21 -10 13:33 10 -21 -10 13:40
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 8.5 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 10.0 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
0-i
ELEV.
(ft)
DEPTH
(ft)
w
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
Depths and elevations based on measured values
%
REC.
'L
04
REMARKS
0.0
Medium SAND, little carbonate, poorly graded,
Sample #HB -08 -1, Depth = 1.8'
very loose, subround - subangular, @ 1.08'-
o
Mean (mm): 0.53 Phi Sorting: 0.87
color grades to dark gray (5Y 4/1), grayish
co
Fines (230): 1.91 /o (SW)
brown (2.5Y -5/2), (SP).
z
1.8
Interbedded layers of silty medium SAND, and
SILT, very dark gray (5Y-3/1), (SM).
Interbedded layers of silty fine to medium-
2.8
SAND, and medium SAND and silt, some
carbonate, loose, subround - subangular, dark
cv
o
Sample #HB -08 -2, Depth = 4.1'
Mean (mm): 0.59, Phi Sorting: 2.01
gray (5Y-4/1), (GM).
oo
Fines (230):6.85% (SW -SM)
Silty fine SAND, some cabonate, loose,
=
Carbonate (0 - 3'): 20.2%
subround - subangular, very dark gray (5Y -3/1),
(SM).
4.1
1
Silty fine SAND and fine to coarse carbonate
gravel, very loose, dark gray (5Y -4/1), (GM).
5.0
Silty fine SAND, little carbonate, loose, burrows
@ 5.42' and 7.75'- fine to medium sand (color=
light gray, 5Y 7/1) infilled burrows, very dark
greenish gray (1 OY -3/1), (SM).
8.5
ititi
Loss of Recovery..
10.0
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 45 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
20
-5
ato]

Attach D - Report 1
A J
rt�
1 6
V,
F
2 : 7
017.
Holden Beach,
r North Carolina
October 2010
-08
- f
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
,... - • 1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
{ www.athenatechnologies.com
.. ? (843) 887 -3800
k-.
5 Ff= 10
46 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
..........
.....
80
`-
10
---
........
---
- - -' --
90
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -08 #HB -08 -1
•
SW
#200 -1.s4
#230 - 1.91
0.98
0.91
-0.41
3.95
0.87
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -09 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,248,769
Northing (Y, ft):
49,405
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEI4A
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
47 of 118

Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -08 #HB -08 -1
Analysis Date: 12 -09 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,248,769
Northing (ft):
49,405
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -6/1
Com
Dry Weight (g):
116.85
Wash Weight (g):
114.63
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
4
-2.25
4.76
5
-2.00
4.00
7
-1.50
2.83
10
-1.00
2.00
14
-0.50
1.41
18
0.00
1.00
25
0.50
0.71
35
1.00
0.50
45
1.50
0.35
60
2.00
0.25
80
2.50
0.18
120
3.00
0.13
170
3.50
0.09
200
3.75
0.07
230
4.00
0.06
Attach D - Report 1
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ph (843) 887 -3800
fax [phone]
Coordinate System: Elevation (ft):
North Carolina State Plane 3200
ments
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines /o):
#20 - 1.94
#230
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.10
0.09
0.10
0.09
0.47
0.40
0.57
0.49
0.96
0.82
1.53
1.31
1.58
1.35
3.11
2.66
2.98
2.55
6.09
5.21
7.99
6.84
14.08
12.05
18.01
15.41
32.09
27.46
27.67
23.68
59.76
51.14
28.93
24.76
88.69
75.90
15.79
13.51
104.48
89.41
7.02
6.01
111.50
95.42
2.47
2.11
113.97
97.53
0.57
0.49
114.54
98.02
0.05
0.04
114.59
98.06
0.04
0.03
114.63
98.09
Phi 5 Phi 16 Phi 25 Phi 50 Phi 75 Phi 84 Phi 95
2.47 1.80 1.48 0.98 0.42 0.13 -0.54
Moment Mean Phi Mean mm Sorting Skewness Kurtosis
Statistics 0.91 0.53 0.87 -0.41 3.95
48 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
80
10
- °
--
90
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -08 #HB -08 -2 1-1
1 Sw -SM
#200 -7.13
#230 - 6.85
1.31
0.75
-0.86
3.08
2.01
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -09 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,248,769
Northing (Y, ft):
49,405
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEI4A
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
49 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -08 #HB -08 -2
Analysis Date: 12 -09 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,248,769
Northing (ft):
49,405
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/1
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
91.44
Wash Weight (g):
85.18
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 7.13
#230 - 6.85
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
5.20
5.69
5.20
5.69
3.5
-2.50
5.66
1.75
1.91
6.95
7.60
4
-2.25
4.76
0.63
0.69
7.58
8.29
5
-2.00
4.00
1.32
1.44
8.90
9.73
7
-1.50
2.83
2.74
3.00
11.64
12.73
10
-1.00
2.00
2.80
3.06
14.44
15.79
14
-0.50
1.41
4.97
5.44
19.41
21.23
18
0.00
1.00
6.54
7.15
25.95
28.38
25
0.50
0.71
7.93
8.67
33.88
37.05
35
1.00
0.50
7.88
8.62
41.76
45.67
45
1.50
0.35
6.29
6.88
48.05
52.55
60
2.00
0.25
7.77
8.50
55.82
61.05
80
2.50
0.18
9.75
10.66
65.57
71.71
120
3.00
0.13
12.68
13.87
78.25
85.58
170
3.50
0.09
6.02
6.58
84.27
92.16
200
3.75
0.07
0.65
0.71
84.92
92.87
230
4.00
0.06
0.26
0.28
85.18
93.15
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.94
2.62
1.31
-0.24
-0.98
-4.03
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
0.75
0.59
2.01
-0.86
3.08
50 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
Borinq Designation HB -09
DRILLING LOG
DIVISION
INSTALLATION
SHEET 1
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Lockwood Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,250,099 Y = 49,364
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 33.8 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
10 -21 -10 13:05 10 -21 -10 13:13
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 8.33 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 10.5 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
d• W
0-i
ELEV.
(ft)
DEPTH
(ft)
w
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
Depths and elevations based on measured values
%
REC.
'L
04
REMARKS
0.0
_j
°0U)
Fine SAND, trace carbonate/silt, poorly graded,
very loose, subround, dark grayish brown
'
(2.5Y -4/2), (SP).
1.0
.'
1.3
SILT, little fine sand, very soft, grades to silty
fine sand, dark gray (5Y-4/1), (ML).
1.8
Medium SAND, little carbonate, trace silt, well
graded, very loose, subround - subangular, @
o
Sample #HB -09 -1, Depth = 3.9'
Mean (mm): 0.30, Phi Sorting: 1.44
1.58'- coarse carbonate gravel, gray (2.5Y -5/1),
oo
Fines (230):5.95% (SW -SM)
(SW).
=
Carbonate (0 - 4'): 18.9%
Fine SAND and silt, little carbonate, burrows,
very dark gray (5Y -3/1), (SP -SM).
3.9
Silty fine SAND, little carbonate, few
interbedded fine sand lenses, loose, subround,
�
Sample #HB -09 -2, Depth = 5.9'
burrows, black (5Y- 2.5/1), (SM).
o
Mean (mm): 0.55, Phi Sorting: 1.69
5.3
°z°
Fines (230):6.17% (SW -SM)
Silty, medium - coarse SAND, some carbonate,
loose, well rounded - subround, black (5Y- 2.5/1),
5 9
(SM).
Silty fine SAND, little coarse carbonate gravel,
very loose black 5Y -2.5/1 (SM).
6.2
Silty fine to medium SAND, little carbonate, few
silt (ML) lenses, loose, burrows, @ 7.58 and
7.85'- light gray (5Y 7/1) fine /medium SAND
infilled burrows, very dark greenish gray
(10Y -3/1), (SM).
8.3
Loss of Recovery..
10.5
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 51 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
20
-5
ato]

'
Attach D - Report 1
-a. R
J.
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
3
8
October 2010
H B -09
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
. `
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
5
10
52 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
80
10
__.........
90
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -09 #HB -09 -1 1-1
1 Sw -SM
#200 -5.6.95 13
#230 -
2.38
1.75
-1.62
5.71
1.44
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -09 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,250,099
Northing (Y, ft):
49,364
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fa x
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
53 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -09 #HB -09 -1
Analysis Date: 12 -09 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,250,099
Northing (ft):
49,364
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -5/1
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
95.57
Wash Weight (g):
89.88
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 6.13
#230 - 5.95
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.76
0.80
0.76
0.80
3.5
-2.50
5.66
1.04
1.09
1.80
1.89
4
-2.25
4.76
0.21
0.22
2.01
2.11
5
-2.00
4.00
0.40
0.42
2.41
2.53
7
-1.50
2.83
1.17
1.22
3.58
3.75
10
-1.00
2.00
1.23
1.29
4.81
5.04
14
-0.50
1.41
2.42
2.53
7.23
7.57
18
0.00
1.00
4.09
4.28
11.32
11.85
25
0.50
0.71
5.28
5.52
16.60
17.37
35
1.00
0.50
4.64
4.86
21.24
22.23
45
1.50
0.35
6.87
7.19
28.11
29.42
60
2.00
0.25
6.99
7.31
35.10
36.73
80
2.50
0.18
16.74
17.52
51.84
54.25
120
3.00
0.13
31.89
33.37
83.73
87.62
170
3.50
0.09
5.67
5.93
89.40
93.55
200
3.75
0.07
0.31
0.32
89.71
93.87
230
4.00
0.06
0.17
0.18
89.88
94.05
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.95
2.81
2.38
1.19
0.38
-1.02
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.75
0.30
1.44
-1.62
5.71
54 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
m 60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
80
- - -...
10
..._....
90
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -09 #HB -09 -2
•
SW -SM
#zoo -6.6.17 42
#230 -
1.15
0.87
-0.43
2.35
1.69
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -09 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,250,099
Northing (Y, ft):
49,364
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fax [phone]
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
55 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -09 #HB -09 -2
Analysis Date: 12 -09 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,250,099
Northing (ft):
49,364
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/1
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
98.36
Wash Weight (g):
92.27
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 6.42
#230 - 6.17
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.39
0.40
0.39
0.40
3.5
-2.50
5.66
1.86
1.89
2.25
2.29
4
-2.25
4.76
0.94
0.96
3.19
3.25
5
-2.00
4.00
1.69
1.72
4.88
4.97
7
-1.50
2.83
3.26
3.31
8.14
8.28
10
-1.00
2.00
5.30
5.39
13.44
13.67
14
-0.50
1.41
7.90
8.03
21.34
21.70
18
0.00
1.00
9.32
9.48
30.66
31.18
25
0.50
0.71
8.76
8.91
39.42
40.09
35
1.00
0.50
7.74
7.87
47.16
47.96
45
1.50
0.35
6.72
6.83
53.88
54.79
60
2.00
0.25
5.38
5.47
59.26
60.26
80
2.50
0.18
10.51
10.69
69.77
70.95
120
3.00
0.13
17.84
18.14
87.61
89.09
170
3.50
0.09
4.04
4.11
91.65
93.20
200
3.75
0.07
0.37
0.38
92.02
93.58
230
4.00
0.06
0.25
0.25
92.27
93.83
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.86
2.61
1.15
-0.33
-0.85
-2.00
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
0.87
0.55
1.69
-0.43
2.35
56 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
Borinq Designation HB -10
DRILLING LOG
DIVISION
INSTALLATION
SHEET 1
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Lockwood Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,250,317 Y = 48,117
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 35.0 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
10 -21 -10 12:31 10 -21 -10 12:40
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 9 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 10.0 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
0-i
ELEV.
DEPTH
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
%
'L
REMARKS
(ft)
(ft)
w
Depths and elevations based on measured values
REC.
04
0.0
°0U)
Fine SAND, little silt, trace carbonate, poorly
graded, loose, subround, dark grayish brown
(2.5Y -4/2), (SP).
1.3
Sample #HB -10 -1, Depth = 3.3'
Mean (mm): 0.29, Phi Sorting: 1.46
0o
Fines (230):6.62% (SW -SM)
Fine SAND and silt, little carbonate, poorly
=
Carbonate (0 - 3'): 12.1 %
graded, loose, subround, carbonate %
increases with depth, burrows, very dark gray
(5Y -3/1), (SP -SM).
3.3
Fine SAND and silt, with fine carbonate gravel,
few coarse fragments, very loose, very dark
o
Sample #HB -10 -2, Depth = 5.0'
4.3
'
gray (5Y -3/1), (GM).
°_°
Mean (mm): 0.52, Phi Sorting: 1.70
Fines (230):13.13% (SM)
Fine SAND and silt, some carbonate, loose, silt
% increases with depth, dark greenish gray
(10Y -4/1), (SM).
5.5
Interbedded layers of sandy SILT, and silty fine
SAND, little carbonate, soft/loose, very dark
6.2
gray (1 0Y -3/1 (SM).
_greenish
Silty CLAY, medium stiff, trace carbonate in few
fine sand lenses, @ 6.85' to 7.05'- fine sand
lenses with carbonate, @ 7.45' - lense of fine
sand, dark gray (N -4/0), (ML).
8.0
Coarse gravelly fine - medium SAND with some
8.5
silt, very loose, round - subangular, @ 7.95'-
clastic cobble, @ 8.45'- large clam shell
fra ment, dark r­ P2.5Y -4/1 GM .
9.0
Silty CLAY, medium stiff, dark gray (N -4/0),
ML.
Loss of Recovery..
10.0
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 57 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
20
-5
ato]

l
1
KA
M
5
L
r
:T�rr
y ,n
y F'
Attach D - Report 1
A
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
8 L
October 2010
f HB -10
Scale in Feet
`• f Photo Mosaic Image
9
A� H E IAA
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
M 1
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
.__..........
80
10
.....,..
- - --
90
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -10 #HB -10 -1
•
Sw -SM
#200 -6.91
#230-6.62
2.47
1.81
-1.48
4.52
1.46
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -09 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,250,317
Northing (Y, ft):
48,117
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fax [phone]
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
59 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -10 #HB -10 -1
Analysis Date: 12 -09 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,250,317
Northing (ft):
48,117
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/2
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
82.96
Wash Weight (g):
77.46
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 6.91
#230 - 6.62
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
1.07
1.29
1.07
1.29
4
-2.25
4.76
0.31
0.37
1.38
1.66
5
-2.00
4.00
0.76
0.92
2.14
2.58
7
-1.50
2.83
1.36
1.64
3.50
4.22
10
-1.00
2.00
1.84
2.22
5.34
6.44
14
-0.50
1.41
2.37
2.86
7.71
9.30
18
0.00
1.00
2.94
3.54
10.65
12.84
25
0.50
0.71
3.78
4.56
14.43
17.40
35
1.00
0.50
3.77
4.54
18.20
21.94
45
1.50
0.35
3.06
3.69
21.26
25.63
60
2.00
0.25
4.26
5.14
25.52
30.77
80
2.50
0.18
16.90
20.37
42.42
51.14
120
3.00
0.13
27.47
33.11
69.89
84.25
170
3.50
0.09
6.70
8.08
76.59
92.33
200
3.75
0.07
0.63
0.76
77.22
93.09
230
4.00
0.06
0.24
0.29
77.46
93.38
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.00
2.86
2.47
1.41
0.35
-1.32
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.81
0.29
1.46
-1.48
4.52
60 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
LF
80
10
-...
90
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -10 #HB -10 -2 1-1
1 SM
200 - 13.a
230 -13.1
1.41
0.93
-0.39
2.08
1.7
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -09 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,250,317
Northing (Y, ft):
48,117
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
61 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -10 #HB -10 -2
Analysis Date: 12 -09 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,250,317
Northing (ft):
48,117
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/1
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
110.39
Wash Weight (g):
95.89
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines ( %):
200 - 13.4
230 -13.1
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
1.40
1.27
1.40
1.27
4
-2.25
4.76
1.21
1.10
2.61
2.37
5
-2.00
4.00
2.14
1.94
4.75
4.31
7
-1.50
2.83
4.90
4.44
9.65
8.75
10
-1.00
2.00
5.38
4.87
15.03
13.62
14
-0.50
1.41
8.29
7.51
23.32
21.13
18
0.00
1.00
8.03
7.27
31.35
28.40
25
0.50
0.71
7.00
6.34
38.35
34.74
35
1.00
0.50
5.20
4.71
43.55
39.45
45
1.50
0.35
14.07
12.75
57.62
52.20
60
2.00
0.25
1.43
1.30
59.05
53.50
80
2.50
0.18
11.42
10.35
70.47
63.85
120
3.00
0.13
19.22
17.41
89.69
81.26
170
3.50
0.09
5.19
4.70
94.88
85.96
200
3.75
0.07
0.63
0.57
95.51
86.53
230
4.00
0.06
0.38
0.34
95.89
86.87
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.29
2.82
1.41
-0.23
-0.84
-1.92
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
0.93
0.52
1.7
-0.39
2.08
62 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
Borinq Designation HB -11
DRILLING LOG
DIVISION
INSTALLATION
SHEET 1
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Lockwood Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32dO NAD 1983
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,248,385 Y = 48,448
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 36.3 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
10 -21 -10 11:58 10 -21 -10 12:07
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 8 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 9.0 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
0-i
ELEV.
DEPTH
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
%
'L
REMARKS
(ft)
(ft)
w
Depths and elevations based on measured values
REC.
04
0.0
_j
°0U)
Interbedded layers of fine SAND, trace
7
carbonate/silt, poorly graded, loose, subround
-
-
Sample #HB -11 -1, Depth = 1.6'
AND silty fine SAND, little carbonate, well
oo
Mean (mm): 0.38, Phi Sorting: 1.13
graded, olive gray (5Y -4/2), (SW -SM).
x
Fines (230):4.97 /o (SW -SM)
1.6
0
Sample #HB -11 -2, Depth = 4.0'
cv
Silty fine-medium SAND, little carbonate, well
Mean (mm): 0.38, Phi Sorting: 1.63
graded, loose, subround, burrows, @ 2.15 to
0o
Fines (230):6.58% (SW -SM)
3.18'- lenses of medium SAND with some
=
Carbonate (0 - 3'): 12.6%
carbonate, dark gray (5Y -4/1), (SW -SM).
4.4
Silty fine SAND and fine - coarse carbonate
gravel, very loose, burrows, dark gray (5Y -4/1),
5.3
(GM).
Silty fine - medium SAND, little carbonate, loose,
burrows, @ 2.33 to 2.50'- light gray (5Y 7/1)
fine - medium SAND infilled burrows, very dark
greenish gray (5GY -3/1), (SM).
8.0
Not recovered. Refusal encountered at 9' below
sediment surface..
9.0
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 63 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
a
-5
ato]

- Attach D - Report 1
t
1 6
i r Holden Beach,
North Carolina
October 2010
HB -11
Scale in Feet
- Photo Mosaic Image
r-
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
,; Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
s f (843) 887 -3800
5 10
64 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
80
....:.........1,..
10
ttl
90
0
r-
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -11 #HB -11 -1 1-1
1 SW -SM
#200 -5.11
#230 - 4.97
1.76
1.39
-0.99
3.65
1.13
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -09 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,248,385
Northing (Y, ft):
48,448
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
65 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 #HB -11 -1
Analysis Date: 12 -09 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,248,385
Northing (ft):
48,448
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/2
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
100.59
Wash Weight (g):
95.57
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 5.11
#230 - 4.97
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
4
-2.25
4.76
0.26
0.26
0.41
0.41
5
-2.00
4.00
0.31
0.31
0.72
0.72
7
-1.50
2.83
1.16
1.15
1.88
1.87
10
-1.00
2.00
2.45
2.44
4.33
4.31
14
-0.50
1.41
2.51
2.50
6.84
6.81
18
0.00
1.00
5.05
5.02
11.89
11.83
25
0.50
0.71
9.00
8.95
20.89
20.78
35
1.00
0.50
8.11
8.06
29.00
28.84
45
1.50
0.35
10.46
10.40
39.46
39.24
60
2.00
0.25
20.85
20.73
60.31
59.97
80
2.50
0.18
24.58
24.44
84.89
84.41
120
3.00
0.13
9.62
9.56
94.51
93.97
170
3.50
0.09
0.79
0.79
95.30
94.76
200
3.75
0.07
0.13
0.13
95.43
94.89
230
4.00
0.06
0.14
0.14
95.57
95.03
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.95
2.49
2.31
1.76
0.76
0.23
-0.86
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.39
0.38
1.13
-0.99
3.65
66 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
80
%_
10
_
........
90
0
L--:
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -11 #HB -11 -2
•
Sw -SM
#200 -6.93
#230 - 6.58
2.06
1.4
-1.26
4.39
1.63
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -09 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,248,385
Northing (Y, ft):
48,448
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fax [phone]
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
67 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 #HB -11 -2
Analysis Date: 12 -09 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,248,385
Northing (ft):
48,448
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/1
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
90.43
Wash Weight (g):
84.47
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 6.93
#230 - 6.58
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
1.56
1.73
1.56
1.73
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.71
0.79
2.27
2.52
4
-2.25
4.76
0.55
0.61
2.82
3.13
5
-2.00
4.00
0.83
0.92
3.65
4.05
7
-1.50
2.83
1.86
2.06
5.51
6.11
10
-1.00
2.00
1.92
2.12
7.43
8.23
14
-0.50
1.41
3.33
3.68
10.76
11.91
18
0.00
1.00
4.53
5.01
15.29
16.92
25
0.50
0.71
5.95
6.58
21.24
23.50
35
1.00
0.50
6.06
6.70
27.30
30.20
45
1.50
0.35
7.83
8.66
35.13
38.86
60
2.00
0.25
8.40
9.29
43.53
48.15
80
2.50
0.18
14.27
15.78
57.80
63.93
120
3.00
0.13
20.21
22.35
78.01
86.28
170
3.50
0.09
5.71
6.31
83.72
92.59
200
3.75
0.07
0.43
0.48
84.15
93.07
230
4.00
0.06
0.32
0.35
84.47
93.42
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.95
2.75
2.06
0.61
-0.09
-1.77
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.4
0.38
1.63
-1.26
4.39
68 of 118

DRILLING LOG DIVISION
1. PROJECT
Town of Holden Beach
Lockwood Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, NC
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
X = 2,247,459 Y = 48,899
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
i
Athena Technologies
4. NAME OF DRILLER
P. McClellan
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
® VERTICAL i VERTICAL
Q INCLINED
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 9.0 Ft.
0
ELEV. DEPTH w CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
(ft) (ft) a Depths and elevations based on measured value
W
0.0
Fine SAND, trace carbonate, poorly graded,
very loose, subround, olive gray (5Y -4/2), (SP).
1.8
1011.1
Silty fine SAND, trace carbonate, loose, black
(5Y- 2.5/1), (SM).
Silty fine - medium SAND, little carbonate, loose,
black (5Y-2.5/1), (SM).
Attach D - Report 1
boring ueslgnatlon mb -u
INSTALLATION SHEET 1
OF 1 SHEETS
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM :HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
DISTURBED i UNDISTURBED (UD)
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
14. WATER DEPTH 34.7 Ft.
STARTED iCOMPLETED
15. DATE BORING ' 10 -21 -10 11:32 10 -21 -10 11:40
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 8.75 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
A. Freeze
0-i
s R% Ca REMARKS
My
Silty fine SAND and fine carbonate gravel, few
coarse carbonate fragments, very loose, @ 5.75
to 6.18'- coarse carbonate gravel, black
(5Y- 2.5/1), (GM).
Silty fine - medium SAND, trace carbonate,
loose, few lenses fine - medium sandy SILT,
burrows, very dark greenish gray (5GY -3/1),
(SM).
sediment surface..
End of Boring
N I Sample #HB-1 2-1, Depth = 1.8'
Mean (mm): 0.24, Phi Sorting: 0.67
°=° Fines (230): 1.86% (SP)
cv Sample #HB -12 -2, Depth = 4.0'
Mean (mm): 0.34, Phi Sorting: 1.38
0o Fines (230):6.03% (SW -SM)
= Carbonate (0 - 3'): 10.5%
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 69 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
M
5
It$]

l
1
KA
M
5
rt�
- x
} '
5
�16
7
11001
i
v ri
-y�
r
Attach D - Report 1
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
October 2010
HB -12
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
9
A� H E IAA
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
M 1
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
NOW ME&

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170 200 230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
m 60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
80
10
- -`--
'--
90
--
-.....
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -12 #HB -12 -1
•
SP
#200 -1.93
#230 - 1.86
2.14 2.05
-1.5
8.57
0.67
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -10 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,247,459
Northing (Y, ft):
48,899
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fax [phone]
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
71 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -12 #HB -12 -1
Analysis Date: 12 -10 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,247,459
Northing (ft):
48,899
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SP
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -6/1
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
121.62
Wash Weight (g):
119.36
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 1.93
#230 - 1.86
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
-2.25
4.76
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5
-2.00
4.00
0.11
0.09
0.11
0.09
7
-1.50
2.83
0.19
0.16
0.30
0.25
10
-1.00
2.00
0.21
0.17
0.51
0.42
14
-0.50
1.41
0.53
0.44
1.04
0.86
18
0.00
1.00
0.90
0.74
1.94
1.60
25
0.50
0.71
1.59
1.31
3.53
2.91
35
1.00
0.50
2.72
2.24
6.25
5.15
45
1.50
0.35
9.60
7.89
15.85
13.04
60
2.00
0.25
31.14
25.60
46.99
38.64
80
2.50
0.18
50.05
41.15
97.04
79.79
120
3.00
0.13
17.19
14.13
114.23
93.92
170
3.50
0.09
4.79
3.94
119.02
97.86
200
3.75
0.07
0.26
0.21
119.28
98.07
230
4.00
0.06
0.08
0.07
119.36
98.14
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.14
2.65
2.44
2.14
1.73
1.56
0.97
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
2.05
0.24
0.67
-1.5
8.57
72 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
a
30
70
20
80
---
f_.........
10
...;....
90
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -12 #HB -12 -2
•
Sw -SM
#200 - 6.6.03 29
#230 -
2.06
1.57
-1.19
4.1
1.38
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -10 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,247,459
Northing (Y, ft):
48,899
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fax [phone]
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
73 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -12 #HB -12 -2
Analysis Date: 12 -10 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,247,459
Northing (ft):
48,899
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/1
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
91.56
Wash Weight (g):
86.04
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 6.29
#230 - 6.03
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.96
1.05
0.96
1.05
4
-2.25
4.76
0.24
0.26
1.20
1.31
5
-2.00
4.00
0.80
0.87
2.00
2.18
7
-1.50
2.83
1.63
1.78
3.63
3.96
10
-1.00
2.00
2.08
2.27
5.71
6.23
14
-0.50
1.41
3.06
3.34
8.77
9.57
18
0.00
1.00
3.33
3.64
12.10
13.21
25
0.50
0.71
4.30
4.70
16.40
17.91
35
1.00
0.50
6.60
7.21
23.00
25.12
45
1.50
0.35
8.70
9.50
31.70
34.62
60
2.00
0.25
11.92
13.02
43.62
47.64
80
2.50
0.18
17.21
18.80
60.83
66.44
120
3.00
0.13
19.54
21.34
80.37
87.78
170
3.50
0.09
4.89
5.34
85.26
93.12
200
3.75
0.07
0.54
0.59
85.80
93.71
230
4.00
0.06
0.24
0.26
86.04
93.97
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.91
2.70
2.06
0.99
0.30
-1.27
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.57
0.34
1.38
-1.19
4.1
74 of 118

Silty fine - medium SAND, little carbonate, loose,
very dark greenish gray (10Y -3/1), (SM).
Silty 1, v SHNU e, v ry dark greenish gray
5.3 gravel, very loose, very dark greenish gray
(10Y -3/1). (GM).
Attach D - Report 1
boring ueslgnatlon mb -ij
INSTALLATION SHEET 1
OF 1 SHEETS
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM :HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
DISTURBED i UNDISTURBED (UD)
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
14. WATER DEPTH 36.8 Ft.
STARTED iCOMPLETED
15. DATE BORING ' 10 -21 -10 10:59 10 -21 -10 11:08
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 5.25 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
A. Freeze
0-i
s R% Ca REMARKS
My
Not recovered. Refusal encountered at 8' below
sediment surface..
End of Boring
Sample #HB -13 -1, Depth = 2.5'
Mean (mm): 0.36, Phi Sorting: 1.18
co Fines (230):1.62% (SW)
= Carbonate (0 - 3'): 11.8%
M I Sample #HB -13 -2, Depth= 4.0'
Mean (mm): 0.33, Phi Sorting: 1.32
°=° Fines (230): 6.11 % (SW -SM)
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 75 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
M
5
IM
DRILLING LOG
DIVISION
1.
PROJECT
Town of Holden Beach
Lockwood Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, NC
2.
CORE LOCATION
i LOCATION COORDINATES
X = 2,247,403 Y = 47,140
3.
DRILLING AGENCY
i CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
Athena Technologies
4.
NAME OF DRILLER
P. McClellan
S.
DIRECTION OF BORING
i DEG. FROM i BEARING
® VERTICAL
i VERTICAL
Q INCLINED
6.
THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
7.
DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
8.
TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING
8.0 Ft.
0
ELEV.
DEPTH
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
(ft)
(ft)
a
Depths and elevations based on measured value
0.0
w
Fine- medium SAND, trace carbonate, poorly
graded,
very loose, subround - subangular, olive
gray (5Y -5/2), (SP).
2.0
Medium SAND, little carbonate, trace silt, well
2.5
graded,
very loose, subround - subangular, dark
gray (5Y-4/1), (SW).
Silty fine SAND, trace carbonate, loose,
3.1
burrows, very dark greenish gray (10Y -3/1),
Silty fine - medium SAND, little carbonate, loose,
very dark greenish gray (10Y -3/1), (SM).
Silty 1, v SHNU e, v ry dark greenish gray
5.3 gravel, very loose, very dark greenish gray
(10Y -3/1). (GM).
Attach D - Report 1
boring ueslgnatlon mb -ij
INSTALLATION SHEET 1
OF 1 SHEETS
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM :HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
DISTURBED i UNDISTURBED (UD)
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
14. WATER DEPTH 36.8 Ft.
STARTED iCOMPLETED
15. DATE BORING ' 10 -21 -10 10:59 10 -21 -10 11:08
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 5.25 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
A. Freeze
0-i
s R% Ca REMARKS
My
Not recovered. Refusal encountered at 8' below
sediment surface..
End of Boring
Sample #HB -13 -1, Depth = 2.5'
Mean (mm): 0.36, Phi Sorting: 1.18
co Fines (230):1.62% (SW)
= Carbonate (0 - 3'): 11.8%
M I Sample #HB -13 -2, Depth= 4.0'
Mean (mm): 0.33, Phi Sorting: 1.32
°=° Fines (230): 6.11 % (SW -SM)
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 75 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
M
5
IM

0 - 5
Attach D - Report 1
2u 7
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
3 �.�: 8
October 2010
HB-13
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
5 �._ 10
76 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
80
10
- - - -
-- - - -`--
- -' --
90
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median Mean
Skew
Ku t
Sort
Sample Information
HB -13 #HB -13 -1 1-1
1 SW
#zoo -1.67
#230 - 1.62
1.76 1.47
-1.81
7.52
1.18
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -10 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,247,403
Northing (Y, ft):
47,140
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
77 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -13 #HB -13 -1
Analysis Date: 12 -10 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,247,403
Northing (ft):
47,140
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -5/2
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
121.43
Wash Weight (g):
119.47
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 1.67
#230 - 1.62
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.25
0.21
0.25
0.21
3.5
-2.50
5.66
2.15
1.77
2.40
1.98
4
-2.25
4.76
0.15
0.12
2.55
2.10
5
-2.00
4.00
0.37
0.30
2.92
2.40
7
-1.50
2.83
0.96
0.79
3.88
3.19
10
-1.00
2.00
1.01
0.83
4.89
4.02
14
-0.50
1.41
2.10
1.73
6.99
5.75
18
0.00
1.00
4.02
3.31
11.01
9.06
25
0.50
0.71
7.34
6.04
18.35
15.10
35
1.00
0.50
10.30
8.48
28.65
23.58
45
1.50
0.35
15.98
13.16
44.63
36.74
60
2.00
0.25
31.07
25.59
75.70
62.33
80
2.50
0.18
31.29
25.77
106.99
88.10
120
3.00
0.13
9.58
7.89
116.57
95.99
170
3.50
0.09
2.71
2.23
119.28
98.22
200
3.75
0.07
0.13
0.11
119.41
98.33
230
4.00
0.06
0.06
0.05
119.47
98.38
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.94
2.42
2.25
1.76
1.05
0.55
-0.72
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.47
0.36
1.18
-1.81
7.52
78 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
80
�I
10
................. . - --
90
0
—
100
100 5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -13 #HB -13 -2 1-1
1 SW -SM
#zoo -6.6.11 30
#230 -
2.02
1.58
-0.97
3.56
1.32
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -10 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,247,403
1293 Graham Farm Road
Northing (Y, ft):
47,140
McClellanville, SC 29458
HEIyA
843 887 -3800
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fa x
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
79 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -13 #HB -13 -2
Analysis Date: 12 -10 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,247,403
Northing (ft):
47,140
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/2
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
94.02
Wash Weight (g):
88.27
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 6.30
#230 - 6.11
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.49
0.52
0.49
0.52
4
-2.25
4.76
0.10
0.11
0.59
0.63
5
-2.00
4.00
0.57
0.61
1.16
1.24
7
-1.50
2.83
1.32
1.40
2.48
2.64
10
-1.00
2.00
1.93
2.05
4.41
4.69
14
-0.50
1.41
3.21
3.41
7.62
8.10
18
0.00
1.00
4.06
4.32
11.68
12.42
25
0.50
0.71
6.16
6.55
17.84
18.97
35
1.00
0.50
7.66
8.15
25.50
27.12
45
1.50
0.35
8.77
9.33
34.27
36.45
60
2.00
0.25
11.93
12.69
46.20
49.14
80
2.50
0.18
16.29
17.33
62.49
66.47
120
3.00
0.13
18.67
19.86
81.16
86.33
170
3.50
0.09
6.38
6.79
87.54
93.12
200
3.75
0.07
0.55
0.58
88.09
93.70
230
4.00
0.06
0.18
0.19
88.27
93.89
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.94
2.71
2.02
0.87
0.27
-0.95
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.58
0.33
1.32
-0.97
3.56
80 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
Borinq Designation HB -14
DRILLING LOG
DIVISION
INSTALLATION
SHEET 1
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Lockwood Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,248,518 Y = 47,441
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 38.0 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
10 -21 -10 10:25 10 -21 -10 10:34
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 5.02 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 7.0 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
ELEV.
DEPTH
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
%
0-i 'L
REMARKS
(ft)
(ft)
w
Depths and elevations based on measured values
REC.
04
0.0
_j
°0�
Medium SAND, little carbonate, poorly graded,
Sample ep =
very loose, subround - subangular, olive gray
7
Mean (mm): 0.63, Phi Sorting: 1.04
0.7
(5Y-4/2), (SP).
co
Fines (230):1.75% (SW)
Carbonate (0 - 1'): 18.4%
Silty fine SAND, trace carbonate, loose,
burrows, very dark greenish gray (10Y -3/1),
(SM).
1.8
Sample #HB -14 -2, Depth = 4.0'
Silty fine - medium SAND, little carbonate, loose,
subround - subangular, very dark greenish gray
Mean (mm): 0.54, Phi Sorting: 2.07
2 8
(10Y -3/1), (SM).
°_°
Fines (230):12.80% (SM)
Silty fine - medium SAND, some carbonate, very
loose, few coarse carbonate fragments, very
3.5
dark greenish gray (10Y-3/1), (GM).
Silty fine SAND, trace carbonate, loose, few
lenses sandy SILT, burrows, very dark greenish
gray (5GY -3/1), (SM).
5.0
Not recovered. Refusal encountered at 7' below
sediment surface..
7.0
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 81 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
a
-5
ato]

0
5
Attach D - Report 1
1
6
2:?.
7
m -s
Holden Beach,
�=
North Carolina
lti E'"
October 2010
HB -14
2.-.
Scale in Feet
r
gf:
Photo Mosaic Image
4
:
9
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
i
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
I
www.athenatechnologies.com
^.
-
(843) 887 -3800
5
Vr
�-
101
82 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20,
80
10
-- ......;..
90
-`-r-
- -
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -14 #HB -14 -1 1-1
1 SW
#zoo -1.77
#230 - 1.75
0.76
0.66
-1.43
8.3
1.04
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -10 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,248,518
Northing (Y, ft):
47,441
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
83 of 118

Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -14 #HB -14 -1
Analysis Date: 12 -10 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,248,518
Northing (ft):
47,441
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -5/2
Com
Dry Weight (g):
122.85
Wash Weight (g):
120.69
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
4
-2.25
4.76
5
-2.00
4.00
7
-1.50
2.83
10
-1.00
2.00
14
-0.50
1.41
18
0.00
1.00
25
0.50
0.71
35
1.00
0.50
45
1.50
0.35
60
2.00
0.25
80
2.50
0.18
120
3.00
0.13
170
3.50
0.09
200
3.75
0.07
230
4.00
0.06
Attach D - Report 1
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ph (843) 887 -3800
fax [phone]
Coordinate System: Elevation (ft):
North Carolina State Plane 3200
ments
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines /o):
#20 - 1.77
#230
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.26
1.03
1.26
1.03
1.18
0.96
2.44
1.99
0.19
0.15
2.63
2.14
0.18
0.15
2.81
2.29
1.20
0.98
4.01
3.27
1.33
1.08
5.34
4.35
4.01
3.26
9.35
7.61
11.46
9.33
20.81
16.94
22.37
18.21
43.18
35.15
35.76
29.11
78.94
64.26
24.16
19.67
103.10
83.93
9.63
7.84
112.73
91.77
5.19
4.22
117.92
95.99
1.92
1.56
119.84
97.55
0.76
0.62
120.60
98.17
0.07
0.06
120.67
98.23
0.02
0.02
120.69
98.25
Phi 5 Phi 16 Phi 25 Phi 50 Phi 75 Phi 84 Phi 95
2.38 1.50 1.27 0.76 0.22 -0.05 -0.90
Moment Mean Phi Mean mm Sorting Skewness Kurtosis
Statistics 0.66 0.63 1.04 -1.43 8.3
84 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
L
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
80
10
--
90
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -14 #HB -14 -2 1-1
1 SM
200 -13.1
230 - 12.8
2.04
0.88
-0.74
2.53
2.07
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -10 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,248,518
Northing (Y, ft):
47,441
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
85 of 118

Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -14 #HB -14 -2
Analysis Date: 12 -10 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,248,518
Northing (ft):
47,441
USCS:
SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/2
Com
Dry Weight (g):
105.78
Wash Weight (g):
92.26
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
4
-2.25
4.76
5
-2.00
4.00
7
-1.50
2.83
10
-1.00
2.00
14
-0.50
1.41
18
0.00
1.00
25
0.50
0.71
35
1.00
0.50
45
1.50
0.35
60
2.00
0.25
80
2.50
0.18
120
3.00
0.13
170
3.50
0.09
200
3.75
0.07
230
4.00
0.06
Attach D - Report 1
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ph (843) 887 -3800
fax [phone]
Coordinate System: Elevation (ft):
North Carolina State Plane 3200
ments
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines ( %):
200 - 13.1
230 - 12.8
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.39
3.20
3.39
3.20
3.02
2.85
6.41
6.05
1.33
1.26
7.74
7.31
1.84
1.74
9.58
9.05
4.24
4.01
13.82
13.06
5.24
4.95
19.06
18.01
6.51
6.15
25.57
24.16
5.13
4.85
30.70
29.01
4.67
4.41
35.37
33.42
5.31
5.02
40.68
38.44
5.07
4.79
45.75
43.23
6.30
5.96
52.05
49.19
10.66
10.08
62.71
59.27
21.03
19.88
83.74
79.15
7.33
6.93
91.07
86.08
0.84
0.79
91.91
86.87
0.35
0.33
92.26
87.20
Phi 5 Phi 16 Phi 25 Phi 50 Phi 75 Phi 84 Phi 95
3.35 2.90 2.04 -0.41 -1.20 -3.05
Moment Mean Phi Mean mm Sorting Skewness Kurtosis
Statistics 0.88 0.54 2.07 -0.74 2.53
86 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
Borinq Designation HB -15
DRILLING LOG
DIVISION
INSTALLATION
SHEET 1
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Lockwood Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,249,862 Y = 46,980
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 37.5 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
10 -21 -10 09:58 10 -21 -10 10:06
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 9.25 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 10.0 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
d• W
0-i
ELEV.
DEPTH
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
%
'L
REMARKS
(ft)
(ft)
w
Depths and elevations based on measured values
REC.
04
0.0
_j
°0�
Fine SAND, trace carbonate/silt, poorly graded,
very loose, subround, @ 1.66 to 1.75'- silty fine
Sample #HB -15 -1, Depth = 2.6'
SAND with little carbonate, @ 2.0 to 2.45'- few
!;2
Mean (mm): 0.26, Phi Sorting: 1.03
burrows, @ 2.45 to 2.55'- fine - medium SAND,
m
Fines (230):1.94% (SW)
well graded, with little carbonate, olive gray
=
Carbonate (0 - 3'): 10.7%
(5Y -4/2), (SP).
2.6
Sample #HB -15 -2, Depth = 4.0'
Silty fine SAND, little carbonate, loose, burrows,
L6
very dark greenish gray (10Y -3/1), (SM).
Mean (mm): 0.32, Phi Sorting: 1.48
°z°
Fines (230):5.50% (SW -SM)
3.8
Silty fine SAND and fine carbonate gravel, very
loose, very dark greenish gray (10Y -3/1), (GM).
5.5
Silty fine SAND, little carbonate, loose, dark
5.8 -------.greenish
gray (10Y-4/1), (SM).
Silty fine SAND, and fine carbonate gravel, very
6.5
loose, very dark greenish gray (10Y -3/1), (GM).
Silty fine - medium SAND, little carbonate, loose,
burrows, @ 8.15'- sand infilled burrows, dark
greenish gray (5GY -4/1), (SM).
8.4
SILT, little mica, medium dense with
interbedded lenses of fine SAND, poorly graded
AND silty fine SAND, trace carbonate, burrows,
9.3
light gray (5Y-7/1), (ML).
Loss of Recovery..
10.0
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 87 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
20
-5
ato]

} '
U,tr
Attach D Report 1
.�A
T L.
2
7
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
_
October 2010
HB -15
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
'
www.athenatechnologies.com
:::..
(843) 887 -3800
5
101
88 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
80
- - -.
-- - - - --
10
- -;--
90
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -15 #HB -15 -1
•
SW
#200 -2.0a
#230 - 1.94
2.23
1.97
-2.07
9.46
1.03
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -10 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,249,862
Northing (Y, ft):
46,980
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fax [phone]
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
89 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -15 #HB -15 -1
Analysis Date: 12 -10 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,249,862
Northing (ft):
46,980
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -5/2
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
113.58
Wash Weight (g):
111.36
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 2.08
#230 -1.94
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.46
0.41
0.46
0.41
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.00
0.00
0.46
0.41
4
-2.25
4.76
0.18
0.16
0.64
0.57
5
-2.00
4.00
0.17
0.15
0.81
0.72
7
-1.50
2.83
0.57
0.50
1.38
1.22
10
-1.00
2.00
0.79
0.70
2.17
1.92
14
-0.50
1.41
1.51
1.33
3.68
3.25
18
0.00
1.00
2.76
2.43
6.44
5.68
25
0.50
0.71
4.05
3.57
10.49
9.25
35
1.00
0.50
3.63
3.20
14.12
12.45
45
1.50
0.35
9.34
8.22
23.46
20.67
60
2.00
0.25
12.44
10.95
35.90
31.62
80
2.50
0.18
44.85
39.49
80.75
71.11
120
3.00
0.13
23.27
20.49
104.02
91.60
170
3.50
0.09
6.84
6.02
110.86
97.62
200
3.75
0.07
0.34
0.30
111.20
97.92
230
4.00
0.06
0.16
0.14
111.36
98.06
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.28
2.81
2.59
2.23
1.70
1.22
-0.14
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.97
0.26
1.03
-2.07
9.46
a 1 . :.

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
m 60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
—
70
20
. .....
80
- - -_..
10
-- -'r-
90
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -15 #HB -15 -2
•
Sw -SM
#200 -5.83
#230 - 5.50
2.33
1.66
-1.18
3.65
1.48
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -10 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,249,862
Northing (Y, ft):
46,980
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fax [phone]
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
91 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -15 #HB -15 -2
Analysis Date: 12 -10 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,249,862
Northing (ft):
46,980
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/1
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
82.71
Wash Weight (g):
78.16
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 5.83
#230 - 5.50
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.91
1.10
0.91
1.10
4
-2.25
4.76
0.31
0.37
1.22
1.47
5
-2.00
4.00
0.66
0.80
1.88
2.27
7
-1.50
2.83
1.63
1.97
3.51
4.24
10
-1.00
2.00
2.02
2.44
5.53
6.68
14
-0.50
1.41
3.00
3.63
8.53
10.31
18
0.00
1.00
4.16
5.03
12.69
15.34
25
0.50
0.71
4.80
5.80
17.49
21.14
35
1.00
0.50
4.54
5.49
22.03
26.63
45
1.50
0.35
3.86
4.67
25.89
31.30
60
2.00
0.25
5.89
7.12
31.78
38.42
80
2.50
0.18
14.53
17.57
46.31
55.99
120
3.00
0.13
25.41
30.72
71.72
86.71
170
3.50
0.09
5.59
6.76
77.31
93.47
200
3.75
0.07
0.58
0.70
77.89
94.17
230
4.00
0.06
0.27
0.33
78.16
94.50
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.96
2.81
2.33
0.85
0.06
-1.34
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.66
0.32
1.48
-1.18
3.65
92 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
Interbedded silty fine SAND and fine sandy
SILT, little carbonate, loose /soft, dark greenish
5.9 gray (5GY -4/1), (SM).
Not recovered. Refusal encountered at 6.5'
below sediment surface..
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 93 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
M
5
It$]
boring ueslgnatlon mb -ie
DRILLING LOG
DIVISION
INSTALLATION
SHEET 1
OF 1 SHEETS
1.
PROJECT
9.
SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10.
COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Lockwood Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32dO NAD 1983
2.
CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11.
MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,249,573 Y = 45,571
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3.
DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12.
TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4.
NAME OF DRILLER
13.
TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 38.3 Ft.
S.
DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15.
DATE BORING i i
10 -21 -10 09:29 10 -21 -10 09:37
6.
THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
7.
DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 5.85 Ft.
18.
NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8.
TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 6.5 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
ELEV.
DEPTH
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
%
0-i 'L
REMARKS
(ft)
(ft)
w
Depths and elevations based on measured values
REC.
O4
0.0
_j
°0U)
Fine SAND, trace carbonate/silt, poorly graded,
very loose, subround - subangular, @ 1.5 to 1.6'
Sample #HB -16 -1, Depth = 2.1'
and @ 1.85 to 2.05'- fine- medium SAND, little
Mean (mm): 0.40, Phi Sorting: 1.22
carbonate, @ 1.95' - coarse carbonate
m
Fines (230): 2.25% (SW)
fragment, olive gray (5Y -4/2), (SP).
x
Carbonate (0 - 3'): 17.8%
2.1
Sample #HB -16 -2, Depth = 4.0'
Silty fine SAND, little carbonate, well graded,
oo
Mean (mm): 0.29, Phi Sorting: 1.47
loose, few possible burrows, @ 3.66 to 3.83'-
x
Fines (230):4.98% (SW -SM)
fine carbonate gravel, @ 4.7' -organic debris,
very dark greenish gray (1 OY -3/1), (SW -SM).
J
5.0
Interbedded silty fine SAND and fine sandy
SILT, little carbonate, loose /soft, dark greenish
5.9 gray (5GY -4/1), (SM).
Not recovered. Refusal encountered at 6.5'
below sediment surface..
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 93 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
M
5
It$]

Attach D - Report 1
2�
1 6
k
2 7
Holden Beach,
3 North Carolina
3 - 8
October 2010
HB -16
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
,t�H E NA
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
_ Athena Technologies, Inc.
*f' 1293 Graham Farm Road
f' McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
' www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
54 10
94 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170 200 230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
80
- - -.
-- - - -.
--
10
r-
- - ---
90
0
t
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Ku t
Sort
Sample Information
HB -16 #HB -16 -1 1-1
1 SW
#200 -2.30
#230 - 2.25
1.63
1.32
-1.25
4.88
1.22
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -10 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,249,573
Northing (Y, ft):
45,571
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
95 of 118

Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -16 #HB -16 -1
Analysis Date: 12 -10 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,249,573
Northing (ft):
45,571
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -5/1
Com
Dry Weight (g):
145.30
Wash Weight (g):
142.04
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
4
-2.25
4.76
5
-2.00
4.00
7
-1.50
2.83
10
-1.00
2.00
14
-0.50
1.41
18
0.00
1.00
25
0.50
0.71
35
1.00
0.50
45
1.50
0.35
60
2.00
0.25
80
2.50
0.18
120
3.00
0.13
170
3.50
0.09
200
3.75
0.07
230
4.00
0.06
Attach D - Report 1
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ph (843) 887 -3800
fax [phone]
Coordinate System: Elevation (ft):
North Carolina State Plane 3200
ments
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines /o):
#20 - 2.30
#230
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.96
1.35
1.96
1.35
0.69
0.47
2.65
1.82
0.36
0.25
3.01
2.07
1.56
1.07
4.57
3.14
2.11
1.45
6.68
4.59
4.82
3.32
11.50
7.91
9.00
6.19
20.50
14.10
9.97
6.86
30.47
20.96
12.35
8.50
42.82
29.46
23.44
16.13
66.26
45.59
25.56
17.59
91.82
63.18
36.05
24.81
127.87
87.99
11.36
7.82
139.23
95.81
2.60
1.79
141.83
97.60
0.14
0.10
141.97
97.70
0.07
0.05
142.04
97.75
Phi 5 Phi 16 Phi 25 Phi 50 Phi 75 Phi 84 Phi 95
2.95 2.42 2.24 1.63 0.74 0.14 -0.94
Moment Mean Phi Mean mm Sorting Skewness Kurtosis
Statistics 1.32 0.40 1.22 -1.25 4.88
96 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
—
80
10
--
90
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -16 #HB -16 -2
•
SW -SM
#200 -5.2s
#230 - 4.98
2.46
1.77
-1.3
3.96
1.47
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -10 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,249,573
Northing (Y, ft):
45,571
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fax [phone]
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
97 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -16 #HB -16 -2
Analysis Date: 12 -10 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,249,573
Northing (ft):
45,571
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/2
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
86.61
Wash Weight (g):
82.30
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 5.29
#230 - 4.98
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.97
1.12
0.97
1.12
4
-2.25
4.76
0.01
0.01
0.98
1.13
5
-2.00
4.00
0.98
1.13
1.96
2.26
7
-1.50
2.83
1.66
1.92
3.62
4.18
10
-1.00
2.00
1.93
2.23
5.55
6.41
14
-0.50
1.41
2.53
2.92
8.08
9.33
18
0.00
1.00
4.24
4.90
12.32
14.23
25
0.50
0.71
4.86
5.61
17.18
19.84
35
1.00
0.50
4.17
4.81
21.35
24.65
45
1.50
0.35
3.30
3.81
24.65
28.46
60
2.00
0.25
5.45
6.29
30.10
34.75
80
2.50
0.18
14.20
16.40
44.30
51.15
120
3.00
0.13
29.87
34.49
74.17
85.64
170
3.50
0.09
7.21
8.32
81.38
93.96
200
3.75
0.07
0.65
0.75
82.03
94.71
230
4.00
0.06
0.27
0.31
82.30
95.02
Phi 5 Phi 16 Phi 25 Phi 50 Phi 75 Phi 84 Phi 95
3.98 2.98 2.85 2.46 1.05 0.16 -1.32
Moment Mean Phi Mean mm Sorting Skewness Kurtosis
Statistics 1.77 0.29 1.47 -1.3 3.96
a

Attach D - Report 1
6.1
7.0
Silty fine - medium SAND, little carbonate, loose,
subround - subangular, very dark greenish gray
(1OY -3/1), (SM).
Silty fine - medium SAND and fine carbonate
gravel, very loose, very dark greenish gray
(1OY -3/1), (GM).
Silty fine - medium SAND, little carbonate, few
interbedded lenses of fine - medium SAND and
SILT, burrows, @ 6.05'= gray (5Y 6/1) SILT
lense, dark greenish gray (5GY -4/1), (SM).
Not recovered. Refusal encountered at 7' below
sediment surface..
End of Boring
Sample #HB -17 -2, Depth= 4.0'
Mean (mm): 0.83, Phi Sorting: 2.15
°=° Fines (230):8.77% (SW -SM)
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 99 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
M
5
It$]
boring ueslgnatlon mb -i i
DIVISION
INSTALLATION
SHEET 1
DRILLING LOG
OF 1 SHEETS
1.
PROJECT
9.
SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10.
COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Lockwood Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32dO NAD 1983
2.
CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11.
MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,248,613 Y = 45,690
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3.
DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12.
TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4.
NAME OF DRILLER
13.
TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 40.3 Ft.
S.
DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15.
DATE BORING i i
10 -21 -10 08:57 10 -21 -10 09:05
6.
THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
7.
DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 6.1 Ft.
18.
NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8.
TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 7.0 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
ELEV.
DEPTH
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
%
0-i 'L
REMARKS
(ft)
(ft)
w
Depths and elevations based on measured values
REC.
O4
0.0
_j
°0U)
Fine- medium SAND, trace carbonate /silt, poorly
Sample #HB -17 -1, Depth = 1.4'
graded, very loose, subround - subangular, olive
Mean (mm): 0.48, Phi Sorting: 0.82
gray (5Y -4/2), (SP).
m
Fines (230): 4.71 % (SP)
=
Carbonate (0 - 2.3'): 10.8%
1A
.
6.1
7.0
Silty fine - medium SAND, little carbonate, loose,
subround - subangular, very dark greenish gray
(1OY -3/1), (SM).
Silty fine - medium SAND and fine carbonate
gravel, very loose, very dark greenish gray
(1OY -3/1), (GM).
Silty fine - medium SAND, little carbonate, few
interbedded lenses of fine - medium SAND and
SILT, burrows, @ 6.05'= gray (5Y 6/1) SILT
lense, dark greenish gray (5GY -4/1), (SM).
Not recovered. Refusal encountered at 7' below
sediment surface..
End of Boring
Sample #HB -17 -2, Depth= 4.0'
Mean (mm): 0.83, Phi Sorting: 2.15
°=° Fines (230):8.77% (SW -SM)
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 99 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
M
5
It$]

0 .7' 5
Attach D - Report 1
4
:f. r
+Y- Holden Beach,
North Carolina
October 2010
8
HB -17
-k
Scale in Feet
k Photo Mosaic Image
4 -• 9
ASH E IAA
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
- Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
5 ,..f -.� _ 101
100 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
a
30
70
20
80
10
- - -
--
-- -
90
- -
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -17 #HB -17 -1 1-1
1 SP
#200 -4.75
#230 - 4.71
1.08
1.05
-0.31
4.28
0.82
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -10 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,248,613
Northing (Y, ft):
45,690
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
101 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report 4*
Depths and elevations based on measured values
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -17 #HB -17 -1 Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
Analysis Date: 12 -10 -10 McClellanville, SC 29458
Analyzed By: CRM Jr. ax (843) 887 -38001
Easting (ft): Northing (ft): Coordinate System: Elevation (ft):
2,248,613 45,690 North Carolina State Plane 3200
USCS: Munsell: I Comments:
SP
I Dry - 5Y -6/1
Dry Weight (g):
170.89
Wash Weight (g):
162.83
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 4.75
#230 - 4.71
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.08
0.05
0.08
0.05
4
-2.25
4.76
0.17
0.10
0.25
0.15
5
-2.00
4.00
0.22
0.13
0.47
0.28
7
-1.50
2.83
0.79
0.46
1.26
0.74
10
-1.00
2.00
0.90
0.53
2.16
1.27
14
-0.50
1.41
3.06
1.79
5.22
3.06
18
0.00
1.00
8.39
4.91
13.61
7.97
25
0.50
0.71
19.86
11.62
33.47
19.59
35
1.00
0.50
45.93
26.88
79.40
46.47
45
1.50
0.35
39.12
22.89
118.52
69.36
60
2.00
0.25
25.54
14.95
144.06
84.31
80
2.50
0.18
13.37
7.82
157.43
92.13
120
3.00
0.13
4.08
2.39
161.51
94.52
170
3.50
0.09
1.15
0.67
162.66
95.19
200
3.75
0.07
0.10
0.06
162.76
95.25
230
4.00
0.06
0.07
0.04
162.83
95.29
Phi 5 Phi 16 Phi 25 Phi 50 Phi 75 Phi 84 Phi 95
3.36 1.99 1.69 1.08 0.60 0.35 -0.30
Moment Mean Phi Mean mm Sorting Skewness Kurtosis
Statistics 1.05 0.48 0.82 -0.31 4.28
102 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
80
r
10
90
011
rL-T
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -17 #HB -17 -2
•
SW -SM
#200 -0.37
#230 - 8.77
0.79
0.27
-0.39
2.13
2.15
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -10 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,248,613
Northing (Y, ft):
45,690
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fax [phone]
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
103 of 118

Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -17 #HB -17 -2
Analysis Date: 12 -10 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,248,613
Northing (ft):
45,690
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/2
Com
Dry Weight (g):
110.70
Wash Weight (g):
100.99
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
4
-2.25
4.76
5
-2.00
4.00
7
-1.50
2.83
10
-1.00
2.00
14
-0.50
1.41
18
0.00
1.00
25
0.50
0.71
35
1.00
0.50
45
1.50
0.35
60
2.00
0.25
80
2.50
0.18
120
3.00
0.13
170
3.50
0.09
200
3.75
0.07
230
4.00
0.06
Attach D - Report 1
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ph (843) 887 -3800
fax [phone]
Coordinate System: Elevation (ft):
North Carolina State Plane 3200
ments:
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines /o):
#20 - 9.37
#230
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4.93
4.45
4.93
4.45
7.35
6.64
12.28
11.09
2.03
1.83
14.31
12.92
2.62
2.37
16.93
15.29
5.66
5.11
22.59
20.40
5.84
5.28
28.43
25.68
7.89
7.13
36.32
32.81
7.95
7.18
44.27
39.99
6.90
6.23
51.17
46.22
7.11
6.42
58.28
52.64
7.53
6.80
65.81
59.44
5.80
5.24
71.61
64.68
9.35
8.45
80.96
73.13
13.54
12.23
94.50
85.36
5.12
4.63
99.62
89.99
0.71
0.64
100.33
90.63
0.66
0.60
100.99
91.23
Phi 5 Phi 16 Phi 25 Phi 50 Phi 75 Phi 84 Phi 95
2.94 2.58 0.79 -1.06 -1.93 -3.88
Moment Mean Phi Mean mm Sorting Skewness Kurtosis
Statistics 0.27 0.83 2.15 -0.39 2.13
104 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
Borinq Designation HB -18
DRILLING LOG
DIVISION
INSTALLATION
SHEET 1
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Lockwood Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,247,294 Y = 45,941
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 40.3 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
10 -21 -10 08:12 10 -21 -10 08:20
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 6.1 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 8.5 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
0-i
ELEV.
DEPTH
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
%
'L
REMARKS
(ft)
(ft)
w
Depths and elevations based on measured values
REC.
04
0.0
_j
°0�
Medium SAND, little carbonate, trace silt, poorly
graded, very loose, subround - subangular, @ .7
to .87' and @ 1.37 to 1.5'- very dark greenish
Sample #HB -18 -1, Depth = 2.3'
gray (10Y 3/1) SILT, soft, @ 1.85'- coarse
Mean (mm): 0.72, Phi Sorting: 1.92
carbonate fragment, color grades to dark gray
co
Fines (230):4.12% (SW)
(5Y 4/1) from, olive gray (5Y -4/2), (SP).
z
Carbonate (0 - 3'): 18.2%
2.0
2.3
Silty medium SAND, little carbonate, loose, very
dark greenish gray (1 0Y -3/1 , SM .
Silty fine SAND, trace carbonate, well graded,
N
loose, few possible burrows, @ 3.0'- silty
00
Sample #HB -18 -2, Depth = 4.0'
fine - medium SAND, some carbonate, @ 3.45' -
Mean (mm): 0.27, Phi Sorting: 1.42
coarse carbonate fragment, very dark greenish
°_°
Fines (230):5.82% (SW -SM)
gray (10Y -3/1), (SW -SM).
4.1
Silty fine SAND, little -some carbonate, loose, @
5.25 to 5.42'- fine - medium SAND, some
`
carbonate, @ 5.42 to 5.5' - SILT, very soft, very
dark greenish gray (10Y -3/1), (GM).
5.5
Medium SAND, little carbonate, trace silt, well
graded, very loose, subround - subangular, dark
6.1
gray 5Y -4/1 (SW).
Not recovered. Refusal encountered at 8.5'
below sediment surface..
8.5
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 105 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
a
-5
ato]

Attach D - Report 1
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
3
8
October 2010
HB -18
Scale in Feet
t
Photo Mosaic Image
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
=
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
;4.
(843) 887 -3800
5
10
106 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
m 60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
80
10
90
f-
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -18 #HB -18 -1 1-1
1 SW
#200 -4.12 40
-
#230 4.
0.92
0.47
-1.1
3.56
1.92
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -14 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,247,294
Northing (Y, ft):
45,941
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fa x
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
107 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -18 #HB -18 -1
Analysis Date: 12 -14 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,247,294
Northing (ft):
45,941
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -6/1
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
92.85
Wash Weight (g):
89.00
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 4.40
#230 - 4.12
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
6.84
7.37
6.84
7.37
3.5
-2.50
5.66
3.38
3.64
10.22
11.01
4
-2.25
4.76
0.58
0.62
10.80
11.63
5
-2.00
4.00
0.73
0.79
11.53
12.42
7
-1.50
2.83
2.19
2.36
13.72
14.78
10
-1.00
2.00
0.88
0.95
14.60
15.73
14
-0.50
1.41
2.74
2.95
17.34
18.68
18
0.00
1.00
5.98
6.44
23.32
25.12
25
0.50
0.71
11.24
12.11
34.56
37.23
35
1.00
0.50
14.24
15.34
48.80
52.57
45
1.50
0.35
11.51
12.40
60.31
64.97
60
2.00
0.25
11.26
12.13
71.57
77.10
80
2.50
0.18
9.72
10.47
81.29
87.57
120
3.00
0.13
5.29
5.70
86.58
93.27
170
3.50
0.09
1.91
2.06
88.49
95.33
200
3.75
0.07
0.25
0.27
88.74
95.60
230
4.00
0.06
0.26
0.28
89.00
95.88
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.42
2.33
1.91
0.92
-0.01
-0.95
-4.08
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
0.47
0.72
1.92
-1.1
3.56
108 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170 200 230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
--
80
10
-- - --
- -'`
90
- - -=
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -18 #HB -18 -2 1-1
1 SW -SM
#zoo -5.6.82 37
#230 -
2.49
1.88
-1.59
5.43
1.42
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -14 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,247,294
Northing (Y, ft):
45,941
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fa x
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
109 of 118

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 1
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -18 #HB -18 -2
Analysis Date: 12 -14 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,247,294
Northing (ft):
45,941
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/2
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
83.83
Wash Weight (g):
78.95
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines
-
#20 /o): 6.37
#230 - 5.82
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
1.59
1.90
1.59
1.90
4
-2.25
4.76
0.21
0.25
1.80
2.15
5
-2.00
4.00
0.22
0.26
2.02
2.41
7
-1.50
2.83
0.77
0.92
2.79
3.33
10
-1.00
2.00
1.23
1.47
4.02
4.80
14
-0.50
1.41
2.14
2.55
6.16
7.35
18
0.00
1.00
2.89
3.45
9.05
10.80
25
0.50
0.71
3.43
4.09
12.48
14.89
35
1.00
0.50
3.21
3.83
15.69
18.72
45
1.50
0.35
6.51
7.77
22.20
26.49
60
2.00
0.25
7.53
8.98
29.73
35.47
80
2.50
0.18
12.43
14.83
42.16
50.30
120
3.00
0.13
25.89
30.88
68.05
81.18
170
3.50
0.09
9.69
11.56
77.74
92.74
200
3.75
0.07
0.75
0.89
78.49
93.63
230
4.00
0.06
0.46
0.55
78.95
94.18
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.12
2.90
2.49
1.40
0.64
-0.96
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.88
0.27
1.42
-1.59
5.43
110 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
Borinq Designation HB -19
DRILLING LOG
DIVISION
INSTALLATION
SHEET 1
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Lockwood Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,246,187 Y = 46,230
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
2
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 39.7 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
10 -21 -10 07:34 10 -21 -10 07:40
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING Not Determined
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 9 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 10.0 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
0-i
ELEV.
(ft)
DEPTH
(ft)
w
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
Depths and elevations based on measured values
%
REC.
'L
04
REMARKS
0.0
Fine SAND, trace carbonate/silt, well graded,
very loose, subround - subangular, olive gray
U
Sample #HB -19 -1 /Garb, Depth - 4.0'
(5Y -4/2), (SW).
Mean (mm): 0.29, Phi Sorting: 1.00
Fines (230):1.07% (SW)
0o
Carbonate (0 - 4'): 13.4%
x
3.1
o
Silty fine SAND, little carbonate, well graded,
loose, few burrows, @ 3.5 to 3.83'- medium
SAND, some silt, little carbonate, @ 5.4 to 5.7'-
N
coarse carbonate gravel, @ 3.95' - color grades
a,
Sample #HB -19 -2, Depth = 5.4'
to very dark greenish gray (10Y 3/1) from, dark
Mean (mm): 0.44, Phi Sorting: 1.66
gray (5Y -4/1), (SW -SM).
°x°
Fines (230):8.47% (SW -SM)
5.7
lit
Silty fine SAND with fine carbonate gravel, very
6.2
loose, very dark greenish gray (1 0Y -3/1 , (GM).
SILT, very soft, high water content, @ 7.15' -
coarse carbonate fragment, very dark greenish
gray (10Y -3/1), (M H).
7.2
Silty fine - medium SAND grading to medium
SAND, well graded, very loose, interbedded
with silty medium SAND, trace carbonate, very
loose, @ 7.58'- organic debris, @ 8.2 to 9.0'-
few silty medium SAND rip -up clasts, very dark
greenish gray (10Y -3/1), (SW -SM).
9.0
Loss of Recovery..
10.0
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 111 of 118
JUN 02 JUN 04
20
-5
ato]

l
1
KA
M
i
5
4:
u
Attach D - Report 1
1S -
1
S
7 l
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
8 October 2010
HB -19
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
9
A� H E IAA
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
10
112 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
a
30
70
20
80
10
J=
-- '-
- -....
90
- -;--
0
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median
Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -19 #HB- 19- 1 /Carb
•
SW
#200 -1.1a
#230 - 1.07
13.40
2.05
1.77
-1.86
7.99
1
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -14 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,246,187
Northing (Y, ft):
46,230
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
TaX 843) 887 -3801
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
113 of 118

Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -19 #HB- 19- 1 /Carb
Analysis Date: 12 -14 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,246,187
Northing (ft):
46,230
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -5/2
Com
Dry Weight (g):
129.65
Wash Weight (g):
128.26
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
4
-2.25
4.76
5
-2.00
4.00
7
-1.50
2.83
10
-1.00
2.00
14
-0.50
1.41
18
0.00
1.00
25
0.50
0.71
35
1.00
0.50
45
1.50
0.35
60
2.00
0.25
80
2.50
0.18
120
3.00
0.13
170
3.50
0.09
200
3.75
0.07
230
4.00
0.06
Attach D - Report 1
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ph (843) 887 -3800
fax [phone]
Coordinate System: Elevation (ft):
North Carolina State Plane 3200
ments:
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines /o):
#20 - 1.14
#230 -1.07
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
13.40
Shells ( %):
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.78
0.60
0.78
0.60
0.13
0.10
0.91
0.70
0.55
0.42
1.46
1.12
0.70
0.54
2.16
1.66
1.01
0.78
3.17
2.44
1.66
1.28
4.83
3.72
2.84
2.19
7.67
5.91
5.05
3.90
12.72
9.81
7.89
6.09
20.61
15.90
12.45
9.60
33.06
25.50
27.16
20.95
60.22
46.45
48.17
37.15
108.39
83.60
15.62
12.05
124.01
95.65
3.89
3.00
127.90
98.65
0.27
0.21
128.17
98.86
0.09
0.07
128.26
98.93
Phi 5 Phi 16 Phi 25 Phi 50 Phi 75 Phi 84 Phi 95
2.97 2.52 2.38 2.05 1.47 1.01 -0.21
Moment Mean Phi Mean mm Sorting Skewness Kurtosis
Statistics 1.77 0.29 1 -1.86 7.99
114 of 118

Attach D - Report 1
PHI Sieve Sizes - 4.25 -4 -3 -2.25 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 3.75 4
Standard Sieve Sizes 3/45/8 5/16 4 5 7 10 14 18 25 35 45 60 80 120 170200230 Hydrometer
100
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0
90
10
80
20
70
30
60
40 2
T
m
50
50
w
o
U
40
60
2
a
30
70
20
80
- - -, --
10
- -,?-
--
90
0
-
100
100
5 10 5 1 5 0.1 5 0.01 5 0.001
Millimeters
Sample
Symbol
Elev. (ft)
USCS
% Fines
% Organics
% Carbonates
Median Mean
Skew
Kurt
Sort
Sample Information
HB -19 #HB -19 -2
•
Sw -SM
#200 -8.7a
#230 - 8.47
2.03
1.2
-1.5
4.59
1.66
Project Name:
Town of Holden Beach
Comments:
Analysis Date:
12 -14 -10
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Analyzed By.
CRM Jr.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Easting (X, ft):
2,246,187
Northing (Y, ft):
46,230
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Horizontal System:
NAD 1983
HEIyA
�h 843 887 -3800
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
fax [phone]
Vertical System:
Gravel
Sand
Siff and Clay
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
115 of 118

Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -19 #HB -19 -2
Analysis Date: 12 -14 -10
Analyzed By: CRM Jr.
Easting (ft):
2,246,187
Northing (ft):
46,230
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -4/1
Com
Dry Weight (g):
122.20
Wash Weight (g):
111.84
Pan Retained (g):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
4
-2.25
4.76
5
-2.00
4.00
7
-1.50
2.83
10
-1.00
2.00
14
-0.50
1.41
18
0.00
1.00
25
0.50
0.71
35
1.00
0.50
45
1.50
0.35
60
2.00
0.25
80
2.50
0.18
120
3.00
0.13
170
3.50
0.09
200
3.75
0.07
230
4.00
0.06
Attach D - Report 1
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ph (843) 887 -3800
fax [phone]
Coordinate System: Elevation (ft):
North Carolina State Plane 3200
ments:
Sieve Loss ( %):
Fines /o):
#20 - 8.78
#230
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.70
2.21
2.70
2.21
1.94
1.59
4.64
3.80
1.09
0.89
5.73
4.69
2.12
1.73
7.85
6.42
2.68
2.19
10.53
8.61
3.70
3.03
14.23
11.64
3.66
3.00
17.89
14.64
4.64
3.80
22.53
18.44
5.30
4.34
27.83
22.78
5.17
4.23
33.00
27.01
7.97
6.52
40.97
33.53
17.80
14.57
58.77
48.10
42.19
34.53
100.96
82.63
9.47
7.75
110.43
90.38
0.58
0.47
111.01
90.85
0.45
0.37
111.46
91.22
0.38
0.31
111.84
91.53
Phi 5 Phi 16 Phi 25 Phi 50 Phi 75 Phi 84 Phi 95
2.59 2.39 2.03 0.76 -0.32 -2.21
Moment Mean Phi Mean mm Sorting Skewness Kurtosis
Statistics 1.2 0.44 1.66 -1.5 4.59
116 of 118

Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, FL 29458
Appendix B:
WPC /Terracon Lab Validation Letter
Geotechnical Investigation for the Town of Holden Beach
AXHEHA Brunswick County, North Carolina
TECHNOLOGIES. INC. October /November 2010
Attach D - Report 1
IMIN ME&

Attach D - Report 1
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
ENGINEER RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
i GEOTECHNICAL AND STRUCTURES LABORATORY
WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION, 3909 HALLS FERRY ROAD
VICKSBURG, MISSISSIPPI 39180 -6199
November 4, 2010
Reply to the Attention of:
Concrete and Materials Branch
Chris Martin, Jr.
WPC/Terracon
3047 St. Johns Bluff Road South
Jacksonville, FL 32246
Dear Mr. Martin:
In reference to your check no. 1800690, dated October 22, 2010, and audit agreement, dated
October 29, 2010, an audit based on your AASHTO Accreditation was performed on documents
submitted by your laboratory. We examined the AMRL On -site Assessment Report No. 438R, dated
December 30, 2008, the CCRL Inspection Report No. E -13, dated April 27, 2009 and the AASHTO
accreditation certificate effective November 4, 2010.
Your Quality System meets the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The material
test methods that you are validated to perform for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers were determined
from the inspection reports from AASHTO and are as follows:
Aggregate Tests: ASTM C40, C117, C127, C128, C136, C566, and C702.
Concrete Tests: ASTM C31, C39, C138, C143, C172, C173, C231, C1064, C42, C78, C192,
C617, C1077, C1231, and E329.
Soil Tests: ASTM D421, D422, D698, D854, D1140, D1556, D1557, D1883, D2166, D2216,
D2434, D2435, D2487, D2488, D2850, D3740, D4318, D4767, D5084, D6938, and E329.
We will add your laboratory to the list of commercial laboratories qualified to conduct material
tests for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; see the Materials Testing Center homepage at
„'i;;tr N; ,,. All Corps offices will be notified of this decision and will have
the opportunity to use your services. WPC/Terracon, Jacksonville, FL will remain on our list of
laboratories qualified to conduct material tests until November 4, 2012 two (2) years from the date of the
audit. In the event your AASHTO accreditation is suspended in whole or part, WPC/Terracon,
Jacksonville, FL is to notify the Materials Testing Center immediately to perform a re- evaluation of your
laboratory's validation. Failure to notify the Materials Testing Center will result in immediate suspension of
your U.S. Army Corps of Engineers validation.
Copy Furnished:
Don Stephens / Jacksonville District
Will Smith / Jacksonville District
Karen Pitchford / Jacksonville District
y,
:rte ,
Crawley, PE
Materials Testing Center

Attach D - Report 2
Holden Beach
Offshore Borrow Area Investigation
Phase II
Prepared For:
Town of Holden Beach, North Carolina
%� 1
mo
_.._ XR......... PU fl........ PU M _90F ¢
+
h
� r a
rt�fl dliR d a
a .
,L 1 ..,e0.1i- ......... a'r'i ,
1i
1".1a .L'
........:..f. .....yi 7 ....... .q...... -. -fl ......... k .- ....... fl ..... -... o.ft......... .fl..........'Si e ........ . ...... [6 e
July 2011
L UL
APPLIED TECHNOLOGY &MANAGEMENT

Attach D - Report 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
INTRODUCTION
1 -1
2.0
BACKGROUND
2 -1
3.0
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
3 -1
3.1 Multi -Beam Bathymetry
3 -1
3.2 Side -Scan
3 -3
3.3 Magnetometer
3 -5
3.4 Cultural Resource Investigation
3 -7
3.5 Seismic Analysis
3 -7
4.0
UPDATED OFFSHORE BORROW AREA
4 -1
5.0
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5 -1
6.0
REFERENCES
6 -1
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A —Tidewater Atlantic Research (TAR) Marine Archaeological Study
APPENDIX B — Multi -Beam Bathymetry Survey
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

Attach D - Report 2
LIST OF TABLES
3 -1 Tidal Datums
4 -1 Borrow Area Volumes Available for Differing Dredge Cut Depths
LIST OF FIGURES
1 -1 Refined Offshore Borrow Area for Beach Nourishment
3 -1 Multi -Beam Bathymetry for the Study Area
3 -2 Side -Scan Results
3 -3 Magnetic Contour Map of Study Area
3 -4 1733 Chart showing Lockwoods Folly and Bells Ferry
3 -5 Additional Seismic Data Collection Transects
3 -6 Sediment Layering within the Proposed Borrow Area
4 -1 Side -Scan, Multi -Beam, and Magnetic Anomaly Data
4 -2 Refined Borrow Area showing all Mud /Hardbottom Seismic Data
4 -3 Refined Borrow Area showing all 2nd Reflector Seismic Data
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

Attach D - Report 2
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the data collection effort that occurred in the spring of 2011 to further
the Holden Beach offshore borrow area investigation for beach compatible material. This
data collection included three primary components:
1. Marine Archaeological Investigation
2. Hardbottom /Natural Resource Investigation
3. Multi -Beam Bathymetric Data Collection
Previous Phase 1 field efforts and analysis were completed in 2010 and included existing
data compilation /review as well as initial seismic and vibracore data collection. Refer to
Offshore Seismic Survey Study (Applied Technology and Management, Inc. (ATM), 2010]
and Offshore Vibracore Analysis (ATM, 2011) for more details. Figure 1 -1 presents the
proposed study area.
8
S
S
g
2241000 , 2242W 2243000 2244000 2246000 2146000 2247000 "2248000 2249000 2260000 ' 2261000 2252000 2263000 2254000 ' 2266000 7266000 2267000 2268000
e 2241000 2242000 2243000 2244000 2245000 2246000 2247000 2246000 2249000 2250000 2251000 2252000 2253000 2254000 2255000 2256000 2257000 2256000
Figure 1 -1. Refined Offshore Borrow Area for Beach Nourishment
1 -1
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11
-_ —
!
\ H8 -0 1 f
I
_
\__,
308
� • / gg18's0
`- ►I
,— _ —_ —__.
O
0
�(
�..30
.8
32.8
O
0
0
l
�
HB -03
608 �•�
• HB4M
•
Hardbottom
-
-
(Sidescan Only)
-�
-
%
\ Borrow
Area
0
0 0
0
500 meter
%
420 Acres
o
Buffer outline
i
6 s -06 • _
sh 8
-1,625 Acres
HB-0
33.8
H
-09 HS-0
--
HB-11
•
/
O
33.8 g
O
3b7
32.8
HB 1
•
8'12
%
Additional
8
_
Study Area
°125 Acres
61
HB -19
•
O
f
H_B-18
_
HB
1T
"a
•
O
36,7
33 8
i
�
8
LeOend
f1
� Boring�
1.000 0 . - --- 2.000 Feet-
J
i
p �.9ACE BOrInJ=
�MM3 �MM_nrt
112.000
O
e 2241000 2242000 2243000 2244000 2245000 2246000 2247000 2246000 2249000 2250000 2251000 2252000 2253000 2254000 2255000 2256000 2257000 2256000
Figure 1 -1. Refined Offshore Borrow Area for Beach Nourishment
1 -1
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

Attach D - Report 2
The proposed borrow area encompasses approximately 545 acres, which is a typical size for
an offshore borrow area where a shallow dredge cut is proposed (note that the 2007 North
Myrtle Beach borrow area was approximately 730 acres). A shallow dredge cut is planned
due to sediment layering and to minimize impacts. Additionally, due to winter weather
conditions (i.e., dredging environmental window) and the offshore location, an offshore
hopper dredge is most likely required and is well- suited to excavating in shallow cuts.
The limits of the hardbottom /natural resource investigation was significantly larger than the
borrow area due to the Division of Coastal Management (DCM) 500 -meter (1,640 -foot) buffer
requirement. As a result, the hardbottom study area encompassed approximately 1,625
acres, including the borrow area (Figure 1 -1).
Side -scan sonar, multi -beam bathymetry, and sub - bottom data were collected and analyzed.
Additionally, a marine archaeological study was performed (as required by DCM for
permitting). Results indicate that no significant exposed hardbottom or archaeological
features were found within the study area. In general, the study area was composed of
sandy material, with gentle sand wave geomorphology evident.
1 -2
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

Attach D - Report 2
2.0 BACKGROUND
As discussed in the Holden Beach study entitled Beach Management Planning and Borrow
Area Investigation (ATM, 2009), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has collected a
substantial amount of data for areas offshore of the Brunswick County beaches over the last
few decades. These studies have mainly consisted of reconnaissance -level geophysical
investigations and broadly spaced borings. ATM reviewed the available information and
targeted the most promising areas for further investigation. ATM's preferred plan was to
refine these areas by the following:
1. Perform a large -scale seismic survey of sub - bottom sediment layers in the most
opportune areas of four potential borrow site areas;
2. Locate and collect vibracore borings;
3. Collect bathymetry and perform cultural and natural resource investigations within the
preferred borrow area(s) for the next nourishment project; and
4. If necessary, perform hardbottom and /or archaeological ground truthing and collect
additional design level vibracores to finalize borrow area limits and quality evaluation.
The sub - bottom seismic survey, vibracore collection and analysis (Items 1 and 2 above)
were completed in 2010. The results summarized in this report refer to Item 3. The
preferred borrow site where detailed bathymetry, side -scan and magnetometer data were
collected is presented in Figure 1 -1. The efforts completed to date indicate that this offshore
area contains the most opportune source (from both distance and quality perspectives) of
available beach compatible sand [refer to Offshore Seismic Survey Study (ATM, 2010) and
Offshore Vibracore Analysis (ATM, 2011) for more details].
2 -1
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

3.0 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The most recent offshore investigation required two data collection events:
1. Side -scan sonar, magnetometer, and sub - bottom data collection; and
2. Multi -beam bathymetry data collection
The side -scan sonar, magnetometer, and sub -
bottom data collection was performed by
Tidewater Atlantic Research (TAR), which
specializes in marine archaeology. The multi -
beam bathymetry data collection was performed
by ARC Surveying and Mapping, Inc., a
qualified hydrographic surveyor (as required by
the 2008 State Sediment Criteria Guidelines for
Attach D - Report 2
Beach Nourishment projects). In general, all of the data collected in this study and during
Phase 1 studies is required as described in the 2008 sediment criteria standards (15A NCAC
07H .0312 Technical Standards For Beach Fill Projects).
Both data collection events required approximately 4 days to run all the transects necessary.
Data collection also required relatively tranquil seas, therefore, inclement weather delayed
the data collection and, in the case of the multi -beam data collection, divided it into two
separate events.
3.1 MULTI -BEAM BATHYMETRY
Multi -beam bathymetry data collection occurred in May and June 2011 and provides 100
percent coverage of the study area seafloor. Transect spacing for the multi -beam survey
was approximately 80 feet and depth measurement acquisition was performed utilizing a
Reson model 7101 swath sounder. Multi -beam echosounders are gradually replacing single -
beam echosounders due to advancing technologies and greater affordability. As a result,
many hydrographic surveyors are now using multi -beam gear as their primary gear and
regulatory agencies are requiring it due to its greater level of seafloor detail. Figure 3 -1
presents the results of the data collection (see Appendix B for ARC multi -beam survey).
3 -1
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

Attach D - Report 2
Bathymetry at the site is mildly sloping and generally ranges from 35 to 40 feet deep. The
deepest area is along the southern boundary.
Depth (Ft NAVD88)
-33
-34 -35
-35
-36 -35
-37 3g h
-38
39
-40
-41
50000
36 -35
36 -36
-37
rn
t
0
z
48000 36
ti
46000
-4
2246000 2248000 2250000 2252006
Easting (R)
Figure 3 -1. Multi -Beam Bathymetry for the Study Area
Depths in Figure 3 -1 are reported in feet relative to the North American Vertical Datum of
1988 (NAVD88). This is a standard vertical datum and is also preferred in DCM's sediment
criteria regulations for borrow area studies.
3 -2
G NV /2011 /0816876/7/20/11

Attach D - Report 2
Table 3 -1 provides a comparison of NAVD88 relative to local tidal datums (mean high water,
mean low water, etc.). The closest tidal datum site is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) Oak Island Station 8659182. NAVD88 and National Geodetic
Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD29) are datums developed to represent approximate mean
sea level (MSQ.
Table 3 -1. Tidal Datums
Datum
feet
Mean Higher High Water (MHHW)
5.27
Mean High Water (MHW)
4.9
North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88)
3.1
Mean Sea Level (MSL)
2.6
National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD29)
2.1
Mean Low Water (MLW)
0.2
Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW)
0
The multi -beam bathymetry data exhibits gentle sand -wave features and no debris or
anomalies are apparent.
3.2 SIDE -SCAN
Side -scan sonar is used to create an image of large areas of the
sea floor. It is commonly used to conduct surveys for shipwrecks
and exposed hardbottom and to generally detect debris and other
obstructions that lie on or protrude above the seafloor. A Klein
3900 600/900 kHz high - resolution side -scan sonar was deployed
for the proposed borrow area as well as for a 500 -meter buffer area
surrounding the proposed borrow area. Transect spacing within
the proposed borrow area was 65 feet (20 meters) while transect
spacing within the buffer area was 130 feet (40 meters).
.w
Results of the side -scan data are provided in Figure 3 -2 (see Appendix A for the complete
TAR report). Review of the side -scan sonar data indicates only sand within the surveyed
limits. In the sonar mosaic, areas of flat sand are darker, whereas areas of low- relief sand
ripples are represented by the lighter areas. These features were verified by a tie line run
through the area that shows the transition between flat sand and sand ripples (TAR, 2011).
3 -3
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11
r

Attach D - Report 2
No exposed hardbottom was detected in either the proposed borrow area or the buffer area
(TAR, 2011).
Legend
D �f F
Cultural Resource Survey Area r ¢ '
Cultural Resource Suracy Area k3urtcr a.
1.
Hard6ottom 5 urvey Border
i
p�. r
N.
Borrow Area
i
I
i
Hardbottom
500 meter :f
Buffer Area
1
is
Figure 3 -2. Side -Scan Results of the proposed borrow area and the surrounding 500 -
meter buffer area.
3 -4
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

3.3 MAGNETOMETER
The magnetometer is another tool used to identify
shipwrecks and other metallic marine debris. This
includes anchors, chains, cables, pipelines, ballast
stone and other scattered shipwreck debris, munitions
of all sizes (unexploded ordnance), aircraft, engines
and any other object with a magnetic expression.
Results of the data collection are presented in Figure 3- Agaff 1
3, as a magnetic contour map. Data was collected using an EG &G Geometrics 881 cesium
vapor magnetometer capable of +/- 0.1 gamma resolution at 65 -foot transect spacing. Any
magnetic anomalies /targets of interest are reported and then cross - referenced with the side-
Attach D - Report 2
scan sonar and bathymetry to determine potential size. While in the field, TAR protocol is to
return to the location of each significant anomaly and re- survey those targets with a closer
transect spacing to further refine the magnetic signature, if needed.
3 -5
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

Attach D - Report 2
Figure 3 -3. Magnetic Contour Map of Study Area
The magnetometer survey of the proposed borrow site identified one magnetic anomaly. The
magnetic anomaly, M -1, is located on the western edge of the borrow area and produced a
positive monopolar signature with an intensity of 5.6 gammas and a duration of 157.8 feet
(TAR, 2011). No side -scan sonar or multi -beam bathymetry targets were associated with this
anomaly. Signature characteristics, intensity and duration suggest a single object of low
ferrous mass and size such as a crab trap, wire, small diameter cable, small boat anchor or
other modern debris. Because the signature is suggestive of a small, isolated single object,
3 -6
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

Attach D - Report 2
no additional investigation of the target (i.e., visual check by diver or other probing) is
recommended (TAR, 2011).
3.4 CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATION
In addition to the field data collection, TAR performed a literature review to assess the
potential of finding significant historic and /or cultural resources within the proposed borrow
area. Research dating back to the earliest settlements in the Brunswick County region was
evaluated and all available data related to shipwrecks were assessed. The TAR study
(2011) provides a comprehensive review. Figure 3 -4 presents a chart from 1733 identifying
Lockwoods Folly Inlet.
DrunswickTim x.
L ..�• r'olfrur
4. CF ror r::
�r i Y� r/t1% (jirr
J � H
L � � '� �� ?f. 'S ♦ y/ Y
i %n.r rr .•r.iFr�v.rr .�
.rr� yrnr
� .u�rs.".."'�"• n:rl, ?::emu � �
('ape Few
v'-
{
Lockwoods - `f
Folly Inlet
��hr++•r�r�•h, nrrGr/�m
V rsiin.rrrA.�h.•rr Awl%n rw
Figure 3 -4. 1733 Chart showing Lockwoods Folly and Bells Ferry (see TAR 2011 study in
Appendix A for more historical /archaeological information).
3.5 SEISMIC ANALYSIS
Some additional sub - bottom (seismic) data were collected in the ` , -. _ j
125 -acre additional study area shown in Figure 1 -1. This area 1
was identified as a potential expansion of the previously r
delineated preliminary borrow area after further review of �r V
3 -7 "
G NV /2011 /0816876/7/20/11

Attach D - Report 2
existing seismic data to the west as well as USACE and Holden Beach boring logs in the
vicinity. An Edgetech 4100 high - resolution digital sub - bottom profiler (SBP) with a 216
transducer was deployed at 500 foot transect spacing.
Legend
HardbottomlMud
Depth Below Surface jftj
4019 -2 0
02.1 -3.0
3.1 -4.0
041 -5 0
*6.1 -8.0
08.1 - 10.0
.101 -120
012.1-14.0
®Additional Seismic
HB Vibracores
Existing USACE Borings
500m Buffer
I Ink
32.8
0
I _
30.8 !/ 1
,
0.8
r ,
,
1
Previous Seismic I+
Study Area
I�
31 8
30.8
Additional
Seismic Analysis
% Ld
36.7
34.8
0 0.125 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Miles
34 8
Figure 3 -5. Additional Seismic Data Collection Transects.
Hardbottom /mud layer is shown and is generally 5 to 10 feet below the
seafloor.
The additional seismic data were analyzed according to the protocols developed for the ATM
report Holden Beach Offshore Seismic Survey Study (ATM, 2010). The additional seismic
data was collected by TAR and was then provided to Sonographics for processing.
Sonographics performed the 2010 data collection and processing study, which included
calibration to borings and comparison with older USACE seismic data in the area.
3 -8
G NV/2011 /081687B/7/20/11

Attach D - Report 2
As with the 2010 seismic analysis, three basic layers were identified based on vibracore
boring data (Figure 3 -6). The three reflector types identified were:
• 1st Reflector = Beach Compatible Sand (sand less than 5 percent fines)
• 2nd Reflector = Marginal Beach Compatible Sand (sand between 5 and 12 percent
fines)
• 3rd Reflector = Hardbottom /Mud /Clay
Figure 3 -6. Sediment Layering within the Proposed Borrow Area
In some instances, not all reflectors can be readily identified. For example, in areas where
hardbottom occurs at the seafloor surface, no sand reflector signals are generated. State
sediment criteria standards generally require less than 10 percent fines for beach - compatible
material, hence the 2nd reflector designation of "marginal'. It is important to note that grain
size analysis reveals most of the sand in this marginal layer shows good agreement with
native Holden Beach sand in terms of grain size, percent shell, and color [refer to Offshore
Seismic Survey Study (ATM, 2010) and Offshore Vibracore Analysis (ATM, 2011) for more
details]. Therefore, when combined with the upper layer of sand, this marginal layer of sand
is suitable for beach nourishment under most circumstances.
3 -9
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

Attach D - Report 2
4.0 UPDATED OFFSHORE BORROW AREA
ATM reviewed and compiled all of the data collected for this study and incorporated it into the
existing project database. Figure 4 -1 presents the side -scan and multi -beam bathymetric
data. The gentle sand wave features are evident in both the side -scan and multi -beam
bathymetric data.
Figure 4 -2 presents the hardbottom /mud sub - bottom layer (i.e., interface of unsuitable beach
material) for all seismic data in this borrow area. The additional seismic data collected
shows similar mud /hardbottom depth as areas to the west. This mud /hardbottom layer is
generally 6 to 12 feet below the surface, with the exception of some localized areas near the
central south and extreme southeast boundaries. Figure 4 -3 presents the 2nd reflector from
the seismic data and indicates good agreement between the 2011 data and the 2010 data.
The layer delineates a reasonable maximum depth limit for dredging of beach - compatible
material. As seen in Figure 4 -3, this layer is generally 4 to 8 feet deep for the proposed
borrow area.
In order to be conservative, the upper and lower boundaries of acoustic backscatter signals
that correspond to only the upper sand layer (i.e., above the 1St reflector) were interpolated to
create a sand isopach (thickness) that enabled volume estimation of beach quality sand
within the proposed borrow area. The upper sand layer, which is delineated by the 1St
seismic reflector, averages approximately 2 feet deep. In addition to the conservative 2 -foot
cut dredge depth, volumes were calculated utilizing a more realistic 3.5 foot cut depth that
extends into the 2nd seismic layer while maintaining at least a 2 -foot buffer from the
hardbottom /mud layer.
Table 4 -1 presents volumes available under different alternatives, varying both dredge depth
and acreage available. The 125 acre additional study area (see Figure 1 -1) requires
additional vibracore data to be permitted, therefore two potential borrow area acreages (with
and without this additional area) are presented.
4 -1
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

Figure 4 -1
Side -Scan, Multi -Beam, and Magnetic Anomaly Data
i4p up

Legend
HB Vibracores
U SAC E Vibracores
500m Buffer
Hardbottom /Mud
Depth Below Surface (ft)
4.2
4.3-3.0
3.1 -4.5
4.6 - 6.0
06.1-8.0
08.1-10.1
910.1-12
012.1-14
®Refined
I
R
[e7
FM
r�
s
N
Attach D -Report 2
1,000 2,000
Feet
Figure 4 -2
Refined Borrow Area showing all 3rd Reflector
(i.e., Hardbottom /Mud depth below the surface) P.Lvc
Seismic Data

Legend
HB Vibracores
U SAC E Vibracores
500m Buffer
2nd Reflector
z
0.0-2.0
2.1 -3.0
3.1 -3.5
1 3.6-4.0
04.1-5.0
05.1-6.0
06.1-7.0
07.1-8.0
0 8.1 - 10.0
0 10.1 - 13.0
®Refined Offshore BA
M
R,
0
1,000
7
Feet
2,000
VI
N
Attach D - Report 2
it * 0 * +
Figure 4 -3
Refined Borrow Area showing all 2nd Reflector
Seismic Data

Attach D - Report 2
Table 4 -1. Borrow Area (BA) Volumes Available for Differing Dredge Cut Depths
Dredge Cut
Area Depth Volume
(Acres) (Ft) (CY) Notes
420 3.5 2,400,000 BA volume, not including additional
eastern area
545
3.5
3,100,000
420
2
1,400,000
545
2
1,800,000
BA volume including additional
eastern area
Conservative BA volume, including
additional eastern area
Conservative BA volume including
additional eastern area
In general, collected and analyzed seismic, side -scan, and magnetometer data show that the
study area is technically and environmentally suitable as a beach nourishment borrow area
and that this borrow area should be able to provide beach compatible material for multiple
nourishment events [refer to Offshore Vibracore Analysis (ATM, 2011) for more details]. The
data collected to date have not identified hardbottom or cultural resources of significance that
would require a minimization or refinement of the proposed borrow area. Additional
compatibility analysis will be conducted in conjunction with project beach fill preliminary
design (prior to permitting).
Once a permit is obtained; however, it will be important to refine /compartmentalize the
borrow area in order to ensure that dredgers work the borrow area in a manner that allows
for multiple uses. If given the entire borrow area for use, dredgers can theoretically go for the
`low- hanging fruit', which in this case is the more easily collected material (i.e., deeper cut
areas, etc.) and can detrimentally affect sand availability for future nourishment projects.
4 -5
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

Attach D - Report 2
5.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This study summarizes the recent offshore borrow area data collection completed to further
Holden Beach's long -term beach nourishment program. Two data collection events occurred
between May and June 2011 that included three primary components:
1. Marine Archaeological Investigation
2. Hardbottom /Natural Resource Investigation
3. Multi -Beam Bathymetric Data Collection
The side -scan sonar, magnetometer, and sub - bottom (i.e. seismic) data collection was
performed by TAR, which specializes in marine archaeology. The multi -beam bathymetry
data collection was performed by ARC Surveying and Mapping, a qualified hydrographic
surveyor (as required by the State). All surveys were performed at the State's required
transect -line spacing to identify any potential submerged cultural (e.g., sunken ships) or
natural (e.g., hardbottom soft - corals) resources. Additionally, some additional data collection
was performed to expand the existing borrow area toward the east. The proposed borrow
area (including the eastward expansion) covers approximately 545 acres, whereas the
hardbottom study area includes a 500 -meter buffer (as required by the State) and covers
approximately 1,625 acres.
Analysis of the data identified one magnetic anomaly and no side -scan sonar or multi -beam
targets in the survey area. The magnetic anomaly appears to have been generated by
modern debris such as a fish or crab trap, pipe, a small diameter rod, cable, wire rope, chain,
or a small boat anchor. No additional investigation of this anomaly is recommended due to its
small size as well as its location on the extreme western edge of the proposed borrow area.
No areas of hard bottom were identified within the proposed borrow area or within the 1,640 -
foot (500- meter) buffer surrounding the proposed borrow site.
As a result of this recent data collection, no additional hardbottom or archaeological ground
truthing [via video - equipped remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) or SCUBA divers] is deemed
necessary at this time. Following permit application submittal, it is possible that DCM or a
reviewing agency (e.g., Wildlife Resources Commission, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
National Marine Fisheries Service) may require additional studies; however, this is unlikely
under the current circumstances. Note that Holden Beach and ATM staff have coordinated
5 -1
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

Attach D - Report 2
with all of these agencies during a pre - scoping meeting and no specific areas of concern
were identified.
To date, the offshore data collection has shown that the proposed borrow area has sufficient
beach compatible material for multiple large beach nourishment projects. Assuming a
nourishment project similar to the USACE 2002 "933" project, which placed approximately
525,000 cy of material, at least 2 or more nourishments are anticipated from the proposed
borrow area. Note that due to dredging losses during the dredging /piping process, a typical
loss rate of 20% is anticipated from the borrow site to the beach. Therefore 525,000 cy on
the beach equates to approximately 630,000 cy at the borrow site.
All of the information processed and analyzed in this report will be submitted with the
planned beach nourishment permit application in the near future. Also, note that this
information will be utilized for future nourishment events. Therefore, any future nourishment
projects using this borrow area are anticipated to have a reduced data collection effort and
should help streamline future permitting. This is in part due to resource agencies being
more comfortable with the borrow area, assuming a successful project has been completed.
After reviewing and analyzing the latest data collection as described herein, it is
recommended that the Town proceed with beach fill project preliminary design and
development/submittal of a permit application. A consensus on the specific alongshore limits
and beach fill volume densities will need to be agreed upon, as well as the desired purpose
and duration of the permit. Ideally, a permit allowing placement of sand according to future
needs (i.e., post -storm losses, or long -term erosion) at locations as determined by future
monitoring would be ideal. This would allow the Town to place sand on the beach in a timely
manner when needs are recognized.
It is noted that some additional vibracore data are also needed for the newly expanded (125
acres) borrow area to the east (see Figure 1 -1). These data are technically not needed for a
permit application; however, the additional 125 -acre area will not be able to be permitted
without additional vibracore data collection. Additional vibracore data collection can occur in
parallel with beach fill design and permit application development/submittal.
5 -2
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

Attach D - Report 2
Also note that DCM could request additional vibracores based on their interpretation of the
sediment criteria guidelines. Dr. Jeff Warren, who developed these criteria, is no longer with
DCM and there is some uncertainty as to the current staff's interpretation of the borrow area
requirements. Additionally, ATM's initial reconnaissance investigations made use of the
existing available USACE vibracore boring data; however, boring logs and supporting data
are limited. Therefore, ATM recommends that some additional vibracore borings be
collected during project final design phase to increase confidence in the USACE vibracore
data.
5 -3
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

Attach D - Report 2
6.0 REFERENCES
Applied Technology and Management, Inc.(ATM). 2009. Holden Beach Beach Management
Planning and Borrow Area Investigation. Charleston, SC.
Applied Technology and Management, Inc.(ATM). 2010. Holden Beach Offshore Seismic
Survey Study. Charleston, SC.
Applied Technology and Management, Inc. (ATM). 2011. Holden Beach Offshore Vibracore
Analysis. Charleston, SC.
Tidewater Atlantic Research (TAR). 2011. A Phase I Remote - Sensing Submerged Cultural
Resource and Hard Bottom Survey of a Proposed Borrow Area off Brunswick County,
North Carolina. Washington, NC.
6 -1
G NV/2011/081687B/7/2 0/11

Attach D - Report 2
APPENDIX A
MARINE ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT

Attach D - Report 2
A Phase I Remote - Sensing Submerged Cultural Resource
and Hard Bottom Survey of a Proposed Borrow Area
off Brunswick County, North Carolina
,r \
'irrunc�b< l ►'
Port .1c,va
ca.J. `�7a.✓ <
Afhley F.1"
s'
Iq
101�lJ
St P.rr4
/ . 0 N� .,.
C tpe (- F rtc TP ---V, --~ 1„ F
1 Cr.:r.rrllra,7 y
peFear
ov
�_� \ � � / � c'.y. Lm•k nut <
i I 'k
I Ile
o,
Obt .
Applied Technology & Management, Inc.
360 Concord St., #300
Charleston, South Carolina 29401
31 May 2011
Appendix A
­-V
Em

Attach D - Report 2
A Phase I Remote - Sensing Submerged Cultural Resource
and Hard Bottom Survey of a Proposed Borrow Area
off Brunswick County, North Carolina
Submitted to:
Applied Technology & Management, Inc.
360 Concord St., #300
Charleston, South Carolina 29401
Submitted by:
Gordon P. Watts, Jr.
Principal Investigator
Tidewater Atlantic Research, Inc.
P. O. Sox 2494
Washington, North Carolina 27889
31 May 2011
Appendix A

Attach D - Repogiq
Abstract
Applied Technology & Management, Inc. (ATM) is the project engineer representing
Holden Beach, North Carolina in its efforts to permit an excavation area off
Brunswick County, North Carolina. In order to determine the proposed dredging
impacts on potentially significant submerged cultural resources and areas of hard
bottom, ATM contracted with Tidewater Atlantic Research, Inc. of Washington,
North Carolina to conduct a magnetometer and side scan sonar survey of the
proposed borrow site. Field research for the survey area was conducted between 9
and 14 May 2011. Analysis of the remote - sensing data generated during the Holden
Beach survey identified one magnetic anomaly and no sonar targets in the survey
area. The magnetic anomaly appears to have been generated by modern debris such
as a fish or crab trap, pipe, a small diameter rod, cable, wire rope, chain, or a small
boat anchor. No additional investigation of this anomaly is recommended in
conjunction with proposed dredging. No areas of hard bottom were identified
within the proposed borrow area or a 1,640 feet (500 m) buffer of the proposed
borrow site.
Appendix A

Attach D - RepogV
Table of Contents
Page
Abstract....................................................................................................................... ............................... iii
Tableof Contents ...................................................................................................... ............................... iv
Listof Figures ............................................................................................................. ............................... v
Introduction................................................................................................................. ............................... 1
ProjectLocation .......................................................................................................... ............................... 1
ResearchMethodology ............................................................................................. ............................... 3
Literature and Historical Research .................................................................... ............................... 3
Remote - Sensing Survey ....................................................................................... ............................... 4
DataAnalysis ......................................................................................................... ............................... 6
HistoricalBackground .............................................................................................. ............................... 7
Descriptionof Findings .......................................................................................... ............................... 26
Cultural Resource Investigation ....................................................................... ............................... 26
HardBottom Investigation ................................................................................ ............................... 26
Conclusions and Recommendations .................................................................... ............................... 26
AppendixA ............................................................................................................... ............................... 36
Appendix A

Attach D - ReportV
List of Figures
Page
Figure 1. Project Location Map ............................................................................... ............................... 2
Figure 2. The 25 -foot Atlantic Surveyor .................................................................. ............................... 4
Figure 3. Launching the GEOMETRICS G -881 cesium vapor magnetometer .............................. 5
Figure 4. Launching the KLEIN SYSTEM 3900 digital side scan sonar ........... ............................... 6
Figure 5. Computer navigation system located at the research vessel helm .............................. 7
Figure 6. John Ogilby map illustrating the location of "Look Wood folly" ... ............................... 9
Figure 7. Moseley map showing the location of Lockwoods Folly and Bells Ferry .................10
Figure 8. Plan of the town of Smithville, 1792 .................................................... .............................13
Figure 9. Chart depicting the two entrances into the Cape Fear River ......... .............................16
Figure 10. Magnetic contour map of the cultural resource survey area ...... ............................... 27
Figure 11. Sonar coverage map of the cultural resource survey area ........... ............................... 28
Figure 12. Side scan sonar mosaic of the hard bottom investigation area ... ............................... 29
Figure 13. A sonar image illustrating the transition from flat sand to sand ripples ................ 30
Appendix A

Attach D - Report 2
Introduction
Applied Technology & Management, Inc. (ATM) is the project engineer representing
Holden Beach, North Carolina in its efforts to permit an excavation area off
Brunswick County, North Carolina. The sand source material for the project is a
borrow area located southeast of Lockwoods Folly Inlet. In order to determine the
impacts proposed dredging on potentially significant submerged cultural resources
and identify areas of hard bottom in and adjacent to the borrow site, ATM
contracted with Tidewater Atlantic Research, Inc. (TAR) of Washington, North
Carolina to conduct a magnetometer and side scan sonar survey of the project area.
The remote - sensing investigation conducted by TAR archaeologists was designed to
provide accurate and reliable identification, assessment, and documentation of
submerged cultural resources in the study area. The assessment methodology was
developed to comply with the criteria of the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966 (Public Law 89 -665), the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Public
Law 11 -190), Executive Order 11593, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Procedures for the protection of historic and cultural properties (36 CFR Part 800)
and the updated guidelines described in 36 CFR 64 and 36 CFR 66. The results of
the investigation were designed to furnish ATM with the archaeological data
required to comply with submerged cultural resource legislation and regulations.
The survey was conducted between 19 and 14 May 2011. Analysis of the remote -
sensing data generated during the Holden Beach survey identified one magnetic
anomaly. No sonar targets were identified in the borrow area. The magnetic
anomaly appears to have been generated by and isolated object, likely modern
debris such as a fish or crab trap, pipe, a small diameter rod, cable, wire rope, chain,
or a small boat anchor. No additional investigation of this anomaly is recommended
in conjunction with proposed dredging.
Project survey personnel consisted of Gordon P. Watts, Jr., principal investigator
and Joshua Daniel, remote - sensing operator. Dr. Watts, Mr. Daniel, and Robin
Arnold carried out the historical and literature research. Dr. Watts and Mr. Daniel
analyzed the remote - sensing data. Dr. Watts, Mr. Daniel, and Ms. Arnold prepared
this report.
Project Location
The remote- sensing project area is situated approximately 3.5 nautical miles
southeast of Lockwoods Folly Inlet. The cultural resource survey area is polygonal
in shape, measuring approximately 6,575 feet long and 5,400 feet wide at its extreme
points and covers an area of 590.17 acres (Figure 1). To ensure sufficient data would
be available to locate any potentially significant targets in the project area, remote -
sensing data were collected along 115 parallel lanes spaced on 65 -foot (20 m)
intervals. The cultural resource area surveyed also included a 100 -foot buffer zone
so that those targets located along the periphery of the borrow area could be
identified and the impact from dredging assessed.
Appendix A

Attach D - Reports
An additional 1,640 -foot (500 m) area around the proposed borrow area was
surveyed to identify areas of hard bottom (Figure 1). This area measures
approximately 10,000 feet in length, 9,000 feet in width, and encompasses an
additional 1034.82 acres.
2232000 2240000 2248000 2256000 2264000
r Lan u
HO
li
Beach + + + Lflng Beach
i
'F /Q RCS
a- B N
p H G-D 1
/{T
/
M G
E U
L /
K —J
i- -- — T
i 78 79 f 8�
t
2.000 4,000 8.000 12.000 16.000 North Carolina State Plane, NAD 83, U.S. Survey Foot
Feet
2232000 2240000 2248000 2256000 2264000
Figure 1. Project Location Map (USGS. "Myrtle Beach quadrangle, South
Carolina" 1:100,000).
The coordinates for the cultural resource survey area, defined in North Carolina
State Plane Coordinates, based on NAD 83, U.S. Survey Foot are as follows:
Point X Y
A 2250244.4 51530.1
B 2251087.4 51330.1
C 2250922.5 50360.7
D 2251908.8 50196.0
Appendix A

Point X
E 2251002.9
F 2250019.1
G 2245660.6
H 2247297.1
I 2248479.8
Y
44771.1
44904.1
45640.7
49183.8
49844.7
Attach D - Report3
The coordinates for the hard bottom buffer survey area, defined in North Carolina
State Plane Coordinates, based on NAD 83, U.S. Survey Foot are as follows:
Point
X
Y
J
2252410.7
43426.7
K
2251199.9
43033.2
L
2244418.9
44062.5
M
2243904.3
45606.3
N
2244661.1
47816.2
O
2246140.8
50253.6
P
2248354.9
51856.9
Q
2249652.9
53116.7
R
2251336.1
53083.5
S
2252668.0
52447.8
T
2253530.8
48921.1
U
2252940.5
44683.0
Research Methodology
Literature and Historical Research
TAR historians conducted a literature search of primary and secondary sources to
assess the potential to find significant historic and/or cultural resources within the
proposed dredge site. A general background history of coastal Brunswick County
and the lower Cape Fear region was prepared from extensive source material in the
TAR research library. Preliminary wreck - specific information was collected from
published sources including: Disasters to American Vessels, Sail and Steam, 1841 -1846
(Lockhead 1954), Encyclopedia of American Shipwrecks (Berman 1972), Shipwrecks of the
Civil War (Shomette 1973), Merchant Steam Vessels of the United States 1790 - 1868
(Lytle and Holdcamper 1975), Shipwrecks of the Americas (Marx 1983), and Official
Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion. In addition, the
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) online database (National Park Service
n.d.), the Automated Wreck and Obstruction Information System (NOAA n.d.) and
the Northern Shipwrecks Database (Northern Maritime Research 2002) were queried
for wreck - specific information.
Personnel at the Underwater Archaeology Branch (UAB) of the North Carolina
Office of State Archaeology (Fort Fisher) were contacted to identify previously
documented submerged cultural resources in the project area. In conjunction with
Appendix A

Attach D - Report4
previous research associated with shipwrecks in Lockwoods Folly Inlet, the
collections of the North Carolina Maritime Museum (Southport) and the Brunswick
County Library were examined for historical and shipwreck data.
Remote - Sensing Survey
In order to reliably identify submerged cultural resources, TAR archaeologists
conducted a systematic remote - sensing survey of the proposed borrow site.
Underwater survey activities were conducted from the 25 -foot survey vessel Atlantic
Surveyor (Figure 2). In order to fulfill the requirements for survey activities in North
Carolina, magnetic and acoustic remote - sensing equipment were employed. This
combination of remote - sensing represents the state of the art in submerged cultural
resource location technology and it offers the most reliable and cost effective method
to locate and identify potentially significant targets. Data collection was controlled
using a differential global positioning system (DGPS). DGPS produces the highly
accurate coordinates necessary to support a sophisticated navigation program and
assures reliable target location.
Figure 2. The 25 -foot Atlantic Surveyor.
An GEOMETRlcs G -881 marine cesium -vapor magnetometer, capable of plus or
minus 0.001 gamma resolution, was employed to collect magnetic data in the survey
area (Figure 3). To produce the most comprehensive magnetic record, data was
Appendix A

Attach D - Report 3
collected at 10 samples per second. The magnetometer sensor was towed
approximately 5 feet below the water surface at a speed of approximately four knots.
Magnetic data were recorded as a data file associated with the computer navigation
system. Data from the survey were contour plotted using QUANTUMGIS computer
software to facilitate anomaly location and definition of target signature
characteristics. All magnetic data were correlated with the acoustic remote - sensing
records.
Figure 3. Launching the GEOMETRIcs G -881 cesium vapor magnetometer.
A 445/900 kHz KLEIN SYSTEM 3900 digital sidescan sonar (interfaced with
SONARPRO SONAR PROCESSING SYSTEM) was employed to collect acoustic data in the
survey area (Figure 4). The side scan sonar transducer was deployed and
maintained approximately 8 feet below the water surface. Acoustic data were
collected using a range scale of 164 feet (50 m) to provide a minimum of 200%
coverage and high target signature definition. Acoustic data were recorded as a
digital file with SONARPRO and tied to the magnetic and positioning data by the
computer navigation system.
A TRIMBLE AgGPS was used to control navigation and data collection in the survey
area. That system has an accuracy of plus or minus three feet, and can be used to
generate highly accurate coordinates for the computer navigation system on the
Appendix A

Attach D - Report6
X11 •1�,��'.
of
7 f,
Figure 4. Launching the KLEIN SYSTEM 3900 digital side scan sonar.
survey vessel. The DGPS was employed in conjunction with an onboard laptop
loaded with HYPACK navigation and data collection software (Figure 5). Positioning
data generated by the navigation system were tied to magnetometer records by
regular annotations to facilitate target location and anomaly analysis. All data is
related to the North Carolina State Plane Coordinate System, NAD 83, U.S. Survey
Foot.
Data Analysis
To ensure reliable target identification and assessment, analysis of the magnetic and
acoustic data was carried out as it was generated. Using QUANTUMGIS contouring
software, magnetic data generated during the survey were contour plotted at 5-
gamma intervals for analysis and accurate location of magnetic anomalies. The
magnetic data was examined for anomalies, which were then isolated and analyzed
in accordance with intensity, duration, areal extent and signature characteristics.
Sonar records were analyzed to identify targets on the basis of configuration, areal
extent, target intensity and contrast with background, elevation and shadow image,
and were also reviewed for possible association with identified magnetic anomalies.
Appendix A

Attach D - Report 7
Figure 5. Computer navigation system located at the research vessel helm.
Data generated by the remote - sensing equipment were developed to support an
assessment of each magnetic and acoustic signature. Analysis of each target
signature included consideration of magnetic and sonar signature characteristics
previously demonstrated to be reliable indicators of historically significant
submerged cultural resources. Assessment of each target includes avoidance
options and possible adjustments to avoid potential cultural resources. Where
avoidance is not possible the assessment includes recommendations for additional
investigation to determine the exact nature of the cultural material generating the
signature and its potential NRHP significance. Historical evidence was developed
into a background context and an inventory of shipwreck sites that identified
possible correlations with magnetic targets (Appendix A). A magnetic contour map
of the survey area was produced to aid in the analysis of each target.
Historical Background
European settlement of the present day Cape Fear region began as early as 1526
when Lucas Vdsquez de Ayll6n led an expedition from Florida into the Cape Fear
region. One of the Spanish vessels was recorded lost near the mouth of the Cape
Fear River, referred to by the Spanish as the Jordon River. During the brief existence
of the Spanish settlement, the area was known as the "Land of Ayll6n" (Lee 1965:3-
4).
Appendix A

Attach D - Report g
The next attempt to settle the Cape Fear region was almost a century and a half later
with the arrival of the English. Settlers from the New England colonies came to the
area eager to establish a Puritan colony in the less harsh climate of the south. Under
the leadership of Captain William Hilton, a group arrived in the summer of 1662 to
find a suitable location. Arriving at the river and "Cape Fear" as he called it, the
group remained for three weeks during which time they purchased the surrounding
area from the Indians. The Puritan settlers that followed during the winter of 1662
remained in the Cape Fear vicinity for only a brief time before abandoning the area
(Lee 1965:4 -5).
In early 1663, King Charles II granted territory south of Virginia to eight noblemen
in tribute for restoring the Stuart dynasty to the monarchy. That conveyance
included the area from Georgia to the Albemarle Sound region of North Carolina.
The territory was divided into three counties: Albermarle [Albemarle Sound area],
Clarendon [Cape Fear region] and Craven [South Carolina]. Shortly after, the Lords
Proprietors received a proposal from a group of Barbadians for a settlement within
the Cape Fear region. In late spring 1664, a group of 200 settlers, under the
command of John Vassall, established a colony at the confluence of the Charles
[modern Cape Fear] River and Town Creek (Potter 1993:5 -6). The capital,
Charlestown, was the first English town in Carolina (Lee 1965:5). The colony was
reported to have reached a population of 800 and extended some 60 miles along the
river at its zenith.
In October 1665, a second expedition by the Barbadians was launched with the
intent of establishing a colony in the vicinity of Port Royal. A small fleet consisting
of a frigate, sloop and a flyboat, under command of Sir John Yeamans, stopped at
the Charlestown settlement after an arduous journey from Barbados. While entering
the river, the flyboat, carrying the new colony's armament, ran aground on the
shoals on the west side of the channel [modern Jay Bird Shoals] and was lost (Potter
1993:9, 29). The loss of this important cargo abruptly ended the Port Royal venture.
Within another two years Charlestown would also be abandoned. Difficulty in
obtaining supplies, differences between the proprietors and settlers over land
policies and hostilities with the Natives resulted in the colony being generally
deserted by late 1667 (Potter 1993:10 -11).
Lockwoods Folly first appeared on the John Ogilby map of 1671 as "Look Wood
Folly" (Figure 6). There are a number of narratives of how the river obtained its
name. The first involves a Barbadian by the name of Lockwood who built a ship up
the river in the 17th century (Angley n.d.:1; Hairr 2007:149 -150; Powell 1968:294).
Only when it was completed did he realize that it had too deep a draft to be floated
over the bar at the entrance of the river. Since there was no way of getting the ship
to sea, he left the vessel to rot in the river.
Powell (1968) suggests that the seventeenth - century word "folly" was used much as
the French "folie ", which means "delight" or "favorite abode ", and formed part of
the name of various English estates. This suggests that it was the favorite abode of
an early settler named Lockwood.
Appendix A

Attach D - Reportg
The third story states that Lockwood led a failed expedition from Bermuda (Hairr
2007:150; Federal Writer's Project 1939:289). The name describes his foolishness in
either failing to bring sufficient supplies to support the colony, or establishing a
colony that was exposed to both sea and Indian attacks. Like previous colonization
attempts, it is likely the latter contributed to the abandonment of the settlement after
conflicts with the Natives.
,!L«•s o o Z,-.oi
11� o
Port I�.1c`val. .�S •
ec
3
Af hiey
Port 6-te"t .Ct Ye�i
S
i
Ca e Caytcret Log, ltmtd
i CntncrI %ir i �
, Ln
\ / ('9pek'ear ea't's Foy....., �
0 4P
� r
� i ll'inn: k t
1
a
� 1•" / � 1Rt� d
Figure 6. John Ogilby map (1671) illustrating the location of "Look Wood folly ".
In 1726, permanent settlements on the lower Cape Fear were established by South
Carolina and upper North Carolina colonists (Lee 1977:7). On the west bank of the
river, about 12 miles above its mouth and several miles below a shoal in the river
called "the Flats," Maurice Moore established the town of Brunswick. A shoal
located at the mouth of Town Creek impeded larger ships from venturing further
upstream. Situated below "the Flats" Brunswick was accessible to vessels of large or
small size (Lee 1977:12). In April 1733, another community was established 15 miles
upstream from Brunswick. The new settlement became known as New Town or
Newton to distinguish it from the "old town" of Brunswick. In 1740, the town was
incorporated and the name was changed to Wilmington (Lee 1977:12).
While there may have been additional attempts to colonize the area around
Lockwoods Folly, it was not until the second quarter of the 181h century that
permanent settlement began (Angley n.d.:1). In 1734, a "Young Gentleman ", on a
Appendix A

Attach D - Report®
trip from Charles Town to Cape Fear, crossed a ferry at Lockwoods Folly. This is
likely Bells Ferry, near modern day Supply, as noted on the Moseley (1733) map
(Figure 7). The unknown traveler described the founding of the settlement of the
area:
IT is named so after one Lockwood, a Barbadian, who with several others
attempted to settle it some time ago; but by his cruel Behavior to the
Indians, they drove him from thence, and it has not been settled above ten
Years (A Young Gentleman 1737:42).
Druick7•
nrw o',
r
T rtr J`r !•o/ OW
! I XIM't Over
L
..niFi,•�r/ c �Nrr.
1, f ,.. vr♦ tiinrr• �.
'; o• s �:1 .i' # •� � ("ape Fear
AN
J f
Figure 7. Moseley map (1733) showing the location of Lockwoods Folly and Bells
Ferry.
As hostilities with France and Spain grew during the 1740s Governor Gabriel
Johnston authorized the construction of a fort along the lower Cape Fear to protect
the burgeoning towns of Brunswick and Wilmington. Construction began in July
1745 on a small bluff overlooking the mouth of the river. Johnston's Fort, as it was
called, was still uncompleted in 1748 when two Spanish vessels entered the river
and raided Brunswick (Carson 1992:20). Efforts to finish construction intensified
after the raid and in less than a year the fort was completed. The resulting structure
was small and poorly constructed. It was manned by only three men and armed
with four rusty cannons (Carson 1992:20). In 1751, the fort was assigned to double
as a quarantine station.
In 1761, Royal Governor Arthur Dobbs replied to a series of questions sent by the
Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations about the general conditions in
North Carolina. This included information about principal rivers and harbors in
North Carolina. About Lockwoods Folly, he states, "there are also (to the Westward
of this River [Cape Fear]) the Inlets of Shalot Lockwoods Folly and Little River
navigable for small Vessels" (Saunders 1888:608).
Appendix A

Attach D - Report T
A year later, in a letter dated 15 June 1762, John McDowell, the minister of St. Philips
Church, gave an account of the situation of his church and parish at that time. St.
Philips parish had approximately 800 taxable citizens, consisting of about 200
families. About Lockwoods Folly, he wrote,
We have no dissenters of any sort excepting a few poor families of
fishermen who came from Cape May at the mouth of the river Delaware
and are settled by the seaside between the mouth of the river Lockwood's
Folly and Shallot [sic], they call themselves new light Anabaptists; but we
hope this frolic will soon dwindle away and disappear among them as it
has already done in many places in this and neighboring provinces
(Judah 2008:88).
Development based upon a maritime economy played a major role in the growth of
both Wilmington and Brunswick during the eighteenth century. Vessels of varying
size entered the Cape Fear from other coastal ports, the West Indies and Europe.
Larger vessels, unable to cross over "the Flats," called at Brunswick, while vessels of
smaller size could travel further up the river to Wilmington. Consequently,
Brunswick was established as the center for overseas shipping and Wilmington as
the center for local and West Indian trade (Lee 1977:16 -17).
Rice, cattle, swine, lumber and naval stores made up the majority of the exports
from the port district of Brunswick. Prior to the Revolution numerous ships left the
Cape Fear River for other ports. The West Indies served as the main destination of
these ships with English ports following a close second. A lesser number carried
cargo to coastal ports, mostly in the northern colonies, but occasionally some
ventured south, down the coast to Charleston (Lee 1977:33).
The Cape Fear region played a minor role in the events of the American Revolution.
In June 1775, Royal Governor Martin fled from New Bern to Fort Johnston, then
under the protection of the British man -of -war Cruizer. Growing patriot activity in
the area forced the governor to relocate to the warship a month later. All portable
materials were transferred to the ship and the fort's guns were spiked and pushed
into the river (Carson 1992:22). Local forces later burned the fort and its
outbuildings.
Knowing that a large number of Loyalists inhabited the interior of the colony
Governor Martin initiated a plan to subjugate the region using a combination of
British and Loyalist forces (Sprunt 2005:113). British reinforcements arrived off the
North Carolina coast by the end of March, but by then the opportunity to subdue
the colony had passed. However, threats of Loyalist attacks still persisted. In 1776,
William Gause applied to the Wilmington -New Hanover Safety Committee on
behalf of "the Inhabitants of Challotee [Shallotte] and Lockwoods folly setting forth
their apprehensions of Danger from the people of Waggamaw and requesting of this
Committee a small supply of powder to enable them to Act in their own defence in
case they should be Attacked" (Wilmington -New Hanover Safety Committee
Minutes, 20 January 1776). As a consequence, the committee ordered 20 pounds of
gunpowder to be supplied from the stock. A month later, on 27 February 1776,
Appendix A

Attach D - Repol?,
Colonel James Moore and the First North Carolina Continentals with a group of
militia defeated a contingent of Scottish Loyalists at the battle of Moore's Creek
Bridge. This battle, called the "Lexington and Concord of the south," kept the
British from occupying the South at the beginning of the war (Powell 1989:180 -182).
Naval operations were of limited importance in the Cape Fear region. In mid -1776,
British warships began taking up regular station over the mouth of the river.
Foraging parties in small vessels worked their way along the smaller streams and
rivers in North Carolina. Forty head of cattle were seized in the vicinity of
Lockwood's Folly and it was feared British sloops could cross the bars at Little River
or Shallotte Inlet (Rankin 1971:72). In May of the following year two British men -of-
war entered the Cape Fear River and destroyed a number of colonial vessels at
anchor (Watson 1992:29). To counter the threat posed by British warships the
General Assembly voted to purchase and arm three brigs for the defense of the Cape
Fear River. However, these vessels proved inadequate for the task and suggestions
were made for either selling them or sending them on trading or privateering
expeditions (Watson 1992:29).
Due to the exposed position of Brunswick Town to the British, the General
Assembly passed an act in 1779 to move the county seat to Lockwoods Folly (Rankin
1971:81). This same act provided for a courthouse, jail, and stocks near the bridge
over the Lockwoods Folly River. Beginning in March 1779, the court met at the
house of John Bell until the courthouse was completed. In spite of insufficient funds
due to war time inflation, the court finally met in the new courthouse on 26 June
1786 on a tract of land purchased from John Bell's son, Robert, on 7 April 1787. By
1792, the "new" courthouse was in need of repairs and in January 1797 the court
adjourned to the tavern of Daniel Bellune.
In 1781, General Henry W. Harrington requested intelligence regarding "the arrival
of the Fleet of our Allies ". His letter gives insight into the fishing and maritime
activities along the coast:
I have engaged a Person to go to the Sea - shore, to Lockwood's folly, and
to the Boundary- house, & as far southward along the Sea coast as he can,
with safety to himself; to make all possible enquiry of the Fishermen, the
Sailing Boats & of all others, of the certainty of the said Fleet's being off
this Coast (Clark 1896:685).
The lower Cape Fear remained quiet until 1781 when Major James H. Craig was
dispatched by Lord Cornwallis in Charleston to take Wilmington. Craig, with a
force of 18 vessels and 400 troops, quickly captured the defenseless town (Sprunt
2005:114). From Wilmington, Craig dispatched parties throughout the countryside
to rally local Loyalists and to obtain supplies for Cornwallis's troops, then marching
through North Carolina. After being checked by Colonial forces in the battle of
Guilford Courthouse the British retreated to Wilmington to recoup and replenish
supplies. Later, when Lord Cornwallis moved north to suppress Virginia, Craig
remained behind in Wilmington to disrupt Colonial activity in that region. News of
Cornwallis's surrender at Yorktown made the British position in Wilmington
untenable and on 17 November Major Craig evacuated the city.
Appendix A

Attach D - RepoJ3
After the conclusion of the war there was a shift in the maritime development of the
Cape Fear region. Almost all the ships that left the Cape Fear now went to
Charleston and few to England or the West Indies (Lee 1977:33). Inbound ships now
proceeded up to Wilmington. This shift brought about the decline of the town of
Brunswick as was indicated by the change in name of the "Port of Brunswick" to the
"Port of Wilmington" (Lee 1977:34).
During the last decades of the eighteenth century the area that would become the
town of Southport consisted of little more than the remains of Fort Johnston and the
homes of local river pilots. The region's potential, however, was realized by three
men from Wilmington, Joshua Potts, John Brown and John Husk, who the viewed
the area, with its salubrious sea breezes, as an ideal spot for a new town. Though
the men's initial petition was rejected in 1790 the group persevered and on 15
November 1792, the General Assembly issued a charter for the establishment of a
town on the bluff overlooking the mouth of the river.
The town was named Smithville, after Benjamin Smith who introduced the bill into
the legislature. The town was laid out with lots offered for sale in Wilmington and
Fayetteville newspapers (Figure 8). The charter specified that no person could
purchase more than six lots in their name and the purchase price of lots was to be 40
shillings per lot (Carson 1992:26). The town plan also reserved space for Fort
Johnston, which was rebuilt in 1804.
I y PLAN
II( � 51y1lTfft•Ii.LE
Rd, fs— pt.f�rtlp• 4: A,se•it. —r
_, I � 1\, \ �s> ✓r..'y,.. /axe ��d>
t ice.
_
Z of
i I a��. I i � • �r ...
wcf a� f• a� _ Ir
'ZI ,r*
Npoes J.*
Figure 8. Plan of the town of Smithville,1792 (Carson 1992:27).
Appendix A

Attach D - RepoJ4
Following the Revolutionary War, Lockwoods Folly remained a river crossing and
the location of the county courthouse (Lee 1978:87). In 1804, Daniel Bellune offered
his plantation, tavern, and ferry for sale or lease:
FOR SALE, OR TO BE LEASED for a term of Years, The Plantation,
Tavern and Ferry on Lockwood's Folly, Adjoining the Court - House.
The House contain's seven Bedrooms and one Dining room above; a Hall
and Parlour, below with four fire - places, Stables and every other
necessary out building. The Garden and Orchard are capacious and
contain a variety of fruit trees.
The Plantation contains 900 acres; 400 are under fence; 80 acres are Tide
Swamp, and a part in order for planting. Boats from four to five feet
draught of water may load at the Landing; Vessels from six to seven feet
draught of water may go over the Bar, which is but 12 miles to Cape Fear
Bar; a Store may be established here to great advantage; and the Ferry,
itself, is becoming, from the great increase of Settlers, every day more
productive (Wilmington Gazette 1804).
In spite of Bellune's positive outlook on the increase in the number of settlers, the
area around Lockwoods Folly grew slowly. Francis Asbury in 1791 described the
location as a "lonely part of the world" where "the soil is very barren, and the
country, consequently, but thinly settled" (Clark et al. 1958:608). On 28 November
1808, the General Assembly approved an act to move the county seat from
Lockwoods Folly to Smithville, diminishing the need to establish an official town
along the river (Lee 1978:91).
With the growing amount of vessel traffic sailing up to Wilmington there arose a
need for improvements in the navigability of the river. As early as 1784, measures
were taken to improve the conditions of the lower Cape Fear River (Lee 1977:36).
Improvements were needed at the treacherous entrances to the river, at the Bar and
upstream at New Inlet. Three major shoals between Wilmington and the sea also
caused problems for ships trying to navigate the river. The "upper shoal," located
near the foot of Clarks Island, off the southern tip of Eagles Island, had eight and
one -half feet of water. The "middle shoal," also known as "the Flats," had nine feet.
The "lower shoal," at the foot of Campbell Island, had nine and one -half feet. The
main channel of the river was then located in a narrow passage between Campbell
Island, Clarks Island and the west bank (Lee 1978:112).
In addition to the shoals, ships deliberately sunk during the American Revolution as
obstructions needed to be removed (Lee 1977:36 -37). Around 1819, Hamilton
Fulton, a noted English engineer, was hired to make improvements on the Cape Fear
River mainly between Wilmington and the ocean where a system of jetties was
planned. Work continued for six years until financial limitations halted this project.
Some improvements were made on the river up until the start of the Civil War with
sporadic financing by the state and local Wilmington businessmen (Lee 1977:37).
Appendix A

Attach D - Repolg
Steam vessels first appeared on the Cape Fear River in 1817. The first steamboat to
arrive was the side -wheel Prometheus, built in Beaufort for a firm in Wilmington that
intended to run the vessel from Wilmington to Fayetteville and Southport. The
following year the Clarendon Steamboat Company was established at Wilmington.
The company held the exclusive right to operate steamboats on the Cape Fear for a
period of seven years provided that it kept one boat in service. In addition to the
Prometheus, the side -wheel Henrietta, also made regular runs between Wilmington
and Fayetteville (Lee 1977:37 -38). By 1822, a second steamship venture, the Cape
Fear Steamboat Company, had begun service on the river. With time the number of
steamboats on the river increased significantly (Lee 1977:38). By the 1850s, nearly a
hundred vessels of all types were in Wilmington at the same time. Many of the
ships were large square- rigged foreign craft, while others were side -wheel steamers.
Most, however, were American schooners engaged in the coastal trade (Lee
1978:116).
Development of the Cape Fear region was soon disrupted by the Civil War. After
Confederate forces in South Carolina attacked the U.S. garrison at Fort Sumter,
President Abraham Lincoln declared a state of open rebellion and called for
volunteers to preserve the Union. Lincoln also issued a proclamation on 19 April
1861 establishing a blockade of Confederate ports in South Carolina, Georgia,
Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas. Eight days later, Lincoln
extended the blockade to include ports in Virginia and North Carolina. With North
Carolina's withdrawal from the Union, Governor John W. Ellis ordered the
occupations of forts Johnston and Caswell.
Union naval forces were inadequate to properly enforce the blockade at the onset of
the war. In 1861, U.S. navy registers listed 90 vessels, 50 of which were propelled by
sail and were considered obsolete for the task at hand. The remaining 40 were
steam, but several of the deep draft vessels proved unsuitable for the shallow
southern waters. Eight others were laid up while 22 vessels remained at station off
foreign shores and would require at least six months travel to reach the United
States (Browning 1980:24). However, within a few months of Lincoln's
proclamation, Secretary of the Navy Gideon Welles took steps to implement an
effective blockade off the southern coastline.
The navy department bought or leased nearly any vessel that could be of service. In
nine months, U.S. Navy agents purchased 136 ships, constructed 52 and
commissioned and repaired another 76 (Engle and Lott 1975:180). The Union
blockade in turn gave rise to the practice of blockade running. At the beginning of
the blockade, practically any vessel was considered suitable for breaking through
the Atlantic squadrons to carry cargo in or out of the isolated southern ports. The
most successful of the early runners were steamers that had belonged to the
Southern Coasting Lines and were idle due to the outbreak of the war. The illicit
trade carried on by these ships reaped considerable profit, but failed to compare
with the great capital resources brought in during the latter part of the war.
Wilmington provided North Carolina with a deepwater port. By 1860, Wilmington
had emerged as a modern shipping center with excellent internal communication.
Three railroads ran through the city and daily steamboat service to Charleston and
Appendix A

Attach D - RepoJ6
New York, as well as, up the Cape Fear River to Fayetteville. With the capture of
New Bern, Roanoke Island and Beaufort, Wilmington was the only North Carolina
port left open for the importation and exportation of goods. As long as supplies
were imported through the two inlets of the Cape Fear River and transported along
the railroad lines, which connected with Lee's army in Virginia, the Confederacy
had a lifeline. Wilmington soon became the most vital seaport in the "Southern
Cause" (Pleasants 1979:15).
Wilmington became the key port for "runners" largely because of the area's
topography. Located 28 miles from the mouth of the Cape Fear River, the port had
access to the Atlantic through two separate entrances; eastward through New Inlet
and southward through the river mouth (Figure 9). Although the two entrances
were only six miles apart, Smith's Island, a strip of sand and shoal, lay in between.
Continuing along Cape Fear were the dangerous Frying Pan Shoals, which extended
10 miles further into the Atlantic, making the distance by water between the two
entrances a little less than 40 miles (Soley 1883:91).
Ji+)r�'7noc7or j Te .fEH'
Snow
�� DlF.Zdevl,(7r
FORT FISHER
lYjgP' t4
F. W IN.T. -1171
Ta J,K
MAP OF THE
CAPE FEAR RIVER
AND THE
APPRDACHES
TO
WHAHNGTON,N.C.
mom cs.A_Fai�jnc.rr �S!!�•vs;y„
Seale of 1.Sle.
ColnIFd�u�]%YI�I�s^y
Figure 9. Chart depicting the two entrances into the Cape Fear
River (U.S. Department of the Navy 1901:38).
Appendix A

Attach D - RepoJ7
This geographical configuration proved highly advantageous for blockade runners
and the initial blockade of Wilmington proved ineffective. When the Daylight, the
first and at the time the only Union vessel sent to blockade these waters, arrived, it
immediately experienced the difficulties associated with guarding the dual
entrances of the Cape Fear River. While pursuing a steamer out of the western bar
entrance, the Daylight inadvertently allowed several other small vessels to pass out
of the New Inlet entrance. Within three months of the Daylight's arrival, 42 vessels
either entered or cleared Wilmington (Browning 1980:27).
A number of vessels were lost at Lockwoods Folly Inlet during the war. The
schooner Kate (also named Leonora and Lucy C. Holmes), inbound from Nassau with a
cargo of salt, was beached near Lockwoods Folly Inlet on 2 April 1862 (U.S.
Department of the Navy [USDN] 1898:196 -7). After being set on fire and abandoned
by the crew, Union sailors boarded the grounded vessel and extinguished the
flames. After an unsuccessful attempt to lighten the Kate by throwing salt
overboard, it was decided to burn and scuttle the vessel. After being fired upon by
the Mount Vernon and Cambridge,
[A]ll the vessels remained by her until 5 p. m., when her masts fell, her
deck fell in, and both hull and cargo were so thoroughly destroyed as to
render it impossible for the rebels to derive any advantage from them
(USDN 1898:197).
The blockade runner Elizabeth (ex- Atlantic), owned by the Southern Steamship
Company was confiscated at New Orleans in January 1862 (Watts 1986). The ship
was a wood hull steamer constructed in New York in 1852 by William Collyer (Wise
1988:138, 289). The 216 -foot long, 28 -foot beam hull was fitted with a vertical -beam
condensing engine and two fire -tube boilers supplied by Morgan Iron Works and
Quinpard Merrit and Company, both of New York (Watts 1986). After Confederate
agents in New Orleans determined that the ship would not be suitable for fitting out
as a cruiser, the vessel was sold and privately operated as a blockade runner.
Under the command of Captain Thomas Lockwood, the Elizabeth left Nassau on 19
September 1863 with a cargo of steel and saltpeter for Wilmington (Gaines 2008:118;
USDN 1899:234). Just twelve miles from the protection of Fort Caswell and the
mouth of the Cape Fear River, the Elizabeth grounded on a shoal on the east edge of
Lockwoods Folly Inlet. Finding it impossible to get the ship free, Captain Lockwood
ordered the vessel burned on the morning of 24 September.
The wreck of the Elizabeth contributed directly to the loss of the blockade runner
Bendigo. Mistaking the Elizabeth for a blockader, the Bendigo attempted to run
between the wreck and the land, where she ran aground (USDN 1899:386). After
being unloaded through the surf, the vessel was set on fire by her crew. The Bendigo
was an iron paddle -wheel steamer of approximately 178 tons.
The Bendigo was discovered by the USS Fahkee on 3 January 1864 with "smoke
issuing from her" (USDN 1899:385). Several attempts were made to refloat and
move the Bendigo off the shoal. Due to the presence of Confederate artillery and
Appendix A

Attach D - Repolg
infantry on shore, Rear - Admiral S.P. Lee ordered the Bendigo destroyed. This
destruction was detailed to Lee on the morning of 4 January: "They report her hull
and boilers riddled by shot and shell, several feet of water in her hold, and firmly
bedded in sand. The woodwork in her forward part, as well as her after, was
entirely consumed by fire" (USDN 1899:386).
On 9 January, several vessels, including the Iron Age, Daylight, Montgomery, Aries,
and Governor Buckingham, under orders from Read - Admiral Lee, attempted to refloat
the vessel and pull her off the shoal (USDN 1899:396 -8). While assisting the
Montgomery, the Iron Age ran aground on 10 January. When efforts to refloat the Iron
Age also failed, the vessel was set afire and destroyed by an explosion on 11 January.
This activity contributed to the loss of a third blockade runner. Shortly after the Iron
Age was blown up, a vessel was sighted beached and burning less than a mile west
of Lockwoods Folly Inlet (USDN 1899:402). The ship proved to be the new, iron,
paddle -wheel steamer Ranger. No doubt trapped by the vessels attempting to save
the Iron Age, the Ranger had been run aground and set afire to avoid capture. Efforts
to save the Ranger were equally unsuccessful and the ship was shelled to complete
destruction of the hull and machinery.
During a two -year period (January 1863- November 1864), Confederate naval sources
listed numerous vessel stations on the Cape Fear. These vessels were identified as:
the ironclad sloop North Carolina, the floating battery Artic, the steam gunboat
Yadkin, the steam gunboat Equator, the torpedo boat Squib, and the ironclad sloop
Raleigh, and two, long one -gun cutters. In November 1864, Confederate Secretary of
the Navy Stephen Mallory also reported to President Jefferson Davis that two new
torpedo boats were under construction at Wilmington (USDN 1921:528 -532, 630,
743 -745).
The capture of Wilmington proved difficult because both entrances to the Cape Fear
were guarded by powerful fortifications and lesser works. Collectively those
fortifications became known as the Lower Cape Fear Defense System. The central
point of that system was Fort Fisher, located on Confederate Point. That fortification
was originally a small earthworks constructed to protect New Inlet. By 1864, Fort
Fisher had become the largest seacoast fortification in the Confederacy. Shaped like
an inverted "L," Fort Fisher's land face ran 628 yards and was guarded by 20 of the
heaviest seacoast guns. The sea face included a 130 -pound Armstrong rifle and a
170 -pound Blakely, both from England (Browning 1980:35).
Extending from the land face was a string of torpedoes, which could be exploded
from inside of the fort (Pleasants 1979:22). Mound Battery, towering to a height of
60 feet with two mounted heavy guns, stood near the end of Confederate Point.
Augusta Battery, which stood behind Mound Battery, was located near the river
(Pleasants 1979:24).
Fort Holmes, on the other side of New Inlet on Smith's Island, shared the protection
of Smith's Inlet in the Cape Fear River with the batteries at Oak Island. Oak Island,
located opposite Fort Holmes, held another series of forts and batteries, such as Fort
Campbell, Fort Caswell and Battery Shaw (Pleasants 1979:24). Fort Caswell guarded
Appendix A

Attach D - Repojq
the western bar entrance. Captured by Confederate militia on 14 April 1861,
Caswell was renovated into a strong casemated work with new armament
consisting of seven 10 -inch, four 8 -inch Columbiads and a 9 -inch Dahlgren gun
(Browning 1980:35; Pleasants 1979:24). Both Fort Caswell and Fort Holmes were
responsible for shelling union vessels in the Middle Ground area, including the
stranded tug Violet, which went aground off the Western Bar Channel on the night
of 7 August 1864.
After his tug struck the shoal Ensign Thomas Stothard requested assistance from the
crew of the nearby 866 -ton brig USS Vicksburg to attempt to re -float the Violet.
Despite their quick response, the extra manpower and effort proved fruitless as
Stothard was ordered to fire the Violet after midnight. In response to a court of
enquiry [sic] investigation, Captain Stothard submitted an incident report to Captain
S.F. Sands of the USS Fort Jackson and offered this account:
After all preparations for sending officers, crew, and ship's effects off in
boats that he [Lieutenant- Commander Braine of the USS Vicksburg] and
Acting Volunteer Lieutenant Williams, of the Emma, had sent, all of which
I did, sending property, a list of which you will find enclosed, also a list
of crew, I made preparations for her destruction as follows: I put a
lighted slow match to a powder tank in the magazine and closed the
door, then filled a large, fine drawer with shavings and straw taken from
pillows and mattresses, partially covered it with another, and sprinkled
two quarts of spirits of turpentine over all and on the woodwork around
it; hung up an oilcloth from the table, one corner hanging in the shavings,
which I touched with a lighted match (in the wardroom), after all the
boats, but mine in waiting, had left the side, and I followed about 2:00
o'clock a.m. this morning. The explosion of the magazine containing
about 200 pounds of powder occurred within half an hour afterwards,
and by daylight she was effectually consumed. One 12- pounder was
thrown overboard, one left on the forecastle, spiked with rat -tail file, and
the 24- pounder was directly over the magazine aft when it exploded, so
that it was thrown into the sea (USDN 1900:343 -344).
Rear - Admiral S.P. Lee recommended that no action be taken to discipline the acting
officer of the Violet. Lee remarked to Union Secretary of the Navy Gideon Welles,
that: " Stothard is a very intelligent and efficient officer, notwithstanding this
casualty" (USDN 1900:344). Prior to its destruction, the Violet (ex- Martha) was
described as a fourth -rate, wooden screw steamer measuring 85 feet in length, with a
beam of 19 feet. The 166 -ton tug housed one, inverted, direct - acting engine with a
30 -inch diameter cylinder and one return flue boiler (USDN 1921:233).
Farther up river from the Violet wreck site there were a series of forts and batteries
used as secondary defenses for Wilmington and as protection for blockade runners
outbound from Smith's Inlet. Fort Lamb was located on the west side of the Cape
Fear River on Reeve's Point. Above Fort Lamb was Fort Anderson, the most
important of the secondary defenses. Partially built from the ruins of Old
Brunswick Town, Anderson consisted of a series of trenches and earthworks
approximately a mile long. Three smoothbore 24- pounders, three rifled 32-
pounders and six smoothbore 32- pounders comprised the Fort's armaments. By
Appendix A

Attach D - Repo2@
1864, Fort Anderson had become an inspection station for all craft heading up the
Cape Fear River to Wilmington (Pleasants 1979:25). Several lesser forts, including
Stokes, Lee, French, Campbell, Strong and Sugarloaf, were situated on the east side
of the river (Pleasants 1979:25).
In addition to this impressive array of forts, a naval construction program was
initiated in Wilmington to contribute to the defenses of the harbor. The success of
the ironclad ram CSS Virginia in the March 1862 battles at Hampton Roads
demonstrated the superiority of armored warships to naval officers of both the
North and South. In late March 1862, Confederate Secretary of the Navy Stephen R.
Mallory, sent "instructions relative to gunboats" to Commander William T. Muse,
the ranking naval officer at Wilmington. Shortly thereafter, the navy began building
two ironclads in the city, the Raleigh at James Cassidy's shipyard at the foot of
Church Street, and the North Carolina at the Seery shipyard on Eagle Island (Still
1985:5-17,79-92).
Both vessels utilized a design based on plans conceived by naval constructor John L.
Porter. The plans called for a tightly framed hull, with a slight deadrise and a hard
chine. The vessels were to be 174 feet long (150 feet between perpendiculars) with a
draft of 13 feet. Amidships, a 105 -foot long casemate, angled at thirty -five degrees
and covered with 4 inches of iron plate, protected the gun deck. Two boilers
provided steam for the vessel's two horizontal engines, which were geared to a
single 10 -foot screw. The first ironclad built on this design, the CSS Richmond, was
completed in Richmond in 1862. Known as the Richmond class, this group,
consisting of five vessels, was numerically the largest standardized class of ironclads
constructed by the Confederacy (Holcombe 1993:63 -64).
The two Cape Fear ironclads entered into active service by late 1863/ early 1864
(North Carolina in December 1863 and the Raleigh in April 1864) after numerous
delays resulting from material shortages, strikes and epidemics. However, the
usefulness of these two vessels to the Confederacy's war effort was limited. Raleigh
grounded on a shoal near the mouth of New Inlet and was destroyed after a sortie
against the blockading squadron on 7 May 1864, less than a month after entering
service. The North Carolina, on the other hand, was reduced to serving as a floating
battery; its deep draft and lack of motive power rendered the vessel ineffective as a
ram.
The ironclad was further hampered by the use of unseasoned timber in its
construction. Warping and splitting timbers caused the ship to leak incessantly and
an infestation by teredo worms further weakened the hull. For most of its career,
the ironclad remained at anchor near Smithville, positioned to support the nearby
forts in the defense of Wilmington. The North Carolina finally sank at its moorings in
September 1864. Though useless as an offensive weapon, the North Carolina served
as a deterrent, preventing the United States Navy from entering and seizing the
lower Cape Fear until the fall of Fort Fisher in the closing days of the war.
When hostilities ended in 1865 so did some of the regular river trade. The prewar
steamer service between Wilmington, Charleston and Savannah was not resumed,
since rail service had been established. Steamship service did, however, resume to
Appendix A

Attach D - RepoR T
the northern cities of Baltimore, Philadelphia and New York (Lee 1977:91). The
coastal trade also revived and was conducted mainly by schooners ranging between
150 and 600 tons. Because of the decimation of American shipping during the war
international commerce was carried in foreign bottoms, usually of British, German
or Scandinavian origins (Sprunt 2005:501).
Industry had been severely interrupted during the war, but was beginning to make
a comeback. Naval stores and lumber continued to be the principal exports with the
addition of some cotton. Exports recorded for the year 1871 amounted to some
95,000 bales of cotton, 100,000 bushels of peanuts, 112,024 barrels of spirits of
turpentine, 568,441 barrels of rosin, 37,867 barrels of tar and 17,963 barrels of
turpentine (Sprunt 2005:513 -514). Without the use of slave labor the rice industry
declined dramatically (Lee 1977:86 -87). By the turn of the century, a decrease in the
availability of pine trees resulted in a decline of the naval stores industry. With
improvements in cultivation and transportation, cotton became a major industry in
Wilmington until its decline in the 1930s. Guano from the West Indies was brought
in for the new fertilizer plants. The production of creosote impregnated wood also
helped increase shipping in the region (Lee 1977:87 -88).
During the last quarter of the nineteenth century efforts were undertaken to develop
Smithville into a port city. In 1886, the North and Southern Railroad Company
announced plans to extend rail service from Wilmington to Smithville. Developers,
envisioning a port that would rival Charleston and Norfolk, requested that the
town's name be changed to Southport to draw attention to the "Port of the South"
(Carson 1992:61). In anticipation of the expected development the town's dirt roads
were paved in crushed shell and the dredge boat Woodbury began deepening and
straightening the channel to accommodate increased vessel traffic. However, the
proposed rail line did not materialize and Southport remained a small town relying
on fishing and tourism for its economic livelihood. The Wilmington, Brunswick and
Southport Railroad eventually extended a line to the town in 1911.
Improvements to navigation on the Cape Fear River had deteriorated during the
war. Continual silting reduced the navigable channel. By 1870, federally financed
projects were again started to improve the conditions of the river. One such project
was the closure of one of the two inlets. New Inlet was closed in 1881 with the belief
that the increased force of the concentrated flow would sweep out the channel. The
closure was accomplished by placing a rock dam that extended for more than a mile
from Federal Point to Zeke's Island. The dam was completed in 1881 and later
became known as "the Rocks." Another rock barrier was later built between Zeke's
Island and Smith's Island. The channel depth was dredged to accommodate the
deeper draft vessels (Lee 1977:91).
Additional studies were conducted on Lockwoods Folly River to ascertain the
feasibility of providing a channel between Supply (established in 1858) and the
Atlantic. A survey carried out in 1880 reported:
The examination was commenced at the bridge on the road from Shallotte
to Smithville, N. C., which point is the head of navigation on the river
Appendix A

Attach D - RepoR?,
and is about 20 miles from its mouth. The river at this point is 125 feet
wide.
The commerce on the river is carried on by several light- draught sailing
vessels from Wilmington, which is the port of entry for this district
These vessels draw from 5 to 6 feet of water loaded, and carry about 300
barrels naval stores. The exports are about 600 barrels manufactured and
200 barrels crude turpentine per month, and 2,000 cords wood, 1,200
barrels fish, and 800 to 900 barrels tar annually (U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers [USACE] 1880:910).
The amount of commerce and the perceived benefit of a channel dredged to 8 feet
were not sufficient at that time to justify the cost of channel improvements.
By 1887, the annual commerce of the Lockwoods Folly River was only $50,000
(USACE 1887:1099). Coasting schooners with a 6 -foot draught entered the river and
continued up river to a bridge, which marked the head of schooner navigation.
Goods were then transported to pole- boats, which carried the goods further up
river. Exports, including crude and manufactured turpentine, tar wood, light -wood,
lumber, shingles, cotton, rice, corn, rye, oats, hay, cabbages, collards, turnips, sweet
potatoes, Irish potatoes, beans, peas, ground -peas, melons, sugar cane, sirup [sic],
fish, oysters, and diamond - backed terrapin, were valued at $25,000 while imported
general merchandise was valued at $25,000. In addition to these goods, the area
contained a large quantity of pine, oak, ash, poplar, maple, hickory, gum, cypress,
and juniper timber. The goods were carried by two schooners, which attempted
weekly trips to Wilmington, but were often detained between six and ten days
because of an oyster rock barrier. Due to the difficulty in getting goods to market,
only approximately 7,000 of a potential 40,000 acres were used in cultivation. It was
speculated that commerce would increase to approximately $350,000 should the
channel be improved. The cost of such improvement was recommended at $40,000
to remove the oyster -rock barrier and mud flats and to establish a 6 -foot navigation
channel (dredged to 7 feet to ensure a 6 -foot channel), 100 feet wide from Supply,
the head of schooner navigation, to the Atlantic.
Apparently the perceived benefit of river improvements was enough to justify the
project, and between 1892 and 1897, improvements were carried out at a cost of
$65,000. This established a channel at least 40 feet wide with a 5 -foot depth, with 3.5
and 4.5 feet over the two shoals, at mean low water. By 1897, the improvements
were deemed sufficient for commercial needs, and by 1904, it seemed that commerce
would decrease, "as a large mill, the lumber of which has formed the largest single
item of commerce of the river, is about to close, owing to the exhaustion of the
timber supply" (USACE 1904:1524). No further surveys or improvements of the
river were recommended until 1971.
The commerce between Supply and Wilmington down the Lockwoods Folly River
was not without loss. A number of vessels were lost at or near Lockwoods Folly
Inlet. The schooner J. W. Potter was reported by the Morning Star (1879) as being
ashore at or near Lockwoods Folly Inlet and it was feared she would not be
refloated. The J.W. Potter, out of Wilmington, was valued at $500. On 24 August
Appendix A

Attach D - RepoR3
1881, the 140 -ton schooner was lost off Lockwoods Folly Inlet with a loss of four
lives (Angley n.d.:6; Stick 1952:249). The vessel was carrying a cargo of coal. On 25
March 1907, the John H. Kuck and Missouri both ran aground on the Lockwoods Folly
bar, both schooners that traded regularly between Wilmington and Supply (Angley
n.d.:6). While the Missouri got off the bar at high tide after casting much of her cargo
overboard, the John H. Kuck was not so lucky. The Kuck "went to pieces" while on
the bar and her cargo of clams was a total loss.
Two life- saving stations were established near the mouth of the Cape Fear River
during the 1880s. Those stations included the Cape Fear station (b. 1882) at east end
of Bald Head Island and the Oak Island station (b. 1889) located west of Fort
Caswell. Each station was equipped with line- throwing guns and self- righting
surfboats (Sprunt 2005:527). Surfinen maintained a constant vigil of the sea from the
station house and conducted regular nightly beach patrols; additional patrols were
conducted in daylight during stormy weather. Both stations remained active until
the 1930s when new Coast Guard facilities were constructed to replace them.
On 20 July 1895, the U.S. Marine Hospital Service appropriated $25,000 for the
construction of a quarantine station at Southport. The new station was to be located
on the river on the east side of the channel between the upper end of Battery Island
and Price's Creek Lighthouse (Carson 1992:73). The entire station was to be built on
a pier 600 feet long and to consist of a hospital building, a disinfecting house,
attendant's quarters and a kitchen. The station opened for service by the middle of
1897 with Dr. J. M. Eager appointed as the station's first quarantine officer. A report
for the fiscal year 1907 illustrates the level of activity at the station:
[Eighty six] vessels spoken and passed; 19 steamers and 1 sailing vessels
inspected and passed; 2 steamers and 3 sailing vessels disinfected; and
485 crew on steamers, 125 crew on sailing vessels, and 3 passengers on
sailing vessels inspected. The vessels disinfected were from Bahia,
Portobello, Santos, Rios, and Barbados (Brown 1974).
By 1937 the station had become obsolete and was placed on caretaker status. As the
facility was located on water and not a navigation hazard it was left to deteriorate
and on 19 August 1951, the abandoned station was destroyed by fire (Brown 1974).
The fishing industry provided the financial stamina for the economy on the lower
Cape Fear during the early years of the twentieth century. The principal source of
income for Southport was the menhaden fisheries. Most catches were processed
into oil which was used in the manufacture of paints, linoleum, tanning solutions,
soaps and waterproof fabrics (Carson 1992:96). Leftover scrap was ground up for
fertilizer and feed for livestock. The Southport Fish Scrap and Oil Company and the
Brunswick Navigation Company established processing plants along the Elizabeth
River while additional plants could be found above the town on the Cape Fear
River.
World War I initiated a revitalization of the economy with the establishment of the
Carolina Shipyard in May 1918. At about the same time, the Liberty Shipyard
started producing steel ships as well as experimental concrete ships. The success of
Appendix A

Attach D - RepoR4
the shipyards was short -lived and the economy fluctuated for several years until it
fell during the 1930s. Though Wilmington saw moderate success in shipping and
shipbuilding after the war, most of the yards had closed by the mid -1920s and
competition from Norfolk and Charleston slowly relegated the city to an import
distribution center catering mainly to regional trade (Watson 1992:145).
This trade averaged 200,000 or more tons through most of the 1920s, but with the
coming of the Great Depression, the amount fell to 94,007 tons by 1932 (Watson
1992:150). Wilmington's economy would not fully recover from the effects of the
depression until the end of the decade. Despite this economic uncertainty,
foundations were laid for future development. By the beginning of World War II,
Wilmington boasted 54 wharves, piers and docks and the opening of the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway expanded the city's trade with its hinterland and increased
its role in the coastal trade (Watson 1992:148 -9).
With war in Europe and German submarines prowling the east coast during the
early 1940s protection and defense of the coast became a top priority in Washington.
The vulnerability of the Cape Fear had been confirmed during World War I and U.S.
Navy officials were anxious to be prepared for future enemy intrusions (Gannon
1990:242 -243). On 17 November 1941, the U.S. Navy reacquired the 248.8 -acre Fort
Caswell reservation, sold into private hands in 1929. The old fort grounds were to
be used for training, communications and submarine tracking (Carson 1992:126).
The U -boat threat finally reached the Cape Fear region in early 1942. On 16 March,
the 11,641 -ton tanker John D. Gill was torpedoed in the coastal waters off the mouth
of the river. As a result of the high number of vessel losses during the early stages of
the war, defensive measures were put into place. Coastal communities were
systematically blacked out, a more efficient convoy system was devised and
additional planes and patrol vessels were put into service along the North Carolina
coast (Stick 1952:237 -239).
In addition to the menace that Axis submarines and aircraft represented during the
conflict, a significant hurricane struck the project area in late summer 1944. On 1
August, the tropical storm made landfall near Southport and the Oak Island coast
guard station reported maximum wind speeds of 80 miles per hour. To the north,
"substantial damage" occurred in Wilmington and Wrightsville Beach and the
combined losses of real estate and crops amounted to two million dollars (Galecki
2005:133 -134).
World War II also brought renewed growth to the shipyards and relief to the area
(Lee 1977:88 -90). The increased jobs and higher wages allowed Wilmington's
economy to increase and become stable. After the war many of the people brought
in to build ships chose to stay and make Wilmington their home. In 1945, the State
Port Authority was formed, promoting ports in Wilmington and Morehead City and
creating new jobs. In 1955, the military established the Sunny Point Army Terminal
[Military Ocean Terminal at Sunny Point]. The facility serves as a terminal for
shipping military hardware and ammunition to American forces around the globe.
The base is a major employer in the area and local service and retail industries
serving the military contribute to the economic prosperity of the region.
Appendix A

Attach D - RepoR3
A number of seaside communities have been incorporated since 1950 (Lee 1978:229).
Long Beach, on Oak Island east of Lockwoods Folly Inlet, was the first in 1953.
Holden Beach, just west of Lockwoods Folly Inlet, was incorporated in 1969.
By 1960, the population of Southport was reported as 2,034 residents. At that time,
the town boasted a popular bookmobile, a new water tank, a "lighted" athletic field
and a picnic area at the community park. Maritime news included the launch of a
"big, new charter boat," the Riptide. Herman Sellers constructed the vessel for Glenn
Trunnell of Southport. Other local commercial fishermen commenced discussions
on the merits to install an artificial reef near the town. In September 1960, Hurricane
Donna struck the region and fortunately caused only minimal damage in Brunswick
County (Reaves 1999:169,172).
In early February 1970, the Atomic Energy Commission approved construction of a
385 million dollar nuclear power plant to be situated north of Southport. The
downtown also experienced a significant economic boost when First - Citizens elected
to build a bank in Southport, its first branch in Brunswick County. At the same
time, waterfront interests offered services to the public such as the modern 150 -seat
restaurant Herman's and the new 450 -foot long "fishing and pleasure pier" (Reaves
1999:243).
In 1971, the Lockwoods Folly River above the Intracoastal Waterway [ICW] was
reclassified as active by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE 2006:6 -4 - 6 -5). A
new project was approved by the Corps on 3 June 1980 to enlarge the existing
channel across the bar from 6 feet to 12 feet with a width of 150 feet for a distance of
4,700 feet. During dredging, it was discovered the 12 -foot depth was impractical
with currently available equipment and this depth was decreased to 8 feet, which
was reached in October 1982. As of 2006, 31 piers and wharves on located on the
Intracoastal Waterway approximately 1.25 mile west of Lockwoods Folly Inlet with
a total frontage of approximately 1,980 feet. Berthing space near the inlet totals
about 2,200 feet, which was deemed sufficient for current commercial traffic.
Today, the Cape Fear region presents a strong economy with a state port facility that
is daily frequented by international cargo vessels. The economy is further
augmented by the military and commercial fisheries, which provide an important
source of income to area residents. In addition, Southport and the coastal
communities on Oak Island and Holden Beach are popular tourist destinations. The
area's offshore waters are a sportsman's paradise catering to recreational boaters
and sport fishermen alike.
Appendix A

Attach D - Repo26
Description of Findings
Cultural Resource Investigation
The cultural resource remote - sensing survey of the Holden Beach borrow site
identified a total of one magnetic anomaly and no acoustic targets (Figure 10 and
Figure 11). The magnetic anomaly, M -1, was located on line 49 and produced a
positive monopolar signature with an intensity of 5.6 gammas and a duration of
157.8 feet (Table 1). No side scan sonar target was associated with the anomaly.
Signature characteristics, intensity and duration suggest a single object of low
ferrous mass and size such as a crab trap, wire, small diameter cable, small boat
anchor or other modern debris. Because the signature is suggestive of a small
isolated single object, no additional investigation of the target is recommended.
Map
Lane
Characteristics
Intensity
Duration
X
Y
Designation
(gammas)
(feet)
M -1
49
Positive
5.6
157.8
2247441.0
49259.8
Monopole
Table 1. Attributes of magnetic anomaly M -1.
Sonar data identified no cultural material exposed on the bottom surface of the
proposed borrow area.
Hard Bottom Investigation
Analysis of the side scan sonar data identified only sand (Figure 12). In the sonar
mosaic, areas of flat sand are darker while areas of low relief sand ripples are
represented by the lighter areas. These features were verified by a tie line run
through the area that shows the transition between flat sand and sand ripples
(Figure 13). No hard bottom was detected in either the proposed borrow area or the
buffer during the survey.
Conclusions and Recommendations
A survey of historical and archaeological literature and background research
confirmed evidence of sustained historic maritime activity associated with the
Lockwoods Folly and the Cape Fear River area that continues even today.
Documented transportation activities in the vicinity of Lockwoods Folly and
neighboring waterways date from the first half of the sixteenth century. The Cape
Fear River region became a focus for European activities as early as 1526 when
Lucas Vdsquez de Ayll6n led an expedition from Florida into the Cape Fear region.
Permanent settlement along the banks of the Cape Fear River began during the
second decade of the eighteenth century.
Appendix A

2246000
2248000
2250000
Attach D - RepoR7
2252000
0 312.5 625 1 e; 1.875 2,500 Feet North Carolina State Plane, NAD 83, U.S. Survey Foot
22460
2248000
Figure 10. Magnetic contour map of the cultural resource survey area.
Appendix A

0
soon
2218000
iE
Legend
L--= cultural Resource Survey Area
Cultural Resource Survey Area Buffer
N
MW
6000
i
2250000
Attach D - RepoRg
22520001
2.600
Fee; North Carolina State Plane, NAD 83, U S Survey Foot
2218000
2250000
Figure 11. Sonar coverage map of the cultural resource survey area.
Appendix A
of
0
0
of
a
Co
of0
2252000

0
0 2246000 2248000 2250000 2252000
Legend
C
C
C
Attach D - RepoQq
0 1
o 495 990 1 ,980 2970 3960
Fet North Carolina State Plane, NAD 83, U.S. Survey Foot
0 2246000 2248000 2250000 2252000
Figure 12. Side scan sonar mosaic of the hard bottom investigation area.
Appendix A
of
0
0
of
0
0
of0
of0
a l0

Attach D - Repo3®
Figure 13. A sonar image illustrating the transition from flat sand to sand ripples.
As a consequence of nearly 400 years of navigation in the coastal region of
Brunswick County and settlement along the banks of the Cape Fear River since the
eighteenth century, there is a high probability that historically significant submerged
cultural resources are located in the area. While no shipwrecks in the project
vicinity have been listed on the NRHP or with the UAB, historical research identified
at least 22 shipwrecks recorded in the coastal waters near Lockwoods Folly Inlet and
the west end of Oak Island (Appendix A). Because of their association with the
broad patterns of North Carolina history, the remains of sunken vessels preserve
important information about the maritime heritage of the North Carolina coast.
Analysis of the remote - sensing data generated during the Holden Beach survey
identified one magnetic anomaly in the cultural resource survey area. The signature
characteristics of this anomaly suggest it was a single object, likely generated by
modern debris such as fish and crab traps, pipes, small diameter rods, cable, wire
rope, chain, rebar, or small boat anchors.
Analysis of the side scan sonar data failed to identify any targets within the cultural
resource survey area. Additional analysis designed to identify areas of hard bottom
revealed only flat sand and sand ripples. In spite of the high probability for cultural
resources in the area, no potentially significant anomalies were identified in the
survey area. No additional investigation is recommended in conjunction with the
proposed project.
Appendix A

Attach D - Repo3 T
References Cited
A Young Gentleman
1737 A New Voyage to Georgia. J. Wilford, London, UK.
Angley, Wilson
n.d. An Historical Overview of Lockwoods Folly Inlet in Brunswick County, North
Carolina. Wilson Angley, NC.
Berman, Bruce D.
1972 Encyclopedia of American Shipwrecks. Mariners Press, Boston.
Brown, Landis G.
1974 Cape Fear Quarantine Station: Origin and Disease Barrier. Brunswick County
Historical Society Newsletter 14(2).
Browning, Robert M., Jr.
1980 The Blockade of Wilmington, North Carolina: 1861 -1865. Master's thesis,
Department of History, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC.
Carson, Susan S.
1992 Joshua's Dream: The Story of Old Southport, A Town with Two Names. Southport
Historical Society, Southport, NC.
Charles, Joan
2004 North Carolina Shipwreck Accounts. Joan D. Charles, Hampton, VA.
Clark, Elmer, J. Manning Potts, and Jacob S. Payton (editors)
1958 The Journal and Letters of Francis Asbury. Hazell Watson and Viney, Aylesbury,
UK.
Clark, Walter (editor)
1896 The State Records of North Carolina. Volume 14. M.I. & J.C. Stewart,
Winston, NC.
Engle, Eloise, and Arnold S. Lott
1975 America's Maritime Heritage. Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, MD.
Federal Writers' Project
1939 North Carolina: A Guide to the Old North State. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.
Gaines, W. Craig
2008 Encyclopedia of Civil War Shipwrecks. Louisiana State University Press, Baton
Rouge, LA.
Appendix A

Attach D - Repo3?,
Galecki, Bryan
2005 Rum Runners, U- Boats, & Hurricanes: The Complete History of the Coast Guard
Cutters Bedloe and Jackson. Pine Belt Publishing, Wilmington, NC.
Gannon, Michael
1991 Operation Drumbeat: The Dramatic True Story of Germany's First U -Boat Attacks
Along the American Coast in World War II. Reprint of the 1990 edition. Harper
Perennial, New York, NY.
Hairr, John
2007 North Carolina Rivers: facts, legends, and lore. The History Press, Charleston, SC.
Holcombe, Robert
1993 The Evolution of Confederate Ironclad Design. Master's thesis, Department of
History, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC.
Judah, Joyce C.
2008 The Legends of Brunswick County: Ghosts, Pirates, Indians and Colonial North
Carolina. Coastal Books, Wilmington, NC.
Lee, Lawrence
1965 The Lower Cape Fear in Colonial Days. University of North Carolina Press,
Chapel Hill.
1977 New Hanover County: A Brief History. Division of Archives and History, North
Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, Raleigh, NC.
1978 The History of Brunswick County North Carolina. Board of County
Commissioners, Brunswick County, NC.
Lockhead, John L. (compiler)
1954 Disasters to American Vessels, Sail and Steam, 1841-1846. Compiled from the
New York Shipping and Commercial List, Mariners Museum, Newport News, VA.
Lytle, William M. and Forrest R. Holdcamper
1975 Merchant Steam Vessels of the United States 1790 -1868 "The Lytle - Holdcamper
List." Edited by C. Bradford Mitchell. Steamship Historical Society of America,
Staten Island, NY.
Marx, R. F.
1983 Shipwrecks in the Americas. Bonanza Books, New York, NY.
Morning Star
1879 No title. Morning Star. Wilmington, NC.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA]
n.d. Wrecks and Obstructions (AWOIS). <http://www.nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/
hsd/ awois.html >.
Appendix A

Attach D - Repo33
National Park Service
n.d. National Register of Historic Places Official Website.
<http:/ /www.nps.gov /nr / >.
Northern Maritime Research
2002 Northern Shipwreck Database. Bedford, Nova Scotia, Canada. CD -ROM.
Pleasants, James A.
1979 A Brief History of the Lower Cape During the Civil War. James Pleasants,
Hatteras, NC.
Potter, Greg L.
1993 Report of Findings: The Yeamans' Expedition Flyboat. Submitted to the
Underwater Archaeology Unit, Kure Beach, NC, from Greg L. Potter.
Powell, William.
1968 The North Carolina Gazetteer. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel
Hill.
1989 North Carolina Through Four Centuries. The University of North Carolina Press,
Chapel Hill.
Rankin, Hugh F.
1971 The North Carolina Continentals. The University of North Carolina Press,
Chapel Hill.
Reaves, Bill
1999 Southport (Snuthville), A Chronology (1941- 1970). Southport Historical Society,
Southport, NC.
Saunders, William L. (editor)
1888 Colonial Records of North Carolina. Josephus Daniels, Raleigh, NC.
Shomette, Donald G.
1973 Shipwrecks of the Civil War, The Encyclopedia of Union and Confederate Naval
Losses. Donic, Washington, D. C.
Soley, James Russell
1883 The Navy in the Civil War: The Blockade and the Cruisers. Charles Schribner's,
London, England.
Sprunt, James
2005 Chronicles of the Cape Fear River. Second Edition. Dram Tree Books,
Wilmington, NC.
Stick, David
1952 Graveyard of the Atlantic: Shipwrecks of the North Carolina Coast. The University
of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.
Appendix A

Attach D - Repo34
Still, Jr. William N.
1985 Iron Afloat: The Story of the Confederate Armorclads. University of South
Carolina Press, Columbia.
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
1880 Report of the Secretary of War, being part of the Message and Documents
Communicated to the Two Houses of Congress at the Beginning of the Third Session of the
Forty -Sixth Congress. Vol. 2, part 1. U.S. War Department, Washington, DC.
1887 Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers, United States Army, to the Secretary of
War, for the Year 1887. Part 2. U.S. War Department, Washington, DC.
1904 Annual Reports of the War Department: Report of the Chief of Engineers. Vol. 6,
part 2. U.S. War Department, Washington, DC.
2006 Wilmington, N.C., District. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
<http: / / www.usace.army.mil / CECW / PID/ Documents/ annual reps/ fy06/ sad_06.
pdf >. Accessed 26 May 2011.
U.S. Department of the Navy (USDN)
1898 Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion.
Ser. 1, vol. 7. U.S. Department of the Navy, Washington, DC.
1899 Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion.
Ser. 1, vol. 9. U.S. Department of the Navy, Washington, DC.
1900 Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion.
Ser. 1, Vol. 10. U.S. Department of the Navy, Washington, DC.
1901 Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion.
Ser. 1, Vol. 12. U.S. Department of the Navy, Washington, DC.
1921 Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion.
Ser. 2, vol. 1. U.S. Department of the Navy, Washington, DC.
Watson, Alan D.
1992 Wilmington: Port of North Carolina. University of South Carolina Press,
Columbia.
Watts, Gordon P., Jr.
1986 Underwater Archaeological Reconnaissance and Historical Investigation of
Shipwreck Sites in Lockwood's Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, North Carolina.
Report to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, NC, report from
Tidewater Atlantic Research, Washington, NC.
Wilmington Gazette
1804 No title. Wilmington Gazette 5 May. Wilmington, NC.
Appendix A

Attach D - Repo33
Wise, Stephen R.
1988 Lifeline of the Confederacy: Blockade Running During the Civil War. University of
South Carolina Press, Columbia.
Appendix A

Attach D - Report 2
Appendix A
Known shipwrecks in the vicinity of Lockwoods Folly Inlet, North Carolina
Vessel
Type
Date of Loss
Location
Disposition
Reference
Unknown
Sloop
12 October 1734
Long Bay
Lost
Charles 2004: 176
Royal Charlotte
Unknown
7 August 1763
Long Bay
Lost
Charles 2004: 176
Judge Hitchcock
Schooner
24 October 1846
Long Beach
Total Loss
Charles 2004:36, 176
Kate
Schooner
2 April 1862
Near Lockwoods Folly Inlet
Aground, scuttled, and
burned
USDN 1898:196 -7
Elizabeth
Steamer
24 September
1863
Lockwoods Folly Inley
Burned
USDN 1899:234
Bendigo
Steamer
3 January 1864
Lockwoods Folly bar
Shelled and set on fire
USDN 1899:386
USS Iron Age
U.S. Navy
Steamer
11 January 1864
Lockwoods Folly Inlet
Blown up
USDN 1899:396 -8
Ranger
Steamer
11 January 1864
Less than a mile from Lockwoods Folly
Inlet
Aground, burned, and
shelled
USDN 1899:402
J.W. Potter
Schooner
12 August 1879
At or near Lockwoods Folly Inlet
Lost
Angley n.d.:6
Mary J. Fisher
Schooner
24 August 1881
Off Lockwoods Folly Inlet
Lost with four lives
An le n.d.:6
Joseph H. Neff
Schooner
17 December 1890
2.5 miles southwest of Oak Island Station
Aground, broken up, one
life lost
Stick 1952:124
Wustrow
Brig
29 August 1893
Oak Island, near Lockwoods Folly
Stranded and gone to pieces
Stick 1952:139, 251
Kate E. Gifford
Schooner
30 August 1893
Oak Island
Aground and broken up
Stick 1952:140 -2
Enchantress
Schooner
31 August 1893
Oak Island, near Lockwoods Folly
Stranded, total loss
Stick 1952:142, 251
Mary W. Morris
Schooner
27 October 1893
Oak Island
Lost
Stick 1952:251
O it
Bark
10 October 1894
Oak Island
Aground
Stick 1952:150 -1
Levi Davis
Tug
29 November
1896
Oak Island
Lost
Stick 1952:251
William
Schooner
23 January 1898
Oak Island
Lost
Stick 1952:252
Seabright
Steamer
18 September
1901
Oak Island
Lost
Stick 1952:252
Clarence H.
Schooner
9 December 1903
Oak Island
Lost with 5 lives
Stick 1952:252
John H. Kuck
Schooner
25 March 1907
Lockwoods Folly bar
Broken up
An le n.d.:6
Savannah
Barge
18 December 1946
Lockwoods Folly
Foundered
Charles 2004:154,176
w
Appendix A

Attach D - Report 2
APPENDIX B
MULTI -BEAM BATHYMETRY SURVEY

O
O
O
O
N
N
W
F
3
3 `3\
3> 3>
0
3> 3> 3
3 •O
3> 2 6 .
3> 3> > 3>
3> 3> 3 3> 3>
3> 3 3> 3> 3>
S 6 S 7
3> 9> > T>5>3>
3> 3
8 3 -3 3 3>
S •9 '7 l > 9
3 >3 3 >3T3 >3>3T
'? 3 •9 '9 •S •?
3 >3> >3 >3 >3 >5 >5>
3> 3 3> 3> 3> 3> 3> 3>
9 3 9 3 3 S 9
. 6 . S . 3 . 4
3>. 9 > 8 >•6>• > >• � >•5> 3> T >
.9 T,6T,3T,3T, a 38 T
3 >. S> g e. 0 >. 8 >.\3 >. 6 >. 6 >. 9 '1 >.
3>S' 83T9> �T 6T 9T 68,0
3 >. 6> > >. > >.,9>. 8>. j >. j >. j >. 6 >. 8 >.
3> 3> 3 3> 3> 3> 3> 3> 3> 3> 3> 3>
6 '6 'S '3 S T T 6 9 8
3> 6T > 6T 2T��g3qT 6T ? T 3T 9 >
`3> 3>
6 > '8 > 3 6 •6 > 9
3T
> 9 8 T S 9 O'
3> 3> 3 3> 3> 38 3> > 3> 3> 36 3>
> 9 8 •> 8 0 9 9 7 '? '0
T T T 8 >T,8.0 , 8, 28,
e 9 9 3 7 3
'3 >. 6 >. 0 >.'36 j 8.28. >.9 .08.38.38.
3T > 3 8 T 3 38 38 38 3
? 7 2 7 •8 •> '? . 3 ' ?�
3'9 28' 38'28' 6 >I 36•Se•
Attach D - Report 2
O O
O O
O O
co O
Nt LO
N N
N N
W W
MAP DEPICTING THE RESULTS OF A HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY OF A
3q 39 . 9 39 3q 39.9 33 39
PORTION OF SUBMERGED LANDS LYING SOUTH OF BRUNSWICK COUNTY
9 > '6 '6 'S '3 '3 '0 NORTH CAROLINA AND IN THE NEARSHORE OF THE ATLANTIC OCEAN
39 3q 3 3 39 3q 3q 3q 3q 39 3q 39 3 3q 3q
s s e>> S? s 9 9 •> ' s s A Z
39393 9� 333 393939339393939393939
S > > 8 6 •6 '9
T '9 •3 S •6 '6 •9 8 S S O
3q 3q 3 q 39 3 S ` 3q 39 3q 39 3q 39 3q 3q 39 3q 39 3q 3q q U)
•9 '6 '8 'O 1 > 9 3 9 6 9 3 6 > > 6 S 3 'S
39 39.3 9 39 39 9 39 . 39 39 39 39 39 3v 39 34 3 39 39 39 3v 39 i

Attach D - Report 3
Geotechnical Investigation for the Town of Holden Beach
Phase II
Brunswick County, North Carolina
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
Prepared For:
Applied Technology & Management, Inc.
360 Concord Street, Suite #300
Charleston, SC 29401
Wei
The Town of Holden Beach
110 Rothschild Street
Holden Beach, NC 28462
October 6th, 2011

Athena Technologies, Inc. Attach D - Report 3
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, FL 29458
Geotechnical Investigation for the Town of Holden Beach
Phase II
Brunswick County, North Carolina
Athena Technologies, Inc. (Athena) was contracted by Applied Technology & Management,
Inc. (ATM) to complete two field events for the Town of Holden Beach, NC. The first field event
(Phase I) took place in October and November, 2010 and consisted of the collection of nineteen
(19) vibracores from a proposed sediment borrow area located approximately four (4) miles east
southeast of Lockwoods Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, North Carolina (Figure 1). The second
field event (Phase 11) consisted of the collection of eleven (11) sediment cores from the same offshore
borrow area. The second field effort took place in August, 2011 and is meant to provide additional
geotechnical information for a proposed beach renourishment of Holden Beach, NC.
Field Sampling Methods
Phase II field sampling for the Town of Holden Beach took place on August 29t', 2011.
Athena utilized our thirty -five (35) foot sample platform, RV Artemis, which is equipped with
Trimble DGPS (sub -meter accurate) interfaced with Hypack and a Sitex CVS -106 fathometer
(accurate to 0.1'), to navigate to the proposed sample locations provided by ATM (Figure 2).
Athena also utilized a Trimble 4800 RTK GPS to acquire elevation data at each sample location.
The RTK base station was installed over the following NC Geodetic Survey benchmark: PID —
AJ4974, Designation — Marina (http: / /www.ngs.noaa.gov /cgi- bin /ds— mark.prl ?PidBox= AJ4974).
The benchmark is located along the southeast property boundary of Holden Beach Marina in
Supply, NC. Once on station, the vessel was immobilized using a triple point anchor system and an
elevation reading was collected using the RTK GPS. Water depths at each vibracore location were
determined via fathometer and verified using a weighted tape measure.
Athena's custom designed and built vibracore system was deployed from the vessel. This
system consists of a generator with a mechanical vibrator attached via cable directly to the sampler
apparatus. The sample barrel was a three inch, 16 gauge steel tube. The sample barrel was lowered
to the sea -floor through a moon pool in the deck of the vessel by attaching lengths of drill stem. The
vibracore machine was then turned on and the sample barrel was allowed to penetrate until it
reached target depth or refusal. The sample barrel was then retrieved using an electric winch. Once
the sample was on deck, the sample barrel was cut, capped, labeled and measured. A vibracore
summary containing the final coordinates, water depths, sediment surface elevations, and
penetration and recovery can be found in Table 1.
The cores were then opened, photographed, logged, sub - sampled, and stored at Athena's
facility in McClellanville, South Carolina. Core logs and high resolution photo mosaic plates of the
cores have been included as Appendix A. The cores were logged according to the Unified Soil
Geotechnical Investigation for the Town of Holden Beach, Phase II
AAF EHA Brunswick County, North Carolina
TECHNOLOGIES. 'Nc. August 2011
2 of 77

Athena Technologies, Inc. Attach D - Report 3
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, FL 29458
Classification System (USCS). Sediment color designation was determined using the Munsell Soil
Color Chart and visual estimates of carbonate and silt percentages were determined utilizing a
Comparison Chart for Visual Percentage Estimation by Terry and Chilingar (1955). Laboratory
grain size analyses were performed on twenty -four (24) sediment samples and carbonate content
analyses were performed on eleven (11) sediment samples. Laboratory analyses were performed by
Coastal Tech of Melbourne, Florida.
The final report was produced using gINT Professional Software.
Geological Characteristics of Vibracore Samples
A total of twenty -four (24) grain size analyses and eleven (11) loss on ignition (LOI)
carbonate analyses were performed on samples collected from the vibracores. Grain size analyses
were performed on three (3) samples from HB -11 -01 and -02, and two (2) samples from each of the
remaining cores. One (1) LOI carbonate and organics analysis, using the Dean (1974) method, was
performed for each vibracore. The proposed sediment subsample intervals for the cores were
discussed with ATM, and agreed upon by both ATM and Athena.
Mean grain size for all samples range from 0.19 mm (fine sand) at HB- 11 -01 -B, to 0.61 mm
(medium sand) at HB- 11 -3 -A. The average mean grain size for all analyses was 0.32 mm (fine
sand). Sorting values for the samples range from 0.65 phi (moderately well sorted) at HB- 11 -01 -A,
to 1.87 phi (poorly sorted) at HB- 11 -12 -B. Average sorting for all sediment samples was 1.23 phi
(poorly sorted sand) (Table 2).
Silt percentages (i.e., percentage of sediment passing a #230 sieve) among the sediment
samples ranged from 0.07% at HB- 11 -01 -A, to 12.73% at HB- 11 -04 -A. Average silt percentage for
all samples was reported to be 5.14 %. Carbonate percentages for the samples collected from the
eleven (11) vibracores range from 9.07 %, at HB -11 -04 (0 — 4.7'), to 17.31 %, at HB -11 -08 (0 —
3.5'). The average carbonate content for all eleven (11) samples is 12.03 %. Organic percentages
ranged from 1.30% at HB -11 -09 (0 - 4.0') to 3.13% at HB -11 -03 (0 — 4.3'). The average organics
percentage for all samples is 1.90% (Table 2).
Attached Figures & Tables
Figure 1: Project Location
Figure 2: Phase I and II Vibracore Locations
Table 1: Vibracore Summary
Table 2: Grain Size Data Summary
Appendix A: Core Logs, Core Photos, Grain Size Curves, and Granularmetric Reports
Geotechnical Investigation for the Town of Holden Beach, Phase II
,AAW EHA Brunswick County, North Carolina
TECHNOLOGIES. 'Nc. August 2011
3 of 77

Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, FL 29458
Attach D - Report 3
z
o-
:,a� y� 6
y
s p
z i
i-1B
4� «
iIB_dW -D'5 � z, s.. �� r
m
e
� x
ti • 04,1!JB-1 ♦ gy a�:a
M � I T T
AFE" [ -EAR s
Figure 1: Project Location, Brunswick County, NC
h 31
t HB -03
}may • HB a
3 ■
Phase I Vibracore Location HB -06 • "11-03 H-05
• f
♦ lf
Phase I1 Vlbracore LocaH �j7 an 1
HB -07
•
HB -11 -01
HB -OS HB -09 14 PIB -12 HB -11-07 HB -11 -02 11
■
HB -11 ♦ AL
•
♦
HB -11 -09 HB -13
• -k�iy
HB -13 HB -11 -06 HS li -03
FIB -13
• HB -15
•
HB -11 -08 HB -11 -04
IM19 ♦ HB -11 -10
f
HH -]h ♦
• HB -17
• HB -lfi j� -11 -015
1-1113-11112 •
♦ ♦
Figure 2: Phase I and II Vibracore Locations, Town of Holden Beach, NC
4& Geotechnical Investigation for the Town of Holden Beach, Phase II
,AT"EWA Brunswick County, North Carolina
TECHNOLOGIES. iNc. August 2011
4 of 77

td
z
C C
o � '� o
u y 0 U
cd
U
E-
00
Attach D - Report 3 k
0
0
O:
wId
�o
V'� o
c, m
N �
U
v m
C�
m v
U
H
0
v
o
C^
u^
'-' O
v�
x
m
U
z
4 LLi
Wo
Io
0
4 Z
LU
m
m
�
w
c
ai
u
U
ai
ai
u u
C
O
.,may
[
n,
O
O
C
n,
"
C
j
w,
o
a
v
v
c
w
z
o
ID
E
o o
ox
m
N
x
1
0
0
1
o
1
o
-
co
q
o
o
a
u
a
u
N
a
b
x
a
0
a
W�
cv
0 0
0
0 �
06
�
� q
c �
'on
x
ri
oop
0
C
c
0
ZZ
N
m
IT
N
N
q
m
N
o
wz
��
C C
L
�
r�
V�
Lri
o 4
U �a
N
c�
co
t�
yr
n
co
yr
co
yr
o x
w
�
m
co
t�
o
cv
cv
yr
yr
cv
cv
cv
cv
cv
cv
cv
cv
cv
cv
� �
cw
c �
� z
o
H
x �
o �
¢z
-0z
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
00
Attach D - Report 3 k
0
0
O:
wId
�o
V'� o
c, m
N �
U
v m
C�
m v
U
H
0
v
o
C^
u^
'-' O
v�
x
m
U
z
4 LLi
Wo
Io
0
4 Z
LU

cd
uz
O
N y O U
O �
N [� PQ
v
..O
cd
H
°o
A
ac
h
w
U
0
o0
oc
v
n
n
m
C
°
OA
Vr
G1
In
G1
G1
O
oc
°
o~
m
c�
0n
N
m
I�
r-,
°
N
Cl
�+
o
x
o
o
v
m
v
c,
m
oc
c
oc
m
y
o
c
N
00
lr�
o
n
o
c
o-6
o
c
o
00
C
°
o~
n
clq
c,
o0
0
oc
�
�
n
o
c
v
oc
�
v
n
m
cq
clq
c,
o0
0n
v
oo
n
c
n
m
o
cy
c
oo
y
c
o
c
o0
[
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
c
o0
0
m
o
m
�
oo
v
m
�
oc
m
m
v
o0
m
m
v
m
m
m
y
y
y
n
y
m
m
m
cy
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
C>
m
00
o
m
o
o
n
m
m
n
c
N
00
N
t�
c
t�
c
00
c
n
0
0
0
0
o
o
o
n.
h
w
d ,�
o
o
o
m
o0
ci
0
o
0
o
0
0
cri
0
o
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
00
0
0
o
o
.
ci
0
o
0
0
00
0
0
o
0
.
0
o
0
0
0
0
ci
0
o
o
o
v,
ci
o
o
o
o
v,
ci
n.
Ca
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
clq
m
n
v
oc
c,
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
°
as
a
as
a
as
a
as
a
as
a
as
00 00 O
report v 00 o
o m
U00
O V) 00 0
C. ; p h
�e 00 � t
ri
y O
0
y G
w
3
,r� 3
C7
m
N
U
Z
v�
4 w
W�
=o
a
Z
Z
U
LLI

Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, FL 29458
Appendix A:
Attach D - Report 3
Core Logs, Core Photos, Grain Size Curves, and Granularmetric Reports
Geotechnical Investigation for the Town of Holden Beach, Phase II
J1-1EHA Brunswick County, North Carolina
TECHNOLOGIES. iNc. August 2011
7 of 77

Attach D - Report 3
Borinq Designation HB -11 -01
DRILLING LOG
CONTRACTOR
CLIENT
SHEET 1
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Applied Technology And Management, Inc.
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983 NAVD 88
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,251,189 Y = 49,540
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
4
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 32.7 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
08 -29 -11 15:54 08 -29 -11 16:00
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING -35.60 Ft.
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 10.42 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 11.0 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
0-i
ELEV.
(ft)
DEPTH
(ft)
w
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
Depths and elevations based on measured values
%
REC.
'L
O4
REMARKS
-35.6
0.0
m,)
Sample #A, Depth = 1.3'
Fine SAND, trace carbonate/silt, poorly graded,
Mean (mm): 0.200 Phi Sorting: 0.65
very loose, subround - subangular, olive gray
A
Fines (230): 0.07% (SP)
(5Y -4/2), (SP).
Sample Interval: 0.0'- 1.3'
-36.9
1.3
Sample #B, Depth = 2.8'
Fine SAND, little silt, trace carbonate, poorly
Mean (mm): 0.190 Phi Sorting: 0.82
graded, loose, subround - subangular, burrows,
B
Fines /o (SP)
dark gray (5Y -4/1), (SP).
Sample Interval: 1.3'- 2.8'
e Irate val:
-38.4
2.8
Sample #C, Depth = 4.0'
Fine SAND, little silt/carbonate, loose,
Mean (mm): 0.34, Phi Sorting: 1.59
subround - subangular, very dark gray (5Y -3/1),
C
Fines (230):9.05% (SW -SM)
(SW -SM).
Sample Interval: 2.8'- 4.0'
-39.6
4.0
Carbonate (0 -4'): 12.7 %, Organics (0 -4'): 1.8%
Silty CLAY, trace very fine organic debris,
medium stiff, blueish black (5B- 2.5/1), (CL).
-46.01
10.4
Loss of recovery/compaction of sediment..
-46.6
11.0
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 8 of77
JUN 02 JUN 04
20
-5
ato]

0 5 70
1 6 71
2 w � 7
AME
5�
11001
Atta D� ort 3
Phase 2
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
August, 2011
HB -11 -01
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
911 A� H E IAA
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
M I
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
9 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G E @ G �\
-
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
$
g
=
CO
»
m
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
k
/
/
f
7
2
2
g-
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
\
\
r
_
}
/
G -0 =
CO
.... ....
\
a
_ 'It CD
} \
c
5
9
)Ea\\
%s
2
U)
m
=�O,
\jmwa
7EI--
e,
....
}
\
^
\\\ 00 00
`
£
a
\
)ne k/
`
7
}
\2
m
°
E
(n
_
)
{
tw
/
}
'
!
o
G
a
\ `
°
]
))
E
GG
°
LL
\
k
d
%
�\
n
W q
C?
(0
416
0
2
E
_
m
2
E
r
]
%\
\\
`
�-
\
/
0
:
@
°
®
\
_
/
G
@
E
G
@
@ °
Cl) @ 5
E
&
_
*
$
)
§
Q
E
2
Percent
Finer
By Weight
)
\
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -01 # 0'- 1.3'
Analysis Date: 09 -26 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,251,189
Northing (ft):
49,540
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-36.9 NAVD 88
USCS:
SP
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -412
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
170.09
Wash Weight (g):
170.09
Pan Retained (g):
- 169.76
Sieve Loss ( %):
99.87
Fines
-
#20 /o): 0.20
#230 - 0.07
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
-2.25
4.76
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5
-2.00
4.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
7
-1.50
2.83
0.12
0.07
0.12
0.07
10
-1.00
2.00
0.32
0.19
0.44
0.26
14
-0.50
1.41
0.62
0.36
1.06
0.62
18
0.00
1.00
0.92
0.54
1.98
1.16
25
0.50
0.71
1.41
0.83
3.39
1.99
35
1.00
0.50
2.55
1.50
5.94
3.49
45
1.50
0.35
7.13
4.19
13.07
7.68
60
2.00
0.25
28.17
16.56
41.24
24.24
80
2.50
0.18
61.82
36.35
103.06
60.59
120
3.00
0.13
53.19
31.27
156.25
91.86
170
3.50
0.09
12.37
7.27
168.62
99.13
200
3.75
0.07
1.14
0.67
169.76
99.80
230
4.00
0.06
0.22
0.13
169.98
99.93
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.22
2.87
2.73
2.35
2.01
1.75
1.18
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
2.29
0.20
0.65
-1.51
8.19
11 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@ G E @ G �\
—
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
$
g
=
CO
»
m
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
k
/
/
f
7
2
2
g—
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
\
\
}CR
e e
,
�
°
�
d = 00
..
.... ...
..........
=
a
\� \ g G
5
@
m
9
9
kE /f 5
%s
E
22mwa
o
......
... ..
\
/ CO 00 00
c
E
2
CO C:
m O _
.......
`
G
21I .rX
c
�
/g/ 'CO =
{
/
\2
U)
=
E
)
_
)
{
��
0
m
k
'
)
6
E
°
GG
.
°
2
LL
\
k
d
%
�\
§
§
416
0
2
E
_
m
2
E
r
]
%\
_ 2
\
+
]
~
\
\
o
,
\
\
E
@
G
@
E
G
@ @ @ 5 2 °
�
§
\
\
Percent
Finer
By Weight
§
\
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -01 # 1.3'- 2.8'
Analysis Date: 09 -26 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,251,189
Northing (ft):
49,540
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-38.4 NAVD 88
USCS:
SP
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -411
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
136.60
Wash Weight (g):
132.04
Pan Retained (g):
- 131.64
Sieve Loss ( %):
96.52
Fines
-
#20 /o): 3.73
#230 - 3.49
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.22
0.16
0.22
0.16
4
-2.25
4.76
0.21
0.15
0.43
0.31
5
-2.00
4.00
0.10
0.07
0.53
0.38
7
-1.50
2.83
0.21
0.15
0.74
0.53
10
-1.00
2.00
0.65
0.48
1.39
1.01
14
-0.50
1.41
1.06
0.78
2.45
1.79
18
0.00
1.00
1.47
1.08
3.92
2.87
25
0.50
0.71
2.05
1.50
5.97
4.37
35
1.00
0.50
2.75
2.01
8.72
6.38
45
1.50
0.35
3.70
2.71
12.42
9.09
60
2.00
0.25
7.81
5.72
20.23
14.81
80
2.50
0.18
37.16
27.20
57.39
42.01
120
3.00
0.13
61.62
45.11
119.01
87.12
170
3.50
0.09
11.60
8.49
130.61
95.61
200
3.75
0.07
0.90
0.66
131.51
96.27
230
4.00
0.06
0.33
0.24
131.84
96.51
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.46
2.97
2.87
2.59
2.19
2.02
0.66
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
2.37
0.19
0.82
-2.56
11.81
13 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G E @ G �\
—
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
$
g
=
CO
»
m
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
k
/
/
f
7
2
2
g—
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
Lq
\
}
\
,
_
d ==
CO
p
r
a
/i \gG
@
\
§
kE /f 5
%s
E
22mwa
....... ..
,
=
G
r
=E/
)
]
2
\2 \ "t?
E
eE33=
`
G
CO (D
/g/ =2
\2
U)
°
E
)
_
)
0
CO
/
tw
/
}
'
!
o
U-
GG
o
E
/
]
g
m
§
CO
410
0
2
2
E
r
%\
_
m
E
a)
\\
`
�-
\
~
�
\
E
®
&
_
G
@
E
G
@
@ 5 2 °
/
Cl)
CO
)
CO
Q
§
E
2
Percent
Finer
By Weight
)
0
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -01 # 2.8'- 4'
Analysis Date: 09 -26 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,251,189
Northing (ft):
49,540
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-39.6 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -311
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
140.23
Wash Weight (g):
128.06
Pan Retained (g):
- 127.04
Sieve Loss ( %):
90.96
Fines
-
#20 /o): 9.48
#230 - 9.05
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.36
0.26
0.36
0.26
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.80
0.57
1.16
0.83
4
-2.25
4.76
0.52
0.37
1.68
1.20
5
-2.00
4.00
1.07
0.76
2.75
1.96
7
-1.50
2.83
3.76
2.68
6.51
4.64
10
-1.00
2.00
4.28
3.05
10.79
7.69
14
-0.50
1.41
6.21
4.43
17.00
12.12
18
0.00
1.00
8.01
5.71
25.01
17.83
25
0.50
0.71
11.58
8.26
36.59
26.09
35
1.00
0.50
9.75
6.95
46.34
33.04
45
1.50
0.35
5.68
4.05
52.02
37.09
60
2.00
0.25
4.40
3.14
56.42
40.23
80
2.50
0.18
12.83
9.15
69.25
49.38
120
3.00
0.13
43.48
31.01
112.73
80.39
170
3.50
0.09
12.75
9.09
125.48
89.48
200
3.75
0.07
1.46
1.04
126.94
90.52
230
4.00
0.06
0.61
0.43
127.55
90.95
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.20
2.91
2.51
0.43
-0.16
-1.44
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.55
0.34
1.59
-0.79
2.51
15 of 77

Attach D - Report 3
Borinq Designation HB -11 -02
DRILLING LOG
CONTRACTOR
CLIENT
SHEET 1
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Applied Technology And Management, Inc.
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32dO NAD 1983 NAVD 88
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,251,192 Y = 48,752
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
4
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 33.0 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
08 -29 -11 15:30 08 -29 -11 15:40
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING -36.40 Ft.
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 10.66 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 11.5 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
0-i
ELEV.
(ft)
DEPTH
(ft)
w
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
Depths and elevations based on measured values
%
REC.
'L
04
REMARKS
-36.4
0.0
_J
U)
Fine SAND, little carbonate, trace silt, well
Sample #A, Depth = 1.0'
graded, very loose, subround - subangular, @
Mean (mm): 0.38, Phi Sorting: 1.48
0.16' = sand dollar fragment, @ 0.42' = juvenile
A
Fines (230): 0.57%
-37.4
1.0
pen shell fra ment, olive gray (5Y-4/2), (SW).
Sample Interval: 0.0'- 1.0'
Sample #B, Depth = 3.0'
Fine SAND, little carbonate, trace silt, well
graded, loose, subround - subangular, burrows,
Mean (mm): 0.20, Phi Sorting: 0.90
@ 2.75' = mercenaria shell (> .1'), dark gray
B
Fines (230): 4.33% (SW)
(5Y -4/1), (SW).
Sample Interval: 1.0'- 3.0'
-39.41
3.0
Sample #C, Depth = 4.5'
Fine SAND, little silt/carbonate, well graded,
loose, subround - subangular, burrows, @ 4.4' -
Mean (mm): 0.31, Phi Sorting: 1.57
carbonate /coarse sand lag deposit, very dark
C
Fines (230): 7.77% (SW -SM)
gray (5Y -3/1), (SW -SM).
Sample Interval: 3.0'- 4.5'
Carbonate (0- 4.5'): 9.5 %, Organics (0- 4.5'): 2%
-40.9
4.5
Interbedded clayey SAND (5Y 5/2 -olive gray)
and sandy CLAY (5Y 3 /1 -dk gray), sand fraction
= fine /medium, little carbonate, soft/loose,
subround - subangular clasts, sand infilled
burrows, @ 5.08 - 5.33' = (5Y 4/1 -dark gray)
coarse SAND, very dark gray (5Y -3/1), (SC).
-43.0
6.6
Silty medium /coarse SAND, some fine
carbonate gravel, litle clay, loose, subround, @
6.83' = Lettered Olive shell, very dark gray
-44.1
7.7
(5Y -3/1), (GM).
Silty fine /medium SAND, trace carbonate /clay,
loose, subround - subangular, fine sand (5Y
7/1 -light gray) infilled burrows, very dark
greenish gray (5GY -3/1), (SM).
-45.5
9.1
Medium /coarse SAND, trace silt, well graded,
loose, subround /subangular, dark gray (5Y -4/1),
(SW).
-47.1
10.7
0
Loss of recovery/compaction of sediment..
-47.9
11.5
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 16 of 77
JUN 02 JUN 04
20
-5
ato]

l
1
KA
M
5
w
0
yam_
6 P� M 71
7
11001
Phase 2
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
August, 2011
HB -11 -02
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
9
A� H E IAA
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
10
17 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G
E @ G �\
—
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
/
g
=
CO
\
\
2
\
/
j
»
{
/
$
*
4
\
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
\
k
/
/
7
2
2
g—
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
/
\
z
}
_
%
d ==
,
CO
/
,
5
t
C :,
^55
c
2E
%s
U)
m
=CO,
\jmwa
.... ..
...........................
,g
!
2
G
°
\
2E /��
u `'
..<
c
E
2
m == It
eE33=
`
G
21Ir X
=
/g/ =2
`
\ 2
............
m
_
E
)
°
{
j2
I
}
tw
/
}
'
!
o
E
GG
o
E
/
]
g
a
°
�
�\
4 =
[
§
41
0
2
E
_
m
2
E
r
]
%\
\\
`
�_
CO
®
)
/
G
@
E
G
@
@ Cl)
5 2 °
E
CO
)
&
_
\
\
E
Percent
Finer
By Weight
\
a)
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -02 # 0'- 1'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,251,192
Northing (ft):
48,752
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-37.4 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -412
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
155.01
Wash Weight (g):
155.01
Pan Retained (g):
- 153.62
Sieve Loss ( %):
99.68
Fines
-
#20 /o): 0.64
#230 - 0.57
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
2.61
4.05
2.61
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
4.05
2.61
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
2.24
1.45
6.29
4.06
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
1.84
1.19
8.13
5.25
3.5
-2.50
5.66
2.77
1.79
10.90
7.04
4
-2.25
4.76
0.90
0.58
11.80
7.62
5
-2.00
4.00
1.03
0.66
12.83
8.28
7
-1.50
2.83
1.29
0.83
14.12
9.11
10
-1.00
2.00
1.41
0.91
15.53
10.02
14
-0.50
1.41
1.98
1.28
17.51
11.30
18
0.00
1.00
2.38
1.54
19.89
12.84
25
0.50
0.71
7.80
5.03
27.69
17.87
35
1.00
0.50
12.74
8.22
40.43
26.09
45
1.50
0.35
11.36
7.33
51.79
33.42
60
2.00
0.25
28.16
18.17
79.95
51.59
80
2.50
0.18
38.23
24.66
118.18
76.25
120
3.00
0.13
29.17
18.82
147.35
95.07
170
3.50
0.09
6.13
3.95
153.48
99.02
200
3.75
0.07
0.52
0.34
154.00
99.36
230
4.00
0.06
0.11
0.07
154.11
99.43
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.00
2.71
2.47
1.96
0.93
0.31
-3.11
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.38
0.38
1.48
-1.48
5.5
19 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@ G E @ G �\
—
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
/
g
=
CO
\
\
2
\
/
j
»
{
/
$
*
4
\
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
\
k
/
/
7
2
2
g—
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
%
\
}
�
e e
,
�
®
a = _
... ...
...
\� \ g G
@
5
m
9
9
kE /f 5
% s
. .
\ CO m w a
._ _
.... ...............................
-71
CO
@
^
)CO= CY)
e ,
k
\
CO \ 3S
........
`
CO
2
CO
\
)OO k/
�
`
CO 7
)
^
/
\2
m
_
E
CO
_
)
{
��
CO
m
k
'
)
6
)\
E
°
GG
.
o
2
E
§]
g
$
�\
\
Wq
f
)®
§
%
§
§
416
0
2
E
_
m
2
E
r
]
%\
.0\
`
\
®
®
)
'
\
>
\
/
G
@
E
G
@ @ @ 5 2 °
E
&
\
\
E
Percent
Finer
By Weight
\
a)
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -02 # 1'- 3'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,251,192
Northing (ft):
48,752
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-39.4 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -411
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
146.53
Wash Weight (g):
140.40
Pan Retained (g):
- 139.94
Sieve Loss ( %):
95.66
Fines
-
#20 /o): 4.58
#230 - 4.33
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
-2.25
4.76
0.10
0.07
0.10
0.07
5
-2.00
4.00
0.11
0.08
0.21
0.15
7
-1.50
2.83
0.48
0.33
0.69
0.48
10
-1.00
2.00
0.85
0.58
1.54
1.06
14
-0.50
1.41
1.80
1.23
3.34
2.29
18
0.00
1.00
2.40
1.64
5.74
3.93
25
0.50
0.71
3.34
2.28
9.08
6.21
35
1.00
0.50
3.93
2.68
13.01
8.89
45
1.50
0.35
4.76
3.25
17.77
12.14
60
2.00
0.25
8.78
5.99
26.55
18.13
80
2.50
0.18
37.03
25.27
63.58
43.40
120
3.00
0.13
62.67
42.77
126.25
86.17
170
3.50
0.09
12.56
8.57
138.81
94.74
200
3.75
0.07
0.99
0.68
139.80
95.42
230
4.00
0.06
0.37
0.25
140.17
95.67
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.60
2.97
2.87
2.58
2.14
1.82
0.23
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
2.3
0.20
0.9
-2.06
7.81
21 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G E @ G �\
-
0
\
§
_
}
20
w
ƒ
/
g
=
CO
\
\
2
\
/
j
»
{
/
$
*
4
\
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
\
k
/
/
7
2
2
g-
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
j
z
\
j
LO
....
......
........ .
. ..
..............
e, e
�
°
CO
a = _
r
, \
!
\0 \ g G
c
5
9
2E ^55
%s
2
U)
m
= -O,
22mwa
........
[
,
=
)
G
]
Q
©
2E /-
E
¥O
eE33=
`
...
G
21IrX
c
?
/g/ =2
7
)
\2
U)
°
E
— -
2
CO
w.
=
9
{
.
\
C5
tw
/
}
'
!
o
E
GG
2
E
/
]
d
m
U)
\
)®
§
%
f
}
§
Wq
Ig
0
2
2
E
r
%\
_
m
E
]
\\
`
C)
�-
CO
e
g
~
2
\
@
°
�
_
/
G
@
E
G
@
@ @ 5 2 °
E
�
&
_
*
$
9
§
Q
E
2
Percent
Finer
By Weight
)
\
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -02 # 3'- 4.5'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,251,192
Northing (ft):
48,752
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-40.4 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -311
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
145.28
Wash Weight (g):
134.66
Pan Retained (g):
- 133.34
Sieve Loss ( %):
92.24
Fines
-
#20 /o): 8.17
#230 - 7.77
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
1.28
0.88
1.28
0.88
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.00
0.00
1.28
0.88
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.98
0.67
2.26
1.55
4
-2.25
4.76
0.41
0.28
2.67
1.83
5
-2.00
4.00
0.26
0.18
2.93
2.01
7
-1.50
2.83
2.33
1.60
5.26
3.61
10
-1.00
2.00
2.50
1.72
7.76
5.33
14
-0.50
1.41
5.97
4.11
13.73
9.44
18
0.00
1.00
8.28
5.70
22.01
15.14
25
0.50
0.71
10.89
7.50
32.90
22.64
35
1.00
0.50
10.43
7.18
43.33
29.82
45
1.50
0.35
7.32
5.04
50.65
34.86
60
2.00
0.25
5.54
3.81
56.19
38.67
80
2.50
0.18
8.32
5.73
64.51
44.40
120
3.00
0.13
46.58
32.06
111.09
76.46
170
3.50
0.09
20.25
13.94
131.34
90.40
200
3.75
0.07
2.08
1.43
133.42
91.83
230
4.00
0.06
0.58
0.40
134.00
92.23
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.27
2.98
2.59
0.66
0.06
-1.10
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.71
0.31
1.57
-1.05
3.45
23 of 77

Attach D - Report 3
Borinq Designation HB -11 -03
DRILLING LOG
CONTRACTOR
CLIENT
SHEET 1
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Applied Technology And Management, Inc.
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983 NAVD 88
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,250,865 Y = 47,507
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 33.6 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
08 -29 -11 14:58 08 -29 -11 15:10
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING -37.70 Ft.
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 9 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 10.0 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
0-i
ELEV.
(ft)
DEPTH
(ft)
w
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
Depths and elevations based on measured values
%
REC.
'L
04
REMARKS
-37.7
0.0
m,)
Medium SAND, some carbonate, well graded,
Sample #A, Depth = 1.1'
very loose, subround - subangular, olive gray
A
Mean (mm): 0.610 Phi Sorting: 1.18
(5Y -5/2), (SW).
Fines (230): 0.57/0 (SW)
-38.8
1.1
Sample Interval: 0.0' - 1.1'
Fine SAND, little carbonate/silt, trace coarse
clasts, well graded, very loose,
Sample #B, Depth = 4.3'
subround - subangular, burrows, dark gray
Mean (mm): 0.37, Phi Sorting: 1.44
(5Y -4/1), (SW -SM).
B
Fines (230):9.62% (SW -SM)
Sample Interval: 1.1' - 4.3'
Carbonate (0- 4.3'):11.1 %, Organics (0- 4.3'): 3.1 %
-41.2
3.5
.'Il
Medium SAND, little coarse sand /carbonate /silt,
trace fine gravel size clasts, well graded, very
-42.0
4.3
loose, subround, burrows, dark gray (5Y -4/1),
(SW).
Interbedded silty fine /medium SAND and sandy
CLAY, little silt /carbonate, soft /loose,
subround - subangular, burrows, very dark gray
(5Y -3/1), (SC).
-43.3
5.6
:o
Silty fine /medium SAND with some carbonate,
6
loose, subround - subangular, @ 6.75' = large
carbonate fragments (> .2'), very dark gray
o
(5Y -3/1), (GW -GM).
-44.7
7.0
.'
Bioturbated, silty fine /medium SAND, trace
clay /carbonate, loose, subround - subangular,
fine sand (5Y 7/1 -light gray) infilled burrows,
dark greenish gray (5GY -4/1), (SM).
-46.7
9.0
Loss of recovery/compaction of sediment..
-47.7
10.0
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 24 of77
JUN 02 JUN 04
20
-5
ato]

0 5
Attach D - Report 3
r
r: c
Phase 2
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
3 8 August, 2011
H B -11 -03
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
4 9
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
•�
(843) 887 -3800
5 10
25 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G
E @ G �\
-
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
»
\
g
R
g
2
CO
CO
\
%
2
\
\
e
/
»
m
/
$
*
4
%
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
k
/
/
/
/
\
7
2
2
]
g-
)
e
k
k
J
j
_
7�
¥
&
,
_
}
\
d ==
CO
=
r
a
/i \gG
@
5
m
9
9
kE /f 5
% s
\ 2 22 \
....
c: E (L)
5 CO ' �
e ,
............
k
\
°
\ \ 3s
,
..... .............. :.....
CO
§
a
\
-
)n0 k/
`®
$
=cu
\2>
...:...
°
E
)
--
_
�
)
�
{
\
tw
/
}
'
!
o
G
a
±
GG
o
E
§
]
g
$
�\
\
Wq
@
§
§
Ig
0
2
E
_
m
2
E
r
]
%\
\\
`
�
�-
\
:
@
°
]
\
/
G
@
E
G
@
@
@ 5 2 °
E
}
&
*
$
9
§
Q
E
2
Percent
Finer
By Weight
)
\
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -03 # 0'- 1.1'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,250,865
Northing (ft):
47,507
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-38.8 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -512
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
149.07
Wash Weight (g):
149.07
Pan Retained (g):
- 148.09
Sieve Loss ( %):
99.93
Fines
-
#20 /o): 0.59
#230 - 0.57
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
1.36
0.91
1.36
0.91
3.5
-2.50
5.66
1.68
1.13
3.04
2.04
4
-2.25
4.76
0.66
0.44
3.70
2.48
5
-2.00
4.00
1.22
0.82
4.92
3.30
7
-1.50
2.83
3.63
2.44
8.55
5.74
10
-1.00
2.00
4.68
3.14
13.23
8.88
14
-0.50
1.41
7.27
4.88
20.50
13.76
18
0.00
1.00
11.37
7.63
31.87
21.39
25
0.50
0.71
16.51
11.08
48.38
32.47
35
1.00
0.50
29.83
20.01
78.21
52.48
45
1.50
0.35
36.91
24.76
115.12
77.24
60
2.00
0.25
21.40
14.36
136.52
91.60
80
2.50
0.18
4.73
3.17
141.25
94.77
120
3.00
0.13
5.27
3.54
146.52
98.31
170
3.50
0.09
1.54
1.03
148.06
99.34
200
3.75
0.07
0.10
0.07
148.16
99.41
230
4.00
0.06
0.03
0.02
148.19
99.43
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.53
1.74
1.45
0.94
0.16
-0.35
-1.65
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
0.72
0.61
1.18
-0.88
4.19
27 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G
E @ G �\
—
0
\
§
_
}
20
w
ƒ
»
\
g
R
g
2
CO
CO
\
%
2
\
\
e
/
»
m
/
$
*
4
%
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
k
/
/
/
/
\
7
2
2
]
g—
)
e
k
k
J
j
/
z
\
}
\
........
... ..
e e
,
�
a = _
=
\� \gG
@
5
m
t
9
a) C14 5
%s
E
22mwa
.........
~
\
\
G
]
3
=E/ 00 00
\2: Cr) CO
e ,
E
e" CO 33=
...........
g
\
C:mrX
c
\
2g/ =2
`
:
/
\2
.
m
°
E
)
2
=
...
9
{
j�
L
\
tw
/
}
'
!
o
, e
j
~
o
@
E
/
]
g
2
m
U)
410
0
2
E
Cn
2
E
r
]
%\
_
\
+
CO
/
\
\
/
G
@
E
G
@
@
@ 5 2 °
E
Q
,_
§
CO
E
Percent
Finer
By Weight
CO
\
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -03 # 1.1' - 4.3'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,250,865
Northing (ft):
47,507
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-42.0 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -411
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
143.05
Wash Weight (g):
129.75
Pan Retained (g):
- 128.99
Sieve Loss ( %):
90.49
Fines ( %):
200 - 10.0
#230 - 9.62
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.28
0.20
0.28
0.20
4
-2.25
4.76
0.68
0.48
0.96
0.68
5
-2.00
4.00
1.28
0.89
2.24
1.57
7
-1.50
2.83
1.72
1.20
3.96
2.77
10
-1.00
2.00
2.56
1.79
6.52
4.56
14
-0.50
1.41
6.37
4.45
12.89
9.01
18
0.00
1.00
10.20
7.13
23.09
16.14
25
0.50
0.71
13.02
9.10
36.11
25.24
35
1.00
0.50
15.08
10.54
51.19
35.78
45
1.50
0.35
12.27
8.58
63.46
44.36
60
2.00
0.25
10.28
7.19
73.74
51.55
80
2.50
0.18
9.79
6.84
83.53
58.39
120
3.00
0.13
29.20
20.41
112.73
78.80
170
3.50
0.09
14.61
10.21
127.34
89.01
200
3.75
0.07
1.38
0.96
128.72
89.97
230
4.00
0.06
0.58
0.41
129.30
90.38
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.25
2.91
1.89
0.49
-0.01
-0.95
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.44
0.37
1.44
-0.48
2.35
29 of 77

DRILLING LOG
1. PROJECT
Town of Holden Beach
Brunswick County, NC
2. CORE LOCATION
CONTRACTOR
Athena Technologies, Inc.
LOCATION COORDINATES
X = 2,250,642 Y = 46,486
3. DRILLING AGENCY
CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
i
Athena Technologies
4. NAME OF DRILLER
P. McClellan
5. DIRECTION OF BORING
i DEG. FROM i BEARING
® VERTICAL
i VERTICAL
Q INCLINED
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN
0,0 Ft,
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK
0,0 Ft,
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING
10.0 Ft.
0
ELEV.
DEPTH
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
(ft)
(ft)
Q
Depths
and elevations based on measured value
-38.7
0.0
W
-40.8 2.1
-42.2 3.5
-42.51 3.8 FF
Attach D - Report 3
boring ueslgnatlon Hb -1 1-U4
CLIENT SHEET 1
Applied Technology And Management, Inc. OF 1 SHEETS
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM :HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983 NAVD 88
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
DISTURBED i UNDISTURBED (UD)
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
14. WATER DEPTH 34.0 Ft.
STARTED iCOMPLETED
15. DATE BORING ' 08 -29 -11 14:19 08 -29 -11 14:30
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING -38,70 Ft,
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 9.25 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
A. Freeze
0-i
s R% Ca REMARKS
My
bioturoatea, silly Tine bANU, trace bampie ;;H, ueptn = u.y
carbonate /coarse clasts, loose, A Mean (mm): 0.30, Phi Sorting: 1.34
subround - subangular, burrows, @ 0.54 - 0.75' Fines (230):12.73% (SM)
= sandy CLAY (5Y 3/1 -very dark gray), olive Sample Interval: 0.0'- 0.9'
gray 5Y -4/2 (SM).
Fine SAND, little carbonate /silt, trace clay,
loose, subround - subangular, burrows, @ 1.54 -
1.66' = carbonate lense with sand dollar
fragment, dark qrav (5Y -4/1), (SW -SM).
Fine SAND, little silt/carbonate, trace clay,
loose, subround /subangular, burrows, very dark
gray (5Y -3/1), (SW -SM).
subround /subangular clasts, very dark gray
5Y -3/1 (GM).
Fine SAND, little silt/carbonate, loose,
-43.4 4.7 subround /subangular, @ 4.5 - 4.66' = Silty
medium SAND, some carbonate gravel, very
dark gray (5Y-3/1), (SW-SM).
Fine /medium SAND, little silt, trace carbonate
-44.3 5.6 (in lag at bottom of interval), very loose,
rounded, find sand (5Y 7/1 -light gray) infilled
burrows, @ 5.5 - 5.58' = carbonate fragment ( >
1'), very dark gray (5Y-3/1), (SW-SM).
Bioturbated silty medium SAND, some
carbonate, trace coarse sand /fine gravel clast,
loose, subround - subangular, burrows, @ 7.62 -
7.83' = (5Y 4/1 -dark gray) interbedded fine
sandy CLAY and fine SAND, burrows, very dark
greenish gray (5GY -3/1), (SM).
-46.9 r 8.2
X1.111 l K
{r Coarse, cemented carbonate /clastic GRAVEL,
} jjJJ black (5Y- 2.5/1), (GP -GM).
Loss of recovery /compaction of sediment..
End of Boring
Sample #B, Depth = 4.7'
Mean (mm): 0.33, Phi Sorting: 1.77
B Fines (230):8.46% (SW -SM)
Sample Interval: 0.9'- 4.7'
Carbonate (0- 4.7'): 9.1 %, Organics (0- 4.7'): 2.1 %
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 30 of 77
JUN 02 JUN 04
M
5
IM

0. de 5
ism
Attach D - Report 3
2
:1
7
Phase 2
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
3
-
$
August, 2011
HB-11-04
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
4
��
9
:�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
[phone]
5
`�
10
31 of 77

Attach D - Report 3
66 /£ /O6 lOJ'SSMJ d3O -3 fdJ'SE)M 1NIJ 13W A-nOzl OOOMNOM - A1V SISAL VNV 3A31S
ty6ia/N
A8 aaSaeOO
tuaoaad
O
o
O
N CO
O
ov
O (0
O Oro rn °o
o
0
0
U
N
m
O
C
(6
N
a
O
Q
Cq
CO
00
O
CO
CO
d
3
N
0
LO
N
00
>
2
m
H
O
N
V
Z
Z
o
a
O
N
E
N
p
m
_
X
}
j,
N
T
Ot
C
C
(06
O
O
N
0-
Q
Q
W
Z
2
>
V
M
p
o
U
�
N
M
........
o
ri r
O
Y
CO,
C N LO
O
m O
N
_ O
ui � C:, C:)
N
Y
N (V oo oo
N W
°�cnr�r�
-00 00
-
-
CO CO
C
E
G
>
F-- CO CO 00 00
a
=
m
�� mt X
M
N
0') U Q
2
..........
O N
C
N
O W
c�
G
O
�2
� a
CO
U
0
0
r
12
2)
CO
O
O r
N a
N
LL
O O
O
o
ON N
C? �
°
N
c
ii
U
u
2
U)
m
z
�i
a
Wo
N m
v
N
_
CM
CO
0
416
y
N
W
E
z
=
N N
OC
C
O
W Ul
m
�'
U
C
_
rn
c
O
a rn
o
�
>
O
O
W I-
(O
L
V
M N
CO
O
(�0
L
Percent
Finer
By Weight
m
=
a
U
66 /£ /O6 lOJ'SSMJ d3O -3 fdJ'SE)M 1NIJ 13W A-nOzl OOOMNOM - A1V SISAL VNV 3A31S

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -04 # 0'- 0.9'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,250,642
Northing (ft):
46,486
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-39.6 NAVD 88
USCS:
SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -412
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
140.10
Wash Weight (g):
123.01
Pan Retained (g):
- 122.03
Sieve Loss ( %):
87.64
Fines ( %):
200 -13.01
230 - 12.7
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.15
0.11
0.15
0.11
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.12
0.09
0.27
0.20
4
-2.25
4.76
0.40
0.29
0.67
0.49
5
-2.00
4.00
0.61
0.44
1.28
0.93
7
-1.50
2.83
2.07
1.48
3.35
2.41
10
-1.00
2.00
2.52
1.80
5.87
4.21
14
-0.50
1.41
4.56
3.25
10.43
7.46
18
0.00
1.00
5.00
3.57
15.43
11.03
25
0.50
0.71
6.66
4.75
22.09
15.78
35
1.00
0.50
10.12
7.22
32.21
23.00
45
1.50
0.35
10.84
7.74
43.05
30.74
60
2.00
0.25
10.98
7.84
54.03
38.58
80
2.50
0.18
18.82
13.43
72.85
52.01
120
3.00
0.13
35.55
25.37
108.40
77.38
170
3.50
0.09
12.12
8.65
120.52
86.03
200
3.75
0.07
1.35
0.96
121.87
86.99
230
4.00
0.06
0.39
0.28
122.26
87.27
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.38
2.95
2.43
1.13
0.52
-0.88
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.75
0.30
1.34
-1.02
3.35
33 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G
E
@
G �\
-
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
»
\
p
R
g
2
CO
CO
\
%
2
\
=
@
e
/
»
m
/
$
*
4
$
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
/
/
7
2
2
g-
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
/
\
)
§
e e
,
�
°
a = _
CO
................
... ...
.........
, \
!
\
\0 g G
c
5
9
2E ^55
%s..
U)
m
=�O,
\222\
.
~
k
CO
I
CO
�Ea�
/J "t?
E
\
eE33=
`
C:mrX
CO
Cl)
q
/g/ =2
`
:
CU
)
\2
U)
_
E
CO
°
{
j�
CO
l
m
k
'
)
6
±
°
GG
o
E
/
]
g
�
m
U)
4 =
[
)®
§
%
/
§
4 Ig
0
2
E
m
2
E
r
]
%\
\_
\
`
C)
U)R
CO
®
®
)
o
c
\
¥
o
-
E
o
=
G
@
E
G
@
@
@
5
2 °
/
CO
§
E
Percent
Finer
By Weight
CO
\
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -04 # 0.9'- 4.7'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,250,642
Northing (ft):
46,486
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-43.4 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -411
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
135.17
Wash Weight (g):
123.99
Pan Retained (g):
- 123.49
Sieve Loss ( %):
91.54
Fines
-
#20 /o): 8.88
#230 - 8.46
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
3.03
2.24
3.03
2.24
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
1.53
1.13
4.56
3.37
3.5
-2.50
5.66
1.20
0.89
5.76
4.26
4
-2.25
4.76
0.29
0.21
6.05
4.47
5
-2.00
4.00
1.52
1.12
7.57
5.59
7
-1.50
2.83
1.70
1.26
9.27
6.85
10
-1.00
2.00
2.97
2.20
12.24
9.05
14
-0.50
1.41
4.15
3.07
16.39
12.12
18
0.00
1.00
5.31
3.93
21.70
16.05
25
0.50
0.71
6.78
5.02
28.48
21.07
35
1.00
0.50
8.38
6.20
36.86
27.27
45
1.50
0.35
8.12
6.01
44.98
33.28
60
2.00
0.25
7.95
5.88
52.93
39.16
80
2.50
0.18
12.58
9.31
65.51
48.47
120
3.00
0.13
40.00
29.59
105.51
78.06
170
3.50
0.09
16.09
11.90
121.60
89.96
200
3.75
0.07
1.57
1.16
123.17
91.12
230
4.00
0.06
0.57
0.42
123.74
91.54
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.25
2.95
2.53
0.82
-0.01
-2.13
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.58
0.33
1.77
-1.32
4.08
35 of 77

Attach D - Report 3
Borinq Designation HB -11 -05
DRILLING LOG
CONTRACTOR
CLIENT
SHEET 1
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Applied Technology And Management, Inc.
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983 NAVD 88
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,250,502 Y = 45,406
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 35.4 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
08 -29 -11 12:36 08 -29 -11 12:45
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING -39.70 Ft.
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 4.17 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 6.0 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
0-i
ELEV.
(ft)
DEPTH
(ft)
w
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
Depths and elevations based on measured values
%
REC.
'L
04
REMARKS
-39.7
0.0
m,)
Fine SAND, trace silt /carbonate, well graded,
Sample #A, Depth = 1.8'
loose, subround - subangular, @ 1.5' =
A
Mean (mm): 0.21, Phi Sorting: 1.00
carbonate fragment (> .1'), olive gray (5Y -4/2),
Fines (230):4.72% (SW -SM)
(SW -SM).
Sample Interval: 0.0'- 1.8'
-41.5
1.8
0
Medium SAND, some carbonate, trace silt, well
-42.0
2.3
graded, very loose, subround - subangular, @
2.1'= arthropod remains ?, olive gray (5Y -4/2),
(SW-SM.
Sample #B, Depth = 4.2'
Mean (mm): 0.24, Phi Sorting: 1.29
Fine SAND, little silt/carbonate, loose,
subround - subangular, @ 2.58' = carbonate
B
Fines (230):5.93% (SW -SM)
-43.0
3.3
fra ment > Y), very dark gray (5Y-3/1), SM
Sample Interval: 1.8'- 4.2'
Carbonate (0- 4.17'): 9.1 %, Organics (0- 4.17'): 1.9%
.
Interbedded fine SAND and silty fine SAND,
trace carbonate, loose, subround - subangular,
-43.9
4.2
burrows, @ 4.0' = coral fragment, dark gray
5Y -4/1 SM .
Loss of recovery. Refusal encountered at 6'
below sediment surface. Multiple cores
attempted to increase penetration /recovery..
-45.7
6.0
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 36 of 77
JUN 02 JUN 04
a
-5
ato]

0 5
Attach D - Report 3
ism
I
26 M 7
Phase 2
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
3 $ August, 2011
H B -11 -05
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
4 _ 9
.Y ,tom H E NA
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458 1 www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
5 10
37 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G
E
@
G �\
-
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
»
\
/
R
g
2
CO
CO
\
%
2
\
=
@
e
/
»
m /
$
*
4
\
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
/
/
7
2
2
g-
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
-
0
j
_
CO,
© 3 =
/i \CD
CD CD
@
5
m
9
9
kE /f 5
% s
\ 2 m w a
............................
~
k
CO
I
CO
=E/ 00 00
/J: CO CO
e ,
E
e CO CO
� ,
........
g
CO (D
CO
r
\
2g/ =2
{
/
\ 2
U)
_
E
CO
_
)
{
��
CO
tw
/
}
'
!
o
e
a
±
°
GG
.
o
2
E
/
]
g
2
m
D
U)
\
Wq
e
)®
§
%
7
§
Ig
0
2
E
_
m
2
E
r
]
%w
\\
`
�
U)-
\
/
0
:
M
/
G
@
E
G
@
@
@
5
2 °
E
7
&
$
9
§
CO
Q
E
2
Percent
Finer
By Weight
)
0
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -05 # 0'- 1.8'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,250,502
Northing (ft):
45,406
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-41.5 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -412
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
143.61
Wash Weight (g):
137.17
Pan Retained (g):
- 136.67
Sieve Loss ( %):
95.40
Fines
-
#20 /o): 5.03
#230 - 4.72
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.26
0.18
0.26
0.18
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.56
0.39
0.82
0.57
4
-2.25
4.76
0.00
0.00
0.82
0.57
5
-2.00
4.00
0.42
0.29
1.24
0.86
7
-1.50
2.83
0.68
0.47
1.92
1.33
10
-1.00
2.00
0.46
0.32
2.38
1.65
14
-0.50
1.41
1.02
0.71
3.40
2.36
18
0.00
1.00
1.67
1.16
5.07
3.52
25
0.50
0.71
2.90
2.02
7.97
5.54
35
1.00
0.50
5.62
3.91
13.59
9.45
45
1.50
0.35
9.65
6.72
23.24
16.17
60
2.00
0.25
13.94
9.71
37.18
25.88
80
2.50
0.18
28.98
20.18
66.16
46.06
120
3.00
0.13
52.49
36.55
118.65
82.61
170
3.50
0.09
16.05
11.18
134.70
93.79
200
3.75
0.07
1.69
1.18
136.39
94.97
230
4.00
0.06
0.45
0.31
136.84
95.28
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.77
3.06
2.90
2.55
1.95
1.49
0.37
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
2.23
0.21
1
-2.05
8.91
39 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G E @ G �\
-
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
»
\
/
R
g
2
CO
CO
\
%
2
\
=
@
e
/
»
m /
$
*
4
\
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
/
/
7
2
2
g-
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
\
}
\
,
_
d = =
CO LO
.
/
r
a
/ MCD
c
5
.E ^55
% s
:
2
U)
f
=�O,
\LL
.:.
r
=E/ 00 CO
S
)
c
g
¥ _� n CO
c
E
m
CO eE333
......
`
CO (D
CO
=
q
/g/ =2
`
7
)
\2
U)
_
E
)
_
)
{
��
CO
tw
/
}
'
!
o
,
G
))
±
GG
o
E
/
]
g
m
U)
w
/
§
Ig
0
2
E
2
E
r
]
%\
_
\
+
CO
/
/
\
o
c
\
\
E
#
,
-C:
/
@
G
@
E
G
@
@ @ 5 2 °
U)
§
\
Percent
Finer
By Weight
§
\
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -05 # 1.8'- 4.2'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,250,502
Northing (ft):
45,406
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-43.9 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -411
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
141.73
Wash Weight (g):
133.48
Pan Retained (g):
- 133.20
Sieve Loss ( %):
94.08
Fines
-
#20 /o): 6.30
#230 - 5.93
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.43
0.30
0.43
0.30
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.69
0.49
1.12
0.79
4
-2.25
4.76
0.37
0.26
1.49
1.05
5
-2.00
4.00
0.78
0.55
2.27
1.60
7
-1.50
2.83
1.80
1.27
4.07
2.87
10
-1.00
2.00
2.03
1.43
6.10
4.30
14
-0.50
1.41
2.75
1.94
8.85
6.24
18
0.00
1.00
4.00
2.82
12.85
9.06
25
0.50
0.71
4.83
3.41
17.68
12.47
35
1.00
0.50
5.42
3.82
23.10
16.29
45
1.50
0.35
5.75
4.06
28.85
20.35
60
2.00
0.25
7.75
5.47
36.60
25.82
80
2.50
0.18
24.99
17.63
61.59
43.45
120
3.00
0.13
56.40
39.79
117.99
83.24
170
3.50
0.09
13.60
9.60
131.59
92.84
200
3.75
0.07
1.22
0.86
132.81
93.70
230
4.00
0.06
0.53
0.37
133.34
94.07
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.04
2.90
2.58
1.93
0.96
-0.82
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
2.05
0.24
1.29
-1.76
5.71
41 of 77

Attach D - Report 3
Borinq Designation HB -11 -06
DRILLING LOG
CONTRACTOR
CLIENT
SHEET 1
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Applied Technology And Management, Inc.
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32dO NAD 1983 NAVD 88
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,249,464 Y = 47,492
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 34.7 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
08 -29 -11 16:45 08 -29 -11 16:55
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING -37.00 Ft.
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 9.66 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 10.5 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
0-i
ELEV.
DEPTH
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
%
'L
REMARKS
(ft)
(ft)
w
Depths and elevations based on measured values
REC.
04
-37.0
0.0
Fine SAND, trace carbonate, well graded, very
loose, subround - subangular, grading to (@
=
Sample #A, Depth 2.9'
-1.4') 5Y 5/1 (gray), fine /medium SAND, little
Mean (mm): 0.280 Phi Sorting: 0.96
carbonate, trace silt, well graded, very loose,
A
Fines
subround - subangular, @ 1.9 - 2.8' = lenses of
Sample Interval: 0.0' - 2.9'
e Irate val: . ' - 2.
fine /medium SAND /some carb, olive gray
(5Y -5/2), (SW).
-39.91
2.9
Sample #B, Depth = 4.7'
Fine SAND, little silt, trace carbonate, well
graded, loose, subround - subangular, burrows,
Mean (mm): 0.25, Phi Sorting: 1.18
@ 3.5' = fine sand infilled burrow, @ 4.96' =
B
Fines (230): 7.37% (SW -SM)
carbonate fragment ( > .1'), very dark gray
Sample Interval: 2.9'- 4.7'
(5Y -3/1), (SW -SM).
Carbonate (0- 4.7'): 11.5 %, Organics (0 -47): 1.5%
-41.7
4.7
Fine /coarse carbonate GRAVEL, silty fine sand
matrix, black (5Y- 2.5/1), (GM).
-43.3
6.3
Bioturbated, silty medium SAND, trace
carbonate /coarse sand clasts /clay, loose,
subround - subangular, @ 7.86' = wood
fragment, @ 8.25 and 8.62' = (5Y 7/1 -light
gray) sand infilled burrows, very dark greenish
gray (5GY -3/1), (SM).
-46.7
9.7
Loss of recovery/compaction of sediment..
-47.5
10.5
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 42 of77
JUN 02 JUN 04
20
-5
ato]

1
KA
M
5
6
11001
Attach D - Report 3
Phase 2
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
August, 2011
H B -11 -06
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
911 A� H E IAA
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
M 1
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
43 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G
E
@ G �\
-
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
»
\
7
w
CO
2
CO
CO
/
»
{
/
$
*
4
%
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
k
/
/
f
7
2
2
g-
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
\
\
}
\
,
_
d ==
CO
/i \gG
c
5
9
2E ^55
%s
2
U)
m
=�O,
22mwa
...,......
e
G
r
00
=E/00=
rCa
e ,
\
,
..........
O(D
§
2
)ne k/
`
\ 2
........
m
_
E
)
_
)
0
\
I
m
k
'
)
6
G
a
, e
LL
�})
LL
U)
]
d
�\
Wq
§
CO
410
0
2
E
_
m
2
E
r
]
%\
\\
`
�
U)-
\
R
g
~
04
\
/
G
@
E
G
@
@
@
5 2 °
E
?
&
*
$
9
§
Q
E
2
Percent
Finer
By Weight
)
\
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -06 # 0'- 2.9'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,249,464
Northing (ft):
47,492
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-39.9 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -512
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
140.77
Wash Weight (g):
140.77
Pan Retained (g):
- 140.41
Sieve Loss ( %):
99.92
Fines
-
#20 /o): 0.23
#230 - 0.17
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.28
0.20
0.28
0.20
4
-2.25
4.76
0.31
0.22
0.59
0.42
5
-2.00
4.00
0.23
0.16
0.82
0.58
7
-1.50
2.83
0.33
0.23
1.15
0.81
10
-1.00
2.00
1.04
0.74
2.19
1.55
14
-0.50
1.41
2.53
1.80
4.72
3.35
18
0.00
1.00
4.12
2.93
8.84
6.28
25
0.50
0.71
5.31
3.77
14.15
10.05
35
1.00
0.50
7.61
5.41
21.76
15.46
45
1.50
0.35
11.20
7.96
32.96
23.42
60
2.00
0.25
24.38
17.32
57.34
40.74
80
2.50
0.18
56.62
40.22
113.96
80.96
120
3.00
0.13
20.77
14.75
134.73
95.71
170
3.50
0.09
5.35
3.80
140.08
99.51
200
3.75
0.07
0.36
0.26
140.44
99.77
230
4.00
0.06
0.08
0.06
140.52
99.83
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.98
2.60
2.43
2.12
1.55
1.03
-0.22
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.85
0.28
0.96
-1.56
6.02
45 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G
E
@
G �\
-
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
»
\
7
w
CO
2
CO
CO
/
»
{
/
$
*
4
%
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
k
/
/
f
7
2
2
g
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
_
7�
¥
&
}
_
$
d ==
,
CO
/i \gG
r
a
=
[
@
5
m
9
m
kE /f 5
%s
....
U-
22mwa
e -00 00
, g
!
2
G
°
\
- CO-
u `'
m..
c
E
m = =##
eEs==
`
....
G
C: X
2
c
�
2 g =2
7
)
\2 /
U)
_
E
)
_
)
{
��
\
I
m
k
'
)
6
G
a
))
E
GG
E
/
]
d
m
U)
)
\
/
\
§
416
0
2
E
_
m
2
E
r
]
%\
\\
`
C)
�
\
®
R
®
M
o
c
\
¥
o
-
E
CN
_
G
@
E
G
@
@
@
5
2 °
/
CO
§
\
E
Percent
Finer
By Weight
CO
\
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -06 # 2.9'- 4.7'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,249,464
Northing (ft):
47,492
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-41.7 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -311
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
141.98
Wash Weight (g):
131.74
Pan Retained (g):
- 131.39
Sieve Loss ( %):
92.72
Fines
-
#20 /o): 7.67
#230 - 7.37
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.69
0.49
0.69
0.49
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.09
0.06
0.78
0.55
4
-2.25
4.76
0.00
0.00
0.78
0.55
5
-2.00
4.00
0.15
0.11
0.93
0.66
7
-1.50
2.83
0.96
0.68
1.89
1.34
10
-1.00
2.00
1.87
1.32
3.76
2.66
14
-0.50
1.41
3.16
2.23
6.92
4.89
18
0.00
1.00
4.53
3.19
11.45
8.08
25
0.50
0.71
5.15
3.63
16.60
11.71
35
1.00
0.50
5.41
3.81
22.01
15.52
45
1.50
0.35
7.61
5.36
29.62
20.88
60
2.00
0.25
15.38
10.83
45.00
31.71
80
2.50
0.18
33.43
23.55
78.43
55.26
120
3.00
0.13
38.58
27.17
117.01
82.43
170
3.50
0.09
12.84
9.04
129.85
91.47
200
3.75
0.07
1.22
0.86
131.07
92.33
230
4.00
0.06
0.42
0.30
131.49
92.63
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.09
2.86
2.39
1.69
1.04
-0.48
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.98
0.25
1.18
-1.56
5.6
47 of 77

Attach D - Report 3
0■
-35.6
0.8
boring ueslgnatlon rt16-11-ut
5Y -4/2 (SP).
CONTRACTOR
CLIENT
SHEET 1
DRILLING LOG
1.0
CLAY soft very dark gray 5Y -3/1 CL.
Fine SAND, little carbonate, poorly graded, very
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Applied Technology And Management, Inc.
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32dO NAD 1983 NAVD 88
2. CORE LOCATION
i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,249,465 Y = 48,774
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY
CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
gray
Fine SAND, little carbonate, trace silt, poorly
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
Athena Technologies
3
4. NAME OF DRILLER
graded, very loose, subround - subangular, olive
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 32.3 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING
i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED
i i
15. DATE BORING i i
08 -29 -11 16:20 08 -29 -11 16:30
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING -34.80 Ft.
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 9.25 Ft.
Mean (mm): 0.53, Phi Sorting: 1.26
CLAY soft very dark gray (5Y-Tl), (CL).
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING
10.0 Ft.
A. Freeze
B
Fines (230): 0.82% (SW)
Sample Interval: 1.8'- 3.9'
O
D!W
ELEV.
DEPTH
w
Carbonate (0- 3.9'): 10.8 %, Organics (0- 3.9'): 1.6%
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
%
0-i 'L
REMARKS
(ft)
(ft)
w
Depths and elevations based on measured values
REC.
O4
-34.8
0.0
_j
Fine
SAND, little carbonate, poorly graded, very
loose, subround - subangular, olive gray
0■
-35.6
0.8
5Y -4/2 (SP).
A
Sample #A, Depth = 1.8'
Mean (mm): 0.26, Phi Sorting: 0.84
Fines (230): 11.10% (SP -SM)
35.8
1.0
CLAY soft very dark gray 5Y -3/1 CL.
Fine SAND, little carbonate, poorly graded, very
loose, subround - subangular, olive gray
Sample Interval: 0.0'- 1.8'
-36.5
1.7
5Y -4/2 (SP).
CLAY soft very dark (5Y-3/1), (CL).
gray
Fine SAND, little carbonate, trace silt, poorly
graded, very loose, subround - subangular, olive
gray 5Y -4/2 (SP).
Sample #B, Depth = 3.9'
Mean (mm): 0.53, Phi Sorting: 1.26
CLAY soft very dark gray (5Y-Tl), (CL).
-37.7
2.9
B
Fines (230): 0.82% (SW)
Sample Interval: 1.8'- 3.9'
Medium SAND, trace carbonate /silt, well
graded, very loose, subround - subangular,
burrows dark gray 5Y -4/1 SW .
Carbonate (0- 3.9'): 10.8 %, Organics (0- 3.9'): 1.6%
Medium /coarse SAND, some carbonate, trace
-38.7
3.9
silt, well graded, very loose,
subround - subangular, @ 3.37' = sand dollar
Silty fine /medium SAND, little carbonate, loose,
subround - subangular, burrows, very dark gray
(5Y -3/1), (SM).
Interbedded medium SAND and silty medium
SAND (5Y 3/1 -very dark gray), some carbonate,
little silt, well graded, very loose,
subround - subangular, burrows, gray (5Y -5/1),
(SW -SM).
-44.1 9.3
Loss of recovery/compaction of sediment..
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 48 of77
JUN 02 JUN 04
5
It$]

l
KA
i
5
�16
7
11001
Attach D - Report 3
Phase 2
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
August, 2011
H B -11 -07
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
A� H E IAA
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
49 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G E
@ G �\
—
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
g
g
CO
CO
\
%
§
e
>
/
»
{
/
$
*
4
\
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
k
/
/
/
/
7
2
CO
2
]
g—
)
e
k
J
j
\
\
z
}
§
,
_
d ==
CO
r
a
/i \ gG
^55
% s
U)
f
=�O,
2 m w a
..............
.......�
......
\
, g
w
G
c
R
=E/
= _. CO
e,
.......:....
I
E
—
¥ _ /
e CO Co
,
...........
_
\
CO 77 X
§
]
w
mn 5.r
=2
=cu
g
$
C- C14
4
........
_
E
)
_
)
0
CO
tw
/
}
'
!
o
\
) )
e
, ~
°
}
/$
]
d
?
\
7
)
/
c
o
I8
0
2
2
E
r
%w Ul
_
m
E
a)
\\
`
C)
�-
CO
/
0
:
®
\
/
G
@
E
G
@
@ Cl)
5 2 °
E
)
&
_
*
$
§
Q
E
2
Percent
Finer
By Weight
)
\
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -07 # 0'- 1.8'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,249,465
Northing (ft):
48,774
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-36.6 NAVD 88
USCS:
SP -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -412
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
123.99
Wash Weight (g):
110.40
Pan Retained (g):
- 110.06
Sieve Loss ( %):
88.90
Fines ( %):
200 - 11.2
230 -11.1
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
-2.25
4.76
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5
-2.00
4.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
7
-1.50
2.83
0.12
0.10
0.12
0.10
10
-1.00
2.00
0.33
0.27
0.45
0.37
14
-0.50
1.41
1.20
0.97
1.65
1.34
18
0.00
1.00
2.45
1.98
4.10
3.32
25
0.50
0.71
4.42
3.56
8.52
6.88
35
1.00
0.50
6.82
5.50
15.34
12.38
45
1.50
0.35
10.37
8.36
25.71
20.74
60
2.00
0.25
18.63
15.03
44.34
35.77
80
2.50
0.18
44.07
35.54
88.41
71.31
120
3.00
0.13
16.48
13.29
104.89
84.60
170
3.50
0.09
4.63
3.73
109.52
88.33
200
3.75
0.07
0.50
0.40
110.02
88.73
230
4.00
0.06
0.21
0.17
110.23
88.90
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.98
2.64
2.20
1.64
1.22
0.24
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.92
0.26
0.84
-1.11
4.48
51 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G
E
@ G �\
-
0
\
§
_
}
20
w
ƒ
g
g
CO
CO
\
%
§
e
>
/
»
{
/
$
*
4
\
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
k
/
/
/
/
7
2
CO
2
]
g-
)
e
k
J
j
\
}
,
%
d ==
CO
y�
r
of
/i \gG
c
5
U)
e
2E ^55
= - O,
%s
E
2=mwa
-00 00
...
,}
j
_
%\
a
/Ef=
.
I
E
¥2 \�?
e- CO 33=
`
G
21I�X
=
/g/ 'CO
`
\ 2
... ..............
m
_
E
)
......� ..............
`
)
O
j4
/
[
m
k
'
)
6
,
G
//
±
GG
o
E
§
]
g
�\
$
\
g
c
o
410
0
2
E
_
m
2
E
r
a)
%\
_
\
+
(n
/
\
E
@
G
@
E
G
@
@
@
5 2 °
(?
)
\
Percent
Finer
By Weight
CO
\
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -07 # 1.8'- 3.9'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,249,465
Northing (ft):
48,774
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-38.7 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -411
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
151.23
Wash Weight (g):
150.13
Pan Retained (g):
- 149.87
Sieve Loss ( %):
99.19
Fines
-
#20 /o): 0.86
#230 - 0.82
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.35
0.23
0.35
0.23
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.37
0.24
0.72
0.47
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.43
0.28
1.15
0.75
4
-2.25
4.76
0.36
0.24
1.51
0.99
5
-2.00
4.00
1.01
0.67
2.52
1.66
7
-1.50
2.83
2.35
1.55
4.87
3.21
10
-1.00
2.00
4.21
2.78
9.08
5.99
14
-0.50
1.41
8.64
5.71
17.72
11.70
18
0.00
1.00
18.52
12.25
36.24
23.95
25
0.50
0.71
22.34
14.77
58.58
38.72
35
1.00
0.50
18.65
12.33
77.23
51.05
45
1.50
0.35
17.09
11.30
94.32
62.35
60
2.00
0.25
17.46
11.55
111.78
73.90
80
2.50
0.18
24.94
16.49
136.72
90.39
120
3.00
0.13
10.49
6.94
147.21
97.33
170
3.50
0.09
2.55
1.69
149.76
99.02
200
3.75
0.07
0.18
0.12
149.94
99.14
230
4.00
0.06
0.06
0.04
150.00
99.18
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.83
2.31
2.03
0.96
0.04
-0.32
-1.18
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
0.92
0.53
1.26
-0.4
2.9
53 of 77

DRILLING LOG
1. PROJECT
Town of Holden Beach
Brunswick County, NC
2. CORE LOCATION
CONTRACTOR
Athena Technologies, Inc.
LOCATION COORDINATES
X = 2,248,001 Y = 46,579
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
i
Athena Technologies
4. NAME OF DRILLER
P. McClellan
5. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
® VERTICAL i VERTICAL
Q INCLINED
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0,0 Ft,
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0,0 Ft,
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 8.0 Ft.
0
ELEV. DEPTH w CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
(ft) (ft) a Depths and elevations based on measured value
w
-38.2 0.0
Fine SAND, trace carbonate/silt, well graded,
very loose, subround - subangular, olive gray
_3R a 07 IFV A10\ ICIAM
graded, loose, subround - subangular, burrows,
-39.6 1.4 "'very dark gray 5Y -3/1 SW -SM .
-39.9 1.7 Medium SAND, some carbonate, trace silt, well
graded, subround /subangular, sand dollar
fragment, gray 5Y -5/1 (SW).
Fine SAND, little silt /carbonate, well graded,
loose, subround - subangular, burrows, very dark
gray (5Y-3/1), (SW -SM).
-41.2 3.0 °
-41.71 3.5 1 � rJ; j subround /subangular clasts, loose, dark gray
(5Y -4/1), (GM).
Silty fine /medium SAND, trace
carbonate /coarse sand clasts, loose,
subround - subangular, burrows, @ 4.0' = m.
mercenaria (clam) shell (> .3'), very dark
greenish gray (5GY -3/1), (SM).
-44.2 6.0 HIM
-44.5 6.3 Organic SILT, little fine sand /cemented silt
gravel, @ 6.0' = m. mercenaria shell fragment,
dark olive gray (5Y-3/2), OL .
Loss of recovery. Refusal encountered at 8'
below sediment surface. Multiple cores
attempted to increase penetration /recovery..
End of Boring
Attach D - Report 3
boring ueslgnatlon mb -1 1-ub
CLIENT SHEET 1
Applied Technology And Management, Inc. OF 1 SHEETS
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM :HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983 NAVD 88
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
DISTURBED i UNDISTURBED (UD)
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
14. WATER DEPTH 37.2 Ft.
STARTED iCOMPLETED
15. DATE BORING ' 08 -29 -11 17:12 08 -29 -11 17:20
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING -38,20 Ft,
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 6.33 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
A. Freeze
0-i
s R% Ca REMARKS
my
bam pie ;;H, uepm = u. t
q Mean (mm): 0.24, Phi Sorting: 0.97
Fines (230): 1.99% (SW)
Sample Interval: 0.0'- 0.7'
Sample #B, Depth = 3.5'
Mean (mm): 0.38, Phi Sorting: 1.73
B Fines (230):9.85% (SW -SM)
Sample Interval: 0.7'- 3.5'
Carbonate (0- 3.5'): 17.3 %, Organics (0- 3.5'): 2.2%
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 54 of 77
JUN 02 JUN 04
M
5
0101

Phase 2
Holden Beach,
Attach D - Report 3
North Carolina
.i
August, 2011
�r
1
H B -11 -08
6
2 w
4,
7
Phase 2
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
August, 2011
H B -11 -08
Scale in Feet
r'1
Photo Mosaic Image
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
-
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
5
�. �.
101
55 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G E @ G �\
-
0
\
_
§
}
\
w
z
»
\
a
c-
g
2
=
CO
C)
\
%
2
\
p
r
e
/
»
E
/
$
*
4
$
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
k
/
/
f
7
2
2
g-
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
\
\
z
}
/
_
d = =
CO
\
g= G i
/
c
5
9
2E ^55
%s
U-
U)
m
=�O,
\jmwa
.................. .............................
2
c
g
� E a)
5 =' CO CO
:
,
........� ..............
c
E
m § _ # #
e CO _
........
CO (D
�
/g/ =2
{
/
\2
U)
_
E
)
_
)
0
��
CO
tw
/
}
'
!
o
G
\2
±
G\
§
(1)
d
$
�
�
�\
\
Wq
R
§
CO
416
0
2
E
_
m
2
E
r
]
%\
U)
`
U)
\
�
:
a
M
@
°
\
/
G
@
E
G
@
@ @ 5 2 °
E
2
&
*
$
9
§
Q
E
2
Percent
Finer
By Weight
)
0
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -08 # 0'- 0.7'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,248,001
Northing (ft):
46,579
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-38.9 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -412
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
140.68
Wash Weight (g):
137.97
Pan Retained (g):
- 137.81
Sieve Loss ( %):
98.02
Fines
-
#20 /o): 2.18
#230 -1.99
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.53
0.38
0.53
0.38
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.09
0.06
0.62
0.44
4
-2.25
4.76
0.09
0.06
0.71
0.50
5
-2.00
4.00
0.44
0.31
1.15
0.81
7
-1.50
2.83
0.39
0.28
1.54
1.09
10
-1.00
2.00
0.63
0.45
2.17
1.54
14
-0.50
1.41
1.30
0.92
3.47
2.46
18
0.00
1.00
2.27
1.61
5.74
4.07
25
0.50
0.71
3.77
2.68
9.51
6.75
35
1.00
0.50
5.75
4.09
15.26
10.84
45
1.50
0.35
8.59
6.11
23.85
16.95
60
2.00
0.25
23.06
16.39
46.91
33.34
80
2.50
0.18
47.86
34.02
94.77
67.36
120
3.00
0.13
29.19
20.75
123.96
88.11
170
3.50
0.09
12.45
8.85
136.41
96.96
200
3.75
0.07
1.21
0.86
137.62
97.82
230
4.00
0.06
0.27
0.19
137.89
98.01
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.39
2.90
2.68
2.24
1.75
1.42
0.17
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
2.06
0.24
0.97
-1.88
8.72
57 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G
E @ G �\
-
0
\
§
_
}
\
w
z
»
\
a
c-
g
2
=
CO
C)
\
%
2
\
p
r
e
/
»
E
/
$
*
4
$
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
�
@
\
k
/
/
f
7
2
2
g-
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
CO
£
z
m
w
e e
,
�
°
}
CO,
a = _
.. ...
.........
..............
, \
!
\- \ g G
c
5
9
2E ^55
% s
AL
LL
U)
m
= -O,
®
CO
\222\
®
%
I
2
-
)CO=
L) CO=-
e ,
eE33=
,
........
_
\
CO(D z
§
mn o =2
`
..
7
}
�0/
\2
_
E
)
_
)
0
CO
°
I
I
m
k
'
)
6
G
a
~
o
@
E
/
]
g
m
U)
4 =
[
7
W°
}
\
/
\
/
§
I
0
2
E
2
E
r
]
%\
_
\
+
CO
Cn
�
~
/
\
/
'
\
\
\
@
G
@
E
G
@
@
@ 5 2 °
,
§
)
CO
Percent
Finer
By Weight
§
\
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -08 # 0.7'- 3.5'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,248,001
Northing (ft):
46,579
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-41.7 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -311
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
142.35
Wash Weight (g):
128.79
Pan Retained (g):
- 127.83
Sieve Loss ( %):
90.14
Fines ( %):
200 - 10.3
#230 - 9.85
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
1.42
1.00
1.42
1.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.87
0.61
2.29
1.61
3.5
-2.50
5.66
2.10
1.48
4.39
3.09
4
-2.25
4.76
1.31
0.92
5.70
4.01
5
-2.00
4.00
1.08
0.76
6.78
4.77
7
-1.50
2.83
4.13
2.90
10.91
7.67
10
-1.00
2.00
4.91
3.45
15.82
11.12
14
-0.50
1.41
6.09
4.28
21.91
15.40
18
0.00
1.00
5.72
4.02
27.63
19.42
25
0.50
0.71
6.43
4.52
34.06
23.94
35
1.00
0.50
7.55
5.30
41.61
29.24
45
1.50
0.35
9.46
6.65
51.07
35.89
60
2.00
0.25
12.65
8.89
63.72
44.78
80
2.50
0.18
18.81
13.21
82.53
57.99
120
3.00
0.13
29.94
21.03
112.47
79.02
170
3.50
0.09
13.72
9.64
126.19
88.66
200
3.75
0.07
1.36
0.96
127.55
89.62
230
4.00
0.06
0.76
0.53
128.31
90.15
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.26
2.90
2.20
0.60
-0.43
-1.96
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.4
0.38
1.73
-1.01
3.16
59 of 77

Attach D - Report 3
Borinq Designation HB -11 -09
DRILLING LOG
CONTRACTOR
CLIENT
SHEET 1
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Applied Technology And Management, Inc.
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32dO NAD 1983 NAVD 88
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,247,419 Y = 48,012
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 35.7 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
08 -29 -11 17:52 08 -29 -11 18:00
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING -36.30 Ft.
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 9.83 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 10.5 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
0-i
ELEV.
(ft)
DEPTH
(ft)
w
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
Depths and elevations based on measured values
%
REC.
'L
04
REMARKS
-36.3
0.0
_
m,)
Fine SAND, little carbonate, trace silt, well
graded, very loose, subround - subangular, olive
Sample #A, Depth = 2.0'
gray (5Y -5/2), (SW).
Mean (mm): 0.31, Phi Sorting: 1.01
-37.6
1.3
A
Fines (230):0.14% (SW)
Sample Interval: 0.0'- 2.0'
Fine SAND, trace silt /carbonate, well graded,
loose, subround - subangular, burrows, dark gray
-38.3
2.0
(5Y -4/1), (SW).
Sample #B, Depth = 4.0'
Mean (mm): 0.35, Phi Sorting: 1.42
B
Fines (230):6.45% (SW -SM)
Sample Interval: 2.0'- 4.0'
Carbonate (04): 13.0 %, Organics (04): 1.3%
Silty medium SAND, some carbonate, little
coarse sand clasts, loose, subround, burrows,
@ 2 - 2.17' = carbonate shell (> .1'), very dark
gray (5Y-3/1), (SW -SM).
-42.6
F 6.3
°
Silty fine /medium SAND, trace carbonate,
loose, subround - subangular, burrows„ very
dark greenish gray (5GY -3/1), (SW -SM).
-44.1
7.8
°
Interbedded CLAY and fine SAND (5Y 7/1 -light
-44.61
8.3
gray), trace carbonate, loose,
subround - subangular, burrows, black
5Y -2.5/1 (SC).
Silty medium SAND, trace carbonate, loose,
subround, sand (5Y 7/1 -light gray) infilled
burrows, very dark greenish gray (5GY -3/1),
°
(SW -SM).
-46.1
9.8
Loss of recovery/compaction of sediment..
-46.8
10.5
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 60 of 77
JUN 02 JUN 04
20
-5
ato]

1
KA
M
5
r; A
5
�16
7
11001
�111
ilk
.S
J7
4
Attach D - Report 3
Phase 2
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
August, 2011
H B -11 -09
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
A� H E IAA
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
61 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G E @ G �\
-
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
c
CO
_
»
\
\
2
CO
»
m
/
$
*
4
C
\
e
/
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
k
/
/
/
/
7
2
CO
2
]
g-
)
e
k
J
j
\
z
\
}
\
,
_
d ==
....�
,
a
/CO
\g= G i
c
5
t
)E ^55
:
2
U)
m
= - O,
\jmwa
_..:..:...
.
!
G
]
§
©
:E/00=
CO CO
.:...
)
E
¥2\
eE33=
`
C: x
CO
r
a) CO
`
`
7
)
\ 2
..........
m
_
E
)
_
)
{
��
\
I
m
k
'
)
6
{j
E
GG
o
E
§
]
g
$
�\
\
Wq
m
§
§
416
0
2
E
Cn
_
m
2
E
r
]
%\
.0\
`
CO
:
R
]
/
G
@
E
G
@
@ Cl) 5 2 °
E
CO
\
\
E
Percent
Finer
By Weight
\
a)
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -09 # 0'- 2'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,247,419
Northing (ft):
48,012
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-38.3 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -512
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
155.87
Wash Weight (g):
155.87
Pan Retained (g):
- 155.49
Sieve Loss ( %):
99.88
Fines
-
#20 /o): 0.19
#230 - 0.14
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.71
0.46
0.71
0.46
4
-2.25
4.76
0.10
0.06
0.81
0.52
5
-2.00
4.00
0.25
0.16
1.06
0.68
7
-1.50
2.83
1.22
0.78
2.28
1.46
10
-1.00
2.00
1.86
1.19
4.14
2.65
14
-0.50
1.41
2.96
1.90
7.10
4.55
18
0.00
1.00
3.84
2.46
10.94
7.01
25
0.50
0.71
6.16
3.95
17.10
10.96
35
1.00
0.50
10.45
6.70
27.55
17.66
45
1.50
0.35
17.25
11.07
44.80
28.73
60
2.00
0.25
36.59
23.47
81.39
52.20
80
2.50
0.18
50.57
32.44
131.96
84.64
120
3.00
0.13
17.61
11.30
149.57
95.94
170
3.50
0.09
5.66
3.63
155.23
99.57
200
3.75
0.07
0.37
0.24
155.60
99.81
230
4.00
0.06
0.08
0.05
155.68
99.86
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.96
2.49
2.35
1.95
1.33
0.88
-0.41
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.71
0.31
1.01
-1.48
5.89
63 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G
E @ G �\
-
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
c
CO
_
»
\
\
2
CO
»
m
/
$
*
4
C
\
e
/
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
k
/
/
/
/
7
2
CO
2
]
g-
)
e
k
J
j
/
\
z
}
\
.....
.....
,
_
(3-000
CO
CO
/i \gG
@
5
m
CO
9
kE /f 5
%s
E
_ _
\jmwa
.........
G
e
2Ea00 00
)
]
-
¥2: CO CO
E
eE33=
`
G
C:mrX
2
)
/g/ =2
`
`
7
)
\ 2
............
m
E
)
.
°
9
2
..
j
\
l
m
k
'
)
6
G
a
LL
°
.
o
2
E
/
]
g
m
U)
\
\
Wq
Cl)
416
0
2
E
Cn
_
m
2
E
r
]
%\
\\
`
C)
CO
®
M
/
G
@
E
G
@
@
@ 5 2 °
E
\
\
E
Percent
Finer
By Weight
\
a)
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -09 # 2'- 4'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,247,419
Northing (ft):
48,012
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-40.3 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -311
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
143.09
Wash Weight (g):
134.07
Pan Retained (g):
- 133.63
Sieve Loss ( %):
93.54
Fines
-
#20 /o): 6.79
#230 - 6.45
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.41
0.29
0.41
0.29
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.53
0.37
0.94
0.66
4
-2.25
4.76
0.58
0.41
1.52
1.07
5
-2.00
4.00
0.71
0.50
2.23
1.57
7
-1.50
2.83
2.71
1.89
4.94
3.46
10
-1.00
2.00
4.16
2.91
9.10
6.37
14
-0.50
1.41
5.90
4.12
15.00
10.49
18
0.00
1.00
7.26
5.07
22.26
15.56
25
0.50
0.71
8.71
6.09
30.97
21.65
35
1.00
0.50
11.46
8.01
42.43
29.66
45
1.50
0.35
14.52
10.15
56.95
39.81
60
2.00
0.25
15.36
10.73
72.31
50.54
80
2.50
0.18
19.18
13.40
91.49
63.94
120
3.00
0.13
30.50
21.32
121.99
85.26
170
3.50
0.09
10.41
7.28
132.40
92.54
200
3.75
0.07
0.96
0.67
133.36
93.21
230
4.00
0.06
0.49
0.34
133.85
93.55
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.97
2.76
1.97
0.71
0.04
-1.24
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.5
0.35
1.42
-0.83
3.02
65 of 77

Attach D - Report 3
Borinq Designation HB -11 -10
DRILLING LOG
CONTRACTOR
CLIENT
SHEET 1
Athena Technologies, Inc.
Applied Technology And Management, Inc.
OF 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
Town of Holden Beach
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM : HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
Brunswick County, NC
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983 NAVD 88
2. CORE LOCATION i LOCATION COORDINATES
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
X = 2,249,358 Y = 46,287
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
DISTURBED UNDISTURBED (UD)
Athena Technologies
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
4. NAME OF DRILLER
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
P. McClellan
14. WATER DEPTH 34.6 Ft.
S. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
iSTARTED iCOMPLETED
® VERTICAL iVERTICAL i
Q INCLINED i i
15. DATE BORING i i
08 -29 -11 12:07 08 -29 -11 12:15
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0.0 Ft.
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING -38.20 Ft.
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.0 Ft.
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 10.42 Ft.
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 11.0 Ft.
A. Freeze
O
D!W
0-i
ELEV.
DEPTH
w
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
%
'L
REMARKS
(ft)
(ft)
w
Depths and elevations based on measured values
REC.
O4
-38.2
0.0
_j
Fine SAND, little carbonate, trace silt, well
Sample #A, Depth = 2.5'
graded, very loose, subround - subangular, @
A
Mean (mm): 0.31, Phi Sorting: 0.92
1.5'- burrow, olive gray (5Y -5/2), (SW).
Fines (230): 0.35% (SW)
Sample Interval: 0.0'- 2.5'
-40.7
2.5
Sample #B, Depth = 4.0'
Silty fine SAND, little carbonate, loose
subround - subangular, burrows, very dark gray
Mean (mm): 0.31, Phi Sorting: 1.49
(5Y -3/1), (SW -SM).
B
Fines (230):9.60% (SW -SM)
41.9
3.7
Sample Interval: 2.5'- 4.0'
Carbonate (04): 11.6 %, Organics (04): 2.0%
Fine /coarse carbonate GRAVEL with silty fine
sand matrix, @ 4.08' = carbonate fragment (>
.2'), @ 6.1' = carbonate fragment (> .1'), grades
to 5GY 3/1 -very dark greenish gray) from, very
dark gray (5Y -3/1), (GM).
-44.5
6.3
Silty fine /medium SAND, trace carbonate,
loose, subround - subangular, greenish black
(5GY- 2.5/1), (SM).
-45.7
7.5
Interbedded fine SAND (5Y 8/1- white) and fine
sandy CLAY (5GY 3/1), trace
carbonate /medium sand clasts, loose,
subround - subangular, burrows, very dark
greenish gray (5GY -3/1), (SC).
-48.6
10.4
Loss of recovery/compaction of sediment..
-49.2
11.0
End of Boring
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 66 of 77
JUN 02 JUN 04
20
-5
ato]

0 5 1 10,
Attach D - Report 3
ism
2 7
Phase 2
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
3 8 August, 2011
H B -11 -10
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
4 9
P�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
5 ��
101
67 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G
E @ G �\
-
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
»
\
>
CO-
g
2
CO
CO
\
%
2
§
\
e
/
»
E
/
$
*
4
$
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
k
/
/
7
2
2
g
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
\
\
}
CO
,
d ==
CO
t
/i \gG
c
5
2E ^55
% s
U)
m
=�O,
CO m w a
.. .
..............
..............
............
\
!
G
w
E a) 00 00
\2 \CO ?
e ,
E
eE33=
«. .
r
\
277rx
2g/ =2
`
\ 2
.........
m
_
E
)
_
)
{
��
\
m
k
'
)
6
}/
E
GG
§
]
d
$
�\
410
0
2
E
_
m
2
E
r
]
%\
\\
`
�
e
g
~
�
\
@
G
@
E
G
@
@ Cl)
5 2 °
E
2
&
U)
Percent
Finer
By Weight
)
\
/
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -10 # 0' - 2.5'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,249,358
Northing (ft):
46,287
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-40.7 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -512
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
152.51
Wash Weight (g):
152.51
Pan Retained (g):
- 151.77
Sieve Loss ( %):
99.86
Fines
-
#20 /o): 0.41
#230 - 0.35
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.46
0.30
0.46
0.30
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.00
0.00
0.46
0.30
4
-2.25
4.76
0.01
0.01
0.47
0.31
5
-2.00
4.00
0.06
0.04
0.53
0.35
7
-1.50
2.83
0.46
0.30
0.99
0.65
10
-1.00
2.00
0.94
0.62
1.93
1.27
14
-0.50
1.41
2.70
1.77
4.63
3.04
18
0.00
1.00
5.31
3.48
9.94
6.52
25
0.50
0.71
6.82
4.47
16.76
10.99
35
1.00
0.50
9.60
6.29
26.36
17.28
45
1.50
0.35
15.79
10.35
42.15
27.63
60
2.00
0.25
41.76
27.38
83.91
55.01
80
2.50
0.18
51.12
33.52
135.03
88.53
120
3.00
0.13
12.96
8.50
147.99
97.03
170
3.50
0.09
3.58
2.35
151.57
99.38
200
3.75
0.07
0.32
0.21
151.89
99.59
230
4.00
0.06
0.09
0.06
151.98
99.65
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
2.88
2.43
2.30
1.91
1.37
0.90
-0.22
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.7
0.31
0.92
-1.46
6.33
69 of 77

Attach D - Report 3
66 /£ /O6 lOJ'SSMJ d3O -3 fdJ'SE)M 1NIJ 13W A-nOzl OOOMNOM - A1V SISAL VNV 3A31S
ty6ia/N
A8 aaSaeOO
tuaoaad
O
o
O
N CO
O
ov
O (0
O Oro rn °o
o
0
0
U
N
m
O
C
a
O
C
2
a
00
LO
CO
CO
m
CO
Q
3
N
V
N
N
i
i0
E
H
O
N
V
Z
Z
E
O
N
E
N
p
m
_
X
}
j,
N
T
Z
Ot
C
C
O
O
N
0-
Q
Q
W
Z
2
O
O
o
U
�
N
r O
.........
O
ai r
O
Y
N
L5 -0 00
C CO LO
W
m O
N
— O
-�CD �
N
c
Y
U)
�
O
a) aO
.&E
�-UMM
O
N W
LL
�LLcnr -r-
O -0000
..> ..............
N
m
c: T 00 00
Cr)
C
G
>
CO CO CO
U)
O N
C
N
O O
c�
G
O
�2
� a
L
CO
U
0
0
U
r
N
2)
Q
O
N a
N
QN1 (OD
LL
O O
O
U
U
U
U
vi
a
v
_
0
y
N
W
E
z
=
N N
OC
C
O
W
�'
0
_
O
-
O
N
En
N
>
D-
E
O
N
O
O
m
O
W I-
O
(O
O
LO
O
O
V
O O O O
M N
CO
L
Percent
Finer
By Weight
m
=
a
U
0
66 /£ /O6 lOJ'SSMJ d3O -3 fdJ'SE)M 1NIJ 13W A-nOzl OOOMNOM - A1V SISAL VNV 3A31S

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -10 # 2.5' - 4'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,249,358
Northing (ft):
46,287
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-42.2 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -311
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
129.50
Wash Weight (g):
117.62
Pan Retained (g):
- 116.85
Sieve Loss ( %):
90.66
Fines
-
#20 /o): 9.92
#230 - 9.60
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.43
0.33
0.43
0.33
4
-2.25
4.76
0.57
0.44
1.00
0.77
5
-2.00
4.00
0.59
0.46
1.59
1.23
7
-1.50
2.83
2.81
2.17
4.40
3.40
10
-1.00
2.00
3.02
2.33
7.42
5.73
14
-0.50
1.41
5.10
3.94
12.52
9.67
18
0.00
1.00
7.59
5.86
20.11
15.53
25
0.50
0.71
8.27
6.39
28.38
21.92
35
1.00
0.50
7.11
5.49
35.49
27.41
45
1.50
0.35
6.41
4.95
41.90
32.36
60
2.00
0.25
8.11
6.26
50.01
38.62
80
2.50
0.18
15.44
11.92
65.45
50.54
120
3.00
0.13
32.33
24.97
97.78
75.51
170
3.50
0.09
17.07
13.18
114.85
88.69
200
3.75
0.07
1.80
1.39
116.65
90.08
230
4.00
0.06
0.42
0.32
117.07
90.40
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.32
2.99
2.48
0.78
0.04
-1.16
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.7
0.31
1.49
-0.88
2.72
71 of 77

DRILLING LOG
1. PROJECT
Town of Holden Beach
Brunswick County, NC
2. CORE LOCATION
CONTRACTOR
Athena Technologies, Inc.
LOCATION COORDINATES
X = 2,247,942 Y = 45,315
3. DRILLING AGENCY CONTRACTOR FILE NO.
i
Athena Technologies
4. NAME OF DRILLER
P. McClellan
5. DIRECTION OF BORING i DEG. FROM i BEARING
® VERTICAL i VERTICAL
Q INCLINED
6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN 0,0 Ft,
7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0,0 Ft,
8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING 8.8 Ft.
0
ELEV. DEPTH w CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
(ft) (ft) a Depths and elevations based on measured value
w
-39.1 0.0
Fine SAND, trace carbonate /silt/medium sand
clasts, poorly graded, very loose,
subround - subangular, olive gray (5Y -5/2), (SP).
Silty fine SAND, little carbonate, well graded,
loose, subround - subangular, burrows, very dark
42.6 3.5
gray (5Y-3/1), (SW -SM).
-44.41 5.3
-46.81 7.7
Fine /coarse carbonate GRAVEL with a silty
fine /medium sand matrix, @ 3.83' = large
carbonate fragment (> .2'), very dark gray
(5Y -3/1), (GM).
Silty medium SAND, trace carbonate /silt lenses,
loose, subround - subangular, burrows, dark
greenish gray (5GY -4/1), (SM).
Loss of recovery/compaction of sediment..
End of Boring
Attach D - Report 3
boring ueslgnatlon mb -11-U
CLIENT SHEET 1
Applied Technology And Management, Inc. OF 1 SHEETS
9. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 3.0 In.
10. COORDINATE SYSTEM /DATUM :HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
North Carolina State Plane 32d0 NAD 1983 NAVD 88
11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL Q AUTO HAMMER
Vibracore Q MANUAL HAMMER
DISTURBED i UNDISTURBED (UD)
12. TOTAL SAMPLES
3
13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE SECTIONS
14. WATER DEPTH 36.5 Ft.
STARTED iCOMPLETED
15. DATE BORING ' 08 -29 -11 11:37 08 -29 -11 11:45
16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING -39,10 Ft,
17. TOTAL RECOVERY FOR BORING 7,66 Ft,
18. NAME OF GEOLOGIST
A. Freeze
0-i
s R% Ca REMARKS
My
Sample #A, Depth = 2.5'
A Mean (mm): 0.26, Phi Sorting: 0.78
Fines (230): 0.11 % (SP)
Sample Interval: 0.0'- 2.5'
Sample #B, Depth = 4.0'
Mean (mm): 0.48, Phi Sorting: 1.87
B Fines (230):8.19% (SW -SM)
Sample Interval: 2.5'- 4.0'
Carbonate (0 -4'): 16.7 %, Organics (0 -4'): 1.5%
SAJ FORM 1836 MODIFIED FOR THE FLORIDA DEP 72 of77
JUN 02 JUN 04
M
5
It$]

l
1
2
r
M
5
5
�16
7
11001
Attach D - Report 3
Phase 2
Holden Beach,
North Carolina
August, 2011
H B -11 -12
Scale in Feet
Photo Mosaic Image
9
A� H E IAA
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
M 1
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, South Carolina 29458
www.athenatechnologies.com
(843) 887 -3800
73 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G
E
@
G �\
—
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
»
\
p
R
g
2
CO
CO
r
G
e
/
»
{
/
$
*
4
\
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
k
/
/
f
7
2
2
g—
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
m
£
z
m
a
}
\
,
_
d ==
CO
5
/ i \gG
c
5
2E ^55
% s
U)
m
=�O,
CO m w a
. ................�..............
j
..............
=
=
\
�E/ 00 00
®
,
)
G
c
2
5 =' n CO
e ,
E
m == #
CO CO
............
21I .rX
2
CO
r
�
/g/ =2
{
/
\2
.
m
_
E
)
_
)
{
��
\
tw
/
}
'
!
o
E
°
GG
.
°
2
LL
\
k
d
%
�\
§
416
0
2
E
_
m
2
E
r %\
]
U)
`
U)
\
-
ED
g
~
04
\
@
G
@
E
G
@
@ Cl)
5
2 °
E
�
&
_
U)
/
§
\
Percent
Finer
By Weight
)
\
a)
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
0
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -12 # 0' - 2.5'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,247,942
Northing (ft):
45,315
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-41.6 NAVD 88
USCS:
SP
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -512
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
148.52
Wash Weight (g):
148.52
Pan Retained (g):
- 148.18
Sieve Loss ( %):
99.89
Fines
-
#20 /o): 0.22
#230 - 0.11
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5
-2.50
5.66
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4
-2.25
4.76
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5
-2.00
4.00
0.26
0.18
0.26
0.18
7
-1.50
2.83
0.38
0.26
0.64
0.44
10
-1.00
2.00
0.43
0.29
1.07
0.73
14
-0.50
1.41
0.93
0.63
2.00
1.36
18
0.00
1.00
1.70
1.14
3.70
2.50
25
0.50
0.71
3.63
2.44
7.33
4.94
35
1.00
0.50
6.93
4.67
14.26
9.61
45
1.50
0.35
13.18
8.87
27.44
18.48
60
2.00
0.25
41.80
28.14
69.24
46.62
80
2.50
0.18
47.35
31.88
116.59
78.50
120
3.00
0.13
24.06
16.20
140.65
94.70
170
3.50
0.09
7.01
4.72
147.66
99.42
200
3.75
0.07
0.53
0.36
148.19
99.78
230
4.00
0.06
0.16
0.11
148.35
99.89
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.03
2.67
2.45
2.05
1.62
1.36
0.51
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.96
0.26
0.78
-1.29
6.54
75 of 77

Attach D - mm,a
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G
Iq5lGAA
« __o
IUGDJGd
0
2
5 CO
@
@
G
E
@ G �\
-
0
\
_
§
}
20
w
ƒ
»
\
p
R
g
2
CO
CO
r
G
e
/
»
{
/
$
*
4
\
/
/
)
C)
m
Q
@
`
o
m
f
@
\
k
/
/
f
7
2
2
g
e
0-
k
k]
J)
j
\
\
z
}
\
r
_
Gam=
CO
.
C,
r
a
/i\gG
@
5
m
9
9
kE /f 5
%s
E
2=mwa
�E/
....... ..
G
r
CO CO
E
/
eE33=
`
21I .rX
CO
�
/g/ 'CO =
\2
U)
\ m
E
)
—
°
...
.
9
2
CO
°
I
t w
12
2)
.
.
!
g
e
a
o
G
/{
,
±
°
GG
.
o
2
E
/
]
g
\U)
2
m
)
\
/
Cl)
§
I /
0
2
E
Cn
m
2
E
r
]
%\
\_
\
`
C)
U)
CO
-
~
@
°
�
0
\
E
c
&_
_
@
G
@
E
G
@
@ Cl)
5 2 °
�
/
§
\
Percent
Finer
By Weight
)
\
a)
rme enema« aasam arm m a,mmm««vms ava+G

o=
0
a
w
ry
U
ry
H
w
2
o=
a
D
Z
Attach D - Report 3
Granularmetric Report
Depths and elevations based on measured values
4*
ArHEry�
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Athena Technologies, Inc.
1293 Graham Farm Road
McClellanville, SC 29458
ax (843) 887 -38001
Project Name: Town of Holden Beach
Sample Name: HB -11 -12 # 2.5' - 4'
Analysis Date: 09 -27 -11
Analyzed By: WD
Easting (ft):
2,247,942
Northing (ft):
45,315
Coordinate System:
North Carolina State Plane 3200
Elevation (ft):
-43.1 NAVD 88
USCS:
SW -SM
Munsell:
Dry - 5Y -311
Comments:
Dry Weight (g):
131.22
Wash Weight (g):
120.98
Pan Retained (g):
- 120.32
Sieve Loss ( %):
92.08
Fines
-
#20 /o): 8.43
#230 - 8.19
Organics ( %):
Carbonates ( %):
Shells ( %):
Sieve Number
Sieve Size
(Phi)
Sieve Size
(Millimeters)
Grams
Retained
% Weight
Retained
Cum. Grams
Retained
C. % Weight
Retained
3/4"
-4.25
19.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/8"
-4.00
16.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11/16"
-3.50
11.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5/16"
-3.00
8.00
1.60
1.22
1.60
1.22
3.5
-2.50
5.66
3.34
2.55
4.94
3.77
4
-2.25
4.76
1.50
1.14
6.44
4.91
5
-2.00
4.00
2.64
2.01
9.08
6.92
7
-1.50
2.83
5.91
4.50
14.99
11.42
10
-1.00
2.00
5.72
4.36
20.71
15.78
14
-0.50
1.41
8.60
6.55
29.31
22.33
18
0.00
1.00
8.28
6.31
37.59
28.64
25
0.50
0.71
10.69
8.15
48.28
36.79
35
1.00
0.50
4.52
3.44
52.80
40.23
45
1.50
0.35
6.66
5.08
59.46
45.31
60
2.00
0.25
7.34
5.59
66.80
50.90
80
2.50
0.18
13.80
10.52
80.60
61.42
120
3.00
0.13
23.85
18.18
104.45
79.60
170
3.50
0.09
14.38
10.96
118.83
90.56
200
3.75
0.07
1.32
1.01
120.15
91.57
230
4.00
0.06
0.32
0.24
120.47
91.81
Phi 5
Phi 16
Phi 25
Phi 50
Phi 75
Phi 84
Phi 95
3.20
2.87
1.92
-0.29
-0.98
-2.24
Moment
Mean Phi
Mean mm
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statistics
1.05
0.48
1.87
-0.52
2.04
77 of 77

Attach D - Report 6
USACE BORINGS IN THE PROPOSED BORROW AREA
COLLECTED IN 2003 and 2004

Attach D - Report 6
Hole No. BCB- 03 -V -38
PROJECT HOLE NO.
ENG FORM1836 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. BRUNSWICK CTY BCB- 03 -V -38
MAR 71 BEACHES
DRILLING LOG DIVISION INSTALLATION SHEET 1
SOUTH ATLANTIC WILMINGTON DISTRICT of 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT 10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 4" Dia. Vibracore
BRUNSWICK COUNTY BEACHES 11. DATUM FOR ELEVATION SHOWfTBM or MSU
2. LOCATION (Coordinates or Stotion) MLLW
INC COORD E 2248717 N 46218 NAD83 12. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL
3. DRILLING AGENCY VBRA CORE SNELL
WILMINGTON DISTRICT 13. TOTAL NO. OF OVER- DISTURBED UNDISTURBED
4 and fl /e number) �n on drawing tit le g C B - 0,3_ V - 3 8 BURDEN SAMPLES TAKEN] 0
14. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES N/A
5. NAME OF DRILLER
ROBBIE PAGE CRANE OPERATOR 15. ELEVATION GROUND WATER N/A
6. DIRECTION OF HOLE :STARTED COMPLETED
1s. DATE HOLE :12/29/03 :12/29/03
[� VERTICAL Q INCLINED DEG. FROM VERT.
17. ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE 0.0' MLLW
7. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN N/A (36.2' Water)
18. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING N/A
B. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.01
19. SIGNATURE OF INSPECTOR
9. TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE 45.0' K. BENTON AND M. HALL
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS x CORE BOX OR REMARKS
ELEVATION DEPTH LEGEND RECOV- SAMPLE lDrllling time. water loss. depth of
(Description) N0. weattering, etc, if slgnlficantJ
MLLW feet e ERY r a
0.0 0 0.0' TO 36.2' WATER Time begin vibracoring:
hrs.
Soils described by Larry
Benjamin, Civil Engr. Tech.
36.
-36.2 36.2 OCEAN BOTTOM X36.2' 36. 2'
• SP Gray, coarse, poor I y NOTE TOP OF HOLE is de-
...• graded sand. 1
fined as surface of water
• I and compensation is made
for the tide such that
36. 7' top of Hole is 0.0 EL MLLW.
37. •,�,
� VIBRACORE BORING
. • • 37. 5' 37. 5' From 0.0' to N/A
SM Grayy, f ne, si I ty sand, Ran N/A Rae: 8.8'
with shel I fragrrents. 2
38. � Top of yibracore soil
38.0' sample is logged as be-
ginning at Ocean Bottom,
I When Run is greater than
Recovery, the difference
is depicted as Assumed
Not Recovered.
39.
3
40. 0'
41. � LAB CLASSIFICATION
Jar
41.5' Number Classification
4
42 0'
43.
43. 5'
5
44. 0'
-45.0 45. BOTTOM OF HOLE AT 45.0'
NOTE Terminated
hole at predetermine
depth at 8.81
p: /GE0
TECH /BCB03- 20- 41.dgn 04/08/2004 08:45:17 AM
.
SOILS ARE FIELD VISUALLY
CLASSIFIED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE UNIFIED SOIL
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
TECH /BCB03- 20- 41.dgn 04/08/2004 08:45:17 AM

Attach D - Report 6
WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 36.2 -36.7
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: BCB- 03 -V -38
Sample No.: 1
Description: SAND, poorly - graded, mostly fine to medium - grained quartz, trace
carbonate, trace silt, olive gray (SP)
Tare Weight, (g): 50.43
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 150.59 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 149.26 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
o /o Passing
Visual Shell Approx.
o/o
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
#4
4.750
0.20
99.80
100
0.20
#10
2.000
1.70
98.10
100
1.70
#14
1.400
1.93
96.18
60
1.16
#18
1.000
6.00
90.19
10
0.60
#25
0.710
13.52
76.69
5
0.68
#35
0.500
26.54
50.19
1
0.27
#45
0.355
26.37
23.86
1
0.26
#60
0.250
14.84
9.05
0
0.00
#80
0.180
5.62
3.43
0
0.00
#120
0.125
1.89
1.55
01
0.00
#200
0.075
0.611
0.94
0
0.00
Total Shell Content: 3

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 6 4 11 3 2 1.112 1 3/4 1 . 12 3 , 18 . 3 4 a 8 10 14 14 20 30 40 go 70 too 140 200 0
I
90
80
10
20
70
30
X
60
W
M
Ir
W 50
LL
40
M
W
W
U)
50
0
Z
W
0 40
0:
UJ
IL
60 UZJ
0
0:
30
-
W
IL
TMT
70
20
-
10
80
90
0
H
Tff
1000 600 100 so 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
100
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE I FINE
7_
COARSE MEDIUM 11-
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO,
Gg
Nat w*/6
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
36.2-36.7
SAND, poorly-graded, mostly fine to
medium-grained quartz, trace carbonate,
trace silt, olive gray (SP)
3
Area
Boring No. BCB-03-V-38
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

Attach D - Report 6
rf 14fW.0
WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
`P 3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) • (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 37.5 -38.0
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: BCB- 03 -V -38
Sample No.: 2
Description: SAND, poorly- graded with silt, mostly fine to medium - grained quartz,
few carbonate, few silt, dark greenish gray (SP -SM)
Tare Weight, (g): 49.51
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 142.93 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 136.09 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
o /o Passing
Approx.
Visual Shelf %
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
#4
4.750
0.50
99.46
100
0.50
#10
2.000
3.98
95.20
100
3.98
#14
1.400
6.03
88.75
60
3.62
#18
1.000
12.44
75.43
20
2.49
#25
0.710
16.61
57.651
5
0.83
#35
0.500
13.97
42.70
2
0.28
#45
0.355
9.22
32.83
1
0.09
#60
0.250
5.29
27.17
1
0.05
#80
0.180
4.74
22.09
1
0.05
#120
0.125
8.63
12.86
0
0.00
#200
0.075
5.36
7.12
01
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 9

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
8 4 3 t 1.12 1 314 iQ 318 3 4 s 3 10 14 16 20 30 40 so 70 too 140 200 0
100
90
80
-
- --
-
- --
-- -
- -
- -- -
-
- -
-
- -
- --
-
- -
-
-
-
-
- -
-
-
-
- -
-
-
- - --
- -- -
10
20
-
-
-
-- -
-
—
—.
-
-
--
- - --
—
-
70
30
2
60
}
w
LU
-
-
- --
-
-
-
-
40
}
m
h
-
z 50
LL
-
-
—
-
--
-
- --
-
-
-
--
-
- -
-
-
50 m
a
0
Z
40
t-
w
w
a.
30
-
-
-
--
60
v
m LU
a.
70
-
-
-
-
--
-
--
-
- --
-
-
20
10
80
-
90
0
1000 500 100 5o 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
GRAVEL SAND
COBBLES COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE SILT OR CLAY
100
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO3
G,
Nat w%
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 2
37.5 -38.0
SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine to
medium - grained quartz, few carbonate, few
silt, dark greenish gray (SP -SM)
9
Area
Boring No. BCB- 03 -V -38
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
A 3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
Project:
Project No.:
Boring No.:
Sample No.:
Description:
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Brunswick County Beaches
1753 -01-40
BCB- 03 -V -38
3
Attach D - Report 6
Depth: 39.5 -40.0
Date: 3/2/2004
SAND, silty, mostly fine to coarse - grained quartz, little carbonate,
little silt, dark greenish gray (SM)
Tare Weight, (g):
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g):
Dry Weight After Washing (g):
49.32
141.14 (with tare)
127.21 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
o /o Passing
Visual Shell Approx.
%
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
5.06
94.49
70
3.54
#4
4.750
3.82
90.33
60
2.29
#10
2.000
9.97
79.47
70
6.98
#14
1.400
6.45
72.45
40
2.58
#18
1.000
6.88
64.95
20
1.38
#25
0.710
6.05
58.36
20
1.21
#35
0.500
7.09
50.64
10
0.71
#45
0.355
7.67
42.29
5
0.38
#60
0.250
7.76
33.84
2
0.16
#80
0.180
6.77
26.46
1
0.07
#120
0.125
6.41
19.48
1
0.06
#200
1 0.075
1 3.97
15.16
0
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 15 %

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 6 4 3 2 1 -112 1 314 112 316 3 4 6 6 10 14 16 20 30 40 60 70 100 140 200 Q
90
80
70
-
-
-
-
- -- -
-- -- --
- -
-.
- --
--
- -
10
20
30
F
- -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
--
-
--
-
- -
- --
-- -
-
-
.
--
_ _..
-
--
-
-
--
-
-
-
-
-
--
-
-
-
-
_ .
-
--
- --
--
--
--
- - - --
-. -_._
- - - --
...
-
-
-
--
--
3 60
}
-
-
40 3
m
-
-
--
�
i50
LL
Z
40
- - ..
. -
-
- -
--
-- --
w
50 0
Q
F
-
-
--
-
--
-
- --
-- -
-
-
- -
-...
-
-
-
0
w
o
30
-
-
- -
--
-
-
- -- -
- - --
-
-
-
- - -
-
--
- _.�-
-
-
-
60 V
IY
w
IL
70
-
-
-
-
- - -.
- -
-
-
-
- --
-- —
-- - --
-
-
-
-
--
-
- -- -
-
-
-
- -... -
- -
-
20
10
-
80
-
- -
-
-
-
-
-- --
-
--
—
-- -
-
-
-
--
90
0
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
100
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO,
G.
Nat w° /6
LL
PL
P{
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 3
39.5 -40.0
SAND, silty, mostly fine to coarse - grained
quartz, little carbonate, little silt, dark
greenish gray (SM)
15
Area
Boring No. BCB- 03 -V -38
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

Attach D - Report 6
Hole No. BCB- 03 -V -64
ENG FORM1836 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. PROJECT BRUNSWICK CTY II- �03 -V -64
MAR 71 BEACHES
DRILLING LOG DIVISION INSTALLATION SHEET 1
SOUTH ATLANTIC WILMINGTON DISTRICT of 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT 10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT 4" Dia. Vibracore
BRUNSWICK COUNTY BEACHES 11. DATUM FOR ELEVATION SHOWfTBM orMSU
2. LOCATION (Coordinates or Statlon) MLLW
NC COORD E 2251518 N 50135 NAD83 12. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL
3. DRILLING AGENCY VBRA CORE SNELL
WILMINGTON DISTRICT 13. TOTAL NO. OF OVER- DISTURBED UNDISTURBED
4 and fl /e number) on drawing tit /e ;BCB - O 3 - V - 6 4 BURDEN SAMPLES TAKEN � rj 0
14. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES N/A
5. NAME OF DRILLER
ROBBIE PAGE CRANE OPERATOR 15. ELEVATION GROUND WATER N/A
6. DIRECTION OF HOLE :STARTED COMPLETED
16. DATE HOLE :01/01/04 :01/01/04
VERTICAL ❑INCLINED DEG. FROM VERT.
17. ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE 0.0' MLLW
7. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN N/A (32.5' Water)
18. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING N/A
8. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.01
19. SIGNATURE OF INSPECTOR
9. TOTAL DEPTH of HOLE 42.5' S. SMITH AND M. HALL
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS X CORE BOX OR REMARKS
ELEVATION DEPTH LEGEND RECOV- SAMPLE (Drilling /lme, water loss, depth of
lDescrlptlonJ N0. weathering. a %. If slgnlflcanl)
MLLW feet e ERY P 9
0.0 O 0.0' TO 32.5' WATER Time begin vibracoring:
0855 hrs.
Soils described by Larry
Benjamin, Civil Engr. Tech.
32.
Scale changed @36.01.
NOTE TOP OF HOLE is de-
-32.532.5 OCEAN BOTTOM @32.5' 32 5' fined as surface of water
SM Li ght gra fi me, si I t and compensation is made
sand, w /shel I fragments. � for the tide such that
top of Hole is 0.0 EL MLLW.
33. 33. o'
VIBRACORE BORING
From 0.0' to N/A
Ran N/A Bee: 10.0'
34. Top of yibracore soil
sample is logged as be-
ginning at Ocean Bottom.
34.5' When Run is greater than
Recovery, the difference
2 is depicted as Assumed
Not Recovered.
35.
35. 0'
36.
36.1 ' � LAB CLASSECATON
MH Dark gray el asti c si I t. Jar
Number Classification
36. 6'
38. 38. o'
4
38. 5'
39. 9' 39. 9'
0• SM Dark gray, fine, si I ty 5
sand, w /shel I fragrnts.
40.4' NOTE Terminated
hole at predetermine
depth at 10.01
.
42.
-42.5 42.5 BOTTOM OF
HOLE AT 425'
SOILS ARE FIELD VISUALLY
CLASSIFIED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE UNIFIED SOIL
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC. Attach D - Report 6
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 32.5 -33.0
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: BCB- 03 -V -64
Sample No.: 1
Description: SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine - grained quartz, few silt,
few carbonate, dark greenish gray (SP -SM)
Tare Weight, (g): 49.51
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 139.8 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 132.87 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
o
/0 Passing
Approx.
Visual Shell
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.20
99.78
100
0.20
#4
4.750
1.63
97.97
100
1.63
#10
2.000
1.80
95.98
100
1.80
#14
1.400
0.90
94.98
100
0.90
#18
1.000
1.11
93.75
90
1.00
#25
0.710
1.45
92.15
60
0.87
#35
0.500
1.97
89.97
30
0.59
#45
0.355
2.95
86.70
10
0.30
#60
0.250
8.24
77.57
3
0.25
#80
0.180
18.48
57.10
1
0.18
#120
0.125
33.00
20.56
0
0.00
#200
0.075
11.63
7.68
0
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 6

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 6 4 7 7 1.117 1 714 1/3 L6 7 I 6 6 10 14 16 20 30 40 60 70 100 160 700
0
90
10
80
- - -
- --
- -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
--
-
20
70
--
-
-
-
- -
--
- -
--
— --
-
-
- -
-
-
--
- --
30
f-
c7
—
3 60
-
--
-
-
- - - --
-
-
-
—
-
-
- --
40
r
m
_
W
W 50
- -
- --
-- -
- -
-
w
50
-
LL
Q
f-
Z
-
- --
- --
-
-
-
-
--
- -
-
f-
w40
-
60 U
n-
-
- -- --
-
-
- -
- -- -
-
-
n.
70
20
--
-
- - --
-
-
-- -
80
-
-- --
10
-
0
100
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
GRAVEL
SAND
COBBLES
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO,
G,
Nat w%
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 1
32.5 -33.0
SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine -
grained quartz, few silt, few carbonate, dark
6
greenish gray (SP -SM)
Area
Boring No. BCB- 03 -V -64
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

'44 WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC. Attach D - Report 6
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 34.5 -35.0
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/212004
Boring No.: BCB- 03 -V -64
Sample No.: 2
Description: SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine to medium - grained quartz,
few silt, few carbonate, dark greenish gray (SP -SM)
Tare Weight, (g): 49.51
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 139.8 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 132.87 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
o
/o Passing
Approx.
Visual Shell
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
#4
4.750
0.82
99.09
100
0.82
#10
2.000
3.48
95.24
100
3.48
#14
1.400
2.45
92.52
80
1.96
#18
1.000
3.26
88.91
60
1.96
#25
0.710
4.33
84.12
40
1.73
#35
0.500
4.17
79.50
30
1.25
#45
0.355
3.04
76.13
20
0.61
#60
0.250
3.45
72.31
10
0.35
#80
0.180
10.45
60.74
2
0.21
#120
0.125
33.71
23.40
1
0.34
#200
0.075
11.301
10.891
11
0.11
Total Shell Content: 1 10

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 6 6 1 2 1412 1 ]II 12 its 3 I 6 6 10 14 16 20 30 40 60 70 100 140 200 (]
90
-
10
-
- -
80
--
- - -
-
-
-
-
- -
-
20
70
-
- --
--
-
-
-- - -
-
--
--
--
-
--
-
- - - --
-
--
--
-
-
30
-
r
t9
u1
60
40 3
}
m
W 50
W
1n
9
50 a
L
r-
Z
-- --
-
--
- --
- -...
-
-
-
- - --
-
- -
L) 40
-
-
- --
--
-
- --
-
-
-
-
-
-
- ..
_.._
- _
... -
- -
-..._.
Z
60 W
W
a-
--
-
U
w
- -
--
- - -
-
-- -
-
IL
30
--
-
--
-
-
--
70
—
-
-
-
20
-
- -
-
--
- -
- -
-
- --
80
--
- -
-
-
10
-
-
- -
-
-
-
- --
- -
0
100
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
GRAVEL
SAND
COBBLES
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% COQ
G.
Nat w%
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 2
34.5 -35.0
SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine to
medium - grained quartz, few silt, few
10
carbonate, dark greenish gray (SP -SM)
Area
Boring No. BCB- 03 -V -64
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

Attach D - Report 6
Hole No. BCB- 03 -V -65
ENG FORM1836 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. PROJECT BRUNSWICK CTY BCB- 03 -V -65
MAR 71 BEACHES
DRILLING LOG DIVISION INSTALLATION SHEET 1
SOUTH ATLANTIC WILMINGTON DISTRICT of 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT 10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT ¢" Dia. Vibracore
BRUNSWICK COUNTY BEACHES 11. DATUM FOR ELEVATION SHOWfTBM or MSU
2. LOCATION (Coordinates or Stotion) ML L W
NC COORD E 2249361N 50070 NAD83 12. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL
3. DRILLING AGENCY VBRA CORE SNELL
WILMINGTON DISTRICT 13. TOTAL NO. OF OVER- DISTURBED UNDISTURBED
4. HOLE i /� number) O ( shown on drawing title BCB - O 3 - V - 6 5 BURDEN SAMPLES TAKEN � rj o
5. NAME OF DRILLER 14. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES N/A
ROBBIE PAGE CRANE OPERATOR 15. ELEVATION GROUND WATER N/A
6. DIRECTION OF HOLE :STARTED COMPLETED
16. DATE HOLE : Q1/01/04 01/01/04
[� VERTICAL F-1 INCLINED DEG. FROM VERT.
17. ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE 0.01 MLLW
7. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN N/A (31.7' Water)
18. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING N/A
8. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK o•o'
19. SIGNATURE OF INSPECTOR
9. TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE 41.1' S. SMITH AND M. HALL
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS 7 CORE BOX OR REMARKS
ELEVATION DEPTH LEGEND RECOV- SAMPLE !Drilling t /me, water loss, depth of
(Description! N0. weathering, etc, if significant)
MLLW fevet e ERY f a
0.0 p 0.0' TO 31.7' WATER Time begin vibracoring
0915 hrs.
Soils described by Larry
Benjamin, Civil Engr. Tech.
31.
Scale changed @34. 0' .
NOTE TOP OF HOLE is de-
1 fined as surface of water
OCEAN BOTTOM @31.7' and compensation is made
-31.7 31.7 - - 31 ' 7 for the tide such that
• • - SP Gray, coarse, Pearl y top of Hole is 0.0 EL MLLW.
• •graded sand. 1
32. ,
• 32.2 VIBRACORE BORING
• • • From 0.0' to N/A
Ran N/A R e c: 9.4'
33. 33. o' Top of yibracore soil
trace of shell sample Is logged as be-
'f ragrrents. ginning at Ocean Bottom.
, When Run is greater than
Recovery, the difference
33. 7' 33.7' is depicted as Assumed
SM Gray, f no, si I ty sand, 2 Not Recovered.
wi t she! I fragrrents.
4.
36. 136. o' LAB CLASSIFICATION
3 Jar
36. 5' Number Classification
38. 38. o'
4
38. 5'
NOTE Terminated
hole at predetermine
40. 40. o' depth at 9.41
.
5
40. 5'
- 41.141.1 BOTTOM OF
HOLE AT 41.1'
SOILS ARE FIELD VISUALLY
CLASSIFIED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE UNIFIED SOIL
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) • (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
Attach D - Report 6
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 31.7 -32.2
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: BCB- 03 -V -65
Sample No.: 1
Description: SAND, poorly - graded, mostly fine- grained quartz, few carbonate,
trace silt, dark greenish gray (SP)
i are vveignT., (g): 4y.yJ
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 154.02 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 152.27 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
°
/o Passing
Approx.
Visual Shell
%
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.60
99.42
100
0.60
#4
4.750
0.08
99.35
100
0.08
#10
2.000
2.13
97.30
100
2.13
#14
1.400
1.91
95.47
90
1.72
#18
1.000
3.45
92.15
50
1.73
#25
0.710
5.67
86.70
30
1.70
#35
0.500
6.17
80.78
5
0.31
#45
0.355
8.86
72.26
3
0.27
#60
0.250
17.85
55.12
1
0.18
#80
0.180
36.03
20.50
1
0.36
#120
0.125
14.75
6.33
1
0.15
#200 1
0.075 1
4.801
1.721
11
0.05
Total Shell Content: 1 6

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
1 00 e 4 3 2 1 -112 1 314 W 316 7 t 6 6 10 14 1e 30 30 40 60 70 100 140 300
O
--
90
--
- -- ..
- -
-
-- - -
- -
- -
-
-
-
--
-
-
- -
-
-
-
- -
10
80
-
-
-
-
-
- -- -
-
-
-
- -
--
--
-
-
-
-
- -
20
--
--
--
- -
- -
-
-
- --
- - --
- -
--
-
70
- -
-
-
-
- --
- -
- -
30
C9
3 60
w50
Z
LL
6—
0 40
CL
-
-
-
- - - --
-
- -
--
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
40
r
W
`n
50 Q
O
U
60 w
CL
-
-
-
-
- --
- --
- -
-
—
-
- -
- ..
-
-
-
-
--
—
- --
30
-
—
- --
- -
-
-
- -- --
-
--
-
- -
20
-
-
-
-
80
10
--
-
-
-
0
100
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO,
Gs
Nat w/.
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 1
31.7 -32.2
SAND, poorly - graded, mostly fine - grained
quartz, few carbonate, trace silt, dark
g
greenish gray (SP)
Area
Boring No. BCB- 03 -V -65
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Attach D - Report 6
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 33.7 -34.2
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: BCB- 03 -V -65
Sample No.: 2
Description: SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine - grained quartz, few silt,
dark greenish gray (SP -SM)
Tare Weight, (g): 50.05
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 142.99 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 133.33 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
o /o Passing
Approx.
Visual Shell
%
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
#4
4.750
0.42
99.55
100
0.42
#10
2.000
3.11
96.20
90
2.80
#14
1.400
3.18
92.78
80
2.54
#18
1.000
4.23
88.23
60
2.54
#25
0.710
6.56
81.17
30
1.97
#35
0.500
7.40
73.21
10
0.74
#45
0.355
8.46
64.11
5
0.42
#60
0.250
13.99
49.05
1
0.14
#80
0.180
21.54
25.88
1
0.22
#120
0.125 1
10.81
14.25
1
0.11
#200 1
0.075 1
4.161
9.771
0
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 9 %

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 6 4 3 3 1 -1/3 1 314 112 316 3 4 6 6 f0 14 76 30 70 40 60 70 100 140 300
(]
- -
-- --
-—
90
-
- -
-
-
-
-
-
--
- --
- --
--
10
80
-
--
-
-
-
-
-- -
-
-
-----
-
-
-
-- - --
.
- -
-
-
- --
20
-
-- -
- -
--
-
- -
-
- ._
-
-
—
-
- - --
-
--
- ..
. - - - --
-
-
- -
- -- -
70
-
-
-
- -
30
�
60
�
m
Z50
LL
2
U 40
a
-
-
-
- -
- -
-
--
- --
-
- -
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
- - --
- -
- -
-
- -
--
w
40 3
r
m
50 Z
O
Z
-
-
-
--
-
-
-
—
-
--
-
-
--
- -- --
-
- -
--
--
--
- -- -
- -
--
--
--
- --
- -
-
- ._.
--
30
-
-
-
- - - --
-
-
--
- -
- --
70
--
20
-
- --
80
-
10
--
-
- -
0
100
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
6/6 CO3
G,
Nat w° /6
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 2
33.7 -34.2
SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine-
grained quartz, few silt, dark greenish gray
9
(SP -SM)
Area
Boring No. BCB- 03 -V -65
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

� .A WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) • (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Attach D - Report 6
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 36.0 -36.5
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: BCB- 03 -V -65
Sample No.: 3
Description: SAND, silty, mostly fine to medium- grained quartz, little silt, little
carbonate, dark greenish gray (SM)
Tare Weight, (g): 48.78
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 144.46 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 127.8 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
°
/o Passing
Approx.
Visual Shell
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
#4
4.750
1.56
98.37
100
1.56
#10
2.000
11.57
86.28
80
9.26
#14
1.400
8.64
77.25
50
4.32
#18
1.000
7.88
69.01
20
1.58
#25
0.710
6.21
62.52
10
0.62
#35
0.500
6.25
55.99
5
0.31
#45
0.355
6.02
49.70
5
0.30
#60
0.250
6.86
42.53
2
0.14
#80
0.180
6.97
35.24
1
0.07
#120
0.125
8.87
25.97
1
0.09
#200
0.075
8.241
17.36
1
0.08
Total Shell Content: 1 14

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 f 4 7 2 1.112 1 314 117 018 0 4 6 B 10 14 16 20 00 40 50 70 100 140 300
O
90
-
-
-- -
-
- --
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- --
-
- -
10
- --
80
--
--
- -
-
-
-.
- -
-
-
-
-
- -
- --
-
- -
-
-
-
-
--
- --
20
70
- -
-
-
- - --
- -
-
- - --
-
--
30
-
--
C)
60
r
m
w 50
U.
2
Uj
40
Uj
D
- -
-
-
- -
--
-
- -
-
- --
- --
- -
-- --
-
--
-- -
- -
- -
-
-
- —
I-
w
40 3
r
m
w
0)
50
O
Y
60 w
a.
-
-
- --
-
-
-
- -
--
-
-
-
-
- -
--
-
-
-
--
30
-
- - -
--
-
-
-
--
70
-
--
20
-
-
80
10
-
- -
-
- -
- -
- ... --
0
100
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO,
Gs
Nat w%
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 3
36.0 -36.5
SAND, silty, mostly fine to medium - grained
quartz, little silt, little carbonate, dark
14
greenish gray (SM)
Area
Boring No. BCB- 03 -V -65
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES �d
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
' 3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Attach D - Report 6
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 38.0 -38.5
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: BCB- 03 -V -65
Sample No.: 4
Description: SAND, silty, mostly fine to medium - grained quartz, little silt, few
carbonate, greenish gray (SM)
Tare Weight, (g): 49.57
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 140.93 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 122.57 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
°
/o Passing
Approx.
Visual Shell
%
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
#4
4.750
1.06
98.84
100
1.06
#10
2.000
4.22
94.22
70
2.95
#14
1.400
4.16
89.67
40
1.66
#18
1.000
5.26
83.91
10
0.53
#25
0.710
6.87
76.39
5
0.34
#35
0.500
9.70
65.77
2
0.19
#45
0.355
11.00
53.73
1
0.11
#60
0.250
12.08
40.51
1
0.12
#80
0.180
10.71
28.79
1
0.11
#120
0.125
6.42
21.76
0
0.00
#200
0.075
1.45
20.171
01
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 6

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 s 4 3 2 1.1/2 1 3u 112 Ls 3 t s a 10 14 1s 20 30 40 so 70 100 140 200
0
90
-
-
-
-
-
-
10
-
--
80
--
-
-
- -
-
-
--
- -
-
-
--
--
- -
20
-
70
- -
--
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
- -
- -
-
- -
--
--
30
- - —
- --
-
-
-- -- -
- -
Uj 60
r
Ir
w 50
9
LL
Z
w
L) 40
a
-
..
-
-
--
--
-- -
-
- -
40 3
r
m
w
0
50 Q
Z
Uj
a
-
-
-
--
-
-
-
30
- -
-
20
-
-
-
-
-
-
- -
-
--
- --
- -
- -
-
--
10
0
100
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
%, CO,
Ga
Nat w° /,
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 4
38.0 -38.5
SAND, silly, mostly fine to medium - grained
quartz, little sill, few carbonate, greenish
6
gray (SM)
Area
Boring No. BCB- 03 -V -65
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
- Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Attach D - Report 6
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 40.0 -40.5
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: BCB- 03 -V -65
Sample No.: 5
Description: SAND, clayey, mostly fine to medium - grained quartz, little clay, trace
carbonate, greenish gray (SC)
i are vveignt, (g): 4v.5r
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 155.48 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 137.82 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
o /o Passing
Approx'
Visual Shell
%
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
#4
4.750
0.67
99.37
30
0.20
#10
2.000
4.32
95.29
50
2.16
#14
1.400
7.46
88.24
20
1.49
#18
1.000
12.64
76.31
5
0.63
#25
0.710
12.56
64.45
1
0.13
#35
0.500
11.51
53.58
1
0.12
#45
0.355
11.15
43.06
1
0.11
#60
0.250
11.95
31.77
1
0.12
#80
0.180
9.52
22.78
0
0.00
#120
0.125
5.40
17.68
0
0.00
#200 1
0.075 1
1.191
16.561
01
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 4 %

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 6 4 0 2 1 -112 1 014 112 0/0 0 4 B 6 10 14 16 20 00 40 50 70 100 140 200 0
-- - -
- ...
-
90
-
--
-
-- - -
-
--
-
-
-
-
- --
- -
-
10
-
-
-
-
-
80
-
--
-
-
--
- -
-
-
- -
- --
-
- -
-
20
-
70
- -
-
-
-
-
--
- -
-
- -
-
- -
-
-
-
-
-
- -
- -
-
-
30
-
-
�
w
60
-
-
40 3
r
}
m
w
w 50
Z
-
-
- - -
--
-
--
- -
-
-
U)
50
-
--
—
U.
Q
�
F
Z
Ix 40
60 V
o-
-
- - --
-
LU
-
- --
- -- - -
-
-
--
LU
-
30
- -
- --
-
-
-
-
-
--
-
- -
- -
20
- -
-
- --
-
-
--
-
- -
-
--
-
80
--
-
-
-
- -
10
--
- -
- -
-
-
- - -
-
0
100
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
GRAVEL
SAND
COBBLES
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO,
G,
Nat w%
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 5
40.0 -40.5
SAND, clayey, mostly fine to medium-
grained quartz, little clay, trace carbonate,
4
greenish gray (SC)
Area
Boring No. BCB- 03 -V -65
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

Attach D - Report 6
F Hole No. BCB- 03 -83A
ENG FORM1836 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. PROJECT BRUNSWICK CTY BCBO03 -83A
MAR 71 BEACHES
DRILLING LOG DIVISION INSTALLATION SHEET 1
SOUTH ATLANTIC WILMINGTON DISTRICT of 1 SHEETS
1. PROJECT 10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT ¢" Dia. Vibracore
BRUNSWICK COUNTY BEACHES 11. DATUM FOR ELEVATION SHOWN-8M or M5U
2. LOCATION (Coordinates or Station) MLLW
NC COORD E 2249418 N 48095 NAD83 12. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL
3. DRILLING AGENCY VBRA CORE SNELL
WILMINGTON DISTRICT Z Z 13. TOTAL NO. OF OVER- :DISTURBED :UNDISTURBED
4 and file number) hxvn on drawing t /t /e BCB - O .J - 8 .J A BURDEN SAMPLES TAKEN 3 Q
5. NAME OF DRILLER 14. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES N/A
ROBBIE PAGE CRANE OPERATOR 15. ELEVATION GROUND WATER N/A
6. DIRECTION OF HOLE :STARTED :COMPLETED
16. DATE HOLE : Q1/02/04 01/02/04
[� VERTICAL O INCLINED DEG. FROM VERT.
17. ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE 0.0' MLLW
7. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN N/A (32.8' Water)
16. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING N/A
B. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK 0.01
19. SIGNATURE OF INSPECTOR
9. TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE 37.0' S. SMITH AND M. HALL
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS Y CORE BOX OR REMARKS
ELEVATION DEPTH LEGEND RECOV- SAMPLE (Or!lling time, water /ass, depth of
MLLW f ete t (�OaiA` /onJ E R Y NO. weotl»rtng, etc. if significant)
0.0 Q 0.0' TO 32.8' WATER Time begin vibracoring:
0845 hrs.
Soils described by Larry
Benjamin, Civil Engr. Tech.
32.
NOTE TOP OF HOLE is de-
1 fined as surface of water
and compensation is made
OCEAN BOTTOM @32.8' 32. 8' for the tide such that
-32.8 32.8 SP Tan, coarse, poorly top of Hole is 0.0 EL MLLW.
33. graded sand, wi th trace shel I I
•'•' fragrrents. �
VIBRACORE BORING
• . • . 33. 3' From 0.0' to N/A
• Ran N/A Rae: 4.2'
34. • • • • Top of yibracore soil
• sample Is logged as be-
ginning at Ocean Bottom.
• When Run is greater than
• Recovery, the difference
• 34.8 34. 8' is depicted as Assumed
SM Gray, fi ne, sl I ty sand, Not Recovered.
35. wi th shel I fragrrents. 2
35. 3'
36. � LAB CLASSIFICATION
Jar
i Number Classification
36. 5'
3
-37.0 37.
BOTTOM OF HOLE AT 37.0'
NOTE Terminated
hole at predetermine
depth at 4.21
/GEOTECH /BCB03- 63- 92.dgn 04/08/2004 08:59:40 AM
.
SOILS ARE FIELD VISUALLY
CLASSIFIED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE UNIFIED SOIL
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
/GEOTECH /BCB03- 63- 92.dgn 04/08/2004 08:59:40 AM

Attach D - Report 6
WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
'sY
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 32.8 -33.3
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: BCB- 03 -V -83A
Sample No.: 1
Description: SAND, poorly - graded, mostly fine to medium - grained quartz, trace
carbonate, trace silt, gray (SP)
Tare Weight, (g): 49.89
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 148.17 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 146.17 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
o
�0 Passing
Approx.
Visual Shell
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.46
99.53
100
0.46
#4
4.750
0.00
99.53
0
0.00
#10
2.000
0.69
98.83
100
0.69
#14
1.400
0.91
97.90
80
0.73
#18
1.000
1.84
96.03
30
0.55
#25
0.710
2.82
93.16
10
0.28
#35
0.500
4.29
88.80
5
0.21
#45
0.355
6.80
81.88
2
0.14
#60
0.250
17.82
63.75
1
0.18
#80
0.180
40.12
22.92
1
0.40
#120
0.125
15.96
6.68
0
0.00
#200
1 0.075
1 4.321
2.291
0
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 2 %

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 G 4 3 2 1_112 1 3N 113 318 3 4 6 8 10 14 16 20 30 40 60 70 100 140 200
0
90
10
80
70
20
30
LU 60
ul
50
40
LU
(0
LL.
50
0
U40
LU
IL
30
— -----
-
60 LU
LU
IL
70
20
80
10
90
0
M.
1
—A,
-1
1000 500 100 so 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
100
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM 111E
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO3
G,
Nat w%
LL
PL
Pl-
Project Brunswick County Beaches
32.8-33.3
—
SAND, poorly-graded, mostly fine to
medium-grained quartz, trace carbonate,
trace silt, gray (SP)
2
Area
Boring No. BCB-03-V-83A
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
I
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

Attach D - Report 6
WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 34.8 -35.3
Project No.: 1753 -01 -40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: BCB- 03 -V -83A
Sample No.: 2
Description: SAND, clayey, mostly fine to coarse - grained quartz, little clay, few
carbonate, greenish gray (SC)
Tare Weight, (g): 49.90
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 152.8 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 133.95 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
o /o Passing
Visual Shell Approx.
%
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
2.61
97.46
100
2.61
#4
4.750
4.49
93.10
70
3.14
#10
2.000
8.70
84.65
70
6.09
#14
1.400
5.80
79.01
30
1.74
#18
1.000
5.78
73.39
20
1.16
#25
0.710
6.68
66.90
5
0.33
#35
0.500
7.54
59.57
2
0.15
#45
0.355
8.39
51.42
1
0.08
#60
0.250
10.36
41.35
1
0.10
#80
0.180
10.80
30.86
1
0.11
#120
0.125
9.36
21.76
0
0.00
#200
1 0.075
3.34
18.511
0
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 12

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 e 4 3 2 1 -112 1 314 112 L3 3 I fi 8 10 1413 20 30 40 60 70 100 140 200 O
90
--
-
-
-- -
-
-
- --
- --
-
10
- -
-
-
-
80
-
20
70
--
30
-
--
—
2
60
r
- -
- -
—
- -
-
�
LLJ
40 3
r
m
-
-
--
- --
-
�
w
z 50
LL
—
50 a
O
H
Z
LU
0 40
w
n
—
U
F
Z
60 LU
0:
-
w
IL
30
--
70
20
—
-
-
- -
-
--
- - --
-
-
--
—
-
80
10
-
—
90
0
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
100
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO,
Gs
Nat w%
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 2
34.8 -35.3
SAND, clayey, mostly fine to coarse - grained
quartz, little clay, few carbonate, greenish
gray (SC)
12
Area
Boring No. BCB- 03 -V -83A
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

` WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Attach D - Report 6
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 30.8 -31.3
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: CBA -16
Sample No.: 1
Description: SAND, poorly - graded, mostly fine - grained quartz, trace carbonate,
trace silt, olive gray (SP)
49.92
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 156.67 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 155.11 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
o /o Passing
Approx.
Visual Shell
%
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
#4
4.750
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
#10
2.000
0.60
99.44
100
0.60
#14
1.400
0.83
98.66
100
0.83
#18
1.000
1.55
97.21
75
1.16
#25
0.710
2.94
94.45
30
0.88
#35
0.500
3.77
90.92
15
0.57
#45
0.355
7.18
84.20
3
0.22
#60
0.250
19.49
65.94
1
0.19
#80
0.180
48.66
20.36
1
0.49
#120
0.125
15.35
5.98
0
0.00
#200
1 0.075
1 4.68
1.59
0
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 3

Attnnh n - Rannrt F
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 6 6 3 2 1 -112 1 316 112 318 3 6 6 8 10 1418 20 30 60 60 70 100 160 200 p
90
ti
10
80
-_ _
-
20
-
-
-
-
- - - - --
-
-
70
-
--
-
--
--
-
30
--
--
-
-
- - - --
-
- --
- - --
--
I-
2
�
a60
3
3
- -
- -
- - - --
--
-
--
-
- - --
-
-
- - --
--
—
—
--
qp
>
�
m
�
50
w
z
-
- --
-
-
—
-
50
LL
O
Z
LLI
0 40
H
w
-
60
w
0.
-
-
-
-
w
IL
30
70
20
-
80
10
-
90
0
~
100
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
GRAVEL
SAND
COBBLES
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO3
Gs
Nat w%
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 1
30.8 -31.3
SAND, poorly- graded, mostly fine- grained
quartz, trace carbonate, trace silt, olive gray
3
(SP)
Area
Boring No. CBA -16
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
t (904) 997 -1400 (Tel) • (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Attach D - Report 6
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 34.3 -34.8
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: CBA -16
Sample No.: 2
Description: SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine to medium - grained quartz,
few carbonate, few silt, dark gray (SP -SM)
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 149.15 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 139.10 1 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
o /o Passing
Approx.
Visual Shell
%
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
1.40
98.58
100
1.40
#4
4.750
1.10
97.47
100
1.10
#10
2.000
3.39
94.04
80
2.71
#14
1.400
3.51
90.48
70
2.46
#18
1.000
6.50
83.91
40
2.60
#25
0.710
10.04
73.74
35
3.51
#35
0.500
9.44
64.19
15
1.42
#45
0.355
9.37
54.70
5
0.47
#60
0.250
12.68
41.87
3
0.38
#80
0.180
17.73
23.92
1
0.18
#120
0.125
9.09
14.72
0
0.00
#200
0.075
1 3.23
11.45
0
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 12

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 i 4 7 2 1.112 1 L4 12 716 7 I B 8 10 14 16 20 70 40 60 70 100 140 200 0
90
-
10
-
-
-
- -
-
--
- --
-
--
-
-
- -
80
20
70
30
-
-
-
it
f-
x
so
�?
3
-
--
--
40 }
M
M
50
- -
-
W
Z
LL
-
-
-
-
50 a
Q
Z
40
—
0
W
IL
-
-
-
-
-
60 V
W
w
30
- -
..-
- -
- --
-
IL
70
--
- -
--
-
--
-
-
20
-
- -
80
10
-
—
-
-
90
0
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
100
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO,
G.
Nat w" /,
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 2
34.3 -34.8
SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine to
medium - grained quartz, few carbonate, few
silt, dark gray (SP -SM)
12
Area
Boring No. CBA -16
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Attach D - Report 6
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 37.0 -37.5
Project No.: 1753 -01 -40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: CBA -16
Sample No.: 3
Description: SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine to medium - grained quartz,
little carbonate, few silt, dark gray (SP -SM)
50.23
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 147.41 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 137.31 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
e)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
o Passing
/o
Visual Sh ell Approx.
ell
%
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
1.57
98.38
0
0.00
#4
4.750
4.21
94.05
90
3.79
#10
2.000
11.48
82.24
80
9.18
#14
1.400
9.52
72.44
60
5.71
#18
1.000
8.46
63.74
35
2.96
#25
0.710
6.84
56.70
30
2.05
#35
0.500
6.79
49.71
25
1.70
#45
0.355
7.44
42.06
15
1.12
#60
0.250
8.78
33.02
5
0.44
#80
0.180
8.69
24.08
1
0.09
#120
0.125
8.00
15.85
1
0.08
#200
0.075
4.89
10.81
0
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 20

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 6 4 6 2 1 -1/2 1 L4 112 716 0 4 6 6 10 1416 20 70 40 60 70 100 140 200 0
90
80
- --
-
10
-
-
-
-
--
-
--
-
-
—
-
20
30
70
H
2
(7
60
�
�
--
- -
-
-
-
40 �
m
m
0:
w
-
�
w
z 50
L
- -
-
-
-
--
-
—
--
- --
-
-
--
—
50 Q
Q
W
~
0 40
w
a
—
60 v
w
a
30
-
-
-
--
-
-
-
70
20
-
80
10
90
0
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
100
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO3
Gs
Nat w%
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 3
37.0 -37.5
SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine to
medium - grained quartz, little carbonate, few
silt, dark gray (SP -SM)
20
Area
Boring No. CBA -16
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Attach D - Report 6
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 40.0 -40.5
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: CBA -16
Sample No.: 4
Description: SAND, silty, mostly fine to medium - grained quartz, little silt, few
carbonate, dark gray (SM)
50.06
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 146.42 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 130.16 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
° /° Passing
Visual Shell Approx.
%
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
#4
4.750
1.68
98.26
100
1.68
#10
2.000
6.01
92.02
70
4.21
#14
1.400
5.89
85.91
40
2.36
#18
1.000
7.57
78.05
25
1.89
#25
0.710
8.79
68.93
20
1.76
#35
0.500
10.64
57.89
5
0.53
#45
0.355
10.90
46.58
3
0.33
#60
0.250
10.09
36.10
1
0.10
#80
0.180
9.81
25.92
0
0.00
#120
0.125
6.67
19.00
0
0.00
#200
0.075
1.341
17.611
01
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 10

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
6 4 3 2 1.112 1 314 112 316 3 4 6 6 10 1416 20 30 40 60 70 100 140 200 Q
100
90
IT
_
--
__
_
__-
10
80
70
-
—
20
30
—
- --
-
-
r
(7
60
-
- -
-
40
m
00
50
w
Z
LL
-
-
-
-
-
50 Q
0
2
40
F
w
a
60 v
30
w
a
20
10
-
80
-
-
90
0
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
100
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
6/6 CO3
Gs
Nat w0 /6
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 4
40.0 -40.5
SAND, silty, mostly fine to medium - grained
quartz, little silt, few carbonate, dark gray
(SM)
10
Area
Boring No. CBA -16
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
-_° 3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
" Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Attach D - Report 6
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 31.7 -32.2
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: CBA -21
Sample No.: 1
Description: SAND, poorly - graded, mostly fine to medium - grained quartz, few
carbonate, trace silt, olive gray (SP)
50.29
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 157.22 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 156.17 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
° /o Passing
Approx.
Visual Shell
%
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.75
99.30
80
0.60
#4
4.750
1.38
98.01
80
1.10
#10
2.000
2.98
95.22
100
2.98
#14
1.400
3.10
92.32
80
2.48
#18
1.000
6.69
86.07
30
2.01
#25
0.710
13.48
73.46
5
0.67
#35
0.500
19.67
55.06
1
0.20
#45
0.355
21.17
35.27
1
0.21
#60
0.250
20.11
16.46
0
0.00
#80
0.180
10.99
6.18
0
0.00
#120
0.125
4.02
2.42
0
0.00
#200
0.075
1 0.991
1.501
0
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 7

Attach D - Report 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
6 4 3 2 7.112 . 1 3 - 14 112 310 3 4 6 6 10 14 16 20 30 40 60 70 100 140 200 0
100
90
ti
-I
J,
10
80
h
20
30
70
(ju
Uj
40
50
LL
50 (0)
0
Z
0
Z
40
60 W
30
70
20
80
10
90
L-L
0
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
100
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE I FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO3
Gs
Nat w016
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 1
31.7-32.2
SAND, poorly-graded, mostly fine to
medium-grained quartz, few carbonate,
trace silt, olive gray (SP)
7
Area
Boring No. CBA-21
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC. Attach D - Report 6
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
` - Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 37.0 -37.5
Project No.: 1753 -01-40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: CBA -21
Sample No.: 3
Description: SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine to medium - grained quartz,
little carbonate, few silt, olive gray (SP -SM)
49.79
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 146.45 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 135.84 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
° /o Passing
Approx.
Visual Shell
%
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
1.79
98.15
100
1.79
#4
4.750
7.08
90.82
100
7.08
#10
2.000
18.82
71.35
90
16.94
#14
1.400
7.48
63.61
60
4.49
#18
1.000
4.93
58.51
20
0.99
#25
0.710
4.35
54.01
5
0.22
#35
0.500
5.57
48.25
2
0.11
#45
0.355
5.67
42.39
1
0.06
#60
0.250
5.60
36.59
1
0.06
#80
0.180
5.65
30.75
1
0.06
#120
0.125
8.71
21.74
0
0.00
#200
0.075
12.67
8.63
0
0.00
'Total Shell Content: 1 23

Attnnh r1 - Rannrt R
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 6 4 3 2 1 -1R 1 314 1R 018 3 I 0 8 10 1416 20 30 40 60 70 100 140 200 0
90
-
10
80
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
20
70
2
L7
60
-
-
-
-
-
--
- - -
--
--
30
H
w
-
_ _._..__
. —.-
- --
- -- --
- --
-
-
-
--
- --
-- --
3
�
--
--
40 3
m
�
50
w
z
LL
-
50
2
40
H
w
IL
- --
- --
-
--
-
-
60 W
30
IL
-
-
--
- --
-
-
70
20
80
10
-
- -
-
--
-
-
-
90
0
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
100
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO3
G.
Nat w%
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 3
37.0 -37.5
SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine to
medium - grained quartz, little carbonate, few
silt, olive gray (SP -SM)
23
Area
Boring No. CBA -21
Date 312/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
-' Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) • (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Attach D - Report 6
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 32.5 -33.0
Project No.: 1753 -01 -40 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: CBA -23
Sample No.: 1
Description: SAND, poorly - graded, mostly fine- grained quartz, trace silt, trace
carbonate, olive gray (SP)
49.24
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 153.30 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 147.98 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
o /o Passing
Approx.
Visual Shell
%
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
#4
4.750
0.13
99.88
100
0.13
#10
2.000
0.74
99.16
100
0.74
#14
1.400
0.76
98.43
100
0.76
#18
1.000
1.05
97.42
90
0.95
#25
0.710
1.59
95.90
70
1.11
#35
0.500
2.03
93.95
40
0.81
#45
0.355
3.15
90.92
20
0.63
#60
0.250
6.87
84.32
2
0.14
#80
0.180
20.64
64.48
1
0.21
#120
1 0.125
1 50.97
15.50
0
0.00
#200
1 0.075
1 11.29
4.651
01
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 4

Attnnh f1 - Rannrt R
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
100 6 4 3 2 1.112 1 314 112 318 3 4 6 8 10 U 16 20 30 40 60 70 100 140 200 0
90
10
80
-
20
70
-
30
F
=
O
60
O
w
3
-
--
-
- --
-
-
--
-
-
40
M
m
50
w
z
U.
-
50 Q
O
Z
U 40
F
w
IL
-
-
B0 V
Ix
30
-
—
w
CL
70
20
-
-- -
--
-
-
-
--
-
- - - - --
- -
-
-
—
- --
— -
-
-
80
10
90
0
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
100
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO3
Gs
Nat w° /6
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 1
32.5 -33.0
SAND, poorly - graded, mostly fine- grained
quartz, trace silt, trace carbonate, olive gray
(SP)
4
Area
Boring No. CBA -23
Date 3/2/2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

14 WOLF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
t
3047 -4 St. Johns Bluff Road S.
- Jacksonville, Florida 32246
(904) 997 -1400 (Tel) - (904) 997 -9150 (Fax)
VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
GRAIN SIZE AND VISUAL SHELL CONTENT
Attach D - Report 6
Project: Brunswick County Beaches Depth: 35.5 -36.0
Project No.: 1753 -0140 Date: 3/2/2004
Boring No.: CBA -23
Sample No.: 2
Description: SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine to medium - grained quartz,
few silt, few carbonate, olive gray (SP -SM)
50.23
Dry Wt. Before Washing (g): 147.40 (with tare)
Dry Weight After Washing (g): 138.43 (with tare)
Sieve Size
(Name)
Sieve Size
(mm)
Weight
Retained (g)
o
/o Passing
Approx.
Visual Shell
Approx. Visual
Shell Wt. (g)
3/4"
19.000
0.00
100.00
0
0.00
3/8"
9.500
0.59
99.39
100
0.59
#4
4.750
1.35
98.00
100
1.35
#10
2.000
4.97
92.89
90
4.47
#14
1.400
2.45
90.37
60
1.47
#18
1.000
3.60
86.66
20
0.72
#25
0.710
5.65
80.85
5
0.28
#35
0.500
6.59
74.07
2
0.13
#45
0.355
5.05
68.87
2
0.10
#60
0.250
4.25
64.50
1
0.04
#80
0.180
5.74
58.59
1
0.06
#120
0.125
1 30.91
26.78
1
0.31
#200
t 0.075
1 17.38
8.89
0
0.00
Total Shell Content: 1 7

Attach D - ReDort 6
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
8 4 3 1 1 -1a 1 714 112 316 3 4 6 6 10 14 16 30 30 40 60 70 100 140 300 0
100
90
--
--
-
—
-
-
-
-
10
80
20
30
-
70
—
-
-
-
- --
f-
x
c�
}
-
—
—
-
O
3
m
w
w
z 50
IL
--
-
50 a
O
F-
0 40
W
a
-
-
-
- --
U
60 w
W
w
—
--
--
-
a
30
70
20
-
80
10
90
0
1000 500 100 50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001
100
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE
COARSE MEDIUM FINE
Sample No.
Elev. Or Depth
Classification
% CO3
G.
Nat w%
LL
PL
PI
Project Brunswick County Beaches
• 2
35.5 -36.0
SAND, poorly - graded with silt, mostly fine to
medium - grained quartz, few silt, few
carbonate, olive gray (SP -SM)
7
Area
Boring No. CBA -23
4A
Date 3!2!2004
GRADATION CURVES
ENG FORM 2087
MAY 63

ATTACHMENT E
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
INFORMATION

Attachment E
Adjacent Property Owner (APO) Information
Adjacent property owners for the proposed nourishment are:
East of the project fill template:
PHYSICAL - STREET-
PARCEL -ID
TAX -NAME
MAILING- ADDRESS-LN2
MAILING -CITY
MAILING -
MAILING -ZIP
NUMBER
PARCEL -ID
TAX -NAME
MAILING - ADDRESS -LN2
MAILING -CITY
STATE
MAILING -ZIP
100 Dunescape
Drive
232MJD01
BREECE FREDERICK B ET MARION
100 DUNESCAPE DRIVE
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
Phone: Buck Breece — 910 - 842 -6854
West of the project fill template:
PHYSICAL - STREET-
NUMBER
PARCEL -ID
TAX -NAME
MAILING- ADDRESS-LN2
MAILING -CITY
MAILING -
STATE
MAILING -ZIP
183 OBW
24666042
CINO PAUL M ETJULIE P
2322 IRIS COURT
JAMISON
PA
18929
Phone: Paul Cino — 215 - 343 -3905
Complete permit application packages have been sent by Certified Letter to the above adjacent
property owners.
A complete list of oceanfront property owners along the proposed project fill template can be
found on the following pages. Note that the Town of Holden Beach has permitted beach
nourishment efforts in 2001 and 2005 where permanent permission from oceanfront
homeowners (i.e. perpetual easements) were sought from Stations -35 +00 (272 OBE) to
-320 +00 (1025 OBW). Over the last decade, the Town has placed material above MHW along
the shorefront that is proposed to be nourished for this project. Perpetual easement information
is on file at the Town of Holden Beach and due to its size, is not included in this permit
application.
E -1

Table E -1: Oceanfront Property Owner Information and Ad)acent Property Owner (APO) Information
Attachment E
STREE
NUMBER
PARCEL -ID
IF
TAX -NAME
I
MAILING - ADDRESS -LN2
MAILING -CITY
MAILING-
STATE
MAILING -
ZIP
Eastern
APO
297 OBE
232MJ001
BREECE FREDERICK B ET MARION
100 DUNESCAPE DR
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
1
293 OBE
232MI017
FERRARA ALAN A. & KATHLEEN M JORDAN
PO BOX 570
MEALLY
KY
41234
2
291 OBE
232MI016
CLAYTON WARREN B ETUX MARIA D
8811 SIDE SADDLE RD.
SPRINGFIELD
VA
22152
3
289 OBE
232MI015
WOODS IRVIN M & NANCY WOODS TRUSTEE
PO BOX 79
HUME
VA
22639
4
287 OBE
232MI01201
AC INVESTMENT CO INC
2790 MOHICAN DR
SUMTER
SC
29150
5
285 OBE
232MI012
MAS PROPERTIES LLC
131 OCEAN BOULEVARD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
6
283 OBE
232MI010
CARLSON EDWIN AJR ETALS
17018TURKEY POINT ST
SAN ANTONIO
TX
78232
7
281 OBE
232MI008
HOLDEN JOHN M & DAVID L
111 DUNESCAPE DR
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
8
279 OBE
232MI006
HOLDEN JOHN M & DAVID L
111 DUNESCAPE DR
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
9
277 OBE
232MI004
MOHN CHARLES E & SUSAN M
4063 EAST MIDDLETOWN RD
NEW MIDDLETON
OH
44442
10
275 OBE
232MI002
ROSE WAYNE P ETUX DONNA T
1542 JIMMIE KERR RD
HAW RIVER
NC
27258
11
271 OBE
232MH015
BBC REAL ESTATE LLC
414 SHOEMAKER DR.
CARMEL
IN
46032
12
269 OBE
232MH013
SLAGLE BEVERLY B ETVIR ROBERT
5950 SENTINAL DR
RALEIGH
NC
27609
13
267 OBE
232MH0ll
KONIGBACHER PETER L ETUX LAURA E
267 OCEAN BOULEVARD EAST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
14
265 OBE
232MH009
REYNOLDS ERICKS ETUX JACQUELINE H
2499 REGENCY LAKES DR
MARIETTA
GA
30062
15
263 OBE
232MH007
HOLDEN JOHN M & DAVID L
111 DUNESCAPE DR
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
16
261 OBE
232MH005
HOLDEN JOHN M & DAVID L
111 DUNESCAPE DR
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
17
259 OBE
232MH00301
WOODS IRVIN M & NANCY WOODS TRUSTEE
PO BOX 79
HUME
VA
22639
18
257 OBE
232MH00302
CAPE FEAR CHEMICALS INC
PO BOX 695
ELIZABETHTOWN
NC
28337
19
255 OBE
232MH00101
HOLDEN JOHN ALAN
128 OCEAN BOULEVARD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
20
253 OBE
232MH001
HOLDEN JOHN ALAN
128 OCEAN BOULEVARD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
21
238 OBE
232MN002
JOHNSTON MARJORIE H & SARAH HUDSON
3509 HASTINGS DR
RICHMOND
VA
23235
22
236 OBE
232MN003
AUSTIN JAMES R ET PAGE N
1251 YORKDALE DR
ROCK HILL
SC
29730
23234
OBE
232MN00301
ROSSE WENDELL F ET SIMMONE V
4605 TIMBERLY DR
DURHAM
NC
27707
24
232 OBE
232MN004
HEWETT LISA ETALS C/O SCOTT DUNCAN
1109 SOUTH PARK DR
REIDSVILLE
NC
27320
25
230 OBE
232MN005
WILLARD TERRY ET DIANA
230 OCEAN BOULEVARD EAST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
26
228 OBE
232MN006
COLN BARRY KEITH ET REBECCA F
105 COLTS FOOT CT
LEXINGTON
SC
29072
27
226 OBE
232MN007
BURNS FRED & SYLVIA BURNS TRUSTEE
1669 NEW RIVER INLET RD
NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH
NC
28460
28
222 OBE
232MN008
THE KINSEY FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
4056 SPRING ISLAND
OKATIE
SC
29909
29
220 OBE
232MN00901
TOWN OF HOLDEN BEACH
110 ROTHSCHILD STREET
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
30218
OBE
232MN00903
1GODBEYJAMES IE TUX WENDYM
1161 MAGENTA COURT
LELAND
NC
28451
31216
OBE
232MN009
RICE CHRISTOPHER C ETALS
2519 N ROBERTS AVE
LUMBERTON
NC
28358
32
214 OBE
232MN00904
WHITE DAWN
724 WHITE RD
BISHOPVILLE
SC
29010
33212
OBE
232MN00902
GRIFFIN JOHN J
619 B SUNRISE HIGHWAY WEST
BABYLON
NY
11704
34
210 OBE
232MN010
KISTLER HERMAN
2754 EAGLE RIDGE RD
MARIETTA
GA
30062
35206
OBE
232MN011
LYNCH L C JR ETUX ANNETTE
134 PLANTATION DRIVE
MOORESVILLE
NC
28117
36
204 OBE
232MN012
HUCKS RONNIE
5891 OLD RANDLEMAN RD
GREENSBORO
NC
27406
37
202 OBE
232MN01301
BONNIE &DAVID COOPER
1939 ISLAND FORD RD
MOORESBORO
NC
28114
38
200 OBE
232MN013
DAVEY ANDREW M E TUX KATHERINE R
1317 NORTH DECATUR RD NE
ATLANTA
GA
30306
39
198 OBE
232MN014
BURROW SHERRY SINK
13 FISHER FERRY ST
THOMASVILLE
NC
27360
40
196 OBE
232MN015
BOYD R E & JAMES L BOYD
PO BOX 458
HOLLY HILL
SC
29059
41
194 OBE
232MN016
FULFORD ELWOOD
2280 SHELL POINT RD SW
SHALLOTTE
NC
28459
42
190 OBE
232MN017
ROBERTS PEGIE H
3801 LARKSTON DRIVE
CHARLOTTE
NC
28226
43
188 OBE
232MN018
TEKSERV INC
223 DU BARTON DRIVE
SPARTANBURG
SC
29307
44
186 OBE
232MN019
BRITT ROBERT C ET NANCY
223 DU BARTON DRIVE
SPARTANBURG
SC
29302
45
184 OBE
232MN020
ITHE BANK OF HAMPTON ROADS
112 CORPORATE DRIVE
ELIZABETH CITY
NC
27909
46
182 OBE
232MN021
RAGLANDTHOMAS EDWARD
108 OCEAN BLVD EAST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28470
47
180 OBE
232MN022
SCHAIDER ELISABETH A ETVIR KENNETH
3248 SIDS MILL ROAD
FAYETTEVILLE
NC
28312
481152B
OBE
232NJ00301
WERLE RALPH ATRUSTEE
3040 SOUTH ROAD
CINCINNATI
OH
45233
49148
OBE
232NJ004
RIAZ AND JULIE BHAMANI
7408 STONEHAVEN DR
WAXHAW
NC
28173
50
150 OBE
232NJ00401
WOODCOCK RICHARD L ET JUDITH A
3897 TIMBERSTREAM LN
SOUTHPORT
NC
28461
51146
OBE
232NJ005
MOVER F THOMAS ET LISA A
7011 HERNDON RD
DURHAM
NC
27713
52
144 OBE
232NJ006
GOODMAN JOHN ET JANE
8310 LILAC LN
ALEXANDRIA
VA
22308
53
142 OBE
232NJ007
ITEKSERV INC
223 DUNBARTON DRIVE
SPARTANBURG
SC
29307
54
140 OBE
232NJ008
TEKSERV INC
223 DUNBARTON DRIVE
SPARTANBURG
SC
29307
551138B
OBE
232NJ00801
NEWLAND MICHAEL E ET JEAN
294 LOCKWOOD LANE
SUPPLY
NC
28462
56
138 OBE
232NJ00802
TEKSERV INC
223 DUNBARTON DRIVE
SPARTANBURG
SC
29307
57136
OBE
232NJ009
HOZEMPA GARY ETUX DIANE
1 EAST BELMONT AVENU E
DALLAS
PA
18612
58
134 OBE
232NJ010
BRITT- JACKSON HOLDINGS LLC
3951 N MITCHELL FORD RD
CLARKTON
NC
28433
59
132 OBE
232NJ0ll
AMATRIAIN JAMES F ET KATHLEEN
PO BOX 1968
MONROE
GA
30655
60
130 OBE
232NK001
IATKINS GAY M TRUSTEE
129 OCEAN BLVD EAST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
61
128 OBE
232NK002
LAWRENCE JOHN CHARLES ETALS
413 W. 23RD ST
LUMBERTON
NC
28358
62
126 OBE
232NK003
MANGUM HEIRS LLC
5515 LAMBSHIRE DRIVE
RALEIGH
NC
27612
63124
OBE
232NK004
SMITH WILLIAM AUSTIN JRTRUSTEE
6512 SAN DALE DRIVE
COLUMBIA
SC
29206
64
122 OBE
232NK005
MAJOR CHARLES K & MORTON KURTIS W
PO BOX 9351
CHARLOTTE
NC
28299
65
232NK00501
MAJOR CHARLES K & MORTON KURTIS W
PO BOX 9351
CHARLOTTE
NC
28299
66
120 OBE
232NK006
BREEZY SHORES INVESTMENT LLC
120 W CHURCH STREET
ROANOKE
VA
24011
Attachment E

67
118.5 OBE
232NK007
ROBINSON KATHERINE ETVIR
711 DOVER ROAD
GREENSBORO
NC
27408
68
118 OBE
232NK008
ROBISON GEORGE D III ET MARGARET
711 DOVER ROAD
GREENSBORO
NC
27408
69
116 OBE
232NK00801
ROBISON GEORGE D III ET MARGARET
711 DOVER ROAD
GREENSBORO
NC
27408
70
114 OBE
232NK009
TOWN OF HOLDEN BEACH
110 ROTHSCHILD STREET
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
71
112 OBE
232NK00901
BEAVER DONALD C
3763 GOLF DR NE
CONOVER
NC
28613
72
232NK00902
TOWN OF HOLDEN BEACH
110 ROTHSCHILD STREET
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
73
110 OBE
232NK011
BEAVER DONALD ET VICKIE
3763 GOLF DR NE
CONOVER
NC
28613
74
108.5 OBE
232NK01101
THOMAS EDWARD RAGLAND III
108 OCEAN BLVD EAST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
75
108 OBE
232NK012
THOMAS EDWARD RAGLAND III
108 OCEAN BLVD EAST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
76
104C108 OBE
232NK021
DOBBS ROBERT J ETUX MARY P
400 FALLEN LEAF LANE
ROSEWELL
GA
30075
77
104207 OBE
232NK022
MARINO PETER ETALS
2105 WHIRLABOUT WAY
RALEIGH
NC
27613
78104106
OBE
232NK023
LAYTON TIMOTHY ETJACQUELINE
117 CALLIS CIRCLE
WILMORE
KY
40390
79
104C205 OBE
232NK024
BULLARD ARCHIE M ETALS
2614 FORDHAM DRIVE
FAYETTEVILLE
NC
28304
80
104 OBW
232NK025
HEACOX DANIEL E
125 MORRISON COVE RD
MOORESVILLE
NC
28117
81
104203 OBE
232NK026
HULL CHARLOTTE A
218 HILLCREST DRIVE
HIGH POINT
NC
27262
82104102
OBE
232NK027
KING RICHARD S ETUX TRACY R
1662 CHINQUAPIN GROVE RD
BLUFF CITY
TN
37618
83
104 OBE
232NK028
SMITH SAMMIE J & BLAIR R
157 WESTGATE ST
REDWOOD
CA
94062
84
OCEAN
232NK015
MAS PROPERTIES LLC
131 OCEAN BOULEVARD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
85
103 OBW
232NK016
SHAW ROBERT
PO BOX 8101
GREENSBORO
NC
27419
86
105 OBW
232NK01602
DAWKINS CONCRETE PRODUCTS INC
PO BOX 1096
HARTSVILLE
SC
29550
87
105 OBW
232NK01603
DAWKINS CONCRETE PRODUCTS INC
PO BOX 1096
HARTSVILLE
SC
29550
88
107 OBW
232NK017
CONCORD HOLDINGS LLC
3042 UNDERGROUND BRANCH
HARTSVILLE
SC
29550
89
109 OBW
232NK018
SIX AT 109 LLC
976 MLKJR BLVD STE 200
CHAPEL HILL
NC
27514
90
111 OBW
232NK019
TOWN OF HOLDEN BEACH
110 ROTHSCHILD STREET
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
91
113 OBW
232NK01901
SMITH WILLIAM L ET ELIZABETH ANN
PO BOX 749
SUPPLY
NC
28462
92
OCEAN
232NK020
ELLIOTT FRANK B & CONSTANCE TRUSTEE
3311 CURTIS ST
SAN DIEGO
CA
92106
93
232NL001
FIRST BANK
341 NORTH MAIN STREET
TROY
NC
27371
94
121 OBW
232NL002
ICOX INVESTMENTS INC
123 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
95
123 OBW
232NL004
COX INVESTMENTS INC
123 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
96127OBW
232NL005
PROPERTIES LLCTAYLOR- WOMBLE
P.O. BOX 261
LILLINGTON
NC
27546
97
125 OBW
232NL00501
COX INVESTMENTS INC
123 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
98
OCEAN
232NL006
MAS PROPERTIES LLC
131 OCEAN BOULEVARD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
99
OCEAN
232NL00601
COASTAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
131 OCEAN BOULEVARD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
100
133 OBW
232NL00701
MAS PROPERTIES LLC
131 OCEAN BOULEVARD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
101
137 OBW
232NL008
HAZEL MONROE
187 TRACE LANE
COMMERCE
GA
30530
102
139 OBW
232NL009
MISCHLER FREDERICK C ET MAUREEN M
712 KYLE LANE
AMBLER
PA
19002
103
143 OBW
232NL010
MURRAY CECILY PARRISH
1105 SILAS RIDGE CT
WINSTON SALEM
NC
27106
104
145 OBW
232NL011
KEECH DAVID ERIC ETUX KIMBERLY K
585 TRINITY RD
YORK
PA
17404
105
147 OBW
232NL01102
BAHLARUN K ET RAYETTA L
17519 JETTON ROAD
CORNELIUS
NC
28031
106
151 OBW
232OH002
ANDERSON JOHN A & J ANDERSON TRUST
5 BELL LANE PO BOX 712
MOODY
ME
4054
107
153 OBW
232OH003
CORBETT BERNARD A III
140 OAK HILL DRIVE
MOORE
SC
29369
108
OCEAN
232OH004
MILLER KENT JR& PAUL SOFHAUSER
631 HILLCREST BLVD
PHILLIPSBURG
NJ
8865
109
157 OBW
232OH005
AMSBARY HARRY L MD & KLEIN DAVID L
10600 MCCORT RD
ADAMSVILLE
OH
43802
110159OBW
232OH006
OVERCASH JANE BIGGERS TRUSTEE
1705MATTHEWS -MINT HILL
MATTHEWS
NC
28105
111161OBW
232OH007
SIMMONS ERNEST G ETU
PO BOX 595
FUQUAYVARINA
NC
27526
112
163 OBW
232OH009
MCCRANE PETER AJR ET JOANNE C
1819 BOBOLINK LANE
CHARLOTTE
NC
28226
113
167 OBW
232OH010
BROTHERS PROPERTIES LLC
167 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
114
169 OBW
232OH0ll
ARMSTRONG JAMES ET DEBORAH
12751 ASHLEIGH CT
FAIRFAX
VA
22030
115
171 OBW
232OH012
ORVETS DANIEL F ETUX MARCIA K
7061 SCRIBNER WAY
DUBLIN
OH
43017
116173OBW
232OH013
CAIN PAUL AETANNE
1401 BARNSIDE LN
APEX
NC
27502
117
173 OBW
232OH014
ROUTH PROPERTIES LLC
PO BOX 13545
GREENSBORO
NC
27415
118
177 OBW
232OH015
ALFRED LLC
3240 GREYLEAD DR
WILMINGTON
NC
28409
119
175 OBW
232OH01501
REGAN JOSEPH M ETUX SALLY W
1732 WEST CAROLINA AVE
HARTSVILLE
SC
29550
120
181 OBW
232OH016
YATES ROBERT G & CARL LOYE ETUXS
P O BOX 37
BELEWS CREEK
NC
27009
121
179 OBW
232OH01601
HICKS NADINE DABNEY
6320 OLD KENNEDY FORD RD
MARSHVILLE
NC
28103
122
185 OBW
232OH017
GREGSON JAMES D JR & HILDA P
P O BOX 695
LIBERTY
NC
27298
123
187 OBW
232OH018
MAS PROPERTIES LLC
131 OCEAN BOULEVARD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
124
189 OBW
232OH019
MCFAYDEN JAMES RJR
12995 N US 220 HWY
JELLERBE
I NC
1 28338
125
191 OBW
232OH020
TONKING HENRY B HENRY & MARY
1191 OCEAN BLVD. W.
IHOLDEN BEACH
NC
1 28462
126
OCEAN
232OH021
ITHOMPSON R B ET VIRGINIA B
13613 LUBBOCK DR
IRALEIGH
NC
1 27612
127
195 OBW
232OH022
IMILLS BRIAN SR & CRAIG &HOLLOWELL D
1690 DURHAM RD
1WRIGHTSTOWN
I PA
1 18940
Attachment E

128
199 OBW
232OH023
DUST DONALD W ETUX CHRISTIE A
26 EMILIE DRIVE
CENTER MORICHES
NY
11934
129
197 OBW
232OH02302
GRIGG KATHRYN R
508 PINE FOREST DRIVE
SILER CITY
NC
27344
130
205 OBW
232OH024
ARTHUR DUDLEY MAXWELL FAMILY LP THE
PO BOX 405
HOPE MILLS
NC
28348
131
207 OBW
232OH025
FARRELL MICHAEL & MARGARET T DEVANE
251 SOWERS MILL DAM RD
RINER
VA
24149
132
209 OBW
232OH026
NEELEY STEVEN W ETUX VICTORIA B
113 WOODLAWN DRIVE
BEAVER
PA
15009
133
211 OBW
232OH027
HOLBROOK DORSAL R ET ALICE B
211 OCEAN BLVD. WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
134
213 OBW
232OH028
YELEY CHRISTOPHER B ETUX KRISTEN M
PO BOX 118
PENDLETON
IN
46064
135
215 OBW
232OH029
JC VENTURE STRATEGIES LLC
4211 FORT AVE
LYNCHBURG
VA
24502
136
219 OBW
232OH030
SABANEGH AMY W & ETVIR EDMUND S JR
33000 CREEKSIDE DRIVE
PEPPER PIKE
OH
44124
137
221 OBW
232OH031
POLLICK DAVID M ET CHRYSANN
171 COVENTRY RD
DALLASTOWN
PA
17313
138
OCEAN
232OH032
223 OCEAN BOULEVARD LLC
511 HILLANDALE ROAD
SENECA
SC
29672
139
225A OBW
232OH033
COX CHRISTOPHER ETUX KRIS A
531 OAKLAWN AVE
WINSTON SALEM
NC
27104
140
225B OBW
232OH03301
COX CHRISTOPHER ETUX KRIS A
531 OAKLAWN AVE
WINSTON SALEM
NC
27104
141
227A OBW
232OH03402
DEG REEN HYATT PETER ETUX CHARLOTTE
821 WATERFRONT DRIVE
LANCASTER
PA
17602
142
227B OBW
232OH03403
PALMERJOHN
2546 MARBLEHEAD DRIVE
SAVASOTA
FL
34231
143229OBW
232OH035
JAMES AND PATRICIA SALEVAN
107 KNIGHTSBRIDGE RD
CARY
NC
27513
144
231 OBW
232OH036
SEA CASTLES INC
128 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
145
235 OBW
247BA001
VONROSENBERG SARAH ETVIR S SMOOTE
3171 COUNTY RD 309
BRAZORIA
TX
77422
146
239 OBW
247BA002
SMOOTE STANLEY ET SARAH VONROSENBER
3171 COUNTRY RD 309
BRAZORIA
TX
77422
147
241 OBW
247BA003
BESSLE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
2713 TITLEIST DRIVE
SALEM
VA
24153
148
243 OBW
247BA004
BESSLE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
2713 TITLEIST DRIVE
SALEM
VA
24153
149
245 OBW
247BA005
BLANCHARD HAROLD C
257 N POWELL BLVD
WHITEVILLE
NC
28472
150
247 OBW
247BA006
HARLEY BENJAMIN ROBERT ET DONNA
224 N RIVER WALK BLVD
SIMPSONVILLE
SC
29681
151
249 OBW
247BA007
MARINO MICHAEL ET MARY
406 PINECREST DRIVE
MYRTLE BEACH
SC
29572
152
251 OBW
247BA008
MISCHLER MAUREEN M
712 KYLE LANE
LOWER GWYNEDD
PA
19002
153253OBW
247BA009
EDWARDS GROVER JR & MARY R SCHENK
2736 WISTERIA ST
SUPPLY
NC
28462
154255OBW
247BA00901
JEDWARDS GROVERJR & MARY RSCHENK
2736 WISTERIA ST
SUPPLY
NC
28462
155
257A OBW
247BA010
MOUNTFORD WILLIAM J JR ET SARA
6608 VARDON COURT
FUQUARY VARINA
NC
27526
156
257B OBW
247BA01001
EANES GORDON LJR ET MEG L BLANTON
1286 COBBLEMILL WAY NW
KENNESAW
GA
30152
1571259A
OBW
247BA011
BRYAN RICHARD H
13120 FIVE STAFF LANE
RIXEYVILLE
VA
22737
158
259B OBW
247BA01101
BRYAN RICHARD H
13120 FIVE STAFF LANE
RIXEYVILLE
VA
22737
159
261 OBW
247BA012
THOMAS SUE P
229 OAK STREET
LILLINGTON
NC
27546
160263OBW
247BA014
ALFORD MURRAY M JR
PO BOX 3229
SHALLOTTE
NC
28459
161
265 OBW
247BA015
IHOLLIS OLIN W JR ETUX PATRICIA
121 MILES ROAD
COLUMBIA
SC
29223
162
267 OBW
247BA016
SHOCKLEY RANDOLPH A
145 DEARING STREET
ATHENS
GA
30605
163
269 OBW
247BA017
EANES GORDON LJR ET MEG L BLANTON
1286 COBBLEMILL WAY NW
KENNESAW
GA
30152
164
273 OBW
247BA01701
PROPERTIES OF HB LLC
PO BOX 36158
FAYETTEVILLE
NC
28303
165
271 OBW
247BA01702
KATZ ROBERT ETUX ANNETTE N
7413 PULASKI
BALTIMORE
MD
21237
166
275 OBW
247BA018
CREDLE RESORT PROPERTIES LLC
204 EAST MARKHAM AVE
DURHAM
NC
27701
167
277 OBW
247BA019
MURFIELD LLC
1406 COMMERCE PLACE
MYRTLE BEACH
SC
29577
168279OBW
247BA020
IMCMILLAN NEILLKIRBYJR &ETALS
462 S WOODBERRY AVE
DANVILLE
VA
24540
169281OBW
247BA021
MCMILLAN NEILL KIRBY JR & ETALS
462 S WOODBERRY AVE
DANVILLE
VA
24540
170
283 OBW
247BA022
MCMILLAN RHODAH
511 E JONES ST
RALEIGH
NC
27601
171285OBW
247BA023
MCMILLAN NEILL KIRBYJR & ETALS
462 S WOODBERRY AVE
DANVILLE
VA
24540
172287OBW
247BA024
MCMILLAN NEILL KIRBY JR & ETALS
462 S WOODBERRY AVE
DANVILLE
VA
24540
173
289 OBW
247BA025
MASSEY OWEN JOHN & ETALS
5416 SOFTIND WAY
AGOURA HILLS
CA
91301
174291OBW
247BA026
MCMILLAN JOHN TAYLOR
511EJONES
RALEIGH
NC
27601
175293OBW
247BA027
MCMILLAN JOHN TAYLOR
511EJONES
RALEIGH
NC
27601
176
295 OBW
247BA02701
TOMPKINS DENNIS W ET PAULA A
1217 HADLEY PARK LN
MATTHEWS
NC
28104
177
297 OBW
247AB001
WHISNANT MIRIAM S ET L RODNEY
P O BOX 156
CORNELIUS
NC
28031
178299OBW
247AB002
WRIGHTENBERRYJO ETUX SYBILLE
502 TRU ITT DRIVE
ELON
NC
27244
179
301 OBW
247AB003
MYERS THOMAS M ET VICKI Y
10201 RATTERSLY CT
CHARLOTTE
NC
28277
180
303 OBW
247AB004
POLLITT FAMILY LLC
407 N. BLOODWORTH ST
RALEIGH
NC
27604
181
305 OBW
247AB005
HALL PATRICIA MC B
3511 BEECHWOOD ST
HOPE MILLS
NC
28348
182
307 OBW
247AB006
HOLDEN TRADING COMPANY
128 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
183
311 OBE
247AB007
AMOS MELVIN H
311 OCEAN BLVD W
HOLDEN BCH
NC
28462
184
313 OBW
247AB008
AMOS MELVIN H
311 OCEAN BLVD W
HOLDEN BCH
NC
28462
185
315 OBW
247AB009
BASSETT FRANKLYN B ET CAROLYN
8309 BRIAR CREEK DR
ANNANDALE
VA
22003
186
317 OBW
247AB00901
WATSON JIMMY J ET ELIZABETH
78 ROCKY COVE ROAD
LEXINTON
SC
29072
187
319 OBW
247AB010
HARTNETT EDWARD J
PO BOX 3023
SHALLOTTE
NC
28459
188
321AB
247AB0ll
SBA INVESTMENTS LLC
524 BROADWAY
MYRTLE BEACH
SC
29577
189323OBW
247AB012
HEDGECOE DAVID J ETUX CLAIRE C
121 GREAT OAKS
FAYETTEVILLE
NC
28303
190
325 OBW
247AB01202
SMYRL OSCAR J ET BETTY S
37 COLONIAL LAKE DR
CAMDEN
SC
29020
191
327 OBW
247AB013
WEINSTEIN MAXJ
PO BOX 53709
FAYETTEVILLE
NC
28305
192
329A OBW
247AB014
BLUE DEVIL ENTERPRISES
8127 WINCHCOMBE DRIVE
DUBLIN
OH
43016
193
329 OBW
247AB01402
VONSPRECKEN MELBA B
7257 PINEVILLE ROAD SUITE 2100
CHARLOTTE
NC
28226
194
331 OBW
247AB015
PHILLIPS ROGER N & ETALS
102 LAKE PINE ROAD
MOORESVILLE
NC
28115
Attachment E

195
333 OBW
247AB01502
NANCE THOMAS A ET WANDA
PO BOX 87
CERRO GORDO
NC
28430
196
335 OBW
247AB016
MARLEY WILLIAM G ET FRANCES
6405 WINTHROP DR
RALEIGH
NC
27612
197
337 OBW
247AB017
BRINCEFIELD ANDREW G
8904 MAGNOLIA HEIGHTS CT
CHARLOTTE
NC
28270
198
339 OBW
247AB01701
MARSHALL PATRICIA KAY
8305 DOVE HOLLOW PLACE
GLEN ALLEN
VA
23060
199
341 OBW
247AB018
WRIGHT MARIETTA
PO BOX 989
GREENSOBRO
NC
27402
200
343 OBW
247AB01802
LAVENDER PEGGY JANE
4516 EAGLE ROCK RD
GREENSBORO
NC
27410
201
345 obw
247AB019
DOBSON RICHARD LEE ETALS
4662 CHANNING PARKWAY
ROCK HILL
SC
29732
202
347 OBW
247AB020
BRANGLE STEPHEN M ET ROSEMARIE V
5908 OXFORD GREEN DRIVE
APEX
NC
27539
203
349 OBW
247AB021
ASHORE THING LLC
1114 LARCHMONT COURT
LELAND
NC
28451
204
351 OBW
247AB022
TICE LLOYD MORRIS ETUX HARRIET
2401 LOCKWOOD DR
SANFORD
NC
27330
205355OBW
247AB023
FERDON JANE THURLOW
6109 LOST VALLEY ROAD
RALEIGH
NC
27612
206357OBW
247AB025
GURLEYJILLTHURLOW
6042 INLAND GREENS DR
WILMINGTON
NC
28405
207
359 OBW
247AB026
JENKINS DAVID B ET SUZANNE R
8506 HAMMOCK DUNES DR
WILMINGTON
NC
28411
208
361 OBW
247AB02601
LUCYSITYN PAU LJ ET PATRICIA W
1405 SOUTH DESOTA AVE
TAMPA
FL
33606
209363OBW
247AB02602
MCMI LLAN FRANCES R
462 SOUTH WOODBURY AVE
DANVILLE
VA
24541
210
365 OBW
247AA001
MYERS RANDALL E ETUX DEBORAH
108 SHORE LANE
CADILLAC
MI
49601
211
367 OBW
247AA002
WEBB MELVAT
4243 LUMSDEN LANE
HIGH POINT
NC
27265
212
369 OBW
247AA003
JIMMY & MELANIE KEEFE
370 ECHO LANE
FAYETTEVILLE
NC
28303
213
373 OBW
247AA004
MOORE INVESTMENTS OF ALAMANCE LLC
325 SUPERIOR ST
SOUTH HAVEY
MI
49090
214
375B OBW
247AA005
DANNY AND KELLY GU RILEY
1007 KAREN WOODS RD
CHAPEL HILL
NC
27516
215
375A OBW
247AA00501
PATRICIA FOX
1004 PANTHER HILL LANE
RALEIGH
NC
27603
216377OBW
247AA006
IMONTGOMERY JOHN AJR &ETALS
113 WINDING RIVER DR
ANDERSON
SC
29625
217
379 OBW
247AA007
SMOLEN PETER N ETUX JEAN C
2904 SPANN STREET
COLUMBIA
SC
29204
218
383 OBW
247AA008
JERRY LAND SHARON L HESTER LLC
1020 KENT MEWS COURT
WINSTON SALEM
NC
27104
219
385 OBW
247AA009
NESTER JERRY L ETUX SHARON L
1020 KENT MEWS COURT
WINSTON SALEM
NC
27104
220
389 OBW
247AA010
WHEELOCK DAVID ET & DOUGLAS H ET
575 CALDWELL
LISLE
NY
13797
221
391 OBW
247AA011
TROLLINGER H R ETAL
911 AMITY RO
ASHEBORO
NC
27203
222
393OBW
247AA012
MAS PROPERTIES LLC
EHILLRD
131 OCEAN BOWEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
223
395 OBW
247AA013
PEAKE MARK J & WALTER H
2306 ATHERHO
LYNCHBURG
VA
24501
224397OBW
247AA014
JUNE TRAFREGER
PO BOX 133
PITTSBORO
NC
27312
2251399
OBW
247AA015
GI LEAD CORP
PO BOX 98
MTGILEAD
NC
27306
226403OBW
247AA016
GILEAD CORPORATION
PO BOX 98
MTGILEAD
NC
27306
227
405 OBW
247AA017
BOWERS KATHRYN BLALOCK
1101 N ELM ST #802
GREENSBORO
NC
27401
228
407 OBW
247AA018
POWELL RONALD L ETALS
148 LONGWOOD WEST DRIVE
CARY
NC
27518
229
409 OBW
247AA019
JULERY MICHELLE R ETVIR MICHAELT
4290 CASTLE BANK LANE
FRISCO
TX
75034
230
411 OBW
247AA020
ERIC GROSS
208 WINDERMERE CT
MCMURRAY
PA
15317
231
413 OBW
247AA021
B & H DEVELOPMENT INC
114 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
232
415 OBW
247AA022
BRITT JANET DTRUSTEE
186 SOUTHPORT SUPPLY RD
SUPPLY
NC
28462
233
417 OBW
247AA023
DAVIS RANDALL K
1711 CHESTNUT GLEN WAY
HIGH POINT
NC
27260
234419OBW
247AA024
ZIGLERJANETS ETALS
PO BOX 68275
NASHVILLE
TN
37206
235421OBW
247AA025
HARRISON WILLIAM GLENN JR ETUX
1880 BROO KWOO DAVE #205
BURLINGTON
NC
27215
236
423 OBW
247AA026
PETERSON -SURI MARY E
1111 EAST MASSACHUSETTS A
SOUTHERN PINES
NC
28387
237
427A OBW
247AA02701
GREENE C DAVID ET RACHEL H
PO BOX 125
BLOWING ROCK
NC
28605
238
427B OBW
247AA02702
LITTLE DANIEL LJR ET MARY
528 MAHALEY AVE
SALISBURY
NC
28144
239
427C OBW
247AA02703
ADKINS EARLENE T ETVIR NEALG
1508 MAIN STREET
BARBOURSVILLE
WV
25504
240427DOBW
247AA02704
LEWIS BARBARA POKLIS
1TURNBERRYCT
LUTHERVILLE
MD
21093
241
429 OBW
247AA02705
WRIGHT HT ETCAROLYN RGREENE
3514 LANGDALE DRIVE
HIGH POINT
NC
27265
242
429B OBW
247AA02706
HOOVER DENNIS HILEMAN ET ETTAJEAN
2358 CANTERWOOD
HIGHLAND
MI
48357
243429COBW
247AA02707
DOUCETTHEODORE
2419 SUNFISH ST
SWSUPPLY
NC
28462
244
429D OBW
247AA02708
ACKER TERRY ET BARBARA
216 W WEST STREET
SOUTHPORT
NC
28461
245
431 OBW
247AA029
TOMA SAAD ET ANGELA
9800 NAJ MAST
RALEIGH
NC
27613
246431OBW
247AA02901
HINNANT JANE C
180 BARNACLE CIRCLE
LEXINGTON
SC
29072
247
431C OBW
247AA02902
RUTH DORSETT
269 RIVERBEND DRIVE
ADVANCE
NC
27006
2481431D
OBW
247AA02903
JAN J JACKSON
1706 ROSEDALE AVE
DURHAM
NC
27707
249
433 OBW
247AA03001
VALKANOFF DENNIS ETUX MARYELLEN A
169 42ND AVE DR NW
HICKORY
NC
28601
250
433B OBW
247AA03002
DONOVAN JOHN C ET SUSAN S
87 SPRING MIST CT
BOLIVIA
NC
28422
251
433C OBW
247AA03003
BROWN MARY C
PO BOX 28
COUNCIL
NC
28434
252
433D OBW
247AA03004
MARSHALL WILLIAM R ETUX MARTHA A
2021 DOWNING STREET
GREENSBORO
NC
27410
253
435B OBW
247AA031
HOUSER GAYLE
7711 TROTTER ROAD
CHARLOTTE
NC
28216
254
435A OBW
247AA03101
JESSEE JANICE SHARPE
147 YACHT WATCH DRIVE
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
2551435C
OBW
247AA03102
OCEANS 11 LLC
227 REIDTOWN RD
FREMONT
NC
27830
256
435D OBW
247AA03103
BANNERMAN CHARLES W ETUX EILEEN
10003 EDWARDS PLACE
CHARLOTTE
NC
28227
257
437 OBW
247AA032
HOLDEN BEACH DEV INC
441 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
258
441 OBW
246DB001
HOLDEN BEACH FISHING PIER INC &GRILL
441 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
259
441 OBW
246DB002
HOLDEN BEACH FISHING PIER INC &GRILL
441 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
260
441 OBE
246DB003
HOLDEN BEACH FISHING PIER INC &GRILL
441 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
261
441 OBW
246DB004
HOLDEN BEACH FISHING PIER INC &GRILL
441 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
Attachment E

262
441 OBW
246DB005
HOLDEN BEACH FISHING PIER INC &GRILL
441 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
263
441 OBW
246DB006
GAINEY RHONDA R (LT)
441 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
264
441 OBW
246DB007
HOLDEN BEACH FISHING PIER INC &GRILL
441 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
265
467 OBW
246DB00801
ANDERSON EDWARD J ET DEBORAH F
217 KING GEORGE LOOP
CARY
NC
27511
266
469 OBW
246DB00802
ANDERSON EDWARD ET DEBORAH
217 KING GEORGE LOOP
CARY
NC
27511
267
471 OBW
246DB00803
EASTERN CAROLINA'S CONST & DEV CORP
131 OCEAN BOULEVARD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
268
473 OBW
246DB0ll
HOLDEN JOHN A & ROBERT BABINGTON ET
128 OCEAN BLVD W
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
269
475 OBW
246DB012
HOLDEN JOHN A & ROBERT BABINGTON ET
128 OCEAN BLVD W
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
270
477 OBW
246DB013
HOLDEN JOHN A & ROBERT BABINGTON ET
128 OCEAN BLVD W
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
271
479 OBW
246DB014
KHAN MUSHTAO
143 TARPON DR
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
272
481 OBW
246DB015
PATE HOLDINGS LLC
11813 NORWOOD ROAD
RALEIGH
NC
27613
273483OBW
246DB016
SCHLIEMAN PAMELA SUE TRUSTEE
4882 COPPERSTONE DR
AMES
IA
50010
274
485 OBW
246DB017
PRICE NANCY C
1214 ROSA DRIVE
MONROE
NC
28110
275
487 OBW
246DB018
ITRI BEACH REALTY INC
114 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
276
491 OBW
246DB019
AMMONS GENE S & DELORES T
PO BOX 64166
FAYETTEVILLE
NC
28306
277
491 OBW
246DB020
AMMONS GENE S & DELORES T
PO BOX 64166
FAYETTEVILLE
NC
28306
278
493 OBW
246DB021
POWELL BOBBY L ET MARGIE L
3863 MOCKINGBIRD LANE
ROCK HILL
SC
29730
279
495 OBW
246DB022
DOERRER STEVEN K ET ANN S
203 HEATHRIDGE LANE
CARY
NC
27513
280
497 OBW
246DB023
CHESTER F. KEMPINSKI
6695 MANCEHSTER FARMS RD
FAIRVIEW
PA
16415
281
499 OBW
246DB024
IWILLIAM EBERWEIN
245 GREENTREE RD
TURNERSVILLE
NJ
8012
282
501 OBW
246DB025
KIERNAN MICHAEL FRANCIS ETALS
901 KINSDALE DR
RALEIGH
NC
27615
283
503 OBW
246DB026
SHORE ENOUGH LLC
1114 LARCHMONT COURT
LELAND
NC
28451
284505OBW
246DB027
FALEWEE DOMINIQUE A KATHRYN I
8820 OXFORDSHIRE COURT
HUNTERSVILLE
NC
28078
285
507 OBW
246DB028
MCCORMICK DONALD M ET GAY M
886 MOYERS RD
WINSTON SALEM
NC
27104
286
509 OBW
246DB029
WHITMIRE RALPH O ET & ETALS
310 CHEROKEE
TAMASSEE
SC
29686
287
511 OBW
246DB030
ELLIOTT ROSS T ET PATRICIA
1059 TENTH AVE
SAN DIEGO
CA
92101
288
511 OBW
246DB031
ELLIOTT ROSS T ET PATRICIA
3311 CURTIS ST
SAN DIEGO
CA
92106
289
513 OBW
246DB032
HOLDEN ACRES, LLC ATTN: JASON KELLY
16214 BRIDGEHAMPTON CLUB
DRIVE
CHARLOTTE
NC
28277
290
515 OBW
246DB033
CORNERSTONE INVESTMENTS INC
114 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
291
517 OBW
246DB034
WATKINS JAMES RAND MARY H
10109 STANDING STONE CT
CHARLOTTE
NC
28210
292
519 OBW
246DB035
DESIMONE JOSEPH MARK ET SUZANNE
304 NOTTINGHAM DRIVE
CHAPEL HILL
NC
27517
293
521 OBW
246DB036
SMITH JOEL A
PO BOX 53373
FAYETTEVILLE
NC
28305
294
523 OBW
246DB037
LEE ERNEST ET VIVIAN
1780 RICHMOND AVE
STATEN ISLAND
NY
10314
295
525 OBW
246DB038
IDENNING CHARLES ET ELIZABETH
P O BOX 1128
SANFORD
NC
27330
296
527 OBW
246DB039
COCKLE SHELLS LLC
1747 TERRACE VIEW RD
f
VA
24551
297
529 OBW
246DB040
DUNE DEALS LLC
1779 TERRACE VIEW ROAD
FORREST
VA
24551
298
531 OBW
246DB041
WOODJEANETTE DOBSON
5345 WILGROVE MINT HILL R
CHARLOTTE
NC
28227
299
533 OBW
246DB042
SHELTON THOMAS W ET ROBIN L
8108 CHAMBERLAIN RD
CARLISLE
OH
45005
300
535 OBW
246DB043
LEE CLYDE E
11622 WOOD BLUFF LOOP
RICHMOND
VA
23236
301
537 OBW
246DB044
SHELTON THOMAS W ET ROBIN L
8108 CHAMBERLAIN RD
CARLISLE
OH
45005
302
539 OBW
246DB045
IWILLIAM PUTSIS
507 MEADOWMONT LANE
CHAPLE HILL
NC
27517
303
541 OBW
246DB046
FOX RICHARD L II ETUX ASHTON L
2727 MCFAYDEN ROAD
FAYETTEVILLE
NC
28306
304543OBW
246DB047
WERTZ SCOTT E ETUX CHRISTINE M
106 TRIDENT COURT
CARY
NC
27518
305
545 OBW
246DB048
SOUTHWELL DOROTHY
545 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
306
547 OBW
246DB049
SWEATT EDWARD M ET CAROLYN
547 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
307
549 OBW
246DB050
WASKEY ROBERT H JR & LEONARD R P
549 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
308
551 OBW
246DB051
ANDERSON SYBIL ALLEN
213 EDINBURGH DR
CARY
NC
27511
309
553 OBW
246DB052
GREEN E L
BOX 2023
WILSON
NC
27893
310
555 OBW
246DB053
MILLER ELIZABETH & LUCINDA LUCAS
4241 QUAIL HUNT LN
CHARLOTTE
NC
28226
311
OCEAN
246CE001
1557 O.B.W. L.L.C.
700 HOLLY RD
CADILLAC
MI
49601
312
559 OBW
246CE003
SKILLMAN STEPHEN M ETUX PAMELA
39 TODD HILLCIRCLE
GOLDEN BRIDGE
NY
10526
313
561 OBW
246CE004
CAMPBELL ROBIN D & DEBRA J TRUSTEES
822 PREAKNESS PLACE
NEWBURY PARK
CA
91320
314
246CE005
CAMPBELL ROBIN D & DEBRA J TRUSTEES
822 PREAKNESS PLACE
NEWBURY PARK
CA
91320
315
567 OBW
246CE006
BEACH MARY E & ROBERT B TRUSTEES
12 N CYPRESS DRIVE
WICHITA
KS
67206
316
563 OBW
246CE00601
AMOS LYNN K
1730 HICKORY RIDGE DRIVE
WAXHAW
NC
28173
317
569 OBW
246CE010
PARKER PAUL
307 CAMBRIDGE DR
TARBORO
NC
27886
318
OCEAN
246CE011
IVENEGASJOSEI
372 OCEANBLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
319
573 OBW
246CE012
LOGUE STEPHEN S ET & JONES J WES ET
400 FOREST LAKE RD
FAYETTEVILLE
NC
28305
320
575 OBW
246CE013
LYNCH THOMAS L & BARBARATRUSTEES
7412 SILENT WILLOW CT
MANASSAS
VA
20112
321
577 OBW
246CE014
RICHARD WILTON HESTER
138 HEATHLAND LANE
MOORESVILLE
NC
28217
322
579 OBW
246CE016
KECK JOHN D ET SUSIE BRIGGS
8110 CRESTVIEW DR SE
COVINGTON
GA
30014
323
581 OBW
246CE017
FUNCK BERNARD R ET ELIZABETH F
1234 WYNDCROFTE PLACE
CHARLOTTE
NC
28209
324
583 OBW
246CE019
PHILLIPS WILL H ET NANCY P
755 CHELSEA PARK LN
MARIETTA
GA
30068
325
587 OBW
246CE021
1CLAIBORNE WILLIAM J
11 YORKSHIRE ST
ASHEVILLE
NC
28803
326
585 OBW
246CE02101
NORRIS WILLIAM L ET ZEBA D NAJAK
PO BOX 48073
ATHENS
GA
30604
327
591 OBW
246CE022
JOHANSON RYAN R
255115TH AVE
SAN FRANCISCO
CA
94127
328
593 OBW
246CE023
MCVAY ROBERT W ET LINDA S
PO BOX 157
PINEHURST
NC
28370
329
595 OBW
246CE024
ELIZABETH W PORRECO
2090 HIDDEN FORGE DR
FAYEYTTEVILLE
NC
28304
Attachment E

330
597 OBW
246CE025
STERLING DOROTHYJ
597 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
331599OBW
246CE026
MONTGOMERY JOHN A ET SHEILA JEAN
PO BOX 609
BLYTHEWOOD
SC
29016
332
601 OBW
246CE027
J I L LLC
PO BOX 98
SANTEE
SC
29142
333
603 OBW
246CE028
DAWKINS M CURRY ETALS
204 WESTOVER DR
HARTSVILLE
SC
29550
334
605 OBW
246CE029
ANDREW RICHARD G ET DIANE E
6812 HUNTERS GLEN ROAD
DALLAS
TX
75205
335
607 OBW
246CE030
ANDREW RICHARD G ET DIANE E
6812 HUNTERS GLEN ROAD
DALLAS
TX
75205
336
609 OBW
246CE031
ANDREW RICHARD G ET DIANE E
6812 HUNTERS GLEN ROAD
DALLAS
TX
75205
337
611 OBW
246CE032
PRICE RACHEL D
744 NAVIGATORS PT
SENECA
SC
29672
338
613 OBW
246CE033
WILSON CHARLIE NEAL REVOCABLE TRUST
PO BOX 1413
BURLINGTON
NC
27216
339
615 OBW
246CE034
TYRE RESORT GROUP LLC
7901 STRICKLAND RD STE109
RALEIGH
NC
27615
340
617 OBW
246CE035
BRUNFIELD STEPHEN ET BRIDGETTE
1455 COMMERCE PLACE
MYRTLE BEACH
SC
29577
341
619 OBW
246CE036
KINGRY JOHN M ETUX
2009 EDGEWATER DR
CHARLOTTE
NC
28210
342
621 OBW
246CE037
HANCHER PEDERJ ET BONNIE E HALLETT
80 SOUTH SHORE RD
CUBA
NY
14727
343
623 OBW
246CE038
VEENKER RONALDALLEN ET BEVERLY
623 OCEAN BLVD W
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
344
625 OBW
246CE039
ICATALDI STEPHEN
513 LAKE SHORE DR
SUNSET BEACH
NC
28468
345627OBW
246CE040
BONANNE JOSEPH ET COLLEEN H
14523 TWIN OAKS DR
CARMEL
IN
46032
346
629 OBW
246CE041
JACKSON DENNIS
PO BOX 688
HOPE MILLS
NC
28348
347
631 OBW
246CE042
NEWTONJUNE
5105 TEDORILL LANE
CHARLOTTE
NC
28226
348
633 OBW
246CE043
ASHORE THING LLC
1114 LARCHMONT COURT
LELAND
NC
28451
349
635 OBW
246CE04301
STEEN ATLE ET KATHERINE & MARY
3945 ALOALII DRIVE
PRINCEVILLE
HI
96722
350
637 OBW
246CE04302
HALLJOHNNIE W ET & MARK C
3517 WOO DVIEW ST
HIGHPOINT
NC
27265
351
639 OBW
246CE044
IBEACH DAZE LLC
BOX 00811055
SIOUX FALLS
SD
57186
352
655 OBW
246CE045
POWELL RONALD L ET CATHY B
148 LOCHWOOD W DR
CARY
NC
27518
353
643 OCEAN
246CE04501
EATON BARBARATRUSTEE
739 UPPER MERRIMAN DR
AKRON
OH
44303
354641OBW
246CE04502
MEREMATT INC
PO BOX 2439
SHALLOTTE
NC
28459
355
645 OBW
246CE04503
LINGAFELT DAVID B ETUX JANET
621 WEST 8TH ST
NEWTON
NC
28658
356
647 OBW
246CE04504
ARCHWAY HOMES INC
P O BOX 14
WINNABOW
NC
28479
357
649 OBW
246CE04505
OVERCASH WALTER S SR & BETSY TRUST
425 BECK RD
SALISBURY
NC
28144
358
651 OBW
246CE04506
DAVID TRU ESDELL
254 MCLENDON HILLS DR
WEST END
NC
27376
359
653 OBW
246CE04507
WELLS FARGO BANK NA TRUSTEE
PO BOX 377
BOLIVIA
NC
28422
360
657 OBW
246CE046
HARRIS DELPHIA L
4020 BUTLER NURSERY RD
FAYETTEVILLE
NC
28306
361
659 OBW
246CE047
LYNN WILLIAM S JR & MARY G LYNN
2205 SANFORD LANE
HILLSBOROGH
NC
27278
362
661 OBW
246CE048
SHIPLEYJIMMY R & GLENDA BTRUSTEES
1501 WILLOWBROOK DR
JOHNSON CITY
TN
37601
363
663 OBW
246CE049
SCHWOB DEBORAH
1600 MORGANTON RD LOT W31
PINEHURST
NC
28374
364
665 OBW
246CE050
1KOBALLA PATRICK) ET CHERYL M
5 BAHAMA DRIVE
WRIGHTSVILLE BCH
NC
28480
365667OBW
246CE051
CORDLE THOMAS LJR ET CAROL C
1415 E CANAL STREET
TARBORO
NC
27886
366
669 OBW
246CE052
SICURANZA MICHAELJ ET SUSAN R
8831 SERENDIPITY LANE
SEVEN VALLEYS
PA
17360
367
673 OBW
246CE054
CARTER BOGUE WEEMS HOLDEN TRUST
1909 MARTINS COVE CT
ANNAPOLIS
MD
21401
368
675 OBW
246CE055
CARTER GARRETT M
53 MARLBOROUGH DR
SHALIMAR
FL
32579
369
677 OBW
246CE056
MCLEAN JONATHAN MORRIS
24 POE RD
PRINCETON
NJ
8540
370
679 OBW
246CE058
THE KINSEY FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSH
4056 SPRING ISLAND
OKATIE
SC
29909
371
681 OBW
246CE05801
THE KINSEY FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSH
4056 SPRING ISLAND
OKATIE
SC
29909
372
685 OBW
246CE059
WILLIAM PEPPER
465 LINDEN RD
CHARLESTON
WV
25314
373687OBW
246CE060
LIDETHEODOREJR
PO BOX 2006
SHALLOTTE
NC
28459
374687OBW
246CE060
LIDE THEODORE J R
PO BOX 2006
SHALLOTTE
NC
28459
375
689 OBW
246CE062
LIDE MARY JANE TRUSTEE & ETALS
1580 WAMPANOAG TRAIL
BARRINGTON
RI
2806
376
691 OBW
246CE064
BLEVINS TONY C ETUX CONSTANCE H
158 HEATHLAND LANE
MOORESVILLE
NC
28117
377693OBW
246CE066
ROBERT ERICKSON
11301 PEMBROOK CIRCLE
BENTONVILLE
AR
72712
378
695 OBW
246CE068
BOYER WILLIAM L ETJAN G
4712 FIELDING DRIVE
RALEIGH
NC
27606
379
697 OBW
246CE070
BHATTACHARYYA B B
301 E 62ND ST APT 12F
NEW YORK
NY
10065
380
699 OBW
246BB001
CLARK, MICHAEL
2275 THOROUGHBRED DRIVE
WADSWORTH
OH
44281
381
701 OBW
246BB002
IMOSER JACKIE L
334 PLEASANT HILL RD
LENIOR
NC
28645
382703OBW
246BB003
THE NANCY M ABCOUWER TRUST
2006 KANAWHA AVE SE
CHARLESTON
WV
25304
383
705 OBW
246BB004
YARBOROUGH WILSON FJR
1519 RAEFORD RD
FAYETTEVILLE
NC
28305
384707OBW
246BB005
MARSHALL CHERYL CHANCE
785080TH PLACE SE
MERCER ISLAND
WA
98040
385709OBW
246BB006
BROWN TERRY L ETUX JU LIA
801 BASS LANDING
GREENSBORO
NC
27455
386
711 OBW
246BB007
BOUMERHI PIERRE ET HOLLY
439 SPRING ST
HOUTZDALE
PA
16651
387
713 OBW
246BB009
IMCNEILL BRUCE M ET RENA L
15001 SPILLMAN RNCH LP RD
AUSTIN
TX
78738
388715OBW
246BB010
JENNIFER SCHOKLEY
315 HIGHGATE AVE
WORTHINGTON
OH
43075
389717OBW
246BB0ll
SIMMONS BARRYJ ETUX JENNIFER
3109 WHITEHART LN
APEX
NC
27539
390
719 OBW
246BB012
WITCHGER KATHLEEN A
1011 EST CLAIR
INDIANAPOLIS
IN
46202
391
721 OBW
246BB013
WITCHGER EUGENE W (TR) MARY A (TR)
65 NEW SETTLEMENT RD
KIAWAH ISLAND
SC
29455
392
723 OBW
246BB014
EUGENE WITCHGER
5010 PLANTATION RD
INDIANAPOLIS
IN
46250
393
725 OBW
246BB015
KHAN MUSHTAG H ET MARTHA S
143 TARPON DR
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
39417
27 OBW
246BB016
POWELL RONALD L ET CATHY B
148 LOCHWOOD W DR
CARY
NC
27518
395
729 OBW
1246BB017
I ROBERTSON SYBIL
2020 EARLYSVILLE ROAD
EARLYSVILLE
VA
22936
396
731 OBW
1246BB018
ILINFORS EUGENE W ET DIANE
144 PINECREST ROAD
DURHAM
NC
27705
Attachment E

397733OBW
246BB019
MCCRANN KELLY & WILLIAM C COUGHENOU
60 VILLAGE GREEN EAST
PINEHURST
NC
28374
398735OBW
246BB020
HALL MARK C
433 SUNDOWN ROAD
MOORESVILLE
NC
28115
399
737 OBW
246BB021
SHOFFNER PROPERTIES LLC
4855 FRIENSHIP PATTERSON
MILL RD
BARLINGTON
NC
27215
400
739 OBW
246BB022
HABERKORN ARNOLD H ET JOYCE M RUSSE
131 RI DGEWOOD CT
BOWLING GREEN
KY
42103
401
7410 BW
246BB023
EBERWEIN HOWARD JR
65 WESTERN AVE.
WESTFIELD
MA
1085
4021743
OBW
246BB024
KUSHNIRANATOLIJETUXJAROSLAVA
400564TH STREET
BETHESDA
MD
20816
403
745 OBW
246BB026
HOBBS BARBARA RTRUSTEE
1911 CAMBORNE RD
RICHMOND
VA
23236
404
749 OBW
246BB027
ALEXANDER KATHLEEN M
8 BUNKER HILL ROAD
HAZLET
NJ
7730
405
751 OBW
246BB028
BKB PROPERTIES LLC
5101 CELLINE CT
WILMINGTON
NC
28409
406753OBW
246BB029
HICKS TIMOTHY L ET DORSEY J
753 OCEAN BLVD WEST
HOLDEN BEACH
NC
28462
407
755 OBW
246BB030
HUCKS D BRANTLEY
490 BEECH RIDGE RD
THOMASVILLE
NC
27360
408
757 OBW
246BB031
BENDER HAROLD
3315 SPARKLEBERRY CT SE
SOUTH PORT
NC
28469
409
759 OBW
246BB03101
THE CAROLINA EDGE II LLC
924 PINEHURST DR
CHAPEL HILL
NC
27514
410
761 OBW
246BB032
WALKER KELLY P ET BRYSON C
432 WISTER ROAD
WYNNEWOOD
PA
19096
411763OBW
246BB033
GATES WILLIAM C JR & HARRIET TRUSTE
4112 KIBANNON WAY
DUBLIN
OH
43016
412
765 OBW
246BB034
KLUTTZ NANCY H
3600 GREENSIDE CT
CONCORD
NC
28027
413
767 OBW
246BB035
GRANDAS ANDREW M ET JOAN A
148 GREEN HILL RIDGE CT
FRONT ROYAL
VA
22630
414769AOBW
246BB036
O'CONNELL DANIELJOHN & THOMAS JAME
1005 DESERT MARIGOLD CT
WAKE FOREST
NC
27587
415
775A OBW
246BB03601
BIVENS JAMES C GSTTRUST
23053 LAKE TILLERY RD
ALBEMARLE
NC
28001
416
775B OBW
246BB03602
WE RE THE STEWARTS INC
PO BOX 1057
RUTHERFORDTON
NC
28139
417
773B OBW
246BB03603
HALL STEVEN L &JOHNNIE W
3517 WOODVIEW DR
HIGH POINT
NC
27265
418773AOBW
246BB03604
PUKALA ZYGMU NO S & ETALS
116 PARK PLACE
CHESHIRE
CT
6410
419
771B OBW
246BB03605
WILLIAM R. ABB
220 AUTUMN DRIVE
CHAPEL HILL
NC
27516
420
771 OBW
246BB03606
SKINNERJANET E & DALE LCARLTON
4253 ROYAL RIDGE DRIVE
DALLAS
TX
75229
421
769B OBW
246BB03607
COTTER EDWARD L ET BARBARA L
9104 PATTON BLVD
ALEXANDRIA
VA
22309
422
777 OBW
246BB039
POSTON YVONNE P & ETALS
3100 WESTCHESTER AVE
COLLEGE STATION
TX
77845
423
779 OBW
246BB040
DRUM BOYD H ETUX MARTHA C
734 S COLLEGE AVENUE
NEWTON
NC
28658
424
781 OBW
246BB041
HARNISH STEVE A ETUX MARY BETH
4115 BEVERLY RD
ROCKVILLE
MD
20853
425
783 OBW
246BB042
CINO PAULM ET JULIE P
12322 IRIS COURT
JAMISON
PA
18929
Western
APO
785 OBW
246BB043
COOPER NANCY GLOVER ETALS
708 EAST H STREET
ERWIN
NC
28339
Attachment E

ATTACHMENT F
APPLICANT'S LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION

110 Rothschild Street
Holden Beach, North Carolina 28462
December 2, 2011
Mr. Fran Way, PE
Applied Technology & Management, Inc.
360 Concord Street
Suite 300
Charleston, SC 29401
anoV
Incorporated 1969
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
RE: Acknowledgement and Authorization for Holden Beach Nourishment Project
Dear Mr. Way:
The Town of Holden Beach authorizes Applied Technology & Management, Inc. to act on its
behalf regarding the CAMA Major Permit Application dated December 2, 2011, regarding the
proposed beach nourishment project. The USACE and their entities are hereby authorized to
deliver responses, notifications, or other documents to Applied Technology and Management,
Inc. in lieu of direct service on the principal, Town of Holden Beach. This acknowledgement and
authorization does not in any way create, delegate, sanction, or permit any decision making
power by Applied Technology and Management, Inc. on behalf of the Town of Holden Beach.
Please let me know if you need additional information.
Sincerely,
David Hewitt
Town Manager
Mayor: J. Alan Holden
Mayor Pro Tem: Don Glander
Commissioners: Ray Lehr, Sandy Miller & Sheila Young
Town Manager: David W. Hewett