20120868 Ver 1_CAMA Permit Application_20120920

20120868
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Beverly Eaves Perdue - Braxton C. Davis
Governor Director Dee Freeman
Secretary
September 19, 2012
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Karen Higgins
401 Oversight
Division of Water Quality- Surface Water Protection
FROM: Doug Huggett, NC DENR -DCM Major Permits Coordinator
400 Commerce Ave., Morehead City, NC 28557 (Courier 11- 12 -09)
SUBJECT: CAMA Major Permit Application Review
Applicant: New Hanover County (Carolina Beach Nourishment)
Project Location: along the oceanfront shoreline of Carolina Beach
Proposed Project: continued beach nourishment as authorized under the Federal storm damage
reduction project, due to expire in 2014
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this
form to Doug Hu_g_gett at the address above by October 13, 2012. If you have any questions
regarding the proposed project, contact Robb Mairs at (910) 796 -7423, when appropriate, in -depth
comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
SIGNED DATE
D ti �L9�
U1
S E P 2 2012
127 Cardinal Drive Ext , Wilmington, NC 28405 DE MR -R7LH
Phone 910 - 796 -7215 \ FAX: [phone] Internet: www nccoastal management, net wetlands,& StOrFnwAtm� o. _�

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
APPLICANT'S NAME: New Hanover County c/o Chris Coudriet
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: The project site includes the Carolina Beach Inlet and approximately
14,000 linear feet the beachfront area of the Town of Carolina Beach located between the north end and
Tennessee Ave. towards the south, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in Carolina Beach, New Hanover
County.
Photo Index -2006: 21- 7379 - 73791 -24, U -X 2000: 21 -257- 259:1 -24, U -X 1995: 21- 238 - 242:1- 24,T -X
Inlet Borrow Site — 2006: 21-7380,12-14, Q -X 2000: 21- 260:10 -14, P -X 1995: 21- 242:10 -14, P -X
State Plane Coordinates— GPS File: 0- 091110A
X:23377193 Y: 109045
Lat: 340 02' 39.87639 "N Long: 770 53' 13.30209 "W
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA / D &F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit — 09/11/2012
Was Applicant Present — No
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received — Completed on 09/07/2012
6. SITE DESCRIPTION: Office — Wilmington
(A) Local Land Use Plan — Town of Carolina Beach
Classification From LUP- Developed /Central Business District
(B) AEC(s) Involved: OH, IH
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing — N/A
Planned - None
(F) Type of Structures: Existing — Commercial and residential buildings
Planned — N/A
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: 27year to 47yr
Source —1998 LTAASCR Update
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
DREDGED F L ED OTHER
(A) Vegetated Wetlands
(B) Non - Vegetated Wetlands
1,573,942 ft.Z
2,752,992 ft2
Shallow bottom and inter -tidal
(36.1 acres)
(63.2 acres)
flats
(C) Other (Highground upper
beach disposal)
2,419,343 ft.z
(55.5 acres)
(u) i otal Area Disturbed: 6,746,277 sq. ft. (155 acres)
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SB Open: Yes
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: New Hanover County proposes to proactively obtain state authorization to
continue beach nourishment along the oceanfront shoreline of the Town of Carolina Beach as specified under
the authorized Federal storm damage reduction project, which is due to expire in 2014.

New Hanover County- Carolina Beach Nourishment Project
Page Two
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The project sites include the oceanfront shoreline of Carolina Beach and borrow site area located within the
Carolina Beach Inlet between the north end of Carolina Beach and the south end of Masonboro Island and
approximately 14,000 linear feet of the beachfront area of the Town of Carolina Beach located between the
north end and Tennessee Avenue. towards the south, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in Carolina Beach, New
Hanover County. To locate the northern limits of the project site from the Wilmington Regional Office (WiRO),
travel from Wilmington to Carolina Beach south on College Road (NC Hwy 421) for approximately 12 miles
south. Continue over Snows Cut Bridge for approximately 1.3 miles south until you reach Carl Winner Drive.
Turn left onto Carl Winner Drive, and then left on Canal Drive. Travel approximately 1.6 miles north until Canal
Drive terminates to the entrance of Freeman Park. Carolina Beach is a barrier island located in New Hanover
County and is flanked by Myrtle Grove Sound /Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW) to the west and the
Atlantic Ocean to the east. The island is heavily developed, mostly residential and commercial properties
located within the Central Business District. Site elevations range from approximately 4' to 6' above mean sea
level (MSL). This area of Carolina Beach utilizes a pre- nourishment or "static" vegetation line.
The high ground portion of the project is vegetated primarily with American Beach Grass (Ammophila
breviligulata) and Sea Oats (Uniola paniculata). The current long term annual erosion rate for the Town of
Carolina Beach varies from 27year on the southern end to 47year on the most northern end of the project
limits, per the current Division of Coastal Management's (DCM) 1998 Annual Erosion Rate maps. The 100 -
year storm recession is approximately 300' giving a total Ocean Hazard AEC from approximately 420' to as
much as 540', as measured from the First Line of Stable Natural Vegetation (FLSNV).
The previously authorized nourishment area for the project is approximately 14,000 linear feet (LF) ( -2.7 miles)
along the oceanfront beach. The northern limits of the project is approximately 720' north of the existing rock
revetment and the Carolina Beach Fishing Pier, and the southern limits of the project is located just north of
Tennessee Avenue. The previous project template consisted of beach fill in an area ranging from
approximately 75' to 130' in width, which was shaped in the form of a 25' in width dune with a crest elevation of
125 above North American Vertical Datum (NAVD), fronted by a 50' in width storm berm at elevation 95
NAVD. The project was later modified to include the existing 2,075' in length rock revetment at the most
northern end of the project site with elevation of 9.5' NAVD. The application also states that the project was
modified over the years to address erosion problems due to the quality of the material used for beach fill and
was later restored back in 1982. Since then, subsequent periodic nourishment events have been accomplished
approximately every three (3) years with material collected in a sediment trap located in the throat of Carolina
Beach Inlet in an area measuring approximately 2,500' in length and ranging from 175' to 600' in width. The
application also states that the average volume of material placed on Carolina Beach oceanfront since 1985
has averaged 858,600 cubic yards (cy) during each periodic nourishment operation, spread over the 14,000 LF
project dimensions with the fill density of approximately 61.3 cy /If (See Table 1).
The application states that the Town of Carolina Beach Federal storm damage reduction project was
authorized by Congress in 1962 (House Document No. 418, 87th Congress, 2nd Session), which was initiated
between December of 1964 through May of 1965. Approximately 3,597,400 cubic yards cy of borrow material
from the Carolina Beach Yacht Basin located at the head of Myrtle Grove Sound was distributed along the
14,000 LF of oceanfront shoreline of Carolina Beach. The Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (PL 99-
662), specifically Section 934 of the Act, provides for Federal participation in beach nourishment for a total
period of 50 years beginning at the initiation of construction. The application also states that the Carolina
Beach portion of the authorized project was re- evaluated under Section 934 in February 1993 and was found
to be eligible for continued Federal participation for the remaining economic life of the project. Further, it
stipulated that the Federal cost - sharing for renourishment at Carolina Beach was authorized through 2014
(See sheets 1 and 2 of 13 and project narrative).

New Hanover County- Carolina Beach Nourishment Project
Page Three
The application states that a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was issued for this project in July
1981, which authorized the placement of beach compatible material from the Carolina Beach Inlet onto the
Carolina Beach oceanfront. The application also includes a Biological Assessment (BA) and an Essential Fish
Habitat Assessment (EFHA) that were completed in August 2012 (See BA and EFHA). The application also
states that the project has been previously reviewed per Section 106 of the National Historical Preservation Act
of 1966 (P.L. 89 -665), as amended, and the Abandoned Shipwreck Act of 1987 (See Appendix H).
The Town of Carolina Beach's Land Use Plan does not have the dry sand beach classified; however, the
upland areas of this project are classified as Developed /Central Business District. The waters of the project site
are classified as SB by the NC Division of Water Quality. The NC Division of Marine Fisheries has NOT
designated this area of the Atlantic Ocean as a Primary Nursery Area (PNA), and the waters are CLOSED to
the harvesting of shellfish.
10. PROPOSED PROJECT:
New Hanover County proposes to proactively obtain state authorization to continue beach nourishment along
the oceanfront shoreline of the Town of Carolina Beach as specified under the authorized Federal storm
damage reduction project, which is due to expire in 2014. The applicant is proposing to follow the precise
template of the federally authorized project, aforementioned. The application states that the borrow area has
seven (7) cut elevations ranging from -21.3' NAVD 88 to -40.8' NAVD 88 and an estimated dredgeable volume
of approximately 947,000 cy.
In April of 2008, the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) adopted State Sediment Criteria
Rule 15A NCAC 07H .0312. The new rule was intended to prevent the disposal of incompatible material on the
beach. In accordance with this new rule, the application states that beach samples and nearshore sediment
samples were taken on May 24, May 25 and June 19, 2012. The application also states that ten (10)
vibracores were collected on June 5, 2012 and a sidescan sonar survey was conducted on July 10, 2012
within the existing Carolina Beach Inlet borrow area.
The application states that the existing water depth within the borrow area ranges from approximately -35' to
+5' NAVD 88 and the beach fill area ranges from approximately -5' to +12.5' NAVD 88. The application also
states that characterization of the native material on Carolina Beach and also within the Carolina Beach Inlet
revealed that material would comply with the criteria set forth within the new rule.
Based on the results of the Geotechnical Report, the applicant proposes to yield an average of approximately
858,600 cy of beach compatible fill material, dredged from the borrow source within the inlet throat and placed
along the 14,000 LF of shoreline along the project limits, aforementioned. The application states the average
fill placement density along the project area would be approximately 61.3 cy /If which is the same as previous
events. The project also consists of beach fill in an area ranging from approximately 75' to 130' in width, which
would be shaped in the form of a 25' in width dune with a crest elevation of 12.5' above NAVD 88. The
application states that a temporary sand dike would be constructed seaward of the fill area during the
placement of beach fill, which would allow the sandy material to settle out before the water re- enters the
ocean. The application states that dredging pipeline would follow exactly what the USACE used in previous
projects: The pipeline has normally run from the inlet down the back side of Freeman Beach, however, there is
a permanent cross -over for a dredge pipe near the Carolina Beach Fishing Pier. When the cross -over is used,
the pipeline would run down the AIWW and then crosses over to the beach (See Sheets 3 through 11 of 13,
Project Narrative, Geotechnical Report and Sheet 13A of 13 -USACE September 1998 Operations and
Maintenance Manual).

New Hanover County- Carolina Beach Nourishment Project
Page Four
The geotechnical data and sediment characteristic information indicates that an appropriate amount of
samples were collected at adequate intervals. Based on the information presented in the application package,
the applicant was able to meet the sediment criteria established under current CRC Rules. As stated, these
calculations represent 10 vibracore samples that were collected from the borrow area, and beach and
nearshore samples. In summary, the proposed beach fill project would remain within the Town limits of
Carolina Beach and the entire project would follow the precise template of the federally authorized project (See
Sheets 3 through 13 of 13, Project Narrative and Geotechnical Report).
11. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS
The proposed maintenance dredging by hydraulic pipeline dredge would disturb approximately 1,573,942 ft.2 of
borrow area within Carolina Beach Inlet and would result in the removal of approximately 858,600 cy to
1,400,000 cy of beach compatible material. The beach fill portion of the project would disturb approximately
2,752,992 ft2 of oceanfront beach below Mean High Water (MHW), and approximately 2,419,343 ft.2 above
MHW, as a result of the nourishment activities. Placement of sand on the beach would result in temporary
mortality for intertidal micro fauna such as crabs and worms. Placement of material below the MHW boundary
would result in temporary turbidity within the nearshore waters of the Atlantic Ocean; potentially affecting fish in
the project area at the time. Limiting the work to the winter season should reduce potential adverse impacts to
fish communities. There may be some impact to sea turtle nesting as a result of this project. The end result of
the project should be a wider beach area with a sloping profile, which would be beneficial to the sea turtles.
Beach compaction should be monitored and tilling should be required to reduce the likelihood of impacting sea
turtle nesting and hatching activities. Erosion escarpments forming after the project completion should also be
leveled to reduce turtle nesting impacts. The project would serve to renourish the public beach on 2.7 miles of
Carolina Beach. Public use of the beach during the beach fill process would be limited to some degree.
Submitted by: Robb L. Mairs Date: September 18, 2012 Office: Wilmington

1CN OP4
APPLICATION for
Maier Development Permit
(last revised 12127106)
7rW
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name
Project Name (if applicable)
New Hanover County
Carolina Beach: Beach Nourishment
Project
Applicant 1. First Name
MI
Last Name
Chris
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
Coudriet
Last Name
Applicant 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
Mailing Address
Jim
PO Box
lannucci
State
!f additional applicants, please attach an additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
ZIP
State
230 Govemment Center Drive
Wilmington
28409
NC
ZIP
Country
Phone No.
Contractor #
FAX No.
28403
New Hanover
910 - 798 - 7139 ext
910 - 798 - 7051
Street Address (d different from above)
City
State
ZIP
Email
jiannucci @nhcgov_com
2. Agent/Contractor Information
Business Name
Coastal Planning & Enigineering Of North Carolina
Agent/ Contractor 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Brad
Rosov
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
Greg
Finch
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
4038 Masonboro Loop Rd.
Wilmington
NC
ZIP
Phone No. 1
Phone No. 2
28409
910-791-9494 ext
- - ext
FAX No
Contractor #
910 791 4129
Federal ID # 020623951
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.

Street Address (if different from above) City State ZIP
Email
brad.rosov @shawgrp.com; greg.finch @shawgrp.com
<Form continues on back>3. Project Location
Street Address
b Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
County (can be multiple)
The northern fill limit is approx. 720' north of the Carolina
State Rd #
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
Beach pier and the southern limit is located in front of the
N/A
New Hanover
Sea Ranch Motel (Located between Carolina Sands Dr and
e. Vegetation on tract
Tennesse Ave)
Subdivision Name
City
State
Zip
N/A
Carolina Beach
NC
28428-
Phone No.
Lot No. (s) (if many, attach additional page with list)
NA - - ext.
NA, I I ,
a. In which NC river basin is the project located?
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Cape Fear
Carolina Beach Inlet and the 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
Carolina Beach Inlet and the 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
Town of Carolina Beach.
4. Site Description
a Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft)
b Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
14,000 (Project Limits)
5,171,555 (Beach Fill); 1,199,229 (Borrow Area)
c. Size of individual lot(s)
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
NWL (normal water level)
NA, I I
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
—12.5 to -15 MSL ❑NHW or ❑NWL
e. Vegetation on tract
See Attached
f. Man -made features and uses now on tract
See Attached
g. Identify and describe the existing land uses ad_ iacent to the proposed
project site.
See Attached
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc. -

h How does local government zone the tract?
i Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
MF, Multi Family; T -1, Tourist; R -1, Residential; C,
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
Conervation
®Yes ❑No ❑NA
1. Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? ❑Yes ®No
k Has a professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. ®Yes ❑No ❑NA
If yes, by whom? See Attached
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 naffe>
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
N/A
o Describe existing drinking water supply source.
N/A
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
N/A
5. Activities and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? ❑Commercial ®Public/Government
❑ Pnvate /Community
b Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
See Attached
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 Attached
d. List all development activities you propose.
See Attached
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.

e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both?
Maintenance
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project?
Beach Fill: 5,171,555;
Borrow Area.
1,199,229
®Sq.Ft or [I
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 Attached
L 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 See Attached
6. Addidonallnformadon
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 Attached Phone No.
Address
Name See Attached Phone No.
Address
Name See Attached Phone No.
Address
g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract Include permit numbers, perrnittee, and issuing
dates.
No previous federal permits. DWQ General Water Quality
Certification No. 3703 issued for past projects.
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization form, if applicable.
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.

1. 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.
1 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.
a
Date klZ y h4- Print Name G 2
Signature�-
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
®DCM MP -2 Excavation and Fill Information ❑DCM MP -5 Bridges and Culverts
❑DCM MP -3 Upland Development
❑DCM MP -4 Structures Information
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc: , - , , , - , ,

Form DCM MP -2
EXCAVATION and F I L L
(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. EXCAVATION ❑This section not
applicable.
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in
cubic yards.
Average 858,600 c.y., maximum 14 mil c.y
c. (i) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (v11L)? 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.
NA
D. i ype or matenai to oe exudvdmu
Sand
d High - ground excavation in cubic yards.
None
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL ®This section not
applicable ,<
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.,
Other
Access
(excluding
C l
Channel
Chan el
Canal
Boat Basin
Boat Ramp
Rock Groin
Rock
Breakwater
shoreline
stabilizatio
NWL)
n
14,000'
Beach;
Length
2,500'
Borrow Area
75' -130'
Beach;
Width
-175' -600'
Borrow Area
-5' to +12.5'
Avg. Existing
NA
NA
Beach; -35'
Depth
to +5'
Borrow Area
-5' to +12.5'
Beach; -
Final Project
NA
NA
21.3' to -
Depth
40.8' Borrow
Area
1. EXCAVATION ❑This section not
applicable.
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in
cubic yards.
Average 858,600 c.y., maximum 14 mil c.y
c. (i) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (v11L)? 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.
NA
D. i ype or matenai to oe exudvdmu
Sand
d High - ground excavation in cubic yards.
None
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL ®This section not
applicable ,<
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.,

a. Location of disposal area.
c (i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.
e. (i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlandstmarsh
(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 disposal in these areas:
b. Dimensions of disposal area.
d. (i) Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance?
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA
(h) If yes, where?
f. (i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION ®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: Width:
c Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL: d. Maximum distance waterward of NHW or NWL:
e. Type of stabilization material.
g. Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level
Bulkhead backf►II Riprap
Breakwater /Sill Other
I Source of fill material.
f. (►) 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 ❑This section not
applicable
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a (i) Will fill material be brought to the site? ®Yes ❑No ❑NA b (i) Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands /marsh
If yes, (CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell
(h) Amount of material to be placed in the water 249.653 c.v. bottom (SB), or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes
are checked, provide the number of square feet
below MHW. Based on 5/8/12 survey data. affected.
(iii) Dimensions of fill area 14.000' x —130' ❑CW ❑SAV
❑SB
(iv) Purpose of fill
The County is requesting a permit to implement a non- OWL ®None
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.

Federal beach nourishment project that would preserve tax
base, protect infrastructure, and maintain the tourist
oriented economy.
(ii) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas
NA
15. 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.,
controlled? dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
A temporary sand dike will be constructed seaward of the fill area
during the placement of beach fill. This structure will allow the
sandy material to settle out before the water reenters the
Atlantic Ocean.
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.
Date
Carolina Beach: Beach Nourishment Project
Project Name
New Havover County, Go Jim lannucci
Applicant Name
s�
Applicant Signature
Cutterhead hydraulic dredge and pipeline, bulldozers,
front -end loaders and other earth moving machines
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.
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc

CAROLINA BEACH
BEACH NOURISHMENT
NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
INDEX TO SHEETS
1 COVER SHEET
2 LOCATION MAP
3 -7 BEACH FILL AREA PLAN VIEWS
8 -10 BEACH FILL CROSS SECTION C —C',
D —D' AND E —E'
11 BORROW AREA PLAN VIEW
12 -13 BORROW AREA PROFILES A —A' AND B —B'
RALEIGH
CHARLOTTE CAPE HATTERAS
N��
JACKSONVILLE* MOREHEAD CITY
CAPE LOOKOUT
PROJECT SITE
N T.S. CAPE FEAR AXAN71C
OCEAN
NOT FOR CONSTRUC11ON
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
oi
OU.-
,'k
-
=, r F_
..r,.. A 77_A� nC
CEAN
a
z
J
a
O
Z
Z
Z
O�w
V =W
� ,A
> Z2 N
zz> IX
=av
WW
Zm
_
m
Z
J
a
V
Z T
W
W
0
W
i
'z
g�g
d 9�
a
GK
1462321
1 OF 13

-, Q
Q CAROL
' w
�w.x;• `i '��r� _;t I 1 Wit
•� 2 FREEMAI
W w
z.
40 +00
LJ
LLJ
uj
Q T-
l a
PH
120 +00
_ T"► r
U CAROLINA', -
EACH_ '}}
. ': `• � .. YACHT° Ai..
f 7 r r BASIN' r .`
9 +99
1971 d ,
BORROW
"C'A R0 LI :N'A
AREA
Yw
�r BEACH
1982 20 +00
/► ' Q
Borrow � F.,
Area
1 t 0 +00
�y
Legend:
CAROLINA BEACH INLET
f STATI;J
y
d - Notes:
1. a COORDINATES
'r h STATE PLANE COORDINATE
DATUM OF 1983 (NAD 83).
IPW1, 2.2010 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY
AGRICULTURE IMAGERY PRt
1 � 1�■
1-

MATCH LINE SHEET 4
O �.
- i
O
. .v S t - .� _� ,• Ob ��SW
z � 1 >
ooz
� - EI' z >
iii
Ul
omnsWlHv
II,
3Yty 3171M�3321 t _Z
4 QN �.h � $, `{S• FY r5 f - - -.� f v ' r i W r
a�
IL z
g N ?Sa rr r 'f 1 rS
to 4 I Z t a
01
d
3nv 33SS3NN3C- r i Z
so
cs
w ri > �YZ. '_,c fl� '''I' .1{ CN i N Q_ R$
Q 0- Z= w z ' mom"
m
�wI
Y w Q 00 0 w vN av N ,; ; CL ,�S u as
Cl
Q4'Q) O
��,,4> 1
D �; DATE:
a ¢ VJ ¢ p Z Q j Z
8/13/12
OO VO B }lL!
z O z 0 w o Q it 0 ante irvaDO �" I' ,' o "ey s GK
ozo �aoa co s"
ONY N0.
146232
3 OF 13

5
<
Lg
LIJ
LLJ Jas
mz uY 0
0 LLI 0 w
C-) P
< <
(n
> w-
LLJ La at1V3A3dV3-
V) z
<
F -U- 0- 0
Z F- M 0 < >
C4 W<WM
e)
R LL (n 0
LU (n 8- z w
co oc-,
z (n 0
X: Lo w f
cl
Lu 0
>
cr I - t it
O<Z V)
<Crz<
0
En < on (n o
LL) ir 00 LLJ — Z 3AV13 IKVH
2: So Wx- 0 < PK uj
<F-C)< <L, W 0 0
<
00 D T
WiE w,3F
0 ow
o 0
M
.s oz-j< o 00 0)<E;< >- LL. W
Q-Z-
C3
0 C4 m m 1 ii
L)
00
z U-
MATCH LINE SHEET 3
rL
to
z
0
M
0
Z
Z Z
MW
02
o0z
=va Z
s. w
Z
w
J
EjW
CL
0:j
Ka
giR
1
Er
S
Z
Z
L
ok
1z
5/13/12
ly.
GK
Mm- No.
146232
3HEET.
4 OF 13
Z
:3
O
0
EjW
CL
0:j
Ka
giR
1
Er
S
Z
Z
L
ok
1z
5/13/12
ly.
GK
Mm- No.
146232
3HEET.
4 OF 13

MATCH, LINE SHEET f
1�7
L
L
C I A I i
06>
w L
Z -�' ',
-j
w
E N <
L
N
z
w
< <
D V)
+
0)
w
oz
W
u)
C
0-
< z X- W,
m z
0
05
W < X
w (n �- 0
LL. z a- Zw
O > cV
0 5:
LOL EL m P w
Zw
WOO _j DO D
w M
V)
V) < w cr
< �S < z < z
w a <
Z(yz <LL- 0 <
Lj
302i 20
zwWw6iE0 it 0 —4r mma2m i
0 OWF- <
ozo:2<3< V) ow
000 <ONM LL. X
Lim
N r1i z 02 MATCH LINE SHEET 4
I
tD
W N
I/
z
Z::,;
Km
4
Z
M
0
0
Z
Z Z
W
X
LO w
0 Z
ZZ5
=U°' 4M
x U
3:4
w w
Z
z
M
0
i(i Ge
n
Iwo
Z
If
Ni
DATE:
8/13/12
BY.
GK
DOMM NO.�
146232
SHEET.-
.5 OF 13
w
C,
wo < U) w
Km
4
Z
M
0
0
Z
Z Z
W
X
LO w
0 Z
ZZ5
=U°' 4M
x U
3:4
w w
Z
z
M
0
i(i Ge
n
Iwo
Z
If
Ni
DATE:
8/13/12
BY.
GK
DOMM NO.�
146232
SHEET.-
.5 OF 13

-1; � ¢
=.F Z
4 101 it Q
O
Z
Z
W
_ -
CC ,00
C-4 �
{ >>
�xz + l � oog
Z Z
W ir W
z m
N:t,r{
W
go
E lkr ✓ 'r }i, O I, ,III'I i' Q
_Z
''" r z
oe
W co
^ -
`� -
w �O� .��, �;��1 Z�IQ F
i N tr
wo
cn (n
{_{��
i OZW �Q Z
Ir
d�L !
w 00 N CO i C'_ Mt i k T a off¢
3 QZ Q =D
V
m��MQS o oll I
" w a0 °
zQ -�ow� °5- -° LLJ
cr- Q in J O O t DATE:
CL
Q.:3U) Q �i' ' !a il' N�
N I 8/13/12
a P°wP <fo w U a ZO o
c QQQZ W OQ ,q� �� � - 0 Y.
D ZUZ Q� O V J ��
_ `-' ° w M MATCH LINE SHEET 5 A BY `;Y ., I - COMM GK
NO
OOOmQQw
OW
R0�
P UZUQomD
a
146232
HEET-
` '' 6 OF 13

Z
O
F JPM �y8tlS.
a V W
: , P� �.G• = C: Z z
p O
( b Z }
U' 1 ' ,- i'G - - a L • , � (� - � w a.
W W
♦ - T- O O U
Zza
O
z �•�' � .. N 'fit 1 ' �
z
J
U)
a
m
U F
D N
rn
0)
0)
�a
z
p U Or
W W Nm
U) LLJ QZ¢ =D
maF- <o
LLI r�
`
Q:
V'Z 00 F- N
ZNw za> 0\0
w f- .. 0- \
az MQC=n"'
SON OmiwU D
aQQLQ�¢
ZOZ pI+.
a�0 -E L
0w0 �I—F— Q
000 < < <w
UzoOom:)
.= N PO
rs�
� }
4J0
�
11
ok
xlv
W
m.V
GRR�At
- �'
z
a
�.
��w
Pa
3e O
z
46 N
it
z i
LU
Z
LL
OA
S
V
ill
D:
0
Z F-
D
MATCH LINE SHEET 6
A
z
J
U)
a
m
U F
D N
rn
0)
0)
�a
z
p U Or
W W Nm
U) LLJ QZ¢ =D
maF- <o
LLI r�
`
Q:
V'Z 00 F- N
ZNw za> 0\0
w f- .. 0- \
az MQC=n"'
SON OmiwU D
aQQLQ�¢
ZOZ pI+.
a�0 -E L
0w0 �I—F— Q
000 < < <w
UzoOom:)
.= N PO
OWX
Op
Z U.
Z �s
= e�
Z
W
ro
z
'z
6 g
J 0�,
2 JD
V $
DATE:
8/13/12
Y:
GK
OMM N0.
146232
SHEET-
7 OF 13
ok
xlv
GRR�At
Al
4
3e O
46 N
z i
1
OA
ill
E� :
Z F-
D
MATCH LINE SHEET 6
A
OWX
Op
Z U.
Z �s
= e�
Z
W
ro
z
'z
6 g
J 0�,
2 JD
V $
DATE:
8/13/12
Y:
GK
OMM N0.
146232
SHEET-
7 OF 13

W
aQ I I
��
I
wj I I
I I �
I ' �
I
I I ! O
I I d
I I
II
z I� o
� I /I Ch
� I
� J I
I
I
w � t
i J WW
I J_ F�-
I
1 I � k
I I Z
I I W O
� zI ZI
I I
l �I oo�
� +I NI
I I
WI >I
31 wl
=I 31
� gl O
Q
z
O
0 o
N
0
ON
V T
I
co
�
I
I I
I
F Ul
J
it I
co
C
Z LL
0
��a
z
W H
o
N CL
­0
> >W
Lu
00J
Z
Z J
=U U.
Wmg
z
W
W
3 m
V J
Q
c
�
dd
W
x U
w
m a
U
LL
z
o
N
a
J
O
0
Q
_N
o
N
z
O
0
V
a
\
2
a
U
Z
X,^
N
co
o
ii
=_ 13
a
Z ;F-
U
m
v
W
a
v
W
c
m
c
�
_
F
tz
?
&
IL
o
N J O—
Q
ci
N
'4
=
U
Q ?
V �
N
o = �
c)
a
O O O
N v-
O O
N
o U °
f-
Z
1=
N
ATE:
ELEVATION (NAVD -FEET)
>
=
8/13/12
Y:
U
ro
m
Y= ,, , ,_ I n
±Y - 4
GK
COMM NO.
C
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
146T32
z FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
a
'P�
SOF13
W
aQ I I
��
I
wj I I
I I �
I ' �
I
I I ! O
I I d
I I
II
z I� o
� I /I Ch
� I
� J I
I
I
w � t
i J WW
I J_ F�-
I
1 I � k
I I Z
I I W O
� zI ZI
I I
l �I oo�
� +I NI
I I
WI >I
31 wl
=I 31
� gl O

D
O
ai
a�
0
a
0 0 0 0
N
r
H
w
w
LL
w
J
m
O
a
CD
z
O
Q
w
) U
J
0
)
c N O O O N
C �
L
m
ELEVATION (NAVD -FEET)
r
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ,3
ME
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
L
C
.A
3
O
UJ
V O
= G
O J
2 rL
O
L
Z
°a'
ui
00�'
ZJ
= V U.
Zma
w
= m
aV J
W V
m
z
J
O
aj
� I
s
I
W
N I
a_
N I
,
I
p�
Q> I
I
Z
Q 3
N J
Q
V
j
a
U
N
1
H
v1
I
I
i I
Q
a:
I
�
J
Q
�
o
I
I
I
I
a�
'
I
i I
, I
i I
P
ce
N
DAT E:
I
I
8/13/12
LO
Sri
I
I
I /
I
Li
I/
I
�
j
LL. J
/1
I
= a
CL
1
/ 1
I
i
W
° >1
Oi
(�
Q1
z
Qi
Z'
W
/
o
/
+1
�I
I
> I
i
,
Wi
wl
wl
31
3�
_�
JI
c
r
H
w
w
LL
w
J
m
O
a
CD
z
O
Q
w
) U
J
0
)
c N O O O N
C �
L
m
ELEVATION (NAVD -FEET)
r
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ,3
ME
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
L
C
.A
3
O
UJ
V O
= G
O J
2 rL
O
L
Z
°a'
ui
00�'
ZJ
= V U.
Zma
w
= m
aV J
W V
m
z
J
O
GK
:omm NO,
146232
MEET:
9OF13
aj
s
W
a_
p�
F-
li
rL
?
Z
Q 3
N J
Q
V
j
a
U
N
H
v1
a.
Q
a:
�
J
Q
�
o
V
Z
P
ce
N
DAT E:
j
2
8/13/12
GK
:omm NO,
146232
MEET:
9OF13

0
N
o
r
O
�
N
Q
O
Z
J
QI ¢I
I
co
O
a
ZI Z.
i
r
�rl �I
w
l
a, W
�a
o
I
I?I >I
o
O W
Z J
Q r
W W I
0
to
w
�
U.
ZZd
I
II
Q
�W
Z W
�'
�I gl
I
C9
V to Z
a
w�
I i
I
/
c7
Z
I
i I
to W
I i
I
(F
Co
z
I
I I
in
I
I
ZZ>
I I
I
Q =o:
w
(
I
I
�I
N
U
°�
W
I
I
II
I
WV
Z
I
li Q
O
Zmw
�-
xw
..
J
WJ
I
I
mZ
I
t�
=
V 0
(
N
U.
I
I
Y O
el
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
cl:
r
m 3
a
z
E
O
J
0
O
°-
U
a
o
a
X
r
IL
N
v
6
Li
-s
ppp °s
V
Y
W
(L
I
W
e
p
U
Z
z
N J
° J
°c
U
co
U
o�
4
_
U
° a
_
a
_
z
_
�
v
a
N
O
O
O
N
J
°
°
'
z
ELEVATION (NAVD -FEET)
h
O
N
DATE:
a j
m
8/13/12
o
r
-
^
Y:
U
o
D e
ESCRI
GK
omm N0.
z
146232
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
EET:
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
of 1
110
a
I
w
�
I
Q
M
I
i I
z
I
I I
in
I
I
01
I I
I
w
(
I
I
�I
N
U
°�
I
I
II
I
Z
I
li Q
O
�-
xw
W�
w�
I
I
mZ
I
t�
(
N
I
I
w
el
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
00

ZI N r° C', I �, , 4
z
I= 2341040 O Q z N C-4 I ` -_ E 2341000
00 \ Q
0 04
N NI 'W aCA Z „d. m +J � V
II II 4 I � 0 v r- 04 N '),0Z J
tnC_D Q i x> .�mo I 0
'+� J =
F-- Z
W >
►`) N M m �. ,. d Z Z
N II fj o. t'-. ' [L'NN �gZ
g
x 0x oow
\ le
OrON n� � rn I �f73 ZZQ
N
If I moo
+Y� Q w N m - Z O
m = ao
�- r-;
�- X O
X
2339500 > - E 2339500 Z
o
LL- (D � RN tmJ� r- -
00 Q
O)F N �N V
F= CU \ \� i N o
f-WZ \ \ ♦ m I II II N
�0Z O
+x J
W
I LN p
T4 N W ` U Cj F w M Q i s$
> z N �O z $$a
cna
M iZ o Z Z
. N i 0 a) �6
Q
Of N u II N ! 0Z OON0 U O
cn /4 n I- i- Q (no rx `' _ cr 6
UQ N x I ' r- N � �-- 0 0 <� �OOC n
mmu L ov u_w�0a 43�.
o4Z M — m N II m Z< <0>- g €
t7 °��- Z � ci a I
moo O 6• x N a <C-)- 0
-of o a
lJ ('� N fn F- — W_ N O i
Z U LO r Q 0- tn im E 2338000 o Q¢ q w N a
W I`• _J 00 r-- ot� 00 I Z Z O
�� �-M 0�= }S \
M � NN �I M� 0<0
' fl V j UU ZOO]
13:9 z II U DATE
i x FU•- ^ U ? O N M 8/13/12 Ca
3E —1 0' , REMSIM
u cv l u Q U' _- DA Y D GK
a ' Z a LLu = �- Z CV / COMM NO.
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ? ° r / 146232
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY t t fit`
• v 1 OF 1

Q a � wZ
O � O
F- � N
L-
L`'
F-
w
Q
j
Z
z
z
l Ofl
Ln Ln
N O N
o >
In
o w °
O
z
O
0
O
U
V
d3a Moaa �0 3 d3
N = N
=
I M�
r
04
v I
w wa
z
Q
Z g
o
Q
�
�Q
I
�
00
P U
o
ZWJ
N
U N
O
11 =O
1
_
19 aa
W
60 Z4 -On a
-Z� o
one�� z
Z
-_O
0
0
0
J�
tC1�
WO
1
N
w z
zm0
w
LL
0
2 m
n801
1
v
0 m
o
o
M
W
E °°
o
U
U I
a
1
U)
W U
Z
J
N
N
to
wQ
z
a w
a Lil N
O
a
JO
Q
mdE>
1- Q N
t1
W
L,.1 Q U sr
zmFr N
c
U
z
Jmm _
H
o =a a
m
Q
wNF- :
}
Ln F- O U
zz
= v 2
-
o!
Ln w ¢
O
6 w
U }
B �N
w
J
O W
U W O }"
m
Z6
mN
Q
Z
zxo
O�lr
a
-i W g
Wv
LnW
jM
LLJ
2
n3�
wM
U I
Lr -io-�w
�Uw �o
Sit
'o
J LJ W Q W
q
go $ 4
U
`m
V W —.Zip
J4 �9 a
O C- O_ pD
lap
x°
zLia 0) C-)
a i
N
fo
Q�z LLB
moo ow
V
a
F-
B
ELEVATION (NAND -FEET)
W <> F"' �
o o w
,
E
<<
UJW f]m
DATE:
a
m
8/13/12
r cV r7
Y:
c
0
i
-DATE Y
1i
GK
z
OMM NO.
146232
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
2 of i
a
Q a � wZ
O � O
F- � N
-Z� o
one�� z
z
-_O
0
O -ZL- n
n801
o
tf)
1

U
o �
}
W
N
O
mN to N O N L1
c�
z
PU
X Q m
W2
Q
Q
e
to N O N lL9
I i
ELEVATION (NAVD -FEET)
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
ll FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
Ll
W
w
Z
O_
U
w
CO
Z
O
Q
w
U
Q
_CZ)
tL
u s,-
f-
% ry I
SR
Ow� D
Z
cr
a. C) }
Z
W
LLJ La m
W WL
ZE
OwZ
0 111
O
to
J
so
d
all
w0M
En
ESC-) 00 LLI
Lu 000-
=�-__
Z
-1
N
U
0=
N
Q
a
(r°DN
Z�a��
�
U
�
V
=
O
Q
O
J
<
OWCUW
>
•I
O
N
Z m
}
t- m
DATE:
O
2
?WJ
N Ki
VZO
1
WIa
>mg
•
ZZ19
Q
•
m
2
ONES■
m
v
to N O N lL9
I i
ELEVATION (NAVD -FEET)
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
ll FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
Ll
W
w
Z
O_
U
w
CO
Z
O
Q
w
U
Q
_CZ)
N
tai Q U
Z�Fr N
J W
OJa �
F= M F Q
Li W
cn f— O W
tL
u s,-
f-
% ry I
SR
Ow� D
Z
cr
a. C) }
Z
W
LLJ La m
W WL
ZE
OwZ
0 111
O
to
J
so
d
all
w0M
En
ESC-) 00 LLI
Lu 000-
0
U
Z
-1
N
U
0=
N
Q
a
(r°DN
Z�a��
�
U
�
V
=
O
Q
O
J
<
OWCUW
>
00-i <<
O
N
Z m
}
t- m
DATE:
O
2
?WJ
N Ki
VZO
WIa
>mg
ZZ19
Q
Sao
W IX
m
2
m
v
m
w
Q
J
v
F
a
Z
J
J w
0
Q
m
(yz
_N
O
�.►
N
tai Q U
Z�Fr N
J W
OJa �
F= M F Q
Li W
cn f— O W
u s,-
U%Z Q
W
% ry I
SR
Ow� D
= a${
cr
a. C) }
C d r
LLJ La m
W WL
ZE
OwZ
0 111
JOir
so
d
all
w0M
ESC-) 00 LLI
Lu 000-
ft
JJlwi> }�
mow? -W
Sc
OV
J
<�
(r°DN
Z�a��
v
aLf)z t<.�
Moo Ow
rnPQ m�
OWCUW
00-i <<
OJW om
DATE:
8/13/12
N Ki
GK
OMM N0.
146232
MEET.
3OF1

'sK
Lg-
F-
WMAIK AV
MIC"AM
ltljt�FnC. PWVttM PAW:
Aft
/ d?
1) MWAfty FM Wo UM WPFM MI MM AVWM
. *a vr4oLm wAc" un CAE oat"
Low To an CONOU&IM OFFILiR Im 04T ADVANCE Noyce
Log OCMUTM
----77:777777-�
IMV E 4A
-D
J
s E "00
IOM=- 0 I=
mc=
-to 0ElITUBYlVOP
Im
luxuarw sr. Ism
9"*l
Mal ""I"
MAP
aPritED
Sheet 13A of 13
il�l
Icl I
4--J A

A,
DCM MP -1
APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
CAROLINA BEACH: BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECT
Carolina Beach, North Carolina
SECTION 4
SITE DESCRIPTION
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.

4e. Vegetation on tract
Perennial grasses, such as American beach grass (Ammophila breviligulata) and sea oats (Uniola
paniculata), are the primary stabilizers along the beach and dune communities along the
oceanfront shorelines of Onslow Bay and the inlet shorelines of Carolina Beach Inlet.
4E Man -made features and uses now on tract
The tract includes single and multifamily residential homes, business and commercial uses. The
beachfront is utilized for recreational activities. There is a 2,075 -foot long rock revetment at the
extreme north end of the project.
4g. Identify and describe the existing land uses adiacent to the proposed project site.
The existing land uses adjacent to the proposed project include single and multifamily
residential, commercial businesses, and community access to the beach front.
4k. Professional Archaeological Assessment
No impacts to known archeological or historic resources are anticipated due to the proposed
work since it is westward of the 1865 shoreline and the inlet is a modern creation. The project
has been previously reviewed per Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
(P.L. 89 -665), as amended, and the Abandoned Shipwreck Act of 1987. See Appendix H.
4m (i). Are there wetlands on the site?
Section 404(b)(1) Evaluations. A Section 404(b)(1) evaluation was prepared for the FEIS dated
July 1981. A copy of this 404(b)(1) evaluation is included in Appendix G.
No wetlands will be impacted by the proposed project.
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.

DCM MP -1
APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
CAROLINA BEACH: BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECT
Carolina Beach, North Carolina
SECTION 5
ACTIVITIES AND IMPACTS
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.

5b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when
complete.
Because the Federal authorization set to expire in 2014 following the next beach nourishment
event, scheduled for 2013, New Hanover County is proactively seeking to obtain the necessary
permits which will allow for the County to fund the continuation of the beach nourishment as
specified under the Federal authorization.
The goals and objectives of the Carolina Beach Nourishment Project are as follows:
• Stabilize the Town's oceanfront shoreline;
• Provide long -term protection to Town infrastructure, residences and businesses over the next
thirty years in the absence of Federal funding;
• Reduce or mitigate for historic shoreline erosion along the 14,000 feet of oceanfront
shoreline of Carolina Beach;
• Improve recreational opportunities along the Town's oceanfront shoreline;
• Acquire beach compatible material for the shoreline protection project;
• Maintain the Town's and County's tax base by protecting existing development and
infrastructure on the oceanfront shoreline of Carolina Beach; and
• Balance the needs of the human environment by minimizing and avoiding negative effects to
natural resources.
The restored beach frontage would be used for recreation by local citizens and tourists, foraging
by shorebirds, and nesting by sea turtles. There would not be any form of organized daily
operation of the project area.
5c. 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.
A sand dike will be constructed on the seaward side of the fill area. The sand slurry will then be
discharged via pipeline dredge behind the dike. Excess water will be released around the end of
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.

the dike. Finally, bulldozers will be used to construct the dune and berm system and grade the
sand across the new beach profile. Typical beach nourishment construction methodology will be
used. Cutterhead hydraulic dredge and pipeline, bulldozers, front -end loaders and other earth
moving machines will be used during construction. Storage of the equipment will not typically
be a concern as the work will likely occur 24 hours a day.
5d. List all development activities you propose.
The Carolina Beach Federal storm damage reduction project was authorized by Congress in 1962
(House Document Number 418, 87th Congress, 2nd Session). The project extends along 14,000
lineal feet of ocean shoreline as shown in Figure 1.4. As originally authorized, the project
consisted of a beach fill shaped in the form a 25 -foot wide dune with a crest elevation of 12.5
feet above North American Vertical Datum (NAVD) fronted by a 50 -foot wide storm berm at
elevation 9.5 feet above NAVD. The project was later modified to include a 2,075 -foot long rock
revetment at the extreme north end of the project which is fronted by a 130 -foot wide 10 berm at
elevation 5.5 feet above NAVD. The crest elevation of the revetment is at 9.5 feet NAVD. The
authorization also included periodic nourishment of the project with the nourishment interval
estimated to be approximately every three years. This project will follow the precise template of
the federally authorized project. This includes the extent of the borrow area located in Carolina
Beach Inlet (Sheet 2 and 11 of 13), the beach fill, and all other specifications of the project. The
plan layout of the project is shown in Sheets 3 -7 of 13 with typical profiles of the beach fill and
revetment sections shown in Sheets 8 -10 and 12 -13 of 13, respectively.
5h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
The fill locations are the oceanfront beach adjacent to the Town of Carolina Beach. Borrow
material will be removed from the existing inlet sediment trap located in the throat of Carolina
Beach Inlet. The proposed work is associated with beach fill and maintenance of the proposed
project.
5j, Mitigation Proposal
A mitigation and monitoring proposal is currently under development for this project (See
Appendix C — Mitigation and Monitoring Plan). Any mitigation or monitoring that may be
required for this project will be approved, and as required, prior to construction of the proposed
project
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc. „
oY

DCM MP -1
APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
CAROLINA BEACH: BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECT
Carolina Beach, North Carolina
SECTION 6
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina,

6a. Project narrative.
Project Background
The Carolina Beach Federal storm damage_ reduction project was authorized by Congress
in 1962 (House Document Number 418, 87th Congress, 2 "d Session). Construction of the
Carolina Beach portion of the project was then initiated in 1964. The Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (PL 99 -662), specifically Section 934 of the Act, provides for
Federal participation in beach nourishment for a total period of 50 years beginning at the
initiation of construction. The Carolina Beach portion of the authorized project was re-
evaluated under Section 934 in February 1993 and was found to be eligible for continued
Federal participation in beach nourishment for the remaining economic life of the project.
This stipulated that the Federal cost - sharing for beach nourishment at Carolina Beach was
authorized to continue through the year 2014.
Because the Federal authorization set to expire in 2014 following the next beach
nourishment event, scheduled for 2013, New Hanover County is proactively seeking to
obtain the necessary permits which will allow for the County to fund the continuation of
the beach nourishment as specified under the Federal authorization.
Existing Conditions
The project is located along the oceanfront shoreline at Carolina Beach. Initial
construction of the Carolina Beach project occurred between December 1964 and May
1965 with a total of 3,597,400 cubic yards of borrow material distributed along the
14,000 -foot project shoreline. The borrow material was obtained from the Carolina
Beach Yacht Basin located at the head of Myrtle Grove Sound (Sheet 2 of 13).
The project experienced some initial erosion problems which were attributable to the
quality of the material used for initial construction and impacts of Carolina Beach Inlet
on sediment transport to the north end of the project. Additional erosion problems
developed between 1971 and 1981 due to lack of Federal and/or State funding. Over this
10 -year period, erosion of the project migrated south eventually encompassing 12,000
feet of the 14,000 -foot project. Ultimately, the funding issues were resolved and the inlet
induced erosion was addressed by modifying the project to include sediment bypassing
from Carolina Beach Inlet to the north end of the project. The Carolina Beach project
was completely restored to its authorized dimensions in 1982 using material from an
upland borrow area on the riverside of Carolina Beach as shown in Sheet 2 of 13.
Following the 1982 restoration, initial construction of the project was officially declared
complete.
Subsequent periodic nourishment events have been accomplished approximately every
three years with material collected in a sediment trap located in the throat of Carolina
Beach Inlet (Sheet 2 and 11 of 13). The volume placed along Carolina Beach since 1985
has averaged 858,600 cubic yards during each periodic nourishment operations. The
entrapment of the material in the sediment trap and subsequent removal and placement on
the Carolina Beach project constitutes a form of sediment bypassing around the inlet. A
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.
La�

summary of past nourishment events for the Carolina Beach project is provided in Table
1.1.
Table 1- Carolina Beach nourishment history
Nourishment
Dates
Borrow Area
Placement
Area (stas.)(2)
Pay Yardage
(c)
Cost of
Operation
Dec 64 — May 65
CB Yacht Basin
0 to 140
3,597,400
$945,135
Mar — Jun 67
CB Net
100 to 140
390,000
$207,482
Apr — Jun 70
CB Inlet
60 to 120
282,400
$294,384
Apr — May 71
CFR south of Snows Cut
0 to 140
734,100
$839,216
Apr — May 81
CB Inlet
60 to 120
406,400
$1,188,716
Dec 81 —Aug 82
Upland Site
0 to 140
3,662,200
$8,384,406
Apr — Jun 85
CB Inlet
80 to 140
764,200
$1,652,004
Mar —Apr 88
CB Inlet
85 to 142
950,900
$1,890,535
May — Jul 91
CB Inlet
0 to 140
1,008,700
$2,450,286
Feb — May 95
CB Inlet
0 to 140
1,157,700
$3,185,642
1998
CB Inlet
0 to 140
1,204,600
$3,061,390
7 -18 Mar 01
CB Inlet
0 to 140
567,300
$2,096,174
Mar — Apr 04
CB Inlet
0 to 140
800,400
$2,076,561
2006-2007
CB Inlet
0 to 140
632,143
$7,125,737
2010
CB Inlet
41 to 140
690,000
$4,278,185
(') Borrow areas shown on Sheet 11 of 13.
(2) Stations in 100's feet (Sheets 3 -7 of 13).
A Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was issued for this project in July 1981.
This document authorized the placement of beach compatible material from Carolina
Beach Inlet onto Carolina Beach. Within the EA/FONSI for Carolina Beach and Vicinity
dated October 1993, the USACE requested that formal consultation be initiated for the
proposed project with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended. The USACE requested USFWS to combine their Biological
Opinion for the Carolina Beach — Area North and the Carolina Beach and Vicinity — Area
South. The USFWS issued its final Biological Opinion for both the north and south
portions of the project on August 9, 1993 which stated the project would not jeopardize
the continued existence of the loggerhead sea turtle, green sea turtle, and seabeach
amaranth. The NMFS stated that the project is not likely to adversely affect threatened or
endangered species under their jurisdiction.
Within the EA/FONSI for the Proposed Change in Construction Schedule, Carolina
Beach and Vicinity -Area South dated July 1995, the USACE requested that formal
consultation be initiated for the proposed project with the USFWS and the NMFS
pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. By letter
dated May 18, 1995, the NUTS stated that the project is not likely to adversely affect
threatened or endangered species under their jurisdiction. USFWS provided the USACE
with a biological opinion dated June 20, 1995. The findings from the USFWS' BO dated
June 20, 1997 stated that the proposed project would not jeopardize the continued
existence of the loggerhead sea turtle, green sea turtle, and seabeach amaranth. Prior to
construction, USFWS will be notified so that the piping plover (and its, ;designated
habitat) will not be adversely impacted. The County will comply with all reaonable =ands
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.
; ? t °",

prudent measures provided in the USFWS' BO's dated August 9, 1993 and June 20,
1995.
In addition to the ,above biological documentation, CPE, NC has prepared a current EFH
and BA attached in Appendices E and F respectively.
The long term average annual erosion rate for the project is currently 2 feet per year. The
proposed update to erosion rates would include a segment of 3 feet per year on the
northern end of the project, beginning approximately 250 feet south of Carolina Beach
Pier and continuing north to the end of the project.
The Town -of Carolina Beach currently has a Static Line of Vegetation established on pre -
nourishment 1984 aerial photography.
Proposed Project
This project will follow the precise template of the federally authorized project. This
includes the extent of the borrow area located in Carolina Beach Inlet, the beach fill,
pipeline placement and all other specifications of the project (See Appendix A for work
plats and location maps). Construction of the project would be scheduled to occur within
the approved dredging window (Nov. 15 — March 31) to minimize environmental
impacts. The dredge pipeline corridor will be same as used in previously authorized
Corps' projects and typically runs down the back side of Freeman Beach, however, there
is permanent cross -over located near the Carolina Beach Fishing pier. When the cross-
over is used the pipeline runs down the AIWW and then crosses over to the beach. See
Sheet 13A for details.
The project extends along 14,000 lineal feet of ocean shoreline as shown in Figure 2 of
13. As originally authorized, the project consisted of a beach fill shaped in the form a 25-
foot wide dune with a crest elevation of 12.5 feet above North American Vertical Datum
(NAVD) fironted by a 50 -foot wide storm berm at elevation 9.5 feet above NAVD. The
project was later modified to include a 2,075 -foot long rock revetment at the extreme
north end of the project which is fronted by a 130 -foot wide berm at elevation 5.5 feet
above NAVD. The crest elevation of the revetment is at 9.5 feet NAVD. As stated
above, the authorization also included periodic nourishment of the project with the
nourishment interval estimated to be approximately every three years. The typical
profiles of the beach fill and revetment sections are shown in Sheets 8 -10 of 13,
respectively. MH'W equals +1.4' NAVD and NEW equals -2.8 NAVD. No fill will be
placed where existing grade is greater than the design fill template.
In April, 2008, the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) adopted State
Sediment Criteria Rule Language (15A NCAC 07H .0312) for borrow material aimed at
preventing the disposal of incompatible material on the beach. The new rule limits the
amount of material by weight in the borrow area with a diameter equal to or greater than
4.76 ' mm and less than 76 mm (gravel), between 4.76 mm and 2.0 mm (granular), and
less than 0.0625 mm to no more than 5% above that which exists on the native beach.
The results of the characterization of native material on Carolina Beach are shown below
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc. �- -, ` n .�a = ; L)

in Table 6. Vibracores obtained within the proposed borrow area within Carolina Beach
Inlet revealed that the material will comply within the newly adopted State Sediment
Criteria Rule Language (Table 2). On June 5, 2012, ten (10) vibracores were collected
within the existing Carolina Beach Inlet borrow area to meet the maximum 500 ft. State
sediment criteria standards for spacing and number of vibracores [I 5A NCAC 07H.0312
(2) (e)]. On July 10, 2012, a sidescan sonar survey was conducted. On May 24, May 25,
and June 19, 2012, CPE-NC collected beach samples and nearshore sediment samples
along five (5) profiles extending from the dune out to -20 ft. NAVD to facilitate an
evaluation of the borrow area's compatibility with the existing beach. A final borrow area
was designed within the footprint of the existing borrow area and has been designated the
Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area. This borrow area has seven (7) cut elevations ranging
from -21.3 ft. NAVD88 to -40.8 ft. NAVD8.8 and an estimated dredgeable volume of
approximately 947,000 cy. The compatibility of the Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area
with the existing beach was evaluated according to wet Munsell color, silt content,
carbonate content and grain size. All values meet the allowable limits defined by Rule
15A NCAC 0714.0312. See Appendix D for the Final Geotechnical Report.
Tahlo 7. - Chararterictirs of the Native Beach and Carolina Beach Inlet Material
- - -- - - -- --
- -- - -
%
%
%
Mean Grain
% Silt
Carbonate
Granular
Gravel
Size (mm)
State Standard Allowance
- 5
15
5
5
N/A
Carolina Beach Native
1.15
5
0.34
0.15
0.21
Beach
State Standard Limit
6.15
20
534
5.15
N/A
Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow
1.87
6
0.46
0.58
0.19
Area
(') Allowances above native beach material.
6b and c. Work Plats and Location Maps.
See Appendix A for Work Plats and Location Maps.
6d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument under
which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
Appendix E includes the 1963 Session Law approved by the General Assembly and the
Town of Carolina Beach Ordinances that allow the applicant to conduct the proposed
projept activities. V
Coastal Planning & EngincerMg of -North Carolina, Inc.

6f. Adjacent Riparian Property Owners
South End
Nahm, Dale L. Rev Trust
7905 Trap Way
Wilmington, NC 28412
North End
Freeman, R B His
PQ Box 36
Clarkton, NC 28433
State of North Carolina
116 Jones Street
j Raleigh, NC 27603
t
Bende; Booker Thrs
6627 Carolina Beach Road
Wilmington, NC 28412
Inlet Watch Yacht Club
801 Paoli Court
Wilmington, NC 2840
Futch, James Firs
P4 Box 15538
Wilmington, NC 28408
ED
,L� 4M, NC
L P i �, '?6 r2
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.

APPENDIX V
404(b) (PL 95-
217) EVALUATION REPORT
CAROLINA BEAC$
BEACH EROSION CONY
WAVE PROTECTION HUR
NEW RICANE
HA NTY NOVER COU PROJECT f
' NORTH CAROLINA
l' Project Description:
a. The Carolina na Beach
a be by the 1962 Flood and Vicinity Hurr'
a berm and dune and Control Act icane Prot
The actual Periodic and provides for Protection Project was
the corporate limits Pro' has ebeenishwent along 25 800 Construction of
could not of Carolina Bea t feet of
each ° the 14,000 ocean
e met for the remainin since terms of feet within
Construction g Portion• local Coo
n activities Aeration
2.6 million cubic have included the
in 1967, 1970 Yards of sand initial
Of that project and 1971. The C in 1964 and 1965 placement of J
Corps now proposes and additional deposits
* The
COmPletio Complete construction.
cubic yards of of the project
Caro li material on the will require the
na Beach. beach Placement
comp letion. This The Corps plans t within the corporate 3.3 million
Sunny Point site is located use an upland limits of
Div' (MOTSU) blast ated within the Aland borrow site
Beach ion of Parks and RecrzOne in an area lh . y Ocean
star for project
fate Park. eati eased by the NortTerminal,
located Currently the and managed i h Carolina
not beenis u developed, and Portion of n conjunction with
developed ade Public. The borrow of future development the siteais lima
:rail) by the ° na he Slate si(i,Is Physically eSe °f the area have
beach L Carol' a Park Parated
and F; 11. Removal Sewa e., marina, campground the
Pit of a moval of s $e Treatment mpground� and
elevation, ately 85 acres for beach fill will and the Carolinaature
Proxim and
to a 30 -foot will result
* mean low water in a borrow
The current schedule on 1 October the ule Proposes dredging
Pletion of cones of the
onsite the acres inue for approximatelyc20� channel
to
and dredging s channel noel commence
will uain rem oved throughltheon inuehabout�truction dredge •willon
including with g clearing and existing access months after be brought
1 the dredging grubbing channel. Sitehlch the dredge
channel will be gang of the ac geSwill take place Preparation,
Fear Rfi ver due wea aced on an existicheanel. The prior to and concurrent-
Fear
diked disposal material from the
new diked upland area f the Carolina P °Sal island
at the CarolinBeach Sewage Treat in the Cape
a Beach borrow Plant or
ow site. in a
The disposal of
V -1
,4 § 1' � T,

CAROLINA BEACH: BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECT
MITIGATION AND MONITORING PLAN
Prepared for:
New Hanover County
Prepared by:
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.
4038 Masonboro Loop Road
Wilmington, North Carolina 28409
August 2012
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

Carolina Beach: Beach Nourishment Project
Mitigation and Monitoring Plan
Table of Contents
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION ............................................................ ............................... 1
DredgeType ........................................................................................... ............................... 1
Construction Schedule ........................................................................... ............................... 1
CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES ...................................................................... ............................... 1
DredgePositioning ................................................................................. ............................... 1
PipelineObservation .............................................................................. ............................... 2
Construction Observations ..................................................................... ............................... 2
MONITORING INITIATIVES ......................................................................... ............................... 3
SedimentCompatibility ......................................................................... ............................... 3
Escarpments........................................................................................... ............................... 3
WaterQuality ......................................................................................... ............................... 3
BirdMonitoring ..................................................................................... ............................... 4
Seabeach Amaranth (Amaranthus pumilus) ........................................... ............................... 4
SeaTurtles .............................................................................................. ............................... 4
West Indian Manatee (Trichechus manatus) ......................................... ............................... 4
LITERATURECITED ...................................................................................... ............................... 5
1
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.-,

AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION AND INNOVATIVE DESIGN MEASURES
The following section describes several actions and measures incorporated into the
design of the proposed project to avoid or significantly reduce adverse effects or
incidental takes of federally listed threatened or endangered species.
Construction Schedule
Dredging within Carolina Beach Inlet is scheduled to occur between November 16th and
March 31 ". The timing of construction activities was specifically scheduled to occur
outside of the sea turtle nesting season, the West Indian manatee summer occurrence in
North Carolina, the piping plover (and other shorebirds) migratory and breeding seasons,
and the seabeach amaranth flowering period. Also, sand placement and dredge operation
conducted outside of primary invertebrate production and recruitment periods (spring and
fall) limit impacts to amphipods, polychaetes, crabs and clams.
Dredge Type
A hydraulic cutterhead is proposed for dredging the proposed borrow area within
Carolina Beach Inlet. A cutterhead dredge uses a rotating cutter assembly at the end of a
ladder arm to excavate bottom material, which is then drawn into the suction arm and
pumped to the shoreline. On the beach, pipelines will transport the sediment to the
designated beach fill area. Bulldozers will be used to construct seaward shore parallel
dikes to contain the material on the beach, and to shape the beach to the appropriate
construction cross - section template. During construction, the contractor will utilize
surveying techniques for compliance with the designed berm width, height, and slope.
Compared to similar types of dredging methodologies, a cutterhead dredge creates
minimal disturbance to the seafloor resulting in lower sedimentation and turbidity levels.
Anchor (2003) conducted a literature review of suspended sediments from dredging
activities. This report concluded that the use of a hydraulic dredge (i.e., cutter suction)
limits the possibilities for suspension of sediment to the point of extraction. Also, since
the sediment is suctioned into the dredge head, the sediment cannot directly enter into the
middle or upper water column.
No incidences of sea turtle takes from a hydraulic dredge have been identified during the
research and development of this document. Therefore, the use and methods involved
with this type of machinery reduces or eliminates the likelihood of an incidental take.
CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES
Dredge Positioning
DREDGEPAK® or similar navigation and positioning software will be used by the
contractor to accurately track the dredge location. The software will provide real -time
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc. '�'

dredge positioning and digging functions to allow color display of dredge shape, physical
feature data as found in background Computer Aided Design (CAD) charts and color
contour matrix files from hydrographic data collection software described above on a
Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) display. The software shall also provide a display of
theoretical volume quantities removed during actual dredging operations.
Dredge anchors shall not be placed any further than 61 m (200 ft) from the edge of the
areas to be dredged. The dredge contractor will be required to verify the location of the
anchors with real time positioning each and every time the anchors are relocated.
Pipeline Observations
In order to minimize adverse impact on wintering piping plover, the pipeline alignment
will be designed to avoid potential piping plover wintering habitat. The alignment will
be coordinated with, and approved by, the USACE. As -built positions of the pipeline
will be recorded using GPS technology and included in the final construction observation
report.
In order to avoid adverse impacts associated with the transport of fill material to the
disposal sites, New Hanover County will negotiate with the dredging contractor to
monitor and assess the pipeline during construction. This will serve to avoid leaking of
sediment material from the pipeline couplings, other equipment, or other pipeline leaks
that may result in sediment plumes, siltation and/or elevated turbidity levels. New
Hanover County, along with their Engineer, will coordinate with the dredgers and have in
place a mechanism to cease dredge and fill activities in the event that a substantial leak is
detected (leaks resulting in turbidity that exceed State water quality standards or
sedimentation). Operations may resume upon appropriate repair of affected couplings or
other equipment.
Construction Observations
Several initiatives will be undertaken by New Hanover County, the Engineer, or his duly
authorized representative to monitor construction practices. Construction observation
and contract administration will be periodically performed during periods of active
construction. Most observations will be during daylight hours; however, random
nighttime observations may be conducted. New Hanover County, the Engineer, or his
duly authorized representative will provide onsite observation by an individual with
training or experience in beach nourishment and construction observation and testing, and
that is knowledgeable of the project design and.permit conditions. The project manager,
a coastal engineer, will coordinate with the field observer. Multiple daily observations of
the pumpout location will be made by New Hanover County, the Engineer, or his duly
authorized representative for QA/QC of the material being placed on the beach. If
incompatible material is placed on the beach, the USACE and appropriate resource
agencies will be contacted immediately to determine appropriate actions.
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc._,

MONITORING INITIATIVES
Sediment Compatibility
As a result of sediment compliance efforts, compaction of fill material on the beach is
less likely to occur due to the lower silt content or hardening of the beach due to high
shell and/or carbonates. Compaction of fill could impact the ability of sea turtles to dig
and nest along the nourished beach, resulting in an increase in false crawls. Also,
macroinfauna indicative of a healthy benthic community depend upon variable particle
sizes and available interstitial pore space in the substrate for aeration properties.
Compaction of the fill material could impact resident macroinfaunal populations thereby
affecting the migratory and resident shorebirds, waterbirds, as well as the commercially
and recreationally important fish that depend upon them.
New Hanover County, the Engineer, or their duly authorized representative, will collect a
representative sub - surface (6 in below grade) grab sediment sample from each 100 -ft
long (along the shoreline) section of the constructed beach to visually assess grain size,
wet Munsell color, granular, gravel, and silt content. Each sample will be archived with
the date, time, and location of the sample. Samples will be collected during beach
observations. The sample will be visually compared to the acceptable sand criteria. If
determined necessary by the Engineer, or his duly authorized representative, quantitative
assessments of the sand will be conducted for grain size, wet Munsell color, and content
of gravel, granular and silt. A record of these sand evaluations will be provided within
the Engineer's daily inspection reports.
Escarpments
Visual surveys of escarpments will be made along the beach fill area immediately after
completion of construction. Escarpments in the newly placed beach fill that exceed 18
inches for greater than 100 ft shall be graded to match adjacent grades on the beach.
Removal of any escarpments during the sea turtle hatching season (May 1 through
November 15) shall be coordinated with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC), USFWS, and the USACE — Wilmington District.
Water Quality
The inlet, nearshore and offshore water columns are classified as SA and High Quality
Water (HQW) under the North Carolina State water quality standards. This classification
requires that work within the water column shall not cause turbidity levels to exceed 25
NTU or background (ambient) conditions that are above 25 NTU.
Dredge and fill operations are expected to temporarily elevate turbidity levels in the
water column at the borrow area and fill sites. Higher turbidity levels are likely to be
found in the discharge zone ( nearshore swash zone) during periods of active construction.
The use of a cutter suction dredge will minimize the area of disturbance since this type -,of : {'
dredge involves suction for the extraction of sediment.
3
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.

Turbidity monitoring during construction will be managed by the contractor. The
contractor will be responsible for notifying the construction engineer in the event that
turbidity levels exceed the State water quality standards.
Bird Monitoring
The North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission and North Carolina Audubon Society
(NCAS) have performed breeding surveys for colonial nesting waterbirds within
proximity of the project location on a regular basis since 1977. This includes portions of
Carolina Beach, Carolina Beach Inlet, and Masonboro Island. Surveys for breeding
piping plovers have been conducted as well at the same locations. Opportunistic surveys
for non - breeding piping plovers have been conducted in more recent years. These
ongoing surveys include observations from breeding and non - breeding seasons for
several listed bird species as well as other shorebirds and waterbirds. This monitoring is
expected to continue for the foreseeable future.
Seabeach Amaranth Monitoring
The USACE has conducted regular monitoring along Carolina Beach and Masonboro
Island for the presence of seabeach amaranth. This monitoring is anticipated to continue
for the foreseeable future.
Sea Turtle Monitoring
Volunteers with the Carolina Beach Turtle Project have been monitoring and protecting
sea turtle nests on Pleasure Island, including Freeman Park, next to Carolina Beach Inlet
since 1989. Since 2007, an average of 8.2 loggerhead nests per year has been recorded.
Monitoring has also been conducted along portions of Masonboro Island by the North
Carolina National Estuarine Research Reserve program since 2006, however the southern
end of the island was not monitored until 2010. During 2010, monitoring was conducted
once every several weeks. In 2011, the entire island was surveyed each day during
nesting season (Sutton, 2012, pers. comm). It is expected that these entities will continue
monitoring efforts into the foreseeable future.
West Indian Manatee Monitoring
Although manatees are not expected to be present during dredge and fill operations, the
contractor will adhere to the precautionary guidelines established by the USFWS —
Raleigh Office for construction activities in North Carolina waters. Refer to the
Guidelines for Avoiding Impacts to the West Indian Manatee.
4 ,F
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc,.

C
LITERATURE CITED
ANCHOR (ANCHOR ENVIRONMENTAL CA, L.P.). June 2003. Literature Review of Effects
of Resuspended Sediments Due to Dredging Operations. Prepared for Los Angeles
Contaminated Sediments Task Force, Los Angeles, California.
SUTTON, Hope. 2012. North Carolina National Estuarine Research Reserve,
Stewardship Coordinator & Southern Sites Manager. Personal communication
regarding sea turtle occurrences along Masonboro Island.
5 �..
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.

!:
DRAFT: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION OF CAROLINA BEACH INLET
BORROW AREA, NEW HANOVER COUNTY CONTINGENCY PERMITTING,
NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared by:
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.
Beth Forrest - Vandera, Ph.D.
Melany Larenas, PG
Kenneth T. Willson, M.Sc.
Jeffrey L. Andrews, PSM, CH
Prepared for:
New Hanover County
Recommended Citation: Forrest- Vandera, B.; Larenas, M.; Willson, K. and Andrews, J., 2012.
Draft: Geotechnical Investigation of Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area, New Hanover County
Contingency Permitting, North Carolina. Wilmington, North Carolina: Coastal Planning &
Engineering, Inc. 26p. (Prepared for New Hanover County, North Carolina).
August 7, 2012
1
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

.l
Executive Summary
In 2012, Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina (CPE -NC) was authorized to
provide services in support of the effort by New Hanover County to obtain the necessary permits
and authorizations required for beach nourishment along portions of the Carolina Beach
shoreline.
During the Carolina Beach geotechnical investigations, CPE -NC researchers conducted
geophysical ( sidescan sonar) and geotechnical (vibracore) surveys within the existing borrow
area located within the Carolina Beach Inlet. On June 5, 2012, ten (10) vibracores were
collected within the existing Carolina Beach Inlet borrow area to meet the maximum 500 ft. State
sediment criteria standards for spacing and number of vibracores [I 5A NCAC 0711.0312 (2) (e)].
On July 10, 2012, a sidescan sonar survey was conducted. On May 24, May 25, and June 19,
2012, CPE -NC collected beach samples and nearshore sediment samples along five (5) profiles
extending from the dune out to -20 ft. NAVD to facilitate an evaluation of the borrow area's
compatibility with the existing beach.
A final borrow area was designed within the footprint of the existing borrow area and has
been designated the Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area. This borrow area has seven (7) cut
elevations ranging from -21.3 ft. NAVD88 to 40.8 ft. NAVD88 and an estimated dredgeable
volume of approximately 947,000 cy. The compatibility of the Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow
Area with the existing beach was evaluated according to wet Munsell color, silt content,
carbonate content and grain size. All values meet the allowable limits defined by Rule 15A
NCAC 07H.0312.
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION OF CAROLINA BEACH INLET BORROW
AREA, NEW HANOVER COUNTY CONTINGENCY PERMITTING, NORTH
CAROLINA
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION......................................................................................... ............................... 5
GEOLOGICALBACKGROUND ............................................................... ............................... 7
CAROLINA BEACH NOURISHMENT HISTORY ................................. ............................... 8
GEOPHYSICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS ............ ............................... 9
InvestigationDetails .................................................................................... ............................... 9
Equipmentand Methods ............................................................................ ............................... 10
NavigationSystems ............................................................................... ............................... 11
Hypack Inc.'s Hypack 2010 ® Data Collection and Processing Program ............................. 11
SidescanSonar Survey ........................................................................... ............................... 11
BeachSample Coll ection ....................................................................... ............................... 13
VibracoreSurvey ..................................................................................... .............................16
Resultsand Discussion .............................................................................. ............................... 18
BORROWAREA DESIGN ........................................................................ ............................... 21
CompatibilityAnalysis .............................................................................. ............................... 23
Color...................................................................................................... ............................... 24
CarbonateContent ................................................................................. ............................... 24
Fines....................................................................................................... ............................... 24
GrainSize .......................................:....................................................... ............................... 24
CONCLUSIONS.......................................................................................... .......................:....... 25
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................ ............................... 25
LITERATURECITED ............................................................................... ............................... 25
List of Figures
Figure1. Location map .................................................................................... ............................... 6
Figure 2. Deployment of a sidescan sonar survey ......................................... ............................... 10
Figure 3. EdgeTech 4200 -BFL sidescan sonar system .................................. ............................... 12
Figure 4. Carolina Beach sample locations .................................................... ............................... 15
Figure 5. Athena Technologies vibracore system being deployed off the RV Artemis ................ 16
Figure 6. Vibracore logging, sub - sample collection and Munsell color determination ................ 17
Figure 7. Sidescan sonar mosaic .................................................................... ............................... 20
Figure 8. Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area ................................................. ............................... 22
3
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
Ww'

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION OF CAROLINA BEACH INLET BORROW
AREA, NEW HANOVER COUNTY CONTINGENCY PERMITTING, NORTH
CAROLINA
Table of Contents
(cont'd)
List of Tables
Table 1. Geophysical and geotechnical investigations conducted in 2012 ...... .............................10
Table 2. Equipment used during the 2012 geophysical and geotechnical investigations ............. I 1
Table 3. Sieve sizes used for grain size analysis ........................................... ............................... 18
Table 4. Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area Cut Conversions ....................... ............................... 21
Table 5. Beach and borrow area characteristics ............................................. ............................... 23
Table 6. Allowable silt, granular and gravel limits defined by State rules .... ............................... 25
List of Appendices
Appendix 1 Scope of Services
Appendix 2 CPE -NC Individual Beach Granularmetric Reports
Appendix 3 CPE -NC Individual Beach Grain Size Distribution Curves/Histograms
Appendix 4 Beach Composite Summary Tables
Appendix 5 Beach Composite Granularmetric Reports
Appendix 6 Beach Composite Grain Size Curves/Histograms
Appendix 7 2012 CPE -NC Vibracore Logs
Appendix 8 2012 CPE -NC Vibracore Photographs
Appendix 9 2012 CPE -NC Individual Vibracore Granularmetric Reports
Appendix 10 2012 CPE -NC Individual Vibracore Grain Size Distribution Curves/Histograms
Appendix 11 2012 CPE -NC Sidescan Sonar Contact Sheets
Appendix 12 Borrow Area Composite Summary Tables
Appendix 13 Borrow Area Composite Granularmetric Reports
Appendix 14 Borrow Area Composite Grain Size Curves/Histograms
4
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC., .,

INTRODUCTION
Carolina Beach is located on the Atlantic Coast of southeastern North Carolina, in New
Hanover County, 15 miles from Wilmington, North Carolina. It is bound to the west by the Cape
Fear River with the exception of the spit on the north end of the Town which is bound to the west
by the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway. To the east the Town is bound by the Atlantic Ocean
(Figure 1).
New Hanover County's beaches are a major economic engine to the tourist based
economies of the local Towns, the County, and the entire southeastern North Carolina region.
The Federal storm protection projects for Wrightsville, Carolina, and Kure Beaches, have been
overwhelming success stories as a model for how to protect valuable infrastructure from coastal
hazards.
The Carolina Beach Federal storm damage reduction project was authorized by Congress
in 1962. The project extends along 14,000 linear ft. of ocean shoreline. As originally authorized,
the project consisted of a beach fill shaped in the form a 25 -ft. wide dune with a crest elevation
of 12.5 ft. above North American Vertical Datum (NAVD) fronted by a 50 -ft. wide storm berm
at elevation 9.5 ft. above NAVD. The project was later modified to include a 2;075 -ft. long rock
revetment at the extreme north end of the project which is fronted by a 130 -ft. wide berm at
elevation 5.5 ft. above NAVD. The crest elevation of the revetment is at 9.5 ft. NAVD. The
authorization also included periodic nourishment of the project with the nourishment interval of
approximately three (3) years.
The Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (PL 99 -662), specifically Section 934 of
the Act, provides for Federal participation in beach nourishment for a total period of fifty (50)
years beginning at the initiation of construction. The Carolina Beach portion of the authorized
project was re- evaluated under Section 934 in February 1993 and was found to be eligible for
continued Federal participation in beach nourishment for the remaining economic life of the
project. Construction of the Carolina Beach portion of the project was initiated in 1964;
therefore, Federal cost - sharing for beach nourishment is authorized to continue through the year
2014.
An analysis of the performance of the Wrightsville, Carolina, and Kure Beach projects
has shown that unless the projects are maintained at least to the same degree as in the past,
progressive failure of all three (3) projects will occur in the near future and expose development
to untold damages associated with coastal storms. The Carolina Beach project is anticipated to
deteriorate beginning in the area fronting the rubble revetment with project deterioration
spreading rapidly south to eventually include the entire 14,000 ft. of the project within a matter
of 10 years or less. This deterioration will lead to loss of private and public property, loss of tax
revenues from both property taxes and room occupancy taxes and a loss of recreational beach.
5
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

Brunswick,
-County
Borrow
Area '
Vo-
Rn
N s
Atlantic Ocean
ATE-
EY id
4h
Notes: Legend:
1. Coordinates are in feet based on the
Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area
North Carolina State Plane Coordinate System,
North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). A USACE Baseline Stations
2.2010 aerial photography is from the National 0 2,000 4,000
Agriculture Imagery Program I
Feet
I inch = 1 4,000 - feet 1
Figure 1. Location map showing Carolina Beach and the project extent.
6
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
f
0 a
-S!
-S
tj 0 0 8
6
.0,
4h
Notes: Legend:
1. Coordinates are in feet based on the
Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area
North Carolina State Plane Coordinate System,
North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). A USACE Baseline Stations
2.2010 aerial photography is from the National 0 2,000 4,000
Agriculture Imagery Program I
Feet
I inch = 1 4,000 - feet 1
Figure 1. Location map showing Carolina Beach and the project extent.
6
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
0 a
-S!
tj 0 0 8
6
4h
Notes: Legend:
1. Coordinates are in feet based on the
Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area
North Carolina State Plane Coordinate System,
North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). A USACE Baseline Stations
2.2010 aerial photography is from the National 0 2,000 4,000
Agriculture Imagery Program I
Feet
I inch = 1 4,000 - feet 1
Figure 1. Location map showing Carolina Beach and the project extent.
6
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

Another implication of allowing a lapse in the maintenance of the Carolina Beach project
is associated with an exception to the state's static vegetation line rule recently granted to
Carolina Beach. Part of the justification for the exception was based on the past nourishment
history of the project and an established financial plan that would support continued nourishment
of the project for at least the next 30 years. If the project is not adequately maintained, the static
vegetation line exception will be withdrawn. Without the exception to the static vegetation line
rule, most oceanfront properties within Carolina Beach would be "non- conforming ", rendering
them un- buildable in the event that damages greater than 50% of the value of the structure were
realized.
With Federal funding authority set to expire in 2014, the USACE has initiated the re-
authorization process for the Carolina Beach project by requesting funding to conduct a
reconnaissance study to determine if re- authorization of the project is in the Federal interest.
Assuming the reconnaissance study findings are favorable, the USACE would prepare a full
report that would re- evaluate the costs and benefits of the project. The report would be submitted
to Congress for re- authorization of Federal funding for the project. The USACE estimates
funding for the reconnaissance study could be available in fiscal year (FY) 2013 based on the
normal budgetary process. Assuming this to be the case, the USACE could initiate the
reconnaissance study in November 2013. Upon completion of a reconnaissance study resulting
in a favorable finding for the project, a General Reevaluation Report (GRR) would be required.
This process can take upwards of 8 to 10 years to complete. In addition to the time required to
re- authorize the project, the Town would face an additional hurdle in trying to obtain
construction funds for a project designated as a "New Start ". Current administrative policy has
virtually banned "New Start" storm damage reduction projects.
Given the uncertainty of Federal Funding, a virtual moratorium on all new start projects,
and a need to maintain the static line exception, the County authorized Coastal Planning &
Engineering of North Carolina (CPE -NC) to provide services in support of the effort by the
Town to obtain the necessary permits and authorizations required for beach nourishment along
portions of the Carolina Beach shoreline (Appendix 1). By obtaining the necessary permits and
authorizations, the County will be able to carry out supplemental maintenance of the project as
needed in the absence of Federal cost - sharing.
This report presents the results of the offshore geophysical (sidescan sonar) and
geotechnical (vibracore) investigations that were conducted by CPE -NC in 2012. General
investigation sequencing is discussed first, followed by a discussion of the sidescan sonar and
vibracore investigations, and finally an assessment of the existing borrow area based on the
results of the geophysical and geotechnical investigations.
GEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND
The southeastern coast of North Carolina is characterized by short barrier islands with an
average length of 5 miles. The islands are separated by wave - dominated, mixed tidal inlets
(Hayes, 1979) that have moderately well- developed ebb -tidal deltas. The barrier islands are
migrating landward in response to rising sea level and a limited sediment supply. Barrier
extremities typically exhibit pronounced shoreline changes (repositioning of shorelines) that are
associated with tidal inlet processes (migration, channel switching, sediment bypassing and
7
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC
lr i4t r P�CR
�h,

opening/closing) (cf.. FitzGerald, 1984). Morphosedimentary patterns and geographic location of
coastal barriers and inlets, along the North Carolina coast are influenced by the inherited
geologic framework (e.g. Macintyre and Pilkey, 1969; Riggs et al., 1995). Underlying rock
structure tends to influence the geomorphology of coastal barriers as does composition of the
bedrock in relation to offshore sediment sources.
Presently, twenty (20) inlets occur along the North Carolina coast. Five (5) of these are
located north of Cape Lookout including a new inlet that opened during Hurricane Irene in
August of 2011, located between Oregon Inlet and the Rodanthe, North Carolina. Eleven (11)
are located in Onslow bay. The remaining four (4), including the mouth of the Cape Fear River
are found further south in Long Bay. The northern inlets are wave - dominated and have large
flood tidal deltas. The tidal range is microtidal (0 -7 ft.). The inlets south of Cape Lookout tend to
be smaller and are dominated by a mix of tidal and wave processes. Many of these inlets are
migratory in nature and may move at rates ranging from 33 -328 ft. /yr. The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers maintains many of the inlets in southeastern North Carolina for navigational purposes.
Others remain in a natural state and are controlled by natural processes like sediment supply to
the inlet system, tidal prism, wave action, and longshore currents. Inlets exert an influence on the
areas immediately adjacent to them in different ways. They generally cause shoreline change.
CAROLINA BEACH NOURISHMENT HISTORY
Initial construction of the Carolina Beach project occurred between December 1964
and May 1965 with a total of 3,597,400 cubic yards of borrow material distributed
along the 14,000 -ft. project shoreline. The borrow material was obtained from the Carolina
Beach Yacht Basin located at the head of Myrtle Grove Sound (Figure 1).
The project experienced some initial erosion problems which were attributed to the
quality of the material used for initial construction and impacts of Carolina Beach Inlet on
sediment transport to the north end of the project. Carolina Beach Inlet was artificially opened
by local interests in 1952 to address water quality issues in the southern portion of Myrtle
Grove Sound and to provide ocean access to boaters. Additional erosion problems developed
between 1971 and 1981 due to lack of Federal and/or state funding. Over this 10 -year period,
erosion of the project expanded south eventually encompassing 12,000 ft. of the 14,000 -ft.
project. Ultimately, the funding issues were resolved and the inlet induced erosion
addressed by modifying the project to include sediment bypassing from Carolina Beach Inlet to
the north end of the project. The Carolina Beach project was completely restored to its
authorized dimensions in 1982 using material from an upland borrow area on the riverside of
Carolina Beach. Following the 1982 restoration, initial construction of the project was
officially declared complete.
Subsequent periodic nourishment events have been accomplished approximately
every three (3) years with material collected in a sediment trap located in the throat of
Carolina Beach Inlet (Figure 1). The volume placed along Carolina Beach since 1985 has
averaged 858,600 cubic yards during each periodic nourishment operations. The
entrapment of the material in the sediment trap and subsequent removal and placement on
the Carolina Beach project constitutes a form of sediment bypassing around the inlet.
8
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. ' °5

GEOPHYSICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
Investigation Details
A systematic approach to marine sand searches has been developed over the years by the
CPE and CPE -NC Coastal Geology and Geomatics team (e.g. Finkl, Khalil and Andrews, 1997;
Finkl, Andrews and Benedet, 2003; Finkl, Benedet and Andrews, 2005; Finkl and Khalil, 2005).
In a comprehensive marine sand search, CPE -NC typically divides the investigation into three
(3) sequential phases. This phased approach can be modified to meet the scope of the
investigation and accommodate the level of work previously performed.
Because the objective of this investigation was to determine if the existing borrow area in
the throat of the Carolina Beach Inlet needed modification, our typical phased approach was not
applied. Sidescan sonar data and vibracores were collected. During this investigation samples
representing the existing beach were also collected. These investigations were followed by an
evaluation of the existing borrow area and application of modifications to this borrow area.
Cultural resource investigations were not conducted. Carolina Beach was artificially opened in
1952. Therefore, the USACE, through consultation with the North Carolina Office of State
Archaeology determined that cultural resource investigations of the inlet were not necessary.
Discussions with personnel from the Underwater Archaeology Branch of the North Carolina
Office of State Archaeology have confirmed this.
During the Carolina Beach geotechnical investigations, CPE -NC researchers conducted
geophysical (sidescan sonar) and geotechnical (vibracore) surveys within the existing borrow
area located within the Carolina Beach Inlet. On June 5, 2012, ten (10) vibracores were
collected within the existing Carolina Beach Inlet borrow area to meet the maximum 500 ft. State
sediment criteria standards for spacing and number of vibracores [15A NCAC 07H.0312 (2) (e)].
On July 10, 2012, a sidescan sonar survey was conducted in order to satisfy the requirements of
the State sediment criteria standards under 15A NCAC 07H.0312 (2) (c). A total of 6.6 nautical
line miles of sidescan sonar data were collected. Bathymetric data required to satisfy 15A NCAC
07H.0312 (2) (c) was obtained from the USACE Wilmington district collected in April 2012.
Subsurface geophysical imaging was not conducted for this borrow area given the fact that much
of the area has depths shallower than 10 ft., and most of the area has previously been dredged.
Beach sand samples were also collected to characterize the existing beach in accordance
with Section (1) of the State sediment criteria rules. The characterization of the beach allows for
a determination of compatibility to be made between the beach and the material to be removed
from the borrow area. Based -on the data that was collected, existing borrow area excavation
elevations were evaluated and revised where necessary.
The work undertaken during the geophysical and geotechnical investigations is
summarized in Table 1.
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

Table 1. Geophysical and geotechnical investigations conducted in 2012.
Total statute miles surveyed sidescan sonar
7.6
Number of vibracores collected
10
Total number of sand subsam les vibracore generated and analyzed
50
Number of beach samples collected
65
Equipment and Methods
Due to the scope and precision required by modern sand search protocols, a wide range of
geophysical and geotechnical survey methods are required. The Carolina Beach investigations
included a sidescan sonar survey, determination of sediment composition and thickness via
vibracoring and characterization of the existing beach. The sidescan sonar survey was conducted
using the setup illustrated in Figure 2. The collection and processing of this data is described
below. The geophysical and geotechnical equipment used during the investigations is listed in
Table 2 and described below.
Survey Vessel
Sidescan Sonar
�lsh
Sidescan Sonar
Swath Coverage
Figure 2. Schematic diagram showing the deployment of a sidescan sonar survey. (Modified
from: http: / /woodshole.er.usgs.gov/ operations /sfmapping/seismichist.htm)
10
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

Table 2. Equipment used during the 2012 geophysical and geotechnical investigations.
Equipment Type Description
Navigation Trimble Differential Global Positioning System (GPS) interfaced
with Hypack Inc.'s Hypack 2012 ® software
Sidescan Sonar Edgetech 4200 -HFL
Vibracores Athena Electric Vibracore System
Navigation Systems
The navigation and positioning system deployed for the geophysical and geotechnical
surveys was a Trimble Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS) interfaced to Hypack
Inc.'s Hypack 2010®. A Pro Beacon receiver provided differential GPS correction from the
nearest U.S. Coast Guard Navigational Beacon. The DGPS initially receives the civilian signal
from the global positioning system (GPS) NAVSTAR satellites. The locator automatically
acquires and simultaneously tracks the NAVSTAR satellites, while receiving precisely measured
code phase and Doppler phase shifts, which enables the receiver to compute the position and
velocity of the vessel. The receiver then determines the time, latitude, longitude, height, and
velocity once per second. Most of the time, the GPS accuracy with differential correction,
provides for a position accuracy of one (1) to four (4) ft. This is within the accuracy needed for
geotechnical investigations.
Hypack Inc.'s Hypack 2010 a Data Collection and Processing Program
Navigational, magnetometer, and depth sounder systems were interfaced with an onboard
computer, and the data was integrated in real time using Hypack Inc.'s Hypack 2010® software.
Hypack 2010® is a state -of -the -art navigation and hydrographic surveying system. The location
of the fish tow -point on the vessel in relation to the DGPS was measured, recorded and entered
into the Hypack 2010® survey program. The length of cable deployed between the tow -point and
each towfish was also measured and entered into Hypack 2010 . Hypack 2010® then takes these
values and monitors the actual position of each towfish in real time. Online screen graphic
displays include the pre - plotted survey lines, the updated boat track across the survey area,
adjustable left/right indicator, as well as other positioning information such as boat speed, quality
of fix measured by Position Dilution of Precision (PDOP), and line bearing. The digital data is
merged with positioning data (DGPS), video displayed and recorded to the acquisition computers
hard disk for post processing and/or replay.
Sidescan Sonar Survey
Sidescan data is required to verify the location and extent of unconsolidated sediment and
to map ocean bottom features such as benthic habitats, exposed pipelines, cables, underwater
wrecks, potential cultural resources, etc. The sidescan survey was conducted to identify features
that may affect borrow area delineation, introduce hazards to dredging, or adversely impact the
environment.
During this sand search investigation an EdgeTech 4200 -HFL sidescan sonar system was
used (Figure 3). This system uses full- spectrum chirp technology to deliver wide -band,, high-
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
,�

energy pulses coupled with high resolution and good signal to noise ratio echo data. The sonar
package included a portable configuration with a laptop computer running EdgeTech's
Discover® acquisition software and a 300 /600 kHz dual frequency towfish running in high
definition mode. Dual frequency provides a more complete sidescan return that aids interpolation
at the outer portions of the swath, which in turn provides a more complete data set.
�f
t
Figure 3. EdgeTech 4200 -HFL sidescan sonar system.
During the investigations, the sidescan was towed from the survey vessel at a position
and depth that limited exposure to sources of interference and provided the best possible record
quality. The survey was conducted in such a manner to achieve total bottom coverage within the
survey area. The line spacing was set up so that we obtained 100% overlap (i.e. all areas of the
seafloor were covered twice). The digital sidescan data was merged with positioning data (DGPS
via Hypack 2010. Position data appeared in the video display and was logged to disk for post
processing and/or replay. The acoustic data was recorded digitally.
Post collection processing of the sidescan data was completed using Chesapeake
Technology, Inc's SonarWiz.NW software. This software allows the user to apply specific
gains and settings in order to produce enhanced sidescan imagery that can be interpreted and
digitized for specific benthic habitat features and debris throughout the survey area. The first step
in processing was to import the data into the software and bottom track the data. Bottom tracking
is achieved using an automated bottom tracking routine and in some cases manual bottom
tracking. This step provides the data with an accurate baseline representation of the seafloor and
eliminates the water column from the data.
After bottom tracking, the data was processed to reduce noise effects (commonly due to
the vessel, sea state, or other anthropogenic phenomenon) and enhance the seafloor definition. In
most cases automatic time - varying gain (TVG) is sufficient to provide the best imagery. Time-
12
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

varying gain divides the data into parallel swaths and equalizes backscatter of each swath to
create a normalized image highlighting contrast change throughout the image, which creates a
better mosaic and allows the processer to pick out areas with similar acoustic properties. In areas
with high levels of noise in the data it was necessary to apply automatic gain control (AGC)
which normalizes the data by strengthening quiet regions /soft returns while simultaneously
reducing/eliminating overly strong returns by obtaining a local average at a given point. Once the
data was sufficiently processed a mosaic was produced in the form of a geotiff. The sidescan
data was then reviewed to identify potential bottom features including benthic habitat and
manmade debris.
Beach Sample Collection
The suitability of a sand source for beach nourishment is directly linked to the
characteristics of the recipient beach. State and federal regulatory agencies require that sand
resources for nourishment be "beach compatible ", that is, "similar" to sand existing in the project
area. Qualities such as grain size, silt content, color, and mineralogical content are taken into
account. It is, therefore, important to accurately characterize existing beach sediments during a
sand search investigation. This allows researchers to target potential sand resources that are most
similar to the recipient beach. The quality of material that can be placed on North Carolina's
beaches, is governed by Rule 15A NCAC 07H.0312 which states that:
Emplacement of sediment along the oceanfront shoreline shall be referred to in this Rule
as beach fill. Beach fill projects including beach nourishment, dredged material disposal,
habitat restoration, storm protection, and erosion control may be permitted under the
following conditions:
(3) The Division of Coastal Management shall determine sediment compatibility
according to the following criteria:
(a) Sediment completely confined to the permitted dredge depth of a federally or state
maintained navigation channel shall be considered compatible if the average
percentage by weight of fine - grained (less than 0.0625 millimeters) sediment is less
than 10 percent;
(b) Sediment used solely to establish or strengthen dunes shall not be considered a
beach fill project under this Rule;
(c) Sediment used solely to re- establish state - maintained transportation corridors
across a barrier island breach in a disaster area as declared by the Governor shall
not be considered a beach fill project under this Rule;
(d) The average percentage by weight of fine- grained sediment (less than 0.0625
millimeters) in each borrow site shall not exceed the average percentage by weight of
fine- grained sediment of the recipient beach characterization plus five (5) percent;
(e) The average percentage by weight of granular sediment (greater than or equal to
2 millimeters and <less than 4.76 millimeters) in a borrow site shall not exceed the
average percentage by weight of coarse -sand sediment of the recipient beach
characterization plus five (5) percent;
. a
13
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

(f) The average percentage by weight of gravel (greater than or equal to 4.76
millimeters) in a borrow site shall not exceed the average percentage by weight of
gravel -sized sediment for the recipient beach characterization plus five (5) percent;
(g) The average percentage by weight of calcium carbonate in a borrow site shall not
exceed the average percentage by weight of calcium carbonate of the recipient beach
characterization plus 15 percent; and
(h) Techniques that take incompatible sediment within a borrow site or combination
of sites and make it compatible with that of the recipient beach characterization shall
be evaluated on a case -by -case basis by the Division of Coastal Management.
(4) Excavation and placement of sediment shall conform to the following criteria:
(a) Sediment excavation depth from a federally or state maintained navigation
channel shall not exceed the permitted dredge depth of the channel;
(b) Sediment excavation depths for all borrow sites shall not exceed the maximum
depth of recovered core at each coring location;
(c) In order to protect threatened and endangered species, and to minimize impacts to
fish, shellflsh and wildlife resources, no excavation or placement of sediment shall
occur within the project area during times designated by the Division of Coastal
Management in consultation with other State and Federal agencies, and,
(d) Sediment and shell material with a diameter greater than three (3) inches (76
millimeters) shall be considered incompatible if it has been placed on the beach
during the beach fill project, is observed between mean low water (AIL W) and the
frontal dune toe, and is in excess of twice the background value of material of the
same size along any 50, 000- square ft. (4,645 square meter) section of beach.
On May 23, 24 and June 19, 2012, CPE -NC collected beach samples and nearshore
sediment samples along five (5) profiles (CB000, CB035, CB070, CB105 and CB140) (Figure
4). Along these profiles, samples were collected from the Dune, Toe of Dune, Midberm, Berm
Crest, Mean High Water (MHW), Mean Tide Level (MTL), Mean Low Water (MLW), Trough,
Bar Crest, and four (4 additional depths evenly spaced between the Bar Crest and -20 ft. NAVD).
The samples collected show cross -shore sediment distribution at selected points across the
existing beach. Results were composited by transect as well as by elevation. These composites
were used to characterize the existing beach conditions to determine sediment compatibility.
14
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

_ 1��a•� ij PJ Z
Ch
a
Z
z
w
d � o
Z Sd'� LL
Zow.-,V, 9 JE ��g S m
LL
to
m
h - o
i
.� � y "?'tom +►'� i -
r
N
o
�1i�'4 • i-' y m
N M
0,0 "
•
C Q m
-d �
j •p O 00 O
mUm,t E
s
am0aCOD
maEa
V ft Ry /}mac
m e c� a E
amio°oimm
c
SUE W
g°
O UZZNQ
Z r N
Q101 S � '�'F'�B e�W+gO ZEZ9Vt \�ooie� ut

Table 3. Sieve sizes used for grain size analysis. Classifications are based on percent retained
in each sieve.
Sieve Size
Sieve Size
Sieve Size
Classification (number)
(phi)
(mm)
3/4"
-4.25
19.00
5/8"
-4
16.00
gravel 7/16"
-3.5
11.20
5/16"
-3
8.00
3 1/2"
-2.5
5.60
4
-2.25
4.75
5
granular 7
10
-2
-1.5
-1
4.00
2.80
2.00
14
-0.5
1.40
18
0
1.00
25
0.5
0.71
35
1
0.50
45
1.5
0.36
sand 60
2
0.25
80
2.5
0.18
120
3
0.13
170
3.5
0.09
200
3.75
0.08
230
4
0.06
fine pan
-
-
Grain size data were entered into the gINTO software program, which computes the mean
and median grain size, sorting, and silt/clay percentages for each sample using the moment
method (Folk, 1974). Granularmetric reports and grain size distribution curves were compiled for
each sample.
Carbonate Content Determination. Carbonate content was determined on composite
beach samples and individual vibracore samples by percent weight using the acid leaching
methodology described in Twenhofel and Tyler (1941). Results were entered into the g1Nr
software and are displayed on the granularmetric reports.
Results and Discussion
During this investigation, beach samples were collected and geophysical (sidescan) and
geotechnical ( vibracore) investigations were conducted. The results of these investigations are
discussed below.
Beach samples were collected to characterize the existing beach. Appendices 2 and 3
contain granularmetric reports and grain size curves/histograms. Composites were created for
each profile line as well as for each position along the beach profile. Composites are presented in
Appendices 4, 5 and 6. Samples from the existing beach that were collected by CPE =NC in 2012 ;
18
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

as part of this investigation indicate that sediment within the Carolina Beach project area has a
composite mean grain size of 0.21 mm. The composite silt content throughout the project area is
1.15% and the composite carbonate content is less than 5 %. The composite wet Munsell Color
value ranges from 4 to 6, with a typical composite value of 5. These characteristics represent the
existing beach.
Vibracores were collected from the existing borrow area within Carolina Beach Inlet.
Appendices 7 and 8 contain vibracore logs and photographs. The granularmetric reports and
grain size curves/histograms for the samples collected from the vibracores are presented in
Appendices 9 and 10, respectively. The vibracores that were collected indicate that the sediment
within the horizontal boundaries of the existing borrow area is predominantly fine grained sand
with trace silt, trace shell hash and trace organics (in the form of wood fragments). Wet Munsell
color value is typically 5. Exceptions to this are CBVC -12 -03 and CBVC- 12 -08, which have
clayey sand at -34.0 ft. MLW ( -36.8 ft. NAVD88) and -29.5 ft. MLW ( -32.3 ft. NAVD88)
respectively. However, these sections are not currently proposed to be excavated and placed on
the beach.
The sidescan sonar data that was collected was reviewed and used to identify potential
natural resources and potentially significant cultural resources. Figure 7 shows the extent of the
sidescan sonar coverage of the investigation area. The sidescan sonar contact sheets, which are
identified on Figure 77 and are presented in Appendix 11, show modern debris.
19
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

Try
5?
I
A �jb
lt
4 00 � 0 � 0
0, iR� I 1,
" Ir
6T
ip
�� 'A
'He 3
t
-�A
Al
lb
-2
,4
L1
-IS
7-,
X-C
h-
'500.,
Fept
Notes: Legend:
1. Coordinates are in feet based on the Sidescan Sonar Contacts
North Carolina State Plane Coordinate System,
North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area
2.2010 aerial photography is from the National
Agriculture Imagery Program.
Figure 7. Sidescan sonar mosaic. The sidescan contact sheet ID's correspond to,the sidescan
sonar contact sheets found in Appendix 11.
20
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

BORROW AREA DESIGN
The Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area was designed within -the existing borrow area
footprint. The maximum cut elevations are based on the maximum recovery of the vibracores
collected by CPE -NC in 2012, and flattened to a uniform dredgeable elevation. Targets identified
during the sidescan sonar survey fall outside of the borrow area boundaries and, therefore, do not
impact the borrow area. The Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area has been excavated and used for
beach placement multiple times. With Carolina Beach Inlet having been artificially opened by
local interests in 1952, the USACE, through consultation with the North Carolina Office of State
Archaeology, determined cultural resource investigations in the inlet were not necessary. For this
reason a new cultural resource investigation was not conducted.
The USACE bathymetry collected in March 2012 used for borrow area design was
referenced to Mean Low Water (MLW). To satisfy Rule 15A NCAC 07H .0312, all final cut
elevations were converted to NAVD88. These conversions are provided in Table 4 below. The
Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area has seven (7) cut elevations that range from -21.3 ft.
NAVD88 to -40.8 ft. NAVD88 (Figure 8). The total dredgeable volume was estimated to be
approximately 947,000 cy. The material in this sediment source is predominantly fine- grained
sand with trace silt, trace shell and trace organics. The typical wet Munsell color value is 5.
Table 4. Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area Cut Conversions
Cut (MLW)
Cut (NAVD)'�`
-27.0
-29.8
-34.0
-36.8
-38.0
-40.8
-35.0
-37.8
-29.5
-32.3
-25.5
-28.3
-18.5
-21.3
Conversion factor between MLW and NAVD88 is from NOAA benchmark 8658559
( http: / /tidesandcurrents.noaa .gov/benchmarks /8658559.html)
2 0.855m (2.81 ft.) difference between NAVD and NCW.
21
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

UAW •CL�'J.d.C'[�1iU � rorN ,''y.� -' ±' ,�' g. � " e ' Q °
ac °v`rc'at'at�:Pl °s �1'�itr �. r,r,$ -�a ;. ��> _ � �' � •'t��,„fp,��''c'� °��
IBM
�g'
` '� //° z h , U err a/VVV ,e 3
14.0 r,Aa.'a'-`,� •'> x�•.- v...AO�,�
F �g V.9 q .1YJ ft,. ' f .j o a 8 a9 d , „ p a •.,.'. -'. r= `�-° °. 9
. s t
'Y'
@g J
i,�'� _ -=tr T= i., :. : 1 - _` /I�LJVIJI`�'vr�
,A;a \•.: -°i Cam,,, },
� i r.:r.NYa11G1 -tr1G1 '� �!`!� "'`r' :!• . s:G � . .an `•: •at-: '1 �•� `� �"-'`
111 0 - _ - 5 °~r �^s F•,'.u'' i4.� a, qi e - - �t 11
.Ce•'sj °. .. �. _`' �- - f f• Ni art• 4" <� yl.•'•ah i ti. � tom.
-3
mss._ t.
ale
�. 10 _ '� . '`-• 'k°i i'Yt' \ •' l�:)Ta,�t'X9t.L" \�y� � `r A��
e, �y' �6 4. i �' j. 4 ° i ti�..� . ' •ate . - 4 '-
h'- - r S y 'y .pfi1¢ps� 1 t • 1 yg
Z A � �� ,p�� S, � .l �� t�w. V�• C Y "Lft'*.P .$c 1•
g4'N n �� �+° • %ny i' 'f ` .�1 A t•a yt� G' �� �7t7V
et
h. = •-� 'f dye t>i,�.e�� 7 $ wo �..'�'ys. � _ tip �F� `;. x f ���. � C �'�
"' Y C C t3 ;q91 • "4i : !f kj t C�b_ Soo 40 y _
Dotes: Legend:
1. Coordinates are in feet based on the
North Carolina State Plane Coordinate System, Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area
North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
2.2010 aerial photography is from the National 2012 Vibracores
Agriculture Imagery Program.
Figure 8. Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area.
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

Compatibility Analysis
The compatibility of the Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area was evaluated according to
color, silt content, carbonate content and grain size. Data from the sieve analyses (cumulative
frequency curves and analytical reports) and vibracore logs, composite mean grain size, percent
silt content and sorting were computed for each vibracore by calculating the weighted average
(sample weighted by representative lengths of the sampled layer within the core). Composite
mean grain size, percent silt content, percent carbonate content and sorting were computed for
each vibracore within the Carolina Beach Inlet Borrow Area by calculating the weighted average
(sample weighted by representative lengths of the sampled layer within the core) and are
included in Appendices 12, 13 and 14. The composite statistics for the entire borrow area were
compiled by averaging the weighted results for all cores within the lateral and vertical limits of
the borrow area. The grain sizes of the fill materials are based on the geotechnical investigations
for the borrow area. The existing beach composites are based on samples collected in 2012. The
grain sizes of the fill materials are based on the geotechnical investigations for the borrow area.
Composite mean grain size, percent silt content, percent carbonate content and sorting for the
existing beach are provided in Appendices 4, 5 and 6. The summary results (composites) are
shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Beach and borrow area characteristics.
Borrow
.,
Area
Or
`
a
'"
>
Carbonate
Mean
wet
Dry
Existing
g
;�
it
Content 2
Grain Size 3
Sorting a
Munsell
Munsell
Color
Color
Beach
M
M
M
M
M
(mm) (phi)
(phi)
Color
Color
Value4
Value
Carolina
Beach
Inlet
1.87
97.08
0.46
0.58
6
0.19 2.37
0.81
5
7
Borrow
Area
Carolina
Beach
1.15
98.35
0.34
0.15
5
0.21 2.23
0.76
5
7
I The quality of material that can be placed on North Carolina's beaches, is governed by Rule 15A NCAC
07H .0312. According to this rule fines are material with a grain size less than 0.0625mm, sand has a
grain size between 0.0625mm and 2.00mm, granular material has a grain size between 2.00mm and
4.76mm and gravel has a grain size between 4.76mm and 76mm)
2 Carbonate content was determined by percent weight on composite beach samples and on individual
vibracore samples using the acid leaching methodology described in Twenhofel and Tyler (1941)
3 Sieve analyses were conducted on all sediment samples in accordance with American Society -for .
Testing and Materials Standard Materials Designation D422 -63 for particle size analysis of soils. Grain h .
23u
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Volume 04.08: Soil and Rock; Building Stones;
Geotextiles. Philadelphia: American Society for Testing Materials.
ASTM, 2006. Standard methods for amount of material in soils finer than No. 200 (75 um) sieve,
designation D1140 -00. 2006 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Volume 04.08: Soil and
Rock; Building Stones, Geotextiles. Philadelphia: American Society for Testing
Materials.
Finkl, C.W., Khalil, S.M. and Andrews, J.L., 1997. Offshore Sand Sources for Beach
Replenishment: Potential Borrows on the Continental Shelf of the Eastern Gulf of
Mexico. Marine Georesources and Geotechnology, 15, p155 -173.
Fink], C.W.; Andrews, J., and Benedet, L., 2003. Shelf sand searches for beach renourishment
along Florida Gulf and Atlantic coasts based on geological, geomorphological, and
geotechnical principles and practices. Proceedings of Coastal Sediments '03 (March
2003, Clearwater, Florida). Reston, Virginia: American Society of Civil Engineers, CD-
ROM.
Finkl, C.W.; Benedet, L., and Andrews, J.L., 2005. Interpretation of seabed geomorphology
based on spatial analysis of high - density airborne laser bathymetry (ALB). Journal of
Coastal Research, 21(3), p501 -514.
Finkl, C.W. and Khalil, S.M., 2005. Offshore exploration for sand sources: General guidelines
and procedural strategies along deltaic coasts. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue
44, 198 -228.
FitzGerald, D.M., 1984. Interactions between the ebb -tidal delta and landward
shoreline: Price Inlet, South Carolina. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 54, 1303 -1318
Folk, R.L., 1974. The Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks. Austin, Texas: Hemphill, 182p.
Hayes, M.O. 1979. General morphology and sediment patterns in tidal inlets. Sedimentary
Geology, 28, 139p.
Macintyre, I. G. and Pilkey, O. H., 1969. Preliminary comments on linear sand/surface features,
Onslow Bay, North Carolina continental shelf. problems in making detailed sea -floor
observations. Maritime Sediments, 1, 26 -29.
Riggs, S.R.; Cleary, W.J., and Snyder, 1995. Influence of inherited geologic framework on
barrier shoreface morphology and dynamics. Marine Geology, 126, 213 -234.
Twenhofel, W.H. and Tyler, S.A., 1941. Methods of Study of Sediments. New York:
McGraw -Hill, 183p.
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. : ` l'