20120868 Ver 2_CAMA Permit Application_20150522

Pat McCrory
Governor
MEMORANDUM
TO
FROM
SUBJECT
Applicant:
Project Location:
A
ATJ -
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
May 19, 2015
Karen Higgins
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
DWR/Water Quality Permitting
i MAY 2 2 2015 i
21
Donald R van der Vaart
Secretary
Jonathan Howell, NC DENR -DCM Assistant Mayor Permits Coordinator
,400 Commerce Avenue, Morehead City, NC 28557 (Courier 11- 12 -09)
CAMA / D &F Permit Application Review
New Hanover County coo Layton eedsole
Carolina Beach Inlet and the AIWW
Proposed Project: to continue federal navigation maintenance dredging, with disposal areas along
the north end of Carolina Beach /Freeman Park (oceanfront), m NH County
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and
return this form to Jonathan Howell at the address above by June 12, 2015. If you have any
questions regarding the proposed project, contact Tara MacPherson at (910)796 -7425 when
appropriate, in depth comments with supporting data is requested
REPLY:
SIGNED
* *The complete application submittal can be viewed at ftp://www.obp-.com
User name:NCDNR52139 Password: Nc52dNrl39
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
DATE
127 Cardinal Drive Ext , Wilmington, NC 28405
Phone 910 - 796 -72151 FAX 910 - 395 -3964 Internet www nccoastalmanagement net

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
SDI -5 Carolina Beach Inlet
APPLICANT'S NAME New Hanover County c/o Layton Bedsole
2 LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE The project site includes the Carolina Beach Inlet, AIWW Crossing -
Tangent 1 Section 4, approximately 4,900 linear feet of beachfront area at Freeman Park/North end of
Carolina Beach, beginning approximately 1500 ft south of Carolina Beach Inlet and extending to the
north side of 398 Oceana Way, and a near -shore disposal area adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in
Carolina Beach, New Hanover County
Photo Index:
AIWW Tangent Crossing -2006 21 -7380 4 -24, R -S 2000: 21 -260 1 -24, P -Q 1995: 21- 242- 1- 24,P -Q
CB Inlet -2006: 21 -7380 12 -13, Q -X 2000: 21 -260 10 -13, Q -X 1995: 21 -242 11 -14, Q -X
Beachfront Placement Area - 2006 21- 7378 -9 Oceanfront 2000: Not Available 1995: Not Available
Coordinates:
Midpoint of beneficial placement area - Lat: 34° 03' 58 68 "N Long: 77'52'4089"W
3 INVESTIGATION TYPE CAMA / D &F
4 INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE Dates of Multi Agency Meetings: 4/21115 (w/ applicant) & 5/8/15
5 PROCESSING PROCEDURE Application Received - March 30, 2015 Completed- May 12, 2015
Office - Wilmington
6 SITE DESCRIPTION
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Town of Carolina Beach
Classification From LUP- No classification for dry sand beach /General Project Area is
classified as Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved EW, PT, OH, IH
(C) Water Dependent Yes
(D) Intended Use Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - N/A
Planned - None
(F) Type of Structures Existing - N/A (North End Park Area)
Planned - N/A
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion 57year to 11 5' /year
Source - 2011 LTAASCR Update
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION
[AREA]
DREDGED FILLED
(A) Intertidal/Subtidal (Open Water)
AIWW/ Carolina Beach Inlet
44 acres
(B) Oceanfront Beach
-16.9 acres
(D) Total Area Disturbed ( -61 acres)
** Note Typical Inlet and AIWW Crossing dredge volumes are listed on the MP -2 Form
** Note An additional nearshore disposal area is described as 3,700 linear feet in length with a variable width

New Hanover County- SDI -5 (Carolina Beach Inlet)
Page Two
(E) Primary Nursery Area No
(F) dater Classification SB Open: Yes
8. PROJECT SUMMARY New Hanover County proposes to obtain state authorization to continue
federal navigation maintenance dredging in Carolina Beach Inlet and the AIWW crossing (Tangent 1 Section 4)
including near -shore disposal with associated ,beneficial placement (including USACE beach template disposal
areas) on approximately 4,900 linear ft of beachfront area at the north end of Carolina Beach /Freeman Park
and in an adjacent near -shore disposal area `
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The project sites include AIWW crossing (Tangent 1 Section 4), Carolina Beach Inlet between the north end of
Carolina Beach and the south end of Masonboro Island, the Oceanfront Shoreline at Freeman Park, and a
near -shore disposal location, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in Carolina Beach, New Hanover County (Figure
4) The defined disposal area for the SDI -5 project begins approximately 1500 ft south of Carolina Beach Inlet
and extends to the north side of 398 Oceana Way 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 132
to 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 section of the island is managed for
recreational use and is adjacent to residential homes to the south and Carolina Beach Inlet to the north The
project site encompasses approximately 4,900 linear feet of oceanfront beach which includes a section of
beach the USACE has historically used for dredge material disposal Carolina Beach Inlet and the AIWW
crossing navigation maintenance areas (from where the sand is being removed) are located along the northern
and western sides of Carolina Beach The applicant has provided the 2012 USACE template (Attachment 3.3
Item 3) and states that the approximate elevation of the tract above NHW was + 6 ft NGVD 29 at the top of
berm at that time The high ground portion of the project is vegetated primarily with American Beach Grass
(Ammophda brevdigulata) and Sea Oats (Uniola paniculata)
The current long term annual erosion rate for the project disposal areas within the Town of Carolina Beach
varies from 5 ft /year on the southern end to 11 5 ft /year on the most northern end of the project limits, per the
current Division of Coastal Management's (DCM) 2011 Annual Erosion Rate maps The Ocean Erodible AEC
ranges from 600 -990 ft in the SDI -5 Carolina Beach Inlet Project Area
The proposed action consists of maintenance dredging and beneficial placement at 5 (five) federally authorized
shallow draft inlets and associated Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway AIWW Crossings, these projects are referred
to as the SDI -5 According to the applicant, ongoing federal navigation maintenance dredging programs at the
inlets and AIWW crossings have been authorized and conducted since at least 1982, but many of North
Carolina's shallow draft inlets have not been in the Presidential budget since 2005 Should the U S Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) be unable to perform the program, local governments seek to have authorization
in place to continue year -round navigation maintenance in areas critical to local commerce and recreation
The application states that maintenance dredging at each inlet would mimic the ongoing, approved (USACE)
maintenance dredging program for each area, which includes the AIWW crossings, connecting channels and
the inlet throats throughout currently authorized inlet linear distances beyond the COLREGS line According to
the applicant, only currently approved dredge material management locations, including shoreline beneficial
placement, near -shore placement and /or upland confined disposal are included in this project The application
states that beach — quality material removed from the inlets and beneficially placed on neighboring beaches will
maintain recreational beach area and provide storm protection to public and private infrastructure

New Hanover County- SDI -5 (Carolina Beach Inlet)
Page Three
CAMA State Permit No 138 -12 was issued to New Hanover County on December 21, 2012 to continue beach
nourishment along the oceanfront shoreline of the Town of Carolina Beach as specified under the authorized
Federal Storm Damage Reduction Project, authorized by Congress in 1962, this permit is due to expire in
December of 2018 According to permit history, a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was issued for
the project in July 1981, which authorized the placement of beach compatible material from the Carolina Beach
Inlet onto the Carolina Beach oceanfront Historically, 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 14,000 LF with the fill density of approximately 61 3 cubic yards /ft The northern limits
of the project was approximately 720 ft north of the existing rock revetment and the Carolina Beach Fishing
Pier and the southern limits of the project was located dust north of Tennessee Avenue
Historically, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has maintained Carolina Beach Inlet as a marked
navigation channel, providing commercial and recreational access to the Atlantic Ocean Over the years, and
with adequate funding, the USACE has been able to maintain the federal channel with their side -cast dredge
fleet Traditionally, they have maintained a depth of -12 ft plus -2 ft overcut in the AIWW Crossing, -8 ft plus -
2 ft overcut in Carolina Beach Inlet at MLW using the side -cast dredge, however, periodic maintenance has
become less frequent due to budget constraints, the shallow depth of the inlet and the amount of material
that's held in the inlet system by the side -cast operations In the event the USACE is not capable of
maintaining the inlet, New Hanover County would like to obtain approval to perform the navigation
maintenance work and utilize the material for beneficial placement
The application states that the navigation maintenance dredging project area depths and dimensions will
mimic the federally authorized project at Carolina Beach Inlet, AIWW crossing Tangent 1 Section 4 and for all
disposal locations According to the applicant, consistency determinations and concurrences have been issued
for federal projects in the proposed project areas associated with Carolina Beach Inlet (see Page 20 -21)
According to the applicant the project template for the SDI -5 beneficial placement in Carolina Beach will
include the USACE placement template area, including a near -shore disposal area (Figure 4)
The application includes a Cultural Resource Assessment (Attachment 5 1) which refers to documents issued
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 Attachment 5.1 page 3 and Appendix A coordination letters) The
applicant states that impacts to cultural resources in the Carolina Beach Inlet Project Area are not anticipated
The application also includes a Sediment Evaluation (Attachment 5.2), a Supplemental Biological Assessment
(Attachment 5.3), Essential Fish Habitat Summary (Attachment 5.4) and Recommended Conservation
Measures (Attachment 6).
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 Conservation 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 OPEN to the harvesting of shellfish
10. PROPOSED PROJECT:
New Hanover County proposes to obtain state authorization to continue federal navigation maintenance
dredging in Carolina Beach Inlet and the AIWW crossing (Tangent 1 Section 4) including near -shore disposal
with associated beneficial placement (including USACE beach template disposal areas) on approximately
4,900 linear ft of beachfront area at the north end of Carolina Beach /Freeman Park and in an adjacent near -
shore disposal area This application is part of a point application for 5 federally authorized shallow draft inlets
which are referred to at the SDI -5 According to the application, the depths and dimensions will mimic the
federally authorized projects at the Carolina Beach inlet area and the AIWW crossing and beach quality
material removed from these areas will be beneficially placed on the oceanfront beach encompassing the
USACE placement template area and /or USACE navigation maintenance near -shore disposal area (see
Narrative, Page 23 & 27 Figure 4 and Attachment 3.3 1 -5)

New Hanover County- SDI -5 (Carolina Beach Inlet)
Page Four
The applicant is proposing to follow the precise template of the federally authorized project conducted by the
USACE Wilmington District (see Page 23, Figure 4 and Attachment 3.3 1 -5) According to the application,
the Carolina beach Inlet navigation maintenance dredging would occur within an area measuring
approximately 6,300 ft in length by 150 ft in width to a maximum depth of -8 ft at MLW (plus 2 ft over - depth)
The AIWW crossing navigation maintenance dredging would occur within an area measuring approximately
3,900 ft in length by 90 ft in width (there is also an authorized 50 ft widener along this stretch of the AIWW
(see Page 16 Table 1)) to a maximum depth of -12 ft at MLW (plus 2 ft over - depth), The application states
that these depths mimic the federally authorized depths within these areas (see NIP -2 Excavation and Fill
Form on Page 22) According to the application typical AIWW crossing maintenance excavates approximately
100,000 cubic yards and the Carolina Beach Inlet navigation maintenance excavates approximately 54,000
cubic yards during each maintenance event Shoal maintenance is mentioned in Attachment 6 (Conservation
Measures) but is not included in the project description for this area
According to the applicant the project template for beneficial placement at Freeman Park begins approximately
1500 ft south of Carolina Beach Inlet and extends to the north side of 398 Oceana Way The applicant states
that the project consists of beach fill (beneficial placement) on the oceanfront beach at Freeman Park along an
area measuring approximately 3000 ft long and 150 ft wide and in the adjacent near -shore disposal location
(located at approximately -10 ft at MLW), in an area measuring approximately 3,700 ft in length at variable
widths and depths (see Pages 23 & 27) The application does not state an average fill placement density
along the project area or provide current dune crest elevations The application does state that the length of
beneficial placement for each event will be based on the volume of dredged material, but will typically be about
2,600 ft in length with an average berm width of 150 ft According to permit history average fill placement
density along the Federal Coastal Storm Damage Reduction Project area to the south is approximately 61 3
cubic yards /ft According to the applicant easements for the beneficial placement locations have been acquired
by New Hanover County No specific upland disposal sites for non - compatible material have been proposed for
Carolina Beach Inlet
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 sediment characterization data were
obtained for Carolina Beach Inlet and the AIWW Crossing from sampling events between 2006 and 2014
According to the application samples collected contained beach compatible material throughout the project
area to the proposed project depth (see Attachment 5.2 (Page 2 -3, Table 2 and Figure 3)). Two additional
samples were taken in October of 2014 within the AIWW crossing area and Carolina Beach Inlet (see
Attachment 5.2 Table 2)
The application states that temporary in -situ sand berms will be used during beach placement to facilitate
settlement and retention of sand on the beach which would allow the sandy material to settle out before the
water re- enters the ocean Dredging associated with beneficial placement will be conducted utilizing a
cutterhead hydraulic dredge and pipeline The application drawing shows the dredging pipeline following
exactly what the USACE used in previous projects from the inlet down the back side of Freeman Beach (see
Figure 4). If beneficial placement is not included in a navigation maintenance event other types of dredges will
be considered (See IVIP -2 Excavation and Fill 5b. on page 30). The proposed beneficial placement location is
essentially within the middle of Freeman Park and according to the applicant the entire project would follow the
precise template of previously authorized projects (see Figure 4, Page 27 and Project Narrative)
Conservation measures submitted by the applicant for the SDI -5 project include an environmental window of
November 16 -April 30 for implementation of routine dredging activities to federally - authorized depths, however
the applicant also mentions dredge /beneficial placement activity outside of the environmental window to
address shoals that may build up within the inlets (see Narrative, Attachment 5.4 Page 2 and Attachment
6) The applicant states that because the proposed action entails maintenance of existing navigation channels,
areas of shell bottom are not considered to be applicable within existing navigation channels (see Page 24
and Attachment 5.4).

New Hanover County- SDI -5 (Carolina Beach Inlet)
Page Five
In summary, the proposed beneficial placement associated with navigation maintenance dredging activities
would remain within the Town limits According to the applicant, all navigation maintenance excavation is
consistent with federal projects thereby not exceeding the depth and width of the federal channel As
proposed, the entire project would overlap previously impacted templates along the oceanfront as well as
previously dredged areas within Carolina Beach Inlet and the AIWW Crossing
11. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS
The proposed navigation maintenance dredging volumes are typically 54,000 yd within Carolina Beach Inlet
and 100,000 yd within the AIWW Crossing According to the applicant, fill densities will be event specific
Shoal maintenance is mentioned in the application, but is not included in the project description The beneficial
placement portion of the project would disturb a maximum of approximately 735,000 sq ft of oceanfront beach
impacting areas below and above Mean High Water as a result of the nourishment activities The near -shore
placement area is 3700 ft in length, the applicant did not provide the width of this area so maximum impact
areas cannot be determined at this time 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 and
aquatic life 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 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 Public use of the beach during the beach fill process
would be limited to some degree The project would serve to provide authorization for New Hanover County
to continue the federal navigation maintenance dredging program at Carolina Beach Inlet and the AIWW
crossing Tangent 1 Section 4 The application states that actual disturbed areas and volumes of material will
be a summation of the locations within the channels that need to be dredged for navigation at a given time, but
the length of beneficial placement areas will typically be approximately 2,600 ft in length with an average berm
width of 150 ft
Submitted by: Tara MacPherson Date: May 18, 2015 Office: Wilmington

Town of Emerald Isle
Town of Topsail Beach
New Hanover County
Town of Holden Beach
Town of Ocean Isle Beach
May 2015
$2 GBRICN6GCRC

TABLE OF CONTENTS
DCM MP -1 Application for Major Development Permit ............................................................................ ..............................1
1.0 Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information ........................................................................................ ..............................2
1.1 Bogue Inlet ....................................................................................................................................................... ..............................2
1.2 New Topsail Inlet .......................................................................................................................................... ..............................2
1.3 Carolina Beach Inlet ..................................................................................................................................... ..............................2
1.4 Lockwoods Folly Inlet ................................................................................................................................. ..............................3
1.5 Shallotte River Inlet ..................................................................................................................................... ..............................3
2.0 Agent /Contractor Information .................................................................................................................... ..............................4
3.0 Project Location ................................................................................................................................................. ..............................5
3.1 Bogue Inlet ....................................................................................................................................................... ..............................5
3.2 New Topsail Inlet .......................................................................................................................................... ..............................5
3.3 Carolina Beach Inlet ..................................................................................................................................... ..............................6
3.4 Lockwoods Folly Inlet ................................................................................................................................. ..............................6
3.5 Shallotte River Inlet ..................................................................................................................................... ..............................7
4.0 Site Description .................................................................................................................................................. ..............................8
4.1 Bogue Inlet ....................................................................................................................................................... ..............................8
4.2 New Topsail Inlet .......................................................................................................................................... ..............................9
4.3 Carolina Beach Inlet ................................................................................................................................... .............................10
4.4 Lockwoods Folly Inlet ............................................................................................................................... .............................11
4.5 Shallotte River Inlet ................................................................................................................................... .............................12
5.0 Activities and Impacts ................................................................................................................................... .............................13
5.1 Brief Description of Maintenance Dredging and Disposal Activities .................................... .............................13
6.0 Additional Information ................................................................................................................................. .............................15
6.A. Project Narrative ........................................................................................................................................ .............................15
6.13. Work Plat ....................................................................................................................................................... .............................16
6.C. Location Map ................................................................................................................................................ .............................17
6.D. Copy of the deed, Easement Statement ............................................................................................ .............................17
6.E. Application fee ............................................................................................................................................ .............................17
6.F. Adjacent Waterfront Owners and Proof of Notification ............................................................ .............................17
6.17.1 Bogue Inlet ............................................................................................................................................. .............................17
6.17.2 New Topsail Inlet ................................................................................................................................ .............................18
6.F.3 Carolina Beach Inlet ........................................................................................................................... .............................18
6.17.4 Lockwoods Folly Inlet ....................................................................................................................... .............................18
6.F.5 Shallotte River Inlet ............................................................................................................................ .............................18
6.G. List of Previous State or Federal Permits Issued for Work on the Project Tract ........... .............................19
6.G.1 Bogue Inlet ............................................................................................................................................. .............................19
6.G.2 New Topsail Inlet ............................................................................................................................... .............................19
6.G.3 Carolina Beach Inlet ......................................................................................................................... ...............................
20
i I Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat- Res.1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs\ Reports \Permit Application\ SDI -5 Permit Application - 051115.doc GURIEN 6 GERE

6.G.4 Lockwoods Folly Inlet ..................................................................................................................... ...............................
21
6.G.5 Shallotte River Inlet ........................................................................................................................... .............................21
6.H. Signed Consultant or Agent Authorization Form ....................................................................... ...............................
22
6.I. Wetland Delineation ................................................................................................................................... .............................22
6.J. Signed AEC Hazard Notice for Projects in Oceanfront and Inlet Areas ............................... ...............................
22
6.K. Statement of Compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Act ...................................... ...............................
22
DCM MP -2 Excavation and Fill Information ............................................................................................... ...............................
23
1. Excavation ........................................................................................................................................................ ...............................
24
2. Disposal of Excavated Material ............................................................................................................... ...............................
25
2.1 Bogue Inlet ............................................................................................................................................... ...............................
25
2.2 New Topsail Inlet .................................................................................................................................. ...............................
26
2.3 Carolina Beach Inlet ............................................................................................................................. ...............................
27
2.4 Lockwoods Folly Inlet ......................................................................................................................... ...............................
28
2.5 Shallotte River Inlet ............................................................................................................................. ...............................
29
3. Shoreline Stabilization .............................................................................................................................. ...............................
30
4. Other Fill Activities ..................................................................................................................................... ...............................
30
5. General ............................................................................................................................................................... .............................30
5.a. Retention of fill excavated material and erosion control measures ...................... ...............................
30
5.b. Describe types of equipment to be used ............................................................................... ...............................
30
5.c. Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project ........................................ ...............................
30
5.d Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project site ....................... ...............................
30
Certification and Permission to Enter on Land ......................................................................................... ...............................
31
Figures
1. SDI -5 Vicinity Map
2. Bogue Inlet Project Area Map
3. New Topsail Inlet Project Area Map
4. Carolina Beach Inlet Project Area Map
5. Lockwoods Folly Inlet Project Area Map
6. Shallotte River Inlet Project Area Map
Attachments
1. Agent Authorization Forms
2. AEC Hazard Notice Forms
3. Dredging & Beneficial Placement Design Plats
3.1. Bogue Inlet
3.2. New Topsail Inlet
3.3. Carolina Beach Inlet
ii I Final: May 11, 2015
I: \NC- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS\ Reports \Permit Application\ SDI -S Permit Application -051115.doc 6 GURIEN6GERE

3.4. Lockwoods Folly Inlet
3.5. Shallotte River Inlet
4. Adjacent Property Owner Notification
S. Supporting Studies
5.1 Cultural Resource Assessment
5.2 Sediment Evaluation
5.3 Supplemental Biological Assessment
5.4 Essential Fish Habitat Summary
6. Recommended Conservation Measures
iii I Final: May 11, 2015
I: \NC- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS \Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc ro GBRIEN G GCRC

DCM MP -1 APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
The local stakeholders for five inlets on the southeast North Carolina coast are submitting a N.C. Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA) Major Permit application to the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NCDENR) Division of Coastal Management (DCM) for conducting maintenance dredging for
navigation (the Proposed Action). The permit application is a joint application for the state and federal
approvals required to conduct the Proposed Action. Issuance of a General Permit 291 from the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers ( USACE) Wilmington District is anticipated for the Proposed Action.
The Proposed Action consists of maintenance dredging and beneficial placement at five inlets and associated
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW) crossings: Bogue, New Topsail, Carolina Beach, Lockwoods Folly, and
Shallotte River Inlet (Figure 1). With the exception of Shallotte River Inlet, which is a federally- authorized
Coastal Storm Damage Reduction (CSDR) borrow area, these inlets are federally- authorized shallow -draft inlets,
and are referred to as "the SDI -5" in this application for convenience. The applicants are the five local
governments adjacent to the inlets (listed below), who wish to obtain major CAMA permits to continue the
ongoing federal navigation maintenance dredging program at the inlets and the AIWW crossings, which is
currently conducted by the USACE Wilmington District. The federal program has been authorized and
conducted since at least 1982, and is currently funded by the State of North Carolina, or a combination of State
and local funds. Should the USACE Wilmington District be unable to perform the program for some reason, the
local governments need to have the requisite permits to continue year -round navigation maintenance in the
inlets, which are critical to local commerce and recreation. Additional project information is provided in Section
6.A of this application.
The project areas for each inlet are depicted on Figures 2 through 6. The maintenance dredging project areas,
depths, and dimensions will mimic the federally- authorized projects at each inlet. In addition to the federally -
authorized beneficial placement areas, placement areas from CAMA- permitted local projects are included in the
proposed potential placement areas for the Proposed Action. The beneficial placement areas from local projects
are described in Form MP -2, Section 2; and are labeled on Figures 2 through 6.
As a result of the ongoing nature of stakeholder projects at the SDI -5, many studies of environmental effects
have been conducted over time. These existing studies have been obtained and summarized in the assessments
provided with this permit application. Electronic copies of these studies can be provided upon request.
Because this application includes five applicants, the standard CAMA permit application form has not been used,
but has instead been adapted into the following sections, which are organized and numbered in accordance with
permit application forms MP -1 and MP -2. As appropriate, permit application sections are replicated where
inlet- specific information must be provided, or are combined if the information to be provided applies to all of
the inlets.
1 I Final: May 11, 2015
I: \NC- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i GBRIEN 5 GERE

1.0 PRIMARY APPLICANT /LANDOWNER INFORMATION
1.1 BOGUE INLET
Business Name(s): Town of Emerald Isle
Applicant Name:
Frank Rush, Jr., Town Manager
Address :
7500 Emerald Drive
City, State, Zip:
Emerald Isle, NC 28594
Phone Number:
252 - 354 -3424
Fax Number:
252 - 354 -5068
E -mail Address:
frush @emeraldisle - nc.org
H. Layton Bedsole, Jr., REM; Shore Protection Coordinator
1.2 NEW TOPSAIL INLET
Business Name:
Town of Topsail Beach
Applicant Name:
Tim Holloman, Town Manager
Address:
820 S. Anderson Blvd.
City, State, Zip:
Topsail Beach, NC 28465
Phone Number:
910 - 328 -5841 x 226
Fax Number:
910 - 328 -1560
E -mail Address:
townmanager topsailbeach.org
Applicant's
Mayor Howard Braxton
Alternate Contact:
1.3 CAROLINA BEACH INLET
Business Name: New Hanover County
Applicant Name:
Chris Coudriet, County Manager
Address:
230 Government Center Drive
City, State, Zip:
Wilmington, NC 28403
Phone Number:
910 - 798 -7104
Fax Number:
910 - 798 -7051
Applicant's
Contact:
H. Layton Bedsole, Jr., REM; Shore Protection Coordinator
E -mail Address:
lbedsole @nhcgov.com
2 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \NC- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i GBRIEN 5 GERE

1.4 LOCKWOODS FOLLY INLET
Business Name: Town of Holden Beach
Applicant Name:
David Hewett, Town Manager
Address:
PO Box 449
City, State, Zip:
Supply, NC 28462
Phone Number:
910 - 842 -6488
Fax Number:
910 - 842 -9315
E -mail Address:
david.hewett @hbtownhall.com
Applicant's
Contact:
Christy Ferguson
E -mail Address:
recsys @hbtownhall.com
1.5 SHALLOTTE RIVER
Business Name:
INLET
Town of Ocean Isle Beach
Applicant Name:
Debbie Smith (Town Mayor)
Address:
3 West Third Street
City, State, Zip:
Ocean Isle Beach, NC 28469
Phone Number.
910 - 579 -2166
Fax Number:
910 - 579 -8804
E -mail Address:
mayor @oibgov.com
Applicant's
Contact:
Daisy Ivey, Town Manager
E -mail Address:
daisy @oibgov.com
3 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \NC- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i GBRIEN 5 GCRC

2.0 AGENT /CONTRACTOR INFORMATION
Signed agent authorization forms for each applicant are provided as Attachment 1. The authorized agent for the
permit application is as follows:
O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc.
Daniel Ramsay
3214 Charles B. Root Wynd, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27612, USA
Phone: 919 - 987 -3090
Fax: 919 - 781 -4360
Daniel.Ramsay @obg.com
4 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i GBRIEN 5 GERE

3.0 PROJECT LOCATION
3.1 BOGUE INLET
County:
Carteret
Location:
Bogue Inlet, Bogue Inlet Connecting Channel, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway
(AIWW) Crossing
City, State, Zip:
Emerald Isle, NC 28594
a) In which NC river basin is the project located?
White Oak
b) Name of body of water nearest to proposed project.
Bogue Inlet, Atlantic Ocean, AIWW,
White Oak River
c) Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
2 Natural R1 Manmade ❑ Unknown
d) Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
Bogue Inlet, Atlantic Ocean
e) Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
R1 Yes ❑ No
f) If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the
proposed work falls within.
Town of Emerald Isle and Carteret Co.
3.2 NEW TOPSAIL INLET
County:
Pender
Location:
New Topsail Inlet, Topsail Creek, Banks Channel, AIWW Crossing
City, State, Zip:
Topsail Beach, NC 28465
a) In which NC river basin is the project located?
Cape Fear
b) Name of body of water nearest to proposed project.
New Topsail Inlet, Atlantic Ocean,
Topsail Creek, AIWW, Black Mud
Channel, Banks Channel
c) Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
Q Natural 0 Manmade ❑ Unknown
d) Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
New Topsail Inlet, Atlantic Ocean
e) Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
0 Yes ❑ No
f) If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the
proposed work falls within.
Town of Topsail Beach
5 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i GBRIEN 5 GERE

3.3 CAROLINA BEACH INLET
County:
New Hanover
Location:
Carolina Beach Inlet, AIWW Crossing
City, State, Zip:
Vicinity of Carolina Beach, NC 28428
a) In which NC river basin is the project located?
Cape Fear
b) Name of body of water nearest to proposed project.
Carolina Beach Inlet, Atlantic Ocean,
AIWW
c) Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
Q Natural R1 Manmade ❑ Unknown
d) Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
Carolina Beach Inlet, Atlantic Ocean
e) Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
Q Yes ❑ No
f) If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the
proposed work falls within.
New Hanover County
3.4 LOCKWOODS FOLLY INLET
County:
Brunswick
Location:
Lockwoods Folly Inlet, AIWW Crossing
City, State, Zip:
Holden Beach, NC 28462
a) In which NC river basin is the project located?
Lumber
b) Name of body of water nearest to proposed project.
Lockwoods Folly Inlet, Atlantic Ocean,
Lockwoods Folly River, AIWW, Eastern
Channel
c) Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
0 Natural R1 Manmade ❑ Unknown
d) Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
Lockwoods Folly Inlet, Atlantic Ocean
e) Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
R1 Yes ❑ No
f) If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the
proposed work falls within.
Town of Holden Beach
6 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs\ Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application - 051115.doc r (Y 1Y BR1EN 6 GERE

3.5 SHALLOTTE RIVER INLET
County:
Brunswick
Location:
Shallotte River Inlet, AIWW Crossing
City, State, Zip:
Ocean Isle Beach, NC 28469
a) In which NC river basin is the project located?
Lumber
b) Name of body of water nearest to proposed project.
Shallotte River Inlet, Atlantic Ocean,
AIWW, Shallotte River
c) Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
RI Natural Rl Manmade ❑ Unknown
d) Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
Shallotte River Inlet, Atlantic Ocean
e) Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
R1 Yes ❑ No
f) If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the
proposed work falls within.
Town of Ocean Isle Beach
7 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i GBRIEN 5 GCRC

4.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
4.1 BOGUE INLET
a)
Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft): Varies
b)
Size of entire tract (sq. ft):
Varies
c)
Size of individual lot(s):
NA
d)
Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or NWL
❑ NHW or ❑ NWL
(normal water level) Top of berm at - +6 ft NAVD 88 (USACE AIWW
Crossing Placement Template - Attachment 3.1, Item #3)
NAVD88 and NGVD -29
e)
Vegetation on tract: Beach contains upland beach grasses and sedges
on dunes.
f)
Manmade features and uses now on tract: Man -made features include dune
cross walks, vehicular
cross - overs, and sand fencing on the beach and channel markers within
the inlet. Uses include
recreational activities on the beach and commercial and recreational boating
within the
proposed dredge channels.
g)
Identify and describe the existing land uses adjacent to the proposed project site: The existing land
uses adjacent to the proposed project include single and multifamily residential
properties,
commercial businesses, and community access to the beach front.
Residential and
h)
How does local government zone the tract?
Commercial
i)
Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning? (attach
p Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
j)
Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment
❑ Yes RI No
proposal:
k)
Has a professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? (If
yes, attach a copy) By whom? See Attachment 5.1 - Cultural Resource
Rl Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
Assessment
1)
Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or
does it involve a Natural Register listed or eligible property? See
❑ Yes RI No ❑ NA
Attachment 5.1- Cultural Resource Assessment
m)
(i) Are there wetlands on the site?
❑ Yes RI No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site?
❑ Yes 0 No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has the delineation been conducted?
❑ Yes ❑ No
(attach documentation, if available)
n)
Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
NA
o)
Describe existing drinking water supply source.
NA
p)
Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
NA
8 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \NC- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS\ Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application - 051115.doc r (Y 1Y BR1EN 6 ISERE

4.2 NEW TOPSAIL INLET
a)
Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft): Varies
b)
Size of entire tract (sq. ft): Varies
c)
Size of individual lot(s):
NA
d)
Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or NWL
❑ NHW or ❑ NWL
(normal water level): Top of berm at - +6 ft NGVD -29 (USACE AIWW
Crossing Placement - Attachment 3.2, Item #2)
NGVD -29 and NAVD88
e)
Vegetation on tract: Beach contains upland beach grasses and sedges
on dunes.
f)
Manmade features and uses now on tract: Man -made features include dune cross walks, vehicular
cross - overs, and sand fencing on the beach and channel markers within the inlet, Topsail Creek,
and Banks Channel. Uses include recreational activities on the beach and commercial and
recreational boating within the proposed dredge channels.
g)
Identify and describe the existing land uses adjacent to the proposed project site: Residential and
commercial development on Topsail Island. Natural wildlife preserve on Lea - Hutaff Island to the
south of New Topsail Inlet.
h)
How does local government zone the tract?
Residential and Commercial
i)
Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
(attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
j)
Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment
❑ Yes 0 No
proposal:
k)
Has a professional archaeological assessment been done for the
tract? (If yes, attach a copy) By whom? See Attachment 5.1 -
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
Cultural Resource Assessment
1)
Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic
District or does it involve a Natural Register listed or eligible
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA
property?
See Attachment 5.1- Cultural Resource Assessment
m)
(i) Are there wetlands on the site?
❑ Yes 0 No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site?
❑ Yes 0 No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has the delineation been
❑ Yes ❑ No
conducted? (attach documentation, if available)
n)
Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
NA
o)
Describe existing drinking water supply source. NA
p)
Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
NA
9 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \NC- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS\ Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application - 051115.doc r (Y 1Y BR1EN 6 GERE

4.3 CAROLINA BEACH INLET
a)
Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft):
Varies
b)
Size of entire tract (sq. ft):
Varies
c)
Size of individual lot(s):
NA
d)
Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high
❑ NHW or ❑ NWL
water) or NWL (normal water level): Top of Berm at - +6 ft
NGVD -29 (Attachment 3.3, Item #3)
NGVD -29
e)
Vegetation on tract: Beach contains upland beach grasses and sedges on dunes.
f)
Manmade features and uses now on tract: The inlet is used for recreational and commercial boating
and fishing, and contains channel markers. The beachfront
is utilized for recreational activities.
g)
Identify and describe the existing land uses adjacent to the proposed project site: The existing land
uses adjacent to the proposed project include single and multifamily residential properties,
commercial businesses, and community access to the beach front. The inlet and AIWW are used
for commercial and recreational boating and fishing.
h)
How does local government zone the tract?
Multifamily (MF), Tourist (T -1),
Residential (11-1), Conservation C
i)
Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
(attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
j)
Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront
❑ Yes 2 No
redevelopment proposal:
k)
Has a professional archaeological assessment been done for
the tract? (If yes, attach a copy) By whom?
Z Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
See Attachment 5.1- Cultural Resource Assessment
1)
Is the proposed project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a Natural Register listed or
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA
eligible property? See Attachment 5.1- Cultural Resource
Assessment
m)
(i) Are there wetlands on the site?
❑ Yes R1 No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site?
❑ Yes R1 No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has the delineation been
❑ Yes ❑ No
conducted? (attach documentation, if available)
n)
Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
NA
o)
Describe existing drinking water supply source.
NA
p)
Describe existing storm water management or treatment
NA
systems.
10 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS\ Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application - 051115.doc r Y �Y
BR1EN 6 GERE

4.4 LOCKWOODS FOLLY INLET
a) Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft): Varies
b) Size of entire tract (sq. ft): Varies
c) Size of individual lot(s):
NA
d) Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high
water) or NWL (normal water level):
❑ NHW or ❑ NWL
Top of berm ranges from - +6.0 ft NAVD 88 (USACE
NAVD88 and NGVD -29
AIWW Crossing, "Piggyback" Project Placement
(Attachment 3.4, Item #2 and #6)
e) Vegetation on tract: Beach contains upland beach grasses and sedges on dunes.
f) Manmade 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, and
includes Holden Beach Pier. The inlet and AIWW are used for commercial and recreational
boating and contain channel marking.
g) Identify and describe the existing land uses adjacent to the proposed project site: The existing land
uses adjacent to the proposed project include single and multifamily residential properties,
commercial businesses, and community access to the beach front.
h) How does local government zone the tract?
Residential /Multifamily /Commercial
i) Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
p Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
zoning? (attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
j) Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront
❑ Yes R1 No
redevelopment proposal:
k) Has a professional archaeological assessment been done for
the tract? (If yes, attach a copy) By whom?
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
See Attachment 5.1- Cultural Resource Assessment
1) Is the proposed project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a Natural Register listed or
❑ Yes Z No ❑ NA
eligible property?
See Attachment 5.1- Cultural Resource Assessment
m) (i) Are there wetlands on the site?
❑ Yes R1 No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site?
❑ Yes RI No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has the delineation been
❑ Yes ❑ No
conducted? (attach documentation, if available)
n) Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
NA
o) Describe existing drinking water supply source.
NA
p) Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems. NA
111 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS\ Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application - 051115.doc r Y �Y
BR1EN 6 GERE

4.5 SHALLOTTE RIVER INLET
Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft): Varies
a Size of entire tracts . ft): Varies
b) Size of individual lot(s):
NA
c) Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or NWL
❑ NHW or ❑ NWL
(normal water level): Top of Berm at - +6 ft NAVD88 (USACE AIWW
Crossing Placement - Attachment 3.5, Item #2)
NAVD88 and NGVD -29
d) Vegetation on tract: Beach contains upland beach grasses and sedges on
dunes.
e) Manmade 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. The
inlet and AIWW are used for commercial and recreational boating, and contain channel markers.
f) Identify and describe the existing land uses adjacent to the proposed project site: The existing land
uses adjacent to the proposed project include single and multifamily residential properties,
commercial businesses, and community access to the beach front and AIWW.
g) How does local government zone the tract?
Residential
h) Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning? (attach
Ayes ❑ No ❑ NA
zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
i) Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment
❑ Yes R1 No
proposal:
j) Has a professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? (If
yes, attach a copy) By whom?
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
See Attachment 5.1- Cultural Resource Assessment
k) Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or
does it involve a Natural Register listed or eligible property?
❑ Yes Cif No ❑ NA
See Attachment 5.1- Cultural Resource Assessment
1) (i) Are there wetlands on the site?
❑ Yes 0 No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site?
❑ Yes 0 No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has the delineation been conducted? (attach
❑ Yes ❑ No
documentation, if available)
m) Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities. NA
n) Describe existing drinking water supply source. NA
o) Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems. JNA
12 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS\ Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application - 051115.doc r Y �Y
OR1EN 6 GERE

5.0 ACTIVITIES AND IMPACTS
5.1 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF MAINTENANCE DREDGING AND DISPOSAL ACTIVITIES
a) Will the project be for commercial, public, or
2 Commercial 0 Public /Government RIPrivate /Community
private use?
b) Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
Bogue, Topsail, Carolina Beach, Lockwoods Folly, and Shallotte River Inlets are shallow -draft inlets that allow
for various -sized vessels to navigate from the AIWW to the Atlantic Ocean for commerce, fishing, and
recreation. Beach - quality material removed from the inlets that is beneficially placed on neighboring
beaches will maintain recreational beach area and provide storm protection to public and private
infrastructure.
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.
For dredging with beneficial placement, typical beneficial placement methodology will be used, which
includes using a cutterhead hydraulic dredge and pipeline to convey sediment to the beach, and using
bulldozers, front -end loaders and other earth moving machinery to shape the sediment. For dredging
without beneficial placement, dredges will be selected based on the following criteria:
Appropriate draft for inlet & channels
Exclusionary fittings for sea turtles and sturgeon (if hopper dredges are used that have sufficient
suction head size and suction power to entrain sea turtles and sturgeon)
Sea- worthy beyond International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (referred to as
COLREGS) demarcation line.
d) List all development activities you propose.
Dredging of the SDI -5, connecting channels, and AIWW Crossings will result in beneficial placement on the
following beaches, using previously- authorized beneficial placement locations from USACE and locally -
permitted projects:
1. The Pointe at Emerald Isle and Bogue Banks
2. Topsail Beach
3. Freeman Park (Carolina Beach)
4. Holden Beach
5. Ocean Isle Beach
e) Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new
Q Existing ❑ New ❑ Both
work or both?
f) What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the
❑ Sq. ft or ❑ Acres
proposed project? The actual disturbed land area will be a
summation of the locations within the channels that need to be
dredged for navigation at a given time, and the volume of that
material that is beneficially placed or disposed.
g) Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public
Q Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
accessway or other area that the public has established use of?
The projects will entail maintenance of publicly - accessible
waterways and beneficial placement on public beaches.
13 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS\ Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application - 051115.doc r (Y IY BR1EN 6 GERE

h) Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state. Decanting of
dredged sand removed from the inlet /AIWW templates.
i) Will wastewater or stormwater be discharged into a wetland?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the
❑ Yes ❑ No 0 NA
receiving water?
j) Is there any mitigation proposed? (If yes, attach a mitigation
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA
proposal)
14 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc rEj GBRIEN 5 GCRC

6.0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
6.A. PROJECT NARRATIVE
Many of North Carolina's shallow draft inlets have not been in a Presidential budget since 2005 (e.g., Bogue,
Carolina Beach and Lockwoods Folly). The USACE Headquarters is also internally assessing the viability of
the side -cast dredge plant "Merritt"; the Corps' primary dredge plant for shallow draft inlet maintenance in
N.C. If North Carolina's shallow draft inlet maintenance dredging continues receiving limited or no support
within Presidential budgets, and USACE Headquarters fails to garner future fiscal support and potentially
determines the "Merritt" as non - viable, local stakeholders must have another alternative. One alternative is
for the local stakeholders adjoining the shallow draft inlets and AIWW crossing to contract the
maintenance dredging on their own. To do this, they would need authorizations (permits) allowing local
maintenance dredging within their specific AIWW crossings and inlets.
To this end, the local stakeholders for the SDI -5 are submitting this single NCDCM Major Permit application
for conducting maintenance dredging.
The inlet project areas and applicants are described in the following table:
Table 6.A.1 Project Summary
Project Area
Applicant
Bogue Inlet, Connecting Channel, AIWW Crossing
Town of Emerald Isle
New Topsail Inlet, Topsail Creek, Banks Channel, AIWW
Crossing
Town of Topsail Beach
Carolina Beach Inlet, AIWW Crossing
New Hanover County
Lockwoods Folly Inlet, AIWW Crossing
Town of Holden Beach
Shallotte River Inlet Coastal Storm Damage Reduction
(CSDR) Borrow Area, as well as the AIWW Crossing
Town of Ocean Isle Beach
The NCDCM Major Permit application will serve as the umbrella permit application for the processing of a
NCDCM Major Permit as well as other state and federal authorizations. The intended result is the
acquisition of locally held authorizations (NCDCM Major Permit / USACE General Permit 291) for each inlet
issued to each participating applicant.
The authorized maintenance dredging at each inlet would mimic the ongoing, approved USACE
maintenance dredging program for each inlet, which includes the AIWW crossings, connecting channels,
and the inlet throats out through the currently authorized USACE inlet linear distances beyond the
COLREGS line. The inlets have typically needed maintenance on a roughly quarterly basis by the USACE
Wilmington District, and AIWW Crossing maintenance has typically been needed every 1 -2 years. The SDI -
5 applicants would continue this maintenance schedule to the extent practical, subject to the navigational
needs at a particular inlet. To improve efficiency and limit potential impacts, the SDI -5 applicants may
combine AIWW Crossing and inlet maintenance events.
The applicants would continue the USACE Wilmington District's use of the least -cost method of disposal,
and would select from currently- approved dredge material management locations including shoreline
beneficial placement, nearshore placement and /or upland confined disposal. The project area for each
inlet is depicted in Figures 2 through 6. The Proposed Action includes the AIWW Crossing wideners
maintained by the USACE Wilmington District, as summarized in the following excerpted table, and shown
in plan -view in Attachment 3:
15 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc rmi GBRIEN 5 GCRC

Table 1. Proposed AIWW Inlet Crossing Wideners.
Notes:
' = Distance measured parallel to AKMN from approbmate center of the inlet crossing
2 = Distance measured perpendicular to AIWW
3 = Width of main easterly widener area toward inlet: number in parentheses is the length (parallel to AIWW) at the indicated width
Source: Environmental Assessment: Channel Wideners at Inlet Crossings, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW), North
Carolina. USACE Wilmington District, Wilmington, NC. December 1997.
Shallotte Inlet is a federally- authorized CSDR Borrow Area, rather than a federally- authorized navigation
channel. In this permit application, the Town of Ocean Isle Beach is seeking approval to maintain the navigable
deepwater channel within the CSDR Borrow Area, which extends across the majority of the inlet and is dredged
on a 3 -year interval.
As a result of the ongoing nature of local stakeholder projects, many studies of environmental effects have been
conducted over time. These existing studies have been obtained and summarized in the following assessments
provided with this permit application:
Cultural Resource Assessment - Attachment 5.1
Sediment Evaluation - Attachment 5.2
Supplemental Biological Assessment (BA) - Attachment 5.3
Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Summary - Attachment 5.4
Recommended conservation measures from the Supplemental BA and EFH Summary to minimize potential
effects to protected species and EFH are provided as Attachment 6 to this permit application. To the extent
practical routinely scheduled dredging activity would be implemented during the environmental window for
dredging and shoreline beneficial reuse that is used by the USACE Wilmington District for AIWW Crossing
projects [November 16 to April 30] to limit the potential effect on federally- managed species.
When navigational needs necessitate inlet and crossing maintenance operations outside the environmental
window, dredges that are capable of nearshore or sidecast disposal would be used to avoid potential impacts
from beneficial placement. Should beneficial placement be needed outside the environmental window, the
applicable permittee would independently coordinate with NCDCM through the minor permit modification
process.
The USACE Wilmington District currently observes restrictions on sidecast dredging in certain inlet areas that
have adjacent habitats that are sensitive to sidecast disposal. These areas include Banks Channel at New Topsail
Inlet, and the Bogue Inlet Connecting Channel and AIWW Crossing ( USACE, 2004). These restrictions on
sidecast dredging would continue to be observed.
6.113. WORK PLAT
Plan view and cross - sectional plans from the USACE Wilmington District are provided in Attachment 3 for the
existing dredging areas at each inlet and AIWW crossing. Plan view boundaries of existing shoreline beneficial
placement areas are provided in Attachment 3, with the typical profiles from the AIWW Crossing maintenance
16 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \Dots\ Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application - 051115.doc r Y �Y
BR1EN 6 GERE
MAXIMUM WIDENER AREA
AIWW DESCRIPTION
LENGTH (ft)'
WIDTH (ft)?
CROSSING NAME
REACH SECTION
TANGENT
NORTH
SOUTH
EAST' WEST
Bogue Inlet
Beaufort - Cape Fear River I
F. G
2000
1500
200 (1700)
0
New Topsail Inlet
Beaufort - Cape Fear River III
8
1600
1600
200 (1000)
50
Mason Intel
Beaufort - Cape Fear River 111
12
1600
1600
700 (600)
50
Masonboro Inlet
Beaufort - Cape Fear River IV
3
2100
1700
200 (1500)
50
Carolina Beach Inlet
Beaufort - Cape Fear River IV
1
2500
900
250 (1300)
50
Lockwoods Folly Inlet
Cape Fear River - Little River -
11
1600
1600
400 (650)
50
Shallotte Inlet
Ca a Fear River - Little River -
19,20
1500
1600
200 1300
5o
Notes:
' = Distance measured parallel to AKMN from approbmate center of the inlet crossing
2 = Distance measured perpendicular to AIWW
3 = Width of main easterly widener area toward inlet: number in parentheses is the length (parallel to AIWW) at the indicated width
Source: Environmental Assessment: Channel Wideners at Inlet Crossings, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW), North
Carolina. USACE Wilmington District, Wilmington, NC. December 1997.
Shallotte Inlet is a federally- authorized CSDR Borrow Area, rather than a federally- authorized navigation
channel. In this permit application, the Town of Ocean Isle Beach is seeking approval to maintain the navigable
deepwater channel within the CSDR Borrow Area, which extends across the majority of the inlet and is dredged
on a 3 -year interval.
As a result of the ongoing nature of local stakeholder projects, many studies of environmental effects have been
conducted over time. These existing studies have been obtained and summarized in the following assessments
provided with this permit application:
Cultural Resource Assessment - Attachment 5.1
Sediment Evaluation - Attachment 5.2
Supplemental Biological Assessment (BA) - Attachment 5.3
Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Summary - Attachment 5.4
Recommended conservation measures from the Supplemental BA and EFH Summary to minimize potential
effects to protected species and EFH are provided as Attachment 6 to this permit application. To the extent
practical routinely scheduled dredging activity would be implemented during the environmental window for
dredging and shoreline beneficial reuse that is used by the USACE Wilmington District for AIWW Crossing
projects [November 16 to April 30] to limit the potential effect on federally- managed species.
When navigational needs necessitate inlet and crossing maintenance operations outside the environmental
window, dredges that are capable of nearshore or sidecast disposal would be used to avoid potential impacts
from beneficial placement. Should beneficial placement be needed outside the environmental window, the
applicable permittee would independently coordinate with NCDCM through the minor permit modification
process.
The USACE Wilmington District currently observes restrictions on sidecast dredging in certain inlet areas that
have adjacent habitats that are sensitive to sidecast disposal. These areas include Banks Channel at New Topsail
Inlet, and the Bogue Inlet Connecting Channel and AIWW Crossing ( USACE, 2004). These restrictions on
sidecast dredging would continue to be observed.
6.113. WORK PLAT
Plan view and cross - sectional plans from the USACE Wilmington District are provided in Attachment 3 for the
existing dredging areas at each inlet and AIWW crossing. Plan view boundaries of existing shoreline beneficial
placement areas are provided in Attachment 3, with the typical profiles from the AIWW Crossing maintenance
16 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \Dots\ Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application - 051115.doc r Y �Y
BR1EN 6 GERE

events. Actual placement profiles and fill densities will be event - specific. Existing upland disposal and nearshore
placement locations are provided in Figures 2 through 6.
The typical excavation profile proposed for navigation maintenance of Shallotte River Inlet is a channel with an
authorized depth of -13 feet mean low water (MLW), with an allowable over -depth of 2 feet. This depth will
match the authorized excavation depth in the CSDR Borrow Area of -15 ft MLW. The proposed bottom width is
150 feet, with 3:1 side slopes, consistent with width and slope dimensions used by the USACE Wilmington
District at the other four inlets of the SDI -5. This profile also matches the one prepared by the USACE
Wilmington District for the Shallotte Inlet CSDR Borrow Area (Attachment 3.5, Item # 6 of 9), except that the
bottom width will be 150 feet instead of "varies."
6.C. LOCATION MAP
Site locations are depicted on Figures 1 through 6.
6.D. COPY OF THE DEED, EASEMENT STATEMENT
Easements for the beneficial placement locations and upland disposal locations have been previously acquired
for the associated federal and local projects. The USACE and the applicants have the respective easements on
file. Should an easement to a property within the proposed disposal areas be found to be problematic or
deficient, the respective applicant will resolve the issue before beginning construction.
Before using the upland disposal sites, the applicants will obtain Consent Agreements from the USACE real
estate office that give the applicants authorization to use the sites. These documents will provide proof of real
estate interest in the disposal sites for the purposes of the CAMA major permit. The USACE Wilmington District
does not require Consent Agreements for beneficial beach placement along federally- authorized shorefront
placement reaches or within federal Coastal Storm Damage Reduction beach placement project areas.
6.E. APPLICATION FEE
The application fee of $475 has been provided with the permit application.
6.F. ADJACENT WATERFRONT OWNERS AND PROOF OF NOTIFICATION.
The riparian property owner adjacent to the previously- authorized beneficial placement templates are
identified below, and have been notified. See Attachment 4 for notification and return receipts.
6.F.1 Bogue Inlet
17 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i GBRIEN 5 GORE
Adjacent Waterfront Property
Adjacent Owner Mailing Address
Name:
--
Hugh and Denise Donahue
Address:
115 Bogue Ct
4 Pheasant Lane, Chadds Ford, PA 19317
Phone
--
N/A
Name:
--
Thomas and Paula Stout
Address:
6707 Ocean Dr
1390 Braewick Dr, Morgantown, WV 26505
Phone
--
N/A
17 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i GBRIEN 5 GORE

6.F.2 New Topsail Inlet
6.F.3 Carolina Beach Inlet
Adjacent Waterfront Property
Adjacent Owner Mailing Address
Name:
--
Lea Island, Inc.
Address:
Lea Island; PIN: 3291 -94- 5377 -000
PO Box 1717, Virginia Beach, NC 23451
Name:
--
Mcleod Family LLC ET AL
Address
Ocean Blvd Off; PIN: 4201 -59- 8862 -0000
c/o Kathey Renee McCullen
Address
--
6513 Wakefalls Dr, Wake Forest, NC 27587
Name:
--
James Gardner
Address:
101 N Anderson Blvd (Town Line)
PO Box 119, Arnolds Park, IA 51331
Name:
--
Robert & Nancy Hemby
Address:
Ocean Blvd (Ocean Blvd /Drum St)
8008 Fieldstone Dr., Frederick, MD 21702
6.F.3 Carolina Beach Inlet
6.F.4 Lockwoods Folly Inlet
Adjacent Waterfront Property
Adjacent Owner Mailing Address
Name:
--
Fred B. Graham, Jr., Et. Al.
Address:
0 Masonboro Island
PO Box 3302, Wilmington, NC 28406
Parcel ID:
R08500- 006 - 003 -000
N/A
Name:
--
Town of Carolina Beach
Address:
398 Oceana Way
1121 N. Lake Park Blvd., Carolina Beach, NC
Parcel ID:
R08807- 005 - 007 -000
(910) 458 -2999
6.F.4 Lockwoods Folly Inlet
6.F.5 Shallotte River Inlet
Adjacent Waterfront Property
Adjacent Owner Mailing Address
Name:
--
Milton Keener
Address:
N /A; Parcel ID: 233PB002
856 Hoffman Rd., Lincolnton, NC 28092
Name:
--
Donald P ET Elaine B Scarborough
Address:
N /A; Parcel ID: 233PB003
209 East Wade St, Wadesboro, NC 28170
Name:
--
Paul M ET Julie P Cino
Address:
N /A; Parcel ID: 246BB042
2322 Iris Ct, Jamison, PA 18929
Name:
--
Nancy Glover Cooper ETALS
Address:
N /A; Parcel ID: 246BB043
708 East H Street, Erwin, NC 28339
Name:
--
Town of Oak Island
Address:
N /A; Parcel ID: 233013002
4601 E. Oak Island Dr, Oak Island, NC 28465
6.F.5 Shallotte River Inlet
18 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc rai O'BRIIIEN 6 GCRC
Adjacent Waterfront Property
Adjacent Owner Mailing Address
Name:
--
Clayton J. Vance, Jr.
Address:
N /A; Parcel ID: 257FI006
3500 Ranlo Drive, Raleigh, NC 27612
Name:
--
Virginia Williamson, OIB Holdings, LLC
Address:
N /A; Parcel ID: 244LM018
2 Causeway Drive, Ocean Isle Beach, NC 28462
18 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc rai O'BRIIIEN 6 GCRC

6.G. LIST OF PREVIOUS STATE OR FEDERAL PERMITS ISSUED FOR WORK ON THE PROJECT TRACT
6.G.1 Bogue Inlet
The following consistency determinations and concurrences have been issued for federal projects on the project
tract:
Description
Date
Purpose
The NC Department of Natural Resources &
1/12/1979 and
Inlet maintenance dredging
Community Development (NC DNR &CD) issued
1/24/1980
concurrence letters to the USACE Wilmington
2. CAMA Major Permit #127 -04
6/19/2007,11/21/2007,11/25/2007, 10/8/2008,3/28/2010,
District
11/21/2010, and 12/23/2010. Modification requested
Crossing
The USACE Wilmington District 1983 Report on
1983
Construction and maintenance of the
Improvement of Navigation and EIS contains a
entrance channel across the ocean
consistency determination in Appendix E
bar at Bogue Inlet
The USACE Wilmington District submitted a
9/2/1983
Maintenance of the Bogue Inlet
consistency determination and concurrence to the
AIWW Crossing and upland disposal
NC DNR &CD
Consistency concurrence issued by the NCDCM
1/16/2009
Maintenance dredging with a
cutterhead hydraulic pipeline dredge
from the Atlantic Ocean through
Bogue Inlet to the AIWW.
In addition, the following state and federal permits have been issued to the Town of Emerald Isle for work on the
project tract:
Permit Number
Issuing Date
1. CAMA Major Permit #20 -99
2/16/99
USACE #1999 - 00659, DWQ #98 -1292
1/27/99
the USACE Wilmington District
9/9/2004; renewed on 2/8/2008, Minor modifications on
10/10/ 2004,12/21/ 2004, 2/8/2005,12/21/2005,05 /07/2007,
2. CAMA Major Permit #127 -04
6/19/2007,11/21/2007,11/25/2007, 10/8/2008,3/28/2010,
determination
11/21/2010, and 12/23/2010. Modification requested
Crossing
10/17/2013.
DWQ Project# 041176
9/7/2004
6.G.2 New Topsail Inlet
The following consistency determinations and concurrences have been issued for federal projects on the project
tract:
Description
Date
Purpose
NC DNR &CD issued concurrence letters to
1/12/1979 and
Inlet maintenance dredging
the USACE Wilmington District
1/24/1980
USACE Wilmington District consistency
2/25/1980
Maintenance of the New Topsail Inlet AIWW
determination
Crossing
19 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS\ Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application - 051115.doc r Y �Y
BR1EN 6 GERE

Description
Date
Purpose
USACE Wilmington District consistency
7/2/1980
Expansion of dredge area within New Topsail
determination
11/12/2013
Inlet to include the connector channels west of
11/17/2010
Banks Channel and Topsail Creek to the AIWW,
USACE Wilmington District consistency
4/18/1980
with nearshore disposal at the -10 ft mean low
determination letter submitted to NC
water (MLW) contour.
Consistency concurrence from NC DNR &
7/16/1980
Dredging within New Topsail Inlet and nearshore
CD
February 1982
disposal
USACE Wilmington District prepared a
9/15/1980
Use of an industry -owned dredge with nearshore
subsequent consistency determination
disposal at the -14 ft MLW contour.
USACE Wilmington District consistency
2/22/1982
Beach disposal of material dredged from Banks
determination
Channel
NC DNR &CD issued a consistency
2/25/1988
Maintenance dredging of the Topsail Inlet AIWW
concurrence letter for USACE Wilmington
Crossing
District consistency determination
In addition, the following state and federal permits have been issued to the Town of Topsail Beach for work on
the project tract:
Permit Number
Issuing Date
1. CAMA Major Permit #22 -09
2/27/2009, modified in 7/1/2009, 12/1/2010,
1/12/2011,1/12/2014
USACE Action ID # SAW- 2006 - 40848 -071
6/15/2009
USACE Action ID # SAW- 2013 -00404
11/12/2013
DWQ Certification #3777
11/17/2010
6.G.3 Carolina Beach Inlet
The following consistency determinations and concurrences have been issued for federal projects on the project
tract:
Description
Date
Purpose
USACE Wilmington District prepared
2/25/1980
Carolina Beach Inlet AIWW Crossing maintenance
consistency determination and submitted
project
to NC DNR &CD
USACE Wilmington District consistency
4/18/1980
Construction and maintenance of Carolina Beach
determination letter submitted to NC
Inlet with nearshore disposal
DNR &CD
USACE Wilmington District submitted
February 1982
Include beach disposal on Masonboro Island
amendment to April 18, 1980 consistency
determination letter to NC DNR &CD
NC DNR & CD consistency concurrence
3/30/1987
Maintenance of the AIWW Crossing and beach
letter (references USACE Wilmington
disposal on Masonboro Island
District Consistency Determination CD
87 -10
20 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i GBRIIEN 5 GCRC

In addition, the following state and federal permits have been issued to New Hanover County for work on the
project tract:
Permit Number
Issuing Date
DCM Permit #138 -12
Expires 12/31/2015
DWQ Certification #3900
(DWQ Project #12 -0868
10/29/2012
USACE Action ID # SAW -2010 -01825
1/8/2013
6.G.4 Lockwoods Folly Inlet
The following consistency determinations and concurrences have been issued for federal projects on the project
tract:
Description
Date
Purpose
NC DNR &CD issued concurrence letters to
1/12/1979 and
Inlet maintenance dredging
the USACE Wilmington District
1/24/1980
maintenance dredging project
USACE Wilmington District consistency
2/251980
Maintenance dredging within the AIWW at
determination
Lockwoods Folly Inlet
USACE Wilmington District consistency
8/4/1980
Ocean Isle Beach coastal storm damage
determination
Lockwoods Folly River AIWW Crossing project
(dredging and upland disposal)
Consistency concurrence issued by
9/25/1980
NCDNR & CD
USACE Wilmington District consistency
6/29/1984
determination
Adding an additional disposal area for dredging
Lockwoods Folly Inlet
Consistency concurrence issued by
7/16/1984
NCDNR & CD
In addition, the following state and federal permits have been issued to the Town of Holden Beach for work on
the project tract:
Permit Number
Issuing Date
1. CAMA DCM Permit #14 -02
Issued 2/1/2002, Major Modification 7/10/2012,
Modification requested 12/20/2013
DWQ Certification #3780 (DWQ Project #20011836)
Issued 2/13/2009, Replaced 6/18/2012
USACE Action ID No. SAW- 2012 -00286
9/28/2012
6.G.5 Shallotte River Inlet
The following consistency determinations and concurrences have been issued for federal projects on the project
tract:
Description
Date
Purpose
USACE Wilmington District consistency
2/25/1980 and
Shallotte Inlet AIWW Crossing
determinations
6/29/1984
maintenance dredging project
NC DNR & CD issued consistency concurrence
7/16/1984
Maintenance dredging in the vicinity of
Holden Beach
NC DCM issued state consistency concurrence
9/29/1997
Ocean Isle Beach coastal storm damage
reduction project
211 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \NC- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS \Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc rmi GBRIIEN 5 GCRC

In addition, the following state and federal permits have been issued to the Town of Ocean Isle Beach for work
on the project tract:
Permit Number
Issuing Date
CAMA Permit # 91 -05
6/28/2005, modified 4/28/2006
DWQ Certification #3400 (DWQ Project No. 050487)
5/13/2005
USACE Department of the Army Permit #SAW- 2005 -00360
9/27/2005
6.H. SIGNED CONSULTANT OR AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
See Attachment 1
6.1. WETLAND DELINEATION
Not necessary.
6.J. SIGNED AEC HAZARD NOTICE FOR PROJECTS IN OCEANFRONT AND INLET AREAS
See Attachment 2
6.K. STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE N.C. ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
Not required.
22 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \NC- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i GBRIEN 5 GCRC

DCM MP -2 EXCAVATION AND FILL INFORMATION
The following sections comprise application form MP -2.
Dimension
Bogue Inlet
New Topsail
Carolina Beach
Lockwoods
Shallotte River
Inlet
Inlet
Folly Inlet
Inlet
Length
AIWW: 5,400 ft
AIWW: 7,800 ft
AIWW: 3,900 ft
AIWW: 7,700 ft
AIWW: 9,000 ft
Bogue Inlet:
New Topsail Inlet:
Carolina Beach
Lockwoods
Shallotte River
6,100 ft
7,800 ft
Inlet: 6,300 ft
Folly Inlet:
Inlet: 5,400 ft
4,100 ft
Connecting
Topsail Creek:
Channel: 10,400
8,000 ft
ft
Banks Channel:
21,100 ft
Width'
AIWW: 90 ft
AIWW: 90 ft
AIWW: 90 ft
AIWW: 90 ft
AIWW: 90 ft
Bogue Inlet: 150
New Topsail Inlet:
Carolina Beach
Lockwoods
Shallotte River
ft
150 ft
Inlet: 150 ft
Folly Inlet: 150
Inlet: 150 ft
ft
Connecting
Topsail Creek &
Channel: 90 ft
Banks Channel:
80ft
Approx.
Maintained
Navigation
—64 acres
—108 acres
—44 acres
—48 acres
—53 acres
Area (Includes
Wideners)
Average
AIWW: -12 ft
AIWW: -12 ft MLW
AIWW: -12 ft MLW
AIWW: -12 ft
AIWW: -12 ft
Existing Depth
MLW
MLW
MLW
Topsail Creek: -7 It
Carolina Beach
(Federally
Connecting
MLW
Inlet: -8 ft MLW
Lockwoods
Shallotte River
authorized
Channel: -6 ft
Folly Inlet: -12 ft
Inlet: -15 ft MLW
depths)
MLW
Inlet: -8 ft MLW
MLW
(CSDR Borrow
Bogue Inlet: -8 ft
Banks Channel: -7
Area Authorized
Depth)
MLW
ft MLW
Final Project
AIWW: -12 +2 ft
AIWW: -12 +2 ft
AIWW: -12 +2 ft
AIWW: -12 +2 ft
AIWW: -12 +2 ft
Depth (Includes
MLW
MLW
MLW
MLW
MLW
Allowable
Connecting
New Topsail Inlet:
Carolina Beach
Lockwoods
Shallotte River
Over - depth)
Channel: -6 +2 ft
-8 +2 It MLW
Inlet: -8 +2 ft MLW
Folly Inlet:
Inlet: -13 +2 ft
MLW
-12 +2 ft MLW
MLW (CSDR
Topsail Creek &
Borrow Area
Bogue Inlet:
Banks Channel:
Authorized
-8 +2 ft MLW
-7 +2 ft MLW
Depth)
i.a. Excavation
AIWW: 100,000
AIWW: 100,000
AIWW: 100,000
AIWW: 100,000
AIWW: 100,000
from below
Bogue Inlet &
New Topsail Inlet,
Carolina Beach
Lockwoods
Shallotte Inlet:
NHW or NWL in
Connecting
Topsail Creek, &
Inlet: 54,000
Folly Inlet:
65,000
cubic yards
Channel: 62,000
Banks Channel:
65,000
(typica12)
50,000
'See widener limit table in Section 6.A for widener dimensions. Dimensions included in maintained navigation area.
2 Typical excavation in inlets assessed by analyzing USACE Wilmington District dredge plant records for the Fry and the Merritt
from 2005 -2012. Typical AIWW Crossing dredging volume provided by USACE Wilmington District personnel.
23 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i GBRIEN S GORE

1. EXCAVATION
a. Amount of material to be excavated from
See table above for approximate typical excavation quantities,
below NHW or NWL in cubic yards
which were prepared based on SDI -5 maintenance dredging
records provided by the USACE Wilmington District for dredge
plants Fry and Merritt for fiscal year 2005 through 2012.
Because Shallotte Inlet is a CSDR Borrow Area, and not a
federally- maintained navigation channel, these quantities are
estimated based on the maintenance requirements observed at
nearby Lockwoods Folly Inlet. Maximum excavation volumes
will be event - specific and dependent on the amount of material
that needs to be excavated to maintain navigation.
b. Type of material to be excavated
Sand
c. Does the area to be excavated include
Benthic habitats mapped in the vicinity of the project areas are
coastal wetlands /marsh (CW), submerged
depicted in the Essential Fish Habitat Summary figures
aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom
(Attachment 5.4).
(SB), or other wetlands (WL)? If so,
None of the inlet excavation areas include CW, SAV, or WL.
provide number of square feet affected,
Because the Proposed Action entails maintenance of existing
and the purpose of excavation in these
navigation channels, the areas of shell bottom depicted in
areas.
Attachment 5.4 are not considered to be applicable within
existing navigation channels.
d. High ground excavation in cubic yards
NA
24 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \NC- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i GBRIEN 5 GCRC

2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL
2.1 Bogue Inlet
a. and b. Location & dimensions of disposal areas: The potential beach placement area begins on the
public trust beach west of 115 Bogue Court and ends at 6709 Ocean Dr (Figure 2). The typical profile for the
proposed placement is provided in Attachment 3.1, Item #3, and comprises a typical berm width of 75 feet, with
a natural slope from the berm to existing grade. The proposed placement area is comprised of the following
previously authorized projects, which have beneficially placed material in the footprints delineated on Figure 2
and shown in the Design Plans in Attachment 3.1. The total length of the proposed potential beneficial
placement area is approximately 32,700 feet. The length of actual beneficial placement in each event will be
based on the volume of dredged material, but will typically be approximately 2,700 feet.
• Bogue Inlet Channel Erosion Response Project, Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Permit #127-
04, conducted by the Town of Emerald Isle in 2005. This includes an authorized beach placement
template of approximately 4.5 miles of beach with a typical berm width of 80 ft and a 20:1 beach face
slope from the berm to existing grade.
• Permit Modification to CAMA Permit #127 -04 for beneficial placement at the Pointe at Emerald Isle,
conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE) Wilmington District in winter 2013/2014.
Approximately 50 acres of placement along 3,000 feet of beach, to a depth of 1 -2 feet.
• Bogue Inlet & AIWW Crossing Maintenance Dredging and Beneficial Placement, conducted by the
USACE Wilmington District. This ongoing project includes beneficial placement on the beach using the
typical profile described above (Attachment 3.1, Item #3 of 8), and near -shore disposal locations at
approximately -10 ft MLW (see Figure 2).
• Upland Disposal Site # AIWW DA 0060, existing diked upland disposal site recommended for use for
incompatible material by USACE Wilmington District. Approximately 21 acres.
c. (i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA
As part of completing the projects described above, the
Town of Emerald Isle acquired easements from the
affected properties for beneficial beach placement of
dredged material. These easements are on file with the
Town of Emerald Isle.
The USACE Wilmington District has easements on file for
the upland disposal site. The applicant will obtain a
Consent Agreement from the USACE Real Estate Office
prior to beginning construction.
Should an easement be found to be problematic, the
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission
applicant will resolve the issue prior to beginning
from the owner.
construction.
d.(i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
(ii) If yes, where?
Same locations
e.(i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands /marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
❑ CW ❑ SAV 11 SB
number of square feet affected:
❑ WL 0 None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
f.(i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
The nearshore disposal area is approximately 6,000 feet long
with a variable width.
25 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \NC- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i GBRIEN 5 GORE

2.2 New Topsail Inlet
a. and b. Location & dimensions of disposal areas: The potential beach placement area begins northeast of
PIN# 4201 -59- 8862 -0000 and ends southwest of PIN# 4223 -46- 2858 -0000 (Figure 3). The typical profile for
the proposed placement is provided in Attachment 3.2, Item #2, and comprises a typical berm width of 100 feet,
with a natural slope from the berm to existing grade. The proposed potential placement area is comprised of the
following previously authorized projects, which have beneficially placed material in the footprints delineated on
Figure 3 and shown in the Design Plats provided in Attachment 3.2. The total length of the proposed potential
beneficial placement area is approximately 23,900 feet. The length of actual beneficial placement in each event
will be based on the volume of dredged material, but will typically be approximately 2,500 feet.
■ Topsail Beach Nourishment Project (Permit #22 -09 Modification), conducted by the Town of
Topsail Beach. This includes an authorized beach placement template of 10,861 linear feet of beach with
an average berm width of 40 ft and a 25:1 beach face slope from the berm to existing grade.
■ New Topsail Inlet, Topsail Creek, Banks Channel, & AIWW Crossing Maintenance Dredging and
Beneficial Placement, conducted by the USACE Wilmington District. This ongoing project includes
beneficial placement on the beach, and near -shore disposal locations at approximately -10 ft MLW (see
Figure 3). Beach placement is conducted using the typical profile described above (Attachment 3.2, Item
#2).
■ Upland Disposal Site # AIWW DA 0203, existing diked upland disposal site recommended for use for
incompatible material by USACE Wilmington District. Site is approximately 14.7 acres.
c.(i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
❑ Yes 21 No ❑ NA
As part of completing the projects described above, the
Town of Topsail Beach acquired easements from the
affected properties for beneficial beach placement of
dredged material. These easements are on file with the
Town of Emerald Isle.
The USACE Wilmington District has easements on file for
the upland disposal site. The applicant will obtain a
Consent Agreement from the USACE Real Estate Office prior
to beginning construction.
Should an easement be found to be problematic, the
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission
applicant will resolve the issue prior to beginning
from the owner.
construction.
d.(i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
(ii) If yes, where?
Same locations
e.(i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands /marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
El CW El SAV El SB
number of square feet affected:
❑ WL RI None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
f.(i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
The nearshore disposal area is approximately 6,000 feet long
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
with a variable width.
26 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS\ Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application - 051115.doc r Y �Y
BR1EN 6 GERE

2.3 Carolina Beach Inlet
a. and b. Location & dimensions of disposal area: The potential beach placement area begins approximately
1,500 feet south of Carolina Beach Inlet and ends to the north of 398 Oceana Way (Figure 4). The typical profile
for the proposed placement is provided in Attachment 3.3, Item # 3, and comprises a typical berm width of 150
feet, and a natural slope to existing grade. The proposed placement area is comprised of the following
previously authorized project, which has beneficially placed material in the footprint delineated on Figure 4 and
shown in the Design Plats provided in Attachment 3.3. The total length of proposed potential beneficial
placement areas is approximately 4,900 feet. The length of actual beneficial placement in each event will be
based on the volume of dredged material, but will typically be approximately 2,600 feet.
■ Carolina Beach & AIWW Crossing Maintenance Dredging and Beneficial Placement, conducted by
the USACE Wilmington District. This ongoing project includes beneficial placement on the beach at
Freeman Park, and near -shore disposal locations at approximately -10 ft MLW (see Figure 4). Beach
placement is conducted with an average berm width of 150 ft and a natural slope from the berm to
existing grade.
c.(i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA
New Hanover County acquired easements from the affected
properties for beneficial beach placement of dredged
material. These easements are on file with New Hanover
County.
Should an easement be found to be problematic, the
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission
applicant will resolve the issue prior to beginning
from the owner.
construction.
d. (i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
(ii) If yes, where?
Same locations
e.(i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands /marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
❑ CW ❑ SAV ❑ SB
number of square feet affected:
❑ WL 0 None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
f.(i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
The nearshore disposal area is approximately 4,800 feet long at
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
variable widths and depths.
27 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i O'BRIIEN 5 GCRC

2.4 Lockwoods Folly Inlet
a. and b. Location of & dimensions of disposal areas: The potential beach placement area begins west of
Parcel ID 233PB002 and ends east of Parcel ID 246BB043 (Figure 5). The typical profile for the proposed
placement is provided in Attachment 3.4, Item # 2, and comprises a typical berm width of 75 feet, and a natural
slope to existing grade. The proposed placement area is comprised of the following previously authorized
projects, which have beneficially placed material in the footprints delineated on Figure 5 and shown in the
Design Plats provided in Attachment 3.4. The total length of proposed potential beneficial placement area is
approximately 23,700 feet. The length of actual beneficial placement in each event will be based on the volume
of dredged material, but will typically be approximately 2,800 feet.
• Holden Beach Central Reach Project (Permit #14 -02), conducted by the Town of Holden Beach. This
includes an authorized beach placement template along 4.2 miles of shoreline, with an average dune
crest width of 25 feet, and a 5:1 construction slope to an average berm width of 140 -190 ft, with a 15:1
beach face slope from the berm to existing grade.
• Lockwoods Folly Inlet & AIWW Crossing Maintenance Dredging and Beneficial Placement,
conducted by the USACE Wilmington District. This includes beneficial placement on the beach, and
near -shore disposal locations at approximately -10 ft MLW (see Figure 5). Beach placement is
conducted with an average berm width of 75 ft and a natural slope from the berm to existing grade.
• Holden Beach 2013 Permit #14 -02 Modification "Piggyback Project ", conducted by the USACE
Wilmington District and the Town of Holden Beach. This included beach placement west of the existing
USACE template for placement from the AIWW Crossing, along approximately 3,700 feet of beach, with
an average berm width of 75 ft and a natural slope from the berm to existing grade.
■ Upland Disposal Site # AIWW DA 0268, existing diked upland disposal site recommended for use for
incompatible material by USACE Wilmington District. Site is approximately 21.5 acres.
c.(i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA
As part of completing the projects described above, the
Town of Holden Beach acquired easements from the
affected properties for beneficial beach placement of
dredged material. These easements are on file with the
Town of Holden Beach.
The USACE Wilmington District has easements on file for
the upland disposal site. The applicant will obtain a
Consent Agreement from the USACE Real Estate Office
prior to beginning construction.
Should an easement be found to be problematic, the
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission
applicant will resolve the issue prior to beginning
from the owner.
construction.
d.(i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
Z Yes ❑No ❑ NA
If yes, where?
Same locations
_(ii)
e. (i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands /marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
❑ CW ❑ SAV ❑ SB
number of square feet affected:
❑ WL Z None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
f. i Does the disposal include any area in the water? IZYes ❑ No ❑ NA
The nearshore disposal area is approximately 5,700 feet long
at Holden Beach, and approximately 8,200 feet long at Oak
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
Island with a variable width at both areas.
28 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs\ Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application - 051115.doc r Y �Y
BR1EN 6 GERE

2.5 Shallotte River Inlet
a. and b. Location & dimensions of disposal areas: The potential beach placement area begins approximately
1,500 feet east of Parcel ID 244LHO20 and ends east of Parcel ID 257FI006 (Figure 6). The typical profile for the
proposed placement is provided in Attachment 3.5, Item # 2, and comprises a typical berm width of 75 feet, and
a natural slope to existing grade. The proposed placement area is comprised of the following previously
authorized projects, which have beneficially placed material in the footprints delineated on Figure 6 and shown
in the Design Plats provided in Attachment 3.5. The total length of the proposed potential beneficial placement
area is approximately 19,900 feet. The length of actual beneficial placement in each event will be based on the
volume of dredged material, but will typically be approximately 2,800 feet.
• Ocean Isle Beach Coastal Storm Damage Reduction Project, conducted by the USACE Wilmington
District. This includes an authorized beach placement template along approximately 3.3 miles of
shoreline, with an average dune crest width of 25 feet, and a 10:1 construction slope to an average berm
width of 50 ft, with a 10:1 beach face slope from the berm to existing grade.
• Shallotte River Inlet AIWW Crossing Maintenance Dredging and Beneficial Placement, conducted
by the USACE Wilmington District. This includes beneficial placement on the beach, and a near -shore
disposal location at approximately -10 ft MLW (see Figure 6). Beach placement is conducted with an
average berm width of 75 ft and a natural slope from the berm to existing grade.
• Ocean Isle Beach East End Project (Permit #91 -05), conducted by the USACE Wilmington District and
the Town of Ocean Isle Beach. This included beach placement east of the existing USACE template for
placement from the AIWW Crossing, along approximately 2,700 feet of beach, with an average berm
width of 130 ft to 150 ft with a slope from the berm ranging from 18:1 to 20:1 to existing grade.
■ Upland Disposal Site # AIWW DA 0300, existing diked upland disposal site recommended for use for
incompatible material by USACE Wilmington District. Site is approximately 13.2 acres.
c.(i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA
As part of completing the projects described above, the
Town of Ocean Isle Beach and the USACE Wilmington
District acquired easements from the affected
properties for beneficial beach placement of dredged
material. These easements are on file with the Town of
Ocean Isle Beach and the USACE Wilmington District.
The USACE Wilmington District has easements on file for
the upland disposal site. The applicant will obtain a
Consent Agreement from the USACE Real Estate Office
prior to beginning construction.
Should an easement be found to be problematic, the
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission
applicant will resolve the issue prior to beginning
from the owner.
construction.
d. i Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
Z Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
(ii) If yes, where?
Same location if fill is required.
e.(i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands /marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
❑ CW ❑ SAV ❑ SB
number of square feet affected:
❑ WL Z None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
f. i Does the disposal include any area in the water? IZYes ❑ No ❑ NA
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
The nearshore disposal area is approximately 3,500 feet long
with a variable width.
29 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs\ Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application - 051115.doc r Y �Y
BR1EN 6 GERE

3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION
Not applicable.
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES
Not applicable.
5. GENERAL
5.a. Retention of fill excavated material and erosion control measures
Temporary in -situ sand berms and dikes will be used during beach placement to facilitate settlement
and retention of sand on beach and also allow water to re -enter Atlantic Ocean.
5.b. Describe types of equipment to be used
For dredging with beneficial placement, a cutterhead hydraulic dredge and pipeline, bulldozers, front -
end loaders and other earth moving machinery will be used. For dredging without beneficial
placement, dredges will be selected based on the following criteria:
• Appropriate draft for inlet & channels
• Exclusionary fittings for sea turtles and sturgeon (if hopper dredges are used that have sufficient
suction head size and suction power to entrain sea turtles and sturgeon)
• Sea - worthy beyond COLREGS line
S.C. Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project
Yes. Location management of U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) navigational aids will be by the USCG and will be
coordinated prior to the commencement of maintenance dredging. Each applicant will coordinate aids
placements with the USCG before, during and following a maintenance dredging event.
5.d Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project site
No.
30 1 Final: May 11, 2015
I: \NC- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study -Ncdcm \DOGS \Reports \Permit Application \5131 -5 Permit Application- 051115.doc r0i GBRIEN S GCRC

CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION TO ENTER ON LAND
Bogue Inlet
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal
review agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this
permit application and follow -up monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date: 3131 / S Print name: Frank Rush
Signature: -Z�,4 kt
More than Engineering Solutions a G©RIEN G GERE

New Topsail Inlet
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in
the application. The projectwill be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that 1 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 certi �ftha e information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date: / Printname: Tim Hollnman _.
Signature:��// %/
More than Engineering 5o1utions Cal CYBRIEN 6 GERE

Carolina Beach Inlet
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal
review agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this
permit application and follow -up monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date: Print name: Chris Coudriet
Signature:
32 1 Final: February 9, 2015
I: \NONat Res.1 550 \5313911, 5tudp-Nmim \Don \Reports \Permit Application \SDI -5 Permit Application- 0ID915.doc G O'BRIEN 6 GERE

Lockwoods Folly Inlet
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal
review agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this
permit application and follow -up monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date: 3 h /2o %$` Print name: David Hewett
Signature:
More than Engineering Solutions G G BRIEN 5 GERE

Shallotte River Inlet
1 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.
1 certify that 1 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.
further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge
Date: _J-6 -&As�
Print name:
Signature:
`�Vr (� t06-1r, JsJe�eoeau
More than Engineering So lotions N ®QRIEN ri GERE

Figures
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

x
E
a
_T
C
U_
U
UI
2
a`
0
LEGEND SDI -5 MAINTENANCE DREDGING N
�+ SDI -5 PERMIT APPLICATION
52139
PROJECT VICINITY MAP 12/30/14
0 5 10 20 ru O'BRIEN 6 GERE
Miles

m
0
0
Li
Q
0
0
J
d
x
X
E
a
m
o
0
O
O
J
N
C
N
01
O
D]
FIGURE 2
SDI -5 MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION PROJECT AREA MAP
BOGUE INLET
TOWN OF EMERALD ISLE, NC 52139
5/4/2015
1,000 2.000 4,000 6,000 8,000 GBRIEN Y GERE
Feet Is

x
E
a
m
c
0
ro
0
d
c
a
0
r
3
d
z
SDI -5 MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION PROJECT AREA MAP
NEW TOPSAIL INLET
TOWN OF TOPSAIL BEACH, NC 52139
5/4/2015
1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8.000 G'[3RIGN Y GCRC
Feet

N
N
N
Q
V
V
N
N
r
O
O
W
H
Q
F
J
d
Q
N
C
O
U
O
J
N
C
L
U
f0
N
O]
f0
C_
O
f0
U
52139
5/4/2015
SDI -5 MAINTENANCE DREDGING
PERMIT APPLICATION
CAROLINA BEACH INLET
NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NC
PROJECT AREA MAP
0 500 1,000 2,000
Feet
am O'BRIEN 5 GERE

Q
m
0
0
Li
0
0
O
J
d
SDI -5 MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION PROJECT AREA MAP
LOCKWOODS FOLLY INLET "
TOWN OF HOLDEN BEACH, NC 52139
5/4/2015
0 000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 O'BRIEN Y GERE
Feet 13

FIGURE 4
a
0
0
cd
U
O
J
N
C
N
J
N
O
N
L
SDI -5 MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION PROJECT AREA MAP
SHALLOTTE RIVER INLET
TOWN OF OCEAN ISLE BEACH, NC 52139
5/4/2015
1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8.000 GBRIEN 5 GERE
Feet

Attachment 1 -Agent
Authorization Forms
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

Pat McCrory
Governor
FqCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Date: November 26, 2014
Name of Property Owner Applying for Permit:
Town of Emerald Isle
Owner's Mailing Address:
Frank Rush, Jr.
7500 Emerald Drive
Emerald Isle, NC 28594
Email: #rush @emeraldisle- nc.org
Phone ( 252 ) 354 -3424
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
Name of Authorized Agent for this project:
O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc.
Agent's Mailing Address:
O'Brien & Gore Engineers, Inc. - Daniel Ramsay
3214 Charles B. Root Wynd, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27512, USA
Email: Daniel.Ramsay @obg.com
Phone (919 ) 987-3090
I certify that I have authorized the agent listed above to act on my behalf, for the purpose of applying
for, and obtaining all CAMA Permits necessary to install or construct the following (activity):
to perform maintenance dredging at Bogue Inlet and beneficially place beach - quality dredged material at
neighboring beaches (i.e., the Point at Emerald Isle, Bogue Banks).
For my property located at Bogue Inlet, the Point at Emerald Isle, Bogue Banks
This certification is valid 1 year from (date) November 26, 2014
7 7 � r zl z /,y
Property Owner Signature Date
N.C. Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Ddve Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: mwmccoastalm anagement. net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Mfirmalhe Acton Empbyer

e7Q
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Governor
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Date: February 6, 2015
Name of Property Owner Applying for Permit: Name of Authorized Agent for this project:
Town of Topsail Beach O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc.
Owner's Mailing Address:
Tim Holloman - Town Manager
820 S Anderson Blvd
Topsail Beach, NC 28465
Email: townmanager @topsailbeach.org
Phone ( 910 ) 328 -5841
Agent's Mailing Address:
O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc. - Daniel Ramsay
3214 Charles B. Root Wynd, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27612, USA
Email. Daniel. Ramsay @obg.com
Phone (919 ) 987-3090
I certify that I have authorized the agent listed above to act on my behalf, for the purpose of applying
for, and obtaining all CAMA Permits necessary to install or construct the following (activity):
to perform maintenance dredging at New Topsail Inlet, Topsail Creek, Banks Channel, and the AIWW Crossing
and dispose sediment as shoreline beneficial placement, upland disposal, or near -shore disposal.
For my property located at New Topsail Inlet, Topsail Beach
This certification is valid 1 year from (date) February 6, 2015
Property Owner Signature Date
N.C. Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Klminglon, NC 26405
Phone: 910 - 79&72151 FAX: [phone] Internet: vnnv.nccosslalmanagemenl.net
M Equal OpWunIYI Alrm mMtm Empl Wr

Pat McCrory
Governor
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Date: February 6, 2015
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
Name of Property Owner Applying for Permit: Name of Authorized Agent for this project:
New Hanover County O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc.
Owner's Mailing Address:
Chris Coudriet - County Manager
230 Government Center Drive
Wilmington, NC 28403
Email: Ibedsole @nhcgov.com
Phone ( 910 ) 798 -7104
Agent's Mailing Address:
O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc. - Daniel Ramsay
3214 Charles B. Root Wynd, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27612, USA
Finall• Daniel. Ramsay @obg.com
Phone (919 ) 987 -3090
I certify that I have authorized the agent listed above to act on my behalf, for the purpose of applying
for, and obtaining all CAMA Permits necessary to install or construct the following (activity):
to perform maintenance dredging at Carolina Beach Inlet and AIWW Crossing and dispose sediment
as shoreline beneficial placement or near -shore disposal.
For my property located at Carolina Beach Inlet, Freeman Park
This certification is valid 1 year from (date) February 6, 2015
9111W.I.,
- t�i•15
Property Owner Signature Date
N.C. Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405
Phone: 910 - 796 -7215 \ FAX: 910 - 395 -3964 Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity\ Affirmative Actium Employer

Pat McCrory
Governor
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Date: November 26, 2014
Name of Property Owner Applying for Permit
Town of Holden Beach
Owner's Mailing Address:
David Hewett, Town Manager
PO Box 449
Supply, NC 28462
Email: david.hewett @hbtownhall.com
Phone ( 910 ) 842 -6488
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
Name of Authorized Agent for this project:
O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc.
Agent's Mailing Address:
O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc. - Daniel Ramsay
3214 Charles B. Root Wynd, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27612, USA
Email: Daniel. Ramsay @obg.com
Phone ( 919 ) 987-3090
I certify that I have authorized the agent listed above to act on my behalf, for the purpose of applying
for, and obtaining all CAMA Permits necessary to install or construct the following (activity):
to perform maintenance dredging at Lockwoods Folly Inlet and AIWW Crossing and dispose sediment
as shoreline beneficial placement, upland disposal, or near -shore disposal.
For my property located at Lockwoods Folly Inlet, Holden Beach
This certification is valid 1 year from (date) November 26, 2014
Property Owner Signature Date
N.C. Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405
Phone: 910 - 796 -72151 FAX: [phone] Internet www.nccoastaimanagement.net
An Equal opportunity '+ Affwmahve Action Employer

Pat McCrory
Governor
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Date: November 26, 2014
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
Name of Property Owner Applying for Permit: Name of Authorized Agent for this project:
Town of Ocean Isle Beach O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc.
Owner's Mailing Address:
Mayor Debbie Smith
3 West Third Street
Ocean Isle Beach, NC 28469
Email: mayor @oibgov.com
Phone ( 910 ) 579 -2166
Agent's Mailing Address:
O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc. - Daniel Ramsay
3214 Charles B. Root Wynd, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27612, USA
Email: Daniel,Ramsay @obg.com
Phone (919 ) 987-3090
I certify that I have authorized the agent listed above to act on my behalf, for the purpose of applying
for, and obtaining all LAMA Permits necessary to install or construct the following (activity):
to perform maintenance dredging at Shallotte River inlet and AIWW Crossing and dispose
sediment as shoreline beneficial placement, upland disposal, or near -shore disposal.
For my property located at Shallotte River Inlet, Ocean Isle Beach
This certification is valid 1 year from (date) November 26, 2014
Property Owner Signature Date
N.C. Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.not
An Equal opportunily 1 Aflirmalive Acl On Emplpyer

Attachment 2 -AEC Hazard
Notice Forms
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

Project is in an:
Property Owner:
OG -AN HAZA RD AEC NOTICE
X Ocean Erodible Area High Hazard Flood Area X Inlet Hazard Area
Town of Emerald Isle
Property Address: Bogue Inlet, Connecting Channel, AIWW Crossing, and Bogue Banks
Date Lot Was Platted: NA
This notice is intended to make you, the applicant, aware of the
special risks and conditions associated with development in this
area, which is subject to natural hazards such as storms, erosion
and currents. The rules of the Coastal Resources Commission
require that you receive an AEC Hazard Notice and
acknowledge that notice in writing before a permit for
development can be issued.
The Commission's rules on building standards, oceanfront
setbacks and dune alterations are designed to minimize, but not
eliminate, property loss from hazards. By granting permits, the
Coastal Resources Commission does not guarantee the safety of
the development and assumes no liability for future damage to
the development. Permits issued in the Ocean Hazard Area of
Environmental Concern include the condition that structures be
relocated or dismantled if they become imminently threatened
by changes in shoreline configuration. The structure(s) must be
relocated or dismantled within two (2) years of becoming
imminently threatened, and in any case upon its collapse or
subsidence.
The best available information, as accepted by the Coastal
Resources Commission, indicates that the annual long -term
average ocean erosion rate for the area where your property is
located is 2.0-2.5 feet per year.
The rate was established by careful analysis of aerial
photographs of the coastline taken over the past 50 years.
Studies also indicate that the shoreline could move as much as
NA feet landward in a major storm.
The flood waters in a major storm are predicted to be about
NA feet deep in this area.
Preferred oceanfront protection measures are beach nourishment
and relocation of threatened structures. Hard erosion control
structures such as bulkheads, seawalls, revetments, groins, jetties
and breakwaters are prohibited. Temporary sand bags may be
authorized under certain conditions.
The applicant must acknowledge this information and
requirements by signing this notice in the space below. Without
the proper signature, the application will not be complete.
1A LA A- s
Property Owner Signature Date
SPECIAL NOTE: This hazard notice is required for
development in areas subject to sudden and massive storms and
erosion. Permits issued for development in this area expire on
December 31 of the third year following the year in which the
permit was issued. Shortly before work begins on the project
site, the Local Permit Officer must be contacted to determine the
vegetation line and setback distance at your site. If the property
has seen little change since the time of permit issuance, and the
proposed development can still meet the setback requirement,
the LPO will inform you that you may begin work. Substantial
progress on the project must be made within 60 days of this
setback determination, or the setback must be re- measured. Also,
the occurrence of a major shoreline change as the result of a
storm within the 60 -day period will necessitate re- measurement
of the setback. It is important that you check with the LPO
before the permit expires for official approval to continue the
work after the permit has expired. Generally, if foundation
pilings have been placed and substantial progress is continuing,
permit renewal can be authorized. It is unlawful to continue
work after permit expiration.
For more information, contact:
Tara MacPherson
Local Permit Officer
127 Cardinal Drive Ext.
Address
Wilmington, NC 26405
Locality
910- 796 -7425
Phone Number
Revised May 2010

BEFORE YOU BUILD
Setting Back for Safety: A Guide to Wise Development Along the Oceanfront
When you build along the oceanfront, you take a calculated risk.
Natural forces of water and wind collide with tons of force, even
on calm days.
Man -made structures cannot be guaranteed to survive the force
of a hurricane. Long -term erosion (or barrier island migration)
may take from two to ten feet of the beach each year, and,
sooner or later, will threaten oceanfront structures. These are the
facts of life for oceanfront property owners.
The Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) has adopted rules for
building along the oceanfront. The rules are intended to avoid an
unreasonable risk to life and property, and to limit public and
private losses from storm and long -term erosion. These rules
lessen but do not eliminate the element of risk in oceanfront
development.
As you consider building along the oceanfront, the CRC wants
you to understand the rules and the risks. With this knowledge,
you can make a more informed decision about where and how to
build in the coastal area.
The Rules
When you build along the oceanfront, coastal management rules
require that the structure be sited to fit safely into the beach
environment.
Structures along the oceanfront, less than 5,000 square feet in
size, must be behind the frontal dune, landward of the crest of
the primary dune, and set back from the first line of stable
natural vegetation a distance equal to 30 times the annual
erosion rate (a minimum of 60 feet). The setback calculation
increases as the size of the structure increases [15A NCAC
7H.0306(a)(2)]. For example: A structure between 5,000 and
10,000 square feet would require a setback from the first line of
stable, natural vegetation to a distance equal to 60 times the
annual erosion rate (a minimum of 120 feet). The graduated
setback continues to increase through structure sizes greater than
100,000 square feet.
The Reasons
The beachfront is an ever - changing landform. The beach and
the dunes are natural "shock absorbers," taking the beating of the
wind and waves and protecting the inland areas. By
incorporating building setbacks into the regulations, you have a
good chance of enjoying the full life of the structure. At first, it
seems very inviting to build your dream house as close to the
beach as possible, but in five years you could find the dream has
become a nightmare as high tides and storm tides threaten your
investment.
The Exception
The Coastal Resources Commission recognized that these rules,
initially passed in June 1979, might prove a hardship for some
property owners. Therefore, they established an exception for
lots that cannot meet the setback requirement. The exception
allows buildings in front of the current setback, if the following
conditions apply:
1) the lot must have been platted as of June 1, 1979, and
is not capable of being enlarged by combining with
adjoining land under the same ownership;
2) development must be constructed as far back on the
property as possible and in no case less than 60 feet
landward of the vegetation line;
3) no development can take place on the frontal dune;
4) special construction standards on piling depth and
square footage must be met; and
5) all other CAMA, state and local regulations must be
met.
The exception is not available in the Inlet Hazard Area.
To determine eligibility for the exception the Local Permit
Officer will make these measurements and observations:
required setback from vegetation line
exception setback (maximum feasible)
rear property line setback
max. allowable square footage on lowest floor
PRE-PERMIT 'STRUCTURE. INADEQUATE SETBACK
PERMITTED
STRUCTURE; PRE-STORM BEACH PROFILE
ADEQUATE POST -STORM BEACH PROFILE
SETBACK
�! ONE YEAR AFTER STORMIBEACH REBUILDING
i
After the storm, the house on the dune will be gone. The other house has a much better chance of survival.

OCEAN HAZARD AEC NOTICE
Project is in an: X Ocean Erodible Area High Hazard Flood Area X Inlet Hazard Area
Property Owner: - Town of Topsail Beach
Property Address: New Topsail Inlet, Topsail Creek, Banks, Channel, AIWW Crossing, Topsail Beach
Date Lot Was Platted: NA
This notice is intended to make you, the applicant, aware of the
special risks and conditions associated with development in this
area, which is subject to natural hazards such as storms, erosion
and currents. The rules of the Coastal Resources Commission
require that you receive an AEC Hazard Notice and
acknowledge that notice in writing before a permit for
development can be issued.
The Commission's rules on building standards, oceanfront
setbacks and dune alterations are designed to minimize, but not
eliminate, property loss from hazards. By granting permits, the
Coastal Resources Commission does not guarantee the safety of
the development and assumes no liability for future damage to
the development. Permits issued in the Ocean Hazard Area of
Environmental Concern include the condition that structures be
relocated or dismantled if they become imminently threatened
by changes in shoreline configuration. The structure(s) must be
relocated or dismantled within two (2) years of becoming
imminently threatened, and in any case upon its collapse or
subsidence.
The best available information, as accepted by the Coastal
Resources Commission, indicates that the annual long -term
average ocean erosion rate for the area where your property is
located is 2.5 feet per year.
The rate was established by careful analysis of aerial
photographs of the coastline taken over the past 50 years.
Studies also indicate that the shoreline could move as much as
NA feet landward in a major storm.
The flood waters in a major storm are predicted to be about
NA feet deep in this area.
Preferred oceanfront protection measures are beach nourishment
and relocation of threatened structures. Hard erosion control
structures such as bulkheads, seawalls, revetments, groins, jetties
and breakwaters are prohibited. Temporary sand bags may be
authorized under certain conditions.
The applicant must acknowledge this information and
requirements by signing this notice in the space below. Without
the proper signature, the application will not be complete.
Property Owner Signature
SPECIAL NOTE: This hazard notice is required for
development in areas subject to sudden and massive storms and
erosion. Permits issued for development in this area expire on
December 31 of the third year following the year in which the
permit was issued. Shortly before work begins on the project
site, the Local Permit Officer must be contacted to determine the
vegetation line and setback distance at your site. If the property
has seen little change since the time of permit issuance, and the
proposed development can still meet the setback requirement,
the LPO will inform you that you may begin work. Substantial
progress on the project must be made within 60 days of this
setback determination, or the setback must be re- measured. Also,
the occurrence of a major shoreline change as the result of a
storm within the 60 -day period will necessitate re- measurement
of the setback. It is important that you check with the LPO
before the permit expires for official approval to continue the
work after the permit has expired. Generally, if foundation
pilings have been placed and substantial progress is continuing,
permit renewal can be authorized. It is unlawful to continue
work after permit expiration.
For more information, contact.
Tara MacPherson
Local Permit Officer
127 Cardinal Drive Ext.
Address
Wilmington, NC 28405
Locality
910 -796 -7
Phone Number
Revised May 2010

BEFORE YOU BUILD
Setting Back for Safety: A Guide to Wise Development Along the Oceanfront
When you build along the oceanfront, you take a calculated risk.
Natural forces of water and wind collide with tons of force, even
on calm days.
Man -made structures cannot be guaranteed to survive the force
of a hurricane. Long -term erosion (or barrier island migration)
may take from two to ten feet of the beach each year, and,
sooner or later, will threaten oceanfront structures. These are the
facts of life for oceanfront property owners.
The Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) has adopted rules for
building along the oceanfront. The rules are intended to avoid an
unreasonable risk to life and property, and to limit public and
private losses from storm and long -term erosion. These rules
lessen but do not eliminate the element of risk in oceanfront
development.
As you consider building along the oceanfront, the CRC wants
you to understand the rules and the risks. With this knowledge,
you can make a more informed decision about where and how to
build in the coastal area.
The Rules
When you build along the oceanfront, coastal management rules
require that the structure be sited to fit safely into the beach
environment.
Structures along the oceanfront, less than 5,000 square feet in
size, must be behind the frontal dune, landward of the crest of
the primary dune, and set back from the first line of stable
natural vegetation a distance equal to 30 times the annual
erosion rate (a minimum of 60 feet). The setback calculation
increases as the size of the structure increases [15A NCAC
7H.0306(a)(2)]. For example: A structure between 5,000 and
10,000 square feet would require a setback from the first line of
stable, natural vegetation to a distance equal to 60 times the
annual erosion rate (a minimum of 120 feet). The graduated
setback continues to increase through structure sizes greater than
100,000 square feet.
The Reasons
The beachfront is an ever - changing landform. The beach and
the dunes are natural "shock absorbers," taking the beating of the
wind and waves and protecting the inland areas. By
incorporating building setbacks into the regulations, you have a
good chance of enjoying the full life of the structure. At first, it
seems very inviting to build your dream house as close to the
beach as possible, but in five years you could find the dream has
become a nightmare as high tides and storm tides threaten your
investment.
The Exception
The Coastal Resources Commission recognized that these rules,
initially passed in June 1979, might prove a hardship for some
property owners. Therefore, they established an exception for
lots that cannot meet the setback requirement. The exception
allows buildings in front of the current setback, if the following
conditions apply:
1) the lot must have been platted as of June 1, 1979, and
is not capable of being enlarged by combining with
adjoining land under the same ownership;
2) development must be constructed as far back on the
property as possible and in no case less than 60 feet
landward of the vegetation line;
3) no development can take place on the frontal dune;
4) special construction standards on piling depth and
square footage must be met; and
5) all other CAMA, state and local regulations must be
met.
The exception is not available in the Inlet Hazard Area.
To determine eligibility for the exception the Local Permit
Officer will make these measurements and observations:
required setback from vegetation line
exception setback (maximum feasible)
rear property line setback
max. allowable square footage on lowest floor
PRE-PERMIT STRUCTURE, INADEQUATE SETBACK
PERMITTED
STRUCTURE; PRE-STORM BEACH PROFILE
ADEQUATE POST -STORM BEACH PROFILE
SETBACK
�! ONE YEAR AFTER STORMIBEACH REBUILDING
i
After the storm, the house on the dune will be gone. The other house has a much better chance of survival.

OCEAN HAZARD AEC NOTICE
Project is in an: X Ocean Erodible Area High Hazard Flood Area X Inlet Hazard Area
Property owner: New Hanover County
Property Address: Carolina Beach Inlet, AIWW Crossing, Freeman Park
Date Lot Was Platted: NA
This notice is intended to make you, the applicant, aware of the
special risks and conditions associated with development in this
area, which is subject to natural hazards such as stonns, erosion
and currents. The rules of the Coastal Resources Commission
require that you receive an AEC Hazard Notice and
acknowledge that notice in writing before a permit for
development can be issued.
The Commission's rules on building standards, oceanfront
setbacks and dune alterations are designed to minimize, but not
eliminate, property loss from hazards. By granting permits, the
Coastal Resources Commission does not guarantee the safety of
the development and assumes no liability for future damage to
the development. Permits issued in the Ocean Hazard Area of
Environmental Concern include the condition that structures be
relocated or dismantled if they become imminently threatened
by changes in shoreline configuration. The structure(s) must be
relocated or dismantled within two (2) years of becoming
imminently threatened, and in any case upon its collapse or
subsidence.
The best available information, as accepted by the Coastal
Resources Commission, indicates that the annual long -term
average ocean erosion rate for the area where your property is
located is 5.0 -11.5 feet per year.
The rate was established by careful analysis of aerial
photographs of the coastline taken over the past 50 years.
Studies also indicate that the shoreline could move as much as
NA feet landward in a major storm.
The flood waters in a major storm are predicted to be about
NA feet deep in this area.
Preferred oceanfront protection measures are beach nourishment
and relocation of threatened structures. Hard erosion control
structures such as bulkheads, seawalls, revelments, groins, jetties
and breakwaters are prohibited. Temporary sand bags may be
authorized under certain conditions.
The applicant must acknowledge this information and
requirements by signing this notice in the space below. Without
the proper signature, the application will not be complete.
(AA- �48*&JA' kr%# l5
Property Owner Signature Date
SPECIAL NOTE: This hazard notice is required for
development in areas subject to sudden and massive storms and
erosion. Permits issued for development in this area expire on
December 31 of the third year following the year in which the
permit was issued. Shortly before work begins on the project
site, the Local Permit Officer must be contacted to determine the
vegetation line and setback distance at your site. If the property
has seen little change since the time of permit issuance, and the
proposed development can still meet the setback requirement,
the LPO will inform you that you may begin work. Substantial
progress on the project must be made within 60 days of this
setback determination, or the setback must be re- measured. Also,
the occurrence of a major shoreline change as the result of a
storm within the 60 -day period will necessitate re- measurement
of the setback. It is important that you check with the LPO
before the permit expires for official approval to continue the
work after the permit has expired. Generally, if foundation
pilings have been placed and substantial progress is continuing,
permit renewal can be authorized. It is unlawful to continue
work after permit expiration.
For more information, contact:
Tara MacPherson
Local Permit Officer
127 Cardinal Drive Ext.
Address
Wilmington, NC 28405
Locality
910- 796 -7425
Phone Number
Revised May 2010

BEFORE YOU BUILD
Setting Back for Safety: A Guide to Wise Development Along the Oceanfront
When you build along the oceanfront, you take a calculated risk.
Natural forces of water and wind collide with tons of force, even
on calm days.
Man -made structures cannot be guaranteed to survive the force
of a hurricane. Long -term erosion (or barrier island migration)
may take from two to ten feet of the beach each year, and,
sooner or later, will threaten oceanfront structures. These are the
facts of life for oceanfront property owners.
The Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) has adopted rules for
building along the oceanfront. The rules are intended to avoid an
unreasonable risk to life and property, and to limit public and
private losses from storm and long -term erosion. These rules
lessen but do not eliminate the element of risk in oceanfront
development.
As you consider building along the oceanfront, the CRC wants
you to understand the rules and the risks. With this knowledge,
you can make a more informed decision about where and how to
build in the coastal area.
The Rules
When you build along the oceanfront, coastal management rules
require that the structure be sited to fit safely into the beach
environment.
Structures along the oceanfront, less than 5,000 square feet in
size, must be behind the frontal dune, landward of the crest of
the primary dune, and set back from the first line of stable
natural vegetation a distance equal to 30 times the annual
erosion rate (a minimum of 60 feet). The setback calculation
increases as the size of the structure increases [15A NCAC
7H.0306(a)(2)]. For example: A structure between 5,000 and
10,000 square feet would require a setback from the first line of
stable, natural vegetation to a distance equal to 60 times the
annual erosion rate (a minimum of 120 feet). The graduated
setback continues to increase through structure sizes greater than
100,000 square feet.
The Reasons
The beachfront is an ever - changing landform. The beach and
the dunes are natural "shock absorbers," taking the beating of the
wind and waves and protecting the inland areas. By
incorporating building setbacks into the regulations, you have a
good chance of enjoying the full life of the structure. At first, it
seems very inviting to build your dream house as close to the
beach as possible, but in five years you could find the dream has
become a nightmare as high tides and storm tides threaten your
investment.
The Exception
The Coastal Resources Commission recognized that these rules,
initially passed in June 1979, might prove a hardship for some
property owners. Therefore, they established an exception for
lots that cannot meet the setback requirement. The exception
allows buildings in front of the current setback, if the following
conditions apply:
1) the lot must have been platted as of June 1, 1979, and
is not capable of being enlarged by combining with
adjoining land under the same ownership;
2) development must be constructed as far back on the
property as possible and in no case less than 60 feet
landward of the vegetation line;
3) no development can take place on the frontal dune;
4) special construction standards on piling depth and
square footage must be met; and
5) all other CAMA, state and local regulations must be
met.
The exception is not available in the Inlet Hazard Area.
To determine eligibility for the exception the Local Permit
Officer will make these measurements and observations:
required setback from vegetation line
exception setback (maximum feasible)
rear property line setback
max. allowable square footage on lowest floor
PRE-PERMIT 'STRUCTURE. INADEQUATE SETBACK
PERMITTED
STRUCTURE; PRE-STORM BEACH PROFILE
ADEQUATE POST -STORM BEACH PROFILE
SETBACK
�! ONE YEAR AFTER STORMIBEACH REBUILDING
i
After the storm, the house on the dune will be gone. The other house has a much better chance of survival.

OCEAN HAZARD AEC NOTICE
Project is in an: X Ocean Erodible Area High Hazard Flood Area X Inlet Hazard Area
Property Owner: Town of Holden Beach
Property Address: Lockwoods Folly Inlet, AIWW Crossing, Holden Beach
Date Lot Was Platted:
NA
This notice is intended to make you, the applicant, aware of the
special risks and conditions associated with development in this
area, which is subject to natural hazards such as storms, erosion
and currents. The rules of the Coastal Resources Commission
require that you receive an AEC Hazard Notice and
acknowledge that notice in writing before a permit for
development can be issued.
The Commission's rules on building standards, oceanfront
setbacks and dune alterations are designed to minimize, but not
eliminate, property loss from hazards. By granting permits, the
Coastal Resources Commission does not guarantee the safety of
the development and assumes no liability for future damage to
the development. Permits issued in the Ocean Hazard Area of
Environmental Concern include the condition that structures be
relocated or dismantled if they become imminently threatened
by changes in shoreline configuration. The structure(s) must be
relocated or dismantled within two (2) years of becoming
imminently threatened, and in any case upon its collapse or
subsidence.
The best available information, as accepted by the Coastal
Resources Commission, indicates that the annual long -tern
average ocean erosion rate for the area where your property is
located is 3.5 -7.0 feet per year.
The rate was established by careful analysis of aerial
photographs of the coastline taken over the past 50 years.
Studies also indicate that the shoreline could move as much as
NA feet landward in a major storm.
The flood waters in a major storm are predicted to be about
NA feet deep in this area.
Preferred oceanfront protection measures are beach nourishment
and relocation of threatened structures. Hard erosion control
structures such as bulkheads, seawalls, revetments, groins, jetties
and breakwaters are prohibited. Temporary sand bags may be
authorized under certain conditions.
The applicant must acknowledge this information and
requirements by signing this notice in the space below. Without
the proper signature, the application will not be complete.
3
ner Signature Date
SPECIAL NOTE: This hazard notice is required for
development in areas subject to sudden and massive storms and
erosion. Permits issued for development in this area expire on
December 31 of the third year following the year in which the
permit was issued. Shortly before work begins on the project
site, the Local Permit Officer must be contacted to determine the
vegetation line and setback distance at your site. If the property
has seen little change since the time of permit issuance, and the
proposed development can still meet the setback requirement,
the LPO will inform you that you may begin work. Substantial
progress on the project must be made within 60 days of this
setback determination, or the setback must be re- measured. Also,
the occurrence of a major shoreline change as the result of a
storm within the 60 -day period will necessitate re- measurement
of the setback. It is important that you check with the LPO
before the permit expires for official approval to continue the
work after the permit has expired. Generally, if foundation
pilings have been placed and substantial progress is continuing,
permit renewal can be authorized. It is unlawful to continue
work after permit expiration.
For more information, contact:
Tara MacPherson
Local Permit Officer
127 Cardinal Drive Ext.
Address
Wilmington, NC 28405
Locality
910 - 796 -7425
Phone Number
Revised May 2010

BEFORE YOU BUILD
Setting Back for Safety: A Guide to Wise Development Along the Oceanfront
When you build along the oceanfront, you take a calculated risk.
Natural forces of water and wind collide with tons of force, even
on calm days.
Man -made structures cannot be guaranteed to survive the force
of a hurricane. Long -term erosion (or barrier island migration)
may take from two to ten feet of the beach each year, and,
sooner or later, will threaten oceanfront structures. These are the
facts of life for oceanfront property owners.
The Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) has adopted rules for
building along the oceanfront. The rules are intended to avoid an
unreasonable risk to life and property, and to limit public and
private losses from storm and long -term erosion. These rules
lessen but do not eliminate the element of risk in oceanfront
development.
As you consider building along the oceanfront, the CRC wants
you to understand the rules and the risks. With this knowledge,
you can make a more informed decision about where and how to
build in the coastal area.
The Rules
When you build along the oceanfront, coastal management rules
require that the structure be sited to fit safely into the beach
environment.
Structures along the oceanfront, less than 5,000 square feet in
size, must be behind the frontal dune, landward of the crest of
the primary dune, and set back from the first line of stable
natural vegetation a distance equal to 30 times the annual
erosion rate (a minimum of 60 feet). The setback calculation
increases as the size of the structure increases [15A NCAC
7H.0306(a)(2)]. For example: A structure between 5,000 and
10,000 square feet would require a setback from the first line of
stable, natural vegetation to a distance equal to 60 times the
annual erosion rate (a minimum of 120 feet). The graduated
setback continues to increase through structure sizes greater than
100,000 square feet.
The Reasons
The beachfront is an ever - changing landform. The beach and
the dunes are natural "shock absorbers," taking the beating of the
wind and waves and protecting the inland areas. By
incorporating building setbacks into the regulations, you have a
good chance of enjoying the full life of the structure. At first, it
seems very inviting to build your dream house as close to the
beach as possible, but in five years you could find the dream has
become a nightmare as high tides and storm tides threaten your
investment.
The Exception
The Coastal Resources Commission recognized that these rules,
initially passed in June 1979, might prove a hardship for some
property owners. Therefore, they established an exception for
lots that cannot meet the setback requirement. The exception
allows buildings in front of the current setback, if the following
conditions apply:
1) the lot must have been platted as of June 1, 1979, and
is not capable of being enlarged by combining with
adjoining land under the same ownership;
2) development must be constructed as far back on the
property as possible and in no case less than 60 feet
landward of the vegetation line;
3) no development can take place on the frontal dune;
4) special construction standards on piling depth and
square footage must be met; and
5) all other CAMA, state and local regulations must be
met.
The exception is not available in the Inlet Hazard Area.
To determine eligibility for the exception the Local Permit
Officer will make these measurements and observations:
required setback from vegetation line
exception setback (maximum feasible)
rear property line setback
max. allowable square footage on lowest floor
PRE-PERMIT 'STRUCTURE. INADEQUATE SETBACK
PERMITTED
STRUCTURE; PRE-STORM BEACH PROFILE
ADEQUATE POST -STORM BEACH PROFILE
SETBACK
�! ONE YEAR AFTER STORMIBEACH REBUILDING
i
After the storm, the house on the dune will be gone. The other house has a much better chance of survival.

OCEAN HAZARD AEC NOTICE
Project is in an: X Ocean Erodible Area High Hazard Flood Area X Inlet Hazard Area
Property owner: Town of Ocean Isle Beach
Property Address: Shallotte River Inlet, AIWW Crossing, Ocean Isle Beach
Date Lot Was Platted: NA
This notice is intended to make you, the applicant, aware of the
special risks and conditions associated with development in this
area, which is subject to natural hazards such as storms, erosion
and currents. The rules of the Coastal Resources Commission
require that you receive an AEC Hazard Notice and
acknowledge that notice in writing before a' permit for
development can be issued.
The Commission's rules on building standards, oceanfront
setbacks and dune alterations are designed to minimize, but not
eliminate, property loss from hazards. By granting permits, the
Coastal Resources Commission does not guarantee the safety of
the development and assumes no liability for future damage to
the development. Permits issued in the Ocean Hazard Area of
Environmental Concern include the condition that structures be
relocated or dismantled if they become imminently threatened
by changes in shoreline configuration. The structure(s) must be
relocated or dismantled within two (2) years of becoming
imminently threatened, and in any case upon its collapse or
subsidence.
The best available information, as accepted by the Coastal
Resources Commission, indicates that the annual long -term
average ocean erosion rate for the area where your property is
located is 4.5 -6.5 feet per year.
The rate was established by careful analysis of aerial
photographs of the coastline taken over the past 50 years.
Studies also indicate that the shoreline could move as much as
NA feet landward in a major storm.
The flood waters in a major storm are predicted to be about
NA feet deep in this area.
Preferred oceanfront protection measures are beach nourishment
and relocation of threatened structures. Hard erosion control
structures such as bulkheads, seawalls, revetments, groins, jetties
and breakwaters are prohibited. Temporary sand bags may be
authorized under certain conditions.
The applicant must acknowledge this information and
requirements by signing this notice in the space below. Without
the proper signature, the applicatio will not be complete.
Property Owner Signature ' Date
11o,s✓
SPECIAL NOTE: This hazard notice is required for
development in areas subject to sudden and massive storms and
erosion. Permits issued for development in this area expire on
December 31 of the third year following the year in which the
permit was issued. Shortly before work begins on the project
site, the Local Permit Officer must be contacted to determine the
vegetation line and setback distance at your site. If the property
has seen little change since the time of permit issuance, and the
proposed development can still meet the setback requirement,
the LPO will inform you that you may begin work. Substantial
progress on the project must be made within 60 days of this
setback determination, or the setback must be re- measured. Also,
the occurrence of a major shoreline change as the result of a
storm within the 60 -day period will necessitate re- measurement
of the setback. It is important that you check with the LPO
before the permit expires for official approval to continue the
work after the permit has expired. Generally, if foundation
pilings have been placed and substantial progress is continuing,
permit renewal can be authorized. It is unlawful to continue
work after permit expiration.
For more information, contact:
Tara MacPherson
Local Permit Officer
127 Cardinal Drive Ext.
Address
Wilmington, NC 28405
Locality
910- 796 -7425
Phone Number
Revised May 2010

BEFORE YOU BUILD
Setting Back for Safety: A Guide to Wise Development Along the Oceanfront
When you build along the oceanfront, you take a calculated risk.
Natural forces of water and wind collide with tons of force, even
on calm days.
Man -made structures cannot be guaranteed to survive the force
of a hurricane. Long -term erosion (or barrier island migration)
may take from two to ten feet of the beach each year, and,
sooner or later, will threaten oceanfront structures. These are the
facts of life for oceanfront property owners.
The Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) has adopted rules for
building along the oceanfront. The rules are intended to avoid an
unreasonable risk to life and property, and to limit public and
private losses from storm and long -term erosion. These rules
lessen but do not eliminate the element of risk in oceanfront
development.
As you consider building along the oceanfront, the CRC wants
you to understand the rules and the risks. With this knowledge,
you can make a more informed decision about where and how to
build in the coastal area.
The Rules
When you build along the oceanfront, coastal management rules
require that the structure be sited to fit safely into the beach
environment.
Structures along the oceanfront, less than 5,000 square feet in
size, must be behind the frontal dune, landward of the crest of
the primary dune, and set back from the first line of stable
natural vegetation a distance equal to 30 times the annual
erosion rate (a minimum of 60 feet). The setback calculation
increases as the size of the structure increases [15A NCAC
7H.0306(a)(2)]. For example: A structure between 5,000 and
10,000 square feet would require a setback from the first line of
stable, natural vegetation to a distance equal to 60 times the
annual erosion rate (a minimum of 120 feet). The graduated
setback continues to increase through structure sizes greater than
100,000 square feet.
The Reasons
The beachfront is an ever - changing landform. The beach and
the dunes are natural "shock absorbers," taking the beating of the
wind and waves and protecting the inland areas. By
incorporating building setbacks into the regulations, you have a
good chance of enjoying the full life of the structure. At first, it
seems very inviting to build your dream house as close to the
beach as possible, but in five years you could find the dream has
become a nightmare as high tides and storm tides threaten your
investment.
The Exception
The Coastal Resources Commission recognized that these rules,
initially passed in June 1979, might prove a hardship for some
property owners. Therefore, they established an exception for
lots that cannot meet the setback requirement. The exception
allows buildings in front of the current setback, if the following
conditions apply:
1) the lot must have been platted as of June 1, 1979, and
is not capable of being enlarged by combining with
adjoining land under the same ownership;
2) development must be constructed as far back on the
property as possible and in no case less than 60 feet
landward of the vegetation line;
3) no development can take place on the frontal dune;
4) special construction standards on piling depth and
square footage must be met; and
5) all other CAMA, state and local regulations must be
met.
The exception is not available in the Inlet Hazard Area.
To determine eligibility for the exception the Local Permit
Officer will make these measurements and observations:
required setback from vegetation line
exception setback (maximum feasible)
rear property line setback
max. allowable square footage on lowest floor
PRE-PERMIT 'STRUCTURE. INADEQUATE SETBACK
PERMITTED
STRUCTURE; PRE-STORM BEACH PROFILE
ADEQUATE POST -STORM BEACH PROFILE
SETBACK
�! ONE YEAR AFTER STORMIBEACH REBUILDING
i
After the storm, the house on the dune will be gone. The other house has a much better chance of survival.

Attachment 3 - Dredging &
Beneficial Placement Design
Plats
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

Attachment 3.1 - Bogue Inlet
ATTACHMENT KEY:
1. USACE Wilmington District; Bogue Inlet Dredging Authorization; September 30,
1978
2. USACE Wilmington District; Plan -View of Dredging and Bathymetry at Bogue
Inlet Crossing, Section 1, Tangent G; August 1, 2013
3. USACE Wilmington District; Bogue Inlet Crossing Location & Disposal Area;
August 1, 2013
4. USACE Wilmington District; Hydrographic Survey and Dredging Locations,
Bogue Inlet Bar; July 25, 2014
S. USACE Wilmington District; Condition Survey and Dredging Locations, Bogue
Inlet Connecting Channel; May 25, 2012.
6. Town of Emerald Isle; Plan -View of Beneficial Placement of AIWW Dredging
Spoils at the Point in Emerald Isle, Winter 2013 -2014; Permit # 127 -04
Modification
7. Carteret County; Bogue Inlet Channel Erosion Response Project - Beach
Nourishment Limits; Permit #127 -04; 2005
8. USACE Wilmington District; Plan -View of Bogue Inlet Crossing Widener,
December 1997
More than Engineering Solutions
GBRIEN G GERE

*CHANNEL TO ROGUE INLET, NORTH CAROLINA
Condition of Improvement, September 30, 1978
Acts Work authorized Documents
Section 107 Present project Detailed Project Report
July 14, 1960 approved November 29,
As Amended 1963
Authorized November 29, 1953, under authority of Section 107, River and
Harbor Act of July 14, 1960. Detailed Project Report, April 1963.
PROJECT: A channel, 6 feet deep, 90 feet wide, and about 2.7 miles long,
between the Intracoastal Waterway and the gorge in Bogue Inlet.
PROGRESS: Complete.
VARIATION OF WATER SURFACE: Tidal. Range about 4 feet on the ocean side of
Bogue Inlet, 2.5 feet just inside the inlet, and about I foot in White Oak
River at Swansboro.
COST OF CONSTRUCTION: $12,615.
*Modification to AIWW.
*NEW TOPSAIL INLET AND CONNECTING CHANNELS
Condition of Improvement, September 30, 1978
Acts Work. authorized __ -- -- Documents
Section 107 Present project
July 14, 1960
As Amended
Detailed Project
Report, approved
April 7, 1966
Authorized April 7, 1965, under authority of Section 107, River and Harbor
Act of July 14, 1960. Detailed Report, July 1965.
PROJECT; A channel through New Topsail Inlet, 8 feet deep and 150 feet
- wide, to the inlet gorge, 0.66 mile; a channel, 7 feet deep and 80 feet
wide, from the inlet gorge to the Intracoastal Waterway via Old Topsail
Creek, 1.42 miles; and a channel, 7 feet deep and 80 feet wide, from the
inlet gorge through Banks Channel to the Intracoastal Waterway, 6.27
miles.
PROGRESS: Complete.
VARIATION OF WATER SURFACE: Tidal. The mean tidal range varies from 3.5 feet
over the ocean bar at New Topsail Inlet to about 2.5 feet in the Intracoastal
Waterway.
COST OF CONSTRUCTION: $99,615 Federal, $17,417 contributed funds.
*Modification to AIWW.
55f -1

*CHANNEL THROUGH ROGUE INLET, NORTH CAROLINA
Condition of Improvement, September 30, 1990
Acts Work authorized Documents
Section 107
July 14, 1960
As Amended
Present Project
Detailed Project
Report, approved
September 7, 1983
Authorized September 7, 1983, under the authority of Section 107, River and
Harbor Act of July 14, 1960. Detailed Project Report, ,tune 2983.
PROJECT: A channel, 8 feet deep, 150 feet wide, from the gorge at 8ogue
Inlet across the ocean bar.
PROGRESS: Completed September 29, 1983.
VARIATION OF WATER SURFACE: Tidal. Range of 4 feet.
COST OF CONSTRUCTION: $17,265 Federal, $13,566 contributed funds.
*Modification to AIWW.
55f
J

CORPS OF ENGINEERS
5WANSBOR0
oo' OIL E aE�
24
Lo
ti
a GCl1Ak R
.\ p7, F S 6
OMI.�� ��T AfWW�mS
�� Husulwe 1?il
ff 6d �
-1
pNME4
fW.I MI /�j ©11 /1 NR7 Lh �gQ
IIF �
auoLtr la.
i, Ys3
'r
li u
xrr �� eti"g
r�i MI. I
IIYV � 4
If
24�
CHANNEL 70 8 THROUGH
ROGUE INLET
F f Qoo
FENDER COUNTY
Iw I.i;
sQ ..
EQ Ya s �
U.S. ARMY
S5f
�aw1.
j'YI.
d Gl'cv'ti. 4
3wY
a°
ao
Rb
is
R*
R
44
NEW TOPSAIL INLET AND
CONNECTING CHANNELS
�caEll 9r �11r
CONTINUING AUTHORITY
SMALL NAVIGATION PROJECTS
CHANNEL TO BOGUE INLET,
4LW NEW TOPSAIL INLET AND
__. I ------------
VARYING CONNECTING CHANNELS
NORTH CAROLINA
VARYING I SALES AS SHOWN
TYPICAL SECTION CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON,N C
�I MAP REVISED SEPT. 1990

SFCTI�N
M. L. W.
- - - -------------- -
CHANNEL PRISM
LINE (TYPI
341119
2'ALLOWABLE
# 5A
N
341440
OVERDEPTH
I
REQUIRED
DEPTH
CAN
TYPI
a f
2572759
1
VARIES
TYPICAL
6
NOT TO SCALE
y 35 +0 0
+ N 341,665.3
+ +
+
\
A.z 35 +89.1
E 2,570,965.2
CE NTERLINE
-9- s_ - OFFSET
- e•sL` .'° ?,.?may __re95
_,n s_zs.4 ,� _ , -0. �z rz �-
},6' _ 3 q _,o?
20.00
20 +00
n
N 341,239.8
9 •o.a3..62 p a ,3.x ;,3 _, ., x 6 -L- Y'v�a�'
- 6,
,a,6 6.
S 6a'4,T
aj6'' z,6.,6 � 10 +aa
-a'6 -� °� CENTERLINE
N 341,218.0
E 2,574,015.6
} l
`
s
_ �t6 _ a_,,.3
E 2,573,824.7
�
4.`�6''
5 +0 0
6
,9 _ '6
-5 _...' _ 3 ".
-_- -- _
SA„
- - _ `•- R., -,,0
_,:b',,9_-3 ",3 _
-T1 :��. -,,.z o.5h °_ .3_5.0 q 5 6 q 3 , 3
A.s
N 341,527.0
a „ -, sa9x_ ;6
x.5 - .�.,-x., -- g,i ,,.° 4
q "
_13 613,
03, a ° a7p0q_a° e3 - ,' qa4 ,za NT F
a - SECTION 1 TANGS_ - - --
E 2,570,943.6
_, -9. 9" i, -,,._„ - �x
-
7,5e _ -
- _-- F--- - - - - -- - -� -.
-
- - - -
-------------- -- ----
SEC TION
1 T ",ICT BUOY"
TANGENT
CHANNEL PRISM LINE G
h45„
+
+ °
50'WIOENER
N 341,150.4
E 2,574,025.8
N 341,076.8
E 2,573,821.7
l6o'e0
4
162 *82.49
3
2
11
--------------
M. L. W.
- - - -------------- -
CHANNEL PRISM
LINE (TYPI
341119
2'ALLOWABLE
# 5A
N
341440
OVERDEPTH
I
REQUIRED
DEPTH
CAN
TYPI
a f
2572759
1
VARIES
TYPICAL
DREDGING SECTION
NOT TO SCALE
NOTES
1. SOUNDINGS ARE EXPRESSED IN FEET AND TENTHS AND REFER TO LOCAL M.L.W.
2.PROJECT SURVEYED 16 JULY 2013 WITH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL "CAPT WALT ". USING
RTK GPS HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EOUIPMENT AND 200 KHZ SOUNDING EQUIPMENT.
3.TIDE GAGE LOCATED AT: BCN #45. 6 NAILS (BEAUFORT DATUM)
4.HORIZONTAL DATUM NAD 1983. VERTICAL DATUM BEAUFORT.
5.THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS MAP REPRESENTS THE RESULT OF SURVEYS
MADE ON THE DATE INDICATED AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED AS INDICATING THE
GENERAL CONDITIONS EXISTING AT THAT TIME.
& NAVIGATION AIDS LOCATED BY SURVEY VESSEL. ACCURACY +/— 3 METERS.
DESCRIPTION EASTING NORTHING
BCN
# 45
2573989
341119
CAN
# 5A
2571526
341440
BCN
# 46
2570509
341834
CAN
JCT BUOY
2572759
341224
7.FOR
LOCATION OF DISPOSAL AREA
SEE PLATE C -2.
LEGEND
G■
AREA TO BE DREDGED
�'D•s SOUNDING
NAVIGATION AIDS
SCALE: 1:2000
200 100 0 100 200 300
SCALE IN FEET
US Army Carps
of Engineers
Wilmington Distdd
41 z
i
- g o a
o u U o
~ z
U
Nw¢
� w U
Z
W Z �
Z W ¢O
Z
w Z
wO
�QC5
QOz
c6
=) 3:
zz
o°
o= a
U U
z ww,zii
A 01
CS'
of
0
¢Noo HH
ao�U Jr
�z z Z
zz
mom �0
goo oLLI
aka mul
z�
m`
U
PLATE
NUMBER
C -1
SHEET 2 OF 7

6
5
4
R
fi=r'
fi
0
..t
00
,00 - -x
Ail t _
TOP OF BERM •6.0'NAVD 88
o5 Army Carps
NATUR SLOPE INTERCEPT of Engineers
S
___ - -- LOP£ Wilmington Distrid
+ Y + !s' `� -•!✓ cif. �'.� -''
___EXISTING GROUNDJr ___
_ ___ ___ ___ _ ____ ____ ______-
;;: CEk'i .0NT 'a } �` x t TYPICAL BERM SECTION
'� N.T.S.
r '• LENGTH WILL BE DETERMINED
DURING CONSTRUCTION AND WILL
BE DEPENDANT ON OUANTITY OF z
MATERIAL PLACED ON BEACH
E
/ 1200' APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF DISPOSAL AREA
J
______ ________________ +__ _____________ ____________ _________--------- _
15'
WIDE 75'WIDE
TIE INTO EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION a
_ 6'NAVD 88 CONTOUR BERM BERM
OR EXISTING GROUND TIE INTO EXISTING
ELEVATION 6'NAVD 88 CONTOUR o
- - f OR EXISTING GROUND
ELEVATION
TRANSITION DETAIL
a
N.T.S.
i
A.
w
CL I I
-
h
0
OTATI P3j
STATI B 7
°z
T Nauo; =esl Y \ w z
\ 3,0
W 27
` .
zoz
wO
a
H
NOTES a o z
1. FOR DETAILS OF THE AREAS TO BE DREDGED. SEE PLATE C -1.
2. AREAS TO BE DREDGED SHOWN THUS -
3. PHOTOGRAPHY DATED: APRIL 2013. COPYRIGHT 2013 DIGITAL GLOBE.
4. DUE TO AGE OF PHOTOGRAPHY. PIPELINE ROUTE IS APPROXIMATE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE
/ CONTRACTING OFFICER IN WRITING NO LESS THAN 15 DAYS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF PIPELINE Z ?
PLACEMENT. PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF PIPE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET ONSITE WITH THE CONTRACTING
/ OFFICER'S REPRESENTATIVE. A USCG REPRESENTATIVE AND A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE NORTH CAROLINA �� w
WILDLIFE RESOURCES COMMISSION TO DETERMINE THE EXACT PIPELINE ROUTE. Q �� Z Q
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL BEGIN DISPOSAL OF DREDGED MATERIAL ON THE BEACH AT THE WESTERN END OF ow zz F
THE DISPOSAL AREA SHOWN. THE EXACT BEGINNING POINT FOR DISPOSAL OF DREDGED MATERIAL Kw Occt)
/ ON THE BEACH WILL BE ESTABLISHED BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S REPRESENTITIVE IMMEDIATELY CC O _
PRIOR TO START OF DREDGING AND DISPOSAL OPERATIONS. PLACEMENT OF THE 75 -FOOT WIDE BERM ? O D
SHALL CONTINUE DOWN THE BEACH AS FAR AS THE OUANTITY OF DREDGED MATERIAL WILL ALLOW. a O � F,
LU
zooms Zd
6. ALL CONTRACTOR OPERATIONS SHALL BE PERFORMED IN A MANNER THAT AVOIDS DAMAGE TO EXISTING coy
SANDBAGS, STRUCTURES AND ROADS. SANDBAGS. STRUCTURES AND ROADS DAMAGED BY CONTRACTOR'S ���� w Z
OPERATIONS SHALL BE REPAIRED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER AT NO COST TO °- om O
THE GOVERNMENT OR TO THE OWNERS OF DAMAGED PROPERTY. iN ORDER TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF giro CD I--
DAMAGE. WHEELED OR TRACKED EARTH MOVING EQUIPMENT SHALL NOT WORK CLOSER THAN 10 FEET FROM < �z Co O
STRUCTURES DURING ALL WORK. INCLUDING DISTRIBUTION AND MOVEMENT OF BEACH FILL MATERIAL.
EXISTING SANDBAGS BELOW ELEVATION 6 FEET THAT LIE WITHIN THE BEACH FILL LIMITS SHALL NOT
BE COVERED WITH FILL. IN AREAS WHERE IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO TIE INTO THE 6 -FOOT CONTOUR. ma
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT THE BLACKSLOPE TO THE NATURAL ANGLE OF REPOSE.
7. VERTICAL DATUM NAVD 1988. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ESTABLISHING VERTICAL
CONTROL USING THE CONTROL POINTS SHOWN PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF DREDGED MATERIAL IN THE PLATE
DESIGNATED INLET DISPOSAL AREA. NUMBER
8. HORIZONTAL DATUM NAD 83.
C -2
9. SEE PARAGRAPH ENVIRONMENTAL WINDOWS OF SECTION 01 57 20.00 10 OF THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL WINDOWS AND RESTRICTIONS. SHEET OF 7
� I

77'710'W 77'6'30" 77'6'M
.119
!90
WkYPOlNT g Ts.,lb. BD ac
-0,
1i �9
-toe ut aD 9e
tI{
- \Orttt- -942 -e9
s
al tr19:,i 1.10.5.8 p -03a5
1 .111.t5B ^11 A -11192 .4:4
•!04 -0.109 40 x61
WAYPOiNT $ a,l�
to
.1 ,g'4
.6, Q5e 164ara2
j�} 5'P }4.tO.Ba
9
•1,5 '12 t9a
10
'l
for 1:2 -5' i
,iI0 Ir3z' q
WAYPOINT 7 n61LA �'
91 asi� a
d
IVA
MATCHLINE
Joins Bogue Inlet Inside Map
.D} -n4 411—, 3
103
x9792w
�Q
d1 oy Ax _ a
a•ar5 u e'.
b+
RA 7
X2980912
TT
,7r 6'11:�0'w
34'38 n 13 v t,
3a W M 52f' N
LONG. T]° 65x549' W
n
7
7T 01S.B6Tri
91'98'15396N
•
25rD334
e r- k r
'74a
8
t�eC�L
Q'ON
.f2 ,
3879&4
331x35 177'6216WW
TI'02F.9A6'W
91'36'A9.AICN
3r'WO62TN
'1Ad LGhW BM ac
�Y011�i1
2567135
0145
".F51 N. W
5P352WK
Sin 8} 701a -07 -0t
2567649
331961 T}'S'S3 M3'Vi
3{`30x6967 "N
A46fgllAlQ BUey •P6 •i914-07-19
2567995
f'
a!-W595�PN
Reg I.bI4li spas 1� 'Miq Rl.Tt!
256T91x
f
6A
1
6�Ln pit - m1a -pF14
7111 r a.€
99
133x635 •7y'6x3 TI4'W
3R'3P 5648 ^'+
PAn 'I'2 7P,a = =Gr.,a
da .95 ,lot
391463 }T "637 r)7'W
.8' s.1 r .SA.
WAYPOINT 6 24' -199 -,9T 91 ° "' .1d D -05
M
x 234aD29
v 3321 rm
AT 317'7x'031 {}d'N
-•v 4'S156 t•W
@ 4aD fQ 999 _0, 4 9:.4 Y. 106 D5 .e5 A)910d4B90.aT t,,31_
WAYPOINT 4
Baa3 d °-0 .241 a t0B 1 A2 R33
.101 - A'.1g9 Ba 1 4 '
Sr 6R 9a QB -14.0 tPi
65 113 6
-11 y).9Y pe 11 93 B 1 °A1t.10:A IB
WAYPOINT 5
• %.9 .r.p. 4y�9® �17 D.x7
t43
a. -s6 as
,6 @aa b.,61T'
• .0 -y
HAM M:C KS BEACH
STATE PARK
„Ra1cnllne
Praje4l Depth Change
AIDS TO NAVIGATION
Can
Nun
Gram Llghletl Buoy
Red Llgh4ed Buoy
IUnGWn Marker
Green Lrgnl
Rea L ght
Green Daybeamn
A Red Daybeacvn
C� Danger Sign
._._ Milebvard
Ir Tlaa Gage
DEPTH IN FEET
4 aW Shallowe,
6.4
7.6
8 -7
10.8
12- ID
14 - 12
15 - 14
■ 15 and Deeper
la ividi_ IA
C TES,
E4EVATIONS ARE IN FEET AND TENTHS AND REFER TO NOAA9 REPORTED
MEAN LOWER LOW WATER [M LLW) RELATIVE TO THE 1933 -2161 TIDAL EPOCH.
P ROJECT SURVEYED WITH DISTRICT' SURVEY VESSEL 'CAPTAIN WALT& S;V SWART. USING RTK GPS
HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EQUIPMENT AND 200 KHZ SOUN INNS EQUIPMENT
HORIZONTAL DATUM MAD 1963 VERTICAL DATUM M.L.LW..
-1 TI DE GAGE LOCATED AT LT 45
USE OF TIDE VALUES FOR THIS GAGE ARE RESTRICTED TO QUALITY ASSURANCE PURPOSES
FOR VERIFICATION. OF RTK TIDES. THE WILMINGTON DISTRICT WILLONLY USE STAFF
GAGE TIDAL VALUES FOR FINAL MAPPING AND QUANTITY CALCULATIONS IF RTK OPS IS UN-
AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF SURVEY.
S THIS PROJECT WAS DESIGNED BY THE WILMINGTON DISTRICT OF THE U.S. ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS, THE INITIALS AND SIGNATURES AND REGISTRATION
DESIGNATIONS OF INDIVIDUALS APPEAR ON THESE PROJECT DOCUMENTS WITHIN
THE SCOPE OF THEIR EMPLOYMENT AS REQUIRED BY ER1110-1 -0452.
6 THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS SURVEY MAP REPRESENTS THE RESULTS OF SURVEYS
MADE ON THE DATES INDICATED AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED AS INDICATING THE GENERAL
CONDITIONS EXISTING AT THAT TIME. THESE CONDITIONS ARE SUBJECT TO RAPID CHANGE
DUE TO SHOALING EVENTS. A PRUDENT MARINER SHOULD NOT RELY EXCLUSIVELY ON THE
INFORMATION PROVIDED HERE. REQUIRED BY 33 CFR 209.325
NAVIGATION AIDS LOCATED WITH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL, ACCURACY +1'- 3 METERS-
5 FOR THE MOST UP TO DATE INFORMATION' PLEASE CHECK OUR WEBSITE AT
'NWW.SAWUSAC.E ARMY MIL
77' 7'0"W
r
4
8090E PILAIWE>S+ 9C 5A" ebeue "L'11N914E
L MON d ce.Nffe" CHANNEL.
T7MCAL AELIlDW ..
,p ,p
° Ise, ^ 3
AiDS TO NAVIGATION
­...n..I —r r r I I
ev4re elar 91 m14dr.2a
x9792w
32a1ae
1r6145u•w
a•ar5 u e'.
H., ffi m149T.22
7376,71'7
316894
,7r 6'11:�0'w
34'38 n 13 v t,
t'ya IRl I@i�'o-7.,T2
25�]01I6
if%8
7T 01S.B6Tri
91'98'15396N
Cx41n ewy mti-0r:;
25rD334
919»+ frr61322VW
256471a
34.3423A2Ca+
f5M 954 m14QT -1d
25698@9
2564b65
3879&4
331x35 177'6216WW
TI'02F.9A6'W
91'36'A9.AICN
3r'WO62TN
'1Ad LGhW BM ac
tin •e6e m1a -0T -10
2567135
0145
".F51 N. W
5P352WK
Sin 8} 701a -07 -0t
2567649
331961 T}'S'S3 M3'Vi
3{`30x6967 "N
A46fgllAlQ BUey •P6 •i914-07-19
2567995
3�891 ii S5I e9@'w
a!-W595�PN
Reg I.bI4li spas 1� 'Miq Rl.Tt!
256T91x
J.3]}63 if 651 0147 N'
31'3443xTN
6�Ln pit - m1a -pF14
jI54Pr64
133x635 •7y'6x3 TI4'W
3R'3P 5648 ^'+
PAn 'I'2 7P,a = =Gr.,a
125MI7
391463 }T "637 r)7'W
WAYPOiNTS
B" Wei - %gp-0l
0cgtw ea4l- NNryp[+9.hi�i411
_._.i_-ii
eaptie YMN- 4YaTppM 0.3
2 01+467 -23
-97.23
'. RBi40T•YS
' 25T9 7
MTW-95
TST62R
3291}01 77" 6 7 Tyr W N' 3t` M4 3• N
�3265Td T }'S'IaCDSW 36 X11 pQ°N
_...., ': ._._v.._.._...�.
33W99 id2'61�995'w :34'30 {C21TN
54 N41 -Vogp 4044
1201aD1'23
25M3
33MW I7r621.Ab@'W WIIV 6A9YN
eppn4iW9- NSTp4N 0.4
.2111497.25
236!131
]32@W BT 65Q91TW 134'34 30.i8TN
epQue HN•V19rpc1Y 08
�2074.9i•$i
75699@1
352149 rIT'g6988i W +94'3052 �T°N
646w� -' pw,l -Gr
..241x-0} -29
256471a
3}3514 472- 654.995IN 34'344 4rN
6bptw YYH• NfrpDW
M 201467 -E4
I256T159
334165 17]'05@.e6rW IWWtZ11Q'W
a49Rb ed.I- N1y°pe1409
;2914g7 -23
1 25650x5
33abW IW3VT62IVN
EMERALD
ISLE
P WAY POINT 3
{
x44 a
9.a °
�1)
59
4T 3
ya x13
ea a
a�
ae1
4e -i3 4
-75 •11,
A Surveyed on July 10 & 11, 2014
y3 a2 3
2
-RP9 9
.13; y.. 9 •\14
411 +• d12i
9{ � 6 atla
-tr a •I •139 -tta
- 412 -,JT1� Ai
- 486- t;.9`uY,y37 134.1DA • Surveyed on July 22 & 23, 2014
'12-1 •491 - Ife.aS
.eet -13, r2a
AP,If 1 4,431 ,20 -D.1
.95 .119.\x3,.5 a1 Td.b
na
- AD -tI R3'I,�b•a 1t4 A7
.10.1
` -139 .r• r
.41 .4101aD "a._
a4 -taT .1ts ae
e,e. -aa -14 a,t+ ,6.1,sc
- °3 y�103s1nr'� WAYPOINT2
4" .tae ,a3 .to,R aR
..a ,q 10 +� -ee :96 ..
98 91 'S.a 5fi
.71 -2.29 .69
t Ta4D d, 44
3fi- -4 .79 -03
4 L' A5 5}BLI.S
1 \ .T6 Y>reaac
.i l d, lF3l 346 194' N
d5 S9 -4x1
}d
1.91 ey e'.1a
dA
-
aea5
`` 4D
.rasa fi .•4
-T 1•'3M 9411 R ,��5111a } _4P bA
LONG T2' W It "r W � �d' e ' .. 44
66 .q
#• as 3u
_ ye Y3B9 'eP
'E ,.R9 .•O0 04 RO
•e4 Its
3;
3 .)11.11.0.704 v2
,.' ..10.5 .t5 v•t22
I ,2 ,,•
M�1_1%_ ° >•1DC , WAYPOINT 1._
T
1 •..,,3,600 ,
HYDROGRAPHIC 'SURVEY
SURVEY DATE(S): JULY 10, 11, 22, & 23, 2014
SURVEYED BY: CRP• JBG
Carteret Co.
MAP DATE: JULY 25, 2014
MAPPED BY: MSA
S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
1LMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
On slow Co.
BO C U E INLET
�' r
MAP SCALE: 1: 3,600
BAR
BDguB
MAP FILE NAME
BOGIlE INLET. NORTH CAROLINA
Inlet Q
!�
IMAGERY DATE APRIL 27,2014 0 2014 DIGITAL GLOBE. INC.
BCGUE_ INLET _BAR _20i4.0T.22_C S_OREDGE M
NORTH
CAROLINA.
I
Bogue 1�
Inlet r.•.
Morehead
City
..��, WihTlrclpl0n
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington District

- iAl "', �'
.t
4w�l It.
NOTES:
1. SOUWWe SA REEXPRESSEDINFEETANDTENTHSMLOREFERTOLOC ALMLW
2 PROJECT SUFY DWITH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL 'J. BUTLER S eATEAU r- USINGRTK GPS
HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EQUIPMENT AND M KHL SOUNDNIG EQUIPMENT
3. TIDE GAGE LOCATED AT DM 016 b TIDE PRUNE
6 HORIZONTAL DATUM NAO 1983 • VERTICAL DATUM BEALiFORF
6 THIS FROACTWASMSIGNED BY THE WILMINOTOH D6TAICT OF THE U S ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS. THE INRMLS OR W"TURESMI) AEG4TRATTO61 DESIONATKTNB OF INDIVIDUALS
APPEAR ON TNESE PR0IECT ODd1M1wM8 WTTFIIN lit€ SCOP€OP TPI €IR ENIPLOYIAEHTAS
REQUREO BY ER f11F1615Y
6. THE&£ MYPOINM, WE AND ASSOCIATED NFOR IWPON REPRESENTS THE REEDIT OF
SURVEY$ IIADE ON THE DATE WDICA4TE' AND,:.ONLY RE CONSIDERED AS BUDICATING
TIC GENERAL CONDITYONS EIOSTING AT THAT TIME THESE CONOrrIONS ME SUBJECT TO
RAPIDCHMIDE DIEMSHOALINOEvENFS AMUDEMWMWERS WNOTRELY
EXCLUSIVELY ON TIE INFORMATION PROVIDED HERE
d. NAVIGATION AIW LOCATED MTN DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL, ACCURACY .N• 3 WTERS
e FOR THE MOST UP TO DATE INFORMATION PLEASE CHECK OUR WEBSITE AT
PAWr SAW USACE ARMY W IMAv
F""..
w
I
WIP
#1
�'kl.l .
Ttt] E Gi4GE
X zs6 w
Y =IN
r
• r
% 2540123
x' 331374
Lm 3+•a�axe66
Lerp. •Td' F ai 16b'
:la
y� I
VYP #t2
16
% x560ES1
V �
l61 31r 392E.36C
1
$ , --
AvwW ROGUE INLET- INSIDE USCG CHANNEL
TYPICAL SECTION A CONNECTING CHANNELS TYPICAL SECTION
- Tye1CAL SiCTtOw
._... .,- -
_ ________ ________ ___ - _ - ________ _ _ ______
r
w
i
AIWW BFTCFR -
SECTIQN. a = TANGENT'G'
BFT -CFR I SA I T -G'"
�. �. WP 92 -
N,�'�>y�n.s.as„ �BFT -CFR I S� -11 I T -G
vu
SCALE = 1 :2,400
D 190 206 100 fi00 %O ,.P00
Fnr
46A
2
r. � is u,• �,.
aryl; jA
AfWW BFTCFR
SECTION 1 - TANGENT F
f
o -
-
Y LEGEND
NAVIGATION AIDS
4 Can
t Nun
= Green Lighted Buoy
Red Lighted Buoy
Junction Marker
Green Light
Red Light
■ Green Daybeaccr,
■ Red paybeacon
O Danger Sign
ate. Mireboard
Y Tide Gage
WAYI DINTS Navigation channel
wt
'�"+ -e�oY �"••° wa • •, — Match Line
a� AwP TAiN DEPTH IN FEET
ti'..o�- rPe,TTm
O .. q
I�..T urn u"— deu+c • - k yr +:TF)uiD- .sue aT -
=4-6
6 -7
NAVIGATION AIDS
aawe.. ora, -w - 6w 6Ir r
I+IaarAa sov�"�asenae -rrer. w r aaeerw 8.16
n
I.e "p a11i� ldo%lh tklw: M.1aFw ri`M
"' -" sq re'uoiYw 3N%i'uvrN td7 -12 �.
NIPYA r e ri TI'A 1gPN
Nw' YE-- aeraas� nom. rrseLilrW '>a<aeweW 12 -14
I w— zuc— .anus 'sY Yaf.TD`w aNie,Ct'. --.H - _
�13n aTJem ii•VUL'w arTP Tw•'H ' 1q -15 LLLL - "5�x w fr'�PIY"R-
- 6' +:w -.. yI'i. - 15 and deeper
INI
CONDITION SURVEY
Connecting Channel Survey Date: 14 -16 MAY 2012
Surveyed By: LMT
US Army Corps
U-S. ARMY ENGINEER orSTRICT
A #WW Condktion Survey Date: 17, 18, 22 MAY 2012
Mapped By: MSA
unPr cc.
'crys,ox
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
Ma Date: 25 MAY 2012
BOGUEINLET
Le,
CONNECTING CHANNEL
Scale: 1:2,400
Map File#Bt 105 -12 -7
EMERALD ISLE, NORTH CAROLINA
Irma B Date: March 14 20120 Di ital Globe Inc.
M8 File Name: B9 ue- Inside 2012 -05 -22 ca dyed e.mxd
Co
NORTH CAROLINA
I I
I,
US Army Corps
Ifoelle
of Engineers
In
Wilmington District

v r AL
!1
ti
e�
ti
1
ti
�-mom.
e
i
a
0

�4
ij,
`Lands End
Subdivision
West
Transition
s
G r. F_bb Tide Dr
Pinta Dr
w
�- -
1r, East
Transition
Main Fill
F,
0 IS
Bogue Inlet Channel Erosion Response Project - Beach Nourishment Limits

Attachment 3.2 - New
Topsail Inlet
ATTACHMENT KEY:
1. USACE Wilmington District; New Topsail Inlet and Connecting Channels
Dredging Authorization; September 30, 1978
2. USACE Wilmington District; New Topsail Inlet Crossing Location & Disposal
Area; July 21, 2010
3. USACE Wilmington District; Plan -View of Dredging and Bathymetry at New
Topsail Inlet Crossing, Tangent 8, Section 3; July 21, 2010
4. USACE Wilmington District; Hydrographic Survey of Topsail Creek and Crossing,
with Dredging Locations; August 5, 2013
S. USACE Wilmington District; Hydrographic Survey of Topsail Inlet, with
Dredging Locations; August 8, 2013
6. USACE Wilmington District; Plan -View of Dredging and Bathymetry at Banks
Channel, Ranges 8 through 11; September 20, 2007
7. USACE Wilmington District; Plan -View of Dredging and Bathymetry at Banks
Channel, Ranges 12 through 14; September 12, 2007
8. Town of Topsail Beach; Plan View of Topsail Beach Nourishment Project;
Permit #22 -09 Modification; January 6, 2011
9. USACE Wilmington District; Plan -View of New Topsail Inlet Crossing Widener;
December 1997
More than Engineering Solutions
O'BRIEN G GERE

*CHANNEL TO ROGUE INLET, NORTH CAROLINA
Condition of Improvement, September 30, 1978
Acts Work authorized Documents
Section 107 Present project Detailed Project Report
July 14, 1960 approved November 29,
As Amended 1963
Authorized November 29, 1953, under authority of Section 107, River and
Harbor Act of July 14, 1960. Detailed Project Report, April 1963.
PROJECT: A channel, 6 feet deep, 90 feet wide, and about 2.7 miles long,
between the Intracoastal Waterway and the gorge in Bogue Inlet.
PROGRESS: Complete.
VARIATION OF WATER SURFACE: Tidal. Range about 4 feet on the ocean side of
Bogue Inlet, 2.5 feet just inside the inlet, and about I foot in White Oak
River at Swansboro.
COST OF CONSTRUCTION: $12,615.
*Modification to AIWW.
*NEW TOPSAIL INLET AND CONNECTING CHANNELS
Condition of Improvement, September 30, 1978
Acts Work. authorized __ -- -- Documents
Section 107 Present project
July 14, 1960
As Amended
Detailed Project
Report, approved
April 7, 1966
Authorized April 7, 1965, under authority of Section 107, River and Harbor
Act of July 14, 1960. Detailed Report, July 1965.
PROJECT; A channel through New Topsail Inlet, 8 feet deep and 150 feet
- wide, to the inlet gorge, 0.66 mile; a channel, 7 feet deep and 80 feet
wide, from the inlet gorge to the Intracoastal Waterway via Old Topsail
Creek, 1.42 miles; and a channel, 7 feet deep and 80 feet wide, from the
inlet gorge through Banks Channel to the Intracoastal Waterway, 6.27
miles.
PROGRESS: Complete.
VARIATION OF WATER SURFACE: Tidal. The mean tidal range varies from 3.5 feet
over the ocean bar at New Topsail Inlet to about 2.5 feet in the Intracoastal
Waterway.
COST OF CONSTRUCTION: $99,615 Federal, $17,417 contributed funds.
*Modification to AIWW.
55f -1

CORPS OF ENGINEERS
5WANSBOR0
oo' OIL E aE�
24
Lo
ti
a GCl1Ak R
.\ p7, F S 6
OMI.�� ��T AfWW�mS
�� Husulwe 1?il
ff 6d �
-1
pNME4
fW.I MI /�j ©11 /1 NR7 Lh �gQ
IIF �
auoLtr la.
i, Ys3
'r
li u
xrr �� eti"g
r�i MI. I
IIYV � 4
If
24�
CHANNEL 70 8 THROUGH
ROGUE INLET
F f Qoo
FENDER COUNTY
Iw I.i;
sQ ..
EQ Ya s �
U.S. ARMY
S5f
�aw1.
j'YI.
d Gl'cv'ti. 4
3wY
a°
ao
Rb
is
R*
R
44
NEW TOPSAIL INLET AND
CONNECTING CHANNELS
�caEll 9r �11r
CONTINUING AUTHORITY
SMALL NAVIGATION PROJECTS
CHANNEL TO BOGUE INLET,
4LW NEW TOPSAIL INLET AND
__. I ------------
VARYING CONNECTING CHANNELS
' NORTH CAROLINA
I
VARYING I $GALES AS SHOWN
TYPICAL SEGTVON CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON,N C
MAP REVISED SEPT. 1990

0■
WE
Ell
©■
PAN
oli
0
0
X ?229
N 500000
X
E 2.397.220.3 U.S. R/W LINE
AREA TO BE DREDGED
SOUNDING
®
N118 L6 INT TOPSAIL L8.
CENTERLINE OFFSET
I.P. 91 +14.6 (245.0)
60+00 65 +00
70+00
75+00
80 +00 85+00
90 +00 TOP -V-09 -4 95+00
TOP -y -09-31 100 +00
.3 A.5°0 �;6
°qa ? X
�h:!5 35.}�'g3h� °j5.
04.e,,.�38g3 3.39346
"T JD€ 3GlJA�E"
�.6'�1A�950 �A%,0
M1g90 2
�6he6.�.oh �6-M1 y,75.
qbq °e .`e2q.°b20
8.°6:636 :q.e°2a �39q.�.'S52q 5 �.N3aq.
?Bh55 �qA °.e n2 n9�q hM1g3a0
•A�eb�'b 5,
+OM1 ♦;,
9,
A'°;9 6t
,♦ ♦
�,0 ;0. 2 a
662 i
°0'°§
5
.a',`b'•.19'�9'09
-
,r
5 t
�
2 t
,,�•,
-
-
3. q:. , 0 , .,
, s 3 9
�K^
5,
L
a-i'
5p 4` � •$ � AB `
� -e
- ,.� 6 °Aq'o 'o R' "A' .♦ ;, b B °'a ",a -e .8� °9 0�¢ '�t T9 � ",t ;'1
�1
6 ♦056 x` 16'
0 ♦ ♦ 0 2.2 6,3yt 0
„99A" 2
99 +0
VCHANNEL PRISM LINE
23
2230981000
RPS FACTORY CE 1982
i95.,5, °e
?3- �•,ea'3.% °a.S'?,,
t gtgO qAO ° A A °6I" 'N 'I , o , , , , '♦3,�6� °F"t e,t A2, ,
�♦�A ate♦ � � � � � .. ,'.°0'
TERL I NE TOP- y -09 -5
T8 -35 TB -33 TS -31 1
U.S. R/W LINE
A Sa "s,. b.?2.00.'4. 9'�4�`h'•' '° �% °? ° 2''' -1 °'q
TOP-V-09-50 m TOP- y- 09 -29/
N 224.737.9
A BM SCSB -21 CE 1978
® SM SCSB -22 CE 1978
Y 2y
22200000
T8 -I8 U.S. R/W LINE TB -16
I.P. 1m7 25.2 (245.F N 225.288.7 I.P. 120 +26.7 (245.01 CENTERLINE OFFSET TANCREOI USE 1979 P. 140.00.8 1244.9)
E 2.401.297.4
110+00 115 +00 "FILE BOARD 270" 120 +00 125+00 130 +00 135+00 140+00
TOP- y -09 -28 1 t M1 5 3
q2� ,9 ,as9Qsz°eA „a.,
wa. ;., ';��`2- g ^`-`'� ,}„`,' ,yew^ qA �3a♦ ..,_'O'';_, °�-.� TCENT111 -12
INE
-50' WIDENER -
TOP-V-09-25 N 225.216.0
CHANNEL PRISM LINE
X ?F
22��06 O
X 2y
2250000
TS-23 T8 -21
- -- - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - - - -- - - - - - ' -- - °- -
U.S. R/W LINE
LEGEND
L -uu'd- u
9r
x
V
AREA TO BE DREDGED
SOUNDING
®
NAVIGATION AIDS
1. SOUNDINGS ARE EXPRESSED IN FEET AND TENTHS AND REFER TO LOCAL M.L.W.
2. PROJECT SURVEYED 28 MAY 2010 WITH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL "J. BUTLER', USING
D.G,P.S.HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EOUIPMENT AND 200 KHZ SOUNDING EQUIPMENT.
3. TIDE GAGE LOCATED AT: RTK VS OUTFALL PIPE.
4. HORIZONTAL DATUM NOD 1983.
5. THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS MAP REPRESENTS THE RESULT OF SURVEYS
MADE ON THE DATE INDICATED AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED AS INDICATING THE
GENERAL CONDITIONS EXISTING AT THAT TIME.
6. NAVIGATION AIDS LOCATED BY SURVEY VESSEL, ACCURACY +/- 3 METERS. LATITUDE AND
LONGITUDE ARE EXPRESSED IN DEGREES AND DECIMAL MINUTES.
DESCRIPTION FASTING NORTHING LATITUDE LONGITUDE
LIGHT # 98 2401329.74 225355.42 34 21.7079373 77 40.2118909
BUOY # 99 2400474.65 224497.30 34 21.5683633 77 40.3841509
BUOY # 99A 2398017.46 222789.18 34 21.2921791 77 40.8771025
MILEBOARD 4 270 2401915 225862 34 21.79012 77 40.09410
COE TIDE GAUGE 2400304 224696 34 21.60149 77 40.41756
7. FOR LOCATION OF DISPOSAL AREA SEE PLATE P -15.
SCALE: 1:2000
200 100 0 100 200 300
SCALE IN FEET
Q)
z ?
�f0
Oz
It -D < V O
Mo o0 LUQ
g Z' co
089 co
Z
0Z<
Z
PLATE
NUMBER
P - 1
6
SHEET 1, OF 22

NOTES
1. SOUNDINGS ARE EXPRESSED IN FEET AND TENTHS AND REFER TOM L W
2 PROJECT SURVEYED WTH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL'J BUTLER, USING RTK
GM HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EOIDIPMEII TANO 200 KHZ SOUNDING EQUIPMENT
3. TIDE GAGE LOCATEDAT MILEBOARD PILINGING NUMBER)
A. HORIZONTALDATIIM NAD 1983 VERTICAL DATUM BEAUFORT
5 THIS PROJECT WAS DESIGNED BY THE VALMINGTON DISTRICT OF THE U.S. ARMY CORPS
OF ENGINEERS THE INITIALS OR SIGNATURES AND REGISTRATION DESIGNATIONS OF
INDIVIDUALS APPEAR ON THESE PROJECT DOCUMENTS VATHM THE SCOPE OF THEIR
EMPLOYMENTAS REQUIRED BY ER 1110 - 13152.
®. THESE WAYPDINTS. MAPS AND ASSOCIATED INFORMATION REPRESENTS THE RESULT OF
SURVEYS MADE ON THE DATE INDICATEIIAND CAN ONLY BE CGNSIDEREDAS INDICATING
THE GENERAL. CONDITIONS EXISTING AT THAT TIME. THESE CONDITIONS ARE SUBJECT TO
RAPID CHANGE DUE TO SHOALING EVENTS. APRUDENT MARINER SHOULD NOT RELY
EXCLUSIVELY ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED HERE
7 NAVIGATION AIDS LOCATEDWTH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL ACCURACY N- 3 METERS
S. FOR THE MOSTUPTO DATE INFORMATION PLEASE CHECK OUR WEBSITE AT
MWW SAW.USACE ARMY MIL
77 "42'M 34 °21'0'N 77 °41'3 rW
�t
n
77'41'30 "W 34 °21'0 "N 77'41'0 "V1+
77'41'0"W 77'40'30'W 77'40'0'W
2
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington District
NORTH CAROLINA
Yt
r�IL INLET
I
q,
/..
MOPEKEAD DIrr
aALaNEAo
ISLANp
�]
PENDER
COUNTY
TOPSAIL
INLET
4')
N
d
a
N
U
C?
p
X
W
W
a
r
m
O
Lu
G
❑
LU
q
�,
w
?
D
w
Lr
N
i
n
0
cv
L;7
2'
UJ
J
GO
�
°6
J
J
f
N
n
�
�
W
7
n
u1
p
�
J
Q
at
•
Q
Lu
Of
0:
UJ
i!Y
T
❑
V
J
6
UJ
Q
LT
UJ
Q.
O
¢
N
E.
ti
W +
c
U
LU
=W101
D °+
z
z 0
a
� 4
Q,
w
Q
✓(��4
z
h
aa�
0 C6 J
�
©
0
N

f
aaa
a,
r+v-, - T
C
X 2402396
Y 219023
_, 31 701" N
mg. 77° 4 1.017' VI
% 2402533
Y 218669
Lat 34° 26 36.181" N
Uno. 77° 39. 59.428" V
NOTES;
I. SOUNDINGSARE EXPRESSED IN FEETAND TENTHS AND REFER TO M.L.W .
2. PROJECT SURVEYED NTH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL "J. BUTLER ", USING RM GPS
HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EOUIPME NT AND 200 KHZ SOUNDING EQUIPMENT
3, TIDE GAGE LOCATION: USACE DOCK
•. HORIZONTAL DATUM NAD 1 9S3 - VERTICAL DATUM BEAUFORT
S. THIS PROJECT V" DESIGNED BY THE VOLM'INGTON DISTRICT OF THE U.S, ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS. THE INITIALS AND SIGNATURES AND REGISTRATION
DESIGNATIONS OF I NDIVIDUALS APPEAR ON THESE PROJECT DOCUMENTS WITHIN
THE SCOPE OF THEIR EMPLOYMENTAS REQUIRED BY ER1110. 1.8152.
S. THESE VATPOINTS, MAPS AND ASSOCIATED INFORMATION REPRESENTS THE RESULT OF
SURVEYS MADE ON THE DATE INDICATED AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED AS INDICATING
THE GENERAL CONDITIONS EXISTING AT THAT TIME. THESE CONDITIONS ARE SUBJECT TO
RAPID CHANGE DUE TO SHOALING EVENTS. A PRUDENT MARINER SHOULD NOT RELY
EXCLUSIVELY ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED HERE.
7. NAVIGATION AIDS LOCATED WITH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL. ACCURACY -I- a METERS.
B. FOR THE MOST UP TO DATE INFORMATION PLEASE CHECK OUR WEBSITE AT
W NNY.SAW.USACE ARMY.MIL
% 2402783
Y 219388
Lai 34'2C 43.266'N
;La13Long. 77' 39' 56.333" V
4'2Cr 02498
19009
39.548" N 39 59.797' W X 24Y 218729 Let 34° 20' 36.768" N Lona. 77'39 58.546" W
X 2403425
Y z1B109
Lel 34° 20' 30.524" N
Long. 77° 39' 48.883" W
a E
4 «
x a4 .4
LEGEND
211.1r TOPSAIL CREELS BANKS CHANNEL INLET Typical Section Typical Section Typical Section
bier � ] I- &a' I I_ BO' I e I 16D M. I
r 'F r Ii 0
NOT TO 5CALE NOT To SCALE NOS TO SCALE
i
Depth In Feet
i� Dredge _B- Topsa.il_2013-DB -08
0 - 4
X 2403362
s 16ia� �a
r 4 -6
Y 219956
Lai 34' 2D 48.803!'N
a an
TIP•
'W
4+
7-
Lang. T7'39 49,33T
^ • a a4 a +� ti�u
01 311347.30 288'003 215Lir7` 7TH' &&1TW
ww57]a-N
l�
10 - 12
�^
M 201307 -30 2]07108 216018 Fr39,.a]"!W
=
X 2402719
Via• X 2463418
Y 219452
05 38I34r•30 3Y.Li847 317831 7P36a iWW
Y 219885
Lat 34' 2{I' 43.907' N
I
La[ 34° 20 48.095" N
.w
Long. 77° 39° 57.096" W
W212624WN
Long. 77° 39' 48 687" W
•aa "
Ne
to 31P10341 2401aT2 21b583. 7T441.2 -W
f
aaa
a,
r+v-, - T
C
X 2402396
Y 219023
_, 31 701" N
mg. 77° 4 1.017' VI
% 2402533
Y 218669
Lat 34° 26 36.181" N
Uno. 77° 39. 59.428" V
NOTES;
I. SOUNDINGSARE EXPRESSED IN FEETAND TENTHS AND REFER TO M.L.W .
2. PROJECT SURVEYED NTH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL "J. BUTLER ", USING RM GPS
HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EOUIPME NT AND 200 KHZ SOUNDING EQUIPMENT
3, TIDE GAGE LOCATION: USACE DOCK
•. HORIZONTAL DATUM NAD 1 9S3 - VERTICAL DATUM BEAUFORT
S. THIS PROJECT V" DESIGNED BY THE VOLM'INGTON DISTRICT OF THE U.S, ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS. THE INITIALS AND SIGNATURES AND REGISTRATION
DESIGNATIONS OF I NDIVIDUALS APPEAR ON THESE PROJECT DOCUMENTS WITHIN
THE SCOPE OF THEIR EMPLOYMENTAS REQUIRED BY ER1110. 1.8152.
S. THESE VATPOINTS, MAPS AND ASSOCIATED INFORMATION REPRESENTS THE RESULT OF
SURVEYS MADE ON THE DATE INDICATED AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED AS INDICATING
THE GENERAL CONDITIONS EXISTING AT THAT TIME. THESE CONDITIONS ARE SUBJECT TO
RAPID CHANGE DUE TO SHOALING EVENTS. A PRUDENT MARINER SHOULD NOT RELY
EXCLUSIVELY ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED HERE.
7. NAVIGATION AIDS LOCATED WITH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL. ACCURACY -I- a METERS.
B. FOR THE MOST UP TO DATE INFORMATION PLEASE CHECK OUR WEBSITE AT
W NNY.SAW.USACE ARMY.MIL
% 2402783
Y 219388
Lai 34'2C 43.266'N
;La13Long. 77' 39' 56.333" V
4'2Cr 02498
19009
39.548" N 39 59.797' W X 24Y 218729 Let 34° 20' 36.768" N Lona. 77'39 58.546" W
X 2403425
Y z1B109
Lel 34° 20' 30.524" N
Long. 77° 39' 48.883" W
a E
4 «
x a4 .4
LEGEND
211.1r TOPSAIL CREELS BANKS CHANNEL INLET Typical Section Typical Section Typical Section
bier � ] I- &a' I I_ BO' I e I 16D M. I
r 'F r Ii 0
NOT TO 5CALE NOT To SCALE NOS TO SCALE
i
lop
li` �"° NAVIGATION AIDS - BANKS CHANNEL
Ty" Winw, Wv y 0.4. 0"-X 6YX Y BNaLY 01116_7
y�
a_- x4.. ozes 2,101 -s1 2,IXge0 2iem2 Tr 3e4e 3oaw 1t•2v s4.zsaN
Om 00 29,3874D 24MM 2,9765 Tr38'S23,3'W 3,`=M9WN
bi 1 •- �T� Can w CIS _w rT W'f1M' W ]I.2TUi. 'N
TOPSAIL ISLAND
M1
.�� % 2403473
Y 218185 l� ,
Lai 34° 2{Y 31272" N
♦. Long. 77'3948.30D' W' «
TI
as
6 a' ra d1 a _1l
] y ear
ra
t]�i415�
- M.Ioh line
Depth In Feet
i� Dredge _B- Topsa.il_2013-DB -08
0 - 4
NAVIGATION
NAVIGATION AIDS - INLET
r 4 -6
_
can
TIP•
M.", & _Ya1. sp�. x 3 r ME LX
MI Y
7-
U
Green Lighted Buoy
01 311347.30 288'003 215Lir7` 7TH' &&1TW
ww57]a-N
Red Lighted Buoy
10 - 12
�^
M 201307 -30 2]07108 216018 Fr39,.a]"!W
312793u•N
}urlclign Marker
fin
05 38I34r•30 3Y.Li847 317831 7P36a iWW
34•W2e.7 N
15 and deeper
I
Nm
00 241309[1 24 MW 2174 77.404.803 W
W212624WN
Green Daybeacon
7
Ne
to 31P10341 2401aT2 21b583. 7T441.2 -W
3l`7V 55571•N
r
«
- _ 4^•
N..
,2 2013030, 2901886 219475 7r40a940rW
to allaoa.m 2882295 23a1W 7T442110W
3,'20442WN
3451051-14
0
Tide Gage
C
❑
W
m
NAVIGATION AIDS - TOPSAIL CREEK
TW.
Nu ­r 6vr-,y ' W.,X ssw_Y Nn1s_x
WSLY
.R -
Mm
0e .'SY XMGI 2,4ffid1 22,91 T!' W8 Mr W
34.2e511aR N
lop
li` �"° NAVIGATION AIDS - BANKS CHANNEL
Ty" Winw, Wv y 0.4. 0"-X 6YX Y BNaLY 01116_7
y�
a_- x4.. ozes 2,101 -s1 2,IXge0 2iem2 Tr 3e4e 3oaw 1t•2v s4.zsaN
Om 00 29,3874D 24MM 2,9765 Tr38'S23,3'W 3,`=M9WN
bi 1 •- �T� Can w CIS _w rT W'f1M' W ]I.2TUi. 'N
TOPSAIL ISLAND
M1
.�� % 2403473
Y 218185 l� ,
Lai 34° 2{Y 31272" N
♦. Long. 77'3948.30D' W' «
TI
as
6 a' ra d1 a _1l
] y ear
ra
t]�i415�
- M.Ioh line
Depth In Feet
i� Dredge _B- Topsa.il_2013-DB -08
0 - 4
NAVIGATION
AIDS
r 4 -6
_
can
6 -7
N Q
Nun
7-
U
Green Lighted Buoy
IrL 8- 10
w0
Red Lighted Buoy
10 - 12
�^
z
12 -14
}urlclign Marker
X14 -15
r��
Green Lighl
15 and deeper
I
Red Light
�
Green Daybeacon
Red Day6eacon
}
m
©
Danger Sign
©
Webaard
0
Tide Gage
X 2406194
Y 216902
Lat 34° 26' 18.220° N
.e Long. 77° 39' 16 663" W
• :. -1x8 ;• a. -.,
,
a � eo es
ar a av
a n - a•aa
a] as
ae xo?
X 2405131 Tar d0 .
Y 216766
I.HI 34' 2D' 16.884'° N
Long. 77° 39' 1 &.840" W «� °iaea ne
a.:
1 : 3,004
•1 2S 500 750 1.900
X 2407162
Y 216286
Lai 34' 20' 11999' N
_ona, 77° 39'4.622" N
% 2407225
Y 216422
Let 34° 20' 13.334" N
Long. 77° 39' 3,845'V
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington District
NORTH CAROliINA
�TOP&UE
6EACk
W
Q
Z
J
_
J
N Q
R
U
EE
w0
D
J
Zwo
i3
z
er
r��
/� J
('}
©¢
O s
U
N_
W
�
N
}
m
H
0 p
f
co
C
❑
W
m
<
a
Z
In
b
�
J
�
N
J
•Q
F
i7
�
O
6
�
o
r"a
r�N
n
N
N
7
CL
N
CL
Q
F
C
r
Q
a
aii
❑
>.
5
to,
a
`�
W
Q
Z
J
_
J
N Q
w.fj
z � �
U
EE
w0
D
J
Zwo
i3
z
r��
/� J
('}
©¢
O s
U
N_
TY� % N
N
0 p

A B
C D
E
F G
H
TOPSAIL
CREEK
4-
\/
X v
E''9 °�
Q�p
X
m
US Army C.-
.1 Engineer.
Wilmington Di.triM
6
�.
0 +00 RANGE 8
* r 2zzo92590
w
&
X 241156.1 8 - --
Y 221156.1 X -
__ _
X z2 -211
- _. v
_ ,O.s
0,00 9
x 2.118877.3
r 223692.4
5
y)
TIDE GAGE
CORPS DOCK
X 24080578
,0. e. V 2225574
to.a
gty.° µt s
RQNGE $ Yzo3,66 $25
g 69
9 e
e e
7.2.
x
2225674
- i o a
'e.s 10.9 113 t0 0 9'3
6. 5'
5 s i
e. i
Y 22s�n0ge
7' 6's 18:8
s.s _ ' -
.i s z.s ' .s
7
Yz236m,o
.g.
�
V 224615]42
0 +00 RANGE 10
z
x za6e965s
Y -114
pANGE 9
&
€
t
X, X
1% ' ` 2
_ -
2
X r 0 +00 RANGE 12
X 2413058.8
e
'�p_�J
V 228612.1
T
002.0
- ■ Y 2z
MANGE 1�
*,
3
a.g 7.6 T'
v i
-
30'09 -
_ 9911 8.83 t`\ X1.0 5 :�
_ 10.5 0 Y 1. 5 :3 4
b6'
�? -
X 2409545,2 9 z -
V 224fi174 7' _ -- .'
0 +00 RANGE 10 �.2 7.2 �� -6.
0.0
Y 225998860
I:4 S. % 2410]81.6 X,
Y 225466.6
-a.'1 5 °Y.'� 1C,
7
�{ �9 __ `Z.s 7'
0 +00 RANGE 11
x 2411829s
V 226186.6
1t
7'
x 2.12245.8
Y .23093.0 /
6
052
{.@, sRF
'$9
/ /
aM6
6 Z U
w G
90 2
w0
O
q
ry
3
1E
X 225070 °36 e.
Y r 7a
e. s 6=$.33
226083
i!'1
A-
.6rs ° i
0.1
.r.s 7.
F
$�
f ¢ C7
a u f
U
Rq
NGE
- _
- �g.a
`. �.. , %a
5.% 3
3.7 a.5
X 22,0281.3
Y 78.9
Y 227669.9
3NOTESt23ti
� 3
u
,�
v 225433.7
\ O Q
�9 - s.4 gfin 4.3
�(
/�
i 18'� 10
7's.T'9'3
9X32411
1.
SOUNDINGS ARE EXPRESSED IN FEET AND TENTHS AND REFER TO LOCAL MLW.
e-
vzz63a7g
Y 22636so12
2.
3.
4.
5.
PROJECT SUREYED WITH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL SKIMMER ". USING DGPS
HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EQUIPMENT AND 200 KHZ SOUNDING EOU IPMENT.
TIDE GAGE LOCATION: CORPS DOCK AND DM tt 12.
HORIZONTAL DATUM:,NAD1983.
THIS PROJECT WAS DESIGNED BY THE WILMINGTON DISTRICT OF THE U.S. ARMY CDRPS
OF ENGINEERS. THE INITIALS OR SIGNATURES AND REGISTRATION DESIGNATION OF
INDIVIDUALS APPEAR ON THESE PROJECT DOCUMENTS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THEIR
��nn
V
z
co
W
CC
W
z
- Z
_ ~
U
EMPLOYMENT AS REQUIRED BY ER 1110 -1 -8152
W
° N
C w
200 100 0 200 400
6.
THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS MAP REPRESENTS
THE RESULTS OF SURVEYS
Y
SCALE IN FEET
MADE ON THE DATE INDICATED AND CAN ONLY BE CONS [DERED AS INDICATING THE
GENERAL CONDITIONS EXISTING AT THAT TIME. THESE CONDITIONS ARE SUBJECT TO
RAPID CHANGE DUE TO SHOALING EVENTS. A PRUDENT MARINER SHOULD NOT RELY
EXCLUSIVELY ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED HERE.
O
W
m
z H
It
m
7.
NAVIGATION AIDS LOCATED WITH DISTRICT SURVEY
VESSEL. ACCURACY + / - 3 METERS.
LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE ARE EXPRESSED IN DEG,
EES. DECIMAL MINUTES
M.L.W. M.L.W.
NOTES:
DESCRIPTION BASTING NORTHING
LATITUDE LONGITUDE
nno o neo oe
e n t e.,. eVeI m
AREA TO BE DREDGED TO 7'
FEET BELOW LOCAL M.L.W.,
BCN 1 2406602 221783
BCN 2 2408118 222529
DM 3 2409480 224696
34 21.10731 77 39.17348
34 21.22689 77 30.87014
34 21.58105 77 38.59353
PLATE
NUMBER
I6ru
° g0' BO
DM 5 2410689 225562
34 21 .72108 77 30.35085
PLUS 2' FEET ALLOWABLE OVERDEPTH,
SHOWN THUS -
BCN 6 2411768 226105
34 21.80815 77 30.13488
TYPICAL SECTION TYPICAL DREDGING SECTION
BCN 7 2413011 228702
34 22.23344 77 37.08066
SXEET OF
T. O SCALE
* NAVAIDS ARE LOCATED FROM 7.8 JUNE 2007

0 +00 RANGE 12
X 2413086.8
Y 228612..1
x \ '
US Army Corpa
of Engineara
Wilmington DiatriH
KANGE 11
x
-
Y 2 X, r9o76,.0
-
RAN Gf
v
0 +00 RANGE 13
q io9s� t0.1 ;5•s X 2416768.2
-_
_ ___s.i 5 Y 230992.0
5 0 5.5
i� 1� �a qa.i
it.
"x
-
z3o501
a1 v z3 asai T 7.4 1. 7 `.9`
- - RANGE 13
X
€
gc
tl
Xz41�636 e
Y 23071]93
O
0 +00 RANGE 14
-
X 2418146.8
Y 233003.8
_
-
r 2323357 232313.2 '11"
X z4n&37.7 x 670.7 Y 2x.3143.7
_
X 2417163.0
Y 23157090 24T30'0
0 +00 RANGE 13 --A
X 2416768.2
Y 2309920
7•
/,1 11.
AIVGE gA"
12.]
_ - -
96,
7'
g.9 qq
' }
0 7•
7
1.4
g E
s
866a
_ _ _ _ 5 5 9 . i _s22 ='
395 7 4 5 6. 5
Z4, 831920 2 a
X24,n037 v 33,11.
Y 2322908
RANGE 13 Y 7
'04
- - ase'�
_ _
4.7
2.2
x 241 9246.8
1 Y 233703.5
2 -267.1
659.0
7 6 4j.4
2 9_ 54 Saj
5.20 \�6.3 , 46'.St 266
4.1 `5� 7.3 s1.4 " 7..
o
a
U_ 2 U
¢ZU Q
w a S S
zLL °z 3
�.3 v 2a1s474
Bc
67
w° k
o
vQ
"Q%
\
;
RA llt
X 2420226.3
v 234233.4
w
s.-.
4d
w 2
X
G E 14
Y Pa,�92e7�a
vai
3 t°
2
NOTES:
Q
a
Q12^
1. SOUNDINGS ARE EXPRESSED IN FEET AND TENTHS AND REFER TO LOCAL MLW.
2. PROJECT SUREY ED WITH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL " SKIMMER ". USING DODS
HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EOU IPME NT AND 200 KHZ 50UNDING EQUIPMENT.
3. TIDE GAGE LOCATION: CORPS DOCK AND DM n 12.
y
z
W
z
4. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD1983.
5. THIS PROJECT WAS DESIGNED BY THE WILMINGTON DISTRICT OF THE U.S. ARMY CORPS
Of ENGINEERS. THE INITIALS 0R SIGNATURES AND REGISTRATION DESIGNATION OF
INDIVIDUALS APPEAR ON THESE PROJECT DOCUMENTS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THEIR
Q
W
Q
- z
Q _
_ ~
U
EMPLOYMENT AS REQUIRED BY ER 1 110-1 -8152
200 100 0 200 400
SCALE IN FEET
6. THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS MAP REPRESENTS THE RESULTS OF SURVEYS.
MADE ON THE DATE INDIGA TED AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED AS INDICATING THE
GENERAL CONDITIONS EXISTING AT THAT TIME. THESE CONDITIONS ARE SUBJECT TO
RAPID CHANGE DUE TO SHOALING EVENTS. A PRUDENT MARINER SHOULD NOT RELY
EXCLUSIVELY ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED HERE.
W
LL
m
LU
_ a
Z
m
7. NAVIGATION AIDS LOCATED WITH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL, ACCURACY METERS.
LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE ARE EXPRESSED IN DEGREES. DECIMAL MINUTES
- - - -- - - -- -
pESCR IPTION FASTING NORTHING LATITUDE LONGITUDE
'AN 7 2413011 228702 34 22.23344 77 37.88066
NOTES:
PLATE
1� za
,
CAN lA 2414297 229475 34 22.35]94 77 37.62288
pM 9 2415529 230277 34 22.48734 77 37.37573
8.
AREA TO BE DREDGED T0. 7' FEET BELOW LOCAL M.L.W..
NUMSEA
a L SO JJ L 0
pM 9A 2416828 231183 34 22.63372 77 37. 11496
TYPICAL SECTION TYPICAL DREDGING SECTION
DM 11 2418092 233052 34 22.93891 77 36.85846
DM 12 2420340 234231 34 23.12808 77 36.40620
PLUS 2' FEET ALLOWABLE OVERDEPTH. SHOWN THUS -
SXEET OF
SCALE MOT
♦ NAVAIDS ARE LOCATED FROM 7.8 JUNE 2007

1 CERTIFY 7HA77HESE PLANS ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH
THE APPLICABLE SEC71ONS OF 7rFLE21,CHAP7ER56.
I CHRISTIAN L. GIBSON, P.E. NO. 026273 DATE
ALIGNMENT
TABLE OF COORDINATES - TOPSAIL CREEK CENTERLINE
NAME
NAME
EASTING
NORTHING
STATION
RANGE
TC -1
2,400,539.59
224,554.37
0.00
0.0
TC -2
2,400,790.74
224,289.04
370.89
0.0
TC -3
2,400,994.85
224,21371
589.96
0.0
TC -4
2.401.173.94
224 208.95
780.12
0.0
TC -5
2,401,525.33
224,357.41
1,141.59
0.0
TC -fi
2.402.04356
224 36'5.14
7 660.18
0.0
TC -7
2.402.26640
224,206.31
1,933 -58
0.0
TC -B
2,402,280.22
223,930.93
2,209.31
0.0
TC -9
2.4Z)2.18&54
22 633.94
7521.33
0.0
TC-1a
2.401.954.66
223,35132
2,885.51
010
TC -11
2,401,545.45
223,074.25
3,183.40
0.0
10-12
7,401,867.64
222,831.86
3,420.81
0.0
TC-13
2. 402.191 14
222,403.07
3.963.94
0.0
TC -14.
2,403,007.92
222,220.46
4,800.89
0.0
TC -15
2,403,640.53
222,15032
5,437.37
0.0
TC-16
2,403.822.70
221,947.84
5.709.74
0.0
TC-17
2,403,867.60
221,852.86
5,814.81
0.0
TC-1a
2,403,897.66
221,704.10
5,966.57
0.0
10-19
2.403.793.25
221,49536
6,197.28
010
TCr20
2,403,664_DS
221,33586
6.404.88
0.0
TC -21
2,403,567.67
221,227.81
8,552.64
H.
TCr22
7403,31399
221,01929
6,860.84
0.0
TC 23
= p
0 Q
Q O
Y
o
O
0.0
HORIZONTAL
COORDINATES
ARE REFERENCED
TO NAD83
OLD
ALIGNMENT TABLE OF COORDINATES
- NEW TOPSAIL INLET CENTERLINE
NAME
EASTING
NORTHING
STATION
RANGE
NT -1
2,405,758.67
221,156.32
000
oA
NTI -2
2,404,969.15
220,718.95
903.54
00
NFI -3
2,404,233.71
220.268.68
1,76483
0.0
NT-4
2,403,778.19
220,243.99
2,221.02
010
NTI -5
.403.537.470
220,243.41
2A81.74
00
MI -8
2,403,315.40
220,292.58
2,689.19
0.0
NTI -7
2,402,633.28
220,444.58
3,38804
0.0
NTI -e
2,401,980.54
220,049.49
4,151.04
oA
NTI -9
z 40; 888.81
219 880.09
835.68
0.0
NTI -10
1 2.401,479.38
219,278.46
5,078.90
0.0
NTI -11
2,401,327.09
218,700.45
5,878.63
OA
NTI -12
2,401,399.18
218,255.85
6,127.04
OA
NTI -13
2,401,578.38
217,879.91
6,543.50
0.0
NTI -14
2,401,843.00
217,660.65
5,887.77
00
NTI -15
2,402,132.38
217,545.00
7,198.67
OA
NTI -16
2,402,629.67
217,504.05
7,697.64
0.0
NTI -17
2,403,657.02
217,751.30
8,754.32
0.0
NTI -18
2,404,223.30
217,657.63
9,328.26
OA
NTI -19
2,406,882.87
1 215.964.BB
12.480.78
0.0
HORIZONTAL
COORDINATES
ARE REFERENCED
TO NAD63
Ld
ALIGNMENT
TABLE OF COORDINATES - BANKS CHANNEL CENTERLINE
NAME
EASTING NORTHING
STATION
RANGE
BC -1
2,405,758.8 221,156.1
0.0
0.0
BC -2
2,406,057.8 222,557.4
2,692.4
0.0
SC -3
2,409,5452 224,617.4
5,2332
0.0
BC -4
2,411,829.9 226,166.6
8,005.0
0.0
BC -5
2,413,056.8 228,8111
10,723.1
0.0
BC -6
2,416,7682 230,992.0
15,132.0
0.0
HORIZONTAL
COORDINATES ARE REFERENCED
TO NAD83
TI -a
24
11 x 17 = HALF SCALE
Atlantic Ocean
SEAL
� M
mrvz
V O y1 1+l
V� #vim
C 0�11f
�1vmm
m v C-1
Oil IL t z
r
V
m
d
4"5.
U
3o
C
p
n-
1�4
N
s
U
C1
N
r
O
N
m
N
RANGE
T -3
= d o
z c
221,236.8
r
p
0.0
TD
m
2,407,083.4
221,755.7
995.1
0.0
N
2,408,735.3
N
1,993.5
0.0
N£
un
3
2,993.5
H
Q
2,410,248.8
CJ 3
0.0
TI -a
2,410,949 0
O
4,992.2
0.0
TI-9
2,411. 644 "0
U
5,991.3
010
TI -10
2,412,350.0
�
8,990.4
�
p
2.4-13.026-0
Z2 45 &5
7,990.2
0.0
m
2,413,705.3
227,190.1
II
010
*
m
$
p
A
>
m
z
p,
a
2,415,160.5
228,552.0
o
0.0
_
r
229,2406
11,968.7
0.0
TI -16
2,418,613.3
229,932.2
°
0"9
TI -17
2,417,338.8
3
13,986.7
i
TI -18
v
231,309.3
14,985.6
0.0
TI -19
2,418,798.5
231,982.7
15,984.4
010
TI -20
2,419,530.0
CO
00
15,983.1
0.0
a
a
2,420,237.3
D
0) a
0.0
TI -22
2,420,974.0
CO Z
N i
a
$ w
p
2,421,716.3
Q.�
z
o
Q
TI -24
2,422,483.0
E
® z
o $
m s s
s
TI -25
= p
0 Q
Q O
Y
o
O
0.0
TI -26
Q
W N
r C
f
OLD
TI -26 +839
m V
O
x
0.0
TI -26 +976
2,424,683.1
L
23,953.8
0.0
HORIZONTAL
p >
Cid O .-
TO NAOB3
C
p
E: O
p 2
p1 N N
S L L
} Q
CL
2! Q
O L
Z
T G
0 - C
0
O
=
12
ALIGNMENT
TABLE OF COORDINATES - TOPSAIL BEACH BASELINE
NAME
FASTING
NORTHING
STATION
RANGE
T -3
2,407,034,3
221,236.8
0.0
0.0
TI -4
2,407,083.4
221,755.7
995.1
0.0
TI -5
2,408,735.3
222,276.4
1,993.5
0.0
TI -8
2,409,505.B
222,913.8
2,993.5
0,0
TI-7
2,410,248.8
223,582.7
3,993.2
0.0
TI -a
2,410,949 0
224,2952
4,992.2
0.0
TI-9
2,411. 644 "0
225,013.0
5,991.3
010
TI -10
2,412,350.0
225,719.9
8,990.4
0.0
TI -11
2.4-13.026-0
Z2 45 &5
7,990.2
0.0
TI -12
2,413,705.3
227,190.1
8,990.0
010
TI -13
2,414,454,5
227,853.9
9,991.0
1 0.0
TI -14
2,415,160.5
228,552.0
10,989.5
0.0
TI -15
2,415,092.5
229,2406
11,968.7
0.0
TI -16
2,418,613.3
229,932.2
12,987.6
0"9
TI -17
2,417,338.8
230,619.1
13,986.7
0.0
TI -18
2,418,060 13
231,309.3
14,985.6
0.0
TI -19
2,418,798.5
231,982.7
15,984.4
010
TI -20
2,419,530.0
232,882.6
15,983.1
0.0
TI -21
2,420,237.3
233,38 &5
17,9824
0.0
TI -22
2,420,974.0
234,043 -3
18,981.4
0.0
TI -23
2,421,716.3
734,711.4
19,98011
0.0
TI -24
2,422,483.0
235,375.1
20,979.1
0.0
TI -25
0.0
TI -26
2,423,954.5
236,704.6
22,977.
OLD
TI -26 +839
2,4241580.5
Z37,26J.4
23,816.3
0.0
TI -26 +976
2,424,683.1
237,355,4
23,953.8
0.0
HORIZONTAL
COORDINATES
ARE REFERENCED
TO NAOB3
H
o
W
1 3
_
CL
2
a
War
N V N
> > p
Q.
�V
C, 0+1N
w c m
0
H
W
_
m
m
a
War
o
�V
p�
W
'
0
0
I aJ S
J
W
1
z °
a
g
=
o
a
a o
U
L
m
�
cc
Q
OL
J
J
0
z

u
y
_
•r
r:
-
r
.
-
•
4
-
7'7L
•
L S.
Al-
:.f
* u
•
@ (C x
i
Ilk
Ilk
ti
_ F _
w
.k
iwr
- '-'-d
v
TANGENT 8. SECTION III i
(NEW TOP AIL INLET CROSSING)
®
APPROXIMATE 11

Attachment 3.3 - Carolina
Beach Inlet
ATTACHMENT KEY:
1. USACE Wilmington District; Carolina Beach Inlet Dredging Authorization;
September 30, 1985
2. USACE Wilmington District; Plan -View of Dredging and Bathymetry at
Carolina Beach Inlet Crossing, Section 4, Tangent 1; August 7, 2012
3. USACE Wilmington District; Carolina Beach Inlet Crossing Location &
Disposal Area; July 3, 2012
4. USACE Wilmington District; Hydrographic Survey of Carolina Beach Inlet &
AIWW Crossing, with Dredging Locations; July 10, 2014
5. USACE Wilmington District; Plan -View of Carolina Beach Inlet Crossing
Widener, December 1997.
More than Engineering Solutions
GBRIEN G GERE

*CAROLINA BEACH INLET, NORTH CAROLINA
Condition of Improvement, September 30, 1985
Acts work authorized Documents
Section 107 8' x 150' channel through Carolina Detailed Proj.
July 14, 1960 Beach Inlet Rept., approved
As Amended Feb. 18, 1983
Authorized February 18, 1982, under authority of Section 107, River and
Harbor Act of July 14, 1960. Detailed Project Report, June 1980.
PROJECT: A channel, 8 feet deep and 150 feet wide, extending from deep
water in the Atlantic Ocean to the Atlantic Intracoastal waterway.
PROGRESS: Construction completed December 9, 1982.
VARIATION OF WATER SURFACE: Tidal. Range is about 4.0 feet in the
ocean.
COST OF CONSTRUCTION: $137,801 Federal; $57,800 contributed funds.
*Modification to AIWW.
55d

CORPS OF ENGINEERS U.S. ARMY
55d
NC
+]
1r� co) 5
Ir p��pry
! PROJECT PjUA
N
LOCALITY MAP
a ec
(, SCALE IN WILES
h V
r,
rr
'r
J�
CHANNEL 8'x150'
v
y
UT
t
'\
AROLINA BEACH
CONT{NUING AUTHORITY `
SMALL NAVIGATION PROJECTS
CAROLINA BEACH INLET
NORTH CAROLINA
II\ SCALE OF MILES
3 I Vg 8 I
I_ VARYING _I
r
TYPICAL $ECT[pF: CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTO!N,N.C.
MAP REVISED SEP 1983

om
\ 2122000
MARINA CE 1981
EL. 6.688' MLW BFT. DATUM (LOCAL MLW)
EL. 5.148' NGVD 1929
E 2337288.5
N 121585.6
ROCK C &GS 1918
2
234000
CHANNEL PSM LINE
II
TANGENT 1 SECTION 4
z
w z
N 121 467.51
E 2 337 992.52
UZ �Cn
5 U.S. R/W LINE
°1saA°
r +O
N 123 599.02
E 2 338 537.24 "154 -
,y>
-
so
. aaz_ -
1_9]
-41
FVZ i- z 1 U
_
.
�
, • ] , ]
.9,xavl
e
, , s ] , ,
_s ,2 ,o _z .x
_z
,) _]_s _z ,] _ _z
N 121 432.85
N 122 983.03
°153°
N 123 005.31 N 123 586.63
E 2 338 128.15
E 2 338 524.32
E 2 338 437.13 E 2 338 585.69
CENTER LINE
°Q�¢ Q Z
4
.
�-
z o ti O =
0 -,t
�' CENTERLINE OFFSET
65 +00
85 +00
90 +00
95 +00 100 +00 105 +00
- /W -IN - - - - - - -� - -- -- - - - -- -- - T-
U.S. R/W LINE T1 -19 TI -21
©M
�2iz00 0
fs7 =
mom
70. +00 \ 75 +00 80 +00
_.. -.. .. -..- 9000..-.. ___ -..-..-..-. .- ..- .._.._.-- ..- ..- ..-- .. -.. -.
,.2122000. T1 -27 U.S. R/W LINE Tt -29
n
v O RPS CARO "1
'A
O
Z
-D
c�
9
n
Z
Z
m
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington District
�o q
ooa
s
- � C, a a
~ z
U
z U
Z
W Z
Z w Q
O
z
wiz
<0Z wo
�o z
Q U
V) �
m 3
J
z
w z
UZ �Cn
NOTESoo
r +O
1. SOUNDINGS ARE EXPRESSED IN FEET AND TENTHS AND REFER TO LOCAL M.L.W.
LEGEND
FVZ i- z 1 U
zaoo W F
2. PROJECT SURVEYED 23 JULY 2012 WITH OiSTRICT SURVEY VESSEL "J. BUTLER',
° a i z J
IP °3 O USING D.G.P.S. HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EQUIPMENT AND 200 KHZ SOUNDING EGUIPMENT.
AREA TO BE DREDGED
°Q�¢ Q Z
z o ti O =
0 -,t
3. TIDE GAGE LOCATED AT: CAROLINA INLET MARINA
2
¢ z
H0, 1,
4. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD 1983. VERTICAL DATA: BEAUFORT MLW.
SOUNDING
"'
Z00QLD
p
z?�go +m
[--"T
5. THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS MAP REPRESENTS THE RESULT OF SURVEYS
1 j,
QU¢�
U
MADE ON THE DATE INDICATED AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED AS INDICATING THE
7t IYI NAVIGATION AIDS
g Q Z
W
GENERAL CONDITIONS EXISTING AT THAT TIME.
a w U) Q J
fLw wo
6. NAVIGATION AIDS LOCATED BY SURVEY VESSEL. ACCURACY +/- 3 METERS. LATITUDE AND
< Q
LONGITUDE ARE EXPRESSED IN DEGREES AND DECIMAL MINUTES.
° U
DESCRIPTION EASTING NORTHING LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
LIGHT # 153 2338985.9 124586.5 34 05.223
77
52.831
BUOY # 154 2338404.3 123333.1 34 05.017
77
52.949
BUOY # 154A. 2337936.2 121388.4 34 04.698
77
53.046
PLATE
NUMBER
7. FOR LOCATION OF DISPOSAL AREA SEE PLATE P -32.
SCALE: 1:2000
200 ISO 0 100 200 300
P-31
SCALE IN FEET
SHEET 31 OF 34
J

6
c"ll Al R. Ulf"s-11,
5
SECTION 5 TANGENT 2
4
3
21
�
51 a�
"4 r•
�i17Viy
TYPICAL BEACH DISPOSAL SECTION
N.T.S.
/50
\ ELEV 6' NGVD -1929
EXISTING BEACH
NgTURgI
S�aaF
LENGTH IYILL BE DETERMINED
DURING CONSTRUCTION AND WILL
VDEPENDANT ON OUANTITY OF
MATERIAL PLACED ON BEACH
- -6•—
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6•— —6 - — — — — ---- - - - - -- —6
1 150'1YIDE 150¢ IDE
CB R1� RUCTION CM RUCTION
TIE INTO EXISTING TIE INTO EXISTING
6'NGYD 29 CONTOUR 6'NGVD 29 CONTOUR
N. T. S.
r:
ol"i�, r
f •
Ah
! h.1� M!
s*
r
EL. 6.688' MLW BFT. E
EL. 5.148' NGVD -1929
N 121585.6
E 2337288.5 Il
DN
TE�
f
r
Fmll
U5 Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilminglce Dladd
9
s
44
Q
N
'00
� w U
z
W z
3,0
OTES:
Z
1. DUE TO AGE OF PHOTOGRAPHY. PIPELINE ROUTE SHOWN IS APPROXIMATE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL
w0
C5
NOTIFY THE TOWN OF CAROLINA BEACH NO LESS THAN 15 DAYS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF PIPELINE
<0z
PLACEMENT. POINT OF CONTACT WITH THE TOWN OF CAROLINA BEACH IS TIM OWENS. TOWN MANAGER.
c6 J
PHONE NO. 910- 458 -2994. PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF PIPE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET ONSITE WITH
THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S REPRESENTATIVE AND A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE NORTH CAROLINA WILD-
LIFE RESOURCES COMMISSION TO DETERMINE THE EXACT PIPELINE ROUTE.
2. VERTICAL DATUM NGVD 1929. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ESTABLISHING VERTICAL
CONTROL USING THE CONTROL POINT SHOWN PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF DREDGED MATERIAL IN THE
DESIGNATED DISPOSAL AREA
3. HORIZONTAL DATUM NAD 1983.
°p<
��?
as z
4. PHOTOGRAPHY DATE: JANUARY 2012. COPYRIGHT 2012 DIGITAL GLOBE.
°w z—
>
¢ z0
UHF
5. AREAS TO BE DREDGED SHOWN THUS -
?a O>
Z'
U)
-
Qt-w0
6. FOR DETAILS OF AREAS TO BE DREDGED, SEE PLATES P -29. P -30 AND P -31.
�,.0
❑�
Z 0
7. THE EXACT BEGINNING POINT FOR DISPOSAL OF DREDGED MATERIAL ON THE BEACH WILL BE ESTABLISHED
Q
N
z° °z
Z0
w J
z �
BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S REPRESENTATIVE IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO START OF DREDGING AND
S '�
< v cr
DISPOSAL OPERATIONS.
-z'wg °z
nza
8. THE NORTH END OF CAROLINA BEACH IS CONSIDERED SUITABLE NESTING HABITAT FOR SEA
`O¢°
2" eo
°a
O U p
TURTLES. SEE PARAGRAPH. ENVIRONMENTAL WINDOWS OF SECTION 01 57 20.00 10 OF THE
°
SPECIFICATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL WINDOWS AND RESTRICTIONS.
a 1-1.
U Uct)
m a
cwn p
2O 9. DREDGING AND BEACH FILL OPERATIONS UNDER SEPARATE GOVERNMENT CONTRACT ARE PLANNED WHICH WILL
°
REQUIRE DREDGING WITHIN CAROLINA BEACH INLET AND PLACEMENT OF DREDGED MATERIAL ON CAROLINA
O
BEACH SOUTH OF THE DISPOSAL AREA LIMITS SHOWN. THE CONTRACTOR PERFORMING WORK UNDER THIS
CONTRACT SHALL COORDINATE HIS OPERATIONS WITH OTHER CONTRACTORS PERFORMING WORK IN THE
AREA AS NEEDED TO AVOID CONFLICTS AND DELAYS.
PLATE
NUMBER
SCALE: 1" = 800'
1600 800 0 800 1600 2,400 C2--
P -32
SCALE IN FEET
SHEET 32 OF 34
I
1

77'53'0"W
AIWW INLET
Typical Section Typical Section
a,
12' PAATCH LINE A 4r
SEE 'AIWW I BFY -CFA „1
mew . +soft SEC ION 4 "YANGENY
MAP
NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE
5
eEd ram s
ASE FEAR RIIIIEfi� .x � p:
■�liG`.i� All p- r
H INLET GRC►?SSJNG" _
154 , fin. rli
IIJ
- .IS
„]
us
+ta.
1 4
14 ,
<
Aet
0 ° r
.r t t• 'a'< I
f, a
V�
155
as
lJn
77'52'30•W '1'52'0"W
i
•
_
6
X 2,31,1 '13 -.
Y 122.734
Lat 34' 4' 54.567" N
S _X
i
Long 77' S1' 57.846" W.
0 Green Daybeacon 14 -1z
ft
•
2,344,433
A Red Daybeacon ® 15-14
1 r.
y,Y4 r -1a v6r aE eode a_ mra+ a,
"
c-
122,485
34'4'51985'N
�.
+
E ws
ua s r, ° an dY a • ^"
n a ao
•0a
Long 77° 51'45.406' W
e.
. ' `'dam
u ns' r:a., a o •_
-rme x5, a= ,m
<, aam :ra 1. >•a+,7, •: '.•,.
a, - +
a.9 -�
2�
at 1
+
,.a oz. ae .r•na,rex
nt
<69 .a .y
vn
M
�'
27126Er!
-
7
4° r .tat a]al yl
+
•
2362175
DA 27Z j m 1."
• �. ` +T
-
X 2343.349
Y 122.588
on
ar
7. ELEVATIONS ARE IN PE£T AND 'FEN7N8 AND REFER 70 NOM'S REPORTED
Lai 34° 4' 53.128" N
_
4
_
a;
Long 77'5V58-277"W
1 _
y
s
DISTRICT SURVEY SUTLER', USING RTK GPS
2. PROJECT AL
7T S 18 T w
c L11N
In
POSITIONING NING
HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EQUIPMENYAND 2DD KHL SOUNDING EQUIPMENT
0 KHZ O
/.
OLI a r��
124M
Y 122.339
Lai 34'4'50.546' N
3. HORIZONTAL DATUM NAD 1583. VERTICAL DATUM M L L.W..
rF► ■l
201"797-08
Long 77'51'45-&37
4, TIDE GAGE LOCATED AT. INLET WATCH MARINA
+!
lust
fS4A
f
72377Ei
171 7
LEGEND
Cen
,57
Aids to Navigation — M'atchlines
233E549
022123
7r 5Z 11770 W
Can Placement Areas
!S7
741402.50•$1.54
2907237
Q Navigation Channel
Tr 5Y 11 56Fw
Cr <r, Dav6wemn
P9q
Nun
2535d2T
°16197
17,57,6ww -.
Depth In Feet
z
i
Green Lighted Buoy 4 and Shallower
LU
d
zz
Red Lighted Buoy 6 - 4
7 -6
Junction Marker
W
J
t
8-7
Green Light 10-8
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington District
NORTH CAROLINA
R €HE.D
i crsv
ppII yy.
= CMO
7f€AGA1
IN EL
cnttD4l-
��ALHIN4Ef
v
6 $
1 : 3,600
Typr
N lMr
Red Light ®12 - 14
S _X
-�
CAC•]L1Ni4
0 Green Daybeacon 14 -1z
01
•
_
A Red Daybeacon ® 15-14
7r 5145.Sr<•W
7i 51 6r.lii W
c-
pT
© Danger Sign 15 and Deeper
z
IM11
Tr 51 %R W
Mileboard
0t
'°
2�
r Tide Gage
1rr 5t•58.�0i5'N'
[1n
M
24140747.06
27126Er!
73.
7
rlal
a
•
2362175
NOTES
Tr-5z b o7.91
on
E r
7. ELEVATIONS ARE IN PE£T AND 'FEN7N8 AND REFER 70 NOM'S REPORTED
2341727
_
4
_ +'
MEAN LOWER LOW WATER (MLLW) RELATIVE TO THE 1983.2001 TIOAL EPOCH.
OE
1 _
_
DISTRICT SURVEY SUTLER', USING RTK GPS
2. PROJECT AL
7T S 18 T w
c L11N
In
POSITIONING NING
HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EQUIPMENYAND 2DD KHL SOUNDING EQUIPMENT
0 KHZ O
,7326965
124M
77'5T49 K2 ' W
3. HORIZONTAL DATUM NAD 1583. VERTICAL DATUM M L L.W..
1'54
201"797-08
Jill AIDS TO NAVIGATION
4, TIDE GAGE LOCATED AT. INLET WATCH MARINA
= 55 a v IM'
lust
fS4A
USE OF TIDE VALUE 8 FOR THIS GAGE ARE RESTRICTED TO QUALITY ASSURANCE PURPOSES
FOR VERIFICATION OF RTK TIDES THE WILMINGTON OISTRICT WILL ONLY USE STAFF
72377Ei
6 $
1 : 3,600
Typr
N lMr
6Nrr+y 4eb
S _X
7YF Y
WlLX
do
Imn
01
20140147-07
YPILA { -07-08
2314397
Z1Ni9<
122m0
17YAJ
7r 5145.Sr<•W
7i 51 6r.lii W
c-
pT
MC07 -0746
2048253
IM11
Tr 51 %R W
wi
0t
.= 019Y98
2�
12242
1rr 5t•58.�0i5'N'
[1n
M
24140747.06
27126Er!
122510
7r W 618?' W
rlal
a
79797
2362175
+28011
Tr-5z b o7.91
on
IN
201447 .07.0E
2341727
17ae7r
7r3 1736rw
N[I
OE
2014 -07.08
341621
12385b
7T S 18 T w
c L11N
In
401407 .07.06
,7326965
124M
77'5T49 K2 ' W
tin
1'54
201"797-08
2230.466
123647
= 55 a v IM'
Nfl
fS4A
701407-0]•06
72377Ei
171 7
77.53'3,93 -
Cen
,57
2014-0297 -176
233E549
022123
7r 5Z 11770 W
Gwn [K�ybwcan
!S7
741402.50•$1.54
2907237
nT77i
Tr 5Y 11 56Fw
Cr <r, Dav6wemn
P9q
160402$0121 -31
2535d2T
°16197
17,57,6ww -.
GAGE TIDAL VALUES FOR FINAL MAPPING AND QUANTITY CALCULATIONS IF RTK GPS IS UN
AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF SURVEY,
5. THIS PROJECT WAS DESIGNED BY THE WILMINGTON DISTRICT OF THE U.S. ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS, THE INITIALS AND SIGNATURES AND REGISTRATION
DESIGNATIONS OF INDIVIDUALS APPEAR ON THESE PROJECT DOCUMENTS WITHIN
THE SCOPE OF THEIR EMPLOYMENT AS REQUIRED BY ER1I10.1.a 152.
9 THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS SURVEY MAP REPRESENTS THE RESULTS OF SURVEYS
MADE ON THE DATES INDICATED AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED AS INDICATING THE GENERAL
CONDITIONS EXISTINGAT THAT TIME THESE CONDITIONS ARE SUBJECT TO RAPID CHANGE
DUE TO SHOALING EVENTS, A PRUDENT MARINER SHOULD NOT RELY EXCLUSIVELY ON THE
INFORMATION PROVIDED HERE REQUIRED BY 33 CFR 200325
7, NAVIGATION AIDS LOCATED WITH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL, ACCURACY 0. 3 METERS
0 :SO 304 7S4 =,444
B FOR THE MOST UP TO PATE INFORMATION PLEASE CHECK OUR WE @SliE AT
FOM WIYWW! -SAW. USACE.ARMY.MIL
77
0
�'
}
m
w
LU
r
a
Cn
d
}
flry
�
aw
D
IJj
(7
in
IJJ
of
4
9
v
0
Nl
Lii
J
0.
a
z
m
0
t�
9
J
a
E^
V
N
C+
t7
�
N
J
3
e+
7
47
}:
LU
w
®
<
DO
LU
>-
Lu
o
{ j
m
ILL
II,
}
w
r18
m
¢
U
0
LU
z
Q
LU
d
zz
W
J
lu Z Z Z
V 1 N V
(4 • A
W /) =
V V0 S
w� z
W W z
LLZ W Z
W N = �
v COg o
0 a
r�y J
v 3
r+S� A� 4
1
p6
U

C
Is]
B
A
5
N1
4
4
3
2
E
1
= DI
M 0l
MI-11
uM.Mnr INSURER OIMTIMOr
COMPS W IMI IRS
MIUM101011. MOMTM CMOUMA
TANGENT 1 SECTION IV
CMIOLINM KMCN INLET CAOSSIM6
APPfMINATE SCALE 1' 4M•
■--•�
Wul til
r.I...rM
AMM�w/ M
I.M.
rw
1
FIGURE 6

Attachment 3.4 - Lockwoods
Folly Inlet
ATTACHMENT KEY:
1. USACE Wilmington District; Lockwoods Folly Inlet Dredging Authorization;
September 30, 1985
2. USACE Wilmington District; Lockwoods Folly Inlet Crossing Location &
Disposal Area; August 1, 2013
3. USACE Wilmington District; Plan -View of Dredging and Bathymetry at
Lockwoods Folly Inlet Crossing, Tangent 11; February 11, 2014
4. USACE Wilmington District; Hydrographic Survey of Lockwoods Folly Inlet
& AIWW Crossing, with Dredging Locations; July 18, 2014
S. Town of Holden Beach; Plan -View of Dredging and Beach Placement Areas
from LWFIX Piggyback Project; Permit #14 -02 Modification; 2013
6. Town of Holden Beach; Typical Beach Disposal Section, LWFIX Piggyback
Project; Permit #14 -02 Modification; 2013
7. Town of Holden Beach; Plan -View of Beach Placement Area, Central Reach
Project; Permit #22 -09; January 5, 2012
8. USACE Wilmington District; Plan -View of Lockwoods Folly Inlet Crossing
Widener, December 1997
More than Engineering Solutions
GBRIEN G GERE

LOCKWOODS FULLY RIVER, NORTH CAROLINA
Condition of Improvement, September 30, 1985
Acts Work authorized Documents
Sept. 19, 1880 5' x 100' channel from ocean to AR, 1887, p. 1099
bridge at Supply
June 3, 1980 *B' x 150' channel through Lockwoods Detailed Project
Sec. 107 Folly Inlet Report,
July 14, 1960 Jan. 31, 1979
* *PROJECT: A channel, 100 feet wide, 6 feet deep, from AIWW to the bridge at
Supply, to be secured by dredging through oyster rocks and mudflats, and a
channel 12 feet deep and 150 feet wide from the AIWW through the ocean bar to
deep water in the Atlantic Ocean.
* *PROGRESS.: Complete, except for deepening the ocean bar channel 12 feet.
VARIATION OF WATER SURFACE: Tidal. Mean range is about 4.5 feet near the
inlet and 2 feet at Supply.
COST OF CONSTRUCTION: $161,047 Federal.
23,505 Contributed.
MA
*See descriptions listed under continuing Authority -Small Navigation
Projects, page 55p.
* *On December 20, 1983, OCE approved termination of any further construction
activity for the Lockwoods Folly Inlet, N.C., project be suspended until
suitable equipment becomes available and that the project be maintained at an
8 -feat depth in the interim.
43

7RPS OF ENGINEERS
UPSTREAM LIMIT OF
sn 'FEDERAL PROJECT
I$UPPLY 12.5Md r'
rt
C7
Q
r
"C
1n
U.S. ARM'
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
8 Mi.
,TMi.
6Mi.-- C-..§ s5Mi
MERCERS GUT
4Mi
i+
OI%ONS L00• �` p
4s tl
1�
1�
GENOES
PT mad
J
q.LW.M'_.�..1
�d + k HOWELLS PT rrr
ML `
Ad .w iYrif Cash
"
r C..1...�
BEACH
Ru NaNxes LdNG REACH
QMi�
N
V
A T L A N T J C 4�� O C E A N
0
LOCKWOODS FOLLY RIVER,
ML W
------------ NORTH CAROLINA
e'
SCALE 4F MILES
TYPICAL SECTION
CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON,N.C.
� _ µAP REVISED SEPT 1983

3
7
2 TOP OF BERM •6.0' NAVD E.
` SLOP --- E - - -- - -_-
NATURgL SLOPE SLOPE INTERCEPT
INTERCEPT - -r7
EXISTING GROUND) -_ --- --- - - - - --
TYPICAL BEACH DISPOSAL SECTION
N.T.S.
0
GENERAL NOTES
1. DUE TO THE AGE OF PHOTOGRAPHY. PIPELINE ROUTE SHOWN IS APPROXIMATE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL
NOTIFY THE TOWN OF HOLDEN BEACH NO LESS THAN 15 DAYS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF PIPELINE
PLACEMENT. POINT OF CONTACT WITH THE TOWN OF HOLDEN BEACH IS DAVID HEWETT. TOWN MANAGER.
PHONE NO. 910- 842 -6488. PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF PIPE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET ONSITE WITH
THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S REPRESENTATIVE AND A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE NORTH CAROLINA
WILDLIFE RESOURCES COMMISSION TO DETERMINE THE EXACT PIPELINE ROUTE. THE AGREED UPON PIPELINE
LANDING SPOT ON HOLDEN BEACH SHALL BE SURVEYED OR OTHERWISE LOCATED AND PROVIDED TO THE
CONTRACTING OFFICER OR HIS /HER DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE.
2. VERTICAL DATUM NAVD 1988. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ESTABISHING VERTICAL
CONTROL USING THE CONTROL POINT SHOWN PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF DREDGED MATERIAL IN THE
DESIGNATED DISPOSAL AREA.
3. HORIZONTAL DATUM NAD 1983.
A. PHOTOGRAPHY DATE: APRIL 2013. COPYRIGHT 2013 DIGITAL GLOBE.
5. AREAS TO BE DREDGED SHOWN THUS -
6. FOR DETAILS OF THE AREA TO BE DREDGED. SEE PLATE C -3.
7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BEGIN DISPOSAL OF DREDGED MATERIAL ON THE BEACH AT THE EAST END OF
THE DESIGNATED DISPOSAL AREA OR AS DIRECTED BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER OR HIS /HER
DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE. DUE TO ONGOING CHANGES TO THE SHORELINE CAUSED BY OCEAN
I
WAVES. THE EXACT BEGINNNG POINT FOR DISPOSAL OF DREDGED MATERIAL WILL BE ESTABLISHED BY
CO
THE NTRACTING OFFICERS REPRESENTATIVE IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO START OF DREDGING AND
DISPOSAL OPERATIONS. PLACEMENT OF THE 75 FOOT WIDE BERM SHALL CONTINUE DOWN THE BEACH
AS FAR AS THE QUANTITY OF DREDGED MATERIAL WILL ALLOW.
8. ALL CONTRACTOR OPERATIONS SHALL BE PERFORMED IN A MANNER THAT AVOIDS DAMAGE TO EXISTING
SANDBAGS. STRUCTURES AND ROADS. SANDBAGS. STRUCTURES AND ROADS DAMAGED BY CONTRACTOR'S
OPERATIONS SHALL BE REPAIRED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER OR HIS /HER
DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE AT NO COST TO THE GOVERNMENT OR TO THE OWNERS OF DAMAGED
PROPERTY. IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF DAMAGE. WHEELED OR TRACKED EARTH MOVING
EQUIPMENT SHALL NOT WORK CLOSER THAN 10 FEET FROM STRUCTURES DURING ALL WORK.
INCLUDNG DISTRIBUTION AND MOVEMENT OF BEACH FILL MATERIAL. EXISTING SANDBAGS BELOW
ELEVATION 6 FEET THAT LIE WITHIN THE BEACH FILL LIMITS SHALL NOT BE COVERED WITH
FILL. IN AREAS WHERE IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO TIE INTO THE 6-F0OT CONTOUR. THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT THE BACKSLOPE TO THE NATURAL ANGLE OF REPOSE.
9. THE EAST END OF HOLDEN BEACH IS CONSIDERED SUITABLE HABITAT FOR SHORE BIRDS. SEE PARAGRAPH
ENVIRONMENTAL WINDOWS OF SECTION 01 57 20.00 10 OF THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL WINDOWS
AND RESTRICTIONS.
` I
P°
.OAK ISLAND -
LENGTH WILL BE DETERMINED
DURING CONSTRUCTION AND WILL
BE DEPENDANT ON QUANTITY OF
MATERIAL PLACED ON BEACH
500'
500'
�______________ _____________ I_____________________
75'WIDE 75'WiDE
CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION
BERM BERM
TIE INTO EXISTING TIE INTO EXISTING
6'NAVD 88 CONTOUR 6'NAVD 88 CONTOUR
OR EXISTING GROUND OR EXISTING GROUND
ELEVATION ELEVATION
N.T.S.
400 200 0 400 800
SCALE IN FEET
ay UU5 Army Carps
� f Engineers
k; ..1 Wilminglon Dittdd
_ o
v
~ z
U
Nw¢
W U
Z
W Z �
Z W ¢O
Z
W Z
wO
�QC5
QOZ
c6 S
zz z
O,
Ua
J
zW - H
o�0' JO
a z Za
�o:10
I ¢ U J
z�3 LL
z -m o0
t rz OOU
z� YO
m� O
PLATE
NUMBER
C -4
SHEET 5 OF 7
�:,�'n,ai"1 .
�
�
_T+ISS f�:�r;
�t�,,.J•�r;�. S ;..�
- *A� �.
�
„�
L
_',
NGENT
i t
- - ---
__
____
______________
°
-�'
-- ---
-- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - -
-- -"
V
/
�� n TANGENT
-- -- -
12 _ - - - -- -------------- -
____
- ---
Tr -
LLJ
.
iiiT
•'
K.J.. . �>! i
-t '' T✓' •r
' : ::..
_
f� �tk�2
3
7
2 TOP OF BERM •6.0' NAVD E.
` SLOP --- E - - -- - -_-
NATURgL SLOPE SLOPE INTERCEPT
INTERCEPT - -r7
EXISTING GROUND) -_ --- --- - - - - --
TYPICAL BEACH DISPOSAL SECTION
N.T.S.
0
GENERAL NOTES
1. DUE TO THE AGE OF PHOTOGRAPHY. PIPELINE ROUTE SHOWN IS APPROXIMATE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL
NOTIFY THE TOWN OF HOLDEN BEACH NO LESS THAN 15 DAYS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF PIPELINE
PLACEMENT. POINT OF CONTACT WITH THE TOWN OF HOLDEN BEACH IS DAVID HEWETT. TOWN MANAGER.
PHONE NO. 910- 842 -6488. PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF PIPE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET ONSITE WITH
THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S REPRESENTATIVE AND A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE NORTH CAROLINA
WILDLIFE RESOURCES COMMISSION TO DETERMINE THE EXACT PIPELINE ROUTE. THE AGREED UPON PIPELINE
LANDING SPOT ON HOLDEN BEACH SHALL BE SURVEYED OR OTHERWISE LOCATED AND PROVIDED TO THE
CONTRACTING OFFICER OR HIS /HER DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE.
2. VERTICAL DATUM NAVD 1988. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ESTABISHING VERTICAL
CONTROL USING THE CONTROL POINT SHOWN PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF DREDGED MATERIAL IN THE
DESIGNATED DISPOSAL AREA.
3. HORIZONTAL DATUM NAD 1983.
A. PHOTOGRAPHY DATE: APRIL 2013. COPYRIGHT 2013 DIGITAL GLOBE.
5. AREAS TO BE DREDGED SHOWN THUS -
6. FOR DETAILS OF THE AREA TO BE DREDGED. SEE PLATE C -3.
7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BEGIN DISPOSAL OF DREDGED MATERIAL ON THE BEACH AT THE EAST END OF
THE DESIGNATED DISPOSAL AREA OR AS DIRECTED BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER OR HIS /HER
DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE. DUE TO ONGOING CHANGES TO THE SHORELINE CAUSED BY OCEAN
I
WAVES. THE EXACT BEGINNNG POINT FOR DISPOSAL OF DREDGED MATERIAL WILL BE ESTABLISHED BY
CO
THE NTRACTING OFFICERS REPRESENTATIVE IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO START OF DREDGING AND
DISPOSAL OPERATIONS. PLACEMENT OF THE 75 FOOT WIDE BERM SHALL CONTINUE DOWN THE BEACH
AS FAR AS THE QUANTITY OF DREDGED MATERIAL WILL ALLOW.
8. ALL CONTRACTOR OPERATIONS SHALL BE PERFORMED IN A MANNER THAT AVOIDS DAMAGE TO EXISTING
SANDBAGS. STRUCTURES AND ROADS. SANDBAGS. STRUCTURES AND ROADS DAMAGED BY CONTRACTOR'S
OPERATIONS SHALL BE REPAIRED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER OR HIS /HER
DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE AT NO COST TO THE GOVERNMENT OR TO THE OWNERS OF DAMAGED
PROPERTY. IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF DAMAGE. WHEELED OR TRACKED EARTH MOVING
EQUIPMENT SHALL NOT WORK CLOSER THAN 10 FEET FROM STRUCTURES DURING ALL WORK.
INCLUDNG DISTRIBUTION AND MOVEMENT OF BEACH FILL MATERIAL. EXISTING SANDBAGS BELOW
ELEVATION 6 FEET THAT LIE WITHIN THE BEACH FILL LIMITS SHALL NOT BE COVERED WITH
FILL. IN AREAS WHERE IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO TIE INTO THE 6-F0OT CONTOUR. THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT THE BACKSLOPE TO THE NATURAL ANGLE OF REPOSE.
9. THE EAST END OF HOLDEN BEACH IS CONSIDERED SUITABLE HABITAT FOR SHORE BIRDS. SEE PARAGRAPH
ENVIRONMENTAL WINDOWS OF SECTION 01 57 20.00 10 OF THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL WINDOWS
AND RESTRICTIONS.
` I
P°
.OAK ISLAND -
LENGTH WILL BE DETERMINED
DURING CONSTRUCTION AND WILL
BE DEPENDANT ON QUANTITY OF
MATERIAL PLACED ON BEACH
500'
500'
�______________ _____________ I_____________________
75'WIDE 75'WiDE
CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION
BERM BERM
TIE INTO EXISTING TIE INTO EXISTING
6'NAVD 88 CONTOUR 6'NAVD 88 CONTOUR
OR EXISTING GROUND OR EXISTING GROUND
ELEVATION ELEVATION
N.T.S.
400 200 0 400 800
SCALE IN FEET
ay UU5 Army Carps
� f Engineers
k; ..1 Wilminglon Dittdd
_ o
v
~ z
U
Nw¢
W U
Z
W Z �
Z W ¢O
Z
W Z
wO
�QC5
QOZ
c6 S
zz z
O,
Ua
J
zW - H
o�0' JO
a z Za
�o:10
I ¢ U J
z�3 LL
z -m o0
t rz OOU
z� YO
m� O
PLATE
NUMBER
C -4
SHEET 5 OF 7

6
5
4
3
2
11
i
2234000
TANGENT 11 6g000�
CENTERLINE OFFSET
BULKHEAD -
N 62.861.9
E 2,230.308.0 "4B"
N 62,824.2 6 CHANNEL PRISM LINE
E 2,230.084.8 b9. 6'9 _5 .6 ,
"46A° 63,227.1
E 2,232.468.4
45«00 "4t1A^ . 40 +00 4y,a. �_] 532,] B4 z _5Sh 3j ° +" q]? aa2.5.B�°
5 +00
] 35 ] 3 2 _2 _ 2 5 �fih ° 0 , P r ?0.9_9 _ 5 A6' 9"4 _ . _3•x_3 _3 � _ _ _2 a]? h
_ _9?6965659_0565, 0° �! W•a'4
4�3,Rz5r - '
_s_` "- r+y9g1'B''s'h
022 p
12•,____ .9.
6 6 ° .4
_ L
h - , ,
4.i 4'4 — �4 tr T e 5 ,. '0. 0
°4bBee 2'tB.° Q+ _ ;d343� � 1_ _,03 g005�9 u,/
.?55h.03 .903,25 3.5 _ ly° ,2546,An 1_,]_,],,]_,3 -85 _
�051991h 29.2 e,T59 }` �
a v5s` s3,,3 ?+3- 6�aa_.4- kr§ -2�-� ?34,3�H]�3.2s
Z-5"T' a , - _ , 3.a.z�____g _,. 55 �.z5:5 4 X265° , h B ioto B„o 'A'., ' 6
92_ -� } 6
, -1., 0 _ _ _ ] g4 ? 505.4 -6 � s
_ 4.4 n?440 _ _ _ _ _ � /x�r�•. Y_
eh'
z•_2 _, °. , _, _ _9 as .2 4 °� ^ ` °' , , ° .zO1A.4 °� °A A _, _, ,.62.4, 9 a a5 9,1 >R _, _, _,2.�x �_, 23i ° >4oi�- �,za3'4_,51_,6. >,5.�3.4 _,3 >>3 �,3 ^,o >,,. � 3 ,5 0, 9x. >2; 3 23
1 a
CENTERLINE ° ° ,. , ° ° ° _ 4 _ �, -� -1�' 4,x,5 >43 ;:� °h _B _,'"6 _5 _3 _ _2x_ h _4
... ° sA e 31, .° 65. 2 ., , 2.,
CHANNEL PRISM LINE h? s?
N 62.735.4 q.2 z'n
?x 9
E 2.230.099.8
N 63.138.3
N 62.852.4 6 5 ,3 ayx_9.,_a _4 ?0 _ x _2 5�5 B' E 2.232.483.4
N 62,723.9 a; , a •'s;;' sr, 9
E 2.230.331.3 E 2.231.091.6 o- ;e1,y96 X41,;3. 909894 05929
N 63. 122. 1
,x15;5 �s�e
HOLDEN BEACH N 62.808.4 E z,z32.3a7.7
,9 :
E 2,231.131.7 N 62,867.1
E 2,231.354.7 IN 63.006.8
E 2,232.305.4 SHEEP ISLAND
M. L. W.
-f-
--------------
- - - -- - - - --
CHANNEL PRISM
LINE (TYPI
Z
2' ALLOWABLE
US Army Carps
N
of Engineers
... .. _ /
Wilmington Dittrid
i
2234000
TANGENT 11 6g000�
CENTERLINE OFFSET
BULKHEAD -
N 62.861.9
E 2,230.308.0 "4B"
N 62,824.2 6 CHANNEL PRISM LINE
E 2,230.084.8 b9. 6'9 _5 .6 ,
"46A° 63,227.1
E 2,232.468.4
45«00 "4t1A^ . 40 +00 4y,a. �_] 532,] B4 z _5Sh 3j ° +" q]? aa2.5.B�°
5 +00
] 35 ] 3 2 _2 _ 2 5 �fih ° 0 , P r ?0.9_9 _ 5 A6' 9"4 _ . _3•x_3 _3 � _ _ _2 a]? h
_ _9?6965659_0565, 0° �! W•a'4
4�3,Rz5r - '
_s_` "- r+y9g1'B''s'h
022 p
12•,____ .9.
6 6 ° .4
_ L
h - , ,
4.i 4'4 — �4 tr T e 5 ,. '0. 0
°4bBee 2'tB.° Q+ _ ;d343� � 1_ _,03 g005�9 u,/
.?55h.03 .903,25 3.5 _ ly° ,2546,An 1_,]_,],,]_,3 -85 _
�051991h 29.2 e,T59 }` �
a v5s` s3,,3 ?+3- 6�aa_.4- kr§ -2�-� ?34,3�H]�3.2s
Z-5"T' a , - _ , 3.a.z�____g _,. 55 �.z5:5 4 X265° , h B ioto B„o 'A'., ' 6
92_ -� } 6
, -1., 0 _ _ _ ] g4 ? 505.4 -6 � s
_ 4.4 n?440 _ _ _ _ _ � /x�r�•. Y_
eh'
z•_2 _, °. , _, _ _9 as .2 4 °� ^ ` °' , , ° .zO1A.4 °� °A A _, _, ,.62.4, 9 a a5 9,1 >R _, _, _,2.�x �_, 23i ° >4oi�- �,za3'4_,51_,6. >,5.�3.4 _,3 >>3 �,3 ^,o >,,. � 3 ,5 0, 9x. >2; 3 23
1 a
CENTERLINE ° ° ,. , ° ° ° _ 4 _ �, -� -1�' 4,x,5 >43 ;:� °h _B _,'"6 _5 _3 _ _2x_ h _4
... ° sA e 31, .° 65. 2 ., , 2.,
CHANNEL PRISM LINE h? s?
N 62.735.4 q.2 z'n
?x 9
E 2.230.099.8
N 63.138.3
N 62.852.4 6 5 ,3 ayx_9.,_a _4 ?0 _ x _2 5�5 B' E 2.232.483.4
N 62,723.9 a; , a •'s;;' sr, 9
E 2.230.331.3 E 2.231.091.6 o- ;e1,y96 X41,;3. 909894 05929
N 63. 122. 1
,x15;5 �s�e
HOLDEN BEACH N 62.808.4 E z,z32.3a7.7
,9 :
E 2,231.131.7 N 62,867.1
E 2,231.354.7 IN 63.006.8
E 2,232.305.4 SHEEP ISLAND
M. L. W.
-f-
--------------
- - - -- - - - --
CHANNEL PRISM
LINE (TYPI
Z
2' ALLOWABLE
N
�
W
OVERDEPTH
REQUIRED
DEPTH
(TYP)
a f
S U
z¢UN
1
VARIES
TYPICAL
DREDGING SECTION
F
Lu
NOT TO SCALE
NOTES
1. SOUNDINGS ARE EXPRESSED IN FEET AND TENTHS AND REFER TO LOCAL M.L.W.
2. PROJECT SURVEYED 5 FEB 2014 WITH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL "J. BUTLER ".
USING RTK GPS HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EQUIPMENT AND 200 KHZ SOUNDING EOUIPMENT.
3. TIDE GAGE LOCATED AT: BCN rs48A. 6 NAILS, M.L.W.. BALDHEAD DATUM.
4. HORIZONTAL DATUM NAD 1983. VERTICAL DATUM BALDHEAD.
5. THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS MAP REPRESENTS THE RESULT OF SURVEYS
MADE ON THE DATE INDICATED AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED AS INDICATING THE
GENERAL CONDITIONS EXISTING AT THAT TIME.
6. NAVIGATION AIDS LOCATED BY SURVEY VESSEL. ACCURACY +/- 3 METERS.
DESCRIPTION EASTING NORTHING
BUOY B12 2231561 62685
LIGHT 44 2233941 63533
DM 46 2233069 63378
BUOY 46A 2232091 63340
BUOY 47 2231984 63025
BUOY 47A 2231578 63246
BUOY 47B 2231085 63024
BUOY 48 2231321 63257
BUOY 48A 2229791 62844
7. THE LOCATION OF DISPOSAL AREA IS THE EAST END OF HOLDEN BEACH.
APPROXIMATE SHORELINE
LOCATION (TYP.)
-+- 2233000
61000
I
I
Qa 3
s
LU
Z >
Ir
8 U w
Z
W Z z
Z w ¢O
Z
L
w 27 W
ya0 CC
<0z
Z W
m CE
0
LU
LU
?
Z
LEGEND
r
�
W
�9TFq
O
S U
z¢UN
OZ
U
-+- 2233000
61000
I
I
Qa 3
s
LU
Z >
Ir
8 U w
Z
W Z z
Z w ¢O
Z
L
w 27 W
ya0 CC
<0z
Z W
m CE
0
LU
LU
� I
?
Z
LEGEND
o uj
�
W
>oQ°
Q
O
S U
z¢UN
OZ
U
AREA TO BE DREDGED
wa�zz
�32ok<
F
Lu
Zz
-10.5
SOUNDING
00
NAVIGATION AIDS
¢zzm,
z 'd> ¢
OW a
a�° �°
�UUpZ
H
In
ABANDONED NAVIGATION AID
SINKER AND CHAIN
o C, o
�Q3pu
O
U
�Yw
0
U >
00¢
O
J
PLATE
NUMBER
200
SCALE: 1:2000
100 0 100 200 300
BID _1
SCALE IN FEET
� I

z
p
78`15'0 "W 78a14'30'W 78"147W
Alww INLET _
Typical 41W1N -CAPE FEAR RIVER LITTLE RIVER y� r
l Section Typical Section +(�/ /��) ■/��//��F ■{�, */� - 2
ff 2{
1Q AEe�RE9�1�EPrH_ 1� 46
so III. ISO It - - -•4541
NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE
lvl
o
ao. '1^ S I r 0 HI
.
M• } r.. L
s a.ml
x.
...-_' s•ir�a 7 "' " tl34 a ., t y�'A . � t '�;c ail .� III��•� ., �
'41
3 p � a aF^ - - •.
115 9F ,oL ,1E V dA. 207 '0! 11 ty,;A ;• -
IV
:
s
°1
,. •, v YI .. ,xi
,+ f
�.. �.a� LI a ' IFS 1, �" � ■
X 2.230,793 •.. ae FO L5 an ' ° .A.,
Y 60,402
_ - •-- Lai 33' 54'49476- N
- Long 78' 14'21.933" W * aq
T�x 2,z3os272.z3osz7
Y 60,416
1. •' ',: `' �., 1 ., , br 1 r Long 78° 1420 345" W �' �•
NO
,
a
a .a;
• r _ al -
y ` ♦� `�'�"d L V ��/ �.'A't �Y/FViI� ���I���!. �.IS a;� irk � __ _
ti
e
`k ''C-'S
+1
Y`st''?sXr��.4113:�'�±:�4?>.�
AIDS TO NAVIGATION
.. I 1 r r —'
-,
2014-07 ,
.211407.15 t6
22307]4
5laatl
78 ,W 28 7u' W
10 3tl 17.161' N
I 2239411
30!07
i0 iw;xL 10'w
S3'9tl 20319 N
aT
mN47.1 },b
313G780
E8967
7e la2e783'w
3a 3tl 68TH
Nn
211467.1510
2290564
$9314
'fi M��SW
3��n 7T�iiB•H
C.
05
70447.15-"
22MM
5MM
70- IN27OWW
33'SP4tis!
14e
0 THE INFORMATION D"ICTEO ON THIS SURVEY MAP REPRESENTS THE REaLrLTS OF SURVEYS
2014417.1510
223GB37
OW}3
�a'ti T13RW
!] W45' T IN
Q.
67
201407.19.10
273!034
SION
7e',#IQeIrW
335{5493s'N
Nn
12
20 •1 16
M-1 6F
viii
Ti ;iFi 9sC yr
3l w W. Ju 'A
Rw I.pM
K
201407 -MIS
223 19
saw
76'!543uww
33 WIS'S70'N
1
46
2014-07-15,15
1233913
b3WC
70, 17314575
IS6./f7N
I
40A
201147.15.15
225MM
S3724
70'lFO3 Iffl
WSB75.40e'N
Ow
i7
20Ho -1 },8
?T120A
6'136,
70',kbs75'W
73'SY 13.B1]'N
47A
201407.151e
Td30S01
52533
ie' 1F 10327 W
33' SS 1:7.H3b• R
NJII
40
20taA7 -t }t8
?239022
87026
78'71 lb.sa7'w
33'SS'1a,StT'N
RiidLVN
! 45A
211447.1516
2YJ8'141
6Y044
I 70' 14 ...- W
S]' SS 12.905' N
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Mmington District
NORTH CAROLINA
�.r
IV
' Southport
_ Southpgrt
Zu; -':,:: LOCKWOODSFOLLY
iNLE78CROSSING e
LEGENDS
J
I , BE,hDIG [] • LISA 4101L .'.
TAARIE
tiPlen�'
CAPEFEAR CIVIL WAR ter= c
e � -` �_ IRON SHIPWRECK DISTRICT,
\ }.''•�.,• -a AGE } ° as
X 2,239002 as
s
Y 513.8$0
Lat 33.54'33.769 "N . �.", - - ELIZABETH
Lang 76° 14'31A611" W
X 2230,136 "ate
\i @1tH t 7 ai Y 58,821
4
ti,5yl� ti, l 1.y�yLYyt1�4 1tµ Lat 33 54 33.100 IN - -
L" 1 \9� „", 4. tl C¢'L,SY'ir k,LytL L .lie i[ iy4•,1 1 a ° a tl A -0 Lnrq 76' 14' 29 873 -
1,
�4NOTES y
r1t��•:'.�'rih� y45-a� `k�:� �.: 0o-1o..ne � eA .aw �`1h. v;� �`+, -�_. `. I Ele nnorwnR€ IN FEET aNO rExrNa,wa REFER Tano..a'a R €ISaarEa
1'. %iU !yiVs�il�'� \•. ye�n'}11 l atr .�,�.4 t�`�f��•v,4 r, .1,. MEAN 4o'ARR LOW 1WIERIYIIINI RE4ATM1!E rO THE 14S3,TUal Tidk EPGCN
1.h '� `1.tt .L •.l,Y. ,h.F T .,4 ,1T. •,ztie~ •.1 :..):'
RRIJECF SURVEYED YATR pISi3OCT SURVEI' VESSELIS] -J. SURER•. VSI1l+d R1K OPS
�. L�., A.[ lq�l t. :4'���,sy,�}}y1), -, qq�£ �aL _ _ ,..1; -q 1t 4.,�'._:�.• HCRIZONTµ fO9ngNINGEWIPhaWfhWdeaKM '60SlNWNQEQUIP4ENt.
i.
`.r {k 1, t`: �'} tl�y .lF i ! 4 u�,y� '�'r_•y, w.: l '���.' \��L '��F i?ap.�� — __— _ —__��— — —__ ]. NORILONTIi MTllN 1Y.D 196J. YERFIULL dRTW N.L L.W_
. 1 • 1 r r. 1 „'� � 9'r `>,�;;.. �'�OQ • TOECAAEtOCATEDAT IIGWTF9A
USE OF TILE VALVES FOR THIS OAOE ARE RESMOICO TO OVALITY ASSVRAf4CE PURPOSES
9
Aids to Navigation A(- Wrer*s
509
Can MaTchlnes
FOR VERIFICATION OF RTK TR]ES FRS WLMINDr0hI DISTMT %%L ONLY VU STAFF
�P5 dredge box 2014-07-118
Nun Plaeernent Areas
�',tT
NSVig:ahon Channel
'e Green Lighted Buoy Depth In Feet
I and Shallower
AVA ues AT 111E TiAE OF SURVEY
Red Ihied Buoy c
-
+
Rh ncwn Marker 5
a
-T
Green Light 10-8
12 -t0
Red Light to • 12
CORPSOFENGIN €ERS TH€INIFLALS AI�S,fllAFt1RESANOREGFSTRAi1ON
DESIGNATIONS OF INDIVIDUALS APPEAR ON THESE PROJECT DOCUMENTS W1THW
Green Daybexbn 15-14
-,�� :,ems -i
- 15 and beeper
THE SCOPE OF THEIR ENROYIAENT AS REWIRED By ER1110 ,14$52
A Red Dayteawn
WRECKS
Q Danger Sign
0 THE INFORMATION D"ICTEO ON THIS SURVEY MAP REPRESENTS THE REaLrLTS OF SURVEYS
kideboard
OPF�
.l" T,de Gage
ti,5yl� ti, l 1.y�yLYyt1�4 1tµ Lat 33 54 33.100 IN - -
L" 1 \9� „", 4. tl C¢'L,SY'ir k,LytL L .lie i[ iy4•,1 1 a ° a tl A -0 Lnrq 76' 14' 29 873 -
1,
�4NOTES y
r1t��•:'.�'rih� y45-a� `k�:� �.: 0o-1o..ne � eA .aw �`1h. v;� �`+, -�_. `. I Ele nnorwnR€ IN FEET aNO rExrNa,wa REFER Tano..a'a R €ISaarEa
1'. %iU !yiVs�il�'� \•. ye�n'}11 l atr .�,�.4 t�`�f��•v,4 r, .1,. MEAN 4o'ARR LOW 1WIERIYIIINI RE4ATM1!E rO THE 14S3,TUal Tidk EPGCN
1.h '� `1.tt .L •.l,Y. ,h.F T .,4 ,1T. •,ztie~ •.1 :..):'
RRIJECF SURVEYED YATR pISi3OCT SURVEI' VESSELIS] -J. SURER•. VSI1l+d R1K OPS
�. L�., A.[ lq�l t. :4'���,sy,�}}y1), -, qq�£ �aL _ _ ,..1; -q 1t 4.,�'._:�.• HCRIZONTµ fO9ngNINGEWIPhaWfhWdeaKM '60SlNWNQEQUIP4ENt.
i.
`.r {k 1, t`: �'} tl�y .lF i ! 4 u�,y� '�'r_•y, w.: l '���.' \��L '��F i?ap.�� — __— _ —__��— — —__ ]. NORILONTIi MTllN 1Y.D 196J. YERFIULL dRTW N.L L.W_
. 1 • 1 r r. 1 „'� � 9'r `>,�;;.. �'�OQ • TOECAAEtOCATEDAT IIGWTF9A
USE OF TILE VALVES FOR THIS OAOE ARE RESMOICO TO OVALITY ASSVRAf4CE PURPOSES
9
74
509
759 1.0013 -
FOR VERIFICATION OF RTK TR]ES FRS WLMINDr0hI DISTMT %%L ONLY VU STAFF
j
�',tT
GAGE TIDAL VALUES FOR F#NL MAFNNG,WL OIMNTITY CILGIxATIONS IF RTK GPII IS WM•
U
FF ®! ;:.
4k ••
AVA ues AT 111E TiAE OF SURVEY
-' '--r
-
O
s. THIS PVI"" DE SIGNED by THE yn MINVON DISTRICT OF THE V S, ARMY
a
CORPSOFENGIN €ERS TH€INIFLALS AI�S,fllAFt1RESANOREGFSTRAi1ON
DESIGNATIONS OF INDIVIDUALS APPEAR ON THESE PROJECT DOCUMENTS W1THW
._,.�
._ __ —.__• ._„�
-,�� :,ems -i
..
....>_._��;'� ,_ri -:�— '.,,
THE SCOPE OF THEIR ENROYIAENT AS REWIRED By ER1110 ,14$52
�
C7
WRECKS
0 THE INFORMATION D"ICTEO ON THIS SURVEY MAP REPRESENTS THE REaLrLTS OF SURVEYS
NamF
OPF�
cOFFT
OJT -SV `
MIADEMONS DATES INpOANTTIME CAN ONLY OE CpNSIDEREOISJ HTGT AFMID CARGEAAL
ATTWLTTIIAE THESE FLD
LOO
- 2231010
9%39
TC tC 41.1i2'N '1s
3T
[WToIOIDALINSTING
NO RELYE CLUSMILCIEA110E.
DENTMARIMER SHOULD NOT RELY EKCLLL31'Y'ELY ON THE
SnQA
AGE
- '2231010
111,40
T2, sr
70'10 R226T"W 133'On 30710'H -,'�,�
W1ETO
PAGEVENTHERE Ft
NFORMAT(pN PWOV'mEO HERE RECWRE0 BY ]1 CFRiM 325
:+?H
2231179
,5901!
_W
TO'T45.631rw 433.01']3.911• N
J. NAVIGAiIOH AIDS LOCATED MN DISTRICT suftEY VESSEL 3 WETERS
H
a
Li' 11L2T W 3Y 6:406Sa• N
•'Ra'a;FiT
2P1r420
:9011
TO'1 T.902"W "SF'a29L6•N
A FOR THE MOST LR TD GATE IHPIRMATIOW FIEASE CHECK OIIR WYESSITE AT
" --
r
4 -.
VN••N SAW USAGE ARMT MIL
W
_3
a
In
Lu
78 °14'0 "W
0
U
78113131
z
m
�
[1]
L7
Lu
w
D
DO
L7
a
a
a
x
i
lu
t7
A
W
D'
�I
I
rIt
o
ui
z
w
U
O
a
4
4
cv
�
C7
O
J
N
:3
n
m
0
m
H
a
Of
a
Q
r
d
W
_3
a
In
Lu
0
U
tl3
uJ
w
C1w�s 0 O V
Q ?
s Y
I
war ILL
„
L,L 59 IL Z V L7
2
a
Fy W
E¢ a
COr3
T O J
aCD� O N
O
a
2 Q
O
J

fir^
r . , USACE Project ,
Dredging Footprint
W m m m 0 0 m W cJn vs AIWW
m
�.
O to- I�
O m O v O O O
O r N M M
M
M M
om C, ° m O 0
m m O O O LO
O O O LO N V O O O 0 °O O + O ti ti I N O O O + + +
O � 00 M O r O + NO � U + CO) p O O � + O O 1Y O LA O O
LO ° vol Bch + O ° + O
Town Proposed
O O O O + + o 00
0 + ++ O o O O Dredging Footpri nt
nt o
O ° � M�N1 ,_M O O,
IrCentraplReach o USACE Project
ermitted Town Proposed Fill Template
Project Fill Template (approximate) (Red)
mlate (approximate) (Blue)
Yellow) _
,000 1,500 0 3,000
Figure l:
Proposed LWFIX piggyback project (blue) in relationship to the Central Reach project footprint (yellow).
USACE and Town LWFIX Fill Templates to vary based on available sediment available at the time of construction
I PLIED TECHNDLDGY &MANAGEMENT
r

Modification Requests: The Town would like to modify the existing permit to include the
LWFIX borrow area. A sediment criteria compatibility analysis is appended as Attachment
A.
Based on previous USACE LWFIX projects, it is anticipated that the beach fill template for
the Towns' piggyback project will be within the existing permit template boundary (i.e., west
of Station 40 +00). Fill template and volumes will also be within the existing permit
templates. The USACE LWFIX projects typically place -20 to 30 cy /ft while the Central
Reach project will place -60 cy /ft. Figure 2 below presents a typical beach fill profile
template that the USACE and Town LWFIX projects will use.
751
`. iVAT 'JR
SLOPE �'
`1 SL opt
INTERCEPT
EMISTING GROUNDI'y - - - - - - - -__
TYPICAL BEACH DISPOSAL SECTION
N.T.S.
Figure 2: typical beach fill section (USA CE LWFIX design).
INTERCEPT
Figure 3 at the end of this section compares the 2010 LWFIX borrow area with the USACE
planned 2014 borrow area. Figure 4 presents the LWFIX borrow area to be included in the
permit modification.
The Town would like to request a modification to the following permit conditions:
2) Al I excavation activities shall take place entlrely within the arm indic -Ou I urn atimhod Sheet No. 17
of 2.0 (Project Borrow !w)-
Comment 1: To include LWFIX borrow area. The Town still needs the Central Reach project to be
included in the permit. The upland borrow areas have previously been permitted under 14 -02. While
no nourishments are planned using the upland borrow areas, these borrow areas may be needed in
the future.
4) Exeivation shall he accomplished by a hopper dredge- Use of any other medW of excavation shall
rNuirc modification of this permit_
Comment 2: A cutterhead dredge should also be included.

STA 40 +0 —' = M
Q
w
~uzi
J
O Z
<
¢
0
O —
o
CD
r
STA 80+0__' N D
ZZ
STA 90+0- - r-
Qg
YJ
U
O
U J
C0
V)
00
STA 140 +0 ---
i�
J LL-
STA 150 +0 1n
STA 160 +0 --- o
~uzi
STA 40 +0 —' = M
N
STA 50+0---
STA 60+0---
~uzi
STA 70+0---
r
STA 80+0__' N D
ZZ
STA 90+0- - r-
Lv
U
O
STA 100+0--- N
U
STA 110 +0 ---
Nr
Z
Z
STA 120+0---
a
STA 130 +0 �- E0
STA 140 +0 ---
i�
STA 150 +0 1n
STA 160 +0 --- o
~uzi
STA 170+0---
STA 180+0---
U)
STA 190 +0 ----�—
N
STA 200+0___—
STA 210+0--- N
STA 220+0—
STA 230 +0 --' ~E a
STA 240+0'
t-
o
o
o
STA 250 +0 ---' (n
STA 260 +0
°
Q)
4)
LL-
Z
Ld U
C
N
�Z� ° Q
O m
o vi
A IM SM
PROPOSED BEACH FILL SITE PLAN APPLICANT INFORMATION
JOB NUMBER: 08 -1687
TOWN OF HOLDEN BEACH
360 Concord Street, Suite 300 Holden Beach Nourishment ISSUE DATE: 01 -05 -2012 110 ROTHSCHILD STREET
Charleston, SC 29401 HOLDEN BEACH, NC 28462
843.414.1040 Brunswick County, North Carolina SHEET NUMBER: 2
Certificate of Authorization #00359

�I
FBI
C
B
A
5
5
4 3 2
Lfog— 4=
Aaf MAW
{
a _
a
— — ----------- - - - - -- - - - - -- a
—ATL ANTIC INTRAODASTAI 1NATEMAY
WEEP. 1SLAND
—
i
yt
r t-
1
u& &AMY f"odam oiwmp
C01Ut W ffw . gmt
NIUMMIU N, MOWN CAMUMA
so-AP-•M
TANGENT 11
(LOCKYOMS FOLLY INLET CROSSING)
MOIOXfIMTi SCALE l• 9!'
t....wv
EI��rW
It.b..ybr
Irpwwr bp
GWr
/4w
Ors
cod"
r0 df
4
3
2
1
t
FIGURE 7

Attachment 3.5 - Shallotte
River Inlet
ATTACHMENT KEY:
1. USACE Wilmington District; Shallotte River Dredging Authorization;
June 30, 1973
2. USACE Wilmington District; Shallotte Inlet Crossing Location & Disposal
Area; August 1, 2013
3. USACE Wilmington District; Plan -View of Dredging and Bathymetry at
Shallotte Inlet Crossing, Tangents 19 and 20; March 24, 2014
4. USACE Wilmington District; Plan -View of Dredging and Bathymetry at
Shallotte River Crossing, Tangent 17; August 1, 2011
S. USACE Wilmington District; Shallotte River Crossing Location & Disposal
Area 300; August 1, 2011
6. USACE Wilmington District; Hydrographic Survey of Shallotte Inlet, with
Coastal Storm Damage Reduction (CSDR) Borrow Area; August 28, 2013
7. Town of Ocean Isle Beach; Beneficial Placement Area for East End
Nourishment Plan; Permit #91 -05; December 29, 2004
8. USACE Wilmington District; Plan -View of CSDR Project at Ocean Isle
Beach; 1997
9. USACE Wilmington District; Plan -View of Shallotte River Inlet Crossing
Widener, December 1997
More than Engineering Solutions
GBRIEN G GERE

SHALLOTTE RIVER, NORTH CAROLINA
Condition of Improvement, June 30, 1973
Acts Work authorized Documents
Mar. 4, 1413 4' x 36' channel to Whites Landing HD 721/62/2
Jan. 21, 1927 Extension of channel to Shallotte HD 273/69/1
PROJECT: A channel, 4 feet deep, 36 feet wide, from the mouth to the town
of Shallotte.
PROGRESS: Complete.
VARIATION OF WATER Tidal. Mean range is about 5 feet at the mouth
to 3 feet at the town of Shallotte.
COST OF CONSTRUCTION: $18,181.
44

AlW.W'
SHA LX -OTT
bt CH
aCENpy 454
)E
R!!lEAM LIMIT T
5ERL PROJECT
J J M
d
7Mi.---
tt�
b
r
6
1
� I
TA R
LANDING
b
R R U N S W I C K C O L I N T Y !�
aMI. I t`
I
11
I
II
1�
r1
I'
'I 7VT
gy/A LL PTTF
'I G00NES NECK
rl
rl
,r
IMI. PT 11
1 �r
41s
p
2 �
m 9
m
A r L A N T( C
U. 3- AM M T
-- -
--- - -
44
z
A
`
-7 f
NC
r
r -9
�pN
TYPICAL SECTION
0�
PROJECT
P1tP
LOCALITY MAP
o ao
x.-nic w nines
N
11
I
II
1�
r1
I'
'I 7VT
gy/A LL PTTF
'I G00NES NECK
rl
rl
,r
IMI. PT 11
1 �r
41s
p
2 �
m 9
m
A r L A N T( C
HOLDS' !EACH
p C E A N
®i
SHALLOTTE RIVER,
NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE OF FEET
,"O 0 2000 4000 FCOC
CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON, N C.
MAP REVISED SEP1979
M L W
--- - -
- - --
------------
A
I�
s
r -9
TYPICAL SECTION
HOLDS' !EACH
p C E A N
®i
SHALLOTTE RIVER,
NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE OF FEET
,"O 0 2000 4000 FCOC
CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON, N C.
MAP REVISED SEP1979

0 19
M,-
n=
©m
r ❑ �. v � r u n
NOTES US
o
II I
f Engineers e0 Corps
M L. W.
P
IminI;.. istrW
PRISM 2'ALLOWABLE 1 SOUNDINGS ARE EXPRESSED IN FEET AND TENTHS AND REFER TO LOCAL M.L.W.
0 EROEPTH
ma
2.PROJECT SURVEYED 18 MARCH 2014 WITH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL "J. BUTLER ". <R +
ftEOUIREO• DEPTH USING RTK GPS HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EQUIPMENT AND 200 KHZ SOUNDING EQUIPMENT.
VARI ES 3. TIDE GAGE LOCATED AT: DM #78
CAL DREDGING SECTION 4. HORIZONTAL DATUM NAD 1983. VERTICAL DATUM BALDHEAD.mP s
Pb'
NOT TO SCALE 5. THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS MAP REPRESENTS THE RESULT OF SURVEYS tim00 •�� ;. M m' °, % `r; r m
EE LEGEND FOR REQUIRED DEPTH MADE ON THE DATE INDICATED AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED AS INDICATING THE
GENERAL CONDITIONS EXISTING AT THAT TIME.
6. NAVIGATION AIDS LOCATED BY SURVEY VESSEL. ACCURACY +/- 3 METERS. '�P� %„o-,r
N 58,110.4 jog'
DESCRIPTION EASTING NORTHING E 2, 187, 105.6 _ „a
RED DAY BEACON u 80 2187962 59021 ° rmr "l�'
NUN 4t 80A 2186849 57818 m oP �, 7 r
P'
CAN rr 81 2186249 57202
NUN # 82 2185577 57176
GR LIGHT BOUY u 83 2185327 56848 m X
RED LIGHT # 84 2183568 56709
7.A LAYER OF ROCK AND DEBRIS, UNSUITABLE FOR BEACH DISPOSAL. MAY BE ENCOUNTERED IN THE N 58,007.2
�yN M ° /0m
WIDENER AT THE INTERSECTION OF TANGENTS 19 AND 20. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT DREDGE °or "" °� % "pr E 2,187,200.0
ROCK OR DEBRIS. THE LOCATION AND DEPTH OF ROCK SHALL BE RECORDED ON THE DAILY REPORT. MP m e' "� "r °
2184000 _ 9
semem g. DISPOSAL AREA IS OCEAN ISLE BEACH. mm rrm rm My
Al "80A"
N 57.896. 5
mm e - rmq otm'rpm E 2,187,301.4
N 57,162.9 m-
E 2,186,070.7
' L?;, 200' WIDENER
G ro m Mr e ,xN m p m mr m p h N 57,613.8 S a
BRICK C ® 82„ mr grN mPprp r mm R7 .0.' Nrm gmr r E 2, 186.770.4 - $
CHANNEL PRISM LINE N 57,503. 1 LL
E 2,186,871.8 m a
C�AFK CE83 r1_ '�m" �- rx;» - pm, " "' r50' WIDENER N 57,512.5 N 57,401.9
20 e -a; ;,,� "81 E 2,186,659.8 E 2,186,761.2
'i��_�_�is�:%�
'00
'."I'�= 7 WQ Cn I
CEg3 `aTc-`^ T w
® ® FRY m° n xr ' r ti -- w z
01'3 FE am (3 _ cu
m Sm � �ys� 2 °' m o mr00 Aj w O
W.84. 83' W . -
" 'wo oz
�o� W�
N 57,100.1 a c
ILL cr
CENTERL
2 INE Zm.mm
25,40.83
1
15 +mm
+2185000
56000
1m +mm
L N E 2,186.209.4
57,079.9
E 2,186,113.4
� mz
O
LEGEND
zz
"o
UU Z
IF cO
�
BLOWABLEEOVERDEPTH
�wwz O
z < U
PLUS 2�A
Q
z
UQp
JCA
AREA TO BE DREDGED TO -9'
a � o � Z cf)
H
zzw WZ
�c❑�¢
�W
z Oz
-.� SOUNDING
J�
<.a a_
* NAVIGATION AIDS
ww �
NU
PLATE
SCALE: 1:2000
NUMBER
200 100 0 100 200 300
BD -1
SCALE IN FEET
� I

\/219600 0
Q
X219600 0
/
El BM SCSP -6 CE78
TIDAL #4 CGS 1953 A N 59587.7
E 2191441.4 •LONG
5 ♦ BM 1161 CGS 1963
N 59979.8
E 2190610.8 /
BM M161 CGS 1963 A ® RM #15 USE 1934 CHANNEL PRISM LINE
'71' Ttr -�
tee__..- ..- ..- .. -..- __.._ _.. -.._. -..- ...- .._.. -. _-_-.._..-_.- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- _�.. -.. -_-
TANGENT 17 - STA. 35 +21.5 7.42 e+ r' "` ^' 1 ,2'. • >
TANGENT 18 - STA. 0
a
z 90 * TANGENT
/'��_� "71 A"
0z 75
TIDE GAUGE / ,� /77E7" A HB #7 A /
35+ 1.6 cENTERL1NE OFFSET
,a XC j• + ^ % % =i 2' ®G1 #1 30+00 25 +00 20+00 18 +40 115 +00 10 +00 6+00 5+00 o+oo
/ .,. ,• ^,, ^� ^•`.,. ^,any 35+00 /�•,.
N 59799.0 N 59406.9
E 2190525.4 E 2191356.0 TANGENT n - sra. o +oo /
TANGENT 17
"MB -330" /`° k /
Al
�.
'F✓ :,, a, / t U.S. RM LINE T17 -1 1171 T17 -1
/.iNO { ^�'^
TANGENT 18
3 / -12/ a
s' k
LEGEND
.1133
1
AREA TO BE DREDGED
SOUNDINGS
NAVIGATION AIDS
200 100 0 200 40OFT
SCALE: 1 "= 200'
16 /
/
0
US Army Corps
of Engineers
fflmingl n DiWia
Ed N
(7 U
U
z
J
y 2 Q
O w U
Z
Z W O
Z
W p Z
mp
� cr
� J
� 3
c3� z
HO
�zz ¢
2?i?tNil -4z
Z � �z
�
_ W
zHzOW (t
�>a W
- oc7z r~
U LL1 O
J
s U U Q
cn
6U _
OJ¢
PLATE
NUMBER
P -8
SHEET 8 OF 9
21 090/
/
®
k
"i
/
NOTES
1-SOUNDINGS ARE EXPRESSED IN FEET AND TENTHS AND
REFER TO LOCAL
M.L.W.
t;g+
2.PROJECT SURVEYED 24 JUNE 2011 WITH DISTRICT SURVEY
VESSEL "J.
BUTLER". USING
D.G.P.S. HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EQUIPMENT AND 200
KHZ SOUNDING
EQUIPMENT.
k
3.TIDE GAGE LOCATED AT: LIGHT # 78.
4.HORIZONTAL DATUM NAD 1983.
5.THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS MAP REPRESENTS
THE RESULT OF
SURVEYS
MADE ON THE DATE INDICATED AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED
AS INDICATING
THE
GENERAL CONDITIONS EXISTING AT THAT TIME.
6-NAVIGATION AIDS LOCATED BY SURVEY VESSEL. ACCURACY
+/- 3 METERS.
M. L. W.
LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE IS EXPRESSED IN DEGREES,
DECIMAL MINUTES.
_
DESCRIPTION EASTING NORTHING
LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
2ALLOWABLE
T."-ERDEP-TH
7
LIGHT # 71A 2193525 58498
33 54.54078
78 21.73673
DM # 73 2192498 58886
33 54.60581
78 21.93942
REQUIRED DEPTH
DM # 75 2191240 59428
33 54.69648
78 22.18733
BUOY 9 76 2191259 59707
33 54.74250
78 22.18327
VARIES
LIGHT # 77 2190038 59889
33 54.77077
78 22.42447
_�
LIGHT st 78 2189390 60109
33 54.81067
78 22.55231
MB # 330 2188940 59923
33 54.78053
78 22.64142
L DREDGING
SECTION
7.FOR LOCATION OF DISPOSAL AREA SEE PLATE P -9.
LEGEND
.1133
1
AREA TO BE DREDGED
SOUNDINGS
NAVIGATION AIDS
200 100 0 200 40OFT
SCALE: 1 "= 200'
16 /
/
0
US Army Corps
of Engineers
fflmingl n DiWia
Ed N
(7 U
U
z
J
y 2 Q
O w U
Z
Z W O
Z
W p Z
mp
� cr
� J
� 3
c3� z
HO
�zz ¢
2?i?tNil -4z
Z � �z
�
_ W
zHzOW (t
�>a W
- oc7z r~
U LL1 O
J
s U U Q
cn
6U _
OJ¢
PLATE
NUMBER
P -8
SHEET 8 OF 9

TYPICAL SECTION
A1WW
3 '
VARIES SC 2176615
RI
� ,rte.' ..
rI Y 57655 '
NO7 TO SCALE - LAT 78° 23' 3 -$72" w
UC.. -,4 LONG. 33° 64'24130" N
_ 1 1► X21 ®7978 -r
. % 2166962 LAT 78°23'0 774" W
R Y 5711, LONG. 33" 64" 20.432" N .
LAT 78° 23' 33468" w
LONG. 33° 64'18,574' N
X 2197905 -
Y 58974
- - -i--- LAT 78, 23' 1.869"
LONG. 33° 54' 16.789• N
a`'• - -
% 2195786
Y 56760
LAT 78° 23'4-280' IN
LONG. 33°
54'1 SL675" N
X 2189957
Y 55593
LAT 78' 23'2.263" W
LONG. 33' 54' 14.019" N
_ OCEAN ISLE ,
X 2198994 .,
.... Y 78° 23' 1. 23' 1,
'
LAT 833 "w /
LONG. 33° 54' 12473" N
° % 2187294
Y 56196
LAT 78° 22' 5B.298" W *+
LONG. 33" 54' 19.071" N
M
-- IMVI :... b
J
7'
'Awl 0 ` K
!� a � �
` #iL�aINT�C *�-
1 ,
z SAW
'A♦� y��f ;� -
1 :3,000
0 500 1,090 +:
_ Feet
i
NOTES-
1. SOUNDI NGS ARE EXPRESSED I N FEET AND TERMS AND REFER TO LOCAL M.L.W..
2. PROJECT SURVEYED WITH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL 'BATEAU T. USING RIIC GPS
HORIZONTAL POSITIONING EQUIPMENT AND 200 KHZ SOUNDING EQUIPMENT.
3. HORIZONTAL DATUM NAB 1983. VERTICAL DATUM BALDHEAD. " p
4. TILE GAGE LOCATED AT: BCN 078
5 THIS PROJECT WAS DESIGNED BY THE VOLMINGTON DISTRICT OF THE U.S. ARMY X 21 ®7301
CORPS OF ENGINEERS. THE INITIALS AND SIGNATURES AND REGISTRATION
DESIGNATIONS OF I NDIVIOUALS APPEAR ON THESE PROJECT DOCUMENTS WITHIN Y 52939
THE SCOPE OF THEIR EMPLOYMENTAS REQUIRED BY ER 1110 - 1-0152. LAT 79° 22' 58.446" W
LONG. 33° 53' 37.849" N
6 THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS SURVEY MAP REPRESENTS THE RESULTS OF SURVEYS
MADE ON THE DATES INDICATED AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIBERED AS INDICATING THE GENERAL
CONDITIONS EXISTING ATTHAT TIME. THESE CONDITIONS ARE SUBJECT TO RAPID CHANGE
DUE TO SHOALING EVENTS. APRUDE NT MARINER SHOULD NOT RELY EXCLUSIVELY ON THE
INFORMATION PROVIDED HERE. REGUIREB BY 33 CFR 209.325
? NAVIGATION AIDS LOCATED WITH DISTRICT SURVEY VESSEL. ACCURACY -1- 3 METERS % 2186797
Y 53056
0 FOR THE MOST UP TO DATE INFORMATION PLEASE CHECK OUR WEBSITE AT.. LAT 78° 22' 40.698° W
^NWSAW USACE AR MY MIL LONG. 33°
Y, 53' 38.916" N L.11t.,�LL
�►.
LEGEND
AIDS TO NAVIGATION
NAVIGATION
AIDS
DEPTH IN FEET
Tap♦
Nunlwe
M
X
BPF,Y
ebl$JK
Dmky
+
X 2187049
C-
UT
343 •
2an"
545x3
wZrN4,3`W
33'bT310GTN
10. 8
LIDJ
Y 5-1869
U
aw
02
I3a11M22
zraetan_
54018
7C2241A W
�33534a84rN
Green Light
- 15 - -14
\
LAT 7a° 23' 1,081 ' W
❑
dil
63
241 }p622
2 88031
5518+
7x•27 O SPS W
b1 51 D D15' N
®
Green Daybeacon
LONG, 33° 54'26.635"N
ar,
D5
20130&22
21888i1 --
S4au
7a•224240i5V
''23 53,51 888•N
o
170
�
l8e1
a6_
2x13015-23
2859r-
.
2T Z"3&+6s.'W335351351'N
�C Army Corps
Qo
07
24150
21881]4
_f170+
55474
7a -- ,ITNTW
.W 5126TS`N
Nun
00
20131M
I21at"Ki
55 S
M7V- 4a11=w-
..asse257'N_
as
Engineers
Of �Clf�lneers
W
On
W
_-
2(1330&32
21885HU
55075
i8" 2213 t20' Y/
' 31 53 58 406' N
1•�
Iwi
14
2413 22
z18a123
561u
ra•z2 �aasD•w
31.5+11 rerN
U,
Wilmington District
J
r NORTH CAROLINA
Q.
CL
. v.
C]
ci
9
+/Ont:,EAOGir
m
a
7
C4
X 2187649
N
ra
Q
�
N
w�M1miG*[Y1
[�
Y 56897
�y+
G6
M
LAT 78.22'54,031"W
@
N
N
�
LONG. 33.54' 18:978" N
s
&unnxxk Co++nry
j
X 2198299
Y 56265
LAT 78° 22'46,366;w
w
LONG. 33° 54' 10 -686"
l � _
WWI
• -
L 4' -
�A< HOLDEN BEACHF:;el
B
z uj
LEGEND
NAVIGATION
AIDS
DEPTH IN FEET
can
`1.0
x
6.4
+
Hun
=
Green Lighted Buoy
-B - -7
W
■
i
Red Lighted Buoy
10. 8
_
Q,y
U
- 12 - -10
ALL
1inclionMarker
- 14 - -t2
"
0
Green Light
- 15 - -14
y
❑
N
-- 100 -. -15
r
Red Light
00
®
Green Daybeacon
A
Red Daybeacon
Q
Danger Sign
o
170
Mileboard
.14
Tide Gage
.
Navigation Channel
z uj
f 6 it
ilia
� J
x
W
=
WO
J
W
S7 u. �
_
Q,y
U
J
ALL
715
�I
0
v
y
❑
N
G
u
00
C1
o
N
I
M
�
W
❑
UU
m
U,
w
J
u
Q.
CL
C]
9
U
m
a
7
C4
N
ra
Q
�
N
�y+
G6
M
@
N
�
s
N
L!J
N
>7
N
L
Q
�
Cry
7
uD
0
0
H
W
©
W
F-
Q
n
o
lii
ULI
a
LU
n
U
a
UJ
N
z uj
f 6 it
ilia
� J
0
W
=
WO
J
W
S7 u. �
_
Q,y
z0
00
J
ALL
715
I17k
0
v
y
❑
U7 J
_
G
u
O

�1
ti
A
f
f�
1 is
r..k -
e. I
%
:V
cl
I f 1 i
1
a
� '
13 JAN �Lm
20
Z CrGE 3
w O O iL
J �
1\ 0 1 co m j �i Z
0
0
U
N
m
c
_
J fk1i r
•'\ W
L ��»
�1
ti
A
f
f�
1 is
r..k -
e. I
%
:V
cl
I f 1 i
1
a
� '
13 JAN �Lm
20
Z CrGE 3
w O O iL
J �
1\ 0 1 co m j �i Z
0
0
14
~ I
1 I
I I
1
a
t�
I.
i
`, s-4
1
t
I
Charlotte
pt
- Shalotte Blvd.'
\f
I
y
J
\
•'\ W
L ��»
Y
II
1\
\
\
Ir
5
t
It
1
I
14
~ I
1 I
I I
1
a
t�
I.
i
`, s-4
1
t
I
Charlotte
pt
- Shalotte Blvd.'
\f
I
1
\
\
l
Y
II
1\
\
\
Ir
5
t
It
1
I
f
L
'01
CO
W
r
d
eo
V
u
i
I
+00 E
N
r.
— 10 +00 E
m v
u C v
O
O O
N cq
0 +00
m
S
O w
O
LO J Q
U
U
O U
2
a
Q
00
LO
10 +00
}C
1 .20 +00
30 +00
_I 0
1 m
�
W W ;11 w z ui
:Y U
;1 Q
11 D w a
.r cfl
I o
N
DCM L
CO
A
U
A
w
Q
H
w
Ni
I.b
a
0
O
N
U
N
rn
N
L
U
CB
O m
c
co
40
o
F
H
c
co
a
01 CC N
Wm L
Z m
O
ccv Z
U C
a p w
cu
w

0
M
?v
h'S
fl
/ C1 • C � r-�-i
� U
ij t6�
co
£ 65
5 r6L
t
()al
l _ �
I� 0 0?
I
VtM
�1 a
v
� m
. r
6 l I:i
To"
9L
.a> U
O
ON
Ln
z
O
a
L,
z w
N t
+ SZ
�r�a� jNLET
w
U
)Z
�W
�F-
ZJ
J
C�LL
O
N
D
C9
Z
o,
►-
Z
N
0
zw
a
w
a
00
<
�w
Q
o
�m
W
00
LL
o
i t
N Q
t F-
� Z
w
0
O
v
W
Jto
i Y
�N
0
3
,h-y
S
zz
a
.,:c ::D
a
0
wC
8
om
U
N
O
a
0
z
O
r

C
C
8
A
5
TWOW'
k /V Ltd
4
4
3 2
oai
_ ✓ I, f
f -
a -6-
i
�a
3
t
FBI
C
B
ULARY7 ROOMER p@rwCT
cws or oksmaR•
— NOWUN. rORTM CAROUNA
o"." `" A
�—•a TANGENTS 19 AND 20
tSHALLOTTE INLET CROSSING
or..w bp RiHg1 I MiR ]COLE t , 9A•
R.b..r bn Rrr w.r
an a."
4�...s
bp
1
FIGURE 8

Attachment 4 - Adjacent
Property Owner Notification
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

-1-
(Domestic
CO
o
sifeaiAar:No.;......
OIB Holdings, LLC ........
r.
'=m USE
2 Causeway Drive
�N C 1
City Sfafe, Z/P +4
♦ J
�
ru Postage
$
fl.l Postage
ru
ru Certified Fee
10e
2
° Retum Receipt Fee
° (Endorsement Requiretl)
s9
n
Paa)fn�}
ji)
°
01
Postmark
H
�✓ -
Restricted Delivery Fee
° (Endorsement Required)
°
1 D
M
111 Total Postage & Fees
02/1'0/20H
13
:a
ns"
Receipt Fee
(Endorsement Requiretl)
-1-
Sent To
Virginia Williamson
o
sifeaiAar:No.;......
OIB Holdings, LLC ........
r.
or PO Box No.
2 Causeway Drive
�N C 1
City Sfafe, Z/P +4
Ocean Isle Beach, NC 28462
�
Wadesboro,NC 28170
J
S Sent To
Nancy Glover Cooper Et al
rq
° Srreet, Apt N
.......... 708 East H Street
r` or POeoxNO. Erwin, NC 28339
Cib. Sfete, Z/P +4
a rr.
m
Total Postage & Fees
m
'
co
to
U
Donald P. Et Elaine B. Scarborough
p
�N C 1
0
r`
�
Wadesboro,NC 28170
J
fl.l Postage
gtL
-
N
pm
information visit our website
ru Codified Fee
R
our website
° Return Receipt Fee
°
Postmark
H
�✓ -
(Endorsement Required)
ru
°
1 D
$I].177
Restdcted Delivery Fee
r`Q�, Q
]
° (Endorsement Required)
ns"
Receipt Fee
(Endorsement Requiretl)
°
ii7.i1,01201 }:
Return Receipt Fee
Required)
f1J Talal Postage & Fees
$ .�n3
/'
Postmark
Here
S Sent To
Nancy Glover Cooper Et al
rq
° Srreet, Apt N
.......... 708 East H Street
r` or POeoxNO. Erwin, NC 28339
Cib. Sfete, Z/P +4
a rr.
m
Total Postage & Fees
$ • J
t1v11]j: ?01s
) - -
° Return Receipt Fee
Required)
to
sent To
Donald P. Et Elaine B. Scarborough
p
----, --
Street Apt No.
a
r`
orPOeoxNO.
Wadesboro,NC 28170
Coverage Provided)
O
gtL
USE
Total Postage & Fees
rq
pm
information visit our website
at wvnv.usps.com7
visit
our website
.-j-
Postage
2. rm
5513
ru
Postage
$
RJ
ru
Codified Fee
ns"
Receipt Fee
(Endorsement Requiretl)
'111"1" )
fL
°
°O
Return Receipt Fee
Required)
✓
-
0;'i0i2015
Postmark
Here
q
V`7n
Total Postage & Fees
(Endorsement
91020
sent To
Clayton J. Vance, Jr.
Restricted Delivery Fee
r�
°
i f
°
(Endorsement Required)
r`
- - " - -"
`city
h
Raleig ,
°
M
Total Postage & Fees
$ • J
t1v11]j: ?01s
) - -
° Return Receipt Fee
Required)
-t-
sent To
Donald P. Et Elaine B. Scarborough
p
----, --
Street Apt No.
209 East Wade Street
r`
orPOeoxNO.
Wadesboro,NC 28170
Coverage Provided)
CiN. Sfafe, ilP +4
� -�
Ju, August euua
ru Certified Fee
Postal
mark
^
° Return Receipt Fee
Required)
CERTIFIED
MAILT. RECEIPT
(Domestic
Mail Only; No Insurance
(Domestic
Provided)
(Domestic Mail Only;
'
Insurance
Coverage Provided)
°
M
Ln
ciy,-- +4
Total Postage & Fees
rq
pm
information visit our website
at wvnv.usps.com7
visit
our website
�
ru
Postage
Y
$ -D
Certified Fee
�}.�
✓O
RJ
PoO
OReturn
Receipt Fee
(Endorsement Requiretl)
t0
(f
H re
°
°
Restricted Delivery Fee
(Entloraement Required)
-
0;'i0i2015
-�
r
°
11J
Total Postage & Fees
dd.
$
ra
sent To
Clayton J. Vance, Jr.
r�
°
svaetapr.T7o:i " "-.- - --..
" °" i,-
orvO Box No'
3500 Ranlo Drive
NC 27612
- - - ----
r`
- - " - -"
`city
h
Raleig ,
-- ----
" "- sfaia; fP +4-- "
:rr
rr.
ru Certified Fee
1:5. l,`U
mark
^
° Return Receipt Fee
Required)
®r log
O(Endorsement
(Domestic
Mail Only; No Insurance
Coverage
Provided)
(Domestic Mail Only;
'
Insurance
Coverage Provided)
°
M
For delivery
ciy,-- +4
Total Postage & Fees
rq
For delivery
information visit our website
at wvnv.usps.com7
visit
our website
at www.usps.com,n
t
Imp 5-1
ru Certified Fee
1:5. l,`U
mark
^
° Return Receipt Fee
Required)
®r log
O(Endorsement
Q�
RECEIPT
-
Restricted Delivery Fee
(Domestic Mail Only;
° (Endorsement Required)
Insurance
Coverage Provided)
°
M
For delivery
ciy,-- +4
Total Postage & Fees
rq
$ lJ
Sent To Paul M. ET Julie P. Cino
a
° sveai,APEN'd.-------- 2322 Iris Court
ry 01 1!2 O ......... Jamison, PA 18929 .........
City, Slate, Z/P +4
:rr rr.
U.S. Postal ServiceT.
N
Total Postage 8 Fees ,$
ra
CERTIFIED
MAIL,v
RECEIPT
Milton Keener
0
(Domestic Mail Only;
No
Insurance
Coverage Provided)
Lincolnton, NC 28092
For delivery
ciy,-- +4
...........
information
visit
our website
at www.usps.com,n
Imp 5-1
N
Total Postage 8 Fees ,$
ra
:1-
Sent To
Milton Keener
0
3treat, pt No.%
856 Hoffman Road
M1
or PO Sox Na.
'SW9, -ZiP '
Lincolnton, NC 28092
ciy,-- +4
...........

• Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also com l5 6 F 'Y%; % ( _ / Agent `
item 4 if Restricted Delivery Is des' Addressee
• Print your name and address 0 vvse— Date o eliv
so that we can return the car d�ou. ad by ( Prints/d N�ame).
• Attach this card to the back the m�ilpiece, ( /, 6,t fd- SU
or on the front if space per Is. �� D I i y address different from its 7 Yes
1. Article Addressed to: �
If EE nter delivery address below: ❑ No
Virginia Williamson -
OIB Holdings, LLC 3. ice Type
2 Causeway Drive certified Mall ❑ Express Mail
Ocean Isle Beach, NC 28462 ❑ Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise
0 Insured Mall 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) 0 Yes
2. Article, Number I Ilk
BHMI • H,1 n + , , ,,.,
(transfer from service labep --
.:.._ .._ - 102595 -02 -M -1540
I PS Fom L1811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt
OMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY
I
SENDER:
• Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
A. Sig ature p Agent
item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired. X I CRIAddressee
• Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you. B. Reoelved by (Printed Name�)/ C. Date of Delivery
• Attach this card to the back of the mailplece, VvtA)Gff' -, L'—" 1'�U 2 1 v � v r 5
or on the front If space permits. D. Is delivery address different from item 1? 0 Yes
1. Article Addressed to: If YES, enter delivery address below: Iallo
Clayton J. Vance, Jr
3500 Ranlo Drive F4.Rastdoted e Type
Raleigh, NC 27612 Certified Mail ❑Express Mail
istered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise
t ured Mail 0 C.O.D.
Delivery? (Extra Fee) 0 Yes
2. Article Number 7014 1200 0002 2246 5844
(transfer from service labeQ 102595- 02•M•1640
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt
• Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Delivery is desired.
A. Signet 'e
X .
❑ Agent
Addressee
item 4 if Restricted
• Print your name and addresson the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
B. Rec ved by (Printed C. Dale
of Delivery
y'-1T
• Attach this card to the back of the mailplece,
/ �/
or on the front If space permits.
D. Is delive ress different f nem 17
Yes
1. Article Addressed to:
If YES, enter delivery address below:
No
Nancy Glover Cooper Et al
708 East H Street
Erwin, NC 28339 3.��ervlceType
`aceriifled Mall 1 ExPress Mall
❑ Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise
2. Article Number
(transfer from service labeIl
I ps Form 3811, February 2004
0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee)
7014 1200 0002 2246 5837
Domestic Return Receipt
❑ Yes
102595 -02 -M -1540

■ °Complete items 1, 2; and 3. Also complete
item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired.
• Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
• Attach this card to the back of the malipiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Paul M. ET Julie P. Cino
2322 Iris Court
Jamison, PA 18929
Signature
X U 0 Agent
"i ❑ Addressee
. Received by (Printed
VName) C. Date of Delivery .
7'TYICI "' -12,-1-5-
D. Is delivery address different from Rem 1? 0 Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No
3 Ice Type
tO-Certified Mall 0 Express Mall
0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise
0 Insured Mall 0 C.O.D. _
4. Restricted Delivery? (EMra Fee) 0 yes
z. Monster rfroms 7014 '1200 01002 224!6: 5820
(Turns /er Irom service /abe0
i PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595 -02 -M -1540
• Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Item 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired.
• Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
• Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front If space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Donald P. Et Elaine B. Scarborough
209 East Wade Street
Wadesboro, NC 28170
A. Signature /a /� -�'
X r'. I G n A a 1/ Q- ❑ Agent
by(Pr/n�dName) C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery addrdss different from Item 1? 0 Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No
3 wlce Type
�00niged Mall 0 Express Mall
0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise
0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) 0 yeS
2. Article Number 7014 1200 0002 2246 0153
(Transfer from service labeQ
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595 -o2 -M -1540
• Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Item 4 I Restricted Delivery Is desired.
• Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
• Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Milton Keener
856 Hoffman Road
Lincolnton, NC 28092
A.
0 Agent
B. Received by (Printed Name) C. Date of
D. Is delivery address different from Rem l? L3 Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No
`ltjCertified Mall 0 Express Mall
0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise
0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted Dellvery? (Extra Fee) -0y..
2. Article rfrom 7014 1200 0002 2246 0146
( Transfer from service Mail _
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595.02 -M -15401

m (Domestic
C3 �
,-p l 3� CiT I �� L S
�- _,1
ru Postage $ , D
f1J
Cartified Fee 3 ,6.31) 05
ru �J Postmark
E3 (Endorsement Req
E3 Return Recei . 70
pt Fee •] 02uiretl) '� ,e+ Here
M Restricted Delivery Fee
O
(Endorsement Required)
C7 � �i
FU Total Postage& Fees $(/•' e2 112] ; /21)j,.`i
r-1 L
_I- sent 7-0 Town of Carolina Beach
ra --- -A - 1121 N. Lake Park Blvd.
C3 Street Apt No.;
r or PO Box No. Carolina Beach, NC 28428
Ciry, Stare, ZIP +4 ------ - - - - --
PS Form 3800, August 2006 See Reverse for instructions
Ln
. .
O
(Domestic
17
r-:l
E3
VTjT-Vpj r.
1390BraewickDrive .................
$g y,
�
r9
gjjEK.M
ul
I6
n3
Postage
$ ° p
For delivery Information visit our website
•'311
•�
:-115
pp
3�1316
Os
postmark
C3 (Entlorsement Regmred)
p
Return Receipt Fee
Here
Q (Endorsement Required)
112/1(1/201fll
C:3 (Endorsement Required)
°11J..
$11,1111
fu
Postage
$
ru
certified Fee
05�,
R1
3 3tV•310
N
/'R�
ru
1:3
O
p
Return Receipt Fee
(Endo semen Required)
Postmark
Here
I ark
7d�
- C)$2,(li
l/
C3
Restricted Delivery Fee
(Endorsement Required)
y
$11, IJll
O
O 112/1012015
ti Total Postage 8 Fees $ {/
rl
�1- sent re Mcleod Family LLC Et al
a ._._.-_-- - -. - -.- c/o Kathey Renee McCullen -- --
O Srreef, APL No;
or Po Box No. 6513 Wakefalls Dr.
City, sisie,-YXW" Wake Forest, NC 27587
ar rr.
ri
sent To
O
(Domestic
17
Thomas and
E3
VTjT-Vpj r.
1390BraewickDrive .................
$g y,
�
D'
.t td � i ki -Sa �� $
ul
I6
n3
Postage
$ ° p
For delivery Information visit our website
•'311
•�
:-115
E-3 Certified Fee
3�1316
Os
postmark
C3 (Entlorsement Regmred)
p
Return Receipt Fee
Here
Q (Endorsement Required)
112/1(1/201fll
C:3 (Endorsement Required)
Total Postage 8 Fees
$11,1111
Restricted Delivery Fee
t
D (Endorsement Required)
T
Total Postage 8 Fees
112/1Q 12(115
r�y�
$ I1;
•V :7 '
R1
certified Fee
1Tt
sent To
Paula Stout
,a
17
Thomas and
E3
1390BraewickDrive .................
f�
orPOBOx NO.
- - --
-- .- . - - -..
Morganton, WV 26505 _
g
0 Certified Fee
City stele, ZIP +4
]0, August 20c
P• Q-
U.S. Postal Service TM
--W
Ill
17
CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT
Postage
orPOBoxNo. Virginia Beach, VA 23451 ----------'
Er
(Domestic Mall Only; No Insurance Coverage
Ln
Provided)
0 Certified Fee
ra Poste e
g
�
C3Return Receipt Fee
IMM
For delivery Information visit our website
at www.usps.com®
•�
M
C3
Restricted Delivery Fee
+`}
Return Receipt Fee
(Endorsement Required)
C3 (Entlorsement Regmred)
MENEM
O
Restricted Delivery ee
Fo
112/1(1/201fll
C:3 (Endorsement Required)
Total Postage 8 Fees
H3
$ -
ru
Postage
fU
ru
certified Fee
ru
1:3
Return Receipt F09
Postmark
Here
1:3
(Endorsement Required)
C3
Restricted Delivery Fee
WOMEN
nt
(Endorseme Required)
C3
rij
Total Postage & Fees
Sent To Fred B. Graham, Jr.,
E Al
_-r
• Box 3302
_
or •= .
1
I
City, State, ZIP+4
r 3800, August 2006
Postal ServlceTM
See Reverse
for Instructions
TIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT
Provided)
stic Mail Only,, No Insurance Coverage
vrv•w.uaps.",a
very Into visit our well ,
at
P• Q-
L cC a k —a b^.-v
--W
Ill
17
siieei,aPr :NO.; P. O. BOX 1717
Postage
orPOBoxNo. Virginia Beach, VA 23451 ----------'
Er
City, State, ZIP +4
Ln
a 52.03
$ D
0 Certified Fee
ra Poste e
g
�
C3Return Receipt Fee
Postmark
\ Here
M$0.
(Endorsement Requiretl)
•�
M
C3
Restricted Delivery Fee
+`}
Return Receipt Fee
(Endorsement Required)
C3 (Entlorsement Regmred)
k Here
O
Restricted Delivery ee
Fo
112/1(1/201fll
C:3 (Endorsement Required)
Total Postage 8 Fees
H3
$ -
rrl
Sent To Lea Island, Inc.
ri-----
-- -- - - --
17
siieei,aPr :NO.; P. O. BOX 1717
r-
orPOBoxNo. Virginia Beach, VA 23451 ----------'
Er
City, State, ZIP +4
ma
Ln
r
..
CO
Er
ljli CS
Ln
a 52.03
$ D
. °.-
-
ra Poste e
g
�
.�
Certified Fee
S,Ti.
•�
M
�,�CY
<� Postmark
+`}
Return Receipt Fee
(Endorsement Required)
•��`° 70
k Here
O
Restricted Delivery ee
.Il.Iljl
C:3 (Endorsement Required)
H3
$ -
M
.A Total Postage 8 Fees
0211.0,'2j115
fU
rrl SenrTo Hugh and Denise Donahue
,a --- --------- --- ---- - - - - -- 4 Pheasant Lane - .- ... - -. --
o or Bo r. N. Chadds Ford, PA 19317
M1 or PO Box ---
Cly, State, ZIP +4
PS Form 3800, August 2006 see Reverse for instructions

■ Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Item 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to
A.
0 Agent
B )7 / by a x-\ a� I C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No
Town of Carolina Beach
1121 N. Lake Park Blvd. S. eivice Type
Carolina Beach, NC 28428 Certified Mall 0 Express Mail
Registered O Return Receipt for Merchandise
2. Article Number
(Transfer from service labs
Ps Form 3811, February
0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee)
7014 1200 0002 2246 0139
• Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired.
• Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
• Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to
Return Receipt
A. SI nature
X wz
B. Received by (Pdptgcl Name) / C.
0 Yes
102595 -02 -M -1540
D. Is delivery address different from Item 1? -0 Yes
It YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No
Mcleod Family LLC Et al
I
v/o Kathey Renee McCullen
6513 Wakefalls Dr.
3. rvice Type
Wake Forest, NC 27587
certified Mail
O Express Man
p Registered
0 Return Receipt for Merchandise
1
0 Insured Mall
❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) 0 Yes
2. Article Numbe;
7014 1200 0002 2246
0115
(transfer from seMoe labep _
PS Form 3811, February 2004
Domestic Return Receipt
102595.02 -M -1540
• Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired.
• Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
• Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to: -
f at ftl
YY 9t
i Atl1
B. Reoelved by (PdRed Name) C. Date?(
l'vllf -2 Gr C4 a i
D. Is delivery address different from ttem t? Ye
If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No
Lea Island, Inc.
P. O. Box 1717
Virginia Beach, VA 23451
3. S�'Ice Type
16j Ceralned Mall 0 Express Mail
(0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise
0 insured Mail 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) 0 Yes
2. Article Number 7013 2630 0000 6159 8418
(Transfer from service lebep
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595.02•M -15401

• Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Item 4 If Restricted Delivery is desired.
• Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
• Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Hugh and Denise Donahue
4 Pheasant Lane
Chadds Ford, PA 19317
A. Signature
X 13 Agent
0 Addressee
B. Received by (Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from Rem 1? 0 Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No
3. S Ice ype
'3& T
Cerdfied Mall 0 Express Mall
0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise
0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) 0 Y�
2. Article Number
(transfer from senloe labeo 7013 2630 0000 6159. 8395____
I PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595.02 -10-1540
CD
.. -
r9
Service
TM
�I
p;.:r
$
':.
_n
fu
Postage $
ru
MAILTM RECEIPT
Codified Fee
ru
O
Return Receipt Fee
C3
(Endorsement Required)
Provided)
Restdctetl Delivery Fee
C3
(EntlorsemeN Required)
C3
only;
rU
Total Postage & Fees
ra
Postmark
Here
7 SenfTo Robert Hemby, et.al
8008 Fieldstone Drive °"" - "`
M1 orPOeoxNo. Frederick, MD 21702
CiN State, ZIP +4 - - -
:,, .
—0
ru
ru
ru
O
4
C3
O
C3
rD
ra
ra
17
M1
0) i.
U.S.
Postal
Service
TM
. A
Postage
$
CERTIFIED
MAILTM RECEIPT
✓
PQSFdark
Return Receipt Fee
°
~
Provided)
Here d
(Endorsement Required)
(Domestic
Man
only;
No insurance
coverage
Restricted Delivery Fee
CQ
at www.usps.come
For delivery
Information
�}
$
visit our website
—0
ru
ru
ru
O
4
C3
O
C3
rD
ra
ra
17
M1
0) i.
t
rl
ii �i fi "•A C:.—a.
. A
Postage
$
Caddied Fee
✓
PQSFdark
Return Receipt Fee
°
~
Here d
(Endorsement Required)
�'�
E-.
C
Restricted Delivery Fee
CQ
(Endorsement Required)
Total Postage & Fees
�}
$
Sent TO
James C. Gardner
Street, Apf. NO.( --
P. 0. Box 119
0 r FO box Ne. Arnolds Part, 1A 51331

• Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Item 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired.
• Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
• Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
James C. Gardner
P. O. Box 119
Arnolds Park, IA 51331
Agent
0 Addressee
B'.}ACec�d nPlinted Name) C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from item 1? 17 Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No
• Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Item 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired.
• Print your name and address on the reverse
SO that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to
Thomas and Paula Stout
1390 Braewick Drive
Morganton, WV 26505
A. Signature
X 0 Agent
0 Addressee
B. Received by(Pr/nted Name) C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from item 1? 0 Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No
3. S Ice Type
3. Service Type
Certified Mail 0
°ertified Mall 0 Express Mail
`
❑ Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise
0 Insured Mall 0
0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) 0 Yes
2. Article Number
(rranster from service label)
7014 1200 0002 2246 6001
Pa Form 3811, February 2004
Domestic Return Receipt
10259502- M-1540
• Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Item 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired.
• Print your name and address on the reverse
SO that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to
Thomas and Paula Stout
1390 Braewick Drive
Morganton, WV 26505
A. Signature
X 0 Agent
0 Addressee
B. Received by(Pr/nted Name) C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from item 1? 0 Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No
3. S Ice Type
Certified Mail 0
0 Express Mail
Registered 0
0 Return Receipt fa Merchandise
0 Insured Mall 0
0 C
.O.D.
2. Article Number 4. Restricted Delivery? (abs Fee) 0 Yes
? sfer tram service Isbell 7 013 2630 0 0 0 0 6159 8401
OA 13 INSUFFICIENT ADDRESS ❑ 10259ATTEMPTED NOT KNOWN ❑ 5.02- M•1540 OTHER I
0 NO SUCH NUMBER/ STREET
S ❑ NOT DELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSED
- UNABLE TO FORWARD
/ A i p{
NIXIE 000003070 -1N 03/26115
RETURN TO SENDER
UNCIAIMED
UNABLE TO FORWARD
RETURN TO SENDER
111111111.111,11111141 1
RETURN TO SENDER
UNCIAIMED
UNABLE TO FORWARD
RETURN TO SENDER
111111111.111,11111141 1

• Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired.
• Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
• Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front If space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Robert Hemby, et.al
8008 Fieldstone Drive
Frederick, MD 21702
A.
X
R.
19
El Agent
D. Is delivery address different from Item 1? ❑ Ye;
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
S. Service Type
0 Certified Mall O Express Mall
0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) 0 yes
2. Article Number
(transfer from seMos label, 7014 1200 0002 2246 6018
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595 -02 -M -1540

■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front If space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Fred B. Graham, Jr., E AI
P. O Box 3302
Wilmington, NC 28406
A Signa
x � /� �OAgent
11 Addressee
B�iecel b,Pdnted NavA4)1 10. Date of Delivery
Is delivery address different from Item 1? ❑ Ye:
If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No
3 rvice Type
Certified Mall 0 Express Mall
0 Registered 0 Return Recelpt for Merchandise
0 Insured Mall 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) 0 yet;t
Article Number
rrransfer from service labeq 7 014 1200 0002 2 2 4 6 0122
Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595 -02 -M -1540
• Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Item 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired.
• Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
• Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Town of Oak Island
4601 E. Oak Island Drive
Oak Island, NC 28465
0 Agent
S. Received by (Printed N e) C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from Item 1? 0 Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No
0 Geri fled Mall 0 Express Mall
0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise
0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) 0 Yes
z. Article Number 7014 1200 0002 2246 5868
(Transfer from service Meg
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595 -02-M -1540
IL ]Requifed)
N
Ca
N
0 Return Re
O (Endorsement O Restricted DeEndorsement O rL Total Posta
r-i
ICBA
101
J�pslmark
ere A
N
�- Sent To Town of Oak Island
0 orieet, Apf. No.;
- - - -- 4601 E. Oak Island Drive ---- - - - - --
C` or PO Box No.
- -- Oak Island, NC 28465 ------- - - - - --
Clry State, ZIP +4
Servicern,
U.S.
Postal
CERTIFIED
MAIL. RECEIPT
(Domestic
Mall
Only,
No Insurance Coverage Provided)
_
For delivery
Information
visit our website at www.usps.com®
IL ]Requifed)
N
Ca
N
0 Return Re
O (Endorsement O Restricted DeEndorsement O rL Total Posta
r-i
ICBA
101
J�pslmark
ere A
N
�- Sent To Town of Oak Island
0 orieet, Apf. No.;
- - - -- 4601 E. Oak Island Drive ---- - - - - --
C` or PO Box No.
- -- Oak Island, NC 28465 ------- - - - - --
Clry State, ZIP +4

Attachment S - Supporting
Studies
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

Attachment 5.1 - Cultural
Resource Assessment
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

Town of Emerald Isle
Town of Topsail Beach
New Hanover County
Town of Holden Beach
Town of Ocean Isle Beach
May 2015
am GBRICN6GCRC

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................... ..............................1
2.0 Proposed Action Description ................................................................................................................................... ..............................1
3.0 Assessment of Effects .................................................................................................................................................. ..............................1
3.1 Bogue Inlet .................................................................................................................................................................. ..............................1
3.2 New Topsail Inlet ...................................................................................................................................................... ..............................2
3.3 Carolina Beach Inlet ................................................................................................................................................ ..............................3
3.4 Lockwoods Folly Inlet ............................................................................................................................................ ..............................3
3.5 Shallotte River Inlet ................................................................................................................................................. ..............................4
4.0 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................................................... ..............................5
5.0 Literature Cited .............................................................................................................................................................. ..............................6
FIGURES:
1. Bogue Inlet Shipwrecks Map
2. New Topsail Inlet Shipwrecks Map
3. Carolina Beach Inlet Shipwrecks Map
4. Lockwoods Folly Inlet Shipwrecks Map
5. Shallotte River Inlet Shipwrecks Map
APPENDIX
A. Coordination Letters
B. USACE Dredging Design Drawing at Lockwoods Folly Inlet
i Final: May 11, 2015 Am O'BRIEN 6 ISERE

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) requires that federal actions, including federal
permits, be reviewed for compliance with the NHPA requirements for historic preservation. The local
stakeholders for five inlets on the southeast North Carolina coast are submitting a N.C. Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA) Major Permit application to the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NCDENR) Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) for conducting maintenance dredging for
navigation (the Proposed Action). The permit application is a joint application for the state and federal
approvals required to conduct the Proposed Action. Issuance of a General Permit 291 from the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers ( USACE) Wilmington District for the Proposed Action would be considered a federal action, and
thus requires a Section 106 review. This evaluation has been prepared to support the Section 106 review by the
USACE Wilmington District, and includes a description of the proposed action, an assessment of its effects on
cultural resources, and conclusions.
2.0 PROPOSED ACTION DESCRIPTION
The applicants and the five inlet project areas that constitute the Proposed Action are described in the following
table, and are depicted on Figures 1 through 5:
Table 2.1 Project Summary
Project Area
Applicant
Bogue Inlet, Connecting Channel, Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway (AIWW) Crossing
Town of Emerald Isle
New Topsail Inlet, Topsail Creek, Banks Channel, AIWW
Crossing
Town of Topsail Beach
Carolina Beach Inlet, AIWW Crossing
New Hanover County
Lockwoods Folly Inlet, AIWW Crossing
Town of Holden Beach
Shallotte River Inlet Coastal Storm Damage Reduction (CSDR)
Borrow Area, as well as the AIWW Crossing
Town of Ocean Isle Beach
The Proposed Action would mimic the ongoing USACE Wilmington District maintenance dredging program for
each inlet, which includes the AIWW crossings, connecting channels, and the inlet throats out through the
currently authorized USACE inlet linear distances beyond the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions
at Sea (referred to as COLREGS) demarcation line. The authorizations would include currently approved dredge
material management locations including shoreline beneficial placement, nearshore placement and /or upland
confined disposal. The authorized maintenance dredging programs at the five inlets have been conducted by the
USACE since at least 1982, and as early as 1913 in the case of the Shallotte River. The Shallotte River Inlet is a
CSDR Borrow Area, rather than being a federally- authorized navigation channel, and has been dredged at
approximately three -year intervals since 2001. In this permit application, the Town of Ocean Isle Beach is
proposing to maintain a navigable deepwater channel within the Borrow Area.
3.0 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Existing cultural resource evaluations that have been conducted for the inlets have been compiled and reviewed
in this assessment. The results of this review are summarized below, along with project effect
recommendations.
3.1 BOGUE INLET
Two cultural resource surveys and three reports with cultural resource study components were obtained for
Bogue Inlet. The surveys and reports are summarized below in the order of preparation:
1 Final: May 11, 2015 r0i O'BRIEN 6 GORE

• In 1978, a report entitled "Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of Bogue Banks, North Carolina" was prepared
by the USACE Wilmington District. Within the general vicinity of Bogue Inlet, this study identified seven
recorded wrecks occurring between 1846 and 1926. The wrecks included four schooners, one steamer, one
blockade runner, and one unknown vessel type (USACE, 1978).
• In 1980 coordination with the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources, State Historic Preservation
Office (SHPO) regarding channel maintenance resulted in a determination that no impacts would occur to
cultural resources provided the work stayed within the previously maintained channels (Appendix A; SHPO
January 24, 1980 letter).
• In 1983 a "Detailed Project Report on Improvement of Navigation and EIS, Bogue Inlet, NU was prepared
which summarized and restated the findings of the 1978 report (USACE, 1983).
• A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was prepared in 2003 for the proposed dredging of a new
channel. The FEIS detailed a submerged remote sensing survey conducted of Bogue Inlet by Tidewater
Atlantic Research, Washington, NC. The survey discovered 3 magnetic anomalies, only one of which exhibited
signature characteristics consistent with submerged cultural resources; the other two were small ferrous
objects (such as crab traps, small diameter pipe, small boat anchor or other modern debris). The FEIS
concluded that the one anomaly would not be adversely impacted because this area would be used for the
deposit of dredge spoil (USACE, 2003).
• In 2013 a report entitled "Shallow Draft Inlet Reconnaissance Study, Final Report of Findings" (SDI -5
Reconnaissance Study) was prepared for the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NCDENR), Division of Water Resources (DWR, 2013). This report summarized both the 1983 and
2003 EIS's regarding cultural resources within the Bogue Inlet. This report concluded that no further cultural
resource surveys were necessary to assess the Proposed Action.
Based on the conclusions of these surveys and reports, and based on the long- standing, ongoing nature of the
Proposed Action, impacts to cultural resources in the Bogue Inlet Project Area are not anticipated.
3.2 NEW TOPSAIL INLET
Three cultural resource surveys were obtained for New Topsail Inlet. Additionally, coordination with the North
Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) regarding dredging in the New Topsail Inlet Project Area was
obtained from 1980 and 2013. The surveys, report, and coordination letters are summarized below in the order
of preparation:
• In 1980 coordination with the SHPO regarding channel maintenance resulted in a determination that no
impacts would occur to cultural resources provided the work stayed within the previously maintained
channels (Appendix A; January 24, 1980).
• A 1988 "Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Hurricane Protection and Beach Erosion Control, West
Onslow Beach and New River Inlet, North Carolina (Topsail Beach)" concluded that there were no recorded
upland sites, and no National Register of Historic Places listed sites /properties within the project area. A
reconnaissance survey of the borrow area was performed and noted 12 shipwrecks near New Topsail Inlet.
Of these 12, 6 were unlikely to be impacted and the locations of the other 6 were uncertain. The survey of the
borrow area had negative results (USACE, 1988).
• A report of a remote sensing survey was conducted in 2008 by Tidewater Atlantic Research Inc. (Tidewater),
in Washington NC. The survey area, as detailed in the report, "Submerged Cultural Resources Remote
Sensing Survey of a Borrow Area Located off of New Topsail Inlet, Pender County, North Carolina" was
located immediately outside the inlet and south of the Inlet bar channel. Forty -six (46) magnetic anomalies
were located within the survey area. Only two of these had signature characteristics suggestive of a potential
association with shipwreck material. The remaining 44 anomalies appeared to have been generated by
2 Final: May 11, 2015 GO GBRICN 6 ISERE

material such as short lengths of wire rope, cable, pipe, small boat anchors, traps or other modern debris.
The report recommended no further investigation (Tidewater, 2008).
• The SHPO, in a 2013 letter regarding maintenance dredging and beach nourishment, expressed concerns that
the proposed project did not constitute maintenance dredging and that there are extensive shipwrecks in the
general project area (Appendix A; SHPO May 20, 2013 letter). They also expressed concern that the project
would result in bottom disturbance that might damage both known and unknown archaeological resources.
Two shipwrecks noted in the SHPO letter were the remains of the Civil War blockade runner, Phantom,
located immediately adjacent to the proposed dredge area and the early 20th century schooner William H.
Summer, and located north of the inlet.
• In 2013, several letters (including the one referenced above) regarding the maintenance dredging and beach
nourishment project were sent to, and received from, the SHPO (Appendix A; June 25, September 30, October
15, November 11, and December 17, 2013). These letters discussed cultural work and that the project
intended to maintain the federally authorized channel. A magnetometer survey was conducted which
resulted in the discovery that the wreck Phantom was not within the proposed dredging area (TI Coastal
Services, Inc., 2013). Based on this survey the SHPO had no further objections to the project.
Based on the conclusions of the surveys, report, and agency coordination, and based on the long- standing,
ongoing nature of the Proposed Action, impacts to cultural resources in the New Topsail Inlet Project Area are
not anticipated.
3.3 CAROLINA BEACH INLET
One report with a cultural resource study component, and two SHPO coordination letters were obtained for
Carolina Beach Inlet, and are summarized below, in the order of preparation:
• In response to a 1992 archeological report prepared by Panamerican Consultants, Inc., the SHPO concurred
that there were no significant magnetic or sonar targets located within the project area (Appendix A; SHPO
December 4, 1992 letter).
• In an October 2012 letter regarding New Hanover County's CSDR project for Carolina Beach, the SHPO
indicated that there are five historically significant shipwrecks dating from the American Civil War located
between 300 and 600 feet offshore from the proposed CSDR areas. They advised that if any boat /marine
activity is required as part of this project, extreme caution must be taken to avoid these areas (Appendix A;
SHPO October 15, 2012 letter).
• The SDI -5 Reconnaissance Study referenced the 1992 beach nourishment project and the SHPO response that
the project would not affect significant archaeological resources. This report concluded that no further
cultural work was necessary (DWR, 2013).
The closest shipwrecks mapped at Carolina Beach Inlet by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) Office of Coast Survey are depicted on Figure 3 (NOAA, 2014). The three depicted shipwrecks are
referenced in the October 2012 SHPO Letter, and are associated with the Cape Fear Civil War Shipwreck District
(Angley,1985). Nearshore placement would be conducted in the vicinity of the shipwrecks. Placement of sand
on the shipwrecks is an acceptable method of preservation (USACE, 2004), and would not be an adverse effect.
Based on the conclusions of the survey, report, and agency coordination, and based on the long- standing,
ongoing nature of the Proposed Action, impacts to cultural resources in the Carolina Beach Inlet Project Area are
not anticipated.
3.4 LOCKWOODS FOLLY INLET
Three reports with a cultural resource study component were obtained for Lockwoods Folly Inlet, and are
summarized below, in the order of preparation:
3 Final: May 11, 2015 GE GBRICN 6 ISERE

• In a 1979 Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for channel dredging, it was determined that the
dredging would not be expected to have any significant impacts on undiscovered historic resources in the
channel due to previous dredging disturbances. Three known shipwreck sites of possible historic
significance were located in the general area of the project. These were the wrecks of the Civil War blockade
runners Bendigo and Elizabeth, and the steam powered tug Iron Age. No impact on any of the wrecks was
anticipated, because the channel would be maintained on an alignment outside the area of the wrecks in
order to provide safe navigation (USACE, 1979). In 1980, coordination with the SHPO resulted in a
determination that no impacts would occur to cultural resources provided the work stayed within the
previously maintained channels (Appendix A; SHPO January 24, 1980 letter).
• In 2004, an Environmental Assessment for the maintenance dredging of eleven coastal inlets, including the
Lockwoods Folly Inlet, determined that the proposed dredging would not impact cultural resources ( USACE,
2004).
• The SDI -5 Reconnaissance Study referenced the 1979 USACE EIS and concluded that project would not be
expected to have any significant impacts on undiscovered historic resources in the channel due to previous
dredging disturbances (DWR, 2013).
The shipwrecks that have been identified in these previous assessments are depicted on Figure 4 (NOAA, 2014),
and are labeled on the design plat prepared by the USACE Wilmington District for maintenance dredging at
Lockwoods Folly Inlet (Appendix B). These shipwrecks will be avoided during project construction. Based on
the conclusions of the reports and associated agency coordination, and based on the long- standing, ongoing
nature of the Proposed Action, impacts to cultural resources in the Lockwoods Folly Inlet Project Area are not
anticipated.
3.5 SHALLOTTE RIVER INLET
One cultural resources survey and one report with a cultural resource study component were obtained for
Shallotte River Inlet, and are summarized below, in the order of preparation:
• In 1995, Tidewater prepared a report entitled "An Underwater Archaeological Remote Sensing Survey at
Shallotte and Tubbs Inlet, Brunswick County, North Carolina." The underwater survey described in this
report was conducted for the removal of sand from Tubbs and Shallotte Inlets for a beach nourishment
project at Ocean Isle Beach, NC. This report provided a maritime history of the inlets and noted that seven
vessels were listed as known to be lost within the vicinity of Shallotte Inlet. The survey identified no
magnetic or acoustic anomalies within the areas surveyed and recommended no further investigation in the
surveyed areas. However, the survey also concluded that "undetected wrecks could be present" within a
shallow, un- navigable portion of Shallotte Inlet that could not be surveyed. The report recommended that
material should be dredged from the areas outside the bar and /or in the northern section of the borrow areas
because in these areas, the work would have no detectable impact on submerged cultural resources. If
dredging of the areas not surveyed was determined necessary, the report recommended that these areas be
surveyed (Tidewater, 1995).
• The SDI -5 Reconnaissance Study summarized the 1995 report prepared by Tidewater Atlantic Research and
referenced the conclusion of the SHPO (SHPO May 30, 1995 letter) that the project would not impact
significant cultural resources. This report concluded that no further cultural work was necessary (DWR,
2013).
Based on the conclusions of the reports and associated agency coordination, and based on the long- standing,
ongoing nature of the Proposed Action, impacts to cultural resources in the Shallotte River Inlet Project Area are
not anticipated.
4 Final: May 11, 2015 Am GBRICN 6 ISERE

4.0 CONCLUSIONS
The assembled cultural resource surveys, reports, and SHPO coordination letters have resulted in
determinations of no effect provided that the proposed work occurs in the authorized channels. The Proposed
Action is maintenance dredging that has been ongoing since at least 1982 in all five project areas, and the dredge
material will be disposed of in previously authorized /used disposal sites. Identified shipwrecks will be avoided
by dredging activities, and nearshore disposal will improve preservation if burial occurs. Therefore, the
proposed channel maintenance dredging is not expected to have impacts on cultural resources in the project
area.
5 Final: May 11, 2015 rim O'BRICN 6 GCRC

5.0 LITERATURE CITED
Angley, Wilson and Mark Wilde - Ramsing, 1985. National Register of Historic Places Nomination, Cape Fear Civil
War Shipwreck District. September 1985.
DWR, 2013. Shallow Draft Inlet Reconaissance Study, Final Report of Findings. Land Management Group, Inc.
and TI Coastal, Inc. Wilmington, NC. December 2013.
NOAA, 2014. Wrecks and Obstructions Database. NOAA Office of Coast Survey. Accessed online via
http: / /www.nauticalcharts. noaa. gov/ hsd /wrecks_and_obstructions.html on December 15, 2014.
Tidewater, 1995. An Underwater Archaeological Remote Sensing Survey at Shallotte and Tubbs Inlet, Brunswick
County, North Carolina. Tidewater Atlantic Research, Inc. Washington, North Carolina. July 28, 1995.
Tidewater, 2008. Submerged Cultural Resources Remote Sensing Survey of a Borrow Area Located off New
Topsail Inlet, Pender County, North Carolina. Tidewater Atlantic Research, Inc. Washington, NC. January 21,
2008.
TI Coastal Services, Inc., 2013. Magnetometer Survey, Banks Connector Channel, New Topsail Inlet; Topsail
Beach Nourishment Project, Pender County, North Carolina. TI Coastal Services, Inc. Wilmington, NC.
November 7, 2013.
USACE, 1978. Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of Bogue Banks, North Carolina. USACE Wilmington District,
Wilmington, NC. 1978.
USACE, 1983. Detailed Project Report on Improvement of Navigation and Environmental Impact Statement,
Bogue Inlet. USACE Wilmington District. Bogue Inlet, NC. May 1983.
USACE, 1988. Draft Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement on Hurricane Protection and Beach
Erosion Control, West Onslow Beach and New River Inlet, North Carolina (Topsail Beach). USACE Wilmington
District. Wilmington, NC. 1988.
USACE, 1979. Final Environmental Impact Statement, Lockwoods Folly Inlet, Brunswick County, North Carolina.
USACE Wilmington District. Wilmington, NC. January 1979.
USACE, 2003. Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Bogue Inlet Channel Erosion Response Project. USACE
Wilmington District. Emerald Isle, NC. November 2003.
USACE, 2004. Environmental Assessment, Use of Government Plant to Dredge in Federally Authorized
Navigation Projects in North Carolina. USACE Wilmington District. Wilmington, NC. March 2004.
6 Final: May 11, 2015 rim O'BRICN 6 GCRC

O
(0
a
x
E
m
3
U)
m
1
►' I 1r
' •
SDI -5 INLET MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION SHIPWRECKS
BOGUE INLET
TOWN OF EMERALD ISLE, NC 52139
5/11/2015
1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000
]'BRIEN6GERE
Feet

a
0
m
E
0
E
3
U)
0
H
3
a
z
SDI -5 INLET MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION SHIPWRECKS
NEW TOPSAIL INLET
TOWN OF TOPSAIL BEACH, NC 52139
5/11/2015
1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000
1BRIEN6GERE
Feet

0
m
E
0-
0
E
3
N
U
N
N
C11
N
Q
N
U
{ r
J. r s
SDI -5 INLET MAINTENANCE DREDGING "
PERMIT APPLICATION
CAROLINA BEACH INLET
NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NC
SHIPWRECKS
52139 0 500 1,000 2,000 - 313RIEN 6 GERE
5/11/2015
Feet

D
N
a
v
N
M
M
m
N
W
H
Q
H
O
M
ENC = Electronic Navigation Charts produced by National SDI -5 INLET MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION SHIPWRECKS
Oceanic &Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Survey LOCKWOODS FOLLY INLET "
AWOIS = Automated Wreck & Obstruction Information System TOWN OF HOLDEN BEACH, NC
52139
5/1112015
0 1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8.000
GO O'BRIEN6GERE
Feet

0
0
a
M
M
N
a
0
w
a
0
0
0
a
0
E
3
`m
>
K
m
0
m
SDI -5 INLET MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION SHIPWRECKS
SHALLOTTE RIVER INLET "
TOWN OF OCEAN ISLE BEACH, NC 52139
5111/2015
F r
0 1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 °
Feet O'BRIEN6GERE

Appendix A - Coordination
Letters
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

North Carolina Department of Natural DEPUTY SECRETARY
PiQ sou rcQs & r^ ty De t E. Walton Jones
Box 27E87, Raleigh
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Howard N. Lee, Secretary Telephone [phone]
January 24, 1980
Colonel Adolph A. Hight, District Engineer
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
Dear Colonel Hight:
The State of North Carolina has completed its review of your
determinations that maintenance dredging operations at seven inlets are
consistent with North Carolina's Coastal Management Program.
Our only general concern is that impacts on the environment be
limited to areas that have been affected in the past. This is of
particular importance with respect to relatively stationary resources
such as oyster reefs and cultural resources. We recognize that the
channels to be maintained have migrated and will continue to migrate. H'e
also recognize that it is generally best to maintain channels that are
routes of best water. Over the years most, if not all, of the stationary
resources have been removed from this zone of previously maintained
channels. Therefore, it is the State position that so long as the channel
to be maintained in any of these inlets is within that zone of
historically maintained channels, the State will concur with your
consistency determination for maintenance of that inlet.
However, should work be proposed outside of this zone of historical
work, resource damage may occur that will be unacceptable to the State.
Obviously, this would be of particular concern if unnecessary losses were
incurred to irreplaceable vestiges of our State and national history.
Therefore, the State Historic Preservation Officer has provided, in his
comments on your consistency determinations, a guide to the probability of
occurrence of cultural resources at each inlet. Since the State Historic
Preservation Officer also had several comments on how the District can
best meet its responsibilities for protecting cultural resources as
required by federal law and rule, we have attached to this letter his
entire comments on your consistency determination.
All of your determinations noted that your activities will meet the
air and water quality standards of the State. Specifically that the
maintenance activities will meet the conditions of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification X11271 dated November 3, 1978. Since that
certification was modified at the request of your agency on April 9, 1979,
you will need to meet the conditions of the certification as modified.
This will satisfy the water quality interests of the State.
An Cpuo/Opportunity Atlirmotive Action Employer

We only have specific comments for one of the seven inlets:
Lockwoods Folly Inlet - We concur with your determination. However,
a recurrent issue at this inlet is the shoaling at the juncture of the
channel to the inlet with Eastern Channel. Reduced circulation through
Eastern Channel has adversely affected oyster production and forced the
State to abandon two oyster management areas within the vicinity of Sheep
Island. Whether or not this shoaling is a result of maintenance dredging
has been source of much debate. As an alternative, I would ask that we
discuss possible cooperative programs to reestablish circulation within
the Eastern Channel and promote shellfish production in these waters.
Therefore, the State concurs with your general consistency
determinations for maintenance dredging of:
Bogue Inlet
New River Inlet
Topsail Inlet
Lockwoods Folly Inlet
Oregon Inlet
Barden Inlet
Ocracoke Inlet
To allow us to better participate in future discussions of maintenance
proposals at these inlets, it is important that it be displayed that a
specific dredging event will fall within the zone of previous dredgings at
that inlet. We hope that this information can be developed by the
District. Should this be the case, then we should be able to continue to
concur with the existing consistency determination and not require a new
determination. Should this not be the case, then we will need to discuss
what new information is required to ensure that the project meets all
State interests.
If you have any questions on our concurrence with your determinations
or any other matter, please let me know.
Sincerely,
E. Walt n Jones
EWJ:kh:5924
Attachment
cc: Department of Cultural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
Division of Marine Fisheries
Office of Coastal Management
2

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, ;administrator
Governor Pat McCrory Office of Archives and History
Secretary Susan Kluttz Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
May 20, 2013 ' I V E D
Dave Timpy UA
US Army Corps of Engineers — Wilmington District MAY 3 0 2013
69 Darlington Avenue gyp. wi
Wilmington, NC 28403 DLO,
Re: "Maintenance" Dredging & Beach Nourishment, New Topsail Inlet & Topsail Beach Oceanfront,
Pender County, ER 11 -2331
Dear Mr. Timpy:
We have reviewed the above public notice concerning proposed plans to perform maintenance dredging within
the New Topsail Inlet vicinity and utilize the spoil material for beach nourishment along the ocean front
shoreline of Topsail Beach.
Your agency and the applicant should be aware that the Office of State Archaeology Underwater Branch
research files have references to extensive maritime activities and shipwreck losses in the general project
vicinity; therefore, much of the project area holds a high potential for containing submerged cultural resources.
We find that the increased depth of the majority of the proposed project area from -7.0 and -8.0 feet NLW to -
12.0 and -16.0 feet NLW (with an allowable 2 -foot overage) does not constitute maintenance dredging within
controlled and previously dredged channels. The project as specified creates a bottom disturbance that may
damage both known and unknown archaeological resources.
The remains of the Civil War blockade - runner Phantom are located immediately adjacenr to the proposed New
Topsail Inlet Dredge Area. Deepening the channel and, thereby, increasing the overall width and side slope
prism of the channel will likely expose the buried remains of this vessel, causing direct environmental impacts.
Phantom is listed on the National Register of Historic Places as a contributing element of the Cape Fear Civil
War Shipwreck District (NRHP 1985).
:Nlso of note, the remains of an early twentieth- century, Maine -built schooner lk''illiam H. Vuvyner are located
north of the inlet. Two magnetic anomalies (NTT -31 and NTT-34) identified by Tidewater Atlantic Research in
a 2007 survey are also in the general vicinity. The anomalies are noted as having "signature characteristics,
intensity and duration, that suggests the material generating the anomaly- could be associated with the remains
of a vessel that are suggestive of a potential association with shipwreck material." They warrant additional
investigation if their locations may be impacted. (Watts 2008)
In assessment of the known and unknown submerged cultural resources within the overall Uroject area must
be completed prior to anv dredging activity. If it's detern-uned that significant cultural resources may- be
affected, an appropriate mitigation plan must be developed to minimize any adverse effects.
Location: IW) 1'ast ,Rflogh \(:2 -611 1 Mailing Address -161 -Mail Jcn c, mcr.l:alcigh V 2- 699 -461` Telephonc /Fax: 919) Rn- -Cn o 80--6599

The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. In
addition, the area is protected by North Carolina legislation (G.S. 121 -22 to 28, Article 3: salvage of abandoned
shipwrecks and other underwater archaeological materials on all bottoms from low water to one marine league
seaward, and bottoms of other navigable waters). This law is supported by the Abandoned Shipwreck Act of
1987 (P.L. 100 -298) which gives the state jurisdiction over a broad range of living and nonliving resources in
state waters and submerged lands, including certain abandoned shipwrecks, which have been deserted and to
which the owner has relinquished ownership rights with no retention.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill- Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919- 807 -6579 or renee.gledhill-
earlej:kncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced
tracking number.
Sincerely,
e�
�+ Ramona M. Bartos
cc: Tim Holloman, Town of Topsail Beach
Chris Gibson, Gahagan and Bryant Associates of NC
John Mayer, USAGE Wilmington
Jason Dail, NCDENR - CAMA

Gahagan & Bryant Associates of NC, PLLC
295 -A N. Green Meadows Drive
Wilmington, NC 28405
(910) 313 -3338
(910) 313 -6822 FAx (3BA
GBA- NC @gba- inc.com ENGINEERS * SURVEYORS
June 25, 2013
Ramona M. Bartos
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -4617
Re: Maintenance Dredging & Beach Nourishment, New Topsail Inlet & Topsail Beach Oceanfront, Pender
County, ER 11 -2331
Dear Ms. Bartos:
We have received your response regarding the significant cultural resources located within the vicinity of the
proposed deepening and maintenance dredging of New Topsail Inlet, namely the Civil War Blockade Runner
Phantom and the Maine -built schooner William H. Sumner. The project intends to maintain the federally
authorized depth of 8 +2' in New Topsail Inlet by integrating advanced maintenance. The trigger for additional
dredging will be when the inlet channel shoals to a depth of 8.0' MLW, increasing the dormant period between
dredging projects to anticipated lengths of 3 -5 years and reducing overall impacts associated with dredging to
the area.
While the deeper channel depths and the associated side slopes do create a larger footprint than a shallower
channel dug with a hydraulic dredge, the actual area of impact for this proposed project is much smaller than
that of the sidecaster that currently works within the offshore portion of the inlet channel. This is due to the
sidecaster not only impacting the bottom and side slopes of the channel, but also the adjacent areas as new
shoals are created alongside the dredge area. By completing this project via hydraulic cutter suction dredge,
the overall surface area of impact and the number of maintenance dredging projects are reduced.
In an effort to locate the coordinates of the Phantom and the William H. Sumner, GBA contacted the
Underwater Archaeology Branch (UAB) of the Office of State Archaeology. While the wrecks are in the
proximity of the proposed channel alignment, the overall southerly migration of New Topsail Inlet has caused
the remains of the Phantom to be buried under the southern spit of Topsail Beach. The daylight line of the
channel toes (elevation 0.0' MLW of the northern 5:1 Inlet channel slope) is still over 900' from the
coordinates given for the Phantom wreck. It is not anticipated that this project will have any impacts to the
remains of either ship.
Due to the number of past proposed projects in the New Topsail Inlet region, extensive research has already
been conducted in identifying cultural resources within the area. The US Army Corps of Engineers authorized a
Federal Nourishment Project in 1992, utilizing the back barrier shoals within the inlet system, excavating to an
elevation of -30' MLW. This project became inactive in 1994 due to funding limitations, however, and the
Town began work on an interim beach nourishment project due to the projected timeline for the Federal
Project. Offshore borrow areas were delineated for this project, namely Borrow Area X. Both the originally
defined inshore borrow area and Borrow Area X were investigated for Cultural Resources. No significant
impacts were found in either and the bounding boxes for both study areas are shown on the attached map.
BALTIMORE, MD HOUSTON, TX LOS ANGELES, CA SAN FRANCISCO, CA TAMPA, FL WILMINGTON, DE
(410) 682 -5595 (832) 518 -2112 (310) 521 -8127 (415) 883 -7683 (813) 831 -4408 (302) 652 -4948

Gahagan & Bryant Associates of NC, PLLC
295 -A N. Green Meadows Drive
Wilmington, NC 28405
(910) 313 -3338
(910) 313 -6822 FAx 43BA
GBA- NC @gba- inc.com ENGINEERS * SURVEYORS
Additionally, the Tidewater Atlantic Research report discussing the offshore borrow area archeological
investigation is attached. This report identified 46 magnetic anomalies within the study area, only two of which
(NTI -31 and NTI -34) had "signature characteristics, intensity and duration, that suggests the material
generating the anomaly could be associated with the remains of a vessel that are suggestive of a potential
association with shipwreck material." These anomalies lie more than 850 feet from the proposed top of slope
of the channel. It is not anticipated that this project will have any impacts to these magnetic returns above and
beyond the normal shifting of the ebb shoal.
It should be noted that at the time of authorization the southern limit of the USACE Borrow Area was aligned
with the northern extend of Lea Island within New Topsail Inlet and was bounded on the south side by
saltmarsh. As the inlet and barrier island have migrated in a southerly direction the configuration of New
Topsail Inlet is such that the channel now extends south of the USACE study area. While cultural investigations
have not been conducted in this area, it is unlikely that any resources would be located here as it has
historically consisted of saltmarsh with no navigable waters. Additionally, the small gap between the USACE
Borrow Area Box and the Tidewater Atlantic Research survey area is currently at a depth greater than the
proposed dredge template and will not be directly impacted by the upcoming project.
Thank you for providing comments of concern for this project. We look forward to working with you in the
future to establish a sound plan achieving navigation maintenance within the inlet and surrounding channel
areas, providing storm protection and environmental restoration on area beaches, and preserving important
historic cultural resources within our area.
Sincerely,
GAHAGAN & BRYANT ASSOCIATES of NC, PLLC
lvo,
Chris L. Gibson, PE
Vice President
BALTIMORE, MD HOUSTON, TX LOS ANGELES, CA SAN FRANCISCO, CA TAMPA, FL WILMINGTON, DE
(410) 682 -5595 (832) 518 -2112 (310) 521 -8127 (415) 883 -7683 (813) 831 -4408 (302) 652 -4948

TI COASTAL, PLLC
P.O.Box11056
Wilmington, NC 28404
910 - 512 -3096
September 30, 2013
Nathan Henry
VIA E -MAIL: Nathan. Henry @ncdcr.org
RE: Archeological Reconnaissance Survey of New Topsail Inlet
Dear Mr. Henry,
+r
TI j1 a s t l
Thank you for speaking with me yesterday regarding the location of the "Phantom" in near New Topsail Inlet.
Through our discussion, I fully understand SHPO's concern of disturbing this wreck of historical value through
the dredging process. The coordinates that SHPO has on file, demarcation of a wreck on the NOAA charts, and
my personal recollection having navigated Topsail Inlet for 30 years all indicate that the migration of the inlet has
resulted in the wreck being located under the dunes of Serenity Point over 1,000 feet from the proposed channel
dredging. We do agree that being 100% certain the wreck is not within the dimension of the channel is
necessary. The Town of Topsail Beach will conduct a magnetometer survey of the area in the next 7 -10 days
and provide that information to your office in the form of a color coded contour map of the magnetic field for your
review.
As we discussed we are expected to find several small to medium anomalies in or near the channel as buoys 6,
7, and 7A have broken free from their anchors on numerous occasions and those anchors are not normally
retrieve by the USACE or USCG. However the phantom is a 200 foot long steel hull ship that will give us an off
the chart single is we pass anywhere near it.
We look forward to presenting our findings to you in the upcoming days and would ask that you help us continue
the permitting process by signing off on the project conditioned upon the results of the magnetometer survey to
be conducted.
It goes without saying that, in the unlikely event the "Phantom" is found to be within the construction footprint,
we will consult with your office to determine the appropriate avoidance measures such as channel realignment.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Chris Gibson, PE
President
TI Coastal, PLLC
clgibson(aD_ticoastal.com

btu. STATE,,
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Pat McCrory
Secretary Susan Kluttz
October 15, 2013
Chris Gibson, PE
T.I. Coastal, PLLC
PO Box 11056
Wilmington, NC 28404
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Re: Proposed Magnetometer Survey, New Topsail Inlet in Conjunction with Proposed Dredging and Beach
Renourishment for Town of Topsail Beach, CAMA Permit Major Modification 22 -09, Pender County,
ER 11 -2331
Dear Mr. Gibson:
We have received the T.I. Coastal, PLLC proposal to conduct a magnetometer survey in the New Topsail Inlet
channel, a federally maintained waterway with an authorized width of 150 feet and a depth of 8 +2 feet.
One portion of a current proposal by the Town of Topsail Beach requests authorization from the US Army
Corps of Engineers to allow hydraulic dredging at the mouth of the inlet to 16 +2 feet depth with 5:1 slopes
and an effective width of 310 feet. The purpose of this dredging is to provide sediment for beach
renourishment. The dredging would follow the current deep water channel. Because of the reported proximity
of the 19t" century blockade runner Phantom to the proposed dredging, the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) recommended to the NC Division of Coastal Management that a magnetometer
survey be performed to determine the location of the blockade runner Phantom as a condition for any dredging
permit within the area designated New Topsail Inlet, and in particular that portion passing through the ebb -
tidal delta (SHPO to Huggett 8/14/2013). T.I. Coastal, PLLC has proposed to determine through the
magnetometer survey if the wreck is within the APE of the proposed dredging and beach renourishment
project.
An in -house field report generated in 1975 by the NC Underwater Archaeology Branch (UAB) detailed the
examination of the blockade runner Phantom by UAB staff and students from UNC- Wilmington. The report
indicated that the 193 -foot iron hull was intact, with the upper portions of the wreck being at 16 feet depth of
water. The report indicated the latitude and longitude of the wreck being North 34deg. 20' 23"; West 77deg. 39'
29" (NAD27). Although these coordinates placed the wreck near the northeast end of Hutaff Island in 1975,
southwest migration of the inlet and growth of Topsail Island spit now place those coordinates approximately
200 feet north of the federally maintained channel centerline. Obviously this means that, if these coordinates
are correct, side -cast dredging has occurred over the top of the wreck a number of times. It is suggested that
because the top of the Phantom wreck lies 16 feet below the water surface, dredging to a maximum depth of 10
feet has not directly impacted the wreckage or dredging equipment.
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699 -4617 Telephone /Fax: (919) 807 - 6570/807 -6599

The Town of Topsail Beach has an active CAMA Major Permit #22 -09 that allows beach renourishment
utilizing fill from a borrow area immediately east of the ebb -tidal delta of New Topsail Inlet (Borrow Area X).
This area was archaeologically surveyed by Tidewater Atlantic Research and reported in January 2008 (Office of
State Archaeology Bibliography 6167). The report indicated that no magnetic anomalies with characteristics
suggesting shipwrecks occurred within Borrow Area X. The SHPO concurred with this assessment in May
2008. Subsequent major modifications to this LAMA major permit have eliminated Borrow Area X and
allowed utilization of fill from borrow areas within Topsail Creek and Banks Channel. The SHPO had no
issues with this because no known archaeological sites exist in these waterways. The current major modification
request includes utilization of fill from a borrow area within the federally maintained New Topsail Inlet
channel.
Approximately 1,950 linear feet of the proposed ebb -tidal delta channel segment of the dredging project would
occur within the previously surveyed Borrow Area X. Approximately 300 linear feet of the proposed channel
dredging area has not been surveyed. Reported coordinates for the Phantom are adjacent to the most inland
portion of the area not surveyed.
We recommend that T.I. Coastal undertake the magnetic survey of the proposed channel with the following
conditions:
(1) The survey should cover a 300 -foot wide path following the existing deep water channel using
maximum 60 -foot lane spacing.
(2) The survey should overlap the previous 2008 survey of Borrow Area X by a minimum distance of 60
feet, at a centerline point of 34 °20'19.91 "N; 77 °39'25.82 "W.
(3) The survey should follow a 300 -foot wide path through the existing channel to a centerline point of
34 °20'26.34 "N; 77 °39'41.83 "W. Although much of this area is scoured to a depth that sediment cannot
be borrowed, future shoaling may allow this area to be utilized and a future archaeological survey will
not be required.
(4) In the event that magnetic anomalies are encountered the survey data should be reviewed by an
independent archaeologist who is familiar with analysis of magnetic data that suggests the presence of
shipwreck remains.
(5) Because much of the project area has been surveyed and presented in an archeological report submitted
by Tidewater Atlantic Research (2008), this survey may be considered an addendum to that report and
reported as a management summary. This management summary should contain at minimum a map
showing the area covered, a map showing magnetic data in a contoured format and the magnetic
anomalies listed in tabular format with information indicating the location, intensity, and duration of
each magnetic anomaly. Two copies of this management summary should be provided to the SHPO for
review.
In the event that a magnetic anomaly is encountered suggesting the presence of shipwreck remains, SHPO and
the Corps of Engineers should be involved with plans concerning mitigation and /or avoidance.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill- Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919- 807 -6579 or renee.gledhill-
earley&ncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced
tracking number.
Sincerely,
�C� ak_dLO��-
(f'Ramona M. Bartos
cc: Dave Timpy, US Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District

TI COASTAL, PLLC
P.O.Box11056
Wilmington, NC 28404
910 - 512 -3096
November 11, 2013
Nathan Henry
VIA E -MAIL: Nathan. Henry @ncdcr.org
RE: Archeological Reconnaissance Survey of New Topsail Inlet
Dear Mr. Henry,
+r
TI j1 a s t l
Please find attached a map of the magnetometer data collected in Topsail Inlet on November 7, 2013. As
requested, we surveyed the channel adjacent to the southern end of Topsail Beach to insure the "Phantom"
wreck was not located within the proposed dredge area. Multiple small anomalies were detected, however
nothing of the magnitude of a 200 ft. steel hull ship was seen within the data.
The survey was conducted aboard the Survey Vessel "Endeavor ", a 28 ft. Privateer utilizing a geometrics G882
Magnetometer with a Trimble SPS 461 RTK -GPS for positioning. Data was collected and processed using
HyPack 2013 software. Profile lines were collected on 30 ft. spacing out to 180 feet either side of the channel
centerline. Magnetometer layback was 106 ft. Survey lines 5 and 6 were run twice in opposite directions to
properly calibrate the layback distance. The water depths in the survey area ranged from 5 - 20 feet at the time
of survey resulting in minimal altitude of the G882.
On the map we have denoted 5 marks that were in excess of a 20 nT reading or were detected on more than
one profile. There were 18 other scattered anomalies most under 10 nT and all only detected on a single pass.
Each object detected had a steep slope on the profile and no object was detected over more than 4 profiles (90
ft span) indicating smaller, close proximity objects. Based on the aerial photography the largest target, Target
#1, appears to be in the approximate location of a former Nun (Red) Buoy for the crossover channel.
Thank you for your assistance in reviewing this data. If you need any additional information, don't hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerely,
Chris Gibson, PE
President
TI Coastal, PLLC
clgibson(o)ticoastal.com
910- 512 -3096

December 17, 2013
MEMORANDUM
TO: Doug Huggett, Chief
Major Permits Processing Section
Division of Coastal Management, DENR
Colonel James DeLony, District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
FROM: Ramona Bartos
SUBJECT: Management sununary: Magnetometer survey of New Topsail Inlet in
conjunction with proposed dredging and beach renourishment for Town of
Topsail Beach LAMA Permit Major Modification 22 -09. ER 11 -2331
We have received the management summary reporting the results of a magnetometer survey
conducted by T.I. Coastal, PLLC in the New Topsail Inlet channel, a federally maintained
waterway with an authorized width of 150 feet and a depth of 8 +2 feet. The survey revealed
no strong magnetic anomalies within the New Topsail Inlet section of the proposed
dredging project. The survey did discover several strong magnetic anutiialies within the
Banks Channel section of the proposed dredging project. These anomalies do not appear to
be related to shipwrecks and are within the location of a formerly maintained channel
marker buoy indicating the channel between Topsail Greek and Banks Channel. It is likely
that the anomalies were caused by formerly used buoy anchors and associated chain. These
are not significant in terms of cultural resources.
Because no evidence was discovered suggesting significant cultural resources within the
dredging project footprint, we have no abjection to the project as proposed. In the event
that submerged shipwreck materials are encountered the NC Underwater Archaeology
Branch should be immediately contacted (910 458 9042). A staff member will be sent to
assess the material and determine the proper course of action.
If you have questions concerning the above comment:, please contact Renee Gledhill- Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919 - 807 -6579. In all future communication concerning
this project, please cite the above- referenced tracking number.
Cc: Dave Timpy
Project Manager
Regulatory Division
US Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
69 Darlington, Avenue
Wi mington, North Carolina 28402 -1890
Chris Gibson, PE
T.I. Coastal, PLLC

PO Box 11056
WITx ngtvn, NC 28404

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
December 4, 1992
W. Coleman Long
Environmental Resources Branch
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, N.G. 28402 -1890
Re: Carolina Beach and vicinity, North Carolina Area
South Project, Hurricane, etc., New Hanover
County, CH 91 -E -0000 -0807, ER 93 -7689
Dear Mr. Long:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of November 4, 1992, transmitting the archaeological
report for the above project.
During the course of the survey no significant magnetic or sonar targets were
located within the project area. Panamerican Consultants, Inc., has recommended
that no further archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this
project. We concur with this recommendation since this project will not involve
significant archaeological resources.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill - Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733 -4763.
Sincerely,
p.
cs
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB.slw
109 EastJones Street 11 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601 -2807

�rar e•
�7 r
Y
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona h{. Ramos, Administrator
Rcacrl_r R,avcs Perdue, CoNernor
Irnda 1 (:arGslc, Secretary
Jeffa -I Crow, Deputy Sccreian
October 15, 2012
MEMORANDUM
Office of ArcNvcs and f listor%
l7ivision of I limrical Rcsources
David Brook, Dirwor
TO: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Section
Division of Coastal Management,
FROM: Ramona M. Bartos (�� R pama' V
SUBJECT: Carolina Beach Nourishment - Federal Storm Damage Reduction Project Authorization,
New Hanover County, ER 12 -1706
Thank you for your memo of September 19, 2012. We have reviewed the above permit application and would
Eke to take this opportunity to comment.
The Office of State Archaeology underwater research Files have references to extensive maritime activities and
shipwreck losses in the general project viciniti�. The project as proposed should have no impact on significant
cultural resources as work takes place westward of the historic shoreline and Carolina Beach Inlet is a modern
creation.
However, it should be noted that there are five (5) historically significant shipwrecks dating from the American
Civil War located between 300 and 600 feet offshore from the proposed beach nourishment areas, 1 f am
Imai/nlarint acti" ity is required as purl of 1111s project, t'LII.L.111C k niliola Islu"I be r•alcerl to avoid tlu-se at'c Is. file
apl7licant caul contact die NC' I Inds rvvatcr .lrrh"L'010KV Bt -anC11 t01t►.459,9042) f Pr specific infttall1;1l.itral ,Intl
location of thcse resource'; To ;sure avo1da0Ck' ;Intl nr, ilteielcntal impair during operations.
These comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Aistoric Preservation Act of 1966, North
Carolina legislation (G.S. 121 -22 to 28, Article 3), and the Abandoned Shipwreck Act of 1987 (P,L, 100 -298)
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill- Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919.807.6579. In all future
corrununication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
Location: 1091iast Juncs Strict, Ralcigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4017 Mod Service Cenicr, Raleigh NC 27699 -4617 Telephone /Fax: (919) 807 - 65711/8()7 -6599

Appendix B - USACE
Dredging Design Drawing at
Lockwoods Folly Inlet
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

78015'0"W 78014'30"W 78014'0"W 78013'30"W
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington District
Lo
LO
0
m
co
0
0
cn
c�
NORTHC=AFLI NA
t�
Wilmington
Southport
Southport
LQCKWQQDS FOLLY
INLET & CROSSING
vu
0
CY7
LO
0
co
co
C�
cO
IT
X)
0
CY7
CY7
F-
LU
� J
W z
} _ Z
0� Q _ z
z J
Cl) c
J �
_ � ° J C!)
_ ❑w 00 U
LU Zz0
CL LL z G13 C] °
a zQ
wz
co ©� z
0
0 0 J Y
J
78" 15'0 "W 78 014'30 "W 78"14'0"W 78013'30 "W
x
w
c D
w
i
cn
c�
i
co
L6
Qr
C?
0
CV
xl
LL
J
W
©
co
<
>-
0
z
W
L1J
W
J
Q
LL
M
a
cD
N
�
�
o
r
�
r
O
�
N
o
N
o
�
0
OCy
J
C0
LU
Z
r
LL
❑
LJJ
J
0
Lij
Q
>
CU
LLJ
d
CL
ZE
Q
vu
0
CY7
LO
0
co
co
C�
cO
IT
X)
0
CY7
CY7
F-
LU
� J
W z
} _ Z
0� Q _ z
z J
Cl) c
J �
_ � ° J C!)
_ ❑w 00 U
LU Zz0
CL LL z G13 C] °
a zQ
wz
co ©� z
0
0 0 J Y
J
78" 15'0 "W 78 014'30 "W 78"14'0"W 78013'30 "W

Attachment 5.2 - Sediment
Evaluation
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

Town of Emerald Isle
Town of Topsail Beach
New Hanover County
Town of Holden Beach
Town of Ocean Isle Beach
February 2015
Wj O'BRICN6GCRC

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................... ..............................1
2.0 Data Evaluation .............................................................................................................................................................. ..............................1
3.0 Supplemental Geotechnical Sampling ................................................................................................................... ..............................1
4.0 Results ................................................................................................................................................................................ ..............................2
4.1 Bogue Inlet .................................................................................................................................................................. ..............................2
4.2 New Topsail Inlet ...................................................................................................................................................... ..............................2
4.3 Carolina Beach Inlet ................................................................................................................................................ ..............................2
4.4 Lockwoods Folly Inlet ............................................................................................................................................ ..............................3
4.5 Shallotte River Inlet ................................................................................................................................................. ..............................3
5.0 References ........................................................................................................................................................................ ..............................3
Tables
1. Vibracore Sampling Information from October 2014 Event
2. Summary of Vibracore Data Evaluated
Figures
1. Bogue Inlet Sample Location Map
2. New Topsail Inlet Sample Location Map
3. Carolina Beach Inlet Sample Location Map
4. Lockwoods Folly Inlet Sample Location Map
5. Shallotte River Inlet Sample Location Map
Appendices
A. Vibracore Boring Logs from October 2014 Sampling
B. Boring Log Compatibility
i Final: February 9, 2015
I: \Nc- Nat- Res.1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Geotechnical Report \Sediment Evaluation - 020915.doc
rjm GURIEN G GERE

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Technical Standards for Beach Fill Projects (15A NCAC 07H.0312, the Rule) stipulate criteria
for sediment compatibility with beach placement, and define the scope of geotechnical sampling required to
evaluate sediment by those criteria. Bogue, New Topsail, Carolina Beach, Lockwood's Folly, Shallotte River Inlet,
and their associated AIWW Crossings (SDI -5) are maintained navigation channels or associated sediment
deposition basins ( Shallotte River Inlet) in the active nearshore, beach, or inlet shoal system. In order to be
suitable for beach placement, sediment dredged from these inlets must meet several key requirements, as
described below:
■ 15A NCAC 07H.0312(2)(e) "...Characterization of borrow sites completely confined to maintained channels
or sediment deposition basins within the active nearshore, beach or inlet shoal system shall use no fewer
than five evenly spaced vertical samples per channel or sediment basin, or sample spacing of no more than
5,000 linear feet (1,524 meters), whichever is greater.... "...Two sets of sampling data (with at least one
dredging event in between) from maintained navigation channels or sediment deposition basins within the
active nearshore, beach or inlet shoal system may be used to characterize material for subsequent
nourishment events from those areas if the sampling results are found to be compatible with Sub -Item (3) (a)
of this Rule.... "...Vertical sampling shall penetrate to a depth equal to or greater than permitted dredge or
excavation depth or expected dredge or excavation depths for pending permit applications. (2) (g) "Grain size
distributions shall be reported for all sub - samples taken within each vertical sample for each of the four grain
size categories defined in Sub -Item (1)(e) of this Rule. Weighted averages for each core shall be calculated
based on the total number of samples and the thickness of each sampled interval .... (3)(a) "Sediment
completely confined to the permitted dredge depth of a maintained navigation channel or associated
sediment deposition basins within the active nearshore, beach or inlet shoal system is considered compatible
if the average percentage by weight of fine - grained (less than 0.0625 millimeters) sediment is less than 10
percent."
The following sections provide a detailed evaluation of beach compatibility for sediment dredged from the SDI -
5. This evaluation is based on characterization data from multiple geotechnical sampling programs that have
been conducted at each of these inlets.
2.0 DATA EVALUATION
Data to support the beach compatibility evaluation were derived from a number of historical geotechnical
studies, in addition to a geotechnical study conducted to support this permit application. The historical data
were obtained from two sources. One of these was a reconnaissance study conducted by the N.C. Division of
Water Resources (DWR) in 2013 to gather existing permit documents and environmental studies associated
with the SDI -5 to support future permitting efforts. The second was a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
Request submitted to the USACE in September 2014 in support of this permitting effort. The combined data
obtained from these sources were used to evaluate beach compatibility under the Rule. Based on this
evaluation, sufficient existing data were available for the majority of the SDI -5 Project Areas. With input from
the N.C. Division of Coastal Management (DCM), O'Brien & Gere performed coring at three inlets ( Bogue,
Carolina Beach, and Lockwoods Folly) to supplement the existing data.
3.0 SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL SAMPLING
On October 14 -15, 2014, O'Brien & Gere and Aqua Survey, Inc. (Aqua Survey) performed sediment coring at five
locations in Bogue, Carolina Beach, and Lockwood's Folly Inlet (Figures 1, 3, and 4).
Prior to sampling at each location, real -time water depth measurements were used to calculate mean low water
(MLW) elevations and the required recovery length needed to achieve the project depth (i.e. currently
authorized depth of dredging). Sediment collection was performed using a Rossfelder P -3 vibracore with flexible
plastic core liners. After the plastic lining was inserted in the core barrel, a metal shoe was fixed to the end to
provide a cutting edge and retain the plastic liner. Using a winch, the core barrel was then connected to the
1 Final: February 9, 2015 G O'BRICN 6 GCRC
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Geotechnical Report \Sediment Evaluation - 020915.doc

vibracore equipment and lowered to the sediment surface where induced vibration allowed for advancement
into the channel bottom. Upon retrieval of the sampler, the plastic liner was removed from the core barrel, and
cut open to confirm sample recovery.
Each recovered core was inspected and visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification
System (USCS) by the O'Brien & Gere supervising geologist. Sampling intervals used for grain size analysis were
chosen to characterize the range of sediment types observed at each location. Samples were collected and stored
in plastic containers for later grain size analysis by Aqua Survey. Logs for these borings are presented in
Appendix A. General sample and sub - sample information is summarized in Table 1.
4.0 RESULTS
The following sections provide a summary of the sediment evaluation for each of the inlets. Table 2 provides a
summary of the evaluation results.
4.1 BOGUE INLET
Sediment characterization data for Bogue Inlet and the AIWW Crossing were obtained from five sampling events
conducted between 2002 and 2014. Of the 44 vibracores collected in the project area, 39 vibracores had
recovery to a depth greater than or equal to the authorized dredging depths for the AIWW and inlet area.
Consistent with the Rule, these include at least two sets of five borings separated by no more than 5,000 feet,
collected from at least two separate characterization events (Table 2, Figure 1).
The representative vibracores contained beach compatible material throughout the project area, to the project
depth, in accordance with the Rule. Vibracore LB -02 -178, which contained incompatible material, is located at
the salt marsh edge, and outside the project area (Figure 1).
4.2 NEW TOPSAIL INLET
Sediment characterization data for New Topsail Inlet, Topsail Creek, Banks Channel, and the AIWW Crossing
were obtained from four sampling events conducted between 2007 and 2013. Of the 107 vibracores collected
within the project area, 87 of the vibracores had sample recovery to a depth greater than or equal to the
authorized dredging depth for each respective area. Consistent with the Rule, these include at least two sets of
five borings separated by no more than 5,000 feet, collected from at least two separate characterization events
(Table 2, Figure 2).
Borings with sufficient recovery depth contained beach - compatible sediment to the project depth in the
majority of the project area. One sample from the 2009 sampling event (VC- 12- TB -20), which was located in
Banks Channel, contained incompatible material. Data from more recent sampling events in 2010, 2011, 2012,
and 2013 in the portion of Banks Channel near VC- 12 -TB -20 found beach - compatible sediment, suggesting that
the sample VC- 12 -TB -20 is anomalous, and not indicative of sediment characteristics in the area. Two of the 11
vibracores of sufficient recovery depth collected in the AIWW Crossing contained incompatible material. An
upland disposal site will be identified for disposal of material found to be incompatible for beach placement
while dredging the AIWW Crossing.
4.3 CAROLINA BEACH INLET
Sediment characterization data for Carolina Beach Inlet and the AIWW Crossing were obtained from six
sampling events between 2006 and 2014. A total of 75 vibracores were evaluated, 69 of which had recovery to a
depth greater than or equal to the authorized dredging depth for each area. Consistent with the Rule, these
include at least two sets of five borings separated by no more than 5,000 feet, collected from at least two
separate characterization events (Table 2, Figure 3).
2 Final: February 9, 2015 GO GBRIEN 6 GERE
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Geotechnical Report \Sediment Evaluation - 020915.doc

The representative vibracores contained beach compatible material throughout the project area, to the project
depth, in accordance with the Rule. The only two vibracores with sufficient recovery depth that contained
incompatible material (CBIWW- 07 -V -3 and CBXWAIWW- V -09 -2) were located outside the project area (Figure
3).
4.4 LOCKWOODS FOLLY INLET
Sediment characterization data for Lockwood's Folly Inlet and the AIWW crossing were obtained from five
sampling events conducted between 1998 and 2014. Of the 50 vibracores obtained for the project area, 17
vibracores had recovery to a depth greater than or equal to the authorized dredging depth for each area.
Consistent with the Rule, these include at least two sets of five borings separated by no more than 5,000 feet,
collected from at least two separate characterization events (Table 2, Figure 4).
The representative vibracores contained beach compatible material throughout the project area, to the project
depth, in accordance with the Rule. Vibracore LFIXAIWW- V -09 -2 was the only vibracore with sufficient
recovery depth that contained incompatible material, and it is located outside the project area (Figure 4).
4.5 SHALLOTTE RIVER INLET
Sediment characterization data for the Shallotte River Inlet Coastal Storm Damage Reduction (CSDR) Borrow
Area and the AIWW crossing were obtained from four sampling events conducted between 1998 and 2009. Of
the 51 vibracores obtained, 21 vibracores had recovery to a depth greater than or equal to the authorized
dredging depth for the inlet and AIWW crossing. Consistent with the Rule, these include at least two sets of five
borings separated by no more than 5,000 feet, collected from at least two separate characterization events
(Table 2, Figure 5).
The representative vibracores contained beach compatible material throughout the project area, to the project
depth, in accordance with the Rule, with the exception of three vibracores in the AIWW Crossing (BCAIWW -08-
V-2, SHI- V -09 -2, and BCAIWW- 08 -V -8). An upland disposal site will be identified for disposal of material found
to be incompatible for beach placement while dredging the AIWW Crossing.
5.0 REFERENCES
Data for the compatibility evaluation were obtained from the following sources:
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc., Draft. Geotechnical Investigation of Carolina Beach Inlet
Borrow Area, New Hanover County Contingency Permitting, North Carolina, August 7, 2012.
Gahagan & Bryant Associates of NC, PLLC, Topsail Beach Nourishment Project, Major Modification Application,
NCDENR Permit #22 -09, Appendix A, January 12, 2011.
Moffatt & Nichol, Bogue Banks Master Beach Nourishment Plan, Carteret County, NC, Draft Engineering Report,
Appendix B - Sediment Analysis Report, February 7, 2014
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 1997. Environmental Assessment - Brunswick County Beaches -
Ocan Isle Beach Beach Erosion Control and Hurricane Wave Protection, Brunswick County, North Carolina, June
1997.
USACE, 2003. Draft Environmental Impact Statement - Bogue Inlet Channel Erosion Response Project, Emerald Isle,
North Carolina. USACE Wilmington District. Wilmington, NC. November 2003.
3 Final: February 9, 2015 Q'BRICN 6 GCRC
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Geotechnical Report \Sediment Evaluation - 020915.doc rim

Tables
More than Engineering Solutions
r0i O'BRICN 6 GCRC

Table 1 - Vibracore Sampling Information from October 2014 Event
Date
Location
Boring ID
Boring Depth
(Ft. MLW)
Number of Samples for
Grain Size Analysis
Sand Percentage
10/14/2014
Bogue Inlet (AIWW)
B1
15.1
3
>90.4%
10/14/2014
Carolina Beach Inlet (AIWW)
C61
16.4
3
>99.8%
10/14/2014
Carolina Beach Inlet (Inlet Mouth)
C132
12.2
4
>96.5%
10/15/2014
Lockwood's Folly Inlet (AIWW)
LF1
17
3
>97.7%
10/15/2014
Lockwood's Folly Inlet (AIWW)
LF2
15.4
4
>99.8%
More than Engineering Solutions CE P UBRIEN 6 GORE

Table 2 - Summary of Vibracore Data Evaluated
Inlet /Study
Sampled Extent
Quantity
Type
Recovery Depth
Beach
Sample
Compatibility
Year
Bogue Inlet
CPE Geotechnical Survey, Bogue Inlet Channel
Bogue Inlet Re- Alignment Channel
24
Vibracore
( -10) - ( -26.8) ft MLW1
Compatible
2002
Realignment; USACE
USACE Data - 2007
Bogue Inlet Crossing
6
Vibracore
( -3) - ( -15) MLLW'
Compatible
2007
USACE Data - 2008
Bogue Inlet Crossing
8
Vibracore
( -2.1) - ( -17.9) MLLW
Compatible
2008
Bogue Banks Beach Nourishment Master Plan
Bogue Inlet Re- Alignment Channel
5
Vibracore
—( -14) ft MLW
Compatible
2012
-2012
O'Brien & Gere Data - 2014
AIWW Crossing
1
Vibracore
> -14 ft MLW
Compatible
2014
New Topsail Inlet
Topsail Beach Nourishment Project, Major
Outside Ocean Bar
21
Vibracore
( -20) - ( -45) ft NAVD88
Compatible
2007
Mod., NCDENR Permit# 22 -09
USACE Data - 2009
Topsail Creek and AIWW
34
Vibracore
( -0.1) - ( -21.4) MLLW
Compatible
2009
Topsail Beach Nourishment Project, Major
Topsail Creek, New Topsail Inlet,
2010 -
Modification Permit Application, NCDENR
16
Vibracore
( -11) - ( -20.5) ft MLW
Compatible
and Banks Channel
2011
Permit# 22 -09
Topsail Creek, New Topsail Inlet,
2012 -
Topsail Beach - 2013 Permit App
36
Vibracore
( -12.5) - ( -23.6) ft NAVD88
Compatible
and Banks Channel
2013
Carolina Beach Inlet
USACE Data - 2003
Carolina Beach Inlet
14
Vibracore
( -3.0) - ( -22.) MLLW
Compatible
2003
More than Engineering Solutions GO GURICN G GERE

Inlet /Study
Sampled Extent
Quantity
Type
Recovery Depth
Beach
Compatibility
Sample
Year
USACE Data - 2006
Carolina Beach Inlet, and AIWW
10
Vibracore
( -3.0) - ( -25.) MLLW
Compatible
2006
USACE Data - 2007
AIWW
8
Vibracore
( -3.2) - ( -23.8) MLLW
Compatible
2007
USACE Data - 2009
Carolina Beach Inlet, and AIWW
31
Vibracore
( -2.4) - ( -48.1) MLLW
Compatible
2009
CP &E Geotechnical Investigation of Carolina
Beach Inlet - 2012
CSDR4 Borrow Area
10
Vibracore
(-18.5) - ( -27) ft MLW cut
depth
Compatible
2012
O'Brien & Gere Data - 2014
Carolina Beach Inlet and AIWW
2
Vibracore
> -10 ft MLW
Compatible
2014
Lockwoods Folly (LWF) Inlet
USACE Data - 1998
LWF Inlet, AIWW Crossing
9
Vibracore
Depth Unknown (no
datum)
Not
Compatible
1998
USACE Data - 1/2002
LWF Inlet, AIWW Crossing
22
Vibracore
> -14 ft MLLW
Compatible
2002
USACE Data - 2008
AIWW Crossing
7
Vibracore
> -14 ft MLLW
Compatible
2008
USACE Data - 2009
AIWW Crossing
10
Vibracore
> -14 ft MLLW
Compatible
2009
O'Brien & Gere Data - 2014
AIWW Crossing
2
Vibracore
> -14 ft MLW
Compatible
2014
Shallotte River Inlet
Brunswick County Beaches - Ocean Isle Beach
CSDR Project
Shallotte Inlet, AIWW Crossing
13
Vibracore
> -15 ft MLLW, > -14 ft
MLLW (AIWW)
Compatible
1998
More than Engineering Solutions GO GBRICN G GCRC

Inlet /Study
Sampled Extent
Quantity
Type
Recovery Depth
Beach
Compatibility
Sample
Year
Ocean Isle East End Renourishment Project
CSDR Borrow Area
10
Vibracore
> -15 ft MLLW
Compatibles
2005
USACE Data - 2008
AIWW Crossings
11
Vibracore
> -14 ft MLLW (AIWW)
Compatible
2008
USACE Data - 2009
AIWW Crossings
17
Vibracore
> -14 ft MLW (AIWW)
Compatible
2009
Notes
1MLW = Mean Low Water
AAIWW = Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway
3MLLW = Mean Lower Low Water
4CSDR = Coastal Storm Damage Reduction
5Compatibility based on successful completion of East End Nourishment
Project.
More than Engineering Solutions GO Q'BRIEN G GERE

Figures
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

Q
E
2
Q
v
M
O
N
O
W
F
Q
F
J
IL
FIGURE 1
SDI -5 MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION 1/30/2015
52139
BOGUE INLET
SEDIMENT EVALUATION
0 2,500 5,000
O'DRIEN Fi GERE
Feet

LEGEND
= Project Area SDI -5 MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION ti FIGURE 2
0 Sufficient Recovery Depth, Beach Compatible NEW TOPSAIL INLET
Insufficient Recove De th, Beach 1/30/2
Compatible ry p SEDIMENT EVALUATION 521139 39
Sufficient Recovery Depth, Incompatible
Q Insufficient Recovery Depth, Incompatible o 1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,0 00
O'13RICN 5 GCRC
Feet

SDI -5 MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION
CAROLINA BEACH INLET
SEDIMENT EVALUATION
500 1,000
Feet
2,000
FIGURE 3
1/30/2015
52139
an GDRICN S GCRC

SDI -5 MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION N FIGURE 4
LOCKWOODS FOLLY INLET 1/30/2015
SEDIMENT EVALUATION 52139
2,500 5,000 GBRIEN 5 GERE
Feet

SDI -5 MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION N FIGURE 5
SHALLOTTE RIVER INLET 5/11,2015
SEDIMENT EVALUATION 52139
5.000
Feet rim G'BRIEN6GERE mmomd
Feet

AppendixA - Vibracore
Boring Logs from October
2014 Sampling
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

O'ORIICN 6 GERC
BOREHOLE AND WELL COMPLETION LOG
BORING NO. B1
PROJECT: SDI -5 Sediment Evaluation
SHEET 1 OF 1
CLIENT:
INSPECTOR: Nathan Simmons
JOB NO. 52139
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Aqua Survey, Inc.
GROUND ELEV.
DRILLER: Matthew Shappell
PURPOSE: Sediment Characterization SAMPLE CORE CASING
DATUM MLW
DATE STARTED 0/14/2014
DRILLING METHOD: Vibracore TYPE - -- - -- - --
DRILL RIG TYPE: Rossfelder P -3 Vibracore DIA. 2" - -- - --
DATE FINISHED 10/14/2014
=
s
s
CO
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
>
m
a
a�
REMARKS
W r.
�s
@
�(D
@ m
(D
(n T
Z) co
N
K
O>
co?
0
a
@ J
tnZ
-2
-4
-6
WATER
-8
-10
11.6
-12
61 (0 -0.5')
99.9% Sand /Gravel. 0.1%
Greenish black (GLEY 1 2.5/10Y) FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, wet,
SP
medium dense, subangular, some shells, no odor.
Fines.
12.5
Greenish black (GLEY 1 2.5/10Y) CLAYEY SILTY VERY FINE
61 (1 -1.5')
98.4% Sand /Gravel. 1.6%
SAND, wet, loose, low to medium plasticity, trace shells, sulfur
Fines.
odor.
NA
61 (1.7-2.2' )
90.4% Sand /Gravel. 9.6%
-14
sc
Fines.
15.1
End of Borehole at 15.1 fbs.
-16
-18
Notes:

O'ORIICN 6 GERC
BOREHOLE AND WELL COMPLETION LOG
BORING NO. CB1
PROJECT: SDI -5 Sediment Evaluation
SHEET 1 OF 1
CLIENT:
INSPECTOR: Nathan Simmons
JOB NO. 52139
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Aqua Survey, Inc.
GROUND ELEV.
DRILLER: Matthew Shappell
PURPOSE: Sediment Characterization SAMPLE CORE CASING
DATUM MLW
DATE STARTED 0/14/2014
DRILLING METHOD: Vibracore TYPE - -- - -- - --
DRILL RIG TYPE: Rossfelder P -3 Vibracore DIA. 2" - -- - --
DATE FINISHED 10/14/2014
=
s
s
CO
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
>
m
a
a�
REMARKS
W r.
�s
@
�(D
@ m
(D
(n T
Z) co
N
K
O>
co?
0
a
@ J
tnZ
-2
-4
-6
WATER
-8
-10
-12
11.9
Reddish brown (5YR 4/3) FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, wet, loose,
non- plastic, subangular, some intermixed black organic material,
sulfur odor.
CB1 (0.5 -1.0')
100% Sand /Gravel. 0.0% Fines.
As above but brown (10YR 5/3) MEDIUM SAND, less odor.
CB1 (1.5 -2.0')
99.8% Sand /Gravel. 0.2%
-14
Fines.
SP
NA
CB1 (2.0 -2.5')
100% Sand /Gravel. 0.0% Fines.
-16
16.4
End of Borehole at 16.4 fbs.
-18
Notes:

O'ORIICN 6 GERC
BOREHOLE AND WELL COMPLETION LOG
BORING NO. CB2
PROJECT: SDI -5 Sediment Evaluation
SHEET 1 OF 1
CLIENT:
INSPECTOR: Nathan Simmons
JOB NO. 52139
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Aqua Survey, Inc.
GROUND ELEV.
DRILLER: Matthew Shappell
PURPOSE: Sediment Characterization SAMPLE CORE CASING
DATUM MLW
DATE STARTED 0/14/2014
DRILLING METHOD: Vibracore TYPE - -- - -- - --
DRILL RIG TYPE: Rossfelder P -3 Vibracore DIA. 2" - -- - --
DATE FINISHED 10/14/2014
=
s
s
CO
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
>
m
a
a�
REMARKS
W r.
�s
@
�(D
@ m
(D
(n T
Z) co
N
K
O>
co?
0
a
@ J
tnZ
-2
-4
WATER
-6
7.2
. .
CB2 (00 -05')
98.7% Sand /Gravel. 1.3%
Dark bluish gray (GLEY 2 4/513) SILTY FINE SAND, wet, medium
dense, low plasticity, some large shell fragments, no odor.
Fines.
8
SM
CB2 (0.5 -1.0')
98.1% Sand /Gravel. 1.9%
Fines.
a.s
As above, but GLEY 2 4/5B) FINE SAND, wet, medium dense,
CB2 (1.5 -2.0')
96.5% Sand /Gravel. 3.5%
non - plastic, little shells, subangular, no odor.
Fines.
CB2 (2.3 -2.8')
98.0% Sand /Gravel. 2.0%
NA
Fines.
-10
SP
-12
12.2
End of Borehole at 12.2 fbs.
-14
-16
-18
Notes: Wave action would not permit sampling further seaward

O'ORIICN 6 GERC
BOREHOLE AND WELL COMPLETION LOG
BORING NO. LF1
PROJECT: SDI -5 Sediment Evaluation
SHEET 1 OF 1
CLIENT:
INSPECTOR: Nathan Simmons
JOB NO. 52139
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Aqua Survey, Inc.
GROUND ELEV.
DRILLER: Matthew Shappell
PURPOSE: Sediment Characterization SAMPLE CORE CASING
DATUM MLW
DATE STARTED 10/15/2014
DRILLING METHOD: Vibracore TYPE - -- - -- - --
DRILL RIG TYPE: Rossfelder P -3 Vibracore DIA. 2" - -- - --
DATE FINISHED 10/15/2014
=
s
s
CO
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
>
m
a
a�
REMARKS
W r.
�s
@
�(D
@ m
(D
(n T
Z) co
N
K
O>
co?
0
a
@ J
tnZ
-2
-4
-6
WATER
-8
-10
-12
12.5
LF1 (0.0 -0.5')
97.7% Sand /Gravel. 2.3%
Greenish black (GLEY 1 2.5/10Y) FINE SAND WITH SILT, wet,
loose, non - plastic, rapid dilatancy, some shells and organics
Fines.
material, sulfur odor
sM
(1.0-1.5-
LF1 (10 -15')
99.1% Sand/Gravel. 0.9%
-14
14.5
mill
Greenish black (GLEY 1 2.5/10Y) FINE SAND, wet, medium
NA
dense, non - plastic, rapid dilatancy, trace shells and organic
PEI
material, sulfur odor.
LF1 (2.7 -3.2' )
99.5% Sand /Gravel. 0.5%
SP
Fines.
-16
As above, but greenish gray (GLEY 1 5/10Y) FINE TO MEDIUM
SAND, dense, no odor.
17.0
End of Borehole at 17.0 fbs.
-18
Notes:

O'ORIICN 6 GERC
BOREHOLE AND WELL COMPLETION LOG
BORING NO. LF2
PROJECT: SDI -5 Sediment Evaluation
SHEET 1 OF 1
CLIENT:
INSPECTOR: Nathan Simmons
JOB NO. 52139
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Aqua Survey, Inc.
GROUND ELEV.
DRILLER: Matthew Shappell
PURPOSE: Sediment Characterization SAMPLE CORE CASING
DATUM MLW
DATE STARTED 10/15/2014
DRILLING METHOD: Vibracore TYPE - -- - -- - --
DRILL RIG TYPE: Rossfelder P -3 Vibracore DIA. 2" - -- - --
DATE FINISHED 10/15/2014
=
s
s
CO
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
>
m
a
a�
REMARKS
W r.
�s
@
�(D
@ m
(D
(n T
Z) co
N
K
O>
co?
0
a
@ J
tnZ
-2
-4
-6
WATER
-8
-10
11.4
Dark greenish gray (GLEY 1 3/10Y) MEDIUM SAND, wet, dense,
-12
SP
non - plastic, subangular, some large shell fragments, no odor.
LF2 (0.3 -0.8')
99.8% Sand /Gravel. 0.2%
12.4
Fines.
Very strong brown (10YR 3/2) FINE SAND WITH SILT, wet,
medium dense, non - plastic, little shells, strong sulfur odor.
99.9% Sand /Gravel. 0.1%
IFE
LF2 (1.5 -2.0')
Fines.
NA
LF2 (2.0 -2.5')
99.8% Sand /Gravel. 0.2%
14
SM
Fines.
As above, but dense, low plasticity, little organic material.
P Y 9
LF2 (2.5 -3.0')
o
99.9 /o Sand /Gravel. 0.1 /o
Fines.
15.4
End of Borehole at 15.4 fbs.
-16
-18
Notes:

Appendix B - Boring Log
Compatibility
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

SDI -5 Maintenance Dredging Permit Application
Sediment Evaluation
Appendix B - Boring Log Compatibility
Boring Log ID
Date
Sufficient Recovery
Depth
Beach Compatible
within Project Depths
Average % Fines (if
Calculated)
BOGUE INLET
61
10/14/2014
Yes
Yes
3.8
BI -1
4/2012
Yes
Yes
0.15% (Given as
composite mean)
BI -2
4/2012
Yes
Yes
BI -3
4/2012
Yes
Yes
BI -4
4/2012
Yes
Yes
BI -5
4/2012
Yes
Yes
BI- AIWW- 08 -V -1
8/26/2008
No
Yes
1.6
BI- AIWW- 08 -V -2
8/26/2008
No
Yes
1.0
BI- AIWW- 08 -V -3
8/26/2008
Yes
Yes
1.3
BI- AIWW- 08 -V -4
8/26/2008
Yes
Yes
1.4
BI- AIWW- 08 -V -5
8/26/2008
Yes
Yes
1.3
BI- AIWW- 08 -V -6
8/26/2008
Yes
Yes
1.1
BI- AIWW- 08 -V -7
8/26/2008
Yes
Yes
0.8
BI- AIWW- 08 -V -8
8/26/2008
Yes
Yes
2.0
BIVC -02 -01
7/18/2002
No
Yes
1.4
BIVC -02 -02
7/19/2002
Yes
Yes
1.2
BIVC -02 -03
7/20/2002
Yes
Yes
1.1
BIVC -02 -04
7/17/2002
Yes
Yes
1.2
BIVC -02 -05
7/17/2002
Yes
Yes
1.8
EICG- 07 -V -1
5/22/2007
Yes
Yes
0.4
EICG- 07 -V -10
5/22/2007
Yes
Yes
0.7
EICG- 07 -V -2
5/22/2007
Yes
Yes
0.2
EICG- 07 -V -3
5/22/2007
Yes
Yes
1.4
EICG- 07 -V -4
5/22/2007
Yes
Yes
8.9
EICG- 07 -V -5
5/22/2007
Yes
Yes
3.0
LB -02 -167
6/13/2002
Yes
Yes
1.0
LB -02 -168
6/13/2002
Yes
Yes
2.3
LB -02 -169
6/13/2002
Yes
Yes
1.3
LB -02 -170
6/13/2002
Yes
Yes
1.3
LB -02 -171
6/13/2002
Yes
Yes
0.8
LB -02 -172
6/13/2002
Yes
Yes
0.9
LB -02 -173
6/13/2002
Yes
Yes
1.0
LB -02 -174
6/13/2002
Yes
Yes
1.0
LB -02 -175
6/13/2002
Yes
Yes
2.1
LB -02 -176
6/17/2002
Yes
Yes
14.3
LB -02 -177
6/17/2002
Yes
Yes
1.9
LB -02 -178
6/17/2002
Yes
No
10.8
LB -02 -179
6/17/2002
Yes
Yes
2.2
LB -02 -180
6/17/2002
No
Yes
1.1
LB -02 -181
6/17/2002
No
Yes
1.6
LB -02 -182
6/18/2002
Yes
Yes
1.6
LB -02 -183
6/18/2002
Yes
Yes
1.2
LB -02 -184
6/18/2002
Yes
Yes
1.2
LB -02 -185
6/18/2002
Yes
Yes
1.0
1 I borings began at a deeper depth than the project depth, compatibility was evaluated based on the composition of the first
sediment layer encountered.
SP - poorly graded sand
SM - clayey sand
SC - silty sand
MH - elastic silt Page 1 of 8

SDI -5 Maintenance Dredging Permit Application
Sediment Evaluation
Appendix B - Boring Log Compatibility
Boring Log ID
Date
Sufficient Recovery
Depth
Beach Compatible
1
within Project Depth
Average % Fines (if
Calculated)
NEW TOPSAIL INLET
BN KCH N -1
4/14/2010
Yes
Yes
0.0
TBVC -07 -02
6/26/2007
Yes
Yes
3.4
TBVC -07 -06
6/26/2007
Yes
Yes
1.2
TBVC -07 -11
6/27/2007
Yes
Yes
1.4
TBVC -07 -15
6/28/2007
Yes
Yes
1.4
TBVC -07 -17
6/28/2007
Yes
Yes
1.2
TBVC -07 -23
7/24/2007
Yes
Yes
1.3
TBVC- 07 -23A
7/24/2007
Yes
Yes
1.6
TCAIWW- 07 -V -1
2/20/2007
Yes
Yes
1.8
TCAIWW- 07 -V -2
2/20/2007
No
Yes
1.0
TCAIWW- 07 -V -4
2/20/2007
Yes
Yes
1.7
TCAIWW- 07 -V -10
2/20/2007
Yes
Yes
0.6
TCAI W W- 07 -V -11
2/20/2007
Yes
Yes
0.1
TCAIWW- 07 -V -12
2/20/2007
Yes
Yes
0.2
TCAIWW- 07 -V -13
2/20/2007
Yes
Yes
0.2
TCAIWW- 07 -V -3
2/20/2007
Yes
Yes
1.0
TCAIWW- 07 -V -5
2/20/2007
Yes
Yes
0.9
TCAIWW- 07 -V -6
2/20/2007
Yes
Yes
0.8
TCAIWW- 07 -V -7
2/20/2007
No
Yes
0.5
TCAIWW- 07 -V -7B
2/20/2007
Yes
Yes
0.4
TCAIWW- 07 -V -8
2/20/2007
Yes
Yes
0.8
TCAIWW- 07 -V -9
2/20/2007
Yes
Yes
0.7
TB -11 -V B -10
9/29/2011
Yes
Yes
0.3
TB- 11 -VB -11
9/29/2011
Yes
Yes
1.3
TB -11 -V B -12
9/29/2011
Yes
Yes
0.3
TB -11 -V B -13
9/30/2011
Yes
Yes
0.2
TB -11 -V B -14
9/30/2011
Yes
Yes
0.0
TB -11 -V B -4
10/4/2011
Yes
Yes
0.6
TB -11 -V B -5
10/3/2011
Yes
Yes
0.3
TB -11 -V B -6
10/3/2011
Yes
Yes
0.2
TB -11 -V B -7
10/2/2011
Yes
Yes
0.5
TB -11 -V B -8
9/30/2011
Yes
Yes
0.4
TB -11 -V B -9
9/29/2011
Yes
Yes
0.4
TOPCRK -1
4/14/2010
Yes
Yes
0.1
TOPCRK-2
4/14/2010
Yes
Yes
0.0
TOPCRK -3
4/14/2010
Yes
Yes
0.2
TOPCRK -4
4/15/2010
Yes
Yes
0.2
TOP- V -09 -1
2/26/2009
No
Yes
"SP"
TOP- V -09 -10
2/26/2009
No
No
"SP" and "SM"
TOP- V -09 -11
2/26/2009
No
Yes
"SP"
TOP- V -09 -12
2/26/2009
No
Yes
"SP"
TOP- V -09 -13
2/26/2009
No
Yes
"SP"
TOP- V -09 -14
2/26/2009
No
Yes
"SP"
TOP- V -09 -15
2/26/2009
No
Yes
"SP"
1 I borings began at a deeper depth than the project depth, compatibility was evaluated based on the composition of the first
sediment layer encountered.
SP - poorly graded sand
SM - clayey sand
SC - silty sand
MH - elastic silt Page 2 of 8

SDI -5 Maintenance Dredging Permit Application
Sediment Evaluation
Appendix B - Boring Log Compatibility
Boring Log ID
Date
Sufficient Recovery
Depth
Beach Compatible
within Project Depth'
Average % Fines (if
Calculated)
NEW TOPSAIL INLET (CONTINUED)
TOP- V -09 -16
2/26/2009
No
Yes
"S P"
TOP- V -09 -17
2/26/2009
No
Yes
"SP"
TOP- V -09 -18
2/26/2009
No
Yes
1.0
TOP- V -09 -19
2/26/2009
No
Yes
1.2
TOP- V -09 -2
2/26/2009
Yes
Yes
"SP"
TOP- V -09 -20
2/26/2009
Yes
Yes
2.4
TOP- V -09 -21
2/26/2009
Yes
Yes
1.1
TOP- V -09 -22
3/2/2009
Yes
Yes
1.3
TOP- V -09 -23
3/2/2009
No
No
18.5
TOP- V -09 -24
3/2/2009
Yes
Yes
2.6
TOP- V -09 -25
3/2/2009
Yes
Yes
2.5
TOP- V -09 -26
3/2/2009
No
No
18.4
TOP- V -09 -27
3/2/2009
Yes
Yes
1.7
TOP- V -09 -28
3/2/2009
Yes
No
42.4
TOP- V -09 -29
3/2/2009
No
No
33.7
TOP- V -09 -3
2/26/2009
No
No
"SP" and "SM"
TOP- V -09 -30
3/2/2009
Yes
Yes
1.2
TOP- V -09 -31
3/2/2009
Yes
Yes
1.8
TOP- V -09 -32
3/2/2009
No
No
16.1
TOP- V -09 -33
3/2/2009
Yes
Yes
1.6
TOP- V -09 -34
3/2/2009
Yes
No
26.45
TOP- V -09 -35
3/2/2009
No
No
11.58
TOP- V -09 -4
2/26/2009
Yes
Yes
"SP"
TOP- V -09 -5
2/26/2009
Yes
Yes
"SP"
TOP- V -09 -6
2/26/2009
Yes
Yes
"S P"
TOP- V -09 -7
2/26/2009
No
Yes
"S P"
TOP- V -09 -8
2/26/2009
Yes
Yes
"SP"
VC- 12 -TB -10
7/31/2012
Yes
Yes
7.7
VC- 12 -TB -11
7/31/2012
Yes
Yes
0.8
VC- 12 -TB -12
8/22/2012
Yes
Yes
0.3
VC- 12 -TB -13
8/17/2012
Yes
Yes
1.8
VC- 12 -TB -14
8/15/2012
Yes
Yes
0.4
VC- 12 -TB -15
8/15/2012
Yes
Yes
3.2
VC- 12 -TB -16
8/2/2012
Yes
Yes
0.2
VC- 12 -TB -17
8/2/2012
Yes
Yes
0.3
VC- 12 -TB -18
8/2/2012
Yes
Yes
0.3
VC- 12 -TB -19
8/17/2012
Yes
Yes
0.5
VC- 12 -TB -2
8/22/2012
Yes
Yes
0.2
VC- 12 -TB -20
8/3/2012
Yes
No
10.6
VC- 12 -TB -21
8/3/2012
Yes
Yes
0.4
VC- 12 -TB -22
8/17/2012
Yes
Yes
0.8
VC- 12 -TB -23
8/3/2012
Yes
Yes
0.4
VC- 12 -TB -24
8/6/2012
Yes
Yes
0.4
VC- 12 -TB -25
8/6/2012
Yes
Yes
0.4
'If borings began at a deeper depth than the project depth, compatibility was evaluated based on the composition of the first
sediment layer encountered.
SP - poorly graded sand
SM - clayey sand
SC - silty sand
MH - elastic silt Page 3 of 8

SDI -5 Maintenance Dredging Permit Application
Sediment Evaluation
Appendix B - Boring Log Compatibility
Boring Log ID
Date
Sufficient Recovery
Depth
Beach Compatible
within Project Depth'
Average % Fines (if
Calculated)
NEW TOPSAIL INLET (CONTINUED)
VC- 12 -TB -26
8/6/2012
Yes
Yes
0.5
VC- 12 -TB -27
8/6/2012
Yes
Yes
0.5
VC- 12 -TB -28
8/6/2012
Yes
Yes
0.3
VC- 12 -TB -29
8/7/2012
Yes
Yes
0.3
VC- 12 -TB -3
8/16/2012
Yes
Yes
0.4
VC- 12 -TB -30
8/7/2012
Yes
Yes
0.2
VC- 12 -TB -31
8/9/2012
Yes
Yes
0.85
VC- 12 -TB -32
8/9/2012
Yes
Yes
0.5
VC- 12 -TB -33
8/9/2012
Yes
Yes
0.5
VC- 12 -TB -4
8/24/2012
Yes
Yes
1.2
VC- 12 -TB -5
8/29/2012
Yes
Yes
0.5
VC- 12 -TB -6
8/23/2012
Yes
Yes
13.6
VC- 12 -TB -7
8/16/2012
Yes
Yes
0.8
VC- 12 -TB -8
7/31/2012
Yes
Yes
0.1
VC- 12 -TB -9
7/31/2012
Yes
Yes
6.9
VC- 13 -TB -1
4/24/2013
Yes
Yes
0.2
VC- 13 -TB -2
4/24/2013
Yes
Yes
0.5
VC- 13 -TB -3
4/24/2013
Yes
Yes
0.2
VC- 13 -TB -4
4/24/2013
Yes
Yes
0.4
CAROLINA BEACH INLET
CB1
10/14/2014
Yes
Yes
0.1
CB2
10/14/2014
Yes
Yes
2.2
CBAI W W- V -09 -1
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.0
CBAIWW- V -09 -2
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.0
CBAIWW- V -09 -3
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.2
CBAIWW- V -09 -4
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.4
CBAIWW- V -09 -5
2/22/2009
Yes
Yes
1.0
CBAIWW- V -09 -6
2/22/2009
Yes
No
43.9
CBI- 03 -V -10
6/17/2003
Yes
Yes
1.3
CBI- 03 -V -11
6/17/2003
Yes
Yes
0.7
CBI- 03 -V -12A
6/17/2003
Yes
Yes
0.3
C13I- 03 -V -13
6/17/2003
Yes
Yes
0.9
CBI- 03 -V -14
6/17/2003
Yes
Yes
0.7
CBI- 03 -V -1B
6/17/2003
Yes
Yes
1.5
CBI- 03 -V -2
6/17/2003
Yes
Yes
0.8
CBI- 03 -V -3
6/17/2003
Yes
Yes
0.5
CBI- 03 -V -4
6/17/2003
Yes
Yes
1.3
CBI- 03 -V -5
6/17/2003
Yes
Yes
1.1
CBI- 03 -V -6
6/17/2003
Yes
Yes
0.5
CBI- 03 -V -7
6/17/2003
Yes
Yes
1.4
CBI- 03 -V -8
6/17/2003
Yes
Yes
1.1
CBI- 03 -V -9
6/17/2003
Yes
Yes
1.3
CBI- 06 -V -10
5/15/2006
Yes
Yes
0.8
CBI- 06 -V -1A
5/15/2006
Yes
Yes
0.4
'If borings began at a deeper depth than the project depth, compatibility was evaluated based on the composition of the first
sediment layer encountered.
SP - poorly graded sand
SM - clayey sand
SC - silty sand
MH - elastic silt Page 4 of 8

SDI -5 Maintenance Dredging Permit Application
Sediment Evaluation
Appendix B - Boring Log Compatibility
Boring Log ID
Date
Sufficient Recovery
Depth
Beach Compatible
within Project Depth'
Average % Fines (if
Calculated)
CAROLINA
BEACH INLET (CONTINUED)
CBI- 06 -V -2
5/15/2006
Yes
Yes
1.4
CBI- 06 -V -3A
5/15/2006
Yes
Yes
2.8
CBI- 06 -V -4
5/15/2006
Yes
Yes
1.2
CBI- 06 -V -5
5/15/2006
Yes
Yes
1.2
CBI- 06 -V -6
5/15/2006
Yes
Yes
1.4
CBI- 06 -V -7
5/15/2006
Yes
Yes
1.8
CBI- 06 -V -8
5/15/2006
No
Yes
2.2
CBI- 06 -V -9
5/15/2006
Yes
Yes
1.3
CBI- V -09 -01
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.2
CBI- V -09 -02
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.8
CBI- V -09 -03
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.4
CBI- V -09 -04
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
0.9
CBI- V -09 -05
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
2.0
CBI- V -09 -06
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
8.5
CBI- V -09 -07
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
8.5
CBI- V -09 -08
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
0.4
CBI- V -09 -09
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.5
CBI- V -09 -10
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.6
CBI- V -09 -11
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.8
CBI- V -09 -12
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.9
CBI- V -09 -13
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.0
CBI- V -09 -14
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.5
CBI- V -09 -15
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.7
CBI- V -09 -16
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
1.7
CBIWW- 07 -V -1
1/4/2007
Yes
Yes
0.9
CBIWW- 07 -V -2
1/4/2007
Yes
Yes
1.0
CBIWW- 07 -V -3
1/4/2007
Yes
Yes
0.8
CBIWW- 07 -V -4
1/4/2007
Yes
Yes
1.0
CBIWW- 07 -V -5
1/4/2007
Yes
Yes
1.3
CBIWW- 07 -V -6
1/4/2007
Yes
Yes
1.0
CBIWW- 07 -V -7
1/4/2007
Yes
Yes
1.0
CBIWW- 07 -V -8
1/4/2007
Yes
Yes
1.0
CBVC -12 -01
6/5/2012
Yes
Yes
Composite of 1.87%
CBVC -12 -02
6/5/2012
Yes
Yes
CBVC -12 -03
6/5/2012
Yes
Yes
CBVC -12 -04
6/5/2012
Yes
Yes
CBVC -12 -05
6/5/2012
Yes
Yes
CBVC -12 -06
6/5/2012
Yes
Yes
CBVC -12 -07
6/5/2012
Yes
Yes
CBVC -12 -08
6/5/2012
Yes
Yes
CBVC -12 -09
6/5/2012
Yes
Yes
CBVC -12 -10
6/5/2012
Yes
Yes
CBXWAI W W- V -09 -1
2/21/2009
Yes
Yes
CBXWAIWW- V -09 -2
2/22/2009
Yes
No
60.3
'If borings began at a deeper depth than the project depth, compatibility was evaluated based on the composition of the first
sediment layer encountered.
SP - poorly graded sand
SM - clayey sand
SC - silty sand
MH - elastic silt Page 5 of 8

SDI -5 Maintenance Dredging Permit Application
Sediment Evaluation
Appendix B - Boring Log Compatibility
Boring Log ID
Date
Sufficient Recovery
Depth
Beach Compatible
1
within Project Depth
Average % Fines (if
Calculated)
CAROLINA
BEACH INLET (CONTINUED)
CBXWAIWW- V -09 -3
2/22/2009
No
No
43.8
CBXWAIWW- V -09 -4
2/22/2009
No
Yes
1.6
CBXWAIWW- V -09 -5
2/22/2009
Yes
Yes
1.5
CBXWAIWW- V -09 -6
2/22/2009
Yes
Yes
1.4
CBXWAIWW- V -09 -7
2/22/2009
No
No
31.0
CBXWAIWW- V -09 -8
2/22/2009
No
No
39.8
CBXWAIWW- V -09 -9
2/22/2009
No
No
28.8
LOCKWOOD'S FOLLY INLET
BCAIWW- 08 -V -11
4/17/2008
Yes
Yes
0.5
BCAIWW- 08 -V -12
4/17/2008
Yes
Yes
0.4
BCAIWW- 08 -V -13
4/17/2008
No
Yes
0.2
BCAIWW- 08 -V -14
4/17/2008
No
Yes
0.2
BCAIWW- 08 -V -15
4/17/2008
No
Yes
0.2
BCAIWW- 08 -V -16
4/17/2008
No
Yes
0.0
BCAIWW- 08 -V -17
4/17/2008
No
Yes
0.2
LF1
10/15/2014
Yes
Yes
1.2
LF2
10/15/2014
Yes
Yes
0.2
LFI -02 -1
1/29/2002
No
Yes
0.9
LFI -02 -10
1/29/2002
No
Yes
0.9
LFI -02 -11
1/29/2002
No
Yes
0.8
LFI -02 -12
1/29/2002
No
Yes
1.0
LFI -02 -13
1/29/2002
No
Yes
0.3
LFI -02 -14
1/29/2002
No
Yes
0.7
LFI -02 -15
1/29/2002
No
Yes
0.8
LFI -02 -2
1/29/2002
Yes
Yes
6.5
LFI -02 -20
1/29/2002
Yes
Yes
11.7
LFI -02 -22
1/30/2002
Yes
Yes
6.5
LFI -02 -23
1/30/2002
Yes
Yes
3.1
LFI -02 -24
1/30/2002
Yes
Yes
0.9
LFI -02 -25
1/30/2002
Yes
Yes
5.0
LFI -02 -26
1/30/2002
Yes
Yes
2.0
LFI -02 -27
1/30/2002
No
Yes
1.2
LFI -02 -28
1/30/2002
No
Yes
1.0
LFI -02 -3
1/29/2002
No
Yes
4.7
LFI -02 -4
1/29/2002
Yes
Yes
0.6
LFI -02 -5
1/29/2002
Yes
Yes
0.8
LFI -02 -6
1/29/2002
No
Yes
1.6
LFI -02 -8
1/30/2002
No
Yes
1.6
LFI -02 -9
1/29/2002
Yes
Yes
0.9
LFI -1
2/6/1998
No
No
20.3
LFI -2
2/6/1998
No
Yes
0.8
LFI -2A
2/6/1998
No
No
15.7
LFI -3
2/6/1998
No
Yes
0.9
LFI -4
2/6/1998
No
Yes
0.7
1 I borings began at a deeper depth than the project depth, compatibility was evaluated based on the composition of the first
sediment layer encountered.
SP - poorly graded sand
SM - clayey sand
SC - silty sand
MH - elastic silt Page 6 of 8

SDI -5 Maintenance Dredging Permit Application
Sediment Evaluation
Appendix B - Boring Log Compatibility
Boring Log ID
Date
Sufficient Recovery
Depth
Beach Compatible
1
within Project Depth
Average % Fines (if
Calculated)
LOCKWOOD'S FOLLY INLET (CONTINUED)
LFI -4A
2/6/1998
No
Yes
0.8
LFI -5
2/6/1998
No
Yes
1.0
LFI -6A
2/6/1998
No
Yes
1.4
LFI -7
2/6/1998
No
Yes
1.9
LFIXAIWW- V -09 -1
2/20/2009
No
Yes
1.8
LFIXAIWW- V -09 -10
2/20/2009
Yes
Yes
3.7
LFIXAIWW- V -09 -2
2/20/2009
Yes
No
34.4
LFIXAIWW- V -09 -3
2/20/2009
No
Yes
1.0
LFIXAIWW- V -09 -4
2/20/2009
No
Yes
0.9
LFIXAIWW- V -09 -5
2/20/2009
No
Yes
1.0
LFIXAIWW- V -09 -7
2/20/2009
No
Yes
1.4
LFIXAIWW- V -09 -8
2/20/2009
Yes
Yes
1.1
LFIXAIWW- V -09 -9
2/20/2009
No
No
16.1
LFIXAIWW- V -09 -6
2/20/2009
No
Yes
1.2
SHALLOTTE RIVER INLET
BCAI W W- 08 -V -1
4/16/2008
Yes
Yes
0.2
BCAIWW- 08 -V -10
4/16/2008
Yes
Yes
0.3
BCAIWW- 08 -V -2
4/16/2008
Yes
No
21.2
BCAIWW- 08 -V -2A
4/16/2008
No
No
36.0
BCAIWW- 08 -V -3
4/16/2008
No
Yes
0.6
BCAIWW- 08 -V -4
4/16/2008
No
Yes
0.6
BCAIWW- 08 -V -5
4/16/2008
Yes
Yes
0.3
BCAIWW- 08 -V -6
4/16/2008
Yes
Yes
0.4
BCAIWW- 08 -V -7
4/16/2008
No
Yes
2.8
BCAIWW- 08 -V -8
4/16/2008
Yes
No
27.8
BCAIWW- 08 -V -9
4/16/2008
No
Yes
0.4
01 -05 -03
4/20/2005
No
Yes
1.9
01 -05 -05
4/20/2005
No
Yes
1.6
01 -05 -06
4/20/2005
Yes
Yes
2.3
01 -05 -07
4/20/2005
No
Yes
8.1
01- 05 -08A
4/20/2005
No
Yes
1.6
01 -05 -09
4/20/2005
No
Yes
1.0
01 -05 -10
4/20/2005
Yes
Yes
1.5
01 -05 -11
4/20/2005
No
No
15.4
01 -05 -12
4/20/2005
No
Yes
1.8
01 -05 -13
4/20/2005
No
Yes
1.6
SHI -1
2/5/1998
Yes
Yes
7.8
SHI -12
2/5/1998
Yes
Yes
0.7
SHI -13
2/5/1998
No
Yes
0.8
SHI -14
2/5/1998
Yes
Yes
1.8
SHI -15
2/5/1998
Yes
Yes
13.3
SHI -16
2/5/1998
Yes
Yes
23.5
SHI -2
2/5/1998
Yes
Yes
1.0
SHI -3
2/5/1998
No
Yes
13.0
11f borings began at a deeper depth than the project depth, compatibility was evaluated based on the composition of the first
sediment layer encountered.
SP - poorly graded sand
SM - clayey sand
SC - silty sand
MH - elastic silt Page 7 of 8

SDI -5 Maintenance Dredging Permit Application
Sediment Evaluation
Appendix B - Boring Log Compatibility
Boring Log ID
Date
Sufficient Recovery
Depth
Beach Compatible
within Project Depths
Average % Fines (if
Calculated)
SHALLOTTE RIVER INLET (CONTINUED)
SHI -4
2/5/1998
No
Yes
0.9
SHI -5
2/5/1998
No
Yes
1.1
SHI -6
2/5/1998
No
Yes
0.8
SHI -7
2/5/1998
No
Yes
1.2
SHI -8
2/5/1998
No
Yes
0.9
SHI- V -09 -1
2/19/2009
Yes
Yes
"SP"
SHI- V -09 -17
3/4/2009
No
No
"SP" and "MH"
SHI- V -09 -2
2/19/2009
Yes
No
"SP" and "SM"
SHI- V -09 -3
2/19/2009
No
No
"SP" and "SC"
SHI- V -09 -5
2/20/2009
Yes
Yes
"SP"
SHI- V -09 -7
2/20/2009
Yes
Yes
"SP"
SHI- V -09 -8
2/20/2009
Yes
Yes
"SP"
SIWAIWW- V -09 -6
2/19/2009
No
Yes
1.1
SIXAI W W- V -09 -1
2/19/2009
No
No
12.1
SIXAIWW- V -09 -10
2/19/2009
No
Yes
2.5
SIXAIWW- V -09 -2
2/19/2009
Yes
Yes
3.1
SIXAIWW- V -09 -3
2/19/2009
No
Yes
5.0
SIXAIWW- V -09 -5
2/19/2009
No
No
17.0
SIXAIWW- V -09 -8
2/19/2009
No
No
13.8
SIXAIWW- V -09 -9
2/19/2009
No
No
11.8
SIXWAIWW- V -09 -4
2/19/2009
Yes
Yes
1.0
SIXWAIWW- V -09 -7
2/19/2009
No
No
10.6
1 I borings began at a deeper depth than the project depth, compatibility was evaluated based on the composition of the first
sediment layer encountered.
SP - poorly graded sand
SM - clayey sand
SC - silty sand
MH - elastic silt Page 8 of 8

Attachment 5.3 -
Supplemental Biological
Assessment
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

Town of Emerald Isle
Town of Topsail Beach
New Hanover County
Town of Holden Beach
Town of Ocean Isle Beach
May 2015
$2 GBRICN6GCRC

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Tableof Contents ................................................................................................................................................................... ............................... i
1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................... ..............................1
1.1 Project Description .................................................................................................................................................. ..............................1
1.2 Regulatory Background ......................................................................................................................................... ..............................2
1.3 Listed Species and Critical Habitats for the SDI- 5 ...................................................................................... ..............................2
1.4 Collection of Existing Data .................................................................................................................................... ..............................3
1.5 Species Warranting Supplemental Assessment .......................................................................................... ..............................3
2. Loggerhead Sea Turtle Critical Habitat ................................................................................................................... ..............................4
2.1 Regulatory Background ......................................................................................................................................... ..............................4
2.2 Nearshore Reproductive Critical Habitat ( NMFS) ...................................................................................... ..............................4
2.2.1 Species Habitat Description for Nearshore Reproductive Critical Habitat ............................. ..............................4
2.3 Nesting Critical Habitat ( USFWS) ...................................................................................................................... ..............................5
2.3.1 Species Habitat Description ........................................................................................................................ ..............................6
2.4 Current Status of Species ...................................................................................................................................... ..............................7
2.5 Current Baseline Conditions ................................................................................................................................ ..............................8
2.6 Effects of the Proposed Action ............................................................................................................................ ..............................8
2.6.1 Direct and Indirect Effects ........................................................................................................................... ..............................8
2.6.2 Cumulative Effects ........................................................................................................................................... ..............................9
2.6.3 Recommended Effect Determination ...................................................................................................... ..............................9
3. Atlantic Sturgeon ............................................................................................................................................................ .............................10
3.1 Regulatory Background ....................................................................................................................................... .............................10
3.2 Species Habitat Description ............................................................................................................................. ...............................
10
3.3 Current Status of Species .................................................................................................................................. ...............................
10
3.4 Current Baseline Conditions .............................................................................................................................. .............................10
3.5 Effects of the Proposed Action .......................................................................................................................... .............................10
3.5.1 Direct and Indirect Ef fects ...................................................................................................................... .............................11
3.5.2 Cumulative Effect ....................................................................................................................................... .............................11
3.5.3 Recommended Effect Determination ............................................................................................... ............................... 11
4. Rufa Red Knot ................................................................................................................................................................ ............................... 12
4.1 Regulatory Background ....................................................................................................................................... .............................12
Final: May 11, 2015
E&J, GBRIEN 6 GERE

4.2 Species Habitat Description ............................................................................................................................... .............................12
4.3 Current Status of Species .................................................................................................................................... .............................12
4.4 Current Baseline Conditions .............................................................................................................................. .............................13
4.5 Effects of the Proposed Action .......................................................................................................................... .............................13
4.5.1 Direct and Indirect Effects ......................................................................................................................... .............................13
4.5.2 Cumulative Effects ......................................................................................................................................... .............................13
4.5.3 Recommended Effect Determination .................................................................................................... .............................13
5.0 Conservation Measures ............................................................................................................................................ .............................14
6.0 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................................................... .............................15
7.0 References ...................................................................................................................................................................... .............................16
8.0 List of Preparers .......................................................................................................................................................... .............................19
Tables
1. Federally Listed Species Potentially Present Within the Proposed Inlet Project Areas
2. Summary of Historical Biological Effect Evaluations
3. Summary of Recommended Effect Determinations for Federally Listed Species
Figures
1. Bogue Inlet Loggerhead Critical Habitat Map
2. New Topsail Inlet Loggerhead Critical Habitat Map
3. Carolina Beach Inlet Loggerhead Critical Habitat Map
4. Lockwoods Folly Inlet Loggerhead Critical Habitat Map
S. Shallotte River Inlet Loggerhead Critical Habitat Map
ii Final: May 11, 2015
GO GORICN 6 GCRC

1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Many of North Carolina's shallow draft inlets have not been in a Presidential budget since 2005 (e.g., Bogue,
Carolina Beach and Lockwoods Folly). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Headquarters is also
internally assessing the viability of the side -cast dredge plant "Merritt"; the Corps' primary dredge plant for
shallow draft inlet maintenance in N.C. If North Carolina's shallow draft inlet maintenance dredging
continues receiving limited or no support within Presidential budgets, and USACE Headquarters fails to
garner future fiscal support and potentially determines the "Merritt" as non - viable, local stakeholders must
have another alternative. One alternative is for the local stakeholders adjoining the shallow draft inlets and
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW) crossing to contract the maintenance dredging on their own. To do
this, they would need authorizations (permits) allowing local maintenance dredging within their specific
AIWW crossings and inlets.
The Proposed Action consists of maintenance dredging and beneficial placement at five inlets and associated
AIWW crossings: Bogue, New Topsail, Carolina Beach, Lockwoods Folly, and Shallotte River Inlet. With the
exception of Shallotte River Inlet, which is a federally- authorized Coastal Storm Damage Reduction (CSDR)
borrow area, these inlets are federally- authorized shallow -draft inlets, and are referred to as "the SDI -5" in this
application for convenience. The applicants are the five local governments adjacent to the inlets (listed below),
who wish to obtain major Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) permits to continue the ongoing federal
navigation maintenance dredging program at the inlets and the AIWW crossings, which is currently conducted
by the USACE Wilmington District. The project areas and applicants are listed as follows:
Project Area
Applicant
Bogue Inlet, Connecting Channel, AIWW Crossing
Town of Emerald Isle
New Topsail Inlet, Topsail Creek, Banks Channel, AIWW
Crossing
Town of Topsail Beach
Carolina Beach Inlet, AIWW Crossing
New Hanover County
Lockwoods Folly Inlet, AIWW Crossing
Town of Holden Beach
Shallotte River Inlet CSDR Borrow Area, as well as the
AIWW Crossing
Town of Ocean Isle Beach
Shallotte Inlet is a federally- authorized CSDR Borrow Area, rather than a federally- authorized navigation
channel. In this permit application, the Town of Ocean Isle Beach is seeking approval to maintain the navigable
deepwater channel within the CSDR Borrow Area, which extends across the majority of the inlet and is dredged
on a 3 -year interval.
The N.C. Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) Major Permit application will serve as the umbrella
permit application for the processing of a NCDCM Major Permit as well as other state and federal
authorizations. The intended result is the acquisition of locally held authorizations (NCDCM Major
Permit /USACE General Permit 291) for each inlet issued to each participating applicant.
The authorized maintenance dredging at each inlet would mimic the ongoing, approved USACE
maintenance dredging program for each inlet, which includes the AIWW crossings, connecting channels,
and the inlet throats out through the currently authorized USACE inlet linear distances beyond the
International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (referred to as COLREGS) demarcation line. The
inlets have typically needed maintenance on a roughly quarterly basis by the USACE Wilmington District,
and AIWW Crossing maintenance has typically been needed every 1 -2 years. The SDI -5 applicants would
continue this maintenance schedule to the extent practical, subject to the navigational needs at a particular
1 Final: May 11, 2015
GO GBRIEN 6 GERE

inlet. To improve efficiency and limit potential impacts, the SDI -5 applicants may combine AIWW Crossing
and inlet maintenance events.
The applicants would continue the USACE Wilmington District's use of the least -cost method of disposal,
and would select from currently- approved dredge material management locations including shoreline
beneficial placement, nearshore placement and /or upland confined disposal. The project area for each
inlet is depicted in Figures 1 through S. The Proposed Action includes the AIWW Crossing wideners
maintained by the USACE Wilmington District, as summarized in the following excerpted table:
Proposed AIWW Inlet Crossing Wideners.
Notes:
' = Distance measured parallel to AIWW from appropmate center of the inlet crossing
z = Distance measured perpendicular to AIWW
3 = Width of main easterly widener area toward inlet; number in parentheses is the length (parallel to AIWW at the indicated width
Source: Environmental Assessment: Channel Wideners at Inlet Crossings, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW), North
Carolina. USACE Wilmington District, Wilmington, NC. December 1997.
1.2 REGULATORY BACKGROUND
Inlet maintenance dredging and beneficial sand placement activities can affect species protected under the 1973
Endangered Species Act, as amended (ESA). The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) has jurisdiction of those
species that occur above mean high water (MHW), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAH) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has jurisdiction of species that occur below MHW.
Because the Proposed Action will require issuance of a federal permit, the federal permitting agency ( USACE
Wilmington District) must evaluate the potential effect of the federal action on protected species under the ESA.
If not previously evaluated, the USACE Wilmington District must prepare a Biological Assessment (BA) that
evaluates the Proposed Action. If the BA finds that the action may affect, and is likely to adversely affect a
protected species, formal ESA Section 7 Consultation with the USFWS and /or NMFS is required to evaluate the
effects. In the consultation, USFWS /NMFS evaluates the BA, and issues a Biological Opinion (BO) to authorize
takes, if necessary, and /or identify reasonable and prudent measures that are required to avoid and minimize
potential effects to the protected species. This supplemental BA has been prepared to assist the USACE
Wilmington District in its consultation with the USFWS and NMFS on the issuance of General Permit 291 for the
Proposed Action.
1.3 LISTED SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITATS FOR THE SDI -5
Table 1 provides a summarized list of the federally listed species endangered, threatened and candidate plant
and animal species potentially present within the SDI -5 project areas. This list was created based on review of
existing biological studies, assessments, and permit application documentation previously prepared for and /or
adjacent the five inlet project areas. Additionally, review of the USFWS Information, Planning, and Conservation
System (IPaC) website and mapping system was performed for each designated inlet area in November 2014
(USFWS 2014a). Results of the IPaC review confirmed the list in Table 1 and did not identify additional species
for the inlet project areas.
2 Final: May 11, 2015
GO GBRIEN 6 GERE
MAXIMUM WIDENER AREA
AIWW DESCRIPTION
LENGTH (ft)'
WIDTH (ft)
CROSSING NAME
REACH SECTION
TANGENT
NORTH
SOUTH
EAST' WEST
Bogue Inlet
Beaufort - Cape Fear River I
F, G
2000
1500
200 (1700)
0
New Topsail Inlet
Beaufort - Cape Fear River III
8
1600
1600
200 (1000)
50
Mason Inlet
Beaufort - Cape Fear River III
12
1600
1600
700 (600)
50
Masonboro Inlet
Beaufort - Cape Fear River IV
3
2100
1700
200 (1500)
50
Carolina Beach Inlet
Beaufort - Cape Fear River lV
1
2500
900
250 (1300)
50
Lockwoods Folly Inlet
Cape Fear River - Little River
11
1600
1600
400 (650)
5o
Shallotte Inlet
Cape Fear River - Little River
19,20
1500
1600
20D 130D
50
Notes:
' = Distance measured parallel to AIWW from appropmate center of the inlet crossing
z = Distance measured perpendicular to AIWW
3 = Width of main easterly widener area toward inlet; number in parentheses is the length (parallel to AIWW at the indicated width
Source: Environmental Assessment: Channel Wideners at Inlet Crossings, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW), North
Carolina. USACE Wilmington District, Wilmington, NC. December 1997.
1.2 REGULATORY BACKGROUND
Inlet maintenance dredging and beneficial sand placement activities can affect species protected under the 1973
Endangered Species Act, as amended (ESA). The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) has jurisdiction of those
species that occur above mean high water (MHW), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAH) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has jurisdiction of species that occur below MHW.
Because the Proposed Action will require issuance of a federal permit, the federal permitting agency ( USACE
Wilmington District) must evaluate the potential effect of the federal action on protected species under the ESA.
If not previously evaluated, the USACE Wilmington District must prepare a Biological Assessment (BA) that
evaluates the Proposed Action. If the BA finds that the action may affect, and is likely to adversely affect a
protected species, formal ESA Section 7 Consultation with the USFWS and /or NMFS is required to evaluate the
effects. In the consultation, USFWS /NMFS evaluates the BA, and issues a Biological Opinion (BO) to authorize
takes, if necessary, and /or identify reasonable and prudent measures that are required to avoid and minimize
potential effects to the protected species. This supplemental BA has been prepared to assist the USACE
Wilmington District in its consultation with the USFWS and NMFS on the issuance of General Permit 291 for the
Proposed Action.
1.3 LISTED SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITATS FOR THE SDI -5
Table 1 provides a summarized list of the federally listed species endangered, threatened and candidate plant
and animal species potentially present within the SDI -5 project areas. This list was created based on review of
existing biological studies, assessments, and permit application documentation previously prepared for and /or
adjacent the five inlet project areas. Additionally, review of the USFWS Information, Planning, and Conservation
System (IPaC) website and mapping system was performed for each designated inlet area in November 2014
(USFWS 2014a). Results of the IPaC review confirmed the list in Table 1 and did not identify additional species
for the inlet project areas.
2 Final: May 11, 2015
GO GBRIEN 6 GERE

Federally listed threatened or endangered species that have been identified in the associated inlet counties
(Carteret, Pender, New Hanover, and Brunswick), but are not associated with barrier island, estuarine, or
marine habitats in the vicinity of the project have been excluded from review.
1.4 COLLECTION OF EXISTING DATA
The USACE Wilmington District has been performing maintenance dredging in the five inlet areas since 1982,
and as early as 1913, in the case of Shallotte River Inlet. As such, a number of ESA Section 7 consultations with
the USFWS and NMFS have been conducted during this time. Where available, these studies have been
assembled through coordination with the USACE Wilmington District and the local governments surrounding
the five inlets. The assembled studies contain USFWS and NMFS consultation information from the 1980s to as
recent as April 2014, and have been incorporated into this assessment as Table 2, which summarizes the studies,
including project effect recommendations and conservation measures.
1.5 SPECIES WARRANTING SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Based on a review of the assembled studies, the following more recent federal listings are not as thoroughly
documented for all five inlets, and thus warrant supplemental assessments:
Loggerhead sea turtle ( Caretta caretta) critical habitat
Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus)
Rufa red knot (Calidris canutus rufa)
The following sections comprise the Supplemental Biological Assessment for the Proposed Action, and include
the listed species and critical habitats for the five inlets, the project effect conclusions from previous
environmental studies, and the supplemental assessments for loggerhead sea turtle critical habitat, Atlantic
sturgeon, and rufa red knot.
3 Final: May 11, 2015 GO O'BRICN 6 GCRC

2. LOGGERHEAD SEA TURTLE CRITICAL HABITAT
2.1 REGULATORY BACKGROUND
The loggerhead sea turtle ( Caretta caretta) was originally listed worldwide as a threatened species on July 28,
1978 (43 FR 32800) pursuant to the ESA. Critical habitat was not designated for the loggerhead sea turtles at
that time. Pursuant to a joint memorandum of understanding, signed in July 1977 and renewed in January 2010,
the USFWS has jurisdiction over sea turtles on land, which includes nesting beaches, and the NMFS has
jurisdiction over sea turtles in the marine environment, which includes oceans and estuaries (NMFS, 1977). On
September 22, 2011 (76 FR 58868), NMFS and USFWS jointly published a final rule revising the loggerhead sea
turtle's listing from a single worldwide threatened species to nine Distinct Population Segments (DPSs), two of
which are located within U.S. jurisdiction (Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS and North Pacific Ocean DPS) (NMFS,
2013).
Critical habitat is a term in the ESA that identifies geographic areas containing features essential for the
conservation of a listed species and that may require special management considerations or protection ( USFWS,
2013a). Pursuant to the ESA, on July 10, 2014, the NMFS issued a final rule (79 FR 39855, 50 CFR 226) to
designate critical habitat for the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS within the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico.
Critical habitat areas for the loggerhead sea turtle include 38 occupied marine areas that contain one or a
combination of the following habitat types: nearshore reproductive habitat, wintering areas, breeding areas,
constricted migratory corridors, and /or seaweed (Sargassum) habitat (NMFS, 2013).
Additionally, on July 10, 2014, the USFWS issued a final rule (79 FR 39755, 50 CFR 17) to designate specific
areas of terrestrial habitat (nesting beaches) of the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coasts as critical habitat for
the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS in accordance with the ESA. Approximately 685 miles of coastline beaches
containing 88 nesting locations fall within the boundaries of the designated loggerhead sea turtle critical habitat
( USFWS, 2014b).
2.2 NEARSHORE REPRODUCTIVE CRITICAL HABITAT (NMFS)
Specific critical habitat units under the jurisdiction of the NMFS that are applicable to the SDI -5 project areas are
listed below, and are depicted on Figures 1 through 5:
■ LOGG -N -3 - Bogue Banks and Bear Island, Carteret and Onslow Counties: This unit contains nearshore
reproductive habitat only. The unit consists of nearshore area from Beaufort Inlet to Bear Inlet (crossing
Bogue Inlet) and seaward 1.6 km (one mile).
■ LOGG -N -4 - Topsail Island and Lea- Huttaf Island, Onslow and Pender Counties: This unit contains
nearshore reproductive habitat only. The unit consists of nearshore area from Browns Inlet to Rich Inlet
(crossing New River Inlet and New Topsail Inlet) and seaward 1.6 km (one mile).
■ LOGG -N -5 -Pleasure Island, Bald Head Island, Oak Island, and Holden Beach, New Hanover and
Brunswick Counties: This unit contains nearshore reproductive habitat only. The unit consists of nearshore
area from Carolina Beach Inlet around Cape Fear to Shallotte Inlet and seaward 1.6 km (one mile).
2.2.1 Species Habitat Description for Nearshore Reproductive Critical Habitat
Loggerhead sea turtles range extends from Newfoundland, Canada to as far south as Argentina (NMFS, 2013).
The NMFS- designated critical habitat types include: nearshore reproductive habitat, breeding areas, and
wintering habitat, constricted migratory corridors, and seaweed (Sargassum) habitat. These critical habitats
occur in the following zones:
1. Neritic zone - The nearshore marine environments from surface to sea floor where water depths do not
exceed 656 feet. These environments are utilized as reproductive habitat (inter- nesting females and
breeding adults), as a transitional zone (from land to sea) for hatchlings (swim frenzy stage), and as a
migratory corridor (continental shelf waters). Migrating juveniles and adults may forage in Sargassum
4 Final: May 11, 2015 r0i O'BRIEN 6 GORE

habitats in the neritic zone as well. The entire continental shelf, including estuaries, bays, and sounds,
serves as foraging grounds for juvenile and adult loggerhead sea turtles (NMFS, 2013, 2014b).
2. Oceanic zone -The open ocean environment with water depths greater than 656 ft, and where pelagic
juveniles and adults swim and feed in Sargassum habitats (NMFS, 2013, 2014b).
The nearshore reproductive habitat is used for hatchling transition to open waters, and for nesting females to
transition back and forth between open waters and nesting beaches during the nesting season. NMFS nearshore
reproductive habitats are located directly offshore of the critical habitat high density nesting and supporting
beaches designated by the USFWS (NMFS, 2013).
According to Arendt et aL (2012), loggerhead sea turtles in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS likely breed
anywhere that reproductively active males and females encounter each other during the breeding season.
Additionally, for more efficient propagation, breeding occurs where breeding -age adults either remain in regular
proximity to each other or migrate to specific locations for breeding. Two locations in Florida, from Marquesas
Keys and Martin County /Palm Beach County line and south of Cape Canaveral, have been identified as the
primary loggerhead sea turtle breeding sites, as these areas have been documented to contain large
concentrations of reproductively active male and female loggerhead sea turtles in the spring, prior to the nesting
season (NMFS, 2013). Additionally, 80% of all loggerhead sea turtle nesting in the southeastern U.S. also occurs
in Florida (NMFS and USFWS, 2008).
Wintering habitat for loggerhead sea turtles may vary depending on location, foraging locations, and associated
environmental features [e.g., Gulf Stream (NMFS, 2013)]. Morreale and Standora (2005) note that turtles
migrate southward past Cape Hatteras, NC when water temperatures cool, but the end destination appears to
vary. That is, some turtles migrate to more southerly locales (Florida), while others winter further north (in
southern North Carolina, south of Cape Hatteras). Onslow Bay, south of Cape Hatteras, is the primary wintering
habitat in North Carolina, between depths of 20 meters and 100 meters, where water temperatures likely
remain above 10° Celsius (C), near the lower range of loggerhead sea turtle temperature tolerance (NMFS,
2013),
The loggerhead sea turtle migratory corridor lies mostly within the neritic zone; however, loggerhead sea turtles
have been known to migrate in the deeper water of the oceanic zone (NMFS, 2013). For those loggerhead sea
turtles that migrate northward in the spring to foraging areas in the Mid - Atlantic Bight (coastal region from
Massachusetts to North Carolina), and southward in the fall (to waters with more suitable water temperatures,
e.g., south of Cape Hatteras), passage through the deeper oceanic waters off North Carolina is necessary (NMFS,
2013). The continental shelf width of the Mid - Atlantic Bight is approximately 62 miles, narrowing off Cape
Hatteras to approximately 18.6 miles, and then increasing in width southward from Cape Hatteras to roughly 62
miles in Onslow Bay (SAFMC, 2002; Werner et al., 1999). This constriction results in a narrow strip of available
neritic habitat off Cape Hatteras for migrating and foraging loggerhead sea turtles (NMFS, 2013).
The NMFS 2013 Biological Report suggests that juvenile and adult loggerhead sea turtles may actively select
Sargassum raft habitats for shelter and foraging opportunities. Hatchling, juvenile, and adult loggerhead sea
turtles are known to eat vegetation, jellyfish, and bottom dwelling (benthic) invertebrates such as mollusks
(whelk and conch) and crabs in Sargassum rafts within the neritic and oceanic zones, depending on their life
stage (Dodd, 1988; NMFS and USFWS, 2008). In the warmer months, loggerhead sea turtles will forage along the
northern Atlantic Coast states; during the colder months, loggerhead sea turtles will forage along the migratory
corridor as they swim south to warmer waters (NMFS, 2013).
2.3 NESTING CRITICAL HABITAT ( USFWS)
In the July 10, 2014 rule (79 FR 39755, 50 CFR 17), the USFWS listed the following critical habitat areas in the
vicinity of the Proposed Action for the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS (Figures 1 through 5):
■ LOGG- T- NC -01- Bogue Banks, Carteret County: This unit consists of 38.9 km (24.2 mi) of island shoreline
from Beaufort Inlet to Bogue Inlet. The unit includes lands from the MHW line landward to the toe of the
5 Final: May 11, 2015 r0i O'BRICN 6 IGCRE

secondary dune or developed structures. This unit is capable of supporting an expansion of high- density
loggerhead sea turtle nesting from an adjacent unit (LOGG- T- NC -02).
LOGG- T- NC -02- Bear Island, Onslow County: This unit consists of 6.6 km (4.1 mi) of island shoreline from
Bogue Inlet to Bear Inlet. The unit includes lands from the MHW line landward to the toe of the secondary
dune or developed structures. This unit contains high - density loggerhead sea turtle nesting.
LOGG- T- NC -03- Topsail Island, Onslow and Pender Counties: This unit consists of 35.0 km (21.8 mi) of
island shoreline from New River Inlet to New Topsail Inlet. The unit includes lands from the MHW line to the
toe of the secondary dune or developed structures. This unit has high - density nesting by loggerhead sea
turtles.
LOGG- T -NC -04 - Lea - Hutoff Island, Pender County: This unit consists of 6.1 km (3.8 mi) of island
shoreline from New Topsail Inlet to Rich Inlet. Following the closure of Old Topsail Inlet in 1998, two islands,
Lea Island and Hutaff Island, joined to form what is now a single island referred to as Lea - Hutaff Island. The
unit includes lands from the MHW line to the toe of the secondary dune or developed structures. This unit is
capable of supporting an expansion of high- density loggerhead sea turtle nesting from an adjacent unit
(LOGG- T- NC -03).
LOGG- T -NC -05 - Pleasure Island, New Hanover County: This supporting unit consists of 18.6 km (11.5 mi)
of island shoreline from Carolina Beach Inlet to 33.91433 N, 77.94408 W (historic location of Corncake Inlet).
The unit includes lands from the MHW line to the toe of the secondary dunes or developed structures. This
unit is capable of supporting an expansion of the high- density loggerhead sea turtle nesting from the adjacent
unit (LOGG- T- NC -06, on Bald Head Island).
LOGG- T -NC -07 - Oak Island, Brunswick County: This unit consists of 20.9 km (13.0 mi) of island from the
mouth of the Cape Fear River to Lockwoods Folly Inlet. The unit includes lands from the MHW line to the toe
of the secondary dune or developed structures. This unit contains high- density loggerhead sea turtle nesting.
LOGG- T -NC -08 - Holden Beach, Brunswick County: This unit consists of 13.4 km (8.3 mi) of island
shoreline from Lockwoods Folly Inlet to Shallotte Inlet. The unit includes lands from the MHW line to the toe
of the secondary dune or developed structures. This unit is capable of supporting an expansion of high -
density nesting by loggerhead sea turtles from an adjacent unit (LOGG- T- NC -07).
2.3.1 Species Habitat Description
Within these nesting critical habitat areas, the primary constituent elements of the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS are the extra -tidal or dry sandy
beaches from the MHW to the toe of the secondary dunes. These areas are either capable of supporting a high
density of nests or serve as an expansion area supporting beaches with a high density of nests. As recorded in
50 CFR 17, the total nesting critical habitat consists of four components:
(i) Suitable nesting beach habitat that:
a. contains relatively unimpeded nearshore access from the ocean to the beach for nesting females
and from the beach to the ocean for both post- nesting females and hatchlings and
b. is located above MHW to avoid being inundated frequently by high tides.
(ii) Sand that:
a. allows for suitable nest construction;
b. is suitable for facilitating gas diffusion conducive to embryo development and
c. is able to develop and maintain temperatures and a moisture content conducive to embryo
development.
6 Final: May 11, 2015
GO GURICN 6 GCRC

(iii) Suitable nesting beach habitat with sufficient darkness to facilitate nesting turtle emergence to the
beach, and hatchling and post- nesting female orientation to the sea.
(iv) Natural coastal processes or artificially created or maintained habitat mimicking natural conditions.
This includes artificial habitat types that mimic the natural conditions for beach access, nest site
selection, nest construction, egg deposition and incubation, and hatchling emergence and movement to
the sea.
2.4 CURRENT STATUS OF SPECIES
The current "threatened" status of loggerhead sea turtles is based on continued natural or anthropogenic threats
to the species, including loss or degraded nesting habitat from coastal development and beach armoring;
disorientation of hatchlings by beachfront lighting; nest predation by predators; degraded foraging habitat;
marine pollution and debris; watercraft strikes; disease; and incidental take from channel dredging and
commercial trawling, longline, and gill net fisheries (USFWS, 2012). The Recovery Plan for the Northwest A tlan tic
Population of the Loggerhead Sea Turtle ( Caretta caretta), Second Revision summarizes the population status
through 2008 in the Northern Recovery Unit, which extends from the Florida /Georgia border through southern
Virginia. Annual nest totals averaged 5,215 nests from 1989 -2008. The loggerhead sea turtle nesting trend from
daily beach surveys showed a significant decline of 1.3% annually since 1983. Overall, there is strong statistical
evidence to suggest the Northern Recovery Unit has experienced a long -term decline (NMFS and USFWS, 2008).
The North Carolina Sea Turtle Project, coordinated by Dr. Matthew Godfrey of the NC Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) Division of Wildlife Management, provided nesting data for the project area beaches. The
period from 1997 onwards is considered to be the most accurate because monitoring and data collection
protocol were standardized in 1997.
Table 2.4.1 - Loggerhead Sea Turtle Nesting Data for Project Area Beaches
Year
Bogue
Banks
Topsail
Island
Carolina
Beach
Holden
Beach
Ocean
Isle'
1997
29
65
8
21
19
1998
25
101
4
71
31
1999
38
181
8
53
31
2000
15
103
6
35
24
2001
25
79
6
20
14
2002
19
86
9
40
10
2003
39
77
15
48
25
2004
21
56
2
15
9
2005
37
68
3
44
21
2006
32
94
6
27
26
2007
27
63
11
18
8
2008
33
89
12
37
11
2009
35
59
12
23
25
2010
52
104
1
27
17
2011
28
110
9
30
23
2012
38
84
7
48
24
2013
36
133
9
73
36
2014
18
52
2
19
4
'Ocean Isle Beach does not have nesting or nearshore critical habitat.
Source: Dr. Matthew Godfrey, NC Sea Turtle Project, December 2014.
7 Final: May 11, 2015
GO GBRIEN 6 GERE

2.5 CURRENT BASELINE CONDITIONS
The USACE Wilmington District has been performing maintenance dredging at all five inlet areas since 1982 and
as early as 1913, in the case of Shallotte River Inlet. Each of the areas in the Proposed Action has had routine
inlet maintenance dredging and beneficial placement performed on a routine basis. Beach placement activities
have mitigated the effects of beach erosion and associated reduction in potential loggerhead sea turtle nesting
habitat. Material placed on the beaches in the project area must meet state guidelines for beach compatibility
based on sediment characteristics, which limit the potential for beach compaction due to placing fine particles
on the beach. Multiple beneficial placement events have been conducted at the project area beaches, and as
shown in Table 2.4.1, loggerhead sea turtle nesting has continued during that time.
Dredging has been conducted by the USACE Wilmington District using sidecast dredges or hopper dredges with
dragheads that are too small to entrain loggerhead sea turtles (NMFS, 1999). Loggerhead sea turtle take during
maintenance dredging at the SDI -5 has not been documented. Likewise, take from maintenance dredging
performed in the AIWW Crossings by hydraulic pipeline dredges has not been documented (Personal
communication, Jeff Richter, USACE Wilmington District, December 9, 2014). Dredging activities in the inlets
and connecting channels have been conducted year -round to maintain navigation in the inlets. Dredging
activities and beneficial placement from the AIWW Crossings are typically conducted before April 301h to avoid
sea turtle nesting season.
Additional human activities in the project area that have historically impacted loggerhead sea turtle critical
habitat are:
• ocean front development, which can reduce available nesting habitat;
• recreational beach activities, which can result in abandoned crawls if the female loggerhead sea turtle is
distracted during laying, or if beach equipment is left out overnight (NMFS and USFWS, 2008) and
■ beachfront lighting, which can disorient hatchling turtles (NMFS and USFWS, 2008).
To help improve loggerhead sea turtle nesting success, each project area beach is monitored by the North
Carolina Sea Turtle Project. As part of the monitoring program, sea turtle nests are identified and marked to
minimize accidental human disturbance.
2.6 EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
2.6.1 Direct and Indirect Effects
The direct and indirect effects to loggerhead sea turtle critical habitat are described below, by critical habitat
category.
Nearshore reproductive habitat
If a hopper dredge is used for dredging the inlets and nearshore disposal of dredged sediment at -10 ft MLW is
conducted, the hopper dredge will travel through nearshore reproductive habitat and will dispose dredged
sediment in the habitat. This will result in temporary increases in turbidity and sedimentation that may result
in the temporary displacement of aquatic biota ( USACE, 2004). However, with the relatively small quantities of
disposed sediment each time the hopper dredge is emptied (300 cubic yards, in the case of the USACE hopper
dredges) and the restricted extent of the authorized nearshore placement areas, adverse modification to
nearshore reproductive habitat from nearshore disposal is not anticipated.
Nesting critical habitat
Beneficial placement within nesting critical habitat will be conducted outside the loggerhead sea turtle nesting
window. As a result, potential negative effects are limited to changes, if any, to beach composition. The State of
North Carolina Technical Standards for Beach Fill Projects (15A NCAC 07H.0312) require that sediment from
8 Final: May 11, 2015 GO GBRICN 6 ISERE

the active nearshore, beach, or inlet shoal system have less than 10% fine particles. Therefore, beneficially
placed sediment will be relatively coarse - grained, which will minimize the potential for compaction, thereby not
inhibiting nest excavation. Should compaction be identified through qualitative assessments, tilling may be
required as a conservation measure.
Beneficial placement from the Proposed Action will have a potential positive effect on nesting habitat by
mitigating the effects of beach erosion, and increasing beach surface available for nesting above MHW. Sand will
be placed at a natural grade, which will minimize potential effects in nesting area access.
2.6.2 Cumulative Effects
The Proposed Action is ongoing, and has been ongoing since at least 1982 in each case. Cumulative effects
beyond the baseline conditions are not anticipated.
2.6.3 Recommended Effect Determination
The Proposed Action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect nearshore reproductive critical habitat
and /or nesting critical habitat.
9 Final: May 11, 2015 Am O'BRIEN 6 GERE

3. ATLANTIC STURGEON
3.1 REGULATORY BACKGROUND
A petition was issued to list the Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus) in 2009 under the authority of the ESA
of 1973. As a result, five DPS were listed under the ESA in 2012, four of which are given the status of
endangered, and one is listed as threatened (NOAA, 2012). The endangered DPSs include (1) New York Bight
DPS, (2) Chesapeake Bay DPS, (3) Carolina DPS, and (4) South Atlantic DPS. The Gulf of Maine DPS is listed as
threatened.
3.2 SPECIES HABITAT DESCRIPTION
The range of Atlantic sturgeon extends along the east coast from Canada in the north to as far south as Florida
(Vladykov and Greeley 1963; Scott and Scott 1988). The species is anadromous, migrating into freshwater
systems from the sea to spawn. Historical survey data has indicated that Atlantic sturgeon use nearshore
habitats from the South Carolina border up to the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay (Moser et al., 1998).
The migration timing of spawning adults varies with latitude, but typically occurs in the spring from February to
March in the southern end of the range, and from April to May in the mid - Atlantic region (NMFS, 2014). Male
Atlantic sturgeon that have immigrated into freshwater have been documented to remain in these waters until
the fall, while females typically will inhabit freshwater systems up to 6 weeks before returning to sea (NMFS,
2014).
Juveniles typically reside in estuarine habitats for months to years. Adults and sub - adults typically live in
nearshore coastal and estuarine waters at depths of 10 to 50 meters, with a preferred substrate of gravel and
sand (NMFS, 2014). Atlantic sturgeon are benthic feeders, primarily consuming macroinvertebrates such as
crustaceans, worms, and mollusks (NMFS, 2014). Inlets provide adult sturgeon with migration corridors from
nearshore waters to freshwater spawning habitat, and provide juvenile sturgeon with eventual migration from
estuarine nursery grounds out to nearshore ocean waters (ASMFC, 2012). However, the project area does not
contain spawning rivers (Post et aL 2014), and frequent use of the project area inlets does not appear to be
likely, based on historical catch data [personal communication, Michael Loeffler, N.C. Division of Marine
Fisheries (NC DMF), December 16, 2014]. The Roanoke River is the only North Carolina river that has been
confirmed to contain a current spawning population of Atlantic sturgeon, although spawning is suspected in the
Cape Fear River, based on telemetry data (Post et al. 2014).
3.3 CURRENT STATUS OF SPECIES
Population assessments for spawning Atlantic sturgeon in the Carolina DPS has been estimated to be fewer than
300 adults, which is less than 3% of the historical abundance of spawning Atlantic sturgeon in the region
(ASSRT, 2007).
3.4 CURRENT BASELINE CONDITIONS
The historical threat for the Atlantic Sturgeon was overharvest from commercial fishing in the 1950s to 1990s,
which "...led to wide- spread declines in Atlantic sturgeon abundance." (NMFS, 2014). Current threats include
bycatch, habitat degradation and loss, habitat impediments, and ship strikes (NMFS, 2014). The USACE has been
performing maintenance dredging in the five inlet areas since at least 1982, and as early as 1913 in the case of
the Shallotte River. However, the project areas do not represent prime habitat for the Atlantic sturgeon, and
takes during maintenance dredging in the inlets or the AIWW Crossings have not occurred since at least 2000,
and likely before (Personal communication, Jeff Richter, USACE Wilmington District, January 13, 2015).
The direct and indirect effects of the Proposed Action on Atlantic sturgeon are discussed in the following
subsections.
10 Final: May 11, 2015 r0i O'BRIEN 6 ISERE

3.5.1 Direct and Indirect Effects
Atlantic sturgeon may be present in the general vicinity of the proposed dredge areas due to their migratory
nature. However, developing juvenile sturgeon likely would not be present in adjacent estuaries because known
spawning habitat is not located upstream of the project areas. Additionally, adult sturgeon have not been
documented as using the SDI -5 to access spawning habitat, and typically live in nearshore waters that are
deeper than the SDI -5. Therefore, direct and indirect effects to Atlantic sturgeon from the Proposed Action
would be minimal.
3.5.2 Cumulative Effect
The Proposed Action is ongoing, and therefore the Proposed Action will not cause an additional, cumulative
effect beyond baseline conditions.
3.5.3 Recommended Effect Determination
The Proposed Action will have no effect on the Atlantic sturgeon.
11 Final: May 11, 2015 GO O'BRIEN 6 GERE

4. RUFA RED KNOT
4.1 REGULATORY BACKGROUND
In 2004, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) received a petition to list the rufa red knot (Calidris canutus
rufa) as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act. Red knot was subsequently given the status as a
candidate species for listing in 2006 (USFWS, 2013b) and was listed as "threatened" on December 11, 2014.
The rufa red knot is a highly migratory bird, noted for traveling long distances to reach breeding grounds near
the Arctic Circle in the north while overwintering as far as the southernmost point of South America (USFWS
2013c). While at the breeding grounds, rufa red knots nest in dry, elevated slope locations often with little to no
vegetation cover, and consume primarily terrestrial invertebrates (USFWS, 2014c).
The wintering grounds of rufa red knot are found at lower latitudes, of which the southeastern U.S. from Florida
to North Carolina is considered a wintering area (USFWS 2014c). Overwintering areas occur in marine and
estuarine habitats with extensive areas of exposed intertidal flats (USFWS 2013c).
During migration, rufa red knots undertake long flights that may span thousands of miles without stopping,
traveling up to 19,000 miles annually (USFWS, 2014c). Along the migratory route, rufa red knots stopover at
staging sites and consume easily digested food that can fuel the next migratory flight. High percentages of the
population can occur together at a small number of nonbreeding locations, of which Delaware Bay is an example.
Delaware Bay hosts up to 50 to 80 percent of the rufa red knot population migrating to the arctic breeding
ground in the spring (USFWS, 2014c).
Rufa red knots use coastal North Carolina as both wintering and stopover habitat. Migrating knots that
stopover in North Carolina typically pass through in May during the spring migration, and return from July to
September (USFWS, 2014c). Preferred habitats in North Carolina for either migration stopovers or wintering
are muddy or sandy coastal areas at the mouths of bays and estuaries, tidal flats, and unimproved tidal inlets.
Roosting occurs above the high tide line, in areas with sparse vegetation (USFWS, 2014c). Range -wide, rufa red
knots typically forage for hard - shelled mollusks in 2 to 3 centimeters of sediment, with a water level that is
typically no more than 2 to 3 centimeters deep. In North Carolina, wintering and migrating rufa red knots
typically prey on small bivalves such as coquina clams (Donax spp.); sand fleas (haustoriids); mole crabs
(Emerita talpoida) (NCWRC comment provided in USFWS, 2014c). An exception to this diet preference occurs
during spring migration, when rufa red knots feed on horseshoe crab eggs as a source of easily digestible food to
prepare for flights (USFWS, 2014c).
4.3 CURRENT STATUS OF SPECIES
While precise, range -wide population estimates have not been developed, the USFWS is confident that survey
data in two key rufa red knot areas (Tierra del Fuego - wintering, and Delaware Bay - spring migration) have
shown population declines of roughly 70 to 75 percent since 2000. The best available data indicates that a
sustained decline occurred during the 2000s, which may have stabilized at a low level in the last few years.
USFWS has not concluded that wintering populations in the Southeast have declined during that time (USFWS,
2014c).
Historically, the rufa red knot has relied upon the eggs of horseshoe crab (Limnulus polyphemus) during the
migrations due to their abundance (timing of migration of the rufa red knot coincides with breeding season of
the horseshoe crab) and because they are easily digested. Thus, food availability and habitat quality at stopover
sites is vital for the long -term survival of the species, and is thought to be the leading cause of the observed
decline in rufa red knot populations (USFWS, 2013c).
12 Final: May 11, 2015 GO GBRICN 6 IGCRE

4.4 CURRENT BASELINE CONDITIONS
The USACE Wilmington District has been performing maintenance dredging in the five inlet areas since at least
1982. Given the similar habitat requirements between piping plover and rufa red knot (USFWS, 2014c),
avoidance and minimization measures utilized by the USACE Wilmington District for piping plover have likely
benefited rufa red knot as well. The USACE Wilmington District has avoided conducting beneficial placement on
inlet shoulders (USACE, 1997a), where the preferred foraging and roosting habitat for piping plover and rufa red
knot occurs.
Additional historical and ongoing human activities in the project areas include commercial and recreational
boating, beach recreation, and adjacent coastal storm damage reduction. Activities that have included beneficial
sand placement have temporarily disrupted benthic invertebrate communities, thus temporarily decreasing
prey availability. However, these activities are typically low in sand volume, minimal in operational hours and
restrictive in placement locations avoiding the inlet shoulder areas, thus minimizing potential effects to
preferred red knot foraging habitat.
4.5 EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
4.5.1 Direct and Indirect Effects
Continued maintenance dredging of the existing SDI -5 would not affect rufa red knot foraging habitat in sand
flats adjacent to the inlets, and would not affect sheltering habitat above MHW.
Beneficial placement above MHW on the beach and within the surf zone would have the potential to disturb
sheltering and foraging red knots, and may affect the rufa red knot's foraging ability within the construction area
by temporarily disrupting benthic invertebrate communities. However, the beneficial placement would be
conducted largely outside the inlet shoulder habitats that contain shallow sand flat areas preferred by rufa red
knot for foraging, and adjacent sandy areas above MHW for sheltering. Despite temporary disruption of the
benthic communities where beneficial placement is conducted, the availability of preferred, unaffected sand flat
habitat for foraging nearby would provide a continued food source for rufa red knot. Additionally, Peterson et
al. demonstrated in a study conducted following a beach nourishment event at Bogue Banks that shorebird
usage of filled areas of the beach for foraging approached the usage in the control areas at the end of the first
warm season following nourishment (Peterson et al., 2006).
4.5.2 Cumulative Effects
The Proposed Action is ongoing, and has been since at least 1982. Therefore, no additional cumulative effects
are anticipated beyond baseline conditions.
4.5.3 Recommended Effect Determination
The Proposed Action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, the rufa red knot.
13 Final: May 11, 2015 Am 0'[3RIEN 6 ISERE

5.0 CONSERVATION MEASURES
Considering the conservation measures recommended in the existing environmental studies, and based on the
conclusions identified in Section 4; the following conservation measures are recommended to avoid and
minimize potential adverse effects on listed species and critical habitats:
1. To the extent practical routinely scheduled dredging activity would be implemented during the
environmental window for dredging and shoreline beneficial reuse that is used by the USACE Wilmington
District for AIWW Crossing projects [November 16 to April 30] to limit the potential effect on federally -
managed species. During this time period, sea turtles and West Indian manatees are not likely to be utilizing
the inlets or beaches to breed, nest, migrate, or forage. Additionally, this window will be prior to seabeach
amaranth seed germination.
When navigational needs necessitate inlet and crossing maintenance operations outside the environmental
window, dredges that are capable of nearshore or sidecast disposal would be used to avoid potential
impacts from beneficial placement. Should beneficial placement be needed outside the environmental
window, the applicable permittee would independently coordinate with NCDCM through the minor permit
modification process.
3. The USACE Wilmington District currently observes restrictions on sidecast dredging in certain inlet areas
that have adjacent habitats that are sensitive to sidecast disposal. These areas include Banks Channel at
New Topsail Inlet, and the Bogue Inlet Connecting Channel and AIWW Crossing ( USACE, 2004). These
restrictions on sidecast dredging would continue to be observed.
In addition, to the above requirements, the following conservation measures are recommended to avoid and
minimize potential effects to individual endangered and threatened species and associated critical habitat:
Piping Plover & Rufa Red Knot
4. If project maintenance extends into the nesting timeframe for piping plover (April 1- August 31), the
applicant will coordinate with the NCDCM and the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NC WRC) to plan
maintenance activities within potential use areas as well as monitor the pipeline route prior to any shore -
side maintenance activities. Before start of work each morning, contracted personnel will provide a visual
survey conducted in the area of work for that day, to determine if piping plovers or rufa red knots are
present. If piping plovers or rufa red knots are present in the work area, careful movement of equipment in
the early morning hours should allow those individuals to move out of the area.
S. Prior to pipeline installation, the proposed pipeline route will be reviewed by the NC DCM and the NC WRC.
West Indian manatee
6. For all dredging that occurs between June and October, the dredges would comply with the precautions in
the USFWS "GUIDELINES FOR AVOIDING IMPACTS TO THE WEST INDIAN MANATEE" to minimize impacts
to manatees.
14 Final: May 11, 2015
r0i O'BRICN 6 ISERE

6.0 CONCLUSIONS
Table 3 summarizes the recommended effect determinations for the federally threatened or endangered species
that might occur within the vicinity of the Proposed Action. These recommendations reflect the effects
recommendations documented in previous studies (Table 2), as well as the effects recommendations from
Sections 2, 3, and 4 of this report for loggerhead sea turtle critical habitat, Atlantic sturgeon, and rufa red knot,
respectively.
Having been thoroughly addressed in previous studies (Table 2), piping plover and its critical habitat were not
separately assessed in this supplemental biological assessment. With implementation of Conservation Measures
#4 and #5, the recommended effect determination is the Proposed Action "may affect, but is not likely to
adversely affect" piping plover and its critical habitat (Table 3). This recommended effect determination is
consistent with the conclusions of the previous studies summarized in Table 2.
The Proposed Action is not likely to adversely affect federally listed endangered or threatened species nor their
respective critical habitats.
15 Final: May 11, 2015 Am GBRICN 6 ISERE

7.0 REFERENCES
Arendt, M.D., A.L. Segars, J.I. Byrd, J. Boynton, J.A. Schwenter, J.D. Whitaker, and L. Parker. 2012. Migration,
distribution, and diving behavior of adult male loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta) following dispersal from
a major breeding aggregation in the Western North Atlantic. Marine Biology 159(1):113 -125.
ASMFC. 2012. Habitat Addendum IV to Amendment 1 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic
Sturgeon. September 2012.
Atlantic Sturgeon Status Review Team (ASSRT). 2007. Status review of Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser
oxyrinchus). Report to National Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Regional Office. February 23, 2007. 174 pp.
Coastal Planning & Engineering (CPE) of North Carolina, Inc. 2014. Kure Beach Coastal Storm damage Reduction
Project Supplemental Biological Assessment. Prepared for New Hanover County. Submitted to North Carolina
Division of Coastal Management and USACE Wilmington District. Wilmington, NC. April 2014.
CPE.2012a. Biological Assessment, Section 7 Consultation Endangered Species Act New Hanover County
Carolina Beach: Beach Nourishment Project. Prepared for New Hanover County, North Carolina. August 2012.
Dial Cordy and Associates, Inc (Dial Cordy). 2012. Post -Irene Renourishment Project Biological Assessment.
Prepared for Bureau of Ocean Energy Management USACE and Carteret County Shore Protection Office. March
2012. Wilmington, NC.
Dodd, C.K., Jr. 1988. Synopsis of the biological data on the loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta (Linnaeus 1758).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 88(14). 110 pages.
Morreale, S.J. and E.A. Standora. 2005. Western North Atlantic waters: crucial developmental habitat for Kemp's
ridley and loggerhead sea turtles. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 4:872 -882.
Moser, M.L., Bichey, J.B., and S.B. Roberts. 1998. Sturgeon distribution in North Carolina. Center for Marine
Science Research, Wilmington, North Carolina. Final Report to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
District.
NMFS, 1977. National Marine Fisheries Service Instruction 02- 301 -02. MOU Between USFWS and NMFS on
Defining Roles in the Joint Administration of ESA as to Marine Turtles. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service. July 18, 1997, renewed January 2010.
NMFS. 1997. South Atlantic Regional Biological Opinion: the Continued Hopper Dredging of Channels and
Borrow Areas in the Southeastern United States. NMFS, Southeast Regional Office. September 25, 1997.
NMFS,1999. Biological Opinion Consultation. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National
Marine Fisheries Service, St. Petersburg, FL. March 9, 1999.
NMFS and USFWS. 2008. Recovery Plan for the Northwest Atlantic Population of the Loggerhead Sea Turtle
(Caretta caretta), Second Revision. National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, Maryland.
NMFS. 2012. Biological Opinion, Post - Hurricane Irene Beach Renourishment Project in Carteret County, North
Carolina (Consultation Number F/SER/2012/01054). NMFS, Southeast Regional Office. St. Petersburg, FL.
October 3, 2012.
NMFS. 2013. Biological Report on the Designation of Marine Critical Habitat for the Loggerhead Sea Turtle,
Caretta caretta. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Marine Fisheries Service.
http: / /www.nmfs.noaa .gov/pr /pdfs /criticalhabitat /loggerhead criticalhabitat biological.pdf\
NMFS, 2014. Atlantic Sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus). NOAA Fisheries Office of Protected
Resources. Accessed online at http:/ /www.nmfs.noaa.govll2r /species /fish /atlanticsturgeon.htm on December
16, 2014.
16 Final: May 11, 2015 r0i GBRICN 6 GCRC

NOAA. 2012. NOAA lists five Atlantic sturgeon populations under Endangered Species Act.
http: / /www.nmfs.noaa.gov /stories /2012 /01 /31_atlantic_Sturgeon.html.
Peterson, C.H., Bishop, M.J., Galen, A.J., D'Anna, L.M., Manning, L.M., 2006. Exploiting beach filling as an
unaffordable experiment: Benthic intertidal impacts propogating upwards to shorebirds. Journal of
Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 338: 205 -221.
Post, William C. Chad Holbrook, Elizabeth Miller, Corbett Norwood, Levi Kaczka, and Jarrett Gibbons. 2014.
Research and Management of Endangered and Threatened Species in the Southeast: Riverine Movements of
Shortnose and Atlantic Sturgeon. South Carolina Department of Natural Resources. 2014.
South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC). 2002. Second Revised Final Fishery Management Plan for
Pelagic Sargassum Habitat of the South Atlantic Region. South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Charleston,
South Carolina. 228 pages.
USACE. 1983. Detailed Project report on Improvement of Navigation and Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS), Bogue Inlet, NC. USACE Wilmington District. Wilmington, NC. May 1983.
USACE. 1989. Draft Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement on Hurricane Protection and Beach
Erosion Control, West Onslow Beach and New River Inlet, North Carolina (Topsail Beach). USACE Wilmington
District. Wilmington, NC. 1989.
USACE. 1996. Environmental Assessment for Advanced Maintenance Dredging, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway
Side Channels, Topsail Creek, Banks Channel, and Cedar Bush Cut, Pender and Onslow Counties, NC. USACE
Wilmington District. Wilmington, NC. December 1996.
USACE. 1997a. Environmental Assessment- Channel Wideners at Inlet Crossings AIWW, North Carolina. USACE
Wilmington District. Wilmington, NC. December 1997.
USACE. 1997b. Environmental Assessment for Brunswick County Beaches - Ocean Isle Beach, Beach Erosion
Control and Hurricane Wave Protection, Brunswick County, North Carolina. USACE Wilmington District,
Wilmington, NC. June 1997.
USACE. 2004. Environmental Assessment, Use of Government Plan to Dredge in Federally Authorized Navigation
Projects in North Carolina. USACE Wilmington District. Wilmington, NC. March 2004.
USACE. 2009. Integrated General Reevaluation Report and Environmental Impact Statement Shore Protection,
West Onslow Beach and River Inlet (Topsail Beach), North Carolina. February 2009; Revised April 2009.
http:/ /www.saw.usace.army.mil /Portals /59 /docs /coastal storm damage reductionITBGRR /Tol2sail Beach FG
RRandFEIS FEB2009r Main.Vdf
USACE. 2013. Integrated Feasibility Report and Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Coastal Storm Damage
Reduction, Bogue Banks, Carteret County, North Carolina - Draft Report. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District. August 2013.
USFWS. 2001. Draft Biological /Conference opinion on the effects of the Ocean Isle Beach Project on seabeach
amaranth, manatee, loggerhead and green sea turtles, and piping plover. USFWS, Raleigh Field Office. Raleigh,
NC. February 16, 2001.
USFWS, 2008. Recovery Plan for the Northwest Atlantic Population of the Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Caretta
caretta), Second Revision. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, Maryland. December 31, 2008.
USFWS. 2012. Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Caretta caretta) Fact Sheet. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Last updated
February 2012. http:/ /www.fws.gov /northflorida /SeaTurtles /Turtle %20Factsheets /PDF /Loggerhead -Sea-
Turtle.pdf
17 Final: May 11, 2015 GO GBRICN 6 GCRC

USFWS. 2013a. ESA Basics, 40 Years of Conserving Endangered Species. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Endangered Species Program. Arlington, VA. January 2013. http:/ /www.fws.gov /endangered /esa-
library/odf /ESA basics.pdf
USFWS. 2013b.Previous Federal Actions. Supplement to: Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants;
Proposed Threatened Status for the Rufa Red Knot (Calidris canutus rufa). Docket No. FWS- R5 -ES- 2013 -0097;
RIN 1018 -AY17.
USFWS. 2013c. Rufa Red Knot Ecology and Abundance. Supplement to: Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and
Plants; Proposed Threatened Status for the Rufa Red Knot (Calidris canutus rufa). Docket No. FWS- R5- ES -2013-
0097; RIN 1018 -AY17.
USFWS. 2014a. IPaC- Information, Planning, and Conservation System - Project initial scoping for Bogue, New
Topsail, Carolina Beach, Lockwoods Folly, and Shallotte River Inlet areas provided lists of potential Endangered
Species, Federal Species of Concern, and Candidate Species for the designated inlet areas.
http: / /ecos.fws.gov /ipac/ wizard /chooseLocation!prepare.action. Accessed November 2014.
USFWS. 2014b. Loggerhead Sea Turtle Critical Habitat for the Northwest Atlantic Ocean.
httl2:1/www.fws.gov /northflorida /SeaTurtles /2014 Loggerhead CH /Terrestrial critical habitat loggerhead.ht
ml. Updated July 10, 2014.
USFWS, 2014c. Rufa Red Knot Background Information and Threats Assessment. Supplement to Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Threatened Status for the Rufa Red Knot (Calidris canutus
rufa) [Docket No. FWS- R5 -ES- 2013 -0097; RIN AY17]. USFWS, Northeast Region, New Jersey Field Office.
Pleasantville, NJ. November 2014.
Scott, W.B., and M.G. Scott. 1988. Atlantic fishes of Canada. Canadian Bulletin of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
219: 1 -731.
Vladykov, V.D., and J.R. Greely. 1963. Order Acipenseroidei. Pages 24 -59 in Y.H. Olsen, editor. Fishes of the
western North Atlantic. Sears Foundation for Marine Research, New Haven, Connecticut.
Werner, F.E., B.O. Blanton, J.A. Quinlan, and R.A. Leuttich. 1999. Physical oceanography of the North Carolina
continental shelf during the fall and winter seasons: implications to the transport of larval menhaden. Fisheries
Oceanography 8(2): 7 -21.
18 Final: May 11, 2015 GO GBRICN 6 GCRC

8.0 LIST OF PREPARERS
Daniel Ramsay, O'Brien & Gere
Abby Kondratowicz, O'Brien & Gere
Michael Rondinelli, O'Brien & Gere
19 Final: May 11, 2015 Am G -BRICN 6 ISERE

Tables
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

MAMMALS
North Atlantic
Charadrius melodus
Threatened
Bogue, New Topsail, Carolina
right whale
Eubalaena glacialis
Endangered
None Beach, Lockwoods Folly, and
None
All five inlets
Roseate tern
Shallotte River (All five inlets)
Humpback whale
Megaptera novaeangliae
Endangered
None
All five inlets
Blue whale
ealaenoptera musculus
Endangered
None
All five inlets
Finback whale
ealaenoptera physalus
Endangered
None
All five inlets
Sei whale
ealaenoptera borealis
Endangered
None
All five inlets
Sperm whale
Physetermacrocepholus
Endangered
None
All five inlets
West Indian
Trichechus manatus
Endangered
None
All five inlets
manatee
Kemp's ridley sea
BIRDS
Piping plover
Charadrius melodus
Threatened
Yes
All five inlets
Red knot
Calidris canutus rufa
Threatened
None
All five inlets
Roseate tern
Sterna dougallii dougallii
Endangered
None
Bogue Inlet
REPTILES
Loggerhead sea
Acipenser brevirostrum
Endangered
None
All five inlets
sturgeon
Caretta caretta
Threatened
Yes
All five inlets
turtle
Acipenser oxyrinchus
Endangered
None
All five inlets
Green sea turtle
Chelonia mydas
Threatened
None
All five inlets
Leatherback sea
Dermochelys coriacea
Endangered
None
All five inlets
turtle
Hawksbill sea
Eretmochelys imbricate
Endangered
None
All five inlets
turtle
Kemp's ridley sea
Lepidochelys kempii
Endangered
None
All five inlets
turtle
FISH
Shortnose
Acipenser brevirostrum
Endangered
None
All five inlets
sturgeon
Atlantic sturgeon
Acipenser oxyrinchus
Endangered
None
All five inlets
oxyrinchus
VASCULAR PLANTS
Seabeach
amaranth
Amaranthus pumilus I Threatened
All five inlets
More than Engineering Solutions rin Q'BRICN 6 GCRC

SDI -5 Maintenance Dredging Permitting
Supplemental Biological Assessment
Table 2 - Summary of Historical Biological Effect Evaluations
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Biological Assessment \Tables \Table 2 - BioAssessment _Documented_Resources 121914.xis 1 of 4
May Affect /
May Affect, not Likely to
Not Likely to Affect/
Inlet
Resource Document
Action Area
Dredge Type
RTE Species Assessed
Critical Habitat (CH)
Likely to Adversely Affect
Adversely Affect
No Effect
Conservation Measures
loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretto )
green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas )
Kemp's Ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys kempii )
Bogue, New
hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmochelys imbricate )
Topsail,
South Atlantic Regional Biological
Addressed the use of hopper dredges in channels and borrow
leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea)
1. fin whale
1. Use draghead deflector, inflow screens, and overflow screens to reduce sea turtle
Carolina Beach,
Opinion (SARBO) - National Marine
areas along the Atlantic portion of the U.S. Army Corps of
hopper dredge
shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum )
Not discussed
1. swimming sea turtles
1. humpback whale
2. sei whale
takes
Lockwoods
Fisheries Service (NMFS) 1997
Engineer's (USACE's) South Atlantic Division (SAD) within existing
humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae)
(other than leatherback)
2. Atlantic right whale
3. sperm whale
2. Utilize biological observers for whales, sea turtles, and shortnose sturgeon.
Folly, and
dredging windows.
North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis)
2. shortnose sturgeon
4. leatherback sea turtle
Shallotte River
finback whale ((3alaenoptera physalus )
sei whale (Balaenoptera borealis)
sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus )
loggerhead sea turtle
green sea turtle
Kemp's Ridley sea turtle
hawksbill sea turtle
leatherback sea turtle
1. piping plover
shortnose sturgeon
1. AIWW inlet crossing maintenance will be scheduled to be performed between
humpback whale
2. manatee
November 16 and April 30 in order to minimize potential impacts
Bogue, New
Dredge AIWW channel wideners in the vicinity of the seven inlet
North Atlantic right whale
3. shortnose sturgeon
2. If work must be conducted after April 30 and before November 16, then an approved
Topsail,
Environmental Assessment (EA) -
crossings (Bogue, New Topsail, Mason, Masonboro (at Shinn
finback whale
4. humpback, finback, sei, and
monitoring and relocation plan for sea turtles will be coordinated with the USFWS, the
Carolina Beach,
Channel Wideners at Inlet Crossings -
Creek), Carolina Beach, Lockwoods Folly, and Shallotte River
pipeline
sei whale
1. sea turtles
sperm whales
NMFS, and the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) prior to implementation.
Lockwoods
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway
Inlets). The wideners would establish areas where shoals could
hydraulic
sperm whale
Not discussed
NA
2. North Atlantic right whale
S. red - cockaded woodpecker
3. Dredged material must have a mean sand content of 90 percent or greater to be
Folly, and
(AIWW), North Carolina - USACE 1997
build up prior to encroaching into the area designated for
dredge
Florida manatee (Trichechus monatus)
3. seabeach amaranth
6. eastern cougar
acceptable for placement on the beach. If the dredged material is not suitable for beach
Shallotte River
navigation and thereby lengthen the time between dredging
American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis)
7. rough - leaved loosestrife
disposal, it will be deposited in an appropriate diked upland disposal site.
events. Includes beach placement of compatible sediment.
eastern cougar (Puma concolor couguar)
8. meadow rue
4. Beach disposal areas will continue to be monitored to assess impacts to seabeach
piping plover (Charadrius melodus)
ca
a n chaffseed
9. American
amaranth.
red - cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis)
seabeach amaranth (Amaranthus pumilus )
rough - leaved loosestrife (Lysimochia asperulaefolia )
Cooley's meadow rue (Tholictrum cooleyi )
American chaffseed (Schwalbea americana )
loggerhead sea turtle
1. Sidecast dredges will not be used north of the New Topsail Inlet channel or outside of
green sea turtle
the Bogue Inlet channel, including the AIWW.
Kemp's Ridley sea turtle
2. Prior notification will be given to the Division of Environmental Health's Shellfish
EA and Finding of No Significant
hawksbill sea turtle
Sanitation and Recreational Water Quality Section (WQS) if discharges of dredged or fill
Bogue, New
Impact (FONSI), Use of Government
leatherback sea turtle
materials from waters closed to the harvest of shellfish are to be placed into waters that
Topsail,
Plant to Dredge in Federally
Included Bogue Inlet, Connecting Channel, and AIWW Crossing;
shortnose sturgeon
1. whales
are open to taking the shellfish
Carolina Beach,
Authorized Navigation Projects in
New Topsail Inlet, Topsail Creek, and Banks Channel; Carolina
sidecast and
humpback whale
2. sea turtles
3. Prior notification will be given to the WQS if discharges of dredged or fill materials
Lockwoods
North Carolina -USAGE 2004
Beach Inlet & AIWW Crossing; Lockwoods Folly Inlet &AIWW
hopper dredges
North Atlantic right whale
Not discussed
NA
3. shortnose sturgeon
1. manatee
from waters closed to the harvest of shellfish or posted for swimming advisories are to be
Folly, and
Includes: USACE 1998 Biological
Crossing; Shallotte River Inlet &AIWW Crossing. Sediment
finback whale
4. piping plover
2. American alligator
placed into coastal ocean waters between months of April and October.
Shallotte River
Assessment and NMFS 1999 Biological
disposed by sidecast or nearshore disposal by hopper dredge.
sei whale
4.All dredging that occurs between June and October will comply with all precautions in
Opinion
sperm whale
the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) Guidelines for Avoiding Impacts to the West
manatee
Indian Manatee to avoid impacts to manatees
piping plover
5. dredging vessels operate at slow speeds, and have small dragheads with low suction
American alligator
levels.
American alligator
loggerhead sea turtle
green sea turtle
Detailed Project Report on
Extension of authorized Bogue Inlet Channel and maintenance
Kemp's Ridley sea turtle
Improvement of
dredging of the extension.
hawksbill sea turtle
Bogue
Navigation and Environmental Impact
The Selected Plan developed from this report consists of an
hopper dredge
leatherback sea turtle
Not discussed
NA
NA
all listed threatened and endangered
USFWS and NMFS concurred with the no effect determination
Statement (EIS), Bogue Inlet, NC - U.S.
excavated channel 8 f deep and 150 ft wide across the ocean bar.
shortnose sturgeon
species
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
The improved channel will intersect an existing 6 -ft deep channel
brown pelican (Peleconus occidentalis )
1983a
from Bogue Inlet to Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW).
bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus )
peregrin falcon (Falco peregrinus )
red - cockaded woodpecker
manatee
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Biological Assessment \Tables \Table 2 - BioAssessment _Documented_Resources 121914.xis 1 of 4

SDI -5 Maintenance Dredging Permitting
Supplemental Biological Assessment
Table 2 - Summary of Historical Biological Effect Evaluations
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Biological Assessment \Tables \Table 2 - BioAssessment _Documented_Resources 121914.xis 2 of 4
May Affect /
May Affect, not Likely to
Not Likely to Affect/
Inlet
Resource Document
Action Area
Dredge Type
RTE Species Assessed
Critical Habitat (CH)
Likely to Adversely Affect
Adversely Affect
No Effect
Conservation Measures
loggerhead sea turtle
green sea turtle
Kemp's Ridley sea turtle
1. Atlantic sturgeon
1. Environmental construction window (all species; November 16 to March 31)
The proposed project would place a maximum of 992,000 cubic
hawksbill sea turtle
1. piping plover: The east end of Bear
2. loggerhead sea turtle,
1. North Atlantic right whale and
1. piping plover and it's
2. Vessel transit speed restrictions (manatees and whales)
Post -Irene Renourishment Project
yards of sand from Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site (ODMDS)
leatherback sea turtle
Island, the west end of Bogue Banks
green sea turtle, Kemp's
humpback whale
critical habitat
3. Endangered species observers (whales, manatee, sea turtles, sturgeons)
Bogue
Biological Assessment -Dial Cordy and
onto Bogue Banks along 7.1 miles of beaches in the towns of
hopper dredge
shortnose sturgeon
(Bogue Inlet - Unit NC -10), and the
Ridley sea turtle, hawksbill sea
2. all five listed sea turtles (effects
2. shortnose sturgeon
4. Sediment compatibility (piping plover, sea turtles, seabeach amaranth)
Associates Inc. 2012
Emerald Isle and Pine Knoll Shores between the existing toe of the
Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus)
west end of Shackleford Banks are
turtle (effects from dredging,
from sand placement /grading)
3. West Indian manatee
5. Escarpment monitoring (sea turtles)
fore -dune out to an approximate elevation of -8 feet National
humpback whale
designated as critical habitat for
based on history of incidental
3. seabeach amaranth
4. Leatherback sea turtle (effects
6. Rigid draghead deflectors, silent inspector, inflow screening (sea turtles, sturgeon)
Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD).
North Atlantic right whale
wintering piping plovers.
take of turtles and Atlantic
from dredging)
*See table 4 of Dial Cordy 2012 for entire list of conservation measures.
West Indian manatee
sturgeon via hopper dredging)
piping plover
seabeach amaranth
loggerhead sea turtle
green sea turtle
1. The U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) shall have measures in place to
Kemp's Ridley sea turtle
monitor and report all interactions with any protected species resulting from the
Sand placement along 7.1 miles in three distinct locations of
hawksbill sea turtle
proposed action.
Carteret County's Bogue Banks shoreline: (1) western Emerald Isle
leatherback sea turtle
1. Swimming loggerhead and
2. BOEM will require NMFS- approved observers to monitor dredged material inflow and
Biological Opinion issued by NMFS for
between survey transects 9 -16 (approximately 265,000 cubic yards
shortnose sturgeon
green turtles - likely to
1. Kemp's Ridley sea turtle
1. whales
overflow screening baskets on the hopper dredge.
Bogue
the Post -Irene Renourishment Project
along 2.0 miles); (2) eastern Emerald Isle between survey transects
hopper dredge
Atlantic sturgeon
Not discussed
adversely affect, but not likely
2. hawksbill sea turtle
2. shortnose sturgeon
3. BOEM will require the hopper dredge's sea turtle deflector draghead to be inspected
NMFS 2012
35 -46 (approximately 410,000 cubic yards along 2.6 miles); and (3)
humpback whale
to jeopardize their continued
3. leatherback sea turtle
3. Atlantic sturgeon
prior to startup of hopper dredging operations. In addition, BOEM shall ensure that all
Pine Knoll Shores between survey transects 61 -70 (approximately
North Atlantic right whale
existence
contracted personnel involved in operating hopper dredges receive thorough training on
317,000 cubic yards along 2.5 miles)
finback whale
measures of dredge operation that will minimize sea turtle takes.
blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus)
4. BOEM will implement relocation trawling ahead of hopper dredging if the take of at
sei whale
least one sea turtle occurs.
sperm whale
loggerhead sea turtle
green sea turtle
Kemp's Ridley sea turtle
1.fln ,blue, sei ,and sperm whales,
hawksbill sea turtle
shortnose sturgeon, smalltooth
leatherback sea turtle
1. leatherback sea turtle
sawfish, roseate tern
shortnose sturgeon
2.1oggerhead and green sea
2. humpback and
Integrated Feasibility Report and Draft
The purpose of this study is to evaluate coastal storm damage
Atlantic sturgeon
1. loggerhead, green sea,
turtles, piping plover /critical
Environmental Impact Statement,
reduction at Bogue Banks, a 25.4 -mile long barrier island located
Hydraulic
humpback whale
1. piping plover: Unit NC -10
Kemp's Ridley and hawksbill
habitat, and seabeach amaranth
North Atlantic right whale, Atlantic
Bogue
Coastal Storm Damage Reduction,
on North Carolina's central coast in Carteret County.
Pipeline cutter-
North Atlantic right whale
encompasses the westerly tip of Bogue
sea turtles, and Atlantic
(during beach placement)
sturgeon, manatee, Kemp Ridley
Environmental commitments listed in Appendix G, which was not available.
Bogue Banks, Carteret County, North
The tentatively selected plan consists of an 119,670 ft (22.7 miles)
head and
finback whale
Banks and is located within the study
sturgeon (during in -water
3. humpback and North Atlantic
and hawksbill sea turtles (during
Carolina, Draft Report - USACE 2013
long main beach fill.
hopper dredges
blue whale
area.
dredging)
right whales, and manatee (during
beach placement)
sei whale
in -water dredging)
3. piping plover /critical habitat and
sperm whale
seabeach amaranth (during in -water
piping plover
dredging)
roseate tern (Sterna dougallii )
West Indian manatee
smalltooth sawfish (Pristis pectinota )
seabeach amaranth
Draft Feasibility Report and
1. Hurricane protection and erosion control of southern end of
Environmental Impact Statement on
Topsail Island (3 miles) and surrounding waters.
1. Disposal sand would be monitored for compatibility with
New Topsail
Hurricane Protection and Beach
2. The DEIS identified the southern end of Topsail Island along the
pipeline dredge
loggerhead sea. turtle
Not discussed
NA
1. loggerhead sea turtle
1. piping plover
beach sediments and work would avoid the turtle nesting season
Erosion Control, West Onslow Beach
Town of Topsail Beach as the disposal area and evaluated several
piping plover
2. If work extended into the turtle nesting season, monitoring with NCWRC would be
and New River Inlet, North Carolina
alternatives for borrow areas and shore stabilization methods
conducted in consultation with the USFWS
(Topsail Beach). - USACE 1989
1. Avoidance of the very southern end of Topsail Island
1. piping plover: USFWS designated
where piping plover and seabeach amaranth habitat exists
Final Integrated General Reevaluation
6 -mile long ocean shoreline of the Town of Topsail Beach. Topsail
loggerhead sea turtle
1,114 acres (Unit NC -11) of critical
2. Disposal activities conducted during winter months for all projects to avoid nesting
Beach is located at the southern end of Topsail Island adjacent to
1. piping plover
season for plover and flowering season for seabeach amaranth (December 1 to March
Report and Environmental Impact
New Topsail Inlet. consists of a sand dune constructed to an
green sea turtle
habitat for wintering piping plovers of
2. seabeach amaranth
31)
Statement,
elevation of 12 feet above the National Geodetic Vertical Datum
Kemp's Ridley sea turtle
which the southern spit of Topsail
1. migrating loggerhead,
3. nesting eatherback
g
l.desi nated piping lover critical
g P P g p
3. Use of dra line deflectors seasonal dredging windows to avoid the nesting season and
g g g g '
New Topsail
Shore Protection, West Onslow Beach
(NGVD), fronted by a 50 -foot wide beach berm constructed to an
hopper dredge
hawksbill sea turtle
Beach is included. The unit extends
green, Kemp's Ridley, and
loggerhead, and green sea turtles
habitat at the south end of Topsail
termination of work if numerous takes occur (provided in SARBO 1997)
and New River Inlet (Topsail Beach)
elevation of 7 feet above NGVD. This dune and berm feature would
leatherback sea turtle
southwest from 1.0 km northeast of
hawksbill sea turtles during
4. Minimal threat of collision with
Island will be avoided.
4. Use of turtle deflecting dragheads, inflow and /or overflow screening, and NMFS
North Carolina -USACE Revised April
extend 23,200 feet, with a 2,000 foot northern transition fill, and a
piping plover
Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) of
dredging
whales during dredging
certified turtle and whale observers
2009
1,000 foot southern transition fill, for a total length of 26,200 feet.
seabeach amaranth
New Topsail Inlet on Topsail Island to
operations.
5. Maintain observers on hopper dredges for the periods
The sand source is offshore.
whales
km southwest of MLLW of Rich
prescribed by NMFS to document any incidental takes of sea turtle species and to ensure
Inlet on Figure Eight Island.
nle
that turtle deflector dragheads are used properly
*See additional conservation measure on pages 75 -78 and 135 -137 of this document.
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Biological Assessment \Tables \Table 2 - BioAssessment _Documented_Resources 121914.xis 2 of 4

SDI -5 Maintenance Dredging Permitting
Supplemental Biological Assessment
Table 2 - Summary of Historical Biological Effect Evaluations
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Biological Assessment \Tables \Table 2 - BioAssessment _Documented_Resources 121914.xis 3 of 4
May Affect /
May Affect, not Likely to
Not Likely to Affect/
Inlet
Resource Document
Action Area
Dredge Type
RTE Species Assessed
Critical Habitat (CH)
Likely to Adversely Affect
Adversely Affect
No Effect
Conservation Measures
loggerhead sea turtle
green sea turtle
Kemp's Ridley sea turtle
hawksbill sea turtle
leatherback sea turtle
shortnose sturgeon
1. piping plover
Environmental Assessment for
Topsail Creek Channel: 50 ft widener would be constructed along
humpback whale
2. manatee
1. Beach disposal will occur between November 16 and April 30 to avoid sea turtle
Advanced Maintenance Dredging,
the east side of authorized channel, adjacent to Ranges 6 and 7A of
North Atlantic right whale
3. shortnose sturgeon
nesting season and seabeach amaranth growing season May 1 to November 15).
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway Side
the 7 ft by 80 ft wide channel. Disposal of dredge material on
finback whale
4. humpback, finback, sei, and
Consultation with USFWS and NMFS if project delays cause construction to extend into
Channels, Topsail Creek, Banks
Channel, and Cedar Bush Cut, Pender
oceanfront beach of Topsail Island. Approximately 37,000 cubic
pipeline
sei whale
1. sea turtles
sperm whales
nesting season for sea turtles and growing season for seabeach amaranth.
New Topsail
yards dredged.
hydraulic
sperm whale
Not discussed
NA
2. North Atlantic right whale
S. red - cockaded woodpecker
2. Sand compaction testing - tilling of sand will occur if sand compaction exceeds 500
and Onslow Counties, NC -USAGE
Banks Channel: 50 ft wideners would be constructed along the
dredge
manatee
3. seabeach amaranth
6. eastern cougar
CPUs.
1996
north side of the channel at various locations, and dredged to -9 ft
g
piping lover
PP gP
7. rough-leaved loosestrife
g
3. No disposal of material will occur within the inlet beach portions where piping lover
P P PP gP
mean low water (MLW). Disposal of approximately 144,000 cubic
American alligator
8. Cooley's meadow rue
habitat exists.
yards of dredged material on Topsail Beach.
eastern cougar
9. American chaffseed
4. Continue seabeach amaranth monitoring program at disposal area locations.
piping plover
red - cockaded woodpecker
seabeach amaranth
rough - leaved loosestrife
Cooley's meadow rue
American chaffseed
humpback whale
North Atlantic right whale
finback whale
blue whale
1. Grab samples to assess sediment compatibility.
sei whale
2. Visual surveys of escarpments
Biological Assessment, Section 7
sperm whale
3. Use of hydraulic cutter -head dredge to prevent sea turtle takes
Consultation Endangered Species Act,
loggerhead sea turtle
4. Environmental construction window of November 16 to March 31 to minimize impacts
Project included nourishment of portions of Carolina Beach and
1. all listed sea turtles
1. all listed whales
Carolina Beach
New Hanover County, Carolina Beach:
Kure Beach since 1964, nourishment occurring every 3 years with
hydraulic cutter-
green sea turtle
Not discussed
NA
2. seabeach amaranth
2. West Indian manatee
to sea turtles, manatees, and piping plover.
Beach Nourishment Project. Prepared
material collected from throat of Carolina Beach Inlet.
head dredge
Kemp's Ridley sea turtle
3. piping plover
3. shortnose sturgeon
5. All dredging that occurs will comply with all precautions in the USFWS Guidelines for
for New Hanover County, North
hawksbill sea turtle
4. Atlantic sturgeon
Avoiding Impacts to the West Indian Manatee to avoid impacts to manatees
Carolina - CPE 2012
leatherback sea turtle
6. Species monitoring - reliance on NCWRC sea turtle monitoring program, as well as
shortnose sturgeon
seabeach amaranth and piping plover monitoring by others.
Atlantic sturgeon
7. Pipeline will be placed to avoid potential piping plover wintering habitat.
West Indian manatee
piping plover
seabeach amaranth
1. loggerhead sea turtle: proposed
loggerhead sea turtle
Critical Habitat Unit LOGG -N -S consists
green sea turtle
of the nearshore areas from Carolina
1. Dredging windows: hydraulic pipeline between November 16 and April 30; hopper
Kemp's Ridley sea turtle
Beach Inlet around Cape Fear to
dredge between November 16 to March 31
1 foot
The authorized Kure Beach project consists a 2 wide dune
hawksbill sea turtle
leatherback sea turtle
Shallotte Inlet (crossing the mouths of
2. Conservation -based construction practices
the Cape Fear River and Lockwoods
3. Grab samples to assess sediment compatibility.
with a crest elevation of 12.5 feet NAVD, fronted by y a 50 -foot wide
shortnose sturgeon
Folly Inlet)
1. sea turtles
1. whales
4. Visual surveys of escarpments
Kure Beach Coastal Storm Damage
g
berm at an elevation of 8.0 feet NAVD. The project covers atotal
Atlantic sturgeon
2. loggerhead sea turtle: proposed
2. piping plover -may influence
2. West Indian manatee
5. Observation of avoidance and minimization measures from 1997 SARBO
1
Reduction Project Supplemental
of 18,000 feet of shoreline including a 1,500 foot transition section
hopper dredge
West Indian manatee
Critical Habitat Unit LOGG- T -NC -OS
plover activities but not likely to
3. proposed loggerhead sea turtle
6. All dredging that occurs between June and October will comply with all precautions in
Carolina Beach
Biological Assessment - Coastal
on the south end of the design template. The primary borrow area
or hydraulic
humpback whale
consists of 18.6 km (11.5 mi) of island
NA
adversely affect their critical
critical habitat
the USFWS Guidelines forAvoiding Impacts to the West Indian Manatee to avoid
Planning & Engineering of NC, Inc.
utilized for the Kure Beach project was Borrow Area A -South until
pipeline
North Atlantic right whale
shoreline from Carolina Beach Inlet to
habitat
4. shortnose sturgeon
impacts to manatees.
April 2014
the most recent USAGE event in 2013/2014, Areas B -East and B-
finback whale
33.91433 N 77.94408 W (historic
,
3. red knot (candidate species)
5. Atlantic sturgeon
7. Species monitoring - reliance on NCWRC sea turtle monitoring program.
effort are
West used in the 2013/2014 USAGE effort are the practicable
sei whale
location of Corncake Inlet)
4.seabeach amaranth
8. Contract scientist will survey daily for piping plover and red knots during maintenance
source locations for the NHC Kure Beach project.
sperm whale
3. piping plover: Kure Beach project is
events.
blue whale
red knot (Calidris conutus rufa)
approximately 2.65 miles further south
9. Pipeline placement will be field verified by regulatory agencies before maintenance
of the piping plover critical habitat unit
activities begin.
piping plover
seabeach amaranth
NC -14 located adjacent to Carolina
Beach Inlet
loggerhead sea turtle
green sea turtle
1. Beach disposal to occur during fall- winter time period to avoid sea turtle nest (April 30-
Kemp's Ridley sea turtle
Nov 16) and flowering season for seabeach amaranth (April- August). If necessary to
hawksbill sea turtle
deposit dredge material on beach during nesting season, a sea turtle relocation program
leatherback sea turtle
could be implemented
Brunswick County Beaches - Ocean
shortnose sturgeon
2. If escarpments occur on the beach after construction or maintenance period, the
Isle Beach, Beach Erosion Control and
Inlet borrow area -1.6 million cubic yards of beach quality sand to
hydraulic
humpback whale
Recommended determination of "proposed action will notjeo jeopardize the continued existence of
1 P
escarpment will be graded prior to sea turtle nesting season.
Shallotte River
Hurricane Wave Protection, Brunswick
be used create artificial dune and berm along 17,000 linear feet
pipeline dredge
P P g
North Atlantic right whale
g
Not discussed
federal) listed species." Effects recommendations b species not provided.
y p y P P
3. Tilling would be conducted if needed based on results of sand compaction tests
g P
County, North Carolina - USACE 1997
I
of Ocean Isle Beach.
finback whale
following project construction.
sei whale
4. Shoreline monitoring program will be implemented to determine if modifications in
sperm whale
operation are necessary to avoid adverse impacts to adjacent beaches.
manatee
5. Reliance on continued seabeach amaranth monitoring by USACE Wilmington District.
piping plover
seabeach amaranth
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Biological Assessment \Tables \Table 2 - BioAssessment _Documented_Resources 121914.xis 3 of 4

SDI -5 Maintenance Dredging Permitting
Supplemental Biological Assessment
Table 2 - Summary of Historical Biological Effect Evaluations
Inlet
Resource Document
Action Area
Dredge Type
RTE Species Assessed
Critical Habitat (CH)
May Affect /
Likely to Adversely Affect
May Affect, not Likely to
Adversely Affect
Not Likely to Affect/
No Effect
Conservation Measures
1. Dredging Shallotte Inlet at elevation -15 ft NGVD from the
1. Use beach - compatible sand for placement on Ocean Isle Beach.
AIWW to the bar channel (approximately 110 acres)
2. If the construction phase extends into seabeach amaranth growing season (April 1 to
November 30), conduct seabeach amaranth survey prior to sediment disposal or tilling
2. Beach placement on Ocean Isle Beach from approximately
Unlikely to jeopardize the
operation, and protected identified plants with buffer zone.
Station 9 +50
3. All dredging that occurs between June and October will comply with all precautions in
westward to Station 181+00 (approximately 3.25 miles. Disposal of
( pP y p
seabeach amaranth
No recorded nests of piping plover in
continued existence of
1. loggerhead sea turtles
the USFWS Guidelines for Impacts to the West Indian Manatee to avoid
f H P
Ocean Isle Beach Project - Draft
dredge sediments on Ocean Isle Beach in three main fill segments:
West Indian manatee
impacts to manatees
Shallotte River
Biological /Conference Opinion -
a. Segment 1 is a dune and berm fill extending from Station 51 +50
hydraulic
loggerhead sea turtle
the project area, presumably due to
2. green sea turtles
NA
NA
4. Implement a sea turtle nest monitoring and relocation program if the project will be
pipeline dredge
the developed nature of Ocean Isle
3. piping plover and their
USFWS 2001
to Station 103 +00 ft ,150 5
( )
green sea turtle
conducted between May 1 and November 15
b. Segment 2 is the 50 ft berm portion of the main fill, and extends
piping plover
Beach.
critical habitat 4.seabeach amaranth
5. Monitor beach compation and escarpment formation immediately following
from Station 103 +00 to Station
completion of the project and prior to the next three sea turtle nesting seasons. Tilling
129 +00 (2,600 ft)
5. West Indian manatee
and escarpment leveling shall be conducted as required to reduce the likelihood of
c. Segment 3 is the 25 ft berm segment of the project, and extends
impacting nesting and hatching.
from Station 129 +00 to Station
6. Conservation -based construction practices to be used during sea turtle and piping
153 +00 (2,400 ft).
plover nesting season.
Notes:
'The Kure Beach Project is currently under review, as of February 9, 2015.
NA= Not Applicable
I: \Nc- Nat - Res. 1550 \52139. Env - Study- Ncdcm \Docs \Reports \Biological Assessment \Tables \Table 2 - BioAssessment _Documented_Resources 121914.xis 4 of 4

Table 3.
MAMMALS
North Atlantic right
whale
_
ubolaena glacialis
No effect All five inlets
None
Megaptera
novaeanglioe
None
Humpback whale
No effect All five inlets
Balaenoptera
musculus
None
Blue whale
No effect All five inlets
No effect All five inlets
Finback whale
Balaenoptera
physalus
None
Balaenoptera
borealis
None
Sei whale
No effect All five inlets
Sperm whale
Physeter
macrocephalus
None
No effect
All five inlets
West Indian
manatee
Trichechus
manatus
None
No effect All five inlets
BIRDS
Piping plover
May affect, but not
likely to adversely affect All five inlets
Charadrius
melodus
Yes
Red knot
Calidris canutus
rufa
None
May affect, but not All five inlets
likely to adversely affect
No effect Bogue Inlet
May affect, but not All five inlets
likely to adversely affect
Roseate tern
Sterna dougallii
dougallii
None
REPTILES
Loggerhead sea
turtle
Caretto caretto
Yes
Green sea turtle
Chelonia mydas
None
May affect, but not All five inlets
likely to adversely affect
Leatherback sea
turtle
Dermochelys
coriacea
None
May affect, but not
likely to adversely affect
All five inlets
Hawksbill sea
turtle
Eretmochelys
mbricate
None
May affect, but not
likely to adversely affect
All five inlets
Kemp's ridley sea
turtle
Lepidochelys
kempii
None
May affect, but not
likely to adversely affect All five inlets
FISH
No effect All five inlets
Shortnose
sturgeon
Acipenser
brevirostrum
None
Acipenser
Atlantic sturgeon
oxyrinchus
None
No effect All five inlets
oxyrinchus
May affect, but not All five inlets
likely to adversely affect
VASCULAR PLANTS
Seabeach
amaranth
Amaranthus
pumilus
None
More than Engineering Solutions Am O'[3RICN 6 GCRC

Figures
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

0
m
E
SDI -5 INLET DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION BOGUE INLET
" LOGGERHEAD CRITICAL HABITAT
52139
5/11/2015
1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000
O'[3RICNSGCRC
Feet

O
N
a
N
M
m
N
W
H
Q
F
a
SDI -5 INLET MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT NEW TOPSAIL INLET
1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000
Feet
LOGGERHEAD CRITICAL HABITAT
52139
5111/2015
BRICN6GCRC

FIGURE 3
SDI -5 INLET DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION "
CAROLINA BEACH INLET
LOGGERHEAD CRITICAL HABITAT
52139 0 500 1,000 2,000 .713RIEN 6 GERE
5/1112015
Feet

SDI -5 INLET DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION LOCKWOODS FOLLY INLET
1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000
Feet
LOGGERHEAD CRITICAL HABITAT
52139
5/11/2015
BRICN6GCRC

0
0
` -fit.. � K '�'!dr�Cru55�9r•SWr�` LT,
y �'t
�. - ! a �.. _SiY+Snalhutte POiflNL'a?pR .
SDI -5 INLET DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION SHALLOTTE RIVER INLET
LOGGERHEAD CRITICAL HABITAT
52139
5111/2015
1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000
=E=q i ©'BRIEN6GERE
Feet

Attachment 5.4 - Essential
Fish Habitat Summary
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

Town of Emerald Isle
Town of Topsail Beach
New Hanover County
Town of Holden Beach
Town of Ocean Isle Beach
May 2015
$2 GBRICN6GCRC

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................... ..............................1
1.1 Proposed Action Description ............................................................................................................................... ..............................1
1.2 EFH and HAPC ............................................................................................................................................................ ..............................2
1.3 Summary of Previous EFH Assessment Conclusions ................................................................................ ..............................3
2.0 EFH Conservation Recommendations ................................................................................................................... ..............................3
3.0 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................................................... ..............................3
4.0 References ........................................................................................................................................................................ ..............................4
TABLES
1. Essential Fish Habitat and Habitat Areas of Particular Concern in the Vicinity of the Proposed Action
2. Summary of Previous Essential Fish Habitat Assessments
FIGURES
1. Bogue Inlet Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
2. New Topsail Inlet Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
3. Carolina Beach Inlet Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
4. Lockwoods Folly Inlet Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
S. Shallotte River Inlet Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
6. Bogue Inlet Benthic Habitat
7. New Topsail Inlet Benthic Habitat
8. Carolina Beach Inlet Benthic Habitat
9. Lockwoods Folly Inlet Benthic Habitat
10. Shallotte River Inlet Benthic Habitat
APPENDIX
A. Primary Nursery Area Maps for the SDI -5 Inlets
i Final: May 11, 2015 rjm GBRIEN 6 GERE

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA), amended on October 1996
(formally the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976), was enacted by the U.S. Congress
to prevent overfishing, minimize bycatch and protect marine fish stocks and habitat. As part of the MSFCMA,
Congress established Essential Fish Habitat (EFH), which can be defined as habitats (waters and substrate)
needed for spawning, breeding, feeding or growth to maturity. EFH are identified for federally managed fish
species under the authority of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and fishery management councils,
and also include Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC), which are defined as a subset of EFH. Two fishery
management councils have jurisdiction on the North Carolina coast: the South Atlantic Fishery Management
Council (SAFMC) and the Mid - Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC).
The NMFS typically conducts consultation under the MSFCMA as part of a joint permitting process, such as the
North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) major permit application. To support NMFS' consultation
with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE) Wilmington District, who would issue General Permit 291 for the
Proposed Action, this summary of existing EFH assessments has been prepared.
1.1 PROPOSED ACTION DESCRIPTION
Many of North Carolina's shallow draft inlets have not been in a Presidential budget since 2005 (e.g., Bogue,
Carolina Beach and Lockwoods Folly). The USACE Headquarters is also internally assessing the viability of
the side -cast dredge plant "Merritt"; the Corps' primary dredge plant for shallow draft inlet maintenance in
N.C. If North Carolina's shallow draft inlet maintenance dredging continues receiving limited or no support
within Presidential budgets, and USACE Headquarters fails to garner future fiscal support and potentially
determines the "Merritt" as non - viable, local stakeholders must have another alternative. One alternative is
for the local stakeholders adjoining the shallow draft inlets and Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW)
crossing to contract the maintenance dredging on their own. To do this, they would need authorizations
(permits) allowing local maintenance dredging within their specific AIWW crossings and inlets.
The Proposed Action consists of maintenance dredging and beneficial placement at five inlets and associated
AIWW crossings: Bogue, New Topsail, Carolina Beach, Lockwoods Folly, and Shallotte River Inlet. With the
exception of Shallotte River Inlet, which is a federally- authorized Coastal Storm Damage Reduction (CSDR)
borrow area, these inlets are federally- authorized shallow -draft inlets, and are referred to as "the SDI -5" in this
application for convenience. The applicants are the five local governments adjacent to the inlets (listed below),
who wish to obtain major CAMA permits to continue the ongoing federal navigation maintenance dredging
program at the inlets and the AIWW crossings, which is currently conducted by the USACE Wilmington District.
The project areas and applicants are listed as follows:
Project Area
Applicant
Bogue Inlet, Connecting Channel, AIWW Crossing
Town of Emerald Isle
New Topsail Inlet, Topsail Creek, Banks Channel, AIWW
Crossing
Town of Topsail Beach
Carolina Beach Inlet, AIWW Crossing
New Hanover County
Lockwoods Folly Inlet, AIWW Crossing
Town of Holden Beach
Shallotte River Inlet CSDR Borrow Area, as well as the
AIWW Crossing
Town of Ocean Isle Beach
Shallotte Inlet is a federally- authorized CSDR Borrow Area, rather than a federally- authorized navigation
channel. In this permit application, the Town of Ocean Isle Beach is seeking approval to maintain the navigable
deepwater channel within the CSDR Borrow Area, which extends across the majority of the inlet and is dredged
on a 3 -year interval.
1 Final: May 11, 2015 r0i GBRIEN 6 ISERE

The N.C. Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) Major Permit application will serve as the umbrella
permit application for the processing of a NCDCM Major Permit as well as other state and federal
authorizations. The intended result is the acquisition of locally held authorizations (NCDCM Major
Permit / USACE General Permit 291) for each inlet issued to each participating applicant.
The authorized maintenance dredging at each inlet would mimic the ongoing, approved USACE
maintenance dredging program for each inlet, which includes the AIWW crossings, connecting channels,
and the inlet throats out through the currently authorized USACE inlet linear distances beyond the
International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (referred to as COLREGS) demarcation line. The
inlets have typically needed maintenance on a roughly quarterly basis by the USACE Wilmington District,
and AIWW Crossing maintenance has typically been needed every 1 -2 years. The SDI -5 applicants would
continue this maintenance schedule to the extent practical, subject to the navigational needs at a particular
inlet. To improve efficiency and limit potential impacts, the SDI -5 applicants may combine AIWW Crossing
and inlet maintenance events.
The applicants would continue the USACE Wilmington District's use of the least -cost method of disposal,
and would select from currently- approved dredge material management locations including shoreline
beneficial placement, nearshore placement and /or upland confined disposal. The project area for each
inlet is depicted in Figures 1 through S. The Proposed Action includes the AIWW Crossing wideners
maintained by the USACE Wilmington District, as summarized in the following excerpted table:
Proposed AIWW Inlet Crossing Wideners.
Notes:
1 = Distance measured parallel to AIWW from approbmate center of the inlet crossing
2 = Distance measured perpendicular to AIWW
1 = Width of main easterly widener area toward inlet; number in parentheses is the length (parallel to AIWW) at the indicated width
Source: Environmental Assessment: Channel Wideners at Inlet Crossings, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW), North
Carolina. USACE Wilmington District, Wilmington, NC. December 1997.
1.2 EFH AND HAPC
Table 1 summarizes the EFH and HAPC that are present at each of the SDI -5, based on available habitat mapping
information, and existing EFH studies obtained for this summary. Figures 1 through 10 depict the mapped
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) areas [published by the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NCDENR) and the Albemarle - Pamlico National Estuary Partnership (APNEP) in 2008] and mapped
benthic habitat areas for the inlets [geographic information systems data published by the NCDENR Division of
Marine Fisheries (NC DMF) in 2013]. Primary nursery area maps prepared by the NCDMF are provided in
Appendix A.
As described above, the Proposed Action is a compilation of existing, authorized projects conducted by the
USACE Wilmington District and the local government applicants. Rather than re- assess the effects of the
Proposed Action on the EFH and HAPCs in each inlet project area, the previous EFH assessments associated with
these existing or similar projects have been obtained, reviewed and incorporated into this summary. Table 2
2 Final: May 11, 2015 rim GBRIEN 6 GORE
MAXIMUM WIDENER AREA
AIWW DESCRIPTION
LENGTH (ft)
WIDTH (ft)
CROSSING NAME
REACH SECTION
TANGENT
NORTH
SOUTH
EAST' WEST
Bogue Inlet
Beaufort - Cape Fear River I
F, G
2000
1500
200 (1700)
0
New Topsail Inlet
Beaufort - Cape Fear River III
8
1600
1600
200 (1000)
5o
Mason Inlet
Beaufort- Cape Fear River III
12
1600
1600
700 (600)
5o
Masonboro Inlet
Beaufort - Cape Fear River N
3
2100
1700
200 (1500)
50
Carolina Beach Inlet
Beaufort - Cape Fear River IV
1
2500
900
250 (1300)
50
Lockwoods Folly Inlet
Cape Fear River - tittle River
11
1600
1600
400 (650)
50
5hallotte Inlet
Cape Fear River - Little River
19,20
1.500
1600
200 1300
50
Notes:
1 = Distance measured parallel to AIWW from approbmate center of the inlet crossing
2 = Distance measured perpendicular to AIWW
1 = Width of main easterly widener area toward inlet; number in parentheses is the length (parallel to AIWW) at the indicated width
Source: Environmental Assessment: Channel Wideners at Inlet Crossings, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW), North
Carolina. USACE Wilmington District, Wilmington, NC. December 1997.
1.2 EFH AND HAPC
Table 1 summarizes the EFH and HAPC that are present at each of the SDI -5, based on available habitat mapping
information, and existing EFH studies obtained for this summary. Figures 1 through 10 depict the mapped
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) areas [published by the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NCDENR) and the Albemarle - Pamlico National Estuary Partnership (APNEP) in 2008] and mapped
benthic habitat areas for the inlets [geographic information systems data published by the NCDENR Division of
Marine Fisheries (NC DMF) in 2013]. Primary nursery area maps prepared by the NCDMF are provided in
Appendix A.
As described above, the Proposed Action is a compilation of existing, authorized projects conducted by the
USACE Wilmington District and the local government applicants. Rather than re- assess the effects of the
Proposed Action on the EFH and HAPCs in each inlet project area, the previous EFH assessments associated with
these existing or similar projects have been obtained, reviewed and incorporated into this summary. Table 2
2 Final: May 11, 2015 rim GBRIEN 6 GORE

summarizes the prior EFH assessments by inlet, including conclusions regarding potential project effects, and
recommended conservation measures. The following section summarizes the previous EFH assessments.
1.3 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS EFH ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS
The previous EFH assessments summarized in Table 2 do not identify adverse impacts to EFH, HAPC, or
managed species from the assessed actions. Potential effects that are described were generally expected to be
minor, temporary, and /or localized. Conservation measures were often used to minimize potential effects,
including the use of environmental construction windows (CP &E 2004, 2009a, 2009b, 2012, 2014), avoidance of
mapped hard - bottom habitat (USACE 2013 and CP &E 2009a), and the use of real -time positioning and
monitoring during construction (CP &E 2009a, 2009b, 2012).
2.0 EFH CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the previous EFH assessments at the SDI -5, the following two conservation measures are proposed for
the Proposed Action:
1. To the extent practical routinely scheduled dredging activity should be implemented during the
environmental window for dredging and shoreline beneficial reuse that is used by the USACE
Wilmington District for AIWW Crossing projects [November 16 to April 30] to limit the potential effect
on managed species. During this time period, many of the managed species will not be utilizing the
inlets, and it is anticipated that individuals that may be in close proximity to dredge activity will be able
to avoid direct dredge areas.
Occasionally, dredge activity outside of the environmental window may be necessary to remove shoals
that may build up within the inlets. These shoals can limit navigation and present a potential hazard for
recreational and commercial vessels. Dredge activity in the five inlets outside of the environmental
window has been previously addressed by the USACE Wilmington District, who concluded that minimal
impacts to EFH would be anticipated because these actions would rarely occur more than 1 -2 times per
year at a given location, and would rarely (if ever) reach authorized dredge depths (USACE 2004).
2. The bedrock hard bottom identified at Shallotte River Inlet (Figure 10) should be avoided through the
use of navigation /positioning software to monitor dredge location during construction activity.
3.0 CONCLUSIONS
The previous EFH Assessments summarized in this report concluded that the assessed actions would not
adversely affect EFH, HAPC and EFH- managed species. The Proposed Action is in keeping with previously -
authorized and ongoing federal and local government actions. As such, many conclusions from the previous EFH
Assessments conducted for these and similar actions are applicable to the Proposed Action.
3 Final: May 11, 2015 Am GBRICN 6 GORE

4.0 REFERENCES
CP &E. 2004. Bogue Inlet Channel Relocation Project. Essential Fish Habitat Assessment. February 2004.
CP &E. 2009a. Topsail Beach Interim (Emergency) Beach Fill Project. Final Essential Fish Habitat Assessment.
March 2009.
CP &E. 2009b. North Topsail Beach Shoreline Protection Project, Final Environmental Impact Statement.
December 2009.
CP &E. 2012. Carolina Beach Shoreline Protection Project, Essential Fish Habitat Assessment. August 2012.
CP &E. 2014. Kure Beach Coastal Storm Damage Reduction Project. Supplemental Essential Fish Habitat
Assessment. April 2014.
NCDENR. 2008. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation. NCDENR and APNEP. Raleigh, NC. 2008. Accessed via NC One
Map at: http:./,/data.nconemap.com/geoportal/catalog/main/home.page.on December 18, 2014.
NCDMF. 2013. Estuarine Benthic Habitat Mapping. NCDMF. Morehead City, NC. Accessed via NC One Map at:
httl2:1/data.nconemal2. com/ geol2ortal lcatalog/main /home.12age on December 18, 2014.
NMFS. 2010. Essential Fish Habitat: A Marine Fish Habitat Conservation Mandate for Federal Agencies, South
Atlantic Region. NMFS, Habitat Conservation Division, Southeast Regional Office. St. Petersburg, FL. Revised
September 2010.
Roscov, B. and D. York. 2009. Town of Emerald Isle, North Carolina Bogue Inlet Channel Erosion Response
Project, Final Biotic Community Assessment Report. Wilmington, NC: Coastal Planning & Engineering of North
Carolina, Inc. February 2009.
USACE. 1997. Environmental Assessment. Channel Wideners at Inlet Crossings Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway,
North Carolina. USACE Wilmington District. Wilmington, NC. December 1997.
USACE. 2004. Environmental Assessment. Use of Government Plant to Dredge in Federally Authorized
Navigation Projects in North Carolina. USACE Wilmington District. Wilmington, NC. March 2004.
USACE. 2013. Integrated Feasibility Report and Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Coastal Storm Damage
Reduction, Bogue Banks, Carteret County, North Carolina, Draft Report. USACE Wilmington District. Wilmington,
NC. August 2013.
4 Final: May 11, 2015 rim GBRICN 6 GCRC

Tables
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

SDI -5 Maintenance Dredging
Table 1- Essential Fish Habitat and Habitat Areas of Particular Concern in the Vicinity of the Proposed Action
Essential Fish Habitat'
Potential Presence
In /Near Project Vicinity
Within Project Area
Estuarine Areas
Estuarine Emergent Wetlands
Yes
No
Estuarine Scrub /Shrub Mangroves
No
No
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)
Yes
No
Oyster Reefs and Shell Banks
Yes
No
Intertidal Flats
Yes
Yes
Palustrine Emergent and Forested Wetlands
No
No
Aquatic Beds
Yes
No
Estuarine Water Column
Yes
Yes
Marine Areas
Live /Hard Bottoms
Yes
No
Coral and Coral Reefs
No
No
Artificial /Manmade Reefs
Yes
No
Sargossum
Offshore
No
Water Column
Yes
Yes
Geographically Defined Habitat Areas of Particular
Concern
Council- designated artificial reef special management
zones
No
No
Hermatypic Coral Habitat and Reefs
No
No
Hard Bottoms
Yes
No
Hoyt Hills
No
No
Sargossum Habitat
Offshore
No
State - designated Areas of Importance to Managed
Species
Yes
No
SAV
Yes
No
North Carolina
Big Rock
No
No
Bogue Sound
Yes
Yes
Pamlico Sound at Hatteras /Okracoke Islands
No
No
Capes Hatteras, Fear and Lookout (sandy shoals)
No
No
New River
No
No
Ten Fathom Ledge
No
No
The Point
No
No
NOTES:
1Current Essential Fish Habitat designations according to National Marine Fisheries Service for the South and
Mid - Atlantic Regions, found in Essential Fish Habitat: A Marine Fish Habitat Conservation Mandate for
Federal Agencies, South Atlantic Region. September 2010 (Appendices 4 and 5).

SDI -5 Maintenance Dredging
Table 2 - Summary of Previous Essential Fish Habitat Assessments
'Biological effect columns identify the effect on categories of EFH, or individual managed species, depending on how each study assessed the effects.
2The Kure Beach Project is currently under review, as of February 9, 2015.
1of1
Habitat Areas of Particular Concern
Not Likely to Affect/
Inlet
Resource Document
Assessed Action
Dredge Type
Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Categories Identified
(HAPC)
May Affect, but not Likely to Adversely Affect
No Effect'
Conservation Measures
Bogue, New
US Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE). 1997.
Widener dredging at AIWW at /near inlet crossings in
Topsail, Carolina
Environmental Assessment. Channel
(1) PNAs
NA- Impacts of widener dredging expected to be insignificant on estuarine and
Beach, Lockwoods
Wideners at Inlet Crossings Atlantic
g
North Carolina, including Bogue Inlet, New Topsail
hydraulic pipeline
(1) Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)
1 Prima Nurse Areas PNAs
() Primary Nursery (PNAs)
Not Applicable
PP
2 SAV
()
marine organisms due to short -term duration and localized nature of dredging
g g g
Folly, and
Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW), North
Inlet, Carolina Beach Inlet, Lockwoods Folly Inlet, and
dredge
(2) Estuarine emergent wetlands
(3) Estuarine emergent wetlands
activity
Shallotte River
Carolina. December 1997.
Shallotte River Inlet
(1) Estuarine emergent wetlands
Maintenance dredging at federally authorized shallow
(2) SAV
Bogue, New
draft inlets and AIWW Crossings, including Bogue Inlet,
(3) Oyster reefs and shell banks
(1) Estuarine emergent wetlands
(i) Oyster reefs and shell banks
Topsail, Carolina
P
USAGE. 2004. Environmental Assessment.
Connectin Channel, and AIWW Crossing; New Topsail
g g' P
hopper dredge
PP g
(4) Intertidal flats
1 PNAs
O
2 SAV
O
2 Intertidal flats
O
NA- No significant adverse impact to EFH, HAPC, or EFH species. Minimal
g P P
Beach, Lockwoods
Use of Government Plant to Dredge in
Inlet, Topsail Creek, and Banks Channel; Carolina
and. sidecast
(5) Aquatic beds
(2) Bogue Sound (North Carolina
(3) Aquatic beds
(3) Creeks
impacts that may occur are expected to be minor and temporary both on
Folly, and
Y
Federally Authorized Navigation Projects in
Beach Inlet and AIWW Crossing; Lockwoods Folly Inlet
g y
dredge
g
(6) Estuarine and marine water column
Geographically-defined HAPC )
4 Estuarine and marine water column
()
4 Mud bottom
( )
individuals and as cumulative effects
Shallotte River
North Carolina. March 2004.
and AIWW Crossing; Shallotte River Inlet and AIWW
(7) Seagrass
(5) Seagrass
(5) Hard bottom
(8) Creeks
Crossing
(9) Mud bottom
(10) Hard bottom
(1) Estuarine emergent wetlands
(1) Penaeid shrimp
1. Project time frame during winter months (November 16th -March 315t) to
(2) SAV
(1) Juvenile summer flounder (Poralichthys dentatus)
(2) Cobia (Rachycentron canadum )
reduce effects offish spawning periods and likely avoid
Coastal Planning and Engineering. 2004.
Relocate channel approx. 1,082 in west of current
(3) Oyster reefs and shell banks
(2) Southern flounder
(3) Gray snapper (Lutjanus griseus )
immigration /emigration of species through inlet
Bogue
Bogue Inlet Channel Relocation Project,
channel, consistent with 1976 and 1978 ebb channel
hydraulic pipeline
(4) Intertidal flats
(1) PNAs
(Paralichiys lethostigma)
(4) Red drum (Scianops ocellatus )
2. Use of cutter suction dredge to lessen effects on fish; noise and vibration
Essential Fish Habitat Assessment. February
locations. Beach placement of excavated sediment.
dredge
(5) Estuarine and marine water columns and creeks
(2) SAV
(3) Blue crab (Callinectessopidus)
(5) Spiny lobster (Panularis argus)
created from dredge should keep fish out of project area
2004.
(6) Shallow sand and muddy bottoms
(4) Coastal sharks
(6) Bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix )
3. Construction of sand dike to replace intertidal habitat
uper c plea
Snapper-grouper
(7) Snapper - grouper complex
4. Use of sorted sediment with low silt percentage and high sand content
(8) tuna us s j
(1) Estuarine emergent wetlands
(1) Estuarine emergent wetlands
US Army Corps of Engineers. 2013.
(2) Intertidal flats
(2) Intertidal flats
Integrated Feasibility Report and Draft
22.7 long main beach fill on Bogue Banks with 2,000
hopper or
(3) Estuarine water column
(1) Hard bottoms
(1) Sargassum habitat
(3) Estuarine water column
1. Low relief hard bottom resources mapped and avoided with 500 meter (m)
Bogue
Environmental Impact Statement, Coastal
transition zone berm. Sand source is offshore borrow
hydraulic pipeline
(4) Creeks
(2) Sargassum habitat
(2) Marine water column
(4) Creeks
buffer; no impacts to reef forming corals due to 500 m buffer
Storm Damage Reduction, Bogue Banks,
area. Three -year interval on nourishment.
dredge
(5) Live /hard bottoms
(3) PNAs
(3) PNAs
(5) Live /hard bottoms
2.500 m buffer around State - managed artificial reefs
Carteret County, North Carolina, Draft
(6) Artificial /manmade reefs
(4) Bogue Sound
(6) Artificial /manmade reefs
Report. August 2013.
(7) Sargassum
(7) Bogue Sound
(8) Marine water column
Roscov, B. and D. York. 2009. Town of
Emerald Isle, North Carolina Bogue Inlet
Channel Erosion Response Project, Final
Assessment of biotic community changes in response
(1) SAV
1. SAV total acreage increased 129.4% between pre- construction (2003) and post- construction (2008) assessments in the Permit Area
Bogue
Biotic Community Assessment Report.
to Bogue Inlet Channel Relocation conducted in 2004
NA
(2) Intertidal flats
2. Intertidal flat total acreage decreased by 17% between pre- construction (2003) and post - construction (2008) assessments in the Permit Area
NA.
Wilmington, NC: Coastal Planning &
and 2005
(3) Live /hard bottoms
3. Live /hard bottom habitat decreased 0.7% between pre- construction (2003) and post- construction (2008) assessments in the Permit Area
Engineering of North Carolina, Inc. February
2009.
1. Pink shrimp (Penaeus duorarum )
2. White shrimp (Penaeus setiferus )
3. Blue crab
1. Project time frame during winter months (November 16th -March 31st) to
4. Coal sharks
Coastal
reduce effects of fish spawning periods and likely avoid
(1) Estuarine emergent wetlands
5. Coast
immigration /emigration of species through inlet
Proposal for Town of Topsail Beach to perform an
(2) Live /hard bottoms
2. 500 m buffer zone around rock outcrops
Coastal Planning and Engineering. 2009.
emergency (i.e., one -time) beach fill project to protect
(3) SAV
(1) Hard bottoms
1. Juvenile brown shrimp (Penaeus aztecus)
6. Gray snapper
3. Relocation of Borrow Area X seaward of ebb tide delta +reduced footprint
New Topsail
Topsail Beach Interim (Emergency) Beach
oceanfront property and infrastructure from potential
hydraulic pipeline
(4) Oyster reefs and shell banks
(2) SAV
2. Summer flounder
7. Red drum
of borrow extent
Fill Project Final Essential Fish Habitat
storm damages /beach erosion. Sand source was
dredge
(5) Intertidal flats
(3) PNAs
3. Southern flounder
8. Bluefish
4. Real -time positioning and monitoring during construction activity
Assessment. March 2009.
offshore borrow area.
(6) Estuarine and marine water columns
9. Spanish mackerel (Scomberomorus maculates)
5. Monitoring of biotic and benthic communities /populations within and near
10. King mackerel (Scomberomorus cavalla )
(7) Shallow sand and muddy bottoms
11. Atlantic croaker (Micropoganias undulates)
Borrow Area X pre and post- construction.
12. Spot (Leiostomus xanthurus )
6. Use of low silt content borrow material from offshore
13. Scamp (Mycteroperca phenox )
14. White grunt (Haemulon plumieri )
1. Dredging activity scheduled between November 16th and March 31st -
Non- Federal shoreline and inlet management project.
(1) Estuarine emergent wetlands
(1) Estuarine emergent wetlands
construction window occurs outside fish and larval biota utilization of the
Coastal Planning & Engineering. 2009.
Preferred alternative is 11.1 miles of beach fill on
hydraulic pipeline
(2) Intertidal flats
(2) Intertidal flats (both positive and adverse potential effects
channel (ingress and egress from the inlet)
New Topsail
North Topsail Beach Shoreline Protection
North Topsail Beach, with New River Inlet channel
dredge
(3) SAV
NA
identified)
(1) SAV
2. Use of hydraulic cutterhead limits the amount of disturbance resulting in
Project, Final Environmental Impact
adjustment, and upland disposal of incompatible
(4) Live /hard bottoms
(3) Live /hard bottoms
lower sedimentation and turbidity levels
Statement. December 2009.
material. Borrow area in New River Inlet and offshore.
3. Navigation and positioning software used to track dredge location near hard
bottom habitats
1. Pink shrimp
2. White shrimp
3. Blue crab
(1) Estuarine emergent wetlands
4. Coastal sharks
1. Project time frame during winter months (November 16th - March 31st) to
Coastal Planning and Engineering. 2012.
New Hanover County seeking State and Federal
(2) SAV
1. Juvenile brown shrimp
S. Cobia
reduce effects of fish spawning periods and likely avoid
Carolina Beach: Beach Nourishment Project,
ermits to continue Federal authorized beach
permits
hydraulic pipeline
y
( Oyster reefs and shell banks
3 ) y
2. Summer flounder
6. Gray snapper
PP
immigration /emigration of species through inlet
Carolina Beach
Essential Fish Habitat Assessment. August
nourishment project for Carolina Beach. Borrow area
dredge
(4) Intertidal flats
(1) PNAs
3. Southern flounder
7. Red drum
2. Use of hydraulic cutterhead to reduce disturbance of seafloor minimizing
2012.
is Carolina Beach Inlet.
(5) Estuarine and marine water columns
8. Bluefish
sediment suspension and turbidity
(6) Shallow sand and muddy bottoms
9. Spanish mackerel
3. Real -time positioning and monitoring during construction activity
10. King mackerel
4. Use of low silt content borrow material from Carolina Beach Inlet
11. Atlantic croaker
12.Spot
Coastal Planning and Engineering. 2014.
1. Environmental construction window of November 16th to April 30th for
Kure Beach Coastal Storm Damage
New Hanover County seeking to modify Major Permit
hydraulic pipeline
(1) Marine water column - inner shelf waters
(1) Marine water column - inner shelf waters
hydraulic pipeline dredge, November 16th to March 31st for hopper dredge.
Carolina Beach
z
Reduction Project . Supplemental Essential
#132 -12 to include federal Kure Beach Coastal Storm
dredge or hopper
(2) Marine water column - surf zone
NA
(2) Marine water column - surf zone
(1) Live /hard bottoms
2. Conservation -based construction practices.
Damage Reduction Project. Borrow area is offshore.
dredge
(3) Live /hard bottoms
Fish Habitat Assessment. April 2014.
3. Placement of beach - compatible sediment.
'Biological effect columns identify the effect on categories of EFH, or individual managed species, depending on how each study assessed the effects.
2The Kure Beach Project is currently under review, as of February 9, 2015.
1of1

Figures
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

O
t0
10 v 4-7 1 , 1 k-–'; F - i-&g At
SDI -5 INLET DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION BOGUE INLET
1,000 2,000 4,000 6.000 8.000
Feet
" SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION
52139
12/19/2014
BRICN6GCRC

m
a r
- ( -IIJ
SDI -5 INLET MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT NEW TOPSAIL INLET
N SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION
52139
12/19/2014
1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000
■ O'BRICN6GCRC
Feet

FIGURE 3
SDI -5 INLET DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION "
CAROLINA BEACH INLET
SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION
52139 0 500 1,000 2,000 .113RIEN 6 GERE
12/19/2014
Feet

0
'm
E
a
0
of
a
m
N
W
H
Q
F
a
SDI -5 INLET DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION
1,000 2,000 4,000
Feet
6,000 8,000
I
LOCKWOODS FOLLY INLET
SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION
52139
12/19/2014
©'BRIEN6GERE

O
l0
U - i5
�r � ! K Sra'�Cru55�9r•SW ij y
� e Poit�NLx+p,Q �Y
�.. _SiY+Snalhott u'..
SDI -5 INLET DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION SHALLOTTE RIVER INLET
SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION
52139
12/3/2014
1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000
1BRIEN6GERE
Feet

FIGURE E
LEGEND
>ON 110 �,.•�y��� ♦� ��.�q�►�♦�' � � � Maintenance Dredging Project Area
•_ ` _ �i<
w - : ���� '�'j% �'� .��..__��`��� ���� �° a° "��� a 8 Beneficial Placement Locations
o St ♦„r> > - -- '� °� ♦ ♦4a o - Pipeline Route
SDI -5 INLET DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION
1,000 2,000 4,000
Feet
6,000 8,000
I
Near Shore Disposal
Diked Upland Disposal Location
Subtidal Habitats
B - Soft Vegetated Without Shell
C - Soft Non - vegetated With Shell
D - Soft Non - Vegetated Without Shell
E - Firm Vegetated Shell
F - Firm Vegetated Without Shell
G - Firm Non - Vegetated Shell
H - Firm Non - Vegetated Without Shell
I - Hard Vegetated Shell
J - Hard Vegetated Without Shell
K - Hard Non - Vegetated Shell
L - Hard Non - Vegetated Without Shell
Intertidal Habitats
N - Soft Vegetated Without Shell
O - Soft Non - Vegetated Shell
P - Soft Non - Vegetated Without Shell
Q - Firm Vegetated Shell
R - Firm Vegetated Without Shell
�I S - Firm Non - Vegetated Shell
T - Firm Non - Vegetated Without Shell
L U - Hard Vegetated Shell
F V - Hard Vegetated Without Shell
_ W - Hard Non - Vegetated Shell
_ X - Hard Non - Vegetated Without Shell
BOGUE INLET
BENTHIC HABITAT
52139
12/19/2014
O'BRICN6GCRC

a
a
m
E
m
Q
N
LEGEND
I ZM Aww 1 KIM *===* Beneficial Placement Locations
` �� ._�rj� ���� f?, p�" �� - Pipeline Route
Ii +y'''am' • � �, � (��1��� ;� � ��\ .. �,` �. S
.r��!��� •Vs_-' ��" :i�:�i_._��'�.�•. �� ��� �� Near Shore Disposal
SDI -5 INLET MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT
1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000
Feet
8,000
Maintenance Dredging Project Area
Diked Upland Disposal Location
Subtidal Habitats
B - Soft Vegetated Without Shell
Kx C - Soft Non - vegetated With Shell
D - Soft Non - Vegetated Without Shell
E - Firm Vegetated Shell
F - Firm Vegetated Without Shell
G - Firm Non - Vegetated Shell
H - Firm Non - Vegetated Without Shell
I - Hard Vegetated Shell
J - Hard Vegetated Without Shell
K - Hard Non - Vegetated Shell
L - Hard Non - Vegetated Without Shell
Intertidal Habitats
C N - Soft Vegetated Without Shell
O - Soft Non - Vegetated Shell
P - Soft Non - Vegetated Without Shell
C Q - Firm Vegetated Shell
R - Firm Vegetated Without Shell
_
S- Firm Non - Vegetated Shell
7 T - Firm Non - Vegetated Without Shell
U - Hard Vegetated Shell
V - Hard Vegetated Without Shell
_ W - Hard Non - Vegetated Shell
_ X - Hard Non - Vegetated Without Shell
NEW TOPSAIL INLET
BENTHIC HABITAT
52139
12/19/2014
BRICN6GCRC

a
m
E
Q
w
0
m
N
W
Q
0
0
M
SDI -5 INLET DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
4,000
LEGEND
� i Maintenance Dredging Project Area
0===* Beneficial Placement Locations
o_o = = Pipeline Route
Near Shore Disposal
Diked Upland Disposal Location
Subtidal Habitats
B - Soft Vegetated Without Shell
C - Soft Non - vegetated With Shell
D - Soft Non - Vegetated Without Shell
E - Firm Vegetated Shell
j F - Firm Vegetated Without Shell
G - Firm Non - Vegetated Shell
H - Firm Non - Vegetated Without Shell
I - Hard Vegetated Shell
J - Hard Vegetated Without Shell
K - Hard Non - Vegetated Shell
L - Hard Non - Vegetated Without Shell
Intertidal Habitats
N - Soft Vegetated Without Shell
O - Soft Non - Vegetated Shell
_ P - Soft Non - Vegetated Without Shell
Q - Firm Vegetated Shell
R - Firm Vegetated Without Shell
_ S - Firm Non - Vegetated Shell
® T - Firm Non - Vegetated Without Shell
U - Hard Vegetated Shell
V - Hard Vegetated Without Shell
_ W - Hard Non - Vegetated Shell
_ X- Hard Non - Vegetated Without Shell
CAROLINA BEACH INLET
BENTHIC HABITAT
52139
12/19/2014
O'BRIEN6GERE

O
N
Q
N
O
m
N
W
Q
0
0
0
a
SDI -5 INLET DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION
0 1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000
Feet
I
LEGEND
� i Maintenance Dredging Project Area
0===* Beneficial Placement Locations
o_o = =­ Pipeline Route
Near Shore Disposal
Diked Upland Disposal Location
Subtidal Habitats
B - Soft Vegetated Without Shell
C - Soft Non - vegetated With Shell
D - Soft Non - Vegetated Without Shell
E - Firm Vegetated Shell
F - Firm Vegetated Without Shell
G - Firm Non - Vegetated Shell
H - Firm Non - Vegetated Without Shell
I - Hard Vegetated Shell
J - Hard Vegetated Without Shell
K - Hard Non - Vegetated Shell
L - Hard Non - Vegetated Without Shell
Intertidal Habitats
N - Soft Vegetated Without Shell
O - Soft Non - Vegetated Shell
P - Soft Non - Vegetated Without Shell
Q - Firm Vegetated Shell
R - Firm Vegetated Without Shell
S - Firm Non - Vegetated Shell
T - Firm Non - Vegetated Without Shell
U - Hard Vegetated Shell
V - Hard Vegetated Without Shell
W - Hard Non - Vegetated Shell
_ X - Hard Non - Vegetated Without Shell
LOCKWOODS FOLLY INLET
BENTHIC HABITAT
52139
12/19/2014
O'BRIEN6GERE

FIGURE 1G
Eros Project
CSDR Borrow Area
0===30 Beneficial � _ R 1 c� _yS°�Shd4a•�Gain1 A,.;RpS
Placement
z=o=c3zr- Pipeline Route
SDI -5 INLET DREDGING PERMIT APPLICATION
1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000
Feet
8,000
I
Near Shore Disposal
Diked Upland Disposal Location
_ Exposed Bedrock
Subtidal Habitats
B - Soft Vegetated Without Shell
C - Soft Non - vegetated With Shell
D - Soft Non - Vegetated Without Shell
E - Firm Vegetated Shell
F - Firm Vegetated Without Shell
G - Firm Non - Vegetated Shell
H - Firm Non - Vegetated Without Shell
I - Hard Vegetated Shell
J -Hard Vegetated Without Shell
K - Hard Non - Vegetated Shell
L- Hard Non - Vegetated Without Shell
Intertidal Habitats
N - Soft Vegetated Without Shell
O - Soft Non - Vegetated Shell
_ P - Soft Non - Vegetated Without Shell
Q - Firm Vegetated Shell
R - Firm Vegetated Without Shell
ow S - Firm Non - Vegetated Shell
T - Firm Non - Vegetated Without Shell
U - Hard Vegetated Shell
V - Hard Vegetated Without Shell
_ W - Hard Non - Vegetated Shell
_ X - Hard Non - Vegetated Without Shell
SHALLOTTE RIVER INLET
BENTHIC HABITAT
52139
12/3/2014
O'BRIEN6GERE

Appendix A - Primary
Nursery Area Maps for the
SDI-5 Inlets
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

This map was produced by the Geographic Information Systems (G S) �!
program. Informational data used to create this map were collected from
federal, state, county, and private organizations. This map is a general
guide to assist the public and is for illustrative purposes only. While every tt., t f CO -J
effort is made to keep this map accurate and up -to -date, it is not intended -- 7[7iS Fs
CO Ya
to replace any official source. Under no circumstances shall the State of
North Carolina be liable for any actions taken or omissions made from : ` - CAR- R •I_ Kuhns
reliance on any information contained herein from whatever source nor
shall the State be liable for any other consequences from any such reliance.
9 j 'White Oak River
j . �- Cp .0103 12 f -- - Z-1
i
Holland Mill Creek .01o312tii
Queens Creek C g
Green' 0103 12 h
SSS
x
Hall's Creek
a
0--- j .0103 12 h iii JI
Sao `` i % r � ` }`� � / •'` _ - X � � � '�- - $warlstwro f, _
Parrot Swamp
+ -
.0103 12 g -
' f
12 .;$•; i l o " Hawkins Creek
a - rot •" . Careat Nock
o
t
Y 1
n. �[ 010312hi f
0103 12 i a r Dick's Creek `
Bear Creek � � ea4�+a Y ! - -
Salliers Bay 0103 13 a,
Salliers Bay .0103 13 a
�r
Ou r sue¢ MDZRA
Background imagery are U.S. Geological Fishery Nursery Areas Fishery Nursery Areas
Survey 1:100,000 -scale planimetric maps. ® Primary
® Permanent Secondary
® Special Secondary
® Military Danger
Zones and
Restricted Areas
locator map Map 20
— Inland waters (WRC jurisdiction)
Map Datum:
NAD83
Map Projection: NC State Plane
Map Date:
March 2011
1000
0 1000
2000 Yards
0.7
0 0.7
1.4 Miles

P ` - � � � � .• sir _-�.r. JI ys 'yf.
K Gales Creek _
PO j_i •.� r - ..It �' �-•' Broad Creek ' ti _0103 12 a e
12 b � 4 Y
P'WMuhwsr
PV.""' Pettiford Creek
Sanders Creek
.0103 12 f i 0103 12 c
ti. alt ?p �' - - - - p"p_ jh°� lU.
�
corfiEw Goose Creek I I =
.010312d
AIR JI
I.
NumphrBY.'
-. --
} Piney
Aruft
ti�ynte I PuIM
7
CHERRY K
U S MILITARY RV
ood Wand.
Isbwd
saber
path
8 (19Ue
tau .010312 a LArcher Creek
ill P
I
I
336
f P ' 35
334
{ 334
- _ This map was produced by the Geographic Information Systems (GIs)
- - I program. Informational data used to create this map were collected from
federal, state, county, and private organizations. This map is a general
guide to assist the public and is for illustrative purposes only. While every
effort is made to keep this map accurate and up -to -date, it is not intended
MDZRA to replace any official source. Under no circumstances shall the State of
North Carolina be liable for any actions taken or omissions made from
reliance on any information contained herein from whatever source nor
7 shall the State be liable for any other consequences from any such reliance.
Background imagery are U.S. Geological Fishery Nursery Areas Fishery Nursery Areas
Survey 1:100,000 -scale planimetric maps. ® Primary
® Permanent Secondary
® Special Secondary
® Military Danger
Zones and
Restricted Areas
locator map Map 21
— Inland waters (WRC jurisdiction)
Map Datum: NAD83
Map Projection: NC State Plane
Map Date: March 2011
1000 0 1000 2000 Yards
0.7 0 0.7 1.4 Miles

Background imagery are U.S. Geological Fishery Nursery Areas Fishery Nursery Areas
Survey 1:100,000 -scale planimetric maps. ® Primary
® Permanent Secondary
® Special Secondary
® Military Danger
Zones and
Restricted Areas
locator map Map 26
— Inland waters (WRC jurisdiction)
This map was produced by the Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
NAD83
program. Informational data used to create this map were collected from
Map Projection: NC State Plane
federal, state, county, and private organizations. This map is a general
Map Date:
guide to assist the public and is for illustrative purposes only. While every
1000
effort is made to keep this map accurate and up -to -date, it is not intended
2000 Yards
to replace any official source. Under no circumstances shall the State of
_.
North Carolina be liable for any actions taken or omissions made from
reliance on any information contained herein from whatever source nor
shall the State be liable for any other consequences from any such reliance.
-
-
Mallard Bay Area
�yl 4 Ij`4• \t` V M1a.
'"� J�}- - f .0103 15 d
sa– J.....� --�,.� _��
a 19 -
'_ r a ,.
.0103
Old Topsail Creek n104 F;
Cape Fear River
a o
' - `'
4,a Old Topsail Creek .010315 b
��
.lam
N��47
Mill Creek .0104 7 r r
.• r� gl rr
9cuarn { }' x .0103 15 c
,may r
r Topsail
b
' Sound
t
.0103 16 a
J O} Futch Creek 1.0103
16 b
.010316a� cc
Pages Creek o104 8 5 }y av
' .0103 16 a Q
,= Page's Creek
.010316c
.0103 16 a rm
Howe Creek
m
All
_ .0103 17 b 11) en
0103 16 a 4o� R_
`(N
.0103 16 d General Waters
�l r
F�73
Background imagery are U.S. Geological Fishery Nursery Areas Fishery Nursery Areas
Survey 1:100,000 -scale planimetric maps. ® Primary
® Permanent Secondary
® Special Secondary
® Military Danger
Zones and
Restricted Areas
locator map Map 26
— Inland waters (WRC jurisdiction)
Map Datum:
NAD83
Map Projection: NC State Plane
Map Date:
March 2011
1000
0 1000
2000 Yards
0.7
0 0.7
1.4 Miles

Background imagery are U.S. Geological Fishery Nursery Areas Fishery Nursery Areas
Survey 1:100,000 -scale planimetric maps. ® Primary N
® Permanent Secondary Map Datum: NAD83
® Special Secondary Map Projection: NC State Plane
Map Date: March 2011
® Military Danger 1000 0 1000 2000 Yards
Zones and
Restricted Areas
locator map 0.7 0 0.7 1.4 Miles
—
Inland waters (WRC jurisdiction) Map 27
®,
Cape
, ' i, Masonboro- Myrtle Grove
Fear
r - ;. Sound Area (west side)
010318 b
River
....�
Cape Fear River '. _ ;_ r
II�IIIIIII
• .
���1 �� �
1 i II .VIII
\Ir O'1j1'III 'I •
0103 19 a I
Sound Area (east side)
1 i
I
III������II��
I,�
iJ
1 ■
.rte
I
.,11,11
� ,IliLio�'lll
J
�� I
'�i�y""'•t�sinxwat�;j�-
�'„ ;n��� a3 -
i�
,'I� I ;
F 1r:.u.,.
�bn �� IYI.
/i
T �{
v
rtID�Y%1i�•
I` `°
� cii � •-.y� . �
• •a] N• 3'ai'Ilai � y. 7
�
_ _`
. •
IIII� \� .
.I� I'
1
i' +���III!I.
;
:I�II�
� p���ux.+ ➢.�n•� ► .,"7�� �r
I�' _
/+�%�@e._
___ _
r.. �.� °t
.:�'
Sound Area (west side)
— —
Jim
-=
— _
r
�I
pill
__ - _
803
Cape Fear River
r,
���►
!
,`
i'��OII I �
lid - � I I
Ii �
I
��
\ \\
� l �
� ' y! •..y,l,
■
d I Q.
ix I r\I �I�IIhI
I
! I III
I it
I
Sound Area (east side)
9u1;(.
>> 1 III
I
I
�
Gw."rr
�,ii,�c�i� �
'/.
•• /
•} I
I
1
1 1
�� %
�
III, i
4Ur1 ``
tlll ; ,�olll�
Background imagery are U.S. Geological Fishery Nursery Areas Fishery Nursery Areas
Survey 1:100,000 -scale planimetric maps. ® Primary N
® Permanent Secondary Map Datum: NAD83
® Special Secondary Map Projection: NC State Plane
Map Date: March 2011
® Military Danger 1000 0 1000 2000 Yards
Zones and
Restricted Areas
locator map 0.7 0 0.7 1.4 Miles
—
Inland waters (WRC jurisdiction) Map 27
®,
Cape
, ' i, Masonboro- Myrtle Grove
Fear
r - ;. Sound Area (west side)
010318 b
River
Cape Fear River '. _ ;_ r
Masonboro -Myrtle Grove
?•
0103 19 a I
Sound Area (east side)
l
J
I
ti
r .0103 18 a
r.. �.� °t
Mason boro -Myrtle Grove
Sound Area (west side)
— —
0103 19 a
-=
— _
.0103 18 b
pill
__ - _
803
Cape Fear River
!
Masonboro- Myrtle Grove
_i
_
, I
Sound Area (east side)
Kk ell
'
847
p
Masonboro -Myrtle Grove
!?
- .0103 18 a
.0103 18
b Sound Area (east side)
! ` -
Masonboro -Myrtle Grove
s
Sound Area (west side)
.
9
.:
This map was produced by the Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
program. Informational data used to create this map were collected from
{ r —
federal, state, county, and private organizations. This map is a general
guide to assist the public and is for illustrative purposes only. While every
effort is made to keep this map accurate and up -to -date, it is not intended
a A aCH
to replace any official source. Under no circumstances shall the State of
-'• YAHFf
North Carolina be liable for any actions taken or omissions made from
- ---
y
reliance on any information contained herein from whatever source nor
shall the State be liable for any other consequences from any such reliance.
Background imagery are U.S. Geological Fishery Nursery Areas Fishery Nursery Areas
Survey 1:100,000 -scale planimetric maps. ® Primary N
® Permanent Secondary Map Datum: NAD83
® Special Secondary Map Projection: NC State Plane
Map Date: March 2011
® Military Danger 1000 0 1000 2000 Yards
Zones and
Restricted Areas
locator map 0.7 0 0.7 1.4 Miles
—
Inland waters (WRC jurisdiction) Map 27

He.l
V. -
-
T
*a "a
r•s
i EI
II nIQ� +I
i 'llll�U I�
�� .IVi�l�Il6;b
r II `hlr il' 44.
-
�r ,-P"plmm[W- n
13 A
765
77
Lockwoods Folly River A �`
0104101
Davis Creek
78
This map was produced by the Geographic Information Systems (GIs)
program. Informational data used to create this map were collected from
federal, state, county, and private organizations. This map is a general
guide to assist the public and is for illustrative purposes only. While every 122
effort is made to keep this map accurate and up -to -date, it is not intended
to replace any official source. Under no circumstances shall the State of
North Carolina be liable for any actions taken or omissions made from
reliance on any information contained herein from whatever source nor
shall the State be liable for any other consequences from any such reliance.
Background imagery are U.S. Geological Fishery Nursery Areas Fishery Nursery Areas
Survey 1:100,000 -scale planimetric maps. ® Primary
® Permanent Secondary
® Special Secondary
® Military Danger
Zones and
Restricted Areas
locator map
— Inland waters (WRC jurisdiction) Map 29
Lockwood Folly River
.01051
�1
Oak Island Area
.0103 19 i
-_
was Beac
0103 20 a
Davis Creek and Davis Canal
79 i 80
I
i
I
I
123 124
Map Datum:
NAD83
Map Projection: NC State Plane
Map Date:
March 2011
1000
0 1000
2000 Yards
0.7
0 0.7
1.4 Miles

Shallotte River j
Y ? tiyt'ead A k .010321 a r
y s, _ l �.
-$a — o
t'
Shallotte Creek
(Little Shallotte
River)
o wanb
Tw ' 0103 21 c
_. •" � Saucepan Creek
` -•_' '._ �j' .0103 21 d
\
1
ti
Calabash River s — Gause Landing Area r.,+
Ulu cce g
- -r_
NAD83
This map was produced by the Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
program. Informational data used to create this map were collected from
federal, state, county, and private organizations. This map is a general
Map Date:
March 2011
1000
t
guide to assist the public and is for illustrative purposes only. While every
effort is made to keep this map accurate and up -to -date, it is not intended
0.7
0 0.7
--
., }
;
to replace any official source. Under no circumstances shall the State of
Saucepan
North Carolina be liable for any actions taken or omissions made from
.0103 21 e
Creek
reliance on any information contained herein from whatever source nor
Old Channel Area
shall the State be liable for any other consequences from any such reliance.
sr h
s
+
.0103 22 b Eastern Channel Area
Shallotte River j
Y ? tiyt'ead A k .010321 a r
y s, _ l �.
-$a — o
t'
Shallotte Creek
(Little Shallotte
River)
o wanb
Tw ' 0103 21 c
_. •" � Saucepan Creek
` -•_' '._ �j' .0103 21 d
\
1
ti
Calabash River s — Gause Landing Area r.,+
Background imagery are U.S. Geological Fishery Nursery Areas Fishery Nursery Areas
Survey 1:100,000 -scale planimetric maps. ® Primary
® Permanent Secondary
® Special Secondary
® Military Danger
Zones and
Restricted Areas
locator map
— Inland waters (WRC jurisdiction) Map 28
Ulu cce g
- -r_
NAD83
.010321 b
Shallotte River
Map Date:
March 2011
1000
0 1000
2000 Yards
0.7
0 0.7
.010512
(Ocean Flats) )
s-
Saucepan
.0103 21 e
Creek
Old Channel Area
4'letk
sr h
s
+
.0103 22 b Eastern Channel Area
0103 22 c i Big Teague Creek
rd
0103 22 ii Little Teague Creek ]N 6
0
c
S 1`I
`v Mad Inleet t Area rea
L•
j
.0103 22 c iii Big Norge Creek
i\ f
118
119
117
Background imagery are U.S. Geological Fishery Nursery Areas Fishery Nursery Areas
Survey 1:100,000 -scale planimetric maps. ® Primary
® Permanent Secondary
® Special Secondary
® Military Danger
Zones and
Restricted Areas
locator map
— Inland waters (WRC jurisdiction) Map 28
Map Datum:
NAD83
Map Projection: NC State Plane
Map Date:
March 2011
1000
0 1000
2000 Yards
0.7
0 0.7
1.4 Miles

Attachment 6 -
Recommended Conservation
Measures
More than Engineering Solutions r0i Q L3RIEN S GCRC

Based on the conservation measures recommended in the Supplemental Biological Assessment and the Essential Fish
Habitat (EFH) Summary, the following conservation measures are recommended to avoid and minimize adverse effects
on listed species, critical habitats, and EFH:
1. To the extent practical routinely scheduled dredging activity would be implemented during the environmental
window for dredging and shoreline beneficial reuse that is used by the USACE Wilmington District for AIWW
Crossing projects [November 16 to April 30] to limit the potential effect on federally- managed species.
2. When navigational needs necessitate inlet and crossing maintenance operations outside the environmental window,
dredges that are capable of nearshore or sidecast disposal would be used to avoid potential impacts from beneficial
placement. Should beneficial placement be needed outside the environmental window, the applicable permittee
would independently coordinate with NCDCM through the minor permit modification process.
3. The USACE Wilmington District currently observes restrictions on sidecast dredging in certain inlet areas that have
adjacent habitats that are sensitive to sidecast disposal. These areas include Banks Channel at New Topsail Inlet,
and the Bogue Inlet Connecting Channel and AIWW Crossing ( USACE, 2004). These restrictions on sidecast dredging
would continue to be observed.
In addition, to the above requirements, the following conservation measures are recommended to avoid and minimize
impacts to individual endangered and threatened species, associated critical habitat, and EFH:
4. The bedrock hard bottom identified at Shallotte River Inlet (Figure 10 of the EFH Summary) should be avoided
through the use of navigation /positioning software to monitor dredge location during construction activity.
Piping Plover & Rufa Red Knot
S. If project maintenance extends into the nesting timeframe for piping plover (April 1- August 31), the applicant will
coordinate with the NCDCM and the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NC WRC) to plan maintenance activities
within potential use areas as well as monitor the pipeline route prior to any shore -side maintenance activities.
Before start of work each morning, contracted personnel will provide a visual survey conducted in the area of work
for that day, to determine if piping plovers or rufa red knots are present. If piping plovers or rufa red knots are
present in the work area, careful movement of equipment in the early morning hours should allow those individuals
to move out of the area.
6. Prior to pipeline installation, the proposed pipeline route will be reviewed by the NC DCM and the NC WRC.
West Indian manatee
7. For all dredging that occurs between June and October, the dredges would comply with the precautions in the
USFWS "GUIDELINES FOR AVOIDING IMPACTS TO THE WEST INDIAN MANATEE" to minimize impacts to manatees.
More than Engineering Solutions ris Q'QRICN 6 GCRC