20061048 Ver 1_Public Comments_20060711

North Carolina
Coastal Federation
Northern Office: P.O. Box 475, Manteo, NC 27954 [phone]
July 11, 2006
Alan Klimek
NC Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Dear Alan,
On behalf of NCCF, I am writing to object to the proposed variance requested by the NC
Division of Transportation to mine sediment from a wetland on Hatteras Island. As you know,
NCCF is a nonprofit environmental group with 8,000 members statewide. I understand your staff
plans to recommend to the Environmental Management Commission that the variance be
granted, but I feel they have not been given all the facts.
There are so many problems with this request I scarcely know where to begin. First, local
managers at neither the National Park Service nor the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service knew about
the request until I told them about it. How can DOT propose to mine sediment that has not
received a seal of approval from the two agencies charged with protecting public beaches on
Hatteras Island? Wetland sediment is generally much different in texture and color from upland
sand. Although DOT proposes to stockpile the sand for dune building, past experience has shown
that sand placed in dunes will quickly end up in the surf. Any sediment used to build dunes must
be compatible with that on the beaches.
Second, DOT argues that it is costly and unsafe to take trucks loaded with sand across the
Bonner Bridge. I can assure you that trucks loaded with fill cross the bridge on a daily basis.
They may not be loaded to capacity. But safety issues associated with the bridge have not
stopped contractors from filling lots on Hatteras Island. What is more, there is currently no load
limit on the bridge. If DOT really has such safety concerns, it needs to enact a load limit. As to
the cost, DOT should not be surprised that it is expensive to maintain a highway on a quickly
migrating barrier island.
Third, it is alarming that the site proposed for this activity is adjacent to Kinnakeet Shores, the
development in Avon where ponds have been dug to enable construction of waterfront homes.
When this project is completed, what is now 11 acres of wetland and shrub forest would be a
pond, and the development value of the land around it would be enhanced.

Fourth, while the mitigation proposed by DOT would protect an adjacent coastal marsh, some of
the mitigation would take place out of Dare County. Thus, there would be a net loss of local
wetlands.
Fifth, the problems besetting Highway 12 will be back to haunt us next year, and all the years
following as long as the road remains in its current location. Are we to allow the mining of
wetlands up and down Hatteras Island in our attempts to keep the road in place?
We ask you to make these facts known to the EMC Water Quality Committee when the variance
is considered at Wednesday's meeting. This is an extremely ill-conceived scheme, and
committee members need to know all the facts before making their deliberations.
Thank you for your help on this important issue.
Sincerely,
Jan DeBlieu
Cape Hatteras COASTKEEPER®
Cc: Tom Reeder, Cyndi Karoly