20061064 Ver 2_CAMA Application_20161219

Montalvo, Sheri A
From: Coburn, Chad
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 2:03 PM
To: Montalvo, Sheri A; Mairs, Robb L
Subject: RE: Wainwright Slough
This one is going to be Robb's and the copy is in Jos' box. It's for maintenance excavation within the Wainwright Slough
Federal channel. It looks like it should be version 2 of 2006-1064.
From: Montalvo, Sheri A
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 12:12 PM
To: Coburn, Chad <[e-mail]>; Mairs, Robb L <[e-mail]>
Subject: Wainwright Slough
I have a CAMA here for the above. When I search in BIMS a few different ones come up. Which one should I version this
to or should it be a new number?
Thanks
sherf, Mov OLvo
Administrative Assistant
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Division of Water Resources
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
919-807-6303 (office)
919 807-6494 (fax)
sheri.montalvoa,ncderin gov
Physical: 512 N. Salisbury St., Ste 942-D, Raleigh, NC 27609
Mailing: 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
1� ----5- ' Nothin + orn res_-,, ,
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
December 12, 2016
MEMORANDUM:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Applicant:
Project Location:
PAT MCCRORY
Go,rrnor
DONALD R, VAN DER VAART
Secretory
1
DLP
Karen Higgins
Division of Water Resources
Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
CAMA/DREDGE & FILL Permit Application Review
Carteret County (Wainwright Slough)
BRAXTON DAVIS
Dimcior
DEC ] 9 2016
Carteret County, Conflux of Pamlico and Core Sound adjacent to Wainwright
Island.
Proposed Project: Proposes to maintenance excavate Wainwright Slough and place spoils in
Wainwright area. Wainwright Slough is a federal channel. Approximately
40,000 CY would be excavated.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by
January 1, 2017. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please contact Ryan Davenport,
Permit officer at [phone]. When appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting -data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
SIGNED DATE
State ofNorth Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
400 Commerce Avenue I Morehead City, NC 28557
252-808-28081252-247-3330 (fax)

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: Carteret County (Wainwright Slough)
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Conflux of Pamlico and Core Sound adjacent to
Wainwright Island, Carteret County
Photo Index - 2006: No Photo Available
Longitude: 76°12'30.65" W Latitude: 34°59'24.63" N
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA/D&F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit —11/1816
Was Applicant Present — No
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received —12/8/16
Application Complete- 12/12/16
Office — Morehead City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan — Carteret County
Land Classification from LUP — Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: EW, PTA, ES, CW
(C) Water Dependent: (yes)
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing — N/A
Planned — N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing — Spoil Island, Navigation Aids
Planned — Spoil Island
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: N/A
Source — N/A
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION:
DREDGED FILLED OTHER
(A) Open Water lac 10ac
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 17 acres
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No Shellfish Classification: Open
(F) Water Classification: SA-ORW

Field Investigation Report:
Carteret Co.
Page 02
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: Carteret County is proposing to maintenance excavate
Wainwright Slough and place spoils in the Wainwright Island area. Wainwright Slough is
a federal channel. Approximately 40,000 CY would be excavated.
91. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: The Wainwright Slough project is located at the conflux
of Pamlico Sound and Core Sound off of Cedar Island, Carteret County. The existing
island and federal channel is about half way between Cedar Island and Core Banks. This
channel is the navigation route connecting Core Sound and Pamlico Sound
Wainwright Island as it exists today is less than .5ac and is covered with Coastal Wetlands
comprised of Spartina altemiflora. There is a patch of SAV South of the island. Wainwright
Slough has existed as a federal channel since the 1970's. The channel was last excavated in
2013 and is currently experiencing shoaling east of Wainwright Island. The current low
water depth in the shoal area is -4'. The US Coast Guard maintains Navigational Aids along
this channel.
This area of Core Sound is classified as SA-ORW by DWR. It is not a Primary Nursery
area. It is open to the harvesting of shellfish. Carteret County's Land Use Plan classifies
the future land use of this area as conservation.
10. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Carteret County is proposing to maintenance excavate
Wainwright Slough in an effort to restore navigation for recreational boating and
commercial fishing vessels. The excavation would be performed by Hydraulic Dredge with
spoils being placed in the area of Wainwright Island. A total of 40,000CY would be
removed form Wainwright Slough.
The proposed cut would be 2,600' long and 75' wide. Water depth in this area would
increase from -4' MLLW to -7' MLLW. Based on samples taken, dredge material is
expected to be fine to medium grain size sand. The excavated material would be placed in
a 780' X570' area adjacent to what remains of Wainwright Island. Aerial photos indicate
that spoils have been placed in this area during previous dredging projects. Water depths in
this area would increase from -3' MLLW to +1.5' MLLW. Sand dikes would be constructed
to help control the dredge effluent. After excavation is complete, the spoil area would be
sloped to a 20:1 grade in order to promote shorebird usage. The consultant(Moffatt &
Nichol) has provided a detailed narrative in order to help in the review of this project.
11. Anticipated Impacts: This project should increase navigation of the area by recreational
boaters and provide a deeper channel for commercial fishing vessels to safely ingress and
egress. There would be lac of EW and PTA excavated and l0ac of EW and PTA filled
during this project. Temporary siltation would occur during excavation and could affect
neighboring Coastal Wetland and SAV areas.
Name: Ryan Davenport Date: 12/9/16 Morehead City

4700 Falls of Neuse
Raleigh, NC 27609 Road, Suite 300
m o f t a t f & [phone] Fax [phone]
www.moffattnichol.com
December 7, 2016
Mr. Ryan Davenport
N.C. Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM)
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, NC 28557
Re: NCDCM Major Permit Application
Wainwright Slough Dredging, Carteret County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Davenport:
As authorized agent for Carteret County, please find enclosed an NCDCM Major Permit
application for the above referenced project. The permit package includes NCDCM Forms MP -1
and MP -2, permit drawings, and additional information in support of the project. The
application fee of $475.00 is being provided under separate cover by the County.
We would appreciate review of this application at your earliest convenience as it is imperative
that we initiate actions as soon as possible to support ongoing commercial fishing that depend
on access through Wainwright Slough. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or
need additional information.
Sincerely,
MOFFATT & NICHOL
Johnny Martin, P.E.
Senior Coastal Engineer
Enclosures
cc: Greg "Rudi" Rudolph, Carteret County
Robert Neal, Moffatt & Nichol

Overall Summary- of Information to Support a CAMA Major Development Permit
Wainwright Slough Dredging, Carteret County, NC
Attachment A: A signed agent authorization letter from Carteret County. The letter authorizes
Moffatt & Nichol to represent the County in efforts to obtain state and federal permits for the
proposed maintenance work in Wainwright Slough.
2. Attachment B: NCI)CM Permit forms (MP -1 &: MP -2).
Attachment C: The permit drawings for Wainwright Slough maintenance event. No work has
been conducted for the proposed project. Previous maintenance events have been conducted by
the USAGE, Wilmington District under a federal authorization. A location map can be found
within the permit drawings. Wainwright Slough may only be accessed by boat within Pamlico
Sound near Cedar Island in Carteret County.
4. Attachment D: Pro; ect narrative and environmental summary for the Wainwright Slough
maintenance event..
5. Attachment E: The 1995 Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact.
6. Attachment F: 2006 DCM Consistency Detennination for previous maintenance dredging
activities in Wainwright Slough. Both the EA/FONSI and Consistency Determination are
considered relevant to the current proposed action.
7. Attachment G: Statement from the Audubon Society in support of the project. The affected
properties for this project are all submerged land,,; and property or the State of North Carolina.
The project will fill. lands above MLW near Wainwright Island. Ownership of lands at this site
belongs to the National Audubon Society. The Audubon Society supports the project and
welcomes opporturdties to help enhance bird nesting and foraging habitat at Wainwright Island.
The agent for the Audubon Society is Mr. Walker Golder (Office: 910.686.7527).
The National Audubon Society (NAS) is the only adjacent property owner and has been involved
in the development of the propose project. A letter indicating receipt of the permit application
will be provided under separate cover. The letter will advise the NAS of the 30 day requirement
for submitting comments on the proposed project. In addition, the NAS will be copied on all
correspondence transmitted to DCM addressing; the proposed project.
8. Attachment H: Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) survey report.
9. Attachment I: Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) assessment.
10. Attachment J: Biological Assessment of federally listed protected species.
11. Attachment K: Review of the project by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)

Additional Support Information
• The application fee will be provided under separate cover from Carteret County.
• All previous maintenance events have been conducted under federal authorizations, as opposed to
state and federal permits. As a result, no permits are believed to exist for the previous works.
• An AEC hazard notice is not considered applicable for this project.
• Compliance with Land Use Plans: There are no land use issues associated with this project since
the project involves open water issues. The disposal site to be approved by DCM will be required
to meet requirements of CAMA Land Use Plans.
• N.C. Environmental Policy Act Compliance: The dredging work proposed as part of this
application is maintenance dredging of a previously maintained channel and does not require
review under the N. C. Environmental Policy Act.
• Adjacent Riparian Property Owners: The project site is in open water and does not involve
riparian property owners other than the National Audubon Society who owns Wainwright Island.
As previously noted, the Society has been contacted and support for the project has been obtained
(see Attachment G).

Shore Protection Manager
Greg L. Rudolph
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
car�zret county
�G
protection office
orctec.tre�Ceacn coM
December 5, 2016
NC Division of Coastal Management
400 Commerce Drive
Morehead City, NC 28557
RE: Wainwright Slough, Carteret County — Agent Authorization
To Whom It May Concern:
Please be advised, Moffatt & Nichol has been authorized by the Carteret County Board of County
Commission as an Authorized Agent. The authorization entails (and is limited too) efforts
necessary to acquire state and federal permits for the maintenance dredging of Wainwright Slough.
Sincerely,
5 % k—
Greg "Rudi" Rudolph
Shore Protection Manager
Carteret County Shore Protection Office
Shore Protection Office • P.O. Box 4297 . Emerald Isle, North Carolina 28594
www. protect the beach. com

Attachment B — NCDCM Permit Forms (MP -1 & MP -2)

UPLICATION for
Nader Development Permit
(last revised 12/2T/06)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
I. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name
Project Name (if applicable)
Carteret County Board Of County Commimssioners
Wainwright Slough Navigation Maintenance
Applicant 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Tommy
Agent/ Contractor 1: First Name
Burns
Applicant 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
Rudi
Rudolph
If additional applicants, please attach an additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
302 Courthouse Square
Beaufort
NC
ZIP
Country
Phone No.
FAX No.
28516
Carteret
252 - 728 - 8450 ext.
252 - 728 - 2092
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
ZIP
Email
[e-mail]
2. AgentlContractor Information
Business Name
Moffatt & Nichol
Agent/ Contractor 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Robert
Neal
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
Johnny
Martin
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
272 N. Front St., Ste. 204
Wilmington
NC
ZIP
Phone No. 1
Phone No. 2
28401
910 - 218 -
7100 ext.
919 - 781 - 4626 ext.
FAX No.
Contractor #
919 781 4869
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
ZIP
Email
[e-mail]
<Form continues on back>
252.80$-2808 „ 1-383-4RCOAST a, www.nccoastaimanagement.ne+t

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 2 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple)
Street Address
State Rd. #
Carteret
Pamlico Sound
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
Subdivision Name City
State
Zip
2.0 ❑NHW or ®NWL
NC
-
Phone No.
Lot No. (s) (if many, attach additional page with list)
910 - 686 - 7527 ext.
Commerical and recreational navigation submerged lands.
a. In which NC river basin is the project located?
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Neuse
Pamlico Sound
c. Is the water body identified in (b) aoove, natural or manmade?
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
®Natural ❑Manmade ❑Unknown
Pamlico Sound
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
f. If app icable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
❑Yes ®No
work falls within.
4. Site Description
a. Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.)
b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
2,600 ft
10 Acres (Placement Site) 7.0 Acres (Navigation Channel)
c. Size of individual lot(s)
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
Wainwright Slough Ranges 2, 2a, & 3,
NWL (normal water level)
2.0 ❑NHW or ®NWL
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
e. Vegetation on tract
Spartina alterniflora, sparse Hl. wrightii (<1% cover).
f. Man-made features and uses now cn tract
Commerical and recreational navigation submerged lands.
g. Identify and describe the existing land uses adjacent to the proposed project site.
Recreational navigation, bird foraging and fishery haoitat.
h. How does local government zone the tract?
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
Not zoned
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
]Yes ❑No ®NA
j. Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? ❑Yes ®No
k. Hasa professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. ❑Yes ®No [INA
If yes, by whom?
I. Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a ❑Yes ®No [INA
National Register listed or eligible property?
<Form continues oil next page>
252-808.2303 1-383-4iRCOAST „ www,n ,- aoastaI manag9M9nt,net

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 3 of 4)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
m. (i) Are there wetlands on the site?
®Yes ❑No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? ®Yes ❑No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? [-]Yes ®No
(Attach documentation, if available)
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
None
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
None
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
None
5. Activities and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? ®Commercial ®Public/Government
❑Private/Community
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
Navigation access through Wainwright Slough & bird habitat on Wainwright Island material placement site. Wainwright
Slough is generally located between Cedar Island and Core Banks and represents the only viable navigational thoroughfare
for the Down East fishing industry connecting Core Sound to Pamlico Sound. The project was initially authorized by the
River and Harbor Act of August 30, 1935. (see attached narrative for furher information)
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.
One hydraulic dredge with accompaning HDPE pipeline (most likely) to excavate approx. 40,000 CY from Wainwright Slough
and place the material within the material placement site adjacent to Wainwright Island. Most likely up to 1 or 2 pieces of
heavy equipement (bull dozer, front end loader) will be used to grade the material after placement. Additonal service vessels
Qon boat, floating barge, tug) will be necessary to assist in manuvering and supporting the construction equipment.The
equipment will be stored at the site during the construction process and removed upon completion. Construction is estimated
to last a maximum of 60 days.
d. List all development activities you propose.
Hydraulically dredge Wainwright Slough for navigation maintenance and place the material adjacent to Wainwright Island.
Material will be placed in a manner to encourage shorebird use with minimal slopes along the water's edge. The mateiral
placement site will maintain a maximum (highest) elevation of +1.5 MLLW as a result of the construction process.
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? Maintenance
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 17 ❑Sq.Ft or ®Acres
g. Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public accessway or other area ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
that the public has established use of?
h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
New discharges to waters of the state will only occur during construction as the slurry mixture of sediment and waters are
hydraulically placed adjacent to Wainwright Island. No permanent discharge structures are proposed as part of the work.
Temporary containment dikes will be constructed to encourage sediment settling based upon past projects and previous
authorizations.
i. Will wastewater or stormwater be discharged into a wetland? ❑Yes ❑No SNA
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water? ❑Yes ❑No ®NA
j. Is there any mitigation proposed? ❑Yes ❑No ®NA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
252.808.2803 1-838�4RC0A5T wr-mw.n-coastaIrnanagarne gt,nat

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 4 of 4)
<Form continues on back>
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
6. AdditionalInformation
!n addibi)n to this completed application form. (MP -1) the following items &,tow, if applicable, must be subm4fed in order for the application
package to be complete hems p l (ij are always applicable b any major development application. Please consult the applGtxtron
instruction booklet on how to properly prepare time required items below.
1 a. A project narrative
b An accurate. dated work plat (including plan view and cross-serticnal drawings) drawn to scale. Please give the present status of the
proposed project. is any portion already complete'? If prev ously authorized work. clearly indicate on maps. plats, drawings to distinguish i
between work completed and proposed
c A site or location map that is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
i
d A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument urder which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
L
e The appropriate application fee Cneck or money order mane payable to DENR
if A list ofthe names and complete -addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such I
1 owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail. Such andowners must be advised that they have 30 days in
i which to submit comments on the, proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
Name National Audubon Society cio Mr. Walker Golder Phone No. 910.686.7527 (office)
jAddress 7741 Market Street. Unit D: Wilmington. NC 28411-9444
! Name —
Phone No
Address
I
Name Phone No.
Address
Ig, A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, permittee, and issuing dates.
Previous marntenace events were conducted under federal
authorizations by the USACE:
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization form. if applicable
Wetland delineation. f necessary
j. A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront and inlet areas (Alust be signed by property owner)
k A statement ofcompliance with the N C Environmental Poiicl Act N G �' S 113A T-10). if necessary If the project involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
7. Certification and Permission to Enter on Land
I understand that any permit issued n response to this application �roiil allow cnly the development described in the application.
The project will be subject to the corditiors and restrictions cont.ainec in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant and do in fact grant permission :o representatives of state and federal review agencies to
enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating nformation related to this permit application and follow-up
monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided n this applicat on is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date 127,`16 Print Name Greg 'rudi' Rudoiph
Signature
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your ,proposed project
ZDCM MP -2 Excavation. and Fill Irformanon ❑DCM MP -5 Bridges and Culverts
❑DCM MP -3 Upland Deveiopment
ODCM MP -4 Structures Information

Form DCM MP -2
EXCAVATION and FILL
(Except for bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP -1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation and/or fill activities. All values should be given in feet.
1.
Access
❑This section not applicable
a.
Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in
b.
Other
Channel
Canal
Boat Basin
Boat Ramp
Rock Groin
Rock
(excluding
c.
(NLW or
d.
High -ground excavation in cubic yards.
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
Breakwater
shoreline
NWL)
number of square feet affected.
stabilization
Length
2,600
OWL ®None
780
Width
75
Navigation Maintenance
570
Avg. Existing
DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL
❑This section not applicable
a.
Location of disposal area.
b.
Dimensions of disposal area.
Depth
-4 MLLW
10 AC
C.
! NA
NA
-3 MLLW
Final Project
Depth
-7 MLLW
❑Yes ❑No ®NA
NA
NA
+1.5 MLLW
1.
EXCAVATION
❑This section not applicable
a.
Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in
b.
Type of material to be excavated.
cubic yards.
Sand
40,000 CY
c.
(i) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlands/marsh
d.
High -ground excavation in cubic yards.
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
0 CY
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
Navigation Maintenance
2.
DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL
❑This section not applicable
a.
Location of disposal area.
b.
Dimensions of disposal area.
Wainwright Island - Pamlico Sound
10 AC
C.
(i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
d.
(i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
❑Yes ®No ❑NA
❑Yes ❑No ®NA
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.
(ii) If yes, where?
e.
(i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh
f.
(i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
®Yes ❑No RNA
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
10 AC
OWL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
Material placement from maintenace event.
252-808-2806 ;: 1-888-4RCOAST ;; www.nccoastaimanagement.net revised: 12126106

3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION
(if development is a wood groin, use MP -4 — Structures;
a Type of shoreline stabilization:
❑Bulkhead ❑Riprap ❑Breakwater/Sill ❑ether
c Average distance waterward of NHW or NVIL.
e Type of stabilization material
g Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level.
Bulkhead backfill Riprap
Breakwater/Sill Other
1. Source of fill material.
®This section not applicable
b Length.
Width
d Maximum distance waterward of NHVV or NVVL.
f (i) Has there been shoreline erosion during preceding 12
months?
❑Yes ❑No [INA
00 If yes, state amount of erosion and source of erosion amount
information.
h Type of fill material.
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES �-
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a (i) WII fill material be brought to the asite? ®Yes ❑No ❑ NA I;
If yes.
(ii) Amount of material to be placed in the water 44.004 CY
(iii) Dimensions of fill area 10 A,V-
(iv) Purpose of fill
Material desposition from channel maintenance
S. GENERAL -
a. How will excavated or rill material be kept on site and erosior
controlled?
Sand dikes during construction -Length of dikes TBD by contractor.
C. (i) Will navigational aids be required as a result of the protect?
®Yes []No ❑NA
(ii) If yes. explain what type and how tney will be implemented
ATONS will need to be repositionec to mark federal channel as
opposed to deep water path.
❑This section not applicable
(i) Will All material be placed in coastal wetlands/marsh (CW,
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (Se), or
othe, wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
numoer of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
MWI_ SNone
0j) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas.
b What type of construction equipment will be used (e.g.. dragiine,
backhoe. or hydraulic dredge)?
hydraulic dredge. heavy equipment.. support vessels.
d (i) SII wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project
site? ©Yes ENO ❑NA
(ii) if yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts
December 6, 2016 Carteret County Board of County Commission Go Greg Rudolph
Date
Wainwright Slough Navigation Maintenance
Project Name
Applicant Name
Applicant Signature

CARTER.ET COUNTY
`VAINWRI(JHT SLOUGH
NAVIGATION MAINTENANCE
PERMIT SKETCHES
DECEMBER 07, 2016
PITT
HYDE
BEAUFORT
PAMLICO
SOUND
FAM.ICO V AmnuGHT O
SLOUGH
JONES
CRAVEN //
CARTEREI' ATLANTIC OCEAN
ONSLOW i
INOT TO SCALE
VICINITY MAP
SHEETINDEX
SHT 1 -
TITLE PAGE
SHT 2-
CONTROLSHEET
SHT 3 -
SITE PLAN
SHT 4 -
EXISTING CONDITIONS
SHT 5 -
SAV SURVEY AREA
SHT 6 THRU 9
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH CHANNEL PROFILES
SHT 10
MATERIAL PLACEMENT SECTION VIEWS
FOR PERMITTING ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
,,,,moffatt & nlchof

WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH NAVIGATION CHANNEL
CONTROL TABLE
Station
Easting
(ft)
Northing
(ft)
Survey
Azimuth (')
Base
Width (ft)
Side
Slope
(H:V)
Dredge Volume
cy/ft Cy
Overdepth Tolerance
cy/ft cy
cy/ft
Tota(
Cy
Cumulative
Vol.
CY
10+00
2,835,710.79
461,497.61
111.44
75 ft
3:1
0.0
0
2.8
323
2.8
323
323
11+00
2,835,747.34
461,590.70
119.13
1.5
181
3.6
369
5.1
550
872
12+00
2,835,807.26
461,670.75
126.82
75 ft
3:1
2.1
240
3.8
410
5.9
650
1,522
13+00
2,835,867.19
461,750.80
126.82
75 R
3:1
2.7
371
4.4
526
7.1
897
2,419
14+00
2,835,927.12
461,830.85
126.82
75ft
3:1
4.7
603 1
6.1
636 1
10.8
1,239
3,658
15+00
2,835,987.05
461,910.91
126.82
75ft
3:1
7.3
975
6.6
694
13.9
1,669
5,328
16+00
2,836,046.98
461,990.96
126.82
75 ft
3:1
12.2
1,448
7.3
770
19.5
2,217
7,545
17+00
2,836,106.91
462,071.01
126.82
75 ft
3:1
16.8
1,704
8,1
820
24.9
2,524
10,069
18+00
2,836,166.84
462,151.07
126.82
75ft
3:1
17.3
1,750
8.3
829
25.6
2,579
12,648
19+00
2,836,226.77
462,231.12
126.82
75ft
3:1
17.7
1,777
8.3
832
26.0
1 2,609
15,256
20+00
2,836,286.70
462,311.17
126.82
75ft
3:1 1
17.8
1,755
8.3
1 829
26.2
2,584
17,841
21+00
2,836,346.62
462,391.23
126.82
75ft
3:1
17.3
1,581
8,2
811
25.5
2,392
i 20,233
22+00
2,836,406.55
462,471.28
126.82
75 ft
3:1
14.4
1,413
8.0
795
22.3
2,208
22,440
23+00
2,836,466.48
462,551.33
126.82
75ft
3:1
13.9
1,319
7.9
782
21,8
2,101
24,542
24+00
2,836,526.41
462,631.39
126.82
75ft
3:1
12.5
1,060
7,7
662
20.2
1,722
26,264
24+85
2,836,577.72
462,699.92
112.68
12.4
183
7.9
116
20.3
299
26,563
25+00
2,836,579.85
462,714.15
98.55
75 ft
3:1
12.0
1,133
7,6
745
19.6
1,878
28,440
26+00
2,836,594.73
462,813.11
98.55
75ft
3:1
10.7
1,022
7.3
728
18.0
1,750
30,190
27+00
2,836,609.60
462,912.08
98.55
75 ft
3:1
9.8
909
7.2
709
17.0
1,618
31,808
28+00
2,836,624.47
463,011.04
98.55
75ft
3:1
8.4
776
7.0
689
15.4
1,465
33,273
29+00
2,836,639.35
463,110.00
98.55
75ft
3:1
7.1
593
6.8
662
13.9
1.255
34,528
30+00
2,836,654.22
463,208.%
98.55
75ft
3:1
4.7
363
6.4
646
11.2
1,009
35,537
31+00
2,836,669.09
463,307.93
98.55
75 ft
3:1
2.5
223
6.5
644
9.0
866
36,403
32+00
2,836,683.97
463,406.89
98.55
75ft
3:1
1.9
172
6.4
645
8.3
817
37,221
33+00
2,836,698.84
463,505.85
98.55
75ft
3:1
1.5
124
6.5
650
8.0
774
37,995
34+00
2,836,713.71
463,604.81
98.55
75ft
3:1
1.0
83
6.5
644
7.5
727
38,722
35+00
2,836,728.58
463,703.78
98.55
75ft
3:1
0.7
46
6.4
607
7.1
653
39,375
36+00
2,836,743.46
463,802.74
98.55
75 ft
3:1
0.2
24
5.7 1
573
6.0
596
39,971
NOTES:
1. ELEVATIONS REF. MLLW AS
ESTABLISHED BY NOAA
BENCHMARK 865 5151 "A
TIDAL".
2.HORIZONATAL CONTROL
REFERENCES NORTH CAROLINA
STATE PLANE NAD 83 FT
(SINGLE ZONE),
3. VOLUMES CALCULATED BY
AVERAGE END AREA METHOD.
WAINWRIGHT ISLAND MATERIAL PLACEMENT SITE
CONTROL TABLE
vertex
Eastlng (ft)
Northing (R)
A
2,835,794.14
463,099.35
8
2,835,822.78
462,943.53
C
2,835,678.06
462,739.67
D
2,835,442.59
462,655.69
E
2,835,048.32
462,588.24
F
2,834,946.17
463,177.34
G
2,835,340.28
463,245.68
H
2,835,590.28
463,244.07
FOR PERMITTING ONLY -
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
LCONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR HYDRAULICALLY DREDGING WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH (STA. 10+00 TO STA. 36+00)
AS SHOWN ON PLANS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTROLLING THEIR CUTfERHEAD EQUIPMENT SO
NO MATERIAL DISTURBANCE OCCURS BELOW THE OVERDREDGE (OD) TOLERANCE ELEVATIONS SHOWN.
2.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE MATERIAL PLACEMENT WITHIN THE SITE BOUNDARIES AS SHOWN. THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL ERECT SAND DIKES USING THE DREDGE MATERIAL TO CONTROL THE EFFLUENT TO RUN GENERALLY
SOUTHWEST DIRECTION FROM SEGMENT A -B TO SEGMENT E -F.
3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL REASONABLE PRECAUTIONS & ACTIONS TO PREVENT THE EFFLUENT FROM
TRAVERSING BACK INTO THE DREDGE AREA. HOWEVER, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE PROHIBITED FROM PLACING
SANDBAGS OR OTHER PERMANENT OBSTRUCTIONS TO PREVENT THE EFFLUENT FROM LEAVING THE FILL PLACEMENT SITE.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTROLLING THE EFFLUENT AND RESULTING TURBIDITY PLUME SO
AS TO REMAIN COMPLIANT WITH WATER QUALITY STANDARDS STIPULATED BY THE PROJECTS'S STATE AND FEDERAL
PERMITS.
4.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN A MAXIMUM ELEVATION OF THE PLACED (DREDGED) MATERIAL MATCHING THE
EXISTING ELEVATION OF WAINWRIGHT ISLAND (APPROX. +1.5 MLLW).
5.PRIOR TO PROJECT COMPLETION AND DEMOBILIZATION THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SMOOTH GRADE ALL MATERIAL ABOVE
MLLW TO DISCOURAGE WATER PONDING. THE EDGES OF FILL SHALL BE SLOPED AT A MAX. (STEEPEST) ANGLE OF 1H:IOV
(FEET) TO HELP ENCOURAGE SHOREBIRD USAGE.
CARTERET COUNTY
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
NAVIGATION MAINTENANCE , /„ m o ff a t t n i c h o i
PG. 2 OF 10 CONTROL SHEET
DRAWING DATE: DEC. 07, 2106

STATION 10+00
STATION 12+00
10
10
3
3
0 NAVD (0.1 M
0
NAVD (0.1 FI)
Q
Q
W
-10
-10
-
W
a
I
-20
-20 11
-1+00 0+00 1+00
-1+00
0+00 1+00
RANGE (FT)
RANGE (FT)
STATION 14+00
STATION 16+00
10
10
0 NAVD (0.1 Ff)
0
NAVD (0.1 FT)
H
1 777
I
W
-10
-10
W
W
'
W
i
-20
-20
I !
-1+00 0+00 1+00
-1+00
0+00 1+00
RANGE (FT)
RANGE (FT)
FOR PERMITTING ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
LEGEND
---------
EXISTING GROUND (NOV. 2016)
PROPOSED DESIGN TEMPLATE TIDAL RANGE�LW)
— —
— PROPOSED OVERDREDGE TEMPLATE
MHW = 0.38 FT
a s' 10,
PROPOSED DREDGE AREA
MTL = 0.20 FT
NAVD88 = 0.10 FT
VERTICAL SCALE:
CARTERET COUNTY
MLW = 0.01 FT
a Sa Iw
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
HORIZONTAL SCALE:1^=1oa
PG. 6OF 10
NAVIGATION MAINTENANCE
STA 10+00 TO 16+00
,,,, moffatt & nlchol
DRAWING DATE: DEC. 07 2106

STATION 18+00
STATION 20+00
10
10
Q NAVD (0.1 FT)
Q
' NAVD (0.1 FT)
Q
H
-10
-10
— —
w
,
I
-20
-20
-1+00 0+00 1+00
-1+00
0+00 1+00
RANGE (FT)
RANGE (FT)
STATION 22+00
STATION 24+00
10
10
I
0 NAVD (0.1 FT)
� Q
NAVD (0.1 FT)
H
i
w
— --
H
H
o--
Q
W
-10 ;^
W -10
i
—
I
I
-20
-20 --
i
-1+00 0+00 1+00
-1+00
0+00 1+00
RANGE (FT)
RANGE (FT)
FOR PERMITTING ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
LEGEND
---------
EXISTING GROUND (NOV. 2016)
PROPOSED DESIGN TEMPLATE TIDAL RANGE (MLLW)
— —
— PROPOSED OVERDREDGE TEMPLATE
MIiW = 0.38 FT
0. s is
PROPOSED DREDGE AREA
MTL = 0.20 FT
NAVD88 = 0.10 FT
VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=10'
CARTERET COUNTY
MLW = 0.01 FT
a so, wa
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
HORIZONTAL SCALE: V=1W
NAVIGATION MAINTENANCE
PG. 7 OF 10
STA 18+00 TO 24+00
, /„ m o ffa tt & n l c h o l
DRAWING DATE: DEC. 07 2106

STATION 26+00
STATION 28+00
10
10
3
3
_
0 NAVD (0.1 FT)
0
NAVD (0.1 FT)
FG•
"
F-'
O
O
Qi
Qi
>
-10>
-10
�-
I
fs1
5
W
-20 1 1 T
-20 -91
—77F7
-1+00 0+00 1+00
-1+00
0+00 1+00
RANGE (FT)
STATION 30+00
STATION 32+00
10
10
i
0 NAVD (0.1 FT)
0
NAVD (0.1 FT)
0
a
w
-10 ,.
w 10
w
�
w
-20
-20
-1+00 0+00 1+00
-1+00
0+00 1+00
RANGE (FT)
RANGE (FT)
FOR PERMITTING ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
LEGEND
---------
EXISTING GROUND (NOV. 2016)
PROPOSED DESIGN TEMPLATE TIDAL RANGE WLLW)
— —
— PROPOSED OVERDREDGE TEMPLATE
NOM = 0.38 Ff
v s 10,
rT
PROPOSED DREDGE AREA
MTL = 0.20 Ft
NAVD88 = 0.10 Ff
VERTICAL SCALE: i^=10'
CARTERET COUNTY
MLW = 0.01 FT
a ea 100'
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1'100'
NAVIGATION MAINTENANCE
PG. 8 OF 10
STA 26+00 TO 32+00
,,,, m offs tt & n i c h o l
DRAWING DATE: DEC. 07 2106

STATION 34+00
STATION 36+00
10
10
I t r
-
0 NAVD (0.1
FT) 0
NAVD (0.1 FT)
0
Q
-10 , .
7 -10
i.
a
I �
Ia
i
L
-20 - ---
-20
-1+00 0+00 1+00
-1+00
0+00 1+00
RANGE (FT)
RANGE (FT)
FOR PERMITTING ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
LEGEND
---------
EXISTING GROUND (NOV. 2016)
PROPOSED DESIGN TEMPLATE
TIDAL RANGE (MI,LW)
— —
— PROPOSED OVERDREDGE TEMPLATE
MHW = 038 FT
0' s
10,
PROPOSED DREDGE AREA
MTL = 0.20 FT
NAVD88 = 0.10 FT
VERTICAL SCALE: 1^=10
CARTERET COUNTY
MLW = 0.01 FT
0' 50'
100
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=100'
NAVIGATION MAINTENANCE
PG. 9 O 10
STA 34+00 TO 36+00
,,,, moffatt &
nlchol
DRAWING DATE: DEC. 07 2106

10
a
0
w
z
0
w
a
w
-10
-20
0-
SECTION A' -A"
1. TEMPORARY DIKING SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS -NEEDED TO
CONTROL EFFLUENT RUN-OFF FROM RE-ENTERING THE DREDGE AREA.
HOWEVER, NO DIKING SHALL BE ALLOWED ALONG SEGMENT E -F.
2. ALL DIKING MATERIAL SHALL BE SMOOTH GRADED UPON
COMPLETION OF FILL OPERATIONS.
3. MAX. ALLOWABLE SLOPE FINISHED SLOPE AROUND PEREMITER OF
MATERIAL PLACMENT SITE SHALL BE 1 V:20H (FEET)
10
a
0
z
0
Q -10
w
-20
0 -
RANGE (FT)
SECTION B' -B"
RANGE (FT)
TIDAL RANGE (MLLW)
MHW = 0.38 FT
MTL = 0.20 FT
NAVD88 = 0.10 FT
MLW = 0.01 FT
LEGEND a 19 20'
--------- EXISTING PROFILE (NOV. 2016) FOR PERMITTING ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
MAX. (HIGHEST) FILL ELEVATION VERTICAL SCALE: 1"==20P
a 100, ear
CARTERET COUNTY
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1'--2W'
NAVIGATION MAINTENANCE „" m o ffa tt & n l c h o l
PG. 10 OF -10 MATERIAL PLACEMENT SITE - SECTION VIEWS

Attachment D — Project Narrative and Environmental Summary

ATTACHMENT D
WAINWRIGHT ISLAND
NAVIGATION MAINTENANCE
PROJECT NARRATIVE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Carteret County intends to dredge approximately 40,000 cubic yards (CY) of material from the federally
authorized channel of Wainwright Slough, Ranges 2, 2A and 3. Wainwrigth Slough lies near Cedar Island
in south Pamlico Sound near the Cape Lookout National Seashore (Figure 1). The project will restore
navigation depths to the federally authorized channel for recreational boating and commercial fishing
vessels. The channel will be dredged to -7 MLLW with an additional 2 feet proposed as an overdepth
tolerance. This will result in a maximum depth of disturbance down to -9 MLLW. The project will maintain
compliance with the federally authorized dimensions for the channel and previous maintenance events
conducted by the USACE Wilmington District (see permit forms, Attachment B and permit sketches,
Attachment Q.
The dredge sediment will be used to help create nesting and foraging bird habitat by open placement of the
material adjacent to Wainwright Island. Sediment placement will occur over a maximum footprint of 10
acres up to an elevation of +1.5 MLLW. This elevation marks the approximate highest elevation of the
existing Wainwright Island. The slopes and grades of the material placement site will be constructed to
encourage nesting and foraging bird activities to the extent reasonable. The maximum (steepest) slope along
the edge of the material placement site will be constructed at 20H:1 V (feet) down to MLLW. In addtion,
the top or surface of the site will be smooth graded to discourage water ponding or entrapment.
SITE LOCATION & PROJECT HISTORY
Wainwright Slough is generally located between Cedar Island and Core Banks and represents the only
viable navigational thoroughfare for the Down East fishing industry connecting Core Sound to Pamlico
Sound (Figure 1). The project was initially authorized by the River and Harbor Act of August 30, 1935,
yet there is no documentation with respect to where the dredged material was disposed. Fifteen
maintenance dredging events were conducted along various reaches of the channel by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (Corps) through 1968, and on an as -needed basis since (see Table I below).
August 31, 1935 = Project authorized in the River and Harbor Act.
1935 — 1968 = Rfteen maintenance events (no details regarding disposal).
1968 —1976 = "As needed" maintenance, but no documentation.
1976 = EIS prepared, codifies Wainwright Island as disposal area.
1976 —1986 = No documentation.
1986 = Maintenance event.
1991= Maintenance event.
1994 = Maintenance using the U.S. Corps hopper, the Currituck (disposal?).
1995= New EA/FONSI regarding Wainwright Island (emphasis on creating upland bird habitat).
1997 = Maintenance event.
2006 = Mallatenance event funded by hurricane supplemental bill (145,000 cubic yards).
2013 = Maintenance event funded by hurricane supplemental bill (submersible pump).
Table 1: Wainwright Slough Historical Actions (courtesy of Carteret County)

Wainwright Slough Project Alarrative Page 2 of 8
In August 1976 disposal issues were formally addressed in a Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
entitled, "Maintenance of the Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, North Carolina",
which codified the disposal along the toe -of -the -bunk on the east side of Wainwright Island.
Documentation of dredging/disposal events that were conducted in the 1970s through the early 1990s are
almost absent from the record, yet there is reference to a 1986 and 1991 maintenance event (assumingly
pipeline dredge with "upland" disposal along Wainwright Island) and emergency dredging by the Corps'
special use (hopper) dredge; the Currituck in 1994. Again there is no documentation with respect to disposal
activities for the 1994 event.
The disposal method along Wainwright Island was modified in a June/August 1995 Environmental
Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact (EA/FONSI) requiring the dredged shoal material to be
placed above mean high water. The dredging slurry was proposed to be controlled by constructing sand
dikes that were leveled upon completion of each event, thereby creating unvegetated sandy habitat. No
maintenance dredging was conducted from 1997 until the mid -2000s when extensive shoaling of the
channel and erosion of Wainwright Island occurred in the wake of hurricanes Isabel (2003) and Ophelia
(2005). Supplemental appropriations to the Corps provided the ability to conduct a large maintenance event
(145,000 cubic yards) including rehabilitation of Wainwright Island. The Corps' Consistency Position for
this event referenced an existing series of sandbags located along the eastern periphery of Wainwright
Island. Assumingly the sand bag wall was utilized for containing the dredging effluent in 1997 but there is
no reference to this effect in the 1995 EA/FONSI. Remnant sand bags are still visible today. The last
dredging event occurred in 2013 via another supplemental federal appropriation (Hurricane Sandy)
whereby the Corps utilized a submersible pump ;affixed to their special-purpose vessel, the Snell. The total
excavation volume for this event is unknown.

Wainwright Slough Project Narrative
Page 3 of 8
Figure 1: Project Location Map
PURPOSE & NEED
The USACE Wilmington District has previously maintained Wainwright Slough for navigation purposes
in accordance with Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. The most recent maintenance events
conducted by the USACE where sediment was hydraulically dredged from Wainwright Slough and placed
in an adjacent material management site occurred in 2013, 2007, & 1997. However, due to a shortfall in
government funding the USACE remains unable to provide maintenance operations for the current
conditions. The channel has become nearly impassable for vessel navigation with depths measured as
shallow as -4 MLLW or less during a June 2016 survey conducted by the Wilmington District (Figure 2).

Wainwright Slough Project 1Varrative Page 4 of 8
Volume Est. (USACE, 2016)
Authorized Channel:
20,293 CY @ -7 Ft (MLLW)
37,323 CY @ -9 Ft (MLLW)
Deep Water Path
9,073 CY @ -7 Ft (MLLW)
25,757 CY @ -9 Ft (MLLW)
LEGEND
Aisle to Navigation
Depth In Fast
Co.
! 4 and Shallower
:a-4
Nun
i7-6
Green Lighted Buoy " 8 - 7
Red Lighted Buoy
solo-$=
10-8=t2-10
12 - 10
Junction Marker
14 -12
Green Light
= 15 - 14
7 15 and Deeper
Red LightQ
Navigation Channel
Gram Daybeacon
Red Daybeaoon
O Danger Sign
Mileteoerd
a Tice Gage
,t figure l: U6ACE June 2016 Hydrographic Survey of Wainwright Slough
In lieu of the budget shortfalls for the federal government and the USACE, Carteret County intends to
maintenance dredge the federal navigation channel known as Wainwright Slough. This action will help
alleviate the burden created by the current shoaling fbr the local commercial fishing industry and help
promote recreational navigation in the area. Under the current conditions the commercial fishing industry
will be unable to access fish house landings within Carteret County during the peak 2017 fishing season.
This scenario creates a potentially devastating economic impact for the local fishing industry.
The County has been unaware of the immediate need to obtain independent state and federal permits for
the maintenance work due to the USACE's long standing commitment to maintaining Wainwright Slough.
Once the County became ,aware of the situation and need, the County began the process to obtain the
necessary authorizations. Early discussions were held with the USACE to conduct emergency dredging
with its shallow draft fleet under its permit authorization.. 'This emergency dredging request was not granted
per a June 22, 2016 Corps correspondence citing operational limitations associated with their side -cast
dredge (the Merritt) and tangential disposal issues. Consequently, the County is pursuing a Major CAMA
Permit along with other State and federal authorizations to perform a dredging maintenance event consistent
with the regulatory mech&aisms in place as described above AND in the most expeditious manner as
possible.
After completion of this maintenance work, the County intends to develop a long-term maintenance strategy
for Wainwright Slough. However, the current project remains limited due to the timing constraints
necessary to complete the work prior to the 2017 peak fishing season.
As stated previously, Wainwright Slough has been dredged more than 22 times since initial authorization
in 1935 — not counting undocumented "as needed" maintenance events. An Environmental Impact
Statement was prepared in 1976 which codified Wainwright Island as a disposal site. Subsequently, an
Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact (EA/FONSI) was prepared by the USACE in

Wainwright Slough Project Narrative Page 5 of 8
1995 (see Attachment E) focused on the positive impacts of creating upland bird habitat associated with a
maintenance action to dredge 30,000 yd3 from Wainwright Slough and placement of dredge material on or
near Wainwright Island. A 404(b)(1) analysis was also performed by the USACE as part of the
environmental documentation process and the 1995 project — very similar to the current proposed action —
was found to be in compliance with the Guidelines; this analysis determined that the discharge [of dredge
material] represented the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative.
A request for Consistency Concurrence was submitted to the NC Division of Coastal Management
(NCDCM) by the USACE for maintenance dredging (145,000 yd3) of Wainwright Slough and re-
establishment of Wainwright Island in 2006 (see Attachment F). NCDCM determined this action to be
consistent with the State's coastal management program and consistent with the 1995 EA/FONSI
previously prepared by USACE (September 2, 2006; CD06-042).
While these actions are somewhat dated, it is clear that a consistent pattern of environmental compliance
has occurred for dredging of Wainwright Slough and deposition of dredge material on or near Wainwright
Island. The current requested action is very similar in nature to previous requests. Actions will be taken
to avoid and minimize adverse environmental impacts while contributing to creation of colonial waterbird
habitat on Wainwright Island.
CONSTRUCTION PROCESS
The work will be conducted through the use of a hydraulic dredge and pipeline system. Approximately
40,000 CY will be dredged from Wainwright Slough and placed adjacent to Wainwright Island in a material
placement site. The work will be conducted on a 24-hour a day schedule with completion expected prior to
April 1, 2017. The material placement site will be constructed to discourage sediment from flowing back
into the navigation channel. The contractor will be required to erect temporary sand dikes along the flow
way of the placement site to help direct the dredge slurry away from the navigation channel and to
encourage sediment settling. Based upon the grab samples and observations completed during the SAV
survey fine to medium grain size sand is expected for the dredged material. The dikes will be constructed
from the initial dredge material in order to reduce disturbance of the placement area. The dikes will be
extended 'and maintained in a fashion to help limit the turbidity plume leaving the work area. At the
completion of the dredging activities, the temporary dikes will be smooth graded consistent with the
remainder of placed material. The emergent boundary of the material placement site will be sloped to below
MLLW on a 20H:1 V (ft) grade in order to promote shorebird usage.
AVOIDANCE & MINIMIZATION EFFORTS
A number of measures will be implemented to avoid and minimize potential adverse impacts. The dredging
footprint will follow the existing channel limits eliminating the need for new bottom disturbance. Hydraulic
dredging will be employed in an effort to reduce siltation and turbidity that is often associated with other
dredging methods (such as clamshell dredging). The use of temporary sand dikes will encourage sediment
settling, reduce disturbances within the placement area and limit the turbidity plume. Other best
management practices include avoidance of areas denoted in past permits as areas of concern as well as
Avoidance of critical habitat areas such as SAV with large areas shown on the plans when the field
investigations showed minimal relic stalks of SAV with less than I% coverage (see Attachment C — Permit
Drawings and Attachment H — SAV Report for more information).

Wainwright Slough Project Narrative Page 6 of 8
The work is not expected to impact the existin; , emergent wetland portion of Wainwright Island (Figure 3).
This includes an area less than 500 ft' in size covered predominately by Spartina grasses. No pipelines or
equipment will be allowed to traverse over the! emergent grassesor impact known SAV populations.
P1gure 3: September 2016 Conditions of Wainwright Island
ALTERNATIVES
No Build — This alternative assumes that no maintenance dredging will be conducted or that future dredging
will be subject to schedule: and funding by USACE. The result would be that navigational constraints will
remain, the local down east fishing economy would be; severely impacted (loss of only connection of Core
Sound to Pamlico), and that the channel will remain nearly impassable for maritime traffic. This alternative
fails to meet the project purpose and need.
Dredge in Deeper Water - The County discussed .an. alternative withthe USACE on the potential to
maintain the deep water path, as shown in I-igure 2, in a similar capacity as some previous federal
maintenance projects. By moving to deeper water, less dredging would be needed, and time and money
could be saved. However., the USACE Office of Counsel determined the position of Wainwright Slough
fell in a fixed location. Therefore, work outside of the; fixed location would be considered new work and
the establishment of a neer channel for a non-federal interest. The USACE previous maintenance events
within the deep water path were authorized under Engineer Regulation (ER) 1165-119, paragraph 9. This
regulation allows the USACE to shift the locations of federal channels in attempts to reduce maintenance
costs. Unfortunately, this provision does not correspond with non-federal maintenance operations within a
federal waterway. Because of regulatory constraints, this alternative is not being considered.
Dredge Existing Marked Channel (Preferred Alternative) — This alternative proposes to dredge within
the existing channel as marked and designated. by USACE. The proposed maintenance operations will
restore navigation access to the federal channel pathway. This alternative meets project purpose and need
and can be accomplished without significant regulatory delays.

Wainwright Slough Project Narrative
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
Page 7 of 8
Wainwright Island is a small dredge spoil island that is constantly subject to wave action and erosion. The
island is inundated much of the time with only a small portion of land (less 46 square meters [500 square
feet]) currently remaining above the water. The small remnant island is dominated by Spartina alterniora.
The island is used by a variety of colonial waterbird species (although no specific species were noted during
recent sampling) and is owned and managed by the National Audubon Society (letter of support for the
project by the Society, Attachment G).
The 1995 Environmental Assessment performed by USACE for similar dredging activities discussed
beneficial use of dredge material which is relevant to the current action (see Attachment E). The preferred
disposal alternative (creating habitat adjacent to Wainwright Island) would: 1) provide for satisfactory
disposal of maintenance dredging material; 2) stabilize the existing upland limits of the island; 3) enhance
or create habitat for colonial waterbird species such as royal terns and sandwich terns, snowy egrets, tri-
colored herons, and glossy ibis; and 4) existing habitat would be preserved and expanded for breeding
brown pelicans, herring gulls and great black -backed gulls, and wading birds such as black -crowned night
herons, great egrets, and little blue herons.
An SAV survey was conducted on September 21, 2016 and identified no SAV populations within the
project area. The September survey found only sparse or relic stalks of shoal grass (H. wrightii) present at
five locations at less than 1% coverage. No existing populations of SAV will be impacted by project
activities (see Attachment H).
Pamlico Sound is one of the largest estuaries in the United States. Offshore waters support a diverse
recreational and commercial fishery, with species such as red drum, speckled trout, blue crab, oysters, and
other shellfish often found in abundance.
An Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) assessment has been performed for this project. Although the proposed
project would likely result in some short-term, localized and temporary adverse effects to EFH and managed
species, construction measures and best practices will keep these impacts to a minimum, as well as reduce
the possibility of any permanent, long-term impacts. While reducing available sandy benthic habitat within
the project area, project actions will also create over 10 acres of emergent estuarine wetland (a designated
EFH within the project area) in an area where benthic habitat has been impacted by exposure to waves. A
re-established Wainwright Island would also provide valuable new nesting and foraging habitat for coastal
birds — as noted above. The Preferred Alternative could result in increased long-term SAV colonization and
general benthic habitat improvements adjacent to the re-established island (see Attachment I).
PROTECTED SPECIES ASSESSMENT
A review of federally protected species has been conducted. Results indicate that the proposed project will
have no effect on threatened or endangered species (see Attachment J).
WETLANDS
Dredging will be conducted on submerged lands in Pamlico Sound not considered jurisdictional wetland.
The remains of Wainwright Island above water levels support estuarine wetland dominated by Spartina
grass (less than 500 ft'). These areas will be disturbed or impacted by proposed actions; dredge material

Wainwright Slough Project narrative
Page 8 of 8
will be placed to the east of the island and is intended to increase the island footprint and potentially create
additional estuarine wetlartd. No wetland impacts are anticipated.
CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has reviewed the project and indicated they are unaware of
any historic resources which could be affected by the project. Therefore, SHPO has no further comment
on the project as proposed (see November 30, 2016 SHPO letter — Attachment K).

Attachment E —1995 EA/FONSI

US Army Corps
of Engineers
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
SOUTH ATLANTIC DIVISION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH -CAROLINA
JUNE 1995

ENVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSMENT
MAIN TE NAK1: DREDGING
WAIN,
VVRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET C01UNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
JUNE 11995
Table of Contents
Items
Page No.
1.00 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................... 1
2.00 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND HISTORY ......................... 1
3.00 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE ................................ 2
4.00 PURPOSE AND NEED ............................................ 2
4.01 Current Disposal Method ..................................... 2
4.02 Alternative Disposal Methods Investigated ....................... 2
4.03 Preferred Disposal Method ................................... 3
5.00 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT ...................... 3
5.01 Dredging and/or Disposal Alternatives .......................... 3
5.01.1 Clamshell or Bucket and Barge Dredge .................. 3
5.01.2 Hopper Dredging ..................................... 3
5.01.3 Upland Diked Disposal ................................ 3
5.02 No -Action Alternative ........ „ .............................. 4
6.00 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ...................................... 4
6.01
Water Quality ..............................................
4
6.02
Estuarine; Resources .......................................
5
6.03
Terrestrial Resources .......................................
6
6.04
Beneficial Use .............................................
7
6.05
Threatened and Endangered Species ..........................
8
6.06
Archaeological,/Historical Resources ...........................
9
• 6.07
Recreation and Aesthetic: Resources ..........................
10
6.08
Development .............................................
10
6.09
Executive: Order 11988, 1:lood Plain Management ................
10
6.10
Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands ..................
11
6.11
Air Quality ...............................................
11
7.00 RELATIONSHIP TO LAND USE PLANS ............................. 11
i

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
,CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
JUNE 1995
Table of Contents (cont'd)
Items
Page No.
8.00 RELATIONSHIP TO NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM.................................................. 12
9.00 PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT ............................. 12
9.01 Scoping ................................................. 12
9.02 Fish and Wildlife Coordination ............................... 12
9.03 Other Agencies and Organizations ............................ 13
10.00 LIST OF RECIPIENTS .......................................... 14
11.00 POINT OF CONTACT .......................................... 16
12.00 REFERENCES ............................................... 17
Figures
(Follows Page No. 17)
Figure 1: Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound & Beaufort Harbor,
North Carolina.
Figure 2: Wainwright Island -Sites A, B, C, and D Location Map.
Attachments
Attachment A: Section 404(B)(1) (Public Law 95-217) Evaluation.
Attachment B: Onsite Scoping Meeting - List of Attendees.
Attachment C: Responses to the March 27, 1995, Scoping Letter.
ii

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTI;:NANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
JUNE 1995
1.00 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project involves changing the method of dredge disposal for the continued
as -needed maintenance dredging in `he Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and
Beaufort Harbor at Wainwright Slough (see section 4.00). The site is located
approximately 5 miles northeast of the Cedar Island Ferry Landing in Carteret County,
North Carolina (see Figure 1). The channel is dredged approximately once every three
to four years.
Historically, dredged material has been placed at the toe -of -the -bank on the
channel (east) side of Wainwright Isl,:ind (see: Site A, Figure 2). Due to the location of
this disposal area, the dredged material has (quickly returned to the channel. To correct
this situation, the material would be d:ilscharged in upland areas (see Figure 2, site D)
and directed overland to the non-cha•inel (west) side of the island.
The maintenance dredging will remove materials lying above the plane of 9 feet
below mean low water (m.l.w.) (-7 feed: m. 1.%,. plus 2 feet of allowable overdepth) within
the designated limits of the channel. Approximately 30,000 cubic -yards of material
consisting of fine -to -medium grained sand may be removed from the channel by a
hydraulic pipeline dredge. The work will be accomplished in late fall -early winter of
each year as needed and completed prior to the April 1 onset of the colonial waterbird
nesting season.
2.00 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND HISTORY
The project was. authorized by the River and Harbor Act of August 30, 1935. The
channel was originally dredged in 19;35. Fifteen maintenance dredgings occurred in
various portions of the channel through 1966; since that time the channel has been
maintained on an as -needed basis. li he last maintenance dredging was completed in
late 1991. Emergency dredging by the special purpose dredge CURRITUCK was
completed in early 1994.

3.00 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
Environmental issues and concerns associated with maintenance dredging of
Wainwright Slough and the discharge of dredged material on or around Wainwright
Island are addressed in the Final Environmental Statement. Maintenance of the
Waterwav Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor North Carolina, dated
August 1976 and are being incorporated into this environmental assessment (EA) by
reference.
4.00 PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose of the project is maintenance of the AIWW channel in Wainwright
Slough to ensure navigation safety for commercial and sports fishermen and
recreational boaters. Ongoing maintenance of this project will result in positive
economic impact in the form of continued opportunities for waterborne commerce in the
Carteret County area.
4.01 Current Disposal Method
At the present time, dredged material is placed within a sandbagged area at the
toe -of -the -bank on the channel side of Wainwright Island. Due to the inadequate size
and the location of the existing disposal area, much of the dredged material flows back
into the channel area north of the island.
4.02 Alternative Disposal Methods Investigated
To address the problems associated with the .current disposal method, the
following disposal options have been investigated:
a. Alternative 1 - Control of Effluent. The material would be placed in upland
areas of the island and directed overland to the open water on the non -channel (west)
side of the island (see Figure 2, Site D). The discharge would be guided to avoid areas
containing submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV).
b. Alternative 2 - Sandbagged Retention Area. Sandbags would be placed along
the shoal line to confine 4 to 5 acres of open water on the non -channel side of the
island (see Figure 2, Site B). The discharge would be pumped into this confined area.
c. Alternative 3 - Unconfined Toe -of -the -Bank. Dredged material would be
pumped to the toe -of -the -bank on the non -channel (west) side of the island (see Figure
2, Site C).
2

4.03 Preferred Disposal Method
The preferred method of disposal is by control of effluent (Alternative 1) at Site D.
This method has the least damaging environmental impacts of the considered
alternatives and is the most cost effective and efficient method of material disposal for
the maintenance dredging of Wainw-ight Slough. The discharge will be guided to
elevatAesired portions of the island. A, l(Aff sand berm will be constructed above the
mean high water (m.h.w.) line on the western shoreline to contain the effluent and allow
solids (sand) to settle and renourish and elevate the island. The berm will be
reconstructed as necessary as the alrea behind it is elevated by the disposal material.
It is anticipated that most of the effluent flowing over the berm into Core Sound will
consist primarily of discharge water containing a minimal amount of suspended solids.
Any solid material passing over the berm should not significantly impact existing
aquatic resources. Upon completion of the work, the retention berm will be graded to
achieve desired shoreline and upland elevations.
5.00 ALTERNATIVES TO THE. PROPOSED PROJECT
5.01 Dredginri and/or Disaos_al Alternatives
5.01.1 Clamshell or Buelket an_d Barge Dredge
Use of a clamshell or bucket and barge dredge with disposal on Wainwright
Island would involve double handling of dredge disposal material. Compared to
hydraulic pipeline dredging, these methods are less productive and not cost or time
efficient for the proposed activity. Additionally, they would not provide for the beneficial
uses of the dredged material.
5.01.2 Hopper Dredgineal
Emergency :maintenance of Wainwright Slough was conducted in 1994 to remove
a shoal in the channel near Wainwright Island. This method involved use of the special
purpose dredge CURRITUCK with open water disposal. Open water disposal of
dredged material is used only in emergency dredging situations.
5.01.3 Upland Diked Disposal
Construction of an upland dike on Wainwright Island would not provide the habitat
variety essential to the various colonial waterbird species that now or could utilize the
island for nesting and breeding. They National Audubon Society opposes this disposal
retention method.
:3

5.02 No -Action Alternative
As stated in section 4.01, the current disposal area adjacent the channel is not
well located and is inadequate in size. Dredged material pumped into this site quickly
returns to the channel. This results in more frequent maintenance dredging operations.
There are no feasible alternative upland disposal sites in the area. Benefits to colonial
waterbirds utilizing the island (see section 6.04) would not be realized with the no -
action alternative.
6.00 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
6.01 Water Quality
The North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (NCDEM) has
designated the waters surrounding Wainwright Island as SA/NSWJORW waters. SA
waters are suitable for commercial shellfishing and all other tidal salt water uses
including primary and secondary recreation, and fish propagation. Nutrient sensitive
waters (NSW) require limitations on nutrient inputs. Outstanding Resource Waters
(ORW) are unique and special waters of exceptional state or national recreation or
ecological significance which require special protection to maintain existing uses.
NCDEM will concurrently review this EA and the Corps' request for a section 401
(P.L. 95-217) water quality certificate to authorize the work that may impact water
quality under the proposed action. Also, the section 404(b)(1) evaluation for the
discharge of dredged material is included in Attachment A.
Turbidity associated with dredging and disposal.will be at a .low-level, short term in
duration, and end following dredging due to the low silt content in the coarse -to -
medium grain sand removed from the bottom. The dredged sediments are not
anticipated to be contaminated with toxic substances, since the site is well removed
from any known sources of pollution. Visual inspection revealed no indication that the
island is or has been a disposal area for hazardous or toxic waste materials.
Salinity in the vicinity of the project averages 30 parts per thousand (ppt) and
seldom drops below 20 ppt within Core Sound. No significant change in salinity is
expected to occur in the surrounding waters of Wainwright Island as a result of the
proposed action.
No significant adverse impacts are expected to occur to water quality or to ground
water resources as a result of the proposed activity.
4

6.02 Estuarine Resources
The principal users of the waterway connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort
Harbor are commercial fishermen and recreational boaters. Commercial usage
primarily consists of transporting fresh fish, shellfish, and menhaden for market (Corps
of Engineers, 1994).
General estuarine habitats in the project area include sounds, inlets, bays, and
tributary marsh creeks. The 1988 map entitled "NOAH -Coastal Ocean Program
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Stud(" (National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS),
1991) published by Ithe NMFS Beaufort Laboratory indicates that submerged aquatic
vegetation (SAV) habitat may be present on both sides of the waterway in the
Wainwright Island area and throughout Core Sound in general. Eelgrass (Zostera
manna), shoalgrass (Halodule wrighl.)i , and widgeon grass (Ru is maritima) occur
throughout Core Sound.
Dredge and fill operations can remove or bury SAV and make bottoms unsuitable
for SAV habitat. Dredging may result in depth, turbidity, current, or salinity changes
detrimental to SAW; however, the channel area to be dredged is not mapped as
containing SAV resources.
It is anticipated that the effluent discharge may affect SAVs and/or their shallow
water habitat off the western shoreline of the island. Construction of the shoreline sand
berm to control the effluent will minimize the amount of suspended solids entering the
open water. It is anticipated that most residual suspended solids will settle in the area
between the retention berm and any SAV.
The presence of SAVs (eelgrass and widgeon grass) in non -channel sites around
the island was verified by the NMFS ,on May :3, 1995. They advise that eelgrass can
tolerate 25 percent burial of plant height for short periods without increasing mortality
or reducing productivity.
The location and extent of SAVs will be determined using pre -project
interpretation of June 1995 aerial photograph,. During that month, a base line sub-
meter accuracy SAV imap will be compiled using Geographic Positioning System (GPS)
technology. A seagrass boundary will be staked parallel to the island's western
shoreline (near Site C, Figure 2). This boundary will be included on the work site plan.
After disposal operations are complete, a seagrass inventory and impact assessment
will be conducted by the NMFS. This; information will be compared with the pre -project
data. If it is determined that SAV resources have been adversely impacted,
compensatory mitigation will be provided in accordance with the recommendations of
the NMFS.
5

The nearest oyster or clam leases are on the mainland side of Core Banks near
the town of Atlantic and will not be impacted by the project. Public oyster resources are
not located within the immediate project area but are abundant in other areas of Core
Sound. Oysters will not be adversely impacted by the project.
Core Sound is open to the mechanical harvest of clams except in SAV habitat
areas and within oyster and clam leases. However, the mechanical clam harvest line
stops just south of Wainwright Island. Hard clams (Mercenaria mercenaria) may be
taken by hand in shallow water not subject to shifting sand due to tidal flows. NCDMF
advised that clam density is not expected to be significant in the vicinity of Site B (see
Figure 2); they did not express concern for project impacts to clams.
The NCDMF advised that bay scallops may be present on the southwest side of
the island_ Due to their mobility, it is not anticipated that the scallop resource will be
adversely impacted by turbidities or sediments generated along the shoreline by the
effluent discharge.
Core Sound also provides habitat for an abundance of other estuarine and marine
organisms. Blue crabs, shrimp, and finfish are taken by commercial and recreational
fishermen from this estuary. Larval fish and shrimp migrate to and from primary
nursery areas throughout the Sound. The nearest primary nursery area is Cedar Island
Bay located to the southeast of Wainwright Island; this nursery area will not be
impacted by the project. However, to protect migrating larvae and other sensitive
aquatic fauna during periods of high biological activity, dredging activities will be limited
to the period between October 1 and March 31.
6.03 Terrestrial Resources
Terrestrial resources on Wainwright Island on the highest elevations include
mixed shrub thickets, sparsely vegetated areas, and unvegetated areas comprised of
sand and shells. The shoreline fringe areas contain sparse or no vegetation to the
marsh or high tide line. There are no areas on the island that would be classified as
maritime forest habitat.
Because it is isolated from the mainland and the Outer Banks, no predators are
found on Wainwright Island, a factor critical to the survival of colonial waterbird
species. Breeding and nesting activities occur from April 1 through August 31 of each
year. Dredging and disposal activities will be limited to the period from October 1
through March 31 to protect the colonial waterbirds and their habitat during the
breeding and nesting season.
5

6.04 Beneficiail Use
The preferred disposal alternative would: (1) Provide for satisfactory disposal of
maintenance dredging material; (2) s' abilize, the existing upland limits of the island;
(3) enhance or create habitat for colonial watarbird species such as royal terns and
sandwich terns, snowy egrets (Egretta thula thula), tri -colored herons (Evretta tnLcolor),
and glossy ibis (Plegadis falcinellus falcinellus); and (4) existing habitat would be
preserved and expanded for breeding brown pelicans, herring gulls (Lary s ar entatus
smithsonianus) and great black -backed gulls, and wading birds such as black -crowned
night herons (Nycticc►rax nvcticorax h_)act/i , great egrets (Casmerodius albus a recta),
and little blue herons (Florida eaerulea caeru/ea).
Wind and wave erosional forces have significantly reduced Wainwright Island
from its original 16 -acre size. It is a national bird sanctuary owned by the National
Audubon Society. The island is one of North Carolina's most important nesting sites for
colonial waterbirds (Parnell 1995). In 1991 the island supported North Carolina's
largest colony of nesting royal terns (13tema madma maxima) (6,337 pairs) (Corps of
Engineers, 1993) and many sandwich terns (;)terna sandvicensis acuf/avidus). It
presently supports the State's second largest colony of nesting brown pelicans
(Pelecanus occidentaifs carolinensis) (950 pairs). Suitable bare ground nesting and
breeding habitat for terns has diminished greatly due to wind and wave erosion and
vegetation growth. Nesting habitat fer brown pelicans is now threatened. Royal and
sandwich terns abandoned the iisland in 19914.
Colonial waterbird nesting sites in North Carolina have been reduced almost 50
percent from the mid 1970's to the late 1980's (Golder 1995; Bain 1989; Parnell and
Soots 1979). As a result, more and more birds utilize the remaining but rapidly eroding
breeding and nesting islands. Although colonial waterbird populations within North
Carolina are not presently declining, this may not be the situation in the near future
(Parnell 1995). Crowding increases the potential for a catastrophic loss of birds by
disease, weather related events (e.g., hail storms), or by human activities.
The National Audubon Society :supports the placement of dredged sand in such a
way as to protect the ;pelican and wading bird nesting habitats while restoring the tern
nesting habitat. They recommended that a fringe of vegetation be left on the eastern
and northern sides of the island to provide habitat for pelicans and that no material be
placed on the northwestern finger of the island. Similar landscaping actions have
proven to work successfully on South Pelican and Ferry Slip Islands in the lower Cape
Fear River (Golder 19,95).
7

6.05 Threatened and Endangered Species
The proposed work has been reviewed for compliance with the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended. Informal consultation was initiated with telephonic
requests on March 16, 1995, for the North Carolina endangered species lists from the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the NMFS. Based on these listings, the
following species may occur in the project area and must be considered:
SPECIES
Leatherneck sea turtle
Kemp's ridley sea turtle
Loggerhead sea turtle
Green sea turtle
Arctic peregrine falcon
Roseate tern
Bald eagle
Piping plover
Red -cockaded woodpecker
Rough -leafed loosestrife
Seabeach amaranth
Eastern cougar
American alligator
Dismal Swamp
southeastern shrew
Sei whale
Sperm whale
Finback whale
Right whale
Hawksbill sea turtle
Leatherback sea turtle
Shortnose sturgeon
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Dermoche/vs coriacea
Lepidochelvs kem
Caretta caretta
Chelonia mvdas
Falco peregrinus tundrius
Sterna dou allii dou allii
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Charadrius melodus
Picoides borealis
Lvsimachia asperulaefolia
Amaranthus pumilus
Felis concolor cou uar
All_ igator mississipoiensis
Sorex lonjirostris frsheri
Balaenoptera borealis
Phvseter macrocephalus
(catodon)
Balaeno,otera phvsalus
Balaena facialis
Eretmochelys imbricata
Dermochelvs coriacea
Aci,oenser brevirostrum
STATUS
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
The eastern cougar, rough -leafed loosestrife, Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew,
and red -cockaded woodpecker should not be affected by the proposed work, as
Wainwright Island does not contain suitable habitat for these species. Furthermore,
their presence on the island is highly unlikely since it is isolated by surrounding waters
and situated far from the nearest mainland area.
Sea turtle nesting habitat is confined to oceanfront beaches. They would be
expected to appear along the North Carolina coast between May 1 and November 15.
Due to its estuarine location, Wainwright Island would not provide suitable nesting
8

habitat for any sea turtles. Green, Kemp's ridley, and loggerhead turtles may feed in
the project area; however, the NMFS has determined that hydraulic pipeline dredges
are unlikely to adversely affect sea kirtles.
Due to the estuarine location of the project, none of the whales would be impacted
by the proposed work.
The arctic peregrine falcon and the bald eagle may migrate through the area or
occur as winter residents in eastern North Carolina. Wainwright Island does not
provide suitable nesting, resting, or feeding habitat for these species. The project
should not adversely affect the falcon or the bald eagle.
The shortnose sturgeon may be found in the area. It has been documented for
the Cape Fear River (Moser and Ross, 1993), but no other populations are known
within coastal North Carolina. Due to their mobility, this species should not be affected
by the work as there is no direct evidence that dredging negatively impacts migrating
shortnose sturgeon (Moser and Ross, 1993).
Seabeach amaranth is an annual or perennial plant only found on oceanfront or
ocean inlet beaches. Because of its presumed absence in estuarine environments, this
plant should not be impacted by the project.
The piping plover is a winter resident of the beaches of North Carolina. Due to its
estuarine location, Wainwright Island does not provide suitable nesting or feeding
habitat for this oceanfront inhabitant. The roseate tern infrequently visits the area but
is not known to nest here. The project should not adversely affect these species.
The American alligator is no longer a threatened species and is listed only for
similarity of appearances purposes. Section 7 consultation requirements no longer
apply to this species.
In summary, it has been determined that the proposed project, as described in
section 1.00, is not likely to adversely impact or affect any listed threatened or
endangered species or their critical habitat.
6.06 Archaeological/Historical Resources
The project area was visually inspected on May 3, 1995, by Mr. Mark Mathis,
Archaeologist, North Carolina Division of Archives and History. Mr. Mathis commented
that no archaeological survey has been previously conducted on the island (Attachment
C). The field inspection demonstrates the site contains substantial undisturbed and
potentially significant cultural deposits. Mr. Mathis recommends that archaeological
testing be conducted across the island to: (a) document the nature, extent, and
9

condition of the cultural deposits; (b) evaluate the significance of the deposits with
regard to the National Register of Historic Places; and (c) develop, if warranted, an
appropriate impact mitigation plan.
A copy of the State field report (Mathis 1995) will be supplied upon written
request. In summary, large numbers of sand and clay Middle and Late Woodland
Period (AD 800 -1500) ceramics were found on the surface. The island contains a
heavy covering of shell midden, particularly on its northern and western sides. The
southern and eastern sides appear to have been previously disposed upon, and this
material may be hiding any remaining midden.
Impacts to the site will be limited to covering of artifact deposits and possible
damage from heavy equipment. Prior to project commencement, an archaeological
survey will be implemented which will assess National Register of Historic Places
eligibility. If the Corps and State agree that the site is significant, some restrictions may
be placed on the manner in which heavy equipment is operated.
6.07 Recreation and Aesthetic Resources
Wainwright Island lies within Core Sound which is part of the second largest
estuarine system in the eastern United States. The area affords opportunities for many
boating and other saltwater recreational activities including swimming, finfishing,
shellfishing, water skiing, and bird and other nature observing and exploration
activities. The proposed maintenance dredging work will only have short-term and
minor impacts, if any, on the recreational activities and natural aesthetics of the
estuarine environment. As discussed in section 6.04, the work will be beneficial to
colonial bird populations.
6.08 Development
Due to the isolation of the work site, it is not anticipated that commercial or
residential development opportunities will be enhanced or hindered by the proposed
work. Most of the surrounding area is comprised of public land or areas not considered
prime development property. Cape Lookout and Cape Hatteras National Seashores lie
to the east; the Cedar Island National Wildlife Refuge is situated southeast. The
nearest mainland areas are comprised of Federal and State regulated wetlands, areas
protected from development activities. Commercial fishing traffic is not expected to
increase in the future in Core Sound.
6.09 Executive Order 11988, Flood Plain Management
The proposed disposal area is located within the 100 -year flood plain. However,
as discussed in section 5.03, there are no feasible upland alternative sites. As
10

discussed elsewhere in this EA, adverse impacts to natural flood plain resources have
been minimized; therefore, the proposed action complies with all applicable State and
local flood plain ordinances and with Executive Order 11988, Flood Plain Management.
6.10 Executive Order 11990. IProtection of Wetlands
The proposed action has been evaluated under Executive Order 11990,
Protection of Wetlands. The shoreline: of Wainwright Island contains regularly flooded
tidal wetlands characterized by the presence of scattered fringe areas of saltmarsh
cordgrass (S artina alterniflora) and .invegetated intertidal flats. Impacts to wetlands
will be minimized by construction of the effluent retention berm above the m.h.w. line.
It is anticipated that any adversely impacted tidal wetlands will quickly recover or
reestablish along the shoreline limits below the effluent retention berm. Elevation
contouring by control of effluent may present opportunities to create and expand (both
tidal and intertidal) wetlands beyond the amount that may be affected by the proposed
disposal work. If deemed appropriate and necessary, sprigs will be planted at proper
elevations to accelerate the establisl-ment of wetland vegetation.
Additionally, a law function and value wetland area vegetated by Phraomites
australis has been established within the upland portion of the island. Concern for this
area was not expressed by respondents to the scoping letter or attendees at the
scoping meeting.
6.11 Air ualit f
The project is located within the jurisdiction for air quality of the Wilmington
Regional Office of the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources. The ambient air quality fir' Carteret County has been determined to be in
compliance (attainment area) with they National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This
project is not anticipated to create any adverse; effect on the air quality of this
attainment area.
7.00 RELATIONSHIP TO LAND USE PLANS
The Carteret County Coastal Ansa Mana<�ement Act (CAMA) Land Use Plan of
March 1991 classifies the waters of Core Sound as ORWs. The proposed dredging
and dredged material disposal would not result in significant adverse effects to the
lands and waters on and around Wainwright Island; therefore, the proposed action
does not conflict with the land use plains for Carteret County.
11

6.00 RELATIONSHIP TO NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM
Based on information presented within this EA, the proposed maintenance
dredging of Wainwright Slough by pipeline dredge with disposal on Wainwright Island
by control of effluent is consistent with the approved Coastal Management Program of
the State of North Carolina and the 1991 Carteret County Land Use Plan. During
coordination of the EA, the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management will review
the information presented herein and furnish a consistency position on the proposed
work.
9.00 PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT
9.01 Scoping
On March 27, 1995, a scoping letter was sent to Federal and State agencies,
interest groups, and the public to request identification of significant resources; issues
of concern; and recommendations for studies considered necessary. Further
coordination was conducted during an onsite scoping meeting held on May 3, 1995
(see Attachment B for list of attendees). Responses to the scoping letter are presented
in Attachment C. The letters noted support for the project, suggestions for beneficial
uses of dredged material, and concerns needing to be addressed.
9.02 Fish and Wildlife Coordination
The USFWS, by letter dated April 25, 1995, identified fish and wildlife resources
in the project area and discussed potential project -related impacts._. Recommendations
of that report were considered during project development. The following paragraphs
present these recommendations and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' response to
each.
The Service recommended that the planning include the following considerations:
USFWS Recommendation: As much sediment as possible should be placed
above the high tide line on the existing island, consistent with the creation of suitable
nesting habitat for colonial birds. These efforts should be coordinated with the National
Audubon Society, the North Carolina's Wildlife Resources Commission, and the
Service's Habitat Management Biologist.
12

Corps Response. This EA is being circulated for comment to the suggested
parties. All recommendations for creating suitable colonial waterbird habitat will be
considered.
USFWS Recommendation: Sediment which cannot be placed above the high
tide line should be used to expand the; area of habitat for colonial waterbird nesting in
areas which are now intertidal and suptidal. Although the Service does not endorse the
elimination of estuarine shallows, the Service would not oppose the restoration of the
historic area of the island reduced by erosion. They recommend using historic data to
determine the former extent of the island and limit disposal in intertidal and subtidal
areas to the historic "footprint" of the island.
Corps Response: To minimize impacts to SAVs, wetlands, and other estuarine
resources, direct disposal will not encroach beyond the existing high ground limits of
the island. As stated in section .4.03, ontrol of effluent disposal is the most cost
effective and efficient method of dredged material disposal for the maintenance
dredging of Wainwright Slough. Restoration of the island to its historic limits could be
pursued by the National Audubon Society under the cost sharing procedures of Section
204 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-580). The Corps
would be a willing cosponsor of such a proposal.
USFWS Recomrnendation: The Service recommends that the Corps eliminate
the use of a sandbag retention wall frorn the planning process.
Corps Response: The preferred disposal method, Alternative 1 - Control of
Effluent (see section 4.02), does not involve use of a sandbag retention area.
USFWS Recomrnendation: The-Servic;e recommends that the Corps' planning
process include a carefully considered work schedule which would avoid periods of
high biological activity.
Corps Responses: As stated in .section 6.03, all dredging and disposal work will
be conducted between October 'i and March 31 to avoid periods of high aquatic and
terrestrial biological activity.
9.03 Other Agencies and Organiizations
Representatives from the following, agencies and organizations were contacted
regarding the proposed action:
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Di�� sion of Environmental Management
North Carolina Division of Marine F=isheries
13

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
North Carolina Division of Archives and History
National Marine Fisheries Service
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Audubon Society
University of North Carol ina-Wiimington (Dr. James Parnell)
10.00 LIST OF RECIPIENTS
This EA is being circulated for 30 -day review to the following agencies and
individuals:
Federal Agencies
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV
Forest Service, USDA, Southeastern Area
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Center for Environmental Health
National Marine Fisheries Service
U.S. Department of Interior
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fifth Coast Guard District
Federal Highway Administration
National Resource Conservation Service, USDA
U.S. Department of Energy
U.S. Coast Guard
Postmasters
State Agencies
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Division of Environmental Management
Division of Marine Fisheries
State Clearinghouse
14

Libraries
UNC-Chapell Hill Library
Librarian, North Carolina Environmental Resources Library
UNC -Wilmington Library
North Carolina State Library
Duke University Library
Elected Officials
Honorable Jean Preston
Honorable Jonathan Robinson
Honorable Beverly M. Perdue
Honorable Patrick J. Ballentine
Honorable Walter B. Jones, Jr.
Honorable Lauch Faircloth
Honorable Jesse Helms
Chairman, Board of Carteret Ccunty Commissioners
Mayors
Local Agencies
North Carolina Council of Governments Region P
Carteret County Economic Development Council
Morehead City Building Inspector
Conservation Groups
Conservation Council of North Carolina
North Carolina Environmental Defense Fund
Sierra Club
National Audubon Society
National Wildlife Federation
North Carolina Wildlife Federation
Carteret County Crossroads
Izaac Walton League
Col leges/Universities
UNC Institute of Marine Science
Duke University Department of geology
Cape Fear Community College
15,

Companies and Individuals
Carteret -Craven EMC
Jacksonville Daily News
Carteret County News -Times
Morehead City Shipping Company
Williams and Haywood, Inc.
T.D. Eure Construction Company
Wilmington Shipping Company
Sailcraft, Inc.
Texasgulf, Inc.
Stevens Towing Company
Stroud Engineering
Land Management Group, Inc.
George Davenport
Grady Davis
John Hooten
T.O. Talton
R.T. Jones
Luther Smith and Son
Lloyd Wood
Alex Malpass
Calvin Mason
R.W. Chambers
John Fussell
Frank Hatsel
Walter Gentry
William Whaley
Anne McCrary
Vince Bellis
Ray Brandi
Orrin Pilkey
James Parnell
Claude Brown
W.D. Aman
11.00 POINT OF CONTACT
Any comments or questions regarding this EA should be addressed to
Mr. Ernest Jahnke, Engineering and Planning Division, Environmental Resources
Section, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, PO Box 1890, Wilmington,
North Carolina 28402-1890. Telephone contact is [phone].
16

12.00 REFERENCE►
Bain, Harold C., Jr. 1989. Trends in Site,, Utilization Among Colonial Waterbirds
in North Carolina Estuaries. Master cf Science Thesis, University of North Carolina -
Wilmington.
Ferguson, Randolph L.; Wood, Lisa L.; and Pawlak, Brian T. 1988. SAV Habitat
from Drum Inlet to Ocracoke Inlet, North Carolina. (Map). National Ocean Service,
Photogrammetry Branch, Nautical Charting Division: Rockville, MD.
Golder, Walker. 1995. Sanctuary Manager for the National Audubon's North
Carolina Coastal Island Sanctuary Program, Wilmington, North Carolina. Personal
Communication. May 1995.
Kimmel, Richard H. 1995. Cultural Resources Assessment of the Wainwright
Island Vicinity, Carteret County, North Carolina. Memorandum dated May 8, 1995, on
file. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington, North Carolina.
Mathis, Mark A. 1995. Archaelog!ical Field Inspection of Wainwright Island -
31 CR273, Core Sound, Carteret County, North. Carolina.
Moser, M.L. and S.W. Ross. 1993. Distribution and Movements of Shortnose
Sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrurn) and Other Anadromous Fishes of the Lower Cape
Fear River, North Carolina. Final Report to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Wilmington District.
Parnell, James F. 1995. Professor of Ornithology, University of North Carolina -
Wilmington. Personal Communication. May 3, 1995.
Parnell, James F. and R.F. Soots, Jr. 1979. Atlas of colonial waterbirds of North
Carolina estuaries. UNC Seagrant Publication. UNC -SG -78-10. June 1979
National Marine Fisheries Service.. 1991. Biological Opinion, Dredging of
Channels in the Southeastern United ;States from North Carolina Through Cape
Canaveral, Florida. November 25, 199,111,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Colonial Waterbird Database Program. Contract
No. DACW54-88-H-0012. Updated 1993.
1994. Limited Reevaluation Report and Draft
Environmental Assessment for Drum Inlet, Carteret County, North Carolina, June,
1994.
17

�1 VARYING--
T.w nw�
TYPICAL SECTION
C.—
'r I
.TI
G oAE
E R ST�� LOCALITY MAP
I V Srau OF rlt[e
R e so so
U S E IAAt L co so 4v o
N E -- •.�.
.-......./
wcsr IAr -tom 'w•.
h IAfMNi1T
0 : 4 JLIYIM
.f • _ ••.�v ...... .....•
CEDAR
ISLAND J%' SITE
ATLANTIC
.'ATLANTIC
1
j•jeAALRV•L1 'f SAND BAG o4��
OtSFOSAt AREA qty
C A R T E R E T COUNTY
"VIS SO J+ O
�r
wn.w ` 4
se•
vw. gr �''•
'Ise aTct.e'iu ll e
r ;� ~tset. 1►
� a
stop
Nor v =06f
OIL
s fes;' i �atRt ����v�JJ� i
aaT �
0
V •
a i
o + SAND BAGMileo • 0 is the fkroO k B waterway is aleeewed Southward tram the
,I,NKaYr •-.. DISPOSAL AREA
efINT Merth end of Weiawright SSeuah.
i,
T,.• WATERWAY CONNECTING
PAMLICO S0. Ek BEAUFORT HARBOR,
NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE OF MILES
t O A 4 A e
CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON, N.C.
MAP REVISED SEPTEMBER 1987
FIGURE 1

SITE A - Existing Disposal Area
SITE B - Proposed Sandbagged Disposal Area
SITE C - Proposed Unconfined Toe -of -the -Bank
Disposal Area
SITE D - Proposed Upland Disposal
w/ Control of Effluent Area
SITE B
S ITE C
SITE D'
_:NP- o.-- —
WAINWRIGHT ISLAND
Not to Scale
Photo 28 SEP 94
FIGURE 2
SITE A

MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WA114WRIGHIT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING P'AMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY„ NORTH CAROLINA
EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES
40 CIFR 230
Secticn 404 Public Notice No. CESAW-EP-PE-95-16-0005
1. Review of Compliance (230.10(a) -(d}1 Preliminary1/ Final 2/
A review of the NEPA Document
indicates that:
a. The discharge represents the least
environmentally damaging practicable
alternative and if in a special aquatic
site, the activity associated with the
discharge must have direct access or
proximity to, or be located in the aquatic
ecosystem to fulfill its basic purpose (if no. _ _ _ _
see section 2 and NEPA document); YES _I NOF YESI X I NOI_r
b. The activity does not:
1) violate applicable State water quality
standards or effluent standards prohibited
under Section 3,07 of the CWA; 2) jeopardize
the existence of federally listed endangered
or threatened species or their habitat; and
3) violate requirements of any federally
designated marine sanctuary (if no, see section
2b and check responses from reso jrce and
water quality, certifying agencies); YESI_I NOI_I- YESI X I NOI_I
c. The activity will riot cause or contribute
to significant degradation of waters of the
U.S. including adverse effects on hurnan
health, life stages of organisms dependent
on the aquatic ecosystem, ecosystem diversity,
productivity and stability, and recreational,
aesthetic, and economic values (if no, _ _ _
see section 2); YESI_I NO(_I` YESI X I NOI_I
d. Appropriate and practicable steps have
been taken to minimize potential adverse
impacts of the discharge on the aquatic
ecosystem (if no, see section 5). YESI_I N0I_1- YESI X I NOI_(
Proceed to Section 2
1, 21 See page 6.

2. Technical Evaluation Factors (Subparts C -F)
Physical and Chemical Characteristics
of the Aquatic Ecosystem (Subpart C)
(1) Substrate impacts.
(2) Suspended particulates/turbidity
impacts.
(3) Water column impacts.
(4) Alteration of current patterns
and water circulation.
(5) Alteration of normal water
fluctuations/hydroperiod.
(6) Alteration of salinity
gradients.
b. Biological Characteristics of the
Aquatic Ecosystem (Subpart D)
(1) Effect on threatened/endangered
species and their habitat.
(2) Effect on the aquatic food web.
(3) Effect on other wildlife (mammals,
birds, reptiles, and amphibians).
C. Special Aquatic Sites (Subpart E)
(1)
Sanctuaries and refuges.
(2)
Wetlands.
(3)
Mud flats.
(4)
Vegetated shallows.
(5)
Coral reefs.
(6)
Riffle and pool complexes.
d. Human Use Characteristics (Subpart F)
(1) Effects on municipal and private
water supplies.
(2) Recreational and commercial
fisheries impacts.
(3) Effects on water -related recreation
(4) Aesthetic impacts.
(5) Effects on parks, national and
historical monuments, national
seashores, wilderness areas,
research sites, and similar
preserves.
Not Signifi- Signifi-
N/A cant cant*
I I
1 i I I
I ! X I I
I I X I
I I I !
t X I i
XI
I I
I 1
X I i
l X l
I I
I I
X I I
I_X I
► !
I X I
I j
I_ X I
{ I
I I
I X
I I
I I
I I
I I
X I I
I I
X I I
I
X 1 j
I I
I I
l I
I I
! I
I
I I
I I
I I
X I 1
Remarks: Where a check is placed under
the significant category, preparer add explanation below.
Proceed to Section 3
`See page 6.
A2

3. Evaluation of Dredged or Fill Material (S jboart X3 3
a. The following information has been
considered in evaluating the biological
availability of possible contaminantss in
dredged or fill material. (Check oily
those appropriate)
(1) Physical characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . IN
(2) Hydrogralphy in relation to
known or anticipated
sources of contaminants ....................................IXI
(3) Results from previous
testing of the material
or similar material in _
the vicinity of the project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .
(4) Known, significant sources of
persistent pesticides from _
land runoff f or percolation ...... ..... ......................... I_I
(5) Spill records for petroleum
products or designated
(Section 3.11 of CWA)
hazardous substances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . (_)
(6) Other public records of
significant introduction of
contaminants from industries,
municipalities, or other
sources..............................................I_I
(7) Known existence of substantkil
material deposits of
substances which could be
released in harmful quantities
to the aquatic environment by _
man -inducted discharge activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. I_I
(8) Other sources (specify) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . I_I
last appropriate references.
Reference: Environmental Assessment, Maintenance Dredging, Wainwriaht Slough, Waterway
Connecting Pamlico Sound and BEzufort Harbor, Carteret County, North Carolina, dated June
1995.
b. An evaluation of the appropriate information in 3a
above indicates that there is reason to believe the
proposed dredge or fill material is not a carrier of
contaminants, or that levels of coniaminantas are sub-
stantively similar at extraction and clisposal sites and
not likely to result in degradation of the disposal site.
The material meets the testing exclusion criteria. YES I X I NO I_{•
Proceed to Section 4
", 3/, see page 6.
A3

4. Disposal Site Determinations (230.11(f)).
a. The following factors as appropriate,
have been considered in evaluating the
disposal site.
(1)
Depth of water at disposal site . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .
IN
(2)
Current velocity, direction, and
variability at disposal site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .
!XI
(3)
Degree of turbulence .......................... ............
I_)
(4)
Water column stratification ...................................
I_I
(5)
Discharge vessel speed and
direction .............................................
_
I_I
(6)
Rate of discharge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .IXI
(7)
Dredged material characteristics
(constituents, amount and type
of material, settling velocities) .... ......................... ....
IXI
(8) Number of discharges per unit of _
time...............................................I-1
(9) Other factors affecting rates and
patterns of mixing (specify)
List appropriate references.
Reference: Environmental Assessment, Maintenance Dredging, Wainwriaht Sough. Waterway
Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret County, North Carolina, dated June
1995.
b. An evaluation of the appropriate factors in
4a above indicates that the disposal site _
and/or size of miiang zone are acceptable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES IXI NO I_I'
5. Actions to Minimize Adverse Effects (Subpart H).
All appropriate and practicable steps have been taken,
through application of recommendations of 230.70-230.77,
to ensure minimal adverse effects of the proposed _ _
discharge. List actions taken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YES IXI NO I_I'
For water quality see Section 6.01 of the EA.
For benthos see Section 6.02 of the EA.
For fisheries see Section 6.02 of the EA.
For threatened and endangered species see Section 6.05 of the EA.
Return to section 1 for final stage of compliance review. See also
note 3/. page 3.
`See page 6.
A4

6. Factual Determinations (230.11).
A review of appropriate information as identified in
items 2-5 above indicates that there is minimal
potential for short- or long-term environmental
effects of the proposed discharge as related to:
a. Physical substrate at the disposal site
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5).
YES jXj
_
NO
b. Water circulation, fluctuation, and <,salinity
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5).
YES jXj
NO
C. Suspended particulates/turbidity
(review sections 2a, 3, 4, and 5).
YES jXj
NO j_j•
d. Contaminant availability
(review sections 2a, 3, and 4).
_
YES jXj
NO j_j•
e. Aquatic ecosystem structure and function
YES jXj
NO
(review sections 2b and c, 3, and 5).
f. Disposal site
(review sections 2, 4, and 5).
_
YES jXj
NO j_j•
g. Cumulative impact on the aquatic
ecosystem.
YES jXj
NO
h. Secondary impacts on the aquatic
ecosystem.
YES jXj
_
NO
7. Findings.
a. The proposed disposal site for discharge of
dredged or fill material complies with the
Section 404(b)(1) guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
b. The proposed disposal site for discnarge of
dredged or rill material complies with. the
Section 404(b)(1) guidelines with the
inclusion of the following conditions: . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... .. I_I
'See page 6.
A5

8.
C. The proposed disposal site for discharge of
dredged or fill material does not comply with
the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines for the
following reasons(s):
(1) There is a less damaging practicable alternative ... ..... _ F_I
................
(2) The proposed discharge will result insignificant _
degradation of the aquatic ecosystem ...............................
(3) The proposed discharge does not include all
practicable and appropriate measures to minimize _
potential harm to the aquatic ecosystem . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
V
William R. Dawson, P.E.
Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division District Engineer Q
Date: Date: ' 1
'A negative, significant, or unknown response indicates that the permit app kation may not be in
compliance with the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines,
11 Negative responses to three or more of the compliance criteria at this stage indicate that the proposed
projects may not be evaluated using this "short form procedure." Care should be used in assessing
pertinent portions of the technical information of items 2 a -d, before completing the final review of
compliance.
2/ Negative response to one of the compliance criteria at this stage indicates that the proposed project does
not comply with the guidelines. If the economics of navigation and anchorage of Section 404(b)(2) are to
be evaluated in the decision-making process, the "short form evaluation process is inappropriate."
2/ If the dredged or fill material cannot be excluded from individual testing, the "short -form" evaluation
process is inappropriate.
A6

ATTACHMENT B
ONSITE: SCORING MEETING
MAY 3„ 1993
LPLT O1: A?TENDEES
National Audubon Society
National Marine Fisheries Service
North Carolina Division of Archives cmd History
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, Morehead City Regional Office
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management, Wilmington Regional Office
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Northside Office, Raleigh
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Habitat Conservation Office,
Washington, North Carolina
University of North Carolina - Wilmington

ATTACHMENT C
RESPONSES TO THE MARCH 27, '1995, SCOPING LETTER

'North Caroffma Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Govemzor
Betty Ray McCain, Sewnny
April 20, 1995
William R. Dawson,:PE
Chief, Engineering and Planning Division
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, N.C. 28402-1890
Re: Dredge Disposal Modification, Wainwright Island,
Carteret County, ER 95-8737
Dear Mr. Dawson:
Division of Archives and Hist(
WiUiam S. Price, Jr., Directo
Thank you for your letter of Alaril 13, 1995, concerning the above project.
Our records indicate that there, are no recorded archaeological or historic resources
on Wainwright Island. However, the island has never been surveyed for sites.
Based on similar islands in the region, It is quite possible that prehistoric remains
may have at one time existed,m the island, assuming it is not a man-made spoil
island.
Mark Mathis of our Office of State Archaeology will participate in the field visit to
the site on May 3, 1995. If there are any changes in plans please contact him at
919/733-7342.
The above comments are mads; pursuant to Section 106 of the Natignal Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and ithe Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's _
Regulations for Compliance wrath 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.
Sk; erely,
/"o A-�. (D V?
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:siw

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
May 4, 1995
Mr. Earnest Jahnke
Environmental Resources Section
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Dear Mr. Jahnke:
The trip to Wainwright Island on Wednesday, May 3, 1995 was very informative. I
believe that the method of disposal which involves control of eluent with discharge directed
overland (sites C and D) to the open water on the non -channel side (west side) of the island
would be significantly enhance the island for colonial nesting birds and only minimally impact
the shallow water habitat. I agree that toe -of -the -bank disposal would be the least desirable of
alternatives that have been discussed.
Thank you for arranging the trip. Please contact me if additional information is needed at
this stage of review.
Sincerely,
'WAN0 Zral'w..
Franklin T. McBride, Manager
Habitat Conservation Program

National : ; Audubon Society
May 11, 1995
Mr. Ernie Jahnke
Environmental Resources Section
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 284,02-1890
Dear Mr. Jahnke:
North Carolina
Coastal Islands Sanctua
10 E. Greensboro St., 87
Wrightsville Beach, NC 20
[phone]
I am writing in response to requests for comments regarding
the proposed disposal of dredged sand on Wainwright Island located
at the junction of Cdre and Pamlico Sounds, Carteret County, North
Carolina.
Wainwright Island, owned and protected as a wildlife
sanctuary by the National Audubon Society, has long been a vital
nesting site for many species of colonial waterbirds. Deposition of
dredged sand on portions of the island has created habitat suitable
for nesting terns and pelicans, while habitats that existed prior to the
disposal of dredged sand on the island have supported nesting
wading birds. The island once supported North Carolina's largest
colony of Royal and Sandwich terns, and continues to support the
state's second largest colony of Brown Pelicans_ However, erosion
and vegetation growth in recent years has eliminated the nesting
habitat for Royal and Sandwich Terns which abandoned the island in
1994, and threatens the nesting habitat for Brown Pelicans. Erosion
has also greatly reduced tate islalidl from its original size of 16 acres.
The National Audubon Society supports the deposition of
dredged sand'. on the island iu a :manner that will restore nesting
habitat for waterbirds and restore *the island, as nearly as possible, to
its original size. Of the disposal sites proposed in "figure 2" of the
letter dated March 27, 1995, dredged sand placed on sites D, C and B
would accomplish this. Audubon recommends ' that a fringe of
vegetation be, left on the eastern . and northern sides of the island to
provide habitat for pelicans and that no material be placed on the
northwestern finger of the island. To restore the island to its original
size, Audubon recommends that material be placed in site B and that
sand bags be: used if deemed necessary or effluent be controlled to
minimize the impact on surrounding shallows and restore the vital
waterbird habitat that has been lost to erosion.
►�r.ao� w.c,a.s tiv..

Nesting waterbirds occupy Wainwright Island from 1 March to
1 September, therefore Audubon recommends that all activity on
and adjacent to the island be completed between September and
March.
From the mid 1970's to the late 1980's, North Carolina's coast
experienced an almost 50% reduction in the number of active nesting
sites used by colonial waterbirds. Thus, those sites that remain are
increasingly important. The 1993 Atlas of Colonial Waterbirds of
North Carolina Estuaries (Parnell et al. 1995) includes loss of nesting
habitat as a major threat to the state's waterbirds.
We, at Audubon, appreciate the opportunity to comment on
this project and .look- forward to working closely with the Corps to
ensure - that Wainwright Island continues to provide a safe haven for
nesting waterbirds.
Please call me if you have any questions.
:Since ly,
Walker Golder
Sanctuary Manager
Literature Cited
Parnell, 1. F., W. W. Golder and T. M. Henson. 1995. 1993 atlas of
colonial waterbirds of North Carolina estuaries. NC Sea Grant
Publication UNC -SG -95-02. Raleigh, North Carolina.

RCV BY:Wilmington District ; 5-11-i�5 ; 16:07
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
health and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
James B. Hurit, Jr., Govemor
Jonathan B. Howes. Secretarli
Raper N. Schecter, Director
Willf 1m R. Dawson,, Chief
Enpftteering and Planning Division
U.S. Army Corps of Engineer
Wifirdngton District
P.G. Box 1890
Wflmftagton, NC 28402-1890
-+ USACE-Reg. Brand'
may 11, 1995
Post4t" Fax Note 7671
TO
'rias a c�A�
CoJDeM G AGr
25r/ -
O0' DG M
a�t4ol�e A
R»BNCE: DCM9S-19: Sro*ng. Modification of Disposal Method, Walnwdght Ulana
Dear Mr. Dawson:
The, Divisfai of Coastal 1,UMennent would 11ko to dank you for the oppatudty to participate in the site
meeting held May 3. 1995, Wainwright Idtaid in C*ttrct County. NG The Meeft was held to discaass and invite
continent on the varkus alternatives which Mve been proposed for the digal caf dredged material from the AIWW
on Wainwright Ubmi. As a tslpplt: mt: to the disettsdws held oaatc. we Offir ft
following comments:
I. we would conrider Alozmdv:. B to be the lent pcefen!ld alfeteadve. A 12W au of shallow bottom
habitat arGIAI he lost and there an: patmtial atfgnilixgm ic%%= on wbmagMa a4UUk vegetaation and other
eSdmrine n.9otaan .
I Altecnad,is C would impart a Targe amount of wetland& eapocWly if efflW& w= uaoonfuted.
3. The combination 8/D altmt>ay.ve disctassed at the site meetmg WWW CNO dis )QW of the dredged
m8liid on IM higher sandy portion of dwe island with the effitaetat being acted tlowtaslope,.westward
tows* the 't+i Uff- Wo fool that Ibis alternative Could be x100 W Wo pVtridod the tnMrial is contained
latadward of 'd* COMW wetlands vtgetWon line by a sandbeg tarring abrocsm F
4. A Consistency DM Mnation'rill be required for the pmposal to Its Mal (mt. pint to 15 CFR 930
Subpart C - Cotasaaaoy for Fodaral Activities.
If you have any gmdoms Mgarftg our co nurienm pkatac coo= ante or Sem AoraM Di Ift of Coastal
Manazement. at (919033-2293. Thank yce for yaw ootadderaaon of the Not* Cadina, Coastal Management
Program.
sincerely.
(`aa im J. Belts
ct~ Preston Pau, Assistant Diffusor. IN.vision of Coastal Management
Charles loves. Division of Coastal h1anagemetx, Morehead CSty
Earnest Jahnict, US Army Corps Of Engineers, WRinington Disodct
0 e1 Rev 77At7 Vein&*% New+k e-rf- r ry 17A T i_ 7AA-r TdnrJanna A eor" -- r w v n.n ,^^ • . -

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
�. P' NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
Southeast Fisheries Science Center
Beaufort Laboratory
101 Pivers Island Road
Beaufort, NC 28516-9722
May 8, 1995
MEMORANDUM FOR: Gordon Thayer
FROM: Lisa Wood}
SUBJECT: Wainwright Island Project
On May 3, 1995, I visited Wainwright Island with
representatives from Wilmington District U.S. Army Corp of
Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Audubon Society, CAMA,
N.C. State Fisheries, UNC -Wilmington (Dr. Pernell), and the
Archaelogy Society to discuss alternative disposal methods for
maintenance dredging of Wainwright Slough.
Adverse conditions for locating seagrass habitat were
observed. Strong winds prior to our visit created turbid water
conditions and cloudy skies prevented sunlight from illuminating
the bottom. Sampling with a rake, we found Zostera marina and
RuDnia maritima throughout Site B. Seagrass was not observed on
the north side of the island. Over the past two years, the north
side of the island experienced severe erosion. Most of the
representatives supported depositing spoil on Site C to expand the
nesting area for pelicans etc. There is a low berm between Site C
and B. Effluent will flow down the berm into the area containing
seagrass in Site B. The COS asked if the seagrasses could tolerate
any degree of burial.
I posed this question to Mark Fonseca. Mark explained recent
research shows Zosters marina can tolerate 25i burial of plant
height for short periods. The research suggested a thin layer of
sediment greater than 25%- of the height of the smallest plant will
significantly increase mortality and reduce productivity. Can the
COE control the amount of effluent flowing down the berm in the
seagrass habitat?
SUGGESTIONS
1- Review 1995 aerial photographs for seagrass distribution and
make a field trip under better atmospheric and water qualilty
conditions.
2- Map boundaries of seagrass habitat and island with GPS for
baseline data. Position stakes along boundaries for future
reference.
3- Discuss ways to control effluent to avoid smothering
seagrass.
CC: Ernie Jahnke
Larry Hardy
Ron Sechler

State of North Ca, .qia
Department of Environment, A&*-W;wj'!
Health and' Natural Resources &4j
Division of Ntarine Fisheries A
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor � e
MEW
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary C
Bruce Freeman, Director
May 5, 1995
Mr. Ernie Jahmke
Environmental Resources Section
P. O. Box 1891)
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Dear Mr. Jahnke:
As a result of rebi.ewing the. proposed spoil disposal modifica-
tion of Wainwright Island and the on-site visit May 3, 1995, the
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries would like the
following concerns addressed in the upcoming environmental
assessment.
The presence of sea grass beds, i.e. Halodule wriahtii
Zostera marina or Runpia Mari <t hard clams and bay scallops that
may be buried by the deposition of spoil material will be the main
concern of the Division,. Another investigation of the site on the
southwest side: of the island needs to be conducted on a clear,
calm day to determine the presence and density of these species.
Bay scallops, if any, present on the southwest side of the
island could be relocated east of the channel to the seagrass
bed (s) there. The density of clams is not expected to be signifi-
cant in the vicinity of the "Site B" area. Dredge spoil disposal
on any significant sea grass concentrations should be avoided or
impact should be minimized. How such gradual covering by sand over
time the sea grass can withstand is unknown and any areas covered
with grass should be separated from spoil effects.
If the combination ' of Sites C and D with effluent directed
toward Site B is pursuant as the preferred alternative the
Division at this time would recommend the use of sand bag retention
wall to reduce turbidity and contain the spoil material.
Sincerely,
David L. Taylor
DLT:rrm
cc: Mike Street
Melba McGee
P.O. Eax 769, EllcngWad City, !North Carorlrec 28557-0769 TeEephone 919-726-7021 FAX [phone]
An Equal 4+por0unity Afficma6ve Ac kn E rmlover So% recydad/ 1016
Pc;t-conswctisr Raper

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Ecological Services
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
April 25, 1995
Mr. William R. Dawson
Chief, Engineering and Planning Division
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Dear Mr. Dawson:
p TAKE
AMEEI:l ANN
This responds to your March 27, 1995 request for scoping comments
from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on the proposal
by the Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers (Corps) to modify
the method of disposal for dredge material from the maintenance
dredging of the Wainwright Slough portion of the Waterway
connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret County,
North Carolina. These comments are provided in accordance with the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667d) and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). This letter is provided on
a planning aid basis and does not constitute the report of --the
Department of the Interior as required -by Section 2(b) of the Fish
and Wildlife Coordination Act.
The current disposal method involves toe -of -bank placement on the
channel side (east) of Wainwright Island. This disposal site is at
capacity and material placed in this area quickly returns to the
channel. The Corps is currently considering three alternatives to
alleviate this'problem: (1) control of effluent with discharge
directed overland to the open water on the non -channel (west) side
of the island; (2) toe -of -bank disposal on the non -channel side
with confinement by a sandbag retention wall; and, (3) toe -of -bank
disposal on the non -channel side without confinement.
Concerns of the Service and Recommendations for Environmental
Document
The Service recognizes the problems of the current disposal method
and the need for modifications. The Service also is aware that
Wainwright Island is an important nesting site for colonial
waterbirds and that the island is managed by the National Audubon
Society. The habitat value of the island for nesting waterbirds
has been reduced by erosion and the growth of vegetation.

Therefore, the Service believes that a major objective of this
disposal plan should be -to enhance the value of the island as a
nesting site for colonial waterbirds without significant adverse
impacts to other fish and wildlife resources in the area.
In light of this objective., the Service recommends that the Corps,
planning include the following considerations:
1. As much sediment as possible should be placed above the high
tide line on the existing island. However, this placement
should be consistent with the creation of suitable nesting
habitat for colonial waterbirds. Sediment placed above the
high tide line should be properly contoured and at a proper
height to maximize the habitat value of the area. The final
configuration of sediment above the high tide line should be
coordinated with the National Audubon Society, the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, and the Service's
Habitat ,Management Biologist Bob Noffsinger, who may be
reached at -[phone].
2. Sediment which cannot be placed above the high tide line
should used to expand the area of habitat for colonial
waterbird nesting in areas which are now intertidal and
subtidal . While the Service does not endorse the
elimination of estuarine shallows, the Service would not
oppose the restoration of 'the historic area of this island
which has been reduced by erosion. 'Therefore, the Service
recommends that the Corps' use historic data to determine
the former extent of the island and limit disposal in
intertidal and subtidal areas to the historic "footprint" of
the island.
3. The Service does not support the construction of hard,
erosion control structures in marine or estuarine areas.
The Service believes that the use of a sandbag wall to
retain the sediment `could be an undesirable precedent which
could lead to increased efforts by others to erect such
structuress. Therefore, the: Service recommends that the
Corps eliminate the use of a sandbag retention wall from the
planning process.
4. Any dredgring and disposal project during a time of high
biological activity can produce adverse, environmental
impacts to species such as sea turtles and/or anadromous
fish, among others. Therefore, the Service recommends that
the Corpse planning process include a carefully considered
work schedule which would avoid periods of high biological
activity.
The attached pages identify the Federally -listed endangered,
threatened, and candidate species which occur in Carteret County,
North. Carolina. The section of the environmental document
regarding protected species should contain the following
information:

1. A review of the literature and other information;
2. A description of any listed species or critical habitat that
may be affected by the action;
3. An analysis of the "effect of the action", as defined by CFR
402.02, -on the species and habitat including consideration
of direct, indirect, cumulative effects, and the results of
related studies;
4. A description of the manner in which the action may affect
any species or critical habitat;
5. Summary of evaluation criteria used as a measure of
potential effects; and
6. Determination statement based on evaluation criteria.
Candidate species refers to any species being considered by the
Service for listing as endangered or threatened but not yet the
subject of a proposed rule. These species are not legally
protected under the Act or subject to its provisions, including
Section 7, until formally proposed or listed as threatened or
endangered. New data could result in the formal listing of a
candidate species. This change would place the species under the
full protection of the Endangered Species Act, and necessitate a
new survey if its status in the project corridor is unknown.
Therefore, it would be prudent for the project to avoid any adverse
impact to candidate species or their habitat. The North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program should be contacted for information on
species under State protection.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments
and we look forward to continued involvement with the Corps on this
project. If you have any questions, please call Howard Hall at
919-856-4520 (ext. 27).
Sincerel ,
u�
L.R. Mike �Gantt
Supervisor

REVISED ,APRIL 19,, 1995
Carteret County
Mammals
Eastern cougar Fegs conccouauar,) - E
Bir
Said eagle (Haliaeetus leucoce ha aluz) .- E
peregrine falcon (Falco nereorinus �n rdi ) - T
Red cockaded woodpecker (Plcoldes hgireaffs) - E
Roseate team (Stoma dgucal douaaltai) _ E
Piping plover (Charaddys mel; us) - T
Reptiles
Green sea turtle (Chelonla mxf aim) - T
Kemp's (ALdantic) Ridley sea turtle (Legtfdochelvs kemoi) - E
Leathe,rbalck $ea "le (Derrmocheha cbriacea) - E
Loggearihead sea turtle (garens caretta) - T
Plants
Rough -leaved loosestrife (Lvsii�achea ;M,oerulaefolia) - E
Seabeach amaranth ma n hum j�miltts) - T
Sea turtles when 'in the water ::ale under the Jurisdiction of. the National Marine Fisheries Service and
should be contacted concerning your ag!mcy's responsibilities under Section 7 of the Endangered. spades
Act. Their address is:
National Marine Fishetles Service
U.S. Department of comm
9450 Koger Boulevard
Duval Building
St.. Petersburg, Florida 3:3702
There are spades wtIch, although not stow fisted or officially proposed for listing as endangered or
threatened, are under status review by d"I Service.. These BCandidate'(C1 and C2) spades are not legally
protected under the Act, and ars not subject to any of hs proviitons,, including Section 7, until they are
formally proposed or listed as dtraaterwdor endangered. We are providing the below Est of candidate
spades which may occur within the pr+ojact area for the purpose of giving' you advance notification. These
spades may be listed in the future, at which time they will be protected under the Act. In the meantime,
we would appreciate anything you might do for than.
Birds
Bachnian's sparrow (Aimoaht(aI >lnIhaft) - C2
Black rall (lsterallus 1sit) - C2
Henslow's 'sparrow (Ammodraa�W bgn-g _ C2
Re ilei,
Northern diamondback terrapin (Maladorn terrapin terrapin) - C2
Arnohibians
Carolina crawfish frog Rana Lreoiata g jito) - C2
Crustaceans
Croatan crayfish (Procambarvs RhLowmar(>Is) - C2

Carteret County (cont'd)
REVISED APRIL 19, 1995
Insects
Carter's noctuid moth (Soartiniahaaa carterae) - C2
Plants
Carolina goldenrod Solida oulp chra) - C2
Chapman's sedge Carex chanmanii - C2
Dune blue curls (Trichostema 12.1 - C2
Loose watermilf oil (Mvrionhvtlum laxum) - C2
Pondspice ea 3aestivalis) - C2
Savanna camy(opus (Camy(onus caroGnae) - C2
Savanna cowbane Ox lis errata) - C2
Smooth bog -asphodel of IdiaIg abra) - C2
Venus flytrap Diona s musc3nu(a) - C2

,,Eo sr„fes
A
o 4M.% UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
�yt�«pcE4�
REGION I V
34:5 COURTL.AND STREET. N.E.
ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30365
APR -.4
Colonel Robert J. Sperberg
District Engineer, Wilmington
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, :NC 28402-1890
Attn: Mr. Earnest Jahnke
Environmental Resourzes Brunch
Subject: Changes to the Kaintenance Design for the Wainwright
Slough Portion of the Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound
and ;Beaufort Harloor, Carteret County, NC
Dear Colonel Sperberg:
Pursuant to your request of March 27, 1995, EPA, Region 4 has
reviewed the -s,ubject proposal wisich discusses the environmental
consequences of altering the current dredge disposal regimen on
Wainwright Island. After an examination of the information
provided and conversations with ElMvironmental, Resources I technical
staff we suggest that a varlation of Option B and C be examined in
more detail. Shallow eater habitat would be covered with
maintenance material with each of these options, but by putting the
material immEad:Lately adjacent to the present shoreline and using
some kind of confining measure (sand bags/tubes) the overall
footprint could be m i n f n l zo.d .
This notwithstanding, it is not clear to us that shallow water
habitat is a limiting factor in system functioning; whereas
Providing some long-term p3-Oteeti.on to Wainwright Island which is
relatively unique has obvious sea -it. It should be noted that the
entire island appears to be at risk from erosional processes;
hence. the no -action alterattive has its own adverse ramifications.
For example, we understand that the island receives a great deal of
use as a rookery and this capability mould be lost if it were
inundated.
On the basis of the: scop-- of: the proposal we have no
significant objections to your plans to use an EA as the evaluation
model rather than the moire comprehensive environmental impact
statement format.
Printed on Recycled Pap

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this action. If
we can be of further assistance in this matter, Dr. Gerald Miller
(404-347-3776 VM 6853) will serve as initial point of contact.
Sincerely,
W'Ay
Heinz J. Mueller, Chief
Environmental Policy Section
Federal Activities Branch

North Carolina :Deparbnanit of Cultural Resources
Janis B. Hunt. Jr.. Govenor
Betty Ray McCain, Seattary
May 18, 1995
William R. Dawson, P.E.
Chief, Engineering and Planning Diviision
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, N.C. 213402-1890
Re: Dredge Disposal Modification, WainVuright Island,
Carteret County, ER 95-8737
Dear Mr. Dawson:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Mee. Jr.. Director
On May 3, 1995, an on-siteinspection was conducted at Wainwright Island -by a
number of agency representatives, including Archaeologist Mark Mathis, who
prepared the enclosed field inspection report. The following comments concerning
the proposed disposal project are based on Mr. Mathis's report.
As noted in our letter of April 20, 1995, no archaeological resources had been
recorded on the island. However, during the recent inspection, an extensive
deposit of prehistoric shell was observed allong the eroding western shore of the
island and recorded as 31 CR273. -
!Based on Mr. Mathis's observations and the historical use of the island for dredge
disposal, portions of the interior and eastern side of the island are covered with old
dredge materials. At the time of the inspection, the island was inhabited by a
substantial population of nesting pelicans and evaluation of the extent of the
cultural remains across the island wi s impossible. However, we believe the site
probably contains substantial undisturbed and potentially significant cultural
deposits.
Prior to initiation of any new disposal and ground disturbing activities, we
recommend that archaeological testing be conducted across the island. The
purpose of the teslt excavations should The Ito (a) document the nature, extent, and
condition of the cultural deposits; (bl) evaluate the significance of the deposits with
regard to the National' Register of Historic Places; and (c) develop, if warranted, an
appropriate impact mitigation plan.
We appreciate your including Mr. MFithis in the recent inspection and hope these
comments will assist you in the project planning process. If you have questions
concerning the field report, please: contact Mr. Mathis at 919/733-4763.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh. Waath Carolina 27601-2807

William R. Dawson
May 18, 1995, Page 2
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,
44JI5
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
W LMMTON Off"UCI" CORPS OF ENGNEM
P.O. BOX logo
WILMINGTON, NORTH GAPAXINA 28402-1890
��
,T'cx+oF September 5, 1995
Environmental Resources Section
Dear Madam or Sir:
Enclosed for your information is a copy of the Finding of No
Significant Impact for Maintenance Dredging, Wainwright Slough,
Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret
County, North Carolina, dated August 1995.
An Environmental Assessment was distributed for public
comments on June 26, 1995. After review and consideration of
the comments received, we have determined that the proposed
action will not significantly affect the quality of the human
environment; therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will
not be prepared. Also enclosed is a copy of the Notice of
Availability for the signed Finding of No Significant Impact,
which is being provided to the general public.
Thank you for your interest in this project and for your
comments. If you have any questions regarding this project,
please contact Mr. Ernest Jahnke, Environmental Resources Section,
at [phone].
Enclosures
Sincerely,
Robert J,'Sperberg
Colonel, }}.5.__Army_
District Engineer
Pnnbd on W PWCVC W Paper

September 5, 1995
Environmental Resources Section
Dear Madam or Sir:
Enclosed for
inforrration is
August
An Environmental Assessrrent was distributed for public
comments on June 26, 1995. After review and consideration of
the comments received, we have determined that the proposed
action will not significantly affect the quality of the human
environment; therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will
not be prepared. Also enclosed is a copy of the Notice of
Availability for the signed Finding of No Significant Impact,
which is being provided to the general public.
Thank you for your interest in this project and for your
comments. If you have any questions regarding this project,
please contact Mr. Ernest Janke, Environmental Resources Section,
at [phone].
Sincerely,
Robert J. Sperberg
Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
Enclosures "-1 4x
CESAW-EP-PE/Ja&*e4581
CESAW-EP-PE/Uat1-g'?7
CESAW-EP/Dawson/s/,
CESAW-DX/Burch
CESA;�
CES)AW-DE/COL Sperberg/s/
CALL BETSY @ 4543 TO PICK UP WHEN SIGNED.
CESAW-EP/Files
File: n:\3002pndr\wpdoc\wainrite.fns

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY
CESAW-EP-PE-95-16-0010
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
September 5, 1995
A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the following U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers activity is available.
Project: Maintenance Dredging, Wainwright Slough, Waterway Connecting
Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret County, North Carolina.
The Environmental Assessment, Maintenance Dredging. Wainwright Slough, Waterway
Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret County, North Carolina, was
circulated to Federal and State agencies and the public on June 26, 1995. After review
and consideration of the comments received, the FONSI was signed on August 31,
1995.
Copies of the FONSI may be requested from or further questions addressed to
Mr. Ernest Jahnke, Environmental Resources Section, at [phone].

US Army Corps
of Engineers
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
SOUTH ATLANTIC DIVISION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
AUGUST 1.995

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
List of Fii Ltires
—
Figure 1: Locality Map (Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound & Beaufort Harbor,
North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
List of Attachments
(Fo1ows Page 9)
Attachment 1: Letters [Received During The 30 -Day Comment Period.
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SEPTEMBER 1995
Table of Contents
Items Page No.
1.00
EXISTING PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED ACTION ...........
1
2.00
INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE * * ... *­­**­­*­­****­
1
3.00
PUBLIC AND A(3ENCY COORDINATION .............................
1
4.00
RESULTS OF PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION ..................
3
4.01 NMFS; letter of July 10, 191)5 .................................
3
4.02 USFWS
4
4.03 USEPA; (Telephonic Response) July 14, 1995 .....................
4
4.04 NCDMF; letter of July 19, 1995 ..................................
5
4.05 North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (NCDEM); letters of
May 11, 1995, and July 19, 1995 ................................
5
4.06 North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) ............
6
4.07 NCWRC. Scoping Response letter of May 4, 1995 ..................
7
4.08 North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources. Scoping letter comments
of May 18, '1995 ...............................................
7
5.00
ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES .........................
7
6.00
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS .................................
8
6.01 Cultural Resources ...........................................
8
6.02 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) ............................
8
6.03 North Carolina Coastal Management Program ......................
8
7.00
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
8
8.00
REFERENCES
8
9.00
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI) .......................
9
List of Fii Ltires
—
Figure 1: Locality Map (Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound & Beaufort Harbor,
North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
List of Attachments
(Fo1ows Page 9)
Attachment 1: Letters [Received During The 30 -Day Comment Period.

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SEPTEMBER 1995
1.00 EXISTING PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED ACTIN
The project involves changing the method of dredge disposal for the continued
as -needed maintenance dredging in the Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and
Beaufort Harbor at Wainwright Slough. The site is located approximately 5 miles
northeast of the Cedar Island Ferry Landing in Carteret County, North Carolina (see
Figure 1). The channel is dredged approximately once every three to four years.
Historically, dredged material has been placed at the toe -of -the -bank on the
channel (east) side of Wainwright Island. Due to the location of this disposal area, the
dredged material has quickly returned to the channel. The proposed action is to
discharge the dredged material in upland areas on Wainwright Island and direct it
overland to the non -channel (west) side of the island. The work will be accomplished in
late fall -early winter of each year as needed and completed prior to the April 1 onset of
the colonial waterbird nesting season.
2.00 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
U.S. Army Engineer District, Wilmington. June 1995. Environmental Assessment,
Maintenance Dredging, Wainwright Slough, Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and
Beaufort Harbor, Carteret County, North Carolina, dated June 1995.
3,00 PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION
During ,June 1995, the above reference was mailed to Federal and State agencies
and the interested public for a 30 -day review and comment period. As a result, letters
were received from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS); the North Carolina
Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF); the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA); and the North Carolina State Clearinghouse. Copies of the letters received
are included as Attachment 1. Telephonic responses were received from the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the USEPA.

TYPICAL SECTION
TAI
At
1,
#sL A no
V.1%. ARMY
.J
car
LOCALITY UM
so"
0 seej���p�� 2 i 3 S r
FIGURE 1
aw
WOO GAS -4dtP
Depow AftA 4k*
C A ft T C ft 9 T COUNTY
IL
i
4p
%
6L
ra
SA#WSAG
OWPOS" AdKA
$M*AMd f� 6,
low *ad of welowil*f aft,40.
WATERWAY CONNECTING
PAMLICO SD. a BEAUFORT HARBOR,
NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE OF rttEf
CORPS OF ENGINEERS wLmolGmKm.c
N"Reymo SePTEM"It 1947
FIGURE 1

4.00 RESULTS OF PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION
All comments received on the environmetal assessment (EA) were considered in
making the decision to sign the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). Pertinent
comments from each commentor are summarized and addressed below.
4.01 NMFS: letter of July 10, 1995.
COMMENT: The construction and utilization of a diked upland disposal
area was not adequately described or considered. The EA should provide the
basis for the determination that the habitat needs of waterbirds outweigh the need
to maximize avoidance of impact to submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) habitat.
RESPONSE: The EA adequately considers confined upland disposal. The
proposed plan is an upland disposal plan which addresses colonial nesting
waterbirds, SAVs, and other aquatic resources. Using the low berm, the proposed
plan maximizes containment of dredged material to protect SAVs and other
aquatic resources. Its removal after disposal minimizes impacts to waterbirds.
Construction of a diked upland disposal area would create a water retaining
depression that would prevent succession of vegetation essential to colonial
waterbird nesting habitat. Audubon prefers disposal that would form a dome of
material or other sloping that would prevent ponding of water. Section 4.03 of the
EA discussed the proposed construction of a low sand berm along the shoreline
and above the mean high water (m.h.w.) line to contain the discharge material
and allow solids (sands) to settle and renourish and elevate the island. The low
berm would be rebuilt as needed as elevations increase during disposal
operations. When disposal is finished, the berm would be graded to prevent
ponding. It is anticipated that the berm minimizes impacts to SAVs and other
aquatic resources.
Additionally, during the onsite scoping meeting held May 3, 1995, the North
Carolina Department of Cultural Resources (NCDCR) identified an extensive
deposit of prehistoric shell along the eroding western shore of the island (see
paragraph 4.08). The NCDCR and the Corps will conduct a survey to assess the
extent, location, and significance of the cultural deposits to determine whether the
construction of the low retention berm would adversely impact historic resources.
To minimize potential impacts to these resources, material to construct the berm
can be taken from areas of the island identified as not containing cultural resource
deposits or from newly disposed material.
3

COMMENT: NMFS is also concerned that the EA may overstate the
tolerance of SAV to burial by dredged material. While it is true that SAV may
tolerate short periods of burial without ill affects, the depth tolerance and duration
factors vary from site to site and erre not well defined. This argues strongly for the
selection of an alternative that awaids this:► impact rather thin risking SAV habitat
loss due to miscalculations on the part of contractors performing the work. If
Alternative 1 is to remain the preferred al'temative, the EA should address the
need for onsite monitoring during construction to ensure that either SAV habitat is
avoided or that burial of SAV is within limits specified by the NMFS.
RESPONSE: Information on the burial tolerance of SAVs was obtained from
the NMFS. As stated in Section 6.02 of the EA, prior to beginning disposal, the
NMFS will identil`y the location and extent of SAVs off the western side of
Wainwright Island using recent aerial photography. A base line submeter
accuracy SAV map will be compa d using Geographic Positioning (GPS)
technology. They will stake a sea grass boundary parallel to the shoreline that
will be included in the work site plan (Wood, 1995). Upon completion of the work,
a post -construction seagrass inveitory and impact assessment will be conducted
by the NMFS. This information will be compared with the pre -project data to
determine the need for remedial action. 11` acceptable to the NCQCR, the
shoreline retention berm will to constructed to minimize the amount of solid
material entering open water that -might adversely impact SAVs.
The dredging and disposal will be monitored by the U.S. Army Corps. of
Engineers" dredge inspectors. The Audubon Society has also committed to
monitoring the work to ensure that either SAV habitat is avoided or that SAV
burial is within limits specified by the NMFS (Golder, 1995). We will work with the
NMFS to develop written standards and procedures for monitoring impacts of the
disposal operation on SAV.
4.02 USFWS.
COMMENT:: The Service is "no -actioning" the EA for disposal of dredged
material on Wairrivright Island (Hall, 199:0.
RESPONSE:: Noted. Their response: to the project scoping is contained in
the EA, Attachment C.
4.03 U EPA: ffolephonic Response) July 14. 1995 flee Attachment C of the
EAJ. (EPA telephonically advised that tie comments in their scoping response letter of
April 20, 1995, were applicable to the E.A.)
0

COMMENT: After examining the information provided in the Corps scoping
letter, we conclude that shallow water habitat would be covered with all proposed
alternatives. We suggest disposal immediately adjacent the western shoreline
within an offshore retention area of sandbags or tubes. It is not clear to us that
shallow water habitat is a limiting factor in system functioning; whereas providing
some long-term protection to Wainwright Island which is relatively unique has
obvious merit. It should be noted that the entire island appears to be at risk from
erosional processes; hence, the no -action alternative has its own adverse
ramifications.
RESPONSE: The suggested alternative would impact more estuarine
bottom and likely more SAV than the preferred alternative. Section 6.04 of the EA
discussed the ongoing problem of erosion on the island. The USFWS
recommended restoration of the island to its original configuration. The Audubon
Society is in favor of reclaiming area lost to erosion. The Corps has proposed
that the Audubon Society and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) participate in restoration of the historic limits of the island under the
cost sharing procedures of Section 204 of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1992. No response has been received to this proposal.
4.04 NCDMF: letter of July 19, 1995.
COMMENT: The EA adequately addresses the Division's concerns. To
protect the white shrimp that tend to migrate during the fall, dredging should take
place only during the November 1 - March 31 time period.
RESPONSE: Agreed. Dredging and disposal will be accomplished only
during the period November 1 - March 31 of each year.
4.05 North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (NCDEM):
letters of May 11, 1995 (Scoping Response, see Attachment C of the EA), and
July 19, 1995.
COMMENT: (May 11, 1995) We would consider Alternative B to be the
least preferred alternative. A large area of shallow bottom habitat would be lost
and there are potential significant impacts on submerged aquatic vegetation and
other estuarine resources. The combination C/D alternative discussed at the site
meeting would entail disposal of the dredged material on the higher sandy portion
of the island with the effluent being directed downslope, westward to the water.
We feel this alternative could be acceptable provided the material is contained
landward of the coastal wetland vegetation line by a sandbag retaining structure.
Alternative B is the least preferred alternative. A large area of shallow bottom
habitat would be lost and there are potential significant impacts on submerged
5

aquatic vegetation and other estuarine resources. Alternative C would impact a
large amount of wetlands, especially if effluent were unconfined.
RESPONSE: These comments support the Corps' preferred alternative of
upland control -of -effluent disposal. A, lour sand berm, rather than a sandbag
retention dike, will be constructed along the shoreline to minimize effluent impacts
to coastal wetlands and other aquatic resources. Upon completion of the work,
the berm will be graded and sloped to create natural shoreline contours. This will
establish a shoreline more suitabia to wetland vegetation growth and provide
natural habitat beneficial to colonial resting waterbirds utilizing intertidal areas.
COMMENT: (July 19, 1995) DEM andorses the Corp's preferred alternative
disposal method for protecting water quality. The project may require a 401
Certification for upland contained disposal areas (WQC #2668), certain
maintenance dredging activities it coastal waters (WQC #13328), and written
concurrence from DEM.
RESPONSE: The application for 401 Water Quality Certification for the
proposed project was forwarded by letter dated June 28, 1995.
4.46 North Carolina Division of Coastal Management NCDCM).
COMMENT: We agree with your determination that the proposed activity is
consistent with the North Carolina Coastal Management Program, provided the
following conditions are met:
a. To control effluent runoff at Site 1), a low sand berm is to be constructed
above the m.h.w. line. This sand berm shall be constructed above the coastal
wetlands vegetation line as well.
b. A 401 Water Quality Certification is received from the NCDEM.
c. An approved sedimentaticn and erosion control plan is required for the
project. This plan must be submittad to the NC Division of Land Resources at
least 30 days prior to the onset of work.
RESPONSE:: As required, the sand (berm will be constructed above the
m.h.w. line and above coastal wetlands vegetation. Prior to berm construction, a
representative of the NCDCM, Mofehead City Regional Office, will be requested
to identify the coastal wetlands vegetation line for this purpose.
An application for a 401 Water Quality Certification was forwarded to the
NCDEM on June 28, 1995.
15

At least 30 days prior to construction, a sedimentation and erosion control
plan will be filed with the Washington Regional Office of the NC Division of land
Resources.
4.07 NC RC. Scoping Response letter of May 4, 1995 (see Attachment C of
the EA). (No response received to the EA)
COMMENT: The Commission believes that the method of disposal which
involves control of effluent with discharge directed overland (Sites C and D) to the
open water on the non -channel side (west side) of the island would significantly
enhance the island for colonial nesting birds and only minimally impact the
shallow water habitat. We agree that toe -of -the -bank disposal would be the least
desirable of alternatives that have been discussed.
RESPONSE: These comments support the Corps' preferred alternative of
upland control -of -effluent disposal.
4.08 North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources. Scoping letter
comments of May 18, 1995 (see Attachment C of the EA).
COMMENT: We recommend that (based on a May 3, 1995, field inspection)
archeological testing be conducted to (a) document the nature, extent, and
condition of cultural deposits; (b) evaluate the significance of the deposits with
regard to the National Register of Historic Places; and (c) develop, if warranted,
an appropriate impact mitigation plan.
RESPONSE: The requested survey will be conducted to assess these
concerns.
5.00 ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES
Informal consultation was initiated by telephone on March 16, 1995, with the
USFWS and the NMFS. The EA stated that the proposed project was not likely to
adversely impact any listed endangered or threatened species or their critical
habitat. Comments to the contrary were not received from the USFWS or the
NMFS or any other recipient of the EA.

6.00 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
The following commitments must be fulfilled.
6.01 CulturalResources - A preliminary survey to assess potential project
impacts on cultural resources from the proposed work will be conducted on August 16,
1995, by the NCDCR and the Carps. No work will be undertaken that would adversely
impact cultural deposiits.
6.02 Submerge_d Actuatiic VegetationSAV) - Impacts to SAVs will be assessed
on information compiled by the NMFS. If appriapriate, further measures will be taken to
minimize adverse impacts to SAV.
6.03 North Carolina Coastal M;jnagement Program - Prior to beginning any
dredging or disposal activity, coastal wetland vegetation will be identified for avoidance
during sand berm construction; a 401 Nater Quality Certification will be obtained from
the NCQEM; and, at least 30 days prior to beginning work, a sedimentation and erosion
control plan will be filed with the NC Division of Land Resources_
7,00 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Comments received during the coordination of the EA failed to note any additional
categories of environmental impacts. There are no remaining unresolved issues.
8.00 REFERENCES
Hall, Howard. 1995. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, Raleigh,
North Carolina. Personal Communication. July 25, 19,95.
Golder, Walker. 1995. Sanctuary Manager for the National Audubon's North Carolina
Coastal Island Sanctuary Program, Wilnnington, North Carolina. Personal
Communication. May 3, 1995.
Wood, Lisa. 1995. National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science
Center, Beaufort Laboratory, Beaufort, North Carolina. Personal Communication.
May 24, 1995.
8

9.00 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI)
The proposed action will not significantly affect the quality of the human
environment; therefore, an environmental impact statement will not be prepared.
Date:�� 31 /`mut
Attachment
4RobeJ. Sperbergel, U.S. Army
District En'neer
cbripapier I �8
Major, Uj VA %w.
Acting .[ "ft MR&ecr
9

Colonel Robert J.
District Engineer,
Department of the
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, North
rEhf 01
r '� UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF CaOMMERCI
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrati,
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
Habitat Conservation Division
9721 Executive Center Drive North
St. Petersburg, Florida 33702
Sperberg
Wilmington
Army, Corps
July 10, 1995
District
of Engineers
Carolina 28402-1890
Attention Ernest Jahnke
Dear Colonel Sperberg:
The National Marine Fisheries Sersiice (NMFS) has ,reviewed the
Environmental Assessment (EA), Maintenance Dredging, Wainwright
Slough, Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor,
Carteret County, North Carolina, dated June 1995. The proposed
project involves changing the method of dredged material disposal
for the continued as -needed maintenance dredging in Core Sound at
Wainwright Slough northeast of the Cedar Island Ferry Landing in
Carteret County, North Carolina. The following comments are
provided for your consideration.
The EA does not adequately describe or consider the alternative of
the construction and utilization of a diked upland disposal area on
Wainwright Island. The preferred alternative (Alternative 1) is
for unconfined disposal with controlled effluent release back into
the water rather than diked confinement in the same area. The
discussion of a diked disposal site alternative is brief and
incomplete. According to the EA, the National Audubon Society is
opposed to the diked upland disposal alternative based on the
impacts on colonial nesting waterbird habitat even_ though it
clearly maximizes avoidance of impacts to submerged aquatic
vegetation (SAV) habitat. The EA should incorporate the benefits
and impacts of all alternatives and provide the basis for the
determination that the habitat needs of waterbirds outweigh the
need to maximize avoidance of impacts to SAV habitat.
We are also concerned that the EA say overstate the tolerance of
SAV to burial by dredged material. While it is true that SAV may
tolerate short periods of burial without ill effects, the depth
tolerance and duration factors vary from site to site and are not
well defined. This argues strongly for the selection of an
alternative that avoids this impact rather than risking SAV habitat
loss due to miscalculations on the part of contractors performing
the work. If it is determined that Alternative 1 is to remain the
preferred alterative, the EA should address the need for on-site
® Printed w Regded Paper

monitoring during project construction to ensure that either SAV
habitat is avoided or that: any burial of SAV is within limits
specified by the NMFS.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments.
Sincer
�eas Mag Jr. Assistant R Tonal Director
cc: FWS, ATLA, GA
FWS, Raleigh, NC
BPA, ATLA,-GA
NCDEHNR, Raleigh, IAC
NCDBHNR, Morehead City, KC
F/SE02

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources 4 • •
Division of Marine Fisheries r
.lir♦
James B. Hunt, Jr., GovernorH
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary FEE
Bruce L. Freeman, Director
July 19, 1995
Mr. Ernest Jahnke
Environmental Resources Section
U. S. Army Corps of ,::ngineers
Wilmington. District
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Dear Mr. Jahnke:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the -wainwright
Island Spoil Disposal Project Environmental Assessment. The
Division's concerns were addressed quite adequately in the
document. There is one point, however, that I:failed to mention in
my May 5, 1995 letter or in subsequent conversations.
Wainwright channel is a major migratory route for adult white
shrimp in the fall as they make their way around from the mouth of
the Neuse River to core Sound. Upon further consideration, I do
not think the October 1 start date for dredging (which I may have
suggested) is appropriate due to the fact that during warmer
weather, the white shrimp tend to migrate- later in the fall.
November 1 through March 31 should be the time period in which
dredging can take place.
I trust this change can be incorporated in actual practice
even if not in the assessment document itself.
Sincerely,
grid .C. 1146"
David L. Taylor
DLT:rrm
cc: maty West
Melba McGee
P.O. Box 769, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557-0769 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management:
James E• Hum, Jr, G ove mor
Jonathan B HoweA Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Aily 19.,1945
Mmica Swa=
A4 4070
�EHNNNWR
Subject Maintenaaoe Dredift NV*,9vr ZJk Slough
Camera County
EENR #95-0953, DENt WQ #1.0993
Ile subject document has been reviewiid by this ogee. The Division of Environmental
Management is respcasible for the issuance of the Section 401WAw Quality Certification
for activities which rM impact wm= of the State including wetlands. The Mowing
comments are offered in response to thc. EA-
1.
Ibe DEM endo t .e COM • d1 .• altentative disposal method for protecting
quality.
rr • 0►�� •� •:�� • • •
N1tst a .:• . +.•• •ra , ..�� " � . • : .. �,t•�� � fitr..� •• �.r�t• rl • t ••� � :r
I If spprov4 this project may require. a 401 Certification issued far certain marnzmoe
dredgarg acdvi is the coastal navipbie wak= (WQC #133?RX requiring written
caac�rrmoe from DEM.
Tire COE is MM that endonenient of an EA by DEM would not predbde the denial of
a 401 Certssca loon apian Mm li�Or if vrrdw d inipac�ts have not been avaded and
mimrn. to the muimnm eft pmdc caibie.
Questions regarding the; 401 Cextif cation should be dkocced to Greg Price (733-1786) in
DEMs Water Qulty Environmental S(:idnces Branch.
Eavitoama" 5c eem Hnac$ - 4 QI Reedy Cie,* RcAd
Mi i x Actio. Earky-
RA=S;h, Nett C=OL= 27W7
FAX # [phone]
Ms -cyckmos pea ooesMW Ma

State of North C �pIlna
epartment Of t. ,trlronment, & 156VA
Health and Natural Resources 4
Division of Coastal Management r*A
Jdnnes S. Hunt, Jr., Goven-Kw - : r`ii1�■li■�1111�
Jom tan S. Howes, Secretary E' ---t N
Roger N. Schecter, Director Aagm 22,1945
Ce1x1 Robes 7. Speit arg
U.S. Army Corps; of Fn kmers
VV3lmi%wn Diskia
P.O. BOX 1890
VdmilWmt, NC 213402 -IM
REFERBNCB: CM -16 EA Maentesu = Dredging w6wwright Skwgh ftacadm of Dir 0W Medi 4
DCff Colonel 3pet wg:
IU StW of Nadia CaMIhm las completed to inview pUMUM w 15 C FX 930 SdVw C - awWsmncy for
Pedend Aawides, of ft refta+aroed *aMmut, dattad 7nne, 1945, for lite Waposed mumtemic a dredging of
Wainwright S1oUO wilt dapaasl an W2kMA& IdW4. The combmatian W disposal ahereaative dism add at the
site meefg in May is w be filed+ with dopoW of dre dredged mamW on the wSba SUY par dm of the
UIMd and aha efflum being directed dmadWe. wea wad towards else wager. Based Ww oar raview. we aaroe
WAh yaw ddeunwadw dw tk propowd seaway is cowdae at whh the North Ca:dina Coft"d %nageerent
Pia, Provided me follow* cotdidow w =L
I. To taotoi eMwat rtwoff at Site D. a low sand berm is to be cmswwW above stro meso Nab water
Bird,. T1ais and berm dtala be coostrumd sbovo file C0#AW wetlands vegaWw line ac,we0.
7. A 401 Watrr Quality Cwdficatiorr is received from dw NC Divbaiort of pxVk0allaMMIi Manager UIL
3. An approved w&meDmdm gad awim owfid pian is mqui,,W far the prgject. That Pk. MW be
srsbCninad to the NC Dividon of Lad Resourm at least 30 days prW w the orssa of Wat.
If B � i OW frad W or oordloiora, pinnae aamaot S*ve BOW" or Caroibre
1Vlaauaga=K at [phone],. Mw* you for yosr ConAdermim d fire KM* CwWwa
CWsaal M .
Siucerdy,
Roger N. Scd=cW
C= C'.tarta 7oaea, Division of Coand fit, Moteiraad City
Melba MoCiea. Pri cy sad Deveiopmw
Chryat BgMM NC Stas CWnn om
PaUI& McGloin, Division of Land Raomes
AM Qr000, Division of Envhm m=W lafanaseatera
BrwK Yahnb. US Amy Carps of Et>gineaa, Wihningtoa Distna
R.O. Box 27687, Rd k$-,. North Crarolna 27611-7687 TvioptWW 919.733-2'293 FSU( 419-733-1495
An Equd dPP Y AAttrr,dt m Acrim STOO ar WS Moyciew 10% pod!-cawxnwr Pier

Attachment F — 2006 CAMA Consistency Determination

�INA
- YFA
0
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jolles, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
September 2, 2006
William F. Adams, Chief
Environmental Resources Section
Wilmington District Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
SUBJECT: CD06-042 - Consistency Concurrence for the Proposed Maintenance Dredging of
Wainwright Slough and Reestablishment of Wainwright Island, Carteret County
(DCM#20060061)
Dear Mr. Adams:
The Division of Coastal Management received (July 10, 2006) a consistency determination from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) finding that the proposed maintenance dredging of Wainwright
Slough and reestablishment of Wainwright Island in Carteret County would be consistent with the
State's coastal management program. According to the project description the Corps proposes to
reestablish Wainwright Island to approximately size of I6-19 acres (approximately 9 feet high with
1:20 slopes). The project will involve the direct discharge of dredged material below the plane of
MHW until enough high ground is established. Once this is accomplished discharge will be conducted
consistent with the 1995 EA/FONSI (CD95-16).
North Carolina's coastal zone management program consists of, but is not limited to, the Coastal Area
Management Act, the State's Dredge and Fill Law, Chapter 7 of Title 15A of North Carolina's
Administrative Code, and the land use plan of the County and/or local municipality in which the
proposed project is located. It is the objective of the Division of Coastal Management (DCM) to
manage the State's coastal resources to ensure that proposed Federal activities would be compatible
with safeguarding and perpetuating the biological, social, economic, and aesthetic values of the State's
coastal waters.
To solicit public comments, DCM circulated a description of the proposed project to State agencies
that would have a regulatory interest. No comments asserting that the proposed activity would be
inconsistent with the State's coastal management program were received. The comments received
have been attached for reference.
DCM has reviewed the submitted information pursuant to the management objectives and enforceable
policies of Subchapters 15A NCAC 07H and 15A NCAC 07M of Chapter 7 of Title 15A of North
Carolina's Administrative Code which are a part of the State's certified coastal management program
400 Commerce Avenue, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557-3421
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity'k Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled 1 10% Post Consumer Paper

and concurs that the proposed Federal activiry, as conditioned below, is consistent, to the maximum
extent practicable, with the, enforceable polic:i.es of North Carolina's coastal management program.
In order to be found consistent with Norrh Carolina's coastal management program, DCM
requires that dredging operations no,: be underaken from April l" to Sept 30`'' of any year to
protect the migrE,tion of white shrima unless agreed to by the North Carolina Division of
Marine Fisheries. The "'Finding of No SlgnijFicant Impact for Maintenance Dredging,
Wainwright Slough, Waterway Connecting Pa.mlico South and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret
County, North Carolina" (August 1595) accepted the requirement not to dredge from
November 1st through March 31" of any year.
• In order to be found consistent with North Carolina's coastal management program, DCM
requires that dredging and disposal operations be conducted consistent with the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality X101 Water Quality Certification (#061064) issued on July
28, 2006.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) requests that dredging operations be
avoided, if possible, during the colonial bird nesting period of April I" to August 31" of any year.
Additionally, the NCWR,-- requests, if possible, that the; reestablished slope of Wainwright Island be in
the range of 1:25 through 1:30 rather than the proposed 1:20 to further facilitate bird nesting.
Should the proposed action be modified, a revised consistency determination could be necessary. This
might take the form of eith--r a supplemental consistency determination pursuant to 15 CFR 930.46, or
a new consistency determination pursuant to 15 CFR 930.36. Likewise, if further project assessments
reveal environmental effec-,s not previously considered by the proposed development, a supplemental
consistency certification may be required. If you have any questions, please contact Stephen Rynas at
252-808-2808. Thank you for your consideration of the North Carolina Coastal Management
Program.
Cc: Charles S. Jones, Division of Coastal Management
Maria Tripp, NC Wildlife R -sources Commission
Noelle Lutheran. NC Division of Water Quality
Mike Street, NC Division of Marine Fisheries
Tere Barrett, Division of Coastal Management
Sincerely,
Doul; Huggett
Manager, Major Permits and Consistency Unit
Page- 2

A111F, - 1
117
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, -Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
July 13, 2006
TO: John Fear
NC National Estuarine Research Reserve
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, NC 28557-3421
FROM: Stephen Rynas, AICP; Federal Consistency Coordinator
SUBJECT: Consistency Determination Submission for the Proposed Maintenance Dredging of
Wainwright Slough and Reestablishment of Wainwright Island (DCM#20060061)
LOCATION: . Wainwright Island, Northeast of Cedar Island and Southwest of Portsmouth Island, Core
Sound, Carteret County, North Carolina
The above listed document is being circulated for review and comment by August 4, 2006. Your
responses will assist trs in determining whether the proposed project would be consistent with the State's
Coastal Management Program. If the proposed project does not conform to your requirements, please
identify the measures that would be necessary to brEng the proposed project into conformance. If you "
have any additional questions regarding the proposed project you may contact me at 252-808-2808 or
e-mail me at: "[e-mail]".
REPLY
No Comment.
This office supports the project as proposed.
Comments to this project are attached.
This office objects to the project as proposed.
Signed.T r f Date: <=
CORRECTIONS
Please identify any corrections, additions, or deletions that should be made in terms of contact information.
RETURN COMPLETED FORM
to
Stephen Rynas, Federal Consistency Coordinator
NC Division of Coastal Mana;ement
400 Commerce Avenue
i%torehead City, NC 28557-3421

qFx;
44, A _
NCDENRn
North CarolinaD =
Department of l_nv ronment and Natura esour es
Division of Coastal Management 9-
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Janes, Director ]p/ . i G. Ross Jr. Secretary
V
TO
FROM
SUBJECT
LOCATION
MEMORANDUM
July 13, 2006
Bonnie Divito
DCM - Coastal Engineer
DCM - Raleigh Office
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638
Stephen Rynas, AICP; Federal Consistency Coordinator
M 8nbaa City DCN1
Consistency Determination Strbm ssion for the Proposed Maintenance Dredging of
Wainwright Slough and Reestablishment or Wainwright Island (DCM#20060061).
Wainwright Island, Northeast of Cedar Island and Southwest of Portsmouth Island, Core
Sound, Carteret County, North Carolina
The above listed document is being circulated for , eview and comment by August 4, 2006. Your
responses will assist us in determining whether the proposed project would be consistent with the State's
Coastal Management Program. If the proposed pncje.:t does. not conform to your requirements, please
identify the measures that would be necessary to bring the proposed project into conformance. If you
have any additional questions regarding the proponed project you may contact me at 252-808-2808 or
e-mail meat: "Stephen.rynasCal ncmail_net".
REPLY
No Comment.
This office supports the project as proposed.
Comments to this project are attached.
This office oblec s to the pro ect as proposed.
Signed: A�%��' _ Date: v�Y
CORRECTIONS
Please identify any corrections. additions, or deletions tzat should be made in terms of contact information.
RETURN CO �fPLETED FORM
to
S,ephen Rynas. Federal Consistency Coordinator
NC Division of Coastal Nfanagement
400 Corrmerce Avenue
i4iorehead Ci y. NC 28557-3421

I Jr
VWA
•
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley,'Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
July 13, 2006
TO: Maureen Will
Planning
DCM Morehead City Office
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, NC 28557-3421
FROM: Stephen Rynas, AICP; Federal Consistency Coordinator
SUBJECT: Consistency Determination Submission for the Proposed Maintenance Dredging of
Wainwright Slough and Reestablishment of Wainwright Island (DCM#20060061)
LOCATION: Wainwright Island, Northeast of Cedar Island and Southwest of Portsmouth Island, Core
Sound, Carteret County, North Carolina
The above listed document is being circulated for review and comment by August 4, 2006. Your
responses will assist us in determining whether the proposed project would be consistent with the State's
Coastal Management Program. If the proposed project does not conform to your requirements, please
identify the measures that would be necessary to bring the proposed project into conformance. If you
have any additional questions regarding the proposed project you may contact me at 252-808-2808 or
e-mail me at: "stephen.rynas@ncmail. net"_
REPLY
No Comment.
This office supports the project as proposed.
Comments to this project are attached.
/his yoffice
�objects t the project as proposed.
Signed: 1 Date.� ,
CORRECTIONS
Please identify any corrections, additions, or deletions that should be made in terms of contact information.
RETURN COMPLETED FORM
to
Stephen Rynas, Federal Consistency Coordinator
NC Division of Coastal Management
400 Commerce Avenue
:Morehead City, NC 28537-3421

NCDEIN R
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Re s
Michael F. Easley, Governor Division of Marine Fisheries P. ,�, Director
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary _
MEMORANDUM
TO: Stephen Rynas
Federal Consistency Co rdina:or
FROM: Mike Streell-
DATE: July 21, 2006
X14;, (L/
ry OC
SUBJECT: Consistency - (Proposed Maintenance Dredging of Wainwright Slough and
Reestablishment of Wainwright, Island
DCM # 20060061 / Carteret County
Attached is the Divisions' reply for thE,, above referenced project. If you have any questions,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
MS/sw
3441 Arendell Street, P.O. Box 769, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.ncdmf.net NorthCarolina
An Equal opportunity / Affirmati to Action Employer - 50'= Recy,:led 1 10 post Consumer Paper ;VatunillJ

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley,,Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
July 13, 2006
TO: Mike Street
NCDENR = Division of Marine Fisheries
P.O. Box 769
Morehead City, NC 28557-0769
FROM: Stephen Rynas, AICP; Federal Consistency Coordinator
SUBJECT: Consistency Determination Submission for the Proposed Maintenance Dredging of
Wainwright Stough and Reestablishment of Wainwright Island (DCM#20060061)
LOCATION: Wainwright Island, Northeast of Cedar Island and Southwest of Portsmouth Island, Core
Sound, Carteret County, North Carolina
The above listed document is being circulated for review and comment by August 4, 2006. Your
responses will assist us in determining whether the proposed project would be consistent with the State's
Coastal Management Program. If the proposed project does not conform to your requirements, please
identify the measures that would be necessary to bring the proposed project into conformance. If you
have any additional questions regarding the proposed project you may contact me at 252-808-2808 or
e-mail me at: "stephen.rynas�ncmail.net".
j REPLY
No Comment.
This office supports the project as proposed.
Comments to this project are attached.
This office objects to the project as proposed.
Signed: �-irc� (`' G4�a�1 b'< <:�A_ Date: Ltt C1
CORRECTIONS
Please identify any corrections, additions, or deletions that should be made in terms of contact information.
RETURN COMPLETED FORM
to
Stephen Rynas, Federal Consistency Coordinator
NC Division of Coastal Ltanagement
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City. NC 28557-3421
D ! LLq I�,
,lUi_ 2 0 2006
i :,'

APPENDIX G - Statement of Project Support
From the National Audubon Society

AudubOn NORTH CAROLINA 774 i Market Street, Unit D
December 6, 2016
Robert Neal, P.E.
Moffatt & Nichol
272 N. Front Street, Suite 204
Wilmington, NC 2$401
Re: Wainwright Island
Dear Mr. Neal,
Wilmington, NC 28411-9444
Tel: 9 i o-686-752 -,
Fax: [phone]
www.ncaudubon.org
www.audubon.org
The National Audubon Society is aware of Cwte r County's plans to dredge approximately
40,000 CY of sand from Wainwright Slough in Pamlico Sound. We are also aware that the County
proposes to place the material on or adjacent to Wainwright Island, which is owned and managed by the
National Audubon Society.
The National Audubon Society supports the initiative to use the dredge material to enhance bird
nesting and foraging habitat on Wainwright Wand. We may provide additional comments pertaining to
the project after review of the detailed plans and permit application.
I understand that National Audubon Society will be provided 30 calendar days to provide any
additional comments from the time Carteret County provides a copy of the submitted application to the
Audubon Society.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or concerns.
Walker Golder
Dsrectm, Atlantic Flyway Coast Initiative

APPENDIX H — Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) Survey

Submerged Aquatic
Vegetation Survey Report
Wainwright Slough, NC
Presented to:
Carteret County
December 8, 2016
Prepared by:
moffatf & nichol
4700 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27609

Submerged Aquatic- Vegetation Survey Report
Table of Contents
I.
Introduction
........................................................,............................................................................ 3
2.
Methodology.......................................................,............................................................................5
3.
Results and Discussion
........................................,,........................................................................... 6
4.
Summary ..............,,..,,............................................,...........................................................................8
5.
References
..............,...................................,........................................... 9
......................
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 2

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report •
1. Introduction
Carteret County intends to dredge approximately 30,500 cubic meters (40,000 cubic yards) of material from
the federally authorized channel of Wainwright Slough, Ranges 2, 2A and 3, near Cedar Island, south Pamlico
Sound (Figure 1; Map 1 Appendix). Dredged sediment will be placed on the adjacent Wainwright Island. The
project will restore navigation depths to the authorized channel for recreational boating and commercial
fishing vessels. The channel will be dredged to -7 MLLW with an additional 0.6 meters (2 feet) of overdepth
tolerance, resulting in a maximum depth of disturbance down to -9 MLLW. The project maintains compliance
with the federal authorization for the channel. The sediment placement will be used to help create nesting
and foraging bird habitat by open placement of the material adjacent to Wainwright Island. Sediment
placement will occur over a maximum footprint of 4.2 hectares (10.5 acres) up to an elevation matching the
existing Wainwright Island. The slopes and grades of the material placement will be constructed to
encourage nesting and foraging bird activities to the extent reasonable.
Figure 1: Project Location Map
Moffatt & Nichol was contracted to perform a submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) survey in the general
vicinity of the 33 hectare (81.6 -acre) disposal site (Wainwright Island). Protocols used for this study were
provided by and discussed with the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (Gregg Bodnar) and
NOAA Fisheries Habitat Conservation Division (Ken Riley) prior to sampling. State and federal resource
agencies required the survey as a measure to help identify potential impacts the project may create for any
existing SAV within the proposed work areas.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 3

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report Carteret Ci
Site Description
Wainwright Island is a small dredge spoil island that is constantly subject to wave action and erosion. The
island is inundated much of the time with only a small portion of land (less 46 square meters [500 square
feet]) currently remaining above the water. The small remnant island is dominated by Spartina olterniflora.
Signs of bird use were evident as central areas of the island were trampled and covered in guano; no species
were noted during this sampling period.
Pamlico Sound is one of the largest estuaries in the United States (NCSU 2016). Offshore waters support a
diverse recreational and commercial fishery, with species such as red drum, speckled trout, blue crab,
oysters, and other shellfish often found in abundance. Fishing activity was noted in the project area during
the time of this study as evidenced by the presence of two pound nets extending across the island. Although
a detailed fishery assessment was not part of this study, mullet and cow nose rays were observed while
snorkeling in the area.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 4

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report Carteret County
2. Methodology
A Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping exercise was conducted to determine potential locations of
existing SAV based on high-resolution imagery. GIS was also used to establish the sampling regime for this
study. Transects were established in a north/south direction every 100 meters to cover the 32.4 -hectare (80 -
acre) area of interest, for a total of ten transects. Sampling locations were placed every 50 meters along each
transect. In areas of known SAV presence based on aerial imagery, transects were placed every 50 meters.
Starting points for the sample transects were randomly selected. In total, there were 87 sampling locations
established for field reconnaissance.
Percent cover and shoot density were the main SAV parameters noted in the survey. At each sampling
location, a metal garden rake was used to determine presence or absence of SAV. If SAV was found, three
0.25 -square -meter quadrats were randomly placed within the SAV beds and percent cover was estimated. All
SAV species in the quadrat were identified, shoots were counted, and other features in the area were noted,
including presence of shell or floating SAV debris.
The depth of the water at each sampling location was surveyed with a marked PVC pole. A water quality
sampling device (YSI Model 556) was used to sample water quality parameters (e.g. dissolved oxygen, pH,
salinity, and temperature) at the beginning of sampling effort. Pictures were taken to characterize the site
and provide photographic evidence of SAV presence.
Data collected in the field included:
• Survey date and time
• Location (latitude and longitude)
• Surveyors name
• Wind speed/direction
• Turbidity
• Tidal stage and tendency (i.e., flood or
ebb)
• Species present/absent
• Percent cover
• Shoot density
• Sediment type
• Depth
• Other prominent features (e.g. pound
nets, shell presence)
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 5

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report Carteret County
3. Results and Discussion
The SAV survey was conducted on September 21, 2016 by Moffatt & Nichol, with assistance from the North
Carolina Division of Coastal Management. Weather conditions were favorable throughout the entire
sampling period. Wind speeds were less than 5 mph out of the northeast and the day was mostly overcast
with storms to the north and east of the site. There was high turbidity in the Sound with approximately 0.3 -
meter (one -foot) of visibility during the sampling period. The tide was low in the morning and rising
throughout the sampling period; however the tidal range in this area is less than 1 meter (3 feet) and did not
affect sampling activities.
The sampling regime (Map 2 -Appendix) was loaded into a Trimble Global Positioning System (GPS) unit
(Geoexplorer 2008) that was used to direct the captain along transect lines to sampling points. At each
location, one person raked the bottom 3-4 times to feel for seagrass presence, one person used a PVC
measuring pole to conduct depth measurements, and the GPS location was marked. A majority of locations
were sampled from the boat. Presence or absence of SAV noted on aerial imagery and from raking sites was
confirmed through snorkeling surveys. Five locations contained SAV [G2-4, F2-3]; however, only 1-2 shoots
(<I cover) were found in only five quadrats sampled from those locations (Map 3 -Appendix). Shoal grass
(Halodule wrightii) was the only species noted. The shoots encountered were not growing and had senescent
leaves (Figure 2). All other sample areas had no signs of seagrass when raking from the boat. While
snorkeling to sample, reconnaissance revealed sparse presence of H. wrightii. One patch of eel grass (Zostera
marina) that found growing out of an eroded piece of marsh mud platform that seem to have come from the
adjacent island (Figure 2). There was floating H. wrightii in some of the sampling locations but this would be
expected, as there are records of large SAV beds to the east and west of the site (See Map 2 -Appendix).
Collected data is summarized and available in the Appendix.
Figure 2: Example of H. wrightii found at sampling locations near the
remnant Wainwright Island.
The sediment in most cases was sandy,
with some areas of mud that may have
been remnants of a nearby marsh
platform. While raking some locations
there was loose shell material as part of
the benthic material. Upon inspection,
oyster shell was the prominent loose
material type. Some depressions in the
sand had detrital SAV, mainly H. wrightii
that had settled. No rhizomes were
found in the quadrats in the sample area
or in sites noted during reconnaissance
surveys near Wainwright Island.
Substrate conditions do not appear to be
a limiting factor in seagrass
establishment. Species such as Halodule
wrightii can be found on a wide variety
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 6

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
of substrates ranging from silty mud to course sand with varying amounts of mud. Most bed maintenance
and new shoot production probably occurs through rhizome elongation irrespective of substrate conditions.
There were no anomalous results in this snapshot of water
Table 1: Water quality data collected
quality data that would indicate any reason for seagrass
Wainwright Slough, NC
absence (Table 1 provides summary data of water
Date/Time 9/21/16
temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and salinity). For the
10:30am
most part, conditions in the study area are conducive to
Water 26
supporting seagrasses. Optimum temperatures for H. wrightii
temperature (°C)
are similar to those of Thalassia, and range between 20 —
Dissolved oxygen 89.3
30oC (Phillips 1960), well within the range of temperatures at
N
the time of this survey (26oC). Halodule has been reported in
pH 6.21
abundance in salinities ranging from 12.0 - 38.5 ppt (Phillips
Salinity (ppt) 21.6
1960) — in line with the 21.3 ppt noted at the site. The pH of
water at the time of the survey does not appear to be a
limiting factor and is only relevant with respect to the plant's
ability to conduct photosynthesis; leaves of seagrasses have a low capacity for extracting inorganic carbon
under normal pH and salinity conditions, with photosynthesis limited by the availability of inorganic carbon
under various light conditions (Beer and Koch 1996).
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 7

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey ReportCarteret County
I �I
4. Summary
In summary, SAV presence was virtually non-existent in the sampling area around Wainwright Island. Only 1-
2 shoots (<1% cover) were found in five quadrats sampled during this investigation. There is no obvious
explanation for why SAV growth is limited in this portion of Pamlico Sound. About 80,000 hectares of marine
bottom are dominated by Halodule in Core and Pamlico Sounds in North Carolina, where Halodule occurs
away from the main body of its distribution farther south. The species is common in Texas and Florida (and
the Caribbean) but does not extend any farther north than Cape Hatteras (Ferguson et a/ 1993). Seagrass
distribution in the targeted study area may be affected by factors that affect seagrass composition and
distribution throughout its range including turbidity or sediment load in the water column and the
cumulative effect of increased turbidity and dredging and spoil disposal, boat propeller scarring, and shrimp
trawling.
Based on the results of this analysis, SAV populations are not expected to be impacted by proposed dredging
in Wainwright Slough and subsequent material placement on Wainwright Island.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 8

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report Carteret County III
S. References
Beer S, Koch E. 1996. Photosynthesis of marine macroalgae and seagrasses in globally changing CO2
environments. Marine Ecology Progress Series 141: 199-204
Ferguson, Randolph L., B.T. Pawlak, L.L. Wood. 1993. Flowering of the seagrass Halodule wrightii in North
Carolina, USA. Aquatic Botany, Volume 46, Issue 1, Pages 91-98
NC State University. 2016. Coastwatch. https://ncseagrant.ncsu.edu/coastwatch/previous-issues/2012-
2/summer-2012/the-Pamlico-sound-fishing-gem-of-north-carolina/. Accessed November 28, 2016.
Phillips RC. 1960. Observations on the ecology and distribution of the Florida seagrasses. Professional Paper
Series No. 2. Florida State Board Conserv Mar Lab, St. Petersburg, FL. Appendices
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 9

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report Carteret CountyII
Map Appendix
Map l: SA V Survey Location
Map 2: Sampling Regime, including transects and sampling locations
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 10

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Map 3: Field -sampled Survey Points and Survey Results
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 11

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report e
Photo Appendix
Photo 1: Remnant of Wainwright Island from the channel looking east. Note PVC poles marking
pound net.
Photo 2: Remnant patch of Wainwright Island. Existing channel to the right of this photo.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 12

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Photo 3: Zostera clump found growing on remnant marsh platform.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 13

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report Carteret County
Raw Data Appendix
Crew: Meg Goecker, Adam Efird,
Gregg Bodnar, Captain Billy
_ -- - ---------
Date: 09-21-2016
Adjacent shoreline:
remnants of Wainwright
Island near channel
Temp (oC): 26
DO & pH: 89.3; 6.21
Wind -----
Speed/direction:<5mph /
NE
Salinity (ppt): 21.6
Tide level: Low tide and rising
during sampling
Turbidity: High turbidity, no
Secchi taken
Transect
#, pt
Time
Picture
#
depth
(m)
% Cover by species
(Zm, Hw, Rm)
Notes
A10
9.32
1.2
sand j
A9
9.35
1
sand
A8
9.35
1
sand
A7
9.36
0.9
sand
A6
9.38
0.86
sand
A5
9.4
0.92
sand
A4
9.41
1.1
sand
A3
9.42
1.15
sand
A2
9.44
1.3
sand
Al
9.46
1.25
sand
B1
9.52
1.4
sand
B2
9.53
1.4
sand
B3
9.54
1.5
sand, shell, muddy- break
through hardpack
B4
9.56
1.4
muddy, shell
B5
9.58
1.3
muddy, sand
B6
9.59
0.8
sand
B7
10
0.9
sand
B8
10.01
1
sand
B9
10.02
1.1
sand
B10
10.03
1.2
sand
C9
10.05
1.1
sand
C8
10.06
0.9
sand
C7
10.07
0.8
sand
C6
10.09
0.8
sand
C5
10.11
0.8
sand
C4
10.12
1.3
sand, shell
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 14

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report Carteret County
Transect
#, pt
Time
Picture
#
depth
(m)
% Cover by species
(Zm, Hw, Rm)
Notes
C3
10.14
1.4
sand, shell
C2
10.15
1.5
sand/mud, shell
C1
10.17
1.6
can't reach, pound net - GPS
pt.
D1
10.18
1.7
can't reach
D2
10.19
1.7
can't reach
D3
10.2
1.25
sand/mud, shell
D4
10.21
1.2
sand
D5
10.22
1
sand, shell
D6
10.23
0.9
duck blind GPS, sand
D7
10.24
0.7
sand
D8
10.26
0.8
sand
D9
10.27
1
sand
E9
10.31
0.9
sand, grass floating
F9
10.33
0.8
sand
G9
10.34
0.8
sand, shell
G10
10.35
0.9
sand/mud, shell
H9
10.38
0.8
sand
110
10.39
0.8
sand
19
10.4
0.9
sand
18
10.41
1
sand
17
10.43
1.2
sand
16
1.2
sand, shell a lot
15
10.46
148-048
1.2
sand, shell
14
10.47
483
1.2
sand, shell, soft bottom
13
10.49
1.2
sand, close to marsh island -
Spartina scarp
12
10.52
484-487
1.6
muddier, can't reach with
rake
11
10.52
489-490
1.8
can't reach
11
10.55
1.6
sand, course, Hw floating
blades
J2
10.56
7.6 feet
can't reach
G1
11.04
5 feet
can't reach
G2
11.19
1.1
0
0
<1% Hw
single shoot, patch through
transect. Very sparse
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 15

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Transect
#, pt
Time
Picture
#
depth
(m)
% Cover by species
(Zm, Hw, Rm)
Notes
G3
11.22
1.2
0
0
<1% Hw
sandy layer with shell below
G4
11.3
1.1
0
0
<1% Hw
single shoot
F4
11.35
1
0
0
0
sand
F3
11.39
1.2
<1% Hw
0
0
two shoots Hw
F2
11.41
1.1
0
<1% Hw
0
in pound net lead
F5
11.56
1.2
sand, seagrass detritus
raked from bottom
E5
11.57
1.5
sand, shell
E6
1.4
sand, shell
F6
12.01
1.1
sand, seagrass detritus
raked from bottom
F7
12.02
1.1
sand, seagrass detritus
raked from bottom
E7
12.04
1.2
sand
E8
12.06
1.1
sand, detritus, picture of
mud
F8
12.08
1.1
sand
F8.5
12.1
1
sand
E8.5
12.12
1.3
sand
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 16

ATTACHMENT I — Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Assessment

Essential Fish Habitat
Assessment for Channel
Dredging and Wainwright
Slough Dredge Placement
Project
Carteret County, North Carolina
Prepared for:
Carteret County
Submitted to:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration Fisheries
December 6, 2016
Prepared by:
hdhq
moffatt & nichol
4700 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27609

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment •
Table of Contents
1. Introduction.................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Site Description.........................................................................................................................2
1.2 Project Description....................................................................................................................2
2. Description of Alternatives..........................................................................................................3
2.1 Alternative 1: No Action............................................................................................................3
2.2 Alternative 2: Applicant's Preferred Alternative — Maintaining navigability and restoring
WainwrightIsland.....................................................................................................................3
3. Essential Fish Habitat..................................................................................................................3
3.1 Habitat Elements.......................................................................................................................3
3.1.1 Estuarine Emergent Wetlands...............................................................................................5
3.1.2 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation/Seagrass..............................................................................5
3.1.3 Aquatic Bed (Tidal Freshwater)..............................................................................................6
3.1.4 Estuarine Water Column/Creeks............................................................................................6
3.1.5 Primary Nursery Areas........................................................................................................... 7
4. Managed Species.........................................................................................................................7
4.1 SAFMC, MAFMC, and NMFS-managed Species........................................................................7
4.1.1 Black Sea Bass (Centropristis striata)..............................................................................9
4.1.2 Bluefish............................................................................................................................9
4.1.3 Butterfish (Peprilus triacanthus).....................................................................................
9
4.1.4 Summer Flounder (Paralichthys dentatus).....................................................................9
4.1.5 Penaeid and Rock Shrimp (Penaeus spp. and Sicyonia spp.)..........................................9
4.1.6 Snapper Grouper Management Group.........................................................................10
4.1.7 Coastal Migratory Pelagics............................................................................................10
4.1.8 Highly Migratory Species..............................................................................................10
4.1.9 Spiny Lobster.................................................................................................................10
4.2 ASMFC-managed Species........................................................................................................11
4.3 NCDEQ-DMF............................................................................................................................11
5. Potential Impacts to EFH...........................................................................................................11
5.1 Short-term and Temporary Impacts........................................................................................12
Moffatt & Nichol I TOC

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment ! I •
5.2 Permanent and Long-term Impacts........................................................................................12
5.3 Managed Species Effects Determination................................................................................13
5.3.1 NCDEQ-DMF Managed Species Impacts.......................................................................15
6. Summary....................................................................................................................................15
7. Reference..................................................................................................................................16
Moffatt & Nichol I TOC

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
1. Introduction
Carteret County intends to dredge approximately 40,000 cubic yards (CY) of material from the federally
authorized channel of Wainwright Slough, Ranges 2, 2A, and 3, near Cedar Island, south Pamlico Sound
(Figure 1) in North Carolina. The purpose of this document is to assess impacts to essential fish habitat (EFH)
resulting from the project's Preferred Alternative, which includes placement of dredged sediment on the
adjacent Wainwright Island. The project will restore navigation depths to the authorized channel for
recreational boating and commercial fishing vessels.
Figure 1: Project Location Map
The Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 USC 1801 et seq.) requires the US
Secretary of Commerce to develop guidelines assisting regional fisheries management councils on the
identification and creation of management and conservation plans for EFH. Each council is required to amend
existing fisheries management plans (FMP) to include EFH designations and conservation requirements. The
act also requires federal agencies to consult with the Secretary of Commerce on all actions, or proposed
actions, authorized, funded, or undertaken by the agency that might adversely affect EFH.
All EFH is defined as "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth
to maturity" (16 USC 1802(10)). "Waters" include aquatic areas and their associated physical, chemical, and
biological properties that are used by fish and may include aquatic areas historically used by fish where
appropriate. "Substrate" includes sediment, hard bottom structures underlying the waters, and associated
biological communities. "Necessary" means the habitat is required to support a sustainable fishery and the
managed species' contribution to a healthy ecosystem. "Spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity"
Moffatt & Nichol Page 1

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment ( +
covers a species' full life cycle. The designation of EFH is required only for species or species units for which
councils have developed FMPs.
1.1. Site Description
Carteret County is in southeastern North Carolina within the Tidewater Region of the Atlantic Coastal Plain
physiographic province. Topography in the area consists of nearly level and gently sloping land that drains
primarily into Pamlico Sound, one of the largest estuaries in the United States (NCSU 2016). Wainwright
Slough is approximately five miles northeast of the Cedar Island Ferry Landing in Carteret County. The
channel connects Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, and Wainwright Slough serves as a conduit for
passage of commercial and recreational anglers between Beaufort Harbor and Pamlico Sound (Figure 1). The
survey area established for this study in which EFH habitat has been investigated is a 100 -acre area
encompassing the potential dredge disposal site (Wainwright Island) and adjacent waters immediately
surrounding the island. Wainwright Island is a small dredge spoil island that is constantly subject to wave
action and erosion. The island is inundated much of the time with only a small portion of land (less than 500
square feet) currently remaining above water. The small remnant island is dominated by Spartina
alterniflora.
1.2. Project Description
The proposed action responds to the following underlying needs:
Budget shortfalls in the USACE navigation maintenance program have led to significant shoaling of
Wainwright Slough due to no recent maintenance activities within the channel.
• Wainwright Slough has become impassible in some areas by commercial and recreational vessels.
There are potential economic, health, and safety impacts as a result.
• Wainwright Slough is the only marked navigable route for local fishing vessels in this area of Pamlico
Sound.
The project was authorized under the River and Harbor Act of 1899 (amended August 30, 1935). The channel
was originally dredged in 1935. Fifteen documented maintenance activities occurred in portions of the
channel through 1968, with occasional maintenance dredging occurring after 1968 on an as -needed basis
(USACE 1995a). The channel historically was dredged approximately once every three to four years, but due
to budget shortfalls in the US Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) navigation maintenance program, the channel
has not been dredged for many years. Historically, dredged material has been placed at the toe -of -the -bank
on the channel (east) side of Wainwright Island. Due to the disposal area's location, dredged material tends
to return to the channel in a relatively short amount of time. Historically, scoping and permitting
requirements for Wainwright Slough were managed and completed by the USACE Wilmington District - South
Atlantic Division, and culminated in an Environmental Assessment (EA) dated June 1995. A Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) for Maintenance Dredging at Wainwright Slough was issued in August 1995
(USACE 1995b). The EA and associated FONSI covered the action to place dredge material on the island's
non -channel side.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 2

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
2. Description of Alternatives
This section describes the alternatives evaluated for responding to the shoaling within the channel and the
disposal of dredge material to restore Wainwright Island. The analysis of alternatives is based on meeting the
project purpose and need as defined (restore commercial and recreational navigation through Wainwright
Slough to maintain and sustain economic benefits from the local commercial fishing industry, recreational
fishing, and local tourism), in addition to minimizing adverse environmental consequences. This EFH report
focuses on impacts resulting from the Preferred Alternative. The alternatives evaluated include:
• Alternative 1— No Action
• Alternative 2 — Applicant's Preferred Alternative — Maintaining navigability and restoring Wainwright
Island
2.1. Alternative 1: No Action
The "No Action" alternative involves maintaining existing conditions of the Wainwright Slough channel.
USACE has not been able to perform maintenance activities in the channel; therefore, navigation would
remain impassible and potentially dangerous in the future. The potential for economic, health, and safety
impacts would remain and possibly become more significant with time.
2.2. Alternative 2: Applicant's Preferred Alternative - Maintaining Navigability
and Restoring Wainwright Island
In an attempt to reestablish the channel navigability, Carteret County is seeking a permit that would allow
dredging and placement of materials to restore Wainwright Island.
Approximately 40,000 CY would be dredged from the federally authorized channel of Wainwright Slough,
Ranges 2, 2A, and 3, with sediment placement occurring adjacent to Wainwright Island. The dredging would
restore navigation depths to the authorized channel for recreational boating and commercial fishing vessels.
The channel would be dredged to -7 MLLW with an additional 2 feet of overdepth tolerance, resulting in a
maximum depth of disturbance down to -9 MLLW. The project maintains compliance with the channel's
federal authorization, and the sediment placement will be used to help create nesting and foraging bird
habitat by open placement of the material adjacent to Wainwright Island. Sediment placement will be
located on the west side of the existing island to reduce erosion back into the channel and will occur over a
maximum footprint of 10.5 acres up to an elevation matching the existing Wainwright Island.
3. Essential Fish Habitat
3.1. Habitat Elements
Pursuant to the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Public Law 94-265) and the
1996 amendments to the Act, known as the Sustainable Fisheries Act (Public Law 104-297), an EFH
consultation was requested by NOAA Fisheries for the proposed project. For the North Carolina coast, this
requires that EFH be identified for all fish species managed by the South Atlantic Fisheries Management
Council (SAFMC), the Mid -Atlantic Fisheries Management Council (MAFMC), and NOAA National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS). This EFH assessment's objective is to determine whether the actions for the
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 3

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
proposed project "may adversely affect" designated EFH for relevant managed fisheries species within the
proposed project area.
A list of EFH habitat types and their presence or absence in the project area is provided in Table 1.
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) is found in both SAV/seagrass and tidal freshwater (aquatic bed)
habitat categories. Habitats are described in more detail in the following sections.
Table 1: EFH Types Potentially Found in Project Area
EFH Type
Found in
PMat AM
Inshore
•
Estuarine emergent wetlands
Yes
•
Estuarine forested wetlands
No
•
Estuarine shrub/scrub (mangrove)
No
•
Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV)/Seagrass
Yes*
•
Oyster reef and shell bank
No
•
Intertidal flats/mud bottoms
No
•
Palustrine emergent and forested (freshwater)
No
•
Aquatic bed (tidal freshwater)**
Yes
•
Estuarine water column/creeks
Yes
Marine
•
Live/hard bottom
No
•
Coral and coral reef
No
•
Artificial/man-made reef
No
•
Sargassum
No
•
Water column
No
SAV was not found in the project area; however, potential SAV habitat is present in the general project
vicinity.
** Includes SAV in shallow areas.
Figure 2 (following page) depicts locations of EFH areas in Pamlico Sound within the proposed action area.
The EFH identified in the Fisheries Management Plans (FMP) amendments of the SAFMC that are in proximity
to this site include Estuarine Water Column/Creeks, Estuarine Emergent Wetlands, and Aquatic Beds (Tidal
Freshwater). Those identified in the MAFMC that are present within the project area include SAV/Seagrass
and Estuarine Water Column/Creeks. Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) are subsets of designated
EFH. Under the South Atlantic HAPC, SAV is a designated HAPC and can be found in proximity of the project
area.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 4

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment a •
Figure 2: EFH Area Locations
3.1.1. Estuarine Emergent Wetlands
Estuarine Emergent Wetland includes all tidal wetlands dominated by erect, rooted, herbaceous hydrophytes
(excluding mosses and lichens). These wetlands occur in tidal areas where salinity due to ocean -derived salts
is equal to or greater than 0.5 percent and that are present for most of the growing season during most
years. Perennial plants usually dominate these wetlands and vegetation cover is typically above 80 percent.
These wetlands are typically dominated by marsh grasses such as Spartina species, needlerush (Juncus spp.),
and narrow leaved cattail (Typha angustifolia). Estuarine emergent wetlands are nutrient -rich with high
primary productivity, allowing these habitats to support a diversity of fish, invertebrates, and coastal birds.
Managed fish species use these marshes during multiple life stages because they provide nursery habitat for
juveniles and foraging for adults. Estuarine emergent wetland habitat is present on the existing Wainwright
Island.
3.1.2. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation/Seagrass
The shallow waters (6 feet deep or less) of Pamlico Sound provide habitat and potential habitat for SAV beds.
NCMFC defines SAV habitat as area currently vegetated with one or more appropriate SAV species or has
been vegetated by one or more species within the past 10 growing seasons, as well as meets the average
growing conditions needed (water depth of 6 feet or less, average light availability [Secchi depth of one foot
or more], and limited wave exposure.
SAV habitats are typically rich in invertebrates and serve as important foraging areas, in addition to providing
many juvenile and adult fish refuge from predators. SAV also plays a role in stabilizing sediment, nutrient
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 5

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
cycling, reduction of wave energy, and provision of organic matter that supports complex food webs (North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission [NCWRC], 2005). For these reasons, SAV habitat is considered
Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) for several managed fish species. The distribution and
composition of SAV habitat is influenced by several factors; among the most important factors are salinity,
light, nutrient levels, and wave action.
Because SAV distribution, abundance, and density varies seasonally and annually in response to climatic
variability coupled with its sensitivity to other stressors, large-scale SAV changes may occur. Major threats to
SAV habitat include water quality degradation from dredging activities, excessive nutrient and sediment
loading, plus the emerging threat of accelerated sea level rise, barrier island stability, and increasing water
temperatures (Deaton et al. 2010).
Moffatt & Nichol was contracted to perform a submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) survey in the general
vicinity of the 100 -acre disposal site (Wainwright Island). Protocols used for this study were provided by and
discussed with the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (Gregg Bodnar) and NOAA Fisheries
Habitat Conservation Division (Ken Riley) prior to sampling. State and federal resource agencies required the
survey as a measure to help identify potential impacts the project may create for any existing SAV within the
proposed work areas.
SAV presence was virtually non-existent in the sampling area around Wainwright Island. Only 1-2 shoots (<1%
cover) were found in five quadrats sampled during this investigation. There is no obvious explanation for why
SAV growth is limited in this portion of Pamlico Sound, although significant wave exposure and movement of
water was observed in the field. Wave exposure in shallow water could possibly affect SAV populations.
About 309 square miles of marine bottom are dominated by Halodule wrightii in Core and Pamlico Sounds in
North Carolina, where Halodule occurs away from the main body of its distribution farther south. The species
is common in Texas and Florida (and the Caribbean) but does not extend any farther north than Cape
Hatteras (Ferguson et al 1993). Seagrass distribution in the targeted study area may be affected by factors
that affect seagrass composition and distribution throughout its range, including turbidity or sediment load in
the water column and the cumulative effect of increased turbidity and dredging and spoil disposal, wave
exposure, boat propeller scarring, and shrimp trawling. Even though SAV presence was virtually non-existent,
it is recognized that SAV habitat potential is present in the general vicinity of the project and throughout
Pamlico Sound.
3.1.3. Aquatic Bed (Tidal Freshwater)
Aquatic bed habitats in the project area include the soft bottom substrate of the Pamlico Sound. This habitat
type is comprised of sand as well as inorganic muds, organic muds, and peat. Nutrients are typically provided
by riverine sources and transported via wind tides in addition to lunar tidal exchange. The abundance of
benthic macroalgae in this habitat supports a high diversity of invertebrates that are an important fishery
food source. Shallow areas less than 6 feet deep within this habitat type can also support SAV populations
(Street et al. 2005).
3.1.4. Estuarine Water Column/Creeks
The estuarine water column extends from the estuarine bottom to the surface waters and is especially
important as it directly affects all other estuarine aquatic habitats (NCWRC 2005). This habitat is
characterized by the oligohaline (estuarine) waters present in Pamlico Sound with seasonally variable salinity
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 6

Essential (Fish Habita t Assessment .
levels. Distinct zones within the water column can be defined by parameters such as salinity, temperature,
and dissolved oxygen. Water column zonation continually fluctuates and is a function of tidal dynamics,
season, nutrient levels, and ocean proximity. Fish and shellfish often exploit distinct resources within the
water column based on species-specific diet, behavior, and morphology. For example, pelagic fishes (live
higher in the water column) and demersal fishes ;bottann dwelling) have adapted to take advantage of these
different habitats, and favorable spamming and feeding corditions can occur at varying locations at different
tines of the year.
3.1.5. Primary Nursery Areas
While not a single specific EFH type, Primary NurK-ery Areas (PNA) are composed of several EFH types and are
state -designated waters that are used by marine and estuarine fishes and invertebrates during early
development. Secondary Nursery Areas (SNA) typically occur in the lower reaches of streams and bays.
Nursery areas are designated and regulated by Ni: Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF) and NCWRC in some
areas. These areas are typically shallow waters w�t:h soft bottom substrate that are surrounded by marshes
and wetlands. The abundance of refuge, foraging habitat, and food resources present in these areas result in
the successful development of many sub -adult organisms (Beck et al. 2000). Nursery areas are considered
HAPC for several managed fish species. There are no designated Primary or Secondary Nursery Areas within
the project area.
4, Managed Species
1. SAFMC, MAF C, and LNIFS- t,anagt:-! i Species
SAFMC and MAFMC have developed FMPs for several species, or species units (SAFMC 2008; MAFIVIC 2008),
although not all of these species are found in the project area. Highly migratory species' FMPs and Atlantic
billfish FMPs were developed by the Highly Migratory Species Management Unit, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, NMFS (NMFS, 1999a; NMFS, 199910). As par; of each FMP'the council designates not only EFH, but
also HAPC, a subset of EFH that refers to specific locations required by a life stage(s) of that managed species.
Table 2 presents the species or species units for which EFH and/or HAPC exist, and the occurrence of these
species within the project area.
The sections that follow describe managed species that are found in the project area and their associated
EFFIs.
Table 2: Project Area Managed Species, EFIy' and iLIAPiC
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 7

Essential Fish Habitat AssessmentNOAA Fisheries
Butterfish (Peprilus
Yes
Eggs, Larvae,
Estuarine Water
triacanthus)z
Juveniles, Adults
Column/Creeks
None
Spiny dogfish (Squalus
acanthius)
No
None
None
None
Longfin squid (Loligo pealei)
No
None
None
None
Monkfish (Lophius americanus)
No
None
None
None
Ocean quahog (Artica islandica)
No
None
None
None
Estuarine Water
Summer Flounder (Paralichthys
Larvae, Juveniles,
Column/Creeks, SAV,
dentatus)
Yes
Adults
Aquatic Beds, Estuarine
SAV*
Emergent Wetlands
Scup (Stenotomus chrysops)
No
None
None
None
Shortfin squid (!Ilex
illecebrosus)
No
None
None
None
Tilefish (Lopholatilus
chamaeleonticeps)
No
None
None
None
South Atlantic Fisheries Management Council (SAFMC)
Penaid and Rock Shrimp
Estuarine Water
(Penaeus spp. and Sicyonia
Yes
Larvae, Juveniles,
Column/Creeks, SAV,
None
spp)
Adults
Aquatic Beds, Estuarine
Emergent Wetlands
Estuarine
Estuarine Water
Water
Snapper grouper management
Yes 3
Larvae, Juveniles,
Column/Creeks, SAV,
Column/
unit
Adults
Estuarine Emergent
Creeks, SAV,
Wetlands
Estuarine
Emergent
Wetlands
Golden crab (Chaeceon fenneri)
No
None
None
None
Spiny Lobster (2 Species)
Estuarine Water
Spiny lobster (Panulirus argus)
Eggs, Larvae,
Column/Creeks, SAV,
Slipper lobster (Scyllarides
Yes
Juveniles, Adults
Aquatic Beds, Estuarine
None
nodifer)
Emergent Wetlands
Coastal migratory pelagic
Yes 4
Larvae, Juveniles,
Estuarine Water
species
Adults
Column/Creeks
None
Sargassum (Sargassum spp.)
No
None
None
None
Calico scallop (Agopecten
gibbus)
No
None
None
None
Coral, coral reef, and live/hard
bottom habitat
No
None
None
None
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
Highly migratory species
Yes (Bluefin
Estuarine Water
(sharks, tuna, swordfish)
Tuna)
Juveniles
Column/Creeks, SAV,
None
Aquatic Beds
Billfish
No
None
None
None
Source: MAFMC, 2008; SAFMC, 2008; NMFS, 1999a, 1999b.
1 No EFH or HAPC designated for black sea bass by MAFMC is located in the project area; however, black sea bass are
included in the snapper grouper management unit under SAFMC.
2 No EFH or HAPC designated for butterfish by MAFMC is located in the project area; however, because of catch
records of butterfish, the estuarine waters of Pamlico Sound are included as "inshore" EFH.
3 Species from this management unit that have been recorded near the project area include black sea bass, red
grouper, and Atlantic spadefish.
4 Spanish mackerel is the only species from this management unit recorded in the vicinity of the project area.
* Potential SAV habitat; SAV presence was not noted during field surveys
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 8

Essential Fish Habitat AssessmentNOAA Fisheries
4.1.1. Black Sea Bass (Centropristis striata)
The black sea bass is a demersal species found from Maine to Florida that are opportunistic feeders and
accept a variety of food sources. As juveniles and adults, this species is associated with submerged structures
in estuarine and marine waters. Spawning occurs offshore from May to October along the continental shelf in
an area extending from southern New England to North Carolina. Eggs are generally hatched on the
continental shelf near large estuaries, but eggs have also been found in bays in North Carolina. Juvenile Black
Sea Bass enter estuaries during late spring and ea -ly summer to forage on invertebrate prey and small fish.
This species is typically not found in the Pamlico S:)und, but: fishing reports from NCDMF have shown
presence of this species in the last 10 years. MAFPAC does rot currently designate any EFH or HAPC areas for
black sea bass within the project area, however, SAFMC considers black sea bass one of the 70 species
included in the Snapper Grouper Management Unit. All tidal and estuarine waters, including emergent
wetlands, estuarine water column and potential SAV habitat are designated EFH for this species. Additionally,
potential SAV habitat within the project area is co ,isidered HAPC for this species.
4.1.2. Bluefish
Bluefish are primarily pelagic fish found over the continental shelf (NOAA 2016a). Adults are piscivorous (fish -
eating) and feed on small bait fish in inshore and estuarine habitats. While not typically found in oligohaline
waters such as Pamlico Sound, bluefish do occur within the project area based on nearby fishing records.
Spawning takes place on the continental shelf at different times of the year depending on location, and eggs
are not found in estuarine wagers. However, as larvae develop, they may cross into inshore and estuarine
waters.
There are no EFH areas designated for eggs and la -vae within the study area, but EFH exists forjuveniles and
adullts within the estuarine water column/creeks. alo HAPC for bluefish adults and juveniles has been
identified in this area.
4.1.3. Butterfish (Peprilus tiriacanthus)
Butterfish spawning occurs offshore, but eggs and larvae can be found in estuaries. All life stages may make
use of estuaries during growth. MAFMC has designated both inshore and offshore EFH for all life stages of
butterfish. Inshore EFH is defined as the estuarine "mixing zone" where fresh and saline waters converge.
Appropriate potential habitat exists within the project area for butterfish and local fishing records indicate
butterfish have been documented in Pamlico Sour d; therefore, the estuarine water column has been
included as EFH for this specie.
4.1.4. Summer Flounder (Paralichthys dentatus)
The summer flounder is estuari ne-dependent and is found along the Atlantic coast from Maine to Florida.
Spawning occurs from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras between October and May along the continental shelf in
waters 30 to 60 feet deep. In later winter and spring, larvae enter estuaries to develop into juveniles. In the
fall, juveniles migrate to the open ocean. Adult surnmer flounder utilize estuaries on a seasonal basis.
MAFMC designates all tidal estuarine waters, including estuarine emergent wetlands, potential SAV habitat,
and aquatic beds as EFH for all life stages except el;i;s. SAV habitat that does occur in Pamlico Sound is also
considered a HAPC for summer flounder.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 9

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
4.1.5. Penaeid and Rock Shrimp (Penaeus spp. and Sicyonia spp.)
Penaeid shrimp (white, pink, and brown shrimp) are estuarine -dependent species of commercial and
ecological significance. Penaeid shrimp spawn offshore where both larval and postlarval development occurs.
Currents carry postlarval shrimp into estuaries, where they are distributed based on salinity and substrate
preferences. As shrimp grow, they migrate to higher salinity areas before returning to offshore spawning
areas. All tidal and estuarine waters within the project area, including estuarine emergent wetlands,
potential SAV habitat and aquatic beds are designated as EFH for penaeid shrimp.
4.1.6. Snapper Grouper Management Group
The Snapper Grouper Management Group includes more than 70 species that are managed by the SAFMC.
Red grouper, Atlantic spadefish, and black sea bass are species within this group that have been documented
near or within the project area. Black sea bass have been previously discussed, and have been documented
in Pamlico Sound.
Red grouper spawn from early winter to late spring and occur in shallow nearshore reef habitats. Juveniles
move to deeper waters at sexual maturity and movements of adults are extensive, but are not well known.
While not typically found in oligohaline waters, local fishing reports have documented presence of this
species within Pamlico in or near the project area.
Atlantic spadefish are opportunistic bottom feeders that utilize a variety of brackish water and nearshore
habitats. Spawning occurs from May to September and juveniles are typically found in estuarine waters while
adults are typically found in nearshore areas. Atlantic spadefish have been documented in local fishing
reports in or near the project area.
4.1.7. Coastal Migratory Pelagics
The only coastal migratory pelagic species found near the project area is the Spanish mackerel. Spanish
mackerel spawn from May to September (SAFMC 1998), with eggs and larvae using pelagic habitats and
juveniles moving into estuaries for use as nursery areas. While typically not found in oligohaline waters such
as Pamlico Sound, Spanish mackerel do occur in the area based on commercial fishing data. Estuarine water
column/creek habitats are designated as EFH by SAFMC in the management of this unit because prey items
for species in this unit are typically estuarine dependent. There are no HAPCs designated by SAFMC for
Spanish mackerel in the project area.
4.1.8. Highly Migratory Species
Atlantic bluefin tuna juveniles are the only highly migratory species with EFH in the project area (NOAA
2009). Bluefin tuna generally spawn in the Gulf of Mexico, continuing to the mid -east coast of Florida where
they remain until development into juveniles. Juveniles can be found from North Carolina waters to coastal
waters in the northeastern United States. Adults are pelagic and can be found from the Gulf of Mexico to
waters off the northeastern United States coast. The project area and general project vicinity contains EFH
for juvenile bluefin tuna in the estuarine water column/creeks, potential SAV areas, and aquatic bed habitats.
4.1.9. Spiny Lobster
Spiny lobster and slipper lobster have EFH for all life stages within the project area. EFH includes estuarine
water column/creeks, aquatic bed, and SAV (NOAA 2016b). The spiny and slipper lobster larvae are typically
found in open ocean in the epipelagic zone of the Caribbean Sea, Gulf of Mexico, and the straits of Florida.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 10

Essential Fish Habitat Carteret County j N tAA Fisheries
Post -larvae and juveniles occupy shallow waters of bays, lagoons, and reef flats, habitats supported by the
production of seagrasses, benthic algae, phytoplankton, and detritus. As the lobsters increase in size, they
move towards deeper waters in bays, reefs, and nearshore areas. As adults, they can be found in deeper
waters both nearshore and off=shore.
4.2. ASMFC-managed Species
The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASIViFC) coordinates additional conservation and
management of states' shared nearshore fishery resources. Member states include North Carolina, South
Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode
Island, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Maine. Species managed by the ASMFC that are found in the
Pamlico Sound and nearshore waters include: American eel (Anguilla rostrata), Atlantic croaker
(Micropogonias undulatus), Atlantic menhaden (B,-evoortio tyrannus), black sea bass, blueback herring (Alosa
aestivalis), bluefish, red drum ,(Sciaenops ocellatus), spot (Leiostomus xanthurus), spotted sea trout
(Cynoscion nebulosus), southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma), striped bass (Morone saxatilis), summer
flounder, and weakfish (Cynoscion regalis).
4.3. NCDEQ-DMF
The Fisheries Reform Act of 1997 (FRA) prompted NCDEQ-DMF to begin the process of developing FMPs for
all commercially or recreationally important species and fisheries that are found in state marine or estuarine
waters, with the goal of ensuring the long-term sustainability of these fisheries. Species with existing or in -
development management plans include: river herring [blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis) and alewife (Alosa
pseudoharengus)], shrimp (Penaeus spp.), striped pass, southern flounder, blue crab (Callinectes sapidus), red
drum, oysters (Crassostrea virginica), 'hard clams (blercenaria mercenaria), bay scallop (Argopecten
irradians), kingfish (Menticirrhus americanus), and striped mullet (Mugul cephalus).
S. Potential Impacts to EFH
Historic and present stressors to fish and EFH communities in the Pamlico Sound have occurred as a result of
fluctuations in nutrient loading, turbidity, and salinity as well as increased fishing pressures. Turbidity and
wave exposure are important factors in affecting the distribution of habitat quality near the project area.
Impacts created by the Preferred Alternative are primarily localized short-term impacts and will not have a
permanent additive effect on fish and EFH stressors within the project area.
Actions taken during project design and implementation phases will ensure that the Applicant's Preferred
Alternative avoids or minimizes direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to identified essential fish habitat and
associated species in proximity to the project. The work will be conducted using a hydraulic dredge and
pipeline system. The work will he conducted on a 24-hour day schedule with completion expected prior to
April 1, 2017. The material placement site will be constructed to discourage sediment from flowing back into
the navigation channel. The contractor will erect temporary sand dikes along the flow way of the placement
site to help direct the dredge slurry away from the navigation channel. The dikes will be constructed from the
initial dredge material to reduce disturbance of the pBacement area. The dikes will be extended and
maintained in a fashion to help limit the turbidity plume leaving the work area.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 11

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
5,1. Short-term and Temporary Impacts
Construction associated with the Preferred Alternative would take place in Pamlico Sound, and include
channel dredging and the subsequent placement of dredged material around Wainwright Island.
Construction activities will produce noise, turbidity, and siltation, thereby creating short-term, localized
impacts to EFH identified in the project area and possibly to targeted management species. Dredging
activities could create a short-term decrease in dissolved oxygen. Many, if not all, of the fish species with EFH
within the project area would be expected to escape the area during construction activities, and construction
disturbances would not be expected to be lethal to any fish species with EFH within the project area.
At the ecosystem level, increased turbidity could result in reduced ecosystem productivity (ability of the
ecosystem to produce and export energy) and nursery value by elimination of organisms that cannot easily
flee construction activities, and the displacement of mobile organisms. For individual organisms, turbidity can
impair visual predation success, predator avoidance, and an organism's ability to take in oxygen through
clogging of respiratory organs. Siltation could alter SAV and invertebrate animal communities within the
project area. Again, these potential impacts are expected to be short term and temporary in nature. Mobile
animals would likely avoid the area during the construction phase, but likely return once construction is
complete and pre -construction conditions return. Benthic organisms would likely recover rapidly post -
construction, as most benthic communities (including SAV) are resilient and recolonize quickly after short-
term impacts (Ellis 2009, Dernie 2003).
5,2. Permanent and Long -Term Impacts
While dredging construction activities and placement of dredged material will create short-term and
localized impacts on EFH within the project area, long-term and permanent impacts are expected to be
minimal for the Preferred Alternative. The area has been dredged historically and EFH resources such as SAV
are limited to non-existent based on field surveys. Growth of SAV is affected by salinity, wave exposure,
nutrient concentrations, Fight, and turbidity. The Preferred Alternative would have no effect on salinity,
nutrient concentrations, light, and wave exposure. During a SAV survey conducted in September 2016, only
single shoots of Halodule wrightii were found in a few locations within the project area. Coverage of SAV was
limited to less than 1% of the surveyed area. Wave exposure appeared to be one of the most significant
limiting factors for SAV in the surveyed area based on field observations. The nearest state -mapped SAV
locations (APNEP/NCDEQ 2011) are more than 1,000 feet from the proposed placement area of dredged
material around Wainwright Island.
Dredged material would likely settle and stabilize quickly in the placement area. In addition, no negative
impacts to the area containing the existing Wainwright Slough channel would be expected, as these channels
are generally lower in productivity due to low levels of light penetration and a disturbed bottom.
Dredge material placement within the proposed footprint of the restored island will displace any benthic
habitat located within this 10.5 -acre area, and create temporary impacts to the existing emergent estuarine
wetland located on the current Wainwright Island. However, the re-establishment of a 10.5 -acre island will
create significantly more emergent wetland habitat than currently exists at the site.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 12

Essential Fish Ha bitat Assessment
53. Managed Species Effects Determination
The Preferred Alternative should create minimal localized and short-term effects within the project area for
identified managed species. Most species are motile and should be able to avoid construction activities
during the construction phase of the project. This section evaluates impacts to SAFMC, MAFMC, NMFS, and
NCDEQ-DMF managed species, but does not include an evaluation of impacts to ASMFC-managed species.
ASMFC is primarily a deliberative body, coordinating the conservation and management of states' shared
fishery resources. In general, short-term impacts include potential mortality in earlier life stages for managed
species, and some limited displacement and habitat disturbance in later life stages. Long-term impacts are
minimal and generally involve the potential disruption of dispersion within Pamlico Sound for earlier life
stages of managed species. Table 3 providers a surimary of both short-term and long-term potential impacts
for SAFMC, MAFMC, and NMFS-managed species within the project area.
Tatp/e 3: Potential Short- and Long -Term Impacts ro Project Area E:FH Species
Species
impact type
Eggs '
LarVae
Juveniles
-Mortality from
5twrt-Term
N/A
Mortality from
constructionDisplacement
and
1p2icts
construction
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
Blank sea bass (Centropristis
and habitatdisturbance
striota)
---
--
Limited potential
toctg-Term
N/A
disruption of
N/A
N/ A
N/ A
impacts
in
Pamlico Sound
-Mortality from
SJ Tor
N/Aement
N/A
construction
-Displac
Displacement and
Bluefish (Pomatomus
and habitat
habitat disturbance
salotrix)
disturbance
Er ecr
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
-Mortality from
S11oft-Te
Mortality from
Mortality from
construction
Displacement and
impacts
i
construction
construction
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
v
and habitat
disturbance
Butterfish (Peprilus
Low density in
triacanthus) €
project area,
Low density in
but limited
project area, but
LoWTecm
potential
limited potential
N/A
N/A
f" impacts
dlisruption of
c'isruption of
dispersion in
dispersion in
IJ
Pamlico 5ourd
Pamlico Sound
-Mortality from
-Mortality from
Summer Flounder
? SE►�srt Ter�t
construction
construction
Displacement and
(Pa•alichthys dentatus)
Impacts
N/A
-Displacement
acemt
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
and
and habitat
disturbance
disturbance
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 13

Essential Fish Habitat AssessmentNOAA Fisheries
Species
Impact Type
Eggs
Larvae
Juveniles
Adults
Long -Term
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
impacts
-Mortality from
-Mortality from
Short -Term
construction
construction
Displacement and
Impacts
N/A
-Displacement
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
Penaid and Rock Shrimp
and habitat
and habitat
(Penaeus spp. and Sicyonia
disturbance
disturbance
spp-)
Limited potential
Long -Term
N/A
disruption of
N/ A
N/ A
Impacts
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
-Mortality from
-Mortality from
Short -Term
construction
construction
Impacts
N/A
-Displacement
-Displacement
-Displacement and
and habitat
and habitat
habitat disturbance
Snapper grouper
disturbance
disturbance
management unit
Limited potential
Long -Term
N/A
disruption of
N/A
N/A
Impacts
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
-Mortality from
Short -Term
Mortality from
Mortality from
constructionDisplacement
and
Impacts
construction
construction
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
and habitat
Spiny Lobster (2 Species)
disturbance
Spiny lobster (Panulirus
ar us
9 �
Low density in
Low density in
Slipper lobster (Scyllarides
project area,
project area, but
nodi er
f �
Long -Term
but limited
limited potential
Impacts
potential
disruption of
N/A
N/A
disruption of
dispersion in
}
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
P
Pamlico Sound
Short -Term
N/A
Mortality from
DisplacementDisplacement
and habitathabitat
and
Impacts
construction
disturbance
disturbance
Coastal migratory pelagic
species
Limited potential
N/A
disruption of
N/A
N/A
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
Displacement
N/A
N/A
and habitat
N/A
Highly migratory species
Long -Term
disturbance
(sharks, tuna, swordfish)
Impacts
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 14

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment' Cary.., ► •a
5.3.1. NCDEQ-DMF Managed Species Impacts
In addition to the SAFMC, MAFMC, and NMFS-managed EFH species, NCDEQ-DMF has developed or is in the
process of developing FMPs for many species four -d in North Carolina waters, including red drum, southern
flounder, striped bass, blue crab, striped mullet, hard clams, and kingfish. Impacts to flounder are similar to
impacts listed for summer flounder in the previous table. Potential impacts to red drum, kingfish, river
herring, striped bass, hard clams, bay scallops, oysters,, blue crabs, and striped mullet are addressed below.
The red drum is an estuarine -dependent species with foraging areas throughout Pamlico Sound. Red drum
typically arrive in Pamlico Sound in the spring, with a second arrival often occurring in the fall as fish begin a
southerly migration from Mid -Atlantic States. Both juvenile and adult red drum may occur in the project area
but are mobile enough to avoid construction activities. Kingfish have a similar life history to the red drum in
Pamlico Sound. Juveniles and adult kingfish may occur in the project area, but are a highly mobile species,
therefore impacts will be minimal.
River herring and striped bass are anadromous fish whose adult life stages live in lower estuaries and marine
waters. Juveniles and adults are mobile enough to avoid construction disturbance in the project area.
Potential impacts to hard clams in the project area include increased short-term turbidity and siltation that
could clog the respiratory and feeding structures of hard clams that may result in limited mortality. Mortality
of hard clams in the direct area of dredge placement would be high, as clams are sessile and would not be
able to escape construction impacts. In this area, l-abitat alteration for the hard clam would be permanent.
Impacts to oysters and bay scallops would be similar to hard clams, however, no live oysters or bay scallops
were observed during a field visit in September 2016.
Blue crabs occupy various marine and estuarine habitats throughout their life cycle. Mating occurs in
estuaries, followed by spawning near coastal inlets from April to June and August to September in North
Carolina. Weather, water quality conditions, proximity to inlets, wind direction, and hours of dark flood tide
impact breeding productivity in blue crabs. impacts affecting; eggs .and larvae from noise, turbidity, and
siltation may occur but should be short term.luveniles and adults .are mobile and would be able to escape
construction disturbance.
Striped mullet are catadromous (move from freshwater to ocean to spawn) species that live in fresh and
estuarine waters until moving to high salinity estuarine and nearshore marine waters to spawn in winter and
early spring. Larvae develop in marine offshore environments, and would not be present in Pamlico Sound.
Immature striped mullet move to estuaries during the winter and generally occupy estuarine waters until
spawning. Juveniles and adults may be present near the project area, but are mobile and would be minimally
impacted by turbidity, siltation, and noise resulting from construction activities.
6. Summary
The Preferred Alternative includes the dredging of approximately 40,000 CY from a federally authorized
channel and placement of that dredge material to restore approximately 10.5 acres of emergent salt marsh
habitat at Wainwright Island. The Preferred Alternative would likely result in primarily short-term, localized,
and temporary adverse effects to EFH and managed species, but project design, implementation, and
construction measures under consideration would keeip these impacts to a minimum, as well as reduce the
possibility of any permanent, long-term impacts. Short-term impacts would include increased turbidity,
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 15

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
siltation, and noise from construction activities, but most managed species found in this area are highly
mobile and would be able to escape construction disturbance and eventually return to the area post -
construction. Aquatic substrate impacted by siltation should recover after construction, and turbidity would
be limited to the immediate construction area.
SAV habitats were found to be minimal to non-existent within the project area, so impacts to SAV resources
will be minimal for this project. Species that utilize SAV habitats for foraging and refuge from predators likely
will not be impacted since current SAV resources are limited. Additionally, the Preferred Alternative will have
no long-term, adverse effects on the ecosystem benefits provided by SAV, including the provisioning of
organic matter for localized food webs, stabilizing sediment, nutrient cycling, and reduction of wave energy.
The Preferred Alternative, while reducing available sandy benthic habitat within the project area, will also
create over 10 acres of emergent estuarine wetland (a designated EFH within the project area) in an area
where benthic habitat has been impacted by exposure to waves. A re-established Wainwright Island would
also provide valuable new nesting and foraging habitat for coastal birds. The Preferred Alternative could
result in increased long-term SAV colonization and general benthic habitat improvements adjacent to the re-
established island.
7. Reference
Albemarle -Pamlico National Estuary Partnership (APNEP), NCDEQ, 2011. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation GIS
data based on 2006-2008 Aerial Imagery. Available at http://www.nconemap.com. Accessed: November
2016.
Beck, M.W., K.L. Heck Jr., K.W. Able, D.L. Childers, D.B. Eggleston, B.M. Gillanders, B. Halpern, C.G. Hayes, K.
Hoshino, T.J. Minello, R.J. Orth, P.F. Sheridan, and M.P. Weinstein. 2001. "The Identification, Conservation,
and Management, of Estuarine and Marine Nurseries for Fish and Invertebrates." Bioscience. 51(8): 633-641.
Deaton, A.S., W.S. Chappell, K. Hart, J. O'Neal. 2010. North Carolina Coastal Habitat Protection Plan. NC
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Marine Fisheries.
Dernie, K.M, MJ, Kaiser, and R.M. Warwick. 2003. "Recovery rates of benthic communities following physical
disturbance." Journal of Animal Ecology. 72: 1043-1056.
Ellis, B.O. 2009. "Year Five (Final) Submersed Aquatic Vegetation Survey, Currituck Sound, Whalehead Bay-
Currituck Heritage Park." Memorandum to John Hennessy, Environmental Supervisor, National Park Service,
Assistance and Compliance Oversight Unit.
Ferguson, Randolph L., B.T. Pawlak, L.L. Wood. 1993. Flowering of the seagrass Halodule wrightii in North
Carolina, USA. Aquatic Botany, Volume 46, Issue 1, Pages 91-98
Mid -Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC). 2008. Fishery Management Plans. Available at
http://www.mafmc.org/fishery-management-plans/. Accessed: November 2016.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 16

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment Carteret County / NOAA Fisheries
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1999. Essential fish habitat: A marine fish habitat conservation
mandate for federal agencies. Revised 08/04. NMFS, Habitat Conservation Division, Southeast Regional
Office, St. Petersburg, Florida.
NMFS. 1999a. Final fishery management plan for Atlantic tuna, swordfish, and sharks, including the revised
final environmental impact statement, final regulatory impact review, the final regulatory flexibility analysis,
and the final social impact assessment. Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Springs, Maryland.
NMFS. 1999b. Amendment 1 to the Atlantic billfish fishery, management plan, including the revised final
environmental impact statement, final regulatory impact review, the final regulatory flexibility analysis, and
the final social impact assessment. Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Springs, Maryland.
North Carolina State University (NCSU). 2016. Coastwatch.
https://ncseagrant.ncsu.eclu/coastwatch/previou!i4ssues 2012-2/summer-2012/the-pamlico-sound-fishing-
gem-of-north-carolina/. Accessed November 2016.
NC Wildlife Resources Commission. 2005. North Carolina Wildlife Action Plan. Raleigh, NC. Available at
http://www.ncwildlife.org/pgC7 Wild lifeSpeciesCon 7c1 3.htm. Accessed: November 2016.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 2009. Final Amendment 1 to the 2006
Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan, Essential Fish Habitat. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Sustainable Fisheries,
Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Silver Spring, MD. Public Document. pp. 395.
NOAA 2016a. https://www.greateratlantic.fisherie!s.naaa.go�//hcd,/bluefish.htm. Accessed November 21,
2016.
NOAA 2016b. http://www.habitat.noaa.gov/protection efh newlnv/index.html. Accessed: November 21,
2016
South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC). 2008. Fishery Management Plans. Available at
http://safmc.net/fishery-mana,ement-plans-amendments,/. Accessed: November 2016.
SAFMC. 1998. Final Habitat Plan for the South Atlantic Region: Essential Fish Habitat Requirements for
Fishery Management Plans of the South Atlantic F sheiy Management Council. The Shrimp Fishery
Management Plan, The Snapper Grouper Fishery management Plan, The Coastal Migratory Pelagics Fishery
Management Plan, The Spiny Lobster Fishery Management Plan, Charleston, South Carolina: South Atlantic
Fishery Management Council, 4.57p. plus Appendices and Amendments. http://www.safmc.net/resource-
library/fishery-management-plans-amendments. Accessed: November 2016.
Street, M.W., A.S. Deaton, W.S. Chappell, and P.D. Mooreside. 2005. North Carolina Coastal Habitat
Protection Plan. North Carolina Department of Enviroriment ,and Natural Resources, Division of Marine
Fisheries, Morehead City, North Carolina. 656 op.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 17

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Wilmington District. 1995a. Environmental Assessment
Maintenance Dredging Wainwright Slough Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor.
Carteret County, North Carolina.
USACE Wilmington District. 1995b. Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI): "Maintenance Dredging,
Wainwright Slough Waterway connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor." Carteret County, North
Carolina.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 18

ATTACHMENT J: Biological Assessment of Federally Listed Protected Species

Protected Species Evaluation
Wainwright Slough, Carteret County, NC
Introduction
The purpose of this report is to identify the federally protected species found in the Carteret County area
and to determine likely impacts to these species as a result of proposed actions to dredge Wainwright
Slough with deposition of spoil material adjacent to Wainwright Island.
Site Description
Carteret County is in southeastern North Carolina within the Tidewater Region of the Atlantic Coastal Plain
physiographic province. Topography in the area consists of nearly level and gently sloping land that drains
primarily into Pamlico Sound, one of the largest estuaries in the United States. Wainwright Slough is
approximately five miles northeast of the Cedar Island Ferry Landing in Carteret County. The channel
connects Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, and Wainwright Slough serves as a conduit for passage of
commercial and recreational anglers between Beaufort Harbor and Pamlico Sound.
Proiect Description
Carteret County intends to dredge approximately 30,500 cubic meters (40,000 cubic yards) of material
from the federally authorized channel of Wainwright Slough, Ranges 2, 2A and 3, near Cedar Island, south
Pamlico Sound (Figure 1; Map 1 Appendix). Dredged sediment will be placed adjacent to Wainwright
Island. The project will restore navigation depths to the authorized channel for recreational boating and
commercial fishing vessels. The channel will be dredged to -7 MLLW with an additional 0.6 meters (2 feet)
of over depth tolerance, resulting in a maximum depth of disturbance down to -9 MLLW. The project
maintains compliance with the federal authorization for the channel. The sediment placement will be
used to help create nesting and foraging bird habitat by open placement of the material adjacent to
Wainwright Island. Sediment placement will occur over a maximum footprint of 4.2 hectares (10.5 acres)
up to an elevation matching the existing Wainwright Island. The slopes and grades of the material
placement will be constructed to encourage nesting and foraging bird activities to the extent reasonable.
Listed Species
Carteret County, North Carolina
Threatened and Endangered Species
Common Name
Scientific name
Federal Status
Record Status
American alligator
Alligator mississippiensis
T (S/A)
Current
Green sea turtle
Chelonia mydas
T
Current
Hawksbill (=carey) sea turtle
Eretmochelys imbricata
E
Historic
Kemp's (=Atlantic)
ridley sea turtle
Leatherback sea turtle
Loggerhead sea turtle
Piping plover
Lepidochelys kempii E Current
Dermochelys coriacea E Current
Caretta caretta T Current
Charadrius melodus T Current
1

Red -cockaded woodpecker
Red knot
Roseate tern
Shortnose sturgeon
West Indian manatee
Rough -leaved loosestrife
Seabeach amaranth
Definitions of Federal Status Codes:
Picoides borealis
E
Current
Calidris canutus rufa
T
Current
Sterna dougallii dougallii
T
Current
Acipenser brevirostrum
E
Current
Trichechus manatus
E
Current
Lysimachia asperulaefolia
E
Current
Amaranthus pumilus
T
Current
E = Endangered. A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
T = Threatened. A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of
its range."
T(S/A) = threatened due to similarity of appearance
https://www.fws.sov/raleigh/species/`cntylist/carteret html. Accessed December 6, 2016
Species Evaluation
American alligator: The American alligator is a species endemic to the southeastern United States.
Alligators inhabits freshwater wetlands, such as marshes and cypress swamps from Texas to North
Carolina and are not found in the open ocean or in saltwater habitats.
Status: The Wainwright Slough project area does not contain habitat suitable for this species.
Sea Turtles: Sea turtles are migratory species found in open ocean environments. Listed species may be
found along the North Carolina coast between May 1 and November 1. Several species may feed in the
project area (especially green, Kemps and loggerheads) or migrate through the Sound, but the National
Marine Fishery Service has determined that hydraulic pipeline dredges are unlikely to adversely affect
sea turtles.
Status: Sea turtle nesting habitat is confined to oceanfront beaches. Due to its estuarine location,
Wainwright Island would not provide suitable nesting habitat for this species.
Piping plover: The piping plover is a winter resident of the beaches of North Carolina while nesting
further north. Birds usually return to the same areas for nesting every year. Nest sites are simple
depressions or scrapes in the sand.
Status: Due to its estuarine location, Wainwright Island does not provide suitable nesting or feeding
habitat for this beach oriented species.
Red -cockaded woodpecker: Red -cockaded woodpeckers live in groups and utilize large, live pine trees
(usually long leaf pine) on uplands as nesting sites for their colonies. They forage in the adjacent pine
woodlands.
Status: The Wainwright Slough project area does not contain habitat suitable for this species.
Red knot: Red knots migrate in large flocks northward through the contiguous United States mainly
April -June and southward July -October. Nesting occurs further north and some locations (such as the
Chesapeake Bay) provide critical feeding sites during migration. The preferred habitat for these

shorebirds is primarily seacoasts on tidal flats and beaches, less frequently in marshes and flooded
fields.
Status: Although there is a remote possibility that red knots may pass through this area as part of their
migratory pathway, the Wainwright Slough project area does not contain suitable nesting habitat nor
feeding opportunities for this species.
Roseate tern: The preferred habitat for the roseate tern is bay/sound, lagoon, river mouth/tidal river,
and tidal flat/shore areas. This tern nests further north and migrates to and from the Caribbean and
Central/South America.
Status: This seabird may infrequently visit the project area on its migratory journey but is not known to
nest here. Project activities should have no impact on roseate terns.
Shortnose sturgeon: The shortnose sturgeon spawns in Georgia in February and in Connecticut in
April/May. This species lives and reproduces in large freshwater rivers and prefers deep pools. They can
migrate to and through nearshore saltwater environments. This species has been found in the Cape
Fear Rive but no other populations are known within North Carolina.
Status: It is highly unlikely that shortnose sturgeon would be found in the Wainwright Slough project
area. These offshore environments do not provide suitable spawning habitat for the species. Even if
sturgeon were migrating through the area, this species would not be affected by proposed activities due
to its mobility.
West Indian manatee: Manatees are generally found in warmer waters from Florida and the Gulf of
Mexico to the Caribbean Sea. These herbivorous marine mammals generally prefer bay/sound, lagoon,
river mouth/tidal river habitats that offer copious amounts of submerged aquatic vegetation for
consumption. Georgia coastal areas are the usual northernmost limits of the manatee range due to an
intolerance for cold water. However, individual sightings have been documented further north,
including in North Carolina.
Status: It is highly unlikely that manatees will be affected by this project. This species' normal range is
further south and if an infrequent migrant does come through this portion of Pamlico Sound, there is
insufficient feeding habitat to attract these marine mammals.
Rough -leaved loosestrife: Rough -leaved loosestrife is an erect, herbaceous, rhizomatous perennial.
This species occurs most often in shrub scrub wetlands especially in ecotones between longleaf pine
uplands and pond pine pocosins in moist, sandy or peaty soils with low vegetation that allows for
abundant sunlight to the herb layer.
Status: The Wainwright Slough project area does not contain habitat suitable for this species.
Seabeach amaranth: The seabeach amaranth is an annual plant found only on oceanfront or ocean inlet
beaches. This species is intolerant of competition and prefers non -vegetated sites. Seabeach amaranth
is found within scattered locations along the coast from South Carolina to New York.
Status: The Wainwright Slough project are does not contain habitat suitable for this species.
3

Summary
A determination has been made that the proposed project is not likely to adversely impact or affect any
federally listed threatened or endangered species or their critical habitat. This determination has been
based on a brief analysis of conditions and habitat potential in the project area compared with individual
species' documented presence or absence, life requisites, and feeding or nesting requirements.
2

ATTACHMENT K — SHPO Letter

North Carolina Department of Natural and 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
November 30, 2016
Jerry McCrain, Ph.D
Moffatt & Nichol
4700 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27609
Re: Dredge Wainwright Slough, Carteret County, ER 16-2174
Dear Dr. McCrain:
Thank you for your letter of November 22, 2016, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act 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,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.review(ab,nc, dcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
Ramona M. Bartos
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 2769911617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599