20180233 Ver 1_CAMA Application_20180215

Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
February 12, 2018
�DrCE
-rd 1 5 2018
a
TO: Karen Higgins
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
DWR/Water Quality Permitting
ROY COOPER
Govemor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
BRAXTON DAVIS
Director
FROM: Heather Coats, Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
NCDEQ - Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilm., NC 28405 heather. coats(oncdenr.gov
Fax: [phone] (Courier 0416-33)
SUBJECT: CAMA /Dredge & Fill Application Review
Applicant: NC Coastal Reserve & National Estuarine Research Reserve
Project Location: on Masonboro Island, adjacent to Loosin Creek & Masonboro Sound,
near Wilmington, in New Hanover County
Proposed Project: to construct 40 wooden plots to study marsh sediment
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and
return this form to Heather Coats at the address above by March 8, 2018. If you have any
questions regarding the proposed project, contact Courtney Spears at [phone] when appropriate
in-depth comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
**Additional comments may be attached**
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 DATED,
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405
910-796-7215

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: NC Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve c/o Brandon Puckett
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Site is located at Masonboro Island Reserve adjacent to Loosin Creek and
Masonboro Sound, near Wilmington, New Hanover County.
Photo Index -2006: 24-7408: E -K 10-11 Lat: 34°10'09.67"N Long: 77049'38.63"W
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA/D&F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit — 2/1/2018
Was Applicant Present — No
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received —1/24/2018 (initial)1/29/2018 (complete)
Office — Wilmington
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan— Wilmington - New Hanover County
Land Classification From LUP — Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: CW
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Private
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing- N/A
Planned- N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing- undeveloped
Planned- 40 approximately 5 ft2 wooden plots in CW, 30 of which will be filled
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: N/A
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION:
[AREA]
nRFnGFD FILLED OTHER
(A) Vegetated Wetlands (Coastal)
(B) Non -Vegetated Wetlands (Open Water)
(C) Other - Highground disturbance
212 ft2
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 212 ft2 (0.005 acres)
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SA-ORW Open: Yes
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to construct 40 wooden experimental plots (5 ft2 each) to study
sediment addition in the marsh.

NCCR and NERR c/o Brandon Puckett
Page 2
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site is located at Masonboro Island Reserve, adjacent to Loosin Creek and Masonboro Sound, in New Hanover
County. The island is only accessible from the mainland via boat. From Eastwood Road, head south on Military Cutoff and
travel approximately 2 miles until you reach Greenville Loop and make a left. Travel for approximately 3 miles until you
reach Pine Grove Drive and make a left. After approximately 1 mile Pine Grove Drive turns into Masonboro Loop. Continue
on Masonboro Loop for approximately 2 miles and then turn left onto Trails End Road. At the terminus of Trails End Road
is a public boat ramp. Once on a boat, travel approximately 1.4 miles north along the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway
(AIWW). Take a slight right to navigate into old Masonboro Channel and travel approximately 0.4 miles. The entrance to
Loosin Creek will be on the right-hand side. The experimental plots are in the low and high marsh as indicated by GPS
points on Sheet 4 of 7.
Masonboro Island Reserve is approximately 5,653 acres in size and the area around the experimental plots ranges from
-3' below Normal High Water (NHW) to 1' above NHW. Masonboro Island is an undeveloped barrier island that is currently
part of the North Carolina Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve. It is bounded by the Atlantic Ocean
to the east, the AIWW to the west, Masonboro Inlet to the north, and Carolina Beach Inlet to the south. On the northern
terminus of Masonboro Island, adjacent to Masonboro Inlet, is a rock jetty that was constructed around 1980 to maintain
access through Masonboro Inlet. Masonboro Island is approximately 8.4 miles in length and consists of a narrow sandy
beach ranging in width from approximately 20' to 220'. The northern and southern tips of the island have well-established
dune ridges which can be observed from aerial photography. Along the middle of the island there are many over wash
sites in various stages of recovery, which is typical of an undeveloped barrier island. The island is vegetated by native
species with Sea Oats (Uniola paniculata) predominantly on the crest and ocean side of the dunes, and transitioning to
various beach tolerant species on the landward side of the dunes. There are pockets of maritime forest on the back side
of the island, and an eventual transition to high marsh consisting primarily of Salt Meadow Cord Grass (Spartina patens).
From the high marsh, there is an extensive swath of low marsh varying in width. Along the project area the low marsh
measures approximately 300' in width and consists primarily of Smooth Cord Grass (Spartina alterniflora).
The Wilmington -New Hanover County 2006 Land Use Plan classifies adjacent waters and high ground portion of the
property as Conservation. The waters of Loosin Creek and Masonboro Sound are classified SA-ORW by the Division of
Water Resources. They ARE designated as a Primary Nursery Area (PNA) by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries and they
are OPEN to the harvest of shellfish.
PROPOSED PROJECT
The applicant proposes to construct 40 wooden experimental plots (5 ft' each) to study sediment addition in the marsh.
The application states that the purpose of the project is to understand whether sediment addition is an effective
strategy for marshes in the face of sea level rise, and the potential to use dredged sediment to benefit marsh vegetation.
The applicant proposes to investigate by constructing 40 wooden frames measuring approximately 2.3' by 2.3' and 5.5"
in height with stakes to hold them in place. These frames would be placed in low and high marsh to contain added
sediment (see Sheet 6 of 7). The plots would be grouped by 4s, with 5 groups of 4 wooden frames sited in the higher
marsh area and 5 groups of 4 wooden frames in the low marsh area (see Sheet 4 of 7 and Appendix 1). Each group of 4
would consist of the following: 1) no sediment addition (control), 2) addition of 2.75" of standardized sediment, 3)
addition of 5.5" of standardized sediment, and 4) addition of 2.75" of dredged sediment. The standardized sediment
would consist of a mixture of sand and organic soil. The dredged sediment would come from a nearby spoil island (see
narrative). The total amount of added sediment across all plots would collectively be approximately 3 cubic yards. The
application states that the plots would be monitored prior to sediment addition and in 6 months intervals until project
completion at 3 years. The application also states that all containment barriers would be removed at the end of the
project and any sediment addition plots that are void of vegetation would be graded to match surrounding sediment
elevation and re -vegetated. The proposed experimental plots would result in the filling of approximately 212 ft' of
Coastal Wetlands primarily consisting of Smooth Cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora), however there is also Salt Wort
(Salicornia spp.), Sea Lavender (Limonium caroliniana), and Spike Grass (Distichlis spicata) around the higher marsh
plots.

NCCR and NERR c/o Brandon Puckett
Page 3
10. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS
The new structures and sediment addition would result in the filling of 212 ftZ of Coastal Wetlands, which is also Estuarine
Waters and Public Trust Area. No SAV or live shell resource was observed in the experimental plot areas. The low marsh
plots consist of mostly silty mud sediment, while the higher marsh plots have a mix of mud and sand sediment. Based on
the application, the proposed structures would not encroach into the adjacent 15' riparian corridor setback requirements.
The application states that all sediment transport will occur via small skiff and marsh mats and marsh carts will be used to
minimize impacts to the surrounding marsh during construction.
Submitted by: Courtney Spears Date: February 6, 2018 Office: Wilmington

B. Puckett
Project Narrative
Thin -layer sediment placement: evaluating an adaptation strategy to enhance
coastal marsh resilience
Brandon Puckett
North Carolina Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Tidal marshes provide key ecosystem services, but are threatened by sea level rise (SLR). Recent
research at 16 National Estuarine Research Reserves (NERR), including Masonboro Island
NERR in New Hanover County, suggests marshes across the country may be vulnerable to sea
level rise [1]. Long-term marsh vegetation monitoring at Masonboro Island NERR suggests
vegetation is being impacted by increased water levels. In the low marsh, percent cover of
Spartina alterniflora is decreasing over time (Figure la), whereas high marsh vegetation (e.g.,
Spartina patens) is being displaced by low marsh species (Spartina alterniflora) as it migrates
upland (Figure lb). The proposed project moves beyond assessing vulnerability of marshes to
SLR and monitoring marsh vegetation to actively testing strategies to reduce vulnerability. We
plan to conduct replicated restoration experiments examining the effectiveness of thin -layer
sediment placement as an adaptation strategy for marshes within the Masonboro Island NERR
(and 7 other NERRs in other states across the nation). Sufficient sediment supplies and/or robust
rates of peat formation are required for marsh elevation to track future rises in water level.
Sediment addition raises the elevation of the marsh plain, lending the marsh greater `elevation
capital'. A potential "win-win" source is sediment dredged from nearby harbors and navigation
channels.
4
9),
2010 Nit, NW- 2019 2014 201.5 2014 2011. 2032 2013 2014+ 201a
Figure 1. Change in marsh vegetation percent cover categories overtime in A) low marsh and B)
high marsh. Changes in cover categories resulted in a 10-25% decline in percent cover in panel A.
In panel B, percent cover of S. alterniflora increased by 30-40% and percent cover of high marsh
spp. decreased by —25%. Dashed horizontal line is `no change' reference.
Beneficial use of dredged sediment to enhance coastal resilience is a concept that resonates in
many coastal states. The project team has interviewed 32 and surveyed 86 end users involved in
funding, permitting, implementation or monitoring of thin -layer sediment projects. Many of
these end-users attended the USACE's recent three-part webinar series on thin -layer sediment
addition. End-users identified the following needs a) more case studies across, the. counntry'to
y T 9LL nt$
U .

B. Puckett
Project Narrative
evaluate the strategy's effectiveness, b) a national approach to sediment addition, c)
identification of conditions and sites where this strategy would be most successful, d) standard
monitoring protocols, e) guidance on navigating the permitting process and f) public outreach to
explain the rationale and potential benefits of beneficial re -use of sediment for marsh restoration.
PROJECT APPROACH
The proposed project addresses several core research questions that have been articulated by
local, regional, and national end-users engaged in marsh management, monitoring, or funding:
• Is sediment addition an effective adaptation strategy for marshes in the face of SLR?
• How does marsh resilience respond to different levels of sediment addition?
• How do low vs. high marsh habitats differ in their response to this restoration strategy?
• Do responses to sediment addition vary by region or plant species?
• How should numeric restoration targets be defined and monitored to determine success
of sediment addition projects?
We will answer these questions by implementing a coordinated restoration experiment at
the eight participating Reserves in four bioregions along two coasts to provide broad
geographic scale rather than limiting project relevance to only one site or estuary. Within an
individual Reserve (e.g., Masonboro Island), however, the project scale will be very small to
keep to a limited budget, minimize permit requirements, and to ensure project feasibility.
Technical methodology: The experimental design of our project will largely follow the before
after -control -impact approach that requires monitoring both before and after sediment addition in
experimental plots and in additional plots to serve as experimental controls. Within this design
we will evaluate marsh responses to sediment addition at two different levels of three factors—
marsh elevation, sediment thickness, and sediment type—that managers must consider when
implementing sediment addition projects. To evaluate the effects of elevation, we will work in
two distinct habitats that occupy very different elevation regimes relative to local water levels.
Our site selection approach in the low marsh is to focus on bare or largely bare areas that have
recently been degraded due to SLR. The emphasis in this habitat is to provide drowning areas
with new elevation capital and to allow low marsh vegetation to return. In the high marsh, we
will largely focus on using sediment to support special high marsh communities that are
threatened by SLR. We will select areas that have recently lost native high marsh communities
via SLR -induced vegetation shifts; the focus of sediment addition in these cases will be on
returning native high marsh vegetation.
We will also evaluate the effects of adding different levels of sediment thickness to our plots. In
our project survey, end-users identified a sediment thickness of 10-15 cm as the highest priority
to evaluate. Based on this, we chose 14 cm (5.5 in) as the high sediment thickness treatment to
evaluate and coupled this with a low-end treatment of 7 cm (2.75 in), which may be valuable to
represent sites where incremental maintenance applications over a series of years (or periods)
may be better suited than a one-time thick sediment addition.
Two sediment types will be tested. We will add a standardized mixture of sand and organic
soil to some experimental plots at a thickness of 7cm and 14cm. If available at time of pre-
construction
re construction notification, information on % sand and % organic soil in mixture will be, provided:-,

B. Puckett
Project Narrative
We will also add dredged sediment from a nearby spoil island to experimental plots at a
thickness of 7cm. The spoil island is located at -77.822514°W, 34.192970°N.
All sediment addition plots will be established in the same consistent manner to ensure that data
and results are seamlessly comparable within and among Reserves. There will be n=4 plots in
each of n=5 low and high marsh replicates for a total of 40 plots at each Reserve (see Appendix
1 for plot coordinates). All experimental field plots will be enclosed by a containment barrier
consisting of a wooden frame to reduce sediment slumping, erosion, and loss during the
experiment but allowing for flooding and drainage during tidal cycles (Figure 2). Containment
barriers will be removed at the end of the project. Any sediment addition plots that are void of
vegetation at the end of the project will be graded to match surrounding sediment elevation and
re -vegetated (see Appendix 2 for project timeline).
Three of the four plots within each marsh elevation
replicate will receive sediment (2 plots with sand and
organic soil, 1 plot with dredged sediment). The
remaining plot will serve as a control. All plots will
be 0.5 m'(0.7 m x 0.7 m) and will be randomly
placed within the available habitat type and elevation
appropriate for each treatment. Total area of
wetlands disturbed will be 20 m2 (212 ft). The
total amount of sediment added will be —3 cu yds.
The general study area where plots will be located in
Masonboro Island NERR is depicted in Figure 3. The
study area is comprised of several wetland plant
species including Spartina alterniflora, Salicornia
spp., Borrichia frutecens, Spartina patens, Limonium
spp., Distichlis spicata. The proposed study area is
located in an area where Reserve staff (including B.
Puckett) continue to conduct long-term monitoring of
marsh vegetation and marsh surface elevation.
Field methods and monitoring: Our monitoring will
focus on three core elements — marsh vegetation, elevation, and sediment properties.
Vegetation surveys: We will monitor vegetation in experimental plots using the point -
intercept method, a highly -quantitative method that serves as the basis for the NERR
biomonitoring program. Pre -restoration vegetation monitoring will proceed immediately before
sediment addition (March 2018). Post -restoration monitoring will occur at approximately six-
month intervals thereafter until project completion (3 years).
a�� 2 4 N1

Elevation changes: We will
employ a two-tiered approach to
monitor changes in plot elevation
during the experiment. The first tier
will use laser levelling (sub -cm
vertical accuracy) from appropriate
benchmarks to measure plot
elevation immediately before and
immediately after sediment addition,
and then again after two years. The
second tier will provide a higher -
resolution picture of elevation
changes. We will use elevation pins
made from thin copper pipe and
modified with an attachment to
measure eight surface elevations in a
straight line within each plot, but
away from the center pin,
immediately before and after
sediment addition and then again
after two years. We will also deploy
thin feldspar marker horizons on
each plot both above and below
added sediment at the start of the
experiment to track subsidence,
erosion should it occur, and surface
accretion over the course of the
study.
Sediment and porewater
properties: To provide an
B. Puckett
Project Narrative
Masonboro Reserve
Figure 3. Proposed study area in Masonboro Island
NERR (highlighted in green). Plot locations will be
prioritized within the magenta rectangle. Inset map
depicts location of Masonboro Island relative to
Wilmington, NC.
understanding of how sediment
composition varies between natural marshes and sediment addition sources, we will analyze
sediment composition, including organic content, bulk density, and particle size distribution at
three high marsh and three low marsh control plots from each Reserve, and compare this to the
added sediment mixture. We will also analyze the composition of the new surficial sediment
accreted above our feldspar marker horizons in all plots at the end of the study. Particle size
distribution will be measured. Likewise, we will assess porewater differences among treatments
by sampling all plots with diffusion samplers at a depth of 10 cm at the end of the study.
Porewater will be analyzed for pH, salinity, redox, alkalinity and sulfide concentration.
Permitting: All of the Reserves participating in this thin -layer placement project have
incorporated the project activities into their NOAA 315 applications. The NEPA review,
including Endangered Species Act (ESA) and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
consultations, has been conducted for the project at Masonboro Island NERR. J f_
.... .. _ Y 1_ LJ
D(,i%,1'0l1LMlNGrON, NC
J, 4 2018

B. Puckett
Project Narrative
Funding: Funding for the project will be provided by the NERRS Science Collaborative
administered by the University of Michigan through a cooperative agreement with NOAA.
Project team: Dr. Brandon Puckett, research coordinator for the North Carolina National
Estuarine Research Reserve, will lead all aspects of the project in North Carolina, including
permit acquisition, site selection, experimental design, sediment addition, monitoring, data
analysis, publications, and outreach.
Project team members at other NERRs include:
• Dr. Kenny Raposa (project lead) and Jennifer West (collaborative lead) at Narragansett
Bay NERR (RI)
• Dr. Kerstin Wasson and Ms. Andrea Woolfolk (technical leads) at Elkhorn Slough NERR
(CA)
• Dr. Gregg Moore and Rachel Stevens at Great Bay NERR (NH)
• Dr. Megan Tyrrell at Waquoit Bay NERR (MA)
• Dr. Jenny Allen at Chesapeake Bay Maryland NERR (MD)
• Mr. Scott Lerberg at Chesapeake Bay Virginia NERR (VA)
• Dr. Matt Ferner at San Francisco Bay NERR (CA)
The Advisory Committee of end-users includes:
• Dr. Jo Ann Muramoto at Massachusetts Bays National Estuary Program
• Catilin Chafee at Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council
• Dr. Cathy Wigand at US EPA Atlantic Ecology Division
• Jim Turek at NOAA Restoration Center (Northeast Region)
• Nicole Carlozo at Maryland Dept of Natural Resources
• Elizabeth Murry at US Army Corps of Engineers, Wetlands and Coastal Ecology Branch
(San Francisco District)
• Christina Toms at San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
• Richard Nye at USFWS Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge
PROJECT OUTPUTS
The proposed project will generate the following outputs:
1) Technical report: a report available on the National Estuarine Research Reserve
Association (NERRA) webpage will detail the restoration methods, experimental design,
monitoring results, and lessons learned for end users needing details to inform their future
restoration projects. This output ranked highest among the 86 end users surveyed.
2) Monitoring protocol: a stand-alone and easily transferrable protocol for monitoring of
projects to enhance marsh resilience through sediment addition will be available on the
NERRA webpage for use by other organizations, meeting a critical need for standardized,
vetted monitoring and for explicit restoration targets by which to evaluate project
3) Consensus statement on thin -layer sediment addition: a statement and decision -tree
jointly drafted and agreed upon by the project team and a diverse advisory committee,
identifying conditions and sites where this strategy would be most successful in
bolstering marsh resilience.
4) Webinar on lessons learned: a webinar coordinated through the joint NERRS-US Fish
and Wildlife Service Restoration Webinar Series to share the results of the restoration_
J � L-
NGT''�N NC
ais 9

B. Puckett
Project Narrative
experiments to enhance coastal resilience with hundreds of interested parties across the
nation.
5) Permitting considerations: a synopsis of the primary permitting pathways as well as the
key issues that end users and regulators must consider when planning future projects.
This will be a memo including a decision tree based on the size and location of the
project and guidelines on how to assess potential project impacts.
6) Journal publication: following completion of the technical report, we will draft a more
succinct, conceptual review of results for publication in a peer-reviewed international
scientific journal.
7) Presentations for other audiences: Team members will give presentations about this work
to numerous other audiences in the course of the year following the end of grant funding,
including international conferences such as the Coastal and Estuarine Research
Federation and Restore America's Estuaries, as well as local and regional workshops.
EXISTIiVG CONDITIONS
a. List of existing permits: None
b. Previous project name(s) or owner name(s): NA
c. Existing compliance or pollution incidents: NA
d. Current conditions or development on site: The study area is comprised of several
wetland plant species including Spartina alterniflora, Salicornia spp., Borrichia
frutecens, Spartina patens, Limonium spp., Distichlis spicata.
e. Size of tract: 20 m2 (212 f[2)
f. Streams or wetlands on site: Yes, study area is in a coastal wetland.
g. Stream name and classification: NA
h. Historical significance of property: Unsure
i. Seasonal high water table elevation: Unsure
j. Riparian buffers: Unsure
k. Areas of environmental concern: Study area is approximately 1.5 miles from
Masonboro inlet.
1. Setbacks: NA
?019

Appendix 1. GPS coordinates of experimental plots.
Marsh Location
Block
Latitude
Longitude
Low marsh
A
34.16838777
-77.82880236
Low marsh
A
34.16839209
-77.82878405
Low marsh
A
34.1683954
-77.82876155
Low marsh
A
34.16839959
-77.82873939
Low marsh
B
34.17008837
-77.82861706
Low marsh
B
34.170075
-77.82862462
Low marsh
B
34.1700592
-77.82863077
Low marsh
B
34.17004276
-77.8286378
Low marsh
C
34.17015991
-77.82865419
Low marsh
C
34.17014406
-77.82866226
Low marsh
C
34.1701222
-77.82867549
Low marsh
C
34.17010328
-77.82868641
Low marsh
D
34.17031759
-77.82774844
Low marsh
D
34.17033211
-77.82773043
Low marsh
D
34.17034654
-77.82771099
Low marsh
D
34.17036354
-77.82769734
Low marsh
E
34.17090165
-77.82804649
Low marsh
E
34.1709104
-77.82806155
Low marsh
E
34.1709175
-77.82808738
Low marsh
E
34.1709146
-77.82811986
High marsh
A
34.17021096
-77.82662963
High marsh
A
34.17019088
-77.82663418
High marsh
A
34.17017169
-77.82664178
High marsh
A
34.17015399
-77.82663905
High marsh
B
34.17002859
-77.82662524
High marsh
B
34.17000476
-77.82661479
High marsh
B
34.16998329
-77.82662863
High marsh
B
34.16994291
-77.82663813
High marsh
C
34.16981733
-77.82700535
High marsh
C
34.16980172
-77.82702845
High marsh
C
34.1697801
-77.82703446
High marsh
C
34.16975936
-77.82702172
High marsh
D
34.16960884
-77.82710861
High marsh
D
34.16958573
-77.82711789
High marsh
D
34.16956212
-77.82713349
High marsh
D
34.16954013
-77.82714814
High marsh
E
34.16843588
-77.82794803
High marsh
E
34.16841203
-77.82794295
High marsh
E
34.16838781
-77.82793687
High marsh
E
34.16836809
-77.82794525
B. Puckett
Project Narrative

B. Puckett
Project Narrative
Appendix 2. Project timeline.
Month in 2018 Month in 2019 Month in 020
eeeeeee■®®eeeeeeeee■■■eeeeeeee
.
HMO ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■WEE
ee■■■
ME -mm
■
. ..: ■■■■■ee■■■■■ee■■■e■■■■■■ee■■e
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■e
->
C)

DO Nr -1
APPLICATION for
Mayor Development Permit
(last revised 12/27/06)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
Business Name Project Name (if applicable)
North Carolina Coastal Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve Thin -layer sediment experiment at Masonboro Island NERR
Applicant 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Brandon
Joel
Puckett
Applicant 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
If additional applicants, please attach an additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
101 Pivers Island Rd
ext.
Beaufort
NC
ZIP
Country
Phone No.
FAX No.
28516
USA
252 838 0851 ext'
Email
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
ZIP
Email
[e-mail]
Iiiiii I --
Business Name
E
Agent/ Contractor 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
ZIP
Phone No. 1
ext.
Phone No. 2
ext.
FAX No.
Contractor #
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
ZIP
Email
—
<Form continues on back>
JAN 2 4 2018
252.808-2808 .. 1-888.41RCOAST .. www.nccoastaimanagement.net
I, IVC

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 2 of 4)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
a. Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.) b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
County (can be multiple)
Street Address
State Rd. #
New Hanover
N/A—Masonboro Island
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
Subdivision Name
City
State
Zip
Monitoring infrastructure (surface elevation tables x 4, groundwater wells x 3), permanent marsh vegetation monitoring transects
Wilmington
NC
28409
Phone No.
Lot No.(s) (if many, attach additional page with list)
- ext.
R-20 residential
a. In which NC river basin is the project located?
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Cape Fear
Masonboro Sound, Masonboro Inlet, Atlantic Ocean
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
ENatural ❑Manmade ❑Unknown
see(b)above
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
[]Yes R No
work falls within.
a. Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.) b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
C. 900 ft c. 200,000 sq ft
c. Size of individual lot(s)
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
5.3 sq ft (x 40 plots)
NWL (normal water level)
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
from 0.9m below to 0.4m above❑x NHW or ❑ NWL
e. Vegetation on tract
Spartina alterniflora, Saliconna spp., Borrichia frutescens, S. patens, Limonium spp., Distichilis spicata
f. Man-made features and uses now on tract
Monitoring infrastructure (surface elevation tables x 4, groundwater wells x 3), permanent marsh vegetation monitoring transects
g. Identify and describe the existing land uses adjacent to the proposed project site.
Research, education, and visitor/recreation
h. How does local government zone the tract?
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
R-20 residential
❑x Yes [:]No El 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 ONo ❑NA
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? —
D&M IOYiLMING j CN, NC
<Form continues on next page>
JAN 2 4 2018
252-808-2808 .. 1-888-4RCOAST .. www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 3 of 4)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
m. (i) Are there wetlands on the site? DYes []No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? EYes []No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? ❑Yes [DNo
(Attach documentation, if available) We have habitat maps of the area produced by staff, but have not had a professional wettand delineation performed.
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
WA
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
WA
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
WA
<Form continues on back> VViLIIr INGTOINJI, N'
JAl`v L 4 2010
252-808-2808 -. 1-888-4RCOAST .. www.nccoastaimanagement.net
a.
Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? ❑Commercial EIPublic/Government
❑Private/Community
b.
Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
The proposed project is for purpose of scientific research and inquiry. We are particularly interested in understanding whether sediment addition is an effective adaptation strategy
for marshes in the face of sea -level rise. The application of the research is relevant to the potential to use dredged sediment to benefit marsh vegetation.
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.
Transport of sediment will occur via small vessel (skiffs). Marsh mats will be used to minimize effects of transporting sediment to experimental plots. Small (untreated) wooden
containment frames (0.5 sq m x 40) will be placed at each experimental plot for a 3 year period. 30 of the 40 plots will recieved sediment. 10 of the plots will serve as controls and receiv
no sediment.
d.
List all development activities you propose.
Filling of experimental plots with sediment. We will test two sediment thicknesses (7cm and 14cm). Total fill < 3 cu yd,
e.
Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both?
New project
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 212 ®Sq.Ft or []Acres
g.
Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public accessway or other area ❑Yes ONo ❑NA
that the public has established use of?
h.
Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
WA
i.
Will wastewater or stormwater be discharged into a wetland? ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water? ❑Yes ❑No DNA
j.
Is there any mitigation proposed? ❑Yes ONo ❑NA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
<Form continues on back> VViLIIr INGTOINJI, N'
JAl`v L 4 2010
252-808-2808 -. 1-888-4RCOAST .. www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 4 of 4)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in the application.
The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to
enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow-up
monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date 1/5/18 Print Name Brandon Puckett
Signature
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
®DCM MP -2 Excavation and Fill Information ❑DCM MP -5 Bridges and Culverts RECEIVE[)
❑DCM MP -3 Upland Development X&i WILMINGTON, NC
❑DCM MP -4 Structures Information
ANI 2 4 2018
252-808-2808 .. 1-888-4RCOAST . www.nccoastaimanagament.net
loopa. A project narrative.
b.
An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale. Please give the present status of the
proposed project. Is any portion already complete? If previously authorized work, clearly indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish
between work completed and proposed.
c.
A site or location map that is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
d.
A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
e.
The appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DENR.
f.
A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such
owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in
which to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Managemerr.
t arr€e " 8 ale rtCleC GO., I11G: -- Phone No,
Address 1125 S. Lumina Ave, Wilmington, NC 28406'
Name Fraser A Perry and Rogene S Perry Phone No.
Address 920 Water St., Wrightsville Beach, NC 28480
g.
A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, permittee, and issuing dates.
N/A
h.
Signed consultant or agent authorization form, if applicable.
i.
Wetland delineation, if necessary.
j.
A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront and inlet areas. (Must be signed by property owner)
k.
A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A 1-10), if necessary. If the project involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in the application.
The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to
enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow-up
monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date 1/5/18 Print Name Brandon Puckett
Signature
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
®DCM MP -2 Excavation and Fill Information ❑DCM MP -5 Bridges and Culverts RECEIVE[)
❑DCM MP -3 Upland Development X&i WILMINGTON, NC
❑DCM MP -4 Structures Information
ANI 2 4 2018
252-808-2808 .. 1-888-4RCOAST . www.nccoastaimanagament.net

Form DCM MP -2
EXCAVATION and FILL
(Except for bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP -1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation and/or fill activities. All values should be given in feet.
Access Other
Channel Canal Boat Basin Boat Ramp Rock Groin Rock (excluding
(NLW or Breakwater shoreline
NWL) stabilization
Length 92'
Width 2.3'
Avg. Existing
0' (surface)
Depth
Final Project
Depth 0.23-0.46' (fill)
e. (i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh f. (i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), []Yes ❑No ❑NA
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected.
number of square feet affected.
❑CW [-]SAV ❑SBS'
❑WL ❑None °(,M WILMINGTON,
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
u: 1111 2 4 2018
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.necoastalmanagement.net revised: 12126/06

Form DCM MP -2 (Excavation and Fill, Page 2 of 2)
a. Type of shoreline stabilization: b. Length:
❑Bulkhead ❑Riprap ❑ Brea kwater/Sill ❑Other: Width:
c. Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL:
e. Type of stabilization material:
g. Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level.
Bulkhead backfill Riprap
Breakwater/Sill Other
i. Source of fill material.
d. Maximum distance waterward of NHW or NWL:
f. (i) Has there been shoreline erosion during preceding 12
months?
❑Yes ❑No F1 NA
(ii) If yes, state amount of erosion and source of erosion amount
information.
h. Type of fill material. Alf & C. - W E D
D M WILMINGTON, NC_
AN 2 4 2018
TIVI ' ❑This section not applicable
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
u 'h'e cite? ®Yes ❑No ❑NA b.
If yes,
(ii) Amount of material to be placed in the water 0
(iii) Dimensions of fill area 212 sq ft
(iv) Purpose of fill
To test whether sediment addition is an effective adaptation
strateav for marshes in the face of sea -level rise
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion
controlled?
Fill in each 2.3'x 2.3' experimental plot (x 30) will be placed within a wooden
containment frame to control erosion.
C. (i) Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project?
❑Yes ®No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, explain what type and how they will be implemented.
Date
Thia Samar sediment rimen+ at Masonbom island NERR
Project Name
(i) Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands/marsh (CW),
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
®CW 212 scift ❑SAV OSB
❑WL EJNone
(ii) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas:
To test whether sediment addition is an effective adaptation
strategy for marshes in the face of sea -level rise
b. What type of construction equipment will be used (e.g., dragline,
backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
None. Shovels and buckets.
d. (i) Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project
site? ®Yes ❑No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts.
We will use marsh mats and marsh carts to minimize damage to
marsh vegetation and marsh sediment. Fill will be applied in late winter or
Brandon Puckett
Applicant Nam<.
Applicant Signature
252-808-2808 n 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastaimanagement.net revised: 12i26/06

R E C. vl=n
Applicant: Brandon Puckett pg 1 of 7
Date: January 3, 2018 JAN 4 1018
Location Map: Masonboro Island National Estuarine Research Reserve
III it: II It' 11
Project
Sites
;gunny
,int f4 letary
wan Tern-win.al I`iiw
Legend
Coastal Wetland Study Area
E771 Masonboro Reserve Boundary
Study Site
0 100 200 Meters
I I I

..
•.► _ 54
The Oleander Co., .Inc.,
f� x
IF
IZ
a
k
Data sio� a , U.S. Navy, N
r
GEECO
dy location
ICh
.Imagery Date: 10/29/2016 Iat 34.1362411 Io
r F
a
IF
IZ
a
k
Data sio� a , U.S. Navy, N
r
GEECO
dy location
ICh
.Imagery Date: 10/29/2016 Iat 34.1362411 Io

Applicant: Brandon Puckett WILMINGTON, NC pg 3 of 7
Date: January 3, 2018 JAN 2 4 2018
Top View: Location of study plots

vt
Applicant: Brandon Puckett FSE `-�' pg 5 of 7
Date: January 3, 2018 DGNI WILMINGT'
Top View: study plots SAN 2 4 2018
M
N
Ctf
M
N
High Marsh Study plots (4 of 20)
2.3 ft
18.2 ft
2.3 ft
18.2 ft
7 cm
.75 in)
diment

Applicant: Brandon Puckett '-� ,,., pg 6 of 7
Date: January 3, 2018 JAN 2 4 201$
Top View: wood containment frame
m
N
Ln
Ln
Wood frame used for containing sediment
2.3 ff
2.3 ft
18.2 ft
7 c
.75 in)
liment

Applicant: Brandon PuckettuL}�` pg 7 of 7
Date: January 3, 2018 JAN 2 4 201
Cross -Sectional View
Wood frame
High Marsh Study plots 0 Sediment
Marsh surface elevation Added
1.5ft NAVD88 sediment
-� 2.75 in
v v •_
E Ln
Q v �n
\ N
3ft 3ft 3ft No sediment
tMean High Water
1.4ft NAVD88
Added
Low Marsh Study plots sediment
v v .
E Ln
Q v Ln
N L-► = 3ft
t— 2.3 ft -�
Marsh surface elevation
-0.8ft NAVD88
L Mean Low Water
-2.4ft NAVD88
2.75 in
3ft 3ft No sediment