Ver _COMPLETE FILE_19830901

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
A. PERMIT:
This office cannot comment on this project until after the close of the Section
401 Certification Public Comments Period.
X This office has no objection to the issuance of the permit(s) for the proposed
project with the following conditions:
That the activity be conducted in such a manner as to prevent significant
increases in turbidity outside the area of construction or construction-
related discharge (increases of 25 NTU's or less are not considered
significant).
That the instream turbidity not be increased by more than 50 NTU's as a
result of the proposed activity after a reasonable opportunity for dilu-
tion and mixture.
That turbidity levels in shall not be increased
by more than 10 NTU's as a.tesult of the proposed activity after a reason-
able-opportunity for dilution-and mixture. " -
B. CERTIFICATION STATUS:
Certification is not required
for this project.
Certification is required for
this project. Such action to
process the certification has
been initiated. Proposed
Certification will be acted on
or after
X The proposed project is certified
under General Certification
A) No. 1179 issued on January 25,
1977, for sewer line construction
B) No. 1272 issued on November 10,
1978, for bulkhead construction.
D) No. 1431 issued on October 16,
1980, for boat ramp construction.
E) No. 1664 issued on September 8,
1983, for Rip-Rap Placement.
C) No. 1273 issued on November 10, F) No. 1665 issued on September 19,
1978, for discharges of liquid 1983, for incidental bridge
effluent from diked upland disposal construction.
areas.
WATER QUALITY SECTION
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Comments concerwing an application,for State Federal CAMA Permit(s) from /?xe-b
a ?inTA' ER QUALITY MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
NORTH CHANNEL MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT
MANTEO, NC
Sediment Analyses
Three sediment samples will be taken: one from Range 11,
one from Range 1 of the North Channel, and one from Range 2
and 3 of the North Channel. A sieve analysis will be done on
a composite sample from the following depths: 0 to 6 inches,
6 to 18 inches, and 18 to 36 inches. Each of the sediment
samples also will be analyzed for nutrients (total phosphorus,
phosphate, and total nitrogen) and for metals (cadmium, chromium,
copper, nickel, lead, zinc, mercury).
Water Analyses
1. For the same three general locations, water samples will
be taken as follows:
Before dredging (less than 10 days): Turbidity, dissolved
oxygen, pH, temperature, total phosphorus, total nitrogen,
phosphates and metals (cadmium, chromium, copper, nickel, lead,
zinc, and mercury).
During dredging (close proximity to dredge): Same analyses
as before dredging.
After dredging (within 10 days): Same as above.
(The above samples should be taken with a labline and as
many analyses as possible should be performed at the time the
samples are taken.)
2. Beginning when outlet starts flowing and every 10 days
thereafter, outlet samples will be taken and analyzed for the
following: turbidity, settleable solids, total phosphorus, total
nitrogen, phosphates, and metals (cadmium, chromium, copper,
nickel, lead, zinc, and mercury).
3. Each day during the dredging period when outlets are
flowing, a sample should be taken from the outlets and checked
with an Imhoff cone for the amount of settleable solids.

[T

a 7
fi ° I'
Z n
.L i
s?
C.A r
3 z "
- 1

n o
r

O? V7 F W N fC
w po D
?O 00-i
c j
z
v o
. n
. ?.
J
d
1 N

?. AT
y
a ?
P3 ?S
yg
?,?^ l_? ter _ JJ-Y.
N ?
? J
r
$y 70C ,?
1n i
N ,? r W Vl -> <
N I'sil OO V O0 N N C
Vl N V 0000N Wx- ON%AO
%n 00 O 00 N •? .L O% 00%D O
Z
M
v
°o
t
M
8v
m ?
?D
1 p C
1
r?
8?
M ?
N ?
o
fl
S
01
7
7
kI D
c?
?. z
?. m
n
0
i.
`%
r?
F-
r
r

f
D _
c c
70 m m
A m Z _?
r.
P a D D Z r
Y-
r
n m
:J
Z o > N 'j
i
's. m ?D
D V ?•• I
m
00 (D
' c ?
m
}
Y -
D Y?iTr??? f`
a r ?
m ?
i .? Tn2
mil, y 1?T1?
`? r f? - 'T .aTt y
v
hl.
` , n `YJ - r X11 l ?? ?
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANA,,;EPIENT
December 5, 1988
MEMORANDUM
TC,: Lor,r,ai nc -Shinn
Regional Office Manager,
rI
•1"MRO1baH: Roger, K. Thorpe, tFater uGaa ity Regional Super•visar,
t^lashirr7tan Regional Office
1 ROM: Deborah A. Sawyer', Environmental Technician
Water, . ual i •ty Section, WaRO
SUBJECT: A-95/EIS Review
F0NSI
North Channel Maintenance Dr,edgi ng Pr,oj -ct
Oar•e County
The above project has been reviewed by the Water- quality Section of
the Washington Regional Office. This Office requested in a
memorandum on October, 3, 1988 that k sieve analysis of the sediment
and any -antici ated--water qua] it
K? y Impact be; submitted to this offid?" ,
for •r•eview. After, review of the analysis and the attached document,
this office has the following comments:
1. DUr,i ng the dr•edgi ng, water, sampling should be perfor,me-d and
analyzed around the dredging site and spoils site for,
dissolved oxygen, tLlr,bidity, metals (Cd,Cr•,Cu,Ni,Pb.Zn,Hg)
total nitrogen and total phosphorus.
2. These analyses should be performed Lipstr,eam and downstream
of the dr,edgi ng site as well as the inlet and outlet ar•e;a
of the spoils disposal site on a weekly basis.
The metals and nutrients analyses should be pet
the sediment as well as the water,.
4, The sampling and analyses should be conti nUed on _.
bimonthly basis for, a 60--ci,-.y p-er•i od .rafter, the dr,edgi ng has
been completed.
This office requests the above i nfor,mati on to deter,minn the water,
quality impact that this dredging imposes, now and for, possible
:sir edging projects in the future,
Please notify this, Division if you have any questions or, comments.,
C-AS/cm
Encl os ur,e
fr?`v ?f SNOUV 2dO
R FC S Z 330
(AA13038
i-A
H-i
"t' (:.I lj:.i'.f:.: f. t{?.};.i:.;. •{

:..:.{ ? {
1. J i-4 LJ 1.- -j

i
{{ : ':f"??'.,
.. .
..
.
...f ..
{Z
. i.J
.
'•}
'
°
j f.:. ....[} i;:.',..`

k
'
?
'.
{.'i Fit
t -
: :
. ..:: . :
.
::
,: :..:.,...:...::.: ...{ i :1 ... r':.:.. '. :...... {k
,
.... +
....
:
{ t
•... .... '..
; ... ... ......
.......
:. i
.... .. i t : .....:..r
;f%::iii , ;' ..t.'I'{ (} ,...4+.':: ..{'•:i}..}:.. {5...}...;;_i }..}

:: i'.

??0-4?
WATER QUALITY MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
NORTH CHANNEL MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT
MANTEO, NC
Sediment Analyses
Three sediment samples will be taken: one from Range 11,
one from Range 1 of the North Channel, and one from Range 2
and 3 of the North Channel. A sieve analysis will be done on
a composite sample from the following depths: 0 to 6 inches,
6 to 18 inches, and 18 to 36 inches. Each of the sediment
samples also will be analyzed for nutrients (total phosphorus,
phosphate, and total nitrogen) and for metals (cadmium, chromium,
copper, nickel, lead, zinc, mercury).
Water Analyses
1. For the same three general locations, water samples will
be taken as follows:
Before dredging (less than 10 days): Turbidity, dissolved
oxygen, pH, temperature, total phosphorus, total nitrogen,
phosphates and metals (cadmium, chromium, copper, nickel, lead,
zinc, and mercury).
During dredging (close proximity to dredge): Same analyses
as before dredging.
After dredging (within 10 days): Same as above.
(The above samples should be taken with a labline and as
many analyses as possible should be-.performed at the time the
samples are taken.)
2. Beginning when outlet starts flowing and every 10 days
thereafter, outlet samples will be taken and analyzed for the
following: turbidity, settleable solids, total phosphorus, total
nitrogen, phosphates, and metals (cadmium, chromium, copper,
nickel, lead, zinc, and mercury).
3. Each day during the dredging period when outlets are
flowing, a sample should be taken from the outlets and checked
with an Imhoff cone for the amount of settleable solids.
j
D1`7IS ON OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Water Quality Section
October 4, 1988
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Melba McGee
Environmental Assessment Section
FROM: 1 Mills U - -r
SUBJECT: Draft FONSI
North Channel
Maintenance Dredging Project
Dare County
The FONSI does cause some reason for concern about the
adequacy of the spoil disposal areas. The FONSI describes
the material to be dredged as being "sandy material" and
that the bottom is "more sandy than that of those in
Shallowbag Bay and in the channel south to Wanchese." I
have not been able to find any documentation of the
composition of__thi_s material.. - -
If one accepts that the dredged material is.mostly
sand, then a 2:1 ratio of disposal area volume to amount of
dredged material is generally accepted as the minimum to
allow sufficient settling and storage. The diked areas
should be designed to provide a very minimum of 2:1 after
allowances for a minimum of 1 foot free board. Should the
bottom have more clays and silts than Division of Water
Resources anticipate, even this diked volume may not be
adequate. Some verification of the material to be dredged
would certainly seem reasonable.
The Water Quality Certification will have to be amended
to include this project. The processing of the amendment to
the Certification will be processed jointly with the major
modification to the CAMA permit.
BM/dkb
cc: John Parker
Bill Moore
John Sutherland
'A ;k

DRAFT
FONSI
NORTH CHANNEL
MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT
DARE COUNTY
1. Narrative Description
The North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development (NCDNRCD) is proposing to do maintenance
dredging of an authorized Corps of Engineers a channel in Dare
County running north from Shallowbag Bay toward Albemarle Sound
(See Figure 1). Approximately one-fourth (0.5 miles) of this
channel was dredged to 8 feet in 1985 with environmental review
accomplished by a Corps of Engineers Environmental Assessment and
.a State Negative Declaration (attached) The entire section of
channel was last dredged in 1964.
The main purpose of this dredging is to allow larger boats to
travel directly to Manteo and other Dare County harbors from
Albemarle Sound and the Atlantic Intercoastal Waterway. The use
of the North Channel will shorten the trip from Albemarle Sound
to Manteo, or vice-versa, by approximately 26 miles.
Figure 2 shows the alignment and controlling depths, of the
North Channel. The channel will be 9 feet deep (8 feet plus
1 foot of overdredging), 100 feet wide and approximately 1.9
miles long. An estimited 100,000 cubic yards of sandy material
will be removed from this section of the channel.
Disposal of the dredged spoil material will be on diked
upland sites southeast of Manteo and just to the north of U. S.

(2)
Highway 64/264. Figure 2 shows the general location of these
disposal areas. Figure 3 gives a more specific location of the
dikes and spillways and indicates typical dike sections.
NCDNRCD is proposing to begin dredging the North Channel on
December 1, 1988. The time of construction for this channel is
from 60 to 120 days, depending on weather conditions and
contractor capabilities.
2. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Project
Noise - There will be noise from heavy equipment used to
construct the higher dikes around the disposal areas and from the
pipeline dredge used to remove material from the channel. This
will be a temporary impact, with noise from dike construction
lasting approximately 45 days, and that from dredging
approximately 60 days. Because the work will occur in winter and
because most of the work is located more than one mile from any
residential areas, very few people would be impacted by the
noise.
Air Quality - The combustion of fuels during dike
construction and dredging will cause a very localized and
temporary increase in combustion products (air pollutants).
Water Quality - The pipeline dredge, when using a cutterhead
in combination with suction, causes limited disturbance of
surrounding sediments resulting in minor localized turbidity.
This will cause a short-term decrease in light penetration and a
corresponding decrease in photosynthetic activity and growth of
plants in the water at and downcurrent from the site. The
disturbed sediment may also release nutrients and other attached

(3)
substances. If the bottom material contains organic matter,
bacterial decomposition may occur, resulting in a lowering of
dissolved oxygen and a release of nutrients. These water quality
effects will be temporary, localized and of minor significance;
particulary because the dredging will be undertaken during the
cold winter months when plant metabolism is low and dissolved
oxygen levels are relatively high.
Waters that are transported along with dredged bottom
sediments can, in some cases, have an impact on the quality of
surface and ground waters near the spoil disposal site. In this
case, because the composition of the.bottom of the North Channel
is more sandy than that of those in Shallowbag Bay and in the
Channel south to Wanchese, the turbidity of the effluent released
from the diked disposal areas should not be that much higher than
that of the sound waters. Any increases in turbidities in the
receiving waters should return to predredging levels shortly
after disposal activities cease. Seepage of this effluent into
the groundwaters under the disposal area should not affect water
quality. NCDNRCD sampled the sediments in Shallowbag Bay and the
Wanchese Channel in 1984 and found no significant concentrations
of pollutants.
Ecological Effects - A survey conducted in August of 1984
by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries found no important
benthic communities in or near the channel from Shallowbag Bay
south to Wanchese. Dredging of the channel will result in the
loss of all bottom organisms in or on the substrate to the depth
of the cut. Recruitment of biota from adjacent undisturbed areas
If s
(4)
should approximate those lost during dredging. The recovery
period should be from one to two years. The channel to be
dredged is an authorized Federal channel and has been previously
disturbed. By completing dredging in the North Channel during
the winter, the loss of organisms will be lessened because the
brown shrimp, blue-crabs, and juvenile fin fish (trout, spot, and
croaker) do not start moving into that area until May and June.
It is not expected that the placement of dredged spoil material
will have any significant impact because the areas to be diked
have previously been used for disposal of dredged materials.
Endangered Wildlife - The project will not have an adverse
effect on known endangered wildlife species.
Cultural Resources There will be no impacts to known
archeological, historic, or cultural resources.
3. Reasons for Concluding that an EIS is Not Warranted
The major reason for concluding that an Environmental Impact
Statement is not needed is the fact that all areas of the
proposed project (channel area and disposal area) have been
disturbed previously by similar actions.
4. Final Statement - For reasons given above, an Environmental
Impact Statement will not be prepared for the Manteo to Wanchese
Maintenance Dredging Project.
FIGURE I
Ir s MAMTCn Tn WAMruFCG AAIn NORTH rHANNFI C
ALBEMARLE SOUND

I1.(O NWT. fill 04 clb
.:l 1. CL. b'
VIII T. CL. •rMir.
VIh T. CL. •O•N.V. 0
b
Z
1l 1
II
II
• NAGS
HEAD
Dp•
a.Q /O
North ,Ch
` K M(
°0.
V1
0
c
z
0
1
ROANOKE ,?
MARSHES ?Q ?? d a; ? yti,
DARE COUNTY 6
•r? AUTN 0
:.? JETTIES
?. I .. OYI ? ,IY
WLET
N p %% ?JryOlrt. -? COW"".
L M.. LO MMY .R.000
p A M 4r? v[er CL.. i M M
VLai. CL 11:1. ..L-.
'Ir
M.L.W ----
VA?YING
I_ VAIIYINS
r
TYPICAL SECTION
1 \? •r
lAO
9y
oY,
,CA
N
y
"v
a
40
o ?
0
4? ? f ri
M.M.

14

c? 1

VA.
K C. \ .
N

1 C y

NC
s t.? N

A?11G
ATL

x LOCALITY MAP
SCALE Of MILES
o 30 00
m
0
0
s
r
a
z
IS ACRES _ f ?•(
RIP
ANCHESE
? JD
E IS.
Q Q ^ ?7 IMrNTm
Mike. 1. Ih. 0,09" mm - bMwAse Ch~ol k .1.0.0,0. has a pla ?.Ma.
sN10 1. L41hoz a 4 0 0- Ink: Caa.l 411.,1 stall". 00w .11taas.. ata
I "Sv,6E Sta. }Incl{an. dlh thla *henn01.
NORTH CHANNEL
NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE OF MILES
0 2 _ 4
CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON, N.C.
MAP REVISED SEPT. 1962
s . .•
4' FIGURE 2
NORTH CHANNEL MAINTENANCE
NAVIGATION PROJECT
NOVEMBER, 1987

North Channel
G S J H I A D
3
Proposed Previousl
' Z5 Section Permitted
'l (9 feet deep) Section
(8 feet)
BM
,••?o? "` got er Vineyard, Previously
Dredged
Section
+`d?• Baum Point
?.o
...
Li h
• :•?. o (B M 5) . ?co
?.?. - . ?c''•?t fie.
Cem '-:• : `r? Ballast
"'"='`t oQ Point
Ail r.7 ''i.;,.. •`:'?%y$;• Sandy Point QP?
•?''?''.+?::;?? S Ilowbag Bay
. ` ''r Light
Haven Crok
iia Disposal
'ant Areas
• ?• °Q `
Manteo'.
ell Field'. 0.1
'
s `\ Site
C7
' R O A N 0? .K\E I S L A N
Roo
3
BM 4 ?• '? ' G(0
?, /000 0 /ieo Yoro 3de•
a O
H
P 0
? Q
'Ci
s
?- QD H
r4 F
r' 0a U N oo
0 ?" 1Q rn
O Q
??' r; vg o (si z a W
c 3 H H
71
/? b H A W
,r k LK,S w H
E-1 P4
IIT - •
a
a
0
?' 4` • '`z ' Q ? II z
ro0 roro
-P u -P -ri -P
o m H?Z rn0 ?N 4
4J -r-I $ rl4J w A U41 41
I , ? ?' ? i rim N
S? I 4 W 40 ri Ul ro -P P -ri -1 0 W ,?q
0 V •,1 0 •rl w 0. 3 0 •ri -P 0
N _. w 04 3 N 4 0 rA b*, m 0 9 ro
0 44 iH U ro -rl •u •r 1 r•I
I I \ 0 rl m A r-1 0. 0 >~ 0 p 44
W ro 0 -ri r-q •rl g ro 4j ro rd 0
N I w 0 0 ro 1~ 4 x r-I ro •r1 I~ 0 4-4
1 ri-H a) r-I -4r o w 0) H 9 rd H° N
1 l \T ro cn D +) 1~ 3 44 9 br ro •rl ?I U 0 0
\ 1- 4" ro 0 P •r1 N .1.1 ro 44 A ?4 aJ 4J
\ •IJ v r-I 0 0 ro to 3 -ri co 0 0 0
I _ V I \x 4 H d.) 4-3 N • x -ri U 41 N ?4 Ji
W // 11 4a .J •rl ro (D 9 rn m 0 x 0 44 (13 4J ro 1~
m I \ I V 0 34 4-) U W 0 94J a)E0 ro 9a) ro
I I 1 0 br 9 •rl rl •rl q 44 0 411 34 ro 0 N
Q ?? I () NVrd •rl 0rd04J 3000)-1 rd 0Uit 40
a M4 0940 roEj 044E >9 roa
I 00 0 0 •ri r-I p 9 0 0 x o 0 1-I H
;c I 4J •rl P+ 1 •n ?1 a rd rn rd ro 9 P .u ? U 0 ro a4
I M ro U) ri r •rl •ri N° 44 H N
I a) p 0- 0 ro•r1 0 WH U) 4 ro 3 a? ro 0 U!4-)
x 4ro 4 3U -ri roaNA? ? 0 0a)
/ il V H N 0 4 •rl •r1 U U) • -) •ri r•I
0 0 a) U !n p +r 0 r-I +) M a) q3 ° 9 •-) 4-3 9
I ro ro a) ro 44 •rI J; •r1 ro 4J dJ iJ -P 4 cn 0 0 V?
v, I \? to 0 0 Q 4J co + I 0 U cn •r1 N r4 0 0
_ I ro0Oro o? q 3N?0- rn ?N 0 a a) °w
i _ I 1 a 0 •rl r1 • 0 0 0 V o. V ro 040 a 44
P rd ri rl UJ W W U) a 4? 4J 0 r-I N Ul •ri 4J 0 0 41
D 0 UlU 0ro0 0 Mm -Pw 1y1,71 00
I I $I a) 0 0 ri •r1 U1 N• •n N 0 4J aJ 0 9 04
_ 4 134 4J IV 4J In v Jv a) 0 4 r-I ro 0 -ri ro •ri v
I UI a' 4J 'U 4J W4 U1 M Q 0r-4 ro4 3 OH H E•ri U44
'o 4)
N 1- z N M o o
\A w a.
..
NORTH CHANNEL NAVIGATION PROJECT
Dike Volumes
Site #1
Approximate Total Area:
Area of Dike:
Area Inside Dike:
Dike Height:
Dike Volume (Inside Dike):
Dike Volume (Including Inside
3.79 acres
1.98 acres
1.81 acres
10.00 feet
29,200 cubic yards
Slope): 37,600 cubic yards
Site #2
Approximate Total Area: 4.82 acres
Area of Dike: 2.86 acres
Area Inside Dike: 1.96 acres
Dike Height: 8.0 feet
Dike Volume (Inside._Dike)- 25,300 cubic yards
Dike Volume
(Including Inside Slope): 34,700 cubic yards
Site #3
Approximate Total Area:
Area of Dike:
Area Inside Dike:
Dike Height:
Dike Volume (Inside Dike):
Dike Volume
(Including Inside Slope):
11.3 acres
4.7 acres
6.6 acres
10 feet
106,500 cubic yards
126,300 cubic yards
Total Volume of Sites
#1, #2 and #3: 198,600 = 200,000 cubic yards
i p? y m ,« 3 y ? Y
r
t- wu- a
? M-4
5rA
N ,r 3 }North 4?Q olna D ,a a t of f atural?
?? ???` Fesourceq, Or
s &Communityypevelopment

Y?
3
ui
11
J
IJ
4
5
Li
--. k
i
I
1 S ' i ` I .S. ?S
J 7 ` `J
I..
?--- J-
ZAL

O • `
h?
1
O
. }L 3 c

o
3 1(1 d?
• 1

517
I
w YS

?-
_ ?l
CL

3 Y `
1 •; -J
J; ?
j

loww"Lgm 'v W

2 v
?
s
J ? ? h

ti
u W
0
h
? v? ,rte a V
?-E I S L A
• -
y - t
\
*,.4.????
'? - _ - 397100a^ H-
.?: \ 9m
Sk3'co
y
49 640

NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR THE
MANTEO TO WANCH.ES.E CHANNEL
MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT
1. Narrative Description
•ti
k 198,9
V61 p
C .. , r
The North Carolina. Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development (NCDNRCD), in preparation for America's 400th Anniversary Cele-
bration at Roanoke Island, is proposing to do maintenance dredging of (1)
a portion of the existing navigation channel from Manteo _to Wanchese; (2)
an adjoining channel north from Shallowbag Bay toward Albemarle Sound; and
(3) an adjoining area in front of the waterfront docks at Manteo.
The specific purposes of this dredging are (1) to allow critical
maintenance necessary to protect the Elizabeth II historic replica ship from
damage,; (2) to allow sea trials for the Elizabeth II to take place; (3) to
allow the Elizabeth II to operate as a tour vessel from Manteo and to visit
oti?er ports" for educat iona-1 - purposes.;-- (4) to- al l-ow, l a-r--g.er - boat s_ to, travel _ tlo
Manteo from the Albemarle Sound and the Atlantic Intercoastal Waterway; and
(5) to allow expanded use of the city docks at Manteo.
Site location map number 1 shows the alignment, controlling depths,
and the approximate amounts of sediment to be dredged from each of the two
channels. Both channels will be 10 feet deep and 100 feet wide, as shown on
Plate 1. Location map number 2 shows the location of the area to be dredged
in front of the Manteo's waterfront docks. It will also be dredged to a depth
of 10 feet.
Disposal of the dredged spoil material will be on diked upland sites
located adjacent to the channel from Shallowbag Bay south to U.S. Highway 64/
264 bridge. Site location map number 1 shows the general location of these
disposal areas. Plate 2 gives a more specific location of the dikes and spill-
ways and also shows a typical dike section. The top.of the dike will be 14
feet above mean low water (MLW).
NCDNRCD is proposing to begin dredging the three areas described
above on April 1, 1984, if ,possible. The channel in Shallowbag Bay (Ranges 1,
2, 3, and 4 on Site Map 1) and the area in front of the docks would be completed
first. The estimated time of construction for these two parts is 30 days.
0.- . .n
-2-
The other portions of the channel (Ranges 4a, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9) would then
be dredged, with an estimated time for completion of 30 days. The construction
schedule may vary, depending on weather conditions and contractor capabilities.
2. Environmental Impacts of the Prop osed'Project
Noise - There will be noise from bulldozers used to construct the
higher dikes around the disposal:areas and from the pipeline dredge used to
move the material from the bottom of the channels. This will be a temporary
impact, with noise from dike construction lasting approximately 45 days, and
that from dredging approximately 60 days.
Air Quality - The combustion of fuels during dike construction and
dredging will cause a very localized and temporary increase in combustion
products (air pollutants).
a
Water Quality - The pipeline dredge, when using a cutterhead in
combination with suction, disturbs surrounding sediments and creates minor
turbidity through resuspension of sediment in the water column. This wil']
cause a short-term decrease in light penetration and a corresponding decrease
in photosynthetic activity and growth.of plants in the water at and downcurrent
from the site. The disturbed sediment may also release nutrients and other
attached substances. If the bottom material contains organic materials,
bacterial decomposition may occur, resulting in a lowering of dissolved oxygen
and a release of nutrients. The water quality effects will be temporary and
localized and will not be of major significance.
Waters that are transported along with the bottom sediments by dredg-
ing operations will have an impact on the quality of surface and ground waters
near the spoil disposal site. Depending on the type of material dredged, the
effluent that will be released from the diked disposal areas could increase
turbidity in receiving waters. Turbid'ities in the receiving waters should
return to predredging levels shortly after disposal activities cease. Seepage
of this effluent into the groundwaters under the disposal area could affect
water quality. NCDNRCD is sampling the sediments and waters from the areas
to be dredged to determine whether there are any significant concentrations
of pollutants. Before dredging will be allowed, a Section 401 Water Quality
Certificate must be issued by the N.C. Division of Environmental Management.
+. w
-3-
Ecological Effects - Dredging of the channel areas will result in
the loss of all bottom organisms in or on the substrate to the depth of the
cut. Recruitment of biota from adjacent undisturbed areas should approximate
those lost during dredging. The recovery period should be from one to two
years. The channels to be dredged are authorized Federal channels and have
been previously disturbed. By completing dredging in Shallowbag Bay in April,
the loss of organisms will be lessened because the brown shrimp, blue crabs,
and juvenile fin fish (trout, spot, and croaker) do not start moving into that
area until early May and June. It is not expected that the placement of dredged
soil material will have any significant impact because the areas to be diked
have previously been used for disposal of dredged materials.
Endangered Wildlife - The project will not have an adverse effect on
known endangered wildlife species.
Cultural Resources - There will be no impacts to known archeological,
" historic, or cultural resources.
3. Reasons for Concluding that an EIS is Not Warranted
The major reason for concluding that an Environmental Impact Statement
is not needed is the fact that all areas of the proposed project (channels, dock
area and disposal area) have been disturbed previously by similar actions.
The environmental effects of the work will be fully evaluated during the review
of permit applications by State and Federal agencies under the provisions of
the Coastal Area Management Act and the Clean Water Act.
It is urgent to complete these navigation improvements to allow the
Elizabeth II to be removed from the water at Wanchese and painted to prevent
damage by shipworms. It is also urgent to allow sea trials to take place
and any corrective actions to be taken by the shipbuilder during a period of
six months after launching, as specified by contract.
4. Final Statement - For reasons given above, an Environmental Impact
Statement will not be prepared for the Manteo to Wanchese Maintenance Dredging
Project.
I concur with the decision to not require an Environmental Impact
Statement for this project.
NORTH CA A DEPAR T OF NAT RAL
RESOUR ND-COM Y DEV NT
By
• hd ' "'rte ?
r?
, ' \ ? .
F 1
?`yV . ,
{ ? ? I t

J? , ,

?•.?. or

C

,

Z
LAJ }

J?

LLJ
cri

7

w v ?

J
z e c a c
_ r v
? n C ? OC

W ?

? l is ? y?F

- O'l
v
0 1
LL.

u,
w
43 Ar
t
a apace 3 ~
op %9
t C- J
' _
i
y

,

O

w

`r
o

o s s
c? z
I•
ti as
V r j o 0 0 0 0 C
<
/
Oa c o0 0 IeD a
C', l
ov. _

D' ZZ ? a
1 c1 IV
Z o
D ?
.Kcn?-??! ?Ooo- l
t?
H
j T v
? oL F•- aC i ? J H ;

u 0 3
?
2 M

Q
4
v
O
v
1
y
N
ft?
m
Q -?
W O
'?51' Q ? Q M 1
x '& Q W
' J
i
t
e ? ? ,4 J
v'
b h y
cr W
W? o Q'0 ? E h
I w 3 Q .I
WI ?
CA
? Q
I
x ? o
LL
uC, l ?
W
lul
u
u
r
J
n
^C
J
IJ ?
4 I 1?
I
X ?---,EE
?- ql,

v

w
z
Z U4
? z

Q M Vf W

D
3; W
o v
CD sp
Z
Ur Q
W ?
o 1
+t? J
(
W
o .: _ _
?
C
C2
ta.

w
w` o
o

LLI

OA,
O

CG
J

06-

tf
0
z
a
a
1 ?

I o
Z
2
p
xU ? S 0
?
moo` Y f
a o

gun
D ? ?
S.? O
•/
Y :7
j
S

?
-13
Q
3T
o c?
J dT
s
Y
rA
i

r
r

i

r
a -
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE OF THE MANTEO-OREGON INLET CHANNEL
(Mk'gTEO TO :,l,',-XHESE)
MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY
DARE,COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SEPTEMBER 1983

ENVIRO?NLENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE OF THE MANTEO-OREGON INLET CHANNEL
(MANTEO TO WANCHESE)
MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
1.0 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action. The State of North Carolina
and the Town of Manteo, in preparation for America's 400th Anniversary
celebration (Roanoke Island, North Carolina) have requested the Corps of
Engineers to maintain the channel from Manteo to Wanchese and the channel
around the north end, Roanoke island Controlling depths in these
are 6 feat_t?fThe request fojr maintenance of these channels is based
on the operation of a replica of Sir Walter Raleigh's vessel
ELIZABETH as a tour vessel in Manteb. The ELIZABETH II is designed to be ,
the centerpiece of the anniversary celebration, to act as tourist
attraction, to visit other ports, and to provide a unique type of sailing
experience in the waters around Roanoke Island. it is a 50-ton, twin-decked
vessel, 70 feet long, with a mast height of 70 feet, and drawing eight feet
of water.
The existing project was authorized.by the River and Harbor Acts of June 25,
1910, May 17, 1950, July 14, 1960, and December 31, 1970, and provides for a
channel 20 feet deep and 400 feet wide across the ocean bar at Oregon Inlet;
a channel 14 feet deep and 120 feet. wide from the gorge of Oregon Inlet to
and including a 15-acre basin-of the,same depth at•Wanchese; a channel (Old
House Channel) 12 feet deep- and 100 feet wide to the 12-foot depth in
Pairilico Sound; a channel 12 feet deep an'd-100 feet wide from the side
channel to Wanchese (mile $.2) to a turning basin (200 X 600 feet wide) of
the same depth at Manteo (mile 15.7); and a channel 10 feet deep and 100
feet wide from mile 14.5 of the Manteo-Oregon Inlet Channel to the 10-foot
depth in Albemarle Sound near the northern end of Croatan Sound.
The channel 10 feet deep and 100 feet wide .from mile 14.5 of the Manteo-
Oregon Inlet Channel to the 10-foot depth in Albemarle Sound was justified
on deliveries of petroleum .:products barged from Norfolk, Virginia, to
Manteo, North Carolina. The last shipment was made in October 1975.
Therefore, this feature of the authorized project plan wa•s eliminated from
further. consideration as part of the recommended plan 'Ift the Manteo
(Shallowbag) Bay, North Carolina,,,, Design :Memorandum 1, General Design
Memorandum, Phase 1, Plan Formulation, July. 1977. The last authorization of
December 31, 1970, for this project included the stabilization of Oregon
Inlet with a dual rubblemound jetty system, including means for sand
transfer to adjacent beaches and bottom protection for the Bonner Bridge
across Oregon inlet. Location of the project is shown on figure 1.
Various aspects of the Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay, North Carolina Project have
been covered in the following environmental documents:
a. Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay, North Carolina, Final Environmental
Statement (filed with EPA April 1979).

b. Final, Supplement to the Final EIS, Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay Project,
Dare County, North Carolina (filed with EPA November 1980).
The maintenance of the existing Manteo.-Oregon Inlet Channel from mile 8.2 to
mile 15.7 including the turning basin at Manteo and the 6-foot-deep and
100-foot-wide channel from Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay to that. depth in
Albemarle Sound (approximately 1.6 miles) were not covered by the above
documents. The 6-foot channel between Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay and Albemarle
Sound was dredged in 1911. The last maintenance of this channel was
performed in 1964. The controlling depth is presently 6 feet; therefore, no
maintenance is needed at this time. The channel from Manteo to Wanchese
including the basin at Manteo was completed. in March 1960 to a depth of 12
feet. This channel was last maintained in 1966. The existing controlling
depth of this channel from Manteo to'Wanchese is 6 feet.
Vessels analyzed in the economic analysis draw 8 to 8.5 feet (based on
vessels presently using and ones anticipated to use miles 8.2-15.7 of the
Manteo-Oregon Inlet Channel); therefore, a channel 10 feet deep is adequate
to meet the needs of the area. In addition to ELIZABETH II, there are two
tugs and several barges based in Manteo. A deeper channel will allow larger
pleasure and commercial vessels to use the marine and recreational
facilities in Manteo.
2.0 Description of the Proposed Action.
The proposed action is to perform maintenance dredging of the Manteo-Oregon
Inlet Channel from Wanchese-(mile 8.2) to: Manteo (mile 15.7) including the
600- by 200-toot turning basin at Manteo. The channel will be dredged 10
f.ee_t_ deep with 27f.oot _over depth and 100 feet wide. Disposal will be on
diked upland sites located along" the. channel from Shallowbag Bay south to-U.
S. Route 64/264-bridge. Approximately 300,000 cubic yards, of material will
be dredged from various ranges of the channel. Disposal areas and amounts
to be dredged from the various ranges are shown on figure 2.. It is
anticipated that an additional approximate 150,000 cubic yards will have to
be removed after 4 years. The disposal' area identified for future
maintenance is located just south of the U. S.. Route 64/264 bridge. This
area will hold the dredged material from one future maintenance dredging
event. Dredging will take place during the time' period. of 1 October to
31 March.
3.0 Alternatives.
Alternatives considered for this project wexe as follows:
r
Disposal Methods: Alternative methods of disposal for dredged
material include on-land disposal in confined or unconfined areas
and open-water diposal in confined or unconfined areas. Uncon-
fined disposal, whether on land or in the water, and confined
disposal in the water is not consistent with the Coastal Zone
Management Program of North Carolina. Therefore, they were not
considered to be viable alternatives.
2
0
Various Channel Plans: Based on the economic reanalysis., choices
of channel depths vary between the existing authorized project
depth of 12 feet and a channel 10 feet deep. As stated above, a
10-foot depth (plus) two feet of overdepth is adequate to meet
present and projected navigation needs. No new routes for the
existing channel were considered, because following the route of
the existing channel would have the least environmental impact and
would require the least amount of dredging to perform the
necessary maintenance.
No Action: The only nonstructural alternative available is no
action. The selection. of this alternative would avoid any envi-
ronmental impacts associated with a structural solution but is
considered unacceptable as it .tiould not provide a solution to the
navigation problem.
4.0 Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action.
Water Oualitv.
Shallowb ag Bay is classified as SC waters by the N. C. Environmental
Management Commission. Waters hav•in; this class iiication are suitable
fishing and fish propagation. or any other usage requiring waters of lower
quality. Shallowbag Bay is closed' to shellfishing bE-sed on total coliform
counts exceeding the total col-iform standard for shellfishing waters.
The Roanoke Sound waters of the.project area are classified SA, with a best
usage of shellfishing for -market purposes. or any8ther use requiring waters
of lower quality.
Disposal of the dredged material will be in diked upland disposal areas (see
figure 2). Diked upland disposal, as currently planned, is covered by a
nationwide permit (33 CFR 330.5(a)(16)). There is an existing Section 401
(P.L. 95-217) water quality certification (No. 1273) for diked upland
disposal areas.
Turbidity due to dredging and disposal can cause a short-term decrease in
light penetration and dissolved oxygen. These impacts are expected to be
temporary and minor. Turbidity and' dissolved oxygen are expected to return
to ambient levels shortly after completion of dredging and disposal.
Terrestrial Resources.
The proposed disposal areas have received ;dredged material in the past and,
as a result, the vegetation has been changed from black needlerush Ouncus
roemerianus) marshland to upland early seral stage vegetation. Dominant

shrubs of these areas are saitbush (Baccharis halimifolia) and wax myrt_e
(Myrica cerifera). Various grasses and sedges are also common. The
vegetation within the disposal areas will be completely covered by dredged
material.

3

Estuarine Resources
The Juncus marshland located along the shores of Shallowbag Bay and Roanoke
Island are irregularly flooded and are influenced primarily by wind tides.
Although black needlerush is the dominant plant species in this portion of
marsh, species like saltmeadow cordgrass (Spartina patens), big cordgrass
(Spartina cynosuroi.des), marsnelder (Iva frutescens), saltbush (Bacchaus
halimifolia), and camphorweed (Pluchea purpurascens) are common.
Waterfowl resources in and around the project area are present in good
quantity. Shallowbag Bay and Roanoke Sound provide a feeding and nesting
area for various types of waterfowl. The area is situated near the midpoint
of the Atlantic Flyway and -is an important migratory waterfowl habitat.
Wading birds utilize the creeks and aujacent marshlands of Shallowbag Bay.
Birds which use habitats of this type include the ibises, bitterns, and
herons. Other animals common in .-the area include the whitetailed deer
(Odecoileus virginianus), marsh 'rabbit (Sylvilagus palustris), Nutria
(Myocastor coypus), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus , marsh rice rat (Oryzomys
palustris , banded water snakeNatrix fascita), and diamondback terrapin
(Malaclemys terrapin). _
The waters of Shallowbag Bay are productive and diverse. Oysters and clams
are found in Shallowbag Bay; however, the area was, closed to shellfish
harvesting in 1972 by the State of North Carolina. The bay also produces
commercially important quantities of crabs and, shrimp. The bay is a
spawning area for finfish, crabs, 'and oysters. Scarboro and Doughs Creeks
are considered primary nursery areas for shrimp.* Along the channel from
Shallowbag Bay to Warnchese, the waters- are of better quality,_ and . there_...are
a number of commercial oyster harvest areas.
Estuarine bottom provides habitat for benthic invertebrates. These
organisms, including polychaetes, amphipods, isopods, mollusks, and crabs,
provide an-important food source for a variety of species.
The dredging for maintenance of the channel-from Manteo to Wanchese is not
expected to cause significant impacts to estuarine resources. The bottom
sediments of the channel are"frequently disturbed.by the turbulence created
by propellers of pleasure and commercial vessels- navigating the channel.
The substrate is, therefore, undesirable habitat -for sessile and burrowing
life forms so they are not expected to occur in great numbers in the
channel. Any sessile or slow-moving organisms which are there will be lost
to the dredge. .'Bottom sediments in the channel will .continue to be
disturbed by large vessels and periodic maintenance dredging. Since bottom
conditions after maintenance would be `similar to existing conditions,
recolonization.by similar inhabitants is expected. Motile organisms should
be able to avoid the dredge cutterhead and escape harm or may be forced to
temporarily leave the bay during' construction. No intertidal areas or
submerged aquatic vegetation should be impacted by the proposed project.
Endangered Species
Informal consultation under Section 7(c)
amended, with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
of the Endangered Species Act, as
Service and the National Marine
4
.
Fisheries Service provided the following list of endangered and threatened
species to be considered:
1. Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Caretta caretta)
2. Green Sea Turtle (Chelonia mydasT-
3. Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle LeDidochelys kempii)
4. Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum)
5. Brown Pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis
6. Arctic Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus tundris)
7. Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus,leucocephalus)
8. American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis)
9. Red-cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis)
Loggerhead Sea Turtle, (threatened); Green Sea Turtle, (threatened); and
Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle, (endangered), These sea turtles are treated as a
group as they all utilize similar habitats. All of them occur offshore or
in estuarine situations in the area, but only the loggerhead is known to
nest in North Carolina. All of the turtles occur in the higher salinity
reaches of the estuary. Records o loggerhead sea turtles in fresher
situations have occurred, but all the animals were stranded. These sea
turtles feed principally on invertebrates, marine algae, rooted plants, and
fish. The main reasons for their s ecline include overexploitation by man,
loss of suitable beaches for nest-ing, and drowning caused by inadvertent
captures in fishing nets. Since the dredging will take place during the
time period of 1 October to 31 March (period of low activity of sea turtles
in North Carolina) in waters of low salinities,. and there is a lack of
records for the turtles in. this area of Roanoke Sound, the proposed action
is not expected 'to affect the sea- turtles.
Shortnose Sturgeon, (endangered). The status of the shortnose sturgeon in
North Carolina waters is unknown, but many researchers feel that it may be
extirpated. Populations of shortnose sturgeon are known 4o occur both to
the north -and the south of the, State, lending some credence to the
speculation that the species may be.present but so far has gone undetected:
Pollution, damming of coastal rivers, and overfishing are generally
considered to be the principal causes for the -decline of this species.
Spawning areas are thought to 'require fast flows and rocky bottoms,
requirements not met by the project area; therefore, though project dredging
will be ongoing during part of the spawning season (February - May), no
effect should occur as no spawning-''habitat is available. Although the date
is inconclusive, it appears to be the consensus of the shortnose sturgeon
recovery team that the species is. extirpajted in North Carolina; therefore,
the project should have no effect on it.
Brown Pelican (endangered). On the east and gulf coasts this species ranges
from North Carolina to Texas with most of the breeding in South Carolina and
Florida. Currently, there are three breeding colonies of brown pelicans in
the State - one on North Rock Island behind Ocracoke Inlet in the Pamlico
Sound, one on two small dredge islands in the lower Cape Fear River, and one
which just became established on a dredge island behind Oregon Inlet. The
5
E1
greatest threats currently facing the brown pelican in North Carolina appear
to be continual erosion of their island nesting sites and overwash of their
colonies during severe storms. Pesticides do not seem to be a significant
problem for the brown pelican in the State, as records indicate that the
North Carolina population has remained relatively- stable during the general
periods of decline nationwide. The proposed action will not affect the
brown pelican.
Arctic Peregrine Falcon, (endangered). The Arctic Peregrine Falcon breeds
in the Arctic tundra and migrates along the Atlantic Coast and middle North
America to Central and South America. Some overwintering occurs in the
project area. Their primary diet in the project area is shore birds. The
reasons for decline appear to be the accumulation of chlorinated hydrocarbon
pesticides in the birds' tissues which causes reproduction failure, illegal
shooting, electrocution by powerlines, and loss of nesting sites through
habitat modification. Migrating birds use the barrier beaches and the outer
banks as a temporary stopover. The proposed action will not affect any
peregrine which may occasionally occur in.tle area.
Bald Eagle (endangered). The bald- eagle is -found infrequently throughout ;
the United States, having had its populations decimated during the 1950's
and 1960's by the use of chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides and
indiscriminate shooting. In North Carolina, it occurs principally as a
migrant and as an uncommon winter resident.' In 1980 a bald eagle nest was
discovered on Collington Island in Dare County, N. C., the first reported
nesting in the State since 1971. This nesting did not produce any young.
The project will. not destroy any potential nesting trees and will not
-'significantly reduce --fe-eding,- a.reas.__ _Therefore,, the proposed action will not
affect the bald eagle.
American Alligator (endangered). This species reaches the northern extent
of its range in the Albemarle Sound region. It occurs in. coastal rivers,
marshes, and estuaries in the_State, although it seems to reproduce most
favorably in situations where there. is a relatively stable water level. No
alligators are reported for the project area", a reflection of both the poor
habitat available and its geographic position within the range of the
species. Therefore, it has been determined that the project will not affect
the alligator, because there have been no reports- of the alligator in the
project area and food supply for the alligator will remain high.
Red-cockaded Woodpecker (endangered). This species was once abundant
throughout the southeastern United States, but has now been reduced in
numbers to a point where it remains primarily in scattered populations, with
only a few areas remaining as strongholds for the species.. Requiring mature
open pine stands, it was naturally one of the first species to feel the
pressures of agriculture and the logging industry. Disposal of dredged
material will take place on a distdrbed upland site which does not have the
species requisite open pine forest habitat. The project, therefore, will
not affect. the red-cockaded woodpeckers.
6

de uriA Ressources.
An archeological survey of the Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay project area was
completed in 1977. The study included a ground survey of Wanchese Harbor
and the disposal islands on the eastern shore of Roanoke Island. The study
resulted in identification of a historical area (Ballast Point) and a
secondary prehistoric site (31 DR' 49) within the proposed project area.
Neither Ballast Point nor 31 DR 49 retain any significant intact evidence.
Since the proposed work is maintenance of the existing channel, no
significant cultural resource remains are anticipated in the area to be
dredged. If something is encountered by the dredge, work will stop and the
proper authorities will be notified.
5.0 List of Agencies and Persons Consulted.
a. North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development.
(1) Division of Marine Fisheries
(2) Office of Coastal Management

(3) Division of Environmental Management
(4) Division of Parks and'-Recreation, Natural Heritage
P rogr-am '
(5) Office of Water Resources
b. North Carolina Department.-of Cultural Resources,- Division of
Archives and History.
C. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
(1) Division of Ecological Services, Raleigh Field Office
(2) Asheville Endangered Species Field Office
d. National Marine Fisheries Service.
(1) Beaufort Field Office
(2) Southeastern Regional Endangered Species Office
e. North Carolina Department of Transportation.
f. Mr. Ralph Reed (owner of property to be used for first time
maintenance disposal).

7

g. Concurrent with circulation . s e;VtonmentI a"ssessme it
a consistency determination will be furnished .to the North
Carolina Office of Coastal Management for concurrence/non-
currence. . Copies of this environmental assessment will be
furnished to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife. Service and National
Marine Fisheries Service to complete coordination under
Section 7 (c) of the Endangered Species Act, as amended.
h. Recipients of the Assessment.
This assessment will be circulated for review and comment to
the agencies and .public listed below for 30 days. After
reviewing the comments received, the District Engineer will
decide whether to sign the Finding of No Significant Impact
and proceed with the proposed project or to prepare an EIS.
Environmental Protection Agency
Forest Service, USDA
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Department of Commerce
Federal Emergency Management Administration
Federal Maritime Commission
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Energy
U. S. Department of the Interior
Coast Guard
Conservation'-:Council of :,North- CarolinaR '- --
Izaac - Walton League
Federal Highway Administration
National Audubon Society
N. C. Wildlife Federation
Department of Housing and Urban Development
National Wildlife Federation
Soil Conservation Service,-USDA
Sierra Club
Environmental Defense Fund, Inc.
Dare County Board of Commissioners
Dare County Manager
State Clearinghouse of North Carolina
Mayor of Manteo
Harry B. Schiffman
Allan Foreman
Ralph Reed %.
Lewis Midgett `
Honorable Walter B. Jones
8
• .

A L BEMAV E SOUND
VA. rarTO,LC
-- N.c- ? SITE
BASIN
600' LONG AAEErtaolro ?»
200' WI DE •ourHAr

t.s MI t NAGS cA?[
x , O HEAD
II
K
fATETTTTEYLLC MEM ? NATTErAS
rEI1N
^
Z '?
p
64 $ z ?? O
J`CV I

CAP(
oocOUT
L
o mi. WILVIriTOr
2.64 , VI CINITYMAP
MANTEO 14 MI I 0 50

13 NI'
S ALLOWBA6 1 D
t~+
O BAY
12 sal

Z z;;

'- it MI
Y.
= 12 Cl
D

c„ z 1IN
v I X Ln OQ
g
45 wuI ?
n
Z
C m
g. rn
c?
4Mt r

o. MI
WANCHESE i+11
YMI?
A
BASIN 7MI I1 >O
t Zp
14'x 15 ACRES
I
am
6 w I x
o
_ PROPOSED NORTH JETTY
DUCK ISLAND
Ml4 `'s ( ROPOSED RANGE NOT SHOWN)

,o ,_4 MI./k i;`+ PROPOSED
CHANNEL
'
'
0O /i 5 M I??
? C? 20
x 400
, \
]mi PROPOSED SOUTH JETTY

i
?
OG o4 4PEA ISLAND
t?j? ? 2Q
MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY
NORTH CAROL 1 N A
O I 2 3•
SCALE IN MILES
FIGURE

W ^- Y?I ??/iYN ??
L N
I; LLJ o
?! I \ -
r m 60 • w
Ot i w S
U =
Z y(D
r ° 3 LA-.
? r•? a d
o
o `
n ali ? ? o°
N
CL W
U
W
,' 7l Z
°
Q '
11 ? 0
I
11 N '
II i
O O r , yy_./ O
V •, N
w 1•
7 I , d'
;I = w
III r i Q ? ?. Z
11 u
r
II Ifs" .1 ?1i t,: Q w
U. w
w Z
w Q W
W 1 r?• '^
° , co O O :D Z O
OL/)_N?
`' O cr
V V ? 11
w w
h t ? W 1. ,
?: oo Q?? ? C U 1 I •Q?
O¢ I' 7 _i o W ° O' O C
3 n' it W o Ny
? S w
Ncn
O0w Y y ~
OS z
r it a 0 Q O
o V bi• V Z
n co o o 11 _
0 00 A°o Q
,o pyJ6 BAY X10
7
Z ??I118? oy ° ? I Cl)
Q o
v ?.
J W
Of i t c?' u I j I° Z I
d
I
II U
o!I O
X?, 0' O 7J?J'
'' O v a i
9

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
1. Name of Action. ?Mai`igtenance the Manteo-Oregon Inlet Channel, (Manteo to
Wanchese ,-Manteo (Sha•llowbag Bay), Dare County, North Carolina.
2. Description of Action. The Corps of Engineers proposes to perform
maintenance dredging of the Manteo to Oregon Inlet Channel from Wanchese
(mile 8.2) to Manteo (mile 15.7) including the 600 feet by 200 feet turning
basin at Manteo. The channel will be dredged to 10 feet deep (plus two feet
overdepth) and 100 feet wide. Disposal will be on diked upland sites
located along the channel from Shallowbag Bay south to below the U. S. Route
64/264 bridge.
3. Anticipated Environmental Effects. The proposed action will result in
no significant adverse impacts. A-discussion of the significant resources
present in the project area and the•project's anticipated impacts on them is
• presented in Section 4.00 of the Environmental Assessment.
4. Conclusions. I have determined, based on "he information outlined in ?
Section 4.00 of the Environmental Assessment, that the proposed action will
result in no overall environmental. degradation and will not significantly
affect the quality of the human environment.
Wayne A. Hanson
_ Colonel,_.Corps of Engineers
District Engineer
DATE
T

9
yr yr

E"'dE' DA E t;;! + r}.t!'' /'t.:s°iMA 401 '".,::.,+` DATE
°t .....(....?.......l.lt!
!!..:
:.1 { .i.1...1...
ADD FILE ;?>'???' ?' ...E i.:r"ii''if"3?r0r-- {'';::..... :. WD :?
>
FORMAT {'dC4?...','?.:f••ii''A I'`?{::X {:CD
:• :.::.
';)??a°.::....',
ACTION ADD, EN TER {. A f A , ;:.. ... ... ADDED IS 0 0530 FRD DATA
1°'R.i:.?O: 0 0 533 PRO,.(: NRCD-MANTEO CHANNEL COUNT Y: DAR[:.' REGION : 0*',*-'
ASS IGNED TO: DAS ,.1il.i.t"1 t NOTIC E: N
TYPE CERT IFICATION. RECOMM END DATE,.--.*.' YYMMDD
•+':},.. PN: 40 REQ: ISSUE- RECEIVED: 881i22
. E°, r"t ..... Y : GC: UPLAND D I K E D E N Y - INITIAL REPORT: 'E 20",,'
... +..: ' ::: va i°" E'{ i::. ,.:, HOLD; T FINAL REPORT:

RECEIVING :
STREAM: P'•: :..j
... t ' .! .. • i .... SOUND .. E... ;.:(,::•
S SA-
SC BASIN: PAS
COMMENTS:
SITE LOCA BETWEE
TED N :. ::::: , :..; .E"E f t :... i... ;..,.`?r B::.j:: DAY CHANNEL
.. f , ..,

AND E''; i.
.. ?f"If;?li!{:jEi
i } . , :::;:',Ei..i!;:
E ''+ :.. t..i;.Jt'`{!.J !
PROPOSAL FOR MAINTE NANCE DREDGING
HOLD UNTI L APPRE.1''aAi... OF MONITORING SCHEME OF DREDGE AND SPOIL AREA
COMMENTS PENDING AP PROVAL OF E" SCHEME
COPIES: W f':!R i....i..,i::.N E RA l.......t'"t.1.1...i...S....DCH

8 En 12 1988
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Parker
FROM: David Griffin
SUBJECT: Modification and Renewal Request from NRCD for CAMA Permit #217-84
DATE: November 15, 1988
The N. C. Department of Natural Resources and Community Development is
requesting to renew and modify CAMA permit #217-84. This permit authorized
the maintenance excavation of a channel 100' x 10' deep from Manteo to U. S.
264/64 bridge and a 100' x 6' deep channel north from the junction of
Shallowbag Bay channel and Roanoke Sound channel for a distance of 5000'. All
excavation has been accomplished, except approximately 3500' of the permitted
North--Channel excavation plus_ 2000' at Range 11 south of Highway U. S. 264
bridge.
NCDNRCD is requesting to modify this permit to allow the North Channel
excavation to be extended to a total of 1.5 miles long, or an addition of
1500', from the junction of the Sound channel with the Shallowbag Bay channel.
The proposed channel dimensions will be 100' x 9' deep. An estimated 92,000
cubic yards of sandy material is anticipated to be removed. This material is
proposed to be placed in'three diked disposal areas on Ballast Point. These
areas have previously been approved and used as spoil areas and remnants of
the previous dikes still exist. The combined volumes of these sites is in
excess of 185,000 cubic yards.
cc: Preston Pate
Division of Water Resources
N.C. Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
NORTH CHANNEL
MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT
DARE.,000NTY
November 14, 1988
For further information
Contact: Mr. John Sutherland
Division of Water Resources
[phone]
FONSI
NORTH CHANNEL
MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT
DARE COUNTY
1. Narrative Description
The North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development (NCDNRCD) is proposing to do maintenance
dredging of an authorized Corps of Engineers a channel in Dare
County running north from Shallowbag Bay toward Albemarle Sound
(See Figure 1). Approximately one-fourth (0.5 miles) of this
channel was dredged to 8 feet in 1985 with environmental review
accomplished by a Corps of Engineers Environmental Assessment and
a State Negative Declaration (attached). The entire section of
channel was last dredged in 1964.
The main purpose of this dredging is to allow larger boats to
travel directly to Manteo and other Dare County harbors from
Albemarle Sound and the Atlantic Intercoastal Waterway. The use
of the North Channel will shorten the trip from Albemarle Sound
to Manteo, or, vice-versa,-by: approximately 26 miles.
Figure 2 shows the alignment and controlling depths, of the
North Channel. The channel will be 9 feet deep (8 feet plus
1 foot of overdredging), 100 feet wide and approximately 1.5
miles long. An estimated 92,000 cubic yards of fine sand
will be removed from this section of the channel.
Disposal of the dredged spoil material will be on diked
upland sites southeast of Manteo and just to the north of U. S.
Highway 64/264. Figure 2 shows the general location of these
disposal areas. Figure 3 gives amore specific location of the
dikes and spillways and indicates typical dike sections. Table 1
shows the volumes of the proposed dikes, which total just over
185,000.cubic yards. This volume provides twice as much volume
as is proposed to be dredged. One foot of free board is also
provided on each dike.
NCDNRCD is proposing to begin dredging the North Channel on
January 4, 1989. The time of construction for this channel is
estimated to be 60 days, with actual time depending on weather
conditions and contractor capabilities.
* Seive analysis of four core samples taken from area to be
dredged indicated that 97 percent of the material is medium and
fine sand and 3 percent, silt and clay.
(2)
2. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Project
Noise - There will be noise from heavy equipment used to
construct the higher dikes around the disposal areas and from the
pipeline dredge used to remove material from the channel. This
will be a temporary impact, with noise from dike construction
lasting approximately 45 days, and that from dredging
approximately 60 days. Because the work will occur in winter and
because most of the work is located more than one mile from any
residential areas, very few people would be impacted by the
noise.
Air Quality - The combustion of fuels during dike
construction and dredging will cause a very localized and
temporary increase in combustion products (air pollutants).
Water Quality - The pipeline dredge, when using a cutterhead
in combination with suction, causes limited disturbance of
surrounding sediments resulting in minor localized turbidity.
This will cause a short-term decrease in light penetration and a
corresponding decrease in photosynthetic activity and growth of
plants in the water at and downcurrent from the site. The
disturbed sediment may also release nutrients and other attached
sub'stance's. If the `bottom-.-materia-l -con-ta ns or.gani.c-..matter,
bacterial decomposition may occur, resulting in a lowering of
dissolved oxygen and a reiease of nutrients. These water quality
effects will be temporary, localized and of minor significance;
particulary because the dredging will be undertaken during the
cold winter months when plant metabolism is low and dissolved
oxygen levels are relatively high.
Waters that are transported along with dredged bottom
sediments can, in some cases, have an impact on the quality of
surface and ground waters near the spoil disposal site. In this
case, because the composition of the bottom of the North Channel
is composed almost entirely of fine sands, the turbidity of the
effluent released from the diked disposal areas should not be
that much higher than that of the sound waters. Any increases in
turbidities in the receiving waters should return to predredging
levels shortly after disposal activities cease. Seepage of this
effluent into the groundwaters under the disposal area should not
affect water quality. NCDNRCD sampled the sediments in
Shallowbag Bay and the Wanchese Channel in 1984 and found no
significant concentrations of pollutants.
Ecological Effects - A survey conducted in August of 1984
by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries found no important
benthic communities in or near the channel from Shallowbag Bay
south to Wanchese. Dredging of the channel will result in the
loss of all bottom organisms in or on the substrate to the depth
of the cut. Recruitment of biota from adjacent undisturbed areas
(3)
should approximate those lost during dredging. The recovery
period should be from one to two years. The channel to be
dredged is an authorized Federal channel and has been previously
disturbed. By completing dredging in the North Channel during
the winter, the loss of organisms will be lessened because the
brown shrimp, blue-crabs, and juvenile fin fish (trout, spot, and
croaker) do not start moving into that area until May and June.
It is not expected that the placement of dredged spoil material
will have any significant impact because the areas to be diked
have previously been used for disposal of dredged materials.
Endangered Wildlife - The project will not have an adverse
effect on known endangered wildlife species.
Cultural Resources - There will be no impacts to known
archeological, historic, or cultural resources.
Wetlands - The proposed spoil sites are located on old spoil
islands which are part of the Pirates Cove (Roanoke Properties)
development.. The dikes for the three disposal areas will all be
constructed on top of old dikes and at least 10 feet from coastal
wetland areas. Silt fencing or berms will be used to keep the
dike material from eroding into wetland areas. An approved
sedimentation and :erbsion control plan will -'be. -followed.
3. Reasons for Concluding that an EIS is Not Warranted
The major reason for concluding that an Environmental Impact
Statement is not needed is the fact that all areas of the
proposed project (channel area and disposal area) have been
disturbed previously by similar actions.
4. Final Statement - For reasons given above, an Environmental
Impact Statement will not be prepared for the North Channel
Maintenance Dredging Project.
MANTEO TO WANCHESE AND NORTH CHANNELS
I ALBEMARLE SOUND
i •
o?z?,sis°r t0o?
ar..n° o
¢,wi `L'ID
0
.«'food
!H IMt .?
o?Z
MAN ?r ,;;..•, . Nf'
vi ct
C) sit
' . ? 'fly
z O?I'A
43
i?

c? 1
/
-
K C.
, N
NAGS
HEAD \ C
l OL40

NC ??
?
AS
thCh nel I Oct
? NN
? ? A?tlc
?1L

Y LOCALITY MAP
SCALE Of MILES
o so to

."It CL NDOW t!
VCAT.CL 111'M•
a

1
r
a
p ?
ItH z

?? Q
,1?1 \ I
- f9
C O N
', O
It Z

• a O
'Z 346
e ?
o Ir
Cn
k? r r
15 ACRES
tr
ANCHESE b 6
0

t, Q
.
E 15
o ?? LIGHT
Ss
ROANOKE
MARSHES

DARE COUNTY 6

M Oc
YITN
xrrlts
.
YI am!
co uYr?r®
?y "4 .
Mtw. rftt
N D
SOU ??O!!ti ../
o!!i II?t: f..lt w•./
Ir.t?t.
C 0
N•r ..IO?t?
..to
/{
p /?
• .o..t cL so'
AT Cl t1.0' N M
`? V(.T CL t/.i M.l q
0
+ ? " ?I JC
,

Ir
,
,
?
'" ?? 1.11. M•1 h,1.•w +. .. I'Ma? .. •I•
MLw
ViAl
ID
YA7IYINO
lr
MIN.It I• IA• 0/.". I.W - Wwtw Ctw..n•1 M w•.•wN f- • HMI ?•Ir•••w
NORTH CHANNEL
NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE Of MILES
0 2 4
CORPS OF FNGINFERS WILMINGTON N C
4- FIGURE; 2
NORTH CHANNEL MAINTENANCE
NAVIGATION PROJECT
NOVEMBER, 1987
Light
.1,o
4•
` North Channel
?e
. G S H ?? A D
6Proposed Previously' So
`?5 Section Permitted
_•? (9 feet deep) Section SS
(8 feet) G.o
1?0 ?? Mot er Vineyard 7.0 Previouslv
Dredged
,• ? Section
•`d\ ?% Baum Point Xr
Lieh g.t
i I
MANTE0,•. ?.
?o(BM 5).? co
.' ' hem "` ter` Ballast
Point
•.?•.?• .??' . •y1 '` Vim.
Sandy Point ht
8;?-??:',•;.;, S Ilowbag Bay
e, ueht
Haven Crvek,'.`'•?;?'?'
Disposal
?; w,te? ?•.i
¢ht Areas
Manteo' X60
s ell Field's '
site
BM\,
R O A N O\ .? I S L A N j ,;
\ ? v ? _ \ Ro?oK??y E
5.0 - Controlling depthe
<: 8 M
in feet, mean low . 3
water.
?9 BM 4 ?. r G(0
0
0
? P
0
0
y? V
_ ? 4Iw
? I N
I I ? ?I
N I I
I
I?
P ?
N ? ? I
19
N a'
a ?.
?w
W-
z ?.

a ?

o 0 ?
?w
' \A
X
I (V
l ?
lx
u
I? t
I
d• I
to I 7:2
I ?
I
i I
I?NI
I
I I
P I
I
I
I

? I•

z
?
J H
q
? a A
' '? w
H
W H
t? D? U fn W
ta) r>QI z Oo
V•I ? ? rn
i m W

a z ° w
00 a
?, H
5 C7 H ?
H ? A W

S r74 EA
r-1 H P4
W U W
z

FC4 0
z
U
P4
x

a
0
z

a)
W
x +) H
roo roro
41 0 4J -H 4J
0 r-) 4) U) 4 H ?-I
•r•I r-I z a) rl a)
+) •rl .u w a, .? 4J 41

41 ?. r-) U) H ?
.4 0 r-) U) ro +) P
rl r r-q 0 4.4 A
a) 4J rl o -'I U) 0 . g a) •ri 4J N
(d
? 3 o m ?
f °
(
d 4a • r
? ': Q) U)
o a) ) -H
+
0 r{ U) Q ri 09 a) 4 0 ?4 4a d
U] ? k
-1ro
? (d rc$ °
ro
() ro ? •
? 4-4
Q)
X ro (0 +) -P ? 0 ro a) U) ? 0 N
•-I •? a) H •11 0 4A tP r- ?4 T) r{
ro U) > +)r, 3 4a 40) ro •rl ?4 0a ro
O as a) •ri -H a .u ro ro v 0
ro •14 0 3 ro m rt -P -rq U) o a) -rq
rt
ro (1) P •r) N +) (U 4.4 A s? 4) 4)
(?
? 4J? ro3
oo
. N . k•rq -P U,p .
W p -H (U a) 4 b-I U) a) k a) 4-4 ro +) ro ?
0 3: +) o U) o ri 4) (1) o (a r? (1) ro
r N
d 4)
0 ro
U) 4-) ro • '
(1) 4-) 4 p
3 (1) ro a1 U (0 +) a)
a (d O>~A V (d r4 044 F? >4 (d 04
040 roro i") p>~a) 0 lfi 00 4 ?
4-) +1 n r-{ 04 rot:;) roro9N 4 ?U 0 rd PI

? (d
-1
?
o
w
O
a)
a1- (
d rd 0 En
t
ro g 4)(d z U) .N
?ro C: 3 U •r4 ro 4 Ed Ax A 0 0 a)
I? H w (1) S.. rl •rl U U) +) -4 H
? b I i ?'
>~
n Ix 4 a) • x a1 Q a) A P 3 ? N l
d ? •r
I
0 ro -r+ (1) x v 9-11 ,4 it U) ::1 0 > U r-i
v ro4IQ ? roro+'
4J 4J °
U) v ro +la1i
U) () V) -rq ?4 r
i :j 0
b o
(d O
d 4 U RA °
(
dro r
-) q -
3 N ? U) a) N W
? U) [
- (d °
rt U)
ro U) U
) U) p, .
?+P 0 r
iN U •a+
1 0 04J
(TJ U) (d +) 4 4 4 U) U) F: rd ?' 4)
o U) 0 0ro0 4 roro +)N ty, >-; a)4
i
a) 0 0 •rl •rl (n U) - •n (n (1) +) +) 4 4 04
A H ro
rI
U UDU (0 X(1)H>1
a)9>4 +)U r-i k ON
rt 0 •r') 4 4) ro N N •rl q •r) -rq 0 •ri `j o {~ •ri C, 4 0
+) ro 4J U) 4 U) rn A 0 H ro 4 3 0 rl H ;~ • r{ U 4-I

a)
+-)
0
z ri N (Y) NP L
NORTH CHANNEL NAVIGATION PROJECT

Dike Volumes*
Site #1
Approximate Total Area: 3.79 acres
Area of Dike: 1.98 acres
Area Inside Dike: 1.81 acres
Dike Height: 10.00 feet
Dike Volume (Inside Dike): 26,300 cubic yards
Dike Volume (Including Inside Scope): 33,000 cubic yards
Site #2
Approximate Total Area: 4.82 acres
Area of Dike: 2.86 acres
Area Inside Dike: 1.96 acres
Dike Height: 8.0 feet
Dike Volume _( Inside "Dike )_.. -22 I00 `cubic yards
Dike Volume
(Including Inside Slope): 29,300 cubic yards
Site #3
Approximate Total Area:
Area of Dike:
Area Inside Dike:
11.30 acres
4.87 acres
6.43 acres
Dike Height:
Dike Volume (Inside Dike):
Dike Volume
(Including Inside Slope):
Total Volume of Sites
#1, #2 and #3:
11 feet
103,700 cubic yards
123,400 cubic yards
185,700 cubic yards
* Volumes associated with the 1.0 foot of freeboard are not
included in these totals.
Sample
Number
1
2
3
4
y DATA FOR NORTH CHANNEL
CORE SEDIMENT SAMPLES
i
Approximate Distance 1 Water 2 Approximate Depth 3
from Junction (feet) Depth (ft) of Sample Qt)
6,700 7.5 3.0
4,900 6.0 4.0
3,100 7.0 3.0
1,300 7.5 3.0
1 See attached survey map for approximate locations.
,--7 -~-°Wate-r,-depths 7were approximately foot deeper than` nean
low water depths shown on attached survey map. Sampling was
done on October 28, 1988 from 9:00 - 12:00 a.m.
3 Each sample was collected in an aluminum cylinder, 4 inches
in diameter, that was vibrated into the bottom of the
channel, then capped and removed by means of a water jet.
After a sample was lifted into a work boat, the vibrocore
clamp was removed and that empty part of the cylinder was
cut off with a hacksaw. Work was performed by a certified
scuba diver trained in collecting bottom samples in the
manner described.

? T
• 4
r
SIM E .1.?AUSIS MTN Silr
P°-OJECT S0. /f/;00A T1,4 /ANN
P=tOJECT BO•M.M : 0.
DATE SX-Ttr- ::0.
DESCQIpTION DEP?'E
TESTED BY -
lild
!Pt:T-D BY "
C: E-MI.TD BY
MOI_?:'L'Zq COST-.,-
Tare # - t'rTC^ L CF SOLIDS FOR
. ?`
Tare Wt. Gms. Pan -)-; 1
T`'t !'t. Gms. - ? Seap le - COntliner G=s. 1
nr.. ra. •.tr r?,-ra;-
_ Gas . I ? - - °- Cis.
Ito; St....2
sr,:: S2rcl
Sieve I Dia. I Wt. Retained Gas. I To razstal: Sa-mle I =asst :s
O ( Spec. L2--: is -
O I / Oo7
C
0

es I ( .
90 ? ? q I

0(tra, fug..( I ?a
zoo
f/t o? CAy
*Applicable only if total vei ht of
d sample requires splitting.
J NC t.•.. ? ? GH-t'
%
1
SIZi E ,X,`at SIS DATA SiI .E;
P.°.OJECT \0. NIt T,(? (?J? pN^,?'L
PW. F.CT `:AIE BORI::C :0.
DATE SA *_,'.- ::0.
DESCRIPTIOV DEPT.:
T
ESTED BY
C0: PL•TED BY -
Q4QC:i'cC::EJ By
MOIS..., r CO\"mT:
Tare tr12S T Cr SOLIDS =0R
Tzre rot. cm s. I Pa;l.
Eec '.'t. Gms. ' I Saa?lz - Co::ta=::e- G-s.
Tom.. ?.1. G'IS. I 'Tr ?'n•.r?_..er G-t I • I
- - 5. I
TIC. Sn1it Sa-=2 G ' I s
Sie,.•e l.t+„•111Ve '
I Dfa. Wt.
Retained C r`'ss? =s
ms. I Total Sa..o1e assz:.s
I ! Spec. U=4 ts
o. I I d !
0I o I
o
7-7
o ?? I I
I I .$
I I f-
i I I. i I
i I CIO
I I ??
I I
*APPliczble only if total ueioht of sample requires s '
.
Plittinn.
SIc: E .L`.xL --SIS D.IT.I Si1EE;
P°nJECT S0.
P=ROJECT BO?.I.:C ..
DATE "- SA:.L*?- ::0.
DESCI.t
IPT IO.V DE.D?:i .
TESTED BY • ,
CO.MPU'?ED BY
-
A!OIS.... r CO C!"=C::S' BY
` :T.
Tare 0 tdr-Tc--:i
L Or . SOLIDS FOR
_---
3
i
*ApPlicable only if total weight of I
- Splitting.
- SI:aE ,L?;iu,YSIS D.l?.1 SiI;•.E;
'PPDJECT NO. OVUMK CA?i4NN0'C?
PROJECT ::.1%IE BOR=C ::0.
DATE SA:.!?, -r
;•0
DESCRnTION DEPT:i
TESTED BY _
C0: ?VrZD BY
CH'cC_:zD By
Tare 0 t•1'c?C i Or SOLID ---
T_c ' ??t. Gins. ? 'Pan
T` - 't. Gms, ' I Sa?? le - Ccntai. ar G'.
nr.. ram Gms, I ''~ -afner Gms. s.
•s. I I
Sieve # l:i =J.Lazl ve
Dia.
Pvt. Retained G i •, Pass,
Ps- I Total S?»ole I. ass":;
I I d :i Soec.
/aOZ
°I E
--D ? I goo I _ .
I
. I I ?o I -
9?.? 3 3 s
I w
I I Reds
'y • .7 ,2
*Applicable only if totsl weight of sample requires splittin .
CD i
C??+fl,V`?'
i
q R S a t
M a 1
R ? ?Q R H
? a7

RSA
+ w)
t
+
N

1
t Q?
1
t
4 t?
sr +
4 1
y' 4
y r:
Fa'

Q
M
R
1
1
I,e

oa
1
I
M R 1O
. fy <
I
1
• R ?R
I
.n
r
r?
i .

0 <
?1
1 .c
1
J .p e? ?bo
O f7 1 OVT • ,Ir
1

•r • <
Iti
r
?. R r o

1-
a
1
• R to ,
(

e w
sy +,Qb

1
(
}

s 1
N a
?
o r; RR i
i
R
A y ? .
M
1

R

R
R
1
r
• 1
4 + R ?:
w . w.n i
- - 1
N
M1 a •; qR
1
r; +; R
• . w
' O Q '?' / ?" sa o 4
4 e o ?
R 1 4
R R
w w
w q R R
. M r p
p a o
• w it ?
a a a
w w ?
p a O O
p w .r .n
s.
OQ +
VV
R a o a
I
R
r
1
V,
n` .

R
w

0

F-
z

a a
r
a a ?!
4 a
.? r
a
:. r
r ••
n ?
a a a
00 4 09 3N I-1
-Q 1

a a
• I
{ W
Z
r
J

s. : J
O

Z
n w O
• k U

O

4 ? a
It

a I
4
i
.
s -
H?1VW

r/ '` r J ran ? Q Q r/^'.

d a'
m OD

$

M `
-77
H ?l C!W
I Q
w
~
00409 3N1I o
M U

*M -- a I
• w

w
5
U
/ O

w o y q?
w - w w A
O
O
U
O H
: U
• a M1w Q q rT.
Li
_ U

Y

a

W
Z LL
j w W
rr

?Un 0
Z
cr.
0
It 4 • a ]j O
0
W O
co
LL .

9 r! R} / 4 It

p / + A ?
=
1J11 Y
J
Q
W _
s; a R IR W
1 -0
i WZ
>a W
Z
t.
A
+ p cr

N

W
Z
W !-
`
' a M
R 4 4 4 Ri
w • + + ` -
cr o
?W 0
W
a R ?2 W
0 x ... ; ;

I
o 0 + v
P O `
• P
• O
w w

f
a
c
4

4
a
4
C/
V
4

4

H
C:
D:
F-
U_

2
F-
3
Q
k I W

a.
r ?
W f
2
t -? 1- O
• z a
I J
0
a:
f-
Z
0
U

O
P
a
a
•
f
? p
P
• r
P •
r

l

W FZ 2

ti 2 W

p 0
U QJ

?PfL9
>:
?'
o no -
00 ZQ
0
0
a ax NJ
?2 0
/ cr
f 0
U
F-
o w ? '? o ?

• w°
TA*
R ? as w
_ I
q q .. w a;
r ?'? r r
0 Q? O(f R Q zt- . R
r ? r r c r
r
R R R... R R
c r ? c r r
R 4 4 4 R
0 0 q q o
c c r r c
c r c ??. c c
a q K :q,. q o
.? c c c r
M
. 4 R- 4 R R
r r r -.? r c
o R R ?, '? R R

FONSI
RECEIVED
NORTH CHANNEL
NOV 141988
MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT
;:'.Secretarys Office
DARE COUNTY
1. Narrative Description
The North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development (NCDNRCD) is proposing to do maintenance
dredging of an authorized Corps of Engineers a channel in Dare
County running north from Shallowbag Bay toward Albemarle Sound
(See Figure 1). Approximately one-fourth (0.5 miles) of this
channel was dredged to 8 feet in 1985 with environmental review
accomplished by a Corps of Engineers Environmental Assessment and
a State Negative Declaration (attached). The entire section of
channel was last dredged in 1964.
The main purpose of this dredging is to allow larger boats to
travel directly to Manteo and other Dare County harbors from
Albemarle Sound and the Atlantic Intercoastal Waterway. The use
of the North Channel will shorten the trip from Albemarle Sound
to Manteo, or vice-versa, by approximately 26 miles.
'Figure 2 shows the alignment and controlling depths, of the
North Channel. The channel will be 9 feet deep (8 feet plus.
1 foot of overdredging), 100 feet wide and approximately 1.5
miles long. An estimated 92,000 cubic yards of fine sand
will be removed from this section of the channel.
Disposal of the dredged spoil material will be on diked
upland sites southeast of Manteo and just to the north of U. S.
Highway 64/264. Figure 2 shows the general location of these
disposal areas. Figure 3 gives a more specific location of the
dikes and spillways and indicates typical dike sections. Table 1
shows the volumes of the proposed dikes, which total just over
185,000 cubic yards. This volume provides twice as much volume
as is proposed to be dredged. One foot of free board is also
provided on each dike.
NCDNRCD is proposing to begin dredging the North Channel on
January 4, 1989. The time of construction for this channel is
estimated to be 60 days, with actual time depending on weather
conditions and contractor capabilities.
* Seive analysis of four core samples taken from area to be
dredged indicated that 97 percent of the material is medium and
fine sand and 3 percent, silt and clay.
V

(2)
2. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Project
Noise - There will be noise from heavy equipment used to
construct the higher dikes around the disposal areas and from the
pipeline dredge used to remove material from the channel. This
will be a temporary impact, with noise from dike construction
lasting approximately 45 days, and that from dredging
approximately 60 days. Because the work will occur in winter and
because most of the work is located more than one mile from any
residential areas, very few people would be impacted by the
noise.
Air Quality - The combustion of fuels during dike
construction and dredging will cause a very localized and
temporary increase in combustion products (air pollutants).
Water Quality - The pipeline dredge, when using a cutterhead
in combination with suction, causes limited disturbance of
surrounding sediments resulting in minor localized turbidity.
This will cause a short-term decrease in light penetration and a
corresponding decrease in photosynthetic activity and growth of
plants in the water at and downcurrent from the site. The
disturbed sediment may also release nutrients and other attached
substances. If the bottom material contains organic matter,
dissolved oxygen and a release of nutrients. These water quality
effects will be temporary, localized and of minor significance;
particulary because the dredging will be undertaken during the
cold winter months when plant metabolism is low and dissolved
oxygen levels are relatively high.
Waters that are transported along with dredged bottom
sediments can, in some cases, have an impact on the quality of
surface and ground waters near the spoil disposal site. In this
case, because the composition of the bottom of the North Channel
is composed almost entirely of fine sands, the turbidity of the
effluent released from the diked disposal areas should not be
that much higher than that of the sound waters. Any increases in
turbidities in the receiving waters should return to predredging
levels shortly after disposal activities cease. Seepage of this
effluent into the groundwaters under the disposal area should not
affect water quality. NCDNRCD sampled the sediments in
Shallowbag Bay and the Wanchese Channel in 1984 and found no
significant concentrations of pollutants.
Ecological Effects - A survey conducted in August of 1984
by the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries found no important
benthic communities in or near the channel from Shallowbag Bay
south to Wanchese. Dredging of the channel will result in the
loss of all bottom organisms in or on the substrate to the depth
of the cut. Recruitment of biota from adjacent undisturbed areas

(3)
should approximate those lost during dredging. The recovery
period should be from one to two years. The channel to be
dredged is an authorized Federal channel and has been previously
disturbed. By completing dredging in the North Channel during
the winter, the loss of organisms will be lessened because the
brown shrimp, blue-crabs, and juvenile fin fish (trout, spot, and
croaker) do not start moving into that area until May and June.
It is not expected that the placement of dredged spoil material
will have any significant impact because the areas to be diked
have previously been used for disposal of dredged materials.
Endangered Wildlife - The project will not have an adverse
effect on known endangered wildlife species.
Cultural Resources - There will be no impacts to known
archeological, historic, or cultural resources.
Wetlands - The proposed spoil sites are located on old spoil
islands which are part of the Pirates Cove (Roanoke Properties)
development. The dikes for the three disposal areas will all be
constructed on top of old dikes and at least 10 feet from coastal
wetland areas. Silt fencing or berms will be used to keep the
dike material from eroding into wetland areas. An approved
sedimentation and erosion control plan will be followed. _
77
3. Reasons for Concluding that an EIS is Not Warranted
The major reason for concluding that an Environmental Impact
Statement is not needed is the fact that all areas of the
proposed project (channel area and disposal area) have been
disturbed previously by similar actions.
4. Final Statement - For reasons given above, an Environmental
Impact Statement will not be prepared for the North Channel
Maintenance Dredging Project.
W

MANTEO TO WANCHESE AND NORTH CHANNELS
14
VA.
N C. \ f
/ -
? N
1 C
N C \
5 c?\` ?\ OCE'N
?iL'N11L
Y LOCALITY MAP
KALE Of' MILE.
o so eo
"esRse!Q
a
r
a a
:' o z
a 9y IEr ?
z O? --?
W
cl)
N (P ,
amt
Z sss a
rLINININC 1,01s
v :, g?eM
ANCMESE
\?L'\l7° O Q ^ 77 LIGMTYOq$E
ROANOKE
MARSHES
ARE COUNTY ?
Ojy Q% GO •oo'norr 'i
.rl? YITM Q
K T TIES
w Out
?Y
t?3/ ?v.. •. «C«. WIT
N p %" MIO I? (..I I W...
S O rtln..
P.4
1 O ? ``Ir•
"0011 CCL
(.I L, .so
r? V
` i
ALBEMARLE SOUND
w NAGS
HEAO
Iookt,
o•
Nor th\.Ch
a. ?
4 1" root
o_
O
o?
'Z swim M«T pIM
., • #4m,
MAN ""1141. eo oow
rise ".v ee1Mt CIS V(qT. CI III .6.04W.
re.I E. CL eo'
Y(. T. CL..o'r.r.
O yTl?? s? ;? 1s??..
?Ir
_ '#L w_
-___ YAIIYIMG ----_--
1 1
1 MIMq. I. 14. 0r49.I, I.I.I • 166wlw ch~01 M a..I«wC T..w a NMI ?eT....e
0.(1. I. L4mh-" .M of"- e.Mt C.e.I 4.I.rg tI.I1M.Ot11« .III.ep.. -0
NORTH CHANNEL
NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE OF MILES
0 2 4 4
CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON, N.C.
?V

?• FIGURE 2
NORTH CHANNEL MAINTENANCE
NAVIGATION PROJECT
NOVEMBER, 1987

` _` North Channel
G S H A D
3
Proposed Previously''
25 Section Permitted
I,.._, a to
(9 feet deep) Section
(8 feet) i.d
?BM • ? .. Vii,.
13 •• . IL
•? •?ot• ' ;` got ersVineyarcl ~ ?0 Previously
?S Dredged
Section
?`•`0? Baum Point 7i'
Ligh 1).?
i
i
• _• Ly
'.iMANTED; :•,•
o(BM 5) % i co K
: hem r` Ballast
''? ?i ??L •' . ':4c?,? ' pia Point
/ r•' H _::l?:z.;,.? ?`;'?%w Sandy Point
r ` ° _ ' " ? :'8:.+,'.?:???''•?: S To w b a g B a y
Ught
Haven CrpOk,,.
Disposal
?:.. wat
i Ynt Areas
Manteo`•
ell field'• . , %` °?.
s %`\ Site ?'?i•' ? 0 \'.
?' ? T 8M CAP \. ?
R O A N Off. _ I S L A N' ? j R
soulqp-l
5.0 - Controlling depths,
in f eet, mean low ' • ?^ , 83
water.
4 ?. Gds
'• A ;S? /AAA A //ae LMe taw• a

o 0
p z
H
C7
A
N
A H
(r? H
t? Do U U) 00
Do. co
Q
l? V. ` M rI rl
04 w
o z
H U) W
44
a F( a
N "? _ f z W N
U P4
x
0 0
' ? UI
7t:) rov ?ro
Q p?z yN ??
MI r-I U) a) 4J r4
19 A U?
a) -P r.1 0 -rq En 0 4J 4)
3 N-x.. ___ . _ .. 0 _ ro-
cd 44 •rl u ro 3 N vi ro a) .P •r) ?
= I w 0r+ N n ?0x()r. 0 N w 0
N^1 ^1 ro ri a) r? •r1 r-I •r1 k to }! Id ro 0
N I W i W W It 0 4 4 ro •rJ l rg a) 4-I [
rS4 ro (d +P -P N 0 ro a) co N 0
I l7 -4 -ri a) r-I •r4 0 44 tP ri 9 ro rl
1 ( ? roNy +) 9 3 44
qtil (d -H N 0a a)
ro a) r1 r-? •r{ F }7 ro rd 010 ?.
a1 •rl [ 3 ro (1) ri 4-) •r1 U) 0 a) "A ri
I ?1 Ni? 4 x ro 0 N •r? W 4J (0 4a A ?-I -P
0 Q) ro (d 3 •r1 U) 0 0 0
I v -
w rl a9 WNV xo 44 ro
a? ?N r-
d \u H ? ma) )
I
m 0 34 41 uto0 r,4J a)?i 0 (d s~ a) ro
\ I 0 IT 9 •ri •r1 •ri 0 44 0? N ro a) N
I? y u)41ro•rl NrON•N 30 09N ra 0 0 0 -P a)
7 u a fd4 09AQ0 fdt~ 044 Ej >>~ fEl a
000 ro•rl r-4 prl0 o 4 00N r{
y X I -•r,N+I •M Ha robnroro9N - 00 roa
7: 2 (d ro w H r •r4 •ri N 0 LH H 0
I 0 N W- (d ro •-1 0 U) r•I U) 4 Id g 0 cd >~ U) .u
X 4 ro A r-I 3 u •r? ro 0 N A x A 0 0 a)
/ \A ?. 4j H U) W 4 H •ri 0 N
f I ?" 0 a) a) 0 u) N -P a) r 14J (d a) §q 0 ? 4u +1 a
9-P ? k I~ a) •-I .k 0 A Q) A N 3 4J a (d (D •H
v ` I 1 I 0 • ro •ri a) x a) I~ •r1.0 (d U) 0 0 D 0 r-I
rd M ) a) d) rd 4a ri 4 -H ro-P N .u 4 N w a) o •I-
/ V? I 1 I to a
>1 aN a) 4•I -P 9+) O N+Iw ? a o N
ro 0 (d ro 0 H 0 3 w -P - N N a) a) w
3 0 •r? •r1 . 0 0 0 -P O- 4J ro 040 9 4a
P ro H r-4 U) U) W U) I4 4 .N 0 r-I N W -rq -P 0 0 4J
P I ro U) id -P q ci ;% N N z ra 04 U)
`D 0 to 0 0 0 0 0 (d Id 4J a) Ol > a) a)
a) 0 0 •rl •r1 N U) •M N a) -P -P 1'i 9i 0.0
W ro A a -P a) -P N a) >r a) a) ,0 r-4 (d a) r1 Id •r1 4-1
r-I U) a) 0 P 0 0 rx r1 a) x > 4J 41 u r-I 0 N
a r-a 0 •r1 ro a) (d al N •-I r'.' •r1 •-I (d •rl :j 0 rl •rI r? .4 rr1'
z N a 4J T$ iJ U1 4 U) to A 0 r-I TO X' 3 0 r1 H? •ri U 4a
4 I' 0 .. ..
N °I z r? N M 'r L
w

NORTH CHANNEL NAVIGATION PROJECT
Dike Volumes*
Site #1
Approximate Total Area: 3.79 acres
Area of Dike: 1.98 acres
Area Inside Dike: 1.81 acres
Dike Height: 10.00 feet
Dike Volume (Inside Dike): 26,300 cubic yards
Dike Volume (Including Inside Scope): 33,000 cubic yards
M
Site #2
Approximate Total Area: 4.82 acres
Area of Dike: 2.86 acres
Area Inside Dike: 1.96 acres
Dike Height. 8.0 feet
Dike Volume (Inside Dike): 22,100 cubic yards
Dike Volume
(Including Inside Slope): 29,300 cubic yards
Site #3
Approximate Total Area:
Area of Dike:
Area Inside Dike:
Dike Height:
Dike Volume (Inside Dike):
Dike Volume
(Including Inside Slope):
Total Volume of Sites
#1, #2 and #3:
11.30 acres
4.87 acres
6.43 acres
11 feet
103,700 cubic yards
123,400 cubic yards
185,700 cubic yards
* Volumes associated with the 1.0 foot of freeboard are not
included in these totals.

NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR THE
MANTEO TO WANCHESE CHANNEL
MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT
1. Narrative Description
The North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development (NCDNRCD), in preparation for America's 400th Anniversary Cele-
bration at Roanoke island, is proposing to do maintenance dredging of (1)
a portion of the existing navigation channel from Manteo to Wanchese; (2)
an adjoining channel north from Shallowbag Bay toward Albemarle Sound; and
(3) an adjoining area in front of the waterfront docks at Manteo.
The specific purposes of this dredging are (1) to allow critical
maintenance necessary to protect the Elizabeth II historic replica ship from
damage.; (2) to allow sea trials for the Elizabeth II to take place; (3) to
allow the Elizabeth 11 to operate as a tour vessel. from Manteo and to visit
other ports for educational purposes; "(4) to allow°larg7ii__b ats `to travel toll"
Manteo from the Albemarle Sound and the Atlantic Intercoastal Waterway; and
(5) to allow expanded use of the city docks at Manteo.
Site location map number 1 shows the alignment, controlling depths,
and the approximate amounts of sediment to be dredged from each of the two
channels. Both channels will be 10 feet deep and 100 feet wide, as shown on
Plate 1. Location map number 2 shows the location of the area to be dredged
in front of the Manteo's waterfront docks. It will also be dredged to a depth
of 10 feet.
Disposal of the dredged spoil material will be on diked upland sites
located adjacent to the channel from Shallowbag Bay south to U.S. Highway 64/
264 bridge. Site location map number l shows the general location of these
disposal areas. Plate 2 gives a more specific location of the dikes and spill-
ways and also shows a typical dike section. The top of the dike will be 14
feet above mean low water (MLW).
NCDNRCD is proposing to begin dredging the three areas described
above on April 1, 1984, if ,possible. The channel in Shallowbag Bay (Ranges 1,
2, 3, and 4 on Site Map 1) and the area in front of the docks would be completed
first. The estimated time of construction for these two parts is 30 days.
a

-2-
i
The other portions of the channel (Ranges 4a, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9) would then
be dredged, with an estimated time for completion of 30 days. The construction
schedule may vary, depending on weather conditions and contractor capabilities.
2. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Project
Noise - There will be noise from bulldozers used to construct the
higher dikes around the disposal areas and from the pipeline dredge used to
move the material from the bottom of the channels. This will be a temporary
impact, with noise from dike construction lasting approximately 45 days, and
that from dredging approximately 60 days.
Air Quality - The combustion of fuels during dike construction and
dredging will cause a very localized and temporary increase in combustion
products (air pollutants).
Water Quality - The pipeline dredge, when using a cutterhead in
combination with suction. _ disturbs _, surround_i n.g sed..tnn.ts___a.nd. o.re.a.tes ..m.i.n..o:r_.__
turbidity through resuspension of sediment in the water column. This will
cause a short-term decrease in light penetration and a corresponding decrease
in photosynthetic activity and growth of plants in the water at and downcurrent
from the site. The disturbed sediment may also release nutrients and other
attached substances. If the bottom material contains organic materials,
bacterial decomposition may occur, resulting in a lowering of dissolved oxygen
and a release of nutrients. The water quality effects will be temporary and
localized and will not be of major significance.
Waters that are transported along with the bottom sediments by dredg-
ing operations will have an impact on the quality of surface and ground waters
near the spoil disposal site. Depending on the type of material dredged, the
effluent that will be released from the diked disposal areas could increase
turbidity in receiving waters. Turbid'ities in the receiving waters should
return to predredging levels shortly after disposal activities cease. Seepage
of this effluent into the groundwaters under the disposal area could affect
water quality. NCDNRCD is sampling the sediments and waters from the areas
to be dredged to determine whether there are any significant concentrations
of pollutants. Before dredging will be allowed, a Section 401 Water Quality
Certificate must be issued by the N.C. Division of Environmental Management.

f
-3-
Ecological Effects - Dredging of the channel areas will result in
the loss of all bottom organisms in or on the substrate to the depth of the
cut. Recruitment of biota from adjacent undisturbed areas should approximate
those lost during dredging. The recovery period should be from one to two
years. The channels to be dredged are authorized Federal channels and have
been previously disturbed. By completing dredging in Shallowbag Bay in April,
the loss of organisms will be lessened because the brown shrimp, blue crabs,
and juvenile fin fish (trout, spot, and croaker) do not start moving into that
area until early May and June. It is not expected that the placement of dredged
soil material will have any significant impact because the areas to be diked
have previously been used for disposal of dredged materials.
Endangered Wildlife - The project will not have an adverse effect on
known endangered wildlife species.
Cultural Resources - There will be no impacts to known archeological,
historic, or cultural resources,
3. Reasons for Concluding that an EIS is Not Warranted
The major reason for concluding that an Environmental Impact Statement
is not needed is the fact that all areas of the proposed project (channels, dock
area and disposal area) have been disturbed previously by similar,actions.
The environmental effects of the work will be fully evaluated during the review
of permit applications by State and Federal agencies under the provisions of
the Coastal Area Management Act and the Clean Water Act.
It is urgent to complete these navigation improvements to allow the
Elizabeth II to be removed from the water at Wanchese and painted to prevent
damage by shipworms. It is also urgent to allow sea trials to take place
and any corrective actions to be taken by the shipbuilder during a period of
six months after launching, as specified by contract.
4. Final Statement - For reasons given above, an Environmental Impact
Statement will not be prepared for the Manteo to Wanchese Maintenance Dredging
Project.
I concur with the decision to not require an Environmental Impact
Statement for this project.
NORTH CA A DEPAR T OF NAT RAIL
RE OUR ND-COM Y DEV NT
By
L ?7. v .f. .. . V

r
lY ?J
1
c?
J
{
i
.ti
-i
?j
a
w 1
N
a
0
F t T
Y y7
? •c.r
^A Y.
r -
` Y
ICJ r.

J
Q ? C
f
•1r
Z
?
? i
Q 3

L

2' J
C
L
_
c ? z ...:c n

C N `

d , J

2 C C a <

ms

!
j
u
1 ul h ?, h h

4

1q r-
j (P -.9

O t`

tr
0 0
ti
kit
o[

C ,
:
s
W cc C m O of fh O d
G
? K .
tD
Z
J
J
d
v 0
Z
D - K Cn V) V cam' M 0-
13
c I
Iv- °.=
10 OL E
T F
•
r

Z 30
/1F w,
r

f

d

Y w

v J . Yj?•
? ,
,? J
?'y?

w
4
??E
o?C aP d ,.-„f
r
W v?
1-
-ar £
12
4e'?? J N
d
Z
2
' 0 3
r ?4
F 7
a
?r
4' 'r
.Joe 0
W
I
C c
K z

?
/ h

o?.
z
4
v
v

}
ft?
Q-
m

4
au
?o

W o
p? ? P
X i& p
Q
W
t ?
I w
I w 3? c
?I <
,I
Q cn
<I ?, Y
I Q
v.
I
? o
J+
Cu,f ?
W
I
t
I
I
I
C
u
u
r
n
C
J
l
x
?- '41,
1

y?.
!9 e)

M
Lu -
W
t

C7
Q p
0
O o
..

O W;

LLI

O

M
r.
f

L
4
2
1 ?
f
P
I ?

LU
Z ?
? ?
O

Z
w i.
l
e
U ?
?
2

_ W
Q

D CD ?. }
0 0 J

O

3
wANUi?t
Plto =. cr
ftGA LocAT-00 MAP
+u . tin
2ogNoKE
5.04ND

a
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE OF THE MANTEO-OREGON INLET CHANNEL
(MANTEO TO ' ,VgCHESE )
*LAVTFO (SHALLC.:'SAG) BA's'
D4RE.COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SEPTEMBER 1983
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE OF THE MANTEO-OREGON INLET CHANIEL
(MANTFO TO WANCHESE)
:4. MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
1.0 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action.
and the Town of Manteo, in preparation for
celebration (Roanoke Island, North Carolina)
Engineers to maintain the channel from Manteo
around the north ene;?,; a Roanoke Island.
The State of North Carolina
America's 400th Anniversary
have requested the Corps of
to Wanchese and the channel
,ontrolling depths in these
are 6 fiThe request for maintenance of these channels is based
tM on the operation of a replica of Sir Walter Raleigh's vessel
ELIZABETH as a tour vessel in Manteo. The ELIZABETH II is designed to be
the centerpiece of the anniversary celebration, to act as tourist
attraction, to visit other ports, and to provide a unique type of sailing
experience in the waters around Roanoke Island. It is a 50-ton, twin-decked
vessel, 70 feet long, with a mast height of 70 feet, and drawing eight feet
of water.
The existing project was authorized.by the River and Harbor Acts of June 25,
1910, May 17, 1950, July 14, 1960, and December 31, 1970, and provides for a
channel 20 feet deep and 400 feet wide across the ocean bar at Oregon Inlet;
a channel 14 feet deep and 120 feet. wide from the gorge of Oregon Inlet to
and including a 15-acre basin-of the, same depth at• Wanchese; a channel (Old
House, ,Channel):___12...feet __deep'..and_._10.0 , f.eet--wi.de_--to; the 1-2-food depth in
Pamlico Sound-; a channel 12 feet deep and 100 feet wide from the side
channel to Wanchese (mile 8.2) to a turning basin (200 X 600 feet wide) of
the same depth at Manteo (mile 15.7); and a channel 10 feet deep and 100
feet wide from mile 14.5 of the Manteo-Oregon Inlet Channel to the 10-foot
depth in Albemarle Sound near the northern end of Croatan Soand.
The channel 10 feet deep and 100 feet wide .from mile 14.5 of the Manteo-
Oregon Inlet Channel to the 10-foot depth in Albemarle Sound was justified
on deliveries of petroleum ..products barged from Norfolk, Virginia, to
Manteo, North Carolina. The last shipment was made in October 1975.
Therefore, this feature of the authorized project plan was eliminated from
further, consideration as part of the recommended plan 'in the Manteo
(Shallowbag) Bay, North Carolina,.,, Design :Memorandum 1, General Design
Memorandum, Phase 1, Plan Formulation, July 1977. The last authorization of
December 31, 1970, for this project included the stabilization of Oregon
Inlet with a dual rubblemound jetty system, including means for sand
transfer to adjacent beaches and bottom protection for the Bonner Bridge
across Oregon Inlet. Location of the project is shown on figure 1.
Various aspects of the Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay, North Carolina Project have
been covered in the following environmental documents:
a. Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay, North Carolina, Final Environmental
Statement (filed with EPA April 1979).
s -
b. Final Supplement to the Final EIS, Manteo (Shalloiabag Bay Project,
Dare County, North Carolina (filed with EPA November 1980).
The maintenance of the existing Manteo-Oregon Inlet Channel from mile 8.2 to
mile 15.7 including the turning basin at Manteo and the 6-foot-deep and
100-foot-wide channel from Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay to that. depth in
Albemarle Sound (approximately 1.6 miles) were not covered by the above
documents. The 6-foot channel between Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay and Albemarle
Sound was dredged in 1911. The last maintenance of this channel was
performed in 1964. The controlling depth is presently 6 feet; therefore, no
maintenance is needed at this time. The channel from Manteo to Wanchese
including the basin at Manteo was completed in March 1960 to a depth of 12
feet. This channel was last maintained in 1966. The existing controlling
depth of this channel from Manteo to-*Wanchese is 6 feet.
Vessels analyzed in the economic analysis draw 8 to 8.5 feet (based on
vessels presently using and ones anticipated to use miles 8.2-15.7 of the
Manteo-Oregon Inlet Channel); therefore, a channel 10 feet deep is adequate
to meet the needs of the area. In addition to ELIZABETH II, there are two
tugs and several barges based in Manteo. A deeper channel will allow larger
pleasure and commercial vessels to use the marine and recreational f
facilities in Manteo.
2.0 Description of the Proposed Action.
The proposed action is to perform maintenance dredging of the Manteo-Oregon
Inlet Channel from Wanchese (mile 8..2) to. Manteo (mile 15.7) including the
?.
.600 by 200 foot turning: basin
fleet' deep with 2-fobt over depth and 100 feet wide. Disposal will be on
diked upland sites located along the charnel from Shallowbag Bay south to U.
S. Route 64/264 bridge. Approximately 300,000 cubic yards, of material will
be dredged from various ranges of the channel. Disposal areas and amounts
to be dredged from the various ranges are shown on figure 2. It is
anticipated that an additional approximate 150,000 cubic yards will have to
be removed after 4 years. The disposal area identified for future
maintenance is located just south of the U. S. Route 64/264 bridge. This
area will hold the dredged material from one future maintenance dredging
event. Dredging will take 'place during the time' period. of 1 Occober to
31 March.
3.0 Alternatives. '`
Alternatives considered for this project weze as follows:
r
Disposal Methods: Alternative methods of disposal for dredged
material include on-land disposal in confined or unconfined areas
and open-water diposal in confined or unconfined areas. Uncon-
fined disposal, whether on land or in the water, and confined
disposal in the water is not consistent with the Coastal Zone
Management Program of North Carolina. Therefore, they were not
considered to be viable alternatives.
1)

Various Channel Plans: Based on the economic reanalysis, choices
of channel depths vary between the existing authorized project
depth of 12 feet and a channel 10 feet deep. As stated above, a
10-foot depth (plus) two feet of overdepth is adequate to meet
present and projected navigation needs. No new routes for the
existing channel were considered, because following the route of
the existing channel would have the least environmental impact and
would require the least amount of dredging to perform the
necessary maintenance.
No Action: The only nonstructural alternative available is no
action. The selection.of this alternative would avoid any envi-
ronmental impacts associated with a structural solution but is
considered unacceptable as it Would not provide a solution to the
navigation problem.
4.0 Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action.
[dater Ouality.
i
Shallowbag Bay is classified as SC waters by the N. C. Environmental
Management Commission. Waters having this classification are suitable
fishing and fish propagation' or any other usage requiring waters of lower
quality. Shallowbag Bay is closed" to shellfishing based on total colifo-'m
counts exceeding the total col-iform standard for shellfishing waters.
The Roanoke Sound waters of the project area are classified SA, with a best
usage of shellfishing for market pur`poses..or any other use requiring waters
of lower quality. r...a
Disposal of the dredged material will be in diked upland disposal areas (see
figure 2). Diked upland disposal, as currently planned, is covered by a
nationwide permit (33 CFR 330.5(a)(16)). There is an existing Section 401
(P.L. 95-217) water quality certification (No. 1273) for diked upland
disposal areas.
Turbidity due to dredging and disposal can cause a short-term decrease in
light penetration and dissolved oxygen. These impacts are expected to be
temporary and minor. Turbidity and dissolved oxygen are -expected to return
to ambient levels shortly after completion of dredging and. disposal.
Terrestrial Resources.
The proposed disposal areas have received ;dredged material in the past and,
as a result, the vegetation has been changed from black needlerush Ouncus
roemerianus) marshland to upland early seral stage vegetation. Dominant
shrubs of these areas are saltbush (Baccharis halimifolia) and wax myrtle
(MMyrica cerifera). Various grasses and sedges are also common. The
vegetation within the disposal areas will be completely covered by dredged
material.
3
4
Estuarine Resource,*
The Juncus marshland located along the shores of Shallowbag Bay and Roanoke
Island are irregularly flooded and are influenced primarily by wind tides.
Although black needlerush is the dominant plant species in this portion of
marsh, species like saltmeadow cordgrass' (Spartina patens), big cordgrass
(Spartina cynosuroides), marsilelder (Iva frutescens), saltbush (Bacchaus
halimifolia), and camphorweed (Pluchea purpurascens) are common.
Waterfowl resources in and around the project area are present in good
quantity. Shallowbag Bay and Roanoke Sound provide a feeding and nesting
area for various types of waterfowl. The area is situated near the midpoint
of the Atlantic Flyway and is an important migratory waterfowl habitat.
Wading birds utilize the creeks and adjacent marshlands of Shallowbag Bay.
Birds which use habitats of this type include the ibises, bitterns, and
herons. Other animals common in the area include the whitetailed deer
(Odecoileus virginianus), marsh 'rabbit (S lvilagus palustris), Nutria
(Myocastor coypus), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus: marsh rice rat (Oryzomys
palustris , banded water snake (Natrix fascita), and diamondback terrapin
Malaclemys terrapin). _
The waters of Shallowbag Bay are productive and diverse. Oysters and clams
are found in Shallowbag Bay; however, the area was, closed to shellfish
harvesting in 1972 by the State of North Carolina. The bay also produces
commercially important quantities of crabs and. shrimp. The bay is a-
spawning area for finfish, crabs, -and oysters. Scarboro and Doughs Creeks
are considered primary nursery areds for shrimp.' Along the channel from
_ Shal-lozab.ag; ,B?y, to Wanehese; the waters -are: of het ter -qual-rty, and "there are
a number of commercial oyster harvest areas.
Estuarine bottom provides habitat for benthic invertebrates. These
organisms, including polychaetes, amphipods, isopods, mollusks, and crabs,
provide an-important food source for a variety of species.
The dredging for maintenance of the channel from Manteo to Wanchese is not
expected to cause significant impacts to estuarine resources. The bottom
sediments of the channel are"frequently disturbed.by the turbulence created
by propellers of pleasure and commercial vessels- navigating the channel.
The substrate is, therefore, undesirable habitat -for sessile and burrowing
life forms so they are not expected to occur in great numbers in the
channel. Any sessile or slow-moving organisms which are there will be lost
to the dredge. Bottom sediments in the channel will continue to be
disturbed by large vessels and periodic maintenance dredging. Since bottom
conditions after maintenance would be `similar to existing conditions,
recolonization.by similar inhabitants is expected. Motile organisms should
be able to avoid the dredge cutterhead and escape harm or may be forced to
temporarily leave the bay during' construction. No intertidal areas or
submerged aquatic vegetation should be impacted by the proposed project.
Endangered Species
Informal consultation under Section 7(c)
amended, with.the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
of the Endangered Species Act, as
Service and the National Marine

4
e
Fisheries Service provided the following list of endangered and threatened
species to be considered:
1. Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Caretta caretta)
2. Green Sea Turtle (Chelonia mydas5-
3. Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle Lenidochelys kemnii)
4. Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum)
5. Brown Pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis)
6. Arctic Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus tundris)
7. Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus,leucocephalus)
8. American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis)
9. Red-cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis)
Loggerhead Sea Turtle, (threatened); Green Sea Turtle, (threatened); and
Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle, (endangered). These sea turtles are treated as a
group as they all utilize similar habitats. All of them occur offshore or
in estuarine situations in the area, but only the loggerhead is known to
nest in North Carolina. All of the turtles occur in the higher salinity
reaches of the estuary. Records o loggerhead sea turtles in fresher
situations have occurred, but all•the animals were stranded. These sea
turtles feed principally on invertebrates, marine algae, rooted plants, and
fish. The main reasons for their recline include overexploitation by man,
loss of suitable beaches for nesting, and drowning caused by inadvertent
captures in fishing nets. Since 'the dredging will take place during they
time period of 1 October to 31 March (period of low activity of sea turtles
in North Carolina) in waters of low salinities,, and there is a lack of
records for the turtles in. this area of Roanoke Sound, the proposed action
is , not expected t_o,_.aff.ec.k _.the_s-ea_ turtles.
Shortnose Sturgeon, (endangered). The status of the shortnose sturgeon in
North Carolina waters is unknown., but many researchers feel that it may be
extirpated. Populations of shortnose sturgeon are known to occur both to
the north -and the south of the., State, lending some credence to the
speculation that the species may be-present but so far has gone undetected:
Pollution, damming of coastal rivers, and overfishing are generally
considered to be the principal causes for the decline of this species.
Spawning areas are thought to 'require fast flows and rocky bottoms,
requirements not met by the project area: therefor'e, though project dredging
will be ongoing during part of the spawning season (February - May), no
effect should occur as no spawning-'habitat is available. Although the date
is inconclusive, it appears to be the consensus of the shortnose sturgeon
recovery team that the species is, extirpated in North Carolina; therefore,
the project should have no effect on it. '
Brown Pelican (endangered), On the east and gulf coasts this species ranges
from North Carolina to Texas with most of the breeding in South Carolina and
Florida. Currently, there are three breeding .colonies of brown pelicans in
the State - one on North Rock Island behind Ocracoke Inlet in the Pamlico
Sound, one on two small dredge islands in the lower Cape Fear River, and one
which just became established on a dredge island behind Oregon Inlet. The
5
r
greatest threats currently facing the brown pelican in North Carolina appear
to be continual erosion of their island nesting sites and overwash of their
colonies during severe storms. Pesticides do not seem to be a significant
problem for the brown pelican in the State, as records indicate that the
North Carolina population has remained relatively,. stable during the general
periods of decline nationwide. The proposed action will not affect the
brown pelican.
Arctic Peregrine Falcon, (endangered). The Arctic Peregrine Falcon breeds
in the Arctic tundra and migrates along the atlantic Coast and middle North
America to Central and South America. Some overwintering occurs in the
project area. Their primary diet in the project area is shore birds. The
reasons for decline appear to be the accumulation of chlorinated hydrocarbon
pesticides in the birds' tissues which causes reproduction failure, illegal
shooting, electrocution by powerlines, and loss of nesting sites through
habitat modification. Migrating birds use the barrier beaches and the outer
banks as a temporary stopover. The proposed action will not affect any
peregrine which may occasionally occur in.the area.
Bald Eagle (endangered). The bald- eagle is -found infrequently throughout ;
the United States, having had its populations decimated during the 1950's
and 1960's by the use of chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides and
indiscriminate shooting. In North Carolina, it occurs principally as a
migrant and as an uncommon winter resident: In 1980 a bald eagle nest was
discovered on Collington Island in Dare County, N. C., the first reported
nesting in the State since 1971. 'This nesting did not produce any young.
The project will. not destroy any potential nesting trees and will not
significantly greduce feeding__ areas,., Therefpre,,__the, prop_o_sed._ac.tion_ will .not
affect th bald eagle.
American Alligator (endangered). This species reaches the northern extent
of its range in the Albemarle Sound region. It occurs in. coastal rivers,
marshes, and estuaries in the State, although it seems to reproduce most
favorably in situations where there. is a relatively stable water level. No
alligators are reported for the project area, a reflection of both the poor
habitat available and its geographic position within the range of the
species. Therefore, it has been determined that the project will not affect
the alligator, because there have been no reports- of the alligator in the
project area and food supply for the alligator will remain high.
Red-cockaded Woodpecker (endangered). This species was once abundant
throughout the southeastern United States, but has now been reduced in
numbers to a point where it remains primar.;ily in scattered populations, with
only a few areas remaining as strongholds `for the species.. Requiring mature
open pine stands, it was naturally one of the first species to feel the
pressures of agriculture and the logging industry. Disposal of dredged
material will take place on a distdrbed upland site which does not have the
species requisite open pine forest habitat. The project, therefore, will
not affect the red-cockaded woodpeckers.
6

^•N
Ca'Iturift r esources :
An archeological survey of the Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay project area was
completed in 1977. The study included a ground survey of Wanchese Harbor
and the dis-posal islands on the eastern shore of Roanoke Island. The study
resulted in identification of a historical area (Ballast Point) and a
secondary prehistoric site (31 DR 49) within the proposed project area.
Neither Ballast Point nor 31 DR 49 retain any significant intact evidence.
Since the proposed work is maintenance of the existing channel, no
significant cultural resource remains are anticipated in the area to be
dredged. If something is encountered by the dredge, work will stop and the
proper authorities will be notified.
5.0 List of Agencies and Persons Consulted.
a. North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development.
(1) Division of Marine Fisheries
(2) Office of Coastal Management
(3) Division of Environmental Management
(4) Division of Parks and--Recreation, Natural Heritage
Program
(5) Office of Water Resources
b. North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources' Division of
Archives and History.
c. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
(1) Division of Ecological Services, Raleigh Field Office
(2) Asheville Endangered Species Field Office
d. National Marine Fisheries Service.
(1) Beaufort Field office
(2) Southeastern Regional Endangered Species Office
e. North Carolina Department of Transportation.
f. Mr. Ralph Reed (owner of property to be used for first time
maintenance disposal).
7

g. Concurrent with circulation envitonmenf'asse§sment,
a consistency determination will be furnished ,to the North
Carolina Office of Coastal Management for concur rence/non-
currence. , Copies of this environmental assessment will be
furnished to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife. Service and National
Marine Fisheries Service to complete coordination under
Section 7 (c) of the Endangered Species Act, as amended.
h. Recipients of the Assessment.
This assessment will be circulated for review and comment to
the agencies and .public listed below for 30 days. After
reviewing the comments received, the District Engineer will
decide whether to sign the finding of No Significant Impact
and proceed with the proposed project or to prepare an EIS.
Environmental Protection Agency
Forest Service, USDA
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Department of Commerce
Federal Emergency Management Administration '
Federal Maritime Commission
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Energy
U. S. Department of the Interior
Coast Guard
Conservation Council of North Carolina
Federal Highway Administration
National Audubon Society
N. C. Wildlife Federation
Department of Housing and Urban Development
National Wildlife Federation
Soil Conservation Service,.^USDA
Sierra Club
Environmental Defense Fund, Inc.
Dare County Board or Commissioners
Dare County Manager
State Clearinghouse of North Carolina
Mayor of Manteo
Harry B. Schiffman
Allan Foreman
Ralph Reed
Lewis Midgett
Honorable Walter B. Jones
8
r01/O,LIf ? '
A18EMARLE SOUND' VA.
-- SITE
BASIN N.C
600' LONG uttruolo ?,,
200' WIDE •ourlur
Tt 1.6 MI NAGSCA
T % 11 O HEAD rirr ,.+ v? M.tri?1
p O I[Ilr •l
X FAYETTEVILLE
l1
Z
Q !
L
64 g"= I1 ,% N, LOOKOUT °
i o mi. WILVINGTOr
2.64 Vj COINITY VAOP
( ?o
MANTEO 14 MI
AN MILES
13 MI' D
q? S ALLOWSAG i
0 3AY
m 12111 z
D N ?In ?.
2 r 11 mi 12 n
z IAN .
0 I x to 0 Q
i dS IOMI Io.
C G r" ?t
in Z
} S; 11I r

WANCHESE 1111
IIMI•?1
BASIN v0
14'x15 ACRES ?p
0. ?
awl ? ran
PROPOSED NORTH JETTY
DUCK ISLAND A11 ?s n I ROPOSED RANGF NOT SHOWN)
+M1 x PROPOSED
CHANNEL
'''??? . $. 20'x 400'
9wi
lul PROPOSED SOUTH JETTY
PEA ISLAND
MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) SAY
NORTH CAROLINA
0 1 2 1•
SCALE IN ri1LES
FIGURE

rri 39Nru ?!?
04
?? NI w` °
r W (? LU
w .S
Q , U = -
Z
LL-
l1 r•' l o
"l?
./Zli Y O
t!1 /' C W O
V N
u w
w
i 7 0 a z_
/ J
Ct? U
p i s
O r N
O
cr W „ a
J s i, N*
??•? m
,
+ V. W
• O ?? W
. O 11 i ?•, J Q
U-1 Q W
1 Z
O N w O F--
???_? - ate. 0 Q V'
w O
t
O
_; ?Jv W1. J Z'
:: 00 Q? c U i Q
T ?J O W vo C
3 n \l, N Q ° Nys O
N UJ
,
O
p } bid u
t? M 0 u
(i O
0
?- FF LL?y? 9p8AY N op Q
?, • Q
?A l/ V i
F ` O' / p ^
t[ti•
I! 9 ?

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
1. Name of Action. Maintenance the Manteo-Oregon Inlet Channel, (Manteo to
Wanchese ,-M lteo (Shallowbag Bay), Dare County, North Carolina.
2. Description of Action. The Corps of Engineers proposes to perform
maintenance dredging of the Manteo to Oregon Inlet Channel from Wanchese
(mile 8.2) to Manteo (mile 15.7) including the 600 feet by 200 feet turning
basin at Manteo. The channel will be dredged to 10 feet deep (plus two feet ,
overdepth) and 100 feet wide. Disposal will be on diked upland sites
located along the channel from Shallowbag Bay south to below the U. S. Route
64/264 bridge.
3. Anticipated Environmental Effects. The proposed action will result in
no significant adverse impacts. A•discussion of the significant resources
present in the project area and the•project's anticipated impacts on them is
presented in Section 4.00 of the Environmental Assessment,
4. Conclusions. I have determined, based on the information outlined in i
Section 4.00 of the Environmental Assessment, that the proposed action will
result in no overall environmental, degradation and will not significantly
affect the quality of the human environment.
Colonel, Corps of Engineers
District Eneiaeer
DATE:
I
9