19920089 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_19920101

a%
IWAP? DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

March 22, 1991
MEMORANDUM
TO: Roger Schecter
THROUGH: Perry Nelson
Steve Tedder
AJ-
FROM: John Dorne
RE: Wetland impacts of groundwater withdrawal from the
Cape Hatteras Water Association Permit
on March 5, 1991, Deborah Sawyer and I visited the proposed
well field at.Buxton.Woods with_DCM and Water Association repre-
sentatives,.'`` The purpose 'of the visit was. to examine the ;proposed
well.field,alignment 'with respect to its"; impact. on freshwater'
,.wetlands. Since the wells will be withdrawing.water'from the
same' surfieial aquifer that':supports the wetlands, it is, quite
posslible that any surficial aquifer drawdown could affect the.
adjacent wetlands and dry them up: Since..this would be a removal
of use, it would be in violation of our Antidegradation Standard
(15A NCAC 2B .0201(b)). This would then be the technical ration-
ale for a recommendation to DCM to deny or only partially approve
the permit.
The two pertinent questions which need to be answered are 1)
at what distance are the proposed wells from nearby wetlands and
2) what is the projected cone of depression which could remove
sufficient water to result in a loss of uses which these wetlands
provide? Given the natural fluctuation of water in these wet-
lands, their gradually sloping bottoms, and the seasonal nature
of water withdrawal, I believe that if drawdown is one foot or
less that it will have no long term effect on'the wetland. This
is a best professional judgement which is subject to change if
convincing, contradictory evidence is presented.
Guy Pearce (Groundwater Section, Washington Regional
Office, DEM) has analyzed the groundwater system in the area.
This analysis revealed that at an average pumping rate (30 gpm)
there would be some drawdown within 200 feet of the well. Esti-
mated aquifer drawdown values ranged from 1 to 5 feet depending

on distance, pumping rate, and assumed aquifer characteristics.
If the aquifer is semiconfined in the area of concern, then the
drawdown should be negligible.
Field inspection of the existing well field revealed that
there has probably been 1 to 3 feet of localized subsidence near
the wells. Whether the local water table has been lowered is
unclear because of past disturbance in the area. However, it
appears that the existing well field may have affected the adja-
cent wetlands.
From the field measurements we made on March 15, the
following distances to the nearest wetland edge were found:
Well # 1 > 200 feet
# 2 > 200 feet
# 3 20 feet
# 4 50 feet
# 5 70 feet
# 6 20 feet
# 7 40 feet
# 8 100 feet
# 9 20 feet
Therefore, I conclude that (based on the assumptions outlined
above).wells h and 2 can.be safely permitted at-this time without
threatening the, uses-of the adjacent wetlands. ,
Thee other- wellscould be :.permitted without threatening the
wetlands if thesapplicant conducts-a:detailed surfic:ial.ground-.
water= modeling. study. and °the results :show that there;-will be
little negative impact.- ° Specif ca.lly,. we . recommend that a field
test be made along, the:' following;' pine's . - . Three monitoring wells
with, digital recorders. should be'insta led: in the vicinity of-
-Well No. 2 under the guidance-of.the?.Washington Regional Office.
One well should be located at the closest-wetland to-Well 2 and
should be screened 10 to 15 feet- below the land surface. Two
additional wells should be installed halfway between the pumping
well and edge of the wetland on a straight line with the first
well. One of the wells should be screened at 10 to 15 feet and
the second screened at the depth of the pumping well screen.
Monitoring should be carried out for three months between June
and September and water levels should be recorded at 30-minute
intervals. A fourth well should be utilized as a background
well, located adjacent to the wetland in an area not affected by
pumping.
The purpose of the monitoring wells is to determine
the hydraulic connection between the water table and the aquifer
at the screen interval of the pumping well. This will allow
development of a more accurate groundwater model by the Associa-
tion. There is a question whether the aquifer in the area can be
treated as a single, water table aquifer or whether water is
being withdrawn from a partially confined aquifer. There is also
a question regarding what drawdown can be expected at the edge of
a
s,-
the wetland. The Water Quality and Groundwater Sections would be
glad to work with the applicant to design and evaluate such a
study.
This recommendation is similar to one made on January 10,
1990 by DEM to Texasgulf with regard to their mine expansion. In
that-case, we were concerned about the potential for wetland
desiccation from deep groundwater withdrawal. After detailed
study, DEM was able to approve their withdrawal with reasonable
assurance that wetlands would not be affected. Therefore, there
is precedent for action similar to what we are recommending for
the Well Association.
I would be glad to discuss these findings with DCM staff or
Well Association personnel upon request. I can be reached at
733-5083.
JD/kls
Schecter.mem/b-3
cc: George Everett
Deborah Sawyer
L4E rl Bailey
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WiLMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
January 13, 1992
IN REPLY REFER TO
Regulatory Branch nJo?'?`? L.J 4
Action ID. 199200738
??
Mr. James D. Gregory
Department of Forestry,
North Carolina State University ?&
Box 8002 t?? c3
Raleigh, North Carolina 27695
Dear Mr. Gregory:
All
Through coordination with the North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management, we have learned of your plans to place seventeen test wells on
three transects in wetlands, Buxton Woods, Dare County, North Carolina.
Our review of NCDCM 's December 27, 1991 Field Investigation Report
discloses that your work will not involve the placement of any dredged or fill
material in wetlands. Therefore, Department of the Army authorization is not
required. You should complete your coordination with NCDCM prior to the
commencement of any work.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Raleigh Bland,'Washington
Field Office, Regulatory Branch, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Copies Furnished:
Mr. John Parker
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of ironmental Management
North ina Department of
vironment, Health and
Natural Resources
post office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. David Griffin
Elizabeth City Regional Office
North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management
1367 U.S. 17 South
Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
Cape Hatteras Water Association
Box 578
Buxton, North Carolina 27920
National Park Service
U.S. Department of the Interior
Box 675
Manteo, North Carolina 27954
JAN-17-1992 14:57 FROM EHNR WASH REG OFFICE TO
P+Dst-It"' brand faa4 transmits
KV it ...- 169*'s4. r #-,

1 919 733 9919 P.01
7M I#otpages o /
•w rM1 ..yy, Y\ K\
'snow
?tteras gets permit'
to expand wellfield
By Jens Liars
SraJ?t
erl[a tfntt, hurdle 4btontan aalfi is
Al"
?
A y tr Of tfN into i;mbn
vndrd
neaday tar the Cape Itativna *
-
pFtprbpr the Council of SiatC.
which fiats of aov. ,tnrnr s G.
niarttn and the stalek tnp ated
d

tAvIl? o50Vatst tsi whcn the
gt incnt lar Qrllcioft, fyoternan Said he vr
ua un.
t+ttn wNethct there wou18 be
sUCd A porrrAt to aiiaw ctort M
W R a
t
tams ! d uxton tang tfnai approval ntal
Se
ribmt
w
e dt
? the
e or Etsri? ?s-
flYtttto(11 the Penult grpxJti,
"uthern lvattetas Wand xould
b Innd, b. %V fc*r that the ac.
tabs
?catea
ht hart, the
ovo Camp to a Virtual stnndoUlt be,

CAM the wMidAthm had rmelled
its 11 if't on water
Tt?C e
l b
Box
o Ea %0 f A rjt •
Ino cwatted on !C A?oPted atep:fd
h
a
h
e
?
r
+ sa*{ea y $RRO cuxteat•
a" on aou liatter?s tstand, c
ased to th
w
to
ot?
!!
lromdeval"ent.

"10t a »Kvw hurdle, no
about p,' said James L
onEton Isl
" II an altornAv for the
E
jew Con
.

wou
b rabic to sup
Ma" t t?ca?asavctation, *Wt
mV ply
nwre venter
T+ to in q
W Ife14 Id
;;
iilaf
n'•algnlfi col ccrn n lja e
been cacpr?p W about th

,
+etht wiles thhte
was el! a e use Of

-
?
hmx ve
TER, D3
AATER Vrolfa to out to h*%V drlrtn+enW eat, Jdhnsoa said tho state char d
tttcylt be shat alL' the assoeladoa's
carrrlraedfmM ost of the oondltions lnvolt fient of the new wi iV ign.
monltoring uh'CrrrCAts to unsure c lA !o avold tan,
theft lands Ibr putpom that thsi tht Well MO c loss Of trees. The nine
ineomtstcnt with their natueat ?Mslorn does wens wil be drilled aiong a 15•19ot•
heriara DO ham Surrounding wottands or wide skip or land about threeqjaar•
We value," 84 n l *e twater AquEfor that left of a mile 11mg,
• 148j,69. 114110 hftd not (
seen the will be ai' POC The ogulcer prevides
colt, d"Axed to , nhethar pm. per. v4 site sole souree,oi drfnkE The new cis will enable the aa•
ronmentelOft residen to >roth neon tp water saelsdon to simply sn addit,or+At f
w center represented §Y the tstiard, W106" S2110119 of*aler
R appeal the state's TIM slaRc's doclsior, h b Crea€in Eta &y. n.
WORM ad stn de. 6 one half its existing 2
In rosponse to onvironnreettat elation ap d t the the Sato' l ?a c ac,
' convvntti the state placed IT cwsdt. pp pennlt in X? e•
Vorks on thv pee ember 1840. he osaoCEation in January.
fur the D1t9aJOIak of a spotceswotrraa State "vtronmcrrtal o!!ldala a n. slapped issulng new %Ater units to mik ment Anid C4astaf eluded aAcr a t eve month stud customers because It could supply
(ye do hart sate y no tnore,9ictnan said. 17,v ?p?
lael eumrner lltat tho additImAl lion wilt low the Sts v1si ro l
to tttepcunit;'spo swPardo ans built n. J li?rsorot of harm tl+e wetlands, su0 enou ? of (hc F1.809 utte er unit*
nrttc •?v on otddk°if Any o scan Ram.
units
of tboo To Mow.. the impact tv the for- lhrt?e.wroom. two-401A hom st,ooo
P014lt` brand tax transmittal memo 7671 r er o?pes . /
w
CaZy ' bw C
ru r ??
...i-k p.
TOTAL P.01
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
CAMA MAJOR PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW
PROJECT NAMR!
COUNTY: PROJECT .. -
STREAM OR ADJACENT WATER BODY: CLASS: qZ
BASIN: 8(4@y OPEN OR CLOSED: (FOR SHELLFISHING) Z w?I
STORMWATER PLAN REQ'D: (Y OR N)
IF YES, DAT PPROVED: ,
PROJECTn DESCRIPX N: --?-
ASSIGNED TO: J
DATE APP. REC'D.: 4720104 (YY/MM/DD) JOINT NOTICE _ A/(Y/N)
INITIAL REPORT: (YY/MM/DD) RECOMMENDATION:
FINAL REPORT: -9010.7- (YY/MM/DD) (ISSUE/DENY OTHER)
WATER UQ ALITY CERT. (401)
CERT. REQ'D:J%/_(Y OR N)
IF YES: GENERAL CERT: (Y OR N)
TYPE GEN: (INDIVIDUAL CERT:_
(BULKHEAD, BOAT RAMP, ETC.)
SEWAGE DISPOSAL
TYPE OF DISPOSAL PROPOSED: /V
(EXISTING, PROPOSED SEPTIC TANK, ETC.)
TO BE PERMITTED BY: (DEM, DHS, COUNTY)
IF BY DEM, IS SITE AVAILABLE AND PERMIT ISSUANCE PROBABLE? (Y OR N)
WATERNETLAND FILL
AREA OF FILL: WATER: /qOv"P
WETLAND : 2&me
IS FILL ELIMINATING A SIGNIFICANT USE? (Y OR N)
DREDGING
IS DREDGING ACTIVITY EXPECTED TO CAUSE A SIGNIFICANT LOSS OF
RESOURCE? (Y OR N) AREA TO BE DREDGED 1'?an-0
IS SPOIL DISPOSAL ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED? (Y OR N)
MARINA
ARE THE FOLLOWING ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED?
SEWAGE DISPOSAL:
MARINA SERVICES:
OXYGEN IN BASIN:
CLOSURE OF SHELLFISHING WATER:
(ATTACH A MARINA USE ATTAINABILITY EVAL.)
RECOI44 FNDED CONDITIONS OR PERMIT RESTRICTIONS:
cc: WaRO - Dorney - Central Files - DCM: J. Parker, Morehead City,
Washington, Elizabeth City
OFFICE OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
±s, FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME James D. Gregory, NCSU
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE Buxton Woods Wellfield, off Hwy 12 in
Buxton Woods Dare Count
PHOTO INDX: 1989: 200-23: 1984: 146-382
STATE PLANE COORDINATES: X: 566600 Y: 3026500
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: DREDGE & FILL_
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE:
(A) DATES OF SITE VISIT 11/13/91
(B) WAS APPLICANT PRESENT No
CAMA X
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: APPLICATION RECEIVED December 23. 1991
OFFICE Elizabeth City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) LOCAL LAND USE PLAN Dare Count
LAND CLASSIFICATION FROM LUP Limited Conservation
DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS IDENTIFIED IN LUP None
(B) AEC(S) INVOLVED: OCEAN HAZARD ESTUARINE SHORELINE
COASTAL WETLANDS PUBLIC TRUST'WATERS
ESTUARINE WATERS OTHER Wellfield AEC
(C) WATER DEPENDENT: YES NO X
(D) INTENDED USE: PUBLIC X PRIVATE COMMERCIAL
(E) TYPE OF WASTE WATER TREATMENT: EXISTING_NLA
PLANNED N A
(F) TYPE OF STRUCTURES: EXISTING NL
PLANNED N A
(G) ESTIMATED ANNUAL RATE OF EROSION N A SOURCE _N A
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION:
AREA
(A) VEGETATED WETLANDS DREDGED FILLED OTHER
(B) NON-VEGETATED WETLANDS:
(C) OTHER:
(D) TOTAL AREA DISTURBED: 5640 square feet (.13 acres)
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: Placement of 17 test wells in 3 transects one
A
James D. Gregory
Bio Report
Page Two
Site Description
Dr. James D. Gregory with the Department of Forestry, NCSU
proposes to conduct research in Buxton Woods, Dare County on the
relationship of spatial and temporal water table fluctuation in
interdunal wetlands and adjacent uplands to environmental
variables (i.e., rainfall, season, topography, vegetation type,
and soil type) and to determine the impact of groundwater
withdrawal on those relationships.
Three transects of shallow wells are planned. Transect #1
will be located across existing well #12 on Cape Hatteras Water
Association (CHWA) property down Water Plant Road. Seven (7)
test wells are planned spanning from 70m north to Tom south of
supply well #12. Transect #2 will be located on the proposed and
recently permitted wellfield area of CHWA. Five (5) wells are
planned beginning at CHWA's test well #1 and extending over into
Jeannette's Sedge. Transect #3 will be located on Cape Hatteras
National Seashore Property near the Hatteras Pines Subdivision.
Five (5) test wells are planned across the dune ride into
Jeannette's Sedge.
Each test well will consist of schedule 80 PVC pipe, 5.1 CM
inside diameter, with a closed bottom and a 1.5m long screen.
The casing will be installed by jetting to a depth where the top
end of the screen will be -0.3m below the seasonal high water
table. All equipment will be carried from existing sand roads to
each well site. Access through the woods will be by foot and
only hand clearing of underbrush will be necessary. Two floating
boardwalks will be constructed (-35m long x -.5m wide) to access
the test wells located in Jeannette's Sedge in Transect #1 and
Transect #2.
Anticipated Impacts
No wetlands are proposed to be filled or excavated; no
impact should occur to the maritime forest. Valuable data and
information will be gained regarding the natural and man-induced
fluctuations in the water table in Buxton Woods.
CAMA Review
The shallow test wells are proposed for an area that is
classified as Limited Conservation on the land classification map
of the Dare County land use plan. This classification provides
only for a limited range of uses under a specific set of
guidelines. The primary relevant guideline for this project

James D. Gregory
Bio Report
Page Three
stipulates that any land clearing activity should not remove
existing vegetation any more than shall be necessary. So long as
the placement and monitoring of these wells is kept to that
standard, the proposal will be consistent with the County land
use plan on this aspect of the project.
Submitted by: David R. Griffin
Date: December 27, 1991
.w
'Sco
errs of ?e?e5'
tre ?gJ,jeto
covets
is a44?'cat,°r cot"
'?` ?
? Pctl
r91 P'? a?a?'a5e?e
5
astax S %s
Co
11 C c'' AA
9
e ?' 'L2 or
N-1111 r
?ateal
`? ate ()G:a
.S ??3 2,5 e4t' of Pafi e?
? C V? ? ir4 t?cest .
?erttoA ?? tat
6
lz?Og S,at,°r?'S?ea
sws! ce a
1s CG S lei ate' < ? P.?. iU'n5'01
It 1599
?aviSCbs ?6.A4 ??Q?? t???rgb, date aboTS P
C n°r,??av?5a "Svc,
tax??a 'to
() cco
, ?eQt' °gcs ??ces
Vol b X99
tbe? ?0 °f i?Jl
pSec??Or ?tea$o ? e??'? atet Pct
atetis e Gear
irtO or?? of ? s of eexs
Sect ?y C°?t?ct
? 1? StOr?
?i

PWase type or print. Carefully describe all anticipated
development activities, including construction, excava-
tion, filling, paving, land clearing, and stormwater con-
trol. If the requested information is not relevant to your
project, write N/A (not applicable). Items 1-4 and 8-9
must be completed for all projects.
1 APPLICANT
a. Name James D. Gregory
Dept. of Forestry, N.C. State Univ.
Address Box 8002
City Raleigh
State NC
Zip 27695 Dayphone (919) 51577567
Landowner or X Authorized agent
b. Project name (if any) See attached
2 - see attachment for descriptions
If you plan to build a marina, also complete ap¢l
attach Form DCM-MP-2.
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an
existing project, new work, or both?
New work `..
c. Will the project be for community, private, gf m%'"'`" y
commercial use?
Research nroiect conducted by N.C.
State University
d. Describe the planned use of the project.
Determine the relationship of spatial & tempura
water table fluctuation in interdurial wetlands
and adjacent uplands to environmental variables
and the impact of groundwater wi awa on
those relationships.
4 LAND AND WATER
c. If the applicant is not the landowner, also give the CHARACTERISTICS
owner's name and address.
Cape Hatteras Water Assn., Box 578, Buxton
_NC27920; N.C. Div of Coastal Manacgement,a. Size of entire tract N/A
Ra 1 ei gh., Nc; USDI National Park Service, b. Size of individual lot(s) N/A
Rt--1, Box 675 Manteo, NC 27954
2 LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
c. Elevation of tract above mean sea level or
National Geodetic Vertical Datum
variable - see attachment
d
Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract Fine sands of the
Conabv. Corolla, Currituck, Duckston, & Fripp
series
Vegetation on tract Marie-, f_rcen freshwater sedge
marsh to mixed pine-hardwood or mixed hardwoods
a. Street address or secondary road number
See attached e.
b. City, town, community, or landmark
Buxton Woods, Hteras Island, NC
c. County Dare
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? No
e. Name of body of water nearest project
Atlantic Ocean/Pamlico Sound
3 DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
f. Man-made features now on tract _ ee attachment
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan Classification of
the site? (Consult the local land use plan.)
X Conservation Transitional
Developed Community
Rural Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local goveinment?
SED-1
i. How are adjacent waters classified?
N/A
a. Describe all development activities you propose (for j. Has a professional archaeological survey been
example, building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, carried out for the tract? If so, by whom?
or pier). Floating boardwalks will be built N/A
at two locations in the Buxton Woods _
AF.C'_ - well transect 1 and well transect
3/91
5 #UPLAND DEVELOPMENT
Complete this section if the project includes any land
development.
a. Type and number of buildings, facilities, or
structures proposed
b. Number of lots or parcels
c. Density (Give the number of residential units and the
units per acre.)
d. Size of area to be graded or disturbed
e.
If the proposed project will disturb more than one
acre of land, the Division of Land Resources must
receive an erosion and sedimentation control plan at
least 30 days before land disturbing activity begins.
If applicable, has a sedimentation and erosion
control plan been submitted to the Division of Land
Resources?
f. Give the percentage of the tract within 75 feet of
mean high water to be covered by impermeable
surfaces, such as pavement, buildings, rooftops.
m. Water supply source
n. If the project is oceanfront development, describe
the steps that will be taken to maintain established
public beach accessways or provide new access.
o. If the project is on the oceanfront, what will be the
elevation above mean sea level of the first habitable
floor?
6 EXCAVATION AND FILL
INFORMATION
a. Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation
or rill activities (excluding bulklicads, which are
covered in Section 7).
Length Width Depth
g. List the materials, such as marl, paver stone, asphalt, Access channel
or concrete, to be used for paved surfaces. (MLW) or (NWL)
Boat basin
h. If applicable, has a stormwater management plan ,
been submitted to the Division of Environmental
Management?
i. Describe proposed sewage disposal and/or waste
water treatment facilities.
j. Have these facilities received state or local approval?
3
k. Describe existing treatment facilities.
Other (break-
water, pier,
boat ramp,
rock jetty)
Fill placed in
wetland or below
MHW
Upland fill
areas
b. Amount of material to be excavated 4om below
water level in cubic yards
c. Type of material
Describe location and type of discharges to waters of
the state (for example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent, "wash
down").
d. Does tale area to be excavated include marshland,
swamps, or other wetlands?
e. High ground excavation, in cubic yards
2 3/91
3
l
f. #Dimensions of spoil disposal area
g. Location of spoil disposal area
h. Do you claim title to the disposal area?
If not, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner.
i.
Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance?
If so, where?
j. Does the disposal area include any marshland,
swamps, or water areas?
k. Will the fill material be placed below mean high
water?
1. Amount of fill in cubic yards
m. Type of fill material
n. Source of fill material
o. Will fill material be placed on marsh or other
wetlands?
p. Dimensions of the wetland to be filled
q. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled?
r.
S. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment
to project site? If yes, explain steps that will
be taken to lessen environmental impacts.
7 SHORELINE STABILIZATION
a. Length of bulkhead or riprap
b. Average distance waterward of mean high water or
normal water level
What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic
dredge)?
c. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 mo6ths, in
d. Type of bulkhead material
t. .
e. Amount of fill, in cubic yards, to be placed below
mean high water
Type of fill material
8 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the follow-
ing items must be submitted:
A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other
instrument under which the applicant claims title to the
affected property. If the applicant is not claiming to be
the owner of said property, then forward a copy of the
deed or other instrument under which the owner claims
title, plus written permission from the owner to cant' out
the project.
An accurate work plat (including plan view and cross
sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black ink on an 8
1/2 x 11 white paper. (Refer to Coastal Resources
Commission Rule 7J.0203 for a detailed description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if 18 high
quality copies are provided by applicant. (Contact the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding that agency's
use of larger drawings.) A site. or location map is a part
of plat requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed
to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the
site. Include county road (SR) numbers, landmarks, and
the like.
A stormwater management plan, if applicable, that
may have been developed in consultation with the
Division of Environmental Management. ,
A list of the names and complete addresses of the
adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners. These
individuals have 30 days in which to submit comments
on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal
Management and should be advised by the applicant of
that opportunity.
3/91.
Name
Address
Name
Address
Name
Address
A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
Application for well const-mi -ticm pet:
has been submitted to NC Div. of
Environmental Management
A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment , Health, and Natural Resources to cover
the costs of processing the application.
A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront
and inlet areas.
A statement on the use of public funds. If the project
involves the expenditure of public funds, attach a state-
ment documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A-1 to 10).
4
9 CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
Any permit issued in response to this application will
allow only the development described in the application.
The project will be subject to conditions and restrictions
contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's ap-
proved Coastal Management Program and will be con-
ducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I further certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in
fact, grant permission to representatives of state and
federal review agencies to enter on the aforementioned
lands in connection with evaluating information related
to this permit application and follow-up monitoring of
project.
This is the Q% day of 191/.
owner or Authorized agent

J.)
Ut.C 2'.x'91
3/91

PLAN FOR A NETWORK OF RESEARCH WELLS FOR WATER TABLE MEASUREMENT
LOCATED IN BUXTON WOODS, HATTERAS ISLAND, NC ([?
APPLICATION FOR WELL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT
TO THE
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT DEC ?
James D. Gregory
Department of Forestry
North Carolina State University
December 20, 1991
This plan outlines the proposed location and method of construction of a network of
shallow research wells for measurement of water table depth/elevation to be located in Buxton
Woods, Hatteras Island, North Carolina. The purpose of the research is to determine the
relationship of spatial and temporal water table fluctuation in interdunal wetlands and adjacent
uplands to environmental variables (ie, rainfall, season, topography, vegetation type, and soil
type) and to determine the impact of groundwater withdrawal on those relationships. The
research will be conducted under auspices of two research grants that will be coordinated by the
same research team: (1) The Impacts of Groundwater Withdrawal on the Hydroperiod of Buxton
Woods Wetlands, United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service and (2) Water
Table Response to Well Field Expansion in Buxton Woods, North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management.
The well network will consist of three separate transects of shallow water .table wells in
which each well will be screened in the zone through which the water table fluctuates. Each
transect will cross the central dune ridge of `Hatteras Island and there will be a well in each
transect in each of the principal hydrologic-topographic land types of Buxton Woods: xeric
ridge top (xrt), mesic lower slope or flat (mis), tree-shrub wetland (tsw), and sedge wetland
(sw). Approximate depths of the wells will be: xrt, 5-6 m; mis, 2-3 m; tsw, 1-2 m; sw, 1-2
m. Data on the exact depth of each well will be provided after installation.
Precise horizontal and vertical control of the water table wells and the.topography on
which they are located is critical in this study. In the vicinity of each transect, bench marks are
being installed by the North Carolina Geodetic Survey and a high precision traverse will tie
those bench marks to an existing one on NC highway 12. The transects have been surveyed by
a licensed surveyor relative to a reference point in each but have not yet been tied to a bench
mark to provide elevations and coordinates of each well. Therefore, the location information
provided includes an area map that indicates the location of each transect, a map of, each that
shows well locations relative to a ground reference point, and a general narrative description of
each transect. When the surveying has been completed, a map of each transect that shows the
coordinates and elevation of each well will be provided.
1
0
Transect 1 (TR 1) will consist of a line of 7 wells that bisects the line of water supply
wells (well field 1) that is currently operated by the Cape Hatteras Water Association (CHWA).
The reference point for the transect is supply well number 12 on Water Plant Road. The
transect will extend 70 in to the north and 70 in to the south of supply well 12. Wells 5-7 will
be located on CHWA property and wells 1-4 will be located on property of the Cape Hatteras
National Seashore (CHNS), lands administered by the National Park Service.
Transect 2 (TR 2) will consist of a line of 5 wells that crosses a portion of a second well
field proposed by the CHWA (well field 2). The reference point for the transect is the CHWA's
test well 1 that is located on an unnamed, unimproved woods road that can be accessed from
highway 12 (see area map). The well transect will begin at test well 1 and extend southward
over the dune ridge and into Jeannette Sedge for a total length of 229 m. All wells of the
transect will be located on property of the North Carolina Coastal Reserve (NCCR), lands
administered by the N.C. Division of Coastal Management.
The reference point for transect 3 is a boundary corner of the CHNS south of Lost Tree
Trail in Hatteras Pines subdivision from whence the boundary extends eastward and southward.
Transect 3 begins 6 m south of the east-west CHNS boundary segment that parallels Lost Tree
Trail and the beginning point of the transect is about 58 m east of the north-south CHNS
boundary segment. The transect will consist of a line of 5 wells that will extend southward over
the dune ridge and into Jeannette Sedge for a total length of 204 m. All wells of the transect
will be located on property of the CHNS.
All well casings will consist of schedule 80 PVC pipe, 5.1 cm inside diameter, with a
closed bottom and a 1.5 m long screen of 0.25 mm wide slots at the lower end of the casing
(Figure 1). The casing (initially with an open bottom) will be installed by jetting to a depth
where the top end of the screen will be about 0.3 in below the seasonal high water table. A
small Haberin jet will be used that fits inside the casing and flushes the water and sediments up
through the casing. Water for the jet will be pumped from a nearby swale pond when working
in each transect. When the casing has been installed to the appropriate depth, a cypress plug
will be installed in the bottom of the casing to prevent upwelling of sand into the casing. A
kiln-dried plug will be used that quickly swells to provide a tight fit in the casing when pushed
to the bottom of the casing and held in the water there for a few minutes. Each well will be
developed to form a sand pack around the screen and remove fines that could clog the screen.
This method of well construction was chosen because light weight, portable equipment
and all supplies must be transported considerable distances through roadless, wooded areas to
the well locations. The method also provides for ease of installation of the casing into both
unsaturated and saturated soil/sediments, minimizes the diameter of the hole into which the
casing is inserted, and also minimizes disturbance to the soil/sediments surrounding the well
casing. When a small diameter well casing is installed in this manner in structureless sand of low
cohesion, the jet produces a small opening no larger than the casing and sand collapses around
the casing as it is installed and forms a seal around the casing.
2

A surface seal of concrete grout will serve the dual purposes of preventing surface
infiltration from flowing downward along the exterior casing wall and anchoring a security
enclosure. Constructed of 20.3 cm diameter steel pipe (5 mm minimum wall thickness), the
security enclosure will protect the well and associated equipment from vandalism and also shield
the well casing and transducer cable and vent tube from wind-induced vibration that produces
noise in the water level data. The grout seal will be poured outside the security enclosure to a
depth of about 15 cm and annular width of about 20 cm. The space between the security
enclosure and the well casing below ground surface will be filled with soil to provide vibration
isolation from the security enclosure/grout seal unit.
Well 1 on each transect to be installed in the sedge wetland will consist of a combination of a
piezometer installed inside a surface well (Figure 2). The soil in the sedge wetlands has a histic
epipedon (organic surface layer), averaging about 40 cm in thickness, that may restrict vertical
water movement. To help determine the degree of hydraulic connection between surface
inundation and the saturated zone beneath the organic soil layer, the piezometer will be screened
below the sapric lower portion of the organic layer and the surface well will be used to measure
the depth /elevation of the surface inundation. An annular space around the piezometer casing
about 3 cm across and extending from the soil surface through the histic epipedon will be filled
with bentonite to ensure a tight seal. The surface well of schedule 80 PVC pipe, 20.3 cm inside
diameter, will have an open bottom pushed about 10 cm into the fabric upper portion of the
organic layer and will have a network of 3 mm diameter holes in the lower 0.5 m. The surface
well will be secured vertically by attachment to 3 soil anchors adjacent to it.
The water level in each water table well and the piezometers•in the sedges will be
continuously monitored with a pressure transducer connected to an electronic data logger
(Campbell Scientific CR-10 or BDR 320). A float sensor with 10-turn potentiometer mounted
inside the well will be used to measure water level in the surface well at well 1 in each transect.
Cables secured in electrical conduit will be used to connect several wells to a single data logger.
The maximum cable run that can used without risking signal distortion or loss is about 75 in,
so the equipment setup on each transect will be designed to monitor the pressure transducers,
potentiometer, and a rain gauge with the minimum number of data loggers. A tipping bucket
rain gauge will be installed at each transect and will be located adjacent to well 1 in the sedge
in order to provide the clear area needed without removing vegetation. The data loggers will
be enclosed in steel security cabinets.
A floating board walk will be installed into the sedge at well 1 in each transect
prior to well installation so that equipment can be installed and serviced without disturbing the
vegetation and soil of the sedge. Frequent movements into the sedge and around the well
location during installation of the well, rain gauge, and associated equipment followed by weekly
(or more often) visits to the well thereafter would be extremely difficult without a firm surface
and would create a highly disturbed path through the sedge. The board walk will consist of a
short (3-4 m long by 1 m wide) approach/anchor section (proximal end) at the high water mark
set on posts to which will be connected via pivot hinges a floating section about 30 m in length.
The floating section will consist of treated 5 cm x 25 cm (2" x 10") boards, 2 boards wide,
3
D
supported by expanded polystyrene floats spaced 2.44 m on center. The floats, 1.22 m x 1.22
m x 0.30 m, will be painted with dark green marine epoxy paint. Vertical posts set at the center
and distal end of the floating span will provide lateral stability.
4

n JAo J 3 J a \
x
s z? H e ?
0 3 ? o F ?
? 3 e F ?
a ? e

L?J
o--..
W?
Z •?
a
(37VO5)16-9/-Z/ :-sN"UT9=
moo
m
N CO
M
om2
NOn
a?en
_ co
w W
00 W
W
J W
J
N y
ci O W
W
_.l
LL
O
CL
r
N
fl

2

t

J
W

W
of

w

w
F- Ih
w
f ?
v
cc u? a m cu - o w

3 W Zj a?

Q,
?
?
J
Q Q

Cc HQ

4J Q

of
3
i
Z'
O LL
O
w
w wa
? o
co a
OD
N
ac
n -
- - -aM li0S,9
w
J N
co
3.i z
w =W O W
it m Z?
C6 co
Z to 6 a
Q a ci z
_j M
W Z
F-
Q
w - - -
Q.
a
v o
U. 2
O Q
J
} lV _
f-- 3
w Co
W J
CL ?
o =
a ?
J W
u Alp
(T ?
?v
N 4
?

i

LL-
N

O
ca

j p

? ?.n LV J-? o,
(_ ? CS Of
Q ?

C
L W Q co
LUL

I
^ N
Nm

e'
?
U c?
m 2
uj
co I
Z i 1- ` M 2}0W

a 5-MW
LL-
Lij co
J IL'Lj
°o
m L

C; lo

L
-. bti M W ?

F' -MW

a J
O
o ?

W
? O
J ?
C a

P -A IW

Z d -M IN
0

W?

a
?

3
a I-A IW
1
.
Z
•
?
°s• a 1-

Nx O
,
a? P
S ??
•
°
?Qo°4?
N 7 i
_ •? 2 =
d •

P>'
1, . S Z ?1.1
17

LL
cc O
LL
Q

4
C>
LU
0
r

U
?
U
L
c3
Q
Cl:

~
y
O

x W
-j
Q cf
j
LU i o

o
h
0
O
W
F-
W
x
0
CD
It
M -
?-MA
I in
0
W Z
J
Q W
V O
}
Z f
Q W
J M
a
Cr
a
J
O -mm
Q
Q \
N.
a.
W
2
J
}
a
0
z
0
m
N MW
r
cans S3NId SV831IV14

a w
Y q g
lit
r
V
u ?
W
C W
r z
? u
. W
? a
Co
n
? W
LI
.L
? ¦
C
t
i
i
i
t
So ?? Cab/e
i Con c{ ul -
.?? S. l cv?, 3D Sc11 ed ul e. $ o _
? Svc,
t
i
/oo CM
t
t
/'
?. Aock;11 Cover
20.3 crn 3D ScAeJu/e So PVC.
CI II C ko v (3 ih a patte i)
WcafeN sw4cme.
PVC, Suppo --" " CAoI/al-
S o i 1 S u?--Ac'e..
'Ff b hi c
o hDOU i c_
bewfoh, fe, -
__ _ Sc hceh
!• s rn /oK?
vevCtop S NKcQ
pQ ar0Lkk4
$cheeh - qq
= -cYphcss 1 l?J
sated
S'qp r: c
Figure 2. Cross-section sketch of Well 1, not to scale
i
.r
2,0. 3 c.n
---securi?Y eh?losure.
so cm
caile_ cohduaf So l/ su?--C_qce
(y6 {.:i
/sc r, tom. s?:-?.•- coin c H ?-E--ems ro
Ro uh
Seatl/ahc.?.o
Wa czhnuklk sPc?ce,
Sea/ej d y/ n u
Deve/, eA so.hS
pack d j-oue sck e eh
?2?DTn oT p e.,1Z,,zmefev wit/
?/gtfFy w i'?t lb?oq}^a?,h4 C.
S.1 cm 2D/ S-Aej'dq_ 80 pyc,
-Scr^eeh/ l.Sm 42h9
P lecr 1°l"]
Figure 1. Cross-section sketch of installed piezaneter,
general, not to scale
4
?v
li_U1
RALPH C. HEATH
Consulting Hydrogeologist
December 20, 1991
Mr. Jim Coleman
"Cape Hatteras Water Assn
PO Box 578
Buxton, N.C. 27920
Dear Jim:
4821 Kilkenny Place
Raleigh, N. C. 27612
?•... [phone]
<1
•u' [" ?r9
Pa
I99I
ORoilrk'Mu K r
`Yesterday I obtained from Ted Mew, N.C. Groundwater Section, a copy of
the State permit issued to the CHWA for the construction of a well-
field in the Buxton Woods Coastal Reserve. I have read the permit
conditions and discussed some of them with Ted. The purpose of this
letter -is to provide guidance to you relative to the permit condi-
# bons. I understand that the CHWA has until about January 7-to re-
.,,quest modification of the conditions.
Condition No. 9 - At the meeting in Raleigh in May, there seemed to be
general agreement that a drawdown in the water table of.1 ft at a dis- 04-4?
tance of 100 ft from a pumping well would be acceptable so far as the rQ?
protection of wetlands is concerned. I had anticipated that this
would be the performance standard specified in any permit that was
-
issued.
The performance standard included in Condition No. 9 of the permit is
that the drawdown.in the water table at a distance of 25 ft from a
pumping well shall not exceed 1 ft for any period longer than 48
hours. I think this standard can be met because I estimate that the
pumping wells in Buxton• Woods will produce a drawdown in the water
table of about 1 ft at a distance of about 25 ft. However, making the
performance standard the same as the estimated drawdown does not pro-
vide any margin for error resulting from unanticipated variations in
hydraulic characteristics from place to place in the aquifer and, I
..,. think, is therefore undesirable. I believe that a
performance
standard of 2 ft of drawdown in the water table at a distance of 25 ft
would be more realistic and would still provide more than adequate
protection for the nearby wetlands. Incidentally, I think that se-
lecting a distance of 25 ft for the performance standard is an excel-
lent choice.
Relative to other requirements in Condition No. 9, the drawdown per-
formance standard, if it is exceeded at all, is most likely to be ex-
ceeded over a three-day holiday such as the Fourth of July or Labor
Day. Therefore, it would seem to me to be desirable to increase the
period over which the drawdown can be exceeded from 48 to 72 hours.
A more important point, however, concerns the action that the Associa-
tion must take in case the drawdown standard is exceeded. The permit
requires that the pumping well involved be shut down until the water
table recovers. This requirement fails to consider the fact that the
CHWA cannot instantaneously impose water rationing over a three-day

P
holiday and, therefore, if one well is shut down the withdrawals from
other wells will automatically increase. In case the dravdown stan-
dard is exceeded, the permit should require that the yield of the pro-
duction well, at which the standard is exceeded, be reduced as neces-
sary to meet the standard, rather than being shut down entirely. Such
reduction in yield can easily be accomplished by partially closing the
valve on the discharge line at the well.
Condition No. 11 - I anticipate that the largest dravdovns in the
water table will occur in the vicinity of wells 4, 5, and 6, which are
located near the center of the vellfield. Therefore, it is-desirable
and appropriate that the monitoring wells listed in Condition No. 10
be required and that they be equipped with instruments that will pro-
vide an essentially continuous record of grater-level fluctuations.
Recognizing that the largest drawdown in the vater't.able is expected
o . occur -near the center--of the wellfield and -that the monitoring,-,-
wells needed to measure it are required near wells 5 and 6, I do not
see the meed for monitoring wells near 4, 7, 8, and 9.
-Also, because the supply wells will be automatically controlled and
4-therefore cycle on and off as water use in the system dictates,`4aily
measurements, as specified in Condition No. 11 of the permit, will
provide very little, if any useful data because every-measurement---
inevitably
inevitably will be made at a different time in the pumping cycles.
See, for example, the hydrograph for well 21-C in Figure 13 of Ted
New's report and imagine what the graph would have looked like if it
had been based on daily measurements, some of which were made when the
Frisco wellfield was on and others when it was off.
.I believe that Condition No, 11 should be eliminated entirely from the
permit.
Condition No. 12 - This is an excellent requirement. It appears from
the maps I have that Buxton Woods Test Well No. 4 is about 1500 to
1600 ft from proposed supply wells 8 and 9.. (See Figure 4 in my June
1990 report on the Buxton Woods well field.) I believe this would be
a good location for the water-table well required in Condition No. 12 --
The advantage of using this location is that it would also permit
observation of the water level in the production zone at the same dis-
tance from the pumping wells as the required water-table montrol well.
Condition No. 13 - The word "gaging" in the 2nd line should be changed
to "stage." Through long U.S. Geological Survey usage, the word ? ?-
"gaging" implies determination of surface-water flow whereas the
intent of this condition is to measure only changes in surface-rater
level - that is, stage.
The requirement in Condition No. 13 fora one-foot contour map of the
wellfield at a scale of 1 inch = 100 ft was apparently included on the
assumption that the topography of the area is very flat. As you Imov,
this is not the case. I understand that this requirement was included
in the permit in an effort to determine the seasonal changes in the
extent of surface-vater inundation of Jennette Sedge in the vicinity

of the velifield. This objective can be met by preparing a topo-
graphic map with a one-foot contour interval of the northern half of
Jeanette Sedge where it borders the vellfield. The position of any
overflow channels and significant surface depressions in the Sedge
T: should also be mapped. Presumably, the stage gage required by Condi-
tion No. 13 will be located either in the channel, if any exist, or in
a readily-accessible surface depression.
Because the intent of.this condition is to provide a means for mapping
changes in inundation of the Sedge, there is no reason to extend the
r ,.topographic mapping more than one or possibly two feet above the 404
` line - that is, above the boundary of the Sedge nearest the welifield.
If this condition can be changed to meet the State's objective, it
` ;?.will-save-the CHNA a large and unnecessary expense. It will also
avoid the necessity of clearing survey lines through the maritime
forest, swhich would clearly be in violation of -Condition -No.-7.... y- - -
Condition No.'°l4 - It is clearly desirable to operate a recording rain
gage as near the center of the wellfield - as near wells 4, 5, and 6
.--as possible. The siting of such a
gage must, however, meet the
minimum exposure requirements of the National Weather Service..' I
think this will require a cleared area in which the maximum vertical
angle from the gage to the tops of the nearest trees does not exceed
45 degrees. It may be difficult, if not impossible, to develop such
an area without violating Condition No. 7. The permit should contain
guidance on this point. -
I hope the above comments are helpful to you and to the Division of
Coastal Management. Note, however, that I am sending copies of this
letter only to you, Outten,.Diehl, and Mew. You should make any other
- distribution that you think desirable.
_ Sincerely,

Ralph C. Meath- -
rch/mh
Copies to: Bobby Outten
Bill Diehl
r _ Ted Mew !/?