20190264 Ver 1_CAMA Application_20190226

Oregon Inlet Channel Maintenance
Utilizing a New Privately Owned Hopper Dredge
DRAFT Environmental Assessment
Prepared by:
Aptim Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.
Prepared For:
Dare County, North Carolina
January 2019
RECEIVED
JAM 3 0 2019
DCM WILMINGTON, NC

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................1
1.1 The Proposed Action.......................................................................................1
1.2 Purpose and Need............................................................................................5
1.3 Scoping and Consultation History.................................................................7
2 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES....................................................................8
2.1
Alternative #1: Status Quo- Continuation of Existing Channel Maintenance
4.1
Operations........................................................................................................8
2.1.1
Summary of USACE Maintenance Dredging.............................................12
2.1.2
Existing Authorizations for the Utilization of USACE Dredge Fleet
4.4
withinOregon Inlet........................................................................................14
2.2
Alternative #2: Applicant's Preferred- Oregon Inlet Maintenance
Supplemented with a New Privately Owned Hopper Dredge ...................16
3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING..............................................................................17
4.4.3 Habitat Areas of Particular Concern...............................................36
3.1
Physical Environment of Oregon Inlet........................................................17
4.4.4 Nursery Areas....................................................................................36
3.1.1 Geomorphology..................................................................................18
4.4.5 Significant Natural Heritage Areas..................................................37
3.1.2 Waves..................................................................................................19
4.4.6 Managed Species................................................................................38
3.1.3 Wind and Storms...............................................................................20
4.4.6.1 Coastal Migratory Pelagics................................................39
3.1.4 Sea Level Rise.....................................................................................22
4.4.6.2 Highly Migratory Species...................................................40
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT................................................................................23
4.1
Water Quality .................................................................................................23
4.2
Air Quality ......................................................................................................25
4.3
Noise................................................................................................................26
4.4
Essential Fish Habitat....................................................................................27
4.4.1 Fishery Management.........................................................................27
4.4.2 Habitats Designated as ETH .............................................................30
4.4.3 Habitat Areas of Particular Concern...............................................36
4.4.4 Nursery Areas....................................................................................36
4.4.5 Significant Natural Heritage Areas..................................................37
4.4.6 Managed Species................................................................................38
4.4.6.1 Coastal Migratory Pelagics................................................39
4.4.6.2 Highly Migratory Species...................................................40
4.4.6.3 Snapper Grouper Complex................................................40
4.4.6.4 Shrimp.................................................................................41
4.4.6.5 Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass .................41
4.4.6.6 Red Drum............................................................................42
4.4.6.7 Bluefish................................................................................43
4.4.6.8 Spiny Dogfish......................................................................44
4.5
Threatened and Endangered Species...........................................................44
4.5.1 West Indian Manatee........................................................................45
4.5.2 Sea Turtles..........................................................................................46
4.5.3 Shortnose Sturgeon............................................................................50
4.5.4 Atlantic Sturgeon...............................................................................50
4.5.5 Giant Manta Ray...................................................................REGENED
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
JAN 3 0 2019
l7GM INK.MINGTON, NC

4.6 Cultural Resources........................................................................................54
4.7 Socioeconomic Resources..............................................................................60
4.7.1 Economic Impacts of Oregon Inlet.....................................................62
4.8 Recreational Resources.................................................................................62
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH EACH ALTERNATIVE.................................62
5.1 Water Quality.................................................................................................62
5.1.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative .....................62
5.1.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative... 64
5.2 Air Quality......................................................................................................65
5.2.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative .....................65
5.2.2
Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative...
65
5.3 Noise
................................................................................................................65
73
5.3.1
Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative .....................65
Alternative..........................................................................................76
5.3.2
Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative...
66
5.4 Essential
Fish Habitat....................................................................................66
5.5.3.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred
5.4.1
Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative .....................67
5.4.2
Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative...
70
5.5 Threatened and Endangered Species...........................................................72
5.5.4.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred
5.5.1
West Indian Manatee........................................................................72
5.5.1.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative .........
72
5.5.1.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred
Alternative..........................................................................................73
5.5.2 Sea Turtles..........................................................................................73
5.5.2.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative .........
73
5.5.2.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred
Alternative..........................................................................................76
5.5.3 Shortnose Sturgeon............................................................................77
5.5.3.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative .........
77
5.5.3.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred
Alternative...........................................................................................78
5.5.4 Atlantic Sturgeon...............................................................................79
5.5.4.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative .........
79
5.5.4.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred
Alternative...........................................................................................80
5.5.5 Giant Manta Ray...............................................................................81
5.5.5.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative ......... 81
5.5.5.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred
Alternative..........................................................................................81
5.6 Cultural Resources........................................................................................81
5.6.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative .....................81
5.6.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative... 83
5.7 Socioeconomic Resources..............................................................................83
5.7.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative .....................83
5.7.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative... 84
5.8 Recreational Resources.................................................................................85
5.8.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative ................... R EIVED
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
JAN 3 ® 2019
DCAA W;P RAIKIf4TOKI, NC

List of Figures
1 Project Location......................................................................................................2
2 Map showing locations of dredge projects maintained with USACE
Wilmington District Dredge Plants.......................................................................3
3 Proposed dredging corridor and disposal locations............................................6
4 Oregon Inlet/Old House Channel..........................................................................9
5 The sidecast dredge the Merritt..........................................................................10
6 The special purpose dredge Currituck...............................................................11
7 The special purpose dredge Murden...................................................................11
8 Cumulative dredge volumes removed since 1980 ..............................................13
9 Annual cost maintenance dredging for the Oregon Inlet project ....................14
10 Average wave height and direction near Oregon Inlet from
WISStation 63223................................................................................................20
11
5.8.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative...
85
6 Cumulative
Impacts...................................................................................................85
6.1
Water Quality.................................................................................................86
6.2
Air Quality......................................................................................................87
6.3
Noise................................................................................................................87
6.4
Essential Fish Habitat....................................................................................88
6.5
Threatened and Endangered Species...........................................................88
6.5.1 West Indian Manatee........................................................................88
17
6.5.2 Sea Turtles..........................................................................................88
18
6.5.3 Shortnose Sturgeon............................................................................89
6.5.4 Atlantic Sturgeon...............................................................................89
6.5.5 Giant Manta Ray...............................................................................89
6.6
Cultural Resources........................................................................................89
6.7
Socioeconomic Resources..............................................................................89
6.8
Recreational Resources.................................................................................90
7 CONSERVATION AND MONITORING MEASURES........................................90
7.1
Construction Practices..................................................................................90
7.2
Dredge Design Specifications........................................................................90
8 LITERATURE CITED.............................................................................................91
List of Figures
1 Project Location......................................................................................................2
2 Map showing locations of dredge projects maintained with USACE
Wilmington District Dredge Plants.......................................................................3
3 Proposed dredging corridor and disposal locations............................................6
4 Oregon Inlet/Old House Channel..........................................................................9
5 The sidecast dredge the Merritt..........................................................................10
6 The special purpose dredge Currituck...............................................................11
7 The special purpose dredge Murden...................................................................11
8 Cumulative dredge volumes removed since 1980 ..............................................13
9 Annual cost maintenance dredging for the Oregon Inlet project ....................14
10 Average wave height and direction near Oregon Inlet from
WISStation 63223................................................................................................20
11
Average wind speed and direction near Oregon Inlet from
WISStation 63223................................................................................................21
12
Relative sea level rise trend at Oregon Inlet Marina, NC.................................23
13
Water quality sampling stations in proximity to Oregon Inlet........................25
14
SAV resources found within proximity to the project area..............................33
15
Shellfish resources in proximity to the project area..........................................35
16
Loggerhead turtle sightings during the Southeast SMAPPS summer
2016 aerial survey.................................................................................................48
17
Migration routes of satellite -tracked loggerhead turtles..................................49
18
Atlantic sturgeon detections recorded by acoustic array..................................53
"'
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING &ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. JAN 3 0 2099
0CM W9f,M1N11,3T0NI, '\T-

List of Tables
Summary of Average Annual Dredging Activity for the
OregonInlet Project.............................................................................................12
EFH for managed species within coastal North Carolina.................................28
Essential Fish Habitat identified in FW Amendments of the
South Atlantic and Mid -Atlantic FMC's............................................................30
Geographically defined HAPC identified in the IMP .......................................36
HMSand their life stage.......................................................................................40
Federally threatened, endangered or proposed listed species that may
occurin the Project Area.....................................................................................45
Proposed federal state channel maintenance projects within the
OuterBanks..........................................................................................................86
List of Appendices
A 2017 Guidelines for Avoiding Impacts to the West Indian Manatee
ECEWED
iv APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. JAN., ®2099
DCfl4IAIPl.pr KIO'TOI, MC

INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Proposed Action
Oregon Inlet, in Dare County, North Carolina, is located along the Outer Banks and separates
Bodie Island from Pea Island, which is the northern tip of Hatteras Island. The inlet is the only
ocean -to -sound passage between Virginia and the south tip of Hatteras Island and provides
access and safe harbor to recreational boaters, commercial fishing fleets, north and south bound
transient vessels avoiding Diamond Shoals, and other vessels traversing the waters between
the inland waters of the Pamlico, Albemarle, Currituck, Croatan, and Roanoke Sounds and the
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
JAN 3 ® 2019
DCM WILMINOTON. NC

Figure 1). Since its formation following a hurricane in 1846, the inlet has migrated
approximately 2.3 miles south as shifting sands have built up the northern side while eroding
its southern side. The erosion of the south side of the inlet was abated by the construction of
a Terminal Groin on the northern end of Pea Island in 1991. As these sands shift, extRi8VED
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
JAN 30 200
DCAB VVILMINGTMI, MC

shoaling often occurs within the confines of the inlet creating chronically unsafe conditions for
navigation. As such, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) along with the State of North
Carolina and Dare County have spent significant time and resources attempting to maintain
navigable depths and restore safety for mariners. In 1950, Congress authorized the USACE to
dredge a channel in the inlet to a depth of 14 feet. Later, in 1970, Congress authorized
construction of two jetties and extended the depth of the ocean bar navigation channel within
the inlet to 20 feet. However, after several decades of studies and debate, the j etty proj ect was
ultimately rejected largely due to environmental concerns leaving dredging as the sole means
of management.
Historically, dredging operations within the inlet have been performed by a combination of the
USACE dredge fleet (sidecast dredge and special purpose hopper dredges) and contract
dredges including both pipeline and hopper dredges. According to dredge data from the North
Carolina Beach and Inlet Management report, between 1975 and 2015 more than 32 million
cubic yards has been dredged from within Oregon Inlet (Moffatt & Nichol, 2016). A decrease
in federal funding for shallow draft inlets nationally has resulted in decreased funding for
dredging of Oregon Inlet. The overall downward trend in federal funding prompted the North
Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (Formerly NC Department of Environment and
Natural Resources) to execute a Memorandum of Agreement with the USACE in November
2013, allowing the State and Local Governments to contribute funds to the USACE for
maintenance dredging of "Shallow Draft Navigation Channels".
A number of factors prompted the State of North Carolina to modify the 2013 MOA. The first
factor was a noticeable trend of decreased federal funding to maintain Oregon Inlet between
2013 and 2016. The second factor had to do with the ineffectiveness of an approximately $9
million pipeline dredge project conducted by the USACE (contract dredge) in 2014. The
channel, which was dredged to approximately 18 feet, shoaled to a depth of less than 4 feet in
a matter of months. This led to local officials and the USACE concluding that continuous
maintenance of Oregon Inlet year round was necessary to avoid navigation closures of the inlet.
However, that amount of dredging would have exceeded the $4 Million cap included in the
original MOA. A third factor included the nearing of the expiration of the 2013 MOA,
scheduled to expire in September 2017. The MOA was amended in July 2016, increasing the
annual cap from $4 Million to $12 Million.
Although the State and Dare County have taken initiatives to provide the necessary
supplemental funding to maintain the Oregon Inlet Channel, dredge plant availability has
become an issue as the USACE Wilmington District dredge plants are in high demand to
maintain navigation channels throughout the East and Gulf Coast. Figure 2 shows a figure of
all the different projects competing for use of these limited dredges.
3
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. JAN, 3 0 2019

{,'."' Dare County
Oregon Inlet Channel Maintenance Environmental Assessment
Bodie
Island
Pamlico
Sound
Oregon:
Inlet
Atlantic
Ocean

Maine
r 1
rx�,r JM3116 ii
US Army Corps ✓Green Herb
of Engineersasuil Heil
Wilmmgron nidnat unt Lydi
New York MA
annei
���cn.tnae
rater
` hreWs Houstc
Shark River
J
NJ � ana River roof NJ
'�T,Ii naepaan,Nei, NJ-
Mantoloking; JNJ
MD oms Rrver,
BaBgal I
eNaI, NJ
�kila Egg 1.16 rhor, NJ
Li@
DE � le Egg Inlet NJ '
Absecon lnlal,
r
Cold SP111119a, NJ
"-"�Ancateagatiue, MD
Chincoteague Inlet, VA.
'nngjlerCrwnrvul VA
Virginia Onalmock Creak.
- Ggeek.A
A
'nnha VA
—1z,�BmCreak, VARudeeIntel
VA
jRialter slough. NC
North Carolina ggon Intel, No
Rodienthm Harbor NC
Hatteras Perry, NO
-�olgrson Channel Re
Tea hes Hale/ Silver Lake Harbor, NC
TaylorF9 Greek.:NC
BulkF�ead Ghannei, NC
South Boygs e Inlet NC
NaW R�ver inlet NC
Carolina �INaV
Topsail Inlet, NO
hI
ard's F Beanlet, Nd NO
ockwootl s Fnlry Inlet, Nd
v �` �.hau OmInlet, NC
Town Creak SC`
Georgia aIly Beach, SC
�Femandina Harboc.FL
��GIV4W Florida
--8L Au®ualma, FL
`—Pence de Leon inlet,: FL
Cleanvaler PLS
Tampa Ray FFC—
,'
Pinellas Cuunry. Fi-
Stuart, FL
Lido Key. Sanaaote, Fi
Yf
.--St. Luole Inlet, FL
—'.—Palm BeaahrFL.-
Ft.lJyars FLS `, <
.b.ry 19 2415.
v0142011-017•04
G
0 50 100 200 300
Miles.
Wilmington District
East & Gulf Coast
Dredging Locations
Figure 2. Map showing locations of dredge projects maintained with USACE Wilmington District Dredge
Plants (Source: USACE Wilmington District).
RECEIVED
5 JAN ® 2099
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
P` rf U !All I_M!NrTnNI A!G

Recognizing the need for greater dredging capacity, Senate Bill 99 of Session 2017 was passed
by the North Carolina Senate and provides for the construction of a privately owned dredge
that can be utilized to maintain shallow draft navigations channels within the State including
Oregon Inlet. Section 13.7(a -h) of the bill states:
... the maintenance of the state's shallow draft navigation channels in a manner that
keeps those channels navigable and safe and minimizes their closure or degradation is
a vital public purpose and proper governmental function and that declines in federal
funding and dredging activity have significantly and adversely impacted the ability of
the federal government to maintain these channels in a timely manner. The resulting
deterioration in these channels damages the significant portion of the economy of the
State's coastal regions that is dependent on the use of the navigation channels by
watercraft. Therefore, it is the policy of the State to support and when necessary to
meet the public purposes set forth in this subsection, to supplement federal maintenance
of the navigational channels.
The bill authorized the allocation of up to $15 million of State funds to be provided, in the
form of a forgivable loan to a private partner for the construction and operation of a dredge
capable of maintaining shallow draft navigation channels throughout the State. The legislation
further authorized the Oregon Inlet Task Force to solicit proposals through an RFP, through
which a private partner could be selected. Proposals were solicited from interested companies
and the Oregon Inlet Task Force selected a private partner to work with. However, prior to
significant investments being made by the dredge partner for planning, design, and
construction of a dredge plant, it is necessary to have permits in place for the maintenance
work for which the dredge is being constructed.
With that in mind, Dare County is seeking the permits and authorizations required to utilize a
privately owned new special purpose dredge to supplement the USACE's efforts to maintain
safe navigation within the confines of Oregon hilet and certain connecting channels (Figure
2). This proposed action includes the ability to dredge on a year-round basis as is currently.
All aspects of the proposed dredging operations, including the extent of dredging areas, the
location for disposal of dredge spoils and the ability to dredge year round would be bound by
the same conditions and constraints as defined within the USACE's existing authorization for
the operation of their special purpose dredges. The specific areas to be dredged, as defined in
the USACE authorization, would include:
"... a 14 feet deep by 400 feet wide channel through Oregon Inlet and the ocean bar.
An approximate 16,050 -foot long portion of the channel from Oregon Inlet to Hell's
Gate (12 feet deep by 100 feet wide) and an approximate 2,850 foot long portion of
Old House Channel (12 feet deep by 100 feet wide) in Dare County" (USACE, 2004).
Given the channel through Oregon Inlet and the ocean bar as well as the channel from Oregon
Inlet to Hell's Gate are both maintained in a location that follows "best water", and are not in
a fixed position, a proposed channel corridor has been defined in which maintenance dredging
is being requested to align with the channel parameters sited above. Figure 3 show w w
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
JAN 3 ® 2019
DCM enrAGmIGTON wua

location of the proposed channel corridor, examples of the channel position based on present
bathymetric surveys, as well as proposed disposal sites. The nearshore disposal sites proposed
for material dredged by the new dredge would also be identical to what is currently authorized
by the USACE that is "nearshore disposal off the north end of Pea Island and in deep scour
holes beneath the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge" (USACE, 2004).
1.2 Purpose and Need
Dredging is necessary to maintain safe and reliable transportation routes through waterways.
Oregon Inlet is no exception. Despite considerable efforts on the part of the USACE, State,
and Dare County, shoaling continues to impede mariners and has resulted in the U.S. Coast
Guard's inability to properly position navigation buoys within the channel. As a result, the risk
of damage to vessels and injury to people continues. Since the 1960's, over 25 people have
died and 22 boats have been lost within the inlet (Dare County, 2018).
Oregon Inlet is considered one of the most commercially vital inlets along coastal North
Carolina (Dumas, 2014). Numerous business sectors rely on the ability to safely navigate this
waterway on a regular basis. As such, maintaining safe navigation from Pamlico Sound to the
Atlantic Ocean via Oregon Inlet is critical for the local, regional, and State's economy.
Based on available data, between 1995 and 2012, the US Army Corps of Engineers spent an
average of approximately $6.5 million per year on dredging Oregon Inlet. In recent years, Dare
County and the State of North Carolina have contributed significantly to the maintenance of
Oregon Inlet as federal funding levels have been reduced. That being said, the economic
impact of Oregon Inlet to Dare County is very significant and far outweighs the costs necessary
to keep the inlet passable through dredging. In fact, the annual economic impact to the Federal
Government alone greatly exceeds the recent and historical annual expenditures for dredging
(Dumas et al, 2014). A recent economic study of the inlet suggested that under recent
conditions, (as of 2014) when the navigation through Oregon Inlet is successful 40% of the
time, five business sectors (commercial fishing, seafood packing/processing, boat building and
support services, recreational fishing, and tournament fishing) contribute an economic impact
of $403.5 million in revenues while supporting 3,319 jobs in Dare County. When
incorporating nearby counties including Dare, Currituck, Camden, Pasquotank, Perquimans,
Tyrell, and Hyde, the regional economic impact of the inlet amounts to $423.3 million while
supporting 3,601 jobs. At a larger scale, the study cites an overall statewide economic impact
of $548.4 million and 4,348 jobs. If the inlet were to be navigable 85%-100% of the time over
the course of an entire year, the 2014 study stated that these business sectors could potentially
provide a total annual economic impact of 5,120 j obs and $642.2 million to Dare County, 5,590
jobs and $678.4 million to the region, and 5,397 jobs and $693.0 million to the State of North
Carolina (Dumas et at, 2014).
The economic impact of Oregon Inlet to Dare County prompted the County to partner with the
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NC DWR) to provide supplemental funding for
Oregon Inlet starting in 2016. The annual report prepared by the NCDWR, which was required
by SL 2013-360, Section 14.22, indicates a Dare County contribution of $884,000 matched
with $2,652,000 by the State to contribute an additional $2,652,000 to the USACE for Oregon
Inlet maintenance in FY 16/17. RECEIVED
7 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
DCNO 1AlII_MINIMON. NC

3
O
O
D
O
D
r
z
Z
Z_
z
O
20
m
z
O
Z o0
m
m
z
0
O
m
z
0
A
am
am
O
D
0
O
C:
z
D
z
0
JAN 3 ® 2019
DCM WILMINGTON, MC

Even with the State and Dare County taking initiatives to provide the necessary supplemental
funding to maintain the Oregon Inlet Channel, dredge plant availability has become the
primary reason for not being able to maintain dependable navigation through the inlet. The
USACE Wilmington District dredge plants are in high demand to maintain navigation channels
throughout the East and Gulf Coast including other channels throughout North Carolina.
Demand has increased recently given the ability of other communities to provide supplemental
funding for USACE dredges to conduct navigation maintenance in channels vital to their
communities.
The purpose of Dare County's proposed action is to have the ability to operate a yet -to -be -
constructed dredge within the confines of Oregon Inlet in a manner that aligns with current
USACE maintenance practices within Oregon Inlet. This includes the ability to conduct
maintenance dredging on a year-round basis. The need of this action is to maintain the
county's, region's and states economic viability while preserving environmental quality and
human safety.
1.3 Scoping and Consultation History
An interagency scoping meeting to discuss the proposed action was held at the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality (NC DEQ) in Washington, NC on September 25, 2018.
Attendees included representatives from Federal and State resource agencies including the US
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), North Carolina
Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF), North Carolina Division of Water Resources (DWR),
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (DCM), and the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission (WRC). Representatives from Dare County's consultant, APTIM,
were also in attendance. The meeting's primary objective was to bring agency representatives
together to present the project scope and develop an agreed upon permitting approach and the
necessary environmental documentation.
During the meeting, it was determined that a CAMA Major Pennit, NC DWR General Water
Quality Certificate, and NC State Historic Preservation Office's (SHPO) concurrence would
be required. In addition, from the federal side, a Department of Army (DA) Individual Permit
complying with Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act would be required. Concurrences would also be needed from USFWS and NMFS to
comply with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Magnuson -Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Furthermore, an Environmental Assessment (EA)
would be required to satisfy the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA).
A subsequent meeting was convened on October 29, 2018 between the County and
representatives of Wilmington District's Civil Works and Regulatory Division to discuss the
procedural aspects of the proposed project and to ensure that the actions associated with the
proposed project will strictly adhere to the conditions set forth for the authorized federal
project.
INSERT DISCUSSION OF FURTHER CONSULTATION WITH USFWS and NMFS (use of
existing SARBO if Josh provides me with this info.)?? RECEWED
9 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
iJChO 111RLMINGT®N, NC

DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES
2.1 Alternative #1: Status Quo- Continuation of Existing Channel Maintenance
Operations
The federal Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay project (also known as the Oregon Inlet Project) consists
of the maintenance dredging of a channel 14 feet deep and 400 feet wide from the Atlantic
Ocean through Oregon Inlet with a connecting channel 12 feet deep and 100 feet wide west of
the Bonner Bridge to the intersection with Old House Channel in Pamlico Sound. This channel
intersection is known as Hell's Gate. Old House Channel, which also measures 12 feet deep
and 100 feet wide, connects Hell's Gate with Wanchese Harbor and Shallowbag Bay near
Manteo (Figure 4).
In recent years, the USACE has focused much of its maintenance dredging in the area around
the navigation span of the existing Bonner Bridge to address severe shoaling associated with
the southward encroachment of the Bodie Island spit into the navigation channel. The
navigation span of the existing bridge is only 130 feet wide and the channel through the
navigation span must be maintained in order to keep the channel navigable.
Maintenance dredging near the navigation span has been performed by contract hopper
dredges, contract pipeline dredges, Government sidecast dredges, and Government special
purpose dredges. Maintenance of the ocean bar channel has been performed primarily by
contract hopper dredges since 1993 supplemented by USACE sidecast dredges and special
purpose dredges. Prior to 2004, maintenance of the channel west of the bridge and a portion of
Old House Channel near Hell's Gate, was maintained by contract pipeline dredges with
disposal of the dredged material in upland disposal sites. In 2004, the USACE published an
EA/FONSI (USACE, 2004) which permitted USACE special purpose dredges to perform
maintenance in the channel west of the bridge as well as in Hell's Gate and along
approximately 2,850 feet of Old House Channel near Hell's Gate on a year-round basis (Figure
4).
The Bonner Bridge is currently undergoing replacement and the new Bonner Bridge will
include a 3,400 -foot navigation section. Bent spacings for the navigation section of the new
bridge will be 350 feet, which will allow a greater degree of flexibility for routing the
navigation channel through the bridge.
10 JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
tIrU WILMINGTON, PIC

Ofd House Channel
to Oregon Inlet
00
a are un
�
Zan€eo (3ha€fs7&ba�gj 8E r..� Bland
Atlantic Ocean
Ckegvra Inlet
lsl Isl. C x�aac+ � .. a +� t
ell's Gate �lOKiS'B d �♦
lat.
Dynamic Inlet Dredging Mows
extUting dtanneVnaturally deep water, ..
. except in the vicinity of Herbert C.
Banner Bridge, where the dredging
alignment is constrained by the bridge's Farnlico Sound
navigation span.
Dredge material to be placed in
new shoredisposal as well as
underneath Hence t C. Bonner t• -
Bridge in deep scour holes.
Coastal streets
Not so scale. Not intended for navigation use.. For Near Shore Dispos.
Navigation Channel
=s3ix Dredge Limits
Figure 4. Oregon Inlet/Old House Channel (Source USACE EA 2004).
Maintenance of the ocean bar channel through Oregon Inlet was initiated by the USACE in
1960. Between 1960 and 1972, maintenance was accomplished primarily with the USACE
hopper dredge Hyde supplemented by the USACE sidecast dredges Merritt and Schweizer.
ECENED
JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
0VM WILMINGTON, TON, NC

With the retirement of the hopper dredge Hyde, maintenance of the bar channel between 1973
and 1980 was performed exclusively by USACE sidecast dredges Merritt, Schweizer, and Fry.
In 1981, severe shoaling of the seaward portions of the bar channel necessitated the renewed
use of contract hopper dredges. Between 1981 and 1982, the newly commissioned USACE
special purpose dredge Currituck together with the sidecast dredges Merritt, Schweizer, and
Fry constructed a pilot channel across the inlet ebb tide delta in order to allow larger
commercial hopper dredges to work in the inlet channel. Between 1983 and 1990, maintenance
of the ocean bar channel was accomplished by a combination of contract hopper dredges,
USACE sidecast dredges and the Currituck. The material removed by the contract hopper
dredges during this period, which totaled over 4 million cubic yards, was deposited off the
north end of Pea Island in water depths of approximately 20 feet. During that same time period,
USACE sidecast dredges reportedly removed approximately 5.3 million cubic yards from the
bar channel. Note, the sidecast dredge Schweizer was retired in the year 2000.
As previously mentioned, shoaling in the vicinity of the navigation span of the existing Bonner
Bridge, which is associated with the southward encroachment of the Bodie Island sand spit
into the navigation channel, became acute around 1991 requiring the USACE to obtain the
services of high capacity contract pipeline dredges to clear the channel. Since 1991, contract
pipeline dredges have removed an average of about 275,700 cubic yards of sand per year,
primarily from the vicinity of the bridge navigation span. The dredged material removed by
pipeline dredges is pumped to ocean beach disposal sites located along the northern 1 to 3
miles of Pea Island.
When operating sidecast
dredges like the Merritt
(Figure 5) dispense material �
to the side of the navigation
channel, while special sx�-
u ose dredges such as the
p rP g
Currituck (Figure 6) and
Murden (Figure 7) fill a
small hopper with the
material and transport it to
designated disposal areas. In
special purpose dredges,
such as the Currituck, water
pumped into the hopper is Figure 5. The sidecast dredge the Merritt. (Photo credit: USACE)
overflowed to provide an
economic load of sand, since the dredged slurry entering the hopper contains about 20% sand
and 80% water. Once the desired load is obtained, the sediment is taken to nearshore waters
where the split —hull hopper is opened and the sediments are dumped. In 2012, the USACE
replaced the sidecast dredge Fry with the special purpose dredge Murden. The Murden is
similar in design to the Currituck, but has a larger bin capacity of 512 cubic yards compared
to 315 cubic yards for the Currituck. The Murden along with other USACE dredges including
the Currituck and the sidecast dredge Merritt have all worked in Oregon Inlet.
RECE ED
tz JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING &ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
f'n Y#19i. MlNCTOIV, INC
i _1

Based on recent operations, the Currituck can remove between 2,000 to 2,500 cubic yards per
day. Production rates for the Murden average between 2,500 to 3,000 cubic yards/day.
Production rates for the two dredges depend on the location of the disposal sites. In 2018, the
Currituck worked a total of 145 days in Oregon Inlet and removed over 307,000 cubic yards
of material. The Murden worked 5 days and removed over 10,000 cubic yards of sand. Most
of the material removed by Murden and Currituck was deposited in the scour hole in Davis
Slough on the south end of the bridge. The working speeds of these special purpose hopper
dredges range between 1 and 3 knots, and travel speeds range from 7 to 10 knots. The dredges
normally maintain shallow channels with depth between -4 - and -14 feet MLW.
Daily operating costs for the Currituck are currently $16,200/day while the Murden costs
$19,200/day based on a 12 hour day.
Figure 6. The special purpose dredge Currituck. (Photo Credit: safesea.com [left.]; from; USACE [right])
www.professional mariner.com [right])
13 JAN ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
0CM WILMINGTON, NO

2.1.1 Summary of USACE Maintenance Dredging
The past maintenance dredging activity by the USACE for the Oregon Inlet project is
summarized in Table 1. This table was developed using Annual Reports of the Secretary of the
Army on Civil Works Activities up to 2012, dredge records published in a 2003 report by
Moffatt & Nichol on the Bonner Bridge replacement (1Moffatt & Nichol, 2003), and a summary
of Oregon Inlet dredging activity published in 2018 by EJE Recycling (EJE, 2018). The values
in this table are not intended to represent any one year since the type of dredge used over the
years has varied. Rather, the values in the table are only intended to provide a general indication
of the scope of past maintenance dredging activity associated with the Oregon Inlet Project. A
graph of the cumulative volumes removed by the different dredge types since 1980 is provided
on Figure 8.
Table 1. Suntin ry of Avera a Annual Dredging A ivity for the Ore Yon Inlet Prc&et
I
14
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. JAN
T)CM WILMINGTON, NG
Period of
Record Used
Average Dredge
Dredging
Years of
Total Dredge Vol.
Volume (cy/yr)
Estimated
Activity
From
To
Record Used
(cy) During Period
During Period of
Dredge days/yr.
of Record
Record
Interior
Pipeline
1995
2009
15
4,181,100
278,700
117
Ocean Bar-
Hopper Dredge
1983
2005
23
6,504,500
282,800
62
Pipeline -Bridge
1991
2013
23
6,340,900
275,700
IS
& Bar Channel
Sidecast
1974
2015
41
22,380,000
545,800
182
Special Use-
1988
2015
28
1,586,800
56,700
27
Hoppe
I
14
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. JAN
T)CM WILMINGTON, NG

Nigure N. Cumulative dredge volumes removed since 1980.
A plot of the cost of maintenance dredging for the Oregon Inlet project between 1995 and
2015, with cost updated to 2018 price levels using changes in the marine equipment index
(USACE, 2016), is provided on Figure 9. These costs only include the actual cost of the
dredging operations and do not include ancillary cost for surveys, engineering & design,
environmental monitoring, etc.
Note the peak in funding during FY 2009 was associated with special funding provided by the
American Recovery & Reinvestment Act and does not reflect the average level of funding with
normal Operation and Maintenance (O&M) funds. Excluding 2009, the average cost of
maintenance dredging between 1995 and 2015 for the Oregon Inlet project (expressed in 2018
price levels) was $6,525,000/year.
15
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. JAN 3 0 W9
Be"

Figure 9. Annual cost maintenance dredging for the Oregon Inlet project (1995 to 2012)
Following the replacement of the Bonner Bridge, dredging currently conducted in the vicinity
of the sole navigation span would no longer be needed. However, dredging in other portions
of the channel may be required, including the portion of the channel west of the bridge.
Furthermore, if the Bodie Island sand spit continues to migrate south, the spit could again begin
to encroach into the navigation channel, however, based on past movement of the sand spit,
shoaling due to the southward migration of the sand spit should not pose a problem for at least
another 20 to 30 years (CPE -NC, 2012).
2.1.2 Existing Authorizations for the Utilization of USACE Dredge Fleet within Oregon
Inlet
On May 17, 1950, through PL81-516, The River and Harbor Act, Congress authorized the
USACE to dredge Oregon Inlet's ocean bar navigation channel to a depth of 14 feet. In 1970,
Congress authorized the Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay Project, which involved the construction
of two rock j etties and a 20 -foot -deep ocean bar navigation channel for Oregon Inlet. However,
in 2003, after decades of study and debate, the White House Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) announced that they reached a mutual agreement with the Departments of Interior and
Commerce not to proceed with the project primarily due to environmental concerns. The
decision included assurances that the US Army Corps of Engineers would receive enough
funding to keep the inlet dredged to maintain the authorized 14 -foot depth. RECEIVED
16 JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
0CM WILMINGTON, NO

In April 2002, the USACE issued an EA for the maintenance of the ocean bar channel that
includes dredging a 600 -foot wider channel on the north side of the inlet, removing 26 acres
of Bodie Island, and placing the dredged material on Pea Island. After receiving comments
from the Department of Interior, two special use permits were issued- one by the NPS and the
other from US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) that allowed for a 400 -foot wider channel
on the north side of the inlet with the dredged material to be placed on Pea Island.
In March 2004, the USACE drafted another EA entitled "Use of Government Plant to Dredge
in Federally Authorized Navigation Projects in North Carolina The subsequent Finding of
No Significant Impacts (FONSI) document, issued in September 2004, authorized the
maintenance of"an approximate 2,650 -foot long portion of Oregon Inlet (14 -feet deep by 400 -
feet wide), an approximate 16,050 -foot long portion of the channel from Oregon Inlet to Hell's
Gate (12 -feet deep by 100 -feet wide) and an approximate 2,850 -foot long portion of Old House
Channel (12 -feet deep by 100 -feet wide) in Dare County". The nearshore disposal site for
material dredged by a special purpose dredge is located on the south side of Oregon Inlet, off
the north end of Pea Island, and in deep scour holes beneath the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge.
This authorization allowed for the use of the USACE's shallow -draft special purpose dredge
Currituck (or similar Corps special purpose dredge) and the sidecast dredge Merritt (or similar
Corps' sidecast dredge). Because the intent of the authorization was to expeditiously remove
shoals that were impeding navigation, the proposed dredging could occur at any time of the
year.
In 1998, the USACE drafted a Biological Assessment (BA) entitled "Use of the Sidecast
Dredges Fry, Merritt, Schweizer, and the Split -Hull Hopper Dredge Currituck in Coastal
United States Waters". Due to concerns with possible impacts to swimming sea turtles and
other biological resources, the BA describes a number specifications included with the design
and specifications of the authorized dredges. These design considerations are intended to
reduce the risk of impacts to these resources. These include:
Draghead suction limited to an average 350 -horsepower with a maximum horsepower
of 400 -horsepower.
The draghead sizes limited and range from approximately 2 feet by 2 feet to 2 feet by
3 feet.
The draghead openings are further subdivided on their undersides by gridded baffles
with openings ranging from about 5 inches by 5 inches to 5 inches by 8 inches. These
baffles restrict the size of objects which can enter the dredge draghead.
With these specifications in place, the authorization further states that these vessels are not
required to operate with sea turtle deflectors on the dragheads and do not require screening or
observers.
The subsequent Biological Opinion (BO) issued by NMFS later that year states:
t,- MV
17 JUN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
DCM WILMINGTON, NC

" Based on our consideration of the best available information, we believe that the year-
round operation of the hopper dredge Currituck and the sidecast dredges Fry, Merritt
and Schweizer to maintain coastal inlets on the eastern seaboard of the United States
may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the continued existence of listed species
under NMFS purview. This consultation is valid as well for the operation by
Wilmington District Corps of Engineers for channel maintenance dredging of up to 10
vessels of this or similar type and size class (under 500 gross tons), with similar
dragheads (Brunswick, Brunswick County Type, Brunswick Adjustable, or equivalent),
dredge pump horsepower (400 H.P. maximum), and suction and discharge pipe
specifications (dredge suction pipes 10-14 inches in diameter, and combineddischarge
pipe 12-16 inches in diameter) ".
2.2 Alternative #2: Applicant's Preferred- Oregon Inlet Maintenance Supplemented
with a New Privately Owned Hopper Dredge
Dare County is seeking permits and authorizations to utilize the yet -to -be -constructed privately
owned special purpose dredge in the same manner and under the same conditions as what is
currently authorized for USACE to perform maintenance dredging within the waters in
proximity to Oregon Inlet, as defined in the 2004 FONSI. The dredging conducted by the
privately owned dredge would not replace dredging performed by the USACE dredge fleet;
rather it would complement the USACE's existing efforts.
Because the USACE authorization allows for the maintenance dredging following best water,
the footprints of the areas to be dredged are not fixed. Rather, a bathymetric survey is
performed prior to each dredge event in an effort to determine the location of the best water
for the channel. As such, for this proposed project, a "dredge corridor" has been developed
and will serve as the domain in which dredging could be performed in the future (Figure
3). Figure 3 depicts the current location of the confluence of Old House Channel and the
Oregon Inlet to Hell's Gate Channel. It should be noted, however, that after further
consultation with USACE Navigation staff, the extent of authorized dredging within Old
House Chanel that was included in the 2004 FONSI, only includes Range 1 (which extends
approximately 2,850 feet) (Figure 3). Due to the migration of"best water" within the channel,
dredging of the 2,850 linear feet under this proposed project may occur anywhere along the
portion of Old House Channel Range 1 and 2 and Manteo Channel Range 17 Extension within
the proposed dredge corridor, as shown in Figure 1.
The nearshore disposal sites for material dredged by the new dredge would also be identical to
what is currently authorized by the USACE. These areas include nearshore disposal off the
north end of Pea Island and in deep scour holes beneath the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge (Figure
3. Because it is anticipated that the majority of the existing Bonner Bridge will be demolished
in the near future, the disposal of material for this proposed action will be limited to the areas
surrounding the remaining bridge pilings.
Many of the specifications for the dredges authorized for year-round use in Oregon Inlet, as
specified in the 2004 USACE EA/FONSI are detailed above in Section 2.1.1. RMLYWED
18 IAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
0CM WILMINGTON, NC

specifications were developed to reduce the potential for impacts to swimming sea turtles and
other biological resources. With these measures in place, it was determined in the FONSI that
sea turtle deflectors on the dragheads, screening, or the use of observers would not be required.
These specifications will be implemented for the operation of the privately owned dredge as
well.
Historically, the total volume of dredged material removed from the connecting channels in
proximity to Oregon Inlet has averaged around 900,000 cubic yards on an annual basis. This
includes material removed by pipeline dredges from the interior channels as well as the volume
removed by the USACE special purpose dredges and sidecast dredges. However, it should be
noted that of that volume, approximately 558,400 cubic yards is attributed by the USACE's
sidecast dredges. In general, the material removed by sidecast dredges is over stated since the
material is simply discharged immediately adjacent to the channel with some of this material
retuning to the channel following the dredging operation. The actual volume of in-situ material
removed from the channel by sidecast dredges is generally credited to be around 50% of the
reported volume. Assuming this is the case, the volume of material that could be available for
removal by the privately owned dredge each year would be approximately 615,000 cubic yards.
In addition to the material removed by these three dredge types, the privately owned dredge
would also be able to perform some maintenance dredging in the ocean bar channel. Based on
the values provided in Table 1, the average volume of material typically removed from the
ocean bar channel by a USACE special purpose hopper dredge has been approximately
300,000 cubic yards/year. Thus, in total, the total volume of material available for removal by
a privately owned dredge may average between 900,000 and 1,000,000 cubic yards/year.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
3.1 Physical Environment of Oregon Inlet
The project area encompasses the waters between the southern tip of Bodie Island and the
northern portion of Pea Island including the ocean bar channel extending offshore and the
connecting channels and waters on the Pamlico Sound side of the existing Bonner Bridge.
The inlet connects the northern end of Pamlico Sound to the Mid Atlantic Bight region of the
Atlantic Ocean. Oregon Inlet is approximately 1.5 miles along its axis and 0.6 miles wide
(Mallinson et al., 2008). Bodie Island, which forms the inlet's northern shoulder, is a part of
the Cape Hatteras National Seashore (Seashore), which is administered by the National Park
Service (NPS). The southern end of Bodie Island, including the Oregon Inlet campground and
the Oregon Inlet Marina and Fishing Center, is primarily used for recreation. The southern
shoulder of the inlet is home to the Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge). The Refuge
lies within the boundaries of the Seashore and is administered by the US Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS). The Refuge consists primarily of barrier island beach, dunes, and coastal
wetlands. A former US Coast Guard Station building is at the northern end of Hatteras Island.
The Station is listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).
In 1963, the 2.44 -mile Bonner Bridge was constructed and served to connect vehicular traffic
along Highway 12 between Bodie Island and Pea Island. The bridge includes a primary
navigation span navigation span providing 65 feet of vertical clearance above mean higRECEIVED
19 JAN 2L'i9
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

and 130 feet horizontal clearance between fenders. An adjacent span with 90 feet of horizontal
clearance is often used for navigation as the result of natural channel movement (US DOT,
2008). The primary navigation channel, Oregon Inlet Channel, extends approximately 3 miles
and is aligned northeastward in the inlet proper and then turns northwestward to Old House
Channel, into Pamlico Sound. Davis Channel, a secondary route just west of Pea Island, runs
to the southwest for 2.5 miles and is especially susceptible to shoaling (Nichols and Pietrafesa,
1997). Because the existing Bonner Bridge is nearing the end of its intended lifespan, the
North Carolina Department of Transportation is in the process of constructing a replacement
bridge. The new 2.8 mile Bonner Bridge, anticipated to open in the spring of 2019, will be
located just west of the existing bridge (NC DOT, 2018). The new bridge will include seven
navigation spans providing an average of 300 feet of horizontally clearance between spans and
a vertical clearance of 70. The navigation zone (area with spans of the navigation span height
and width) would be 1,600 to 2,000 feet long (US DOT, 2008). Following the construction of
the new bridge, the majority of the original bridge will be demolished with the exception of a
1,000 -ft section at the south end that will be repurposed into a fishing pier (Walker, 2018).
3.1.1 Geomorphology
Like most inlets, the geomorphology of Oregon Inlet is dynamic. During relatively storm -free
periods, an elongated spit forms along the southern shoulder of Bodie Island and the cross-
section of the inlet assumes a narrow, but deep configuration with steep banks. However,
during times of stormy weather, when Oregon Inlet's shoulders are well-rounded, the
configuration is a shallow channel with wide overbanks on one or both sides (US DOT, 2008).
The inlet channel that separates the adjacent islands is called the throat channel or inlet gorge.
The throat channel generally consists of a central main ebb channel flanked by several marginal
flood channels. In general, the cross-sectional area of the throat channel conforms to the
volume of water that must pass through it. When the water volume is decreased, the channel
will tend to shoal. If the volume increases, the channel will deepen and/or widen (Mallinson et
al., 2008). The throat channel at Oregon Inlet has remained relatively stable over time;
however, there has been a tendency for the gorge to migrate southward. Shifts in the location
of the throat often coincide with the passing of major storm events such as hurricanes and
nor'easters. The continued movement of the throat has become problematic for the USACE
in maintaining the navigation channel beneath the existing Bonner Bridge's navigation span.
In the first few years following the construction of the bridge, the location of the channel
through the navigation span was maintained by the natural scouring action of tidal currents
(Mallinson et al., 2008). However, beginning in 1968, the shoaling rate for this part of the
channel increased as the sand spit on the Bodie Island shoulder began migrating southward
toward the span. Since 1971, bottom profiles have shown the throat channel somewhere other
than at the navigation span most of the time (US DOT, 2008).
The continued movement of Oregon Inlet's throat channel has complicated the USACE's
maintenance of the ocean bar channel. In 1981, the channel adjacentto the south end of Bodie
Island began to deteriorate, and a new bar channel formed in a more central location between
Oregon Inlet's shoulders. Consequently, inlet dredging was increased to preserve the
navigation channel, a terminal groin was constructed on the south bank at Pea Island in 1989-
RECIENED
20
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. JAN 3 ® 2019
3CaNfl WILMINGTON, TOfV, IVG

1991, and a rock revetment was emplaced around the south base of the bridge to prevent further
migration (Mallinson et al., 2008). Despite these attempts to maintain safe navigation, the
geomorphology of the inlet channel remains dynamic necessitating the need to continue regular
channel maintenance dredging.
3.1.2 Waves
Wave data gathered by the USACE's Wave Information Studies program from WIS Station
63223, located offshore from Oregon Inlet, indicates that significant wave heights at Oregon
Inlet average about 3 feet with yearly extreme signifrcantwave heights of at least 10 feet. Wave
heights exceeding 5 feet occur approximately 10% of the time in the project area. The majority
of the wave energy at Oregon Inlet comes from the northeast and east directions; this accounts
for the southward migration of Oregon Inlet (Figure 10) (USACE, 2018).
21 JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
DCM WILMINGTON, NC

Atlantic WIS Station 63223
Is 01 -Jan -1980 thru 31 -Dec -2014
wero ub,m :,win Long: -75.330 Lat: 35.830 Depth: 30 m
Total .Ohs: 306815
WAVE 805E
W 21
N
0
4'i7 S 11 S
luko -101.0
180
SIG WAVE HEIGHT (m) S
1.2 2-3
4-5 5 ].5 7,1-11 10.12.5
0.1 � .:
1a US Army. Engineer Research .& Development Center ST53224v03
frequency
of
occurrence
90 E
ig
Figure 10. Average wave height and direction near Oregon Inlet from WIS Station 63223.
3.1.3 Wind and Storms
Wave data gathered by the USACE's Wave Information Studies program from WIS Station
63223, located offshore from Oregon Inlet; indicates that the mean wind speed from 1980
through 2014 near Oregon Inlet was 15.4 mph with a maximum wind speed of 86 mph. The
mean wind direction during this timeframe was from the southeast at 142° (Figure 11)
(USACE, 2018).
22 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
OCM WILMINGTON, NO

Figure 11. Average wind speed and direction near Oregon Inlet from WIS Station 63223.
Most of the storms affecting the Outer Banks, including Oregon Inlet, occur during the months
of November through April with the most intense in January followed by December and
February. Cione et al. (1993) showed that between November and March, there are 4 or 5
extratropical cyclones which occur per month in the vicinity of Cape Hatteras, with each event
lasting 1 to 4 days. Generally, the North Carolina coast is subject to two types of severe
windstorms: extra -tropical northeasters and hurricanes. Northeasters, with accompanying high
tides and waves, can rapidly erode the shoulders of Oregon Inlet. These storms are fairly
common in this area, with between 30 and 35 of varying severity hitting the coast each y CEIVED
23 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
GCM WILMINGTON, NO
Atlantic WIS Station 63223
1
01 -Jan -1980 thru 31 -Dee -2014
Long: -75.330 Lat: 35.83° Depth: 30m
W
Total Obs': 306815
WIND ROSE
N
0
337.5 22.5
315
- 45.
292(5
67:5
frequency
of
0,13
'A.1
occurrence
0.06
0.03
W 270
90
E
.247:5
112:5
225
135
202.5. 157.5
180
WIND SPEED (m!s)
S
0-5 5-10 1015 1520
2025 2630 >30.
US Army: Engineer Research & Development Center ST63223_003
Figure 11. Average wind speed and direction near Oregon Inlet from WIS Station 63223.
Most of the storms affecting the Outer Banks, including Oregon Inlet, occur during the months
of November through April with the most intense in January followed by December and
February. Cione et al. (1993) showed that between November and March, there are 4 or 5
extratropical cyclones which occur per month in the vicinity of Cape Hatteras, with each event
lasting 1 to 4 days. Generally, the North Carolina coast is subject to two types of severe
windstorms: extra -tropical northeasters and hurricanes. Northeasters, with accompanying high
tides and waves, can rapidly erode the shoulders of Oregon Inlet. These storms are fairly
common in this area, with between 30 and 35 of varying severity hitting the coast each y CEIVED
23 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
GCM WILMINGTON, NO

(US DOT, 2008). Hurricanes may be responsible for major events, such as inlet openings and
closings and gorge shifts, but because of their relative infrequency (approximately one
hurricane every two years), the overall impact of hurricanes is less significant than northeasters
on this section of the coast (US DOT, 2008). Storm surges associated with hurricanes and
extra -tropical lows have dramatic impacts on Oregon Inlet by generating water level
differences between the sound and the ocean, which potentially could be more than 10 feet (3
meters). The maximum sound water level of 7.5 feet over mean sea level was recorded during
Hurricane Donna, in September 1960; during the Ash Wednesday Storm in March 1962, the
maximum ocean surge level of 8 feet over mean sea level was recorded (US DOT, 2008).
3.1.4 Sea Level Rise
On October 1, 2011, the USACE distributed an Engineering Circular (EC) setting parameters
for the inclusion of the effects of projected sea level rise for all phases of USACE coastal
projects. This consideration includes the planning, engineering, design, construction, operation
and maintenance phases (EC 1165-2-212). Because projects are implemented at a local or
regional scale, it is important to distinguish between global mean sea level (GMSL) and local
mean sea level (MSL). According to the USACE (1996), global mean sea level (GMSL)
change is defined as a global change of oceanic water level. Local mean sea level (MSL)
changes result from the collective effects of GMSL and regional changes, such as local land
elevation changes.
According to the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2013), the long-term global
mean sea level trend estimate from 1901 to 2010 is 1.7 mm/year, for a total sea level rise of
0.19 in. The latest IPCC report states that global mean sea level will continue to rise during the
21st century, and climate models predict that rates of sea level rise will increase due to increased
ocean warming and melting glaciers and ice sheets (IPCC, 2013).
Mean sea level trends can be estimated using historical tidal gauge records. The National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has maintained a tide observation
station at Oregon Inlet Marina, North Carolina called Tide Station 8652597 since 1977
(NOAA, 2018). This station presently is in working order and continues to collect tide data.
The mean sea level trend for Oregon Inlet is estimated at 4.36 (+/- 1.66) mm/year, based on
monthly mean tidal data recorded by Tide Station 8652587 from 1977 to 2017 (Figure 12)
(NOAA, 2018).
JAN 3 0 2019
24
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. ICM WILMINGTON, NG

BG52587 Oregon. Inlet Marina, North Carolina. 4.36+/=-1.16 mm/yr
0.60
—Linear Relative Sea Level Trentl J�11,1.4K
Inteival i
'
0.45
—Upper 95% Confidence _ _ _ _ _ — _ _ _ _ _ _ — _
—Lower 95% Confidence Interval
Momhly mean sea,levei with the:
0.30
average seasonal cycle removed — — — — — — —.— — - - — — — -- — — — — —
0.15
—— _ — _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — — — _ — —. _ — _ _ _ _ — _ — _ _ '
0.00
0.15.—_
-- __—_. - —_ —. _--._-—__--..--
-0.301
——.- — —.—- — — —.-. .._--..—.—.----.--..•—.--
0.451
—
--. --_ — —.— _-' ------._----.-- — — —— -- ——-- — —` —.
�� —
1900 1910' 1920 1930 1990 1950 7900 1970 1990 1990. 2000 2010 2020:
Figure 12. Relative sea level rise trend at Oregon Inlet Marina, North Carolina.
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
4.1 Water Quality
The waters of the Atlantic Ocean contiguous to that portion of Pasquotank River Basin that
extends from the North Carolina -Virginia State Line to the northeast tip of Ocracoke Island
are classified as SB by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of
Water Resources (DWR). Class SB waters are tidal salt waters protected for all SC uses in
addition to primary recreation. Primary recreational activities include swimming, skin diving,
water skiing and similar uses involving human body contact with water where such activities
take place in an organized manner or on a frequent basis. Class SC waters are all tidal salt
waters protected for secondary recreation such as fishing, boating and other activities involving
minimal skin contact; fish and noncommercial shellfish consumption; aquatic life propagation
and survival; and wildlife.
Water quality can be measured by a number of different methods that quantify re -suspended
sediments and the related effects of turbidity, light attenuation and water chemistry. Turbidity,
expressed in Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU), quantitatively measures the clarity of
water, taking into account the scattering and absorption of light by suspended particles. The
two reported major sources of turbidity in coastal areas are very fine organic particulate matter
and sand sized sediments that are re -suspended around the seabed by local waves and currents
(pompe, 1993). Total Suspended Solids (TSS) are solids that are present anywhere in the water
column. TSS can include a wide variety of material, such as silt, decaying plant and animal
matter, industrial wastes and sewage. Currently, there are no standards associated with TSS in
North Carolina.
In 1989, the DWR (at the time known as the Division of Environmental Management of the
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources) conducted a
synoptic water quality study of the Albemarle/Pamlico system. Water quality parameters were
sampled from 33 sampling sites at the surface, photic zone, bottom, and throughout the water
column. Two locations sampled near Oregon Inlet (Pamlico Sound near channel mar VEE
25
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
JAN 3 ® 2019
GOM WILMINGTON, NO

4M14 "PA" and Roanoke Sound at channel marker G "9") indicated that the parameters tested
were within state standards and expected ranges (US DOT, 2008).
The DEQ's Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) maintains water quality sampling sites
throughout the State. Two stations near the Oregon Inlet indicate good water quality levels,
with enterococci levels within the EPA standards for swimming. These monitoring sites are
located specifically at the northernmost beach access on Pea Island (Station ID #25) and at the
Oregon Inlet Federal Campground (Station ID #23) (Figure 13). Between April 2017 and
October 2018, neither monitoring site exhibited enterococci levels about the EPA standard
indicating that water quality, in terms of bacterial contamination, was good in the ocean waters
around Oregon Inlet and no water quality advisories or alerts had been issued (NCDMF, 2018).
JAN 3 0 2019
26
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. OOM WILMINGTON, NC

Figure 13. Water quality sampling stations in proximity to the Oregon Inlet. Green indicates no
alert/advisory, meaning the enterococci levels are within the EPA standards for swimming.
4.2 Air Quality
In accordance with the Clean Air Act of 1970 (42 USC 7609, as amended in 1990 and 1997)
the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) established National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for the protection of public health and welfare. Ambient air quality
standards are based on six common pollutants: particulate matter less than 2.5 m (PM-2.5"
PM-2.5 ��®
particulate matter 2.5 to 10 m (PM -10); carbon monoxide (CO); ozone (03); sulfur
JAN 3 0 2019
27
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. DDM WILMINGTON, NC

(S02); nitrogen dioxide (NO2); and lead (Pb). According to the EPA, a geographic area that
meets or is within the national ambient air quality standard is deemed an "attainment area"; an
area that does not meet this standard is called a nonattainment area. Dare County as a whole is
designated as an attainment area (USEPA, 2014).
4.3 Noise
Noise levels in the proposed project area are relatively low. No terrestrial -based commercial
or industrial activities exists within the proposed project area. The two main sources of noise
in proximity to the inlet originate from vehicular traffic on the Bonner Bridge along Highway
12 and boat traffic (including dredging activity).
In 2003, a noise measurement survey was conducted in areas surrounding Oregon Inlet. The
A -weighted noise levels, a measure of sound intensity with frequency characteristics that
correspond to human subj ective response to noise, were recorded in a grassy area in the Oregon
Inlet Campground located approximately 1.5 miles to the north of Oregon Inlet. The average
A -weighted noise level at this location was 58 dBA which does not approach the Federal
Highway Administration's Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) for Category B activities (US
DOT 2008).
As stated previously, a wide range of commercial and recreational vessels utilize Oregon Inlet
on a regular basis. These vessels contribute to the noise within the project area. The primary
sources of noise emanating from ships originates from their propellers, motors and gears. The
noise created by the motor is continuous and caused by the combustion of fuel inside the engine
cylinders and by the rotating gears and shafts. Sound is also created by bubbles formed by the
rotating propellers and, to a lesser extent, by the wake of waves produced by the movement of
the ship. The breaking of these bubbles creates a loud acoustic sound and is known as cavitation
noise. The faster the propeller rotates the more cavitation and the louder the sound. The
breaking bubbles produce sound over a range of frequencies, and at high speeds, these
frequencies can be as high as 20,000 Hz. On the other extreme, a large ship with slowly turning
propellers can generate very low frequencies (below 10 Hz) (Discovery of Sound in the Sea,
2018). Most vessels, but particularly large ships, produce predominantly low frequency sound
(below 1 kHz) from onboard machinery, hydrodynamic flow, and from propeller cavitation
(Ross, 1987). Source levels can range from < 150 dB re: IuPa to over 190 dB for the largest
commercial vessels (Hildebrand, 2009).
Along with boating operations, the use of dredges on a regular basis contributes to the noise
experienced within Oregon Inlet. Hopper dredges, like the USACE Murden and Currituck,
hydraulically remove sediment from the seafloor through dragheads. Sediment is sucked
upward through a pipe by means of centrifugal pumps, and the slurry is transferred to the
hopper bin. These actions, along with operating the vessel's engine, produce noise ranging
from 70 to 1,000 Hz with peaks at 120 to 140 dB (Clarke et a12002, unpublished). Robinson
et at., (2011) carried out an extensive study of the noise generated by a number of trailing
suction hopper dredges during marine aggregate extraction. Source levels of the vessels EIVED
estimated and an investigation undertaken into the origin of the noise. Source levels at
frequencies below 500 Hz were generally in line with those expected for a cargo ship trave][19A 3 ® 2019
28 OCNI WILMINGTON, INC
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

at modest speed. Levels at frequencies above 1 kHz were elevated by additional noise
generated by the extraction in harder substrate (e.g., gravel), and attenuate rapidly with
distance. CEDA (2011) indicate that hopper dredges have a source level of 186 dB — 188 dB
re luPa rms ranging from 100 — 500 Hz. In a study of hopper dredge noise on a sand shoal,
Reine et al., (2014) found that source levels peaked at 178.7 dB re luPa at lm.
Additional ambient noise levels in the inlet arise from sources such as wind and pounding surf.
Ambient sound levels within coastal waters can vary seasonally and temporally, and are
associated with shipping and industrial sounds, wind -and -wave induced sound, and
biologically produced sound (Richardson et al., 1995).
4.4 Essential Fish Habitat
4.4.1 Fishery Management
The Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA) of 1976,
amended on October 1996 and also referred to as the Sustainable Fisheries Act, was enacted
by the U. S. Congress to protect marine fish stocks and their habitat, prevent overfishing while
achieving optimal yield and minimize bycatch to the extent practicable. Congress defined
Essential Fish Habitat as "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding,
feeding or growth to maturity". The MSFCMA requires that EFH be identified for all fish
species federally managed by the Fishery Management Councils (FMC) and the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
Eight FMC were established under the MSFCMA to manage living marine resources within
federal waters and are required to describe and identify EFH designations in their respective
regions. Each of these councils is responsible for developing Fishery Management Plans
(FMP) to achieve specified management goals for fisheries. The FMP includes data, guidelines
for harvest, analyses and management measures for a fishery. Each FMP must describe the
affected fishery, analyze the condition of the fishery, and describe and identify relevant EFH.
In close coordination, both the South Atlantic Fisheries Management Council (SAFMC) and
the Mid -Atlantic Fisheries Management Council (MAFMC) manage marine fisheries in the
federal waters off the North Carolina coast. Federal water limits off the North Carolina coast
extend from 3 nautical miles to 200 nautical miles. In addition, the Atlantic States Marine
Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) manages fisheries in the state waters of all 15 Atlantic coast
states from Maine to Florida. The ASMFC manages fish stocks within the state waters of North
Carolina from the coastline to three nautical miles offshore.
The SAFMC is responsible for the conservation and management of fish stocks within the
federal 200 -mile limit of the Atlantic off the coasts of North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia
and east Florida to Key West. The seven states that comprise the MAFMC are New York, New
Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia and North Carolina (North Carolina is
also on the South Atlantic Council). The MAFMC also works with the ASMFC to manage
summer flounder, scup, black sea bass, bluefish and spiny dogfish. The SAFMC broadly
defines EFH habitats for all of its managed fisheries in a generic management plan amendment
RECEIVED
29
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. JAN 3 0 COT

that contains life stage based EFH information for each of the federally managed species. The
SAFMC currently manages eight fisheries that include coastal migratory pelagics, coral and
live bottom habitat, dolphin and wahoo, golden crab, shrimp, snapper grouper, spiny lobster
and Sargassum. Of these eight fisheries, only the snapper grouper complex contains species
that are considered overfished. Both the recreational and commercial snapper grouper fisheries
are highly regulated and progress continues to be made as more species are removed from the
overfished list each year. The other fisheries are expected to continue into the future at
productive sustainable levels (SAFMC, 2018).
The MAFMC is responsible for the conservation and management of fish stocks in the federal
waters off the coasts of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia
and North Carolina. They have prepared multiple FMPs with amendments to identify EFH for
each life stage (eggs, larvae, juvenile and adults) of its managed fisheries (Table 2). The
MAFMC identifies several broad areas designated as EFH in estuarine and marine
environments. The six FMPs developed by the council are the golden tilefish; summer
flounder, scup, black sea bass; dogfish; surf clam and ocean quahog; Atlantic mackerel, squid,
and butterfish; and bluefish (MAFMC, 2014).
NMFS has also prepared multiple FMPs with amendments to identify EFH within its authority.
Four fisheries (billfish, swordfish, tuna and sharks) are managed under the FMPs of NMFS
and are classified as Highly Migratory Species (HMS). NMFS geographically defines EFH for
each HMS along the Atlantic coast. The defined EFH areas are species-specific and include
shallow coastal waters, offshore waters inside the exclusive economic zone (EEZ), offshore
waters outside the EEZ and inshore waters along the Atlantic coast (NMFS, 2010a).
The North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission (NCMFC) manages commercially and
recreationally significant species of fisheries found in state marine or estuarine environments.
The NCMFC designates Primary Nursery Areas (PNA) that are included as EFH by the
SAFMC.
Table 2. EFH for managed species within coastal North Carolina. Not all species within a management unit
b '
have EFH d ear natde ; such species hithr
ave none within the life st a es co1
30 JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
WW IV!11, ftMrTnhl l NIC
umn.
Management
Agency
Management Plan
Species group
Common time
Scientific name
EFH life stages
SAFMC
Calico Scallop
Calico scallop
Ar o ecten gibbus
A
SAFMC
Coastal Migratory Pelagics
Cobia
Rach centron canadum
E L P J A
SAFMC
SAFMC
Dolphin Coryphaena hi urns
L P JA
King mackerel Scomberomoms cavalla
JA
SAFMC
Spanish mackerel Scomberomoms maculatus
LJA
SAFMC
iCoral & Coral Reef
Corals
100s of species
Florida only
SAFMC
Golden Crab
Golden crab
Chaeeon renneri
A
SAFMC
Red Drum
Red drum
Sciaena s ocellatus
E L A -
SAFMC
Shrimp
Brown shrimp
Far ante enaeus a teeus
E L A
SAFMC
Pink shrimp Far ante enaeus duorarum
E L A
SAFMC
Rock shrimp Sigonia bre irostris
A
SAFMC
Royal red shrimp Pleoticus robustus
A
SAFMC
White shrimp Lilo enaeus sefi eros
E L A
SAFMC
I Snapper Grouper
Blackfin snapper
Lut anus buccanella
J A
SAFMC
Bluelinetilefish Caulolatllusmicros
E A
SAFMC
Golden tilefish Lo holatilus chamaeleontice s A
SAFMC
Gra sna per Lut'anus iseus
L A
SAFMC
Greater amberiack ISeriola dumerili J
30 JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
WW IV!11, ftMrTnhl l NIC

SAFMC
Jewfish
Eine helus ita'ara
Florida onl
SAFMC
Mutton snapper Lu 'anus analis
Florida onl
SAFMC
Red porgy Pa us pawus
E L J A
SAFMC
Red snapper Lut'anus cam echanus
L P J A
SAFMC
Scamp M aero erca hen"
A
SAFMC
Silk snapper Lutrous vivanus
JA
SAFMC
Snowy grouper Eine helus niveatus
ELA
SAFMC
Speckled hind Eine helus drummondha i
A
SAFMC
Vermillion snapper Rhombo lites aurorubens
J A
SAFMC
Warsaw grouper Epinephelusnigritus
EA
SAFMC
White grunt Haemulon plumieri
E L A
SAFMC
Wreckfish Polvprion americanus
A
SAFMC
Yellowed a grouper Eine helus llavolimbatus
E L A
SAFMC
Spiny Lobster
Spiny Lobster
Panuliras argus
L J A
MAFMC
Atlantic Mackerel, Squid,
Butterfish
Atlantic butterfish
Peprilw iriacanthus
None
MAFMC
Atlantic mackerel Scomber scombras
1,Tone
MAFMC
Long finned squid Loli o pealei
None
MAFMC
Short finned squid Illex illecebrosus
None
MAFMC
Atlantic Surfclam & Ocean
Ouahog
Ocean quahog
Artica islandica
None
MAFMC
Surfclam S isula solidissima
None
MAFMC
Bluefish
Bluefish
Pomatomus saltatrix
LJA
MAFMC
Sin Dofish
Sin do fish
S ualus acanthias
JA
MAFMC
Summer Flounder, Scup,
Black Sea Bass
Black sea bass
Centro ristis striata
E L J A
MAFMC
Summer flounder Paralichth s dentatus
L J A
NMFS
High Migratory Species
Blue marlin
Makaira nigricans
E L J A
NMFS
Lon bill s earfish Tetra turus pflueyr,
JA
NMFS
Sailfish Istio horus plaLvpterus
ELJA
NMFS
White marlin Tetra turas albidus
JA
NMFS
Atlantic angel shark S uati'na dumerili
None
NMFS
Atlantic sharpnose shark Rhizo rionodon terraenovae
JA
NMFS
Basking shark Cetorhinos maximus
None
NMFS
Big nose shark Carcharhinus altimus
J
NI%US
Bi e e sand tier shark Odontas is noronhai
None
NMFS
Bi e e six ill shark Hexanchus vitalus
None
NMFS
Bi e e thresher shark Alo ias su erciliosus
E L P J S A
NMFS
Blacknose shark Carcharhinus acronotus
JA
NMFS
Blacktip shark Carcharhinus limbatus
JA
NMFS
Blue shark Prionace qlauca
J S A
NMFS
Bonnethead Sphyrnatiburo
JA
NMFS
Bull shark Carcharhinus leucas
J
NMFS
Carribean reef shark Carcharhinusperezi
Research Area
NMFS
Carribean shay nose shark Rhizo rionodon porosus
None
NMFS
Dusky shark Carcharhinusobscurus
A
NMFS
Finctooth shark Carcharhinus isodon
E L P J S A
NMFS
Galapagos shark Carcharhinus galapagensis
None
NMFS
Great hammerhead S h rna mokarran
J A
NMFS
Lemon shark Ne a rion brevirostris
JA
NMFS
Lon fin mako shark Isurus paucus
E L P J S A
NMFS
Narrowtooth shark Carcharhinus brach urns
None
NMFS
Night shark Carcharhinus signatus
J A
NMFS
Nurse shark Gin 1 mostoma cirratum
J A
NMFS
Oceanic whitetip shark Carcharhinus Ion "manus
J S A
NMFS
Porbeagle shark Lamna nasus
None
NMFS
Sand tiger shark Odontas is taurus
J A
NMFS
Sandbar shark Carcharhinus plumbeus
JA
NMFS
Scalloped hammerhead S h na lewini
JA
NMFS
Sha nose seven ill shark He tranchias perlo
None
NMFS
Shortfin mako shark Isurm oxyrinchus
E L P J S A
NMFS
Silky shark Carcharhinus alci ormis
J
NMFS
Six ill shark Hexanchus griseus
None
NMFS
Smalltail shark Carcharhinus orosus
None
NMFS
Smooth hamerhead Sphyrna zy3zaena
None
NMFS
Sinner shark Carcharhinus brevi inna
JA
31 JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING &ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

NMFS
MAFMC
Estuarine Areas
Thresher shark common Alo ias vul inus None
NMFS
Tiger shark Galeocerdo cuvien J S A
NMFS
Whale shark Rhincodon typus None
NMFS
White shark Carcharodon carcharias J
NMFS
Swordfish Xi hias ladius E L J S A
NMFS
Albacore Thunnus alaluniza A
NMFS
Atlantic bi e e tuna Thunnus obesus J A
NMFS
Atlantic yellowfin tuna Thunnus albacares E L J S A
NMFS
Ski lack tuna Katsuwonus elamis E L J S A
NMFS
Western Atlantic bluefin hma Thunnus th inus JE L J S A
1. These Essential Fish Habitat species were corn iled from Essential Fish Habitat: A Marine Fish Habitat Conservation
Mandate for Federal A des. February 1999 (Revised 10/2001) (Appendices 2 3, 6, 7, and 8). Although 49 species are listed
in Appendix 3 under National Marine Fisheries Service management, only 35 of these species have EFH listed in Appendix 8.
. Life stages include: E = Eggs, L = Larvae, P = PostLarvae, J = Juveniles, S = SubAdults, A = Adults
. Organizations responsible for Fishery Management Plans include: SAFMC (South Atlantic Fishery Management Council);
FMC (Mid -Atlantic Fishery Management Council; NMFS =National Marine Fisheries Service)
4.4.2 Habitats Designated as EFH
Aside from the life -stage based EFH defined for managed fish species, the SAFMC and
MAFMC have designated eight habitats as EFH, listed in Table 3. Of those habitats listed, only
marine/estuarine water column, intertidal flats, seagrass, and oyster reef and shell banks are
found in proximity of the project area. Brief descriptions and effects determinations for all
EFH categories near the proposed Project Areas are continued below.
Table 3. Essential Fish Habitat identified in FMP Amendments of the South Atlantic and
Mid -Atlantic FMC's (NMFS, 2010a).
SAFMC
MAFMC
Estuarine Areas
Estuarine Areas
Estuarine Emergent Wetlands
Seagrass
Estuarine Scrub/Shrub Mangroves
Creeks
Oyster Reefs and Shell Banks
Mud Bottom
Intertidal Flats
Estuarine Water Column
Palustrine Emergent and Forested Wetlands
Aquatic Beds
Estuarine Water Column
Marine Areas
Marine Areas
Live/Hard Bottoms
(None)
Coral and Coral Reefs
Artificial/Manmade Reefs
Sargassum
Water Column
Intertidal Flats
The SAFMC designates intertidal flats as EFH that serve as benthic nursery areas, refuges and
feeding grounds. Benthic nursery areas provide a low energy environment where predation
RECEIVED
sz JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA. INC.
ila A.'! tamp aapspA^r3P1 Al(`

pressure is low and suitable prey is abundant (flounders, red drum, gray snapper, blue crab and
penaeid shrimp utilize this EFH as nurseries). Intertidal flats serve as areas of refuge since they
provide safety from predation and adverse physical conditions, such as tidal currents. As
feeding grounds, intertidal flats provide prey for those species adapted to feeding in shallow
water (SAFMC, 1998). Intertidal flats are ephemeral features located within Pamlico Sound
and along the shoulders of Oregon Inlet on Bodie Island and Pea Island.
Estuarine and Marine Water Columns
The SAFMC and MAFMC designate estuarine and marine water columns as EFH. The
SAFMC defines the estuarine and marine water columns as the medium of transport for
nutrients and migrating organisms between river systems and the open ocean (SAFMC, 1998).
The estuarine water column is organized into salinity categories ranging from 0 ppt to > 30 ppt
according to the method of classification utilized. The marine water column is divided into
oceanographic zones that are defined by physical parameters of the water column such as
temperature, salinity, density and others. Three oceanographic zones are defined for the North
Carolina area including outer shelf (131 to 230 ft.), mid -shelf (66 to 131 ft.) and inner shelf (0
to 66 ft.). These zones are influenced by the Gulf Stream, winds, tides and freshwater runoff
(SAFMC, 1998). Marine water column environments in proximity to the Project Area include
the inner shelf waters and surf zone waters in proximity to Oregon Inlet. Managed fish species
that utilize marine water column EFH in North Carolina waters are managed by the ASMFC,
NCDMF, NMFS, SAFMC and MAFMC and are discussed in Section 4.4.1 above. The
estuarine water column environment within the project area encompass the waters on the
soundside of the Bonner Bridge in proximity to the connecting channels.
The North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) classifies the Pamlico Sound as SA,
High Quality Waters (HQW) while the Atlantic Ocean is classified as SB. The SA
classification refers to tidal salt waters used for commercial shellfishing or marketing purposes
and are also protected for all Class SC and Class SB uses. All SA waters are also HQW by
supplemental classification. The HQW classification refers to waters that rate excellent based
on biological and physical/chemical characteristics through Division monitoring or special
studies, primary nursery areas designated by the Marine Fisheries Commission and other
functional nursery areas designated by the Marine Fisheries Commission.
Seagrass
Seagrass, or submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), is generally defined as submerged lands
that are vegetated with one or more species of submerged aquatic vegetation, or have been
vegetated by one or more species of submerged aquatic vegetation within the past 10 annual
growing seasons. The average physical requirements of water depth (six feet or less), average
light availability (secchi depth of one foot or more) and limited wave exposure that characterize
the environment suitable for growth of SAV are also required to meet the general definition.
(NC Marine Fisheries Commission (NCMFC) (15A North Carolina Administrative Code
(NCAC) 03I.0101(4)(i)). In North Carolina, the most common species of SAV is eelgrass
(Zostera marina), shoalgrass (Halodule wrightii) and widgeon grass (Ruppia maritime). These
vegetation beds occur in both subtidal and intertidal zones and may occur in isolated patches
or cover extensive areas (Deaton, 2010). SAV is designated EFH for the snapper/gouu er�'��®
complex, red drum and penaeid shrimp by the SAFMC (NWS, 2010b). Blue crabs, w
JAN 3 0 2019
33
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. 0CM WILMINGTON, NO

managed by the NCDMF, also utilize seagrass habitat during various life stages. In terms of
their value as EFH, seagrass bed ecosystems are utilized by larval and juvenile fishes for
foraging, spawning and escape from predation. Commercial and sport fishes in their larval and
juvenile stages, such as gag grouper (Mycteroperca microlepsis), gray snapper (Lu Janus
griseus), bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix), flounder species (Paralichthys sp.), fish of the
Clupeidae family and others are found in seagrass beds in the early spring and summer
(ASMFC, 2016). Bay scallops (Argopecten irradians concentricus) are also typically found in
SAV habitat. Because of its use for foraging, spawning and shelter, SAV is designated as
HAPC. The red drum (Sciaenops ocellatus) is one species that SAV serves as a HAPC.
The Carolinas are in a transitional area that represents the southernmost extension for some
cold -adapted species and the northernmost extension of warm -adapted species. In North
Carolina, the dominant seagrass, eelgrass (Zostera marina), grows at the southernmost extent
of its range, while shoal grass (Halodule wrightii) is at its northernmost extent.
SAV is an important indicator of environmental health because of its sensitivity to aquatic
stressors. Factors affecting SAV distribution include the hydrodynamic characteristics of water
velocity, depth, waves and the water's ability to transport sediments. Boating operations cause
direct impacts to SAV as a result of increased wave action, propeller damages, and by reduced
light due to the suspending of bottom sediments and manmade overhangs and structures (i.e.
piers). Indirectly, the construction and maintenance of channels by dredging may suspend
sediments leading to decreased light transmissivity and burial of the vegetation. Consequently,
the mapping of SAV allows for their avoidance during the planning and design of new vessel
channels and marine basins. SAV occurrences within coastal areas in North Carolina have been
delineated by NMFS using visual interpretation of SAV areas using high resolution aerial
photography. The most recent visual interpretation for the area surrounding Oregon Inlet was
conducted using 2013 imagery (Field, 2018 pers. comm.). Figure 14 depicts the extent of the
occurrences within this area. No SAV resources are found within the proposed project area.
JAN 3 0 2019
34
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. GCM WILMINGTON, NC

Figure 14. SAV resources found within proximity to the project area. RECEIVED
JAN 3 ® 2019
35
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. UCM WILMINGTON, NC

Oyster Reefs and Shell Banks
The SAFMC defines this habitat as the natural structures found between (intertidal) and
beneath (subtidal) tide lines that are composed of oyster shell, live oysters and other organisms
that are discrete, contiguous and clearly distinguishable from scattered oysters in marshes and
mudflats and from wave -formed shell windows (SAFMC, 1998). Common terms used to
describe shell bottom habitats in North Carolina are "oyster beds," "oyster rocks," "oyster
reefs," "oyster bars," and "shell hash." Shell hash is a mixture of sand or mud with gravel
and/or unconsolidated broken shell (clam, oyster, scallop and/or other shellfish). Extensive
intertidal oyster rocks occur in North Carolina's southern estuaries, where the lunar tidal ranges
are higher. The SAFMC has designated oyster reefs as EFH for red drum (NMFS, 2010a). The
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries differentiates potential shellfish habitat by strata
types. Designated strata types are classified based on characteristics of the habitat including
subtidal or intertidal setting; soft, firm or hard substrate; vegetated or non -vegetated substrate
and presence or absence of shell. Figure 15 depicts the distribution of the various habitats
within the project area that contain shellfish resources based on data from the NCDMF
Shellfish Mapping Program. The red polygon just to the west of the project area is designated
as "subtidal unvegetated shell" habitat.
RECEIVED
JAN 3 ® 2019
36
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. 0CM WILMINGTON, NO

JAN 3 0 2019
37
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
I;Bt,'M WILMINGTON, NO

4.4.3 Habitat Areas of Particular Concern
Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) are subsets of designated EFH and are defined as
rare, particularly susceptible to human -induced degradation, especially ecologically important
or located in an environmentally stressed area. The SAFMC and the MAFMC have designated
HAPC areas to focus conservation priorities on specific habitat areas that play a particularly
important role in the life cycles of federally managed fish species. HAPC may include high
value intertidal and estuarine habitats, offshore areas of high habitat value or vertical relief and
habitats used for migration, spawning and rearing of fish and shellfish (NMFS, 2004).
Areas identified as HAPC by the NMFS and the FMCs in the South Atlantic and North
Carolina are presented in Table 4 below (NMFS, 2010a). There are no designated HAPC
identified within the project area.
Table 4. Geographically defined HAPC identified in the FMP Amendments affecting the South
Atlantic area (NMFS, 2010a).
South Atlantic HAPC
Project Area Habitat
Council -Designated Artificial Reef Special
Management Zones
Not Applicable
Henna is Coral Habitat and Reefs
Not Applicable
Hard bottoms
Not Present
Hoyt Hills
Not Applicable
Sar assum Habitat
Not Applicable
State -Designated Areas of Importance to Managed
Species
Not Applicable
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
Not Applicable
North Carolina HAPC
Project Area Habitat
Big Rock
Not Applicable
Bogue Sound
Not Applicable
Pamlico Sound at Hatteras/Ocracoke Inlets
Not Applicable
Capes Fear, Lookout & Hatteras (sandy shoals)
Not Applicable
New River
Not Applicable
The Ten Fathom Ledge
Not Applicable
The Point
Not Applicable
4.4.4 Nursery Areas
NCDMF has designated three categories of nursery areas, Primary, Secondary and Special
Secondary Nursery Areas. Primary Nursery Areas (PNAs) encompass approximately 80,000
acres throughout North Carolina. PNAs are typically shallow with soft muddy bottoms and
surrounded by marshes and wetlands. They are found in the upper portions of bays and creeks,
where the low salinity and abundance of food is ideal for young fish and shellfish. To protect
juveniles, many commercial fishing activities are prohibited in these waters. Secondary
Nursery Areas (SNAs) are located in the lower portion of bays and creeks. As juvenile fish and
shellfish develop, primarily blue crabs and shrimp, they move into these waters. Trawling is
prohibited in SNAs. Special SNAs are found adjacent to SNAs, but closer to the open waters
of sounds and the ocean. These waters are closed for a majority of the year when juvenile
species are abundant (Deaton et al., 2010). There are no NCDMF designated PNAs i IftEIVED
proposed project area.
38 JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
f1CIVI WILMINGTON, NO

4.4.5 Significant Natural Heritage Areas
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) serves as an information
clearinghouse in support of conservation of the rarest and most outstanding elements of natural
diversity in the State. These elements of natural diversity include plants and animals that are
so rare or natural communities that are so significant that they merit special consideration in
land -use decisions.
A total of 34 natural areas are recognized in Dare County. Of these, three are in proximity to
Oregon Inlet including the Bodie Island Lighthouse Pond, the Oregon Inlet/Roanoke Sound
Bird Nesting Islands, and the Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge.
Bodie Island Lighthouse Pond
The Bodie Island Lighthouse Pond is a man-made pond/impoundment spanning 255 acres
located on the west side of NC Highway 12 approximately 2 miles to the north of Oregon Inlet.
This feature is owned by the National Park Service and is part of the Cape Hatteras National
Seashore. The pond was created decades ago for waterfowl hunting purposes and for fill
material for NC 12 (Sorrie, 2014). There is only one narrow outlet to Roanoke Sound, impeded
by an earthen roadbed. Water level fluctuates with rainfall cycles, such that the amount of
emergent marsh encircling the pond varies over time. Common plants include nonnative
common reed (Phragmites australts), Olney's threesquare, common threesquare
(Schoenoplectus pungens), broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia), climbing hempweed (Mikania
scandens), and seashore mallow (Kosteletzkya virginica). Three North Carolina rare
spikerushes are present: salt marsh spikerush (Eleocharis halophila), beaked spikerush (E.
rostellata), and littlespike spikerush (E. parvula). Olney's threesquare (Schoenoplectus
americanus, formerly known as Scirpus olneyi), a Watch List sedge, is common in patches
(Sortie, 2014). The Pond is habitat for large numbers of waterbirds, making it an excellent
bird watching site. Black -necked stilts (Himantopus mexicanus) nest at the edge of the pond,
and black rails (Laterallus jamaicensis) have been heard calling in the marsh and are presumed
to nest there (Sortie, 2014).
Oregon Inlet/Roanoke Sound Bird Nesting Islands
The Oregon Wet/Roanoke Sound Bird Nesting Islands natural area comprises a collection of
nine or more dredge spoil islands along the channel from Oregon Inlet to Roanoke Sound (east
of Wanchese), as well as a few islands that extend south into northern Pamlico Sound, opposite
North Pond on Pea Island. The 314 -acre site comprises an outstanding cluster of bird nesting
colonies, with eighteen species documented, eleven of them rare in North Carolina.
Shrub thickets support nesting colonies of up to seven species of herons, ibises, and egrets.
Several less -vegetated islands are used by large numbers of gulls and terns for nesting and
resting. Nearly 1,000 pairs of brown pelicans (Pelecanus occidentalis) nested in 1988 (Sortie,
2014). The 2011 census tallied these numbers of nesting pairs: great egret (Ardea alba) — 112,
little blue heron (Egretta caerulea) — 47, snowy egret (E thula) — 16, tricolored heron (E.
tricolor) — 53, white ibis (Eudocimus alhus) —1,474, gull -billed tern (Gelochelidon nilotica) —
3, Caspian tern (Hydroprogne caspia) — 2, herring gull (Larus argentatus) — 186, great WMGEIVED
JAN 30 2019
39
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. 0CM WILMINGTON, N6

backed gull (L. marinus) — 133, black -crowned night -heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) — 22,
brown pelican —1,485, glossy ibis (Plegadisfalcinellus)-14, black skimmer (Rynchops niger)
— 90, common tern (Sterna hirundo) — 46, least tem (Sternula antillarum) — 150, royal tern
(Thalasseus maximus) — 3,961, Sandwich tern (T. sandvicensis) — 490 (NCWRC, 2011).
Succession to woody species on islands used by tems, gulls, and skimmers is detrimental; on
others, woody succession creates nesting habitat for the herons, ibises, and egrets. Deposition
of dredge materials on some of the early successional islands by the US Army Corps of
Engineers is helping to replenish lost sand and to smother woody succession.
Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
Pea Island was cut off from Hatteras Island by New Inlet, just north of Rodanthe until the inlet
closed many decades ago. Today, Pea Island forms the northern end of Hatteras Island. This
site includes 5,899 acres and features 12 miles of ocean beach, dunes, interdune sand flats,
shrub thickets, tidal marshes, and waterfowl impoundments; most of it in excellent condition.
Islets in Pamlico Sound provide nesting habitat for egrets, shorebirds, terns, and skimmers.
Terns and piping plovers also nest on sand flats and upper beaches. The impoundments attract
many kinds of birds to feed and rest; some spend the summer, some spend the winter, and
others stop over just in migration (Sorrie, 2014).
Natural communities found within the Refuge include Brackish Marsh (Salt Meadow
Cordgrass Subtype), Dune Grass (Southern Subtype), Maritime Shrub (Bayberry Subtype),
Maritime Shrub (Wax Myrtle Subtype), Maritime Wet Grassland (Southern Hairgrass
Subtype), Salt Marsh, Sand Flat, Stable Dune Barren (Southern Subtype), Upper Beach
(Southern Subtype) (Sorrie, 2014). These communities serve as habitat for a large number of
rare plants and animals. Rare plants include blue witchgrass (Dichanthelium caerulescens),
nerved witchgrass (D. aciculare ssp. neuranthum), little -spike spikerush (Eleocharisparvula),
salt -meadow grass (Diplachne maritima), winged seedbox (Ludwigia alata), Illinois
pondweed (Potamogeton illinoensis), slender sea -purslane (Sesuvium maritimum), moundlily
yucca (Yucca gloriosa) (Sorrie, 2014). Rare animals found within the site include piping
plover (Charadrius melodus), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), little blue heron (Egretta
caerulea), snowy egret (E. thula), tricolored heron (E. tricolor), gullbilled tern (Gelochelidon
nilotica), American oystercatcher (Haematopus palliatus), blacknecked stilt (Himantopus
mexicanus), black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis), glossy ibis (Plegadis falcinellus), black
skimmer (Rynchops niger), common tem (Sterna hirundo), least tern (Sternula antillarum),
diamondback terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin), loggerhead seaturtle (Caretta caretta), green
seaturtle (Chelonia mydas), Carolina watersnake (Nerodia sipedon williamengelsi) (Sorrie,
2014).
4.4.6 Managed Species
Managed species that have the marine water column listed as an EFH and that may be present
in the project area include coastal migratory pelagics, highly migratory species; snapper
grouper complex; shrimp; summer flounder, scup and black seabass; red drum; bluefish and
spiny dogfish. The following narratives briefly describe each of these groups or species.
.IAN 3 0 2019
40
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. OCIVl WILMINGTON, NO

4.4.6.1 Coastal Migratory Pelagics
Prior to the 1980'x, king and Spanish mackerel catches were essentially unregulated.
Introduction of airplane reconnaissance and large power -assisted gill net vessels in the
commercial fishery took advantage of the schooling nature of the fish and greatly increased
catches. Harvests by both recreational and commercial fishermen in the 1970's and early 1980's
exceeded reproductive capacity and led to overfishing. Federal regulations were implemented
in 1983 to control harvest and rebuild dwindling stocks of king and Spanish mackerel.
Different migratory groups were later managed separately, and quotas, bag limits and trip
limits established to rebuild the mackerel fisheries. Gear regulations included the elimination
of drift gill nets in 1990. Since the implementation of management measures, stocks have been
increasing (SAFMC, 2018).
The Coastal Migratory Pelagic (Mackerel) FMP for the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic
regions is a j oint management plan between the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council
and SAFMC. Beginning in January 2012, in addition to managing separate migratory groups
of king mackerel and Spanish mackerel, the two fishery management councils have
added separate migratory groups of cobia to the FMP.
Essential fish habitat for coastal migratory pelagic species includes sandy shoals of capes and
offshore bars, high profile rocky bottom, barrier island ocean -side waters and waters from the
surf to the shelf break zone, including Sargassum. In addition, all coastal inlets and all state -
designated nursery habitats are of particular importance to coastal migratory pelagics.
Spanish Mackerel (Scomberomorus maculates)
Spanish mackerel make north and south migrations depending on water temperature, with 68°
F being a preferred minimum. Spanish mackerel can be found from April to November in
North Carolina's waters, then they migrate south to the Florida coast in the late fall. They may
be found as far inland as the sounds and coastal river mouths in the summer months. Spanish
mackerel spawn from May to September (SAFMC, 1998).
King Mackerel (Scomberomoms cavalla)
Similar to Spanish mackerel, water temperature and prey availability trigger inshore and
offshore migrations of king mackerel. In the winter and early spring, king mackerel congregate
just inside the Gulf Stream along the edge of the continental shelf. During the summer and fall,
they move inshore along the beaches and near the mouths of inlets and coastal rivers. King
mackerel prefer water temperatures between 68° F and 78° F (SAFMC, 1998).
Cobia (Rachycentron canadum)
Cobia have a world-wide distribution preferring warm water temperatures from 680 to 86° F.
Cobia are pelagic fish, and typically congregate off North Carolina to spawn in May and June.
However, spawning has been observed in shallow bays and estuaries with the young heading
offshore after hatching (FLMNH, 2010). Cobia typically migrate south in the fall to over -
winter in warmer waters. EFH for cobia includes, but is not limited to high salinity bays,
estuaries, seagrass habitat, sandy shoals and rocky bottom (SAFMC, 1998). 145CE'VED
JAN 3 0 2019
41
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. 0CM WILMINGTON, NO

4.4.6.2 Highly Migratory Species
Atlantic Highly Migratory Species are managed under the dual authority of the MSFCMA and
the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (AICA). Under the MSFCMA, the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) must manage fisheries to maintain optimum yield by rebuilding
overfished fisheries and preventing overfishing. Under ATCA, NMFS is authorized to
promulgate regulations, as may be necessary and appropriate, to implement the
recommendations from the htternational Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas
(ICCAT). Before this action, tunas, swordfish and sharks were managed under the 1999 FMP
for Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish and Sharks (and its 2003 amendment) and billfish were managed
under the 1988 Atlantic Billfish FMP (and its 1999 amendment). The 2006 final HMS FMP
combined the management of all Atlantic HMS into one FMP (NMFS, 2006).
In Amendment 1 to the consolidated HMS FMP released in 2009, NMFS updated identification
and descriptions for EFH and revised existing EFH boundaries for Atlantic HMS (NMFS,
2009). Table 5 identifies the HMS and corresponding life stage for which the marine waters
in vicinity of the project are designated as EFH.
Table 5. HMS and their life stage that have marine waters in vicinity of the project area des4 nated as EFH.
Tuna
Life Stage'
Sharks
Life Stage
Bluefin (Thunnus thynnus)
J
Sandbar (Carcharhinus phtmbeus)
YOY, J, A
Skipjack (Katsaiwonus pelamis)
J, A
Silky (Carcharhinus falciformis)
YOY, J, A
Yellowfin (Thunnus albacres)
J
Spinner (Carcharhinus brevipinna)
J, A
Billfish
Life Stage
Tiger (Galeocerdo cuvieri)
YOY, J, A
Sailfish
(Istiophorus platypterus)
J
Sand Tiger (Carcharias taurus)
YOY, J, A
Sharks
Life Stage
Angel (Sguatina dumerili)
J, A
Scalloped Hammerhead (Sphyrna
lewini)
J, A
Sharpnose (Rhizoprionodon
terraenovae)
A
Dusky (Carcharhinu obscurus)
YOY, J, A
Thresher (Alopias vulpinus)
1 Young of the Year (YOY), Juvenile (J), Adult (A)
4.4.6.3 Snapper Grouper Complex
Ten families of fishes containing 73 species are managed by the SAFMC under the snapper
grouper FMP. Association with coral or hard bottom structure during at least part of their life
cycle and their contribution to an interrelated reef fishery ecosystem is the primary criteria for
inclusion within the snapper grouper plan. There is considerable variation in specific�lIVED
42
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
JAN 3 0 2019
i)CM WILMINGTON, N O°

history patterns and habitat use among species included in the snapper grouper complex
(SAMFC, 1998).
Essential fish habitat for snapper grouper species includes coral reefs, live/hard bottom,
submerged aquatic vegetation, artificial reefs and medium to high profile outcroppings on and
around the shelf break zone from shore to at least 600 feet where the annual water temperature
range is sufficiently warm to maintain adult populations. EFH includes the spawning area in
the water column above the adult habitat and the additional pelagic environment, including
Sargassum, required for larval survival and growth up to and including settlement. In addition,
the Gulf Stream is an essential fish habitat because it provides a mechanism to disperse snapper
grouper larvae. Essential fish habitat for specific life stages of estuarine dependent and
nearshore snapper grouper species includes areas inshore of the 100 -foot contour such as
attached macroalgae; submerged rooted vascular plants; estuarine emergent vegetated
wetlands; tidal creeks; estuarine scrub/shrub; oyster reefs and shell banks; unconsolidated
bottom; artificial reefs; and coral reefs and live/hardbottom.
Given the lack of EFH present near the project area and space constraints in this document,
thorough characterizations of this diverse multispecies complex is omitted but may be
referenced in the SAFMC FMP (SAFMC, 1998).
4.4.6.4 Shrimp
Penaeid Shrimp: Brown Shrimp (Penaeus aztecus), Pink Shrimp (Penaeus duorarum), White
Shrimp (Penaeus setiferus)
Penaeid shrimp are reported to spawn offshore, moving into estuaries during the post -larval
stage during the early spring. As the shrimp grow larger, they migrate to higher salinity
environments. In late summer and fall, they return to the ocean to spawn (NCDMF, 2006).
For penaeid shrimp, EFH includes inshore estuarine nursery areas, offshore marine habitats
used for spawning and growth to maturity, and all interconnecting water bodies as described
in the Habitat Plan. hishore nursery areas include tidal freshwater (palustrine); estuarine and
marine emergent wetlands; tidal palustrine forested areas; mangroves; tidal freshwater,
estuarine and marine submerged aquatic vegetation and subtidal and intertidal non -vegetated
flats. This applies from North Carolina through the Florida Keys.
4.4.6.5 Summer Flounder, Scup and Black Sea Bass
Summer flounder (Paralichthys dentatus), scup (Stenotomus chrysops) and black sea bass
(Centropristus striata) are managed by the MAFMC. The three species are considered part of
an offshore -wintering guild of fish, a migratory group of wann temperate species that are
intolerant of colder, inshore winter conditions (MAFMC, 2018).
Summer flounder (Paralichthys dentatus)
Adult summer flounder emigrate from North Carolina estuaries beginning in November as
water temperatures decrease and spawning takes place in continental shelf waters (MAFMC,
2018). Larvae immigrate to the higher salinity areas of estuaries becoming common JJWFOAEdVED
43 ,JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
OCIVI WILMINGTON, NC

through April. Juveniles are present year-round at salinities between 5 ppt to > 25 ppt
(MAFMC, 2018). Adult summer flounder are common in estuaries in November and
December, but typically not present January through March as they will have migrated to
warmer offshore waters to over -winter. Juveniles are abundant year-round in estuarine waters
from 5 ppt to >25 ppt salinity. From January to April larval summer flounder are rare at lower
salinities (5 ppt to 25 ppt), becoming common at salinities > 25 ppt (MAFMC, 2014). This
stage (larval) of the life cycle is reported as most abundant in nearshore waters (12 — 50 miles
offshore) at depths between 30 and 230 feet from November to May in the southern part of the
Mid -Atlantic Bight (MAFMC, 2018). EFH for summer flounder has been identified as shelf
waters and estuaries from Albemarle Sound, North Carolina through to St. Andrew/Simon
Sounds, Georgia for the larval, juvenile and adults stages (MAFMC, 2018).
Scup (Stenotomus chrysops)
Scup are a schooling continental shelf species of the Northwest Atlantic that undertake
extensive migrations between coastal waters and offshore waters. Spawning occurs from May
through August, peaking in June. Scup spawn once annually over weedy or sand -covered areas.
Juvenile and adult scup are demersal, using inshore waters in the spring and moving offshore
in the winter. About 50% of age -2 scup are sexually mature (at about 17 cm total length, or 7
inches), while nearly all scup of age 3 and older are mature. Adult scup are benthic feeders and
forage on a variety of prey, including small crustaceans (including zooplankton), polychaetes,
mollusks, small squid, vegetable detritus, insect larvae, hydroids, sand dollars, and small fish.
The Northeast Fisheries Science Center food habits database lists several shark species, skates,
silver hake, bluefish, summer flounder, black sea bass, weakfish, lizardfish, king mackerel and
goosefish as predators of scup (MAFMC, 2018). Essential Fish Habitat for scup includes
demersal waters, sands, mud, mussel beds and seagrass beds, from the Gulf of Maine through
Cape Hatteras, North Carolina.
Black Sea Bass (Centropristus striata)
The northern population of black sea bass spawns in the Middle Atlantic Bight over the
continental shelf during the spring through fall, primarily between Virginia and Cape Cod,
Massachusetts. Spawning begins in the spring off North Carolina and Virginia, and progresses
north into southern New England waters in the summer and fall. Collections of ripe fish and
egg distributions indicate that the species spawns primarily on the inner continental shelf
between Chesapeake Bay and Montauk Pt., Long Island. Adult black sea bass are also very
structure oriented, especially during their summer coastal residency. Unlike juveniles, they
tend to enter only larger estuaries and are most abundant along the coast. A variety of coastal
structures are known to be attractive to black sea bass, including shipwrecks, rocky and
artificial reefs, mussel beds and any other object or source of shelter on the bottom. Essential
Fish Habitat for black sea bass consists of pelagic waters, structured habitat, rough bottom
shellfish, and sand and shell, from the Gulf of Maine through Cape Hatteras, North Carolina
(MAFMC, 2018).
4.4.6.6 Red Drum
Red drum (Sciaenops ocellatus) are managed solely by the ASFMC through Amendment 2 to
the Interstate IMP (ASFMC, 2014). Red drum populations along the Atlantic co VEE
JAN 3 0 2019
44
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. BCM WILMINGTON, IVC

managed through the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act (Atlantic
Coastal Act). Unlike the MSFCMA that addresses fishery management by federal agencies,
the Atlantic Coastal Act does not require the ASFMC to identify habitats that warrant special
protection because of their value to fishery species. Nonetheless, the ASFMC identifies
habitats used by the various life stages of red drum for management and protection purposes
(ASFMC, 2013).
Red drum occur in a variety of habitats distributed from Massachusetts to Key West, Florida
on the Atlantic coast. Spawning occurs at night in the fall (August through October) along
ocean beaches and near inlets and passes and in high salinity estuaries with optimal
temperatures being between 72° to 86° F (SAFMC, 1998; ASMFC, 2013). In North Carolina,
spawning adults were reported to be common in salinities above 25 ppt (ASMFC, 2013).
Juveniles are reported to prefer shallow shorelines of bays and rivers and shallow grass flats in
the sounds (SAFMC, 1998).
Adult red drum migrate seasonally along the Atlantic coast. Reports from fishermen and
menhaden spotter pilots indicate that red drum typically arrive at Cape Hatteras, North
Carolina between March and April, some entering Pamlico Sound and others proceeding up
the coast. They are expected about a week later at Oregon Inlet and three weeks to a month
later in Virginia. Red drum leave Virginia in most years by October and North Carolina by
November (SAMFC, 1998).
The SAFMC recognizes several habitats as EFH for red drum from Virginia to Florida. In
North Carolina, these natural communities include tidal freshwater, estuarine emergent
vegetated wetlands, submerged rooted vascular plants, oyster reefs and shell banks,
unconsolidated bottom, ocean high salinity surf zones, and artificial reefs. Of the designated
EFH, HAPC have been recognized for red drum by the SAFMC. Areas that meet the criteria
for HAPC in North Carolina include all coastal inlets, all state -designated nursery habitats of
particular importance to red drum, documented sites of spawning aggregations, other spawning
areas identified in the future, and areas supporting submerged aquatic vegetation (NCDMF,
2008a).
4.4.6.7 Bluefish
Bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix) are managed by the NMFS as a single stock under a joint FMP
collaboratively developed by the MAFMC and the ASMFC and implemented in 1990. Bluefish
are considered warm water migrants, preferring waters above 57° to 61° F (Shepherd and
Packer, 2006). Generally, juvenile bluefish occur in North Atlantic estuaries from June through
October, Mid -Atlantic estuaries from May through October, and South Atlantic estuaries
March through December, within the "mixing" and "seawater" zones. Adult bluefish are found
in North Atlantic estuaries from June through October, Mid -Atlantic estuaries from April
through October, and in South Atlantic estuaries from May through January in the "mixing"
and "seawater" zones. Bluefish adults are highly migratory and distribution varies seasonally
and according to the size of the individuals comprising the schools. Juveniles utilize estuaries
as nursery areas and then emigrate to warmer offshore waters when temperatures approach 59°
F (Shepherd and Packer, 2006). Bluefish can tolerate temperatures of 53.2° to 86.7° F, but
RECEIVED
JAN 3 ® 2019
45
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. 0CM WILMINGTON, NO

exhibit signs of stress at both extremes. They can survive temporarily in waters of 45.5° F, but
juveniles cannot survive below 50° F (Lund and Maltezos, 1970),
Bluefish EFH has been designated for marine areas north of Cape Hatteras based on life stage.
Based on the maps provided in Amendment 1 to the Bluefish FMP (MAFMC, 2018), EFH for
all life stages of bluefish exists within or in proximity to the Project Area, with an emphasis
on young of the year (YOY) and adult bluefish surveys showing the most dense coverage near
the project area.
4.4.6.8 Spiny Dogfish
In North Carolina, the spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthial) is currently included in the
Interjurisdictional FMP, which defers to ASMFC/MAFMC/NEFMC FMP compliance
requirements. It is managed jointly under the MAFMC and the North East Fisheries
Management Council (NEFMC) FMPs (NCDMF, 2008b).
The spiny dogfish is a long-lived species with an estimated life expectancy of 25 to 100 years
and is reported to be one of the most abundant sharks in the world. Spiny dogfish are found in
oceans and coastal zones, are rarely found in the upper reaches of estuaries, and do not occur
in fresh water. Generally, spiny dogfish are found at depths of 33 to 1475 ft. in water
temperatures ranging between 37° and 82°F. The preferred temperature range is 45° to 55° F.
Spiny dogfish migrate seasonally, moving north in the spring and summer and south in fall and
winter (MAFMC, 2018). They are most common in shelf waters in North Carolina from
November through April, at which time they begin their northward migration toward
Newfoundland and Labrador. Pregnant females and pups are present from February through
June in North Carolina waters, with the preferred pupping area located around the Cape
Hatteras shoals (MAFMC, 2018).
North of Cape Hatteras, EFH is the waters of the continental shelf from the Gulf of Maine
through Cape Hatteras, North Carolina in areas that encompass the highest 90% of all ranked
ten-minute squares for the area where adult dogfish were collected in the NEFSC trawl surveys.
Based on figures within the Spiny Dogfish FMP (MAFMC, 2018), this includes marine water
located within the Project Area.
4.5 Threatened and Endangered Species
The threatened and endangered (T&E) species under consideration within this environmental
assessment were identified through consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (UFW S) (Table 6). These species, as described
in detail below, could be present in the project area based upon their historic geographic range.
However, the actual occurrence of a species in the project area would depend upon the
availability of suitable habitat, the seasonality of occurrence, migratory habits and other
factors.
46
JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
00M WILMINGTON, NO

Table 6. Federally threatened, endangered or proposed listed species that may occur in the Project Area.
Common Name
Scientific Name
Federal Status
Mammals
West Indian Manatee
Trichechus manatus
Endangered
Reptiles
Leatherback Sea Turtle
Dermochelys coriacea
Endangered
Hawksbill Sea Turtle
Eretmochelys imbricata
Endangered
Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle
Lepidochelys kempit
Endangered
Loggerhead Sea Turtle
Caretta caretta
Threatened -NWA DPS'
Green Sea Turtle
Chelonia mydas
Endangered'
Fish
Shortnose Sturgeon
Acipenser brevirostrum
Endangered
Atlantic Sturgeon
Acipenser oxyrinchus
Endangered—Carolina DPS'
Giant Manta Ray
Manta birostris
Threatened
4.5.1 West Indian Manatee
The West Indian manatee is listed as a federally protected species under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (ESA) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (MMPA). An
adult manatee is, on average, 10 ft (3 m) long, weighs approximately 2,200 lbs. and is typically
referred to as the "sea cow." The coloring of the manatee is grayish brown, which contributes
to the difficulty in detecting manatees in silt -laden waters. This mammal can be found in
shallow waters (5-20 ft) of varying salinity levels including coastal bays, lagoons, estuaries
and inland river systems. Manatees primarily feed on aquatic vegetation, but can be found
feeding on fish, consuming between four and nine percent of their body weight in a single day
(Schwartz, 1995; USFWS, 2018a). Sheltered areas such as bays, sounds, coves and canals are
important areas for resting, feeding and reproductive activities (Humphrey, 1992).
The West Indian manatee occupies the coastal, estuarine and some riverine habitats along the
western Atlantic Ocean from Virginiato the Florida Keys, in the Gulf of Mexico, the Caribbean
Islands, Mexico, Central America and northern South America (Garcia -Rodriguez et al.,
1998). The West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus) includes two subspecies, the Florida
manatee (T. m. latirostris) and the Antillean manatee (T. m. manatus). Within U.S. waters, the
Florida manatee can be found throughout the southeastern U.S., including North Carolina,
while the Antillean manatee is found in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands (Lefebvre et al.,
2001). As the Antillean manatee does not occur within the southeastern U.S., this biological
assessment will only evaluate the Florida manatee population.
No statistically robust estimate of population size is currently available for manatees (USFWS,
2018a). The current, best available information includes FWC's 2011 counts, and suggests a
minimum population size of 4,834 individuals in the Florida stock (Laist, et al., 2013).
Occurrence throughout the southeastern U.S. changes seasonally, as the manatee®
JAN 3 0 2919
47
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
sCM WILMINGTON, NO

warmer water temperatures. During the winter months (October through April), the entire U.S.
population typically moves to the waters surrounding Florida (Humphrey, 1992).
The greatest threat and cause of mortality for manatees is boat collisions. Other dangers to the
species include entanglement in fishing lines, entrapment and entanglement in locks, dams and
culverts, loss of warm -water refuge areas, and exposure to cold. Long-term and cumulative
impacts are associated with a loss of aquatic vegetated habitat and blocking of estuarine and
riverine systems (Runge, et al., 2007).
Sightings and stranding data suggest the Florida manatee regularly occurs within inland and
coastal waters of North Carolina, and they have been sighted most frequently from June
through October when water temperatures are warmest (above 71.6°F) (USFWS, 2017;
USFWS, 2018a). Manatees may also overwinter in North Carolina where the discharge from
power plants supports the warm water temperatures (USFWS, 2008). The USFWS has reported
manatee sightings in the last 20 years in the counties of Beaufort, Bertie, Brunswick, Camden,
Carteret, Chowan, Craven, Currituck, Dare, Hyde, New Hanover, Onslow, Pamlico,
Pasquotank, Pender, Perquimans, Pitt, Tyrrell and Washington. Cummings et al. (2014)
documented 99 manatee sightings in North Carolina from 1991 to 2012, with 30 manatee
sightings occurring in 2012. Manatees arrived in North Carolina in April, and sightings were
most common from June to October, when water temperatures were above 20°C (68°F).
Sightings declined with water temperature in November, and manatees appeared to absent from
the region from December through February (Cummings et al., 2014). Within northeastern
North Carolina, sightings have increased since 2011, which may be due to greater awareness
and improved survey efforts (Cummings et al., 2014). The greatest number of manatee
sightings occurred within the Intracoastal Waterway, sounds and bays, and rivers and creeks.
Manatees were least commonly sighted in the open ocean and around marinas. The number of
manatees potentially occurring in the Project Area is not known, but is presumed to be low
with the greatest likelihood of occurrence during the warmer months, in particular June through
October.
4.5.2 Sea Turtles
There are five species of sea turtles that can be found nesting on the beaches of North Carolina,
swimming in offshore waters, or both. These species include the leatherback sea turtle
(Dermochelys coriacea), hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata), Kemp's ridley sea
turtle (Lepidochelys kempii), green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas), and the loggerhead sea turtle
(Carretta carretta). Because the proposed activity is limited to dredging and disposal of
dredged material within the waters in and around Oregon Inlet, the information provided below
will pertain to swimming sea turtles only.
Numerous studies have shown that the Mid -Atlantic and South -Atlantic Bight, particularly the
waters from North Carolina to New Jersey, provide important seasonal and migratory habitat
for sea turtles, especially juvenile and adult loggerheads from the Northern U.S population.
The Mid -Atlantic Bight (MAB) includes oceanic waters from Cape Cod, Massachusetts to
Cape Hatteras, NC; and the South Atlantic Bight (SAB) includes oceanic waters from Cape
Hatteras, NC to Cape Canaveral, Florida. Loggerhead sightings data compiled for the AWQMVED
JAN 3 0 2019
48
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. UCM WILMINGTON, NC

Marine Assessment Program for Protected Species show the presence of this species inside the
200-m isobaths is well-documented during the spring (NOAA, 2016) (Figure 16). The
occurrence and distribution of sea turtles along the Atlantic coast is tied to sea surface
temperature (SST) (Coles and Musick, 2000; Braun -McNeill et al., 2008). In addition,
Mansfield et al. (2009) shows that site fidelity of juvenile loggerheads can be due to
environmental changes such as water temperature as well as prey availability. Throughout the
region, water temperatures increase rapidly in March and April and decrease rapidly in October
and November; these temperature changes are quicker in nearshore waters. An analysis of
historical tracking and sightings data conducted by the Turtle Expert Working Group (TEWG)
indicates that the shelf waters (out to the 200 -meter isobaths) off North Carolina are seasonally
"high -use areas" for certain life stages of loggerhead sea turtles (TEWG, 2009). During the
winter months (January through March), very few loggerheads occur coastally north of Cape
Hatteras, North Carolina. During the spring (April through June), summer (July through
September) and fall (October through December), the nearshore waters from the North
Carolina/South Carolina border up to the Chesapeake Bay, Virginia serve as high -use areas for
juvenile and adult nesting females. Similarly, male loggerheads frequent the nearshore waters
of the mid-Atlantic Bight from the spring through the fall (essentially April through
December), with a high -use area in the vicinity of Cape Hatteras. Braun -McNeill et al.(2008)
show that loggerhead turtle presence off Cape Hatteras (based on sightings, strandings, and
incidental capture records) occurred when 25% or more of the area exceeded SST of 11°C
(51.8°F). Satellite tagging studies of juvenile loggerheads performed by Mansfield et al. (2009)
also demonstrate that the waters of Virginia and North Carolina serve as important seasonal
habitat forjuvenile sea turtles from May through November, and the Cape Hatteras area creates
a "migratory bottleneck" that warrants "special management consideration".
In a study spanning ten years (1998-2008) 68 female loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta)
were tagged following nesting on the beaches of North Carolina (NC), South Carolina (SC),
and Georgia (GA) (Griffin et al., 2013). Using satellite tags, their movements were observed
to document where the turtles spend their time at sea. Tagging data from the "Northern
Recovery Unit (NRU) turtles" (those turtles nesting in this area of the United States) indicate
that they migrate to areas offshore Cape Hatteras, NC to northern New Jersey (NJ) to forage
and recover from the stresses of reproduction and nesting (Griffin et al., 2013). The majority
of the NRU tagged turtles (42 of 68) used migration routes over the continental shelf off Cape
Hatteras, NC moving south to the SAB in the winter (mid -September -November) and north to
the MAB in the summer (April -June) (Griffin et al., 2013) (Figure 17). The width of the
migratory corridor used by the turtles was constricted off Cape Hatteras, NC and used over 7
months of the year (Griffin et al., 2013). This indicates that it is an important high -use area for
female loggerheads and this should be considered when conducting activities there.
49 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
DOM WILMINGTON, NC

N
i R"fhs 385 'a
240 320
Figure 16. Loggerhead turtle sightings during the Southeast AMAPPS summer 2016 aerial
survey. Image from NOAA, 2016.
50 JAN a ® V19
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
100 'wjLMjt4GT06d9 He

Northwest
Atlantic
Ocean
Cape Hatteras
t
South Atlantic Bight
N
0 10 20 40 e0 80 jp
Kilometers A
Figure 17. Migration routes (post -nesting and inter -foraging segments) of satellite -tracked loggerhead
turtles (N=15) represented by individualblack lines in the Cape Hatteras, North Carolina (NC) region.
The horizontal dotted line separates the Mid -Atlantic and South Atlantic Bights. Figure from Griffin et
al., 2013.
Although loggerheads are the most common turtle occurring offshore of North Carolina, the
state's marine waters also provide important habitat for green and Kemp's ridley sea turtles. A
review of sightings reports obtained from commercial and recreational fishermen and the
public indicate that sea turtles are present offshore North Carolina year-round. There were two
seasonal peaks: one in spring (April to June) off the entire North Carolina coast, and one in
51
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

late fall (October through December) off the northern North Carolina coast (Epperly et al.,
1995). Sightings were generally greatest in offshore water (>5.6 km from shore), except during
the period from May to June, when nearshore (<5.6 km) sightings were equal to offshore
sightings. Leatherbacks were also documented nearshore in "large numbers" in early May,
presumably with the appearance of prey. The sightings data also indicated the leatherbacks
subsequently moved northward along the beach, and leatherback presence declined by late
June (Epperly et al., 1995).
The North Carolina Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvage Network (STSSN) collects stranding
data that are used by state and federal managers in management decisions regarding fisheries
activities, dredging operations, beach renourishment, etc. More than 700 participants in the
STSSN are required to report each stranding to the NC sea turtle coordinator within 24 hours
of first observation. Sea turtle stranding data from STSSN in 2017 show that of 1040 total
recorded strandings in North Carolina, 461 (44%) occurred in the months of December and
January. Of the 1040 observations, 545, or 52% originated from the waters of Dare County.
This includes 4 from the waters off Bodie Island, 365 off Hatteras Island, and 13 in proximity
to Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge (Seaturde.org, 2013).
4.5.3 Shortnose Sturgeon
The shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) was listed as endangered on March 11, 1967
under the Endangered Species Preservation Act of 1966 (a predecessor to the Endangered
Species Act of 1973). NMFS later assumed jurisdiction for shortnose sturgeon under a 1974
government reorganization plan (38 FR 41370). The shortnose sturgeon is the smallest of the
three sturgeon species that are found in eastern North America, rarely exceeding a length of
4.7 ft and a weight of 50.7 pounds (NMFS, 2018a). Shortnose sturgeons are bottom feeders,
typically feeding on crustaceans, insect larvae, worms, mollusks and some plants (NMFS,
1998). They appear to feed either in freshwater riverine habitats or near the
freshwater/saltwater interface. This species is anadromous, primarily utilizing riverine and
estuarine habitats, migrating between freshwater and mesohaline river reaches. Spawning
occurs in upper, freshwater areas, typically in January and February while feeding and
overwintering activities may occur in both fresh and saline habitats. Aside from seasonal
migrations to estuarine waters, this species rarely occurs in the marine environment (NMFS,
1998; Keiffer and Kynard, 1993). There are accounts of shormose sturgeons occurring in the
Atlantic Ocean offshore of North Carolina (Holland and Yelverton, 1973; Dadswell et al.,
1984), however, these records are not well substantiated and there is speculation as to whether
they were misidentified juvenile Atlantic sturgeon (Shormose Sturgeon Status Review Team,
2010). Those shortnose sturgeon captured in the ocean are usually taken close to shore, in low
salinity environments; there are no records of shortnose sturgeon in the NMFS database for the
northeast offshore bottom trawl survey (NMFS, 1998).
4.5.4 Atlantic Sturgeon
hi 2009, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) petitioned NMFS to list the Atlantic
sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA). As a result
of the petition, four Distinct Population Segments were listed as endangered on FebruREOEIVED
52 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
DOM WILMINGTON, NO

2012, including the South Atlantic DPS, the Carolina DPS, the Chesapeake Bay DPS and the
New York Bight DPS. The project area falls within the range of the Carolina DPS f. Atlantic
sturgeon are similar in appearance to shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum), but can be
distinguished by their larger size, smaller mouth, different snout shape and scutes (NMFS,
2018b). The Atlantic sturgeon is a long-lived, estuarine dependent, anadromous fish. They are
benthic feeders and typically forage on invertebrates including crustaceans, worms and
mollusks. Atlantic sturgeon can grow to approximately 14 feet long and can weigh up to 800
pounds (NMFS, 2018b). They are bluish -black or olive brown dorsally (on their back) with
paler sides and a white belly.
Adults range from St. Croix, ME south to the St. Johns River in Florida (NMFS, 20118b).
These fish undergo seasonal migrations to and from freshwater, but spend much of their adult
life in the marine environment for growth (Stein et al., 2004; Atlantic Sturgeon Status Review
Team, 2007). Atlantic sturgeons are found offshore primarily during the fall to spring months
of approximately October to March. However, different life stages will utilize the marine
environment during the summer as well. Although Atlantic sturgeons spawn repeatedly, they
do not necessarily spawn every year (Smith and Clugston, 1997). During non -spawning years,
adults may utilize marine waters year-round (Bain, 1997). Spawning adults migrate upriver in
spring, beginning in February to March in the south, April to May in the mid-Atlantic, and
May to June in Canadian waters. In some areas, a small spawning migration may also occur in
the fall. Spawning occurs in flowing water between the salt front and fall line of large rivers.
Atlantic sturgeon spawning intervals range from one to five years for males and two to five
years for females (NMFS, 2018b). Following spawning, males may remain in the river or lower
estuary until the fall while females typically exit the rivers within 4 to 6 weeks (NMFS, 2018b).
Juveniles move downstream and inhabit brackish waters for a few months and when they reach
a size of about 30 to 36 inches, they move into nearshore coastal waters (Smith, 1985). Tagging
data indicates that these immature Atlantic sturgeons travel widely once they emigrate from
their natal (birth) rivers.
Records from federal, private and state surveys also show that Atlantic sturgeon have been
documented within nearshore Atlantic Ocean habitats from the North/South Carolina state line
to off the mouth of Chesapeake Bay (Moser et al. 1998). Collins and Smith (1997) reported
the occurrence of Atlantic sturgeons in the Atlantic Ocean off South Carolina in months of low
water temperatures (November—April) from nearshore to well offshore in depths up to 40
meters. The rivers, estuaries and nearshore waters of coastal North Carolina serve as important
habitat for Atlantic sturgeon. Coastal North Carolina is considered one of several concentration
areas along the northeastern U.S. where sturgeon have been shown to aggregate, and Stein et
al. (2004) found the fish were often associated with inlets of the Outer Banks. An acoustic
array deployed offshore Cape Hatteras has collected data on acoustically -tagged Atlantic
sturgeon (tagged by members of the Atlantic Cooperative Telemetry network) from February
2012 to May 2014. The array consists of 12 VR2W receivers placed 1.6 km apart, from
nearshore to just shy of 20 km offshore. Data has been collected for 123 individual Atlantic
sturgeon, and indicate the highest numbers of detections have occurred during the months of
November and March (Bangley, pers. comm., 2014). In general, few acoustically tagged
Atlantic sturgeon were recorded passing the array during the summer months. The array has
picked up signals from sturgeon released from Connecticut through Georgia, and thOt ftEPVED
53
JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

suggest the area may be a "hotbed for Atlantic sturgeon" (Rulifson, pers. comm., September
11, 2014) (Figure 18).
A study conducted by Laney et al. (2007) provides some insight into spatial distribution of
Atlantic sturgeon in the marine waters offshore Virginia and North Carolina, based on
incidental captures in winter tagging cruises conducted between 1988 and 2006. The surveys
included sampling in and near extensive sand shoals adjacent to Oregon Inlet and Cape
Hatteras. During the months of January and February from 1998 through 2006, investigations
by bottom trawling captured 146 juvenile Atlantic sturgeons in depths from 929.9 to 69.9 ft.
(Laney et al., 2007). Numbers of Atlantic sturgeon captured and tagged in a given year ranged
from 0 (1993, 1995) to 29 (2006). Atlantic sturgeon were encountered in 4.2% of tows, with
the percentage varying from 0 in 1993 and 1995 to 12.6% in 1988. Captures typically occurred
near shore at depths less than 18 in. Capture patterns suggested that Atlantic sturgeon were
likely aggregating to some degree. Many of the fish were captured over sandy substrates. Total
lengths of captured Atlantic sturgeon ranged from 577 to 1,517 mm (mean of 967 mm),
suggesting that most fish were juveniles. Limited tagged returns and genetic data suggest that
fish wintering off North Carolina constitute a mixed stock.
Sturgeons are distributed within areas that provide foraging opportunity. The narrow depth
ranges and substrate types preferred by sturgeon correspond with bottom features that likely
support depth -specific concentrations of prey (Stein et al., 2004; Kynard et al., 2000). Analysis
of commercial fishery by -catch data suggests that, along the northeastern U.S., migratory sub -
adults and adults show preference for shallow (33-164 ft) coastal areas dominated by gravel
and sand substrate (Stein et al., 2004). Within the mid-Atlantic Bight (including coastal North
Carolina), sturgeon may prefer even shallower depths (82 ft or less). Coastal features, such as
inlets and mouths of bays, support high concentrations of Atlantic sturgeon presumably due to
the physical and biological features produced by outflow plumes (Stein et al., 2004). This
species has also been shown to utilize sand shoals in the mid-Atlantic Bight. Atlantic sturgeon
were collected during otter trawl surveys over the Beach Haven Ridge, a large shoal feature
located about 7 miles offshore New Jersey in water depths 6.5 — 62 ft (Milstein and Thomas,
1977). CSA International et al. (2009) suggests pelagic and demersal species that affiliated
with shoals are likely seeking food, shelter, orientation or a break from the currents.
[RECEIVED
54 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
0CM W1LMINGTON, NO

120
100
80
me
40
20
Date
Figure 18. Atlantic sturgeon detections recorded by acoustic array located offshore Cape Hatteras, NC.
Sturgeon were tagged by the Atlantic Cooperative Telemetry Network (Bangley,pers. comm., September
15, 2014)
4.5.5 Giant Manta Ray
littl!s://www.risheries.no,ta.gov/sl)ecies/giant-iiianta-i-,,iv
The giant manta ray (Manta birostris) is currently proposed as threatened under the ESA (82
FR 3694). This proposed rule was initiated by a November 10, 2015 petition from Defenders
of Wildlife, which also included the request to designate critical habitat alongside the final
listing. As part of this process, a detailed status review of the species was conducted and
published in 2016 (Miller and Klimovich, 2016). This review contains extensive species
information such as life history and ecology, abundance trends, analysis of the ESA Section
4(A)(1) factors and extinction risk analysis.
The IUCN lists the species as vulnerable, which indicates that it is facing a high risk of
extinction in the wild. The genus is also listed on Appendix lI of CITES, which provides
protections regarding international trade of the animals and requires very closely restricted and
controlled regulations to avoid over utilization. In addition, M. birostris is listed on both
Appendix I and H of the Convention of Migratory Species (CMS). This listing ainRECEIVED
JAN 3 ® 2019
55
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. UCC WILMINGTON, INC

conserve migratory species throughout their range, including their habitats and migratory
routes.
The giant manta ray can weigh up to 2,400 kg (5,300 lbs) and extend up to 8m (25 ft) in length.
It is characterized by a diamond-shaped body that is black on the dorsal side and white on the
ventral side. The giant manta ray has paired cephalic lobes and a wide terminal mouth which
they use to feed on plankton. As pelagic planktivores, the giant manta ray seasonally inhabits
coastlines with regular upwelling, oceanic island groups, and offshore pinnacles and seamounts
(NMFS, 2018c). They also have been observed utilizing inshore areas such as shallow reefs
(less than 32 ft in water depth), sandy bottom areas, and seagrass beds (O'Shea et al., 2010;
Marshall et al., 2011; Rohner et al., 2013). Overall, the species has a global distribution and
is considered migratory; however, studies also suggest that this species may have a higher
degree of site fidelity than previously thought (Stewart et al., 2016). The furthest from
the equator they have been recorded is North Carolina in the United States (31°N) and
the North Island of New Zealand (36°S). They prefer water temperatures above 68 °F (20 °C).
The overall low population numbers of giant manta rays are in part due to the threats that these
animals face, namely targeted fisheries and bycatch. Manta rays are primarily sought after for
their gill plates, which are used in traditional medicine. In addition, the cartilage and skins are
also valued in the international trade market (NMFS, 2018c). To a lesser extent, tourism may
also negatively impact manta rays by potentially altering their behavior and by divers
inadvertently damaging their habitat and/or inappropriately interacting (i.e. touching) the
animals. Lower biodiversity and prey availability at overexploited dive sites has also been
observed (Miller and Klimovich, 2016).
Although no specific studies on the presence of the giant manta ray in North Carolina appear
to be available, there have been reports individuals observed in nearshore waters along the
outer Banks along with numerous sightings offshore (Bonne, pers. comm., 2018).
4.6 Cultural Resources
Cultural resources, such as archaeological or historic artifacts and structures, exist along
portions of the North Carolina coastline including along the Outer Banks. Some may be
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRNP). The federal statutes
associated with the protection of these important cultural resources include Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (PL 89-665); the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969; the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1987; the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Procedures for the Protection of Historic and
Cultural Properties (36 CFR Part 800); and the Abandoned Shipwreck Act of 1987.
In 2008, the US DOT developed an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) while evaluating
alternatives to replace the existing Bonner Bridge. As part of the development of the 2008
EIS, surveys were conducted in order to identify historic architectural and other historic
resources within the area of potential effects (APE). The APE for the Bonner Bridge
replacement project included the marine and terrestrial areas surrounding the northern terminus
of Bonner Bridge and Hatteras Island from Oregon Inlet to Rodanthe, which includes a p"IVED
JAN 3 ® 2019
56
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
UCM WILMINGTON, NO

of the proposed dredging corridor for this proposed project (see Figures 19 and 20). The
methodology for the surveys consisted of background research into the historical and
architectural development of the area and a field survey of the APE. All structures 50 years of
age and older were photographed, mapped, surveyed, and evaluated for NRNP -eligibility. The
APE, as defined for the Bonner Bridge replacement project, is inclusive of portions of the
project area for this proposed action, which includes the entire proposed dredging corridor.
57 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
0CM WILMINGTON, NC

Figure 19. Area of Potential Effect as determined within the 2008 EIS.
Four resources or resource areas within the APE were identified in the 2008 EIS as either listed
on, or eligible for, inclusion in the NRHP. These include 1) Pea Island National Wildlife
Refuge; 2) the (former) Oregon Inlet US Coast Guard Station building (at the northern end of
Hatteras Island; 3) Rodanthe Historic District; and 4) the Chicamacomico Life Saving RVED
58 JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
01CtNlii U.MINGTON, PIC
�\
y
v
l
t
WANCHESE�,,�
s In
Roanoke '.
Island Duch.
8�
rslM„a
� m
t a
Q<
(Poriner) Oregon Inlet
V
Pr
US Coast Guard Station
�.,5�1
� °c��
Canal Zone
i Hot Spot
e
e.
It
IV.
PeaMncl
lH Nnfimtnl 914Ilrtc
Refuge
d
Sandbag Aaea (1
e . Hot Spot
c'3
•t
is
Q
If
t Mand
P .Q,
LEGEND
^r'Pemlico Sound bridge Carrier
L'
�O '•w,
°b°'•
6
-..f
el ParaOelBntlge Conitlor
�6b
.Q ftotlanfhe �S'
. Area of Potential Effect
%�
t Craves Hof Spot
Pea Island National Wiltllde
Refuge
Hot Spotc®Opo
••.. 1”
®O'`at*
National Register at Historic
Eligible Rutlanthe Historic
Places
®ttininw6......... Hy
1•
r
District. Boundaryq
y See inset Inalt ,
Pmergency i-f- t
,...:
��
FeYryCbck ODANTME
Figure 19. Area of Potential Effect as determined within the 2008 EIS.
Four resources or resource areas within the APE were identified in the 2008 EIS as either listed
on, or eligible for, inclusion in the NRHP. These include 1) Pea Island National Wildlife
Refuge; 2) the (former) Oregon Inlet US Coast Guard Station building (at the northern end of
Hatteras Island; 3) Rodanthe Historic District; and 4) the Chicamacomico Life Saving RVED
58 JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
01CtNlii U.MINGTON, PIC

(USDOT, 2008). Each of these four sites are terrestrial. Because the proposed action of
operating a new dredge within the waters of Oregon Inlet and its connecting channels do not
include any terrestrial areas, these sites would not be affected and will not be included for
further investigation within this EA.
As described in Section 3.1.1, the waters within the project area are dynamic and extensive
shoaling occurs on a regular basis. Despite the dynamic conditions, historical research
indicates that the project area lies in a location with an active maritime history. As such, the
North Carolina Division of Archives and History, Underwater Archaeology Branch
(NCDAHUAB) has documented the loss of approximately 96 vessels in the general vicinity of
Oregon Inlet and an additional 79 vessels within Pamlico Sound (USDOT, 2008). The majority
of the documented wrecked vessels are schooners while other vessel types include barks, brigs,
and steamers. Documentation from NCDAHUAB indicates that vessel traffic through Oregon
Inlet was heaviest in the nineteenth century, with traffic during earlier periods slight in
comparison (Dames and Moore, 1979; Angley, 1985; Watts, 1992). Of these documented
losses, four wrecks have been identified in proximity to the project area using historic maps.
Three of the wrecks plotted on an 1849 US Coast Guard Survey Map are likely well north of
the project area because of the southerly migration of Oregon Inlet since its formation in 1846.
The fourth wreck, plotted on NOAA Navigation Chart No. 12204 (1975), appears to be the
remains of an iron -hulled barge that washed ashore in the early 1970s (USDOT, 2008). This
wreck site is in Pamlico Sound immediately west of Rodanthe. This wreck is a modem vessel,
however, and is not considered a significant submerged cultural resource. An early twentieth-
century windmill also was identified during a review of historic cartographic maps; however,
the windmill site is outside of the project area.
A magnetometer survey was performed by Dames and Moore (1979) within the Oregon Inlet
navigation channel. This survey revealed several anomalies. However, no ground tmthing of
the Dames and Moore targets were performed at the time as background research revealed no
known shipwrecks. However, NCDOT, FHWA, and representatives of the SHPO worked
cooperatively to develop a scope of work for a remote sensing survey for underwater resources
in the area that would likely be disturbed by the construction of Bonner Bridge replacement
and, in February 1993, performed the survey. The survey area excluded those areas that have
been dredged in the past. The results of the remote sensing survey revealed 41 anomalies, of
which three were considered high priority (two near the northern end of Bonner Bridge, and
one near the southern end of Bonner Bridge), requiring investigations if not avoided. The
SHPO concurred with this assessment in a letter dated May 23, 1993 (USDOT 2008). In
October 1995, an underwater investigation of these three anomalies was conducted. A
magnetometer survey was conducted to confirm and refine each location and visual inspections
were conducted. The anomalies in the northern area were also investigated using subbottom
probes. This investigation revealed that the source objects for the anomalies of the two clusters
at the north end of the bridge either lie more than 10 feet below bottom or were too small to be
located within the patterns of sub -bottom probing. It is, therefore, reasonable to conclude that
no substantial shipwreck remains exist within 10 feet of the bottom in this area. The anomaly
cluster at the south end of the bridge consisted of three anomalies. A pipeline discovered during
the diving investigation has characteristics indicating modern origin and, apparently, is the
source object for two of the three anomalies. The third anomaly, indicative of an isolated
RECEIVED
59 JAN 3 6 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
DCM WILMINGTON, NO

single -source object, has significantly reduced potential for representing a shipwreck. Based
on the results of this investigation, it is concluded that no shipwrecks exist in this area. The
SHPO concurred with this finding in a letter dated June 5, 1996 (USDOT, 2008).
In 1991, an additional remote sensing survey was conducted at Oregon Inlet for the USACE
by Panamerican Consultants, Inc. under contract with GAI Consultants, Inc. (Figure 11). This
survey was designed to determine the presence or absence of targets that might represent
historically significant shipwrecks within proposed jetty construction and dredging areas in
response to the USACE's Scope of Work for Delivery Order No. 0001, entitled Underwater
Archaeological Remote Sensing Sample Survey, Oregon Inlet Jetties, Manteo (Shallowbag)
Bay Project, Dare County, North Carolina, under Contract No. DACW54-91-0010. The
sensing survey, which employed both magnetometer and side -scan sonar, recorded three
targets which possibly represented shipwreck sites. Of these anomalies, Target 1 was
determined to be the site of a drill rig that was lost in 1981, Target 2 represents the recent
wreck of the fishing trawler Elizabeth Christine, and Target 3 represents the remains of the tug
W.G. Townsend that was lost in 1961. Owing to the recent time frame of these targets, none
are considered historically significant relative to National Register of Historic Places criteria
and further archaeological investigations within the survey area are not warranted.
JAN 3 ® 2019
60
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. t$CM WILMINGTON, NO

�•'-''_ Dare County
Oregon Inlet Channel Maintenance Environmental Assessment
Atlantic
'- Ocean

As described in detail in Section 2. 1, dredging has occurred extensively within Oregon Inlet
and its connecting channels. Channel dredging has primarily occurred through the navigation
zone of Bonner Bridge, in a corridor approximately 1,000 feet to the east of Bonner Bridge
and in a corridor parallel to and west of Bonner Bridge. The dredging parallel to Bonner Bridge
occurred during construction of the bridge. The inlet bottom was dredged where the water was
less than 10 feet deep. This dredging occurred in an area approximately 150 feet wide and
extending the full length of the bridge, except in the area of the current navigation span and
several spans to the south. As such, this dredging activity would have disturbed, damaged, or
destroyed shipwreck resources unless scour associated with inlet movement re -deposited
vessel remains at depths below the limits of dredging.
In summary, the 2008 EIS drafted to support the Bonner Bridge replacement effort concluded,
"The North Carolina Office of State Archaeology site files contain no record of terrestrial or
submerged cultural resources in the Bonner Bridge project area and the associated APE". In
addition, the 1991 USACE archeological survey performed within the confines of the proposed
jetties in Oregon Inlet revealed the presence of no historically important resources as well.
4.7 Socioeconomic Resources
As stated in Section 1.2, a recent economic study of Oregon Inlet by Dumas et.al (2014)
suggested that five key business sectors contribute the majority of Oregon Inlet's economic
impact to Dare County, the region, and the state. These sectors include commercial fishing,
seafood packing/processing, boat building and support services, recreational fishing, and
tournament fishing.
Commercial Fishing
Oregon Inlet is considered one of the most commercially vital inlets along coastal North
Carolina (Dumas et al., 2014). Users include fishermen from the communities of Wanchese,
Manteo, Manns Harbor, and Stumpy Point (all in Dare County) as well as additional
communities from other coastal counties (e.g. Hyde, Pamlico). As the ability to navigate
through Oregon Inlet has declined over recent decades, the commercial fishing industry has
declined as well. For example, in the 1960s there were approximately 40-50 different
commercial seafood businesses in Dare County. Presently, however, there are approximately
only 15-20 remaining in the County. Of these businesses, most landings are handled by the 4-
5 largest dealers (Dumas et. al, 2014). Due to the relative shallow and dangerous conditions,
fewer fishermen choose to operate through Oregon Inlet compared to in the recent past.
Potential trips are frequently lost or shortened due to these dangerous inlet conditions, resulting
in reduced catch. The shallow draft conditions force commercial boats reduce catch in an
attempt to lighten tonnage so that they might be able to pass through the inlet with less chance
of grounding. On some occasions, when navigation is extremely challenging, some Oregon
Inlet -based commercial fishing boats must offload their landings in Virginia due to safety
concerns of traveling the inlet under loaded conditions. If the navigability of Oregon Inlet is
not maintained, Dumas et. al (2014) indicated that the remaining few commercial fishing
vessels would choose to remain in the fishing business but would relocate their fishing
operations to other ports, most likely located in southern North Carolina or Virginia®
would certainly impact the local and regional economy.
JAN 3 0 2019
62
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. 0CM WILMINGTON, NO

Seafood Packing/Processing
Seafood packing and processing businesses prepare the catch for market after the catch is
brought into port. Taken together, these Oregon -Inlet dependent activities generate jobs,
wages, and profits for local workers and business owners, as well as tax revenues to support
local government services. Again, a recent trend is showing that some local businesses have
also begun packing and processing businesses in Virginia so that the loaded vessels are not
dependent on Oregon Inlet conditions. It is assumed that if Oregon Inlet were to close, Oregon
Inlet dependent fishery landings would be lost (Dumas, 2014).
Boat Building and Support Services
The commercial fishing industry in proximity to Oregon Inlet are supported by a number of
businesses that service and supply the vessels. As of 2014, 15 boat building companies existed
in Dare County producing custom sport fishing yachts. These companies directly employed a
total of 274 workers, earning $10.6 million in wages, and represent over half of the 480
manufacturing jobs in Dare County as of 2013 dollars (Dumas et.al, 2014). These local boat
builders are directly dependent on Oregon Inlet, as the valuable reputation of the boats for
strength and durability is maintained by continuous research and testing in the uniquely rough
waters offshore. Based on the field interviews conducted by Dumas et. al, (2014), if Oregon
Inlet were to close, these businesses would as well.
Recreational Fishing
The area offshore of the northern Outer Banks, including the waters off Oregon Inlet, is
considered one of the prime sportfishing regions along the East Coast due to its proximity to
the Gulf Stream and extended seasons of abundant fishing opportunities (e.g. marlin, tuna).
The recreational sportfishery is vast and includes large "headboaf'recreational fishing vessels,
smaller "for -hire" charter fishing vessels, and private fishing boats. As of 2014, it was
estimated that 109,000 Oregon Inlet fishing trips are taken per year by North Carolina residents
and an additional 153,000 trips are taken by non-residents (Dumas et. al, 2014). A significant
number of jobs in the tourism industry are related to sport fishing, which is dependent on the
inlet for access to the ocean fishing grounds which contain the fish species prized by sport
fishermen.
Tournament Fishing
In addition to general recreational fishing, sportfishing tournaments are important to the
economy in the Oregon Inlet region. The Outer Banks is called "The Billfish Capital of the
World," as hundreds of blue marlin, white marlin and sailfish are caught and released in the
offshore waters annually. The billfish season is long, with the peak for blue marlin in June and
white marlin and sailfish most plentiful in August and September. All are caught consistently
from late spring to early fall. Another big draw are yellowfin tuna, which are caught year-
round. Large offshore fishing tournaments are held in Dare County with anglers utilizing
Oregon Inlet as the means to access the offshore waters. In 2006, there were 9 fishing
tournaments in the area, however, by 2014 the number had declined to just 5 (Dumas et. al,
2014). During that time more than 173 boats annually are expected to participate in
sportfishing tournaments dependent on passage through Oregon Inlet (Dumas et. al, 2014).
These tournaments draw significant economic impacts to the County rangii�¢��
63 JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
0Oi1N WILMINGTON, NC

expenditures on fishing gear, lodging, food, retail to custom boat sales, marine maintenance,
and/or boat storage. These recreational fishing activities generate additional economic impacts
for the region, in particular for the tourism industry.
4.7.1 Economic Impacts of Oregon Inlet
Under recent conditions at Oregon Inlet where the UASCE, Dare County, and the State
continue to perform maintenance dredging on a regular basis, these five business sectors
contribute an economic impact of $403.5 million in revenues while supporting 3,319 jobs in
Dare County. When incorporating nearby counties including Dare, Currituck, Camden,
Pasquotank, Perquimans, Tyrell, and Hyde, the regional economic impact of the inlet amounts
to $423.3 million while supporting 3,601 jobs. At a larger scale, the study cites an overall
statewide economic impact of $548.4 million and 4,348 jobs. If the inlet were to be navigable
throughout the entire year, the 2014 study stated that these business sectors could potentially
provide a total annual economic impact of 5,120 j obs and $642.2 million to Dare County, 5,590
jobs and $678.4 million to the region, and 5,397 jobs and $693.0 million to the state of North
Carolina (Dumas et.al, 2014).
4.8 Recreational Resources
The area surrounding Oregon Inlet offers a wide range of recreational opportunities for
residents and tourists alike. Anglers utilize the inlet for access to the nearshore and offshore
waters. Fishing is also popular on the sound side of the Bonner Bridge. In addition, surf
fishing occurs along the beaches of Bodie Island and Pea Island. Visitors to the Pea Island
National Wildlife Refuge, located directly to the south of the inlet, take part in bird watching
and guided canoe tours. Oregon Inlet Campground is the northernmost campground on Cape
Hatteras National Seashore located on the south end of Bodie Island. The beach adjacent to
the campground can be reached by foot from your campsite as well as by vehicle with a Cape
Hatteras Off -Road Vehicle Permit. Popular activities include fishing, swimming, surfing,
birding, and shell hunting. The calmer waters of the sound to the west of the campground can
be accessed at the public boat launch at Oregon Inlet Fishing Center. Popular sound side
opportunities include crabbing, clamming, paddle -boarding, boating, and fishing.
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH EACH ALTERNATIVE
5.1 Water Quality
5.1.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative
Direct Impacts: Historically, maintenance dredging in and around Oregon Inlet has been
performed by USACE sidecast dredges, special purpose dredges, and contracted
pipeline/hopper dredges. The material dredged by special purpose and hopper dredges have
been disposed in a nearshore disposal site off the northern end of Pea Island and within scour
holes located along the pilings of the Bonner Bridge. The material dredged by the pipeline
dredges has been disposed of along the northern shoreline of Pea Island. Due to the operational
differences attributed to these dredge types, the impacts to water quality are realized in
different ways. RECEIVED
64 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
0CM WILMINGTON, NO

During dredging events performed by a special purpose dredge, sediment re -suspension occurs
as the draghead moves over the seafloor, as well as during the discharge of overflow while
filling the hopper. Sediment re -suspension that results from overflow as the hopper is being
filled generally only occurs during a portion of the filling time. The time required to fill a
hopper (fill cycle) can vary, but on average may take 45 minutes to one hour, depending on
the hopper capacity, when dredging sandy substrates. The first 1/3 of the cycle involves filling
the hopper with sand and water. For the remaining 2/3 of the fill cycle, sand replaces the water
in the hopper, and the water sporadically overflows back into the ocean. Turbidity plumes can
also be created sub -surface at the drag head site. These plumes are localized to the immediate
vicinity of the drag head and do not reach the surface (LaSalle et al., 1991). The sediment
plume generated by hopper dredging has been shown to extend 1,640 to 4,000 feet from the
dredge, and is generally reported to be short-term (Hitchcock et al., 1999; Anchor
Environmental 2003; Roman -Sierra et al., 2011). The length and shape of the plume depends,
in part, on the hydrodynamics within the water column as well as the sediment grain size within
the area being dredged. Turbidity also increases temporarily during the disposal of material
from the hopper dredge at the disposal site.
Impacts to water quality as a result of sidecast dredging differ from those attributed to hopper
dredging and have been described in a 2013 USACE EA entitled "Sidecast Maintenance
Dredging of a Portion of Hatteras -to -Hatteras Inlet Channel- Pamlico Sound, North Carolina".
The EA states that minor and short-term suspended sediment plumes and the release of soluble
trace constituents from the sediment can be expected during sidecast dredging. As such, during
active dredging, turbidity increases outside the immediate dredging area. However,
approximately 50-75 feet from the disposal area, turbidity levels typically diminish to below
25 NTUs (Nephelometric Turbidity Units). These water quality effects of sidecast disposal are
expected to be short-term and minor and rapidly dissipated by wave and current action
(USACE, 2013).
Cutter suction pipeline dredges generate comparatively lower amounts of suspended sediment
and plumes are confined to within a few meters of the drilling cutterhead at the seafloor. A
cutter suction dredge functions by drilling below the surface of the substrate; therefore, the
sediment plumes created from the drilling cutterhead are generally highly localized (CSA et
al., 2009). Additionally, the material is hydraulically moved from the cutterhead /sediment
interface directly into a pipeline, eliminating the hopper -filling stage and associated overflow.
Although unlikely, a leaking submerged pipeline can also be a source of elevated turbidity
(Michel et al., 2013). At the placement site, turbidity will increase within the surf zone due to
pipeline discharge and can affect hundreds of meters of shoreline. Several studies of similar
projects involving sand placement activities have shown elevated concentrations within the
nearshore extend an alongshore distance of 1,310 to 1,640 feet from the discharge pipe in the
swash zone, and dissipate on the order of hours (Shubel et al., 1978; Burlas et al., 2002; Wilber
et al., 2006). Best management construction practices are typically employed and include the
construction of temporary containment dykes on the beach in an attempt to minimize the
magnitude and extent of turbidity. Furthermore, the use of beach -compatible material has
ensured that the percentage of fine material within the beach fill is limited which has served to
minimize turbidity levels as well. 'RECEIVE®
65 JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
0CM WILMINGTON, NO

Because the material dredged from within the federally authorized channels at Oregon Inlet is
generally composed of sand with low organics and biological oxygen demand, re -suspended
material would be expected to have a quicker settling time, and have no appreciable effects on
the dissolved oxygen, pH or temperature. Furthermore, the tidal exchange within inlets allows
adequate mixing with oxygen rich ocean waters. The 2004 EA drafted by the USACE entitled
"Use of Government Plant to Dredge in Federally Authorized Navigation Projects in North
Carolina" explored the impacts associated with the implementation of sidecast and special
purpose dredging in proximity to Oregon Inlet along with other federally maintained channels
within the state. The document stated, "The relatively minor amount of dredging and dredged
material disposal anticipated from all three alternatives would result in only temporary and
minimal impacts to water quality" (USACE, 2004).
Indirect Impacts: When sediment re -suspension occurs as a result of dredging activity, larger
particles rapidly settle out; however, the finer sediments will remain suspended for longer
periods, or even indefinitely in turbulent water (Adriaanse and Coosen, 1991). Suspended
particles may interfere with the biological functions of some organisms such as feeding,
respiration, reproduction and potentially cause predator avoidance. High turbidity and silt loads
can have detrimental impacts to filter feeding organisms associated with nearshore benthic
communities including amphipods, isopods, decapods, polychaetes, mollusks and others. The
conditions of diminished light penetration can detrimentally affect the photosynthetic activity
of phytoplankton, the primary producers of energy production. However, due to the temporary
nature of the anticipated elevated turbidity levels, no indirect impacts will be expected.
5.1.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
Direct Impacts: The proposed action involves the use of a special purpose dredge. Therefore,
the direct impacts to water quality, as described above in Section 5. 1.1 for special purpose and
hopper dredges will be anticipated. In summary, the length and shape of the turbidity plume
created during dredging and disposal depends, in part, on the hydrodynamics within the water
column as well as the sediment grain size within the area being dredged. Turbidity also
increases temporarily during the disposal of material from the dredge at the disposal site.
Because the material dredged from within the federally authorized channels at Oregon Inlet is
generally composed of sand with low organics and biological oxygen demand, re -suspended
material would be expected to have a quicker settling time, and have no appreciable effects on
the dissolved oxygen, pH or temperature. As such, only temporary and minor impacts to water
quality would be anticipated.
Indirect Impacts: The indirect impacts for water quality would be the same as described above
in Section 5.1.1. In short, due to the temporary nature of the anticipated elevated turbidity
levels, no indirect impacts will be expected.
JAN 3 0 2019
66
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. OCMs )NILMINGTON, NO

5.2 Air Quality
5.2.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative
Direct andlndirectlmpacts: A temporary reduction in air quality occur as a result of emissions
created by the engines and generators associated with dredges and support vessels. The primary
emissions would result from the burning of fossil fuels by this equipment. Variables that will
affect the impact to ambient air quality include duration of dredging activities and
meteorological conditions (e.g. wind velocity and direction) during dredging.
In accordance with 40 CFR 93.153 for nonattainment and maintenance areas, conformity
determinations with the State Implementation Plan are required for federal permits if certain
exemptions are not met. However, since the project is in an attainment area, a conformity
determination is not required. In addition, the 2004 EA entitled "Use of Government Plant to
Dredge in Federally Authorized Navigation Projects in North Carolina" and the 2013 EA
entitled "Sidecast Maintenance Dredging of a Portion of Hatteras -to -Hatteras Inlet Channel
Pamlico Sound, North Carolina", it was stated that the project was in compliance with Section
176 (c) of the Clean Air Act, as amended. The direct and indirect emissions from the project
fall below the prescribed de minimis levels; therefore, the activities associated with the Status
Quo Alternative would not have any adverse effect on the air quality of the Project Area
(USACE, 2004; USACE 2013). Therefore, no direct or indirect impacts would be associated
with the Status Quo alternative.
5.2.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
Direct andlndirect Impacts: Due to the similarity of the nature of the proposed activity to the
similar activities already authorized by the USACE, the findings from the 2000, 2004, and
2013 EAs would apply to this proposed prof ect and no adverse effect on air quality is expected.
5.3 Noise
5.3.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative
Direct Impacts: During dredging activities, noise levels will increase above the ambient levels
near the dredge area and at the nearshore disposal site due to the presence of the dredge and
personnel. Marine dredging produces broadband, continuous, low frequency sound that can be
detected over considerable distances and may trigger avoidance reactions in marine mammals
(Thomsen et al., 2009) and other organisms. The sound produced is dependent on many factors
including, but not limited to, sediment type being dredged, type of equipment used, and skill
of the dredge operator. The variation in noise emitted by equipment type is related to how the
machinery makes contact and extracts material from the sea floor. Clarke et al. (2002)
performed a study of underwater noise produced by various types of dredging equipment,
including a trailing suction hopper dredge. For the hopper dredge, which is similar to the
special purpose dredges often used in Oregon Inlet by the USACE, much of the sounds emitted
during the active dredging process are produced by propeller and engine noise, purr VEE
67 JAN 3 0 2099
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
OCIVI WILMINGTON, PIC

generators. Most of the sound energy produced fell within the 70 to 1,000 Hz range and was
continuous in nature. However, Clarke et al. (2002) reported peak pressure levels recorded by
a listening platform ranged from 120 to 140 dB re 1 µPa rms for hopper dredges. A more recent
study evaluated sound levels produced by hopper dredges operating in an offshore environment
during sediment excavation, transport of material, and pump -out of material (Reine et al.,
2014). When averaged across all dredging activities, sound pressure levels averaged 142.31
dB at a distance of 50 meters, and grew progressively less to 120.1 dB at 1.95 km. At all
distances from dredging activity, sound levels were highest during sediment removal activities
and transition from transit to pump -out, and were quietest during flushing of pipes at pump -
out (132.45 dB). At a distance of 2.5 km, sounds attenuated to ambient levels. Noise levels
may only be elevated during active construction and will return to pre -construction levels upon
project completion.
Indirect Impacts: Sound plays an important role in the marine environment; however, the
function of sound in the ecology of many marine animals is not entirely understood. The
extraction of sand from the marine environment produces sound that elevates levels above
ambient and may disturb or cause injury to some marine fauna such as invertebrates, fishes,
mammals and sea turtles. For example, in marine cephalopods, exposure to low -frequency
sound was found to cause acoustic trauma to sensory structures responsible for the animals'
sense of balance and position (Andre et al., 2011). Sound can also prove detrimental to fishes,
especially those considered "hearing specialists" that have specialized hearing structures, and
those with swim bladders. The frequency and sound levels emitted by dredges overlap the
range of hearing for some fish species, meaning dredging can cause adverse effects such as
behavioral changes or physiological damage (Thomsen et al., 2009). Impacts from dredging
noise incurred by certain threatened and endangered species (e.g. manatees, whales and sea
turtles) are discussed further in Section 5.5.'
5.3.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
Direct Impacts: As stated above in Section 5.3.1, direct noise impacts in association with
operating a special purpose dredge, similar to the yet -to -be -constructed privately owned
dredge, would result in peak pressure levels of 120-140 dB re Ippa rms. These noise levels
dissipate to ambient levels at only 2.5km. See Section 5.3.1 for more information regarding
the noise impacts associated with hopper dredging. Noise levels may only be elevated during
active construction and will return to pre -construction levels upon project completion.
Indirect Impacts: The indirect impacts associated with the proposed action are the same as
those described in Section 5.3.1.
5.4 Essential Fish Habitat
There are no HAPC or PNAs identified within the project area and therefore impacts to these
designated areas will not be discussed below. Three Significant Natural Heritage Areas are
found in proximity to Oregon Inlet including the Bodie Island Lighthouse Pond, the Oregon
Inlet/Roanoke Sound Bird Nesting Islands, and the Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge.
However, due to the fact that they are not located within the proposed project area, impacts
RECEIVED
68 JAN 3 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
ibC WI WILMIINGT®NI, IVC

will not be incurred and will not be discussed below. However, there are four habitats
considered EFH within the project area — intertidal flats, seagrass, estuarine and marine water
column, and oyster reefs and shell banks. The potential for impacts, both direct and indirect,
are discussed for each of the two alternatives. In addition, the impacts to managed species are
discussed as well.
5.4.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative
Direct Impacts:
Intertidal Flats
Although intertidal flats are found within proximity to the project area, specifically within
Pamlico Sound and along the shoulders of Oregon Inlet and Bodie Island, the current dredging
efforts conducted by the USACE dredge fleet and contracted pipeline dredges do not encroach
on these areas. Therefore, no impacts associated with the Status Quo Alternative is anticipated
for intertidal flats.
Seagrass
While the ongoing maintenance dredging performed by the USACE dredge fleet and
contracted pipeline dredges occur in the vicinity of known SAV habitat, the rapid accumulation
of sand characteristic of the development of such shoals likely precludes the presence of mature
or extensive SAV populations within the areas to be dredged. SAV do no occur in the nearshore
areas adjacent to the ocean beaches of North Carolina, therefore the disposal of material in
nearshore sites by special purpose dredges does not impact SAV. The nature of sidecast
dredging involves a discharge adjacent to the area being dredged. When possible, the use of a
sidecast dredge includes positioning of the discharge pipe into the deepest water. Conditions
that preclude this are when winds and/or currents redeposit this material back into the recently
dredged area. The decision as to whether this positioning can be done is left up to the dredge
captain, but the need to avoid deposition in shallow water to the maximum extent practicable
is emphasized each time a sidecast dredge is used.
If SAV are present within the sidecast dredge's deposition area, they could be impacted.
However, effluent from the dredge rapidly dissipates and the quantity of material is generally
less than that occurring in past emergency dredging scenarios due to the nature of maintenance
dredging: the preemptive removal of shoals before they become too large. The US Army Corps
of Engineers' Engineering Research and Development Center (F.,RDC) ran a model predicting
the impacts of sandy material dredged from Hatteras Inlet, located south of the project area, on
SAV that are 350 feet or more from the centerline of the sidecast dredge discharge (USACE,
2013). In a 2,000 -foot reach of the model summary, TSS concentrations above 10 mg/L, 1
mg/L and 0.1 mg/L are predicted to occur only within 55 feet, 80 feet and 100 feet,
respectively, of the centerline of the discharge. In a different 6,500 -foot reach of the model
summary, TSS concentrations above 10 mg/L, 1 mg,/L, and 0.1 mg/L are predicted to occur
only within 80 feet, 130 feet and 160 feet, respectively, of the centerline of the discharge.
Therefore, the plume was not predicted to spread over the SAV beds within Hatteras Channel,
which were at least 350 feet from the centerline of the discharge. Considering the location of
known SAV beds in relation to the dredging activities associated with the Status Quo
alternative, impacts are anticipated to be minimal, temporary, and short-lived. RECEWED
JAR 3 0 2019
69
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. DCM INIL MINGT®N, NO

Estuarine and Marine Water Columns
The potential water quality impacts of dredging and disposal are addressed in Section 5.1.
Dredging and disposal operations conducted during project construction may impact the
estuarine and marine water columns in the immediate vicinity of the discharge; either adjacent
to the dredging project in the case of sidecast dredge use or adjacent to the nearshore disposal
area in the case of special purpose dredge use. These impacts may include minor and short-
term suspended sediment plumes and related turbidity, as well as the release of soluble trace
constituents from the sediment. Outside the project area, turbidity increases resulting from the
actual dredging would be less than 25 NTUs and are, therefore, considered insignificant.
Oyster Reefs and Shell Banks
Oyster reefs and shell banks near the proposed project area have the potential to be affected by
sedimentation caused by the channel maintenance dredging. However, as discussed above,
sedimentation in estuarine areas should be minimal since the location of the habitat is not
within the areas effected by dredging activity. No direct effects to this EFH are expected.
Managed Species
As determined by the USACE, the effects of sidecast and special purpose dredging in Hatteras
Inlet to adult managed species would at most be minimal and short lived. In addition to the
dredging components of the Status Quo alternative, the nearshore disposal would also have a
minimal and transient effect to any adult managed species since they are mobile and expected
to avoid the active disposal location or insignificantly effected at the population level (USACE,
2004; USACE, 2013).
Larvae and early juvenile stages of many managed species, however, pose a greater concern
to the activities associated with the Status Quo alternative than adults because their powers of
mobility are either absent or poorly developed, leaving them subject to transport by tides and
currents. This physical limitation makes them potentially more susceptible to entrainment by
an operating dredge. Organisms close to the dredge intake may be captured by the effects of
its suction and may be entrained in the flow of dredged sediment and water (USACE, 2004).
As a worst-case, it may be assumed that entrained animals experience 100% mortality,
although some small number may survive. Susceptibility to this effect depends upon avoidance
reactions of the organism, the efficiency of its swimming ability, its proximity to the intake,
the pumping rate of the dredge, and possibly other factors. Behavioral characteristics of
different species in response to factors such as salinity, current, and diurnal phase (daylight
versus darkness) are also believed to affect their concentrations in particular locations or strata
of the water column. Any organisms present near the channel bottom would be closer to the
dredge intake and, therefore, subject to higher risk of entrainment.
The biological effect of hydraulic entrainment has been studied to assess its impact on early
life stages of marine resources, including larval oysters (Carriker et al., 1986), post -larval
brown shrimp (Van Dolah et al., 1994), striped bass eggs and larvae (Burton et al., 1992), and
others. In general, these studies indicate that the primary organisms subject to entrainment by
hydraulic dredges are bottom -oriented fishes and shellfishes. The significance of entrainment
impact depends upon the species present; the number of organisms entrained; the relationship
CENE®
70 JAN 3 0 2919
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
ti C"M WILMINGTON, No

of the number entrained to local, regional, and total population numbers; and the natural
mortality rate for the various life stages of a species. Assessment of the significance of
entrainment is difficult, but most studies indicate that the significance of impact is low.
Reasons for low levels of impact include: (1) the very small volumes of water pumped by
dredges relative to the total amount of water in the vicinity, thereby impacting only a small
proportion of organisms, (2) the extremely large numbers of larvae produced by most
estuarine -dependent species, and (3) the extremely high natural mortality rate for early life
stages of many fish species (natural larval mortalities may approach 99% [Dew and Hecht,
1994; Cushing, 1988]). In summary, only a very small percentage of marine and estuarine
larvae are subject to entrainment; therefore, dredging conducted as part of the Status Quo
Alternative is not expected to significantly impact these organisms at the local or regional
population levels.
Indirect Impacts:
Intertidal Flats
Although ephemeral and dynamic, intertidal flats often exist within the areas historically
maintained by the USACE within Oregon Inlet and its connecting channels. This dredging
activity, however, is not performed in a defined area as, rather, it follows the best or deepest
water. As such, intertidal flats will inherently be avoided by dredging.
SeaQrass
Because dredging activity is limited to the areas of best or deepest water, no SAV resources
will be impacted by the dredges. By employing a 100' "no dredge" buffer around any mapped
SAV resources, indirect impacts associated with elevated turbidity will be curtailed.
Estuarine and Marine Water Columns
As noted in the 2004 EA, scientific data are very limited with regard to the effects of placement
of dredged material on fishery resources. These effects may be similar, on a smaller scale, to
the effects of storms; storm effects may include increased turbidity and sediment load in the
water column and, in some cases, changes in fish community structure (Hackney et al., 1996).
However, due to the temporary nature of the elevated turbidity levels observed during
maintenance dredging activities, indirect impacts are not anticipated as a result of the Status
Quo alternative.
Oyster Reefs and Shell Banks
Due to the lack of oyster reefs and shell banks within the areas historically maintained through
dredge activity under the Status Quo alternative, no indirect impacts are anticipated.
Managed Species
The dredging activity associated with the Status Quo alternative along with the nearshore
disposal would also have a minimal and transient effect to any adult managed species since
they are mobile and expected to avoid the active disposal location (USACE, 2004; USACE
2013). However, the loss of larval and juveniles through entrainment could indirectly impact
predators that would otherwise feed upon these organisms in the estuary. Due to the small
percentage of entrained larvae during active dredging operations compared to the volume of
RECE ED
71 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
Xhil WILMINGTON, NO

water flowing in and out of the inlet on a daily basis, these impacts are not anticipated to be
significant.
5.4.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
Direct Impacts:
Intertidal Flats
Although intertidal flats are found within proximity to the project area, specifically within
Pamlico Sound and along the shoulders of Oregon Inlet and Bodie Island, the proposed
dredging efforts to maintain navigation within Oregon Inlet and its connecting channels will
not encroach on these areas due to the fact that dredging will follow deep or best water.
Therefore, no impacts associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative is anticipated for
intertidal flats.
Sea ass
Impacts to seagrass as a result of the Applicant's Preferred Alternative would be limited to
those produced by special purpose and hopper dredging as described above in Section 5.4.1.
SAV do no occur in the nearshore areas adjacent to the ocean beaches of North Carolina,
therefore the disposal of material in nearshore sites by the Privately owned dredge will not
directly burry or smother SAV resources. Elevated turbidity during dredging will be temporary
and, due to the method of disposal, will be less significant than what has been documented for
sidecast dredging. As discussed above, the US Army Corps of Engineers' Engineering
Research and Development Center (ERDC) ran a model predicting the impacts of sandy
material dredged from Hatteras Inlet, located south of the project area, on SAV that are 350
feet or more from the centerline of the sidecast dredge discharge (USACE, 2013). In a 2,000 -
foot reach of the model summary, TSS concentrations above 10 mg/L, 1 mg/L and 0.1 mg/L
are predicted to occur only within 55 feet, 80 feet and 100 feet, respectively, of the centerline
of the discharge. In a different 6,500 -foot reach of the model summary, TSS concentrations
above 10 mg/L, 1 mg/L and 0.1 mg/L are predicted to occur only within 80 feet, 130 feet and
160 feet, respectively, of the centerline of the discharge. Therefore, the plume was not
predicted to spread over the SAV beds within Hatteras Channel, which were at least 350 feet
from the centerline of the discharge. A special purpose dredge would produce a smaller plume
compared to what has been documented for a sidecast dredge.
A dredging corridor has been established for the proposed project that defines the limits of
where dredging activity may occur (Figure 3). Based on NOAA's most recent assessment of
SAV locations in the area, some patchy seagrass beds are found within the dredging corridor.
A 100' buffer surrounding these mapped resources will be employed such that dredging
activity will not directly affect mapped seagrass beds. Therefore, considering the location of
known SAV beds in relation to the dredging activities associated with the Applicant's Preferred
Alternative, impacts to any SAV resources are not expected. Furthermore, during open water
disposal, the effluent from the dredge rapidly dissipates and the quantity of material is
generally less than that occurring in past emergency dredging scenarios due to the nature of
maintenance dredging.
RECEIVED
,IAN 3 ® 2019
72
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING &ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. UCIVI WILMINGTON, NO

Estuarine and Marine Water Columns
The potential water quality impacts of dredging and disposal are addressed in Section 5.1.
Dredging and disposal operations conducted during project construction may impact the
estuarine and marine water columns in the immediate vicinity of the discharge at the nearshore
disposal area and adjacent to the bridge pilings of the Bonner Bridge. These impacts may
include minor and short-term suspended sediment plumes and related turbidity, as well as the
release of soluble trace constituents from the sediment. Outside the project area, turbidity
increases resulting from the actual dredging would be less than 25 NTUs and are, therefore,
considered insignificant.
Oyster Reefs and Shell Banks
Oyster reefs and shell banks near the proposed project area have the potential to be affected by
sedimentation caused by the channel maintenance dredging. However, as discussed above, a
dredging corridor has been established for the proposed project that defines the limits of where
dredging activity may occur (Figure 3). Based on NCDMF's most recent assessment of
shellfish beds in the area, several oyster reefs and shell banks have been mapped within the
dredging corridor. However, it should be noted that one of these features appears to be
inaccurate due to the fact that historical channel maintenance dredging has occurred directly
over the feature and no shellfish has been noted. A 100' buffer will be created around verified
shellfish features within the proposed dredging corridorwhich will serve to reduce the potential
for direct impacts.
Managed Species
Dredging activity performed by the privately -owned dredge would have a minimal and
transient effect to any adult managed species since they are mobile and expected to avoid
entrainment and the active disposal locations (USACE, 2004; USAGE, 2013). As described
in greater detail above in Section 5.4.1, larvae and early juvenile stages of many managed
species pose a greater concern to the activities associated with the Applicant's Preferred
Alternative than adults because their powers of mobility are either absent or poorly developed,
leaving them subject to transport by tides and currents. The significance of entrainment impact
depends, however, upon the species present; the number of organisms entrained; the
relationship of the number entrained to local, regional, and total population numbers; and the
natural mortality rate for the various life stages of a species. Assessment of the significance of
entrainment is difficult, but most studies indicate that the significance of impact is low.
Because only avery small percentage of marine and estuarine larvae are subjectto entrainment;
therefore, dredging performed by the privately -owned dredge is not expected to significantly
impact these life forms at local or regional population levels.
Indirect Impacts:
Intertidal Flats
Although ephemeral and dynamic, intertidal flats often exist within the areas historically
maintained by the USACE within Oregon Inlet and its connecting channels. This dredging
activity, however, is not performed in a defined area as, rather, it follows the best or deepest
water. As such, intertidal flats will inherently be avoided by dredging.
RECEWE®
73
IAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
C)CiVl WILMINGTON, NO

Sea�rass
Due to the inclusion of the 100' buffer around existing seagrass beds found within the proposed
dredge corridor, no indirect impacts are anticipated.
Estuarine and Marine Water Columns
Similar to those described above in Section 5.4.1, the effects to the water column may be
similar, on a smaller scale, to the effects of storms; storm effects may include increased
turbidity and sediment load in the water column and, in some cases, changes in fish community
structure (Hackney et al., 1996). However, due to the temporary nature of the elevated turbidity
levels observed during maintenance dredging activities, indirect impacts are not anticipated as
a result of the Applicant's Preferred Alternative.
Oyster Reefs and Shell Banks
Due to the inclusion of the 100' buffer around existing oyster reef and shell banks found within
the proposed dredge corridor, no indirect impacts are anticipated.
Managed Species
As described in Section 5.4.1, dredging and nearshore disposal activity would also have a
minimal and transient effect to any adult managed species since they are mobile and expected
to avoid the active construction areas (USACE, 2004; USACE 2013). However, the loss of
larval and juveniles through entrainment could indirectly impact predators that would
otherwise feed upon these organisms in the estuary. Due to the small percentage of entrained
larvae during active dredging operations compared to the volume of water flowing in and out
of the inlet on a daily basis, these impacts are not anticipated to be significant.
5.5 Threatened and Endangered Species
5.5.1 West Indian Manatee
5.5.1.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative
Direct Impacts: One of the major threats to the West Indian manatee is collisions with
watercrafts, which can result in serious injury or mortality. Manatees are present seasonally in
North Carolina, and are most commonly sighted in the Intracoastal Waterway or sounds and
bays. There is also substantial SAV, a primary food source for manatees, within the Pamlico
Sound in proximity to the areas historically dredged by the USACE and contracted pipeline
dredges. The number of manatees potentially occurring in the project area is not known with
certainty, but is presumed to be low with the greatest likelihood of occurrence during the
warmer months, in particular June through October. It is therefore considered possible, but
unlikely, that a manatee may be present in the Pamlico Sound or Oregon Inlet during the
warmer months. Should dredging coincide with this period, manatee and vessel interactions
are possible while the dredge is underway. That said, for all dredging that occurs between June
and October, the dredges would comply with all precautions outlined within the USFWS's
"Guidelines for Avoiding Impacts to the West Indian Manatee" (Appendix A).
RECEIVED
74
IAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
0CM WILMINGTON, NO

Marine mammals are highly vocal and dependent on sound for many ecological functions,
making them particularly susceptible to noise impacts. For example, manatees have been
shown to select grassbeds with lower ambient noise for frequencies below 1 kHz. Noise levels
within the nearshore environment will likely be elevated due to construction activities
associated with the placement of sand onto the receiving beaches. As stated above, however,
manatees do not commonly utilize the nearshore environment off North Carolina; therefore, it
is considered unlikely manatees will occur within much of the project area. Due to its rare
occurrence in the area, the nature of the proposed construction activities, and compliance with
the guidelines, the Status Quo Alternative is not likely to adversely impact the manatee.
Indirect Impacts: No indirect impacts are anticipated.
5.5.1.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
Direct Impacts: Direct impacts associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative would
be the same as those described above in Section 5.5.1.1. Operation of the privately -owned
dredge would also comply with the precautions outlined within the USFWS's "Guidelines for
Avoiding Impacts to the West Indian Manatee" (Appendix A). As such, due to its rare
occurrence in the area, the nature of the proposed construction activities, and compliance with
the guidelines, the Applicant's Preferred Alternative is not likely to adversely impact the
manatee.
Indirect Impacts: No indirect impacts are anticipated.
5.5.2 Sea Turtles
5.5.2.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative
Directlmpacts: Sea turtles utilize different habitats in different phases of their life cycle. While
sea turtles spend the vast majority of their life within the marine environment, they also utilize
the beach for nesting purposes. Navigation maintenance dredging and beach nourishment
activities, both part of the Status Quo Alternative, may lead to several effects on swimming
and nesting sea turtles. Dredging and sand placement activities occurring outside the typical
environmental windows recommended for sea turtles (November 16 through March 31 for
hopper dredges; November 16 through April 30 for cutterhead dredges) could exacerbate these
impacts as construction would coincide with warmer water temperatures and periods of
increased sea turtle activity within North Carolina waters and beaches.
As discussed in Section 4, swimming sea turtles are present seasonally within Pamlico Sound
and the nearshore waters surrounding Oregon Inlet; spending spring, summer and fall within
the sound and migrating out to the ocean in the winter. Therefore, there would be little to no
chance of encountering swimming sea turtles when dredging occurs in the cooler winter
months. When dredging occurs in the spring and summer, however, it is possible that
loggerhead, green and Kemp's ridley sea turtles would be present in the sound or migrating
into the sound via Oregon Inlet. RECEIVED
JAN 3 ® 2019
75
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. OCIVI WILMINGTON, NO

The risk of collision also depends upon the amount of time the animal remains near the surface
of the water (NMES, 2012). The greatest risk of collision would occur when the dredge is
transiting between the dredging areas and the nearshore pump -out locations. While vessel
collisions are a significant source of mortality for swimming sea turtles, it is assumed that
turtles are more likely to avoid slower moving vessels, such as dredges, due to a greater amount
of time to maneuver out of harm's way. Because there are no hardbottom areas that would
serve as sea turtle foraging habitat in proximity to the areas historically dredged under the
Status Quo Alternative, it is most likely any sea turtles present will be swimming in the water
column or on the surface to breathe rather than on the bottom foraging. This may increase the
chance of a collision; while at the same time reduce the potential for entrainment.
As described in the 1998 Biological Assessment (USACE, 1998), the special purpose dredges
use small, "California -style dragheads", and the sizes and suction power are less than that of
commercial hopper dredges. The California -style draghead has a large flat bottom that sits
level in the sand (Figure 21). The location of the intake is approximately 1 to 2 feet below the
sediment surface making it less likely to entrain turtles (Studt, 1987; USACE, 1990). The
dredge pumps on these vessels average 350 horsepower and draghead sizes range from
approximately 2' x 2' to 2' 3'. The draghead openings are further subdivided on their
undersides by gridded baffles with openings ranging from 5" x 5" to 5" x 8". The baffles restrict
the size of objects that can enter the dredge and even -out and direct the hydraulic forces during
dredging, allowing for maximum production with each dredge cut.
In 1998, field trials were performed to test the potential of special purpose dredges to take sea
turtles. Tests were run using a deceased green sea turtle (previously taken in the gill net fishery
and frozen) in three scenarios that incorporated impinging the sea turtle on the draghead while
the pumps were running 1) in the water column, 2) placed on the bottom, and 3) during active
dredging. In the first two scenarios, the suction was not strong and the turtle could be easily
prodded away from the draghead using a pole. The third scenario was considered the worst
case and resulted abrasions from being dragged along the bottom, but no fractures,
dislocations, or other physical damage was detected. It was therefore concluded that the low
suction forces attributed to these special purpose dredges would reduce the likelihood of
impinging a sea turtle. If a sea turtle were to become impinged accidentally, it would have
many opportunities to escape due to low suction forces and bottom irregularities (USACE,
1998).
.IAN 3 0 2019
76 0CM WILMINGTON, NO
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

California draghead
Figure 21. Representation of the California draghead. This drag head sits flat upon the bottom and the
location of the intake for sediment s approximately 1 to 2 feet below the sediment surface. (Schematic
from Studt,1987).
The slow speeds in which these special purpose dredges operate will also reduce the risk of in -
water collisions. In 1998, the Corps prepared aBiological Assessment (BA) assessing the year-
round use of the USACE dredge plant special purpose dredges and sidecast dredges on sea
turtles and other listed species. NMFS provided a Biological Opinion (BO) on March 9, 1999,
concluding that the year-round use of these dredge types in North Carolina's coastal inlets,
including Oregon Inlet, may affect, but is not likely to, adversely affect the continued existence
of these species "because of the slow speed of the vessels, the low suction levels inherent to
these small dredges, and the small size of the dragheads." The continuation of the Status Quo
Alternative will not introduce any new or different impacts for swimming sea turtles, therefore
the effect determination for loggerhead, green and Kemp's ridley sea turtles remains may
affect, not likely to adversely affect. Hawksbill and leatherback sea turtles have not been
recorded within Pamlico Sound, and both species have been documented to nest very rarely
along the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. Therefore, no effects are anticipated for hawksbill
or leatherback sea turtles.
In April 2008, the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) adopted State
Sediment Criteria Rule Language (15A NCAC 07H .0312) for borrow material aimed at
preventing the disposal of incompatible material on the beach. The only aspect of the Sediment
Criteria Language that applies for navigation projects, however, is the requirement that the
material being disposed must contain less than 10% silt. The material dredged from the ocean
bar and placed in the near shore waters of Pea Island or along the Bonner Bridge pilin IVSD
JAN 30 2019
77
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. 0CIVI WILMINGTON, NO

historically met these criteria and consequently reduces many of the potential impacts to
nesting and hatchling sea turtles.
Indirect Impacts: As discussed above, the seagrass resources near the areas historically
dredged under the Status Quo Alternative provide habitat and foraging opportunities for sea
turtles, particularly green sea turtles. Dredging near seagrass beds could pose adverse impacts
such as reduced light attenuation due to increased turbidity and TSS within the water column.
However, due to the distance of these resources from the historical areas dredged by the
USACE dredge fleet, no impacts to these important foraging areas would be expected.
When sand is placed along portions of Pea Island, benefits to endangered and threatened sea
turtles may be realized through the restoration of nesting habitat along the previously eroded
shoreline. Some studies have found no significant difference between nourished and non -
nourished beaches in the number of eggs per nest, as well as, hatching and emergence success
(Nelson et al., 1987; Ryder, 1991). Other projects have shown increased numbers of nests,
hatchlings, and survival rate of young turtles (Raymond, 1984). The widened beach along the
fill placement areas on Pea Island will indirectly benefit sea turtles since they require dry
beaches to nest, preferring to nest along wide sloping beaches or near the base of the dunes.
5.5.2.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
Direct Impacts: Dredging activities occurring outside the typical environmental windows
recommended for sea turtles (November 16 through March 31 for hopper dredges) could
exacerbate these impacts as construction would coincide with warmer water temperatures and
periods of increased sea turtle activity within North Carolina waters and beaches. As discussed
in Section 4, swimming sea turtles are present seasonally within Pamlico Sound and the
nearshore waters surrounding Oregon Inlet; spending spring, summer and fall within the sound
and migrating out to the ocean in the winter. Therefore, there would be little to no chance of
encountering swimming sea turtles when dredging occurs in the cooler winter months. When
dredging occurs in the spring and summer, however, it is possible that loggerhead, green and
Kemp's ridley sea turtles would be present in the sound or migrating into the sound via Oregon
Inlet.
The risk of collision also depends upon the amount of time the animal remains near the surface
of the water (NMFS, 2012). The greatest risk of collision would occur when the dredge is
transiting between the dredging areas and the nearshore pump -out locations offshore of Pea
Island and along the remaining pilings of the existing Bonner Bridge. While vessel collisions
are a significant source of mortality for swimming sea turtles, it is assumed that turtles are
more likely to avoid slower moving vessels, such as dredges, due to a greater amount of time
to maneuver out of harm's way. Because there are no hardbottom areas that would serve as sea
turtle foraging habitat in proximity to the areas historically dredged under the Applicant's
Preferred Alternative, it is most likely any sea turtles present will be swimming in the water
column or on the surface to breathe rather than on the bottom foraging. This may increase the
chance of a collision; while at the same time reduce the potential for entrainment.
11�,NI 9 0 2019
78
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. JCIVI WILMINGTON, NO

The specifications of the new privately owned dredge will mimic many of the specifications
included in the USACE's special purpose class of dredges. These specifications will reduce
the risk of in -water impacts to sea turtles. The low suction power and California style drag
head reduces the likelihood of impingement and it is hypothesized that live turtles would be
able to free themselves if they were impinged. The slow speeds that they operate will also
reduce the risk of in -water collisions. In 1998, the Corps prepared a Biological Assessment
(BA) assessing the year-round use of the USACE dredge plant special purpose dredges and
sidecast dredges on sea turtles and other listed species. NWS provided a Biological Opinion
(BO) on March 9, 1999, concluding that the year-round use of these dredge types in North
Carolina's coastal inlets, including Oregon Inlet, may affect but is not likely to adversely affect
the continued existence of these species. The implementation of the Applicant's Preferred
Alternative will not introduce any new or different impacts for swimming sea turtles, therefore
the effect determination for loggerhead, green and Kemp's ridley sea turtles remains may
affect, not likely to adversely affect. Hawksbill and leatherback sea turtles have not been
recorded within Pamlico Sound, and both species have been documented to nest very rarely
along the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. Therefore, no effects are anticipated for hawksbill
or leatherback sea turtles.
Indirect Impacts: As discussed above, the seagrass resources found in proximity to the
proposed dredge corridor provide habitat and foraging opportunities for sea turtles, particularly
green sea turtles. Dredging near seagrass beds could pose adverse impacts such as reduced
light attenuation due to increased turbidity and TS S within the water column. However, due to
the distance of these resources from the dredge corridor, no impacts to these important foraging
areas would be expected.
5.5.3 Shortnose Sturgeon
5.5.3.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative
Direct Impacts: Shortnose sturgeon spawning habitat lies upstream in inland rivers. There is
no such habitat within or near the areas historically dredged; therefore, dredging will not occur
within the typical spawning or foraging grounds for juvenile or spawning adult shortnose
sturgeon. As discussed in Section 4.5.3, historical capture data and recent telemetry studies
suggest this species presumably does not occur in the Pamlico Sound and the Oregon Inlet
area. Also, juvenile shortnose usually remain upstream of saline water until they reach about
45 cm (approximately 18 in) in length. That said and although highly unlikely, adult shortnose
sturgeon may be present in areas where dredging and sand disposal will occur. Encounters in
or near the dredge site would be most likely to occur in the winter and spring, after spawning
and the migrations to feeding areas in downstream estuarine waters (NMFS, 1999). These
individuals will be larger than 45 cm in length, which is too large to become entrained by the
small dragheads used on the special purpose and side cast dredges.
Telemetry studies show these fish may undergo alongshore migrations over substantial
distances in the nearshore waters of the Atlantic; therefore, it is possible one or more
individuals may migrate through or near the nearshore disposal area. Because of them
it is presumed these individuals would be capable of avoiding and out-maneuvering�e -
JAN 3 0 2019
79
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. DDM WILMINGTON, NC

moving dredges, greatly reducing any chances of collision or interaction with the dredge at the
disposal site.
The ocean environment may be affected by elevated turbidity levels resulting from mechanical
action of the draghead at the dredge site, as well as placement of sand at the nearshore disposal
site. In the case of a sidecast dredge, sediment re -suspension will also occur as the slurry is
discharged via the discharge pipe. In general, when sediment re -suspension occurs, larger
particles will likely settle out; however, the finer sediments will remain suspended for longer
periods, or even indefinitely in turbulent water (Adriaanse and Coosen, 1991). Suspended
particles may interfere with the biological functions of shortnose sturgeon including feeding,
respiration, reproduction and potentially cause predator avoidance. The areas historically
dredged by the USACE within Oregon Inlet, however, is generally composed of non -
contaminated sandy material with low organics and silt content; therefore, re -suspended
material is expected to settle out quickly and have no appreciable effects on the dissolved
oxygen, pH, or temperature. Additionally, the hydrodynamics of the inlet and the nearshore
environment allows adequate mixing with ocean water. Turbidity levels are not expected to
reach levels considered detrimental to shortnose sturgeon. This conclusion is consistent with
that reached in the 2004 USACE's FONSI for dredging within Oregon Inlet and the connecting
channels. Additionally, these fish are highly mobile and it is anticipated that they would avoid
the activity within the nearshore disposal area via minor alteration of migration routes. It is
therefore considered unlikely any shortnose sturgeon would be impacted by project activities.
For these reasons, it is determined that the potential impacts to shortnose sturgeon are
insignificant and extremely unlikely, and therefore the project activities may affect, but are not
likely to, adversely affect shortnose sturgeon. This determination is consistent with that of the
Biological Opinion for Use of Dredge Fry, Merritt, Schweizer and Currituck in coastal U.S.
Waters (NMFS, 1999).
Indirect Impacts: No indirect impacts are anticipated to the shortnose sturgeon.
5.5.3.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
Direct Impacts: As discussed above in Section 5.5.3.1, although it is highly unlikely, adult
shortnose sturgeon may be present in areas where dredging will occur under the Applicant's
Preferred Alternative. Encounters in or near the dredge site would be most likely to occur in
the winter and spring, after spawning and the migrations to feeding areas in downstream
estuarine waters (NMFS, 1999). These individuals will be larger than 45 cm in length, which
is too large to become entrained by the small dragheads used on yet -to -be -built special purpose
dredge. Furthermore, because of their mobility, it is presumed these individuals would be
capable of avoiding and out -maneuvering the slow-moving dredges, greatly reducing any
chances of collision or interaction with the dredge at the disposal sites.
For these reasons, it is determined that the potential impacts to shortnose sturgeon are
insignificant and extremely unlikely, and therefore the project activities may affect, but are not
likely to, adversely affect shortnose sturgeon. This determination is consistent with th%M6 E®
JAN 3 0 2019
80
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. 0CM WILMINGTON, NO

Biological Opinion for Use of Dredge Fry, Merritt, Schweizer and Currituck in coastal U.S.
Waters (NWS, 1999).
Indirect Impacts: No indirect impacts are anticipated to the shormose sturgeon.
5.5.4 Atlantic Sturgeon
5.5.4.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative
Direct Impacts: The areas historically maintained by dredging activity associated with the
Status Quo Alternative does not include suitable spawning grounds for the Atlantic sturgeon,
as the closest spawning grounds are located in the Tar -Pamlico and Roanoke rivers. However,
the presence of individuals in past tagging studies indicates at least a small presence within
Pamlico Sound. Because this species transits from riverine spawning habitat to the ocean, it is
possible for Atlantic sturgeon to migrate through Oregon Inlet. Atlantic sturgeon spend much
of their life history in the marine environment and can be found there year-round; therefore,
the possibility that this species may transit through or near the nearshore disposal area cannot
be ruled out.
The potential for Atlantic sturgeon to be present in the dredging area creates the possibility for
interactions with the dredge and draghead. Any Atlantic sturgeon passing through the inlet will
likely be subadults or adults, and will therefore be larger than 36 inches. The size and inherent
mobility of these individual should allow them to avoid approaching slow-moving dredges and
entrainment in the small dragheads. These conclusions are consistent with those made for
shormose sturgeon in the 1999 Biological Opinion regarding the use of special-purpose
dredges and sidecast dredges in U.S. Coastal waters (NMFS, 1999).
The water column within the estuary and nearshore ocean environment may be affected by
elevated turbidity levels resulting from placement of sand at the nearshore disposal site and
along the oceanfront shoreline at Pea Island. The mechanisms of these effects are discussed
previously for shortnose sturgeon in Section 5.5.3. Any increase in turbidity should be transient
and restricted to the area directly around the draghead, and within the nearshore environment.
The sediment that will be dredged and disposed is composed of a low percentage of fines. This
will allow suspended material to quickly settle out of the water column, and minimize the
potential for turbidity to reach levels considered detrimental to Atlantic sturgeon.
As is the case with shormose sturgeon, dredging and disposal activities will not occur near, or
pose any impacts to, spawning and juvenile Atlantic sturgeons. Although unlikely, the only
potential for interaction with this species would be adult individuals within, or migrating
through, the inlet and the disposal sites. The size and mobility of adult Atlantic sturgeon that
would occur in these areas makes it highly unlikely that any adverse impacts will occur. It is
therefore determined that the potential impacts to Atlantic sturgeon are insignificant and
unlikely to affect this species adversely. This determination is consistent with that of the
Biological Opinion of Use of Dredge Fry Merritt, Schweizer and Currituck in coastal U.S.
Waters (NMFS, 1999).
JAN 3 0 2019
at
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. OCM WILMINGTON, NC

Indirect Impacts: No indirect impacts are anticipated to the Atlantic sturgeon.
5.5.4.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
Direct Impacts: The dredging corridor, defined for the Applicant's Preferred Alternative, as
depicted in Figure 3, does not include suitable spawning grounds for the Atlantic sturgeon, as
the closest spawning grounds are located in the Tar -Pamlico and Roanoke rivers. However, the
presence of individuals in past tagging studies indicates at least a small presence within
Pamlico Sound. Because this species transits from riverine spawning habitat to the ocean, it is
possible for Atlantic sturgeon to migrate through Oregon Inlet. Atlantic sturgeon spend much
of their life history in the marine environment and can be found there year-round; therefore,
the possibility that this species may transit through or near the nearshore disposal area cannot
be ruled out.
The potential for Atlantic sturgeon to be present in the dredging area creates the possibility for
interactions with the dredge and draghead. Any Atlantic sturgeon passing through the inlet will
likely be subadults or adults, and will therefore be larger than 36 inches. The size and inherent
mobility of these individual should allow them to avoid approaching slow-moving dredges and
entrainment in the small dragheads. These conclusions are consistent with those made for
shortnose sturgeon in the 1999 Biological Opinion regarding the use of special-purpose
dredges and sidecast dredges in U.S. Coastal waters (NMF S, 1999).
The water column within the estuary and nearshore ocean environment may be affected by
elevated turbidity levels resulting from placement of sand at the nearshore disposal site and
along remaining bridge pilings at the Bonner Bridge. The mechanisms of these effects are
discussed previously for shortnose sturgeon in Section 5.5.3. Any increase in turbidity should
be transient and restricted to the area directly around the draghead and within the disposal
locations. The sediment that will be dredged and disposed will be generally composed of a low
percentage of fines. This will allow suspended material to quickly settle out of the water
column, and minimize the potential for turbidity to reach levels considered detrimental to
Atlantic sturgeon.
As is the case with shortnose sturgeon, dredging and disposal activities will not occur near
spawning and juvenile Atlantic sturgeons and therefore will not pose any impacts. Although
unlikely, the only potential for interaction with this species would be adult individuals within,
or migrating through, the inlet and the disposal sites. The size and mobility of adult Atlantic
sturgeon that would occur in these areas makes it highly unlikely that any adverse impacts will
occur. It is therefore determined that the potential impacts to Atlantic sturgeon are insignificant
and unlikely to affect this species adversely. This determination is consistent with that of the
Biological Opinion of Use of Dredge Fry Merritt, Schweizer and Currituck in coastal U.S.
Waters (NMFS, 1999).
Indirect Impacts: No indirect impacts are anticipated to the Atlantic sturgeon
JAN 3 0 2019
82 0CM WILMINGTON, NO
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

5.5.5 Giant Manta Ray
5.5.5.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative
Direct Impacts: The main threat to the giant manta is fishing, whether targeted or incidental.
Other threats, such as mooring line entanglement and boat strikes, can also wound manta rays,
decrease fitness, or contribute to non -natural mortality (Deakos et al. 2011). Because manta
rays are highly mobile and quite rare in the waters surrounding Oregon Inlet, it is very unlikely
that they would collide with a dredge. Therefore, no direct impacts to the giant manta ray are
anticipated.
Indirect Impacts: No indirect impacts to the giant manta ray would be anticipated under the
Status Quo Alternative.
5.5.5.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
Direct Impacts: The main threat to the giant manta is fishing, whether targeted or incidental.
Other threats, such as mooring line entanglement and boat strikes, can also wound manta rays,
decrease fitness, or contribute to non -natural mortality (Deakos et al. 2011). Because manta
rays are highly mobile and quite rare in the waters surrounding Oregon Inlet, it is very unlikely
that they would collide with a dredge. Therefore, no direct impacts to the giant manta ray are
anticipated.
Indirect Impacts: No indirect impacts to the giant manta ray would be anticipated under the
Status Quo Alternative.
5.6 Cultural Resources
5.6.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative
Direct Impacts: As described in Section 4.6, four terrestrial cultural resources or cultural
resource areas within the area of potential effects were identified in the 2008 EIS as either
listed on or eligible for inclusion in the NRNP. These include 1) Pea Island National Wildlife
Refuge; 2) the (former) Oregon Inlet US Coast Guard Station building (at the northern end of
Hatteras Island; 3) Rodanthe Historic District; and 4) the Chicamacomico Life Saving Station
(USDOT, 2008). Each of these four sites are terrestrial.
The nearshore disposal area off Pea Island results in the deposition of a relatively small amount
of material during each event. While not expected due to the lack of known shipwrecks in
proximity to the disposal area, burying shipwrecks is an acceptable method of preservation.
Based on this rationale, there would be no impacts to cultural resources as a result of nearshore
disposal. Sidecast dredging discharges do occur near the dredge areas. Similar to the disposal
of material in the nearshore environment, an addition of material to a dynamic aquatic
environment would not result in adverse impacts to cultural resources. RECEIVE®
JAN 3 ® 2019
83
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. 0CM WILMINGTON, NC

The North Carolina Division of Archives and History, Underwater Archaeology Branch
(NCDAHUAB), however, has documented the loss of approximately 96 vessels in the general
vicinity of Oregon Inlet and an additional 79 vessels within Pamlico Sound (USDOT, 2008).
Of these documented losses, four wrecks have been identified in proximity to the dredge and
disposal areas associated with the Status Quo Alternative. Three of the wrecks plotted on an
1849 US Coast Guard Survey Map are well north of these areas because of the southerly
migration of Oregon Inlet since its formation in 1846. The fourth wreck, plotted on NOAA
Navigation Chart No. 12204 (1975), appears to be the remains of an iron -hulled barge that
washed ashore in the early 1970s (USDOT, 2008). This wreck site is in Pamlico Sound
immediately west of Rodanthe which is considerably south of the areas where dredge or
disposal would occur. Furthermore, this wreck is a modern vessel, however, and is not
considered to be a significant submerged cultural resource. An early twentieth-century
windmill also was identified during a review of historic cartographic maps; however, the
windmill site is outside of the project area as well.
A magnetometer survey was performed by Dames and Moore (1979) within the Oregon Inlet
navigation channel. This survey revealed several anomalies. However, no ground truthing of
these targets have been performed. Background research revealed no known shipwrecks;
however, NCDOT, FHWA, and representatives of the SHPO worked cooperatively to develop
a scope of work for a remote sensing survey for underwater resources in the area that would
likely be disturbed by the construction of Bonner Bridge replacement project that is currently
underway. In February 1993, the remote sensing survey was performed, but excluded those
areas that have been dredged in the past. The results of the remote sensing survey revealed 41
anomalies, of which three were considered high priority (two near the northern end of Bonner
Bridge, and one near the southern end of Bonner Bridge), requiring investigations if not
avoided. The SHPO concurred with this assessment in a letter dated May 23, 1993 (USDOT
2008). In October 1995, an underwater investigation of these three anomalies was conducted.
A brief magnetometer survey was conducted to confirm and refine each location and visual
inspections were conducted. The anomalies in the northern area were also investigated using
subbottom probes. This investigation revealed that the source objects for the anomalies of the
two clusters at the north end of the bridge either lie more than 10 feet below bottom or were
too small to be located within the patterns of sub -bottom probing. It is, therefore, reasonable
to conclude that no substantial shipwreck remains exist within 10 feet of the bottom in this
area. The anomaly cluster at the south end of the bridge consisted of three anomalies. A
pipeline discovered during the diving investigation has characteristics indicating modern origin
and, apparently, is the source object for two of the three anomalies. The third anomaly,
indicative of an isolated single -source object, has significantly reduced potential for
representing a shipwreck. Based on the results of this investigation, it is concluded that no
shipwrecks exist in this area. The SHPO concurred with this finding in a letter dated June 5,
1996 (USDOT, 2008). In summary, the 2008 EIS drafted to support the Bonner Bridge
replacement effort concluded, "The North Carolina Office of State Archaeology site files
contain no record of terrestrial or submerged cultural resources in the Bonner Bridge project
area and the associated APE". The domain of the area assessed by the NC Office of State
Archaeology is inclusive of the dredge and disposal areas associated with the Status Quo
Alternative.
RECEIVE®
JAN 3 0 2019
84
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. 0CM WILMINGTON, NC

During the development of the 2004 EA entitled, "Use of Government Plant to Dredge in
Federally Authorized Navigation Projects in North Carolina", the Wilmington District and the
NC Division of Archives and History evaluated a number of inlets, including Oregon Inlet, for
potential impacts to cultural resources as a result of dredging and nearshore dredged material
disposal. These initial studies included dredged and nearshore disposal areas associated with
the Status Quo Alternative, and considered potential cultural resource impacts to the authorized
project depth. The federally maintained channels in the inlet areas assessed in the 2004 EA
follow existing deep water. The deep water shifts locations within these inlet areas routinely.
Numerous shipwrecks lie within and just offshore of these inlets, and shifting channels are
known to routinely cross shipwreck sites. Dredging a shoal in these channels could result in
damage to the shipwreck in addition to damage to the dredge. The North Carolina Department
of Cultural Resources (NCDCR) consulted with the USACE during the development of the
2004 EA and by a letter dated September 9, 2003, NCDCR requested the development of a
Programmatic Agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act,
for an inlet monitoring program to better avoid historical shipwrecks in the shifting inlets. The
Programmatic Agreement was developed and includes updated inlet and disposal area
mapping, periodic resurveys of known sensitive areas, and a monitoring plan.
Based on the nature and locations of the dredge and disposal activities under the Status Quo
Alternative, no impacts to cultural resources are anticipated.
Indirect Impacts: No direct impacts to cultural resources are anticipated.
5.6.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
Direct Impacts: Based on the similar nature and locations of the dredge and disposal activities
the Applicant's Preferred Alternative to the Status Quo Alternative, the impacts would be the
same as described above under Section 5.6.1. No direct impacts to cultural resources would
be anticipated.
Indirect Impacts: No direct impacts to cultural resources are anticipated.
5.7 Socioeconomic Resources
5.7.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative
Direct Impacts: The cost of maintaining the maintenance dredging operations between 1995
and 2015 is depicted in Figure 9. On an annual basis, the costs range from approximately $2M
to $16M (however, the $16M cost in 2009 was an anomaly associated with special funding
provided by the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act). Excluding 2009, the average cost
of maintenance dredging between 1995 and 2015 for the Oregon Inlet project (expressed in
2018 price levels) was $6,525,000/year. Daily operating costs for the Currituck averages
around $16,200/day while the Murden costs approximately $19,200/day.
Indirect Impacts: The continuation of the ongoing dredging and disposal activities associated
with the Status Quo Alternative will allow for safe navigation through Oregon Inlet d_t} J 6VE®
85 JAN 3 a 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
CCM WILMINGTON, NO

much of the year. There are times, however, when navigation will remain unpassable due to
rapid shoaling rates in proximity to the navigation span or along the ocean bar. As stated in
Section 4.7, under recent conditions at Oregon Inlet where the UASCE, Dare County, and the
State continue to perform maintenance dredging on a regular basis, five business sectors
composed of commercial fishing, seafood packing/processing, boat building and support
services, recreational fishing, and tournament fishing contribute an economic impact of $403.5
million in revenues while supporting 3,319 jobs in Dare County (Dumas, 2014). When
incorporating nearby counties including Dare, Currituck, Camden, Pasquotank, Perquimans,
Tyrell, and Hyde, the regional economic impact of the inlet amounts to $423.3 million while
supporting 3,601 jobs. At a larger scale, the study cites an overall statewide economic impact
of $548.4 million and 4,348 jobs (Dumas, 2014).
5.7.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
Direct Impacts: The State will be providing a $15M forgivable loan to builder/operator of the
new special purpose dredge. In return, the new dredge will provide maintenance dredging over
a 10 -year period at a discounted rate that is intended to offset the expense of the $15M loan.
Therefore, in essence, the economic impact of assisting with the financing of the new dredge
will be neutral to the State.
Once the dredge is constructed, it will operate in the waters of Oregon Inlet and its connecting
channels and will supplement the continuing maintenance efforts performed by the USACE
dredge fleet. As stated above in Section 5.7.1, the historical cost associated with maintaining
the inlet has averaged $6,525,000/year between 1995 and 2015 (excluding 2009 when ARRA
funds were applied and increased spending anomalously). Upon completion of the
replacement bridge across Oregon Inlet and the demolition of the existing bridge, maintenance
dredge practices are expected to change in Oregon Inlet. Due to the relatively large navigation
spans under the new bridge, dredging will likely focus more on following best water rather
than maintaining the existing channel through the current navigation span. No detailed
modeling of Oregon Inlet to determine changes in maintenance needs given the new bridge
configuration have been conducted by the USACE. It is expected that revenue streams for the
USACE maintenance of Oregon Inlet will stay the same after the replacement bridge is
completed and the old bridge is demolished and therefore some of the funds that would have
been spent on maintaining the channel near the navigation span could be spent on maintaining
the ocean bar. The addition of the privately owned dredge for maintenance dredging operations
within Oregon Inlet may require additional funding by the State and Dare County. However,
the presence of an additional dredge will expand the dredge plant capacity to maintain Oregon
Inlet more frequently than is currently possible with the existing dredge plants. The additional
cost required for the increased channel maintenance cannot be determined at this time as it is
not yet known.
Although there is an expected increase in cost to perform maintenance dredging within Oregon
Inlet, the economic return associated maintaining navigability through the inlet on a more
frequent basis will outweigh the costs. As stated above in Section 5.7.1, under current
conditions, the five main business sectors that rely on safe passage through Oregon Inlet
contributes an economic impact of $403.5 million in revenues while supporting 3,319CWIVED
86 JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
nr,N,l tMILMINGTAN, NO

Dare County. When incorporating nearby counties including Dare, Currituck, Camden,
Pasquotank, Perquimans, Tyrell, and Hyde, the regional economic impact of the inlet amounts
to $423.3 million while supporting 3,601 jobs. At a larger scale, the study cites an overall
statewide economic impact of $548.4 million and 4,348 jobs. If, however, the inlet were to be
navigable throughout the entire year, the Dumas et. al (2014) economic study stated that these
business sectors could potentially provide a total annual economic impact of 5,120 jobs and
$642.2 million to Dare County, 5,590 jobs and $678.4 million to the region, and 5,397 jobs
and $693.0 million to the State of North Carolina. While the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
may not result in safe navigability through Oregon Inlet throughout the entire year, it can be
inferred that the additional days that the inlet remains passible would in turn boost the impact
to the local, regional, and state economies.
Indirect Impacts: No direct impacts to cultural resources are anticipated.
5.8 Recreational Resources
5.8.1 Impacts Associated with the Status Quo Alternative
Direct Impacts: Recreational activities that do not rely on navigability through Oregon Inlet
(such as surf fishing, swimming, surfing, and bird watching) will not be impacted by the Status
Quo Alternative. Offshore recreational fishing, however, does rely on the ability to access the
ocean through Oregon Inlet. Therefore, when the inlet is not passible due to the USACE's
dredge fleet's inability to maintain navigability regularly, recreational fishing may be
impacted.
Indirect Impacts: No direct impacts to recreational resources are anticipated.
5.8.2 Impacts Associated with the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
Direct Impacts: The addition of the new privately owned special purpose dredge will result in
an increased number of days of safe navigability through Oregon Inlet due to the increased
dredge plant capacity when combining the USACE current capacity with this additional
dredge. With the increase in dredge capacity, recreational opportunities such as offshore
recreational fishing will be positively impacted. Recreational activities that do not rely on
navigability through Oregon Inlet (such as surf fishing, swimming, surfing, and bird watching),
however, will not be impacted by this alternative.
Indirect Impacts: No direct impacts to recreational resources are anticipated.
6 Cumulative Impacts
The Council of Environmental Quality defines cumulative impacts as:
"The impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the
Permit when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future Permits
regardless of what agency (Federal or non -Federal) or person undertakes sucVED
87 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
DOM WILMINGTON, NO

Permits. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively
significant Permits taking place over a period of time." (NEPA 40 CFR 1508.7)
Cumulative impacts maybe temporal (e.g. time crowding or time lagging) or spatial (e.g. space
crowding, cross -boundary, or fragmentation). The likelihood that multiple projects will occur
throughout the geographic extent of this cumulative impact analysis (the entire Outer Banks)
contributes to time -crowded and space -crowded cumulative effects. A number of federal and
non-federal channel maintenance projects that include dredging and disposal of material within
the inshore waters of the Outer Banks have been previously authorized and permitted (Table
7). These projects occur on an as -needed basis and when adequate funding is made available.
The USACE operates its fleet of sidecast and special purpose dredges including the Currituck,
Murden, and Merritt. The NCDOT operates its cutter suction pipeline dredge the Manteo.
Collectively, the channel maintenance projects that have occurred in the past and will most
likely be conducted in the foreseeable future have been included in the assessment of
cumulative impacts related to the proposed project of operating a new special purpose dredge
within Oregon Inlet and its connecting channels.
Table 7. Proposed federal state channel maintenance projects within the Outer Banks
Pro'ect Location
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway
Oregon Inlet Bar
Oregon Inlet Bridge
Oregon Inlet West of Bridge
Old House Channel
Manteo-Shallowba Ba
Croatan Sound
Rollinson Channel
Hatteras Ferry Connecting Channel
Hatteras to Ocracoke Ferry Channel
Stumpy Point
Swanquarter
Rodanthe Harbor
Ocracoke Inlet
Teaches Hole
Silver Lake Harbor
Big Foot Slou
Wanchese Inner Harbor
Far Creek
Wainwright Slough
Avon Harbor
Currituck/Knotts Island
Manns Harbor Shipyard Entrance Channel
Hatteras Ferry Terminal
Ocracoke North (Southdock)
6.1 Water Quality
Some of the ongoing channel maintenance projects in the Outer Banks, particularly those
located far from an oceanic inlet occur in areas where the dredged material contains rela*i&EIVE®
88 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
kO4'.4tP 1AIIILMINGT®N, NO

higher silt levels that can lead to a longer duration of elevated turbidity. When sediment re-
suspension occurs as a result of dredging activity, larger particles rapidly settle out; however,
the finer sediments will remain suspended for longer periods, or even indefinitely in turbulent
water (Adriaanse and Coosen, 1991). Suspended particles may interfere with the biological
functions of some organisms such as feeding, respiration, reproduction and potentially cause
predator avoidance. High turbidity and silt loads can have detrimental impacts to filter feeding
organisms associated with nearshore benthic communities including amphipods, isopods,
decapods, polychaetes, mollusks and others. The conditions of diminished light penetration
can detrimentally affect the photosynthetic activity of phytoplankton, the primary producers of
energy production.
The areas to be dredged within the confines of Oregon Inlet and its connecting channels,
however, are generally comprised of relatively coarse grain sand with a low percentage of fine
material. As a result, sediment plumes generated from dredging the areas within the proposed
dredge corridor and disposal in the nearshore disposal area are generally short-lived,
measurable on a scale of thousands of meters, and not considered a source of concern (Michel
et al., 2014). For the proposed project, the dredging and disposal of this material will limit the
amount of turbidity created within the areas where channel maintenance activity will occur.
There are no long-term adverse impacts to water quality anticipated from the Applicant's
Preferred Alternative and, therefore, cumulative impacts associated with turbidity and
degraded water quality are not anticipated.
6.2 Air Quality
It can be assumed that insignificant additions of greenhouse gases will be emitted from dredge
and construction equipment. There are no long-term adverse impacts to air quality anticipated
for the proposed project. As a result, the project will not contribute to cumulative impacts to
air quality in the Outer Banks.
6.3 Noise
There are many sources of sound in the marine and estuarine environments, and sound
produced in one location can perpetuate for long distances, reaching areas many miles from
the source. Within the project area, the most likely sound sources include noise from
commercial and recreational fishing vessels transiting the inlet and dredging operations.
Although the hearing thresholds for many aquatic organisms are unknown, it has been
determined that dredging noise from comparable dredges of the one being proposed for this
project, overlaps the hearing spectrum for baleen whales (which are not found within the
project area) and possibly sea turtles. Although increased noise levels from the utilization of a
new special purpose dredge are not likely to cause injury and only occur during operations,
and therefore temporary, the cumulative impact of many sources of marine noise within
Oregon Inlet may continue to mask biologically important sounds for these and other marine
and estuarine animals.
JAN 3 0 2019
89
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. UCM WILMINGTON, NO

6.4 Essential Fish Habitat
Dredging activity has the potential to impact a number of managed species and their associated
essential fish habitat. However, due to the limited geographic scope of the proposed additional
dredging activities planned and in the foreseeable future, no cumulative impacts to these
resources are anticipated.
6.5 Threatened and Endangered Species
6.5.1 West Indian Manatee
The greatest threat to manatees is watercraft strikes, and these collisions can be expected to
continue in the future. The addition of the new privately owned special purpose dredge into
the fleet of dredged operating within the Outer Banks will increase the likelihood of
interactions with vessels. However, the dredges used for these maintenance projects operate
at very slow speeds, thereby reducing the collision risk with manatees. In addition, the dredge
operators will adhere to the Guidelines for Avoiding Impacts to the West Indian Manatee. For
these reasons, including the fact that that manatees reportedly do not frequent the project area,
cumulative effects are not expected.
6.5.2 Sea Turtles
No upland work is associated with the operation of a privately owned special purpose dredge
and, therefore there will be no cumulative impacts to nesting sea turtles. Activities that
cumulatively threaten the survival of all sea turtle species in the marine environment include,
but are not limited to, mortality or injury from fisheries by -catch, vessel strikes, marine debris
ingestion or entanglement, and environmental contamination and disease. The slow speeds in
which the new dredge will operate will reduce the risk of in -water collisions. The 1998 USACE
BA assessed the year-round use of the USACE dredge plant special purpose dredges and
sidecast dredges on sea turtles and other listed species. NMFS's subsequent BO issued in 1999
concluded that the year-round use of these dredge types in North Carolina's coastal inlets,
including Oregon Inlet, may affect, but is not likely to, adversely affect the continued existence
of these species. Because design aspects of the new privately owned special purpose dredge's
draghead will conform to those included in the USACE's special purpose dredges, the risk of
impingement will be considerably reduced. The small "California -style draghead" utilizes
reduced suction power compared to standard commercial hopper dredges while the location of
the intake is approximately 1 to 2 feet below the sediment surface making it less likely to
entrain turtles (Studt, 1987; USACE, 1990). The dredge pumps on these vessels average 350
horsepower and draghead sizes range from approximately 2' x 2' to 2' 3'. The draghead
openings are further subdivided on their undersides by gridded baffles with openings ranging
from 5" x 5" to 5" x 8". The baffles restrict the size of objects that can enter the dredge and
even -out and direct the hydraulic forces during dredging, allowing for maximum production
with each dredge cut. The 1999 BO issued by NMFS consultation stated that their findings of
"may affect but is not likely to adversely affect" was to be valid for the operation by
Wilmington District Corps of Engineers for channel maintenance dredging "of up to 10 vessels
of this or similar type and size class (under 500 gross tons), with similar dragheads (BrutxG &VED
90 JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
L)CM 9NII_MINGTAN, NC

Brunswick County Type, Brunswick Adjustable, or equivalent), dredge pump horsepower (400
H.P. maximwn), and suction and discharge pipe specifications ( dredge suction pipes 10-14
inches in diameter, and combined discharge pipe 12-16 inches in diameter)". For these
reasons, no cumulative impacts are anticipated.
6.5.3 Shortnose Sturgeon
Although it is possible for shortnose sturgeon to pass through the project area during
migrations, there is no available data that indicates species abundance in the region.
Furthermore, there is no proximate spawning habitat. For that reason and for the same reasons
described above for sea turtles in Section 6.5.2, no cumulative impacts to shortnose sturgeon
are anticipated.
6.5.4 Atlantic Sturgeon
Although it is possible for Atlantic sturgeon to pass through the proj ect area during migrations,
there is no available data that indicates species abundance in the region. Furthermore, there is
no proximate spawning habitat. For that reason and for the same reasons described above for
sea turtles in Section 6.5.2, no cumulative impacts to Atlantic sturgeon are anticipated.
6.5.5 Giant Manta Ray
The occurrences of giant manta rays within the project area are quite rare. For that reason and
for the same reasons described above for sea turtles in Section 6.5.2, no cumulative impacts to
giant manta rays are anticipated.
6.6 Cultural Resources
Because no cultural resources are anticipated to be impacted by the utilization of the new
privately owned special purpose dredge, no cumulative impacts would be expected.
6.7 Socioeconomic Resources
The cumulative effect of the proposed action as it relates to the Applicant's Preferred
Alternative would result in an increase in overall channel maintenance spending by Dare
County and the State. However, should the maintenance dredging performed by the new
privately owned dredge within Oregon Inlet result in an increased number of days that the inlet
remains navigable, positive economic impacts could be realized. If the inlet were to be
navigable throughout the entire year, the Dumas et. al (2014) economic study stated that these
business sectors could potentially provide a total annual economic impact of 5,120 jobs and
$642.2 million to Dare County, 5,590 jobs and $678.4 million to the region, and 5,397 jobs
and $693.0 million to the state of North Carolina. Although the addition of the new privately
owned special purpose dredge is not likely to maintain the inlet's navigability 100% of the
year, it is expected to increase the navigability significantly leading to a positive economic
impact on a cumulative basis.
,JAN 3 ® 2019
91
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. NCM WILMINGTON, NC

6.8 Recreational Resources
Should the use of the new privately owned special purpose dredge result in an increased
number of days of safe navigability through Oregon Inlet, recreational opportunities such as
offshore recreational fishing will result in beneficial cumulative impacts. Recreational
activities that do not rely on navigability through Oregon Inlet (such as surf fishing, swimming,
surfing, and bird watching), however, will not be impacted by this alternative.
CONSERVATION AND MONITORING MEASURES
The following describes actions and measures incorporated into the design and implementation
of the Applicant's Preferred Alternative to avoid and minimize direct, indirect and cumulative
effects to the resources found within the Project Area and the species that utilize it.
7.1 Construction Practices
The dredging activity will be limited to the area within the dredging corridor as shown above
in Figure 3. This corridor was developed with several factors in mind, including the desire to
avoid impacts to SAV and shellfish resources. In order to reduce potential affects to these
resources, a 100 ft. buffer will be imposed around any SAV or shellfish bed identified within
the dredge corridor and no dredging will be permitted within this buffer.
7.2 Dredge Design Specifications
In order to minimize the risk of impacts to any threatened or endangered species, the
construction of the new privately owned dredge comply with specifications that were included
with the design of the USACE's special purpose dredges. These specifications include:
• Brunswick, Brunswick County Type, Brunswick Adjustable, or equivalent dragheads
• Draghead suction produced by use of dredge pumps averaging 350 -horsepower, with
a maximum horsepower of 400D
• Draghead sizes range from approximately 2 feet by 2 feet to 2 feet by 3 feet
• Draghead openings are include gridded baffles with openings ranging from 5 inches
by 5 inches to 5 inches by 8 inches
• Suction pipes 10-14" diameter
• Discharge pipes 12-16" diameter
The 1999 BO issued by NMFS states that the special purpose dredges that include the
specifications described above are not required to operate with sea turtle deflectors on the
dragheads nor is screening or observers required. The new privately owned hopper dredge will
abide by the same standards.
RECEIVED
JAN 3 ® 2019
92
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. UCM WILMINGTON, NO

LITERATURE CITED
Adriannse, L.A. and J. Coosen. 1991. Beach and Dune Nourishment and Environmental
Aspects. Coastal Engineering 16:129-146.
Ackermann, R. A. 1996. The nest environment and the embryonic development of sea turtles.
In: P. L. Lutz and J. A. Musick (eds.). The Biology of Sea Turtles. CRC Press, Boca Raton,
Florida. pp. 83-106.
Anchor Environmental CA, L.P., Los Angeles Contaminated Sediments Task Force, and
California Coastal Commission. 2003. Literature review of effects of resuspended sediments
due to dredging operations. Los Angeles Contaminated Sediments Task Force. 87 pp +
Appendices.
Andre, M., M. Sole, M. Lenoir, M. Durfort, C. Quero, A. Mas, A. Lombarte, M. van der Schaar,
M. Lopez-Bejar, M. Morell, S. Zaugg, L. Houegnigan. 2011. Low -frequency sounds induce
acoustic trauma in cephalopods. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 9(9): 489-493.
Angley, Wilson, 1985. An historical overview of Oregon Met. N.C. DAH, Raleigh.
ASMFC. 2013. Addendum I to Amendment 2 to the Red Drum Fishery Management Plan:
Habitat Needs & Concerns.
ASMFC. 2016. Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission- Submerged Aquatic Vegetation.
Online at: http://www. asmfc.orWhabitat/hot-tonics#SAV . Accessed: November 2, 2018.
Atlantic Sturgeon Status Review Team. 2007. Status Review of Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser
oxyrinchus oxyrinchus). Report to National Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Regional
Office. February 23, 2007. 174 pp.
Bain, M. B. 1997. Atlantic and shortnose sturgeons of the Hudson River: Common and
divergent life history attributes. Environmental Biology of Fishes 48(1-4): 347-358.
Braun -McNeill, J., Epperly, S.P., Avers, L., Snover, M.L., Taylor, J.C., 2008. Growth rates of
loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta) from the western North Atlantic. Herpetol. Conserv.
Biol. 3, 273-281.
Brock, K.A., J.S. Reese, L.M. Ehrhart. 2008. The effects of artificial beach nourishment on
marine turtles: differences between loggerhead and green turtles. Restoration Ecology. 17(2):
297-307.
Broderick, A.C., Godley, B.J., and Hays, G.C. 2001. Metabolic heating and the prediction of
sex ratios for green turtles (Chelonia mydas). Physiological and Biochemical Zoology
����
161-170.
93 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
OCM WILMINGTON, NC

Burlas, M., D.G. Clarke, G.L. Ray, and D.H. Wilber. 2002. Biological monitoring of beach
nourishment operations in northern New Jersey, USA: Linkages between benthic in fauna and
higher trophic levels. Dredging '02: Key Technologies for Global Prosperity. Proceedings of
3rd Specialty Conference on Dredging and Dredged Material, May 5-8, 2002, Orlando,
Florida. American Society of Civil Engineers.
Burton, W. H., S. B. Weisberg, A. Brindley, and J. A. Gurley, 1992. Early life stage survival
of striped bass in the Delaware River. USA. Archives for Environmental Contamination and
Toxicology 23:333-338.
Carriker, M. R., LaSalle, M. W., Mann, R., and Pritchard, D. W. 1986. Entrainment of oyster
larvae by hydraulic cutterhead dredging operations: Workshop conclusions and
recommendations. American Malacological Bulletin. Special Edition No. 3, pp 71-74.
CEDA (Central Dredging Association). 2011. "Underwater sound in relation to dredging".
Central Dredging Association Position Paper, Prepared by the CEDA Working Group on
Underwater Sound under the remit of the CEDA Environment Commission. Available at:
www.dredgingtoday.org/news details. asp
Cione, J. J., S. Raman, and L. J. Pietrafesa, 1993: The effect of Gulf Stream -induced
baroclinicity on the U.S. east coast winter cyclones. Mon. Wea. Rev., 121, 421-430.
Clarke, D., Dickerson, C., and K. Reine 2002. "Characterization of underwater sounds
produced by dredges. Dredging 2002, ASCE, Orlando, Florida, USA, p 64-81.
Coles W, Musick JA. 2000. Satellite sea surface temperature analysis and correlation with sea
turtle distribution oV North Carolina. Copeia 2000(2):551-554.
Collins, M. R., and T. I. J. Smith. 1997. Distributions of shortnose and Atlantic sturgeons in
South Carolina. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 17:995-1000.
CPE -NC. 2012. Conceptual Evaluation of Improvements to Oregon Inlet, North Carolina.
Submitted to: Oregon Inlet Users Association.
Crain, D.A., Bolten, A.B., and Bjorndal, K.A., 1995. Effects of beach nourishment on sea
turtles: review and research initiatives, Restoration Ecology, p. 3, 2, 95-104.
CSA International, Inc., Applied Coastal Research and Engineering, Inc., Barry A. Vittor &
Associates, Inc., C.F. Bean, L.L.C., and Florida Institute of Technology. 2009. Analysis of
Potential Biological and Physical Impacts of Dredging on Offshore Ridge and Shoal Features.
Prepared by CSA International, Inc. in cooperation with Applied Coastal Research and
Engineering, Inc., Barry A. Vittor & Associates, Inc., C.F. Bean, L.L.C., and the Florida
Institute of Technology for the U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management ED
JAN 3 0 2019
94
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. OCC WILMINGTON, NO

Leasing Division, Marine Minerals Branch, Herndon, VA. OCS Study MMS 2010-010. 160
pp. + apps.
Cummings, E.W., DA. Pabts, J.E. Blum, S.G. Barco, S.J. Davis, V.G. Thayer, N. Adimey, and
W.A. McLellan. 2014. Spatial and Temporal Patterns of habitat use and mortality of the Florida
manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris) in the Mid -Atlantic States of North Carolina and
Virginia from 1991 — 2012. Aquatic mammals 40(2): 126-139.
Cushing, D.H. 1988. The study of stock and recruitment. In: Fish Population Dynamics
(Second Edition). Edited by J.A. Guliand. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.
Dadswell. M.J., B.D. Taubert, T.W. Squiers, D. Marchette, J. Buckley. 1984. Status of the
shortnose sturgeon, Acipenser brevirostrum, in Canada. Canadian Field -Naturalist 98:75-79.
Dare County. 2018. Planning Department- Grants and Waterways. Online at:
https://www.darenc.com/departments/planningigrants-waterways/oregon-inlet. Accessed:
October 15, 2018.
Dames and Moore, 1979, Final report, geotechnical investigation, route selection study,
Richmond Transport Service, San Francisco, California: San Francisco, California, Dames and
Moore, Consulting Engineers, 57 p.
Deakos, M.H., J.D. Baker, L. Bej der. 2011. Characteristics of a manta ray Manta alf edi
population off Maui, Hawaii, and implications for management. Marine Ecology Progress
Series, 429 (2011), pp. 245-260.
Deaton, A.S., W.S. Chappell, K. Hart, J. O'Neal, and B. Boutin. 2010. North Carolina Coastal
Habitat Protection Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
Division of Marine Fisheries, Morehead City, NC. 639 pp.
Dew, C.B and J.H. Hecht. 1994. Recruitment, Growth, Mortality, and Biomass Production of
Larval and Early Juvenile Atlantic Tomcod in the Hudson River Estuary. Transactions of the
American Fisheries Society. Volume 123. September 1994. Number 5. Pp. 681-702.
Discovery of Sound in the Sea. 2018. How does shipping affect ocean sound levels? Online
at: https://dosits.org/. Accessed: October 22, 2018.
Dumas, Christopher F., John Whitehead, Craig Landry. 2014. A study of the economic impacts
of Oregon Inlet Navigability to Dare County, the Surrounding Region, and the state of North
Carolina. With: Moffatt & Nichol, Inc., Raleigh, NC. 240 pp.
EJE Recycling. 2018, Oregon Inlet & NC Waterways Dredging Plan, April 2018.
Epperly, S.P., J. Braun, and A. Veishlow. 1995. Sea turtles in North Carolina waters.
Conservation Biology. 9(2): 384-394. RECEIVED
JAN 3 ® 2019
95
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. DCC WILMINGTON, NC

Garcia -Rodriguez, A.I.; Bowen, B.W.; Donning, D.; Mignucci-Giannoni, A.A.; Marmontel,
M.; Montoya-Ospina, R.A.; Morales -Vela, B.; Rudin, M.; Bonde, R.K., and Mcguire, P.M.
(1998). Phylogeography of the West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus): how many
populations and how many taxa? Molecular Ecology 7(9),1137-1149.
Greene, K., 2002. 'Beach nourishment: A review of the biological and physical impacts,"
ASMFC Habitat Management Series 47. Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission,
Washington DC 174 pp.
Griffin DB, Murphy SR, Frick MG, Broderick AC, Coker JW, Coyne MS, Dodd MG, Godfrey
MH, Godley BJ, Hawkes LA, Murphy TM, Williams KL, Witt MJ. 2013. Foraging habitats
and migration corridors utilized by a recovering subpopulation of adult female loggerhead sea
turtles: implications for conservation. Mar Biol 160:3071-3086.
Hildebrand, J.A. 2009. Anthropogenic and natural sources of ambient noise in the ocean.
Marine Ecology Progress Series 395:5-20.
Hitchcock, D.R., R.C. Newell, and L.J. Seiderer. 1999. Marine aggregate mining benthic and
surface plume study. Report for the U.S. Department of the Interior, Mineral Management
Service. Coastline Surveys Ltd., Gloucestershire, UK.
Holland, B.F., Jr. and G.F. Yelverton. 1973. Distribution and biological studies of anadromous
fishes offshore North Carolina. North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic
Resources, 368 Division of Commercial and Sports Fisheries, Morehead City, Special
Scientific Report 24:1-132.
Hughes, A.L. and E.A. Caine. 1994. The effect of beach features on hatchling loggerhead sea
turtles. Proceedings of the 14th Annual Symposium on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation.
Hilton Head, South Carolina, p. 237.
Humphrey, S.R. 1992. Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida, Volume I. Mammals: 190-198.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2013: Summary for policymakers. In:
Climate change 2013: The physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
Keiffer, M.C. and B. Kynard. 1993. Annual movements of shortnose and Atlantic sturgeons in
the Merrimack River, Massachusetts. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 122(6):
1088-1103.
Kynard B., M. Horgan, M. Kieffer, and D. Seibel. 2000. Habitats used by shortnose sturgeon
in two Massachusetts rivers. Transaction of the American Fisheries Society 129: 487-503.
JAN 3 0 2019
96
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. 0CM WILMINGTON, NC

Laist, D.W., C. Taylor, and J.E. Reynolds III. 2013. Winter habitat preferences for Florida
manatees and vulnerability to cold. PLOS/one 8(3): e57978
doi:10.13 71/j ournal.pone.0057978.
Laney, R. W., J. E. Hightower, B. R. Versak, M. F. Mangold, W. W. Cole Jr., and S. E.
Winslow. 2007. Distribution, habitat use, and size of Atlantic sturgeon captured during
cooperative winter tagging cruises, 1988-2006. In Anadromous sturgeons: habitats, threats,
and management (J. Munro, D. Hatin, J. E. Hightower, K. McKown, K. J. Sulak, A. W. Kahnle,
and F. Caron, eds.) p. 167-182. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp. 56, Bethesda, MD.
LaSalle, M.W., D.G. Clarke, J. Homziak, J.D. Lunz, T.J. Fradette. 1991. A framework for
assessing the need for seasonal restrictions on dredging and disposal operations. Technical
Report D-91-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Lefebvre, L.W. M. Marmontel, J.P. Reid, G.B. Rathbun, and D.P. Domning. 2001. Status and
biogeography of the West Indian manatee. Pages 425-474 in C.A. Woods and F.E. Sergile,
Editors. Biogeography of the West Indies: Patterns and Perspectives. CRC Press, Boca Raton,
FL. 582 pp.
Lorne, J.K. and M. Salmon. 2007. Effects of exposure to artificial lighting on orientation of
hatchling sea turtles on the beach and in the ocean. Endangered Species Research 3: 23-30.
Lund, W.A. Jr. and G.C. Maltezos. 1970. Movements and migrations of the bluefish
(Pomatomus saltairix) tagged in waters of New York and southern New England. Trans. Am.
Fish, Soc. 99(4):719-725.
Lutcavage M. E., Plotkin P, Witherington B. & Lutz P. L. 1997 - Human Impacts on Sea
Turtle Survival, pp. 387-409. In: Lutz P. L. & J. A: Musick (eds.), The Biology of Sea Turtle.
CRC Press.
MAFMC (Mid -Atlantic Fisheries Management Council). 2018. Fishery Management Plans &
Amendments. Online at: http://www.mafmc.org/fisheiy-managernent-plans. Accessed:
October 22, 2018.
Mallinson, D.J., Culver, S.J., Riggs, S.R., Walsh, J.P., Ames, D., and Smith, C.W. 2008. Past,
present, and future inlets of the Outer Banks barrier islands, North Carolina. East Carolina
University Press, Greenville, NC. 28 pp. Online at:
htti)://core.ecu.edu/geoloev/mallinsond/PP&F%2OInlet%2OBook.pdf. Accessed: October 18,
2018.
Mann, T.M. 1977. Impact of developed coastline on nesting and hatchling sea turtles in
southeastern Florida. Unpublished M.S. Thesis. Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton,
Florida.
JAN 3 0 2019
97
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. ,,OCM WILMINGTON, NO

Mansfield, K.L., J. Wyneken, W.P. Porter, and J. Luo. 2014. First satellite tracks of neonate
sea turtles redefine the `lost years' oceanic niche. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 281:
20133039.
Marshall A, Bennett MB, Kodja G, Hinojosa-Alvarez S, Galvan-Magana F, Harding M,
Stevens G, and T Kashiwagi. 2011. Manta birostris The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
www.iucnredlist.ora
Michel, J., A.C. Bejarano, C.H. Peterson, and C. Voss. 2013. Review of Biological and
Biophysical Impacts from Dredging and Handling of Offshore Sand. U.S. Department of the
Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Herndon, VA. OCS Study BOEM 2013-0119.
258 pp.
Miller, M.H. and C. Klimovich. 2016. Endangered Species Act Status Review Report: Giant
Manta Ray (Manta birostris) and Reef Manta Ray (Manta ale&). Draft Report to National
Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Protected Resources, Silver Spring, MD. December 2016.
127 pp. Available online at: http://www.fpir.noaa.gov[Library/PRD/manta ray/manta-ray-sr-
2016.pdf.
Moffatt & Nichol, Inc. 2003. Bonner Bridge Replacement: Oregon Inlet Movement
Consideration, Prepared for Parson, Brinkerhoff, Quade, & Douglas, Inc., by Moffatt & Nichol
Engineers, September 2003.
Moffatt & Nichol, Inc. 2016. North Carolina Beach and Inlet Management Plan 2016 Update
Report. 321 pp.
Morreale, S.J, G.J. Ruiz, J.R. Spotila and E.A. Standora. 1982. Temperature -dependent sex
determination: current practices threaten conservation of sea turtles. Science 216: 1245-1247.
Moser, M. L., and S. W. Ross. 1995. Habitat use and movements of shortnose and Atlantic
sturgeons in the lower Cape Fear River, North Carolina. Transactions of the American
Fisheries Society 124(2):225-234.
Mrosovsky N, Provancha JA. 1992. Sex ratio of hatchling loggerhead sea turtles: data and
estimates from a 5 -year study. Can J Zool 70:530-538,
Nichols, C.R., and Pietrafesa, L.J. Oregon inlet: Hydrodynamics, volumetric flux and
implications for larval fish transport. United States: N. p., 1997. Web. doi:10.2172/479074.
NCDMF (North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries). 2006. North Carolina Shrimp Fishery
Management Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
Division of Marine Fisheries. Morehead City, North Carolina. April 2006.
NCDMF (North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries). 2008a. North Carolina Red Drum
Fishery Management Plan. Amendment L North Carolina Department of Environment RECEIVED
JAN 3 ® 2019
98
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. 000 WILMINGTON, NO

Natural Resources. North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries. Morehead City, North
Carolina. November, 2008.
NCDMF (North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries). 2008b. North Carolina Inter -
jurisdictional Fisheries Management Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources. North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries. Morehead City, North
Carolina. June, 2008.
NCDMF (North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries). 2018. Online Recreational Water
Quality Sampling Data. Online at: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/rwq-sampling-data.
Accessed: October 22, 2018.
NCDOT (North Carolina Department of Transportation). 2018. Replacing the Bonner Bridge.
Online at: https://www.ncdot.gov/proiects/bonner-bridge/Pages/project-facts.aWx. Accessed:
October 18, 2018.
NCWRC (North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission). 2011. Colonial Bird Nesting Data.
NCWRC, Raleigh.
Nelson, D.A., K.A. Mauck, and J. Fletemeyer. 1987. Physical effects of beach nourishment on
sea turtle nesting, Delray Beach, Florida. Technical Report EL -87-15. USACE Waterways
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Nelson, D.A. and D.D. Dickerson. 1989. Effects of beach nourishment on sea turtles. In: S.
Eckert, K. Eckert, and T. Richardson (compilers). Proceedings of the ninth annual symposium
on sea turtle conservation and biology. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-232,
pp. 125-127.
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2004. Endangered Species Act Section 7
Consultation on Dredging of Gulf of Mexico Navigation Channels and Sand Mining
("Borrow") Areas Using Hopper Dredges by COE Galveston, New Orleans, Mobile, and
Jacksonville Districts (Consultation Number F/SER/2000/01287), 119 pp.
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2006. Final Consolidated Atlantic Highly
Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Highly
Migratory Species Management Division, Silver Spring, MD. Public Document. 1600 pp.
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 1998. Recovery plan for the shortnose sturgeon
(Acipenser brevirostrum). Prepared by the Shormose Sturgeon Recovery Team for the
National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, Maryland. 104 pages.
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2009. Final Amendment 1 to the 200���1�®
Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan, Essential Fi
99 JAN 3 ® 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
JCNJ WILMINGTON, NO

Habitat. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries
Service, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Highly Migratory Species Management Division,
Silver Spring, MD. Public Document. 395 pp.
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2010. Essential fish habitat: A marine fish habitat
conservation mandate for federal agencies. South Atlantic Region. National Marine Fisheries
Service. St. Petersburg, FL. 14 pp.
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2018a. Shormose sturgeon (Acipenser
brevirostrum). Online at: https://www.fisheiies.noaa.gov/species/shortnose-sturgeon.
Accessed: October 23, 2018.
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2018b. Atlantic Sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus
oxyrinchus). Online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/atlantic-sturgeon. Accessed:
October 23, 2018.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2018c. Protected Resources. Manta Rays. NOAA
Fisheries. Online at: hn://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/fish/manta-ray.html. Accessed:
October 24, 2018.
NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2013a. Website on mean sea
level trend, 8651370 Oregon Inlet Marina, North Carolina. Online at:
https://tidesandeurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends station. shtml?id=8652587#tab50yr.
Accessed: October 19, 2018.
NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2016. Annual Report of a
Comprehensive Assessment of Marine Mammal, Marine Turtle, and Seabird Abundance and
Spatial Distribution in US Waters of the Western North Atlantic Ocean — AMAPPS IL Online
at:
https//www nefsc noaa gov/psb/AMAPPS/docs/Annual%20Report%2Oof%202016%20AM
APPS final.ydf. Accessed: October 23, 2018.
O'Shea, OR, Kingsford, MJ, and J. Seymour. 2010. Tide -related periodicity of manta rays and
sharks to cleaning stations on a coral reef. Marine and Freshwater Research 61: 65-73.
Raymond. P.W. 1984. Sea Turtle Hatchling Disorientation and Artificial Beachfront Lighting.
Center for Environmental Education, Washington, DC. 72 pp.
Reine, K.J., Clarke, D., Dickerson, C., and Wikel, G. 2014. Characterization of Underwater
Sounds Produced by Trailing Suction Hopper Dredges during Sand Mining and Pump -out
Operations. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers. ERDC/EL TR 14-3, BOEM 2014-055. Herndon, VA, March 2014.
100 JAN 3 0 2019
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
OCM WILMINGTON, NG

Richardson, W.J., Greene, C.R. Jr., Malme, C.I. and Thomson, D.H. 1995. Marine mammals
and noise. Academic Press, San Diego, California. 576 pp.
Ross, D. 1987. Mechanics of underwater noise. Los Altos, CA: Peninsula Publishing.
Robinson, S.P., P.D. Theobald, G. Hayman, L.S. Wang, P.A. Lepper, V. Humphrey, and S.
Mumford. 2011. Measurement of underwater noise arising from marine aggregate dredging
operations. Marine Aggregate Levy Sustainability Fund (MALSF). MEPF 09/P108. Available
at: http://www.cefas.defra.gov.uk/ media/462859/mepf%20pI08%20fnnal%20report.pdf
Rohner, CA, Pierce SJ, Marshall AD, Weeks SJ, Bennett MB, and AJ Richardson. 2013.
Trends in sightings and environmental influences on a coastal aggregation of manta rays and
whale sharks. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 482: 153-168 doi 10.3354/meps10290.
Roman -Sierra, J., M. Navarro, J Munoz -Perez and G. Gomez Pina. Turbidity and other effects
resulting from Trafalgar Sandbank Dredging and Palmar Beach Nourishment. Case Study.
Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal and Ocean Engineering. 13 pp. DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WW.1943-5460.0000098.
Runge, M.C., Sanders -Reed, C.A., and Fonnesbeck, C.J. 2007. A core stochastic population
projection model for Florida manatees (Trichechus manatus latirostris): U.S. Geological
Survey Open -File Report 2007-1082, 41 p.
Ryder C. 1991. The effects of beach nourishment on sea turtle nesting and hatch success.
Unpublished Report to Sebastian Inlet Tax District Commission, December 1991.
SAFMC (South Atlantic Fishery Management Council). 1998. Final Habitat Plan for the South
Atlantic Region: Essential Fish Habitat Requirements for Fishery Management Plans of the
South Atlantic Fishery Management Council. The Shrimp Fishery Management Plan, The Red
Drum Fishery Management Plan, The Snapper Grouper Fishery Management Plan, The
Coastal Migratory Pelagics Fishery Management Plan, The Golden Crab Fishery Management
Plan, The Spiny Lobster Fishery Management Plan, The Coral, Coral Reefs, and
Live/Hardbottom Habitat Fishery Management Plan, The Sargassum Habitat Fishery
Management Plan, and The Calico Scallop Fishery Management Plan. Prepared by the South
Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Charleston, South Carolina, October 1998.
SAFMC (South Atlantic Fishery Management Council). 2018. Online at:
http://www.safmc.net/. Accessed: October 22, 2018.
Seaturtle.org, 2018. North Carolina Stranding Report. Online at:
http://seaturtle.org/strand/summary/index.shtml?program=l&year=2017. Accessed: October
23, 2018.
RECEIVED
JAN 3 ® 2019
101
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. 0CM WILMINGTON, NO

Schwartz, F.J. 1995. Florida manatees, Trichechus manatus (Sirenia: Trichechidae), in North
Carolina 1919-1994. Brimleyana 22:53-60.
Shepherd, G.R. and Packer, D.B., June 2006. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document:
Bluefish, Pomatomus saltatrix, Life History and Habitat Characteristics, Second Edition:
National Marine Fisheries Service, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, loop.
http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/nefsc/publications/tm/tml9g/tml 98.pdf.
Shortnose Sturgeon Status Review Team. 2010. A biological assessment of shortnose sturgeon
(Acipenser brevirostrum). Report to National Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Regional
Office. November 1, 2010. 417 pp.
Schubel, J.R., H. H. Carter, R. E. Wilson, W. M. Wise, M. G. Heaton, M. G. Gross. 1978. Field
investigations of the nature, degree, and extent of turbidity generated by open -water pipeline
disposal operations. Technical Report D-78-30, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, MS. NTIS No. AD A058 507. Online at:
http: //el. erde.usace. army. mil/elpub s/pdf/trd78-3 0/cover. pdf
Smith, T. I. J. 1985. The fishery, biology and management of Atlantic sturgeon, Acipenser
oxyrhynchus, in North America. Environmental Biology of Fishes 14(1): 61-72
Smith, T. I. and J. P. Clugston. 1997. Status and management of Atlantic sturgeon, Acipenser
oxyrinchus, in North America. Environmental Biology of Fishes, 48(1-4): 335-346.
Some, B.A. 2014. Site Survey Report: Nags Head Woods/Run Hill. North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program, Office of Land and Water Stewardship, DENR, Raleigh.
Speybroeck, J., D. Bronte, W. Courtens, T. Gheskiere, P. Grootaert, J. Maelfait, M. Mathys,
S. Provoost, K. Sabbe, EMM Stienen, V. Van Lancker, M. Vincx and S. Degraer. 2006. Beach
nourishment: An Ecologically Sound Coastal Defense Alternative? A review. Aquatic
Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 16:419-435.
Stein, A.B., K.D. Friedland, and M. Sutherland. 2004. Sturgeon marine distribution and habitat
use along the northeast coast of the United States. Transactions of the American Fisheries
Society 133:527-537.
Stewart JD, Beale CS, Fernando D, Sianipar AB, Burton RS, Semmens BX, O Aburto-
Oropeza. 2016. Spatial ecology and conservation of Manta birostris in the Indo-Pacific.
Biological Conservation 200: 178-183 doi 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.05.016.
Studt, J.F. 1987. Amelioration of maintenance dredging impacts on sea turtles, Canaveral
Harbor, Florida. In: Witzell, W.N. (ed). Ecology of East Florida Sea Turtles. Proceedings of
the Cape Canaveral, Florida Sea Turtle Workshop. Miami, Florida. NOAA Technical Report
NMFS 53. RECEIVED
JAN 3 0 2019
102
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. 0CM WILMINGTON, NO

TEWG (Turtle Expert Working Group). 2009. An assessment of the loggerhead turtle
population in the Western North Atlantic Ocean. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-
SEFSC-575, 131 pp.
Thomsen, F.T., S. McCully, D. Wood, F. Pace, and P. White. 2009. A Generic Investigation
into Noise Profiles of Marine Dredging in Relation to the Acoustic Sensitivity of the Marine
Fauna in UK Waters with Particular Emphasis on Aggregate Dredging: PHASE 1 Scoping and
Review of Key Issues. Center for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science. Lowestoft,
Suffolk, 61 pp.
Trindell, R., M. Conti, D. Gallagher, and B. Witherington. 2005. Sea turtles and lights on
Florida's nesting beaches. Proceedings of the 25th Annual Symposium on Sea Turtle Biology
and Conservation, pp. 152-153. Savannah, GA.
Walker, S. 2018, August 28. Can I get a connection? Last girder laid for new Bonner Bridge.
Outer Banks Voice. Online at: httos:Houterbanksvoice.com/2018/08/28/can-i-get-a-
connection-last-girder-laid-for-new-bonner-bridge/. Accessed: October 18, 2018.
USACE (United States Army Corps of Engineers). 1996. Coast of Florida Erosion and Storm
Effects Study, Region III, Feasibility Report with Final Environmental Impact Statement.
USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2004. Finding of No Significant Impact, Use of
Government Plant to Dredge in Federally Authorized Navigation Projects in North Carolina.
US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District, September 2004.
USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2013. Environmental Assessment: Side Case
Maintenance Dredging of a Portion of Hatteras -to -Hatteras Inlet Channel Pamlico Sound,
North Carolina. US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District, November 2013.
USACE, 2016, EP 1110-1-8, Vol. 3, November 2016, Construction Equipment Ownership and
Operating Expense Schedule, Region III, US Army Corps of Engineers, 2016.
USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2018. Wave Information Studies Project
Documentation. Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory Engineer Research and Development
Center. Online at: http://wis.usace.army.mil/hindeasts.html. Accessed: October 16, 2018.
USDOT (United States Department of Transportation). 2008. Final Environmental Impact
Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation: NC 12 Replacement of Herbert C. Bonner Bridge. Pp.
792.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2014. Current nonattainment
counties for all criteria pollutants. Online at: httns://www.e]2a.goy/green-book. Accessed:
October 22, 2018.
AN 3 ® 2019
103
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC, aCM WILMINGTON, NO

USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2008. West Indian manatee, (Trichechus manatus).
Online at: hitps://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library_/pdf/manatee.pdf. Last visited October
23, 2018.
USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2017. Guidelines for Avoiding Impacts to the West
Indian Manatee, Precautionary Measures For Construction Activities In North Carolina
Waters, Online at: http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/mammal/manatee guidelines.pdf. Accessed:
October 23, 2018.
USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2018a. West Indian Manatees in North Carolina.
Online at: hM://www.fws.gov/nc-es/mammal/manatee.html. Accessed: October 23, 2018.
Van Dolah, R.F, R.M. Martore, A.E. Lynch, P.H. Wendt, M.V. Levisen, D.J. Whitaker, and
W.D. Anderson. 1994. Environmental evaluation of the Folly Beach project. Final Report.
US Army Corps of Engineers, Charleston District and the South Carolina Department of
Natural Resources, Marine Resource Division.
Watts, Gordon P., Jr., 1992. Historical and cartographic research to identify and assess the
potential for cultural resources in the proposed corridor for a replacement bridge on N.C. 12
across Oregon Inlet, Dare County, North Carolina. Tidewater Atlantic Research, Inc.,
Washington, NC.
Wilbur, D.H., D.G. Clarke and M.H. Burlas. 2006. Suspended sediment concentrations
associated with a beach nourishment project on the northern coast of New Jersey. Journal of
Coastal Research 22(5): 1035-1042.
Witherington, B.E. and R.E. Martin. 1996. Understanding, assessing, and resolving light -
pollution problems on sea turtle nesting beaches. Florida Marine Research Institutional
Technical Report TR -2. 73 pp.
JAN 3 0 2019
104
APTIM COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. UCC WILMINGTON, NO

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. BEGAN
Secretary
BRAXTON C. DAVIS
Director
March 4, 2019
MEMORANDUM:
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
FROM: Heather Coats, Beach & Inlet Management Project Coordinator
NCDEQ - Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
Fax: [phone] (Courier 04-16-33)
Heather. Coats(cDncdenr.gov
SUBJECT: CAMA/Dredge & Fill Application Review
Applicant: Dare County
Project Location: Oregon Inlet extending to Old House Channel, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in
Dare County
Proposed Project: To maintain the federal navigation channel by way of hopper dredge from
Oregon Inlet to Old House Channel.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and
return this form by March 19, 2019 at the address above. If you have any questions regarding the
proposed project, please contact Heather Coats at [phone]. When appropriate, in-depth
comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
.Additional comments may be attached"
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
PRINT NAME
AGENCY
SIGNATURE
DATE
NOR1 cr.RWNA ��I
Doorman aFrWkQMffW 0On"
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Coastal Management
Morehead City office 1 400 Commerce Avenue I Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
252.808.2808

1 FORMS
1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner information
Business Name
Project Name (if applicable)
Dare County
Dare County Oregon Inlet Channel Maintenance Project
Applicant 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Robert
L
Outten
Applicant 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
NA
NA
NA
If additional applicants, please attach an additional pages) with names listed.
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
954 Marshall C Collins Drive
State
Manteo
INC
ZIP
Country
Phone No.
FAX No.
27954
USA
252 475 5800 ext.
252 4731817
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
ZIP
Email
[e-mail]
Federal ID # 020623951
2.Agent/ContractorInformation
Business Name
APTIM
Agent/ Contractor 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Kenneth
Willson
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
Brad
Rosov
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
4038 Masonboro Loop Road
Wilmington
NC
ZIP
Phone No. 1
Phone No. 2
28409
910 - 791 - 9494 ext.
ext.
FAX No.
Contractor #
NA
Federal ID # 020623951
Email
[e-mail]; [e-mail]
3. Project Location
RECEI VEL
APTIM JAN 3 0 2019
1
CCM WILMINGTON, NO

County (can be multiple)
Street Address
State Rd. #
Dare
Unincorporated Dare County within Oregon Inlet
NA
Subdivision Name
City
State
Zip
NA
NA
NC
NA
Phone No.
Lot No.(s) (ff many, attach additional page with list)
NA
NA
a. In which NC river basin is the project located?
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Pasquotank River Basin
Atlantic Ocean and Pamlico Sound
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
®Natural ❑Manmade []Unknown
Atlantic Ocean and Pamlico Sound
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
❑Yes ®No
work falls within.
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? ❑Yes ®No
NA
4. Site Description
a. Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.)
b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
None
145,190,199 (Size of proposed dredge corridor)
c. Size of individual lot(s)
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
NA
NWL (normal water level)
(if many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
-2 to -12 MSL ❑NHW or ❑NWL
e. Vegetation on tract
None
f. Man-made features and uses now on tract
Existing navigation channels.
g. Identify and describe the existing land uses adiacent to the proposed project site.
Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge (to the south) and Bodie Island sand spit (to the north)
h. How does local government zone the tract?
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
NA
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
❑Yes ❑No ®NA
j. Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? ❑Yes ®No
k. Hasa professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. ®Yes ❑No [INA
If yes, by whom? Dames and Moore magnetometer survey (1979), NCDOT, FHWA, and SHPO
remote sensing survey (1993 and 1995)
I. Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a [-]Yes ®No [INA
National Register listed or eligible property?
m. (1) Are there wetlands on the site? []Yes ®No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? ❑Yes ®No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? []Yes ®No
(Attach documentation, if available)
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
NA
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
NA.
APTIM JAN 3 ® 2019
2

p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
NA
5. Activities and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public or private use? ®Commercial SPublic/Government
❑Private/Community
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use and daily operations of the project when complete.
See Attached.
c. Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where it is to be stored.
See attached.
d. List all development activities you propose.
Maintenance dredging of existing navigation channels with a newly constructed privately owned special purpose dredge.
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? Maintenance
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 0.0 ❑Sq.Ft or SAcres
g. Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public access way or other area ®Yes ❑No ❑NA
that the public has established use of?
h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
Dredged material will be placed along the nearshore waters off Pea Island and in proximity to the remaining bridge pilings along
the existing Bonner Bridge.
I. Will wastewater or stormwater be discharged into a wetland? ❑Yes SNo [INA
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water? ❑Yes ❑No SNA
j. Is there any mitigation proposed? ❑Yes SNo ❑NA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
6. Additional Information
In addition to this completed application form, (MP -1) the following items below, if applicable, must be submitted in order for the application
package to be complete. Items (a) — (f) are always applicable to any major development application. Please consult the application
instruction booklet on how to propedy prepare the required items below.
a. A project narrative.
b. An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale. Please give the present status of the
proposed project. Is any portion already complete? If previously authorized work, clearly indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish
between work completed and proposed.
c. A site or location map that is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
e. The appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DENR.
APTIM JAN 3 ® 2019
3
UCM WILMINGMN, NO

f. A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such
owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in which
to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
Name See attached Phone No.
Address
Name Phone No.
Address
Name Phone No.
Address
g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, permittee, and issuing dates.
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization form, if applicable.
i. Wetland delineation, if necessary.
j. A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront and inlet areas. (Must be signed by property owner)
k. A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A 1-10), if necessary. If the project involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
17. Certification and Permission to Enter on Land I
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in the application.
project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to enter on the
aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow-up monitoring of the project.
I further certi that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date Print Name {5 �c Ly N�J� ✓
�Y. -
Signature
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
®DCM MP -2 Excavation and Fill Information ❑DCM MP -5 Bridges and Culverts
❑DCM MP -3 Upland Development
❑DCM MP -4 Structures Information
(..; gmgm
_m
APTIM JAN 3 ® 2019
4
UCM WILMINGTON, NC

1.2 DCM MP -2
EXCAVATION and FILL
(Except for bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP -1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation and/orfill activities. All values should be given in feet.
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in
Access Channel
cubic yards.
Boat.
Boat
Rock
Rock
Other (excluding
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
(NLW or NWL)
Canal
Basin
Ramp
Groin
Breakwater
shoreline titi 14Vstabilizaon) .p I t/l t
❑WL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
NIA
D/SPOSAt OF �JCCAVATEO N1A ER/A`L
11,090 ', 20,549, and
Length
b: Dimensions of disposal area.
Open water disposal in nearshore waters off Pea Island
5,000'x2,500'
and adjacent to remaining Bonnec.Bridge pilings
C. (1) Do you claim title to disposal area?
8,410'
Width
maintenance?
®Yes []No [INA
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.
(ii) If yes, where?
Same locations
e. (i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh
100'-400'
Avg. Existing
Eyes ❑No ❑NA
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
(0)If yes, how much water area is affected?
number of square feet affected. -
'NA,
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
-5' MLW
Depth
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas: N/A
Final Project
NA-
NA
-10 to -14' MLW
Depth
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in
b. Type of material to be excavated.
cubic yards.
Sand
125,750 cubic yards based on current conditions
C. (i) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlands/marsh
d. High -ground excavation in cubic yards.
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
None
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
_
❑CW ❑SAV OSB
❑WL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
NIA
D/SPOSAt OF �JCCAVATEO N1A ER/A`L
El This section not applicable
a. Location of disposal area.
b: Dimensions of disposal area.
Open water disposal in nearshore waters off Pea Island
5,000'x2,500'
and adjacent to remaining Bonnec.Bridge pilings
C. (1) Do you claim title to disposal area?
d.. (i) Will a disposal area be available for future
[]Yes ❑No ENA
maintenance?
®Yes []No [INA
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.
(ii) If yes, where?
Same locations
e. (i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh
f. (1) Does the disposal include any area In the water?
(CM, submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
Eyes ❑No ❑NA
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
(0)If yes, how much water area is affected?
number of square feet affected. -
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
12,500,00012
[]WL ENone
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas: N/A
APTIM JAN 3 0 2019
5
DCM WILMINGTON, NC

SHORELINE STABILIZATION ®This section not
applicable
(If leve%pmenf is a wood groin, use MP4 — Structures)
a. Type of shoreline stabilization b. Length:
[]Bulkhead ❑Riprep ❑Breakwater/Sill ❑Other: _
C. Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL:
e. Type of stabilization material:
g. Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level.
Bulkhead backfill_ Riprap_
Breakwater/Sill Other
I. Source of fill material.
Width:
d. Maximum distance waterward of NHW or NWL:
f. (i) Has there been shoreline erosion during preceding 12
months?
[]Yes ❑No [INA
(ii) If yes, state amount of erosion and source of erosion
amount information.
h. Type of fill material.
7THER FILL ACTMTIES ®This section no appligable
(Ezchiding Shoreline Stabilization)
(1) Will fill material be brought to the site? []Yes ONO ❑NA b. (i) Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands/marsh
If yes,
(ii) Amount of material to be placed in the water
(iii) Dimensions of fill area
(iv) Purpose of fill
a. How will excavated or Fill material be. kept on site antl erosion
controlled?
Excavated material will be transported from excavation site to
disposal areas via hopper dredge only,
C. (i) Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project?
❑Yes ONO ❑NA
(ii) If yes, explain what type and how they will be implemented.
(GW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), Shell bottom
(SB), or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked,
provide the number of square feet affected.
❑CW- ❑SAV- _ ❑SB _
❑WL ❑None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas:
(e.g.,
dragline, backhoe, or
Hopper dredge.
d. (i) Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to
project ske? [--]Yes ®No []NA
(ii) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or
minimize environmental impacts.
A'TIM JAN 3 ® 2019
6
DCM WILMINGTON, NO

2 ATTACHMENTS
2.1 DCM MP -1. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
2.1.1 5b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
Dredging is necessary to maintain safe and reliable transportation routes through waterways. Oregon Inlet is
no exception. Despite considerable efforts on the part of the USACE, State, and Dare County, shoaling
continues to impede mariners and has resulted in the U.S. Coast Guard's inability to properly position
navigation buoys within the channel. As a result, the risk of damage to vessels and injury to people continues.
Since the 1960's, over 25 people have died and 22 boats have been lost within the inlet (Dare County, 2018).
Oregon Inlet is considered one of the most commercially vital shallow draft inlets along coastal North Carolina
(Dumas, 2014). Numerous business sectors rely on the ability to safely navigate this waterway on a regular
basis. As such, maintaining safe navigation from Pamlico Sound to the Atlantic Ocean via Oregon Inlet is
critical for the local, regional, and state's economy.
Between 1995 and 2012, the US Army Corps of Engineers, State of North Carolina, and Dare County have
spent an average of approximately $6.25 million per year on dredging Oregon Inlet. The economic impact of
Oregon Inlet to Dare County, however, is very significant and far outweighs the historic costs necessary to
keep the inlet passable via dredging (Dumas et al, 2014). A recent economic study of the inlet suggested that
under recent conditions (when the inlet is navigable —40% of the time), five business sectors (commercial
fishing, seafood packing/processing, boat building and support services, recreational fishing, and tournament
fishing) contribute an economic impact of $403.5 million in revenues while supporting 3,319 jobs in Dare
County. When incorporating nearby counties including Dare, Currituck, Camden, Pasquotank, Perquimans,
Tyrell, and Hyde, the regional economic impact of the inlet amounts to $423.3 million while supporting 3,601
jobs. At a larger scale, the study cites an overall statewide economic impact of $548.4 million and 4,348 jobs.
If the inlet were to be navigable 85-100% of the time over the course of a year, the 2014 study stated that these
business sectors could potentially provide a total annual economic impact of 5,120 jobs and $642.2 million to
Dare County, 5,590 jobs and $678.4 million to the region, and 5,397 jobs and $693.0 million to the state of
North Carolina (Dumas et al, 2014).
The economic impact of Oregon Inlet to Dare County prompted the County to partner with the North Carolina
Division of Water Resources (NC DWR) to provide supplemental funding for Oregon Inlet starting in 2016.
The annual report prepared by the NC DWR, which was required by SL 2013-360, Section 14.22, indicates a
Dare County contribution of $884,000 matched with $1,768,000 by the State to contribute an additional
$2,625,000 to the USACE for Oregon Inlet maintenance in FY 16/17.
Even with the state and Dare County taking initiatives to provide the necessary supplemental funding to
maintain the Oregon Inlet Channel, dredge plant availability has become the primary reason for not being able
to maintain dependable navigation through the inlet. The USACE Wilmington District dredge plants are in
high demand to maintain navigation channels throughout the East and Gulf Coast including other channels
throughout North Carolina. Demand has increased recently given the ability of other communities to provide
supplemental funding for USACE dredges to conduct navigation maintenance in channels vital to their
communities.
RECEIVED
AP
TIM
FEB 1 3 2019
7
DCM WILMINGTON, NC

Recognizing the need for greater dredging capacity, Senate Bill 99 of Session 2017 was passed by the North
Carolina Senate and provides for the construction of a privately owned dredge that can be utilized to maintain
shallow draft navigations channels within the state including Oregon Inlet. Section 13.7(a -h) of the bill states:
...the maintenance of the state's shallow draft navigation channels in a manner that keeps those
channels navigable and safe and minimizes their closure or degradation is a vital public purpose and
proper governmental function and that declines in federal finding and dredging activity have
significantly and adversely impacted the ability of the federal government to maintain these channels
in a timely manner. The resulting deterioration in these channels damages the significant portion of
the economy of the State's coastal regions that is dependent on the use of the navigation channels by
watercraft. Therefore, it is the policy of the State to support and, when necessary to meet the public
purposes set forth in this subsection, to supplement federal maintenance of the navigational channels.
The bill authorized the allocation of up to $15 million of State funds to be provided, in the form of a forgivable
loan to a private partner for the construction and operation of a dredge capable of maintaining shallow draft
navigation channels throughout the state. The legislation further authorized the Oregon Inlet Task Force to
solicit proposals through an RFP, through which a private partner could be selected. Proposals were solicited
from interested companies and the Oregon Inlet Task Force selected a private partner to work with. However,
prior to significant investments being made by the dredge partner for planning, design, and construction of a
dredge plant, it is necessary to have permits in place for the maintenance work for which the dredge is being
constructed.
With that in mind, the purpose of Dare County's proposed action is to have the ability to operate a yet -to -be -
constructed dredge within the confines of Oregon Inlet in a manner that aligns with current USACE
maintenance practices within Oregon Inlet. This includes the ability to conduct maintenance dredging on a
year-round basis. The need of this action is to maintain the county's, region's and state's economic viability
while preserving environmental quality and human safety.
2.1.2 5c. Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used
during construction, the number of each type of equipment and where it is to be stored.
Dredging will be performed on a year-round basis by a newly constructed privately owned hopper dredge. As
stated below in the response to item 6a, the dredge will be outfitted with a number of specifications that will
minimize the risk of impacts to a number of threatened or endangered species that may be present during
dredge operations. Dredged material will be disposed at the nearshore disposal location off Pea Island and/or
along the bridge pilings at the remaining portions of the original Bonner Bridge. No equipment will be stored
on the land. When not in use, the dredge will be docked at a marina or moored in proximity to Oregon Inlet.
2.1.3 6a. Project Narrative
Dare County is seeking permits and authorizations to utilize the yet -to -be -constructed privately owned special
purpose dredge in the same manner and under the same conditions as what is currently authorized for USACE
to perform maintenance dredging within the waters in proximity to Oregon Inlet, as defined in the 2004 FONSI.
The dredging conducted by the privately owned dredge would not replace dredging performed by the USACE
dredge fleet; rather it would complement the USACE's existing efforts.
The dimensions of the channels in which maintenance dredging is proposed follows the existing USACE
authorization, which is specifically stated as "...a 14 -feet deep by 400 -feet wide channel through Oregon Inlet
RECEIVED
APTIM
s FF
DCM WILMINGTON, NC

and the ocean bar. An approximate 16,050 -foot long portion of the channel from Oregon Inlet to Hell's Gate
(12 -feet deep by 100 -feet wide) and an approximate 2,850 -foot long portion of Old House Channel (12 -feet
deep by 100 -feet wide) in Dare County". Because the USACE authorization allows for the maintenance
dredging following best water, the footprints of the areas to be dredged are not fixed. Rather, a bathymetric
survey is performed prior to each dredge event in an effort to determine the location of the best water for the
channel. As such, for this proposed project, a "dredge corridor" has been developed and will serve as the
domain in which dredging could be performed in the future (Figure 1). Figure 1 depicts the current location
of the confluence of Old House Channel and the Oregon Inlet to Hell's Gate Channel. It should be noted,
however, that after further consultation with USACE Navigation staff, the extent of authorized dredging within
Old House Chanel that was included in the 2004 FONSI, only includes Range 1(which extends approximately
2,850 feet) (Figure 1). Due to the migration of "best water" within the channel, dredging of the 2,850 linear
feet under this proposed project may occur anywhere along the portion of Old House Channel Range 1 and 2
and Manteo Channel Range 17 Extension within the proposed dredge corridor, as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Proposed dredging and disposal locations
The nearshore disposal sites for material dredged by the new dredge would also be identical to what is currently
authorized by the USACE. These areas include nearshore disposal off the north end of Pea Island and in deep
scour holes beneath the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge (Figure ). It should be noted that no upland disposal will
be included in the proposed work. Because it is anticipated that the majority of the existing Bonner Bridge
will be demolished in the near future, the disposal of material for this proposed action will be limited to the
APTIM RECEIVED
9
FtE3 13 2019
DCM WILMINGTON. NC

areas surrounding the remaining bridge pilings. According the NCDOT, the portion of the existing bridge that
will remain will extend from the shoulder of Pea Island approximately 1,500 feet and will end at the section
known as "Bent 184".
Historically, the total volume of dredged material removed from the connecting channels in proximity to
Oregon Inlet has averaged around 900,000 cubic yards on an annual basis. This includes material removed by
pipeline dredges from the interior channels as well as the volume removed by the USACE special purpose
dredges and sidecast dredges. In addition to the material removed by these three dredge types, the privately
owned dredge would also be able to perform some maintenance dredging in the ocean bar channel. The average
volume of material typically removed from the ocean bar channel by a USACE special purpose hopper dredge
has been approximately 300,000 cubic yards/year. Thus, in total, the total volume of material available for
removal by a privately owned dredge may average between 900,000 and 1,000,000 cubic yards/year even after
the existing Bonner Bridge with the restrictive navigation span is removed. This proposed activity for this
permit request will be limited to the operations of a new special purpose dredge and will not include work
performed by a pipeline or sidecast dredge.
In order to minimize the risk of impacts to any threatened or endangered species, the construction of the new
privately owned dredge comply with specifications that were included with the design of the USACE's special
purpose hopper dredges which are currently authorized to operate year-round in Oregon Inlet. The 1999 BO
issued by NMFS states that the special use hopper dredges that include the specifications, as listed below, are
not required to operate with sea turtle deflectors on the dragheads nor is screening or observers required. The
new privately owned special purpose hopper dredge will abide by the same standards. These specifications
include:
• Vessel weight limited to 500 gross tons
• Brunswick, Brunswick County Type, Brunswick Adjustable, or equivalent dragheads
• Draghead suction produced by use of dredge pumps averaging 350 -horsepower, with a maximum
horsepower of 400D
• Draghead sizes range from approximately 2 feet by 2 feet to 2 feet by 3 feet
• Draghead openings are include gridded baffles with openings ranging from 5 inches by 5 inches to 5
inches by 8 inches
• Suction pipes 10-14" diameter
• Discharge pipes 12-16" diameter
Because dredging activity is limited to the areas of best or deepest water, no SAV or shellfish resources will
be impacted by the dredges. By employing a 100' "no dredge" buffer around any mapped SAV or shellfish
resources, direct impacts and indirect impacts associated with elevated turbidity will be minimized.
2.1.4 6b An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to
scale. Please give the present status of the proposed project. Is any portion already complete?
If previously authorized work, clearly indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish between
work completed and proposed.
See Appendix A.
2.1.5 6e. A site or location map that is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with
the area to the site.
RECEIVED
APTuv1Et 13 'Gi9
10 F`
DCM WILMINGTON, NC

See Appendix A
2.1.6 6d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument under which the
applicant claims title to the affected properties.
Not Applicable.
2.1.7 6e. The appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DEQ.
Please find enclosed an application fee check for $475.
2.1.8 6E A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners
and signed return receipts as proof that such owners have received a copy of the application and plats
by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in which to submit
comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
W.A. Worth Estate and James C. Fletcher
0 Island
Wanchese, NC 27981
Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
c/o Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge
P. O. Box 1969
Manteo, NC 27954
Cape Hatteras National Seashore,
ATTN: Mr. Steve Thompson,
1401 National Park Drive
Manteo, NC 27954-9451
NCDOT
Jerry Jennings, Division 1 Engineer
Highway Division 1
113 Airport Drive,, Suite 100
Edenton, NC 27932
2.1.9 6g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include
permit numbers, permittee and issuing dates.
• May 17,1950; P181-516, The River and Harbor Act, Congress authorized the USACE to dredge
Oregon Inlet's ocean bar navigation channel to a depth of 14 feet.
• May, 1988: EA/FONSI, Maintenance Dredging of Ocean Inlets and Connecting Channels Within the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, With a Sidecast or Hopper Dredge.
• November 1990: EA/FONSI, Emergency Maintenance Dredging Manteo-Oregon Inlet Channel,
Discharge of Dredged Material in Oregon Inlet, Vicinity of the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge, Manteo
(Shallowbag) Bay Project, Dare County, North Carolina.
RECEIVED
APTiM FEb 13 019
11
DCM WILMINGTON, NC

• December 1990: EA/FONSI, Maintenance Dredging Manteo-Oregon Inlet Channel, Discharge of
Dredged Material at Oregon Inlet, Vicinity of the Herbert c. Bonner Bridge, From December 1990
through March 31, 1991, Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay Project, Dare County, North Carolina.
• July 1990: EA/FONSI, Discharge of Dredged Material on Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge and
Advanced Maintenance of the Oregon Inlet Channel, Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay Project, Dare County,
North Carolina.
• September 1990: EA/FONSI, Maintenance Dredging of New Alignment of Manteo-Oregon Inlet
Channel, Vicinity of Old House Channel, Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay Project, Oare County, North
Carolina.
• September 2004; USACE Finding of No Significant Impact: "Use of Government Plant to Dredge in
Federally Authorized Navigation Project in North Carolina"
2.1.10 6h. Signed Agent Authorization Form.
See Appendix B.
2.1.11 6i. Wetland delineation, if necessary.
Not applicable.
2.1.12 6j. Signed AEC Hazard Notice.
See Appendix B.
2.1.13 6k. A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A 1-10), if
necessary. If the project involves expenditure of public funds or use of public lands, attach a
statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
SEPA compliance has been met by the development and authorization of the federal project.
RECEIVER
n 13
APTIM
12 DCM WILMINGTON, NC

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
APPLICANT'S NAME: Dare County Oregon Inlet Channel Maintenance Project
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: The project site is located at Oregon Inlet extending to Old House
Channel, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in Dare County.
Approximate State Plane Coordinates — X: 3029134 (start)/ 3011404 (end) Y: 759402 (start)/ 749329 (end)
Approx. Lat: 35°47'13.65"N/ 35°45'40.16"N Long: 75°31'45.44"W/ 75°35'24.73"W
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA / D&F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit — 1/11/19
/ Was Applicant Present — No
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received —1/30/19
Office — Wilmington
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan — Dare County
(B) AEC(s) Involved: OH, PTA, EW
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment:Existing — N/A
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing — Federal channel, NCDOT bridge & terminal groin
Planned — Maintenance authorization for dredging of the federal channel
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: N/A SBF: N/A
HABITAT DESCRIPTION:
[AREA]
DREDGED FILLED OTHER
(A) Vegetated Wetlands (coastal)
(B) Other (Below MHW)
— 167 acres +/-
Up to 287 acres
(approx.-subject to deep
(nearshore disposal)
water channel location)
(C) Other (Above MHW)
(H) Total Area Disturbed: up to —454 acres
(I) Primary Nursery Area: No
(J) Water Classification: SA Open: No
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to maintain the federal navigation channel by way of
hopper dredge from Oregon Inlet to Old House Channel.
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality l Coastal Management
Wilmington Office 1127 Cardinal Drive Extension I Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
910 796 7215

Dare County Oregon Inlet Channel Maintenance Project
Page Two
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Oregon Inlet is located between Bodie Island to the north, which is part of Cape Hatteras National
Seashore, and Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge, which is located south of the inlet in Dare County.
While primarily undeveloped, a former U.S. Coast Guard Station is located on Pea Island. The building is
listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Oregon Inlet Fishing Center is located immediately
north of the project vicinity on the sound side of Bodie Island and Oregon Inlet Campground is located on
the south end of the island to the east of the Fishing Center. The Herbert C. Bonner Bridge spans the inlet
connecting the two islands via NC Highway 12. Oregon Inlet is a highly trafficked means of access
between the Atlantic Ocean and Pamlico Sound, both by commercial and recreational vessels. The current
bridge has constrained navigation from the ocean to sound and the inlet's interior channels through a
primary navigation span measuring 130' in width. The inlet is currently maintained by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wilmington District via special purpose hopper and sidecast dredges, as
authorized under the Corps' 2004 Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and DCM Federal
Consistency Determination DCM 2004-0061. This authorization allows for year-round dredging at
Oregon Inlet. Since 2016, Dare County and the State of NC (through the Division of Water Resources)
have contributed supplemental funding to the USACE for maintenance of the inlet. However, concerns
regarding continued federal dredge plant availability led to the allocation of $15 million from the State's
Shallow Draft Navigation Channel Dredging and Aquatic Weed Fund to be provided to Dare County as a
local partner for the purchase of a privately -owned hopper dredge for maintenance of the shallow draft
navigation channels, and to be used under the direction of the Oregon Inlet Task Force (via Session Law
2018-5).
The project boundaries extend from the Ocean Bar Inlet Channel to Hells Gate Channel to Old House
Channel. While channels lengths and locations vary due to the federal channel authorization following
deep water rather than a fixed location, Oregon Inlet and the ocean bards authorized to a maximum width
of 400 feet and a depth of -14' MLLW. The channel from Oregon Inlet to Hell's Gate is referenced in the
federal authorization as approximately 16,050 feet in length, 100' in width, and dredged to a depth of -12'
MLLW. Old House Channel is authorized at 100' wide and to -12' MLLW depth, and referenced in the
federal authorization as 2,850 feet in length. Due to the fluctuation in the location of deep water over the
years, Old House Channel has expanded from Range 1 to include Range 2 and Manteo Channel Range 17
Extension. Dredging in the inlet and connecting channels has been accomplished by hopper dredge and
dredged material is disposed of at a 5000' length near -shore disposal area south of Oregon Inlet and
adjacent to the north end of Pea Island, or in deep scour holes beneath the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge, as
needed. A new bridge is currently under construction, and is reportedly scheduled to open to traffic in the
spring of 2019. The NC Department of Transportation (DOT) will then be demolish the current bridge,
save for a section measuring approximately 1,500' located to the south adjacent to Pea Island. The new
bridge will provide for much broader range of vessel clearance with multiple navigation spans, rather than
essentially confining all vessel passage to a single span. As a result, historically the USACE has dredged
approximately 900,000 cubic yards in the project area at Oregon Inlet annually in an effort to maintain
navigation.
The waters of Oregon Inlet and Old House Channel fall within the Pasquotank River Basin, as classified
by the NC Division of Water Resources (DWR). The waters adjacent to Oregon Inlet are classified as SA
by the DWR. The NC Marine Fisheries Commission has NOT designated the area to be impacted as a
Primary Nursery Area, and the area is open to the harvesting of shellfish.
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality l Coastal Management
Wilmington Office 1127 Cardinal Drive Extension I Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
910 796 7215

Dare County Oregon Inlet Channel Maintenance Project
Page Three
PROPOSED PROJECT:
The applicant proposes to maintain Oregon Inlet from the ocean bar through Hells Gate to Old House
Channel following the federally authorized dimensions by way of a privately -owned, but state -contracted
hopper dredge. The applicant has identified a dredge corridor encompassing 145,190,199 square feet
(approximately 3,333 acres), within which the channels could be located based on deep water and surveys
at the time of the dredge event.
While replacement of the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge will result in more flexibility for navigation than the
current structure, the applicant is still anticipating a need to regularly dredge the inlet and connecting
channels due to the highly dynamic nature of the area.
The applicant is proposing use of a shallow -draft hopper dredge, similar in nature and specifications to
the USACE's Special Purpose Dredge Currituck, with the intention of being able to work year-round. The
narrative states that in order to minimize risk to threatened and endangered species, the proposed dredge
plant would be weight limited to 500 gross tons, and equipped with Brunswick, Brunswick County Type,
Brunswick Adjustable or equivalent dragheads. The draghead suction would average 350 -horsepower,
with a maximum horsepower of 400, and the draghead sizes would not exceed 2 feet by 3 feet. Draghead
openings would include gridded baffles with openings ranging from 5 inches by 5 inches to 5 inches by 8
inches in size. Suction pipes would not exceed 14" in diameter and discharge pipes would range from
12"-16" in diameter.
10. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS
The proposed dredging associated with the first project is currently projected to result in impacts to up to
167 acres of submerged bottom. Up to 287 acres of nearshore disposal site has been identified as
potentially impacted, as well as an unquantified area at the remaining Bonner Bridge bents in cases of
scour holes. However, it should be noted that actual impacts will be dependent on future conditions and
are subject to vary due to the intent to follow the deep water channel. All proposed dredging work would
remain confined within the channel corridor box identified on Sheets 2-5. While the total area of the
proposed corridor encompasses approximately 3,333 acres, only channel length would vary based on the
location of deep water. Channel width and depth would remain fixed as represented in the application.
The dredging and nearshore disposal would result in temporary increases in turbidity and impacts to
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) are not anticipated due to the following of the deep water channel.
It should be noted that should the permit be issued, dredging by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will
also likely continue to some extent.
Submitted by: Heather Coats Date: February 20, 2019 Office: Wilmington
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality l Coastal Management
Wilmington Office 1127 Cardinal Drive Extension I Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
910 796 7215

Major Permit Fee Schedule
Project Name: DAQ O C'0• county: Check No & Amount:` 7s
(7fL,�orJ t��Cf" %(44(.311 I
C"ANJVPL VV\PnWTeAvjGC
DCM %
DWQ %
Development Type
Fee
(14300160143510009316256253)
(2430016024351000952341)
I. Private, non-commercial development
that does not involve the filling or
excavation of any wetlands or open water
areas:
$250
100%'($250)
0%1($0)
IC Public or commercial development that
does not involve the: filling or excavation
-
of any wetlands or open water areas:
$400
100%($400)
0%($0)
Ill. For development that involves the
filling and/or excavation: of up to 1 acre of
wetlands and/or open :water areas,
determine if&B C, or:D below applies.
Iil(A). Private, non-commercial
development, if General Water Quality
_.
Certification No. '4144 (See attached) can
be applied'
$250
100%>($250)
0%($0)
III(B) Public or commercial development,
if General Water Quality -Certification No.
4144 (See attached) can be applied:
$400
100%($400)
0%($0)
III(C). If General Water Quality
Certification No. 4144(see attached)
could be applied, but DCM staff
determined that additional review and
written DWQ concurrence is needed'
because of concerns related to water
quality or aquatic life.
$400 IL
60%($240)
40%($160)
III(D). If General Water Quality
Certification No. 4144 (see attached)
cannot be applied
$400
60%;($240)
40%($160)
IV. Development that involves the filling
and/or excavation of more than one acre
of wetlands and/or open water areae
$475
60%,($285)
40%($190)

0 12500 25000
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
OREGON INLET CHANNEL
MAINTENANCE PROJECT
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SHEET INDEX
1 COVER SHEET
2 PROJECT OVERVIEW
3 OREGON INLET & OCEAN BAR CHANNEL PLAN VIEW
4 OREGON INLET TO HELLS GATE CHANNEL PLAN VIEW
5 OLD HOUSE CHANNEL PLAN VIEW
6 OREGON INLET & OCEAN BAR CHANNEL CROSS SECTIONS A -A' & B -B'
7 OREGON INLET TO HELLS GATE CHANNEL CROSS SECTIONS C -C' & D -D'
8 OLD HOUSE CHANNEL CROSS SECTIONS E -E' & F -F'
GENERAL NOTES:
1. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM, NORTH AMERICAN
DATUM 1983, (NAD83).
2. ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED TO MLLW.
3. DATE OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY: FEBRUARY, 2016.
4. SURVEY DATA COLLECTED BY THE USACE ALONG THE OREGON INLET AND OCEAN BAR CHANNEL; NOVEMBER 20,
2018 (OREGON INLET BAR) & DECEMBER 13, 2018 (OREGON INLET SPIT)
5. SURVEY DATA COLLECTED BY THE USACE ALONG THE OREGON INLET TO HELLS GATE CHANNEL; SEPTEMBER
24-25, 2018 (RANGE 2-6) & DECEMBER 20, 2018 (OREGON INLET WEST RANGE 1)
6. SURVEY DATA COLLECTED BY THE USACE ALONG THE OLD HOUSE CHANNEL; AUGUST 8-9, 2018 (OLD HOUSE
CHANNEL RANGE 2) & DECEMBER 14, 2018 (RANGE 17 EXTENSION & OLD HOUSE CHANNEL RANGE 1
LEGEND
PRO] ECT LOCATION
RALEIGH - -
GP` CAPE HATTERAS — —
CHARLOTTE oY\
JACKSONVILLE • MOREHEAD CITY
z \
CAPE LOOKOUT
C � \
N.T.S. CAPE FEAR
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
i
3
i
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
i
4
Name DATE
CROSS SECTION LINE
DREDGE AREA
PROPOSED CHANNEL CORRIDOR
RECEIVED
FLq 13 " ::
DCM WILMINGTON, NO
N
r r
n ti
Z �o
W ate¢
Z "
z
W
._
Z C
Z
v
0.
J
Q Z
h IJ6
a O
O 00)
� °
J
ON
E oZ o
■�m z V
`w z o
F►
a Q° a
�z Q
co 3
c� 3
a
z
J
J O
z W Q
apv
u W Lu
U O U)
J z
z Q W
zW Z 7
O
Oz0 U
c Q
O
Lu
Q
0
DRAWING NO.
CS -1
SHEET 1 OF 1 OF 88

IN 763000
DISPOSAL
N 753000 ISLAND "L"
m m
wo
m
m
w
�N
w
F s
n ti
F-•
O O
O O
O O
1"
O
O
O
F
O
O
O
Z
o
as rn
W
W
W
ix
tL
Z
U.
BODIE ISLAND
Ns"_
W
`� OREGON INLET AND
OCEAN BAR CHANNEL
Z _
FOOTPRINT OF
Z o
REPLACEMENT BRIDGE x>>
'
a
q ATLANTIC j o
OCEA N LL
�0
\ O o�
p U
O Z a
m
i+ zO p
PROPOSED CHANNEL a a a
I � 2z�
CORRIDOR z 3
or 3
I
� I
OREGON
I �
DISPOSAL INLET �
ISLAND "C" /
J PORTION OF HERBERT C.
QLD HOUSE CHANNEL BONR BRIDGE TO REMAIN
NEAR SHORE DISPOSAL AREA INCLUDES THE —2,500
DISPOSAL
am—
ISLAND "MN"
Hl
w
O
t�
O
0
0
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
743000
DATE
PAMLICO
SOUND
Elm
r7}
OREGON INLETTO
HELLS GATE CHANNEL
(T
FOOT PORTION OF THE ACTIVE BEACH PROFILE THAT o
EXTENDS FROM 0.) FT. NAVD88 CONTOUR OUT TO
6 THE -24.0 FT. NAVD88 CONTOUR.
N 753000
kD
o
0
O
O
OI
RECEIVED
FEB 13 2010
CM WILMINGTON, NC
MAN
Z
PEA ISLAND
0 1250 2500
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
d
Z
w �
�WU rW
T-
>
u a w
wp >
�U O
zd
z w Z
0 - Z
uj °
��U a
w
a
o
DRAWING NO,
PV -1
SHE LT 2 Or N

ie
OREGON INLET T 1. r
HELLS GATE CHANNEL-,
1
BODIE ISLAN
O
0
O
2
SOUNDa
V, -
�p
C
4 , �• _
_�.
.a
�1.
10
T
r
_1
l _
'1
FOOTPRINT OF
> f
REPLACEMENT BRIDGE
/1 f
t r'' a
0
'
2
SOUNDa
V, -
�p
C
4 , �• _
_�.
.a
�1.
10
T
r
_1
l _
'1
77
"�• y ` ..` -
OREGON INLET AND
I LET
OCEAN BAR CHANNEL
PORTION
OF HERBERT C.
3°3°p°p BONNER BRIDGE TO REMAIN
s
0
0
A r A T ,-• . A A S r. f
_ __- r i
.,8.�
B�1
1. PROPOSED OREGON INLET AND OCEANBAR CHANNELS IS
NOT FIXED AND RATHER FOLLOW DEEPWATER AT TIME OF
MAINTENANCE. LOCATION SHOWN IS IEPRESENTATIVE
ONLY AND WILL CHANGE BASED ON BAFHYMETRY AT TIME
OF MAINTENANCE.
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION'
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
Name DATE
i IJ +1
1 f
/ ATLANTIC
l V OCEAN
13 1019
D C M W! LM INJGR "s
0 500 1000.
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FI'
a
LL' n
zWu zWz
az
U0 -a wil
F w i U w
J U Z >
za} z<
Zwz om �]
�za
W�III Z o �w
o`U 0O
W
a
a
0
DR,,V,Iry S NQS
PV -2
SHEET :s OF A I

DISPOSAL
ISLAND "L"
DISPOSAL _\
ISLAND "MN"
C
0
10"t-o�
OLD HOUSE CHANNELOD
--6
`s0
000
W da
W U -
FOOTPRINT OF a _
DISPOSAL REPLACEMENT BRIDGE W
ISLAND "C"j
ad
BODIE
ISLAND z ._
Zo
J u
0 1 a=
Z
Q 0
co10
�Cl ow
_ p J't- t-
/ x 4.2.. rQ Q a? a
O
t• � � 3
-
'�•.. OREGON INLET TO
.r.f
",♦ ~
_ - 'f,! HELLS GATE CHANNEL
co40
Ilb
o
PROPOSED CHANNEL - r
CORRIDOR
PAMLICO
SOUND
500
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
Name
DATE
1. PLACEMENT OF DREDGE SPOIL MATERIAL OV DISPOSAL
ISLAND MN, L, AND C IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE
PROPOSED ACTION.
2. PROPOSED OREGON INLET TO HELLS GATE-HANNEL IS
NOT FIXED AND RATHER FOLLOW DEEP WA -ER AT TIME OF
MAINTENANCE. LOCATION SHOWN IS REPRESENTATIVE
ONLY AND WILL CHANGE BASED ON BATHYMETRY AT TIME
OF MAINTENANCE.
OREGON INLET AND
OCEAN BAR CHANNEL
o"
PORTION OF HERBERT C. - � 1. 3 2019
BONNER BRIDGE TO REMAIN
DCM WILMINGTON, N
11 1000 1500
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
It
z_
� J
Lu
W
2 LLJ u O Z
u�� �vw
I- Lu
wu >
za}o z�W
zW (D (Dg
Quo LuLp
W<0 J
E
0 u W
°`W r
a
a
DRAWING NO.
PV -3
SHEET 4 OF R '

PAMLICO
SOUND
\000
DISPOSAL
ISLAND "MN"
RANGE 2
DISPOSAL
ISLAND "L"
PROPOSED CHANNEL
CORRIDOR
0000
F
M
6
RANGE 17 EXTENSION
RECEIVED
i, r
--l--,3 ' 1 13
A
0
IN
gN
z o0
z u-
5
z
W
z
z
J
ct u
c
Z
0
0 0
Eo.
'Z' oti'
Z
co
cn
0
DCM WILMINGTON, N
1 .2 W -j
0
U
cy 3:
T
U IL
F- ,, u
LU u
-i z z w
0 500 1000<z
UJ Z 0
0
Lu
GRAPHIC SCALE IN Fr cc
U 0
ui
o
DRAWING NO.
PV -4

10-
0-
10-
0
0010O -20
w -30
-40
CROSS SECTION A -A'
i
f
----------
EXISTING GRADE _-._--_-_._--
NOVEMBER 20, 2018
1L
J1 EXISTING GI
- - ---- — ---- NOVEMBER,
----- —
AND DECEM
-_—�—
`1
-----J---
= -14.0 ' MLLW 400'
AND DECEMBER 13, 2018
1
I
1
�
MAXIMUM AD
EL.
\
-14.0 ' MLLW
-500 0
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
Name
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
DISTANCE ALONG SECTION (FEET)
0 10 20 0 500 1000
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
CROSS SECTION B -B'
DATE
10-
5.
Lu
w
0
1
J
-5
O
< -10
Lu
J
Lu
-15
10
5
0
BADE
.012018
3ER 13, 2018
-10
-15
-1000 -500 0 500 1000
DISTANCE FROM CENTERLINE (FEET)
10 � 250 500
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
9000 10000 11000 12000
RECEIVED
F Flk 13 J':9
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
�R
,Y
h h.
� Oy1
W =x
W as
Z
r
z
W�
z E
z
J
da
b.
J G
Q Z
Q O �
O °
t3 g o Z6
mo (z) o
Aw z o i
CL ° 0 a
Q 56 a
pJ 2
M
as 3
a bo
J J m
Ozo�
hoz a.aa
t�-- _
VU, JUIn
U, C(:"
z'<o
2 Z>. Z M h
z U Z o z u
oE-z�w
0zp wC70Qtn
0�0U 0UN
o w 00
Q w
o u
DRAWING NO.
XS -1
SHEET 6 OF 8
f
----------
1L
J1 EXISTING GI
- - ---- — ---- NOVEMBER,
----- —
AND DECEM
`1
MAXIMUM AD EL.
= -14.0 ' MLLW 400'
10
5
0
BADE
.012018
3ER 13, 2018
-10
-15
-1000 -500 0 500 1000
DISTANCE FROM CENTERLINE (FEET)
10 � 250 500
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
9000 10000 11000 12000
RECEIVED
F Flk 13 J':9
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
�R
,Y
h h.
� Oy1
W =x
W as
Z
r
z
W�
z E
z
J
da
b.
J G
Q Z
Q O �
O °
t3 g o Z6
mo (z) o
Aw z o i
CL ° 0 a
Q 56 a
pJ 2
M
as 3
a bo
J J m
Ozo�
hoz a.aa
t�-- _
VU, JUIn
U, C(:"
z'<o
2 Z>. Z M h
z U Z o z u
oE-z�w
0zp wC70Qtn
0�0U 0UN
o w 00
Q w
o u
DRAWING NO.
XS -1
SHEET 6 OF 8

' 10
w 0
U.
J -10
-20
Q
Lu
W -30
CROSS SECTION C -Cl
-500 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
CROSS SECTION C -Cl
J
U
d
14000 15000 16000 17000 18000 19000 20000 21000 21500 -500 -250 0 250 500
DISTANCE ALONG SECTION (FEET) DISTANCE FROM CENTERLINE (FEET) z d
d
zGQ 0
u z V
ua�- wiU
L-0 ZUN
-iuz 2
0 10 20 0 500 1000 0 S 10^1 Z�-2�50 wZ� o u
- - Z Lu
QF - z wv�w
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT z Q nc -�
Cdco ow(A
w(1)0
RECEIVED
RECEIVED o
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION FF g 13 '2011 9 DRAWING no.
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
a
DCM WILMINGTON, NG XS -2
c
Name DATE SHEET 7 OF 8
7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 130001
EXISTING GRAD
i
3
EXISTING GRADE
0
' 1
EXISTING GRADE
w
0
SEPTEMBER 24-25, 2018 --
s
w
w
SEPTEMBER 24-25, 2018
20, 2018
AND DECEMBER 20, 2018
1L
�1
-5
5
G
1
-20
0
1
-10
L
AND DECEMBER 20, 2018
MAXIMUM AD EL.
_
-30
Lu
3
-15
I
w
MAXIMUM AD EL. \ 1
--- - ---- _ -12.0' M LLW - —_ ---- - ---- ___ _-.-�-
i
I
�---------
_ _— ------
---
cr
O
-
-15
i
w
v
v
7
IN
MAXIMUM
AD EL.
-1Z�M_LLW-----
4
-500 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
CROSS SECTION C -Cl
J
U
d
14000 15000 16000 17000 18000 19000 20000 21000 21500 -500 -250 0 250 500
DISTANCE ALONG SECTION (FEET) DISTANCE FROM CENTERLINE (FEET) z d
d
zGQ 0
u z V
ua�- wiU
L-0 ZUN
-iuz 2
0 10 20 0 500 1000 0 S 10^1 Z�-2�50 wZ� o u
- - Z Lu
QF - z wv�w
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT z Q nc -�
Cdco ow(A
w(1)0
RECEIVED
RECEIVED o
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION FF g 13 '2011 9 DRAWING no.
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
a
DCM WILMINGTON, NG XS -2
c
Name DATE SHEET 7 OF 8
7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 130001
�n r
lU
EXISTING GRAD
i
3
EXISTING GRADE
0
w
w
0
SEPTEMBER 24-25, 2018 --
s
w
w
�
20, 2018
AND DECEMBER 20, 2018
1L
�1
-5
5
G
1
-20
0
1
-10
L
Q
MAXIMUM AD EL.
_
-30
Lu
3
-15
I
w
MAXIMUM AD EL. \ 1
--- - ---- _ -12.0' M LLW - —_ ---- - ---- ___ _-.-�-
i
�---------
_ _— ------
---
�n r
lU
EXISTING GRAD
0
w
w
0
w
w
w
�
20, 2018
-10
1L
�1
-5
5
G
-20
0
0
-10
L
Q
MAXIMUM AD EL.
_
-30
Lu
ui
w
-15
w
o
CROSS SECTION D -D'
W =x
W CL
Z U.
0
z
W�
cd ,5
c�
�a
Z A
z i
J
ac
J 0
Q Z
u.
Q.
o�
0 o
... m z
Aw ZOO �H.
a az 4
00
2
"`
5
EXISTING GRAD
0
--- SEPTEMBER 24-
-- ---
--
AND DECEMBER
7
20, 2018
1L
�1
U
5
S
`°
f
.J
L
100'
MAXIMUM AD EL.
_
cEi�:
x�
N
_ -12.0' MLLW
W =x
W CL
Z U.
0
z
W�
cd ,5
c�
�a
Z A
z i
J
ac
J 0
Q Z
u.
Q.
o�
0 o
... m z
Aw ZOO �H.
a az 4
00
2
"`
5
0
E
25, 2018
20, 2018
U
- 5
`°
f
.J
L
ti N
U
cEi�:
x�
N
V
-10
cr
o
cr
O
-
-15
w
v
v
7

,v
z
s
s
CROSS SECTION E-EW d d
z "
10-
10
W
�v
c
F- 0 0 0 �a
w z
z
J -10 -10 J s
W
cj
� -2a q Z
LD —20 Q O
j o $
w
0-0
w -30 -30 a e
m z V
4w 0 d_
CL
-500 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 9500
DISTANCE ALONG SECTION (FEET)
`r 10 20 � 50�=000
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
fn
Gi u
K
CROSS SECTION F -F'
0
5 5
IDr4
Y =ko
W 0 tEn
o
AUGUST
2018 0
c
_5 -5 �d q� 52
aC cY um V"'
L
J
O -10 -10
H
>
-15 -15 2
s W ,
J (i.
W ice'
z W Q Z
W
uuja _Ln
-soo -250 0 250 sao -j z z w o
DISTANCE FROM CENTERLINE (FEET) z w z o u
tufo N
2 WQO U)
wzu Ln
RECEIVED Q d 01
Y Q V
0 S 10 0 125 250 FF� � � 20��
r NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION —
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT DRAWING NO.
DCIM WILMINGTON, NC XS -3
k
Name DATE SWEET 8 OF 8
i
EXISTING GRADE
� w
AUGUST 8-9, 2oi8
AND DECEMBER 14,
3
EXISTING GRADE
I-_—
MAXIMUM AD EL.
� 100'
AUGUST $-9, 2018
_ -12.0' MLLW
AND DECEMBER 14, 2018
MAXIMUM AD E L.!^-
_ -12.0 ' M LLW
}
t
f
i
EXISTING GRADE
AUGUST 8-9, 2oi8
AND DECEMBER 14,
3
3
I-_—
MAXIMUM AD EL.
� 100'
_ -12.0' MLLW