20191032 Ver 1_CAMA Application_20190730

'kudubOn NORTH CAROLINA
July 17, 2019
807 East. Main Street
Suite 220-2
Durham, NC 27701
Dawn York
Moffatt & Nichol
272 N. Front Street
Suite 204
Wilmington, NC 28401
Dear Dawn,
As the state office of the National Audubon Society, Inc., Audubon North Carolina has owned
Wainwright Island since 1992 (deed attached) and has managed it for the benefit of nesting waterbirds
since that time. We are pleased to offer our support for your grant application titled "Building Adaptive
Shorelines for Resilient Coastal Communities (Carteret County, NC)" for the following reasons.
Wainwright Island has been monitored by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission and Audubon North
Carolina since the 1970s. During that time it has regularly supported up to 16 coastal species of colonial
waterbird, as well as American Oystercatchers and Willets. Numbers of many of these species are
significant to healthy state- and region -wide populations, including Brown Pelican, Common Tern (state
endangered species), Forster's Tern, Glossy Ibis, Great Egret, Little Blue Heron, and Tricolored Heron. In
particular, Wainwright has most consistently provided important nesting habitat for Royal and Sandwich
Terns. In some years, the island has hosted the largest colony of Royal Terns in the state (5,168 pairs).
Significant numbers of Royal Terns (>500 pairs) occupy an average of only five sites in North Carolina
annually, and significant numbers of Sandwich Terns (>200) occupy an average of only four annually.
Wainwright is also the only nesting site for these species between the areas of Harker's Island and
Ocracoke Inlet, allowing these terns which primarily prey on baitfish to capitalize on the excellent
foraging habitat in Core Sound. For example, Wainwright received sand in the late winter of 2017. Royal
and Sandwich Terns immediately capitalized on the newly suitable habitat that same year. Both the
number of terns that can use it, and the paucity of suitable nesting islands for them state-wide makes it
critical that Wainwright remains available for nesting birds in the future. Therefore, providing sand for
Wainwright and protecting that habitat with living shoreline and/or other green infrastructure is in the
interest of waterbird management in North Carolina.
Audubon North Carolina recognizes the importance of the channel Wainwright Slough to the local Down
East economy. Maintaining the navigational channel between Core Sound and Pamlico Sound creates
economic opportunities for commercial and recreational fishermen and also provides safe and reliable
passage for dredges, Coast Guard vessels, and other civic or emergency craft. We are pleased that in this

instance, dredging a channel can also benefit wildlife, especially with the addition of living shoreline to
the project.
Audubon North Carolina supports the protection of shorelines through green infrastructure, which is
more resilient to sea -level rise and which also benefits marine ecosystems by providing habitat for
juvenile fish, crustaceans, and other sea life. These species contribute to a healthy food web that
supports not only the birds that use the island, but other wildlife and human fishermen as well.
Developing, implementing, and learning from projects of this kind will be even more important in the
future, as the impacts of climate change are felt across the coast.
Therefore, we support this project, and for the October 2019 — August 2022 grant period, we can
commit $16,441 to the project through in-kind donations of boat time, truck miles, staff time, and
volunteer hours.
Thank you for this opportunity to partner with you again,
Curtis Smalling
Director of Conservation
828-406-1685
[e-mail]

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

Red -cockaded woodpecker
Picoides borealis
E
Current
Red knot
Calidris canutus rufa
T
Current
Roseate tern
Sterna dougallii dougallii
T
Current
Shortnose sturgeon
Acipenser brevirostrum
E
Current
West Indian manatee
Trichechus manatus
E
Current
Rough -leaved loosestrife
Lysimachia asperulaefolia
E
Current
Seabeach amaranth
Amaranthus pumilus
T
Current
Definitions of Federal Status Codes:
E = Endangered. A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
T = Threatened. A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of
its range."
T(S/A) = threatened due to similarity of appearance
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/carteret.htmi. Accessed December 6, 2016
Species Evaluation
American alligator: The American alligator is a species endemic to the southeastern United States.
Alligators inhabits freshwater wetlands, such as marshes and cypress swamps from Texas to North
Carolina and are not found in the open ocean or in saltwater habitats.
Status: The Wainwright Slough project area does not contain habitat suitable for this species.
Sea Turtles: Sea turtles are migratory species found in open ocean environments. Listed species may be
found along the North Carolina coast between May land November 1. Several species may feed in the
project area (especially green, Kemps and loggerheads) or migrate through the Sound, but the National
Marine Fishery Service has determined that hydraulic pipeline dredges are unlikely to adversely affect
sea turtles.
Status: Sea turtle nesting habitat is confined to oceanfront beaches. Due to its estuarine location,
Wainwright Island would not provide suitable nesting habitat for this species.
Piping plover: The piping plover is a winter resident of the beaches of North Carolina while nesting
further north. Birds usually return to the same areas for nesting every year. Nest sites are simple
depressions or scrapes in the sand.
Status: Due to its estuarine location, Wainwright Island does not provide suitable nesting or feeding
habitat for this beach oriented species.
Red -cockaded woodpecker: Red -cockaded woodpeckers live in groups and utilize large, live pine trees
(usually long leaf pine) on uplands as nesting sites for their colonies. They forage in the adjacent pine
woodlands.
Status: The Wainwright Slough project area does not contain habitat suitable for this species.
Red knot: Red knots migrate in large flocks northward through the contiguous United States mainly
April -June and southward July -October. Nesting occurs further north and some locations (such as the
Chesapeake Bay) provide critical feeding sites during migration. The preferred habitat for these
2

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

Summary
A determination has been made that the proposed project is not likely to adversely impact or affect any
federally listed threatened or endangered species or their critical habitat. This determination has been
based on a brief analysis of conditions and habitat potential in the project area compared with individual
species' documented presence or absence, life requisites, and feeding or nesting requirements.
4

NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
30 July 2019
MEMORANDUM.
FROM: Gregg Bodnar, Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
NCDEQ - Division of Coastal Management
400 Commerce Ave., Morehead City, NC 28557
Fax: [phone] (Courier 04-16-33)
gregq.bodnar(a_ncdenr.gov
SUBJECT: CAMA Major Permit Application Review
Applicant: Carteret County Board of Commissioners #29-17
ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
BRAXTON DAVIS
Director, Division at Coastal
Management
Project Location: Conflux of Pamlico and Core Sounds at Wainwright Slough
Proposed Project: Proposes to perform dredging to maintain Wainwright Slough to follow deep
water for a possible alignment outside the federally designated channel, in
Carteret County
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and
return this form to Gre_p_p Bodnar at the address above by 20 August 2019. If you have any questions
regarding the proposed project, contact Ryan Davenport [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.
PRINT NAME
AGENCY
SIGNATURE
DATE
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.
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405 919 796 7215

Essential Fish Habitat
Assessment for Channel
Dredging and Wainwright
Slough Dredge Placement
Project
Carteret County, North Carolina
Prepared for:
Carteret County
Submitted to:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration Fisheries
April 19, 2019
Prepared by:
rnoffatt & nichol
4700 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27609

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment -
Table of Contents
1. Introduction.................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Site Description.........................................................................................................................2
1.2 Project Description....................................................................................................................2
2. Description of Alternatives..........................................................................................................3
2.1 Alternative 1: No Action............................................................................................................3
2.2 Alternative 2: Applicant's Preferred Alternative — Maintaining navigability and restoring
WainwrightIsland.....................................................................................................................3
3. Essential Fish Habitat..................................................................................................................3
3.1 Habitat Elements.......................................................................................................................3
3.1.1 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation/Seagrass.......................................................................5
3.1.2 Aquatic Bed (Tidal Freshwater).......................................................................................6
3.1.3 Estuarine Water Column/Creeks.....................................................................................6
3.1.4 Primary Nursery Areas.....................................................................................................6
4. Managed Species.........................................................................................................................6
4.1 SAFMC, MAFMC, and NMFS-managed Species........................................................................6
4.1.1 Black Sea Bass (Centropristis striata)..............................................................................8
4.1.2 Bluefish............................................................................................................................8
4.1.3 Butterfish (Peprilus triacanthus).....................................................................................8
4.1.4 Summer Flounder (Paralichthys dentatus).....................................................................9
4.1.5 Penaeid and Rock Shrimp (Penaeus spp. and Sicyonia spp.)..........................................9
4.1.6 Snapper Grouper Management Group...........................................................................9
4.1.7 Coastal Migratory Pelagic Species..................................................................................9
4.1.8 Highly Migratory Species..............................................................................................10
4.1.9 Spiny Lobster.................................................................................................................10
4.2 ASMFC-managed Species........................................................................................................10
4.3 NCDEQ-NCDMF.......................................................................................................................10
5. Potential Impacts to EFH...........................................................................................................11
5.1 Short-term and Temporary Impacts........................................................................................11
5.2 Permanent and Long-term Impacts........................................................................................11
Moffatt & Nichol I TOC

Essential Fish Habitat AssessmentNOAA Fisheries
5.3 Managed Species Effects Determination................................................................................12
5.3.1 NCDEQ-NCDMF Managed Species Impacts..................................................................14
6. Summary....................................................................................................................................14
7. Reference..................................................................................................................................16
Moffatt & Nichol I TOC

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
1. Introduction
Carteret County (County) is requesting federal and state authorization to conduct maintenance dredging
within the federally authorized channel of Wainwright Slough, Ranges 2, 2A, and 3. Wainwright Slough,
authorized under the River and Harbor Act of 1899 (amended 1935), was originally dredged in 1935. The
channel lies near Cedar Island in the southern portion of Pamlico Sound near the Cape Lookout National
Seashore connecting the Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor and serving as an important passage for
commercial and recreational anglers. Wainwright represents the only viable navigational thoroughfare for
the Down East fishing industry connecting Core Sound to Pamlico Sound.
Figure 1: Project Location Map
The Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 USC 1801 et seq.) requires the US
Secretary of Commerce to develop guidelines assisting regional fisheries management councils on the
identification and creation of management and conservation plans for EFH. Each council is required to amend
existing fisheries management plans (FMP) to include EFH designations and conservation requirements. The
act also requires federal agencies to consult with the Secretary of Commerce on all actions, or proposed
actions, authorized, funded, or undertaken by the agency that might adversely affect EFH.
All EFH is defined as "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth
to maturity" (16 USC 1802(10)). "Waters" include aquatic areas and their associated physical, chemical, and
biological properties that are used by fish and may include aquatic areas historically used by fish, where
appropriate. "Substrate" includes sediment, hard bottom structures underlying the waters, and associated
biological communities. "Necessary" means the habitat is required to support a sustainable fishery and the
managed species' contribution to a healthy ecosystem. "Spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity"
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 1

Essential Fish Habitat AssessmentNOAA Fisheries
covers a species' full life cycle. The designation of EFH is required only for species or species units for which
councils have developed FMPs.
1.1. Site Description
Carteret County is in southeastern North Carolina within the Tidewater Region of the Atlantic Coastal Plain
physiographic province. Topography in the area consists of nearly level and gently sloping land that drains
primarily into Pamlico Sound, one of the largest estuaries in the United States (NCSU, 2016). Wainwright
Slough is approximately five miles northeast of the Cedar Island Ferry Landing in Carteret County. The
channel connects Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, and Wainwright Slough serves as a conduit for
passage of commercial and recreational anglers between Beaufort Harbor and Pamlico Sound. The survey
area established for this study in which EFH habitat has been investigated is the new 87.7 -acre potential
dredging corridor and adjacent waters immediately surrounding this area.
1.2. Project Description
The proposed action responds to the following underlying needs:
• Budget shortfalls in the US Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) navigation maintenance program
have led to significant shoaling of Wainwright Slough due to no recent maintenance activities
within the channel.
• Wainwright Slough is the only marked navigable route for local fishing vessels in this area of Pamlico
Sound.
The project was authorized under the River and Harbor Act of 1899 (amended August 30, 1935). The channel
was originally dredged in 1935. Fifteen documented maintenance activities occurred in portions of the
channel through 1968, with occasional maintenance dredging occurring after 1968 on an as -needed basis
(USACE 1995a). The channel historically was dredged approximately once every three to four years, but due
to budget shortfalls in the USACE navigation maintenance program, the channel has not been dredged for
many years. Historically, dredged material has been placed at the toe -of -the -bank on the channel (east) side
of Wainwright Island. Due to the disposal area's location, dredged material tends to return to the channel in
a relatively short amount of time. Historically, scoping and permitting requirements for Wainwright Slough
were managed and completed by the USACE Wilmington District - South Atlantic Division and culminated in
an Environmental Assessment (EA) dated June 1995. A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for
Maintenance Dredging at Wainwright Slough was issued in August 1995 (USACE 1995b). The EA and
associated FONSI covered the action to place dredge material on the island's non -channel side.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 2

Essential Fish Habitat AssessmentNOAA Fisheries
2. Description of Alternatives
This section describes the alternatives evaluated for responding to the shoaling within the channel and the
disposal of dredge material to restore Wainwright Island. The analysis of alternatives is based on meeting the
project purpose and need as defined (to restore commercial and recreational navigation through Wainwright
Slough, to maintain and sustain economic benefits from the local commercial fishing industry, recreational
fishing, and local tourism), in addition to minimizing adverse environmental consequences. This EFH report
focuses on impacts resulting from the Preferred Alternative. The alternatives evaluated include:
• Alternative 1: No Action
• Alternative 2: Applicant's Preferred Alternative - Maintaining navigability and restoring Wainwright
Island
2.1. Alternative 1: No Action
The "No Action" alternative involves maintaining existing conditions of the Wainwright Slough channel.
USACE has not been able to perform maintenance activities in the channel; therefore, navigation would
remain impassible and potentially dangerous in the future. The potential for economic, health, and safety
impacts would remain and possibly become more significant with time.
2.2. Alternative 2: Applicant's Preferred Alternative - Maintaining
Navigability and Restoring Wainwright Island
In an attempt to re-establish and maintain the channel navigability, Carteret County is seeking a permit
that would allow dredging and placement of materials to restore Wainwright Island.
The County's request for authorization to move the channel to deeper water on the "dogleg" portion of the
alignment will result in minimized dredging volumes and costs in addition to reduced environmental effects.
The managed width and depth of the channel would continue to be the same as currently permitted and
routed through a "corridor." The channel will be dredged to -7 MLLW with an additional 2 feet proposed as
an overdepth tolerance for up to a maximum of 45,000 cubic yards (CY) for each event (Appendix D — Permit
Drawings). SAV as mapped existing vegetation and suitable habitat will be avoided.
Following historical practice, the dredge sediment will be used to help create nesting and foraging bird
habitat by open placement of the material adjacent to the Audubon Society -owned Wainwright Island.
Sediment placement will occur over a maximum footprint of 10 acres up to an elevation of +1.5 MLLW. This
elevation marks the approximate highest elevation of the existing Wainwright Island. The slopes and grades
of the material placement site will be constructed to encourage nesting and foraging bird activities to the
extent reasonable. In addition, the top or surface of the site will be smooth graded to discourage water
ponding or entrapment.
3. Essential Fish Habitat
3.1. Habitat Elements
Pursuant to the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Public Law 94-265) and the
1996 amendments to the Act, known as the Sustainable Fisheries Act (Public Law 104-297), an EFH
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 3

Essential Fish Habitat AssessmentNOAA Fisheries
requires that EFH be identified for all fish species managed by the South Atlantic Fisheries Management
Council (SAFMC), the Mid -Atlantic Fisheries Management Council (MAFMC), and National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). This EFH assessment's
objective is to determine whether the actions for the proposed project "may adversely affect" designated
EFH for relevant managed fisheries species within the proposed project area.
A list of EFH habitat types and their presence or absence in the project area is provided in Table 1.
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) is found in both SAV/seagrass and tidal freshwater (aquatic bed)
habitat categories. Habitats are described in more detail in following sections.
Table 1: EFH Types Potentially Found in Project Area
EFH Type
Found in
Project Area
Inshore
•
Estuarine emergent wetlands
No
•
Estuarine forested wetlands
No
•
Estuarine shrub/scrub (mangrove)
No
•
Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV)/Seagrass
Yes
•
Oyster reef and shell bank
No
•
Intertidal flats/mud bottoms
No
•
Palustrine emergent and forested (freshwater)
No
•
Aquatic bed (tidal freshwater) *
Yes
•
Estuarine water colum n/creeks
Yes
Marine
•
Live/hard bottom
No
•
Coral and coral reef
No
•
Artificial/man-made reef
No
•
Sargassum
No
•
Water column
No
* Includes SAV in shallow areas.
Figure 2 (below) depicts locations of EFH areas in Pamlico Sound within the proposed action area. The EFH
identified in the Fisheries Management Plans (FMP) amendments of the SAFMC that are in proximity to this
site include Estuarine Water Column/Creeks and Aquatic Beds (Tidal Freshwater). Those identified in the
MAFMC that are present within the project area include SAV/Seagrass and Estuarine Water Column/Creeks.
Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) are subsets of designated EFH. Under the South Atlantic HAPC,
SAV is a designated HAPC and can be found in proximity of the project area.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 4

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment •
Figure 2: EFH Area Locations
3.1.1. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation/Seagrass
The shallow waters (6 feet deep or less) of Pamlico Sound provide habitat and potential habitat for
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) beds. North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission (NCMFC) defines SAV
habitat as area currently vegetated with one or more appropriate SAV species or has been vegetated by one
or more species within the past 10 growing seasons, as well as meets the average growing conditions needed
(water depth of 6 feet or less, average light availability [Secchi depth of one foot or more], and limited wave
exposure).
SAV habitats are typically rich in invertebrates and serve as important foraging areas, in addition to providing
many juvenile and adult fish refuges from predators. SAV also plays a role in stabilizing sediment, nutrient
cycling, reduction of wave energy, and provision of organic matter that supports complex food webs (North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission [NCWRC], 2005). For these reasons, SAV habitat is considered
Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) for several managed fish species. The distribution and
composition of SAV habitat is influenced by several factors; among the most important factors are salinity,
light, nutrient levels, and wave action.
Because SAV distribution, abundance, and density varies seasonally and annually in response to climatic
variability coupled with its sensitivity to other stressors, large-scale SAV changes may occur. Major threats to
SAV habitat include water quality degradation from dredging activities, excessive nutrient and sediment
loading, plus the emerging threat of accelerated sea level rise, barrier island stability, and increasing water
temperatures (Deaton et al., 2010).
Moffatt & Nichol was contracted to perform a SAV survey in the general vicinity of a new potential dredging
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 5

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
corridor, east of the previous project area from 2016. Protocols generally followed the 2016 survey
protocols, but were modified due to the larger site, time constraints, and an approaching storm. State and
federal resource agencies required the survey as a measure to help identify potential impacts the project
may create for any existing SAV within the proposed work areas.
SAV presence was widespread within the 2018 project area. Most of the SAV is concentrated in areas mapped
as SAV on NC One Map, with often smaller patchy clumps being distributed throughout the project area, with
the main exception being along the western edge of the project area, and some areas to the south.
3.1.2. Aquatic Bed (Tidal Freshwater)
Aquatic bed habitats in the project area include the soft bottom substrate of the Pamlico Sound. This habitat
type is comprised of sand as well as inorganic muds, organic muds, and peat. Nutrients are typically provided
by riverine sources and transported via wind tides in addition to lunar tidal exchange. The abundance of
benthic macroalgae in this habitat supports a high diversity of invertebrates that are an important fishery
food source. Shallow areas less than 6 feet deep within this habitat type can also support SAV populations
(Street et al., 2005).
3.1.3. Estuarine Water Column/Creeks
The estuarine water column extends from the estuarine bottom to the surface waters and is especially
important as it directly affects all other estuarine aquatic habitats (NCWRC, 2005). This habitat is
characterized by the oligohaline (estuarine) waters present in Pamlico Sound with seasonally variable salinity
levels. Distinct zones within the water column can be defined by parameters such as salinity, temperature,
and dissolved oxygen. Water column zonation continually fluctuates and is a function of tidal dynamics,
season, nutrient levels, and ocean proximity. Fish and shellfish often exploit distinct resources within the
water column based on species-specific diet, behavior, and morphology. For example, pelagic fishes (living
higher in the water column) and demersal fishes (bottom dwelling) have adapted to take advantage of these
different habitats, and favorable spawning and feeding conditions can occur at varying locations at different
times of the year.
3.1.4. Primary Nursery Areas
While not a single specific EFH type, Primary Nursery Areas (PNA) are composed of several EFH types and are
state -designated waters that are used by marine and estuarine fishes and invertebrates during early
development. Secondary Nursery Areas (SNA) typically occur in the lower reaches of streams and bays.
Nursery areas are designated and regulated by NC Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF) and NCWRC in some
areas. These areas are typically shallow waters with soft bottom substrate that are surrounded by marshes
and wetlands. The abundance of refuge, foraging habitat, and food resources present in these areas result in
the successful development of many sub -adult organisms (Beck et al., 2000). Nursery areas are considered
HAPC for several managed fish species. There are no designated Primary or Secondary Nursery Areas within
the project area.
4. Managed Species
4.1. SAFMC, MAFMC, and NMFS-managed Species
SAFMC and MAFMC have developed FMPs for several species, or species units (SAFMC, 2008; MAFMC, 2008),
although not all these species are found in the project area. Highly migratory species' FMPs and Atlantic billfish
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 6

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
FMPs were developed by the Highly Migratory Species Management Unit, Office of Sustainable Fisheries,
NMFS (NMFS, 1999a; NMFS, 1999b). As part of each FMP, the council designates not only EFH, but also HAPC,
a subset of EFH that refers to specific locations required by a life stage(s) of that managed species.
Table 2 presents the species or species units for which EFH and/or HAPC exist, and the occurrence of these
species within the project area.
The sections that follow describe managed species that are found in the project area and their associated
EFHs.
Table 2: Project Area Managed Species, EFH and HAPC
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 7
Present
Life Stages Present
Designated EFH in
HAPC in
Species
in Project
in Project Area
Project Area
Project Area
Mid -Atlantic Fisheries Management Council (MAFMC)
Atlantic mackerel (Scomber
scombrus)
No
None
None
None
Atlantic surfclam (Spisula
solidissima)
No
None
None
None
Black sea bass' (Centropristis
No
None
None
SAV
striata)
Bluefish (Pomatomus salatrix)
Yes
Juveniles, Adults
Estuarine Water
None
Column/Creeks
Butterfish (Peprilus triacanthus) z
Yes
Eggs, Larvae,
Estuarine Water
None
Juveniles, Adults
Column/Creeks
Spiny dogfish (Squalus
acanthius)
No
None
None
None
Longfin squid (Loligo pealei)
No
None
None
None
Monkfish (Lophius americanus)
No
None
None
None
Ocean quahog (Artica islandica)
No
None
None
None
Summer Flounder (Paralichthys
Larvae, Juveniles,
Estuarine Water
dentatus)
Yes
Adults
Column/Creeks,
SAV
SAV, Aquatic Beds
Scup (Stenotomus chrysops)
No
None
None
None
Shortfin squid (Illex
illecebrosus)
No
None
None
None
Tilefish (Lopholatilus
chamaeleonticeps)
No
None
None
None
South Atlantic Fisheries Management Council (SAFMC)
Penaid and Rock Shrimp
Larvae, Juveniles,
Estuarine Water
(Penaeus spp. and Sicyonia
Yes
Column/Creeks,
None
Adults
spp.)
SAV, Aquatic Beds
Estuarine
Water
Larvae, Juveniles,
Estuarine Water
Column/
Snapper grouper management
Yes'
Adults
Column/Creeks, SAV
Creeks, SAV
unit
Golden crab (Chaeceon fenneri)
No
None
None
None
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 7

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
Spiny Lobster (2 Species)
Spiny lobster (Panulirus argus)
Eggs, Larvae,
Estuarine Water
Slipper lobster (Scyllarides
Yes
Juveniles, Adults
Column/Creeks,
None
nodifer)
SAV, Aquatic Beds
Coastal migratory pelagic
Yes a
Larvae, Juveniles,
Estuarine Water
species
Adults
Column/Creeks
None
Sargassum (Sargassum spp.)
No
None
None
None
Calico scallop (Agopecten
gibbus)
No
None
None
None
Coral, coral reef, and live/hard
No
None
None
None
bottom habitat
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
Highly migratory species
Yes
Estuarine Water
(Bluefin
Juveniles
Column/Creeks, SAV,
None
(sharks, tuna, swordfish)
Tuna)
Aquatic Beds
Billfish
No
None
None
None
Source: MAFMC, 2008; SAFMC, 2008; NMFS, 1999a, 1999b.
1 No EFH or HAPC designated for black sea bass by MAFMC is located within the project area; however, black sea bass
are included in the snapper grouper management unit under SAFMC.
2 No EFH or HAPC designated for butterfish by MAFMC is located within the project area; however, because of
catch records of butterfish, the estuarine waters of Pamlico Sound are included as "inshore" EFH.
3 Species from this management unit that have been recorded near the project area include black sea bass, red
grouper, and Atlanticspadefish.
4 Spanish mackerel is the only species from this management unit recorded near the project area.
4.1.1. Black Sea Bass (Centropristisstriata)
The black sea bass is a demersal species found from Maine to Florida that are opportunistic feeders and
accept a variety of food sources. As juveniles and adults, this species is associated with submerged structures
in estuarine and marine waters. Spawning occurs offshore from May to October along the continental shelf in
an area extending from southern New England to North Carolina. Eggs are generally hatched on the
continental shelf near large estuaries, but eggs have also been found in bays in North Carolina. Juvenile Black
Sea Bass enter estuaries during late spring and early summer to forage on invertebrate prey and small fish.
This species is typically not found in the Pamlico Sound, but fishing reports from NCDMF have shown
presence of this species in the last 10 years. MAFMC does not currently designate any EFH or HAPC areas for
black sea bass within the project area, however, SAFMC considers black sea bass one of the 70 species
included in the Snapper Grouper Management Unit. All tidal and estuarine waters, including estuarine water
column and potential SAV habitat are designated EFH for this species. Additionally, SAV habitat within the
project area is considered HAPC for this species.
4.1.2. Bluefish
Bluefish are primarily pelagic fish found over the continental shelf (NOAA, 2016a). Adults are piscivorous (fish -
eating) and feed on small bait fish in inshore and estuarine habitats. While not typically found in oligohaline
waters such as Pamlico Sound, bluefish do occur within the project area based on nearby fishing records.
Spawning takes place on the continental shelf at different times of the year depending on location, and eggs
are not found in estuarine waters. However, as larvae develop, they may cross into inshore and estuarine
waters.
There are no EFH areas designated for eggs and larvae within the project area, but EFH exists for juveniles
and adults within the estuarine water column/creeks. No HAPC for bluefish adults and juveniles has been
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 8

Essential Fish Habitat AssessmentNCIAA Fisheries
identified in this area.
4.1.3. Butterfish (Peprilustriacanthus)
Butterfish spawning occurs offshore, but eggs and larvae can be found in estuaries. All life stages may make
use of estuaries during growth. MAFMC has designated both inshore and offshore EFH for all life stages of
butterfish. Inshore EFH is defined as the estuarine "mixing zone" where fresh and saline waters converge.
Appropriate potential habitat exists within the project area for butterfish and local fishing records indicate
butterfish have been documented in Pamlico Sound; therefore, the estuarine water column has been
included as EFH for this species.
4.1.4. Summer Flounder (Paralichthysdentatus)
The summer flounder is estuarine -dependent and is found along the Atlantic coast from Maine to Florida.
Spawning occurs from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras between October and May along the continental shelf in
waters 30 to 60 feet deep. In later winter and spring, larvae enter estuaries to develop into juveniles. In the
fall, juveniles migrate to the open ocean. Adult summer flounder utilize estuaries on a seasonal basis.
MAFMC designates all tidal estuarine waters, including potential SAV habitat and aquatic beds, as EFH for all
life stages except eggs. SAV habitat that occurs in Pamlico Sound is also considered a HAPC for summer
flounder.
Penaeid and Rock Shrimp (Penaeus spp. and Sicyonia spp.)
Penaeid shrimp (white, pink, and brown shrimp) are estuarine -dependent species of commercial and
ecological significance. Penaeid shrimp spawn offshore where both larval and post -larval development
occurs. Currents carry post -larval shrimp into estuaries, where they are distributed based on salinity and
substrate preferences. As shrimp grow, they migrate to higher salinity areas before returning to offshore
spawning areas. All tidal and estuarine waters within the project area including SAV habitat and aquatic beds
are designated as EFH for penaeidshrimp.
4.1.5. Snapper Grouper Management Group
The Snapper Grouper Management Group includes more than 70 species that are managed by the SAFMC.
Red grouper, Atlantic spadefish, and black sea bass are species within this group that have been documented
near or within the project area. Black sea bass have been previously discussed and have been documented in
Pamlico Sound.
Red grouper spawn from early winter to late spring and occur in shallow nearshore reef habitats. Juveniles
move to deeper waters at sexual maturity and movements of adults are extensive but are not well known.
While not typically found in oligohaline waters, local fishing reports have documented presence of this
species within Pamlico Sound in or near the project area.
Atlantic spadefish are opportunistic bottom feeders that utilize a variety of brackish water and nearshore
habitats. Spawning occurs from May to September and juveniles are typically found in estuarine waters while
adults are typically found in nearshore areas. Atlantic spadefish have been documented in local fishing
reports in or near the project area.
4.1.6. Coastal Migratory Pelagic Species
The only coastal migratory pelagic species found near the project area is the Spanish mackerel. Spanish
mackerel spawn from May to September (SAFMC, 1998), with eggs and larvae using pelagic habitats and
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 9

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment I Carteret County / NOAA Fisheries
juveniles moving into estuaries for use as nursery areas. While typically not found in oligohaline waters such
as Pamlico Sound, Spanish mackerel do occur in the area based on commercial fishing data. Estuarine water
column/creek habitats are designated as EFH by SAFMC in the management of this unit because prey items
for species in this unit are typically estuarine dependent. There are no HAPCs designated by SAFMC for
Spanish mackerel in the project area.
4.1.7. Highly Migratory Species
Atlantic bluefin tuna juveniles are the only highly migratory species with EFH in the project area (NOAA,
2009). Bluefin tuna generally spawn in the Gulf of Mexico, migrating to the mid -east coast of Florida where
they remain until development into juveniles. Juveniles can be found from North Carolina waters to coastal
waters in the northeastern United States. Adults are pelagic and can be found from the Gulf of Mexico to
waters off the northeastern United States coast. The project area and general project vicinity contains EFH
for juvenile bluefin tuna in the estuarine water column/creeks, SAV areas, and aquatic bed habitats.
4.1.8. Spiny Lobster
Spiny lobster and slipper lobster have EFH for all life stages within the project area. EFH includes estuarine
water column/creeks, aquatic bed, and SAV (NOAA, 2016b). The spiny and slipper lobster larvae are typically
found in open ocean in the epipelagic zone of the Caribbean Sea, Gulf of Mexico, and the straits of Florida.
Post -larvae and juveniles occupy shallow waters of bays, lagoons, and reef flats, habitats supported by the
production of seagrasses, benthic algae, phytoplankton, and detritus. As the lobsters increase in size, they
move towards deeper waters in bays, reefs, and nearshore areas. As adults, they can be found in deeper
waters both nearshore and offshore.
4.2. ASMFC-managed Species
The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) coordinates additional conservation and
management of states' shared nearshore fishery resources. Member states include North Carolina, South
Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode
Island, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Maine. Species managed by the ASMFC that are found in the
Pamlico Sound and nearshore waters include: American eel (Anguilla rostrata), Atlantic croaker
(Micropogonias undulatus), Atlantic menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus), black sea bass, blueback herring (Alosa
aestivalis), bluefish, red drum (Sciaenops ocellatus), spot (Leiostomusxanthurus), spotted sea trout
(Cynoscion nebulosus), southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma), striped bass (Morone saxatilis), summer
flounder, and weakfish (Cynoscion regalis).
4.3. NCDEQ-NCDMF
The Fisheries Reform Act of 1997 (FRA) prompted NCDMF to begin the process of developing FMPs for all
commercially or recreationally important species and fisheries that are found in state marine or estuarine
waters, with the goal of ensuring the long-term sustainability of these fisheries. Species with existing or in -
development management plans include: river herring [blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis) and alewife (Alosa
pseudoharengus)], shrimp (Penaeus spp.), striped bass, southern flounder, blue crab (Callinectes sapidus), red
drum, oysters (Crassostrea virginica), hard clams (Mercenaria mercenaria), bay scallop (Argopecten irradians),
kingfish (Menticirrhus americanus), and striped mullet (Mugulcephalus).
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 10

Essential Fish Habitat AssessmentNOAA Fisheries
5. Potential Impacts to EFH
Historic and present stressors to fish and EFH communities in the Pamlico Sound have occurred because of
fluctuations in nutrient loading, turbidity, and salinity as well as increased fishing pressures. Turbidity and
wave exposure are important factors in affecting the distribution of habitat quality near the project area.
Impacts created by the Preferred Alternative are primarily localized short-term impacts and will not have a
permanent additive effect on fish and EFH stressors within the project area.
Actions taken during project design and implementation phases will ensure that the Applicant's Preferred
Alternative avoids or minimizes direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to identified EFH and associated
species in proximity to the project. The work will be conducted using a hydraulic dredge and pipeline system.
The material placement site will be constructed to discourage sediment from flowing back into the navigation
channel. The contractor will erect temporary sand dikes along the flow way of the placement site to help
direct the dredge slurry away from the navigation channel. The dikes will be constructed from the initial
dredge material to reduce disturbance of the placement area. The dikes will be extended and maintained in a
fashion to help limit the turbidity plume leaving the work area.
5.1. Short-term and Temporary Impacts
Construction associated with the Preferred Alternative would take place in Pamlico Sound, and include
channel dredging and the subsequent placement of dredged material around Wainwright Island.
Construction activities will produce noise, turbidity, and siltation, thereby creating short-term, localized
impacts to EFH identified in the project area and possibly to targeted management species. Dredging
activities could create a short-term decrease in dissolved oxygen. Many, if not all, of the fish species with EFH
within the project area would be expected to escape the area during construction activities, and construction
disturbances would not be expected to be lethal to any fish species with EFH within the project area.
At the ecosystem level, increased turbidity could result in reduced ecosystem productivity (ability of the
ecosystem to produce and export energy) and nursery value by elimination of organisms that cannot easily
flee construction activities, and the displacement of mobile organisms. For individual organisms, turbidity can
impair visual predation success, predator avoidance, and an organism's ability to take in oxygen through
clogging of respiratory organs. Siltation could alter SAV and invertebrate animal communities within the
project area. Again, these potential impacts are expected to be short-term and temporary in nature. Mobile
animals would likely avoid the area during the construction phase, but likely return once construction is
complete and pre -construction conditions return. Benthic organisms would likely recover rapidly post -
construction, as most benthic communities (including SAV) are resilient and recolonize quickly after short-
term impacts (Ellis, 2009; Dernie, 2003).
5.2. Permanent and Long -Term Impacts
While dredging construction activities and placement of dredged material will create short-term and
localized impacts on EFH within the project area, long-term and permanent impacts are expected to be
minimal for the Preferred Alternative. Growth of SAV is affected by salinity, wave exposure, nutrient
concentrations, light, and turbidity. The Preferred Alternative would have no effect on salinity, nutrient
concentrations, light, and wave exposure. During a SAV survey conducted in August 2018, SAV was observed
in a majority of the project area. Wave exposure appeared to be one of the most significant limiting factors
for SAV in the surveyed area based on field observations.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 11

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
Dredged material would likely settle and stabilize quickly in the placement area. In addition, no negative
impacts to the area containing the existing Wainwright Slough channel would be expected, as these channels
are generally lower in productivity due to low levels of light penetration and a disturbed bottom.
Dredge material placement within the proposed footprint of the restored island will displace any benthic
habitat located within this 10.5 -acre area and create temporary impacts to the existing emergent estuarine
wetland located on the current Wainwright Island. However, the re-establishment of a 10.5 -acre island will
create significantly more emergent wetland habitat than currently exists at the site.
5.3. Managed Species Effects Determination
The Preferred Alternative will create minimal localized and short-term effects within the project area for
identified managed species. Most species are mobile and should be able to avoid construction activities
during the construction phase of the project. This section evaluates impacts to SAFMC, MAFMC, NMFS, and
NCDMF managed species, but does not include an evaluation of impacts to ASMFC-managed species. ASMFC
is primarily a deliberative body, coordinating the conservation and management of states' shared fishery
resources so it is not necessary to include detailed determinations for managed species effects. In general,
short-term impacts include potential mortality in earlier life stages for managed species, and some limited
displacement and habitat disturbance in later life stages. Long-term impacts are minimal and generally
involve the potential disruption of dispersion within Pamlico Sound for earlier life stages of managed species.
Table 3 provides a summary of both short-term and long-term potential impacts for SAFMC, MAFMC, and
NMFS-managed species within the project area.
Table 3: Potential Short- and Long -Term Impacts to Project Area EFH Species
Species
Impact Type
Eggs
Larvae
Juveniles
Adults
-Mortality from
Short -Term
Mortality from
constructionDisplacement
and
N/A
-Displacement
Impacts
construction
and habitat
habitat disturbance
Black sea bass (Centropristis
disturbance
striata)
Limited potential
Long -Term
N/A
disruption of
N/A
N/A
Impacts
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
-Mortality from
Short -Term
construction
Displacement and
Bluefish (Pomatomus
Impacts
p
N/A
N/A
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
and habitat
salatrix)
disturbance
Long -Term
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Impacts
-Mortality from
Butterfish (Peprilus
Short -Term
Mortality from
Mortality from
constructionDisplacement
-Displacement
and
triacanthus)
Impacts
p
construction
construction
and habitat
habitat disturbance
disturbance
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 12

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 13
Low density in
Low density in
Butterfishrilus Pe
( p
project area,
project area, but
triacanthus)
Long -Term
but limitedpotential
limited potential
Impacts
disruption of
N/A
N/A
disruption of
dispersion in
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
Pamlico Sound
-Mortality from
-Mortality from
Short -Term
construction
construction
Displacement and
Summer Flounder
Impacts
N/A
-Displacement
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
(Paralichthys dentatus)
and habitat
and habitat
disturbance
disturbance
Long -Term
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Impacts
-Mortality from
-Mortality from
Short -Term
construction
construction
Displacement and
Impacts
N/A
-Displacement
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
Penaid and Rock Shrimp
and habitat
and habitat
(Penaeus spp. and Sicyonia
disturbance
disturbance
Limited potential
spp.)
Long -Term
N/A
disruption of
N/A
N/A
Impacts
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
-Mortality from
-Mortality from
Short -Term
construction
construction
Impacts
N/A
-Displacement
-Displacement
-Displacement and
and habitat
and habitat
habitat disturbance
Snapper grouper
disturbance
disturbance
management unit
Limited potential
Long -Term
N/A
disruption of
N/A
N/A
Impacts
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
-Mortality from
Short -Term
Mortality from
Mortality from
constructionDisplacement
and
Impacts
construction
construction
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
and habitat
Spiny Lobster (2 Species)
disturbance
(Panulirus argus)
Slipper lobster (Scyllarides
Low density in
Low density in
nodifer)
project area,
project area, but
Long -Term
but limited
limited potential
potential
N/A
N/A
Impacts
disruption of
disruption of
dispersion in
dispersion in
P
Pamlico Sound
Pamlico Sound
Short -Term
Mortality from
DisplacementDisplacement
and
N/A
and habitat
Impacts
construction
disturbance
habitat disturbance
Coastal migratory pelagic
species
Limited potential
Long -Term
N/A
disruption of
N/A
N/A
Impacts
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 13

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 14
Displacement
Highly migratory species
(sharks, tuna, swordfish)
Long -Term
Impacts
N/A
N/A
and habitat N/A
disturbance
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 14

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
5.3.1. NCDEQ-NCDMF Managed Species Impacts
In addition to the SAFMC, MAFMC, and NMFS-managed EFH species, NCDMF has developed or is in the
process of developing FMPs for many species found in North Carolina waters, including red drum, southern
flounder, striped bass, blue crab, striped mullet, hard clams, and kingfish. Impacts to flounder are similar to
impacts listed for summer flounder in the previous table. Potential impacts to red drum, kingfish, river
herring, striped bass, hard clams, bay scallops, oysters, blue crabs, and striped mullet are addressed below.
The red drum is an estuarine -dependent species with foraging areas throughout Pamlico Sound. Red drum
typically arrives in Pamlico Sound in the spring, with a second arrival often occurring in the fall as fish begin a
southerly migration from Mid -Atlantic States. Both juvenile and adult red drum may occur in the project area
but are mobile enough to avoid construction activities. Kingfish have a similar life history to the red drum in
Pamlico Sound. Juveniles and adult kingfish may occur in the project area, but are a highly mobile species,
therefore impacts will be minimal.
River herring and striped bass are anadromous fish whose adult life stages live in lower estuaries and marine
waters. Juveniles and adults are mobile enough to avoid construction disturbance in the project area.
Potential impacts to hard clams in the project area include increased short-term turbidity and siltation that
could clog the respiratory and feeding structures of hard clams that may result in limited mortality. Mortality
of hard clams in the direct area of dredge placement would be high, as clams are sessile and would not be
able to escape construction impacts. In this area, habitat alteration for the hard clam would be permanent.
Impacts to oysters and bay scallops would be similar to hard clams, however, no live oysters or bay scallops
were observed during a field visit in August 2018.
Blue crabs occupy various marine and estuarine habitats throughout their life cycle. Mating occurs in
estuaries, followed by spawning near coastal inlets from April to June and August to September in North
Carolina. Weather, water quality conditions, proximity to inlets, wind direction, and hours of dark flood tide
impact breeding productivity in blue crabs. Impacts affecting eggs and larvae from noise, turbidity, and
siltation may occur but should be short term. Juveniles and adults are mobile and would be able to escape
construction disturbance.
Striped mullet are catadromous (move from freshwater to ocean to spawn) species that live in fresh and
estuarine waters until moving to high salinity estuarine and nearshore marine waters to spawn in winter and
early spring. Larvae develop in marine offshore environments and would not be present in Pamlico Sound.
Immature striped mullet move to estuaries during the winter and generally occupy estuarine waters until
spawning. Juveniles and adults may be present near the project area but are mobile and would be minimally
impacted by turbidity, siltation, and noise resulting from construction activities.
6. Summary
The Preferred Alternative would likely result in primarily short-term, localized, and temporary adverse
effects to EFH and managed species, but project design, implementation, and construction measures under
consideration would keep these impacts to a minimum, as well as reduce the possibility of any permanent,
long-term impacts. Short-term impacts would include increased turbidity,
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 15

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
siltation, and noise from construction activities, but most managed species found in this area are highly
mobile and would be able to escape construction disturbance and eventually return to the area post -
construction. Aquatic substrate impacted by siltation should recover after construction, and turbidity would
be limited to the immediate construction area.
SAV habitats were found within the project area, but would have no long-term, adverse effects on SAV
habitats and the ecosystem benefits provided by SAV, including the provisioning of organic matter for
localized food webs, stabilizing sediment, nutrient cycling, and reduction of wave energy.
The Preferred Alternative, while reducing available sandy benthic habitat within the project area, will also
create over 10 acres of emergent estuarine wetland (a designated EFH within the project area) in an area
where benthic habitat has been impacted by exposure to waves. A re-established Wainwright Island would
also provide valuable new nesting and foraging habitat for coastal birds. The Preferred Alternative could
result in increased long-term SAV colonization and general benthic habitat improvements adjacent to the re-
established island.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 16

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment •
7. Reference
Albemarle -Pamlico National Estuary Partnership (APNEP), NCDEQ. 2011. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation GIS
data based on 2006-2008 Aerial Imagery. Available at http://www.nconemap.com. Accessed: August 2018.
Beck, M.W., K.L. Heck Jr., K.W. Able, D.L. Childers, D.B. Eggleston, B.M. Gillanders, B. Halpern, C.G. Hayes, K.
Hoshino, T.J. Minello, R.J. Orth, P.F. Sheridan, and M.P. Weinstein. 2001. "The Identification, Conservation,
and Management, of Estuarine and Marine Nurseries for Fish and Invertebrates." Bioscience. 51(8): 633-641.
Deaton, A.S., W.S. Chappell, K. Hart, J. O'Neal. 2010. North Carolina Coastal Habitat Protection Plan. NC
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Marine Fisheries.
Dernie, K.M, M.J, Kaiser, and R.M. Warwick. 2003. "Recovery rates of benthic communities following physical
disturbance." Journal of Animal Ecology. 72: 1043-1056.
Ellis, B.O. 2009. "Year Five (Final) Submersed Aquatic Vegetation Survey, Currituck Sound, Whalehead Bay-
Currituck Heritage Park." Memorandum to John Hennessy, Environmental Supervisor, National Park Service,
Assistance and Compliance Oversight Unit.
Ferguson, Randolph L., B.T. Pawlak, L.L. Wood. 1993. Flowering of the seagrass Halodule wrightii in North
Carolina, USA. Aquatic Botany, Volume 46, Issue 1, Pages 91-98
Mid -Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC). 2008. Fishery Management Plans. Available at
http://www.mafmc.org/fishery-management-plans/. Accessed: August 2018.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1999. Essential fish habitat: A marine fish habitat conservation
mandate for federal agencies. Revised 08/04. NMFS, Habitat Conservation Division, Southeast Regional
Office, St. Petersburg, Florida.
NMFS. 1999a. Final fishery management plan for Atlantic tuna, swordfish, and sharks, including the revised
final environmental impact statement, final regulatory impact review, the final regulatory flexibility analysis,
and the final social impact assessment. Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Springs, Maryland.
NMFS. 1999b. Amendment 1 to the Atlantic billfish fishery management plan, including the revised final
environmental impact statement, final regulatory impact review, the final regulatory flexibility analysis, and
the final social impact assessment. Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Springs, Maryland.
North Carolina State University (NCSU). 2016. Coastwatch.
https://ncseagrant.ncsu.edu/coastwatch/previous-issues/2012-2/summer-2012/the-pamIico-sound-fishing-
gem-of-north-carolina/. Accessed August 2018.
NC Wildlife Resources Commission. 2005. North Carolina Wildlife Action Plan. Raleigh, NC. Available at
http://www.ncwildlife.org/pg07 Wild lifeSpeciesCon/pg7c1 3.htm. Accessed: August 2018.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 17

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2009. Final Amendment 1 to the 2006
Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan, Essential Fish Habitat. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Sustainable Fisheries,
Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Silver Spring, MD. Public Document. pp. 395.
NOAA 2016a. https://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/hcd/bluefish.htm. Accessed August 2018.
NOAA 2016b. http://www.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/newlnv/index.html. Accessed: August 2018.
South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC). 2008. Fishery Management Plans. Available at
http://safmc.net/fishery-management-plans-amendments/. Accessed: August 2018.
SAFMC. 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 Snapper Grouper Fishery Management Plan, The Coastal Migratory Pelagics
Fishery Management Plan, The Spiny Lobster Fishery Management Plan, Charleston, South Carolina:
South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 457p. plus Appendices and Amendments.
http://www.safmc.net/resource- library/fishery-management-plans-amendments. Accessed: August
2018.
Street, M.W., A.S. Deaton, W.S. Chappell, and P.D. Mooreside. 2005. North Carolina Coastal Habitat
Protection Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Marine
Fisheries, Morehead City, North Carolina. 656 pp.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Wilmington District. 1995a. Environmental Assessment
Maintenance Dredging Wainwright Slough Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor.
Carteret County, North Carolina.
USACE Wilmington District. 1995b. Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI): "Maintenance Dredging,
Wainwright Slough Waterway connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor." Carteret County, North
Carolina.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 18

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
MAP
EFH WITHIN
PROJECT AREA '
IO 175 350 700 1.650
Feet
Essential Fish Habitat Assessment R11•
Figure 2: EFH Area Locations
N
A
Legend
F7EFH Project Area (1 oa Acres)
D SAV (e1% coverage based on September 2016 surveys)
AquatiC Bed (Tidal Freshwater)
Estuarine Emergent Wetland
Estuarine Water ColumnlCreeks
3.1.1. Estuarine Emergent Wetlands
Estuarine Emergent Wetland includes all tidal wetlands dominated by erect, rooted, herbaceous hydrophytes
(excluding mosses and lichens). These wetlands occur in tidal areas where salinity due to ocean -derived salts
is equal to or greater than 0.5 percent and that are present for most of the growing season during most
years. Perennial plants usually dominate these wetlands and vegetation cover is typically above 80 percent.
These wetlands are typically dominated by marsh grasses such as Spartina species, needlerush (Juncus spp.),
and narrow leaved cattail (Typha angustifolia). Estuarine emergent wetlands are nutrient -rich with high
primary productivity, allowing these habitats to support a diversity of fish, invertebrates, and coastal birds.
Managed fish species use these marshes during multiple life stages because they provide nursery habitat for
juveniles and foraging for adults. Estuarine emergent wetland habitat is present on the existing Wainwright
Island.
3.1.2. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation/Seagrass
The shallow waters (6 feet deep or less) of Pamlico Sound provide habitat and potential habitat for SAV beds.
NCMFC defines SAV habitat as area currently vegetated with one or more appropriate SAV species or has
been vegetated by one or more species within the past 10 growing seasons, as well as meets the average
growing conditions needed (water depth of 6 feet or less, average light availability [Secchi depth of one foot
or more], and limited wave exposure.
SAV habitats are typically rich in invertebrates and serve as important foraging areas, in addition to providing
many juvenile and adult fish refuge from predators. SAV also plays a role in stabilizing sediment, nutrient
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 5

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment III FALIIIL =0
cycling, reduction of wave energy, and provision of organic matter that supports complex food webs (North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission [NCWRC], 2005). For these reasons, SAV habitat is considered
Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) for several managed fish species. The distribution and
composition of SAV habitat is influenced by several factors; among the most important factors are salinity,
light, nutrient levels, and wave action.
Because SAV distribution, abundance, and density varies seasonally and annually in response to climatic
variability coupled with its sensitivity to other stressors, large-scale SAV changes may occur. Major threats to
SAV habitat include water quality degradation from dredging activities, excessive nutrient and sediment
loading, plus the emerging threat of accelerated sea level rise, barrier island stability, and increasing water
temperatures (Deaton et al. 2010).
Moffatt & Nichol was contracted to perform a submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) survey in the general
vicinity of the 100 -acre disposal site (Wainwright Island). Protocols used for this study were provided by and
discussed with the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (Gregg Bodnar) and NOAA Fisheries
Habitat Conservation Division (Ken Riley) prior to sampling. State and federal resource agencies required the
survey as a measure to help identify potential impacts the project may create for any existing SAV within the
proposed work areas.
SAV presence was virtually non-existent in the sampling area around Wainwright Island. Only 1-2 shoots (<1%
cover) were found in five quadrats sampled during this investigation. There is no obvious explanation for why
SAV growth is limited in this portion of Pamlico Sound, although significant wave exposure and movement of
water was observed in the field. Wave exposure in shallow water could possibly affect SAV populations.
About 309 square miles of marine bottom are dominated by Halodule wrightii in Core and Pamlico Sounds in
North Carolina, where Halodule occurs away from the main body of its distribution farther south. The species
is common in Texas and Florida (and the Caribbean) but does not extend any farther north than Cape
Hatteras (Ferguson et al 1993). Seagrass distribution in the targeted study area may be affected by factors
that affect seagrass composition and distribution throughout its range, including turbidity or sediment load in
the water column and the cumulative effect of increased turbidity and dredging and spoil disposal, wave
exposure, boat propeller scarring, and shrimp trawling. Even though SAV presence was virtually non-existent,
it is recognized that SAV habitat potential is present in the general vicinity of the project and throughout
Pamlico Sound.
3.1.3. Aquatic Bed (Tidal Freshwater)
Aquatic bed habitats in the project area include the soft bottom substrate of the Pamlico Sound. This habitat
type is comprised of sand as well as inorganic muds, organic muds, and peat. Nutrients are typically provided
by riverine sources and transported via wind tides in addition to lunar tidal exchange. The abundance of
benthic macroalgae in this habitat supports a high diversity of invertebrates that are an important fishery
food source. Shallow areas less than 6 feet deep within this habitat type can also support SAV populations
(Street et al. 2005).
3.1.4. Estuarine Water Column/Creeks
The estuarine water column extends from the estuarine bottom to the surface waters and is especially
important as it directly affects all other estuarine aquatic habitats (NCWRC 2005). This habitat is
characterized by the oligohaline (estuarine) waters present in Pamlico Sound with seasonally variable salinity
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 6

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
levels. Distinct zones within the water column can be defined by parameters such as salinity, temperature,
and dissolved oxygen. Water column zonation continually fluctuates and is a function of tidal dynamics,
season, nutrient levels, and ocean proximity. Fish and shellfish often exploit distinct resources within the
water column based on species-specific diet, behavior, and morphology. For example, pelagic fishes (live
higher in the water column) and demersal fishes (bottom dwelling) have adapted to take advantage of these
different habitats, and favorable spawning and feeding conditions can occur at varying locations at different
times of the year.
3.1.5. Primary Nursery Areas
While not a single specific EFH type, Primary Nursery Areas (PNA) are composed of several EFH types and are
state -designated waters that are used by marine and estuarine fishes and invertebrates during early
development. Secondary Nursery Areas (SNA) typically occur in the lower reaches of streams and bays.
Nursery areas are designated and regulated by NC Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF) and NCWRC in some
areas. These areas are typically shallow waters with soft bottom substrate that are surrounded by marshes
and wetlands. The abundance of refuge, foraging habitat, and food resources present in these areas result in
the successful development of many sub -adult organisms (Beck et al. 2000). Nursery areas are considered
HAPC for several managed fish species. There are no designated Primary or Secondary Nursery Areas within
the project area.
4. Managed Species
4.1. SAFMC, MAFMC, and NMFS-managed Species
SAFMC and MAFMC have developed FMPs for several species, or species units (SAFMC 2008; MAFMC 2008),
although not all of these species are found in the project area. Highly migratory species' FMPs and Atlantic
billfish FMPs were developed by the Highly Migratory Species Management Unit, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, NMFS (NMFS, 1999a; NMFS, 1999b). As part of each FMP, the council designates not only EFH, but
also HAPC, a subset of EFH that refers to specific locations required by a life stage(s) of that managed species.
Table 2 presents the species or species units for which EFH and/or HAPC exist, and the occurrence of these
species within the project area.
The sections that follow describe managed species that are found in the project area and their associated
EFHs.
Table 2: Project Area Managed Species, EFH and HAPC
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 7
Present in
Life Stages Present
Designated EFH in
HAPC in
Species
Project Area
in Project Area
Project Area
Project Area
Mid -Atlantic Fisheries Management Council (MAFMC)
Atlantic mackerel (Scomber
scombrus)
No
None
None
None
Atlantic surfclam (Spisula
solidissima)
No
None
None
None
Black sea bass' (Centropristis
striata)
No
None
None
SAV*
Bluefish (Pomatomussalatrix)
Yes
Juveniles, Adults
Estuarine Water
None
Column/Creeks
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 7

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

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

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

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

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment III FALIIIL =0
5.1. Short-term and Temporary Impacts
Construction associated with the Preferred Alternative would take place in Pamlico Sound, and include
channel dredging and the subsequent placement of dredged material around Wainwright Island.
Construction activities will produce noise, turbidity, and siltation, thereby creating short-term, localized
impacts to EFH identified in the project area and possibly to targeted management species. Dredging
activities could create a short-term decrease in dissolved oxygen. Many, if not all, of the fish species with EFH
within the project area would be expected to escape the area during construction activities, and construction
disturbances would not be expected to be lethal to any fish species with EFH within the project area.
At the ecosystem level, increased turbidity could result in reduced ecosystem productivity (ability of the
ecosystem to produce and export energy) and nursery value by elimination of organisms that cannot easily
flee construction activities, and the displacement of mobile organisms. For individual organisms, turbidity can
impair visual predation success, predator avoidance, and an organism's ability to take in oxygen through
clogging of respiratory organs. Siltation could alter SAV and invertebrate animal communities within the
project area. Again, these potential impacts are expected to be short term and temporary in nature. Mobile
animals would likely avoid the area during the construction phase, but likely return once construction is
complete and pre -construction conditions return. Benthic organisms would likely recover rapidly post -
construction, as most benthic communities (including SAV) are resilient and recolonize quickly after short-
term impacts (Ellis 2009, Dernie 2003).
5.2. Permanent and Long -Term Impacts
While dredging construction activities and placement of dredged material will create short-term and
localized impacts on EFH within the project area, long-term and permanent impacts are expected to be
minimal for the Preferred Alternative. The area has been dredged historically and EFH resources such as SAV
are limited to non-existent based on field surveys. Growth of SAV is affected by salinity, wave exposure,
nutrient concentrations, light, and turbidity. The Preferred Alternative would have no effect on salinity,
nutrient concentrations, light, and wave exposure. During a SAV survey conducted in September 2016, only
single shoots of Halodule wrightii were found in a few locations within the project area. Coverage of SAV was
limited to less than 1% of the surveyed area. Wave exposure appeared to be one of the most significant
limiting factors for SAV in the surveyed area based on field observations. The nearest state -mapped SAV
locations (APNEP/NCDEQ 2011) are more than 1,000 feet from the proposed placement area of dredged
material around Wainwright Island.
Dredged material would likely settle and stabilize quickly in the placement area. In addition, no negative
impacts to the area containing the existing Wainwright Slough channel would be expected, as these channels
are generally lower in productivity due to low levels of light penetration and a disturbed bottom.
Dredge material placement within the proposed footprint of the restored island will displace any benthic
habitat located within this 10.5 -acre area, and create temporary impacts to the existing emergent estuarine
wetland located on the current Wainwright Island. However, the re-establishment of a 10.5 -acre island will
create significantly more emergent wetland habitat than currently exists at the site.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 12

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
5.3. Managed Species Effects Determination
The Preferred Alternative should create minimal localized and short-term effects within the project area for
identified managed species. Most species are mobile and should be able to avoid construction activities
during the construction phase of the project. This section evaluates impacts to SAFMC, MAFMC, NMFS, and
NCDEQ-DMF managed species, but does not include an evaluation of impacts to ASMFC-managed species.
ASMFC is primarily a deliberative body, coordinating the conservation and management of states' shared
fishery resources. In general, short-term impacts include potential mortality in earlier life stages for managed
species, and some limited displacement and habitat disturbance in later life stages. Long-term impacts are
minimal and generally involve the potential disruption of dispersion within Pamlico Sound for earlier life
stages of managed species. Table 3 provides a summary of both short-term and long-term potential impacts
for SAFMC, MAFMC, and NMFS-managed species within the project area.
Table 3: Potential Short- and Long -Term Impacts to Project Area EFH Species
Species
Impact Type
Eggs
Larvae
Juveniles
Adults
-Mortality from
Short -Term
Mortality from
constructionDisplacement
and
Impacts
N/A
construction
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
and habitat
Black sea bass (Centropristis
disturbance
striata)
Limited potential
Long -Term
N/ A
disruption of
N/ A
N/A
/
Impacts
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
-Mortality from
Short -Term
construction
Displacement and
Bluefish (Pomatomus
Impacts
p
N/A
N/A
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
and habitat
salatrix)
disturbance
Long -Term
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Impacts
-Mortality from
Short -Term
Mortality from
Mortality from
constructionDisplacement
and
Impacts
construction
construction
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
and habitat
disturbance
Butterfish (Peprilus
Low density in
triacanthus
project area,
Low density in
but limited
project area, but
Long -Term
potential
limited potential
N/A
N/A
Impacts
disruption of
disruption of
dispersion in
dispersion in
Pamlico Sound
Pamlico Sound
-Mortality from
-Mortality from
Summer Flounder
Short -Term
construction
constructionDisplacement
and
(Paralichthys dentatus)
Impacts
N/A
-Displacement
-Displacement
habitat disturbance
and habitat
and habitat
disturbance
disturbance
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 13

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

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

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

Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1999. Essential fish habitat: A marine fish habitat conservation
mandate for federal agencies. Revised 08/04. NMFS, Habitat Conservation Division, Southeast Regional
Office, St. Petersburg, Florida.
NMFS. 1999a. Final fishery management plan for Atlantic tuna, swordfish, and sharks, including the revised
final environmental impact statement, final regulatory impact review, the final regulatory flexibility analysis,
and the final social impact assessment. Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Springs, Maryland.
NMFS. 1999b. Amendment 1 to the Atlantic billfish fishery management plan, including the revised final
environmental impact statement, final regulatory impact review, the final regulatory flexibility analysis, and
the final social impact assessment. Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Springs, Maryland.
North Carolina State University (NCSU). 2016. Coastwatch.
https://ncseagrant.ncsu.edu/coastwatch/previous-issues/2012-2/summer-2012/the-pamlico-sound-fishing-
gem-of-north-carolina/. Accessed November 2016.
NC Wildlife Resources Commission. 2005. North Carolina Wildlife Action Plan. Raleigh, NC. Available at
http://www.ncwildlife.org/pg07 WildlifeSpeciesCon/pg7c1 3.htm. Accessed: November 2016.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 2009. Final Amendment 1 to the 2006
Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan, Essential Fish Habitat. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Sustainable Fisheries,
Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Silver Spring, MD. Public Document. pp. 395.
NOAA 2016a. https://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/hcd/bluefish.htm. Accessed November 21,
2016.
NOAA 2016b. http://www.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/newinv/index.html. Accessed: November 21,
2016
South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC). 2008. Fishery Management Plans. Available at
http://safmc.net/fishery-management-plans-amendments/. Accessed: November 2016.
SAFMC. 1998. Final Habitat Plan for the South Atlantic Region: Essential Fish Habitat Requirements for
Fishery Management Plans of the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council. The Shrimp Fishery
Management Plan, The Snapper Grouper Fishery Management Plan, The Coastal Migratory Pelagics Fishery
Management Plan, The Spiny Lobster Fishery Management Plan, Charleston, South Carolina: South Atlantic
Fishery Management Council, 457p. plus Appendices and Amendments. http://www.safmc.net/resource-
library/fishery-management-plans-amendments. Accessed: November 2016.
Street, M.W., A.S. Deaton, W.S. Chappell, and P.D. Mooreside. 2005. North Carolina Coastal Habitat
Protection Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Marine
Fisheries, Morehead City, North Carolina. 656 pp.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 17

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

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: Carteret County(Wainwright Slough)MAJOR MODIFICATION
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Conflux of Pamlico and Core Sound adjacent to
Wainwright Island, Carteret County
Photo Index - 2006: No Photo Available
Longitude: 76'12'30.65" W Latitude: 34'59'24.63"' N
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA/D&F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit — 7/15/19
Was Applicant Present — No
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received — 7/1/19
Application Complete- 7/19/19
Office —Morehead City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land. Use Plan —Carteret County
Land Classification from LUP —Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: EW, PTA, ES, CW
(C) Water Dependent: (yes)
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing — N/A
Planned — N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing —Spoil Island, Navigation Aids
Planned —Spoil Island
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: N/A
Source. N/A
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION:
DREDGED FILLED OTHER
(A) Open Water lac l 0ac
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 17 acres
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No Shellfish Classification: Open
(F) Water Classification: SA-ORW

Field Investigation Report:
Carteret Co.
Page 02
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: Carteret County is proposing to maintenance excavate
Wainwright Slough and place spoils in the Wainwright Island area. Wainwright Slough is
a federal channel. A maximum 45,000 CY would be excavated but Carteret County asks
for a possible alignment outside the federally designated channel.
9. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: The Wainwright Slough project is located at the conflux
of Pamlico Sound and Core Sound off of Cedar Island, Carteret County. The existing
island and federal channel is about half way between Cedar Island and Core Banks. This
channel is the navigation route connecting Core Sound and Pamlico Sound
Wainwright Island as it exists today is less than .5 ac and is covered with Coastal Wetlands
comprised of Sp artina alterniflora. There is a patch of SAV South of the island. Wainwright
p
Slough has existed as a federal channel since the 1970's. The channel was last excavated in
2017 and is currently experiencing ex eriencin shoaling east of Wainwright Island. The last excavation
event was authorized under Major Permit #29-17. The current low water depth in the shoal
area is -4'. The US Coast Guard maintains Navigational Aids along this channel.
This area of Core Sound is classified as SA-ORW by DWR. It is not a Primary Nursery
area. It is open to the harvesting of shellfish. Carteret County's Land Use Plan classifies
the future land use of this area as conservation.
10. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Carteret County is proposing to maintenance excavate
Wainwright Slough in an effort to restore navigation for recreational boating and
commercial fishing vessels. - The excavation would be performed by Hydraulic Dredge with
spoils being placed in the area of Wainwright Island. A maximum of 45,000CY would be
removed form Wainwright Slough. In this case, the applicant is requesting authorization to
follow the natural deep water channel instead of remaining within the limits of the federal
channel. The consultant has outlined a polygon in which the channel may migrate in the
future. The entire polygon is SAV habitat with large patches of SAV actively growing. A
SAV surveyis included in the application. This proposal is submitted with the assumption
pp
that no SAV would be present in the natural channel at the time of migration. The applicant
has stated that a new SAV survey would be provided at the time of each dredge event.
The proposed cut would be 2,600' long and 75' wide. Water depth in this area would
increase from -4' MLLW to -7' MLLW. Based on samples taken, dredge material is
expected to be fine to medium grain size sand. The excavated material would be placed in
a 780' X570' area adjacent to what remains of Wainwright Island. Aerial photos indicate
that spoils have been laced in this area during previous dredging projects. Water depths in
p p
this area would increase from -3' MLLW to +1.5' MLLW. Sand dikes would be constructed
to helpcontrol the dredge effluent. After excavation is complete, the spoil area would be
g
sloped to a 20:1 grade in order to promote shorebird usage. The consultant (Moffatt &
Nichol) has provided a detailed narrative in order to help in the review of this project.
11. Anticipated Impacts: This project should increase navigation of the area by recreational
boaters and provide a deeper channel for commercial fishing vessels to safely ingress and
egress. There would be lac of EW and PTA excavated and 10ac of EW and PTA filled
during this project. Temporary siltation would occur during excavation and could affect
neighboring Coastal Wetland and SAV areas.
Name: Ryan Davenport Date: 7/24/19 Morehead City

Submerged Aquatic
Vegetation Survey Report
Wainwright Slough, NC
Presented to:
Carteret County
December 6, 2016
Prepared by:
hdhq
rnoffatt & nichol
4700 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27609

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report [—Carteret County
Table of Contents
1. Introduction................................................................................................................................. 3
2. Methodology...............................................................................................................................4
3. Results and Discussion................................................................................................................5
4. Summary......................................................................................................................................6
5. References...................................................................................................................................6
MapAppendix.................................................................................................................................8
PhotoAppendix.............................................................................................................................10
Raw Data Appendix........................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.2
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 2

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

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Site Description
Wainwright Island is a small dredge spoil island that is constantly subject to wave action and erosion. The
island is inundated much of the time with only a small portion of land (less 46 square meters [500 square
feet]) currently remaining above the water. The small remnant island is dominated by Spartina alterniflora.
Signs of bird use were evident as central areas of the island were trampled and covered in guano; no species
were noted during this sampling period.
Pamlico Sound is one of the largest estuaries in the United States (NCSU 2016). Offshore waters support a
diverse recreational and commercial fishery, with species such as red drum, speckled trout, blue crab,
oysters, and other shellfish often found in abundance. Fishing activity was noted in the project area during
the time of this study as evidenced by the presence of two pound nets extending across the island. Although
a detailed fishery assessment was not part of this study, mullet and cow nose rays were observed while
snorkeling in the area.
2. Methodology
A Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping exercise was conducted to determine potential locations of
existing SAV based on high-resolution imagery. GIS was also used to establish the sampling regime for this
study. Transects were established in a north/south direction every 100 meters to cover the 32.4 -hectare (80 -
acre) area of interest, for a total of ten transects. Sampling locations were placed every 50 meters along each
transect. In areas of known SAV presence based on aerial imagery, transects were placed every 50 meters.
Starting points for the sample transects were randomly selected. In total, there were 87 sampling locations
established for field reconnaissance.
Percent cover and shoot density were the main SAV parameters noted in the survey. At each sampling
location, a metal garden rake was used to determine presence or absence of SAV. If SAV was found, three
0.25 -square -meter quadrats were randomly placed within the SAV beds and percent cover was estimated. All
SAV species in the quadrat were identified, shoots were counted, and other features in the area were noted,
including presence of shell or floating SAV debris.
The depth of the water at each sampling location was surveyed with a marked PVC pole. A water quality
sampling device (YSI Model 556) was used to sample water quality parameters (e.g. dissolved oxygen, pH,
salinity, and temperature) at the beginning of sampling effort. Pictures were taken to characterize the site
and provide photographic evidence of SAV presence.
Data collected in the field included:
• Survey date and time
• Location (latitude and longitude)
• Surveyors name
• Wind speed/direction
• Turbidity
• Tidal stage and tendency (i.e., flood or
ebb)
• Species present/absent
• Percent cover
• Shoot density
• Sediment type
• Depth
• Other prominent features (e.g. pound
nets, shell presence)
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 4

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

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
of substrates ranging from silty mud to course sand with varying amounts of mud. Most bed maintenance
and new shoot production probably occurs through rhizome elongation irrespective of substrate conditions.
There were no anomalous results in this snapshot of water
quality data that would indicate any reason for seagrass
absence (Table 1 provides summary data of water
temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and salinity). For the
most part, conditions in the study area are conducive to
supporting seagrasses. Optimum temperatures for H. wrightii
are similar to those of Thalassia, and range between 20 —
30oC (Phillips 1960), well within the range of temperatures at
the time of this survey (26oC). Halodule has been reported in
abundance in salinities ranging from 12.0 - 38.5 ppt (Phillips
1960) — in line with the 21.3 ppt noted at the site. The pH of
water at the time of the survey does not appear to be a
limiting factor and is only relevant with respect to the plant's
Table 1: Water quality data collected
Wainwright Slough, NC
Date/Time 9/21/16
10:30am
Water 26
temperature (°C)
Dissolved oxygen 89.3
N
pH 6.21
Salinity (ppt) 21.6
ability to conduct photosynthesis; leaves of seagrasses have a low capacity for extracting inorganic carbon
under normal pH and salinity conditions, with photosynthesis limited by the availability of inorganic carbon
under various light conditions (Beer and Koch 1996).
4. Summary
In summary, SAV presence was virtually non-existent in the sampling area around Wainwright Island. Only 1-
2 shoots (<1% cover) were found in five quadrats sampled during this investigation. There is no obvious
explanation for why SAV growth is limited in this portion of Pamlico Sound. About 80,000 hectares of marine
bottom are dominated by Halodule in Core and Pamlico Sounds in North Carolina, where Halodule occurs
away from the main body of its distribution farther south. The species is common in Texas and Florida (and
the Caribbean) but does not extend any farther north than Cape Hatteras (Ferguson et al 1993). Seagrass
distribution in the targeted study area may be affected by factors that affect seagrass composition and
distribution throughout its range including turbidity or sediment load in the water column and the
cumulative effect of increased turbidity and dredging and spoil disposal, boat propeller scarring, and shrimp
trawling.
Based on the results of this analysis, SAV populations are not expected to be impacted by proposed dredging
in Wainwright Slough and subsequent material placement on Wainwright Island.
5. References
Beer S, Koch E. 1996. Photosynthesis of marine macroalgae and seagrasses in globally changing CO2
environments. Marine Ecology Progress Series 141: 199-204
Ferguson, Randolph L., B.T. Pawlak, L.L. Wood. 1993. Flowering of the seagrass Halodule wrightii in North
Carolina, USA. Aquatic Botany, Volume 46, Issue 1, Pages 91-98
Moffatt & Nichol Page 6

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
NC State University. 2016. Coastwatch. https://ncseagrant.ncsu.edu/coastwatch/previous-issues/2012-
2/summer-2012/the-Pamlico-sound-fishing-gem-of-north-carolina/. Accessed November 28, 2016.
Phillips RC. 1960. Observations on the ecology and distribution of the Florida seagrasses. Professional Paper
Series No. 2. Florida State Board Conserv Mar Lab, St. Petersburg, FL. Appendices
Moffatt & Nichol Page 7

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Map Appendix
Map 1: SAV Survey Location
Map 2: Sampling Regime, including transects and sampling locations
Moffatt & Nichol Page 8

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Map 3: Field -sampled Survey Points and Survey Results
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 9

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report Carteret County
Photo Appendix
Photo 1: Remnant of Wainwright Island from the channel looking east. Note PVC poles marking
pound net.
Photo 2: Remnant patch of Wainwright Island. Existing channel to the right of this photo.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 10

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report rteret County
Photo 3: Zostera clump found growing on remnant marsh platform.
Moffatt & Nichol Page 11

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report PF I Carteret County
Raw Data Appendix
Crew: Meg Goecker, Adam Efird,
Gregg Bodnar, Captain Billy
Date: 09-21-2016
Adjacent shoreline:
remnants of Wainwright
Island near channel
Temp (oC): 26
DO & pH: 89.3; 6.21
Wind
Speed/direction:<5mph /
NE
Salinity (ppt): 21.6
Tide level: low tide and rising
during sampling
Turbidity: High turbidity, no
Secchi taken
Transect
#, pt
Time
Picture
#
depth
(m)
% Cover by species
(Zm, Hw, Rm)
Notes
A10
9.32
1.2
sand
A9
9.35
1
sand
A8
9.35
1
sand
A7
9.36
0.9
sand
A6
9.38
0.86
sand
A5
9.4
0.92
sand
A4
9.41
1.1
sand
A3
9.42
1.15
sand
A2
9.44
1.3
sand
Al
9.46
1.25
sand
131
9.52
1.4
sand
B2
9.53
1.4
sand
133
9.54
1.5
sand, shell, muddy- break
through hardpack
134
9.56
1.4
muddy, shell
B5
9.58
1.3
muddy, sand
B6
9.59
0.8
sand
137
10
0.9
sand
B8
10.01
1
sand
B9
10.02
1.1
sand
1310
10.03
1.2
sand
C9
10.05
1.1
sand
C8
10.06
0.9
sand
C7
10.07
0.8
sand
C6
10.09
0.8
sand
C5
10.11
0.8
sand
C4
10.12
1.3
sand, shell
Moffatt & Nichol Page 12

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Transect
#, pt
Time
Picture
#
depth
(m)
% Cover by species
(Zm, Hw, Rm)
Notes
C3
10.14
1.4
sand, shell
C2
10.15
1.5
sand/mud, shell
C1
10.17
1.6
can't reach, pound net - GPS
pt.
D1
10.18
1.7
can't reach
D2
10.19
1.7
can't reach
D3
10.2
1.25
sand/mud, shell
D4
10.21
1.2
sand
D5
10.22
1
sand, shell
D6
10.23
0.9
duck blind GPS, sand
D7
10.24
0.7
sand
D8
10.26
0.8
sand
D9
10.27
1
sand
E9
10.31
0.9
sand, grass floating
F9
10.33
0.8
sand
G9
10.34
0.8
sand, shell
G10
10.35
0.9
sand/mud, shell
H9
10.38
0.8
sand
110
10.39
0.8
sand
19
10.4
0.9
sand
18
10.41
1
sand
17
10.43
1.2
sand
16
1.2
sand, shell a lot
15
10.46
148-048
1.2
sand, shell
14
10.47
483
1.2
sand, shell, soft bottom
13
10.49
1.2
sand, close to marsh island -
Spartina scarp
12
10.52
484-487
1.6
muddier, can't reach with
rake
11
10.52
489-490
1.8
can't reach
J1
10.55
1.6
sand, course, Hw floating
blades
J2
10.56
7.6 feet
can't reach
G1
11.04
5 feet
can't reach
G2
11.19
1.1
0
0
<1% Hw
single shoot, patch through
transect. Very sparse
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 13

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Transect
#, pt
Time
Picture
#
depth
(m)
% Cover by species
(Zm, Hw, Rm)
Notes
G3
11.22
1.2
0
0
<1% Hw
sandy layer with shell below
G4
11.3
1.1
0
0
<1% Hw
single shoot
F4
11.35
1
0
0
0
sand
F3
11.39
1.2
<1% Hw
0
0
two shoots Hw
F2
11.41
1.1
0
<1% Hw
0
in pound net lead
F5
11.56
1.2
sand, seagrass detritus
raked from bottom
E5
11.57
1.5
sand, shell
E6
1.4
sand, shell
F6
12.01
1.1
sand, seagrass detritus
raked from bottom
F7
12.02
1.1
sand, seagrass detritus
raked from bottom
E7
12.04
1.2
sand
E8
12.06
1.1
sand, detritus, picture of
mud
F8
12.08
1.1
sand
F8.5
12.1
1
sand
E8.5
12.12
1.3
sand
Moffatt & Nichol Page 14

ON MP -1
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
(last revised 12/27/06)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name
Project Name (if applicable)
Carteret County
Wainwright Slough Deep Water
Route Maintenance Event
Applicant 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Last Name
Tommy
Burns
Neal
Applicant 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
Last Name
Rudi
Rudolph
PO Box
If additional applicants, please attach an additional page(s) with names listed.
State
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
302 Courthouse Square
ZIP
Beaufort
Phone No. 1P
NC
ZIP
Country
Phone No.
910-218-7100
FAX No.
28516
us
252-222-5835
ext.
252 - 222 - 5826
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
ZIP
Email
State
ZIP
[e-mail]; [e-mail]
2. Agent/Contractor Information
Business Name
Moffatt & Nichol
Agent/ Contractor 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Robert
Neal
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
272 N. Front Street, Suite 204
Wilmington
NC
ZIP
Phone No. 1P
hone No. 2
28401
910-218-7100
ext.
ext.
FAX No.
Contractor #
919 781 4869
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
ZIP
Email
[e-mail]
<Form continues on back>
252-808-2808 .. 1-888-4RCOAST .. www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 2 of 4)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple)
Street Address
State Rd. #
Carteret
Pamlico Sound
2,600
Subdivision Name
City
State
Zip
Phone No.
Lot No.(s) (if many, attach additional page with list)
252-222-5835 ext.
, , , ,
a. In which NC river basin is the project located?
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Neuse
Pamlico Sound
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
®Natural ❑Manmade ❑Unknown
Pamlico Sound
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
®Yes []No
work falls within.
g.
Carteret County
4.
Site Description
a.
Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.)
b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
2,600
10 Acres (Placement Site) 7.0 Acres (Navigation Channel)
c.
Size of individual lot(s)
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
NWL (normal water level)
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
2.0 ❑NHW or ®NWL
e.
Vegetation on tract
Spartina alterniflora, sparse H. wrightii (<1% cover) for portion of the island still emergent. All activities will be completed
outside of area with vegetation and construction methods will be limited to not occur in this area. (See attached plans)
f.
Man-made features and uses now on tract
Commerical and recreational navigation. Submerged lands.
g.
Identify and describe the existing land uses adjacent to the proposed project site.
Commercial and recreational navigation, limited bird foraging habitat with erosion of island. Wainwright Slough represents
the only viable navigational thoroughfare for the Down East fishing industry connecting Core Sound to Pamlico Sound.
h.
How does local government zone the tract?
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
Not zoned
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
❑Yes ❑No ®NA
j.
Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? ❑Yes ®No
k.
Hasa professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
If yes, by whom?
I.
Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
National Register listed or eligible property?
<Form continues on next page>
252-808-2808 .. 1-888-4RCOAST .. www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 3 of 4)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
m. (i) Are there wetlands on the site? ®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.
N/A
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
N/A
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
N/A
5. Activities and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? ❑Commercial ®Public/Government
❑ Private/Community
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
Navigation access through Wainwright Slough & bird habitat on Wainwright Island material placement site. Wainwright
Slough is generally located between Cedar Island and Core Banks and represents the only viable navigational thoroughfare
for the Down East fishing industry connecting Core Sound to Pamlico Sound. The project was initially authorized by the River
and Harbor Act of August 30, 1935. (see attached narrative for furher information)
c. Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where it is to be stored.
One hydraulic dredge with accompaning HDPE pipeline (most likely) to excavate a maximum of 45,000 CY from Wainwright
Slough and place the material within the material placement site adjacent to Wainwright Island. Most likely up to 1 or 2
pieces of heavy equipement (bull dozer, front end loader) will be used to grade the material after placement. Additonal
service vessels (jon boat, floating barge, tug) will be necessary to assist in manuvering and supporting the construction
equipment.The equipment will be stored at the site during the construction process and removed upon completion.
Construction is estimated to last a maximum of 60 days.
d. List all development activities you propose.
Hydraulically dredge Wainwright Slough for navigation maintenance and place the material adjacent to Wainwright Island.
Material will be placed in a manner to encourage shorebird use with minimal slopes along the water's edge.
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? Both
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 17 ❑Sq.Ft or ®Acres
g. Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public accessway or other area ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
that the public has established use of?
h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
New discharges to waters of the state will only occur during construction as the slurry mixture of sediment and waters are
hydraulically placed adjacent to Wainwright Island. No permanent discharge structures are proposed as part of the work.
Temporary containment dikes will be constructed to encourage sediment settling based upon past projects and previous
authorizations.
i. Will wastewater or stormwater be discharged into a wetland? ❑Yes ❑No ®NA
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water? ❑Yes ❑No ®NA
j. Is there any mitigation proposed? ❑Yes ❑No ®NA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
252-808-2808 .. 1-888-4RCOAST .. www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 4 of 4)
<Form continues on back>
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
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 properly 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.
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 National Audubon Society c/o Mr. Walker Golder Phone No. 910.686.7527 (office)
Address 7741 Market Street, Unit D; Wilmington, NC 28411-9444
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.
Previous maintenance events were conducted under federal authorizations by the USACE;
2017 CAMA Major 29-17; GP -291 Action Item SAW -2016-01676.
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.
7. Certification and Permission to Enter on Land
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in the application.
The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to
enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow-up
monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date
Print Name Gregory Rudolph
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
252-808-2808 .. 1-888-4RCOAST .. www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP -2
EXCAVATION and FILL
(Except for bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP -1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation and/or fill activities. All values should be given in feet.
1. EXCAVATION El This section not applicable
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in b. Type of material to be excavated.
cubic yards. Sand
45,000
c. (i) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
d. High -ground excavation in cubic yards.
0 CY
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL ❑This section not applicable
a. Location of disposal area. b. Dimensions of disposal area.
Wainwright Island - Pamlico Sound
c. (i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
❑Yes ®No ❑NA
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner
(i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
10 acres
d. (i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
®Yes ❑No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, where?
Wainwright Island
f. (i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
®Yes [-]No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
10 acres
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastaimanaAement.net revised: 12/26/06
Access
Other
Channel
Canal
Boat Basin
Boat Ramp
Rock Groin
Rock
(excluding
(NLW or
Breakwater
shoreline
NWL)
stabilization
Length
2,600
780
Width
75
570
Avg. Existing
-4 MLLW
NA
NA
-3 MLLW
Depth
Final Project
-7 MLLW
NA
NA
+1.5 MLLW
Depth
1. EXCAVATION El This section not applicable
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in b. Type of material to be excavated.
cubic yards. Sand
45,000
c. (i) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
d. High -ground excavation in cubic yards.
0 CY
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL ❑This section not applicable
a. Location of disposal area. b. Dimensions of disposal area.
Wainwright Island - Pamlico Sound
c. (i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
❑Yes ®No ❑NA
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner
(i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
10 acres
d. (i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
®Yes ❑No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, where?
Wainwright Island
f. (i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
®Yes [-]No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
10 acres
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastaimanaAement.net revised: 12/26/06

Form DCM MP -2 (Excavation and Fill, Page 2 of 2)
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION ®This section not applicable
(If development is a wood groin, use MP -4 — Structures)
a. Type of shoreline stabilization:
❑Bulkhead ❑Riprap ❑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.
b. Length:
Width:
d. Maximum distance waterward of NHW or NWL:
f. (i) Has there been shoreline erosion during preceding 12
months?
❑Yes [-]No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, state amount of erosion and source of erosion amount
information.
h. Type of fill material.
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES E] This section not applicable
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. (i) Will fill material be brought to the site? ®Yes [:]No [:INA b
If yes,
(ii) Amount of material to be placed in the water 45,000 CY
(iii) Dimensions of fill area 10 acres
(iv) Purpose of fill
Material desposition from channel maintenance.
(i) Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands/marsh (CW),
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
❑WL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas:
5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion b. What type of construction equipment will be used (e.g., dragline,
controlled? backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
Sand dikes during construction -Length of dikes TBD by contractor. hydraulic dredge, heavy equipment, support vessels.
C. (i) Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project? d. (i) Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project
®Yes ❑No ❑NA site? ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, explain what type and how they will be implemented. (ii) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
USCG will mark deep water route dredged for Wainwright environmental impacts.
Slough.
Date
Wainwright Slough Deep Water Route Maintenance Event
Project Name
Carteret County c/o Gregory Rudolph
Applicant Name
Applicant Signature
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastaimanagement.net revised: 12/26/06

Carteret County Navigation Project
Wainwright Slough Deep Water Route Maintenance Event
Permit Narrative
(June 2019)
Project Purpose, Need & Scope
Carteret County (County) is requesting federal and state authorization to conduct maintenance dredging
along a deep -water route adjacent to the federally authorized channel of Wainwright Slough, Ranges 2, 2A,
and 3. Wainwright Slough, authorized under the River and Harbor Act of 1899 (amended 1935), was
originally dredged in 1935. The channel lies near Cedar Island near the Cape Lookout National Seashore.
Wainwright Slough connects Core Sound with Pamlico Sound and serves as an important passage for
commercial and recreational anglers. Figure 1 shows the project location in northern Carteret County.
Wainwright Slough represents the only viable navigational thoroughfare for the Down East fishing industry
utilizing Core Sound as a homeport.
Figure 1. Wainwright Slough Vicinity Map
Wainwright Slough has been dredged more than 22 times since the initial authorization (not counting
undocumented "as needed" maintenance events). Table 1 provides records of fifteen (15) maintenance
events conducted along various reaches of Wainwright Slough by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) since the 1935 original dredging event. The USACE suspended maintenance dredging efforts for
Wainwright Slough from 1997 until the mid -2000s. The dredging operations resumed when extensive
channel shoaling and erosion of Wainwright Island occurred in the wake of hurricanes Isabel (2003) and

Carteret County Navigation Project
Wainwright Slough Deep Water Route Maintenance Event
Permit Narrative
(June 2019)
Page 2 of 8
Ophelia (2005). The most recent dredging event by the USACE occurred in 2013 via another supplemental
federal appropriation (Hurricane Sandy).
Table 1: Wainwright Slough Historical Actions (courtesy of Carteret County)
August 31, 1935 = Project authorized in the River and Harbor Act.
1935-1968= Fifteen maintenance events (no details regarding disposal).
1968 —1976 = "As needed" maintenance, but no documentation.
1976 = EIS prepared, codifies Wainwright Island as disposal area.
1976-1986 = No documentation.
1986= Maintenance event.
1991= Maintenance event.
1994= Maintenance using the U.S. Corps hopper, the Currituck (disposal?).
1995 = New EA/FONSI regarding Wainwright Island (emphasis on creating upland bird habitat).
1997 = Maintenance event.
2006 = Maintenance event funded by hurricane supplemental bill (145,000 cubic yards).
2013 = Maintenance event funded by hurricane supplemental bill (submersible pump).
Wainwright Island is the current disposal location for sediments dredged from Wainwright Slough. An
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) entitled, "Maintenance of the Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound
and Beaufort Harbor, North Carolina," codified the disposal location along the east channel side
approximate to Wainwright Island. However, this disposal location tended to result in dredged material
returning to the channel in a relatively short amount of time. Therefore, a 1995 Environmental
Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact (EA/FONSI) covered the action to place dredge material on
the non -channel side of the island above mean high water. Sand dikes help to control the dredging slurry
and create non -vegetated sandy habitat during each maintenance event.
hi 2017 Carteret County assumed maintenance responsibility of Wainwright Slough due to budget shortfalls
in the USACE navigation work plan. Figure 2 shows the channel had become nearly impassable for vessel
navigation with depths measured as shallow as -4 MLLW or less during a June 2016 USACE survey. As a
result, the County obtained permits and conducted maintenance dredging involving removal of
approximately 40,000 cubic yards (CY) to restore navigation depths to the federally authorized channel.
The County considers the 2017 project as an important success for maintaining recreational and commercial
fishing access through Wainwright Slough. In addition, conversations with Audubon North Carolina
indicate the project provided a short-term enhancement of bird nesting and foraging habitat.

Carteret County Navigation Project
Wainwright Slough Deep Water Route Maintenance Event
Permit Narrative
(June 2019)
Page 3 of 8
Figure 2: USACE June 2016 Hydrographic Survey of Wainwright Slough
One item to note from the 2017 maintenance event entails the permit restriction requiring the County to
follow the federal channels documented limits. This resulted in dredging a significant shoal compared to
an adjacent deep -water path. Based on USACE calculations, the shoaled area required removal of
approximately 11,500 more CY compared to the adjacent deep -water path. Although the USACE possesses
authorization to move the channel or dredging footprint within reason if the District Engineer finds the new
path to be in the best interest of the federal government, the County does not receive the same latitude.
Therefore, for future maintenance events the County is requesting state and federal authorization to
identify the most efficient dredge alignment prior to each event similar to the federal authorization.
This approach allows the County to continue to meet the project purpose (providing safe passage for the
commercial fishing industry, recreational use, and overall safety for the user public) while also being good
stewards of tax dollars.
The County's request for authorization to move the channel to deeper water where appropriate will result
in minimized dredging volumes and costs in addition to reduced environmental effects. The managed width
and depth of the channel will continue to be the same as the federal authorization and routed through a
"corridor." The channel will be dredged to -9-ft (7+2) MLLW for up to a maximum of 45,000 CY for each
event (Appendix E — Permit Drawings).
Following historical practice, the dredge sediment will be used to help enhance nesting and foraging bird
habitat by material placement on the adjacent Audubon Society -owned Wainwright Island (Appendix F —
Audubon North Carolina Letter of Support). Sediment placement will occur over a maximum footprint of
10 acres. The slopes and grades of the material placement site will be constructed to encourage nesting and
foraging bird activities to the extent reasonable. In addition, the top or surface of the site will be smooth
graded to discourage water ponding or entrapment.

Carteret County Navigation Project
Wainwright Slough Deep Water Route Maintenance Event
Permit Narrative
(June 2019) Page 4 of 8
Construction Methodology and Sediment Placement
Prior to construction, DCM will be notified of the specific channel alignment for approval with updated
bathymetry and SAV habitat coverage. The channel alignment will stay within the dredge corridor as shown
in the permit drawings (Appendix E), but the alignment will ultimately follow the most efficient deep -water
path to minimize dredge volumes and potential construction impacts. The channel will remain 75 feet in
width with 3:1 side slopes.
A hydraulic dredge and pipeline system will conduct the work. Hydraulic dredging will reduce siltation and
turbidity that is often associated with other dredging methods such as clamshell dredging. A maximum of
45,000 CY will be dredged from Wainwright Slough and placed on the Wainwright Island material
placement site (Figure 3). Dredge material will be hydraulically placed to create a natural slope to the
existing grade. The material may also be shaped to help enhance nesting opportunities through creation of
windbreaks or sediment shelfs. However, grading operations shall not encourage water ponding from wave,
rain, or other sources. The material placement site will also be constructed to discourage sediment from
flowing back into the navigation channel. The contractor may be required to erect temporary sand dikes
along the flow way of the placement site to help direct the dredge slurry away from the navigation channel
and to encourage sediment settling. In this event, dikes constructed from the initial dredge material will
help to reduce disturbance of the placement area. At the completion of the dredging activities, the temporary
dikes will be smooth graded consistent with the remainder of the placed material. If necessary to discourage
or prohibit water ponding and encourage shorebird usage, the contractor will smooth grade the material
placement site as needed (above MLLW) to a maximum (steepest) angle of repose of 1H:IOV (feet) prior
to demobilization.
Figure 3. Wainwright Island Project Map

Carteret County Navigation Project
Wainwright Slough Deep Water Route Maintenance Event
Permit Narrative
(June 2019)
Page 5 of 8
Maintenance operations will only be conducted between November 16" and March 31St to help further
minimize the potential for adverse impacts. These cooler winter months generally remain less active for
juvenile fish species and invertebrates common to the area. Therefore, limiting construction activities to the
cooler months will minimize the potential for migrating species to become entrained or captured by the
construction activities. Limiting the construction activities to the later months of the year will also allow
time for agency review of the SAV and bathymetric data submitted as part of a maintenance request.
Environmental Concerns
Carteret County has completed several studies in support of the Wainwright Slough maintenance dredging
operations. These studies and assessments include SAV surveys in addition to evaluations of potential
impacts to listed or endangered species. In addition to the work completed by Carteret County, the USACE
completed a study in 1995 to document how beneficial reuse of dredge material would 1) provide for
satisfactory disposal of maintenance dredging material; 2) stabilize the existing upland limits of Wainwright
Island; 3) enhance habitat for colonial water bird species such as royal terns and sandwich terns, snowy
egrets, tri -colored herons, and glossy ibis; and 4) preserve and expand existing habitat for breeding brown
pelicans, herring gulls and great black -backed gulls, and wading birds such as black -crowned night herons,
great egrets, and little blue herons. For reference, Appendix G provides the 1995 federal environmental
assessment documentation.
SAV Surveys
As part of the permitting process for the 2017 maintenance event, Carteret County completed a submerged
aquatic vegetation (SAV) survey, as shown in Appendix H. The 2017 SAV survey was conducted in
September 2016 and identified no SAV populations within the vicinity of the Wainwright Island placement
site. The September survey found only sparse or relic stalks of shoal grass (K wrightii) present at five
locations at less than 1 % coverage. The 2017 maintenance operation avoided the five (5) locations identified
as potential SAV habitat in order to minimize the potential for adverse impacts. As a result, the maintenance
event did not create any known SAV impacts.
An additional SAV survey was conducted in August 2018 (Appendix I). The purpose of this additional
survey was to collect data near the area of interest for the potential navigation corridor. Transects were
established in an east/west direction every 45-55 meters to cover the 35.5 -hectare (87.7 -acre) area of
interest, for a total of 29 transects. Figure 4 shows the survey results, including areas of identified SAV
presence or favorable SAV habitat, which will be avoided during dredging activities.
As part of this permit request, Carteret County will update the SAV habitat during the summer growing
season, prior to any planned maintenance event. Plan sheet drawings will be provided showing the updated
SAV habitat with the proposed dredge alignment. Updated bathymetry will also be included on the
drawings to show the most relevant contour elevations. The updated information will help facilitate agency
review and approval of the proposed dredge alignment prior to conducting the work.

Carteret County Navigation Project
Wainwright Slough Deep Water Route Maintenance Event
Permit Narrative
(June 2019)
Figure 4. SAV Habitat Area Adjacent to Wainwright Slough
Essential Fish Habitat
Page 6 of 8
Carteret County also completed an Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) assessment in support of the 2017
maintenance event. The 2017 EFH concentrates on Wainwright Sloughs documented channel limits as well
as the Wainwright Island material placement site. Appendix J shows the 2017 EFH assessment and
Appendix K provides a more recent assessment conducted by Carteret County. The recent assessment finds
dredging and disposal activities would likely result in short-term, localized, and temporary adverse effects
to EFH and managed species, but project design, implementation, and construction measures proposed
would minimize these impacts and reduce the potential of any permanent, long-term effects. Short-term
impacts would include increased turbidity, siltation, and noise from construction activities, but managed
species found in this area are highly mobile and would be able to escape construction disturbance and
eventually return to the area post -construction. Aquatic substrate impacted by siltation should recover after
construction, and turbidity would be limited to the immediate construction area.
Protected Species Assessment
A review of federally protected species has been conducted. Appendix L provides the results of the
assessment, which indicate the proposed project will have no effect on threatened or endangered species.
WatlnnAQ
Wetlands approximate to the project site include the historic Wainwright Island. Figure 5 shows the
remnants of Wainwright Island as identified in 2016, prior to the most recent maintenance event. As shown
in the figure, the island has supported Spartina grass nearly 500 ft2 in area. The work will not traverse into
this area, as the dredge material will be placed to the east of the 2016 island location. In addition, no
pipelines or equipment will be allowed to traverse over emergent grasses or impact known SAV
populations.

Carteret County Navigation Project
Wainwright Slough Deep Water Route Maintenance Event
Permit Narrative
(June 2019)
4W
Page 7 of 8
Figure 5: September 2016 Conditions of Wainwright Island
Cultural and Historic Resources
An archaeological assessment has not been completed for the proposed dredging; however, Wainwright
Slough is a federally authorized navigation channel and has been dredged since the 1930's. In addition, the
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) reviewed the 2017 project and indicated they are unaware of any
historic resources, which could be affected by the project. Appendix M provides the November 30, 2016
letter from SHPO.
North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
The project involves expenditure of public funds and is compliant with the North Carolina Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA).
SEPA applies for any project that meets all three of the following criteria and stipulates an environmental
document must be prepared:
An expenditure of $10 million in funds provided by the state of North Carolina for a single project
or action or related group of projects or action
.M
Land -disturbing activity of equal to or greater than 10 acres of public lands resulting in substantial,
permanent changes in the natural cover or topography of those lands (or waters)
2. An action by a state agency, and
3. Has a potential detrimental environmental effect upon natural resources, public health and safety,
natural beauty, or historical or cultural elements, of the state's common inheritance.
Since the project is less than $10 million and disturbs less than 10 acres of public land, further
environmental documentation under SEPA is not required.

Carteret County Navigation Project
Wainwright Slough Deep Water Route Maintenance Event
Permit Narrative
(June 2019) Page 8 of 8
Summary
Carteret County intends to continue maintenance dredging operations for Wainwright Slough similar to the
County's 2017 initiative when beneficial reuse material placement occurred from shoaled sediment in the
navigation channel. The major change for the current initiative includes efforts to identify the most efficient
dredge alignment at the time of each maintenance event. This action should provide a significant cost
savings by reducing the volumetric dredging need and extend the project life. Evaluating the 2017
maintenance operations suggest the project could have been reduced by approximately 11,500 CY through
selection of a more efficient channel corridor as compared to the documented alignment. As shown in
Figure 2, the deep -water corridor adjacent to Wainwright Slough would have required approximately
11,500 CY less than the documented channel limits. The USACE routinely assess the surrounding
bathymetry of navigation channels, including Wainwright Slough, to determine the most effective route for
maintenance operations. Carteret County is requesting a similar authorization through state and federal
permits.
As part of each independent maintenance event, Carteret County will provide updated bathymetry,
estimates of dredge volumes, and updated SAV survey results. The bathymetry and volume estimates will
help justify the need for selecting an alternate navigation corridor from the documented position of
Wainwright Slough. In addition, an updated SAV survey will help minimize potential impacts by helping
to ensure the project avoids all SAV habitat. The updated bathymetry and SAV survey results will be
collected between May and August prior to the maintenance operation. This effort will help to provide the
most realistic results expected at the time of construction. The SAV survey results and bathymetric data
will be submitted to DCM for agency review and approval prior to October when requesting a maintenance
event.
Planview drawings showing the proposed work will also be provided with the SAV and bathymetric data.
The drawings will incorporate the updated SAV results in addition to the bathymetric information to show
the most relevant status of the project features. The drawings will also incorporate the Wainwright Island
material placement site and other project features necessary for agency review.
The maintenance operations will maintain a 75 -ft channel dredged to a depth of -9 ft (7+2) MLLW with
removal of a 45,000 CY maximum volume. These channel dimensions maintain consistency with the
federally authorized channel and the authorized alignment from the County's 2017 maintenance event. The
45,000 CY threshold stems from the maximum volume expected to shoal into the documented alignment
of Wainwright Slough included in the County's 2017 maintenance event. Surveys obtained prior to the
2017 event showed approximately 40,000 CY had shoaled into the navigation channel. Although some
capacity still existed within the channel footprint, the conditions could be considered a reasonable worst-
case scenario. Therefore, conditions outside of the documented channel should not be expected to shoal
considerably worse and still provide a more economical deep -water route. The dredging operations will
also be limited to occur between November 161h and March 31 St to further reduce the potential for
environmental impacts.

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Pat McCrory
Secretary Susan Kluttz
November 30, 2016
Jerry McCrain, Ph.D
Moffatt & Nichol
4700 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27609
Re: Dredge Wainwright Slough, Carteret County, ER 16-2174
Dear Dr. McCrain:
Thank you for your letter of November 22, 2016, concerning the above project.
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.review(a�ncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
(1� ):�LtckuLtak4�
Ramona M. Bartos
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

US Army Corps ]PUBLIC NOTICE
Of Engineers
Wilmington District
Issue Date: June 20, 2019
Comment Deadline: July 20, 2019
Corps Action ID #: SAW -2019-01067
The Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers (Corps) has received a prospectus
proposing to include an additional site, known as the Juniper Tract, to the Lower Cape
Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank (LCFUMB). The site is an approximately 782 -acre
parcel located on the south side of Mill Creek Road SE and on the north side of Danford
Road, immediately east of Bolivia, NC.
Specific plans and location information are described below and shown on the attached
plans. The Public Notice and the full Prospectus are available on the RIBITS web site at
hos://ribits.usace.army.mil. To access the public notices, first select the Wilmington
District from the Filter View drop-down menu in the lower left-hand corner, and then
select the Bank & ILF Establishment tab, or to access the prospectus directly go to
https://ribits.usace.army.mil/ribits apex/f?p=107:278:13399755261145::NO:RP,278:P27
8 BANK ID:5410
Sponsor: LCFUMB, LLC
C/o: Mr. Jon Vincent
1508 Military Cutoff Road, Suite 302
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
Agent: Mr. Christian Preziosi
Land Management Group, Inc.
3805 Wrightsville Avenue, Suite 15
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
Authority
The Corps will evaluate this prospectus and the establishment of the mitigation bank site
in accordance with the procedures outlined in 33 CFR Part 332. Additionally, this
proposal will also be reviewed pursuant to the permitting authority under Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act if construction work involves the discharge of fill material in waters
and/or wetlands of the United States.

Location
The proposed Juniper Tract mitigation site is located on the south side of Mill Creek
Road SE and on the north side of Danford Road, immediately east of Bolivia, NC. The
site is situated between a NC DOT mitigation site, located to the west across Highway
17, and the Boiling Spring Lakes Plant Conservation Preserve, located to the southeast.
It is located at Latitude 34.071816, Longitude -78.120178. The tract is situated within
the Lower Cape Fear River 8 -digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03030005 of the Cape
Fear River Watershed Basin and the Lower Pee Dee 8 -digit HUC 03040208.
Existing Site Conditions
The proposed Juniper Tract, totaling 782 acres, contains a 765 -acre main parcel (Parcel
ID 12500047) in addition to a 17 -acre permanent conservation easement to be obtained
from an adjacent parcel (portion of Parcel ID 12600017). The main parcel includes a 34 -
acre power line easement that is proposed to be excluded from mitigation credit
generation. The site is situated between a NC Division of Transportation mitigation site,
located to the west across Highway 17, and the Boiling Spring Lakes Plant Conservation
Preserve, located to the southeast (Figure I shows proximity to protected sites). The site
consists predominantly of former headwater wetland flats that drain directly and
indirectly to five different tributaries: Harris Swamp, Bolivia Branch, Willet Branch,
Hickman Branch, and Mill Creek. The non -riparian and riparian wetlands have been
historically ditched and maintained as part of a prescribed silvicultural management plan
implemented by silvicultural operations in the 1970s. The network of drainage ditches
serves to lower groundwater tables and intercept surface water — thus compromising the
ecological functions (i.e. nutrient/sediment retention, flood attenuation, etc.)
characteristic of headwater wetlands.
The site consists predominantly of drained hydric soils characteristic of broad interstream
flats of the outer Coastal Plain. Representative soil units mapped on the NRCS county
soil survey include Muckalee loam, Pantego mucky loam, Rains fine sandy loam, and
Torhunta mucky fine sandy loam. These series are poorly drained to very poorly drained
soils characteristic of non -riparian wetlands and stream floodplains. Approximately
44,100 linear feet of open ditching currently exists throughout the site. This ditching was
installed as part of a timber management plan that lowered water table levels throughout
a large portion of the site and effectively removed and/or compromised wetland
hydrology. An approved jurisdictional determination was obtained by the Land
Management Group (LMG) in 2006 (Action ID 2006-41554-010). A preliminary
wetland mapping effort performed by LMG indicates that approximately 239 acres of
jurisdictional wetlands remain on the tract. The Sponsor is proposing to conduct a
comprehensive wetland delineation to determine existing wetland acreage on the tract.
An approved jurisdictional determination will be obtained as part of the mitigation plan
approval.

Project Purpose
The purpose of the proposal is to establish a wetland and stream mitigation bank in order
to provide compensatory mitigation for non -riparian wetlands, riparian (non-riverine)
wetlands, and stream impacts associated with Department of the Army authorizations
pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Project objectives focus onsestoring,
enhancing, and preserving natural wetland and stream functions associated with non -
riparian wetlands, riparian (non-riverine) wetlands, as well as zero and first -order
streams. Targeted functions include water quality improvements, nutrient and sediment
load reduction, increased surface and subsurface water storage, and increased wildlife
habitat. This is anticipated to benefit the receiving waters of Hickman Branch, Mill
Creek, and the Cape Fear River watershed.
Project Description
The Sponsor proposes to accomplish the following within the 782 -acre site: 1) Restore
1,980 linear feet of first -order stream; 2) Enhance --5,708 linear feet of zero -order
stream; 3) Restore —242 acres of non -riparian wetlands; 4) Enhance —64 acres of non -
riparian wetlands; 5) Preserve —164 acres of non -riparian wetlands; 6) Restore --26 acres
of riparian (non-riverine) wetlands; and 7) Enhance —11 acres of riparian (non-riverine)
wetlands. Overall restoration and enhancement activities consist of the following: 1)
removal or plugging of silvicultural ditches; 2) removal of roadbeds and spoil piles; 3)
grade work to restore first -order stream channels; 4) planting of characteristic wetland
trees and shrubs in select areas.
The Sponsor's estimated credits that the Bank could generate include 31 riparian (non-
riverine) wetland credits, 294 non -riparian wetland credits, and 7,688 stream credits (see
Table 1. Below).
Table 1. Preliminary Mitigation Type and Quantity
Community Type
Mitigation Type
Quantity (ac/lf)
Credit Ratio
Potential
Credits
Non -riparian Wetlands
Restoration
242
1:1
242
Non -riparian Wetlands
Enhancement
64
2:1
32
Non -riparian Wetlands
Preservation
164
8:1
20
Riparian Wetlands
Restoration
26
1:1
26
Riparian Wetlands
Enhancement
11
2:1
5
First -Order Stream
Restoration
1,980
1:1
1,980
Zero -Order Stream
Restoration
5,708
1:1
5,708
Total Wetlands
325
Total Stream
7,688
The proposed Geographical Service Area (GSA) encompasses the entire boundary of the
8 -Digit HUC 03030005- Lower Cape Fear River watershed. The amount of credit
proposed to be generated within the Lower Pee Dee watershed (8 -digit HUC 03040208)

is less than 1 credit of non -riparian wetland, so no change to the current LCFUMB GSA
is proposed. To date, the sponsor has not designated a third party entity to handle the
long-term management of the bank via conservation easement, but the most likely
easement holder will be the Land Trust for America (which currently holds the easement
for the other sites of the LCFUMB). Other potential holders include the North Carolina
Coastal Land Trust and the Cape Fear River Watch.
Evaluation and Commenting Information
The Corps is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State and local agencies and
officials, including any consolidated State Viewpoint or written position of the Governor;
Indian Tribes and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the
establishment of the Juniper Tract addition to the LCFUMB. Any comments received
will be considered by the Corps of Engineers in evaluating the approval of this bank. To
make this decision, all factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered
including the cumulative effects thereof, among those are conservation, economics,
aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, historic properties, fish and
wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain values (in accordance with Executive Order
11988), land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply
and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral
needs, considerations of property ownership, and in general, the needs and welfare of the
people.
The Corps has reviewed the prospectus and has examined all information provided by the
sponsor. Our preliminary review indicates the following: 1) An Environmental Impact
Statement will not be required; 2) Potential effects to listed species of fish, wildlife,
and/or plant species (or Critical Habitat) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 will
be assessed within the proposed 782 -acre bank; 3) There are no known cultural or historic
resources located within the proposed project site; and 4) There are no Essential Fish
Habitat (EFH) areas within the property. A "no effect' determination for threatened and
endangered species and for cultural and/or historic resources has not been made at this
time; and it has been determined that no additional EFH evaluation will be conducted.
Any additional or new information may change these preliminary findings.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above and as described in
the prospectus, will be received by the Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, until
5pm, July 20, 2019. Comments should be submitted to Mr. Tyler Crumbley, 69
Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North Carolina 28403, or at
tyler.a.crumble @usace.army.mil. If you have any questions or are unable to access a
copy of the bank prospectus, please contact Mr. Tyler Crumbley at [phone].

Action ID No: SAW -2019-01067
June 24, 2019
To include an additional site, known as the Juniper Tract, within the Lower Cape Fear
Umbrella Mitigation Bank (LCFUMB). The proposed 782 acre mitigation site is located
ori the south side of Mill Creek Road SE and on the north side of Danford Road,
immediately east of Bolivia, NC. The site is situated between a NC DOT mitigation site,
located to the west across Highway 17, and the Boiling Spring Lakes Plant Conservation
Preserve, located to the southeast. It is located at Latitude 34.071816, Longitude -
78.120178. The tract is situated within the Lower Cape Fear River 8 -digit Hydrologic
Unit Code (HUC) 03030005 of the Cape Fear River Basin and the Lower Pee Dee 8 -digit
HUC 03040208.
No. Cys. Mail To
Mr. Jon Vincent, LCFUMB LLC, 1508 Military Cutoff Road, Suite 302
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
Mr. Christian Preziosi, Land Management Group, Inc., 3805 Wrightsville
Avenue, Suite 15, Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
Mr. Corey Novak, Land Management Group, Inc., 3805 Wrightsville
Avenue, Suite 15, Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
Honorable David Rouser, House of Representatives, 424 Cannon House
Office Building, Washington, DC 20515
I Honorable David Rouser, House of Representatives, 310 Government
Center Drive, Unit 1, Bolivia, North Carolina 28422
1 Riegelwood NC 28456 (Postmaster)
1 Bolton NC 28423 (Postmaster)
I Delco NC 28436 (Postmaster)
1 East Arcadia NC 28456(Postmaster)
I Wilmington NC 28401 (Postmaster)
1 Wilmington NC 28403 (Postmaster)
1 Wilmington NC 28405 (Postmaster)
1 Castle Hayne NC 28429 (Postmaster)
I Lake Waccamaw NC 28450 (Postmaster)
Mr. Fritz Rohde, National Marine Fisheries Service, Habitat Conservation
Division, Pivers Island, Beaufort North Carolina 28516
Ms. Kathy Matthews, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 33726,
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726

Mr. Todd Bowers, Region IV -Wetlands Regulatory Section, Water
Management Division, USEPA, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303
Mr. Chad Coburn, North Carolina Division of Water Resources, 127
Cardinal Drive Ext, Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Ms. Karen Higgins, North Carolina Division of Water Resources,
NCDEQ- Mail Service Center 1650, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Ms. Maria Dunn, North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission, 943
Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889
Mr. Travis Wilson, NC Wildlife Resource Commission, 1718 Highway 56
West, Creedmoor, North Carolina 27522
Mr. Mac Haupt, North Carolina Division of Water Resources, NCDEQ-
Mail Service Center 1650, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Ms. Debra Wilson, North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, 127
Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, North Carolina 28405

A
o-,{
SITE
r
i
NC NOMgalonBt
f
R
'
3
` f
f
Bailing Spring Lakes Plant Conservation Preserve
i
Legend
f.
Dedicated Nature Preserve
-
- - -
Lam' Other Protection
'® State Ownership
-�- --
-sI
za! n mps
L \wetlands
N 0 1,000 2.000 4,000
0 Feet
Boundaries areapproaen aM not meant to be absolute.
are apprommale aml not meant
Map Source: ArcGIS Open Street Map, NC Natural Heritage Program
Scale applies to 11X17" print.
Juniper Tract
TMG
Brunswick County, NC
LLYJ.
May 2019ae05
tnvu siaFareu9vi m:ucv
was # mower
Figure 1
Vicinity Map
LMG # 19.027N51Mngton,
No xenon
[phone]

U11
R
L -JI
-
-
N 0 1,000 2,009 4,009
Boundaries
tppi-oa ate,aMaps vFeet
Map Sourc are approximate and not meant i be absolute.
Map Source: USGS Brunswick County Mosaic (eoliva 8 Funston ZS' Quads) Scale applies l0 77X17" print.
Juniper Tract T ]\�/�
Brunswick County, NC j�j�� �]
iaeP auauaueM cuuuv Figure 2
April 20193eos w��#�.P"�'., _ Topographic Map
LMG # 19.027 W ldt., NC 28403
[phone]

l
l 6 1 d
n
r'F � ryFyP.L
� W 1
aA'Y�'Y A
�� �1

�AUdUbOn NORTH CAROLINA
December 6, 2016
Robert Neal, P.E.
Moffatt & Nichol
272 N. Front Street, Suite 204
Wilmington, NC 28401
Re: Wainwright Island
Dear Mr. Neal,
7741 Market Street, Unit D
Wilmington, NC 28411-9444
Tel: gio-686-7527
Fax: yio-686-7587
www.ncaudubon.org
www.audubon.org
The National Audubon Society is aware of Carteret County's plans to dredge approximately
40,000 CY of sand from Wainwright Slough in Pamlico Sound. We are also aware that the County
proposes to place the material on or adjacent to Wainwright Island, which is owned and managed by the
National Audubon Society.
The National Audubon Society supports the initiative to use the dredge material to enhance bird
nesting and foraging habitat on Wainwright Island. We may provide additional comments pertaining to
the project after review of the detailed plans and permit application.
I understand that National Audubon Society will be provided 30 calendar days to provide any
additional comments from the time Carteret County provides a copy of the submitted application to the
Audubon Society.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
l
Walker Golder
Director, Atlantic Flyway Coast Initiative

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

a
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
JUNE 1995
Table of Contents
Items
Page No.
1.00 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................... 1
2.00 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND HISTORY ......................... 1
3.00 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE ................................ 2
4.00 PURPOSE AND NEED ........................................... 2
4.01 Current Disposal Method .................................... 2
4.02 Alternative Disposal Methods Investigated ....................... 2
4.03 Preferred Disposal Method ................................... 3
5.00 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT ...................... 3
5.01 Dredging and/or Disposal Alternatives .......................... 3
5.01.1 Clamshell or Bucket and Barge Dredge .................. 3
5.01.2 Hopper Dredging .................................... 3
5.01.3 Upland Diked Disposal ............................... 3
5.02 No -Action Alternative ....................................... 4
6.00 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ......................................
4
6.01
Water Quality .............................................
4
6.02
Estuarine Resources .......................................
5
6.03
Terrestrial Resources .......................................
6
6.04
Beneficial Use .............................................
7
6.05
Threatened and Endangered Species ..........................
8
6.06
Archaeological/Historical Resources ...........................
9
6.07
Recreation and Aesthetic Resources ..........................
10
6.08
Development .............................................
10
6.09
Executive Order 11988, Flood Plain Management ................
10
6.10
Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands ..................
11
6.11
Air Quality ...............................................
11
7.00 RELATIONSHIP TO LAND USE PLANS ............................. 11
i

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

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
JUNE 1995
1.00 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project involves changing the method of dredge disposal for the continued
as -needed maintenance dredging in the Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound and
Beaufort Harbor at Wainwright Slough (see section 4.00). The site is located
approximately 5 miles northeast of the Cedar Island Ferry Landing in Carteret County,
North Carolina (see Figure 1). The channel is dredged approximately once every three
to four years.
Historically, dredged material has been placed at the toe -of -the -bank on the
channel (east) side of Wainwright Island (see Site A, Figure 2). Due to the location of
this disposal area, the dredged material has quickly returned to the channel. To correct
this situation, the material would be discharged in upland areas (see Figure 2, site D)
and directed overland to the non -channel (west) side of the island.
The maintenance dredging will remove materials lying above the plane of 9 feet
below mean low water (m.l.w.) (-7 feet m.l.w. plus 2 feet of allowable overdepth) within
the designated limits of the channel. Approximately 30,000 cubicyards of material
consisting of fine -to -medium grained sand may be removed from the channel by a
hydraulic pipeline dredge. The work will be accomplished in late fall -early winter of
each year as needed and completed prior to the April 1 onset of the colonial waterbird
nesting season.
2.00 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND HISTORY
The project was authorized by the River and Harbor Act of August 30, 1935. The
channel was originally dredged in 1935. Fifteen maintenance dredgings occurred in
various portions of the channel through 1968; since that time the channel has been
maintained on an as -needed basis. The last maintenance dredging was completed in
late 1991. Emergency dredging by the special purpose dredge CURRITUCK was
completed in early 1994.

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

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

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

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

The nearest oyster or clam leases are on the mainland side of Core Banks near
the town of Atlantic and will not be impacted by the project. Public oyster resources are
not located within the immediate project area but are abundant in other areas of Core
Sound. Oysters will not be adversely impacted by the project.
Core Sound is open to the mechanical harvest of clams except in SAV habitat
areas and within oyster and clam leases. However, the mechanical clam harvest line
stops just south of Wainwright Island. Hard clams (Mercenaria mercenaria) may be
taken by hand in shallow water not subject to shifting sand due to tidal flows. NCDMF
advised that clam density is not expected to be significant in the vicinity of Site B (see
Figure 2); they did not express concern for project impacts to clams.
The NCDMF advised that bay scallops may be present on the southwest side of
the island. Due to their mobility, it is not anticipated that the scallop resource will be
adversely impacted by turbidities or sediments generated along the shoreline by the
effluent discharge.
Core Sound also provides habitat for an abundance of other estuarine and marine
organisms. Blue crabs, shrimp, and finfish are taken by commercial and recreational
fishermen from this estuary. Larval fish and shrimp migrate to and from primary
nursery areas throughout the Sound. The nearest primary nursery area is Cedar Island
Bay located to the southeast of Wainwright Island; this nursery area will not be
impacted by the project. However, to protect migrating larvae and other sensitive
aquatic fauna during periods of high biological activity, dredging activities will be limited
to the period between October 1 and March 31.
6.03 Terrestrial Resources
Terrestrial resources on Wainwright Island on the highest elevations include
mixed shrub thickets, sparsely vegetated areas, and unvegetated areas comprised of
sand and shells. The shoreline fringe areas contain sparse or no vegetation to the
marsh or high tide line. There are no areas on the island that would be classified as
maritime forest habitat.
Because it is isolated from the mainland and the Outer Banks, no predators are
found on Wainwright Island, a factor critical to the survival of colonial waterbird
species. Breeding and nesting activities occur from April 1 through August 31 of each
year. Dredging and disposal activities will be limited to the period from October 1
through March 31 to protect the colonial waterbirds and their habitat during the
breeding and nesting season.
6

6.04 Beneficial Use
The preferred disposal alternative would: (1) Provide for satisfactory disposal of
maintenance dredging material; (2) stabilize the existing upland limits of the island;
(3) enhance or create habitat for colonial waterbird species such as royal terns and
sandwich terns, snowy egrets (Egretta thula thula), tri -colored herons (E retia tricolor),
and glossy ibis (Ple adis falcinellus falcinellus); and (4) existing habitat would be
preserved and expanded for breeding brown pelicans, herring gulls (Larus arQentatus
smithsonianus) and great black -backed gulls, and wading birds such as black -crowned
night herons (Nvcticorax nvcticorax hoactli , great egrets (Casmerodius albus a retia ,
and little blue herons (Florida caerulea caerulea).
Wind and wave erosional forces have significantly reduced Wainwright Island
from its original 16 -acre size. It is a national bird sanctuary owned by the National
Audubon Society. The island is one of North Carolina's most important nesting sites for
colonial waterbirds (Parnell 1995). In 1991 the island supported North Carolina's
largest colony of nesting royal terns (Sterna macima maxima) (6,337 pairs) (Corps of
Engineers, 1993) and many sandwich terns (Sterna sandvicensis acuflavidus). It
presently supports the State's second largest colony of nesting brown pelicans
(Pelecanus occidentalis carolinensis) (950 pairs). Suitable bare ground nesting and
breeding habitat for terns has diminished greatly due to wind and wave erosion and
vegetation growth. Nesting habitat for brown pelicans is now threatened. Royal and
sandwich terns abandoned the island in 1994.
Colonial waterbird nesting sites in North Carolina have been reduced almost 50
percent from the mid 1970's to the late 1980's (Golder 1995; Bain 1989; Parnell and
Soots 1979). As a result, more and more birds utilize the remaining but rapidly eroding
breeding and nesting islands. Although colonial waterbird populations within North
Carolina are not presently declining, this may not be the situation in the near future
(Parnell 1995). Crowding increases the potential for a catastrophic loss of birds by
disease, weather related events (e.g., hail storms), or by human activities.
The National Audubon Society supports the placement of dredged sand in such a
way as to protect the pelican and wading bird nesting habitats while restoring the tern
nesting habitat. They recommended that a fringe of vegetation be left on the eastern
and northern sides of the island to provide habitat for pelicans and that no material be
placed on the northwestern finger of the island. Similar landscaping actions have
proven to work successfully on South Pelican and Ferry Slip Islands in the lower Cape
Fear River (Golder 1995).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

FIGURE 1

11-5
N
-lop-
.41pi-W7
ofs
k*
AMINO
■

ATTACHMENT A
SECTION 404 (13)(1) (PUBLIC LAW 95-217) EVALUATION

MAINTENANCE DREDGING
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
WATERWAY CONNECTING PAMLICO SOUND AND BEAUFORT HARBOR
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EVALUATION OF SECTION 404(b)(1) GUIDELINES
40 CFR 230
Section 404 Public Notice No. CESAW-EP-PE-95-16-0005
1. Review of Compliance (230.10(a) -(d)) Preliminary 1/ Final 2/
A review of the NEPA Document
indicates that:
The discharge represents the least
environmentally damaging practicable
alternative and if in a special aquatic
site, the activity associated with the
discharge must have direct access or
proximity to, or be located in the aquatic
ecosystem to fulfill its basic purpose (if no,
see section 2 and NEPA document); YESI_l NOI_I' YESI X I N0I-1
The activity does not:
1) violate applicable State water quality
standards or effluent standards prohibited
under Section 307 of the CWA; 2) jeopardize
the existence of federally listed endangered
or threatened species or their habitat; and
3) violate requirements of any federally
designated marine sanctuary (if no, see section
2b and check responses from resource and
water quality certifying agencies); YESI_l N01_1' YESI X I NOI_I
c. The activity will not cause or contribute
to significant degradation of waters of the
U.S. including adverse effects on human
health, life stages of organisms dependent
on the aquatic ecosystem, ecosystem diversity,
productivity and stability, and recreational,
aesthetic, and economic values (if no,
see section 2); YESI_l N01_1• YESI X I N01-1
Appropriate and practicable steps have
been taken to minimize potential adverse
impacts of the discharge on the aquatic
ecosystem (if no, see section 5). YESI_l N01_1• YESI X l NOI_I
Proceed to Section 2
*,.1, 2/ See page 6.

2. Technical Evaluation Factors (Subparts C -F)
a. Physical and Chemical Characteristics
of the Aquatic Ecosystem (Subpart C)
(1) Substrate impacts.
(2) Suspended particulates/turbidity
impacts.
(3) Water column impacts.
(4) Alteration of current patterns
and water circulation.
(5) Alteration of normal water
fluctuations/hydroperiod.
(6) Alteration of salinity
gradients.
b. Biological Characteristics of the
Aquatic Ecosystem (Subpart D)
(1) Effect on threatened/endangered
species and their habitat.
(2) Effect on the aquatic food web.
(3) Effect on other wildlife (mammals,
birds, reptiles, and amphibians).
c. Special Aquatic Sites (Subpart E)
(1)
Sanctuaries and refuges.
(2)
Wetlands.
(3)
Mud flats.
(4)
Vegetated shallows.
(5)
Coral reefs.
(6)
Riffle and pool complexes.
d. Human Use Characteristics (Subpart F)
(1) Effects on municipal and private
water supplies.
(2) Recreational and commercial
fisheries impacts.
(3) Effects on water -related recreation
(4) Aesthetic impacts.
(5) Effects on parks, national and
historical monuments, national
seashores, wilderness areas,
research sites, and similar
preserves.
Not Signifi- Signifi-
N/A cant cant`
I I I I
I X
I X I
I I I I
I X I
X l
I
I I
X I I
I X1
I I
X I
X I
I I
I x l
I I
X 1
I I
I I
X I
I I
I
I I
I I
I I
X I I
X I
I
X I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
X I I
Remarks: Where a check is placed under
the significant category, preparer add explanation below.
Proceed to Section 3
`See page 6.
A2

3. Evaluation of Dredoed or Fill Material lSubnart Gl 3/
a. The following information has been
considered in evaluating the biological
availability of possible contaminants in
dredged or fill material. (Check only
those appropriate.)
(1) Physical characteristics . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . .. .. . .. . . . . .. .. . .. . .. .IXI
(2) Hydrography in relation to
known or anticipated
sources of contaminants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IXI
(3) Results from previous
testing of the material
or similar material in _
the vicinity of the project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I_I
(4) Known, significant sources of
persistent pesticides from _
land runoff or percolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I_I
(5) Spill records for petroleum
products or designated
(Section 311 of CWA) _
hazardous substances .... ..... ........ ......... .. ......... I_I
(6) Other public records of
significant introduction of
contaminants from industries,
municipalities, or other _
sources..............................................I_I
(7) Known existence of substantial
material deposits of
substances which could be
released in harmful quantities
to the aquatic environment by _
man -induced discharge activities . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I_I
(8) Other sources (specify) ..................................... I_I
List appropriate references.
Reference: Environmental Assessment, Maintenance Dredging. Wainwright Slough, Waterway
Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor. Carteret County. North Carolina, dated June
1995.
b. An evaluation of the appropriate information in 3a
above indicates that there is reason to believe the
proposed dredge or fill material is not a carrier of
contaminants, or that levels of contaminants are sub-
stantively similar at extraction and disposal sites and
not likely to result in degradation of the disposal site. _
The material meets the testing exclusion criteria. YES I X I NO I—I`
Proceed to Section 4
", 3/, see page 6.
A3

4. Disposal Site Determinations (230.11(f)).
a. The following factors as appropriate,
have been considered in evaluating the
disposal site.
(1) Depth of water at disposal site .. .. . . . . . . . .....
. . . . . . . . .. .. . . . .. IXI
(2) Current velocity, direction, and
variability at disposal site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IX_I
(3) Degree of turbulence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I—I
(4) Water column stratification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I_I
(5) Discharge vessel speed and
_
direction .............................................
I_I
(6) Rate of discharge .. . . . . ... . . . . . . . .. .. . .
. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .IXI
(7) Dredged material characteristics
(constituents, amount and type
of material, settling velocities) . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. IXI
(8) Number of discharges per unit of
_
time...............................................I_I
(9) Other factors affecting rates and
patterns of mixing (specify)
List appropriate references.
Reference: Environmental Assessment, Maintenance Dredaina,
Wainwriaht Sough. Waterway
Connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret County,
North Carolina, dated June
1995.
b. An evaluation of the appropriate factors in
4a above indicates that the disposal site
_
and/or size of mixing zone are acceptable .. . .. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . YES IXI NO 1_I'
5. Actions to Minimize Adverse Effects (Subpart H).
All appropriate and practicable steps have been taken,
through application of recommendations of 230.70-230.77,
to ensure minimal adverse effects of the proposed
discharge. List actions taken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . YES IXI NO 1_1'
For water quality see Section 6.01 of the EA.
For benthos see Section 6.02 of the EA.
For fisheries see Section 6.02 of the EA.
For threatened and endangered species see Section 6.05 of the EA.
Return to section 1 for final stage of compliance review. See also
note 3/. page 3.
'See page 6.
A4

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

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

ATTACHMENT B
ONSITE SCOPING MEETING
MAY 3, 1993
LIST OF ATTENDEES
National Audubon Society
National Marine Fisheries Service
North Carolina Division of Archives and History
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, Morehead City Regional Office
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management, Wilmington Regional Office
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Northside Office, Raleigh
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Habitat Conservation Office,
Washington, North Carolina
University of North Carolina - Wilmington

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

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt. Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
April 20, 1995
William R. Dawson, PE
Chief, Engineering and Planning Division
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, N.C. 28402-1890
Re: Dredge Disposal Modification, Wainwright Island,
Carteret County, ER 95-8737
Dear Mr. Dawson:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of April 13, 1995, concerning the above project.
Our records indicate that there are no recorded archaeological or historic resources
on Wainwright Island. However, the island has never been surveyed for sites.
Based on similar islands in the region, it is quite possible that prehistoric remains
may have at one time existed on the island, assuming it is not a man-made spoil
island.
Mark Mathis of our Office of State Archaeology will participate in the field visit to
the site on May 3, 1995. If there are any changes in plans please contact him at
919/733-7342.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act. of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's _
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill -Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Siiw,erely,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188,919-733-3391
Chanes R. Fullwood, Executive Director
May 4, 1995
Mr. Earnest Jahnke
Environmental Resources Section
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Dear Mr. Jahnke:
The trip to Wainwright Island on Wednesday, May 3, 1995 was very informative. I
believe that the method of disposal which involves control of effluent with discharge directed
overland (sites C and D) to the open water on the non -channel side (west side) of the island
would be significantly enhance the island for colonial nesting birds and only minimally impact
the shallow water habitat. I agree that toe -of -the -bank disposal would be the least desirable of
alternatives that have been discussed.
Thank you for arranging the trip. Please contact me if additional information is needed at
this stage of review.
Sincerely,
Xr;;-�rlwm KA
Franklin T. McBride, Manager
Habitat Conservation Program

National c: ` Audubon Society
J.
May 11, 1995
Mr. Ernie Jahnke
Environmental Resources Section
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Dear Mr. Jahnke:
North Carolina
Coastal Islands Sanctuary
10 E. Greensboro St.. #7
Wrightsville Beach, IVC 28480
[phone]
I am writing in response to requests for comments regarding
the proposed disposal of dredged sand on Wainwright Island located
at the junction of Gore and Pamlico Sounds, Carteret County, North
Carolina.
Wainwright Island, owned and protected as a wildlife
sanctuary by the National Audubon Society, has long been a vital
nesting site for many species of colonial waterbirds. Deposition of
dredged sand on portions of the island has created habitat suitable
for nesting terns and pelicans, while habitats that existed prior to the
disposal of dredged sand on the island have supported nesting
wading birds. The island once supported North Carolina's largest
colony of Royal and Sandwich terns, and continues to support the
state's second largest colony of Brown Pelicans. However, erosion
and vegetation growth in recent years has eliminated the nesting
habitat for Royal and Sandwich Terns which abandoned the island in
1994, and threatens the nesting habitat for Brown Pelicans. Erosion
has also greatly reduced the island from its original size of 16 acres.
The National Audubon Society supports the deposition of
dredged sand on the island in a manner that will restore nesting
habitat for waterbirds and restore the island, as nearly as possible, to
its original size. Of the disposal sites proposed in "figure 2" of the
letter dated March 27, 1995, dredged sand placed on sites D, C and B
would accomplish this. Audubon recommends ' that a fringe of
vegetation be left on the eastern. and northern sides of the island to
provide habitat for pelicans and that no material be placed on the
northwestern finger of the island. To restore the island to its original
size, Audubon recommends that material be placed in site B and that
sand bags be used if deemed necessary or effluent be controlled to
minimize the impact on surrounding shallows and restore the vital
waterbird habitat that has been lost to erosion.

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

RCV BY:Wilmington District ; 5-11-95 ; 16:07 ; -+ USACE—Reg. Branch;x
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of coastal Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Hauges, Secretary
Roger N. Schecter. Director May. 11, 1995
William R. Dawson, Chief
EnOneering and Planning Divisioll
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1894
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Port4t" Fax Note 7671
/
to riaiG rr.h.��E c
F"0"' Ca r0C0iy el f
CoA)Wt aG'
too. DG M
Place r
PhW # 73 ' 2. Z 3
Fax N Z
F+x •
RENlOt]3NCE: DCM95-19: SrgAng. Modification of Disposal Method, Wainwright Yslond
Deja W. Dawson:
The Division of Coastal Management would like to thank you for the opportunity to participate in the site
meeting held May 3, 1995, Wainwright Island in C`.ratanot County, NC. The meting was held to discuss and invite
comment on the various alternatives which have been proposed fir the disposal of &edged material from the AIWW
on Wainwright Island. As a suppleamt to the discussions held onsite. we offer tht following comments:
1. We would consider Alternative B to be the least preferred alternative. A large area of shallow bottom
habitat would he lost and there are potential significant impacts on submerged aquatic vegetation and other
estuarine resources.
2. Alternative C would impact a large amount of wet>ands, espoeiaily if offinent were unoonfroo&
3. The combination B/D alters alive discussed at the site meeting would entail disposal of the dredged
material on the higher sandy portion of the %land with dte efte nt being chested downslope,_ westward
towards the water. We feel that this alternative could be acceptable, pt+ovided the material is contained
landward of the coastal wetlands vegetation line by a sandbag retaining atm3 use.
4. A Consistency Determination will be requited for the proposal to its MW f zi, pursuant to 15 CFR 930
Subpart C - Consistency for Federal AcdivitieS.
If you have any questions regarding our conunants, plena contact me or Swft laeam Division of Coastal
Management, at [phone]. Thank you for your consideration of the North Cue inn Coastal Management
Program.
Siticudy,
i�� ' / ,
ewoune J. BOWS
cc: Preston Pate, Assistant Director, Divi<cion of Coastal Management
Charles loner. Division of Coastal Management, Morehead City
Ernest Jahnke, US Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
P.O. Roy 27687. Rdeld,, Nora, Carofino 27671-7687 T61aotvone 010-733-2293 FAX 010-73.ft-Ws,

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

State of North Cat .ria
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources4&74jp*
Division of Marine Fisheries
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor c
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary G "
INJ Pit
Bruce Freeman, Director
May 5, 1995
Mr. Ernie Jahnke
Environmental Resources Section
P. O. Box. 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Dear Mr. Jahnke:
As a result of retiiewing the proposed spoil disposal modifica-
tion of Wainwright Island and the on-site visit May 3, 1995, the
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries would like the
following concerns addressed in the upcoming environmental
assessment.
The presence of sea grass beds, i.e. Halodule wriahtii.
Zostera marina or Ruppia maritima hard clams and bay scallops that
may be buried by the deposition of spoil material will be the main
concern of the Division. Another investigation of the site on the
southwest side of the island needs to be conducted on a clear,
calm day to determine the presence and density of these species.
Bay scallops, if any, present on the southwest side of the
island could be relocated east of the channel to the seagrass
bed(s) there. The density of clams is not expected to be signifi-
cant in the vicinity of the "Site B" area. Dredge spoil disposal
on any significant sea grass concentrations should be avoided or
impact should be minimized. How much gradual covering by sand over
time the sea grass can withstand is unknown and any areas covered
with grass should be separated from spoil effects.
If the combination'of Sites C and D with effluent directed
toward Site B is pursuant as the preferred alternative, the
Division at this time would recommend the use of sand bag retention
wall to reduce turbidity and contain the spoil material.
Sincerely,
,4UV/- -2
David L. Taylor
DLT:rrm
cc: Mike Street
Melba McGee
P.O. Box 769, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557-0769 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 5o% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Ecological Services
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 2763&-3726
April 25, 1995
Mr. William R. Dawson
Chief, Engineering and Planning Division
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Dear Mr. Dawson:
PRIDE MImmw �
AMERI R
e�
This responds to your March 27, 1995 request for scoping comments
from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on the proposal
by the Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers (Corps) to modify
the method of disposal for dredge material from the maintenance
dredging of the Wainwright Slough portion of the Waterway
connecting Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret County,
North Carolina. These comments are provided in accordance with the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667d)'and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). This letter is provided on
a planning aid basis and does not constitute the report of 'the
Department of the Interior as required -by Section 2(b) of the Fish
and Wildlife Coordination Act.
The current disposal method involves toe -of -bank placement on the
channel side (east) of Wainwright Island.. This disposal site is at
capacity and material placed in this area quickly returns to the
channel. The Corps is currently considering three alternatives to
alleviate this'problem: (1) control of effluent with discharge
directed overland to the open water on the non -channel (west) side
of the island; (2) toe -of -bank disposal on the non -channel side
with confinement by a sandbag retention wall; and, (3) toe -of -bank
disposal on the non -channel side without confinement.
Concerns of the Service and Recommendations for Environmental
Document
The Service recognizes the problems of the current disposal method
and the need for modifications. The Service also is aware that
Wainwright Island is an important nesting site for colonial
waterbirds and that the island is managed by the National Audubon
Society. The habitat value of the island for nesting waterbirds
has been reduced by erosion and the growth of vegetation.

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

1. A review of the literature and other information;
2. A description of any listed species or critical habitat that
may be affected by the action;
3. An analysis of the "effect of the action", as def ined by CFR
402.02, --on the species and habitat including consideration
of direct, indirect, cumulative effects, and the results of
related studies;
4. A description of the manner in which the action may affect
any species or critical habitat;
5. Summary of evaluation criteria used as a measure of
potential effects; and
6. Determination statement based on evaluation criteria.
Candidate species refers to any species being considered by the
Service for listing as endangered or threatened but not yet the
subject of a proposed rule. These species are not legally
protected under the Act or subject to its provisions, including
Section 7, until formally proposed or listed as threatened or
endangered. New data could result in the formal listing of a
candidate species. This change would place the species under the
full protection of the Endangered Species Act, and necessitate a
new survey if its status in the project corridor is unknown.
Therefore, it would be prudent for the project to avoid any adverse
impact to candidate species or their habitat. The North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program should be contacted for information on
species under State protection.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments
and we look forward to continued involvement with the Corps on this
project. If you have any questions, please call Howard Hall at
919-856-4520 (ext. 27).
jSinnccer� el ,
l'�'tl.�lJ►�`q��`1i
L.R. M1.ke Gantt
supervisor

REVISED APRIL 19, 1995
Carteret County
Mammals
Eastern cougar Fees concolor cou uar) - E
ftdi
Said eagle (Haliaeetus leucoceahalus) - E
peregrine falcon (Falco aerearinus tundrius) - T
Red cockaded woodpecker (Picoldes borealis) - E
Roseate tem (Stoma dounallif 0 11il) - E -
Piping plover (Charadrius melo us) - T
Reotiles
Green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas) - T
Kemp's (Atlantic) Ridley sea turtle (Lealdochelys kemoi) - E
Leatherback sea tyle (Dermochelvs coriacea). - E
Loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) - T
Plants
Rough -leaved loosestrife (Lvsimachia asoerulaefolia) - E
Seabeach amaranth (Amarenthusuo milus) - T
Sea turtles when 'in the water".. -are under the jurisdiction of. the National Marine Fisheries Service and
should be contacted concerning your agency's responsibilities under Section 7 of the Endangered. species
Act. Their address is:
National Marine Fisheries Service
U -S. Department of commerce
9450 Koger Boulevard
Duval Building
St. Petersburg, Florida 33702
There are spades which, although not now listed or officially proposed for listing as endangered or
threatened, are under status review by the Service. These 'Candidate'(Cl and C2) spades are not legally
protected under the Act, and are not subject to any of its provisions,' including Section 7, until they are
formally proposed or listed as threatened or endangered. We are prof ldi ng the below Est of candidate
spades which may occur within the project area for the purpose of giving you advance notification. These
species may be listed In the future, at which time they will be protected under the Act. In the meantime,
we would appreciate anything you might do for them.
Birds
Bachman's sparrow (Aimonhila sestivalis) - C2
Black rail (Laterallus lamakcensis) - C2
Henslow's sparrow (AmmodramusI wii) - C2
Reptiles
Northern diamondback terrapin (Malademys terrapin terrapin - C2
Amphibians
Carolina crawfish frog (Rana areolata canito) - C2
Crustaceans
Croatan crayfish (Procambarus plumimanus) -.C2

Carteret County lcont'd)
REVISED APRIL 19, 1995
Insects
Carter's noctuid moth (Snartininhacra carterae) - C2
Plants
Carolina goldenrod Solida ouo Ichra) - C2
Chapman's sedge Carex chanmani�) - C2
Dune blue curls (Trichostema 12.) - C2
Loose watermilf oil (Mvrioohvilum laxum) - C2
Pondspice JUtsea aestivalis) - C2
Savanna camylopus (Camvlonus carolinae) - C2
Savanna cowbane Ox lis temata) - C2
Smooth bog -asphodel ofi Idia labra) - C2
Venus flytrap Di na a muscioula) - C2

'<f0 ST4,
2 Z
c
n
o � u
s
c �
tir,� .ROiE`
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION IV
345 COURTLAND STREET. N.E.
ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30365
APR
Colonel Robert J. Sperberg
District Engineer, Wilmington
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Attn: Mr. Earnest Jahnke
Environmental Resources Branch
Subject: Changes to the Maintenance Design for the Wainwright
Slough Portion of the Waterway Connecting Pamlico Sound
and Beaufort Harbor, Carteret County, NC
Dear Colonel Sperberg:
Pursuant to your request of March 27, 1995, EPA, Region 4 has
reviewed the subject proposal which discusses the environmental
consequences of altering the current dredge disposal regimen on
Wainwright Island. After an examination of the information
provided and conversations with Environmental, Resources technical
staff we suggest that a variation of Option B and C be examined in
more detail. Shallow water habitat would be covered with
maintenance material with each of these options, but by putting the
material immediately adjacent to the present shoreline and using
some kind of confining measure (sand bags/tubes) the overall
footprint could be minimized.
This notwithstanding, it is not clear to us that shallow water
habitat is a limiting. factor in system functioning; whereas
providing some long-term protection to Wainwright Island which is
relatively unique has obvious merit. It should be noted that the
entire island appears to be at risk from erosional processes;
hence, the no -action alternative has its own adverse ramifications.
For example, we understand that the island receives a great deal of
use as a rookery and this capability would be lost if it were
Inundated.
On the basis of
significant objections
model rather than the
statement format.
the scope of the proposal we have no
to your plans to use an EA as the evaluation
more comprehensive environmental impact
Prirled on Recycled raper

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

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt. Jr.. Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
May 18, 1995
William R. Dawson, P.E.
Chief, Engineering and Planning Division
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, N.C. 28402-1890
Re: Dredge Disposal Modification, Wainwright Island,
Carteret County, ER 95-8737
Dear Mr. Dawson:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
On May 3, 1995, an on-site: inspection was conducted at Wainwright Island -by a
number of agency representatives, including Archaeologist Mark Mathis, who
prepared the enclosed field inspection report. The following comments concerning
the proposed disposal project are based on Mr. Mathis's report.
As noted in our letter of April 20, 1995, no archaeological resources had been
recorded on the island. However, during the recent inspection, an extensive
deposit of prehistoric shell was observed along the eroding western shore of the
island and recorded as 31 CR273. -
Based on Mr. Mathis's observations and the historical use of the island for dredge
disposal, portions of the interior and eastern side of the island are covered with old
dredge materials. At the time of the inspection, the island was inhabited by a
substantial population of nesting pelicans and evaluation of the extent of the
cultural remains across the island was impossible. However, we believe the site
probably contains substantial undisturbed and potentially significant cultural
deposits.
Prior to initiation of any new disposal and ground disturbing activities, we
recommend that archaeological testing be conducted across the island. The
purpose of the test excavations should be to (a) document the nature, extent, and
.condition of the cultural deposits; (b) evaluate the significance of the deposits with
regard to the National Register of Historic Places; and (c) develop, if warranted, an
appropriate impact mitigation plan.
We appreciate your including Mr. Mathis in the recent inspection and hope these
comments will assist you in the project planning process. If you have questions
concerning the field report, please contact Mr. Mathis at 919/733-4763.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2W7

William R. Dawson
May 18, 1995, Page
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
44 David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
Enclosure
you have questions
Gledhill -Earley,

WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
DEEP WATER ROUTE MAINTENANCE EVENT
CARTERET COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CARTERET COUNTY
302 COURTHOUSE SQUARE
BEAUFORT, NC 28516
Pamlico Sound
V
Core
iJeus°M",—. Sound
nertowe
wlli;iari'•'
1Ak
M—h-d UK9esulort
Atlantic 9 -h .kie ns.leknd
© GOOGLE
VICINITY MAP
NO SCALE
SITE MAP
NO SCALE
FIGURE 1

IF
-A•
CORE SOUND1
X,
=ii
lic\IV
4 �
1
�
-_,
(/ c\((375 \\\
✓L� �\,
1�
\/ ^t
\
/ ---
� f
I .
„1 —_
I
-
-
III
,
� • �
_ iI � `I� I� � 1 /( \)
�G''
• /� l
-
•
I If)1 1
� �_�\ �;I 1f'f lt � ��
r
tl
c/
- •I♦ �`Ci�// //' /
Ste\ (�� e
\5
_
on

10
� 0
i
H -
w
z
0
� -10
w
w
CHANNEL7-tx
-20 70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
DISTANCE (FEET)
DREDGE AREA NOTES:
1. CHANNEL ALIGNMENT SHALL BE IDENTIFIED AND APPROVED BY
DCM PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE ALIGNMENT SHALL REMAIN
WITHIN THE DREDGE CORRIDOR AS SHOWN ON FIGURE 2.
2. UPDATED BATHYMETRY AND SAV HABITAT COVERAGE SHALL BE
PROVIDED TO DCM PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION TO HELP FACILITATE
REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CHANNEL ALIGNMENT.
3. THE CHANNEL ALIGNMENT SHALL MAINTAIN A 75 -FT WIDTH WITH
3:1 SIDE SLOPES AND SHALL NOT ENCROACH INTO ANY
POTENTIAL SAV HABITAT.
4. THE CHANNEL ALIGNMENT WILL FOLLOW THE MOST EFFICIENT
DEEP WATER PATH TO MINIMIZE THE DREDGE VOLUMES AND
POTENTIAL CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS.
5. A MAXIMUM OF APPROXIMATELY 45,000 CY SHALL BE
HYDRAULICALLY DREDGED AND PLACED IN THE MATERIAL
PLACEMENT AREA TO COMPLETE THE MAINTENANCE EVENT.
FIGURE 3
5' 0' 5' 10'
VERTICAL SCALE: 1"=10'
DREDGE CORRIDOR - TYPICAL SECTION 2
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"-20'
EXIST. GROUND
�
�
I
DREDGE AREA
DESIGN DREDGE
EL -7.00• =
M H W
EL 0.
8
1
-
MLW
L 0.
37.50'
I
37.50'
OVERDREDGE
EL -9.00

TOP OF FILL
10:1 MAX
FINISHED
SLOPE, T'
%T T
FILL
EL 0.38
EL 0.01
LAID 1.
GROUND
MATERIAL PLACEMENT SITE NOTE
1. DREDGE MATERIAL WILL BE HYDRAULICALLY PLACED TO CREATE A NATURAL SLOPE
TO THE EXISTING GRADE. THE FILL PLACEMENT AREA WILL BE FREE OF
DEPRESSIONS, RUTS / TRENCHES AND SHALL NOT ALLOW THE PONDING OF WATER.
2. MATERIAL PLACEMENT SHALL BE DIRECTED AWAY FROM WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH TO
PREVENT THE DREDGE EFFLUENT FROM RETURNING TO THE DREDGE AREA.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED TO PREVENT OR DISCOURAGE THE DREDGE
EFFLUENT FROM LEAVING THE MATERIAL PLACEMENT SITE THROUGH THE USE OF
SANDBAGS, OR OTHER OBSTRUCTIONS. HOWEVER, THE CONTRACTOR MAY DIRECT
THE DREDGE EFFLUENT FLOW THROUGH THE USE OF SAND BERMS / DIKES. THE
EFFLUENT SHALL BE DIRECTED IN A STRAIGHT LINE PATH AWAY FROM THE
MATERIAL PLACEMENT SITE.
4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING COMPLIANCE WITH
THE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS STIPULATED BY THE STATE FEDERAL PERMITS
FOR THIS PROJECT.
5. IF NECESSARY TO DISCOURAGE OR PROHIBIT WATER PONDING AND ENCOURAGE
SHOREBIRD USAGE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SMOOTH GRADE THE MATERIAL
PLACEMENT SITE ABOVE MLLW TO A MAXIMUM (STEEPEST) ANGLE OF REPOSE OF
1 H: 10V (FEET) PRIOR TO THE DEMOBILIZATION OF EQUIPMENT.
6. MATERIAL PLACED ON WAINWRIGHT ISLAND MAY BE SHAPED TO CREATE WIND
BREAKS AND BIRD REFUGE AREAS TO PROMOTE BIRD ACTIVITY. HOWEVER, THE
MATERIAL SHAPING SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN SUCH A MANNER TO DISCOURAGE
WATER PONDING. ANY AND ALL MATERIAL SHAPING SHALL BE CONDUCTED PRIOR
TO COMPLETION OF DEMOBILIZATION AND IN COORDINATION WITH AUDUBON NORTH
CAROLINA (THE UNDERLYING PROPERTY OWNER OF WAINWRIGHT ISLAND).
MATERIAL PLACEMENT SITE - TYPICAL SECTION FIGURE 4

DREDGE CORRIDOR
WORK POINTS
POINT No.
NORTHING
EASTING
WP101
464594.44
2836862.44
WP102
464445.82
2837851.34
WP103
462302.25
2837529.18
WP104
461468.77
2836905.23
WP105
460566.80
2835345.29
WP106
461590.70
2835747.34
WP107
462702.41
2836571.71
MATERIAL PLACEMENT SITE
WORK POINTS
POINT No.
NORTHING
EASTING
WP201
463177.34
2834946.17
WP202
463245.68
2835340.28
WP203
463244.07
2835590.28
WP204
463099.35
2835794.14
WP205
462943.53
2835822.78
WP206
462739.67
2835678.06
WP207
462655.69
2835442.59
WP208
462588.24
2835048.32
WORK POINT TABLES
FIGURE 5

Submerged Aquatic
Vegetation
Field Survey Report
Wainwright Slough, NC
Presented to:
Carteret County
April Z 2019
Prepared by:
moffati & nichol
4700 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27609

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report NIL- Carteret County
Table of Contents
1. Introduction................................................................................................................................. 3
2. Methodology...............................................................................................................................5
3. Results and Discussion................................................................................................................7
4. References...................................................................................................................................8
MapAppendix.................................................................................................................................9
PhotoAppendix.............................................................................................................................13
FieldNotes Appendix....................................................................................................................15
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 2

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
1. Introduction
Carteret County (County) has identified Wainwright Slough as a navigation channel where vessel
access has been impeded by continuous sediment shoaling and has resulted in localized economic
losses to the commercial fishing fleet (Figure 1 — Project Location). To address this navigation need,
the County is requesting state and federal authorizations to dredge a deep -water channel through
Wainwright Slough to maintain access for commercial fishermen. The channel is anticipated to
migrate over time based on historical trends and observations, therefore the County is seeking
authorization to dredge the channel as it naturally migrates within the corridor (Figure 2). Carteret
County intends to conduct maintenance dredging to help preserve the health and safety of the
boaters traversing through the inland waterways, including Wainwright Slough, Atlantic Harbor, East
Taylors Creek, and Morgan Creek. For permitting on all projects, the County is proposing acquisition
of both initial and long-term maintenance permits as the United States Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) has historically held.
Wainwright Slough, authorized under the River and Harbor Act of 1899 (amended August 30, 1935),
was originally dredged in 1935. Authorized channel dimensions are 75 feet in width and seven feet (+
two feet maintenance) in depth from mean lower low water (MLLW). It is located approximately five
miles northeast of the Cedar Island Ferry Landing in Carteret County. The channel connects the
Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Harbor, serving as an important passage for commercial and recreational
anglers. Wainwright Slough is the only connection from Beaufort traveling east to the Pamlico Sound.
Current depths based on a 2017 USACE hydrographic survey are -7 to -9 feet MLLW within the
authorized channel. Areas just outside the authorized channel can be as shallow as -3 feet.
Historical channel maintenance activities occurred regularly through the last 1960's and less
frequently afterward. Due to budget shortfalls in the USACE navigation maintenance program, the
channel has not been dredged for many years. Therefore, the maintenance responsibility has
shifted to Carteret County. Historically, dredged material has been placed at the toe -of -the -bank on
the channel (east) side of Wainwright Island. Due to the location of this disposal area, dredged
material tends to return to the channel in a relatively short amount of time. To address this issue, a
1995 Environmental Assessment (EA) and associated Finding Of No Significant Impact (FONSI)
covered the action to place dredge material on the non -channel side of the island.
In 2017, the County obtained permits and conducted maintenance dredging involving removal of
approximately 40,000 cubic yards to restore navigation depths to the federally authorized channel
for recreational boating and commercial fishing vessels. The disposal material was placed on
Wainwright Island. On the heels of this work, the County is pursuing authorization to move the
channel to deeper water on the "dogleg' portion of the alignment. By following this natural deep-
water alignment, dredging volumes and costs will be minimized and environmental effects will be
reduced. To accommodate this flexibility, the County is requesting a "corridor" in which it would be
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 3

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report I Carteret County
allowed to dredge the channel. Channel width and depth would continue to be the same as
currently permitted. This project is needed to provide safe passage for the commercial fishing
industry as well as for recreational use, resulting in overall increased safety for the user public. In
addition, placement of disposal material will expand bird habitat on the Audubon Society -owned
Wainwright Island.
Figure 1: Project Location Map
Based on a meeting with regulatory agencies in December 2017, the anticipated major regulatory
requirements include the following:
• Section 408 review will be needed through the USACE Civil Works branch.
• Department of the Army General Permit 198000291 (NC Coastal Management Act approved
construction) was renewed in 2017 and will be valid until December 31, 2021. This project
could likely be processed under 0291 authorization.
• A CAMA major permit will be required and can be issued for a three-year period with a 2 -
year renewal. It is possible that this work can be conducted under a modification to the
2017 permit.
• The impact of this project on navigation will need to be addressed.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 4

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
• A submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) survey will be required in potential impact areas to
supplement the studies that were conducted in 2016.
No Biological Assessment (BA) is anticipated if there are no new species likely to be impacted
by the project.
• Additional discussions will need to be undertaken for long-term permit authorizations and
how such permits can be granted. It may be that the initial permits can just continue to be
modified every 3 years thru a streamlined process.
Moffatt & Nichol was contracted to perform a submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) survey in the
new area of interest for the potential dredging corridor. Protocols used for this study were similar to
the protocols used in the 2016 SAV Survey and Report (Moffatt & Nichol 2016), but were modified
due to the larger study area, time contraints, and impending inclement weather. The protocols used
were generally based on a presence/absence study with groundtruthing for the existing SAV layers
on NCOneMap.
Site Description
Wainwright Island is a small dredge spoil island that is constantly subject to wave action and
erosion. The island is inundated much of the time with only a small portion of land (See Photo
Appendix, Photo 1) currently remaining above the water (even less than the 2006 SAV Survey which
had less than 46 square meters [500 square feet] of land above the water). The small remnant
island is dominated by Spartina alterniflora. The new area of interest for the potential dredge
corridor is located to the east of the 2016 survey area.
Pamlico Sound is one of the largest estuaries in the United States (NCSU, 2016). Offshore waters
support a diverse recreational and commercial fishery, with species such as red drum, speckled
trout, blue crab, oysters, and other shellfish often found in abundance.
2. Methodology
A Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping exercise was conducted to determine potential
locations of existing SAV based on high-resolution imagery. GIS was also used to establish the
sampling regime for this study. Transects were established in a east/west direction every 45-55
meters to cover the 35.5 -hectare (87.7 -acre) area of interest, for a total of 29 transects. Sampling
locations were placed every 25 meters along each transect. Starting points for the sample transects
were randomly selected. In total, there were 323 sampling locations established for field
reconnaissance.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 5

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Due to time and weather constraints, the general approach taken for this survey was to ground -
truth existing SAV mapping data available on NC One Map (http://www.nconemap.com/) and to
determine presence/absence rapidly throughout the entire study area.
Moffatt & Nichol scientists used a metal garden rake, a clam rake, snorkeling gear, and a marked
depth pvc pole to assist in sampling along established transects. Limited GPS data were collected in
areas of SAV presence to confirm location within existing mapped SAV NCOneMap layers. Pictures
were taken to characterize the site and field conditions.
Data collected in the field included:
• Survey date
• Surveyors name
• Notes on species presence
• Notes on density (i.e. — dense, patchy)
• Sediment type
• Other prominent features (e.g. pound
nets, shell presence)
Moffatt & Nichol Page 6

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
3. Results and Discussion
The SAV survey was conducted on August 7, 2018 by Moffatt & Nichol staff scientists. Weather
conditions were favorable for a part of the sampling period. A series of thunderstorms approached
after approximately 2 hours on the water, which reduced avaliable sampling time during the
scheduled field survey. There was high turbidity in the Sound with approximately 0.3 -meter (one -
foot) of visibility during the sampling period. The tide was high in the morning and falling
throughout the sampling period; however the tidal range in this area is less than 1 meter (3 feet)
and did not affect sampling activities.
The sampling regime (See Map Appendix, Map 2) was loaded into a Trimble Global Positioning
System (GPS) unit (Geoexplorer 2008) that was used to direct the captain along transect lines to
sampling points. At each location, one person raked the bottom 3-4 times to feel for seagrass
presence, one person used a PVC measuring pole to determine depth. A majority of locations were
sampled from the boat. In areas within existing mapped SAV and favorable water depths, Moffatt &
Nichol scientists entered the water to conduct snorkeling surveys. Presence or absence of SAV was
noted on paper copies of field mapping and with the GPS unit. Shoal grass (Halodule wrightii) was
the only species noted.
The sediment in most cases was sandy, with some areas of mud that may have been remnants of a
nearby marsh platform. Outside of the areas with existing mapped SAV, especially in deeper waters
along the western edge of the study area, the substrate often changed to a more mucky, muddy
substrate. While raking some locations there was loose shell material as part of the benthic
material. Upon inspection, oyster shell was the prominent loose material type.
In summary, SAV presence was found within most of the sampling area and within areas of mapped
SAV shown on NCOneMap. A majority of the study area is fairly homogeneous in water depth,
substrate, SAV presence, and water clarity. The only areas where SAV was not found or possibly not
surveyed for were areas of deeper water along the western edge of the study area and portions of
the southern section of the study area. Based on field sampling, depth survey information, and SAV
data on NCOneMap, a SAV Potential Habitat Map (See Map Appendix, Map 4) was created to
identify areas with SAV or favorable SAV habitat.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 7

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
4. References
NC State University. 2016. Coastwatch. https://ncseagrant.ncsu.edu/coastwatch/previous-
issues/2012-2/summer-2012/the-Pamlico-sound-fishing-gem-of-north-carolina/. Accessed
November 28, 2016.
Moffatt & Nichol. 2016 SAV Survey Report. December 2016.
Moffatt & Nichol Page 8

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report or��
Map Appendix
Map 1: SAV Survey Location
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 9

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
0 375 750 1,500 2,250
Feet
Map 2: Sampling Regime, including transects and sampling locations
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 10
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
MAP 2
SAV SAMPLING
REGIME AND
TRANSECTS
0000000000Oo
J0000000000000
¢❑o❑❑❑❑❑0000ov
b000000000000
OD❑OOO°004❑❑❑
0000000000000
6000004000000
000 p 0❑❑004❑0
000400000000,
1000000000000
b0o000000
0 0O
°❑ Ono
❑° O° 0❑° Oo°
O O❑ Q D
o❑ o
0000 0000
o°°❑
o❑ oQ
° ° 0
p
❑O p° ❑O p° Q11 D
°°O°O 04 000
0
0 000
p0 00 00 vD 0
❑°
❑°..
°
❑q o❑ a°
°°O
Legend
°0
°
Q
D0 ❑
° Sampling Point
Transect Line
SAV Study Area
0 375 750 1,500 2,250
Feet
Map 2: Sampling Regime, including transects and sampling locations
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 10
WAINWRIGHT SLOUGH
MAP 2
SAV SAMPLING
REGIME AND
TRANSECTS

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

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
Map 4: SAV Habitat Area
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 12

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report
.- CarteretCounty
Photo Appendix
Photo 1: Remnant of Wainwright Island looking west.
Photo 2: Remnant patch of Wainwright Island.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 13

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report I Carteret County
Photo 3: M&N scientist checking water depth during field survey.
Moffatt & Nichol Page 14

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Survey Report NIL- Carteret County
Field Notes Appendix
Crew: Dawn York,
Date: 08-07-2018
Adam Efird, Captain
Lester Murphy
Transect Area
Notes
133-12, C4-10, D4-10,
Sandy bottom, minimal to no shell presence. Approximately 3.5-5 feet deep,
E4-10, F4-11
with deeper areas in the western portion of the field sampled area. SAV
presence throughout in dense clumps, more concentrated in the areas from the
NCOneMap SAV layer.
G3-13, 1-14-13,14-13,
Sandy bottom, with areas of muckiness beginning around point 3 or 4 on the
J4-11
western side of the field sampled area. Approximately 3.5-4.5 feet deep
throughout. SAV presence throughout, concentrated in the areas from the
NCOneMap SAV layer.
K4-13, L4-12, M4, N4-
Sandy bottom, no shell presence, approximately 3-5 feet deep. Patchy SAV in
9, 04-11, P4-12, Q5-
small clumps approximately 2-4 feet in width located throughout. Slightly less
11, 115-11, 55-11, T6-
dense than areas to the north.
10, L16-8
Eastern Section of
Sandy bottom, no shell presence. One or two small patches of SAV,
Lines V -X
approximately 2-4 feet in width.
Eastern Section of
Sandy bottom, no shell presence. One or two small patches of SAV,
Lines Z, AA, AB
approximately 1-3 feet in width.
Moffatt & Nichol I Page 15