19951042 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_19960109

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, LTW;VA
Health and Natural Resources 1 • 0
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary pEHN R
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 10, 1997
County of Dare
c/o Mr. Ray Sturza, County Manager
PO Box 1000
Manteo, NC 27954
Dear Mr. Sturza:
WQC Project #951042, COE Project #199705095
Dare County
On October 4, 1997, you requested a 401 Water Quality Certification from the
Division of Water Quality for your project (cleanup of the Kitty Hawk canal dredging
project) located near SR 1210 in Dare County. We wrote to you on April 2, 1997
discussing concerns that we have regarding the design of the project and placing it on hold
until those concerns are addressed. As of today, we have not received a response to our
earlier letter. Unless we receive a written response from you by December 19,1997, we
will consider that you have withdrawn this application and are not interested in pursuing the
project at this time.
Please call me at 919-733-1786 if you have any questions or would like to discuss this
matter.
Si cerely,
t'- -A'
J
Jo n R. Dorney
W ter Quality Certifica on Program
cc: Washington DWQ Regional Office
Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Central Files
John Dorney
Richard Watts; Elizabeth City DCM
951042.clr
Division of Water Quality • Environmental Sciences Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27626-0535 • Telephone [phone] • FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Ja mes B. Hunt, Jr., G ove mor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
April 2,1997
Mr. Richard Watts, District Manager
NC Division of Coastal Management
1367 US 17 South
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
'".
ID F= F1
Re: Kitty Hawk Canal Dredging Project; Dare County; DWQ # 951042
Dear Mr. Watts:
After hearing about problems with the Kitty Hawk canal dredging project, Pete Colwell of
my staff and Deborah Sawyer of the Division's Washington Regional Office met Dennis
Hawthorn on March 25, 1997 to examine the dredge spoil site. From that inspection we found
that the boat basin had been filled with up to 6 feet of silt from the effluent pipes and that a
significant are of jurisdictional wetlands had been filled with up to 1.5 feet of spoil material from
the breaches in the containment dikes. Although no formal 401 Water Quality Certification was
issued for this project, the unauthorized filling of waters and wetlands at this site clearly removes
the function and use of those aquatic areas and may constitute a violation of the State's
Antidegradation Policy (NCAC T15A: 02B .0201).
It is our understanding that the CAMA Major Permit was modified in August of 1996 to
allow the boat ramp spoil site to be used rather than the original site near Midgett's Pond. This
modification was made without any notification to the Division of Water Quality and without any
opportunity of DWQ to comment on the change. DWQ would not have approved the smaller
boat ramp dredge spoil site as it was constructed. The original site was much larger and called for
the influent pipe to enter the spoil area at one end and the effluent pipe to leave at the other end
allowing the fines to settle out. The site was also to be split up into different cells and at least two
feet of freeboard maintained on the dikes. The boat ramp site was constructed immediately
adjacent to wetlands and with very steep slopes on the dikes. We found the influent and effluent
pipes at the same end of the spoil area with no use of settling cells. It should also be noted that in
a letter from the consulting engineer, he states that the new spoil site will hold 1855 cubic yards of
material with 1 foot of freeboard, only 109 cubic yards more than the estimated material to be
dredged. Clearly there was no room for error at the boat ramp site.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
50% recycled/100/6 post consumer paper

DWQ requests that the applicant, Dare County, be required to remove all spoil material
from the boat basin and jurisdictional wetlands (where it is greater than one foot deep)
immediately. This cleanup operation should be closely monitored to prevent further impacts to
the resource. When the cleanup is complete, we also request a full review of the boat ramp
dredge spoil site before it is allowed to be used again. DWQ also requests that the Division of
Coastal Management keep this Division informed about and future interagency meetings on this
project and progress on the cleanup of the site. Please contact Deborah Sawyer at our
Washington Regional Office [phone] with this information.
Icerely,
R. Dorney
r Quality Certifi ation Program
cc:
Ray Sturza, County of Dare
John Parker, DCM Raleigh
Deborah Sawyer, DWQ Washington Regional Office

Regulatory Branch
ACTION ID: 199705095
March 21, 19;7
P,
County of Dare
c/o Mr. Ray Sturza, Dare County Planner
Post Office Box 1000
Manteo, North Carolina 27954
Dear Mr. Sturza:
50"
-Pl
c ??2a 199,
`9v
This correspondence is to confirm your March 13, 1997, telephone conversation with Mr.
Raleigh Bland of my regulatory staff, and our subsequent March 19, 1997, onsite inspection of the
work being conducted at the Kitty Hawk Canal maintenance dredging project, located off State
Road 1210, adjacent Kitty Hawk Bay, in Kitty Hawk, Dare County, North Carolina. The purpose
of both our telephone contact and our subsequent inspection was to address your non-
compliance to the terms and conditions of Department of the Army (DA) Permit No. 199505838
issued to Dare County and the Oregon Inlet and Waterways Commission and resulting
unauthorized filling activities that have adversely effected maritime wetlands, coastal marsh, and
open waters of the United States on property owned by Dare County. Present during the
inspection, which was conducted by Messrs. Bland and David Lekson (also of my staff, were
Messrs. Richard Watts, Dennis Hawthorn, and Ed Harrell of the North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management, Messrs. Richard Peed and Pat McClain of the North Carolina Division of
Land Quality, Mr. Robert Stewart of Performance Engineering (a consultant for Dare County),
and Mr. Danny Burrus of the Cape Dredging (your contractor).
My staffs inspection has revealed that your contractor has violated eight General and
Special Conditions of the Department of the Army permit, which has resulted in dredged materials
being deposited over approximately 51,618 square feet (1.19 Acres) of waters and wetlands
subject to our regulatory jurisdiction. Therefore, this work, undertaken in noncompliance with
your permit has resulted in a violation of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344)
and Section 10 of the River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403). I understand that both you
and your contractor have verbally agreed to cease and desist from any further unauthorized work
within waters and wetlands of the United States and have indicated that you will cooperate with
my staff in developing a plan for remedial action.
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
Pnnted on ® Recycled Paper
, • /
-2-
You are cautioned that a failure to honor your commitment to cease and desist from
additional unauthorized activities in waters and wetlands of the United States may result in the
revocation of the permit issued to the Dare County/Oregon Inlet and Waterways Commission for
work on the Kitty Hawk Canal Project. As previously discussed, your contractor (Cape
Dredging) is being held jointly responsible for this unauthorized activity, and it is their
responsibility to work with the County to resolve this matter in compliance with the law. You
are also advised that we are strongly considering levying an administrative fine for violations of
permit conditions pursuant to 33 U.S.C.A. Section 1319 (g)(1)(b).
Any questions regarding this matter may be addressed to Mr. Bland at the Washington
Regulatory Field Office, Post Office Box 1000, Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000,
telephone [phone], extension 23.
Sincerely,
Michael D. Smith, P.W.S.
Chief, North Section
Regulatory Branch
I-
Copies Furnished:
United States Attorney
Eastern District of North Carolina
310 New Bern Avenue
Suite 800, Federal Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Mr. John Hefner
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Thomas Welborn, Chief
Wetlands Regulatory Section-Region IV
Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds Branch
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Atlanta Federal Center
100 Alabama Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Mr. Larry Hardy
National Marine Fisheries, NOAA
Habitat Conservation Division
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
Mr. John Dorney
Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Mr. John Parker
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. Richard Watts, District Manager
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
1367 U.S. 17 South
Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
Cape Dredging Company
c/o Mr. Danny Burrus
Post Office Box 446
Buxton, North Carolina 27920
Performance Engineering
C/o Mr. Robert Stewart, Jr.
Post Office Box 2004
Kill Devil Hills, North Carolina 27948
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
Match 2I, i99
Regulatory Branch
ACTION ID: 199705095
Mr. Danny Burrus
c/o Cape Dredging Company
433 West Bridge Lane
Nags Head, North Carolina 27959
Dear Mr. Burrus:
50"
This correspondence to confirm your March 13, 1997, telephone conversation with
Mr. Raleigh Bland of my regulatory staff, and our subsequent March 19, 1997, onsite inspection
of the work that you have been performing at the Kitty Hawk Canal maintenance dredging
project, located off State Road 1210, adjacent Kitty Hawk Bay, in Kitty Hawk, Dare County,
North Carolina. The purpose of both our call and our subsequent inspection was to address many
instances of noncompliance with the terms and conditions of Department of the Army (DA)
Permit No. 199505838 issued to Dare County and the Oregon Inlet and Waterways Commission
and the resulting unauthorized filling activities that have adversely effected maritime wetlands,
coastal marsh, and open waters of the United States on property owned by Dare County. Present
during the inspection, which was conducted by Messrs. Bland and David Lekson (also of my
staff) and including yourself, was Messrs. Richard Watts, Dennis Hawthorn, and Ed Harrell of the
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, Messrs. Richard Peed and Pat McClain of the
North Carolina Division of Land Quality; and Mr. Robert Stewart, a consultant for Dare County.
My staffs inspection has revealed that your actions, as the contractor for Dare County,
have violated eight General and Special Conditions of the Department of the Army permit issued
to Dare County, which has resulted in dredged materials being deposited over approximately
51,618 square feet (1.19 Acres) of waters and wetlands subject to our regulatory jurisdiction.
Therefore, this work, undertaken in noncompliance with the County's permit, has resulted in a
violation of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) and Section 10 of the River
and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403). I understand that both you and the Dare County
officials have verbally agreed to cease and-desist from any further unauthorized work within
waters and wetlands of the United States, and have indicated that you will cooperate with my
staff in developing a plan for remedial action.
Printed on ® Recycled paper
-2-
You are cautioned that a failure to honor your commitment to cease and desist from
additional unauthorized activities in waters and wetlands of the United States may result in the
revocation of the Department of the Army Permit issued to Dare County and the Oregon Inlet and
Waterways Commission for work on the Kitty Hawk Canal Project. As previously discussed,
both you and Dare County are being held jointly responsible for this unauthorized activity, and it
is your responsibility to work with the County to resolve this matter in compliance with the law.
You are also advised that we are strongly considering levying an administrative fine for violations
of permit conditions pursuant to 33 U.S.C.A. Section 1319 (g)(1)(b).
Any questions regarding this matter may be addressed to Mr. Bland at the Washington
Regulatory Field Office, Post Office Box 1000, Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000,
telephone [phone], extension 23.
Sincerely,
Michael D. Smith, P.W.S.
Chief, North Section
Regulatory Branch
-3-
Copies Furnished:
United States Attorney
Eastern District of North Carolina
310 New Bern Avenue
Suite 800, Federal Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Mr. John Hefner
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Thomas Welborn, Chief
Wetlands Regulatory Section-Region IV
Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds Branch
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Atlanta Federal Center
100 Alabama Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Mr. Larry Hardy
National Marine Fisheries, NOAA
Habitat Conservation Division
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
County of Dare
c/o Mr. Ray Sturza, County Planner
Post Office Box 1000
Manteo, North Carolina 27954
Mr. John Dorney
Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Mr. John Parker
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. Richard Watts, District Manager
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
1367 U.S. 17 South
Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
Mr. Floyd Williams
Division of Land Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, North Carolina 27889
Performance Engineering
c/o Mr. Robert Stewart, Jr.
Post Office Box 2004
Kill Devil Hills, North Carolina 27948
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources / • •
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
p E H N F1
Jonathan B. Howes, , Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
January 9, 1996
MEMO
To: John Parker, DCM
From: John Dorney, DE
Re: DEM review of CAMA Project are County/OIWC -
Kitty Hawk project boat basin
Dare County
DEM # 951042
DEM has no objections to the proposed dredging of this canal as long as at least two
(2) feet of freeboard are maintained at all times in the upland diked disposal basin..
Please call me at 733-1786 if you have any questions.
cc: Washington DEM Regional Office
Central Files
George Wood
951042.dcm
P.O. Box 29535, Rdeigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
WATER QUALITY SECTION
401 COMPLIANCE MONITORING
FORM
DWQ Investigator: Le to, 'V.
Date Time: < < < ??
Project Name: k4 ff F{y?k
Permi ttee: lL we Gou N f y
Location of Project: Or(
e?, ?Gol?el/ DWQ # gPff 2
_ Regional Office: ?? R d County:. Gt?"2
&af 6.yl'h 1 Ga0a1
0-T L1/1/1
Type of Development Authorized: Maim *,o o 4ce ?yRe?gi.-9
Type of Permit / Water Quality Certification: C-AMA /
Type of Impact: Af ,i? to g dep f 4 o?
S{e,4
Wetland Type and DWQ Rating: /
Nearest Stream: K% f (4,1 w t Cu M a
Y Basin/Sub.:
Distance of Wetland Impact from Nearest Surface Water: / 50 Ff/
Specific 401 Conditions: C M ?? ??` f Ct ot?&`^?vP?(
1?1 (2A s f `f wo ?e c f o1? ?? 40
-5 ?.e w;fa ad
Is project in compliance with all conditions: Y
Comments / Description: / t0?4`dX ?v?a fe,( y ac a( ?vaf?(i5 a??
a ve- be-e 0 J(; f1ee? w. f4 s??ct' a y?5?`lf F?o?

WCal, wi ? ?? f vl o l i ? P fo ?GriQ, lVd o lCj? ? is `dal L ?vS?yt t'
Is there a violation of the 401 Certification authorization ?
If so complete the enforcement section on the back of this form and forward copy to
the Central / Regional Office.
Signature: U, ?-
Date: 3 ?sl y?
DWQ 12/96
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., G ove mor
Jonathan R Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
FAX TO:
FAX NUMBER:
FROM:
PHONE:
-Ye?
3
NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS SHEET:
COMMENTS:
e??
1:3 EHNF=11'
i
i
V
Environmental Sciences Branch • 4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 501/6 recycled/10% post consumer paper
-------------
i r
1
T
46-1 ?}?c.1 S i1C e ?v ` L
?mN`"
(:V?v 6S
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
Ja mes B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
FAX TO:
r
10
r4i?EHNF1
-?Jov;
FAX NUMBER:
?9-V4 i -o'1z
FROM:
PHONE:
l2?
NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS SHEET:
COMMENTS:

U
17Hc
Environmental Sciences Branch • 4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycleWl0% post consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Roger N. Schecter, Director
A ??
DEHNR
MEMORANDUM
7 7
TO: John Parker
FROM: Dennis W. Hawthorn
SUBJECT: Kitty Hawk Basin ?+..
Additional comments ----
DATE: October 26, 1995
It was brought to our attention by one of the reviewing
agencies that they had several concerns regarding the subject
application review prepared by Elizabeth City DCM. These concerns
and clarifications are discussed as follows.
[1] Discrepancy over whether the distance to be excavated out
into Kitty Hawk Bay will be 300 or 400 ft.
The submitted plat work for this project indicate a proposed
excavation channel distance of 400 ft. out into Kitty Hawk Bay.
The distance referenced in paragraph 1 of the PROPOSED WORK Section
should be changed to 400 ft., as is referenced in my
October 9, 1995 memo to you on the Kitty Hawk Basin project.
[2] The presence of SAV communities in the vicinity of the
proposed work. On September 11, 1995 I conducted a field
investigation for this subject application. Although SAV
communities are known to exist in Kitty Hawk Bay, on the above date
no SAV's were noted in the proposed dredge channel. The DMF has
confirmed the existence of Eurasian milfoil in areas of Kitty Hawk
Bay and shallow areas near the mouth and shoreline of Kitty Hawk
Canal.
No SAV's were identified in the dredge channel. I cannot
quantify it but SAV communities in the vicinity of Kitty Hawk Canal
and Bay would be impacted by the turbidity which would be
associated with channel dredging.
1367 U.S. 17 South, Elizabeth Clty, North Carolina 27909 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

John Parker, October 19, 1995
Kitty Hawk Basin
Page Two
[3] Connecting water depths. The work plats submitted with
the application indicate an 8 ft. NWL depth at the terminal end of
the proposed project. On my 9/11/95 field investigation I
confirmed 6 to 8 ft. water depths in the vicinity indicated on the
submitted work plats. Previous staff investigations in 1994
confirmed similar depths. We do not have navigable resources to
precisely confirm the water depth contours of Kitty Hawk Bay.
The applicant has requested a 5 ft. depth and this depth was
recommended in my 10/9/95 memo.
[4] Total spoil excavation. The total volume of spoil
reported to be excavated by the applicant is 14,500 cy. This
figure was calculated by R.J. Stewart, Performance Engineering for
the applicant.
When I first reviewed this proposed project, I must admit my
gut feeling was that there would be a whole lot more spoil
generated in this project than the application indicated. I have
studied the work plat cross sections on page 1 of 4. I have had
discussions with the applicant, their consultant; the applicant has
submitted a copy of the calculation of dredge spoil and revised
numbers on the work plat 1 of 4. Copies o= both are attached.
R. L. Watts and myself have reviewed the numbers more than
once. The applicant bases their calculation on the following:
(a) a 3:1 slope ;
(b) that 32.2 cf. per linear ft. would be excavated from 4800
linear ft. of the project (cross section 1-1) ;
(c) that 35.7 cf. per linear ft. would be excavated from
6600 linear ft. of the project (cross section 2-2) ;
With these assumptions and changes the applicant calculates a
total excavation of 14,451 cy. We have done our own calculations
using these same assumptions and are coming up with similar
numbers. We feel that the proposed volume calculations of dredge
spoil are realistic.
[5] Habitat description. With the revised numbers supplied
by the applicant and the additional review of this proposed
project, we revise the area dredge impact to 306,468 sf. (7.06 A)
and the total impact area to 366,468 sf. (8.41 A).
i; ! c%jr' ? .-sue uM• Ga- ?? f ?Y? ??E'.i?' ! n ( `?-' ?O ? •? -?- ?-?.+?a?.-??
I 1
i
I
Post -It* Fax Note 7671 Data/a pag b.
to ;"1_ ,1 1 _ _ From \ _ h 60-
Co./Dept, Co.
Phone
! Phone M ?/
T

Fax M Gf ? +y
FAx 8 v
? d ?OrI

I7_,O
I?r?1? 2 b MIN.
I!
I ?3.g
¢? r_1 5
6
`-Boo LT- 00.-f 6)-

? i -T-1 tTy I I 't t a
I,•
lip (0 5
1 I
yet
I " ?1-4364) s, q?l.?3? 3? 7 l1
Ism -,c C3
(3 S*_ 7 i?jr.
I? !
;a
MEMORANDUM,,
December 22, 1995
GJJ'k? ,?Q?`ra?' AT4 A•?
4-114,
To: Jimmy Overto _ l L1 Z? /f
Through: Jim Mulligan ( [
From: Deborah Sawy r
X
DEHNR
Subject: Section 401 Water Quality Certification Review
Dare County/OIWC - Kitty Hawk Boat Basin
Cutty Sark Development Corp.
Dare County
The above two (2) projects were reviewed by this office in October
of this year. A recommendation was forwarded to hold the projects
until a model was performed. The recommendation was made for the
the following reasons:
Kitty Hawk Boat Basin: This project proposal is to maintenance
dredge 2.16 miles of Kitty Hawk Canal. The canal is 2.5 miles
in length from its mouth at Kitty Hawk Bay to the SR 1208
bridge. The canal ranges between 30 and 50 feet in width and
averages approximately three (3) feet in depth and
hydraulically connects Kitty Hawk Bay with ditch drainage to
ZJean Guite Creek. Significant coastal marsh is present along
?- o `Nimost the entire length of the canal on both sides. -Kitty
.., ?-•- Hawk Bay and its tributaries is classified as SC waters. The
' a-
`•; Q t,aUjapplicant (OIWC) proposes to dredge the canal to an overall
.? ?.. Cndepth of -5 feet. The applicant has provided no proof (County
Q records) that the canal was ever dredged to -5 feet. This
,;;•• office is of the opinion that the additional 2 feet of depth
proposed to be dredged as maintenance will cause the dissolved
oxygen problems in this extremely long canal to become worse
and therefore adversly impact waters of the State more. It is
recommended that the applicant show written proof that the
canal was originally dredged to a -5 feet depth and/or that
the additional 2 feet of depth will not worsen the dissolved
oxygen problem which already exists in this canal. This can
only be shown by performing a model. This office believes that
the model will show that the canal has low dissolved oxygen
problems now and will become worse with added depth. This
office recommends that the project be denied at a dredged
depth of -5 feet. This office recommends that the project be
conditioned to dredge to an overall depth of -3 feet which
will remove the problem shoals.
Cutty Sark Development Corp.: This project proposes to dredge
an existing 1420 feet long canal, which has an average depth
of two (2) feet to a depth of -5 feet. This proposal is to
provide water access for a 23 lot subdivision which is
proposed to be developed. The canal is approximately 25 to 30
feet wide. The applicant proposes to excavate the width to an
overall 30 feet. This will require the excavation of
approximately 1,925 square feet of high ground. WCEIVO
JAN 9 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL &: j;.:h r -g
recommended that the applicant show written proof (County
records) that the canal was originally dredged to a -5 feet
depth and that the additional three (3) feet of depth will not
worsen the dissolved oxygen problem which probably exists in
the canal. This can only be shown by performing a model. This
office recommends that the project be denied at a dredged
depth of -5 feet.
If you have any questions or comments concerning these two
projects, please call. Thank you.
cc: John Dorney
Roger Thorpe
Fax:[phone] Dec 22 '95 1031 P.02/04
MEMORANDUM
p December 22, 1995
M?
To: John Dorney
Flom: Deborah Sawyer
Subject: Comments on CAMA Dredging Projects
Please find attached comments on dredging projects which you requested. Pl se forward the
final comments to John Parker at 'the Raleigh office of the Division of Coastal Management.
Also, please contact George Wood of Environmental Professionals, inc. at [phone] to
i?fioim_ hi of 1shitus of these projects. The comments are as fnilows: VtLo
w
I`
??,? / Cm*/OIWC: Kitty Hawk Boat Basin: Refer to comments submitted on 10/11/95
pp?? (• . Requested a model to be performed due to in se depth.
?a
e County/OIWC: A & B Seafood Project; SAV's present. Central office to make
I 'ott as to significance of loss- CDF has insufficient holding a ddty to dredge
?a?` the entire project is one phase. IA order to maintain a 2' freeboard ac well as a 2:1 ratio
for holding capacity; applicant should dredge in 2 phases of approximately 600 cuyds_
of dredge material per phase.
c.CountylOlWG: Peiry?Nu?er Project: Applicant should maintain a 2' *eetx)ard
and a 2:1 ratio of discharge to holduag capacity. This can be accomplished by dredging
in 2 phases with no greanx tl 700 cuyds. ok dredgacl material discharged into the CDF
during any phase.
Dare County/OJWC: Maness Bator Boat Basin: SAV evaluation needs to be performed;
appllmd6n not conclusive as to degree and type of presence. CDF insufficient to hold all
pnoposed dredged material in one phase_ In order to maintain a 2' freeboard as well as
a 2:1.ratio of holding capacity to discharged dredge material, applicant should dredge in
3 phases, 6f no greater than 650 Wyds_ of dredged material discharge intro CDl~ during
any one phase (1,333.33 cuyds. holding capacity with a Tf cboard)
ark: Refer to comments on 10/11195 (attached). Requested a model to be
rrm due to increased depth.
If \You-have any questions or comments, please call. Thank you.
cc: Jimmy Overton
Roger Thorpe
;wL?a

(5 /

Q
Fax:[phone] Dec 22 '95 10:31 P.03/04

octvber 11, 1995
To: John Dorney
From Deborah Sawyer 99
Subject; Recommendations
Section 401 Certifications
CANA Applications
The following cAMA applications have been reviewed by the WaRO and
recommendations made:
PROM=
NCVOT: Hatteras
Landing and Marina
Channel (Minor
Modification on.
Ray Codfrey CPUXTY
Dare

erquimans low
Issuance of Modified
Section 401 Certif!Qation

Issuance of Section 401
Cetif i.cati.on
W. Mullets Plaskett Fasquotank Issuance of Section 403
Certification
Pirates Quay Owners Hyde Issuance of 99ation 401
Assoc./Dr. Ray B. Certification
Armistead
Dare.County/01WC: Dare xoLD: Model should be
Kitty Hawk Boat performed due to
Basin increased depth of
114,046.0 feet canal
Cutty Sark Dare HOLD: Model should be
Development corp. performed due to
increased depth Of 1420.0
feet canal
NCDOT: Ocracoke Hyde County Issuance of apprpval
Island North Dock letter from WaRO (no
Ferry Terminal fill)
]]Etlivardiew Estates Pasquotank issuance of appToval
xiomeowners letter from WaRO (no
Association fill)
DEH R Fax:[phone] Dec 22 '95 10:32 P.04i04
Deaton Yacht Pamlico Issuance of approval
Service, Inc. letter fron WaRO (no
fill)
.NCDOT, Dora Roper, Beaufort Issuance of Section 401
and Roland Mason: Certification
Bayview Ferry
Jeff Goldberg Dare issuance of section 401
Certification
Carl. F. and Donna Dare Issuance of approval
Newton letter from WaRO (no
fill)
If you have any questions or comments , please call this office at
[phone]. Thank you.
ac.- Jimmy Overton
Roger Thorpe
Jim Mulligan
} . .
Dec 22 '95 1031 P.01/04
North Caro -no
Department of
Environment, Health
t atural. Resources
WASHINGTON :REGIONAL OPOICE
1424 Carolina Avenue
waswo on, N. C. 27889
Phone: 919=946-601 FAX: [phone]
` -barn,
TO: ?Lk.,a
PAX-RUMBBR: alp) 7 --
FROM:
DAM

Number of pages (Includtny corer papal `7Z
t
Fax:[phone]
jo _ r DEHNR
Fax:[phone] Oct 11 '95 10:53 P.02/03
X M0R MDUM
October. 11, 1995
To., John Dorney
From: Deborah Sawyer
subject: Recommendations
Section 401 Certifications
CAMP, Applications
Tho following CAMA applications have been reviewed by the WaRO and
recommendations made:
PROJECT NAM
OT Hatteras
d ` n and M i
ne (Mi
xfi at' n
1
P rat Quay owners
."7 Hare Cr?unty/g1:WC:
Kitty Hawk Boat
Basin
Dare
(4( Gutty Sark
N DOT. raroke Hyde
d N th ask
s 1
rry Terminal
.,
?tivervi?w . ates
ss Ar. Y
A iste
Development Corp.
1?ssociation
Deaton Yacht Pamlico
sorviaQ, Inc. A
COUNTY
Dare- n d
i'ns
Hyde
pare

4OZ
v
RECpMMDATION
ice ditied
401 Ce tific4ton
issuance of Section 401
Cetifiaation
Certification
on
increased depth of
114,048.0 feet canal
fill) 7Cmsuaxace of approval
fill)
Tsmuanre of approval
an 401
HOED: Madel should be
performed due to
HOLD: Model should be
performed due to
increased depth of 1420.0
filet canal
1s nc® of _/approval
lE;tgaRO (no
letter from WaRil (no
letter from WaRO (no
fell)
S I DEHNR
Fax:[phone] Oct 11 '95 10:53 P.03/03
5e I suano actq01
aid ?ianr MRDon. Ce ioatxon
B isw Ferry
Dare - Iesuanoe of sectC'?r. tificatiQri
and Donna Da issuance of apprPon letter from WaRO fill)
if you have any questions Qr aom7??ants, p1gasm call this affiC0 at
[phone]. Thank you.
cc: jimmy Overton
Roger Thorpe
Jim Mulligar?
,
North Carolina
Department of
Environment, Health
Natural Resources
WASHINGTON R11.010144 OFFICE
U24 carolt N. C. ??899
Washington,
Phone: 919-9a?.-940 FAX: 919.975- t '16
n _ i"\
DEHNR
Fax:[phone]
Oct 11 '95 1053 P.01/03
NONE&
?EHNR
TO: .
UMBOR:. 6
FAX
FROM:

of page$ (including cover page)
Number
DATE: __z
[1
COMMiNTS:
12-23-1995 10:544*1 FROM Enuironmental Prof. Inc. TO 19197339959 P.01
Pl?nntgf for a better rrriro?,arnt
(919) 441-.."
D=mber 23. 1995
Mauro to: W. John Dorney
Priam: George it wood w
S*cct: Kitty Haw1t Dredging Projea
I intariewcd MT. ?eke Keller with regards to the originW dredging c f the canal. Foie fattier, );are Kcller was
romctod by Ilk Fred $ ff= to 0="te the. =26 ofjattj Jig& in 1957 and 195$ after the writs of
hurricanes in the dd-ffi a He waS iD9ttuCtad to dig the cx 91 six feet deep and as W. Mike Keller said.
his dAddY bdl*1ed m giving pcopte their mion" worth and dug deeper than that. Recent evidenee of the
depth coma fi+m our soundings taken in 1994 trod 1995. The depths shown on the plat arc to the top of the
read. We %= able to drive the probe to depths gremer than five feet m 4A slta before encountering hard
sand.
1 hope this infor Olt helps.
P.O. 80X 3368 • KILL DEVIL Hilt, NORTH CAROLINA 27948-3368
TOTAL P.01

r? ? s
NOTICE OF FILING OF OCT , 4
APPLICATION FOR CAMA MAJOR DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT AND WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
The Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources hereby gives public
notice as required by NCGS 113A-119(b) and 143-215 3(a)(1)(c) that the COUNTY OF
DARE, OREGON INLET WATERWAYS COMMISSION of Dare County, filed an
application on September 6, 1995, for a permit from the Division of Coastal Management to
develop in an Area of Environmental Concern and for certification from the Division of
Environmental Management that a discharge of fill material in project wetlands will not
violate applicable water quality standards.
According to said application the COUNTY OF DARE, OREGON INLET
WATERWAYS COMMISSION proposes to maintenance dredge 14,500 cubic yards of
material from Kitty Hawk Canal. The project site is located off of SR 1208 and SR 1210.
A copy of the entire application and additional information may be examined (or
copies furnished upon request and payment of reproduction costs) during normal business
hours at the office of Dennis W. Hawthorn, Division of Coastal Management, located at
1367 US 17 South, Elizabeth City, N.C., 919/264-3901, and/or the office of Deborah
Sawyer, Division of Environmental Management, DEHNR Regional Field Office,
Washington, N.C., 919/946-6481.
The Division of Environmental Management proposes to take final action on this
water quality certification on or before October 21, 1995. The issuance of the CAMA Major
Development permit and the Section 401 Certification may deviate from this projected date
depending upon the nature of the comments submitted and subsequent hearings that may
result.
All persons desiring to make comments should do so in writing to Roger N. Schecter,
Director, Division of Coastal Management, P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, N.C., 27611, prior to
October 19, 1995 for consideration in the CAMA permit decision, and to Mr. John Domey,
Division of Environmental Management, P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, N.C., 27611, prior to
October 14, 1995 for consideration in the water quality certification decision. Later
comments on the CAMA application will be accepted and considered up to the time of permit
decision. Project modifications may occur based on review and comment by the public and
state and federal agencies. Notice of the permit decision in this matter will be provided upon
request.
PUBLISHED ON: Tuesday, October 26, 1995
1
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: Dare County/Oregon Inlet Waterways Commission
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Kitty Hawk Canal / High Bridge Creek
Photo Index - 1989:144-13,N7 1984:137-494,L22
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2,967,400 Y: 851,000
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA and D & F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 9/7/95;9/11/95
Was Applicant Present - no;yes
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received - 9/6/95
Office - Elizabeth City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Kitty Hawk LUP
Land Classification From LUP - Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: PT,CW,EW,ES
(C) Water Dependent: YES
(D) Intended Use: Both public and commercial
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - none
Planned - none
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - man-made canal,boat basin, boat ramp and docks,parking and
commercial structures
Planned -
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion:
Source -
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
DREDGED FILLED OTHER
(A) Vegetated Wetlands
(B) Estuarine/Public Trust 285,000 sf.
Waters
(C) Upland spoil disposal site 60,000 sf.(1.38A)
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 345,000 (7.92 A)
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SC Open: N/A
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to maintenance dredge 14,500 cy of material from
Kitty Hawk Canal. The proposed excavation would provide continued access from Kitty Hawk Bay
to the Kitty Hawk/Dare County WRC Boat Ramp and other marine facilities located on Kitty Hawk
Canal.

DARE COUNTY
KITTY HAWK BOAT BASIN
BIO REPORT
Page Two
INTRODUCTION
Currently, navigation within Kitty Hawk Canal is restricted due to shallow channel
depths and shoals within the existing man-made canal. The Oregon Inlet Waterways
Commission is a local advisory committee in Dare County which is responsible for local
administration of various waterway dredging projects. The Oregon Inlet Waterways
Commission has contracted the firm, Environmental Professionals, Inc., to apply for the
subject permit. The proposed project includes maintenance dredging of 2.16 miles of Kitty
Hawk Canal and connecting waters to Kitty Hawk Bay.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The Kitty Hawk Canal was constructed in 1956/57 to a depth of 15 ft. below the
NWL. The Kitty Hawk Canal is approximately 2.5 miles in length from its mouth at Kitty
Hawk Bay to the SR 1208 bridge. As indicated on the applicant's 2/16/95 work plats, the
upper end of the Kitty Hawk Canal is often referred to as High Bridge Creek). The canal
ranges between 30 and 55 feet in width and hydraulically connects Kitty Hawk Bay with
ditch drainage to Jean Guite Creek. Marsh is present along almost the entire length of the
canal on both sides.
Three (3) majpr permits have been issued in the past on projects within proximity to
the Kitty Hawk Canal. These include :
NC DOT Bridge No. 40 (LAMA Major Permitt # 109-93)
Kitty Hawk Landing Association (CAMA Major Permit # 138-93)
Dare County Boat Basin (CAMA Major Permit # 260-88)
Although a depth of 8.0 ft. below NWL exists at the canal's entrance, currently, the
Kitty Hawk Canal depths range between 2.7 and 4.0 ft. below the NWL, with an average
depth of 3.0 below the NWL.
No submerged aquatic vegetation communities are currently present within the canal or
the proposed project area within Kitty Hawk Bay. The entire canal drains through a
significant coastal marsh including the coastal plant species Spartina cynosuroides (big cord
grass), Juncus roemerianus (black needlerush), Typha latifolia (cattail), Spartina patens (salt
meadow grass) and Cladium jamaicense (saw grass). Baccharis halimifolia (groundsel tree)
also are present along the canal bank. A Pinus taeda (loblolly pine) canopy emerges along
just the slightly elevated areas of the canal bank approximately one half mile from Kitty
Hawk Bay. A sub-canopy of Myrica cerifera (wax myrtle) and Baccharis halimifolia are also
DARE COUNTY
KITTY HAWK BOAT BASIN
BIO REPORT
Page Three
species, the marsh adjacent to the upper end of the canal also includes Sagittaria falcata
present along the canal bank at about one mile from Kitty Hawk Bay. In addition to
coastal (bultongue) and Hibiscus moscheutos (hibiscus). In addition to Pinus taeda, the
canopy along the canal bailk in this vicinity also include Juniperus virginiana (red cedar) and
Liquidamibar styraciflua (sweet gum).
Three smaller canals intersect Kitty Hawk Canal, one of these includes a Wildlife
Resources Commission boat ramp facility. This facility includes a 25 ft. wide concrete boat
ramp and approximately 200 ft. of 5 ft. width dock boardwalk adjacent to the ramp as well
as the associated parking. The two remaining side canals include a private residence in one
canal and a small marine repair facility at the other canal. This small latter canal, which is
actually more like a basin, includes a rail haul-up boat ramp, boardwalk and dock area as
well as a 28 ft. by 60 ft. enclosed structure which is on piles over wetlands, lawn and public
trust waters.
All man-made tributaries connecting to the Kitty Hawk Bay are classified as Joint
Waters by the Wildlife Resources and Marine Fisheries Commissions. The Division of
Environmental Management water quality classification for Kitty Hawk Bay and it's
tributaries is SC. The waters of Kitty Hawk Bay and it's tributaries are considered by the
Division of Coastal Management as Public Trust and Estuarine Waters and part of the
Estuarine System Area of Environmental Concern.
PROPOSED WORK
The applicant proposes to maintenance dredge 2.16 miles of Kitty Hawk Canal. This
proposal includes hydraulically dredging the channel section between the canal mouth and the
private boat basin south of the SR 1208 bridge. The proposed work also includes
maintenance of the channel approximately 300 ft. beyond the canal mouth.
This proposed excavation would involve dredging 11,400 linear ft. of the Kitty Hawk
Canal and the removal of 14,500 cubic yards of dredge material from below the NWL. The
applicant proposes to pump dredge spoil from the canal to an upland commercial site which
is located approximately midway between the canal mouth and the SR 1208 bridge. The
spoil disposal site is an upland commercially used area, approximately 500 ft. east of the
Kitty Hawk Canal and is adjacent SR 1210 and Midgett's Pond. The applicant proposes to
place the influent and effluent pipes over skids when crossing the adjacent marsh.
10
DARE COUNTY
KITTY HAWK BOAT BASIN
BIO REPORT
Page Four
The spoil disposal structure would consist of a 400 ft. by 150 ft. (interior dimension)
earthen berm structure, 27 ft. wide at the structure base and include a water control structure
to control effluent discharge. The spoil facility would have a total capacity of 14,500 cubic
yards and allow 2 ft. of freeboard. It is estimated that approximately 72,500 cubic feet of
dredge spoil effluent would be discharged into estuarine waters. The effluent waters would
drain back to the Kitty Hawk Canal.
ANTICIPATED IMPACTS
The applicant proposes to hydraulically maintenance dredge 2.16 miles of Kitty Hawk
Canal. Localized turbidity will be increased during excavation. The temporary placement of
skids, influent and effluent piping over the adjacent coastal marsh between the canal and the
disposal site will also have a temporary impact on the associated marsh. However, if the
piping apparatus are in place for more than one season, impacts to the associated marsh
could be greater. Effluent discharge from the spoil disposal structure may also increase
turbidity. Removal of 14,500 cubic yards of spoil from the Kitty Hawk Canal will require
the pumping of approximately 72,500 cubic yards of estuarine waters. These large quantities
of water and spoil will require monitoring of the integrity of the disposal structure. If the
proposed work is undertaken during a period of lesser biological activity, impacts to local
fishery resources should be minimal.
Due to existing shallow channel depths and the canal silt, current boat traffic
aggravates the sediment plume discharge from Kitty Hawk Canal to Kitty Hawk Bay. Once
maintenance dredging is complete the canal drainage area stabilizes, turbidity may be less
than is presently experienced.
CAMA REVIEW
The local land-use plan review will be submitted under a separate document in the near
future.
Submitted by D. W. Hawthorn
September 18, 1995
Form DCM-MP-I
APPLICATION
(To be completed by all applicants)
1. APPLICANT
a. Landowner:
Name County of Dare
Address PO BOx 1000
City Manteo State NC
Zip 27954 Day Phone
Fax
b. Authorized Agent:
Name Environmental Professionals, Inc.
Address PO Box 3368
City Kill Devil Hills State NC
Zip 27948 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
c. Project name (if any) Oregon Inlet Waterways
Commission <Kitty Hawk Boat Basin>
NOTE: Perinif will be issued in name q f landowner(s), and/or
project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. County Dare
Revised 03/95
b. City, town, community or landmark
Kitty Hawk
c. Street address or secondary road number
SR 1208 & 1210
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? X Yes No
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) Kitty Hawk Bay
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or tilling activities.
maintenance dredging
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? maintenance
c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use? communi ry
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed
project. If more space is needed, please attach
additional pages. maintenance dredging
of Kitty Hawk canal to provide
continued access to the WRC Boat Ramp
and a marine rail

jU i
n EP r, ' 1
,
?

Form DCM-MP-1
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract N/A
b. Size of individual lot(s) N/A
c. Approximate elevation of tract above MHW or
NWL N/A
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
Udorthants
e. Vegetation on tract N/A
f. Man-made features now on tract man made
canal - existing spoil site
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (Consult the local land use plan.)
X Conservation X Transitional
Developed Community
Rural Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
unzoned (water) VC3 (spoil area)
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? X Yes No
(Attach zoning compliance cerfificcue, if applicable)
j. Has a professional archaeological assessment been
done for the tract? Yes X No
If yes, by whom?
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National
Register listed or eligible property?
Yes _X No
I. Are there wetlands on the site? X Yes No
Coastal (marsh) Other x
If yes, has a delineation been conducted? No
(Attach documentation, if available)
Revised 03195
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
N/A
n. Describe location and type of discharges to waters
of the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.) spoil area
effluent
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
• A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then
forward a copy of the deed or other instrument under
which the owner claims title, plus written permission
from the owner to carry out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by 11" white paper. (Refer to
Coastal Resources Commission Rule 7J.0203 for a
detailed description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
adequate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers regarding that agency's use of larger
drawings.) A site or location map is a part of plat
requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed to
guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the
?s1
i j
U Lm
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
P
Form DCM-MP-1
site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
• A Stornrvvater Certification, if one is necessary
• 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. Upon signing this term, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name spe page one of pInt
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
• A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
None
• A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - I to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public lands, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.
Revised 03/95
6. 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 conditions
and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
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.
This is the 24th day of August , 19
Print Name George H. Wood
Signature
l?rnc u?wus or Authorized gent
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
X DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
DCM MP-3 Upland Development
_ DCM MP-4 Structures Information
DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE: Please sign and date each attachment in the
sj)ace provided at the bottom of each form.
r__J t_-_j a -
•
Form DCM-MP-2
EXCAVATION
AND FILL
(Except bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for LAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all
other sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or
fill activities. All values to be given in feet.
Average Final
Existing Project
Length Width Deplla Depth
Access
channel
(MLW) or (NWL)
Canal
Boat
basin
Boat
ramp
Rock
groin
Rock
breakwater
Other
(Excluding
shoreline
stabilization)
Revised 03/95
42' -3.5'
11400' to -5'
50' -3'
1. EXCAVATION
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below
MHW or NWL in cubic yards 14,500
b. Type of material to be excavated sand and mud
c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAVs) or other wetlands? X Yes No
d. Highground excavation in cubic yards None
2. DISPOSAL Or EXCAVATED
MATERIAL
a. Location of disposal area see plat
b. Dimensions of disposal area irregular - s e
plat
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
Yes X No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner.
d. Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance? X Yes No
If yes, where? same area
i. I I
Form DCM-MP-2
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes X No
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
Yes X No
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION N/A
a. Type of shoreline stabilization
Bulkhead Riprap
b. Length
c. Average distance waterward of MHW or NWL
d. Maximum distance waterward of MHW or NWL
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
(Source of information)
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed below
water level
(1) Riprap
(2) Bulkhead backfill
h. Type of till material
i. Source of till material
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES N/A
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
Yes No
Revised 03/95
If yes,
(1) Amount of material to be placed in the
water
(2) Dimensions of till area
(3) Purpose of till
b. Will till material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes No
If yes,
(1) Dimensions of fill area
(2) Purpose of till
5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or till material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? dike disposal area
- smoothed and grassed
b. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic
d red ge)?
hydraulic dredge, bulldozer
c. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment
to project site? X Yes No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts. effluent pipes will
be skidded over wetlands to Kitty
Hawk Canal
Oregon Inlet Waterways Commission
<Kitty Hawk Boat Basin>
Applica or Project Nvue
i' ._. ?i -//,j;t7
XglWur
Date
5 E P
( j lJ
?JI ?r?i
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 50"
P.O. BOX 1890r
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890 Iwo=^^°
REPLY TO September 29, 1995
ATTENTION OF
Regulatory Branch
Action ID No. 199505838
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Dear Mr. Dorney:
Enclosed is the application of the Dare County Waterways Commission
for Department of the Army (DA) authorization and a State Water Quality
Certification to undertake maintenance dredging activities within Kitty
Hawk Canal, located off State Road 1208 and State Road 1210, Kitty Hawk
Bay, Kitty Hawk, Dare County, North Carolina. Your receipt of this letter
verifies your acceptance of a valid request for certification in
accordance with Section 325.2(b)(ii) of our administrative regulations.
We are considering authorizing the proposed activity pursuant to
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and we have determined that a water
quality certification is required under the provisions of Section 401 of
the same law. A Department of the Army permit will not be granted until
the certification has been obtained or waived.
In accordance with our administrative regulations, in most cases,
60 days after receipt of a request for certification is a reasonable time
for State action. Therefore, if you have not acted on the request, or
asked for an extension of time, by November 11, 1995, the District
Engineer will deem that waiver has occurred.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Raleigh Bland,
Washington Regulatory Field office, telephone [phone], extension 4.
Enclosure
Sincerely,
ne Wr g t
C ie Regul tory Branch
m
0
oZ
q
t u:
C:
m
z
n
R
u
-P, G
?L CJ
-2-
Copies Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. John Parker
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. Richard Watts
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
1367 US 17 South
Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT -
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: Dare County/Oregon Inlet Waterways Commission
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Kitty Hawk Canal / High Bridge Creek
Photo Index - 1989:144-13,N7 1984:137-494,L22
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2,967,400 Y: 851,000
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA and D & F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 9/7/95;9/11/95
Was Applicant Present - no;yes
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received - 9/6/95
Office - Elizabeth City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Kitty Hawk LUP
Land Classification From LUP - Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: PT,CW,EW,ES
(C) Water Dependent: YES
(D) Intended Use: Both public and commercial
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - none
Planned - none
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - man-made canal,boat basin, boat ramp and docks,parking and
commercial structures
Planned -
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion:
Source -
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
OTHER
(A) Vegetated Wetlands
(B) Estuarine/Public Trust 285,000 sf.
Waters
(C) Upland spoil disposal site 60,000 sf.(1.38A)
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 345,000 (7.92 A)
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SC Open: N/A
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to maintenance dredge 14,500 cy of material from
Kitty Hawk Canal. The proposed excavation would provide continued access from Kitty Hawk Bay
to the Kitty Hawk/Dare County WRC Boat Ramp and other marine facilities located on Kitty Hawk
Canal.
DARE COUNTY
KITTY HAWK BOAT BASIN
BIO REPORT
Page Two
INTRODUCTION
Currently, navigation within Kitty Hawk Canal is restricted due to shallow channel
depths and shoals within the existing man-made canal. The Oregon Inlet Waterways
Commission is a local advisory committee in Dare County which is responsible for.local
administration of various waterway dredging projects. The Oregon Inlet Waterways
Commission has contracted the firm, Environmental Professionals, Inc., to apply for the
subject permit. The proposed project includes maintenance dredging of 2.16 miles of Kitty
Hawk Canal and connecting waters to Kitty Hawk Bay.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The Kitty Hawk Canal was constructed in 1956/57 to a depth of 15 ft. below the
NWL. The Kitty Hawk Canal is approximately 2.5 miles in length from its mouth at Kitty
Hawk Bay to the SR 1208 bridge. As indicated on the applicant's 2/16/95 work plats, the
upper end of the Kitty Hawk Canal is often referred to as High Bridge Creek). The canal
ranges between 30 and 55 feet in width and hydraulically connects Kitty Hawk Bay with
ditch drainage to Jean Guite Creek. Marsh is present along almost the entire length of the
canal on both sides.
Three (3) majpr permits have been issued in the past on projects within proximity to
the Kitty Hawk Canal. These include :
NC DOT Bridge No. 40 (CAMA Major Permitt # 109-93)
Kitty Hawk Landing Association (CAMA Major Permit # 138-93)
Dare County Boat Basin (CAMA Major Permit # 260-88)
Although a depth of 8.0 ft. below NY-11, exists at the canal's entrance, currently, the
Kitty Hawk Canal depths range between 2.7 and 4.0 ft. below the NWL, with an average
depth of 3.0 below the NWL.
No submerged aquatic vegetation communities are currently present within the canal or
the proposed project area within Kitty Hawk Bay. The entire canal drains through a
significant coastal marsh including the coastal plant species Spartina cynosuroides (big cord
grass), Juncus roemerianus (black needlerush), Typha latifolia (cattail), Spartina patens (salt
meadow grass) and Cladium jamaicense (saw grass). Baccharis halimifolia (groundsel tree)
also are present along the canal bank. A Pinus taeda (loblolly pine) canopy emerges along
just the slightly elevated areas of the canal bank approximately one half mile from Kitty
Hawk Bay. A sub-canopy of Myrica cerifera (wax myrtle) and Baccharis halimifolia are also
DARE COUNTY
KITTY HAWK BOAT BASIN
BIO REPORT
Page Three
species, the marsh adjacent to the upper end of the canal also includes Sagittaria falcata
present along the canal bank at about one mile from Kitty Hawk Bay. In addition to
coastal(bultongue) and Hibiscus moscheutos (hibiscus). In addition to Pinus taeda, the
canopy along the canal bank in this vicinity also include Juniperus virginiana (red cedar) and
Liquidamibar styraciflua (sweet gum).
Three smaller canals intersect Kitty Hawk Canal, one of these includes a Wildlife
Resources Commission boat ramp facility. This facility includes a 25 ft. wide concrete boat
ramp and approximately 200 ft. of 5 ft. width dock boardwalk adjacent to the ramp as well
as the associated parking. The two remaining side canals include a private residence in one
canal and a small marine repair facility at the other canal. This small latter canal, which is
actually more like a basin, includes a rail haul-up boat ramp, boardwalk and dock area as
well as a 28 ft. by 60 ft. enclosed structure which is on piles over wetlands, lawn and public
trust waters.
All man-made tributaries connecting to the Kitty Hawk Bay are classified as Joint
Waters by the Wildlife Resources and Marine Fisheries Commissions. The Division of
Environmental Management water quality classification for Kitty Hawk Bay and it's
tributaries is SC. The waters of Kitty Hawk Bay and it's tributaries are considered by the
Division of Coastal Management as Public Trust and Estuarine Waters and part of the
Estuarine System Area of Environmental Concern.
PROPOSED WORK
The applicant proposes to maintenance dredge 2.16 miles of Kitty Hawk Canal. This
proposal includes hydraulically dredging the channel section between the canal mouth and the
private boat basin south of the SR 1208 bridge. The proposed work also includes
maintenance of the channel approximately 300 ft. beyond the canal mouth.
This proposed excavation would involve dredging 11,400 linear ft. of the Kitty Hawk
Canal and the removal of 14,500 cubic yards of dredge material from below the NWL. The
applicant proposes to pump dredge spoil from the canal to an upland commercial site which
is located approximately midway between the canal mouth and the SR 1208 bridge. The
spoil disposal site is an upland commercially used area, approximately 500 ft. east of the
Kitty Hawk Canal and is adjacent SR 1210 and Midgett's Pond. The applicant proposes to
place the influent and effluent pipes over skids when crossing the adjacent marsh.
DARE COUNTY
KITTY HAWK BOAT BASIN
BIO REPORT
Page Four
The spoil disposal structure would consist of a 400 ft. by 150 ft.(interior dimension)
earthen berm structure, 27 ft. wide at the structure base and include a water control structure
to control effluent discharge. The spoil facility would have a total capacity of 14,500 cubic
yards and allow 2 ft. of freeboard. It is estimated that approximately 72,500 cubic feet of
dredge spoil effluent would be discharged into estuarine waters. The effluent waters would
drain back to the Kitty Hawk Canal.
ANTICIPATED IMPACTS
The applicant proposes to hydraulically maintenance dredge 2.16 miles of Kitty Hawk
Canal. Localized turbidity will be increased during excavation. The temporary placement of
skids, influent and effluent piping over the adjacent coastal marsh between the canal and the
disposal site will also have a temporary impact on the associated marsh. However, if the
piping apparatus are in place for more than one season, impacts to the associated marsh
could be greater. Effluent discharge from the spoil disposal structure may also increase
turbidity. Removal of 14,500 cubic yards of spoil from the Kitty Hawk Canal will require
the pumping of approximately 72,500 cubic yards of estuarine waters. These large quantities
of water and spoil will require monitoring of the integrity of the disposal structure. If the
proposed work is undertaken during a period of lesser biological activity, impacts to local
fishery resources should be minimal.
Due to existing shallow channel depths and the canal silt, current boat traffic
aggravates the sediment plume discharge from Kitty Hawk Canal to Kitty Hawk Bay. Once
maintenance dredging is complete the canal drainage area stabilizes, turbidity may be less
than is presently experienced.
CAMA REVIEW
The local land-use plan review will be submitted under a separate document in the near
future.
Submitted by D. W. Hawthorn
September 18, 1995
Form DCNI-NIP-1
C, cl-
ICATION
APPL
(To be completed by all applicants)
b. City, town, community or landmark
1. APPLICANT Kitty Hawk
a. Landowner:
Name County of Dare
Address PO BOx 1000
City Manteo State NC
Zip 27954 Day Phone
Fax
b. Authorized Agent:
Name Environmental Professionals, Inc.
Address PO Box 3368
City Kill Devil Hills State NC
Zip 27948 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
c. Project name (if any) Oregon Inlet Waterways
Commission <Kitty Hawk Boat Basin>
NOTE: Permit will be issued in none of landowner(s), curd/or
project nanee.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. County Dare
Revised 03/95
c. Street address or secondary road number
SR 1208 & 1210
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? X Yes No
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) Kitty Hawk Bay
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or tilling activities.
maintenance dredging
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? maintenance
c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use? community
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed
project. If inure space is needed, please attach
additional pages. maintenance dredging
of Kittv Hawk canal to Drovide
continued access to the WRC Boat Ramp
and a marine rail
f f j t? l
Ii 1
SEP 'i 1995 P?.!
i
Form DCM-MP-1
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract N/A
b. Size of individual lot(s) N/A
c. Approximate elevation of tract above MHW or
NWL N/A
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
Udorthants
e. Vegetation on tract N/A
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
N/A
n. Describe location and type of discharges to waters
of the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.) spoil area
effluent
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
N/A
f. Man-made features now on tract man made
canal - existing spoil site
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (Consult the local land use plan.)
X Conservation _ x Transitional
Developed Community
Rural Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
unzoned (water) VC3 (spoil area)
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? X Yes No
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
j. Has a professional archaeological assessment been
done for the tract? Yes X No
If yes, by whom?
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve it National
Register listed or eligible property?
Yes X No
1. Are there wetlands on the site? X Yes No
Coastal (marsh) Other X
If yes, has a delineation been conducted? No
(Attach document(ition, if available)
Revised 03195
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
• A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then
forward a copy of the deed or other instrument under
which the owner claims title, plus written permission
from the owner to carry out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by 11" white paper. (Refer to
Coastal Resources Commission Rule 7J.0203 for a
detailed description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
adequate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers regarding that agency's use of larger
drawings.) A site or location map is a part of plat
requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed to
guide agency?personnel unfamiliar with the area to the
1 i
?l1Vt?? -.U L i?
Form DCNI-NIP-1
site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
• A Storniwater Certification, if one is necessary
• 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 continents
on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal
Management. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
• A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
None
• A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - I to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public lands, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.
6. 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 conditions
and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
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.
This is the 24th day of August , 1985.
Print Name George H. Wood
Signature J ' t t & ?//
Lruu rnvnrr or Awhotized gent
Please indicate attaeliments pertaining to your proposed
project.
X DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
DCM MP-3 Upland Development
_ DCM MP-4 Structures Information
_ DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE. Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided at the bottom of each form.
D Sig i
it
SCP 6 1:"9a ,? }
Revised 03/95
Furth DCNI-MP-2
EXCAVATION
AND FILL
(Except 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.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or
fill activities. All values to be given in feet.
Average Filial
Existing Project
Length Width Depth Depth
Access
channel
(MLW) or (NWL)
Canal
Boat
basin
Boat
ramp
Rock
groin
Rock
breakwater
Other
(Excluding
shorclinc
stabilization)
Revised 03/95
42' -3.5'
11400' to -5'
50' -3'
1. EXCAVATION
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below
MHW or NWL in cubic yards 14,500
b. Type of material to be excavated sand and mud
c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAVs) or other wetlands? X Yes No
d. H ighground excavation in cubic yards None
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED
MATERIAL
a. Location of disposal area see plat
b. Dimensions of disposal area irregular - see
plat
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
Yes X No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner.
d. Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance? X Yes No
If yes, where? same area
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Form DCNI-NIP-2
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes X No
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
Yes X No
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION N/A
a. Type of shoreline stabilization
Bulkhead Riprap
If yes,
(1) Amount of material to be placed in the
water
(2) Dimensions of till area
(3) Purpose of till
b. Will till material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes No
If yes,
(1) Dimensions of fill area
(2) Purpose of fill
b. Length
c. Average distance waterward of MHW or NWL
d. Maximum distance waterward of MHW or NWL
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
(Source of in fornuuion)
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed below
water level
(1) Riprap
(2) Bulkhead backtill
h. Type of till material
i. Source of fill material
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES N/A
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
Yes No
Revised 03195
5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or till material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? dike disposal area
- smoothed and grassed
b. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic
dredge)?
hydraulic dredge, bulldozer
c. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment
to project site? X Yes No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts. effluent pipes will
be skidded over wetlands to Kitty
Hawk Canal
Oregon Inlet Waterways Commission
<Kitty Hawk Boat Basin>
Appliai or Project Name
gMlur
Hale - ? --? •--,_?' - . .-:'j',l
s_... _._.. a ) I
;:I
DIVISION OF COAT STA„L MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: Dare County/Oregon Inlet Waterways Commission
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Kitty Hawk Canal / High Bridge Creek
Photo Index - 1989:144-13,N7 1984:137-494,L22
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2,967,400 Y: 851,000
D ?.
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA and D & F
OC(-?iJ5
4. INV;;STIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 9/7/95;9/11/95
Was Applicant Present - no;yes
WAii.i
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received - 9/6/95
Office - Elizabeth City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Kitty Hawk LUP
Land Classification From LUP - Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: PT,CW,EW,ES
(C) Water Dependent: YES
(P) Intended Use: Both public and commercial
,E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - none
Planned - none
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - man-made canal,boat basin, boat ramp and docks,parking and
commercial structures
Planned -
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion:
Source -
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
DREDGED FILLED
OTHER
(A) Vegetated Wetlands
II (B) Estuarine/Public Trust 285,000 sf.
I I I I)
Waters
(C) Upland spoil disposal site 1 60,000 sf.(1.38A)
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 345,000 (7.92 A)
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SC Open: N/A
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to maintenance dredge 14,500 cy of material from
Kitty Hawk Canal. The proposed excavation would provide continued access from Kitty Hawk Bay
to the Kitty Hawk/Dare County WRC Boat Ramp and other marine facilities located on Kitty Hawk
Canal.

DARE COUNTY
KITTY HAWK BOAT BASIN
BIO REPORT
Page Two
INTRODUCTION
Currently, navigation within Kitty Hawk Canal is restricted due to shallow channel
depths and shoals within the existing man-made canal. The Oregon Inlet Waterways
Commission is a local advisory committee in Dare County which is responsible for local
administration of various waterway dredging projects. The Oregon Inlet Waterways
Commission has contracted the firm, Environmental Professionals, Inc., to apply for the
subject permit. The proposed project includes maintenance dredging of 2.16 miles of Kitty
Hawk Canal and connecting waters to Kitty Hawk Bay.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The Kitty Hawk Canal was constructed in 1956/57 to a depth of 15 ft. below the
NWL. The Kitty Hawk Canal is approximately 2.5 miles in length from its mouth at Kitty
Hawk Bay to the SR 1208 bridge. As indicated on the applicant's 2/16/95 work plats, the
upper end of the Kitty Hawk Canal is often referred to as High Bridge Creek). The canal
ranges between 30 and 55 feet in width and hydraulically connects Kitty Hawk Bay with
ditch drainage to Jean Guite Creek. Marsh is present along almost the entire length of the
canal on both sides.
Three (3) inajpr permits have been issued in the past on projects within proximity to
the Kitty Hawk Candl. These include :
NC DOT Bridge No. 40 (CAMA Major Permitt # 109-93)
Kitty Hawk Landing Association (CAMA Major Permit # 138-93)
Dare County Boat Basin (CAMA Major Permit # 260-88)
Although a depth of 8.0 ft. below NWL exists at the canal's entrance, currently, the
Kitty Hawk Canal depths range between 2.7 and 4.0 ft. below the NWL, with an average
depth of 3.0 below the NWL.
No submerged aquatic vegetation communities are currently present within the canal or
the proposed project area within Kitty Hawk Bay. The entire canal drains through a
significant coastal marsh including the coastal plant species Spartina cynosuroides (big cord
grass), Juncus roemerianus (black needlerush), Typha latifolia (cattail), Spartina patens (salt
meadow grass) and Cladium jamaicense (saw grass). Baccharis halimifolia (groundsel tree)
also are present along the canal bank. A Pinus taeda (loblolly pine) canopy emerges along
just the slightly elevated areas of the canal bank approximately one half mile from Kitty
Hawk Bay. A sub-canopy of Myrica cerifera (wax myrtle) and Baccharis halimifolia are also
DARE COUNTY
KITTY HAWK BOAT BASIN
BIO REPORT
Page Three
species, the marsh adjacent to the upper end of the canal also includes Sagittaria falcata
present along the canal bank at about one mile from Kitty Hawk Bay. In addition to
coastal(bultongue) and Hibiscus moscheutos (hibiscus). In addition to Pinus taeda, the
canopy along the canal bank in this vicinity also include Juniperus virginiana (red cedar) and
Liquidamibar styraciflua (sweet gum).
Three smaller canals intersect Kitty Hawk Canal, one of these includes a Wildlife
Resources Commission boat ramp facility. This facility includes a 25 ft. wide concrete boat
ramp and approximately 200 ft. of 5 ft. width dock boardwalk adjacent to the ramp as well
as the associated parking. The two remaining side canals include a private residence in one
canal and a small marine repair facility at the other canal. This small latter canal, which is
actually more like a basin, includes a rail haul-up boat ramp, boardwalk and dock area as
well as a 28 ft. by 60 ft. enclosed structure which is on piles over wetlands, lawn and public
trust waters.
All man-made tributaries connecting to the Kitty Hawk Bay are classified as Joint
Waters by the Wildlife Resources and Marine Fisheries Commissions. The Division of
Environmental Management water quality classification for Kitty Hawk Bay and it's
tributaries is SC. The waters of Kitty Hawk Bay and it's tributaries are considered by the
Division of Coastal Management as Public Trust and Estuarine Waters and part of the
Estuarine System Area of Environmental Concern.
PROPOSED WORK
The applicant proposes to maintenance dredge 2.16 miles of Kitty Hawk Canal. This
proposal includes hydraulically dredging the channel section between the canal mouth and the
private boat basin south of the SR 1208 bridge. The proposed work also includes
maintenance of the channel approximately 300 ft. beyond the canal mouth.
This proposed excavation would involve dredging 11,400 linear ft. of the Kitty Hawk
Canal and the removal of 14,500 cubic yards of dredge material from below the NWL. The
applicant proposes to pump dredge spoil from the canal to an upland commercial site which
is located approximately midway between the canal mouth and the SR 1208 bridge. The
spoil disposal site is an upland commercially used area, approximately 500 ft. east of the
Kitty Hawk Canal and is adjacent SR 1210 and Midgett's Pond. The applicant proposes to
place the influent and effluent pipes over skids when crossing the adjacent marsh.

DARE COUNTY
KITTY HAWK BOAT BASIN
BIO REPORT
Page Four
The spoil disposal structure would consist of a 400 ft. by 150 ft.(interior dimension)
earthen berm structure, 27 ft. wide at the structure base and include a water control structure
to control effluent discharge. The spoil facility would have a total capacity of 14,500 cubic
yards and allow 2 ft. of freeboard. It is estimated that approximately 72,500 cubic feet of
dredge spoil effluent would be discharged into estuarine waters. The effluent waters would
drain back to the Kitty Hawk Canal.
ANTICIPATED IMPACTS
The applicant proposes to hydraulically maintenance dredge 2.16 miles of Kitty Hawk
Canal. Localized turbidity will be increased during excavation. The temporary placement of
skids, influent and effluent piping over the adjacent coastal marsh between the canal and the
disposal site will also have a temporary impact on the associated marsh. However, if the
piping apparatus are in place for more than one season, impacts to the associated marsh
could be greater. Effluent discharge from the spoil disposal structure may also increase
turbidity. Removal of 14,500 cubic yards of spoil from the Kitty Hawk Canal will require
the pumping of approximately 72,500 cubic yards of estuarine waters. These large quantities
of water and spoil will require monitoring of the integrity of the disposal structure. If the
proposed work is undertaken during a period of lesser biological activity, impacts to local
fishery resources should be minimal.
Due to existing shallow channel depths and the canal silt, current boat traffic
aggravates the sediment plume discharge from Kitty Hawk Canal to Kitty Hawk Bay. Once
maintenance dredging is complete the canal drainage area stabilizes, turbidity may be less
than is presently experienced.
CAMA REVIEW
The local land-use plan review will be submitted under a separate document in the near
future.
Submitted by D. W. Hawthorn
September 18, 1995

Form DCM-MP-1
APPLICATION
(To be completed by all applicants)
1. APPLICANT
a. Landowner:
Name County of Dare
Address PO BOx 1000
City Manteo State NC
Zip 27954 Day Phone
Fax
b. Authorized Agent:
Name Environmental Professionals, Inc.
b. City, town, community or landmark
Kittv Hawk
c. Street address or secondary road number
SR 1208 & 1210
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? X Yes No
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) Kitty Hawk Bay
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or tilling activities.
maintenance dredging

Address PO Box 3368
City
Kill Devil Hills
State NC
Zip 27948 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
c. Project name (if any) Oregon Inlet Waterways
Commission <Kitty Hawk Boat Basin)
NOTE. Pernut will be issued in trance of landowner(s), and/or
project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. County Dare
tte VL-ed 03195
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? maintenance
c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use? rommun i t y
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed
project. If more space is needed, please attach
additional pages. maintenance dredging
of Kitty Hawk canal to provide
_continued access to the WRC Boat Ramp
and a marine rail

?
w U '
,Y fI
n SEP iZ -J
i

Form DCM-MP-1
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract N/A
b. Size of individual lot(s) N/A
c. Approximate elevation of tract above MHW or
NWL N/A
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
Udorthants
e. Vegetation on tract N/A
f. Man-made features now on tract man made
canal - existing spoil site
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (consult the local land use plan.)
X Conservation x Transitional
Developed Community
Rural Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
unzoned (water) VC3 (spoil area)
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? X Yes No
(Auach zoning compliance cer7ifcate, if applicable)
Has a professional archaeological assessment been
done for the tract? Yes X No
If yes, by whom?
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National
Register listed or eligible property?
Yes X No
Are there wetlands on the site? X Yes
Coastal (marsh) Other x_
If yes, has a delineation been conducted?
(Attach documentation, if available)
Revised 03195
No
No
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
N/A
n. Describe location and type of discharges to waters
of the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.) spoil area
effluent
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
• A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then
forward a copy of the deed or other instrument under
which the owner claims title, plus written permission
from the owner to carry out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by 11" white paper. (Refer to
Coastal Resources Commission Rule 7J.0203 for a
detailed description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
adequate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers regarding that agency's use of larger
drawings.) A site or location map is a part of plat
requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed to
-- guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the
i.?L t? ?t?u t., i?
r
Form DCM-MP-1
site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
• A Stormwater Certification, if one is necessary.
• 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. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
• A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
None
• A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public lands, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.
6. 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 conditions
and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
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.
This is the 24th day of August , 1999 .
Print Name George H. Wood
Signature J ' C?
Ltu?r owner or Awhorized gau
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
X DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
DCM MP-3 Upland Development
DCM MP-4 Structures Information
DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE. Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided at the bottom of each form.
r7 F
S C J U 1,w ?1 ; I
_ -. _ .. -- ...... .......__
Revised 03/95
Form DCM-MP-2
EXCAVATION
AND FILL
(Except 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.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or
fill activities. All values to be given in feet.
Average Final
b:xisling Project
Length Width Depth Depth
Access
channel
(MLW) or (NWL)
Canal
Boat
basin
Boat
ramp
Rock
groin
Rock
breakwater
Other
(Excluding
shoreline
stabilization)
Revised 03195
42' -3.5
11400',. 50' -3' -5
1. EXCAVATION
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below
MHW or NWL in cubic yards 14T500
b. Type of material to be excavated san and mud
c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAVs) or other wetlands? X Yes No
d. Highground excavation in cubic yards None
2. DISPOSAL Or EXCAVATED
MATERIAL
a. Location of disposal area _see plat
b. Dimensions of disposal area -irregular - spa
plat
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
Yes X No
if no, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner.
d. Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance? X Yes No
If yes, where? same area

Form DCNI-NIP-2
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes X No
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
Yes X No
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION N/A
a. Type of shoreline stabilization
Bulkhead Riprap
b. Length
c. Average distance waterward of MHW or NWL
d. Maximum distance waterward of MHW or NWL
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
(Source of in fornuuion)
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed below
water level
(1) Riprap
(2) Bulkhead backfill
h. Type of till material
i. Source of fill material
4. OTHER PILL ACTIVITIES N/A
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
Yes No
Revised 03195
If Yes,
(1) Amount of material to be placed in the
water
(2) Dimensions of till area
(3) Purpose of till
b. Will till material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes No
If Yes,
(1) Dimensions of fill area
(2) Purpose of fill
5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or till material be kept on site
,And erosion controlled? dike disposal area
- smoothed and Rrassed
b. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic
dredge)?
hydraulic dredge, bulldozer
c. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment
to project site? X Yes No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts. effluent pipes will
be skidded over wetlands to Kitty
Hawk Canal
Oregon Inlet Waterways Commission
<Kitty Hawk Boat Basin>
Applic.-or Project Name
i' _.?J'/// 6t,77
ktgdrltur
August 24i 1995
Date ? -
ri' S t`r 0 N
I 'J ?i `? LvL Lf I I
--------------------------
..
.I 4 ,
A . I
4 ? , ? 4Y: 4 ) ! I. _•,f av a! fS t t}?.`>? Pi,+'.,1r1 ".fYs";r" n- I',:a,, t
Y1. hI I . 1 ., 1 k I+ I ..,? a t 1.`. ,, , 'yu r ?{ ) l+ ;t 'ji
.11 .: ,I. ` 1, I r " .r ,i• •p 1 JI ?`1 ;I t,i tl r, i', ;4.???,t ?., •-I; 1. 1
i OO , I r (?`+, ,'- I, 2t N,011'd1 S . ,
.. r ^ ). .:, I' '/ •,J i , .-./ ) ( ,}. 4 ,11,4 rh K,1?? Ix.,_
. I I 14 'i `.., ; `. 4' I Vto •` 1 i1 5 1 I. 1) 4 t%r! / ) ,•1 it '+•.;., `
I1j? ]S ' ti )) r,° a,. , tV_
1
. ?,.
` ': ) I ' Jir i.a r>nf 1 ,1'4 .f 1 , ', 1 y ?•i r! I {
, r +• 4 1 ,l , :i ,. •I 7' 'Pt b .VJ rt t rtk Fy t'a y'+ 4.j.T j I I, r
I '• '} t". .035odo2ld. ta.A? 1 ,? , 5 ?:. rl4 l?Jr,i ,r }? {1 f /s 4 `Nut 1,! 'a;, t
H10IM NIOJ1oe + ?I " ) 4 ?'
i , , .) T/ ? 1 ,1. I" a 4 } l t?, l?tY," j 11Y,'
J ,. x , .I' T ;I1, ,
4_1___?_ . I . 'r., , - . ! . . . . . '_ -, ?, I - , . '- , - - I ,
• J • r Q Y f),. 1 ` , ).
?+ ,
Nbu33s ssoaD YAV0x3' ` ;
5301) H1o8 { } i; I r F.- i/ tI1 + 1 7 1
I rl "II I, ,` .. r t r t{
... n / . ; : t I ,,v y iYt t ,X x 44, ,?&f 1 1 ,.. ?r ,, ,?. ?) JY
301n0HS ,9 .- + •a" UJIM" " 4fr ' . "" Ertl `} S IY 1 S i P, 1 a i
i, '.
F ANVB -T• ' ?I )
30 NJIS30 It, `1 Jr L, r 'IINN 1 t 4'4 .01 s ? t.Ij :.%, ,i .
4.' I - r HId30 'ONIISIX3 > a , l-?1?•;4?1 . 4 r
.. , , tl'1 A Y, , r 1 1 41+ v-i )4' ?y -YMJ ?l jr. FI; +t 1' 1'i'),y f ??1 !? 4):r 11 r i } , t o rt+1t Ip kn r $ ts µ
,
' V 1• t air' ti 4 v 4l,ayt •rY,vis .i t ) r All. , ? 14 ) -.I;,-
11 ?(
X09 H1 OIM dot ' 1 , ^IIr / / '\y { * rl t.
1 1 1 ,' {I
rl a.:q ,': r r,l.tl - I/ ', 1 c 1.', t l y1 N I7 hlp ;". '){ 4 t w' 11 'ti
.,` ., AC
,. L I .1 4 } .- , J 4x. I'liiy ),a( I4? , `, ,t f , 1/yaltar 4 . t D. f ( Y !
' '1., r ! . 'r !\ r , .R";,? Itpry}l ? t5? y f ITS`'/
I 1. 1 ' , '1E i,
1 r! , ., V '
I 1 , I rl t.
t ;:1 . (tl ,:I { .., 11 . , f 7+Y L' r ' q ! ',. 1 I t n, li. 4 `fj d4 'a '}I4t {6 r t .•A ,? 4x,!!iJ 't?.
4? -l `.' ` ,`? fi /r I 4. 1 ,'+ ?( ' •5*rf 1'!4r<``"10. f?trYf., ?I ?.?1I J 4 ,;'f?- .Ill r! };I/
l A
. .1., % .,% '? , .\ f• t r ? } 4, %?}li;!i. '. d'.?' rk'r•}`,,?ti 1 , • h it :).,;1. t; 1h 1 r/ i' :Z
.'? ,1 rl' 'J) '•'(• .. ' ' 4 ,;•, f.t, - '1?.;, ' YY a'1r1Sh?4rit •r'?i; .Y/)y.'^,•'y?' 1i;.?14.
' ,, . 4 - 6 t' ') tr, i ,•,+ r,?•f lh> ef,? \ t'hy ?'g l F? 1
.,
I r ` - )I l ; '1, t 4? t' Y; t ,y, ?` f??• ut Is
,. I ? ?. : I. I - I - :. , , , ? : . ) , ,
j J ?1 + ,1 ;1 1g 1, 1• . . '{:• , • l i T 7 'S f'%, 1)1 f
{ a?. Nr , <)4 ; Su P rvl,lllnl?yil?lytf .+ . ln..i t 11.1 ` 1 At.) j \t t, 1, f , :, rt t` .!:? I...., 'iK , ...`t ,l'.
?
i...... J; .
?C ; i9t•IgI 4. .1^1 ,?,ti 4f;, „uJr ,) ,'"'rtl'4f ti4. '+, v:? 4'\( {`?I.'n?`?S(!{?L?Y1'}'F.r(4j{!
L;. t/t ?:': Y, .,? r , 1 '.? ``?,/ 1 :'S r r. `a [C, ..k I•,.r?~ti' a'itils•:{FL'JSr', i,??`:4.j.":} t
r.
. ,I-: , : : ? :. ?- - -'.-' ! . . .
'r J^' r4 ! -,,.'f ?. /, 1•' ,,ti t ?M'1„'i lr•,fl,>. yr.r•S I ? ?,4N
4 ) /.r; , / 1 . 1. I I. ,II?r )' I vs, vl ye.,' ,
': Nil ,I I 4, 4 l 1 .,( ',`f rat `, ``^?)J' :. 1, t . , 1
r`?? Yi,, j ,.:2;i; ti Atti ?', k4 M cl ,;I l' •t•?n ,I .4 r/?,CJ V ?• r ti. ) +) f(. (i 1, I Y
Ir1I. r' :i0. >{; , 1?1''.Q r .1 y r i ? 0 t 1, } - I I i Y? i ,,.. tr 1. , I .yl'r'4 h.,s)?;
i 1 l i s ° .? .1+ 14f °{ iP ', 1 e It .v )i• k 1, i rl r i 15 r 1 4? 1
4S/ ,,, y?i .lY )-4 s' Ifs ,4r, tr w• , 4 't. .,1'.r 7.1 4.I.r t 'r 1?,'c.r ;/.1 tv Y
. 11
. 0Q ?9 NOI1b'1S k L, .
i, ;
/ , •
:r , .If Vr a r t7 , •tr l 4'
t •?! ,t r-wk
,, r' I M ).\/.J-I •[ \O I..l.. ?, ,S,h,.d , Ti, 1,'F 7 (4?`-j f. 0 ?`. Al. ``tRtt lf!. 4'. .. .t ?I } A, 1;:r ' <jt re
Y ? r h ? I I, 'I '.1 ;bY )M. y r, , y ;.tv 11 ;4a )1`^h /': 1't4i}, ?4 ?I )l..t?,, (, !1. lli •'. t , ' I,' t, `(M yr r 'h'.
I • _. -
,? ; 1 ! ?'A11f I•'•t/.1j :1:,'/'444 'JYi!?•.,y1a 1. 1 I•r tg}? ,?,-I
:., ; r• r }• t y,J V,IVU CaY 1fNI -iI I.,`??' y1,)• ,ut,'t .yL t-,
,i?l t WOllOg Q3SOdb2ld 2?? 7 ; I ?,n f ;, II rJ, i ,1
.. , I 11 ? . . . 1 , I ( . i '. , '\ . "s, _? I.- ? I . . a, L_ ' I ' - 1 i I 1 L t" ., _? , ?'s`A -trav ''f` '
. NoI103S SSOaO NOLLbhbOX3 1 r t
S301S fll?0 d . 1' I 4r I.I; F N ` /4?, 41. } 4f ' I. ' - i
N3011f .Ua,a wo»ua wwx
. I 1, ( I .
,.. ., . ., I ??, I. , 1, .:.,
_WN ' 9 H1d3a' NOIS30 , ° WN - NV? .' ,{
t . t, Hl'd30 JNILSIX3
t
• r
?(
. .
tZb . H101M d01 I
c
. .,
1)
1 I /,!
! , '/ Iel ?`
f
A ,,1 4 , ,0
r,?,• •?; ?.?. ... .p ... ..... .. - 4(, ' . .•r II, 't , ?lr I,, /r.(I
.
,\. \' . I . . . . . . . . .: .: I I ,j' r 't
".. \ ,
. y -1...... .?,`\ f .
. ,? . : I ! . . . 1: I . ? ?
f z lts?
............._10. ........ I ? , t
1
b?t7 `'i` ? Vy \? I
??7 / AV8
'
'I. .1 ' `____ „ . )IA+IVH A.11.IH ,?
l , .. , '
't' 11NIfl „ ;
%? I , 1. . . _.'?''l
lo3f'OLId ?//
H1noS , . I ; ,
Fr °+ tit'
'` /? '
\ r , 1 tty' v a, r . 1 t 1 I 4 I ' 1
y4 I ( 1 „? t ,
\ ?...., try ' 1 1 r f.)r ,' 1
''V i,
,4 . ?. I ..? : , I'^-`-^
1` ) / .