CAPE HATTERAS NATIONAL SEASHORE

BODIE ISLAND

LIGHTHOUSE & OIL HOUSE

HISTORIC STRUCTURE

REPORT

Cultural Resources Division

Southeast Regional Office

National Park Service

December 2004
Cultural Resources Division

Southeast Regional Office

National Park Service

100 Alabama Street, SW

Atlanta, GA 30303

404.562.3117

Bodie Island Lighthouse & Oil House

Cape Hatteras National Seashore

Manteo, NC 27954

http://www.nps.gov/caha

About the cover: Bodie Island Light Station, HABS # NC395-5, photographed by Jon Buono; LCS#: 00114.

The historic structure report presented here 

exists in two formats. A printed version is 

available for study at the park, the Southeast 

Regional Office of the National Park Service, 

and at a variety of other repositories. For more 

widespread access, this historic structure 

report also exists in a web- based format 

through the web site of the National Park 

Service. Please visit www.nps.gov for more 

information.
Cape Hatteras National Seashore

Bodie Island Lighthouse and Oil House

Historic Structure Report

Contents

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR v

List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Administrative Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Locaton Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Related Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Cultural Resource Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

Historical Background & Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Chronology of Development & Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Physical Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Summary of Historic Character . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Associated Site Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Exterior Materials Finishes and Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Interior Materials Finishes and Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

Summary Description of Interior Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

Tower Levels 1 – 7 (LH/101-LH/107) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

Tower Level 8 / Service Room (LH/108) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

Tower Level 9 / Watch Room (LH/109) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

Tower Level 10 / Lantern Room (LH/110) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

Structural Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

Loads and Stress Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Electrical Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
vi National Park Service SERO

PART 2 TREATMENT & USE

Requirements for Treatment & Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

Alternatives for Treatment & Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

Ultimate Treatment & Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

CONDITION ASSESSMENT

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

Project Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

Project Statement and Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120

List of Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

Inspection Team Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

Methodologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

Identification and Management Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

Modifications and Dates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

Graphic Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

Condition Assessment Data Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

Overview of Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

Specific Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

Structural Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137

Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

Cast Iron Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146

Masonry Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Glass Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

Other Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

Summarized Cost Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

REFERENCE

Sources of Information for Part 1 and Part 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153

Sources of Information for Condition Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
List of Figures

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR vii

1 Bodie Island Light, 1893. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2 1964 NPS photograph showing sign to nature trail. . . . . . . . . . . . 15

3 Bodie Island Light Station, looking south, 2002. . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

4 Landing support beams in Tower. Beams were actually installed with

manufacturer’s stamp upside down. Photo courtesy of Jack McCombs. . . . . 22

5 Drawing of original Bodie Island plaque. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

6 Bodie Island Lighthouse, 1920s. Photograph courtesy of Cheryl Shelton-Roberts.

Original in possession of John Gaskill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

7 Bodie Island, 1969. Observation platform to the right of Tower. . . . . . . . 28

8 1989 USCOE photo showing cracked masonry in Oil Room interior chimney. . . . 35

9 1989 USCOE photo showing deterioration of exterior edge of lantern gallery. . . 36

10 1989 USCOE photo showing missing lantern deck prisms. . . . . . . . . . 36

11 1989 USCOE photo showing detached hinge on door to gallery.. . . . . . . 37

12 USCG close-up photograph of damage to stair treads, 1992. . . . . . . . . 40

13 USCG photograph of damage to stair treads, 1992. . . . . . . . . . . . 40

14 Existing repairs to stair treads. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

15 Historic plan of ground floor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

16 Stair configuration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

17 Original drawing of front door details. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

18 Drawing detail of north elevation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

19 Photo of south elevation by U.S. Coast Guard, 1948.. . . . . . . . . . . 60
viii National Park Service SERO

20 Drawing detail of Lighthouse base. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

21 Oil House, Hall (OH/100) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

22 Plate XI, 1871 Drawings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

23 Well. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

24 Dedication Plaque. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

25 Watch Room ceiling insert made of prismatic glass. . . . . . . . . . . . 89

26 Lens pedestal, original manufacturer’s brass plaque. . . . . . . . . . . . 89

27 First order Fresnel lens. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

28 South chimney above the Oil Room. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

29 Three treads with notable cracks, below Landing #1. . . . . . . . . . . . 93

30 Detail of vertical crack on south side of masonry wall.. . . . . . . . . . . 94

31 Detail of masonry repair located above landing support beam.. . . . . . . . 95

32 Detail of water collecting on landing that accesses Service Room. . . . . . . . 95

33 Detail of peeling paint in Watch Room. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

34 View from Lantern Gallery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

35 Detail of handrail. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

36 Detail of utility meter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

37 Detail of utility routing through door frame. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

38 Detail of electrical line. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

39 Detail of electrical wiring access to distribution panel. . . . . . . . . . . 101

40 Detail of distribution panel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

41 Lightning rod installed on gallery handrail. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

42 Conduit for lightning protection, located at tower base. . . . . . . . . . . 102

43 Detail of stair showing tread repair. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

44 Detail of foundation showing mortar leaching. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR ix

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu

45 Detail of Fresnel lens. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117

46 Floorplan with 16 axes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

47 Legend of assemblies.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
x National Park Service SERO
http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR xi

Project Team

Project Manager Danny Scheidt, Historical Architect

National Park Service

Southeast Regional Office

Atlanta, GA

Contract Technical Representative Tommy Jones, Architectural Historian

National Park Service

Southeast Regional Office

Atlanta, GA

Building Reporters Deborah Harvey, Historical Writer

Hartrampf Inc.

Atlanta, GA

Jack Pyburn, Historical Architect, AIA

OJP, Inc.

Atlanta, GA

Specialized Building Investigation Robert A. Bass, P.E., Structural Engineer

Ashraf Demian, P.E., Electrical Engineer

Hartrampf Inc.

Atlanta, GA

Courtney Swann, Historical Architect

OJP, Inc.

Atlanta, GA

Document Layout/

Internet Access

Jon Buono, Historical Architect

Jay Womack, Historian

National Park Service

Southeast Regional Office

Atlanta, GA

Program Reviews Bob Blythe, History

Allen Bohnert, Museum Services

Danny Scheidt, Historic Architecture

National Park Service

Southeast Regional Office

Atlanta, GA
xii National Park Service SERO
 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR xiii

Foreword

We are pleased to make available this historic structure report, part of our ongoing effort to provide comprehensive documentation for the historic structures and landscapes of National Park 

Service units in the Southeast Region. Many individuals and institutions contributed to the successful completion of this work. We would particularly like to thank the staff at Cape Hatteras National Seashore for their assistance throughout the process. We hope that this study will prove 

valuable to park management in their continuing preservation of the building and to everyone in 

understanding and interpreting the Bodie Island Lighthouse and Oil House.

Dan Scheidt

Chief, Cultural Resources Division

Southeast Regional Office

National Park Service

December 2004
xiv National Park Service SERO
http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 1

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

Executive Summary

The area on which the Bodie Island Light Station now stands was 

originally spelled Body’s Island. This spelling appears on many 

early documents. It is not known how the island got its name or 

when or why it was changed, though research is currently underway to determine the answer to those questions. The current 

spelling, Bodie Island, is used throughout this document for the 

sake of clarity unless directly referencing an original document 

using the original spelling. The Bodie Island Lighthouse is significant in the understanding of the history of maritime navigational 

aids used by the United States during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. It was constructed during a period of building of 

several such aids along the shores of this country and stands 

largely unchanged except for the means of powering the light. 

The surroundings of the Bodie Island Lighthouse, unencumbered by visible signs of contemporary society, with the 

exception of the access road, are also significant to the understanding of under what conditions the Lightkeepers lived and 

worked in the last part of the nineteenth century and first half of 

the twentieth.

In March of 2002, at the request of the National Park Service, 

personnel from Hartrampf, Inc., engineers, and the Office of Jack 

Pyburn, Architect, Inc. traveled to the Bodie Island Light Station 
Executive Summary

2 National Park Service SERO

at Oregon Inlet near Nags Head, North Carolina to undertake a physical inspection of the 

Tower and attached Oil House, called, collectively, the Bodie Island Lighthouse. The 

purpose of the inspection was to provide information relative to the existing condition of 

the structure involved in the course of compiling this Historic Structure Report. Personnel 

inspecting the site included Mr. Robert A., 

Bass, P.E., structural engineer, Mr. Ashraf 

Demian, P.E., electrical engineer, and Ms. 

Deborah Harvey, historical writer, of Hartrampf, Inc. as well as Mr. Jack Pyburn, AIA, 

Historic Architect and Mr. Courtney Swann, 

Historic Architect, of the Office of Jack Pyburn, Architect, Inc., with the assistance of Mr. 

Steve Harrison, National Park Service Chief of 

Resource Management at the Cape Hatteras 

National Seashore, North Carolina.

Photographs, measurements, and notes were 

taken regarding the subject structure, in addition to a video record of the investigation. In 

accordance with the scope of work for this report, no historic fabric was removed or altered 

for this inspection, and no scaffolding or other 

inspection structures were constructed. No 

intrusive methods were used to inspect the 

structures. Therefore, only observations of the 

exterior surfaces of the Lighthouse normally 

accessible were possible. On- site personnel 

were interviewed about ongoing maintenance 

and restoration efforts currently underway at 

the site. A visit to the Cape Hatteras National 

Seashore headquarters archives and offices in 

Manteo, North Carolina was made by the representatives of Hartrampf, Inc., and, with the 

assistance of Mr. Steve Harrison, documents, 

drawings, and photographs regarding the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse were reviewed and 

pertinent documents copied. A trip by Ms. 

Deborah Harvey to the headquarters of the 5th

United States Coast Guard District in Portsmouth, Virginia and, later, to the Civil 

Engineering Unit of the Shore Maintenance 

Detachment of the United States Coast Guard 

in Cleveland, Ohio, yielded further documentation, including drawings, notes, sketches, 

and reports, regarding the use and maintenance activities of the Government at the 

Bodie Island Light Station from its construction in 1872 to the present. Documents 

provided by the National Park Service, including a copy of A History of the Bodie Island Light 

Station, prepared in 1967 by Francis R. Holland, Jr. and published by the National Park 

Service, several recent structural evaluations of 

the Tower and Oil House, and an historic paint 

survey, completed by John H. Scott of the National Park Service in 2002, were also reviewed. 

An interested researcher, Jack McCombs, provided information regarding the steel 

fabricating company, and the book, Lighthouse 

Families, by Cheryl Shelton- Roberts, gave insight into the lives of Lightkeepers and their 

families. Ms. Harvey also conducted correspondence with Jack McCombs, Cheryl 

Shelton- Roberts, and John Gaskill, son of the 

last Lightkeeper, which produced further pertinent information about the history of the 

Lighthouse.

The Bodie Island Lighthouse is within the environs of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. 
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 3

There is a General Management Plan extant 

for the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. 

However, it was formulated prior to the acquisition of the Bodie Island Lighthouse in 2000 

and, thus, contains no directives regarding use 

or preservation requirements for this structure. There is no Period of Significance 

established in the General Management Plan 

for the Bodie Island Lighthouse. In the absence 

of such direction, this report proposes that the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse be preserved to interpret its ongoing use as a maritime navigational 

aid.

Since changes to the building have been minimal, all eras of the history of the building can 

be interpreted, requiring only minor alterations to its present condition to allow for safe 

visitor access to the building. The United 

States Coast Guard expects to continue operation of the light for another eight or ten years. 

When that use ceases, the National Park Service may want to re- evaluate the significance 

of the Bodie Island Light Station within the 

context of an overall interpretive plan for all 

the surviving lighthouses on the Outer Banks. 

While there is no compelling rationale for restoring it to an earlier period at the present 

time, the National Park Service may decide 

later that the Bodie Island Light Station has 

special significance and that to properly interpret that significance, restoration to some 

earlier period is required.

Findings of the physical investigation and review of historic documents indicate that the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse, while essentially 

sound, has been the victim of 131 years of wind, 

weather, and insensitive maintenance activity. 

This is not to say that the Lighthouse Board 

and the United States Coast Guard did not engage in maintenance activities during their 

tenures as keepers of the structure. The main 

focus of both government entities was to 

maintain the light as a navigational aid, and 

their efforts did not focus on the preservation 

of the historic features of the building or on 

relating improvements to the structure’s history or historical context. Consequently, when 

replacing surface finishes, repairing damage, or 

re- installing weathered features, the focus was 

not on keeping the historic fabric intact, but on 

keeping the facility functioning as a lighthouse.

A major concern regarding this building is 

whether or not it is structurally sound and can 

be opened for visitation by the public. In general, the structure is sound and could be 

opened, with some restrictions, for visitation 

by the public after modifications suggested 

herein have been made. The foundations and 

loadbearing walls, while experiencing some 

deterioration of mortar that might be expected 

in a 131- year old structure in a coastal setting, 

are stable and require only minor repairs. Deterioration of metal parts has occurred and 

must be remedied. The structural evaluation 

indicates that the stair treads and landings can 

support the loads mandated by current building codes; however, the stair stringers would 

require bracing before any wholesale visitation 

by the public could occur. The conclusion regarding the gallery on the outside of the Tower 

is that it should be repaired as necessary for 

maintenance of the exterior and to replace lost 
Executive Summary

4 National Park Service SERO

features. To open the gallery to the public, it 

will be necessary to strengthen the support 

structure and replace the handrail with one 

that complies with current codes.

Visitor management will be an issue at the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse. Fall protection at 

landing and stair handrails and at window 

openings must be provided. The physical size 

of the upper landings, especially the Watch 

Room and Lantern level, will restrict the number of people that can be accommodated to 

possibly no more than four or five on these 

levels at any one time. Therefore, a management strategy must be devised to coordinate 

public access with the capacity of the stairs and 

landings. To allow access to the top level, the 

Lantern level, a handrail must be installed 

along the stairs leading from the Watch Room 

to the Lantern level. These stairs are exceptionally steep and narrow, with no handholds 

of any kind. However, it seems imperative that, 

if the National Park Service allows visitors to 

the top of the Tower, they must be allowed to 

the Lantern level, as there is no other means of 

physically viewing and appreciating the light, 

the lens, the lamp, and the landscape.

Access for the physically disabled is an issue at 

the Bodie Island Lighthouse. The Lighthouse 

has never been an accessible structure. The 

building type, in general, is one designed for a 

unique use, and the configuration of the structure reflects that use. Applying the standards 

for physical modification to achieve accessibility in accordance with the Americans with 

Disability Act, UUDAG, and UFAS is not possible without producing a significant negative 

effect on the historic character of the structure. 

Therefore, the application of “minimum alternative access” as provided for in the 

consultation procedures of ADAAG 4.1.7(2) 

(56 Federal Register 35429, July 26, 1991) 

should be applied to this structure. The type of 

responses appropriate under the “minimum 

alternative access” provisions could include 

such elements as accessible observation points 

on the ground to view building features, videos 

interpreting the experience of ascending the 

tower and viewing from the watch balcony, or 

scale cutaway models of the interior of the 

structure for viewing at the Visitor Center.

The following represents a summary of the 

treatment recommended to preserve the Bodie 

Island Lighthouse and provide a safe and enjoyable visitor experience.

Paint Removal

• Perform lead paint abatement on all 

painted surfaces of the exterior and interior of the Oil House and Tower where 

necessary. Where lead paint is not indicated, remove paint to expose surfaces for 

inspection.

Masonry

• Inspect the granite, brick, and mortar 

forming the foundation and walls of the Oil 

House, Hall Connection, and Tower and 

document conditions.

• Repair cracks in foundations and walls 

using an appropriate method.
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 5

• Perform tests on the mortar to determine 

its composition and repoint the foundations and walls using appropriate methods 

and mortars.

Metal

• Inspect metal surfaces and features, document conditions, and repair or replace in 

kind as necessary.

• Install structural strengthening members as 

necessary to bring the gallery up to code to 

allow visitor access.

Wood

• Repair or replace in kind as necessary 

damaged existing wood features in the Oil 

House and Hall Connection.

Glass

• Reglaze the exterior panes of the lamp, 

replacing clouded or crazed panes.

• Reglaze windows as necessary in Oil 

House and Tower.

Roofing

• Remove existing Oil House roof, inspect 

the roof framing over the Oil House and 

Hall Connection, and document conditions.

• Replace any rotted members discovered 

during the inspection of the roof framing.

• Inspect the east chimney to verify that the 

chimney is not experiencing distress below 

the roof line.

• Install a new roof deck, new roof flashings, 

and new roofing on the Oil House and Hall 

Connection.

• Inspect the roof of the Tower and the ventilator ball at the top for damage, document 

conditions, and repair or replace if inspection indicates that this is necessary.

Flooring

• Refinish and seal the wood floor in the 

Work Room. 

• Clean the marble floors in the Oil House 

and Tower and replace any cracked or 

missing tiles.

• Securely install replacement prisms in the 

Lantern level grating floor.

Safety

• Install a new, code- compliant railing 

around the existing exterior gallery.

• Modify the stair and landing level railings 

to provide fall protection.

• Install bracing on each side of stairs, midflight, to bring the stair stringers up to 

code.

• Install fall protection at the openings to the 

windows on the 2nd, 5th, and 8th level landings.

• Fabricate and install a railing conforming to 

current code requirements at the stair from 

the Watch Room level to the Lamp level.

• Remove the chain link enclosure at the 

base of the Tower stairs and repair the walls 

and floor of the ground level of the Tower 

as necessary.
Executive Summary

6 National Park Service SERO

• After reconstruction of the exterior metal 

gallery, remove the exterior wood fence 

around the Tower.

Electrical

• Verify the presence of asbestos insulation 

in wiring prior to making any repairs.

• Repair and replace electrical wiring and 

fixtures as necessary.

• Add lightning protection at the highest 

point of the Tower with two down conductors. Verify the connection of the existing lightning protection ground 

conductors. If the connection cannot be 

verified, install a new ground ring with 

ground rods.

Painting

• After repair, replacement, and modification of Lighthouse features have been 

completed, paint the Oil House and Tower 

using an historically- appropriate paint 

scheme.

Maintenance

• Implement a systematic program to open 

the windows regularly to provide ventilation and reduce moisture condensation on 

the interior of the Tower.

• Implement a systematic program to inspect 

the underside of the stair treads for future 

stress cracks.

The conclusion is that the Bodie Island Lighthouse is essentially in sound structural 

condition. Original physical features are substantially intact. Additionally, it is feasible to 

open it to the public, with some limitations. 

With coordinated, historically- appropriate 

physical improvements and a creative interpretive plan, the Lighthouse can be managed to 

achieve a safe and satisfying visitor experience 

while protecting the significant historic qualities and features of the structure and 

maintaining it as an active maritime aid to 

navigation.
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 7

Administrative 

Data 

Location Data

Building Name: Bodie Island Lighthouse

Building Address: Bodie Island Lighthouse, Nags Head,

North Carolina

LCS # 00114

Related Studies

Holland, Francis R., Jr. A History of the Bodie Island Light Station, 

National Park Service History Department, 1967.

National Park Service, Historic Paint Finishes Study, Bodie Island 

Lighthouse and Oil House, National Park Service Northeast 

Cultural Resources Center Building Conservation Branch, 

2002.

Cultural Resource Data

National Register of Historic Places: The Bodie Island Light 

Station is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic 

Places. A register nomination is being prepared by the National 

Park Service for this structure.
Administrative Data 

8 National Park Service SERO

Period of Significance: The Period of Significance for the Bodie Island Lighthouse begins 

in 1872, when construction was completed and 

the light was first displayed as a navigational 

aid. The end of the Period of Significance has 

not yet been determined. Several options are 

available: 1872, the original condition; 1932, after the conversion of the Light Station from oil 

to electricity; 1940, the year the last Lightkeeper left Bodie Island; 1945, the year the 

Bodie Island Light Station site reached its 

present size; 1953, when the Light Station was 

converted to commercial electricity; or 2000, 

when the Lighthouse was transferred from the 

United States Coast Guard to the National 

Park Service. Each of these periods (1872 – 1932, 

for example) present unique characteristics, 

though they are, except for the last, mainly related to the production of light in the Tower. 

The adoption of most of these would probably 

necessitate the removal of some later features 

and the re- installation of missing components 

known to have existed and for which there is 

documentary evidence regarding the appearance of the missing feature. In the absence of 

direction in the General Management Plan of 

the Cape Hatteras National Seashore for the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse, the authors of this 

report, with the concurrence of the National 

Park Service, recommend that the Period of 

Significance be defined as the period in which 

the Lighthouse was used as an active navigational aid. Thus, the Period of Significance 

represents the collective history of the structure, a history that is not yet completed since 

the Lighthouse is still in use as an aid to navigation. At such time as the Bodie Island 

Lighthouse ceases to be used as an aid to navigation, the National Park Service may decide 

to modify this approach and determine a less 

inclusive Period of Significance. If so, the Park 

Service should open dialogues with representatives of families and groups in surrounding 

communities with historic ties to the Lighthouse, such as those who had ancestors who 

worked at the Lighthouse, who would qualify 

as “traditionally associated peoples,” as defined in National Park Service management 

policies for ethnographic resources.

Proposed Treatment and Use: The Light Station remains in use as an aid to navigation, but 

it is also an attraction to visitors to the area. 

The treatment is to preserve the Tower and the 

Oil House, known collectively as the Lighthouse as it has evolved into the 21st century. 

While some modifications are necessary to address safety issues, the Lighthouse would 

essentially be only repaired to preserve the existing structure with no modifications made to 

the structure except to accommodate limited 

visitor access. Restoration of features removed 

in the course of the use of the Lighthouse as a 

navigational aid are not recommended. However, recent modifications that are not related 

to the use of the Lighthouse as an aid to navigation, such as the fences installed to prevent 

injury to visitors, could be removed. The General Management Plan for the Cape Hatteras 

National Seashore should be revised to include 

a plan for this structure that addresses continued maintenance and visitor access.
http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 9

PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

Historical 

Background & 

Context

The historical background of the Bodie Island Lighthouse has 

been ably documented by Francis R. Holland, Jr. in his report, 

History of the Bodie Island Light Station, written in 1967 and 

printed by the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. A copy of his report is included as an appendix to this report. 

Therefore, this section does not undertake to repeat Holland’s 

work, but includes a summary based on that work, with some additional information not included in Holland’s. Footnoting will 

not be provided for information in this section that is derived 

from Holland’s History, but only for information from other 

sources that applies to the period from 1848 to 1954. The history of 

the Bodie Island Lighthouse is resumed in this report beginning at 

1954, the last year documented in Holland’s book.

The existing Lighthouse at Bodie Island is the third built in this vicinity, but it is not on the foundations of either of the first two. 

The foundations of the first two Bodie Island Lighthouses are now 

under water in the Oregon Inlet. The first Lighthouse was completed in 1848, but, only ten years later, it was necessary to replace 

it due to defects in the foundation. The foundation had not been 

designed to accommodate the soils on which the structure was 

placed, causing it to settle unevenly, leaning nearly a foot out of 

plumb by 1851. In addition, the decision was made to upgrade the 
Historical Background & Context

10 National Park Service SERO

light apparatus of this Lighthouse. Accordingly, 

a new Tower was built at a nearby site in 1859, at 

a cost of nearly eight times what the original 

had been. Whereas the first Tower had taken 

nearly 20 years from conception to completion, 

the second Tower was completed within a year, 

and the old Tower was subsequently razed.

Despite efforts to make the second Lighthouse 

more durable by improving the foundation on 

which it rested, it did not last as long as the first. 

In 1861, North Carolina seceded from the 

Union, and the state sent forces to the Outer 

Banks to build and occupy forts along the coast 

to protect against Federal incursions via the inlets. The forts were quickly built, but Federal 

forces launched amphibious attacks on the 

Confederates at Hatteras Inlet. Within three 

days, both Fort Hatteras and Fort Clark had 

fallen. With these two forts gone, the forts on 

either side of them, at Ocracoke Inlet and Oregon Inlet, were no longer tenable, and the 

Confederates abandoned them in November of 

1861. Before leaving Oregon Inlet, however, the 

Confederate forces blew up the Lighthouse 

Tower – though they salvaged the light – apparently to prevent the Federals from using it as 

a lookout. The second Bodie Island Lighthouse 

was left in ruins by the Federal government for 

the duration of the Civil War because it was felt 

that the Cape Hatteras light, which had been 

restored after the Confederates abandoned the 

fort, was adequate for the coast at the time.

After the end of the Civil War, normal shipping 

resumed along the North Carolina coast. By 

1867, the number of shipwrecks in the area 

caused the District Engineer of the Lighthouse 

Board to urge the reconstruction of the Bodie 

Island Light Station. Initial plans to place the 

third Light Station on the same plot of ground 

occupied by the first two were thwarted by the 

fact that the Oregon Inlet was advancing 

steadily on the site of the earlier lighthouses 

and had come within 400 yards of it. Consequently, the District Engineer proposed to 

select a site on the north side of the inlet on a 

plot of land owned by John B. Etheridge, who 

had been a keeper of the first Bodie Island 

Lighthouse. The 15 acres of land that John 

Etheridge and his wife agreed to sell to the 

Lighthouse Board were conveyed on June 13, 

1871, for $150.00.

Shortly after the sale, site preparation began for 

the construction of the Lighthouse with the 

building of storage buildings, workers’ quarters, a wharf, and a tramway connecting the 

wharf to the site. The pit for the foundation was 

dug, and the foundation was laid. In September 

and October of 1871, the foundry shipped 

beams to Baltimore to be loaded on ships 

bound for Bodie Island.1

 By November, the 

bricks for the Tower were being shipped to the 

site. On July 21, 1872, the Tower was nearly 

ready to receive its light, and the District Engineer requested that the lens ordered for Bodie 

Island be shipped immediately to Norfolk, Virginia. The lens was installed in September, and 

the light was first exhibited on October 1, 1872.

1. Phoenix Iron Company, Philada section of Business 

Ledgers, Phoenixville, Pennsylvania. Currently 

held at the Hagley Museum and Library, University of Delaware, Wilmington, Delaware, 1871, pp. 

292, 331.
PART I DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 11

Figure 1 Bodie Island Light, 1893.

The total cost for the Light Station was 

$140,000.00.

The arrangement for maintenance of the Light 

Station involved, in 1872, the employment of a 

Principal Keeper, a 1st Assistant Keeper, a 2nd

Assistant Keeper, and, for the first two years, a 

3rd Assistant Keeper. Between 1872 and 1940, 

four Principal Keepers served the Bodie Island 

Light Station.2

 The first Principal Keeper at 

Bodie Island Light Station was William F. Hatsel, of North Carolina, who was employed until 

1878 at a salary of $820 per year. Peter Johnston 

was assigned as the 1st Assistant Keeper on October 15, 1872 at a salary of $400 per year, and 

W. E. Etheridge was the 2nd Assistant Keeper, 

assigned October 11, 1872 at a salary of $350 per 

year. By 1874, the office of 3rd Assistant Keeper, 

held by Rebecca Hatsel, wife of the Keeper, had 

been abolished. Over the next five years, a succession of 1st and 2nd Assistant Keepers rotated 

in and out of the service of the Bodie Island 

Light Station.

Keeper William F. Hatsel was transferred from 

Bodie Island in July of 1878 and replaced by Peter G. Gallop of Maryland, who seems to have 

remained in that position until 1906. The frequent reassignment of Assistant Keepers 

continued. In 1887, the first pay raise for Assistant Keepers was approved: John Shannon, 2nd

Assistant Keeper, was given a raise from $425 to 

$450 per year, putting his salary on par with 

that of the 1st Assistant Keeper. A year later, 

George Blivens, 1st Assistant Keeper, received a 

raise of $50 per year, his salary rising from $450 

to a whopping $500 per year!

In 1906, Keeper Peter G. Gallop was replaced 

by Ephraim Meekins, Jr. Meekins accepted the 

position with a decrease in the base pay for 

Keepers from $820 per year to $720 per year. 

The Assistant Keepers’ pay rates apparently remained the same. By 1911, the 2nd Assistant 

Keeper was making $456 per year. Still, Assistant Keepers were mostly transient; several 

were appointed nearly every year. In late 1919, 

Keeper Meekins relinquished his position to 

the fourth and final Principal Keeper at Bodie 

Island, Lloyd Vernon Gaskill.3

 In the 1920s, the 

position of 2nd Assistant Keeper was abolished 

2. McComb, Jack, to Deborah E. Harvey, e-mail dated 

23 April 2002.
Historical Background & Context

12 National Park Service SERO

thanks to the installation of a “mechanical 

keeper,” a thermostat positioned over the kerosene lamp flame and attached to a warning 

bell located in the Keepers’ Quarters and to a 

recording device to notify the Keeper if the 

light went out and to record the event.4

The apparently high turnover may have been 

the result of long hours and an isolated condition for the Lightkeepers. A report in 1909 

indicates that the only means of reaching the 

Light Station was by a small sailboat to a landing and then on foot down a sandy road almost 

1⁄2- mile long.5

 Later, the Lighthouse had a 

powerboat that transported people and supplies to the island.6 This situation was not 

rectified until the late 1920s, when a bridge to 

the island was built.7

 In 1909, the distance to the 

nearest post office was six miles, and to the 

nearest steamboat landing and town, 12 miles.8

Because there were no schools or churches on 

Bodie Island, Keeper Gaskill, as well as his assistant keepers, housed his family on Roanoke 

Island at Wanchese for the majority of the year, 

moving them to Bodie Island only in the 

summer.9

The duties of the Keepers were incessant. 

When there were three keepers, two of the 

three men were on duty at all times.10 Until the 

“mechanical keeper,” the thermostat, was installed, a Keeper had to be in the Watch Room 

whenever the lamp was lit.11 A small coal stove 

helped to dispel the cold for the Keeper on 

duty.12 Keeper Gaskill kept the first watch, and 

one of his assistants relieved him about midnight.13 After the installation of the thermostat 

and the elimination of one of the Assistant 

Keeper positions, the two remaining Keepers 

alternated nights on watch.14 John Gaskill described his father’s routine for Cheryl SheltonRoberts in Lighthouse Families:

“Daddy would come out here about thirty minutes before sundown. He would go to the storage 

house that was outside the tower on the south 

side, fill a three- gallon brass can with oil, and get 

a bucket of coal. Next he would climb the stairs 

to the watch room, fill the oil reservoir, and 

watching the gauges carefully, pump the oil to 

pressurize it and send it upward into the mantle 

in the center of the Fresnel lens in the lantern 

room. Then Daddy would climb the stairs to the 

lantern room, go in, take the alcohol torch from 

its holder, light the torch, and use it to warm the 

3. Gaskill, John, to Deborah E. Harvey, e-mail dated 

22 April 2002.

4. Shelton-Roberts, Cheryl, and Bruce Roberts, Lighthouse Families, Cranehill Publishers, Birmingham, 

1997, p. 159.

5. ----, “Description of Lighthouse Tower, Buildings, 

and Premises”. Report for the U.S. Department of 

Commerce and Labor, in papers of the 5th United 

States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 6 Mar 1909, pp. 3-4.

6. Shelton-Roberts, p. 163.

7. Gaskill, John, to Deborah E. Harvey, e-mail dated 

26 April 2002.

8. ----, “Description of Lighthouse Tower, Buildings, 

and Premises,” pp. 3-4.

9. Gaskill, John, to Deborah E. Harvey dated 26 April 

2002.

10. Shelton-Roberts, pp. 158-159.

11. Ibid, p. 171.

12. Ibid.

13. Ibid.

14. Gaskill, Lloyd Vernon, “Personnel Classification 

Board Form No. 14 – Field Questionnaire” completed for the Lighthouse Board, certified as 

accurate and complete 21 Sept 1928 by H. D. King, 

Superintendent of Lighthouses, from Lloyd V. 

Gaskill papers at Cape Hatteras National Seashore 

headquarters, Manteo, North Carolina. Original 

documents in the possession of John Gaskill, his 

son.
PART I DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 13

kerosene to vaporize it. The kerosene vapor 

burned in the mantle, producing a brilliant 

light.”15

However, keeping the light lit was not the only 

task assigned to the Keepers. In 1928, Lloyd 

Vernon Gaskill described his work:

“(1) As keeper in charge of this station, I am 

responsible for the for the [sic] proper execution 

of the duties whether performed by my self [sic] 

or Asst. I light lamp in tower every othe [sic] 

evening and raise curtains so the light will be visible to passing ships. Asst. Keeper performs the 

same duty the following evening. I watch the 

light intervals untill [sic] sunrise when I extinguish light and refill tanks with kerosene so it will 

be ready for lighting in the evening. Also I clean 

lens and watch room before coming [sic] down 

to dwelling. I am on duty about twelve hours in 

this instance. (2) I have one Asst. and I superintend and assist in painting, cleaning paint on 

outhouses and dwelling, clean iron work by 

chipping ruse [sic] from same when needed. Also 

keep grass cut on lawn, make minor repairs to 

sta. such as replaceing [sic] lantern glass when 

broken, repairing doors, replaceing [sic] hinges 

when broken, painting motor boat and skiff, 

keep engine repaired so it can be used at any time 

for getting supplies and mail from nearest store 

and Post Office seven miles across the sound. I 

put in about five hours per day at this work. (3) 

In addition to above duties I must make a weekly 

inspection of Sta. Including assistants quarters 

and record made of condition of Sta. log. Make 

monthly report of condition of Sta. to district 

Supt. at Baltimore. Take annual inventory and list 

all articles worn out have them surveyed and 

condemed [sic] when Supt. visits sta. on inspection. Also I superintend and assist in the painting 

of tower outside, steps inside, and whitewash 

once every five years. I attend to all correspondence from sta. with Supt. relative to general 

repairs to station. I average about two hours per 

day at this work.”16

In addition to the long hours, the quarters were 

somewhat cramped, making it difficult for 

Keepers and their Assistants to have their families with them. One building at the Bodie Island 

Light Station, designed as a duplex known as a 

Double Keepers Quarters (DKQ), was expected to serve both the Keeper and his family 

and any Assistant Keepers assigned to the station. By the end of the 1800s, the Lighthouse 

Board had decided that a second Keeper’s 

Quarters at Bodie Island would be desirable. It 

was determined that the Assistant Keepers 

could share the existing Double Keepers Quarters and that a new, larger residence should be 

built for the Principal Keeper. Several plans for 

these changes were drawn.17 However, they 

were unable to convince Congress to appropriate the approximately $7,500 it would cost for 

construction of the second dwelling and associated cistern and outhouse until 1907. By that 

time, the cost of the second dwelling had risen, 

and the Lighthouse Board was unable to design 

a structure that would be within the limits of 

15. Shelton-Roberts, p. 171.

16. Gaskill, “Personnel Classification Board Form No. 

14 – Field Questionnaire,” n.p.

17. Assorted plat plans and building designs in papers 

of the Civil Engineering Unit, Shore Maintenance 

Detachment, United States Coast Guard, Cleveland, Ohio, various dates.
Historical Background & Context

14 National Park Service SERO

the authorized amount. The matter was 

dropped.

In 1910, the Lighthouse Board was abolished 

and the Bureau of Lighthouses created. The 

Bureau apparently consisted of one person, the 

Commissioner of Lighthouses. The lighthouse 

service was transferred from the Treasury Department to the Department of Commerce.

Between 1919 and 1937, the families of Keeper 

Gaskill and his Assistant Keeper lived in 

Wanchese on Roanoke Island during the winter months so that their children could attend 

school regularly.18 However, by 1937, Gaskill 

had reached an agreement with the local school 

board to transport the children daily to and 

from the main highway, where they could 

board a school bus. The school board agreed to 

furnish the gasoline used to transport the children to the highway. For this reason, Gaskill’s 

wife, Bertha, and youngest daughter, Erline, 

were able to live on Bodie Island year- round, 

the older children having already left home.19

Gaskill enquired of the Commissioner of 

Lighthouses regarding reimbursement for car 

repairs and tires incidental to the transportation of the children, but was rejected. However, 

the following year, the school board agreed to 

pay for only 75 percent of the cost of gasoline 

(60 of the 80 gallons used). Gaskill asked the 

Commissioner of Lighthouses to provide the 

remainder, only 14 gallons since the owner of 

the Bodie Island Hunt Club, near the Light Station, was paying for six gallons so that his 

children could ride to the school bus with the 

children of the Keeper. The Commissioner acceded to his request on the condition that he 

provide information on the cost of gasoline and 

whether it would be taken from official stock or 

purchased privately. According to Holland, because the cost of a gallon of gasoline was, at that 

time, about seven and three- quarters cents, the 

expenditure of $1.08 by the Commissioner of 

Lighthouses required about $20 in paperwork.

In 1937, the Cape Hatteras National Seashore 

was authorized, and, in 1938, the Department of 

the Interior expressed an interest in the Bodie 

Island Light Station, which was rumored to be 

on the verge of being declared surplus. This, 

and the reorganization of the Bureau of Lighthouses in 1939, when the Bureau was 

consolidated with the United States Coast 

Guard, caused some consternation among the 

Lighthouse Keepers and prompted letters of 

inquiry from Gaskill to the Commissioner of 

Lighthouses as well as to his State Representative, Lindsay Warren, regarding his status.20 He 

was assured by both the Commissioner of 

Lighthouses and President of the local Federal 

Employees Union that neither his position nor 

his salary was in jeopardy. He also received a 

soothing letter from Representative Warren, 

who informed him that an increase at Bodie Island was being considered. Additionally, his 

salary was raised to $1,740 per year.21 However, 

the transfer of the lighthouses to the care of the 

Coast Guard did have an impact on Lloyd Ver18. Gaskill, John, to Deborah E. Harvey, 24 April 2002.

19. Shelton-Roberts, pp. 166-167, 170.

20. Lloyd V. Gaskill papers.

21. Short, Oliver C., Director of Personnel, Department of Commerce, in letter to Lloyd V. Gaskill, 

dated 16 Jun 1930, in Lloyd V. Gaskill papers.
PART I DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 15

non Gaskill’s life. In May of 1940, he was 

transferred from Bodie Island to Coinjock to 

replace a retiring Keeper, and was then assigned to a buoy tender depot, a position of 

enormous responsibility.22 The letter informing him of the transfer stated, “This detail is 

temporary, but it is anticipated you will not return to Bodie Island, and that your present 

temporary detail will become permanent.”23 At 

the same time, the Commander of the Norfolk 

District (5th District) of the Coast Guard, sent a 

letter to the Officer- in- Charge at the Nags 

Head Coast Guard Station stating that, as a result of the transfer of Lloyd V. Gaskill to the 

Coinjock Light Station and the transfer of Assistant Keeper, J. H. Austin, to the Sharps Island 

Light Station, the Bodie Island Light Station 

would be unmanned, making it necessary for 

the Officer- in- Charge to undertake the operation of the Light Station.24 Lloyd V. Gaskill’s 

records show that the Bodie Island Light Station became an unmanned station at 6:30 a.m. 

on May 22, 1940.25

In 1945, the size of the Bodie Island Light Station site increased by slightly over 40 acres. 

However, in 1953, the property was declared 

surplus, and the General Services Administration at last listed the 56.37 acres of the Bodie 

Island Light Station for disposal. The National 

Figure 2 1964 NPS photograph showing sign to 

nature trail.

Park Service requested that the land be added 

to the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. This 

was established by Secretarial Order on January 

12, 1953. On October 15, 1953, the Coast Guard 

relinquished all of the land of the Bodie Island 

Light Station except a small, square plot of 

ground, 100 feet on each side, on which the 

Lighthouse stands, to the National Park Service. The Coast Guard continued to operate the 

Lighthouse, though automation eliminated the 

need for a resident Keeper of the light.

The National Park Service and the Coast Guard 

cooperated on the maintenance and operation 

of the Bodie Island Light Station property. The 

Coast Guard signed agreements with the National Park Service to allow a nature trail and an 

observation deck to be built on the Lighthouse 

grounds. A parking lot to the northwest of the 

Double Keeper’s Quarters was also constructed. Photographs from 1964 and 1969 

22. Shelton-Roberts, p. 167.

23. Crapster, T. G., in letter to L.V. Gaskill, Keeper, 

Bodie Island Light Station, dated 20 May 1940, 

from Lloyd V. Gaskill papers.

24. Crapster, T. G., in letter to Officer-In-Charge, Nags 

Head Coast Guard Station, Manteo, North Carolina, dated 20 May 1940, from Lloyd V. Gaskill 

papers.

25. Gaskill, Lloyd V., trip report dated 22 May 1940 in 

Lloyd V. Gaskill papers, 
Historical Background & Context

16 National Park Service SERO

show the location of the parking as well as the 

observation deck located to the south of the 

Lighthouse.26 In 1972, permission was granted 

to Offshore Navigation, Inc. to temporarily install a 3- pound radar beacon on the Lighthouse 

in connection with their seismographic operation, provided this installation did not conflict 

with the environmental program involving the 

osprey in which the Coast Guard was participating.27 Also in 1972, the Coast Guard and the 

National Park Service discussed an agreement 

to allow public access to portions of the Lighthouse, provided that it did not interfere with 

the operation of the light. The Coast Guard 

asked the National Park Service to agree to assume responsibility for maintaining those 

portions of the Lighthouse that were open to 

the public, which included all portions of the 

structures except the Generator Room (Oil 

Room) in the Oil House and the Lamp in the 

Tower. In addition, the National Park Service 

was to agree not to allow nighttime visitors to 

the Lighthouse without the installation of a 

Coast Guard- approved lighting system, to reimburse the Coast Guard for any damages to 

the Lighthouse caused by the National Park 

Service or its visitors, to make some required 

safety improvements to the Lighthouse, and to 

hold the Coast Guard harmless from liability 

for injuries sustained by Park Service staff or 

visitors to the Lighthouse, in addition to maintaining the grounds around the structures. The 

agreement was signed in June of 1973.28 However, the National Park Service apparently still 

did not have access to the interior of the Oil 

House and the Tower in 1976, when the Coast 

Guard was reported to be making some improvements on the Oil House.29

In November of 1977, the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service submitted a 

nomination for the Bodie Island Light Station 

to be added to the National Register of Historic 

Places. The Coast Guard was concerned that 

this was done without their concurrence.30

Their concern was that a National Register listing would impede any maintenance activities 

they might want to undertake at the Lighthouse. However, the nomination was never 

forwarded to the National Register, and the 

matter lapsed.

The Coast Guard allowed the firm of Brown 

and Caldwell, consulting engineers to install a 

26. Photographs from Bodie Island Lighthouse papers 

at Cape Hatteras National Seashore headquarters, 

Manteo, North Carolina.

27. Bullard, Ross P., Rear Admiral, U. S. Coast Guard, 

Commander, 5th Coast Guard District in letters to 

Offshore Navigation, Inc. from papers of the 5th

United States Coast Guard District headquarters, 

Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 5 May 1972 and 11 

May 1972.

28. “Use Agreement, Bodie Island Light,” signed by T. 

N. Miller, Property Officer for the U. S. Coast 

Guard, 5th Coast Guard District, and Robert D. Barbee, Superintendent, of Cape Hatteras National 

Seashore, National Park Service, Department of 

the Interior, from papers at the 5th United States 

Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, 

Virginia, dated June 19/23, 1973.

29. Garner, John C., Jr., Historic Architect, Planning 

and Compliance Division, Southeast Region, 

National Park Service “Memorandum” to the 

Regional Director, Southeast Region, National 

Park Service, in the papers at the Cape Hatteras 

National Seashore headquarters at Manteo, North 

Carolina, dated 4 November, 1976.

30. ----, Commandant, United States Coast Guard, in 

letter to the Commander of the 5th United States 

Coast Guard District, from papers of the 5th

United States Coast Guard District headquarters, 

Portsmouth, Virginia, dated August, 1978.
PART I DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 17

temporary transponder on the gallery of the 

light tower during the month of July 1981.31 This 

was part of an oceanographic study being conducted by the firm for the preliminary design 

and siting of a wastewater ocean outfall offshore of Kill Devil Hills, North Carolina.32 The 

transponder was mounted on a surveyor’s tripod, so no intrusion into the fabric of the 

lighthouse was necessary.

In May of 1983, the National Park Service obtained permission from the Coast Guard to 

present historical programs inside the Oil 

House and the lowest level of the Tower.33 The 

National Park Service proposed to provide a 

movable barrier to block access to the upper 

portions of the Tower and to perform routine 

interior maintenance.34 National Park Service 

personnel would be stationed within the Lighthouse four hours a day, five days a week, to 

answer questions, The Coast Guard indicated 

that they would install a door to the Generator 

Room (Oil Room), which was to be off limits to 

the public.35 By November, the Coast Guard 

had decided to install a more permanent barrier 

to block public access to the Tower than that 

provided by the National Park Service. An 8’ 

high chain link fence with a locking access door 

was installed at the foot of the spiral stairs to 

the Tower.36 Visitors were then allowed to enter the lowest level of the Lighthouse and peer 

up the shaft toward the Watch Room level. 

However, on August 7, 1988, the National Park 

Service and the United States Coast Guard 

jointly commemorated the bicentennial of the 

Lighthouse Service by escorting visitors to the 

top of the Tower. One Coast Guard escort 

climbed the first half of the Tower stairs with 

the visitors, and another escorted them the rest 

of the way.37 A year later, Captain BMC Grady 

reported that 930 people had climbed to the 

top of the Bodie Island Tower during the period from Friday through Sunday.38

The United States Coast Guard and the National Park Service, despite their efforts at 

cooperation, appear to have had some differences regarding responsibility for the 

maintenance of the Bodie Island Light Station, 

in particular, the Oil House and the Tower. In

31. Koloski, M. E., “Special Use Permit” in the papers 

of the 5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 24 July 

1981.

32. Pitman, R. W., Project Manager, Brown and Caldwell, letter to H. J. Styron, U. S. Coast Guard 

Facility, Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, in papers 

of the 5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 6 July 1981.

33. Pritchard, H. S., Commander, U.S. Coast Guard 

Group Cape Hatteras, letter to Commander, 5th

United States Coast Guard District, in papers of 5th

United States Coast Guard District headquarters, 

Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 27 May 1983.

34. Hartman, Thomas L., Superintendent, Cape Hatteras National Seashore, National Park Service, 

letter to Lieutenant Herman Pritchard, Commander, U. S. Coast Guard Group Cape Hatteras in 

papers of the 5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 6 

May 1983.

35. “Bodie Island Light” sketch showing which locations would be accessible to the National Park 

Service, in the papers of the 5th United States 

Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, 

Virginia, dated 14 July 1983.

36. Dunn, Thomas M., in memo in papers of the 5th

United States Coast Guard District headquarters, 

Portsmouth, Virginia, n.d. 

37. Hohmann, Jack, “Bodie Island Lighthouse,” article 

in The Coastland Times newspaper, August 14, 

1988, p. 1B.

38. ----, Telephone conversation note in the papers of 

the 5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 8 August 

1989.
Historical Background & Context

18 National Park Service SERO

Figure 3 Bodie Island Light Station, looking south, 

2002.

August of 1990, J. A. Chop, CWO2 of the U.S. 

Coast Guard, made a trip to the Cape Hatteras 

Coast Guard Group for the purpose of inspecting the light stations in their keeping. He 

reported that “a significant problem ... is the 

confusion in maintenance responsibility. The 

Park Service allegedly holds the responsibility 

for all maintenance on the LT though this cannot be confirmed until the individual lease 

agreements are reviewed. Presently, some work 

is not being accomplished because one party 

(Park Service) thinks the other (Coast Guard) is 

responsible to do it. In addition, the procedure 

for one agency to submit work requests or report problems to another is not clear. Work is 

not done until major complications arise.”39

By 1994, negotiations were underway to transfer the Bodie Island Lighthouse to the care of 

the National Park Service.40 According to the 

Biennial Lighthouse Inspection Report, the 

Lighthouse was already on the National Register of Historic Places41 and currently leased to 

the National Park Service, who had responsibility for performing all maintenance and 

repairs on the Lighthouse except in the Lantern 

Room.42 The Coast Guard was to retain access 

rights and the optics in the Tower. It was expected that these negotiations would be 

finalized by June of 1994,43 but this was an optimistic projection. By 1996, the Coast Guard was 

still in possession of the Lighthouse and was 

negotiating with the Outer Banks Lighthouse 

Society to assume some of the maintenance responsibilities.44 The Outer Banks Lighthouse 

39. Chop, J. A., CWO2, USCG, in Trip Report in papers 

of the 5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 24 October 

1990.

40. “Biennial Lighthouse Inspection Report,” in 

papers of the Civil Engineering Unit, Shore Maintenance Detachment, United States Coast Guard, 

Cleveland, Ohio, dated 25 January 1994.

41. The Light Tower and Oil House were not then on 

the National Register of Historic Places. A National 

Register Nomination is currently being prepared 

(2002).

42. It is not clear that the Park Service was aware of 

these expectations of the Coast Guard regarding 

their maintenance responsibilities.

43. “Biennial Lighthouse Inspection Report,” 1994.

44. Westfall, Edward A., Lieutenant, Fifth Coast Guard 

District Lighthouse Program Manager in fax to 

Cheryl Shelton-Roberts, president of Outer Banks 

Lighthouse Society, in papers of the 5th United 

States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 25 July 1996.
PART I DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 19

Society is a non- profit organization incorporated in 1994 to “aid in the preservation of the 

lighthouses in the area and work with the National Park Service and other agencies and 

non- profit groups to achieve the safekeeping 

of the buildings, artifacts, and records.”45 The 

Society organized a volunteer program to open 

the lower portion of the Lighthouse to the 

public46 and independently authorized an engineering evaluation of the structure.47 On 

December 4, 1996, the Superintendent of the 

Cape Hatteras National Seashore wrote to the 

Commander of the Coast Guard, Atlantic Area, 

to request the transfer of “the remaining USCG 

property,” i.e. the Lighthouse and the surrounding land retained by the Coast Guard.48

Though negotiations between the Coast Guard 

and the National Park Service continued, by 

October of 1997, the Outer Banks Lighthouse 

Society had a limited license in place with the 

Coast Guard to provide cleaning and ventilating of the interior of the Tower in conjunction 

with their volunteer efforts.49

On 13 July 2000, the Bodie Island Lighthouse 

(Tract No. 02- 102) was finally officially transferred to the National Park Service and became 

part of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. 

The original first order Fresnel lens at the top 

of the Tower was retained by the United States 

Coast Guard as personal property, to be maintained as part of their museum program.50

45. “Outer Banks Lighthouse Society Mission Statement,” at www.outer-banks.com, 2002.

46. Shelton-Roberts, Cheryl, to Deborah E. Harvey, email dated 25 April 2002.

47. Alden and Associates, “Bodie Island Lighthouse, 

Dare County, N.C., Report of Structural Conditions 

– July 20, 1996” in papers of Cape Hatteras 

National Seashore headquarters, Manteo, North 

Carolina, dated 20 July 1996, n.p.

48. Harrison, Steve, National Park Service, in reference 

note to preparers of this report, 31 May 2002.

49. “Biennial Lighthouse Inspection Report, Fifth District, Bodie Island Light, LLNR 590,” noted 

“Information current as of 10/1/97 in papers of the 

Civil Engineering Unit, Shore Maintenance 

Detachment, United States Coast Guard, Cleveland, Ohio, 1997 and Cheryl Shelton-Roberts in email to Deborah E. Harvey dated 25 April, 2002.

50. Harrison, 2002.
Historical Background & Context

20 National Park Service SERO
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 21

Chronology of 

Development & 

Use

The description of the construction and early maintenance of the 

Bodie Island Light Station is excerpted from Francis Ross Holland’s History of the Bodie Island Light Station. A copy of that 

report may be found in the Appendix to this report. Information 

regarding construction and maintenance of the Light Station between 1871 and 1954 that was not part of Holland’s book but was 

discovered in other sources is included in this report. Descriptions of later maintenance to the Lighthouse are from documents 

held at the National Park Service Cape Hatteras National Seashore headquarters at Manteo, North Carolina, the 5th District of 

the United States Coast Guard Headquarters in Portsmouth, Virginia, and the Shore Maintenance Detachment, Civil Engineering 

Unit, of the United States Coast Guard in Cleveland, Ohio.

The construction of the third Bodie Island Light Station was begun mid- 1871. Determined to build a foundation for this 

Lighthouse that would preclude any of the foundation and structural problems such as those that plagued the first one, the 

Lighthouse Board contracted for a construction crew to dig a pit 

7 feet deep, which was kept pumped free of water. At the bottom 

of this pit was laid a grid of 6” x 12” timbers, in two courses at 

right angles, topped by 18” thick granite blocks. Water was then 
Chronology of Development & Use

22 National Park Service SERO

allowed to cover the foundation construction, 

preserving the wood.

Atop this base, courses of rubble block weighing up to five tons were laid, each grouted with 

hydraulic Portland cement, to raise the foundation an additional five feet. On this was the 

base of the tower set: “cut granite on the outside and rubble set cement on the inside.”51

The foundry began to ship beams to Baltimore 

in September of 1871. Holland refers to the 

beam supplier as Paulding, Kemble, & Co. of 

West Point Foundry, New York.52 However, 

examination of the beams reveal that they are 

stamped with the legend “Phoenix Iron Company Philada.” In addition, several of the 

original plates specifically call for Phoenix 

shapes. Researcher Jack McCombs located the 

business records for the Phoenix Iron Company of Phoenixville, Pennsylvania among the 

papers housed at the Hagley Museum and Library, associated with the University of 

Delaware, in Wilmington, Delaware. These 

records show 17 beams shipped to Baltimore 

for the Lighthouse Board on September 15, 1871 

and 16 beams shipped on October 27, 1871. Six 

more beams were shipped to the Lighthouse 

Engineer on February 13, 1872. 

Which of these beams, if not all, were used at 

Bodie Island Lighthouse is not recorded, but 

the evidence clearly points to the Phoenix Iron 

Company as the supplier of beams for the conFigure 4 Landing support beams in Tower. Beams 

were actually installed with manufacturer’s stamp 

upside down. Photo courtesy of Jack McCombs.

struction of the Bodie Island Lighthouse. Payment in cash for the shipments is recorded in 

the ledger. The 39 beams shipped to Baltimore 

for the Lighthouse Board cost the Lighthouse 

Board $1,072.65.53

By November of 1871, the bricks had begun to 

arrive for the construction of the main body of 

the Tower. About March of 1872, the Lighthouse Board decided to change the bonding of 

the brick to resemble that at Cape Hatteras 

rather than as shown on the drawings. By the 

first of July, the Tower was nearly ready for the 

installation of the light, and the District Engineer requested that the lens be shipped 

immediately. Toward the end of September, the 

light was in place. It was first exhibited on October 1, 1872.54 This Lighthouse and the 

associated structures, such as the Keepers’ 

Dwelling, had cost $140,000 to construct,55

51. Holland, Francis R., Jr., A History of the Bodie 

Island Light Station, National Park Service, U. S. 

Department of the Interior, 1967, p. 39.

52. Ibid.

53. Phoenix Iron Company business ledger, pp. 292, 

331, 441, and 731.

54. Holland, pp. 41-42.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 23

Figure 5 Drawing of original Bodie Island plaque.

more than 46 times the cost of the original 

Lighthouse and more than five times the cost 

of the second. A carved marble plaque was 

erected commemorating the 1871 Lighthouse 

Board responsible for the construction of this 

Lighthouse. The plaque listed the names of all 

members of the Lighthouse Board and the District Officers. This was later removed by order 

of the Lighthouse Board and replaced with one 

that gave simply the longitude and latitude of 

the Lighthouse and the date construction was 

completed.56

The Tower rose 156 feet from the water elevation to the focal point of the light. To the 

ventilator ball, it was 162 feet. It was painted in 

alternating bands of black and white, about 22 

feet wide. The first order Fresnel lens installed 

at the top exhibited a fixed white light that 

could be seen for over 18 nautical miles. 57

On October 29, 1872, less than 30 days after the 

lighting of the new Station, a flock of wild geese 

flew into the lamp, shattering three panes of the 

3/8th- inch thick glass and greatly damaging the 

lens. To prevent a recurrence, the District Engineer ordered the installation of a protective 

screen around the glass enclosure of the 

light.58 A screen remained around the light until after the installation of electrical power and 

the conversion from a fixed to a flashing light 

in 1932. The flashing light apparently solved the 

problem of birds colliding with the Lighthouse 

at night.59

Lightning was also found to be a problem with 

the Lighthouse. In December of 1877, the District Engineer discovered vertical cracks on all 

landings of the tower from the second landing 

to the seventh.60 He attributed these cracks to 

lightning rather than to settlement.61 The 

Lighthouse was equipped with lightning protection, which consisted of a connection 

between the metal spiral stairway of the Tower 

to the metal work of the lantern at the top and 

to a copper rod driven into the ground at the 

55. Ibid, p. 42.

56. Drawing of original Bodie Island Lighthouse 

plaque in documents of the Civil Engineering 

Unit, Shore Maintenance Detachment, United 

States Coast Guard, Cleveland, Ohio, n.d. The history of this plaque is noted on the drawing.

57. ----, “Description of Lighthouse Tower, Buildings, 

and Premises,” 1909, p. 4.

58. Holland, pp. 42-43.

59. Shelton-Roberts, p. 171.

60. Holland, p. 44.

61. Ibid.
Chronology of Development & Use

24 National Park Service SERO

center of the Tower at the bottom.62 During 

storms, the stairway could become heavily 

charged with electricity, as an early Keeper discovered when he was temporarily paralyzed as 

the result of being on the stairs when lightning 

struck.63 The District Engineer surmised that 

the stress of these electrical strikes gave rise to 

the cracks he discovered. The Engineer made a 

proposal for additional lightning protection, 

which was not installed until 1884, when lightning again struck the Tower. Though not 

following the recommendation of the District 

Engineer to the letter, the installation did follow the spirit of his recommendation. A cable 

was run from the lantern through the center of 

the spiral staircase to a cast iron plate buried in 

the ground. The cable was connected to each of 

the landings in the Tower.64 The cable that is 

currently fastened to the newel of the first flight 

of stairs in the Tower and runs along the north 

side of the Tower ground level floor, along the 

wall of the connecting hall, out through the 

window in the hall, down the outside wall of 

the connecting hall and into the ground may be 

the remains of this lightning protection system. 

The installation of the cable apparently resolved the problems of the Tower with 

lightning, for no other lightning damage is reported until after the installation of commercial 

power in 1953, with the exception of a rogue 

lightning bolt which struck the Tower in 1939 

and traveled through the telephone wires to the 

Keepers’ Dwelling, breaking glass windows, 

exploding the telephone, and frightening the 

inhabitants.65

Over the years, the third Bodie Island Lighthouse performed well, requiring only routine 

maintenance, though changes were made to the 

Lighthouse and its environs, as well as to the 

light itself. In 1883, the Lighthouse Board substituted mineral oil (kerosene) for the original 

lard oil as the fuel, and the following year installed regular kerosene lamps.66 The light 

consisted of five wick- burning lamps inside the 

lens which had to be kept lit all night and during fog events.67 Due to the smoke produced 

by both lard oil and kerosene, keeping the lens 

and the glass of the light clean would have been 

a continuous task. Even after the conversion to 

kerosene lamps, the Keepers may have occasionally used lard oil. John Gaskill relates that 

the third Bodie Island Keeper, Ephraim 

Meekins, Jr., told his father, Lloyd Vernon 

Gaskill, that he had used lard oil.68 Meekins 

assumed responsibility for the Bodie Island 

light in 1906,69 much later than the date Holland gives for the conversion to kerosene. The 

low flashpoint of the kerosene eventually resulted in the construction of an oil storage 

facility separate from the Lighthouse. An 1890 

plat in the possession of the Coast Guard 

shows an oil tank drawn to the east of the Oil 

House.70 Whether this tank was ever installed 

at that location is not clear. A supplementary 

sheet iron Oil House was erected in 1896.71 A

62. Holland, p. 45.

63. Shelton-Roberts, p.166.

64. Holland, pp. 45-46.

65. Shelton-Roberts, p. 166.

66. Holland, p. 46.

67. Shelton-Roberts, p. 171.

68. McCombs, Jack, e-mail to Deborah E. Harvey 

dated 23 April 2002.

69. Holland, p. 55.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 25

Figure 6 Bodie Island Lighthouse, 1920s. Photograph 

courtesy of Cheryl Shelton-Roberts. Original in 

possession of John Gaskill.

rectangle labeled “Oil House, 10x16 iron, brick 

found.” is sketched on the 1896 plat map in a 

location that is now part of the parking lot of 

the Bodie Island Visitor Center.72 No record 

has been found that it was ever built in that location, and a sheet iron Oil House is referred to 

in 1909 as being 50’ S.E. of the tower, which 

may be the actual original location of the 1896 

supplementary Oil House.73 A photograph 

taken between 1920 and 193074 shows a structure in that general location that matches a 

photograph taken in 1945 by the Coast Guard 

and labeled “Oil House”.75 The oil tank 

sketched on the 1890 plat map appears to be installed next to the flat- roofed oil house shown 

in these pictures. In 1898, the Bodie Island 

Lighthouse received telephone service as a result of a national defense initiative.76 In 1912, 

the light was upgraded to an incandescent oil 

vapor lamp.77 The brightly- burning, incandescent lamp was a great improvement over 

the old wick lamps.78 During the 1920s, a “mechanical keeper” was installed to monitor the 

light, thus eliminating the need for one of the 

Assistant Keeper positions. The device consisted of a thermostat installed above the lamp 

and connected to an alarm installed in the 

Keepers’ Quarters and to a recording device. If 

the lamp was extinguished, the alarm sounded 

in the Keepers’ Quarters and a record was 

made of the event. Though this device eliminated the need for a Keeper to constantly 

watch the light while it was lit, the Keepers still 

had to strain the oil through a cloth to remove 

impurities to produce a clean, bright flame and 

make sure the lamp was properly lit. The re70. “Plat of Site of Body’s Island L. Sta.,” drawing, 

microfiche in the possession of the Civil Engineering Unit, Shore Maintenance Detachment, United 

States Coast Guard, Cleveland, Ohio.

71. Holland, p. 46.

72. “Plat of Site of Body’s Island L. Sta.,” drawing, 

microfiche in the possession of the Civil Engineering Unit, Shore Maintenance Detachment, United 

States Coast Guard, Cleveland, Ohio.

73. ----, “Description of Lighthouse Tower, Buildings, 

and Premises,” 1909, p. 9.

74. Shelton-Roberts, p. 158.

75. Photographs in the records of the 5th United 

States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia. A photograph of a small, flatroofed building approximately 10’ square with a 

concrete stoop and what appears to be a fuel storage tank to one side is labeled “Oil House.” 

Photograph of what was originally and is now 

called the Oil House is labeled “Engine House.”

76. Holland, p. 46.

77. Ibid, p. 49.

78. Shelton-Roberts, p. 171.
Chronology of Development & Use

26 National Park Service SERO

cording device monitored whether the light 

was burning erratically, which occurrence 

could result in a negative report on the Keepers when the Lighthouse inspector made a 

visit.79 On September 19, 1932, the lighting apparatus was converted to electricity.80

The upgrade to electrically- generated light significantly changed the operation of the 

Lighthouse. No longer was the Keeper required 

to mount the 214 steps to the top of the Lighthouse in the evening and again in the morning 

to light and to extinguish the light, not to mention the reduced effort involved in hauling fuel 

and supplies up the stairs to maintain the light 

and the lens. With the installation of the incandescent electric light, the candlepower rose to 

160,000, and power was supplied by two oilburning, 2 KW, 110V Kohler generators to four 

250- watt rotating lamps on an Astronomic 

timing switch.81 This change in operation also 

allowed the light to be converted from a fixed 

to a flashing light.82

The Tower was repainted in 1934. Keeper 

Gaskill persuaded the Commissioner of Lighthouses to allow him to hire local labor to 

perform this task. Consequently, Earl Mann, 

son of the manager of the Bodie Island Hunt 

Club, Fritz Hayman, and John Gaskill, the 

Keeper’s son, were hired to do the job. John 

Gaskill described the arrangements for this task 

to Cheryl Shelton- Roberts for her book, Lighthouse Families. According to John, a box large 

enough for the painters to stand in was suspended by ropes on hooks attached to the 

stanchions of the gallery railing. “Every morning the three painters hoisted the box up the 

outside of the tower and then climbed over the 

railing and down ... into the box. Armed with 

scrapers, paintbrushes, and the black and white 

paint they had mixed with zinc, lead, linseed 

oil, and turpentine – and as much courage as 

they could muster, the three men scraped and 

painted.”83 They started at the top of the tower 

and worked their way down, scraping, painting, 

and then lowering the box to the next work 

level. They could not paint if it looked like rain. 

“To paint the area under the [gallery], John put 

the ends of a board into the holes of the massive 

iron braces to make a scaffolding.”84 They 

made $3 a day.85

The United States Coast Guard assumed responsibility for the operation of the Lighthouse 

in 1940 and transferred all personnel away from 

Bodie Island. The Nags Head Lifeboat Station 

was given the oversight of the light,86 which 

was lit by a bulb powered by an electrical generator operated by a timer. In 1941, the 

candlepower was reduced from 160,000 to 

13,000,87 possibly in response to national security concerns. A plot plan of the Lighthouse 

79. Shelton-Roberts, p. 159.

80. Holland, p. 50.

81. Ibid, and “Gas Buoy Record Card, Bodie Island 

Light Station, N.C.”, in papers of the 5th United 

States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, n.d. 

82. Holland, p. 50. 

83. Shelton-Roberts, p. 162.

84. Ibid.

85. Ibid.

86. Crapster, T. G., in letter to Officer-in-Charge, 

Nag’s Head Coast Guard Station, Manteo, North 

Carolina, dated 20 May 1940, from Lloyd V. Gaskill 

papers.

87. Holland, p. 50.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 27

site, drawn in 1944, shows that the grounds and 

buildings around the Lighthouse remained 

much as they had been when a Keeper occupied the Double Keepers’ Quarters.88 Though 

the additional oil house erected in 1896 is not 

documented on the plot plan, photographs indicate one existed in 1945 that matched one in 

photographs taken in the 1920s. According to 

the plot plan, a fence enclosed both the original 15 acres and the perimeter of the walk 

between the Double Keepers’ Quarters and the 

Lighthouse. The separate cisterns, storage 

buildings, and privies erected for the Keeper 

(on one side of the Double Keepers’ Quarters) 

and the Assistant Keepers (on the other side of 

the Double Keepers’ Quarters) remained intact, with walkways leading from the dwelling 

northwest and southeast to the perimeter of 

the site, the location of the privies. Although 

the National Park Service currently has the 

front entrance of the Visitor Center in the 

former Double Keepers’ Quarters on the road 

side of the site, the dwelling was built to face 

the Lighthouse, 89 possibly because the site was 

originally accessed by boat before the construction, in the late 1920s, of a bridge and road 

to Bodie Island.

In 1945, the Coast Guard acquired an additional 

40 acres around the Light Station, ostensibly 

for expansion purposes.90 A power cable survey was performed in March of 1945, but it was 

another seven years before the Light Station 

was supplied with commercial electrical 

power.91 The Watch Room and the first 

through seventh level landings were scraped 

and painted in July of 1945.92

During the Coast Guard’s operation of the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse, weekly, monthly, and 

biennial inspections and reports were made regarding the condition of the Lighthouse, and 

repairs and maintenance efforts were undertaken. The Coast Guard personnel struggled 

with a faulty Astronomic clock for two years, 

from 1946 through 1948, before replacing it.93

Then, the Kohler generators began to require 

frequent repairs.94 The Lighthouse was finally 

converted from 110 V.O.C. to 3- wire, 120/240V 

commercial power on October 9, 1953.95 The 

two original Kohler generators were removed. 

One of the generators was then replaced with a 

11⁄2 KVA, 110V A.C., single- phase, 60- cycle, automatic start, emergency standby Kohler 

generator, installed on the existing foundation.96 A new, heavy- duty lamp changer was

88. “Bodie Island N.C. Light Plot Plan,” in papers of 

the 5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 10 May 

1944.

89. Holland, p. 41.

90. Ibid, p. 50 and “Preliminary Survey Description, 

Map of Proposed Area to be Acquired for Future 

Expansion, Bodie Island Lighthouse Station,” in 

papers of the 5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Plymouth, Virginia, dated 22 

Nov 1944.

91. “Power Cable Survey, Bodie Island Station and 

Lighthouse,” in papers of the 5th United States 

Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, 

Virginia, dated 13 Mar 1945. It shows the area 

acquired by the Coast Guard in 1945.

92. “Gas Buoy Record Card, Bodie Island Light,” in 

papers of the 5thUnited States Coast Guard district 

headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, n.d.

93. Ibid.

94. Ibid.

95. Ibid.

96. ----, “Memo” to Commanding Officer, Unmanned 

Aids Ashore in papers of 5th United States Coast 

Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, 

dated 12 Jun 1953.
Chronology of Development & Use

28 National Park Service SERO

Figure 7 Bodie Island, 1969. Observation platform to 

the right of Tower.

installed.97 The Tower was cleaned and 

painted.98

Thereafter, power difficulties occurred mainly 

as a result of interruption of commercial electrical power. Most of the maintenance activity 

involved recharging the generator batteries or 

replacing minor worn parts. The Coast Guard 

continued to inspect the Lighthouse and to 

make repairs and paint. The Tower and Oil 

House were scraped and painted in 1959 and 

again in 1963. The cost for painting the Lighthouse in 1963 was $3,375.00. The work was 

completed by U. S. Building Services of Virginia from Norfolk, Virginia. Also in 1963, the 

light was reworked, with a new lampchanger, a 

new generator, and flashers installed, and the 

candlepower was increased to 80,000.In February of 1964, the gallery railings around the 

lamp on the outside of the Tower were replaced and painted at a cost of $856.50.99

By 1964, the National Park Service had constructed an observation platform on the 

grounds at the location of the former detached 

Oil House. A nature trail was laid out, and signs 

were posted directing visitors to the attractions 

that were being developed on the property. 

An electrical storm caused a power outage and 

damage to the Lighthouse and equipment in 

June of 1964. This necessitated the replacement 

of the electrical switch box, the main switch, 

the service entrance switch, two three- way 

switches for the Tower lights, one outlet box, 

and 14 broken windowpanes in the Tower.100

The timing clock that operated the light at 

Bodie Island, which had been causing some 

trouble, was replaced with a photo- electric 

cell, 120V A.C., in May of 1969. The Coast 

Guard continued to inspect the Lighthouse 

regularly and to repair and refurbish as was 

necessary to maintain the light.101

In 1972, permission was granted to Offshore 

Navigation, Inc. to temporarily install a 3-

pound radar beacon on the Lighthouse in con97. Ibid.

98. Purchase Order No. 05-13171-53, Painting of 

Bodie Island Lighthouse Tower, in papers of the 

5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 20 May 1953.

99. Maintenance Records in papers of the 5th United 

States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, various dates.

100. Ibid.

101. Ibid.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 29

nection with their seismographic operation.102

Later that year, the Coast Guard began negotiations with the National Park Service to allow 

public access to a portion of the inside of the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse, provided such access 

did not interfere with the operation of the 

light.103 The result of this arrangement, signed 

in June of 1973, was that the National Park Service agreed to make some required safety 

modifications to the Tower, including rebuilding and modifying the gallery structure by 

installing additional railing on the inward side, 

closer to the Tower, and repairing, replacing, 

and restoring the existing railing. In addition, 

the Park Service was required to paint the interior of the Tower and the portions of the Oil 

House that would be open to the public, to repair, replace, or restore, as necessary, the front 

entrance door, including the hardware, and to 

make any other necessary improvements that 

the Coast Guard required for the protection 

and safety of visitors to the Tower.104

It appears that, by the end of 1974, the Bodie Island Lighthouse was still not open for public 

access, apparently because the National Park 

Service had not performed the repairs and 

maintenance required by the Coast Guard. On 

12 November 1974, Lieutenant Junior Grade T. 

H. Donek met with personnel from the Cape 

Hatteras National Seashore to discuss the 

maintenance of the Lighthouse as required by 

the 1973 agreement. A walk- through of the facility was performed and deficiencies noted. 

LtJG Donek reported that the exterior paint of 

the Tower was in extremely poor condition, 

badly blistered and flaking, though the interior 

appeared to be in good condition except near 

the top of the Tower, where some moisture 

damage was evident. The spiral stairs exhibited 

surface rust and some cracked treads near the 

top of the Tower but were in generally good 

condition. Donek noted that the spiral stairs 

were unsupported except at the top and the 

bottom and could use some intermediate bracing. The Watch Room door needed replacing, 

and several of the wall plates on the east side of 

the gallery were badly cracked and rusted, with 

many of the thinner members wasted away. The 

entrance door and jamb of the Oil House were 

in need of replacement, as well as the floor, 

windows, and windowsills, which were reported as being termite- infested. The Oil 

House needed painting.105

It is unclear how the National Park Service and 

the Coast Guard resolved their differences re102. Bullard, Ross P., Rear Admiral, U. S. Coast Guard, 

Commander, 5th Coast Guard District in letters to 

Offshore Navigation, Inc. from papers of the 5th

United States Coast Guard District headquarters, 

Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 5 May 1972 and 11 

May 1972.

103. Masse, S. J. T., Chief, Civil Engineering Branch, U. 

S. Coast Guard, “Public Access to Bodie Light,” in 

papers of the 5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 17 

November 1972.

104. “Use Agreement, Bodie Island Light,” signed by T. 

N. Miller, Property Officer for the U. S. Coast 

Guard, 5th United States Coast Guard District, and 

Robert D. Barbee, Superintendent, of Cape Hatteras National Seashore, National Park Service, 

Department of the Interior, in papers at the 5th

United States Coast Guard District headquarters, 

Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 19 and 23 June 1973.

105. Donek, T. H., “Memo – Cape Hatteras Light and 

Bodie Island Light,” in papers at the 5th United 

States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 25 November 1974.
Chronology of Development & Use

30 National Park Service SERO

garding responsibility for the maintenance of 

the Bodie Island Lighthouse. By October of 

1976, the National Park Service apparently had 

a use permit for visitation in place, though it 

seems to have been only for approach onto the 

grounds around the Lighthouse that were controlled by the Coast Guard, not inside the 

structure. At this time, the Coast Guard was reported to be replacing the wooden floor on one 

side of the Oil House.106 A later paint analysis 

indicates that this was in the Work Room.107

The National Park Service representative, John 

C. Garner, Jr., who observed this activity, expressed concern over whether or not the Coast 

Guard was complying with Section 106 procedures.108 The paint analysis indicates that the 

Coast Guard re- layed at least some of the original wood floor boards, in compliance with 

Section 106 requirements.109 Garner also iterated that the spiral stairs in the Tower were not 

supported between landings and were subject 

to “considerable movement when traversed.”110 Garner’s trip to Bodie Island may 

have included a meeting with representatives 

from Industrial Non- Destructive Testing Co., 

Inc., of Charleston, South Carolina, the Department of Materials Engineering of North 

Carolina State University at Raleigh, North 

Carolina, and personnel from the National 

Park Service. A report issued by that group, 

which met on October 19 and 20, indicated that 

the structural integrity of the staircase at the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse was a complex problem that would require “complete testing of all 

components and extensive structural modification” before the public could safely be 

allowed access. They concluded that “[t]he 

present structure is unsafe for public use because of both the present extent of 

deteriorating due to apparent corrosion and 

the original design.”111

By November of 1977, the roof of the Oil House 

had been replaced with asphalt shingles, and 

the main entrance door had also been replaced.112 When these changes were made and 

by which government entity is unclear. No 

record of this work exists among either the 

records of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore 

at Manteo, North Carolina or the records of the 

5th Coast Guard District Headquarters in 

Portsmouth, Virginia. John Gaskill relates that 

the original wooden shingles were first replaced with asbestos shingles, though he did 

not know the date.113 Since he did not recall the 

Oil House ever having wooden shingles, it is 

likely that they were replaced around or before 

1920. The 1893 photograph shows a rough- surfaced roof, which was likely the original wood 

106. Garner, 1976.

107. National Park Service, Historic Paint Finishes 

Study, Bodie Island Lighthouse and Oil House, 

2002, p. 32.

108. Garner, 1976.

109. National Park Service, Historic Paint Finishes 

Study, Bodie Island Lighthouse and Oil House, 

2002, p. 32.

110. Garner, 1976.

111. ----, “Visual Inspection of Cape Hatteras and Bodie 

Island Lighthouses,” from papers of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore headquarters at Manteo, 

North Carolina, (undated, but referencing the Oct 

1976 meeting dates).

112. ----, “National Register of Historic Places Inventory 

Nomination Form, Bodie Island Visitor Center and 

Lighthouse,” in papers of the 5th United States 

Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, 

Virginia, dated 9 November 1977.

113. Gaskill, John, to Deborah E. Harvey, e-mail dated 2 

May 2002.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 31

roof. The asbestos shingles that replaced it were 

unsatisfactory because, being brittle, they 

broke in high winds, so they were replaced with 

asphalt shingles, according to John Gaskill, 

sometime in the late 1920s.114 Photographs 

from the 1920s and 1930s belonging to Gaskill 

shows a roof that appears to be of a lighter 

color than that in the 1893 photograph, but the 

composition is not discernable.115 Photographs in the possession of the National Park 

Service and the Coast Guard appear to show a 

darker, rough shingle applied to the roof of the 

Oil House in 1948 through 1964. By 1969, however, photographs indicate a lighter roof again. 

It appears that roofs were routinely replaced 

without making mention of them in reports.

In 1977, some ice damage was reported at the 

Bodie Island Light Station. The starter motor to 

the emergency generator was replaced as a result of this damage, but the generator was 

beginning to reach the end of its useful life and 

require more frequent servicing.116 The Coast 

Guard inspector recommended overhauling 

the one removed from Cape Hatteras and installing it at Bodie Island.117 The inspector also 

reported that six panes of glass were cracked on 

one side of the Tower.118 Both the Tower and 

the Oil House were painted in 1978.119 The 

paint manufacturer expressed some concern at 

the time that the Coast Guard might be applying too much paint over the old paint if the 

sealer coat required in the specifications was 

used, but he was instructed to follow the 

specifications.120

The work request to overhaul the Onan Generator removed from Cape Hatteras and install 

it at the Bodie Island Light Station was signed 

on 2 February 1979. However, this plan was 

found not to be feasible because the Cape Hatteras generator was determined to be obsolete, 

with replacement parts not available. The order 

was cancelled. In April of 1980, authorization 

was signed to replace the existing emergency 

generator, citing it as obsolete and unreliable, 

with parts not available for maintenance and 

support.121 Still, it was not until February of the 

following year that the procurement request 

was signed, authorizing the purchase of a new, 

diesel Onan generator and an Onan automatic 

transfer switch from the Paxton Company of 

Norfolk, Virginia, at a total cost of $9,906.00 

after a 35 percent government discount.122 An 

inspection in March of that year revealed that 

the existing generator would not start on loss 

of commercial power due to a dead battery.123

114. Ibid.

115. Shelton-Roberts, pp. 158 and 165.

116. Maintenance Records, Portsmouth, Virginia, various dates.

117. Baines, Charles A., Inspector, “Ocean Engineering 

Aids to Navigation Inspection, Bodie Island Light 

(LL-163)” in records of 5th United States Coast 

Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, 

dated 18 October 1978

118. Ibid.

119. Ibid.

120. ----, Telephone Conversation Record of a conversation between a representative of the U.S. Coast 

Guard and Mr. Kalis, of Baltimore, Md. regarding 

Mr. Kalis’ concerns over the painting of the Bodie 

Island Light Station, in the records of the 5th

United States Coast Guard District headquarters, 

Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 19 August 1977.

121. Maintenance Records, Portsmouth, Virginia, various dates.

122. “Procurement Request No. 10518” in papers of 

the 5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 20 February 

1981.
Chronology of Development & Use

32 National Park Service SERO

A later report based on the inspection noted 

that the generator, the control panel, and the 

battery charger were due to be replaced in the 

fourth quarter of Fiscal Year 1981. It was recommended that the Coast Guard maintain the 

existing generator operational until replacement.124 The March 1981 inspection also noted 

that the six cracked panes of glass remained 

and that the steel window casings were badly 

cracked at the Watch Room level. More rust 

was noted than previously, and several stair 

treads were noted as cracked. A new item on 

the inspection report was the notation of 

cracks in the wall below the Service Room, extending five levels, 180 degrees apart.125

In August of 1981, the work order to replace the 

existing obsolete Onan engine generator with a 

6KW Onan Engine generator was finally signed 

for both the Bodie Island and the Currituck 

Beach Lighthouses. In September, a request for 

additional funds ($150) was made to cover the 

cost of purchasing three transformers. By the 

23rd of the month, the original work order was 

reported as being complete at a cost of 

$1,456.00 (for both lighthouses), stating that 

additional work of renewing the service entrance cable, main disconnect, and watt hour 

meter was required at Bodie Island.126

The biennial inspection report of 1983 continued the trend begun in 1981 of reporting an 

increasing number of maintenance items and 

structural concerns, though the superstructure 

of the Lighthouse continued to be reported as 

safe. Metal parts were increasingly described as 

rusty, and condensation was reported on the 

inside of the window frames. The biggest concern that year, though, was that the lightning 

protection grounding conductor on the east 

side was frayed and a potential safety hazard.127

By March of the next year, the lightning protection grounding conductor was reported to 

have been repaired.128

In November of 1983, the United States Coast 

Guard inspected the Lighthouse, along with 

the National Park Service, which wanted to 

present historical programs within the Lighthouse, and Thomas Dunn of the 5th District 

Coast Guard issued a memo regarding what 

should be done to the Lighthouse to make it 

safe for the general public to tour. It was determined that, since the generator was subject to 

123. May, D. R., Lieutenant, Junior Grade, “Ocean 

Engineering Aids to Navigation Inspection, Bodie 

Island Light (Ll-163)” in papers of the 5th United 

States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 12 March 1981.

124. ----, Commander, 5th United States Coast Guard 

District in memo to Commander, U.S. Coast Guard 

Group Cape Hatteras, in papers of 5th United 

States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 6 April 1981.

125. May, 1981.

126. Work Orders in papers of 5th United States Coast 

Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, 

various dates.

127. Slade, H.B. and C. A. Baines, “Ocean Engineering 

Aids to Navigation Inspection, Bodie Island Light 

(LL-163), in papers of the 5th United States Coast 

Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, 

dated 12 October 1983, and Memo from Thomas 

M. Dunn, at the direction of the Commander, Fifth 

Coast Guard District, to the Commanding Officer, 

Coast Guard Group Cape Hatteras in the papers of 

the 5th United States Coast Guard District Headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 15 

November 1983.

128. DeLong, John P., Commander, Coast Guard Group, 

Cape Hatteras in memo to Commander, Fifth 

Coast Guard District in papers of the 5th United 

States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 22 Mar 1984.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 33

start at any time during a loss of power, the 

room in which the generator was set must remain off limits. One window in the lower level 

required replacement, and a security fence was 

to be installed at the bottom of the spiral stairs. 

It was suggested that the National Park Service 

provide funding for these improvements.129 By 

May of 1984, a work request for the installation 

of the security fence at a total cost of $650 had 

been issued and signed.130 In addition to the 

installation of the security fence, the Oil Room 

was painted.131

Another work order for the Bodie Island 

Lighthouse was signed in November of 1984. 

This one provided for the conversion of the 

light to solid state at a cost of $790.00.132 The 

work was apparently completed in June of 

1985.133 At the same time, it was reported that 

the fuel tank was leaking due to deterioration 

and should be replaced.134 At the end of the 

year, M. Roman and Chief Midgett also recommended in their biennial report on the 

Lighthouse that the 30- gallon diesel tank be 

replaced. The list of needed repairs was growing longer. They also reported that the window 

frames and ceilings of the Oil House were infested with termites to an unknown extent and 

that the upper windows should be replaced, 

that the steel and iron at the top of the Tower 

was in extremely poor condition and should be 

repaired, and that the cracks, previously noted 

on earlier inspections, should be repaired as 

soon as possible. They recommended fabricating a new bug screen for the main gallery and 

re- pointing and painting the exterior brick. 

The recommendation was to make the repairs 

in 1986 and paint the structures in 1987.135 A 

hand- written list attached to the biennial report contained suggested repairs not included 

in the official report: replace the roof on the Oil 

House, especially over the Oil Room, replace 

the main door frame in the Oil Room, repair 

the tongue- and- groove ceiling in the Work 

Room, and replace a total of four window 

frames. All these suggested repairs were a result 

of noted termite damage.

In September of 1986, repairs were begun on 

the termite damage to the door and window 

frames and the ceiling in the Oil House, in addition to treating it for termites.136 There is no 

mention of roof replacement. The specifications for repainting the Lighthouse were issued 

in January of 1987.137 The estimated cost was 

129. Dunn, Thomas M., Memo to unknown party, in 

papers of the 5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 16 

November 1983.

130. “Work Request No. 36-84” in the papers of the 5th

United States Coast Guard District headquarters, 

Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 22 May 1984. 

131. Maintenance Records of the Bodie Island Light 

Station in papers of the 5th United States Coast 

Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, 

dated 13 July 1984.

132. “Order for Supplies or Services, No. DTCG27-85-P50428” in papers of the 5th United States Coast 

Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, 

dated 21 November 1984.

133. “Work Order Number J319-85” in papers of the 

5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 7 June 1985.

134. Maintenance Records of the Bodie Island Light 

Station in papers of the 5th United States Coast 

Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, 

dated 25 June 1985.

135. Roman and Midgett, “Ocean Engineering Aids to 

Navigation Inspection, Bodie Island Light, (LL163)” in papers of the 5th United States Coast 

Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, 

dated 17 December 1985.
Chronology of Development & Use

34 National Park Service SERO

$14,682.30.138 The procurement request asserted that the painting of the Lighthouse 

would be beyond the capabilities of the Cape 

Hatteras Group Coast Guard unit.139

The report of the semi- annual group inspection of lighthouses of 1988 made only a few 

minor recommendations for improvements to 

the Bodie Island Lighthouse, including replacing the six cracked window panes that were 

first reported in 1977, repairing a light switch at 

the door to the outside along the gallery, repairing the lightning ground cable, and 

repairing the fallout shelter sign.140 In March, 

the fuel pump to the emergency generator had 

to be replaced.141 In April, the Coast Guard 

erected a VHF- FM Hi- Level Site Communication Antenna on the watch gallery railing of 

the Bodie Island Lighthouse,142 much to the 

consternation of the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, who received the 

news after the fact.143 The Department was not 

so concerned with the attachment of the antenna to the railing as it was with the impact of 

the installation of power cables to the visual 

presentation of the historic site.144

In July of 1989, an inspection and structural 

evaluation was performed and a report prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on 

the Bodie Island Lighthouse on behalf of the 

United States Coast Guard Shore Maintenance 

Detachment.145 It was the first of several more 

thorough investigations into the condition of 

the Lighthouse. The report was based only on 

a visual inspection; no materials testing or 

other evaluation requiring instruments was involved. Some exterior components of the 

Tower were not closely inspected because that 

activity would have required construction of 

exterior scaffolding. A copy of the report of the 

Corps of Engineers is included as an appendix 

to this report. It is summarized as follows.

136. ----, Tele-com, in papers of the 5th United States 

Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, 

Virginia, dated 8 July 1986. Shows schedule is to 

inspect on 30 July, demolish 20 September, treat 

for termites 25 September, order materials, and 

rebuild in October and November.

137. “Specifications for the Exterior Painting of Bodie 

Island Light Tower Located on Bodie Island Near 

Oregon Inlet, North Carolina, Specification No. 

7688,” in papers of the 5th United States Coast 

Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, 

dated January, 1987.

138. Procurement Request to “provide services and 

materials to paint Bodie Island Lighthouse LL245,” in papers of the 5th United States Coast 

Guard District headquarters, dated 23 January 

1987.

139. Ibid.

140. Phillips, M. L., “Report of Semi-Annual Group 

Inspection of Lighthouses,” in papers of the 5th

United States Coast Guard District headquarters, 

Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 6 October 1988.

141. Maintenance Records, Bodie Island Light Station 

in papers of the 5th United States Coast Guard District, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 28 March 1989.

142. Malmrose, J. C., Commander, U. S. Coast Guard, 

Supervisor, Shore Maintenance Detachment in letter to William S. Price, Jr., State Historic 

Preservation Officer, North Carolina Department 

of Cultural Resources, in papers of the United 

States Coast Guard Shore Maintenance Detachment, Cleveland, Ohio, dated 7 April 1989.

143. Brook, David, Deputy State Historic Preservation 

Officer, North Carolina Department of Cultural 

Resources, in letter to J. C. Malmrose, Commander, 

U.S. Coast Guard, Supervisor, Shore Maintenance 

Detachment, in papers of the United States Coast 

Guard Shore Maintenance Detachment, Cleveland, Ohio, dated 25 April 1989.

144. Ibid.

145. Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

Wilmington, North Carolina, “Bodie Island Lighthouse, Dare County, North Carolina Inspection 

Report,” in papers of the United States Coast 

Guard Shore Maintenance Detachment, Civil Engineering Department, Cleveland, Ohio, dated July 

1989, cover, n.p.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 35

Figure 8 1989 USCOE photo showing cracked 

masonry in Oil Room interior chimney.

In the Oil House, the ceiling boards and wood 

molding next to the south chimney wall exhibited signs of water damage, likely caused by 

deteriorated chimney flashing or bricks. There 

were cracks and displaced bricks on the inside 

chimney walls that were probably caused by 

thermal expansion. The Corps recommended 

that the wood framing around the chimneys be 

checked for deterioration and replaced if warranted and that the chimneys be checked for 

soundness. They suggested that flashing 

around both chimneys be replaced, and, 

though the roof did not appear to be leaking, 

that roof replacement would likely become 

necessary within the next several years.

The report noted that the exterior masonry of 

the Tower appeared “in good condition,”146

including the stone foundation, and had been 

painted within the past three years (the stone 

foundation had not been painted). The Corps 

noted the vertical cracks on the interior masonry beginning at level five and ending just 

below level nine on the north and south sides 

of the Tower, the same cracks noted in previous reports. The cracks began or ended at 

intersections of the stair landing support 

beams and the wall. Corps engineers concluded that the cracks were caused by “a 

combination of the corrosion of the support 

beams and thermal expansion of the wall.”147

Additionally, several vertical cracks were 

noted near the windows on level nine, probably caused by the same factors. These cracks 

were not considered to compromise the integrity of the walls or stair landings.

The Corps reported that, in addition to some 

deterioration of the window frames, the windows in the Tower did not close properly and, 

therefore, water penetrated to the interior 

from the outside. The frames at level nine, 

which are part of the ornamental bracket and 

panel system below the gallery platform and 

serve as an anchoring system for the gallery 

platform brackets, were cracked and had “separated significantly at three of the four 

windows,”148 allowing water to leak down and 

behind the frames, corroding the frames, and 

deteriorating the masonry behind them. The 

cause of the cracked frames appeared to be 

differential thermal movement between the 

cast iron brackets and the masonry of the supporting wall.

The stairs and landings were found to be in 

generally good structural condition, though 

some corrosion on all units was noted as well

146. Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

1989, p. 2.

147. Ibid.

148. Ibid.
Chronology of Development & Use

36 National Park Service SERO

Figure 9 1989 USCOE photo showing deterioration of 

exterior edge of lantern gallery.

as corrosion on “the ends of the landing support beams embedded in the masonry wall and 

at the edge of each stair landing where the 

landing abuts the tower wall.”149 This corrosion was felt to be the result of “moisture 

entering through openings above the gallery 

level”150 and through “the poorly fitted tower 

windows”151 and condensate forming on the 

stairs and landings as a result of high humidity 

levels on the interior due to a lack of ventilation. The extent of the corrosion was not 

considered severe in 1989.

Beneath the gallery, the Corps noted that a 

complete inspection of the cast iron support 

system was not possible due to limited access 

to the underside of the gallery deck. An inspection of this portion of the Tower would 

require the construction of a scaffolding system. The Corps suggested that this be done in 

the near future in order to identify portions of 

the system that had deteriorated and to repair

Figure 10 1989 USCOE photo showing missing lantern 

deck prisms.

those portions that might fall, endangering visitors below. From visual observations of the 

support system from within the Tower, 

through the windows below the support system, it was noted that there were “cracks in the 

gallery belt course under the support brackets, 

missing sections of the support brackets, and 

corrosion damage to the brackets and gallery 

deck.”152 Additionally, the cast iron handrail 

and posts around the gallery had deteriorated 

from corrosion as much as 40 percent in some 

places. However, this was not felt to be a 

structural problem. The Corps reported that 

the gallery deck plates did not exhibit any 

cracks, displacement, or settlement, indicating 

that the support system below the plates was 

probably also sound, though they did not investigate it due to lack of access. The gallery 

wall plates, however, did show “significant” 

cracking, with some cracks running “the entire 

width of the plate section.”153 The Corps speculated that the cause of these cracks was

149. Ibid, p. 3.

150. Ibid.

151. Ibid.

152. Ibid.

153. Wilminton District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

1989, p. 3.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 37

Figure 11 1989 USCOE photo showing detached 

hinge on door to gallery.

probably corrosion on the back side of the 

plates and thermal expansion.

According to the report, the “ornamental iron 

work surrounding the exterior edge of the lantern gallery [showed] significant deterioration,” 

with “sections of the iron work ... missing or 

separated from the deck.”154 One result of the 

missing iron work was that birds were building 

nests in the vent accesses. The report noted 

that bars under the eave of the lantern roof, 

used to support a moveable ladder, were 

heavily corroded and one had become completely detached. However, the lantern balcony 

and interior deck were reported to be “in good 

structural condition, [with] no visible cracks or 

significant corrosion of the support system below the deck.”155 Leaking of the surrounding 

exterior lantern windows, caused by cracked 

glass and poor caulking, had caused slight corrosion of the top surface of the inner portion of 

the deck. Though not mentioned in the report, 

photographs accompanying it also show that 

some of the deck prisms, designed to allow 

light to penetrate below the lantern gallery level 

to the watch level, were missing. The roof of the 

lamp, though not inspected, was judged to be in 

good condition based on a lack of evidence to 

the contrary from the underside of it. 

The Watch Room doors leading from the 

Watch Room beneath the lantern gallery to the 

exterior gallery deck were considered to be in 

good condition, although the bottom hinge on 

the right side door had separated from the 

jamb.

Overall, the Bodie Island Tower and Oil House 

were found to be in generally good condition, 

with one area of concern being the cast iron 

support system of the gallery, which could not 

be inspected. The Corps estimated that the cost 

for the repairs suggested for the stabilization of 

the structure and prevention of further deterioration would be $18,600.156

Later in 1989, the Coast Guard performed its 

own inspection of the Bodie Island Lighthouse 

as part of its annual inspection program. The 

inspector’s report was much less detailed than 

that submitted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers earlier in the year. The main 

recommendation of his report was that the 

electrical wiring needed to be inspected and 

replaced as necessary.157 In August of 1990, J. A. 

154. Ibid, p. 4.

155. Ibid.

156. Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1989, p. 5.

157. Reed, M.L. (by direction), “Memo from Commander, Coast Guard Group Cape Hatteras to 

Commander, Shore Maintenance Detachment, 

Cleveland, in papers of the United States Coast 

Guard Shore Maintenance Detachment, Civil Engineering Unit, Cleveland, Ohio, dated 17 Jan 1990.
Chronology of Development & Use

38 National Park Service SERO

Chop, CWO2 of the United States Coast 

Guard, also made a trip to the Cape Hatteras 

Group for the purpose of inspecting the light 

stations under their care. He reported that the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse was equipped with 

non- standard emergency generator and 

transfer unit equipment and that the Oil Room, 

which housed an electric heater, lead acid batteries, diesel fuel, and the generator set, was 

not equipped with an automatic fire suppression system.158

The electrical work suggested in the 1989 inspection report was apparently completed in 

1992, as evidenced by a statement written and 

signed by one of the workmen, Edward J. 

Thacker, regarding the cause of damage to several of the stairs of the Tower.

“On 5 May 1992, I, Edward J. Thacker, was working on Bodie Island Lighthouse removing one 

inch conduit that was running from the top floor 

of the Light to the Emergency Generator Room 

located on the ground floor. I was on the 6th

staircase landing removing the conduit with a 

pipe wrench and a hacksaw when a section of 

conduit about 15 ft. long slipped away from me as 

I was unthreading it. This section of conduit had 

a 2” x 4” junction box on it that must have caught 

on to part of the staircase below me which 

directed it to the center of the staircase steps. The 

conduit then passed through one step on the 

staircase between the 2nd and 3rd landing. It then 

passed through two steps on the next staircase 

between the 1st and 2nd landing. Then it passed 

through one more step on the next staircase 

between the 1st landing and the ground floor. 

[signed] Edward J. Thacker [typed] Edward J. 

Thacker.159”

Regardless of the upgrades to the electrical service, it appears that, by 1992, wind, weather, 

and a certain amount of deferred maintenance 

had taken their toll of the Bodie Island Lighthouse. After the 1992 inspection, the inspector 

reported, “This light is in the worst shape out of 

any that I inspected on this trip.”160 The inspector expounded on his comment as follows:

“This brick lighthouse is in poor condition. The 

exterior needs to be tuckpointed and painted. 

Shifting in the foundation has caused major 

cracks that run from the fourth level to the top. 

Damaged and missing stairs and the poor condition of the flooring are liability concerns which 

should be addressed. The majority of the windows and doors have rotted and need to be 

replaced. The lantern and gallery levels are in 

extremely bad condition; work involves poor 

exterior servicing ladder, missing and deteriorated handrail sections, and the fascia band 

around the decking which has worked its way 

loose and has deteriorated.

Bodie Island is a brick lighthouse with a concrete 

and stone foundation. The granite around the 

base is chipped and spalled and is in overall good 

shape [sic]. The brick on the exterior is in good 

158. Chop, J. A., CWO2, USCG, in Trip Report in papers 

of the 5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 24 October 

1990.

159. “Biennial Lighthouse Inspection Report,” 1994.

160. “Bodie Island Light (LLNR 505) Report for Group 

Cape Hatteras, aNT, Kennebec,” in papers of 

Shore Maintenance Detachment, United States 

Coast Guard, Cleveland, Ohio, 1992.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 39

shape (visually) and only needs to be tuckpointed 

and a paint job. The interior view of the bricks 

shows major cracks that run along the interior 

from the 4th level up. This crack appears to be 

caused by some shifting of the foundation. The 

interior stairs are cracked at the same place in six 

locations. Recently, the Coast Guard had an accident and a piece of conduit fell and damaged 

about five steps including one which is totally 

missing. The marble flooring located in the entry 

level is in extremely poor condition and needs 

replacing/repair. All of the windows/doors have 

wooden casings which are rotted and need 

replacing. The interior of the light has paint spalling and the brick needs repointing and painting. 

The top portion of the tower is cast iron and is 

cracked in several places. It is in poor structural 

condition and needs major work. The ladder on 

the exterior of the gallery level to the exterior of 

the lens level is showing signs of member deterioration and it is scary to climb up it due to its 

location. The fascia band around the lens level 

decking has worked its way loose and is rusting 

badly. It needs to be replaced. The stanchions 

and handrails are all corroded and need 

replacement.”161

The inspector was sufficiently alarmed that he 

recommended immediate action regarding repairs to the Lighthouse, estimating that it 

would cost about $55,000.162

The deterioration of the Lighthouse appears to 

have been, in part, the result of misunderstanding between the United States Coast 

Guard and the National Park Service regarding 

responsibility for the maintenance of the structures. J.A. Chop, CWO2 of the United States 

Coast Guard, after his trip to the Cape Hatteras 

Group, reported that

“a significant problem ... is the confusion in 

maintenance responsibility. The Park Service 

allegedly holds the responsibility for all maintenance on the LT though this cannot be confirmed 

until the individual lease agreements are 

reviewed. Presently, some work is not being 

accomplished because one party (Park Service) 

thinks the other (Coast Guard) is responsible to 

do it. In addition, the procedure for one agency 

to submit work requests or report problems to 

another is not clear. Work is not done until major 

complications arise.”163

The Coast Guard must have taken at least some 

of the concerns of the inspector to heart. On 22 

October 1993, a request was made for a structural evaluation of the Bodie Island Lighthouse, 

stating that temporary repairs had been made 

to broken stair steps in order to continue servicing the light and referencing a VHS tape 

showing the interior deterioration.164 The request was also to make necessary repairs based 

on the structural evaluation. Unfortunately, the 

tape seems to have disappeared and was not 

available for viewing at the headquarters of the 

5th District United States Coast Guard at Portsmouth, Virginia, the Shore Maintenance 

161. Ibid.

162. Ibid.

163. Chop, J. A., CWO2, USCG, 1990.

164. Ransone, S.B., “Shore Maintenance Record, GB02-

94 for Discrict 05, USCG Group Cape Hatteras” in 

papers of the Shore Maintenance Detachment, 

Civil Engineering Unit, United States Coast Guard, 

Cleveland, Ohio. 
Chronology of Development & Use

40 National Park Service SERO

Figure 12 USCG close-up photograph of damage to 

stair treads, 1992.

Detachment, Civil Engineering Unit in Cleveland, Ohio, or the Cape Hatteras National 

Seashore headquarters at Manteo, North 

Carolina.

On 25 January 1994, Mr. Ward of the Civil Engineering Unit, Cleveland, and BM3 Barry of 

the Cape Hatteras Group, both of the United 

States Coast Guard, made another biennial inspection of the Bodie Island Lighthouse. The 

1994 report described a less grim picture of the 

structural condition of the Lighthouse, though 

it continued to need cosmetic attention and 

other repairs. The inspector reported that the 

structure was in good overall condition with no 

major structural deficiencies, including the 

granite block foundation, though some lime 

leaching of the mortar was observed. Except 

for the foundation, the exterior masonry exhibited minor cracking throughout, and larger 

Figure 13 USCG photograph of damage to stair 

treads, 1992.

cracks were observed through the upper four 

sections of the Tower, running in a longitudinal 

direction. The inspector recorded that the interior masonry near the top of the Tower 

showed signs of moisture intrusion, evidenced 

by deteriorated brick and joints and by severe 

corrosion on the adjacent metal surfaces. He 

noted that the stairs exhibited pitting and rust 

and that approximately eight stair treads had 

been damaged, though two, broken during the 

1992 electrical demolition, had been replaced 

with steel plates. The stairs also tended to be 

unstable during climbing due to a lack of lateral 

support. All metal surfaces throughout the 

structure exhibited rust as well as pitting and 

material loss in some places. Cracking of the 

exterior cast iron trim work around the perimeter of the lantern gallery reduced the 

allowable safe working load on the deck, and 

some of the exterior handrails had lost material 
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 41

due to the corrosive action of the weather. The 

coating system on the exterior iron surface at 

the Lantern and Watch Room levels was also 

beginning to exhibit signs of pitting and deterioration. Four of the lantern glass panes had 

cracked, and interior window channels showed 

signs of standing water. The plexi- glass glazing 

in six of the 48 window frames, probably those 

installed in 1988, had clouded significantly. The 

wood frames of the windows throughout the 

Tower and the main entrance doorframe had 

experienced considerable wood rot. Some of 

the asphalt roofing material on the Oil House 

had deteriorated. The interior plaster walls and 

ceiling in this building were cracked and broken in several locations, the cupola roof was 

badly corroded, and the fascia was cracked and 

pitted.165 The inspector also noted, perhaps in 

contrast, that the grounds surrounding the 

Lighthouse and the associated outbuildings 

were well maintained by the National Park 

Service.166

The inspector recommended that the Coast 

Guard repair the damage done by personnel 

performing the electrical work in 1992 and add 

lateral bracing to the stairs to stabilize them. In 

addition to this work, the inspector recommended replacing the broken, cracked, and 

clouded lantern glazing with Lexan, sealing all 

glazing to prevent water intrusion, and cleaning 

and painting all iron surfaces, both interior and 

exterior, in the Lantern Room. The inspector 

recommended notifying the National Park 

Service that cleaning and painting of the main 

access stairs and interior masonry repairs at the 

Watch Room level were required, as well as repair of the masonry cracks and spalling and 

exterior iron work at the Lantern Room gallery 

and cupola. Despite any repairs to the exterior 

iron work, the inspector recommended that 

personnel accessing the exterior Lantern 

Room gallery be limited to two.167

Probably in response to these recent reports of 

maintenance requirements at the Bodie Island 

Lighthouse, R. A. Koehler, Commander of the 

U. S. Coast Guard Civil Engineering Unit of the 

Shore Maintenance Detachment in Cleveland, 

Ohio, wrote to Dr. William S. Price, Director of 

the Division of Archives and History of the 

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, in August of 1995 regarding proposed 

refurbishment work at the Bodie Island Light 

Station. The Coast Guard proposed to repair 

the damaged interior cast- iron stair steps in 

place and in kind, paint all interior metal surfaces including stairs and handrails, paint all 

exterior metal surfaces, repair damaged window glazing and frames, and tuckpoint any 

cracked masonry.168 The Deputy State Historic 

Preservation Officer responded that the North 

Carolina Department of Cultural Resources 

concurred with the proposal of the United 

States Coast Guard regarding the refurbishment of the Bodie Island Lighthouse.169

165. “Biennial Lighthouse Inspection Report, 1994.” 

166. Ibid.

167. Ibid.

168. Koehler, R. A., Commander, U. S. Coast Guard in 

letter to William S. Price, Jr., Director of the Division of Archives and History, North Carolina 

Department of Cultural Resources, in papers of 

the 5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 15 August 

1995.
Chronology of Development & Use

42 National Park Service SERO

However, no repairs were undertaken until two 

years later.

On 11 September 1995, another Coast Guard inspection of the Bodie Island Lighthouse was 

made, and it was determined that “the current 

condition of the lighthouse is virtually unchanged since the 1994 inspection.”170 The 

inspector in this case also reported that the exterior paint was reaching the end of its useful 

life, having been applied eight years previously.171 The 1995 inspection report 

recommended that the painting of the Lighthouse be scheduled within the next three years, 

and noted that a project scheduled for FY96 

included minor tuckpointing, repair of the spiral staircase, window frames, and gallery 

metalwork but was part of a backlog of scheduled projects.172 The inspector suggested that 

the replacement of the cracked and clouded 

panes with Lexan, the resealing of the glazing 

and the cleaning and painting of the Lantern 

Room could be accomplished at the unit level, 

apparently without a submittal to the Civil Engineering Department.173 By October, the 

endorsement for the work cited for unit level 

accomplishment had been signed, with a notation to ensure that all damaged Lantern Room 

windows be replaced with safety glass. However, the proposed painting of the Lighthouse 

was not submitted while research was underway to determine when it should be 

accomplished.174

Writing in May of 1996 to the Commander of 

the Fifth Coast Guard District, the Commander 

of the Coast Guard Group Cape Hatteras 

stated

“Since the biennial inspections conducted [2 Oct 

1995 and 8 Jan 1996], conditions at ... Bodie 

Island Lighthouse (LLNR 590) continue to deteriorate at an increasing rate. The paint coatings in 

the lantern galler[y] ... have failed allowing corrosion to advance on the gallery framing. ... 

Additionally, structural deterioration at Bodie 

Island Light is making the light unsafe for personnel to maintain the light gallery and optics. 

Cracks in the brickwork beneath the light gallery 

have lengthened, weakening the I beam anchor 

points for the landing.

P/N C3278 RPR/PAINT BODIE ISLAND LIGHT 

... refer[s] to the structural repairs ... and require 

immediate attention to preserve the light structures and to allow personnel safe access to the 

light galleries to accomplish required maintenance. ... I strongly recommend that the repair 

projects process be hastened to minimize further 

structural damage ... as well as to prevent possi169. Brook, David, Deputy State Historic Preservation 

Officer, North Carolina Department of Cultural 

Resources in letter to R. A. Koehler, Commander, 

U. S. Coast Guard, Civil Engineering Unit in papers 

of the 5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 12 

September 1995.

170. “Biennial Lighthouse Inspection Report, Fifth District, Bodie Island Light, LLNR 590,” in the papers 

of the Civil Engineering Unit, Shore Maintenance 

Detachment, United States Coast Guard, Cleveland, Ohio, dated 1995.

171. Ibid.

172. Ibid.

173. Ibid.

174. Walters, J. R. (by direction), in “First Endorsement” from Commander, Fifth Coast Guard 

District to Commander, Coast Guard Group, Cape 

Hatteras in papers of the 5th Coast Guard District 

headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated 2 October 1995.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 43

ble personnel injury to maintenance 

personnel.”175

In July of 1996, a structural evaluation of the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse was conducted by Alden and Associates of Reading, Pennsylvania at 

the request of Cheryl Shelton- Roberts, President of the Outer Banks Lighthouse Society.176

The Outer Banks Lighthouse Society was 

formed in 1994 as a non- profit, citizen effort to 

aid in the preservation of the buildings and artifacts of the lighthouses in the area. A copy of 

the report may be found in the Appendix to this 

report. It is summarized as follows.

Alden and Associates, like the Corps of Engineers 

before them, made a visual inspection of the Oil 

House and Tower and reported on their findings. 

They did not engage in any removal of materials 

for testing, build scaffolding or employ any other 

means of exploring the condition of the Lighthouse that could not be accomplished without 

such aids. The inspection of the exterior of the 

Tower revealed stains and possible masonry 

deterioration on the south side in the uppermost 

and middle white bands and on the east side 

above and adjacent to the windows in the uppermost and middle white bands and in the upper 

black band. Additionally, at least one of the cast 

iron supports for the gallery was missing, though 

the cause was not determined. This is the first 

recorded instance of this condition. 

On the interior of the Tower, the circular castiron stairs, landings, platforms, structural supporting members, and railings were found to be 

severely rusted and corroded. The report speculated that the paint on the metal work appeared 

to be lead- based and had, in some places, been 

hand- sanded. The “[c]ondition of the stairs is 

deplorable and in some instances, dangerous.”177

Of the brick walls of the Tower, the report 

noted cracks from below the fourth landing 

through the seventh landing. These cracks are 

the same as those that were reported beginning 

in 1981. The report noted that “the further up 

you go, the more the brick walls [are] cracked 

and deteriorated. Water penetration has obviously been severe. Some repointing has been 

unsuccessfully done.”178 Alden and Associates 

postulated that the cracking was probably due 

to “severe windloading”179 and suggested that 

the structural integrity of the Tower could be 

in doubt. The report stated that “the greatest 

proliferation of cracks is in the vicinity of the 

Seventh Landing thus indicating that the 

greatest amount of lateral movement in the 

tower takes place around the Seventh Landing,”180 and also noted “some evidence of 

misalignment of the stairs with the brick 

walls”181 at the sixth landing.

The windows of the Tower were reported as 

being generally in need of maintenance, with 

gaps reported between some window sashes 

175. Letter from Commander, Coast Guard Group Cape 

Hatteras to Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District 

(oan), in papers of the Shore Maintenance 

Detachment, Civil Engineering Unit, United States 

Coast Guard, Cleveland, Ohio, dated May 1996.

176. Alden and Associates, 1996, cover.

177. Ibid, p. 6.

178. Ibid.

179. Ibid, p. 7.

180. Ibid.

181. Ibid.
Chronology of Development & Use

44 National Park Service SERO

and sills, inoperative hardware, and rotted 

wood components.

The report on the Tower was organized by levels. By the eighth level, the investigator was 

clearly disturbed by the condition of the Tower. 

Of the eighth landing, he observed,

“Extensive water penetration is very evident. 

Most of the paint has peeled off. Some bricks 

should be replaced. Some mortar is VERY bad. 

Some pointing has been done in this area some 

time in the past, but with minimal effort, it can be 

pulled out of the joints. This entire [area] should 

have deteriorated brick replaced, tuckpointing in 

depth should be done with an expanding type of 

specially blended and formulated tuckpointing 

mortar.”182

The investigator’s comment about the Watch 

Room and interior gallery was that the “entire 

area is in deplorable condition.”183 The description of this area indicated severe rust and 

corrosion on all ferrous metal parts, including 

the lens and lantern gallery supports as well as 

the stairs and railings. The attachment of some 

of the electrical conduits to plywood mounted 

on steel framing, in violation of the National 

Electrical Code, was noted, as was a missing 

cover from a condulet box that left wiring exposed. The investigator also noted the missing 

glass prisms from the overhead walkway.

In reviewing the condition of the lantern level, 

the report noted that the tube through the 

mantel at the top of the lens, which was originally used to vent smoke and gasses from 

burning oil, was stuffed with paper towels and 

rags and that the metal was rusting. This condition of rusting was evident on all metal parts of 

the lantern room and interior and exterior galleries. In addition, it was noted that some of the 

metal hardware for operating the vent windows 

was missing, and some of the glass panes of the 

windows were broken.

The report explored the ventilation of masonry 

construction lighthouses in the United States, 

noting that the ventilation originally provided 

to the Bodie Island Lighthouse had, over the 

intervening years, been closed, a fact that was a 

cause of the high humidity levels inside the 

tower, which, in turn contributed to the deterioration of the components and the surface 

treatments.

In reference to the Oil House, the report noted 

“some type of cementitious coating applied 

over the brick walls”184 which appeared to be 

in need of repair. Additionally, the investigators speculated that lead paint covered the 

wood surfaces. “Rusted anchors were noted at 

several roof structure support members” of the 

roof, and “the structural integrity of these anchors is questionable.”185 It was inferred from 

water stains that the roof sheathing of the Oil 

House had rotted in some places. At the transition between the wood ceilings and the 

underside of the brick arch to the light tower, 

staining indicates evidence of a “water leak 

probably occurring at the roof flashing where 

182. Alden and Associates, 1996, p. 2.

183. Ibid, p. 8.

184. Ibid.

185. Ibid, p. 4.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 45

the [Oil House] roof meets the Tower wall.”186

It is evident from the report of Alden and Associates that the Coast Guard had done very 

little to rectify the problems outlined in the 

1989 report. It seems that there was still a lack 

of agreement between the Coast Guard and the 

National Park Service regarding which entity 

was responsible for the maintenance of the 

Lighthouse.

In a 1996 fax to Cheryl Shelton- Roberts of the 

Outer Banks Lighthouse Society, Lieutenant 

Edward Westfall, Fifth Coast Guard District 

Lighthouse Program Manager, indicated that a 

“more detailed architectural/engineering 

study” was needed for the Bodie Island Light 

and that such a study would be contracted before October 1, 1996.187 Whether he was aware 

at the time of the study done by Alden and Associates is unclear. The fax includes, at the 

bottom, handwritten notations regarding responsibility for repairs and timetables, and a 

note within the body of the fax stating that 

Lieutenant Westfall was “confident that OBLS 

and the CG can negotiate a license or outlease 

that allows the OBLS to do some things at the 

site.... [T]he CG position is that we want to develop creative flexible agreements that work 

with any organization willing to shoulder some 

of the responsibility for these lights.”188

However, the Coast Guard may have been 

made aware of the possibility of lead paint in 

the structure. Later in the year, Frederic R. 

Harris conducted a visual inspection of the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse while collecting paint 

samples for lead paint analysis. Laboratory 

analysis of the paint samples indicated that the 

coatings of Bodie Island “substantially exceed 

regulatory levels” for lead.189 A copy of the 

Bodie Island portions of that report (it was 

combined with a report on the Reedy Island 

Lighthouse) is included in the Appendix of this 

report.

Specifications were issued for the painting of 

the Bodie Island Lighthouse in March of 

1997,190 and it was subsequently repaired and 

repainted at a cost of $148,623.191 Additional 

items in the specifications were for the replacement of five of the wooden windows in the 

Tower and four at the Watch Room level, repointing of the interior brickwork at the Watch 

Room and gallery levels, replacement of 15 of 

the 48 Lantern Room windows and resealing 

all 48 Lantern Room windows, fabrication and 

installation of four steel covers for the damaged 

stair treads on the spiral staircase, repair of the 

cast iron cracks on the exterior of the gallery 

level wall, gallery level catwalk, and lantern 

level catwalk, and sealing of approximately 150 

186. Alden and Associates, 1996, p. 5.

187. Westfall, 1996.

188. Ibid.

189. White, B. S., Memo from Commanding Officer, 

Coast Guard Civil Engineering Unit Cleveland to 

Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District (oan), in 

papers of the Civil Engineering Unit, Shore Maintenance Detachment, United States Coast Guard, 

Cleveland, Ohio, dated 10 Oct 1996.

190. “Specifications to Repair/Paint Bodie Island Light, 

Outer Banks, North Carolina,” in the papers of the 

5th United States Coast Guard District headquarters, Portsmouth, Virginia, dated March 1997.

191. “Biennial Lighthouse Inspection Report, Fifth District, Bodie Island Light, LLNR 590,” noted 

“Information current as of 10/1/97 in papers of the 

Civil Engineering Unit, Shore Maintenance 

Detachment, United States Coast Guard, Cleveland, Ohio, 1997.
Chronology of Development & Use

46 National Park Service SERO

Figure 14 Existing repairs to stair treads.

linear feet of masonry cracks in the lighthouse.192 Additive bid items in the 

specifications called for surface preparation 

and painting of the spiral staircase and landings 

up to, but not including, the Watch Room level. 

The 2002 inspection of the Lighthouse by personnel from Hartrampf, Inc. and the Office of 

Jack Pyburn, Incorporated noted a fairly recent 

painting of the staircase and landings, as well as 

metal plates installed in place of the damaged 

stair treads. It should be noted that these metal 

plates do not meet the criteria for “repairing in 

kind” suggested in the 1995 letter of R. A. 

Kohler to Dr. William Price.193 Additionally, 

the paint scheme appears to have been 

changed from that in the specifications, which 

called for following the existing paint scheme. 

The stairs, painted gray or brown at the time, 

according to the 2002 paint analysis,194 were 

painted black.

In mid 1997, the biennial inspection of the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse was conducted, and a 

one- page report issued on the status of the 

Lighthouse stated that a survey (that done by 

Frederic R. Harris) showed that there was 

lead- based paint on both the interior and exterior of the Tower. The report noted that an 

asbestos survey had not been completed, but 

that it was unlikely that any asbestos- containing material (ACM) was present. (However, see 

Electrical Evaluation of this report for further 

information regarding ACM in the buildings.) 

The report also stated that the original firstorder Fresnel lens was still in service. According to the report, the Lighthouse was likely to 

continue to be needed by the Coast Guard until 

2010, though it was in the process of being 

transferred to the National Park Service. In addition, the Outer Banks Lighthouse Society had 

received a limited license for cleaning and ventilating the interior of the Lighthouse. 195

Another report on the condition of the Bodie 

Island Lighthouse was generated in 1997. It was 

based on an inspection by Cullen Chambers, of 

the Tybee Island Historical Society, sponsored 

by the Outer Banks Lighthouse Society. 

Though prefaced by a disclaimer that all observations should be verified by a registered 

Structural Engineer, the report is thorough in 

its scope and detailed in its recommendations. 

192. “Specifications to Repair/Paint Bodie Island Light, 

Outer Banks, North Carolina,” 1997.

193. Kohler, 1995.

194. National Park Service “Historic Paint Finishes 

Study, Bodie Island Lighthouse and Oil House,” 

2002, pp. 23, 26.

195. Ibid.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 47

A copy of the report can be found in the Appendix of this report.

In general, Chambers concurred with the findings of Alden and Associates, expanding on the 

details. Of greatest concern was the deterioration of the metal parts, particularly those of the 

deck supporting the lantern and the surrounding galleries and ornamental ironwork. The 

report was replete with warnings regarding the 

possibility of falling metal parts. At the canopy 

above the lantern, the report warns that rust 

has “caused the soffits to expand away from 

[the] canopy. Loss of fabric and structural integrity has resulted in sections of pipe rail 

separating from rail brackets and hanging 

[loose].”196 This condition was first noted in 

1989 by the Corps of Engineers. Of the lantern 

gallery deck, it said, “Two deck sections nearest 

ladder has [sic] structural cracks which could 

result in sections of deck falling from lantern.”197 The bolts of the 16 sections of the 

cornice that were bolted to the deck had lost 

integrity, and there were “wide gaps between 

[the] cornice and [the] gallery deck. Several 

sections have large pieces...cracked or missing,”198 and stress and expansion fractures 

were widespread. The bracket and belt plate 

cornice was experiencing many stress and expansion fractures and some loss of structural 

integrity; indeed, “[s]everal large pieces have 

already fallen.”199 The lantern deck cornice 

and vent system produced even more startling 

findings of deterioration:

[The] “entire system located just below the lantern room gallery has widespread stress and 

expansion fractures and massive loss of historic 

fabric with resultant falling debris. ...Cornice 

could fall in [sic] mass in one or more six pound 

sections. Condition also allows excessive moisture behind Cast Iron plate watch roof walls 

along Gallery walk. Six panels have extensive 

stress and expansion cracks [sic] any further radical movement could produce large sections of 

falling debris.”200

An interesting feature of this report is the detailed assembly information given for the 

support system of the gallery deck. This information is not found in any previous assessment 

of the Lighthouse structure. In describing the 

condition of the support system, Chambers 

states:

“The sixteen huge support brackets were built 

into the brick wall and connected to internal cast 

iron framing. They were designed to carry the 

load of the gallery walk deck but to be part of the 

safety rail system on the gallery walk as well. 

...[T]he safety rail post fed through the gallery 

deck plates, into the support bracket box and was 

screwed into the huge decorative nut which forms 

the end point of the bracket. Over the course of 

time moisture has dissolved the rod which is 

within the box, especially at the connecting nut. 

Not only is the rail system dependent on the 

threaded post but the 50 pound decorative nut is 

196. Chambers, Cullen, in letter to the Outer Banks 

Lighthouse Society summarizing his findings in his 

report, in papers of the Cape Hatteras National 

Seashore headquarters, Manteo, North Carolina, 

dated 17 March 1997, n.p.

197. Ibid.

198. Ibid.

199. Ibid.

200. Ibid.
Chronology of Development & Use

48 National Park Service SERO

also dependent on the threaded post. One nut on 

the north west side of the tower has already failed 

and fell [sic] to the ground. Large sections of the 

hollow decorative box walls have also cracked 

and fallen from the bracket....

Between each support bracket there are cast iron 

spanning plates weighing approx [sic] 80 Lbs. 

These plates are connected by six bolts to the 

inner edges of the support brackets along the 

masonry wall. Moisture trapped between the 

wall and spanning plates has caused the bolts to 

fail and numerous and widespread cracks to 

occur throughout many of the plates. The end 

result could be large sections of cast iron weighing several pounds to fall from the plates.”201

These alarming predictions caused the National Park Service, heeding the 

recommendations of Mr. Chambers, to cordon 

off the area around the Lighthouse to protect 

the viewing public from falling debris. Later, a 

sturdy wooden fence was built around this 

area.

In addition to his safety concerns, Chambers 

made an extensive report on the condition of 

the other components of the Tower and Oil 

House and detailed recommendations for their 

preservation, repair, or replacement. His inspection and recommendations regarding 

architectural features went far beyond the 

structural engineering inspection performed by 

Alden and Associates. Mr. Chambers estimated 

that the repairs he recommended would be at a 

cost of about $635,000, but noted that his estimate was based on the cost of repairs 

performed at the St. Augustine Lighthouse and 

that the metal work at Bodie Island “represents 

some of the worst [conditions] that I have 

found in either the Key West; St. Augustine; or 

Currituck Lights and will require extensive and 

expensive repair and / or replacement,”202 and 

that “[t]he conditions at Bodie represent a far 

greater level of deterioration to the metal work 

and a greater logistics problem due to the 

location.”203

Three years after Chambers’ report was generated, no significant remediation having taken 

place at the Bodie Island Lighthouse, the Outer 

Banks Lighthouse Society contracted with another firm, the International Chimney 

Corporation of Buffalo, New York, for another 

structural review of the Tower. This corporation was then working on restoration of the 

Currituck Beach and St. Augustine Lighthouses, and had previous experience in the 

restoration of the Tybee Island and Cape Hatteras Lighthouses.204 A copy of that report is 

included in the Appendix of this report and 

summarized as follows.

201. Chambers, Cullen, in letter to the Outer Banks 

Lighthouse Society summarizing his findings in his 

report, in papers of the Cape Hatteras National 

Seashore headquarters, Manteo, North Carolina, 

dated 17 March 1997, n.p.

202. Chambers, Cullen, “Bodie Island Lighthouse, 

Bodie Island North Carolina – Selected Existent 

Conditions and Recommendations,” in papers of 

the Cape Hatteras National Seashore headquarters, Manteo, North Carolina, n.d., Section II, p. 32.

203. Chambers, n.d. Section II, p. 33.

204. International Chimney Corporation report on 

Bodie Island Lighthouse, no title, in papers of the 

Cape Hatteras National Seashore headquarters, 

Manteo, North Carolina, dated 30 March 2000, 

cover page. 
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 49

The shortest of the reports contracted by the 

Outer Banks Lighthouse Society, it focuses on 

concerns regarding the safety of the public if 

allowed to ascend to the top of the Tower. 

Noting that replacement of any of the damaged 

stair treads will be difficult as they are “structurally integrated such that no one (1) step can 

be removed for replacement without endangering the remainder of the system,”205 the 

report also iterated previous warnings that, 

because the staircase was designed only to 

support one or two people at a time, the load of 

20 or 30 people gathered on one section of the 

stairway might “translate to sway and eventual 

failure”206 of the stair system. Additionally, 

though not couched in the extreme language 

used by Cullen Chambers, the report confirmed the loss of structural integrity that his 

report noted on the metal support system of 

the lantern and gallery levels. This report also 

contains an enlightening discussion of the assembly of the lantern curtain wall and the roof 

above and the reasons for deterioration in 

these areas. In addition to the structural concerns, the report made some observations and 

recommendations for repair of other portions 

of the Tower and Oil House, all of which had 

been made previously in other reports. The report also suggested that the Fresnel lens was 

showing signs of age, specifically in the cracking of the white lead putty holding the sections 

of the prisms together, but that the United 

States Coast Guard, with specialists in this type 

of work, should be contacted for repairs to this 

feature. The International Chimney Corporation estimated that stabilization measures to 

allow the interior of the facility to be safely 

open to the public would cost about $900,000 

with an additional cost of $400,000 to 

$500,000 for total restoration.

Four months after this report was returned to 

the Outer Banks Lighthouse Society, on the 

13th of July, 2000, the Bodie Island Lighthouse 

was officially transferred from the United 

States Coast Guard into the care of the National Park Service.

205. International Chimney Corporation report on 

Bodie Island Lighthouse, no title, in papers of the 

Cape Hatteras National Seashore headquarters, 

Manteo, North Carolina, dated 30 March 2000, 

n.p.

206. International Chimney Corporation report on 

Bodie Island Lighthouse, no title, in papers of the 

Cape Hatteras National Seashore headquarters, 

Manteo, North Carolina, dated 30 March 2000, 

n.p.

Bodie Island Light Station Timeline

1848 Completion of the first Bodie Island Lighthouse.

1859 Completion of the second Bodie Island Lighthouse. First Lighthouse 

subsequently razed.

April, 1861 Start of the Civil War. Confederates occupy Bodie Island Lighthouse.

November, 1861 Confederates abandon Bodie Island Lighthouse to the Federals but blow 

it up, after removing the light, to prevent the Federals from using it.
Chronology of Development & Use

50 National Park Service SERO

June 13, 1871 Government purchases land from John B. Etheridge and his wife for the 

location of a new Bodie Island Lighthouse.

October 1, 1872 Light of third Bodie Island Lighthouse first exhibited. Original oil source 

was lard oil

October, 1872 William F. Hatsel employed as first Keeper of the Bodie Island Light.

October 29, 1872 Flock of geese collides with, and damages, the light, causing a protective 

screen around the glass enclosure to be installed.

July, 1878 Keeper Hatsel transferred; Peter G. Gallop becomes Keeper of the Bodie 

Island Light.

1883 The Lighthouse Board substitutes mineral oil (kerosene) as the fuel 

source for the light.

1884 Regular mineral oil lamps installed in the light. New lightning protection 

installed.

1898 Telephone service installed.

1906 Ephraim Meekins, Jr. replaces Peter G. Gallop as Keeper of the Bodie 

Island Light.

1912 Light upgraded to vapor oil lamp.

1919 Lloyd Vernon Gaskill replaces Ephraim Meekins, Jr. as Keeper of the 

Bodie Island Light.

September 19, 1932 Lighting apparatus converted to electricity. Generator installed in former 

Oil Room of the Oil House. Light converted from a fixed to a flashing 

light. Candlepower jumps to 160,000.

1934 Tower scraped and painted.

1937 Cape Hatteras National Seashore established.

1939 United States Coast Guard assumes control of lighthouses.

May 1940 L. V. Gaskill, last Lightkeeper at Bodie Island Light Station, transferred to 

Coinjock Buoy Tending Depot. Bodie Island Light Station becomes an 

unmanned light.

1941 Candlepower reduced from 160,000 to 13,000.

1945 Size of Bodie Island Light Station site increased from 15 acres to a little 

over 56 acres.

1953 Tower cleaned and painted. 

October 9, 1953 Electrical source converted from generator to commercial power. Existing generator used for emergency power only.

Bodie Island Light Station Timeline
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 51

October 15, 1953 Bodie Island Light Station property (56.37 acres) declared surplus and 

transferred to the care of the National Park Service, except for the small, 

square plot of land, 100’ on a side, on which the Lighthouse stands.

1959 Tower and Oil House painted.

1963 Candlepower increased to 80,000. Tower and Oil House painted.

February 1964 Gallery railings replaced and painted.

May 1969 Timing device controlling the light replaced with a photo- electric cell.

October 1976 Coast Guard replaces termite- ridden flooring on the Work Room side of 

the Oil House.

1978 Tower and Oil House painted.

September 1981 Obsolete emergency generator replaced.

May 1983 National Park Service begins to present historical programs inside the Oil 

House and to permit visitors to enter the lowest level of the Tower to peer 

upward toward the light deck.

May 1984 8’ high chain link security fence preventing access to the Tower by the 

general public installed by the U.S. Coast Guard.

June 1985 Light converted to solid state.

July 1986 Oil House treated for termites, and termite damage repaired in ceilings, 

door frames, and window frames.

1987 – Lighthouse painted.

August 7, 1988 The National Park Service and the United States Coast Guard jointly 

commemorate the establishment of the Lighthouse Service by escorting 

visitors to the top of the Lighthouse.

July 1989 Structural evaluation of the Lighthouse prepared by the U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers.

1992 Upgrade of electrical service completed. Spiral staircase treads damaged 

by workman pulling cable.

1994 Outer Banks Lighthouse Society established.

July 1996 Structural evaluation of the Lighthouse prepared by Alden and Associates; paint analysis and visual inspection prepared by Frederic R. Harris, 

Inc.

Bodie Island Light Station Timeline
Chronology of Development & Use

52 National Park Service SERO

1997 Tower and Oil House repaired and repainted by the United States Coast 

Guard at a cost of $148,623.00. Inspection report issued by Cullen Chambers of the Tybee Island Lighthouse Society at the request of the Outer 

Banks Lighthouse Society.

March 2000 International Chimney Corporation issued a report on the condition of 

the Tower and Oil House and recommendations for the repair and preservation of the structures, as well as upgrades to make the Lighthouse safe 

for visitors to climb to the top. 

July 13, 2000 Bodie Island Lighthouse officially transferred to the care of the National 

Park Service.

Bodie Island Light Station Timeline
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 53

Physical 

Description

Summary of Historic Character

Overall, the Bodie Island Lighthouse is substantially intact as 

originally built and is in generally sound condition, with some exceptions, from an architectural standpoint.

There are three primary elements of the historic structure: the Oil 

House, consisting of three rooms (including a hall), the connecting hall between the Oil House and the Tower, and the Tower. All 

sections of the structure were constructed at the same time. The 

project was conceived in 1869, with construction beginning in 1871. 

The light was presented October 1, 1872. The date carved into the 

head of the front door is 1871 (per the 1871 construction drawings). 

While the structure has seen a number of modifications over time, 

the vast majority of the original structure is extant. Both the Tower 

and Oil House have load- bearing, masonry wall systems. The Oil 

House has a wood floor system in the north area and stone on fill 

in the hall and, likely, in the south room, the Oil Room. The roof 

structure of the Oil House is wood frame. The stairs, landings, and 

upper rooms of the Tower are cast iron. Because they are interior 

features, they have been protected from the elements and, overall, 

are in good condition. Only the stairs show signs of notable deterioration. The exterior finish of the Tower and Oil House is
Physical Description

54 National Park Service SERO

Figure 15 Historic plan of ground floor.

painted brick. The upper exterior of the Tower 

is cast iron. The exterior cast iron on the Tower 

is exhibiting considerable deterioration. The 

Oil House is painted white, and the Tower is 

painted alternating black and white stripes 

consistent with the original exterior markings. 

The interior walls of both the Tower and Oil 

House are painted white, though some of the 

finishes are not original. The interior cast iron 

is painted black, not the original colors, which 

varied throughout the Tower. There is evidence 

in the 2000 Historic Paint Finish Study, prepared by the Building Conservation Branch of 

the Northeast Cultural Resources Center of the 

National Park Service, that graining was used 

on some of the interior woodwork of the Oil 

House. In particular, the interior door to the 

north room of the Oil House (OH/D2) was 

identified to have graining. The paint analysis 

indicates that the presence of graining dates to 

the 1872 period of the buildng.

Associated Site Features

• Fence: The four- railed fence is of recent 

vintage, constructed by the National Park 

Service for safety. The fence is not a contributing feature of the site or structure. It 

appears in sound condition.

• Walk: The walk between the Double Keepers’ Quarters (DKQ) and the Oil House 

may be a contributing site feature based on 

information provided by the site staff. It 

was stated that the brick walk that connects 

the Double Keepers’ Quarters to the Oil 

House was laid with brick left over from 

the original Tower construction. This 

understanding should be confirmed by 

testing as the existing brick appears to be in 

very good condition, in fact, much better 

condition than the brick on the Oil House 

and Tower, suggesting the existing brick in 

the walk might be of more recent vintage. 

Additionally, according to Holland, the 

“vast quantity of bricks” left over from the 

building of the Bodie Island Light Station 

were proposed by the Engineer to be used 

to build the Keepers’ Quarters at Cape 

Lookout.207 However, early plat drawings 

(1890) appear to corroborate the information provided by site personnel by noting 

the walk between the Double Keepers’ 

207. Holland, p. 42.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 55

Quarters and the Oil House to be brick. 

There is an absence of any maintenance 

information from the Coast Guard or the 

National Park Service indicating that the 

brick walk was ever replaced, and information from John Gaskill, son of the last 

Keeper at Bodie Island (1919- 1940), indicated that the walk had never been 

replaced as far as he could recall. 

• Double Keepers’ Quarters (DKQ): The 

Double Keepers’ Quarters was rehabilitated by the National Park Service in 1992 

and has been converted to a Visitor Center 

with interpretation, exhibits, and a bookstore on the first floor and staff office and 

work space on the second floor. This 

structure is contributing to the site and 

appears, overall, in sound condition based 

on cursory observations only.

• Brick Cisterns adjacent to the Double 

Keeper’s Quarters: North and south of and 

adjacent to the Double Keepers’ Quarters 

are early brick cisterns of historical significance, two on either side. These features 

are presently covered with concrete slabs.

• Support Buildings: There are several support buildings on the site: a restroom 

building (built by the National Park Service) and an historic storage building. 

Exterior Materials Finishes and 

Characteristics

A paint analysis was performed by the National 

Park Service in 2002. It is this analysis that is 

referenced in discussing the following.

Figure 16 Stair configuration.

OIL HOUSE

Structural System: The Oil House structure 

consists of the following components:

• Foundation: The foundation of the Oil 

House was not accessible. However, based 

on the 1871 construction drawings and 

given the substantial consistency between 

the drawings and the majority of the structure, it is reasonable to expect that the 

foundation is substantially consistent with 

the drawings. The foundation appears in 

the drawings to extend to a depth equal to 

the widest part of the Tower footing. Several cracks were observed in the masonry 

walls on the north and south side of the 

building. All cracks were patched at some 

unknown date and appear dormant. The 

wall cracks were generally at typical stress 

points originating in upper corners of windows. While there could be some relationship to structural movement, the cracks are 

likely a result of early differential settling 

that is no longer active. It appears that the 

structure is stable at this time, including the 

foundation of the Oil House.
Physical Description

56 National Park Service SERO

• Walls: The walls are load- bearing masonry. 

As noted in the foundation observations, 

the walls appear to be sound and stable. 

While there is evidence of cracks in the 

masonry walls on the north and south elevations of the Oil House, the cracks appear 

dormant and have all been patched. The 

primary concern with the walls is the 

underlying condition of the brick. Though 

apparently structurally sound, the existing 

bricks, covered with numerous layers of 

paint, appear to exhibit a significant 

amount of spalling. Given the frequent 

exposure to moisture and the potential for 

moisture to be trapped behind the paint in 

the brick due to rising damp, it is logical 

that the brick could have experienced 

some damage over time. See the Ultimate 

Treatment and Use portion of this report 

for treatment recommendations.

• Floor Structure: The floor framing in the 

Oil House is not accessible. No access to 

the crawl space was provided in the original design, and none has been created 

since. Therefore, the comments made in 

this section are based on field observations 

of secondary conditions and correlating 

those observations with the original plans 

for the structure. There is a curiosity about 

the floor framing in the hallway (OH/100) 

and Oil Room (OH/102) of the Oil House. 

The original plans indicate the Oil House 

floor framing to be 3”x 12” beams spanning 

north/south in all three rooms. The plans 

indicate the placement of a crawl space 

vent on the south wall of the building, 

under Room OH/102. Further, the plans 

indicate the floor framing in the hall (OH/

100) and Oil Room (OH/102) were 3” below 

the framing in the Work Room (OH/101), 

where the flooring is wood. This original 

depressed- floor framing layout appears 

appropriate to accommodate marble tile in 

the hall (OH/100) and the Oil Room (OH/

102) over wood framing. Given a 1” thick 

marble tile as was observed in the lower 

level of the Tower, 3” remain for a mortar 

bed in the Hall (OH/100) and Oil Room 

(OH/102). A 1” dimension between the top 

of the floor joist and the desired finished 

floor was provided in the Work Room 

(OH/101) to accommodate wood flooring. 

This seems logical. The three observations 

that raise questions about the actual floor 

framing in rooms OH/100 and OH/102 are:

• There are no crawl space vents in the south 

elevation or south half of the east elevation, 

but there are two vents in the north elevation and one in the north side of the east 

elevation. There are no vents in the west 

elevation. The absence of crawl space vents 

on the south side of the building raises a 

question whether the decision was made 

during construction to put all marble 

flooring on fill. 

• The original drawings indicate that the 

marble tile flooring in the hallway connection between the Oil House and the Tower 

and the marble flooring on the first level of 

the Tower are set on fill. This establishes a 

precedent on site for this approach.

• When the power source for the beacon was 

changed from oil to electricity, a generator 

was installed in the Oil Room (OH/102). At 
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 57

that time, what appear to be two slabs of a 

cementitious material, presumably concrete, were installed in the room as mounts 

for power generating equipment. It seems 

unusual, but not out of the question, that 

the support for a motor mount would be 

concrete or grout on wood framing. It 

would be more appropriate for fill or a pier 

to support the generator. According to several reports, the flooring in the Work Room 

(OH/101) was partly replaced in 1976 due to 

termite damage. Termite damage was never 

reported in the Oil Room floor. The condition of the flooring and framing in the 

entire Oil House appears to be quite sound. 

The marble tiles do not appear to have 

been cracked or offset due to sagging or 

settling. The floor structure under the hall 

(OH/100) and the Oil Room (OH/102) 

could be further explored by removing a 

piece of the floor tile and grout in one or 

both of these rooms to determine the support. However, physical evidence indicates 

that it is probably fill rather than wood 

framing.

Another concern, particularly given the lack of 

access to the crawl space under the Oil House, 

is the fact that the site has flooded numerous 

times over the 130 years the Oil House has been 

in place. It is likely that the framing has been 

exposed to high humidity, if not water, creating 

the conditions for mildew, mold, and rot. 

However, the floor does not appear to be failing. If it becomes necessary in the future to 

replace the flooring of the Oil House, the wood 

floor framing beneath should be inspected, 

fully documented, and rotted members 

replaced. 

• Roof Framing: No access was provided to 

the attic area of the Oil House in the original design, and no access has been created 

since. Unlike the floor framing, the roof 

framing is much less likely to have been 

subjected to direct water from below; 

however, water infiltration from above is a 

factor in the condition of the roof framing. 

The wood tongue- and- groove ceiling in 

the northwest corner of the Oil Room 

(OH/102) is rotted, indicating a significant 

leak in recent history. Overall, however, the 

wood ceilings in the Oil House are in good 

condition, suggesting that the roof framing 

is in reasonable condition as well.

West Elevation: The west elevation of the Oil 

House is the front elevation. It has a Stick 

styled, cantilevered, gabled roof supported by 

three brackets over the front stoop. The front 

stoop is four risers above grade. From the 

stoop landing, there is one additional riser to 

the threshold of the front door. See sketch of 

the lower level stair configuration. Flanking the 

front door is a pavilion- like projection of brick 

about 10” off the prevailing plane of the front 

wall. On the same elevation as the floor is a water table of cut stone. This band is presently 

painted white; however, the paint analysis indicates this feature of the Oil House was not 

painted until recent times, but was probably 

first painted in the last 20 years, certainly before the last painting in 1997. Below the water 

table course of stone is an inset plane of brick 

producing the appearance of a building base.
Physical Description

58 National Park Service SERO

Figure 17 Original drawing of front door details.

This area, too, is painted white. The paint analysis indicated that this portion of the west 

elevation was historically painted white but 

with a clear glaze coating, presumably to give an 

added level of moisture protection to the brick. 

An 1893 photograph shows this paint scheme. 

A late 1920s photograph shows the band to be 

dark, probably black.

The brick wall above the water table, including 

the brick pilasters or pavilion- like detailing, is 

painted white to match the white banding on 

the Lighthouse behind and seen from the west. 

One earlier application of paint on the building 

is textured. According to Peggy Albee, of the 

National Park Service, the Coast Guard experimented with paints in attempts to find 

solutions that would provide better, more durable coverage in the harsh environments 

typical of most lighthouse locations. The textured materials in the paint on the Bodie Island 

Oil House are tiny, transparent sheets, thinner 

than mica, that, when they clump together in 

the paint, present the appearance of a sand 

painted finish.208 It is unknown whether these 

materials are naturally occurring or synthetic. 

Based on the location of the layer, the paint 

containing this material was probably applied 

in the 1960s.

The front- cantilevered roof over the front 

stoop is wood construction and appears in 

sound condition with limited probing. As previously stated, this pedimented door hood is in 

a Stick style and is consistent with the original 

plans in detailing, materials, and dimensions. 

This feature is painted white as it was historically, according to the paint analysis.

The front steps are unpainted granite but the 

cheek walls on either side of the steps, including the low railing- like walls on either side of 

the upper stoop landing, are masonry and 

painted white. Paint analysis was not performed on this portion of the Oil House, so it is 

difficult to say when painting of these features 

began.

The existing front door is not original. The 

door originally was a single paneled door with 

diagonal infill within the stiles and rails (shown 

on the left of the adjacent graphic). A door such 

as this can be found on the front door of the 

Currituck Beach Lighthouse, the sister structure to the Bodie Island Lighthouse, built in 

208. Albee, Peggy, Northeast Building Conservation 

Branch, National Park Service, to Jack Pyburn, email dated 28 May 2002.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 59

1875. Over the front door is a 3/3 transom light, 

intact. This window appears to be original by 

the profiles of its muntins and frame. The transom is in fair condition, certainly well within 

restorable condition. The head of the door 

opening is a cut stone arched head with the inscription 1871, per 1871 construction drawings. 

The stone head of the front door remains unpainted with its original finish. Some overpainting of white was observed on the stonework from the most recent painting application 

in 1997.

North Elevation: The main wall of the north 

elevation is brick painted with the same paint 

characteristics as the west wall, white with a 

clear glaze coating. The north elevation contains two windows, two crawl space vents (3”x 

9”, without a vermin or insect cover), a water 

table, and the inset brick base below the water 

table as described in the west elevation. Two 4/

6 double hung windows are positioned at approximately quarter points in the wall and 

flanked by Stick- style brackets at the center 

and outside corners of the gabled elevation. 

The westernmost bracket shows substantial 

deterioration in the lower portion of the vertical member. A sheet metal cover evidences 

attempts at remedial improvement over the deteriorated area.

Overall, the north elevation is in sound condition. However, there are signs of past stress in 

the cracks over the west window in the elevation. This crack has been patched and painted, 

is sealed, and appears to be inactive.

Figure 18 Drawing detail of north elevation.

A chimney is located on the center of the elevation and inset into the building so that the 

chimney is not expressed in the outside wall. 

The design of the chimney includes a granite 

cap and granite detail six bricks below the twin 

openings on the north and south sides and single openings on the east and west sides of the 

chimney. The chimney appears in good 

condition.

South Elevation: The south elevation is a mirror of the north elevation in composition. Like 

the north elevation, the south elevation exhibits 

a dormant and repaired crack from the west 

corner of the east window downward and to 

the east. In addition, there appear to be several 

patches in the elevation that have repaired 

brick damage, likely spalling. One patch is over 

the head of the east window, and one is at the 

east side and below the sill of the west window. 

Evidence of spalled brick can be seen on the 

lower east corner of the elevation below the 

water table.
Physical Description

60 National Park Service SERO

Figure 19 Photo of south elevation by U.S. Coast 

Guard, 1948.

There are two patched holes in the center of 

the elevation below the water table and above 

the inset in the wall. Earlier photos suggest 

these patches mark the location of what appear 

to be drain outfalls from the Oil Room. Mid20th century photos also indicate the location 

of a box mounted to the south wall below the 

water table. The brick shelf defining the inset 

brick panel below the water table was partly 

removed to accommodate the box sometime 

between 1930 and 1948. A portion of a bracket, 

likely part of the anchorage system for the box, 

remains attached to the wall. The windows on 

this elevation are 4/6 like those on the north elevation. However, the east window on the 

south elevation has a metal screen on a wood 

frame attached to the window frame. Also 

present are five brackets for shutters that no 

longer exist. 

The chimney on the south elevation matches 

the chimney on the north elevation but is leaning noticeably to the west. A visual inspection 

of the chimney by the structural engineer of 

Hartrampf, Inc. suggests the lean is not due to 

deterioration but was more likely produced in 

the original construction, an interesting deviation in craftsmanship from the quality of the 

balance of the structure. At the time of the next 

roofing and flashing related rehabilitation in 

this area, the alignment and condition of the 

chimney masonry at and just below the roofline should be further evaluated. There is no 

evidence on the interior that this chimney is in 

any distress. The crack on the interior side of 

the chimney is likely due to early thermal expansion of the vent flue and does not appear to 

be active. This flue was originally designed to 

vent gasses from the building when oil stored in 

the room was burned as a light source. The vent 

is no longer used.

East Elevation: The east elevation is a continuation of the painted brick, water table, and 

inset band below the water table on the north 

and south elevations. The banding on the Oil 

House is terminated into the wall of the connecting Hall (H/100). The north side of the east 

elevation contains a single crawl space vent of 

the size and in a similar relationship to the water table as on the north elevation, just below 

the water table and centered in the wall.

Roof: The roof of the Oil House is a brown asphalt composition shingle of unknown age. 

The earliest reference to the material of the 

roof is in the 1977 National Register Nomination drafted by the North Carolina Heritage 

Conservation and Recreation Service, which 

refers to the roof as being asphalt shingle. No 

reference to a roof replacement since then has 

been located among the agencies charged with 
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 61

the maintenance oversight of the Lighthouse. 

While showing some age, the roofing appears 

to be functioning satisfactorily. There were 

originally no gutters or downspouts on the 

building, and there are none now. The fascia 

board on the Oil House appears to be in reasonably good condition. The likely culprit 

causing the damage to the ceilings below is the 

flashing.

The flashing on the building is a problem. The 

valleys are copper and appear to be functioning, but the southwest valley is in the 

approximate location of an apparent leak in the 

Oil Room (OH/102). The flashing at the chimneys appears to have had remedial repair with a 

black mastic- type material and could well be 

close to failing, if not already failing. 

Summary Observations: The following summarize the observations and issues identified 

related to the exterior of the Oil House:

• Spalling of the brick was observed on the 

Oil House. This is a concern due to the 

potential for water to enter the building 

from flooding and rising damp, given the 

high water table in the area. See the Ultimate Treatment and Use portion of this 

report for recommendations.

• The condition of the roof framing, currently not accessible, should be examined 

and fully documented at the next roof 

replacement. Rotted members should be 

replaced.

• There did not appear to be any notable 

movement in the structure that merited 

concern. Stress cracks observed all 

appeared to be stable and not active.

• The flashing around the chimneys and in 

the valleys appears, from visual observation on the underside, to require replacement.

HALL CONNECTION

The Hall Connection (H/100) is a short corridor between the Oil House and the Tower. This 

space is defined by the door separating the hall 

from the Oil House and the radial stairs leading 

to the first level of the Tower.

Foundation: The original drawings of the Hall 

Connection (H/100) indicate that the foundation, shown to be brick resting on a stone 

footing, extends down from 4’ to 6’ below 

grade. All observable conditions suggest that 

the foundation of the Hall Connection is 

sound. 

Structural System: The structural system for 

this part of the structure is similar to the structure of the Oil House:

• A footing that extends some distance 

below grade

• Load- bearing masonry walls

• Wood roof framing

• The floor supported by fill, possibly stone 

fill, as suggested in the original drawings.

The structural systems appear in sound condition. However, the roof framing was not 

accessible and, therefore, its condition could 

not be verified. There are no sags or other ir-
Physical Description

62 National Park Service SERO

regularities in the roof ridge or decking, 

common clues of damage to the wood roof 

support system.

North Elevation: The north elevation of the 

hall (H/100) contains one double- hung 4/6 

window approximately centered in the wall. A 

diagonal crack extending from the upper east 

corner of the window and extending to the east 

was patched and appeared dormant. A lightning protection cable penetrates the east jamb 

of the window frame approximately in line with 

the middle of the upper sash and extends vertically to the ground. A National Park Service 

staff member on site reported to have been told 

that this cable was the original lightning protection cable. However, examination of historic 

data does not support this speculation. The 

original lightning protection system was the 

stair, which was connected to the lightning rod 

atop the ventilator ball at the top and to a copper grounding rod driven into the ground near 

the center of the Tower at the bottom, according to Holland. When this method proved to be 

dangerous to personnel at the Lighthouse, it 

was changed, in 1884, to a cable running from 

the light, down the center of the Tower, and 

connected at the bottom to an iron plate buried in the ground. The location of the iron 

plate is not known. It may be that this cable is a 

remnant of the second lightning protection 

system, as it runs along the interior wall of the 

connecting hall at floor level with the Tower 

and then along the perimeter of the floor in the 

Tower, terminating at a connection to the bottom stair newel.

The brick walls of this elevation are similar to 

that described on the Oil House. Painted with 

numerous coats of paint, the brick condition is 

difficult to determine. However, the amount of 

irregularity in the wall surface suggests the face 

of the brick under the paint may be damaged.

The fascia board of the roof eave at this elevation was rotted and will require replacement. 

This elevation contains a notable amount of 

mildew on the painted brick surfaces, suggesting both exposure to a significant and ongoing 

amount of moisture and poor air circulation 

and sun exposure, which, if improved, could 

deter mildew growth. 

South Elevation: The characteristics and conditions of the south elevation are similar to 

those on the north elevation except for the 

following:

• No rotted fascia board on the eave of the 

roof at this elevation was observed. 

• A repaired crack in the masonry, patched 

prior to the last painting, extending from 

the upper east corner eastward, appears 

dormant.

• There is less mildew on this elevation than 

on the north elevation

• The window has been covered with plywood to protect it from further deterioration.

Roof: The roof of the Hall Connection (H/100) 

has a common ridgeline with the Oil House. 

The roofing material is, as on the Oil House, 

reddish brown asphalt composition shingles. 

The primary flashing related to this roof is two 
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 63

valleys where the roof ties into the roof of the 

Oil House and step flashing at the junction with 

the Tower. The flashing at the Tower appears 

marginal in condition and may be contributing 

to the infiltration of water into the Tower as exhibited by peeling paint in the brick arched 

ceiling area of the Tower at the connection with 

the Hall (H/100).

Summary of Observations: The following 

summarize issues and conditions of note in 

considering restoration of the Hall between 

the Oil House and Tower:

• Spalling of the brick was observed on the 

Hall Connection (H/100). This is a concern 

due to the potential for water to enter the 

building from flooding and rising damp, 

given the high water table in the area. See 

the Ultimate Treatment and Use portion of 

this report for recommendations.

• The condition of the roof framing, currently not accessible, should be examined 

and completely documented at the next 

roof replacement. Rotted members should 

be replaced.

• There did not appear to be any notable 

movement in the structure that merited 

concern. All previous stress cracks appear 

to be stable and not active.

• The flashing at the Lighthouse/Hall Connection joint appears, from observations 

on the interior, to be failing.

LIGHTHOUSE

Structural System: The Tower is load- bearing 

masonry on a stone foundation.

Foundation: The foundation of the Tower is 

described in A History of the Bodie Island Light 

Station by Francis R. Holland, Jr. (1967) in 

which he states that a pit 7’ deep was dug and 

pumped during construction to keep it dry. In 

the pit, a timber grillage, two courses of 6”x 12” 

timbers, was placed. Large granite blocks, 18” 

thick were placed on the grillage. On top of the 

grillage blocks, courses of rubble blocking 

weighing one to five tons were placed to raise 

the foundation an additional 5’. Each course of 

stone was grouted with hydraulic Portland cement. Overall, the foundation of the Tower 

appears in very good condition.

Wall Structure - Base: The exterior course of 

the base is split- faced granite with a cut band 

around each piece except for the cap, which 

has a smooth finish. The interior of the base, 

behind the exterior cut stone, was rubble set in 

cement.

Wall Structure - Brick: The Tower’s brick walls 

taper from 2 1⁄2 bricks thick at the top to 6 bricks 

thick at the base as indicated on the original 

drawings.

The drawings further suggest that there is an 

interior course of veneer brick throughout the 

Tower. It is unclear if and how the interior 

course of brick is tied into the exterior, more 

massive, assembly by other than mortar and the 

characteristics of its cylindrical configuration. 

Windows are offset vertically to avoid two windows with overlapping vertical alignment. 

Overall, the masonry structure appears sound. 

No cracks in the exterior masonry were observed from the ground using a 10x monocular.
Physical Description

64 National Park Service SERO

Figure 20 Drawing detail of Lighthouse base.

The Tower was last painted in 1997, which, 

along with the number of previous paint layers, 

may have masked conditions that cannot be 

observed from the ground.

West Elevation: Being a symmetrical, tapered 

cylinder, the basic characteristics of the Tower 

are similar on each elevation. The overall characteristics of the Tower exterior will be 

discussed here, and conditions and characteristics specific to the balance of the elevations 

will be discussed under the presentation for 

each of the other elevations.

According to the paint analysis, the strata of 

finish on the exterior of the Tower includes:

Masonry: Overall, the masonry appears in good 

condition. However, as was observed on the 

exterior of the Oil House, there are areas of irregularity in the masonry surface that suggest 

that, over time, moisture has penetrated behind 

the paint, primer, and sealer as a result of 

flooding or rising damp, and, possibly, produced spalling.

Parge Coating: This strata is not visible from the 

exterior but was documented in the paint analysis. The paint analysis refers to the Currituck 

Beach Lighthouse as also having a parge coating (but never painted) similar to the Bodie 

Island structure. A site visit was made to the 

Currituck Beach Lighthouse to observe the 

surface conditions. No parge or mortar- like 

wash coating remained on that structure, likely 

due to its erosion by the forces of local weather.

Resinous Oil- Based Sealer: This layer is not exposed. The stratum of finish was analyzed and 

addressed in the paint analysis. Its condition 

and effectiveness in retarding moisture infiltration is unknown.

Paint Primer: This layer, like the sealer, is not 

exposed and, like all the coating layers on the 

tower, is examined in the paint analysis of the 

structure. The condition and effectiveness of 

this layer is unknown but is presumed to be 

sound, given the age and condition of the current exterior paint coating.

Paint Finish Coats: The existing exterior paint 

coating was applied in 1997 by the United 

States Coast Guard. This coating is, overall, intact, with exceptions noted below.

The color scheme of the tower is of note. The 

existing color scheme includes:

• Unpainted cut ashlar granite base except 

for the top of the cut cap course, where the 

vertical surface is painted white.

• Five approximately- equal alternating 

bands of white and black starting with 

white (band 1) above the unpainted base. 

Bands are about 22’ wide. 
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 65

• Black at the watch level and above with the 

exception of the white window muntins at 

the lantern level.

The placement of the five windows in the 

Tower is notable. They are alternating so as to 

not align, providing sufficient spacing between 

them to retain structural integrity of the Tower 

shaft. The windows are on the east and west 

elevations of the Tower. The windows on the 

west side are positioned in the black bands, 2 

and 4. The windows are articulated by projecting brick surrounds further detailed by stone 

window hoods, lintel corner stones, and keystones, all rusticated in texture with a smooth 

cut band around their perimeter of about 1”. 

Until about 1944, the stone window details 

were not painted.

The upper three levels of the Tower are notably different from the zone of the elevation 

between the base and the belt course of masonry at approximately the floor elevation of 

the Watch Room. At and above the belt course, 

cast iron features are introduced to the elevation. At the Watch Room level, the first level 

above band 5, substantial cast iron brackets are 

mounted to the wall of the Tower. These 

brackets support the lower gallery above. 

There are four brackets per quadrant of the 

Tower’s circumference. A window is centered 

in the Tower at quarter points on the north, 

south, east, and west. The four brackets in each 

Specific observations on the west elevation

What appeared as a dark stain or moisture was 

observed in this area. It was difficult to view 

this condition, but the condition was sufficiently noticeable to merit recording.

Stain or dampness in band three vertically 

aligned with the north corner of the window in 

band 4 and extended to that point. It had 

rained earlier in the day that these visual 

observations were made; therefore, the “stain 

or dampness” may have been of little or no 

significance. However, given the other observations made on this and other elevations of 

the Tower, it is worth noting and monitoring.

What appears to be efflorescence on bands 1 

and 2 to the north of the window in band 2.

A small spall area was observed at the area of 

the upper south corner of the window in black 

band 2. While not major, this observation suggests the likelihood of some moisture behind 

the brick in isolated areas.
Physical Description

66 National Park Service SERO

quadrant are spaced equally from the jamb of 

one window to the jamb of the next adjacent 

window.

The exterior of the Watch Room level is currently painted black, including the windows. 

This may not have always been the case, based 

on observations documented in the paint analysis. It may be that this zone, below the lower 

gallery and above the black belt course at the 

bottom of the structural cast iron brackets, was 

a lighter shade. This is supported by the original rendering of the Tower showing a lighter 

shade than the darker bands that were rendered as black in the original drawings. 

However, it has been painted black since before 1932, according to the paint analysis.

A cast iron band the height of this level and 

surrounding the tower between the lower and 

upper gallery encases the level below the lantern. From observation inside the Tower and 

from the original drawings, the brick, it appears, may be two courses thick. It extends 

above the thickened brick belt course at the 

bottom of the watch level to the top of the level 

below the lantern. The exterior of the brick 

was not accessible. However, observations of 

the iron banding revealed a generally horizontal crack that extended from the south 

quadrant of the west elevation well into the 

south elevation of that level and material. 

There was no evidence of a corresponding 

condition in the brick; however, the full surface of the interior brick was not accessible.

The galleries are cast iron. Refer to the structural evaluation, based on visual observation, 

regarding the current structural condition and 

carrying capacities of the galleries contained 

later in this report. Clues of their condition include the following site observations:

• Some decorative components of the cast 

iron brackets supporting the lower gallery 

are missing parts. The on- site staff indicated that some parts have fallen from the 

Tower in recent times. The earliest record 

of this occurrence is in the Alden and 

Associates report of 1996. The loss of decorative parts can be a clue to the potential 

for deterioration in the balance of the 

brackets.

• Observations from the Watch Room level 

windows, located vertically in the middle 

of the gallery brackets, indicated a considerable amount of oxidation on and erosion 

of the cast iron fittings and features of the 

gallery brackets and underside of the 

flooring.

• Some of the stanchions on the lower gallery railing, as stated in the paint analysis, 

are showing considerable deterioration. As 

much as 30 percent of their cross section 

has been lost to corrosive erosion.

The window muntins at the lantern level appear in sound condition. Attached to them on 

the exterior are two sets of what appear to be 

brass handles, presumably as grips for use 

when it was necessary to be on the gallery to 

maintain, inspect, or operate the Lighthouse. 

The handles appear to be in very good condition. It is not known when they were installed.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 67

North Elevation: Observed conditions specific 

to the north elevation include: 

• An area of mold or algae growth appears to 

exist in the area of band 4 on this side of 

the Tower. 

• A lightning protection ground cable is 

attached to the Tower on this elevation. 

• At the base, generally in the middle coursing of the cut granite base, there appears to 

be leaching at the mortar joints. The characteristics of the mortar are not known.

While the condition of the mortar appears 

generally sound all around the base, the 

leaching suggests some pressure from the 

inside of the Tower base outward. One 

possible cause is that, over time, the combination of high water table and flooding 

has pushed moisture up into the base, and 

that those conditions and events have 

resulted in leaching. The stone base, however, appears to be stable.

• The upper vertical surface of the base capstone is inappropriately painted and should 

be stripped.

South Elevation: Observed conditions specific to the south elevation include: 

• There appears to be an efflorescence- type 

action on this elevation similar to the 

leaching identified above on the north elevation. 

• The upper vertical surface of the base capstone is inappropriately painted and should 

be stripped.

East Elevation: The east elevation is similar to 

the other three elevations except that it contains three windows. The three windows are in 

the three white bands of the Tower, bands 1, 3, 

and 5, and are of the same design and detailing 

as the windows on the west side. Like the west 

windows, the stone detailing of the window 

hood and sill have been painted, though, in this 

case, white to match the banding of the Tower.

Observed conditions specific to the east elevation include:

• Staining at belt course of brick, generally at 

the floor level of the Watch Room. The 

source is likely the cast iron brackets and 

associated fittings in the vicinity of the belt 

course.

• Earlier photographs reveal that a lightning 

protection ground was installed at one time 

on this elevation of the Tower. On the 

south side of the three windows on this 

elevation are a series of small areas of 

deterioration generally extending from the 

base of the lowest window to the middle of 

the black band between the second and 

third windows from the base. These conditions deserve further evaluation from 

closer range. 

• The upper vertical surface of the base capstone is inappropriately painted and should 

be stripped.

Roof: The roof of the Tower is presently inaccessible and is historically and architecturally 

significant. Most, if not all, of the original roof 

structure appears intact when comparing site 

observations with the original drawings. The 
Physical Description

68 National Park Service SERO

roof material is shown on the 1871 drawings to 

be made of 3/32” copper sheeting. There are no 

records that it has ever been replaced. With the 

limited amount of rain on the day of the site 

visit for this report, there were no obvious leaks 

in the roof and no signs of wholesale roof leaks 

when viewed from the underside. 

The crown piece with ventilator ball is a distinctive feature of the roof. As shown on the 

original drawings, it includes several components. Its spherical top, the ventilator ball, 

supports a bronze, platinum- pointed pinnacle 

of 3’- 10 1⁄2 ” in height, the original lightning 

protection. On the lower half of the copper 

ventilator ball is a series of holes designed to 

vent the lantern room when oil was the source 

of fuel. Within the ventilator ball is a cylindrical 

ventilator that works in tandem with the vent 

holes in the sphere.

Interior Materials Finishes and 

Characteristics

The original drawings for the Tower illustrate in 

considerable detail the original finish characteristics of the Tower. An examination of the 

drawings in relation to on- site observations of 

the interior of the structures indicates the interior is substantially intact. The observations 

documented herein are focused on modifications of details that have occurred to respond 

to the requirements for maintenance and the 

repair of deterioration. The three primary generators of change in the structures are moisture 

infiltration, insect infestation, and changing 

power sources and luminaries for the operation 

of the light. The following Schedule of Finishes 

catalogs the finishes and characteristics found 

in the structure in the preparation of this 

report. 

Schedule of Existing Finish Characteristics - Floors & Walls

Ident. # Location Floor Walls

North South East West

Oil House

OH/100 Hall Marble Brick/ Paint Brick/Paint Door Door

OH/101 Work Room Wood Brick/Paint/

Wainscoting

Cement/

Paint

Brick/Paint/

Wainscoting

Brick/Paint/

Wainscoting

OH/102 Oil Room Marble Cement/Paint Brick/Paint Brick/ Paint Brick/ Paint 

Hall

H/100 South 

Window

Marble/

Granite

Brick/ Paint Brick/ Paint - Door

Lighthouse

LH/100 First Level of 

Tower

Marble/

Granite

Brick/ Paint Brick/ Paint Brick/Paint Brick/Paint
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 69

LH/101 First Cast Iron 

Landing

Cast Iron Brick/ Paint Brick/ Paint Brick/Paint Brick/Paint

LH/102 Second Cast 

Iron Landing

Cast Iron Brick/ Paint Brick/ Paint Brick/Paint Brick/Paint

LH/103 Third Cast 

Iron Landing

Cast Iron Brick/ Paint Brick/ Paint Brick/Paint3 Brick/Paint

LH/104 Fourth Cast 

Iron Landing

Cast Iron Brick/ Paint Brick/ Paint Brick/Paint Brick/Paint3

LH/105 Fifth Cast 

Iron Landing

Cast Iron Brick/Paint1 Brick/Paint1 Brick/Paint Brick/Paint3

LH/106 Sixth Cast 

Iron Landing

Cast Iron Brick/Paint1 Brick/Paint2 Brick/Paint3 Brick/Paint1

LH/107 Seventh Cast 

Iron Landing

Cast Iron Brick/Paint1 Brick/Paint3 Brick/Paint3 Brick/Paint3

LH/108 Eighth Cast 

Iron Landing

Cast Iron Brick/Paint1 Brick/ Paint Brick/Paint Brick/Paint

LH/109 Watch Room Cast Iron Cast Iron Brick/Paint2 Brick/Paint Cast Iron

LH/110 Lantern 

Room

Cast Iron Granite / Cast 

Iron

Glass Glass Glass

LEGEND

Flooring Walls

Wood 3 1⁄4” Tongue & Groove Wood Flooring running East/West Brick Brick

Marble 12”x12”x1” Marble, Black/ White Checkerboard Paint/BK/GR Paint/ Black/Gray

Cast Iron Cast Iron Checker Plate Wainscoting Wainscoting/ See Detail

Granite Granite Steps Door Door & Transom

Open Open

Cement Cementitious Finish on Brick

Glass Glass

Cast Iron Cast Iron

Notes

1 Vertical Wall Crack, Patched, Inactive

2 Paint & Brick Spalling

3 Peeling Paint and/or Moisture Stains

4 Prismed Floor Grate
Physical Description

70 National Park Service SERO

 

Schedule of Existing Finish Characteristics - Ceilings, Moldings & Fixtures

Ident. 

# Location Ceiling Moldings Fixture

Material Base Crown

Oil House

OH/100 Hall Wood 1 Paint/8” - 1

OH/102 Oil Room Wood 1 - Wood 1

OH/101 Work Room Wood 1 Wood Wood 1

Hall

H/100 South Window Wood 2 Paint/7” - -

Lighthouse

LH/100 First Level of Tower Cast Iron/Open Paint/GR/8” Corbel 2N

LH/101 First Cast Iron Landing Cast Iron/Open Paint/BK/4” Corbel 2S

LH/102 Second Cast Iron Landing Cast Iron/Open Paint/BK/4” Corbel -

LH/103 Third Cast Iron Landing Cast Iron/Open Paint/BK/4” Corbel 2N

LH/104 Fourth Cast Iron Landing Cast Iron/Open Paint/BK/5” Corbel -

LH/105 Fifth Cast Iron Landing Cast Iron/Open Paint/BK/5” Corbel 2N

LH/106 Sixth Cast Iron Landing Cast Iron/Open Paint/BK/4 1⁄2” Corbel -

LH/107 Seventh Cast Iron Landing Cast Iron/Open Paint/BK/5” - 2NE

LH/108 Eighth Cast Iron Landing Cast Iron Paint/BK/4” - 2NE

LH/109 Watch Room Cast Iron4 - - 2N

LH/110 Lantern Room - - - -
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 71

 

LEGEND

Ceiling Base

Wood 1 3 1⁄2” Beaded Board running East/ West P/ __” Black Paint on Masonry/ Inches in ht.

Wood 2 4” Beaded Board Running East/West Wood Wood Assembly

Corbel 4 brick Corbel, See Detail

Cast Iron 1⁄2 Cast Iron Landing Crown

Open 1⁄2 Open to accommodate Stair Wood Wood Crown Type 1/ See Detail

Fixtures (Note: location is indicated by direction)

1 Fixture 1/See Detail

2 Fixture 2/See Detail

Notes

1 Vertical Wall Crack, Patched, Inactive

2 Paint & Brick Spalling

3 Peeling Paint and/or Moisture Stains

4 Prismed Floor Grate
Physical Description

72 National Park Service SERO

 

 

Molding & Light Fixtures

Ceiling Molding Type 1 Fixture 1 Fixture 2

Door Elevations

Elevation 1 Elevation 2 Elevation 3 Elevation 4 Elevation 5
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 73

 

Door Schedule Ident. # Location

WidthHeightProfileTransomMaterialFinishHeadJambThresholdHardwareOriginal

Oil House

OH/D1 Front 

Door

3'- 3 1/4” 7'- 5 1⁄2” 2 1 Wood Painted 2 2 1 Not 

Original

No

OH/D2 OH/100 to 

OH/102

2'- 11 1⁄2” 7'- 6” 2 1 Wood Painted 1 1 2 Not 

Original

Yes

OH/D3 OH/100 to 

OH/101

2'- 11 1⁄2” 7'- 6” 1 1 Wood Painted 1 1 2 Mortise Yes

OH/D4 OH/100 to 

H/100

3'- 3” 7'- 5 1⁄4” 1 1 Wood Painted 3 3 3 Mortise Yes

Hall

No 

Doors

Lighthouse

LH/D1 Lower 

Gallery 

Exteror 

Door

2'- 10” 6'- 8 1⁄2” 3 - Iron Painted 4 1 4 4 1 2 Yes

LH/D2 Lower 

Gallery 

Interior 

Door

2'- 3” 6'- 8 1⁄4” 4 - Wood Painted 4 1 4 4 Mortise Yes

LH/D3 Watch 

Room 

Door

2'- 2 1⁄2” 6'- 8 1⁄2” 5 - Wood Painted - - 5 Not 

Original

No

LEGEND

Notes

1 Head detail matches jamb detail

2 Iron slide bolt on face of door
Physical Description

74 National Park Service SERO

 

Door Profiles

Profile 1 Profile 2

Profile 3

Profile 4 Profile 5

Door Head/Transom Details

Head 1 (Head 2 similar) Head 3 Transom Muntin
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 75

Door Jamb Details

Jamb 1 Jamb 2 Jamb 3

Jamb 4 (Head 4 similar)

Door Threshold Details

Threshold 1 Threshold 2 Threshold 3

Threshold 4 Threshold 5
Physical Description

76 National Park Service SERO

 

Window Elevations

Oil House- Exterior 

Window Elevation

Oil House- Interior 

Window Elevation

Tower - lh/w1 & w2 Tower- lh/w3 & w4 Tower- lh/w5 Tower - lh/w6, w7, w8, & 

w9
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 77

 

Window Schedule Ident. # Location

WidthHeightTypeNo. LightsMaterialFinishHeadJambSill

Oil House

OH/W1 Southwest 

Window

2'- 3 1/2” 

2'- 6 1/4”

5'- 10”1

 

6'- 6 1/2”

Fixed/ 

Double 

Hung

4/6 

Lts.

Wood Painted 1 1 2

OH/W2 Southeast 

Window

2'- 3 1/2” 

2'- 6”

5' 10”1

 

6'- 6 3/4”

Fixed/ 

Double 

Hung

4/6 

Lts.

Wood Painted 1 1 2

OH/W3 Northwest 

Window

2'- 3 1/2” 

2'- 4 3/4”

5'10”1 

6'- 7 1/2”

Fixed/ 

Double 

Hung

4/6 

Lts.

Wood Painted 1 1 1

OH/W4 Northeast 

Window

2'- 3 1/2” 

2'- 4 3/4”

5'10”1 

6'- 7 1/2”

Fixed/ 

Double 

Hung

4/6 

Lts.

Wood Painted 1 1 1

Hall

H/W1 South 

Window

27- 1/2” 5'- 10” Fixed/ 

Double 

Hung

4/6 

Lts.

Wood Painted 1 2 3

H/W2 North 

Window

27- 1/2” 5'- 10” Fixed/ 

Double 

Hung

4/6 

Lts.

Wood Painted 1 2 3

Lighthouse

LH/W1 Level 2/3 

East 

Window

3'- 2” 9'- 5 1/4” 

9'- 11”2

Fixed/ 

Casement

4/10 

Lts.

Wood Painted 2 3 4

LH/W2 Level 4 

West 

Window

3'- 2” 9- '6” 

9'- 11”2

Fixed/ 

Casement

4/10 

Lts.

Wood Painted 2 3 4

LH/W3 Level 5/6 

East 

Window

3'- 2” 8'- 9 1/4” 

9'- 3”2

Fixed/ 

Casement

4/10 

Lts.

Wood Painted 2 3 4

LH/W4 Level 7 West 

Window

3'- 1 1/2” 8'- 10”3 

9'- 3 1/4”

Fixed/ 

Casement

4/10 

Lts.

Wood Painted 2 3 4

LH/W5 Level 8/9 

East 

Window

3'- 2” 7'- 4”3 Fixed/ 

Casement

4/10 

Lts.

Wood Painted 2 3 4
Physical Description

78 National Park Service SERO

LH/W6 Level 10 

East 

Window

2'- 2 1/4” 7'- 6 1/2” Fixed 4/8 

Lts.

Wood Painted 3 4 5

LH/W7 Level 10 

South 

Window

2'- 2 1/4” 7'- 6 1/2” Fixed 4/8 

Lts.

Wood Painted 3 4 5

LH/W8 Level 10 

West 

Window

2'- 2 1/4” 7'- 6 1/2” Fixed 4/8 

Lts.

Wood Painted 3 4 5

LH/W9 Level 10 

North 

Window

2'- 2 1/4” 7'- 6 1/2” Fixed 4/8 

Lts.

Wood Painted 3 4 5

LEGEND

Notes

1 Exterior window dimension

2 Height of window at crown of arch

3 Height of window at spring of arch
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 79

 

Window Jamb Details

Jamb 1 Jamb 2

Jamb 3 Jamb4

Window Head Details

Head 1 Head 2 Head 3
Physical Description

80 National Park Service SERO

 

Window Sill Details

Sill 1 Sill 2 Sill 3

Sill 4 Sill 5

Muntin Details

Muntin 1 Muntin 2 Muntin 3
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 81

Summary Description of Interior 

Conditions

OIL HOUSE

Hall (OH/100)

Floor: The 12”x12” black and white marble tile is 

set to produce a diamond pattern in the space. 

The marble tile is typical of the Oil Room in the 

Oil House, the Connecting Hall and the first 

level of the Tower and is likely 1” thick as was 

observed in the Light Tower. A 5” white marble 

band surrounds the diamond pattern in the 

floor.

Walls: The plaster on masonry walls have a 

smooth finish and are painted. Generally, the 

plaster is in sound condition. 

Ceiling: The ceiling is arched and finished with 

tongue- and- groove boards with one bead on 

the tongue side. There is one 4” wide board just 

south of center of the ceiling, while the prevailing board width is 3 1⁄2”. The ceiling is in good 

condition.

Base: The base is painted on the wall up to a 

height of 7” in black.

Crown: No crown molding exists in this room.

Fixture: Light fixture Type 1 is affixed to the 

ceiling of this room.

Other Features: None identified.

Figure 21 Oil House, Hall (OH/100)

Work Room (OH/101)

The Work Room finish merited a more refined 

treatment than the Oil Room. Given the industrial functions of the Oil Room, it would have 

been impractical to finish it with wainscot and 

wood floors. The Work Room, on the other 

hand, could provide more comfortable surroundings for the Keeper and his Assistants 

who used it.

Floor: The floor in this room is wood and is in 

sound condition. According to the paint analysis and Coast Guard maintenance reports, the 

floor and floor framing were partly replaced in 

1976 due to termite damage.
Physical Description

82 National Park Service SERO

Walls: The north wall of this room contains the 

fireplace and windows. The walls in the Work 

Room have different treatments. The south 

wall is brick with a cementitious finish. The 

other three walls are painted brick. All walls in 

this room have a wainscot with a chair rail cap 

at 3’- 8 3⁄4”.

Ceiling: The ceiling in this room is tongueand- groove, single bead board 3 1⁄2” wide running east and west. The ceiling material appears 

in good condition overall. This ceiling may 

have been the one repaired by the Coast Guard 

in late 1986 due to termite damage.

Trim: The wainscot is illustrated in the detail 

attached to the finish schedule. An examination 

of the details of the existing wainscot indicates 

trim that is different from that suggested in the 

original drawings, raising some question that 

one of the following may be the case:

• the wainscot may not be original, or 

• parts were altered in the past, or

• the original wainscot was not built as indicated on the drawings.

It may be that the wainscot was included in the 

repairs undertaken by the Coast Guard in late 

1986 that were the result of termite damage.

Base: The base in this room is wood and, like 

the wainscot, does not match the profiles 

shown on the original drawings. It may also 

have been repaired due to termite damage in 

1986.

Crown: The crown molding in this room is a 

two- piece assembly as illustrated in the finish 

schedule and appears in good condition.

Fixture: An industrial metal shaded fixture 

mounted to a junction box is on the ceiling of 

this room. Its date of installation is not known.

Fireplace: The fireplace in the north wall of this 

room is original, including the mantle and surround, and is in good condition. The original 

stone mantle cap is in place. According to the 

paint analysis, the mantle surrounds and cap 

have always been painted. Missing paint at the 

bottom of the surrounds should not be mistaken for the shadow of a past base as one was 

never installed according to the paint analysis.

Shadow of Past Shelving: There is evidence of 

bracketed shelving or cabinets on the east and 

west walls of this room. The 1871 drawings define the characteristics of this shelving.

Oil Room (OH/102)

The Oil Room has seen the most change of any 

of the spaces in the structure. This is due to the 

fact that the conversion from oil to electricity as 

a power source for the light has been the single 

most significant change in the history of the 

building. Given that the function of the Oil 

Room has been to support the power source 

for the light, it has realized the most change.

Floor: The floor in the Oil Room is 12”x12’ marble in a pattern to match the pattern described 

in the hall. Inserted in the floor are two areas of 

concrete where the tile was removed and 

equipment mounted in the past to support 
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 83

power- generation. Like the Hall (OH/100), a 5” 

band of white marble surrounds the square tile 

floor pattern.

Walls: The painted brick walls are generally in 

good condition. The walls on the east and west 

side of the room accommodate cabinets and 

benches. The north wall is brick with a cementitious finish. The south wall is substantially 

filled with the fireplace and the two windows.

Ceiling: The single bead board ceiling appears 

in sound condition except for the deteriorated 

area in the northwest corner of the room.

Base: There is no base in this room.

Crown: The crown profile is a two- piece trim 

at the joint between the wood ceiling and plaster walls. Overall, the trim appears in sound 

condition.

Fixture: There is an industrial metal shade fixture mounted to a junction box in the ceiling of 

this room. Its date of installation is not known.

Other Features: There are several features of 

note in this room. They include:

East and West Walls

• Butt Shelf Wall: The cast iron butt shelves 

held the oil drums during the period when 

oil was the power source for the light. The 

original drawing for these shelves, Plate 

VII, calls out the shelving as 155 lb. and the 

iron support below as 140 lb. Phoenix Tiron. The shelves are in place and in good 

condition. 

• Casework above Butt Shelf with Ladder:

The wood casework originally installed 

above the cast iron butt shelving remains in 

place, including the metal rails for the steel 

ladders (based on the 1871 construction 

documents) that were not observed on site. 

Overall, the casework is in good condition.

North Wall

• Electrical Panel and Backboard: The north 

wall of the room, east of the door, contains 

a plywood backboard and an electrical 

panel supporting the power supply to the 

electric lamp at the top of the Tower.

South Wall

• Fireplace: The fireplace is original, including the mantle and surround, and is in good 

condition. Of particular note is a hole in 

the upper part of the fireplace, above the 

mantle that is often where a flue for a 

wood- burning stove might have been 

installed. However, an examination of the 

original drawings indicates that the opening in the chimney was to accommodate a 

ventilator for handling and managing 

fumes from the oil stored in the room. 

There is no flue pipe connected to the hole 

in the chimney at this time. The original 

stone mantle cap is in place. According to 

the paint analysis, the mantle surrounds 

and cap have always been painted.

• Shelving: The south wall of this room 

accommodated a workbench in front of the 

window with casework to the east and west 

side of each window respectively. These 
Physical Description

84 National Park Service SERO

features do not exist at this time but were 

presumably installed to address the operational requirements of an oil- fired lamp.

Connecting Hall (H/100)

Floor: The marble floor, identical in layout and 

treatment to that found in the Oil House, is in 

sound condition. A 1 1⁄2” white marble band 

separates the square tile pattern from the wall 

on the north and south side of the room.

Walls: The painted brick walls exhibit peeling 

paint and evidence of mildew. A potential 

cause for this condition is the fact that a significant part of the north and south walls in the 

room are inside the base of the Tower. The 

mildew observed in this room supports the 

conclusion that rising damp and flooding is 

contributing to the leaching in the exterior 

stone base, which may remain damp for long 

periods of time, if not constantly.

Ceiling: The ceiling in this room is 4” tongueand- groove single bead board similar to the 

single 4” ceiling board identified in the Hall of 

the Oil House. The ceiling is, overall, in good 

condition. At the east end of the Hall, the wood 

ceiling terminates, and brick arches support the 

Tower wall at the opening. Peeling paint was 

observed in this area, suggesting the potential 

that failure has occurred in the flashing where 

the Hall roof connects to the Tower. 

Base: There is no base in this room. However, 

the suggestion of a base is painted on the north 

and south walls to a height of 7”.

Crown: There is no crown molding in this 

room.

Fixture: There is no light fixture in this room.

Conduit for Lamp Power: A significant feature 

in this room is the conduit that traverses from 

the electrical panel in the Oil Room of the Oil 

House through the Hall and into the Tower, 

where it ascends the Tower wall to the panel in 

the Watch Room at the top of the Tower. A 

portion of the brick at the intersection of the 

Tower wall and the Hall wall at the top of the 

stairs from the Hall to the Tower has been removed to accommodate the turn of this 

conduit from the Hall into the Tower.

LIGHTHOUSE

The Light Tower is, effectively, four rooms: the 

main shaft, the Service Room, the Watch 

Room, and the Lantern Room. However, given 

that there are specific conditions to be noted at 

and between each landing in the Tower, each 

landing was considered a room for purposes of 

documenting conditions in the Tower. 

Stairs: Since the stairs are common to all levels 

of the Tower, they are addressed here to best 

present their condition and characteristics. The 

original drawings document the characteristics 

of the stairs in great detail. The Tower stairs 

and landings (except for the first level which is 

on fill with marble and stone flooring) are cast 

iron. There are five cast iron components associated with each tread (see Plate XI. of the 1871 

construction documents), which are cast iron 

with an open- checked plate walking surface.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 85

Figure 22 Plate XI, 1871 Drawings.

The landings are cast iron plate with diamond 

pattern on the walking surface and an integral 

reinforcing grid on the underside and are supported by a cast iron I- beam at the diameter 

edge of the landing.

The focus of this assessment is to identify the 

number of treads on each level and the conditions that deserve attention. The deteriorated 

conditions noted in the following schedule are 

based primarily on visual observation of damaged treads. There may be other conditions of 

damaged cast iron components that deserve 

Schedule of Stair Treads & Conditions

Section # of 

Treads Damaged Treads

Flight 1 1 - 25 19, 23, 24, 25

Flight 2 26 - 50 46, 47

Flight 3 51 - 72 71

Flight 4 73 - 94 82, 84, 85

Flight 5 95 - 114 -

Flight 6 115 - 132 -

Flight 7 133 - 149 -

Flight 8 150 - 179 169

Flight 9 180 - 196 186, 188, 192, 193

Flight 10 197 - 205 -
Physical Description

86 National Park Service SERO

repair or replacement that have been obscured 

by successive coats of paint.

Base Level of Tower (LH/100)

The base level of the Tower is approximately 

9’- 9” above the prevailing grade and 7’- 8” 

above the finished floor of the Oil House and 

Connecting Hall (H/100). The five treads leading from the intermediate level of the room to 

the main level are granite. The upper level of 

the stairs is protected by an ornamental cast 

iron railing (See Plate IX of the 1871 Construction Documents, “Plan of Guard Railing at 

Entrance Steps”).

Floor: The floor of this level of the tower is primarily marble of alternating black and white. 

The marble squares, however, are not set at the 

same angle as those in the Oil House and Connecting Hall (H/100). The curved steps on the 

east side of the room are granite with a granite 

wall containing the inside of the steps.

Walls: The walls are painted brick, as is the case 

throughout the Tower. Overall, the walls are in 

good condition.

Ceiling: The ceiling of each level in the Tower is 

the underside of the cast iron landing system 

above. These are painted black. Overall, the 

under side of the cast iron landing appears to 

be in good condition. 

Base: There is no applied base in the Tower. 

However, there is a painted base, the characteristics of which are cataloged in the Finish 

Schedule.

Crown: While there is no crown molding in the 

traditional sense, at the joint between the 

Tower and each landing, a four- brick corbelling exists to support the landing at the Tower 

side. Overall, this detail appears in good 

condition.

Fixture: The Type 2 fixture, a jelly- jar type industrial fixture, is surface mounted on the 

north wall. This is typical of the fixtures in the 

Tower. The locations of the fixtures in the 

Tower are indicated in the finish schedule.

Other Features:

Security Fence and Door: A recent introduction 

to the Tower on the lowest level is a chain- link 

security fence and padlocked door installed in 

1985 to prevent unwanted entry to the Tower 

stairs. This is may be considered a non- contributing feature that could be removed once 

the use and management program for access to 

the Tower is in place. It was installed to prevent 

access by National Park Service visitors to the 

Tower and is not part of any modifications related to the production or maintenance of the 

light. Some floor and wall damage will have to 

be repaired in this area if the fence is removed.

Well: In the center of the ground level is a depressed well approximately 30” deep protected 

by an original cast iron railing 38” high. The 

well is constructed of cast iron, with a cast iron 

wall and cast iron floor, the entire assembly being painted black. The well and railing are in 

sound condition. The well was reportedly constructed to receive weights used in the 

operation of a mechanism that would allow the
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 87

Figure 23 Well.

light to “flash.” However, the mechanism was 

never installed, and, thus, the well was never 

used as intended in the original design.

Electrical Conduit: Extending into the room 

from the hall, the electrical conduit carrying 

the cables that power the lamp is recessed into 

the corner of the wall of the Tower as it turns 

south to run horizontally to the center of the 

south wall where it turns up to the upper level 

of the Tower. There is also conduit on the 

south wall to provide service to the light fixtures. There was no evidence of conduit 

encased in the masonry walls. If there is any 

concealed conduit, it is likely above the wood 

ceiling in the adjacent hall.

Dedication Plaque: A marble dedication plaque 

is mounted on the archway facing the center of 

the Tower (see picture). There are three points 

of note regarding this plaque. First, the spelling 

of “Body” is an early spelling of the name, thus 

suggesting an early fabrication and installation

Figure 24 Dedication Plaque.

of the plaque. The second point of note is that 

the 1871 construction documents do not show a 

plaque, suggesting one was designed, fabricated, and installed in an exercise separate 

from the original construction. Thirdly, this is 

not the first plaque erected. The original plaque 

listed the members of the Lighthouse Board 

and the date at the time the construction of the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse was begun. An image 

of the drawing for the original plaque is found 

in the Chronology of Development and Use 

portion of this report. The drawing indicates 

that the location of this plaque is also the location of the installation of the first plaque. The 

current plaque is in excellent condition, but has 

some overpainting of white, the result of applications of paint to the wall to which it is affixed, 

that should be removed. 

Tower Levels 1 – 7 (LH/101- LH/107) 

Floors: From this level to the Watch Room 

level, the flooring is similar: a half- circle, cast 

iron floor. The flooring appears in good con-
Physical Description

88 National Park Service SERO

dition. Like the stairs, the cast iron, non- slip, 

diamond- pattern flooring is documented in 

some detail in the original drawings. 

Walls: The walls are painted brick. See Finish 

Schedule for specific masonry conditions 

identified.

Windows: The windows, though conforming to 

the original window configuration, were installed in 1997 with hardware that is not 

historic. The granite window stools were 

painted black in 1997. According to the paint 

analysis, the window ledges, historically, were 

painted. Black was the original color, but they 

were also painted brown and red- brown over 

the years. However, the paint layer prior to the 

1997 painting was black.

Ceiling: Underside of the cast iron landing 

above, painted black.

Base: Painted; see Finish Schedule.

Crown: Though there is no crown molding in 

the traditional sense, at the joint between the 

Tower and each landing, a four- brick corbelling exists to support the landing at the Tower 

side. Overall, this detail appears in good 

condition.

Fixture: See Finish Schedule.

Other Features: None identified.

Tower Level 8 / Service Room (LH/108)

Floor: The floor in the Service Room is cast 

iron, diamond- pattern plating the full diameter 

of the Tower at this level except for the curved 

opening to accommodate the stairs from the 

level below.

Walls: Cast iron paneling covers the masonry 

on the north wall. The stair well from below is 

enclosed by cast iron plating as well on the west 

side. 

Ceiling: The ceiling of the service room is the 

underside of the grating of level 9. The grating 

is in good condition. 

Base: There is no base in this room, painted or 

otherwise.

Crown: There are no crown molding features 

in this room.

Fixture: There is a Type 2 light fixture mounted 

on the northeast side of the room. 

Other Features: None identified.

Tower Level 9 / Watch Room (LH/109)

Floor: The floor of the Watch Room is cast iron 

grating, fully detailed in the original drawings. 

It is in good condition.

Walls: The walls of the room are cast iron on 

the east and west and, otherwise, painted 

masonry.

Ceiling: The ceiling of this space is the underside of the flooring for the lantern level above. 

A special feature of the perimeter cast iron 

“ceiling” is a number of round inserts of prismatic glass designed to provide light to the
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 89

Figure 25 Watch Room ceiling insert made of 

prismatic glass.

Watch Room level below the lantern, much like 

the deck prisms of ships. A number of the glass 

prisms are missing. The cast iron grating and 

lens pedestal appear in sound condition. On 

the southwest side of the Watch Room is a penetration in the ceiling for a vent for earlier coal 

heat at that level. This source of heat has been 

abandoned.

Base: See Finish Schedule.

Crown: None.

Fixture: Type 2 on north wall.

Other Features:

Lens Pedestal: The cast iron pedestal that supports the lens and light positioned in the center 

of the room is supported by the cast iron floor 

and framing below. The original manufacture’s 

brass plaque, in French, is mounted on the post 

Figure 26 Lens pedestal, original manufacturer’s 

brass plaque.

of the pedestal. The pedestal is in good 

condition.

Electrical Panel: An electrical panel located on 

the west wall is served by the main panel on the 

north wall of the Oil Room.

Tower Level 10 / Lantern Room (LH/110)

Floor: The floor of the Lantern Room is the 

grating in a perimeter ring around the lens 

containing the inserts of prismatic glass. The 

floor inside the lens is cast iron diamond plate, 

typical of the floors at the Tower levels. The 

floor, except for missing glass prisms in the 

grating, appears in good condition.

Walls: The walls of this room are glass in cast 

iron muntins the full circumference of the 

room. There are two horizontal muntins in the 

window framing structure. No visually notable 

deterioration of structural concern was 

observed.
Physical Description

90 National Park Service SERO

Ceiling: The ceiling of this room is the underside of the roof. There were no noticeable leaks 

or signs of deterioration in the ceiling area, 

though not all of the roof area was visible due 

to the size and presence of the hood feature 

described below.

Base: There is no base in this room 

Crown: There are no crown molding features 

in this room.

Fixture: The fixture in this room is the light. It is 

a two bulb “Carlisle & Finch #44768” fixture. 

While it was not lit the evening of the site visit, 

there were no obvious signs of physical damage 

to the fixture and lighting apparatus. Some 

components of the original assembly to receive 

and support the earlier oil reservoirs remain.

Other Features:

Lantern Hood: The lens hood is a feature remaining from the days of oil burning lamps. 

This feature appears substantially intact but, 

evidenced by the dents in it, may have been 

moved or removed from time to time to access 

the ventilation apparatus above.

Lens: The lens is a first order Fresnel lens held 

in position by a brass and iron frame. There are 

five distinct sections of the lens defined by the 

position and configuration of the prisms. Except for a few chipped prisms and one missing 

prism in the second tier from the top of the 

southeast quadrant of the lens, the lens appears 

Figure 27 First order Fresnel lens.

in sound condition. The frame exhibits a limited amount of oxidation in some parts of the 

cast iron frame. The bronze components of the 

lens frame appear in good condition.

Structural Evaluation

The structural evaluation consisted of a visual 

inspection of the subject structures that could 

be conducted without benefit of removing historic fabric or constructing scaffolding around 

the Tower, as well as a review of the following 

previously- completed evaluations, copies of 

which were provided by the National Park 

Service:

“Bodie Island Lighthouse Inspection Report,” 

by the United States Corps of Engineers for the United States Coast 

Guard, 1989.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 91

“Bodie Island Lighthouse, Dare County, N.C. 

Report of Structural Conditions,” by 

Alden and Associates, 1996.

Report of the International Chimney Corporation regarding structural and safety 

concerns at the Bodie Island Lighthouse, 2000.

In general, the observations of Hartrampf, Inc. 

concur with previous evaluations, noting that 

structural deterioration is progressing, and the 

cost of remediation is increasing. One feature 

of the Tower which has been of concern since it 

was first reported in 1981 has been the vertical 

cracking of the interior face brickwork, which 

extends from the fourth through the seventh 

levels. This may even be the cracking noted by 

the District Engineer in 1877, who reported 

“very slight” vertical cracks running from the 

second landing to the seventh and attributed 

them to stress from lightning strikes. 209 These 

cracks do not appear to extend to the exterior 

of the Tower. The finding is that one of the 

cracks is inactive, that is, not getting worse, and 

one of the cracks is still active, as evidenced by 

past repair work that is currently failing. Since 

1989, several reports have postulated possible 

causes of these cracks. In 1989, the U.S. Corps 

of Engineers suggested that the cracks were 

caused by the combined effects of corrosion of 

the support beams and thermal expansion of 

the wall, though they did not feel that this compromised the structural integrity of the wall at 

that time. The Coast Guard inspector in 1992 

stated that he felt that the cracks in the bricks 

had weakened the I- beam anchor points for 

the Watch Room landing, making the structure 

unsafe for maintenance personnel. The Alden 

and Associates report in 1996 suggested that 

cracking was due to severe windloading and 

that the structural integrity of the tower could 

be in doubt.

The cause of the cracks is not settlement, a 

cause suggested by the Coast Guard inspector 

in his 1992 report on the condition of the 

Lighthouse.210 Settlement would be evidenced 

by corresponding cracks in the foundation, 

and the cracks do not originate at or propagate 

from the base of the Tower as they would if 

settlement was the problem. The location and 

direction of the cracks indicate that windloading, such as was suggested by Alden and 

Associates in 1996,211 is also not the cause. 

Cracks caused by flexural stresses from lateral 

loads on a vertical cylinder, which the lighthouse is, would have a horizontal or slightly 

diagonal pattern, not a vertical pattern such as 

exists at Bodie Island. The findings of Hartrampf, Inc. on the cause of these cracks and 

their importance to the structural integrity of 

the Tower agree with those of the U.S. Corps of 

Engineers. Corrosion of the steel beams, the 

corresponding expansion stresses on the surrounding mortar, and thermal expansion and 

contraction are the likely causes of the cracks. 

Subsequent moisture infiltration is causing expansion and deterioration of the mortar 

209. Holland, p. 44.

210. “Bodie Island Light (LLNR 505) Report for Group 

Cape Hatteras, aNT, Kennebec,” in papers of the 

Shore Maintenance Detachment, Civil Engineering 

Unit, United States Coast Guard, Cleveland, Ohio, 

1992.

211. Alden and Associates, 1996, p. 7.
Physical Description

92 National Park Service SERO

surrounding the bricks. This condition, if 

properly addressed, using a deep- penetration 

mortar repair, should not undermine the structural integrity of the Tower. Hartrampf found 

no indication that the I- beam support had deteriorated significantly since the last repair. If 

necessary, the mortar surrounding these members can be repaired using the same deeppenetration method as that suggested for the 

repair of the brickwork.

Following are details of the findings of the 

Hartrampf, Inc. structural inspection and evaluation. Issues not directly related to the 

structural integrity of the Tower and Oil House, 

such as windows and hardware, are addressed 

elsewhere in this report.

OIL HOUSE

The Oil House provided limited access to 

structural elements. There was no access to the 

under side of floor or to the roof framing. Some 

of the architectural finish elements have evidence of rot. This implies that structural 

elements behind most likely will have rot as 

well. Specific locations include:

• Ceiling of the Oil Room

• Wall behind northern side of lower cabinet 

shelf of west wall in Oil Room

• Wall behind southern side of upper cabinet 

shelf of east wall in Oil Room

• Ceiling of the Work Room

Preservation efforts in these areas should include removal of damaged materials only and 

replacement to match existing. There was no 

Figure 28 South chimney above the Oil Room.

evidence on the exterior of roof framing failure, 

which might be detected by sagging of the roof 

at the ridgeline or other framing members.

The southern chimney, above the Oil Room, 

has a noticeable lean to it above the roofline. 

Concern has been expressed that the chimney 

may be unstable. However, there is no apparent 

evidence of distress to the brickwork. Historic 

photographs from the 1890s suggest that this 

chimney was leaning at that time, implying that 

the chimney may have been originally built out 

of plumb. The tilt has had no apparent adverse 

effects on the structural integrity of the chimney. Therefore, recommendations in this report 

do not include rebuilding or straightening of 

the chimney.

LIGHT TOWER - EXTERIOR

Some of the exterior granite stonework shows 

efflorescence and a discharge of mortar material at the joints. These joints do not appear to 

be failing, and the stonework does not appear 

to be unstable in any way. There is no visible 
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 93

evidence of movement of the stones. Past suggestions that the foundation is experiencing 

movement are not supported by physical evidence of separation of the blocks from each 

other or from adjacent structures. 

There are areas of the exterior brickwork above 

the base granite stonework that show predominantly vertical cracks along the mortar joints. 

Some, if not all, of these areas have been repaired during previous maintenance projects. 

Some areas were too high above eye level or the 

reach of a ladder to investigate properly to determine if any of the cracks were active. The 

visible cracks are not at the same locations as 

the cracks on the interior, further substantiating the finding that the masonry of the entire 

Tower is not under structural distress.

LIGHTHOUSE TOWER – INTERIOR

The structural base for the Tower finished floor 

is apparently granite blocks on fill. Some of the 

marble finish floor tile is cracked or missing in 

places, but there was no visible cracking of the 

floor structure.

The cast iron metal shapes of the stair treads 

and stringers, as well as the landings and supports, were evaluated for loads and stresses to 

inform the National Park Service of the level of 

public access that could be allowed in the 

Tower above the ground floor. This evaluation 

is discussed in detail at the end of the enumeration of findings on each stair flight and 

landing.

Figure 29 Three treads with notable cracks, below 

Landing #1.

Stair flight #1: One tread has been strengthened 

by the addition of a steel plate bolted to the 

original open- checked plate tread. There are 

three treads just below Landing #1 (LH/101) 

that have minor cracks near the toe of the 

checked plate. These have been marked with 

spray paint as a caution to visitors.

LH/101: The masonry walls and steel framing 

are in good condition with very little paint 

damage on the walls and no visible repair 

work. 

Stair flight #2: Two stairs have been strengthened by the addition of a steel plate bolted to 

the original open- checked plate tread.

LH/102: The masonry walls and steel framing 

are in good condition with very little paint 

damage on the walls. There are minor masonry 

joint cracks at the interior windowsill, and minor masonry repair work is evident above stair 

flight #2. 
Physical Description

94 National Park Service SERO

Figure 30 Detail of vertical crack on south side of 

masonry wall.

Stair flight #3: One stair has been strengthened 

by the addition of a steel plate bolted to the 

original open- checked plate tread.

LH/103: The masonry walls and steel framing 

are in good condition with very little paint 

damage on the walls. There is minor masonry 

repair work evident below the beams supporting LH/104.

Stair flight #4: Three stairs have been strengthened by the addition of a steel plate bolted to 

the original open- checked plate tread.

LH/104: The masonry walls and steel framing 

show more signs of distress than previously. 

Repairs of vertical cracks are holding, with no 

signs of the cracks reopening. However, as you 

move up inside the Tower from this landing, the 

brick mortar shows increased evidence of 

stress. This is indicative of a moisture problem 

that should be addressed. See the Ultimate 

Treatment and Use portion of this report for 

recommendations.

Stair flight #5: No stairs have been strengthened 

or show any visible cracking.

LH/105: The masonry walls and steel framing 

show active signs of distress. The previouslyrepaired vertical crack on the south side has reopened, and the repair mortar shows cracks as 

well. The crack repair on the north side appears 

to be holding. There is a crack on the windowsill. The wood on the window frame is rotting 

at the base of the window. There are many areas where the paint is peeling and falling off the 

walls below LH/106. 

Stair flight #6: No stairs have been strengthened or show any visible cracking.

LH/106: There have been three major masonry 

repairs, one above each landing support beam, 

which continues to the level above and one 

above the center of the landing, which extends 

approximately 6 feet above the landing. All of 

these repairs seem to be holding well, though 

paint is peeling away in areas along the wall.

Stair flight #7: No stairs have been strengthened 

or show any visible cracking.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 95

Figure 31 Detail of masonry repair located above 

landing support beam.

LH/107: There have been two major masonry 

repairs, one above each landing support beam, 

which continues to the level below. Both of 

these repairs seem to be holding well, though 

paint is peeling away in areas along the wall. 

There is a crack along the window ledge at the 

window between LH/106 and LH/107.

Stair flight #8: One stair has been strengthened 

by the addition of a steel plate bolted to the 

original open- checked plate tread.

Service Room (LH/108): There is some paint 

peeling from the walls, and there are some exposed mortar joints. No active cracks are 

apparent. Water appears to collect on the landing from condensation and minor leaks from 

above. Resulting moisture here and throughout 

the stair system can create a slipping hazard. 

Stair flight #9: Four stairs have been strengthened by the addition of a steel plate bolted to

Figure 32 Detail of water collecting on landing that 

accesses Service Room.

the original open- checked plate tread between 

LH/108 and the Watch Room (LH/109) above.

The Watch Room (LH/109): This room, providing access to the lens, has paint peeling away 

from the walls in multiple locations. Some water leakage is evident at the gallery/exterior wall 

intersection. The leakage is slight and does not 

significantly affect the structure, but does indicate the presence of moisture infiltration from 

the exterior at this level.

The Lantern Gallery, the top exterior walkway, 

shows many areas of distress. The steel plates 

that make up the exterior wall show rusting 

through the paint, especially along the plate 

joints. There are several cross- plate cracks on 

the east side of the wall, as well. The handrails 

are badly deteriorated along the entire perimeter, though they have not rusted through yet. 

They are stronger than they appear, due to 

some residual strength, but it is doubtful that 

they could withstand the 200- pound lateral
Physical Description

96 National Park Service SERO

Figure 33 Detail of peeling paint in Watch Room.

load mandated by current building codes. The 

top side of the floor plate shows some rusting 

but is adequate to support a man, though probably not the 100 pounds per square foot 

mandated by current building codes for public 

access areas. The brackets which support the 

gallery could not be closely inspected, due to 

lack of access, but at least a portion of one of 

the brackets has fallen to the ground. The condition of the gallery railing, installed in the 

1960s, which is severely corroded, can give 

some indication of the condition of the support 

metal below the gallery, installed in 1872. It 

should be noted that these conditions have 

been in evidence since at least the 1989 structural evaluation performed by the U.S. Corps of 

Engineers for the Coast Guard, and have been 

repeatedly mentioned in subsequent reports. 

These reports and the warnings contained 

therein should be taken very seriously. Recommendations regarding these components may 

be found in the “Ultimate Treatment and Use” 

portion of this report.

Figure 34 View from Lantern Gallery.

Loads and Stress Evaluation

The National Park Service wishes to open the 

Tower for access to the public. However, past 

evaluations have intimated that the stair system 

and exterior gallery may not be safe for the 

numbers of people the Park hopes to attract. 

An estimate by a volunteer at Currituck Beach 

Lighthouse, the sister lighthouse to Bodie Island, concluded that, if the Bodie Island 

Lighthouse was opened to the public for touring, the park could initially attract 200,000 to 

300,000 visitors annually and could eventually 

attract as many as 500,000 visitors annually.212

This estimate is based on a two- year survey of 

visitors to the Lighthouse who wished to climb 

to the top. In response to this, Hartrampf, Inc. 

presents the following structural evaluation.

212. McCombs, Jack, to Deborah E. Harvey, e-mail 

dated 9 May 2002.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 97

STAIR SYSTEM

Fortunately, physical evidence on site and the 

efforts of an interested volunteer researcher led 

to the identification of the supplier of the steel 

shapes in the Lighthouse, such as the beams 

supporting the landings, as the Phoenix Iron 

Company, Phoenixville, Pennsylvania.213 This 

company was well- known, and frequently 

used by the government to supply iron shapes 

for structures, including other lighthouses such 

as Currituck Beach Lighthouse, which was 

built in 1873. The company is listed in Iron and 

Steel Beams, 1873 to 1952, a publication that was 

assembled by the American Institute of Steel 

Construction (AISC) to document and catalog 

steel shapes that are no longer produced or that 

have changed properties over the years. The 

book contains tables showing, among other 

things, dimensions, weight, and stress factors 

for steel and wrought iron shapes produced by 

the companies listed in it. Unfortunately, the 

company listed by Holland in History of the 

Bodie Island Light Station as supplying the iron 

for the Bodie Island Lighthouse, Paulding, 

Kemble, & Co. of West Point Foundry, New 

York,214 was not listed. Therefore, data for 

shapes from the Phoenix Iron Company were 

used in the analysis of the steel members of the 

stairs, as well as being extrapolated from the 

known properties of wrought iron of the time.

The stairs were analyzed in two parts: the individual treads and the stringers. The handrails 

were not analyzed. The first part of the analysis 

concerned allowable loads, that is, how many 

pounds per square inch the subject component 

can withstand. According to Iron and Steel 

Beams, wrought iron produced by the Phoenix 

Iron Company was rated for unit stress at 12 ksi 

(12,000 lbs. per square inch).215 The treads 

were analyzed for the maximum amount of 

load that would be possible to generate as a result of a 300- lb. visitor standing on the tread. 

The fact that the stair tread is an open- check, 

that is, not a solid plate, was factored into the 

calculations. The effects of stress on the treads 

as a result of fatigue (age and impact) will be 

discussed later in this analysis. The result of the 

load stress calculations was a maximum load of 

8.3 ksi, well below the 12 ksi limit. This indicates 

that the stair treads can withstand the demands 

of public access based on current building 

codes. The stringers were analyzed for the 

maximum weight that would be generated by 

persons ascending and descending the stairs 

(100 psf) plus the weight of the stair treads and 

handrails. This resulted in considerable deflection and a 10.3 ksi load. Although this stress is 

below the 12 ksi maximum allowed, it is too 

close for comfort, especially given the age of the 

wrought iron and concerns about fatigue (see 

the following paragraph). In addition, the existing stringers do not meet current allowable 

deflections for public access. To meet current 

codes, a support would have to be added midflight to each flight of stairs. The support must 

span both stringers rather than support only 

the one closest to the wall as the current 

213. McCombs, Jack, to Deborah E. Harvey, e-mail 

dated 23 April 2002.

214. Holland, 1967, p. 39.

215. Ferris, Herbert W., comp. and ed., Iron and Steel 

Beams, 1873 to 1952, American Institute of Steel 

Construction, Chicago, 1985, p. 5.
Physical Description

98 National Park Service SERO

stringer support at the bottom of the first flight 

of stairs does. The addition of such a support, 

which could be attached to the masonry using 

an epoxy type anchor rather than an expansion 

anchor to avoid further damage to the masonry 

itself, would result in the stringer meeting current code requirements for deflections and 

loading in public access areas. 

According to The Manual of Steel Construction 

Allowable Stress Design, Ninth Edition, produced by the American Institute of Steel 

Construction, “[f]atigue...is defined as the 

damage that may result in fracture after a sufficient number of fluctuations of stress. Stress 

range is defined as the magnitude of these 

fluctuations. ...consideration shall be given to 

the number of stress cycles, the expected range 

of stress, and the type and location of member...”.216 Early steel and wrought iron has less 

than 2/3 the strength of modern steel and 

wrought iron, so fatigue factors come into play 

when determining the safety of the stair treads 

and stringers. The stair treads are very close to 

the limit for fatigue stress. However, this is 

mainly a concern after a crack has started. Fatigue cracks generally form on the bottom 

surface of a fatigued member. The National 

Park Service should implement an inspection 

schedule of the underside of the stair treads, 

where cracks are likely to develop first. Fatigued treads should be replaced, and regular 

inspections made thereafter. Except for the 

treads that already have fatigue cracks, the existing stair treads are safe for visitors to use.

LANDINGS

The landing plates and beams were also analyzed for load. The landing plates are formed 

with bracing ribs integral to the plates. The 

plates could deflect by 1” at a load of 100 lbs. 

per square inch. This would be noticeable to 

someone walking across the landing, but is not 

dangerous. However, the size of the landings 

prevents that amount of load from ever being 

present as the dimensions will not allow 

enough visitors on the landing at the same time 

to result in a load that could cause such a deflection. Additionally, the integral bracing 

prevents the plates from deflecting out of plane, 

so a higher unit stress load (18 ksi) can be used. 

Based on the structural analysis and a maximum load result of 4.6 ksi, the conclusion is 

that the landing plates will not fail even if fully 

loaded. The beams, which are 10 1⁄2” wrought 

iron, are no longer manufactured. The analysis 

of the beams includes interpretation of the results of stress fatigue based on methods 

provided by the Manual of Steel Construction 

Allowable Stress Design. The material of the 

beam resulted in a stress category designation 

A: plain material, base metal with rolled or 

cleaned surface. A stress cycle load was calculated based on the number of visitors that the 

tower might accommodate daily, given the 

probable frequency of groups of visitors to the 

top and number of those visitors in each group 

that could physically occupy the upper levels. 

This load resulted in a loading condition num216. American Institute of Steel Construction, Manual 

of Steel Construction Allowable Stress Design, 

Ninth Edition, Chicago, 1989, Appendix K, p. 5-

106.
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 99

ber 3, approximately 200 applications every day 

for 25 years. Using these figures, the allowable 

stress range for the beam is calculated at 24 ksi. 

The beam, also, is capable of withstanding the 

demands of public access as defined by current 

building codes.

HANDRAILS

The handrails of the stairs and landings were 

not analyzed for strength. They do not meet 

current safety codes, which require a 4” or less 

space between pickets. Modifications to these 

handrails to meet codes will result in non- historic treatments. One of these treatment 

options would be to fabricate and install new 

handrails with the proper spacing. Another 

would be to install a non- clouding, rigid plastic 

barrier or a mesh at the railings to prevent falls. 

Though neither of these options represents an 

historic treatment, the second is a more reversible modification that is easily identifiable as 

non- historic, while the first would be permanent and might be mistaken by visitors as 

representing an original installation.

GALLERY

The exterior gallery was not analyzed for public access. Visual observation of the condition 

of the surface and supports indicates that considerable strengthening of the gallery members 

would be required before visitors could safely 

be allowed on the gallery. Such strengthening 

would include re- fabrication of missing and 

deteriorated parts, both of the ornamental 

ironwork and structural components such as 

Figure 35 Detail of handrail.

the decking and handrail supports. The handrail has been worn away by weather over time 

and will eventually need to be replaced regardless of whether the gallery is open to the public. 

At this time, it is doubtful that it would support 

the weight required by current codes. The addition of structural strengthening members 

beneath the deck may be required to meet current requirements for loads on the gallery 

should the National Park Service wish to allow 

the public access to it. The inability to access 

the gallery is likely to be a great disappointment 

to visitors to the top of the Tower. It is suggested that the door be opened so that visitors 

can look out, but that a barrier of some kind, 

perhaps as little as a theater rope or stout chain, 
Physical Description

100 National Park Service SERO

be fixed across the door when it is opened to 

remind visitors not to step out on the gallery 

until it can be strengthened and made safe for 

visitation.

The conclusion of the structural analysis is as 

follows:

• The stair treads, landing plates, and beams 

are capable of withstanding modern load 

and stress requirements for public access.

• The stair stringers are not cable of withstanding these requirements and should be 

braced, mid- flight, on each flight, with an 

historically- appropriate brace similar to 

the one at the bottom of the first flight of 

stairs. This bracing should span both 

stringers, and could be attached to the 

masonry surface with an epoxy anchor to 

avoid additional expansive stresses on the 

masonry wall. If properly designed, located 

beneath the stair treads, and painted, such 

a support should be essentially invisible to 

the casual visitor.

• The interior handrails do not meet current 

codes. Modifications to them to meet current safety codes would result in non- historic treatments, either permanent or 

temporary.

• The exterior gallery should not be opened 

to public visitation until it has been 

repaired, and additional structural support 

and a new handrail installed. Until such 

repair has been completed, visitors could 

be allowed to appreciate the view through 

the door to the gallery but should not be 

allowed to step out on it.

Data from the structural evaluation may be 

found in the Appendix to this report.

Electrical Evaluation

The electrical service entrance for the Bodie 

Island Lighthouse is provided via underground 

service. The utility meter is mounted on the 

west side of the entrance to the Oil House, and 

the meter indicates 120/240 V service (see Figure 36).

The main service conductors run from the 

meter box to the 100A distribution panel in the 

Oil Room. The service conductors are routed 

in electrical tubing and are severely bent in 

many locations. There is no size indicated on 

the exterior sheathing, and concerns about 

possible asbestos insulation prevented examination to determine the size of the conductors. 

There is a bare copper conductor running from 

the ground bar of the service distribution panel 

parallel to the service entrance tubing and into 

the earth. The ground conductor runs in a flex 

conduit without protection once it leaves the 

Oil House.

The routing of the service conductors and 

grounding cable runs from the utility meter to 

above the door of the Oil House entrance (see 

Figure 37), penetrates the door (Figure 38), is 

routed across the south wall of the Hall to 

above the Oil Room door, and penetrates the 

door to the distribution panel (see Figure 39).

The distribution panel is a 12- circuit panel with 

a 100A main circuit breaker located in the north 

wall of the Oil Room (see Figure 40).
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 101

 

 

 

 

The 12 circuits are:

• Ckt. #1Room lights (20A)Ckt. # 2Main light 

(2 pole 40A)

• Ckt. # 3Stair light (20A)Ckt. # 4Main light 

(2 pole 40A)

• Ckt. # 5Receptacle (20A)Ckt. # 6Light 

(20A)

• Ckt. # 7Receptacle # 1 (20A)Ckt. # 8

Receptacle #4 (20A)

• Ckt. # 9Receptacle # 2 (20A)Ckt. # 10

Receptacle # 5 (20A)

• Ckt. # 11Receptacle # 3 (20A)Ckt. # 12

Space.

Figure 36 Detail of utility meter.

Figure 37 Detail of utility routing through door frame

Figure 38 Detail of electrical line.

Figure 39 Detail of electrical wiring access to 

distribution panel.

Figure 40 Detail of distribution panel.
Physical Description

102 National Park Service SERO

Figure 41 Lightning rod installed on gallery handrail.

Circuit number 5 is the receptacle for the Work 

Room, and receptacles designated with numbers 1 through 5 are receptacles installed 

recently to support the ongoing maintenance 

program by the National Park Service. Cables 

for circuits number 1, 3, and 6 look older. They 

may be those installed during the 1992 electrical 

renovation.

Stair lights consist of a light fixture at each 

landing level on the north wall of the Tower. 

With the exception of the ground level landing 

and the first floor landing, the rest of the lights 

do not work; either light bulbs need to be 

changed or wiring problems may exist. 

Cables to the main light (circuits number 2 and 

4) are in good condition and appear to have 

been installed recently. The cables are routed 

through a PVC conduit with fittings from the 

ground level to the main lights. Conduit and 

Figure 42 Conduit for lightning protection, located at 

tower base.

fittings are in good condition. Conduit continues to the control box in the Watch Room level 

and then to the main light.

There are number of lightning rods installed on 

the handrail of the gallery and supported by the 

handrail (see Figure 40) with two opposite 

down conductors (2/0) on the north and south 

side of the Lighthouse. The two down conductors are bare copper and are routed exposed to 

approximately 14’ above ground, then routed to 

a 1⁄2” schedule 40 PVC conduit to the earth (see 

Figure 41). There was no indication of what the 

down conductors were connected to underground (ground rods, ground ring, or both). 

The original lightning rod at the top of the ventilator ball is no longer connected to any down 

conductors. However, a bare copper cable runs 

from a newel post at the base of the Tower 

stairs, along the perimeter of the ground floor 

of the Tower, through the window on the north 

side of the Hall Connection (H/100), and down 

the wall on the exterior into the ground. This 
PART 1 DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 103

may be part of the cable installed in 1884 to replace the original lightning protection system. 

It is not known if this cable is attached to any 

ground plate or grid underground. It is, however, attached to the bottom newel post of the 

stairs. This is a safety concern. If it is connected 

to nothing underground, the possibility exists 

for a lightning strike to electrify the stairs and 

landings, which could cause injury to anyone 

standing on or touching them at the time. If it is 

desired to retain this feature because of possible historic value, a connection to an 

underground grounding grid should be verified 

or made, or the cable should be disconnected 

from the stairway and secured so that it will not 

touch the stairs or any other metal. Otherwise, 

it should be removed.

The Lighthouse is powered by underground 

commercial power. 1963 U.S. Coast Guard 

drawings show overhead poles and electrical 

modifications to install a diesel generator, automatic transfer switch, and fuel tanks inside 

the Oil Room. However, the generator, intended to be used as a backup to commercial 

power, and its accessories have since been removed, and the Lighthouse is currently 

operating with commercial power only.
Physical Description

104 National Park Service SERO
http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 105

PART 2 TREATMENT & USE

Requirements for 

Treatment & Use

Legal mandates and policy directives circumscribe treatment of 

the Bodie Island Lighthouse. Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act (NHPA) mandates that federal agencies, including the National Park Service, take into account the effects of their 

actions on properties listed or eligible for listing in the National 

Register and give the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a 

reasonable opportunity to comment. NHPA regulations (36 CFR 

800.10) mandate special requirement for protecting National 

Landmarks. Section 110(f) of the Act requires that the Agency Official, to the maximum extent possible, undertake such planning 

and actions as may be necessary to minimize harm to any National 

Historic Landmark that may be directly and adversely affected by 

any undertaking. The National Park Service’s “Cultural Resource 

Management Guideline” (DO- 28) requires planning for the protection of cultural resources whether or not they relate to the 

specific authorizing legislation or interpretive programs of the 

parks in which they lie. The Bodie Island Lighthouse should be 

understood in its own cultural context and managed in light of its 

own value so that it may be preserved, unimpaired, for the enjoyment of present and future generations. To help guide compliance 

with these statutes and regulations, the Secretary of the Interior 

has issued Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. The 
Requirements for Treatment & Use

106 National Park Service SERO

National Park Service’s Preservation Briefs also 

provide detailed guidelines for appropriate 

treatment of a variety of materials, features, 

and conditions found in historic buildings.

Historic preservation is the primary component of the National Park Service mission for 

the Bodie Island Lighthouse. The General 

Management Plan (GMP) for the Cape Hatteras National Seashore was prepared prior to 

the National Park Service taking possession of 

the Bodie Island Lighthouse from the United 

States Coast Guard. An update of the Cape 

Hatteras National Seashore General Management Plan should consider and incorporate the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse.

Given the ownership and mission of the National Park Service at this site, the alternatives 

for use of the Lighthouse are limited. The appropriate use is for preservation of a significant 

historic resource and its interpretation as a 

navigational aid on the coast of North Carolina. 

This statement of use is the authors’, since the 

currently approved General Management Plan 

(GMP) was prepared prior to the acquisition of 

the property by the National Park Service. 

Thus, there is no direction provided in a General Management Plan for the Bodie Island 

Lighthouse. 

The United States Coast Guard managed and 

operated the Lighthouse, conducting repairs 

and maintenance activities as needed, until 

2000, when the National Park Service acquired 

the property on which the Lighthouse sits and 

all appurtenances thereto except the original 

Fresnel lamp at the top of the Tower. The Coast 

Guard expects to operate the light until 2010 

and retains access rights and ownership of the 

lamp. Because the light remains in use as a navigational aid, treatment must not interfere with 

that use. Existing electrical power and other 

features directly related to its ongoing use as an 

aid to navigation must be maintained.

Visitor access is a significant issue for this 

property. First, it is not possible to provide 

wheelchair accessibility to any part of the interior of the building without having a significant 

negative effect on it. Even the installation of a 

wheelchair ramp to the Oil House would result 

in either the obliteration of the existing entrance stairway or the creation of a new 

opening to the building, thus damaging the historic character of the building. This is an 

undesirable effect. Therefore, under the provisions of ADA, an “alternative minimum” 

approach to accessibility should be developed 

by the National Park Service that will allow interpreting the interior of the Lighthouse and 

the experience of ascending to the lantern level 

for those who are physically unable to accomplish this. The National Park Service has 

existing guidelines for developing such a 

program.

While access by the able- bodied is possible, 

there are several factors that serve to limit that 

access as well, even after modifications to the 

stair stringers has brought them within code
PART 2 TREATMENT AND USE

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 107

Figure 43 Detail of stair showing tread repair.

requirements. The Watch and Lantern levels at 

the top of the Tower have a limited physical capacity: possibly no more than four people 

could be comfortably or safely accommodated 

within either of these spaces at a time. The 

landings have decreasing physical capacity as 

the stairs ascend, and, from a safety perspective, it is undesirable to have people passing on 

the stairs or standing on the landings for any 

great length of time. Therefore, only small 

groups should be allowed in the Tower at a 

time. Based on the strength and physical capacity of the stairs and landings, it might be 

possible to have as many as five groups of four 

in the Tower at one time, but it would be better 

to manage those groups so that they pass on 

landings rather than on stairs because of the 

narrowness of the stairs rather than because of 

any lack of strength in the stair members. This 

management could tend to be labor intensive, 

as it would probably require the services of 

volunteers based on several levels of the Tower 

to interpret the Lighthouse and maintain the 

safety of the visitors and the equipment.

Other safety issues must also be considered. 

The dimension between the pickets on the interior hand railing is as much as 7”, well over 

the code for child safety and significant modification would be required to meet safety 

standards for railings. The recommended 

method for making the landing railings safe is 

to install clear, non- yellowing, rigid plastic 

barriers behind the existing historic railings. A 

second option for the stair railings could be the 

installation of a metal mesh inside the railing 

pickets. Either of these barriers would be nonpermanent and clearly not historic, and could 

not be mistaken by visitors for an historic installation. The third option would be to 

fabricate and install railings with pickets at the 

spacing currently required for public access areas. These, however, would be a permanent 

installation that could be mistaken for historic 

railings.

Another safety concern has been the possibility 

of visitors falling out of windows. While on the 

stairs, it would be very difficult for visitors to 

“fall” out of the windows, as this would generally require climbing over the stair railing and 

standing on the window stool to accomplish. At 

the 8th level, however, it might be possible for 

visitors to get close enough to a window to fall 

out. Currently, the windows are painted shut or 

are not operable. However, should the National 

Park Service follow the recommendations 

found later in this report to ventilate the Tower 

by opening the windows, fall protection should 

be installed to prevent visitors from tumbling 

out in attempts to see out or to get a photograph from high in the Tower. This fall 
Requirements for Treatment & Use

108 National Park Service SERO

protection could be something as simple as a 

bar installed across the window opening at 

about 4’ from the floor to remind visitors not to 

access the window stool or something more 

substantial, such as a barred grille, across the 

lower part of the window. Either such device 

should be too close to the bottom of the window to allow a visitor to crawl between it and 

the window stool, and too high for the visitor to 

climb over.

Visitors should not be allowed on the gallery 

under any circumstances until it has been 

strengthened and the railing made safe. The 

gallery can currently support one or two people on occasion, for maintenance or inspection 

purposes, but should not be made available to 

anyone without fall protection. To allow visitors to see out at that level of the Tower, the 

door to the gallery could be opened, but a barrier should be put across the opening to remind 

visitors not to access the gallery. This barrier 

could be something as simple as a theater rope 

or stout chain, or something as complex and 

sturdy as a grilled panel.

Consideration should also be given to safety issues regarding electrical power in the building. 

The main electrical panel is in the Oil Room. 

Power is delivered to the lamp at the lantern 

level in a conduit mounted on the wall in the 

Tower. The conduit is adjacent to the stairs and 

accessible to visitors. The conduit is new, is 

contained in PVC, and does not pose a hazard 

to visitors unless, for some reason, they decide 

to try to pull it off the wall. Posted warning 

signs directing visitors not to touch the electrical conduit should be sufficient to protect them 

from it. However, the electrical panel and wiring in the Oil Room should be protected from 

visitors, either by restricting access to the room 

or by building an enclosure around it to prevent 

visitor access. 

There is one other issue associated with use. To 

properly maintain the masonry walls of the 

Tower that are showing signs of dampness in 

the masonry, it is critical to be able to use the 

original means of venting the building: opening 

the Tower windows. At this time, the windows 

are kept shut or are fixed. To most effectively 

vent the building and keep moisture as close to 

a desirable level as possible, the use of the designed, natural ventilation is necessary. It is 

recommended that the National Park Service 

implement a program of opening the windows 

on a regular basis to provide ventilation to the 

interior of the building to mitigate the problem 

of moisture condensation that is the cause of 

most, if not all, of the surface finish and feature 

disintegration. Such a program may not completely alleviate the moisture problems, but it 

will go a long way to preventing the acceleration of the deterioration of the finishes on the 

interior of the Lighthouse. 
PART 2 TREATMENT AND USE

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 109

Alternatives for 

Treatment & Use

The preferred treatment for the Bodie Island Lighthouse is to preserve it, repairing degraded features as necessary for appearance 

and safety, and to interpret the entire useful history of the Lighthouse, which is not yet at an end. The parameters of such a 

treatment are outlined in the following section, entitled “Ultimate 

Treatment and Use.” There are, however, alternatives for this 

treatment that could be considered, either immediately or in the 

future.

Alternatives for treatment could include:

• To return to one of the oil- powered systems. This would 

require considerable investment to restore and operate 

equipment compared to the preferred approach stated above.

• To return to the 1932 lamp and generator- driven power 

source. The requirements of this approach are similar but 

operationally less complicated than the oil- powered system 

approach.

• To return to the 1953 configuration, when commercial power 

was installed. This would require installation of the same type 

of equipment as the 1932 approach, plus the reinstallation of 

such things as power poles and wiring, but would not be as 
Alternatives for Treatment & Use

110 National Park Service SERO

expensive and complicated to operate as 

either of the above options.

• To move forward in a manner appropriate 

to an operating lighthouse. Because the 

Lighthouse is still in operation and is being 

put to its original use, the argument could 

be made that it is still in the formative stages 

of its history. Should the National Park 

Service desire to make it possible for many 

visitors to travel to the top of the Lighthouse and access the gallery for the experience of being in an operational maritime 

aid to navigation, as opposed to the experience of being in a dormant lighthouse, the 

structural members could be strengthened 

in a manner that would still be sensitive to 

the original design and configuration, and 

modifications could be made to the handrails, stairs, and windows that would prevent accidental death or injury from falls, 

thus allowing a greater measure of safety 

for visitors. This option is close to the one 

presented in the “Ultimate Treatment and 

Use” portion of this report.

In both of the first three alternatives, the nonpower- related improvements would be similar 

in scope. For the most part, the modifications 

to moldings, doors, and windows have been 

sufficiently recent that the 1953 conditions substantially return to the original details and 

characteristics of wood moldings and doors as 

shown in the original construction documents, 

with the exception of some differing paint finishes on the interior and treatments such as 

shutters on the exterior. The third alternative 

would result in some non- contributing modifications that would, nevertheless, expand the 

range of visitors to the Lighthouse.
PART 2 TREATMENT & USE

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 111

Ultimate Treatment 

& Use

The proposed use is as a visitor interpretation of maritime navigational history on the North Carolina coast while retaining the 

existing power service and continuing to operate the light as a 

navigational aid. The proposed treatment is preservation of the 

existing facility.

The following represents recommendations for treatment of the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse to accomplish the preservation objective 

and allow visitors to tour the Oil House and Tower in a safe 

environment.

The Lighthouse can be divided into four separate work projects, 

worked either concurrently or individually: the exterior of the Oil 

House, including the Hall Connection, the exterior of the Tower, 

the interior of the Oil House, including the Hall Connection, and 

the interior of the Tower.

The 1996 paint analyses of the Oil House indicated the presence of 

lead in paint beneath the top surface paint. Lead paint abatement 

on painted surfaces of the exterior of the Oil House should be 

performed. After the paint has been removed and before the application of a new coat of paint, an inspection should be made of 

the granite, brick, and mortar forming the foundation and walls of 
Ultimate Treatment & Use

112 National Park Service SERO

the Oil House and Hall Connection. It is not 

anticipated that any structural defects will be 

found in either the foundation or the brick 

walls, but the condition of these features 

should be documented before any masking 

layers of paint are applied to the surfaces. If repointing is found to be necessary, testing 

should be performed on the mortar to determine its composition. Repointing mortar 

should be formulated to match the existing 

mortar in composition to prevent future stress 

on the blocks or bricks of the foundation and 

walls from incompatible mortar. It is not recommended that the existing exterior electrical 

meter be moved, as it is in its original location. 

See the electrical recommendations at the end 

of this section for comments on the possible 

presence of asbestos wiring insulation. The 

rotted wood bracket on the northwest corner 

of the Oil House should be repaired or replaced 

to match the other bracket. Following inspection, repairs, and, if necessary, repointing, the 

Oil House and Hall Connection should be repainted. Consult the paint analysis for an 

appropriate color scheme. It is unclear when 

shutters formerly attached to the Oil House 

were removed. If this occurred under the stewardship of the National Park Service, they 

should be reinstalled and painted a light color 

as indicated in the most recent pictures in 

which they appear.

The roof of the Oil House and Hall Connection 

is reaching the end of its useful life. The last 

known roof installation occurred before 1977. 

In addition, the copper flashing appears to be 

in need of replacement. The existing roof and

Figure 44 Detail of foundation showing mortar 

leaching.

decking should be removed. While it is removed, an inspection should be made of the 

roof framing over the Oil House and Hall Connection and conditions fully documented. 

Before a new roof is installed, any rotted members should be replaced. The east chimney, 

which is leaning, should be inspected to verify 

that the chimney is not experiencing distress 

below the roofline. A new roof deck, new roof 

flashing, and new roofing should be installed 

using asphalt composition shingles matching 

the current existing color.

The stone foundation and brick walls of the 

exterior of the Tower do not appear to be in 

distress. Leaching of the mortar from the foundation, likely caused by rising damp, is not 

sufficient to jeopardize the stability of the 

structure. Cleaning of the exterior joints and 

repointing will be required periodically, as it 

would on any stone or brick structure, and 

should be performed at this time with a mortar 

appropriate to the existing mortar. However, a 

closer inspection of the brick Tower, especially 
PART 2 TREATMENT & USE

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 113

of the upper levels,should be performed to 

document that cracks appearing in the interior 

of the Tower do not penetrate to the exterior. 

Like the Oil House, the paint of the Tower contains lead. The paint on the exterior of the 

Tower should be removed. Paint removal, inspection, and repainting will require the 

construction of scaffolding or the employment 

of some other means to reach the top of the 

Tower. To most efficiently use this means of 

reaching the upper exterior reaches of the 

Tower, the paint of all exterior metal portions 

of the Tower should also be removed at this 

time and all metal parts thoroughly inspected 

for damage and documented. In addition, the 

roof of the Tower, composed of 3/32” sheet 

copper, and the ventilator ball at the top 

should be inspected from the outside for damage, and conditions documented. If the Park 

Service prefers to repair the existing gallery to 

make it safe for maintenance and inspection 

activities but not allow visitor access at this 

time, missing parts should be fabricated and 

installed, repair welding should be performed 

on cracks in exterior metal plating and ground 

smooth to achieve the proper exterior finish, 

and a new railing should be installed. If the 

National Park Service is determined to 

strengthen the exterior gallery to allow visitors 

access to it, design and contract documents 

should be drawn based on the verified conditions. It is likely that considerable fabrication 

and installation of new strengthening members 

will occur in this case, in addition to repair of 

existing deteriorated features and replacement 

of the exterior railing, which should be replaced in either case. The engineers designing 

the structural strengthening members and the 

contractors fabricating new parts and making 

repairs will want close access to the surfaces to 

field verify conditions found after paint removal and before new paint coats are applied. 

To maintain the existing presentation of the 

historic exterior, it is preferable to install a 

railing that matches the one installed by the 

Coast Guard in 1965. However, if visitor access 

is to be allowed in the future, the Park Service 

may opt to install one that meets current code 

requirements.

After paint removal, inspection of surfaces, and 

installation of needed repair materials, the 

metal and brick surfaces of the exterior of the 

Tower should be repainted using the historic 

color scheme that has been in use since at least 

1945. This includes painting of the granite surfaces surrounding the windows, which were 

originally not painted, but have now been 

painted for nearly sixty years. It does not include painting the vertical surface of the base 

capstone which was inadvertently overpainted 

during the 1997 painting of the Tower and 

should be returned to its historically unpainted 

condition. If inspection of the copper roof and 

ventilator ball indicates repair or replacement is 

necessary, these features should be repaired or 

replaced at this time. The lamp should be 

reglazed, with clouded and crazed panes 

replaced.

On the interior of the Oil House and Hall Connection, lead paint documented in the 1996 

paint analyses should be removed. With the 

paint removed, the brick interior walls and the 

wooden surfaces should be inspected, docu-
Ultimate Treatment & Use

114 National Park Service SERO

mented, and repaired where necessary before 

repainting. Reinstallation of missing features, 

such as shelving or power generation equipment, should not be undertaken, though it 

might be educational to seal the walls exhibiting the ghosts of past shelving against moisture 

with a clear sealer instead of repainting them. 

Additionally, it is not recommended to attempt 

to return to earlier woodwork profiles or door 

or window hardware. Existing features should 

be preserved wherever possible or replaced in 

kind where necessary. The wood floor in the 

Work Room should be refinished and sealed. If, 

in the future, it becomes necessary to replace 

this floor for any reason, the framing below 

should be inspected, thoroughly documented, 

and any rotted members replaced. In the Hall, 

Hall Connection, and Oil Room, the marble 

floors should be cleaned and any cracked or 

missing tiles replaced. It is not recommended 

to replace the cementitious material that marks 

the locations of former power- generation 

equipment. The electrical panel must be protected from visitors to the Oil House. This may 

involve restricting access of visitors to the Oil 

Room in some way or building a protective 

screen around the equipment. The equipment 

should not be moved, as it is in its historic location. The flue vent in the fireplace of the Oil 

House should not be blocked where the blockage would be visible to visitors, but should be 

blocked on the interior to prevent insects, 

birds, and rain from accessing the Oil Room. 

Since neither fireplace is currently used, nor 

have they been used for many years, it might be 

useful to block both of them in this manner. 

The electrical wiring should be inspected and 

replaced as necessary. See electrical recommendations at the end of this section. Light 

fixtures should be inspected and repaired or 

replaced in kind if necessary. After inspections 

and repairs have been made, the interior surfaces of the Oil House and Hall Connection 

that were painted should be repainted. Consult 

the 2002 paint analysis for a color scheme.

The first step in the preservation of the Tower 

should be the restoration of the natural ventilation system present in the first design. The 

Tower windows should be made operable by 

removing paint that holds them shut and installing appropriate hardware. A systematic 

program should be implemented to open the 

windows regularly to provide ventilation and 

reduce moisture condensation on the interior 

of the Tower. The finding regarding the vertical 

cracks on the interior of the Tower is that the 

cracks are the result of thermal expansion and 

contraction, exacerbated by moisture infiltration resulting from condensation on the 

interior of the Tower, not by moisture penetrating the Tower from the outside. Therefore, a 

reduction in condensation should result in a 

reduction in the deterioration of the mortar 

surrounding the brickwork as well as a reduction in the rate of deterioration of the the metal 

surfaces.

Paint should be removed from the surfaces of 

the interior of the Tower, both the brick walls 

and the metal stair and landing system, up to 

the 8th landing. It may not be necessary to remove paint from the metal well in the center of 

the ground floor of the Tower or from the railings at the access stairs between the Hall 
PART 2 TREATMENT & USE

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 115

Connection and the Tower, as these features do 

not appear to be experiencing distress. However, removal of this paint would result in a 

uniform appearance of all the metal surfaces in 

the Tower when repainting occurs. With the 

paint removed, surfaces should be inspected 

for cracks that may have been masked by the 

multiple paint layers, and conditions documented. The mortar should be tested to 

determine its composition. Only one of the 

cracks in the Tower is considered to be active. 

This should not be construed to mean that the 

Tower walls are unstable. Past repairs to this 

crack have failed, probably due to faulty surface 

preparation. Cracks should be repaired using a 

deep- penetration method and appropriate 

mortar. Damage around bearing beams at the 

landings should also be repaired using this 

method. Deteriorated mortar joints on other 

parts of the brick interior should be cleaned 

and repaired with a mortar appropriate to the 

existing mortar. The underside of the stair 

treads should be inspected for stress cracks and 

treads requiring replacement documented. It 

will probably be necessary to disassemble the 

stair assemblies to replace damaged stair 

treads. Damaged stair treads should be replaced with new cast iron treads matching the 

original design. The original stair fabrication 

drawings are available to allow an accurate replica to be produced. Bracing should also be 

installed on each flight of stairs, mid- flight, to 

bring the stair stringers up to code. These 

braces should span both stringers rather than 

just being attached to one stringer as the original bracing at the top and bottom of the stair 

system is. If installed beneath the stairs, designed in an historically appropriate 

configuration, and painted to match the stairs, 

this bracing should be essentially invisible to 

visitors. After paint removal, inspection, and 

repair activities are completed, the walls and 

stairs should be repainted using an appropriate 

color scheme. This includes repainting the interior window stools, which were historically 

painted. The metal railings around the well in 

the center of the ground floor of the Tower and 

the railings at the stair access from the Hall 

Connection to the Tower should also be 

painted. Consult the 2002 paint analysis for appropriate colors. A program should be 

implemented by the National Park Service to 

inspect the underside of the stairs on a regular 

basis to detect any further stress cracks. If not 

covered by 1/8th inch of paint layers, as they are 

currently, cracks in the stairs should be detectable before they become severe. After painting 

is completed, the marble floor tiles on the 

ground level of the Tower should be cleaned 

and any cracked or missing tiles replaced to 

match existing.

The landing level railings should be modified to 

provide fall protection. This can be done either 

by fabricating and installing new railings with 

pickets less than 4” apart or by installing a clear, 

non- yellowing, rigid plastic barrier or a metal 

mesh barrier on the inside of the railing. The 

second option is preferred, as it could be a 

temporary installation and would be obviously 

a non- historic addition that could not be mistaken for an original installation. The Park 

Service should also consider installation of fall 

protection, possibly mesh, on the inside of the 
Ultimate Treatment & Use

116 National Park Service SERO

stair railings. The possibility of visitors falling 

out of windows on levels below the 8th level is 

remote. On the 2nd and 5th landing levels, visitors could have access to the openings, but the 

ledges are several feet wide, and falling out 

would require standing or sitting on the window stool. It is not likely a visitor could fall out 

of a window simply by leaning over the stool. 

At the other windows, the stair railing prevents 

easy access to the window stools. However, if 

desired, a single bar installed across the opening to the windows at landing levels, at the 

furthest point in the wall from the window and 

several inches above the top of the window 

stool, should deter visitors from accessing the 

window ledges and possibly falling from windows that have been opened to provide 

ventilation to the Tower.

Treatment of the 8th level, the Watch Room 

level, and the Lamp Room level is somewhat 

different from that of the levels below, and so is 

discussed separately. On the 8th level and 

Watch Room level, the walls are both metal and 

brick. On the 8th level, the floor and ceiling are 

metal, but on the Watch Room level, the floor is 

metal, while the ceiling consists of a metal grate 

with prismatic glass inserts. Moisture control 

appears to be more difficult in these rooms because of a lack of means of ventilation, though 

the 8th level does have four windows. These 

windows could be easily accessed by visitors. 

Though the exterior ledges are still quite wide, 

it is recommended that fall protection be provided if these windows are opened for 

ventilation. A more substantial barrier than that 

recommended for lower levels, such as a barred 

grille, should be constructed on the interior of 

the window at the Tower wall, at least 3’ in 

height to prevent visitors from getting too close 

to the opening.

Paint should be removed from the brick and 

metal surfaces of the 8th and Watch Room levels, including the stairs and the support of the 

lamp, and the surfaces inspected for damage 

and documented. Some moisture infiltration 

has occurred at the connection between the 

masonry and the metal wall surfaces. It appears 

that this moisture is the result of leaking 

through cracks and deterioration in the metal 

surface on the outside of the tower. Repair of 

these exterior cracks and deteriorated surfaces 

should solve that problem; however, this surface should be caulked prior to painting to 

provide a moisture- proof barrier against outside water infiltration. Cracks on the interior 

metal and brick surfaces of the 8th and Watch 

Room levels should be repaired as appropriate 

and as detailed in other parts of these recommendations. There are three metal doors 

involved in this section of the Tower: one accessing the gallery, one accessing the Watch 

Room, and one designed to close either opening. They are all historic, being either original 

or installed by the Coast Guard, and they are in 

poor condition. The doors and their associated 

hardware should be repaired or replaced in 

kind and painted as appropriate. The stairs 

should be inspected for stress cracks in the 

same manner as the stairs on the other landings 

and repaired as necessary. After inspection and 

repair activities are completed on the walls, 

floor, ceiling, and stairs of the 8th level and the 
PART 2 TREATMENT & USE

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 117

walls, floor, and stairs of the Watch Room level, 

these surfaces should be painted using an appropriate color scheme. Consult the 2002 paint 

analysis for colors.

The paint on the lamp support in the Watch 

Room does not appear to be in poor condition 

and probably does not need to be removed or 

replaced. However, removal of the paint and 

repainting would result in a surface uniform 

with the rest of the metal surfaces in the Watch 

Room and is recommended. Care should be 

taken not to damage the original historic brass 

manufacturer’s plaque affixed to the lamp support column. The stairs in the Watch Room do 

not have any railings or other fall protection. In 

order to allow visitors to ascend to the top of 

the Tower and view the light and the lens, a 

standard railing with pickets conforming to 

current code requirements should be fabricated and installed at the stair from the Watch 

Room level to the lamp level and painted to 

match the stairs.

The grating that serves as both the ceiling of the 

Watch Room and the floor of the lamp level is 

missing several of the glass prisms installed in 

the inserts to provide light to the Watch Room 

below. This grating and the interior of the 

muntins in the lamp should be stripped of 

paint, inspected for defects, and repaired as 

necessary. Replacement prisms should be fabricated and securely installed in the grating. (It 

is entirely possible that some of them have been 

removed in the past as souvenirs.) The grating 

and the muntins should be repainted as appropriate, consulting the 2002 paint analysis for 

guidance on paint colors.

Figure 45 Detail of Fresnel lens.

The Fresnel lens and the light within are the 

property of the United States Coast Guard. It is 

not recommended that the Park Service undertake any repair activities on these features. 

The hood above the lens and the ventilation 

tube that connects to the ventilator ball are, 

however, features belonging to the Lighthouse 

structure. These should be cleaned, repaired if 

necessary, and painted if required. The ventilation tube is stopped up with some sort of fabric 

or paper. This should be removed. However, it 

is desirable to prevent insects, rain, or birds 

from accessing the interior of the Fresnel lens, 

so the tube should be stopped with caulk or 

other waterproof material at a distance inside 
Ultimate Treatment & Use

118 National Park Service SERO

the tube that will not be normally visible to 

visitors.

Though the electrical service was upgraded in 

1991, some electrical modifications should be 

made at the Bodie Island Lighthouse. Ideally, 

these should be accomplished together rather 

than piecemeal, and probably after the bulk of 

the preservation activities have been completed. Electrical modifications include:

• Replacing the service entrance tube with 

conduit and replacing service entrance 

cables that have suffered severe bending.

• Bonding the service entrance.

• Replacing branch circuit cables for the stair 

lights, room lights, and receptacles (circuits 

#1, 3, 5, and 6) with new cables in accordance with the latest National Electrical 

Code. Check for asbestos insulation before 

proceeding with any work.

• Replacing non- working light bulbs or 

faulty wiring on the landing areas (only 

lights on the ground level and landing 1 are 

working).

• Adding lightning protection at the highest 

point of the Tower with two down conductors.

• Verifying the connection of the existing 

lightning protection ground conductors. If 

the connection cannot be verified, consider installing a new ground ring with 

ground rods. While this is being done, it 

may be possible to verify the connection of 

the old bare copper cable that is purported 

to be part of one of the earliest lightning 

protection systems.

• Shortening and adequately supporting the 

two down conductor PVC conduits. They 

are currently about 14’ long and minimally 

supported. They could be shortened to 3’ 

or 4’ and should be better supported.

The National Park Service may want to consider removing the chain link enclosure erected 

by the Coast Guard in the 1980s to prevent visitors from accessing the stairs to the upper levels 

of the Tower. If this installation is removed, 

some repairs to the walls and floor of the 

ground level of the Tower will be necessary.

The preparers of this report believe that, if the 

recommendations outlined herein are implemented, the Bodie Island Lighthouse will be in 

a state of preservation for the enjoyment and 

education of current and future generations of 

visitors to the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. Subsequent to these preservation efforts, 

normal maintenance activities should be sufficient to maintain the Lighthouse in a state of 

repair and preservation.
http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 119

CONDITION ASSESSMENT

Introduction

Project Identification

This project consists of Title I architectural and engineering services. The project is located at the Bodie Island Light Station, at 

the Cape Hatteras National Seashore, Nags Head, North Carolina. 

The Park is under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service 

Southeast Regional Office, located in Atlanta, Georgia. The limits 

of this project are the top floors of the lighthouse, from the eighth 

floor to the top of the roof.

Project Statement and Purpose

This Condition Assessment is Volume II of the Appendix to the 

Historic Structure Report for Bodie Island Lighthouse dated June, 

2002. The inspection, assessment, and documentation of the condition of the Bodie Island Lighthouse was prepared to establish a 

baseline of conditions and a foundation of information upon 

which to make thoughtful decisions related to the restoration/rehabilitation of the lighthouse. Recommendations for treating the 

structure, as well as a Class B cost estimate for these improvements, are included in this report.
Introduction

120 National Park Service SERO

Definitions

Double Keepers’ Quarters: Duplex residence 

built for light station keepers. At Bodie Island, 

the Double Keepers’ Quarters is now used as a 

Visitor Center.

Feature Condition: The current existing condition of the named feature regarding degree of 

deterioration.

Historic Rating: Whether or not the feature is of 

historic fabric. H = Historic. N = Non- historic. 

U = Unknown.

Light Station: All property, structures, features, 

and landscapes associated with a lighthouse.

Lighthouse: The tower and attached buildings; 

in the case of Bodie Island, the Oil House is 

part of the Lighthouse.

Preservation: “The act or process of applying 

measures necessary to sustain the existing 

form, integrity, and materials of an historic 

property. Work, including preliminary measures to protect and stabilize the property, 

generally focuses upon ongoing maintenance 

and repair of historic materials and features 

rather than extensive replacement and new 

construction. New exterior additions are not 

within the scope of this treatment; however, the 

limited and sensitive upgrading of mechanical, 

electrical, and plumbing system and other 

code- required work to make properties functional is appropriate within a preservation 

project.” (SI, 1995)

Priority: During considerations regarding 

preservation, rehabilitation, reconstruction, or 

restoration of a site, building, collection of 

buildings, or other construction, the ranking 

the feature merits in restoring or retaining the 

historic nature of the construction in question 

or in complying with local, state, or Federal requirements for such a construction.

Reconstruction: “The act or process of depicting, by means of new construction, the form, 

features, and detailing of a non- surviving site, 

landscape, building, structure, or object for the 

purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period of time and in its historic location.” 

(SI, 1995)

Rehabilitation: “The act or process of making 

possible a compatible use for a property 

through repair, alterations, and additions while 

preserving those portions or features which 

convey its historical, cultural, or architectural 

values.” (SI, 1995)

Restoration: “The act or process of accurately 

depicting the form, features, and character of a 

property as it appeared at a particular period of 

time by means of the removal of features from 

other periods in its history and reconstruction 

of missing features from the restoration period. 

The limited and sensitive upgrading of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems and 

other code- required work to make properties 

functional is appropriate within a restoration 

project.” (SI, 1995)
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 121

Total Inventory: The total number of one type 

of feature (e.g. cornice, pier, toilet, etc.) contained in the investigated site or construction.

List of Abbreviations

AIA American Institute of Architects

comp. Compiler, comparable

deg. Degrees

ea. Each

ed. Edition, editor

e.g. For example

H Historic

IBC International Building Code

Inc. Incorporated

ksi Kilopounds per square inch

lf Linear feet

lb. Pound

max. Maximum

min. Minimum

N Non- historic

NPS National Park Service

P.E. Professional Engineer

pr. Pair

psf Pounds per square foot

psi Pounds per square inch

sf Square feet

SI Secretary of the Interior

U Unknown

U.S. United States

Inspection Team Information

The following persons performed an inspection of the light tower at Bodie Island 

lighthouse on November 12 and 13, 2002:

• Mr. Robert A. Bass, P.E., Structural 

• Ms. Chau Tran, P. E., Structural 

• Mr. Jack Pyburn, AIA, Historic Preservation Architect

• Mr. Scott Howell, Cast iron expert

Mr. Robert Bass and Ms. Chau Tran may be 

reached at:

Hartrampf, Inc.

180 Allen Road, Suite 217N

Atlanta, GA 30328

404- 252- 2063

bob.bass@hartrampf.com

chau.tran@hartrampf.com

Mr. Jack Pyburn may be reached at:

Office of Jack Pyburn, Architect, Inc.

1197 Peachtree St., N.E., Suite 533A

Atlanta, GA 30361

404- 685- 9015

jpyburn@ojparchitect.com

Mr. Scott Howell may be reached at:

Robinson Iron

Robinson Road

Alexander City, AL 35011- 1119

256- 329- 8486

scotty@robinson- iron.com

Methodologies

Field Investigation: On the 12th and 13th of November, 2002, a field investigation team visited 

the site to collect data concerning existing conditions at the Bodie Island Lighthouse Tower, 

8th Level and above. The investigative team 

consisted of Mr. Robert A. Bass, P.E., Structural, and Ms. Chau Tran, P.E., Structural, of 

Hartrampf, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, Mr. Jack Pyburn, AIA, of The Office of Jack Pyburn, 

Architect, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, and Mr. Scott 

Howell, cast iron expert from Robinson Iron 

Company of Alexander City, Alabama. The 

team made a visual inspection of the exterior of 

the Tower using a bucket on a crane provided 

by the International Chimney Corporation. 

Access to the interior of the lighthouse was via 

the interior stairs. No destructive inspection 
Introduction

122 National Park Service SERO

methods were used; no coverings, coatings, or 

materials were removed. Photographic documentation, including 35mm and video 

photography, was made of all features. Notes 

on features were taken. On- site National Park 

Service staff members were interviewed regarding concerns for the structure.

Collection and Analysis of Data: Information 

from the Historic Structure Report prepared by 

Hartrampf, Inc and the Office of Jack Pyburn, 

Architect, Inc., from the original construction 

drawings, and from previous inspections of the 

structure by others were assembled. Ms. Chau 

Tran modeled the structural components of 

Levels 8 and upward for strength and deflection, using Visual Analysis, a computerized 

modeling program. Reference works on 

strengths and characteristics of early cast iron, 

which is no longer used as a structural component, were consulted.

Determination of Cost Estimates: Mr. Scott 

Howell, of Robinson Iron Company, provided 

data to facilitate the estimation of costs for appropriately treating the iron components of the 

structure. Construction and design contingencies were computed for each item and are 

reflected in the listed totals. R.S. Means Repair 

& Remodeling Cost Data, 2002, 23rd Annual Edition, and Historic Preservation Project Planning 

& Estimating by Swanke Hayden Connell Architects were consulted as reference guides.
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 123

Executive Summary

The Bodie Island Lighthouse was built in 1871- 1872 by the United 

States Lighthouse Board for use as an aid to navigation in a chain 

of lighthouses along the East Coast. It was the third lighthouse 

constructed at this general location. Since that time, the light has 

been in continuous use as an aid to navigation. Over the years, the 

power source for the light changed from oil to electrical, but few 

other changes were made to the structure. The government engaged in only the maintenance activities necessary to keep the 

light functioning. As a result, deterioration from the harsh coastal 

climate has impacted the structure, especially the metal components. The Bodie Island Lighthouse was officially transferred to 

the National Park Service on July 13, 2000 and became part of the 

Cape Hatteras National Seashore. The Coast Guard retained the 

original first order Fresnel lens and maintains the light as part of 

their coastal signal program. This report details the existing physical condition of the structure and makes recommendations to the 

National Park Service for the preservation and restoration of the 

facility and to make it safe to open it to the public. 

Overall Physical Condition: Due to the wide range of conditions 

with individual assemblies within the upper levels of the Bodie 

Island Lighthouse, the overall condition of the part of the Lighthouse addressed herein is considered good to fair. Some 
Executive Summary

124 National Park Service SERO

significant structural/architectural components, specifically the Watch Gallery Support 

Brackets, are generally in poor condition.

Period of Significance: As detailed in the Historic Structure Report dated June, 2002, for the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse, the Period of Significance for this structure is currently 

undetermined. The authors recommend that 

the Period of Significance by designated as the 

period during which the Lighthouse was in use 

as an active navigational aid. The Lighthouse 

was completed in 1872 and continues to be used 

by the United States Coast Guard as an aid to 

navigation. Therefore, the Lighthouse could be 

considered to be still in the formative stages of 

the Period of Significance. This is useful, because it would allow the National Park Service 

more latitude in dealing with structural and 

safety issues within the Lighthouse than might 

normally be expected if the Period of Significance was closed. The Lighthouse is not 

currently listed on the National Register of 

Historic Places, but a National Register Nomination has been prepared.

Potential for Use: The potential for the use of 

the Tower for interpretation and public visitation is significantly influenced by the capacity 

of certain historic building features and assemblies (e.g. stairs and galleries) to accommodate 

loads and activities other than those anticipated in the original design.

Public visitation to the upper levels of the 

Lighthouse of more than a few people at a time 

will require reinforcing the stair system to assure structural safety. As stated in the Historic 

Structure Report, the Watch Level of the 

Lighthouse can physically accommodate only 

four or five people at a time. Given this space 

limitation, only the replacement of stair treads 

designated in this report as in fair or poor condition with new cast iron treads to match the 

existing in dimension, detail, and finish is required. Structural reinforcement of the stair 

stringers will not be required if public access is 

limited to less than nine people on the stairs at a 

time. The number of people allowed on the 8th

and 9th levels should be under direct National 

Park Service staff supervision to insure against 

overloading of the stair stringer between these 

two levels.

However, structural capacity is only one component when considering the issues associated 

with public access. Railing safety and the conflict between having operable windows for 

improved ventilation and the associated liability of having unattended visitors in the Tower 

when the windows are open are also issues to 

be considered when evaluating the alternatives 

for managing this historic resource. Responses 

to identified physical modifications necessary 

to accommodate public access in the Lighthouse could include barriers on operable 

windows, supplemental railings and/or supplemental railing components. 

Accommodations for public access have the 

distinct potential to alter the historic character 

of the Lighthouse and its specific historic features. Therefore, physical responses to public 

access issues should be considered in their totality and addressed to avoid negative effects 

on the historic features of the Lighthouse.
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 125

Recommendations for Critical Work to Preserve 

the Upper Levels of the Bodie Island Lighthouse: 

There are three critical issues to be addressed. 

At least one requires scaffolding. From an economic standpoint, once a decision is made to 

scaffold the structure to deal with the critical 

issues, all the issues in this report should be 

addressed. 

Replacement of Gallery Level Support Brackets:

Access to the Watch Level gallery has been 

closed to the public. While this action eliminates risks associated with public access to the 

gallery, the potential for parts of deteriorated 

gallery brackets falling to the ground remains. 

It is clear from visual inspection that some 

bracket finials have fallen in the past and others, still in place, are significantly deteriorated 

and have the potential to separate from their 

assembly and fall to the ground. The perimeter 

of the Tower is currently fenced. With the Oil 

House protecting the area under the west 

watch gallery, and with the wood fence on the 

north, south, and east sides of the lighthouse 

discouraging public access to the area under 

the gallery bracket finials, the area is, to a degree, secured. Monitoring of access around the 

Lighthouse is recommended to keep the public 

out of the fenced area.

Reduction of moisture infiltrating the structure:

This issue requires both repairs to the cast iron 

and comprehensive removal, resealing, and resetting of the glass at the light level, including 

associated repair and replacement of window 

system components as detailed in this report. 

Given the construction characteristics of the 

Lighthouse and the exposure of the structure 

to the elements, it is impossible to eliminate 

moisture from entering the building through 

the brick and other locations over time. Therefore, ventilation of the tower as discussed 

below will be very important to the maintenance of the building and its components. 

Improvement of interior ventilation of the 

Tower: The original design of the Lighthouse 

did not produce a watertight building. The 

Lighthouse design recognized the importance 

of ventilation to the proper maintenance of the 

Tower using operable windows and upper 

level vents. The systematic maintenance of the 

natural ventilation of the Tower, using operable windows in their original configuration and 

the lantern level vents, is critical to properly 

managing the moisture in the building and 

maintaining the structure over time.

Requirements for Modification to Allow Public 

Use: The National Park Service and the Cape 

Hatteras National Seashore has expressed a 

desire to open the Lighthouse Tower for public 

access. Public access will require modifications 

to the Lighthouse Tower structure to meet 

code requirements for public safety. Some 

modifications are to address structural deficiencies and some are to fulfill modern code 

requirements. These modifications should be 

made with the understanding that, while the 

Period of Significance is not closed, such modification is to accommodate a use not integral 

to the functioning of the building as a lighthouse, and thus, does not contribute to the 

history of the structure. Consequently, any 

such modifications should be made in a way 

that protects the historic structure, features, 
Executive Summary

126 National Park Service SERO

and finishes and is reversible to allow historic 

characteristics to be recaptured without degradation to the building’s historic features. 

Structural analysis of the stairs, landings, and 

exterior galleries indicate the following work 

should be performed before public access to 

the upper levels of the Lighthouse Tower is 

allowed.

Repair the cornice at the edge of the Gallery 

Deck: The cornice at the outer edge of the 

Watch Level Gallery Deck provides support for 

the deck. While the deck meets the structural 

requirements in the applicable building code 

for strength and can support the proposed live 

load, it does not meet the structural requirements in the applicable code for deflection. In 

this situation, deflection is not a safety concern. 

However, discernable deflection may be perceived under the anticipated loads and make 

visitors to the deck uncomfortable. Repair of 

the cornice will reduce the amount of deflection experienced by visitors to the gallery. The 

cornice should be repaired to match the original in material, detail, and finish.

Replace Gallery Deck Railing Assembly: The 

Watch Level Gallery Deck handrails as originally designed meet the structural 

requirements of the applicable building code. 

However, in their current poor condition, the 

railings do not meet the structural requirements of the applicable building code. The 

Watch Level Gallery Deck handrails should be 

replaced to match the original design in material, detail, and finish. 

The original Watch Level Gallery Deck railing 

assembly design does not meet current code 

requirements for safety with respect to free 

open area between the handrail and the gallery 

deck, between the two top balusters, and between the intermediate vertical pickets and the 

handrail posts. Section 1003.2.12 of the International Building Code requires a space of less 

than 4” in any area of the guard rail assembly 

up to 34” high and a space of less than 8” above 

34” to a height of 42”. The space between the 

lowest horizontal bar of the railing and the 

deck of the Watch Gallery is about 61⁄4”, and the 

space between the two upper horizontal bars is 

91⁄2”, with the intermediate bar rising only 301⁄2” 

from the deck. The vertical pickets provide a 

space of less than 4” between them except at 

the space between the vertical intermediate 

pickets and the handrail posts, which is 41⁄4”. If 

public access to the Watch Level Gallery is allowed, and if the applicable code requirements 

for safety are met, the original railing design 

will have to be supplemented with non- historic 

features to achieve the required limitation for 

free area in the railing assembly. The addition 

of the features should be separate from the 

original assembly and not be modifications to 

the original design. The code- accommodating, 

non- historic safety features should be sufficiently distinct from the original materials and 

assembly to be able to clearly interpret the 

original railing assembly and have a minimal 

visibility when viewing the Lighthouse from 

the site or at a longer distance. The addition of 

non- historic, code- accommodating features 

should be installed in a way to be reversible and 

not damage the historic railing assembly.
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 127

Treatment of Stair Stringers: Applicable building code criteria for the strength of new stair 

stringers specifies a 100 lbs. per square foot live 

load. In practice, a 100 lbs. per square foot represents a person on every tread of the stringer 

at one time. If a 100 lb. per square foot load 

were, in fact, allowed in the Bodie Island Lighthouse, a steel bracket support attached to the 

tower masonry wall and spanning both stringers would be required at mid- flight of each 

stair stringer. However, practically, such loading is not possible given the limitations of the 

existing stair width and building configuration, 

and it is certainly within the means of the National Park Service to assure such loading is not 

achieved. By restricting the design occupancy 

to one person every other tread for purposes of 

load calculation, the need for mid- span brackets is eliminated. It should be within the 

capability of National Park Service management practices to limit public access to the 

upper levels of the Lighthouse to achieve the 

lighter load on the stair stringers.

Treatment of Stair Treads: The other public access issue related to the historically significant 

stairs is the capacity of the stair treads. The primary issue with the capacity of the treads is the 

effect of repetition, that is, the number of visitors traversing the stairs over time. The larger 

the number, the more fatigue is introduced into 

the stair treads. The more fatigue introduced, 

the more potential exists for deterioration of an 

individual tread. 

When considering the issue of tread fatigue, 

structural engineering calculations can correlate the number of repetitions with the 

potential for tread failure. The effect of fatigue 

on the cast iron stair treads should be clearly 

understood. The concept of fatigue includes a 

finite number of trips on a tread that can be accommodated before the cast iron tread cracks 

or otherwise deteriorates to a point of failure 

and must be replaced. When the light keeper 

was the only user of the stairs, the number of 

trips up and down the stairs that the light 

keeper generated, approximately four hundred 

to eight hundred per year, could be sustained 

for several hundred years before damage by fatigue took its effect. The increase of traffic 

generated by visitors to the top of the lighthouse will dramatically shorten the life 

expectancy of the historic stair treads. In fact, 

this increased wear will damage all stair treads 

over time, a much shorter time than intended in 

the original design, to the point of requiring replacement of all original treads at some point in 

the future. 

The fundamental question, then, becomes: 

what is the tradeoff between the volume of use 

and the importance of the stair treads as a significant historic feature? The primary 

limitation on public access to the top of the 

lighthouse is the building safety code that limits 

occupancy of the tower to 25 people at one 

time and the limited space at the top of the 

lighthouse, which has the capacity of no more 

than five people at one time. With a low volume of 80 people per day or less and rangeraccompanied public visitation to the top of the 

tower, the life of the historically significant 

stair treads can be substantially extended. 
Executive Summary

128 National Park Service SERO

Repair Connection of Lantern Roof to Tower:

While this is not a load capacity issue, the deteriorated attachment of the historic roofing to 

the upper perimeter wall frame should be repaired to ensure that the roof at the light level 

does not separate from the building under high 

wind loads. Though this is not an immediate 

concern, continued neglect and deferral of repairs will inevitably exacerbate the 

deterioration the roof connection and could 

result in damage to or loss of some of the historic roofing.

A Class B Cost Estimate has been prepared for 

this project. Costs are contingent upon the decisions made by the National Park Service for 

management of the facility. The cost estimate is 

based on recommendations contained within 

this report. The total cost of repair and restoration of the Bodie Island Lighthouse Tower 

Levels 8 and above is projected to be approximately $2,700,000.
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 129

Existing 

Conditions

Identification and Management Information

Building Name: Bodie Island Lighthouse

Building Address: Bodie Island Lighthouse, Nags Head, North 

Carolina

LCS #: 00114

Construction Date: 1871- 1872

Height: 150 feet from ground level to the focal point of the light; 

160 feet from ground level to the uppermost part of the lightning 

rod atop the ventilator ball.

Modifications and Dates

The only significant modifications made to the Bodie Island 

Lighthouse have been the result of changes in power systems. No 

major modifications to the structure have been made since construction was completed in 1872. The following dates have been 

identified as times when modifications were made, but none of 

these modifications resulted in actual structural changes:

September 19, 1932: Conversion to electrical light; installation of 

electrical generator in the Oil House.
Existing Conditions

130 National Park Service SERO

October 9, 1953: Installation of commercial 

electrical power; electrical generators removed, 

but a small generator installed for back- up 

power.

February 1964: Replacement of gallery railings.

May 1992: Replacement of electrical conduit to 

the top of the tower resulted in damage to some 

of the stair treads.

Graphic Data

The following graphics were prepared as part 

of the Condition Assessment report for the 

Bodie Island Lighthouse at Cape Hatteras National Seashore.

Photographic Record: An extensive photographic record of existing conditions as of 

November 12 and 13, 2002 has been organized 

and provided as a part of this report. This inventory is provided in printed and electronic 

format.

Condition Assessment Data Summary

Introduction

The foundation of the Condition Assessment 

was the identification and analysis of the components that comprise the upper three levels of 

the Bodie Island Lighthouse Tower. From a 

historic standpoint, virtually all the features of 

the area addressed in this report are considered historically significant. The only 

exceptions are the non- original windows and 

the electrical panel serving the current light.

Above Level 8, the Bodie Island Lighthouse 

mostly consists of a limited range of materials, 

mainly cast iron, glass, brass, bronze, brick, 

mortar, and paint. The primary concern of this 

Condition Assessment is with the condition 

and stability of the cast iron. Because it sits only 

3,500 feet from the shores of the Atlantic Ocean 

and 1,200 feet from Roanoke Sound, the lighthouse is exposed to wind, salt, and moisture. 

Completed in 1872, the lighthouse has understandably experienced a notable amount of 

deterioration due to normal aging factors. 

These are exacerbated by exposure to the elements. The single largest culprit in the 

deterioration on the upper levels of the lighthouse is moisture. It is a significant challenge to 

manage the exposure of the lighthouse to 

moisture and inhibit its effect on the condition 

of the lighthouse components. 

Overall Physical Condition

Overall, the structure and its components 

above Level 8 are in fair condition. Interior 

components are in good structural condition, 

and exterior components are in generally fair 

condition. However, there are certain components that are in poor condition. The condition 

of the upper cast iron varies dramatically 

throughout and, in some cases, from piece to 

piece for a given feature. The following assessment identifies the condition of each of the 

components. This assessment provides an accurate and detailed evaluation from which to 

prepare a management approach and a cost estimate for the restoration/rehabilitation and 

maintenance of the upper levels of the 

lighthouse.
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 131

Summary of Significant Building Features

The cast iron assembly at the upper levels is a 

series of interconnected components designed 

to achieve both structural stability and watertightness. At Level 8, the structure is primarily 

the masonry walls that support a cast iron deck. 

At Level 9, the integration of cast iron and masonry share the structural demands of the 

features there. The wall of Level 9 has both cast 

iron and masonry components. At Level 10 and 

above, cast iron and bronze assume the full responsibility for structural integrity. From Level 

9 up, there is considerable interdependency 

between the masonry and cast iron associated 

with the historic design and assembly of the 

lighthouse.

Design Deficiency

One deficiency in the original design was identified in the field investigation of the upper 

levels of the lighthouse. The apparent lack of 

tolerance between the brick wall and cast iron 

outer wall at the Watch Level, with the inevitable exposure to moisture, has caused swelling 

in the structural masonry wall, producing 

cracks in the exterior cast iron wall at the 

Watch Level. It is recommended that the exterior cast iron wall be repaired in situ. It is 

anticipated that the other recommendations to 

manage the moisture in the upper levels of the 

building will have a positive effect on the performance of the cast iron wall in the future.

Other Issues

The intended future use of the Bodie Island 

Lighthouse as a tourist destination has dramatic implications for the historic stairs at all 

levels. The historic stairs are adequate for a 

person of average weight to traverse the tower 

on a regular basis as was intended in the original design. When the load of public occupancy 

is less than one person per every other tread, 

the stringers are structurally acceptable when 

analyzed against the applicable building code. 

The effects of fatigue on the treads are the primary issue with public access. The larger the 

visitor numbers, the sooner the treads will deteriorate due to the fatigue of increased use. 

Therefore, maintaining as low an occupancy 

over time as is acceptable will serve to extend 

the life of the stair treads. Some treads are already in fair to poor condition. These should 

be replaced with new treads of the same material, detail, and finish as the original treads. 

Approach to Treatment

A characteristic of the construction of the upper levels of the lighthouse is the 

interconnectedness of the cast iron features. 

This interconnectedness makes the consideration of the approach to treatment and extent 

of replacement of deteriorated components 

and assemblies a significant concern. This assessment has been prepared based on the 

understanding that as many of the historic features as possible will be retained and treated in 

situ.

Special Attention Issues in Condition Assessment

The following items have been identified as 

special conditions on which the National Park 

Service desires specific comment. The issues 
Existing Conditions

132 National Park Service SERO

deserving special attention are summarized as 

follows:

Managing Moisture: The lighthouse is a masonry structure painted on the interior and 

exterior. Encapsulating the masonry in paint 

creates the opportunity for moisture to infiltrate the masonry with limited opportunities 

for it to escape. The lighthouse structure was 

designed to be ventilated by the operable windows and the now- deteriorated upper level 

ventilation system. It is important to provide 

the maximum possible ventilation for the interior of the building to reduce the moisture in 

the masonry. Material testing should be conducted on the paint on both the interior and 

exterior to determine the extent of the barrier 

the existing paint is producing on both the interior and exterior.

Condition of Watch Balcony Brackets: The balcony support brackets are in the worst 

condition of the cast iron components on the 

upper levels of the lighthouse. To allow more 

than minimal maintenance access, these components must be restored and, in many cases, 

replaced to their original architectural and 

structural characteristics. In their current condition, they represent a danger from falling 

bracket finials. Several have fallen to date. No 

injuries have been reported, and a barrier fence 

exists around the tower. The National Park 

Service should maintain sufficient visual control of the fence area to assure that visitors do 

not enter the perimeter fence until these 

brackets are restored. 

Water infiltration from Lantern Level Glazing 

System: Considerable water is entering the 

Lantern Level. This is primarily due to the failure of the window glass sealant system. 

Limited structural capacity of stairs: The 

amount of weight the current stairs can withstand is limited. Stair treads determined to be 

in fair to poor condition in this report should 

be replaced to match the original components 

in materials, detail and assembly. Protecting the 

stairs from future overstress should be accomplished by limiting the number of visitors in the 

building at one time and limiting the number of 

people on a run of stairs at any one time to one. 

Meaning of Terms of Condition for Purposes of 

Cost Estimating

To provide a basis for converting the field 

judgments to an estimate, the following responses were defined for each judgment of 

condition:

Poor: Features identified in this category are 

expected to be replaced to match the original 

features in material, dimension, and detail 

based on the existing components in the field 

and information provided in the original construction documents. There will be some cases 

where this general approach will be treated in 

situ such as the repair of the Watch Level exterior steel wall.

Fair: These features require significant treatment but will be treated in situ.

Good: Some treatment may be required, but the 

primary actions will be those related to reduc-
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 133

ing exposure to the elements that accelerate 

deterioration of historic features.

Excellent: The treatment for features in this 

category will be primarily maintenance and arresting exposure to conditions that accelerate 

deterioration.

Key To Condition Schedules: The cast iron design for the upper three levels of the Bodie 

Island Lighthouse is based on 16 increments 

(22.5 degrees). To organize field observations 

and assignment of conditions for each unit of 

assembly, the notation identified below was established. Tables were prepared for multi- piece 

assemblies to provide the level of detail necessary to prepare a thorough estimate of 

improvement costs. 

Numbers shown outside the floor plan below 

identify the 16 axes on which the structural features (particularly cast iron features) of the 

Figure 46 Floorplan with 16 axes.
Existing Conditions

134 National Park Service SERO

upper lighthouse construction align. Letters 

shown above are used to identify the components of the lighthouse that span between the 

16 axes.

Legend of Assemblies: The following diagram 

identifies the primary assemblies of the upper 

three levels of the lighthouse to assist in orientation to the condition assessment that follows.

1. Pinnacle

2. Ventilator

3. Roof

4. Roof Cornice

5. Window Standards & Rebates

6. Glass

7. Lantern Gallery Railing

8. Lantern Gallery Deck and Cornice

9. Steel Exterior Wall

10. Watch Gallery Railing

11. Watch Gallery Deck

12. Watch Gallery Brackets

13. Lower Collar 

14. Ventilator Hood

15. Lamp and Lens

16. Steel and Masonry Walls

17. Stairs

18. Windows

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

17

Level 8/Service Room

Level 9/Watch Room Deck

Level 10/Lantern

Figure 47 Legend of assemblies.
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 135

Overview of Findings

Moisture, combined with the dramatic temperature range at the site, is a major factor in the 

identified poor cast iron conditions. As would be 

expected with the exposure of the lighthouse to 

moisture, wind, and salt, the effect of moisture 

and temperature on the condition of the lighthouse is most significant. Cast iron and brick 

expand and contract at two different rates. Adequate tolerances are required to assure both 

can coexist. In at least one identified case, the 

tolerances do not appear adequate to avoid 

damage from movement of the two materials in 

close proximity to one another.

The second effect is the result of direct contact 

between salt- laden moisture and metal on the 

upper levels of the lighthouse. Exposure (and, 

here, salt is a more significant participant) 

without adequate, on- going maintenance over 

time causes damage ranging from pitting to 

delamination of the iron. Pitting conditions 

vary from minor to significant. Delamination in 

some areas produced thin layers or sheets of 

iron loosely attached. 

The masonry tower structure is sound. The masonry tower structure is sound, though it is 

retaining an undesirable amount of moisture 

due, in part, to being painted on the interior 

and exterior, thus entrapping moisture in the 

masonry walls. In addition, the introduction of 

fixed windows has significantly reduced the 

ability of the tower interior to ventilate and aid 

in the evaporation of moisture in the interior of 

the tower. Evidence of entrapped moisture is 

expressed by peeling paint, staining, and spalling on the exterior and interior of the 

structure, deteriorated mortar joints, and 

cracking in ridged cast iron assemblies. The 

tower exhibits evidence of significant cracks on 

the north and south elevations of the interior 

that have been patched and are stable. Visual 

inspection indicates the masonry cracks do not 

extend through the full thickness of the lighthouse wall.

Interior cast iron is damaged from other than 

moisture exposure. Damage to the cast iron 

components of the upper levels of the lighthouse that cannot be directly attributed to the 

effects of moisture are primarily due to impact. 

This condition is seen on the stair treads at 

Levels 8 and 9. 

The window system leaks at Lantern Level (Level 

10). The window system glazing at the lantern 

level allows water to penetrate to the interior in 

a blowing rain of moderate intensity or greater.

Lantern Level window wall frame and roof assembly is in good condition. Though individual 

components of the Lantern Level window wall 

system were identified for some level of treatment, the structure above the floor level of 

Level 10 is in good condition overall. The roof 

and roof features, pinnacle, and ventilator all 

appear to be in sound condition. The exception 

is the trim pieces that contribute to the connection of the metal roof to the window wall 

system at the eave of the roof. 

Exterior cast iron is a primary issue. The exterior cast iron is in the worst physical condition 

of all the features above Level 8. The effects of 
Existing Conditions

136 National Park Service SERO

the exposure to the elements over time have 

produced deterioration ranging from cracked 

horizontal cast iron bands to brackets with 

missing parts due to delamination and spalling. 

The deterioration is a result of corrosive action 

and the associated jacking taking place at connections. In some cases, the retention of 

moisture inside a cast iron component, such as 

the fennels, exacerbates the corrosion process. 

In this example, notable sections of the fennels 

have popped off, leaving the interior of the fennels and, more importantly, the threaded 

connecting tie rod to the landing exposed to 

the elements with the likelihood of accelerated 

deterioration and escalated risk of the loss of 

integrity of the balcony structure. 

There is no obvious deterioration of the anchorage of the brackets to the masonry, or, for 

that matter, any cast iron components connected into the masonry.

Cast iron railings have also deteriorated. In the 

case of the Watch Level gallery railing, the 

lower railing assembly was replaced in the 

1960s. The standards are significantly deteriorated and have lost most of their cross- section 

in some areas.

A primary issue in addressing the treatment 

of any part of the upper level cast iron features is that the components are structurally 

and functionally interconnected. For example, the Lantern Level floor assembly is 16 units 

extending from the Fresnel lantern base casting 

to the outside edge of the lantern gallery and 

including the sill for the glass wall system at that 

level. Deterioration that requires the replacement of any one component of this casting 

could result in the disassembly of a much larger 

set of components.

Specific Findings 

Interior of Lighthouse:

Roof: The ventilator hood sheltering the lantern is sagging slightly, and there is some rust 

evident, but, overall, it is in good condition. 

Because of the ventilator hood, the zinc ceiling 

above it could not be fully inspected. However, 

the slight sag of the ventilator hood is not a 

structural concern and, indeed, is a function of 

the original installation that should not be corrected. The crown piece and wrought iron 

spider frame and tie rods supporting the crown 

piece are in good structural condition.

Level 8 and 9: The eighth and ninth level landings are in good condition. The seventh, ninth, 

thirteenth, and fourteenth stair treads between 

the eighth and ninth levels have been strengthened by the addition of a steel plate to the top 

of each tread. There is a long vertical crack on 

the left side of the jamb at the west window on 

the eighth level. Also on the eighth level, there 

is a displaced brick above a window. The steel 

beams supporting the ninth level and the lantern pedestal and support at the ninth level are 

in excellent structural condition. At the ninth 

level, paint is peeling on the walls due to moisture in the wall.

Lantern Level: At the lantern level, water is 

ponding at the window sill rebates. The bolts at 

the sill rebates are deteriorated and rusted from 
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 137

the water penetration through windows. The 

interior lantern floor and beams supporting the 

floor are in good structural condition. The interior and exterior floor plates are composed of 

one plate every 22.5 degrees. The exterior portion of the plate is supported at its outer edge 

by the steel exterior wall below and at its interior edge by the masonry wall below. The 

interior portion of the plate acts as a cantilever 

and is supported by the masonry wall below. 

Even though the interior portion of the floor is 

in good condition, a complete assessment is 

dependent upon the condition of the exterior 

part.

Exterior of Lighthouse:

Lantern Level: The exterior portion of the lantern level floor is, overall, in fair condition, but 

it is continuing to deteriorate as evidenced by 

the gaps at the joint between the plates and the 

separation of the deck plate from the corbel at 

the edge of the deck. There is surface rust on 

the top surface of the deck, and there could be 

more rust on the underside of the deck. The 

underside of the deck could not be examined 

because of the steel exterior wall surrounding 

the deck. The railings are in fair condition with 

some surface rust. The spacing of the rail posts 

exceeds the maximum allowable per code for 

public access. The connection of the ladder 

from the gallery deck to the lantern level exterior deck has deteriorated and is almost 

completely rusted through. The spacing of the 

rungs on the ladder from the gallery deck to the 

lantern level exceeds the maximum allowed by 

the current building code. The ladder from the 

lantern level exterior deck to the roof is completely missing, and the rods to which the 

ladder was hooked are in poor condition. One 

of the rods is completely gone, and another is 

almost completely rusted through. 

Watch Gallery: The gallery deck, gallery rail 

and posts, and gallery support brackets are, 

overall, in fair to poor condition. The rail posts 

have corrosion on almost all the posts. Some 

have bad surface corrosion, and some are severely corroded. Corrosion has caused loss of 

material at the posts. The spacing of the rail 

balusters and, in some cases, the posts, exceeds 

the maximum allowable per code for public access. The deck plates are severely corroded on 

the underside of the deck. The gallery supports 

have significant structural deterioration including severe corrosion, loss of material, and 

missing pieces. The cornice at the edge of the 

deck has cracks at several locations. At some 

sections, loss of material is evident. The steel 

exterior wall is in fair to poor condition, with 

several sections of the wall having large cracks. 

Structural Analysis

The structural analysis involved certain assumptions based on field observations and 

judgment of conditions. The following categories were developed and used in the computer 

model of the structure to define each component of the structural system for the purpose of 

analysis:

Excellent: Modeled as shown on original 

drawings (no evident loss of material/strength)
Existing Conditions

138 National Park Service SERO

Good: Modeled with a 10 percent reduction of 

material due to deterioration, delamination, 

etc.

Fair: Modeled with a 25 percent reduction of 

material due to deterioration, delamination, 

etc.

Poor: Features in this category must be replaced, so models of existing conditions were 

not developed.

Using Visual Analysis, computer models were 

built for each of the following: the lantern deck, 

gallery deck, gallery support, stair landings, and 

stair flight from the eighth to ninth floor. Models were built and analyses were performed for 

both the current and the originally designed 

condition for compliance with current building 

codes. The gallery handrails were also reviewed 

for compliance with current building codes.

Live loads used in the analysis were based on 

Table 1607.1 of the 2000 International Building 

Code (IBC). From the IBC, the minimum uniformly distributed live loads for stairs is 100 psf, 

so a 100 psf live load was used in the analysis of 

the stairs and landings. A 60 psf uniform live 

load for walkways was applied in the watch gallery deck analysis, and a 40 psf uniform live 

load designated for catwalks was applied in the 

analysis of the lantern gallery deck. The reduced loads for the walkways reflect the 

expectation of a lower use load in these areas 

than on the stairs and landings. All models were 

checked for compliance with the 2000 International Building Code based on flexure, shear, 

and deflection criteria. 

Since cast iron is not a product that is used as a 

structural material today, stress values had to be 

interpreted from various texts. Structural Renovation of Buildings (Newman) gives the typical 

maximum allowable bending stress for cast 

iron as 3 ksi with a safety factor of 13.33 and allowable bending stress of 12 ksi for wrought 

iron based on a safety factor of 4.17. The allowable bending stress of wrought iron matches 

the value given in Iron and Steel Beams 1873 to 

1952 ( AISC). Based on the average modulus of 

rupture value of 40 ksi, the allowable bending 

stress was obtained by dividing the modulus of 

rupture by a safety factor, exactly like the 

method described in Structural Analysis of Historic Buildings (Rabun). The safety factor used 

for cast iron is substantially higher than that 

used for wrought iron. Cast iron is a brittle material, exhibiting little or no yielding before 

failure, and is weak and unpredictable in tension and bending. Therefore, a higher safety 

factor must be used to account for that unpredictability and for the variability of different 

castings. 

When analyzing an existing structure that has 

been standing for over 130 years, a lower factor 

of safety can be used than when designing a 

new structure. With a new structure, there is 

more uncertainty about how the structure and 

material will behave. An existing structure has 

been subjected to various loads throughout its 

life and, if it is still standing with no signs of 

distress, it is obvious that it can support those 

loads. Because structural capacity can be more 

accurately assessed for existing structures 

based on the current conditions, a smaller fac-
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 139

tor of safety than for a new structure can be 

used. 

Because of the brittleness of cast iron, fatigue 

stress, caused by cyclic loading, is a major concern. Three main factors affect fatigue 

performance of a structural component: material, loading (stress), and environment. The 

structural properties of a component, such as 

its metallurgical and mechanical properties and 

any discontinuities in the material, have a major 

effect on how much fatigue it can withstand. 

External environmental factors, such as temperature, also have an impact on a structure’s 

fatigue life. According to Fracture & Fatigue 

Control in Structures, “the primary factor that 

affects the fatigue behavior of structural components is the fluctuation in the localized 

stress,”217 that is, the number of repeated cycles 

of loadings to which a component is subjected. 

Once fatigue cracks develop, they will propagate rapidly as the magnitude of loading cycles 

increases and will ultimately lead to failure.

Stair System: The stair system was analyzed in 

two parts: the individual treads, and the stringers. Both the stringers and treads are cast iron. 

Analyses were performed on the individual 

stair treads and the stair stringer between the 

eighth and ninth levels.

The majority of the stair treads are in good 

condition, though some are in fair or poor conditions. Analyses of a single tread were based 

on a 300- pound person stepping on the tread 

(including impact) per the IBC. As originally 

designed, a maximum stress of 8.1 ksi and a 

maximum deflection of 0.066 inch were produced. Existing treads in good condition 

produced a stress of 9.92 ksi and a deflection of 

0.09 inch, and existing treads in fair condition 

produced a maximum stress of 14.2 ksi and a 

deflection of 0.16 inch.

With the stress results for a 300- pound person, 

the safety factors are 4.0 for the treads in good 

condition and 2.8 for the ones in fair condition. 

Those safety factors are much lower than the 

recommended safety factor of 13.3 for new cast 

iron. Because of the variability of the different 

castings of the treads and the unpredictability 

of cast iron, the small safety factor exceeds the 

“comfort zone” of safety for cast iron, and the 

possibility exists of failure of the stair treads 

when subjected to the load of a 300- pound 

person.

However, the likelihood of a 300- pound person walking up and down the lighthouse stair 

system is slim, so the treads were also analyzed 

for a more realistic condition, a 250- pound 

person stepping on the tread (including impact). As originally designed, the maximum 

stress of the analysis was 6.62 ksi. Existing 

treads in good condition produced a stress of 

8.14 ksi, and existing treads in fair condition 

produced a stress of 11.6 ksi.

The stress results for a 250- pound person 

show safety factors of 4.9 for the treads in good 

condition and 3.4 for the ones in fair condition. 

Those safety factors are much smaller than the 

217. Barsom, John M., and Stanley T. Rolfe, Fracture & 

Fatigue Control in Structures – Applications of 

Fracture Mechanics, 2d ed, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: 

Prentice-Hall, 1987, p. 224.
Existing Conditions

140 National Park Service SERO

recommended safety factor of 13.3 for new cast 

iron. Because of the variability of the different 

castings of the treads and the unpredictability 

of cast iron, the low safety factor exceeds the 

safety “comfort zone” of cast iron, and the 

possibility of failure of the stair treads exists 

when subjected to the load of a 250- pound 

person stepping on the tread. However, the 

stair treads have withstood the load of personnel using the stairs in the structure for over 130 

years and are still in mostly fair to good condition. From the physical evidence of the existing 

treads, the treads in good condition should be 

able to support the loading of a 250- pound 

person stepping on a single stair tread. However, this does not account for the additional 

stress that will be caused by fatigue.

Over the years, the lighthouse has been accessed by a few people for maintenance 

purposes and has not been subjected to excessive loading. The two light keepers, working in 

shifts, walked up and down the lighthouse 

stairs every day for nearly 60 years until it was 

converted to electrical light in 1932. Thereafter, 

fatigue loading cycles were less frequent until 

1940, when the Bodie Island became an unmanned light and such loading cycles ceased 

except for occasional maintenance activities. 

The stress cracks exhibited in the stair treads 

are, therefore, considered to be the result of 

the earlier phase of operation, before 1932. Fatigue loading cycles are taken for a 25- year 

period. Based on the history of its use, for four 

cycles per day over the first 25- year period, the 

stair treads and landings were subjected to 

36,500 loading cycles. A National Park Service 

volunteer has estimated that 250,000 visitors 

per year will want to climb the lighthouse if it is 

open to the public, based on surveys of use for 

other lighthouses in the area. For a 25- year period, the number of loading cycles resulting 

from this number of visitors would be approximately 6,000,000. Based on the allowable 

stress range for fatigue at each loading condition, if the lighthouse were to be opened to the 

public at the number estimated, the increase in 

loading cycles would decrease the allowable 

stress of the structural component, specifically 

the stair treads and landings, by 60 percent 

over that 25- year period.

If the lighthouse were to be open for public access, the number of loading cycles would 

increase significantly from its past use. Fatigue 

cracks have already developed on some stair 

treads. The presence of those cracks illustrates 

that fatigue is a factor in the safety of the stair 

treads. Once cracks have developed, they will 

propagate rapidly when the number of loading 

cycles increases. Since the number of loading 

cycles will be increased more than 150 times its 

previous loading cycles, the fatigue stress on 

the stair treads will be increased by 60 percent 

from its current state. For a tread in good condition, using the 250- pound load, the stress 

would increase from 8.14 ksi to 13.0 ksi. The fatigue stress of 13.0 ksi exceeds the stress of 11.6 

ksi determined for treads in fair condition. The 

number of loading cycles can be altered so that 

the fatigue stress on these treads is less than 11.6 

ksi. The rationalization is that the existing 

treads have supported the load of a man for 

over 130 years and are in fair condition; there-
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 141

fore, as long as stresses are lower than 11.6 ksi, 

the treads should be adequate. If the number of 

loading cycles on the stair treads is increased by 

only 25 times the previous condition, the fatigue stress will be increased by only 40 

percent from the current state. A 40- percent 

increase in fatigue stress would result in a 

stress of 11.4 ksi for the treads in good condition, which is lower than the stress of 11.6 ksi on 

the treads in fair condition for a 250- pound 

load. Based on the rationalization mentioned 

above, the stair treads in good condition 

should be able to support a 250- pound person 

if the magnitude of loading cycles does not exceed 50 cycles per day (25 people walking up 

and down) for a 25- year period. If the National 

Park Service wishes to allow more than 25 

people per day into the lighthouse, the stair 

treads would have to be assessed again in several years. For instance, if 68 people were 

allowed into the lighthouse per day, the stair 

treads would have to be assessed again in ten 

years for fatigue. That number can be increased to 95 people per day for assessment in 

seven years. In any case, if the light tower is 

opened for public visitation, the National Park 

Service should implement a program of regular 

inspections of all stair treads for cracks.

The stair stringer between levels eight and nine 

was also analyzed using the minimum code 

recommended live load of 100 psf for public 

access. As originally designed, the maximum 

stress of the stringers was 8.9 ksi, giving a safety 

factor of 4.5. That factor of safety is much lower 

than the recommended safety factor and exceeds the “comfort zone” for cast iron. Because 

of the variability and unpredictability of cast 

iron, with that safety factor, the possibility of 

failure exists. The maximum deflection of 0.15 

inch was below the allowable deflection of 0.65 

inch. As originally designed, the stair stringer 

from the eighth to ninth level meets current 

building codes for deflection, but, for safety, 

there is concern because of the low factor of 

safety results.

The existing stair stringers are in good condition. The analysis of the stringers produced 

results of 14.5 ksi and 0.19 inch. The deflection 

results are below the allowable deflection of 

0.65 inch, but the maximum stress far exceeds 

the safety “comfort zone” for cast iron. Therefore, the code- mandated loads for public 

access indicate a possibility of failure. If a support is added mid- flight to the stair stringers 

from the eighth to ninth levels, the capacity of 

the stair stringers will increase substantially. 

The support must span both stringers and be 

attached to the masonry, preferably with epoxy 

anchors. The addition of the support would reduce the stress of the stringers to 5.07 ksi, 

which is higher than the recommended allowable stress of 3 ksi, but with a safety factor of 7.9, 

that is still within the “comfort zone” for safety.

Landings: Analyses were also performed on 

the landing plates and beams at the eighth level 

as originally designed and in its existing condition. As noted in the Historic Structure Report 

dated June 2002, the landing plates are formed 

with bracing ribs integral to the plates. The integral bracing prevents the plates from 

deflecting out of plane and adds strength to the 

landing plates. Because of the bracing ribs, the 
Existing Conditions

142 National Park Service SERO

allowable stress can be increased by 50 percent 

to 4.5 ksi for the landing plates. Using the minimum code recommended live load of 100 psf, 

the maximum stress of the landing plates as 

originally designed was calculated to be 8.8 ksi, 

giving a safety factor of 6.8 based on the additional 50 percent of allowable stress. Although 

that value is lower than the recommended 

safety factor for cast iron, it is still a comfortable safety factor since the landing plate 

showed no apparent signs of cracks. The maximum calculated deflection of 0.68 inch 

exceeds the allowable deflection of 0.57 inch. 

In its existing condition, an analysis of the 

eighth level landing produced stress and deflection results of 11.1 ksi and 0.83 inch. With 

the additional 50 percent allowable stress, the 

safety factor for the existing landing plate is 

5.4, much lower then the recommended safety 

factor of 13.3 and exceeding the “comfort 

zone” for safety. Since analysis of the landing 

plate produces results that exceed the safety 

“comfort zone,” there is a possibility of failure 

if the landing is fully loaded to the maximum 

code- mandated load of 100 psf. To fully load 

the 100 square foot landing to 100 psf, 40 people weighing 250 pounds per person would 

have to stand on the landing. It would be physically impossible for 40 people to stand on the 

landing simultaneously. Additionally, fire and 

life safety laws for publicly accessed spaces restrict the number of people in the entire light 

tower to no more than 25 at one time due to the 

limited means of egress. A more realistic assumption would be 15 people on the landing at 

one time (one person per 7 square feet,) reducing the load to approximately 40 psf and 

the stress to 4.5 ksi. The resulting stress would 

be within the recommended range for cast 

iron.

Gallery Deck: Two analyses were performed 

for the watch gallery deck: one of the originally 

designed condition, and the other of the current condition. As originally designed, the 

maximum stress on the deck sections is 3.09 

ksi, which is close to the maximum allowable of 

3 ksi recommended for cast iron. The gallery 

deck would be adequate for public access as 

originally designed. 

The existing watch gallery deck is in fair to 

poor condition (see Inventory Data), so a 25 

percent reduction of material was taken in the 

analysis for the sections in fair condition, and 

no analysis was performed for the sections in 

poor condition. The deck sections considered 

poor must be replaced as shown on the original 

drawings. The results of the analysis of the deck 

sections in fair condition showed a maximum 

stress of 5.1 ksi, which would give a factor of 

safety of 7.8, less than the safety factor of 13.3 

recommended for design of cast iron, but still a 

comfortable factor of safety since the deck 

showed no signs of cracks. If cracks do start to 

develop, there is cause for concern, because, as 

mentioned previously, cracks tend to propagate 

as the number of loadings increases.

The results of the model of the existing condition showed a maximum deflection of 0.59 

inch, which exceeds the allowable deflection of 

0.25 inch. The results of the model of the deck 

in its original condition showed a maximum 

deflection of 0.27 inch, exceeding the allowable 
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 143

deflection of 0.25 inch. This indicates that deflection in this area has increased over the 

years. 

Below the edge of the gallery deck is a cornice. 

Since the cornice is in poor condition, it was 

not modeled. As mentioned previously all 

components considered “poor” must be replaced. Once the cornice is replaced, it will 

support the gallery deck at the edge, so, realistically, the deflection that will occur at the deck 

will be less than the deflection results from the 

analysis of the model. 

The results of the analysis show that the gallery 

deck sections meet current codes for public 

access for strength but not for deflection. Deflection is a serviceability concern, not a safety 

concern. Whereas the issue of strength concerns the maximum load that a particular 

component can safely carry, the issue of serviceability concerns the “comfort” of its 

occupants. Visitors walking on the gallery deck 

may feel the deck deflect. It is at the discretion 

of the National Park Service whether to address this issue.

The wrought iron handrails at the gallery level 

were also analyzed to determine if they could 

withstand a 200- pound lateral load per the International Building Code. Calculations were 

performed for the handrails of the originally 

designed and existing condition. The existing 

handrails and rail posts are in fair to poor condition. The results showed that rails as 

originally designed and in existing fair condition can withstand the 200- pound lateral load 

and comply with current codes. All rails considered poor should be replaced.

Gallery Support Brackets: The gallery support 

brackets are in poor condition and must be replaced, so an analysis was not performed of the 

existing condition. As originally designed, the 

gallery support brackets comply with current 

building codes for public access. The maximum 

stress of 2.4 ksi and the maximum deflection of 

0.0027 inch are below the allowable bending 

stress of 3.0 ksi and the allowable deflection of 

0.25 inch, respectively. 

Gallery Wall Plates: There are several large 

cracks along the exterior gallery wall plates. 

The cracks in the steel plates are not caused by 

overload but by other factors: the lack of adequate tolerance between the masonry structure 

and the adjacent exterior wall plate, thermal 

expansion and contraction of the cast iron, and 

swelling caused by moisture in the masonry 

wall behind the wall plate. The cast iron wall 

plate should be repaired to arrest deterioration 

of that feature. From the perspective of structural strength, the cracks in the cast iron wall 

plate are not a safety issue and are not the 

source of significant moisture infiltration into 

the masonry behind the wall plate. The primary 

source of moisture in the masonry at the upper 

levels of lighthouse appears to be from above 

the Watch Level at the Lantern Level deck, 

venting system, and window system. Attention 

to the watertightness of these assemblies will 

improve the performance of the masonry and 

cast iron wall assembly at the Watch Level.
Existing Conditions

144 National Park Service SERO

Lantern Level Deck: Two models were analyzed for the lantern level deck: one of the 

originally designed condition, and the other of 

the current condition. The current lantern level 

deck is in fair condition, so a 25 percent reduction of material was taken in the analysis. The 

results of the analysis showed a maximum 

stress of 1.64 ksi, which is below the allowable 

bending stress of 3.0 ksi. The maximum deflection of 0.02 inch is below the allowable 

deflection of 0.125 inch. Therefore, the lantern 

level deck meets current codes for strength 

and deflection, provided it is only used for 

maintenance purposes and is not open for 

public access.

Roof: A structural analysis was not performed 

on the roof. A visual inspection of the interior 

and exterior of the roof indicates a separation 

of the bronze trim from the roof panel at the 

cornice bracket. A few of the bolts that connect 

the bronze trim to the roof have deteriorated, 

enabling the trim to separate from the roof. 

From a structural perspective, because the span 

of the trim and roof panel (approximately 2’-

3”) and the forces on the roof are not great, risk 

of failure of the roof connection is not an immediate concern. However, the greatest risk is 

an abnormal wind condition that could dislodge the roof and do significant damage to this 

historic feature that is otherwise sound. Repair 

to the trim involves removing the paint on the 

bronze trim to check for any deterioration. If 

there is no deterioration of the bronze trim, the 

missing and deteriorated bolts should be replaced with new stainless steel bolts, and the 

bronze trim reattached to the roof panel and 

cornice. Missing trim pieces should be replaced to match the original. This treatment 

should be a priority. 
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 145

Recommendations

It is impossible to segregate the structural and architectural components in the Bodie Island Lighthouse. Virtually all components 

on the upper levels of the lighthouse are structural and also contribute to the architectural character of the structure. The primary 

work recommendations are focused on addressing the structural 

problems, including the watch level gallery structure, the stair system, and the balance of other more discrete restoration 

recommendations. These should be repaired or replaced with 

components that match the original design, material, and assembly. Further, where structural concerns do not necessitate 

replacement, repairing in place should be the treatment of choice. 

The National Park Service is considering alternatives for the management and use of the lighthouse. To protect the historic 

components and those replaced to match the original, the use of 

management techniques that limit access so as not to exceed that 

which approximates the loads and activity levels intended in the 

original Bodie Island Lighthouse design and use should be given a 

priority.

This report recommends the following work be undertaken to 

preserve and restore the Bodie Island Lighthouse Tower from 
Recommendations

146 National Park Service SERO

level 8 upward, and to make it safe for controlled and limited visitor access.

Cast Iron Components

Replace the Gallery Level support brackets:

Several cast iron finials on the bottom of the 

cast iron Gallery Level support brackets have 

deteriorated to the point that they have fallen to 

the ground. To date, no one has been injured. 

Inspection of the remaining finials suggests that 

others could fall at any time. Visitors must not 

be allowed on the Watch Level Gallery until repairs have been made. All deteriorated support 

brackets should be replaced with cast iron 

brackets fabricated to match the original 

design.

Repair the cornice at the edge of the Gallery 

Deck: The cornice at the edge of the Watch 

Level Gallery Deck supports the edge of the 

deck. While the deck meets codes for strength 

and can support the proposed load, it does not 

meet codes for deflection. Deflection is not a 

safety concern, but too much deflection may 

make visitors to the deck feel unstable and, 

thus, uncomfortable. Repair of the cornice will 

reduce the amount of deflection experienced 

by visitors to the gallery. Deteriorated pieces 

should be replaced.

Replace Gallery Deck handrails: The Watch 

Level Gallery Deck handrails in their originally 

designed configuration meet current building 

codes for strength. However, they are currently 

in poor condition and must be replaced if visitors are to be allowed on the Watch Level 

Gallery Deck. The original Watch Level Gallery 

Deck railing assembly design does not meet 

current code requirements for safety with respect to free open area between the handrail 

and the gallery deck, between the two top balusters, and between the intermediate vertical 

pickets and the handrail posts. Section 1003.2.12 

of the International Building Code requires a 

space of less than 4” in any area of the guard 

rail assembly up to 34” high and a space of less 

than 8” above 34” to a height of 42”. The space 

between the lowest horizontal bar of the railing 

and the deck of the Watch Gallery floor is 

about 61⁄4”, and the space between the two upper horizontal bars is 91⁄2”, with the 

intermediate bar rising only 301⁄2” from the 

deck. The vertical pickets provide a space of 

less than 4” between them except at the space 

between the vertical intermediate pickets and 

the handrail posts, which is 41⁄4”. A new railing 

should either meet those requirements or 

should be fabricated and installed as originally 

designed with the addition of a barrier that 

both meets code and has minimal or no visual 

effect on the character of the tower from the 

site and distant views of the lighthouse. 

Repair wall plates (interior and exterior):

The wall plates are cracked. While this is not a 

structural safety issue, it is a maintenance concern as it may allow moisture to infiltrate 

behind the plates and cause damage. The 

cracks should be repaired from the interior by 

removing the masonry, inserting and attaching 

a backup cast iron plate, and reinstalling the 

brick. New mortar used to reinstall historic 

brick must match the historic mortar in color, 

composition, and strength. 
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 147

Repair or replace damaged components of 

the Level 8 lower collar: At the time of replacement or repair, a method should be 

implemented to allow for expansion and contraction in the collar assembly to avoid 

recurring cracking.

Repair or replace cast iron window frames 

on 8th Level: Return the windows to their original, operable condition. In addition to an 

accurate presentation of the original windows, 

operable windows will provide much needed 

and originally- intended ventilation to the upper part of the Lighthouse Tower.

Provide fall protection at 8th Level windows:

If the Park Service chooses to make the 8th

Level windows operable in order to improve 

ventilation at the top of the Lighthouse Tower, 

barriers across the 8th Level windows must be 

provided to prevent visitors from falling as a 

result of leaning over the ledges to see outside. 

This barrier could be temporary and moveable, 

but it would be preferable to install a barrier 

substantial enough to resist being moved by a 

determined visitor. This condition is another 

pressure on the historic fabric of the lighthouse 

caused by public access. Window barriers can 

have a dramatic negative impact on the visual 

character of the lighthouse if not designed in a 

sensitive manner. Once public access is allowed, this issue must be addressed whatever 

amount of public access is accommodated.

Repair or replace metal doors to Watch 

Level; repair or replace hardware: Every effort should be made to save and repair the 

original doors. Replace hinges to match original 

design. Clean, restore, and reuse as much of 

the original hardware as possible. 

Replace all stair treads in fair or poor condition: All treads in poor or fair condition must 

be replaced to match the historic treads in material, detail, and assembly. The remaining 

treads can withstand the load of a 250- lb. visitor standing on one tread. The Park Service 

may choose among several options to mitigate 

the lack of structural capacity to handle the 

scope of proposed public visitation. One option is to implement a weight restriction for 

visitors ascending to the top of the Lighthouse 

Tower to less than 250 pounds and limit the 

number of people using the stairs on a daily basis to fewer than 90. A second option is to 

strengthen the treads with steel plates attached 

to the underside of the treads. A third option is 

to replace all historic treads with new treads 

fabricated as originally designed. New cast iron 

treads are the most expensive alternative. A 

fourth option, and the preferred one, is to 

manage the occupancy of the stairs to minimize 

damage to the treads as described below. 

Manage occupancy to minimize damage to 

historic stairs and stringers: To accomplish 

this objective, two management actions are required. First, no more than one person should 

be allowed on a run of stairs at a time. This will 

maintain the level of use intended in the original design. Second, if public access is 

imperative, the number of visitors should be 

maintained at the lowest possible daily level. It 

should be understood that each visitation beyond that intended in the original design, two 

to four trips per day by a single person, has the 
Recommendations

148 National Park Service SERO

effect of shortening the life of the historic stairs 

due to fatigue. Any increase in the number of 

trips per day accepts the accelerated deterioration of the stair treads that eventually will result 

in replacement of these historic components. 

Further, given the limited capacity of the Watch 

Room Level, four or five people at a time, one 

person per stair run is a reasonable and appropriate means of managing the flow of visitors 

through the structure.

To meet current building codes for allowable 

occupancy on a flight of stairs (one 300- lb. 

person per tread), a support must be added 

mid- flight to each stair stringer. The support 

must span both stringers and be attached to the 

masonry wall. However, this requirement can 

be eliminated with proper management of stair 

occupancy. Restricting the number of people 

on a run of stairs at one time to fewer than nine 

people will eliminate the requirement for the 

additional support. Restricting the number of 

people on a run of stairs to one person at a time 

will result in an occupancy far below the number that would require the additional stringer 

support. Therefore, the preferred method for 

managing the stair system is to restrict the 

number of people allowed on a run of stairs to 

one person at a time.

Replace or modify interior handrails: The 

existing interior handrails of the stairs and 

landings do not meet code requirements for 

safety which require a space of less than 4” between pickets. The current spacing on all 

landings is about 5” between pickets, resulting 

in a 41⁄2” space between them. Stairs have one 

picket per tread, which results in a variable 

spacing depending on the flight. However, all 

spaces are greater than 4”. Modifications to the 

handrails to meet safety requirements will result in non- historic treatments. If public 

visitation to the tower is allowed, this issue will 

exist. If there is a management approach to 

control of public visitors without supplemental 

railing features to meet code, that approach 

would be preferable. However, if supplemental 

treatment is required, it should be separate 

from and not impact the historic railing assembly and should be light weight enough not to 

alter the structural integrity and load- carrying 

capacity of the stair assembly. 

Replace missing skylight in Watch Level ceiling: Recast missing skylight component to 

match existing. The missing skylight is a significant historic feature of the upper level of the 

tower. There are certainly other such skylight 

features to interpret the skylight assembly. It is 

believed that the missing skylight was removed 

to accommodate a stove flue to the roof. An alternative to replacing the skylight is to interpret 

the installation of a stove on the Watch Level 

and what was required to vent the stove 

through the skylight level to the Lantern Level.

Repair Lantern Level/Gallery Deck: This 

feature, cast as a single unit, includes the interior gallery deck, the Lantern Level window sill 

and vents, and the exterior gallery floor. To address deterioration on any one segment of this 

assembly will require considerable disassembly 

of the entire upper cast iron structure. Therefore, repair in place is the most desirable 

approach based on the conditions observed 
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 149

and documented at the Lantern Level Gallery 

deck in this report.

Provide a barrier or a handrail from Watch 

Level to Lantern Level: While the light is still 

being used by the Coast Guard as an aid to 

navigation, it may be desirable to restrict access 

to the interior Lantern Level to maintenance 

personnel only. If this is the case, a barrier 

should be provided at the base of the stairs to 

the Lantern Level to prevent public access. The 

stairs to the Lantern Level are steep, narrow, 

curving, and have no handrail. If visitor access 

to the Lantern Level is desired, a safety handrail should be installed. The rail should be 

constructed to be easily recognized as not part 

of the original installation and should be installed so that the installation is reversible 

without damage to the historic fabric.

Restrict visitor access to the Lantern Level:

According to the structural analysis, the Lantern Level gallery deck does not meet current 

building code strength requirements for public 

access. It is, however, sufficiently strong to accommodate one person at a time. Therefore, 

visitor access to this level should be restricted 

to one person at a time. Given the limited number of people that can be accommodated in the 

Watch Level below, only four or five people at a 

time, it should be within the management capability of the Park Service personnel to 

enforce this restriction.

Replace handrail around Lantern Level gallery: The existing exterior handrail is not 

original and is deteriorating rapidly. Fabricate 

and install a new handrail to match the original 

design. Because this gallery is for maintenance 

purposes only, it is not necessary to meet 

building code requirements for publicly- accessed spaces.

Replace or replicate and install the exterior 

ladder to the Lantern Level Gallery: If this 

ladder still exists, it should be reinstalled in its 

historic location; if not, it should be replicated 

to match the historic ladder and installed in 

place. Visitors should not be allowed to access 

the exterior Lantern Level Gallery. Prevent 

such public access by installing signage or other 

non- invasive means at the base of the ladder.

Replace cornice bracket and bars at Lantern 

roof level: Replace exterior cornice sections of 

upper wall assembly where bracket deterioration will not allow the reinstallation of the 

wrought iron bars. Replace missing wrought 

iron bars.

Repair the connection of Lantern Roof to 

Tower: While this is not a structural strength 

issue, the connection should be repaired to ensure that the roof of the light does not separate 

from the building during periods of high wind. 

This treatment should be undertaken in the 

near term. 

Masonry Components

Examine the paint history of both the interior and exterior of the tower and develop 

the optimal approach to the treatment of the 

original paint and subsequent painting to 

improve breathability of the masonry and 

durability of the coatings. It is clear from field 
Recommendations

150 National Park Service SERO

observations that the exposed paint layers of 

both the exterior and interior coatings of the 

masonry walls are modern paints with notably 

different characteristics than those likely used 

in the original and early coatings. It is expected 

that the combination of the type and number of 

modern coatings on both the interior and exterior of the lighthouse have much less capability 

to transmit moisture out of the brick than the 

early coatings. The alternating black and white 

markings on the tower contribute to the historic character of the building and should be 

retained. The less precise definition of the period of significance, given the continued use of 

the structure as a navigational aid, does not 

provide a specific framework for the rationale 

for treatment of the paint condition. Because 

the existing layers of paint are likely causing 

damage to the structure, it is recommended 

that, based on an understanding of the existing 

paint strata on the lighthouse, later layers of 

paint be removed to the point of improved 

breathability while retaining the alternating 

black and white pattern on the tower. 

Given the similarities between the Currituck 

Lighthouse and the Bodie Island Lighthouse 

and the fact that the Curritcuk Lighthouse was 

never painted, a comparison of the brick conditions and history between the two could shed 

some additional light on the role of the paint 

finish on the Bodie Island Lighthouse on the 

condition of the brick at that structure. 

Upon completion of the analysis of the existing 

strata of interior and exterior masonry coatings 

and comparative analysis with the Curituck 

Lighthouse, if applicable, a final direction regarding the coating of the Bodie Island 

Lighthouse should be to return to a historic 

coating that provides the optimal breathability 

while retaining a distinct black and white horizontal banding pattern of the tower. 

Repoint Masonry: Inspection of both the interior and exterior masonry pointing was limited, 

except in isolated cases, to observations of indentations in the painted joints revealing loss of 

mortar over time. On the areas of mortar exposed due to moisture- induced delamination 

of paint, the mortar is granulated and loose. It 

is likely that the amount of moisture in the masonry has been sufficiently high over a long 

period of time that the mortar has deteriorated 

and is substantially loose, particularly at the 

outer edges of the walls. If exposed, it is likely 

that the masonry joints of most of the building, 

if not the entire building, would require pointing. A comprehensive approach to the 

treatment of the lighthouse masonry will likely 

expose much of the deteriorated masonry 

joints. While it is difficult to anticipate the full 

extent of the mortar deterioration, it is appropriate to project, for scope of work and 

budgeting, that the entire tower would be rehabilitated in the restoration of the lighthouse. 

The repointing mortar should match the historic mortar in composition and color, and the 

joints should match the historic joint characteristics. Particular attention should be given to 

the protection of the brick, which is soft, in the 

preparation of the joints for repointing. 
CONDITION ASSESSMENT

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 151

Glass Components

Fabricate and install replacement prisms in 

Watch Room Level ceiling grating: The grating should be inspected for defects and 

repaired as necessary. Its original coating 

should be replaced after testing to determine 

appropriate composition. The existing prisms 

should be removed, cleaned, and reinstalled, 

with new prisms installed where prisms are 

missing from the grating.

Replace broken glass pane in Lantern: Remove all glazing strips, recaulk all glazing, and 

reinstall all glazing strips.

Other Work

Remove paint from painted surfaces, inspect 

for damage, repair as necessary, and repaint 

with material to match the historic finish.

Remove paper from ventilation tube at the 

hood above the Fresnel lens. The ventilation 

tube is part of the original ventilation system 

design of the lighthouse. If bugs or debris entering the Lantern Level through the 

ventilation tube prove to be a problem, install 

screen wire at the bottom of the tube in a manner that will allow it to be easily removed for 

cleaning without damaging the ventilation 

tube.

Summarized Cost Data

The Class B cost estimate for the recommended 

work is based on the inventory data and condition assessment. The estimate was developed 

using square footage data where appropriate. 

Due to the specialized nature of the cast- iron 

work addressed in the assessment, Mr. Scott 

Howell, President of Robinson Iron Works in 

Alexander City, Alabama provided support for 

this estimate. The estimated cost to implement 

the recommendations in this report is 

$2,693,747. There are several major components of work within the total estimate. They 

include:

Scaffolding the Lighthouse: This is a significant cost of $307,000. It will be most efficient to 

accomplish the maximum amount, if not all, of 

the work on the lighthouse that will benefit 

from scaffolding at the time it is erected. 

Restoring the Level 10 Deck: A complicating 

factor of this work is the fact that the exterior 

deck, windowsill, and interior deck at this level 

are one piece. The estimate for this work is 

$125,642.

Level 9 Deck and Structure: This work is estimated to be $131,130. 

Repair/Restore/Replace Watch Gallery Support Brackets: This is a major item. The 

estimated cost for this work is $365,053.

Repair Belt Course: This assembly is interconnected with both the Watch Gallery Support 

Brackets and the cast iron components of the 

windows at the Service Room level. The estimated cost for this work is $235,727.

Strip, Repoint, and Repaint Tower: To address ongoing moisture damage to the brick 

structure, the existing paint layers should be 
Recommendations

152 National Park Service SERO

removed to a breathable layer and the mortar 

repointed as necessary. The tower should be 

repainted using the historic paint scheme. The 

estimated cost for this work is $470,770.
http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 153

REFERENCE

Sources of Information for 

Part 1 and Part 2

Albee, Peggy, Northeast Building Conservation Branch, National 

Park Service, to Jack Pyburn, AIA, in e- mail, 28 May 2002.

American Institute of Steel Construction, Manual of Steel Construction Allowable Stress Design, Ninth Edition, AISC, Chicago, 1989.

Ferris, Herbert W., comp. and ed., Iron and Steel Beams, 1873 to 

1952, American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, 1985.

Gaskill, John, to Deborah E. Harvey, in e- mails, April, 2002.

Gaskill, Lloyd Vernon, collection of papers relating to service of 

L.V. Gaskill during tenure as lighthouse keeper with the 

Board of Lighthouses and the United States Coast Guard 

held at the National Park Service, Cape Hatteras National 

Seashore headquarters, Manteo, North Carolina, 1911 – 1945. 

Original documents are in the possession of John Gaskill.

Holland, Francis R., Jr., A History of the Bodie Island Light Station,

National Park Service, U. S. Department of the Interior, 1967.

McCombs, Jack, to Deborah E. Harvey, in e- mails, April, 2002.
Sources of Information

154 National Park Service SERO

National Park Service, collection of papers relating to Bodie Island Light Station, held at 

Cape Hatteras National Seashore headquarters, Manteo, North Carolina, 1987 – 

2002.

National Park Service, Northeast Cultural Resources Center, Building Conservation 

Branch, “Historic Paint Finishes Study – 

Bodie Island Lighthouse and Oil House,” 

2002.

Phoenix Iron Company Business Ledgers, 

Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, currently 

stored at the Hagley Museum and Library, 

University of Delaware, Wilmington, Delaware. Images used by permission.

Shelton- Roberts, Cheryl, to Deborah E. Harvey, in e- mails, April, 2002.

Shelton- Roberts, Cheryl, and Bruce Roberts, 

Lighthouse Families, Cranehill Publishing, 

Birmingham, 1997.

United States Coast Guard, 5th District, collection of documents and photographs relating to Bodie Island Light Station, held at 

5th District Headquarters, Portsmouth, 

Virginia, 1909 – 2000.

United States Coast Guard, 9th District, collection of microfilmed documents and 

photographs relating to Bodie Island Light 

Station, held at Shore Maintenance Detachment, Civil Engineering Unit, United 

States Coast Guard, Cleveland, Ohio, 1871 – 

2000. Some of the originals are in the National Archives, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

United States Lighthouse Board, “First Order 

L.H. for Body’s Island, N.C.” original construction drawings, 21 plates, 1871. Originals 

are in the National Archives, Philadelphia, 

Pennsylvania.
REFERENCE

http://crs.sero.nps.gov/historic/hsr/malu/e_summary.htm

 Bodie Island Lighthouse HSR 155

Sources of Information for 

Condition Assessment

American Institute of Steel Construction. Manual of Steel Construction Allowable Stress Design, Ninth Edition, Chicago: 

AISC, 1989.

Barsom, John M., and Stanley T. Rolfe. Fracture & Fatigue Control in Structures - Applications of Fracture Mechanics, 2d ed, 

Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice- Hall, 1987

Ferris, Herbert W., comp. and ed. Iron and Steel Beams, 1873 to 

1952, Chicago: American Institute of Steel Construction, 1985.

Holland, Francis R., Jr. A History of the Bodie Island Light Station, 

Washington: National Park Service, U. S. Department of the 

Interior, 1967.

National Park Service, collection of papers relating to Bodie Island Light Station, held at Cape Hatteras National Seashore 

headquarters, Manteo, North Carolina, 1987 - 2002.

National Park Service, Northeast Cultural Resources Center, 

Building Conservation Branch, “Historic Paint Finishes 

Study - Bodie Island Lighthouse and Oil House,” 2002.
Sources of Information

156 National Park Service SERO

Newman, Alexander. Structural Renovation of 

Buildings, Methods, Details, and Design Examples, New York: McGraw- Hill, 2001.

Rabun, J. Stanley. Structural Analysis of Historic Buildings, New York: John Wiley & 

Sons, 2000.

Secretary of the Interior. The Secretary of the 

Interior's Standards for the Treatment of 

Historic Properties, Washington: United 

States Department of the Interior, 1995. 

(SI)

United States Coast Guard, 5th District, collection of documents and photographs relating to Bodie Island Light Station, held at 

5th District Headquarters, Portsmouth, 

Virginia, 1909 - 2000.

United States Coast Guard, 9th District, collection of microfilmed documents and 

photographs relating to Bodie Island Light 

Station, held at Shore Maintenance Detachment, Civil Engineering Unit, United 

States Coast Guard, Cleveland, Ohio, 1871 

- 2000. Some of the originals are in the 

National Archives, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

United States Lighthouse Board, “First Order 

L.H. for Body's Island, N.C.” original construction drawings, 21 plates, 1871. Originals 

are in the National Archives, Philadelphia, 

Pennsylvania.
As the nation’s principal conservation agency, 

the Department of the Interior has responsibility 

for most of our nationally owned public lands 

and natural resources. This includes fostering 

sound use of our land and water resources; 

protecting our fish, wildlife, and biological 

diversity; preserving the environmental and 

cultural values of our national parks and 

historical places; and providing for the enjoyment 

of life through outdoor recreation. The 

department assesses our energy and mineral 

resources and works to ensure that their 

development is in the best interests of all our 

people by encouraging stewardship and citizen 

participation in their care. The department also 

has a major responsibility for American Indian 

reservation communities and for people who live 

in island territories under U.S. administration. 

NPS D- 433 January 1997