NCS000589_Email RE Removing Outfall Response_20171013

Strickland, Bev
From: Ogallo, LeToya Fields <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 3:44 PM
To: Georgoulias, Bethany
Cc: Lawyer, Mike; Tyndall, Kent; Lucas, Annette
Subject: [External] RE: Duke Energy Weatherspoon Plant NCS000589
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify that the
attachment and content are safe. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to [e-mail].
Thank you for your review and comments Bethany. We have taken a look and think it should be relatively
straightforward to regrade this small area We will work out a schedule and get back to you and Mike on any follow-up
that is needed.
Thanks,
Toya
From: Georgoulias, Bethany [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2017 2:26 PM
To: Ogallo, LeToya Fields
Cc: Lawyer, Mike; Tyndall, Kent; Lucas, Annette
Subject: RE: Duke Energy Weatherspoon Plant NCS000589
*** Exercise caution. This is an EXTERNAL email. DO NOT open
attachments or click links from unknown senders or unexpected
email. ***
Toya,
Thanks for reaching out to the Fayetteville Regional Office and us to evaluate this situation. The photos were also very
helpful.
We agree that the historical sampling point of the drainage pipe under the road for SW -1 was not representative of the
stormwater associated with industrial activity at the Weatherspoon plant site. However, the area where stormwater
flow from the road drain do not present a straightforward "sheet flow' non -point source situation for the discharges
from the haul road either. We cannot remove outfall SW -1 from Weatherspoon's NPDES stormwater permit based on
the current circumstances.
However, I think there are two workable options that Duke Energy Progress could explore at this site instead:
#1— Regrade the area to remove the localized channelization by the roadside and then request removal of SW -1 from
the permit.
#2 — Request representative outfall status (ROS) for one or both of the other outfalls to represent discharges from SW -
1. This would suspend the analytical sampling requirement for SW -1. ROS requests should go directly to the FRO.
Please let me know if you have any further questions.
1

Best regards,
Bethany
Bethany Georgoulias
Environmental Engineer
Stormwater Program, Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources
N.C. Department of Environmental Quality
919 807 6372 office
bethany.geor oulias �,ncdenr.gov
1612 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1612 (mailing)
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27604 (location)
Website: http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energ_y-mineral-land-resources/stormwater
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records
Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Ogallo, LeToya Fields [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2017 2:37 PM
To: Georgoulias, Bethany<[e-mail]>
Cc: Lawyer, Mike <[e-mail]>; Tyndall, Kent <[e-mail]>
Subject: Duke Energy Weatherspoon Plant NCS000589
Hi Bethany,
We recently invited Mike Lawyer out to the Weatherspoon plant to provide some perspective on stormwater sampling
locations for the three stormwater outfalls there. For SW -2 and SW -3 we agreed that samples should be pulled from the
catch basins directly upstream of the outfalls due to access and safety concerns. However for SW -1 we observed that
there doesn't appear to be a point source discharge to the unnamed tributary (LIT) listed as the receiving stream. What
has been described in the permit materials as a "grass lined tough" is very gently sloped and flattens to disperse sheet
flow at some distance from the unnamed tributary (LIT). I have attached some photos for your reference.
• From the south, the trough ends approximately 130 ft from the UT. After the trough ends, the water path would
flow via sheet flow down a gently sloped hill and through the woods prior to reaching the UT.
• From the north, the trough ends in a small channelized (but vegetated) area approximately 8 feet long and 2 ft
wide where the flow path has caused some erosion around a tree stump remnant. After the 8 foot length, the
area flattens and the flow path disperses to sheet flow for approximately 40 feet before reaching the UT.
Historically, Duke staff sampled SW -1 at a drainage pipe that crosses under the road. The pipe is the discharge from a
neighboring property owner's pond (automobile part business). Duke staff collected samples for SW -1 within 2-3 feet of
this piped discharge. Based on our observations, we believe that this location is not representative and in fact that SW -1
is not a point source discharge. Therefore we request that this be removed as an outfall in our permit. Please let me
know if you have any questions or require additional information.
Thanks,
Toya
Toya Ogallo I Environmental Specialist
Duke Energy NPDES Permitting and Compliance
410 South Wilmington Street, Raleigh NC 27601

o: 919.546.6647 1 c: 919.608.1793 1 f: 919.546.4409