NCDEQ Response Letter March 25, 2020

Alamance Aggregates, LLC
P.O. Box 552
Snow Camp, NC 27349
June 10, 2020
Ms. Judith A. Wehner
NCDEQ
512 N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, NC 27699
RE: Proposed Alamance Quarry and Construction Materials Quarry
Alamance County
Cape Fear River Basin
Dear Ms. Wehner,
We have reviewed your letter of March 25, 2020 requesting additional information. We have
revised and/or added the appropriate information that was requested. Please review the below
and included information to see that it is satisfactory. Should there be any more additional
requests, please reach out directly and we will ensure that it is provided timely.
Sincerely,
Chad Threatt
Alamance Aggregates LLC
Page 1 of 6

Alamance Aggregates, LLC
P.O. Box 552
Snow Camp, NC 27349
Provide proof that your company has obtained the buffer authorization from the
Division of Water Resources for impacts to the buffer from the access road and
fencing.
• I have attached the approval from NCDEQ.
2. Show the location of the monitoring wells and permanent seismograph locations on
the Mine Map. In addition, show the dwelling and existing wells within the permit
boundary.
See plan page C201 for the location of monitoring wells, seismograph
location, dwelling and existing wells.
3. Describe the traffic on the roadway that crosses the Colonial Pipeline. Provide details
on any necessary measures needed to protect said roadway.
• Alamance Aggregates and Colonial Pipeline have agreed that this road
shall be relocated so that it turns eastward and intersects with Quakenbush
Road prior to reaching the pipeline easement and without crossing the
pipeline easement. This agreement is subject to receipt of an NCDOT
permit for access at that location.
4. Provide a well water quality analysis for all wells located within 500 feet of the
proposed pit limits. At a minimum the analysis shall include the following
parameters:
Radiological: radon, uranium, and gross alpha and gross beta total and dissolved
metals: Aluminum, Antimony, Arsenic, Barium, Beryllium, Boron, Cadmium, Calcium,
Chromium, Cobalt, Copper, Iron, Lead,
Lithium, Magnesium, Manganese, Mercury, Molybdenum, Nickel, Potassium,
Selenium, Silver, Sodium, Strontium, Thallium, Tin, Titanium, Vanadium, Zinc
microbiology: Alkalinity, Bicarbonate, Carbonate, TOG (Total Organic Carbon),
Turbidity
nutrients: NH3-N, NO2+NO3-N, Phosphorus Total as P, TKN (Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen)
wet chemistry: Bromide, Chloride, Fluoride, Silica, Sulfate, Sulfide, Total Dissolved
Solids (TDS)
bacteria: total coliform & E.coli
• 1 have attached the well water quality analysis report from Groundwater
Management Associates for the study's that were requested.
Page 2 of 6

Alamance Aggregates, LLC
P.O. Box 552
Snow Camp, NC 27349
5. Response to item 5 questions.
A. Generally speaking, the design for many sediment basins associated with this
mine are not approvable due to poor placement, configuration, and
non -adherence to standard sediment basin design.
• The sediment basins have been modified in accordance with the
comments on page three of the letter dated 3/25/20.
B. The basins need to be shown on the plans, in scale, along with all the measures.
• The basins & features have been shown on the plans to scale with all
measures.
C. Placement of all the sediment basin details on one sheet has been problematic
for review because the surrounding topography isn't really shown.
• Sheet C302 has been deleted from the plan set; the information has
been conveyed to the other erosion control sheets.
D. Why are the match lines shown to be about half an inch wide on the plans? They
are covering up topo and measures.
• The size of the match lines have been reduced for clarity.
E. Removal of the temporary crossing and other measures need to be addressed in
the reclamation plan, if not already.
• The removal of the temporary crossing and other measures has been
noted on the Reclamation Plan.
F. They should address maintenance of measures in the crossing area since it is
not typical of the rest of the site.
• The maintenance of the erosion control measures has been noted on
sheet C301 Bin the enlarged temporary crossing plan.
G. They need to move the silt fence back from the tops of the stream banks to the
maximum extent practical in the span culvert area.
In addition, address the following:
Page 3of6

Alamance Aggregates, LLC
P.O. Box 552
Snow Camp, NC 27349
It is not acceptable for the emergency spillway to be in the first cell.
It is not acceptable for the skimmer to be located up the side slope. It creates a
situation where the basin cannot drain to the floor.
Regarding the skimmer basin design, 18 of the 29 basins are designed such that
the baffles run the length of the basin, resulting in short flow paths. There are
several instances where it is difficult to determine if the basin design is
acceptable given scale of the drawings when including each of the basins on a
single sheet, and there is no difference in the line used for basin contours and
baffles.
• The silt fence has been moved back from the tops of stream banks.
• The emergency spillways have been shifted so as not to be in the first
cell
• The skimmers have been shifted so as not to be located on a side slope
• The lines -for the basin baffles have been shown darker and the baffles
are labeled.
Basin 1: The outlet of the slope drain appears to be placed on top of the first baffle
and flow into the second cell
• The outlet of the slope drain has been shifted.
Basin 2: The outlet of the slope drain appears to be placed on top of the first baffle
and flow into the second cell, and the baffles are right on the contours such that
there is no storage on the bottom of the basin in the first and last cell.
• The outlet of the slope drain has been shifted and the baffles have been
moved as well; this basin has been re -configured.
Basin 3: The outlet of the slope drain appears to be placed on top of the first baffle
and flow into the second cell.
• The outlet of the slope drain has been adjusted so flow is in the first
cell.
Basin 4/5: The ditch design appears to bypass the basin
• The ditches have been modified to direct flow directly into the basins.
Page 4 of 6

Alamance Aggregates, LLC
P.O. Box 552
Snow Camp, NC 27349
Basin 8: The diversion is shown conveying flow into the second cell
• The diversion location has been modified.
Basin 9: The diversion appears to convey flow right onto the baffle between the first
and second cell.
• The diversion has been modified to convey flow into the first cell.
Basin 11: A diversion is shown to convey flow into the third or fourth cell.
• The diversion has been adjusted to convey flow into the first cell.
Basin 12: The baffles are right on the contours such that there is no storage on the
bottom of the basin in the first and last cell.
• The basin has been re -configured.
Basin 14 The baffles are very close to the contours such that there is very little
storage on the bottom of the basin in the first and last cell. Cells should be 25%
each.
• The baffles have been modified to create additional area at the first cell.
Basin 15: The baffles are very close to the contours such that there is very little
storage on the bottom of the basin in the first and last cell
The baffles have been adjusted.
Basin 18: The ditch design appears to bypass the basin
• The ditch has been re -graded to direct flow directly into the basin.
Basin 20: Flow appears to be conveyed into second cell
• The storm drainage pipe length has been reduced to ensure flow is in
the first cell.
Page 5 of 6

Alamance Aggregates, LLC
P.O. Box 552
Snow Camp, NC 27349
Basin 22: The diversion appears to be conveyed right onto the baffle between the
first and second cell
i he diversion has been modified.
Basin 26: The diversion appears to convey flow just before the first baffle.
The diversion has been adjusted.
Basin 28: The diversion appears to run through the emergency spillway.
• The diversion has been revised.
Basin 29: The diversion appears to convey flow just before the first baffle.
• The diversion has been modified for conveyance into the first cell.
Page 6of6