NCG020408_COMPLETE FILE - HISTORICAL_20151001

PERMIT NO.
DOC TYPE
DOC DATE
STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET
N CG PERMITS
/V C& baDya �
HISTORICAL FILE
MONITORING REPORTS
❑bi�1D�`
YYYYMMDD

Compliance Inspection Report
Permit: NCGO20408 Effective: 10/01/15 Expiration: 09130/20 Owner: LBM Whitewater Quarry
SOC: Effective: Expiration: Facility: LBM Whitewater Quarry
County: Transylvania Hwy 281 S
Region: Asheville
Sapphire NC 28774
Contact Person: Jason Hall Title: Phone: [phone]
Directions to Facility:
System Classifications:
Primary ORC: Certification: Phone:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
On -site representative Jason Hall 828-321-5850
Related Permits:
Inspection Date: 08/12/2016 Entry Time: 02=13M Exit Time: 03:15PM
Primary Inspector: Shawna Riddle Phone:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Reason for inspection: Routine lnspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Inspection Type: Mining Activities Stormwater Discharge COC
Facltity Status: E Compliant n Not Compliant
Question Areas:
Storm Water
(See attachment summary)
Page: 1

L I
r
10 #
Permit: NCG020408 Owner- Facility: LEW Whitewater Quarry
Inspection [late: 08/12/2016 Inspection Type : Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Met with Jason Hall for a Mutlimedia inspection for stormwater and air quality permits. I also did an inspection of the quarry
(mining permit). The facility is following their SPPP and conducting monitoring as required. The stormwater water permit for
the concrete plant and the quarry are the same NCG020408. We will not be requiring that the facility get a separate permit
for the quarry. The facility has a stormwaterlwashwater treatmentltivater reuse system. The final 2 basins are located beside
the entrance road to the quarry/concrete plant. This area also has a spring water diversion structure that routes water from
slope drains to a ditch that flows to the first pond (pond is used for dust supression). The next pond is a detention pond for
stormwater/washwater and leads to Outfali "B" (pipe installed flowing to the horsepasture river).
Page: 2

permit; NCG0204138 Owner • Faeility: LBM Whitewater Quarry
lnspectlon Date: 0&12I2016 Inspection Type; Compliance Evaluation Reason for VIGIL Routine
Analytical Monitorinq Yes No NA NE
Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring? N ❑ ❑ ❑
# Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring from Vehicle Maintenance areas? ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Permit and Outfalls Yes No NA NE
# Is a copy of the hermit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Were all outfalls observed during the inspection? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# If the facility has representative outfall status, is it properly documented by the Division? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
# Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non stormwater) discharges? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Qualitative Monitoring Yes No NA NE
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Yes No NA NE
Does the site have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan?
0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a General Location (USGS) map?
N ❑ [] ❑
# Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and drainage areas?
❑ ❑ []
# Does the Plan include a list of significant spills occurring during the past 3 years?
E El ❑ ❑
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Parry(s)?
0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
E❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Has the Slormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
E ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Page: 3

0
0
Compliance
Inspection Report
Permit: NGGG204GB
Effective: 10/01/15
Expiration: 09/30/20 owner:
LBM Whitewater Quarry
SOC:
Effective:
Expiration: Facility:
LBM Whitewater Quarry
County: Transylvania
Hwy 281 S
Region: Asheville
Sapphire NC 28774
Contact Person: Jason Hall
Title:.
Phone: [phone]
Directions to Facility:
System Classifications:
Primary ORC: Certification: Phone:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Representative($):
On -site representative Jason Hall 828-321-5850
Related Permits:
Inspection Date: 09/07/2017 Entry Time: 09:45AM Exit Time: 11:00AM
Primary Inspector: Shawna Riddle Phone:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Reason for Inspection: Routine Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Inspection Type: Mining Activities Stormwater Discharge COC
Facility Status: Compliant Not Compliant
Question Areas:
Storm Water
(See attachment summary)
Page: 1

Permit: MCG020408 Owner - Facility: LBM 1Miitewater Quarry
Inspection Date: 0910712017 Inspection Type :Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Met with Jason Hall for a Multimedia inspection for stormwater and air permits. I also did an inspection of the quarry (mining
permit). The facility is following their SPPP and conducting monitoring as required. The stormwater permit for the concrete
plant and the quarry are the same NCG020408. We will not be requiring that the facility get a separate permit for the quarry.
The facility has a stormwaterlwashwater treatment/water reuse system. The final 2 basins are located beside the entrance
road to the quarry/concrete plant. This area also has a spring water diversion structure that routes water from slope drains to
a ditch that flows to the first pond (pond is used for dust supression). The next pond is a detention pond for
stormwaterlwashwater and leads to Outfall "B" (pipe installed flowing to the horsepasture river).
Page: 2

Permit- NCGO20408 Owner - Facility: LBM Whitewater Quarry
Inspection Date: 09107/2017 Inspection Type. Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Yes No NA NE
Does the site have a Slormwater Pollution Prevention Plan?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a General Location (USGS) map?
■
❑ ❑ 0
# Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and drainage areas?
0
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a list of significant spills occurring during the past 3 years?
[]
0 ❑ ❑
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
0
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
0
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
0
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Party(s)?
❑ ❑ ❑
# Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
❑ ❑ ❑
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
(qualitative Monitoring Yes No NA NE
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually? M ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Analytical Monitorinq Yes No NA NE
Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring from Vehicle Maintenance areas? ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Permit and Outfalls
YgsNoNANE
# Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Were all outfalls observed during the inspection? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
# If the facility has representative outfall status, is it property documented by the Division? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
# Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non stormwater) discharges? a ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Page: 3

NCDENR r
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources
Land Quality Section
Tracy Davis, PE, CPM
Director
April 7, 2014
Jason Hall
LBM Industries, Inc.
P.O. Box 40
Sapphire, North Carolina 28774
SUBJECT: NPDES Stormwater Permit Compliance Inspection
White Water Quarry
Permit No: NCG020408
Transylvania County
Dear Mr. Hall:
Pat McCrory, Governor
John E. Skvarla, III, Secretary
This letter is in follow-up to the NPDES Stormwater Permit Compliance Inspection conducted on March 27,
2014. The facility was found to be in compliance with permit NCG020408.
Enclosed is a copy of the Compliance Inspection Report, which contains additional observations and
comments for your reference.
If I can be of any further assistance, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely, ,
Jeff Wait
Environmental Specialist
Land Quality Section
Enclosure: Compliance Inspection Report
Asheville Regional Office, 2090 US Highway 70, Swannanoa, North Carolina,
Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
http:l/Qortal.ncdenr.org/web/Ir/land-quality
An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer
28778-8211
NolrthCarolina
Naturalltf

a
t
0 0
Compliance Inspection Report
Permit: NCG020408 Effective: 01/01/10 Expiration: 12/31/14 Owner: LBM Whitewater Quarry
SOC: Effective: Expiration: Facility: LBM Whitewater Quarry
County: Transylvania Hwy 281 S
Region: Asheville
Sapphire NC 28774
Contact Person: Jason Hall Title: Phone: [phone]
Directions to Facility:
System Classifications:
Primary ORC:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Related Permits:
Certification: Phone:
Inspection Cate: 03/27/2014 EntryTime: 10:30 AM Exit Time: 11:45 AM
Primary Inspector: Jeffrey L Wait Phone:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Shawna Riddle Phone:
Reason for Inspection: Routine Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Inspection Type: Mining Activities Stormwater Discharge COC
Facility Status: ■ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Question Areas:
Storm Water
(See attachment summary)
Page: 1

0 0
Permit: NCG020408 Owner - Facillty: LBM Whitewater Quarry
Inspection Elate: 03/27/2014 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Mine is following their SWPPP and is doing a good job of keeping records up to date as required. Met with Jason Hall and
Bo McCall during the inspection.
Page: 2

0 •
Permit: NCG020408 Owner - Facility: t.BM Whitewater Quarry
Inspection Date: 0312712014 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Reason for Visit:
Routine
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Yes
No
NA
NE
Does the site have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan?
■
❑
n
❑
# Does the Plan include a General location (USGS) map?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and drainage areas?
■
❑
Cl
❑
# Does the Plan include a list of significant spills occurring during the past 3 years?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Party(s)?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
■
0
❑
❑
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
■
❑
❑
❑
Comment: SWPPP is in place and is being followed. All records are up to date.
Qualitative Monitoring
Yes No
NA
NE
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually?
■ ❑
❑
❑
Comment: Qualitative monitoring is being done as required.
Analytical Monitoring
Yes No
NA
NE
Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring?
■ ❑
❑
❑
# Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring from Vehicle Maintenance areas?
❑ ❑
■
❑
Comment: Analytical monitoring is being done as required.
Permit and Outfalls
Yes
No
NA
NE
# Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Were all outfalls observed during the inspection?
MOOD
# If the facility has representative outfall status, is it properly documented by the Division?
❑
❑
■
❑
# Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non stormwater) discharges?
❑
❑
■
❑
Comment: Outfalls were observed during inspection
Page: 3

Rc: Horsepasture River ROP
Subject: Re: Horsepasture River ROP
From: Susan Wilson <susan.a.wiIson a ncmaiLnet>
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 18:07:56 -0400
To: "Elizabeth.Kountis a ncmaiLnet" <Elizabeth.Kountis rr ncnlail.net>
CC: rob.krebs a nemail.net, jeff.manning&cmail.net, ken.pickle a ncnlail.net,
[e-mail]
ncmaiLnet
I'm really, really uncomfortable with giving this guy anything in writing at this point (we're not
obligated to do that - but, of course, that's ya'lls decision if you want to go that route - just gettin: lily two
cents in). 1 would fake some statements put in re. Fairfield Sapphire (have some questions on "vested" -
which I know the EMC doesn't like to get into). I'll discuss outside ol'e-mails my concerns.
f'.lizabeth.Kountis u,ncinail.net wrote:
All - Here is a draft of the Horsepasture River ROP - hurrah! At this
point, 1'd greatly appreciate it, since it still is in draft form, to
be an internal document only. For those of you not too familiar with
the reclassifcation, feel free to peruse the document to learn more
about it. Please also note that where you see "xx" in the attachment is
for a page number which I have not yet assigned as I'm not sure how
many edits will need to be made to the document. (Also, I apologize
for the length of this email, but there's lots to discuss, and if you
have any questions or feel I have left out any details, please feel
free to contact me..........)
I talked with Mr. Kimzey late yesterday. He is prepared to meet with
us on Toes Aug 12 at 1030. He said Forrest will send me directions to
the McGill and Associates branch in Hickory where we are to meet. He
plans on having Forrest, Mack McNeely, and himself at the meeting, and
will be waiting for us on Tuesday am starting at 10 am. We (Susan, Ken,
counsel (Brenda Menard) whose email address I don't have at home where
I am now but I'll forward her this message today), and myself) will
.leave Raleigh in one of our vehicles at 8 am from the loading dock of
the Archdale Building. Rob Krebs and Roger Edwards will join us at the
meeting location (Roger -thanks for being able to do so on such short
notice), perhaps accompanied by Starr Silvis. I wish we all had the
chance to chat before the meeting; perhaps we can use a meeting room at
the meeting location from 10-1030 - I'll check into that option.
Mr. Kimzey's agenda: he repeatedly said that he'd like to discuss the
ROP, and would like for me to send him at least a summary of it ASAP.
He did not mention specifically wanting to discuss any impacts of the
ORW reclassification on the quarry SW permit. I told him the ROP will
not be ready by the 8/12 meeting date, but that we could discuss it at
the meeting, and that I would send him the final two paragraphs of the
ROP, the ones in the Recommendation section. I also thought I'd send
him a copy of the Table of Contents (TOC) to see if he'd like to
discuss any particular parts of the ROP. I think the only info in the
ROP that he has not received at this point is perhaps a few regulatory
references, the written comment information from the "Public Hearing
Process and Comments Received" section, and the "Major Issues Raised
and DWQ Responses" section that I think he might want to discuss.
Rob and Jeff - Please read the "Recommendation" section at the end of
the ROP and the TOC this am, as I'd like to send it. to Mr. Kimzey
today. If you could also review at least the "Major Issues Raised and
DWQ Responses" section and provide any edits by Monday at noon, that
would great.
All - The 3th, 6th, and 7th paragraphs in the response to the 2nd to
1 of2 &1 1/2008 4:17 PNI

Re; Horsepasture River ROP
last issue, which is the issue regarding detrimental economic and
environmental impacts, in the "Major Issues Raised and DWQ Responses"
Becton are paragraphs for which I'd like your input ASAP. I think they
are key paragraphs that we need to be on the same page about for
Tuesday's meeting.
Rob --I have a section meeting in the pm (130-3) of Monday, so the best
time to reach me will be anytime before that meeting. I think you
mentioned you were going to call me Monday.....
Susan A. Wilson, P.E.
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
(919) 807 - 6389
of 2 811 112008 4:17 PM

0F w A 7'�9oc
J �
July 31, 2008
Bill and Mack McNeely
LBM Industries Inc.
P.O. Box 40
Sapphire, NC 28774
Dear Mr. Bill McNeely and Mr. Mack McNeely:
Michael F. Fuslcy, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Sccrulary
North Carolina Department orEnvirenment and Natural Resources
Coleen 11. Sullins. Director
Division or Water Quality
RE: Proposed ORW Reclassification of
Horsepasture River
This letter is intended to clarify how the proposed reclassification of the Horsepasture River to
Outstanding; Resource Waters (ORW),may effect your current and future operations at LBM Industries
with regard to your current stormwater general permit.
Section 15A NCAC 02B .0225 (c) outlines quality standards for ORW. The standards for
freshwater ORW stipulate that "No new discharges or expansions of existing; discharges shall be
permitted, and stormwater controls for all new development activities requiring; an Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Plan... shall be required to follow stormwater provisions as specified in 15A
NCAC 2H A000." General permits are not exempted from these restrictions.
While the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) interprets the niles to allow stormwater—only
discharges to ORW, the language does not allow new or expanded process wastewater discharges
directly to segments designated as ORW or to which ORW regulations apply. There are two stonmwater
general permits that allow process wastewater discharges; thus, proposed new or expanded wastewater
discharges under these general permits are not allowed. Projects proposing to discharge only
stormmwater or those proposing; a closed -loop recycle system to manage wastewater are still allowed.
Existing permitted operations are still allowed (See May 11, 2007 policy memo).
It is our understanding that LBM Industries does hold a stormwater general permit that allows
for process wastewater discharges. However, per the comment letter received from James Kimzey,
",..1-13M Industries discharges all of its waste water into settling; ponds to be reused rather than being;
discharged intn the river." Thus, it appears that even though LBM Industries is permitted to discharge
wastewater, current operations do not result in such a discharge (except during; hard rains per DWQ
records),
The reclassification, as proposed, will not affect LBM Industries' current stormwater general
permit, nor the ability to have that permit renewed as currently written. In addition, the stormwater
component of LBM Industries' current stormwater general permit may be expanded in the future if the
proposed reclassification becomes effective. However, as mentioned above, the ORW reclassification
would not allow LBM Industries to increase its currently permitted process wastewater discharge
North Carolina Division o(WaerQaality 1617 Mail Sen ice Center Raleigh, NC 21699-16t7 Phone [phone]
Inlcrnet: w",,wv 1 atvntcrqualit�L.—og Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
An Equal OpporlunilylAt(irmative Action Employer — 50°% Recycled110°% Post Consumer Paper
Customer Service
1-877-623-674K
ow
`ordicarkslinit
,rl rrtrrrrrily

component. Thus, per DWQ regulations, if the ORW reclassification became effective, quarry
expansion could occur as long as such expansion was conducted in a manner that would not increase its
currently permitted. wastewater discharge.
Should you need further clarification or have further questions, please feel free to contact
Bradley Bennett at [phone].
Sincerely,
Robert B. Krebs
Mooresville Regional Office Surface Water
Protection Section Supervisor
Enclosure — May 11, 2007, NPDES General Permit Policy Memo
cc: Matt Matthews - DWQ
Elizabeth Kountis - DWQ
James Kimzey, attorney

Re: [Fwd: [Fwd: Re: McNeely quarry meeting this Thl]
Subject: Re: [Fwd: [Fwd: Re: McNeely quarry meeting this Th]]
From: Starr Silvis <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:18:35 -0400
To: Bethany Georgoulias <[e-mail]>
CC: Ken Pickle <ken.pickle a ncmail.net>
Last I talked to Bradley it was my understanding that the stormwater permitting unit would write
something up. He had been in correspondence with Forest Westall, who is the McNeely's consultant. If
memory serves we agreed that the McNeely quarry would be able to continue to discharge at their
current rate, regardless of the location of the discharge since the ORW rules say no new or expanded
ww discharge. we would encourage the McNeely's to look at non -discharge options for any new areas
that they opened. Given the size and shape of their property this should be doable for them. We
discussed that we would need to have them quantify their current discharge so that there was same
baseline that we could hold them to.
Not sure where it is other than that..
Bethany Georgoulias wrote:
Starr,
Did anything ever get resolved with this one? The last I talked with Bradley about it, it sounded
like the only route out of ORW restrictions might be for Planning to write the classification as a
'Special Management Strategy'. I haven't heard anything more oil this.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Fwd: Re: McNeely quarry meeting this Th]
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 13:08:02 -0400
From: Bradley Bennett <13radley.Bennctt 5,ncmai1.net>
To: Ken Pickle <ken.pickle a,ncmail.net>, Bethany Georgoulias
<bethany.georgOUlias a,ncmail.net>
Hey Guys
"fake a look at Starr's note. This realtes to the Elizabeth Kountis brought to our attention that may
be impacted by an ORW reclassifiifcation. What are your thoughts on her interpretation?
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: McNeely quarry meeting this Th
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 07:32:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: Starr.Silvis cr ncmail.net <starr.silvis(u�ncmail.net>
Reply -To: Starr.Silvis u ncmail.net <starr.silvis a ncmail.net>
To: <Ializabeth.Kountis a ncmail.net>, Roger Edwards < Roger. Edwards cr,ncmai1.net>,
brad ley. bennett n,ncmai].net
CC: Rob Krebs <rob.krebsnncmail.net>, Jeff Manning <jeff.ilianning0(,,ncmail.net>
l of 3 8111/2008 4:24 PM

Re: E Fwd: [Fwd: Re: McNeely quarry meeting this Thll
Roger and I met with the McNeely's et al on Thursday. Since Roger is out on vacation he has asked
me to provide comments/summary of discussion during the meeting.
The McNeely's own approximately 400 contiguous acres which adjoin the horsepasture river both
above and below the bridge. They own property on both side of the river. Currently they have 88
acres in their mining permit on the east side of the river. They have a couple hundred acres on the
other side of the river. Their plans are to open up the other side to mining some time in the future.
They are very concerned that the proposed reclassification will prevent them from using the land
that they have for their intended purpose.
As a side note, they do a very good job with the mine they currently work. They have a series of
basins and rarely discharge. They discharge only in response to hard rains. Tile McNeely's go
above and beyond regulatory requirements and are in all respects good stewards.
ORW classification precludes "new or expanded wastewater discharge". Now here is where
interpretation comes into play. The LBM whitewa€er quarry has a permit for stormwater and
wastewater discharge. Since they already have a permit, any expansion would not be a new
discharge... its already permitted. The general permit does not have flow limits, nor is any flow
presumed except as reported by them on their monitoring forms. Since no flow limits are in place,
it would be impossible to expand their wastewater discharge (i.e. how do you expand something
that isn't quantified?). They are aware that any new or expanded treatment units for wastewater
would need an A to C. This is the case regardless of the classification.
The McNeely's have asked that if we all concur with the above summary and interpretation that we
compose a letter to the effect for Raleigh signature. Otherwise there will likely be legal action
taken (my words, not theirs). They have a substantial investment in the 400 acres and are very
concerned that this reclass will effectively prohibit their intended use of the property.
Thoughts'? Comments? Bradley, please comment on how your office would review and A to C for
a mine in an ORW. Would it be possible to essentially view the quarry as having vested rights to
utilize their existing property? Obviously they cannot violate water quality standards, and any new
treatment units (please note that this would not be a "new discharge" as prohibited in the rules)
would have to get an A to C.
I think it is also prudebt to realize that the mine is upstream from sampling points that came back as
excellent. This provides some good evidence that the operation is not negatively affecting water
quality.
Roger, did I miss anything or misstate anything?
Starr Silvis, P.E.
Environmental Engineer
North Carolina Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
Asheville Regional Office
2 of 3 8/1 I/2008 4:24 l'M

Re: McNeely quarry inecting this Th
Subject: Re: McNeely quarry meeting this Th
From: Elizabeth Kountis <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 1 1:28:44 -0400
To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, Roger Edwards
<[e-mail]>, bradley.bennett a ncmail.net, Ken Pickle <ken.pickle rr ncmai1.net>
CC: Rob Krebs <[e-mail]>, Jeff Manning <jeff:manning cr ncmail.net>
We did meet with Senator Snow and Representative Walend last Wednesday; they had
several questions from their constituents which we addressed, and they also asked for
copies of several documents in the proposed reclassification file. If you'd like to
know more about the meeting, please let me know. Regarding the quarry, I told them
that DWQ staff had visited the site recently and DWQ internal discussions were
occurring concerning the impact of the proposed reclassification on their general
stormwater permit, especially in relation to future plans for the site.
Could I please receive a status on those discussions? I would like to contact the
McNeelys today if at all possible with the results of those discussions, given that
tomorrow is the end of the comment period. Thanks.
Elizabeth Kountis wrote:
Starr/Roger -- Thanks for the quick response, and taking the time to meet with the
McNeelys at their quarry.
All - My unit has been contacted by legislators, who may have well been contacted
by folks concerned about the impact of the reclassification to the quarry, and
those legislators want to meet soon, seemingly this week, to discuss the
reclassification. In addition, please remember that the comment period ends on July
1, 2008. Thus, as a reminder, if ya'll could please discuss and then hopefully come
to a conclusion within the next couple of days how the proposed reclassification's
stormwater and wastewater requirements would affect the quarry's general stormwater
permit, that would be greatly appreciated. The goal here is to provide the outcome
of your discussions to the McNeely's this week before the comment period closes if
at all possible. Thanks for your work thus far, and to come, on this issue!
[e-mail] wrote:
Roger and I met with the McNeely's et al on Thursday. Since Roger is out on
vacation he has asked me to provide comments/summary of discussion during the
meeting.
The McNeely's own approximately 400 contiguous acres which adjoin the
horsepasture river both above and below the bridge. They own property on both
side of the river. Currently they have 88 acres in their mining permit on the
east side of the river. They have a couple hundred acres on the other side of
the river. Their plans are to open up the other side to mining some time in the
future. They are very concerned that the proposed reclassification will prevent
them from using the land that they have for their intended purpose.
As a side note, they do a very good job with the mine they currently work. They
have a series of basins and rarely discharge. They discharge only in response
to hard rains. The McNeely's go above and beyond regulatory requirements and
are in all respects good stewards. ORW classification precludes "new or expanded
wastewater discharge". Now here is where interpretation comes into play. The
LBM whitewater quarry has a permit for stormwater and wastewater discharge.
Since they already have a permit, any expansion would not be a new
discharge... its already permitted. The general permit does not have flow
limits, nor is any flow presumed except as reported by them on their monitoring
forms. Since no flow limits are in place, it would be impossible to expand
their wastewater discharge (i.e. how do you expand something that isn't
quantified?). They are aware that any new or expanded treatment units for
wastewater would need an A to C. This is the case regardless of the
classification. The McNeely's have asked that if we all concur with the above
I of 2 8/1l/2008 4:25 I'M

Re: McNeely quarrY meeting this Th
summary and interpretation that we compose a letter to the effect for Raleigh
signature. Otherwise there will likely be legal action taken (my words, not
theirs), They have a substantial investment in the 400 acres and are very
concerned that this reclass will effectively prohibit their intended use of the
property.
Thoughts? Comments? Bradley, please comment on how your office would review
and A to C for a mine in an ORW. Would it be possible to essentially view the
quarry as having vested rights to utilize their existing property? Obviously
they cannot violave water quality standards, and any new treatment units (please
note that this would not be a "new discharge" as prohibited in the rules) would
have to get an A to C.
I think it is also prudent to realize that the mine is upstream from sampling
points that came back as excellent. This provides some good evidence that the.
operation is not negatively affecting water quality.
Roger, did I miss anything or misstate anything?
2 of2 8/11/2008 4:25 PM

Re: McNeely gUarry meeting; this Th
Subject: Re: McNeely quarry meeting this Th
From: Elizabeth Kountis <Elizabeth,Kountis t ncmai1.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 12:56:33 -0400
To: "Starr.Silvis a ncmai1.net" <starr.silvis a ncmail.net>, Roger Edwards
<Roger.Edward s a ncrnail.nct>, bradley.bennett cr ncmail.net, Ken Pickle <ken.pickle cr ncrnail.net>
CC: Rob Krebs <rob.krebs cr ncmai1.net>, Jeff Manning <jeff.manning cr nemail.nct>
Starr/Roger - Thanks for the quick response, and taking the time to meet with the
McNeelys at their quarry.
All - My unit has been contacted by legislators, who may have well been contacted by
folks concerned about the impact of the reclassification to the quarry, and those
legislators want to meet soon, seemingly this week, to discuss the reclassification.
In addition, please remember that the comment period ends on July 1, 2008. Thus, as a
reminder, if ya'11 could please discuss and,then hopefully come to a conclusion within
the next couple of days how the proposed reclassification's stormwater and wastewater
requirements would affect the quarry's general stormwater permit, that would be
greatly appreciated. The goal here is to provide the outcome of your discussions to
the McNeely's this week before the comment period closes if at all possible. Thanks
for your work thus far, and to come, on this issue!
[e-mail] wrote:
Roger and I met with the McNeely's et al on Thursday. Since Roger is out on
vacation he has asked me to provide comments/summary of discussion during the
meeting.
The McNeely's own approximately 400 contiguous acres which adjoin the horsepasture
river both above and below the bridge. They own property on both side of the
river. 'Currently they have 88 acres in their.mining permit on the east side of the
river. They have a couple hundred acres on the other side of the river. Their
plans are to open up the other side to mining some time in the future. They are
very concerned that the proposed reclassification will prevent them from using the
land that they have for their intended purpose.
As a side note, they do a very good job with the mine they currentl} work. They
have a series of basins and rarely discharge. They discharge only in response to
hard rains. The McNeely's go above and beyond regulatory requirements and are in
all respects good stewards.
ORW classification precludes "new or expanded wastewater discharge". Now here is
where interpretation comes into play. The LBM waitewater quarry has a permit for
stormwater and wastewater discharge. Since they already have a permit, any
expansion would not be a new discharge —its already permitted. The general permit
does not have flow limits, nor is any flow presumed except as reported by them on
their monitoring forms. Since no flow limits are in place, it would be impossible
to expand their wastewater discharge (i.e. how do you expand'something that isn't
quantified?). They are aware that any new or expanded treatment units for
wastewater would need an A to C. This is the case regardless of the
classification.
The McNeely's have asked that if we all concur with the above summary and
interpretation that we compose a letter to the effect for Raleigh signature.
Otherwise there will likely be legal action taken (my words, not theirs). They
have a substantial investment in the 400 acres and are very concerned that this
reclass will effectively prohibit their intended use of the property.
Thoughts? Comments? Bradley, please comment on how your office would review and -A
to C for a mine in an ORW. Would it be possible to essentially view the quarry as
having vested rights to utilize their existing property? Obviously they cannot
violate water quality standards, and any new treatment units (please note that this
would not be a "new discharge" as prohibited in the rules) would have to get an A
to C.
I think it is also prudent to realize that the mine is upstream from sampling
1 of 2 9/8/2008 4:02 I'M

Re: McNc6y quarry mectinb this Th
points that came back as excellent. This provides some good evidence that the
operation is not negatively affecting water quality.
Roger, did T miss anything or misstate anything?
2 oC2 9/8/2008 4:02 PM

McNeely quarry meeting next a-eek
Subject: McNeely quarry meeting next week
From: Elizabeth Kountis <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 16:08:15 -0400
To: Starr Silvis <Starr.Silvis cc ncmail.net>, bradley.bennett a nctnail.net, Ken Pickle
<ken.pickle@ncmai l.net>
CC: Roger Edwards <Roger. Edwardsa ncmail.net>, Rob Krebs <rob.krebs a ncmail.net>, Jeff Manning
<[e-mail]>
Forrest Westall, on behalf of the McNeelys, asked to meet DWQ staff next week to
discuss the McNeelys' concerns about potential impacts to their quarry due to the
proposed reclassification of the Horsepasture River watershed. Roger has informed me
that he and other ARO staff (Starr I think) are going to meet with Forrest and the
McNeelys at the quarry site on Thursday, June 19th at 1 pm. T understand that Rob,
Jeff, Bradley, and Ken cannot make the site visit. Please note that I did offer to
have DwQ staff who will be in Raleigh next Thursday available via a conference call
with others at the quarry site that same day, but Forrest thought perhaps such a call
could happen once DwQ folks who visit the quarry site have a chance to share what they
learn with those DwQ folks who can not make the site visit.
My hopes are that ARO staff will be informed by the McNeelys of all options of
interest for future expansion, including method/s of stormwater and wastewater
treatment for such options, if some areas of the quarry will be closed out as other
areas are opened, etc_ Any and all details regarding future expansion plans would be
worthy of receiving, especially as they relate to the quarry's general stormwater
permit (with its wastewater components). If this information could then be passed via
an email from ARO staff to Bradley, Ken, Rob, Jeff, and 1 within a couple of working
days of the quarry site visit, that would be much appreciated. I would then hope that
discussions would occur between Roger, Starr, Bradley, and Ken as to how the proposed
reclassification's stormwater (and wastewater) requirements would affect the quarry's
general SW permit in relation to the various options presented by the McNeelys. As
the comment period ends on July 1, 2008, it would be great if the outcome of those
internal discussions could close by one week from the site visit, which would be
Thursday, June 26th. The outcomes of those discussions could be relayed to the
McNeelys the following day, which would occur before the July 1, 2008 closing date of
the comment period.
1 01,1 8/11/2008 4:26 I'M

[Fwd: Ri •RW and NCG0204081 J? h„ i i [��-- i a n S r-F D 'Vi re cf a SsLG,
,�-[-i--
'- tl. ter H."TIPe n,u & 4-
�e 'gyp. mQr 4` a+-� Or
Subject: [' wd: Re: ORW and NCG020408]
From: Ken Picklc •<[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:31.02 -0400 C o n� �-o d a re�r �c no G to a.✓
To: Bethany Georgoulias<[e-mail]>
CC: Bradley Bennett <[e-mail]> Ra 0RVJ ru.P .
G0�GIu
Bethany,
Thanks for your clarity on this. I concur. I think I'll wait to hear from
Jeff/Betsy before I respond to Mr. McNeely.
I think the task of identifying what constitutes an expansion of the discharge will
be BPJ as we pick a past average? or 90% value? or maximum recorded value? But, it's
doable, and seems to be in accord with the ORW Rule.
Ken
Subject: Re: ORW and NCG020408
From: Jeff Manning <Jeff. Manning@ ncmail.net>
Date: "Cue, 22 Apr 2008 08:13:05 -0400
To: Bethany Georgoulias<Bethany.Georgouli as@ncmai 1. net>
CC: Ken Pickle <ken,pick Ie a ncmai1.net>, Bradley Bennett <Bradley,Bennett@ncmai1,net>, Elizabeth
Kountis <Elizabeth,[e-mail]>
I'm printing these (haven't read them yet), and Betsy and I will discuss in the car
today (Dianne is riding with us as well to join the convo). Based on the length of
the email string, I'm guessing we'll need to re -connect on this topic next week with
everyone once we all get back in the office. Thanks!
,Leff
Bethany Georgoulias wrote:
Okay, I understand why the flow wouldn't be limited to 50% of the 7Q10 (that would
apply to new NPDES discharges only, not existing). However, it seems to me that
if ORW is a subset of HQW, the ORW restrictions prevail. ;Which means we have to,
evaluate what his level of discharge has been in the past,,based on the monitoring
data he has submitted (presuming he did this quarterly as per the permit). Not
sure how to do that, but we probably ought to establish how... Otherwise, the ORW
rule wouldn't do anything to protect ORW status of waters where existing mines
decide to expand indiscriminately. That would be sad.
Ken Pickle wrote:
Just to capture the discussion today, here's what we said about Mr. McNeely's
mine and what I'm preparing to report to him. Please contact me if I've
misunderstood our discussion, or conclusions. We reached an agreement
yesterday, but in writing it down, I have a problem in the ORW Rule that we
didn't address yesterday.
1) BACKGROUND
The facility is covered under the current mining discharge General Permit as
the Whitewater Quarry, Transylvania County, discharging to Horsepasture Creek
in the savannah River Basin, Class B Tr, and is valid until 12/31/09.
NCG020406. Quarterly monitoring for flow, pH, Settleable Solids, and
turbidity. BIMS showed inspections in 2006 and 2007, but no violations. The
receiving water will soon be reclassified ORW.
of 4/22/2008 8:33 AM

[Fwd: Re: ORW and NCG020408i
2) APPLICABLE HQW REQUIREMENTS
a) It appears that the reclassification of Horsepasture Creek to ORW will NOT
affect his obligations under the HQW Rule.
b) Specifically, this interpretation is based on 2B .0224 High Quality Waters
(ORW is a subset of HQW):
Provisions in .0224(l)(b) for new discharges do not apply. (This is not a new
discharge.)
However, Section .0224(1)(c) provides, "All expanded NPDES wastewater
discharges in High Quality Waters shall be required to provide the treatment
described in Sub -Item (1)(b)of this Rule, EXCEPT for those existing discharges
which expand with no increase in permitted pollutant loading." The second part
of this sentence applies in that any expansion of McNeely's mine will
undoubtedly be accomplished with no increase in permitted pollutant loading. (I
mean, we in the 5tormwater Permitting Unit will not increase his permitted
concentrations above 10 NTU (trout), pH of 6-9, and Settleable Solids above
(0.1 ml/L, 0.2 ml/L).
Imagine that his mine's footprint expands with Lime, and the amount of mine
dewatering water presumably increases with time based on the increased
footprint. Under those circumstances he very well may have more wastewater
discharge. But since the permit has no limit on volume or flow rate now, and
since the pollutant limitations are written in concentrations, the result is
that as long as he can meet the concentrations limits, he meets his permit
requirements, and he meets the HQW Rule in that he expanded "with no increase
in permitted pollutant loading."
3) APPLICABLE ORW REQUIREMENTS, 2B .0225
a) But I'm not so sure that the ORW requirements are parallel. It seems to me
we also have to apply the ORW Rules, too. We should probably prefer the ORW
Rule to the HQW Rule when encountering problems in interpretation or
application to ORW streams.
b) Consider .0225(c)(1) which provides that, "No new discharges or expansions
of existing discharges shall be permitted..." Again, this is not a new
discharge, so the first part of the sentence does not apply. Leaving,
"No.._.expansions of existing discharges shall be permitted..." But note! We
can read the two rules so that there is a relevant difference in this case
between the two rules. The HQW rule can be read to say that there CAN be
expansion of a discharge, but no increase in the permitted pollutant load into
HQW waters. The ORW rule seems to say that we CANNOT permit expansions of
existing discharges into ORW waters. This is not exactly the conclusion we
reached yesterday.
4) DISCUS5ION
With this second, different reading of the two rules, what I must tell Mr.
McNeely is, "The reclassification to ORW means that in the future you cannot
discharge more flow than you did when Horsepasture Creek was classified B
Trout. If you do expand the discharge, then we will not renew your permit at
the next expiration date." Our problem in this reading is that since we have
no flow limit in the NCG02 permit (but we do have flow monitoring), it may
difficult for us to maintain that there has in fact been an expansion of the
existing discharge, and so there is no basis for our threatened refusal to
renew.
The way we agreed on yesterday means that I say to Mr. McNeely, "The
reclassification has no bearing on your operation of the mine. You still must
meet the permit limits of pH, SS, and turbidity. Absent any current General
Permit limit on flow, we have no authority to restrict the amount or rate of
wastewater that you discharge."
2 of 3 4/22/2008 8:33 AM

[Fwd; RetW and NCG0204081
In McNeely's circumstances, I don't think it's likely that we would be able to
establish the applicability of the .0224(1)(b)(v) provision limiting the
aggregate expansion of all dischargers into an HQW water to 50% of the 7Q1.0.
Please correct my misunderstanding, if you can. To me, right now, it looks
like a toss up between our original determination that the ORW classification
has no bearing, and the determination that we tell him we won't renew if he
discharges more flow as the mine expands.
Ken
�11e: {)RW and NCG41204(18 Content -Type: messa e/rfc822
Content -Encoding: 7hrt
3 of 3 4/22/2008 833 AM

Michael F. Easley, Governor
Williatn G. Ross Jr., Sccrclary
North Carolina Department of Environmcnl and Natural Resources
Alan W. };lime!;. P.E. Direelor
Division 01' Waler Quality
May 11, 2007
To: Stormwater Permitting Unit
7
From: Bradley Bennett, Stormwater Permitting Unit Supervisor f
Subject: Permitting. Policy for NPDES General Permits NCG020000 & NCG140000
when Discharge Proposed to ORW-Classified Waters or Waters with Special
Water Quality Management Plaits
This memo clarifies the permitting policy for proposed discharges to waters classified
as Outstanding Resource Waters (ORWs) under NPDES general permits NCG020000 (Mining
Activities) and NCG 140000 (Ready -Mix Concrete). These are the only two general permits
issued by the Stormwater Permitting Unit (SPU) that allow both stormwater and process
wastewater discharges. This guidance also addresses the special case of the Lockwoods Folly
River area in the Lumber Basin,
ORW Rules. Section 15A NCAC 02B .0225 (c) outlines quality standards for ORWs.
The standards for freshtua.ter ORW stipulate that "No new discharges or expansions of
existing discharges shall be permitted, and stormwater controls for all new development
activities requiring an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan ... shad be required to follow
stormwater provisions as specified in 15A NCAC 02H .1000." Unlike in the Water Supply
rules, general permits are not exempted from these restrictions. Later in 2B .0225, specific
waterbodies are addressed. For some of these waterbodies, the rules allow new or expanded
NPDES permitted "non -domestic, non -process industrial" discharges.
Discharges directly to freshwater ORWs. While DWQ interprets the rules to allow
stormwater-only discharges to ORWs, the language does not allow new or expanded process
wastewater discharges directly to ORW designated segments. NCG02 and NCG14 both allow
process wastewater discharges; therefore, proposed new or expanded wastewater discharges
under these general permits should not be approved. Projects proposing to discharge only
stormwater or those proposing a closed -loop recycle system to manage wastewater are still
allowed. "Closed -loop" systems at ready -mix concrete sites will include those designed to
contain the 25-year, 24-hour storm plus one foot of freeboard.
Discharges directly to saltwater ORWs. Section 2B .0225 (c) (2) requires a public
hearing for any proposed permits to discharge to saltwater ORWs. However, general permits
do not necessarily go through a public hearing during the notice process. For this reason,
and for consistency with our policy regarding discharges to freshwater ORWs, the SPU will
not approve new or expanding wastewater discharges to saltwater ORWs under NCG02 or
NCG 14.
f FoithCarolina
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Smicc Center Raleigh. NC 27699-1617 Phone (9 M 733-5083 Cuslon+er Service
Inlerncl; wu�c.ncwalrrqu,tliry.urg Location: 512 N. Salisbury &. Kaleigh, NC 27604 Fav [phone] 1-877-623-6748
An Equaf OpporlunitylAffrrmabve Action Emp$oyer— 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

DWQ Stormwater PermittinD Policy for ORW Waters
May 11, 2007
Discharges to waters draining to ORWs. Depending on the watershed, there are
different requirements for waters draining to ORWs. In some areas, new or expanding
process wastewater discharges are prohibited in undesignated tributaries draining to the
ORW water. For other ORW waterbodies, the rules require effluent limits for discharges
located upstream. In those site -specific cases, the Total Suspended Solids (TSS) parameter is
relevant to both the NCG02 and NCG 14 permits; that limit is 20 mg/l and 10 mg/1 if trout
waters are affected. Currently the NCG02 and NCG14 permit limits are not that stringent
and do not address discharges upstream of ORWs. Therefore, even proposed wastewater
discharges in areas where these limits apply should not be issued a Certificates of Coverage
(COC) for NCG02 or NCG14. Those projects will need to apply for an individual NPDES
permit (unless these permits are revised in the future to address these cases). The
waterbodies where effluent limits apply are listed in 2B .0225.
Discharges to The Lockwoods Folly River Area (Lumber Basin). Section 15A NCAC
02B .0227 addressees waters protected by Water Quality Management Plans. Currently, the
rule prohibits new or expanding NPDES industrial process wastewater discharges to all
waters of the lower Lockwoods Folly River "in an area extending north from the Intracoastal
Waterway to a line extending from Genoes Point to Mullet Creek." Most segments of this
river are actually classified HQW in BiMS with no indication of a special management
strategy, so a reviewer needs to be aware of this special case. As with dischargers to ORW
segments, a COC for wastewater discharges under an NCG02 or NCG14 permit will not be
issued for these receiving waters. This rule does allow non -domestic, non -industrial process
type discharges (e.g., stormwater), and the SPU interprets the mandatory public hearing
requirement to apply only to individual wastewater permits (as with saltwater ORWs).
DWQ will not permit new or expanding NPDES wastewater discharges under
NCG02 or NCG14 that propose discharge directly to freshwater or saltwater ORW-
classified waterbodies, or to waters protected by the Lockwoods Folly River Area Water
Quality Management Plan. In areas draining to ORW waterbodies, the 2B .0225 rules
should be consulted to verify if the discharge is allowed at all and whether special
effluent limits apply- If more stringent TSS (or other) limits are applicable, an individual
NPDES permit will be required. This policy affects any NCG02 or NCG14 applicant proposing
to discharge process wastewater to ORW-classified waters, waters draining to ORWs, or
waters in the Lockwoods Folly River area.
References: North Carolina Rules Governing Classifications and Water Quality Standards:
I5A NCAC 02B Section .0200.
cc: Stormwater Permitting Guidance Materials File
Pioyd Williams, Division of Land Resources/Land Quality Section (Mining)
DWQ Supervisor, Raleigh Regional Office
DWQ Supervisor, Mooresville Regional Office
DWQ Supervisor, Asheville Regional Office
DWQ Supervisor, Winston-Salem Regional Office
DWQ Supervisor, Wilmington Regional Office
DWQ Supervisor, Washington Regional Office
DWQ Supervisor, Fayetteville Regional Office

I—B, M. INDUSTRIES INC.
D gap����
AUG 0.1 2008
,)IV. OF WATER WALITY
DIRECTOR 5 OFFICE
Mr. Alan W Klimek, P.E.
Director
Division of Water Quality
NCDENR
1617 Mai! Service Center
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-1617
July 23, 2008
RE: LBM INDUSTRIES ENVIRONMLNTAL RL-'PALSEN'I'r1FIVE''
Dear Tvir, Klimek:
cml--
CL
We have designated a single representative from our company for all correspondence with the Department
of Environment and Natural Resources and our mining and concrete operations. This representative will
facilitate quick and efficient relations between your office and ours. He will primarily be located at Nantahala
Talc & Limestone in Topton \tC, but will be available for all scheduled inspections at anv of our sites. Please
revise the contact information for our mining operations (Whitewater coc#NCG020408, Nantahala 'Talc &
Limestone cot#NCG020065), and our concrete operation (rosaway Concrete Cashiers coc# NCG140141)
with the following information.
Jason Hall
Environmental Representative
LBA7 Industries
imhall na meneclycoinnanies.corn
828.321.4239 (Office)
828,557.4428 (Cell)
If you have any questions or comments I can be reached at 828-966-4270. I appreciate ),our consideration
in this matter.
Sincerely,
i W L. NICNeely III
Vice President
Y.O. 110X 40 • SAPPtlIRE. NC- 28774
PHONE: [phone] • rAX: 828-862-4308

wig=��`�
t4i°'
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Russ Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.I?. Director
Division oC Water Quality
February 7, 2005
William L McNeely
LBM Whitewater Quarry
PO Box 40
Sapphire, NC 28774
Subject: NPDES Stormwater Permit Coverage Renewal
LBM Whitewater Quarry
COC Number NCG020408
Transylvania County
Dear Permittee:
In response to your renewal application for continued coverage under general permit NCG020000 the Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) is forwarding herewith the reissued stormwater general permit. Please review the new permit to familiarize
yourself with the changes in the reissued permit. The general permit authorizes discharges of stormwater and some types of
wastewater. You must meet the provisions of the permit for the types of discharges present at your facility. This permit is
reissued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement
between the state of North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, dated December 6, 1983.
The following information is included with your permit package:
■ A new Certificate of Coverage
• A copy of General Stormwater Permit NCGG2( OGO
• A copy of a Technical Bulletin for the general permit
• Five copies of Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) Forms - wastewater and stormwater
+ Five copies of Qualitative Monitoring Report Form
Your coverage under this general permit is not transferable except after notice to DWQ. The Division may require modification
or revocation and reissuance of the Certificate of Coverage. This permit does not affect the legal requirements to obtain other
permits which may be required by DENR or relieve the permittee from responsibility for compliance with any other applicable
federal, state, or local law, rule, standard, ordinance, order, judgment, or decree.
If you have any questions regarding this permit package please contact Ken Pickle of the Central Office Stormwater Permitting
Unit at [phone], ext.584.
Sincerely,
for Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
cc: Central Files
Stormwater & General Permits Unit Files
Asheville Regional Office
Nnc
orrhCarolina
11vafura!!il
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.uslsulstormwater.html 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 PAX [phone] 1-877-623.6748
An Equal OpportunitylAHirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
GENERAL_ PERMIT NO. NCG020000
CERTIFICATE OF COVERAGE No. NCG020408
STORMWATER AND PROCESS WASTEWATER DISCHARGES
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards and
regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission, and
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
LBM Whitewater Quarry
is hereby authorized to discharge stormwater and to operate treatment systems and discharges associated
with mine dewatering wastewater and process wastewater from a facility located at
LBM Whitewater Quarry
Hwy 281 S
Sapphire
Transylvania County
to receiving waters designated as Horsepasture River, a class B;Tr stream in the Savannah River Basin in
accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, 11,
III, IV, V, and VI of General Permit No. NCG020000 as attached.
This certificate of coverage shall become effective February 7, 2005.
This Certificate of Coverage shall remain in effect for the duration of the General Permit_
Signed this day February 7, 2005
CGIyIr,�
for Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

% . 14
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
March 7, 2000
Mr. William L. McNeely
LBM-Whitewater Quarry
Post Office Box 40
Sapphire, North Carolina 28774
NCDENR
Subject: General Permit No. NCG020000
LBM-Whitewater Quarry
COC NCG020408
Transylvania County
Dear Mr. McNeely:
In accordance with your application for discharge permit received on February 25, 1997, we are
forwarding herewith the subject certificate of coverage to discharge under the subject state - NPDES general
permit. This permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215 .1 and the
Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the US Environmental Protection agency dated
December 6, 1983.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to request an individual permit by submitting an individual permit
application. Unless such demand is made, this certificate of coverage shall be final and binding.
Please take notice that this certificate of coverage is not transferable except after notice to the Division of
Water Quality. The Division of Water Quality may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the
certificate of coverage.
This permit does not affect the legal requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by the
Division of Water Quality or permits required by the Division of Land Resources, Coastal Area Management Act
or any other Federal or Local governmental permit that may be required.
If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Aisha Lau at telephone number
919/733-5083 ext. 578.
Sincerely,
CpIG144- SIGNED BY
W1LIyC' MULS-
Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Asheville Regional Office
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
CENTRAL PERMIT NO. NCG020000
CERTIFICATE OF COVERAGE No. NCG020408
STORM WATER, MINE DEWATERING, AND/OR OVI?RI'I,OW FROM
PROCESS WATER RECYCLE SYSTEMS DISCHARGES
NATIONAL POLLUTANT 1lISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215,1. other lawful standards and
regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission, and the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
LBN1 Industries Inc.
is hereby authorized to discharge stormwater from a facility located at
I.BN1 — Wbitewater Quarry
I -I W Y. 2815
Sapphire
Transylvania County
to receiving waters designated as Horsepasture River, class B TR waters, in the Savannah River Basin
in accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts 1, 11, 111,
IV, V, VI and VI1 of -General Permit No. NCG020000 as attached.
'['his certificate of coverage shall become effective March 7, 2000.
This Certificate of Coverage shall remain in effect for the duration of the General Permit.
Signed this day March 7, 2000,
ORtiG PM MILDLSY
WILLC.
Kerr T. Stcvcns, Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

83'00' 316000m{. 319 I 320 S. C. 1,410,000 FEET 321 57'30• 1322
30
'CAERS / �� � v �/—�����co� � i•,�V � v � i �
-7 �, J 1�� V vy v, ��
/•.♦ �, I� /�P heir
�307a ��� V�V `'� ✓ rl �/'—Min\ 1 /
it, ,�����w ( [ OBI �✓
Oakland _
l/^ / OAKLANO
cii
fte
�7-7
/�` �'�'�(ROUhdtop of j
Je86 J � '1,� �/ ( '— ..� ✓ �\ Cam/ A' ✓/ / /� ��
70,
CLOO II
FEET
4 /
A // �✓ ��ef/
3885. �.. _ �, / i p/'. /��A�V✓� s• ��A 'A
/
��J ��. / -�� ✓ i--. / � 1 r � � Jl\� �o�,�� � V� ✓ /> /// 1 v i 1. �
1-7�
L/ •✓ 1 ^ (off / � /�/,
'�51��
�� p, w
38
Palli
9z

FACILITY
COUNTY
NR S 6 va®goz
lmmk*WW&W11 l 3 0/ o `i
l

71
•
Permit: NCG020408
SOC:
County: Transylvania
Region: Asheville
Compliance Inspection Report
Effective: 01/19/05 Expiration: 12/31/09 Owner: LBM Whitewater Quarry
Effective: Expiration: Facility: LBM Whitewater Quarry
Hwy 281 S
Contact Person: Jason Hall
Directions to Facility:
System Classifications:
Primary ORC:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Related Permits:
Inspection Date: 05/2712009
Primary Inspector: Linda S Wiggs
Secondary Inspector(s):
Sapphire NC 28774
Title: Phone: [phone]
Certification: Phone:
Entry Time: 10:30 AM Exit Time: 12:50 AM
Phone: [phone]
Ext.4653
Reason for Inspection: Routine Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Inspection Type: Mining Activities Stormwater Discharge COC
Facility Status: ■ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Question Areas:
0 Storm Water
(See attachment summary)
Page: 1

Permit: NCG020408 Owner - Facility: LBM Whitewater Quarry
Inspection Date: 05/2712009 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason For Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Met with owners, consultant, Roger and James. Facility created diversion for groundwater near entrance, installed culvert
for outfall water to Horsepasture, and will monitor instream turbidity levels in HOrsepasture for compiance.
Page: 2

Permit: NGG020408 Owner -Facility: LBM whitewater Quarry
Inspection Date: 0512712009 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Reason for Visit:
Routine
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Yes
No
NA
NE
Does the site have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan?
❑
❑
❑
■
# Does the Plan include a General Location (USGS) map?
❑
❑
❑
■
# Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
❑
❑
❑
■
# Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and drainage areas?
❑
❑
❑
■
# Does the Plan include a list of significant spills occurring during the past 3 years?
❑
❑
❑
■
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
n
❑
❑
■
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
Cl
❑
❑
■
# Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
❑
❑
❑
■
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
❑
❑
❑
■
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
❑
❑
❑
■
# Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
❑
Cl
❑
■
# Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Party(s)?
❑
❑
n
■
# Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
❑
❑
❑
■
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
❑
❑
❑
■
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
❑
❑
❑
■
Comment:
Qualitative Monitoring
Yes
No
NA
NE
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually?
❑
❑
❑
■
Comment:
Analytical Monitoring
Yes
No
NA
NE
Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring?
❑
■
❑
❑
# Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring from Vehicle Maintenance areas?
❑
■
❑
Cl
Comment: Facility states they will start monitoring.
Permit and Outfalls Yes No NA NE
# Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
# Were all outfalls observed during the inspection? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
# If the facility has representative outfall status, is it properly documented by the Division? 0 0 ■ ❑
# Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non stormwater) discharges? ■ 0 ❑ ❑
Comment: After receiving NOV facility has evaluated other sources of non stormwater
and groundwater contributing to their lower ponds and made diversions for groudnwater.
Page: 3

�. csa+.i. ✓.'rs...rvN'n+•.,�+�+ - Fly
Bo McCall
L.B.M. Industries
P.O. Box 40
Sapphire N.C. 28774
AngLrst 20, 2010
Linda Wiggs
DWQ Asheville Regional Office
2090 U.S. Hwy 70
Swannanoa N.C. 28778
Dear Unda
rl
AUG 2 3 2010
l�
t�
WATER QUALITY gE FFICE
yyy A'�H VILLF REGIONAL OOFFI
I am writing in response to your Ietter addressing the discharge relating to the road
washing activity documented on JLtly 21, 2010.
I was not on site the day of the discharge but have since had the opportunity to
investigate the events leading up to the occurrence and can hopefully shed some light on
the situation.
At the time of the noted discharge L.B.M. staff was in the process cleaning the lower
portion of the entrance to the quarry, The standard procedure for removing material From
this area 111110IVCS the LISC of a hydraulic broom attached to a skid steer loader. This
pi-deess allows the material to be swept into a hooded bucket;and transported to a spoil
pile inside the quarry.
On .luly 21" 2010 the hydraulic broom attachment was offsite undergoing repair.
Material had accumulated on the driveway and its Intersection with N.0 Flwy 281 to it
point where action was needed to insure safe operating conditions. The decision was
made by L.B.M staff to use the water truck to wash the area.
As you arc aware we use water front our storm water containment structures for dust
control in the quarry and also have a spring water diversion system that routes water from
slope drains to the ditch where the documented discharge was noted.
It appears that the discharge noted on July 21.2010 was a direct result of water pumped
front the storm water pond into a water truck which then used it to wash the portion of the
driveway and entrance area that drains into the D.O.T. ditch which leads to the
Horsepasture River. This activity resulted in water that should have remained inside the
storm containment system tieing allowed to drain into the D:O.T. ditch.

•
- . ... -, - - - - ..., , - - -, . - 1 0. '1..-

9
Page Two
After reviewing [lie facts and realizing (lie error it has been determined that the hydraulic
broom or other mechanical means will be used to remove any dust or other materials
from the area draining into the D.O.T. ditch and if additional water is needed to provide
safe operating conditions it will be clean water and not obtained front the storm water
basins.
III res])011se to the monthly 1110111toring reports associated with the Notice of Violation
dated April 6"' 2009. I would like to update you on a new measure that has been
implemented at the quarry.
In addition to [lie spring water diversion structure we have recently installed an automatic
float switch in our lower wash water pond that helps rlinilmize the amount of make tip
water introduced into the production cycle. This in turn increases the amount of freeboard
on that pond and provides additional storm water- containment capacity. We have Noticed
the combination of these BMP's coupled with diligent use of storm water for dust control
has greatly reduced the 111-Imber of discharges at L.B.M.
While we did have a few rain events duI•ing the eight month period noted in your' letter
that coilld have resulted in a discharge, our records reflect these eveNts occurred during
weekends and after hours when Staff was not present to take samples ill a timely planner.
Plans are in place to start work on a closed loop recycle system in the near future which
will Also hell) improve our storm water management.
We will continue to address storm water and other environmental issues associated with
L.B.M. Industries and maintain a pro active approach to the task. Please feel free to call
Willi any questions you may have on the matter.
Sincerely,
All
Bo McCall
Cc: Mack McNeely
Jason Hall

COPY
RCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Govemor Director Secretary
August 17, 2010
William McNeely
LBM Whitewater Quarry
PO Box 40
Sapphire, NC 28774
SUBJECT: LBM Whitewater Quarry
NCG020408
Stream Standard Violation — Turbidity Standard
Transylvania County
Response deadline: September 3, 2010
Dear Mr. McNeely:
On July 21, 2010 Division of Water Quality staff documented a discharge from the LBM quarry located
on HWY 281 in Transylvania County resulting in a violation of State Water Quality Standards. Turbid
discharge was found in the small stream located adjacent to the recently constructed bypass pipe with
>1000 NTU draining directly to the Florsepasture River. At 300 feet downstream of the discharge point
the turbidity in the main body of the Horsepasture River read 65 NTU. At the sampling point selected
by LBM staff for monthly monitoring, approximately 1000 feet downstream of LBM discharge point the
turbidity measured 30 NTU. The upstream sample taken from the bridge over the Horsepasture River
measured 1.7 NTU. The water quality standard for trout streams is 10 NTU.
After conversation with LBM staff, the discharge was determined to be the result of road washing
operations. Dust is obviously a safety concern that needs to be addressed on the public highway.
However, runoff from washing still constitutes a water quality violation. Please respond in writing by
September 3, 2010 explaining how LBM plans to manage road washing operations so as not to violate
water quality standards.
SURFACE WATER PROTECTION SECTION - ASHEVILLE REGIONAL_ OFFICE One
Location: 2090 1 Highway 70. Swannanoa, North Carolina 28778 NorthCarolina
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1.877.623-6746 -� �} f/
Internet: www,ncwaterqualily.org ;Vatuml/
An Equal Opptutulily 1 Affirmative Action Employer

Page Two
LBM Quarry
August 17, 2010
The Notice of Violation dated April 6, 2009 issued to LBM is still open and has not been completely
resolved. Please submit, by the above noted response deadline, the monthly monitoring reports to the
Asheville Regional Office that were required in the Notice of Violation, Required Response l.d.. Eight
months of monitoring were required in the Notice of Violation, to date there has been no data submitted
to the Division of Water Quality.
Should you have any questions regarding these matters, please feel free to contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Linda Wiggs
Environmental Specialist
Cc: ARO File
ARO-DLR
S:NSWP1Transylvania\Stormwater\NCG02 Mining\NCG020408-LBMILBM.TurbLTR.Aug2OI0.doc

0
Bo McCall
L.B.M. Industries
P.Q. Box 40
Sapphire N.C. 28774
July 31, 2009
Roger C. Edwards
DWQ Asheville Regional Office
2090 U.S_ Hwy 70
Swannanoa N.C. 28778
Dear, Roger
FEV E D
SEP 2 4 2009
WATER QUALITY SECTION
ASHEVILLE nEGIONAL OFFICE
t am writing to give you an update on the status of the storm water system at the
Whitewater Quarry in Sapphire. To date we have not had a discharge through our storm
water containment system since our modifications were made and inspected at your last
Site visit.
We have however periodically observed the discolored water seeping through what we
believe to be the subsurface fractures in the location just below Hwy 281 we discussed on
site. As you are aware even in very small amounts this seepage can discolor the receiving
waters of the Horsepasture River especially in periods of low flow.
We have looked closely at the flow patterns of the receiving waters and have selected
designated sample locations that we feel will insure effluent mixing and hopefully better
represent the impacts on the river.
We will continue to address the water quality and other environmental issues associated
with the mine. 1 personally appreciate the improved communication with the Surface
Water Protection Section and hope you will feel free to call if you have any questions or
need additional information.
A"c
ely,
Bo McCall

'LE COPY
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H Sullins
Beverly Ear,,es Perdue Director Dee Freeman
i;overnor Secretary
April 6, 2009
William McNeely
l.,BM Whitewater Quarry
110 I3ox 40
Sapphire, NC 28774
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF VIOLATION
LBM Whitewatcr Quarry
NOV-2009-PC-0308
Stormwatcr Permit Condition Violations—NCIS020408
Stream Standard Violation — Turbidity Standard
Transylvania County
Response deadline: April 24, 2009 or 15 days from receipt
Dear Mr. McNeely:
On March 19, 2009, staff from the Asheville Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) documented permit condition and stream standard violations at the LBM Whitewvater
Quarry on HWY 281 in Transylvania County. NPDES Stormwvater General Permit — NCG020408,
provides coverage for the subject quarry. The site drains to Horsepasture River, Class B-Trout
waters, located in the Savannah River Basin.
VIOLATIONS
I. Stormwater Permit NCG0020408 Effluent Limitations
A DWQ site visit on March 19, 2009 revealed violations of the following permit condition:
Table 9 Effluent Limitation for Turbidity ('trout Waters) is 10 NI"U.
At the time of the site visit, the following results were obtained:
Outfall "B" Effluent: 450 NTU
SURFACE WATER PROTECTION SECTION-ASHEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE One 1
LocaGan: 2090 U.S. Highway 70, Swaananoa, Norih Carolina 28778 Nord1 lCclro lna
M;w 828-296-450M FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-677-62115748
Internet www.ncwaterqua14y.org ��t lillYlC ll
An Equal Opportunity i Afirrmabve Action Employer

Llr?vl Whitmater Quarry
William McNcely
April 6, 2009
Page 2 o1'3'
11. Stream Standard Violation.
A DWQ site visit on March 19, 2009 revealed violations of the following; stream standards:
Turbidity 15A NCAC 02B .0211 (3)k: the turbidity in the receiving; water shall not
exceed 50 Nephclometric Turbidity Units (NTU) in streams not designated as trout
waters and 10 NTU in strearns, lakes or reservoirs designated as trout waters; for
lakes and reservoirs not designated as trout waters, the turbidity shall not exceed 25
NTU.
At the time of the site visit, the following results were obtained:
Upstream: 1.5 NTU
Downstream: 25 NTU
III. Twenty-four Hour Reporting (Part IV. Section E. No.8)- The lack of notification
to DWQ regarding non-compliance represents violations oi*NCG020408 Permit.
IV. Reporting Requirements (Part IV, Section E, No. 1&2)-File review indicates no
Discharge Monitoring Reports have been submitted to DWQ.
REQUIRED RESPONSE
This Office requests that you respond in writing within 15 days of receipt of this Notice. Your
response should be sent to both the attention of Linda Wiggs, Division of Water Quality, 2090 US
HWY 70, Swannanoa, NC 28778 and Mr. John Hennessy at the Wetlands and Stormwater Branch,
NI'S .Assistance and Compliance Oversight Unit, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-
1617. Your response should address the following; items:
1. Stormwater Permit NCGO020408
a. Please detail the events that resulted in non-compliance with the above-lnentioiled
NCG020408 permit conditions.
b. Please explain when you anticipate being in full compliance with the NCGO020408
Permit.
c. Please provide information detailing; your compliance with the reporting
requirements. Specifically, it is requested that the Asheville Office of DWQ be
provided a copy of discharge monitoring reports for the last two permit terms.
d. Monthly monitoring; at Outfali B for Turbidity is required from this point forward
through the remaining; permit term.

1-13M WhiicrQnarry
WilEiain (vlcNecNccl?-
April 6, 2009
Ptigc 3 n1'3
11. Stream Standard - Turbidity
a. Please explain why effluent limitations and stream standards for turbidity were
violated and how you plan to prevent these problems from reoccurring at this
facility.
b. Please explain why these violations occurred without proper notification to DWQ.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. This Office is considering sending a recommendation
for enforcement to the Director of the Division of Water Quality regarding these issues and any
future/continued violations that may be encountered. Your above -mentioned response to this
correspondence will be considered in this process. This office requires that the violations, as
detailed above, be abated immediately. These violations and any future violations are
subject to a civil penalty assessment of up to $25,000.00 per day for each violation. Should
you have any questions regarding these matters, please contact Linda Wiggs at [phone].
Sincerely,
Roger C. Edwards
Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
cc: John Hennessy —NI'S Assistance and Compliance Oversight Unit
FARO File Copy
Central Files
DLR-ARO
D1,R-Ralcioh Floyd Williams
"Transylvania County Planning
G:\W]'DA'I'A\I)FMWQI"I'ransylvania\Storinwater Mining NCG021NCG020408-1.l3M\NOV-2009-1'C-0308.(Ioc

Oct 24 2008 7:57'nM LBM Industries 8288628619 p•1
s
w7'-70 S 1/1 /► -aw1 ep
?-?7
� f17
�� •�', f � d� � �w fur �
sago" •oipsjd ❑ AF4doa amoid ❑ )ugd&uwo* 09"d ❑ d XNJ p Um" 0
B..o h-z -o/ Mae Id
z tog,nd owA
tin

_..nc l 9
)Gr 24 200

t
31 n��'
U

11 1
D LEI
FAN2 7 2009 1
LBMIndustries,,,
PO Box 40 --- Sapphire, NC 28774 --- [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Visit us at www.meneelycompanies.com
April 24, 2009
Mr. Roger Edwards, Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
Asheville Regional Office
2090 U. S. Highway 70
Swannanoa, NC 28778
R.E Notice of Violation
LBM Whitewater Quarry
NOV-2009-PC-0308
Dear Mr. Edwards,
UALITY SECTION
In response to your Notice of Violation (NOV) dated April 6, 2009, LBM Industries is
submitting this correspondence to address specifically the issues your letter has raised. In
addition, I would note that I and Mr. Bo McCall met with you and Ms Linda Wiggs in the
Regional Office on April 7 following the site visit your staff made to our facility on
March 19, 2009. We initiated the meeting to better understand the site visit conducted
and to discuss any concerns the Division may have about our facility or the operation of
our stormwater management system. I believe this meeting to a great degree addressed
many of the issues your letter identifies, but we want to provide a written response to the
NOV as well.
I want to state as a preamble to the comments provided here that LBM Industries remains
committed to a well run, environmentally responsible operation at the quarry site and
within all of the business components of our company. We believe we have installed,
operated and maintained an effective series of best management practices to minimize the
impact of our quarry operation and the associated stone processing facilities.
We have for many years now implemented an environmental management system at the
facility that meets the Stormwater Best Management Practices Plan requirements in our
NPDES General Permit and have dedicated personnel and other resources to making sure
that we comply with this permit and all of the regulatory requirements in effect at our
quarry. We will continue to apply ourselves to these objectives.

It is not our intention here to contest our responsibility to comply with all requirements-,
however we take a Notice of Violation very seriously. Because of that I want to address
each reference your letter makes to possible violations of permit requirements or NC
Water Quality Standards:
1. Stormwater Permit NCG002020408 Effluent Limitations. Outfall "B"
As you know from previous site visits, we employ a stormwater_trea entJwate_r-reuse
system to manage site runoff and to provide water for stone washing. During much of
the year this system never discharges. In fact we often have to pump water into the
system to provide sufficient "make up" water to keep our stone washing process in
operation. The system includes a series: of -basins that collect=and:treat,s_tormwater and
excess.washwater. The final two basins can be seen along NC 281 near our entrance
road.
On the date of your site visit the system was not a'schargin My
the final b sin. Your
staff member took samples from the ditch that would receiveischarge from our
mangggment--Mstem. This sample was taken downstream of the treatment system and
"below" NC 281. The flow of water in this ditch was not co ' the outfall of the
treatment basin, but was comin om+subsurf e flov� This flow was discolored and
contained sediments that were visually similar to the extremely fine solids seen
suspended in the water within our stormwater system.
We have been carefully evaluating the potential reasons for this condition and believe at
this preliminary stage thafj�periiiieter drains along the base -.of -the. -slope that surroundsthe
quarry/processin area and that were installed to protect the structural integrity of the
slope and to remove excess precipitation on this bank are acting as a "conduit" for
stormwater that is being held in the basin just.upstream_of_the final=basin} It is possible
that as stormwater flo om the site increases -and the level in this basin rises that the
level may be reaching the point that basin water is "back°flowing"into=the=perimeter
drain system. Due to the fractured:nature of the rock underlying this site, these drains
have apparently "found" a route that result in runoff/drainage from the bank surfacing in
the ditch below the discharge point.
We believe that the elevated turbidity observed is coming from our site, but the source of
this turbidity is not from the permitted treatment system discharge. This release isn't
"planned" and is completely unintended. Because of the discovery of this situation, we
are t cin specific a_� to prevent this from occurring in the future�_We_are looking at
and confininp, stormwater'flow to the stormwater �managen
2. Stream Standard Violation
NC's Water Quality Standard for turbidity as cited in the NOV appears in the rules in its
full text as follows (I SA NCAC 02B .2011 (3) k):

0 0
"Turbidity: the turbidity in the receiving water shall not exceed 50 Nephelometric
Turbidity Units (NTU) in streams not designated as trout waters and 10 NTU in streams,
lakes or reservoirs designated as trout waters; for lakes and reservoirs not designated as
trout waters, the turbidity shall not exceed 25 NTU; if turbidity exceeds these levels due
to natural background conditions, the existing turbidity level shall not be increased.
Compliance with this turbidity standard can be met when land management activities
employ Best Management Practices (BMPs) [as defined by Rule .0202 of this Section]
recommended by the Designated Nonpoint Source Agency [as defined by Rule .0202 of
this Section]. BMPs must be in full compliance with all specifications governing the
proper design, installation, operation and maintenance of such BMPs;"
The full text here is important since the quarry operation is permitted by the Division of
Land Resources (DLR), the Designated Nonpoint Source Agency for mining and other
land disturbing activities. The General NPDES Permit clearly states that BMPs are to be
installed, operated and maintained to manage the stormwater generated on a mine site. I
have presented the facts as best we know them concerning the causes of the elevated
turbidity measured by your staff member on March 19. There is no indication in your
NOV that your staff or that of DLR preformed an evaluation of the BMP systems in place
on the site. Your staff member, to our knowledge, did not come onto the active mining
area or the stone processing facilities on March 19 or before that date or after. The
elevated turbidity level in the surface waters is something we are very concerned about
and as noted we will be doing all that we can to address.
An additional consideration of the stream turbidity measurements made on March 19 is
related to where those samples were collected. The pictures taken by your staff member
clearly shows that the turbidity entering the Horsepasture from the channel already noted
"clings" to the left bank (looking downstream) and that a point of "mixing" with the full
flow of the river doesn't occur until several hundred feet downstream of the confluence
of the channel with the river. If the downstream sample was collected before the mix
point and within the plume of the flow from the channel, the levels will be significantly
higher than below the mix point.
Again, we will not hesitate to take all the steps available to us to effectively manage our
stormwater treatment system and to work cooperatively with the Division to accomplish
this, but we want to fully understand the basis of the "violations" noted.
3. Twenty-four Hour Reporting (Part IV. Section E. No. 8, General Permit
NCG020000)
Without citing the entire section referenced in your letter, a full reading of this condition
shows that the notification requirement is triggered by two primary considerations. First,
it is essential that the permit holder "know" about the violation, and second, the violation
much be such that it "may endanger health or the environment."
The monitoring frequency of the permit is such that analytical sampling is no more
restrictive than quarterly and qualitative monitoring requirements are semi-armual. The

0 0
BMP flan requirements in the permit and our specific plan calls for all stormwater BMPs
to be inspected at least every seven calendar days and within 24 hours of any storm event
that results in a discharge. We do this and as noted on the day in question there was no
discharge from the permitted outfall of the treatment system. The "release" of turbidity
based on our follow-up investigation occurred outside of the BMP system and wasn't
noted in the normal monitoring of our systems.
On March 19 we saw the vehicle used by your staff member parked along NC 281 and
went down to talk with him. No indication of any water quality problem that could be
due to the operation of our facility was related to us during our conversation and the only
indication of the sampling that was being done was described as related to "ambient"
monitoring. We received no communication from your office prior to the NOV
referenced and we initiated the meeting held in your office on April 7 (the April 6, 2009
NOV was apparently "in the mail" at this point). Prior to our meeting with you we had
none of the details generated by the site visit that would help us address the issues that
your NOV identified, which we received almost three weeks after the site visit. It is our
responsibility and commitment to address any situations on our site that could be a
concern. We want to address those quickly and effectively. I can honestly say that until
we were able to identify and investigate the potential causes of the turbidity releases that
we were in really no position to "notify" DWQ. We would have welcomed the
opportunity to respond to the concerns your site visit generated, we just didn't know.
In the normal conduct of the Division's NPDES program, it is our understanding that
"notification" of violations significant enough to "endanger health or the environment" is
a relatively high bar for a 24 hour notice followed by a five -clay written submission. 1
can only wonder based on the number of violations within any reporting period by the
thousands of permitted discharges that the Division regulates how many of these
dischargers gave a 24 hour notice of those violations followed by a five-day written
submission. Even if we had experienced a discharge that we knew abouturbidity
levels reported in your NOV, that occurrence would not justify natification.under_thed
kited condx� no . In fact, since turbidity, like all analytical sampling analyzed in a lab,
would not have been available until the lab procedures were completed any notification
would have to come following the availability of lab results. Even your agency delayed
submission of the results of your site visit to us for 17 days and that notice was sent by
US mail. Had we not requested the meeting on April 7 we would not have had access to
the results of your site visit. The NOV itself didn't contain the detailed results of your
site visit. We only got those by coming to your office. We want to work with DWQ on
all aspects of our permit and we are very interested in addressing problems as quickly as
possible. Had we been told about the observations made by your staff and the concerns
that were noted in the NOV on March 19 we could have been addressing these issues
from that time forward.
4. Reporting Requirements
Discharge monitoring reports under the General Permit were submitted in the past but
due to an oversight reports have not been submitted recently. Qualitative monitoring is

being done and facilities inspections in accordance with the BMP Plan are being
conducted. The procedures for submitting reports have been updated and the all required
reporting will be done.
The section of the NOV describing what needs to be submitted (the "required response"
section) have been addressed for the most part in the point by point discussion above.
The time needed to address some of the physical realities at this site is difficult to
establish. As noted the site is geologically complex and drainage patterns are affected by
the underlying fractured rock under the site. Some of the actions noted have already been
done. We have also identified several things we believe will improve our BMP systems.
Our efforts will be built on the following primary actions:
➢ Development of a management plan to eliminate or greatly reduce the release of
turbidity in the area of the discharge channel,
➢ The redirection of all "clean water" sources away from the stormwater
management system to reduce the possibility of discharge,
➢ Evaluation of feasible methods to prevent the movement of turbid water from the
site through fractures in the underlying rock formations,
➢ Modification of the existing stone washing system to achieve a closed -loop system
that is completely isolated from the stormwater system,
A Once the closed -loop system is in operation, use treated stormwater for "make-up"
water to the closed -loop operation (reducing the need to discharge stormwater).
One additional issue we need to address is site access. We acknowledge your agency's
statutory authority to perform water quality investigations, but as the permit notes, this is
after "presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required by law." Our
site is an active mining site and we have to protect our personnel, your personnel, and the
public from the potential for injury. This site is involved with blasting and the use of
very heavy equipment. It is imperative to notify us of your need to be on site and for us
to provide appropriate personnel to accompany you or your staff while on LBM
Industries property. We have no problem with your need to inspect our site either
through announced or unannounced inspections, but in order to protect your and our
personnel and comply with all State and Federal safety requirements, when visiting LBM
Industries property; you or your staff must first report to the site office (scale house) so
that all visitors can be logged in, receive the required site specific hazard training, and be
escorted by a company representative.
Following your review of this response, we request the opportunity to discuss the steps
we have identified and to develop an V additional actions that would be ap
prophate to
to . We also want to talk with you about the additional monitoring that your NOV
directs. As I have explained, the configuration of our site and the BMPs in place results
in only a limited number of discharge situations throughout the year. During normal
operation it is our experienced rainfall event inrexcess-of two-inchesas.required
before the_st water-system_will h eva a discharge. Most of the time our inspections
find the system in a "no discharge" situ to ion. We are prepared to do whatever monitoring

you require of us, but we would like to have a mutual understanding of the data we can
collect and how that will assist us in accomplishing our goals.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
V"� x
W. L. McNeely III
VP, LBM Industries Inc.

7XPLICATION FOR A MINING PERMIT
` Saame as current permit.
A detenteion pond is located on 'the property for any w�as_te water. The
ypond's to le% r t system consists of a 36" CMP riseand a 24" CMP barrel:?
This outlet system is sufficient t� o carry a 25-year storm event with a 7.5
acre watershed. The pond is suf.ficientiy sized to allow �s�torage and
settling time for the actual watershed area of the pond (which is less than
U.5—acresl). The water outlet discharges onto solid rock and requires no
frirt:har washout protection.
c. Will any part of the proposed mine excavation(s) extend below the water table? Yes[:] No Z.
If yes, do you intend to dewater the excavation(s)? Yes❑ • No El -
If yes, what impact, if any, will mine dewatering have on neighboring wells? Estimated withdrawal rate in
gallons per day: . Locate all existing wells on the mitre map(s) that lie within
500 feet of the proposed excm ation area. Provide data to support any conclusions or statements made,
including any monitoring well data, well construction data and current water withdrawal rates. Indicate
whether the proposed mine locale is served by a public water system or private wells,
d. If you answered yes to any of the above questions, provide evidence that you have applied for or obtained
the appropriate water quality permit(s) (i.e., non -discharge, NPDES, Stormwater, etc.) from the Division
of Water Quality, Water Quality Section.
NPDES Stormwater Permit
General Permit # NCG020000 0
Certificate Of Coverage ## NCG✓0408
Expires: 31 December 2009
In addition, the applicant is required to rer gister water use with the Division of Water Resources if the
operation withdraws more than 100,000 gallons per day or ifthe operation lies within a capacity use area
and withdraws more than 10,000 gallons per day. The applicant is also required to obtain a Capacity Use
Permit from the Division of Water Resources if withdrawing more than 100,000 gallons per day in a
capacity use area.
4. a. Will the operation involve crushing or any other air contaminant emissions? Yes ® No ❑
If yes, indicate evidence that you have applied for or obtained an air quality permit issued by the Division
of Air Quality or local governing body.
NCDAQ Air Permit ## 03379Ril
Site ## 01/88/00100
Expires: 31 May 2010
b. How will dust from stockpiles, haul roads, etc., be controlled?
Same as current permit.
ter suppression from water truck.
- 7 - Revised 312007

'PPLICATION FOR A MINING PERMIT
C. PROTECTION OF NATURAL RESOURCES
l . Describe in detail the sequence of events for the development and operation of the mine and reference the
sequence to the mine map(a). Attach additional sheets as needed.
I
Same as current permit.
The limits of the process area and stockpile areas are expected to remain
the same. The quarry limits will be extended in the following order:.
I.The East wall'will be extended.
2. The North wall will be worked.
3. The Western wall will be excavated..
2. Describe specific erosion control measures to be installed prior to land disturbing, activities and during
mining to prevent offsite sedimentation (include specific plans for sediment and erosion control for mine
excavation(s), waste piles, access/mine roads and process areas), and give a detailed sequence of
installation and schedule for maintenance of the measures. Locate and label all sediment and erosion
control measures on the mine map(.$) and provide typical cross-sections/construction details of each
measure. Engineering designs and calculations shall be required when needed to justify the adequacy of
any proposed measures.
Same as current permit.
1. Storm water runoff from undisturbed areas are diverted away from
disturbed areas by the use of berms or ditches to prevent
contamination of storm water.
2. Areas are graded to avoid erosion problems (washing).
3.Where-ever practicable, areas will be graded to drain into the
se:t:tlicng.ponds .
4. Silt fences will be used to control erosion resulting from sheet flow
of areas that are likely to cause sedimentation problems.
5. unprotected slopes are stabilized as quickly as possible, either by
seeding and mulching or by covering with rip -rap.
6. All of our approved erosion control measures have been in place for
some time and are functioning adequately. All control measures are
inspected at least weekly by our personnel (also after each storm
.event) and are .inspected annually by NC DWQ and DLQ. Buffer and
barrier zones are utilized around the entire Perimeter of the mining
property. The runroff-basins and sett t� l�ng�ponds ;are clearly indicated
on the Mane Layout Map.
4
3. a. Will the operation involve washing the material mined, recycling process water, or other waste water
handling? YM No D. if yes, briefly describe all such processes including any chemicals to be used.
Same as current permit.
ash_wa#;erl will be used on approximatel`
s re`ecycled to e wash thscreens after
o d�to remove suspended p� articulates:
50% of total production. Wash water
�ssing--through a sEries-of s�ttli:nq,
b. Will the operation involve discharging fresh or waste water from the mine or plant as a point discharge to
the waters of the State? YesZj No[]. If yes, hriefly describe the nature of the dischcugeand locate
all proposed discharge points (along with their method of stabilization) on your mine
- 5 - Revised 312007

Permit: NCG020408 Owner - Facility: t_BM Whitewater Quarry
Inspection Date: 01/25/2007 Inspection Type: Stormwater
Reason for Visit: Rouline
Inspection Summary:
Mr. Bo McCall, Mr. Mac McNeeley, and Mr. Kenny Queen met with the inspectors. The primary topic during the
inspection was the reported discharge of turbid water by the facility. There has been speculation that there may be a
fracture in the bedrock which allows turbid water to leave the site even when the ponds are not overflowing, The facility
has been keeping the levels in their ponds drawn down in order to prevent overflow except in the case of heavy rains.
The facility has also been conducting visual monitoring of the river below their outfall to determine if overflow is occuring.
The visual monitoring is being conducted only during rainfall events. They have not noticed any turbid water leaving the
site. The facility was advised to conduct visual monitoring of the river on both rainy and non -rainy days to determine if
turbid water is leaving the site. The facility was advised that any exceedance of water quality standards is a violation.
The recieving stream is classified as Tr, and as such has a turbidity standard of 10 NTUs. The inspector did not see
turbid water leaving the site at the time of the inspection.
Since the last inspection the facilty has installed a lock on the release valve fore the secondary containment, has begun
taking rainfall data, and is conducting inspections on a weekly basis.
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Yes
No
NA N5
Does the site have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan?
®
❑
❑ Cl
# Does the Plan include a General Location (USGS) map?
®
n
n Cl
# Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
®
❑
Cl ❑
# Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and drainage areas?
®Q
❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a list of significant spills occurring during the past 3 years?
®❑
❑ 0
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
®
❑
Cl fl
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
®❑
❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
®
❑
❑ Cl
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
®❑
fl ❑
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
®❑
❑ ❑
# Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
®
n
Cl ❑
# Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Party(s)?
®,
❑
0 ❑
# Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
®
❑
Cl ❑
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility inspection Program?
®
n
n n
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
❑
El n
Comment:
Qualitative Monitoriq_9
Yes
No
NA NB
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually?
®❑
❑ ❑
Comment:
Page: 2

%
OF
of
Copyright (C( 1998, Maptech, Inc.

Alf
Cross#ng
�`'oo
�� Outfall
Fir �.�. � �� � � f► IIJJf `� � ��. �A ~�,` � � � t- QA-
1•if / � 5` 1 5 5y1+ rr �� f J+ �Mr11 �'� + `�? r� % �✓'�^�.. ~ .! •' f'! +-r rr
r�'1 � t� � i�`- � ? �+ L• Cam"Ir
+'� �,
C?j

41F
ALI
I -
I , idiw
IL Ol

0
0
L.B.MINDUSTRIES
August 28, 2006
N.C.D.E.N.R.
2090 U.S.HWY. 70
SWANNANOA N.C. 28778
ATTN: LINDA WIGGS
P.O.BOX 40
SAPPHIRE N.C. 28774
As you requested I have attempted to document the duration of the discolored water we first
discussed on your visit Wednesday 8-16-06. I kept a check on the flow of the material morning and
evening each day through Friday afternoon at which point it decreased to a flow that was barely
evident &orn the bridge .When I returned to work Monday morning the flow had decreased to a level
that was barely evident from the bank of the river. When 1 checked Tuesday morning it was not
evident to me at all.
After your visit Friday 8-25-06 Kenny and I marked the current pond level and 6 inch gradations up
to an additional 3 ft. and installed a rain gauge on site. As we discussed I will keep a watch on the
river and at the first sign of discoloration I plan to dye the pond. I will keep a close check on the river
and document if any dye becomes evident and call your office immediately.
Sincerely, Bo McCall
AUG 2 9 2006
6 • • • 0 • • • • • a • • • • • • 6 6 0 0 0 4 • 0 0 •

Y)4
r-
1) ,
cv-
jof All v (, �- �v��'� /`15� Az v �?
�I L
,`�� � � � ,mod. �`' Y r -� ��•�l`�
Rom, r�

0 9
P.o.aox 40
SAPPHIRE N.C. 29774
L.B.MINDUSTUES
August 28, 2006
N.C.D.E.N.R.
2090 U.S.HWY. 70
SWANNANOA N.C. 28T78
ATTN: LINDA WIGGS
As you requested I have attempted to document the duration of the discolored water we first
discussed on your visit Wednesday 8-16-06. I kept a check on the flow of the material morning and
evening each day through Friday afternoon at which point it decreased to a flow that was barely
evident from the bridge When I returned to work Monday morning the flow had decreased to a level
that was barely evident from the bank of the river. When I checked Tuesday morning it was not
evident to me at all.
After your visit Friday 8-25-06 Kenny and I marked the current pond level and 6 inch gradations up
to an additional 3 ft. and installed a rain gauge on site. As we discussed I will keep a watch on the
river and at the first sign of discoloration I plan to dye the pond- I will keep a close check on the river
and document if any dye becomes evident and call your office immediately.
Sincerely, Bo McCall
• • 0 i 0 0 • • • • • • • • • • • •
AUG 2 0 2006

f
IZ-
1 Po
rr'll

For Lab Use ONLY
01V1S1ON OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WATER QUALITY F-IFLU-LAB FORM (DMI1
COUNTY
PRIORITY
SAMPLE TYPE
U
RIVER BASIN,._,�'.1,
❑rCOMPLIANCE
TO( AR
FROMRO RRO WaRO WIRO WSRO TSAT
f£NT QA
5TREAM
EFFLUENTREPORT
BM �`
❑
❑ LAKE
1
❑ WFLUE-NT
Other
CHAIN
OF CUSTODY
❑ EMERGENCY
❑ ESTUARY
Shipped hy: Bus
Courier, Staff, Other
Lab Number- Aye-i k;,49 --
Date Received: v �� 7-CE- Time: Clef)i'
Reed b : 3 M S Fram: Bua-Courier land Del
DATA ENTRY BY: f/1'LS CK: 1M S
/ DATE REPORTED: L -3U -vt
COLLECTOR(S): rl4 "? 1-7-1 am.{ /
.j uf
STATION LOCATION:
Estimated BUD Range: 0.5/5-25/25-65/40-130 or 100 plus T
Seed: Yes ❑ No❑ Chlorinated: Yes ❑ No ❑ REMARKS:
`pC 1`-r_t of-, Date Begin (yy/mm/dd) Time Begin to End Time End Depth DM DB DBM Value Type Composite Sample Type
A H L T S B C G GNXX
1
B005 310 mg/1
COD High 340 rag/]
COD Low 335 mg/1
41
Coliform: MF Fecal 31616 /loom]
5
Coliform: MF Total 31504 /loom[
6
Collorm: Tube Fecal 31615 /loom]
7
Coliform: Fecal Strop 31673 /100rai
8
Resldur. Total 500 mg/1
9
Volatile $05 mg/l
Irl
Flied 510 - mg/l
1 1
Residue: Suspended 530 mg/1
12
Volatile 535 mg/l
13
Fixed 54o mg/l
14
i
pH 403 units
15
Acidity to pH 4.5 436 mgA
16
Acidity to pH 8.3 435 mg/l
Alksllnity to pli 8.3 415 m9A
Alkalinity to pH 4,5 410 mg/t
19
TUC 680 FnSA
20
Turbidity 76 r KIM
Chloride 940 mg/I
Chi a: Tri 32217 ag/l
Chi a. Corr 322D9 ug/l
Pheophytin a 32213 ug/l
Color. True Be Pt -Co
Color:IpH ) 83 ADMI
Color pH 7.6 82 ADMI
Cyanide 720 mg/l
Fluoride 951 mg/l
Formaldehyde 71980 mg/1
Grease and Oils 556 mg/1
Hardness Total900 mg/l
Specitic Cond. 95 aMho■/cm2
MBAS 38260 mg/l
Phanois 32730 USA
Sulfate 945 m9A
Sulfide 745 mg/l
NH3 as N 610 mg/l
TKN as N 625 mg/1
NO2 plus NOS as N 630 mg/I
P: Total as P 665 mg/1
PO4 as P 70507 rogA
R Dissolved as P 6" mgA
Cdiadmium 1027 no
Cr ChromlunLTood 1034 a6/1
CU_C&Pper 1042 ug/l
NpNickei 1067 ugA
Pb-Lead 1051 ug/l
Tat -Zinc 1092 og/l
A"Ilver 1077 USA
Al-Aluminars 1105 USA
Be-Reryillum 1012 ug/l
Ca-Caiclum 916 mg/i
Co -Cobalt 1037 agA
Fe -Iron 1045 ug/l
1-1-Lithlum 1132
ugA
Mg -Magnesium 927
rag/]
Mn-manganese 1055
ugll
No -Sodium 929
mg/l
AraenicTotal 1002
Se -Selenium 1147
ag/1
ug/l
Hg-Mercury 71900
rr/1 j
Organachiprine pesticides
!
Organaphaepi orus Pesticides
Acid Herb:cidea
Base/ Neutral Extracta:.lr
Acid Extractable Organics
Purgeable Organics (VOA bot�l+e
l
Sampling Point X
Conductance at 25 C
Water Temperature IQ
D.O. mgA
r4i
Alkalinity
Acidity
Air Temperature 00
PH 9.3 pii 4.5
pit 4.5 pH 8.3
2 _
94
Salinity %
to
Preciplilon (lMrlay)
300 1r
490 .
=44 431
82243 82249
20
Cloud Cnvrr A
Wind Directlon(petr)
Stream now Severity
Turbidity Severity
Wind Velncify M/11
Mean Stream Depth ft-
Stream Wkith ft.
480 1
45
132 136
13S1
1350
35
64
4
y--��
47r�� t i s 1 I ! le "'
-- •--T- -
)M ]/Revised 10/86

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
GENERAL PERMIT NO. NCG020000
CERTIFICATE OF COVERAGE No. NCG020408
STORMWATER AND PROCESS WASTEWATER DISCHARGES
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards and
regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission, and
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended,
LBM Whitewater Quarry
is hereby authorized to discharge stormwater and to operate treatment systems and discharges associated
with mine dewatering wastewater and process wastewater from a facility located at
LBM Whitewater Quarry
Hwy 281 S
Sapphire
Transylvania County
to receiving waters designated as Horsepasture River, a class B;Tr stream in the Savannah River Basin in
accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II,
ill, IV, V, and VI of General Permit No. NCG020000 as attached.
This certificate of coverage shall become effective February 7, 2005
This Certificate of Coverage shall remain in effect for the duration of the General Permit.
Signed this day February 7, 2005
for Alan W Klimek, P E , Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

. Michael F. Easley, Governor
o�0� w A r�RQ�
February 7, 2005
William L McNeely
LBM Whitewater Quarry
PO Box 40
Sapphire, NC 28774
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Subject: NPDES Stormwater Permit Coverage Renewal
LBM Whitewater Quarry
COC Number NCG020408
Transylvania County
Dear Permittee:
In response to your renewal application for continued coverage under general permit NCG020000 the Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) is forwarding herewith the reissued stormwater general permit. Please review the new permit to familiarize
yourself with the changes in the reissued permit. The general permit authorizes discharges of stormwater and some types of
wastewater. You must meet the provisions of the permit for the types of discharges present at your facility. This permit is
reissued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement
between the state of North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, dated December 6, 1983.
The following information is included with your permit package:
• A new Certificate of Coverage
• A copy of General Stormwater Permit NCG020000
• A copy of a Technical Bulletin for the general permit
• Five copies of Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) Forms - wastewater and stormwater
Five copies of Qualitative Monitoring Report Form
Your coverage under this general permit is not transferable except after notice to DWQ. The Division may require modification
or revocation and reissuance of the Certificate of Coverage. This permit does not affect the legal requirements to obtain other
permits which may be required by DENR or relieve the permittee from responsibility for compliance with any other applicable
federal, state, or local law, rule, standard, ordinance, order, judgment, or decree.
If you have any questions regarding this permit package please contact Ken Pickle of the Central Office Stormwater Permitting
Unit at [phone], ext.584.
Sincerely,
» Alan W. Klimek, P.
cc: Central Files
Stormwater & General Permits Unit Files
Asheville Regional Office
E D V
FEB 2
LWATER QUALITY SECTION
ASI-EVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
,,o��
NCarolina
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet h2o.enr.state.ne.uslsulstormwater.html 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

DI
nSION OF WATER QUALITY
7 ,.
�^
Che
iatry Laboratory Report I W.ter Quality
SAMPLE
TYPE
Lab Number
Date Received �. �• t,]��
COUNTY
-j�[(/r.�,�,/
Time Received
RIVER BASIN;
-
AMBIENT
❑ QA
El STREAM
❑ EFFLUENT
Received By
REPORT TO
Relpanal Otlicc
COMPI,
£ CHALN OF CUSTODY
LAKE
INFLUENT
Other
r�E'1Ji( �� -5%% `OTt�}
ENER-GE
VISP'lb
ESTUARY
Data Released
COLLECTOR(S)
(l _ __
➢a:r Reported
Estimated BOD Range:
,.,
Station Location: Aoz 511
1C�,C
Seed:
Chiorinaled:
Remarks=
Slaiian PlLocation Code
Date mmldd) I
Date End (n/mmfdd)
Time Begin- Time End
Depth - DM, DB, DBM
Value Type -A, H, L
Composite-T, S, B
Sample Type
7gi.
(Jt
nob ) t o mglL
COD High 340 mg/L
COD Law 335
Coliforrn W Fecal 31616 /loond
Coliform- MF Total 31504 1100nd
Cohfurm tube Fecal 316 i 5 I I00mi
Colds— Fecal Strop 31673 /100m1
Residue. Total 500
Volatile 505 mg/L.
Fixed $10 mg/L
Residue: Suspended 530 mglL
Volatile 535 mWL
Fixed 540 -@(L
H 403 units
Acidity to pH 4.5 436 mg'L
Acidity to pH 8.3 435 mglL-
Alkalinity to pH 8.3 415
Al kalinity to pH 4.5 410 -WL
TOC 610 mg/L
T.,bid,ty 76 NTU
Coliform Total Tube / [00 nil
Chlonde 940
1 rng/L.
Chlorophyl I a EP
k 445 0 madihed option ugfL
Color True 80
au
Calor-(pH) 83
pH• Cu
Color: H7.6 971
c.u.
Cyanide 720
mg1L.
Fluoride 951
mg/1.
Formaldehydr7t
t8O mg/L,
Crease and Oils 5
6 mg1L
Hardness Total 960
mg1L.
Specific Cond, 951
urnhoskrn
MBAS 39260
m
Phenols 32730
upR-
Sulfate 945
m
Sulfide 74$
-wL
Boron
Tannin & USpith
v
Hexavalent Chino
um ug/L
Bicarbonate .
mg/L
Carbonate
MwL
Total Dimi-d Sakids
M911-
NH3 as N 610 -91L
TKN m N 625 ffs(L-
NO2 plus NO3 as N 630 MG&
P Total n P 665 rrrt
PO4 w P 70507 M6n-
P. Dissolved as P 666 nrL
K-Potassium mp/L
Cd- Cadmium 1017 USIL-
Cr-ChromiumToial 1034 ag/L
Cu- Copper 1042 ug/L
Ni-Nickel 1067 uBIL.
Pb- Lead 10 51 uWL
Zn- Zinc t092 ug/L
V-Vanadium UWL
Ag. SiMr 1077 u
AI -Aluminum 1105 ug/L
Be-Bcrylliu,n 1012 ug/L
Ca- Calcium 916 m8'L.
Co- Cobalt 1037 u
Fe -Iron 1045 ag/L
Mo-Molybdenum ug/L
Sb-Antimony ugfL.
SmTin ug/L
TI-Thallium ug1L
Ti•T,tanium ug.'L
Mg-163 1 n g1L
Lc -Lithium 1132 ug/L
Mg. Mapes ivm927 mg1L.
Mn-Manganese 1055 ug/L
Na- Sodovm 929 mg'L
Arsen,c.Total 1002 ug/L
St. Selenium 1147 VWL
Jig- Mercury 71900 uv/L.
Ba-Barium ugfL
Or och€onnr Pesuctdcs
Organophas horns Pesticides
Organonitrogen Pesticides
Acid Herbicides
BaselNevlral&Acid Extractable Orpnics
TPH Diesel Range
Purgtable Organics (VOA bottle r.4'd)
TPH Gaeaiine Range
TPWBTEX Oasrihne Ran
Phymplankton
Temperature on snivel (°C)�
o
%6'
is

G
COUNTY 'T?eQ 4-5YGVA4F1A
RIVER BASIN;
REPORT TO : RegiaMl Office
Other CiGUf11C>*��JTq�f-orore:
COLLECTOR(S)
Estimated BOD Range:
Seed: Chlorinated:
Slat"", 111Locasion Code Date
`C Oq!
Ilan SIo mg1L
COD High 340 m,-IL
COD Low 335 mdL
Col:form MF Feral 31616 /100ml
Coldorm. MF Toast 3 1 504 / l ooml
Cahform tube Feeal 31615 !loom?
1
Co}derm Fccal Srrep 11673 1I00mi
Residue Total500 mg1L
Volatile 505 rng(L
Freed 510 M9fL
Restduc Suspended 530 mg/L
volaciic 535 m,/L
Fixed 540 m4/.L,
H 403 units
Acidit - to pH 4 5 436 -eL.
. Acidity to pH 3.3 435 MWL
Alkalinity to pH 8 3 a 15 -WL
Alkalinity to pH 4 5 410 mpf_
TOC 68o ^iBl1-
ETurbicloy 76 NfLI
Cobfeim Total Tube /100 ml
1
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
Chjmiswy Laboratory Repar[ f iv stir Quality
SAMPLi:'.YPE
mozo
AMBIENT QA STREAM EFFLUENT
COMPLIAN CE CHAQVOFCUSTODY LAKE LtiFLUEM
ExizRGENCY VISIT ID H57L'wR!' E�
11 � lilt`
Station Location:
Lab Numberyr
Date Recer.ed
Tiine Received
Received By `/ } `CY
Data Released
Date Repaned
Remarks:
IV7c.✓r',54Y Q vA g fe r
Date End (y),Jmmlddl Time Begin Time End I Depth - DM. ➢B, DBM Value Typc - A. H. L^ Composite-T, 5, B Sample Type
Chloride 940
meJL
Chloroph Y11 a EPA 44$.0 modi(ed option ue/L
Color Trve 80 a u.
Color(pH) 83 pH- cu
Color pH 7.6 81 c.u.
Cyanide 720 mg/L.
Fluoride 951 mMfL
Formaldehyde 7 tQ80 n•.-WyrL.
Grcasc and O-lt 5 6 mg(L,
Hardness Total *0 mg/L
Specific Cond 91 umhaskm
MBAS 38260
n,WL.
Phenols 32730
ugfL
Sulfate 945
I m91L
Sulfide745 mdL
Boron
Tannin a Li ,n I ugfL
,Ht,cavalenl Chrn 4um ueL
B carbonate I mglL
Carbonate ' I -*L
Tatat Dino hid Schds rrg✓t
Mr1 as N 610 m��L
TKN art N 675 mg/L
NO2 ptus NO] as N 630 mc/L
P Total as P 665 m¢L
PO4 u P 70S07 m.LefL
P Dissal ,ed as P 666 nieL
K-Poius,um mvJL
Cd- Cadmium 1027 up/L
Cr-Chromium Tolal 1034 ugIL.
Cu-Copper 1042 vdL
Ni-N:ckcl M7 uglL
Pti- Lead 1051 u,rL
1 Zn- Zinc 1092 uYL
V - V an adtum ueL
A^ -Silver 1077 ug/L
AI- Alu=num 1105 up'L.
Bc-Bervihum 1012 ug/L.
Ca- Calcium 916 mg1L
Co- Cobalt 1037 up/L
Fe -Lan 1045 vgfL
Mwl�tolvbdenvm uy/L
Sb-Ant:mony uWL
Sn-Ten ug4
Tl-Thallium ugfL
T,-Tilan,um ug/L
r—jHS-'
631 ng1L
Lt-Lnh:um 1132 uPIL
Mg-Magrres— 927 mgfL
Mn-Manganese 1055 uOL
Na- Sodium 929
Anenic?ataf 1002 uSfL
Se- Selenium 1147 ug/L
Hg- Mercury 71.900 u7/L
Bit-Buium ugfL
Organochlorme Pesticides
0!proph.sph.rus Pestic,des
Organonarogeri Pesticides
Acid Y.ermcides
BasdNeutral&And Extractable Organics
TPH Diesel Range
Purgeable Orpnics (VOA battle req'd)
TPH Casnlme Range
TPFYBTEX Gasoline Range
Phy!oplsnktan
Te=erature on arrival (°C)_ r
CONU14ENTS

6VI
COUNTY : L
RIVER BASIN: e- Av —
REPORT TO _ /Y0 Regwnal of .ce
Other oat Q t Ir,C
COLLECTORS) G AI
Eslimared BOD Range:
Seel: Chlorinated:
Sl. ion MILacalion Code I Dale
�Q 9 5 /r2ASTU e E ) O
BOD 310 mr/L
COD RSI+ 340 mg,''L
COD Low 335 m&L
Cohform MF Fecal]: 616 f I OOmI
Coliform Mr' Tom) 31 SO4 f l 00ml
Cohform tube Fecal 31615 fI00ml
Cohfc, m Fecal Strep 31673 1100m1
Res,due Tau1500 rrt#L
Volatile 505 r.WL
Fixcd 510 MeL
Res,dve. Suspcn4eI 530 mg(L
Volaule 535
Fixed 540 mg1L
PH 403 uml s
Acidity to DH 4.5 436 mg/L
Ac,dsty to PH 8 3 435
Alkshndy to pH 3.3 415 L
Alkai mty to pH d 5 a 10 rng/L
TOC 690 MeL.
Turbidity 76 NW
Cohform Total Tube 111i0 ml
COMis7ENT5 :
DIVISION OFWATER QUALITY
Chtmistry Laboratory Report! War— QuaFiry
SANS -LE TYPE
PSic
AbBIENT QA STREAM EFFLUENT
COMPLIAIJCE CHANOFCUSTODY LAKE iNT'LLEAT
E.MPRGEN�Y VLSrr lD ESTUARY
0
Station Lousiau: y �^ �j /�
Remarks: SrJ , � wtis T �Q G,(.✓� 1.fi 7r ti�7 `/ �7 � �C� � k
Lib Number O t /jl7M
Date Received
Time Received
Kemwd B3
Date End Oylmmldd� j Time Begin 4 Ttme End I Deplh - DM, DX DBM I Value Type - A. H, L I Composite-T, S, 81 Sample Type
Chloride 940
mg/L
I
Ci+lorophyll a EOA 445 0 mod,ficd op! -on ugIL
l
Color True 90 I c u
Color (pH) 83 pH- c.0
Color PH 7.6 91 c u
Cyanide 7'0 _VrL
Fluoride 951 1 mWL.
Formaldehyde 7 jS80 O*L.
(5 cur and Ods 156 n4L
Hardness Total 9D0 mg/L
Specific Cond 95 umhoslcm
MBAS 33260 I mg/L
Phenols 32730 '� ug7L
Sulfate 945 nsg/L
Sulfide 745 I mg/L
Boson
T. nm k USm" uj/L
Hexa"Icnt Chromium u
8icvbonve mg1L
Cvbarou � nlgfL
Total Dtssoi,dSolids n+glL
i
i
NH3 as N 610 mrr/L
TKN an N 625 mr/L
NO2 plus NO3 as 14630 M&L
P Total as P 665 negrL
PO4 as P 70507 ff*,L
P. D,swl—d as P 6" MeL
K-Potassium
Cd- Cadmium 1027 ug/L.
CT -Chromium Total 1034 ugfi.
Cu- Copperl043 ug/L
NFN.kel 1067 ug/L
Pb- Lead 1051 ugfL.
Zn• Zinc 1092 ug/L
V-Vanadium uF1L
Ag-Silver 1077 ug/L.
AI- Aluminum ! 195 ug1L
Be- Beryllium 1012 ug/L
Ca- Calcium916 mg1L
Co-Cobah 1037 UWL
Fe- Iron 1045 ug1L
Mn-Mal bdmum
Sb-Antimony u L
S n-T,n
TI-ThalAum ug/L
T+-Tttmm- ugfL.
N -1631 ngfL
L,.L,Ihium 1132 ugIL
ME- Magncstum927 fftL
Mn-Manganese 1055 urlL
Na- Sodium 929 mplL
Armn,vTotal 1002 u#L
Se- Selenium 1147 ug/L
Hg- N, arcury 71900 ugIL
B.-Bar';
0rganttehlar,ne Pesticides
Or nophosphows Pesticides
OrginonWoW Pesticides
Acid Herbtc,des
Bam NeutraMAcid Extractable Organics
3PH Diesel R-&--
Purltcahle Or ies (VOA bottle req'd)
TPHCiwolinc Ran e
TPH1BTEX Gasoitne Rouge
Phyloniankton
.S
Temperature on an+nl (°C),
•
L A

0 •
Portion of Proposed Horsepasture River Reclassification
Proposed + Area
Horsepasture River Proposed ORW Are
(Lupton Lake, Sapphire Lake): C;Tr
NC2al
Ifi_.__ 1 PRKS GORGES STATE PARK
General Stormwater
Permit Outfall
'i
NC281
ti
Rocky
Knobs
N
Thursday, October 23, 2008 12:20:28 PM
C:IMLF_PROJECTS1Betaytihorse�_pastureIBMlndustrieslncQuarry_McNeely_topo_23oct08 mxd
7 '19
�o rliat�U
G„
+� i "•LA
Nantahala
X BenthiC Sampling Station
'Bufrer/Affectod AGmage Boundary"
'Permit Boundary'
"Property Boundary"
_ State Land
_ Federal Land
Named Stream
Unnamed Stream
_—__ h111e5
0 005 0.1 0.2 0.3 01 0.5

Michael F. Easley, Govemor
is William G Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department nvironment and Natural Resources
FILE C Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Asheville Regional Dfrice
SURFACE WATER PROTECTION
January 29, 2007
William L McNeely
LBM Whitewater Quarry
PO Box 40
Sapphire NC 28774
SUBJECT: January 25, 2007
Stormwater Inspection
LBM Whitewater Quarry
Permit No: NCG020408
Transylvania County
Dear Mr McNeely:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Stormwater Inspection form from the inspection
conducted on January 25, 2007. The facility was found to be in compliance with permit
NCG020408.
Please refer to the enclosed inspection report for additional observations and
comments. If you or your staff have any questions, please call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
if 1 1 111
Starr Silvis
Environmental Engineer
Enclosure
cc: Danny Smith — NPS- ACO
Central Files
Asheville Files
One
NolthCam ina
2090 U.S. Highway 70, Swannanaa, NC 28778 Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone] Customer Service 1 877 623-6748

0
Compliance Inspection Report
Permit: NCG020408 Effective: 01/19/05 Expiration: 12/31/09 Owner: LBM Whitewater Quarry
SOC: Effective: Expiration: Facility: LBM Whitewater Quarry
County: Transylvania Hwy 281 S
Region: Asheville
Sapphire NC 28774
Contact Person: William L McNeely Phone: [phone]
Directions to Facility:
Primary ORC: Certification: Phone:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Related Permits:
Inspection Date: 01/25/2007 Entry Time: 01:45 PM Exit Time: 02,45 PM
Primary Inspector: Starr Silvis Phone: [phone]
Secondary Inspector(s):
Karen Higgins Phone:
Reason for Inspection: Routine Inspection Type: Stormwater
Permit Inspection Type: Mining Activities Stormwater Discharge COC
Facility Status: ■ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Question Areas:
0 Storm Water
(See attachment summary)
Page: 1

0
Permit: NCG020408 Owner - Facility: LBM Whitewater Quarry
Inspection Date: 01/2512007 Inspection Type: Stormwater
Inspection Summary:
Reason for Visit: Rou':ne
Mr. Bo McCall, Mr. Mac McNeeley, and Mr. Kenny Queen met with the inspectors. The primary topic during the
inspection was the reported discharge of turbid water by the facility. There has been speculation that there maybe a
fracture in the bedrock which allows turbid water to leave the site even when the ponds are not overflowing. The facility
has been keeping the levels in their ponds drawn down in order to prevent overflow except in the case of heavy rains
The facility has also been conducting visual monitoring of the river below their outfall to determine if overflow is occuring.
The visual monitoring is being conducted only during rainfall events. They have not noticed any turbid water leaving the
site. The facility was advised to conduct visual monitoring of the river on both rainy and non -rainy days to determine if
turbid water is leaving the site. The facility was advised that any exceedance of water quality standards is a violation.
The recieving stream is classified as Tr, and as such has a turbidity standard of 10 NTUs. The inspector did not see
turbid water leaving the site at the time of the inspection
Since the last inspection the facilty has installed a lock on the release valve fore the secondary containment, has begun
taking rainfall data, and is conducting inspections on a weekly basis.
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Yes
No
NA HE
Does the site have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan?
■
❑
❑
O
# Does the Plan include a General Location (USGS) map?
■
0
❑
Q
# Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
■
0
D
Q
# Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and drainage areas?
■
n
n
n
# Does the Plan include a list of significant spills occurring during the past 3 years?
■
n
p
n
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
■
0
n
n
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
■
n
n
o
# Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
■
n
n
n
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
■
0
❑
C)
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
■
n
n
n
# Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
■
n
n
n
# Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Party(s)?
■
# Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
■
n
n
Cl
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
■
n
n
n
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
■
❑
Q
Comment:
Qualitative Monitoring
Yes
No
NA
NE
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually?
■
❑
Comment:
Page: 2

: P.O.BOX 40
SAPPHIRE N.C. 29774
L.B.MINDUSTRIES
August 28, 2006
N.C.D.E.N.R.
2090 U.S.HWY. 70
SWANNANOA N.C. 28778
ATTN LINDA WIGGS
As you requested I have attempted to document the duration of the discolored water we first
discussed on your visit Wednesday 8-16-06. 1 kept a check on the flow of the material morning and
evening each day through Friday afternoon at which point it decreased to a flow that was barely
evident from the bridge .When I returned to work Monday morning the flow had decreased to a level
that was barely evident from the bank of the river. When I checked Tuesday morning it was not
evident to me at all.
After your visit Friday 8-25-06 Kenny and I marked the current pond level and 6 inch gradations up
to an additional 3 ft. and installed a rain gauge on site. As we discussed I will keep a watch on the
river and at the first sign of discoloration I plan to dye the pond. I will keep a close check on the river
and document if any dye becomes evident and call your office immediately.
Sincerely, Bo McCall
AUG 2 9 2006 _
6 6 • • 0 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0

i
194 -% (0.
Ta L) r ems`
Lv
��l �' sip �� �� �•�— � sf p-oc.� .

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OI- WATER QUALITY
GENERAL PERMIT NO. NCG020000
TO DISCHARGE STORMWATER, MINE DEWATERING, AND PROCESS WASTEWATER
UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, this permit
is hereby issued to all owners or operators, hereafter permittees, which are covered by this permit
as evidenced by receipt of a Certificate of Coverage by the Environmental Management
Commission to allow the discharge of stormwater, mine dewatering wastewater, and process
wastewater to the surface waters of North Carolina or to a separate storm sewer system
conveying discharges to surface waters in accordance with the terns and conditions set forth
herein.
Coverage under this general permit is applicable to:
• Stonnwater point source discharge outfalls associated with mining and quarrying of
nonmetallic minerals (except fuels), land disturbance, and vehicle maintenance.
• Mine dewatering wastewater discharge outfalls.
• Wastewater discharge outfalls from sand and/or gravel operations.
• Nondischarging closed loop recycle systems.
• Process recycle wastewater discharge outfalls.
The following activities and their associated discharges are specifically excluded from coverage
under this General Permit: borrow pits covered by the DOT statewide stormwater permit, peat
mining, coal mining, metal mining, oil and gas extraction operations, and combined
mining/asphalt operations (where the asphalt operation is not covered by a separate permit).
The General Permit shall become effective on January 19, 2005.
The General Pennit shall expire at midnight on December 31, 2009.
Signed this day January 19, 2005.
Oi-iginal Signed by Alan Klimek
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By the Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
T
L�

Permit No. NCG020000
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAR''' 1 INTRODUCTION
Section A: General Permit Coverage
Section B: Pen-nitted Activities
PART II AUTHORIZATION TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A TREATMENT
FACILITY
Section A: Requirements to Construct New or Expanded Treatment Facilities
Section B: Requirements For Operation of a Treatment Facility
PART III MONITORING, CONTROLS AND LIMITATIONS FOR PERMITTED
DISCHARGES
Section A: Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) Plan
Section B: Analytical and Qualitative Monitoring Requirements for Discharges Composed
Entirely of Stonnwater
Section C: Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements for Mine Dewatering and Process
Wastewater Discharges
PART N STANDARD CONDITIONS
Section A: Compliance and Liability
1.
Compliance Schedule
2.
Duty to Comply
3.
Duty to Mitigate
4.
Civil and Criminal Liability
5.
Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
6.
Property Rights
7.
Severability
S.
Duty to Provide Information
9.
Penalties for Tampering
10.
Penalties for Falsification of Reports
Section B: General
Conditions
I.
General Permit Expiration
2.
Transfers
Y

E
•
Permit No. NCG020000
3. When an Individual Permit May be Required
4. When an Individual Permit May be Requested
5. Signatory Requirements
6. General Permit Modification, Revocation and Reissuance, or
Termination
7. Certificate of Coverage Actions
Section C: Operation and Maintenance of Pollution Controls
1. Proper Operation and Maintenance
2. Need to Halt or Reduce not a Defense
3. Bypassing of Wastewater or Stormwater Control Facilities
Section D: Monitoring and Records
1. Representative Sampling
2. Recording Results
3. Flow Measurements
4. Test Procedures
5. Non-Stormwater Discharges
6. Representative Outfall
7. Records Retention
8. Inspection and Entry
Section E: Reporting Requirements
1. Discharge Monitoring Reports
2. Submitting Reports
3. Availability of' Reports
4. Non-Storriiwater Discharges
5. Planned Changes
6. Anticipated Noncompliance
7. Bypass
8. Twenty-four Hour Reporting
9. Other Noncompliance
10. Other Information
PART V LIMITATIONS REOPENI;R
PART VI ADMINISTERING AND COMPLIANCE MONITORING FEE
REQUIREMENTS
PART VII DEFINITIONS
IF

0
0
PART I INTRODUCTION
SECTION A: GENERAL PERMIT COVERAGE
Permit No. NCG020000
All persons desiring to have facilities covered by this General Permit must register with the
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) by the filing of a Notice of Intent (NOI) and applicable fees.
The NOI shall be submitted and a certificate of coverage issued prior to any discharge of
stonnwater associated with industrial activity, mine dewatering wastewater or process
wastewater that has a point source discharge to the surface waters of the state.
This General Permit covers mining and quarrying of nonmetallic minerals (except fuels)
including borrow pits that would not be covered under the statewide DOT stonnwater permit)
and active or inactive mines that discharge stonnwater contaminated with or that has come in
contact with, any overburden, raw material, intermediate products, finished products, byproducts
or waste products located at the site of such operations and stormwater runoff from vehicle
maintenance areas. This General Permit also covers discharge of wastewater from processing
mined materials and mine dewatering wastewater from the groundwater and/or stormwater that
accumulates in the mine pit.
Any owner or operator not wishing to be covered or limited by this General Permit may make
application for an individual NPDES permit in accordance with NPDES procedures in 15A
NCAC 2H .0100, stating the reasons supporting the request. Any application for an individual
permit should be made at least 180 days prior to commencement of discharge.
This General Permit does not cover activities or discharges covered by an individual NPDES
pert -nit until the individual permit has expired or has been revoked. Any person conducting an
activity covered by an individual permit but which could be covered by this General Permit may
request that the individual permit be revoked and coverage under this General Permit be
provided.
Facilities submitting NOIs for coverage under this permit, prior to establishment or approval of a
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for a priority pollutant(s) for stonnwater discharges (i.e.
wet weather flows), may be covered under this permit during its tenn. For such facilities
continued coverage under the reissuance of this permit is subject to the facility demonstrating
that it does not have a reasonable potential to violate applicable water quality standards for such
pollutants due to the stormwater discharge(s). For facilities that do have a reasonable potential
for violation of applicable water quality standards due to the stormwater discharge(s) the facility
shall apply for an individual permit 180 days prior to the expiration of this general permit. Once
the individual permit is issued and becomes effective the facility will no longer have coverage
under the general permit. A list of approved TMDLs for the state of North Carolina can be found
at http:llh2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl/General_TMDLs.htm.
Part I Page I of 2

0 0
Permit No. NCG020000
SECTION B: PERMITTED ACTIVITIES
Until this permit expires or is modil;ed or revoked, the permittee is authorized to discharge
stormwater, mine dewatering and process wastewater to the surface waters of North Carolina or a
separate storm sewer system which�as been -adequate Iy treated and minagedan accordance with
the terms and conditions of this GenefGil-Pennit. All -discharges shall be in accordance with the
conditions of this permit.
Any other point source discharge to surface waters of the state is prohibited unless it is an
allowable non-stonnwater discharge or is covered by another pen -nit, authorization or approval.
The discharges allowed by this General PermitrshalC,not c�iuse or contribute to violations of
Water Quality Standards. Discharges allowed by this permit must meet applicable wetland
stands as outlined in 15A NCAC 2B .0230 and .0231 and water quality certification
requirements as outlined in 15A NCAC 21-1 .0500.
This permit does not relieve the permitee from responsibility for compliance with any other
applicable federal, state or local law, rule, standard, ordinance, order or decree.
Part I Page 2 of 2

E
0
Permit No. NCG020000
PART II AUTHORIZATION TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A
TREATMENT FACILITY
Mining operations which involve construction and operation of treatment facilities for mine
dewatering wastewater or process wastewater (such as saw water, wash water, etc.) are subject
to construction and operation requirements for these facilities as outlined in Section A and
Section B below.
SECTION A: REQUIREMENTS TO CONSTRUCT NEW OR EXPANDING
TREATMENT FACILITIES
All new or expanding treatment facilities must receive an Authorization to Construct (A
to C) from DWQ.
2. Application for the A to C requires that plans and specifications be submitted to the
Division of Water Quality, Stormwater Permitting Unit, 1617 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 for approval.
3. Upon approval of the plans and specifications by the Division, a set of approved plans
and specifications for the subject project will be returned to the permittee. These plans
must be retained by the permittee for the life of the treatment facility.
4. Upon receipt of an approved A to C, the approved treatment facilities shall be constructed
in accordance with the conditions of this pennit, the approved plans and specifications,
and other supporting data. The treatment facilities shall be constructed to meet the
effluent limitations in Part I11, Section C of this general permit.
Upon completion of construction and prior to operation of a permitted facility, a
certification of plans and specifications must be received from a professional engineer in
accordance with G.S. 89-25 certifying that the permitted facility has been installed in
accordance with this pennit, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting
materials. Mail the Certification of plans and specifications to the Division of Water
Quality, Stormwater Permitting Unit, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-
1617.
6. The DWQ Regional Office shall be notified at least forty-eight (48) hours in advance of
operation of the installed facilities so that an in place inspection can be made if the
Regional Office so desires. Such notification to the regional supervisor shall be made
during normal business hours from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday,
excluding State Holidays.
Part 11 Page 1 of 2

0
Permit No. NCG020000
Existing, new and expanding treatment facilities shall be subject to the following operational
requirements.
SECTION B: REQUIREMENTS FOR OPERATION OF A TREATMENT FACILITY
Operation and maintenance of treatment facilities must be in accordance with the
requirements in this General Permit. Ijor the purposes of this permit no documentation
other than a signed Certificate of Coverage is required to operate an existing treatment
facility. New facilities must also have an Authorization to Construct permit.
Diversion or bypass of untreated wastewater from a treatment facility is prohibited except
under provisions of this permit in Part IV, Section C.3.
3. In the event that a facility fails to perform satisfactorily, including the creation of
nuisance conditions, the permittee shall take immediate corrective action, including those
actions that may be required by this Division, such as the construction of additional or
replacement treatment or disposal facilities.
4. The issuance of this permit shall not relieve the permittee of the responsibility for
damages to surface waters of the State resulting from the operation of a treatment facility.
Any discharge from a treatment system to groundwater must protect the groundwater,,
standards specified in 15A NCAC 2L, Groundwater Classification and Standards.
6. Any groundwater quality monitoring, as deemed reasonably necessary by the Division,
shall be provided.
No chemical flocculants shall be used in the treatment facility without written
authorization from the Division.
All discharges of mine dewatering wastewater and process wastewater will be monitored
in accordance with Part III, Section C of this permit.
Part I1 Page 2 of 2

0 0
Permit No. NCG020000
PART III MONITORING, CONTROLS, AND LIMITATIONS FOR
PERMITTED DISCHARGES
SECTION A: STORMWATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) PLAN
The permittee shall implement stormwater BMPs to ensure that contaminants do not enter
surface waters via stonnwater that comes in contact with any unstabilized overburden,
raw materials, intenmediate products, finished products, byproducts or waste products
located on the site covered by this pen -nit. A BMP Plan shall be developed in accordance
j with the requirements of this section. The BMP Plan requirement, or portions of the plan
requirement, may be met by utilizing appropriate requirements in other documented plans
specific to the permitted facility. l
E
Management of Stormwater Runoff and Runon. The pernittee shall maintain stormwater
BMPS for land disturbance areas and outside process areas. In addition, controls should
be used to limit or isolate selected land disturbance and process areas and limit the
amount of off site stonnwater runon to those areas. Appropriate Best Management
Practices (BMPs) should be used to divert, infiltrate, reuse or otherwise manage
stonnwater runoff and runon in a manner that reduces pollutants in stonnwater
discharges leaving the site. Appropriate BMPs may include but are not limited to:
vegetative swales, bens, use of reclaimed mine areas, and reuse of collected stonnwater
(such as for an industrial process or as an irrigation source).
BMP Controls Inspection and Maintenance. All stormwater BMPs shall be inspected by
or under the direction of the permittee at least once every seven calendar days and within
24 hours after stor n event that results in a discharge. The BMPs implemented shall
j be operated and maintained so that they are cleaned out when the sediment storage
( capacity has been reduced by 50%. If any visible sedimentation is leaving the property,
corrective action shall be taken to reduce the discharge of sediments. Visible
sedimentation found offsite shall be recorded with a brief explanation as to the measures
taken to prevent future releases as well as any measures taken to remove the sediment that
Lileft the site. All other stonnwater specific controls (e.g. oil /water separators) shall be
inspected and qualitatively monitored (as per Part 111.3.3) on a semiannual schedule, once
n the fall (September -November) and once during the spring (April -June). A log of
sampling data and of activities taken to implement BMPs associated with the vehicle
maintenance activities shall be maintained and incorporated into the BMP Plan and kept
onsite for the duration of the permit tern and made available to the Director upon request.
4. Erosion and Sedimentation Control. The permittee shall implement the management
practices and the erosion and sedimentation control measures that are included in the
mining permit or erosion and sedimentation control permit issued by the Division of Land
Resources. Compliance with the issued permit is considered a requirement of this
general permit. Any deviation from the issued permit, or amendments to the issued,
permit, that impacts water quality shall constitute a violation of the terms and conditions
of this general permit. A signed copy of the issued pen -nit including the approved erosion
and sedimentation control measures and the reclamation plan shall be maintained on the
site at all times. Once an area is released by the Division of Land Resources in
Part III Page I of 9

Permit No. NCG020000
accordance with NCGS Chapter 74, Article 7, it shall no longer be subject to this general
permit.
5. Preventive Maintenance Inspections and Good Housekeeping Practices. Equipment
utilized during mining activity on a site must be operated and maintained in such a
manner as to prevent potential or actual pollution of the surface water or ground waters of
the state. Fuels, lubricants, coolants, and hydraulic fluids, or any other petroleum
products, shall not,be•discharged`on—
�the;ground or into surface waters. Spent fluids shall
be disposed of in a manner so as not to enter the surface waters or ground waters of the
state and in accordance with applicable federal disposal regulations. Any spilled fluids
shall be cleaned up to the maximum extent practicable and disposed of in a manner that
does not allow their entry into the surface waters or ground waters of the state.
1 Secondary Containment. The pennittee shall provide secondary containment for bulk
.storage of liquid materials, storage of Section 313 of Title III of the Superfund
' Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) water priority chemicals, or storage of
hazardous liquids substances to prevent leaks and spills from contaminating stormwater
y runoff. If the secondary containment devices are connected directly to stormwater
f conveyance systems, the connection shall be controlled by manually activated valves or
other similar devices (which shall be secured with a locking mechanism) and any
stormwater that accumulates in the containment area shall be at a minimum visually
observed for color, foam, outfall staining, visible sheens and dry weather flow, prior to
release of the accumulated stormwater. Accumulated stormwater shall be released if
found to be uncontaminated by the material stored within the containment area.
SECTION B: ANALYTICAL AND QUALITATIVE MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
FOR D1SCHARGESfCOMPOSED ENTIRELY OF STORMWATER 7
Analytical monitoring for stormwater discharges shall be performed for parameters as specified
in Tables 1 through 4. All analytical monitoring shall be performed during a representative storm
event as defined in Part V It. For each parameter, the arithmetic mean of all analytical sampling
results collected durin the to he e it may be calculated for each individual outfall and
compared to the cut-off concentrations listed in Tables 2 and 4. If'the arithmetic mean isJQL_
than the specified cut-off concentration for a given parameter, the facility is Rot required to
continue annual monitoring for that parameter (at that outfall) until the last ar of the permit
unless a significant change in facility operations or configuration occurs. If a cut-off
concentration results in discontinued analytical monitoring at an individual discharge outfall, the
permittee is required to maintain facility operations that ensure the continuation of stormwater
runoff quality. The Vermittee must perform analytical sampling during the first and last year of
the penriit term regardless of cut-off concentration conditions.
In situations where stormwater runoff is controlled by some type basin or retention/detention
pond, the following provisions are applicable for sample collection for analytical monitoring:
• Analytical monitoring for stormwater discharges from a basin or other similar control
structures must be performed within the first 30 minutes of discharge.
Part III Page 2 of 9

0
Permit No. NCG020000
Analytical monitoring for a basin /pond designed to contain the I 0-year design stone (see
Part VII, Definitions) without discharging is not required. Qualitative monitoring for color,
foam, outfall staining, visible sheen and dry weather flow is the only monitoring requirement.
Analytical and qualitative monitoring are not required for a basin/pond designed to contain
the 25-year, 24-hour storm (see Part VII, Definitions) without discharging. A basin/ pond
meeting this provision is considered a non -discharging stormwater control.
I . Analytical Monitoring for Stormwater Discharges from Land Disturbance and
Process Areas.
Analytical monitoring for stormwater discharges from land disturbance process areas
shall be performed as specified in Table 1. h �—
Table I. Analytical Monitoring Requirements for Stormwa_ ter Discharges ,fromvLandl
Disturbing_Activities_and:Process_Areas.-
Discharge
Characteristics
� . Units .
Measurement
Fre uenc i
Sample
T e2
Sample
Location3
Settleable Solids
ml/l
Annually
Grab
SDO
Total Suspended Solids
m /l
Annually
Grab
SDO
Turbidity
NTU
Annually
Grab
SDO
Total Rainfall4
inches
Annual l
--
--
Event Duration4
minutes
Annually--
--
Total Flow4
MG
Annually
--
SDO
Fool —__not oles'
l Measurement Frequency: Once per year during a representative storm event. A year is defined as the 12 month period beginning on the
month and day of issuance of the Certificate of Coverage.
2 The sample is collected within the first 30.minutes. of.disc harge from the outfall.
3 Sample Location: Samples shall be collected at each stomlwater discharge outfall (SDO) unless representative outfall status has been granted,
4 For each sampled representative storm event, the total precipitation, storm duration, and total flow most be monitored, Total now shall be
either; (a) measured continuously, (b) calculated based on the amount of area draining to the outfall, the amount of built -upon (impervious)
area, and the total amount of rainfall, or (c) estimated by the measurement of flow at 20 minute imen-als during the rainfall event.
Table 2. Analytical Monitoring Cut-off Concentrations for Stormwater Discharges
from Land Disturbance Activities and Process Areas
Discharge
Characteristics
Cut-off Concentration
Settleable Solids
0.1 ml/i
Total Suspended
Solids
100 mg/1
Turbidity
Freshwater non -trout streams
50 NTU
Turbidity
Non -trout lakes and saltwaters
25 NTU
Turbidity
(Trout waters) _
_I0 NTU_
Part III Pagc 3 of 9

Permit No, NCG020000
Analytical Monitoring for On -site Vehicle Maintenance.
Facilities which have any on -site vehicle maintenance activity that uses more than 55
gallons of new motor oil per month when averaged over the calendar year shall perform
analytical monitoring as specified below in Table 3. This monitoring shall be performed
at all outfalls which discharge stormwater runoff from the vehicle maintenance areas.
Table 3. Analytical Monitoring Requirements for Stormwater Discharges from On -Site
Vehicle Maintenance Areas
Discharge Characteristics
Units
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
" XXpell
Sample
Location2
F-I
S.U.
Annually
Grab
SDO
Oil and Grease
m /l
AnnWAY
Grab
SDO
Total Suspended Solids
m =/l
Annually
Grab
SDO
Total Rainfa113
inches
Arinuallj
Grab
--
Event Duration3
minutes
Annually
Grab
--
Total Flow3
MG
Annually
Grab
SDO
Footnotes:
I The sample is collected within the first 30 minutes ofdischarge.
2 Samplc Location: Samples shall be collected at each siomtwater discharge outfall (SDO) [hat discharges stormwater runoff from
area(s) where vehicle maintenance activities occur.
3 Total Flow shall be; (a) measured continuously, (b) calculated based on the amount of area draining to the outfall, the amount of built -
upon (impervious) area, and the total amount of rainfall, or (c) estimated by the measurement of now al 20 minute intervals during the
rainfall event. Total precipitation and duration ol' the rainfall event measured shall result from the sampled representative storm event.
Table 4. Cut-off Concentrations for On -Site Vehicle Maintenance Activities
Discharge Characteristics
Cut-off Concentration
1-i'
within range the 6.0 -- 9.0
Oil and Grease
30 m Tll
Total Suspended Solids
100 m r/l
Footnotes:
1 put cannot be averaged due to the nature of the logarithmic pll scale. The most recent pll sample result shall be used for cut-off
concentration purposes.
3. Qualitative Monitoring for Stormwater Discharges from Land Disturbance Areas,
Process Areas and Vehicle Maintenance Areas.
Qualitative monitoring requires a visual inspection of all stormwater outfalls with
stormwater runoff from land disturbance, process or vehicle maintenance areas regardless
of representative outfall status or cut-off concentrations and shall be performed as
specified below in Table 5. No analytical tests are required.
Part Ill Page 4 of 9

Permit No. NCG020000
The first qualitative monitoring event during the term of the pqrrnit must coincide with
the initial analytical monitoring event (regardless of the season). All other qualitative
monitoring will be performed twice per year, once in the spring (April - June) and once in
the fall (September - November) and does not need to be performed during a
representative stortn event.
Table 5. Qualitative Monitoring Requirements
Discharge Characteristics.
Frequency
Monitoring .
Location 1
Color
Setni-Annual
SDO
Odor
Semi -Annual
SDO
Clarity
Semi -Annual
SDO
Floating Solids
Semi -Annual
SDO
Suspended Solids
Semi -Annual
SDO
Foam
Semi -Annual
SDO
Oil Sheen
Semi -Annual
SDO
Deposition at or immediately below the
outfall
Semi -Annual
SDO
Erosion at or immediately below'the
outfall
Semi -Annual
SDO
Other obvious indicators
of stormwater pollution
Semi -Annual
SDO
footnotes:
I Monitoring Location: Qualitative monitoring shall be performed at each stormwater discharge outrall (SDO) associated with land
disturbance areas, process areas and vehicle maintenance areas regardless of representative outfall status.
(SECTION C. EF LUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
FOR MINE DEWATERING WASTEWATER AND PROCESS
,. WA�STEWATERD
1. Mine Dewatering Wastewater (including Borrow Pits)
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the
permittee is authorized to discharge mine dewatering wastewater controlled in accordance with
the conditions of this permit. Mine dewatering activities that have the potential to drain wetlands
must have secured and implemented an Operation and Monitoring Plan approved by the
Division. Operation and Maintenance Plans shall include, but are not limited to:
Groundwater monitoring strategies to demonstrate the effect of pumping and, as necessary,
establish the pumping regime necessary to reduce impacts.
Detailed plans to maintain the surrounding hydrology and the respective monitoring to
demonstrate compliance.
Part III Page 5 of 9

i]
0
Permit No. NCG020000
Alternative site specific pumping and monitoring regimes may be approved by the Division on a
case -by -case basis.
The discharge of Mine dewatering wastewater that is directly pumped from the pit through an
erosion and sedimentation control structure prior to discharging to surf -ace waters is not required
to receive an authorization to construct in accordance with Part 11, Sections A and 13, Mine
dewatering wastewater discharges which requires additional treatment other than erosion and
sedimentation control structures are subject to the authorization to construct requirement.
Analytical monitoring of mine dewatering wastewater shall be performed as specified below in
Table 6. For each parameter, an effluent limitation is contained in Table 9. An exceedence of any
of these limitations is a violation of the permit conditions and may be subject to enforcement
action as specified in Part IV, Section A.2 of this permit.
Table 6. Monitoring Requirements for Mine Dewatering Wastewater
Discharge
Characteristics
Units
Measurement
Frequency]
Sample'
"r e2'
Sample.
Location3 '
I -I
s.u.
Quarterly
Grab
Il
Settleable Solids
ml/l
Quarterly
Grab
E
Total Suspended So1ids5
m /l
Quartedy
Grab
E
Turbidity
NTU
Quarterly
Grab
E or U,D
Fecal Colllorm"
col/ml
Quarterly
Grab
E
Total Flow4
MG
Quarterly
-
E
Footnotes:
l The monitoring frequency is quarterly unless the effluent limitation in 'fable 9 is exceeded at which time
monthly monitoring will be required for that parameter for the remaining permit term.
2 A grab sample is not required for pH and TSS from a basin/ pond designed to contain or treat mine dewatering
wastewater that results from rainfall in excess of 10-yr, 24-hr storm (this exemption is not available for mine
dewatering of clay pits).
3 Sample location: F — Effluent, U — Upstream, D — Downstream
4 Total flow volume shall be recorded by a continuous flow measurement instrument, Alternatively, pump curves
and pump logs may be used as a moms to calculate flow volume.
5 Only facilities mining Industrial Sand are required to monitor for this parameter.
G Only facilities discharging to waters classified as SA waters are required to monitor for this parameter
2. Wastewater Associated With Sand/Gravel-Mining
During the period beginning on the effective date of. -the permit and lasting until expiration, the
pennittee is authorized to discharge wastewater from mining of sand and/or gravel operations.
For the purposes of this permit, wastewater from mining of sand and/or -gravel is water -that that
Part it] Page 6 of9

0 0
Permit No. NCG020000
Lis.conveyed from the mined.sand.and/or gravel-through.an erosion and sedimentationn control
facility prtor._to discliarging"to_surface-waters. Authorization.to.construct -and operate ___1'
requirements (Part I1, Sections A and B) are not applicable to this type of wastewater operation.
Analytical monitoring of wastewater draining from mined sand and/or gravel shall be performed
as specified below in Table 7. For each parameter, an effluent limitation is contained in Table 9.
An exceedence of any of these limitations will result in a violation of the permit conditions and
may be subject to enforcement action as specified in PartW, Section-A.2 of this permit.
Table 7. C'Monitoring,Require ments-.for Wastewater from7Sand-and/or=Gravel-Mining
Discharge
Characteristics
Units
Measurement
Frequency]
Sample
-Tv e2
Sample
Location3
H
s.u.
Quarterly
Grab
E
Settleable Solids
ml/!
Quarterly
Grab
E
Total Suspended Solids5
m 7/l
Quarterly
Grab
E
Turbidity
NTU
Quarterl
Grab
E or U,D
Total Flow4
MG
Quarterly
-
E
Footnotes; _
I The monitoring frequency is quarterly unless the efflu_ent limitation in Tablc 9 is exceeded at which time monthly
monitoring will be required for that parameter for the icmaining permit -term
2 A grab sample is not required for pH and TSS from a basin/ pond designed to contain or treat process wastewater
that results from rainfall in excess of 10-yr, 24-hr storm,
3 Sample Location: E — Effluent, or combined (U — Upstream, D — Downstream)
4 Total Flow volume shall be recorded by a continuous flow measurement instrument. Alternatively, pump curves
and pump logs may be used as a means to calculate flow volume.
5 Only facilities mining Industrial Sand are required to monitor for this parameter.
3. Overflow From a Closed Loop Process Recycle Wastewater System Designed to Operate
With Minimum of Two Feet of Freeboard
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the
permittee is authorized to discharge overflow from the following closed loop process recycle
wastewater systems
designed and operated with two feet of freeboard during normal operation:
a) Sand, Gravel and Stone Washing Operations
I b) Dimension Stone Cutting Operations
E c) Crusher Dust Control Operations
i
For the purposes of this permit, overflow refers to a discharge that occurs as a result of a
precipitation event that over -tops the two feet of freeboard, Closed loop is defined as limiting the
water entering the system to makeup water that is added to operate the system at or below the two
feet of freeboard and/or precipitation that falls directly into the system. The system would also be
Part 11.1 Page 7 of 9

0
11
Permit No. NCG020000
designed to exclude stormwater runoff from draining into the system. Authorization to construct
and operate requirements (Part II, Sections A and B) are not applicable to this type of process >
wastewater operation.
No analytical monitoringis s required for overflow from closed loop process recycle wastewater
systems desl ,,ncd tooperate with two Fcet of freeboard.
4. Overflow From Other Process Recycle Wastewater Systems
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the
permittee is authorized to discharge overflow from the following process recycle wastewater
systems that are not designed as closed loop recycle systems with two feet of freeboard:
a) Sand, Gravel and Stone Washing Operations
b) Dimension Stone Cutting Operations
c) Air Scrubbing and Dust Control Operations
Analytical monitoring of overflow from process recycle wastewater systems that are not designed
as closed loop recycle systems with two feet of freeboard shall be performed as specified below in
Table 8. For the purposes of this permit, overflow refers to a discharge of process wastewater as a
result of a precipitation event. These systems don't meet the requirements for closed loop recycle
systems and are not designed and operated with two feet of freeboard. Authorization to construct
and operate requirements (Part II, Sections A and B) are applicable to this type of process
wastewater operation.
'fable 8. Monitoring Requirements for Overflow From Process Recycle astewater Systems
Discharge
Characteristics
Units
Measurement
Fre uenc l
Sample
Type'
Sample
Location3
1-I
s.u.
!2uarterly
Grab
1�
Settleable Solids
ml/i
Quarterly
Grab
E
Total Suspended Solids5
m =/i
Quarterly
Grab
E
Turbidity
NTU
Quarterly
Grab
6 or U,D
Total Flow4
MG
Quarterly
E
Footnotes:
l The monitoring frequency is quarterly unless the effluent limitation in 'fable 9 is exceeded at which time monthly
monitoring will be required for that parameter for the remaining permit term.
2 A grab sample is not required for pl-{ and TSS from a basin/ pond designed to contain or treat process wastcwater
that results from rainfall in excess of l Q-yr, 24-hr storm.
3 Sample Location: E — Effluent, or combined (U — Upstream, 1) — Downstream}
4 "rotal Flow volume shall be recorded by a continuous flow measurement instrument. Alternatively, pump curves
and pump logs may be used as a means to calculate now volume.
5 Only facilities mining Industrial Sand are required to monitor for this parameter.,
Part Ili Page 8 of 9

Permit No. NCG020000
TOW 9. _ E_ fuent Limitations for Process Wastewater and-Min-e Dewatering Wastewater
— I,.- _ ._
Discharge Characteristics
Effluent Limitations
Monthl_v Average
DailX Maximum
Settleable Solids
0.1 ml/1
0.2 ml/1
Total Suspended Solids Industrial Sand Mining)'
25 m 7 1
45 ni /l
I-{ Range'
--------
6.0 — 9.0
Turbidity Freshwater non -trout streams
--------
50 NTU
Turbidity Non -trout takes and saltwaters
--------
25 NTU
Turbidity Trout waters -
Footnotes;
The pH range for saltwater is 6.8-8.5. Designated swamp waters can have a pli as low as 4.3 if duc to natural
conditions.
2 Monthly Average Limit for discharges to waters designated as HQW waters is 2 rngll �%
5. BMP Conditions
a) The permittee shall utilize best management practices to ensure that contaminants do not
enter the surface waters as a result of blasting at the site.
b) The pennittec shall obtain authorization from the Director prior to utilizing any chemical
flocculants.
6.. Residual Management
The residuals generated from treatment facilities used to meet the effluent limitations must be
disposed of in accordance with applicable standards and in a manner such as to prevent any
pollutants from such materials from entering waters of the state or navigable waters of the United
States.
Dart III Page 9 of 9

0
u
Permit No. NCG020000
'ART IV \ STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR NPDES STORMWATER GENERAL
PERMITS
SECTION,A': COMPLIANCE AND LIABILITY
Compliance Schedule
a. The permittee shall comply with Limitations and Controls specified for stormwater
discharges in accordance with the following schedule:
(1) For Discharge From Process Areas and Vehicle Maintenance Activities:
(a) Existing Facilities with First Stormwater Permit. Develop and implement BMPs
and stormwater controls as appropriate within the first 12 months of permit
coverage.
(b) Proposed Facilities. Develop and implement BMPs and stormwater controls, as
appropriate prior to beginning mining operations.
(2) For Discharges From Land Disturbance Activities:
(a) Existing Facilities with First Stormwater Permit. Implement BMPs and
stormwater controls as appropriate, on the effective date of permit coverage.
(b) Proposed Facilities. Develop and implement BMPs and stormwater controls as
appropriate prior to beginning land disturbance activity.
b. The pennittee shall comply with Effluent Limitations for wastewater discharges by the
effective date of the permit unless otherwise specified in the permit.
2. `Duty to Comply
The permittee must comply with all conditions of this general permit. Any permit
noncompliance constitutes a violation ofthe Clean Water Act and is grounds for
enforcement action; for certificate of coverage termination, revocation and reissuance, or
modification; or denial of a certificate of coverage upon renewal appiieation.
The permittee shall comply with standards or prohibitions established under
section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for toxic pollutants within the time
provided in the regulations that establish these standards or prohibitions, even if
the permit has not yet been modified to incorporate the requirement.
b. The Clean Water Act provides that any person who violates section 301, 302, 306,
307, 308, 318 or 405 of the Act, or any permit condition or limitation implementing
any such sections in a permit issued under section 402, is subject to a civil penalty not
to exceed $27,500 per day for each violation. Any person who negligently violates
such sections, or any permit condition or limitation is subject to criminal penalties of
$2,500 to $25,000 per day of violation, or imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or
Part IV Page I of' 1 1

u
Permit No. NCG020000
both. In the case of a second or subsequent conviction for a negligent violation, a
person shall be subject to criminal penalties of not more than $50,000 per day of
violation, or by imprisonment of not more than 2 years, or both. Any person who
knowingly violates such sections, or any permit conditions or limitations is subject to
criminal penalties of $5,000 to S50,000 per day of violation, or imprisonment for not
more than 3 years, or both. In the case of a second or subsequent conviction for a
knowing violation, a person shall be subject to criminal penalties of not more than
$100,000 per day of violation, or imprisonment of not more than 6 years, or both. Any
person who knowingly violates such sections, or any permit conditions or limitations,
and who knows at that time that he thereby places another person in imminent danger
of death or serious bodily injury, shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not
more than $250,000 or imprisonment of not more than 15 years, or both. In the case
of a second or subsequent conviction for a knowing endangerment violation, a person
shall be subject to a fine of not more than $500,000 or by imprisonment of not more
than 30 years, or both. An organization (as defined in section 309 of the Clean Water
Act) shall, upon conviction of violating the imminent danger provision, be subject to
a fine of not more than $1,000,000 and can be fined up to $2,000,000 for second or
subsequent convictions. Also, any person who violates a pen -nit condition may be
assessed an administrative penalty not to exceed $1 1,000 per violation with the
` maximum amount not to exceed $137,500, [Ref: Section 309 of the Federal Act 33
USC 1319 and 40 CFR 122.41(a).]
Under state law, a daily civil penalty of not more than twenty-five thousand
dollars ($25,000) per violation may be assessed against any person who violates
or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of a
permit. [Ref North Carolina General Statutes 143-215.6A]
d. Any person may be assessed an administrative penalty by the Director for
violating section 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act, or any pen -nit
condition or limitation implementing any of such sections in a permit issued under_:
1 section 402 of the Act. Administrative penalties for Class I violations are not to
exceed $1 1,000 per violation, with the maximum amount of any Class I penalty
assessed not to exceed $27,500. Penalties for Class 1I violations are not to exceed
$1 1,000 per day for each day during which the violation continues, with the
maximum amount of any.Class-iI penalty-not.to exceed .$137,500.. _.._
3. Duty to Mitigate
The permittcc shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge in
violation of this general pen -nit which has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting
human health or the environment.
4. Civil and Criminal Liability
Except as provided in Section C of this part regarding bypassing of stormwater control
facilities, nothing in this general permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee from
any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties for noncompliance pursuant to NCGS 143-
Part IV Page 2 of 11

r,
l3
Permit No. NCG020000
215.3, 143-215.6A, 143-215.613, 143-215.6C or Section 309 of the Federal Act, 33 USC
1319. Furthermore, the permittee is responsible for consequential damages, such as fish
kills, even though the responsibility for effective compliance may be temporarily
suspended.
Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
Nothing in this general pert -nit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal
action or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which
the permittee is or may be subject to under NCGS 143-215.75 et seq. or Section 311 of the
Federal Act, 33 USC 1321.
6. Property Rights
The issuance of this general permit does not convey any property rights -in either real or
personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private
property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of Federal, State or local
laws or regulations.
Severability
The provisions of this general pen -nit are severable, and if any provision of this general
permit, or the application of any provision of this general permit to any circumstances, is
held invalid, the application of such provision to other circumstances, and the remainder
of this general permit, shall not be affected thereby.
8. Duty to Provide Information
The pennittee shall furnish to the Director, within a reasonable time, any information
which the Director may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying,
revoking and reissuing, or tenninating the certificate of coverage issued pursuant to this
general permit or to determine compliance with this general permit. The permittee shall
also furnish to the Director upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this
general permit.
9. Penalties for Tampering
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly
renders inaccurate, any monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this
general permit shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per
violation, or by imprisonment for not more than two years per violation, or by both. If a
conviction of a person is for a violation committed after a first conviction of' such person
under this paragraph, punishment is a fine of not more that $20,000 per day of violation,
or by imprisonment of not more than 4 years, or both.
10. Penalties for Falsification of'Reports
Part IV Page 3 of 1

® 0
Permit No. NCG020000
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who knowingly makes any false statement,
representation, or certification in any record or other document submitted or required to
be maintained under this general permit, including monitoring reports or reports of
compliance or noncompliance shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more
than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than two years per violation,
or by both.
SI?CTION B: GENERAL CONDITIONS
General Permit Expiration
The permittee is not authorized to discharge after the expiration date. In order to receive
automatic authorization to discharge beyond the expiration date, the permittee shall
submit forms and fees as are required by the agency authorized to issue permits no later
than 180 days prior to the expiration date. Any permittee that has not requested renewal
at least 180 days prior to expiration, or any permittee that does not have a permit after the
expiration and has not requested renewal at least 180 days prior to expiration, will be
subjected to enforcement procedures as provided in NCGS § 143-2153.6 and 33 USC
1251 et.seq.
Transfers
The certificate of coverage issued pursuant to this general permit is not transferable to any
person except after notice to and approval by the Director. The Director may require
modification or revocation and reissuanee of the certificate of coverage to change the
narne and incorporate such other requirements as may be necessary under the Clean
Water Act.
When an Individual Permit May -be Required
The Director may require any owner/operator authorized to discharge under a certificate
of coverage issued pursuant to this general permit to apply for and obtain an individual
permit or coverage under an alternative general permit. Any interested person may
petition the Director to take action under this paragraph. Cases where an individual
permit may be required include, but are not limited to, the following:
The discharger is a significant contributor of pollutants;
b. Conditions at the permitted site change, altering the constituents and/or
characteristics of the discharge such that the discharge no longer qualifies for a
general permit;
C. The discharge violates the terms or conditions of this general permit;
d. A change has occurred in the availability of demonstrated technology or practices
for the control or abatement of pollutants applicable to the point source;
Part IV Page 4 of 1 1

C1
Permit No. NCG020000
Effluent limitations are promulgated for the point sources covered by this general
permit;
A water quality management plan containing requirements applicable to such
point sources is approved after the issuance of this general permit.
g. The Director detennines at his own discretion that an individual permit is
required.
4. When an Individual Permit May be Requested
Any pernnittee operating under this general permit may request to be excluded from the
coverage of this general permit by applying for an individual permit. When an individual
Permit is issued to an owner/operator the applicability of this general permit is
automatically terminated on the effective date of the individual permit.
Si ng atoU Requirements
All applications, reports, or information submitted to the Director shall be signed and
certified.
All notices of intent to be covered under this general permit shall be signed as
follows:
(1) For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer. For the purpose of
this Section, a responsible corporate officer means: (a) a president,
secretary, treasurer or vice president of the corporation in charge of a
principal business function, or any other person who performs similar
policy or decision making functions for the corporation, or (b) the manager
of one or more manufacturing production or operating facilities employing
more than 250 persons or having gross annual sales or expenditures
exceeding 25 million (in second quarter 1980 dollars), if authority to sign
documents has been assigned or delegated to the manager in accordance
with corporate procedures.
(2) For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general partner or the
proprietor, respectively; or
(3) For a municipality, State, Federal, or other public agency: by either a
principal executive officer or ranking elected official.
All reports required by the general permit and other information requested by the
Director shall be signed by a person described above or by a duly authorized
representative of that person. A person is a duly authorized representative only if:
(1) The authorization is made in writing by a person described above;
Part IV Page 5 of 11

Permit No. NCG020000
(2) - The authorization specified either an individual or a position having
responsibility for the overall operation of the regulated facility or activity,
such as the position of plant manager, operator of a well or well field,
superintendent, a position of equivalent responsibility, or an individual or
position having overall responsibility for environmental matters for the
company. (A duly authorized representative may thus be either a named
individual or any individual occupying a named position.); and
(3) The written authorization is submitted to the Director.
Any person signing a document under paragraphs a. or b. of this section shall
make the following certification:
"I certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were
prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed
to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information
submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system,
or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the
information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate,
and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false
information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing
violations."
6. General Permit Modification, Revocation and Reissuance, or Termination
The issuance of this general permit does not prohibit the Director from reopening and
modifying the general permit, revoking and reissuing the general permit, or terminating
the general pennit as allowed by the laws, rules, and regulations contained in Title 40,
Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 122 and 123; Title 15A of the North Carolina
Administrative Code, Subehapter 2H .0100; and North Carolina General Statute 143-
215.1 et. al.
After public notice and opportunity for a hearing, the general permit may be tenminated
for cause. The filing of a request for a general permit modification, revocation and
reissuance, or termination does not stay any general permit condition. The certificate of
coverage shall expire when the general permit is terminated.
Certificate of Coverage Actions
The certificate of coverage issued in accordance with this general permit may be
modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause. The notification of planned
changes or anticipated noncompliance does not stay any general permit condition,
SECTION C: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF POLLUTION CONTROLS
1. Proper Operation and Maintenance
Part IV Page 6 of I 1

E
Permit No. NCG020000
The permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of
treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are installed or used by the
permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions of this general permit. Proper
operation and maintenance also includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate
quality assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of back-up or
auxiliary facilities or similar systems which are installed by it permittee only when the
operation is necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of the general pennit.
2. Need to Halt or Reduce not a Defense
It shall not be a defense for a permittee in an enforcement action that it would have been
necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with
the condition of this general permit.
Bypassing of Stormwater or Wastewater Control Facilities
Bypass is prohibited and the Director may take enforcement action against a permittee
for bypass unless:
a. Bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury or severe property
damage; and
b. There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as the use of auxiliary
control facilities, retention of stormwater or maintenance during nornnal periods of
equipment downtime or dry weather. This condition is not satisfied if adequate
backup controls should have been installed in the exercise of reasonable
engineering judgment to prevent a bypass which occurred during normal periods
of equipment downtime or preventive maintenance; and
The permittee submitted notices as required under Section E. of this part.
If the Director determines that it will meet the three conditions listed above, the Director
may approve an anticipated bypass after considering its adverse effects.
SECTION D: MONITORING AND RECORDS
Renresentative Samnline
Samples collected and measurements taken, as required herein, shall, .be chary cteristic of
the volume and nature of the permitted discharge. Analytical sampling shall"be
performed during a representative storm event.)Stunples shall betaken on it da-ay and time
that i characteristic of the disch�rbe. fill samples shall be taken before the discharge
joins or is diluted by any other waste stream, body of water, or substance. Monitoring
points as specified in this permit shall not be changed without notification to and
approval of the Director.
Part IV Page 7 of 11

u
2. Recording Results
Permit No. NCG020000
For each measurement, sample, inspection or maintenance activity performed or collected
pursuant to the requirements of this general permit, the pennittee shall record the
following in formation:
The date, exact place, and time of sampling, measurements, inspection or
maintenance activity;
b. The individual(s) who performed the sampling, measurements, inspection or
maintenance activity;
The date(s) analyses were performed;
The individual(s) who performed the analyses;
C. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
The results of such analyses.
Flow Measurements
Where required, appropriate flow measurement devices and methods consistent with
accepted scientific practices shall be selected and used to ensure the accuracy and
reliability of measurements of the volume of monitored discharges.
4. Test Procedures
Test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall confonm to the EMC regulations
published pursuant to NCGS 143-215.63 et. seq, the Water and Air Quality Reporting
Acts, and to regulations published pursuant to Section 304(g), 33 USC 1314, of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as Amended, and Regulation 40 CFR 136.
To meet the intent of the monitoring required by this general permit, all test procedures
must produce minimum detection and reporting levels and all data generated must be
reported down to the minimum detection or lower reporting level of the procedure.
5. Non-Stormwater Discharges
If a monitored storm event coincides with a non-stormwater discharge, the permittee shall
separately monitor all parameters as required under the non-stormwater discharge pen -nit
and provide this information with the stormwater discharge monitoring report.
Representative Outfall
If a facility has multiple discharge locations with substantially identical stormwater
discharges that are required to be sampled, the pennittee may petition the Director for
Part IV Page 8 of I I

III
Permit No. NCG020000
representative outfall status. If it is established that the stormwater discharges are
substantially identical and the permitter is granted representative outfall status, then
sampling requirements may be performed at a reduced number of outfalls.
Records Retention
Qualitative monitoring shall be documented and records maintained at the facility.
Copies of analytical monitoring results shall also be maintained on -site. The permittee
shall retain records of all monitoring information, including all calibration and
maintenance records and all original strip chart recordings for continuous monitoring
instrumentation, and copies of all reports required by this general pen -nit for a period of at
least 5 years from the date of the sample, measurement, report or application. This period
may be extended by request of the Director at any time.
Inspection and Entry
The permittee shall allow the Director, or an authorized representative (including an
authorized contractor acting as a representative of the Director), or in the case of a facility
which discharges through a municipal separate stone sewer system, an authorized
representative of a municipal operator or the separate storm sewer system receiving the
discharge, upon the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required
by law, to;
Enter upon the pennittee:s premises where a regulated facility or activity is located
or conducted, or where records must be kept under the conditions of this general
permit;
b. I -lave access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under
the conditions of this general permit;
Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and
control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required under this
general permit; and
d. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of assuring general
permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Clean Water Act, any
substances or parameters at any location.
SECTION E: CiEPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Samples analyzed in accordance with the terms of this permit shall be submitted to the
Division on Discharge Monitoring Report forms provided by the Director. Submittals
shall be received by the Division no later than 30 calendar days after the end of the
reporting period.
Part IV Page 9 of' I

0 0
Permit No. NCG020000
Documentation of the qualitative monitoring associated with the initial analytical
monitoring event shall be included with the required analytical monitoring submittal for
the first year of the permit coverage.
Analytical results from sampling during the final year of the permit tertn shall be
submitted with the permit renewal application.
2. Submitting Reports
Duplicate signed copies of all reports required herein, shall be submitted to the following
address:
Central Files
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
3. Availability of Reports
Except for data determined to be confidential under NCGS 143-215.3(a)(2) or Section
308 of the Federal Act, 33 USC 1318, all reports prepared in accordance with the terns
shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the Division of Water Quality. As
required by the Act, analytical data shall not be considered confidential. Knowingly
making any false statement on any such report may result in the imposition of criminal
penalties as provided for in NCGS 143-215.613 or in Section 309 of the Federal Act,
4. Non-Stornwater Discharges
If the stone event monitored in accordance with this general permit coincides with a non-
stormwater discharge, the permittee shall separately monitor all parameters as required
under the non-stormwater discharge permit and provide this information with the
stormwater discharge monitoring report.
5. Planned Changes
i The permittee shall give notice to the Director as soon as possible of any planned changes
at the permitted facility which could significantly alter the nature or quantity of pollutants
discharged. This notification requirement includes pollutants which are not specifically
listed in the general permit or subject to notification requirements under 40 CFR Part
122.42 (a).
Part IV Page 10 of I l

0 0
Permit No. NCG020000
6. Anticipated Noncompliance
1 The permittee shall give notice to the Director as soon as possible of any planned changes
at the pennitted facility which may result in noncompliance with the general permit
} requirements.
Bypass
a. Anticipated bypass. If the permittee knows in advance of the need for a bypass, it
shall submit prior notice, if possible at least ten days before the date of the bypass;
including an evaluation of the anticipated quality and affect of the bypass.
b. �antIi ted bypass. The permittee shall submit notice within 24 hours oI'
becoming aware of an unanticipated bypass.
$--. 'Twenty-four Hour Reporting
—The-permittee sh-all report'to"ihe DWQ central office or the appropriate DWQ regional
office any noncompliance which may endanger health or the environment. Any
information shall be provided orally within 24 hours from the time the permittee became
aware of the circumstances. A written submission shall also be provided within 5 days of
the time the permittee becomes aware of the circumstances.
The written submission shall contain a description of the noncompliance, and its causes;
the period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times, and if the noncompliance
has not been corrected, the anticipated time compliance is expected to resume; and steps
taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance.
The following shall be included as information which must be reported within 24 hours
under this paragraph:
(1) Any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation in the general
permit.
?U(2) Any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation in the general pen-nit.
{3) Violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any of the pollutants listed
by the Director in the general permit to be reported within 24 hours.
The Director may waive the written report on a case -by -case basis if the oral report has
been received within 24 hours.
9. Other Noncompliance
The permittee shall report all other instances of noncompliance not reported under the 24-
hour reporting; requirement at the time monitoring reports are submitted.
10. Other Information
Where the permittee becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in a Notice
of Intent to be covered under this general permit or in any report to the Director, it shall
promptly submit such facts or information.
Part IV Page 1 1 of 1

® 0
Permit No. NCG020000
PART V LIMITATIONS REOPENER
This general pen -nit shall be modified or alternatively, revoked and reissued, to comply with any
applicable effluent guideline or water quality standard issued or approved under Sections 302(b)
(2) (c), and (d), 304(b) (2) and 307(a) of the Clean Water Act, if the effluent guideline or water
quality standard so issued or approved:
a. Contains different conditions or is otherwise more stringent than any effluent limitation in
the general pen -nit; or
b. Controls any pollutant not limited in the general permit.
The general pen -nit as modified or reissued under this paragraph shall also contain any other
requirements in the Act then applicable.
PART VI ADMINISTERING AND COMPLIANCE MONITORING FEE
REQUIREMENTS
The pennittee must pay the administering and compliance monitoring fee within 30 (thirty) days
after being billed by the Division. Failure to pay the fee in a timely manner in accordance with
15A NCAC 2H .0105(b)(4) may cause this Division to initiate action to revoke the Certificate of
Coverage.
PART VII DEFINITIONS
l . Act
See Clean Water Act.
2. Arithmetic Mean
The arithmetic mean of any set of values is the summation of the individual values
divided by the number of individual values.
3. Allowable Non-Stormwater Discharges
This permit regulates, in part, stormwater discharges. Non-stonnwater discharges which
shall be allowed in the stormwater conveyance system are:
(a) All other discharges that are authorized by a non-stormwater NPDES permit.
Part V, VI and VII Page 1 of 7

a❑
•
Permit No. NCG020000
(b) Uncontaminated groundwater, foundation drains, air -conditioner condensate
without added chemicals, springs, discharges of uncontaminated potable water,
waterline and fire hydrant flushings, water from footing drains, flows from
riparian habitats and wetlands.
(c) Discharges resulting from fire -fighting or fire -fighting training.
4. Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Measures or practices used to reduce the amount of pollution entering surface waters.
BMI's may take the form of a process, activity, or physical structure.
5. Bypass
.A bypass is the known diversion of stonnwater or wastewater from any portion of a BM P
or control facility including the collection system, which is not a designed or established
operating mode for the facility.
6. Bulk Storage of Liquid Products
Liquid raw materials, manufactured products, waste materials or by-products with a
single above ground storage container having a capacity of greater than 660 gallons or
with multiple above ground storage containers located in close proximity to each other
having a total combined storage capacity of greater than 1,320 gallons.
7. Certificate of Coverage
The Certificate of Coverage (COC) is the cover sheet which accompanies the general
permit upon issuance and lists the facility name, location, receiving stream, river basin,
effective date of coverage under the permit and is signed by the Director.
8. Clean Water Act
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act (CWA), as
amended, 33 USC 1251, et. seq.
J. Division or DWO
The Division of Water Quality, Department of Environment, and Natural Resources.
10. Director
The Director of the Division of Water Quality, the permit issuing authority.
11. EMC
The North Carolina Environmental Management Commission.
Part V, VI and V I1 Page 2 of 7

El
12, Grab Sample
Permit No. NCG020000
An individual sample collected instantaneously. Grab samples that will be directly
analyzed or qualitatively monitored must be taken within the first 30 minutes of
discharge.
13. Hazardous Substance
Any substance designated under 40 CFR Part 116 pursuant to Section 31 1 of the Clean
Water Act.
14, Landfill
A disposal facility or part of a disposal facility where waste is placed in or on land and
which is not a land treatment facility, a surface impoundment, an injection well, a
hazardous waste long-term storage facility or a surface storage facility.
15. Municipal Separate Stonn Sewer System
A.stormwater collection system within an incorporated area of a local government such as
a city or town.
16. Notice of Intent
The state application form which, when submitted to the Division, officially indicates the
facility's notice of intent to seek coverage under a general permit.
IT Overburden
Any material of any nature, consolidated or unconsolidated, that overlies a mineral
deposit, excluding topsoil or similar naturally occurring surface materials that are not
disturbed by mining operations.
18. Permittee
The owner or operator issued a certificate of coverage pursuant to this general permit.
19. Point Source Discharge of Stormwater
Any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance including, but not specifically limited
to, any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, or discrete fissure from which
stonnwater is or may be discharged to waters of the state.
20. Representative Storn Event
A storm event that measures greater than 0.1 inches of rainfall and that is preceded by at
least 72 hours in which no storm event measuring greater than 0.1 inches has occurred. A
single storm event may contain up to 10 consecutive hours of no precipitation. For
Part V, VI and V II Page 3 of 7

W
0
Permit No. NCG020000
example, if it rains for 2 hours without producing any collectable discharge, and then
stops, a sample may be collected ifa rain-prodking a discharge begins again within the
,r
next ] 0 hours.
21. Representative Outfall Status
When it is established that the discharge of stormwater runoff from a single outfall is
representative of the discharges at multiple outfalls, the DWQ may grant representative
outfall status. Representative outfall status allows the permittee to perform analytical
monitoring at a reduced number of outfalls.
22. Rinse Water Discharge
The discharge of rinse water from equipment cleaning areas associated with industrial
activity. Rinse waters from vehicle and equipment cleaning areas are process
wastewaters and do not include wastewaters utilizing; any type of detergent or cleaning
agent.
23. Secondary Containment
Spill containment for the contents of the single largest tank within the containment
structure plus sufficient freeboard to allow for the 25-year, 24-hour storm event.
24. Section 313 Water Priority Chemical
A chemical or chemical category which:
Is listed in 40 CFR 372.65 pursuant to Section 313 of Title III of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986, also titled the, Emergency
Planning and Community Right -to -Know Act of 1986;
b. Is present at or above threshold levels at a facility subject to SARA title III,
Section 313 reporting requirements; and
Meets at least one of the following criteria:
(1) Is listed in appendix D of 40 CFR part 122 on either Table 11 (organic
priority pollutants), Table III (certain metals, cyanides, and phenols) or
Table IV (certain toxic pollutants and hazardous substances);
(2) Is listed as a hazardous substance pursuant to section 31 1(b)(2)(A) of the
CWA at 40 CFR 1 16.4; or
(3) Is a pollutant for which E-PA has published acute or chronic water quality
criteria.
Part V, VI and VII Page 4 of 7

0 0
Permit No. NCG020000
25. Severe Property Damage
Means substantial physical damage to property, damage to the control facilities which
causes them to become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of natural resources
which can reasonably be expected to occur in the absence of a bypass. Severe property
damage does not mean economic loss caused by delays in production.
26. Significant Materials
Includes, but is not limited to: raw materials; fuels; materials such as solvents, detergents,
and plastic pellets; finished materials such as metallic products; raw materials used in
food processing or production; hazardous substances designated under section 101(14) of
CERCLA; any chemical the facility is required to report pursuant to section 313 of Title
Ill of SARA; fertilizers; pesticides; and waste products such as ashes, slag and sludge that
have the potential to be released with stonnwater discharges.
27. Significant Spills
Includes, but is not limited to: releases of oil or hazardous substances in excess of
reportable quantities under section 31 1 of the Clean Water Act (Ref: 40 CFR 110.10 and
CFR 117.21) or section 102 of CERCLA (Ref: 40 CFR 302.4).
28. Stormwater Runoff
The flow of water which results from precipitation and which occurs immediately
following rainfall or as a result of snowmelt.
29. Stonmwater Associated with Industrial AcjjyLty
The discharge from any point source which is used for collecting and conveying
storinwater and which is directly related to manufacturing, processing or raw material
storage areas at an industrial site. Facilities considered to be engaged in "industrial
activities" include those activities defined in 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14). The term does not
include discharges from facilities or activities excluded from the NPDES program.
30. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
A comprehensive site -specific plan which details measures and practices to reduce
stonnwater pollution and is based on an evaluation of the pollution potential of the site.
31. Ten Year Desi Storm
The precipitation event of a duration which will produce the maximum peak rate of
runoff for the watershed of interest resulting from a rainfall event of an intensity expected
to be equaled or exceeded, on the average, once in ten years.
Part V, V 1 and VII Page 5 of 7

DI
0
32. Total Flow
Permit No. NCG020000
The flow corresponding to the time period over which the sample collection occurs.
Total flow shall be either; (a) measured continuously, (b) calculated based on the amount
of area draining to the outfall, the amount of built -upon (impervious) area, and the total
amount of rainfall, or (c) estimated by the measurement of flow at 20 minute intervals
during the rainfall event.
33. Toxic Pollutant
Any pollutant listed as toxic under Section 307(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act,
34, UEset
Means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary
noncompliance with technology based permit effluent limitations because of factors
beyond the reasonable control of the penmittee. An upset does not include
noncompliance to the extent caused by operational error, improperly designed treatment
or control facilities, inadequate treatment or control facilities, lack of preventive
maintenance, or careless or improper operation.
Effect of an Upset.
An upset constitutes an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with
technology based permit effluent limitations if the requirements of paragraph c. of this
condition are met. No detenmination made during administrative review of claims that
noncompliance was caused by upset, and before an action for noncompliance, is final
administrative action subject to judicial review.
Conditions Necessary for a Demonstration of Upset
A permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate,
through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence that:
(1) An upset occurred and that the permittee can identify the cause(s) of the upset;
(2) The pcnnitted facility was at the time being properly operated; and
(3) The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required in Part 1V, E. 8 of` this
general permit.
(4) The permittee complied with any remedial measures required under Part 11, A. 2.
of this general permit.
Burden of Proof
In any enforcement proceeding the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of an
upset has the burden of proof.
Part V, V1 and VII Page 6 of 7

0
35. Vehicle Maintenance Activity
Permit No. NCG020000
Vehicle rehabilitation, mechanical repairs, painting, fueling, lubrication, vehicle cleaning
operations, or airport deicing operations.
36. Visible Sedimentation
Solid particulate matter, both mineral and organic, that has been or is being transported
by water, air, gravity, or ice from its site of origin which can be seen with the unaided
eye.
37. 25-year,_24-hour storm event
The maximum 24-hour precipitation event expected to be equaled or exceeded, on the
average, once in 25 years.
Part V, VI and VII Page 7 of 7