NCG550248_Emails_20180604

Strickland, Bev
From:
Graznak, Jenny
Sent:
Monday, June 04, 2018 9:27 AM
To:
Weaver, Charles
Subject:
RE: NCG550248 - should I make it Inactive?
Sounds good. Thank you, Charles.
From: Weaver, Charles
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2018 9:24 AM
To: Graznak, Jenny <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: NCG550248 - should I make it Inactive?
We can make the permit Inactive due to no response from the permittee. Paying the annual fees in a permit condition
which the owner has repeatedly violated.
I recommend we make it Inactive and be done with it. There are too many active discharges that we know about to
keep this CoC active when nothing has been built.
CHW
From: Graznak, Jenny
Sent: Monday, June 4, 2018 9:16 AM
To: Weaver, Charles <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: NCG550248 - should I make it Inactive?
Oh boy. I guess we can't rescind the permit unless they request to have it rescinded....
Shall we push them to rescind or just inactivate? Which do you think makes more sense long term since it seems like this
is not the appropriate permit for them?
From: Weaver, Charles
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2018 8:48 AM
To: Graznak, Jenny <[e-mail]>
Subject: NCG550248 - should I make it Inactive?
Jenny — this site was last inspected by Jen Kreamer in December 2012. At that time, nothing had been constructed.
She noted I her report that a new AtC would be required, and that an updated review of discharge alternatives should
be conducted.
Randy Culler hasn't paid any annual fees, ever. Do you want to have someone drive by the site, or should I just make
this one Inactive?
As always, thanks for your help.
Charles H. Weaver
Environmental Specialist
N.C. Division of Water Resources
N.C. Department of Environmental Quality
1

919-807-6391
ch arles.weaverancdenr.aov
(mailing address) 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed
to third parties.