NCG020046_COMPLETE FILE - HISTORICAL_20071130

STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET i
NCG PERMITS
PERMIT NO.
/vC��a(�6�(0
DOC TYPEHISTORICAL
FILE
❑ MONITORING REPORTS
DOC DATE
❑ 3U
YYYYMMDD

Charlotte District
P.O. Box 7446
Charlotte, NC 28241-7446
Telephone [phone]
Fax [phone]
Aggregates
NOV 3 0 2007
November 29, 2007 NC DENR MRO CERTIFIED MAIL
TURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
DA-Surface Wafer Protecf 5 1820 0000 0465 3568
Ms. Marcia Allocco
Surface Water Protection Section
610 East Center Ave., Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Re: Letter of Deficiency, Martin Marietta's Arrowwood Quarry
NPDES Permit No_ NCG020046
Dear Ms. Allocco:
In response to the stormwater inspection conducted by Ms. Lespinasse on September 10, 2007 at Martin
Marietta's Arrowwood Quarry, I am providing information to address the concerns outlined in the
Compliance Evaluation Inspection.
1. Qualitative Monitoring will be initiated in accordance with the conditions of the NPDES permit_
Quarry personnel will be informed of the schedule and procedures required to conduct this
monitoring, and appropriate records will be maintained.
2. In accordance with the most recent SPCC regulations, it is our understanding that secondary
containment is not required for designated fuel dispensing areas (i.e. tanker transfer to bulk
storage or dispensing fuel for quarry vehicles). Our current SPCC Plan requires that the fuel
supplier have a spill containment kit available during the transfer of product. In addition, Martin
Marietta has on site absorbent pads, granular material, and booms to address incidental spills.
We feel that all feasible alternatives have been provided associated with fueling activities to
protect the waters of the State. However, it is our intention to maintain the standards established
by our company and implement good housekeeping practices, as well as, continue to educate all
employees to meet the desired standards set forth by our company.
The runoff from the vehicle wash area discharges as overland flow before reaching any area that
may cause concern. However, we will evaluate the implementation of passive and/or active
practices to address this issue.
3. The bulk oil containment structure has been cleaned and all material and waste removed.
4. In accordance with the most recent SPCC regulations, it is our understanding that secondary
-containment is not required for 55-gallon drums. As of July 1, 2009, these regulations will
require secondary containment for all drums and Martin Marietta will comply with these rules.
5. All stained soil from around the vehicle maintenance area will be removed and properly
disposed of

:
A sediment basin has been installed in the tailings disposal area. This basin will be maintained
as required.
7. Martin Marietta will determine the cause of the oil sheen on the water in the pit sump, and
repair any issues that are discovered. It is our intention to fully protect the waters of the state,
and not discharge contaminated water to the stream.
8. Representative outfall status was requested from DWQ on August 8, 2000. No response was
ever received for the request. A copy of this documentation will be sent to the quarry for their
records, and has been provided for your information.
9. An amendment and/or revision section will be added to the BPM Plan/SWPPP to document
updates that have been implemented.
This information should complete the requirements of the Notice of Deficiency. Should you have any
questions, please contact Richard Broughton at [phone].
Sincerely,
TIN MAFJETTA MATERIALS, INC.
Brian K. orth, PE
Manager, Engineering Services
6431DWQ Letter of Deficiency Response

Martin Marietta Aggregates
Charlotte District
P.O. Box 240635
Charlotte, North Carolina 28224-0635
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
August S, 2000
Mr. Tony Evans
NPDES Group
North Carolina DENR
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Re: Request for Representative Outfall Status - Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.
Arrowood, Asheboro, Bakers, Bessemer City, Bonds, Caldwell, Charlotte, Denver, Hickory,
Jamestown, Kannapolis, Kings Mtn., Maiden, Mallard Creek, Matthews, Pomona, Rocky
River, Salem, Statesville, Thomasville and Woodleaf Quarries
Dear Mr. Evans:
Based on our past conversations and subsequent meetings with your Department, I am officially
submitting two copies of each stormwater maps for the above referenced quarries. This request is
for Representative Outfall Status for-stormwater discharges from Land Disturbance, Process
Areas and Vehicle Maintenance Areas at our quarry locations, as indicated in the General Permits.
I have identified the outfall location for each sample type on the stormwater map for your review.
The land disturbance sample location for each site was based on current exposed areas (berm
construction or overburden removal) and the maximum acreage exposed. Process and Vehicle
Maintenance areas were located on the map, based on drainage features and actual topography of
each site. I plan to begin the stormwater sampling in September. I trust the information provided
is adequate for your review and approval. If any additional information is required, please feel
free to contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS, INC.
Brian K. North, PE
Sr. Environmental Engineer
Attachments gmeraRrep outfall satuts

OF W A rFq Michael F. Easley, Governor r
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
7 North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
p Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
October 29, 2007
Mr, Brian North
Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.
P.O. Box 7446
Charlotte, NC 28241-7446
Subject: NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY
Compliance Evaluation Inspection
NPDES Permit No. NCG020045
Arrowwood Facility
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. North:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Evaluation Inspection Report for the inspection conducted at
the subject facility on September 10, 2007, by Ms. Polly Lespinasse of this Office.
It is requested that a written response be submitted to this Office by November 29, 2007, addressing the
deficiencies noted in the Inspection Summary, Qualitative Monitoring, and, Permits and Outfalls
Sections of the report. In responding, please address your comments to the attention of Ms. Marcia Allocco.
The report should be self-explanatory, however, should you have any questions concerning this report, please
do not hesitate to contact Ms. Lespinasse or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Robert B. Krebs
Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
Enclosure
cc: Shelton Sullivan, DWO, NPS-ACO Unit
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301
Intemet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us Mooresville, NC 28115
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
North Carolina
Nfltura!!J
An Equal Opportunily/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

Compliance Inspection Report
Permit: NCG020045 Effective: 01/19/05 Expiration: 12/31/09 Owner: Martin Marietta Materials Inc
SOC: Effective: Expiration: Facility: Martin Marietta-Arrowwood
County: Mecklenburg 11325 Texiand Blvd
Region: Mooresville
Contact Person: Brian K North Title:
Directions to Facility:
System Classifications:
Primary ORC:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Related Permits:
Inspection Date: 09/10/2007 Entry Time: 09:00 AM
Primary Inspector: Polly Lespinasse
Secondary lnspector(s):
Charlotte NC 28217
Phone: [phone]
Certification:
Exit Time: 10:15 AM
Phone:
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

Permit: NGG020045 Owner - Facility: Martin Marietta Materials Inc
r
Inspection Date: 09/1012007 Inspection Typo: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Overall the facility appeared to be in general compliance. There were some minor issues associated with the storm water
pollution prevention plan. Qualitative monitoring has not been conducted at the facility. Discussed feasible alternatives
regarding providing secondary containment at fueling areas, providing containment for Vehicle wash areas (or recycling
the washwater). Some housekeeping issues were observed during the facility inspection. The oil storage containment .
area had both product and waste in it. There were some drums of petroleum being stored outside (not under cover and
not in containment). Petroleum contaminated soils were observed on the ground in the vehicle maintenance area.
Containment areas must be inspected and maintained. Petroleum contaminated soils must be excavated and properly
disposed of.
There was a land disturbance area that was not stabilized and a sediment basin had not been installed in the vicinity of
the discharge from this area. Appropriate erosion control measures must be installed and maintained.
An oil sheen was observed on the water surface in the mine pit. The water from this pit is pumped out into a settling cell
and reused, as was the process on the day of the inspection. However, when water is not required, the mine water is
pumped and discharged directly into a lake that then discharges to a stream. There are not treatment measures from the
discharge point to the stream (the lake that the water discharges to all provides attentuation for other properties located
around it. The source of oil in the pit must be determined and corrected.
Page: 2

F.
Permit: NCG020045 Owner - Facility: Martin Marietta Materials Inc
Inspection Date: 0911012007 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"?
®
n
n
❑
# 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
n
n
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
n
®
n
n
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
■
❑
n
n
# Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
®
Cl
❑
n
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
■
❑
n
n
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
■
❑
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
n
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program? ■ n ❑ n
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented? ■ n n n
Comment: An SWPPP is not required, but the facility has a document titled such.
Discussed feasible alternatives (i.e., providing secondary containment for fuel
dispensing areas, spill kits at fuel dispensing areas). The training log was not available
on site (kept in a different facility) and the training module did not include a specific
storm water section. The responsible parties list did not include the person that
conducts the routine facility inspections. Recommended adding an "plan update" page
as the plan should be updated annually (plan developed 06/07).
Qualitative Monitoring
Yes
No
NA
Nt
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually?
n
■
❑
❑
Comment: Qualititative monitoring has not been conducted and documented for this
facility.
Analytical Monitoring
Yes
No
NA
NE
Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring?
■
❑
❑
n
# Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring from Vehicle Maintenance areas?
■
n
Cl
❑
Comment: Facility has analyzed stormwater for all required parameters. None of the
parameters exceeded the cutoff concentration limits/benchmarks.
Permit and Outfalls
Yes
No
NA
NE
# Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site?
S
❑
n
❑
Page: 3

Permit: NCG020045 Owner - Facility: Martin Marietta Materials Inc
Inspection Date: 09110/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine•
# Were all outfalls observed during the inspection? ❑ n Q
# If the facility has representative outfall status, is it properly documented by the Division? ® Q 0 0
# Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non stormwater) discharges? ®❑
Comment: The facility has requested representative outfall status for the facility.
According to facility representatives, a response was not received from DWQ. The
facility roust provide documentation to DWQ to indicate that respresentative outfall
status was requested.
Page: 4

tia3�5 TeXIAJ 6W>
I N S Stormwater Questions for Facilities in BIMS Q rrn,.l�tnnr'
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Yes
No
I NA
NE
Does the site have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
❑
❑
❑
Site Plan
1. Does the Plan include a General Location (USGS) map?
❑
❑
❑
Facility location in relation to roads and surface waters. Includes: name of receiving stream or name of municipal
storm sewer system, and accurate lat. and long. of point of discharge. This helps the permittee to understand their
location with respect to receiving waters.
2. Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
❑
❑
I ❑
Should cover storage practices, loading and unloading areas, outdoor process areas, dust or particulate generating
or control processes, and waste disposal practices, etc.
3. Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and
Z'
❑
❑
❑
drainage areas?
Should show
• Location of industrial activities (storage areas, disposal areas, process areas, unloading and loading areas)
• The drainage structures
• Drainage areas for each outfall and activities occurring in the drainage area
• Building locations
• Existing BMPs and impervious surfaces and the % of each drainage area that is impervious
• For each outfall, a narrative description of the potential pollutants which could be expected to be present in the
stormwater discharge.
This forces permittee to analyze the site with relation to stormwater discharges. It is also a tool for the inspector to
understand if the site has changed over time, i.e. if site map does not match facility they must update their plan.
4. Does the Plan include a list of sig
scant s ills occurring during the past 3
ElElyears?
L
Needs to include corrective actions that were taken. The permittee needs to know what the reportable quantities are
for wastewater, oil pollution, and SARA Title Ill.
5. Have stormwater outfalls been evaluated for the presence of non-stormwater
�(
u
❑
❑
❑
discharges?
Signature required:
• Corporation - signed by Responsible Corporate Officer or assigned manager
• Partnership or Sole Proprietorship — General Partner or the Proprietor
• Municipality, State, Federal, or other public agency — either principal executive officer or ranking elected official
Comments:

NCS Stormwater Questions for Facilities in RIMS
Stormwater Management Plan
Yes
No
NA
NE
1. Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
❑
❑
❑
Provide a review of the technical and economic feasibility of changing the methods of operations and/or
storage practices to eliminate or reduce exposure of materials and processes to stormwater.
• in areas where elimination of exposure is not practical, the stormwater management plan shall document the
feasibility of diverting the stormwater runoff away from areas of potential contamination.
2. Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
I ❑
V ❑ r ❑
• Applies to liquid raw materials, manufactured products, waste materials, or by-products
• Single AST capacity > 660 gallons
• Multiple AS containers in close proximity to each other with a total combined capacity of > 1,320
• If connected to SW conveyance; controlled by manually activated valves or other similar devices? (Closed?)
• Collected water observed for color, foam, outfall staining, visible sheens, and dry weather flow prior to release
• Document individual making observation, description of water, date, and time of release (RR=5 yrs)
3. Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
1 0'
❑
I ❑
I ❑
Narrative description of BMPs to be considered including oil and grease separation, debris control, vegetative filter
strips, infiltration and stormwater detention or retention, where necessary.
■ The need for structural BMPs shall be based on the assessment of potential sources to contributb significant
quantities of pollutants to stormwater discharges and data collected through monitoring of stormwater
discharges.
4. Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
❑ I
❑
I ❑
• Assessment of potential pollutant sources based on materials inventory of the facility
• Facility personnel responsible for implementing the SPRP shall be identified
• Responsible person shall be on -site at all times during facility operations that have the potential to
contaminate stormwater runoff through spills or exposure of materials associated with the facility operations.
5. Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping
r
�I
❑
❑
❑
Plan?
• Document schedules of inspections and maintenance activities of stormwater control systems, plant
equipment and systems
• Inspect material handling areas
• Regular cleaning schedules of these areas
6. Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
❑ j ❑ 1
❑
• Provide at a minimum, annual training for all personnel including: proper spill response, cleanup procedures,
preventative maintenance activities for all personnel involved in any of the facility's operations that have
the potential to contaminate stormwater runoff
• Develop training schedule and identify facility personnel responsible for implementing the training
nn
HA a IrAm'?v"Q._ La i t ed bu emD a ec-f, � j to
j
J

NCS Stormwater Questions for Facilities in BIMS
Yes
No
NA
NE
7. Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Parties?
15T
❑
❑
❑
Identify position responsible for the overall coordination, development;�mplementation, and revision of the SPPP
8. Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
I [v"
❑
j ❑
I ❑
Have there been any changes to the design, construction, operation, or maintenance of the facility, which would have
a significant effect on the potential for the discharge of pollutants to surface waters? Does plan include changes?
C (14)ej &) 0 1
-
9. Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
1 ❑
❑
❑
• Inspect at a minimum semiannually once in Fall (Sept. -Nov) and once in Spring (Apr -June)
• Inspection and subsequent maintenance activities performed shall be documented
o Record date and time
o Individual performing inspection
o Narrative description of the stormwater outfall and plant equipment and systems
• Records should be incorporated into the SPPP
10. Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
❑
❑
❑
Have they done what they said they were going to do and have they documented it. Examples include:
• Monitoring and measurements including sampling data
• Inspections
• Maintenance activities
• Training provided to employees
• Activities to implement BMPs associated with industrial activities including vehicle maintenance. (RR=5 yrs)
Comments:
Qualitative Monitoring
Yes
No
NA
NE
1. Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually?
❑
❑
❑
Sampling in Spring (April -June) and Fall (September -November)
Color Odor Clarity Floating Solids
Suspended solids Foam Oil Sheen Other indicators
Comment: II ll i
Cpn�ucf �1�e./e. aiial � 'cz .l S a(c l��'
�a U� � � 4
2L� S
�U�A�� Va+t�l e. mOn ,�Qr�• i14Clti�t C�11 1JZ; n C� C�slO1C��

NCS Stormwater Questions for Facilities in BIMS
Analytical Monitoring
Yes
No
NA
NE
1. Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring?
9
❑
❑
❑
2. Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring from Vehicle Maintenance
lir
❑
El
Elareas?
Comment:
Q Gr�, '
SAmP1lnc �11
� pr�Qom-+
J
0 C4t10 4-/
Permit and Outfalls
Ye
No
NA
NE
1. Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site?
❑
❑
❑
2. Were all outfalls observed during the inspection?
❑
❑
❑
❑
3. If the f cility has re}presentative ojutfall status; has it been documented by the
� 0. i
d
❑
ElDivision?
UM, 5 Q# f ¢. fli•1�
4. Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non stormwater) discharges?
❑
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
COLA1 Ve C�e�,�e�
A • . �►'G��
<
i��
Po,' S��e
(L4noU
30e,6
SA �2©r ���`� �c� # -taker,)
( Q��c(
— �►���1 �St � �� Ow W4�5�2 Q,rec�,
— �1i� Sr\ Wa ce- 1n �iT

f
f
- tf

a
A(rovhocccl
NCG Stormwater Questions for Facilities in BIMS
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
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?
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?
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
Comment:
Qualitative Monitoring
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually?
Comment: 1 y } 1i
Rll
Analytical Monitoring
Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring?
Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring from Vehicle Maintenance areas?
Comment:
_30 % SA PAP} .5 �C,)Le j TronA,_ JA-MQ 0 ��# I
Permit and Outfalls
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; has it been documented by the Division?
LHas the facility evaluated all illicit (non stormwater) discharges?
Comment:
Yes
No
NA
NE
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
R
❑
❑
❑
2
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
z
❑
❑
❑
R
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
2
❑
❑
❑
Yes
No
NA
NE
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
QK
❑
❑
Yes
No
NA
NE
❑
❑
❑
❑
©
❑
❑
❑
z
❑
❑
❑
Yes
No
NA
NE
❑
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
2'
❑
❑
❑
EJ
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑