NCG020701_COMPLETE FILE - HISTORICAL_20130617

STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET
NCG PERMITS
PERMIT NO.
,v �� a a o To l
DOC TYPE
C4 HISTORICAL FILE
❑ MONITORING REPORTS
DOC DATE
❑ 4 ?0) 3 b � I �
YYYYM M DD

SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL. SERVICES Inc.
June 17, 2013
Mr, Robert D. Patterson, P.E.
Stormwater Permitting Unit
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Dear Mr. Patterson:
�U� iZ2Cv..���Tu S�lNG� Y"�iS
This is in regards to the Bonney Bright Sand Mine located at 100 Marsh
Causeway, Knotts Island, Currituck County, North Carolina. The mine operates under
General Permit No. NCG 0200000 and COC NCG020701.
Enclosed please find the I" half CY 2013 Semi -Annual Qualitative Stormwater-
Mine Dewatering Visual Mine Inspection Report.
If you have any questions regarding the information contained herein, please do
not hesitate to contact me at business cell [phone], Email: Rharoldiones(a�aot.com
or the letterhead address. D R @
Fit U
Sincerely,
R. Harold Jones, P
President
CC: Mr. Bonney G. Bright
-NC DWQ Central Files (2 Copies)
emeritus
N 0 2013
1513 SANDBRIDGE ROAD, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456
Business Cell [phone], FAX [phone], Email: [e-mail]

wl
,. _tit .a L, •mot•.. r

Semi -Annual Qualitative Stormwater-Mine Dewatering
Visual Mine Inspection Report
June 2013
Outfall #001
WCS #7
Bonney Bright Sand Mine
Currituck County
North Carolina
Date: June 4, 2013
Time: 1630
Outfall Location: Outfall #001, (WCS #7)
Inspector: R. Harold Jones, PWS, emeritus
Inspection Items:
Color
Frequency
Monitoring
Conditions/Comments/Findings/
Location
Results
Odor
Semi -Annual
Outfall 4001
No Odor
Clarity
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
Slightly cloudy —seasonal algal
bloom in stagnant water behind
WCS
Floatin Solids
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
None observed
Suspended
Semi -Annual
Outfal1 #001
None observed -Reported
Solids
empirically on a semi-annual
basis
Foam
Semi -Annual
Outfall 4001
None observed
Oil Sheen
Semi -Annual
OutfaIl #001
None observed
Deposition at or
Semi -Annual
Outfal1 ##001
None observed
Immediately
Below Outfall

P,

Erosion at or
Semi -Annual
Outfal1 #001
None Observed
Immediately
Below the
Outfal I
Other obvious
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
None Observed
Indicators of
Stormwater
Pollution
Discharge
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
No Flow (discharge) over
Volume at Time
flashboard riser since
of Inspection
3 April 2012

K
ISIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, Inc.
April 8, 2009
Mr. Robert D. Patterson, A.E.
Stormwater Permitting Unit
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27-699-1617
Dear Mr. Patterson:
This is in regards to the Bonney Bright Sand Mine located at 100 Marsh
Causeway, Knotts Island, Currituck County, North Carolina. The mine operates under
General Permit No. NCG 020000 and COC NCG020701.
Enclosed please find the following information and data for the I" Quarter CY
2009 reporting period:
- Mine Pump Volume Discharge Log
- On -site Precipitation Data
- DMRs
- Chloride Analysis - Mine Pump Discharge Point
If you have any questions regarding the enclosed informatioi
hesitate to contact me at business cell [phone], Email at Rha
or the letterhead address. Thank you for your consideration of this mdtt�l
Sincerely,
V w.-_
R. Harold Jones, P
President
CC: Mr. Bonney G. Bright
NC DWQ Central Files (2 copies)
1513 SANDBRIDGE ROAD, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456
BLisiness Cell [phone] fax [phone]

Bonney Bright Sand Mine
Currituck County
2009 Mine Pump Discharge Log
MGD
r��MM�
1 • 1 :
1 : �
1 � 11

2009 On -Site Precipitation Data
KM
* Precipitation for the winter storm of March 1, 2 and 3 was collected as a total on March
3, 2004.

,.
_
'�
,
'
�•
. _; � �_ I �
�
`
r_
�
_ 1 _ 1 � _
i
�
�
�!
,
�_ �
�!
�,
�
r
c
tl
i
4
1
__ .._
�
��;
�
_ _
I_
t !I
- 1
!
''
_
4..
��
_ .f _
!
, 1 r
-
i , !
�
�!
' '
;
,
_
,
�.
._ - - - __.. - _ .._ ... S �_ ...- _ �
�.
4
_ _ i -- � i
� I
� i•
.. 4Y}i i�' 3�l� � � r � �. _l��; ii �. � � �r ���. .. � ,� iIJ; _'� 1,, �. �'S1, l� l�.. 1.1i .I�. � '1 F .-I.���1��y ��f�
, it r

PROCESS/MINE DEWATERING WASTEWATER DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT (DMR)
Please Mail Original And One Copy To Mailing Address Below
GENERAL PERMIT NO. NCG020000
Part A,- Facility Information
Samples Collected in Quarter- 10 2O 3Q 4 (all samples shall be reported within 30 days following monitoring period)
jcl-k o-)
Certificate Of Coverage No. NCG02 _ (9 .:F o1 County of Facility
Facility Name P-5mrvNK 2R-ic-*r SAW4 Co. Name of Laboratory �T2�stiP���S Lr�/3d2�T�2reS
Facility Contact 'YYt2• -Aj VV CO. I'va-44161-7- Lab Certification # VS at°4 Opo4-d
Facility Contact Phone No. { S:7) 7a1-- S Sa.3
Part B: Process Wastewater and Mine Dewatering Wastewater Monitoring Requirements
Outfail
Number
Receiving Stream Name
Date
Sample Collected
50050
00400
00530
00076
00545
Daily Flowt
pH
Total Suspended Solids
Turbidity
Settleable Solids
001-
mo/d!Vyr
MGD
unit
m
NTUs
mill
oc��
►4CK
of-��-off
©,��8
G zB
!o. S
C,
D-I
00
3,4-eK
��-���pi
O.2o3
6•qq
g.o
i 0
Ca11
eon
�� (v'
d�--off-o
D,��g
6`
$
7.s
{4• r
1 Measured continuously using a flow measuring device or estimated using manufacturer's pump curves and pump logs.
Part C: CertfTcation
"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."
( ignatuyreefzPermi ) (Date)
Part D: Mailing Address 7
Attn. Central Files, DENR, N.C. Division of Water Quality, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 276"-1617
S W U-244-012005

ti
3 CYPRESS AVENUE
VIRGINIA BEACH. VA 23451
TELEPHONE [phone]
FACSIMILE 757/422/9176
CoM Kate of Malysls
SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
TO ATTN: HAROLD JONES
1513 SANDBRIDGE RD.
VIRGiNIA BEACH, VA 23456
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION Water
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS
DATA 01 / 15/09
ANALYSIS NUMBER 09-0085
Sample received:
01/07/09 @ 1500
Sample collected:
01/07/09 @ 0755
Sample marked:
Outfall #1(WCS #7) NC Mime
Sampled by:
J. Haynes of J.L.I.
DATE & TIME
ANALYSIS
SOU S MOOD
QLANALYSIS
ANALYST
PH
6.28 SM 18" Edition
01/07/09 @ 0757
JH
4500 H+B
Settleable Solids
<0.1 mg/L SM 18' Edition
01/08/09 @ 1300
LS
2540 F
Total Suspended Solids
10.5 mg/L SM 18'h Edition
01/13/09 @ 0940
LS
2540 D
Turbidity
6.5 NTU SM 18" Edition
01/08/09 @ 1210
LS
2130 B
Chloride
38.4 mg/L SM 18" Edition
01/08/09 @ 1430
HH
4500 Cl-B
r1wwnk4 a-'71 1.

S
3 CYPRESS AVENUE
VIRGINIA BEACH. VA 23451
TELEPHONE [phone]
FACSIMILE 757/422/9176
Certificate of Analysis
SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
To ATTN: HAROLD JONES
1513 SANDBRIDGE RD.
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23456
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS
DATE 01 / 15/09
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION
Water
ANALYSIS NUMBER
09-0085
Sample received:
01/07/09 @ 1500
Sample collected:
01 /07/09 @ 0755
Sample marked:
Outfall #1(WCS #'n NC Mine
Sampled by:
J. Haynes of J.L.I.
DATE & TIME
ANALYSIS
RE -HUMS WETHOD
QE ANALYSIS
ANALYST'
l pH
6.28 SM 18t' Edition
01 /07/09 @ 0757
JH
4500 H+B
Settleable Solids
<0.1 mg/L SM 181 Edition
01/08/09 @ 1300
LS
2540 F
Total Suspended Solids
10.5 mg/L SM 18" Edition
0]/13/09 @ 0940
LS
2540 D
Turbidity
6.5 NTU SM 181h Edition
01/08/09 @ 1210
LS
2130 B
Chloride
38.4 mg/L SM 18" Edition
01/08/09 @ 1430
HH
4500 Cl-B
rj%�krt '�ez' a2-.

1118 CYPRESS AVENUE
VIRGtNIA BEACH, VA 23451
TELEPHONE 757/425/T498
FACSIMILE 757/422/9176
Certificate of Analysis
TO SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ATTN: HAROLD JONES
1513 SANDBRIDGE RD,
VIRGWIA BEACH, VA 23456
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION Water
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS
DATE 03/ 12/09
ANALYSIS NUMBER 09-0806
Sample received:
03/04/09 @ 1400
Sample collected:
03/04/09 @ 1125
Sample marked:
Out -fall 41 (WCS #7) NC Mine
Sampled by:
J. Haynes of J.L.I.
DATE & TIME
ANALYSIS
RESULTS METHOD
OF ANALYSIS
ANALYST
pH
6.64 SM 18`h Edition
03/04/09 @ 1128
JH
4500 H-B
Settleable Solids
<0.1 mg/L SM 18'hEdition
03/05/09 @ 1000
LS
2540 F
Total Suspended Solids
8.1 mg/L SM 18" Edition
03/09/09 @ 1005
LS
2540 D
Turbidity
7.5 NTU SM 18" Edition
03/05/09 @ 1320
LS
2130 B
Chloride
40.9 mg/L SM 18"' Edition
03/06/09 @ 1530
HH
4500 Cl-B
Comment: 2.5" Overflow .- 0, 1�-s 3 'Lti" C- C)
Chemist
OFRCIAL METHOOS OF AO O.C.S., A, ..M„ E,PA, AP.H V USED W All. ANALYSIS UNLESS OTHEAWrE STATED.

ISIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Inc.
January 22, 2009
Mr. Robert D. Patterson, P.E.
Stormwater Permitting Unit
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27-699-1617
Dear Mr. Patterson:
/oil fto
JA N 2 6 2009
DENR
wetlands � ER QUALITY
n"K'ater Braru:�,
This is in regards to the Bonney Bright Sand Mine located at 100 Marsh
Causeway, Knotts Island, Currituck County, North Carolina. The mine operates under
General Permit No. NCG 020000 and COCNCG020701?
Enclosed please find the following:
- DMR for the 4ch Quarter CY 2008
• 2008 Mine Pump Volume Discharge Log
- 2008 On -site Precipitation Data
• Copies of chloride analysis taken at the mine pump discharge point for
the 41h Quarter 2008.
- Semi -Annual Qualitative Monitoring Report
If you have any questions regarding the enclosed information, please do not
hesitate to contact me at business cell [phone], Email at Rharoldjones(a)aol.com
or the letterhead address. Thank you for your consideration of this matter
Sincerely,
R. Harold Jones,
President
CC: Mr. Bonney G. Bright
NC DWQ Central Files (2 copies)
1513 SANDBRIDGE ROAD, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456
Business Cell [phone] fax [phone]

PROCESS/MINE DEWATERING WASTEWATER DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT (DMR)
Please Mail Original And One Copy To Mailing Address Below
GENERAL PERMIT NO. NCG020000
Part A: Facility Information
Samples Collected In Quarter: 10 20 3 4 (all samples shall be reported within 30 days following monitoring period)
ccr.� apt
Certificate Of Coverage No. NCG02 Q % — County of Facility e c mat r�u!
Facility Name VetiLtfa'.Y Bl-lf�{r SRC eo • Name of Laboratory >-0/4,es
Facility Contact Lab Certification # US ER'4 boD4Fd
Facility Contact Phone No.
Part B: Process Wastewater and Mine Dewatering Wastewater Monitoring Requirements
Outfall
Number
Receiving Stream Name
Date
Sample Collected
50050
00400
00530
00076
00545
Daily Flowl
pH
Total Suspended Solids
'Turbidity
Settleable Solids
mo/dd/
MGD
unit
m
NTUs
mVl
l
��jj
//i te'7 a -<
1-V / �! d 5,
ev, P—o
her+7-
Se 3
iJ
t�,
S' o
0, 2 3
(Q. 22-
a
a a
< o. l
Oo
3 c4cl�E' 13
! 3
I Measured Continuously using a flow measuring device or estimated using manufacturer's pump curves and pump logs.
Part C: 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."
ignature of Permittee (Date
Part D: Mailing Address
Attn: Central Files, DENR, N.C. Division of Water Quality, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
S W U-244-012005

Bonney Bright Sand Mine
Currituck County, NC
2008 Mine Pump Discharge Log
MGD
2008
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
Ju
Au
Set
Oct
Nov
Dec
__P�ay
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.768
0.864
0.888
0.811
0.408
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.768
0.864
0.888
0.836
0
0.888
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.768
0
0.888
0.663
0.943
0.663
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.792
0.864
0.456
0.624
0.811
0.616
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.768
1 0.864
0.470
0
0.888
0.616
6
0
0 1
0
0
0
0
0
0.864
0.888
0.811
0.943
0.616
7
0
0
0
0
0
0.180
0.768
0.864
0
0.861
0.888
0.616
8
0
0
0
0
0
0.765
0.768
0.864
0.888
0.768
0.768
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
0.765
0.816
0.864
1 0,888
0.624
0
0.888
10
0
0
0
0
0
0.765
0.768
0
0.971
0.624
1 0.943
0.888
11
0
0
1 0
0
0
0.765
0.864
0.918
0.888
0.663
0.768
0915
12
0
0
0
0
0
0.765
0.864
0.864
0.624
0
0.792
0.943
13
0
0
0
0
0
0.765
0
0.864
0.624
0.811
0.768
0.616
14
0
0
0
0
0
0.765
1.008
0.918
0
0.811
0.943
0
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.039
0.864
0.864
0.861
0943
0.616
16
0
0
0
0
0
0.765
1.008
0.864
0.888
0.811
0
0.663
17
0
0
0
0
0
0.765
1.008
0
0.888
0.811
0.943
0.616
18
0
0
0
0
0
6.720
1.008
0.918
0.816
0.811
0.888
0.663
19
0
0
0
0
0
0.720
1.008
0.864
0.456
0
0.924
0.616
20
1 0
0
0
0
0
0.720
0
0.918
0.456
0.888
0.768
0.666
21
0
0
0
0
0
0.720
1.008
0.918
0
0.943
0.768
0
22
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.008
0.864
0.811
0.811
0.663
0.811
23
0
0
0
0
0
0.720
1.008
0.918
0.811
0.470
0
0.836
24
0
0
0
0
0
0.720
1.071
0
0.861
0.456
0.888
0.616
25
1 0
0
0
0
0
0.720
1.071
0.918
0.811
0.456
0.943
0.616
26
0
0
0
0
0
0.720
1.071
0.891
0934
0
0.811
0.616
27
0
0
0
0
0
0.720
0
1 0.918
0.934
1 0.811
0.616
0.616
28
0
0
0
0
1 0
0.720
1.071
0.864
0
0.811
0.6630
29
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.440
0.864
0.768
0.484
0.456
0.811
30
1 0
0
0
0
0.720
1.008
0.864
0.768
0.624
0
0.836
31
1 0
0
1.008
0
0.624
0.616

. : r.. ..
�.
.� �
_ T
-
�'
„r �
•
• .f. -
.. t.l 1k
�
'f rl
� .
i f.
5
,
t � ..
�
_ _
..
.
• . 5
�
�
y
.•f . 5
�
- .. Ir.
1. a�
� ,
� _, ,
. ,
.. 4'
f 11j
�
� f ,
'��
ti
!
� i,
r :f
� � ,
.. r..
.q
r
..
+.
__ .. _ ... _ .
...
I-
_
_

Bonney Bright Sand Mine
2008 On -Site Precipitation Data
Inches
�■■■�����
mom■
■■mm
K��
m1m

i.
t �"mnps�illlloratm�es-� _,
. J CYPRESS AVENUE
ViRGINIA BEACH, VA 23451
TELEPHONE [phone]
FACSIMILE 757/422/9176
Cerdiicate of Analysis
SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
TO ATTN: HAROLD JONES
1513 SANDBRIDGE RD.
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23456
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS
DATE 12/11 rob
sAr41'LE 9SCR1PWN- -- -Water
- -.. 444-1 vss Wk4MR
08-4800
Sample received: 12/03/08 @ 1400
Sample collected: 12/03/08 @ 1140
Sample marked: Outfall #1 (WCS #7) NC Mine
Sampled by: J. Haynes of U.I.
DATE & TIME
ANALYSIS
RESULTS METHOD
OF ANAL-YS15
ANALYST
.pH
6.20 SM 18' Edition
12/03/08 @ 1143
JH
4500 H'B
Settleable Solids <0.I mg/L SM 18" Edition
12/04/08 @ 0930
LS
2540 F
Total Suspended Solids 3.6 mg/L SM 18" Edition
12/08/08 @ 1350
LS
2540 D.
Turbidity
&0 NTU SM 18" Edition
12/04/08 @ 1045
LS
2130 B
Chloride
40.8 mg/L SM 18'b Edition
12/04/08 @ 1130
HH
4500 Cl-B
NOTE: About 3.0" Overflow

18 CYPRESS AVENUE
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23451
TELEPHONE [phone]
FACSIMILE 7571422/9176
Certificate of Analysis
SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
TO AT-fN: HAROLD JONES
1513 SANDBRIDGE RD.
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23456
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION Water
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS
DATE11/13/08
ANALYSIS NUMBER 08-4431
Sample received: 11/05/08 @ 1530
Sample collected: 11/05/08 @ 0915
Sample marled: Outfall #1 (WCS #7) NC Mine
Sampled by: J. Haynes of J.L.I.
DATE & TIME
ANALYSIS
RESULTS METWOR
OF ANALYSIS
ANALYST
pH
6.22 SM 18' Edition
11/05/08 @ 0917
JH
4500 H+B
Settleable Solids
<0.I mg/L SM 18`h Edition
11/06/08 @ 1220
LS
2540 F
Total Suspended Solids 29.7 mg/L SM 18' Edition
11/10/08 @ 1220
LS
2540 D
Turbidity
24 NTU SM 181, Edition
11/06/08 @ 1125
LS
2130 B
Chloride
40.5 mg/L SM 18" Edition
11/06/08 @ 1330
HH
4500 Cl-B
NOTE: 3.5" Above Overflow
1

I' ia�ai'slu�ties e
1 i 18 CYPRESS AVENUE
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23451
TELEPHONE [phone]
FACSIMILE 7571422/9176
Certificate of Analysis
To SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ATTN: HAROLD JONES
1513 SANDBRIDGE RD.
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23456
SAMPLE DESCRFMN Water
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS
DATE 10rM08
ANALYSIS NlA180 08-4179
Sample received: 10/15/09 @ 1230
Sample collected: 10/15/08 @ 1015
Sample marked: Outfall #1 (WCS #7) NC Mine
Sampled by: J. Haynes of J.L.I.
DATE & TIME
MALYSIS RESULTS METHOD
OF ANALYSIS
ANALYST
l
PH 6.37 SM 18ie Edition
10/15108 @ 1017
JH
4500 WB
Settleable Solids <0.1 mg/L SM 18" Edition
10/16/08 @ 1100
LS
2540 F
Total Suspended Solids 5.3 mg/L SM 18d'Edition
10/20/08 @ 1125
LS
2540 D
Turbidity 9.5 NTU SM I e Edition
10/ 16/08 @ 1040
LS
2130 B
Chloride 43.0 mg/L SM 18'd Edition
10/15/08 @ 1500
HH
4500 CI -B

MOM
CYPRESS AVENUE
VIRGINIA. BEACH, VA 23451
i=I-PHONE [phone]
GA^5!MILE 757/422/9176
Certificate of Analysis
SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
TO ATTN: HAROLD JONES
1513 SANDBRIDGE RD.
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23456
SAMPLE DESCRIP-90N Water
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS
DATE
ANALYSIS NUMBER
10/14/08
Sample received: 10/13/08 @ 1135
Sample collected: 10/13/08
Sample marked: OutfaO #1 (WCS #') NC Mine
Sampled by: J. Haynes of J.L.I.
DATE & TIME
ANALYSIS
RESULTS METHOD OF ANALYSIS
ANALYST
I pH
No Flow SM 18'd Edition
JH
4500 H+B
Settable Solids No Flow SM 18' Edition
LS
2540 F
Total Suspended Solids No Flow SM 18'b Edition
LS
2540 D
Turbidity
No Flow SM i 8`h Edition
LS
2130 B
Chloride
No Flow SM 18' Edition
HH
4500 Cl-B
Comment: About 4.5" From Top
ChpmM /�/'q

k f�S l8�P8t�1'�8-c�
; CYPRESS AVENUE
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23451
TELEPHONE [phone]
FACSIMILE 757/422/9176
Certificate of Analysis
t0 SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ATT N: HAROLD JONES
1513 SANDBRIDGE RD.
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23456
SAME DEsCRWM Water
Sample received:
12/03/08 @ 1400
Sample collected:
12/03/08 @ 1125
Sample location:
Bonney Bright Sand Pit (Currituck, NC)
Sample marked:
Pump Outfall
Sampled by:
J. Haynes of J.L.I.
Chloride
Chemist
BELTS
43.5 mg/L
METHOD
SM 18" Edition
4500 Cl-B
DATE & TIME
F ANALYSIS
12/05/08 @ 1530
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS
DATE 12/08/08
,a"w.rS" iw1 E' 08-4995
ANALYST

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS
1118 CYPRESS AVENUE
nGINIA BEACH, VA 23451
_PHONE [phone]
FACSIMILE 757/42219176
CerUflcate of Analysis
To SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
AT'TN: HAROLD JONES
1513 SANDBRIDGE RD.
ViRGINIA BEACH, VA 23456
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION water
Sample received:
11/05/08 @ 1530
Sample couected:
11/05/08 @ 0900
Sample location:
Bonney Bright Sand Pit (Cur ituck, NC)
Sample marked:
Pump Outfall
Sampled by,
J. Haynes of J.L.I.
Chloride
39.0 mg/L
METHOD
SM IS" Edition
4500 Cl-B
DATE 11 /07/08
ANALYSIS NUMBER 08-4430
DATE & TIME
OF ANALYSIS
11 /06/09 @ 1300
i10-1109

ANALYTICAL C14EMISTS
III
i 1 18 CYPRESS AVENUE
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23451
TELEPHONE [phone]
FACSIMILE 757/42219176
Certificate of Analysis
SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 10/30/08
To ATTN-. HAROLD JONES DATE
1513 SANDBRIDGE RD.
VIRGRQA BEACH, VA 23456
Water 08-4312
SAWU � Sample received: 10/27/08 @ 1500 MALYZ NUMBIR
Sample collected: 10/27/08 @ 1020
Sample location: Bonney Bright Sand Fit (Carritack, NC)
Sample marked: Pump OuEtfall
Sampled by: J. Haynes of J.L.I.
DATE & TIME
$ESUIn METHOD OEANALYSIS ANALYST
Chloride 39.7 mg/L SM I r Edition 10/30/08 @ 1500 HH
4500 Cl-B

Semi -Annual Qualitative Stormwater-Mine Dewatering
Visual Mine Inspection Report
Outfall #001
WCS#7
Bonney Bright Sand Mine
Currituck County
North Carolina
Date: December 26, 2008
Time: 1300
Outfall Location: Outfall #001, WCS #7
Inspector: R. Harold Jones, PWS
Inspection Items:
Color
Frequency
Monitoring
Conditions/Comments/
Location
Findings/ Results
Odor
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001/WCS #7
No Odor
Clarity
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001 /WCS #7
Clear
Floatinp, Solids
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001/WCS#7
None Observed
Suspended
Semi -Annual
OutfalI 4001/WCS#7
None Observed -Reported
Solids
Empirically on a Quarterly
Basis
Foam
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001/WCS#7
None Observed
Oil Sheen
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001/WCS#7
None Observed
Deposition at or
Semi -Annual
Outfall 4001 /WCS#7
None Observed
Immediately
Below Outfall
Erosion at or
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001/WCS#7
None Observed
Immediately
Below the
Outfall

,3. xY� '.
.. _ n
.�r' .
• i
. ... _
... � . .L, _
� i1f' .. , .
. _L
.. � �. � � .. �• 1. � a � L _ � � ., .

Other obvious
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001/WCS#7
None Observed
Indicators of
Stormwater
Pollution
Discharge
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001/WCS47
Approximately 1.0 inch
Volume at Time
flow overtop of flashboard
of Inspection
riser

-sPG[ rl Lt�S
SKJMA F'.NVIRONMI:.`,NI AL S1 RVICI S Inc;_
October 10, 2008
Mr. Robert D. Patterson, P.E.
Stormwater Permitting Unit
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27-699-1617
Dear Mr. Patterson:
This is in regards to the Bonney Bright Sand Mine located at 100 Marsh
Causeway, Knotts Island, Currituck County, North Carolina. The mine operates under
General Permit No. NCG 020000 and COC NCG020701.
Enclosed please find the following:
• DMR 3d Quarter CY 2008
• 2008 Mine Pump Discharge Log
• 2008 On -site Precipitation Data
• Copies of Chloride analysis performed by Jennings Laboratories, Inc. for
the 3Td Quarter 2008.
Please note that the chloride sample taken on September 08, 2008 provides a
reading of 1,365.0 mg/L. The excessive chloride level is a result of the ambient waters of
Back Bay rising high enough to overtop the highest flashboard riser at water control
structure 47 (Permitted outfall #001). This condition happens periodically when sustained
strong southerly winds prevail creating a higher than normal "wind tide" in Back Bay and
its tributaries. Therefore, the chloride sample taken on September 08, 2008 constitutes a
non -representative discharge sample.
No sampling for pH, settleable solids, total suspended solids or turbidity was
undertaken for the quarter. This was due to an apparent
miscommunication/misunderstanding with the testing laboratory. I met with the office
manager this morning and have directed them to collect and analyze all required
parameters beginning Monday October 13, 2008, and thereafter monthly, rather than
quarterly, as required by the permit. As I mentioned to you this morning, I will forward
the results of the analysis to you by the end of next week.
1513 SANDBRIDG1, ROAD, VIItCiINIA BEACH, VIRCINIA 23456
BLISHICSS C C11 [phone] fay (757) 426-51=45

Thank you for your consideration of this matter. If you have any questions
regarding the enclosed information, please do not hesitate to contact me at business cell
[phone], Email at Rharoldiones Waoi.com or the letterhead address.
Sincerely,
R. Harol'd Jones, PWS
President ,
CC: Mr. Bonney G. Bright

PROCLSS/ii1NI I )NEAT FRING WAS'I ENVA E'R I)ISCIiAKC-,I'' iN'IONI 1 OkING KEPOR I (IINIR)
Pleas Mall Original And One Coley To Madill" Address Belo k.
Gi:11ERAL Pi~;i MIT NO. NCCO20000
Pfirl A- 1-cr:•dill biJ„rilialion
Saniples Collected Ili Quarter:-I0_'U__Q samples sliall be reported Within 341 dais fullo"in- oitlnitorinl pes-iudl
Cel-fificatc Of Cos'cr•a,-e No. \C(;02._Coun(v of Facllily C.ul��rTUGi[ _�r
F.Icifils Name21
oN eAmi—a
�iLf [�a. Naiile of Laboralon, _-r,!- if0�3 �¢!>BR�7reJ r7r.0
Facilif}' Conlacl it. (;fir 01r- Lab Certification a (1SEPh? it,* noo�G
FaCllitl' C41111acf MIMIC No. - ( - �mjj
Par! B. Prue :Ns flirt/ Abut. ii/tva"w(ner- rllurliluri))Regrrii-ellwills
(.)ull'alk
:\unlace
Receiving Stream Nalne
Date
Sample Collected
5011510
00400
110530
00076
(1U345
Daily Flosi
pil
Total Suspended Solids
Turbidily
Sellieable Solids
olu111111r
INKA)
unit
mg/1
NTt)s
mE/I
D 1
keK 134
No eie
-et--,
I Nlea,utcd .' wonu„u.l}' usinL a Ilim IlicnstlrinG dct-i[c ur r>liillalyd a+ing lllannfiICWrCr'% ralllh CAR onCN and r1u11111 I0yi.
"I cerlifY, under pewilly of law, lhal this ducunu•nl and all allachmenls were prepared Miller" MY dlfCCllOri 01' St111Cr"YiSltlll ill accurdaocC aith a
syslem designed it) assure (hat qualified personnel property i„ather and es•aluale life information submitted. Based un my imluir% of Ific person
Or persons who rlianage file system. or loose persons direcils responsible for galhering file infurniatimi Ilie informatiuii submitted is, to file best
01
of illy knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and cuutptete. I aril aware that there are sihrtif-tcanf penalties for subinillin- l•:dSC int01-U1136011,
inclutirl" file pussibilily of lilies and iiiyrisounkcul for knoli'ing- violaliotts." r ,
Par/ U: ,',furl!+ry hldrcs.s
Alin: C'enlraf Files, DENIt, N.C. Divkiori of Water Qtiafity, 1617 Mail Service Center, Ralci-11l, NC 27699-1617
, tWl inn:

Bonney Bright Sand Mine
Currituck County, NC
2008 Mine Pump Discharge Log
MGD
__-__�
=MMM0MM
1
1 :.
1 .
-_=I!
-_-
®�a■oao■r�
•
o
I ..
�■
m
�I
MEMO
I1:
I
1 •
--_
mmmmm=MMMMMUM
moo�oo
1
�■r�
1:.
�mm
m_-
��0__-

Bonney Bright Sand Mine
2008 On -Site Precipitation Data
Inches
Elm����r��

3 ��l'Blel'�CS c
i, i8 CYPRESS AVENUE
ARGIMA BEACH, VA 23451
-ELEPHONE 757142511498
;ACSIMILE 757/422/9176
certificate of Analysis
SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
TO ATTN: HAROLD JONES
1513 SANDBRIDGE RD.
VIRGR41A BEACH, VA 23456
SAMN--- DESCRIPTION water
Sample received:
09/08/08 @ 1600
Sample collected:
09/08/09 @ 1015
Sample location:
Bonney Bright Send Pit (Currftuck, NC)
Sample marked:
Pump Outfall
Sampled by:
J. Haynes of J.L.I.
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS
DATE09/15/08
M&YSIS 08-3598
DATE & TIME
Ma=S RESULTS HUHQD OF ANALYSIS ANALYST
Chloride 1,365.0 mg/L SM 18" Edition 09/12/08 @ 1500 HH
4500 CI-B

I
m�Igs IoffloMes
d CYPRESS AVENUE
/IRGINIA BEACH, VA 23451
ELEPHONE 7571425/1498
:ACSIMILE 757/42219176
;erfifCBb of Maly*
1n SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ATTN: HAROLD TONES
1513 SANDBRMGE RD.
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23456
Water
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION Sample received:
08/04/08 @ 1230
Sample collected:
09/04/09 @ 1104
Sample location:
Bomuy Bright Sand Pit (Currituck, NC)
Sample marked:
Pump Outfall
Sampled by:
J. Haynes of J.L.I.
Amy'nCAL CHEMISTS
DATE 09/ 14/08
08-2932
MALYM MAW
DATE & TIME
ANALYSIS REHM MIETHOD OF ANALYSIS ANALYST
Chloride 32.3 mg/L SM 18* Edition 08/14/08 @ 1430 HH
4500 Cl-B

jamhteratm+les
3 CYPRESS AVENUE
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23451
TELEPHONE [phone]
FACSIMILE 757/422/9176
Cerffftate of Analysis
To SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ATTN: HAROLD JONES
1513 SANDBRIDGE RD.
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23456
Water
SAMPLE I?ESCRIFMON Sample received:
07/07/08 @ 1515
Sample collected:
07/67/08 @ 0835
Sample location:
Bonney Bright Sand Pit (Carritucly NC)
Sample marked:
Pump Outfall
Sampled by:
J. Haynes of J.L.I.
ANAMYSIS
Chloride
RESULTS
30.5 mg(L
METHOD
SM 18°i Edition
4500 Cl-B
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS
DATE 07/14/08
08-2534
ANALYSIS N"P.
DATE & TIME
OF ANALYSIS
07/14/08 @ 1330
ANALYST
HH

ESIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Inc.
July 8, 2008
Mr. Robert D. Patterson, P.E.
Stormwater Permitting Unit
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Dear Mr. Patterson:
This is in regards to the Bonney Bright Sand Mine located at 100 Marsh
Causeway, Knotts Island, Currituck County, North Carolina. The mine operates under
General Permit No. NCG 0200000 and COC NCG020701. ,
Enclosed please find the following:
• DMR- 2" d Quarter CY 2008
• Semi -Annual Qualitative Monitoring Report
• 2008 Mine Pump Discharge Log
• 2008 On -site Precipitation Data
Although the Mine Pump Discharge Log documents that pumping resumed on
June 7, 2008, the water levels in the recharge Swale, farm field ditches and the collector
ditch have not risen high enough to result in a discharge to State waters. As a
consequence, no sample were taken during the quarter.
If you have any questions regarding the information contained herein, please do
not hesitate to contact me at business cell [phone], Email: [e-mail]
or the letterhead address.
Sincerely,
R. Harold Jones, P
President
1513 SANDBRIDGE ROAD, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456
Business Cell [phone] fax [phone]

PROCESS/1\MINE DENVA`fERUNG WASTEWATER DISCHARGE 1NIONITORENG REPORT (DAIR)
Please Mail Original And Onc Copy
To Maililiy Address Below
GENERAL PE101IT NO.
NCG020000
Par! A: FeicilitU In%r>rmation
Samples Collected In Quarter:
IQ 20 30 4Q_ (Ml samples shall he reported wilhin 30 days following monitoring period)
Certificate Of Coverage No.
tCi-k 0-I
NCG02 o
County, of Facility
CvK /TU
F:tcdity Name
n�
DN 4 !2.l6iFT L4.
,wane of Laboratory
-%e'V'Y' IPSi3_�®,tU
Facility Contact
!t- d SIU600f—
Uib Certification #
(7�t'j'¢ J/'* aoa4�G
Facility Contact I'ilone No.
Peirt B. Process Weiveivaler and Aline Den•aterirrg ll a-rlelrarer ,llorril0r irrb Requiretnews
Outfall
Number
Receiving Stream Name
Date
Sample Collected
500i0
00400
00530
00076
00545
Daily Flowt
pit
Total Suspended Solids
Turbidity
Settleable Solids
molddlyr
MCD
[snit
mg/l
\'1'Us
null
0 a 1
SDK /-3,4q
Ap eye-
AoA18—
HO
I S 1421- Pc-s
1 NiCaSUred COUtinUOUSly IlSinj, 3 f10W nic;" 1r1Ug device or estimated Usln'_' [11a[1UfaCt11rCrS pltnlp CUrves and pump logs.
Part C: Cerlifecrlion
"I certif}', under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments there prepared under n1r direction or supervision in accordance with a
system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluale the information submitted. Based on 111y 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 nay knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. 1 and att•are that there arc significant penalties for subrnittinn false information,
including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations."
��iMAMMW5rrTi1
Par? D: rU e ilinb Address
Alin. Central Files, DENR, N,C• Division of NN"ater Quality, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, INC 27699-1617
SWU-244-01200-5)

Semi -Annual Qualitative Stormwater-Mine .Dewatering
Visual Mine Inspection Report
Outfall #001
WCS # 7
Bonney Bright Sand Mine
Currituck County
North Carolina
Date: June 30, 2008
Time: 1600
Outfall Location: Outfall #001, WCS #7
Inspector: R. Harold Jones, PWS
Inspection Items:
Color
Frequency
Monitoring
Conditions/Comments/Findings/
Location
Results
Odor
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
No Odor
Claris
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
Clear
Floating Solids
Semi -Annual
0utfal1 #001
None Observed
Suspended
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
None Observed -Reported
Solids
Em2irically on a Quarter/ Basis
Foam
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
None Observed
Oil Sheen
Semi -Annual
Outfall 4001
None Observed
Deposition at or
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
None Observed
Immediately
Below Outfall
Erosion at or
Semi -Annual
Outfall 4001
None Observed
Immediately
Below the

Outfall
Other obvious
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
None Observed
Indicators of
Stormwater
Pollution
Discharge
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
No Discharge
Volume at Time
Volume Recorded ❑aily
of Inspection

Bonney Bright Sand Mine
2008 On -Site Precipitation Data
Inches

Bonney Bright Sand Mine
Currituck County, NC
2008 Mine Pump Discharge Log
MGD
______
11;
______
m000000—�___—
�0_000

Mr. Bonney G. Bright, President
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
5513 Buzzard Neck road
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
Dear Mr. Bright:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department or Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
June 6, 2008 JUN a -p
2006
VWQ_WA®O
Subject: General Permit No. NCG 020000
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
Modification of COC NCG020701
Currituck County
In accordance with your application for a modification to your discharge permit received on
December 27, 2007, and additional information received on March 6, 2008, April 25, 2008 and May 16,
2008, 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 October 15, 2007 (or as subsequently amended).
Your COC has been modified to include the discharge of mine dewatering under General Permit
No. NCG020000, and the approved Operation & Monitoring (O&M) Plan. Please, note that a requirement
of this permit is compliance with the Division of Land Resources (DLR) Mining Permit No. 27-49 (Part
Ill, Section AA of NCG020000). This includes compliance with the letter from DLR dated May 19, 2008
and your requirement to provide a report on your operation's potential to impact adjacent groundwater
resources.
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. Please also note the requirement to have a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan and to comply with the cut off concentrations listed in the permit.
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 Robert Patterson at telephone
number [phone] ext. 360.
Sincerely,
C R1G P IGNM BY
KEN CKLE No ` Carolina
for Coleen H. Sullins, Director Nalara!!y
. Di, ision of Water Qualily
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: www,newatercivalitkora Location: 512 N, SalisburySt. Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
An Equal opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

Mr. Bonney G. Bright
Bonney Bright Sand Co. NCG020701 Modification
Rine 6, 2008
cc: Washington Regional Office, Mr. Jeffery Manning
Central Files
Stormwater Permitting Unit Files
DLR, Floyd Williams, PG
Page 2 of 2

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
GENERAL PERMIT NO. NCG020000
CERTIFICATE OF COVERAGE No. NCG020701
STORMWATER & MINE DEWATERING 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,
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
is hereby authorized to discharge stormwater from a facility located at
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
100 Marsh Causeway
Knotts Island
Currituck County
to receiving waters designated as the North Landing River, a class SC water in the Pasquotank
River Basin, in accordance with the effluent Iimitations, monitoring requirements, and other
conditions set forth in Parts I,1I, III, IV, V, and VI of General Permit No. NCG620000 as
attached.
This certificate of coverage shall become effective June 6, 2008.
This Certificate of Coverage shall remain in effect for the duration of the General Permit.
Signed this 61h day of June, 2008. ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
KEN PICKLE
for Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
By the Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

-ez

L
LOCATION MAP:
f i� y f r. •s t iJlar J t h
ft S r.r.' a' Y f YA � y � rr (N f :. T �r ,k4 L 1. • J, r} f J � � a
' —�-`.� Y..+M en-J�. tY -,i YS .-Y. i L '� +•' •,. • 'L �w' .� r t \ y
. 1.4� ,4'4 -' I' ; { 1, S� + .-'i ,4 •• x �l ,f 5 �4a t �E..+.
h { ;" i '. fY� I�xf yl. ` + 7yJ+, F . �, r:� Jib. r J"1`'•1 t r � i, �7 ,_
tiit a
- l! � I � �•� � ^• ^ �, � tc �w"a•• .'��' � �, -� '�l J: .t.� .1 � _ s.rrT .. n�l .'�'s'
_-`�";' x I `\f:, � ' t a ' L�, �-�.✓� ; * ( .:'irk � � r �� 4 1 ---'�' _ �_'�.t _ � 6 1 � �
• {
'�Y— Y 1 `�:J' '•.�'�r,�"4Lt I :. to --"ft l s - - - - _`Y Jy 1 r.l !! t /t J
� 1' '\I' _ �. .� �r.is ..i � N• "��T._ �, ' � �.� y,� � n } I '-gyp �!
- J''I ! ��. � �, t' � •L u.n �~ + .. ""� -�: - ,r"]' % ; y{ a - ^ en l I
I _ i _ Syr `� l ..`�•,`1`
J+. v .� / ! r-r, X _E A f- 1! r_A _". !{.`.•'� IL�ff {".. i l '`. 1 � 1.•' ,i �� �
Bonney Bright Sand Co. •r:::'. � -x: .✓ .!' =: � � !;�� f 'I -?
+•,r - 'r: t ,n Y ''� „Z., c t
z
4
�{, t. fi c. `• °w��rf ✓}� /� },� I�,r� a� t r-"'�. _ _ • {' t °,� Sri` i
_ L iti
f l .F Y m a 4-• {ff s l -f 4� �. � t �.-� 1✓�.
' dry � "� "1 'Y '4n 'Y v y I
t{i 5',.� _ �:„t,a'^'a•�a� wy, �tirLrr''_"."+^•-•..... F.f�,�• .�+,1`3 - �� � '•• 1..�,a._ �' �7�� �;'�
�11 �•` v ,rati 1 d- i' ,�•_ J`r.L Y'_� _ - fA . { 1, r t
wp l r . t _ k # •. 1 i' E '"I
-. 1 ; ACRA�t liL Y/ ND ,fir•_ .. �T . � ; L� t✓� r�i��' {j '1�,. �,'�I �• � t`.M..
Maak rv�, • • -a, rt &� I. 1 l.
a,t�..*-♦v '<�y Gll MARS `_
_ _ u.: :bslK _ �' .,...�t� ,,�k' .r.►�L`' - •ar. � +�.-1-_ a'� F �: -�:��" '�'1+.%'Y t s �� 1 .`: �..a:-
Latitude: 36°33'01" N NCG020701 facility
Longitude: 76N0'16"W )
County: C rrituck Boonney Bright Sand Location '
Stream Class: SC
Receiving Stream: North Landing River �i
Sub -basin: 03-01-54 (Pasquotank River Basin) �ottA Net to Scale

ALTGZI_10�;
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
James D. Simons, PG, PE ' Michael F. Easley, Governor
Director and State Geologist William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
CERTIFIED MAIL
Return Receipt Requested
May 19, 2008
ylr. Bonney G. Bright
Bonney Bright Sand Company
5513 Buzzard Neck Road
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23457
RE: Permit no. 27-49, Bright Mine
Currituck County/Pasquotank River Basin
Dear ivlr. Bright:
A review was recently made of the monitoring reports from the above mine in response to a
complaint that dewatering at the mine had caused salt water intrusion and increased salinity in a
neighboring well.
The reports submitted are not in compliance with the reporting required by the mining permit, as
noted in the previous notice of violation. Additionally, it appears that two of the monitoring
wells have gone dry. The reports received are not complete enough to fully determine if the
dewatering activities are causing an adverse impact to offsite ground water resources.
Consequently, you are requested to provide within 30 days of receipt of this letter a report from a
qualified consultant to address whether or not your operation has caused or is likely to cause
under existing mining conditions salt water intrusion or other adverse effects to the adjacent
ground water resources.
Please contact Mr. Floyd Williams, PG or me at this address if you have any questions
concerning this matter. Your cooperation will be appreciated.
Sincerely,
4 /g • / LC"t't k
James. D/ Simons, PE, PG
Cc, Floyd Williams, PG
Bradley Bennett, PE
Pat McClain, PE
Geological Survey • Land Quality • Geodetic Survey
Division of Land Resources - 1612 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1612
512 North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
919-733-38331 FAX: [phone] Internet: www.dlr.enr. state.nc.us/dlr.htm
An Equal Opportunity l Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

5-z q vg
3
&--dLj l,Lj I
- .3

waNO
o�0F w A r�9Qt:
r
August 4, 2008
Mr. Bonney G. Bright, President
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
5513 Buzzard Neck road
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
To whom it may concern:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Colcen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
In accordance with an application for a modification to discharge permit No. NCG020701 received on
December 27, 2007, a site inspection was performed at the facility located at 100 Marsh Causeway, Knotts
Island, Currituck County on March 03, 2008. To bring the facility into compliance with North Carolina General
Statute 143-215.1 The North Carolina Division of Water Quality granted a modification to General Permit No.
NCG020701 COC to include the discharge of mine dewatering on dune 06, 2008.
Please note that a requirement of this permit is compliance with the Division of Land Resources (DLR) Mining
Permit No. 27-49 (Part III, Section A.4 of NCG020000). This includes compliance with the letter from DLR
dated May 19, 2008 and your requirement to provide a report on your operation's potential to impact adjacent
groundwater resources.
kincerely,
Al Hodge, Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
Washington Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
One
NartItCaro ina
Natrrrallil
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Washington Regional office Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: www.newaterquality.org 943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

ISIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES. Inc.
Mr. Robert D. Patterson, P.E.
Stormwater Permitting Unit
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Dear Mr. Patterson:
July 8, 2008 Jot 1 ZOO
o,~ �WQQ VVARo
.k' Q
This is in regards to the Bonney Bright Sand Mine located at 100 Marsh
Causeway, Knotts Island, Currituck County, North Carolina. The mine operates under
General Permit No. NCG 0200000 and COC NCG020701.
Enclosed please find the following:
• DMR- 2" d Quartet CY 2008
• Semi -Annual Qualitative Monitoring Report
• 2008 Mine Pump Discharge Log
• 2008 On -site Precipitation Data
Although the Mine Pump Discharge Log documents that pumping resumed on
June 7, 2008, the water levels in the recharge Swale, farm field ditches and the collector
ditch have not risen high enough to result in a discharge to State waters. As a
consequence, no sample were taken during the quarter.
If you have any questions regarding the information contained herein, please do
not hesitate to contact me at business cell [phone], Email: Rharoldiones(a]aol.com
or the letterhead address.
Sincerely,
R. Harold Jones, P
President
1513 SANDBRIDGE ROAD, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456
Business Cell [phone] fax [phone]

0
CC: Mr. Bonney G. Bright

PROCESS/MINE DEAVATERING WASTEWATER DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT (DNIR)
Please Mail Original And One Coley To Mailing Address Bclow
GENERAL PERMIT NO. NCG020000
Part A: Facility Information
Samples Collected In Quarter: .!_Q 2Q 3Q 4 (ail samples shall be reported within 30 days following monitoring; period)
Certificate Of Coverage No. NCG02 6 jL401 County of Facility ecU'& rrV
Facility ,Name Name of Laboratory--JeN�lfi4g3 Apt 7,1-3 ZtA-_
Facility Contact ie- o fjlub+ Lab Certification # 6%5 P/g � 6/f4 eoe 440
Facility Contact Phone No. (7s� ?�2/—ASS
Part B: Process Wastewater and Mine Dewofering fVactewater Monitoring Requirements
Outfall
Number
Receiving Stream Name
Date
Sample Collected
50050
00400
00530
00076
00545
Daily Fiowr
pll
Total Suspended Solids
Turbidity
Settleable Solids
molddlvr
MCD
unit
ruUll
NTUs '
ml/l
1r�cct
ON
f Measured continuously using a flow measuring device or estimated using manufacsurcr's pump curves and pump logs.
Part C: Certification
"I certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance ~rich a
system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based oil 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."
{ i"n: ire o 13ermittee) (Date)
a
Part D: Mailing Address
Attn: Central Files, DENR, N.C. Division of Water Quality, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
SWU-244-012005

I
Semi -Annual Qualitative Stormwater-Mine Dewatering
Visual Mine Inspection Report
Outfall #001
WCS # 7
Bonney Bright Sand Mine
Currituck County
North Carolina
Date: June 30, 2008,
.
Time: 1600
Outfall Location: Oritfall #001, WCS #7
Inspector: R. Harold Jones, PWS
Inspection Items:
Color
Frequency
Monitoring
Conditions/Comments/Findings/
Location
Results
Odor
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
No Odor
Clarity
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
Clear
Floatin Solids
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
None Observed
Suspended
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
None Observed -Reported
Solids
Em irically on a Quarterly Basis
Foam
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
None Observed
Oil Sheen
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
None Observed
Deposition at or
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
None Observed
Immediately
Below Outfall
Erosion at or
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
None Observed
Immediately
Below the

Outfal l
Other obvious
Semi -Annual
Outfall #001
None Observed
Indicators of
Stormwater
Pollution
Discharge
Semi -Annual
OutfalI #001
No Discharge
Volume at Time
Volume Recorded Daily
of Inspection

Bonney Bright Sand Mine
2008 On -Site Precipitation Data
Inches

Bonney Bright Sand Mine
Currituck County, NC
2008 Mine Pump Discharge Log
MGD
_____m
11:
_m____
1 ,
Von
'� :
CM
En
mm�=Mm1
:1
_m__m_I'
=
1
=
1 '
mm___-
mmmm0�m
1 '
mmm_�_
mmm`
=
1 '
_m__�_
M00�mmm
1 '
____m_
®m0�'_m=
1 '
_m____
mmQ=M=
1 '
_m_m__I
mm�m=�m=
1 '
_m__m-
��'�immmm
1 '
_m___m
mmmmm=
1 1
M___M_
mm�0mmm
1 1
-_____
__-_M_I
_�__�_m_
_________
®Qi�s
=0
M
1�_
�''
QYO=m
1 1
MMMMMM
®M0Mmm
1 1
_____=
MM
Im"
1 1
_M_-M-
00
1
1
1
1 1
__-___
mmmmmm

C
Mr. Bonney Bright
Bonney Bright Sand Company
5513 Buzzard Neck Road
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
Subject:
Dear Mr. Bright:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
April 20, 2007
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
7003 2260 0005 5380 5749
Request for Remission of Civil Penalty
Bonney Bright Sand Company
Case No. DV-2007-0005
Currituck County
In accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6A(f), I, the Director of the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality, considered the information you submitted in support of your
request for remission and did not find grounds to modify the civil penalty assessment of
$4,091.00.
There are two options available to you:
1) You may pay the penalty.
If you decide to pay the penalty at this stage of the remission process, please make
your check payable tothe Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(DENR). Send the -payment within thirty (30) calendar days of your receipt of this
letter to the attention of:
Mr. Shelton Sullivan
NC Division of Water Quality —NPS Assistance & Compliance Oversight Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
no
2) You may decide to have the Environmental Management Commission's Committee on
Civil Penalty Remissions make the final decision on your remission request.
If payment is not received within 30 calendar days from your receipt of this letter,
your request for remission with supporting documents and the recommendation of the
Director of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality will be delivered to the o
Committee on Civil Penalty Remissions for final agency decision.°rthCtrolin
�Vaturrrll�
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: www.newaterquality.org Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled110°% Post Consumer Paper

Bonney Bright Sand Company
Case No. DV-2007-0005
Currituck County
Page 2 of 2
If you or your representative would like to speak before the Committee, you must complete and
return the attached_ form within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this letter. Send the
completed form to:
Ms. Karen Higgins
NC Division of Water Quality — NPS Assistance & Compliance Oversight Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
The Environmental Management Commission (EMC) Chairman will review the supporting
documents .and your request for an oral presentation (if you make the request). If the Chairman
determines that there is a compelling reason to require a presentation, you will be notified of
when and where you should appear. If a presentation is not required, the final decision will be
based upon the written record.
Thank you _for your cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions, please contact Karen
Higgins at [phone] ext. 574 or Danny Smith at [phone] ext. 353.
Sincerely,
Alan W.Zek, P.E.
AWK/sds
cc: Al Hodge -- DWQ Washington Regional Office Supervisor
Jeffery Manning —DWQ Washington Regional Office
NPS Assistance and Compliance Oversight Unit -- File Copy
DWQ Central Files
Ho [ECE ED
APR 2 4 2007

P'
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF Currituck
IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT )
OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST: }
Mr. Bonney Bright and )
Bonney Bright Sand Company
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION
CASE NUMBER DV-2007-0005
REQUEST FOR ORAL PRESENTATION
I hereby request the opportunity to make an oral presentation before the Environmental
Management Commission's Committee. On Civil Penalty Remissions in the matter of the case
noted above. In making this request, I assert that I understand all of the following statements:
• This request will be reviewed by the Chairman of the Environmental Management
Commission and may be either granted or denied.
• Making a presentation will require the presence of myself or my representative during a
Committee meeting held in Raleigh, North Carolina.
• My presentation will be limited to discussion of issues and information submitted in my
original remission request, and because no factual issues are in dispute, my presentation will be
limited to five minutes in length.
This the day of , 20
SIGNATURE
TITLE (President, Owner, etc.)
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE

of WA rF9
r
Mr. Bonney Bright
Bonney Bright Sand Company
5513 Buzzard Neck Road
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
Dear Mr. Bright:
Michael F. Easley, Govemor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
April 20, 2007
Alan W. Klimek, RE, Director
Division or Water Quality
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
7003 2260 0005 5380 5749
Subject: Request for Remission of Civil Penalty
Bonney Bright Sand Company
Case No. DV-2007-0005
Currituck County
Iri accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6A(f), I, the Director of the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality, considered the information you submitted in support of your
request for remission and did not find grounds to modify the civil penalty assessment of
$4,091.00.
There are two options available to you:
1) You may pay the penalty.
If you decide to pay the penalty at this stage of the remission process, please make
your check payable to the Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(DENR). Send the payment within thirty (30) calendar days of your receipt of this
letter to the attention of:
Mr, Shelton Sullivan
NC Division of Water Quality -- NPS Assistance & Compliance Oversight Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
OR
2) You may decide to have the Environmental Management Commission's Committee on
Civil Penalty Remissions make the final decision on your remission request.
If payment is not received within 30 calendar days from your receipt of this letter,
your request for remission with supporting documents and the recommendation of the
Director of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality will be. delivered to the
Committee on Civil PenaltyRemissions for final agency decision. ivfo ttUrI71in
g Y �11 �nhrrrr!!11
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: www,ncwatergtLality.org Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycledll0% Post Consumer Paper

Bonney Bright Sand Company .
Case No. DV-2007-0005
Currituck County
Page 2 of 2
If you or your representative would like to speak before the Committee, you must complete and
return the attached form within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this letter. Send, the
completed form to:
Ms. Karen Higgins
NC Division of Water Quality — NPS Assistance & Compliance Oversight Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
The Environmental Management Commission (EMC) Chairman will review the supporting
documents .and your request for an oral presentation (if you make the request). If the Chairman
determines that there is a compelling reason to require a presentation, you will be notified of
when and where you should appear. If a presentation is not required, the final decision will be
based upon the written record.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions, please contact Karen
Higgins at [phone] ext. 574 or Danny Smith at [phone] ext. 353.
Sincerely,
'Da
Z
6
Alan W.mek, P.E.
AWK/sds
cc: Al -Hodge — DWQ Washington Regional Office Supervisor
Jeffery Manning — DWQ Washington Regional Office
NPS Assistance and Compliance Oversight Unit — File Copy
DWQ Central Files
RE((� IVCD
APR 2 4 2007

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF Currituck
IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT )
OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST: }
Mr. Bonney Bright and )
Bonney Bright Sand Company
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION
CASE NUMBER DV-2007-0005
REQUEST FOR ORAL PRESENTATION
I hereby request the opportunity to make an oral presentation before the Environmental
Management Commission's Committee On Civil Penalty Remissions in the matter of the case
noted above. In making this request, I assert that I understand all of the following statements:
• This request will be reviewed by the Chairman of -the Environmental Management
Commission and may be either granted or denied.
• Making a presentation will require the presence of myself or my representative during a
Committee meeting held in Raleigh, North Carolina.
My presentation will be limited to discussion of issues and information submitted in my
original remission request, and because no factual issues are in dispute, my presentation will be
limited to five minutes in length.
This the day of
20
SIGNATURE
TITLE (President, Owner, etc.)
ADDRESS -
TELEPHONE

Michael F. Easley, Governor
c
Mr. Bonney Bright
Bonney Bright Sand Company
5513 Buzzard Neck Road
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
March 30, 2007
RE: Request for Remission of Civil Penalty
Bonney Bright Sand Company
Case No. DV-2007-0005
Currituck County
Dear Mr. Bright:
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
LAK
AP? 0 2 2007
DWQ-WARD
_ The Division of Water Quality has received your request for remission of civil penalty_
-dated March 20, 2007, with accompanying support information. Your request will be presented
to the Director of the Division of Water Quality and you will be notified of the results.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to call Shelton Sullivan at (919) 733-
5083 ext. 544 or myself at ext. 574.
Sincerely, K
r
Karen Higgins
NPS Assistance and Compliance Oversight Unit
cc: Al Hodge — DWQ Washington Regional Office Supervisor
Jeffery Manning — DWQ Washington Regional Office
NPS Assistance and Compliance Oversight Unit — File Copy
DWQ Central Files ,
twtCarolin
rall j
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: www.ncwatcrquality.org Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
An Equal OpportunitylAffirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycledll0% Post Consumer Paper

Mr. Bonney Bright
President
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
5513 Buzzard Neck road
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
Dear Mr. Bonney:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
February 23, 2007
M�MOVED
MAR 0 6 2007
DWG-WARO
Subject: General Permit No. NCG 020000
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
COC NCG020701
Currituck County
In accordance with your application for a discharge permit received on January 16, 2007, 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 -May 9,. 1994-(ar-as sub sequently'amended).
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. Please also note the requirement to have a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan and to comply with the cut off concentrations listed in the permit.
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 Kelly Johnson at telephone
number [phone] ext. 376.
Sincerely,
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
BRADLEY BENNETT
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
cc: �- Washington Regional Office, Mr. Jeffery Manning
Central Files
Stormwater Permitting Unit Files
cnc: Certificate of Coverage WC -he I.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: www.newaterguality org Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative 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. NCG020701
STORMWATER 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,
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
is hereby authorized to discharge stormwater from a facility located at
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
100 Marsh Causeway
Knotts Island
Currituck County
to receiving waters designated as the North Landing River, a class SC water in the Pasquotank
River Basin, in accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other
conditions set forth in Parts I, 1I, III, IV, V, and VI of General Permit No. NCG02000 as attached.
This certificate of coverage shall become effective February 23, 2007..
This Certificate of Coverage shall remain in effect for the duration of the General Permit.
Signed this 23`d day of February 2007.
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
BRADLEY BENNETT
for Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By the Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

LOCATION MAP:
A ,:s x ;wS' w lf�'g`irr' G""5 sr £ lF, c m f� r i��t y'-r m "w b y T.-•w• r
� \ I i..lj° � l t��f�b y�,��i.-: � t �m�,F 1��a �S. k"� �� � �r�✓'`�'�-�� t � rr`'T cy , � 'r,� w>� d'�"a" ����:�' �T"•M1i i 7 n� 4� �
!j� s r i a Tn a t. ,kr' r aA' '✓� �r ri ` .,
/ �1 l { Y ,.r M>. ST ' si21 a } _ ✓�kr.a i.. r'; - ` ✓„s{ ''`. f 'k
- t rFF � ` fl S Ys.H+�� a r 7ry��•�v,,a ry✓ i if'a, '17 ( ' .{„ rrYs�, ;(%tir.}' � �. �r�.o, !�<,}h �A iy.�' 4 � ✓`+ -++ - t,. Fl
"''r` 14r ��%`. `Lyv �"h.4����� i - �� ��Y r'� 1-� a, "'t Fr x � •-}f �4 ��� � -r �'� ti, j�',`1?•.,al��le,y. r,�'W_.. �. �„llt �.tW�«sr„��7x !y� 'w ylY^�,�, '�, rlk.�r'}, • r.vc''
�J
sS
� -+� -v c ��'b4 ; �r� C.r-�,i r ! ri' -.i �y ,r "d
.�
ks.�i�a���:
1�yyl }'r
\T ;.I Cr��SY�'
M
r�`
•;.. w wV x fi 3�"'"^ ( °X J fix.-w�#i �'+-+$,:f a f� 5 t't1 0 �s J f[f v1 j +e 4" µ� `'b 3
��M � -G h P /' i11 F'^ h T Y •�
� f ^ nt. , �. � '4;�rr",a, rt�' ��°a( .. w�� � �l•! '4 1 �� � ( w'� t'='�'�>"`�-
't '(,{rJ.
Z'r, SO
\ ��'
""• �--AU![]77 C.1dOlANA ] '� t•�'yy' ;.: ^� J n �L�
� ,�Y�.S`Y�7
R` 1.-,'
t•-. i t ` � „' r1 -s V 3?S h+�r �gv A.. f�r,,���� �_ � �r�3r _r�, � n__..,a, V, tom._::
�� ;r f ° j ,may. -r �.\ � �`" "� ��}e-�r a � : l � 1. �• � ( �� +.:'. g � �,
, w. � ♦ ��r � f E r ,i � rtw< a n"`$�"1 s:'� �a� %/ i r C � � M '
{ •rf; \.\...�,,,,�-�' '�}�� ��.`"'n ! +,X - ✓'} '_ - }� r �JH ; �a -w (-+f� :fix., ��+;
k� �v� l r +� 'C R t A P.` V --_A R S j If � ,,,a t 1 {V ('` � r�, f•
y �Y tIIL ��,�✓�r � _ r`'q � I i r ���,� ( ��rp�r,l c'•� A� sl
----Bonney Brieht Sand Co + = f -__�_ i s ,t}', i , s
N' � � ,, �r r it _
� 1 !` •'
r+�N�A.
\
•na'°!" �.�r''� _�` d•{�.5 ,+U,
, atu r r t 17 � k'�ts'° '3•� 7 �� r -. '�im� 3'�, + z 6 r
+ a F � s ,r�'�,�2}`'��x�•l �r,p?°"m ef, �4 '�,,�i i! �F' I e . J
Pew.iw�e�'�
1 �. v &,�, # f S Y,��"k`ic�'i*ri'��prr'? o- rc"' 1fv _ - _ _�- •'� ! >, ,:,P t-1'{ (--
��
y r r 4�'�
f a�
I t � S, •, ,F d*-+���„� #� ab r� q 4. � �+ �''R"y`t`: � !. � , _ j� F� U` rl yf�
C � ?,.j��'�' �r , � .r '3. }; • �l 1 { \ 'J" it :.
rr""�� ,4x�. � i -fig q fl �•
5�. ?.na.Fr s-1:'ii = .f: .f i., t� ry- .. 'zl } f' t I~Y e� r • r `
f
Latitude: 36°33'01" N NCG020701 Facility
Longitude: 76100'16"W
Bonney Bright Sand '
County: Currituck Co Location
Stream Class: SC
Receiving Stream: North Landing River
Sub -basin: 03-01-54 (Pasquotank River Basin) [NOPLt%L Not to Scale

of w A rF9
o �
January 29, 2007
CERTIFIED MAIL 7006 0100 0000 8379 4102
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Bonney G. Bright
5513 Buzzard Neck Road
Virginia Beach VA, 23457
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION
NOTICE OF RECOMMENDATION
OF ENFORCEMENT
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
Currituck County
Dear Mr Bright:
Michael P. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr,, Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, [I.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
2
This letter is to notify you that the Washington Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality is
considering forwarding a recommendation for enforcement action to the Director of the Division of
Water Quality. The recommendation concerns the violations of NCGS 143-215.1, illegal discharges at
the mine facility located at 100 Marsh Causeway, Knotts Island, Currituck County, North Carolina.
Jeffery A. Manning, of the Division of Water Quality, made a site visit to the Knotts Island mine site on
Wednesday January 24th, 2007. 1 understand per,your conversation with Mr. Manning upon his site
visit that your facility has dewatered and discharged to waters of the state of North Carolina without a
permit.
Please be advised that NCGS 143-215.6 of the state Water Quality Statutes provides:
"A civil penalty of not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) may be assessed by the [Environmental
Management] Commission against any person who is required but fails to apply for or to secure a permit
required by G.S. 143-215.1, or who violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or
requirements of such permit." NCGS 143-215.6 further provides that "if any action or failure to act is
continuous, the Commission may assess a penalty not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per day for so
long as the violation continues."
Please respond in writing to the Washington Regional Office within ten (10) days after receipt of this
Notice. Your explanation will be reviewed and if an enforcement action is still deemed appropriate,
your explanation will be forwarded to the Director with the enforcement package for his consideration.
Failure to respond within the time specified may result in the issuance of a civil penalty.
On
NotihCaroiina
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Washington Regional Office Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: WWW.ncwaterquality.org 943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycied110% Post Consumer Paper f

4 .
If you have any questions you may contact Jeffery A. Manning, Environmental Specialist, at
[phone].
A
ereI ,
Al Hodge, "Regionallupervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
Washington Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
Cc: WQ Central Files
Pat McClain -Land Quality, Washington Regional Office
Kelly Johnson -Non -Point Source Planning, Raleigh Regional Office
WaRO Enforcement Files
CERTIFIED:-IVI,AICa-REC
(Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Cc
C`-
m F N � A L
(�
gO Postage $ 3/
0
p
Cemlled Fee
a
Fee
(Endocese erd RReequlred)
Restricted De"very Fee
rq
(Endorsement Required)
t3
-a
t3
P_
A'
, �� PoIV
stmark\
Q
Tote] Postage & Fees I '
tick
Send
BONNY G BRIGHT
e�v9,5513 BUZZARD NECK RD
cftr VIRGINIA BEACH VA 23457
F
2

February 16, 2007
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
7003 0500 0002 7892 5655
NOTICE OF VIOLATION OF MINING PERMIT
Mr. Bonney G. Bright
5513 Buzzard Neck Road
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23457
RE: Bright Mine
Mining Permit No. 27-49
Currituck County
Pasquotank Drainage Basin
Dear Mr. Bright
This is to inform you of violations of Mining Permit a. 27-49 issued to you and/or your firm to operate
the Bright Mine in Currituck County. On January , 2007, personnel of the Department inspected your
mine and determined that one or more of the conditions contained in your mining permit are being
violated. The conditions being violated are as follows:
Operating Condition No. 1A: Any wastewater processing or mine dewatering shall be in
accordance with the permitting requirements and rules promulgated by the N.C. Environmental
Management Commission.
Operating Condition No. 3B_ Any mining activity affecting waters of the State, Waters of the
U.S., or wetlands shall be in accordance with the requirements and regulations promulgated by
the N.C. Environmental Commission.
Operating Condition No. 4D: All dewatering activities shall be conducted as indicated on the
Mine Development/Reclamation Plan Sheets 1 through 4, last revised December 1, 2005, and
per the supplemental information received by the Land Quality Section via facsimile on January
27, 2006.
Operating Condition No. 13: The operator shall notify the Department in writing of the desire to
delete, modify or otherwise change any part of the mining, reclamation, or erosion/sediment
control plan contained in the approved application for a mining permit or any approved revision
to it. Approval to implement such changes must be obtained from the Department prior to on -
site implementation of the revisions.

. . -"W "
10
r
■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mg4blece,
or on the front if space permits. ) M
A i nature ..'I'll- .:::, u ' :i ' r....
S
/sue p K'a i.
Addrasslre`=
B. eceived by ( Printed Name) Data of D ery `.
D. Is delivery address differe t from Item ? Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
3. Service Type
❑ Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail
i ❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mall ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes
2. Article Number ?006 0100 000G 8379 4102
{Transfer from service label}
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-W-M-1540,
1. Article Addressed to:
BA
r ,.
BONNY G BRIGHT
5513 BUZZARD NECK RD
VIRGINIA BEACH VA 23457

t
Mr. Bright
Permit No. 27-49
Page 2
In order to bring this site into compliance, the following corrective actions must be taken:
1. IMMEDIATELY CEASE discharging into waters of the State until properly
permitted by the Department to do so.
2. If a permit is issued by the Division of Water Quality to discharge into waters
of the State of North Carolina, a request to modify the mine permit to allow
discharging into waters of the State must be filed with the Division of Land
Resources. The request to modify the mining permit must be made within 30
days of receipt of the permit issued by the Division of Water Quality and a
copy of said permit must be included in the request to modify the mining
permit.
If the above violations are not corrected with Ithe given time periods, appropriate enforcement action will
be taken and a civil penalty may be assessed against you. 1f a civil penalty is assessed, the amount
may be up to five hundred dollars ($500.00) for each day of violation, beginning with the date of your
receipt of this Notice of Violations (N.C.G.S. 74-64). Other enforcement actions may include seeking
an injunction or criminal penalty or revoking your mining permit.
The responsibility for understanding and complying with the conditions of your mining permit rests with
you. The responsibility also rests with you for notifying this office of your plans to correct the violations.
Please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Patrick H. McClain, Regional Engineer, at [phone], or Mr.
Floyd Williams, State Mining Specialist, at [phone], regarding any questions you might have
about this matter.
Very truly yours,
James D. Simons, PG, PE
Director
Enclosure: Copy of NOV issued by Division of Water Quality
JDSlphmlkh
cc: Mr. Floyd R. Williams, State Mining Specialist
Mr. Patrick H. McClain, Regional Engineer, Washington Regional Office
Mr. Alton Hodge, Regional Supervisor, Division of Water Quality
Mr, James McConathy, Water Permit Manager, VA Department of Environmental Quality,
Tidewater Office, 5636 Southern Boulevard, Virginia Beach, VA, 23462

Michael P. Easley, Governor
William G. !toss Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of ]-nvironmeni and Nalural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
January 29, 2007
CERTIFIED MAIL 7006 0100 0000 8379 4102
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Bonney G. Bright
5513 Buzzard Neck Road
Virginia Beach VA, 23457
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION
NOTICE OF RECOMMENDATION
OFENFORCEMENT
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
Currituck County
Dear Mr Bright:
This letter is to notify you that the Washington Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality is
considering forwarding a recommendation for enforcement action to the Director of the Division of
Water Quality. The recommendation concerns the violations of NCGS 143-215.1, illegal discharges at
the mine facility located at 100 Marsh Causeway, Knotts Island, Currituck County, North Carolina.
Jeffery A. Manning, of the Division of Water Quality, made a site visit to the Knotts Island mine site on
Wednesday January 24th, 2007. 1 understand per your conversation with Mr. Manning upon his site
visit that your facility has dewatered and discharged to waters of the state of North Carolina without a
permit.
Please be advised that NCGS 143-215.6 of the state Water Quality Statutes provides:
"A civil penalty of not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) may be assessed by the [Environtnental
Management] Commission against any person who is required but fails to apply for or to secure a permit
required by G.S. 143-215.1, or who violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or
requirements of such permit." NCGS 143-215.6 further provides that "if any action or failure to act is
continuous, the Commission may assess a penalty not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per day for so
long as the violation continues."
Please respond in writing to the Washington Regional Office within ten (10) days after receipt of this
Notice. Your explanation will be reviewed and if an enforcement action is still deemed appropriate,
your explanation will be forwarded to the Director with the enforcement package for his consideration.
Failure to respond within the time specified may result in the issuance of a civil penalty.
�o�re NhCarolina
�VlTI!!lYT��lf ,
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Washington Regional Office Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: %vw%v.newaterquality.org 943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

Jy
If you have any questions you may contact Jeffery A. Manning, Environmental Specialist, at
[phone].
Sincerely,
Al Hodge, Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
Washington Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
Cc: WQ Central Files
Pat McClain -Land Quality, Washington Regional Office
Kelly Johnson -Non -Point Source Planning, Raleigh Regional Office
WaRO Enforcement Files
2

Re: [Fwd: additional info Bonney Bright Sand Mine]
Subject: Re: [I~wd: Additional info Bonney Bright Sand Mine]
From: Bradley Bennett <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 07:37:08 -0400
To: Robert Patterson <[e-mail]>
Robert
I talked with Floyd on Friday. DLR is sending has issued the permit but is now
preparing a letter to them about expectations for ongoing groundwater monitoring to
track potential problems. They will copy us on their letter and we should hold our
permit until then so we can reference it in our cover letter.
BB
Robert Patterson wrote:
Bradley,
Their DLR permit issued March 8, 2006 does include mine dewatering.
Floyd - Are their anymore issues on your end with DLR that we should take into
consideration before issuing this modification to the stormwater permit? What is
the status of the NOV DLR issued?
Thanks.
Robert
Bradley Bennett wrote:
Robert
I'm not sure that we could issue this one this quickly. Weren't they also
getting a mod from DLR an part to add dewartering to their permit? If so, we
need to coordinate with them.
BB
Robert Patterson wrote:
Jeff,
Thoughts on this? 1t looks acceptable to me. If WaRO is ok with
everything, I'll try to get the permit out today. Bradley - any concerns
with this?
Thanks.
Subject:
Additional info Bonney Bright Sand Mine
From:
Rharold'[e-mail]
Date:
Fri, 16 May 2006 00:40:10 EDT
To:
robert. [e-mail], [e-mail]
To:
[e-mail], [e-mail]
Mr. Patterson:
l of 5 5/20/2008 7:52 AM

Re: [Fwd: Additional info Bonney Bright Sand Mine] i _;-I
Jeffery Manning indicated in a telephone conversation on 5-15-08 that'the
only remaining item needed before permit issuance could be undertaken was a
discussion of design or functional components employed to reduce/mitigate
turbidity of mine pump water before it was discharged to state waters. The
following provides information that should clearly demonstrate that amble
opportunities have been incorporated into the design and operational plan of
the sand mine to facilitate the reduction of potential suspended solids
delivered to the permitted outfall structure, to the maximum extent
practicable.
First, the pump intake structure is a floating device, designed to withdraw
mine water from a short depth under the surface, reducing the potential
suction of sediments from the bottom.
Secondly, mine water will be pumped to the surface and discharged into a
designated "Recharge Swale" which surrounds the mine on three sides. The
recharge swale is approximately 20 feet wide on average, 3-4 feet deep, and
totals over 3150 feet in length. Once the recharge swale reaches design
capacity, pumped water will overflow into one or more culverts into 4 of 6
existing farm field ditches abutting the recharge swale. The farm field
ditches are approximately 8-10 feet wide and 4 foot deep, with a total
length of over 4960 linear feet. Water then flows in southerly direction
through the four ditches to a "collector ditch". As water levels rise in the
collector ditch upstream of WCS #8 water backfloods into two farm field
ditches without discharge pipes from the recharge Swale. This provides
extended periods of resident time for discharged waters -and affords optimal
settling time for any suspended solids, without subject to hydraulic head,
in approximately 1455 linear feet of farm field ditch.
All farm field ditches empty into a "farm collector ditch" at the southern
end of the property. This ditch flows from west to east and is
approximately 3240 feet in length, 10-12 feet wide and averages 4 -5 feet in
deep.
There are four flashboard riser water control structures located within the
discharge drainage system. Two are located in the farm field ditches and two
are located in the farm collector ditch. The structures are designed to
maximize the retention time of commingled mine and stormwaters. A total of
over 11,350_1inear feet (2.11 miles) of recharge swages, farm field ditches
and farm collector ditches, coupled with the four water control structures
provide more than amble opportunity to reduce mine pump water velocities to
the absolute minimum, provide extended periods of resident time resulting in
maximum particulate settlement before overtopping water control structure #
7 and discharging to state waters of North Carolina.
As a point of comparison, Mr. 3right's adjacent sand mine in Virginia only
provides around 4700 linear feet of surface recharge/drainage swale before
discharging to state waters of Virginia, operates a dewatering pump with 60
percent more capacity then the Currituck mine, and routinely reports TSS at
almost an order of magnitude below the upper limit threshold. The following
table provides reported TSS results analyzed by an approved analytical
laboratory for the last 10 sampling events. Maximum limit established by VA
2 of 5 � 5/20/2008 7:52 AM

Re: [>:wd: kdditional info Bonney Bright Sand Mine]
DEQ is for TSS 60 Mg/L.
Sampling Date
TSS - Mg/L
5/5/08
9.2
4/28/08
2.2
4/23/08
5.1
4/21/08
7.1
4/14/08
4.3
4/7/08
5.9
4/01/08
9.2
3/31/08
3.6
3/24/08
3.4
3/17/08
3.7
3 of 5 5/20/2008 7:52 AM

Re: [Fwd: Additional info Bonney Bright Sand Mine]
1--;• ".,
If you require any additional information or clarification on the
information presented above, please do not hesitate to contact me. I will be
away from the office most of the day on Friday so, if needed, please contact
me on my business cell at 757 615-9974.
It is our hope and expectation that a COC can be issued ASAP to allow the
operation of this mine to continue as originally designed and contemplated.
Thank you for your assistance and sensitivity on this matter.
Harold
R. Harold Jones, PWS
Sigma Environmental Services, Inc.
1513 Sandbridge Road
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23456
Business cell: 757 615-9974
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail] <mailto:Rharold�[e-mail]>.
--------------------------_-----------------------------------------------
Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at
AOL Food <http://food.aol.Com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001>.
4 of 5 5/20/2008 7:52 AM

Additional info Bonney Bright Sand Mine
Subject: Additional info Bonney Bright Sand Mine
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 00:40:10 EDT
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]
Mr. Patterson:
Jeffery Manning indicated in a telephone conversation on 5-15-08 that the only remaining item needed
before permit issuance could be undertaken was a discussion of design or functional components
employed to reduce/mitigate turbidity of mine pump water before it was discharged to state waters. The
following provides information that should clearly demonstrate that amble opportunities have been
incorporated into the design and operational plan of the sand mine to facilitate the reduction ofpotential
suspended solids delivered to the permitted outfall structure, to the maximum extent practicable.
First, the pump intake structure is a floating device, designed to withdraw mine water from a short depth
under the surface, reducing the potential suction of sediments from the bottom.
Secondly, mine water will be pumped to the surface and discharged into a designated "Recharge Swale"
which surrounds the mine on three sides. The recharge swale is approximately 20 feet wide on average,
3-4 feet deep, and totals over 3150 feet in length. Once the recharge swale reaches design capacity,
pumped water will overflow into one or more culverts into 4 of 6 existing farm field ditches abutting the
recharge swale. The farm field ditches are approximately 8-10 feet wide and 4 foot deep, with a total
length of over 4960 linear feet. Water then flows in southerly direction through the four ditches to a
"collector ditch". As water levels rise in the collector ditch upstream of WCS 48 water backfloods into
two farm field ditches without discharge pipes from the recharge swale. This provides extended periods
of resident time for discharged waters and affords optimal settling time for any suspended solids,
without subject to hydraulic head, in approximately 1455 linear feet of farm field ditch.
All farm field ditches empty into a "farm collector ditch" at the southern end of the property. This ditch
flows from west to east and is approximately 3240 feet in length, 10-12 feet wide and averages 4 -5 feet
in deep.
There are four flashboard riser water control structures located within the discharge drainage system.
Two are located in the farm field ditches and two are located in the farm collector ditch. The structures
are designed to maximize the retention time of commingled mine and stormwaters. A total of over
11,350 linear feet (2.11 miles) of recharge swales, farm field ditches and farm collector ditches, coupled
with the four water control structures provide more than amble opportunity to reduce mine pump water
velocities to the absolute minimum, provide extended periods of resident time resulting; in maximum
particulate settlement before overtopping water control structure # 7 and discharging to state waters of
North Carolina.
As a point of comparison, Mr. Bright's adjacent sand mine in Virginia only provides around 4700 linear
feet of surface recharge/drainage swale before discharging to state waters of Virginia, operates a
dewatering pump with 60 percent more capacity then the Currituck mine, and routinely reports TSS at
almost an order of magnitude below the upper limit threshold. The following table provides reported
TSS results analyzed by an approved analytical laboratory for the last 10 sampling events. Maximum
limit established by VA DEQ is for TSS 60 Mg/L.
1 of 2 5/16/2008 6:54 AM

Additional info Bonney Bright Sand Mine
Sampling Date
TSS — Mg/L
5/5/08
9.2
4/28/08
2.2
4/23/08
5.1
4/21 /08
7.1
4/14/08
4.3
4/7/08
5.9
4/01 /08
9.2
3/31 /08
3.6
3/24/08
3.4
3/17/08
3.7
If you require any additional information or clarification on the information presented above, please do
not hesitate to contact me. I will be away from the office most of the day on Friday so, if needed, please
contact me on my business cell at 757 615-9974.
It is our hope and expectation that a COC can be issued ASAP to allow the operation of this mine to
continue as originally designed and contemplated. Thank you for your assistance and sensitivity on this
matter.
Harold
R. Harold Jones, PWS
Sigma Environmental Services, Inc.
1513 Sandbridge Road
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23456
Business cell: 757 615-9974
Fax: [phone]
Email: Rharoldiones napol.com
Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food.
2 of 2 5/16/2008 6:54 AM

PFW
U/_� c _i,_t• t� �.- i K!� �Cc� �- ayr� Fo,>2s,,1�-R.� t✓� � a i �r c�1 Tra�r/ '"��
�tiJG G- 02 0 2 a r tc_3 Fo lz n ► � i� ��—w� ' r �s/� y
?0C 9" T 4 r w11 S 5Ltf3Nif rE�
-Ak/_D P-9Af-'ly? V Dwa - dN �2r�- � 2-ob�3re
W/ � Y_ y �t i-At AIIA1 - -r4 cnw04.cP-A�W.
— `g.� P,

Bonney Bright's North Carolina Sand Mine
Subject: Bonney Bright's North Carolina Sand Mine
From: "McConathy,James" <jrmcconathy a deq.virginia.gov>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 13:57:20 -0400
To: <robert. patterson@ncmail. net>, <[e-mail]>
Gentlemen,
We met with Harold Jones, the consultant for Bonney Bright's sand mine operation, this morning to discuss permit
options for pumping storm water and/or ground water from the North Carolina sand mine,
We told Mr. Jones that we did not believe his current proposal to combine pit water pumped out of the North
Carolina mine with his Virginia pit discharge under his Virginia general permit was a viable option because of the
issue of flow control, capacity of his ditch system to retain flow sufficiently to meet permit limits, and potential water
quality issues associated with higher flows and flooding of the receiving ditch. We told him we believed the most
environmentally protective option and the most defendable one for Virginia would be for us to process an
application for an individual permit covering the combined discharge from both mines. This VPDES individual
permit would include a flow limit. This was not a very satisfactory option for Mr. Jones this morning. As a result,
discussion occurred regarding other possible alternatives. One of the alternatives that was discussed was applying
to North Carolina for a discharge permit.
We stated we could not speak for the North Carolina waste water permit folks but in my discussions with North
Carolina, I was given no indication that North Carolina would not consider permitting a discharge from the Bright
North Carolina sand mine if a complete and correct. application was made.
Therefore, it is possible that Mr Jones will be contacting the permit folks in Raleigh and may have already done so
by the time this message goes out.
We told Mr. Jones we are certainly willing to process an individual permit for a combined discharge from both
mines into Virginia state waters should we receive an application.
If you have questions, please feel free to contact me.
James R. McConathy
Water Permit Manager
Tidewater Regional Office
Telephone - 757-518-2165
Fax - 757-518-2009
l of 1 5/9/2008 1:56 PM

RE: Bonney Bright permit ammendment
Subject: RE: Bonney Bright permit ammendment
From: "McConathy,James" <jrnicconathy a deq.virginia.gov>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 12:11:13 -0400
To: "Jeff Manning" <[e-mail]>, <robert.patterson a ncmail.net>
Mr. Patterson and Mr. Manning,
We have a meeting scheduled with Harold Jones tomorrow to discuss permit
actions for the Bonney Bright North Carolina sand mine. The proposal
Mr. Jones has presented to us on behalf of Mr. Bright is a request to
combine the flow pumped from the North Carolina mine with the existing
discharge from the Virginia mine under his current VPDES general permit
for discharges from nonmetallic mineral mines.
We will be discussing options with Mr. Jones tomorrow. It may be a
while before we know how the North Carolina discharge will be permitted.
-----Original. Message -----
From: Jeff Manning [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:38 AM
To: McConathy,James
Subject: Bonney Bright permit ammendment
Mr. McConathy,
Would you please respond to Robert Patterson's inquiry and let them know
in Raleigh (permitting) how Virginia is proceeding with the proposed
Bonney Bright permit amendment.
Thank you,
Jeffery A. Manning
Jeff,
I spoke with Bradley yesterday. We both feel that we need something
(email or letter) from VA saying they will be able to modify the VA
permit to include the water from the NC mine before we rescind the NC
permit. Otherwise what happens if we rescind it and then VA says they
don't want to modify it. Then they would have to shut down the NC mine
until they get it modified or reapply for a NC permit. Can you guys get
something from your CIA contact for our files?
Thanks!
Robert
Robert D. Patterson, PE
Environmental Engineer
NCDENR I DWQ I Stormwater Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
512 N, Salisbury St, Raleigh, NC 27604
Phone: [phone] ext. 360
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Website http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/su/stormwater.html
l of 1 5/9/2008 7:25 AM

Re: Fw: NCG020701 - Bonney Bright Mine - Permit Rescision
----Original Message ----
From: [e-mail]
Date: Apr'29, 2008 15:43
To: "Robert Patterson"<[e-mail]>
Subj: Re: NCG020701 - Bonney Bright Mine - Permit Rescision
Robert,
Al and I just got off the phone with Robert Jones, the consultant for
Bonney Bright, and Jim McConathy of Virginia DEQ. Mr. Jones has
satisfied us that the wetlands are hydrologically isolated due to
soil
composition. He provided us with monitoring well data and we consulted
a
Currituck County soil survey to confirm his statements.
The data he provided, coupled with the site visit I made in March has
answered all of the questions we had prior to agreeing to rescind his
permit. If you and Bradley do not have any "heartburn" on your end
then
we are recommending that his permit be rescinded.
Jeffery A. Manning
Robert Patterson wrote:
Jeff,
I received the copy of: the letter that was sent to Al dated April
2008 that requests their permit be rescinded. Please let us know
when
you are satisfied with what is proposed, and we will then rescind
it.
Thanks.
2 of 2 5/1/2008 7:4 l AM

Re: Fw: NCG020701 - Bonney Bright Mine - Permit Rescision
Subject: Re: Fw: NCG020701 - Bonney Bright Mine - Permit Rescision
From: Bradley Bennett <Bradley.Bennettcr ncmai1.net>
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 07.33:38 -0400
To: "Robert. [e-mail]" <Robert.Patterson a ncmail.net>
Robert
Do you know what the input from the Va DEQ on this has been? It would be nice to know how they are
going to respond to this before we rescind the permit. Looks like their rep was in on the discussions, but
there is no indication here of whether they have any concerns that would lead to them not accepting the
approach.
is
Robert. Patterson a ncmail.net wrote:
of 5/1/2008 7:41 AM

YSIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Inc.
April 23, 2008
Mr. Robert D. Patterson, P.E,
Stormwater Permitting; Unit
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Dear Mr. Patterson;
Per request from MT. Jeffery Manning, Division of Water Quality of the
'Washington Regional Office, I have enclosed a copy of correspondence, dated April 18,
:1008, to Mr. Al Hodge regarding the Bonney Bright Sand Mine located at 100 Marsh
(Causeway, Knotts Island, North Carolina.
If you require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at
business cell [phone], Email at [e-mail] or the letterhead address.
Sincerely,
�r
R. Harold Jones, PWS
President
CC: Mr. Bonney G. Bright
1513 SANDBRIDGE ROAD, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456
Business Cell [phone] fax [phone]

SIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, Inc.
April 18, 2008
Mr. Al Hodge
Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
Division of Water Quality
Washington Regional Office
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
Dear Mr. Hodge:
This responds to your correspondence dated April 14, 2008 regarding a review of
the North Carolina Stormwater permit (NCG020000) for the Bonney Bright Sand
Company's thine located in Currituck County, North Carolina.
By way of this correspondence, the Bonney Bright Sand Company formally
requests the North Carolina Division of Water Quality rescind Certificate of Coverage
No. NCG020701, issued on February 23, 2007, for stormwater discharges associated with
the subject sand mine. The reasons for this request are articulated below and portrayed on
the enclosed "Alternative Plan for Mine Dewatering, Surface Water Routing and
Discharge Outfall", dated April 15, 2008.
Prior to development of the Currituck County Sand Mime, Mr. Bright applied for
and received the appropriate authorizations from the Currituck County Planning
Department, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Land Resources, Land Quality Section and the Water Quality Section. After
receiving a Notice of Violation, NOV-2008-DV-0046 dated January 23, 2008, Sigma
Environmental Services re-examined the approved mining plan, issued authorizations and
other data. As articulated in correspondence to you dated February 19, 2008, Sigma
determined that all co -mingled stormwater and mine dewatering volumes discharged into
the recharged swale from the mine, would ultimately flow and outfall to waters of the
Commonwealth of Virginia, not state waters of North Carolina. Based on that finding of
fact, Mr. Bright proposes to remedy this regulatory complication by applying for the
appropriate discharge authorization from the Commonwealth of Virginia and requests
recision of his current NC-NPDES authorization.
The following provides a discussion regarding the items of concern contained in
,your April 14, 2008 correspondence.
1513 SANDBRIDGE ROAD, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456
Business Cell [phone] fax [phone]

Wetlands Protection
Forested wetlands exist along the southeast corner of the property. The
closest edge of the wetland to the top of slope of the mine is 645 feet. The wetlands are
hydrologically supported by precipitation and supplemental translocation of surface
waters from Back Bay. Underlying soils within the wetland consist predominately of
Tomotley silt loam, with a small area of Bojac loamy sand located in the southwest
corner of the wetland. The Tomotley series is a poorly drained soil with slopes from 0 to
2 per cent. The series has an apparent high water table between 0 and -1.0 feet below the
surface from December through March. The B horizon ranges from 7 to 45 inches below
the surface and exhibits a typically restrictive layer with a permeability rate of 0.6 -2.0
inches per hour. This slow permeability rate coupled with the hydrologic inputs of
precipitation and surface and subsurface infiltration from Back Bay, provides more than
sufficient sustaining hydrology for this wetland to meet the technical criteria established
in the Corps of Engineers Wetland 1987 Delineation Manual, as revised. The criterion is
the presence of an observable water table located within the top 12 inches of the surface
of the soil for a period of no less than 5% (approximately 14 days) at the onset of the
growing season. The B horizon of the Tomoteey series serves as an aquatard between the
groundwater table and the apparent water table, acting and reacting relatively
independent of each other.
Effects of water table drawn down can be examined on the enclosed chart which
plots water levels recorded from Monitoring Well #4. The well is located approximately
80 feet from the edge of the wetland in a farm field and is situated approximately 565 feet
from the mine. Mine inspection logs provide daily pumping records. Pumping occurred 5
days a week from April 1, 2007 and ceased on November 7, 2007. For the period from
April 1, 2007 to November 7, 2007 when mine dewatering was active, water levels in the
well averaged 5.00 feet below the surface for 21 sampling events. For the period from
November 9, 2007 to March 31, 2008, the average water level was 4.86 feet below the
surface for 26 sampling events. Water level variation during the monitoring segments
was not significantly different. The range of variation was almost identical. However,
inter -period ranges where significantly different, with far greater stability observed
during the period of mine dewatering activity than during the period when no pumping
occurred. However, and most importantly, these data clearly demonstrate that during both
pumping and non -pumping assessment periods, there was clearly no interaction between
the ground water table and the apparent (surface) water table associated with the adjacent
wetland. The aquatard, situated between 7-45 inches below the surface, confines surface
water to the surface and restricts groundwater to depths of 4 feet or more. As a
consequence, future mine dewatering activity should exhibit extremely little, if any,
impact on the hydrologic viability of the adjacent forested wetland.
East Side Ovcrburben Site
The approved mine }flan designates a 3.11 acre overburden area located on the
eastern side of the mine outside of the recharge swale. This area is currently in active
,agriculture and is planted with winter wheat and will remain in active agricultural

operation for the foreseeable future. Stockpiles of marketable mine product are situated
inside of the recharge Swale, and held temporarily prior to loading for delivery. No
component of the authorized and active mining activity is located outside of the recharge
swale. Should the designated site be utilized for overburden storage at some point in the
future, an identical stabilization berm, as is current utilized at the mine, will be
constructed to contain any eroded materials.
Stormwater Management
A major component of the approved mine plan is the designated "recharge swale"
as portrayed on the enclosed drawings. All areas within the designated recharge swale are
sloped to drain internally to the sand mine (see cross sectional drawing). Mine dewatering
operations would pump commingled waters to the recharge swale surrounding the outer
limits of the mine. if water levels rose high enough in the recharge swale they would over
flow through four metal pipes into existing farm field ditches and drain towards a
collector ditch located along the southern boundary. The proposed "Alternative Plan for
Mine Dewatering, Surface Water Routing and Discharge Outfall" incorporates a number
of changes which significantly modify the previously approved stormwater discharge
plan. First, we propose into install an earthern plug in the recharge swale immediately
south of the mine pump discharge point. This will prevent any commingled stormwater
and/or mine dewatering discharges from draining southerly and will completely prevent
any discharge waters from entering the existing farm field ditches and flowing to the
collector ditch. Only direct precipitation captured outside the recharge swale berm
(outside of the permitted mine area) will ever have the opportunity to flow to the
collector ditch.
Secondly, with installation of the plug, all pumped waters will be directed
northward through the recharge Swale and will cross the Virginia— North Carolina
boundary line. Waters will ultimately flow approximately 1200 feet and cross the VA -NC
line into an existing surface drainage system associated with Mr. Bright's Virginia sand
mine operation. Waters will continue to flow an additional 1150 feet in a northeasterly
direction to Water Control Structure 46 (WCS) which is currently closed. Once opened,
all pumped waters will flow an additional 1300 linear feet and intersect the Virginia
mine's main surface channel between WCS #3 and WCS#4. Waters will then migrate an
additional 950 linear feet before reaching WCS #5, also known as, and permitted by
VADEQ, as NPDES permit Outfall #002. Re -direction of flow will provide over 4600
.linear feet and 92,000 sq. ft. of potential recharge area. The three water control structures
aocated within the system will provide substantial flow and velocity impediments
:Facilitating substantial opportunities for particulate settlement before discharging to State
waters of Virginia. Please see the attached composite plan, as highlighted, for
clarification on flow directions.

VADEQ AgencyAgengy Position
Enclosed please find a copy of an e-mail communication regarding Virginia
Department of Water Quality's intent to consider modification of Mr. Bright VA NPDES
permit to include discharges from the Currituck County mine and their affirmation
thereto.
Detailed Map
Enclosed please find a composite map/plan of both the North Carolina and
Virginia mines sites. Significant features have been highlighted in various colors and
labeled accordingly on the plan.
Summary
It is hoped that the enclosed information and exhibits provide the necessary
documentation to allow your agency to proceed forward with an appropriate Stormwater
Permit recision. Also, it is requested that your agency provide Mr. Bright an immediate
release from mine pumping restrictions and a statement that the Bonney Bright Sand
Company is not, and has not, been in violation of any North Carolina discharge permits.
If you have any questions regarding the information or exhibits presented in this
correspondence please contact me as soon as possible at business cell 757-615-9974,
E-mail at: Rharoldionesnaol.com or the letterhead address. Thank you for your
consideration of this matter.
Most Sincerely,
R. Harold. Tones, PWS
President
CC: Mr, Bonney Bright

d
a�
LL
s
s
4
3
2
1
0
Water Levels Well #4
oo� oo� 001 00� oo� 001 001 001 00� 001 00� oo� oo� oo� 001 00� oo� oo� ao� oo� oo� oo� oo�
Date
�-- Series1

Page i of i
Subj: RE., Bonney Bright Sand Mines
Date: 4/18/2008 1:20:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: [e-mail]_ia.gov
To: Rharoldjones@aolcom
Mr. Jones,
In connection with our meeting last Friday, you presented us with a proposal to reroute the flow of pit water from
Mr. Bright's North Carolina sand mine so that the discharge to public waters could occur in Virginia. We agreed
that the proposal discussed was a potential discharge option we could consider for the issuance of a Virginia
NPDES type permit. We also stated that our consideration of a permit would include close coordination with
North Carolina environmental officials in determining the appropriate permitting pathway for the North Carolina
mine.
James R. McConathy
Water Permit Manager
Tidewater Regional Office
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
-----Original Message -----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]}
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 10:08 PM
To: McConathy,James
Subject: Bonney Bright Sand Mines
Mr. McConathy,
Thank you for you and Michelle Hollis meeting with me on Friday, April 11, 2008. It is my understanding
that you are receptive to evaluating our proposal to modify Mr. bright's NPDES permit for his Virginia
sand mine to include discharge waters from the immediately adjacent mine located in Currituck County.
NCDWQ has requested a statement of agency viability of a potential VADEQ permit modification to
enable them to proceed forward with a release on pumping restrictions. Your concurrence with this
understanding would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
R. Harold Jones, PWS
Sigma Environmental Services, Inc.
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL.Autos.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008 America Online: Rharoldjones

., .
. . 1 • .. L �. � ! .. . . .. ._ . .
I � F. —.. •.�� ..'1 ale i .. l I}' r r 1- .r � i_- �. .'� - � .:r ram.. 1�.1

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr,, Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Re50UNC5
Coleen I1_ Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
o�o� w A r�9�+✓
4 �
Mr. Bonney G. Bright
Bonney G. Bright Sand Co.
5513 Buzzard Neck Road
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
Dear Mr. Bright:
April 14, 2008
r�
Subject: NCG020701 Permit Review for Bonney Bright Sand Co.
Currituck County, North Carolina
In the Washington Regional Office Jeffery A. Manning and l met with your consultant, R. Harold
Jones, on Wednesday April 09, 2008 concerning possibly rescinding your North Carolina Stormwater
Permit. A preliminary review of your project indicates that before your State Stormwater permit could be
considered for rescission additional information is needed.
(1) A written request to rescind your North Carolina Stormwater permit (NCG020701) must be submitted.
(2) Your request should show that the wetlands adjacent to your mine site is not being degraded by the
mine dewatering activities. We would suggest the following Information be evaluated in this regard:
a) Data that could should show that the mine dewatering "cone of depression" does not extend
into the wetlands. Data from well #4 might be useful.
b) Data that could show the wetlands in question are hydraulically isolated from the aquifer
being dewatered.
(3) Your request should address the overburden site on the east side of the mine site. The overburden
site must be vegetated and stable from erosion or it must be isolated by the same type of constructed
berm as the mine site.
(4) Your request should include a detailed strategic plan that shows that no stormwater, from the active
mine site, or mine dewatering discharges will enter into drainage features within North Carolina.
(5) Your request should include documentation from The Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality(VDEQ) regarding the viability of modifying your existing VDEQ discharge permit to include the
stormwater and mine site dewatering discharge from your North Carolina mine (e-mail communication
will be adequate).
(6) Your request should include a detailed map of both the North Carolina and Virginia mine sites.
Onc
NolthC—aro
J1 awal
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Washington Regional Office Phone [phone] FAX [phone]
Intemet: h2o.enr.state.ne.us 943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889
An Equal OpporlunitylAffirmative Action Employer— 50% Recydedll0%a Post Consumer Paper
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

All materials and information should be delivered to this office no later than (45) days from the date of
receipt of this letter. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Jeffery A.
Manning at 252-948-3966.
inctere ,
sor odge, Vegon '
'Surfdce WaterProtection Section
'•Washington Regional Office
Division of,Water Quality
Cc: R. Harold Hones, PWS
L,-'<obert Patterson
WaRO files
Central files

[Fwd: [Fwd: 1'W: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observati...
Subject: [Fwd: [Fwd: [Fwd: [Fwd: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation]]]]
From: Jeff Manning <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 12:05:09 -0400
To: Robert Patterson <Robert.Patterson @ncmail.net>
Robert,
I just received this as it was mistakenly sent to the other Jeff Manning. Please review it and give
me your thoughts. We are still in the process of reviewing my findings from last weeks site visit
and should have a determination in the next few days.
Thanks,
Jeffery
Subject: [Fwd: [Fwd: [Fwd: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation]]]
From: Jeff Manning <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 11:53:06 -0400
To: [e-mail]
Meant for you?
Subject: [Fwd: [Fwd: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation]]
From: Pat McClain <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 09:53:45 -0400
To: Jeff Manning <[e-mail]>, Al Hodge <[e-mail]>
FYI
------- Original Message--------
Subject:[Fwd: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation]
Date:Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:16:24 -0400
From:Floyd Williams <Floyd.Will iams(d7ncrnail.net>
To:Pat Mcclain <[e-mail]>
For your information.
Floyd
Floyd Williams, PG, CPG, CPM
State Mining Specialist
Land Quality Section
Division of Land Resources
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
1612 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Pat McClain, PE
Land Quality Regional Engineer - Washington Region
NC Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
943 Washington Square Mall
1 of 4 4/4/2008 9:04 AM

[Fwd: [Fwd: [Fwd: [Fwd: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observati...
Washington, NC 27889
Office 252-946-6481, fax [phone]
Subject: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation
From: "martin hooker" <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 17:35:29 -0400
To: <[e-mail]>
Floyd:
Good morning. Please read the attachment to find the link to Bright mining drainage plan was a fraud
conspiracy on Bright's part, leveled on Virginia and North Carolina. This means his permits were acquired with
false testimony and should be revoked, for perjury/conspiracy findings.
Go Have Fun
mdh
From: martin hooker [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 5:31 PM
To: Gregory Horvath ([e-mail])
Subject: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation
Greg:
Goon morning. Well this may be the bright conspiracy, you wanted to find. This attachment is the proof that,
Bright new his drainage system was a failure in Virginia, and he needed to lie to North Carolina, to get his Carolina
mine opened, and that Virginia DEQ had caught him but just failed to do anything to stop him, and the bull is still
being passed on to Back Bay.
Go Have Fun
MDH.
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 7:21 AM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Fwd: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation
Martin: can you think about the e-mail I just wrote and tell who we can send it to... Does this have the smell of a
coverup or planned deception... Would epa or any other enity have an intrest in this observation...
john
Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home.
Subject: Re: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation
From: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:13:36 -0400
To: <[e-mail]>
CC: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Ben:
Something has been bothering me about the discharge issue with the Bright mine. I went back thru my documents obtained
from the Commonwealth of VA , Department of Environmental quality, Tidewater Region and came up with the Nov 6, 2006
Technical Inspection Report of the 200 Princess Anne Rd. Mine approx 2000' north of your mine in VA.
2 of4 4/4/2008 9:04 AM

[F,Fd: : [Fwd: [Fwd; FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observati...
This is a quote from Steven J.E.Long -Inspector, Environmental Specialist II, Report...
"The North Carolina pit was discussed with Mr. Bright noting that as long as all discharges from the site remain in N.C. ther
would be no reason for issuance of another permit.
The plan as provided by Mr. Bright, is to discharge the pit water from the N.C. site into the ditches that do flow into
Virginia. The intent is to fill the ditches with the water and allow for the water to recharge into the ground. Several flood
gates, similar to those already in place in the ditches for the Virginia pit, have been placed at various locations to maintain
the water on site.. This was the same plan that was used for the Virginia pit, and as demonstrared in May 2005, DID
NOT prevent a discharge from occuring."
I will fax a copy of the complete report to you....
My conclusion to this e-mail is how can Currituck Co. issue a conditional use permit for the N.C. mine on 5-16-06 which
states in condition 10 of said document that there is to be "no off -site discharging of water or sediment from the mine
site is allowed under this permit; "
And... on Nov.6, 2006 of the same year to a VA. DEQ inspector that he intends to discharge from the N.C. mine in to
VA..
I amd you should construed that Mr. Bright intended from the start to decieve N.C. & VA. on how he was going to
operate the mines... and he has shown total disregard for the authoritys in both VA. and N.C.
Remember when I told you that the operation of the mine in N.C. was flawed. It was based on the fact that Mr. Bright knew
or should have known that the the proposed operation would not work since the area was simular to the VA. mine and he
knew that the propose operational plan would fail . He figures that he could simply manuvere N.C. in to modifying the
mining permit like he did in Va. Once he had the permit you would simply continue with it...
wonder if Currituck Co. will reward Mr. Bright for being so clever...
If this is not grounds for the repeal of the Currituck Co. permit ... I do not know what is.
Sincerely,
John Purnell
Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home.
[Fwd: [Fwd: [Fwd: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation] Content -Type: messagelrfc822
] Content -Encoding: 7bit
Content -Type: messagelrfc822
[Fwd: [Fwd: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation]] Content -Encoding: 7bit
k _
Content -Type: messagelrfc822
FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update! observation.em!
Content -Encoding: 7bit
Re: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation.eml� Content -Type: message/rfc822
3 of 4 4/4/2008 9:04 AM

[Fwd: [Fwd: [Fwd: [Fwd: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observati...
X
Content -Encoding: 70
4 of 4 4/4/2008 9:04 AM

[117- d: V'V".4;3onnie Bright Mine Update/ observation]
Subject: [Fwd: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation]
From: Jeff Manning <Jeff.A.Mann [e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 08:24:28 -0400
To: Robert Patterson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation
From: "martin hooker" <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 17:39:59 -0400
To: "Ben Woody" <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Ben & Jeff;
Good morning. Please read John's attachment which shows Bonnie knew his drainage system had failed in
Virginia, but just went ahead to get you to approve the same failure in North Carolina. This has to be a fraudulent
presentation to you departments, which is grounds for revocation of his approved permits.
Go Have Fun
MDH
From: martin hooker [mailto: martindhooker@cox. net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 5:35 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation
Floyd:
Good morning. Please read the attachment to find the link to Bright mining drainage plan was a fraud
conspiracy on Bright's part, leveled on Virginia and North Carolina. This means his permits were acquired with
false testimony and should be revoked, for perjury/conspiracy findings.
Go Have Fun
mdh
From: martin hooker [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 5:31 PM
To: Gregory Horvath ([e-mail])
Subject: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation
Greg:
Good morning. Well this may be the bright conspiracy, you wanted to find. This attachment is the proof
that, Bright new his drainage system was a failure in Virginia, and he needed to lie to North Carolina, to get his
Carolina mine opened, and that Virginia DEQ had caught him but just failed to do anything to stop him, and the bull
is still being passed on to Back Bay.
Go Have Fun
MDH.
From: [e-mail] [mailto:][e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 7:21 AM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Fwd: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation
Martin: can you think about the e-mail I just wrote and tell who we can send it to... Does this have the smell of a
coverup or planned deception... Would epa or any other enity have an intrest in this observation...
I of 3 3/24/2008 8:24 AM

[Fwd: FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation]
john
Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home.
Subject: Re: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation
From: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:13:36 -0400
To: <[e-mail]>
CC: <martindhooker@cox. net>, <[e-mail]>
Ben:
Something has been bothering me about the discharge issue with the Bright mine. I went back thru my
documents obtained from the Commonwealth of VA , Department of Environmental quality, Tidewater
Region and came up with the Nov 6, 2006 Technical Inspection Report of the 200 Princess Anne Rd. Mine
approx 2000' north of your mine in VA.
This is a quote from Steven J.E.Long -Inspector, Environmental Specialist II, Report...
"The North Carolina pit was discussed with Mr. Bright noting that as long as all discharges from the site
remain in N.C. ther would be no reason for issuance of another permit.
The plan as provided by Mr. Bright, is to discharge the pit water from the N.C. site into the ditches
that do flow into Virginia. The intent is to fill the ditches with the water and allow for the water to recharge
into the ground. Several flood gates, similar to those already in place in the ditches for the Virginia pit,
have been placed at various locations to maintain the water on site.. This was the same plan that was
used for the Virginia pit, and as demonstrared in May 2005, DID NOT prevent a discharge from
occuring."
I will fax a copy of the complete report to you....
My conclusion to this e-mail is how can Currituck Co. issue a conditional use permit for the N.C. mine on
5-16-06 which states in condition 10 of said document that there is to be "no off -site discharging of
water or sediment from the mine site is allowed under this permit; "
And... on Nov.6, 2006 of the same year to a VA. DEQ inspector that he intends to discharge from the
N.C. mine in to VA..
I amd you should construed that Mr. Bright intended from the start to decieve N.C. & VA. on how he
was going to operate the mines... and he has shown total disregard for the authoritys in both VA.
and N.C.
Remember when I told you that the operation of the mine in N.C. was flawed. It was based on the fact that
Mr. Bright knew or should have known that the the proposed operation would not work since the area was
simular to the VA. mine and he knew that the propose operational plan would fail . He figures that he
could simply manuvere N.C. in to modifying the mining permit like he did in Va. Once he had the
permit you would simply continue with it...
I wonder if Currituck Co. will reward Mr. Bright for being so clever...
If this is not grounds for the repeal of the Currituck Co. permit ... I do not know what is.
2 of 3 3/24/2008 8:24 AM

rr
[F%`+d:.FW�.N3onnie Bright Mine Update/ observation]
Sincerely,
John Purnell
Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home.
FW: Bonnie Bright Mine Update! observation Content -Type: messagelrfc822
� Content -Encoding: 7bit
— - _ — —. .. __. yPe: messy...:
Content -Type: _g
elrfc822
Re: Bonnie Bright Mine Update/ observation.eml Content -Encoding: 7bit '
i
3 of 3 3/24/2008 8:24 AM

[t"wd_W_ light ditch design (laws.]
.1
Subject: [Fwd: I- W: Bright ditch design flaws.]
From: Jeff Manning <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 08:24:45 -0400
To: Robert Patterson <Robert.Patterson rr ncmail.net>
Subject: FW: Bright ditch design flaws.
From: "martin hooker" <niartindhooker a cox.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 14:17:10 -0400
To: <jef`[e-mail]>
From: martin hooker [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 1:24 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Bright ditch design flaws.
Jeff:
Good morning. Here is something I put together to show why the Bright ditches can not work as designed.
Go Have Fun
MDH
Content -Type: message/rfc822
FW: Bright ditch design flaws.
Content -Encoding: 7bit
I
(18[}O1 Bright ditching design FLAWS.doc Content -Type: applicationlmsword
Content -Encoding: base64
l of 1 3/24/2008 &25 AN4

Bright ditching design FLAWS:
• Bright digs his ditches to the upper ground sand level. This is all
right. The water standing in the ditch will be absorbed to the
groundwater levels in the aquifer system.
• But when he plows his fields, if a rain event occurs, the sediment
run off which is basically, is hydric soils, and spreads a thin layer
cap of' soil which acts like a vapor barrier. Which prevents the
absorption of the standing water in to the soil.
• The side walls of the ditch are hlydric soils which block the
absorption process to the groundwater levels.
• This process continues throughout his farming seasons.
• The Malcom Pirinie, Study, recognized this situation and
provided a guideline for ditching clearing, the layer of Hydric
soil needs to be cleaned either on a bi-monthly basis, but at a
minimum of -once quarterly to allow for run off absorption to the
groundwater levels to protect the shallow aquifers.
• Bright's, ideas can work, but he needs to prepare a ditch
maintenance program to protect the groundwater levels in the
area. As well as follow his maintenance proposal.
• With the dewatering of the mine the sediments suspended in the
discharge settle over the Hydric soil cap, but does not allow for
deep absorption to the groundwater, through the cap layer.

ESIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, Inc.
March 4, 2008
Mr. Robert D. Patterson, P.E.
Stormwater Permitting Unit
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Dear Mr. Patterson,
OK
This responds to your February 20, 2008 request for additional information in
support our request to modify permit number COC NCG020701 for the Bonney Bright
Sand Company's mine located at 100 Marsh Causeway, Knotts Island, North Carolina.
In correspondence dated February 1, 2008 to you, a copy of "Wetland Protection
Strategies" dated January 30, 2008 was provided. The purpose of that document was
demonstrate key design elements that were considered by the Bonney Bright Sand Mine
Company during siting and design of the facility to assure that no adverse impacts to
existing wetland resources would result from implementation of the mining operation. It
was not intended to replace an Operation and Monitoring Plan. As stated in NCG02000,
Section C, Partl "An approved Operation and Monitoring Plan is required for mine
dewatering activities that have the potential to drain wetlands". It can logically and
legally be interpreted that if a mine's dewatering activities do not have the potential to
dewater wetlands then no Operation and Monitoring Plan would be required. The
information presented was intended to demonstrate that mine dewater activities have the
potential to actually increase the rate and frequency and duration of supporting wetland
hydrology, not drain the wetlands. The enclosed O&M Plan incorporates the above
referenced information for your consideration.
Also, and most importantly, as presented in correspondence to Mr. Al Hodge,
DWQ Surface Water Protection Section, dated February 19, 2008, all stormwater and
potential mine dewatering activities discharge through outfalls located approximately 550
feet north of the Virginia —North Carolina border into waters of the Commonwealth of
Virginia, not state waters of North Carolina.
If you require any additional information please feel free to contact me at business
cell (757) 615-997, Email at: Rharoldionesaaol.com or the letterhead address.
1513 SANDBRIDGE ROAD, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456
Business Cell [phone] fax [phone]

Sincerely,
R. Harold Jones WS
President
CC: Mr. Bonney G. Bright

I I r
OPERATION
G�
MONITORING PLAN
For
Bonney Bright Sand Company
Currituck County Mine
Knotts Island, North Carolina
Prepared:
March 3, 2008
E Siena Environmental Services, Inc.
Virginia Beach, Virginia

MINE DESIGN — WETLAND PROTECTIVE STRATEGIES
The following provides a short discussion on the siting and design components of
the Bonney Bright Sand Mine Plan which were employed to assure that no adverse
impacts to existing wetland resources would result from implementation of the mining
operation.
The "Mining Development Plan for Bright Mine"' dated 3-17-04 shows the
location and limits of jurisdictional wetlands as approved by the Wilmington District
Corps of Engineers. The forested wetlands are located on the subject property but outside
of the Permit Boundary.
Surface Drainage
The closest edge of the wetland to the top of slope of the mine is 645 feet.
Located between the wetland and the edge of the pit is an Overburden Storage Area
(OSA) with a design measurement of 325 feet wide by 920 feet long. A surface haul road
is located between the OSA and the edge of the mine. The road is bermed on both sides.
A 3,646 linear foot Surface Recharge Swale encircles the mine pit. The 20 foot wide, 3
foot deep swale is located immediately adjacent to and on the outside of the haul road.
Design elevation of the haul road is 5.5 feet. The wetlands are located at elevation 2.0
feet and below. Given the fact that the surface elevation of wetland area is lower in
elevation than the surface area immediately adjacent to the edge of the mine, the potential
for the loss of supporting wetland hydrology loss via runoff to the mine is non-existent.
Subsurface Drainage
Supporting hydrology for this forested wetland system is primarily precipitation,
however that is supplemented by translocation of surface waters, via hydraulic head,
through the surface soil horizons from the Back Bay. The wetland gently slopes to the

east and eventually transitions into a herbaceous system which is hydrologically
supported entirely by the waters of Back Bay. The volume and duration of this
hydrological input is directly dependent on the water levels in Back Bay. Water levels
fluctuate widely depending on the direction and duration of sustained winds over the
system. The greater the wind velocity and duration from the southern vectors, the greater
the experienced water levels are in the Bay. Accordingly, increased rates of surface
flooding and soils saturation occur. These surface hydrologic inputs act independently of
any activity associated with the sand mine and are not affected by the mining activity.
A component of the mining plan also incorporates a perimeter Recharge Swale
(RS) encircling the mine on three sides. Water is pumped from the mine pit up and into
the RS. When water levels rise high enough in the RS, water is released through
connection pipes into 4 pre-existing farm field ditches. The ditches flow to the south to a
pre-existing farm collector ditch. The collector ditch is regulated by 4 flashboard riser
water control structures. The collector ditch flows from west to east and fronts the
forested wetland area. Pumping excess minelstormwater to the surface ditching system
will increase the soil moisture content within the existing farm fields and coincidingly
augments supporting hydrology by increasing the both frequency and duration of near
surface recharge capacity.
Underlying soils within the wetland consist predominately of Tomotley silt loam,
and a small area of Bojac loamy sand located in the southwest corner of the wetland. The
Tomotley series is a poorly drained soil with slopes from 0 to 2 per cent. The series has
an apparent high water table between 0 and -1.0 feet from December through March. The
B horizon ranges from 7 to 45 inches below the surface and exhibits a typically restrictive
layer with a permeability rate of 0.6 -2.0 inches per hour. This slow permeability rate
coupled with the hydrological inputs of precipitation, surface and subsurface infiltration
from Back Bay and the subsurface augmentation associated with the surface recharge
system, helps to ensure that no adverse impacts to the forested wetland area will result as
a consequence of the sand mining activity.

QUANTITY OF DISCHARGE
The quantity of discharge from the borrow pit dewatering operations will be
determined by daily recordation of pump hours logged. A standard pump operation RPM
will be established. The corresponding discharge rate for the specified RPM will be
obtained from the pump's manufacturers discharge curve and will be used to accurately
measure discharge volume on a daily basis. Measurements will be recorded daily and
reported quarterly.
QUALITY OF DISCHARGE
The quality of pit discharge water will be monitored in order to determine any
changes in water chemistry over time. Samples will be taken at the mine discharge outfall
as it enters the Surface Recharge Swale. Grab samples will be taken and reported on a
quarterly basis. The following parameters will be measured:
• Settle Solids
• Total Suspended Solids
• Turbidity
Total Flow
GROUNDWATER MONITORING
Water levels
Four groundwater wells have been installed around the mine. Depth to ground
water will be measured in the field on a weekly basis and reported quarterly.
A static on -site rain gauge is located at water control structure VA-2. Precipitation
is read and recorded daily.

Five (5) flashboard riser water control structures are located in the pre-existing
farm field ditches. Water levels overtopping the flashboard riser are recorded daily.
Water Quality
Water quality parameters within each of the four monitoring wells will be
measured on a quarterly basis and reported quarterly. The following parameters will be
measured:
• pH
• Temperature
• Specific Conductivity
• Chloride
• Sulfate
• Alkalinity as CaCO3
• Calcium
• Magnesium
• Sodium
• Iron
• Potassium
All samples will be collected using standard sampling procedures, collected in
laboratory -provided containers with appropriate preservatives, packed on ice and sent to
an EPA approved laboratory for analysis.
POTENTIAL EFFECTS ON ADJACENT WETLANDS
Pumping Regime

Mine water will be pumped from the mine pit up and into the Recharge Swale
(RS). When water levels rise high enough in the RS, water is released through connection
pipes into 4 pre-existing farm field ditches. The ditches flow to the south to a pre-existing
farm collector ditch. The collector ditch is regulated by 4 flashboard riser water control
structures. The collector ditch flows from west to east and fronts the forested wetland
area. Pumping excess mine/stormwater to the surface ditching system will significantly
increase water levels within the existing farm fields ditches, and most importantly, within
the collector ditch which fronts the forested wetland. Coupled with the flow restrictions
created by the 4 water control structures, significant increases in both the frequency and
duration of elevated water levels in the collector ditch can only provide an additional
source of supporting hydrology (lateral flow) to the wetlands as compared to a non -
pumping regime.
According to the Corps of Engineers 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual,
supporting hydrology for wetlands is only measured within 12 inches of the surface of the
soil. The adjacent wetland is largely situated on a Tomotely series soil which exhibits a
typically restrictive layer in the B horizon ranging from 7 to 45 inches below the surface.
Mine dewatering pumping located over 1000 feet to the northwest and at a maximum
depth of 15 feet below the surface depth should exhibit very little, if any, subsurface
drawdown of supporting wetland hydrology. This is borne out in the "Bonney Bright
Borrow Pit Groundwater Monitoring Program" by Malcom Pimie of Newport News,
Virginia, 2001 for the sand mine located immediately adjacent to the Currituck County
mine. The model criteria included:
• Groundwater elevation prediction
• Three dimensional groundwater flow
• Multiple aquifers
• Simulation of natural boundary conductions
• Simulation of vertical recharge {precipitation)
• Simulation of both unconfined and confined groundwater conditions

A copy of the model is attached as Appendix A.
Predevelopment ground water elevations were modeled and determined to be
approximately 213's of the surface elevation. For example, at a surface elevation of 12
feet MSL the water table would be 8 feet MSL or four below the surface. Given the
restrictive layer (aquatard) in the Tomotely series between 7 to 45 inches below the
surface, supporting wetland hydrology is more effected by the frequency and duration of
precipitation events than ground water since the aquifer never elevates to the surface to
develop a ground water discharge condition. Near surface hydrologic inputs from the
surface waters of Back Bay and associated subsurface head and lateral infiltration from
the farm field collector ditch fed by the mine dewatering pumping activities supply
sufficient opportunity for the wetland to serve as zone of ground water recharge zone
rather than a discharge area. As the volume of mine dewatering increases, the
corresponding water levels in the collector ditch will increase. Flow velocities will be
greatly restricted by the water control structures, providing sustained head facilitating
lateral flow into the wetland at or above the aquatard. The resulting condition will
substainally increase the duration of supporting hydrology to the wetland as compared to
pre -development conditions.
Wetland Hydrology Monitoring
A series of four (4) shallow (20-24 inch) ground water monitoring wells will be
installed within the wetland. Installation will be performed in accordance with WRP
Technical Note HY- I A-3.1 Installing Monitoring Wells/Piezometers in Wetlands, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, 1993. Orientation will be from the collector ditch southeast
toward the open waters of Back Bay. The wells will be read once every 4 days from
February 25 through April 5 each calendar year. Data will be collected and recorded as
depth below the surface. Well data and precipitation data will be correlated.

APPENDIX A
GROUNDWATER MODEL FOR IMPACT EVALUATION
A numerical groundwater flow model was developed to predict impacts from dewatering
operations at the Bright Borrow Pit located in southeastern Virginia Beach. The
hydraulic characteristics used in the model were selected such that the model would tend
to over predict the impact area. The model that was selected has been used previously for
predicting impacts in compliance with the Groundwater Withdrawal Regulations.
Model Selection
The following sub -sections briefly describe the criteria used for model selection and the
specific model used to simulate dewatering impacts from the Borrow Pit operations. The
selection of a numerical model involves examination of a group of criteria that the user
must identify and match for the system that is being modeled. The ability of the model to
adequately handle each of the criteria was used to select a model. The principal criteria
CJ required of the model includes the following:
• Groundwater elevation prediction
■ Three dimensional groundwater flow
■ Multiple aquifers
■ Simulation of natural boundary conductions
■ Simulation of vertical recharge (Precipitation)
• Simulation of both unconfined and confined groundwater conditions
The model must also have the ability to simulate a variety of aquifer boundary conditions,
such as surface water features. In addition to the above listed criteria that were used to
guide the selection of the model, it is beneficial if the selected model has been previously
used to simulate conditions within the system that is being examined. Meeting the above
listed guidelines was the USGS Modular Three Dimensional Finite Difference
L
0153-222 Ad

_ Groundwater Flow Model (MODFLOW) developed for the U.S. Geological Survey
(McDonald and Harbaugh, 1988).
The Modular Three Dimensional Finite Difference Groundwater Flow Model
(MODFLOW) was developed by McDonald and Harbaugh for the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) to simulate three dimensional groundwater flow under a
variety of conditions. This model is one of the most widely used groundwater flow
models in the United States and has been accepted by the USEPA and Virginia DEQ for
simulating groundwater flow under a wide variety of conditions. The current version of
MODFLOW, as described in the USGS Techniques of Water Resources Investigations
Book 6 (1988), is based in part on earlier versions of three dimensional groundwater flow
models developed by Trescott (1975), Trescott and Arson (1976), and Trescott, Pander,
and Larson (1976) for the USGS.
MODFLOW simulates three dimensional groundwater flow using a block centered finite
difference approach. For the block centered finite difference form, the aquifer systems
are divided into a series of three dimensional cells, with heads calculated at the center of
each cell (node). The size of each cell can be varied by row and/or column to provide
variable horizontal descritization of the model area. A complete discussion of the finite
difference equations used in calculating flow between the cells is provided in McDonald
and Harbaugh (1988).
The model is structured such that additional factors effecting groundwater flow can be
easily incorporated into the basic model. Some of the additional packages include effects
of wells, recharge (precipitation), rivers, drains, evapotranspiration, and general head
boundaries.
Bright Barrow Pit DescrrPtinn
The aquifer system that was modeled consists of the water table and the uppermost unit
r..
��. of the Yorktown aquifer separated by a confining unit. The groundwater flow inodel
0153-222 A-2

( developed for the borrow pit used data from the site investigations and published area
hydrogeologic investigations, including Hamilton and Larson, 1988; Converse Ward
Davis Dixion, 1981; Harsh and Laczniak, 1990; Meng and Harsh, 1988; Focazio and
Samsel, 1993; and Siudyla, May, and Hawthorne, 1981.
The model encompasses an area 2 miles north by 2 2/3 miles east. There are 126
columns and 107 rows in the model grid (Figure A-]). Columns and rows are equally
spaced with a grid cell size of 100 by 100 feet. The model simulates the uppermost
aquifers using four model Iayers, Layer I simulates the water table aquifer and Layer 2
simulates the Yorktown aquifer. The two layers are separated by leakance values to
simulate the confining units. The water table aquifer was defined in the model as an
unconfined variable head aquifer. Recharge from precipitation was applied uniformly
over all the variable head cells representing the water table aquifer. In the water table
aquifer (Layer 1) perennial and tidal streams, rivers, and lakes were simulated using the
MODFLOW General Head Boundary Package. Ditches were simulated using the River
package. Dewatering operations at Bright Pit was simulated using the Ditch package.
Surface elevations were discritized from USGS Topographic maps and used to calculate
an initial water table elevation. For the purpose of the Bright Borrow Pit model, the
water table elevation was assumed to be 213's the surface elevation. For instance, at an
elevation of 25 feet MSL, the initial water table elevation would be 17 feet MSL, or eight
feet below the surface. At a surface elevation of 12 feet MSL, the water table elevation
would be 8 feet MSL, or 4 feet below the surface. This general relationship closely
approximates actual groundwater elevations.
The model edges to the north and south were defined as a Constant Head Boundary for
the water table aquifer. For cells in Layer I that coincide with surface water bodies or
were in close proximity to surface water bodies, the cells were set to general head
boundary. The initial groundwater levels and elevations used for river, drain, and
constant head elevations in Layer I were set equal to the initial water table elevation.
The water table elevation for the drain package used to simulate dewatering from the
0153-222 A-3

�f borrow pits was set to an elevation close to the overall bottom elevation of the water table
aquifer. Constant head cells in the Yorktown were set 1 foot lower than the heads for the
water table.
The values of transmissivity, leakance, storage, and recharge were adjusted slightly
during calibration until groundwater levels predicted by the model simulated those
observed in the field. Generally, groundwater elevations in the water table aquifer follow
the topography at a depth of about 2 to 8 feet below ground surface. The correlation with
topographic features are more subdued in the underlying Yorktown layers.
The hydraulic conductivity used in Layer 1 was 30 ft/day, as detennined from brain size
distribution from the McCallum Boring samples. Changes in hydraulic conductivity for
the water table aquifer had little influence on predicted drawdown in the Yorktown
aquifer. The transmissivities of the Yorktown aquifer were varied based on estimated
transmissivity from nearby well specific capacity, Health Department records, Siudyla,
1981, and Converse Ward Davis Dixon, 1981. Transmivissity was also varied based on
apparent geologic control expressed by features such as the North Landing River, Pungo
Ridge, and Back Bay. Transmissivity of the Yorktown aquifer was set to a conservative
constant value of 800 ftz/day.
Because of a lack of measured leakance values across the area, a constant leakance value
was set for the model layer and was not varied across the area. The leakance used in the
model for the Yorktown confining unit was set to l x10'/day.
0153-222 A-4

Michael F. Easley, Governor
w A
February 20, 2008
Mr. R. Harold Jones
Sigma Environmental Services, Inc.
1513 Sandbridge Road
Virginia Beach, VA 23456
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
Subject: Additional Information Request For
COC NCG020701 Modification
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
Currituck County
Dear Mr. Jones;
The facility's O&M Plan, labeled "Wetland Protection Strategies", was received by the
Stormwater Permitting Unit on February 4, 2008. However, a review of the O&M Plan by the
Stormwater Permitting Unit and the Washington Regional Office showed that the O&M Plan is
significantly deficient, and not compliant with the permit. Before the permit modification can
finish being processed please provide information regarding the following:
1) The O&M plan must be able to demonstrate the effect of pumping and, as
necessary, establish the pumping regime necessary to reduce the potential impacts
to adjacent wetlands. Please refer to Page 5 of 9 Part III of the NPDES
NCG020000 Permit Conditions.
2) A radius of influence calculation must be provided for mines intending to dewater
from the pit if there are surface waters in close proximity to the mine that could
potentially be impacted. Based on this radius of influence, the O&M plan needs
to include monitoring wells, and a monitoring schedule, that are located
appropriately to monitor potential impacts to surface waters.
3) The 0&M plan provided states that wetlands will not be impacted by runoff, but
does not mention potential impacts from mine dewatering. Please provide
supporting calculations on how the proposed dewatering ditches will protect the
surrounding hydrology.
4) The O&M plan should include monitoring plans for the monitoring wells and for
the monitoring requirements listed in Table 6 of the NPDES NCG020000 Permit.
One
NprLhCarcrlina
�attrra!!y
111orth Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX [phone]
An Equal QpportunitylAffirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycledll0% Post Consumer Paper

COC No. NCG020701
Mr. R. Harold Jones
Sigma Environmental Services, Inc.
February 20, 2008
Please be aware that since your project is located near wetlands, your NPDES permit will
require dewatering operations without wetland impacts. The specific requirements. for mine
dewatering at facilities near wetlands -can be found in the text of the general NPDES mining
permit NCG020000 available on our website,
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/su/Forms_Documents.htm. See Section C, Part 1 of the permit on the
page labeled, "Part III Page 5 of 9". An approved Operation and Monitoring Plan is
required for mine dewatering activities that have potential to drain wetlands. Discharging
mine dewatering wastewater without Plan approval, and without a Permit, will be subject
to enforcement action. A Plan for your facility must be submitted to the Washington Regional
Office and approved before we can issue your permit. We encourage you to contact Jeffery
Manning at the Washington Regional Office at [phone] to address any wetland
concerns for your facility in order to ensure a successful NPDES application review.
Please submit the requested information to my attention by March 5, 2008.
If you have any questions, please contact me at [phone], x 360 or Jeffery
Manning in the Washington Regional office at [phone].
Sincerely,
Robert D. Patterson, P.E.
Environmental Engineer
Stormwater Permitting Unit
cc: Mr. Bonney G. Bright, 5513 Buzzard Neck Road, Virginia Beach, VA 23457
Washington Regional Office, Jeffery Manning
;Stormwater Permitting Unit Files
C

Aquifer situation.
Subject: Aquifer situation.
From: "martin hooker" <rnartin dho oker@cox. net>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:36:56 -0500
To: <Robert,Patterson@ncmail_net>
CC: <[e-mail]>
Roger:
Good morning. Well I received the a mail from Jeff Manning yesterday, the boondoggle just continues in
the Bright Mining operations. I talked with Britt McMillan, P.G (757.873-4421), at Malcolm Pirinie this morning, We
discussed the aquifer situation in the area of Bright Mining sites, Va. /N.C. He told me the primary aquifer in the
area is the Yorktown Aquifer. This is the primary large aquifer in the area it extends roughly from N.C. State line
northward in to Virginia Beach. But when it extends in to N.C. It splits in to three different levels depths, to form the
aquifers in N.C. He stated if Salt Water intrusion has occurred in the Yorktown the other aquifers will commingle
with Yorktown causing Salt Water intrusion in to all levels. I left him your names because you may want to contact
him for guidance, remember once Salt Water intrusion starts it in irreversible. By the way Malcom Pirinie , in its
Bonnie Bright groundwater Monitoring Program report in 2001, advised the city of V.B, the depth they should
permit the Va. Mine should only be 20-25', but the city allowed 32'.The city allowed expansion from 10-15' depth to
32' depth. Then the city pretty much blew away the Pirinie report, on monitoring practices. Hope this helps you
define a plan for the safety of your N.0 citizens.
Go Have Fun
MDH.
1 of 1 2/20/2008 12:52 PM

FW: FOIA Request.
Subject: FW: FOIA Request.
From: "martin hooker" <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14.39:29 -0500
To: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Guys
Good morning. We got this in Wednesday. This states From Virginia Game and Inland Fisheries, that the
water found in Back Bay is safer than John's well water, thanks to Bright Mining in Virginia.
Go Have Fun
MDH
From: [e-mail][mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 8:53 AM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: RE: FOIA Request.
2000
0.67
2001
1.80
2002
2.80
2003
0.61
2004
0.59
2005
0.60
2006
0.96
2007
1.67
The values above are average salinities in Back Say from 2000-2007. Keep in mind, the average salinity is a
compilation (average) of many different sampling stations around Back Bay, some of which are in the creeks,
some are in the mainstem of the bay. Individual salinity readings at the various stations for each year may be
higher or lower than the average. If you need salinities from certain sites or stations in the bay, you will need to
contact DEQ. I told John yesterday that I thought the 2007 salinity was around 2.0 ppt, but it was a little lower
than that at 1.67 ppt. The value of the salinity is in parts per thousand (ppt). Please inform John that the
conversion from mg/L to ppt is as follows, mg/L equals parts per million (ppm), covert ppm to ppt by dividing by
1000, so in his case 233 mg1L equals 233 ppm, and 233 ppm is .233 ppt (seawater is 32 ppt, fresh water is 0 ppt).
Hope this helps.
Chad
Chad Boyce
District Fisheries Biologist
Va Dept. of Game and Inland Fisheries
3909 Airline Blvd
Chesapeake, Va 23321
office [phone]
From: martin hooker [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 2:59 PM
To: Boyce, Chad
I of 2 2/18/2008 7:24 AM

FW: FOIA Request.
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: FOIA Request.
Mr. Boyce:
Good morning. I am requesting release of any data you have in house on the salinity of the water in Back
Bay, thru the period 2000-2007.1 am compiling research on a study of Back Bay water vs. local aquifer water
supplies. If available please send it by e-mail. If not just mail to me at M. D. Hooker, L.S.
3807 Magnolia Dr.
Portsmouth, Va. 23703
Go Have Fun
MDH
2 of 2 2/18/2008 7:24 AM

Bright mining situation.
Subject: Bright mining situation.
From: "martin hooker" <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:50:43 -0500
To: <[e-mail]>
CC: <[e-mail]>, "Richard Quinn"<[e-mail]>,
<j [e-mail]>
Robert:
Good morning. Just an update. It is 02/15/08. Blight's N.C. mine site is dewatering and discharging in to
Virginia. The city of V. B. installed a 15' Gravel Drive to the entrance of John's property The pumping has caused
inlet erosion so bad the Drive is now 12' wide. And it will likely be breached within a week if this continues. Just a
warning. I do this when he pumps for Jeff Manning. By the way he was pumping at night. Mon. thru Wed. Now we
had 1.5" of rain Wed. night, and Thursday So where did the water com from before Monday night, my guess he
has broken the aquifer at the N.C. mine site? Our geologist tells me he only has to go 20 — 25' deep to hit the top
of the shallow aquifers in the area. By the way his permit says run off must be contained on site, not to be pumped
off to neighboring properties, to include his adjacent Virginia properties, His engineering concept for containment
on site, and absorption on site does not hold water.
Go Have Fun
MDH
I of 1 2/ 18/2008 7.] 6 AM

FW: Bright Mine info.
Subject: FW: Bright Mine info.
From: "martin hooker" <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:35:20 -0500
To: "Robert Patterson" <[e-mail]>
Mr. Patterson:
Good morning. Here are the documents I received from, David Webb, at Currituck County Planning
Department. Open VA Beach Fax l.pdf. This is the city council meeting which approved the V.B. CUP. If you want
a guided tour thru this document, call me and I can walk you thru it.
Go Have Fun
MDH
757.484-0243
From: David Webb[maiIto: [e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, 3anuary 08, 2008 10:17 AM
To: martin hooker
Subject: Bright Mine info.
Mr. Hooker,
As you requested, the documents that Virginia Beach sent Currituck County regarding the Bright Sand Mine permit
renewals are attached.
Please let me know if you have additional questions.
David Webb, AICP
Chief Planner
Currituck County
PO Box 70, Currituck, NC 27929
252-232-6033
FAX: [phone]
VA Beach Fax1.PDF Content -Type: application/octet-stream
Content -Encoding: base64
j Content -Type: applicat] onloctet-stream
VA Beach Fax2.PDF
� Content -Encoding: base64
1 of 1 2/13/2008 8:48 AM

3-10-06; 7Q:44AM;C1 ty Clerl< Va Bch Vti p94265669 5
W
City, Clerk's Office
City of Virginia Beach
2401 Courthouse Drive
Room 281
Virginia Beach, VA 23456-9005
757-385-4303
757-385-5669 (Fax)
To: L 4(?, From:
Fax: Pages:
i
Phone: Date:
Re: CC:
❑ Urgent 0 For Review ❑ Please Comment 0 Please Reply 0 Please Recycle
a Comments;
07e
J /-a- /a ! + //o GJ

t0-OG;t0:4iAM;Cliy Clerk Va Bch'VO ;94265669 -& 2I" 6 15
-28-
Item V-J 2,
PLANNING .ITEM 4 54918 (Continued)
The following speakers registered in OPPOSITION:
Carol Cocke, 416Princess Anne Road, Phone: [phone], resident of Creeds and mother of school -aged
Children: registered on behalf of her husband, herselfand Susan Davis, concerned re the inadequate
roadway being utilized as a major truck route from the Bonney Bright Pit. There are 15 blind corners
from the inersection of Princess Anne Road to Pungo .Ferry Road, heading south to the Pit. Ms. Cocke
presented a petition in Oppositon, a map depicting the location of the Borrow Pits and the substandard
road, and it formation relative the Rural Roads Improvements Project in 1989. Said information is
hereby made a part of the record. There are fourteen (14) competitive Borrow Pits in this area
Nelllie Carroll Leonardson, 345 Princess Anne Road, Phone: [phone], resident of one of the "blind"
corners. Mrs. Leonardson has a business in Pungo and travels Princess Anne everyday. The road is
too narrow for a truck and school bus to pass each other safely.
Attorney John Richardson, 2101 Parks Avenue, represented Ogden Reid, owner of the Flyaway Club, on
the other side of the North Carolina Line, fronting on Back Bay. Mr. Reid's concern is the water table
and he is appreciative ofstaff's work to address those concerns with the installation ofthe wells and the
monitoring.
Phil Skorupa, Inspector — Commonwealth of Virginia- Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy,
Councilman Schmidt had requested Mr. Skorupa's attendance. The flow of the water is regulated
by the Ground Water Control Permit. The Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy has regulations
that govern the protection of the ground water. In the Discharge Permit, Mr. Bright is allowed to
discharge waterfrom the Mine Permit onto his farm property. The water flows into a series of irrigation
ditches on his farm property. None of the waterflows into the main waterway at Princess Anne Road.
There is a gate at Princess Anne Road that must remain shut, so it does not go into any other major
waterway, To his knowledge, Mr. Bright has the Department of Environmental Quality Discharge
Permit. At this time, the post -mine land use of this property is to be a lake. The site is permitted with the
State of Virginia and has been permitted with the Commonwealth of Virginia since1991. The Conditional
Use Permit is also a part of the permit.
Officer Lourenco, Supervisor — Motor Carrier Safety Unit, which patrols the roads and inspects the
Trucks, advised in 2005, there were forty-six (46) inspections in the Princess Anne Road section and
only two (2) of them were Bonney Bright's trucks.
A MOTION was made by Councilman Reeve, seconded by Council Lady Wilson to ADOPT an
Ordinance upon application of 8OA7VEY G. BRIGHT for Modification and Renewal of a Conditional
Use Permit for a borrow pit expansion as conditioned with the maximum number of truck trips generated
by the borrow pit shall be 75 per day. Councilman Reeve requested City staff study road improvements to
Princess Anne Road
February 14, 2006

3-10-06:i0=44AM;City Clerk ve BCh v9 ;94265669
-29-
Item V-J.2.
PLANNING ITEM # 54978 (Continued)
Upon SUBSTITUTE MOTION by Councilman Schmidt, seconded by Councilman Wood, City Council
ADOPTED an Ordinance upon application of BONNEY G. BRIGHT for Modification and Renewal of
a Conditional Use Permit for a borrow pit expansion, -
ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF BONNEY G. BRIGHT FOR
MO.DIFICATIONAND RENEWAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR A BORR0WPIT EAPANSIONRO20634142
BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OFT HE CITY OF YIRGINL4 BEACH, YIRGINIA
Ordinance upon Application of Bonney G. Bright for Modification and
Renewal of a Conditional Use Permit for a borrow pit expansion
approved by City Counr_il on Navetnber 28, 2000. The property is
located on the east side of Princess Anne Road, 2,172 feet south of the
intersection with Pocahontas Club Road.(GPW 23176213270000;
23177232590000, 23176125200000) DISTRICT 7 —PRINCESS ANNE
The following conditions shall be required:
1. No excavation or restoration of the borrow pit expansion shall be allowed without first
obtaining any necessary permits from the appropriate Federal, State and Local agencies,
required as a result of the expansion of the existing borrow pit operation. In addition, the
applicant shall obtain a Non -Metallic Mineral Mining General Permit front the Department
of Environmental Qualityfor the proposed expansion.
2. No excavation or restoration of the burrow pil shall commence until such time that a site plan
has been reviewed and approved by the Development Services Center. the site plan must
include a specific street and highway contingency plan that addresses the repair and
replacement of any damaged roadway surfaces associated with the borrow pit operation.
The site plan shall also detail the truck -watering schedule currently utilized for the abatement
of dust generated by this application.
3. The limits of excavation in the southeast corner of the site, as shown on the site plan dated
April 20, 2000, by Gallup Surveyors and Engineers and on file in the Planning Department,
must be modified to remove the cemetery sire from the excavation area and provide at least a
100 foot buffer from the cernetery limits to the edge of the excavation area. The site plan
submitted to the Development Services Center must show the cemetery site, new limits of
excavation and permanent fencing to identify and protect the cemetery site. All other limits
of excavation shown on the plan dated April 20, 2000, must be adhered to.
4. The site plan submitted to the Development Services Center must indicate the sequence of
construction far maintaining 3:1 side slopes on the borrow pit, as shown in the "typical cross
section " on the site plan dated April 20, 2000, within 60 days after excavation is complete.
5. The maximum depth ofthe proposed expansion shall not exceed an elevation of-32.0 feet
from elevation 0.00.
6. No access to or from Pocahontas Club Road will be allowed for the borrow pit operation.
7. Renewal of the conditional use permit is required after a five (5) period.
February 14, 2006

3-i0-06;i0;44AM;ClLy Clerk Va BCh Ve
-30-
; 54265668 # 4,1..
5 It
Item V-J.2.
PLANNING IITEM # 54918 (Continued)
8. Operating hours shall be 7:06 AM to 7:00 PM, Monday through Saturday. No Sunday
operating hours shall be permitted.
9_ No encroachments into existing easements will be allowed Access to drainage easements
must be provided by the applicant over all outfall systems within this site.
10. No encroachment into natural drainage channels will be allowed.
11. Dewatering of the pit will be allowed and the following are required
a. A dewatering settlement basin shall be constructed to capture sediment before
discharge,
b. A permit from the Virginia Water Control Board is required to discharge any water
from dewatering into a state waterway.
c. Pumps for dewatering shall operate only between the hours of 7: 00 Aril and 7: 00 PM
Monday through Saturday. No pumps shall operate on Sundays.
d The operator of the bor row pit shall be responsible for continuous water service for
the private wells up to 1, 000 feet and those within 2,500 feet if proved to be affected
by this operation.
12. The existing buffer of pine trees along Princess Anne Road must remain undisturbed.
13. Undrained pockets and stagnant pools resulting from surface drainage shall be sprayed in
accordance with requirements of the State Board of Health to eliminate breeding places for
mosquitoes and other insects.
14. A double row ofLoblolly and Virginia Pine trees, at least 2 —3 years old at planting, and an
under story row of wax myrtle shrubs, is required to be planted along a three (3) foot high
berm along the Pocahontas Club Road frontage for screening and buffering.
15. On an annual basis, the amount of excavated material removed from the pit shall be
consistent with the amount reported to the "Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals, and
Energy" for the year 2000. A copy of the 2000 year end report and all future quarterly
reports shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator to ensure compliance with this
condition.
16. Applicant shall, at his expense, establish monitoring wells, between two (2) to four (4) in
number (to be determined by the Water Resources Manager) at such locations as may be
determined by the Water Resources Manager, for the purpose of monitoring any salt water
intrusion which may occur as a result of the applicant's operation. Testing shall be
performed at each such well a min irnum of four (4) times per year if deemed necessary by the
Water Resources Manager. Results shall be provided to the Water Resources Manager. If,
in the judgment of the Water Resources Manager, such results indicate that salt water
intrusion is occurring to such extent that private drinking water wells are threatened with salt
water intrusion, the applicant shall cease dewatering of the borrow pit at the cost of the
borrowpit operator.
17. The maximum amount ofsand which can be transported from the borrow pit during the
twelve (12) month period, commencing on March 1, 2006, and for each successive twelve
(12) month period thereafter, shall not exceed 600,000 cubic yards.
February 14, 2006

1 3-10-0G;1o:44AM7CFty Clerk va Bch v3 ;94265569 a 5r 5
-31-
Item V-J.2.
PLANNING ITEM # 54918 (Continued)
18. The operator shall install a left turn lane on Princess Anne Road into the borrow pit
entrance. Additional right-of-way may need to be dedicated by the applicant to accommodate
the turn lane. In addition, the entrance shall be paved and the pavement -shall extend fifty (50)
feet back fi-om the property Iine and then graveled an additional fifty (50) feet. The entrance
plan shall be reviewed and approved by Traffic Engineering.
19. All trucks and equipment used in conjunction with the borrowpit operation must be stored,
repaired and fueled on the borrow pit site or on property zoned for such use.
20. For the first year following this approval, the applicant shall provide quarterly reports from
the test wells to include nitrate readings. The reports shall be submitted to the Zoning
Administrator for review by the Water Resources Manager. Following the first year,
frequency of the reports shall be determined by the Water Resources Manager. Required
frequency shall not exceed four (4) reports per year.
21. Approval is for a one year period. If all conditions have been met, the conditional use permit
may be extended an additional four (4) years.
This Ordinance shall be effective in accordance with Section 107 (0 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the Fourteenth of Februmy, Two
Thousand Six
Voting: 7-3
Council Members Voting Aye:
Harry E. Diezel, Robert M. Dyer, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf, Peter 1W
Schmidt, Ron A. Villanueva, Rosemary Wilson: and Jaynes L. Wood
Council Members Voting Nay:
Reba S. McClanan, Richard A. Maddox and Jim Reeve
Council Members Abstaining:
Vice Mayor Louis R. Jones
Council Members Absent:
None
Vice Mayor Jones DISCLOSED and ABSTAINED on the application of Bonney G. Bright for the
modification and renewal of a Conditional Use Permit. Vice Mayor Jones is a member of the Board of'
Directors of Resource Bank and receives more than $10,000 annually in compensation as a member of
the'Board. The applicant, Bonney G. Bright, has a b:4riness relationship ivith Resource Bank Vice Mayor
Jones disclosed this interest and ABSTAINED front discussion and vote on this item.
February 14, 2006

Ly ci of k V9 eco VEj ; 94265669 # �� 26
City Clerks office
City of Virginia Beach
2401 Courthouse Drive
Room 2BI
Virginia Beach, VA 23456-9005
757-385-4303
757-385-5669 (Fax)
M
To:From• %
Fax; ��� t�v Pages:
Phone: !fate:
Re: CC.
© Urgent 0 For Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply © Please Recycle
® Comments:
%a / s //a 61

s-iu-ub;1l;32AM;Ctty Clerk va Bcn Va
; 94265669 is ; 2/ ae,
CITY OF VIRGINIA 13EACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: Bonney G. Bright— five-year extension of an existing borrow pit operation
MEETING DATE: February 14, 2006
13 Background:
An Ordinance upon Application of Bonney G. Bright for Modification and Renewal
of a Conditional Use Permit for a borrow pit expansion approved by City Council
on November 28, 2000. The property is located on the east side of Princess
Anne Road, 2,172 feet south of the intersection with Pocahontas Club
Road.(GPIN 23176213270000; 23177232590000; 23176125200000) . DISTRICT
7 -- PRINCESS ANNE
® Considerations:
This item is for an additional five-year extension of the existing borrow pit
operation. City Council approved the original conditional use permit on December
18, 1989, subject to 11 conditions_ On November 28, 2000, City Council
approved an expansion of the operation subject to 16 conditions. Condition #7
states that, "Renewal of the conditional use permit is required after a five year
period." The Planning Department is not renewing this conditional use permit
administratively because complaints have been received related to the operation
of the facility. In addition, Condition #16 required the operator to install monitoring
wells and this condition had not been -met when renewal was considered. Since
October 215t, staff has received a report that the wells have been installed and
that no saltwater intrusion problems are evident. Complaints related to truck
traffic from residents of the area continue to be received.
There was opposition to the request.
a Recommendations:
The Planning Commission gassed a motion by a recorded vote of 6-5 to approve
the request with the following conditions:
1. No excavation or restoration of the borrow pit expansion shall be allowed
without first obtaining any necessary permits from the appropriate Federal,
State and Local agencies, required as a result of the expansion of the existing
borrow pit operation. In addition, the applicant shall obtain a Non -Metallic

3-7u--ub; 1 1 : 32AM;c1 ry clerk v8 Bch va
;94265689 # 3/ 28
Bonney G. Bright
Page 2 of 4
Mineral Mining General Permit from the Department of Environmental Quality
for the proposed expansion.
2. No excavation or restoration of the borrow pit shall commence until such time
that a site plan has been reviewed and approved by the Development
Services Center. The site plan must include a specific street and highway
contingency plan that addresses the repair and replacement of any damaged
roadway surfaces associated with the borrow pit operation. The site plan
shall also detail the truck -watering schedule currently utilized for the
abatement of dust generated by this application.
3. The limits of excavation in the southeast corner of the site, as shown on the'
site plan dated April 20, 2000 by Gallup Surveyors and Engineers and on file
in the Planning Department, must be modified to remove the cemetery site
from the excavation area and provide at least a 100 foot buffer from the
cemetery limits to the edge of the excavation area. The site plan submitted to
the Development Services Center must show the cemetery site, new limits of
excavation and permanent fencing to identify and protect the cemetery site.
All other limits of excavation shown on the plan dated April 20, 2000 must be
adhered to.
4. The site plan submitted to the Development Services Center must indicate
the sequence of construction for maintaining 3:1 side slopes on the borrow
pit, as shown in the "typical cross section" on the site plan dated April 20,
2000, within 60 days after excavation is complete.
a. The maximum depth of the proposed expansion shall not exceed an
elevation of —32.0 feet from elevation 0.©D.
6. No access to or from Pocahontas Club Road will be allowed for the borrow pit
operation.
7. Renewal of the conditional use permit is required after a five-year period.
8.' Operating hours shall be 7.00 am to 7:00 pm, Monday through Saturday. No
Sunday operating hours shall be permitted.
9_ No encroachments into existing easements will be allowed. Access to
drainage easements must be provided by the applicant over all outfall
systems within this site.
10.No encroachment into natural drainage channels will be allowed.
11.Dewatering of the pit will be allowed and the following are required:
a. A dewatering settlement basin shall be constructed to capture
sediment before discharge.
b_ A permit from the Virginia Water Control Board is required to discharge
any water from dewatering into a state waterway.

�+ e r K V B as c n V 8
;94265669 # 4/ 26
Bonney G. Bright
Page 3of4
c. Pumps for dewatering shall operate only between the hours of 7:00 am
and 7:00 pm, Monday through Saturday. No pumps shall operate on
Sundays.
d. The operator of the borrow pit shall be responsible for continuous
water service for the private wells up to 1,000 feet and those within
2,500 feet if proved to be affected by this operation.
12.The existing buffer of pine trees along Princess Anne Road must remain
undisturbed.
13. Undrained pockets and stagnant pools resulting from surface drainage shall
be sprayed in accordance with requirements of the State Board of Health to
eliminate breeding places for mosquitoes and other insects.
14.A double row of Loblolly and Virginia Pine trees, at least 2 —3 years old at
planting, and an under story row of wax myrtle shrubs, is required to be
planted along a three (3) foot high berm along the Pocahontas Club Road
frontage for screening and buffering.
15.On an annual basis, the amount of excavated material removed from the pit
shall be consistent with the amount reported to the "Virginia Department of
Mines, Minerals, and Energy for the year 2000. A copy of the 2000 year end
report and all future quarterly reports shall be submitted to the Zoning
Administrator to ensure compliance with this condition.
16.Applicant shall, at his expense, establish monitoring wells, between two to
four in number (to be determined by the Water Resources manager) at such
locations as may be determined by the Water Resources Manager, for the
purpose of monitoring any salt water intrusion which may occur as a result of
the applicant's operation. Testing shall be performed at each such well a
minimum of four times per year if deemed necessary by the Water Resources
Manager. Results shall be provided to the Water Resources Manager. if, in
the judgment of the Water Resources Manager, such results indicate that salt
water intrusion is occurring to such extent that private drinking water wells are
threatened with salt water intrusion, the applicant shall cease dewatering 'of
the borrow pit at the cost of the borrow pit operator.
17. The maximum number of truck trips generated by the borrow pit shall be 75
per day. A truck trip shall be considered one round trip, in and out of the
borrow pit. Truck trip records shall be submitted to the Planning Department
every 60 days.
18.The operator shall install a left turn lane on Princess Anne Road into the
borrow pit entrance. Additional right-of-way may need to be dedicated by the
applicant to accommodate the turn lane,'In addition, the entrance shall be
paved and the pavement shall extend 50' back from the property line and
then graveled an additional 50'. The entrance plan shall be reviewed and
approved by Traffic Engineering.

-- . . .. -, -,-, " - o'.- 1a ; 9426SB69 a 5i 28
Bonney G. Bright
Page 4 of 4
19.All trucks and equipment used in conjunction with the borrow pit operation
must be stored, repaired and fueled on the borrow pit site or on property
zoned for such use. Staff is instructed to allow the repair of trucks at the
facility on Buzzard Neck Road for.an additional five months.
20. For the first year following this approval, the applicant shall provide quarterly
reports from the test wells to include nitrate readirigs. The reports shall be
submitted to the Zoning Administrator for review by the Water Resources
Manager_ Following the first year, frequency of the reports shall be
determined by the Water Resources Manager. Required frequency shall not
exceed four reports per year.
21.Approval is for a one-year period. If all conditions have been met, the
conditional use permit may be extended an additional four years.
M Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting DepartmentlAgency: Planning Department
City Manager:

3-10-06;17:32AM;Clty Clerk va Bch Va ;94265669
BON EY G. BROGHT
Agenda Item # 20
January 11, 2006 Public Hearing
Staff Planner. Karen Lasley
On December 14, 2005, the Planning
Commission deferred this request to allow the
applicant to submit a revised site plan showing
truck harking at the borrow pit site. As of
January 3, 2006 staff has not received a
revised site plan.
Map z--24
Bonnev G. Bri hr
ACi
Y u I
AC-1 1
CUP- news - nowprt
atpansnnpetmif
REQUEST; This item is for an additional five-year extension of the existing borrow pit operation_
City Council approved the original conditional use permit on December 18, 1989, subject to 11 conditions.
On November 28, 2000, City Council approved an expansion of the operation subject to 16 conditions,
Condition #7 states that, "Renewal of the conditional use permit is required after a five year period." The
Planning Department is not renewing this conditional use permit administratively because complaints
have been received related to the operation of the facility. In addition, Condition 416 required the operator
to install monitoring wells and this condition had not been met when renewal was considered. Since
October 21"', staff has received a report that the wells have been installed and that no saltwater intrusion
problems are evident. Complaints related to truck traffic from residents of the area continue to be
received.
ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: Property located on the east side of Princess Anne Road, 2,172 feet south of
the intersection with Pocahontas Club Road.
GPIN: COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: SITE SIZE:
23176213270000; 7 — Princess Anne 162 acres wlth a total borrow pit area of
23177232590000; 69.4 acres.
23176125200000
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
This conditional use permit for a barrow pit was not renewed
administratively by the Planning Department because complaints were received. The complaints were
primarily related to the truck traffic associated with the borrow pit. Neighbors claim that the owner, Mr.
Bright, is keeping a fleet of'trucks related to the borrow pit on his agricultural farm at 5513 Buzzard Neck
Road. Neighbors on Buzzard NecK Road complained about noise from the trucks and safety issues. They
claimed that the trucks were being stored, fueled and repaired on the farm and returning to the farm
several times a day. The zoning Inspector made several visits to the site and found the claims to be
substantiated. The Zoning Inspector notified Mr. Bright that parking, repairing and fueling borrow"
BONNE .G BRIGHT
.z.
Agericia iterh: :20.....
.. . , - •:Rage � .,

3-e0-0a;11.32AM;City Clerk va Bch ve
dump trucks on the farm property was a zoning violation in a letter dated August 1, 2005 (falter is
attached). Mr. Bright's attorney responded in writing on August 30'h explaining why he felt his client was
in compliance (letter is attached). Complaints persisted and the Inspector continued to monitor the site.
On October 5, 2005, for example, the Inspector noted that 211dump trucks headed south on Princess
Anne Road from the farm between 6:13 a.m. and 8:40 a-m. On October 21 5% the Zoning Administrator
officially notified Mr. Bright that the conditional use permit would not be renewed administratively (letter Is
attached) and scheduled the public hearing for December 'I4 . It remains the Zoning Administrator's
conclusion that storing, fueling and repairing trucks and equipment from the commercial borrow pit on the
farm property is a violation of the Zoning Ordinance-
.
Although the letter from the Zoning Administrator notes that condition f#16, regarding monitoring wells,
had not been met; the applicant has since provided evidence that the wells have been installed. The
report on water condition is currently being reviewed by Public Utilities.
Since adjacent property notices have been sent out, Planning'has received several other complaints
about the borrow pit operation including the amount of truck traffic on Princess Anne Road. The 2000
application indicated that there would be an average of 25 -- 30 truck trips per day, however, there is no
condition limiting the number of truck trips to and from the borrow pit. The 2000 application also indicated
that excavation would not be completed until 2015.
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
EXISTING LAND USE: The subject property is zoned AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural District. There is an existing
borrow pit and agricultural operation on the subject site.
SURROUNDING LAND North:
. AgricuItural and residential uses/ AG-1 and AG-2 zoning
USE AND ZONING: South:
0 Agricultural and residential uses/ AG-1 and AG-2 zoning
East:
0 Agricultural and residential uses/ AG-1 and AG-2 zoning
West:
Y Agricultural and residential uses- A campground exists to the
southwest across Princess Anne Road 1 AG-1 and AG-2 zonind
NATURAL RESOURCE AND The property is located on the narrowest portion of the Pungo Ridge.
CULTURAL FEATURES: The approximate distance from the pit to the brackish waters of Back
Bay and the North Landing River is approximately 3,000 to 5,000feet.
Typical land surface elevations are approximately eight feet above mean
sea level and the Morrow pit is approximately 38 feet deep.
The 2000 staff report on the borrow pit expansion Indicated that it is
extremely likely that the cone of influence from the de -watering operation
associated with the borrow pit will extend into Back Bay and the North
Landing River. This means that brackish waters from Back Bay and the
North Landing River can be drawn into the water table aquifer. The
normal flow of groundwater is from the water table to Back Bay and the
North Landing River. This operation has a high probability of reversing
that flow and causing saltwater intrusion because of its proximity to
brackish waters. Saltwater intrusion is generally irreversible, it cannot be
mitigated and it could result in rendering water supply wells undrinkable.
BONNE•Y, G. BRIGHT
Age�ida lirerri,:#:24...:.
Page 2

3-t0-06:1i:32AM;C[cy Clerk va Bcn V8
'J4 Lttoboy rF of ca
AICUZ: The site is in an AICIIZ of less than 65 dB Ldn surrounding NAS
Oceana.
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) 1 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM {CIPI:
Princess Anne Road is currently a two lane undivided rural road at this location. This road is designated
on the Master Transportation Plan as a future 90-foot right-of-way with a bikeway. There are currently
no Capital Improvement Projects scheduled for this section of Princess Anne Road.
TRAFFIC:
Street Name
Present
volume
Present Capacity
Generated Traffic'
Princess Anne
3,621 ADT
1400 AD 1
95 ADT as conditioned
Road at Pungo
with a maximum of 75
Ferry Road
truck trips per day.
Average Daily Trips
Note: In 2000. the 24- hour traffic volume at Princess Anne Road and Pungo Ferry Road was Z379 ADT.
WATER and SEWER: Public water and sewer services are not available in this area of the City.
The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site as being within COMPREHENSIVE PLAID
rural area.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
It Is recommended that this borrow pit renewal be extended for an additional one year period, subject to the 16
conditions attached to the 2000 approval plus six additional conditions. The first new condition, number 17,
addresses the number of truck trips generated by the borrow pit per day. When approved in 2000, the number
of truck trips was estimated at 25 — 30 per day. Currently, as many as 75 trips per day can occur and
standards call for entrance improvements, addressed by condition # 18, including a left turn lane off Princess
Anne Road. Traffic Engineering concludes that the amount of traffic from the south does not generate the
need for a right turn lane. Condition #19 prohibits trucks and equipment used routinely at the borrow pit from
being kept on the farm, which is not zoned for the bulk storage of trucks, truck repair or truck fueling. Proposed
conditions #20 and #21 address concerns with salt water intrusion. Condition #22 addresses future renewals.
At the end of one year, the operation will be reviewed. If all conditions have been reef, an additional four-year
approval can be granted administratively. These issues were riot addressed in 2000 by conditions and appear
BONNEY.G..BRIdHi
Agenda ftem2.20 .
':Pages 3

, 3-30--08; 11 :32AM;CI ty CIerK Ve 8Ch Va
; w4zh7bgy M b, —
to be causing most complaints about the borrow pit.
CONDITIONS
The following 15 conditions from the 2000 conditional use permit shall remain in effect.
No excavation or restoration of the borrow pit expansion shall be allowed without first obtaining any
necessary permits from the appropriate Federal, State and Local agencies, required as a result of the
expansion of the existing borrow pit operation. In addition, the applicant shall obtain a Non -Metallic
Mineral Mining Gencral Permit from the Department of Environmental Quality for the proposed
expansion.
2. No excavation or restoration of the borrow pit shall commence until such time that a site plan has been
reviewed and approved by the Development Services Center. The site plan must include a specific
'street and highway contingency plan that addresses the repair and replacement of any damaged
roadway surfaces associated with the borrow pit operation. The site plan shall also detail the truck -
watering schedule currently utilized for the abatement of dust generated by this application.
3. The limits of excavation in the southeast corner of the site, as shown on the site plan dated April 20,
2000 by Gallup Surveyors and I=ngineers and on file in the Planning Department, must be modified to
remove the cemetery site from the excavation area and provide at least a 100 foot buffer from the
cemetery limits to the edge of the excavation area. The site plan submitted to the Development
Services Center must show the cemetery site, new limits of excavation and permanent fencing to
identify and protect the cemetery site. All other limits of excavation shown on the plan dated April 20,
2000 must be adhered to.
4. The site plan submitted to the Development Services Center must indicate the sequence of
construction for maintaining 3:1 side slopes on the borrow pit, as shown in the `typical cross section"
on the site plan dated April 20, 2000, within 60 days after excavation is complete.
5_ The maximum depth of the proposed expansion shall not exceed an elevation of —38.0 feet from
elevation 0.00.
6. No access to or from Pocahontas Club Road will be allowed for the borrow pit operation.
7. Renewal of the conditional use permit is required after a five-year period.
8. Operating hours shall be 7:00 am to 7:00 pm, Monday through Saturday. No Sunday operating hours
shall be permitted.
9. No encroachments into existing easements will be allowed. Access to drainage easements must be
provided by the applicant over all outfali systems within this site.
10. No encroachment into natural drainage channels will be allowed.
11. Dewatering of the pit will be allowed and the following are required:
a. A dewatering settlement basin shall be constructed to capture sediment before discharge.
b. A permit from the Virginia Water Control Board Is required to discharge any water from
dewatering into a state waterway.
c. Pumps for dewatering shall operate only between the hours of 7:00 am and 7:00 pm, Monday
through Saturday. No pumps shall operate on Sundays.
BONNtY.`.G.' BRtC.�.HT
r
Agenda Item:# 20.
:Page 4

3—i0-06;ii:32AM;C1ty Clerk Va Bch Va ;�� 49Uri� u ivi ccs
d. The operator of the borrow pit shall be responsible for continuous water service for the private
wells up to 1,000 feet and those within 2,500 feet if proved to be affected by this operation.
12. The existing buffer of pine trees along Princess Anne Road must remain undisturbed.
13. Undrained pockets and stagnant pools resulting from surface drainage shall be sprayed In
accordance with requirements of the State Board of Health to eliminate breeding places for
mosquitoes and other insects.
14. A double row of Lablolly and Virginia Pine trees, at least 2 —3 years old at planting, and an under story
row of wax myrtle shrubs, is required to be planted along a three (3) foot high berm along the
Pocahontas Club Road frontage for screening and buffering.
15. On an annual basis, the amount of excavated material removed from the pit shall be consistent with
the amount reported to the "Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals, and Energy for the year 2000. A
copy of the 2000 year end report and all future quarterly reports shall be submitted to the Zoning
Administrator to ensure compliance with this condition.
16. Applicant shall, at his expense, establish monitoring wells, between two to four in number (to be
determined by the Water Resources manager) at such locations as may be determined by the Water
Resources Manager, for the purpose of monitoring any salt water intrusion which may occur as a
result of the applicant's operation_ Testing shall be }performed at each such well a minimum of four
times per year if deemed necessary by the Water Resources Manager. Results shall be provided to
the Water Resources Manager. If, in the judgment of the Water Resources Manager, such results
indicate that salt water intrusion is occurring to such extent that private drinking water welts are
threatened with salt water intrusion, the applicant shall cease dewatering of the borrow pit at the cost
of the borrow pit operator.
The following six additional conditions are also recommended:
17. The maximum number of truck trips generated by the borrow pit shall be 75 per day. A truck trip shall
be considered one round trip, in and out of the borrow pit.
18. The operator shall install a left turn lane on Princess Anne Road into the borrow pit entrance.
Additional right-of-way may need to be dedicated by the applicant to accommodate the turn lane. In
addition, the entrance shall be paved and the pavement shall extend 5Q' back from the property line
and then graveled an additional 50'. The entrance plan shall be reviewed and approved by Traffic
Engineering.
19. All trucKs and equipment used In conjunction with the borrow pit operation must be stored, repaired
and fueled on the borrow pit site or on property zoned for such use.
20. For the first year following this approval, the applicant shall provide quarterly reports from the test
wells to include nitrate readings. The reports shall be submitted to the zoning Administrator for review
by the Water Resources Manager. Following the first year, frequency of the reports shall be
determined by the Water Resources Manager. Required frequency shall not exceed four reports per
year.
21. Condition #f5 of the 2000 approval, allowing a depth of —38', is deleted. Maximum depth of the borrow
pit shall be —32 feet.
22. Approval is for a one-year period. If all conditions have been met at the end of the one.ye'ar;:tt�.e
BONNEY-G. BRIGHT
Ageinda ,ltem*_20 .

I:i ry �,i erK va Gcn va
:94285668 a t1/ 26
conditional use permit may be extended an additional four years.
NOTE: Further conditions maybe required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances.
Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to
meet all applicable City Codes.
The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police
Department.for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
(OPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site.
BONtMY-,.G , BRIGHT
Agenda ItetTi: .20 -
Pae.6

r y
r� t � r ✓ b}�r'� r -�'�i -+I}'� �:.♦-; P $y,��' � Y 1L �� r � r� I+C+ '� ,., r kt 1 6 ,f
S. •- i is aw�Jie '1. 1 }�_ .1� ( �� a. 5'nl.' rLl'I /� JKyt, ,da �) 44 I,S�] I MS
n� r ... � I r i
FEf i a •"+��.1 ��}•�: r� -rJ• �' •t`�a{wtit ?q a"' e r ,,.�3�i r rid r'f
IV � f 1 7 <v 1 f !•r 'L l� k'l�r �.i�s. t
�� l l •Y'1 I ? T p Y' -!y. i Cl r K y S "n I i {.'r � r J!
� ��+1,� �1� I .r - h;� 7.+ � iri'E } �'7[rIH I J ? F r r; r•
' � � 1 fK+ 1 i ��%,tti�.��; { p. Wr+X �r, 'y '+y ,� H•..,, tF L:'�,��'xl ' E' ' ! r,'7G+r, I� f, +,Jy� 1
r"3 fail
}y�
{:"!
1 ®� � �'� r .� 'r:� 1+.•. r prro "te_ .M I x� z � ¢{�><. �'' is�i ""'�
i �` ° a•:' �Y,'`�f;.� s ':i'1 1 L41 Ff Jlv1• +j
*r•' $; /r�/ 'r. ,: r; c 't t : 1'}% �lY:f }� +s',•f-S
J cp3�tiyt� �
� t;. °,: `.��• � .•+ .i � �`�r•; of � 1 �• -.ly i`"S�a�r I i _� f �{ ��
.S-vr+•'' u cl�-''i�'f�A, ` } �,C'��'!It'1;� r,l�. rti,�•.; ;••:- , M' � r�;yC ' '� �^.
���F""'� r 1:'s7f '[•4 - { Y '�i �' ' t t �. �u Sli Jr �'y �ti
t�=5t • , sl2rr.�f �L{�lx rr`tx s� r �u.,. LC'i • U} �!
tr Z7 r!tt! „tit ,y... i y y���� +��, '� * .• �+ J•�yy��� rn �y�.�{Jr7t�� 1 i �
j31t��.,,r �J. r•:i)I r1"`' a �- Q�,1,`+ � Isx .', R • It+ Sri 4r i'•r*+� ' 1 s •'�
� s : S: �':-' !� S.L}�rj��,•7 f+ ,".ZU.S l+r µL yy a+.:+rl�`.,y a.•r•.r• 'aY. �' /'�
�nl, . -cr►. .,+ �s �.•y,, - 's .,,,• ._ , : Y n`trhl Pa,,�a'K'r}rf��•�' �?"*c
�l FL'\� �t ,r��'r ■ q•}r''S'.
tZ ' S[ r � • �j [t ••�,� ��� �t'�� pe.{ +'E'h � Z r*��t� dryLt�"'��°
lYa+ Vt #,"f [� l•,' I+Ft .
i r ^� �• �iN�'F214
• 3 yl
= 1 � � � �Ltrtf 'i Yrr•�{��•!'JI, t?F yT �� 't `
t ! i-t' _ ! f�r:•' F' ~ kr �f+' {*ffps, •'rfv .
IL
/.,.n� I r a� C', ;i�lE .�,f 's � i. r,,`lW � y''{ �4Yla� �', � r • �'..;�'
�r .a
\� �� b i G l,b 7.a t , L= --• yy m�,., ' Y.4� _ c` r f - Y r
r � r
k
� �f'• Ir���. �rl �pt'1 � .p qla ,;{;,',*J.,�v; ,a,,i 'r .. - �
zr df+l F'tl

1 13-10-O6;ii:32AM;CIty Clerk vs eCh va
;54265669 P 13/ 2U
PROPOSED SITE PL/ki
:•r:
B0NN.6f :G.: �BRI HT
Agenda Item.*_.20

3--to-08 ;t1:32aM;Ciry cierk Va Bch Va
;94265669 u 14i 2r3
1
12/18/89
Conditional Use Permit for a borrow pit
2
11/28/2000
Conditional Use Permit for the expansion
of a borrow pit
3
10/29/91
Commercial Kennel
4
2/13189
Change to a Nonconforming Use
5
11/8/2005
Conditional Use Permit for a campground
ZONING
BONNEY`G: BRECHT
Agenda .Item20 .
,:1"'age9

. 3-10-06; I I :32Ak4;Clty Clerk Vo BCh Ve
;94265669 a 15Z 20
"FUCAMN PAGE OF4'
-CONDITIONAL USE PERMrF
UiT bF'V1kG1N1A BEACH
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT'
ApFlIcant's Name: QDT)DeY orlot
ListAll Cwreat
p,mpfftyOvmErs. Bonney Bright
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOS10RE
If the property owner Is a CORPORATION, list all offkeevs of the Cmponlion be -low- (AuachYmifaecr=j-y)
K/A
If the property owner is a PARTNMMP. FIRK or other UNINCORPOJUTED ORGANUATION. list
all membm or purtn= in the orgwirnion below: (Attach list g(necE=ry)
14/A
0 Cheek hem if ft property owner Is NOT acarporation. Pw=rSh1p, rmlmoz other "r)QoQGra1tCd
7f0#44WVr=dLv not (Iso wrrW owxv 411heympv1y, complete the Applicant DITdoutre Seclionblow:
AvFuCANT DISCLOS10 KE
U the mpip%iqAm is a CORPORATION, 11= nit uffi=& ofthe Corporation below: (Mach list ifsjec'-VcY)
If the applicant to a PARTNERSMP. MM or outer UNINCORPORATED ORGANIZA710M. list all
members or partners in I]= orgwd=Liion below - (attach hif Vn0,a=,arY)
0 Check bere if the applicant Is NOT a. curpurz4on, partnership, firm, or other uniworpmEed organization.
ICEWMCArnoN.- I cort(& that the b1forzoadon confair, rein is irrie and "crorate.
Sig re
Bonney Bright
mat KMD
P
BoN4r=Y.-*.G." MOM.
A'qqqda 1.tem',-#.-20.--
q.1 Q

3-jo-06;i1:32AM;C1ty Clerk Ve eCh Ve
;94265869 ;f,- 16/ 2a,
D1!WTAWOFPIAJhWMO
ZwNO Amvm (MDOU aMAim
FAX(7MW-iD12
August.1, 2005
Bonney G. Bright
5513 Buzzard Neck Road
Virginia Beata, VA 23457
Re: Storage of Commercial p ump Trucks at 5513 Buzzard fleck Road
Virginia Beach, VA
Dear Mr. Bright:
Current City records indicate you as the owner of the above referenced property.
Inspection of the property indicates a large number of dump trucks being parked, repaired,
and fueled on the property. This is not an agricultural use allowed in the property. Section
401(b)2 of the City Zoning Ordinance prohibits a business from operating at the above
location where there is any change in the outside appearance of the building or any visible
or audible evidence from outside the building lot either permanently or intermittently, of the
conduct of such business,
You have 30 days after receipt of this letter to correct the violation by removing the trucks
from the property or Legal action as allowed by law will be taken to correct the sltuation,
In accordance with Section 16.2.2311 of the Code of Virginia, you have the right to appeal
this decision to the Board of Zoning Appeals within 30 days from the date of this letter, if
you do not appeal, this decision shall be final and unappealable. An appeaj may be taken
by fling with the Zoning Administrator a notice of appeal specifying the grounds thereof.
If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call at 426-5068.
Sincerely,
Bill Mellon
Zoning Inspector
C: File
CAUelbuzzard neck5513.05
4NEYBRIGHT
Agenda 1terh .20 - .

3-10-06;ii:32AM;Clty Clerk Va Bch Va
;94266669 U 17/ 28
S 1L lief ROUMI N,
MY, 1 aC—
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS Al LAW
PCNOROK£ OFFLeE PARK • WRLOINO O'44
281 JU04rfMUCNct 8ou4.Lvnnn '
FVT14 FLDOA
A rWiNIA BrAGM, ViRmlNI.4 23462.2S89
T&L[PNONC 757.499.8971
FA=L1mK.: 7S7-4S&-544S AI-IgUst 30, 2005
Via Hand peliveru
Bill Mellon, Zoning Inspector
Department of Planning
Zoning Division
Building 2, Room 100
Municipal Center
Virginia Reach, Virginia 23456-9039
pee Bonney G. IRdgbt and Bonney Bright Farms
5513 Buzzard Neck Road, Virginia Beach, VLrgaxia
Dear Mr. Mellon:
Jt]N a, r.nz�AN
SCOTr N. ALP6R[N
R. ROwARD BOURD0N,JA.
JAMGS T. CROMWELL
L STEVEN EMMERT
OAvIP S. HOLLAND
K1nK U. LEVY
JENNIYEF[ h. CRAM -SWIM
HOWARD R, syms. at,
I Ann writing to you on behalf of Mr. Bunney G. Bright in reply to your
letter of August 1, 2005.
Please he advised that zny client has had a handful of trucks that he
did not own which were parked on his farm removed from his property. As
of this date, all of the remaining vehicles, trucks and equipment belong to
Mr. Bright and Bouncy Bright Farms, • All of the tracks and machinery
located on his farm are utilized in his very signeificant. farming operation,
Sorne of his vehicles are' used for multiple purposes associated with his
farming operation.
As a. result of the foregoing, Mr. Bright is in compliance with, the
requirements of the City Zoning 4rdinancc with respect to his longstanding
and ongoing agricultural operation.
Should you have any questions or concerns regarding the contents of
this letter do not hesitate to contact me_
Sincerely,
R. Edward Bourdon, Jr.
REBjr/axhm
cc Bouncy G. Bright, Bonney Bright Far=
Karen Lathy, 7,0rdn9 Adicinb[rntar
Jack WhAncy. Director, DeportatentbEAIIriculture
Z0NTNG/DRjGKT/MELL0N 1
1.
BONNE-Y`G. BRIGHT
Agenda fter4.20
P40e12

3—i0-08;11!32AM;C1ty Clerk V6 Bch V£1 ;9426B&69 Yr 18/ 26,
DEPAMIf.t"OFP Aeov.M
R.7l4'7-.Ml
F;4X(7SI)t264%V
October, 21, 2005
VBgov_rnm
NUTA%*ALCENTER
@ULDW132[ROM 116
moccufty"Ou=p9m
MOIN9ADEaCKVIROWA 23&SGQ D
Mr. Bonney G. Bright
Bonney Bright Farms
5613 Buzzard Neck Road
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
R.E: Conditional Use Permit for a Barrow Pit Expansion on the East Side o'f
Princess Anne Road, 2,172 feet South of the Intersectioon Wth Pocahontas Club
.Road, 162 Acres, Approved by City Council on November 28, 2000.
Dear Mr. Bright:
As you may know, the above referenced conditional use permit for your borrow
pit expires on November 28, 2005, i am wring to inform you that the Planning
Department will not be renewing your conditional use permit administratively for
the following reasons:
1. Condition 916 attached by City Council to the approval, requires you to
Install monitoring wells and provide the City with test results pertainfng
to salt water Intruslon at least once per year or, at a maaamum, four
times per year if regUlred by the M's Water Resources Manager.
Your attorney Edward Bourdon informed me that these test wells have
been reeentty Installed, however, 1 have received no water reports or
written confirmation that the wells were installed.
2. The City continues to recelve complaints about trucks related to the
borrow pit business being kept at your faun on Buzzard Neck Road.
Our Zoning Inspector has observed the truck irdfrre and we must
conclude that the cornplaints-have validity. We recognize your position
BONNEY'-G:.BRkGHT
Agericia Item--A,20.... .
P"' .3

3-+O-o6;ti:32AM;City Clerk Va Bch ve
;94265669 # 19Z 28
that these trucks are used for farm related activity, however, it also
appears that a significant amount of the traffic is related to the barrow
pit business. We conclude that thts Issue should be discussed In a
public hearing forum, This will give all parties the opportunity to
express their position and concerns. '
We are placing your renewal on'the December 14, 2005 Planning Commission
meeting for a public ►tearing_ The public hearing begins at 12:00 noon, i=ollawing
a recommendation by the Planning Commission, the renewal will be heard by the
City Council the fallowing month, Please feel free to call me with any questions or
concerns at 563-1264.
Sincerely,
n
Karen Easley
Zoning Administrator
Cc: Kay Wilson
Bob Scott
ftrbara Duke,` -
Bill Mellon
Edward Bourdon

6-1U-U3;11:32AM;C1'ty clerk ve Bell va
94265669 V, ;O/ 28,
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Modification and Renewal of a Conditional Use Permit for a
Borrow pit approved by City Council on November 28, 2000
East side of Princess Anne Road
District 7
Princess Anne
January 11, 2006
REGULAR
Barry Knight: The next agenda item Mr. Strange.
Joseph Strange: The next item is Item #20 Bonney G. Bright. It is for a Modification and
Renewal of a Conditional Use Permit for a harrow pit expansion approved by City
Council on November 29, 2000. The property is located on the east side of Princess
Anne Road, 2,172 feet south of the intersection with Pocahontas Club Road with 20
conditions.
Barry Knight: Mr. Bourdon is earning his pay today.
Eddie Bourdon: Before you start the clock, I've got the letters of support that you all
received this morning. I don't think you need another set of those. You have already
seen those. For the record, my name is Eddie Bourdon, a Virginia Beach attorney. Mr.
Chairman and members of the Planning Commission, I am truly honored and consider
myself privileged to stand before you this afternoon representing one of the pillars of the
agricultural industry in our City. -Mr. Bonney Bright, like a handful of other significant
agricultural business owners in southem Virginia Beach has lived and farmed in southern
Virginia Beach his entire life. The Bonney Bright farms agricultural business utilizes
over 3,500 acres of land in southern Virginia Beach and northeast Currituck County,
North Carolina. All of the more than 3,500 acres of land that they operate upon is zoned
agriculture. And Bonney has never. sought a Conditional Use Pon -nit for alternative rural
residential development. Bonney has been honored as the Man of the Year in Agriculture
for the City of Virginia Beach. Bonney has received the Planning Commission's award
for the City of Virginia Beach's Agricultural Operation in 1996. Bonney has served for
many years on the City's Agricultural Advisory Board. Bonney is a significant
contributor to the 4-H Program and to many other community organizations in Virginia
Beach and specifically in southern Virginia Beach. Bonney's agricultural business
employees and provides a livelihood to more than 50 individuals. His annual payroll
approaches two million dollars. In,addition, Bonney buys almost all of his parts,
equipment, services, and fuel from Virginia Beach businesses. Last year, Mr. Bright
spent close one and a quarter of a million dollars on parts, equipment, services, and fuel
in the City of Virginia Beach. Bonney Brighf farms, owns and operates 141 pieces of
agricultural equipment including 25 dump trucks. Up until now, most of Bonney's
agricultural equipment has been stored, serviced, and maintained at his home place on

.3-i0-06;11:32AM;City clerk va Bch va ;94265669 z 21i 28
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 2
Buzzard Neck Road just west of downtown Creeds. Like other large agricultural business
operations, Bonney has stored, serviced, and maintained, and fueled all of his equipment
at his home place where he has a significant investment in infrastructure. Most
individuals who have managed to survive in agriculture will attest that diversification and
flexibility are essential. Hard work and a little luck are mandatory. Mining sand rather
than building houses represents Bonney's diversification. In the early 1970s, Mr. Telford
Williams began reining a little sand from the site that is now commonly referred to as the
Bonney Bright Borrow Pit. Bonney purchased Mr. Williams' land in 1975 and Mr.
Bright now owns 500 acres of contiguous land that surrounds and encompasses the area
that is the excavation area, which is 69 acres of this borrow pit. Going on 17 years ago,
in 1979 Virginia Beach City Council approved a Use Permit for a 231h-acre excavation
site for Mr. Bright subject to eleven conditions. In November 2000, City Council
approved an application to expand and enlarge the excavation area by 45 acres to a total
of 69 acres of excavation. Subject to 16 conditions, one of which was renewal of the
Conditional Use Permit required for five years and that is a common condition in all
borrow pit applications. The original 198.9 Use Permit and the 2000 Use Permit
modification both contained a condition that limits excavation to 38 feet in depth. In the
year 2000, there was some concern expressed by a handful of folks who opposed the
request to expand the excavation area. They were concerned about the potential for
drinking wells being affected or for saltwater intrusion to take place. We had three
experts confirm that this would not be a problem given the 38-foot excavation limitation
that had been in place since 1989. And, the fact that Bonney does not pump the water
away from the site but recharges the agriculture by having the water circulating and
remain on site. I draw your attention to Condition #5 and #11 in the 2000 approval that
deals with the regeneration, recharging and the warranty of people's wells against Failure.
In seventeen years of operation no wells have failed or been effected including Mrs.
William's well, which is right next to the pit and is only a 35 foot deep well. No
saltwater intrusion has taken place. The City had a ground water study done by Malcolm
Purney in the year 2001, which essentially agreed with our experts but assessed that there
might be some risk if we excavated significant amounts below 32 feet in depth_ Well,
Mr. Bright has not excavated below 32 feet in depth. Has not executed what was
permitted at 38 feet and in fact, we are willing to agree to modifying Condition #5 to limit
the excavation to 32 feet in depth. There is no sand worth retrieving below 32 feet in
depth, which essentially removes that issue from the table in terms of there being any risk
of salt water intrusion. But the conditions that are recommended by staff are all
acceptable. We're not asking that they be changed but to make sure that everyone
understands that is really at this point a red hC, _. I also want to point out that Mr.
Bright's sand is sold almost exclusively to locations and people developing and doing
other things needing sand in Virginia Beach. Over 90 percent of the sand that he
delivered in the last 3 to 4 years has been to locations in Virginia Beach. The conditions
that staff has recommended to you with this extension we are in agreement with .but with
one caveat and i want to take a minute to talk about that. Moving these vehicles from the
home place where they have been all these years does create some problems. One is that
these 25 large vehicles have to have their brakes inspected on a daily basis. That can be

3-10-06;11:32AM;CIty Clerk Va BCn Va ;94285669 V 22/ 28
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 3
done at the site where we will store them at in the pit but they cannot be repaired there.
And that is going to present some issues with regard to traffic and traffic on Princess
Anne Road. But, we do believe that allowing the vehicles to repaired at his home place
where all of the other 126 vehicles and equipment are stored and repaired simply makes
sense. We have a disagreement with the staff as to whether these agricultural zoned
properties where the Use is permitted in agriculture and an agriculture operator who owns
there that can't do that as an accessory use on his property but we do have that
disagreement. We're trying not to be disagreeable in trying to find common ground here_
I want to mention also that Mr_ Bright has an exemplary safety record. These trucks that
he operates go over 1'/2 million miles a year. The only accidents that have ever occurred
involving a Bonney Bright owned truck were a rear end collision where a car hit one of
our trucks. The car driver being at fault and no one having been injured, and a truck only
incident where a truck ran into a ditch. There was no other vehicle involved and no one
injured, again, over a 11/2 million miles a year. Again, we are willing to accept the
conditions that have been laid out by the staff. However, we do think it is imposing a
burden and we really aren't convinced that it is right to suggest that he cannot repair his
vehicles at his shop on his farm. Under Section 227 of the Comprehensive Zoning '
Ordinance there are factors that are Iisted that you should consider involving approving
borrow pits. If you take a look at those one is the affect of the proposed pit on ground
water supply and drainage. We covered that. History shows that is not an issue or
problem and to a degree that might have even been thought of a problem limiting the
excavation to 32 feet eliminates that in its entirety. The cap of the Yorktown aquafer is
conservatively at 32 feet and other experts will argue that it is even less. It is down in the
40 to 45 foot range. The effective use of city streets in the area including traffic safety,
again, my clients record is impeccable when it comes to safety record. The realty is sand
is needed in Virginia Beach is either corning here or cowing from other locations in the
southern part of Virginia Beach and Chesapeake and in northeastern North Carolina on
the exact same roads. We also have buffers in place, berms in place, trees in place.
We're more than two football fields away from the closest home an Pocahontas and the
people who are next to us on Princess Anne have no objection to our continued operation.
I'll be happy to answer any questions that any of you may have. I appreciate your
attention. We're here to try to resolve the problems that there are.
Barry Knight: Are there any questions of Mr. Bourdon?
Eddie Bourdon: Thank you Mr. Chairman,
Joseph Strange: Our first speaker speaking in support is Richard Hancock.
Barry Knight: Hello Richard, Welcome. Please state your name.
Richard Hancock: Richard Hancock. I live on Buzzard Neck Road. My comments
address the communication on November 10, 2005 written to Councilman Reeve. I
believe you all received a copy. In this regard, Councilman and Mr. Knight met with a

3-10-06;11:32AM;C1ty clerk va Bcn va ;942G5669 0 23/ 28
Item #'20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 4
couple of residents on Buzzard Neck Road along with some non-residents. I want to
know about the other residents that we not count. Mr. Knight, I think you should have
abstained because of your business relationship with Bonney. Otherwise, I think there is
a question of ethnics involved. The issue is safety in that letter. The neighbors have been
jogging that road for 20 years. No problems. I'm speaking of Buzzard Neck Road. Two
ladies walk almost daily. No problem. Me,1 travel in and out of that road more than any
other resident on that road. No problem. The previous owner of the Culpepper house
Iived in that house for 13 years. No problem. No vibrations. Is safety the real issue to a
man who takes a lawnrnower up and down Buzzard Neck Road with a small child in his
lap, no helmet, no seatbelt but is unable to hear approaching traffic. Several times I have
came up behind Mr. Culpepper in my truck and have had to wait; for hire to turn and
visually acknowledge me before I could pass. And the issue of maintaining the rural
integrity. To me, sand, dirt, topsoil are commodities like potatoes. You dig, you load,
and you haul it to the market. A perfect fit for rural agricultural. The farmer who does
not diversify in today's economy is not going to be in the markets. How can someone in
the real estate business preserve the rural integrity? They buy, sell, subdivide, sell, buy
more traffic, more noise, more infrastructure costs. As far as the issue of noise in this
regard, I live at the end of Buzzard Neck Road on the water. There are a lot of boats at all
tinges, day and right. Noisy? Yes. Wake me up? Yes. But it is the nature of the
environment that I chose to Iive in. Now the people who are against him on Buzzard
Neck Road knew the nature of that.environment when they moved there. As far as the
issue of zoning rules to me should be practical and appropriate for the culture of the area -
My father practiced medicine over there for over 40 years. The majority of that time he
was the only doctor available at that hour. And you know what, his office practice was
never zoned as a medical building. Would you have thrown him out? Would you have
deprived him of that service? It is the principal of it. Other tractors farm Bonney Bright
farms are not a teacup full of jobs out there. The last point that I wanted to make is how
can you in good conscience jeopardize a number of people's livelihoods? Another word
that was mentioned I think was nuisance. if something is really a nuisance, you avoid it
at all cost_ You riight ask the people that live on Buzzard Neck Road who are against
this where they got the dirt and rock in their driveway. If you're really against something
why do you support him.? Thank you very much.
Barry Knight: Any questions for Mr. Hancock? Mr. Hancock, just a point of clarity..
Richard Hancock: Yes sir.
Barry Knight: Mr. Bright and I were in the hog business from 1994 — 1992 and we had a
wonderful relationship. We were friends then and we're friends today. As far as the
meetings that I had with some of the residents on Buzzard Neck Road, I afforded them
the opportunity to rneet with me just as I afforded Mr. Bright the opportunity to meet with
him. I have not formed a decision here today.
Richard Hancock: 1 didn't say you had.

11 :,j4A [; U4 Ly L:I erK Va SCn V&
:942655Fa9 24/ 28
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 5
Barry Knight: I tnderstand it
Richard Hancock: I just felt like all the residents should be consulted_ That was my
point.
Barry Knight: Thank you Mr. Hancock.
Joseph Strange: The next person speaking in support is Marvin Rollins.
Barry Knight: Welcome Marvin.
Marvin Rollins: Thanks Barry.
Barry Knight: Please state your name.
Marvin Rollins; Mr. Chairman and mennbers of the Planning Commission, my name is
Marvin Rollins. I live at 1521 Mill Landing Road, which is at Back Bay. I am the
operator and owner of a construction company that started with my father in 1946. We
are Class A in Virginia, unlimited in the State of North Carolina. I've had the privilege to
know the Bright family for a long time. I've been married to Bruce and Bonney Bright's
sister. for 41 years.. To. us,. as older members of this family, I sure regret being here today
and the younger members will soon regret too. Anyone that is involved as I am in the
construction business that is used to proctor tests, compression test, special inspection
reports, etc., know the necessity of good quality material that comes out of the ground.
And this pit whether it is my brother -in-laws, or it could be any body, does have duality
material that consistently meets the requirements so that the construction industry can be
carried forward. All materials, as engineers and builders know, do not meet that. There
are three points that I would Iike to make and that being one of them. Another one is that
any time the construction industry comes to be there is always conflict_ Not necessarily a
knock down, drag out conflict but a verbal commitment or I don't like this or I don't like
that. The human race certainly does like conveniences. And it does not like
inconveniences. And unfortunately with the construction industry hauling with trucks,
cement trucks, material trucks whatever it may be, there are inconveniences. Most of the
time that there are inconveniences and the squeaky wheels start to squeak louder and
louder. And, when the project is finished, a lot of times and I think people in the
construction industry that have been there for many years that usually the person that
makes the most racket or is the first one there to open the doors when the business is
open, and we don't live in a utopia and we never will. I hope that this business can go
forward and I hope you people understand that it is a necessity for the City of Virginia
Beach, and it certainly creates much more livelihood and much better things than there is
negativity to it. Thank you all very much.
Barry Knight: Are there any questions for Mr. Rollins? Thank you Marvin.

3-10-06;11:32AM;C1ty Clerk Va Bch Va
;9426seee - # 25/ 28
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 6
Joseph Strange: Is Barbara Humphries here? Are you speaking in support or opposition.
Barbara Humphries: A little bit of both.
Joseph Strange: Okay. You're next. Barbara Humphries.
Barry Knight: Welcome Ms. Humphries. State your name.
Barbara Humphries: Thank you. New Chairman Knight and ladies and gentlemen of the
Planning Commission, my name is Barbara Halstead Humphries. I'm here speaking
today on behalf of my father Robert Halstead and his residence is at 6364 Pocahontas
Club Road, which is located adjacent to the Bright mine. I'm also speaking on behalf of
my husband and myself. We live about a male south of the pit at 115 Martin Lane, Knotts
Island. The address is Knotts Island but we don't actually live on the island. We support
the additional conditions that have been proposed by the Planning Department to manage
the traffic impacts of the Bright rrdn,e on State Route 615, which is Princess Anne Road.
We also support the extension of the Conditional Use Permit for a one-year period only.
However, any future extensions should be made on a year -by -year basis because of past
and continuing violations of the 16 conditions from the 2000 Conditional Use Permit.
The Bright mine failed to comply with Condition #16 requiring installation of ground
water monitoring wells until sometime. in. the late 2005. I.believe it was somewhere
between August and October. The Bright inine disebarges deep water fluent into ditches
and canals that feed into Back Bay, which may violate Condition #11. The Bright mine is
violating Condition It14 by failing to plant loblolly and Virginia pine trees and wax
myrtle shrubs on the bean along Pocahontas Club Road. We are very concerned about
the combined impacts of the existing sand mine in Virginia Beach, and the new mine that
Bonney G. Bright proposes to develop just south of the existing site in Currituck,County,
North Carolina.. We are asking the Virginia Beach Planning Commission to oppose the
new Bright sand mine in Currituck, and until such time as the Bright mine in Virginia
Beach seizes to operate. Our community can barely manage the impacts of one sand
n-dnc at a time. Continue operation of the existing mine plus a new mine would be in
tolerable. Thank you very much for your time.
Barry Knight: Thank you Ms. Humphries. Are there any questions? Thank you.
Joseph Strange; The next speaker is Kendall Smith.
Barry Knight: Mr. Smith, you didn't check down here whether or not you support or
oppose.
Kendall Smith: I guess I would be opposed based on one concern that we have.
Barry Knight: If you want to wait a minute, we'll finish with the ones that are for it.
We'll get you in a minute.

3--10-06;ii:32AM;C1ty Clerk Ve Bcn Va
;94265669 0 ?6/ 28
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
page 7
Joseph Strange: The lastspeaker that we have in support is Don Horsley.
Barry Knight: Mr. Horsley, you couldn't get enough of us could you? Welcome back
Don.
Donald Horsley: Thank you sir. Ms_ Chairman and members of the Commission, last
month we deferred this application.
Ed Weeden: Please state your name for the record.
Donald Horsley_ Don Horsley, 3169 Land of Promise Road. Last month we deferred
this application assuming that we were going to come back with an expansion to allow
for the removal of these trucks. I understand that through some negotiations that didn't
work out. So we're conning back basically the same request that we had last month. We
did use that time to work out a feasible situation to get the trucks off of Buzzard Neck
Road because that appears to be what is serviced in the last few months to be the main
conflict with Mr_ Bright's operation. Now we have a problem with the service of the
vehicles on Buzzard Neck Road because they can't use Buzzard Neck Road. We can get
the trucks to the pit but we can't work on the trucks. So, we realize this a violation of the
current zoning ordinance that we've got. We also realize that is what commissions and
councils are. for to look at situations like this and we've done this over the lb years that I
sat in your seat. We looked at many of these situations and various other applications.
What I'm asking from you today is that Mir. Bright willingly said that he will move his
trucks. I don't know what number the condition is but he can't come back and work and
service his trucks. I ask you to give him a little bit of leeway on that portion of the
conditions. If any of you have ever worked with mechanics or whatever, you know they
are not going to go down to a sand pit and work on trucks. I mean it is hard enough to get
mechanics to work in nice facilities much less laying on the ground in cold wet weather.
So we ask you to give some leeway to that condition to allow Mr. Bright to be able to
come back and service his vehicles in a sensible manner. I see the light Ed. And also, I
ask that you to recommend to the Agricultural Advisory Commmission that they look at
this ordinance to see if some type of minor tweaking needs to be done if we don't do
anything but define what an agricultural vehicle is. And, then it will make it a whole lot
easier for our Zoning Administrators to make rulings on these things. So that is what I'm
asking you today, is to allow a little leniency and refer this matter of the agricultural
vehicles back to the Agricultural Advisory Commission. You've got a new group over
there. They're looking for things to do right now so give them a job and Set therm work on
this. I think if we could just get a new definition for what an agricultural vehicle is or
either have a printed definition of what an agricultural vehicle is. So, that is basically
what I've got to say. I would have said it last month if we would of heard this issue.
Thank you very much.
Barry Knight: Thank you Don. Ms. Wood would you like to ask a question?

3-10-06;11:32AM;C1Ly Clerk V,y Bch Va
94265669 0 27/ 26
Item ##20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 8
Dorothy Wood: We miss you sir. One thing. This morning someone told us, Mr. Scott
that the truck brakes have to be done every day or checked every day?
Donald Horsley: I know they check periodically. I don't know if it is everyday or not. I
know they're checked periodically_ Mr. Bright has to make sure and it is a little different
from regular farm vehicles. He has to make sure that he is up to DOT Standards so it is
more inspections that are done to these dump trucks then his regular farm equipment. So,
I'm not sure that it is every day but I'm sure its every two or three days anyway.
Dorothy Woad: I would like to see some compromise be worked but if they had toga
everyday or every two days, it would be pretty much like it is now Don.
Donald Horsley: I'm guessing that Mr. Bright and you could ask him if you like to but
I'm guessing that Mr_ Bright would probably agree to that each truck possible two times a
week.
Dorothy Wood: It has to be that often to be serviced?
Donald Horlsey: I would think so.
Dorothy Wood:,T4ank you sir. ,
Donald Horsley: That would be my guess.
Barry Knight: Are there any other questions for Mr. Horsley? Ron.
Ronald Ripley. Don, have they had a period of time to operate or maybe some
modification of operating, give them time for the Agricultural Advisory Commission to
meet and try to address it, do you think that would fit together? I'm trying to get bits and
pieces of this thing. There is an expansion piece to the possible to the property in the
future. The operation will continue for a little while_ Am I not correct in that?
Donald Horsley: I don't know the length of time that operation is going to continue but it
is going to continue for a while. Yes. But also, the sand that Mr. Bright has on his pit is
conning to an end very drastically because he couldn't get the depth that he originally
thought he was going to get. So, the duzation there may not be as long as a lot of people
think. But so far as the Agricultural Advisory Commission they sheet on a quarterly basis.
l would think this would be something that they could look at as well and Ms. Lasley, Mr.
Macali, and Mr. Whitney could help therm out.
Ronald Ripley. Something like five months.
Donald Horsley: I'm sure it could be done in that length of time. There next general
meeting is in April.

-:$-lU-Vt5;11::JZAM;GIty Clerk Va BCh Ve ;94265669 # ?e/ 28
Item. #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 9
Barry Knight: Any other questions for Mr. Horsley. Thank you Don.
Donald Horsley: Thank you.
Dorothy Wood. Mr. Bourdon is going to answer my question.
Eddie Bourdon: I think it would help to clarify. The brakes have to be inspected every
day but that can be done at the parking facility at the pit but they have to be adjusted and
that happens maybe once ox twice and that depends on miles. The adjustment of the
brakes is what requires a sheltered environment and you have to lift the truck up. The
brake adjustments, which would happen once or twice a week depending on mileage
can't really be done at the pit. It would have to be done elsewhere. But the inspections
can be done there. The daily inspections are done for safety reasons. That can be done
there. It's the servicing, the working, and the adjusting that can't be done.
Dorothy Wood: The truck would have to go twice a week. That is a lot of trucks.
Eddie Bourdon: Potentially every truck once or twice a week, which would be basically a
total of 50 trips in a course of a week and it could be restricted in terms of the time of day
so that it wouldn't bother people early is the morning.
Dorothy Wood: It doesn't make sense maybe but I'm not into truck repair. Could it be
done, lets say done on Tuesday and Thursday only.
Eddie Bourdon: The problem there is that they're operating everyday. They need to be
safe everyday. That's the primary goal here is safety.
Dorothy Wood: Thant: you.
Barry Knight: Joe.
Joseph Strange: Speaking in opposition we have Bruce Bright.
Barry Knight: Welcome Bruce.
Bruce Bright: Hello.
Barry Knight: Please state your name.
Bruce Bright. My name is Bruce Bright. I thank you for the opportunity to speak about
the Use Permit for the borrow pit. My wife and I have lived in our house on Buzzard
Neck Road for the past 33 years. We live next door to Bonney Bright Farms where the
majority of this hauling sand pit truck operation occurs. For the past several years, we've
been aware of significant increases in the number and size of the dump trucks being used
in conjunction with that business. What was once a few small dump trucks has grown

3-10-06; 11:42AM;C1iy CICrk Va acn Va ;94265669 vR 2/ 23
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 10
into a fleet of approximately 25 much larger trucks owned by Bonney. These trucks are
traveling Buzzard Neck Road six days a week. We routinely see these tracks leaving the
farm as early as 5:30 a.m_ Their trucks make a lot of noise starting up, idling in the
morning getting ready to leave. The clanging of the empty truck bins as they travel the
unleveled driveway is loud and disruptive. Many of these same trucks return off and on,
all day long for reasons unknown to us and often times for only a few minutes at a time.
The trucks also pose major safety issues as they come and go on this narrow country road.
It is impossible to meet one of these trucks without having to drive partially off the paved
surface and having to come to a slow pace or have to stop to allow the trucks to 0o by and
violations to the 35 MPH speed limit zone are frequent. The trucks are stored,
maintained, serviced and fueled on the farm property that is zoned agricultural. On
Sundays, the trucks are moved around as they are pressured washed, which is another
noisy process. It is apparent that the whole borrow pit hauling business is operating out
of the farm location. On August 1, the City officials notified Bonney that he had to
relocate the trucks because he was in violation of zoning. On September 1, the contract
trucks that were being stored on the property and maintained there as well were removed.
Even though the contract trucks were removed, Sonny's trucks still remained. The
contract trucks have been reserved on several occasions to return to the farm to be
maintenance and the repair shops as well. Please note that our concerns do not in any
way relate the farm use of the vehicles that are used on the farm or stored. Our concerns
are_just.for._the. borrovsr.pit business. We -recommend that you_accept. the conditions as
forth by Planning, particularly Condition 19, which requires to relocation of the dump
trucks that are used in the operation of the hauling business to a more appropriate
industrial zoned site off of Buzzard Neck Road. I am asking also that the storage,
rnaiiatenance and fueling of the dump trucks on the farm property be relocated as soon as
possible. It is vague to us the way it written that he could have a year to continue to run
these trucks. Thank you.
Barry Knight: Are there any question for Mr. Bright?
Dorothy Wood: Bruce, you don't really have a problem ,with the borrow pit just the
trucks.
Bruce Bright: Not at all. We're asking about the maintenance of the brakes_ That's just
one maintenance issue. You've still got the repair of the trucks and everything else that
goes on with repairing these trucks on a regular basis. Are there any other questions?
Barry Knight: Thank you.
Joseph Strange: The next speaker in opposition is Sarah Culpepper_
Sarah Culpepper: Hi. My name- is Sarah Catherine Culpepper and I'm a resident of 5476
Buzzard Neck Road. I'm speaking in opposition of the application for the renewal of the
Conditional Use Permit for the borrow pit expansion if all the conditions are not met.

3-10-06;i7:42,AM;CIty Clerk Va Bch Va :04265669 At .3. 23,
Item #20
Bonney Cx, Bright
Page I
Other than that, I have no problems with the expansion of the condition. While I have
little interest in restricting the use of another property owner's land, I am compelled to act
when it begins to negatively affect my family. It continues to negatively affect my family.
And once that happens I £eel compelled to seek help from you. I was raised on Buzzard
Neck Road and I have never experienced the amount of unnecessary traffic being
generated by these sand trucks on such a narrow country road. My family has
experienced safety issues and other concerns that you should find in your report that was
submitted to you in December 2005. I hope you have found time to look at the report and
it has helped you to understand our concerns that we have on Buzzard Neck Road on a
daily basis. I am in favor of Condition #19 and the removal of the trucks off of Buzzard
Neck Road. However, I have concerns regarding the time allotment and the inspections
of this matter. I would Like to feet confident that the City would be holding the property
owner to these conditions. I want to be sure that City of Virginia Beach is planning on
monitoring the conditions being recommended and plans on inspecting the applicant to be
sure that the tracks have been removed from Buzzard Neck Road. The City of 'Virginia
$each has also set forth some other conditions that were not met as of October 2005.
That is why that I am asking that they make sure they monitor those conditions that
they're setting forth at this time. In conclusion, I remain in opposition to the renewal of
the Conditional Use Permit for the expansion of the borrow pit on Princess Anne Road if
the applicant is not in compliance to all conditions set forth by the City of Virginia Beach
but --most of:all_Condition.#19.-._.I.am.in.favor-and.insist.:the..City..hold_the=applicant-
responsible for removing the trucks from Buzzard Neck Road in a timely fashion.. I am
requesting that before the applicant is granted a one-year extension to his permit that he is
required to be full compliance of the 19 conditions set forth today. I would like to thank
Karen Lasley and the Planning Department for hearing our concerns and taking the time
to mediate them and I'm asking for members of the Commission today to also do the
same thing. I am confident that you will be fair and professional in regards to this
application. I also have a copy of ray report that was submitted in December.
Barry Knight: Any questions for Ms. Culpepper? Thank you.
Joseph Strange: Our next speaker in opposition is Dick Shaffer.
Barry Knight: Welcome.
Dick Shaffer: Morning. My name is Dick Shaffer, actually Richard for technical reasons.
I moved to Buzzard Neck Road in 1973. I appreciate Richard Hancock's discussion
about the noise. Not only do I have noise, when those trucks hit those bricks, our
building shakes. It literally shakes on -its foundation: I live on the first curve in there and
it is extremely dangerous. The City has had to come out there and widen the curve
because it is a not literally a curb. When we try to get a truck and school bus around
there, it is very difficult. I am very concerned at the point where I put a barrier in my
front yard. It is sort of a study. When we were remodeling the house, the kids were
playing in the front yard. I' m concerned about their safety if one of them should pass right

3-10-66;11:42AM;Ciry Clerk Ve Bch Va ;94265G69 9 4/ 23
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 12
out there. So, I put a little barrier out there with shrubs. I'm not against Bonney Bright
and his operation. I don't want him to lose his business and have to go out of business_
God forbid. I'm very concerned about the safety of myself and other people on that road.
Simple mathematics. I've been sitting here thinking. If he does a million plus miles a
year on 25 vehicles and those 25 vehicles have to go up and down Buzzard Neck Road
that road is not built for,that. I've talked to Roger Lane with the Highway's Department
for the City. He said he appreciated my concerns and everything but there is nothing that
he could really do because the road is a country road. You peat that many trucks on
Princess Anne Road and the same amount of trucks on a small country road that the
shoulders are constantly deteriotating that doesn't make good sense. So, I ask the
Planning Commission to take these coiniments into consideration and please for our safety
and for our peace of mind in being able to sleep, those conditions were not there when I
moved to that area. I know that. Thank you.
Barry Knight: Are there any questions for Mr. Shaffer. Thank you.
Joseph Strange: Our last speaker iu opposition is John Richardson.
John Richardson: Good afternoon members of the Commission. My name is John
Richardson.. I'm a local attorney_ I represent. Ogden Reed. Mr. Reed owns a 500 acre
track of land right below the North Carolina line that abuts the property line. His c oncern
is the dewatering aspect of the borrow pit not so much'the truck traffic. It doesn't impact
him. His concern is with the expansion of roughly two times the size of the existing pit.
It may affect his property negatively. His request, of course, is in a letter I seat so I won't
belabor the point is to ask that a professional environmental assessment be clone to
determine what impact that would have on the neighboring property before a permit is
issued to expand the borrow pit_ Thank you_
Barry Knight: Are there any questions for Mr. Richardson. Ms. Anderson.
John Richardson: Yes ma'am.
Janice Anderson: Mr_ Richardson, would the new Condition #20 help you out with the
quarterly reports on the testing?
John Richardson: It may well.
Janice Anderson: I think that was just added and it may address your problems.
John Richardson: It may well. Yes ma'am.
Janice Anderson: Okay.
John Richardson: I'll certainly point that back to my client. I just saw that this afternoon.

3-10-06;$1:42AA4;C1ty Clerk va Bch va
i9426S669 tt ,6/ 23.
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 13
Janice Anderson: Right because that is new. Thank you.
Barry Knight: Mr. Richardson.
John Richardson. Yes sir.
Barry Knight: They voluntarily raised the depth up to 32 feet. That will keep the cone of
depression down some. Also, like Ms. Anderson said with four reports per year they
check static water level on that too, so that may help somewhat.
John Richardson: Yes sir.
Barry Knight: Mr. Ripley.
Ronald Ripley: Where is your client's property?
Barry Knight: Use the laser John.
John Richardson: It's called the Flyway Club Mr. Ripley. It's on the North Carolina line
right about along here and his property fronts on Back Bay and runs from Back Bay to
.Currituck.Sound..:..lt's-just_bareiy.the North..Carolina.line.:.You_see_the.sign:that_saysy......:.......... _ . _ ......._. , .
"Welcome to North Carolina" going to Knotts Island, there is a small trailer. Not a trailer
park but a campsite, and the next property to it is the Flyaway Club. It's been there since
the 1930s. His father bought the property and developed the club. It's a hunting club. A
lot of land is farmed.
Ronald Ripley: Has he had any problem with dewatering to date?
John Richardson. No sir.
Ronald Ripley: Okay.
John Richardson: He is not at his home as we spore. He is concerned.
Ronald Ripley: It raises a concern.
John Richardson: Yes sir. He is just concerned.. He knows of Mr. Bright and thinks be
is a well -respected businessman. We all do. He is just concerned that his farn-dand and
his home might be negatively impacted by the expansion of the borrow pit.
Ronald Ripley: So, Mr. Scott if this report reports a water issue, what happens? Does it
stop operation until you figure it out or what?
Robert Scott: We may have to do that depending on what exactly we find. What 1 think

3-16-06;11:42AM;CIty clerk va Bch ve
94265669 * gi 23
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 14
we're really concerned'about is saltwater intrusion. That's the number one concern. I
can't fix that if it occurs. If there is evidence that is happening or about to happen that is
very important. It depends on what's found, I think. We want to be as prudent as
possible.
Barry Knight: Any other questions for Richardson? Thank you.
John Richardson: Thank you Mr. Knight.
Joseph Strange: Our next speaker is Kendall Smith
Barry Knight: Welcome sir. State your :name please.
Kendall Smith: My name is Kendall Smith. I'm assistant Refuge Manager at Mackay
Island Natural Wildlife Refuge. I'm here on behalf of Tim Cooper, Refuge Manager who
is at another meeting today. He has offered a letter that I will provide to you all. I ask
that I read that. In the interest of time, I'm going to skip down our two major concerns.
The second paragraph reads, the existing thine operation is pumping water into
agricultural ditches for the potential recharge of local ground water. The agricultural
ditches are supposed to be holding water to allow ground water recharge and the settling
of sus ended matenals. The water control'stitictures tii'at'surrourid the faeiii -ar"
currently inoperative and do not preclude discharge of water into Back Bay. Water is
discharged into Back Bay that has heavy sediment loads, which have adverse impacts on
the Bay. The extensive corrosion has created holes in the water control structures that
will require replacement. Due to brackish water conditions, aluminum or galvanized
structures should be required in all areas where agricultural ditches exist the property.
The applicant should be required to routinely maintain all structures and the settling basin
should also be considered since the recharge of ground water was not the original intent
of the agricultural ditches. The settling basin that empties into the ditches will provide
additional protection to Back Bay if water control structures were breached in the future.."
The second concern, which you are apparently aware of is that the applicant has a
proposal for a pit in North Carolina. The concern of the Refuge Manager Cooper is that
these can be considered together and these planning issues concern they may not be
considered. Also, in Paragraph 3, it is our understanding that the existing operation is
under 75 round truck trips per day. It appears that the North Carolina mine could add up
to 200 additional round truck trips daily. That is based on the plans that were submitted
to North Carolina. So, that is a lot of additional traffic that would have an impact on our
visitors to the refuge. Most likely this would discourage them from visiting the refuge
and cause safety concerns. That sort of summarizes the paragraph that I would like to add
to the record.
Barry Knight: Thank you Mr. Smith. Are there any questions for Mr. Smith? Thank you
sir. I think Ron.

3-10-06;11:42AAA;CIty Clerk Va Bch Va
;94265569 * ,7/ 23 .
Item 420
Bonney G. Bright
Page 15
Ronald Ripley: You're saying that the water discharges into the ditches to recharge, and
then it's going into the Bay?
Kendall Srnith. That is our understanding that is the purpose of there. Two other
controlled structures that we are aware of are not functioning correctly and allow water to
pass through them. In discussions with Bonney he says there are some other water
controlled structures but we are not aware of those. Our concern is that the situation be
examined to verify that water is being prevented from directly going into the Bay.
Barry Knight: Ms. Anderson.
Janice Anderson: So, if these were repaired then you wouldn't have an issue? Is that
correct?
Kendall Smith: Yes, if they were replaced and were functional.
Barry Knight: Are there any other questions? Thank you Mr, Smith.
Joseph Strange: The next speaker is Laurie Grogotis.
Laurie Grogotis: Laurie Grogotis. I'm up here as a concerned citizen living in Creeds. I
have children that ride the school buses. Although Mr. Bright may own. 25 trucks there,
are many more trucks that come up and down that road on a daily basis before 6:00 a.m.
When you took at the ditches on either side of the road and how narrow Princess Anne
Road is and winding, those trucks go flying. There are no traffic lights to slow their
speed. Many times they are over the side of the road. It is a huge safety issue. My kids
say their buses shake when they pass them. Another concern that I have is with the
amount of trucks, it was my understanding that Mr. Bright's original Permit was for 25
truckloads a day. I believe Ms. Lasley has confirmed that. There are that many trucks
before 9:00 a.m. So, my question is who monitors this? If he's looking for expansion
who is going to monitor that? Princess Anne Road and if you sit back even if you go to
monks for lunch, you will see a continual convoy of trucks of all sizes,maybe a car here
and there. It takes me sometimes quite a bit of time to pull out of my street and those
trucks are just flying by. And as far as the wells that were installed, I guess my question
is, I believe that Mr. Bright installed those wells closer to where his pit is not bordering
houses that are around it especially those near Back Bay, which certainly would be
affected by salt intrusion. So, I'm wondering where that responsibility lies. As far as the
drainage count goes, I have personally seen where those ditches run off to a canal that
opens up directly to Back Bay. 'There is a Slouth gate. It is inoperable. And that was of
just this past weekend. So, I would just like to know who is that will monitor this and
police these amount of truckloads that have already been grossly ignored. Thank you.

e-1 -uo;I 1: 4GAM; C; I ry c1erK Va 6Gh Va
;94265689 7R 8/ 23
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 14
Barry Knight: Are there any questions? Thank you. We'll get that on the rebuttal and in
our discussion phase. We'll address those concerns of yours.
Laurie Grogotis: Thank you sir.
Joseph Strange: That's it for the speakers.
Barry Knight: Mr. Bourdon.
Eddie Bourdon. Thaalc you Mr. Chairman. Again, we appreciate everyone taking the
time to come down, and putting in their two cents. First of all, lets make sure it is clear
and I mentioned it to Mr. Richardson_ And you all know this and this is not an
application to expand the Bonney Bright borrow pit located in Virginia Beach, so that's
clear. Where to start? I think the one thing that we talked about is when the notice that
Mr. Bright received in August 1, was received and I was first brought into this issue. It
was my opinion and it remains my opinion today that the third party contractors whose
trucks were on his home place, those trucks were not permitted to be there. And those
trucks were removed immediately or almost immediately. That was my advice and I
know that Mr. Bright adhered to that advice. Those trucks are not there and to my
knowledge have not -been there since. Now, there may have been someone who drove up
there at some point but they're not stored there, serviced Eltexe,
not allowed to be there because he doesn't own that part in his agricultural operation. It
is not necessarily clear cut with regard to the trucks that he has and uses in his agricultural
business but again, we're not going to belabor that point here today but there is a
disagreement as to whether that is doable or not. One thing that we are not in
disagreement with and that is that the trucks are being femoved from Mr. Bright's site, his
home place as far as their storage is concerned, their fueling is concerned. They will be
moved to the borrow pit site before City Council heaxs this application. It should be
completed within the next ten days to two weeks, certainly by the end of the month at the
latest. That isn't an issue. I appreciate some of the comments that were made in that
regard but those trucks are being moved from the horse place but the servicing is clearly
an issue as I indicated to you. Regardiag Mr. Shaffer's statements about noise of the
brakes? Mr. Bright's trucks do not have Jake brakes. And those are the brakes that cause
a lot of noise. Some of the contractor's trucks do and people operating trucks in 'Virginia
Beach, whether they come from northeast North Carolina or Chesapeake with sand can
operate with those brakes. If the City wants to regulate those brakes that is the City's
business to do and the City could probably do that but they are not Mr. Bright's trucks
that have those loud brakes called Take brakes. Mr. Smith's comment about water going
into Back Bay. Mr. Bright has indicated that Mr. Smith hasn't seen the replacement
structures that are down stream of the structures that he referred to and Mr. Bright
contends that there is no working discharge into Back Bay. Those structures that Mr.
Smith referred to are superseded by structures that are down stream of those, which I
don't believe he has seen. We certainly are not discharging and if there are any structures
that are in need of repair or replacement to prohibit discharge into Back Bay that certainly

y-1V-06;11:42AM;CIty CIerx va Bch va :94265669 # .9/ 23 .
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 17
will happen because that is a condition that's been met. Let me speak one minute if I
could about the monitoring wells. The wells were installed but there was a long delay in
part because of the City having commissioned the Malcolm Purney Study and then
getting back to Mr. Bright and explain to him where they wanted these wells to be
installed. These wells were installed where the City and Malcolm Purney requested they
be installed. The first reports were delivered to the City some time back, about a month
half ago. There is no evidence of any intrusion. If you read the report from Malcom
Purney and our experts in 2000, if we stay above 32 feet it is not going to be an issue but
we will still provide those reports. I just wanted to make sure that was real clear. We're
not going to have a saltwater intrusion problem with these limitations that are in place
now and have been in place the entire time that Mr. Bright has been operating. It is a
difficult situation. Obviously for most everyone involved with regard to the issue of
Buzzard Neck Road. My client has expressed a willingness to try make improvements to
Buzzard Neck Road to add shoulders to widen the road and do some things along those
lines but the reality of it is that servicing those trucks on a limited basis is going to have
to happen somewhere other than at the pit. His home place is in close proximately of the
pit, which is not the case with regard to other options as to where the servicing can take
place. We are still going to need sand in Virginia. Beach and that sand is going to come
from either existing pits in Virginia Beach or pits in northeast North Carolina or southern
Chesapeake that is going to use the exact same roads. They're going to be operated by
-- .-` -. eo le -we: don't=hav�any - ontrol=over. " Who-aren--t= illarszof our-communit -here-i.rr—=_-:_�: -- --- ----=p - p - y-c . - - p y- . _ .
Virginia Beach and I think we all need to keep that in mind. I really do appreciate the fact
that Bruce Bright has indicated on more than one occasion that his intent is not to try to
suggest that Bonney is not doing a good service to the City as far as the sand operation is
concerned but simply his personal issues with regard to the noise and what have you.
There is certainly some sympathy to that. We believe there needs to be a recognition. It
doesn't make any common sense to have these trucks be brought up to the northeru part
of the City everyday or once or twice a week to be serviced when it is something that can
be done there very quickly. Also, I want to point out that the City inspectors come in and
take over Bonney's shop twice a year and inspect these vehicles again, for service and to
make sure that they are safe. That will take place some place else. I'll be happy to answer
any questions. I appreciate you listening to me.
Barry Knight: Mr. Bourdon, I have two right off the bat. Mr. Smith came in and said
about the water -controlled structures there. I know Bonny has a very good repoi with
Malay Island. In fact, he has been farming some of their land for years. If Bonney could
just get hire in his pickup truck and carry him back there and show him the weirs, it
would answer that question right there. I ant sure he will.
Eddie Bourdon: That is exactly what Bonny whispered in my ear Mr. Knight and that is to
get him out there and show him.
Barry Knight: The second thing is these brakes, the Jake brakes, I don't believe any of
Bonney's trucks have these .lake brakes on them but the independent truckers do. I don't

,3-10-QG;11:42AM;Clty Clerk va Bch va
;9A2G5683 # 10/ 23
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 18
think the City wants to go the route of enacting an ordinance. These Jake brakes you
don't need them on flat ground. They're kind of the nature of the beast. If you have a
great big old coal truck that is used to going up and down hills and now you carry them
on flat country and you have a Jake brake, you're going to use therm. Part of the reason
you use them is because it saves your brakes on your truck. But if Mr. Bright, and I feet
confident he will do this, also really, really encourages these independent trucks not to
use their Jake brakes. It would to a long ways on good will because if they continue to
use them the City may enact an ordinance. I don't want to see any more ordinances
happen. If you can just convey that to Bonney, I'm sure he will do that.
Eddie Bourdon: I'm absolutely certain that Mr. Bright will absolutely encourage the third
parties who haul for him on occasion to riot use their Jake brakes. I just want to make
sure that every body understands and appreciates the fact that there are lots of other
people hauling sand in large trucks in Virginia Beach south and other wise, that is an
issue that needs to be addressed. It really needs to be addressed comprehensively. Mr.
Bright can't be held responsible for allowing brakes on people's trucks that aren't his
own. I certainly assure you that he will be happy to ask all third parties that haul from his
pit to not use their Jake brakes.
a y Knigh! _Are.then— .._questions-for,14r.. Bourdon
Eddie Bourdon: Those third parties won't be going down Buzzard Neck Road. Again,
Mr. Bruce Bright was honest enou;h to indicate to me that was a significant betterment. It
didn't eliminate his concern but it was certainly a betterment that took place in response
to the City's letter on August 1.
Janice Anderson: Eddie, I just want to make it clear. The application is for an extension
of the borrow pit. It is not an expansion.
Eddie Bourdon: No. This is not an application to expand the borrow pit.
Janice Anderson: Okay.
Barry Knight: Ms. Wood.
Dorothy Wood: Eddie, I was trying to see if we could get the two parties together just to
cooperate a little bit. Someone mentioned that they actually had to bring them there to
wash them and fuel them. It seems like that could be done somewhere else.
Eddie Bourdon: I'm not here suggesting anything.
Dorothy Wood: You wouldn't have to be there twice a week.
Eddie Bourdon: I'm not suggesting that they be washed there or fueled there.

3-to-06;11:42AM;CIty Clerk Va Bch Va ;942aSs69 0 11/ 23
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 19
Dorothy Wood: That is what someone said today that they were.
Eddie Bourdon, That is being done and has been done the entire time but the conditions
that staff has recommended to you will prohibit that and we are totally going to abide by
those conditions. The only thing that we have asked for consideration of rather than
litigate about it or fight about it is the repair aspect. Not wash. Not fuel but repair.
Today, we're not requesting that he be permitted to fuel them at his site as much as he
Liked to do that or to wash them at his home site. We're not asking for that- All we really
need -is to be able to have the vehicles serviced. Essentially, the primary issues are the
brakes. They will need to be adjusted generally once a week and sometimes twice
depending on the number miles the truck is hauling and just factors that are not capable of
being controlled, bumps in the road and usage. It is the lifting of the truck and the
adjusting of the brakes that can't be done in the pit. There are servicing issues that can be
scheduled_ It can be done at the same tirne. It is the brakes that have to inspected daily, it
can be done at the pit but when they have to be adjusted that can't be done at the pit.
That is the principal problem with regard to the conditions that they're dealing with.
Barry Knight: Mr. Henley.
Al Henley: Mr. Bourdon. I know there have been comments and concerns about the
_._ ._ ... ----- _ . -
proposed farm pit and pits up adjacerit�to tlze-farm:7. ........ ay-ortnay- iofhave=
to this but is the life expediency of the one in Virginia Beach to the be completely
exhausted prior to the operation, if it is approved in Currituck County for that to happen?
Our reason for. it is that our concerns in light of the audience is that both of these pits are
going to be working simultaneously together and it is going to double the issue of the
trucks on that road.
Eddie Bourdon: The pit in Virginia Beach depending upon volume of excavation doesn't
have as it is currently approved doesn't have twelve months worth of life left. So, it is
inconceivable to me given the process that the one in North Carolina will go through,
which I don't have anything to do with that by the time that is online and if it is online,
this pit will be out or there will be some other application that will coordinate that whole
thing. At this point, all we have is what we have. What we're dealing with is what we
got. That pit that is there does not have a significant amount sand volume to be ruined.
We may be coming back at some point depending upon what takes place in northeastern
North Carolina. There would be no practical reason to be operating two pits. It wouldn't
make any sense.
Barry ,might: Mr. Waller.
John Waller: There was the question, that I was going to ask him. But in addition when
the Currituck mine is open where would the trucks that service that be serviced?

3-10-06;is:42AM;Clty Clerk Va Bch Va
;94265669 'A 12i 23
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 20
Eddie Bourdon: Well, when you're dealing with a situation that is uncertain as the one
we're dealing with is in this instance, the investment to try to a build a facility that
services vehicles that is not going to be made if at some point there is an approval for a
significant enough operation With a long enough useful life in it then there is the
possibility of constructing some place to service them. When you're dealing with what
we're dealing with here today and all that we're dealing with here today and that is a pit
in Virginia that doesn't have more than twelve months useful Life you're not going to
spend tens of thousands of dollars to build a shop to have those trucks serviced at this
facility.
John, Waller: In North Carolina?
Eddie Bourdon: No. I'm talking about this. This is all that we can deal with is what we
have here today. If it is conceivable and we're not there and I don't even know where we.
are with regard to that approval process but if there is an approval for one in North
Carolina then the potential exists to actually invest in the infrastructure at that point it
could pay for itself over the life of the pit that doesn't exist today.
John Waller: That is why I asked if the mine opens in North Carolina we will have a
place_to_service_.them in_Narth Carolina not in Buzzard Neck Road.
Eddie Bourdon: 'That is something that is a possibility. Yes. That is something that we
have discussed. But that has not been approved at this point_ But if that were to be
approved that is an option. But that could be many months. This pit could be done
before that one may even get approved. i don't know that. Pin not versed in how long
that process is going to take.
John Waller: All the noise that happens on Buzzard Neck Road will be over with in a
year because the mine is going to be closed and the trucks won't be there.
Eddie Bourdon. I absolutely anticipate that to be the case Mr. Waller. Yes. Most of the
truck traffic has been reduced tremendously by the removal of the third party contractor
trucks from Buzzard Neck Road_ By the end of this month there won't be any trucks on
Buzzard Neck Road. What we are trying to have an opportunity to deal with is the
servicing of those trucks for an interim period of time until something comes about that
will make it feasible to do it somewhere other than'Buzzard Neck Road. But that doesn't
exist today other than to bring them up to northern part of the City, which defies common
sense and logic. We don't control the fact that this particular situation arose because of
the five-year period of this Use Permit expiring. If we had a little more time we might
not be having all this dialogue about their may be a solution for this but we don't have
one. That is why we're in the dilemma were in_
Barry Knight: Ms. Wood.

3-10-06;11-42AM;C1Cy Cierk Va BCM Va
;94265669 # 13/ 23
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Pape 21
Dorothy Wood. Eddie, we've been talking a lot about the truck traffic but really you're
not asking for a rezoning so that the trucks can be repaired there. Since they're not .
agricultural trucks they really can't under the present zoning. Is that correct?
Eddie Bourdon: Ms. Wood. It is my argument and belief that because they are owned by
an agricultural owner who is operating an agri-business in the City of Virginia Beach on
property zoned agriculture as this property is zoned agriculture and because those
vehicles are using that agri-business, even if it is a small percentage of the time for
something other than hauling sand then it is an appropriate accessory use that can take
place on his property. Rather than get into a legal argument about it. There have been
attorney's advising Mr. Bright, who had advised him that he can win in court. I haven't
gone that route. I don't think that helps anybody. I don't think it helps Mr. Bright. I think
the best thing we can do is do actually what Mr. Bright has attempted to do and that is
work with his family members and neighbors and not get into a big fight with everybody.
It is the Zoning Administrator's opinion that these vehicles aren't agricultural vehicles
and that is not -defined anywhere in your ordinance what an agricultural vehicle is, and
therefore she has opined that they can not be stored, fueled or be maintained on his farm
site zoned agriculture but they must be maintained on his borrow pit site zoned
agriculture. Again, you asked the question. I'm not here trying to perpetrate an.
argument. .I think its appropriate to understand why this isn't black and white. Mr.
- B rYght=is-trynffg-ta=tie=a aod=citizen=ari =a gcsod�agri= usiness�owncrand=try-to=work___......... ..... ...•---.. .
through these problems. Unfortunately, where we stand today we don't have a simple
solution that would make everybody happy. I wish we did. Believe me, a lot of us have
worked long and hard trying to find one. I'm open to suggestions. I've listened to a lot of
people and I talked with a lot people. I think we've come a long way. I think everybody
on Buzzard Neck Road who is open minded about ii that we've come a long way. I hope
we can get it.
Dorothy Wood: Well, certainly with my home economics degree I'm not arguing with a
lawyer Mr. Bourdon. I do wonder about that. I also wondered why since you all knew
you were conning here today why weren't the trucks moved now rather than waiting.
Eddie Bourdon: They just can't be moved at a snap of a finger. First of all, we looked at
a number of alternatives. We try to find other alternatives to be able utilize the existing
facility without using Buzzard Neck Road. That was number one. Number two when the
decision was made and we had a couple of options that we thought were going to work
but they turned out they didn't work. When we got to the point where we had no other
alternative then that was the decision that was made. And, that involves having to take a
lot of steps. It is not just a simple matter we'll just go out in the park in the middle of the
field. You've got to get sets of keys. You've got to get security set up. You've got to do
a number of things that take time to act done. And we were dealing with the holidays on
top of that. All those things are basically in place at this point. And as I said, those
trucks will be at the borrow pit site by the end of January. But that is an effort to avoid

3--10--06; 11 :42AM;Ci ry Clerk vE QCh Ve
;94265669 9 14/ 23
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 22
any disagreement and litigation, over what's a permitted accessory use on an agricultural
property. We've agreed to the conditions.
Dorothy Wood: Thank you sir.
Barry Knight: Are there any other questions for Mr. Bourdon? Ron.
Ronald Ripley: If you're not able to service the trucks on the Buzzard Neck Road
property where would you service there?
Eddie Bourdon; That is what we're in the. process of locating alternatives as to where we
can service them. We don't have that decision made. It will probably be somewhere
either in southern Chesapeake or in the middle of Virginia Beach. We are not aware of
any place that can happen down south. I mean in Virginia Beach when I say down south.
Joseph Strange: And that is because of the zoning?
Eddie Bourdon. Exactly. I'm not aware of any property that is zoned. You can get a
Conditional Use Permit for repair of agriculture vehicles but the Zoning Administrator
says this is not an agricultural vehicle. We're a dog chasing its tail around in the circle.
Ronald Riley: So if you move it to tha �G-2�Fie`ee
permissible in other AG.
Eddie Bourdon: Yes. The Zoning Administrator and I don't disagree with her on this.
Her term and I'm sorry to keep speaking for her but her position I think is an accessory
use on the borrow pit site as an accessory to the borrow pit. Iwouldn't disagree with that.
Ronald Ripley: I think that would be the tide. Is there other land adjacent to this existing
pit that an expansion of this pit that you would be corning in and asking for later? Is that
something that is in the mill?
Eddie Bourdon: Things hinge on what is going to take plaice with the application in
Currituck. We may come back here depending on what takes place there. That is all up
in the air at this point. That may be denied. And we may be back here looking: to expand
this pit. That is what I would anticipate happening. Until we have something approved
that would justify the expenditure that is the dilemma that we are dealing with.
Ronald Ripley: I'm sympathetic to both sides. i see the neighbor's point of view with the
truck traffic, and I see the operator's point of view. I'm wrestling. To rne, a solution
would be to get some time to relocate a facility or work it out with the Agricultural
Advisory Committee but what I'm hearing is not real definite. That is concerning. If it
was definite then those kinds of plans could be made. Capital could be assembled and
property facility constructed so you could operate. I'm kind of floundering with this now.

3-10-0e;ii:42AM;CJty clerk va Bcr; vn
;94265668 # ss/ 23 ,
Item-#20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 23
Eddie Bourdon: You and I axe on the samit predicament Mr. Ripley. I had hope that
maybe there would be an approval in hand in northeast North Carolina, which would give
us a direction we needed to go in. At this point, we don't have any choice. We have
agreed to these conditions. That's the long and short of it. We will have to make
arrangements to have the vehicles serviced. The predicament here is they are under the
interpretation that the Zoning Administrator of our ordinance and of these vehicles there
is no where else that can be serviced other than on a borrow pit or on a property zoned
industrial or commercial up in the northern part of the City of Virginia Beach. And, that
is why I think it is something that does need some review and discussion among the agri-
business owners and the Agricultural Advisory Committee. I think that is where some
discussion needs to take place. It is a difficult circumstance. We're dealing with a
regulatory perspective. I do understand what the concerns are with regard to people on
Buzzard Neck Road and widening the road and doing improvements to the road is
something that we're willing to do. I don't know if that is going to satisfy their concerns.
And limiting the time of day and those things we will also do. Again, don't know if that
is going to satisfy their concerns.
Barry Knight: Are there any more questions for Mr_ Bourdon? Thank you,
Eddie Bourdon: Sorry to ramble on.
Barry Knight: Thank you. We'll open it up for discussion among the Commissioners.
Okay. Ms. Anderson.
Janice Anderson: Yes. We've bad the opportunity and I think everybody did, to visit
both sites, the residential site on Buzzard Neck and the dig site. From our understanding
in the report that these vehicles have been serviced there and fueled at the residential
location for quite a number of years without any complaint. And, as the report has
indicated Mr. Bright has run this business in an outstanding manner so far as he character.
But I think the main issue gets down to Condition #19 and that's it. I would be
supportive of approval as written by the City with the 22 conditions. Condition 19 says
that, repair has to be on the property properly zoned. Now it is Mr. Bourdon's
interpretation that it is properly zoned now where he is doing because it is AG, then there
shouldn't be a problem with this zoning_ I know that Karen Lasley has a different
opinion and that it is not properly zoned in the residential area. I don't know if we want
to get the City Attorney to chime in on her opinion but anyway, I think that is where we
are. My issue with the request of saying it is okay to do it for four or five months if it is
not allowed in the zoning, I don't know how we can say we're going to let it happen.
Hopefully, the changes Mr. Bourdon has made by moving those trucks out and things like
that and if there is no call out to the site there may not be a violation. But, anyway I know
it is a limited use and it is a big burden on him and not that I'm totally agreeable with it
but I think that is where I am stuck. I think if the zoning doesn't allow it right now, I
don't see how we can say it is okay for even an extended period of time. If they're in the
opinion that they can do it then there shouldn't be an issue. But, they've run -a business

.3-10-0G;71:42AM;C1ty Clerk va Bch va
;94265669 u IS/ 23
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 24
without any problems before. Unfortunately, now there is and I think that is the situation.
So, I would like to be.in support of approval with the 21 current conditions -
Barry Knight: Any other discussion? Ron.
Ronald Ripley: I agree with Jan. That's the crux of it and that's Condition #19. But I'm
trying to look at it from both points of view. I'm viewing it from the businessman's point
of view_ Basically, he has operated. Yes. Apparently, the City believes it is illegal.
However, I think this operator since he's operated as such needs some time to transition if
you will. If it hasn't been corrected today, I believe the City could have corrected it if
they felt that strong about it. I am sure they do feel strong about it or we wouldn't be here
but still it could have been corrected. I believe that the neighbors need to know that it is
going to stop at one point. I think the businessman needs some opportunity to resolve it.
I think 5 to 6 month time period would permit the Agricultural, Advisory Committee to
convene and to address it so a different twist may show up at that point that makes some
sense to this body and for the neighbors, and to the business community. And it also
gives a little bit of time to determine what may happen with the future expansion whether
there's going to be a need for additional capital or just servicc if off site and be done with
it. That is my difference. I agree with what you're saying. That's my degree of
difference though. I think we need some transition period.
Barry high kC� ay. Tay f rst. en ene.
Jay Bemas. I agree with Commissioner Ripley. But I would also like to address one of
the other issues one of the citizens raised was the number of trips generated. I see that
Condition #17 limiting 75 a day. I think it would be very difficult to monitor that and I
would recommend to the Conmx ssion that maybe the applicant submit monthly or
quarterly reports on the number of truck trips generated. I just think that from an
enforcement standpoint unless you have a City inspector out there everyday counting
trucks I think to more efficiently -do that from a monitoring standpoint to add a condition
to required them to submit a monthly or quarterly report to the Zoning Administrator for
review and compliance.
A] Henley: I have a question to the Planning staff. Ms. Lasley, there seems to be and I
have the same concern as some of these speakers that there is as interpretation that the
applicant, if approved, has one year to comply to these conditions. My question is if it is
approved today under the current conditions, under all 22 items, what time limit does the
applicant have to comply to all 22 conditions?
Karen Lasley: I would expect immediate compliance except on the improvements that
have to be made into the entrance, the turn lanes and the access pavement. That takes a
while to get into place. They have to go through Planning Review. But the rest of the
conditions would apply immediately.
Al Henley: Immediately. You mean today assuming if it was approved?

3-10-06:11:42AM;Clty Clerk va Bch va
04266660 It 171 23 ,
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 25
Karen Lasley: If City Council approves it from that date.
Al Henley. If City Council approves_ Which is in February, I believe it's heard.
Karen Lasley: Correct.
Al Henley: May I have some more time? I'd like to thank the applicant and his attorney
that I think they have worked diligently to improve the conditions to satisfy a lot of
complaints in the neighborhood. I think that is good. I think really the only concern that
remains now, the primary concern is the utilization of the garage, if you will to service the
vehicles. And the way I understand it the trucks are going to need probably servicing
twice a week. That is based on current conditions. If that is the case there would be
absolutely no change in those conditions. The positive side to that is that the trucks will
be moved by February 1, 2006, so that will help the residents out considerably because
the noise and the traffic, and the safety issues that have risen. My concern is that the
borrow pit in Virginia Beach has a life expectancy of approximately one year or twelve
more months. So, if the garage is not moved or relocated then the residents will still have
to continue to put up wirh the concerns that they have on the garage. But I think more
importantly if orae year expired and of course those conditions will go away. But more
irri _ortantl th_e..re is a rababi[sty and a passibility that a borrow pit will open up adjace.nt
_.
to this existing borrow pit. If that is approved then" a nuin "'er"o years'wz I 6E productive
on reining sand from: that location. That will still require the garage services, as we know
it today located on Buzzard Neck Road. I believe as Planning Commissioners, we don't
have the right to challenge the law. We do have a law issued here where zoning has been
violated. It's a zoning law. It is really difficult I know for the Planning Commissioners.
I know it is for me to look at those when we have the applicant has been living in the area
and his family for many generations. It has developed into a great concern, not for only
the immediate neighborhood but people who reside further down the road where the
general people who utilize Princess Anne Road through Pungo and everywhere else. I
have received a number of calls, complaints, and inquiries about the continuation of that.
So it does give me a great deal of concern in trying to reach a happy compromise here to
as a win -win situation. I think that the conditions here that is very helpful for the
Planning Commission to make some decisions on this. I believe that some of the
compromises that have been by the applicant and his attorney will help a great deal on the
concerns that the residents on Buzzard Neck Road have had. Actually, the uncertainties
that we have in North Carolina, it is hard for me to, I guess alter from the existing
conditions, these 22 conditions. I'm going to make a motion shortly, but I believe, there
are some other comments that I believe, Mr. Ripley, did you have another comment? Mr.
Crabtree. I'm going to allow Mr. Crabtree to make some comments before I will make a
motion.
Barry Knight: Mr. Crabtree.
Eugene Crabtree: I'm inclined to sort of agree with what Mr. Ripley said that I think this

3-10-06;11:42AM;City Clerk VO BCh Va 794265669 & t8/ 23
Item #20
Bonney G_ Bright
Page 26
is a dilernma that has been there for a long time. I think that moving the trucks is a
positive thing. However I agree with trying to repair trucks in a sandy area is not the thing
to do. You have to have time to find another repair facility in order to properly keep the
trucks on the road. Otherwise you're not going to keep them on the road. I personally am
in favor of going ahead and approving this but I think the real part is got to have a delay
to give the applicant an appropriate period of time to find an alternative. It can't be done
in the next week or two weeks. I am inclined to agree with Mr. Ripley if it is delayed for
about six months. That gives the Agricultural Advisory Committee also a chance to look
at this zoning ordinance and to make a decision whether or not these trucks are AG trucks
or whether they are industrial commercial trucks and how it should apply. I'm in favor of
giving six months leeway on this particular one. You can just find a new repair facility
tomorrow. It is impossible.
Barry bight: Mr_ Strange.
Joseph Strange: Well, I'm in favor of all these to except for one thing. Can we send
something to City Council where we know somebody has broken the law?
Barry Knight. Let's ask Ms. Wilson.
Kay Wi s1 0 hattman igh 'and nie�m�iers of"Ykie C nrniss on rtis the C'it� Ye i on ""'^""� '
and the determnation of the Zoning Administrator that repairing these trucks on this AG
property is a violation of the zoning ordinance. That has been a determination of the
Zoning Administrator. Mr. Bourdon has a different opinion but that is really irrelevant to
the City. This is a violation of the zoning ordinance. Okay. It Is a violation. You really
don't have the authority to allow them to continue a violation for any period of time.
What you would be doing is saying that it's okay to violate the zoning ordinance. You
can't allow them to violate the zoning ordinance. The way for this to be changed is for
the Code to be changed. If they wanted to go change the code that is the way for this to
be changed would be to change the code to do a new definition to change the code in
some rnanner. That would be the way to make this available for them to repair these
vehicles on the'AG property. But if you have a motion to allow them to continue to
repair the trucks on the AG property, that would be a violation of the City's Zoning
Ordinance.
Barry Knight: Mr. Ripley.
Ronald Ripley: 1 don't disagree that it's a legal issue. You look at it cut and dry. I don't
disagree with that. I wouldn't expect anything else for you to say that. Okay. But as a
Planning Commission I think it's our duty from a public's point of view, which we are
essentially try to represent, we'xe trring to bring what we think is some reason to the
process too. Not that a lot of reasoning hasn't been applied to here because it has. We're
making a recommendation to City Council. City Council may take that and throw it out.
That is there prerogative too. I just see an operation that has been operating down there

3-10-68;11=42AM;City Clerk Va Bch Va
; 9426Se60 V if)/ 23
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 27
for years. I see a rnaa that is trying to continue to operate and finish up his business but I
see residents having issues with the noise. I'm suggesting a VanSitiDD period, which we
do that in a lot of situations where a zoning ordinance comes into play but can be
transitioned, etc. It is a gray area that I do recognize but I think: it is a practical. It is not a
solution but it's a practical part of this problem.
Barry Knight: Mr. Ripley. I weigh is ou that. You have hit all the points right on. We
can't do anything. Our hands are pretty much tied. Legally, as far as how we can tweak
this, we can still make a strong recommendation to Council that possibility they give him
a predetermined set amount of time, if on Agricultural Advisory agenda, which I believe
meets April 12, 2006 to get their recommendations but we can make that
recommendation to Council. I don't believe that we could put it in the motion itself but
we can certainly put it in the verbatim. They'll look at it. That is my view of it. Is there
any other discussion? I'll entertain a motion.
Al Henley: I'll make a motion to approvethe application as listed in the 22 items with a
note that it will be total number of trips from the borrow pit every 60 days to present it to
Planning staff.
Dorothy Wood: Are you adding Ron's?
Barry Knight: You're just staying with the same 22 conditions.
Dorothy Wood: But you're not adding Mr. Ripley's.
Al Henley: No. Because I want to comply to the law as a junior Commissioner. I don't
want to break the law.,
Barry Knight: A motion has been made. Do I have a second?
Janice Anderson: Second.
Barry Knight: Ms. Anderson has made a second.
Ronald Ripley: Can I offer a substitute motion?
Barry Knight: There is a motion on the floor and a second. Discussion?
Ronald Ripley: I would like to offer a substitute motion. It is a substitute to his motion.
That is basically that repairs as noted in Condition #19 be permitted on Buzzard Neck
Road property for a period of five months. It will permit time for the applicant to secure
an alternative repair arrangement. That is my substitute.
Barry Knight: That is the substitute. Do I have a second to the substitute?

,3-l0-06;11:42AM:City Clerk VO BCh VO
;94265669 0 20i 23
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 28
Dorothy Wood: Can I add that it would not to your substitute maybe the third substitute
that they may be repaired but not stored or fueled there.
Ronald Ripley: Just repair. That is all that I'm speaking of.
Dorothy Wood: So you're taking out the stored on Condition #19,
Ronald Ripley: I just spoke to the item about repair. Stored and fueling will remain off
site. It is just for a period of five months.
Eugene Crabtree: I'll second the motion.
Barry Knight: Mr. Crabtree seconds it. Is there any discussion on the substitute motion?
Joseph Strange: I guess my question still comes back. Can we do something supporting
something illegal? Hey, you can that I'm going to find the solution just like you do. I
think its fair. We don't have the authority to do it how can we do it?
Eugene Crabtree: What's the recommendation?
Barry Knight: Iguess we'll ask Ms. Wilson. Do we as a Planning Commission body, are
we legally
Kay Wilson: It's a violation of the zoning ordinance_
Barry Knight: I hate to get back to it. Do we legally have the authority to vote on it as a
recommendation to Council?
Kay Wilson: You can ,vote on it you're voting on a violation to the zoning ordinance.
Karen Lasley: And the Buzzard Neck Road site is technically not on your agenda. lust
the borrow pit is.
Ronald Ripley: It's the topic.
Dorothy Wood: But this is Condition #19 is talking about Buzzard Neck Road,
Karen Lasley: No its not. It's very general. It says that storage, repair and fueling of the
trucks has to be done on a site that is zoned for that.
Barry Knight: Ms. Anderson.
Janice Anderson: 1 understand where everybody is trying to link to and I think everybody
wants to work out a compromise. But I think Barry that the rmornmendation that you
have I think would solve everything. We're being told by the City attorney that if we

3-10-06;11:42AM;Cliy Clark Va Bch va
04265669 A 2,1 / 23
Item #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 29
make the motion that is automatically a violation under their opinion. So, we're voting in
a violation of the zoning ordinance. I think if we pass it under Al's motion as is and then
do a verbal recommendation that the City will be reasonable with any violations that may
be noted by Mr. Bright if they come down for a violation, reasonable in resolving those
violations or reasonable in exercising those. He has to be notified of the violation if
maintenance occurs at that site and violations are made after this period of time that the
City can be reasonable in dealing with those violations due to this burden.
Kathy Katsias: So repeat it.
Ronald Ripley: I rather have you call for the question.
Barry Knight: We're still in the discussion. We'Il ask Mr. Bernas.
Jay Bernas: Is it the Commission's desire to include the modification of Condition #17 as
I had recommended.
Barry Knight: That is not on the table. It wasn't included in the motion.
a ..Jay Bernas: Okay... _.. .
Al Henley: I included it my motion.
Barry Knight: Oh, you did include it. So that was in the original motion. Was that
included in the substitute motion? ray, would you explain to Mr. Ripley about Condition
#17.
Jay Bernas: Condition #17. One of the concerns, one of the citizens raised was the
number of trips generated by the borrow pit and that she didn't believe that is was more
than 75 trips. I think from an enforcement standpoint instead of having an, inspector
sitting out there counting trucks to ask the applicant to submit monthly reports and I think
Al recommended 60 days to submit a 50 day report to the Zoning Administrator so that
we can ensure that there is compliance with respect to that condition.
Barry Knight: Would you like to include that in your substitute motion?
Ronald Ripley: Well, Al didn't you speak to that?
Barry Knight: He did on the original motion but the substitute motion is still on the floor
unless you've withdrawn it?
Ronald Ripley: I'll put that in there.
Barry Knight: You'll include that? Gene, will you concur to that on the second.

.3-10-06;11:42AM;CICV Clerk Va Bch Va
942SS669 0 22/ 23
hem #20
Bonney G. Bright
Page 30
Eugene Crabtree: Yes_
Barry Knight: I guess the substitute motion is on the floor. The substitute motion was
first by Mr. Ripley and seconded by Gene to approve the application with the 22
conditions, will submit records every 60 days to Planning Department, and to allow an
extension to repair only at its facility on Buzzard Ncck Road for five months. Lets call
for the question.
AYE 6
NAY 5 ABS 0 ABSENT 0
ANDERSON
NAY
BERNAS
AYE
CRABTREE
AYE
HENLEY
NAY
KATSZAS
AYE
KNIGHT
NAY
LIVAS
AYE
RIPLEY
AYE
STRANGE
NAY
WALLER
NAY
WOOD
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 6-5, the substitute motion has passed.
Barry Knight: That's it_
Eddie Bourdon_ Thank you to everybody. I appreciate it.
Barry Knight: if there's no more busiacss before this body, the meeting, stands adjourned.

3-10-06;11:42AM;CIty Clerk va Bch va
t—f-3 A4:V1 rAA r-u'fa9:Sntisu HIGGENUON BUCHANAN INC
;e4265ry59 u 2:�/ 23
LgJuuz
4 C�-test''
GGERM90N
U NA N9 INC. GENERAL CONTRACTORS
RM UD 11eS 53OQ t3ntNes DM MVa. CJ-�vA Z33M PMNE {75-n 5454665 FAX PS7) 543.8930
January 9, 2006
City of V' ' *4 Beach
Virginia Beae VA
Re: Bormcy B t Farms Borrow Pit
VA Beach, VA
Gentlemen
It has come to our attention that the material available from the Borrow Pit operated by
Bonney Bright Famrs is rapidly being depleted VMd that an extension of this pit may not be
approved by th o City.
Asa mat2ctor that does numerous projects in Hampton Roads in general, and Virginia
Beach in paffic ular, this concerns ale deeply_ 1 have been told by thee operators of several of the
other local bo ow pits (E.V. Williams and NLM. G ll inter, for enmple) that they are also running
o[sJofayaiLab[ Y=1&�i a. i o sel
material from offsite source will be formd to haul this material from other localities, such as
Moyock, lslccX Wight and Suffolk. This additional haul distance not only adds to the cost .
incurred by Ilu se Projects, but also itl;reases the amount of dump trucks necessary to complctc
the job in a titnely trainer. This becomes not only a safety, issue and an issue of additional wear
and tear on the City's streets, but a finmcial issue as well, as prospective future industries
consider the ' eased cost of building in Virginia Beach.
IME on -Buchanan has used the material from Bonney Bright Farms numerous times in
the past and would look forward to continuing to do so in the future. I ask you to please consider
the positive im act that approving an extension of this pit would have on the City and its future
growth.
Thank You for your consideration in this matter. If you have any questions, please feel
free to contact e:
Very truly yours:
Hi GERSON-BUCHANAN, INC.
William A. M att, Jr.
Vice President

Re: FW: possible salt water intrusion due to mine dewatering
Subject: Re: FW: possible salt water intrusion due to mine dewatering
From: Bethany Georgoulias<Bethany,[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:59:45 -0500
To: "Wagner,Terry" <[e-mail]>
CC: [e-mail]
That's understandable -- it has been a complicated issue. The permit engineer Robert
Patterson has been in touch with some folks in your office already, I believe. I'll
pass your number along. Thanks so much for offering assistance!
Bethany Georgoulias
5�'ovC z f ( 2-10cd
VA 4- I% . )3c.l� . Paftm•N" V/ ,vl,-- o�
Wagner,Terry wrote: �-
I
Bethany,
I am pretty sure I do not fully understand the issues involved with this e-mail
string. If there is any way that you think I can provide assistance please feel
free to give me a call at 804-698-4043 to discuss.
-----Original Message ------
*From:* Pellei, Steven (VDH)
*Sent:* Tuesday, January 29, 2008 4:48 PM
*To:* [e-mail]
*Cc:* [e-mail]; Alexander, Donald (VDH); Wagner,Terry; Horne,
Daniel (VDH)
*Subject:* possible salt water intrusion due to mine dewatering
Bethany,
I discussed this issue with Dan today. I was under the incorrect assumption that
there were wells attached to waterworks involved. That not being the case - the
Office of Drinking Water would not be involved as our authority only covers those
that are waterworks.
Two other possible leads are Don Alexander of the Office of Environmental Health,
and Terry Wagner of the Department of Environmental Quality.
I will copy them as an FYI.
I hope this helps,
Steve
---------- Original Message --------
*Subject: *
[Fwd: possible salt water intrusion due to mine dewatering]
*Date: *
Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:38:56 -0500
*From: *
Daniel Horne <[e-mail]>
<mailto:[e-mail]>
1 of 5 1/31/2008 1028 AM

Re: [Fwd. Mining Permit No. 27-49 (Bonney Bright Mine)]
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Mining Permit No. 27-49 (Bonney Bright Mine)] L 'T
From: Judy Wehner <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:10:29 -0500 r�
To: Robert Patterson <Robert. Patterson@ncmail. net> �) �0 Y�' $�A
�C
Or contact Pat McClain at the Washington Regional Office. He knows alot about the
situation. rf-C-L4iA/ Z/z/ogV1 ,1,1,q I 1 2/13�aS� _ jS�rt.cl✓1Tpnl��G Gc�3LLS
Robert Patterson wrote: /-to'iv) Tae-IA16-
Thanks Judy! I'll try and email Floyd again to meet about this one.
Judy Wehner wrote:
Floyd Williams has been handling this complaint. Evidently Mr. Purnell has
complained to every one. The regulatory issue from your end would be an NPDES
permit if they are dewatering, which I believe they have. You may want to sit
down with Floyd and find out all that he has done,
Robert Patterson wrote:
! Judy,
Can you assist me with answering some things regarding the subject mine? I
have been getting almost daily complaints from an adjacent land owner (John
Purnell) regarding damage that dewatering at this mine has caused to his
drinking well. I'm not sure that there is anything I can do here from a
surface water protection side. I have talked to Evan Kane in Aquifer
Protection, and he said they are deffering to DLR and the State of
Virginia. I have also talked to VA DEQ, VA DH, and EPA; no one can provide
any real answers as to what (if any) avenue we have from a regulatory stand
point. Do you know what's going on with this site? I need some assistance
to at least determine if it is an issue for us or for another department or
agency.
Thanks!
Subject.
Mining Permit No. 27-49 (Bonney Bright Mine)
From:
Robert Patterson <[e-mail]>
Date.
Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15
To.
Floyd Williams <Flo
To.
Floyd Williams <Flo
Floyd,
06:4B -0500
[e-mail]>
[e-mail]>
Has there been any activity regarding this permit and site? They have
submitted a modification to us for their NPDES SW permit to allow
dewatering. We have received numerous comments from concerned land owners,
VA DEQ, and EPA that there may be a concern of saltwater intrusion into
private drinking water wells in the area. Are you aware of this issue? Did
they have to provide DLR with a dewatering 0&M plan? I would like to talk
with you regarding this site when you have a minute. I'll be around
tomorrow afternoon or Friday morning. Please let me know when you could
meet.
Thanks!
oft 2/12/2008 2:27 PM

Re: [Fwd: Mining Permit No. 27-49 (Bonney Bright Mine)]
2 of2 2/12/2008 2:27 PM

youeig iaieMu,ioIS $ SFuefjeM
I Db71p MAYM - 8N30
tiUUC 8 ���
North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources nn
Land Quality Division
Attn: Floyd R. Williams
Dear Mr. Williams,
We have sent to you a copy of the complaint that we have made against Bright Mining (concerning the
Currituck County mine pit) to the North Carolina Board of Examiners for Engineers and Surveyors.
As you can see from the documents provided, the engineering firm and /or the law firm that provided you
with information appear to be inaccurate. Therefore, the data they submitted to your organization for the
approval of this mine pit could not be accurately reviewed by your department. This situation also carries
over to the Currituck County Board of Commissioners when they approved this project.
At the very least, it appears that the engineer omitted Virginia SR 616 -Pocahontas Club Road from the
site plan, as stated by the city of Virginia Beach (see copy of letter attached) and confirmed by the
Virginia Department of Transportation,
Your letter dated June 29, 2006 stated that the recently permitted Bright Mine would, in you own words;
"cease any further mining activities within the 20 foot purported easement and with in 50 feet on
either side of the purported easement until this issue is resolved"
We will be keeping you updated on the complaint.
We have also provided you the baseline info of our drinking well, and the current test results indicate that
there is a 133% increase in the Chloride contained in our drinking water. Please note the max allowed
by NC & VA Health Dept. is 250 mg/1 and we currently tested at 233 mgll.
We know that this information, once reviewed by the proper parties, will once and for all end this issue
and vindicate our position we have always stated.
Sincerely,
Jennifer and John Purnell
6480 Pocahontas Club Road
Va. Beach, Va. 23457
Enclosures.
1-E-mail of the base line of the water analysis for our well in Feb. 2001.
2-Copy of most recent analysis of the same drinking well at 6480 Pocahontas Club Road, Va. Beach, Va.
23457
3-Copy of your letter dated June 29, 2006.
4-Copy of the letter from Robert L. Outten
5-Copy of Complaint form to North Carolina Board of Engineers for Engineers and Surveyors
6- Copy of the letter issued to Bonney Bright concerning VA SR 616 (Pocahontas Club Road)
7
Richard Quinn- Staff reporter for the Virginia Pilot Newspaper [�
Currituck Count Planning Department
Environmental Protection Agency
Tim Kaine, Governor of Virginia "'

,.71
r
, .,�. �.r :, (� I':'i'."� � L_•.i,l,r, LI.. .1;f •, � s L.
.. ;f'I;j
.., £1. �. ...1: , 3,:1 , .► i t 1, :I. 1 , `
, .'li'. �r {' JL
• , fif I( .1 �1 , „ 1 j r i• .. _ r.t1 I '
:I, 1. r .:} :'+ I
14
' �; �.. ' I. ,i.l�. tf rl,�.l.l .'�� . � ,
I 1� 1... /• . 1 .
r • .!•{ r'1 . •Ii
, I 1�J,\' �•, 5T •1' !:, „ t „ , y 1 it
iJ .. •,i i,:l 1 . .
1�. / '!. r�
' .i, 111'IJ Tt �l' ar'3'.' � � r,_ rY �•t� � ,{
1 •'�I'; , 'f•, !
'-1 , 41 ... i { f �s• E ... ...'f,+j (: ' I , s �,,
i •'1 i' i .. I .
!t. ,7:3;
1; f.i� r'.r, .:�
►`• ri ': f'1 :+r .'''
' ln. I I \'• 31�r1r �( , �, rl' 1'' ,�
., ! .1�.: 17. Z' ! '
.• �, J 'f �1 , `tlj-r
1
U , :i ,, 1•, r. '1 I ,
1. 1.. _ l' . ,
'I 'I: l r it
} ,li 1� r.1• _. .. !� �,. '1 �f,r
�f'J, Ir .:! r
I! ,1, � _ It
IJ r 1�• C. L' � ( r "1'. i (l,r I..Irt :'� .
'lr' Nt�_I r f.. ,ii
`', 11,. "l1• .1 , .

07/10/2006 13:00 9197156801 NC DENR DLR PAGE 02
..o.A'Y-.FA
'Can%ENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
Land Quality Section
James D. Simons, PG, PEA
Director and State Geologist
June 29, 2006
Cg&TIQED MAIL
T EC IPT REQUESTED
7003 0500 0002 7858 1783
Mr. Bonney G. Bright
5513 Buzzard Neck Road
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
RE: Bright Mine
Mine Permit No.27-49
Currituek County / Pasquotank River Basin
Dear Mr, Bright;
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr„ Secretary
This office has been notified by Mr. John Purnell whom resides in Virginia
that there is a deeded 20 foot easement that goes through your recently
permitted Bright Mine in Cunituck County. Mr. Purnell is contending that the
hatched lined road going through your mine site as indicated on the attached
map is approximately where the easement is located.
Please cease any further mining related activities within the 20 foot
purported easement and within} 5D feet on either side of the purported easement
until this issue 'is resolved. if you have any legal documents that indicates an
easement does not exist, please provide this office with such documents.
Sincerely,
Floyd R. Williams, PG, CPG, CPM
State Mining Specialist
Land Quality Section
FRW/frw
Enclosures
Cc: Pat McClain, PE w/enclosures
1612 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699.1612 •919-733AS74 / FAX: [phone]
512 North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Actloo Employer - 50% Recycled 140% Post Consumer Paper

,
t
t

&-vrvy.jrrm, 1855667 # 1/ t
amity o$' -1,47:Lx-g3raijEa ]B4�sch
VBVW.CDM
z
Dec.anbcr I8.2007
Mr. Bonney ]aright
Homey G. ftgbt Sand Company
5513 Buzmd Neck Raad
Vugbda Beach, VA 23457
Subject: EPA A.dndnWntive Order and Pocahontas Club Road
Dear Mr. Aright
The City ofMug= Bcacb has been notified that the Environmental Pmtectuin Agency (EPA) has
found your bcmow pit disebaw imcamistant with the terms of your Vuglnia Pollift nt DisobaSt
Elimination Permit (VPDM. While meeting the discharge limits in your permit is solely an issue
to be iesolved bares you and the EPA, the City mast also maintain a stormwater permit for its
municipal drainage system Only permitted kdw*ial &9dmMw am allowed within the City.
Failure to maintain or meet the requirements of your poanit is a discharge violation and does not
amet the touns of your conditional use p=mt Please provide documentation that you have
resolved the issues associated with the EPA Administrative Order within GQ days offfic date of this
letter or the City will have no recotme but to revolve your conditional use permit.
An additional issue has oecumcd regarding Pocahomas Club Road. Raseatoh bus revealed that
public aooess has biskmeaft wasted thr das waved roadway $nm dw improved portion of
Om mad to the North Carolina scam line. Your d9mmager ditch n impeding such acaem Please
resolve this access blaclmge or the City will be tbrced to restore access in a manner that may not
serve your current drainage needs.
While there arc several City agmoies associated with the above, please feel f&ee to contact me at
3854131, or e-mail high aftM&M if you have any guadons or for assistance in resolving
dose is UCL
Si erely,
William J Job nston, P.E.
cc: Karen Lasley
Jim Lawson
Phil Davaaport

F6-164T 12,41pm
From -EPA REGION -A-9PEB-2 [phone]' T-701 P.002/003 F-T54
Michad F. Easlcy, Governor
William a Rm IT., Seereacry
Noah CamliaaDgW=rat of Environment and Natural pm ourca
Alan W. Klimek, P-F- ialrcew
Division of Water Quality
January 29, 2007
CERTIFIED MAIL 7g06 0100 0000 8379_4102
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Bonney G. Bright
5513 Buzzard Neck Road
Virginia Beach VA, 23457
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION
NOTICE OF RECOMMENDATION
OF ENFORCEMENT
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
Currituck County
Dear Mr Bright:
This letter is to notify you that the Washington Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality is
considering forwarding a recommendation for enforcement action to the Director of the Division of
Water Quality. The recommendation concerns the violations of NCGS 143-215.1, illegal discharges at
the mine facility located at 100 Marsh Causeway, Knotts Island, Cun-ituck County, North Carolina.
Jeffery A. Manning, of the Division of Water Quality, made a site visit to the Knotts Island mine site on
Wednesday January 24t', 2007. l understand per your conversation with Mr. Manning upon his site
visit that your facility has dewatered and discharged to waters of the state of North Carolina without a
permit
Please be advised that NCGS 143-215.6 of the state Water Quality Statutes provides:
"A civil penalty of not more than ten thousand dollars (S10,000) may be assessed by the [Environmental
Management] Commission against any person who is required but fails to apply for or to secure a permit
required by G-S. 143-215.1, or who violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or
requirements of such permit." NCGS 143-215.6 further provides that "if any action or failure to act is
continuous, the Commission may assess a penalty not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per day for so
long as the violation continues."
Please respond in writing to the Washington Regional Office within ten (10) days after receipt of this
Notice. Your explanation will be reviewed and if an enforcement action is still deemed appropriate,
your explanation will be forwarded to the Director with the enforcement package for his consideration.
Failure to respond within the time specified may result in the issuance of a civil penalty.
K—L CmeU— ntv7ylon of W W= Qustlry Yeazzuns,vn VLGWDT=3 C) fMGC PIIattc (.252) 9qo-ttsR Gua�umcr ba-n"
Int mce www.newmanquality.mg 943 Washiapm Square Mall, WarAinV01%NC 27889 FAX [phone].623-674B
An Equal OpparnWlylAffian *$ Acden Employer- 50% Recgdeft?% Post Consumer Paper
i

F4
v-
17
r4
t1

Peb-1617 12:42pm From -EPA REGION A-WPEB-2
[phone]— _, T-701 P.003/003 F-764
If you have any questions you may contact Jeffery A. Manning, Environmental Specialist, at
[phone].
Sincerely,
Al Hodge, Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
Washington Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
Cc: WO Central Files
Pat McClain -Land Quality, Washington Regional Office
Kelly Johnson -Non -Point Source Planning, Raleigh Regional Office
WaRO Enforcement Files
2

ICa�•.i! �.. _�.
� `�C�F_ I ', � Ili
. � u• ��
.� � �,
..
{. a�, �!C „'�•.�r � .'dal
�. L��'.
1..: � ,r�`
- 'r'+ '��'
!,1
-�—�7,Fr
.,
..I,1.; �
��

1'iimelll40481-03
OF COR_RFCTION
Tau E>< t rs ant to
THIS DEED OF CORRECTION, made this 27"' day of January, 2005, by and between
SAMUEL I. WHITE, P.C., Substitute Trustee, GRANTOR, party of the first part, and
JENNIFER L. OM GRANTEE, party of the second part, whose address is: 1911 Clifton
Road, Virginia Beach, VA 23457,
WITNESSETH
THAT WHEREAS, by deed dated November 6, 2003, recorded in the Clerk's Office of
the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach on January 14, 2004, in Instrument No.
200401140007927, Samuel I. White, P.C., Substitute Trustee, conveyed the hereinafter described
property to Jennifer L. Orr, following a foreclosure sale which had been conducted on November
6, 2003; and
WHEREAS, said foreclosure deed contained a legal description which was incorrect, and
it is the purpose of this deed to correct said legal description.
NOW THEREFORE, this deed, that for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars
($10.00), cash in hand paid, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is
hereby acknowledged, the said Grantor does grant, convey and hereby contiimt title unto the said
Grantee in and to the following described property, to -wit:
THAT CERTAIN tract of land, with its appurtenances, situated on Morse's
Point, in the City of Virginia Beach, in the State of Virginia, being bounded and
described in prior conveyances as follows;
BEGINNING at a post near the angle of the road separating the pact hereby
conveyed from land of Best, where said road runs northerly; running thence S.
21 degrees E 1,000 feet to the Virginia -Carolina State line; thence with said line
N 56 degrees W 400 feet; thence N 38 deg= 45' W 700 feet, mare or less, to
the aforesaid toad; thcmi� along said road, N 51 degrees 15' E 605 feet, to the
point of beginning; containing seven (7) acres, more or less, as shown by a plat
thereof anwxed to the deed from John C. Cason, et at, to E.A. Shaw. recorded in
the Register's Office of Guurituck County, North Carolina, in Deed Book 47, at
pale 84.
The property is also described by reference to a plat entitled "Physical Survey
Parcel Indicated as Reid 9.6 Ames Plat of Flyway by S.W. Armistead July 1930"
dated November 6, 1999, made by Bonifant land Surveys, Phil M. Sonifanl,
L.S., a copy of which survey is recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit
Court of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 4213 at page 1754 and by this
reference made a part hereof, -by the following courses and distanoes:
COMMENCING at the Virginia North Carolina line monument #4, said
momimsut being in the Virginia -- North Carolina state Line where said line
uitersects Princess Anne Rd. (State Route 615) monument being on the eastern
side of said road. Thence running along the aforesaid state line S 83 degrees 43'
40'E 3,106.56' to a point, thence N 30 degrees 19' E 14.82'to a point marked by

a 4" cast iron pipe imbedded in concrete broken off at its base, th nee N 37
degrees 46'W 740.0' to a 4" cast iron pipe finbedded in concrete broken off at its
base in the southern edge of 20' Right -of -Way described In Deed Book 47 at Page
8M of the Clerk's Office of Currituck County, North Carolina (Pocahontas
Club Rd.), thence N. 52 degrees 14' B along said Read 435' more or less and
extending beyond the bend of said road 170' more or less a total of 605.0' to a 4"
cast iron pipe imbedded in concrete in the marsh, thence S. 20 degrees 10' H,
1.078.9' to a 4" cast iron pipe embedded in concrete on the Virginia -- North
Carolina state line, thence along the of %ald state line N 83 degrees 43' 40" W.
406.92 to the point of beginning, Containing 9.573 Acres.
TOGETHER with the easement to the public road leading from Knotts Island to
Norfolk (Princess Anne Road) created in the deed from John C. Cason, et al, to
E.A. Shaw, dated August 23, 1904, and record in the office of the Register of
Deeds for C4Mtuck County. North Carolina, in Deed Book 47, page 80, a copy
of which is recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Cirmit Corns of the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 4213 at Page 12S2.
TOGETHER with an essemern over the undeveloped portion of Pocahontas Club
Road across the property formerly belonging to John C. Cason, and currently
belonging to Bonney T. Bright leading to the developed portion of Pocahontas
Club Road.
Subject to a Right of Way Agreement dated September 5, 2WI in favor of
Virginia Electric and Power Company and recorded in Clerk of Court, City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia in Deed Book: 4522, at Page 505.
IT BEING the same property conveyed to Jennifer L. Orr (now known as Jennifer
L. Purnell) by deed from Samuel 1. White, P.C., a Profossional Corporation,
Substitute Trustee, dated November 6, 2003, and duly recorded in the aforesaid
Clerk's Office on January 14, 2004, as Instrument No. 200401140007927.
This property is conveyed subject to all conditions, restrictions and easements, if any, of
record, constituting constructive notice.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor on the day and year first above written, has
caused this instrument to be signed and sealed.
SAMUEL 1. WHM, P.C.
BY:
Carolyn B. Leen, Vice President
STATE OF VIROINIA,
CITY/COUNTY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
The undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the city and state aforesaid, do hereby certify
that Carolyn 13. Leen, Vice President of Samuel L White, P.C., a corporation, whose name as
such is signed to the foregoing deed dated January 27, 2005, has acknowledged her signature
before the undersigned.
Oiven under my hand and notarial seal this day of . 2005.
Notary Public (SEAL)
My Commission Expires:
Prcpaml by;
6nmoo! E. WOO. P.C.

This is to certify that I, en 6-Savemft®r 1999, Surveyed the
in
rty shown thi• punt, and that the title line® and the 01
�the
are as cwm aura thin plat. M
The buildings stand strictly within the title theE"
ao a tamachumW of other buildlW .on -'the prapnLT@ t an ehowl
rA . 9
1 ov
Aw
m&Aq,r a
006
PI
jo- Fos {1 .
4osrW,
�'�11i
I
I
.:ford, indicated as
MM - 9.6 A=W
F mm" AF.tint &mNW dW l930
Virg a 8escho Virginia .
SCale 1. m 200' 6 Naveml= 1999
ads f
nbrfh Carw
f4 or Jahn W. r%WFISN6 R - This ProPexty appears to lie
Banifaat rand SurvWv Within flood zone ns (ffi S}
P.O. Bon 6389 Panel 109..of 109
Virginia Beach, 7a. 23456 cbmmunity:No. 515531 R

W.D6
1-S
Permit Number Facility Name FACTYPE FACLASS
VAG840148 BONNEY BRIGHT SAND COMPANY (FRMRLY. IND SMALL
AG843032)
Inspection Type INSPBY INSPDATE RPTDATE SCHED ANN
TECHNICAL SJL 10/12/2006 10/19/2006 N N
LAB RATING
COMMENT:
TILL NOT PERFORMING ALL AS REQUIRED BY PERMIT AND THE SWP3. DMR
EPORTING PROBLEMS FOUND. CONCERN FOR DISCHARGE FROM THE NWIT
WOUNDED AT THE TIME BUT IS POSSIBLE 91`45THE PIT START TO PUMP
IATER. ENet, S
IAT IAR L/NOV ISSUED WLJNOV RESOLVED
10/19/2006
w WE ad
1
�
FT FMM
comments:
--jffm.,a-rq-0v
recommended
16

C'MMONW EALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OFEIMRONMENTAL QUALITY
TIDEWATER REGIONAL OFFICE
L. Preston Bryant, Jr 5636 Southern Boulevard, Vuginia Beacb, Virginia 23462 David K. Paylor
Seaetuy of Natural Resources [phone] Fax [phone] Director
—Aegxirginia.gov
Francis L. Daniel
Regional Director
NOV 05 20 fi
Mr. Bonney Bright, Owner
Bonney Bright Sand Company
5513 Buzzard Neck Rd.
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
Re: Technical Inspection Report
(200 Princess Anne Rd.) (VAG840148)
Dear. Mr. Bright:
Enclosed is a copy of the technical inspection report prepared for the inspection conducted on
October •12, 2006. Please note the deficiencies cited in this report and implement appropriate
corrective measures in order to ensure continued .permit compliance: Due to the deficiencies
found, a Warning Letter is also enclosed. Within fifteen 15 days of receipt of this report, you are
requested to submit a letter documenting that the necessary corrections have been made. One
response to both the inspection report and the Waming. Letter is acceptable.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please feel free to contact rune at the above
address or telephone [phone]. .
Sincerely,
Steve J.E.- Lon
Environmental Specialist II
Enclosure
cc: DEQ/OWCP: S.G. Steil
DEQITRO: File, D.Kay

FJ+ J
rF
1 _
i
l _ .
r� L
1'
•4

BONNEY BRIGHT:._ Co.
iddre S 200 PRINCESS ANNE RD.
Wu'n'f V.ICi ff " ' VIRG[NIA BEACH, VA 23457
;'�ttf;�tfil�
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
STORMWATER GENERAL FACILITY
INSPECTION REPORT
VP®ESN�O21 VAG840148
nspection date:
October 12, 2006 Date form completed:
October 19, 2006
.
nspection by:
Steven J.E. Long Inspection agency:
DEQUIRO
rime spent: 3 hours i
gin
Reviewed by: Kenneth T. Raum
'resent at inspection:
Michelle Hollis — DEQ Permit Writer
Lan Smith - Pit Foreman, Bonn2j Bright — Owner
TYPE OF INSPECTION:
Routine
Reinspection
Compliancelassistaneelcomplaint -T
Date of previous inspection:
Agency:
DEQITRO
Term: 711104-6/30/09
Other. Non -Metallic Mineral Mining
storm Water P3 available and up dated? Pill
YES
,J
NO
Dutfalls Identified in SWP3? Site Map with Drainage and Flows available?
YES
NO.
X
PII, H.2.a.1
Has there been any new construction? If yes, were the plans and
YES
NO
cifications approved and the SWP3 amended? PII.G
Housekeeping and Preventive Maintenance? PII, H.3.a & b
YES
,j
NO
Inspections (113M) Pill, H.3_d
YES
NO
X
Training (Annual) PII, H.3.c
YES
NO
X
Visual Examinations of Stormwater Quality performed and documented? PII,
YES
NO
H.3.d
na
Comprehensive Site Evaluation and Report. Certification of Compliance or
YES
NO
X
issues of non-compliance? PII H.4
Oil or other Hazardous Spills? PII,H.2.a.1, Pill, B.4
YES
NO
If sampling is required is it performed correctly and documented? PI,A.1
YES
NO
X
Results and records available? PII, H.3.d
YES
NO
COPIES TO: (x) DEWRO; (x) DEQIOWPP; (x) OWNER; O OPERATOR; O EPA -Region Ill; O Other:
or those items marked with an X or a 4ee the summary section and the Inspection Comments.

! +..��-i. :--Y .-a '"'S-;•�i.~1 d�. .0 _ �'r •�
4 i. 1.. i
�- �a��d .i a
Y 'ti
�i ��'Ir •�If r,Y
r ..
.
' .., _ � ! ,7
, - . [�*r•..
, ' .Is.
.. 1 i.i 1� � � � ,�. •i .��} .y,• I�aIS'l �.fti

FAcility: Bonnie Bright San-. .o.
VAG840148
- Prt B: Special Co ditions :z
�
Are vehicles/equipment utilized maintained to prevent discharge of POL?
Sewage disposal acceptable?
If there is chemical addition was it included in the approved registration statement?
na
Was a new registration statement provided with changes to the Division of Mineral Mining
na.
permit?
Spill requirements met?
na
Are all discharges except those allowed permitted prevented from leaving the site?
,J
Co -located Asphalt plant — if present are discharges prevented or covered under a different
na
ermit?
�f AlliWix,
This site visit was performed in response to a complaint from John Purnell, an adjacent property owner, who
stated that another Non-metallic mineral mining pit was being excavated in North Carolina and discharges from
this pit wefe entering Virginia state water. There is no record of a permitted discharge from this new facility
and an inspection was conducted to determine if any discharges were occurring that needed permitting.
While in the area and onsite at the permitted facili an inspection was performed.
On arrival to the site met personnel in the site trailer and they contacted Larry Smith the Pit foreman.
Discussing the' N.C. operations with personnel in the trailer they provided that pumping out of the pit has not
started. The only work currently being performed at the N.C. pit was building of the perimeter berm.
Mr. Smith arrived and the purpose of the visit was discussed providing information concerning the complaint
and the intent to perform an inspection of the currently permitted facility. Mr. Bonney Bright, owner of both
facilities was contacted and was In route to the site.
The inspection for the permitted facility was started with Mr. Smith with a review of the pit operation, changes
noted since the last site visit, and inspection of the two permitted discharge points. A second outfall was
added as a result of the inspections performed May 2005. These site visits determined that there were
discharge points at the northwestern corner and at the southeastern comer. The northwestern outfall, 001, is at
the beginning of a ditch line that ends 1n the southeastem corner. The pumped discharge flows to this area
with the majority of the flow going towards the west and eventually discharging out of Outfall 002. Outfall 001
is a flood control gate that will allow for a discharge towards time west and Princess Anne Rd.
Facility personnel are trying to prevent discharges from Outfall 001 by keeping the gate closed. Most of the
water is diverted towards Outfall 002 but there remains a very small amount of discharge from this structure.
The small discharge needs to be eliminated or it must be monitored.
No significant Issues were observed throughout the facility. Several stock piles In areas that would have
erosion issues were covered with vegetation. This practice, whether actively planted or from natural growth,
should be continued. if stockpiles are maintain without vegetation, any stormwater discharges should be
directed to the pit.
Dischar a from Outfall 002 was observed with some turbidi though riot thought'g to be excessive.
A review of the records was attempted but most of the records were not maintained onsite. THIS CONTINUES
TO BE A DEFICIENCY AFTER -SEVERAL VISITS AND DISCUSSION WITH SITE PERSONNEL AND THE OWNER.
The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan was on site and briefly reviewed. The plan needs to be reviewed and
edited to ensure that it meets all content requirement as detailed In the permit. Specific issues include:
• Site map needs to be updated to Include all items as listed in Part 11, H.2.a.1
• The frequency of training must be specified in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan.
• The frequency of inspections (Part 11, H.3.d) must be specified in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Plan.
• The Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluation Report or the Certification of Compliance is not included

J1

F6ciiity: Bonnie Blight San_ ,o. VAG840148
These specific items were discussed with Mr. Bright and the missing records were requested. Records were
received on October 18, 2006 and reviewed. Several deficiencies were found in the records and,are reviewed
below.
A site map with several items was provided but still does not include all of the information as required. A
listing of the items required to be on the site map was provided to the owner for development of the map but
this has yet to be completed. THIS IS A REPEAT DEFICIENCY FROM THE LAST SiTE VISIT. THE LIST AND THE
PERMIT NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED SO THAT ALL ITEMS AS REQUIRED BY THE PERMIT ARE INCLUDED ON
THE SiTE MAP. The most notable items missing from the map are the drainage patterns for the discharges and
the locations of the outfalls.
During the site visit and discussions concerning the required inspections, Mr. Bright stated that daily
inspections were performed and documented though the documentation was not available onsite. The last
seven days of inspection records were requested for review.
Ten records were submitted and ranged in dates from January 16 to September 1, 2006. Most of the records
only provide "Pit ok" or "Pit good" with a couple noting "Pit wet" and had Mr. Bright's initials.
The inspection requirements are found In Part 11, H.3.d and specify the items that are to be reviewed and
Inspected. The records submitted do not meet the inspection requirements as specified in the permit. These
are the first records for inspections that have ever been submitted by this facility. The last full inspection
determined that the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan had not been developed nor had the required
Inspection been documented. THIS IS A REPEAT DEFICIENCY FROM THE LAST SITE ViSIT. THE INSPECTION
ROUTINE MUST BE EXPANDED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOUND IN THE PERMIT. Ensure that the
records include the date and time of the inspections, any findings, and the corrective measures for those
findings.
Training for-Stormwater Pollution Prevention is required, at a minimum, annually. Records of training were
submitted but from the subject matter documented on these records, nothing concerning Stormwater Pollution
Prevention was reviewed. Several individual records for `-'Annual Refresher Training RecordlCertification"
were provided with the subject "relevant to mining operations" noted. Furthermore, these records are not
valid as they have not been signed as required.
As with the Inspection issues, these are the first records submitted for training since previous inspections did
not have training records provided. THIS IS A REPEAT DEFICIENCY FROM THE LAST SITE VISIT. TRAINING,
SPECIFIC FOR STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION MUST BE CONDUCTED AT LEAST ANNUALLY.
A Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluation, required at a minimum annually, was not Included in the
documents submitted for review. An "Inspection Report" from the Division of Mineral Mining was submitted
documenting the training conducted on 2115106 by DMM personnel but does not meet the requirements of the
evaluation as specified in the permit. THiS IS A REPEAT DEFICIENCY FROM THE LAST SiTE. A
COMPREHENSIVE SITE COMPLIANCE EVALUATION MUST BE CONDUCTED AT LEAST ANNUALLY.
All laboratory information for the last two sampling events was requested for review. The records received
Included the Certificate of Analysis for the last two sampling events and the DMR for the third quarter. A copy
of the r quarter DMR was retrieved from the file. Chain of Custody records were not provide as requested and
therefore, could not be reviewed.
From the Certificate of Analysis, the "Sample marked" provides "Sand Pit/ Ditch Overflow" and does not
specify which outfall Is being sampled. It Is believed that the southeastem comer discharge, Outfall 002, is
being sampled.
The Discharge Monitoring Reports are for Outfall 001. It is believed that these results are being submitted on
the incorrect DMR form since all Information concerning the sampling point has been for Outfall 002. Outfall
002 was added to the permit on 611106. Since this is the location at which a majority of the water is actually
discharged it was suggested that this be the monitored outfall. With the sampling performed on 5/24/06 and
8/28106, monitoring should be performed and documented from Outfall 002.
As provided by facility personnel, discharges from Outfall 001 are attempted to be prevented. The discharge at
this location must be eliminated otherwise monitoring must be performed.
With the addition of the second outfall, two DMRs must be submitted, one for each of the Outfalls. If "No
Discharae" is maintained at Outfall 001 this DMR still must be submitted with the statement of "No Discharae".

./;
_s
1 ;;w'r:sJ�:�r:+t: ,:- r• " `-- . , .fir Y.Y _
�.1-, , ..
.E . , .�; . 11' - -- t
'Nit L
Ar[`t �I • `.. -Y,r rr+- :c} 7 •,f e s � "•
r !„ �'
�: Fa :1 .:�'�! 1 '' ,:'„ r4•.=. .. �
!.a.'r:°, ,.l..r
:y; X•, t'
llaa
!: !•` S`» 7.' 't.'. .! .., h.•4
. .
y, . _
SIX
7
, L�':c: r.f-' • i S' �'r� •1•'.L' . ..i ' ` F,
`. .. ... -
- ! .. �i} `1 -.. r.'.rr ..'f r> .!.'�'r'
_ ��'�>_t fS.�i',i`}-Y �� ,' .r
.?l. I ,'!1C..
.:'��L.. .. •`: .. r �.:Ec ri ,
I
! +:o•a:i �e Ali -- .'_T�r. .'r7!
.j
•i
+ r,- .'r '{' �'r'• 1L��)s_. , i;r.i. +... .. .] �
r . 1.
+ .!4. r>f � � C ,Ii?I' .�
:.i r. "S•''. .. 'r ... i•4., -'r. .. _,l.. ,_ _ � _ i.."-.
� =l. Ir'. • �-
r .' .. i��. '�' ! ri+
to
+
3 17 1),1!Cps, _1S i'
r .r,
.f. y�.. •' '�',:1, .- "r" '
.. ,'.a
,i -
..Tl
I
�
i " l W+.
:' a <• 1
:�
�.�� ,... .� 'J•. y_, el-�: `' _ - :�9
't:i' i
-`�" - C.ij.` `sue!• ;�_ .j `.. f� I
�+ - rf 'not,'dG , : •t :f..,r4,
e'
! I, Sl;ahtS�C, � u � Y . , 't. ' - ... �!
... . e=. .
� tr• � t i _ - 'ft 1 -: J. . ., i

Far-;Hh • Rnnnip- Rrirlht Rnn. in
VAG840148
;1SPERT:ON'_C
k MENDS rArttintCl t
Average flow estimation is recorded as 0.004 and 0.005 MGD for the two periods reported with a maximum of 0
.06 MGD. The flow should be estimated from the day of sampling and since there is only one estimate, the
average should be the same as the maximum . The estimated flow can be determined from the pump rating and
the amount of time that the pump is on for the day of sampling. For a typical day, with a rate of 40,000 gallons
per -hour and pumping conducted for up to ten hours the estimate flow would be 0.4 MGD.
The North Carolina pit was discussed with Mr. Bright noting that as long as all discharges from the site remain
in N.C. there would be no reason for issuance of another permit.
The plan, as provided by Mr. Bright, is to discharge the pit water from the N.C. site into ditches that do flow into
Virginia. The intent is to fill the ditches with the water and allow for the water to recharge into the ground.
Several flood gates, similar to those already in place in the ditches for the Virginia pit, have been placed at
various location to maintain the water on site. This was the same plan that was in use for the Virginia pit, and
as demonstrated in May 2005, DID NOT prevent a discharge from occurring.
Though some water is expected to recharge into the ground, and there will be some evaporation, the amount of
water -that is being pumped will usually inundate the ditches. The flood control gates do hold back water but
they are not water tight. Once the water is up to the level of the boards, the water will seep around and between
and still discharge. One of the gates observed did not have board installed and a discharge into the pipe was
not observed. A flow was seen at this location and is believed to be from water flowing along the exterior
length of the pipe versus inside the pipe.
Mr. Bright was informed that a permit would be needed if water from the N.C. pit discharged to Virginia and
ended up in Virginia state waters. Mr. Bright was informed that the permit was required prior to discharge not
afterwards. Also discussed with Mr. Bright was the fact that the same plan. for preventing a discharge was
being used and during periods of high pumping and heavy rain, the pit water would likely discharge and he
would need a permit. It was left that this is Mr. Bright's decision but and it would be preferred to have all of the
pit water from N.C. stay in N.C. A registration statement was provided in case Mr. Bright decided to obtain a
discharge permit for the new pit.
Since there is no discharge coming from the pit, the complaint is unfounded and further action is not needed.
a
frEfM. ...M F. .GpMAI�ND TiONS . �4RgC004 , ,w
THE FOLLOWING ARE REPEAT DEFICIENCIES FROM PREVIOUS SITE VISITS:
• Maintain the records on site as required by the permit.
• Update the site map to include all items as required by the permit.
• Perform routine site inspections as required by the permit and properly document the inspections.
• Perform and document the required training, specifically addressing Stormwater Pollution Prevention.
• Perform -and document the required Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluation.
Properly document the sampling locations noting which Outfall Is being sampled. Report that information on
the correct Discharge Monitorin Re ort and submit all Discharge Monitoring Re its as re uired.

s .,
�r �— - � �
.,._ � - ,i y �, �. 1 .� _... _. ._. —.
• � � i ....� ... .+ — Imo. _ , F . J 1 . .. � _
1 ,
"�.
fT s � !' 1 � � ..., . � � - u ,. `'. � :' ` ��7 is

Page 1 of 1
Subj: well water tests
Date; 1l30=0812:26:12 PM Eastern Standard Time
From:
To:
The following is the data pertaining to the well drilled at 6480 Pocohontas Club Rd, dtd 8 Feb 2001.
Well depth: 6T Yield: 12gpm Static level: 11' Iron(fe) .5 - .8 ppm Clorides 100 PH 7.6 (no
noticible odor to water) Isl el stan
Never miss a thing.
Thursday. January 31, 2008 America Online: JLOrr137

L�

Aft UNIVERSAL LABORATORIES
20 Ptesmrofft Of m Iiampbun. Va 2WIM
t aasaaao
M. JwM Punta"
6480 Pomhun au Club Road
vaginia Beach VA 23457
ATTN: John Pumell
Project ID: NIA
Project # NIA
Site: OMking Water Sample
Mafrix: DrWng Water
Comments w of"r.
Total Sodium
Chloride
REPORT OF ANALYSIS
0801288
OMPM DAM
2"an-w
UL Sample Number: 08012=-001
Sw* 10:
DdnMV WAW SOtrrpts
Crab Datemme:
1rZ21M 8 09.30
Composite stark
WA
Composite Stop:
NIA
Collected By:
CUENT
Test UL Analyst
..Method�.�■�� Rfmil: Units Ukrd ^ DateMms
SM3111 Mee nv L 0M 1r2wr2m EF
13:35:00
8M4500 CL/8 233 m9+L 1 1I25MM AS
Cmwants for Semple ID 0t10120401
-ate
PW2d2
w
Moinb D*A109 wow too MM Naen Car01w onnMng WaW Lae 9 $1700
►mE Q Lae aocoom NosO came tN Lee it "3
12:43.DD
fftS CZ'�1i�i]f SUbTI111.i8ff, 1
EPA LAB CODE VA00912 oeoiM4)01

v-
i

NORTH CAROLINA 64ARD OF EKAMMERS
FOR ENGEERS AND SURVEYORS
4QM St Forks 1R080, SuRe Sig,
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
CCMPIJQW FORM
COMO*=* John & Jenrdw (Orr) Pumen
(urns) 6480 P4c hardas (iub Road, Virginia Beach. VA 239W
(Ph ) P.O. Box 343, Knatts land. NC 27M
(Mafto Address --1i Date W) 4757) 773-1112
(DaYfim Tie Numbe )
(wi "nt BisseQ Pm%sWoW Gfoup (tlt3ark S. Bt&SA P.F.)
Agaimt
( ) [phone]
(Te Number) 16m
(Uosase Nurratrer-- gAppr=W)
wuness: AtWffdn D. Hoolm, L.S. - VA UC.14058
(ate) 3807 MaWwM Dfine, Pam►, VA 23703
(Address) [phone]
(Telephane Number)
(Address)
(Tee Number)
wunew
(Name)
n'elepWne )
Use AddMonal Pages As Needed

Details of
Complaint: (Name of Specific design plan, survey or report)
Page 2
Details of CwVk&ht
Bissell IRMNSSIM01 Group prepared a Site plan for Bright Mkft Project 0 4087. Page 1 of 4. They
shoat Bordit & der Cw propatty as a per/ Odom pwpertil. Tbew pmpwgm are shuate in the City
of vi%ftia Beach. Va . Both kft appear to have the corned prop mly dares. But balk propedles Front on a
3w undevetoped Public RIWf, r+efarrled to in Yhrgb to Beach as P000lmu►tas Club Road. attd dso known as Va. St.
Rte. 616.This RW Irderseib WWI the dingidal I,brth Cat+olm State Lb" as shamtn in DA 47. Pgs. 811-83_
(Gurrituck Cowdy r ). T as deed abo descdtm a 2W Perpetual P4W of Way arhd is debneated thm the Br%ftt
pmpefttoL4anbCauswmqt,LCSLRta.615-BMofdwsmbdamtmtshmt on the Bbse8 phm We ask you
to have Bisseq P oft s l i rhal GmgpL Check wW redo ib property resew h to see 11 a" can &W the reoap:W
da =ML If forged to twB as we stater have Bissell Gawp corned VWr plans and restdm* to tine apprapda3te
county and State agendem -- -..
This project by Bright Mining has severed my southern access (that is not in a flood
zone) to NC SR 615.
Bnght hmng has harvested the sand under the 20 foot perpetual right way and sold the
sand on the open market and keep the proceeds for himself
This action has dewed me access since July 2006.
Use Additional Pages As Needed
Please enclase COP49 of asy referenced documents and any evklence ,
f 1
Signature of Complainant
NpTARY S � ATEMEtaT
ti y�
State of
County of
ice dm Public for said county and state do herby certify that J er\'�-r o'—
C-'L- 4r*\Vn\6j- personally appeared bebm me and being by me duty \-"L' Cr-e
sworn, stated that thelsche executed the
Witness rely hand aced o{tlal seal, this the
(Official Seal)
ECLAUDINE S. BEAMAN
Notary Pubtle
COMMOnwealth of Vir$irda
262910
My Commisslon Explres May 31, 2010
r
of ,
iv Nt►6lic 1
My commission expires��•71�� Ci

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CENTER (DSC)
[phone]
[phone] (FAX)
September 21, 2006
Mr. Mark S. Bissell, P.E.
Bissell Professional Group
P.O. Box 1068
4417 North Croatan Hwy
Kitty Hawk, NC 27949
City of Virginia Beach
MUNICIPAL CENTER
BUILDING 2
2445 COURTHOUSE DRIVE
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456
RE: Right of Way Improvements and Left Turn Lane for Bright Mine
Princess Anne Road Located in Virginia Beach, Virginia
DSC File # L24-601
Dear Mr. Bissell:
The City of Virginia Beach, Planning, Civil Inspections, has requested that all construction
related work in within the Princess Anne Road right of way associated with above referenced
project be terminated until such time as a construction plan can be submitted, reviewed and
approved by the City of Virginia Beach, Planning, Development Services Center {DSC).
Based on the information contained in the set of plans provided to this office, by the
contractor, the plans are not acceptable for review and/or approval.
The plan must be submitted to the City of Virginia Beach, Planning Department,
Development Services Center {DSC} for review. The following information is provided for
your use during the preparation of the plans. Please note that additional information and
revisions may be necessary during review. The normal review time for this type of project is
four weeks for the first review and three weeks for any subsequent reviews. Much of the
information stated below is clarified or available on the City of Virginia Beach web site and
can be downloaded as needed.
The following comments are provided for your use during plan review:

J i iA
H':S3 s .'i';t+� +ll;� 'n�LS: . ..' IQ .: �. ., : . .•'��:. '.lf:+ !� 'f� �i' .',
ifr FS'JE' fl . !{,.'1;, ?'!JIE')'JS '?.!' 1:,. k ] Iritr t > I• I'rel'!
_ r
(' •'fi; t 1; ...J4'r Ila,�.l'. f's , •1 e,i'
�J:r}, S. r.r= ( iei'`�f•itir `.:I1 . )' i ri'1!I�r .7(r r fi .. rt11. a:l.r liUir
� :f _ jr; .. ] � r f•7ir. I:i'. I J .� � �Ir:. I rl� 't ')✓ 1fl v �i .i�! S'i �J' rp'
I:.I •?'r.l•� ',C�,. •i Ji: .E rI.. +• r's'; •.rs r �i;,r( ., ti li!
iflriC'i` •EI JCI {. �i 14. ,Ci I.'•L.!? i ifl I;t ' I !/'. �, Er i'•1,1 1 ,!! `I
r'!i fl:.�i� of it i:t ir' !'�:.Ji'!�':Ri i.r.li• 1 _ I t !t ` i rr,�,l I .�Ti � �', i1: , !f+I'�u r• r
-.t h
i �i'�i, i �,r r•ri �j 1, i1 .[I �r :S I i'.I-,•ICJ.. .:' � ' r r , . ;it!tr ,r ,i �� ..
.. dJ'.. r r'I. !t'..ti•, f;} i �ii'JJ 'r ,'lir' i�t I r _+ r•lir i "t+J'
1.. , 'liar • 1+ ) ,'J .; r.:! :s •f ,'r I ,I:i 1'I r,s'', ., �' r r'I I sii;f� I; ,.I ., s' Ir].
1:•,'.•! :I. 'I r,. ''iII�J i�„ I' ,f 1F 1,� rr,•r�{. ,'I :i '!1,. :l .. i.

Re: [Fwd: Re: Bonney Bright mine dewatering in Currituck County, NC]
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Bonney Bright mine dewatering in Currituck County, NC]
From: Jeff Manning <Jef£A.Manning a ncmail.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 10:04:55 -0500
To: Robert Patterson <[e-mail]>
I got a call from him the consultant this morning. I will try to find out if they are
dewatering. they are allowed to discharge stormwater and that may be what Mr. Purnell
is seeing, but I will check. I agree on the wetlands issues. I think we need to
follow up on this closely and make sure that they are doing all that can be done to
protect the environment.
Jeffery
Robert Patterson wrote:
Jeff,
I looked through what they submitted today. I don't think this is sufficient for
an 0&M plan. The site plan shows 4 monitoring wells, but they are not mentioned
in the "wetland protection strategies". Also, I'm having trouble seeing if the
ditches drain back into the wetland, or if they go somewhere else. It talks about
the slow permeability of the soils, so I not convinced of how much recharge is
being achieved by the recharge swale.
The adjacent land owner, John Purnell, called me yesterday. I called him back
this morning. He is sending us a package of information regarding this site. He
said that the mine has been dewatering in the last couple of weeks; even after the
NOV for dewatering w/o a permit. He also said that there are major flaws in the
site plan, and he has sent info on this to the NC Board of Engineers and Land
Surveyors.
I'm going to talk to Floyd Williams here at DLR to see what's happening on their
end with this site.
Thanks.
Robert
Jeff Manning wrote:
I have not received anything from them yet.
Jeffery
Robert Patterson wrote:
Jeffery,
Have they submitted any add info to you? I sent them an add info letter
back on 1/11/08 to provide info on any wetlands and an 0&M plan. The due
date for that info is 2/11/08. I talked to Bradley, and he said we may
return the application if we haven't heard by that due date. I'll keep you
updated either way.
Thanks.
Robert
Jeff Manning wrote:
Thanks Robert, let me know.
Jeffery
1 of 2 2/5/2008 10:18 AM

Re: [Fwd: Re: Bonney Bright mine dewatering in Currituck County, NC}
[e-mail] wrote:
Jeff,
Good question! I'm still working with Bethany and Bradley to figure
it out.
I'm not really sure if we even have anything in our permits regarding
salt water intrusion like vA does. More to come.
Thanks.
Robert
2 of2 2/5/2008 10:18 AM

ISIGMA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, Inc.
February 1, 2008
Mr. Robert D. Patterson, P.E.
Stormwater Permitting Unit
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Dear Mr. Patterson,
t�
V1
a
•�
t
This responds to your request for additional information in support our request to
modify permit number COC NCG020701 for the Bonney Bright Sand Company's mine
located at 100 Marsh Causeway, Knotts Island, North Carolina.
Enclosed please find a copy of the "Mining Development Plan for Bright Mine"
dated 3-17-04 which shows the location and limits of jurisdictional wetlands as approved
by the Wilmington District Corps of Engineers and a short discussion paper entitled
"Wetland Protection Strategies" dated January 30, 2008.
If you require any additional information please free to contact me at business cell
[phone], Email at: RharoldjonesAaol.com of the letterhead address.
Sincerely,
R. Harold Jones, �JJVS
President �/
CC: Mr. Bonney G. Bright
Enclosures, w/o map
1513 SANDBRIDGE ROAD, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456
Business Cell [phone] fax [phone]

WETLAND PROTECTION
For
Bonney Bright Sand Company
Currirtuck County Mine
Knotts Island, North Carolina
Prepared:
January 30, 2008
E Sigma Environmental Services, Inc.
Virginia Beach, Virginia

r

The following provides a short discussion on the siting and design components of
the Bonney Bright Sand Mine Plan which were employed to assure that no adverse
impacts to existing wetland resources would result from implementation of the mining;
operation.
The "Mining Development Plan for Bright Mine" dated 3-17-04 shows the
location and limits of jurisdictional wetlands as;approved:by-theViltnington.District
Gbrpstof-Engineers:-The forested wetlands are located on the subject property but outside
of the Permit Boundary.
Surface Drainage
The.closest edge.of the wetland -.to the.top of slope of the.mine.is:645 feet.
Located between the wetland and the edge of the pit is an Overburden Storage Area
(OSA) with a design measurement of 325 feet wide by 920 feet long. A surface haul road
is located between the OSA and the edge of the mine. The road is bermed on both sides.
A 3,646 linear foot Surface Recharge -Swale encircles the.mine.pit. The 20 foot wide, 3
foot deep swale is located immediately adjacent to and on the outside of the haul road.
Design elevation of the haul road is 5.5 feet. The wetlands are located at elevation 2.0
feet and below. Given the fact that the surface elevation of wetland area is lower in
elevation than the surface area immediately adjacent to the edge of the mine, the potential
for the loss of supporting wetland hydrology loss via runoff to the mine is non-existent. 0
(Xvee bm1T 40W I9 ot{7,=RoAf Pc,tMPiti(
Subsurface Drainage
Supporting hydrology for this forested wetland system is primarily precipitation,
however that is supplemented by translocation of surface waters, via hydraulic head,
through the surface soil horizons from the Back Bay. The wetland gently slopes to the
cast and eventually transitions into a herbaccous system which is hydrologically
supported entirely by the waters of Back Bay. The volume and duration of ;this
- raf z`_foY

hydrological input is directly dependent.on-the,water-level s-in -Back.Bay. Water levels
fluctuate widely depending on the direction and duration of sustained winds over the
system_ The greater the wind velocity and duration from the southern vectors, the greater
the experienced water levels are in the Bay. Accordingly, increased rates of surface
flooding and soils saturation occur. These surface hydrologic inputs act independently of
any activity associated with the sand mine and are not affected by the mining activity.
A component of the mining plan also incorporates a perimeter Recharge Swale
(RS) encircling the mine on three sides. Water is pumped from the mine pit up and into
the RS. When water levels rise high enough in the RS, water is released through
connection pipes into 4 pre-existing farm field ditches. The ditches flow to the south to a
pre-existing farm collector ditch. The collector ditch is regulated by 4 flashboard riser
water control structures. The collector ditch flows from west to east and fronts the
forested wetland area. Pumping excess mine/stormwater to the surface ditching system
increases the soil moisture content within the existing farm fields and coincidingly
augments the near surface hydrology of the forested wetland, increasing the hydrologic
support of the system.
Underlying soils within the wetland consist predominately of Tomotley silt loam,
and a small area of Bojac loamy sand located in the southwest corner of the wetland. The
Tomotley series is a poorly drained soil with slopes from 0 to 2 per cent. The series has
an apparent high water table between 0 and -1.0 feet from December through March. The
B horizon ranges from 7 to 45 inches below the surface and exhibits a typically restrictive
layer with a permeability rate of 0.6 -2.0 inches per hour. This slow permeability rate
coupled with the hydrological inputs of precipitation, surface and subsurface infiltration
from Back Bay and the subsurface augmentation associated with the surface recharge
system, helps to ensure that no adverse impacts to the forested wetland area will result as
a consequence of the sand mining activity.

Re: possibie salt water intrusion due to mine dewatering
Subject: Re: possible salt water intrusion due to mine dewatering
From: Bethany Georgoulias<[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:09:39 -0500
To: Steve Pellei <[e-mail]>
CC: [e-mail]
Thanks so much, Steve! That helps our understanding of where to go from here.
Bethany
Steve Pellei wrote:
t Bethany,
I discussed this issue with Dan today. I was under the incorrect assumption that
there were wells attached to waterworks involved. That not being the case - the
Office of Drinking Water would not be involved as our authority only covers those
that are waterworks.
Two other possible leads are Don Alexander of the Office of Environmental Health,
and Terry Wagner of the Department of Environmental Quality.
I will copy them as an FYI.
I hope this helps,
Steve
-------- Original Message ---------
Subject: [Fwd: possible salt water intrusion due to mine dewatering]
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:38:56 -0500
From: Daniel Horne <[e-mail] inia. ov>
To: Steven Pellei <[e-mail]>
Steve -
As discussed with you today, this project does not affect any wells that are part
of waterworks. It apparently might affect some private home wells. We had
previously been contacted concerning the possible impacts to those wells via
saltwater intrusion from a similar facility located in Virginia (the same company
apparently operates the North Carolina facility). The same Virginia citizens who
are concerned about the Virgnia facility are apparently concerned about the North
Carolina facility as well.
Since there are no impacts to any Virginia waterworks wells, I don't see that ODW
has any role in this issue (whether for the VA facility or the NC facility). It
may be that OEHS (via the Virginia Beach HD) might have concerns. However, the
major player in this issue (actual or potential impacts to the aquifer) would be
DEQ. Perhaps the best person to have NC DENR contact would be Terry Wagner, since
he is the overall manager of the DEQ GW program.
Dan H.
-------- Original Message ---------
Subject: possible salt water intrusion due to mine dewatering-
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 15:43:49 -0500
From: Steve Pellei<_St_ev_e.Pe11_ei9vdh.virginia.gov>
Organization: VDH-ODW
To: "Daniel B. Horne" <Daniel.Horne@vdh:virginia.gov>
Dan,
I called Bethany and recommended she call you regarding this issue.
1 of 3 1/31/2008 7:31 AM

Re: possible salt water intrusion due to mine dewatering
I have edited her email with the pertinent info..
Let me know if you need support,
Thanks,
STeve
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Voice from your past in NC...
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:09:22 -0500
From: Bethany Georgoulias <Bethan .Geor [e-mail]>
To: [e-mail] inia. ov
Hi, Steve!
*one of our general NPDES permits is a combined wastewater and stormwater permit
for mining activities. It's a complicated permit, and we run into our share of
controversial mining projects.
This particular sand mine pit is on the border in Currituck County (it's called
the Bonnie Bright Sand Mine ... it may be notorious; I'm not sure), and our group
issued coverage under the general NPDES permit for mines that authorized
*stormwater discharge only* because the applicant indicated no dewatering (and
would have had to provide a lot more info. to ensure no impact to nearby wetlands
if he were). However, apparently there was dewatering involved, and upon
investigation by our WaRO, the applicant was directed to cease immediately and
apply to DWQ to modify his COC to include dewatering authorization. The problem
involves not just potential to affect wetlands (dewatering can drain or otherwise
impact them), but we've gotten word from concerned citizens in VA that there has
been salt water intrusion into drinking water wells (Virginia Beach maybe did the
tests?).*
That modification is under review in our office (our staff engineer processing the
request is Robert Patterson), and because the WaRO is beginning to hear about the
problems north of the border, we thought it wise to coordinate with your
Department. I'm including the forwarded message below; they reference Ernest
Johnson Jr. of VDH; not sure if that's our best bet or not. Our contact in the
WaRO is [e-mail]
We would appreciate any help or direction you can give us at all. Robert's e-mail
is [e-mail], and'his extension is 360.
Thanks again, and I hope Miho and the kids are all doing well this winter season!
take care,
Bethany
Bethany Georgoulias
Environmental Engineer
NC DENR Division of Water Quality
Stormwater Permitting Unit
tel. [phone], ext. 529
fax [phone]
Subject:
Bright Mine.
From:
"martin hooker" <[e-mail]>
Date:
Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:52:23 -050C
To.
2 of 1/31/2008 7:31 AM

Re: possible salt water intrusion due to mine dewatering
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
To:
<[e-mail]>, <flo [e-mail]>
CC:
<[e-mail]>, "Richard Quinn" <[e-mail]>,.
<[e-mail]>, "PAM LAZOS" <[e-mail]>
Jeff:
Good morning. Some thing I would like to go over with you. In 2,000 the city of
Virginia Beach created a staff report," on the Virginia borrow pit expansion that
it is extremely likely that the cone of influence from a dewatering operation will
extend in to Back Bay and the North Landing River. This means that brackish waters
from Back Bay and the North Landing River can be drawn into the water table
aquifers. The normal flow of groundwater is from the water table to Back Bay and
the North Landing River. This operation has a high probability of reversing that
flow causing Salt Water intrusion because of its proximity to brackish water. Salt
water intrusion is irreversible, it can not be mitigated and it could result in
the pollution to the private well systems. Rendering supply wells undrinkable."
This report was sent to Currituck County on 03/10/06, @11.32AM from the city of
Virginia Beach. Now this shows that the Beach new in 2000, and C.0 new in 2006,
that it was inevitable to happen. Yet the mine was approved.
I have in my possession, from the city of Virginia Beach, an e mail with a report
from AH Environmental Consultants, dated February 26,2007. On page 9 of 9 it
states, "There *does appear* to be evidence of Salt Water Intrusion as evidenced
by the campground and the Pocohontas club wells. Sodium and Chloride
concentrations have significantly increased (over 60 %) in the Pocohontas and
campground wells during the monitoring periods.
I also have the report by Ernest G Johnson Jr. P.E. for VDH prepared at my request
after I received the monitor well reports from the city of Virginia Beach. Dated
11/30/07.Which states do to the increase of Sodium and Chlorides in the campground
and Pocohontas Club monitoring wells. The pit is pulling the Salt Water wedge,
"Toe" westward from the ocean and Back Bay. Through Pocohontas Club Well toward
the west. This establishes Salt Water intrusion to the Virginia site.
It is my conclusion that sometime in 2006, the Salt Water began to move in to the
aquifers. But what I do not know yet are the Virginia aquifers tied directly to
the North Carolina aquifers, I advise you have Currituck County get all monitoring
well reports to the North Carolina State Health Department and get a report on
Salt Water intrusion compiled, because the intrusion may cause all the local
private well to become undrinkable as well, unhealthy to the local residents. And
the county may want to shut the mine down for violation of the Use permit issued
by Currituck County, and the State mining bureau.
Go Have Fun
10101:1
Bethany Georgoulias
Environmental Engineer
NC DENR Division of Water Quality
Stormwater Permitting Unit
tel. [phone], ext. 529
fax [phone]
3 of 3 1/31/2008 7:31 AM

1/2- ol�' - E oc, '" ki)-
r !Wa AIL .JVG m //V/ ply
iV0 N1 Y� i4T% /� 5 T
`r S S V/ ' I o /v. fo �CotAi a >ug To 4 G Frr_-0>S
� DrTLr��-S
V c `T l ��S (c otit�,✓cF��s c✓l Mir r�x w�t7J,PI�.
NFDNG
AAY h-I.NSi�ry
�PA l /V
C � �-- #'/i (7 , W, Fo L }< 5
�y� f A16" To Y>P- G--' Pt -MAT
,%1 AIL- 4-726--&PL 7�Y A"

1p

Rest 3�)nneS Bright mine dewatering in Currituck County, NC
Subject: Re: Bonney Bright mine dewatering in Currituck County, NC
From: "Ernest G. Johnson, Jr." <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:25:40 -0500
To: Robert Patterson <Ro bert. Patterson@ ncmail. net>
Robert:
The issue came about originally from a dispute between Mr. Purnell and the Bright
mine in VA.
Here is the background on the issue. According to Mr. Purnell, several months ago
somebody associated with the mine destroyed the access road to a newly purchased home
on several acres next to the mine, off of Back Bay, making the property inaccessible
by vehicle. The mine refused to repair the road and the city doesn't want to force
the mine owner to repair the road, despite destruction of the road having violating
city law. Mr. Purnell says that the owner of the mine is a cousin of a member of
city council and he claims that is why the city is not helping him.
In his research, Mr. Purnell discovered that one of the zoning approval stipulations
for the mine was that dewatering operations could not cause saltwater intrusion on
the private residential wells near the mine. He had known that residents near the
mine have been complaining that the water from their private wells has been
increasingly salty in the past several years since the mine has been in operation.
After much resistance from the city, help from the Virginia -Pilot newspaper and FOIA,
he was able to obtain some data from the DEQ monitoring wells installed around the
mine. He claims nobody from the DEQ, the city health department or the city
utilities would offer to help him interpret the data to determine if saltwater
intrusion was occurring. That is when I was contacted by his agent, Mr. Hooker (a
land surveyor) who asked me to interpret the data. I concluded that it did appear
the data would be consistent with the effects of saltwater intrusion caused by mine
dewatering. However, the data was very limited and had some apparent inconsistencies
that might have been due to sampler error. There is also a general consensus that
the saltwater wedge is moving westward due to the drought and heavy groundwater use
in the region. There is also a rebuttal to my report from the Director of Virginia
Beach Utilities, who generally does not agree with my findings.
Mr. Purnell paid me a visit last week with a plastic bottle of water he was able to
finally obtain from the well at his property and asked me to test it. I first
advised him that the sample was of no use since it was not in an approved container.
I then advised him that, since we do not have a lab here and our state lab only
provides testing for public water supplies, I could not test his water. I provided
him with the names of a couple of certified private labs and advised him of the
parameters to test. I also advised him of my position of having only provided
technical assistance and that I have no regulatory authority over the mine or
dewatering operations.
He also brought up that he recently discovered an internal memo from one of the
city's engineers written during the time that zoning approval was being considered
for the mine. Mr. Purnell claimed the engineer's memo agreed with my findings --
that it would cause saltwater intrusion in the private wells around the mine.
Mr. Purnell additionally claims that the mine has incurred numerous NPDES discharge
violations for exceeding TDS that are not being enforced by the VA DEQ. I advised
him follow up with EPA if the VA DEQ is not responding to his complaints over the
discharge violations.
I hope that helps. Thanks.
Ernie Johnson
Robert Patterson wrote:
Ernest,
Thanks for that info! I did have one more question. The saltwater intrusion
monitoring... was that a question/issue based on the Bright mine in VA or was it
based on the one here in NC?
l of 2 1/29/2008 10:56 AM

Re: Bonney Bright mine dewatering in Currituck County, NC
Thanks again!
Robert
Ernest G. Johnson, Jr. wrote:
Mr. Patterson:
Thank you for contacting me concerning the subject project. Although I have
been involved in this issue, I am not the proper regulatory contact for the
project. My involvement was in the form of technical assistance to Mr. Hooker
and Mr. Purnell (the public) in interpreting well data and offering an opinion
as to whether or not the dewatering was contributing to saltwater intrustion of
the monitoring wells.
The proper regulatory agency for Virginia concerning this project would be the
Dept. of Environmental Quality - Tidewater Regional Office. The contact would
be James McConathy, Water Permits Manager, DEQ - Tidewater Regional Office at
[phone], [e-mail]
Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Thanks.
Ernest G. Johnson, Jr., P.E., District Engineer
VDH - Office of Drinking Water
830 Southampton Ave., Room 2058
Norfolk, Virginia 23510
[phone] ext. 112
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
www.vdh.state.va.us/dw
2 of2 1/29/2008 10:56 AM

Re',3QnncS Bright mine dewatering in Currituck County, NC
Subject: Re: Bonney Bright mine dewatering in Currituck County, NC
From: "Ernest G. Johnson, Jr." <Ernest.Johnson [e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:25:53 -0500
To: Robert Patterson <Robert.Patterson oncmail.net>
Mr. Patterson:
Thank you for contacting me concerning the subject project. Although I have been
involved in this issue, I am not the proper regulatory contact for the project. My
involvement was in the form of technical assistance to Mr. Hooker and Mr. Purnell
(the public) in interpreting well data and offering an opinion as to whether or not
the dewatering was contributing to saltwater intrustion of the monitoring wells.
The proper regulatory agency for Virginia concerning this project would be the Dept.
of Environmental Quality - Tidewater Regional Office. The contact would be James
McConathy, Water Permits Manager, DEQ - Tidewater Regional Office at [phone],
[e-mail]
Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Thanks.
Ernest G. Johnson, Jr., P.E., District Engineer
VDH - Office of Drinking Water
830 Southampton Ave., Room 2058
Norfolk, Virginia 23310
[phone] ext. 112
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
www.vdh.state.va.us/dw
Robert Patterson wrote:
Mr. Johnson,
Your info was given to me during a phone conversation with Martin Hooker regarding
the stormwater permit we are reviewing for the subject mining site. The applicant,
Bonney Bright Sand Co., has applied for a modification to their NPDES Stormwater
Permit (NCG 020000) to allow dewatering. We have been contacted by Mr. Hooker
regarding possible salt water intrusion due to mine dewatering operations in
Virginia. We would like to discuss and coordinate with the State of Virginia since
this site is around the state line. Could you call me at your earliest convenience
to discuss this?
Thanks!
of 1 1/29/2008 6:46 AM

r
ili4-- - Zoo a
- .K�Jt .i! 54LT WA-T 94Z. &TpLudt.
j 41MA b
Il,�c-lfi
OI fN /
'�/{I�Y$� M.o�/�`rDi�-lA%s iv�i�l�-s �Z� NICi✓: 'Co-{� �o�
Ls71
QG���-rJ.
�A ,D 90T
-V/YIqAL I e? 3tY M vol
/%,f�l IAI I�OoKepf Poc)�V� C4LL- Li
c)Z`t3
RObey+
r lI. Sill
Dirt
7ST S 3 • Z000! x 1 v2

(
`
.}
s

y✓c�� � QL[ t'FictL. �' k oT�c:.'i! bq.,1 a �� L"fir 6�✓
.�• r4 W-4-�.1� c� � 55 rt i� .
I N R) CAN
A
SALT k/A-Q�q1A)- AA_jk$.IbA1y
Z''b M I Ve N 13\ l A/ VA Coo,

[Fwd: Bright Mine.]
Subject: [Fwd: Bright Mine.]
From: Jeff Manning <Jef£[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:50:12 -0500
To: Robert Patterson <Robert.Patterson a ncmai1.net>
T received this from a concerned citizen about the Bonney bright sand pit,
Jeffery
Subject: Bright Mine.
From: "martin hooker" <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:52:23 -0500
To: <j eff.a. manning@ncmai 1. net>, <[e-mail]>
CC: <JLOrr I [e-mail]>, "Richard Quinn"<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>, "PAM LAZOS" <LAZOS.PAMELA a EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV>
Jeff:
Good morning. Some thing I would like to go over with you. In 2,000 the city of Virginia Beach created a
staff report," on the Virginia borrow pit expansion that it is extremely likely that the cone of influence from a
dewatering operation will extend in to Back Bay and the North Landing River. This means that brackish waters
from Back Bay and the North Landing River can be drawn into the water table aquifers. The normal flow of
groundwater is from the water table to Back Bay and the North Landing River. This operation has a high probability
of reversing that flow causing Salt Water intrusion because of its proximity to brackish water. Salt water intrusion is
irreversible, it can not be mitigated and it could result in the pollution to the private well systems. Rendering supply
wells undrinkable."
This report was sent to Currituck County on 03/10/06, @11:32AM from the city of Virginia Beach. Now this
shows that the Beach new in 2000, and C.0 new in 2006, that it was inevitable to happen. Yet the mine was
approved.
I have in my possession, from the city of Virginia Beach, an a mail with a report from AH
Environmental Consultants, dated February 26,2007. On page 9 of 9 it states, "There does appear to be evidence
of Salt Water Intrusion as evidenced by the campground and the Pocohontas club wells. Sodium and Chloride
concentrations have significantly increased (over 60 %) in the Pocohontas and campground wells during the
monitoring periods,
also have the report by Ernest G Johnson Jr. P.E. for VDH prepared at my request after
received the monitor well reports from the city of Virginia Beach. Dated 11130107.Which states do to the increase
of Sodium and Chlorides in the campground and Pocohontas Club monitoring wells. The pit is pulling the Salt
Water wedge, "Toe" westward from the ocean and Back Bay. Through Pocohontas Club Well toward the west.
This establishes Salt Water intrusion to the Virginia site.
It is my conclusion that sometime in 2006, the Salt Water began to move in to the aquifers. But what I do
not know yet are the Virginia aquifers tied directly to the North Carolina aquifers, I advise you have Currituck
County get all monitoring well reports to the North Carolina State Health Department and get a report on Salt
Water intrusion compiled, because the intrusion may cause all the local private well to become undrinkable as
well, unhealthy to the local residents. And the county may want to shut the mine down for violation of the Use
permit issued by Currituck County, and the State mining bureau.
Go Have Fun
MDH
Bright Mine. Content -Type: message/rfc822
Content -Encoding: 7bit
1 of I 1/[812008 7:1 1 AM

O�oF W A rE9pG
� Y
January 11, 2009
Mr. Bonney G. Bright
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
5513 Buzzard Neck Road
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Colleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
Subject: Additional Information Request For
Future COC NCG020701 Mod.
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
Currituck County
Dear Mr. Bright:
Your facility's Notice of Intent (NOI) for a permit modification to COC NCG020701 was
received by the Stormwater Permitting Unit on December 27, 2007. However, a review of the
NOI by the Stormwater Permitting Unit showed that the application is incomplete. Before the
NOI can finish being processed please provide information regarding the following:
1) Since this NOI states that mine dewatering will be occurring onsite, information
must be submitted regarding any wetlands that may be potentially impacted and
how wetland impacts will be avoided. Please submit two (2) copies of any
information (wetland locations, O&M manual, etc.), plans, and calculations
regarding the dewatering activities.
Please also be aware that if your project is Iocated near wetlands, your NPDES permit
will require dewatering operations without wetland impacts. The specific requirements for mine
dewatering at facilities near wetlands can be found in the text of the general NPDES mining
permit NCG020000 available on our website,
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/su/Forms_Documents.htm. See Section C, Part 1 of the permit on the
page labeled, "Part III Page 5 of 9". An approved Operation and Monitoring Plan is
required for mine dewatering activities that have potential to drain wetlands. Discharging
mine dewatering wastewater without Plan approval, and without a Permit, will be subject
to enforcement action. A Plan for your facility must be submitted to the Washington Regional
Office and approved before we can issue your permit. We encourage you to contact Jeffery
Manning at the Washington Regional Office at [phone] to address any wetland
concerns for your facility in order to ensure a successful NPDES application review.
Also, we do not charge a fee for modifications to a COC under a NPDES General
Stormwater Permit. Therefore, your check no. 57451 for $100,00 is being returned to you.
If the requested information is not returned to my attention by February 11, 2008 your
application will be returned as incomplete.
NorhCarolina
)Valtirall(J
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us 512 N. Salisbury St, Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX [phone]
An Equal OpportunitylAfiirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

COC No. NCG020701
Mr. Bonney G. Bright
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
January 11, 2008
If you have any questions; please contact me at [phone], x 360.
Sincerely,
Robert D. Patterson, P.E.
Environmental Engineer
Stormwater Permitting Unit
cc: Washington Regional Office, Jeffery Manning
Stormwater Permitting Unit Files

Re: Sand mining permti
Subject: Re: Sand mining permti
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:33:02 EST
To: [e-mail]
Bethany,
Thank you for you prompt reply. We will file for a permit modification to cover the mining discharge since that was
the intent of the orginial application.
Thanks, Harold
See AOL's top rated recipes and easy ways to stay in shape for winter.
1 of 1 12/17/2007 12:34 1'M

Re: Sand mining permd
Subject: Re: Sand mining permti
From: Bethany Georgoulias <Bethany.Georgoulias a ncmail.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:01:47 -0500
To: [e-mail]
CC: Bob Guerra <[e-mail]>, Susan A Wilson <[e-mail]>, Sarah
Young <sarah.young a ncmail.net>, Bradley Bennett <[e-mail]>
Harold,
As we discussed this morning, if the original Certificate of Coverage (COC) was
written to cover stormwater only, mine dewatering discharge is not covered, and your
client will need to reapply for NCG02. We will probably be able to process it as a
modification to the existing NCG020701, so please be sure to indicate this on the NOI
form. You can find the NOI application for NCG02 here:
httD://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/su/Forms Documents.htm4stormwaterGP
The reason your client should reapply is because we need to ensure additional
technical review is completed for any wastewater discharges that were not indicated
on the original application.
I apologize for the confusion. It is true that NCG02 general permit covers both
types of discharges, but the COC must be consistent with the original application.
When the COC is written to authorize stormwater discharges only, wastewater
discharges are not covered. If the original application did indicate mine
dewatering, and the COC was processed incorrectly, we will work with you to make the
correction.
Regards,
Bethany Georgoulias
Susan Wilson wrote:
Harold,
>From what you described to me - sounds like your client is covered by the SW
general permit for sand mining (key words being sand MINING).
The NPDES wastewater general permit (NCG5500000) covers all waters associated with
instream sand dredging (key words being INSTREAM sand dredging activities).
Sounds like your client excavates sand and de -waters (and has a discharge
completely associated with mining activities, including associated stormwater,
rather than instream sand dredging/mining activities).
So - I'm of the opinion that your client is sufficiently covered by NCG020701.
You may wish to reconfirm that with Bethany Georgoulias or Bob Guerra on Monday.
It's understandably a bit confusing!
Bethany - Mr. Jones said he spoke with Steve Manning in WaRO (so we may need to
clarify with him).
*Susan A. Wilson, P.E.*
Supervisor, Western NPDES Program
(919) 733 - 5083, ext. 510
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Bethany Georgoulias
of2 12/17/2007 12:341'M

Re: Sand mining permti
Environmental Engineer
NC DENR DWQ
Stormwater Permitting Unit
[phone], ext. 529
[e-mail]
2 of 2 12/17/2007 12:34 PM

o�0F wAr f'19
� Y
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
STAFF REVIEW AND EVALUATION
NPDES Stormwater Permit
Alan W. Klimek, P. E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
Facility Name: Bonney Bright Sand Co.
NPDES Permit Number: NCG 020701
Facility Location: 100 Marsh Causeway, Knotts Island, (Currituck Co)
Type of Activity: Construction Sand and Gravel
SIC Code (if applicable): 1442
Receiving Streams: North Landing River
River Basin: Pasquotank River Basin, Sub -basin 03-01-54
Stream Classification: SC
Central Office Staff Contact: Kelly Johnson, [phone], ext. 376
Location: This facility would be a new sand mine on the border of Virginia and North Carolina.
The site drains to the Great Marsh, which is not found in BIMS. As shown in Figure 1, Great
Marsh is bordered by Back Bay to the north and the North Landing River to the south. Neither
Great Marsh nor Back Bay are classified in BIMS for this river basin. The facility therefore
drains to the North Landing River. The Basinwide Plan also shows that the MacKey Island
National Wildlife Refuge is just south of NC-615. This is not shown in Figure 1, but is to the
slight east and south of this area.
Regulated Activities:
• The applicant requests a general mining permit including mine dewatering for times during
heavy rain.
• The Regional Office will conduct a site visit on January 24, 2007 following reports that the
facility is operating without a permit.
• This mine has a DLR Permit (number 27-49), which expires in 2016.
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 [phone]
0-th
1JCENlR
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

NCG020701
1
Figure 1: Facility Location ("'M�-
Public t
:/` __,••' '� � �� ���-'� r � � Landing "�.
Point " �• r.l -_ _ Back Bay
(Not in RIMS,
for Pas quota ilk
Basin)
Green`\Light .f .-+ Zrailu' .-
lPoini� tok ( Q
Ills
6 V \ n�� .•..+► »tom �. tl,'/ \, �^\.. • s�_ryh �_= �.
•S .` IV u � _ � � � 111 �, � (" W.F^ �_± j� �; _.�#,•
+ i $ � `•� �,: "'_ _ ' � lei � � � 'VIRGINIA BEACH 3_ V1
IIURHRCG1AN12I0i.►W;rY
F—jU(Ko\�.G►•a•
reat
-- --
r
'+ °e � `�` -_ - b a� =' '"• _ -= Marsh
.
Bonnev Bright Sand Co Ppini� `',� �k`•\, ��'� Not in BIMS
for Pasquotlnk
Basin)
op4wz 1' 61591
Frraby s �s �� � �.,•yy�++_ [.-�+�' �„Y
;�;- l � ° y Island — f-�..� ;.. '•4
Gibbs +Lto • i .{, j;J
"- Point
V 1 PP �Yr- II
North Landing Raver:'
(Receiving Water) " •\ ,� ' '
_ - •M. 1 y •t
OA

aRcu
Currituck County is within the Pasquotank River Basin, Sub -basin 03-01-54
It
Fte Elk Q To Fawkm Help I
®Bk- ® a o i �e� F; �f�_b 0-is
Address (M Ntp:jlh2o-e ,"..m.u5rDmtw delPnP-*twiJ20a2 cbcu7ff tsjpas 5e V Pdr Y ® C. tlnls
Co�gk ;G - �,�� d - f �7 9odaae ba. Pooups e4ay a ad a� arara . AWaP �y se ato• B ®sxtppp.
1ps.eac[aIT5 >P4ltiDsFa� l:l n t o�1a-�1k"1 a` �r.b
I � l��.� Yt -- ndobcRtadsr7~o!
f
Figure A4 Cenral Nlap of the Pasquotank River Basin
� a
KpY.p
ay.a!•de 01,01•54
C
Atlantic
esat-s2 rrW Ocean
03-0144
r`l�i.�[�''��'�:�r��ift�iti`�''.'�"�'.'�'�''�"�•;y�rj�.�'.1 f:: � n'.p. t4.4
2d70 Cfoi
0 0 lti f FH o�
D.wA.ded N et :
Called applicant. The facility is on the eastern side of the causewa C-615 .
Map of t
Rie Edt A& Farakes Iods. He,
® ® - L-F g qf) ! Saar[h Fawkes 4019- 6 ® - D
Fd6ers �]klp:JlwwwrmpJ+esi.[orrJnp�s7suP.a�psmd[1'pe-eddessa.�.r[7dd'rstvY-e�saadieb-I+onwHutttYpa`ad1 � ®Go Ws r.
I
GooSJe LC • j:ca <. ®d - ¢ aedopa la- [ b ked ';1.I:hedk - r'It dkr« KV . ' j A.A.H [�P 5 ,d W. Q sar:t gr• '
r I71. S • ti.• '.�
Lta. W 1 trap I a..b.... s.L,t>e.. Maps Direcdans Mobile
Printer Friondir I F�C�!>stl f 5m�d to [ell I Send to RDA I Link to this Mao
* 100 Marsh Cewy Online Offers i
Knotts Island, NC 27950-9721, US . Knots Island Hotels • Knobs Isllagtl Insuranca
Directions To I Directions From I Reyise I t aW Mao • Schools In Knolh ISIMd • KnUCS Island Real Estate
I® Flnd Nearby: (e.p„Theaters) o. 5lect a CateGo�y �: search
...Aa• -- — krd h1°¢ Online Offers
H01118 In Knatls hand
Knotl � • s bland Schools
t 1 • Real EState kn KneltB laland
tk7 _ r '�i • Knobs Island Insurance I
�� 1� • Films io Knoci Island
d
Filentletl Star Hotels
[
• -� :'•� s t�. _ Hat[h Caalma Bea[hes
? �\' __-...r b..M.. In Wrm Carplry,
+ . •� a•.a Typyr•N.prt. ••rnh.e[1b
ET�.i1 � � �� �� r� ti N4tlN olhle Beams
-LD.M1 1 q Lpdma+ar rlodh C>dlm b-OW
ul K L t , *YA e.,
oar x h .I_ b.+M sale..
f 1/ 1 C xaruC+ronn.e..M6lnpon.wm
1 r Krrone h4md Ne
11wM r 6t C—p... Hol.l., rM Ap.&n b,
6 r �(7� ?� • r.� Sisk W..ih.r. Y.p.. Y.I1ow6 l d'P.p..
7Y ` t� !�� wruAu.au4E.s.n.l
l9 i
•�1 � :1 Artt.+,:, Thrme-Parks
4nscrml. on wrrrh.m.P.w Iul
oa l i f i i I tD bkerrrt i

i
This facility is at 10-ft elevation, drains to the cast to Great Marsh.
0 Pie V%w FN TQCk t"S WS AdWW* Wk*Help
. 70-1
10
VIPGINIA BEACH CITY;,
LOOm—hc:—w'
CURRITUCK CO
R!
C3 Sandy
Poi
0
1.0
0 4
O.x
32'3
Fare
4044
Gibbs
Point
Map continued from map above: Great Marsh is the speckled blue to the right. The
facility drains into Great Marsh lust north of the causeway.
FU Vti Find Took [h., (PS Ad**Add- H*
and drag to — map (ShIn. ZDcm OuQ [Shd-Ctrl: CertarTooq
, =Tt." 'b W
- 1N

y
Great Marsh is not found in BIMS. Great Marsh could drain to either Back Bay (to the
north) or North Landing River (to the south). Back Bay is also not in BIMS (the one that
is in BIMS is in the Neuse River Basin). So, it must drain south to the North Landing
River.
e File Tasks Queries Administration Help
JM lw'J I030' 32' 21.19" N I076.6e' 30.30" YU I 2 1t
-�_''�;"• 1 `�r.� fir- y - � ` w _
Waterbody Name: great marsh Clear
Waterbody Description:
Basin: Drainage Area:
Subbasin: County:
Stream Index Num: F'Waterbodieswith Proposed Classiricati...
Special Designations: Reclassification Year:
daintaln �4
C-I Any Of (0. Q All Of CAN
Current Classiccabons �— Selected Classifications LL' `
B
C r; Hdd Search Waterbody
CA
HOW t Remove No waterbedies found for the selected search criteria.- VN8
HOW
N!A " --
Olf.
Use a "to indicate one or more missing characters.
a Beek Next} Select Close
t.oading.., 1311): WBSR
ti p
'$i$J f• t. C " r4-� Inbox for kell f m]ohnsorn, };ell.. ® l3winwide Inf... f Qb; NCI 420)l .. ` Terrain riavig... r92 Nl¢r0s0ft

Direction of flow from facility
}°° "%;/`j, _ �4 , 1'� ,� ��• ° w (��:=c Public
Walke `" J ti. = .G� ".✓ S� �� e
Point
10
Q��
L o'°. s 1t�` �+r �'.w `•...LTV pr `� �d fi .
to
6 SI, k as°' •51 Y.�+.•�` �..J y (p
VIRGINIA_ BE:AC_H�G=iY' r . f� � NORTH
' _ — gr' N �1ItQLlNf1"—
cuitt ITUCK COa'
kk kk .°y .`t Yl �T �V''! a s? � t dt�s -� s ��� �'�'•,+•
'y °o Sandy
5` It o Point O
3 1 ° i •:al
,,4,• \\nr. ,.y..
O ,•� {;4
E15Z �. 1, � fykr�•�"'� r -
. � ; k•' u@ Il�ft
\I °; Fara 6y A
Gibbs e
Point :1
k t u 4 `
..tYhk�

r
This is NC-615 In the Basinwide Plan. Note the
M Edt Go To Fer m Hdp
OeKk - 0 0- 4 E)
I 4120021dm IPASr.pcf
Ln S GWO �471-41
........... ..........
............. ................ .......................................
...... . ............................... .................
..... .. .............................
.......................................
. . . .... ........... .....................
V) ........ i
...... ... ...
47
R=
. .. ........
..... ... ......
...... ......
... ..... ......
2of, I V V1 1 0 0 1 Ll I )-j 141 Do

DLR Permit is active
Fie Edit Yk F—tR T ob Kdp
®- - ® 0- g, ® D
nd&ess bl J. v ®Go Links '•
Go L d . ¢ 9-k-ft, o Pdp pr dial Check . % waatr-k _ '6a,trw [* s«a te. q
PBrmitlmeniorY: Mina Entry W .-
g_ J� Find vine Name
Mirk I -J Region WfA.RO . 11
�'ff03�I! 2095 J'f Issue Data O7y'f 98]+l 2006�1iI
Jif l! Dateaee ` lI J11�J
i 'Bonded lS o� 1J�
_. J AtteY --= -jl
D7Q1=-Lattuda 36.55000
'CoPection
ids . , -.-.. - . From Mao - To oe removed
BrnYtese TRIO Hanle
Bdgh[Mirte.__-� Da *Cxpirabo
07 _;f OB-_.�f 70i6-J
'Riser Pa_.Unk i.
Basin
Permit
RoAslon Heating
Date
Date
"Mina ��L4Ve ( 'Commodity 'Band anq 9r.ry4
Status Code
'Bond 'gtler W C iedn Single Sfond
Type--- Amounl
i52,19000` ]i
'Ldngltude •T0.90000
r Reference NADI927 •�
Datum -
New
Comment
n
Yew CammenM
CRY Pisorld
Yale • History +i Asaoclafetl Documents - - - - ------------r,
Oocuments(doc;wpd) New Pennd(77-49 NEWT-d u r Download Document
twin I I I ] 1 ? a ktecnet

Re: Bonney Bright NOV
Subject: Re: Bonney Bright NOV
From: Jeff Manning <Jeff.A.Mann ing a ncmail.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 11:51:16 -0500
To: Kelly Johnson <kelly.p johnson cr ncmail.net>
He replied to the NOV-NOT, but has not received the assessment yet. I'll let you know
what he does.
Jeffery
Kelly Johnson wrote:
Thanks. So, I know that you said he responded. Did he pay the fine or did he
request remission? If he was granted remission, which of the five factors did he
claim? Was he granted remission? I haven't seen these forms before so I did not
know to ask these questions before.
Thanks,
KJ
Jeff Manning wrote:
Here you go. It has been a headache for me.
Jeffery
Kelly Johnson wrote:
Jeffery,
I still haven't received the NOV. Do you have any electronic files of that?
Bradley wants to look at it before we issue the permit.
Thanks,
Kelly
Do -- Jrf )kd
4z) pry
RAMC V
Pry-> n�crr
t�CS
*(tv
1 of 1 2/27/2007 1 1:54 AM

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural RCSOUNCS
Alan W. Klimek, P.L. Director
Division of Water Quality
January 29, 2007
CERTIFIED MAIL 7006 0100 0000 8379 4102
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Bonney G. Bright
5513 Buzzard Neck Road
Virginia Beach VA, 23457
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION
NOTICE OF RECOMMENDATION
OFENFORCEMENT
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
Currituck County
Dear Mr Bright:
This letter is to notify you that the Washington Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality is
considering forwarding a recommendation for enforcement action to the Director of the Division of
Water Quality. The recommendation concerns the violations of NCGS 143-215.1, illegal discharges at
the mine facility located at 100 Marsh Causeway, Knotts Island, Currituck County, North Carolina.
Jeffery A. Manning, of the Division of Water Quality, made a site visit to the Knotts Island mine site on
Wednesday January 241h, 2007. 1 understand per your conversation with Mr. Manning upon his site
visit that your facility has dewatered and discharged to waters of the state of North Carolina without a
permit.
Please be advised that NCGS 143-215.6 of the state Water Quality Statutes provides:
"A civil penalty of not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) may be assessed by the [Environmental
Management] Commission against any person who is required but fails to apply for or to secure a permit
required by G.S. 143-215.1, or who violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or
requirements of such permit." NCGS 143-215.6 further provides that "if any action or failure to act is
continuous, the Commission may assess a penalty not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per day for so
long as the violation continues."
Please respond in writing to the Washington Regional Office within ten (10) days after receipt of this
Notice. Your explanation will be reviewed and if an enforcement action is still deemed appropriate,
your explanation will be forwarded to the Director with the enforcement package for his consideration.
Failure to respond within the time specified may result in the issuance of a civil penalty.
One
No hCarohna
11vallIU111y
North Carolina Division or Water Quality Washington Regional Office Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org 943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 FAX [phone]
An Ecual Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

If you have any questions you may contact Jeffery A. Manning, Environmental Specialist, at
[phone].
Sincerely,
Al Hodge, Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
Washington Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
Cc: WQ Central Files
Pat McClain -Land Quality, Washington Regional Office
Kelly Johnson -Non -Point Source Planning, Raleigh Regional Office
WaRO Enforcement Files

y v
DIVISION OF WATER -QUALITY - CIVIL PENALTY ASSESSMENT
Violator: Bonney Bright and Bonney Bright Sand Company
County: Currituck
Case Number: DV-2007-0005
ASSESSMENT FACTORS
1) The degree and extent of harm 'to the natural resources of the State, to the public health, or to
private property resulting from the violation;
No harm to the natural resources of the state was documented.
2) The duration and gravity of the violation;
The owner of the sand pit located at 100 Marsh Causeway on Knotts
Island, North Carolina admitted to discharging, the duration is unknown.
3) The effect on ground or surface water quantity or quality or on air quality;
No harm to the natural resources of the state was documented but
untreated mine discharge may be high in turbidity and solids and may
adversely impact the waters of the state.
4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
Unknown
5) The amount of money saved by nonc6mpliance;
Unknown
6) Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentionally;
The violation was committed willfully. Mr. Bright was aware that a permit is
required to dewater the mine discharge.
7) The prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with programs over which
the Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority; and
The facility has no prior record of violations.
8) The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
$91.00.
Date All Hodge, Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection
Washington Regional Office

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary p
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W, Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Guality
February 27, 2007
CERTIFIED MAIL7006 0100 0000 8379 4096
RETURN RECEIPT REOUESTED
Mr. Bonney Bright
Bonney Bright Sand Company
5513 Buzzard Neck Rd
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
SUBJECT: Notice of Violation and Assessment of Civil Penalty
for Violations of North Carolina General Statute (G.S.) 143-215.1(a)(6)
Mr. Bonney Bright
Bonney Bright Sand Company
Case No. DV-2007-0005
Currituck County
Dear Mr. Bright:
This letter transmits a Notice of Violation and assessment of civil penalty in the amount of
$4,091.00 ($4,000.00 civil penalty + $91.00 enforcement costs) against Bonney Bright and Bonney
Bright Sand Company.
This assessment is based upon the following facts: Jeffery A. Manning, of the Division of Water
Quality, made a site visit to the Knotts Island mine site on Wednesday January 241h, 2007.1
understand per your conversation with Mr. Manning, at that time, that your facility has dewatered
and discharged to waters of the state of North Carolina without a permit. The violation is
I
ummarized in Attachment A to this letter.
Based upon the above facts, I conclude as a matter of law that the Bonney Bright and Bonney
Bright Sand Company violated the terms, conditions or requirements of G.S. 143-215.1(a)(6) in
the manner and extent shown in Attachment A. In accordance with the'maximums established by
G.S. 143-215.6A(a)(2), a civil penalty may be assessed against any person who violates the terms,
conditions or requirements of a permit required by C.S. 143-215.1(a).
Based upon the above findings of fact and conclusions of law, and in accordance with authority
provided by the Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the
Director of the Division of Water Quality, I, Al Hodge, Regional Supervisor of Surface Water
Protection for the Washington Region, hereby make the following civil penalty assessment against
the Bonney Bright:
North Carolina
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Washington Regional Office Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: ww w.ncwaterquality.org 943 Washington Square Mull, Washington, NC 27889 FAX [phone]
An Equa! OpportunitylAffirinative Action Employer— 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

$4000.00 1 of the 1 violations of G.S. 143-215.1(a)(6) by discharging into the
waters of the State without a permit.
$4000.00 TOTAL CIVIL PENALTY
$91.00 Enforcement Costs
$4091.00 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
Pursuant to G.S. 143-215.6A(c), in determining the amount of the penalty I have taken into
account the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and the factors set forth at G.S. 14313-
282.1(b), which are:
(1) The degree and extent of harm to the natural resources of the State, to the public health, or
to private property resulting from the violation;
(2) The duration and gravity of the violation; .
(3) The effect on ground or surface water quantity or quality or on air quality;
(4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
(5) The amount of money saved by noncompliance;
(6) Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentionally;
(7) The prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with programs over
which the Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority; and
(8) The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
Within thirty days of receipt of this notice, you must do one of the following:
Submit payment of the penalty:
Payment should be made directly to the order of the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (do not include waiverform). Payment of the penalty will not foreclose further
enforcement action for any continuing or new violation(s). Please submit payment to the
attention of:
Eastern NPDES Program
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
OR
2. Submit a written request for remission or mitigation including a detailed justification
for such request:
Please be aware that a request for remission is limited to consideration of the five factors listed
below as they may relate to the reasonableness of the amount of the civil penalty assessed.
Requesting remission is not the proper procedure for contesting whether the violation(s)
occurred or the accuracy of any of the factual statements contained in the civil penalty
assessment document. Because a remission request forecloses the option of an administrative
hearing, such a request must be accompanied by a waiver of your right to an administrative
hearing and a stipulation and agreement that no factual or legal issues are in dispute. Please
prepare a detailed statement that establishes why you believe the civil penalty should be
remitted, and submit it to the Division of Water Quality at the address listed below.

I
In determining whether a remission request will be approved, the following factors shall be
considered:
(1) whether one or more of the civil penalty assessment factors in NCGS 14313-282.1(b)
was wrongfully applied to the detriment of the petitioner;
(2) whether the violator promptly abated continuing environmental damage resulting from
the violation;
(3) whether the violation was inadvertent or a result of an accident;
(4) whether the violator had been assessed civil penalties for any previous violations; or
(5) whether payment of the civil penalty will prevent payment for the remaining necessary
remedial actions.
Please note that all evidence presented in support of your request for remission must be submitted
in writing. The Director of the Division of Water Quality will review your evidence and inform
you of his decision in the matter of your remission request. The response will provide details
regarding the case status, directions for payment, and provision for further appeal of the penalty to
the Environmental Management Commission's Committee on Civil Penalty Remissions
Committee. Please be advised that the Committee cannot consider information that was not part of
the original remission request considered by the Director. Therefore, it is very important that you
prepare a complete and thorough statement in support of your request for remission.
In order to request remission, you must complete and submit the enclosed "Request for Remission
of Civil Penalties, Waiver of Right to an Administrative Hearing, and Stipulation of Facts" form
within thirty (30) days of receipt of this notice. The Division of Water Quality also requests that
you complete and submit the enclosed "Justification for Remission Request." Both forms should
be submitted to the following address:
Eastern NPDES Program
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
3.File a petition for an administrative hearing with the Office of Administrative Hearings:
If you wish to contest any statement in the attached assessment document you must file a petition
for an administrative hearing. You may obtain the petition form from the Office of Administrative
Hearings. You must file the petition with the Office of Administrative Hearings within thirty (30)
days of receipt of this notice. A petition is considered filed when it is received in the Office of
Administrative Hearings during normal office hours. The Office of Administrative Hearings
accepts filings Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., except for
official state holidays. The original and one (1) copy of the petition must be filed with the Office
of Administrative Hearings. The petition may be faxed - provided the original and one copy of the
document is received in the Office of Administrative Hearings within five (5) business days
following the faxed transmission.

i
The mailing address for the Office of Administrative Hearings is:
Office of Administrative Hearings
6714 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714
Telephone [phone] Facsimile: [phone]
and
Mail or hand -deliver a copy of the petition to
Mary Penny Thompson, General Counsel
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601
Please indicate the case number (as found on page one of this letter) on the petition.
Failure to exercise one of the options above within thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter, as
evidenced by an internal date/time received stamp (not a postmark), will result in this matter being
referred to the Attorney General's Office for collection of the penalty through a civil action. Please
be advised that additional penalties may be assessed for violations that occur after the review
period of this assessment.
If you have any questions, please contact Jeffery A. Manning of the Washington Regional Office
at 252-948-3966.
Sincerely,
Al Flodge, Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection
Washington Regional Office
ATTACHMENTS
cc: WaRO Enforcement File w/ attachments
Karen Rust — Eastern NPDES Program w/ attachments
Central Files w/ attachments

JUSTIFICATION FOR REMISSION REQUEST
DWQ Case Number: DV-2007-0005 County: Currituck
Assessed Party: Bonney Bright and Bonney Bright Sand Company
Permit No. (Not Applicable): Amount Assessed: $4091.00
Please use this form when requesting remission of this civil penalty. You must also complete the
"Request For Remission, Waiver of Right to an Administrative Hearing, and Stipulalion of Facts "
form to request remission of this civil penalty. You should attach any documents that you believe
support your request and are necessary for the Director to consider in evaluating your request for
remission. Please be aware that a request for remission is limited to consideration of the five factors
listed below as they may relate to the reasonableness of the amount of the civil penalty assessed.
Requesting remission is not the proper procedure for contesting whether the violation(s) occurred or
the accuracy of ariy of the factual statements contained in the civil penalty assessment document.
Pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 14313-282.1(c), remission of a civil penalty may be granted only when one or
more of the following five factors applies. Please check each factor that you believe applies to your
case and provide a detailed explanation, including copies of supporting documents, as to why the
factor applies (attach additional pages as needed).
(a) one or more of the civil penalty assessment factors in N.C.G.S. 143B-282.1(b) were
wrongfully applied to the detriment of the petitioner (the assessment factors are listed in the civil
penally assessment document),
(b) the violator promptly abated continuing environmental damage resulting; from the
violation (i.e., explain the steps• that you took to correct the violation and prevent fixture occurrences);
(c) the violation was inadvertent or a result of an accident (i.e., explain v by the violation
ii,as unavoidable or something you could not prevent or prepare foi);
(d) the violator had not been assessed civil penalties for any previous violations;
_ (e) payment of the civil penalty will prevent payment for the remaining necessary remedial
actions (i.e., explain hotir payment cif the civil penalty ii,ill prevent you.from performing the activities
necessary to achieve compliance).
EXPLANATION:

- - It
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COUNTY OF CURRITUCK
IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT
OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST
BONNEY BRIGHT AND
BONNEY BRIGHT SAND COMPANY
WAIVER OF RIGHT TO AN
ADMINSTRATIVE HEARING AND
STIPULATION OF FACTS
FILE NO. DV-2007-0005
Having been assessed civil penalties totaling $4091.00 for violation(s) as set forth in the
assessment document of the Division of Water Quality dated February 26, 2007, the undersigned,
desiring to seek remission of the civil penalty, does hereby waive the right to an administrative hearing
in the above -stated matter and does stipulate that the facts are as alleged in the assessment document.
The undersigned further understands that all evidence presented in support of remission of this civil
penalty must be submitted to the director of the Division of Water Quality within thirty (30) days of
receipt of the notice of assessment. No new evidence in support of a remission request will be allowed
after (30) days from the receipt of the notice of assessment.
This the
day of
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE
SIGNATURE
20

Currituck County is within the Pasquotank River Basin, Sub -basin 03-01-54
Ffe Edt Go to Fava . NdBQ'� Seerrh Fb k°r ®j 0. � ® _ D .� _. ..
Mless] ktA:iVh2o.r.T.dd..rs.�s�..sudelPaf,B+otail�Ge7ldonmenulrAS� Pd` fva ® co ihbs
([ �C.. • i GD BOdJh 6 � p[Qps daY L AIIAlk... '5AVtDI2d1 SWd to- �$r•�thp5.
P®
1 G'l s-°.cpPp D4 19 7►sd�t I �' !:€ " e lee% • O I o'%' l I Lrfip� Y/ - Adinbe-teador7~o!
k
s
Figure A4 General %lap of the Pasquatank RiveT Basin
o
-
-
vkvb.r•
�- ,�
q�r>
1 n:
------- ---
t
R 1.
ean
..[yam
j 9ii.
v
`cc_�/•r;tt,y�� r-'�'
.•
,' ' c•d
13 vs'k-. dx.T;
. ' •
I
r )!�.�'}•'
N t'nRtll
Jr ttl .-.
d2 Y-•" :"%
to III 4 =±Wf. Pi i Q o I © Ly 1 Hi d11
Do.rbafed(DBiI -- _
Y
Called applicant. The facility is on the eastern side of the causeway (NC-f 15).
FM ' Eck Ytbw Fa trta. look/yHdp 4
®B°d` •® 2 a I II I A Search ' Fa tes 0 I 0• b ®- D .3 r
l
Add&rra �] Hto:Ilr'�'•w.mNO�s<.cmllmepalmsn•^dame.dkyne-�assermntn�(.nddldistorY-d¢saldaat.�toll�IamtrBa-adn�tvdB-eapnat.de�rw � ®C>o trfs ".
CM* (, Ca 1. � d . � � tlodmerks- a I t>tod" I � Q7 k , S> took to ram .'S M1aRf C+5ardto-
-- • ZZ - i
..ttb. I N.1P I r....a.... tdum.... Maps Directions Mobile
ajilter-FnendlY I Et:1,3i1 I Sortd to Cell I Send fo P6A I Lint; to this Man
100 Mereh CSWV Online Offers
Knotts Island, NC 27950-9721, US • 1Sa91l,Island tiQiPel, • Kndde Island Insmante
DireWdns To I Directions From I Revise I Now Man • 6trloots in Knods Island . Knols Is aI,aCd Real €stato
(® ., ) Or SelBct�Catepory ` Find Nearby: (e.gTheatersSearch
Adkl M.Dr Online Otfars Y�
a 7 r ❑ Shop 1.h Is • Hotels Vn Knotta kland
• gldabslVand Schools
®� - , 1 . Real Eslafa iq j(rlen.lslantl
• Knobs island Insurance
� r , FI9h1s jQ LCr19G9 Iliond
�e - + I • FJABndad 3tav }iaial6
��• �i Nattl Carolhla BBachea
••,y Top.all 1.1" It On. @11h. 1,W '
` arw.d.d b..chn In H.%h C.di-.
�'' � �t� P � � n.•a TI•.iumR•.ISp.ebMi.MAbt
�, t �'ltj �ti4t0t CalaWla Heach
Lddhlnp for Nth C.dina b... h.0
l
C f k� l *•• N.: Crr Idle B id Demd•rr pmld•.
�Nu3 Knotty Hlmd Nc
�1 7 ! C•mpa. W.I.I. Find Ap.Am• . ,
Rft.tr �� i1 •�_' W..,h.r, u.n. Y•II.�R WhA. P.p•.
t r
4,�, ��^ Theme -Parke rn• bip..R.onr.. nra..
A
i nformah•n on Th.m•P.W I
taena I I I 1 1 Ito >ti—.t

This facility is at l0-ft elevation, drains to the east to Great Marsh.
Fie ybw Fird Took Layers GP5 4mart Wndow Hdp
�'�'d0' AAI�@3.�:�'c�'®_tQ:t`I�i.�i���i��_XI� i�7�,� i.i � C,B^ ?j me•s�o�,•N oia•ov r
5 4�
—__--�--'� VIRGINIA BEACH CIT,S,'.,��.��. far! ti
CURRITUCK CO' -
:k--7
♦+
, 5 o
Sandy N,lier�•r'• �
Point p `':;ti ••�
•
t 4
o I `r
i.
t
1 0 �
a r •..J
15 55
Ilan
nP
Gibbs
Point 1 e
5
A1NhIts
k i
.�,.
"- t!�-
6 ° t t
_r_._
W # -•f
t 5
�Clltk ene Qreq to move map i$MII Zoom Oup iSAIrt,C4t. Center TooQ
n
Map continued from map above: Great Marsh is the speckled blue to the right. The
facility drains into Great Marsh iust north of the causeway.
-R pe III- rid Tad. Igars GP5 AdW t yndow H* ram-- _ • a x
I—�1__.f. _.. C=_ ��I�I.J lif�fl5®x3'^' 1.31�0[I[I 1.1 T J1R �i me•rraerH o�e•ar+arw._..0 n..

Great Marsh is not found in BIMS. Great Marsh could drain to either Back Bay (to the
north) or North Landing River (to the south). Back Bay is also not in BIMS (the one that
is in BIMS is in the Neuse River Basin). So, it must drain south to the North Landing
River.
edes
T' J]I036•32'21.18"N [076•88'30.38"W] 2tt
WaterbodyName: great marsh Clear
Waterbody Description:
Basin: Drainage Area:
Subbasin: + County:
Stream Index Num: U Waterbodies with Proposed Classificati...
Special Designations: �', Reclassification Year;
talntaln
CQ) Any Of {0. Q All Of CAN .
Ilk
-'Cur—ent'CI ssiticagws
B
C
CA
FWS
HQW
WA
Use a" to Indicate one or more missing characters.
""5elected'Classificatio`ns �"""`� '—"
lsrfdSearch Waterbody
Remele No waterbodles found for the selected search crtteria. -
W
+Back Next> Select I Close
.. -
-
Loading... �� SID: WBSR
and drag to move map [Shift: Zoom Out] [Shill+Ctrl: Center Tool]
Ready
SID: PMOD

Direction of flow from facility
-� uWoMe
L ding
nil
ni
Point
�/, 7 y ��W � ��� �� it • , �. �� '*"", �} �= a`N,..� __ • . ' -
Green �L aM -z ". a . Trailer'
kpoini+ `a �J0 y ! 'lam tom= �:•`�'
N r 0
6 . � o _ 'C� .� " l 1. . !-•�� _ .._ � y 1-
'.1'\,L,VIRGINIA.BFACH
r T• =— —�•NURTIi-EAI201:11�i�1a.
C:K CV' ,°
t ��1': ti •' :
Sandy tit, _• } �.,: p.
Point
C`. r tl• do. 1 fa -
1
kA
51 5b ° 'G •� .N91 • •.mow 1 .�I•'r
5�5 °o \ r'1'� "• F� Yam. ''.i.
a. L 5 ° v, Fareby
island
r
Gibbs S5L10 o ` 1 ►.
Point \ 5`

This is NC-615 in the Basinwide flan. Note the Refuac.
H6 Ed! Co To F—t., Kt
©-k ® - R 2 0
. Ijc�
111

DLR Permit is active
Fie Edt Yew F-ant- Teals H*
0 Bk - ® - C] 2 01 P 5 h *-- el ®. D .�
Adders rAtp;jtb.—,enr.state.rx,ush(mheir'>'^eF^uY.kw7mFreFacRtYKeY'-1985 �1, rC. rr
C-4c ;c' V Q 4�r . Q noakm i..�
, 5' Popups y Ct—k . i* Astollnk . AV
�A1,Fd S rdto. 0 StttYps-
Mlning Permit IRYentdry V�I Mlne Enlry 1�..�
4
Fund 'Mine Name
Bnght Mine__ _ rl O'Birahsn C7 ]iT0 -17016.J1
Region YAR1N C
•Riser
BasinOdglral
Pa87uolanN
�"�"
03 712g`05� 0 7 BB,_ �'c 2gO6 J
`�Y.r + �_
Permit
Revlslon
1 Heerinq I�— j, r!ir
�1 Date ! I I i�
—, Issue Dale
"` 'J"'
Date
_I .J
- -
�� Release j�� j j�
'=r�=.—J Dale '�.—�T =7=.J
"Mine
Status
i "'� +Commodlry
Code y�nq and era".;tC
"Bontletl I
IS A,.--
'Bond
j „Band
$tng1F C Fount 357,100.00� I
Acres �.-.1er7tF'eTCgtt
'LOW, 36.55000
'Longitutla
7fi.00000 r
'Collectlon From Nap• To he removed
.� 'Reference
I
—1971 Y_
Method
Datum
New
Comment
View Comments
"erns Fins Nanne
CITY
Phone
I r
Mr. Bonney O Bright
Vhglnia Beach
[phone] SPIc[[AlTdiate
jl i
Me. History f Assacl also Documents
Doc —+
I umenls ( doc; wpd; Nary Penntt(2A69 NEW.doc) +% D—nad Documnnl 31
r-w.,a�nnR ._ .. _ .r Inn"rena Gren.la lla..lc
AEI
�1 Done 1 I f O Internet .

RE: Bonney Bright
Subject: RE: Bonney Bright
From: Jeff Manning <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 10:30:43 -0500
To: Kelly Johnson <kelly.p.johnson a ncmail.net>
Kelley,
I have spoken with Al and he sees no reason to hold up the Bonney Bright Sand Company
permit for the Knotts Island site. As far as I know it is okay to go ahead and issue
it.
Jeffery A. Manning
Jeffery A. Manning
Environmental Specialist
Washington Regional Office
DENR/DWQ
252-948-3966 (direct)
252-946-6481 (main)
I of 1 2/19/2007 10:31 AM

NCG 020701_Bonney Bright Sand
Subject: NCG 020701_Bonney Bright Sand
From:.Kelly Johnson <kelly.p.johnson a nemail.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 09:01:34 -0500
To: [e-mail]
ncmail.net
Jeff,
The attached staff report for Bonney Bright Sand Co (Currituck County) contains the
issues that we discussed yesterday. I know that you are onsite today, lets talk when
you get back.
Kelly
NCG 020701_Bonney Bright —Staff Rpt.doc Content -Type: application/msword
Content -Encoding: base64
NCG 020701_Application.pdf Content -Type: application/pdf
lContent -Encoding: base64
1 of 1 1/24/2007 9:01 AM

A7j7LA
NCDENR-
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
Land Quality Section
James D. Simons, PG, PE Michael F. Easley, Governor
Director and State Geologist William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
April 9, 2007
Mr. Bonney G. Bright a
Bonney Bright Sand Company
x�
5513 Buzzard Neck Road `"> r-►
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23457
N
RE: Permit No. 27-49 1 Bright Mine Q
Currituck County 1 Pasquotank River Basin C�
Dear Mr. Bright:
Your recent request to have the above referenced mining permit modified has been
approved. The modification is to allow discharging of stormwater from the permitted area as per
General Permit No. NCG020000 and Certificate of Coverage No. NCG020701 issued by the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality on February 23, 2007.
Please attach this approval Letter to your existing mining permit for future reference. The
expiration date, mine name and permit number on the permit document shall remain the same as
before this modification.
The issuance of a mining permit and/or any modification to it does not supersede local
zoning regulations. The responsibility of compliance with any applicable zoning regulations lies
with you.
As a reminder, your permitted acreage at this site is 56.73 acres and the amount of land
you are approved to disturb is 45.04 acres.
Please advise this office at [phone] should you have any questions concerning this
matter.
Sincerely,
2'�
Floyd R. Williams, PG, CPG, CPESC
State Mining Specialist
Land Quality Section
FRWIjw
cc: Mr. Pat McClain, PE
Mr. Bradley Bennett-DWQ
1612 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1612 -919-733-4574 I FAX: [phone]
512 North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina, 27604
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

. �
il.
--- y= .�

jF W A rF
qp�
t7 �
Mr. Bonney Bright
President
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
5513 Buzzard Neck road
Virginia Beach, VA 23457
Dear Mr. Bonney:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Divi" ian 6f Watcr Quality
February 23, 2007
Subject: General Permit No. NCG 020000
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
COC NCG020701
Currituck County
In accordance with your application for a discharge permit received on January 16, 2007, 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 dateMay-9-1994-(o- as subsequently -amended). - —
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. Please also note the requirement to have a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan and to comply with the cut off concentrations listed in the permit.
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 Kelly Johnson at telephone
number [phone] ext. 376.
Sincerely,'
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
BRADLEY BirN'``•E-f._I
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
cc: Washington Regional Office, Mr. Jeffery Manning
Central Files
Stormwater Permitting Unit Files -
enc: Certificate of Coverage
?P,Nlina hCaro
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone]
Internet: www.newateraualitv.orsr Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
An Equal OpportunitylAHirmative Action Employer— 50°/. Recycledl10% Post Consumer Paper
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
GENERAL PERMIT NO. NCG020000
CERTIFICATE OF COVERAGE No. NCG020701
STORMWATER 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,
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
is hereby authorized to discharge stormwater from a facility located at
Bonney Bright Sand Co.
100 Marsh Causeway
Knotts Island
Currituck County
to receiving waters designated as the North Landing River, a class SC water in the Pasquotank
River Basin, in accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other
conditions set forth in Parts 1, II, III, IV, V, and VI of General Permit No. NCG02000 as attached,
This certificate of coverage shall become effective February 23, 2007..
This Certificate of Coverage shall remain in effect for the duration of the General Permit.
Signed this 23rd day of February 2007,
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
BRADLEY BENNETT
for Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By the Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

4
LOCATION MAP:
"IT
Latitude: 36033'01" 7v NCG020701 Facility
Longitude: 76100 16 W�
County: Currituck Bonney Bright Sand Location '
Stream Class: SC
Receiving Stream: North Landing River
Sub -basin: 03-01-54 (Pasquotank River Basin) O'Lt�L Not to Scale

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617
FAX: [phone]
PHONE: [phone]
TELECOPY TO: LoNN�� �/ 3 O�. E 6.41 7
FAX NUMBER:
'44f2s a't/
PHONE: k 3 6 U # OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS SHEET:
COMMENTS:
FG t 8 y vL_� 'J_y Aira_5

a�
i�
State waters of Virginia
& Waters of the U.S. R-
u 14
�r
Outfall
red (old) Ou
`• unnumbered ,/ /'• '`, '1 I ` I d .�
1,1
`
\\\ -6 _ � {I � #�
is
WCS #5 \ ! ,'/,, WCS #7 ,` `�._• _ _..__ _� ��
VA Outfall # 002
WCS # 8
a , . /' �` 33S \�` fir... 9ar+r�'r ,,,�.1. Y� •ih "y' `�,�
• \��.' / �d��j¢FF$ i �4�� � edv�ca,wmwkrtrk , I'+�`��;�
•� \\ �` V } Y',y' `, ¢ V
A ." _ v� '`_^' • .: A "'tip , 2�
WCS #4 !\\<`. .._ . -' y �`\ j _ t1 b.11its
�\
�\ � Fes• ) ! �� � .` ��
t \\� [I �+.+.'.'". .�,4 •may "_ - -.,� ` w WCS # 9
sit,
,•ter+.''- ..-1 ~`�v'' ;- •r /'
Ila
k / \ Y -'!f �y'il - -Haw•« `-i•-„•.r•wti.` •4. •gyp
GPIN: 23 0-1537 ` �' r 4�. - '�,�_'�'_" _ - - .:.•.�..••.. . - ''" � _ `,• =` x 9
sit.
� S ,.• t r . y� �' + .. .-, `� .•--_. , ,e it : • k a r I�a� !s f/,• �', rj R s` ', =y"i r-- ^'ate `' ? v,uwosm�acr — �'
s •6,`+ it ,r ' � 1, !: ,'!rt'� "• � ``" ' �� ��;A ' St• � x �i' 1 •--•'�Sr"�,pLva�'��`�� r\\ �
J kr �� r i. � •d • s _ J'traxx,r�aarAe�esnAo�dt' _ \
Nr\\
allt • - J "•� I ik • �
IE _ 1I CS #10
WCS #3 �, 6� s , II + r r _ } ` tt ,.Yoy"%'•^'�i`i il; •Iy 29 +td
99 ` � ' r •�3 iI - 1-' ) _ t .. •� •'� �1 of4•'. r 'f � 3D Sp fn+1 �tv'Y` i` +3 e
�, !, ' / !� ,.T1111 :N '., t.• `F t. .�^ `- _ � � .�XY �yI,•F1':I.xq���E` YN*s o,,�p� i�=�
PN AZ
35.14't ,1 Ilo'
�q1.9
�� \�
,id _ may,' t � �: 1• I.t � �/ r�� _ t �.
4> '+3O, 'I.1 "�'� ,`•:• y� r t t ' I{i ,: -� � r� tr+''�p'� t'' d�
� +'` :�}•'.'.i�:'�•• �.. �i- ' ......: __ IT/ it:.I�a. .` Y� �r�-��lau� t t
6 ' • ?- lF• r • 1• �1 � _ate- t
f S 59'53'1y Vr /•, '!: �'�... -�+_ `,' t � Fi' '1�S r
�• 58.17 ��" 1� sl ►+ ¢ �I I. t t' r ` '
,%j. i� 3. 13 :..ii-'ti`" .• w.a - J `� t.�.'.., F. / a 11 `Zk
•'•'. III- f` {WAr�,f ,. • ��
t(�tj � s
�'Y°ri�� 1>13 tt \,
r — — _ V' i ' • ' i"i i i�� `+' 1t'' t i i b :' r ►� ♦ tea+ p N�'* 1
�d¢St� �• - ?E ••:� • � ..! ' _ ,. � .ai� C•�'yy�� y '� el 1 � ! `=` ems'} +,.. +t
lit
3 �}• `�Q• � �, rl+ .F `: '!` ',`r
u.
EXISTING �. Vi►Cs#
'toEXCAVATION AREA zv �, ; •E ' '" ; '�_ NC Mine Pump Outfali .�= . ti~ ~! r e-z -- -" .
a - ,
Rol
GPIN: 2317--73'-0791 4 (69.405AC.) // `
y° (3.30 MILLION CU. YDS. / ;. �` -= - t _•,• ." :,,:_ .•• ' ._ t -� ti t'
TO BE EXCAVATED)/ � � '� - +` � �' :•• •; ^ s __ •� ,.::: •��•;��• : ;; �:..: .:�� ' •--• � � ,�Lia � ..�-'
((�� � ' , • _ C y ter+• .. , `+'' . ,' � y' � � . `� r i
h I l lSt CP. v r. + . I 5 . L f ' // f': 'r4" - '♦Ttr ''' V Fl I3 / ♦ \
�'` �f i `� z -�`� I ,. r ar :��y- `&%;+;y `•"' '�,, ► ` ��o os
roped Recharge Swale Plug
��J � / � /� /' z J� �� ��� t �� �..'t�t'.tx.a''`.(•~'' ,•� "•`,':,���s'ti .•. :`•.': �" 1�5 �/� I� I� /�i t,
z � I / ff% �. t tl �. r t e •;"�} �"•', •;f7.'•` '•t•. •t • t w •?'$ 4 i � �•'••�,���;•'; i .F � �.£c t �� ' / \`
•i,:. 2....1 ? 64- 535 i
S 28'4'2i' IN % r s i .1� S-.. •i If •; "1�• .L` `'>Sa .�::.'w 7f�:%.; •! 1 r x i4 �l `' / Q \
lj._s G � 1ta� y s 1 play •-,;:��,�_�:`.•.� '•t' 9 �: , �,M. . / gg
26.33'lilt
/
• ^'] G � � ���D - � �: .J. > i �wft� � .� � � x.3. �_-'.%s+'�4 •� ' 1° i• '' :i.• ;•� ,•,.��.• k,•t•.` . ��1i s ; k �/�� t / � ���* It
"` `� � 0�- � C9: `' " _ '� 1 �BQ��rB � - �11lS � i li.;. r fvl: .• I '.: � :• ,�;, pis".' � .:� ',`�c •. •' � . , Y � / r� �
to LO.,fl T S OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED \ PIT S, VocKP11
4 0} BORROW! \ 517.31 SQ• FT.
\ i7.3i ACRES
6 4 -
\\ s! :�.. ` e z - --., •� / \\ \
OPIt,:2317-2 1327� �O{PA-
6T
Cy h'J - � , � / �'� •''�}ti+S I � ; .Io-ys� ��. a � a ,�� � �lfj r- 1 \ \\ '
w '� ggk- \ � � �,�'v $ , . �'y rd2 \ , ✓r `� �.,�' I r )"s ��� sii ��� r / ` 1
L 'Qa � ` � '� ' � g � 6.. \ . �' I I . ' I � �. a • =� � r 1 r ��"Sid \� \\ 1
c oa f tn: �� \ �'j 4 8 IN
�; rig
N �,, , 2 t I L I t� 5 X� E
\. •t, \ 96.56t I Ise 14 t a \\
,y � � �.QO � � � � \ � 1 � G},25• 35' t^i 49 tt � � , � ��g�� •'tt ti\`
c
6'24'2 7"s'r
7a VA Pump Outfall° I
L
cU• � a
LIMITS OF APPROVED `� trs R�'t�� tt � >i a I \t `•�
/ SORO' PI r� i I it, ! \
.� WSC # 1 .- 102.93' t*t , � 44 tt >t n � tt \♦
VA NPDES Outfall #001 111B.78-
12 21.71 TGTAL tr t 1 ;
' 03-3313"
c rn f I L= 65.24'
� r ISO' ACCESS RD. �-:
4Orange - VA -NC Border
1 Yellow - Water Control Features
-k�� ADMINISTRATION DATA Blue - VA Mine Dewatering Flow
I �`t io6 54 1 • OWNER OPERATOR Green - Proposed NC Mine Dewatering Flow
3zS.�?• ' 1110-47' / B©NNEY G. 6RIGHT
r0 pvrkN �6 28'27"-196.78' L=2O5.14' ! !' N 03'33'1" .E
5513 BUZZARD? NECK RD.
'oA� cnrrA R�-1643.92' R=1938.98' VIRGINIA BEACH,: VA. 23457
LESS ANNE ROAD 50. R/
[phone]
PRiN 2. APPLICATE: BONNEY G. BRIGHT Alternative Plan for Mine Dewatering, Surface
Water Routing and Discharge Outfall
3. MINING OFFICIAL IN CHARGE: BONNEY G. BRIGHT Bonney Bright Sand Mine
Currituck County, North Carolina
April 15, 2008
. °.�� it' k ••r'�r'f'�'f !. ri: yi � "' �+•r� ti,,'• �• ,Si•F!F7 r i si:! •{�::.�.
' ! €-�.1 �� � r', I ( i ti ' !- S 5 ',I!• � i r 1,', 1 I �. � r �, F ! rl ,
JN
--� o o, GPIN. 23 = 7---82- 3152
GAIN: 2317- 72-3259 �
S 00.5 44" V`
56g•40' �
t 1279,59' 10to1
OC)'5�4"�44 '
9
N � n
N
WCS # 2
08. 18"
249.85'
63410.3 S4. FT,
1.46 ACRES

111N&�
T
NOTES:
1. DEVELOPER/OWNER/MANAGER: BONNEY G. BRIGHT
5513 BUZZARD NECK RD.
MR61NIA BEACH, VA 23457
757-721-5823 (Office)
2. SUBJECT PROPERTY: 101.79 AC. TRACT LOCATED ON EAST SIDE OF NCSR 615 AND
FALLS ALONG THE VIRGINA AND NORTH CAROLINA BORDER
PINfS:0055--000-0001-OOM. 0055-000-0002-0000, 0055-000-0003-•OCOO
RECORDED REFERNCES. D.B. 320, PG. 519, D.B. 203, PG. 246. D,6,178, PG. 710.
FRUITVILLE TOWNSHIP, CURRITUCK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
3. TOTAL SITE AREA : 4,434,023.68 SO. FT. (101.79 AC.)
MAXIMUM PERMITTED EXCAVATION AREA: 1,330,207 SQ.FT. (30.53 AC.) -307. OF TOTAL SITE AREA.
4. SITE ZONING : A AGRICULTURAL
5. TRACT DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
MAXIMI IAA I nT CAVPPACzF - rrl/
OFFICE TRAILER AREA = 4,632 $0. FT. (0.11 AC.)
STOCKPILE AREA = 208,473 SQ. FT. 4.79 AC.
OVERBURDEN AREA = 135.452 SO. FT. (3.11 AC.)
EARTHEN BERM AREA = 104.253 $0. FT. (2.39 AC,)
PROPOSED RECHARGE DITCH AREA = 73,245 SO. FT. (1.68 AC.
PROPOSED HAUL ROAD = 155.496 SO. FT. (3.57 AC.)
PROPOSED EXCAVATED AREA = 1,280,307 $0. FT. (Z9.39 AC}
TOTAL AFFECTED ACREAGE = 1,961,858 S.F. (45.03 AC.)
F. MINING COVERAGE (EXCAVATION ONLY) = 28.9%
6. TOTAL PERMITTED AREA : 2.468,608. SO. FT. (56.67 AC.)
7. BUILDING SETBACKS:
STREET- 20'. SIDE- 15, REAR- 25', VEHICULAR AREA SIDE/REAR- 10'
B. BUFFER YARD REQUIREMENTS;
PROPOSED LAND USE: ACTIVE MINE _
ADJOINER ADJACENT USE
NORTH
AGRICULTURAL
EAST
AGRICULTURAL
SOUTH
AGRICULTURAL
WEST
AGRICULTURAL
9. PROPERTY ON THIS PLAT CONTAINS 404 WETLANDS AND MAY REQUIRE U.S. ARMY CORP. OF
ENGINEERS PRIOR TO DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY.
10, FEMA DATA: F.I.R.M. PANEL 370078 0070 C AND 0090 C 11-1-1984. CURRITUCK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ALL PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITHIN ZONE A3 (EL 6)
USE OF LAND WITHIN A FLOODWAY OR FLOODPLAIN IS SUBSTANTIALLY RESTRICTED BY ARTICLE 16 OF THE
CURRITUCK UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
11. ALL AREAS VISIBLE FROM NCSR 615 TO BE SCRENED FROM PUBLIC VIEW BY USE OF EXISTING VEGETATIVE
SCREENING AND PROPOSED BERMING.
12, THE HOURS OF OPERATION OF ALL MINING RELATED FACILITIES AND ACTIVITIES ON THE MINING SITE SHALL
BE ESTABLISHED BY THE CURRITUCK BOARD OF COMMISSIONAERS. IN NO CASE SHALL THE HOURS OF
OPERATION BE BEYOND DAWN TO DUSK NOR SHALL MINING ACTIVITY OCCUR ON SUNDAYS.
13. MINED MATERIALS SHALL NOT BE STORED IN EXCESS OF TWENTY-FIVE (25) FEET IN HEIGHT.
14. ALL TRUCKS HAULING MINED MATERIAL, (I.E. SAND, CLAY, TOPSOIL) SHALL BE COVERED WITH A TARPAULIN.
15. NO BULK WASTE, HAZARDOUS WASTE, COMMERCIAL WASTE, GARBAGE, CONSTRUCTION OR DEMOLITION WASTE
SHALL BE PLACED ON SITE.
16. NO TRESPASSING SIGNS SHALL BE POSTED AROUND THE SITE BEING MINED AT A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF
250' APART INDICATING THAT A MINING OPERATION IS BEING CONDUCTED ON THE PROPERTY.
17. DRAINAGE PATTERNS SHALL NOT BE ALTERED AS TO CAUSE FLOODING OFF --SITE. THE EXISTING FARM
DITCHES WILL EITHER BE CLEARED OR GATED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE MINING
OPERATION. THE EXISTING CULVERT PIPES WILL BE REMOVED AND THE EXISTING CONNECTIONS FILLED IN, IT
IS ANTICIPATED THAT THESE MODIFICATIONS TO THE EXISTING FARM DITCHES WILL HAVE NO EFFECT ON THE
SURROUNDING PERIMETER DRAINAGE. WITH NO CHANGES OCCURRING TO THE EXISTING PERIPHERAL
DRAINAGE, NO DRAINAGE PATTERN IMPACT SHOULD RESULT
18, NO MINING ACTIVITIES SHALL ADVERSELY AFFECT SURROUNDING IN USE WELLS. ANY PERSON OWNING OR
OPERATING A MINING SITE IN A MANNER THAT ADVERSELY AFFECTS AN IN USE WELL THROUGH
CONTAMINATION OR DIMINUTION OF GROUNDWATER SHALL PROVIDE THE WELL OWNER WITH A REPLACEMENT
WATER SUPPLY OF EQUAL QUANTITY & QUALITY.
19. NOISE LEVELS AT 1)qE EXTERIOR PROPERTY LINES ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE A MAXIMUM OF 68 DECIBELS,
20.SuRVEY DATA BASED ON SURVEY FOR BONNEY BRIGHT TAKEN BY WARREN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. LAND
SURVEYORS OUT OF VIRGINA BEACH, VA ON DECEMBER 1. 2004,
THE BRIGHT MINING OPERATION CONSISTS OF A 28.89 ACRE MINE FOR THE EXCAVATION AND DISTRIBUTION
OF SAND. THE SITE IS LOCATED OFF OF (NC R7 615) WITHIN FRUITVILLE TOWNSHIP, CURRITUCK COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA. THL FOLLOWING DESCRIBES THE OPERATIONAL SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED OPERATION;
OPERATION SUMMARY:
1) THE ANTICIPATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC LOAD COUNT IS 100 LOADS, WITH ONE TRUCK LEAVING
APPROXIMATELY EVERY SIX MINUTES. AN OCCASIONAL LARGE JOB WILL INCREASE THE TRAFFIC LOAD
TO APPROXIMATELY 200 LOADS PER DAY, WITH ONE TRUCK LEAVING EVERY THREE MINUTES.
2) EXCAVATION WILL CONSIST OF STRIPPING OVERBURDEN, DIGGING DEWATERING AND DRAINAGE DITCHES
WILL E_ PERFORMED BY THE USE OF AN EXCAVATOR. THE EXCAVATOR WILL EITHER STOCKPILE
MATEF,iAL OR USF DUMP TRUCKS TO HAUL MATERIAL TO OTHER LOCATIONS WITHIN THE PROPOSED
"IINING AREA.
3)LOADINC OF SAND ON DELIVERY DUMP MUCKS WILL BE DONE BY A RUDE,:R •?IRE FRONT-END LOADER
AND A EXCAVATOR OPERATING AT THE MINING AREA ENTRANCE,
O TRUCKS ENTERING THE MINING AREA WILL BE REQUIRED TO STOP AT THE OFFICE TRAILER TO RECEIVE
LOAD TICKETS AND INSTRUCTIONS UPON ENTERING AND EXISTING THE MINING AREA, SPEED LIMITS WILL
POSTED ALONG THE ACCESS ROAD TO THE MINING AREA AND WILL BE STRICTLY ENFORCED. ALL
TRUCKS EXITING THE SITE WITH MINED MATERIAL SHALL BE COVERED WITH A TARPAULIN.
5) A DEWATERING PUMP WILL BE PROVIDED TO LOWER THE STA11C WATER TABLE AS MINING PROGRESSES.
DISCHARGE FROM THE PUMP WILL BE DIRECTED TO A PROPOSED RECHARGE DITCH LOCATED AROUND
THE OUTSIDE OF THE SCREENING BERM. THIS DITCH WILL BE CONNECTED TO EXISTING ON -SITE
FARMING DITCHES TO INCREASE ITS OVERALL LENGTH AND EFFECTIVENESS. THE INTENT IS TO PROVIDE
SUFFICIENT STORAGE WITHIN THIS SWALE TO ALLOW THE WATER TO INFILTRATE BACK INTO THE
SURROUNDING SUBSURFACE WATER SUPPLY.
6)A MOTOR GRADER WILL BE PROVIDED AND OPERATED TO MAINTAIN THE ACCESS ROAD AND AREAS OF
THE MINING AREA AS DEEMED NECESSARY. A WATER TRUCK WILL BE PROVIDED TO MAINTAIN DUST
CONTROL ALONG THE ACCESS ROADWAY AND MINING AREA. A SWEEPING BROOM TRACTOR WILL ALSO
BE UTILIZED TO MAINTAIN ANY RESIDUAL. SAND AND DIRT FROM THE ACCESS ROAD ENTRANCE. THESE
METHODS WILL INSURE THE CLEANLINESS OF THE ADJOINING, (N.C. RT. 615) PUBLIC ROADWAY.
7) TO AID IN 114E PROCESSING OF THE MINED MATERIALS A FULLY MOBILE SCREENING PIECE OF
EQUIPMENT WILL BE UTILIZED, THE MACHINE WILL MOVE ABOUT WITHIN THE EXCAVATION AREA AND BE
LOADED BY RUBBER TIRED FRONT END LOADERS AND EMPTIED TO DELIVERY TRUCKS.
8) IT IS PROJECTED THAT THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES OPERATING AT THIS FACILITY WILL BE 15.
RECLAMATION:
WHEN POSSIBLE, KCLAMA11ON SHALL BE CONDUCTED SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE MINING OPERATIONS.
ANNUAL RECLAMATION REPORTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING & INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
WITHIN 10 DAYS OF STATE SUBMISSION,
AS PART OF THE SIMULTANEOUS RECLAMATION, IT IS THE INTENT OF THE OWNER TO CONTINUE THE
EXISTING FARMING ACTIVATES ON THE PROPERTY SURROUNDING THE MINES PERMIT BOUNDARY. ALL
DISTURBED LAND THAT WILL NOT BE USED FOR FARMING, SUCH AS THE SCREENING BERMS, SHALL BE
VEGETATED PER 114E SEEDING SCHEDULE GIVEN ON SHEET 4. THE BULK OF THE RECLAMATION WILL
COMMENCE UPON THE COMPLETION OF THE MINING OPERATION, OR AT THE END OF A 10-YR PERIOD- THE
EXCAVATED MINING AREA WILL BE UTILIZED AS A FUTURE LAKE FOR AGRICULTURAL AND RECREATIONAL
PURPOSES. ALL STOCKPILE, OVERBURDEN, & SCREENING BERM AREAS WILL BE GRADED LEVEL AND
PREPARED FOR FUTURE FARMING USE. THE HAUL ROAD WILL BE KEPT INTACT TO PROVIDE FUTURE LAKE
ACCESS, RECLAMATION WILL PROCEED AT THE COMPLETION OF THE OPERATION WITHOUT ANY PROVISIONS
FOR STAGING OF RECLAMATION.
AT COMPLETION OF RECLAMATION, IT IS ANTICIPATED 'THAT THE PROPERTY WILL REMAIN UNDER CURRENT
OWNERSHIP ASSUMING RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY ON -SITE ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION THAT MAY OCCUR
AFTER EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES ARE COMPLETE".
THE MINING OPERATION WILL CONSIST OF HAUL ROAD CONSTRUCTION WITH DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS,
STRIPPING OVERBURDEN, BERM CONSTRUCTION, EXCAVATION AND DEWATERING OF THE MINING AREA
EXCESS MINE MATERIAL. WILL BE STOCKPILED IN THE DESIGNATED SITE AREA FOR TRANSPORT FOR
OFF -SITE USE, DISTURBED AREAS UNAFFECTED BY THE DAILY MINING OPERATION WILL BE ESTABLISHED
WITH A VEGETATIVE COVER WITHIN 30 DAYS OF DISTURBANCE. IT IS THE INTENT OF THE OWNER TO
CONNECT 114E MINING AREA NORTHWARD ON THE VIRGINIA SIDE OF THE STATE LINE ONCE THE PROPER
PERMITS & APPROVALS HAVE BEEN ACQUIRED. THE DURATION OF THE MINING OPERATION IS ANTICIPATED
TO LAST FOR APPROXIMATELY 10 YEARS AT WHICH TIME RECLAMATION WILL TAKE PLACE.
GRAPHIC SCALE
200 0 100 200 400
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 200 ft.
E " U H H 10 E
Z/\\
SHEET
800
DESCRIPTION
MINING DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
BRIGHT MINE
FRUITVILLE TOWNSHIP CURRITUCK COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA
r ,
I I
! I I
I l ;
1 I i
,III!
I I
1 1 i'
I I !
! I I
I T I
1 1
III
i I I
I
I
I
E
Hera ndrrrLr !
i RAArM iPlaTrrr�M
e� inn[ cress .A¢ rot
YI,P 110af W PAa m
sPr snt a rnP .
LorarowoaT
'G"_'
rPrpa m. lia mPnp
Sara
AmAiE
PSR+c i�wa9Atlt
p!=6 ads W11P
PM OR Pdr�T
r1 a y
.'•
AIO Q CFMEA I
ANDON �
s+,roY fmr[ PR.
m9011 i I
[ a AAtR1
GVOY 1f . a. '�
n va r as
,00M MA+a " mom.
T4 Ir•r * PA01= [P
as 4PP. m dp 1
iPAf YY b PARm. IA ?CM
vilLn
m
•!
KAPJW OR IL LT
•�prola"
1 r I
1zralurt
vxrai MAOL Y.L zw
am
_ my a Men 4)
pa 1% PP >n
TA11 4a ►APm+
I xcr.arrP
-- _
-
o,.rkr.sc
_
�
_..
IdRS'9i
rear a rcwoar
ttilt]ICOABfPA. y11THIilY IA61lEAT WIC.
no: rmc vas
rAx 4uP +a PA11pa s
OWNER BONNEY G. BRIGHT ENGINEER: Bissell Professional Group
MANAGER 5513 BUZZARD NECK RD. Mark S. Bissell, P.E.
DEVELOPER: VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23457 P.O. (Tax 1068
757-721-5823 (Office) Kitty Hawk, N.C. 27949
[phone]
fax: [phone]
emai,': [e-mail]
`oPtin,r
\ mA14ObK
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
S
1
1
ti
11'
,y
�
Pm,*) a KML am
Pr! •er Wfu" m
� asf 1
r W UK voww"
•M v. O14AL A"
WEAL AMk SC V.
A,,
_
May �ou'r
P8 ,tPr IC 10
Pow aft OD 1w
♦
,
♦
SLT r011
` *
`�
/ ' /
9GI"kY,Q 7
,
,' MAMtMm ALOq , SSP AOE3 prmlK aimacq
tares n%�� rrw"GUORIMC
P=•ROX+.`1DP'OfJla"E"
uxm
.,,,•w• .
..,. aa".z1d
f
'
�L si nc i;•�'at i,� �:�.yj.T - _ '
`.:a^^�_a=°{•'•="".w,,.�ye•
...
...... ..._a,...-..... -...
NORTH CAROLINA/VIRGINA STATE LINE
sy � t ..�:�'a.,.� �� fwsw y'a�' "'"'Y*-' •..e:�YeY � K
1 n i
�4. SITE
MIN
f _ s
NORTH 1 WA
LANDING
RIVER
NORTH
CURRITUCK�--
COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
VICINITY MAP 5
SCALE: 1 "=1000'
SITE
CKAY SLAND NATION
i U REFUGE
t
, / y
\
� Q
,
L� Z
1
IZ
.-.
U
<
`,\
U U
Q
Lu
Z�_
t r
\ ZIN
a
1---
Q
W
of O
:D
^4\\4
1_L
�.,�y'•;� �,cti . `_ -. _ I,
KRCWA Sum
"fDRnr cvr � sT�ic uKt' - - -
DUN
111
1 Z' !/ �,'X-`�MVROz.- __,_��•..,-... t ii. . �r aruaw�asr !
�*' _ �+•4rarara4l�rr- FiEYr-,.��'T- - _ 1 aPrlGaraWF f
/ / � \ ♦ ` ` � 1 ppl '• � 'r"ar aa' - `- $ � rr� !� � awna r.�a IP�n,w'wl°mr /
=+6-`_ // I OWNER CERTIFICATE
/ f \ C� `� ealw ewufsl L 1 +.., ,►. [ sue 7
/ '� � • I�ePMR k~ "+ ' S9J'�lTmmrwxm�m1,.'�r a,l ,• / ', s• ! I ., OWNER/AGENT DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I WILL
/ f d u1Sir10 drNl "' „- .� EPEE Pcl,pl "••�„ , , 1 ij , o
\ Wnwo
000
1 y s t aWEOR �T DEVELOP THE PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED PLANS
1+�*.vn.l,nct
NO
�/ \ ` OPIUIgLPAITQImYlAA01 �y 1 /;[ PA am1m WHICH WILL BE CONSTRUCTED OR MAINTAINED SO THAT SURFACE
,' row a wisgaT ,1 O i ( Ir ' +� ,... _ _ �. _ 4 Lr er >'�ttN7A10' ...�.. i r"Ki „�5 `5awo"sCA A 2"
ACyIY AIlpm �rrf , / 1 ! I rA,T rxxrAa,;L4 WATERS FROM SUCH DEVELOPMENT ARE NOT UNREASONABLY
*ram �XOaa W \W s 1rY J r 4 ,' Vora momARu ,� 1 ! COLLECTED AND CHANNELED ONTO LOWER ADJACENT PROPERTIES AT
RUM 1 .10111"ev'044' bb! SUCH LOCATIONS OR AT SUCH VOLUMES AS TO CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL
DAMAGE TO SUCH LOWER ADJACENT PROPERTIES. IN ADDITION, THE
DEVELOPMENT WILL BE CONSTRUCTED OR MAINTAINED SO THAT IT WILL
NOT UNREASONABLY IMPEDE THE NATURAL FLOW OF WATER FROM
HIGHER ADJACENT PROPERTIES ACROSS SUCH DEVELOPMENT, THEREBY
` f �1 $ F �¢ !.0 ' UNREASONABLY CAUSING SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE TO SUCH HIGHER
I I,•a. I 1a'r -r`��, g ! ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
DATE. OWNER/AGENT: --
,' 14
/�♦ t'l LEGEND
1��, 1 1 K ] a
1
COVER SHEET AND SITE LOCATION
2
MINE DEVELOPMENT/RECLAIMATION PLAN
3
MINE DEVELOP MEN T/RECLAIMATION PLAN
4
CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
1LM'�
-' rp. ae wPefLr I 1
000Ef1 R IE>D � �
rA>< rAP 3T rueaL
ES
-' Wl
Row OR "Mmy
OMM R TEA
M Eel 1m
cons ama Era mae,
OA!aM LV
YA Wr Pr PAMM 4
These stancarc symbols will
-- RIGHT-OF-WAY
be found In the drawing.
EDGE OF PAVEMENT/GRAVEL
gg� EXISTIN ;3POl ELEVATION
---------- PROPOSED PROPOSED TOP OF SLOPE/TOE OF SLOPE
.... .... - -PROPOSED WATER SURFACE
0 POWER F'!?LE
---- - - �-- --- - UNDISTURBED LIMITS
• 1 /2" IRO! i RE -BAR (EXISTING)
EXISTING TREELINE
O 3/4" 1ROM PIPE (EXISTING)
-'--- - - - - '-'- OVERBURDEN/STOCKPILE LIMITS
PRCr'OSEp MINING AREA
'- •"� -. - -"" EXISTING DRAINAGE
EXISTING WETLAND AREAS
-- OHE - 9HE - - OHE -••- EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER LINE
L_�
PROPOSED CULVERT (SIZL AS DENOTED)
PROPOSED OVERBURDEN AREA
-- APPROXIMATE WETLAND LIMITS
PROPOS"D STOCKPILE AREA
PERMIT BOUNDARY LIMITS
REC.-ARGE-SWALE
-- - - - - -UNDISTURBED BUFFER LIMITS
r x PROPOSED SEDIMENT FENCE
EX*TING FARM DITCH TO BE FILLED
Q �
0
OL T r,
� � o
� o 0
v)
iu o 52
0 ��zrNryt°
N
p N
a)Zmx ',
X
�a
e3 0 m
N N
3 AU
v E
i �
W
IL °
)S
}`
0
az
pUZts o
ZCo
q U
m000
W 0 ¢U0
U
U
W Q yC O
1/
q.1Gi�WS1.
o ��< U
moo
WE'�dC�
q0W
flzHWC4
R3�Aal
��CCG
a
a
z
O
a
a
V
�
1
C]
Z
TT6­4
0Of
rTr
Of
zV
yO
z
Z
0
W
O
1�"r'■4
to
_j
_j
w
zN
h
:3LLI
M..j
U
U_
0
a
a.
r
Et7
0
Z
Z
O
o
r-
O_
V5CE
0
o
LLJ
0
z%
s
�� O DOO Ocn iV
`O+� ip0 `� 1 )• f 2.
r
w �
DATE: ° I
WALE:
03 - 17 - 04
I "=200'
DESIGNM
CHECKED:
BPG
MSB
DROWN- -
APPROVED:
DMK
MSB
SHEET:
1 4
OF
CAD FILE:
408700B 1
PROJECT NO:
4087
,I -. 1 , {' "� s ., r - �..� } ' • I 1 i `'. T 3T r 1 1 rat l A Lf
hy f r +1 ' 11111.1.7.