NCG020000_Email from Carolina Sunrock with Comment Ltr_20200814

Lucas, Annette
From: Scott Martino <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 9:18 PM
To: Lucas, Annette
Subject: [External] Public Comments for the Draft NPDES Stormwater General Permit -
NCG020000
Attachments: NCG02 Public Comments.pdf
�oz,liogwt ernal email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
MEMEL m aI
Ms. Lucas,
Please find the attached for the public comment period. Thank you again for your hard work.
Take care
Scott Martino
Environmental Compliance Manager/Mine Engineer
Carolina Sunrock
200 Horizon Drive Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27615
Office Phone:[phone] Cell [phone]
2111SUNFIOCK
1

11SUNROCK'°
CAROLINA SUNROCK LLC
Scott Martino
Manager Environmental Compliance
200 Horizon Drive, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27615
August 14, 2020
Annette Lucas, P.E.
Stormwater Program Supervisor
Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources
Department of Environmental Quality
512 North Salisbury Street, Office 640-L
Raleigh, NC 27699
Re: Public Comments for the Draft NPDES Stormwater General Permit - NCG020000
Dear Mrs. Lucas:
The North Carolina Aggregates Association (NCAA) is submitting the following comments for
the draft NCG02000 NPDES Stormwater General Permit that will be effective on October 1,
2020.
Page 4, Section B-6 (Mining Permit)
The permit requires that a copy of the first page of the mining permit, the approved erosion and
sedimentation plan, and the approved reclamation plan be in the SWPPP. The new NCG02
permit should only require the mining permit's first page in the SWPPP. The erosion and
sedimentation and reclamation plans are already onsite or available when requested, so we do not
see the need to have this additional information in the SWPPP.
Page 10, Section C-8 (Upsets) and C-9 (Required Notice for Bypass or Upset)
For unanticipated bypass or upset, NCAA has voiced our concerns about the unnecessary delays
in allowing the operator to begin pumping flood water from the pit. Below are bullet points that
we would like to have in the technical bulletin that helps to clarify the intend of the permit
language.
• Upsets may occur as a result of large named and unnamed storm events that result in
heavy rainfall and associated flooding over a short period of time that are outside of
the permittee's control.
• Such trapped rainfall or flood water must be removed from the mine pit as soon as
possible after the storm event ends in order for the permittee to return to normal
operations.
• Once the permittee provides notice of the Upset to DEMLR's regional office and its
plan to remove/pump the trapped rainfall or flood water from its mine pit in the most
practical and environmental protective manner possible, DEMLR regional office staff
should have the authority to review the plan and grant, in writing, this temporary

JISUNROCK�
CAROLINA SUNROCK LLC
deviation from the permit's standard operating and monitoring conditions for an
agreed upon time period until the operation returns to normal operating conditions.
Page 2 - Public Comments for the Draft NPDES Stormwater General Permit - NCG020000
• Once the operation returns to normal operating conditions, all standard operating and
monitoring conditions of the permit will apply.
Page 12, Section D-3 (Renewal of Dormant Status)
This section references "for a period of one year or less". No other section under "Inactive
Mine/ Dormant Status refers to a time frame of one year or less. This language needs to be
removed from this section.
Page 18, Section F-5 (Exceedance of In -Stream Water Quality Standard for Turbidity)
Of the 21 Stormwater General Permits issued, NCG02 is currently the ONLY permit that even
mentions turbidity. The proposed new NCG25 permit mentions turbidity, but there is no
standard or limit given.
The current NCG02 permit separates the turbidity benchmark and tiered response from other
parameters, and although the benchmarks of 50, 25, and 10 are given, the tiered response for
turbidity states:
"If the first valid sampling result required for the monitoring period is above the turbidity
benchmark at any outfall, and the permittee cannot demonstrate the discharge has not caused or
contributed to a Water Quality Standard violation with up- and downstream samplingresults,
esults,
then the permittee shall:..."
That means if the benchmark for turbidity is exceeded, then the tiered response is only required
if the permittee cannot demonstrate compliance with the Water Quality Standard. If the
permittee can demonstrate compliance with the Water Quality Standard by sampling upstream
and downstream, then the burdensome tiered response (which only addresses turbidity
specifically in Tier Two) should not be required. Doing so has the potential for stormwater
outfalls with higher turbidity levels likely caused by natural soil types (which are also likely to
exist in the receiving stream) to remain indefinitely in monthly Tier Two monitoring.
The simple solution is to list turbidity on the benchmark table the same way it is listed on the
Effluent Limitations table on page 25 of the Draft NCG02 permit, with the note "See F-5,"
Or
Keep the language from the current permit as mentioned above that only applies when the
benchmark is exceeded and compliance with the Water Quality Standard cannot be
demonstrated.
Page 19, 20, and 22. Table 5 (Tier One Response for a Benchmark Exceedance), Table 6
(Tier Two Response for Two Consecutive Benchmark Exceedances), Table 7 (Tier Three
Response for Four Benchmark Exceedances Within Five Years)
Page 2 of 3

JISUNROCK�
CAROLINA SUNROCK LLC
The "Timeline from Receipt of Sampling Results" requires within two weeks for the permittee to
notify the Division's Regional Office of the exceedance date and value. The current permit does
not have a timeline. Revise the timeline to one month for the new permit.
Page 24. Section H-1 (Analytical Monitoring of Wastewater Discharges)
If a facility has achieved semi-annual monitoring under the current permit, the facility should not
have to go back to quarterly sampling because a new general permit was issued. Clarify that
semiannual monitoring of wastewater can continue when the new permit becomes effective.
Page 3 - Public Comments for the Draft NPDES Stormwater General Permit - NCG020000
Page 28. Section I-1 (Submittal of Discharge Monitoring Reports)
The draft permit requires submittal of the DMR within 30 days of receiving the sample results.
If you are required to report within two weeks that you have an exceedance, then why have a
requirement that DMR's shall be submitted within 30 days of receiving the sample results. With
the proposed sample results deadline being a variable due date, instead of a constant due date,
this will create an administrative challenge to ensure that all results are submitted within the 30-
day reporting timeframe. NCAA recommends that the samples should be due 30 days after the
sampling period ends. If the Department wants the results before the sampling period ends, then
we recommend that the Department compile the DMR's, since the Department will already have
this data.
Page 28. Section I-8 (Submittal Process before Electronic Discharge Monitoring
Reporting)
The new permit requires the operator to electronically submit the report and mail the original
report as well. This seems to be redundant; the electronic report should suffice. The courts have
ruled that electronic documents are legal documents, so why does DEQ need the original
document mailed to the regional office. If the regional office needs a copy of the report, they can
receive an electronic copy, as well.
The previous NCG020000 permits have allowed six months for the industry to implement the
new requirements. NCAA is requesting that the same implementation period be applied for this
permit.
Thank -you for the opportunity to submit comments on the draft NCG02000 draft permit.
Sincerely
Scott Martino
Page 3 of 3