NCS000122_HISTORICAL FILE_20200922

STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET
NCS PERMITS
PERMIT NO.
N CS OOOl22
DOC TYPE
❑ FINAL PERMIT
❑ MONITORING REPORTS
❑ APPLICATION
❑ COMPLIANCE
U OTHER +AlSTor-1 CA-u INFov-r ATi [)M
DOC DATE
❑ 2(D Z009 22
YYYYMMDD

March 15, 2013
Mr. Robert Patterson
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
RE: Outfall 001 Best Management Practices Implementation, General Timber Facility, Sanford,
North' Carolina (NCS000122)D'
FILE:49305
Dear Mr. Patterson:
The purpose of this letter is to document the implementation of the Best Management Practice (BMP) associated
with'the National Pollution. Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (NCS000122) for the General Timber
Facility in Sanford, North Carolina. The purpose of this BMP is to address elevated capper concentrations that
have been detected in stormwater at one of the permitted outfalls (Outfall 001), The sections that follow
provide an overview of the background, planning and design, and Implementation of this BMP.
BACKGROUND
The General Timber Facility pressure treats lumber with two types of preservatives, creosote and Chromated
Copper Arsenate (CCA). After treatment, lumber is stored uncovered to complete the passive curing process
prior to being hauled offsite for distribution. The drainage area contributing,stormwater to Outfall 001 consists
of a portion of this treated lumber storage yard, a wooded area and farm field. The portion of the storage yard
that drains to Outfall 001 is used exclusively for the storage of CCA treated lumber.
Outfall 001 have exceeded the permit benchmark value for total
Ai
EVALUATION &'DESIGN
General Timber's historical stormwater discharge monitoring reports indicate the pH at,Outfall 001 has ranged
between 4.2 and 5:6 Standard Units (SU). Acidic stormwater is often accompanied by acidic soil. For many soil
types, a soil can have,a greater capacity to adsorb cations, such as copper, at neutral pH, as opposed to an
acidic pH. Additionally, the solubility of copper is greater in water at a lower pH -than at a neutral. l For these
reasons, pH plays an important role,in the mobilization of copper. The pli rain local to General Timber and
the buffering capacity of native soils were researched to evaluate if acid stormwater was naturally occurring or
caused by General Timber's operations: .The 2007 Ambient Air Quality Report by the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources reveals that the average pH of rainfall in counties local to the General
Timber Facility range from 4.7 to 5.0 SU (consistent with the range of pH detected in stormwater. from Outfall
001). The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) web soil survey for the area contributing stormwater
to Outfa11001 reveals that shallow soils are devoid of calcium carbonate (buffering capacity). These findings,
2610 Wycliff Road, Suite 104, Raleigh, NC 27607 1 p 919-783-7777 1 f 919-783-0757 1 www.obg_com
Engineering and Project Delivery Solutions

Mr. Robert Patterson
March 15, 2013
Page 2
O 2013 O'Brien g Gere. NI Rights Reserved.
coupled with General Timber's measures to abide by their SWPPP; indicate that acidic stormwater is likely
naturally occurring;
Based on this evaluation, O'Brien & Gere developed a plan to perform agricultural soil analyses of topsoil from
the lumber storage yard within the drainage area to Outfall 001. An agricultural soil analysis provides a lime
dosing recommendation to increase soil pH. Soil samples were required for the analyses, therefore,'a sampling
scheme was developed to identify potential variations in lime dosing, if any. Initially, the USDA web soil survey
was reviewed to identify if there were documented differences in the soil in the area. this'review identified two
types of topsoil in the lumber. storage yard within the drainage area to Outfall 001 (Figure 1). Because the two
soil types are very similar, especially in te'r isof cation exchange capacity and lack of calcium carbonate, it was
- _ - -- .....- __
-
Instead, 0 Brien &Gere selected sampling locations based on the difference in use and appearance of the topsoil.
If was suspected, based'on field observation,-tliat there was a difference in the organic content betweenthe
roadways and swales resulting from disparities in vegetative cover. Therefore, O'Brien & Gere collected a
composite sample of roadway soil, and a,separate composite sample of swale soil.
Samples were collected from the top flinches of soil based on the understanding that this interval will have the
strongest influence on stormwater pH and copper concentration. Further based on this understanding, it was
deemed suitable to apply lime io the surface of the lumberyard, as opposed to disking it into the soil. Disking is
used in agricultural.applications where an increase in soil pH is desired at depths greater than 4-inches. In
addition to providing little benefit with regard to storm water, disking was also excluded because of the
potential negative impact on erosion and sediment runoff from the area. The North Carolina Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services recommends that a composite sample from the top 4-inches consist of soil
from 10 to 12 locations. Based on this recommendation, O'Brien and Gere selected 10 locations to generate a
composite swale sample, and 11 locations to generate a,composite roadway sample (Figure 2).
The composite samples were collected and sent to Waters Agricultural laboratories, Inc., Camilla, GA for
analysis. Testing results revealed that Elie initial pH of both soil samples was 5.0 SU. For many soils, the ability
to adsorb dissolved copper cations will increase from a pH of 5 to a ph of 7. For. this reason, the analytical
laboratory; was requested to determine the dosage o€lime required to increase the pH of each soil samplelto 7.0
SU. Testing results recommended a lime application rate of 0.5 tons/acre for the roadways, and 1:5 tons/acre
for the swales in order to achieve the:target soil -pH of 7 SU.
IMPLEMENTATION
On October 24, 2012 General timber applied agricultural lime as recommended by O'Brien & Gere (Figure 2).
O'Brien & Gere observed the application process to document its completion. The prescribed masses of
agricultural lime were:loaded into an open -box bed truck Within the open -box, augers fed lime to spreaders.
The distribution of lime was controlled by driving the truck throughout the lumber storage area. Pelletized
agricultural.lime was used in order to prevent transport by wind. Several `photographs were taken during the
application to document the process (Attachment 2).
An increase in soil pH is not expected to occur until one to two years after the initial lime application, with a
consequent decrease in the concentratitin of copper. in stormwater After -the (nt to two year time frame, the pH
of the soil is expected to gradually return to irs'natural acidic condition (around pH 5) if lime is not reapplied.
General Timber will continue to collect storm water samples semiannually as required in'the facility's NPDES
permit The data From this monitoring will be evaluated to assess the effectiveness of the BMP, and
modifications will be recommended, as necessary.
2610 Wycliff Road, Suite Sb4, Raleigh, NC 27607 1 p 919-783-7777 1 f 919-783-0757 1 www.obg.com
360' Engineering and Project Delivery Solutions

Mr. Robert Patterson
March 13, 2013 0 7013 a8rien & fore- All Rights Rnelel.
Page 3
{
A copy of this letter and its supporting attachments will be kept at the General Timber Facility for inclusion in
the SWPPP as required by the NPDES permit. Please contact m_ a if you have any questions or comments
regarding this submittal.
Sincerely,
t'
O'BRIEN & GERE ENGINEERS, INC
Jason Lewandowski
Engineer If
Attachments: Figure 1- Soil Map
Figure 2 - Soil Sample Locations & Lime Application Map
Attachment 1—Soil Analysis Reports
Attachment 2 - Lime Application Photographic Log
Cc: Arc Williams, General Timber
Greg Williams, General Timber
I
2610 Wycliff Road, Suite 104, Raleigh, NC 27607 1 P 919-783 7777 1 f 919-783-0757 1 w w.obg.coln
360- Engineering and Prolea Delivery Solutions

FIGURE 2
17v.' Composite sample
locations for
$wale soil sample
Composite sample
03 locations for
roadway soil sample.
QSwale, area
( 4 tons of lime
total)
Roadway area
( 1 Mons of lime
total)
Approximate
property
boundary
General Timber, Inc.
STORMWATER SOIL
.SAMPLE LOCATIONS
.IME:APPLICATION MAP
L0 1QORIENEGERE

{\
Waters Agricultural Laboratories, Inc.
A RS' ICE RAl
P.O. Box 382 257 Newton Hwy Camilla. G 317M
((
Im�vovin.�C�rotvt :..
[phone] FAX [phone]
WLa1�SCiLPiYLC.P/�
SON AmolosIs
s IY,
FCh
Grower: GERNERAL TEMBON
Received: 07/20/2012
Farm ID:
Processed: 07/24/2012
P.O. BOX 667
SamplE ID: t`SWL`
Account #: 10358
RAEFORD; NC 28376
- - - - - - - — -
-- _ - Lab Resultii - --
-- Target pH: 7
Lab NumbEr: 821781TC
Ibz: per Aar
Test Method: Mehlich III
— P
�e K
Mg --
-
Ca -
+;;
I _
Sell H?
Buffer H
5
B)
in
=
Min 1f
', Fe"
Cu
Ph ,hm
Pptasalum-
i Maenaeium
[olrmn.
P
P
r5ulM:
Boron I,
ihicc
Me,pvxs y
leirn_
_ Cmm,
7103 A '
198 M
` 180' A
997 M
r'6.0=�
_ 7.40
—� --=
- 27 M
c --— tt
0.44 .L
—•-�—
22:3 VH,
w
`47 M
393' H
17a.0 yH
,
Aluminum
Sotllum
NIVad N(,
spivge Salta
Oryalc Matter
ENp
�t
1.97 %
39:4i
,f fffl ty iifGO11111mdat1011s
Crop: SOYBEANS lbw per Acm Yield:
ume=,
Ta
m_
oy su
iTns/.
NhNp
_
. n�
;
N--c5--I
g
Mo�ealum
--`S
u
Cppp<r
1.5
20
- 40
120
-
* = Maintenance Recommendation
Comments: .. .
NITROGEN SHOULD BE EXCLUDED IF FERTILIZER APPLICATION IS MADE MORE THAN 4 WEEKS PRIOR TO
PLANTING AS NITROGEN EFFICIENCY WILL BE DIMINISHED.

(1
Waters Agricultural Laboratories, Inc.
WAi RSW IC�L, RA4,
:. L'A OR IES R
P.O. Box 362 257 Newton Hwy Camilla, GA 31730
[phone] FAX [phone]
"TnV &vto,
1 Yr�"�YQf1�"'�•"
'F.CI
Grower: GERNERAL TEMBON
Received: 07/20/2012
Farm -ID:
Processed: 07/25/2012
P.O. BOX 667
Sa_mpIdID: RQW
Account#: 10358
I RAEFORD, NC 28376•
I
- -
_ _
lab Results r - --'
- - = Target pH: 7 ..
Lab Number: 821782TC
1h& Doti A[M ,
T..+ Mc+hm. Mehlirh 111
Mg
Ca
_
S;
B
Zn
Mn ,
Fe
Cu
'PhosPharya
r Potassium ,i
Mae nealwth�
,Celalum
Soil H
P
Buff6r
_ pR
- r'.•
5ulhn•
I, -,
,Btten!;
2b
,Manpawsil
Iran, _
CODDer�._.
698 M
6,.A
7.6-0
84, Hill
020 L'
6-d ,A;
30 L
200',A
;28:9 VH
ANmawm)v
SDeilan; „
NltretaN
9oIPDle Salta
'OpaNP Matta
0.4, 0/co
'8i
Very
High
H4h
Adequate
M mun
Low
Crop SOYBEANS
Soil Analysis Ratings
frrNlity Rem. manclations
lbs. Mr Acre Yield.
Cation Eacharga
Caeadty.
3.9 maon000
Base Saturation
K:
2.3 %
Mg;
10.9 %
Ca:
45.3 %
H;
41.5' %
Na:
%
Bass Saturation
14
®XMg
Ume
syr
i ; N
P205
1<20 '
Mg,
Zn
Mn
Fe
Cu
T Aur
itT na/M'a�
Ntiapen
PhoclMate,
Potash
mwtevu
ILStifw
Baiq'I
a2ini'
Manpanna
Iron,
_ COPPer�
0 5
'
20.�_
70
250
10
;5
1.0
` 1.0
=5
- --
h—
f_
_
COmmEntS: • Maintenance RECOrvnendatlo6
NITROGEN SHOULD BE EXCLUDED IF FERTILIZER APPLICATION IS MADE MORE THAN 4 WEEKS PRIOR TO
PLANTING AS NITROGEN EFFICIENCY WILL BE DIMINISHED. If bolomite Lime has been applied recently -
Magnesium recommendation can be cut in half.
ti
9

General Timber
PHOTO NO. i DATE:
10/24/12
DESCRIPTION
Roadway application along
northern 'side of lumber
yard.
S1TE LOCATION:
General Timber, Sanford, NC
PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
49305
CLIENT NAME:
General Timber
SITE LOCATION:
General Timber, Sanford, NC
PROIECT NCIJ
49305
PHOTO 140.
DATE:
w. . trj {"r' H•,�.jj� y° a .rr
1
DESCRIPTION
VIM— pl-
of pelletized
o- ;-Close-up
S'r�}
v
lye
r I March13. ber. 0 ®BRIENISIDERE
I:\General-Timber15082\49305.AnnuabServices\Dots\Reports\lime Documentation
ocumeation Memo Fall 2012Wttachment 4_phota log.d
I

' -.. a'' W
a
e
F

Patterson, Robert
From: Rachel Burris [[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 1:37 PM
To: Patterson, Robert
Subject: RE: NCS000122 renewal
Thank you for checking on the status of the renewal documentation. We'll let the permittee know to watch for the
renewal forms in the mail in the coming weeks.
G O'ORIEN G GERE
Raehel Burris, PE
PROJECT ENGINEER
O'BRIEN & GERE
2610 Wycliff Road, Suite 104
Raleigh, NC 27607
p 919-783-7777 l f 919-783-0757
direct Extension 32
[e-mail] www.obg.com
From: Patterson, Robert [mailto:robert.oatterson( ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 1:24 PM
To: Rachel Burris
Subject: NCS000122 renewal
Rachel,
I checked, and we have not yet mailed out the renewal info for that one. We usually process them in batches
approximately 6 months before they expire; so this one should be in the next batch. We are currently behind on getting
these mailed out though. It will be mailed directly to the permittee we have on file (Clement Williams, 625 Farmville
Mine Rd., Sanford, INC 27330).
The typical items that will need to be submitted for the renewal include: a signed application (form provided by DWQ),
updated site map, analytical monitoring results summary, visual monitoring results summary, Best Management
Practices summary, narrative describing significant changes at the permitted facility since previous renewal, signed
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan certification (form provided by DWQ), and summary of response to monitoring
results.
The 2 forms listed above are personalized for each permit, so I don't have a "generic" form that I can send until we do
the batch process. You can look at the renewal supplemental sheet on our website:
http://Portal.ncdenr.org/c/document library/get file?uuid=4da619el-a7f3-45eb-a3el-dba9385147a3&groupld=38364
Please let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks.
Robert D. Patterson, PE
Environmental Engineer
NCDENR I DWQ I Stormwater Permitting
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Mail 1 512 N. Salisbury St, 9� Floor, Raleigh, NC 27604 I.ocation & Parcels

[phone] Phone [phone] Fax I Robert. Pattersoripnedenr.eov Email I http://T)ortal.ncdenr.org/web/wn/ws/su Websile
sA Before printing this email, please consider your budget and the environment.
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties unless the content is
exempt by statute or other regulation.
This email, including any
attachment(s) to it, is confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is
addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender. Note that any views or opinions
presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not represent those of O'Brien & Gere. O'Brien &
Gere does not accept liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. The recipient
should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses.

®-iVF,
NC® NR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, P.E.
Governor Director
V II GIi WI
May 10, 2012
Mr. Michael S. Hall, PG
O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc.
2610 Wycliff Rd., Ste.104
Raleigh, NC 27607
Subject: BMP Plan Approval
Permit No. NCS000122
General Timber, Inc.
Chatham County
Dear Mr. Hall:
Dee Freeman
Seth etary
The Division of Water Quality is in receipt of your April 17, 2012 letter and proposed BMP plan for
reducing Copper in the stormwater runoff at the subject facility. Please take this letter as Division's
approval for General Timber to move forward with the proposed plan.
If you have any questions or comments concerning this permit, contact me at [phone] or at
[e-mail].
Sincerely,
Robert D. Patterson, PE
Stormwater Permitting Unit
cc: Art Williams - General Timber
Raleigh Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Stormwater Permitting Unit)
Central Files
Wetlands and Stonwater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX [phone]
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
Olio.
NorthCarolina
,lVaturallry

0 3` 0-13RIEN 6 GERE
@@Ro
April 17, 2012
APR ? 0 2012
Mr. Robert Patterson
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
WDENR .WATER
nde6QUA
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
an
RE: Evaluation of Outfall 001 Best Management Practices, General Timber Facility, Sanford, North
Carolina (NCS000122)
FILE: 47584
Dear Mr. Patterson:
The purpose of this letter is to provide an overview of the proposed Best Management Practice (BMP) to be
applied at the General Timber Facility in Sanford, North Carolina. The BMP is required by General Timber's
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (NCS000122). Concentrations of total
recoverable copper detected in the stormwater samples collected from the discharge from Outfall 001 have
consistently exceeded the benchmark value assigned in Table 3 of the NPDES permit. The objective of the BMP
is to bring discharges from Outfall 001 into compliance with benchmark values assigned to total recoverable
copper.
O'Brien & Gere performed an inspection of the existing BMPs on October 26, 2010. On August 4, 2011 O'Brien &
Gere submitted an Evaluation of Outfall 001 Best Management Practices letter recommending that the
concentration of dissolved copper and the concentration of suspended copper be determined at Outfall 001 in
order to design an effective BMP. This characterization was performed in September of 2011, and the results
have been used to develop a conceptual approach to the design and implementation of an improved BMP. The
sections that follow describe the conditions observed at Outfall 001 during our inspection, and a description of a
potential approach for the redesign of this BMP.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT INSPECTION SUMMARY
Outfall 001 is located on the southeastern corner of the General Timber Property (Figure 1). The BMP installed
in Outfall 001 consists of a v-notch plate steel weir across the primary drainage Swale preceded by a single span
of hay bales supported by vertical reinforcing steel bars (Attachment 1). At the time of the inspection, half of the
hay bales were missing, presumably washed out by stormwater flow. Similar conditions were also observed on
August 24, 2010 during stormwater sampling. These conditions were reported to General Timber, and the BMP
was subsequently repaired in September 2010.
The Swale in which the BMP is installed is wide, shallow, straight and weedy, with pines on the southern bank.
The total drainage area contributing to Outfall 001 covers approximately 7.6 acres. Approximately 41% of the
total drainage area for Outfall 001 comes from a treated lumber storage area located to the west of Outfall 001
(Figure 1). The remainder of the drainage comes from the forested area, and farm fields to the southeast. The
storage yard is used predominantly for the storage of Chromated Copper Arsenate (CCA) treated lumber,
although there are a few isolated areas of creosote treated lumber. The storage yard is unpaved, and between
each storage row is a 1-ft to 2-ft deep Swale which quickly channelizes runoff in the yard, leaving little
opportunity for sheet flow to establish. This channelized flow is carried to clay pipes under the access road
which subsequently enters two swales that converge and discharge through Outfall 001.
POTENTIAL SOURCES OF TOTAL RECOVERABLE COPPER
It is suspected that the total recoverable copper detected at Outfall 001 may be derived from naturally occurring
copper in native soil within the drainage area, or from copper used in General timber's manufacturing process,
or a combination thereof. Historical soil sampling results indicate that copper is present in background soil, free
from potential influences of General Timber's manufacturing processes (Table 1). Rain events have the potential
2610 Wycliff Road, Suite 104, Raleigh, NC 27607 1 p 919-783-7777 1 f 919-783-0757 1 www,obg.com
360° Engineering and Project Delivery Solutions

Mr. Robert Patterson
April 17, 2012 © 2012 O'Brien & Gere. All Rights Reserved.
Page 2
to transport this naturally occurring copper from the soil, to surface water at the outfall. In addition, it is well
documented that CCA treated lumber often releases copper to adjacent soil. Historical soil sampling results
�I indicate that copper concentrations in soil within the CCA treated lumber storage are not significantly greater
F than those measured in the background soil (Table 1). This analysis indicates that if copper was transferred
A from CCA treated lumber to the environment, it has not accumulated in the neighboring soil. It is possible that if
copper is released from CCA lumber piles, it is continuously Flushed out of the soil during rain events, and
carried away by stormwater.
J
COPPER MOBILIZATION
II- It is suspected that acidic rain enables the transport of copper from the drainage area to Ou fall 001. The pH of
rainfall in Central North Carolina is typically between 4 and 5 Standard Units (SU). The Chatham County Sow L r
Survey (United States Department of Agriculture, 2006) indicates that soil in the drainage area contri uttng to
Outfall 001 is void of calcium carbonate. As a consequence, the native soil has limited ability to buffer the acid
N C 0 rain. This is evident in historical stormwater discharge monitoring reports for general Timber that show how
43 I the pH at Outfall 001 has remained between 4.2 and 5.6 SU. Byproducts of decomposing vegetation in the forest
oand arm fields that discharge through this outfall may also contribute to the acidity of stormwater. The low pH
rain has the ability to release copper ions adsorbed to the surface of soil particles and dissolve solid complexes
O? of copper. Once dissolved, copper ions are free to be carried by stormwater flow to Outfall 001.
J RECOMMENDED PLAN FOR STORMWATER BMP DESIGN AND INSTALLATION
v
In September 2011, General Timber analyzed stormwater samples from Outfall 001 for both total recoverable,
and dissolved copper. Results for these analyses indicated a dissolved copper concentration of 0.0229 mg/L and
i- �_ a total recoverable copper concentration of 0.0301 mg/L. The difference between the total copper and dissolved
copper concentrations represents a suspended copper concentration of 0.0072 mg/L. General Timber's NPDES
a permit benchmark value for total recoverable copper is 0.007 mg/L. As required in the permit, General Timber
must implement BMPs to bring the total recoverable copper concentration below the benchmark range.
Effective BMPs, therefore, must address both dissolved and suspended copper at Outfall 001.
Based on these conditions, our recommended BMP is to apply agricultural lime to the treated lumber storage
area within the drainage area to Outfall 001. This BMP is intended to increase the stormwater pH and reduce
the total recoverable copper concentration at Outfall 001. An increase in the stormwater pH can enhance the
adsorption of dissolved copper to the native soil, and reduce the total copper concentration reaching Outfall 001.
Additionally, an increase in the stormwater pH will promote the precipitation of dissolved copper. Precipitated
copper is susceptible to settling out of the stormwater Flow, potentially producing further reductions in the total
copper reaching Outfall 001.
O'Brien and Gere recommends the following steps for implementing agricultural lime treatment:
1) Perform a survey to identify the type and location of soil types present in the treated lumber storage area
in the drainage area contributing to Outfall 001.
2) Submit soil samples to the North Carolina Department of Agriculture (NCDA) to determine the quantity
and frequency of agricultural lime application required to maintain a minimum soil pH of 7.0. One soil
sample should be submitted for each soil type identified during the survey
3) Apply agricultural lime as recommend by NCDA. Lime application rates will be tailored to the specific soil
types.
4) Continue regular semiannual stormwater monitoring for a period of two years following the
implementation of the BMP, as specified in the NPDES Permit. Evaluate the total recoverable copper
results for the semiannual sampling from Outfall 001 to determine if the benchmark value specified in the
NPDES Permit (0.007 mg/L) has been achieved. ,gwlt -S
lv4ihl f}�MP�u✓� -ro
?L 4V rftvAl g�S/It �ivrr►si2
2610 Wycliff Road, Suite 104, Raleigh, NC 27607 1 p 919-783-7777 1 f 919-783-0757 1 www.obg.com
360' Engineering and Project Delivery Solutions

Mr. Robert Patterson
April 17, 2012 ® 2012 O'Brien & Gere. All Rights Reserved,
Page 3
5) During this period, General Timber will maintain the existing BMP, to assist with reduction of suspended
copper.
Based on the evaluation of the data obtained over two years, General Timber will assess the effectiveness of the
proposed BMP, and as necessary, recommend modifications. Please contact me if you have any questions or
comments regarding this proposal.
Sincerely,
O'BRIEN & GERE ENGINEERS, INC.
A" //Y
Michael S. Hall, PG
Managing Scientist
Attachments: Attachment 1 - Existing Outfall 001 BMP
Figure 1 - Outfall 001 BMP and Drainage Area Inspection and Evaluation
Table 1—Summary of Historical Soil Analytical Results
Cc: Art Williams, General Timber
Greg Williams, General Timber
2610 Wycliff Road, Suite 104, Raleigh, NC 27607 1 P 919-783-7777 1 f 919-783-0757 1 www.obg.com
360` Engineering and Project Delivery Solutions

r4 rix
W-Z
Z
I
RL

r •'u
U 1
• �'tl � Via. �'}
4 . R
JF- D STING TREATED
LUMBER STORAGE AREA +SFn
et5 '�3."� I� It YlA i%.,,'�J i�t' ,����..• �'
1511NC TREATED,f• It/ IXISDNG SfORW PIPE,
ER STORAGE AREA#i{5f ET �r }yf�n �.��l y'y]a�(�''���'
v J
a ;"I
-,1+ GI""'f•# Iv r '� �� ITi OVTFALL 001 '' iQ i�•j'_ .e `� ^ "'.:..
If
41,�
�40 Q' ( ORNNACpE MFA BOVNOARI
f;���.��� Pry _..•�I- �'- h.�,rk �.. -. -....,
IA
11 • l 1 ,. f 1 1,,� Y .i i - i I,
—._....i_.isltl..��A.�i1' ,• I n N, �.�\1C..6 I `W�+
Figure 1
100 0 ,
GENERAL TIMBER, INC.
625 FARMVILLE COAL MINE R
SANFORD, NC 27330
OUTFACE 001
BMP AND DRAINAGE
AREA INSPECTION
AND EVAWAnON
FILE NO. 15082.I6850.200
.HN , 2011
. ® GBABWti6
- ENGINEERS INC.

Table 1
Historic Soil Samples - 2005
General Timber
Sanford, North Carolina
Constituent
EPA RSLtion
Industrial Soil;Groundwater
mg/kg
amg/kg
ple
Background Soil Samples
BG-1
BG-1
BG-2
BG-2
BG-3
BG-3
e Depth
2"
3.5"
2"3.5"
2"
3.5"
Arsenic
1.6
/kg
3.03-
'3.79t'i
6:51'-;
2.08t-'
"'4.13'
"7.16
Chromium
1500000
/kg
22.4
22.4
32
9.45Copper
41000
/kg
8.19
9.45
11.8
4.00
26.5
19.40
I ql QrL LA`f IO'V 70 (71--'. 7
Constituent
EPA RSL
Industrial Soil
mg/kg
NC Soil to
Groundwater mg/kg
Sample
Location
Stacking Yard (SWMU 27) Samples
SA-1-1
SA-1-2
SA-1-3
SA-1-4
HS-1
Hit
Sample Depth
0"-4"
4.4-
0"1"
4"-8"
0"-0"
4"-8"
0"-0"
4"-8"
0"-0"
4"-8"
8"-12"
0"-4"
Arsenic
1.6
5.8
mg/kg
.99.9 .
', ,5.76:,,t
-5.43t
2.05!:r
'726i30 n'.
1.31
"12:10°.
NA
"��14:00.1
1.56
3:59t'-"
m 22i10'"
BqL
BQL
Chromium
1500000
360000
mg/kg
89.5
9.26
45.10
8.96
32.00
9.82
18.30
NA
12.50
11.20
24.40
18.60
5.68
8.23
Copper
41000
700
mg/kg
53.2
6.76
6.26
2.16
I6.00
2.92
9.87
NA
12.40
3.80
9.94
13.70
3.56
3.Ifi
BQL - Below quantitation limit
NA- Not analyzed
Constituent in excess of the NC Soil to Groundwater Value and the EPA RSL Industrial Soil Value
' Constituent is in excess of the EPA RSL Industrial Soil value but below the NC Soil to Groundwater Value
I:\Genenl-nmber.15012%47584 cenerwYlmber\o«s\aeynASW 0utbll teller\TWet-Niaoriul Soil Barn en4-s2012A,

TO: Mr. Robert Patterson
North Carolina Divison of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
WE ARE SENDING YOU:
X herewith under separate cover drawings
If material received is not as listed, please notify us at once.
DATE: August 5, 2011
FILE: 47584
RE: General Timber Site - Best
Management Practices
descriptive literature letters
1 Letter Evaluation of Best Management Practices Y
*Action letter code: R-reviewed N-reviewed and noted
S-resubmit J-rejected
REMARKS:
Mr. Patterson
Following your review of this letter, we would like to
have a discussion with you regarding the BMP at the
General Timber Site. Please feel free to contact me at
919-783-7777 with any questions.
CC: Art Williams, General Timber
Greg Williams, General Timber
Chad Simmons, O'Brien & Gere, Inc.
CONFIDENTIALITY
/ foryour information
Y foryour approval
Sincerely,
Michael S. Hall, PG
Managing Scientist
This material is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain
confidential information belonging to the sender. Ifyou are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this
information is strictly prohibited. Ifyou have received this material in error lease immediately notify us by
telephone to arrange for the return of these docume ,_, f.2 nMra n
2610 Wycliff Road, Suite 104, Raleigh, NC 27607 i p 919-783-7777 i f 919-783.0757 i 6&jg' ro
360' Engineering and Project Delivery Solutions 1
© O'DRIEN 6 GERE

4/. $Q'ccr r l lrct (�
' /IlT itl6✓D
TµgT Th,S wo""> 3L I Go,jj
ST9,eT , TWBY l✓rr.L BQ PKac�,ra�.
AS `P'W -fqi S PLAN r AA-D
IVI LL Sz vD 'bwa kpj> +T-,r5
45 fA-Vv41 L o g L.oe, 171 b RS/1>5
'7rLST rat% /�� Pa�.tN� 16'O
�n/L(t-aai4'S2� ,a4-r ScN/c�r�T
K
s
i
/

® O'BRICN E GCRC
August 4,2011
Mr. Robert Patterson
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
RE: Evaluation of Outfall 001 Best Management Practices
FILE: 46850
Dear Mr. Patterson:
Testing of storm water samples taken from Outfall 001 on August 24, 2010 indicated levels of recoverable
copper exceeding that required in Table 3 of General Timber's North Carolina National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System NPDES permit (NCS000122). Analytical results for historical sampling from this outfall have
had similar exceedances. Based on this, the NPDES permit has a specific requirement for General Timber to
evaluate the best management practices (BMPs) associated with this outfall, and design and implement an
improved BMP that will reduce the concentration of copper in the discharge from Outfall 001. O'Brien & Gere
performed an inspection of the existing BMPs on October 26, 2010, and has developed several conceptual
approaches to the design and implementation of an improved BMP. The sections that follow describe the
conditions observed at Outfall 001 during our inspection, and a description of potential approaches to the
redesign on this BMP.
CONDITION OF EXISTING OUTFALL 001 BMP
Outfall 001 is located on the Southeastern corner of the General Timber Property (Figure 1) The BMP installed
in Outfall 001 consists of a v-notch plate steel weir across the primary drainage Swale preceded by a single span
of hay bales supported by vertical reinforcing steel bars (Attachment 1). At the time of the inspection, half of the
hay bales were missing, presumably washed out by stormwater Flow. Similar conditions were also observed on
August 20, 2010 during stormwater sampling. These conditions were reported to General Timber, and the BMP
was subsequently repaired in September 2010.
The swale in which the BMP is installed is wide, shallow, straight and weedy, with pines on the southern bank.
The total drainage area contributing to Outfall 001 covers approximately 7.6 acres. Approximately 41% of the
total drainage area for Outfall 001 comes from a treated lumber storage area located to the west of Outfall 001
(Figure 1). The remainder of the drainage comes from the forested area, and farm fields to the southeast. The
storage yard is used predominantly for the storage of chrome, copper, arsenate (CCA) treated lumber, although
there are a few isolated areas of creosote treated lumber. The storage yard is unpaved, and between each
storage row is a 1-11 to 2-ft deep swale which quickly channelizes runoff in the yard, leaving little opportunity for
sheet flow to establish. This channelized Flow is carried to clay pipes under the access road which subsequently
enters two swales that ultimately converge and discharge through Outfall 001.
POTENTIAL SOURCES OF ELEVATED LEVELS OF TOTAL RECOVERABLE COPPER
It is suspected that the elevated copper detected at Outfall 001 may be derived from the runoff from the CCA
lumber storage area. If so, the copper is likely adsorbed to sediment, but may also be present in dissolved phase.
In 2010, O'Brien & Gere collected sediment and surface water samples downstream of Outfall 001. This
investigation was performed to support the evaluation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Environmental Indicators for the facility, and did not identify any impact to surface water and sediment as a
result of stormwater discharges from Outfall 001. No semivolatile organic constituents were detected in surface
water or sediment, nor were any metals detected in surface water. Arsenic, chrome and copper were detected in
the sediment, but at concentrations consistent with naturally -occurring levels. The results of this investigation
are described in detail in the Stream Surface Water and Sediment Monitoring Report, General Timber, Inc.,
Sanford, North Carolina Facility (O'Brien & Gere, February 2011).
2610 Wycliff Road, Suite 104, Raleigh, NC 27607 1 p 919-783-7777 1 f 919-783-0757 1 www.obg.com
360° Engineering and Project Delivery Solutions

Mr. Robert Patterson
August 4, 2011 0 2011 O'Brien & Gere. All Rights Reserved.
Page 2
RECOMMENDED PLAN FOR STORMWATER BMP DESIGN AND INSTALLATION
Based on our current understanding of conditions, we anticipate that the elevated copper concentrations in the
stormwater are the result of suspended sediment; however, we currently have no data to confirm this. This
information is critical to the design of an effective BMP; therefore, we recommend additional characterization of
the stormwater prior to design. Specifically, we recommend collection and analysis of an additional surface
water sample as part of the regular semiannual monitoring at Outfall 001This sample will be filtered prior to
laboratory analysis for copper, and will therefore provide an indication if the elevated copper is the result of
suspended or dissolved -phase copper.
If, as anticipated, the elevated copper is the result of suspended sediment, our recommended BMP is polymer
enhanced fiber filtration tubes; however, this may be changed based on the results of the additional
characterization of stormwater. If confirmed, O'Brien & Gere will design and install the filtration tubes, as
follow:
1) Perform an elevation survey of the existing channel feeding Outfall 001. Accurate survey data is
necessary to design the filtration tube BMP.
2) Design the polymer enhanced filtration tube installation, and order materials.
3) Place Polymer Enhanced Filtration Tubes at intervals in existing channel such that the bottom of the
upstream tube is at the same elevation as the top of the downstream tube. This arrangement creates a
pool behind each tube which allows sediment to settle out in front of each tube. It is estimated that at
least two filtration tubes will be required for the existing channel.
4) Treat each tube with a polymer additive, like poly-acrylimide (PAM), to improve the ability of the
filtration tubes to settle out suspended sediment. Dry polymer will need to be periodically applied to
maintain sediment removal performance.
5) Remove sediment from the drainage channel behind the tubes following installation, and on a regular
interval thereafter as part of regular maintenance. Sediment removed from the drainage channel will be
placed in the storage yard area within the drainage area of Outfall 001, at the most remote point from the
outlet of Outfall 001.
Following the installation of the filtration tubes, regular semiannual monitoring will be performed, as required
by the NPDES permit. Results of this monitoring will be evaluated to determine the effectiveness of the BMP.
Sincerely,
O'BRIEN & GERE ENGINEERS, INC.
Michael S. Hall, PG
Managing Scientist
Attachments: Figure 1 - Outfall 001 BMP and Drainage Area Inspection and Evaluation
Attachment 1 - Outfall 001 BMP
Cc: Art Williams, General Timber
Greg Williams, General Timber
Chad Simmons, O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc.
2610 Wycliff Road, Suite 104, Raleigh, NC 27607 1 p 919-783-7777 1 f 919-783-0757 1 www.obg.com
360° Engineering and Project Delivery Solutions

'3NI SN33NION3
3 9 13 10 i
<<oz 'mvnNvr
OOi•OS994'Z9091 'ON 31U
NouVnwA3 aNV
NOU33dSNI V3SV
3JVNM21a aNV d"S
too lwAno
o££LZ ON 'aaO-MdS
8 3NIYV "MOO 3-n AW2M-4 SZ9
*ONI '838YVIl -M3N30
OOt- t
t 0 OOt
6 ainf i.1
t
t
r w:
k
MVaNn09 V38V 30VNN210
Wo
Kil
� e
.
ir
'rt �
y
s
>
ffilI j }
IL

�w
H
L
O
Cd
n
Zy�
m
0
n
m
no

Patterson, Robert
From:
Patterson, Robert
Sent:
Friday, April 30, 2010 1:35 PM
To:
'F Cook'
Cc:
Pickle, Ken
Subject:
NCS000122 - General Timber
Freeman,
We received the information you submitted about using limestone to remove copper on April 26, 2010. The results of
the test look like it could help with the Cu issues at the facility. I do have concerns about the TSS being increased in
some of the tests. Please keep the TSS benchmark in mind when finalizing the design.
This information submitted is a good start, but are really looking for a fully developed proposal for us to review and
approve. It should include items such as a design narrative, engineering plans, details, and a schedule for completion.
Please also refer to the information in Part II, Section A.2.d. of the permit. Do you have an estimated date that this
proposal will be provided? Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks.
Robert D. Patterson. PE
Environmental Engineer
NCDENR I DWQ I Stormwater Permitting
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 (flail)
512 N. Salisbury St, Raleigh, NC 27604 1 9th Floor (Location R Parcels)
[phone] Phone [phone] Fax
Ismail: robert.patterson(a),ncderingov
Websiie: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ws/s
ABefore printing this email, please consider your budget and the environment.
If you must print, please print only what you need and save ink with the free Eco-Font.
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third Parties.

y
p
Stor tirwater Discharge Vutfali (SDU—)
Qualitative Monitoring Report
Permit No.: or Certificate of Coverage No.: NCG030124
Facility Name: Kobe W land Copper Products, LLC
County: Stokes Phone No. 336A27-6 11
Inspector: Marc Nault ( L)
Date of inspection: 10 4201
By this signature, I certify that this r
is accurate and complete to the best of my
(Signature of Pennitee or DAignee)
1. Outfall Description
Outfall No. Extra Str\(pi,ch, etc.Manhole
Receiving Stream: U.T. To Dan Riv
Describe the industrial activities that occur within the outfall nage area: Manufacturing of Copper Tubing, Maintenance
Garages and Construction.
2. Color
Describe the color of the discharge using basic co rs (red, brown, blue, \)dint (light, medium, dark) as descriptors:
Clear
3. Odor
Describe any distinct odors that the
may have (i.e., smells strongly of oil, weak chlolyne odor, etc.)
Musty
4. Clarity \
Choose the number whic t describes the clarity of the discharge where I is clear and 10 is very cloudy:
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Page I
SWU242-020705 60 81 330
MAI 1VViNa3 :,a
10

General Timber, Inc.
r,ovrniv s-ro rzAG.to
Pressure Treated Wood Products tire
625 Farmville Mine Road • Sanford, NC 27330
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail] Website: www.generaltimber.net
Mr. Robert Patterson, P.E. 20 April 2010
NCDENR {�
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center V 15
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
APR 262010
Re: Stormwater Treatability Data
General Timber, Inc., Sanford, Chatham County, NC DENR - WATER QUALITY
NCS 000122 wounds & stommater Branch
Dear Mr. Patterson:
This report presents data and information relative to a bench -scale laboratory evaluation of the
effectiveness of limestone for buffering and removal of copper from stormwater at the General
Timber facility located in Sanford, NC.
Introduction
On February 22, 2010 stormwater samples were collected from two discrete locations along a
ditch that receives stormwater run-off directly from active on -site CCA storage areas. The
sample locations labeled "Ditch 1" and "Ditch 2" are shown on the drawing provided in
Attachment A. These two locations are approximately 1100 feet and 825 feet upstream of
primary outfall SDO-001. Samples were collected approximately one hour after the onset of the
storm and are considered representative of the first flush from the CCA storage areas. During
this storm event no stormwater was discharged through the outfall and no outfall sampling was
performed.
Procedures
During each static test, pieces of washed No. 2 limestone gravel were placed in either of two (2)
1000 ml beakers and stormwater was then poured into the beakers to cover the limestone.
Approximately 250 mis of stormwater was added to each beaker. Prior to adding the
stormwater, the field samples were thoroughly mixed to re -suspend any settled solids and the
initial pH of the stormwater was recorded. Samples of the raw stormwater from each of the ditch
locations were also transferred into appropriate containers for analytical determinations of total
suspended solids (TSS), total copper (Cu), and dissolved copper. These parameters of interest
were analyzed after each of the static tests.
Static tests were conducted for durations of 1 hour and 12 hours in order to determine if longer
contact time significantly affected the degree of buffering of the stormwater or the removal of
total or dissolved Cu. A second series of static tests was conducted using unwashed gravel to
evaluate the effect of the addition of limestone fines (dust).
Page I

Data and Discussion
The raw and static test results are summarized in Table 1 in Attachment B to this report. The
Ditch I and 2 raw stormwater samples (with tabular reference D1 and 132) had an initial pH of
6.1 and total Cu concentrations of 1.3 mg/L and 1.1 mg/L, respectively. Dissolved Cu levels
were 0.22 and 0.23 mg/L in the raw D1 and D2 stormwater samples; dissolved Cu constituted
16.9% and 20.9% of the total copper present in the raw D1 and D2 samples. This data suggests
that a considerable fraction of the total Cu in the run-off from the CCA storage areas may be
associated with soil particles or treated wood residues that are displaced during storm events.
TSS values for the D1 and D2 samples were 309 and 512 mg/L, respectively.
As shown by the Table 1 data, after I hour contact time, the solution pH increased to 6.9 and 7.1
in the D1 and D2 1-hour samples. Total Cu was reduced to 0.71 and 0.84 mg/L in these samples.
Some of the total Cu reduction in the D2 ]-hour sample may be attributable to the 50% decrease
in TSS, however, TSS concentration in the D1 ]-hour sample actually increased due to re -
suspension of settled and colloidal solids during the transfer of the sample aliquot. The turbidity
of this sample was observed to increase during the liquid transfer.
At 12 hours, the pH of washed limestone static test solutions were recorded at 7.8 and 7.9 for the
DI and D2 samples, respectively. Total Cu was better removed at 12 hours than during the I
hour static test with 0.52 and 0.60 mg/L remaining in the DI and D2 samples, respectively.
However, the data indicates only a marginal improvement in the removal of dissolved Cu at the
longer contact time. In the DI 12-hour sample the TSS concentration was approximately the
same as determined for the raw and D1 samples, but suspended solids were significantly lower in
the D2 12-hour sample (189 mg/L) as a result of the longer period of quiescent settling.
Table I also presents the results of the unwashed limestone static tests. With the addition of the
limestone fines a more dramatic increase in solution pH occurred during both the I -hour and the
12-hour tests. Total Cu concentrations at 1-hour (0.78 and 0.62 mg/L) were similar to those
determined for the washed gravel static tests. In both of the 1-hour static tests, dissolved Cu was
removed to below detection limits (<0.04 mg/L). This was true for the D1 unwashed sample as
well. The Table ] TSS data demonstrates that the addition of limestone fines contributes
significantly to the concentration of suspended solids present in aqueous solution at the end of
the trial. The TSS concentrations at 1-hour were 4950 and 1850 mg/L, respectively, for the DI
and D2 samples. The solids were observed to be very poor settling which is characteristic of
time solids in general. A greater removal of total Cu and TSS was achieved in the 12-hour
unwashed gravel trials.
Table 2 presents the total and dissolved Cu removal percentage calculated for each of the static
test samples. In general, the removal percentage of total Cu increased with a longer contact time
during the washed limestone static tests. As shown on the chart provided in Attachment C,
copper has a minimum solubility point above a pH of approximately 8.2 in aqueous solution The
solution pH approached this value in the washed limestone 12- hour tests which resulted in a
greater degree of dissolved Cu removal. Addition of limestone dust, increased the pH to 8.2 in
the 1-hour test and to 9.5 in the 12-hour test; the increased pH and presence of lime solids are
assumed to have provided more active adsorption sites for the removal of dissolved Cu.
Page 2

Conclusions
Based on the data generated from the bench -scale static tests, the addition of limestone to ditches
in the CCA storage areas would provide some degree of buffering and, with adequate contact
time, removal of up to 45% of total Cu and up to 60% of dissolved Cu from stormwater
generated from these areas.
Mechanisms for removal of total and dissolved Cu during the static tests include precipitation
(e.g. as a metal hydroxide or carbonate), adsorption on the reactive surface of the limestone, and
absorption into the limestone. A literature article discussing these removal mechanisms in greater
detail is provided in Attachment C. An excerpt of another article on the fate of CCA in sandy
soil is also found in Attachment C; Table V of this excerpt presents principal precipitation
reactions of Cu in soils.
Removal of total Cu associated with suspended particulates or soil particles under quiescent
settling conditions within the bioretention cell or via filtration (e.g. in vegetated filter strips)
would also be beneficial. Gravity settling, filtration in native vegetation, and dilution account for
total Cu concentrations of 0.0545 mg/L and 0.0178 mg/L reported for the past two SDO-001
outfall monitoring events. With the placement of adequate limestone in the ditches around and
immediately downstream of the CCA storage areas, the stormwater would be better buffered
which could aid the propagation of tolerant vegetation in a bioretention cell. The limestone
would also prevent further erosion in these ditches which is another source of suspended solids
in the facility stormwater. General Timber proposes to include limestone placement in the
development of the bioretention cell design.
Should there be any questions or comments concerning the data and information discussed in this
report, please contact me at General Timber during normal business hours at [phone] or
Freeman Cook at [phone].
Sincerely,
tVA,pi 61. G/ irrA--
William A. Williams
Vice President
Freeman C. Cook, Jr. P.E.
Consulting Engineer
/Attachments
Page 3

ATTACHMENTS
A. Sample Locations Map
B. Data Tables l and 2
C. Copper Solubility Chart
Literature Article Excerpt on Cu Fate
Literature Article on Limestone Removal

LE ND
ACCESS/EVACIIATION ROUTES
• MONITOR WELL
— BOUNDARY LINE
=-DITCH LINE
--FENCE LINE
0 EXISTING IRON PIPE
he WATER VALVE
at WATER METER
'D. UTILITY POLE
P TELEPHONE PEDESTAL
o B' TERRA GOTTA PIPE
LEGEND FOR STORAGE TANKS- LEGEND FOR PROCESS AREAS JorPW-�
I- WATER A- TIMBER RECEIVING AND SORTING
2- FUEL OIL B- TREE -LENGTH DEBARKING
3- CCA SOLUTION C- POST AND POLE SIZING/)�SL�'•
.- CREOSOTE 0- CHIPPING
5- CCA CONCENTRATE E- POLE AND RAIL SEVEUNG
6- NATURAL GAS AND SPLITTING
2- PESTICIDE F- KILN DRYNG Iu�i •AV`�. �\ _ i
B- WASTE WATER G- WOOD TREATING.., I$ii V,wA4 , .t •J �""-�_e. A I
C) \ts
NMRAII\E DE!KMPIKIN OF STMAGE PRACTICES NID PROGEW£ r)))) ' ��•• �,yJI}"! .
1. ErM Cit. Irw I"th tiro.a tlq qtl. dM IrwIM IdMv
m-YI.. TrwIM ivMv 1. d .10.0 wM a tdI(O rpW.
i MnG dwaaah, io d�Cl. (tMA ha'.' .ON ah,ao o..Id.0 et GdpiolM 1-1; \h P\ W\
1 nwlp rob . at" ba WC a.11.that
GF dww0 ivn iM 1.
. v.c4', \i9 �:` f'_`"_i� 4 ' 1 ,•1
daMe.,« rw,RF. YagM w ti. da Pro w4 u. uwa .www han c v.,.:\ea •P. Iv% - %�\..r ..1
l TIwwwl llh k g (dool.. CG\) v..Ida F IdY. Inm d..1. attnF d(O.•Y'J,a a�\\ {}��.`�• •`�'�=�''\4 \ \� �•••.l
i DLGVJ.wlwnwl MructvM \ \ \ \rm �' 'r• • �;. .• \- -r\;! '•••"
.Y WY I..IVM F bi. that d. 10amN dtn vwmr! tlW M MCwCOI cMlti-ro1 .wcer.v ' /` • `y'II ��••++(( Q �•�•
yn
�NQ�•� 'CJ . ��� ��� r-,.,�'i'�.I. \ � �'r k. 1"^ftr= � � I ',1 `\
/offv�p� /• • � `� Clip ) t�;-rj\! �• _ tl
aka
\%.N�
STORMWATER STUDY •�3x-".@L•� ✓�Jr '`.—/-^- \ ll�'li�`<Z`'�``•\I'
SAMPLE LOCATIONS
PIZ
NOTES:
I -VERTICAL DATUM BASED ON NCGS STATION CHA a, NOVO 29 ELEVATION 290.259'
2- BOUNDARY INFORMATION TAKEN FROM MAP ENTITLED 'GENERAL TIMBER, INC., OAKLAND TOWNSHIP'
CHATHAM COUNTY, 2-20-88- BY ANDY WILLETT. RLS.
3- RECEIVING STREAM GEORGES CREEK, STREAM CLASS: C, SUB -BASIN: 03-06-I1 CAPE FEAR RIVER BASIN
IS NOT ON NORTH CAROLINA's 303 (E) LIST AND IS NOT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED FOR WHICH A TMDL
HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
AS -BUILT SURVEY FOR:
GENERAL TIMBER, INC.
625 FARMVILLE MINE ROAD SANFORD, N.C. 27330
OAKLAND TOWNSHIP, CHATHAM COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA
JANUARY 13, 2003, MAY 28, 2008 (revised)
GRAPHIC SCALE
laps!)
I Iwx . w n
SURVEYOR:
JEFFREY L. GREEN
5322 BIG OAK CHURCH ROAD
EAGLE SPRINGS . N.C.

TABLE 1
STORMWATER TREATABILITY DATA
RAW STORMWATER CHARACTERIZATION DATA
SAMPLE ID pH
TOTAL Cu
DISSOLVED Cu
TSS
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
DITCH 1 6.1
1.3
0.22
309
DITCH 2 6.1
1.1
0.23
512
STATIC TESTS: WASHED LIMESTONE
D1@1HR 6.9
0.71
0.09
381
D 2 @ 1 HR 7.1
0.84
0.085
236
DI @ 12 HR 7.8
0.52
0.07
385
D 2 @ 12 H R 7.9
0.60
0.09
189
STATIC TESTS: UNWASHED LIMESTONE w/ FINES
D 1 @ 1 HR 8.1 0.78
<0.04
4950
D 2 @ 1 HR 8.2 0.62
< 0.04
1850
D1 @12HR 9.5 0.41
<0.04
1130
D 2 @ 12 HR 9.2 0.39
0.057
386
Note: Static test concentrations are amount remaining at completion of the test.
Page 1

TABLE 2
Cu REMOVAL PERCENTAGE
% REMOVAL
% REMOVAL
STATIC TESTS: WASHED LIMESTONE
TOTAL Cu
DISSOLVED Cu
D1@1HR
45.4
59.1
D2@1HR
35.4
63.0
D1 @12HR
60.0
68.2
D2@12HR
45.5
60.9
STATIC TESTS: UNWASHED LIMESTONE w/ FINES
01@1HR 40.0 81.8
D2@1HR 43.6 82.6
D1 @12HR 68.5 81.8
D2@12HR 64.5 75.2
Page 2

ATTACHMENT C
Copper Solubility Chart
Literature Article Excerpt on Cu Fate
Literature Article on Limestone Removal

356 Treatment Plants
Similar curves can and should be developed by the operator
as a means of understanding any waste that must be neutral-
ized. They are of further use in monitoring processes and
calibrating automatic instrumentation. The steepness of the
curves near the equivalence points is a good indication of the
difficulty of pH control, especially when mixing times are short,
tankage is too small, titrant concentrations are too high and
feed equipment including pumps as well as instrumentation
are marginally sized.
QUESTIONS
Write your answers in a notebook and then compare your
answers with those on pages 453 and 454.
6.3A How does pH affect the rate of corrosion?
6.3B What is pH?
6.3C What is alkalinity?
6.31D To treat the same water, which would produce the most
sludge, lime or caustic soda?
6.3E When diluting caustic soda, what items should be con-
sidered?
6.3F What is a titration curve?
1c-
u
1%
6.33 Processes Requiring PH Adjustment and
Neutralization
Almost every wastewater treatment process used to treat
industrial wastewaters involves pH adjustment and the final
effluent usually requires neutralization. The need for an opti-
mum pH may be determined by a chemical reaction being used
(such as cyanide destruction), the manufacturer's specifica-
tions with respect to a piece of equipment (such as to protect
a reverse osmosis membrane), or by a physical process (such
as coagulation of wastewater and sludge). An industrial waste-
water treatment facility may receive streams separated as acid
and alkaline or separated by pollutant. Process dynamics and
economics often dictate preliminary treatment of each stream,
including pH adjustment. The streams are then combined for
additional treatment including pH adjustment and neutraliza-
tion. A few of the more commonly encountered processes
requiring pH control will be discussed in this section.
6.330 Precipitation of Metal Salts
Metal finishing such as iron pickling and copper plating
involves the use of acids, caustics and chemicals. The waste-
waters contain acids, alkaline cleaners, grease and oil, and
heavy metals such as chromium, zinc, copper, iron, nickel, tin
` ° 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
pH UNITS
Fig. 6.22 Precipitation of metal salts versus pH
(From METAL FINISHING WASTES. EPA Technology Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protedlon Agency. Washington, D.C.)
r-

`r-trz_r,- AAa6 + ExcC-(LP 'r-
MODELLING THE FATE OF CHROMATED COPPER ARSENATE
IN A SANDY SOIL
X. MAO", D.A. BARRY', L. LI2.3, F. STAGNITTI4, G. ALLINSON4
and N. TUROCZY4
'Contaminated Land Assessment and Remediatlon Research Centre, lastimte far Infrastructure and
F.mdronntent. School of Engineering and Electronics, King's Buildings, The University of
Edinburgh, Edinburgh E11931L, U.K.; 2Centrejor F.co-Environmental Modelling, 11ohai University,
Nanjing 210098, People's Republic of China; asrhoot of Engineering, The University of
Queensland, Brisbane 4072, Australia: 4School of Ecology and Environment, Deakin University,
Warrnambool, t fctoria 3280. Australia
('author for correspondence, a -mail: [e-mail]. Fax: [phone].
Tel. [phone])
(Received 17 November 2003; accepted 24 rebmary 2004)
Abstract. A pulse of chromated copper arsenate (CCA, a timber preservative) was applied in irriga-
tion water to an undisturbed field soil in a laboratory column. Concentrations of various elements in
the Ieachate from the column were measured during the experiment. Also, the remnants within the soil
were measured at the end of the experiment. The geochemical modelling package, PHREEQC-2, was
used to simulate the experimental data. Processes included in the CCA transport modelling were ad-
vection, dispersion, non-specific adsorption (cation exchange) and specific adsorption by clay minerals
and organic matter, as well as other possible chemical reactions such as precipitation/dissolution. The
modelling effort highlighted the possible complexities in CCA transport and reaction experiments. For
example, the uneven dosing of CCA as well as incomplete knowledge of the soil properties insulted in
simulations that gave only partial, although reasonable, agreement with the experimental data. Both
the experimental data and simulations show that As and Cu are strongly adsorbed and therefore, will
mostly remain at the top of the soil profile, with a small proportion appearing in Ieachate. On the other
hand, Cr is mom mobile and thus it is present in the soil column Ieachate. Further simulations show
that both the quantity of CCA added to the soil and the pH of the irrigation water will influence CCA
transport. Simulations suggest that application of larger doses of CCA to the soil will result in higher
Ieachate concentrations, especially for Cu and As. Irrigation water with a lower pH will dramatically
increase leaching of Cu. These results indicate that acidic rainfall or significant accidental spillage of
CCA will increase the risk of groundwater pollution.
Keywords: adsorption, CCA, contaminant transport, exchange, PHREEQC-2
1. Introduction
Chromated copper arsenate (CCA) is a timber preservative, often used for
the control of wood -destroying termites, fungi and microorganisms (Allinson
et al., 2000). CCA commonly consists of high concentrations of copper sulphate
(CuSO4), sodium dichromate (Na2Cr2O7) and arsenic acid (H3AsO4) (Carey et al.,
2002). The active ingredients of CCA, i.e. cupric (Cu2+), dichromate/chromate
(HCr04 /Cr207—) and arsenate (HAs04—/H2AsOy) ions can leach from timbers
►A Water, Air, and Soil Pollution 156: 357-377, 2004.
FOR' 0 2004 Khmer -Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

368 X. MAO ET AL.
TABLE IV
The main transformations of valence state for As, Cr and Cu
Elements Formulae Equilibrium constants (log K)
As H3AsO4 +2H+ -+- 2e- = H3AS03 + H2O 18.897
Cr 5H++ CrO, = Cr'++ 2.5 H2O + 0.75 02 8.3842
Cu Cu2}+0.5 H2O=Cu++H++0.250,—18.7704
TABLE V
Main precipitates occurring in CCA transport in the soil column
Equilibrium constant
Name Reaction formula (log K)
Lammerile Cn3(AS04)2+4H+=3Cu2++2112As0a 1.55
Atacamite Cu4Cl2(OH)6+6H+=4Cu21+6H20+2C1- 14.3
Cu3(PO4)2 Cn3(PO4)2+2H+=3Cu2}+2HPO4- —12.2
Antlente Cu3(OH)4SO4+4H+=3Cu2{+4H20+SO4- 8.73
Termite CuO + 2H+ = Cu2} + H2O 7.66
Cu3(PO4)2:3H2O Cu3(PO4)2=3H20+2H+=2HPO4-+3Cu2++3H2O —105
Brochamite Cu4SO4(OH)6+6H+=4Cu2}+61120+SO4- 15.4
TABLE VI
Formulas for adsorption reactions of As, Cr and Cu
Intrinsic equilibrium
Elements Formulae constants (log K)
As Hfo_wOH + AsO,'-+ 3H+ = Hfo_wH2AsO4+ H2O
29.31
Hfo_wOH + As04' + 211+ = f fo_wHAs0 + H2O
23.51
Hfo_wOH + As04' + H+ = Hfo_wAs04-+ H2O
10.58
Hfo_w0H + H}ASOa = Hfo_wH,ASO,i- H2O
5.41
Cr Hfo_w0H + Cr04-+ H+ = Hfo_wCr04 + H2O
10.85
Hfos0H +Cr'++ H2O = Hfos0Cr0H++ 2H+
2.06
Cu Hfos0H + Cu2+ = HfosOCu++ H+
2.89
Hfo_wOH + Cu2} = Hfo_w0Cu++ H+
0.60
4.1.3. Main Reactions of Cu in the Soil
In the CCA solution, Cu is present with a valence state of 11. Cu is retained in soil
through non-specific adsorption (Appelo et al., 2000) and specific adsorption by
mineral surfaces (Table VI) and organic matter (Benedetti ei al., 1995). It may also
react with other chemicals and precipitate (Table V). Because of its tendency to
react/sorb, most of Cu will be retained in the soil.

ENVIRONMENT
?. INTERNATIONAL
ELSEVIER Environment International 26(2001) 395-399
www.etsesiecrnmllaertr/rnvint
Removal of copper from water using limestone filtration technique
Determination of mechanism of removal
H.A. Aziz*, N. Othman, M.S. Yusuff, D.R.H. Basri, F.A.H. Ashaari, M.N. Adlan,
F. Othman, M. Johari, M. Perwira
School of Civil F-ngineering. Universiti Sams Malaysia. 31750 Tronoh. Perak Darul Ridzuan. Malaysia
Abstract
This paper discusses heavy metal removal from wastewater by batch study and filtration technique through low-cost coarse media. Batch
study has indicated that more than 90% copper (Cu) with concentration up to 50 mg/I could be removed from the solution with limestone
quantity above 20 ml (equivalent to 56 g), which indicates the importance of limestone media in the removal protests. This indicates that the
removal of Cu is influenced by the media and not solely by the pH. Batch experiments using limestone and activated carbon indicate that
both limestone and activated carbon had similar metal -removal efficiency (about 95%). Results of the laboratory -scale filtration technique
using limestone particles indicated that above 90% removal of Cu was achieved at retention time of 2.31 h, surface -loading rate of 4.07 m3/
in per day and Cu loading of 0.02 kg/m3 per day. Analyses of the limestone media after filtration indicated that adsorption and absorption
processes were among the mechanisms involved in the removal processes. This study indicated that limestone can be used as an alternative to
replace activated carbon. ® 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Activated carbon; Copper, Filtration; Heavy metals'; Limestone
I. Introduction
Methods available for removing heavy metals from
water and wastewater include precipitation of metal
hydroxide, ion exchange, reverse osmosis, electrodialysis,
oxidation and reduction, carbon adsorption and removal
by limestone. However, current heavy metal removal
generally requires the use of chemical reagents for
precipitation of these metals from the solution.
Aziz (1992) and Aziz and Smith (1992, 1996) studied
the use of limestone in removing manganese (Mn) from
water. In their study, a Mn solution of 1 mg/I was shaken
with limestone (containing 53.9% CaCO3 and 5.2%
MgCO3), gravel, crushed brick or with no solid media
at various pH values. At a final pH value of 8.5, Lime-
stone achieved 95% removal of Mn, crushed brick 82%,
gravel 60% and the removal for aeration and settlement
with no solid media was less than 15%. Their results
indicated that rough solid media and the presence of
- Corresponding author. Tel.: [phone]; fax: [phone].
E-mail address: [e-mail] (HA. Aziz).
carbonate are beneficial in the precipitation of Mn- in
water. A subsequent laboratory -scale filtration technique
was used to prove that limestone particle could be used as
a medium for removing Mn from water. The filtration
results indicated that at an input pH of 7 with Mn
concentration of I mg/I, 1.35 h retention time, 500-man
media depth and 20 mUmin, a good removal (above 90°/a)
was observed in the limestone as compared to the gravel
media. This validates the batch results obtained by Aziz
and Smith (1992).
Table 1
General properties of activated carbon used in the study
Specification
Value
Grade
K15060
Particle size
+ 12
Distribution
12 x 40
Iodine
1000 mg/g
minimum
pH
9-10
Ash content
5% maximum
Moisture
5% maximum
Hardness
90 minimum
01604120/01/$- see front matier©2001 Elsevier Scicne,cLtd.All rights rccmed-
PII:SO] 60-4120(01)00018-6

396 HA. Aziz el al. /Fnvironmenl International 26 (2001) 395-399
Table 2
Experimental conditions for the filtration experiment
parameter Value
Media
Limestone
Density (kgtm3)
2740
Panicle size (ram)
2-4
Filter depth (ram)
800
Diameter (mat)
150
Volume of filter column (m3)
0.014
Volume of void (m3)
6.94 x 10-3
Percentage of void 1%)
49.07
Mewl
Cu
Input pit
7
Input metal (mgA)
5
Flow rates (ml/min)
so
Bperiment's duration (days)
30
Retention time (hours)
2.31
Surface loading late (m3/m' per day)
4.07
Copper loading (kg Cu/M' per day)
0.02
This paper discusses the results of the studies to
develop a simple treatment method for removing heavy
metals from water using Filtration technique through a
low-cost coarse medium instead of chemicals. The effi-
ciency of limestone in removing Cu was examined in the
batch experiments and the results were compared with
experiments using activated carbon, which is the common
medium applied in the field. Filtration experiment was
also undertaken to examine suitability of limestone in
removing heavy metals. Studies were also conducted to
examine the potential removal mechanisms. The limestone
used in the experiment was considered fairly low cost as
the price ranges from RM 10 to RM40 per metric ton.
2. Materials and methods
Prior to the experiment, the composition of limestone
used in the experiment was determined via digestion
with concentrated acids followed by metal determination
by an atomic spectrophotometer (model Shimadzu AA
660) as detailed in the Standard Method for the Exami-
nation of Water and Wastewater (APHA, AWWA,
WPCF, 1992). The density of limestone was determined
conventionally, i.e., weight/volume of media. Limestone
Table 3
Composition of the limestone used in the present study
Compositions Percentage
Coco,
95.0
MgCO3
3.5
Others
1.5
Tow]
100
FIn21 pit Against weight of Limestone
1p
n = i s f 2 x It •=m1'IL
s to
t
LL 6l xi0 �L
5 i •wmglL
� -60 myl.
o -20 44) 60 0 1M IM 140 I60 10
Weight of timestooe yamn20 mL •f copper salvrioa
Fig. 1. Effect of volume of limestone on the final pit at different copper
concentrations (initial pl l =7).
was sieved to give a size between 2.36 and 4.75 mm,
i.e., the size suggested by various authors (Aziz and
Smith, 1992, 1996). Activated carbon used in the studies
were commercially available and having specification as
given in Table 1.
The batch study was conducted to establish the
removal pattern of heavy metals using limestone, acti-
vated carbon and the mixture of both. In the first experi-
ment, different volumes of limestone (calculated based on
the weight) was used in a specific volume of heavy Cu
solution (120 ml of synthetic Cu solution). The pH was
adjusted to about neutral using 0.1 M HCI and 0.1 M
NaOH. Copper solution was prepared from AnalaR grade
standard solution and the experiment was conducted at
different Cu concentrations (ranging between 2 and 60
mg/1), which were shaken by an orbital shaker at 300 rpm
for 60 min. Afterwards, the pH of samples were measured
and recorded as final pH. The solution was then left to
settle for 90 min (Aziz and Smith, 1992) before testing
Cu concentration by an atomic absorption spectrophotom-
eter. The experiments were repeated three to four times to
obtain a consistent average. In the second experiment, a
different mixture of limestone and activated carbon (in
%Copper Removal Against weight of Limestone
I W p• e e B C � o -
- 14 •i• � • 2 ml/L
= SO YJ4II • ssmtJl..
y � • Iom>:n.
. N rasa.
40 �•
x omen
e 40 mx9.
• 20 - a 50 mg9.
lT. 6om 2
0 20 40 '60 so lop In 140 160 ISO
R'eirbt et0mnt•ve Ctam'120 mLrolAQ+olvtinv
Fig. 2. Effect of volume of limestone on the copper removal at different
copper concentrations (initial plI=7).

H.A. Aziz et a1. / Envimomeni lnterwfional 26 (2001) 395-399
Final pit A6aimt RaHu of Aledia (Initial pll 7) % Removal "Capper Apimt imal pH With, No Media
12
6
n 10 • ♦Smga. Cu
e •
i;= a
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Italia of Limmmoe:AVinted Carbon by Valumr
(0 meam 0% Ui Icne and IN% Aeirned Carbon)
Fig. 3. Influence of media on final pH at different mtim of limestone and
activated carbon.
terms of volume) was used. The pH was set neutral and
metal concentration was set at 5 mg/l. In order to
establish whether the removal was due to pH, a set of
batch experiments was repeated as above at pH value
above 8 without any media addition.
In the filtration experiment, the upflow filtration model
was set up in the laboratory according to Aziz and Smith
(1996) and the experimental conditions are listed in Table
2. Calculation of the Cu concentration entering each
column was based on a mass balance equation as:
Qflad Cfitut = Yeutter Culler + Qtap Ctap + QCuCCu
where, Q=flow rate in millimeters per minute, C=liquid
concentration in milligrams per liter, and CRnal was set to
5 mg/I
The filter was left running for a month with effluent
discharged into a tank for recycling and eventually was
channeled to the discharge point within the laboratory.
Effluents were sampled every day. Three sets of 40-ml
samples were taken each time and they were acidified
prior to Cu determinations on the atomic absorption
spectrophotometer and the Hach's DR2000 and D112010
spectrophotometers. After the experiment, the media were
air-dried and a particle of the media was cut into half
then fixed onto a fixing plate, smoothed and snapped by
E
C
0 20 40 W W 100
Ratio of Iamutone:Anivated Carbon by Vdome
IN
W
W
E
s` 40
20
0� . i
7 8 9 10 II 12
Fmd pH
397
• 5 mg/L Cu
Fig. 5. Percentage of copper removal against final pH without presence of
any media_
the scanning electron microscope (SEM; Model Leica
Cambridge 5360). This was to determine whether the
metals were adsorbed or absorbed by the media. Some
media were also crushed, homogenised and sieved to 75-
µm size and then analysed using energy dispersive X-ray
instrument (EDX) (model Camscan Editor) and X-ray
fluorescence instrument (model Rigaku RIX3000).
3. Results and discussion
Table 3 indicates that the limestone used in the present
study contained 95% CaCO3 and 3.5% MgCO3. Fig. 1
shows the influence of the quantity of media on the final
pH. The results indicated that limestone was able to
increase the pH from the input value of pH 7. pH value
was increased above 8 at limestone volume of 5 ml
(equivalent to 14 g) and further increased to above 9 at
limestone volume of 10 ml (equivalent to 28 g). Final pH
values were almost constant at between 8 and 9 when the
amount of limestone was increased further. This shows
that the solution has reached its saturation value.
Increases in pH were due to the carbonate content in
limestone that gave buffer capacity (alkaline condition) to
Find pH Apinst Duration of Eapeeimral for Copper Removal
7,6
75
7.4
5mp/L Cu _� 7.3
♦
72
7.1
7
6.9
0 5 10 Is 20 25 30
Durationof Ea marni(da,1
t lminl pll
-o-ranlpn
Fig. 4. Percentage of Cu removal against different ratios of limestone and Fig. 6. Plot of final pH against duration of experiment in filtration column
activated carbon. for copper removal. Initial copper concentration is 5 mg/l. Initial pH =7.

398 H.A. Am et al. / Emimoment International 26 (2001) 395-399
% of Copper Rento.al Apiost Duration of Experimeol
IN
90
60
�waei AbuMim
E
�DiIM10
e m
o—oamao
20
0a
0 5 10 Is 20 25 30
Dnratlop of Faperi.t (&a 0
Fig. 7. Plot of copper removal against duration of experiment in filtration
column for copper removal. Initial copper concentration is 5 mgfi. Initial
pll=7.
the sample and this was higher for higher quantity of
limestone. Fig. 2 shows the removal of Cu against media
weight at different metal concentrations. More than 90%
of Cu with concentration up to 50 mg/I could be
removed from the solution with limestone quantity above
20 ml (equivalent to 56 g). Even at final pll of 7.5, the
removal was still above 90%. The removal without any
media was fairly low (0% to 50%). This indicates that
the removal of Cu was influenced by the media and not
solely by the pH.
Fig. 3 illustrates the influence of media on final pi at
different Cu concentrations, and Fig. 4 shows Cu-removal
efficiency against different ratios of limestone and acti-
vated carbon. The results indicate that the removal of Cu
using activated carbon (without limestone) and limestone
(without activated carbon) was about the same with over
Fig. 8. Scanning election image of media after filtration.
Table 4
Analysis of media before and after the experiment
XRF EDX
Before After Before After
Compounds experiment experiment experiment experiment
Cu0 (%) 0 0.032 0 —
Cu (% 0 — 0 1.83
XRF, X-ray fluorescence. EDX, energy dispersive X-ray
95% removal. The mixture of the two also gave a similar
removal rate. Removal of Cu without any media was
about 20% (Fig. 5). This shows that limestone can be
used as an alternative medium to replace activated carbon.
Results of filtration experiments shown in Figs. 6 and
7 indicate that the removal of Cu was above 90% during
the first 10 days of the experiment, i.e., at retention time
of 2.31 h, surface loading rate of 4.07 m3/m2 per day
and Cu loading of 0.02 kg/m3 per day. The results
further confirmed that limestone is suitable for removing
heavy metals.
The image of limestone particle cross section analyzed
by SEM after the experiment is illustrated in Fig. 8. It
can be observed that some Cu was adsorbed onto the
surface of media and some penetrated through the media
due to absorption. This is further proven by the analysis
of the powder from crushed limestone after filtration,
which indicated that Cu concentration increased as com-
pared to the blank media (before experiment). The
details are given in Table 4.
4. Conclusion
The present study demonstrated that more than 90%
copper with concentration up to 50 mg/I could be removed
from the solution with limestone quantity above 20 ml
(equivalent to 56 g), according to the batch study. Copper
may also be removed from the solution using limestone
and activated carbon. This was further proven in the
filtration experiment whereby above 90% removal of Cu
was achieved at retention time of 2.31 h, surface -loading
rate of 4.07 m3/mi per day and Cu loading of 0.02 kg/m3
per day. Analyses of the limestone media after filtration
indicated that adsorption and absorption processes were
among the mechanisms involved during the removal proc-
ess. Limestone can be used as a cost-effective medium to
replace activated carbon for metal removal.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the research grant provided by
the Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment,
Malaysia and Universiti Sains Malaysia.

ILA. Aztz el at. / Environment International 26 (2001) 395-399
References
APHA, AWWA, WPCF. Standard methods for the ecamimation of water
and wastcwastcr. 18th ed. American Public Health Association,
USA 1992.
Aziz HA. A study on the removal of manganese from water in the presence
399
of coarse mods. PhD thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Univer-
sity of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK 1992 (unpublished).
Aziz HA, Smith PG. The influence of pH and course media on manganese
precipitation from water, Water Res 1992;26:853-5.
Aziz HA, Smith PG. Removal of manganese from water using crushed
dolomite filtration technique. Water Res 19962:489-92.

F)
Patterson, Robert
From:
F Cook [[e-mail]]
Sent:
Thursday, February 25, 2010 7:57 AM
To:
Patterson, Robert
Subject:
RE: General Timber
Robert,
On Friday, Feb 19, 1 met with Art Williams at General Timber to discuss our recent conference call. During this
visit, selected a possible location with proper grade for a biocell and discussed the design and construction aspects of this
BMP. On Monday I happened to be onsite again during a storm and was able to view the sw routing through this area of
the site. I will be preparing a letter to address some of your and Ken's questions about the use of dolomitic limestone in
the some of the upstream drainage channels for erosion control and buffering. I think some additional static bench -top and
column testing might be helpful to this evaluation. I will also be sizing the cell and and have General
Timber's authorization to begin the design. A little more surveying will be needed in this area to support the design work.
This will be conducted as soon as the site conditions allow (very muddy currently).
As Art and I toured the site, it is obvious that the main drainageway to the primary outfall (SDO-001) is a natural
vegetative barrier and bioretention area now. There is an abundance of water -tolerant plants, shrubs, and trees lining this
channel and the time of travel through this channel provides adequate retention time for some degree of passive removal
of solids and other constituents. It will be interesting to see if the addition of a biocell upstream of the outfall, closer to the
active CCA storage areas has a benefit.
Thanks,
Freeman Cook
-----Original Message -----
From: "Patterson, Robert"
Sent: Feb 4, 2010 2:11 PM
To: F Cook
Cc: "Pickle, Ken"
Subject: RE: General Timber
Freeman,
Are you available to talk tomorrow (2/5) morning around 9am?
Thanks.
Robert
From: F Cook [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 12:17 AM
To: Patterson, Robert
Subject: RE: General Timber
Robert,
Would you have time to this a little further? My cell number is 317-524-8231.
Thanks,
Freeman Cook

Patterson, Robert
From: F Cook [[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 7:44 AM
To: Robert Patterson
Subject: General Timber pics
Robert,
Here are the pics I attempted to send last time. If you open on Windows Photo Gallery perhaps the tags will be there
I want to clarify one item regarding the limestone addition and its possible effectiveness. It would prevent erosion in the
main ditch from the CCA storage area and provide buffering to the slightly depressed stormwater pH (typically at of just
below 7). One of the pics shows a typical ditch in the CCA area where limestone would be added. The amount of Cu that
would possibly precipitate or plate out on the active surfaces of the limestone (probably as a hydroxide or other salt)
would depend, as Ken alluded to, would depend on the form of copper present. If it is ionic copper (Cu +2) that might
provide some removal, but if the copper is complexed or chelated, then the removal in any alkaline agent would be less
effective.
The pics depict the often saturated condition in the midsection of the site which I believe GT intends to correct at some
point. As you can see, the wide channel immediately upstream of the weir on SDO-001 is well -vegetated and also often
saturated. I would think that there may be some natural bio-attenuation of soluble constituents in the stormwater by these
indigenous plants. Plus it provides a much needed filtration function prior to discharge.
One picture shows the possible area where a bioretention cell could be located. This is well upstream of the outfall but
just downstream of the CCA storage area. I will enhance a drawing and forward this so you can get an idea of the area
we were discussing.
I have briefed GT about our telecon and will be meeting with them in a week or so to discuss the details of the approach
Will need to do a little more surveying there to get some dimensions and elevations for the design.
Any questions

wsw.pem6Uamrn
Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
2225 Riverside Dr.
Asheville. NC 28804
[phone]
QUALITY CONTROL DATA
Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
98001Gncey Ave. Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 28078
[phone]
Project: M AND M MOTOR CO: RANDLEMAN j
Pace Project No.: 9260333 �\ /
QC Batch: GCSVI6928 Analysis Method: EPA 1664A
QC Batch Method: EPA 1664A � Analysis Description: 1664 HEM, Oiand /se
Associated Lab Samples: 9260333001, 9260333002, 926033300 /
METHOD BLANK: 385067 Matrix: Water
Associated Lab Samples: 9260333001, 9260333002, 9260333003
Blank epo 61
Parameter Units Result 'foil Analyzed Qualifiers
Oil and Grease mg/L ND 5.0 12/30/09 08:57
LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE: 385068
Spike LCS LC'S % Rao
Parameter Units Conc. Result %Re Limits Qualifiers
Oil and Grease mg/L 40 36.2 78-114
MATRIX SPIKE SAMPLE: 385069
9260137001 Spike MS MS % Rec
Parameter Units Result Conc. Result 4 Rec Limits Qualifiers
Oil and Grease mg/L NO 40 34.4 \ 86 78-114
Date: 01/07/2010 03:13 PM
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc..
/?C
Page 5 of 11

Robert,
Would you have time to this a little further? My cell number i (317-524-8231.
Thanks,
Freeman Cook
-----Original Message -----
From: "Patterson, Robert"
Sent: Feb 3, 2010 10:29 AM
To: F Cook
Cc: "Pickle, Ken"
Subject: RE: General Timber
Freeman,
1) Yes, we do need a formal written proposal of an engineered structural Cu-removal BMP for us to
review and approve/disapprove. Note that the permit requires General Timber to submit the
BMP designs to DWQ for approval within 6 months of the first analytical monitoring performed.
2) If you want to do a trial, that is fine, but it does not meet the Cu-removal BMP requirement of
the permit. General Timber can do trials to remove pollutants any time they wish in order to
meet permit requirements. We need to see a proposed design, and get it in the ground to
monitor. It seer -is that since your email back in September 2009 about the limestone proposal,
General Timber could have been doing a small trial as you suggested.
3) I'm still hesitant about the limestone in the ditches providing Cu removal benefit. We have not
seen any details about the remove.l process or engineering calculations to show that it will
rernove Cu when simply placed as a lining in ditches. We also know of no other programs or
facilities that have used such a BtiiP. Even in your email below, you state that for it to even have
a chance of working, you would need enough contact time. Would the use of check dams
provide that needed contact time? I would suggest using a structural BMP that has been shown
to provide some Cu removal. An example of this is bioretention. Literature reports indicate that
bioretention can remove Cu and other metals from runoff. General Timber could even propose
something that combines the use of limestone and bioretention, or some other BMP. It would
seern to me that having to truck the limestone a long distance would be more costly than using
a more traditional BMP.
Please let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks.
Robert D. Patterson, PE
Environmental Engineer
NCDENR I DWQ I Stormwater Permitting
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 (mail)
512 N. Salisbury St, Raleigh, NC 27604 (Location & Parcels)
[phone] Phone [phone] Fax
Email: [e-mail]
ncdenr.gov
Website: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ws/su
Aw Before printing this email, please consider your budget and the environment.
If you must print, please print only what you need and save ink with the free Eco-Font.
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

Patterson, Robert
From: F Cook [[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 7:44 AM
To: Patterson, Robert
Subject: RE: General Timber
Robert,
Attached are two pics of the General Timber site depicting site conditions several days after a typical storm event. The
midsection of the site becomes water-logged and has actually tuned into something like a marsh with cattails and other
water -tolerant vegetation. The is area is in close proximity to the primary outfall (one storage lane over) and the soil
upstream of the outfall also remains water-logged for some !i!ne and does not drain well due to (1) the prevailing clay soil
type which retains water and (2) the flat grade in the main drainage channel. You may recall that if takes a signinificant
(several inches or prolonged wet period) for any stormwater to discharge thru this outfall's v'notch weir.
These conditions pose limitations to the biorentention cell approach which would rely on some amount of infiltration.
There may be another location in the storage yard that might be used but there is heavy equipment traffic in the storage
areas which might cause a problem. If necessary I'm sure General Timber would consider changing the storage in this
area and altering normal traffic patterns.
The CCA storage area in relatively far away from this primary outfall and there are ditches that could be lined with
limestone to buffer that water as it meanders toward the main drainage channel. The time of travel would be adequate at
the onset of a storm to afford some valuable contact time which would beneficial for buffering the stormwater (the pH
trends toward acidic naturally anyway).
I have other pictures on an SO disk that I can send after our discussion.
I just thought that this information might be helpful to have prior to our telephone conversation at 9 this morning.
Perhaps a dual -pronged approach would be considered incorporating more than one approach. Can discuss details prior
to the formal proposal.
Thanks.
Freeman Cook
-----Original Message -----
From: "Patterson, Robert"
Sent: Feb 4, 2010 2:11 PM
To: F Cook
Cc: "Pickle, Ken"
Subject: RE: General Timber
Freeman,
Are you available to talk tomorrow (2/5) morning around 9am?
Thanks.
Robert
From: F Cook [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 12:17 AM
To: Patterson, Robert
Subject: RE: General Timber

Gf}'LL W/ G T F y/1�44)
KEN t�1GKL�
ill( [- �jr� fGt2ClNG 1nG/g/G j�� 2&Pos 4—
_j01e
NOT fe-owclf- 04 Ol t( )ECD ""V I - ,
Ile
h/tj- L✓� SoM��C! „'r/�S . Too �✓✓� � � �. �. ��-L .

i
. �.
.�
s
�
7
,�
r
�)
l
_
�
fi
?(
'�
J,
j .�
/
�
!J
•
I � i
l/
4•
t•
,
r
� �•r
�`I
✓5
���
�
t
�
^d
u-
i+
;�
r .
r
Z
]
',?
f,'
��.
'r
i�
_
�; .
i
.�t
�.
.�,�
„^.
%C'
.
I
�
-�
i
i'
x
i
�i
>�
d�
:+
•�Gt
�
�
•
r'
f.
'
�
�
i
�
t
J%
-� 1

"7
Patterson, Robert
From:
Patterson, Robert
Sent:
Wednesday, February 03, 2010 10:30 AM
To:
'F Cook'
Cc:
Pickle, Ken
Subject:
RE: General Timber
Freeman,
1) Yes, we do need a formal written proposal of an engineered structural Cu-removal BMP for ti; to review and
approve/disapprove. Note that the permit requires General Timber to submit the BMP designs to DWQ for
approval within 6 months of the first analytical monitoring performed.
2) If you want to do a trial, that is fine, but it does not meet the Cu-removal BMP requirement of the permit.
General Timber can do trials to remove pollutants any time they wish in order to meet permit requirements.
We need to see a proposed design, and get it in the ground to monitor.- It seems that since your email back in
September 2009 about the limestone proposal, General Timber could have been doing a small trial as you
suggested.
3) I'm still hesitant about the limestone in the ditches providing Cu removal benefit. We have not seen any details
about the removal process or engineering calculations to show that it will remove Cu when simply placed as a
lining in ditches. We also know of no other programs or facilities that have used such a BMP. Even in your email
below, you state that for it to even have a chance of working, you would need enough contact time. Would the
use of check dams provide that needed contact time? I would suggest using a structural BMP that has been
shown to provide some Cu removal. An example of this is bioretention. Literature reports indicate that
bioretention can remove Cu and other metals from runoff. General Timber could even propose something that
combines the use of limestone and bioretention, or some other BMP. It would seem to me that having to truck
the limestone a long distance would be more costly than using a more traditional BMP.
Please let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks.
Robert D. Patterson, PE
Environmental Engineer -
NCDENR I DWQ I Stormwater Permitting
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 (Mail)
512 N. Salisbury St, Raleigh, NC 27604 (Location & Parcels)
[phone] Phone [phone] Fax
Email: robert.pattersongncdenr gov
website: http://portal.ncdenr.orglweblwq/ws/su
ABefore printing this email, please consider your budget and the environment.
If you must print, please print only what you need and save ink with the free Eco-Font.
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: F Cook [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 7:08 AM
To: Patterson, Robert
Subject: General Timber
Robert,

Sampling conducted last November at General Timber demonstrated 0.055 mg/L of copper in the discharge through the
primary outfall. This was after
the they removed a large amount of debris and old treated wood from 2 of the storage lanes that contribute run-off the the
outfall. So this is still well above the 7 ppb level established in the permit.
Placing limestone in the ditches and creating some shallow rock dams upstream of the outfall might be a viable approach
to buffer the pH and remove some of the soluble copper, but the availability of reactive (dolomitic) limestone is very limited
in North Carolina. We have located 2 sources... one in Asheville and another up in Virginia, but local firms are not
interested in hauling it due to possible damage to the truck beds. General Timber would probably have to send there truck
to pick it up one load at a time. They are considering this.
In terms of a column or bench top test, I did see some buffering (elevation of pH) in �;me samples I prepared in the past,
but the issue for this would be retention time. Would need enough contact time beN,,.,en the stormwater and the active
surface of the limestone to get any possible benefit.
It might be best to propose trial and divert a samll portion of stormwater through a limestone bed in a ditch on one of the
lanes and then sample for copper in the effluent from the bed (sample upstream would also be collected). Would this be
acceptable as a first step in the Cu-BMP process for GT? Do you need a formal proposal for GT to proceed with such an
approach or can we just proceed with the trial and then advise you of the results?
If there are questions, email or you can call me at 317-524-8231 to discuss.
Thanks,
Freeman Cook

NCS006122 - General Timber, Individual SW Permit Renewal -Draft 2
Subject: NCS000122 - General Timber, Individual SW Permit Renewal -Draft 2
From: Robert Patterson <Robert. Patterson@ncmail. net>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:55:50 -0400
To: F Cook <[e-mail]>
CC: Stephanie Brixey <[e-mail]>, Ken Pickle <[e-mail]>
Freeman,
As we discussed during our site visit on July 8, 2008, I have modified the draft
permit as attached. Since all historical analytical monitoring for copper has shown
values in excess of the current benchmark (0.007 mg/1), Cu has been removed from the
Tiered monitoring approach. Instead, bmp(s) will be installed up front to
remove/reduce Cu in stormwater runoff as per the revised permit. I have highlighted
the changes to the permit in yellow. Since these changes are to the monitoring, it
will not have to be public noticed again. Please provide any final comments
regarding this revised draft permit by August 26, 2008. 1 have also attached a link
to a study showing results of Cu removal by bioretention cells ranging from 56% to.
998: http://www.bae.ncsu.edu/stormwater/PublicationFiles/Bioretention2006
Monitoring for creosote has also been added. I was not aware of it's use on the site
during my original review. Please let me know if you have any questions. Note our
phone numbers have changed.
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]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Website: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/su/stormwater.htmi
*Please consider the environment before deciding to print this email*
j NCS000122_Draft Permit
Content -Type: application/msword
Content -Encoding: base64
GG: AV T W(LL 14&k_5 - NA-R_0 CC)F'
of 1 7/29/2008 2:02 PM

NCSOOO122
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE STORMWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina\Gener la St\atute'1/n43-215.1, other lawful
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the.North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
Inc.
is hereby authorized to.\scharge stormwater from a facility located at
eneral Timber, Inc.
FFarmville Mine Road
Sanford, NC
Chatham County
to receiving waters designated as Georges Creek, a class C stream in the Cape Fear River Basin,
in accordance with the discharge limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set
forth in Parts I, II, III, IV, V and VI hereof.
Note: Draft Permit Dates are Approximate
This permit shall become effective August 1, 2008.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on July 31, 2013.
Signed this 281h day of July, 2008.
for Coleen H. Sullins Director
Division of Water Quality
By the Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit No. NCS000122
PART
Section A:
Section B:
Section C:
PART H
Section A:
Section B:
Section C:
Section D:
PART III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
Individual Permit Coverage
Permitted Activities
Locatiot
MONITOR]
DISCHARC
Stormwo
Analytic
Qualitati
On -Site
PERMITTED
STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR NPDES STORMWATER INDIVIDUAL
PERMITS
Section A: Compliance
and Liability
1.
Compliance Schedule
2.
Duty to Comply
3.
Duty to Mitigate
4.
Civil and Criminal Liability
5.
Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
6.
Property Rights
7.
Severability
8.
Duty to Provide Information
9.
Penalties for Tampering
10.
Penalties for Falsification of Reports
Section B: General Conditions
1.
Individual Permit Expiration
2.
Transfers
1

Permit No. NCS000122
3. Signatory Requirements
4. Individual Permit Modification, Revocation and Reissuance, or
Termination
5. Permit Actions
Section C: Operation and Maintenance of Pollution Controls
1. Proper Operation and Maintenance
2. Need to Halt or Reduce Not a Defense
3. Bypassing of Stormwater Control Faciliti
Section D: Monitoring and Records
1. Representative Sampling
2. Recording Results
3. Flow Measurements
4. Test Procedures
5. Representative Outfal(l D
6. Records Retention
7. Inspection and�E>ntry
Section E: Reporting Re � ts"
1. Discharge,Monitoring Reports
2. Submitting Reports
3. Availability of Reports
4. Non-Stormwater Discharges
5. Planned Changes
6. Anticipated Noncompliance
7. Bypass
8. Twenty-four Hour Reporting
9. Other Noncompliance
10. Other Information
PART IV LIMITATIONS REOPENER
PART V ADMINISTERING AND COMPLIANCE MONITORING FEE
REQUIREMENTS
PART VI DEFINITIONS
11

Permit No. NCS000122
PART I INTRODUCTION
SECTION A: INDIVIDUAL PERMIT COVERAGE
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the
permittee is authorized to discharge stormwater associated with industrial activity. Such
discharges shall be controlled, limited and monitored as specified in this permit.
If industrial materials and activities are not exposed to precipitation or runoff as described in 40
CFR § 122.26(g), the facility may qualify for a No Exposure Exclusion from NPDES stormwater
discharge permit requirements. Any owner or operator wishing to obtain a No Exposure
Certification must submit a No Exposure Certification NOPform to 1he Division; must receive
approval by the Division; must maintain no exposure conditionsunless-authorized to discharge
under a valid NPDES stormwater permit; and must reapply for the No -Exposure Exclusion once
every five (5) years.
SECTION B: PERMITTED ACTIVITIES
Until this permit expires or is modified•or
stormwater to the surface waters of Norte
adequately treated and managed in accord,
permit. All stormwater discharges shall be
is authorized to discharge
)r separate storm sewer system that has been
the terms and conditions of this individual
lance with the conditions of this permit.
Any other point source discharge to,surface waters of the state is prohibited unless it is an
allowable non-stormwater discharge.or'is covered by another permit, authorization, or approval.
The stormwater discharges allowed by this individual permit shall not cause or contribute to
violations of Water Quality Standards.
This permit does not relieve the permittee from responsibility for compliance with any other
applicable federal, state, or local law, rule, standard, ordinance, order, judgment, or decree.
Part I Page l of 2

SECTION C: LOCATION MAP
Permit No. NCS000122
NCG000122
N
Wr:
S
General Timber, Inc. J,
General Timber, Inc.
General Timber, Inc.
Latitude: 350 33' 49" N
Longitude: 790 12' 41" W
Receiving Stream: Georges Creek
Stream Class: C
Sub -basin: 03-06-11(Cape Fear River Basin)
r�-
Facility Location
Part I Page 2 of 2

Permit No. NCS000122
PART II MONITORING, CONTROLS, AND LIMITATIONS FOR
PERMITTED DISCHARGES
SECTION A: STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN
The permittee shall develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, herein after referred to as
the Plan. This Plan shall be considered public information in accordance with Part III, Standard
Conditions, Section E, Paragraph 3 of this individual permit. The Plan shall include, at a
minimum, the following items:
Site Plan. The site plan shall provide a description of the physical facility and the
potential pollutant sources that may be expected to contribute.to contamination of
stormwater discharges. The site plan shall contain the; following: i-
a. A general location map (USGS quadrangle map'or appropriately drafted
equivalent map), showing the facility's location,in relation to transportation
routes and surface waters, the name of the receiving-water(s) to which the
stormwater outfall(s) discharges, or if the discharge is to a municipal separate
storm sewer system, the name c
waters; and accurate latitude an
should identify whether each re
List of impaired waters) or is to
been established, and;whatthe
North Carolina's 303(d) List tia
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmd
North Carolina TMDI�documer
http://h2o.enr.state nc;us/tmd
municipality and the ultimate receiving
igitude of the point(s) of discharge. The map
ngwater is impaired (on the state's 303(d)
I'in a watershed for which a TMDL has
meter(s) of concern are.
found here:
can be found here:
_TMDLs
b. A narrative description of storage practices, loading and unloading activities,
outdoor process areas, dust or particulate generating or control processes, and
waste disposal practices. A narrative description of the potential pollutants which
could be expected to be present in the stormwater discharge from each outfall.
C. A site map drawn to scale with the following items:
(1) Distance legend and north arrow
(2) Site property boundary and topography
(3) Location of industrial activities (including storage of materials,
disposal areas, process areas, and loading and unloading areas)
(4) Drainage features and structures
(5) Stormwater discharge points (outfalls)
(6) Delineated drainage areas for each outfall
(7) Drainage area for each outfall in acres and percentage or each
drainage area that is impervious
(8) All on -site and adjacent surface waters and wetlands
(9) Building locations
Part II Page 1 of 10

Permit No. NCS000122
(10) Existing BMPs and impervious surfaces
d. A list of significant spills or leaks of pollutants that have occurred at the facility
during the three (3) previous years and any corrective actions taken to mitigate
spill impacts.
e. Certification that the stormwater outfalls have been evaluated for the presence of non-
stormwater discharges. The certification statement will be signed in accordance with
the requirements found in Part III, Standard Conditions, Section B, Paragraph 3.
2. Stormwater Management Plan. The stormwater management plan shall contain a
narrative description of the materials management practices employed which control or
minimize the exposure of significant materials to stormwater, including structural and
nonstructural measures. The stormwater management plan, at a minimum, shall
incorporate the following: 1/( //\\ \-"�
a. Feasibility Study. A review of the technical.and economic feasibility of changing
the methods of operations and/or storage practices,to eliminate or reduce exposure
of materials and processes to stormwate%'Wherever practical, the permittee shall
prevent exposure of all storage areas;,material handling operations, and
manufacturing or fueling operation/k In areas4here elimination of exposure is
not practical, the stormwater management.plan shall document the feasibility of
diverting the stormwater runoff away ,from areas of potential contamination.
b. Secondary Containment'Requirements and Records. Secondary containment is
required for: bulk storage of liquid materials; storage in any amount of Section
313 of Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA)
water priority chemicals;.and storage in any amount of hazardous substances to
prevent leaks and spills from contaminating stormwater runoff. A table or
summary of all such tanks and stored materials and their associated secondary
containment areas shall be maintained. If the secondary containment devices are
connected directly to stormwater conveyance systems, the connection shall be
controlled by. manually activated valves or other similar devices which shall be
secured closed with a locking mechanism, and any stormwater that accumulates in
the containment area shall be at a minimum visually observed for color, foam,
outfall staining, visible sheens and dry weather flow, prior to release of the
accumulated stormwater. Accumulated stormwater shall be released if found to
be uncontaminated by the material stored within the containment area. Records
documenting the individual making the observation, the description of the
accumulated stormwater and the date and time of the release shall be kept for a
period of five (5) years.
C. BMP Summary. A narrative description shall be provided of Best Management
Practices (BMPs) to be considered such as, but not limited to, oil and grease
separation, debris control, vegetative filter strips, infiltration and stormwater
detention or retention, where necessary. The need for structural BMPs shall be
based on the assessment of the potential of pollutant sources to contribute
Part 11 Page 2 of 10

Permit No. NCS000122
significant quantities of pollutants to stormwater discharges and data collected
through monitoring of stormwater discharges.
d. Copper removal BMPs. The permitee shall design, install, and monitor a
structural storarwater BDAP, at OutfaIl 001, that has been shown to remove or
reduce copper in stormwater discharges (such as a bioretention cell). The
schedule shall be as follows from permit issuance: submit the BMP designs to
DWQ for approval within 6 months; install the BMP within 6 months of approval;
monitor for copper in the stormwater discharge from the BMP on a quarterly basis
for a period of 2 years. Samples shall be taken during a representative rain event.
Quarterly discharge monitoring reports shall be submitted to DWQ. At the end of
the 2-year monitoring period, the permittee shall evaluate the effectiveness of the
iBMP in conjunction with DWQ. At that time, the permit may be modified based
on this evaluation; /2na�nd
3. Spill Prevention and Response Plan. The Spill PreventiResponse Plan (SPRP)
shall incorporate an assessment of potential pollutant?sources based on a materials
inventory of the facility. Facility personnel (or team)'responsible for implementing the
SPRP shall be identified. A responsible person shall be•on site at all times during facility
operations that have the potential to contaminate stormwater runoff through spills or
exposure of materials associated with the facility`operations. The SPRP must be site
stormwater specific. Therefore; anOil`PCC plan -may be a component of the SPRP, but
may not be sufficient to completely address the stormwater aspects of the SPRP. The
common elements of the SPCC wiih the,SPRP may be incorporated by reference into the
SPRP. // 1 �>
4. Preventative Maintenance and,Good-Housekeeping Program. A preventative
maintenance program shall be.developed. The program shall document schedules of
inspections and maintenance activities of stormwater control systems, plant equipment
and systems. Inspection of material handling areas and regular cleaning schedules of
these areas shall be incorporated into the program.
5. Employee Training. Training schedules shall be developed and training provided at a
minimum on an annual basis on proper spill response and cleanup procedures and
preventative maintenance activities for all personnel involved in any of the facility's
operations that have the potential to contaminate stormwater runoff. Facility personnel
(or team) responsible for implementing the training shall be identified.
Responsible Party. The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall identify a specific
position(s) responsible for the overall coordination, development, implementation, and
revision to the Plan. Responsibilities for all components of the Plan shall be documented
and position assignments provided.
Plan Amendment. The permittee shall amend the Plan whenever there is a change in
design, construction, operation, or maintenance that has a significant effect on the
potential for the discharge of pollutants to surface waters. The Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan shall be reviewed and updated on an annual basis. The annual update
Part Il Page 3 of 10

Permit No. NCS000122
shall include an updated list of significant spills or leaks of pollutants for the previous
three years, or the notation that no spills have occurred. The annual update shall include
re -certification that the stormwater outfalls have been evaluated for the presence of non-
stormwater discharges.
The Director may notify the permittee when the Plan does not meet one or more of the
minimum requirements of the permit. Within 30 days of such notice, the permittee shall
submit a time schedule to the Director for modifying the Plan to meet minimum
requirements. The permittee shall provide certification in writing (in accordance with
Part III, Standard Conditions, Section B, Paragraph 3) to the Director that the changes
have been made.
8. Facility Inspection Program. Inspections of the facility and
occur at a minimum on a semi-annual schedule, once durin
(January through June) and once during the second half (Ju
least 60-days separating inspection dates (unless performed
inspection and any subsequent maintenance activities perfo
recording date and time of inspection, individual(s)-making
description of the facility's stormwater
Records of these inspections shall be ii
Prevention Plan. These facility inspec
stormwater discharge characteristic me
Hater systems shall
half of the year
11
.',December), with at
iuentiv). The
ied shall be documented,
ie inspection and a narrative
equipment and systems.
ie Stormwater Pollution
from, and in addition to, the
in Part II of this permit.
9. Implementation. The permittee shall implement the Plan. The permittee shall document
all monitoring, measurements,,i spections'land maintenance activities and training
provided to employees, including the log of the sampling data and of actions taken to
implement BMPs associated with the/industrial activities, including vehicle maintenance
activities. Such documentation.shall be kept on -site for a period of five years and made
available to the Director or the Director's authorized representative immediately upon
request.
PartH Page 4 of ]0

Permit No. NCS000122
SECTION B: ANALYTICAL MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Analytical monitoring of stormwater discharges shall be performed as specified in Table 1. All
analytical monitoring shall be performed during a representative storm event. The required
monitoring will result in a minimum of ten analytical samplings being conducted over the term of
the permit at each stormwater discharge outfall (SDO).
A representative storm event is a storm event that measures greater than 0.1 inches of rainfall
and that is preceded by at least 72 hours in which no storm event measuring greater than 0.1
inches has occurred. A single storm event may contain up to 10 consecutive hours of no
precipitation. For example, if it rains for 2 hours without producing any collectable discharge,
and then stops, a sample may be collected if a rain producing a discharge again within the
next 10 hours.
Table 1. Analytical Monitoring Requirements
Discharge
Characteristics
Units
Measurement Frequencyl
Sample
Type2
Sample
Location3
Copper, total recoverable
m
semi-annuaV
Grab
SDO
Creosote
m
semi-annual
/,._ , . _
Grab
SDO
Total Suspended Solids
mg/L/
< v semi-arinual
Grab
SDO
BOD5 (Biological Oxygen
Demand, 5-day)
m�
i
�� semi-annual
Grab
SDO
COD (Chemical Oxygen
Demand)
\
semi-annual
j
Grab
SDO
pH
standard
semi-annual
Grab
SDO
Total Rainfall4
inches
semi-annual
ain Gauge
Footnotes:
I Measurement Frequency: Twice per year during a representative storm event, for each year until either another
permit is issued for this facility or until this permit is revoked or rescinded. If at the end of this permitting cycle
the permittee has submitted the appropriate paperwork for a renewal permit before the submittal deadline, the
permittee will be considered for a renewal application. The applicant must continue semi-annual monitoring until
the renewed permit is issued. See Table 2 for schedule of monitoring periods through the end of this permitting
cycle.
2 If the stormwater runoff is controlled by a stormwater detention pond, a grab sample of the discharge from the
pond shall be collected within the first 30 minutes of discharge.
3 Sample Location: Samples shall be collected at each stormwater discharge outfall (SDO) unless representative
outfall status has been granted.
4 For each sampled representative storm event the total precipitation must be recorded. An on -site rain gauge or
local rain gauge reading must be recorded.
Part II Page 5 of 10

Permit No. NCS000122
The permittee shall complete the minimum ten analytical samplings in accordance with the
schedule specified below in Table 2. A minimum of 60 days must separate Period 1 and
Period 2 sample dates unless monthly monitoring has been instituted under a Tier Two
response.
Table 2. Monitoring Schedule
Monitoring periodt'Z
Sample Number
Start
End
Year 1 — Period 1
1
August 1, 2008/\
January 31, 2009
Year 1 — Period 2
2
February 1;,2b09^
\ ,July 31, 2009
Year 2 — Period 1
3
August f,'2Q09
�_ jJanuary 31, 2010
Year 2 — Period 2
4
Feb ruary,l 2010
July 31, 2010
Year 3 — Period 1
5
Augusrl- 2010
January 31, 2011
Year 3 — Period 2
6
Febtuary,l, 201 T
July 31, 2011
Year 4 — Period 1
7
1August 1,12011
January 31, 2012
Year 4 —Period 2
8
JlFebruaryil, 2012
July 31, 2012
Year 5 — Period 1
9
\August 1, 2012
January 31, 2013
Year 5 —Period 2
10
\Feb'ruary 1, 2013
July 31, 2013.
Footnotes:
1 Maintain semi-annual monitoring during permit renewal process. The applicant must continue semi-annual
monitoring until the renewed permit is issued. //
2 If no discharge occurs during the sampling. period, the permittee must submit a monitoring report indicating "No
Flow" within 30 days of the end of the six-month sampling period.
Monitoring results shall be compared to the benchmark values in Table 3. The benchmark values
in Table 3 are not permit limits but should be used as guidelines for the permittee's
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SPPP). Exceedences of benchmark values require the
permittee to increase monitoring, increase management actions, increase record keeping, and/or
install stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) in a tiered program. See below the
descriptions of Tier One and Tier Two.
Total Recoverable Copper (Cu) is not subject to the increased monitoring requirements of Tier Two!
All previous years of data for this site showed values of Cu above the benchmark. The facility
and will continue, to investigate the source of Cu in stormwater discharges form the facility. In
addition, the site will continue to make improvements through site modifications and stormwater
controls in order to reduce the Cu in stormwater discharges as per Part II, Section A.2d. These site
modifications and Cu sampling will be re-evaluated no later than the next permit term. Updates of
this process will be provided in writing to DWQ on an annual basis at a minimum:
PartIl Page 6 of 10

Permit No. NCS000122
Table 3. Benchmark Values for Analytical Monitoring
Discharge Characteristics
units
Benchmark
Copper, total recoverable
mg/L
0.007
Creosote
mg/L.
0.3
Total Suspended Solids
mg/L
100
BOD5 (Biological Oxygen
Demand, 5-day)
mg/L
30
COD (Chemical Oxygen
n
�U
Demand)
mgf
�120�\�
pH
standard
Tier One
n
e sampling results are above a�benchmark value, or outside of the benchmark range, for any
ameter at any outfall;
Then: The permittee shall:
I . Conduct.a stormwater management inspection of the facility within two weeks of receiving
sampling results.
2. Identify and evaluate possible causes of the benchmark value exceedence.
3. Identify potential, and select the specific: source controls, operational controls, or physical
improvements to reduce concentrations of the parameters of concern, or to bring
concentrations to within the benchmark range.
4. Implement the selected actions within two months of the inspection.
5. Record each instance of a Tier One response in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan.
Include the date and value of the benchmark exceedence, the inspection date, the personnel
conducting the inspection, the selected actions, and the date the selected actions were
implemented.
Part 11 Page 7 of 10

Permit No. NCS000122
Tier Two
If: During the term of this permit, the sampling results are above the benchmark values, or outside
of the benchmark range, for any specific parameter at a specific discharge outfall two times in a
row tconsecunve);
Then: The permittee shall:
1. Repeat all the required actions outlined above in Tier One.
2. Immediately institute monthly monitoring for all parameters at every outfall where a
sampling result exceeded the benchmark value for two consecutive samples. Monthly
(analytical and qualitative) monitoring shall continue until three consecutive sample results
are below the benchmark values, or within the benchmark range, for all parameters at that
outfall. X
>_
3. If no discharge occurs during the sampling period, the.permittee is required to submit a
monthly monitoring report indicating "No Flow," -
4. Maintain a record of the Tier Two response, in the;Sormwater Pollution Prevention Plan.
During the term of this permit, if the valid sampling results required for the permit monitoring
periods exceed the benchmark value, or re outside the benchmark range, for any specific
parameter at any specific outfall on more than four occasions, the permittee shall notify the DWQ
Regional Office Supervisor in writing within 30 days of receipt of the fourth analytical results.
DWQ may, but is not limited to:
• require that the permittee increase or decrease the monitoring frequency for the remainder
of the permit;
• require the permittee to install structural stormwater controls;
• require the permittee to implement other stormwater control measures; or
• require that the permittee implement site modifications to qualify for the No Exposure
Exclusion.
Part 11 Page 8 of 10

Permit No. NCS000122
SECTION C: QUALITATIVE MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Qualitative monitoring requires a visual inspection of each stormwater outfall regardless of
representative outfall status and shall be performed as specified in Table 4, and during the
analytical monitoring event. Qualitative monitoring is for the purpose of evaluating the
effectiveness of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SPPP) and assessing new sources of
stormwater pollution.
In the event an atypical condition is noted at a stormwater discharge outfall, the permittee shall
document the suspected cause of the condition and any actions taken in response to the
discovery. This documentation will be maintained with the SPPP.
Table 4. Oualitative Monitoring Reouirementc
Discharge Characteristics
Frequencyl
Monitoring
Location2
Color
semi-annual
SDO
Odor
semi-annual
iSDO ',, '
Clarity
semi-annual
/ SDO";
Floating Solids
semi-annual
/; SDO
Suspended Solids
semi_annual' `'
_� DO
� �S
Foam
semi annual,
SDO
Oil Sheen
semi- na nual y
SDO
Erosion or deposition at the
iw
semi-annual
SDO
outfall
i
Other obvious indicators
semi-annual
SDO
of stormwater pollution
Footnotes:
I Measurement Frequency: Twice per year during a representative storm event, for each year until either another
permit is issued for this facility or until this permit is revoked or rescinded. If at the end of this permitting cycle
the permittee has submitted the appropriate paperwork for a renewal permit before the submittal deadline, the
permittee will be considered for a renewal application. The applicant must continue semi-annual monitoring until
the renewed permit is issued. See Table 2 for schedule of monitoring periods through the end of this permitting
cycle.
2 Monitoring Location: Qualitative monitoring shall be performed at each stormwater discharge outfall (SDO)
regardless of representative outfall status.
SECTION D: ON -SITE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Facilities which have any vehicle maintenance activity occurring on -site which uses more than 55
gallons of new motor oil per month when averaged over the calendar year shall perform
analytical monitoring as specified below in Table 5. This monitoring shall be performed at all
stormwater discharge outfalls which discharge stormwater runoff from vehicle maintenance
PartII Page 9 of 10

Permit No. NCS000122
areas, and in accordance with the schedule presented in Table 2 (Section B). All analytical
monitoring shall be performed during a representative storm event.
Table 5. Analvtical Monitoring Requirements for On -Site Vehicle Maintenance
Discharge Characteristics
Units
Measurement
Fre uenc l
Sample
Type2
Sample
Location3
H
standard
semi-annual
Grab
SDO
Oil and Grease
mg/l
semi-annual
Grab
SDO
Total Suspended Solids
mg/l
semi-annual
Grab
SDO
Total Rainfall4
inches
semi-annual
Rain gauge
New Motor Oil Usage
gallons/month
semi-annual
n Estimate
Footnotes:
I Measurement Frequency: Twice per year during a representative sto
permit is issued for this facility or until this permit is revoked or rest
the permittee has submitted the appropriate paperwork for a renewal
permittee will be considered for a renewal application. The applicar
the renewed permit is issued. See Table 2 for schedule of monitoring
cycle.
If the stormwater runoff is controlled by a stormwater
pond shall be collected within the first 30 mutes of i
Sample Location: Samples shall be collected each
stormwater runoff from area(s) where vehicle mainten
For each sampled representative storm e�L the total
gauge reading must be recorded.
i
nt'fa each year until either another
If at the end of this permitting cycle
before the submittal deadline, the
continue semi-annual monitoring until
is through the end of this permitting
grab sample of the discharge from the
pond.
discharge outfall (SDO) that discharges
ies occur.
precipitation must be recorded. An on -site or local rain
Monitoring results shall be compared to the, benchmark values in Table 6. The benchmark
values in Table 6 are not permit limits but should be used as guidelines for the permittee's
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SPPP). Exceedences of benchmark values require the
permittee to increase monitoring, increase management actions, increase record keeping, and/or
install stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs), as provided in Part II Section B.
Table 6. Benchmark Values for Vehicle Maintenance Analytical Monitoring
Discharge Characteristics
Units
Benchmark
pH
standard
6-9
Oil and Grease
mg/L
30
Total Suspended Solids
mg/L
100
Part 11 Page 10 of 10

Permit No. NCS000122
PART III STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR NPDES STORMWATER INDIVIDUAL PERMITS
SECTION A: COMPLIANCE AND LIABILITY
Compliance Schedule
The permittee shall comply with Limitations and Controls specified for stormwater discharges in
accordance with the following schedule:
Existing Facilities already operating but applying for permit coverage for the first time: The Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan shall be developed and implemented within 12 months of the effective date of the
initial permit and updated thereafter on an annual basis. Secondary containment, as specified in Part 11,
Section A, Paragraph 2(b) of this permit, shall be accomplished within 12 months of the effective date of
the initial permit issuance.
New Facilities applying for coverage for the first time and existing facilities previously permitted and
applying for renewal under this permit: The Stormwater Pollution- Prevention -Plan shall be developed and
implemented prior to the beginning of discharges from the operation of the industrial activity and be
updated thereafter on an annual basis. Secondary containment; as specified in Part II, Section A, Paragraph
2(b) of this permit shall be accomplished prior to the beginning of discharges from the operation of the
industrial activity.
2. Duty to Comply
The permittee must comply with all conditions of thi's4ndividual permit. Any permit noncompliance
constitutes a violation of the Clean Water,Act and is, grounds for enforcement action; for permit
termination, revocation and reissuance r modification; or denial of a permit upon renewal application.
a. The permittee shall comply with standards or prohibitions established under section 307(a) of the
Clean Water Act for toxic pollutants within the time provided in the regulations that establish these
standards or prohibitions; even if the permit has not yet been modified to incorporate the
requirement.
b. The Clean Water Act provides that any person who violates a permit condition is subject to a civil
penalty not to exceed $27,500 per day for each violation. Any person who negligently violates any
permit condition is subject to criminal penalties of $2,500 to $25,000 per day of violation, or
imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or both. Any person who knowingly violates permit
conditions is subject to criminal penalties of $5,000 to $50,000 per day of violation, or
imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or both. Also, any person who violates a permit condition
may be assessed an administrative penalty not to exceed $11,000 per violation with the maximum
amount not to exceed $137,500. [Ref: Section 309 of the Federal Act 33 USC 1319 and 40 CFR
122.41(a).]
C. Under state law, a daily civil penalty of not more than twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) per
violation may be assessed against any person who violates or fails to act in accordance with the
terms, conditions, or requirements of a permit. [Ref: North Carolina General Statutes 143-
215.6A]
d. Any person may be assessed an administrative penalty by the Director for violating section 301,
302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act, or any permit condition or limitation implementing any
of such sections in a permit issued under section 402 of the Act. Administrative penalties for Class
I violations are not to exceed $11,000 per violation, with the maximum amount of any Class I
penalty assessed not to exceed $27,500. Penalties for Class II violations are not to exceed $11,000
Part III Page 1 of 8

Permit No. NCS000122
per day for each day during which the violation continues, with the maximum amount of any Class
11 penalty not to exceed S 137,500.
3. Duty to Mitigate
The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge in violation of this
individual permit which has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the environment.
4. Civil and Criminal Liabilitv
Except as provided in Part III, Section C of this permit regarding bypassing of stormwater control facilities,
nothing in this individual permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee from any responsibilities,
liabilities, or penalties for noncompliance pursuant to NCGS 143-215.3, 143-215.6A, 143-215.613, 143-
215.6C or Section 309 of the Federal Act, 33 USC 1319. Furthermore, the permittee is responsible for
consequential damages, such as fish kills, even though the responsibility for -effective compliance may be
temporarily suspended. n i'
5. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
Nothing in this individual permit shall be construed to
the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or p
under NCGS 143-215.75 et seq. or Section 311 of the I
6. Property Rights
The issuance of this individual permi
property, or any exclusive privileges,
personal rights, nor any infringement
7. Severability
on of any legal action or relieve
permittee is or may be subject to
1321.
,any property rights in either real or personal
rile any injury to private property or any invasion of
or local laws or regulations.
The provisions of this individual permifaie severable, and if any provision of this individual permit, or the
application of any provision of this individual permit to any circumstances, is held invalid, the application
of such provision to other circumstances, and the remainder of this individual permit, shall not be affected
thereby.
8. Duty to Provide Information
The permittee shall furnish to the Director, within a reasonable time, any information which the Director
may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating the
permit issued pursuant to this individual permit or to determine compliance with this individual permit. The
permittee shall also furnish to the Director upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this
individual permit.
9. Penalties for Tampering
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate,
any monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this individual permit shall, upon
conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more
than two years per violation, or by both. If a conviction of a person is for a violation committed after a first
conviction of such person under this paragraph, punishment is a fine of not more that $20,000 per day of
violation, or by imprisonment of not more than 4 years, or both.
Part III Page 2 of 8

Permit No. NCS000122
10. Penalties for Falsification of Reports
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who knowingly makes any false statement, representation, or
certification in any record or other document submitted or required to be maintained under this individual
permit, including monitoring reports or reports of compliance or noncompliance shall, upon conviction, be
punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than two years
per violation, or by both.
SECTION B: GENERAL CONDITIONS
Individual Permit Expiration
The permittee is not authorized to discharge after the expiration date. In ordento receive automatic
authorization to discharge beyond the expiration date, the permiltee shalhsubmit forms and fees as are
required by the agency authorized to issue permits no later than 180 days prior to the�expiration date. Any
penmittee that has not requested renewal at least 180 days priorlto expiration, onanypermittee that does not
have a permit after the expiration and has not requested renewal at -least 180 days prior to expiration, will be
subjected to enforcement procedures as provided in NCGS § 143j2153.6 and 33 USC 1251 et. seq.
2. Transfers
This permit is not transferable to any person
Director may require modification or revoca
incorporate such other requirements as ihay
required to notify the Division in writing it�l
3. Signatory Requirements
All applications, reports, or in]
a. All applications to be
notice to and approval by the Director. The
suanceof the permit to change the name and
under the Clean Water Act. The Permittee is
permitted facility is sold or closed
to the Director shall be signed and certified.
this individual permit shall be signed as follows:
(1) For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer. For the purpose of this Section, a
responsible corporate officer means: (a) a president, secretary, treasurer or vice president
of the corporation in charge of a principal business function, or any other person who
performs similar policy or decision making functions for the corporation, or (b) the
manager of one or more manufacturing production or operating facilities employing more
than 250 persons or having gross annual sales or expenditures exceeding 25 million (in
second quarter 1980 dollars), if authority to sign documents has been assigned or
delegated to the manager in accordance with corporate procedures.
(2) For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general partner or the proprietor,
respectively; or
(3) For a municipality, State, Federal, or other public agency: by either a principal executive
officer or ranking elected official.
b. All reports required by the individual permit and other information requested by the Director shall
be signed by a person described above or by a duly authorized representative of that person. A
person is a duly authorized representative only if:
(1) The authorization is made in writing by a person described above;
Part III Page 3 of 8

Permit No. NCS000122
4.
5.
(2) The authorization specified either an individual or a position having responsibility for the
overall operation of the regulated facility or activity, such as the position of plant
manager, operator of a well or well field, superintendent, a position of equivalent
responsibility, or an individual or position having overall responsibility for environmental
matters for the company. (A duly authorized representative may thus be either a named
individual or any individual occupying a named position.); and
(3) The written authorization is submitted to the Director.
C. Any person signing a document under paragraphs a. or b. of this section shall make the following
certification:
"I certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my
direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based'on my inquiry of the person or
i persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the
information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledgeand 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 nowing\violations."
The issuance of this individual permit does not prohibit the'Directoi from reopening and modifying the
individual permit, revoking and reissuing the individual permitor terminating the individual permit as
allowed by the laws, rules, and regulations contam�ed in Title•40, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 122
and 123; Title 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code, Subchapter 2H .0100; and North Carolina
General Statute 143-215.1 et. al. '_1) \ \ %
Permit Actions
The permit may be modified, revoked .and reissued, or terminated for cause. The notification of planned
changes or anticipated noncompliance.does not stay any individual permit condition.
SECTION C: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF POLLUTION CONTROLS
Proper Operation and Maintenance
The permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of treatment and
control (and related appurtenances) which are installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with
the conditions of this individual permit. Proper operation and maintenance also includes adequate
laboratory controls and appropriate quality assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of
back-up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems which are installed by a permittee only when the operation
is necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of this individual permit.
2. Need to Halt or Reduce Not a Defense
It shall not be a defense for a permittee in an enforcement action that it would have been necessary to halt or
reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with the condition of this individual permit.
3. Bypassing of Stormwater Control Facilities
Bypass is prohibited and the Director may take enforcement action against a permittee for bypass unless:
Part III Page 4 of 8

Permit No. NCS000122
a. Bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury or severe property damage; and
b. There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as the use of auxiliary control facilities,
retention of stormwater or maintenance during normal periods of equipment downtime or dry
weather. This condition is not satisfied if adequate backup controls should have been installed in
the exercise of reasonable engineering judgment to prevent a bypass which occurred during normal
periods of equipment downtime or preventive maintenance; and
C. The permittee submitted notices as required under, Part III, Section E of this permit.
If the Director determines that it will meet the three conditions listed above, the Director may approve an
anticipated bypass after considering its adverse effects.
SECTION D: MONITORING AND RECORDS
\ _
1. Representative Sampling i
2.
91
Samples collected and measurements taken, as required herein, shall be characteristic of the volume and
nature of the permitted discharge. Analytical sampling shall be performed during a representative storm
event. Samples shall be taken on a day and time that is characteristic of,the discharge. All samples shall be
taken before the discharge joins or is diluted by any other waste stream, body of water, or substance.
Monitoring points as specified in this permit shall not be changed -without notification to and approval of
the Director. b ,'
Recording Results \, \
For each measurement, sample, inspection o� maintenance activity performed or collected pursuant to the
requirements of this individual permit, the permittee shall record the following information:
a. The date, exact place,
measurements, inspection or maintenance activity;
b. The individual(s) who performed the sampling, measurements, inspection or maintenance activity;
C. The date(s) analyses were performed;
d. The individual(s) who performed the analyses;
e. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
f. The results of such analyses.
Flow Measurements
Where required, appropriate flow measurement devices and methods consistent with accepted scientific
practices shall be selected and used to ensure the accuracy and reliability of measurements of the volume of
monitored discharges.
4. Test Procedures
Test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to the EMC regulations published pursuant to
NCGS 143-215.63 et. seq, the Water and Air Quality Reporting Acts, and to regulations published pursuant
to Section 304(g), 33 USC 1314, of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act; as Amended, and Regulation
40 CFR 136.
Part III Page 5 of 8

Permit No. NCS000122
To meet the intent of the monitoring required by this individual permit, all test procedures must produce
minimum detection and reporting levels and all data generated must be reported down to the minimum
detection or lower reporting level of the procedure.
Representative Outfall
If a facility has multiple discharge locations with substantially identical stormwater discharges that are
required to be sampled, the permittee may petition the Director for representative outfall status. If it is
established that the stormwater discharges are substantially identical and the permittee is granted
representative outfall status, then sampling requirements may be performed at a reduced number of outfalls.
6. Records Retention
Visual monitoring shall be documented and records maintained at the facility along with the Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan. Copies of analytical monitoring results shall,alsobe maintained on -site. The
permittee shall retain records of all monitoring information, including all calibration and maintenance
i r 4..
records and all original strip chart recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation, and copies of all
reports required by this individual permit for a period of at least 5 years from•the date of the sample,
measurement, report or application. This period may be extended by request of the Director at any time.
Inspection and Entry
The permittee shall allow the Director, or an authorized representative (including an authorized contractor
acting as a representative of the Director), or in the case of a facility which discharges through a municipal
separate storm sewer system, an authorized representative_of municipal operator or the separate storm
sewer system receiving the discharge; upon the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be
required by law, to; \\�\�/�
a. Enter upon the permittee's prises where a regulated facility or activity is located or conducted,
or where records must be kept conditions of this individual permit;
b. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under the conditions of
this individual permit;
C. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and control equipment),
practices, or operations regulated or required under this individual permit; and
d. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of assuring individual permit compliance
or as otherwise authorized by the Clean Water Act, any substances or parameters at any location.
SECTION E: REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Discharge Monitoring Reports
Samples analyzed in accordance with the terms of this permit shall be submitted to the Division on
Discharge Monitoring Report forms provided by the Director. Submittals shall be received by the Division
no later than 30 days from the date the facility receives the sampling results from the laboratory.
When no discharge has occurred from the facility during the report period, the permittee is required to
submit a discharge monitoring report within 30 days of the end of the six-month sampling period, giving all
required information and indicating "NO FLOW" as per NCAC T15A 02B .0506.
Part III Page 6 of 8

Permit No. NCS000122
Submitting Reports
Duplicate signed copies of all reports required herein, shall be submitted to the following address:
Division of Water Quality
Surface Water Protection Section
ATTENTION: Central Files
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Availability of Reports
Except for data determined to be confidential under NCGS 143-215.3(a)(2) or Section 308 of the Federal
Act, 33 USC 1318, all reports prepared in accordance with the terns shall be available for public inspection
at the offices of the Division of Water Quality. As required by the Act, analytical data shall not be
considered confidential. Knowingly making any false statement on any such report may result in the
imposition of criminal penalties as provided for in NCGS 143-215N.6B or in Section 309 of the Federal Act.
4. Non-Stormwater Discharges
If the storm event monitored in accordance with this individual permit coincides with a non-stormwater
discharge, the permittee shall separately monitor all parameters as.required under the non-stormwater
discharge permit and provide this information with the stormwater discharge monitoring report.
5. Planned Changes
The permittee shall give notice to the ector as soon as possible of any planned changes at the permitted
facility which could significantly alter the,nature or quantity of pollutants discharged. This notification
i -.
requirement includes pollutants which'are not specifically listed in the individual permit or subject to
11
notification requirements under 40.GFR Part 122.42 (a).
6. Anticipated Noncomnliance
The permittee shall give notice to the Director as soon as possible of any planned changes at the permitted
facility which may result in noncompliance with the individual permit requirements.
Bypass
a. Anticipated bypass. If the permittee knows in advance of the need for a bypass, it shall submit
prior notice, if possible at least ten days before the date of the bypass; including an evaluation of
the anticipated quality and affect of the bypass.
b. Unanticipated bypass. The permittee shall submit notice within 24 hours of becoming aware of an
unanticipated bypass.
8. Twenty-four Hour Reporting
The permittee shall report to the central office or the appropriate regional office any noncompliance which
may endanger health or the environment. Any information shall be provided orally within 24 hours from
the time the permittee became aware of the circumstances. A written submission shall also be provided
within 5 days of the time the permittee becomes aware of the circumstances.
The written submission shall contain a description of the noncompliance, and its causes; the period of
noncompliance, including exact dates and times, and if the noncompliance has not been corrected, the
Part III Page 7 of 8

Permit No. NCS000122
anticipated time compliance is expected to continue; and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and
prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance.
The Director may waive the written report on a case -by -case basis if the oral report has been received
within 24 hours.
9. Other Noncompliance
The permittee shall report all instances of noncompliance not reported under 24 hour reporting at the time
monitoring reports are submitted.
10. Other Information
Where the permittee becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in an application for an
individual permit or in any report to the Director, it shall promptly submit such facts or information.
Part III Page 8 of 8

NCSOOO122
PART IV LIMITATIONS REOPENER
This individual permit shall be modified or alternatively, revoked and reissued, to comply with any applicable
effluent guideline or water quality standard issued or approved under Sections 302(b) (2) (c), and (d), 304(b) 0I and
307(a) of the Clear, Water Act, if the effluent guideline or water quality standard so issued or approved:
a. Contains different conditions or is otherwise more stringent than any effluent limitation in the individual
permit; or
b. Controls any pollutant not limited in the individual permit.
The individual permit as modified or reissued under this paragraphshall al�ntainany other requirements in the
Act then applicable. /f �/\ \� //
PART V ADMINISTERING AND
The permittee must pay the administering and
the Division. Failure to pay the fee in,tiinely i
Division to initiate action to revoke tlie,lndivi
1. Act
See Clean Water Act.
2.
4.
in
MONITORING FEE
ig fee within 30 (thirty) days after being billed by
with 15A NCAC 2H .0105(b)(4) may cause this
DEFINITIONS
Arithmetic Mean
The arithmetic mean of any set of values is the summation of the individual values divided by the number of
individual values.
Allowable Non-Stormwater Discharges
This permit regulates stormwater discharges. Non-stormwater discharges which shall be allowed in the
stormwater conveyance system are:
(a) All other discharges that are authorized by a non-stormwater NPDES permit.
(b) Uncontaminated groundwater, foundation drains, air -conditioner condensate without added
chemicals, springs, discharges of uncontaminated potable water, waterline and fire hydrant
flushings, water from footing drains, flows from riparian habitats and wetlands.
(c) Discharges resulting from fire -fighting or fire -fighting training.
Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Measures or practices used to reduce the amount of pollution entering surface waters. BMPs may take the
form of a process, activity, or physical structure.
Parts IV, V and VI Page 1 of 5

Permit No. NCS000122
5. Bypass
A bypass is the known diversion of stormwater from any portion of a stormwater control facility including
the collection system, which is not a designed or established operating mode for the facility.
6. Bulk Storage of Liquid Products
Liquid raw materials, manufactured products, waste materials or by-products with a single above ground
storage container having a capacity of greater than 660 gallons or with multiple above ground storage
containers located in close proximity to each other having a total combined storage capacity of greater than
1,320 gallons.
7. Clean Water Act
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean+Water Act (CWA), as amended, 33
USC 1251, et. seq.
8. Division or DWO
The Division of Water Quality, Department of
9. Director
The Director of the Division of Water,Quality; the permit issuing authority.
10. EMC
The North Carolina
11. Grab Sample
An individual sample collected instantaneously. Grab samples that will be directly analyzed or qualitatively
monitored must be taken within the first 30 minutes of discharge.
12. Hazardous Substance
Any substance designated under 40 CFR Part 116 pursuant to Section 311 of the Clean Water Act.
13. Landfill
A disposal facility or part of a disposal facility where waste is placed in or on land and which is not a land
treatment facility, a surface impoundment, an injection well, a hazardous waste long-term storage facility or
a surface storage facility.
14. Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
A stormwater collection system within an incorporated area of local self-government such as a city or town.
15. No Exposure
A condition of no exposure means that all industrial materials and activities are protected by a storm
resistant shelter or acceptable storage containers to prevent exposure to rain, snow, snowmelt, or runoff.
Industrial materials or activities include, but are not limited to, material handling equipment or activities,
Part VI Page 2 of 5 Pages

Permit No. NCSOOO122
industrial machinery, raw materials, intermediate products, by-products, final products, or waste products.
DWQ may grant a No Exposure Exclusion from NPDES Stormwater Permitting requirements only if a
facility complies with the terms and conditions described in 40 CFR §122.26(g).
16. Overburden
Any material of any nature, consolidated or unconsolidated, that overlies a mineral deposit, excluding
topsoil or similar naturally -occurring surface materials that are not disturbed by mining operations.
17. Permittee
The owner or operator issued a permit pursuant to this individual permit.
18. Point Source Discharge of Stormwater
Any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance including, but not specifically limited to, any pipe, ditch,
channel, tunnel, conduit, well, or discrete fissure from which stormwatei is or may be discharged to waters
of the state. /l ,
19. Representative Storm Event
A storm event that measures greater than 0.1 inches of rainfall and that is preceded by at least 72 hours in which no
storm event measuring greater than 0.1 inches has occurre& A single storm event may contain up to 10 consecutive
11
hours of no precipitation. For example, if it rains for 2 hours without producing any collectable discharge, and then
stops, a sample may be collected if a raih,produccing a discharge begins again within the next 10 hours.
20. Representative Outfall Status
When it is established that the discharge of stormwater runoff from a single outfall is representative of the
discharges at multiple outfalls, the DWQ may/grant representative outfall status. Representative outfall
status allows the permittee to perform analytical monitoring at a reduced number of outfalls.
21. Rinse Water Discharge i
22.
23
The discharge of rinse water from equipment cleaning areas associated with industrial activity. Rinse
waters from vehicle and equipment cleaning areas are process wastewaters and do not include washwaters
utilizing any type of detergent or cleaning agent.
Secondary Containment
Spill containment for the contents of the single largest tank within the containment structure plus sufficient
freeboard to allow for the 25-year, 24-hour storm event.
Section 313 Water Priority Chemical
A chemical or chemical category which:
a. Is listed in 40 CFR 372.65 pursuant to Section 313 of Title III of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986, also titled the Emergency Planning and Community Right -
to -Know Act of 1986;
b. Is present at or above threshold levels at a facility subject to SARA Title I11, Section 313 reporting
requirements; and
C. That meet at least one of the following criteria:
Part VI Page 3 of 5 Pages

Permit No. NCS000122
(1) Is listed in Appendix D of 40 CFR part 122 on either Table II (organic priority
pollutants), Table III (certain metals, cyanides, and phenols) or Table IV (certain toxic
pollutants and hazardous substances);
(2) Is listed as a hazardous substance pursuant to section 311(b)(2)(A) of the CWA at 40
CFR 116.4; or
(3). Is a pollutant for which EPA has published acute or chronic water quality criteria.
24. Severe Property Damage
Means substantial physical damage to property, damage to the control facilities which causes them to
become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of natural resources which can reasonably be
expected to occur in the absence of a bypass. Severe property damage does -not mean economic loss caused
by delays in production.
25. Significant Materials
Includes, but is not limited to: raw materials; fuels; materials such as.solvents, detergents, and plastic
pellets; finished materials such as metallic products; raw m to erials used,in food processing or production;
hazardous substances designated under section 101(14) of CERCLA; any chemical the facility is required to
report pursuant to section 313 of Title III of SARA;;fertilizers; pesticides; and waste products such as ashes,
slag and sludge that have the potential to be released with(stormwater discharges.
<�
26. Significant Spills � \�
Includes, but is not limited to: releases" foil'\ ardous substances in excess of reportable quantities
under section 311 of the Clean Water Act (Ref: 40 CFR 110.10 and CFR 117.21) or section 102 of
CERCLA (Ref: 40 CFR 302.4). / �
27. Stormwater Runoff
The flow of water which results from precipitation and which occurs immediately following rainfall or as a
result of snowmelt.
28. Stormwater Associated with Industrial Activity
The discharge from any point source which is used for collecting and conveying stormwater and which is
directly related to manufacturing, processing or raw material storage areas at an industrial site. Facilities
considered to be engaged in "industrial activities" include those activities defined in 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14).
The term does not include discharges from facilities or activities excluded from the NPDES program.
29. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
A comprehensive site -specific plan which details measures and practices to reduce stormwater pollution and
is based on an evaluation of the pollution potential of the site.
30. Ten Year Design Storm
The maximum 24 hour precipitation event expected to be equaled or exceeded on the average once in ten
years. Design storm information can be found in the State of North Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control
Planning and Design Manual.
Part VI Page 4 of 5 Pages

Permit No. NCS000122
31. Total Flow
The flow corresponding to the time period over which the entire storm event occurs. Total flow shall be
either; (a) measured continuously, (b) calculated based on the amount of area draining to the nutfatl, the
amount of built -upon (impervious) area, and the total amount of rainfall, or (c) estimated by the
measurement of flow at 20 minute intervals during the rainfall event.
32. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
A TMDL is a calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a waterbody can receive and still meet
water quality standards, and an allocation of that amount to the pollutant's sources. A TMDL is a detailed
water quality assessment that provides the scientific foundation for an implementation plan. The
implementation plan outlines the steps necessary to reduce pollutant loads in a certain body of water to
restore and maintain water quality standards in all seasons. The Clean Water Act, section 303, establishes
the water quality standards and TMDL programs.
33. Toxic Pollutant
Any pollutant listed as toxic under Section 307(a)(1) of the Clean Wit
34. Upset
\\,
Means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with
technology based permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the reasonable control of the
permittee. An upset does not includcnoncomplianceto the extent caused by operational error, improperly
designed treatment or control facilities, imidequate treatment or control facilities, lack of preventive
maintenance, or careless or improper,operation.
35. Vehicle Maintenance Activity
Vehicle rehabilitation, mechanical repairpainting, fueling, lubrication, vehicle cleaning operations, or
airport deicing operations.
36. Visible Sedimentation
Solid particulate matter, both mineral and organic, that has been or is being transported by water, air,
gravity, or ice from its site of origin which can be seen with the unaided eye.
37. 25-year, 24 hour storm event
The maximum 24-hour precipitation event expected to be equaled or exceeded, on the average, once in 25
years.
Part VI Page 5 of 5 Pages

GENERAL TIMBER, INC. CHATHAM COUNTY
,,. NCS 000122
SAMPLING EVENT DATE: /0
PERMIT PART I, SECTION 2, b, 6(2): VISUAL MONITORING
STORMWATER DISCHARGE
CHARACTERISTICS
SDO-001
SDO-003
Color
L� !r f t3
Ora e- a
ay
Odor
Clarity
Floating SolidsPres-
Suspended Solids�,e
re�sP.¢�bc�lrrtsa,/
�reoE�cf-
Foam
Oil Sheen
Other Various Indications
of Stormwater Pollution
SAMPLING EVENT DATE:101544 j I —
PERMIT PART I, SECTION 2, c, g(1): ANALYTICAL MONITORING
STORMWATER DISCHARGE
CHARACTERISTICS
SDO-001
SDO-003
Arsenic(mg/L)
�.0�/�
0,0/4a
Total Chromium (mg/L)
p , 0 3 l°
0. 03Sj
Total Copper (mg/L)
Total Suspended Solids
(mg/L)
Total Rainfall (inches)
Event Duration (minutes)
76-
]5�
Total Flow (gal.)
JUL 0 S 2008

Stormwater Sampling Event
General Timber, Inc.
' I
Samples were collected and analyzed for TI
EPA Methods 160.2 and 200.7, respectively.
i
summarized in Table 1. Cut-off concentra
included in the original NPDES Permit. Thei
obtained from Mr. Tony Evans from the Dep
Resources - Division of Environmental Mane
The stormwater sampling results indicate
Suspended Solids (TSS) for one outfall for or
for both the August 9 and September 3 saml
9 sampling event of Outfall No. 001 was 338
limit of 100 mg/L.
October 8, 1996
S&ME Job No. 1054-93-108
Suspended Solids (TSS) and metals by
e laboratory results from these events are
Is for the sampling parameters were not
-off concentrations listed in Table 1 were
lent of Environment, Health, and Natural
'nent, Stormwater Section.
hat all sample parameters except Total
sampling event were within the cut-off limits
ig events. The TSS results for the August
g/L, thus exceeding the established cut-off
Table
.1:
Laboratory Analytical
Results
I .
Bi-Annual Sampling Event
General Timber, S&ME'Job
No. 1054-93-108
Compound
Outfall No. 001
:.
Outfall No : 003.
NPDES
8/9/96
; 913/96
819/96
9/3/96
Cut-Offs'
Total Suspended Solids
3387m—g/L
I17 mg/L
83 mg/L
38 mg/L
100 mg/L
Arsenic
15.5 Ng/L
F BQL
36.8 pg/L
38.6 ug/L
360 pg/L
Chromium
24.9 pg/L
6.991Ng/L
37.4 leg/L
34.5 pg/L
984 pg/L
Copper
28 2-17g/L
0219�149X
`..5;:;7� _ , _
`21=1=pg t
N/A
Total Rainfall
0.6 in
10.6 in
0.8 in
0.8 in
Event Duration
65 mins
65'mins
169 mins
169 mins
Total Flow*
—90 gals
710jigals
—205 gals
—330 gals
NW - Not Applicable

GENERAL TIMBER, INC. CHATHAM COUNTY
NCS 000122
SAMPLING EVENT DATE:
PERMIT PART 1, SECTION 2, b, g(2): VISUAL MONITORING
STORMWATER DISCHARGE
CHARACTERISTICS
SDO-001
SDO-003
Color
Odor
Clarity
Floating Solids
S orne_ y
Y("SQ
Suspended Solids
J
/ f
Foam
o h e
ohe
Oil Sheen
Other Various Indications
of Stormwater Pollution
I h ov\e-
SAMPLING EVENT DATE:
PERMIT PART 1, SECTION 2,1,c, g(1): ANALYTICAL MONITORING
STORMWATER DISCHARGE
CHARACTERISTICS
SDO-001
SDO-003
Arsenic (mg/L)
Total Chromium (mg/L)
L Q C
C, 0
Total Copper (mg/L)O�e�O
Total Suspended Solids
(mg/L)
I Q ,
i ;� • C
Total Rainfall (inches)
Event Duration (minutes)
Q i-n'l n
Total Flow (gal.)

Mr. Art Williams
General Timber, Inc
December 1, 1999
Page 3
Water samples were collected and analyzed for Total Suspended Solids (TSS) using EPA
Method 160.2 (Outfalls 001 and 003), Total Metals using SW846 6010B (Outfalls 001
and 003), and Oil and Grease using SW846 9070,(Outfall 002). According to Mr. Greg
Williams with General Timber, the analytical requested for oil and grease was actually
for samples collected from Below Shop Area. The Chain -of -Custody dated 9/28/99 was
labeled incorrectly. The sample ID location marked SDO-002 for oil and grease should
have been labeled Below Shop Area. Table 1 is a summary of the laboratory analytical
results. The NPDES permit does not list cut-off concentrations for the referenced
compounds.
Table It >
k 19" Stormwater Sampling Eyent "boratory.Analyfical Results -
.. - ... .. := General Jlmbeir; Sanford, NC.;
NP13U ;NCS600122 o-
Compound
Outfall,SDO-001
a",0utfal1:S00-003
BelowSho Area'
9/28/99."- a
` r a.9%15/99. - I 1`'
'..9/28/99
9/28/99 < "`
TSS
75
t;107-
Z:4,73r7
25
NA
Arsenic
0.0273
0201
0.0,165
BQL
NA
Chromium
BQL
0.0771
BQL
BQL
NA
Copper
046
Oi06.8£
- Oi03 3
BQL
NA
Lead
0.0104
BQL
BQL
BQL
NA
Oil & Grease
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.3
TSS - Total Suspended Solids I
NA - Not Analyzed
All units in milligram/liter (mg/1)
BQL - Below Quantitation Limits -
*Note: These are incorrectly labeled as SDO-003 on the chain -of -custody
Closure
UTTS/E appreciates the opportunity to work with you in this capacity. Please call us if
you have any questions at [phone].
Sincerely,
UTTS ENVIRONMENTAL
. ''tCt j 2u lG¢
Susan L. Dou h1iez Ka rina L. Lueck
Project Manager Project Professional
cc UTTS/Files

Mr. Art Williams
December 12, 2000
Page 2
TABLE�1
2000 Stormwater Sampling Eventiaboratory Analytical Results
General Timber, Sanford; Chatham Co., NC
NPDES NCS000122
Compound
Outfall SDO-001• : i 1 .
Outfall SD04)03
3/20/00
7/25/00
3/20/00
7125/00
TSS
52 mg/I
i420 mg-V
45 mg /1
19.3 mg/I
Arsenic
0.0395 m l
27 1
0.0100 m 1
51 1
Chromium
BQL
24 I
O.Olo rn 1
tANAd
Co er
to'0203_ I
er30:µ
00209Tii
Lead
BQL
NA
O.OIO0 m I
BQL - Below Quantitation Limits
NA - Not Analyzed
The annual arithmetic mean for TSS at Outfall SDO-001 (48.5 mg/1) and Outfall SDO-
003 (69.65 mg/1) is below the permit TSS cut-off concentration of 100 mg/l. According
to the stormwater permit, "if the arithmetic mean is less than the specified cut-off
concentration for a given parameter, then the facility is not required to continue annual
analytical monitoring for that parameter (at that outfall) during the remaining term of the
permit unless a significant change in facility operations or configuration occurs. If a cut-
off concentration results in discontinued analytical monitoring at an individual discharge
outfall, the permittee is required to maintain facility operations that ensure the
continuation of stormwater runoff quality." Tile permit also states "the permittee must
perform analytical sampling during the first and last year of the permit coverage
regardless of cut-off concentration conditions."
Closure
UTTS, a division ofNESCO, Inc. appreciates the opportunity to work with you in this
capacity. Please call us if you have any questions at [phone].
Sincerely,
UTTS, a division of NESCO, Inc.
C� Q y c c,yy{t t
Susan Lau�ltin house Dougtttie"
Project Manager
cc UTTS Files

LEPEND
ACCESS/EVACUATION ROUTES
■ MONITOR WELL
BOUNDARY LINE
— —DITCH LINE
°— FENCE LINE
0 EXISTING IRON PIPE
WATER VALVE
■ WATER METER
`QT UTILITY POLE
o TELEPHONE PEDESTAL
0 8" TERRA COTTA PIPE
LEGEND FOR STORAGE TANKS:
1— WATER
2— FUEL OIL
3— CCA SOLUTION
4— CREOSOTE
5— CCA CONCENTRATE
6— NATURAL GAS
7— PESTICIDE
8— WASTE WATER
�Q/ C4S
LEGEND FOR PROCESS AREAS:
A— TIMBER RECEIVING AND SORTING
B— TREE —LENGTH DEBARKING
C— POST AND POLE SIZING
D— CHIPPING
E— POLE AND RAIL BEVELING
AND SPLITTING
F— KILN DRYING
G— WOOD TREATING
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION OF STORAGE PRACTICES AND PROCESSES: w
a'
1. Fresh cut, tree length timbers, clear wood, and treated lumber are stored in exterior storage areas
on —site. Treated lumber is also stored under a canopy roof.
2. Wood processing by—products (bark, sawdust wood chips) are stored at designated locations on —site
prior to recycling or re —use. OUTFALL
3. Treated wood is staged on a covered drip pad after being removed from the two treatment cyclinders. SDO-00--
The processed wood remains staged on the drip pad until the liquid residues have completely drained 226` "� ".� ?\�-
from the bundles. ✓ j \`� \ \�
4. Treatment chemicals (creosote, CCA) are stored in tanks that are located within properly —sized
secondary containment structures.
5. Diesel fuel is stored in tanks that are located with properly —sized secondary containment structures. j j wl \\w '�
w
234
!I
l � i
I I
DR�NAGE-AREA �w ��a vw w m w w `$ .Y I
OU ALL SDb-*3 1 1
V W6-
ZW' I
\ \J / •� W w w v' w) J' I ! li/ �N INS
/ ND
yr •� W,�b a-++ io 0
\ i��� ��_ �'v -i J� y W w W W •Y� 'v�
17
rn
°��° w w w Ni18
V%��_BMW-t
w-
[I11 w0 W w W w. I, w 24
•�� •MN ,
FORMER � M ,6 ,-t \
�� Nw-13 IMPOUNDMENT
W \ _
o 21 -
...
�` \� \ \• 23 / , � -.Y / •y 21.} .y w .�N V.y O
` � w
l\ //j/ + •Y / .Y / .� d y w W LL' i w !-_ ��.: a 2ffia-.___ ���_v—`����\\
v7_4
t
•i,_�� STORA�
�`
° 3e - �. - �w/' jr,
�F10P , J/ CHIPS AND
' I �� \\o tt
I � r
� t
u-
�rj°j I 1 A
_ 11 ggg TANK"'.
- ax SHED
3, !
.B �� •Y WHITE WODO STORAW), \ -
PIXE BARN BENCHMARK
\ '\ TOP COLUMN fOOTN
\ - ELEv 252.,8
tiY
14,
9. TREATED \ Q�T; SHED
(v O ) wO TE { / ) ! NEL
( \ STORAGE, _ '� COVERED }
v A 1 DRIP PADS --� )•`/ t A W 1 1,
1 w
\ \ DIP TANK/��1�1,.� �
SHED' T ,r IEARAWIIA FEE1. Y Y I
zn a \ PPE ¢[v KILN �
w a
TREE feARKo each
NINE ENTRlJiCE ° — I� _ , O � TIMBER u i SB 8 0
TREATED WOOD STORAGE A S r;. SBOAACE
O d//1 /, I !I i
l j ISCAN� TROOF 1 J "f 7�/;, ;' I
MON. HELL G ! I (Z1506 ALS)
CS ELEV-25e T6 ! � '- � `21' vss� � 1S' of ,y� I •y IFfi
WHITE WOOD
0 > LL m + EAIEa WOm STORAGE v e. �. w w 1EATED S1DR E
b y m m Y DRAINAGE
AREA
LL'
T ;
v
w \ / / I EIEV-241{.58 W J' w .,' •L 'Y l ,+Y �,a. '1>'Y W
OI TREATED WOOD STORAGEQt,, INV- 80 W y
�• �� � � �_ BARKY STOftAGEi w � _
xx .,
lE9
TED 1W]OD AGE
W
TREAIF.D WOOD STORAGE WHITE WOOD f
0-!
3
TREATED WOOD STORAGE
` 4
,W J.
ncER r _ w
0 o f \
O
TREATED Wood STORAGE OUTFALL o �"
' j .Y v- I �+v- .y . — y w _.-_�1 W W �W _ •„ SDO-001 W w w y
4'C `w '1' v+ -„�_ V�_"`��� •v °
O
�i '--`
N 2 0, 169.59' S79 w
418.32'
DRAINAGE AREA
OUTFALL S99-001
MON. WELL N
ELEV-260.12 mod. WELL I
GS ELEV-257.AS 8-6-257.61
GY ELEV-25SI4
NOTES:
1—VERTICAL DATUM BASED ON NCGS STATION CHA 4. NGVD 29 ELEVATION 290.259'
2— BOUNDARY INFORMATION TAKEN FROM MAP ENTITLED "GENERA_ TIMBER, INC., OAKLAND TOWNSHIP'
CHATHAM COUNTY, 2-20-88" BY ANDY WILLETT, RES.
3— RECEIVING STREAM GEORGES CREEK, STREAM CLASS: C, SUB —BASIN: 03-06-11 CAPE FEAR RIVER BASIN
IS NOT ON NORTH CAROLINA'S 303 (d) LIST AND IS NOT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED FOR WHICH A TMDL
HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
AS -BUILT SURVEY FOR:
NEP\\\-xkL THMEBIGR9 HNCO
625 FARMVILLE MINE ROAD SANFORD, N.C. 27330
OAKLAND TOWNSHIP, CHATHAM COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA
JANUARY 13, 2003, MAY 28, 2008 (revised)
SURVEYOR:
JEFFREY L. GREEN
5322 BIG OAK CHURCH ROAD
EAGLE SPRINGS , N.C.

LEGEND
ACCESS/EVACUATION ROUTES
® MONITOR WELL
— BOUNDARY LINE
—...—DITCH LINE
FENCE LINE
0 EXISTING IRON PIPE
�a WATER VALVE
■ WATER METER
9D� UTILITY POLE
o TELEPHONE PEDESTAL
0 8" TERRA COTTA PIPE
LEGEND FOR STORAGE TANKS:
1— WATER
2— FUEL OIL
3— CCA SOLUTION
4— CREOSOTE
5— CCA CONCENTRATE
6— NATURAL GAS
7— PESTICIDE
8— WASTE WATER
LEGEND FOR PROCESS AREAS:
A— TIMBER RECEIVING AND SORTING
B— TREE —LENGTH DEBARKING
C— POST AND POLE SIZING
D— CHIPPING
E— POLE AND RAIL BEVELING
AND SPLITTING
F— KILN DRYING
G— WOOD TREATING
i
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION OF STORAGE PRACTICES AND PROCESSES:
1. Fresh cut, tree length timbers, clear wood, and treated lumber are stored in exterior storage areas w w w w w w SSv
on —site. Treated lumber is also stored under a canopy roof.
2. Wood processing by—products (bark, sawdust wood chips) are stored at designated locations on —site
prior to recycling or re —use. OUTFALL w w y
3. Treated wood is staged on a covered drip pad after being removed from the two treatment cyclinders. SDO-003
The processed wood remains staged on the drip pad until the liquid residues have completely drained
from the bundles.
4. Treatment chemicals (creosote, CCA) are stored in tanks that are located within properly —sized",
secondary containment structures.
5. Diesel fuel is stored in tanks that are located with properly —sized secondary containment structures. w A
Z o f
A
N �
O� v ✓� w w' w w w 'L W w' f ,
T C3 \Y MW-21
'v W' w w w w w w v ✓ '
w 'i w ,v v, W •v wMW-A w W v w
O
DRAINAGE AREA
OUTFALL SDO-003
w v w •-0 o W w w w W V• a '�y
W-22 !MW-12 % O Y OD
v w V+ w W w w W W •Y v - VA
.', w J�a .' V, w •l' w w w w
6gMW-18 W-q
W�MW-'D w w d• w w w •Y�
' MW-11 0 MW-16D •MW-24
O w w w •Y w w' .1
_ FORMER MW-18
y yMW-13 v IMPOUNDMENT
n,
(CLOSED) o � To4,'�
BMW-15w
SUMP
CAMU
w -
o w w, w w w w w w w w w
V
MWC
Y•
32 �MW-QfH O
_` �n3^o,`lic w r . � '- v _ MW-14.;, w w o w ,v w w w a -: 3 •v
MW-F
•-
•MW-E
,r w "Y ✓ Jw w w w W w w W w W w r '> w
v- .y .202,00' �
BARKY STORAGE m w w w w wh,
w O w w v w �. w w ✓ w JI� C SHOP/ CHIPS AND
t� SAWDUST
O� -+L � v w w w b "v v ww ! � ♦ v w L W W •L W t
.. ✓ w w w im�i 14-
OJ Eh' P[v-¢n Ia TANK'' 'tea
L
PLANT 4 FARM 0 p w w t w p 1
RlP f Tts �_— l Q ' 2.1
SHED
6@) e0�'P v w v w w 1 Rti
t WHITE WOOD STORAGE JJJ 1 F
' POLE BARN BENCHMARKTOP
:• w ELEV 25218 FWEN
SHED -'17
/ CHIPS AND Y `1 `✓ `✓ `•'
9%. O TREATED
p FUEL TANK SAWDUST
STORAGE COVERED
DRIP PADS .: AR w w vi v u
W% DIP TANK
w w
SHED, ! 12' TERRACOTTA WE
y w w w
�. ,
�4 iCP Cf PPE 2H.3T 1
KILN
4N w Jr
1
s,1 \ ,e.��pq]_� TREE -LENGTH BARNO BOOM
afi r, MINE ENTRPNCE r �Y EMBER ®� L1 W$8$J2S'DStE
0— ';'si eT 104
MON. WELL G
ELEV-261.13
GS EtEV-25876
-;k w -
"'S.` r w w p
TREATED WOW STORAGE R
,v^(=' 1� STORAGE
k
�► BAFKY �, w w �'.
Tm Y nAsnc H STORAGE V i
DIESEL FUEL TANK w w
CANOPY ROOF
(]500 GALS)
TQ r EIE-245.i wsrc f8 v-2Zi5
i
�
/ \ �SHER
�1REATED WOOD STORAGE 1 - w ,✓ v �w v //1 w v 41t [�
WHITE HOOD
v w w w 4 .✓ `L w TREATED STOR wa
TREATED WOW STORAGE
ry �
DRAINAGE
i 4
AREA
\ WHITE woW
.y
CCBB 22
gLEY 24d.56 �'` " ,• L- v v .v v r + w / w w w 'a, w W
iw1. •y. w / '� TREATED WOOD STORAGE
v w . v �J' w v' V' w go
BARKY STORAGE w
�
'i b& V' w\✓ ,L \ "9 ,�,„` v •r y✓'•-E: 3» 4 ,� w w w ,,. W
\ TR TEDTORA\ D
w Y � w� v^ .- S W •v w V � w W v w w
EATED WOW
W \ v
\ v J \ \w v\y TREATED WOOD STORAGE WHITE W000
Oy
\ ti Vh
,,� �� .y'� � v _� w W w W �l .y w •L W v W
w w [ w
TREATED WOW STORAGE
neER CAT 0
w w y w w w v w v �
o ., •Y- M v 6' u W\ w w w m w w (_i Y ,y W w w
TREATED WOW STORAGE OUTFALL
v w w
,� w w w w-..� �,` ,y SDO-001
2'
172.1 w w w m. 0
MOH. WELL H
EIFV-260.12 MONWELL I
S GS EREV-257.45 R N-257.61
GS ELEV-255.14
N78.eve w w . 7�-
DRAINAGE AREA "• Y w w - w w w
OUTFALL SDO-001
a19.53'
Q��c=od[�
JUL 0 8 2008
DENR - IN R WALI
Wetlands & 9tarnEvater grand,
NOTES:
1—VERTICAL DATUM BASED ON NCGS STATION CHA 4. NGVD 29 ELEVATION 290,259'
2— BOUNDARY INFORMATION TAKEN FROM MAP ENTITLED "GENERAL TIMBER, INC., OAKLAND TOWNSHIP'
CHATHAM COUNTY, 2-20-8811 BY ANDY WILLETT, RLS.
3— RECEIVING STREAM GEORGES CREEK, STREAM CLASS: C, SUB —BASIN: 03-06-11 CAPE FEAR RIVER BASIN
IS NOT ON NORTH CAROLINA'S 303 (d) LIST AND IS NOT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED FOR WHICH A TMDL
HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
T
S-BUILT SURVEY FOR:
ENERAL THMTJDD)J� 9 HNC.
625 FARMVILLE MINE ROAD SANFORD, N.C. 27330
OAKLAND TOWNSHIP, CHATHAM COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA
JANUARY 13, 2003, MAY 28, 2008 (revised)
i
f uy, 'r:
m.
1 elt - 80 f",
32G.
SURVEYOR:
JEFFREY L. GREEN
5322 BIG OAK CHURCH ROAD
EAGLE SPRINGS , N.C.

General Timber, Inc.
Pressure Treated Wood Products
625 Farmville Mine Road Sanford, NC 27330
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail] • Website: www.genera ltimber.ne
A T
m
W
7 February 2008
Mr. Robert D. Patterson, P.E.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality o
1617 Mail Service Center n
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Ref: Draft NPDES Stormwater Permit No. NCS000122
General Timber, Inc., Sanford, Chatham County, NC
Dear Mr. Patterson:
General Timber, Inc. has reviewed the draft NPDES stormwater permit dated January 9, 2008 and wishes to submit
the following questions and comments for your consideration:
1. What is the technical rationale for the addition of COD, BOD, and pH to the analytical monitoring
requirements in the draft permit?
2. Table 3 of the draft permit includes a Benchmark Value for total recoverable copper of 0.007 mg/L (7
ug/L). This value is well below the historical copper data that was reported under the ori;inal permit. For
example, in reporting years 1999 and 2000, copper levels of 0.0464 and 0.0201 me/L, respectively, were
. reported for samples collected at outfall SDO-001. Assuming that these historical copper values are
representative of current conditions, the facility may exceed the Benchmark Value and be subject to the
Tier I guidelines after the initial monitoring event and Tier 2 guidelines after the second monitoring event.
What is the technical justification for the 0.007 mg/L copper benchmark in the draft permit? To what
extent were the historical data considered in deriving the copper Benchmark. Value?
3. The average usage of new motor oil is approximately 40 gallons per month based on purchasing records
and inventory reconciliation.
4. The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for the facility needs to be updated. Some elements of the
updated plan (e.g., feasibility study, BMP selection) will be influenced by the final permit conditions and
the initial smrmvrutcr monitor ng data. How fitter rece;lpt of the f nai permit shouici the updated plan
be implemented?
Your response to these questions and comments would be appreciated.
Sincerely,
William A: Williams
Vice President
m.
�R

..W* 1:-& m Fes ' c,11VK — �9/o 3 1
GENERAL TIMBER STORMWATER PERMIT
Discussion Points
• Proposed Cu Benchmark value in draft permit is significantly lower
than historical CU sampling data for the facility.
• Volume of stormwater discharged through primary outfall SDO-001 is
usually minimal and for the majority of storms there is "No Flow."
• Vegetative barriers in primary drainage channel restrict flow and
provide filtration of storm flows.
• Volume of stormwater discharged through secondary outfall SDO-003
is less than SDO-0001. Since closure of surface impoundments in this
area of the facility, there is little likelihood of industrially -derived
pollutants at this location.
• During a recent storm (May 28) that produced 0.8 inches of rainfall, no
stormwater through outfall SDO-001 until approximately 6 hours after
the onset of the storm. The total discharge for this storm was estimated
to be on the order of 250 gallons with a maximum flow of 5 gpm.
Possible BMPs
• Add limestone to interior drainage channels (in storage lanes) to
provide pH buffering and possible metals removal.
• Construct limestone "flow-thru" barriers in multiple locations along
primary discharge channel (using Class B rip rap).
• Design/build additional covered storage for treated wood products.
• Design/implement drainage improvements during future site
remediation activities.
0 Stormwater collection and treatment prior to discharge.

Re: Meeting
Subject: Re: Meeting
From: Robert Patterson <[e-mail]
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 10:02:15 -0400
To: [e-mail]
Freeman,
We are on for 6/9 at loam in the 9th floor conference room here in the Archdale
Building.
I can't find a copy of my response to the owner's comments in a letter dated 2/7/08
and received by DWQ on 2/11/08.
Here are my responses:
1. As per our latest policy, monitoring for pH is being added to all individual
permit renewals. It is a good indicator of water quality problems. BOD and COD are
being added to wood treatment facility permits because we have found high levels of
these pollutants in surface water along the property of timber facilities.
2. The benchmark value for copper is based on thel/2 FAV from EPA's National
Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2006. We recognize these acute values are low
and the toxicity of copper is highly variable; dependant on the amount dissolved, and
the hardness of the water. NC currently uses 50 mg/L hardness when calculating
toxicity values for these metals.
3. Noted. The vehicle maintenance section is standard language that we put in all
permits.
4. The SPPP must be reviewed and updated on an annual basis; or when there is a
significant change at the facility.
See you on next Monday.
Robert
Freeman Cook Jr. wrote: '
Robert,
Confirming meeting on Monday June 9 at 10 a.m. in your offices.
Could you forward me an elec copy of your response to the draft permit questions
submitted by General TImber (Feb 7 or 8) ?
Thanks,
Freeman Cook
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: htt2://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/su/stormwater.html
I of 1 6/4/2008 10:02 AM

/§5_1'�§$+L°»Za &►MS PCLXLFont 0040Z+QB°'J-e°�o u►MS PCLXLFont 0010Z+qB°'

General Timber, Inc.
Pressure Treated Wood Products
625 Farmville Mine Road Sanford, NC 27330
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail] Website: www.generaItimber.net
December 12, 2007
Mr. Robert Patterson, P.E.
Stormwater Permitting Unit
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Ref: Stormwater Monitoring Data
General Timber, Inc., Sanford, NC
NCS000122
Dear Mr. Patterson:
Pursuant to your recent request, enclosed please find one (1) copy of the 2004 rainfall data and
stormwater monitoring reports for the General Timber, Inc. facility located at 625 Farmville
Mine Road in Sanford, NC 27330.
Should there be any questions concerning this information, please contact me at 919-774-6213.
Sincerely,, %/
& bj j C.G..w>
William A. Williams
Vice President
/Enclosure

General Timber, Inc.
Pressure Treated Wood Products
625 Farmville Mine Road Sanford, NC 27330
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail] Website: www.generaItimber.net
2004 RAINFALL LOG
JANUARY
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
1/25/2004
2"
2/6/2004
1"
0
4/13/2004
1.5"
5/2/2004
3"
2/12/2004
1"
4/26/2004
.5"
5/12/2004
.2"
2/15/2004
1.5"
5/23/2007
.5"
2/17/2004
25"1
5i29/2007
2"
2/27/2004
.5"
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
6/4/20/04
1.8"
7/10/2004
.91,
8/2/2004
.3"
9/8/2004
1.6"
10/3/2004
.11"
6/15/2004
A"
7/13/2004
.6"
8/12/2004
1.5"
9/13/2004
A"
10/13/2004
.51,
6/24/2004
.75"
7/17/2004
.T
8/15/2004
1.7"
9/18/2004
.3"
10/24/2004
.1"
6/25/2004
.5"
7/27/2004
1.4"
8/29/2004
3"
9/28/2004
.8"
6/28/2004
1"
7/30/2004
1.2"
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
11/20/2004
1"1
12/1/2004
.2"
12/2/2004
.7"

Select Element Occurrence
Page 1 of 1
Select Element Occurrence(s)
Found 2 Element Occurrence(s)
Scientific "ED
Common
Date Last
EO
EO
State
Federal
State
Global
Select -Details
EO ID Name
Nb
'Name
Observed
Rank
Accuracy
Protection
Protection
Rank
Rank
Status
Status
r View
Lanius
17487
15
Loggerhead
1990-
E
Very
Sc
53 B,53N
G4
ludovicianus
Shrike
PRE
Low
View
Notropis"
24063
30
Cape Fear
2004-10-
-
E
Medium
E
E -
S3
GI
mekistocholas
Shiner-
27
❑ Select All
Zoom to Record
http://nhpweb.enr.state.nc.us/nhis/partner/forms/eo/eo—Py eo_select.phtml?showOnMap=... 12/3/2007

,. \OaOF W ATE9QG
J �
, 2007
Mr. Art Williams
General Timber Inc.
625 Farmville Mine Road
Sanford, NC 27330
Subject: Notice of Violation
General Timber Inc: NOV-2007-PC-0501
Stormwater Evaluation Inspection
NPDES Permit No. NCS000122
Chatham County
Dear Mr. Williams:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
-i Ii�EiY
On July 24, 2007, Ms. Stephanie Brixey of the Raleigh Regional Office conducted a stormwater evaluation inspection of
General Timber with your assistance. All help was appreciated as it eased the inspection process.
The following observations were made:
I. The facility does have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SPPP) on -site. The plan was written by S&ME in
1995. The plan has not been updated since that time and has not been fully implemented. The permit requires
that the plan be reviewed and updated annually. This is found in Part 11, Section A.8 in the permit.
2. The qualitative monitoring has not been conducted as required by the permit. No monitoring has been performed
in 2007, which is a violation of the permit. It was completed in November and December of 2006. Qualitative
monitoring is to be done once during April to May and once during September to November. This requirement is
found in Section C of the permit. If during these timeframes there is no discharge due to lack of rainfall, please
document this and keep on file.
3. There are two outfalls, which was observed during the inspection.
4. The facility is covered under an expired permit and is responsible to perform all requirements as stated in that
permit. The renewal application was submitted on time.
5. Mr. Williams stated that the facility has not had any spills during the past three years. The plan requires you to
keep a list. If no spills have occurred then document that on the list and keep on file.
The overall condition of General Timber's stormwater program is not compliant with Division standards. If
you have questions regarding the attached report or any of the findings, please contact Stephanie Brixey
at 919-791-4200 (or email: steplianie.brixey@ncmai].net ).
Sincerof
annon Lang ey
Acting Surface WaXionSupervisor
Raleigh Regional Office
Cc: Stephanie Brixey- RRO North Carolina
Natimally
Central Files
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Raleigh Regional Office Surface Water Protection Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o.enrstate.nc.us 1628 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/l0% Post Consumer Paper

Permit: NCS000122
SOC:
County: Chatham
Region: Raleigh
®• S®
Compliance Inspection Report
Effective: 11/12/99 Expiration: 11/30/04 Owner: General Timber Inc
Effective: Expiration: Facility: General Timber Incorporated-SrN2148
625 F3rmville Mine Rd
Sanford NC 27330
Contact Person: Clement, Williams Title: Phone: [phone]
Directions to Facility:. am.Y <-+-•
System Classifications:
Primary ORC: Certification: Phone:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Representative(s)
On -site representative Art Williams Phone:
Related Permits:
Inspection Date: 07124/2007 Entry Time: 01:00 PM Exit Time: 02:30 PM
Primary Inspector: Stephanie Brixey �tt.11�>( Phone:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Reason for Inspection: Routine
Permit Inspection Type: Stonmwater Discharge, Individual
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ■ Not Compliant
Question Areas:
M Storm Water
(See attachment summary)
Inspection Type: Stormwater
Page: 1

Permit: NCS000122 Owner • Facility: General Timber Inc
Inspection Date: 07/24/2007 Inspection Type: Stormwater Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
The facilty has 2 stormwater outfalls on -site.
The stormwater permit expired 11/30/2004. The facility submitted a renewal application and are waiting for a new permit.
Qualitative monitoring has been performed semi-annually but not during the timeframes specified in the permit. The
permit requirements is once in the spring (April -June) and once in the fall (September -November).
The SPPP is not reviewed and updated annually.
Page: 2

Permit: NCS000122 Owner - Facility: General Timber Inc
Inspection Date: 07/24/2007 Inspection Type: Stormwater Reason for Visit: Routine
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Yes No NA NE
Does the site have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a General Location (l1SGS) map?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and drainage areas?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a list of significant spills occurring during the past 3 years?
❑
■
❑
❑
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Party(s)?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
❑
■
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
■
❑
❑
❑
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
❑
■
❑
❑
Comment: There have not been any spills in the last three years but there is no
documentation. The SPPP was written by SWE Inc. in August, 1995. The plan is not
reviewed and updated annually.
Qualitative Monitoring
Yes
No
NA
NE
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually?
❑
■
❑
❑
Comment: Qualitative monitoring was not performed in the spring of 2007. In 2005
and 2006 it was done twice per year but both were in the last half of the year,
Anal ical Monitoring
Yes
No
NA
NE
Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring from Vehicle Maintenance areas?
❑
❑
■
❑
Comment: The facility performed analytical monitoring in 2005.
Permit and Outfalls
Yes
No
NA
NE
# Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site?
■
Cl
❑
❑
# Were all outfalls observed during the inspection?
■
❑
❑
❑
# If the facility has representative outfall status, is it properly documented by the Division?
❑
❑
■
❑
# Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non stormwater) discharges?
■
Cl
❑
❑
Page: 3

Permit: NCS000122 Owner - Facility: General Timber Inc
Inspection Date: 07/24/2007 Inspection Type: Stormwater Reason for Visit: Routine
Comment:
Page: 4

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
April 20, 1999
CLEMENT WILLIAMS
GENERAL TIMBER. INC.
625 FARMVILLE MINE ROAD
SANFORD, NC 27330
T
aiz®
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: NPDES Stormwater Permit Renewal
General Timber, Inc.
Permit Number NCS000122
Chatham County
Dear Permittee:
Your facility is currently covered for Stormwater discharge under NPDES Permit NCS000122. This permit expires
on October 31. 1999. In order to assure your continued coverage under your permit, you must apply to the
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) for renewal of your permit. To make this renewal process easier, we are
informing you in advance that your permit will be expiring. Enclosed you will find an individual permit renewal
application form, supplemental information request. and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan certification. Filing
the application form along with the requested supplimental information will constitute your application for renewal
of your permit. The application form must be completed and returned along with all requested information by May
24. 1999 in order to constitute a timely renewal filing.
Recent legislation modified the fee structure for DWQ permits. Renewal fees have been eliminated and annual fees
have been changed. The new annual fee for your permit is now $715.00 (you will be invoiced later this year for
your annual fee.) A copy of the new fee schedule is enclosed in this package.
Failure to request renewal by May 24. 1999 may result in a civil assessment of at least $250.00. Larger penalties
may be assessed depending on the delinquency of the request. Discharge of Stormwater from your facility without
coverage under a valid Stormwater NPDES permit would constitute a violation of NCGS 143-215.1 and could
result in assessments of civil penalties of up to S10.000 per day.
If you have any questions regarding the permit renewal procedures please contact Tony Evans of the Stormwater
and General Permits Unit at [phone], ext. 584.
Sincerely,
Bradley Bennett, Supervisor
Stormwater and General Permits Unit
cc: Central Files
Stormwater and General Permits Unit Files
Raleigh Regional Office
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10 % post -consumer paper