NC0046728_Correspondence_20160209

NPDES DOCUWENT SCANNING: COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0046728
Mooresville / Rocky River WWTP
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Correspondence ,
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date:
February 9, 2016
This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the re-srerse Bide

NCTO Ci6%%6 41114n! Ori �w+ /Yl�
z/Zoti,
Belnick, Tom
From: Belnick, Tom
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 2:14 PM
To: Bell, Wes; Chernikov, Sergei
Cc: Sledge, Bob; Weaver, Charles
Subject: RE: Town of Mooresville WWTP (NC0046728)
Wes- just left a voice message. I concur with Sergei that staff resources are extremely limited at this time, with higher
priorities. Can they build the platform to utilize at a later date? Did Mooresville request this permit mod when we
renewed permit in 2014?
Tom Belnick
Supervisor
NPDES Complex Permitting Unit, DWR
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
919-807-6390 office
[e-mail]
512 North Salisbury Street
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27669
Nothing Compares._
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Bell, Wes
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 1:08 PM
To: Chernikov, Sergei <[e-mail]>
Cc: Belnick, Tom <[e-mail]>; Sledge, Bob <[e-mail]>; Weaver, Charles
<[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Town of Mooresville WWTP (NC0046728)
Will BIMS need a design flow for the second train?
From: Chernikov, Sergei
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 1:04 PM
To: Bell, Wes <wes.bell(Jncdenr.gov>
Cc: Belnick, Tom <[e-mail]>; Sledge, Bob <[e-mail]>; Weaver, Charles
<charles.weaverPncdenr.gov>
Subject: Re: Town of Mooresville WWTP (NC0046728)
Wes,

I think we should do it when the permit is renewed, but right now we don't have resources to re -open it.
Sergei
From: Bell, Wes
Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 1:02 PM
To: Chernikov, Sergei
Cc: Belnick, Tom; Sledge, Bob; Weaver, Charles
Subject: RE: Town of Mooresville WWTP (NC0046728)
Do you think Mooresville's Permit needs to be modified to show the similar language/requirements as in the City of
Salisbury's Permit (for % removal)?
From: Chernikov, Sergei
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 12:58 PM
To: Bell, Wes <[e-mail]>
Cc: Belnick, Tom <tom.belnickPncdenr.gov>; Sledge, Bob <[e-mail]>; Weaver, Charles
<[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Town of Mooresville WWTP (NC0046728)
Wes,
I think we need to get Charles involved to make changes to BIMS.
Thank you!
Sergei
From: Bell, Wes
Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 10:23 AM
To: Chernikov, Sergei
Cc: Belnick, Tom; Sledge, Bob
Subject: Town of Mooresville WWTP (NC0046728)
Sergei/Tom
Good Morning! Mooresville staff have contacted me (multiple times) regarding their permit and edmr registration and
implementation. They have somewhat of a similar set up as the City of Salisbury in that the WWTP receives two
separate influents that passes through two separate treatment trains prior to combining the secondary clarifier and
continuing through the treatment processes that include tertiary filtration and UV disinfection. This set up has been on-
line for around 2 years and they are currently sampling similar to City of Salisbury, including influent and secondary
clarifier effluents at both treatment trains (for percent removal) and also the ultimate effluent discharge. This facility is
a little different from Salisbury in the fact that Mooresville has tertiary filters following secondary
clarification. Mooresville is in the process of having their contracted computer company upgrade their system to be
compatible with the edmr submittal requirements; however, BIMS currently only recognizes one influent and effluent
(as the current permit requires) and will not be requiring additional monitoring at the second separate treatment
train. How do you want to handle this situation, Mooresville is spending a lot of money for the computer system

upgrade and would like the BIMS/edmr issue resolved so they can start using this system while their contractor is still
on -site to help them work out any issues.
Thanks for any help in this.
Wes
Wes Bell - [e-mail]
North Carolina Dept. of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
610 E. Center Ave., Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Ph: 704.235.2192 Fax: [phone]
0
--`'Nothing Compares._...
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.

Belnick, Tom
Ncro'haL$ - ht N1c6 reneivd, 1k 1/zo16
Os if tftit XeiNi Pelmilke apvf
From: Bell, Wes
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 8:57 AM
To: Sledge, Bob; Denard, Derek
Cc: Belnick, Tom
Subject: Mooresville WWTP NPDES Permit
,,,Q,/,6&,„14 40 re Plea
Z ww7es Ahtcc) 14+b),,*
jib o(.rqLmj.e o o !
Good Morning! Just talked with the Town of Mooresville and the status of their permit came up during the
conversation. The Town has spent around $10K to get computer database system in to download their lab data (on -site
certified lab) into the edmr system, and need the permit (and BIMS) updated to include the additional influent
monitoring locations (like Salisbury -Rowan Permit) so they can start the edmr submittals. The database contractor they
have hired will be there (off and on) for the next few weeks, so this needs to get resolved as soon as possible.
Thanks.
Wes
Wes Bell - [e-mail]
North Carolina Dept. of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
610 E. Center Ave., Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Ph: 704.235.2192 Fax: [phone]
0 Nothing Compares
ref ell- e j9 A l' 1 1/3.o/b0;
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.

44oi'i iof/is IJOrv1 toc((,)g kittiv
Belnick, Tom
Subject:
Location:
Start:
End:
Show Time As:
Recurrence:
Meeting Status:
Organizer:
Required Attendees:
NC0046728 - Rocky River WWTP
Tom's Office
Mon 10/26/2015 11:00 AM
Mon 10/26/2015 11:30 AM
Tentative
(none)
Not yet responded
Sledge, Bob
Belnick, Tom
I told Wes I'd speak with you about the permit for t e Rocky River WWTP. ► e facility is like a mini version of Salisbury;
it has two distinct influents coming into the site and t Ps (on h smaller), with the flows from each
combined prior to discharge. Apparently, the permit isn't reflective of the situation at the site and it's affecting the way
they have been directed to report (i.e., BIMS and eDMR aren't set up to receive the data as MRO would like). If you can
spare a few minutes, we can look at it and see what, if anything can and should be done with the permit. Thank you.

Sledge, Bob
From: Bell, Wes
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 2:51 PM
To: Sledge, Bob
Subject: Mooresville WWTP %removal
Bob,
Could you look into City of Mooresville Permit (NC0046728) and add the two monitoring locations (like Salisbury) for the
%removal calculations. Mooresville has two separate influent sources that go to separate treatment trains prior to
being combined before the tertiary filters, UV, etc. They have registered with edrar-arscrne�ce "thus- additional
monitoring locations before they start using the system. You can set it up like t e City of Salisbu '- 'ermit.
Note: They need the additional monitoring and calculation pages included in this . - o included) like the permit
for Salisbury....this may require a permit correction on our part. Sergei did the last per it renewal.
Thanks for your help in this.
Wes
Wes Bell - [e-mail]
North Carolina Dept. of Environment & Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
610 E. Center Ave., Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Ph: 704.235.2192 Fax: [phone]
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.
i