NC0022187_Permit Modification_20150819

A14_�_
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Governor
Mr. James W. Lintz, Complex Manager
Motiva Enterprises, LLC
410 Tom Sadler Road
Charlotte, NC 28214
Dear Mr. Lintz:
Donald R. van der Vaart
Secretary
August 19, 2015
Subject: Change-Page(s) to Correct Error
NPDES Permit NCO022187 -
Motiva Enterprises, LLC
Charlotte North Terminal
410 Tom Sadler Road Charlotte 28214
Mecklenburg County
The Division of Water Resources (the Division) was notified by Jennifer Bothwell, Environmental
Coordinator with Motiva Enterprises, LLC, .that quarterly sampling for Chronic Toxicity
(Ceriodaphnia dubia) (TGP3B/THP3B) would be problematic due to the episodic duration of the
discharges at this facility. Chronic Toxicity was a new requirement in your recently issued permit
(July 20, 2015). The Division's Aquatic Toxicity Branch recommends that monitoring be changed
to Acute Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia dubia) (TGE3B).
Accordingly, we hereby forward the modified permit pages to amend Sections A.(L) and A.(2.) of
your permit with the following:
Acute Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia dubia) Pass/Fail permit limit (as a grab sample) quarterly
during the months of January, April, July and October.
Please insert these change pages into your existing permit and discard the old pages. We regret any
inconvenience this causes your organization.
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division may
require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not affect the
legal requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of Water
Resources or any other Federal, State, or Local governmental permits that may be required.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Phone: [phone]Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer— Made in part by recycled paper

Pen -nit NC0022187
6. Naphthalene — Provided that the Permittee can demonstrate to the Division that its facility does not
now, nor has ever, stored diesel fuel or other heavy fuels, it may petition to remove monitoring for
naphthalene.
7. Acute Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia dubia) Pass/Fail Limit, Quarterly during the months of January,
April, July and October [see section A. (2.)].
Conditions:
• There shall be no discharge of floating solids or foam visible in other than trace amounts.
• There shall be no oily sheen traceable from the receiving stream to this outfall.
• Direct discharge of tank solids, tank -bottom water, or the rag layer is not permitted.
• Hydrostatic Tank Testing: the Permittee shall discharge no tank solids, no tank bottom -water, no tank rag -
layer; no tank [or pipe] contents, unless benzene concentration tests less than 1.19 µg/L and toluene
concentration tests less than 11 jig/L.
Page 4 of 8

Permit NCO022187
A. (2.) ACUTE TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY)
[15A NCAC 02B .0500 et seq.]
The permittee shall conduct acute toxicity tests on a quarterly basis using protocols defined in the North
Carolina Procedure Document entitled "Pass/Tail Methodology For Determining Acute Toxicity In A
Single Effluent Concentration" (Revised December 2010 or subsequent versions). The monitoring shall
be performed as a Ceriodaphnia dubia 24 hour static test. The effluent concentration at which there may
be at no time significant acute mortality is 90% (defined as treatment two in the procedure document).
The tests will be performed during the months of January, April, July and October. These months
signify the first month of each three month toxicity testing quarter assigned to the facility. Effluent
sampling for this testing must be obtained during representative effluent discharge and shall be
performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly
monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this
monthly test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter code
TGE3B. Additionally, DWR Form AT-2 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch
1623 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1623
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Water Sciences Section no later than 30
days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual chlorine
of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of
the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring is
required, the permittee will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic toxicity (AT) test
form indicating the facility name, permit number, pipe number, county, and the montb/year of the report
with the notation of "No Flow" in the comment area of the form. The report shall be submitted to the
Water Sciences Section at the address cited above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, then
monthly monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing,
this monthly test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above. Assessment of
toxicity compliance is based on the toxicity testing quarter, which is the three month time interval that
begins on the first day of the month in which toxicity testing is required by this permit and continues
until the final day of the third month.
Page 5 of 8

Permit NCO022187
Should any test data from either these monitoring requirements or tests performed by the North Carolina
Division of Water Resources indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re-
opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control
organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will
require immediate follow-up testing to be completed no later than the last day of the month following the
month of the initial monitoring.
A. (3.) FLOW MEASUREMENT RATIONAL [G. S. 143-215.1(b)]
The Rational Equation: Q=KuCIA, where:
Q = flow (peak flow rate (cfs or m3/sec)
Ku = units conversation factor = 1.008 for U.S. standard units (usually
ignored because it is so close to 1), or 0.278 for SI units
C = dimensionless runoff coefficient for the watershed, loosely defined
as the ratio of runoff to rainfall
I = intensity of rainfall taken from the intensity -duration -frequency
curves for the specified design return period at the time of
concentration, tc (in/h or mm/h). tc = time of concentration (time
after beginning rainfall excess when all portions of the drainage
basin are contributing simultaneously to outlet flow)
A = area of tributary watershed (acres or km2)
The rational equation is used to calculate the runoff from a region, given:
• the runoff coefficient (accounts for infiltration losses in the region),
• the rainfall intensity to the region,
• the time for runoff to travel from the region's upper reaches to its outlet, and
• the region's drainage area.
Page 6 of 8

DENR / DWR / NPDES
EXPEDITED FACT SHEET - NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES Permit NCO022187
Derek Denard, Compliance & Expedited Permitting Unit / 919-807-6307 18Aug2015
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name
Motiva Enterprises, LLC/Charlotte North Terminal
Applicant Address
410 Tom Sadler Road, Charlotte 28214
Facility Address
.410 Tom Sadler Road, Charlotte 28214
Permitted .Flow (MGD)
not limited
Type of Waste
100% Industrial, fuel (bulk storage), groundwater remediation
Facility Class _
PC-1
County
Mecklenburg
Permit Status,'' '
Renewal
Regional
Office
MRO
Stream Characteristics
Receiving Stream
UT to Gum Branch
Stream Classification
WS-IV
• Stream,Segment_,
[11-120-5]
Drainage basin,
Catawba
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
0
Subbasin
03-08-34
Winter 7Q10 (cfs) y
0
Use Support
No Data
30Q2 (cfs). .
0
303(4) Listed ..
No
,Average Flow (cfs) '
0.02
State Grid.. '
F15SW
IWC (%) -„
100%
USES Top6 Quad;
Mt. Island Lake, NC
Facility Summary
This facility is an industrial (flow <1 MGD) collecting stormwater from a Surface -Water Pollution
Prevention System in proximity to above -ground storage tanks (ASTs). Facilities include surface bulk -
storage of petroleum hydrocarbon fuels in excess of one million gallons, and fuel -truck loading racks..
Significant changes to this facility are planned for permit renewal include the permittee's addition of
discharge form a GW-REM system to Outfa11001. Discharge from GW-REM is estimated to be less than
1,000 gpd and less than 365,000 gallons per year. The facility consists of the following wastewater
treatment units:
• bermed secondary containment for ASTs (with hand -operated discharge valve, normally closed)
• oil/water separator and waste holding tank (truck -loading rack)
• detention pond for stormwater (with hand -operated discharge valve, normally closed)
• a groundwater remediation system (intermittent) which consists of a dual phase extraction system
with carbon filtration (1,000 gpd).
Monthly average FLOW (MGD) — Last 36 months Mar2012-1762015:
[Ave 0.110 MGD; Maximum, Monthly average flow = 0.406 MGD;
Minimum, Monthly average flow = 0.002]
Year
Maximum flow (daily)
Minimum flow (daily)
Average (daily)
Number Discharges (daily)
2012
1.0183
0.0021
0.1461
35
2013
0.5056..
0.0014
0.0904
63
2014
0.2216
0.0006
0.0895
47
Fact Sheet
Renewal 2015 -- NPDES Permit NCO022187
Page 1

Toxicity — The previous pen -nit required Acute Toxicity Monitoring testing using Pimephales promelas to
be performed on an annual basis as a 24-hour static [TAE6C]. The facility has passed toxicity monitoring
over the past four and a half years. Chronic [TGP3B] (Ceriodaphnia dubia) is required for groundwater
remediation discharges since on -site groundwater remediation (GW-REM) wastestreams are deemed
complex and not episodic. However, since discharges at this facility are managed as batch discharges
(episodic) along with stonnwater, Acute Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia dubia) Pass/Fail permit limit (as a grab
sample) quarterly during the months of January, April, July and October is recommend by the Aquatic
Toxicity Branch for this pennit.
Compliance History — The facility received on NOV for a 06/04/2014 Total Manganese exceedance with
233 µg/L (200 µg/L limit). The facility also had a 01/19/2015 Total Manganese exceedance with 239 µg/L
that has not been addressed.
For Renewal — This permit reflects discharge at Outfall 001. DWR updated the following:
• added updates to facility map, outfall locations and parameter codes
• coordinates for the Outfall 001 are adjusted to the following:
Latitude: 35' 17' 01" Longitude: 80' 56' 13"
• added a groundwater remediation system (intermittent) which consists of a dual phase extraction
system with carbon filtration to the facility description
• changed toxicity monitoring to Acute Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia dubia) Pass/Fail permit limit (as a
grab sample) quarterly during the months of January, April, July and October [Section A. (2.)]
• total Suspended Solids monitoring Monthly with a Monthly Average Limit of 30.0 mg/L and a
Daily Average Limit of 45.0 mg/L
• total Manganese monitoring Monthly with a monthly average limit of 200 µg/L
• for Oil & Grease [00556] the parameter code remains the same for submitting DMR/eDMR, but
EPA method 1664 (SGT-HEM) is used with results in mg/L
• replaced Phenol (single compound) [34694] with Total Recoverable Phenolics [32730].
• added Electronic Reporting - Discharge Monitoring Reports page Section A. (4.).
Stream — Discharge from WWTP for Outfall 001 is into an unnamed tributary to Gum Branch [Stream
Segment 11-120-5]. The segment is not list in the 2014 North Carolina Integrated report or 303(d) list.
RPA — A Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA) was conducted on turbidity, toluene, benzene, ethyl benzene,
naphthalene, xylene (mixture), total phenolic compounds, MTBE, Manganese and Iron effluent parameters
because Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) reported concentration above method -detection levels
(MDLs) for the past four and a half (4'/2) years Sept2011-1762015 data. [See attached RPA summary
sheets.]
Manganese effluent data suggest reasonable potential to exceed its standard of 200 µg /L.
Renewal will require monthly monitoring of Manganese with a Monthly Average Limit of
200 µg /L.
Turbidity effluent did not show reasonable potential to exceed 50 NTU. Monitoring was left
as monthly with 50 NTU limit due to Manganese issues and consistency with other
parameters.
EPA Method 625 — Detected on 9/04/2014. Monitoring remains as Semi -Annually. Not enough date (4
samples) for RPA.
Fact Sheet
Renewal 2015 -- NPDES NCO022187
Page 2

Denard, Derek /f
From:
Sent:
To:
Meadows, Susan
Tuesday, July 21, 2015 2:06 PM
Denard, Derek
Cc: Hennessy, John; Corporon, Joe
Subject: RE: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Okay, Derek, that sounds good.
Just let me know what you end up doing.
Thanks.
Susie
From: Denard, Derek
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:23 PM
To: Meadows, Susan
Cc: Hennessy, John; Corporon, Joe
Subject: RE: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Susie,
That makes sense to give them Cerio Acute, grab. I was following our current strategy. You may need to review the
strategy that Joe Corporon set out. Not sure you all were copied. Basically, Oil Terminals with groundwater monitoring
are given Chronic Tox because these were deemed years ago as complex and non -episodic. This may not fit every
situation. They may be sending the groundwater remediation flow to the stormwater basin and discharging as a batch
as they explained to you. I have no problem changing their permit, but I will need to discuss with John and Joe first. We
will likely get in touch with Cindy if we have questions.
Thanks,
Derek
From: Meadows, Susan
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:09 PM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Hi Derek,
I was talking with Cindy Moore and Jennifer Bothwell at Motiva and they are not going to be able to run a chronic cerio
test due to their timing of discharge.
They are a "batch discharger," so they will not be able to collect enough samples to support a week-long chronic test.
They could run a Cerio Acute test, grab sample.
You may want to give Cindy Moore a call for more details (919-743-8442).
Otherwise, the WET Testing in the permit needs to be changed.
Thanks.
Susie
Susan Meadows, Environmental Biologist

Aquatic Toxicology Branch
DWR/Water Sciences Section
4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, NC 27607
[e-mail]
tel: [phone]
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.
From: Denard, Derek
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 2:13 PM
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Cc: Richard. [e-mail]; Meadows, Susan
Subject: Final Permit NCO022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Please see attached final permit for NCO022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal. If you have questions,
or if we can be of further service, please contact Derek Denard at [[e-mail]] or call [phone].
Sincerely,
Derek
Derek C Denard
Erwironr* tal Speciaast
NCDENR fAv me of Water Resources
waterQ-9ty Per-ttirg Seaton
Compfiarxe & b pedded PerraSwrg iinit
(919) gd7-b347
deye]Ldenard@ra$--m.gov
1517 NW, sarv-acvlwRaEa g+t, TY 2 59 i61i
)Itt9;/ 9O9 t2LnCACf7 03S
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.

Denard, Derek
From: Meadows, Susan
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:09 PM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Hi Derek,
I was talking with Cindy Moore and Jennifer Bothwell at Motiva and they are not going to be able to run a chronic cerio
test due to their timing of discharge.
They are a "batch discharger," so they will not be able to collect enough samples to support a week-long chronic test.
They could run a Cerio Acute test, grab sample.
You may want to give Cindy Moore a call for more details (919-743-8442).
Otherwise, the WET Testing in the permit needs to be changed.
Thanks.
Susie
Susan Meadows, Environmental Biologist
Aquatic Toxicology Branch
DWR/Water Sciences Section
4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, NC 27607
[e-mail]
tel: [phone]
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.
From: Denard, Derek
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 2:13 PM
To: jennifer.bothwell(a)motivaent.com; james.lintz motivaent.com; joseph.gorman motivaent.com
Cc: [e-mail]; Meadows, Susan
Subject: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Please see attached final permit for NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal. If you have questions,
or if we can be of further service, please contact Derek Denard at [[e-mail]] or call [phone].
Sincerely,
Derek
Derek C Denard
Er`:ronf ental S .-t
NUENR Uysion of Water kesourcea
Water Quafty Permitting Section
Cofnp farce & Ezpea ted PerrMirg Unit
(91%W74307
derekdenaro@,rxtiet 4m
1Q7 h&v!S2rV4a Ccnw. R332;igh. M d? 1b17
htt�:11`S�+Utntdan rcrgj4e�.`nq}ra-�,��sfn�las

Denard, Derek
From: Meadows, Susan
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 3:33 PM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: FW: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NCO022187
Hi Derek,
Was the permit sent for Motiva, NC0022187?
I was informed that it was received, but was incorrect with respect to the sampling requirement.
Could you please email a copy to me?
Thanks.
Susie
Susan Meadows, Environmental Biologist
Aquatic Toxicology Branch
DWR/Water Sciences Section
4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, NC 27607
[e-mail]
tel: [phone]
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.
From: Moore, Cindy
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 3:17 PM
To: Meadows, Susan <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NCO022187
Will you find this permit?
From: Jennifer.bothwell('Omotivaent.com [ma iIto: Jennifer.bothwelICaOmotivaent.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 2:54 PM
To: Moore, Cindy
Cc: Denard, Derek..
Subject: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NCO022187
Ms. Moore,
The last time we spoke on the phone you said that the subject permit had been pulled and would not be issued until the
question of the appropriate toxicity test is resolved; however, we received the new permit today. The permit requires
collection of one monthly grab sample, which is appropriate for periodic discharges from the facility's holding
pond. The sampling requirements of the Chronic Toxicity test are inconsistent with the monthly grab sample
requirement.
Motiva is again requesting a return to the Acute Toxicity method of analysis in order to maintain compliance.
Please contact me by phone or email if you would like to discuss this request.

Thank you,
Jennifer Bothwell
Environmental Coordinator
Motiva Enterprises LLC
PMB 282
35-31 Talcottville Road
Vernon, CT 06066
Office: 860-749-2839

Denard, Derek
From: Meadows, Susan
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 4:35 PM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Yes, Derek as well as a GRAB.
Thanks.
Susie
From: Denard, Derek
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 4:27 PM
To: Meadows, Susan <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Let me make sure 1 have this right:
ACUTE TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY) [Ceriodaphnia dubia ]TGE3B?
Derek
Derek C Denard
Ertti:rorr�enta; 5pecla�t
NCDENR DrWiC r. of Water Resoiaces
Water Qua r'.ty pwfK-, ing 5�sction
Compliance & ExpeaAed pefr•.ythN UKA
(919) 8a7-430;
derekdenardCyncdenr_gov
1s17 )naa sz icQ C4„t,., ,gh. W rs9-1si7
htt;.l.pcTtaLncian corq��aL.Fw q: s�;•FG: ^'rd�
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: Meadows, Susan
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 2:06 PM
To: Denard, Derek
Cc: Hennessy, John; Corporon, Joe
Subject: RE: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Okay, Derek, that sounds good.
Just let me know what you end up doing.
Thanks.
Susie
FA

From: Denard, Derek
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:23 PM
To: Meadows, Susan
Cc: Hennessy, John; Corporon, Joe
Subject: RE: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Susie,
That makes sense to give them Cerio Acute, grab. I was following our current strategy. You may need to review the
strategy that Joe Corporon set out. Not sure you all were copied. Basically, Oil Terminals with groundwater monitoring
are given Chronic Tox because these were deemed years ago as complex and non -episodic. This may not fit every
situation. They may be sending the groundwater remediation flow to the stormwater basin and discharging as a batch
as they explained to you. I have no problem changing their permit, but I will need to discuss with John and Joe first. We
will likely get in touch with Cindy if we have questions.
Thanks,
Derek
From: Meadows, Susan
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:09 PM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Hi Derek,
I was talking with Cindy Moore and Jennifer Bothwell at Motiva and they are not going to be able to run a chronic cerio
test due to their timing of discharge.
They are a "batch discharger," so they will not be able to collect enough samples to support a week-long chronic test.
They could run a Cerio Acute test, grab sample.
You may want to give Cindy Moore a call for more details (919-743-8442).
Otherwise, the WET Testing in the permit needs to be changed.
Thanks.
Susie
Susan Meadows, Environmental Biologist
Aquatic Toxicology Branch
DWR/Water Sciences Section
4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, NC 27607
[e-mail]
tel: [phone]
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.
From: Denard, Derek
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 2:13 PM
To: Jennifer.bothwell(-Omotivaent.com; [e-mail]; joseph.gorman(&motivaent.com
Cc: [e-mail]; Meadows, Susan
Subject: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal

Please see attached final permit for NCO022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal. If you have questions,
or if we can be of further service, please contact Derek Denard at [[e-mail]] or call [phone].
Sincerely,
Derek
Derek C Denard
Ez V..ronmentai 5pee;aFst
NCDENR UVaJrin of Water Resources
Water Qi;a9ity Perrn'AfiV Section
Con-p ance & Expedited Rerff ttsrg Unit
(919} 2J7.83A7
derekderaf d@ r *Oenr_gw
16V Ms1 S2�,-a Canten RaWigh, W 2709-1617
httyf1Da'bincdcn r. c ry,M�hcq jsvrpl p�.`n �d¢s
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.

I �
Cketll'�ec covhkil
Denard, Derek
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 3:19 PM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Derek,
I have a question about the chronic toxicity testing. The lab said 2 samples are required. Are the 2 samples collected on
the same day/discharge and if so, how far apart? If they are to be collected on different days, what if we discharge only
one day in a month?
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 2:13 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12; Lintz, James W MOTIVA-DVM/613/36; Gorman, Joseph F MOTIVA-
DVM/613/361
Cc: Richard. [e-mail]; Meadows, Susan
Subject: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Please see attached final permit for NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal. If you have questions,
or if we can be of further service, please contact Derek Denard at [[e-mail]] or call [phone].
Sincerely,
Derek
Derek C Denard
Err+ronnaentai 5petiast
NCDENR D"sysian of Water Resmirces
water Qaa2ty Perm-ttin,g 5ectbn
Comp ianee & b pedited Permitting LK4
(919?807-6347
deretdersrcd@rzdenr cyar
AV MaO sarrka can Aa g �,1 &39 1e17
httF„r?;re*taLntdan rcrq;w¢L,`+.gr`rwF?F$'" Fdas
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.
1

Denard, Derek
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2015 7:53 AM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Draft NCO022187 Motiva Enterprises -Charlotte North Terminal
Hi Derek,
Are we allowed to comment on the new Draft? I'm just wondering how the process works.
Thanks,
Jennifer
-------- Original message --------
From: "Denard, Derek" <derek.denardkncdenr.gov>
Date: 06/24/2015 3:12 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: "Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12" <Jennifer.bothwellkmotivaent.com>, "Lintz, James W
MOTIVA-DVM1613/36" <james.lintzkmotivaent.com>
Cc: "Parker, Michael" <[e-mail]>, "Bell, Wes" <wes.bell@a,ncdenr.gov>,
Richard.Farmer@mecklenbur cg ountync.gov, "Reid, Steve" <steve.reid&ncdenr.gov>, "Meadows, Susan"
<susan.meadowsna,ncdenr. gov>
Subject: RE: Draft NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises -Charlotte North Terminal
One change for the final permit NC0022187 for Motiva Enterprises -Charlotte North Terminal (see attached
final draft): We changed toxicity monitoring to quarterly Chronic [TGP3B] (Ceriodaphnia dubia) since on -
site groundwater remediation (GW-REM) wastestreams are deemed complex and not episodic.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
!j Derek C Denard
lfCDElRt Ernhronmen. ! SpeCaiiv
NCDENR DFVsion of Water Resources
Water Q��eny Permtring Secbm
Comp' nce & ExpeEaed Perm7tting t it
(919) W7-63T,
derekderard@ncdenrVae
1617 W! Sake Cantr, RaRg h, ►JC 27999-1617
httgl7.rtaLncaan r.crg:�wat `FQjshpi;•'n ;des
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: Denard, Derek
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 2:24 PM
To: '[e-mail]'; '[e-mail]'; '[e-mail]'
Cc: Parker, Michael; Allocco, Marcia; Bell, Wes; Richard.Farmer(g'bmecklenburgcountync.gov; Reid, Steve; Meadows,
Susan
Subject: Draft NCO022187 Motiva Enterprises -Charlotte North Terminal
Please find the attached draft permit NCO022187 for Motiva Enterprises -Charlotte North Terminal. Concurrent
with this notification, the Division will solicit public comment on this draft by publishing a notice in
newspapers having circulation in the general Mecklenburg County area, as required by the NPDES Program.
Please provide your comments, if any, to me via email [[e-mail]] or write to my attention care
of DENR / DWR / NPDES Program no later than June 12, 2015. Your written comments are welcome but not
mandatory.
Sincerely,
Derek
;;'(1�, Derek C Denard
WCOEM Emmnn-entay5pe:a at
NO)EHR Wsim of Watef Resources
water Qu&iV PeTK-tt+r9Sects r,
Comp srsce & Exp�ited PermAtln Ur "t
919)W_.-63=?
s.'er=kder rArr_gov
1'i z Rala;gh, fa_-:?593d61?
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.

Denard, Derek
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 4:13 PM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Derek,
Thank you for the information. I searched for something like that on the NCDENR website but was not able to find
it. Since our permit says grab sample and not composite, I am hoping we do not have to follow the compositing
procedure. It appears to be for continuous discharges rather than batches like ours. I will contact Susan Meadows to
confirm.
Thanks again.
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek [mailto:derek.denard(cbncdenr.gov]
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 3:53 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Subject: RE: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Jennifer,
I'm not sure if I have the answer to your question on sampling for chronic toxicity testing. I have attached a guidance
document that I found that may answer your question which I downloaded from the Aquatic Toxicity Branch
website. See page 7 appendix 1. If you still have questions about Toxicity sampling, it would be best to ask someone
with the Aquatic Toxicity Branch. Susan Meadows handles compliance in that group. You may be able to start with her.
[e-mail] 919-743-8439
The Aquatic Toxicity Branch Website:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ess/atu
Branch Main Number: 919-743-8401
Sincerely,
Derek
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 3:19 PM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Derek,
I have a question about the chronic toxicity testing. The lab said 2 samples are required. Are the 2 samples collected on
the same day/discharge and if so, how far apart? If they are to be collected on different days, what if we discharge only
one day in a month?
4

Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek[mailto:derek.denard(a)ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 2:13 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12; Lintz, James W MOTIVA-DVM/613/36; Gorman, Joseph F MOTIVA-
DVM/613/361
Cc: Richard. [e-mail]; Meadows, Susan
Subject: Final Permit NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal
Please see attached final permit for NC0022187 Motiva Enterprises, LLC Charlotte North Terminal. If you have questions,
or if we can be of further service, please contact Derek Denard at [[e-mail]] or call [phone].
Sincerely,
Derek
Derek C Denard
ErkVifor. rr*rta! Speeas -t
NCDENR DY"skon of Water kesoxces
Water Qua4 Perrr4tirV Section
Comp%rce & Expedited Permitting tkvt
(919) W7-6307
derekder.vd@rxdewVor
1617 mil saro ica cantar. Rawgll. Ut 2709-1617
h ttD;l.�tmrta�^cdaa atrg�'waGr`+q!'svy j�n {dss
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.

Denard, Derek
From:
[e-mail]
Sent:
Wednesday, August 12, 2015 2:54 PM
To:
Moore, Cindy
Cc:
Denard, Derek
Subject:
Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Ms. Moore,
The last time we spoke on the phone you said that the subject permit had been pulled and would not be issued until the
question of the appropriate toxicity test is resolved; however, we received the new permit today. The permit requires
collection of one monthly grab sample, which is appropriate for periodic discharges from the facility's holding
pond. The sampling requirements of the Chronic Toxicity test are inconsistent with the monthly grab sample
requirement.
Motiva is again requesting a return to the Acute Toxicity method of analysis in order to maintain compliance.
Please contact me by phone or email if you would like to discuss this request.
Thank you,
Jennifer Bothwell
Environmental Coordinator
Motiva Enterprises LLC
PMB 282
35-31 Talcottville Road
Vernon, CT 06066
Office: 860-749-2839
6

Denard, Derek
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 5:01 PM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NCO022187
Derek,
The terminal did not send the South permit to me so I didn't know it was chronic also. Yes we have the same
concerns at the south. Also the treatment system being installed at the South is air sparing so no water will be
discharged through the outfall.
Thanks,
Jennifer
-------- Original message --------
From: "Denard, Derek" <derek.denard&ncdenr.gov>
Date: 08/12/2015 4:04 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: "Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12"<jennifer.bothweligmotivaent.com>
Cc: "Hennessy, John" <[e-mail]>, "Meadows, Susan" <susan.meadowska,ncdenr.gov>.
"Moore, Cindy" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Sorry for any misunderstanding, but the final copy (see attached) that was e-mail to you had been signed (July
20, 2015), issued and processed before our discussion with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. Sorry, there was a
delay in mailing that final hard copy. A permit correction to change to Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) to Acute
(Ceriodaphnia dubia) is being reviewed by my supervisor with comments from the Susan Meadows with the
Aquatic Toxicology Branch. The permit correction has not been approved and issued yet.
I would like to further clarify that the Aquatic Toxicology Branch recommended Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia)-
grab and not Acute (Fathead Minnow) as required in the previous permit.
While we are on the subject are you ok with sampling Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) for NC0046892 Motiva
South (see attached)? Do you have the same issues with multiple day sampling as Chronic? Otherwise,
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia dubia) sampling is consistent with our strategy for groundwater remediation
discharges. Please let me know if you have any comments for that permit as well.
Again, I'm sorry for any misunderstanding or inconvenience.

Sincerely,
Derek
_&'pL Derek C Dertard
if IUM4 Evivonmerrta! Spsca�st
NCDENR Dis3 . of Water Resourcr_
Water Qaa: V PerrKnr y Sector
Compraarce & Expedled Penni irg Wt
derekdenard@rKdervr gve
ISO 4ti,I SRN= Cantar, 8la3agh, NC 2.,'Q49-1b17
http�rFonalncdimsoty;4��h/rr4lsxD;Gr,n ds
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: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 2:54 PM
To: Moore, Cindy
Cc: Denard, Derek
Subject: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NCO022187
Ms. Moore,
The last time we spoke on the phone you said that the subject permit had been pulled and would not be issued
until the question of the appropriate toxicity test is resolved; however, we received the new permit today. The
permit requires collection of one monthly grab sample, which is appropriate for periodic discharges from the
facility's holding pond. The sampling requirements of the Chronic Toxicity test are inconsistent with the
monthly grab sample requirement.

Motiva is again requesting a return to the Acute Toxicity method of analysis in order to maintain compliance.
Please contact me by phone or email if you would like to discuss this request.
Thank you,
Jennifer Bothwell
Environmental Coordinator
Motiva Enterprises LLC
1' ►/
35-31 Talcottville Road
Vernon, CT 06066

Denard, Derek
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 10:29 AM
To: Meadows, Susan; Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Yes I agree.
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Meadows, Susan[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 9:21 AM
To: Denard, Derek
Cc: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Hi Derek,
It appears that NC0046892 - Motiva South is also in the predicament. They just do not have enough flow to support a
chronic, multi -day sampling schedule.
Susie
Susan Meadows, Environmental Biologist
Aquatic Toxicology Branch
DWR/Water Sciences Section
4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, NC 27607
[e-mail]
tel: [phone]
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.
From: Denard, Derek
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 4:03 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Hennessy, John <[e-mail]>; Meadows, Susan <[e-mail]>; Moore, Cindy
<[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Sorry for any misunderstanding, but the final copy (see attached) that was e-mail to you had been signed (July 20, 2015),
issued and processed before our discussion with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. Sorry, there was a delay in mailing that
final hard copy. A permit correction to change to Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) to Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia) is being
reviewed by my supervisor with comments from the Susan Meadows with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. The permit
correction has not been approved and issued yet.
10

would like to further clarify that the Aquatic Toxicology Branch recommended Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia)-grab and
not Acute (Fathead Minnow) as required in the previous permit.
While we are on the subject are you ok with sampling Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) for NC0046892 Motiva South (see
attached)? Do you have the same issues with multiple day sampling as Chronic? Otherwise, Chronic Toxicity
(Ceriodaphnia dubia) sampling is consistent with our strategy for groundwater remediation discharges. Please let me
know if you have any comments for that permit as well.
Again, I'm sorry for any misunderstanding or inconvenience.
Sincerely,
Derek
j Derek C Denard
ErrranmeMa'! Specia�st
NCDENR Ws;Dr of Water Resources
Water Qjar"q perKmng Sect c+r
Comp"ance & EzpeaAed Perm tying Ur,'d
(91%8077-6347
derekdenard@ncdenr gnr
1617 )&O Sanica Qntar. Rasiyh. W ri99-1617
htty:l.± rtaLncdanr.arflJr , aQ�sw�,ffs,'npdes
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: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 2:54 PM
To: Moore, Cindy
Cc: Denard, Derek
Subject: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Ms. Moore,
The last time we spoke on the phone you said that the subject permit had been pulled and would not be issued until the
question of the appropriate toxicity test is resolved; however, we received the new permit today. The permit requires
collection of one monthly grab sample, which is appropriate for periodic discharges from the facility's holding
pond. The sampling requirements of the Chronic Toxicity test are inconsistent with the monthly grab sample
requirement.
Motiva is again requesting a return to the Acute Toxicity method of analysis in order to maintain compliance.
Please contact me by phone or email if you would like to discuss this request.
Thank you,
Jennifer Bothwell
Environmental Coordinator
Motiva Enterprises LLC
PMB 282
11

Denard, Derek
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:25 AM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Derek,
Do you know who replaced Marcia in enforcement? I have questions about how the agency handles the data when
there is both a monthly average limit and a daily max limit for the same parameter. In the previous permits we had a
daily max for TSS. My interpretation of the new permit is that if the first sample of the month exceeds the daily max, we
have an opportunity to collect additional samples to meet the monthly average. Is that correct? Do we remain in
compliance if we meet at least one of the limits? If we successfully meet the monthly average, is a reading over the
daily max still treated as a permit violation? Alternatively, if we only collect one sample and the reading is 40, are we
then forced to collect a second sample to try to reach a monthly average below 30? If we have to meet both limits each
month then the requirement is more stringent than the previous permit, especially if we do not have enough water for
more than one discharge.
If you cannot answer my questions, please let me know who I should direct them to.
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 4:03 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Cc: Hennessy, John; Meadows, Susan; Moore, Cindy
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Sorry for any misunderstanding, but the final copy (see attached) that was e-mail to you had been signed (July 20, 2015),
issued and processed before our discussion with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. Sorry, there was a delay in mailing that
final hard copy. A permit correction to change to Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) to Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia) is being
reviewed by my supervisor with comments from the Susan Meadows with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. The permit
correction has not been approved and issued yet.
I would like to further clarify that the Aquatic Toxicology Branch recommended Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia)-grab and
not Acute (Fathead Minnow) as required in the previous permit.
While we are on the subject are you ok with sampling Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) for NC0046892 Motiva South (see
attached)? Do you have the same issues with multiple day sampling as Chronic? Otherwise, Chronic Toxicity
(Ceriodaphnia dubia) sampling is consistent with our strategy for groundwater remediation discharges. Please let me
know if you have any comments for that permit as well.
Again, I'm sorry for any misunderstanding or inconvenience.
Sincerely,
Derek
13

Derek C Denard
Erv:ronmer m, SPec7arzt
NCDENR M—sion of water keswces
Water Qaa[ty PerK-ittirg Se€ti©n
Compbance & Upeditoa Perrritfrrg drat
[phone]
derekdenardCumdencgor
IQ7 Mx4 Suyl=C¢tty, Ra3agh, hK 2709-M7
httpr�.� SrcaLncdan r.oyt+.r�M'ir'xu•61F�`�nydz
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: [e-mail][mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 2:54 PM
To: Moore, Cindy
Cc: Denard, Derek
Subject: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Ms. Moore,
The last time we spoke on the phone you said that the subject permit had been pulled and would not be issued until the
question of the appropriate toxicity test is resolved; however, we received the new permit today. The permit requires
collection of one monthly grab sample, which is appropriate for periodic discharges from the facility's holding
pond. The sampling requirements of the Chronic Toxicity test are inconsistent with the monthly grab sample
requirement.
Motiva is again requesting a return to the Acute Toxicity method of analysis in order to maintain compliance.
Please contact me by phone or email if you would like to discuss this request.
Thank you,
Jennifer Bothwell
Environmental Coordinator
Motiva Enterprises LLC
PMB 282
35-31 Talcottville Road
Vernon, CT 06066
Office: 860-749-2839
14

Denard, Derek
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:35 AM
To: Bell, Wes; Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Thank you Derek.
Wes,
Please let me know if you can answer my questions below.
I can also be reached at 860-227-3004.
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:30 AM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Cc: Bell, Wes
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Marica's position has not been filled yet. For the time being you may want to contact Wes Bell or the supervisor Mike
Parker with any questions.
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Regional Office main phone: [phone]
Derek
From: [e-mail] [ma iIto: Jennifer. [e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:25 AM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Derek,
Do you know who replaced Marcia in enforcement? I have questions about how the agency handles the data when
there is both a monthly average limit and a daily max limit for the same parameter. In the previous permits we had a
daily max for TSS. My interpretation of the new permit is that if the first sample of the month exceeds the daily max, we
have an opportunity to collect additional samples to meet the monthly average. Is that correct? Do we remain in
compliance if we meet at least one of the limits? If we successfully meet the monthly average, is a reading over the
daily max still treated as a permit violation? Alternatively, if we only collect one sample and the reading is 40, are we
then forced to collect a second sample to try to reach a monthly average below 30? If we have to meet both limits each
month then the requirement is more stringent than the previous permit, especially if we do not have enough water for
more than one discharge.
15

If you cannot answer my questions, please let me know who I should direct them to.
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 4:03 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Cc: Hennessy, John; Meadows, Susan; Moore, Cindy
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Sorry for any misunderstanding, but the final copy (see attached) that was e-mail to you had been signed (July 20, 2015),
issued and processed before our discussion with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. Sorry, there was a delay in mailing that
final hard copy. A permit correction to change to Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) to Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia) is being
reviewed by my supervisor with comments from the Susan Meadows with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. The permit
correction has not been approved and issued yet.
I would like to further clarify that the Aquatic Toxicology Branch recommended Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia)-grab and
not Acute (Fathead Minnow) as required in the previous permit.
While we are on the subject are you ok with sampling Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) for NC0046892 Motiva South (see
attached)? Do you have the same issues with multiple day sampling as Chronic? Otherwise, Chronic Toxicity
(Ceriodaphnia dubia) sampling is consistent with our strategy for groundwater remediation discharges. Please let me
know if you have any comments for that permit as well.
Again, I'm sorry for any misunderstanding or inconvenience.
Sincerely,
Derek
Derek C Denard
Ersvironn ental Spedwa .--t
NCDENR D iMsion of Water Resources
Water QuaFrty Perm;niv sectbn
CompUnce & Expe-e-ted permit6r5 Urit
(919)8D7-6307
dereicdenard igncderw4m
1617 Mad Sasri a Cents, itah gh. W ZM99-1617
http:ll¢7eKaLncdan r_ary/rt�h+�/sw�?Ce'npdas
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: iennifer.bothwellCabmotivaent.com [maiIto: [e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 2:54 PM
To: Moore, Cindy
Cc: Denard, Derek
Subject: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
16

Ms. Moore,
The last time we spoke on the phone you said that the subject permit had been pulled and would not be issued until the
question of the appropriate toxicity test is resolved; however, we received the new permit today. The permit requires
collection of one monthly grab sample, which is appropriate for periodic discharges from the facility's holding
pond. The sampling requirements of the Chronic Toxicity test are inconsistent with the monthly grab sample
requirement.
Motiva is again requesting a return to the Acute Toxicity method of analysis in order to maintain compliance.
Please contact me by phone or email if you would like to discuss this request.
Thank you,
Jennifer Bothwell
Environmental Coordinator
Motiva Enterprises LLC
PMB 282
35-31 Talcottville Road
Vernon, CT 06066
Office: 860-749-2839
17

Denard, Derek
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:24 PM
To: Bell, Wes
Cc: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Wes,
So in my example, if we only collect one sample and the reading is 40, we have exceeded the monthly average and are
then forced to collect a second sample to try to reach a monthly average below 30? And if we don't have enough water
for a second discharge, or the second discharge is greater than 20 we have violated the permit?
Isn't that forcing us to collect more than one sample per month?
Jennifer
From: Bell, Wes [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 1:49 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Hello Jennifer,
I'll try to answer your questions, you can take multiple TSS samples in the month to get your TSS Monthly average down;
if you violate any limits whether it being daily maximum and/or monthly average, you will be in violation of the permit;
you can take multiple TSS samples throughout the day (as long as the sampling requirement is grab and the samples are
representative of the discharge) and report the average of those TSS samples as the daily value; On the other side, if
only one TSS grab sample is collected in the month and it exceeds both the daily and monthly average limits, there will
be two violations (daily and monthly average) for that month. I hope this helps and please feel free to contact me if you
need any additional info.
Wes
From: [e-mail] [maiIto: [e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:35 AM
To: Bell, Wes; Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Thank you Derek.
Wes,
Please let me know if you can answer my questions below.
I can also be reached at 860-227-3004.
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:30 AM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
18

Cc: Bell, Wes
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Marica's position has not been filled yet. For the time being you may want to contact Wes Bell or the supervisor Mike
Parker with any questions.
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Regional Office main phone: [phone]
Derek
From: [e-mail][mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:25 AM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Derek,
Do you know who replaced Marcia in enforcement? I have questions about how the agency handles the data when
there is both a monthly average limit and a daily max limit for the same parameter. In the previous permits we had a
daily max for TSS. My interpretation of the new permit is that if the first sample of the month exceeds the daily max, we
have an opportunity to collect additional samples to meet the monthly average. Is that correct? Do we remain in
compliance if we meet at least one of the limits? If we successfully meet the monthly average, is a reading over the
daily max still treated as a permit violation? Alternatively, if we only collect one sample and the reading is 40, are we
then forced to collect a second sample to try to reach a monthly average below 30? If we have to meet both limits each
month then the requirement is more stringent than the previous permit, especially if we do not have enough water for
more than one discharge.
If you cannot answer my questions, please let me know who I should direct them to.
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 4:03 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Cc: Hennessy, John; Meadows, Susan; Moore, Cindy
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Sorry for any misunderstanding, but the final copy (see attached) that was e-mail to you had been signed (July 20, 2015),
issued and processed before our discussion with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. Sorry, there was a delay in mailing that
final hard copy. A permit correction to change to Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) to Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia) is being
reviewed by my supervisor with comments from the Susan Meadows with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. The permit
correction has not been approved and issued yet.
I would like to further clarify that the Aquatic Toxicology Branch recommended Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia)-grab and
not Acute (Fathead Minnow) as required in the previous permit.
19

While we are on the subject are you ok with sampling Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) for NCO046892 Motiva South (see
attached)? Do you have the same issues with multiple day sampling as Chronic? Otherwise, Chronic Toxicity
(Ceriodaphnia dubia) sampling is consistent with our strategy for groundwater remediation discharges. Please let me
know if you have any comments for that permit as well.
Again, I'm sorry for any misunderstanding or inconvenience.
Sincerely,
Derek
Derek C Denard
Ernarannw^ta; Specab�t
NCDENR Di'sim.. of Water Resource.
Water QuaCrty Per rn3t;m Seabn
Corrp5ante & Expedited PerKT ing Unit
(919) 07-Ur,
derekdenard@ncdenr_gar
lQ7 apt s=r Vza Gmte;, U69s, sac 27e9-1617
http.?+DcriaLncda+�rory.rvn�, q:rw /p;fnpa-
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: [e-mail][mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 2:54 PM
To: Moore, Cindy
Cc: Denard, Derek
Subject: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NCO022187
Ms. Moore,
The last time we spoke on the phone you said that the subject permit had been pulled and would not be issued until the
question of the appropriate toxicity test is resolved; however, we received the new permit today. The permit requires
collection of one monthly grab sample, which is appropriate for periodic discharges from the facility's holding
pond. The sampling requirements of the Chronic Toxicity test are inconsistent with the monthly grab sample
requirement.
Motiva is again requesting a return to the Acute Toxicity method of analysis in order to maintain compliance.
Please contact me by phone or email if you would like to discuss this request.
Thank you,
Jennifer Bothwell
Environmental Coordinator
Motiva Enterprises LLC
PMB 282
35-31 Talcottville Road
Vernon, CT 06066
Office: 860-749-2839
20

Denard, Derek
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:51 PM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: FW: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Derek,
What was the justification for adding a monthly average TSS limit to the Charlotte discharge permits?
Jennifer
From: Bell, Wes [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:47 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Technically you only have to sample according to the permit; however, you are allowed to collect additional samples and
report those results if you choose to perform additional sampling. The permit does not require you to perform
additional sampling if you report a violation, that option is up to the facility staff.
You are correct with the second scenario.
It is a common practice for facilities with dual limits (daily and monthly) to collect additional samples in the month to try
and get the monthly average down. There is a catch, your facility is subject to the daily maximum limit for any additional
samples/results, so if one of the additional samples exceeded the daily maximum limit, this would add to the number of
violations for that particular month. I hope this helps explain things and feel free to email me if you have any additional
questions or comments.
Wes
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:24 PM
To: Bell, Wes
Cc: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Wes,
So in my example, if we only collect one sample and the reading is 40, we have exceeded the monthly average and are
then forced to collect a second sample to try to reach a monthly average below 30? And if we don't have enough water
for a second discharge, or the second discharge is greater than 20 we have violated the permit?
Isn't that forcing us to collect more than one sample per month?
Jennifer
From: Bell, Wes [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 1:49 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Hello Jennifer,
22

I'll try to answer your questions, you can take multiple TSS samples in the month to get your TSS Monthly average down;
if you violate any limits whether it being daily maximum and/or monthly average, you will be in violation of the permit;
you can take multiple TSS samples throughout the day (as long as the sampling requirement is grab and the samples are
representative of the discharge) and report the average of those TSS samples as the daily value; On the other side, if
only one TSS grab sample is collected in the month and it exceeds both the daily and monthly average limits, there will
be two violations (daily and monthly average) for that month. I hope this helps and please feel free to contact me if you
need any additional info.
Wes
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:35 AM
To: Bell, Wes; Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Thank you Derek.
Wes,
Please let me know if you can answer my questions below.
I can also be reached at 860-227-3004.
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:30 AM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Cc: Bell, Wes
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Marica's position has not been filled yet. For the time being you may want to contact Wes Bell or the supervisor Mike
Parker with any questions.
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Regional Office main phone: [phone]
Derek
From: [e-mail] [ma iIto: [e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:25 AM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Derek,
Do you know who replaced Marcia in enforcement? I have questions about how the agency handles the data when
there is both a monthly average limit and a daily max limit for the same parameter. In the previous permits we had a
daily max for T55. My interpretation of the new permit is that if the first sample of the month exceeds the daily max, we
have an opportunity to collect additional samples to meet the monthly average. Is that correct? Do we remain in
23

compliance if we meet at least one of the limits? If we successfully meet the monthly average, is a reading over the
daily max still treated as a permit violation? Alternatively, if we only collect one sample and the reading is 40, are we
then forced to collect a second sample to try to reach a monthly average below 30? If we have to meet both limits each
month then the requirement is more stringent than the previous permit, especially if we do not have enough water for
more than one discharge.
If you cannot answer my questions, please let me know who I should direct them to.
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 4:03 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Cc: Hennessy, John; Meadows, Susan; Moore, Cindy
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Sorry for any misunderstanding, but the final copy (see attached) that was e-mail to you had been signed (July 20, 2015),
issued and processed before our discussion with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. Sorry, there was a delay in mailing that
final hard copy. A permit correction to change to Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) to Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia) is being
reviewed by my supervisor with comments from the Susan Meadows with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. The permit
correction has not been approved and issued yet.
I would like to further clarify that the Aquatic Toxicology Branch recommended Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia)-grab and
not Acute (Fathead Minnow) as required in the previous permit.
While we are on the subject are you ok with sampling Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) for NC0046892 Motiva South (see
attached)? Do you have the same issues with multiple day sampling as Chronic? Otherwise, Chronic Toxicity
(Ceriodaphnia dubia) sampling is consistent with our strategy for groundwater remediation discharges. Please let me
know if you have any comments for that permit as well.
Again, I'm sorry for any misunderstanding or inconvenience.
Sincerely,
Derek
Derek C Denard
REUM ETY aanmeartat Spedaftl
NCDENR DiuWm of Water Resources
water Quaft Punt" SKton
Componm & Expedited Perrrntting ih*
i919'r 807-6307
derekdenard@mderffgN
1617Ma! Sew-!mCanter,A* igh,?4CZ7999-1617
httr:;yycrtalnaiannwgJAvt: w-qjsw�o;*nOas
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.
24

From: [e-mail] [mailto:Jennifer.bothwellCa�motivaent.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 2:54 PM
To: Moore, Cindy
Cc: Denard, Derek
Subject: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Ms. Moore,
The last time we spoke on the phone you said that the subject permit had been pulled and would not be issued until the
question of the appropriate toxicity test is resolved; however, we received the new permit today. The permit requires
collection of one monthly grab sample, which is appropriate for periodic discharges from the facility's holding
pond. The sampling requirements of the Chronic Toxicity test are inconsistent with the monthly grab sample
requirement.
Motiva is again requesting a return to the Acute Toxicity method of analysis in order to maintain compliance.
Please contact me by phone or email if you would like to discuss this request.
Thank you; -
Jennifer Bothwell
Environmental Coordinator
Motiva Enterprises LLC
PMB 282
35-31 Talcottville Road
Vernon, CT 06066
Office: 860-749-2839
25

Denard, Derek
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 8:30 AM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Derek,
Are you available to discuss the TSS limits today? After clarification from Wes, I am very concerned that adding the
monthly average limit to the permit effectively reduced the daily max from 45 to 30 since we are only required to
sample once per month. If we have made no significant changes to the facility or requested any changes to the permit,
what is the justification for making the permit more stringent?
I am sorry that I did not question this while the permit was in draft, but I incorrectly thought the averaging was added to
give more flexibility, not less.
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:51 PM
To: Denard, Derek ([e-mail])
Subject: FW: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Derek,
What was the justification for adding a monthly average TSS limit to the Charlotte discharge permits?
Jennifer
From: Bell, Wes [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:47 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Technically you only have to sample according to the permit; however, you are allowed to collect additional samples and
report those results if you choose to perform additional sampling. The permit does not require you to perform
additional sampling if you report a violation, that option is up to the facility staff.
You are correct with the second scenario.
It is a common practice for facilities with dual limits (daily and monthly) to collect additional samples in the month to try
and get the monthly average down. There is a catch, your facility is subject to the daily maximum limit for any additional
samples/results, so if one of the additional samples exceeded the daily maximum limit, this would add to the number of
violations for that particular month. I hope this helps explain things and feel free to email me if you have any additional
questions or comments.
Wes
From:jennifer.bothwellC&motivaent.com [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:24 PM
26

To: Bell, Wes
Cc: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Wes,
So in my example, if we only collect one sample and the reading is 40, we have exceeded the monthly average and are
then forced to collect a second sample to try to reach a monthly average below 30? And if we don't have enough water
for a second discharge, or the second discharge is greater than 20 we have violated the permit?
Isn't that forcing us to collect more than one sample per month?
Jennifer
From: Bell, Wes [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 1:49 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Hello Jennifer,
I'll try to answer your questions, you can take multiple TSS samples in the month to get your TSS Monthly average down;
if you violate any limits whether it being daily maximum and/or monthly average, you will be in violation of the permit;
you can take multiple TSS samples throughout the day (as long as the sampling requirement is grab and the samples are
representative of the discharge) and report the average of those TSS samples as the daily value; On the other side, if
only one TSS grab sample is collected in the month and it exceeds both the daily and monthly average limits, there will
be two violations (daily and monthly average) for that month. I hope this helps and please feel free to contact me if you
need any additional info.
Wes
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:35 AM
To: Bell, Wes; Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Thank you Derek.
Wes,
Please let me know if you can answer my questions below.
I can also be reached at 860-227-3004.
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek [mailto:derek.denardCcbncdenr.gov]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:30 AM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Cc: Bell, Wes
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Marica's position has not been filled yet. For the time being you may want to contact Wes Bell or the supervisor Mike
Parker with any questions.
27

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Regional Office main phone: [phone]
Derek
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:25 AM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Derek,
Do you know who replaced Marcia in enforcement? I have questions about how the agency handles the data when
there is both a monthly average limit and a daily max limit for the same parameter. In the previous permits we had a
daily max for TSS. My interpretation of the new permit is that if the first sample of the month exceeds the daily max, we
have an opportunity to collect additional samples to meet the monthly average. Is that correct? Do we remain in
compliance if we meet at least one of the limits? If we successfully meet the monthly average, is a reading over the
daily max still treated as a permit violation? Alternatively, if we only collect one sample and the reading is 40, are we
then forced to collect a second sample to try to reach a monthly average below 30? If we have to meet both limits each
month then the requirement is more stringent than the previous permit, especially if we do not have enough water for
more than one discharge.
If you cannot answer my questions, please let me know who I should direct them to.
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 4:03 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Cc: Hennessy, John; Meadows, Susan; Moore, Cindy
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Sorry for any misunderstanding, but the final copy (see attached) that was e-mail to you had been signed (July 20, 2015),
issued and processed before our discussion with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. Sorry, there was a delay in mailing that
final hard copy. A permit correction to change to Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) to Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia) is being
reviewed by my supervisor with comments from the Susan Meadows with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. The permit
correction has not been approved and issued yet.
I would like to further clarify that the Aquatic Toxicology Branch recommended Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia)-grab and
not Acute (Fathead Minnow) as required in the previous permit.
While we are on the subject are you ok with sampling Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) for NC0046892 Motiva South (see
attached)? Do you have the same issues with multiple day sampling as Chronic? Otherwise, Chronic Toxicity
(Ceriodaphnia dubia) sampling is consistent with our strategy for groundwater remediation discharges. Please let me
know if you have any comments for that permit as well.
Again, I'm sorry for any misunderstanding or inconvenience.
28

Sincerely,
Derek
Derek C Denard
Environmertta7 SPecia�st
NCDENR Msion of %Vater Resovice--
water Qaatay Penn" Secton
CompTarce & Expedited Perm tt;N Urrt
d91%807-6W7
derekdenard@rxdenrsyvr
1Q7 Mi0 SQr WkQ Cantsr. RaVogh. NK rOD-1617
htt,�'l�'r�incdaa�r_GryP�'�l{+'G.frwxP; pr+'`nPd.s
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: [e-mail] [ma iIto: [e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 2:54 PM
To: Moore, Cindy
Cc: Denard, Derek
Subject: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Ms. Moore,
The last time we spoke on the phone you said that the subject permit had been pulled and would not be issued until the
question of the appropriate toxicity test is resolved; however, we received the new permit today. The permit requires
collection of one monthly grab sample, which is appropriate for periodic discharges from the facility's holding
pond. The sampling requirements of the Chronic Toxicity test are inconsistent with the monthly grab sample
requirement.
Motiva is again requesting a return to the Acute Toxicity method of analysis in order to maintain compliance.
Please contact me by phone or email if you would like to discuss this request.
Thank you,
Jennifer Bothwell
Environmental Coordinator
Motiva Enterprises LLC
PMB 282
35-31 Talcottville Road
Vernon, CT 06066
Office: 860-749-2839
29

Denard, Derek
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 3:14 PM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NCO022187
Derek,
Thank you for your response. I appreciate your thorough review of my concerns.
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 11:25 AM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NCO022187
Jennifer,
The daily limit in the previous permit was 30 mg/L. The daily limit in the new permit is 45 mg/L. The daily limit has been
relaxed. However, the monthly average limit is 30 mg/L. You could resample to meet the monthly limit, but you are not
required to resample.
The TSS results for this facility from September 2011 to February 2015 had an average of 7.18 mg/L and maximum of
26.6 mg/L. In 2012, 2013, and 2014 this facility discharged 35, 63 and 47 times, respectively. It would be reasonable to
resample if you exceeded 30 mg/L, even more so with 45 mg/L, but you would not be required to resample. You do run
the risk having more violations with a monthly limit, but I don't believe you will have a problem meeting these limits for
TSS based on the data during the previous permit cycle.
The rationale behind this change is for consistency with other NPDES permits in the state. We have updated our Bulk
Storage Terminal strategy.
Derek
Derek C Denard
Ern^tonmerta: Specs;.--t
NCOENR Dv_+on of Water ResoLrCe;
Water Q aa:V Perm3ting Sector.
Compiiarce & Expected Permsttirg Uric
[phone]
derekdenard@mO" gw
1617 VW1 San m Canty, Ral; gh, NX 2?9 S-1617
htipA;�lyartatncclan r.ory;'w+�,'w'Q.lsa�Ipt�nPdas
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: [e-mail] [maiIto: [e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 8:30 AM
30

To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Derek,
Are you available to discuss the TSS limits today? After clarification from Wes, I am very concerned that adding the
monthly average limit to the permit effectively reduced the daily max from 45 to 30 since we are only required to
sample once per month. If we have made no significant changes to the facility or requested any changes to the permit,
what is the justification for making the permit more stringent?
I am sorry that I did not question this while the permit was in draft, but I incorrectly thought the averaging was added to
give more flexibility, not less.
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:51 PM
To: Denard, Derek (derek.denard(ancdenr.gov)
Subject: FW: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Derek,
What was the justification for adding a monthly average TSS limit to the Charlotte discharge permits?
Jennifer
From: Bell, Wes [ma ilto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:47 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Technically you only have to sample according to the permit; however, you are allowed to collect additional samples and
report those results if you choose to perform additional sampling. The permit does not require you to perform
additional sampling if you report a violation, that option is up to the facility staff.
You are correct with the second scenario.
It is a common practice for facilities with dual limits (daily and monthly) to collect additional samples in the month to try
and get the monthly average down. There is a catch, your facility is subject to the daily maximum limit for any additional
samples/results, so if one of the additional samples exceeded the daily maximum limit, this would add to the number of
violations for that particular month. I hope this helps explain things and feel free to email me if you have any additional
questions or comments.
Wes
From: Jennifer.bothwell(amotivaent.com [ma iIto: Jennifer.bothwelI(Qbmotivaent.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:24 PM
To: Bell, Wes
Cc: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Wes,
31

So in my example, if we only collect one sample and the reading is 40, we have exceeded the monthly average and are
then forced to collect a second sample to try to reach a monthly average below 30? And if we don't have enough water
for a second discharge, or the second discharge is greater than 20 we have violated the permit?
Isn't that forcing us to collect more than one sample per month?
Jennifer
From: Bell, Wes [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 1:49 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Hello Jennifer,
I'll try to answer your questions, you can take multiple TSS samples in the month to get your TSS Monthly average down;
if you violate any limits whether it being daily maximum and/or monthly average, you will be in violation of the permit;
you can take multiple TSS samples throughout the day (as long as the sampling requirement is grab and the samples are
representative of the discharge) and report the average of those TSS samples as the daily value; On the other side, if
only one TSS grab sample is collected in the month and it exceeds both the daily and monthly average limits, there will
be two violations (daily and monthly average) for that month. I hope this helps and please feel free to contact me if you
need any additional info.
Wes
From: [e-mail] [maiIto: [e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:35 AM
To: Bell, Wes; Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Thank you Derek.
Wes,
Please let me know if you can answer my questions below.
can also be reached at 860-227-3004.
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek [mailto:derek.denard(abncdenr.gov]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:30 AM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Cc: Bell, Wes
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Marica's position has not been filled yet. For the time being you may want to contact Wes Bell or the supervisor Mike
Parker with any questions.
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
32

Regional Office main phone: [phone]
Derek
From: [e-mail][mailto:jennifer.bothwellcd)motivaent.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 11:25 AM
To: Denard, Derek
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Derek,
Do you know who replaced Marcia in enforcement? I have questions about how the agency handles the data when
there is both a monthly average limit and a daily max limit for the same parameter. In the previous permits we had a
daily max for TSS. My interpretation of the new permit is that if the first sample of the month exceeds the daily max, we
have an opportunity to collect additional samples to meet the monthly average. Is that correct? Do we remain in
compliance if we meet at least one of the limits? If we successfully meet the monthly average, is a reading over the
daily max still treated as a permit violation? Alternatively, if we only collect one sample and the reading is 40, are we
then forced to collect a second sample to try to reach a monthly average below 30? If we have to meet both limits each
month then the requirement is more stringent than the previous permit, especially if we do not have enough water for
more than one discharge.
If you cannot answer my questions, please let me know who I should direct them to.
Thank you,
Jennifer
From: Denard, Derek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 4:03 PM
To: Bothwell, Jennifer L MOTIVA-DVM/613/12
Cc: Hennessy, John; Meadows, Susan; Moore, Cindy
Subject: RE: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Jennifer,
Sorry for any misunderstanding, but the final copy (see attached) that was e-mail to you had been signed (July 20, 2015),
issued and processed before our discussion with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. Sorry, there was a delay in mailing that
final hard copy. A permit correction to change to Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) to Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia) is being
reviewed by my supervisor with comments from the Susan Meadows with the Aquatic Toxicology Branch. The permit
correction has not been approved and issued yet.
would like to further clarify that the Aquatic Toxicology Branch recommended Acute (Ceriodaphnia dubia)-grab and
not Acute (Fathead Minnow) as required in the previous permit.
While we are on the subject are you ok with sampling Chronic (Ceriodaphnia dubia) for NC0046892 Motiva South (see
attached)? Do you have the same issues with multiple day sampling as Chronic? Otherwise, Chronic Toxicity
(Ceriodaphnia dubia) sampling is consistent with our strategy for groundwater remediation discharges. Please let me
know if you have any comments for that permit as well.
Again, I'm sorry for any misunderstanding or inconvenience.
Sincerely,
Derek
33

Derek C Denard
ErhironmenulSpadaF t
NCDENR Wsaan of %Vater Resources
Water Q;a`?ty PermlitfiN Sector.
Comp aarce & Expedited Pernrirbrq ifrit
(919) 84745397
derekdenard@rx*--nr_ m
1517 hWI San"Centar, Rai6gh, NC 27699.107
httpltymrtai:ntdcn r_orgl'�.'�iK'4t�'A''i�r'n ydat
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: jennifer.bothwellCa)motivaent.com [mailto:jennifer.bothwell(a)motivaent.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 2:54 PM
To: Moore, Cindy
Cc: Denard, Derek
Subject: Motiva Enterprises Charlotte North Terminal Permit NC0022187
Ms. Moore,
The last time we spoke on the phone you said that the subject permit had been pulled and would not be issued until the
question of the appropriate toxicity test is resolved; however, we received the new permit today. The permit requires
collection of one monthly grab sample, which is appropriate for periodic discharges from the facility's holding
pond. The sampling requirements of the Chronic Toxicity test are inconsistent with the monthly grab sample
requirement.
Motiva is again requesting a return to the Acute Toxicity method of analysis in order to maintain compliance.
Please contact me by phone or email if you would like to discuss this request.
Thank you,
Jennifer Bothwell
Environmental Coordinator
Motiva Enterprises LLC
PMB 282
35-31 Talcottville Road
Vernon, CT 06066
Office: 860-749-2839
34