WQ0002284_Email_20011206

r
Page 1 of 2
Jeff Welti
From: Sue Homewood [[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 2:41 PM
To: David Goodrich
Cc: Kim Colson; Al Hodge; nathaniel thornburg
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Kinnakeet Shores WWtP]
David,
the project that I have in house, that you requested a map for was a simple renewal of the existing
NTH permit. Their existing permit allows construction of additional system.
01
I know they have a modificatiop in house and Nathaniel Thornburg has been assigned to that project.
Kim advised me yesterday to issue the renewal of the existing permit without any modifications as
they originally requested, any issues regarding their proposed modifications will be dealt with in the
modification request that Nathaniel is reviewing.
Ka-
e are constructin c dance with t ti of an g I can see. y are co_The region DWQ staff (al hodge) would be the one to address any construction thout a permit
violations.
Sue
David Goodrich wrote:
Sue,
The contractors are about to begin (if they haven't already)
constructing at this facility. As you know, we requested a decent site
map though your office back in April and never received it. They sent
the attached message to the Washington Regional Office, and we cannot
send you our comments until we examine a contemporary site map. Please
advise!
David
Subject: RE: Kinnakeet Shores WWTP
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:45:29 -0500
From: "Jeff Welti" <[e-mail]>
To: "David Ryan"<[e-mail]>
CC: <[e-mail]>
David,Also the only wells we have records of are MW1,2,3&4... GW really needsan updated map
so we can deal with both the old existing system (rotar distributors)and the new proposed
system. Regards,Jeff
---Original Message -----
From: David Ryan[mailto:[e-mail]
1/25/02

Page 2 of 2
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 8:58 AM
To: Jeff Welti
Subject: RE: Klnnakeet Shores WWTP
Jeff,
This is my understanding of the proposed development to take place on the
wastewater treatment facility site;
,� 1)A on s proposed to constructed on the south side of this site as a provision
/ % or an aesthetic buffer between the residential units and the existing
wastewater treatment facility. It is proposed to be outside of required 200'
d� 17 buffer between high rate disposal systems and any lake or impoundment
15N C 2H.0219 (G)).
'^ ) additions ut significantly mailerPon31
is being proposed along the
eastern property line of the site. This also will provide a buffer between the
adjacent property owners and the existing wastewater treatment facility. As
with the other pond, the proposed limits will be outside of the required 200'
buffer. It is proposed that this pond could be utilized for the reuse facility
being proposed.
With the construction of the larger pond along the southern boundary line, (2)
monitoring wells. (wells #5 and #9) will be effected by the construction of the pond.
We are asking for your assistance in the relocation of these wells without greatly
delaying the developer from proceeding with the construction of these ponds. If you
would like, you can contact me @ [phone] ext 228 to discuss this further.
Thank You.
David M. Ryan
David M. Ryan
Project Manager
Bissell Grofessional Group
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti -virus system (www..gdsoft.com).
Version: 6.0.263 / Virus Database: 135 - Release Date: 6/22/01
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti -virus system (www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.263 / Virus Database: 135 - Release Date: 6/22/01
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti -virus system (www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.263 / Virus Database: 135 - Release Date: 6/22/01
1/25/02

Page 1 of 2
Jeff Welti
From: Jeff Welti [e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 9:45 AM
To: David Ryan
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: RE: Kinnakeet Shores WWTP
David,
Also the only wells we have records of are MW1,2,3&4... GW really needs
an updated map so we can deal with both the old existing system (rotar distributors)
and the new proposed system.
Regards,
Jeff
----Original Message -----
From: David Ryan[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 8:58 AM
To: Jeff Weld
Subject: RE: Kinnakeet Shores WWTP
Jeff,
This is my understanding of the proposed development to take place on the wastewater
treatment facility site;
1) A pond is proposed to constructed on the south side of this site as a provision for an
aesthetic buffer between the residential units and the existing wastewater treatment
facility. It is proposed to be outside of required 200' buffer between high rate disposal
systems and any lake or impoundment( 15NCAC 2H.0219 (G)).
2) An additional, but significantly smaller pond, is being proposed along the eastern
property line of the site. This also will provide a buffer between the adjacent property
owners and the existing wastewater treatment facility. As with the other pond, the
proposed limits will be outside of the required 200' buffer. It is proposed that this pond
could be utilized for the reuse facility being proposed.
With the construction of the larger pond along the southern boundary line, (2) monitoring wells,
(wells #5 and #9) will be effected by the construction of the pond. We are asking for your
assistance in the relocation of these wells without greatly delaying the developer from proceeding
with the construction of these ponds. If you would like, you can contact me @ [phone] ext
228 to discuss this further. Thank You.
David M. Ryan
David M. Ryan
Project Manager
Bissell Grofessional Group
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti -virus system (www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.263 / Virus Database: 135 - Release Date: 6/22/01
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
1/25/02

Jeff Welti
From: David Goodrich
[[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 2:07 PM
To: Sue Homewood; [e-mail];
[e-mail]
Subject: Re: wg0002284
Sue,
The primary reason for requesting the site map was to scope out the
size
and location of the new rotary units. I now understand that the a
does not intend to construct new units in the immediate future. I'
this. it's OK with me if we don't have the site maD.
I have been in contact with Jeff Welti (GW Section, WaRO), and it is my
understanding from him that the Washington Regional Office (Water
Quality
Section and Groundwater Section) do not have a complete application
package for this facility. I also understan-dfom Jeff that he has been in
contact with both the applicant and the applicant's consultant, and that a
new hydrogeologic report has been issued relative to the current permit
a�pliogn which we are call working on. It would be most helpful if the
applicant could furnish copies of a complete application package (which
includes this new hydro report) to your office, my office, Jeff Welti's
office, and Al Hodge's office. Please let me know if there is anything I can
do to help this along)
David
Sue Homewood wrote:
> David,
> kinnakeet shores just sent in uge modifica io for this permit. is
> there anyway y that we can issue the perms at you and i have in house
> (without addressing some of the issues you still say you have) and
> address them d�he ❑emit modification that will be reviewed in a
> month or two? its difficult for us to manage 2 applications on the same
> project and the new stuff (that you heard about the other day) is
BRAND
> new stuff and a very large package that we want to keep separate from
> the one you and i have assigned right now.
> sue
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti -virus system (http://www.grisoft.Gom).
Version: 6.0.263 / Virus Database: 135 - Release Date: 6/22/01
!/� 4e -