NC0088226_Permit Issuance_20060615

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
June 15, 2006
Mr. Allen Holloway
Childress Klein Properties
301 South College Street, Suite 2800
Charlotte, North Carolina 28208
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit NCO088226
Wachovia Tryon Street
Mecklenburg County
Dear Mr. Holloway:
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for the subject permit. Accordingly,
we are forwarding the attached NPDFS discharge permit. This permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of
North'Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the
US. Environmental Protection Agency dated May 9,1994 (or as subsequently amended).
This final permit contains the following significant changes from the draft you were sent on April 26, 2006-
➢ The permit has been clarified to reflect the fact that there will be two distinct discharge points. Both
points will have identical monitoring requirements.
If any parts, measurement frequencies oT sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days
following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B
of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings (6714 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714). Unless such demand is made, this decision shall be final and
binding.
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 Quality or permits
required by the Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act or any other Federal or Local
governmental permit that may be required. If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact
Toya Fields at telephone number [phone], extension 551.
Sincerely, a4.
W.Klimek,P.
cc: Central Files
Mooresville Regional Office/Surface Water Protection
Mecklenburg County DEP
I)1PDESUnit ?
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
Technical Assistance and Certification Unit
John S. hair, Engineering Consulting Services, Ltd. 18702 Red Oak Boulevard, Suite A, Charlotte, North Carolina 28217]
Mike Korzelius, CMUD [4000 Westmont Drive, Charlotte, North Carolina 28217]
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone] p{r°` Carolina
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 On the Internet at http://hZo.enr.state.nc.us/ (upq((Y
An Equal OpporlunitylAfimrative Action Employer

w
11
NCO088226
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards
and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
Wachovia Bank, N.A.
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Wachovia Tryon Street
500 Block of South Tryon Street
Charlotte, North Carolina
Mecklenburg County
to receiving waters designated as an unnamed tributary to Little Sugar Creek in the Catawba
River Basin in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other
conditions set forth in Parts I, II, III and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective July 1, 2006.
This permit .and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on June 50, 2010.
Signed this day June 15, 2006.
-'r 4�7
04'X W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

• NC0088226
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are hereby revoked. As of this permit
issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this number is no longer effective. Therefore, the exclusive authority to
operate and discharge from this facility arises under the permit conditions, requirements, terms, and provisions included
herein.
Wachovia Bank, N.A. is hereby authorized to:
1. Discharge dewatering water from a project located at 500 Block 'of South Tryon Street,
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County.
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the locations specified on the attached map into
an,unnamed tributary to Little Sugar Creek, Class C water in the Catawba River Basin,
at the location spe ' 'ed on the attached map..

Wachovia Tryon Street — NCO088226 Facility
USGS Quad Name: Charlotte East 001: 35013'26" Location e
Receiving Stream: UT to Little Sugar Creek 80050'52"
Stream Class: C 002: 350
13'21"
Not t0 SCALESubbasin:Catawba —030834 '80.50'52" N

NCO088226
A. (1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Pemuttee is
authorized to discharge from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as
specified below:
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS -
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample
Location''
Flow
Monthly
Meter
Effluent
Total Suspended Solids
30.0 mg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Oil and Greasez
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Benzene
71.4 pg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Toluene
11.0 pg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Ethylbenzene
383 pg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Total Xylenes
88.5 pg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether
BE
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Leads
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
1,2 Dichloroethane4
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Napthalene4
105 pg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
n-Bttylbenzene
3 pg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Chronic Toxicitys
I Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Notes:
1. All "effluent" samples shall be collected after the point of convergence of all dewatering streams and
prior to the point of connection with the storm sewer.
2. The grab sample for oil and grease should be skimmed from the surface in a quiescent zone, such as a
holding tank, if possible.
3. If lead is detected at 5 25.0 pg/L during the first eight sampling events, the lead monitoring is no longer
required and may be discontinued for the remainder of the permit term. If lead is detected at > 25.0 pg/L
during any of the first eight sampling events, lead monitoring must be continued for the remainder of the
permit term.
4. If this pollutant is not detected above method detection limits during the first eight sampling events, then
monitoring is no longer required and may be discontinued for the remainder of the permit term. If the
pollutant is detected during any of the first eight sampling events, monitoring must continue for the
remainder of the permit term.
5. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 909/6; March, June, September, and December; See Special
Condition A (3) of the Supplement to Effluent Limitations.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or foam visible in other than trace amounts.

NCO088226
A. (2). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Pernuttee is
authorized to discharge from outfall serial number 002. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the
Pemdttee as specified below:
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample
Location'.
Flow
Monthly
Meter
Effluent
Total Suspended Solids
30.0 mg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Oil and Greasez
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Benzene
71.4 µg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Toluene
11.0 µg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Ethylbenzene
383 µg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Total Xylenes
88.5 pg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether
(MTBE)
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Leads
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
1,2 Dichloroethane4
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Napthalene4
105 µg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
n-Butylbenzene
3 pg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Chronic Toxicitys
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Notes:
1. All "effluent" samples shall be collected after the point of convergence of all dewatering streams and
prior to the point of connection with the storm sewer.
2.. The grab sample for oil and grease should be skimmed from the surface in a quiescent zone, such as a
holding tank, if possible.
3. If lead is detected at <_ 25.0 µg/L during the first eight sampling events, the lead monitoring is no longer
required and may be discontinued for the remainder of the permit term. If lead is detected at > 25.0 µg/L
during any of the first eight sampling events, lead monitoring must be continued for the remainder of the
permit term.
4. If this pollutant is not detected above method detection limits during the first eight sampling events, then
monitoring is no longer required and may be discontinued for the remainder of the permit term. If the
pollutant is detected during any of the first eight sampling events, monitoring must continue for the
remainder of the permit term.
5. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 901/6; March, June, September, and December; See Special
Condition A (4) of the Supplement to Effluent Limitations.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or foam visible in other than trace amounts.

NCO088226
SUPPLEMENT TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A (3). CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY) — OUTFALL 001
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant mortality to Cniodaphnia
dubia at an effluent concentration of 90%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, uq arierl� monitoring using test procedures outlined in the "North Carolina
Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised February 1998, or subsequent versions or "North Carolina Phase
II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be
performed during the months March, June, September, and December. Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed
at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
If the test procedure performed as the first test of any single quarter results in a failure or ChV below the permit limit, then
multiple -concentration testingshall be performed at a minimum, in each of the two following months as described in "North
Carolina Phase 11 Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric mean of the highest concentration
having no detectable impairment of reproduction or survival and the lowest concentration that does have a detectable
impairment of reproduction or survival. The definition of "detectable impairment," collection methods, exposure regimes,
and further statistical methods are specified in the "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure"
(Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge Monitoring Form
(MR-1) for the months in which tests were performed, using the parameter code TGP3B for the pass/fail results and THP3B
for the Chronic Value. Additionally, DWQ Form AT-3. (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental 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, accurate, include all supporting chemical/physical measurements and all concentration/response
data, and be certified by laboratory supervisor and ORC or approved designate signature. 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 month/year of the report with the notation of "No Flow" in the comment area of the
form. The report shall be submitted to the Environmental Sciences Section at the address cited above. .
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, monitoring will be required
during the following month.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
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,
minimum control organism reproduction, 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,

NCO088226
A (4). CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY). — OUTFALL 002
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant mortality to Ceriodaphnia
dubia at an effluent concentration of 90%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, qugLimly monitoring using test procedures outlined in the "North Carolina
Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised February 1998, or subsequent versions or "North Carolina Phase
Il Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be
performed during the months March, June, September, and December. Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed
at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
If the test procedure performed as the first test of any single quarter results in a failure or ChV below the permit limit, then
multiple -concentration testing shall be performed at a minimum, in each of the two following months as described in "North
Carolina Phase H Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric mean of the highest concentration
having no detectable impairment of reproduction or survival and the lowest concentration that does have a detectable
impairment of reproduction or survival. The definition of "detectable impairment," collection methods, exposure .regimes,
and further statistical methods are specified in the "North Carolina Phase Il Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure"
(Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge Monitoring Form
(MR-1) for the months in which tests were performed, using the parameter code TGP3B for the pass/fail results and THP3B
for the Chronic Value. Additionally, DWQ Form AT-3 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina ' 27699-1621
• Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental 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, accurate, include all supporting chemical/physical measurements and all concentration/response
data, and be certified by laboratory supervisor and ORC or approved designate signature. 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 month/year of the report with the notation of "No Flow" in the comment area of the
form. The report shall be submitted to the Environmental Sciences Section at the address cited above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, monitoring will be required
during the following month.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
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,
minimum control organism reproduction, 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.

Re: Wachovia Tryon Street general permit
Subject: Re: Wachovia Tryon Street general permit
From: Samar Bou-Ghazale <Samar.Bou-GhazaleC ncmail.net>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 15:09:19 -0400
To: Toya Fields <toya.iields C ncmail.net>
Hi Toya,
Please don't worry about it. It is a minor facility and sometime you guys issue the
permit without requesting a staff report and specially when it is a minor facility.
However, when I saw a request for recommendation I was surprised since there is no
need for us to comment on something that we did not do a staff report for.
Samar
Toya Fields wrote:
Aha!!
It actually was an oversight on my part for not requesting the staff report. It
won't happen again (hopefully). Would you feel uncomfortable with me moving
forward with the permit at this point? I could hold it if you'd rather have time
to complete a staff report.
Toya
Samar Bou-Ghazale wrote:
Hi Toya,
The statement "Please verify that the permit conforms to SR (staff report)" is
written by Rex Gleason (Regional Engineer) to Mike and I, in order to review
the draft permit and see if it conforms to the SR. I hope that this
explanation will answer your question.
Thank You,
Samar
Toya Fields wrote:
Hi Samar,
I received your comments on the Tryon Street groundwater remediation
permit.NC0088226. You wrote something on the cover page- it looks like
"Please verify that the permit conforms to gp". Is that correct? Is there
something in particular that you were concerned about or was it just a
general comment?
Thanks,
Toya
Samar Bou-Ghazale - [e-mail]
Environmental Engineer I
North Carolina Dept. of Environment
Div. of Water Quality
610 E. Center Ave., Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Ph: [phone] Fax: (704)
& Natural Resources
663-6040
1 of 1 5/31/2006 3:51 PM

NCDENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
Wachovia Bank N.A.
NCO088226
Facility Information
(1.) Facility Name:
Wachovia Tryon Street I3TS
(2.) Permitted Flow MGM:
none
i (6.) County:
Mecklenburg
(3.) Facility Class
(7.) Regional Office:
Mooresville
(4.) Pretreatment Program:
N/A
(8.) USGS Topo Quad:
(5) Permit Status:
Pro osed
(9.) USGS Quad Name:
Chadotte East
Stream Characteristics
(1.) Receiving Stream:
UT to Little Sugar Creek
(7J Drainage Area (mi'--):
11.8
(2J Sub basin:
03-08-34
(8.) Summer 7Q10 (cfs):
1.25
—-
(3.) Stream Index Number.
—
11-137-8a
--
(9.) Winter 7Q10 (cfs)
__
-- __
- — --- _
-
N/A
a uatic life
Summary
This dewatering project drains two parcels. Parcel #1 was formerly a firestone facility, a gasoline/service
station, and an automotive sales/service business. An investigation has revealed the presence of
petroleum -impacted soil and chlorinated compounds. Petroleum sources include former petroleum
underground storage tanks (USTs), underground hydraulic lifts, a potential oil -water separator, and floor
drains. TCE (tetrachloroethene) sources were not identified, however according to information submitted
by the permittee, it is not uncommon to find this pollutant in downtown areas.
Parcel #2 is currently a paved parking lot. Various businesses and residences, including an auto -radiator
repair business, formerly occupied the space. Assessments on this parcel do not indicate any adverse
environmental conditions other than potential heating oil USTs/ASTs that may have heated former
residential structures.
The facility is not initially proposing to remediate the groundwater. They plan to simply dewater the site.
Initial data from 4 monitoring wells data indicate the following pollutants have the potential to be
discharged:
Pollutant
Maximum detected
Applicable WQ standard/criteria
concentration p L
(p L)
Benzene
1.75
71.4 (NC, human health)
n-But lbenzene
2.12
3 (ECOTOX)
Diisopropyl ether
1.21
20,000 (ECOTOX)
(isopropyl ether)
Eth lbenzene
4.45
520 (ECOTOX)
p-Isopropylbenzene
3.16
310 (ECOTOX) Ll

NPDES Permit Fact Sheet — 04/ 18/06
Page 2
Wachovia Bank
NCO088226
MTBE
2.67
2,393 (proposed NC)
n-Propylbenzene
1.35
77 (ECOTOX)
Tetrachloroethene (PERC)
2.90
Water supply standard only
Toluene
2.95
11
1,2,4-Trimeth lbenzene
1.98
380 (ECOTOX)
1,3,5-Trimeth lbenzene
1.86
620 (ECOTOX)
m/ -X lene
15
780 (total Xylenes, ECOTOX)
o-X lene
3.97
The groundwater remediation general permit prescribes the following limits and monitoring requirements
for petroleum impacted groundwater:
en C
AMIX. MatiR= �.
Flow
TSS
30.0 m
/L
Oil and grease
Benzene
71.4
/L
Toluene
11.0 N
/L
Eth lbenzene
383 N
/L
X lene
88.5 u
/L
MTBE
Lead
1,2 Dichoroethane
Na thalene
105 u
/L
Based on the results of the sampling data and the parameters of concern, the facility will be required to
monitor for the following:
➢ Flow
➢
Ethylbenzene ➢ Napthalene
➢ TSS
➢
Xylene ➢ n-Butylbenzene
➢ Oil and grease
➢
MTBE ➢ Chronic toxicity at 90%
➢ Benzene
➢
Lead
➢ Toluene
➢
1,2 Dichloroethane
This segment of Little Sugar Creek is listed on the 2006 draft 303(d) list due to both overall and aquatic life
impairments. The impairments are due to fecal coliform standard violations and impaired biological
integrity. Potential sources are urban runoff, storm sewers, and municipal point sources.
The 2004 Catawba Basin Plan notes that Little Sugar Creek is one of several streams collectively draining
the metropolitan center of Charlotte. Similar habitat conditions are found at all sample sites within the
watershed: sand/silt substrate, severe bank erosion, and disturbed or nonexistent riparian vegetation. In
2002, declines in habitat were noted on Little Sugar Creek, but this was most likely due to severe drought.
Proposed Schedule for Permit Issuance
Draft Permit to Public Notice: April 26, 2006
Permit Scheduled to Issue:

NDES Permit Fact Sheet — 04/18/06
Page 3
Wachovia Bank
NC0088226
State Contact Information.
Fyn.
nC�
If you have any questions on any of the above information or on the attached pernut- pleAe contact
Toya Fields at(919) 733-5083,extension 551.
Copies of the following are attached to provide further information on the permit development:
• Draft permit
NPDES Recommendation by:
Signature Date
Regional Office Comments:
,1b
Regional Recommendation by:
Signature C� `/� Date
Reviewed and accepted by;
Regional Supervisor:
Signature, 2G^'('C�"� Date
NPDES Unit Supervisor:
Signature Date

RE: Wachovia draft permit
Subject: RE: Wachovia draft permit
From: "JLair" <JLair @ ecslimited.com>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 17:39:03 -0400
To: "Toya Fields" <[e-mail]>
Just to make things even clearer. This is the plan we are shooting for.
There will be two discharge points, one for each parcel. The larger
parcel has two de -watering systems simply due to the massive size of the
parcel. One of these de -watering systems was shown to have targeted
compounds at concentrations that warrant treatment, while the second
de -watering system was below treatment concentrations. Therefore, we
were going to combine the treated water with the water that did not
warrant treatment and discharge at one point. At the same time, we are
going to track the discharge of the portion of the larger parcel that at
this time does not warrant treatment. If lab analysis in the future
indicates a need to treat this groundwater, we will have the ability to
re -rout the groundwater to the treatment system. Otherwise, we will
continue to discharge as previously noted.
The second parcel was shown to be below applicable standards and would
have a second discharge point. If in the future lab analysis of
groundwater collected from this second parcel indicate the need to
treat, this groundwater will also be routed to the treatment system.
I hope this helps out even further. Look forward to hearing from you on
any other comments. Thanks Toya!
-----Original Message -----
From: Toya Fields [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 05:27 pm
To: JLair
Subject: Re: Wachovia draft permit
Thanks John, I think I was a little confused.
So there are two dewatering systems on the large parcel, but these will
be combined, treated, and discharged at one point to a storm drain.
Then there is one dewatering system on the small parcel that will be
discharged into a second point to a storm drain.
I'll need to have a separate page *for each discharge point*. So if
each dewatering system (in the above case, 3 total) will have its own
distinct discharge point to a storm drain, then that is considered 3
outfalls. If you are going to have one for the large parcel and one for
the small parcel then that will be 2 outfalls. I don't need to know
about internal sample streams, only final discharge points.
Either way, I need to clarify it in the permit but it won't need to go
back out to notice.
Toya
JLair wrote:
There are actually two dewatering systems on the large parcel and one
dewatering system on the small parcel, but only one discharge on the
smaller parcel.
We were planning on sampling at two locations (one for each parcel)
since there was going to be two discharge points. If we can manage to
discharge both parcels into one master effluent, we will try and do
1 of 4 6/14/2006 1:49 PM

RE: Wachovia draft permit
Ithat, that would certainly cut down on sample costs, but it will
involve
Isome logistics having to pump it up -hill and across South Tryon. I
just
wanted to make sure you and I were on the same page. Thanks for your
timely response!
-----Original message -----
From: Toya Fields [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 04:34 pm
To: JLair
Subject: Re: Wachovia draft permit
I can change the name without it going back out to public comment.
Keep
in mind that the permit will remain even after the construction is
complete.
How are you going to handle treatment from both parcels? In our phone
conversation you mentioned that you would want to have the option to
treat both with the same unit. If you want to keep the two discharge
points then I'll add a second identical limits page so that there is
one
for each parcel. You will have to sample at both discharge points.
Toya
JLair wrote:
II Toya, thanks again for taking the time to speak with me today about
the
Wachovia site.
I happened to notice on the Supplement to Permit Cover Sheet on the
DRAFT permit that indicates "Discharge dewatering water from a
groundwater remediation project located at 500 Block of South Tryon
Street, Charlotte, North Carolina". While a technicality, is it
possible
to change that wording to "construction project" as opposed to
"groundwater remediation project" without having to go through the
whole
public comment period again? Treatment of the groundwater is a
bi-product of the construction project, but this is a true
construction
project.
Also, as outlined in our NPDES permit application, the site contains
2 of 4 6/ 14/2006 1:49 PM

RE: Wachovia draft permit
two
parcels, the larger parcel is the 500 block of South Tryon and the
smaller parcel is a skinny tract of land located along Stonewall
Street
between South Tryon and South College Street. We had proposed to
discharge groundwater from the larger parcel to a storm drain on the
corner of 1st Street and South Tryon and the groundwater from the
smaller parcel to a storm drain at the intersection of Stonewall and
South College, both of which discharge to Little Sugar Creek. I
noticed
II that the DRAFT permit indicated "Discharge from said treatment works
at
II the location specified on the attached map into an unnamed tributary
to
Little Sugar Creek, Class C water in the Catawba River Basin, at the
location specified on the attached map." It is o.k. for us to
discharge
at two locations as requested in our application isn't it? Please
contact me with any questions. Thanks again Toya.
Sincerely,
John Lair
-----Original Message -----
From: Toya Fields [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 02:16 pm
To: JLair
Subject: Wachovia draft permit
Hi John,
I got your voicemail requesting a copy of the draft permit for the
Wachovia dewatering project. I've attached the documents. The permit
was actually sent to notice on 4/19 and not 4/5 as I originally
thought.
If you have any questions, let me know.
Toya
Toya Fields - [e-mail]
Environmental Engineer I
Western NPDES Program
Division of Water Quality
3 of 4 6/14/2006 1:49 PM

APR 27 '06 15:37 FIR CLT OBSERVER ADV
7043585394 TO 9191973307198278 P.01i01
35%-53S3
proof G r 5a+ , YIa CI /O1h -4, aQ., /o 4Q-
C�►�s�rvp,✓, Phase_...
man ee.S
�=rorv-►'. Chri�S-Ee�
o! e. /q r / 01�'
0/1 ?o y
Co n+Q. CA rrA—
569915
2 SAT oarzs
CL26 2.0OX 4.50
PUBLIC NOTICE
ENVIRONMENTASTATE
MANAGEMENT COMM 5 ON/NPOES UNIT
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH. NC 27699-1617
NOTIFICATION OF INTENT TO ISSUE
A NPDES WASTEWATER PERMIT
On the basis of thorough staff review and application of NC General
Statute 143.21, Public Law 92-500 and other lawful standards and
regulations. the North Cardin, Errvimnmenlal MIOPOWS to Issue a NationalanemerA ComSaon nyisson
(NPDES) wastewater discharge IpermitOto the pgeerson(s) listed below stem
effective 45 days from the publish date of [his notice.
WriOen comments regarding the proposed permit will be accepted unfit 30 days after the publish dale of this nonce. All comments received prior to that date are considered in the final determinations regarding
the proposed Permit. The Director of the NC Division of Water Quality
may decide to hold a public meeting tar the proposed permit should
the Division receive a significant degree of public interest.
Copies of the draft permit and other supporting information on file used
to determine conditions present in the draft permit are available upon
request and payment of the costs or reproduction. Mail comments
and/or requests for information to the NC Divislon of Water Quality at
the above address or call the Polnt Source Branch at [phone] extension 520 or 363. Please include the NPDES permit number
(attached) in any communication. Interested parsons may also vLtit the
Division of Water Ouality at 512 N. Salisbury Street Raleigh, NC 27604-
1148 between the hours of 8:00 am. and SAO p.m. 10 review Information
on file.
Wachovia Bank (301 South Collage Street, Suite 2e00, Charlotte, NC
28208) has applied for new NPDES permit NCO088226 for the Warhovia
Tryon Street BTS in Mecklenburg County. This Permitted facility will
discharge dewatering water to an unnamed tributary to Little Sugar
Creek in the Catawba River Basin. Currently no parameters are water
quality limited. This discharge may affect future allocations in this ponion
of the Catawba River Basin,
LP5699152
NCDENR/
** TOTAL PAGE.01 **

Table 1
Summary of Available Groundwater Analytical Data
500 Block S. Tryon
Charlotte, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 08-3515
m
C
c
c
'+�
a�
M
C
c
C
O
N
c
c
N
4)
M
M
5+
?
O
N
O
O
C
c
O
Q
C
.0
O
a
F
�
17
O
c
a�
N
O
j,
CL
O
�+
L
LO
V
O
7
4
0
X
cc
Well ID
Date
m
COCL
�
o
W
a
E
X
O
u
u
u
u
u
u
u l
u
u
u
u
u l
u
MW-1
6/19/05
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
12.90
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
MW-2
6/19/05
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
MW-3
1 6/19/05
1.75
2.12
1.21
4.45
3.161
ND
1.35
ND
2.95
1.98
1.86
15.0
3.97
MW-4
6/19/05
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
12.67
ND
1.20
ND
ND
ND
I ND
ND
1.) ND - not detected
2.) ug/1-micrograms per liter (parts per billion).

ECS Mid -Atlantic, LLC
Geotechnical * Construction Materials * Environmental
Ms. Susan Wilson
NCDENR/DWQ/NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Reference: NPDES Permit Application
500 Block of South Tryon Street
Charlotte, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Wilson:
J'AN' 2 7 2006
January 25, 2006
ECS Project 08-3515
ECS, Ltd., on behalf of Wachovia Bank, has obtained the streamflow data at the proposed discharge
location.
The following is an excerpt of the text provided by J. Curtis Weaver a Hydrologist and PE
with the USGS North Carolina Water Science Center located in Raleigh, North Carolina.
In response to your inquiry about the low flow characteristics (7Q10 and 30Q2) for a location on
Little Sugar Creek in Charlotte (Mecklenburg County), the following information is provided:
A check of the lowflow files here at the USGS North Carolina Water Science Center indicates the
previous determination of low flow discharges at two locations near your point of interest. These
estimates (station id 0214640680 at NC Hwy 16, and 0214641790 at Princeton Ave) were
completed using 7Q10 yield values of 0.066 and 0.084 cfs per sgmi, based on flow characteristics
determined at nearby sites where historic discharge records are available (including a previous
gaging station operated 1914-77, station id 02146500, drainage area 41.0 sgmi). The 30Q2
estimated for the site at Princeton avenue was based on a 30Q2 yield of about 0.21 cfsm, based
on the previous gaging station. With a long period of record dating back to the 1920's, it would
be expected that data reflective of natural flow conditions were collected at this site. However, at
the end of the record, there were noted diversions into the basin upstream from the site, and
urbanization had already become a recognized characteristic of this particular watershed.
Examining the map image you sent, your site of interest is located near where the US Highway 74
(Independence Blvd) crosses the stream. The USGS does not have any discharge records at this
location, but the drainage area has been computed to be 10.20 sgmi-(station id 0214640695).
As previously discussed with you, the USGS currently operates a gaging station on Little Sugar
Creek at Medical Center Drive (station id 02146409, drainage area 11.8 sgmi), having collected
continuous records of discharge since October 1994. A quick low -flow analysis based on the
available records through March 30, 2005 (the end of the 2004 climatic year) indicates the 7Q10
is 1.25 cfs (about 0.106 cfsm) and the 30Q2 is 4.10 cfs (about 0.194 cfsm). The 7Q10 yield
values are somewhat higher than those used in the previous requests, and could be reflective of
diversions into Little Sugar Creek. However, the 30Q2 yield is a little lower than that determined
for the previous gaging station (02146500) located further downstream. The possibility of non-
5320 Peters Creek Road, Suite F, Roanoke, VA 24019 • [phone] • FAX [phone] . www.ecslimited.com
Aberdeen, MD • Baltimore, MD - Chantilly, VA • Frederick, MD - Fredericksburg, VA • Norfolk, VA
Richmond, VA • Roanoke, VA • Waldorf, MD - Warrenton, VA* • Williamsburg, VA • Winchester, VA • York, PA
(* testing services only)

NPDES Permit Application
Wachovia Tyron Street BTS
Charlotte, North Carolina
ECS Project 08-3515
January 25, 2006
natural flow conditions being reflected in the discharge records collected at the current gaging
station is further evidenced by the average discharge. The average discharge for the period of
record at the gaging station is 19.1 cfs, equivalent to about 1.6 cfsm. This average yield is also
higher than the 1.1 cfsm typically cited for "natural -flow " conditions in area streams.
Putting all the above information together makes it challenging to reach a definitive conclusion
concerning a proper set of low flow characteristics for your location. The presence of a
continuous -record gaging station downstream of your location is indeed very helpful, but then on
the other hand, a recognition that flow conditions may not be reflective of natural flow creates
some uncertainty in assessing the proper low flow discharges. - -
Thus, for so-called current or as -is flow conditions, I would cite the above values from the gaging
station, noting the location of the gaging station at Medical Center Drive downstream from your
site of interest. For estimates that may be more reflective of natural flow conditions, the most
reasonable conclusion is to acknowledge the historical data limitations for this basin and suggest
that yield values may be lower, but such quantification of natural flow characteristics will be
difficult in a basin located within a highly developed setting.
We hope this discussion provides the information necessary. If you have any questions or comments,
please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
ECS-AUD ATLANTIC, LLC
C.R. ewman
Principal Scientist
2

ECS_Mid-Atlantic, LLC
Geotechnical � Construction Materials - Environmental
January 25, 2006
Ms. Susan Wilson
NCDENR'DWQINPDES unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Reference: NPDES Permit Application
500 Block of South Tryon Street
Charlotte, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Wilson:
FEB 2 2 2006
ECS Project 08-3515
ECS, Ltd., on behalf of Wachovia Bank, has obtained the streamflow data at the proposed discharge
location.
The following is an excerpt of the text provided by J. Curtis Weaver a Hydrologist and PE
with the USGS North Carolina Water Science Center located in Raleigh, North Carolina.
In response to your inquiry about the lowfflow characteristics (7QI0 and 30Q2) for a location on
Little .Sugar Creek in Charlotte (Mecklenburg Counti), the following information is provided:
A check of the lovrf(low files here at the LrSGS A'orth C urolina Water Science Center indicates the
previous determination of low- discharges at rivo locations near your point ofinterest. 71ese
estimates (station id 0214640680 at NC Huy 16. and 02146417*90 at Princeton Ave) were
completed using 7Q10 meld values of 0.066 and 0.084 cfr per sgmi, based on floty characteristics
determined at nearby sites where historic discharge records are available (including a previous
gaging station operated 1924-77, station id 02146500, drainage area 41.0 sgmi). 77ie 30Q2
estimated for the site at Princeton avenue was based on a 30Q2 yield of about 0.11 efstn, based
on the previous gaging station. With a long period of record dating back to the 1920's, it would
be expected that data reflective of natural flow conditions were collected at this site. Howes er, at
the end of the record, there were noted diversions into the basin upstream from the site, and
urbanization had already become a recognized characteristic of this particular watershed.
Examining the snap image you sent, your site of interest is located near where the USHighwav 74
(Independence Blvd) crosses the stream. The LrSGS does not have any discharge records at this
location, but the drainage area has been computed to be 10.20 sgmi (static: id 0214640695).
As previously discussed with you, the USGS currently operates a gaging station on Little Sugar
Creek at Afedical Center Drive (station id 02146409, drainage area 11.8 sgmi), having collected
continuous records of discharge since October 1994. A quick low -flow analysis based on the
mailable records through March 30, 2005 (the end of the 2004 climatic year) indicates the 7Q10
is 1.25 cfs (abort O.I06 cfsm) and the 30Q2 is 4.10 cfs ('about 0.194 efsnn). The 7QI0 yield
values are somewhat higher than those used in the previous requests, and could be reflective of
diversions into Little Sugar Creek. However, the 30Q2 yield is a little lower than that deternined
for the previous gaging station (02146500) located fitrther downstream. 77te possibility of non-
5320 Peters Creek Road, Suite F, Roanoke, VA 24019 • [phone] c FAX [phone] www.eeslimited.com
Aberdeen, MD • Baltimore, MD • Chantilly, VA • Frederick, MD - Fredericksburg, VA • Norfolk, VA
Richmond, VA - Roanoke, VA • Waldorf, MD - Warrenton, VA* • Williamsburg, VA • Winchester, VA • York, PA
(* testing services only)

NPDES Permit Application
Wachovia 7j ron Street BTS
Charlotte, North Carolina
ECS Project 08-3515
January 25, 2006
natural flow conditions being reflected in the discharge records collected at the current gaging
station is further m denced by the average discharge. The en�erage discharge for the period of
record at the gaging station is 19.1 cfs, equivalent to about 1.6 cfsm. This average yield is also
higher than the 1.1 cfsm 4pically cited for "natural -flow" conditions in area streams.
Putting all the above information together makes it challenging to reach a definitive conclusion
concerning a proper set of low flow characteristics for your location. The presence of a
continuous -record gaging station downstream of your location is indeed very helpful, but then on
the other hand, a recognition that flow conditions may not be rejlective of natural flow creates
some uncertainty in assessing the proper low -flow discharges
Thus, for so-called current or as -is flow conditions, I would cite the abmie values from the gaging
station, noting the location of the gaging station at Medical Center Drive downstream from your
site of interest. For estimates that may be more reflective of natural flow conditions, the most
reasonable conclusion is to acknowledge the historical data limitations for this basin and suggest
that lrield values may be lower, but such quanta; fication of natural flow characteristics will be
difficult in a basin located within a highly developed setting.
We hope this discussion provides the information necessary. If you have any questions or comments,
please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
EC.`S-MID AU AN IC, LLC
7_4AA4� J✓ .
C.R. ewman
Principal Scientist
2

ECS Mid -Atlantic, LLC
Geotechnical - Construction Materials - Environmental
Ms. Susan Wilson
NCDF,NRfDWQ/NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-1617
Reference: NPDES Permit Application
500 Block of South Tryon Street
Charlotte, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Wilson:
RDEC E[ WE
AN 30 zoos 'D
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
January 17, 2006
ECS Project 08-3515
ECS, Ltd., on behalf of Wachovia Bank, is requesting a NPDES permit be issued for water generated
during the drilling of the blast boreholes and dewatering wells which will be stored on the site ground
surface until dewatering activities begin and the disposal of the water collected during the dewatering
activities proposed at the subject site.
Back round Information
The subject site is divided into two parcels. The first parcel is a city block bounded by Church Street to
the northwest, 1't Street to the northeast, Stonewall Street to the southwest and Tyron Street to the south
east in Charlotte, North Carolina. The second parcel is a.0.46 acre rectangle located at the east comer of
the intersection of Tyron Street and Stonewall Street in Charlotte, North Carolina. Figure I is a LiSGS
map showing the location of the two parcels. The site is proposed to be redeveloped with a Wachovia
mixed use development including a commercial office tower, a residential condominium tower and a
commercial retail arcade. Previous environmental and engineering investigations have been conducted on
the site. A review of the previously conducted assessments indicates that the first parcel was historically
developed with a Firestone tire facility (1959 to present), a gasoline/service station (1929 to 1943) and an
automotive sales/service business (1929-1984). Assessment of the site has revealed the presence of
petroleum impacted soil and the presence of groundwater impacted with petroleum and chlorinated
compounds above North Carolina groundwater quality standards. Sources of petroleum impact include
former petroleum underground storage tanks (USTs), underground hydraulic lifts, a potential oil/water
separator and floor drains. The source of the chlorinated compound tetraebloroethene (PCE) was not
identified. However, chlorinated compounds are extremely mobile and migrate rapidly through soil and
groundwater. Therefore, based the long history of commercial development of the site and surrounding
properties, it is not uncommon to detect the presence of chlorinated compounds in groundwater in
downtown settings. The second parcel is currently paved and used as a parking lot. The site was
historically occupied by Charlotte Liberty Mutual (approximately 1976 to 1987), Knight Publishers
(approximately 1966 to 1976), Elks Club Lodge (approximately 1941 to 1966), Salvation Army
(approximately 1929 to 1936), Knights of Columbus Lodge (approximately 1911 to 1929). St. Mary's
Seminary was located on a portion of the second parcel from approximately 1900 to 1911. Dwellings
were located on the other portion of the parcel from approximately 1900 to 1929 and an auto radiator
repair business was located on the south end of the second parcel in 1929.
5320 Peters Creek Road, Suite F, Roanoke, VA 24019 • [phone] • FAX [phone] • www.ecslimited.com
Aberdeen, MD • Baltimore, MD • Chantilly, VA - Frederick, MD - Fredericksburg, VA • Norfolk, VA
Richmond, VA • Roanoke, VA • Waldorf, MD - Warrenton, VA* • Williamsburg, VA • Winchester, VA • York, PA

NPDES Permit Application
Wachovia 7)ron Street BTS
Charlotte, North Carolina
ECS Project 08-3515
Januaiti117, 2006
Two areas of impacted soils were identified beneath the first parcel by Environmental Investigations (EI).
The extent of impacted soil was based on laboratory analysis of soil samples collected during
environmental investigations and field data collected during geotechnical investigations. In the western -
central portion of the site, an estimated quantity of 8,250 tons (approximately 5,500 yds3) of impacted soil
was identified. In the eastern portion of the site near the intersection of South Tryon Street and West 1"
Street, an estimated quantity of 3,000 tons (approximately 2,000 yds3) of impacted soil was identified.
The total estimated quantity of impacted soil estimated by El is between 11,250 and 14,250 tons. Based
on our experience, we estimate that approximately 5,500 to 7,500 tons of impacted soil will need to be
disposed at an approved facility. A review of the Phase I by EI does not indicate the presence of
recognized environmental conditions at the second parcel other than potential heating oil USTs/ASTs that
may have heated former residential/commercial structures. The radiator shop on the southern portion of
this site in the late 1920's is downgradient to where dewatering activities will occur and there is no
documented indications of a release associated with this former radiator shop. For the purposes of site
redevelopment, the entire site will be excavated to an approximate depth of 80 feet bgs.
The water collected from the first parcel would discharge to the storm drain located on the east comer of
the intersection of I" Street and Tyron Street and the second parcel would discharge to the storm drain
located on the south comer of the intersection of Stonewall Street and College Street. Figure 1 shows the
approximate discharge locations. The storm drains discharge to Little Sugar Creek. The project length is
estimated as one to two years top complete. The attached table lists the available groundwater data for
the site. Further analytical testing cannot be performed until dewatering commences because the wells
located on site have been abandoned.
Engineering Alternative Analysis
Evaluation of potential restrictions to a wastewater discharge to surface waters
Streamflow data at the proposed discharge location is not available at this time. It will be submitted as
soon as it becomes available.
Little Sugar Creek is a Class C waterway. Therefore, there are no restrictions on watershed development
or types of discharges.
A review of the Catawba River Basinwide Water Quality Plan dated September 2004 and prepared by
Dave Toms with the NC Department of Environment & Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality —
Planning does not list any NPDES permitting strategies that limit wastewater discharges to particular
streams within the basin.
Little Sugar Creek is on the 303(d) list as an impaired waterway. There is a TMDL for fecal coliform of
9.4x101' efu/100 ml. Based on the project description and site contaminants, it is not anticipated that any
fecal coliform will be discharged. into the storm sewer.
Endangered species are not present in the proposed discharge location.
Non Municipal Flow Projections
Until operations commence, a reasonable flow projection cannot be determined.
2

NPDES Permit Application
WachoWa Tyron Street BTS
Charlotte, North Carolina
ECS Project 08-3515
January 17, 2006
Evaluation of technologically feasible alternatives
Alternative A. Connection to an Existing Wastewater Treatment System
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities is responsible for the sanitary sewer system for the subject site. They do
not accept groundwater, stormwater, or other discharges to the sanitary sewer. A letter from Charlotte -
Mecklenburg Utilities is enclosed.
Altemative B. Land Application
Land application would not be. a feasible alternative in downtown Charlotte based on land constraints
within the city.
Alternative C. Infiltration Galleries
This alternative cannot be properly evaluated until there is a clear definition of the contaminant level and
flow projections. Once dewatering begins, this alternative will be evaluated.
Alternative D. In -Situ Groundwater Remediation Wells
In -situ groundwater remediation wells would not be a feasible alternative for this site because the site is
being dewatered; a remediation system is not being constructed.
Alternative E. Closed -Loop Groundwater Remediation Wells
Closed -loop groundwater remediation wells would not be a feasible alternative for this site because the
site is being dewatered; a remediation system is not being constructed.
Alternative F. Direct Discharge to Surface Waters
Direct discharge to the surface water is feasible for this site. Storm drains are located in the vicinity of
the site. The discharge to the storm drain will not create a hazardous condition. All other considerations
have been met as described previously.
Alternative F, direct discharge to surface waters is the most viable option at this time.
If you have any questions or continents, please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
ECS-MID ATLANTIC, LLC
-, / I
C.R. Newman
Principal Scientist
3

NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - GW
For discharges associated with groundwater treatment facilities.
Mail the complete application to:
N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality / NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
NPDES Permit Number ENCOO
If you are completing this form in computer use the TAB key or the up - down arrows to move from one
field to the next. To check the boxes, click your mouse on top of the box. Otherwise, please print or type.
1. Contact Information:
Owner Name Wachovia Bank, N.A. c/o Allen Holloway with Childress Klein
Properties - Authorized Agent.
Facility Name Wachovia Tryon Street BTS
Mailing Address 301 South College Street, Suite 2800
City Charlotte
State / Zip Code North Carolina 28208
Telephone Number [phone]
Fax Number [phone]
e-mail Address [e-mail]
2. Location of facility producing discharge:
Check here if same as above ❑
Street Address or State Road 500 Block of South Tryon St
City Charlotte
State / Zip Code NC, 28202
County Mecklenburg County
3. Operator Information:
Name of the firm, consultant or other entity that operates the facility. (Note that this is not referring to the
Operator in Responsible Charge or ORC)
Name Engineering Consulting Services, Ltd. - Attention John S. Lair
Mailing Address 8702 Red Oak Boulevard, Suite A
City Charlotte
State / Zip Code NC 28217
Telephone Number [phone]
Fax Number ' [phone]
4. Ownership Status:
Federal ❑ State ❑ Private ® Public ❑
Page I of 3 C-GW 0=5

NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - GW
For discharges associated with groundwater treatment facilities.
5. Products recovered:
Gasoline ® Diesel fuel ® Solvents ® Other Hydraulic and Waste
Oils
b. Number of separate discharge points: 2
Outfall Identification numbers) NA
7. Frequency of discharge: Continuous ❑ Intermittent JZ
If intermittent:
Days per week discharge occurs: Activity Dependent Duration: 1-2
Years
S. Treatment System Design flow MGD
9. Name of receiving stream(s) (Provide a map showing the exact location of each outfall, including
latitude and longitude
Little Sugar Creek
10. Please list all additives to the treatment system, including chemicals or nutrients, that have
the potential to be discharged.
Tetrachloroethene, Benzene, N-Butylebenzene, Diisopropyl ether, Ethylbenzene,
p-Isopropyltoluene, n-Propylbenzene, Toluene, 19214 Trimethylbenzene,
1,3,5 Trimethylbenzene, m/p-Xylene, o-Xylene, Methyl -tent butyl ether
11. Is this facility located on Indian country? (check one)
Yes ❑ No
12. Additional Information
All applicants (including renewals):
> A USGS topographical map (or copy of the relevant portion) which shows all outfalls
> A summary of the most recent analytical results (effluent data, if available) containing the
maximum values for each chemical detected
NEW Applicants only:
> Engineering Alternative Analysis
> Description of remediation treatment system components, capacities, and removal efficiency
for detected compounds.
> If the treatment system will discharge to a storm sewer, written approval from the
municipality responsible for the. sewer..
> A list of any chemicals found in detectable amounts at the site, with the maximum observed
concentration reported for each chemical (the most recent sample must be collected less
than one year prior to the date of this application)
> For petroleum -contaminated sites — Analyses for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) should
be performed. Analyses for any fuel additives likely to be present at the site and for phenol
and lead should also be performed.
> For sites contaminated with solvents or other contaminants - EPA Method 624/625
analysis should be performed.
Page 2 of 3 C-GW 03/05

NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - GW
For discharges associated with groundwater treatment facilities.
13. Applicant Certification
I certify that I am farniliar with the information contained in the application and that to the
best of my knowledge and belief such information is true, complete, and accurate.
Printed name of Person 15rigning Title
North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6 (b)(2) provides that; Any person who knowingly makes any false
statement representation, or certification in any application, record, report, plan, or other document files or
required to be maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the Environmental Management Commission
.implementing that Article, or who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate any recording or
monitoring device or method required to be operated or maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the
Environmental Management Commission implementing that Article, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable
by a fine not to exceed $26,000, or by imprisonment not to exceed six months, or by both. (18 U.S.C. Section
1001 provides a punishment by a fine of not more than $25,000 or imprisonment not more than 5 years, or both,
for a similar offense.)
Page 3 of 3 C-GW 03105

. W
CHA MN
January 11, 2006
Ms. Liz Tashma
ECS - Mid -Atlantic
5320 Peters Creek Road, Suite r
Roanoke, Virginia 2401.9
Reference: NPDES Permit Application
500 Block of South Tryon Street
Charlotte, North Carolaina.
Dear Ms. Tashma,
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities is responsible for the sanitary sewer system for the subject site.
The subject site is divided into two parcels. The first parcel is a city block bounded by Church
Street to the northwest, l" Street to the northeast, Stonewall Street to the southwest and Tyron
Street to the south east in Charlotte, North Carolina. The second parcel is a 0.46 acre rectangle
located at the east comer of the intersection of Tyron Street and Stonewall Street in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities does not accept grotmdwater, stornruater, or other prohibitive
discharges to the sanitary sewer as describe in the City of Charlotte's Sewer Use Ordinance. If
you have any questions or comments, contact me at 704-3 91-5 100.
Sincerely,
illysse Watkins, Jr.
System Protection
Charlotte-Meckenburg Utilities

E
ram ♦V
!'[i
MIA/A
,Ay
��am.y 1, .
?rwcAN
„r a•'
y/ � v 10 o Orp An iQe 1 � .Slld
X1,
\ Y
�'�"9J\, )^ �fo�� � ��. i�iv � '•i lilt •r ��iM1� • n,..
R b G
: ` A 41f' ? -r+o" - :�. ' 1 -.•'; F` 't _r._. fl..
Ar LEGEND
SCALE (IN FEET)
Approximate Site Location
A E I000 2000
� Approximate Discharge
Points
S 2000 0
SOURCE: L.9amomwMMEMEWFIGURE 1
U.S.G.S. 7.5 MINUTE SERIES SITE LOCATION MAP
CHARLOTTE EAST WACHOVIA TRYON STREET BTS
QUADRANGLE, NORTHCHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
CAROLINA DATED 1967,
PHOTOREVISED 1988 MUD pQL MIrdc ECS PROJECT NO. 08-3515

Table 1
Summary of Available Groundwater Analytical Data
500 Block S. Tryon
Charlotte, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 08-3515
m
H
L
C
C
C
N
O
C
C
N
O
N
C
N
?►
>+
N
G
E
E
O
N
_
O
a
C
-0
0
n
O
>+
C-
O
U
N
C
F 7
�
N
�'
N
a�
W
Well
Date
N
N
m
O
.N
�,
-C
W
O
y
L
O
`�
d'
N
to
M
X
�'
?.
X
M
c
6
�
c
l-
FO-
�-
�=
E
o
u
u t
u t
u
u t
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
(UM)
MW-1
6/19/05
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.90
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
MW-2
6/19/05
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
MW-3
6/19/05
1.75
2.12
1.21
4.45
3.16
ND
1.35
ND
2.95
.98
1.86
15.0
3.97MW-4
6/19/05
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2.67
ND
1.20
ND
]ND
ND
ND I
ND
1.) ND - not detected
2.) ug/1-micrograms per liter (parts per billion).

Attachment A. Local Government Re
view Form
General Statute Overview. North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 (c) 6 allows in
of NPDES Permits for non -municipal domestic wastewater treatment facilities. Specifically, () put from local governments in the issuance
Commission (EMC) may not act on an application for a new non -municipal domestic rite the Environmental Management it has received a written statement from each city and county government having jurisdiction over wastewater p discharge facility which
h has proposed facility and its appurtenances are to be located. The written statement shall document
r any part of the lands on which the
zoning or subdivision ordinance in effect and (if such an ordinance is in effect) whether the r whether the city or county has a
ordinance. The EIVIC shall not approve a permit application for any facility �,�,�� a proposed facility is consistent with the
inconsistent with zoning or subdivision ordinances unless the approval of such application ty or county has determined to be
significance and is in the best interest of the State. is determined to have statewide
Instructions to the A licant: Prior to submitting an application for a NPDES Pe
shall request that both the nearby city and county government complete this form. The a
Permit for a proposed facility, the applicant
• Submit a copy of the permit application (with a written request for this form t be comcant pleted)
the county by certified mail, return receipt requested. p ed) to the clerk of the city and
• If either (or both) local government(s) fails) to mail the completed form, as evidenced b
mail card(s), within 15 days after receiving and signing for the certified mail, the applicant the
postmark on the certified
the NPDES Unit. Pp y submit the application to
As evidence to the Commission that the local government(s) failed to respond within 15 days,
copy of the certified mail card along with a notarized letter stating that the local government(s), failed othe resp shall submit a
15-day period. to respond within the
Instructions to the Local Government: The nearby city and/or county government whic h may have or has jurisdiction over
any part of the land on which the proposed facility or its appurtenances are to be located is required t
form to the applicant within 15 days of receipt. The form must be signed and notarized. q ° complete and return this
Name of local government ! `l 0 / �} A G
(City/County)
Does the ci ty/county have jurisdiction over any part of the land on which the proposed facility and its a
located? Yes K] No [ ] If no, please sign this form, have it notarized, and return it to the appurtenances are to be
applicant.
Does the city/county have in effect a zoning or subdivision ordinance? Yes
�NO[ ]
If there is a zoning or subdivision ordinance in effect, is the plan for the proposed facility
No [ ] ty consistent with the ordinance? Yes
Date F - -
Signatur
(City Manager/C ty anager)
State of +V=vk _
County of
On this
-day of Pg,6YI�y
personally appeared before me, the said
name
to me known and known to me to be the person described in
and who executed the foregoing document and he (or she) acknowledged that he (or she executed th
by me, made oath that the statements in the foregoing document are true. ) e same and being duly sworn
My Commission expires � � �1 �p � 0--.(Signature . of Notary Public) �l
N 'J3ttjJ_1c (Official Seal)
.:.�
? $ $7 •'•
cl ;
.t •
EAA Guidance Document Version: June 23, 2005
Page 8 of 8