NCG140218_NOV_20170127

Water Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Certified Mail #7014 3490 0001 8821 1474
Return Receipt Requested
Brian Westfall, Plant Manager
Thomas Concrete
2722 Angier Ave
Durham, NC 27703
Dear Mr. Westfall:
ROY COOPER
0ovemor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Se cre tan-'
S. JAY ZIMMERMAN
Director
January 24, 2017
Notice of Violation -Notice of Intent to Enforce
Case No: NOV-2017-PC-0006
Illegal Discharge of Stormwater/Removal of Use
Thomas Concrete
NPDES Permit No. NCG 140218
Durham County
On November 29, 2016, Jonathan Baker and Charlotte Dawn with Durham County Stormwater and GIS
services reported concerns regarding the discharge wastewater from a stormwater detention pond at
Thomas Concrete (2722 Angier Ave, Durham). They also reported that a follow-up inspection in
November 2016 revealed that the problem had not been corrected and that pH at the outfall was 13.2 s.u.
and specific conductance was 1778 ms/cm.
On December 19, 2016, Danny Smith and Ray Milosh with the Raleigh Regional Office (RRO) of the
Division of Water Resources (DWR) and staff from Durham County Stormwater and GIS services
conducted a joint site visit. The following observations were noted during the site inspection:
• The stormwater retention pond had evidence of recent work. The water level in the pond was
below the overflow pipe.
• Water was seen exiting from the outlet of the overflow pipe, indicating that the overflow pipe had
a leak.
• There was an inflatable bladder at the outlet of the overflow pipe that was not holding back the
water.
• The pH of the water exiting the pipe was 13.6 and the specific conductance (SpQ was 866
ms/cm. A thick orange/tan precipitate was seen covering the streambed and rocks in the
streambed. (see photograph 1).
Division of Water Resources, Raleigh Regional Office, Water Quality Operations Section http://portal.nedenr.org/web/wgiaps
1628 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 Phone: [phone]
Location: 3800 Barrett Drive, Raleigh, NC 27609 Fax: [phone]

a+ :;W dd '. �q 1. 1 �'. 6 �St ��Er r i+is, 'r"°!yr ? %✓� 145 / a g i 16
Tryar
aC3i, y, a � ,t� •'1 r� +.r"'�•
i< �.•,'1 r.,.•f z it . +,r ♦ �1+} '-"y,
k .�� , : f ,� �� . '�� , y 5 � �` f-��,y,„., �'i i? bf'i A'' � '�i ,Y� � �, 3 +R � � • Y l;�`� 1 i etf�-y
` ,,,.°',�� 4Y £. �'? ...., 1iAty,� '"� r i Za.\ -•, "> {_ �i�. t f ',:L�v 1. T' 4 ' (x«`"'R .1r� r g
ti � fy.: e � >�;, :��A'd. f f t i ° '� s r � 4 'r• r ` Y � . H '� �\� ` �°`. rtcf.
t�e cy � �y., s✓ r M� ;�' n-° 1 1 t .�' �`t «¢ 'a",w�` ` '�, �4 �
M Y �ti' r Y i'3wil !
71
`•1iT" rT �`�'`�1j `•�,�• i-'"/`+.+F++c'•: y,- �•. €f fFf.rr �w New
lop
w.:. eft j+ic3�4oil
Ifi.�_l�i_ �' ��.���1 i. 1 � 'Nr �ro�'"r�►V• � � -•E'.s 1 �i>t a�t�. .. �.,��`.e:4.. F •. 1�., tn. j?
��". z1P''�, t�' � i �' r ], ,�, " 4�'��-•.Nr` , s it '+ �`�,µ"��y.:" t b' ,,�71�.•- ,.r � ,! �" �4.*� �� �" �C '
' p. y � °j1°�',:q'� ,.c ��' 1 `' sA 5 $ aY ,,� t •... t t S �t
i t"'- �'A. +,� •,'���� ���j ` i� � � �.,, �..a � 1���� � ee w�, ��aC � ��,c, � � f� u M Sr'
• ' ` � ;9-'� i, i� ' +,a �a I a.. # � ,�"'�' �l � �7" � e'� x` A` %� '\`ems
�iIi r IIfO �.
'�°`-• a R 1' 't y^ 4�� � Ptl��"a+ .:"lF$$ u. ."4> a � (�, '` ma`s J� %r' 'Y/t. � f
:. 7 4 � .� y` Y � � �� Y � � �� � � ts'S-� y +�' � t- f t7,�✓,,,, t "
71
ker
�i' 1r a
t.
"'r
fill"y
fill
pyu ; r" t,A r y ti j , +��1 ;•� Y at `
i
Ail
w
+,. w w1t3 r
Cy �
c r
c.
1�� r� .. • �� �,. 1� ->A � ten. �* 1'..

• The pH of the water exiting the culvert under the railroad tracks approximately 200 feet downstream
of the outfall was 10.06 and the SpC was 318 ms/cm. A thick orange/tan precipitate was covering the
streambed and rocks. (see photograph 2)
W4'
a yr
s
�, , 4".n,
< ✓�
is
...a M w
Photograph 2. Water exiting culvert under the railroad tracks about 200 feet downstream of the outfall
from Thomas Concrete. Note orange/tan precipitate covering streambed and stones.

Photograph 3. Water exiting culvert under Hwy 147 approximately 800 feet downstream of
Thomas Concrete. Note precipitate on streambed and rocks.
The pH of the streamwater exiting a pipe under Hwy 147 approximately 800 feet downstream of
the outfall was 9.6 s.u. and the SpC was 363 ms/cm. (see photograph 3). An orange/tan

precipitate was covering some parts of the strearnbed and rocks. Photograph 3, depicted above,
is an unnamed tributary to Third Fork Creek, Class WS-V Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) in the
Cape Fear River Basin.
The site inspection and sample results revealed the following violations of North Carolina General
Statutes, North Carolina Administrative Codes, and NPDES permit conditions (NC0049662) which state
following:
NCGS 143-215.1(a) (6)
"Activities for Which Permits Required. — No person shall do any of the following things or carry out any
of the following activities unless that person has received a permit from the Commission and has complied
with all conditions set forth in that permit.
(6) cause or permit any waste, directly or indirectly, to be discharged to or in any manner intermixed with
the waters of the State in violation of the water quality standards applicable to the assigned classifications
or in violation of any effluent standards or limitations established for any point source, unless allowed as
a condition of any permit, special order or other appropriate instrument issued or entered into by the
Commission under the provisions of this Article."
15 A NCAC 02B .0211 (14)
pH: shall be normal for the waters in the area, which range between 6.0 and 9.0 except that swamp waters
may have a pH as low as 4.3 if it is the result of natural conditions;
Requested Response
This office requests that you respond to this letter in writing within 30 days. of receipt of this Notice.
Your response should be sent to this office at the letterhead address. Your response should address the
following items:
l . Please describe the work that has been done to the settling ponds/stormwater ponds during
this past year (2016). This account should include all settling ponds/stormwater ponds
effluent monitoring, maintenance, and residuals removal and depths of solids.
2. Specifically, detail what housekeeping measures are in place to prevent wastewater from the
site from causing surface water pH standard violations.
3. Please explain how wastewater that exceeds pH of 9.0 s.u. will be prevented from discharging
from the facility. Describe who you have contacted with the Division of Energy Mining and
Land Resources regarding compliance with your Stormwater/Process Wastewater permit
(NCG140000) and the discharge of water with pH elevated beyond 9.0 s.u.
4. Detail how you have come into full compliance with the requirements of the Division of
Energy Mining and Land Resources.
5. Please provide stormwater pond monitoring results from January 1 2015 to the present date
and describe the location of the sampling point(s).
Environmental damage and violations of North Carolina Administrative Codes have been documented for
the subject site as stated above. Your efforts to undertake activities to bring the subject site back into

compliance is not an admission, rather it is an action that must be taken in order to begin to resolve
ongoing environmental issues.
These violations and any future violations are subject to a civil penalty assessment of up to a
maximum of $25,000.00 per day for each violation. Your response to this correspondence will be
considered in any civil penalty assessment process that may occur.
Should you have any questions regarding these matters, please contact Ray Milosh at [phone].
Sincerely,
Danny Smith, S'Gpervisor
Water Quality Regional. Operations
Surface Water Protection Section
cc: RRO DWR Files
Central Files
John Holley — RRO DEMLR
Bradley Bennett — Stormwater Permitting Unit