NCG110010_MONITORING INFO_20110315

STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET
NCG PERMITS
PERMIT NO.
/VC� IIOb��
DOC TYPE
❑HISTORICAL FILE
>�- MONITORING REPORTS
DOC DATE
❑ ,e-c I 10 31
YYYYMMDD

,►•�� FILE
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
LAUt
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins
Director
March 15, 2011
Nis. Jaqueline A. Jarrell, P.E.
Environmental Management Superintendent
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities
4222 Westmont Drive
Charlotte, NC 28217
Subject: Compliance Evaluation Inspection
McAlpine Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit NCG110010
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Jarrell:
Dee Freeman
Secretary
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Evaluation Inspection Report for the inspection conducted at the
subject facility on March 3, 2011, by Ms. Donna Hood of this Office.
This report should be self-explanatory; however, should you have any questions concerning the report, please
do not hesitate to contact Ms. Hood or Ms. Marcia Allocco at [phone].
Sincerely,
Robe7B. rebs
Regioupervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
Enclosure
DH
Mooresville Regional Off Ica
Location: 610 East Center Ave., Suite 301 Mooresville, NG 28115
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] Customer Service: 1-677-623.6748
Internet: www,ncw6terquality,org
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affumative Action Employer- 50% RecyCled1101h Post Consumer paper
NorthCarolina
Naturally

I
Permit: NCG110010
SOC:
County: Mecklenburg
Region: Mooresville
Compliance Inspection Report
Effective: C6/01IC8 Expiration: 05/31113 Owner: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities
Effective: Expiration: Facility: C' arlotte-Mcalpine Creek WWTP
12701 Lancaster Highway
Contact Person: Jacqueline A Jarrell
Directions to Facility:
System Classifications:
Primary ORC:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Related Permits:
Pineville NC 281346386
Title: Phone: [phone]
Ext.238
Certification: Phone:
Inspection Date: 03/03/2011 ..Entry Time: 01:00 PN1 Exit Time: 05:15 PM
Primary Inspector: Donna Hood ,f.t �'", ^� `;�,� ;�s Phone: [phone]
Secondary Inspectors}: Ext.2193
Reason for Inspection: Routine Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Inspection Type: Municipal WWTP > 1 MGD, Stermwater Discharge, COC
Facility Status: ■ Compliant rl Not Compliant
Question Areas:
Storm Water
(See attachment summary)
Page: 1

Permit: NCG110010 Owner - Facility: Charlotte-Meddenburg Utikities
Inspection Date: 03/0312C11 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
During the inspection it was noted that Outfalls 1,2, and 3 were located on 1-485. While every effort must be made to
observe the outfall as it enters the surface water or leaves the property, the Iccaiicn of monitoring at these outfalls could
allow pollutants from 1-485 to be falsely contributed to the facility, It is strongly recommended that the facility monitor
these outfalls prior to the comingling of 1-485 stormwater.
Page: 2

Permit: NCG110010 owner - Facility: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities
Inspection Date: 03/02/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Yes No NA NE
Does the site have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan?
# Does the Plan include a General Location (USGS) map?
# Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
# Does'the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and drainage areas?
# Does the Plan include a list of significant spills occurring during the past 3 years?
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
# Uoes the Plan include a t3MP summary?
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
# Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
# Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Party(s)?
# Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
Comment: The facility performed employee training on 11/18/2010. The Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SPPP) was last updated in February 2011.
Qualitative Monitorina
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually?
Comment: All monitoring is completed as required, The facility performs qualitative
monitoring twice annually during storm events as well as during periods of no rain.
Monitoring during storm events was documented on 7/10/2010 and 3/21/2010,, Outfalls
1-4 were observed during the inspection. All outfalls were well maintained and easily
accessible. No illicit discharges were observed.
Analytical Monitoring
Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring?
# Has the facillty conducted its Analytical monitoring from Vehicle Maintenance areas?
Comment: Analytical monitoring is not required at this time.
Permit and Outfalls
# Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site?
# Were all outfalls observed during the inspection?
# If the facility has representative outfall status, is it properly documented by the Division?
®nnn
®nnn
®nnn
■n❑n
■nnn
■nnn
■nnn
0 n n 01
■❑nn
■n❑n
®n,nn
■nn0l
m0D0
■pnn
■nnn
Yes No' NA NE
■nnn
0 0 M 0
n❑■n
on❑❑
U0Cl0
n■nn
Page: 3

Permit: NCG110010 Owner - Facility: Charlotte-'vlecklenourg Utillties
Inspection Date: 33/03/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
# Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non starrrlwater) discharges?
Comment:
■000
Page: 4

�f
,ririrw►��
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
July 1, 2009
Ms. Jaqueline A. Jarrell, P.E.
Environmental Management Superintendent
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities
4000 Westmont Drive
Charlotte, NC 28217
Subject: Compliance Evaluation Inspection
McAlpine Creek W WTP
NPDES Permit NCGI 10010
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Dear Ms, Jarrell:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Evaluation Inspection Report for the inspection conducted at the
subject facility on June 11, 2009, by Ms. Donna Hood of this Office.
This report should be self-explanatory; however, should you have any questions concerning the report, please
do not hesitate to contact Ms. Hood or Ms. Marcia Allocco at [phone].
Sincerely,
f\�k RobertB. Krebs
Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protectiori Section
Enclosure
cc: Shelton Sullivan, NPS-ACO Unit
Rusty Rozzelle, MCWQP
DH
Mooresville Regional Office
Location: 610 East Center Ave„ Suite 301 Mooresville, NC 28115
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] Customer Service: 1.877.623.6748
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycledl%% Post Consumer paper
NorthCarolina
NatuWly

Permit: NCG110010
SOC:
County: Mecklenburg
Region: Mooresville
Compliance Inspection Report
Effective: 06/01/08 Expiration: 05/31/13 Owner: C h arto tte -Mecklenburg Utilities
Effective: Expiration: Facility: Charlotte-Mcalpine Creek WWTP
12701 Lancaster Highway
Contact Person: Jacqueline A Jarrell
Directions to Facility:
System Classifications:
Primary ORC:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Rep rosentative(s):
Related Permits:
Pineville NC 281346386
Title: Phone: [phone]
Ext.238
Certification: Phone:
Inspection Date: 06/1112009 ntry Time: 09:15 Exit Tim : 02:3 PM
Primary Inspector: Donna Hood �%i Phone: [phone]
Secondary inspector(s): Ext.2193
Reason for Inspection: Routine Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Inspection Type: Municipal WWTP > 1 MGD, Stormwater Discharge, COC
Facility Status: ■ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Question Areas:
Storm Water
(See attachment summary)
Page: 1

4 .
Permit: NCG110010 Owner - Facility: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities
Inspection Date: 06/11/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Page: 2

I of
Permit: NCG110010 Owner -Facility: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities
Inspection Date: 06/11/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Reason for Visit: Routine
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Yes
No NA NE
Does the site have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan?
■
❑ ❑ Cl
# Does the Plan include a General Location (USGS) map?
■
n n Cl
# Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and drainage areas?
■
❑ ❑ Cl
# Does the Plan include a list or significant spills occurring during the past 3 years?
■
❑ ❑ Cl
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
■
Q ❑ Cl
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
■
Cl ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a 6MP summary?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
■
❑ ❑ Cl
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Party(s)?
■
❑ Cl
# Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
■
❑ ❑ Cl
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
■
❑ ❑ Cl
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: An extensive Stormwwater Pollution Prevention Plan has been
implemented at the site. The most recent update for 2009 has not been completed.
This should be completed posthaste.
Qualitative Monitoring Yes No NA NE
Has the facility conducted.its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: All monitoring has been completed as required. Additional conveyances,
which do not meet the State definition of an outfall, are also monitored by the facility.
The location for the qualitative monitoring sites of Outfalls 1, 2, and 3 were reviewed on
the day of the inspection. If the facility desires for safety purposes, these monitoring
sites may be moved to the locations discussed on the day of the inspection.
Permit and Outfalls Yes No NA NE
# Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
# Were all outfalts observed during the inspection?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
# If the facility has representative outfall status, is it properly documented by the Division?
❑
❑ ■ ❑
# Has the facility evaluated ali illicit (non Stormwater) discharges?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Page: 3

MEMORANDUM CONCERNING OIL SPILL AT McALPINE CREEK
WWMF
To: Wes Bell
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Surface Water Protection Section
Mooresville Regional Office
610 E. Center Ave.
Suite 301
. I Km E Fin', V ' = r N
Mooresville, NC 28115
From: Kim Neely, ORC of McAlpine Creek WWMF
Subject Oil Spill Response (event date: 08/25/08)
Date: August 26, 2008
RE: McAlpine Creek NPDES Storm Water Permit
General Permit # NCG 110000
Certificate of Coverage # NCGI 10010
Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities
McAlpine Creek WWMF..
12701 Lancaster Hwy
Pineville, NC 281.34
Mecklenburg County
OIL SPILL EVENT
AUG 2 9 2m
M-Surface Water Protection
1. On August 25, 2008 at approximately 9:30 am'at the Centrifuge Facility of the McAlpine
Creek WWMF, the plant's maintenance staff was moving an electrical transformer from
storage out of the building and damaged the transformer while transporting it wim a forklift
causing it to leak transformer oil from the cooling fins of the unit onto the asphalt roadway
area near the backbay door of this facility.
2. The transformer slowly leaked out approximately 300 gallons of oil over the next hour period
of time. However, all oil was contained within 15 minutes of the spill using loose sand, sand
bags, absorbent pads, absorbent ropes and absorbent media. No oil reached any culvert,
swale, ditch, storm water drains or surface water areas. All storm water drains ( 2) within 100
feet of the -spill site were secured with loose sand and sand bags as a precautionary measure.
3. FCC Environmental, an environmental hydrocarbon service company from Concord, NC
which specializes in emergency response and spill support, was called in and arrived on site
at approximately 12 (noon) pm to conduct clean up procedures of the oil spill. The oil in the

r ti
area was vacuumed, additional absorbent material was applied, the asphalt was degreased
and pressure washed and the entire area was vacuumed again. A small section of
contaminated soil was also removed due to the spill. The cleanup was completed by 5 pm
and all material was removed and transported off site by FCC Environmental. A sample of
the oil was obtained to be analyzed to determine if there was any existence of PCB as a
precautionary measure. There was no suspicion of the existence of PCB in the material
because of known maintenance history of the transformer unit.
4. Wes Bell of the Mooresville Regional Office was contacted and informed of the oil spill by
Kim Neely, the plant ORC at approximately 12:30 pm. Richard Farmer and Chris Elmore of
Mecklenburg County Water Quality were also contacted at approximately 1:30 pm.
CORRECTIVE ACTION
As previously noted, actions to stop the spill as well as appropriate clean up and notification
measures were taken by plant staff immediately upon detection of the spill on August 25,
2008.
2. The damaged electrical transformer was placed back into the Centrifuge Building and will be
shipped out to repair the damaged cooling fin.
3. The maintenance staff will be instructed concerning the proper operation of the forklift when
transporting heavy equipment to avoid future incidences.
Should you have additional .questions or concerns regarding this matter, please feel free to contact
me on my cell phone at 704 634-3512. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

To: Wes Bell
Fax number: 704-663-6040
From: Jackie Jarrell
Fax number: 704-336-50$1
Date: 28 August 2008
Regarding: Oil Spill at McAlpine Creek
Number of pages: 3 including cover sheet
Hi Wes:
Attached Is the memorandum concerning the all Spill
at McAlpine Creek WWMF. I am also sending a
certlfied copy of the memorandum.
I originally tried to fax this on Tuesday, August 26 but
the fax did not go through.
Please call me if you need any additlonal information or
- have any concerns. I can be reached at 704.336.44GO
.and my fax numb'e'r'ls 704.336.5081. or email
[e-mail].
Thank you
Jacqueline Jarrell
E/T 28969EEtrOL 3111 jin 0UnGNZ7X33W :gjj0,jUVH0 WV 90:90 82-6ny-900z

MEMORANDUM CONCERNING OIL SPILL AT McALPINE CREEK
wwmle
To: Wes Bell
North CaroLin.a Department ofEnvironment and Natural Resmirces
Surface Water Protection Section
Mooresville Regional Office
610 E. Center Ave.
Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 2811.5
From: Kim Neely, ORC of McAlpine Creek WWMF
Subject Oil Spill Response (event date: 08/25/08)
Date: August 26, 2008
RE: McAlpine Creek NPDES Storm Water Permit
General Formic ## NC0110000
Certificate of Coverage It N'CG110010
Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities
McAlpine Creek'WWW,
12701 Lancaster Hwy
Pineville, NC 28134
Mecklenburg County
OIL SWILL EVENT
On Atrgttst 25, 2008 at approximately 9:30 am at the Centrifuge Facility of the McAlpine
Creek WWM.F, the plant's maintenance staff was moving an electrical transformer from
etnrsge nut of the. finilding and damaged r1,P trangfnrnPr while ii wiAh,., ftvrklift
causing it to leak transformer oil fiom the coolhig fins of the unit onto the asphalt roadway
area near the backbay door of this facility.
2_ The trany former slowly leaked out: approximately 300 gallons of•oil over the next hour period
of time. However, all oil was contained within 15 minutes of the spill using loose sand, sand
bags, absorbent pads, absorbent ropes and absorbent media. No oil reached any culvert,
swaIc, ditch, storm water drains or surface water areas. All storm water drains ( 2) within 100
feet of the spill site were secured with loose sand and sated bags as a precautionary measure,
3. FCC Environmental, an environmental hydrocarbon ser'viec company rrom Concord, NC
which specializes irx emergency response and spill support, was called in and arrived on site
at approximately 12 (noon) prn to conduct clears up procedures of the oil spill. The oil in the
E/F 285i,96£iVOG 3III'iIln EaSNS7X0SK '21107UH0 KV 60:90 8Z-Ony-900F

area was vacuumed, additional absorbent material was applied, the asphalt was degreased
and pressure washed and the entire area was vacuumed again. A small section o C
contaminated soil was also removed due to [tie spill. The cleanup was completed by 5 pm
and all material was removed and trauspotted off site by FCC Environmental. A sample of
the oil was obtained to be analyzed to determine if there was way existence of PCB as a
precautionary measure. There was no suspicion of t1w existence of PCB in the material
because of known maintenance history of the transformer unit.
4. Wes Bell of the Mooresville Regional Office was contacted and informed of the oil spill by
Kian Neely, the plant ORC at approximately 12:3 0 pm. Richard Farmer and Chris Elmore of
MecIdenburg Couaaty Water {duality were also contacted at approximately 1:30 put_
CORREC I VE A.C1 JON
As previously noted, actions to stop the spill as well as appropriate clean up and notificai.ion.
measures were taken by plant staff immediately upon detection of the shill on August 25,
2008.
2. Tlie damaged electrical transfonner was placed back into the Centrifuge BL ilding and will be
shipped out to repair the damaged cooling fin.
3. The maintenance staff will be instructed concerning the proper operation of the forldi ft when
transpoiling heavy equipment to avoid future incidences.
Should you have additional questions or concerns regarding this matter, please feel free to contact
me on my cell phone at 704 634-3512. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
E/6 299i,9£6i7OG 3III''IIIn 8nEl113'IX03N E1101UH0 Ted 60:90 9?-bny-900L7

7,7
aoi ..7
char ►> E_ lD V L D
AUG' - 5 '2008
August 1, 2008
Ms.'Marcia Allocco NC DENR MRO
DENRIDWQIWater Quality Section M-Surface Water Proteeffon
Mooresville Regional Office
610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Subject: Notice of Violation (NOV) Letter July 3, 2008— Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities (CMU)
Compliance Evaluation Inspection McAlpine Creek WWTP, NPDES Permit NCG110010, NOV- 2008-
PC-0491, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Allocco:
CMU received an NOV letter dated July 3, 2008 relating to the Compliance Evaluation Inspection at
McAlpine Waste Water Management Facility on April 25, 2008. The NOV was based a report by the
inspector, Ms. Donna Hood, of the plant stormwater system and specifically two connections that were
considered to be illicit. The following is our response to the NOV.
During our compliance inspection, we discussed the stormwater permit and the requirements of the
permit. We also demonstrated that we had completed all requirements of the permit including the
Stormwater Prevention Plan, training, qualitative monftoring, analytical monitoring, and other
monitoring requirements of the permit itself. As you are aware, we actively complete self inspections to
be sure we are complying with the general permit. We also had a very comprehensive inspection
completed by Mecklenburg County in January of this year (2008). Recommendations were provided
after the County inspection with no significant issues found during that inspection. Those
recommendations were not finalized as requirements with. the'Mecklenburg County until May 2008
which was after our State inspection completed in April. In other words, we did not receive final
recommendations from the County until May.
The two discharges that were identified as illicit were discussed and pointed out to Ms. Hood during the
inspection. Both of these connections were for seal water to cool process pumps and were a result of
recent improvements made to McAlpine. Both had been identified to be redirected to the plant water
system and were in process at the time of the inspection. As stated in the NOV, one connection was
for non -potable cooling water and the other from potable cooling water. These connections were
tenipurary connections as a resuit'of the construction project that we identified and were working to
correct. At this time the non -potable cooling water connection has already been redirected from the
stormwater system to the plant water system. The potable water connection is in the process of being
re -directed but required more engineering due to other plant piping and cooling jacket issues. Each of
these connection totaled less than 10 gallons per minute (gpm) each.'
During the inspection, we explained what active work was being completed to correct these two
connections. There was agreement by Ms. Hood that the actions we were taking were satisfactory.
There was no indication that an NOV would be issued. We believe that we were working in good faith
to correct a situation and that we should not be penalized for this.
Jacqueline A. Jarrell, P.E. 0 Environmental Management Division • Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities
4222 Westmont Drive 9 Charlotte, NC 28217 6 704/3364460 0 Fax [phone]

r,. We respectfully request that this NOV be rescinded based on the information above. We look forward
to hearing your decision. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at
704-336-4460. ,
Sincerely,
Ya A. �quei�rlL Jarrell, Pi
Environmental Management Division Supt.
C: Robert Krebs, NCDWQ - Mooresville
Rusty Rozzelle, LUESA
Jacqueline A. Jarrell, P.E. • Environmental Management Division 0 Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities
4222 Westmont Drive 0 Charlotte, NC 28217 0 704/336-4460 0 Fax [phone]

om
MOVE
August 1, 2008 AUG - 5 2008
Ms. Marcia Allocco;`a,
DENRIDWQNVater Quality Section "`� `"" `"-'-'' `"
Mooresville Regional Office NC DENR MRO,,uatr'��PQtLC
6S10 East Center Avenue, Suite 301 ^��
Mooresville, NC 28115 Dwourface Wafer PI'o ar1h,"
Subject: Notice of Violation (NOV) Letter July 3, 2008— Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities (CMU)
Compliance Evaluation Inspection McAlpine Creek WWTP, NPDES Permit NCG110010. NOV- 2008-
PC-0491, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Allocco:
CMU received an NOV letter dated July 3, 2008 relating to the Compliance Evaluation Inspection at
McAlpine Waste Water Management Facility on April 25, 2008, The NOV was based a report by the
inspector, Ms. Donna Hood, of the plant stormwater system and specifically two connections that were
considered to be illicit. The following is our response to the NOV.
During our compliance inspection, we discussed the stormwater permit and the requirements of the
permit. We also demonstrated that we had completed all requirements of the permit including the
Stormwater Prevention Plan, training, qualitative monitoring, analytical monitoring, and other
monitoring requirements of the permit itself. As you are aware, we actively complete self inspections to
be sure we are complying with the general permit. We also had a very comprehensive inspection
completed by Mecklenburg County in January of this year (2008). Recommendations were provided,
after the County inspection with no significant issues,found during that inspection. Those
e recommndations were, not finalized as requirements with the Mecklenburg County until May'2008;
which was after our State inspection completed in April. In other words, we did not receive final
recommendations from the County until May.
The two discharges that were identified as illicit were discussed and pointed out to Ms. Hood during the
inspection. Both of these connections were for seal water to cool process pumps and were a result of
recent improvements made to McAlpine. Both had been identified to be redirected to the plant water
system and were in process at the time of the inspection. As stated in the NOV, one connection was
for non -potable cooling water and the other from potable cooling water. These connections were
temporary connections as a result of the construction project that we identified and were working to
correct. At this time the non -potable cooling water connection has already been redirected from the
stormwater system to the plant water system. The potable water connection is in the process of being
re -directed but required more engineering due to other plant piping and cooling jacket issues. Each of
these connection totaled less than 10 gallons per minute (gpm) each.'
During the inspection, we explained what active work was being completed to correct these two
connections. There was agreement by Ms. Hood that the actions we were taking were satisfactory.
There was no, indication, that an NOV would be. issued. We believe that we were working in good.faith
to correct a situation.and that we should not be penalized for this.
Jacqueline A. Jarrell, P.E. s Environmental Management Division 0 Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities
4222 Westmont Drive 0 Charlotte, NC 28217 07041336-4460 0 Fax [phone]

- DUA

We respectfully request that this NOV be rescinded based on the information above.' We look forward
to hearing your decision. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at
704-336-4460.
Sincerely, jo
al
Rquelrn6 A. ,carrell, P.E.
Environmental Management Division Supt.
C: Robert Krebs, NCDWQ - Mooresville
Rusty Rozzelle, LUESA
t-
Jacqueline A. Jarrell, P.E. 0 Environmental Management Division 0 Chariotte-Mecklenburg Utilities
4222 Westmont Drive 0 Charlotte, NC 28217 97D41336-4460 • Fax [phone]

o�QF w AA X.n
rEgQG
•rr r
o -c
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
7007 1490 0004 4509 6055
Ms. Jaqueline A. Jarrell, P.E.
Environmental Management Superintendent
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities
4000 Westmont Drive
Charlotte, NC 28217
Dear Ms. Jarrell:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Colleen Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
July 3, 2008
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION
Compliance Evaluation Inspection
McAlpine Creek W WTP
NPDES Permit NCGI 10010
NOV-2008-PC-0491
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Evaluation Inspection Report for the inspection
conducted at the subject facility on April 25, 2008, by Ms. Donna Hood of this Office.
This report is being issued as a Notice of Violation (NOV) because of the violations of the
subject NPDES permit and North Carolina General Statute (G.S.) 143-215.1 as detailed in the
Permits and Outfalls Section of the attached report. Pursuant to G.S. 143-215.5A, a civil penalty
of not more than twenty five -thousand dollars (25,000.00) per violation per day may be assessed
against any person who violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or
requirements of any permit issued pursuant to G.S. 143-215.1.
It is requested that a written response be submitted to this Office by August 3, 2008,
addressing the deficiencies noted in the Permits and Outfalls Section of the report. In responding,
please address your comments to the attention of Ms. Marcia Allocco.
N. C. Division of Water Quality, Mooresville Regional Office, 610 Gast Center Avenue, Suite 301, Mooresville NC 28115 [phone] Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

■ Complete items 1, 2, and.3. Also camplete
Item 4 If Restricted Delivery is desired -"
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front If space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
NIN JAQUELINE JARRELL, PE �
.NV. MANAGI MENT SUPERINTENDENT
CHAR-NIKK UTILITIES
4000 Wi:iS'f MONT DRIVE
CHARLOTIT NC 28217
swr/dh 7/3/08
A. Si re j
ent {
Ad
B. Received by (Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery addressiflffetiant from iterri•17 ❑ Yes
It YES, enterdelfvery address below: ❑ No
P4 i
Servlce Type "Ll-I %
Cartined Mail ❑ Express maii
Reglstered 12 Roturnlecelptfor Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes
_ f
7007 1490 0004 4509 6055
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 1025042-M•1540 )
Postal
CERTIFIED MAIL,, RECEIPT
ul (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided)
Ln
nor delivery Infdrmallon visit our website at wWW,usps.cornj4
0 F F AL US
Ul postage $ cciq,'7
Corefied Fee
0 Return Receipt Fee Postma�, ra.
O(Endorsems"IRequired) Na
Restricted Delivery fee
Cl (Endorsement Requlred)
ro MS JAQUELINE JAR RI LL�A)r'T' ;; k
� NV, MANAGEMENT SUPERINTENDENT
r* eO CHAR -MUCK UTILITIES
C
3 4000 WE?STMONT DRIVE
CHARLOTTE NC 28217
oiry -
swp/dh 7/3/08

WAT f9 Michael F. Easley, Govern-ejq I� �,� _ +
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary l` f
rEq North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Colleen Sullins, Director
Y Division of Water Quality
MAIL
CEIPT
4
Ms. Jaqueline AJarrell, P.E.
Environmental M ag
Char] otte-Mecklenbu
4000 Westmont Drive
Charlotte, NC 28217
Dear Ms. Jarrell:
nent Superintendent
Utilities
July 3, 2008
Subj
Compliance Evaluation Inspection
Irwin Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit NCG110008
NOV-2008-PC-0441
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Enclosed please find a copy of the 96mpliance Eval Lion Inspection Report for the inspection
conducted at the subject facility on Ayfril 25, 2008, by Ms. onna Hood of this Office.
This report is being issued as otice of Violation (NOV) cause of the violations of the
subject NPDES permit and Nor Carolina General Statute (G.S.) 43-215.1 as detailed in the
Permits and Outfalls S/viates
f the attached report. Pursuant to S. 143-215.6A, a civil penalty
of not more than twentyusand dollars (25,000.00) per violati per day may be assessed
against any person who or fails to act in accordance with the to s, conditions, or
requirements of any perd pursuant to G.S. 143-215.1.
It is requested tha a written response be submitted to this Office by A ust 3 2008,
addressing the defic'encies noted in the Permits and Outfalls Section of the re rt. In responding,
please address yo comments to the attention of Ms. Marcia Allocco,
Id�CJMR
N. C. Division of Water Quality, Mooresville Regional Office, 610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301, Mooresville NC 28115 [phone] Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

,r
Page Two
Ms. Jarrell
NOV-2007-PC-0773
This report should be self-explanatory; however, should you have any questions concerning the
report, please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Flood or Ms. Marcia Allocco at [phone].
Sincerely,
Robert B. Krebs
Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
Enclosure
cc: Shelton Sullivan, NPS-ACO Unit
DI-1
N. C. Division of Water Quality, Mooresville Regional Office, 610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301, Mooresville NC 28115 [phone] Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

r
r Compliance Inspection Report
Permit: NCG110010 Effective: 05/01/03 Expiration: 04/30/08 Owner: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities
SOC: Effective: Expiration: Facility: Charlotte-Mcaipine Creek VVWTP
County: Mecklenburg 12701 Lancaster Highway
Region: Mooresville
Pineville NC 281346386
Contact Person: Sandy Kim Neely Title: Phone: [phone]
Directions to Facility:
System Classifications:
Primary ORC: Certification: Phone:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Related Permits:
Inspection Date: 041251200$ ntry Time: 10:;OA Exit Ti PM
Primary Inspector: Donna Hood rJ�r/� 1 Phone: [phone]
Secondary Inspector(s): fli C� , J �� Ext.2193
Marcia Allocco Phone: [phone] Ext.2204
Reason for Inspection: Routine Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Inspection Typo: Municipal WWTP > 1MGD, Stormwater Discharge, COC
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ■ Not Compliant
Question Areas:
0 Storm Water
(See attachment summary)
Page: 1

Permlt: NCG110010 Owner - Facility: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities ,ti
Inspection date: 04/25/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Many topographic changes have occurred at McAlpine Creek WWTP during the recent upgrades. Some outfalls can now
be excluded from monitoring, per State requirements, but may still need monitoring per Mecklenburg County
LUESA/Stormwater requirements. During the inspection the following outfalls were observed:
4P, 50, 6P,7P, 80, 9P, 10P, 11P, 12P, 13P, 140, 15P, 17P, 18P, 19P
Outfall 9 has been deleted. Outfall 13P discharges into the effluent. Outfalls 80, 140, 18P (now 0) do not require
monitoring per State requirements. Please confirm with Mecklenburg County LUESA1Stormwater before eliminating them
from all stormwater monitoring programs.
During the inspection non -potable cooling water was observed discharging from Outfall 12P. Potable cooling water was
observed discharging from Outfall 1 OP. This is a recent occurrence with the upgrades at McAlpine WWTP. Please be
advised that these are illicit discharges. While on site a discussion ensued that involved piping both these discharges
back into the WWTP. This is one acceptable solution. Please keep this Office advised as to how the discharges are
eliminated.
Page: 2

.r
!, Permit: NCG110010 Owner - Facility: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities
Inspection Date: 041251200E Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Reason for VlsIt: Routine
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Yes
No
NA
NE
Does the site have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a General location (USGS) map?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and drainage areas?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a list of significant spills occurring during the past 3 years?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
■
Cl
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Party(s)?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
■
❑
Cl
❑
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
■
❑
❑
❑
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
■
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Qualitative Monitoring
Yes
No
NA
NE
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually?
■
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Analytical Monitoring
Yes
No
NA
NE
Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring?
❑
❑
■
❑
# Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring from Vehicle Maintenance areas?
❑
❑
■
❑
Comment:
Permit and Outfalls
Yes
No
NA
NE
# Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Were all outfalls observed during the inspection?
■
❑
❑
❑
# If the facility has representative outfall status, is it properly documented by the Division?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non stormwater) discharges?
❑
■
❑
❑
Comment: Please see the attached summary.
Page: 3