NCS000565_COMPLETE FILE - HISTORICAL_20150629

2 14
NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET
RESCISSIONS
PERMIT NO.
YLS o o a5�-s-
DOC TYPE
❑COMPLETE FILE -HISTORICAL
DATE OF
RESCISSION
❑ 2-0 45'�o
YYYYMMDD

All
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory John E. Skvarla, III
Governor RECsEIVED
Andy Keith -./rune 29 zorS
Kinder Morgan Wilmington Terminal JUL 0 1 2015
2005 N. Sixth Street, Wilmington, NC 28401 CENTRAL FILES
DINR SECTION
Subject: Requested rescission of stormwater permit coverage under NCS000565
❑ Rescission request denied. Reason:
eseission request approved, effective immediately. Permit coverage rescinded on the following basis:
❑
You reported that you have ceased all regulated activity and sold the facility.
You reported that although you retain ownership or control of the facility, you have ceased all regulated
and there are no materials remaining on site that may resent a risk of stormwater pollution.
-..activity,
You reported that continued permit coverage is not required because the site activities are not regulated by
the NPDES stormwater permittin4 erogram.
Note other basis: din el d 11�10 A o "Lt .S 6 eg r, 40 ' 01
❑ DEMLR Regional Office concrirence� V'Request processed without RO comment
Operating a treatment facility, discharging wastewater, or discharging specific types of stormwater to
waters of the State without a valid NPDES permit will subject the responsible parry to a civil penalty of
up to $25,000 per day. Enforcement action will be certain for persons that have voluntarily relinquished
permit coverage when, in fact, continuing permit coverage was necessary. If, in retrospect, you feel the
site still requires permit coverage, you should notify this office immediately. Furthermore, if in the future
you wish to again discharge to the State's surface waters, you must first apply for and receive new
coverage under an NPDES permit.
If you have questions about this action, please contact the DEMLR Regional Office (copied below), or
Ken Pickle in the Raleigh Central Office at [phone].
Sincerely,
fCPM,
for Tracy . Davis, P.E.,ector
Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources
ormwater Permitting Program file
VDWR Central Files
DEMLR Budget Office, Deborah Reese (rescissions only)
DEMLR Wilmington Regional Office
Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources
1612 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1612 • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
Location: 512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27604 • hqi):/Iportal,ncdenr.org/web/Ir)
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer

J.ItKINDER7-1 ORGAN
yTERMINALS
September 26, 2014
Mr. Ken Pickle
NC DENR Stormwater Permitting Program
1612 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Subject: Kinder Morgan Wilmington Terminal
Individual Storm Water Permit Application NCS000565, pending
Request to Withdraw
Dear Mr. Pickle,
On December 5, 2012, Kinder Morgan Wilmington Terminal (KMW) submitted the above referenced
Individual NPDES Permit Application for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Industrial
Activity. Based on the following factors, KMW respectfully requests to withdraw the current
pending permit application:
• Late last year, the oxalic acid process went away. Therefore, the facility no longer dissolves
solid oxalic acid with water.
• Ethanol and methanol are no longer stored at the terminal.
• The facility dilutes caustic soda only upon the customer's request (not routinely), and only
adds water in the customer's tank truck as it prepares to leave the site.
• The facility continues to add minor amounts of additives to the other products as per
customer specifications.
Based on the above information, KMW respectfully requests to withdraw the current pending permit
application NCS000565.
If you have any questions or require additional information related to the terminal operations in
regards to the pending application, please contact me directly at 910-762-8588 or Margaret
Sembos, Regional Sr. EHS Specialist at [phone].
Sincerely,
Andy Keith
Terminal Manager
Kinder Morgan Wilmington
RECEIVED
tlt, 113 2014
DENR-LAND QUALITY
STORMWATER PERMITTING
cc: Jim Gregson, NCDENR, Wilmington Regional Office
Margaret Sembos, Kinder Morgan Sr. EHS Specialist, SER
KMT Core Principles
Safety Will Not Be Compromised - Environmentally Compliant and Responsible Operator -Ethics and integrity
Commitment to Emolovees and Resources - Customer Service and Fiscal Resoonsibility - ❑uality Focus

• State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources
" Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Environrnentat Staff Report
Quality
To: ® NPD13S Unit ❑ Non -Discharge Unit Application Na.: NCO073172
Attn: Brianna Young
Facility name: Kinder Morgan Terminals Wilmington, LLC — Wilmington Woodbine Strecl 'Terminal
From: ,ling Gregson
Wilmington Regional Office
Note: This Forth has been adapted front the non-dischar c facility staff report to document the review of both non_
discharge and NPUES pun nit applications and/or renewals. Please cam Mete all sections as they are applicable.
1. GENERAL AND SITE VISIT INFOR'NIATION
1. Was a site visit conducted? ® Yes or ❑ No
a. Bate of site visit: 06/14/2017
b. Site visit conducted by: Jim Grcgson, Tom Tharrington, Brianna Young
c. Inspection report attached? ❑ Yes or [D No
d. Person contacted: Mamaret Scmbos and their contact information: (�43) 853 - 0453 ext. 2263
e. Driving directions: From the intersection of US Highway 421 South and Burnett Blvd, travel south on Burnet
Blvd. approximately 1,700 feet to Woodbine Street and the entrance to the facility,
2. Discharge Point(s):
Latitude: 34° 12'38.38"N Longitude: 77°57' 12.70"W
3. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Cape Fear River
Classification: SC River Basin and Subbasin No. 03-06-17
Describe receiving strewn features and pertinent downstream uses: Commercial shipping;, commercial
fishing and secondary recreation,
11. PROPOSED FACILITIES: NEW APPLICATIONS
I . Facility Classification: (Please attach completed rating sheet to be attached to issued permit)
Proposed flow:
Current permitted flow:
2. Are the new treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal system? ❑ Yes or ❑ No
If no, explain:
3. Arc site conditions (soils, depth to water tabfc, etc) consistent with the submitted reports? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NfA
If no, please explain:
4. Do the plans and site inap represent the actual site (property lines, wells, etc.)? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
If no, please explain:
5. Is the proposed residuals management plan adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NIA
If no, please explain:
FORM: WQKC)SS1t 04-14 Page 1 of

Fi. Arc the proposed application rates (e.g., hydraulic, nutrient) acceptable? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑NIA
If no, please explain:
7. Are there any setback conflicts for proposed treatment, storage and disposal sites? ❑ Yes or ❑ No
if yes, attach a map showing conflict areas.
8. Is the proposed or existing groundwater monitoring program adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NIA
If no, explain and recommend any changes to the groundwater monitoring program:
9. For residuals, will seasonal or other restrictions be required? ❑ Yes ❑ No [] NIA
If yes, attach list ol'sites with restrictions (Certification B)
Describe the residuals handling and utilization scheme:
10. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters:
1 l . Pretreatment Program (PO`FWs only):
III. EXISTING FACILITIES: MODIFICATION AND RENEWAL APPLICATIONS
1. Are there appropriately certified Operators in Charge (ORCs) for the facility? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ NIA
ORC: Michael Alexander Certificate 1: 990451 Backup ORC. ]Benjamin Fiorrell
Certificate 9:997568
2. Are the design, maintenance and operation of the treatment facilities adequate Ior the type of waste and disposal
systcm? ® Ycs or ❑ No
if no, please explain:
Description of existing facilities: The Woodbine Street facility is a bulk storage terminal for liquid product. The
existing wastewater system consists of a spill protection system and stormwater sheet flow. The majority of the
site is located on property owned by the NC State Ports Authority (NCSPA) . With the exception of one 481000
gal. asphalt storage tank, all product storage in located on NCSPA property. Stormwater from all NCSPA
property and associated storage tanks is discharged through the NCSPA stormwater outfall. In order for Kinder
Nlorgan to discharge via outfall•001, a pump must be transported to the site and stormwater must be p6niped over
an existing berm located near the Cape Fear River. The facility has only discharged once in the past three years
and only then during a hurricane.
Proposed flow: Permittee estimates that the facility could discharge up to 39 MOD when discharging.
Current permitted flow: No limit.
F;xplain anything observed during the site visit that needs to be addressed by the, permit, or that may be important
for the permit writer to know (i.e., equipment condition, function, maintenance, a change in facility ownership,
etc.)
3. Are the site conditions (e.g., soils, topography, depth to water table, etc) maintained appropriately and adequately
assimilating the waste? ® Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain:
4. Has the site changed in any way that may affect the permit (e.g., drainage added, new wells inside the compliancc
boundary; new development, etc.)? ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, please explain:
5. Is the residuals management plan adequate? ❑ Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain: No residuals are generated at this facility.
6. Arc the existing application rates (e.g., hydraulic, nutrient) still acceptable? ❑ Yes or ❑ No
If no; please explain: NIA
Is the existing groundwater monitoring program adequate? ❑ Yes ❑'No ® NIA.
If no, explain and recommend any changes to the groundwater monitoring program:
Are there any setback conflicts for existing treatment, storage and disposal sites? ❑ Yes'or ® No
If yes, attach a map showing conflict areas. This facility does not treat or store wastewater.
FOKM: WQKOSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 5

9. Is the description of the facilities as written in the existing permit correct? ❑ Yes or Z No
If no, please explain: The existing permit describes a "stormwatcr/wastes+later holding. pond" When
slormixater is pumped over the existing berm during tropical stonn events, it is pumped to a wetland area that is
tidally connected to the river. It appears that this area may have at one time been some type of containment area,
however it is currently not functioning as a "storniNvater pond".
10. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® NIA
If no, please explain:
Are the monitoring well coordinates correct in BIMS? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® NIA
If no, please complete the following (expand table if necessary):
Monitoring Well
Latitude
Longitude
o
O 1 n
O 1 1!
O
O 1 11
O 1 11
n 1 u
o 1 If
0 1 11
0 1 n
-11. Has a review of all self -monitoring data been conducted (e.g., DMR, NI)MR, NDAR, GW)? ® Yes or ❑ No
Please summarize any findings resulting from this review: The last discharge at the facility was October 2015.
Prior to that the last discharge was in April 2012. The October 2015 data was in compliance with permit limits.
Provide input to help the permit writer evaluate any requests for reduced monitoring, if applicable.
12. Are there any permit changes needed in order to address ongoing B111•tS violations? ® Yes or ❑ No
If yes, please explain:
13. Check all that apply:
0 No compliance issues
❑ Noticc(s) of violation
❑ Current enforcement action(s) ❑ Currently under JOC
❑ Currently under SOC ❑ Currently under moratoriurti
Please explain and attach any documents that may help clarify answer/comments (i.e., NOV, NOD, etc.)
If the facility has had compliance problems (luring the pcnnit cycle, please explain the status. Has the RO been
working with the Permittee? Is a solution underway or in place'?
Have all compliance dates/conditions in the existing permit been satisfied? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, please explain:
14. Are there any issues related to compliance/enforcement that should be resolved before issuing this permit'?
❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
Ifyes, please explain:
15. Possible toxic impacts.to surface waters: None
16. Pretreatment Program (PO'f Ws only): N/A
FORM: WQROSSit 04-14 Page 3 of 5

W. REGIONAL OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS
l . Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? ® Yes or ❑ No
If yes, please explain: Based on a review of past permit decision for this facility it is unclear why the facilin, is
covered under an WDES Permit. While there arc multiple storage tanks on the facility over one million gallons,
there are none on the property that would drain to outfall 001. The facility property is primarily owned by
NCSPA and only one 481,000 Pal. asphalt tank. several buildings and a loading rack is located on Kinder Morgen
property. All stormwater from NTCSPA property is collected and discharged through the NCSPA outfall under the
NCSPA NPDES Stormwater Permit. In the past three years, the facility only discharged in October 2015.
Discharpes at this facility can only occur by active pumping. There is no wastewater generated or treated at the
facility. It is recommended_ if requested by the permittee, that the permit be rescinded.
2. List any items that you would like the if 1)]:S Unit or Non -Discharge Unit Central Office to obtain through an
additional information request:
Item Reason
3. List specific permit conditions recommended to be removed from the permit when issued:
Condition Reason
4. List specific special conditions or compliance schedules recommended to be included in the permit when issued:
Condition Reason
5. Recommendation: ❑ Hold, pending receipt and review of additional information by regional office
❑ Hoid, pending review of draft permit by regional office
❑ Issue upon receipt of needed additional information
❑ Issue
❑ Deny ({'lease state reasons: }
6. Signature of report preparer:
Signature of regional superv1isor:
Date: _%% L5 ��'v/ �'--
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 4 of. 5

V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
None
FORM: WQROSSR 0=4-14 Page 5 of

J-q

4