Complaints Continue after Notice of Violation

Complaints Continue after Notice of Violation

I can't believe this is allowed to continue! The contractor for Quick Trip, McCrory construction, has shown little or no regard for the people surrounding this destructive project.

It has been over since I first reported the site to Alabama Dep. of Environmental Management.(ADEM) Since then, little has changed and ADEM is dragging their heels as usual. It seems that the privileges afforded to polluters outweighs the rights of citizens to be protected from egregious bad actors like this.  

We, Friends of Hurricane Creek have an obligation to our members, the community, and the creek itself to investigate and report situations like this one.

I have been doing storm water investigations in the watershed since 2007, non stop. This particular project is the worst by far when it comes to damaging people off site on such a regular basis. It's chronic. EVERY rain event brings on more violations, flooding, and heartache for the people receiving the brunt of what seems to be complete negligence. Even the sprinklers cause offsite violations!

To add insult to injury, yesterday as I was leaving after documenting the carnage from their failure to follow the rules I saw the dumbest thing I have ever come across. The rain had stopped and things had settling down when they decided to turn on the damn sprinklers! The same sprinklers that have been reported in the past as causing sediment to be transported offsite! That takes a special kind of stupid.

(Feel free to click the pictures to enlarge)

Citizen Complaint filed below...

08/26/21

Please accept the following complaint against the Quick Trip construction project located at the intersection of Buttermilk Road and I-59 in Tuscaloosa County. N 33.17065 W 87.44712 NPDES permit number ALR10BHQ0

Yesterday 08/25/21 I visited the site before a 45-minute moderate rain event. As usual there was a stream of red mud and construction debris / gravel flowing down Valley Lake Rd to the lake itself. It traversed through the road, the front drive to the residence across the street, down the street where it turned toward the lake leaving a lake of mud behind. From there it entered Valley Lake through at least 3 points.

 

Before the rain there was no activity seen working on the failing BMPs or stabilizing the slopes.

 

In the response Mr. Ensor states “The facility identification was not displayed (ADEM). Facility ID to be displayed first thing Monday morning 8/23. (Ensor).

 

As of around 07:30 PM. 08/25/21 there was still no NPDES placard at the entrance. There was, however, a copy of the permit issuance, cover letter on a piece of plywood partially obscured by the silt fence. It is hardly at the entrance. It is located about half way down Valley Lake Rd, inside the silt fence. There is no entrance anywhere near the sign and it certainly cannot be read from the entrance. This is one of the very simplest tasks for any permit holder. Get the proper placard and post it. Given the number of times it has been cited in complaints, inspection reports, an NOV and even in their own engineers report, it is still not properly posted. ADEM needs to take that into consideration during the enforcement and penalty assessment.

 

ADEM should remember the comment in the response to the NOV.

 QT Engineer stated, “Per discussion with McCrory Construction, the site will continue to be permanently stabilized on Monday, August 23. Everyone understanding of the expediency in which the State’s concerns need to be addressed and have already performed multiple BMP installations/alterations to prevent sediment from discharging downstream.“

So far I haven’t seen any sign of stabilization on any area of the permit as of 08/25/21 at around 7:30 PM. I did see, however more ditching for irrigation piping. It was left in a rain with no BMPs. ADEM needs to take that into consideration during the enforcement and penalty assessment.

 

At around 06:30 PM it began a light sprinkle. By 07:07 PM it was raining, but not heavily but the sediment was free flowing across the street and onto private property as well as entering Valley Lake. There as also a plume of sediment flowing down the I-59 side of the permit into Cottondale Creek.

 

At around 07:09 the rain, which had subsided a bit intensified and again the sheet flow of mud came offsite.

It was interesting and irresponsible to me for them to be turning on the sprinkler system it a rain shower. Even their own engineer admitted that the BMPs were not holding back the sprinkler runoff. ADEM needs to take that into consideration during the enforcement and penalty assessment.

 

By around 07:10 PM there was a steady flow of mud coming from under the silt fences, through holes in the fences and flowing freely down the road.

 

The pond did catch some of the water but since it is not constructed properly there was no retention value to it. It’s merely a pass through pond to the road. Water seen at the bottom of the BMPs along the road was just as muddy as the water in the pond. 

 

BY 07:30 PM the rain had all but stopped but there was a steady running plume of heavily contaminated runoff going through the private property and into Valley Lake. I launched my drone for a short time before dark.

 

I could see 3 distinct places in the lake where mud was entering from this brief, moderate summer shower.

 

Along I-59 there has been no attempt to “stabilize” the unpermitted discharge onto state ROW.

 

As I was leaving at around 07:48 PM I saw the most irresponsible act yet. The mud had just stopped flowing and these people turned on the sprinkler where there is NO grass. It started another flow of mud from under the failing silt fence.

 

I arrived at 06:30 PM. 08/25/21 to find the following conditions.

 

1.    No NPDES placard posted at the entrance. The letter is not the proper ID. And it must be posted and visible at the entrance.

2.    No stabilization taking place as promised in the response to ADEM NOV.

3.    No BMPs along the I-59 corridor

4.    Holes in several fences

5.    Undercut fences allowing large amounts of mud to pass under them/

6.    Offsite transport of mud, construction debris/gravel, and extreme turbid water onto County ROW and private property.

7.    No properly constructed retention pond.

8.    Sediment from the site has been left offsite for weeks.

 

Given the numerous opportunities for this polluter has been given to come into compliance and still refuses to show significant improvements, ADEM needs to take measures strong enough to deter more of the same behavior, up to and including heavy fines and a stop work order until all BMP requirements are met.

      --

John L. Wathen,
Hurricane Creekkeeper
Friends of Hurricane Creek
 
Creekkeeper is a member of
Waterkeeper Alliance
www.waterkeeper.org
 
Who has the authority to say someone else
 is not being a good steward of the environment?
 
Anyone who notices

 

Quick Trip official response to Notice of Violation

The following are responses to the ADEM Notice of Violation (NOV) for the QuikTrip 7170 along

Buttermilk Road in Tuscaloosa, Alabama sent August 03, 2021. Site visit (and accompanying

photos) took place on August 19, 2021 at 9:30 am CST.

 

1. Appropriate, effective Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the control of pollutants in stormwater run-off have not been fully implemented and regularly maintained to the maximum extent practicable resulting in the potential for uncontrolled discharges of sediment, turbidity, and other pollutants to a water of the State of Alabama. 

 

View looking west up Valley Lake Road. Minor sediment accumulation. Wattles (20”) to be installed along low side of road to help trap and slow runoff.

Page 01 from the original response to NOV

View looking east down Valley Lake Road. Again, minor sediment accumulation. It should be noted that water in these photos is from the temporary irrigation and not from a precipitation event. 

 

View of Triple Silt Fence at Detention Pond Outfall. Area to be fine graded and sodded as expediently as possible.

Page 02 from the original response to NOV

View looking toward pond from pond outfall. Area to be fine graded and sodded as expediently as possible.

Page 03 from the original response to NOV

View of silt fence around area inlet. Ponding water is from irrigation. Recommend to sod area around inlet immediately and remove silt fence. Silt fence apears to be clogged and water is overtopping berm and running down Valley Lake Road. All bare soil areas shall be stabilized expediently. This will help prevent erosion, aid in infiltration, and slow surface runoff.

2.

Accumulation of sediment was observed offsite downgradient of stormwater discharge outlets at the facility.(ADEM, NOV)

Page 04 from the original response to NOV

3.The facility identification was not displayed.(ADEM NOV)

Facility ID to be displayed first thing Monday morning 8/23.

 

4. Precipitation measurement device was not observed.(ADEM NOV)

The rain gauge is located on the “McCrory” Construction Sign.

 

Additional comment received via Mr. Evan Roberts with ADEM on August 13, 2021:

1.

We’re getting a complaint about concrete washout in the street. The permit require that concrete washout be “managed by an appropriate control”.

Concrete washout was moved on-site on August 20, 2021.

Per discussion with McCrory Construction, the site will continue to be permanently stabilized on Monday, August 23

rd

Everyone understanding of the expediency in which the State’s concerns

need to be addressed and have already performed multiple BMP installations/alterations to prevent sediment from discharging downstream. It should be noted that although sediment is still leaving the site, it is leaving the site is less than what is show in the NOV dated August 3rd due to the improvements and permanent stabilization that is occurring on-site. 

 

If you have any questions, feel free to give me a call at 864-672-3439 or email me at densor@fk-inc.com

Thank you.

 

Response to NOV comments

 Response to NOV comments

To,

Scott Hughes, Derrick Houston,

08/25/21

Please accept the following comments on Quick Trip NOV response and citizen complaints for ALR10BHQ0 on behalf of John L. Wathen, Hurricane Creekkeeper and Friends of Hurricane Creek.

 

In the response to the NOV crafted by Mr. Duane Ensor he makes several statements, which are partially true.

 

1. Page 01. He shows a photo from a vantage point I have already submitted to ADEM of that same day showing runoff from the sprinkler system. His photo doesn’t really show the whole picture. The fact is that this had happened several times and was the source of a complaint to ADEM. He states “Minor sediment accumulation”. Most of his photos were taken in a public ROW and off of the permit boundaries in some cases. The BPM requirement for any project is to keep the sediment onsite not out in the road. He also did not mention that all of the gravel seen in the road in his photos and mine is construction debris washed out of their poorly implemented BMPs.

 

Same site as above 4 hours later. 

His inspection was on the 19^th at 09:30. My photos on that day start a couple of hours later and go through the thunderstorm that afternoon. If the engineer was anywhere near the site he could have witnessed it himself and seen the huge load of mud, gravel and concrete waste that flowed down the street, into 3 separate private driveways and up onto the homes porches and carports. He could have seen the wave of red mud that almost breached the shop area behind the house again. This residence has flooded 7 times that I know of, 3 just since July 22/ 2021. The problem with this engineer not being onsite is that it is too far from Greenville SC to here for him to adequately inspect after major rain events. I can’t see how he knows what the conditions are or how much sediment has left the site. The site was chronically out of compliance when I filed my first complaint in July and it is still out of compliance. ADEM must take this into consideration when calculating any penalty associated with the NOV.

 

EVERY rain event floods the streets and homes along Valley Lake Rd. However his comment about it simply being sprinkler water is an admission that the BMPs are inadequate. If sprinklers were the only problem it would not be so bad but the situation is far worse than some sprinkler water!

2. Page 2 of the response bottom photo shows a triple silt fence but he did not show the corners, which are not joined properly, or the holes under the fence and in the newly installed perimeter fencing as already noted in a previous complaint. ADEM must take this into consideration when calculating any penalty associated with the NOV.

 

3. Page 3 top photo says it will be graded and sodded as expediently as possible. As of today, 03:22 PM no work was being done to the BMPs. In fact there has been no work done on stabilization that I can see. Some of the sediment has been removed from the failing drop inlet near the road but the silt fence wasn’t removed and changed. The response to the NOV stated the area would be sodded and the fence removed. That is not the case. On the 19^th when he visited there were several rolls of sod along the Hargrove Road entrance. Today all of the sod is gone but none was used on the grounds that I can find. ADEM must take this into consideration when calculating any penalty associated with the NOV.

 

PM 5 hours after QT claimed "Minor Sediment"

4. Page 04. Top photo he shows a photo of the failing drop inlet as well as the failing silt fence. Photos taken later in the day after he left show large clods of clay coming from under the fences in several places. If clay balls will wash under the fences, they are not installed properly and do not meet the requirements of the permit or the TMDL requirements for Cottondale and Hurricane Creek. ADEM must take this into consideration when calculating any penalty associated with the NOV.

 

This is not "minor sediment

The bottom photo where he again says “ Minor sediment” was taken during a period of no rain. His photos were taken AFTER the landowner used his tractor and box blade to remove the sediment from the doorway and drive. He has to clean up loads mud after every major rain event. He would be happy to submit a deposition to that effect. This is NOT “Minor sedimentation”. Mr. Ensor makes the statement about the bottom photo “Area of minor sediment accumulation on neighbor’s property.

This is not "minor sediment"

Area to be seeded/stabilized at conclusion of construction.” He doesn’t get to make that decision. The private landowners will have final say in what will happen on their land. The company stopped offering to help right after I was asked to come and document the activity by the landowner. They knew they were in the wrong and have been for months. ADEM must take this into consideration when calculating any penalty associated with the NOV.

 

No NPDES posted

5. On page 5 he states that the permit sign WILL be placed on the gate Mon. Morning “Facility ID to be displayed first thing Monday morning 8/23”. As of 03:34 PM today, 08/24/21 there is no permit placard on the gate. This is simply inexcusable. They have had a permit since August of last year. That’s a full year to do the simplest possible act. Put up the permit! The fact that they continuously disregard and refused to post the permit, complaints, as well as an NOV from ADEM suggests that they have no intent to comply and should be penalized to the maximum extent for their negligence.

 

Improperly built sediment basin

In his report he makes no mention of the retention pond not being built to specs.  As of today, there was no activity in or around the pond to install the Faircloth skimmer, stabilize deep rills in the slopes and they have some sort of makeshift device at the bottom of the overflow pipe to the POD. It looks like a band of erosion fabric and a pile of rocks. That is not what the BMP plan or the handbook calls for. The pond must be reconstructed to meet handbook requirements with a Faircloth screen in place at once. ADEM must take this into consideration when calculating any penalty associated with the NOV.

 

The concrete washout he mentions being “Moved onsite” is not onsite as far as I can see. It doesn’t matter. The plan stated a year ago that a concrete washout must be constructed. As of August 20 they had refused to follow the plan and were washing out concrete trucks in a public ROW. Where is the new washout located? That needs to be taken into account when ADEM considers the amount of penalty.

 

He makes no mention of the unpermitted discharge along the I-59 ROW as it still does today. This site has been dumping tons of mud out into the state ROW for months. No activity could be seen at that kocation as of this writing. No attempt to set up BMPs or mitigate the offsite sediment buildup. ADEM must consider this when making a penalty determination.

 

No stabilization ongoing.

The final comment in his report is as follows “Per discussion with McCrory Construction, the site will continue to be permanently stabilized on Monday, August 23rd. Everyone understanding of the expediency in which the State’s concerns need to be addressed and have already performed multiple BMP installations/alterations to prevent sediment from discharging downstream. It should be noted that although sediment is still leaving the site, it is leaving the site is less than what is show in the NOV dated August 3rd due to the improvements and permanent stabilization that is occurring on-site."

 

His sense of expediency is lost on me. Why are they not working on the issues in the NOV instead of installing more irrigation pipe? The lack of sincerity shown by the contractor is unacceptable. His comment about there being less mud leaving the site than before the NOV is false. I’d like him to show us any calculations he used and how he managed to come up with that comment. The new BMPs that were installed were not set up properly and now have gaps, holes and nonexistent BMPs. If a BMP is not properly installed it is simply solid waste.   ADEM should issue a stop work order at once until all items in the NOV, the response, and the original BMP plan are brought up to date and repaired.

 

I have included a PDF with photos ranging from July 22 until Aug 19^th when Mr. Duane Ensor visited the site. He claims that there is less sediment leaving than before the NOV. He hasn’t been here on a regular basis and hasn’t seen the place often enough to make that determination. I have been documenting flooding and offsite sediment and construction debris with every major rain event since July 22. The NOV was generated based on my complaint.

 

Sediment in wetland around 680 feet from the site

The NOV also noted that a mitigation plan and calculation for offsite sediment must be submitted to ADEM. He makes no mention of that document and must be compelled to present a plan ASAP. ADEM must take this into consideration when calculating any penalty associated with the NOV.