WQ0021861_Staff Report_20200921

State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Environmental Staff Report
Quality
To: ❑ NPDES Unit ® Non -Discharge Unit Application No.: WQ0021861
Attn: Chloe.Lloyd(LNCDENR.gov Facility name: 9016 Noah Helms Rd. SFR
County: Union
From: [e-mail]
Mooresville Regional Office
Note: This form has been adapted from the non -discharge fg acili , staff report to document the review of both non -
discharge and NPDES permit applications and/or renewals. Please complete all sections as they are applicable.
I. GENERAL AND SITE VISIT INFORMATION
1. Was a site visit conducted? ❑ Yes or ® No
a. Date of site visit: Due to schedules and unforeseen circumstances, a "virtual" inspection was conducted on 9-
15-2020.
b. Site visit conducted by: Maria Schutte.
c. Inspection report attached? ❑ Yes or ® No, Sent in separate email; to be available in LaserFiche.
d. Person contacted: Ken Ackerman (Owner) by Email and their contact information: [phone] or
[e-mail]
e. Driving directions: From MRO travel to hwy 3 N; turn right onto Odell School Rd; Follow si=s at Poplar Tent
Rd. to Access I-85 S.; Exit onto 1-485 toward Matthews; Exit for Hwy-218 and turn left. At traffic circle take
lst right turn onto Mill Grove Road; Turn left onto Crowell Dairy Road, then right onto Noah Helms Road.
Property is on the left.
2. Discharge Point(s): NA — this is a non -discharge permit.
Latitude: Longitude:
Latitude: Longitude:
3. Receiving stream or affected surface waters:
Classification:
River Basin and Sub -basin No.
Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses:
11. PROPOSED FACILITIES: NEW APPLICATIONS
1. 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. Are site conditions (soils, depth to water table, etc.) consistent with the submitted reports? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
If no, please explain:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 1 of 4

4. Do the plans and site map 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 ❑ N/A
If no, please explain:
6. Are the proposed application rates (e.g., hydraulic, nutrient) acceptable? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
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 ❑ N/A
If no, explain and recommend any changes to the groundwater monitoring program:
9. For residuals, will seasonal or other restrictions be required? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
If yes, attach list of sites with restrictions (Certification B)
Describe the residuals handling and utilization scheme:
10. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters:
11. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):
III. EXISTING FACILITIES: MODIFICATION AND RENEWAL APPLICATIONS
1. Are there appropriately certified Operators in Charge (ORCs) for the facility? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
WWTP ORC: SI ORC: Certificate #: Owner works with Sid Gaskins (Water
Management of NC, LLC) for servicing and emergencrepairs.
2. Are the design, maintenance and operation of the treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal
system? ® Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain:
Description of existing facilities: Slightly unusual SFR system, as there are two homes (Owners' and daughters'),
ers'),
septic tanks that gravity flow to the peat filters and chlorine tablet disinfection with a pump to the drip irri ag tion
field. This is the only SFR permit in MRO with a wet -weather lagoon, which the owner has repeatedly stated is
an unnecessary expense, as he rarely sees any water in it.
Proposed flow:
Current permitted flow: 600 gpd
Explain 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 compliance
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:
6. Are the existing application rates (e.g., hydraulic, nutrient) still acceptable? ® Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain:
7. Is the existing groundwater monitoring program adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, explain and recommend any changes to the groundwater monitoring program:
8. 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 has a waiver from neighboring property (parcel ID#
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 4

08255013) for reduced property line setback. Mr. Ackerman said his neighbor has not changed; however, search
on Union County GIS, shows a property change/sale?) from Wesley & Emily Breece to Donald and Victoria
Breece. This propertgppears to have been part of an estate for the past several years and ownership seems to
have changed within the Breece family. MRO will leave it to CO to determine if an updated waiver is necessary
9. Is the description of the facilities as written in the existing permit correct? ® Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain:
10. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, please explain:
11. Are the monitoring well coordinates correct in BIMS? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, please complete the following ex and table if necessary):
Monitoring Well
Latitude
Longitude
O / //
O / 11
O l 11
O I 11
O l 11
O / 11
O I //
O I //
O I //
O I //
12. Has a review of all self -monitoring data been conducted (e.g., DMR, NDMR, NDAR, GW)? ❑ Yes or ❑ No
Please summarize any findings resulting from this review: This a SFR permit w/no reporting_ required.
Provide input to help the permit writer evaluate any requests for reduced monitoring, if applicable.
13. Are there any permit changes needed in order to address ongoing BIMS violations? ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, please explain:
14. Check all that apply:
® No compliance issues ❑ Current enforcement action(s) ❑ Currently under JOC
❑ Notice(s) of violation ❑ Currently under SOC ❑ Currently under moratorium
Please explain and attach any documents that may help clarify answer/comments (i.e., NOV, NOD, etc.)
If the facility has had compliance problems during the permit 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:
15. Are there any issues related to compliance/enforcement that should be resolved before issuing this permit?
❑ Yes ®No❑N/A
If yes, please explain:
16. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: ND-SFR WWI system could have residual chlorine, fecal and
nitrogen compounds. This system design allowed for placement of the drip field near a drainage ditch that
could potentially run offsite with storm water if there were a discharge.
17. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 4

IV. REGIONAL OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, please explain:
2. List any items that you would like the NPDES Unit or Non -Discharge Unit Central Office to obtain through an
additional information request:
Item
Reason
Updated Waiver ?
See comments in item III.8. above.
Wet -weather Lagoon
questions.
See additional comments under V. below.
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
❑ Hold, pending review of draft permit by regional office
® Issue upon receipt of needed additional information (Only, if new waiver is needed.)
® Issue
❑ Deny (Please state reasons: )
6. Signature of report preparer: Maria Schutte — Se temberl8th 2020 D.�.S; ned b
Signature of regional supervisor: I A-,-Xuv H P4-a,,.
Date: 9.21.2 0 2 0 F161 FB69AMUA3...
V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
A
W00021861_20181105_Repairs-Email-RE External RE Ackerman SFR.msg
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 4 of 4