WQ0029945_Staff Report_20240503

State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources

Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Staff Report

FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 1 of 6

To: NPDES Unit Non-Discharge Unit Application No.: WQ0029945
Attn: Erick Saunders Facility name: Summerhouse Wastewater Reclamation WWTF

From: Jordan Cocanower, Bryan Lievre
Wilmington Regional Office

Note: This form has been adapted from the non-discharge facility 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: 4/30/2024
b. Site visit conducted by: Bryan Lievre & Jordan Cocanower
c. Inspection report attached? Yes or No
d. Person contacted: and their contact information: ( ) - ext.
e. Driving directions: 349 Holly Ridge Rd, Holly Ridge, Onslow Co., NC
2. Discharge Point(s):
Latitude: Longitude:
Latitude: Longitude:
3. Receiving stream or affected surface waters:
Classification:
River Basin and Subbasin No.
Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses:
II. 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:
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:
DocuSign Envelope ID: DCDB995B-8D76-4F45-86AA-FF130FB12321
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 6
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
ORC: Kary Herndon Certificate #: 1012918 Backup ORC: Mark Young Certificate #:1001105
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: As described in the most recent permit.
Proposed flow: 180,142 GPD
Current permitted flow: 180,142 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.) It should be noted that at least two Pump and Haul Permits (WQ0044112 & WQ0044776) have been issued
by WiRO to allow ONWASA to recover wastewater from Summerhouse WWTF and treat and dispose of it at
Holly Ridge WWTF while repairs have been ongoing at Summerhouse WWTF to perform improvements
(membrane and blower replacements).
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.
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:

DocuSign Envelope ID: DCDB995B-8D76-4F45-86AA-FF130FB12321
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 6
11. Are the monitoring well coordinates correct in BIMS? Yes No N/A
If no, please complete the following (expand table if necessary):
Monitoring Well Latitude Longitude
○ ′ ″ - ○ ′ ″
○ ′ ″ - ○ ′ ″
○ ′ ″ - ○ ′ ″
○ ′ ″ - ○ ′ ″
○ ′ ″ - ○ ′ ″
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: Review Period: April 2023-April 2024. Four NOVs
were issued in this review period. These violations stem from both monthly average exceedances and daily limit
exceedances for total nitrogen and monthly averages for ammonia and total phosphorous. Total nitrogen seems to
be the most consistent problem, with both monthly average and daily limit exceedances being observed.
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? Yes, the system has been repairing and
replacing equipment and keeping the regional office informed.
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: NA
17. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): NA

DocuSign Envelope ID: DCDB995B-8D76-4F45-86AA-FF130FB12321
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 4 of 6
IV. REGIONAL OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? Yes or No
If yes, please explain: See Item V
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
See Item V

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
Issue
Deny (Please state reasons: )
6. Signature of report preparer:
Signature of regional supervisor:
Date:

DocuSign Envelope ID: DCDB995B-8D76-4F45-86AA-FF130FB12321
5/3/2024
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 5 of 6

V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
This report was conducted in response to a proposed major modification to Summerhouse Wastewater Reclamation
WWTP, WQ0029945. The following comments are based on information contained in the Major Modification
Application for the No-Discharge Permit of the: Summerhouse Wastewater Reclamation Facility (WQ0029945),
prepared by Wooten, dated March 2024 and the Engineering Calculations, SE Area WW Capacity Improvements,
Contract 1 – Transmission System, prepared by Wooten, dated March 2024, provided by Julia Byrd with DWI on
4/25/2024.

In general, the proposed activities are intended to allow treated effluent from the Summerhouse WWTP to be sent to
the Holly Ridge WWTP (WQ0019907) spray fields or to continue to be discharged to the existing infiltration basins
on-site. New infrastructure added as part of this modification:
o Install approximately 2,236 LF of 18-inch raw wastewater FM from the proposed Summerhouse Pump Station to
a temporary plug location on Holly Ridge Rd, east of Summerhouse Dr.;
o Install approximately 8,719 LF of 12-inch raw wastewater FM from proposed Holly Ridge Pump Station to
Summerhouse WWTF;
o Install approximately 7,540 LF of 8-inch treated effluent FM from the existing Summerhouse Reclaimed Pump
Station to the existing Holly Ridge WWTP Sprayfield Storage Pond;
o Construct proposed Holly Ridge Pump Station at the existing Holly Ridge WWTP with:
- Approximate 15,708 gallon wet well;
- Two (2) 1,400 gpm at 187 ft TDH submersible pumps with VFDs;
- A 1,400 gpm at 187 ft TDH back-up diesel pump;
- A 350 kW emergency diesel powered generator;
- Electrical building and telemetry equipment; and,
- Assoc piping, appurtenances, roads & site work.
o Construct proposed Summerhouse Pump Station at the existing Summerhouse WRF Site to include:
- A 1,616 gallon inlet splitter box;
- A two chamber wet well with total capacity of approximately 39,188 gallons;
- Three (3) 1,400 gpm at 134 ft TDH submersible pumps with VFDs;
- A 2,800 gpm at 135 ft TDH back-up diesel powered pump;
- A 450 kW emergency diesel powered generator;
- Odor control system;
- Electrical building and telemetry equipment; and,
- Assoc piping, appurtenances, roads & site work.
o Modify Summerhouse Reclaimed Water Pump Station to include:
- Replace existing pumps with two new 400 gpm at 53.9’ TDH reclaimed water pumps with VFDs and
associated equipment.

Comments/Requested Information:
- This comment is for the Non-Discharge Permitting Group - It seems as though some of the proposed activities
should be included within a permit modification for the Holly Ridge WWTF, Permit WQ001997, such as:
o The proposed Holly Ridge Pump Station; and,
o The proposed eight (8) inch diameter force main into the Holly Ridge storage lagoon.
- Please provide a copy of the Fast Track Sewer Extension Permit WQ0036845.
- The proposed 12 inch diameter line leaving the proposed Holly Ridge Pump Station terminates at a tapping
sleeve at Station 97+19 on Plan Sheet C-1.09. Please verify that the remainder of this line is present and
continues to the Summerhouse WWTF.
- Please provide manufacturer pump curves for the pumps in the new proposed Holly Ridge and
Summerhouse Pump Stations.
DocuSign Envelope ID: DCDB995B-8D76-4F45-86AA-FF130FB12321
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 6 of 6
- According to reported discharge information, the Holly Ridge WWTF had an average daily flow of 214,876
gallons per day (gpd) in 2023. This exceeds 90% of the 224,673 gpd permitted capacity for the disposal
system. It should be noted that the cited capacity included the use of all spray fields and it is our
understanding that Field 1/1D has not been constructed nor placed in-use, thereby further diminishing the
capacity of the disposal system. Please describe how the system intends to comply with 15A NCAC 2T
.0118.
- The Project Manual Specifications, Section 11307, Part 1.03 A. 2. and C. 2. should more clearly state two (2)
pumps are required with one (1) duty pump one (1) standby pump.
- Thrust blocking should be indicated as required at Station 12+59 on Plan Sheet C-1.01, Station 26+31 on Plan
Sheet C-1.02, Station 34+29 on Plan Sheet C-1.03, Station 96+66 on Plan Sheet C-1.09, Station 30+31 and
30+32 on Plan Sheet C-2.04, and Station 79+41 on Plan Sheet C-2.09, at a minimum.
- Plan sheets should depict high water and audible alarms as well as weatherproof signage at each of the pump
stations in accordance with the MDC and 15A NCAC 2T .0305(h).
- Protection of the basin sidewall (i.e., basin inlet protection) should be specified for the Existing Spray Field
Storage Pond on Plan Sheet C-2.09.

DocuSign Envelope ID: DCDB995B-8D76-4F45-86AA-FF130FB12321