WQ0021626_Staff Report_20240814

State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources

Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Staff Report

FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 1 of 4

To: NPDES Unit Non-Discharge Unit Application No.: WQ0021626
Attn: Alys Hannum Facility name: 119 Heritage Dr.
SFR

From: Chris Smith
Raleigh 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:
b. Site visit conducted by:
c. Inspection report attached? Yes or No
d. Person contacted: and their contact information:
e. Driving directions:
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. EXISTING FACILITIES: MODIFICATION AND RENEWAL APPLICATIONS
1. Are there appropriately certified Operators in Charge (ORCs) for the facility? Yes No N/A
ORC: Certificate #: Backup ORC: Certificate #:
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:
Proposed flow:
Current permitted flow:
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.)
Docusign Envelope ID: 32923932-C8AA-4A19-AC78-A6F70877736E
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 4
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:
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:
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:
17. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):

Docusign Envelope ID: 32923932-C8AA-4A19-AC78-A6F70877736E
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 4
III. 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

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: 32923932-C8AA-4A19-AC78-A6F70877736E
8/14/2024
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 4 of 4

IV. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS

Cassidy Kurtz from the RRO conducted a compliance evaluation inspection of this facility on August 26, 2022.
The system was compliant and in good working order at the time of that inspection. The property owner at the
time of the inspection had a contract with AQWA to conduct twice yearly monitoring and maintenance on the
system. When contacted, the new owner/applicant Gary Chang stated that he plans to continue the maintenance
agreement with AQWA. Mr. Chang was advised to contact Chris Smith at the RRO if he has any questions
regarding the system or permit.
Docusign Envelope ID: 32923932-C8AA-4A19-AC78-A6F70877736E