NC0043974_Site Visit_20170926

State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Environmental Staff Report
, Quality
To: ® NPDES Unit ❑ Non -Discharge Unit
Attn: Charles Weaver
From: Will Hart
Washington Regional Office
AIC, c)o439Iy
Application No.: (include permit #)
Facility name: Buckland Elementary School
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 RECEIVEDINCDEUDWR
1. Was a site visit conducted9 ❑ Yes or ® No
a. Date of site visit: SEP 2 6 2017
b. Site visit conducted by: Wate+ Quality
Permitting Section
c. Inspection report attached? ❑ Yes or ❑ No
d. Person contacted: and their contact information: (_) - ext.
e. Driving directions:
2 Discharge Point(s). BIMS location coordinates for facility outfall are inaccurate; following are closer to
location:
Latitude: 36.28.11 Longitude- 76.45.44
3. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: UT to Cole Creek (Lilley's Millpond)
Classification: C; NSW
River Basin and Subbasin No. Chowan River (03-01-01)
Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses -
H. EXISTING FACILITIES: MODIFICATION AND RENEWAL APPLICATIONS
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: The description in the current permit appears to be correct.
Proposed flow: 0.006 MGD
Current permitted flow- 0.006 MGD
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:
FORM. WQROSSR 04-14 Pagel of 3

4. Has the site changed in anyway that may affect the permit (e g, drainage added, new wells inside the compliance
boundary, new development, etc )9 ❑ 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
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- Issues revealed from self-monitoring are discussed
below in Iitem 14.
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 place9 The facility filter media was interfering with
UV disinfection, resulting in violations of fecal coliform limits for effluent. The permittee changed the filter
media to correct the coliform issues and are now experiencing condition of low Dissolved Oxygen. The Regional
Office inspector, who is also our technical consultant, is working through these issues with the facility
Have all compliance dates/conditions in the existing permit been satisfied9 ❑ 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).
III. REGIONAL OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS
1 Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permits ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, please explain -
FORM. WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 3

2 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 s to reasons• )
r
3. Signature of report preparer
Signature of regional supervisor.
Date -
IV. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
An inspection was not conducted for this permit review. The Regional Office inspector is scheduled to perform a
routine compliance inspection in October 2017 As noted in an earlier section of the staff reportthe Regional Office
inspector with the facility to correct violations of effluent limits for Dissolved Oxygen
FORM WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 3