WQ0036942_Staff Report_20181219

nWR
State of North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Resources
WATER QUALITY REGIONAL OPERATIONS SECTION
Division of Water Resources NON -DISCHARGE APPLICATION REVIEW REQUEST FORM
November 26, 2018 NOV 9- 9 2018
To: RRO-WQROS: Rick BoIich / Danny Smith
From: Ranveer Katyal, Water Quality Permitting Section - Non -Discharge Branch Raleigh Regional Office
Permit Number: WQ0036942 Permit Type: Single -Family Residence Wastewater Irrigation
Applicant: Thomas S. and Karol A. Tucker
Owner Type: Individual
Facility Name: 5015 Mt. Moriah Rd. SFR
Signature Authority: Thomas S. and Karol A. Tucker
Address: 5015 Mt. Moriah Rd., Durham, NC 27707
Fee Category: Single -Family Residence Wastewater Irrigiaton
Comments/Other Information: Please contact Ranveer regarding the site visit.
U2
Project Type: Renewal
Owner in BIMS? Yes
Facility in BIMS? Yes
Title: Owners
County: Orange
Fee Amount: $0 -Renewal
Attached, you will find all information submitted in support of the above -referenced application for your review,
comment, and -or action. Within 45 calendar days, please take the following actions:
® Return this form completed. ® Return a completed staff report.
❑ Attach an Attachment B for Certification. ❑ Issue an Attachment B Certification.
When you receive this request form, please write your name and dates in the spaces below, make a copy of this sheet, and
return it to the appropriate Central Office Water Quality Permitting Section contact person listed above.
RO-WQROS Reviewer: '&uApt
Date: 1 Z -19 — 7ol
FORM: WQROSNDARR 09-I5
Page 1 of I

State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Environmental Staff Report
Quality
To: ❑ NPDES Unit ® Non -Discharge Unit
Attn: (Ranveer Katyal)
From: (Zack Thomas)
Raleigh Regional Office
Application No.: (WQ0036942)
Facility name: 5015 Mt. Moriah Rd: Tucker SFR
Orange County
Note: This form has been adapted from the non -discharge facilily staff rel2ort to document the review of both non -
discharge and NPDES permit applications andlor 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: 12119.'2018
b. Site visit conducted by: Zach Thomas, Erin Deck, Gary Kreiser, Ranveer Katyal
c. Inspection report attached? ® Yes or ❑ No
d. Person contacted: Thomas Tucker and their contact information: (91�9 451 - 9768 ext.
e. Driving directions:
2. Discharge Point(s):
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:
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 ❑ NIA
If no, please explain:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-I4 Page 1 of 5

6. Are the proposed application rates (e.g., hydraulic, nutrient) acceptable? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NIA
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 ❑ NIA
If no, explain and recommend any changes to the groundwater monitoring program:
9. For residuals, will seasonal or other restrictions be required? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NIA
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):
M. EXISTING FACILITIES: MODIFICATION AND RENEWAL APPLICATIONS
1. Are there appropriately certified Operators in Charge (ORCs) for the facility? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® NIA
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.)
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 ® NIA
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 ❑ NIA
If no, please explain:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 5

•11. Are the monitoring well coordinates correct in BIMS? ❑ Yes ❑ No Z NIA
If 1 no, ease complete the followiniz (ex and table if necessa )
:
Monitoring Well
Latitude
Longitude
o r „
o r rr
o , q
o r rr
o r a
r, r of
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 ® NIA
If no, please explain:
15. Are there any issues related to compliancelenforcement that should be resolved before issuing this permit?
❑ Yes ®No❑N/A
If yes, please explain:
16. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters:
I7. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 5

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
4-
3. List specific permit conditions recommended to be removed from the permit when issued:
4. List specific special conditions or compliance schedules recommended to be included in the permit when issued:
Condition
Reason
I __ I -
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: Pz I a
Signature of regional superyr:
Date:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 4 of 5

V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
The system was reviewed for pennit renewal. The system is a Clearstream serviced by McFarland and appears to be
in good condition. The irrigation area was well maintained and had no ponding of water. There was a fence around
the irrigation area. All setbacks seemed to be adequate and compliant with the permit. On the day of inspection. the
overall system appeared to be well maintained and was operation, as permitted.
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 5 of 5