The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNCS000397_Newton EPA Audit Report_20181213 CITY OF NEWTON, NC MUNICIPAL SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEM (MS4) PROGRAM INSPECTION REPORT NEWTON, NORTH CAROLINA 76 North Main Avenue Newton, NC, 28658 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Energy, Mineral & Land Resources Stormwater Program 512 N. Salisbury Street, 9th floor 1612 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699‐1612 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street SW Atlanta, GA 30303‐8963 MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 i (This page intentionally left blank) MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Inspection Details .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Permittee Information .................................................................................................................................. 2 Supporting Documents ................................................................................................................................. 2 Program Implementation, Documentation, & Assessment .......................................................................... 3 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE) ........................................................................................ 6 Post‐Construction Site Runoff Controls ........................................................................................................ 9 Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations ................................................. 12 Site Visit Evaluation: Municipal Facility No. 1 ............................................................................................. 15 Site Visit Evaluation: Municipal Facility No. 2 ............................................................................................. 17 Site Visit Evaluation: Municipal Facility No. 3 ............................................................................................. 20 Site Visit Evaluation: Post‐Construction Stormwater Control Measure No. 1 ............................................ 22 Site Visit Evaluation: Post‐Construction Stormwater Control Measure No. 2 ............................................ 24 Appendix A: Supporting Documents Appendix B: Photograph Log This inspection consisted of an evaluation of program compliance with the issued permit and implementation of the approved Stormwater Management Plan. This inspection report does not include a review of all program components. There may be additional program deficiencies in addition to those noted. The permittee is required to assess program progress and permit compliance, and to implement the approved Stormwater Management Plan in accordance with the issued permit. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 iii This page intentionally left blank MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 1 of 25 Inspection Details Inspection ID Number: SW‐NCS000397‐12/11/2018 Inspection Date(s): December 11, 2018 Minimum Control Measures Evaluated: ☒Program Implementation ☐Public Education & Outreach ☐Public Involvement and Participation ☒Illicit Discharge Detection & Elimination ☐Construction Site Runoff Controls ☒Post‐Construction Site Runoff Controls ☒Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations ☐Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) Field Site Visits: ☒Municipal Facilities. Number visited: 3 ☐MS4 Outfalls. Number visited: 0 ☐Construction Sites. Number visited: 0 ☒ Post‐Construction Stormwater Runoff Controls. Number visited: 2 ☐ Other: ________________________________. Number visited: 0 ☐ Other: ________________________________. Number visited: 0 Inspector(s) Conducting Inspection Name, Title Organization Sean Ireland, Stormwater Enforcement Workgroup Lead EPA Region 4 Jake Albright, EPA Contractor PG Environmental Collin Mummert, EPA Contractor PG Environmental Jeanette Powell, MS4 Program Coordinator North Carolina Dept of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ), Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources (DEMLR) Alaina Morman, Environmental Specialist NCDEQ, DEMLR Brandon Wise, Environmental Specialist NCDEQ, DEMLR Kenny Llywelyn, Environmental Specialist NCDEQ, DEMLR Lily Kay, Environmental Specialist NCDEQ, DEMLR Seth Titley, Environmental Specialist NCDEQ, DEMLR Inspection Report Author: Jake Albright Signature__________________________________________ Date: March 12, 2019 Inspection Report Author: Collin Mummert Signature__________________________________________ Date: March 12, 2019 MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 2 of 25 Permittee Information MS4 Permittee Name: City of Newton, NC (hereinafter, the City) NPDES Permit Number: NCS000397 (hereinafter, the Permit) MS4 Permittee Address: 401 N. Main Avenue, Newton, NC 28658 Date of Last MS4 Inspection/Audit: Not Applicable (N/A) Co‐permittee(s), if applicable: N/A Primary MS4 Representatives Participating in Inspection Name, Title Organization Alex Fulbright, Assistant Planning Director City of Newton Dennis Falder, Jr., Assistant Public Works and Utilities Director City of Newton MS4 Receiving Waters Waterbody Impairments Clark Creek (Shooks Lake), 11‐129‐5‐(0.3)b 303(d) (IR=5): Ecological/Biological Integrity Benthos Note: This list only includes waterbodies with 303(d) impairments that receive discharges from the permitted MS4. Supporting Documents Number Document Title Provided Prior to/During/After Inspection: 1 City of Newton Stormwater Management Program (hereinafter, Stormwater Plan) Prior to Inspection 2 City of Newton Phase II Stormwater Ordinance (Chapter 87 of City Code) Prior to Inspection 3 City of Newton Administrative Manual for the Phase II Stormwater Ordinance After Inspection 4 City of Newton Stormwater Operation and Maintenance Plan After Inspection 5 City of Newton Facilities Maps Prior to Inspection Note: Refer to Appendix A: Supporting Documents for copies of the above documents. These supporting documents do not represent all MS4 program documentation provided to the inspection team by City representatives. EPA Region 4 maintains all documentation provided to the inspection team by City representatives. Additionally, the photographs contained in Appendix B: Photograph Log and referenced throughout this report do not represent all photographs taken by the inspection team during the inspection. EPA Region 4 maintains all photographs taken by the inspection team. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 3 of 25 Program Implementation, Documentation, & Assessment Permit Citation Program Requirement Status Supporting Doc No. II.A.1 Staffing and Funding The permittee maintained adequate funding and staffing to implement and manage the provisions of the Stormwater Plan and meet all requirements of the permit. No ‐‐ The Stormwater Plan identifies a specific position(s) responsible for the overall coordination, implementation, and revision to the Plan. Yes 1 Responsibilities for all components of the Stormwater Plan are documented and position(s) assignments provided. No 1 The permittee is current on payment of invoiced administering and compliance monitoring fees. Yes 1 Comments City representatives estimated that the MS4 program is afforded less than 0.5 dedicated full‐time equivalent (FTE) staff and funding of approximately $750,000 per year. The program is funded mostly through general funds; however, the Assistant Public Works and Utilities Director position is funded through the Public Works Enterprise fund. City representatives, as well as observations made by the inspection team, indicate the budget and staff is stretched too thin to conduct activities such as proactive inspections and oversight activities. City representatives also indicated the City could benefit from a stormwater fee. The City’s Stormwater Plan includes general language to meet the requirements of the permit; however, there are elements of the Stormwater Plan that the City had not implemented. The Stormwater Plan identifies Alex Fulbright and Dusty Wentz as the points of contact for the stormwater program administration; however, the Stormwater Plan does not document their roles and responsibilities within the program. As stated above, the City is not accomplishing many of the proactive elements (e.g., inspections and maintenance) of implementing the MS4 program because of limited budget and staff. II.A.2 Stormwater Plan Implementation and Evaluation The permittee evaluated the performance and effectiveness of the program components at least annually. No ‐‐ If yes, the permittee used the results of the evaluation to modify the program components as necessary to accomplish the intent of the Stormwater Program. n/a ‐‐ Did the permitted MS4 discharges cause or contribute to non‐attainment of an applicable water quality standards? ‐‐ ‐‐ If yes, did the permittee expand or better tailor its BMPs accordingly? ‐‐ ‐‐ Comments City representatives stated that they update the Stormwater Plan every five years as part of the permit renewal process. The inspection team did not assess non‐attainment or evaluate any water quality standards as part of the inspection. II.A.3 Keeping the Stormwater Plan Up to Date The permittee kept the Stormwater Plan up to date. Partial 1 The permittee notified DEMLR of any updates to the Stormwater Plan. Yes ‐‐ Comments (indicate the date of latest Stormwater Plan and describe the nature of any updates, if applicable). City representatives stated that they update the Stormwater Plan every five years; however, the current Stormwater Plan (2016) describes elements of the stormwater program that the City has not yet begun to implement. For example, the City has not yet developed an inventory of major MS4 outfalls and does not conduct dry weather screening. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 4 of 25 Program Implementation, Documentation, & Assessment Permit Citation Program Requirement Status Supporting Doc No. II.A.4 Availability of the Stormwater Plan The permittee kept an up‐to‐date version of its Stormwater Plan available to the Division and the public online. No ‐‐ The online materials included ordinances, or other regulatory mechanisms, or a list identifying the ordinances, or other regulatory mechanisms, providing the legal authority necessary to implement and enforce the requirements of the permit. Yes 2 Comments The City’s website includes a link to the City’s Phase II Stormwater Ordinance (see II.D.2.b Legal Authorities, below); however, the Stormwater Plan is not available to the public online. The City provided the updated Stormwater Plan to the inspection team prior to the inspection. II.A.5 Stormwater Plan Modifications Did DEMLR require a modification to the Stormwater Plan? No ‐‐ If yes, did the permittee complete the modifications in accordance with the established deadline? n/a ‐‐ Comments NC DEMLR did not require a modification to the Stormwater Plan. The City updates the Stormwater Plan every five years as part of the MS4 permit renewal process and the latest Stormwater Plan updates were completed in 2016. II.A.6 Sharing Responsibility Are any control measures implemented by an entity other than the permittee? No ‐‐ If yes, is there a written agreement in place? No ‐‐ Comments The City does not maintain agreements with outside contractors for implementation of any MS4 program elements. City representatives stated that they are planning to engage with the Western Piedmont Council of Governments (COG) in the future to assist with implementing public outreach and education. II.A.7 Written Procedures The permittee maintained written procedures for implementing the six minimum control measures. Yes ‐‐ Written procedures identified specific action steps, schedules, resources and responsibilities for implementing the six minimum measures. Partial ‐‐ Comments The Stormwater Plan contains written procedures, including action steps and responsibilities of City representatives for implementing the six minimum measures. However, the City has not implemented many of the action items described in the Stormwater Plan. III. A Program Documentation The permittee maintained documentation of all program components including, but not limited to, inspections, maintenance activities, educational programs, implementation of BMPs, enforcement actions, etc., on file for a period of five years. No ‐‐ Comments There was an overall lack of documentation relating to the City’s stormwater program (e.g., no documentation of inspections on public or private facilities, no documentation of illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE) activities or outfall inspections, no training records). The City maintains a citizen request and work order system for complaints and maintenance/repair activities, respectively; however, neither citizen requests nor work orders are categorized or otherwise identified as relating to the MS4 program. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 5 of 25 Program Implementation, Documentation, & Assessment Permit Citation Program Requirement Status Supporting Doc No. III.B Annual Report Submittal The permittee submitted annual reports to the Department within twelve months from the effective date of the permit. No ‐‐ The permittee submitted subsequent annual reports every twelve months from the scheduled date of the first submittal. No ‐‐ The Annual Reports included appropriate information to accurately describe the progress, status, and results of the permittee’s Stormwater Plan, including, but not limited to the following: 1. A detailed description of the status of implementation of the Stormwater Plan as a whole. This will include information on development and implementation of each major component of the Stormwater Plan for the past year and schedules and plans for the year following each report. No ‐‐ 2. An adequate description and justification of any proposed changes to the Stormwater Plan. This will include descriptions and supporting information for the proposed changes and how these changes will impact the Stormwater Plan (results, effectiveness, implementation schedule, etc.). No ‐‐ 3. Documentation of any necessary changes to programs or practices for assessment of management measures implemented through the Stormwater Plan. No ‐‐ 4. A summary of data accumulated as part of the Stormwater Plan throughout the year along with an assessment of what the data indicates in light of the Stormwater Plan. No ‐‐ 5. An assessment of compliance with the permit, information on the establishment of appropriate legal authorities, inspections, and enforcement actions. No ‐‐ 6. A summary of past year activities, including where applicable, specific quantities achieved and summaries of enforcement actions. No ‐‐ 7. A description of the effectiveness of each program component. No ‐‐ 8. Planned activities and changes for the next reporting period, for each program component or activity. No ‐‐ 9. Fiscal analysis. No ‐‐ Comments The latest MS4 annual report that the City had submitted was in 2010. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 6 of 25 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE) Permit Citation Program Requirement Status Supporting Doc No. II.D.2.a IDDE Program The permittee maintained a written IDDE Program. Yes 1 If yes, the written program includes provisions for program assessment and evaluation. Yes 1 Comments The Stormwater Plan includes procedures for implementing an IDDE program through dry weather screening and includes protocols for evaluation and revision of the plan, as necessary. However, the City has not been implementing the IDDE procedures and has not participated in debriefing meetings (described in the Stormwater Plan) to evaluate the effectiveness of the IDDE program. City representatives stated that they are not conducting proactive outfall screening and inspections and that all illicit discharge activities are complaint‐driven. II.D.2.b Legal Authorities The permittee maintained an IDDE ordinance or other regulatory mechanism(s) that provides the legal authority to prohibit illicit connections and discharges to the MS4. Yes 2 If yes, the ordinance applies throughout the corporate limits of the permittee. [Permit Part I.D] Yes 2 Comments The City provided their Phase II Stormwater Ordinance (dated 2007), which was developed based on the model ordinance available through the University of North Carolina (UNC) Environmental Finance Center, prior to the inspection. The ordinance is also available through the City’s website. The ordinance provides the legal authority for the City to prohibit illicit connections and discharges to the MS4. II.D.2.c Storm Sewer System Map The permittee maintained a current map showing major outfalls and receiving streams. Partial ‐‐ Comments The City has been developing a geographic information system‐based (GIS‐based) map of the MS4 infrastructure since 2003. The current map identifies the City’s catch basins, MS4 piping, and receiving waters; however, City representatives indicated that they are still identifying MS4 elements in the field that were not previously included on the map. The inspection team was able to infer the locations of outfalls by identifying where stormwater pipes intersected with receiving waters on the City’s MS4 map; however, the map did not include identifiers or other information for all major or non‐major outfalls within corporate limits. II.D.2.d Dry Weather Flow Program The permittee maintained a program for conducting dry weather flow field observations in accordance with written procedures. No ‐‐ Comments The City was not conducting dry weather screening or outfall inspections, as prescribed in the Stormwater Plan. II.D.2.e Investigation Procedures The permittee maintained written procedures for conducting investigations of identified illicit discharges. Yes 1 Comments The Stormwater Plan includes written procedures for conducting visual and field investigations of identified illicit discharges; however, City representatives stated that they do not always implement the procedures (e.g., field sampling). MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 7 of 25 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE) Permit Citation Program Requirement Status Supporting Doc No. II.D.2.f Track and Document Investigations For each case of an illicit discharge or potential illicit discharge, the permittee documented and tracked the following: 1. The date(s) the illicit discharge was observed No ‐‐ 2. The results of the investigation No ‐‐ 3. Any follow‐up of the investigation No ‐‐ 4. The date the investigation was closed No ‐‐ Comments The City does not maintain documentation of illicit discharge investigations or remediation. City representatives indicated that most communication regarding cleanup and abatement is verbal and some may be email; however, City representatives stated that in at least one past case, the City issued a formal letter when remediation of the illicit discharge was not completed within a reasonable timeframe. The City tracks maintenance activities through a work order system; however, there is no centralized location for documenting illicit discharge events, and work orders are not categorized or otherwise identified as relating to the MS4 program. II.D.2.g Employee Training The permittee implemented and documented a training program for appropriate municipal staff who, as part of their normal job responsibilities, may come into contact with or otherwise observe an illicit discharge or illicit connection. No ‐‐ Comments The City does not implement an IDDE training program for municipal staff. The City only provides brief introductions to the stormwater program as part of the City’s customer service initiative, which requires all City employees to meet with representatives from every City department. City representatives indicated that all City employees are instructed to report any observations made in the field relating to stormwater to the Assistant Planning Director. Administrative staff receiving customer complaints do not receive training related to illicit discharges. II.D.2.h Public Education The permittee informed public employees of hazards associated with illegal discharges and improper disposal of waste. Partial ‐‐ The permittee informed businesses of hazards associated with illegal discharges and improper disposal of waste. Partial ‐‐ The permittee informed the general public of hazards associated with illegal discharges and improper disposal of waste. No ‐‐ Comments City representatives explained that all City employees receive a brief introduction to the stormwater program through an internal customer service initiative, where different departments interact to learn about one another’s job functions; however, the verbal introduction does not emphasize the hazards associated with illicit discharges. For educating new businesses, City representatives indicated that the City holds preliminary meetings to ensure all wastewater is discharged appropriately. City representatives stated that information on the stormwater program in general is distributed through the City’s website, Facebook page, and at some local events. The inspection team did not observe any obvious public material on the stormwater program on the City’s website or Facebook page related to illicit discharges or the stormwater program in general. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 8 of 25 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE) Permit Citation Program Requirement Status Supporting Doc No. II.D.2.i Public Reporting Mechanism The permittee promoted, publicized, and facilitated a reporting mechanism for the public to report illicit discharges. Partial ‐‐ The permittee promoted, publicized, and facilitated a reporting mechanism for staff to report illicit discharges. Partial ‐‐ The permittee established and implemented citizen request response procedures. Yes ‐‐ Comments The City receives public complaints at City Hall via phone call or through the City’s online complaint portal; however, the City does not specifically categorize or document complaints as stormwater‐related. City representatives indicated that complaints they receive generate work orders if City staff are required to perform maintenance or otherwise remediate an issue. Citizen complaints are not categorized or otherwise identified as relating to stormwater and the ability to develop an inventory of stormwater‐related complaints would depend on the strength of information included in the complaint. II.D.2.j Enforcement The permittee implemented a mechanism to track the issuance of notices of violation and enforcement actions administered by the permittee. Partial ‐‐ If yes, the mechanism includes the ability to identify chronic violators for initiation of actions to reduce noncompliance. Partial ‐‐ Comments City representatives can issue notices of violation (NOVs), if needed; however, the City stated that they had not issued any stormwater‐related enforcement actions as of the date of the inspection. The City also tracks code enforcement issues; however, City representatives indicated that they do not categorize or identify the code enforcement issues as stormwater‐related. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 9 of 25 Post‐Construction Site Runoff Controls Permit Citation Program Requirement Status Supporting Doc No. II.F.2.a Legal Authority The permittee maintained an ordinance or other regulatory mechanism designed to meet the objectives of the Post‐Construction Site Runoff Controls Stormwater Management Program. Yes 2 If yes, the ordinance applies throughout the corporate limits of the permittee. [Permit Part I.D] Yes 2 The permittee has the authority to review designs and proposals for new development and redevelopment to determine whether adequate stormwater control measures will be installed, implemented, and maintained. Yes 2 The permittee has the authority to request information such as stormwater plans, inspection reports, monitoring results, and other information deemed necessary to evaluate compliance with the Post‐Construction Stormwater Management Program. Yes 2 The permittee has the authority to enter private property for the purpose of inspecting at reasonable times any facilities, equipment, practices, or operations related to stormwater discharges. Yes 2 Comments The City’s Phase II Stormwater Ordinance authorizes the City to review plans, request information, and enter private property to conduct inspections of post‐construction stormwater control measures (SCMs). The City developed their Phase II Stormwater Ordinance in accordance with the UNC Environmental Finance Center model ordinance. II.F.2.c Plan Reviews The permittee conducted site plan reviews of all new development and redeveloped sites that disturb greater than or equal to one acre (including sites that disturb less than one acre that are part of a larger common plan of development or sale). Yes 2, 3 If yes, the site plan reviews addressed how the project applicant meets the performance standards. Yes 2, 3 If yes, the site plan reviews addressed how the project will ensure long‐term maintenance. Yes 2, 3 Comments The City’s Assistant Planning Director is responsible for reviewing site plans for adherence to post‐construction stormwater control design and performance standards. The City holds pre‐application meetings with developers to discuss stormwater management system concept plans and requirements for building permit applications. The City’s Phase II Stormwater Ordinance requires developers to execute an operation and maintenance (O&M) agreement with the City prior to being issued any permit for development or redevelopment. The City relies on the City of Newton Administrative Manual for the Phase II Stormwater Ordinance for guidance on plan reviews. II.F.2.d Inventory of Projects The permittee maintained an inventory of projects with post‐construction structural stormwater control measures installed and implemented at new development and redeveloped sites. No ‐‐ The inventory included both public and private sector sites located within the permittee’s corporate limits that are covered by its post‐construction ordinance requirements. No ‐‐ Comments The City does not maintain an inventory of projects with post‐construction SCMs installed and implemented within corporate limits. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 10 of 25 Post‐Construction Site Runoff Controls Permit Citation Program Requirement Status Supporting Doc No. II.F.2.e Deed Restrictions and Protective Covenants The permittee provided mechanisms such as recorded deed restrictions and protective covenants that ensure development activities will maintain the project consistent with approved plans. Yes 2 Comments Sections 87‐18(c) and 87‐19(f) of the City’s Phase II Stormwater Ordinance authorizes the City to establish an enforceable restriction on property usage, such as recorded deed restrictions or protective covenants, prior to the approval of a stormwater permit, to ensure that future development and redevelopment on both high‐density and low‐density projects maintains the site consistent with approved project plans. However, City representatives indicated that the City has not implemented any such mechanisms to date. II.F.2.f Mechanism to Require Long‐ term Operation and Maintenance The permittee implemented or required an operation and maintenance plan for the long‐term operation of the SCMs required by the program. Partial 2, 4 The operation and maintenance plan required the owner of each SCM to perform and maintain a record of annual inspections of each SCM. Yes 2, 4 Annual inspection of permitted structural SCMs are required to be performed by a qualified professional. Yes 2 Comments The City’s Phase II Stormwater Ordinance requires post‐construction SCM owners to execute an O&M agreement prior to the issuance of any permit for development or redevelopment. The stormwater ordinance also requires SCM owners to have qualified professionals complete annual inspections and submit the results to City representatives. However, City representatives indicated that they do not follow up to ensure owners have developed an O&M plan. City representatives also said that they have never received or reviewed any annual inspection reports for post‐construction SCMs. II.F.2.g Inspections The permittee conducted and documented inspections of each project site covered under performance standards, at least one time during the permit term. No ‐‐ Before issuing a certificate of occupancy or temporary certificate of occupancy, the permittee conducted a post‐construction inspection to verify that the permittee’s performance standards have been met or a bond is in place to guarantee completion. Partial ‐‐ The permittee documented and maintained records of inspection findings. No ‐‐ The permittee documented and maintained records of enforcement actions. No ‐‐ Comments City representatives indicated that the City conducts inspections of post‐construction SCMs throughout the construction process; however, the City does not maintain documentation of the inspections conducted prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. At the time of the EPA inspection, the City stated that they had not taken any enforcement actions against post‐construction SCM owners and indicated that the City’s primary enforcement mechanism would be to withhold the certificate of occupancy until the SCM is constructed to design specifications. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 11 of 25 Post‐Construction Site Runoff Controls Permit Citation Program Requirement Status Supporting Doc No. II.F.2.h Educational Materials and Training for Developers The permittee made available through paper or electronic means, ordinances, post‐ construction requirements, design standards checklists, and other materials appropriate for developers. Note: New materials may be developed by the permittee, or the permittee may use materials adopted from other programs and adapted to the permittee’s new development and redevelopment program. Partial ‐‐ Comments (If the permittee has adopted materials from other programs, indicate here which materials they are using) The City’s Phase II Stormwater Ordinance is available on the “Planning Forms and Documents” page on the City’s website. The stormwater ordinance references the NC DEQ stormwater design manual approved for use in Phase II jurisdictions; however, there are no links or direction provided for where to find the latest published edition. City representatives indicated the applicable materials are provided to developers as part of the pre‐construction meetings. The City refers developers to long‐term O&M plan development templates available through the NC DEQ website. II.F.2.i Enforcement The permittee tracked the issuance of notices of violation and enforcement actions. No ‐‐ If yes, the tracking mechanism included the ability to identify chronic violators for initiation of actions to reduce noncompliance. n/a ‐‐ Comments The City had not taken formal enforcement actions against owners of post‐construction SCMs and did not have a mechanism for tracking such enforcement actions. The City has the authority to issue NOVs; however, City representatives stated that they have yet to issue an NOV for the incomplete or improper installation of a post‐construction SCM. The City was not conducting SCM inspections after installation and was not enforcing the submittal of annual inspection reports from SCM owners. II.F.3.d Nutrient Sensitive Waters Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02H .0150, for areas draining to Nutrient Sensitive Waters, the permittee used SCMs that reduce nutrient loading in order to meet local program requirements n/a ‐‐ If yes, the permittee also still incorporated the stormwater controls required for the project's density level. n/a ‐‐ Documentation shall be provided where it is not feasible to use stormwater control measures (SCMs) that reduce nutrient loading. In areas where the Department has approved a Nutrient Sensitive Water Urban Stormwater Management Program, the provisions of that program fulfill the nutrient loading reduction requirement. n/a ‐‐ Comments There are no areas within the City’s corporate limits that drain to Nutrient Sensitive Waters. II.F.3.e Design Volume The permittee ensured that the design volumes of SCMs take into account the runoff at build out from all surfaces draining to the system. Yes ‐‐ Where “streets” convey stormwater, the permittee designed SCMs to be sized to treat and control stormwater runoff from all surfaces draining to the SCM including streets, driveways, and other impervious surfaces. Yes ‐‐ Comments The City’s Phase II Stormwater Ordinance follows the NC DEQ Design Manual, which requires the design volume of SCMs to account for the runoff at build out from all surfaces draining to the system. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 12 of 25 Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Permit Citation Program Requirement Status Supporting Doc No. II.G.2.a Facility Inventory The permittee maintained a current inventory of facilities and operations owned and operated by the permittee with the potential for generating polluted stormwater runoff. No 5 Comments The City’s MS4 infrastructure GIS map includes City‐owned properties; however, the City does not maintain an inventory of all City‐ owned properties that have the potential to generate polluted runoff. The City has at least two facilities that have failed to obtain industrial stormwater permits from NC DEQ: the public works yard and the wastewater treatment plant. Additionally, the City’s industrial stormwater permit for the public works yard was expired at the time of the inspection. II.G.2.b Operation and Maintenance (O&M) for Facilities The permittee maintained and implemented an O&M program for municipally owned and operated facilities with the potential for generating polluted stormwater runoff. No ‐‐ If yes, the O&M program specifies the frequency of inspections. n/a ‐‐ If yes, the O&M program specifies the frequency of routine maintenance requirements. n/a ‐‐ If yes, the permittee evaluated the O&M program annually and updated it as necessary. n/a ‐‐ Comments The City had not developed or implemented a written O&M program for municipal facilities. City representatives have also not been conducting inspections of City‐owned properties. II.G.2.c Spill Response Procedures The permittee had written spill response procedures for municipal operations. Yes ‐‐ Comments The City’s spill response procedures for municipal operations are described in the Stormwater Plan. The City’s fire department is described as the first respondent and all fire department staff are trained to the first responder operations level for spill response, as defined by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in 29 C.F.R. section 1910.120(q)(6)(ii). City representatives also indicated there is a City property leased to Verizon for a generator facility that requires a site‐specific spill prevention, control, and countermeasure (SPCC) plan. II.G.2.d Streets, Roads, and Public Parking Lots Maintenance The permittee evaluated, based on cost and the estimated quantity of pollutants removed, existing and new BMPs annually that reduce polluted stormwater runoff from municipally‐owned streets, roads, and public parking lots within its corporate limits. No ‐‐ Comments The City’s street sweeper is equipped with a GPS enabling it to track miles swept. The City documents pollutant removal with load tickets when the debris is hauled away. However, the City was not using these metrics for evaluation of existing and new BMPs. The City collects and disposes of leaves at the City‐owned compost facility; however, the City is not tracking leaf collection metrics for evaluation of the stormwater program and annual reporting. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 13 of 25 Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Permit Citation Program Requirement Status Supporting Doc No. II.G.2.e O&M for Catch Basins and Conveyance Systems The permittee maintained and implemented an O&M program for the stormwater sewer system including catch basins and conveyance systems that it owns and maintains. Partial ‐‐ Comments The City does not maintain and implement a proactive O&M program for stormwater infrastructure. Rather, the City’s inspections and maintenance activities are primarily complaint‐based and reactive. City representatives stated that about 40 percent of the stormwater infrastructure in the City needs to be repaired, a portion of which has been included in larger scale capital improvement projects scheduled to occur within the next 10 years. II.G.2.f Structural Stormwater Controls The permittee maintained a current inventory of municipally‐owned or operated structural stormwater controls installed for compliance with the permittee’s post‐ construction ordinance. No ‐‐ Comments City representatives indicated that the City does not maintain a formal inventory of City‐owned SCMs; however, City representatives stated that there is only one City‐owned SCM, a pond facility at Fire Station No. 1. II.G.2.g O&M for Structural Stormwater Controls The permittee maintained and implemented an O&M program for municipally‐owned or maintained structural stormwater controls installed for compliance with the permittee’s post‐construction ordinance. No ‐‐ The O&M program specified the frequency of inspections and routine maintenance requirements. No ‐‐ The permittee documented inspections of all municipally‐owned or maintained structural stormwater controls. No ‐‐ The permittee inspected all municipally‐owned or maintained structural stormwater controls in accordance with the schedule developed by permittee. No ‐‐ The permittee documented maintenance of all municipally‐owned or maintained structural stormwater controls. No ‐‐ The permittee maintained all municipally‐owned or maintained structural stormwater controls in accordance with the schedule developed by permittee. No ‐‐ Comments The City has not developed and implemented a long‐term O&M plan for the pond located at Fire Station No. 1. The City has also not conducted inspections of the SCM. II.G.2.h Pesticide, Herbicide and Fertilizer Application Management The permittee ensured municipal employees are properly trained. Yes ‐‐ The permittee ensured contractors are properly trained. n/a ‐‐ The permittee ensured all permits, certifications, and other measures for applicators are followed. Yes ‐‐ Comments City representatives stated that pesticides were applied only by City employees with proper applicator licenses. The City does not employ private contractors for pesticide application. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 14 of 25 Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Permit Citation Program Requirement Status Supporting Doc No. II.G.2.i Staff Training The permittee implemented an employee training program for employees involved in implementing pollution prevention and good housekeeping practices. No ‐‐ Comments The City has not implemented an employee training program for all employees involved with implementing pollution prevention and good housekeeping practices. City employees at the public works yard and wastewater treatment plant are also required to receive stormwater training under their Industrial Stormwater General Permits. The City has not conducted this training for the public works yard employees and the City representatives did not specify if the training was provided for the wastewater operators. II.G.2.j Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning The permittee described and implemented measures that prevent or minimize contamination of stormwater runoff from all areas used for vehicle and equipment cleaning. Yes ‐‐ Comments City representatives indicated that all municipally‐owned vehicles are cleaned in the indoor washing bay located at the public works yard, except for police vehicles that are washed at the Police Depot on N. Ashe Avenue. During the site visit to the Police Depot, the inspection team was able to confirm that police vehicles are washed at the indoor bay in the facility’s maintenance garage (see the Site Visit Evaluation for Municipal Facility No. 3 below). MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 15 of 25 Site Visit Evaluation: Municipal Facility No. 1 Facility Name: City of Newton Old Public Works Facility Date and Time of Site Visit: 12/11/2018, 1:10 PM Facility Address: 208 East 5th Street Newton, NC 28658 Facility Type (Vehicle Maintenance, Landscaping, etc.): Equipment and Materials Storage Name of MS4 inspector(s): Alex Fulbright, Assistant Planning Director, City of Newton Most Recent MS4 Inspection (Date and Entity): None (see II.G.2.g above) Name(s) and Title(s) of Facility Representative(s) Present During the Site Visit: Name Title Dennis Falder, Jr. Assistant Public Works and Utilities Director Observations Facility Documentation/Training Does the facility have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or similar document? Is it facility‐specific? No, the facility does not have a SWPPP or similar document. What type of stormwater training do facility employees receive? How often? Facility employees do not receive stormwater training. Inspector Training/Knowledge What type of stormwater training does the MS4 inspector receive? How often? The City does not have dedicated MS4 inspectors and does not conduct routine inspections at municipal facilities. The Assistant Planning Director, who acted as the MS4 inspector during the site visit, has received limited stormwater training in the past but not on a routine basis. Did the MS4 inspector appear knowledgeable about Permit requirements for pollution prevention and good housekeeping? No. City representatives stated that the City does not conduct routine inspections of municipal facilities and has not developed or implemented any tools for doing so. Did the MS4 inspector appear knowledgeable about stormwater pollution prevention and good housekeeping? Partial. City representatives were able to identify some pollution prevention and good housekeeping issues at the facility but did not identify and document all areas of concern observed by the inspection team (detailed below). Inspection Procedures Does the MS4 inspector’s process include the use of a checklist or other standardized form? Obtain copy. No. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include taking photos? No. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include reviewing the facility’s SWPPP (or similar document)? N/A – the facility does not have a SWPPP. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include walking the entire facility and inspecting all points of discharge? No. The MS4 inspectors’ process focused on pollution source control and did not include an assessment of the facility perimeter, points of discharge, and receiving waters. The inspection team investigated stormwater ditches and catch basins on‐site to identify all outfalls and receiving waters. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 16 of 25 Site Visit Evaluation: Municipal Facility No. 1 Did the MS4 inspector miss any obvious areas of concern? If so, explain: Yes. See the notes section below for details. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include presenting the inspection findings to the facility contact? The City does not conduct routine inspections and does not have a formal process for inspecting municipal facilities. The Assistant Planning Director stated that if he would be the individual conducting the inspection, any findings would be relayed to the Assistant Public Works and Utilities Director. If public works staff observe issues while on the job, they would notify the Assistant Public Works and Utilities Director who would then be responsible for coordinating the appropriate corrective action. Inspection Results Did the facility inspection result in any corrective actions to be implemented? If so, for what issue(s)? City representatives were unable to conduct a full, documented inspection of the facility and will need to revisit the site after the City establishes a formalized inspection process. As such, corrective actions were not documented. If compliance corrective actions were identified, what timeline for correction/follow‐up was provided? City representatives verbally indicated that corrective actions identified by the inspection team would be addressed as soon as possible; however, City representatives did not formally document the observations and required corrective actions. Notes/Comments/Recommendations The inspection team observed the following while visiting the City of Newton’s Old Public Works Facility. The areas of concern were not documented by the City representatives and there was only verbal indication that the City would implement the corrective actions. 1. The site is mostly an unstabilized dirt lot (a portion of the upper lot is paved), which creates the potential for sediment to be transported into stormwater ditches and catch basins. The inspection team observed evidence of erosion and sediment transport in various areas throughout the site (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 1 and 2). 2. Rusting and deteriorated vehicles were housed in the storage facility (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 3 and 4) adjacent to the stormwater drainage ditch along the eastern edge of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 5 and 6). As such, the drainage ditch is susceptible to polluted runoff draining through the storage facility. 3. One uncontained and uncovered leaf debris stockpile (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 7) and two uncontained and uncovered sediment stockpiles (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 8) upgradient of the stormwater drainage ditch running along the eastern edge of the site. The inspection team observed evidence of stormwater runoff towards the ditch (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 9). 4. A storage shed located at the northwest corner of the site was completely flooded and filled with debris at the time of the site visit (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 10 and 11). It appeared to be flooded with stormwater and snowmelt from recent precipitation. An adjacent drainage ditch (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 12) conveyed stormwater runoff from the area of the flooded shed directly towards the outfall structure and receiving water at the northeast corner of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 13 and 14). 5. An uncovered dumpster containing trash bags and debris was located upgradient of the stormwater drainage ditch along the eastern edge of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 15). The inspection team observed signs of washed off rust from the dumpster and stormwater runoff from the dumpster towards the ditch (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 16 and 17). Recommendation: While on site, the inspection team discussed the implementation of BMPs including covering inactive stockpiles, covering dumpster and trash cans stored on‐site, and cleanup of the flooded storage shed. These areas of concern would have been noticed and addressed if the trained inspectors were conducting regular inspections of the site. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 17 of 25 Site Visit Evaluation: Municipal Facility No. 2 Facility Name: City of Newton Public Works Facility Date and Time of Site Visit: 12/11/2018, 3:20 PM Facility Address: 201 West 4th Street Newton, NC 28658 Facility Type (Vehicle Maintenance, Landscaping, etc.): Vehicle Maintenance and Equipment Storage Name of MS4 inspector(s): Alex Fulbright, Assistant Planning Director, City of Newton Most Recent MS4 Inspection (Date and Entity): None (see II.G.2.g above) Name(s) and Title(s) of Facility Representative(s) Present During the Site Visit: Name Title Dennis Falder, Jr. Assistant Public Works and Utilities Director Observations Facility Documentation/Training Does the facility have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or similar document? Is it facility‐specific? No, the facility does not have a SWPPP or similar document. The facility is required to have coverage under a NC DEQ industrial stormwater permit (which requires a SWPPP); however, the facility’s permit was expired at the time of the inspection. What type of stormwater training do facility employees receive? How often? Facility employees do not currently receive stormwater training. Inspector Training/Knowledge What type of stormwater training does the MS4 inspector receive? How often? The City does not have dedicated MS4 inspectors and does not conduct routine inspections at municipal facilities. The Assistant Planning Director, who acted as the MS4 inspector during the site visit, has received limited stormwater training in the past but not on a routine basis. Did the MS4 inspector appear knowledgeable about Permit requirements for pollution prevention and good housekeeping? No. City representatives stated that the facility does not maintain a SWPPP, which is a requirement of the NC DEQ industrial stormwater permit. As noted above, the facility’s permit was expired at the time of the inspection. Did the MS4 inspector appear knowledgeable about stormwater pollution prevention and good housekeeping? Partial. City representatives were able to identify some pollution prevention and good housekeeping issues at the facility but did not identify and document all areas of concern observed by the inspection team (detailed below). Inspection Procedures Does the MS4 inspector’s process include the use of a checklist or other standardized form? Obtain copy. No. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include taking photos? No. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include reviewing the facility’s SWPPP (or similar document)? N/A – the facility does not have a SWPPP. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 18 of 25 Site Visit Evaluation: Municipal Facility No. 2 Does the MS4 inspector’s process include walking the entire facility and inspecting all points of discharge? No. The City does not conduct routine inspections at the facility for stormwater and there is no formal process. During the inspection, City representatives focused on pollution source controls and did not assess the facility perimeter, points of discharge, or receiving waters. The inspection team identified that all the onsite stormwater drains to the catch basins at the south end of the facility and to an outfall structure southwest of the site across West 1st Street. Did the MS4 inspector miss any obvious areas of concern? If so, explain: Yes. See the notes section below for details. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include presenting the inspection findings to the facility contact? The City does not conduct routine inspections and does not have a formal process. The Assistant Planning Director stated that if he would be the individual conducting the inspection, any findings would be relayed to the Assistant Public Works and Utilities Director. If public works staff observe issues while on the job, they would notify the Assistant Public Works and Utilities Director who would then be responsible for coordinating the appropriate corrective action. Inspection Results Did the facility inspection result in any corrective actions to be implemented? If so, for what issue(s)? City representatives were unable to conduct a full, documented inspection of the facility and will need to revisit the site after the City establishes a formalized inspection process. As such, corrective actions were not documented. If compliance corrective actions were identified, what timeline for correction/follow‐up was provided? City representatives verbally indicated that corrective actions identified by the inspection team would be addressed as soon as possible; however, City representatives did not formally document the observations and required corrective actions. Notes/Comments/Recommendations The inspection team observed the following while visiting the City of Newton’s Public Works Facility. The MS4 inspectors did not document these areas of concern and the City representatives only verbally indicated that they would take corrective action. 1. Discarded electrical materials were stored on the impervious surface in the southeast corner of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 18). All stormwater collected on the site’s impervious surface drained to a catch basin at the southern portion of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 19). The catch basin ultimately discharges to an outfall and receiving water southwest of the site perimeter, across West 1st Street (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 20 and 21). 2. Two uncovered dumpsters were stored in the southeast and southwest portions of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 22 and 23). One of the uncovered dumpsters was filled and contained electrical wires. 3. A petroleum product sheen was observed on top of stormwater collected in the northwest portion of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 24). The sheen was observed near mechanical equipment stored in the northwest corner of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 25). 4. An uncovered and uncontained barrel was observed in the northwest corner of the site containing discarded material (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 26). There were green stains observed along the inside of the barrel (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 27). 5. Empty, uncovered, and uncontained barrels were stored along the western edge of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 28 and 29) and in the southwest portion of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 30). The label of one of the uncovered barrels in the southwest portion of the site indicated that it used to contain lubricants/petroleum products. The base of one of the barrels stored along the western edge of the site perimeter was completely deteriorated. 6. Petroleum product staining was observed on the impervious surface adjacent to a used oil storage tank in the southwest portion of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 31 and 32). 7. An indoor vehicle washing facility was located in the southwest portion of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 33 and 34). City representatives indicated that the indoor washing facility drains to an oil water separator, which is equipped with an alarm system, prior to discharging to the sanitary sewer system (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 35). MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 19 of 25 Site Visit Evaluation: Municipal Facility No. 2 8. A trash dumpster was stored almost directly on top of a catch basin located in the southern portion of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 36). 9. Petroleum product staining and refuse liquid was observed underneath vehicles parked in the covered storage area in the center of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 37 and 38). There was absorbent material on top of the petroleum product staining. The staining pattern in the refuse liquid showed evidence of drainage towards the uncovered impervious surface sloping toward the catch basin at the southern portion of the site. Recommendation: While on site, the inspection team discussed the implementation of BMPs including covering on‐site dumpsters and disposing of them when full, disposing of unused barrels and equipment stored along the site perimeter, and ensuring that vehicles parked in the covered storage areas are in good working order and not leaking. These areas of concern would have been noticed and addressed if the trained inspectors were conducting regular inspections of the site. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 20 of 25 Site Visit Evaluation: Municipal Facility No. 3 Facility Name: City of Newton Police Depot and Maintenance Facility Date and Time of Site Visit: 12/11/2018, 4:30 PM Facility Address: 2427 North Ashe Avenue Newton, NC 28658 Facility Type (Vehicle Maintenance, Landscaping, etc.): Vehicle Maintenance and Equipment Storage Name of MS4 inspector(s): Alex Fulbright, Assistant Planning Director, City of Newton Most Recent MS4 Inspection (Date and Entity): None (see II.G.2.g above) Name(s) and Title(s) of Facility Representative(s) Present During the Site Visit: Name Title A police officer and a mechanic were present on site during the inspection. N/A Observations Facility Documentation/Training Does the facility have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or similar document? Is it facility‐specific? No, the facility does not have a SWPPP or similar document. What type of stormwater training do facility employees receive? How often? Facility employees do not currently receive stormwater training. Inspector Training/Knowledge What type of stormwater training does the MS4 inspector receive? How often? The City does not have dedicated MS4 inspectors and does not conduct routine inspections at municipal facilities. The Assistant Planning Director, who acted as the MS4 inspector during the site visit, has received limited stormwater training in the past but not on a routine basis. Did the MS4 inspector appear knowledgeable about Permit requirements for pollution prevention and good housekeeping? No. City representatives stated that the City does not conduct routine inspections of municipal facilities and have not developed or implemented any tools for doing so. Did the MS4 inspector appear knowledgeable about stormwater pollution prevention and good housekeeping? Partial. The MS4 inspectors were able to identify some pollution prevention and good housekeeping issues at the facility but did not identify and document all areas of concern observed by the inspection team (detailed below). Inspection Procedures Does the MS4 inspector’s process include the use of a checklist or other standardized form? Obtain copy. No. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include taking photos? No. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include reviewing the facility’s SWPPP (or similar document)? N/A – the facility does not have a SWPPP. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include walking the entire facility and inspecting all points of discharge? No. The MS4 inspectors’ process focused on pollution source control and did not include an assessment of the facility perimeter, points of discharge, and receiving waters. The inspection team identified that all on‐site stormwater drains to the southwest corner of the site and exits the site in sheet flow, discharging to the receiving water south of the site perimeter. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 21 of 25 Site Visit Evaluation: Municipal Facility No. 3 Did the MS4 inspector miss any obvious areas of concern? If so, explain: Yes. See the notes section below for details. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include presenting the inspection findings to the facility contact? The City does not conduct routine inspections and does not have a formal process. The Assistant Planning Director indicated that any inspection findings would be reported to either the Police Chief or another representative of the Police Department in charge of overseeing the site. Inspection Results Did the facility inspection result in any corrective actions to be implemented? If so, for what issue(s)? The Assistant Planning Director did not conduct a full, documented inspection of the facility and will need to revisit the site after the City establishes a formalized inspection process. As such, corrective actions were not documented. If compliance corrective actions were identified, what timeline for correction/follow‐up was provided? The Assistant Planning Director verbally indicated that corrective actions identified by the inspection team would be addressed as soon as possible; however, he did not formally document the observations and required corrective actions. Notes/Comments/Recommendations The inspection team observed the following while visiting the Police Depot on North Ashe Avenue. The MS4 inspectors did not document these areas of concern and the City representatives only verbally indicated that they would take corrective actions. 1. A sheen was observed on top of stormwater collected in the southwest corner of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 39 and 40). Water draining to the southwest corner of the site sheet flows off‐site towards the receiving water south of the site perimeter (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 41). 2. A spill kit with absorbent material was stored near the covered fueling station at the northern portion of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 42). 3. An indoor vehicle washing facility was located in the maintenance garage at the northwest corner of the site (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 43 and 44). City representatives indicated that the indoor washing facility drains to an oil water separator prior to discharging to the sanitary sewer system. 4. A used oil tank was inside secondary containment on the west side of the maintenance garage and vehicle washing facility (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 45). The onsite mechanic indicated that the secondary containment has never filled to the point where it needed to be emptied using the attached valve (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 46). The inspection team noticed that there was separation between the secondary containment structure and the west wall of the garage, indicating a breach in containment (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 47). Recommendation: While on site, the inspection team discussed the possibility of a breach in containment surrounding the used oil tank stored at the northwest corner of the site and how secondary containment should be properly constructed and managed after rainfall events. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 22 of 25 Site Visit Evaluation: Post‐Construction Stormwater Control Measure No. 1 Site Name: City of Newton Fire Station No. 1 Detention Pond Date and Time of Site Visit: 12/11/2018, 2:10 PM Site Address: 208 East 5th Street Newton, NC 28658 SCM Type: Detention Pond Most Recent MS4 Inspection (Include Date and Entity): None (See II.F.2.i above) Name of MS4 Inspector(s): Alex Fulbright, Assistant Planning Director, City of Newton Most Recent MS4 Enforcement Activity (Include Date): None (see II.G.2.g above) Name(s) and Title(s) of Site Representative(s) Present During the Site Visit: Name Title An Assistant Fire Chief was present at the site but did not participate in the SCM inspection. N/A Observations Site Documentation Does the site have an operation and maintenance plan? No. The Assistant Planning Director contacted the Assistant Fire Chief, who was not aware of any O&M plan for the stormwater control measure. Does the site have records of annual inspections? Are they performed by a qualified individual? There were no records of previous inspections (see II.F.2.i above). Inspector Training/Knowledge What type of stormwater training does the MS4 inspector receive? How often? The City does not have dedicated MS4 inspectors and does not conduct routine inspections of post‐construction SCM’s. The Assistant Planning Director, who acted as the MS4 inspector during the site visit, has received limited stormwater training in the past but not on a routine basis. On‐site fire department personnel have not been provided any training by the City specific to post‐ construction SCMs. Did the MS4 inspector appear knowledgeable about MS4 requirements for post‐construction site runoff controls? Partial. The Assistant Planning Director had a general understanding of the requirements but had not reviewed specific requirements related to the Fire Station No. 1 detention pond. Further, he did not bring a copy of the site plans to the site inspection. Did the MS4 inspector appear knowledgeable about post‐construction BMPs (general purpose/function, components, O&M requirements, etc.)? Partial. The Assistant Planning Director was familiar with the general purpose, function, and components of the SCM; however, the MS4 inspectors did not review the SCM design plans during the inspection. Additionally, the Assistant Fire Chief indicated that the only O&M procedures the fire department performs is mowing of the detention pond as needed. Inspection Procedures Does the MS4 inspector’s process include the use of a checklist or other standardized form? What format? No. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include taking photos? No. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 23 of 25 Site Visit Evaluation: Post‐Construction Stormwater Control Measure No. 1 Does the MS4 inspector’s process include reviewing the site’s operation and maintenance plan and records of annual inspections? No. The facility does not have an O&M plan for the SCM and the facility has not conducted any inspection reports. Additionally, the Assistant Planning Director did not use the SCM design plans while conducting the inspection. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include walking the entire site and inspecting all points of discharge? Yes. The drainage area to the SCM is limited to the southern portion of the site, which includes one parking lot. There is one outlet from the SCM that drains to the MS4 at the bottom of the driveway from NC Route 10 West. Did the MS4 inspector miss any obvious operation and maintenance deficiencies? If so, explain: The facility has not developed an O&M plan for the SCM; however, the inspection team did not identify any deficiencies specific to the function of the SCM. Of concern, however, was that only a very small portion of stormwater runoff from the parking lot was directed to the SCM, which is likely less than what was expected. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include presenting the inspection findings to the site contact in writing? No. The MS4 inspectors did not document any observations so that they could be provided to a site contact at a later time. City representatives indicated that the fire department was responsible for conducting and documenting routine inspections; however, the Assistant Fire Chief stated that the fire department was not conducting inspections or long‐term O&M activities other than mowing the detention pond. Compliance/Enforcement What, if any, enforcement actions (verbal warnings, NOV, etc.) did the inspection result in? None. City representatives recognized the need for the development of a long‐term O&M plan in addition to conducting routine inspections. If compliance issues were identified, what timeline for correction/follow‐up was provided? None. The MS4 inspector recognized the need for the development of a long‐term O&M plan in addition to conducting routine inspections; however, these issues were not addressed at the time of the site inspection. Notes/Comments/Recommendations The SCM is a detention pond located directly south of Fire Station No. 1 (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 48). The area of drainage to the SCM consists of one parking lot south of the fire house and a portion of stormwater runoff from the roof of the fire house (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 49). Influent enters the detention pond at the west end of the SCM (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 50) The outfall structure at the east end of the detention pond (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 51) drains to the City’s MS4 at the bottom of the driveway from NC Route 10 West. Recommendation: The inspection team did not identify any maintenance needs as part of the site visit. The Assistant Planning Director recognized that a long‐term O&M plan should be developed for the SCM and the fire department should be aware of the requirements to conduct routine inspections and perform maintenance. The inspection team recommends that design specifications, O&M requirements, and as‐builts be used during the inspection process to ensure the SCM is functioning properly. The inspection team also recommends training fire department personnel specific to post‐construction SCMs to ensure on‐site staff are capable of meeting the long‐term O&M needs. Additionally, the development of checklists for routine inspections would help to streamline the inspection process and ensure timely reporting to the City’s Stormwater Administrators. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 24 of 25 Site Visit Evaluation: Post‐Construction Stormwater Control Measure No. 2 Site Name: South Newton Elementary School Detention Pond Date and Time of Site Visit: 12/11/2018, 2:48 PM Site Address: 306 West I Street Newton, NC 28658 SCM Type: Detention Pond Most Recent MS4 Inspection (Include Date and Entity): None (See II.F.2.i above) Name of MS4 inspector(s): Alex Fulbright, Assistant Planning Director, City of Newton Most Recent MS4 Enforcement Activity (Include Date): None (see II.G.2.g above) Name(s) and Title(s) of Site Representative(s) Present During the Site Visit: Name Title N/A N/A Observations Site Documentation Does the site have an operation and maintenance plan? There was no O&M plan available onsite. City representatives did not contact a site representative to inquire about an O&M plan. Does the site have records of annual inspections? Are they performed by a qualified individual? The City did not have any records of previous inspections (see II.F.2.i above). Inspector Training/Knowledge What type of stormwater training does the MS4 inspector receive? How often? The City does not have dedicated MS4 inspectors and does not conduct routine inspections of post‐construction SCM’s. The Assistant Planning Director, who acted as the MS4 inspector during the site visit, has received limited stormwater training in the past but not on a routine basis. Did the MS4 inspector appear knowledgeable about MS4 requirements for post‐construction site runoff controls? Partial. The Assistant Planning Director had a general understanding of the requirements but had not reviewed specific requirements related to the detention pond system. Further, he did not bring a copy of the site plans to the site inspection. Did the MS4 inspector appear knowledgeable about post‐construction BMPs (general purpose/function, components, O&M requirements, etc.)? Partial. The Assistant Planning Director was familiar with the general purpose, function, and components of the SCM; however, he did not review the SCM design specifications, O&M plan, or as‐builts during the inspection. Inspection Procedures Does the MS4 inspector’s process include the use of a checklist or other standardized form? What format? No. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include taking photos? No. MS4 Inspection Report Newton, NC: NPDES Permit No. NCS000397 Inspection Date: December 11, 2018 Page 25 of 25 Site Visit Evaluation: Post‐Construction Stormwater Control Measure No. 2 Does the MS4 inspector’s process include reviewing the site’s operation and maintenance plan and records of annual inspections? No. The City was unable to provide an O&M plan for review during the inspection. The City representatives also stated that they did not have any records of annual inspections. Additionally, the Assistant Planning Director did not use the SCM design specification or as‐builts while conducting the inspection. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include walking the entire site and inspecting all points of discharge? No. The MS4 inspectors described the general drainage area but did not walk the entire site. The outlet structures at the west end of the SCM and the downstream receiving water were inspected following direction from the inspection team. Did the MS4 inspector miss any obvious operation and maintenance deficiencies? If so, explain: Yes. The inspection team identified multiple maintenance issues (see below) that the Assistant Planning Director did not document in an inspection report and/or photographs. Does the MS4 inspector’s process include presenting the inspection findings to the site contact in writing? No. A site contact was not present during the site visit. The Assistant Planning Director conducted the inspection and did not document any observations so that they could be provided to a site contact at a later time. Compliance/Enforcement What, if any, enforcement actions (verbal warnings, NOV, etc.) did the inspection result in? None. The Assistant Planning Director did not document observed areas of concern and communicate them to the site for correction. If compliance issues were identified, what timeline for correction/follow‐up was provided? None. The Assistant Planning Director did not document observed areas of concern and communicate them to the site for correction. Notes/Comments/Recommendations The SCM is a system of detention ponds located on the north side of South Newton Elementary School consisting of separate ponds and a dual outlet structure (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 52). The upper pond on the east end of the system (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 53) bypasses the lower pond and drains to the northern outfall. The upper pond receives stormwater runoff from adjacent basketball courts and the upgradient drainage area northeast of the school building. The middle and lower ponds (refer to Appendix B, Photographs 54 and 55) drain to the southern outfall. Stormwater captured in the middle pond discharges to the lower pond prior to draining to the southern outfall. The middle and lower ponds receive stormwater from the roof drain of the school building. The inspection team identified the following maintenance needs. The City representatives also identified these issues, but they did not document them with photographs and/or an inspection report. 1. City representatives indicated that white flags in the lower forebay marked areas where vegetation was supposed to have been planted (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 55). The design specifications and as‐builts for the SCM were not available to confirm that the lower pond was missing vegetation. 2. There were basketballs and soccer balls from the school playground in the upper and middle forebays of the SCM (refer to Appendix B, Photograph 53). 3. The inspection team noticed an odor not typical of stormwater originating from the dual outlet structure from the SCM, which could have indicated the presence of an illicit discharge. Despite the odor, City representatives did not document the findings in an inspection report or indicate they would return to conduct sampling.