The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWQ0006058_Staff Report_20200122ROY COOPER Governor MICHAEL S. REGAN Scrrerory LINDA CULPEPPER Dir.-Cwt. NORTH CAPOLIyA Environmental Quality January 22, 2020 To: Water QualioLPermittingSectionCentral Office Attn: Tessa Monday No.: From: Ray yLlilosh Raleigh Regional Qffice Halifax County I. GENERAL SITE VISIT INFORMATION I. Was a site visit conducted? ® Yes or ❑ No a. Date of site visit: jamary 20. 2Q20 b. Site visit conducted by: Ray iM loch c. Inspection report attached? ® Yes or ❑ No Application No.: 1EQ006058 Permittee: _ Regional Log -in d. Person contacted: Tim Mizelle and their contact information: (252) 348 - 4291 ext. e. Driving directions: Il. FACILITY AND APPLICATION FOR NEW AND MODIFICATION APPLICATIONS 1. Facility Classification: Is this correct? ❑ Yes ❑ No If no, please explain: 2. Are the new treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal system? ❑ Yes ❑No If no, please 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, acreage, wells, etc.)? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A If no, please explain: 5. Is the proposed residuals management plan adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A .,NI)fIh[:jIIIiuDqurtr:ientIII EnvironrnefIt.II u.thry 1A.1i,loft ofLy'atcI-Rtrjuurccs R.06citIRcgita1:11 Mit,1- 1 '160015aI II tl T tNv (01 -illh. Nol III aml"na 2109 019 701.4200 If no, please explain: 6. Are the proposed application rates (e.g., hydraulic, nutrient) acceptable? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A If no, please explain: 7. Are there any setbacks conflicts for proposed treatment, storage and disposal sites? ❑ Yes ❑No❑N/A If yes, attach a map showing conflict areas. 8. Is the proposed or existing groundwater monitoring program adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A If no, explain and recommend any changes to the groundwater monitoring program: 9. For residuals, will seasonal or other restrictions be required? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A If yes, attach list of sites with restrictions (Certification B) M. EXISTING FACILITIES FOR MODIFICATION AND RENEWAL APPLICATIONS 1. Are there appropriately certified Operators in Charge (ORCs) for the facility? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A ORC: ale ertificate #: Backup ORC: Ashton Weller 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 below in Section IV. Review Items 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 below in Section IV. Review Items 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 below in Section IV. Review items S. Is the residuals management plan adequate? ® Yes or ❑ No - If no, please explain below in Section IV. Review Items 6. Are the existing application rates (e.g., hydraulic, nutrient) still acceptable? ® Yes or ❑ No - If no, please explain below in Section IV. Review Items 7. Is the existing groundwater monitoring program adequate? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A If no, explain and recommend any changes to the groundwater monitoring program below in Section IV. Review Items 8. Are there any setback conflicts for existing treatment, storage and disposal sites? ❑ Yes or ® No If yes, provide comments below 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 below in Section IV. Review Items 10. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located? N Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A If no, please explain below in Section IV. Review Items, 11. Are the monitoring well coordinates correct in BIMS? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A If no, please complete the following ex and table if necessary.: Monitoring Well Latitude Longitude n r n n — r rr r rr 12. Has a review of all self -monitoring data been conducted (e.g., NDMR, NDAR, GW)? N Yes ❑ No or ❑ N/A Please summarize any findings resulting from this review below in Section IV. Review Items. 13. Are there any permit changes needed in order to address ongoing BIMS violations? ❑ Yes or N No If yes, please explain below in Section IV. Review Items. 14. Check all that apply: ® No compliance issues ❑ Current enforcement ❑ Currently under JOC action(s) ❑ Notice(s) of violation ❑ Currently under SOC ❑ Currently under ❑ Notice(s) of deficiency moratorium Please explain and attach any documents that may help clarify answer/comments (i.e., NOV, NOD, etc.) 15. Have all compliance dates/conditions in the existing permit been satisfied? N Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A If no, please explain below in Section IV. Review Items. 16. Are there any issues related to compliance/enforcement that should be resolved before issuing this permit? ❑ Yes N No ❑ N/A If yes, please explain below in Section IV. Review Items. IV. REGIONAL OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? ❑ Yes or N No If yes, please explain: _ 2. List any items that you would like 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: 4. List specific special conditions or compliance schedules recommended to be included in the permit when issued: S. 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: ue ) 6. Signature of report preparer: Gel Signature of APS regional supervisor: Date: / —,Az -24.2 0 V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS Staff of the Division of Water Resources (DWR), Water Quality Regional Operations Section (WQROS), Raleigh Regional Office (RRO) visited the Perdue Halifax Hatchery #9 Wastewater Surface Irrigation System on January 21, 2020. The purpose of the visit was to conduct a compliance inspection as part of the permit rrenewal process. Tim Mizelle (ORC as of November 2019) and Ashton Welter (backup ORC) assisted during the inspection. The current permit which was issued April 28, 2015 and expires March 31, 2020 was reviewed. The last inspection at this facility was performed May 31, 2018 and the facility was compliant with permit requirements. The wastewater is treated in several septic tanks in series. The septic tanks are pumped approximately every 5 years. The wastewater then flows to the storage lagoon. The berm was well mowed and there were signs and a locked fence preventing unauthorized access. The freeboard was about 3.1 feet and the water was nearly clear and odorless. The treated water is then pumped from a wet well next to the lagoon to sprayfield. Both pumps, the chlorine gas disinfection system and the flow meter were in good order. The facility has historically averaged about 9000 gpd of its 15745 gpd permit limit, applies about 75 of the 400 Ibs PAN permit limit and irrigates about 15" of the 41" permitted. During 2019, the daily flow increased to about 13000 gpd as a result of a change in sanitation practices. The ORC intends to speak with the plant manager to advise him that the flow is nearing permit limits. The grass in the 5 acre sprayfield was mowed and the pine trees looked to be in good condition. No ponding or runoff was noted. The pumps were turned on and all sprayheads appeared to be in good order. The ORC reported that the chlorine gas system fails frequently despite being constantly worked on. The chlorine gas also corrodes the pump room and the o-rings in the plumbing, creating additional maintenance needs. The ORC expressed an interest in modifying the permit during the permit renewal process to include a hypochlorite disinfection system and to beep the chlorine gas system as a backup. The ORC would like to know what is required to request this modification. The ORC reported that other than the chlorine gas problems, the system is reliable and runs well. All records were reviewed and appear to have been submitted on time, correct and complete. Soil samples were collected in December 2019. The monitoring wells were not inspected, but are reportedly in good condition. They are sampled yearly by the ORC. On the day of the inspection the facility appeared to be operating in compliance with permit conditions.