The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWQ0032515_Staff Report_20200219ROY COOPER Governar- MICHAEL S. REGAN sPfTcrary LINDA CULPEPPER Direcrar NORTH CAROLINA Environmental Quality February 19, 2020 To: Water Qualil�LEermitting Section Cen_tl� u.n.. No.: From: Milosh :, .l .I. e _ i . 1> 1. GENERAL SITE VISIT INFORMATION 1. Was a site visit conducted? ❑ Yes or ® No a. Date of site visit: b. Site visit conducted by: Ray Milosh c. Inspection report attached? ❑ Yes or ® No Application No.: WQ0032515 Permittee: North Durham WRF Regional Log -in d. Person contacted: z and their contact information: (M1) 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 If no, please explain: QNor I It Car olirij Depat N1114 1toffnvirumnVntaIQMI[Ity I DivisiunofW.ttcrResotaccs _ R.dcigh Rryiuoal Off irc 1 '5800 fSw rol Drive J Kalelgh. Nurrfr Carolina 17609 -, 40'� 019.7014100 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) Ill. EXISTING FACILITIES FOR MODIFICATION AND RENEWAL APPLICATIONS 1. Are there appropriately certified Operators in Charge (ORCs) for the facility? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A ORC: Certificate #: Backup ORC: Certificate # 2. Are the design, maintenance and operation of the treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal system? ® Yes or ❑ No - if no, please explain 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 W. Review Items 5. 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 1V. Review Items 10. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located? ❑ 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, lease complete the following ex and table if necessary): Monitoring Well Latitude Longitude 12. Has a review of all self -monitoring data been conducted (e.g., NDMR, NDAR, GW)? ® 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 ® No Ifyes, please explain below in Section IV. Review Items. 14. Check all that apply: ® No compliance issues ❑ Current enforcement ❑ Currently under JOC ❑ 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? ® 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 ® No ❑ N/A Ifyes, 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 ® No Ifyes, 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: Condition Reason 4. List specific special conditions or compliance schedules recommended to be included in the permit when issued: Condition Reason 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: _ ) b. Signature of report preparer: Signature of APS regional supery s : Date: Z� V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS This facility was inspected in December 2019 and found to be in compliance. The bulk of the reclaimed water is used on site. There is a bulk fill station, as well. The NPDES permit changed from requiring sampling the effluent five times a week to twice a week. The WQ permit currently required sampling to match the NPDES. Neither the 2U rules and DEQ policies require sampling five times a week. N Durham WRF requested that the sampling frequency of the reclaimed water be changed to match the sampling frequency of the NPDES permit. RRO recommends the minor modification request be approved.