WQ0019665_Staff Report_20200513

State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Environmental Staff Report
Quality
To: ❑ NPDES Unit ® Non -Discharge Unit
Attn: Poonam Giri
From: Will Hart
Washington Regional Office
Application No.: WQ0019665
Facility name: Swan Quarter Sanitary District WWTF
Note: This form has been adapted from the non -discharge fg acili , staff report to document the review of both non -
discharge and NPDES permit applications and/or renewals. Please complete all sections as they are gpplicable.
I. GENERAL AND SITE VISIT INFORMATION
1. Was a site visit conducted? ® Yes or ❑ No
a. Date of site visit: May 6.2020
b. Site visit conducted by: Will Hart
c. Inspection report attached? ❑ Yes or ® No
d. Person contacted: Mr. Jeffrey Stotesberry and their contact information: (252) 542 - 0901 ext.
e. Driving directions: The facility is located on the north side of US Hwy 264 in Swan Quarter.
2. Discharge Point(s): N/A
Latitude:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Longitude:
3. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: N/A
Classification:
River Basin and Subbasin No.
Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses:
II. EXISTING FACILITIES: 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:
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.)
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Pagel of 3

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 ❑ N/A
If no, explain and recommend any changes to the groundwater monitoring program:
8. Are there any setback conflicts for existing treatment, storage and disposal sites? ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, attach a map showing conflict areas.
9. Is the description of the facilities as written in the existing permit correct? ® Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain:
10. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
If no, please explain:
I t . Are the monitoring well coordinates correct in BIMS? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
12. Has a review of all self -monitoring data been conducted (e.g., DMR, NDMR, NDAR, GW)? ® Yes or ❑ No
Please summarize any findings resulting from this review: The district has not been reliably submitting
monitoring data for the facility since a change in ORC. The Regional Office is in the process of issuing Notices
for missing reports/data.
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? WaRO has issued NOD's for missing
NDMR/NDAR and GW-59: we elan to issue NOV for continuing violation/current violations. WaRO has been
working with the District to correct reporting problems. A member of the District staff is training to become
certified for SI and take over operational duties.
Have all compliance dates/conditions in the existing permit been satisfied? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, please explain:
15. Are there any issues related to compliance/enforcement that should be resolved before issuing this permit?
❑ Yes ®No❑N/A
If yes, please explain:
16. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: N/A
17. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): N/A
III. REGIONAL OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, please explain:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 3

2. Recommendation: ❑ Hold, pending receipt and review of additional information by regional office
® Hold, pending review of draft permit by regional office
❑ Issue upon receipt of needed additional information
❑ Issue
❑ Deny (Please state reasons: )
WX H441
3. Signature of report preparer:
Zagva T.sa,"
Signature of regional supervisor:
Date: 5/13/2020
IV. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
I entered coordinates for SW-1 and SW-2 into BIMS, inadverdently for the current permit; they may not show up on
the current application but they are there. The facility is permitted for 125,000 gpd and operating at less than 15,000
gpd. We recommend creating another PPI for flows less than 100,000 gpd and base effluent monitoring on realistic
flow. According to Mr StotesbgM the District plans to repair/rehabilitate one of the existing lagoons and close the
other, likely resulting in reduced permitted flow. The express purpose of my site visit was to work on reportingissues.
sues.
The District is in the process of training one of their staff to become certified to take over operational duties.
Please add the following:
Within 180 days after issuance of permit, the District shall perform and submit an engineering review of the
lagoons at the WWTP to determine the corrections needed to eliminate the leaks from the lagoon liner, remove the
gas bubbles, and address other damage including rips and tears. The District shall include a timeline with fixed
dates when corrections are to be made. The dates for corrections as agreed upon by the Division of Water Resources
in the Washington Regional Office shall be adopted as part of the permit and shall be enforceable under the
permit. Failure to establish agreed upon dates for lagoon repair work to occur shall also be viewed as a permit
condition violation and subject to enforcement action under the permit.
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 3