The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWQ0021632_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200728DocuSign Envelope ID: 35B27798-602A-4787-88AD-051385CD71EA oL W�4 ROY COOPER Z5 Governor r•� MICHAEL S. REGAN {%�°,,• Secretary S. DANIEL SMITH NORTH CAROLINA Director Environmental Quality July 28, 2020 Mr. Shane Fletcher, Residuals Management Coordinator City of Burlington PO Box 1358 Burlington, NC 27216 Subject: Compliance Evaluation Inspection City of Burlington, Class A Residuals Management Program Permit No. WQ0021632 Alamance County Dear Mr. Fletcher: On July 15, 2020, staff of the North Carolina Division of Water Resources Winston-Salem Regional Office (Division) performed a compliance evaluation inspection of the subject facility. This inspection was conducted by DWR staff persons Patrick Mitchell and Caitlin Caudle. The inspection reflects compliance with Permit No. WQ0021632. Please refer to the enclosed compliance inspection report form for additional observations and comments. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Patrick Mitchell or me at the letterhead address or phone number, or by email at patrick.mitchellkncdenr.gov or Ion. sniderkncdenr. gov. Sincerely, DocuSigned<by: 145B49E225C94EA... Lon Snider, Regional Supervisor Water Quality Regional Operations Section Division of Water Resources-NCDEQ-WSRO enc.: Compliance Inspection Report cc: Brent Collins, EMA Resources- brent.collins@emaresourcesinc.com Alamance County Environmental Health (Electronic) DWR Laserfiche File WQ0021632 WSRO Electronic Files North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources Winston-Salem Regional Office 1 450 West Hanes Mill Road, Suite 3001 Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27105 336.776.9800 Compliance Inspection Report Permit: WQ0021632 Effective: 01/01/18 Expiration: 12/31/22 Owner: City of Burlington SOC: Effective: Expiration: Facility: City of Burlington DCAR County: Alamance 2471 Boywood Rd Region: Winston-Salem Graham NC 27253 Contact Person: Robert C Patterson Title: Phone: 336-222-5130 Directions to Facility: Take NC Hw. 87 South off of 1-85 (Exit 147). Proceed on NC Hwy. 87 South, and bear left onto Swepsonville Road. At Boywood Road, bear right. The entrance to the WWTP is 0.25 miles on the right System Classifications: Primary ORC: Certification: Phone: Secondary ORC(s): On -Site Representative(s): Related Permits: NC0023876 City of Burlington - Southside WWTP NC0083828 City of Burlington - J.D. Mackintosh, Jr. WTP Inspection Date: 07/15/2020 Entry Time 09:OOAM Primary Inspector: Patrick Mitchell Secondary Inspector(s): Caitlin Caudle Reason for Inspection: Routine Permit Inspection Type: Distribution of Residual Solids (503) Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Question Areas: Miscellaneous Questions Record Keeping Sampling Land Application Site Storage Transport (See attachment summary) Exit Time: 02:30PM Phone: 336-776-9698 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Treatment Pathogen and Vector Attraction Page 1 of 5 Permit: WQ0021632 Owner - Facility: City of Burlington Inspection Date: 07/15/2020 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine Inspection Summary: On July 15, 2020 WSRO staff conducted an inspection of the subject facility. Mr. Shane Fletcher with the City of Burlington accompanied staff on the inspection. Both residuals source facilities were visited during the inspection and two land application sites (WTP residuals only) were visited. The inspection reflects compliance with the permit. Below is a summary of notes from each portion of the inspection. SOUTHSIDE WWTP (Compost Source Facility) • Required records (sampling results, distribution info, inspection logs, etc.) were found to be present and in good order. • The facility has not produced any new compost since May 2020 (Compost Pile No. 70). No compost was found to be present in the storage area. • The last compost distribution occurred around the week of June 24, 2020. • The Southside WWTP and East Burlington WWTP have both been added to McGill Compost's DCAR Permit as a residuals source facilities and plans to no longer produce Class A Compost. • Discussed the complaint received concerning Mebane Shrubbery mixing Burlington's Class A Compost with other products and selling them without label or permit. *FOLLOW-UP AT MEBANE SHRUBBERY IS PLANNED. MACINTOSH WTP • Records (sampling results, distribution info, inspection logs, etc.) were found to be present and in good order, except bulk residuals field loading records. Those are maintained by the contract operating company (EMA). These records were received following the onsite inspection via email and were found to be complete. • A dredge is now being used for residuals mixing and loading. • Reviewed residuals sampling procedures and found them to be adequate and representative. • Residuals loading and transport were actively occurring during the inspection. Transport tanker #102 was reviewed and found to be compliant. • Not all of the 2020 soil sampling results have not been recieved yet. Review next inspection or in 2020 annual report. LAND APPLICATION SITES (WTP residuals only) • Visited Site AM-109, Fields 1 and 2. Below are findings: - Land application was actively occurring at the time on inspection. - No ponding or runoff was observed during at the time of inspection. - Application fields had good vegetative cover present and all observed buffers were found to be compliant Reportedly Fescue Hay crop. - Estimated loading rate is 20 to 30 lbs. of PAN/acre for the event. - Application equipment (Spreader #311) did not have a copy of the permit or a spill response plan present. However, it should be noted that the other spreader did have copies of both which meets the minimum requirements that a copy of each must be present at the site during events (Condition 111.4.). • Visited Site AM-06, Fields 2, 8 and 9. Below are findings: - Land application had previously occurred to this site, stopping the day before this inspection (7/14/20). - All of fields 2 and 8 were spread, while approximately 1/3 of field 9 was spread. See field sketch notes for the area. - No evidence of ponding or runoff was observed. - Application fields had good vegetative cover present and all observed buffers were found to be compliant Reportedly Fescue Hay crop for some fields and Grazed Fescue Pasture for others. - The estimated loading rate to these fields was 20 — 30 lbs. PAN/acre. Page 2 of 5 Permit: WQ0021632 Owner - Facility: City of Burlington Inspection Date: 07/15/2020 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine Type Yes No NA NE Land Application Distribution and Marketing Record Keeping Yes No NA NE Is GW monitoring being conducted, if required? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Are GW samples from all MWs sampled for all required parameters? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Are there any GW quality violations? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Is GW-59A certification form completed for facility? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Is a copy of current permit on -site? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Are current metals and nutrient analysis available? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Are nutrient and metal loading calculating most limiting parameters? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ a. TCLP analysis? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ b. SSFA (Standard Soil Fertility Analysis)? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Are PAN balances being maintained? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Are PAN balances within permit limits? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Has land application equipment been calibrated? ❑ ❑ ❑ Are there pH records for alkaline stabilization? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Are there pH records for the land application site? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Are nutrient/crop removal practices in place? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Do lab sheets support data reported on Residual Analysis Summary? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Are hauling records available? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Are hauling records maintained and up-to-date? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ # Has permittee been free of public complaints in last 12 months? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Has application occurred during Seasonal Restriction window? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Comment: See summa Pathogen and Vector Attraction Yes No NA NE a. Fecal coliform SM 9221 E (Class A or B) 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Class A, all test must be <1000 MPN/dry gram Geometric mean of 7 samples per monitoring period for class B<2.0*10E6 CFU/dry gram ❑ Fecal coliform SM 9222 D (Class B only) ❑ ❑ ❑ Geometric mean of 7 samples per monitoring period for class B<2.0*10E6 CFU/dry gram ❑ b. pH records for alkaline stabilization (Class A) ❑ ❑ ❑ c. pH records for alkaline stabilization (Class B) ❑ ❑ ❑ Temperature corrected ❑ d. Salmonella (Class A, all test must be < 3MPN/4 gram day) ❑ ❑ ❑ Page 3 of 5 Permit: WQ0021632 Owner - Facility: City of Burlington Inspection Date: 07/15/2020 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine e. Time/Temp on: 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Digester (MCRT) ❑ Compost Class A lime stabilization ❑ f. Volatile Solids Calculations ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ g. Bench -top Aerobic/Anaerobic digestion results ❑ ❑ N ❑ Comment: See summary. Treatment Yes No NA NE Check all that apply Aerobic Digestion ❑ Anaerobic Digestion ❑ Alkaline Pasteurization (Class A) ❑ Alkaline Stabilization (Class B) ❑ Compost Drying Beds ❑ Other ❑ Comment: See summa Sampling Yes No NA NE Describe sampling: COMPOST: composite samples collected around batch piles. WTP: mixed lagoon grab sample. Is sampling adequate? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is sampling representative? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Comment: See summa Transport Yes No NA NE Is a copy of the permit in the transport vehicle? ❑ ❑ ❑ Is a copy of the spill control plan in the vehicle? ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the spill control plan satisfactory? ❑ ❑ ❑ Does transport vehicle appear to be maintained? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Comment: See summary. Land Application Site Yes No NA NE Is a copy of the permit on -site during application events? ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the application site in overall good condition? ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the site free of runoff/ponding? ❑ ❑ ❑ If present, is the application equipment in good operating condition? ❑ ❑ ❑ Are buffers being maintained? ❑ ❑ ❑ Page 4 of 5 Permit: WQ0021632 Owner - Facility: City of Burlington Inspection Date: 07/15/2020 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine Are limiting slopes buffered? 10% for surface application 18% for subsurface application Are there access restrictions and/or signs? Is the application site free of odors or vectors? Have performance requirements for application method been met? For injection? For incorporation? Does permit require monitoring wells? Have required MWs been installed? Are MWs properly located w/ respect to RB and CB? Are MWs properly constructed (including screened interval)? Is the surrounding area served by public water? If Annual Report indicates overapplication of PAN, are wells nearby that may be impacted? Are soil types consistent w/ Soil Scientist report/evaluation? Is the water table greater than 173' bls. Is application occurring at the time of the inspection? Comment: See summary. Page 5 of 5