NCG551771_STFRPT_20200810

State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources

Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Staff Report

FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 1 of 5

To: NPDES Unit Non-Discharge Unit Application No.: NCG551771
Attn: Emily DelDuco Facility name: 140 Rose Garden Ln.

From: Mikal Willmer
Asheville Regional Office

Note: This form has been adapted from the non-discharge facility staff report to document the review of both non-
discharge and NPDES permit applications and/or renewals. Please complete all sections as they are applicable.

I. GENERAL AND SITE VISIT INFORMATION
1. Was a site visit conducted? Yes or No
a. Date of site visit: August 2019
b. Site visit conducted by: Mikal Willmer
c. Inspection report attached? Yes or No (conducted before permit issuance)
d. Person contacted: Adam Jones & Mike Lash and their contact information: 828-356-2106 & 704-847-3031
e. Driving directions: Head west on I-40 from Swannanoa, take exit 27 towards Waynesville. Continues on US-
74/19/23 for approximately 12 miles. Turn right onto walker road and then take a left on Rose Garden Ln.
House is on the right.
2. Discharge Point(s):
Latitude: 35.452980 Longitude: -83.077612

Latitude: Longitude:
3. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: UT to Richland Creek
Classification: B, Tr
River Basin and Subbasin No. French Broad, Pigeon River 06010106
Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: The portion of Richland Creek
downstream of the UT is a Class B, Trout waters, and is still listed as impaired for fecal.
II. PROPOSED FACILITIES: NEW APPLICATIONS
1. Facility Classification: This is a single-family system under a general permit, which we do not currently classify.
Proposed flow: 360 GPD
Current permitted flow: new facility- subsurface system was not permitted (installed in 60’s)
2. Are the new treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal system? Yes or No
If no, explain:
3. Are site conditions (soils, depth to water table, etc) consistent with the submitted reports? Yes No N/A
If no, please explain: verified soil mapping units for the area
4. Do the plans and site map represent the actual site (property lines, wells, etc.)? Yes No N/A
If no, please explain:
DocuSign Envelope ID: A8D8CB6C-5442-4E45-9224-6EF9C23751DA
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 5
5. Is the proposed residuals management plan adequate? Yes No N/A
If no, please explain: O&M manual addresses solids handling.
6. Are the proposed application rates (e.g., hydraulic, nutrient) acceptable? Yes No N/A
If no, please explain:
7. Are there any setback conflicts for proposed treatment, storage and disposal sites? Yes or No
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)
Describe the residuals handling and utilization scheme:
10. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: NA
11. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): NA

III. 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.)
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:

DocuSign Envelope ID: A8D8CB6C-5442-4E45-9224-6EF9C23751DA
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 5
11. Are the monitoring well coordinates correct in BIMS? Yes No N/A
If no, please complete the following (expand table if necessary):
Monitoring Well Latitude Longitude
○ ′ ″ - ○ ′ ″
○ ′ ″ - ○ ′ ″
○ ′ ″ - ○ ′ ″
○ ′ ″ - ○ ′ ″
○ ′ ″ - ○ ′ ″
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:
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?
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:
17. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):

DocuSign Envelope ID: A8D8CB6C-5442-4E45-9224-6EF9C23751DA
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 4 of 5
IV. REGIONAL OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? Yes or No
If yes, please explain:
2. List any items that you would like the NPDES Unit 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

5. 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: )

6. Signature of report preparer:

Signature of regional supervisor:

Date:

DocuSign Envelope ID: A8D8CB6C-5442-4E45-9224-6EF9C23751DA
8/10/2020
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 5 of 5

V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
A site visit was conducted in August of 2019 after being contacted by the Haywood County Health Department
regarding a potential repair denial due to setbacks, unsuitable soils, restrictive horizons etc. This area and several
other areas in the outskirts of Waynesville are in similar situations. These neighborhoods were established and built in
the 60s before septic system permits and repair areas were required. Because of this, restrictive horizons and small lot
sizes, we will see more homeowners requesting single-family discharge systems as these original subsurface systems
age out. Many of these properties may be unsuitable for drip reuse irrigation also due to soils and locations within or
very near the flood plain. This particular property has rocky soils that drain rapidly and provide little adsorption.
There is currently a SFR system that discharges into the same UT located at 771 Walker Rd (NCG551552) permitted
in 2014. If this system is permitted it will discharge approximately 100’ upstream from the outfall for NCG551552.

DocuSign Envelope ID: A8D8CB6C-5442-4E45-9224-6EF9C23751DA